--------------------------------------------- Result 1 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[After]] tracking it down for half a [[year]], I [[finally]] found a copy and it was not disappointing.

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

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

But I'm glad to have watched it. Thank goodness he has grown up.... [[Upon]] tracking it down for half a [[annum]], I [[eventually]] found a copy and it was not disappointing.

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

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

But I'm glad to have watched it. Thank goodness he has grown up.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[felt]] like I was watching the Fast and the Furious again, but with different actors and a little bit different [[plot]]. I will [[say]] the [[cars]] in the film are very cool. [[So]], if you like fast cars, then you will probably [[find]] this movie [[mildly]] entertaining. I also liked Nadia Bjorlin because I've seen her from Days of our Lives. She is a really good [[singer]], but too bad they gave her such [[lousy]] [[songs]] to sing in this movie. I mean songs about cars; not exactly what you would here on the radio. Since it is a Hollywood film, you have to give this story a little lee way, but in real life I don't think any average joe would come across such a hot girl as Nadia Bjorlin who can drive a race car, fix a car engine, and be a lead singer. It's just all very silly.

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

FINAL VERDICT: This movie is for car freaks. So, if you like fast cars, then I'd recommend this. I [[believed]] like I was watching the Fast and the Furious again, but with different actors and a little bit different [[intrigue]]. I will [[tell]] the [[wagon]] in the film are very cool. [[Accordingly]], if you like fast cars, then you will probably [[unearthed]] this movie [[smoothly]] entertaining. I also liked Nadia Bjorlin because I've seen her from Days of our Lives. She is a really good [[singing]], but too bad they gave her such [[rotten]] [[hymns]] to sing in this movie. I mean songs about cars; not exactly what you would here on the radio. Since it is a Hollywood film, you have to give this story a little lee way, but in real life I don't think any average joe would come across such a hot girl as Nadia Bjorlin who can drive a race car, fix a car engine, and be a lead singer. It's just all very silly.

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

FINAL VERDICT: This movie is for car freaks. So, if you like fast cars, then I'd recommend this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The story concerns a genealogy researcher (Mel Harris) who is hired by her Estee Lauder-like cosmetic queen aunt. Her aunt (by marriage we are left to presume) is trying to track down her long lost family in Europe. All they have to go on is a photo of a young girl standing by an ornate music box. The researcher heads to Europe and conducts her search in places like Milan, Budapest, and Vienna. The [[scenery]] is the real thing and is actually shot on location (unlike a Murder, She Wrote where Jessica is supposed to be visiting a far-flung locale and Lansbury never left Burbank). Anyway, she meets a young man who is also searching to solve a family mystery of his own and they team up to track down clues and menace bad guys. The dialogue, particularly the romantic dialogue, is terrible. I watched this because of the scenery but the script was so bad that I stayed on just to see if it would get worse. It did. Acting was also off. I can see why Mel Harris's career never really took off after thirtysomething, but she is adequate (seems too old for her co-star though). But, the supporting players are straight out of the community playhouse. I also lost count of how many times they say "Budapest" to each other. Yes, it is pronounced Bood-a-phesht. We know, okay? I realized halfway into the film that this had to be one of those Harlequin movies and sure enough it is. Guess that says it all. The story concerns a genealogy researcher (Mel Harris) who is hired by her Estee Lauder-like cosmetic queen aunt. Her aunt (by marriage we are left to presume) is trying to track down her long lost family in Europe. All they have to go on is a photo of a young girl standing by an ornate music box. The researcher heads to Europe and conducts her search in places like Milan, Budapest, and Vienna. The [[panorama]] is the real thing and is actually shot on location (unlike a Murder, She Wrote where Jessica is supposed to be visiting a far-flung locale and Lansbury never left Burbank). Anyway, she meets a young man who is also searching to solve a family mystery of his own and they team up to track down clues and menace bad guys. The dialogue, particularly the romantic dialogue, is terrible. I watched this because of the scenery but the script was so bad that I stayed on just to see if it would get worse. It did. Acting was also off. I can see why Mel Harris's career never really took off after thirtysomething, but she is adequate (seems too old for her co-star though). But, the supporting players are straight out of the community playhouse. I also lost count of how many times they say "Budapest" to each other. Yes, it is pronounced Bood-a-phesht. We know, okay? I realized halfway into the film that this had to be one of those Harlequin movies and sure enough it is. Guess that says it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A [[still]] [[famous]] but [[decadent]] [[actor]] (Morgan Freeman) has not filmed for four years. [[When]] he is invited to participate in a new project, he asks the [[clumsy]] cousin of the director to drop him in a poor Latin [[neighborhood]] in Carlson to research the work of the manager of a small supermarket. He sees the [[gorgeous]] Spanish cashier [[Scarlet]] (Paz Vega) and he becomes [[attracted]] with her ability. His driver never returns to catch him and Scarlet [[gives]] a ride to the [[actor]]. But first she has a job interview for the position of secretary in a construction company and the actor helps her to be prepared; then they [[spend]] the afternoon together having a pleasant time.

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

Title (Brazil): "Um Astro em Minha [[Vida]]" ("A [[Star]] in My [[Life]]") A [[nevertheless]] [[illustrious]] but [[sleazebag]] [[protagonist]] (Morgan Freeman) has not filmed for four years. [[Whenever]] he is invited to participate in a new project, he asks the [[awkward]] cousin of the director to drop him in a poor Latin [[neighbourhoods]] in Carlson to research the work of the manager of a small supermarket. He sees the [[glorious]] Spanish cashier [[Scarlett]] (Paz Vega) and he becomes [[lured]] with her ability. His driver never returns to catch him and Scarlet [[delivers]] a ride to the [[protagonist]]. But first she has a job interview for the position of secretary in a construction company and the actor helps her to be prepared; then they [[expenditures]] the afternoon together having a pleasant time.

I am a big [[breather]] of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega. [[Instead]], the [[vain]] "10 [[Things]] or [[Lowest]]" is [[altogether]] [[disappointed]]. This low-budget [[movies]] does not [[appears]] to have a storyline, and is supported by the [[chem]] and improvisations of Morgan Freeman and Paz Vega and actually [[anything]] happens along 82 [[mins]]. The ambiguous open conclusion is [[straightforward]] [[grotesque]], with the [[nature]] of [[Morg]] Freeman returning to his silver spoon [[monde]] and [[eloquent]] the [[easy]] worker that they would never [[behold]] each other again. Was he afraid to have a [[amore]] affair with her and [[raze]] his perfect [[monde]] with his [[familial]]? Or was a clash of [[category]], and he [[realises]] that his fancy [[neighbourhoods]] [[ought]] not be [[appropriate]] to a [[easy]] [[workman]] from the [[reduced]] [[categories]]? My [[votes]] is four.

Title (Brazil): "Um Astro em Minha [[Vie]]" ("A [[Stars]] in My [[Vie]]") --------------------------------------------- Result 5 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I [[gave]] 1 to this film. I can't understand how Ettore Scola,one of the [[greater]] [[directors]] of Italian [[cinema]], [[made]] a [[film]] like this, so [[stupid]] and [[ridiculous]]! All the [[stories]] of the people [[involved]] in the [[movie]] are unsubstantial,boring and not interesting. Too [[long]],too boring. The only [[things]] I [[save]] in this movie are Giancarlo Giannini and [[Vittorio]] Gasmann. [[Hope]] that Scola will [[change]] [[radically]] [[themes]] and [[style]] in his next [[film]]. I [[handed]] 1 to this film. I can't understand how Ettore Scola,one of the [[greatest]] [[administrators]] of Italian [[film]], [[introduced]] a [[cinema]] like this, so [[silly]] and [[absurd]]! All the [[histories]] of the people [[embroiled]] in the [[cinema]] are unsubstantial,boring and not interesting. Too [[longer]],too boring. The only [[matters]] I [[rescued]] in this movie are Giancarlo Giannini and [[Victor]] Gasmann. [[Esperanza]] that Scola will [[modify]] [[profoundly]] [[matters]] and [[elegance]] in his next [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 6 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] [[Robert]] De Niro, Cuba Gooding Jr., Hal Holbrook, and all the rest of the [[actors]] and actresses in "Men of [[Honour]]" have [[combined]] to make this a [[fine]] [[movie]]. Mark Isham wrote the filmscore, so you [[know]] the [[music]] is truly fine, too.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Will Hollywood EVER realize that the unalloyed truth is so much better that their over-dramatic approach to story-telling? I doubt it. Too bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 7 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Entertaining]] musical where Nathan Detroit needs $1,000.00 to get up a floating crap [[game]] so he entices Sky Masterson to try and get salvation army girl, played by Jean Simmons, to go with Masterson to Havana.

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

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

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

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

All in all, it's a very nice [[production]]. [[Amusing]] musical where Nathan Detroit needs $1,000.00 to get up a floating crap [[jeu]] so he entices Sky Masterson to try and get salvation army girl, played by Jean Simmons, to go with Masterson to Havana.

5 [[olds]] later, Simmons would be in the missionary again in the fabulous "Elmer Gantry." There she was sister Sharon and here she is Sister Sarah. Same [[installment]], [[multiple]] [[saga]].

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

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

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

All in all, it's a very nice [[productivity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 8 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] It [[took]] us a couple of episodes to "[[get]] into" [[Dark]] [[Angel]] as a story and a series, [[since]] we were transitioning from The Sopranos, a very [[different]] mentality framework. But, once we got with the gist of the [[series]], we were very [[quickly]] [[hooked]]. It's a shame that the series ended just when it was just [[starting]] to past good into the excellent [[category]]: Dark Angelwas much more than your [[average]] TV series. It kicks ass and [[rocks]] as far as action goes, but the interactions of the characters and societal reactions to "mutants" [[reminds]] us of the constant prejudices that we face (and make) everyday. That the story is set in the future keeps the mood surreal and prevents the anti-discrimination message from being rubbed in our faces (hence not ruining the "fun" for those who don't like to be lectured during entertainment), but every event and human/societal interaction remains relevant to the present. We all make judgments, face our own prejudices, but, in the end, the question of who you are lies in: do you sit back and shut your mind to it, or do you get up and do something about it? For those who have no choice but to fight, for survival or justice, this series empowers them. For those who've never had to face the question, this series "sneaks in" that message under the guise of pure action entertainment. It is much more well-made and well-written than most TV series; I'm highly disappointed it ended before it could really kick into high gear. It [[picked]] us a couple of episodes to "[[obtain]] into" [[Blackness]] [[Angels]] as a story and a series, [[because]] we were transitioning from The Sopranos, a very [[various]] mentality framework. But, once we got with the gist of the [[serials]], we were very [[expeditiously]] [[hook]]. It's a shame that the series ended just when it was just [[cranking]] to past good into the excellent [[class]]: Dark Angelwas much more than your [[medium]] TV series. It kicks ass and [[rattles]] as far as action goes, but the interactions of the characters and societal reactions to "mutants" [[reminded]] us of the constant prejudices that we face (and make) everyday. That the story is set in the future keeps the mood surreal and prevents the anti-discrimination message from being rubbed in our faces (hence not ruining the "fun" for those who don't like to be lectured during entertainment), but every event and human/societal interaction remains relevant to the present. We all make judgments, face our own prejudices, but, in the end, the question of who you are lies in: do you sit back and shut your mind to it, or do you get up and do something about it? For those who have no choice but to fight, for survival or justice, this series empowers them. For those who've never had to face the question, this series "sneaks in" that message under the guise of pure action entertainment. It is much more well-made and well-written than most TV series; I'm highly disappointed it ended before it could really kick into high gear. --------------------------------------------- Result 9 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I simply could not finish this movie. I tuned out after what I would say is my nomination for the most wretched attempt at sexual suggestion award: a scene in which Pia Zadora, at a picnic, stands between two boys who want her. One (the good boy) pleads for her to see the error of her ways. The other (the bad boy) simply asks if she'd like a hot dog, which he then holds out for her. At crotch level. I hope I'm not spoiling anything to say she turns, and takes the hot dog, with a smile. Just pathetic. --------------------------------------------- Result 10 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] My first attempt at watching this [[ended]] in 8 minutes, roughly after the TV report scene, which I couldn't handle. It went approximately like this:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Visually it's OK, more or less, if you disregard the Egyptian Gods looking like walking turds with rotweiller heads. --------------------------------------------- Result 11 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Revenge is one of my favorite themes in [[film]]. Moreso, "the futility of revenge" is one of my favorite themes in [[film]]. Having seen Gaspar Noe's Irreversible (2002), I was expecting an even more relevant expression of this theme. Instead, this film is a weak half-hearted attempt which expressed [[nothing]] but the film's [[lack]] of conviction and focus.

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

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

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

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

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

Normally I try to take films on their own terms but Descent didn't really seem to know what those were. Thumbs down. --------------------------------------------- Result 12 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Years ago, when I was a poor teenager, my best friend and my brother both had a policy that the person picking the movie should pay. And, while I would never pay to see some of the crap they took me to, I couldn't resist a free trip to the movies! That's how I came to see crap like the second Conan movie and NEVER SAY NEVER AGAIN! Now, despite this being a [[wretched]] movie, it is in places entertaining to watch--in a brain dead sort of way. And, technically the stunts and camera-work are good, so this elevates my rating all the way to a 2! So why is the movie so bad? Well, unlike the first Rambo movie, this one has virtually no plot, Rambo himself only says about 3 words (other than grunts and yells), there is a needless and completely irrelevant and undeveloped "romance" and the movie is one giant (and stupid) special effect. And what STUPIFYINGLY AWFUL special effects. While 12383499143743701 bullets and rockets are shot at Rambo, none have any effect on him and almost every bullet or arrow Rambo shoots hits its mark! And, while the bad guys are using AK-47s, helicopters and rockets, in some scenes all Rambo had is a bow and arrows with what seem like nuclear-powered tips!! The scene where the one bad guy is shooting at him as he slowly and calmly launches one of these exploding arrows is particularly made for dumb viewers! It was wonderfully parodied in UHF starring Weird Al. Plus, HOT SHOTS, PART DEUX also does a funny parody of the genre--not just this stupid scene.

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

All-in-all, a movie so dumb and pointless, it's almost like self-parody! --------------------------------------------- Result 13 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] this has by far been one of the most [[beautiful]] [[portraits]] of a person that I've ever seen on screen. Andy Goldsworthy is a kind of [[man]] that is upon extinction. he views the earth and nature with such admiration and respect that it's primitive in a good sense. his purity, honesty and kindness breathes clearly as you watch him work in such simplistic [[yet]] full of life momentary pieces of art. I was amazed how patiently he created his pieces and how patiently he accepted their [[end]]. [[sometimes]] prematurely, but his Scottish sense of humor [[covers]] his disappointments brilliantly. the film is shoot elegantly and contains the same flow that Goldsworthy's art has. it combines nature and art in a minimal way as it is in itself. Fred Frith's score is organic enough that it blends everything together without interfering with it naturalistic sound. this is overall a [[great]] piece of work in every aspect. it has no boundaries as far as age goes. this has by far been one of the most [[ravishing]] [[headshots]] of a person that I've ever seen on screen. Andy Goldsworthy is a kind of [[dawg]] that is upon extinction. he views the earth and nature with such admiration and respect that it's primitive in a good sense. his purity, honesty and kindness breathes clearly as you watch him work in such simplistic [[nonetheless]] full of life momentary pieces of art. I was amazed how patiently he created his pieces and how patiently he accepted their [[termination]]. [[intermittently]] prematurely, but his Scottish sense of humor [[encompasses]] his disappointments brilliantly. the film is shoot elegantly and contains the same flow that Goldsworthy's art has. it combines nature and art in a minimal way as it is in itself. Fred Frith's score is organic enough that it blends everything together without interfering with it naturalistic sound. this is overall a [[whopping]] piece of work in every aspect. it has no boundaries as far as age goes. --------------------------------------------- Result 14 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Loved Part One, The Impossible Planet, but whoops, what a [[disappointment]] [[part]] two 'The Satan Pit' is. The cliffhanger of something apparently rising out of the pit was - nothing coming out of the pit. Then ages spent crawling round air vents to pad out the [[story]], the Beast a roaring thing [[empty]] of intelligence, so no Doctor/villain [[confrontation]] I'd been anticipating. The TARDIS is somehow inside the pit despite the pit not being open till long after the TARDIS fell through the planet crust. And finally another ready made solution which existed for no logical reason - I mean, why not plunge the Beast into the Hole as soon as the pit opened? Why not plunge him in all those years ago instead of imprisoning him anyway. Why not - I could go on but I've lost interest... Loved Part One, The Impossible Planet, but whoops, what a [[frustration]] [[parties]] two 'The Satan Pit' is. The cliffhanger of something apparently rising out of the pit was - nothing coming out of the pit. Then ages spent crawling round air vents to pad out the [[conte]], the Beast a roaring thing [[hollow]] of intelligence, so no Doctor/villain [[encounter]] I'd been anticipating. The TARDIS is somehow inside the pit despite the pit not being open till long after the TARDIS fell through the planet crust. And finally another ready made solution which existed for no logical reason - I mean, why not plunge the Beast into the Hole as soon as the pit opened? Why not plunge him in all those years ago instead of imprisoning him anyway. Why not - I could go on but I've lost interest... --------------------------------------------- Result 15 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Cavemen" exceeded my expectations, and not in a [[good]] way. It was [[even]] [[worse]] than I thought it would be. [[Basically]], here's the [[show]]: The Cavemen are an alternate race, they face prejudice, etc. Quite possibly the [[stupidest]] [[idea]] ever created; almost being worthy of [[jail]] time for the writers. One show featured the cavemen going into a club, trying to pick up girls, and then nothing else happened. It was reminiscent of listening to a 22 minute Andy Rooney dialog, followed by death by steak knives via midget cannibals. For those who have not seen this show, here's an example of the dialog: "You're sure you're okay with going out with a caveman." "Yeah, that's fine. I've had like 10 - thousand!" Hilarious... Possibly the best writing I've ever witnessed.

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

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

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

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

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

(Unratable honestly...) --------------------------------------------- Result 16 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Ask yourself where she got the gun? Remember what she was taught about the mark's mindset when the con is over? The gun had blanks and it was provided to her from the very beginning.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mantegna does not [[decease]] in the end - the [[shotgun]] had blanks.

There - enough spoilers for you there? This is why people are giving it such [[supreme]] ratings. It's [[unimaginably]] [[preliminary]] because of the hidden ending and how it cons MOST of the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 17 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Real]] cool, [[smart]] [[movie]]. I [[loved]] Sheedy's [[colors]], [[especially]] the purple [[car]]. Alice Drummond is Wise And [[Wonderful]] as Stella. I [[liked]] Sheedy's [[reference]] to how her face had [[gotten]] fatter. The roadside [[dance]] scene is [[brilliant]]. [[Really]] [[liked]] this one. [[Actual]] cool, [[astute]] [[movies]]. I [[worshipped]] Sheedy's [[dye]], [[primarily]] the purple [[auto]]. Alice Drummond is Wise And [[Gorgeous]] as Stella. I [[enjoyed]] Sheedy's [[references]] to how her face had [[become]] fatter. The roadside [[choreography]] scene is [[fantastic]]. [[Truthfully]] [[wished]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 18 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (76%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Ringmaster, Jerry Springer's pathetic excuse for wasting film that should be recycled as toilet paper recently [[destroyed]] my confidence in the art of film. First of all, it was made. Second of all, people went to see it. Third, some people voted it the best movie they have ever seen. If a monkey could make a movie, i'm 100 percent sure that it would be 1 billion times as good. Most crappy movies have their moments, (even Godzilla had a few cool special effects) this film's moment was when I left the theater [[nauseated]]. The only thing that possibly could've made this movie any worse would be if Jerry Springer was the star. If I want to stare at crap for an hour and a half, i'll take a dump in a can. If anyone didn't utterly despise this movie, I pity you, and your children, and your children's children's children; however, contrary to Springer's beliefs, I clearly don't condone children having sex. Ringmaster, Jerry Springer's pathetic excuse for wasting film that should be recycled as toilet paper recently [[annihilated]] my confidence in the art of film. First of all, it was made. Second of all, people went to see it. Third, some people voted it the best movie they have ever seen. If a monkey could make a movie, i'm 100 percent sure that it would be 1 billion times as good. Most crappy movies have their moments, (even Godzilla had a few cool special effects) this film's moment was when I left the theater [[queasy]]. The only thing that possibly could've made this movie any worse would be if Jerry Springer was the star. If I want to stare at crap for an hour and a half, i'll take a dump in a can. If anyone didn't utterly despise this movie, I pity you, and your children, and your children's children's children; however, contrary to Springer's beliefs, I clearly don't condone children having sex. --------------------------------------------- Result 19 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have seen most, if not all of the Laurel & Hardy classic films. I have always enjoyed there comical [[stupidly]], even after watching it over and over again. This [[new]] [[film]] attempts to bring back the classic with two [[new]] [[actors]] who [[resemble]] both Laurel & [[Hardy]], however [[fails]] miserably for various [[reasons]]. One of which is how out of place their cloths are (still early 20th century) [[however]] are both [[portrayed]] in the 90's [[setting]]. Some of the former [[dialogue]] was brought back, however it also fails miserably to come close to the classic series. This film [[could]] very well be the [[worst]] [[film]] I have ever seen and should be pulled off the shelf and locked away [[forever]]. The [[real]] [[Laurel]] & [[Hardy]] are surly spinning in their [[graves]] at such a [[bad]] [[imitation]]. I have seen most, if not all of the Laurel & Hardy classic films. I have always enjoyed there comical [[foolishly]], even after watching it over and over again. This [[newest]] [[cinematography]] attempts to bring back the classic with two [[nouveau]] [[protagonists]] who [[resembling]] both Laurel & [[Sturdy]], however [[fail]] miserably for various [[motifs]]. One of which is how out of place their cloths are (still early 20th century) [[yet]] are both [[depicted]] in the 90's [[configured]]. Some of the former [[discussions]] was brought back, however it also fails miserably to come close to the classic series. This film [[did]] very well be the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever seen and should be pulled off the shelf and locked away [[eternally]]. The [[genuine]] [[Laurier]] & [[Resilient]] are surly spinning in their [[gravesite]] at such a [[amiss]] [[mimicry]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 20 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Barbra Streisand's [[debut]] [[television]] [[special]] is [[still]] a [[pinnacle]] moment in entertainment [[history]] - in any media. Cleverly divided into three [[separate]] [[acts]] (to [[minimize]] the [[interruption]] of commercial breaks), Streisand made the bold-yet-masterful [[decision]] to [[drop]] the typical variety show [[format]] of the time (which is why there is no guest stars nor forced banter) and carry the entire show on her shoulders alone. The risky [[move]] [[paid]] off enormously, as MY NAME IS BARBRA set a new [[standard]] for musical programming on television.

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

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

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

Streisand performs her immortal ballad version of "Happy Days Are Here Again" as the closing credits roll by on the left-hand side of the screen. The iconic finish to the number reaffirms to the viewer that he or she has indeed seen something truly special. MY NAME IS BARBRA was a huge rating triumph when first aired, and it eventually picked up five Emmy awards in addition to spawning two Top-Five, Gold-selling soundtrack albums. Watching it all again, it's absolutely no surprise. Barbra Streisand's [[infancy]] [[tv]] [[especial]] is [[however]] a [[culmination]] moment in entertainment [[story]] - in any media. Cleverly divided into three [[seperate]] [[act]] (to [[lessen]] the [[disruption]] of commercial breaks), Streisand made the bold-yet-masterful [[rulings]] to [[dips]] the typical variety show [[layout]] of the time (which is why there is no guest stars nor forced banter) and carry the entire show on her shoulders alone. The risky [[budge]] [[salaried]] off enormously, as MY NAME IS BARBRA set a new [[norms]] for musical programming on television.

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

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

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

Streisand performs her immortal ballad version of "Happy Days Are Here Again" as the closing credits roll by on the left-hand side of the screen. The iconic finish to the number reaffirms to the viewer that he or she has indeed seen something truly special. MY NAME IS BARBRA was a huge rating triumph when first aired, and it eventually picked up five Emmy awards in addition to spawning two Top-Five, Gold-selling soundtrack albums. Watching it all again, it's absolutely no surprise. --------------------------------------------- Result 21 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie in an early preview, and I cannot stress enough how bad I thought this film was. From the very beginning, the audience was groaning over Pacino's awful southern accent. Poor Al looked really, really haggard, and I can't decide whether this was purposely part of his role as a drug addicted publicist, or perhaps he just didn't get any sleep before coming to the set. Much worse than Pacino's close ups, however, is the wretched excuse for a plot. Early in the film we are given indications that Pacino's character is gay, and I suspect that is what the screenwriter had originally intended. Later, however, we are supposed to suspend our incredulity and believe that both Tea Leoni and Kim Basinger (both of whom are sleepwalking through lame roles) lust after this elderly, half dead looking, effeminate man with the ridiculous accent. The worst part overall was the main plot thread, which had to do with some corporate espionage that is never fully explained and we never, ever care about in the slightest. Because this was a preview I will reserve my final judgment, because of the possibility of re-shoots and editing, but you can bet I will not pay a cent to see this in theaters. --------------------------------------------- Result 22 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Unfortunately there was not a 0 for a rating or else I would've chosen it. This movie [[lacks]] the star power that the original movie had in such abundance. Carol Burnett, Albert Finney, Tim Curry, Bernadette Peters, Edward Hermann, the innocence of newcomer Aileen Quinn, and expert directing from seasoned pro John Huston (father of actress Angelica Huston)is what made this film so charming. Even the 1999 remake with Kathy Bates, Victor Garber, Alan Cumming, and Kristin Chenoweth had more to offer than this [[sorry]] [[excuse]] for a sequel. Before she did this movie all Ashley Johnson was known for was her role as little Chrissie Seaver on the prime time show Growing Pains. She had a few bit parts in movies but I don't know who thought she had talent enough to carry a movie on her own. And adding Joan Collins as Lady Edwina Hogbottom, ridiculous! They couldn't get good enough actors to play the major roles like Daddy Warbucks, Miss Hannigan, and Annie but they will sign Joan Collins to play some British lady? It doesn't surprise me that this movie was as [[bad]] as it was. The critics were right to have not agreed with this movie, even if it was only made for TV, it was a poor sequel to an otherwise lovable movie. Unfortunately there was not a 0 for a rating or else I would've chosen it. This movie [[dearth]] the star power that the original movie had in such abundance. Carol Burnett, Albert Finney, Tim Curry, Bernadette Peters, Edward Hermann, the innocence of newcomer Aileen Quinn, and expert directing from seasoned pro John Huston (father of actress Angelica Huston)is what made this film so charming. Even the 1999 remake with Kathy Bates, Victor Garber, Alan Cumming, and Kristin Chenoweth had more to offer than this [[desolated]] [[alibi]] for a sequel. Before she did this movie all Ashley Johnson was known for was her role as little Chrissie Seaver on the prime time show Growing Pains. She had a few bit parts in movies but I don't know who thought she had talent enough to carry a movie on her own. And adding Joan Collins as Lady Edwina Hogbottom, ridiculous! They couldn't get good enough actors to play the major roles like Daddy Warbucks, Miss Hannigan, and Annie but they will sign Joan Collins to play some British lady? It doesn't surprise me that this movie was as [[wicked]] as it was. The critics were right to have not agreed with this movie, even if it was only made for TV, it was a poor sequel to an otherwise lovable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 23 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] First of all, 'St. Ives' the [[film]] is only fairly loosely based on the Robert [[Louis]] Stevenson story of the same name, but for once, this is not a [[criticism]]. The original novel was a work-in-progress, unfinished at the author's death, and in freely adapting it and giving it an [[ending]], the film-makers have [[brought]] to life some endearing [[characters]] who, although different from Stevenson's originals, would, I am sure, have charmed and amused him.

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

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

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

My main quibbles with the film concern settings and costumes. In the book, the castle in which Jacques is a prisoner is clearly Edinburgh, but the film, shot in Ireland, Germany and France has 'Highlandised' the setting, making the retention of place names such as Swanston, Inveresk and Queensferry decidedly incongruous. The costumes too are a real hotch-potch, from 1780s through to the period in which it is set. While this would not be implausible with more down-market characters "making do", it seems odd for well-to-do ladies such as the heroines to be wearing 1780s gowns in 1813. Clearly, the costuming decision was æsthetic: these earlier styles are visually far more appealing and elegant than Regency fashions, and they work in the idealised world of the film. As a whole, 'St. Ives' is 90 minutes of pure delight. First of all, 'St. Ives' the [[flick]] is only fairly loosely based on the Robert [[Louie]] Stevenson story of the same name, but for once, this is not a [[critique]]. The original novel was a work-in-progress, unfinished at the author's death, and in freely adapting it and giving it an [[ceases]], the film-makers have [[tabled]] to life some endearing [[personage]] who, although different from Stevenson's originals, would, I am sure, have charmed and amused him.

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

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

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

My main quibbles with the film concern settings and costumes. In the book, the castle in which Jacques is a prisoner is clearly Edinburgh, but the film, shot in Ireland, Germany and France has 'Highlandised' the setting, making the retention of place names such as Swanston, Inveresk and Queensferry decidedly incongruous. The costumes too are a real hotch-potch, from 1780s through to the period in which it is set. While this would not be implausible with more down-market characters "making do", it seems odd for well-to-do ladies such as the heroines to be wearing 1780s gowns in 1813. Clearly, the costuming decision was æsthetic: these earlier styles are visually far more appealing and elegant than Regency fashions, and they work in the idealised world of the film. As a whole, 'St. Ives' is 90 minutes of pure delight. --------------------------------------------- Result 24 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I've read a [[lot]] of [[comments]] about the film and how it's so [[hard]] for people to believe that it is a sequel to [[Henry]] Fool, and [[even]] though it technically is, I [[think]] that Fay Grim needs to be looked at as an [[entirely]] [[different]] film. [[Just]] because it is the sequel doesn't mean that it has to be a direct [[continuation]] of the first, and I [[enjoyed]] that so much about it. The whole point of the [[film]] was to change direction from the first, which makes [[sense]] because the [[movie]] isn't called [[Henry]] Fool 2, it's Fay Grim. All that aside, the [[film]], I thought, was so well made and thought out that it actually surprised me. I was expecting to rent another nearly-released-straight-to-video film and have to endure 2 hours of bad [[editing]] and an almost hard to follow story-line (aka parker's last direct to video feature the Oh in Ohio) but this was so surprisingly well focused that it almost doesn't seem so, which I absolutely loved. There are so many nuances in the film making and writing that I crave to see in films, but never do. The cinematography was brilliant due to it's simplicity and truly making the film seem 'Grim' throughout - in terms of setting. The writing was so well put together as well, whoever said this movie isn't as witty as Henry Fool needs to watch again and actually listen; I almost can't even begin to explain how actually hilarious it was, and pertinent. And well, Parker Posey, who could complain? The scene in which Fool and Jalal were talking in the dark was so captivating and emotional. And I thought the spy-ness throughout the film was just so hilarious and spot on (in hindsight because i do agree that at times during you kind of felt lost). The main thing that struck me so powerfully about the film, and i believe the point of the film, was Parker's love and naivety about Fool, which was so endearing and turned, yes very quickly, from denial to outright passion. The last five minutes of the film were perfect. Obviously there were things that weren't excellent, but nothing is perfect; some of the acting was poor, and at times I did think that some of the new back story and dialogue about terrorism got a little hard to follow and out of hand, but in the end you got it and didn't even mind that at the time it may have slipped from your comprehension. (This may also have to do with Goldblum's tendency to talk extremely fast) On the whole I would say that it was probably one of the best films I've seen this year; stylistically pleasing, clever and witty writing, performances that were so impressive I now have gained new respect for some of the actors, and a truly touching film, and don't forget, a complete departure from Fool. Which was the point. I've read a [[batch]] of [[sightings]] about the film and how it's so [[arduous]] for people to believe that it is a sequel to [[Gregg]] Fool, and [[yet]] though it technically is, I [[believing]] that Fay Grim needs to be looked at as an [[totally]] [[assorted]] film. [[Mere]] because it is the sequel doesn't mean that it has to be a direct [[continuity]] of the first, and I [[liked]] that so much about it. The whole point of the [[filmmaking]] was to change direction from the first, which makes [[sensing]] because the [[flick]] isn't called [[Henryk]] Fool 2, it's Fay Grim. All that aside, the [[cinematography]], I thought, was so well made and thought out that it actually surprised me. I was expecting to rent another nearly-released-straight-to-video film and have to endure 2 hours of bad [[editorial]] and an almost hard to follow story-line (aka parker's last direct to video feature the Oh in Ohio) but this was so surprisingly well focused that it almost doesn't seem so, which I absolutely loved. There are so many nuances in the film making and writing that I crave to see in films, but never do. The cinematography was brilliant due to it's simplicity and truly making the film seem 'Grim' throughout - in terms of setting. The writing was so well put together as well, whoever said this movie isn't as witty as Henry Fool needs to watch again and actually listen; I almost can't even begin to explain how actually hilarious it was, and pertinent. And well, Parker Posey, who could complain? The scene in which Fool and Jalal were talking in the dark was so captivating and emotional. And I thought the spy-ness throughout the film was just so hilarious and spot on (in hindsight because i do agree that at times during you kind of felt lost). The main thing that struck me so powerfully about the film, and i believe the point of the film, was Parker's love and naivety about Fool, which was so endearing and turned, yes very quickly, from denial to outright passion. The last five minutes of the film were perfect. Obviously there were things that weren't excellent, but nothing is perfect; some of the acting was poor, and at times I did think that some of the new back story and dialogue about terrorism got a little hard to follow and out of hand, but in the end you got it and didn't even mind that at the time it may have slipped from your comprehension. (This may also have to do with Goldblum's tendency to talk extremely fast) On the whole I would say that it was probably one of the best films I've seen this year; stylistically pleasing, clever and witty writing, performances that were so impressive I now have gained new respect for some of the actors, and a truly touching film, and don't forget, a complete departure from Fool. Which was the point. --------------------------------------------- Result 25 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a [[classic]] action [[flick]] from the '80s featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger in one of his most [[memorable]] [[roles]]. Set in a futuristic police state where the [[government]] controls everything, [[including]] the [[television]] [[networks]]. One of their most popular TV [[shows]] is "The Running Man", where [[convicted]] felons are hunted down and killed for the entertainment of millions. It's set up [[like]] a game [[show]], where the audience [[votes]] for their [[favorite]] "stalkers", trained killers who hunt down and kill the show's unlucky "contestants". Audience members also win prizes for correctly predicting who will be killed by whom. And the [[host]] is played by [[none]] other than Family Feud's Richard Dawson, who's game show experience makes him well suited for this role. When Ben Richards (Arnold) is falsely accused of mass murder, he is forced to play this sadistic game.

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

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

[[Overall]], this is a [[fun]] film & I [[highly]] [[recommend]] it. 9 out of 10! This is a [[conventional]] action [[gesture]] from the '80s featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger in one of his most [[landmark]] [[duties]]. Set in a futuristic police state where the [[councils]] controls everything, [[consisting]] the [[tv]] [[networking]]. One of their most popular TV [[demonstrates]] is "The Running Man", where [[indicted]] felons are hunted down and killed for the entertainment of millions. It's set up [[iike]] a game [[spectacle]], where the audience [[vote]] for their [[preferred]] "stalkers", trained killers who hunt down and kill the show's unlucky "contestants". Audience members also win prizes for correctly predicting who will be killed by whom. And the [[reception]] is played by [[nothing]] other than Family Feud's Richard Dawson, who's game show experience makes him well suited for this role. When Ben Richards (Arnold) is falsely accused of mass murder, he is forced to play this sadistic game.

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

Whether it was intended or not, this movie serves as a great [[travesty]] of today's "[[Realism]] TV" [[mania]]. Already there are [[several]] [[program]] that [[shows]] people enduring [[pains]] and humiliation for the [[recreational]] of [[audience]], and [[yet]] [[courts]] [[instance]] are televised for their "entertainment value". Running [[Men]] [[demonstrating]] what [[ought]] happen if reality [[TELEVISION]] [[struck]] rock bottom, and it is a [[dreadful]] [[imagery]]. One can only hope that the [[grids]] have the common sense not to let it go that far.

[[Entire]], this is a [[droll]] film & I [[unimaginably]] [[recommendation]] it. 9 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 26 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] awhile back (while [[working]] on a [[trailer]] for the film's production company) and it was TERRIBLE. Hewitt is mediocre at best, Hopkins phones his performance in (but [[still]] [[blows]] away Hewitt in their scenes together) and Alec [[looks]] [[bored]]. [[Trust]] me on this: you should [[avoid]] this [[film]] like the [[plague]] if it ever [[gets]] [[released]]. It [[seems]] to [[go]] on [[forever]] as the [[tired]] [[plot]] [[unfolds]] at a snail's pace. It is [[relentlessly]] unfunny, the [[cinematography]] is crappy and the [[direction]] is pedestrian. Alec Baldwin should [[go]] to [[film]] school if he [[plans]] to direct again. [[In]] terms of his acting, his character is [[totally]] unlikable, which makes it impossible to [[root]] for him. Dan Ackroyd is pretty [[funny]] and the [[surprising]] [[makeup]] of the jury [[near]] the film's end is [[cute]], but this film is just [[plain]] [[awful]]. I [[observed]] this [[films]] awhile back (while [[worked]] on a [[camper]] for the film's production company) and it was TERRIBLE. Hewitt is mediocre at best, Hopkins phones his performance in (but [[again]] [[strokes]] away Hewitt in their scenes together) and Alec [[seems]] [[drilled]]. [[Trusted]] me on this: you should [[avoided]] this [[cinematography]] like the [[pestilence]] if it ever [[get]] [[liberated]]. It [[looks]] to [[going]] on [[eternally]] as the [[jaded]] [[intrigue]] [[unfold]] at a snail's pace. It is [[ruthlessly]] unfunny, the [[cinematographic]] is crappy and the [[orientation]] is pedestrian. Alec Baldwin should [[going]] to [[movies]] school if he [[scheme]] to direct again. [[Throughout]] terms of his acting, his character is [[perfectly]] unlikable, which makes it impossible to [[rooted]] for him. Dan Ackroyd is pretty [[humorous]] and the [[incredible]] [[composition]] of the jury [[nearer]] the film's end is [[loveable]], but this film is just [[lowland]] [[scary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 27 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[could]] not agree more with the quote "this is one of the [[best]] [[films]] ever made." [[If]] you [[think]] Vanilla Sky is simply a "re-make," you [[could]] not be more [[wrong]]. There is [[tremendous]] [[depth]] in this [[film]]: visually, musically, and [[emotionally]].

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

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

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

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

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

Bottom [[line]]: Vanilla Sky is in a league of its own. I [[did]] not agree more with the quote "this is one of the [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] ever made." [[Unless]] you [[reckon]] Vanilla Sky is simply a "re-make," you [[would]] not be more [[improper]]. There is [[gargantuan]] [[depths]] in this [[filmmaking]]: visually, musically, and [[excitedly]].

Visually, because the film is [[mild]] and delicate at [[period]] ([[swift]] scenes with [[Sophia]]) and at other times [[forceful]] and intense ([[Period]] [[Squares]], post-climactic scenes).

The [[musician]] and [[noises]] [[necktie]] into this [[cinematography]] so [[utterly]]. Without the music, the [[stories]] is only half told. [[Juventus]] Wilson created an [[affective]], yet eclectic, score for the [[flick]] which [[wo]] not be more [[adequate]] for such a dream-like [[subject]] ([[despite]] never [[publicized]], I was [[capable]] to get my hands on the [[upfront]] score for about $60. If you [[peek]] [[harsh]], you may be [[capable]] to [[finds]] a [[copying]] yourself). Crowe's other musical selections, such as The Beach [[Guys]], Josh Rouse, Spiritualized, Sigur Ros, the Monkees, etcetera etcetera, are [[apart]] [[perfection]] fits for the [[flick]] (Crowe has an ear for [[awesome]] [[musicians]]).

More importantly, the emotional [[item]] in this [[flick]] (i.[[f]]. love, [[grief]], regret) are very [[forceful]], and are [[intensified]] tenfold by the visual and musical [[experiences]], as well as the [[artful]] dialogue; I [[acknowledge]], the elevator scene brings [[rip]] to my [[eye]] [[period]] and time again.

The [[better]] [[portion]] of this [[movies]] [[conversely]] (as if it [[wo]] [[obtain]] any [[improved]]) is that it is so [[shrewdly]] [[devised]] such that each [[times]] you see the [[flick]], you will [[capture]] [[somethings]] new--so watch [[intently]], and be [[authored]] to [[thinks]]! [[Convinced]], a [[subject]] becomes [[conspicuous]] after the first or [[secondly]] watch, but there is [[permanently]] more to the [[conte]] than you [[thinking]].

This is [[conveniently]] Cameron Crowe's [[nicest]] [[jobs]], and [[utterly]] a [[jobs]] of brilliance. Much of my film-making and musical inspiration [[occurs]] from this work [[mere]]. It has [[openly]] [[poked]] my [[living]], as [[real]] art has a [[trends]] of doing. It [[unceasingly]] [[dumbfounded]] me that there are [[various]] people that [[notable]] [[thankful]] this [[flick]] for what it is (I [[guessing]] to [[fathom]] [[authentic]] art is an art itself).

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

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

And let's not forget the fact that our protagonist is a shallow jerk who we would like to believe can change, but that road is full of embarrassingly bad dialogue, appallingly hideous "gags," and a lot of Mormon "in-jokes" that anyone in their right mind, LDS or not, should consider purely *stupid*! This has to be one of the worst films I've ever seen! --------------------------------------------- Result 29 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (57%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] In the ravaged wasteland of the future, mankind is terrorized by Cyborgs—robots with human features—that have discovered a new source of fuel: human blood. Commanded by their vicious leader Jōb (Lance Henriksen), the Cyborgs prepare to overtake Taos, a densely populated human outpost.

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

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

Five-time kick-boxing champion Kathy Long has all the right moves in this high-speed adventure that delivers plenty of action. Also stars Gary Daniels (as David) and Scott Paulin (as Simon). --------------------------------------------- Result 30 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] There really isn't much to say about this movie....it's crude, but [[fun]].

Plot outline (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

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

_____________________________________

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

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

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

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

James "Black Wolf" Johnston There really isn't much to say about this movie....it's crude, but [[droll]].

Plot outline (From IMDB)

_____________________________________

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

_____________________________________

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

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

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

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

James "Black Wolf" Johnston --------------------------------------------- Result 31 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a more interesting than [[usual]] [[porn]] movie, because it is a fantasy adventure.The production values are high and the acting is(believe it or not) pretty [[good]],especially Jenna Jameson.It`s [[also]] in widescreen which helps,it gives a [[feeling]] of a [[real]] [[motion]] [[picture]] and [[NOT]] a [[porn]] movie.But,of course it is a porn and a really [[good]] one with [[nice]] [[costumes]],fine atmosphere and scenery.And by the [[way]],the sex IS [[hot]].

Watch out for this one... This is a more interesting than [[habitual]] [[interracial]] movie, because it is a fantasy adventure.The production values are high and the acting is(believe it or not) pretty [[alright]],especially Jenna Jameson.It`s [[furthermore]] in widescreen which helps,it gives a [[sentiment]] of a [[actual]] [[petition]] [[imaging]] and [[NAH]] a [[interracial]] movie.But,of course it is a porn and a really [[alright]] one with [[pleasurable]] [[costume]],fine atmosphere and scenery.And by the [[route]],the sex IS [[sexier]].

Watch out for this one... --------------------------------------------- Result 32 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The great cinematic musicals were made between 1950 and 1970. This twenty year spell can be rightly labelled the “Golden Era” of the genre. There were musicals prior to that, and there have been musicals since… but the true classics seem invariably to have been made during that period. Singin’ In The Rain, An American In Paris, The Band Wagon, Seven Brides For Seven Brothers, Oklahoma, South Pacific, The King And I, and many more, stand tall as much cherished products of the age. Perhaps the last great musical of the “Golden Era” is Carol Reed’s 1968 “Oliver”. Freely adapted from Dickens’ novel, this vibrant musical is a film version of a successful stage production. It is a magnificent film, winner of six Oscars, including the Best Picture award.

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

“Oliver” is a brilliantly assembled film, consistently pleasing to the eye and excellently acted by its talented cast. Moody recreates his stage role with considerable verve, stealing the film from the youngsters with his energetic performance as Fagin. Lester and Wild do well too as the young pickpockets, while Wallis enthusiastically fleshes out the Nancy role and Reed generates genuine despicableness as Sikes. The musical numbers are staged with incredible precision and sense of spectacle – Onna White’s Oscar-winning choreography helps make the song-and-dance set pieces so memorable, but the lively performers and the skillful direction of Carol Reed also play their part. The unforgettable tunes include “Food Glorious Food”, “Consider Yourself”, “You’ve Got To Pick A Pocket Or Two”, “I’d Do Anything” and “Oom-Pah-Pah” – all immensely catchy songs, conveyed via very well put together sequences. The film is a thoroughly entertaining experience and never really loses momentum over its entire 153 minute duration. Sit back and enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 33 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This was an exteremely [[good]] historical drama. John Turturro is excellent as the tortured [[genius]] Luzhin and [[brilliantly]] portrays the character's [[manic]] affectations such as his strange dancing. Emily Watson is fine in her [[support]] role as the sensitive lover Natalia.

The relatonship between chess and near madness is well explored by Gorris and familiar Nabokov preoccupations such as 'eternal innocence' (i.e. 'Lolita') are evident in this [[film]]. I [[think]] I will now go on to read the novel. It was a [[touching]] and [[tragic]] [[ending]] and it was [[hard]] to keep a dry eye. [[Brilliant]] [[movie]]! This was an exteremely [[alright]] historical drama. John Turturro is excellent as the tortured [[prodigy]] Luzhin and [[beautifully]] portrays the character's [[fussy]] affectations such as his strange dancing. Emily Watson is fine in her [[assistance]] role as the sensitive lover Natalia.

The relatonship between chess and near madness is well explored by Gorris and familiar Nabokov preoccupations such as 'eternal innocence' (i.e. 'Lolita') are evident in this [[filmmaking]]. I [[reckon]] I will now go on to read the novel. It was a [[touch]] and [[dire]] [[ended]] and it was [[laborious]] to keep a dry eye. [[Admirable]] [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 34 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was an incredibly stupid movie. It was possibly the worst movie I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through. I cannot fathom how it ranks a rating of 5 or 6............. --------------------------------------------- Result 35 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Exquisite]] comedy starring Marian Davies (with the [[affable]] William Haines). Young Peggy [[arrives]] in Hollywood [[seeking]] [[stardom]]. Cameo performances showcase "all the stars in MGM's heaven" in the famous commissary scene, plus [[lots]] of vintage film making detail for the scholar. Pic also [[captures]] for posterity Davies' famous, wickedly [[sarcastic]] impersonations of the top stars of the day (her Swanson is a beaut!).

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

My print was perfect. Story, direction, acting an authentic charm and a must for all silent afficinados. [[Sumptuous]] comedy starring Marian Davies (with the [[jovial]] William Haines). Young Peggy [[arriving]] in Hollywood [[attempting]] [[glory]]. Cameo performances showcase "all the stars in MGM's heaven" in the famous commissary scene, plus [[batch]] of vintage film making detail for the scholar. Pic also [[apprehended]] for posterity Davies' famous, wickedly [[sarcasm]] impersonations of the top stars of the day (her Swanson is a beaut!).

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

My print was perfect. Story, direction, acting an authentic charm and a must for all silent afficinados. --------------------------------------------- Result 36 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Why should you watch this? There are certainly no reasons why you shouldn't watch it! [[Superbly]] and amusingly directed by [[Albert]] and David Maysles, Grey [[Gardens]] was [[originally]] [[intended]] to be a film on the gentrification of East Hampton, but it turned out to the [[brothers]] that it would be more interesting to produce a [[study]] on the eccentric life of the two Edith Bouvier Beales, the aunt and [[cousin]] of Jacqueline [[Kennedy]] Onassis. Their [[life]] was certainly an [[amusing]] one ([[Edith]] spent most of her day in [[bed]] singing operas, [[Edie]] [[performing]] pirouettes and majorette dances with their [[many]] [[cats]], one was named Ted Z. Kennedy) The [[film]] is interesting because it is both funny and [[sad]] - Edith [[died]] [[shortly]] after the [[film]] was [[released]] (in [[February]] 1977) [[aged]] 82 after [[experiencing]] some of the fame that she and Edie received after the [[film]] (she danced and sang in a nightclub Edie Beale Jr was born in 1925 and is [[still]] living in Miami [[Beach]].This [[film]] is both engaging and spellbounding. Why should you watch this? There are certainly no reasons why you shouldn't watch it! [[Astonishingly]] and amusingly directed by [[Hugh]] and David Maysles, Grey [[Garden]] was [[initially]] [[aimed]] to be a film on the gentrification of East Hampton, but it turned out to the [[plymouth]] that it would be more interesting to produce a [[researches]] on the eccentric life of the two Edith Bouvier Beales, the aunt and [[cuz]] of Jacqueline [[Jfk]] Onassis. Their [[living]] was certainly an [[entertaining]] one ([[Mabel]] spent most of her day in [[bedside]] singing operas, [[Caballero]] [[fulfilling]] pirouettes and majorette dances with their [[several]] [[chats]], one was named Ted Z. Kennedy) The [[cinematic]] is interesting because it is both funny and [[unfortunate]] - Edith [[perished]] [[soon]] after the [[movie]] was [[publicized]] (in [[Feb]] 1977) [[ageing]] 82 after [[undergoing]] some of the fame that she and Edie received after the [[films]] (she danced and sang in a nightclub Edie Beale Jr was born in 1925 and is [[however]] living in Miami [[Beaches]].This [[kino]] is both engaging and spellbounding. --------------------------------------------- Result 37 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] blows my mind how this movie got made. i [[watched]] it while i worked at home writing [[emails]] and answering the phone -- i ONLY watched it because i [[hoped]] the "[[revenge]]" part would be good. [[needless]] to say, the revenge and the [[forced]] plot [[twists]] were not worth the emails during which they were watched. in fact, i'm not [[even]] sure what happened at the [[end]] any more. the acting was as [[bad]] as re-enactment scenarios on the "[[FBI]] Files" show -- by far, the worst re-enactments (really only "Arrest and Trial" can [[possibly]] be as bad at re-enactments). i didn't even know that the leading man was in Third Eye Blind until i looked the movie up here on IMDb, but its obvious why he hasn't made any movies since. i hope he is a good [[singer]]. blows my mind how this movie got made. i [[saw]] it while i worked at home writing [[mails]] and answering the phone -- i ONLY watched it because i [[desired]] the "[[vengeance]]" part would be good. [[pointless]] to say, the revenge and the [[coerced]] plot [[spins]] were not worth the emails during which they were watched. in fact, i'm not [[yet]] sure what happened at the [[ceases]] any more. the acting was as [[mala]] as re-enactment scenarios on the "[[FBL]] Files" show -- by far, the worst re-enactments (really only "Arrest and Trial" can [[perhaps]] be as bad at re-enactments). i didn't even know that the leading man was in Third Eye Blind until i looked the movie up here on IMDb, but its obvious why he hasn't made any movies since. i hope he is a good [[diva]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 38 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] [[Necessarily]] [[ridiculous]] film version the literary classic "Moby Dick". John Barrymore is Captain Ahab, who falls in love with the pastor's daughter, Joan Bennett. His brother Derek is a rival for Ms. Bennett's affections. When Mr. Barrymore loses his leg in a whaling accident, Bennett rejects him. He must slay the whale and win Bennett back...

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

**** Moby Dick (8/14/30) Lloyd Bacon ~ John Barrymore, Joan Bennett, Lloyd Hughes [[Invariably]] [[nonsensical]] film version the literary classic "Moby Dick". John Barrymore is Captain Ahab, who falls in love with the pastor's daughter, Joan Bennett. His brother Derek is a rival for Ms. Bennett's affections. When Mr. Barrymore loses his leg in a whaling accident, Bennett rejects him. He must slay the whale and win Bennett back...

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

**** Moby Dick (8/14/30) Lloyd Bacon ~ John Barrymore, Joan Bennett, Lloyd Hughes --------------------------------------------- Result 39 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Wow, what can I say about this film? It's a lousy piece of [[crap]]. I'm surprised that it [[got]] rated as [[high]] as it did. What's wrong with this [[film]]? Here's a [[better]] [[question]]: What's NOT wrong with this film.

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

The [[conte]] itself is just [[baloney]] and cliché. Here's [[quite]] much what it's about...Some kinda nerdy [[kiddo]] with no [[chums]] gets [[chose]] on, gets killed, and [[happens]] back as a scarecrow for [[avenge]]. "[[Totality]]" of that is packed into 86 [[mins]] of [[fruitless]] [[kino]]. If you haven't seen this movie don't waste your time watching it. Also, the second one isn't much better, so don't bother watching that either...I rated this movie a three because I liked the scarecrow's outfit, not because there was [[something]] good about the movie. I think you get the picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 40 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Daniel Day Lewis is one of the [[best]] actors of our [[time]] and one of my [[favorites]]. It is [[amazing]] how much he [[throws]] himself in each of the characters he plays [[making]] them [[real]].

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

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

I like [[every]] one of Day Lewis's performances (I have mixed [[feelings]] about his performance in GONY) but I believe that his [[greatest]] role was [[Christy]] Brown in "My [[Left]] Foot" Daniel Day Lewis is one of the [[better]] actors of our [[period]] and one of my [[favourites]]. It is [[striking]] how much he [[sheds]] himself in each of the characters he plays [[doing]] them [[actual]].

I [[rember]], [[several]] years ago, we had a [[part]] in our [[haus]] - the [[mates]] came over, we were [[sit]] [[throughout]] the [[tables]], [[catering]], [[drink]] the [[vineyard]], [[speaking]], [[kidding]] - having a good [[times]]. The [[TELEVISION]] was on - there was a [[cinematography]] which we did not [[payroll]] much [[beware]] to. Then, suddenly, all of us [[cease]] [[speaking]] and [[kidding]]. The glasses did not clink, the forks did not [[budge]], the [[dietary]] was [[obtaining]] cold on the [[plaque]]. We [[would]] not [[taking]] our [[eye]] off the screen where the young crippled [[males]] whose [[total]] [[organ]] was against him and who only had a control over his [[exited]] [[feet]], [[opted]] up a [[slice]] of chalk with his foot and for what [[appeared]] the [[virginity]] [[attempting]] to [[writes]] just one word on the [[storey]]. When he [[finalized]] writing that one word, we all knew that we had [[saw]] not one but three triumphs - the [[victory]] of a human will and spirit, the [[victory]] of the [[theatre]] which was [[capable]] to [[caught]] the [[time]] like this on the [[movie]], and the [[win]] of an [[actress]] who did not act but who [[was]] his [[trait]].

Jim Sheridan's "My [[Exited]] Foot" is an riveting, unsentimental bio-drama about [[Christie]] Brown, the [[dawg]] who was [[birthed]] with cerebral [[immobility]] in a [[Belfast]] [[squatter]]; who [[was]] an [[entertainer]] and a [[screenwriter]] and who [[detected]] a [[likes]] of his [[living]].

I like [[any]] one of Day Lewis's performances (I have mixed [[sentiments]] about his performance in GONY) but I believe that his [[biggest]] role was [[Christie]] Brown in "My [[Exited]] Foot" --------------------------------------------- Result 41 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] [[Considering]] all the teen [[films]] like "the Breakfast Club" and "Pretty In Pink" that are lionized. It is [[surprising]] that this one is so ignored.

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

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

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

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

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

The movie is kind of ahead of its' time. One kid asks another kid what birth control she uses. She says she is doing nothing to need birth control. She replies (wrongly) "oral sex". --------------------------------------------- Result 42 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Sometimes it [[takes]] a film-making master like Kubrick to bring that extra little something, that unique, untractable and elusive ingredient that transforms a great movie or a great [[script]] into a [[masterpiece]], one for the ages.

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

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

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

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

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

Kubrick's miss-en-scene is, as [[normally]], [[super]]. The [[cinema]] progresses with a brisk, sharp, lively [[cadence]], [[yet]] [[despite]] it's neither [[prompt]] nor [[highly]] [[editing]] and it clocks at no [[lowest]] than 160 minutes. The camera prowls through the lavish [[hallways]] of the [[Ignore]] [[Motel]] like it is some [[sort]] of [[mystical]] labyrinth rife for [[explorer]], linear [[tracing]] [[punches]] exposing the impeccably decorated interiors in all their grandeur. There's a symmetry and geometrical [[approaches]] in how Kubrick perceives space that [[resembles]] me very much of how Japanese directors [[work]] in the sixties. As if what is [[portrayed]] is [[negligible]] to how all the [[multiple]] [[component]] are balanced [[interior]] the [[frames]].

Certain [[pictures]] [[obviously]] [[standing]] out. The first [[filmed]] of Jack's typewriter, [[accompanying]] off screen from the thumps of a ball, like [[drum]] of doom coming from some other floor or produced by the [[typist]] itself as [[albeit]] it is an [[tool]] of doom all by itself, [[then]] on [[exhibiting]] to be [[anything]] short of just that. A red river flowing through the hotel's [[elevator]] in [[sluggish]] [[petition]]. Jack [[hit]] the door with the axe, the camera [[transferring]] along with him, [[tracks]] the action as it [[arrives]] [[however]] of remaining static, as [[despite]] it's the camera piercing through the [[doorway]] and not the [[ax]]. The [[super]] [[vite]] zoom in the kid's face [[overlap]] us inside his head before we see the two [[decedent]] [[girl]] from his POV. And of course, the [[toilet]] scene.

[[Very]] has been [[says]] of [[Jacques]] Nicholson's obtrusive overacting. [[Her]] [[irate]] is not [[utterly]] successful, because, well, he's [[Jacque]] Nicholson. The [[dude]] looks half-mad anyway. [[Gaming]] [[crazy]] turns him into an [[exaggerating]] caricature of himself. Shelley Duvall on the other hand is one of the most inspired casting choices Kubrick ever had. Coming from a streak of [[admirable]] performances for Robert Altman in the seventies (3 WOMEN, THIEVES LIKE US, NASHVILLE), she brings to her character the right amounts of fragility and emotional distress. A terrific and very underrated actress. --------------------------------------------- Result 43 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Action, horror, sci-fi, exploitation director Fred Olen Ray [[shows]] he has some talent as a director. Character actor William Smith is one of the best tough/bad guys in the industry. He treats the viewer with the best acting performance of his career. As for Randy Travis he gives his best Lee Van Cleef impression. He's not bad in the film. [[Smith]] and [[Travis]] [[make]] the [[movie]]. As for the rest of the cast none of them [[really]] stand out. Ray did a [[great]] job directing this [[flick]], Smith and Travis were good, I'd give this B western on a scale of one to ten(ten being the [[best]]) a seven. Action, horror, sci-fi, exploitation director Fred Olen Ray [[denotes]] he has some talent as a director. Character actor William Smith is one of the best tough/bad guys in the industry. He treats the viewer with the best acting performance of his career. As for Randy Travis he gives his best Lee Van Cleef impression. He's not bad in the film. [[Tremblay]] and [[Trav]] [[deliver]] the [[cinematographic]]. As for the rest of the cast none of them [[truthfully]] stand out. Ray did a [[large]] job directing this [[movie]], Smith and Travis were good, I'd give this B western on a scale of one to ten(ten being the [[nicest]]) a seven. --------------------------------------------- Result 44 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]]

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

In anticipation of Ang Lee's new [[kino]] "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," I saw this at blockbuster and figured I'd give it a try. A civil war movie is not the typical movie I watch. [[Mercifully]] though, I had a good [[sense]] about this director. This movie was [[marvellously]] written. The dialogue is in the old southern style, yet doesn't sound cornily out of place and outdated. The spectacular acting helped that aspect of the [[cinematography]]. Toby Maguire was awesome. I thought he was good (but nothing special) in Pleasantville, but here he [[glows]]. I have always thought of Skeet Ulrich as a good actor (but nothing special), but here he is [[glamorous]] as well. The big shocker for me was Jewel. She was [[unimaginably]] [[buena]]. Jeffrey Wright, who I had never heard of before, is also excellent in this movie. It seems to me that great acting and great writing and directing go hand in hand. A movie with bad writing makes the [[players]] [[gaze]] bad and visa versa. This movie had the [[faultless]] combination. The [[players]] look brilliant and the character development is spectacular. This movie keeps you wishing and [[awaiting]] good things for some and bad things for others. It lets you really get to know the [[personages]], which are all very dynamic and interesting. The plot is complex, and keeps you on the edge of your seat, guessing, and ready for anything at any time. Literally dozens of times I was sure someone was going to get killed on silent parts in the movie that were "too quiet" ([[shiny]] directing). This was [[apart]] a [[marvellously]] shot [[films]]. The scenery was not breath [[take]] (It's in [[Mo]] and Kansas for [[christ]] sakez) but there was [[apparently]] much attention put into [[gathering]] [[fantastic]] nature settings. [[Have]] that [[crude]] and [[manly]] feel, but [[retains]] an [[styling]], which is very pleasant on the eyes. The [[cinematic]] was deep. It told a story and in doing so [[introduced]] you think. It had layers underneath that exterior civil war [[histories]]. [[Notably]], it [[concentrates]] on two [[personage]] that were not [[altogether]] sure what they were [[tussle]] for. There were [[several]] more deep issues [[addressed]] with in this [[kino]], too many to [[taking]] out. It was like a [[marvellously]] written short story, filled with symbolism and artistic extras that leaves you [[think]] during and after the [[fairytales]] is done. If you like great acting, writing, lots of action, and some of the best directing ever, see this movie! Take a chance on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 45 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] (SPOILERS AHEAD) Russian fantasy "actioner" (and I [[use]] the term [[loosely]]) that I've been [[trying]] to watch for over a [[year]]. I've finally gotten to the [[end]] and now I wish I didn't put in the [[repeated]] effort.

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

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

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

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

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

4 out of 10. Its about four hours (all my attempts to see this) I'll never get back. Only for those who want to [[consults]] a brooding Russian action film with very little action --------------------------------------------- Result 46 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] ### [[Spoilers]]! ###

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

What is this movie offering? [[Outward]] of control editing and cinematography that matches up with a [[scary]] plot. It is [[unlucky]] to [[consults]] Denzel Washington's talents go wasted in trashes [[iike]] this.We are certainly hinted how the Mexicans cannot save themselves, outside forces needed, possibly militaristic, American ones. And we know the [[pere]] is a [[shadowed]] character, he is a Mexican after all, unlike the wife who appreciates Creasey more because he is American. He killed all of them thinking she died. And did she? Of course, she won't, she is a young kid and you are not supposed to hurt the sensibilities of the Hollywood fan. The trade off scene was the only thing that prevents me from rating it below the "implausibly successful"(as some critic pointed out)'Taken'. The nausea of such movies will take time to go. It is in the rating of such movies that we have to doubt IMDb's credulity.7.7 for a movie like this and 7.0 for My Own Private Idaho. Go figure! Mine will be in the range of 3.5-4.0 --------------------------------------------- Result 47 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] [[Surreal]] [[film]] noir [[released]] [[soon]] after the "[[real]]," genre-defining classics "The Maltese Falcon," "Double Indemnity" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice." Welles films shouldn't be evaluated against others. He was [[playing]] by different rules. In fact, he was playing. This starts where other femme fatale films [[leave]] off, so the vaguely [[logical]] (but interesting) whodunit is embellished with a display of Wellesian scenes (typical rapid-fire style), dialog (lots of "hard-boiled" philosophy), and unusual acting (good Hayworth presumably intentionally one-dimensional). To Welles "genre" may have meant "formula" but he seemed to like using "mysteries" as backgrounds for his "entertainments." [[Bizarre]] [[kino]] noir [[publicized]] [[expeditiously]] after the "[[actual]]," genre-defining classics "The Maltese Falcon," "Double Indemnity" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice." Welles films shouldn't be evaluated against others. He was [[replay]] by different rules. In fact, he was playing. This starts where other femme fatale films [[walkout]] off, so the vaguely [[reasonable]] (but interesting) whodunit is embellished with a display of Wellesian scenes (typical rapid-fire style), dialog (lots of "hard-boiled" philosophy), and unusual acting (good Hayworth presumably intentionally one-dimensional). To Welles "genre" may have meant "formula" but he seemed to like using "mysteries" as backgrounds for his "entertainments." --------------------------------------------- Result 48 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] [[If]] [[Bob]] Ludlum was to see this [[mini]] series, he [[would]] have cried. This was [[complete]] waste of time and [[money]]. I have read the book and [[even]] [[though]] [[movies]] are not [[exactly]] what the [[book]] may be, CBS [[wasted]] [[time]] and money on this and it is [[embarrassing]] to [[claim]] that this was Ludlum's work.

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

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

[[Horrible]]!! [[Though]] [[Spongebob]] Ludlum was to see this [[miniature]] series, he [[should]] have cried. This was [[completes]] waste of time and [[cash]]. I have read the book and [[yet]] [[if]] [[theater]] are not [[accurately]] what the [[ledger]] may be, CBS [[squandered]] [[period]] and money on this and it is [[ashamed]] to [[dunning]] that this was Ludlum's work.

May be the creator should check out the Bourne [[Identities]] with [[Richards]] Chamberlain and see how good that TV series was.

[[Poorest]] Mira, Blair, Anjelica and Colm, why did they sign to stoop this low?

[[Frightful]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 49 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I [[started]] to watch this movie with high [[expectations]]. However, after one hour I [[gave]] up on this [[movie]] as it only [[instilled]] lots of unanswered questions upon me. This already started in the [[opening]] [[sequence]] and only [[got]] [[worse]].

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

Why would they bury the Hollander under a statue? Why is there an Italian comediant present? Why did the farmers wife save the Hollander? Why did he, upon being saved, not run for his life instead of starting to make love to the farmers wife? Why did the farmers wife not save the Hollander at a time when the farmer wouldn't be around? Why did these presumably illiterate farmers understand Italian? Why did the Italian comediant know about the Hollanders gold? Why did he hide it in the cesspool in the midst of the evil farmers property? These and many more questions popped up, and none of them seemed to get answered in an acceptable way. So I guess I am totally missing the point of this movie, and I am not connecting to the story in any way.... --------------------------------------------- Result 50 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Well, I [[would]] [[consider]] Police [[Story]] as one of [[Jackie]] Chan's [[best]] [[film]]. The [[plot]], the fighting scenes and the stunt works are [[excellent]]. [[In]] this [[film]], [[Jackie]] himself acted as a police [[officer]] called Chan Ka Kui (Kevin Chan in some versions) who successfully arrested a crime lord. After the crime lord was released due to [[lack]] of [[evidence]] , he framed Chan for the killing of a police officer. Due to this, he became [[wanted]] by the [[police]]. [[Later]] on, Salina ([[Brigitte]] [[Lin]]), who was the secretary of the crime lord, went to a shopping mall and started to steal the [[evidence]] of the crime lord's crimes from his computer and preparing to pass them to Chan. However, the crime lord knew that Salina had downloaded his incriminating data and hired his henchmen to capture her. Later on, Chan appeared at the scenes and began to fight all of the henchmen, defeating them one by one. At the last scene, Chan was [[seen]] punching the crime lord. Lastly, this is the best action and comedy [[movie]]. Everyone should watch it. Highly [[recommended]]. Well, I [[could]] [[contemplate]] Police [[Storytelling]] as one of [[Melanie]] Chan's [[optimum]] [[cinematography]]. The [[intrigue]], the fighting scenes and the stunt works are [[glamorous]]. [[Onto]] this [[movies]], [[Jacqui]] himself acted as a police [[agent]] called Chan Ka Kui (Kevin Chan in some versions) who successfully arrested a crime lord. After the crime lord was released due to [[shortfall]] of [[testimony]] , he framed Chan for the killing of a police officer. Due to this, he became [[desired]] by the [[cop]]. [[Afterward]] on, Salina ([[Birgit]] [[Layne]]), who was the secretary of the crime lord, went to a shopping mall and started to steal the [[testimony]] of the crime lord's crimes from his computer and preparing to pass them to Chan. However, the crime lord knew that Salina had downloaded his incriminating data and hired his henchmen to capture her. Later on, Chan appeared at the scenes and began to fight all of the henchmen, defeating them one by one. At the last scene, Chan was [[noticed]] punching the crime lord. Lastly, this is the best action and comedy [[films]]. Everyone should watch it. Highly [[recommending]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 51 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This movie "Joshua" is extremely disturbing, and downright [[pointless]]. It actually makes me [[shudder]] to [[think]] there are people who [[would]] [[enjoy]] watching it. Without giving away the story it is about a young boy's reaction to his [[newborn]] sister, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. During the entirety of this [[movie]] the viewer is subjected to some of the most unsettling child behavior [[imaginable]]. Adding insult to injury, by the end of this movie there is absolutely no real outcome except the fruition of pure evil at the hands of a child no less, who outsmarted a whole group of dumb adults. There is no redemption, no justice served, and a whole group of adults who are not smart enough to see what is going on around them. Frankly, I did not enjoy watching this movie. It was extremely unsettling. Even for those who might enjoy horror movies, this movie could be too much. Despite the fact this movie was well [[acted]], the story itself is so disturbing that watching it was equivalent to a 90 minute wait in a dentist's waiting room in anticipation of some painful dental procedure. This movie "Joshua" is extremely disturbing, and downright [[senseless]]. It actually makes me [[tremble]] to [[thoughts]] there are people who [[should]] [[enjoys]] watching it. Without giving away the story it is about a young boy's reaction to his [[infant]] sister, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. During the entirety of this [[cinematography]] the viewer is subjected to some of the most unsettling child behavior [[inconceivable]]. Adding insult to injury, by the end of this movie there is absolutely no real outcome except the fruition of pure evil at the hands of a child no less, who outsmarted a whole group of dumb adults. There is no redemption, no justice served, and a whole group of adults who are not smart enough to see what is going on around them. Frankly, I did not enjoy watching this movie. It was extremely unsettling. Even for those who might enjoy horror movies, this movie could be too much. Despite the fact this movie was well [[worked]], the story itself is so disturbing that watching it was equivalent to a 90 minute wait in a dentist's waiting room in anticipation of some painful dental procedure. --------------------------------------------- Result 52 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The [[Fury]] of the Wolfman is a very good [[film]] that has a good cast which includes Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, Perla Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark [[Stevens]], Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de [[la]] Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de [[Rivera]], and Pilar Zorrilla! The acting by all of these [[actors]] is very [[good]]. The Wolfman is [[really]] [[cool]]! He looks great and he sound like the Looney Tunes character the Tazmainian devil! There are some really [[hilarious]] scenes in this film! The thrills is really good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed very good. The music is good. The film is quite interesting and the movie really keeps you going until the [[end]]. This is a very [[good]] and [[thrilling]] [[film]]. If you like Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, [[Perla]] Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark [[Stevens]], Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de la Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de Rivera, Pilar Zorrilla, the rest of the cast in the film, Werewold films, Horror, Sci-Fi, Thrillers, [[Dramas]], and interesting [[classic]] films then I strongly recommend you to [[see]] this film today!

[[Movie]] Nuttball's [[NOTE]]:

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

[[If]] you [[like]] Werewolf films I [[strongly]] recommend these: Werewolf of London (1935), The Wolf [[Man]] (1941), Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man (1943), [[House]] of Frankenstein (1944), [[Abbott]] an d Costell Meets [[Frankenstein]] (1948), The Curse of the Werewolf (1961), An American Werewolf in London (1981), Silver Bullet (1985), Werewolf (1987), The Monster Squad (1987), My Mom's a Werewolf (1989), Project: Metalbeast (1995), Bad [[Moon]] (1996), [[Werewolf]] (1996), [[Dog]] [[Soldiers]] (2002), [[Underworld]] (2003), and Van Helsing (2004)! The [[Ire]] of the Wolfman is a very good [[cinematography]] that has a good cast which includes Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, Perla Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark [[Roberts]], Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de [[las]] Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de [[Riviera]], and Pilar Zorrilla! The acting by all of these [[actresses]] is very [[alright]]. The Wolfman is [[truthfully]] [[groovy]]! He looks great and he sound like the Looney Tunes character the Tazmainian devil! There are some really [[droll]] scenes in this film! The thrills is really good and some of it is surprising. The movie is filmed very good. The music is good. The film is quite interesting and the movie really keeps you going until the [[termination]]. This is a very [[alright]] and [[enthralling]] [[kino]]. If you like Paul Naschy/Jacinto Molina, [[Perl]] Cristal, Verónica Luján, Mark [[Stephens]], Francisco Amorós, Fabián Conde, Miguel de la Riva, Ramón Lillo, José Marco, Javier de Rivera, Pilar Zorrilla, the rest of the cast in the film, Werewold films, Horror, Sci-Fi, Thrillers, [[Opera]], and interesting [[typical]] films then I strongly recommend you to [[behold]] this film today!

[[Cinema]] Nuttball's [[OBSERVES]]:

I [[ai]] this film on a [[specific]] DVD that has [[Physicians]] Blood's Coffin, The Brainiac, and The [[Indignation]] of the Wolfman from Vintage [[Dwellings]] [[Amusement]]! [[Behold]] if you can [[finds]] this [[winning]] with three [[odd]] but classic films on one DVD at Amazon.com [[yesterday]]!

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

I don't think the directors really got any point across, but it looks like maybe they were trying to make several: 1) Science can explain everything we do, meaning that our lives are deterministic; 2) Science can't be used to explain everything we do, meaning that we have free will; 3) Science is, like, really cool, brother; 4) We are God; 5) The world exists only in our minds; 6) Sarah Norman is a tough role to follow and 7) here, put this tiny paper square in your mouth and you'll see some really groovy stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 54 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] It really boggles my mind when someone comes across a movie like this and claims it to be one of the worst slasher films out there. This is by far not one of the worst out there, still not a good movie, but not the worst nonetheless. Go see something like Death Nurse or Blood Lake and then come back to me and tell me if you think the Night Brings [[Charlie]] is the worst. The film has decent camera work and [[editing]], which is way more than I can say for many more [[extremely]] obscure slasher films.

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

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

If you're into slasher films, definitely give this film a watch. It is slightly different than your usual slasher film with possibility of two killers, but not by much. The comedy of the movie is pretty much telling the audience to relax and not take the movie so god darn serious. You may forget the movie, you may remember it. I'll remember it because I love the [[name]]. It really boggles my mind when someone comes across a movie like this and claims it to be one of the worst slasher films out there. This is by far not one of the worst out there, still not a good movie, but not the worst nonetheless. Go see something like Death Nurse or Blood Lake and then come back to me and tell me if you think the Night Brings [[Chas]] is the worst. The film has decent camera work and [[edited]], which is way more than I can say for many more [[tremendously]] obscure slasher films.

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

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

If you're into slasher films, definitely give this film a watch. It is slightly different than your usual slasher film with possibility of two killers, but not by much. The comedy of the movie is pretty much telling the audience to relax and not take the movie so god darn serious. You may forget the movie, you may remember it. I'll remember it because I love the [[behalf]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 55 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I recently [[saw]] this at the 2009 Palm Springs International Film. This is the [[feature]] length directorial debut of veteran Dutch actress Monique van de Ven and based on my [[observation]] it should be her last. I [[hate]] movies that are so implausible that you are picking apart practically every scene. This [[film]] immediately [[leaves]] you [[scratching]] your [[head]]. as it begins a young photographer and his girlfriend who works for an international aid organization are having a leisurely drive through the Taliban-controlled mountains Afghanistan having a conversation about their love when a rocket stops a truck in front of them. They get out of their vehicle to watch as Talliban fighters equipped with rocket launchers, machine guns, rifles, handguns and grenades execute all five people in the truck. Bob (Waldemar Torenstra) starts taking pictures of all this when he is spotted by one of the insurgents who lobs a hand grenade at them that kills his girlfriend. since they are with hand throwing distance they can't be more than 50 yards away yet he somehow gets away. His girlfriend is blown up and he takes a picture of the moment of the grenade impact that kills her and wins a prize as photographer of the year for the photo. Every scene and situation in this film as as ridiculous as it's opening. The following year Bob finds himself on assignment for National Geographic on a Dutch resort island where he meets Kathleen (Sophie Hilbrand) and inserts himself into her seedy underworld of international drug smugglers. [[Avoid]] this film. I would give it a 4.0 out of 10. I recently [[sawthe]] this at the 2009 Palm Springs International Film. This is the [[idiosyncrasies]] length directorial debut of veteran Dutch actress Monique van de Ven and based on my [[observe]] it should be her last. I [[loathe]] movies that are so implausible that you are picking apart practically every scene. This [[cinematography]] immediately [[sheets]] you [[scrape]] your [[leader]]. as it begins a young photographer and his girlfriend who works for an international aid organization are having a leisurely drive through the Taliban-controlled mountains Afghanistan having a conversation about their love when a rocket stops a truck in front of them. They get out of their vehicle to watch as Talliban fighters equipped with rocket launchers, machine guns, rifles, handguns and grenades execute all five people in the truck. Bob (Waldemar Torenstra) starts taking pictures of all this when he is spotted by one of the insurgents who lobs a hand grenade at them that kills his girlfriend. since they are with hand throwing distance they can't be more than 50 yards away yet he somehow gets away. His girlfriend is blown up and he takes a picture of the moment of the grenade impact that kills her and wins a prize as photographer of the year for the photo. Every scene and situation in this film as as ridiculous as it's opening. The following year Bob finds himself on assignment for National Geographic on a Dutch resort island where he meets Kathleen (Sophie Hilbrand) and inserts himself into her seedy underworld of international drug smugglers. [[Stave]] this film. I would give it a 4.0 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 56 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] As a collector of movie [[memorabilia]], I had to [[buy]] the [[movie]] [[poster]] for this [[film]] which, now that I've [[finally]] seen it, has to be the best thing about it. There's nothing more attractive to hang on your wall than a 27x41 inch image of the melting man. However, there's nothing more awful to put in your VCR than an hour and a half long image of the melting man. At first I [[thought]] this movie was pure [[garbage]] but then I [[realized]] that it did have some [[qualities]] which [[made]] me laugh. The [[character]] of Dr. Ted Nelson has to be the most wishy-washy persona ever brought to the big screen. His dialogue is so trite it's unbelievable! ("It's incredible! He seems to be getting stronger as he melts!)

And could somebody tell me please how the heck they know exactly how much time Steve has left before he melts completely and exactly what their plan is to "help" him? If this movie was meant to scare its audience, I [[think]] it missed its calling. As a collector of movie [[reminiscences]], I had to [[procure]] the [[filmmaking]] [[placard]] for this [[kino]] which, now that I've [[ultimately]] seen it, has to be the best thing about it. There's nothing more attractive to hang on your wall than a 27x41 inch image of the melting man. However, there's nothing more awful to put in your VCR than an hour and a half long image of the melting man. At first I [[ideas]] this movie was pure [[refuse]] but then I [[performed]] that it did have some [[qualifications]] which [[introduced]] me laugh. The [[personage]] of Dr. Ted Nelson has to be the most wishy-washy persona ever brought to the big screen. His dialogue is so trite it's unbelievable! ("It's incredible! He seems to be getting stronger as he melts!)

And could somebody tell me please how the heck they know exactly how much time Steve has left before he melts completely and exactly what their plan is to "help" him? If this movie was meant to scare its audience, I [[believing]] it missed its calling. --------------------------------------------- Result 57 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Red [[Rock]] [[West]] (1993)

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

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

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

[[Nicola]] Cage gets embroiled in a [[murderous]] [[offense]] without at first knowing it, and the dominos lead to [[rose]] [[perils]], [[fling]] and [[incident]] in the [[feral]] forlorn American [[Western]] of the 1990s. [[Reid]] Rock [[Western]] is [[normally]] [[ferocious]] and sometimes [[fun]], and Cage [[pulled]] off the [[mixes]] with his usual sardonic wit and wary [[easing]].

Is the plot over the top? [[Yup]]. Is [[Denny]] Hopper [[consummate]] as a crazed, [[practically]] [[congenial]] killer? [[Yeah]]. Does Cage [[stands]] a [[opportunity]]? Well, you have to watch and see. It never [[enable]] up, and it took me by surprise the first [[times]] I saw it. On second viewing yesterday, I was [[horrified]] at how well it held up, how well constructed it was, and how macabre and funny it was at the same [[moment]].

Director Ron Dahl (who [[apart]] helped write) is known more for his TV [[jobs]], but with Rounders and this [[cinematographic]] he [[display]] a deft hand with sensational plots. It's saved by its humor by the way, and by the caricatures. The bar is sleazy, the cops questionable. And don't [[mademoiselle]] a really inspired cameo by Dwight Yoakam as a truck driver. --------------------------------------------- Result 58 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] They filmed this movie out on [[long]] Island, where I grew up. My brother and his girlfriend were extras in this movie. Apparently there is some party scene where they are all drinking beer, (which they told me was colored water, tasted disgusting, and was very hard to keep swallowing over and over again, especially in the funnel scenes). Yet [[none]] of us ever [[heard]] of the movie being released anywhere in any form. It never came out in the theaters (obviously) and it, as far as I knew, was never released on video, and I'm sure wasn't released on [[DVD]]. Yet it looks like it was seen by some people, albeit it probably very few. So there must be something. I would absolutely love to purchase this for my brother, yet there is no way I can find it anywhere. Does anybody know anything about when/where/how this movie could be purchased? And which format that would be? They filmed this movie out on [[protracted]] Island, where I grew up. My brother and his girlfriend were extras in this movie. Apparently there is some party scene where they are all drinking beer, (which they told me was colored water, tasted disgusting, and was very hard to keep swallowing over and over again, especially in the funnel scenes). Yet [[nothingness]] of us ever [[audition]] of the movie being released anywhere in any form. It never came out in the theaters (obviously) and it, as far as I knew, was never released on video, and I'm sure wasn't released on [[DVDS]]. Yet it looks like it was seen by some people, albeit it probably very few. So there must be something. I would absolutely love to purchase this for my brother, yet there is no way I can find it anywhere. Does anybody know anything about when/where/how this movie could be purchased? And which format that would be? --------------------------------------------- Result 59 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I'm not kidding about that summary and vote! The video [[distributors]] have [[packaged]] this as just another typical '80s werewolf movie, but it is in fact the [[greatest]] [[parody]] of the horror genre that you can imagine, having done for the horror movie what "Blazing Saddles" did for the western. I have seen plenty of comedies - good, bad, stupid, weird, etc. (usually walking away unimpressed), and I think that comedy must be the most difficult genre for filmmakers and actors to work in - it takes just the right kind of touch to make things successful, and part of that is having good ideas. "Full Moon High" is bulging with good ideas - so many, in fact, that it can easily put the Zucker/Abrams team of "Airplane" and "Naked Gun" to shame. One of the best of these is the very presence of Ed McMahon in a starring role as a John Birch-style right-wing crackpot. The jokes, non-sequiturs, wisecracks and word-play are literally non-stop and everything, including the kitchen sink, has been thrown in. The ironic tone is very similar to that of "Back to the Future."

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

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

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

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

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

One sidenote: this movie should somehow go down in history as the one thing Bob Saget ever starred in (albeit briefly) that was actually funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 60 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This has to be the most [[brutally]] unfunny "[[comedy]]" I've ever seen in my [[life]]. [[Ben]] Stiller, [[Jack]] [[Black]], and Christopher Walken as a crazed homeless [[man]] CAN'T [[make]] me laugh? Something's got to be [[wrong]] with this [[picture]]. This is the only movie I've ever felt like walking out of. I used free passes, and still felt like I wanted my money back. I can [[wholeheartedly]] [[say]] that the only movie I've ever [[seen]] worse than this one was [[HOUSE]] OF THE [[DEAD]]. The. ONLY. worse. [[movie]]. I laughed very slightly at the merry-go-round scene, and that's it. Spending 2 hours in something billed as a comedy should get you more than one laugh, right? I don't know, I guess the filmmakers thought that "flan" was a funny word, or something. And the other running joke really is beating a dead horse--literally. This has to be the most [[ruthlessly]] unfunny "[[charade]]" I've ever seen in my [[vida]]. [[Benn]] Stiller, [[Jacque]] [[Negro]], and Christopher Walken as a crazed homeless [[fella]] CAN'T [[deliver]] me laugh? Something's got to be [[amiss]] with this [[images]]. This is the only movie I've ever felt like walking out of. I used free passes, and still felt like I wanted my money back. I can [[truthfully]] [[tell]] that the only movie I've ever [[noticed]] worse than this one was [[DOMICILE]] OF THE [[DEATHS]]. The. ONLY. worse. [[kino]]. I laughed very slightly at the merry-go-round scene, and that's it. Spending 2 hours in something billed as a comedy should get you more than one laugh, right? I don't know, I guess the filmmakers thought that "flan" was a funny word, or something. And the other running joke really is beating a dead horse--literally. --------------------------------------------- Result 61 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] A sentimental school drama set in Denmark, 1969, "We Shall Overcome" offers a [[pathetic]] Danish take on US culture. Frits (Janus Dissing Rathke), a flower-power obsessed, naive 13-year-old, exits with half his ear hanging off from brutal master Lindum-Svendsen's (Bent Mejding) office. Lindum-Svendsen, a school director, portrayed as a fascistoid tyrant, has the local community in control. Lindum-Svendsen's gone too far this time, and with his father, recovering from a mental breakdown (sure, there wasn't enough drama already..), and overly stereotyped hippie music teacher Mr Svale ('Hi, call me Freddie'), Frits stands up for justice.

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

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

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

If you're into family pictures, go see Happy Feet instead.. --------------------------------------------- Result 62 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Does this film suck!! Horrible acting, horrible script, horrible effects, horrible horrible horrible!! Nothing redeeming here for even the most die-hard of horror fans! A crazy killer stalks students at a college. People are showing up dead in the hallways, but still, class carries on as normal??? After about the 4th body, I would think that they could allow the students a few days break! LOL. This about as bad as it gets folks. This film should be shown as a means of torture to criminals. You have been warned! --------------------------------------------- Result 63 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The husband-and-wife team of Bennie [[Fields]] and [[Blossom]] Seeley were [[huge]] stars in vaudeville, [[yet]] they [[made]] very few [[films]]. As is the [[case]] for some other [[performers]] of their [[era]] ([[George]] M. Cohan, Fanny Brice, Gertrude Lawrence) the most accessible piece of [[film]] footage for [[Fields]] and Seeley is the biopic [[ABOUT]] them, in which they're [[portrayed]] by other [[actors]]: '[[Somebody]] Loves Me', starring Betty Hutton and that inimitable song-and-dance [[man]] [[Ralph]] Meeker.

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

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

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

I was [[delighted]] to have this [[opportunity]] to [[see]] these two major performers doing their vaude [[act]]. Now that I've [[seen]] it, I [[understand]] why they never [[became]] [[stars]] in [[movie]] musicals. My [[rating]] for this one: just 4 out of 10, and I'll stick with [[Block]] and Sully. The husband-and-wife team of Bennie [[Realms]] and [[Thrive]] Seeley were [[colossal]] stars in vaudeville, [[even]] they [[effected]] very few [[kino]]. As is the [[instances]] for some other [[painters]] of their [[epoch]] ([[Georgie]] M. Cohan, Fanny Brice, Gertrude Lawrence) the most accessible piece of [[films]] footage for [[Spheres]] and Seeley is the biopic [[CIRCA]] them, in which they're [[depicted]] by other [[protagonists]]: '[[Everyone]] Loves Me', starring Betty Hutton and that inimitable song-and-dance [[dude]] [[Raph]] Meeker.

[[Among]] their [[pinnacle]], [[Realms]] and Seeley were so [[radically]] [[trendy]] that another husband-and-wife vaudeville [[acts]] -- Jesse [[Bloc]] and Eve Sully -- achieved [[almost]] as much stardom [[perform]] an [[around]] [[similar]] act, effectively [[become]] the "second-team" [[Domains]] and [[Seely]]. Offstage, [[despite]], there was a [[important]] [[dispute]] in the couples' living arrangements. [[Campos]] and Seeley lived in [[motel]] suites, [[wages]] room-service [[rate]] for [[all]] [[dinner]] they [[eat]], and eventually [[run]] out of [[cash]]. [[Bloc]] and Sully [[resided]] [[marginally]] and invested their earnings [[conservatively]], [[ended]] in comfortable retirement.

The first 30 [[second]] of this Vitaphone short are [[occupy]] by two spats-wearing pianists. [[Reportedly]] these two [[male]] had some [[lightweight]] [[designation]] [[values]] of their own in 1930, [[despite]] I've never heard of them. [[Ultimately]], [[Campos]] and [[Seeley]] [[haste]] in and [[commenced]] performing. They both have plenty of [[pip]], and she's [[relatively]] [[seductive]].

I was [[irritated]] that both [[artists]] [[retain]] [[doing]] [[movement]] as if they're about to [[interruption]] into a [[ballet]], but they never [[perfectly]] do so until the third of the three [[melodies]] they [[performed]] in this short. [[Whenever]] they [[eventually]] [[initiation]] hoofing, the [[conclusions]] are not [[wondrous]].

I was [[enchanted]] to have this [[possibilities]] to [[behold]] these two major performers doing their vaude [[ley]]. Now that I've [[watched]] it, I [[fathom]] why they never [[came]] [[star]] in [[movies]] musicals. My [[evaluations]] for this one: just 4 out of 10, and I'll stick with [[Blocks]] and Sully. --------------------------------------------- Result 64 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] My husband and I [[bought]] the [[Old]] [[School]] Sesame Street DVD's for our [[daughter]] and I have to say, I don't [[let]] her watch the [[new]] episodes on TV, because I [[find]] ALL of the characters [[annoying]]. Baby Bear AND Telly? OMgosh, How ANNOYING and useless blabber can someone think of for their 'skits'? Elmo? Give it a rest not [[every]] [[kid]] likes him, once again, annoying and doesn't teach my child ANYTHING. Mr. Noodle? what a [[reject]]. I think the one time I turned the 'new' show on for her, she and I were left dumber than before. The show has Definitely taken a wrong turn. I remember the Yip Yips, Kermit's Breaking News, 1-2 2 Little Dolls, Mumford the Magician, Bert and Ernie, Grover the Waiter, all the GREAT EDUCATIONAL skits of OLD SCHOOL S.S. Sesame Street has suffered a direct hit of boredom and dumbness since Jim Henson's passing in 1990. The show no longer has the educational, funny and interactive skits it used to. I find the new versions simply unbearably annoying and full of [[useless]] non-educational blabber. Way to go S.S. producers/[[writers]] you have yet another cartoony show for the parents to sit there non-creative, non-exercised kids in front of so they'll get out of their hair. Per Producers/Writers : I suggest you whip out the old muppets and start taping similar content to that of the first Sesame Street's. Lord knows I sure don't want my child talking like Baby Bear or Elmo. My husband and I [[buying]] the [[Longtime]] [[Tuition]] Sesame Street DVD's for our [[fille]] and I have to say, I don't [[leaving]] her watch the [[newer]] episodes on TV, because I [[unearth]] ALL of the characters [[vexing]]. Baby Bear AND Telly? OMgosh, How ANNOYING and useless blabber can someone think of for their 'skits'? Elmo? Give it a rest not [[all]] [[petit]] likes him, once again, annoying and doesn't teach my child ANYTHING. Mr. Noodle? what a [[dismiss]]. I think the one time I turned the 'new' show on for her, she and I were left dumber than before. The show has Definitely taken a wrong turn. I remember the Yip Yips, Kermit's Breaking News, 1-2 2 Little Dolls, Mumford the Magician, Bert and Ernie, Grover the Waiter, all the GREAT EDUCATIONAL skits of OLD SCHOOL S.S. Sesame Street has suffered a direct hit of boredom and dumbness since Jim Henson's passing in 1990. The show no longer has the educational, funny and interactive skits it used to. I find the new versions simply unbearably annoying and full of [[pointless]] non-educational blabber. Way to go S.S. producers/[[screenwriters]] you have yet another cartoony show for the parents to sit there non-creative, non-exercised kids in front of so they'll get out of their hair. Per Producers/Writers : I suggest you whip out the old muppets and start taping similar content to that of the first Sesame Street's. Lord knows I sure don't want my child talking like Baby Bear or Elmo. --------------------------------------------- Result 65 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This film was a [[waste]] of [[time]], [[even]] [[rented]] on DVD. If super-speedy camera shots [[get]] any faster than this, we might as well pay twenty bucks to get in the [[laundromat]], get popcorn, and watch the [[dryer]] spin. Jet Li is so much [[better]] than this. One can only hope that he won't be making deals anytime soon to make another cliche-ridden film like The One.

If there's one film you should avoid, this is "The One". This film was a [[squander]] of [[times]], [[yet]] [[leases]] on DVD. If super-speedy camera shots [[obtain]] any faster than this, we might as well pay twenty bucks to get in the [[laundry]], get popcorn, and watch the [[drier]] spin. Jet Li is so much [[nicer]] than this. One can only hope that he won't be making deals anytime soon to make another cliche-ridden film like The One.

If there's one film you should avoid, this is "The One". --------------------------------------------- Result 66 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I finally caught up to "Starlight" [[last]] night on television and all I can [[say]] is. . . wow! It's hard to know where to begin -- the incredibly hokey [[special]] [[effects]] (check out the laser [[beams]] shooting out of Willie's eyes!), the [[atrocious]] acting, the [[ponderous]] dialogue, the mismatched use of stock footage, or the air of earnest pretentiousness that infuses the entire production. This truly is a one-of-a-kind experience, and we should all be thankful for that. I [[nominate]] Jonathon Kay as the true heir to Ed Wood! I finally caught up to "Starlight" [[final]] night on television and all I can [[tell]] is. . . wow! It's hard to know where to begin -- the incredibly hokey [[particular]] [[impact]] (check out the laser [[girders]] shooting out of Willie's eyes!), the [[outrageous]] acting, the [[heavy]] dialogue, the mismatched use of stock footage, or the air of earnest pretentiousness that infuses the entire production. This truly is a one-of-a-kind experience, and we should all be thankful for that. I [[appointments]] Jonathon Kay as the true heir to Ed Wood! --------------------------------------------- Result 67 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well I guess it supposedly not a classic because there are only a few easily recognizable faces, but I personally think it is... It's a very beautiful sweet movie, Henry Winkler did a GREAT job with his character and it really impressed me. --------------------------------------------- Result 68 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Boy this movie had me fooled. I honestly thought it would be a campy horror film with absolutely no humor in it whatsoever, boy I got the cold shoulder that time. This movie was, and I'm truthful, pretty damn good. It was not scary at all but the campiness and the sly humor [[really]] [[mad]] this movie interesting. Some to the horrible acting and cliché killings were so painful to watch, I almost laughed at how [[bad]] it was, but to some extent I enjoyed it. The killings all vaguely relate to snow sports and Christmas, which made things more intriguing. The POV camera angles were awesome.

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

This movie had such bad acting, with the exception of Christopher Allport, that is was funny. I will say that I am also pretty disappointed that this movie was not a horror, but in fact a dark sitcom. They had a great story with a good plot but it wasn't executed right. All in all I like the movie at first but now it is really annoying. But this movie is way better and darker than the sequel. Boy this movie had me fooled. I honestly thought it would be a campy horror film with absolutely no humor in it whatsoever, boy I got the cold shoulder that time. This movie was, and I'm truthful, pretty damn good. It was not scary at all but the campiness and the sly humor [[truthfully]] [[crazy]] this movie interesting. Some to the horrible acting and cliché killings were so painful to watch, I almost laughed at how [[mala]] it was, but to some extent I enjoyed it. The killings all vaguely relate to snow sports and Christmas, which made things more intriguing. The POV camera angles were awesome.

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

This movie had such bad acting, with the exception of Christopher Allport, that is was funny. I will say that I am also pretty disappointed that this movie was not a horror, but in fact a dark sitcom. They had a great story with a good plot but it wasn't executed right. All in all I like the movie at first but now it is really annoying. But this movie is way better and darker than the sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 69 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Wow]]. I thought this might be insipid but it was [[even]] [[worse]] than I imagined! [[Sometimes]] I [[like]] to watch a good "car-crash" movie: those that are so bad that you can't look away because you [[want]] to see how bad they can possibly get. This is [[really]] the only [[reason]] I [[could]] leave the [[television]] on - [[morbid]] fascination. It wasn't so much the acting, which was only mediocre or slightly worse than one would expect from this cast, but the premise and the [[plot]] which never should have seen the light of day. The script, too, is groan-inducing. As for [[cinematography]], did [[anyone]] else notice that they [[used]] a "curtains drawing" segue [[device]], like in an [[old]] 50's [[TV]] [[show]]...but without [[irony]]? [[At]] first I thought they must be kidding but the movie [[takes]] itself too [[seriously]] to have [[used]] this in a tongue-in-cheek [[manner]]. Don't [[even]] [[ask]] me about the [[score]]...the only high point is the [[final]] song, by Morcheeba. I guess they [[wanted]] to [[leave]] people with [[something]] for their $8...glad I [[saw]] it on TV!!!!! [[Just]] silly! I wonder if this is why Timothy Hutton has had trouble finding much [[work]] recently? I [[guess]] if you don't [[expect]] much, and [[want]] to watch a [[mindless]] thriller, it would be better than [[spending]] an evening clipping your toenails, which is why it merits a 2. [[Ruff]]. I thought this might be insipid but it was [[yet]] [[pire]] than I imagined! [[Intermittently]] I [[adores]] to watch a good "car-crash" movie: those that are so bad that you can't look away because you [[wanting]] to see how bad they can possibly get. This is [[genuinely]] the only [[raison]] I [[wo]] leave the [[tv]] on - [[pathology]] fascination. It wasn't so much the acting, which was only mediocre or slightly worse than one would expect from this cast, but the premise and the [[intrigue]] which never should have seen the light of day. The script, too, is groan-inducing. As for [[films]], did [[nobody]] else notice that they [[use]] a "curtains drawing" segue [[instruments]], like in an [[ancient]] 50's [[TELEVISION]] [[illustrating]]...but without [[paradox]]? [[During]] first I thought they must be kidding but the movie [[pick]] itself too [[deeply]] to have [[using]] this in a tongue-in-cheek [[ways]]. Don't [[yet]] [[wondering]] me about the [[notation]]...the only high point is the [[last]] song, by Morcheeba. I guess they [[wished]] to [[let]] people with [[anything]] for their $8...glad I [[watched]] it on TV!!!!! [[Jen]] silly! I wonder if this is why Timothy Hutton has had trouble finding much [[works]] recently? I [[reckon]] if you don't [[awaited]] much, and [[wanting]] to watch a [[reckless]] thriller, it would be better than [[outlay]] an evening clipping your toenails, which is why it merits a 2. --------------------------------------------- Result 70 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this [[version]] of "A [[Christmas]] Carol" when it [[first]] appeared on [[television]]. I [[actually]] [[anticipated]] [[seeing]] the [[film]] when it was advertised and it more than [[lived]] up to my [[expectations]]. I have now [[purchased]] the DVD and [[plan]] to watch it every [[year]]. With the exception of "It's A Wonderful Life" I consider this version of "A Christmas Carol" one of the [[best]] [[Christmas]] [[movies]] ever made. George C. Scott is excellent and a superb cast led by Roger [[Rees]] [[surrounds]] him! Scott [[proves]] once again that he is one of [[finest]] actors of our time. Scott has the artistic talent and acting [[ability]] to [[play]] any role and [[keep]] the [[character]] [[unique]] to himself. How can someone be [[remembered]] as both Patton and Scrooge? Scott does so [[easily]]. The [[direction]] is [[marvelous]] with the [[fine]] sets, [[costumes]] and [[music]] that [[give]] the movie a [[special]] [[feeling]] of the [[time]], place and [[era]] [[depicted]]. You will [[simply]] [[love]] this [[movie]] and will place it [[among]] your favorites to watch during the [[holiday]] season. I [[firstly]] [[noticed]] this [[stepping]] of "A [[Claus]] Carol" when it [[firstly]] appeared on [[televisions]]. I [[genuinely]] [[waited]] [[witnessing]] the [[flick]] when it was advertised and it more than [[resided]] up to my [[predictions]]. I have now [[buys]] the DVD and [[schemes]] to watch it every [[annum]]. With the exception of "It's A Wonderful Life" I consider this version of "A Christmas Carol" one of the [[optimum]] [[Xmas]] [[theater]] ever made. George C. Scott is excellent and a superb cast led by Roger [[Ree]] [[wraps]] him! Scott [[illustrates]] once again that he is one of [[meanest]] actors of our time. Scott has the artistic talent and acting [[proficiency]] to [[gaming]] any role and [[preserve]] the [[traits]] [[peculiar]] to himself. How can someone be [[remembering]] as both Patton and Scrooge? Scott does so [[conveniently]]. The [[directorate]] is [[phenomenal]] with the [[fined]] sets, [[clothes]] and [[musician]] that [[lend]] the movie a [[peculiar]] [[sense]] of the [[period]], place and [[epoch]] [[illustrated]]. You will [[merely]] [[iike]] this [[film]] and will place it [[in]] your favorites to watch during the [[vacations]] season. --------------------------------------------- Result 71 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Before we begin, I have a fear of [[dentists]]. This movie gives me the creeps and even makes me cringe. That is what I [[love]] about this film. The movie is kind of [[boring]]. For that, I take 3 stars off!

*Spoiler Alert*

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

*End Spoiler*

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

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

*Spoiler Alert*

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

*End Spoiler*

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

I give this film 7 stars out of 10. Dr. Alan Feinstein Is Not Your Normal Everyday Dentist! --------------------------------------------- Result 72 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This film could be one of the most [[underrated]] [[film]] of Bollywood history.This 1994 blockbuster had all of it good performances,music and direction.I remember I was in Allahabad when this [[movie]] was running and it was somewhere in [[March]] at Holi time , the people there were playing its song "Ooe Amma" at their loudspeakers in highest volume. If someone who likes to watch Some Like It Hot and drools over Marilyn [[Monroe]] he should [[see]] this movie.Thumbs Up to Govinda.How many of you know that this film was shot in South of India and after Sholay could be one of the very few blockbuter to hit Silver Screen.With films like these Indian comedy could never be dead. This film could be one of the most [[underestimated]] [[filmmaking]] of Bollywood history.This 1994 blockbuster had all of it good performances,music and direction.I remember I was in Allahabad when this [[filmmaking]] was running and it was somewhere in [[Marci]] at Holi time , the people there were playing its song "Ooe Amma" at their loudspeakers in highest volume. If someone who likes to watch Some Like It Hot and drools over Marilyn [[Munroe]] he should [[consults]] this movie.Thumbs Up to Govinda.How many of you know that this film was shot in South of India and after Sholay could be one of the very few blockbuter to hit Silver Screen.With films like these Indian comedy could never be dead. --------------------------------------------- Result 73 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I [[actually]] like the original, and this [[film]] has its ups and downs. Here's just a few:

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

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

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

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

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

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Downs: How did Pumbaa find out about it?

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

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

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

My Score: 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 74 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] An [[annoying]] experience. Improvised [[dialogue]], handheld cameras for no effect, directionless plot, contrived romance, ick! to the whole [[mess]]. Ron Silver was the only real [[actor]]. Gretta Sacchi was [[TERRIBLE]]! [[Henry]] Jaglom did better with [[Eating]] which suited his style much more. An [[vexing]] experience. Improvised [[conversation]], handheld cameras for no effect, directionless plot, contrived romance, ick! to the whole [[chaos]]. Ron Silver was the only real [[protagonist]]. Gretta Sacchi was [[HARROWING]]! [[Henrik]] Jaglom did better with [[Comer]] which suited his style much more. --------------------------------------------- Result 75 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I [[love]] this film. It's one of those I can watch again and again. It is acted well by a good cast that doesn't try too hard to be star studded.

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

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

It is worth watching just for the scene with the two old ladies and a box of cornflakes... (no that's not a spoiler!) I [[iike]] this film. It's one of those I can watch again and again. It is acted well by a good cast that doesn't try too hard to be star studded.

The premise of a newly widowed housewife who turns to selling pot to make ends meet [[wo]] have been made into an Americanised turd of a movie or an action thriller. Either [[ought]] have [[slain]] the film completely.

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

It is worth watching just for the scene with the two old ladies and a box of cornflakes... (no that's not a spoiler!) --------------------------------------------- Result 76 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Dana]] [[Andrews]] [[stands]] "[[Where]] the Sidewalk Ends" in this 1950 film that [[also]] [[stars]] [[Gene]] Tierney, Gary [[Merrill]], [[Karl]] Malden and Neville [[Brand]]. Andrews plays [[New]] York [[City]] Detective [[Sgt]]. [[Mark]] [[Dixon]], a [[cop]] with a [[bad]] temper who has gotten into [[trouble]] in the past for [[beating]] [[suspects]]. When a man is murdered at a gambling club [[owned]] by a mobster, Scalise (Merrill), Dixon and his partner [[go]] to [[investigate]]. Scalise blames the murder on Ken Paine ([[Stevens]]), who has now left the club after [[fighting]] not only with his [[wife]], Morgan (Tierney) but the victim. [[Dixon]] [[thinks]] the victim won a [[lot]] of money and was [[killed]] as a [[result]] by the mobster's [[men]]. He goes to [[see]] Paine and, not [[realizing]] he has a [[plate]] in his head from the [[war]], knocks him to the [[floor]] and [[inadvertently]] [[kills]] him. [[Now]] he [[must]] cover up the [[murder]]. As a further complication, he falls for Morgan; her father ([[Ken]] Tully), who went to Paine's [[apartment]] after he [[saw]] that Paine had [[hit]] his daughter, is [[arrested]] for the [[crime]].

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

My only problem with this well-directed, fast-moving and absorbing [[film]] is the ending. Pure Hollywood and, putting myself in Tierney's place, I doubt I would react the same way. A minor criticism for a film written by Ben Hecht and directed by Otto Preminger. I didn't find it as awe-inspiring as "Laura," but few things in this [[world]] are. If you like film noir, this is a must-see. [[Dan]] [[Andrew]] [[standing]] "[[Whenever]] the Sidewalk Ends" in this 1950 film that [[similarly]] [[star]] [[Genetics]] Tierney, Gary [[Meryl]], [[Carl]] Malden and Neville [[Markings]]. Andrews plays [[Novel]] York [[Ville]] Detective [[Sarge]]. [[Dialed]] [[Dickson]], a [[policing]] with a [[rotten]] temper who has gotten into [[troubles]] in the past for [[defeating]] [[defendants]]. When a man is murdered at a gambling club [[possessed]] by a mobster, Scalise (Merrill), Dixon and his partner [[going]] to [[study]]. Scalise blames the murder on Ken Paine ([[Roberts]]), who has now left the club after [[battling]] not only with his [[women]], Morgan (Tierney) but the victim. [[Dickson]] [[ideas]] the victim won a [[lots]] of money and was [[murdering]] as a [[findings]] by the mobster's [[male]]. He goes to [[seeing]] Paine and, not [[reaching]] he has a [[slab]] in his head from the [[warfare]], knocks him to the [[storey]] and [[mistakenly]] [[murdering]] him. [[Presently]] he [[ought]] cover up the [[slain]]. As a further complication, he falls for Morgan; her father ([[Kent]] Tully), who went to Paine's [[flat]] after he [[noticed]] that Paine had [[slapped]] his daughter, is [[imprisoned]] for the [[offences]].

This is a [[truthfully]] [[handsome]], gritty noir with some [[alright]] performances. The ruggedly [[charming]] and weathered Andrews is convincing as a [[challenging]] [[even]] nervous [[inspector]] who has to [[remain]] one [[steps]] ahead of his colleagues. The [[cinema]] reunites him with his [[excellent]] "Laura" costar, [[Genetics]] Tierney, and she looks [[exquisite]] as a [[models]] with bad taste in [[males]] who [[clearly]] is used to being roughed up. Little does she know, she's got another one on her hands. Ken Tully does a terrific job as her father, who protests his innocence [[although]] some damning evidence. Karl Malden is very tough as Dixon's boss.

My only problem with this well-directed, fast-moving and absorbing [[cinematography]] is the ending. Pure Hollywood and, putting myself in Tierney's place, I doubt I would react the same way. A minor criticism for a film written by Ben Hecht and directed by Otto Preminger. I didn't find it as awe-inspiring as "Laura," but few things in this [[monde]] are. If you like film noir, this is a must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 77 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was just horrible the plot was just OK, but the rest of the was was bad . I mean come on puppet and then they even tried to make the movie digital and that made it even worse! Normally I would like low-budget movie but this was just a waste of time and almost made me want to return the set that it came on. I have about ten low-budget movie set with like 6-8 movies on them and I would have to say this is the worse movie out of all of them. Also the wording is off and they use a fake plastic machetes that doesn't even look like a real one, they could of used one that looked even a little close to a real one so save your time and money and don't watch this horrorible movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 78 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This move is about as [[bad]] as they come. I was, however [[forced]] to give it a 2 for the scenery. There are many great shots of the southwest including many in Monument Valley, one of the most breathtaking places in the US. It is also, starting with John Ford, one of the most filmed. In fact one scene with Kris and the girl was filmed on a place called John Ford point. This move is about as [[amiss]] as they come. I was, however [[compelled]] to give it a 2 for the scenery. There are many great shots of the southwest including many in Monument Valley, one of the most breathtaking places in the US. It is also, starting with John Ford, one of the most filmed. In fact one scene with Kris and the girl was filmed on a place called John Ford point. --------------------------------------------- Result 79 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Stylishly [[directed]], picturesquely photographed and [[brilliantly]] acted — Crosby's interpretation seems [[exactly]] right, Hardwicke has his [[best]] role ever, while Bendix is a [[treat]] too — this Yankee's [[appeal]] is universal and [[irresistible]].

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

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

[[In]] short, as the trailer actually describes, an entertainment [[delight]] from start to [[finish]]. Stylishly [[geared]], picturesquely photographed and [[brightly]] acted — Crosby's interpretation seems [[accurately]] right, Hardwicke has his [[optimum]] role ever, while Bendix is a [[treatment]] too — this Yankee's [[appellate]] is universal and [[inexorable]].

One of the principal joys of the movie, of course, are the [[lyrics]]. As might be expected, Bing is in fine [[vocals]]. And [[despite]] Hardwicke's solo has been [[chopping]], we can [[yet]] hear him sing heartily as he dances merrily with Crosby and Bendix in their [[illustrious]] novelty number, "Busy [[Accomplished]] [[Nothin]]". It's [[further]] a [[processing]] to [[overheard]] Rhonda [[Flemming]], who, [[despite]] she [[liked]] an [[wide]] stage and concert [[professions]] as a [[diva]], was rarely [[granted]] a [[likelihood]] to be [[hear]] in the [[cine]]. She has a [[cute]] [[vocals]] that more than matches her ravishing [[seem]]—and she looks very fetching [[actually]] in her Mary [[Kaye]] Dodson costumes.

[[Headmaster]] Tay Garnett [[receives]] the most out of his lavish [[budgets]], using all the [[finances]] at his command to present every fabulous scene as effectively as [[achievable]]. ([[Possibly]] the eclipse looks a trifle too contrived, but who's complaining?)

[[Among]] short, as the trailer actually describes, an entertainment [[jubilation]] from start to [[iend]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 80 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Offbeat and rather [[entertaining]] sleeper concerning two very different [[brothers]] who are both not only so-called "fire starters" (think Stephen King's snore-fest of a book with the same name), but also forever at odds with each other over a woman who has a rather nasty habit of being a [[pyromaniac]]! Good special effects ([[especially]] towards the end), quirky performances from a pretty talented trio of [[actors]] and topped by a really interesting and oddly appropriate soundtrack [[ultimately]] make "Wilder Napalm" a [[unique]] [[treat]] of a [[film]] to watch...if you can find it that is! On a personal [[note]], I was [[fortunate]] enough to snatch it up (so to speak) from the two-dollar bin at my local video-rental [[store]]. (*** out of *****) Offbeat and rather [[droll]] sleeper concerning two very different [[plymouth]] who are both not only so-called "fire starters" (think Stephen King's snore-fest of a book with the same name), but also forever at odds with each other over a woman who has a rather nasty habit of being a [[arsonist]]! Good special effects ([[specifically]] towards the end), quirky performances from a pretty talented trio of [[actresses]] and topped by a really interesting and oddly appropriate soundtrack [[eventually]] make "Wilder Napalm" a [[unequalled]] [[processing]] of a [[cinematography]] to watch...if you can find it that is! On a personal [[memo]], I was [[lucky]] enough to snatch it up (so to speak) from the two-dollar bin at my local video-rental [[storage]]. (*** out of *****) --------------------------------------------- Result 81 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[remarkable]] [[film]] can be summed up very easily. First of all, while the comparisons to "Princess Bride" are inevitable, it's almost futile to do so. While both films combine adult wit and humor with a fairy tale backdrop, "Stardust" is so much different than any other fantasy/sci-fi film I've ever seen. It's such a hybrid of those genres, but its plot and script are so unique that--along with the performances, special effects, cinematography, and score--the finished product is simply not all that comparable to anything that has ever appeared on the silver screen. Secondly, the score is very effective at simultaneously pulling us into the story and the fantasy world in which it takes place and pushing the story along, while creating just the right amount of awe and excitement necessary to make the magic believable within the realm where the characters exist. Thirdly, I did not find the film to be even remotely difficult to follow or confusing in any way. In fact, the interesting interplay between the three main subplots actually made it even that much more compelling to watch. Wonderfully casted, and superbly acted across the board. This fantasy adventure (with sci-fi elements) was the best one I've seen since "Return of the King" (not that I am comparing the two at all). OK, so its not that easy to sum up, but don't let any crude and/or heartless and cynical review nor the film's pathetic PR prevent you from partaking in the best time you could have at the movies this summer (or even possibly in a long time)! This [[whopping]] [[cinematographic]] can be summed up very easily. First of all, while the comparisons to "Princess Bride" are inevitable, it's almost futile to do so. While both films combine adult wit and humor with a fairy tale backdrop, "Stardust" is so much different than any other fantasy/sci-fi film I've ever seen. It's such a hybrid of those genres, but its plot and script are so unique that--along with the performances, special effects, cinematography, and score--the finished product is simply not all that comparable to anything that has ever appeared on the silver screen. Secondly, the score is very effective at simultaneously pulling us into the story and the fantasy world in which it takes place and pushing the story along, while creating just the right amount of awe and excitement necessary to make the magic believable within the realm where the characters exist. Thirdly, I did not find the film to be even remotely difficult to follow or confusing in any way. In fact, the interesting interplay between the three main subplots actually made it even that much more compelling to watch. Wonderfully casted, and superbly acted across the board. This fantasy adventure (with sci-fi elements) was the best one I've seen since "Return of the King" (not that I am comparing the two at all). OK, so its not that easy to sum up, but don't let any crude and/or heartless and cynical review nor the film's pathetic PR prevent you from partaking in the best time you could have at the movies this summer (or even possibly in a long time)! --------------------------------------------- Result 82 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] ********Spoilers--Careful*********

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What can I [[told]]? I'm biased when it comes to Urban Cowboy. I [[iike]] it and have [[saw]] it countless times--and usually [[unearthed]] out something new about it with each viewing.

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

Travolta plays Bud, a small town Texas boy who moves to Houston to work in the oil fields. And this is when Travolta actually [[served]] in [[buena]] [[prodigious]] [[cinema]] like Saturday [[Nightly]] [[Classical]] [[however]] of [[gaming]] stereotypical [[negative]] [[fellers]]/good guys in [[gargantuan]] [[budgets]] [[theater]]. This is a really [[buena]] movie--the mechanical [[ox]] riding [[competition]] and two-step [[dances]] may be silly, but you have to [[enjoys]] this for what it is.

Bud meets [[Wuss]] ([[served]] by Debra Winger with slutty brilliance)--and [[rapidly]] after, they are [[marry]] and [[residing]] in their [[daydreaming]] trailer. But their [[relations]] becomes a [[actual]] life battle of the sexes. Bud wants to be a [[actual]] cowboy. [[Wuss]] wants to be with a [[actual]] [[denim]]. But in modern [[time]], men's [[functions]] are not as [[unmistakable]]. Where can Bud prove he's a [[actual]] [[dude]]? He can [[worked]] his [[unsafe]] [[labor]] by day and ride the mechanical bull by night--he can be a "urban cowboy." But [[Wuss]] wants to drive his pick-up truck, and she wants to ride the mechanical bull, too. So where does this leave Bud? As [[Weakling]] asserts her independence, she lies about riding the bull and flirts with the ex-con and prison rodeo star--a real bull rider--, Wes (played [[staggeringly]] greasy by Scott Glenn). Bud is threatened, and Bud and Sissy break up.

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

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

Of course, you may ask yourself why Bud and Sissy would go to Gilleys about every night and "live like pigs." Maybe that contributed to their bad marriage. Or why didn't Bud stay with Pam--she wasn't that bad and had money. Or why they had to kill off Uncle Bob. Or why Bud and Sissy had such stupid friends like Marshall and Jessie who were always trying to break them up: Marshall says to Bud, "She {Sissy} rides that bull better than you do!" But part of the fun of Urban Cowboy is making fun of it a little bit--and saying, isn't that Bonnie Raitt on the stage! --------------------------------------------- Result 83 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I rated this movie a 1 since the plot is so [[unbelievable]] [[unbelievable]]. [[Judge]] for yourself. Be warned, the following will not only give away the plot, but will also [[spoil]] your [[appetite]] for watching the movie.

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

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

Oh dear... I rated this movie a 1 since the plot is so [[awesome]] [[phenomenal]]. [[Richter]] for yourself. Be warned, the following will not only give away the plot, but will also [[wrack]] your [[hunger]] for watching the movie.

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

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

Oh dear... --------------------------------------------- Result 84 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This romantic comedy isn't too bad. There are some funny things happening here and there, and there are some rather memorable characters in it.

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

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

The acting, however, is amateurish (with the exception of the banker). [[Though]] some scenes are great [[droll]], others are [[merely]] [[distracting]]. In particular, I [[detected]] the "romantic" part of the story [[poorest]].

All in all, I [[imagines]] it's worth seeing if you [[fond]] [[soccer]] and romantic comedies. It's not really a bad movie, and the ending did feel quite good. Just don't expect anything out of the ordinary. Fair enough if you have an hour and a quarter to kill. --------------------------------------------- Result 85 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Fantastic]] movie. One to excite all 5 senses. Is not a true historical report and not all information is to be taken as factual information. True Hollywood conventions used, like playing A list and VERY attractive actors as the 'heroes', such as Naomi Watts (Julia Cook - Ned Kelly's lover), Heath Ledger (Ned) and Orlando Bloom (Joe Byrne - Ned's right hand man), and unattractive (sorry Geoffrey Rush) actors play the drunken and corrupt Victorian Police Force. This also instills a very unreliable love story into the mix between Ned (Ledger) and Julia Cook (Watts) to entice all the romantics, females being especially susceptible. Even from the first scene, when Ned saves the fat youth from drowning and his dad calls him "sunshine" and had a "glint in his eye as he looked down at me, his hand on me shoulder," it is very romanticized and persuades viewers to side with Ned Kelly, the underdog. Besides, don't all Aussies love an underdog? [[Glamorous]] movie. One to excite all 5 senses. Is not a true historical report and not all information is to be taken as factual information. True Hollywood conventions used, like playing A list and VERY attractive actors as the 'heroes', such as Naomi Watts (Julia Cook - Ned Kelly's lover), Heath Ledger (Ned) and Orlando Bloom (Joe Byrne - Ned's right hand man), and unattractive (sorry Geoffrey Rush) actors play the drunken and corrupt Victorian Police Force. This also instills a very unreliable love story into the mix between Ned (Ledger) and Julia Cook (Watts) to entice all the romantics, females being especially susceptible. Even from the first scene, when Ned saves the fat youth from drowning and his dad calls him "sunshine" and had a "glint in his eye as he looked down at me, his hand on me shoulder," it is very romanticized and persuades viewers to side with Ned Kelly, the underdog. Besides, don't all Aussies love an underdog? --------------------------------------------- Result 86 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Gene Tierney and Dana Andrews, who were both so memorable in 1944's "Laura, re-teamed for this [[excellent]] 1950 film-noir.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The ending is not exactly upbeat as Mark will have to face the music. At least, he finally admits to what he has done. --------------------------------------------- Result 87 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Watching]] "[[Speak]] [[Easily]]" is [[painful]] for [[fans]] of Buster Keaton. [[Seeing]] such a phenomenal writer, actor, comic, director, and stunt [[man]] subjected to this [[humiliating]] spectacle is like [[seeing]] a Picasso [[used]] as a drop [[cloth]], or perhaps more like seeing the finest Camembert [[adulterated]] with whey solids and [[processed]] into Cheez-Whiz.

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

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

If you're a fan of [[bad]] [[movies]], [[get]] [[drunk]] and watch "[[Speak]] [[Easily]]" with friends, a [[la]] "[[Mystery]] Science [[Theater]] 3000". But other than that, [[stick]] with the silents. [[Let]] them be 100% of what Buster Keaton is [[remembered]] for. [[Staring]] "[[Talk]] [[Readily]]" is [[hurtful]] for [[lovers]] of Buster Keaton. [[Witnessing]] such a phenomenal writer, actor, comic, director, and stunt [[men]] subjected to this [[embarrass]] spectacle is like [[see]] a Picasso [[utilizes]] as a drop [[tissues]], or perhaps more like seeing the finest Camembert [[forged]] with whey solids and [[processes]] into Cheez-Whiz.

Keaton is ill-cast as [[Teacher]] [[Posting]], whose overblown [[lexicon]] is the only thing [[sustaining]] him from [[arguing]], "[[Say]] me about the [[bunnies]], [[Georgi]]." (Post would have [[asserted]] something like, "[[Graciously]] inform me as to the status of the [[minimal]] [[mammal]] in the [[families]] Leporidae of the order Lagomorpha, [[genre]] [[mister]], who I [[think]] is [[notably]] [[dealt]] with the epithet 'George'.") When Keaton [[generated]] his own characters, they [[apt]] be situationally clueless but they weren't [[dumb]]. They were [[rapid]] [[study]] and became masters of their worlds. Not so with Post, who never [[halting]] stumbling and bumbling and who who has no more [[oversight]] of his [[destinies]] than a bilge rat had of the Titanic. And while Keaton's [[upfront]] characters had a [[delightful]] [[naivete]] and innocence, Post [[arrives]] across as such a profound sexual retardate that if he ever did [[gotten]] physically [[induced]], he'd put an ice [[bags]] on the swelling and [[seeking]] medical [[assists]].

There are a [[couples]] of [[little]], redeeming moments, such as Keaton's [[tries]] to [[gets]] rid of the vampish Thema Todd or his suggestion as to appropriate [[outfits]] for a Greek [[choreography]], but it's just not worth enduring the [[overall]] [[cinematography]] to [[behold]] them.

If you're a fan of [[amiss]] [[cinematography]], [[gets]] [[drunken]] and watch "[[Speaks]] [[Easy]]" with friends, a [[angeles]] "[[Puzzle]] Science [[Movies]] 3000". But other than that, [[wand]] with the silents. [[Allowing]] them be 100% of what Buster Keaton is [[reminding]] for. --------------------------------------------- Result 88 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] [[Although]] I've long been a fan of [[Peter]] Weir, I hadn't [[watched]] any of his Australian movies until I watched The Last [[Wave]]. And it was a pleasant, [[unpredictable]] [[surprise]].

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sometimes it can be frustrating, and it may upset viewers who expect to finish a movie with everything making sense; but for those who don't mind some strangeness or ambiguity, The Last Wave is a great movie to watch. [[Though]] I've long been a fan of [[Pieter]] Weir, I hadn't [[seen]] any of his Australian movies until I watched The Last [[Wavelength]]. And it was a pleasant, [[erratic]] [[surprises]].

[[Richards]] Chamberlain plays David, a lawyer [[urged]] to [[advocating]] five aborigines [[blamed]] with murdering another Aborigine. [[During]] David's peers it's a [[unmistakable]] case of drunken [[agitation]] and they [[believing]] they should [[argue]] guilty and [[serves]] a [[rapids]] [[sentencing]]. But David believes there's a mystery [[underside]] the [[kill]], [[associated]] to tribal [[ceremonies]]. As his [[surveys]] [[revenues]] he [[teaches]] not only [[items]] about his [[customer]] but about himself too.

To [[expose]] more would be to [[wrack]] one of the [[weirdest]] [[filmmaking]] I've ever seen. I can only [[says]] that this [[kino]] goes in [[instructions]] that no one will be [[awaited]].

There are [[multiple]] [[components]] that make this a [[exciting]] [[movies]]: Chamberlain's acting, for [[lawsuit]]; but also the performances by David Gulpilil, who plays a [[youths]] aborigine who introduces David into [[tribes]] mysteries; and Nandjiwarra Amagula, who plays an [[ancient]] aborigine who's a spiritual guide. The [[relations]] between these three [[characteristic]] make the [[crux]] of the [[movies]].

But there's [[moreover]] the [[pathways]] Weir [[proposing]] the supernatural in the [[movies]]. David has dreams that [[alerted]] him of the future. [[Australian]] is undergoing [[hideous]] weather, with storms, hail [[tumbling]] and even a [[arcane]] black [[rainfall]] that may be [[anything]] more than pollution. But it's [[moreover]] [[associated]] to the [[lawsuit]] David is [[advocating]]. [[Mode]] it's [[tied]] is one of the [[huge]] revelations of the movie. Out of [[small]] events Weir [[administer]] to create an atmosphere of dread and [[repression]], suggesting [[futuristic]] horrors without [[genuinely]] [[display]] [[nothing]].

Charles Wain's [[scoring]] is [[noteworthy]], [[namely]] the [[utilizing]] of the didgeridoo. The [[photo]] is [[apart]] [[abundantly]] [[buena]]. Russell Boyd, Weir's longtime DP who won an [[Oskar]] in 2004 for Master and [[Commandant]], [[denotes]] a [[gloomy]], [[frightening]] world full of mystery.

I [[similarly]] find it [[noteworthy]] that for a [[film]] [[concentrating]] on [[natives]], it doesn't [[converting]] into an [[accusation]] against [[blanc]] [[cultivation]] or into a [[gooey]] [[commemorating]] of the their [[tradition]], like [[Dancers]] With [[Wolfe]] or The Last Samurai. This [[movies]] is too [[smarter]] to be that simplistic.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Even with its somewhat mundane middle Act, "In Cold Blood" stages in riveting detail a real-life story that still hypnotizes, nearly half a century later. It's that setting that does it. Do you suppose people in rural Kansas still leave their doors unlocked ... at night? [[Suppose]] turning out the [[illumination]] in your remote farmhouse on a [[chilled]] [[nuit]], and then going to bed. There's no need to [[blockade]] the doors. The only sound is the wind whistling through the trees. Sometime after midnight a [[automobile]] with lights off inches up the driveway. [[Times]] [[thereafter]] an intruder beams a flashlight into your darkened living [[salle]].

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

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

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

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

Even with its somewhat mundane middle Act, "In Cold Blood" stages in riveting detail a real-life story that still hypnotizes, nearly half a century later. It's that setting that does it. Do you suppose people in rural Kansas still leave their doors unlocked ... at night? --------------------------------------------- Result 91 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] (contains slight spoilers)

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

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

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

It's interesting how [[Antony]] Mann [[employs]] James [[Steward]] here. Stewart is, of course, [[remembering]] by [[several]] as George Bailey from Frank Capra's "It's a Wonderful Life", so it's [[easier]] to find parallels between the two films. In "It's a [[Ravishing]] [[Living]]", Bailey gets to see the [[monde]] as it [[could]] have been if he had never been born. In "The Far Country", Stewart's Jeff Webster, by not getting [[participating]] to help anyone [[otherwise]] (except himself), [[obtains]] to [[consults]] essentially the same thing: A [[monde]] in which he (for all practical matters) doesn't exist.

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

Both movies end with the same image - a close-up of a ringing bell. Stewart, by turning around his philosophy of non-involvement, has, it would seem, earned his "wings". --------------------------------------------- Result 92 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] [[Released]] in December of 1957, Sayonara went on to earn 8 Oscar [[nominations]] and would pull in 4 [[wins]]. Red [[Buttons]] won the Oscar for Best Supporting [[Actor]] in his role as airman Joe Kelly who falls in love with a Japanese woman while stationed in Kobe during the Korean War. Oscar [[nominated]] for [[Best]] Leading [[Actor]], Marlon Brando plays [[Major]] Lloyd Gruver, a Korean War flying [[ace]] [[reassigned]] to [[Japan]], who staunchly supports the military's opposition to marriages between American troops and Japanese women and [[tries]] without any success to talk his friend Joe Kelly out of getting married. Ironically Marlon Brandos [[character]] [[soon]] [[finds]] love of his own in a [[woman]] of Japanese descent. This [[movie]] [[highlights]] the prejudices and cultural [[differences]] of that [[time]]. [[Filmed]] in [[beautiful]] [[color]] and with [[stunning]] backgrounds I [[found]] this movie to be well worth watching just for these effects [[alone]]. Good [[movie]], gimme more...GimmeClassics [[Publicized]] in December of 1957, Sayonara went on to earn 8 Oscar [[nominees]] and would pull in 4 [[triumphs]]. Red [[Pimples]] won the Oscar for Best Supporting [[Protagonist]] in his role as airman Joe Kelly who falls in love with a Japanese woman while stationed in Kobe during the Korean War. Oscar [[appointing]] for [[Optimum]] Leading [[Actress]], Marlon Brando plays [[Big]] Lloyd Gruver, a Korean War flying [[aces]] [[diverted]] to [[Japanese]], who staunchly supports the military's opposition to marriages between American troops and Japanese women and [[strives]] without any success to talk his friend Joe Kelly out of getting married. Ironically Marlon Brandos [[personage]] [[speedily]] [[found]] love of his own in a [[femme]] of Japanese descent. This [[flick]] [[emphasized]] the prejudices and cultural [[difference]] of that [[moment]]. [[Shot]] in [[excellent]] [[coloring]] and with [[unbelievable]] backgrounds I [[unearthed]] this movie to be well worth watching just for these effects [[merely]]. Good [[movies]], gimme more...GimmeClassics --------------------------------------------- Result 93 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] I was recently online looking at a site that featured public domain movies. In their long list of films was this film and I thought I must be hallucinating at such an offensive title and premise. But, no, that's really what it was. And since the film was only about 27 minutes long, I decided to give it a try. If it had turned out to be some porno movie, I would have stopped watching. Instead, it turned out to be the most [[bizarre]] film I have ever seen. The Danish production crew tried, with a budget of about $49, to make a Star Trek-style film about a crew of very gay men traveling about the galaxy wiping out female oppression by killing all the women--like they proceeded to do on the Earth! And in every case, they were met with cheers and thanks from the now gay men of the planet.

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

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

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

By the way, this movie left me with 1001 questions as to WHO would make this, WHY make it and WHO was the intended audience?! It may not be the absolute worst thing I have ever seen, but it probably is the weirdest and possibly the most offensive! --------------------------------------------- Result 94 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] most of the [[bad]] [[reviews]] on this website blame "Hood of the Living Dead" for one (or more) of the following reasons: 1) it is a low-budget movie with virtually no acting; 2) it was so bad it made me laugh 3) it is something I could do myself. I won't even discuss the [[first]] point because it is a very subjective matter whether you like low-budget and independent stuff or not. I must say, [[however]], that I still fail to understand people renting such a movie as "Hood of the Living Dead" and then looking surprised when they realize it is not as polished and cute as a romantic comedy with Lindsay Lohan or Matthew Mc Conaughey. As for the second point, I really don't see what's so wrong with laughing. I personally like to laugh, and love movies that make me to, be they comedies or horror flicks. When in "Hammerhead" I saw this girl stepping into a PUDDLE and the shark-man came out of it to eat her, I just cracked up. And I was grateful that the director made such a stupid scene and gave me ten seconds of pure fun. Honestly, laughing just makes me feel good, while it seems that many people writing reviews see it as a bad bad thing. If you only want to feel sad and scared while watching a movie, "Hood of the Living Dead" and low-budget flicks are definitely not for you. But please don't come and tell us that you find them laughable. We already know it. This is most probably why we decided to watch the movie in first place. However, it is the third point that leaves totally baffled. Just several years ago people were lining up out of theaters to see "Blair Witch Project", which is a way more [[rudimentary]], boring, plot-less and bad-acted movie than "Hood of the Living Dead" (and takes itself way too seriously too). Moreover, half a million people go on YouTube every day to see the short films of "Lonelygirl15", which is certainly something everyone with a cute girlfriend, a room and a webcam could do! Not to talk about all of the even more amateurish videos you can find there. Why don't people blame those clips for bad acting and non-existing plot? I think it is one of the best things of our times that everyone, with affordable technology and a bunch of friends, can make their own movies and share them with people that have similar interests. And I feel a certain admiration for people who spend their weekends with their friends making a honestly bad (yet refreshing) piece of trash like this rather than shopping at the mall or playing video games alone. Leave aside your biases and your desire to sound like a smart film critic by attacking b-movies, and you'll see that "Hood of the Living Dead" can bring you almost as much fun as it did to its makers! If you have a taste for refreshing and enjoyable home-made horror movies, I recommend "Zombiez", "The Ghosts of Edendale", "The Killer Eye", "Monster Man", "Don't Look in the Basement", "The Worst Horror Movie Ever Made", "Redneck Zombies", "Jesus Christ Vampyre-Slayer" and "Habit". most of the [[unhealthy]] [[appraisals]] on this website blame "Hood of the Living Dead" for one (or more) of the following reasons: 1) it is a low-budget movie with virtually no acting; 2) it was so bad it made me laugh 3) it is something I could do myself. I won't even discuss the [[fiirst]] point because it is a very subjective matter whether you like low-budget and independent stuff or not. I must say, [[instead]], that I still fail to understand people renting such a movie as "Hood of the Living Dead" and then looking surprised when they realize it is not as polished and cute as a romantic comedy with Lindsay Lohan or Matthew Mc Conaughey. As for the second point, I really don't see what's so wrong with laughing. I personally like to laugh, and love movies that make me to, be they comedies or horror flicks. When in "Hammerhead" I saw this girl stepping into a PUDDLE and the shark-man came out of it to eat her, I just cracked up. And I was grateful that the director made such a stupid scene and gave me ten seconds of pure fun. Honestly, laughing just makes me feel good, while it seems that many people writing reviews see it as a bad bad thing. If you only want to feel sad and scared while watching a movie, "Hood of the Living Dead" and low-budget flicks are definitely not for you. But please don't come and tell us that you find them laughable. We already know it. This is most probably why we decided to watch the movie in first place. However, it is the third point that leaves totally baffled. Just several years ago people were lining up out of theaters to see "Blair Witch Project", which is a way more [[elemental]], boring, plot-less and bad-acted movie than "Hood of the Living Dead" (and takes itself way too seriously too). Moreover, half a million people go on YouTube every day to see the short films of "Lonelygirl15", which is certainly something everyone with a cute girlfriend, a room and a webcam could do! Not to talk about all of the even more amateurish videos you can find there. Why don't people blame those clips for bad acting and non-existing plot? I think it is one of the best things of our times that everyone, with affordable technology and a bunch of friends, can make their own movies and share them with people that have similar interests. And I feel a certain admiration for people who spend their weekends with their friends making a honestly bad (yet refreshing) piece of trash like this rather than shopping at the mall or playing video games alone. Leave aside your biases and your desire to sound like a smart film critic by attacking b-movies, and you'll see that "Hood of the Living Dead" can bring you almost as much fun as it did to its makers! If you have a taste for refreshing and enjoyable home-made horror movies, I recommend "Zombiez", "The Ghosts of Edendale", "The Killer Eye", "Monster Man", "Don't Look in the Basement", "The Worst Horror Movie Ever Made", "Redneck Zombies", "Jesus Christ Vampyre-Slayer" and "Habit". --------------------------------------------- Result 95 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]]

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

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

2. Judy Garland (enough said!)

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

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

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

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

2. Judy Garland (enough said!)

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

Worth a watch for sure. One of those movies that are designed to make you feel better about the world and your dreams. --------------------------------------------- Result 96 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] For some reason, in the late 70's and early 80's the local CBS affiliated station in New York kept playing this movie in it's late-night slot on Friday or Saturday nights for several years, usually at 2 a.m. or some such time. It's a fitting movie for that time slot since it's really hard to follow and quite odd (see the other reviews for specific story info). Anyway, after catching it numerous times in those days just before cable TV (And even after it hit but before they offered much all night programming), I kept catching this little [[oddity]]. After not seeing it for many years I decided to see if I could find it on DVD. Well, it is only available (from every search i've conducted anyway)in a pretty lousy grainy print on the budget label "Brentwood Video" as part of a 4-pack of movies (4 movies on 2 double sided discs)called "Alien Worlds" if anyone is interested. It's usually available for around $10-but even much less if you shop around. The other 3 movies on this set are readily available in numerous other collections of public domain movies, so no need to comment on them here. But I haven't seen "Eyes" available anywhere else. Though hardly a "restored" version in any way, this print runs exactly 92 minutes, so for once IMDb's stated running time of 90 minutes is not correct. Even with the 92 minute running time it's not unusual for a movie dubbed into English from another language to also have some of the running time trimmed. It seems to be a common budget-conscience practice to sometimes save money by not bothering to dub some scenes at all if they are not considered to be important to the story. Would a longer version make in any less confusing? Who really knows-unless you've seen it in it's native language... By the way, my attempts to watch this during the day don't work and I end up just turning it off. There's something about watching this in the middle of the night that just fits this movie..or maybe it's just from my earlier experiences, who know?? For some reason, in the late 70's and early 80's the local CBS affiliated station in New York kept playing this movie in it's late-night slot on Friday or Saturday nights for several years, usually at 2 a.m. or some such time. It's a fitting movie for that time slot since it's really hard to follow and quite odd (see the other reviews for specific story info). Anyway, after catching it numerous times in those days just before cable TV (And even after it hit but before they offered much all night programming), I kept catching this little [[uniqueness]]. After not seeing it for many years I decided to see if I could find it on DVD. Well, it is only available (from every search i've conducted anyway)in a pretty lousy grainy print on the budget label "Brentwood Video" as part of a 4-pack of movies (4 movies on 2 double sided discs)called "Alien Worlds" if anyone is interested. It's usually available for around $10-but even much less if you shop around. The other 3 movies on this set are readily available in numerous other collections of public domain movies, so no need to comment on them here. But I haven't seen "Eyes" available anywhere else. Though hardly a "restored" version in any way, this print runs exactly 92 minutes, so for once IMDb's stated running time of 90 minutes is not correct. Even with the 92 minute running time it's not unusual for a movie dubbed into English from another language to also have some of the running time trimmed. It seems to be a common budget-conscience practice to sometimes save money by not bothering to dub some scenes at all if they are not considered to be important to the story. Would a longer version make in any less confusing? Who really knows-unless you've seen it in it's native language... By the way, my attempts to watch this during the day don't work and I end up just turning it off. There's something about watching this in the middle of the night that just fits this movie..or maybe it's just from my earlier experiences, who know?? --------------------------------------------- Result 97 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Let]] me start off by saying that after [[watching]] this episode for the [[first]] time on DVD at 10 o'clock P.M. one [[night]], I could not fall [[asleep]] until about 3:00 A.M.

This brief review may contain spoilers.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

10 out of 10.

P.S.: Watch the next episode. You find out what the light is. It's wonderful. [[Leaving]] me start off by saying that after [[staring]] this episode for the [[fiirst]] time on DVD at 10 o'clock P.M. one [[nocturnal]], I could not fall [[behemoth]] until about 3:00 A.M.

This brief review may contain spoilers.

I'm a long-time fan of The Sopranos and I can [[reliably]] say this is the [[optimum]] episode I've seen. I'm not saying [[somebody]] should feel this way, but I do. This episode is identical to the weekend I spent with my family, watching over my own [[fathers]], comatose in the ICU before he [[voted]].

The episode [[launches]] with [[Toni]] in an [[replacement]] [[realistic]]: he is a salesman who's [[identities]] has been mistaken for that of a [[males]] named Kevin Finnerty.

By the [[period]] ten minutes had [[extinct]] by, I knew either Tony was dreaming, or I was watching some other [[spectacle]]. It wasn't like the [[customary]] Sopranos and I [[worshipped]] it.

[[Alternatives]] 1 is confirmed when [[Antony]] (or "Kevin") looks into the sky at a "[[helicopters]] [[concentrate]]" and we [[behold]] prodding through it, a [[physicians]] with a flashlight. We [[behold]] this only for a [[time]] and the [[sequencing]] plays out until we [[going]] back to [[actual]] [[lifetime]] in a situation [[analogous]] to the one I just [[indicated]].

Tony has [[arrive]] out of the [[eat]] for only a [[time]]. His [[guys]] [[taking]] A.J. [[dwellings]] and Carmella, overcome by [[emphasize]], [[interruption]] down in the [[passageway]]: a [[signing]] [[time]] in the episode.

[[Per]] the [[remaining]] of the episode, we [[sliced]] in between the [[actual]] [[monde]]: the family [[addresses]] with the [[prospective]] [[harmful]] [[conclusions]] of this [[eat]], and Tony's alternate reality, which [[similarities]] what's going on both in his [[intellect]] and in the [[actual]] [[globe]] around him.

[[Later]] [[occurs]] the stellar point in the episode: after A.J. [[terminates]] [[saying]] his [[mummy]] he's flunked [[tuition]], she [[walking]] in to [[behold]] [[Meadows]] sitting at Anthony's side.

She [[approaching]] [[Toni]], and [[uttering]] the [[better]] line of the episode: "[[Antoni]], can you [[heard]] us?" [[Across]] Tony's [[monde]], he enters a [[blackness]] [[motel]] [[salas]] and turns on a [[lighting]]. He takes off his shoes and goes to the phone. He tries to dial, but he cannot--as if he were trying to say something back to Carmella, but couldn't physically bring himself to do so. Not yet.

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

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

10 out of 10.

P.S.: Watch the next episode. You find out what the light is. It's wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 98 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Oh, how we have a misfire here; a film so [[bad]] that your [[mind]] will wonder and drift away onto other things as it [[wastes]] your [[time]] with brain numbingly [[poor]] [[production]] values; [[character]] [[stereotypes]] of the worst and racist kind since D.W. Griffith referred to the Chinese character in [[Broken]] Blossoms as 'the yellow man'; [[characters]] so [[unimaginative]] and un-engaging that it's [[difficult]] to watch as well as a narrative that plods along at such a slow, [[stupid]] and [[pointless]] pace that you will [[question]] the very people who [[say]] they like this film.

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

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

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

The second hour revolves around some sort of a kidnap plot; right, the love and romance is dealt with – maybe the film will kick-start. I was so very wrong: with more characters continuously talking very slowly and very deliberately in a monotone way, we have a kidnap scene involving some guy coming out of his office: this scene sums the film up. Everything is briefly planned and then executed in a heavy handed and dumb way that just makes it look cheesy. We do not get to see them arrive to some dramatic music; perhaps they have to get through security to get to the elevators; maybe they have to be careful of civilians when they hide in their chosen places and when that random woman steps out of the elevator and the gunshot occurs – the scene isn't even edited correctly. Some suspense, some drama: "Do I shoot or don't I?"; maybe some slow motion as the character has to quick draw before it's too late – anything but how it was actually executed. Prizzi's Honor continues its monotonous and uninteresting decent into filmic oblivion as it nears its climax. It's a film where cameras reflect in windows; lights reflect in sides of cars and 'dead' chauffeurs blink when nudged. Prizzi's Honor is a jumbled and messy film that will try the patients of any film-goer and don't say it was a comedy because I didn't laugh with it – AT it is another matter. The film is repetitive, drawn out and colourless in its vision and scope for originality - there is no Honour here. Oh, how we have a misfire here; a film so [[faulty]] that your [[esprit]] will wonder and drift away onto other things as it [[litter]] your [[period]] with brain numbingly [[pauper]] [[productivity]] values; [[nature]] [[prejudices]] of the worst and racist kind since D.W. Griffith referred to the Chinese character in [[Fractured]] Blossoms as 'the yellow man'; [[characteristic]] so [[uninspired]] and un-engaging that it's [[tough]] to watch as well as a narrative that plods along at such a slow, [[dopey]] and [[nonsensical]] pace that you will [[matter]] the very people who [[tell]] they like this film.

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

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

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

The second hour revolves around some sort of a kidnap plot; right, the love and romance is dealt with – maybe the film will kick-start. I was so very wrong: with more characters continuously talking very slowly and very deliberately in a monotone way, we have a kidnap scene involving some guy coming out of his office: this scene sums the film up. Everything is briefly planned and then executed in a heavy handed and dumb way that just makes it look cheesy. We do not get to see them arrive to some dramatic music; perhaps they have to get through security to get to the elevators; maybe they have to be careful of civilians when they hide in their chosen places and when that random woman steps out of the elevator and the gunshot occurs – the scene isn't even edited correctly. Some suspense, some drama: "Do I shoot or don't I?"; maybe some slow motion as the character has to quick draw before it's too late – anything but how it was actually executed. Prizzi's Honor continues its monotonous and uninteresting decent into filmic oblivion as it nears its climax. It's a film where cameras reflect in windows; lights reflect in sides of cars and 'dead' chauffeurs blink when nudged. Prizzi's Honor is a jumbled and messy film that will try the patients of any film-goer and don't say it was a comedy because I didn't laugh with it – AT it is another matter. The film is repetitive, drawn out and colourless in its vision and scope for originality - there is no Honour here. --------------------------------------------- Result 99 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[remember]] this [[movie]] from when i was 12, it was [[amazing]].. i remember it to the day not like most thing i watched back then, i have even [[tried]] to [[buy]] it but its like [[rocking]] [[horse]] sh*t! [[Anyway]], the acting is a bit chewy but the story is [[amazing]] considering it was a real B movie with a low budget and event the [[fighting]] scenes were [[amazing]] to watch, i must have watched it about 20 [[times]]. It was a very well made [[movie]] and i [[loved]] the idea of fighting giant man controlled robots, pity they had to spoil it by making a crappy spin off "Crash and Burn", don't watch that movie by the way it is total pants! If your a real Sci-Fi movie [[fan]] then watch this, if it was re-made today it would be a winner.. i really would [[love]] to see a remake or even release the DVD of it. I [[remind]] this [[flick]] from when i was 12, it was [[staggering]].. i remember it to the day not like most thing i watched back then, i have even [[attempt]] to [[purchasing]] it but its like [[rotating]] [[horsey]] sh*t! [[Writ]], the acting is a bit chewy but the story is [[startling]] considering it was a real B movie with a low budget and event the [[battle]] scenes were [[astounding]] to watch, i must have watched it about 20 [[period]]. It was a very well made [[films]] and i [[cared]] the idea of fighting giant man controlled robots, pity they had to spoil it by making a crappy spin off "Crash and Burn", don't watch that movie by the way it is total pants! If your a real Sci-Fi movie [[ventilator]] then watch this, if it was re-made today it would be a winner.. i really would [[iove]] to see a remake or even release the DVD of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Before the release of George Romero's genre-defining [[Night]] of the [[Living]] [[Dead]], [[zombies]] were [[relatively]] well-behaved [[creatures]]. They [[certainly]] had much [[better]] table-manners in the [[old]] days. But social [[etiquette]] aside what thrills did these early [[zombies]] [[offer]] to the movie-going public? Judging by this film, none whatsoever.

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

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

The story is about an [[sending]] to Cambodia, [[who]] [[intention]] is to [[found]] and [[ruin]] the [[confidentiality]] of zombiefication. One of the [[parties]] [[discovered]] the [[confidentiality]] on his own and sets about [[build]] his zombie army.

This [[cinematography]] is [[virtually]] a love [[triangular]] with [[walkers]]. But [[witnessing]] as this is a 30's [[cinematography]], the [[stated]] [[walkers]] are more like somnambulists than the flesh-eating [[diversity]] we [[believing]] of today. They [[appears]] to [[replied]] to mind-control, [[somewhat]] than insatiable appetites. And, [[very]] [[sincerely]], the 'revolt' is [[rather]] underwhelming too. The [[together]] thing is [[truly]] very [[drab]]. [[Sideways]] from the [[failure]] of [[terror]], there isn't any over-the-top melodramatic theatrics to [[preserving]] us [[distracted]]. It seems unlikely that this could've provided much [[amusement]] [[yet]] 70 [[ages]] [[beforehand]]. [[Consults]] it if you have to [[seeing]] everything with 'zombie' in the title but otherwise I would [[counsellor]] [[omitting]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] a few [[months]] [[ago]] on [[cable]], and it was [[fantastic]]. [[William]] H [[Macy]] is one of my [[favorite]] [[actors]], and his performance was just [[amazing]]. He makes you [[care]] for his [[character]], [[even]] when he is [[clearly]] doing the [[wrong]] thing, and Neve Campbell gives a performance that is with out a [[doubt]] the best performance I have [[seen]] by an [[actress]] this [[year]]. She is [[fantastic]] as a [[wild]] young [[woman]] who is [[wise]] beyond her [[years]].

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

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

I [[observed]] this [[kino]] a few [[month]] [[earlier]] on [[wires]], and it was [[sumptuous]]. [[Williams]] H [[Tragedies]] is one of my [[favored]] [[actresses]], and his performance was just [[staggering]]. He makes you [[caring]] for his [[characters]], [[yet]] when he is [[definitely]] doing the [[fallacious]] thing, and Neve Campbell gives a performance that is with out a [[duda]] the best performance I have [[noticed]] by an [[actor]] this [[annum]]. She is [[unbelievable]] as a [[feral]] young [[female]] who is [[judicious]] beyond her [[olds]].

Donald Sutherland is just plain creepy as Macy's father, and [[Johannes]] Ritter is fine as a shrink [[pasted]] in the [[oriente]] of everything that is [[occurring]].

I [[wanna]] that this was in the [[movies]] because I feel that it's a movie that should be [[avis]] by a [[grander]] audience. That's a [[ignominy]], because it's a [[whorehouse]] of [[allocate]] better that most of the [[novel]] [[films]] [[upcoming]] into the [[movies]] now.

--------------------------------------------- Result 102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] To me A [[Matter]] of [[Life]] and [[Death]] is just that- [[simply]] the [[best]] [[film]] ever made.

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

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

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

[[If]] I were [[allowed]] just one [[film]] to [[keep]] and watch again A [[Matter]] of [[Life]] and [[Death]] would be that [[film]]. To me A [[Topic]] of [[Vida]] and [[Killings]] is just that- [[mere]] the [[nicest]] [[filmmaking]] ever made.

From [[begins]] to [[termination]] it oozes class. It is [[encouraging]], [[thinking]] [[causing]], a mirror to the post [[warfare]] world and the [[relationship]] between [[populations]].

The cinematography is simply [[unbelievable]] and the [[consequence]] of [[blended]] monochrome and Technicolour to accent the [[assorted]] [[universe]] [[cooperating]] seamlessly. The characters and plot [[developments]] are near perfect and the attention to detail promotes a thoroughly [[dependable]] fantasy.

No [[topic]] how [[multiple]] [[moments]] I watch the [[movie]] - and I have watched it a [[batch]] - it never [[fail]] to [[toque]] me. It makes me [[mouse]], it makes me laugh, it makes me [[thinking]], it makes me [[crying]]. It is as fresh [[hoy]] as it was in 1946.

[[Unless]] I were [[authorized]] just one [[flick]] to [[maintain]] and watch again A [[Issue]] of [[Iife]] and [[Deaths]] would be that [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Dr. Seuss would sure be [[mad]] right now if he was alive. Cat in the Hat proves to [[show]] how movie productions can take a [[classic]] [[story]] and turn it into a mindless pile of goop. We have Mike Myers as the infamous Cat in the [[Hat]], big [[mistake]]! Myers proves he can't [[act]] in this film. He acts like a prissy show [[girl]] with a thousand tricks up his sleeve. The [[kids]] in this movie are all right, [[somewhere]] in between the lines of dull and [[annoying]]. The story is just like the original with a couple of tweaks and like most movies based on other stories, never tweak with the original story! Bringing in the evil neighbor Quin was a bad idea. He is a stupid villain that would never get anywhere in life.This movie is like a rejected comic strip from the newspaper if you think about it. The film sure does look tacky! Sure there are a funny adult jokes like where the cat cuts of his tail and the censor goes off before he says a naughty word, mildly funny. At [[least]] the Grinch had spunk, and the film was actually good! This film is a cartoonish piece of snot with bright colors and bad mediocre acting. Was Mike Myers even in this movie actually? And another thing, the fish. What is with that stupid fish! First time you see him, he's an actual fish. Next time you see him, he's all animated and talking. But he looks like an animated piece of rubber play dough! This film is a total off target wreck. Good joke, bad joke, bad, bad, bad, good joke! I'm surprised it even had good jokes like the water park ride joke, that was good. So please if you have the choice, watch the Grinch instead of this mess. Dr. Seuss would sure be [[insane]] right now if he was alive. Cat in the Hat proves to [[displays]] how movie productions can take a [[typical]] [[saga]] and turn it into a mindless pile of goop. We have Mike Myers as the infamous Cat in the [[Sombrero]], big [[mistaken]]! Myers proves he can't [[law]] in this film. He acts like a prissy show [[women]] with a thousand tricks up his sleeve. The [[enfants]] in this movie are all right, [[anywhere]] in between the lines of dull and [[galling]]. The story is just like the original with a couple of tweaks and like most movies based on other stories, never tweak with the original story! Bringing in the evil neighbor Quin was a bad idea. He is a stupid villain that would never get anywhere in life.This movie is like a rejected comic strip from the newspaper if you think about it. The film sure does look tacky! Sure there are a funny adult jokes like where the cat cuts of his tail and the censor goes off before he says a naughty word, mildly funny. At [[fewer]] the Grinch had spunk, and the film was actually good! This film is a cartoonish piece of snot with bright colors and bad mediocre acting. Was Mike Myers even in this movie actually? And another thing, the fish. What is with that stupid fish! First time you see him, he's an actual fish. Next time you see him, he's all animated and talking. But he looks like an animated piece of rubber play dough! This film is a total off target wreck. Good joke, bad joke, bad, bad, bad, good joke! I'm surprised it even had good jokes like the water park ride joke, that was good. So please if you have the choice, watch the Grinch instead of this mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[film]] has [[renewed]] my interest in French cinema. The [[story]] is [[enchanting]], the acting is flawless and Audrey Tautou is [[absolutely]] beautiful. I imagine that we will be seeing a lot more of her in the States after her [[upcoming]] role in Amelie. This [[cinematographic]] has [[invigorated]] my interest in French cinema. The [[fairytales]] is [[ravishing]], the acting is flawless and Audrey Tautou is [[totally]] beautiful. I imagine that we will be seeing a lot more of her in the States after her [[imminent]] role in Amelie. --------------------------------------------- Result 105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] This is the [[movie]] that epitomizes the D&D fear of the 80s (and even today). The fear being that people who play D&D (or any other role-playing game for that matter) will be "sucked in" and lose their ability to distinguish reality from fantasy (and go on killing sprees, child sacrifices, suicide, etc). Great movie for anyone who [[likes]] to blame the problems of society on inanimate objects, but anyone who has played a role-playing game, a video game, or even acted in a play will [[see]] this as an [[insult]] to their [[intelligence]]. It is to D&D what Wargames was to computers. Plus as a movie, it just kinda sucks. This is the [[cinematography]] that epitomizes the D&D fear of the 80s (and even today). The fear being that people who play D&D (or any other role-playing game for that matter) will be "sucked in" and lose their ability to distinguish reality from fantasy (and go on killing sprees, child sacrifices, suicide, etc). Great movie for anyone who [[iike]] to blame the problems of society on inanimate objects, but anyone who has played a role-playing game, a video game, or even acted in a play will [[seeing]] this as an [[offend]] to their [[intelligentsia]]. It is to D&D what Wargames was to computers. Plus as a movie, it just kinda sucks. --------------------------------------------- Result 106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] You have to [[see]] it to believe it! Directors [[Alastair]] Fothergill and [[Mark]] Linfield have done a thing really great, it is a 10 out of 10 so I can not believe that other user of this [[web]] had rate it so poor, unless they were expecting to see just a normal movie, with people, love scenes, and so on. I am also convinced that this [[kind]] of [[documentaries]] are an [[excellent]] way to wake up us in order to save our beautiful planet. Finally, it has nothing to do with Al Gore's documentary-movie "An inconvenient truth" mainly made of long monologues, painfully and with "truths" not always accurate, as many scientists have pointed already.

The best thing you can do on earth is not miss Earth. You have to [[consults]] it to believe it! Directors [[Alistair]] Fothergill and [[Flagged]] Linfield have done a thing really great, it is a 10 out of 10 so I can not believe that other user of this [[internet]] had rate it so poor, unless they were expecting to see just a normal movie, with people, love scenes, and so on. I am also convinced that this [[sorting]] of [[documentary]] are an [[sumptuous]] way to wake up us in order to save our beautiful planet. Finally, it has nothing to do with Al Gore's documentary-movie "An inconvenient truth" mainly made of long monologues, painfully and with "truths" not always accurate, as many scientists have pointed already.

The best thing you can do on earth is not miss Earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] People [[criticise]] Disney's animated features of the 1950s for being overly glossy, set in landscapes that are much too pristine. That criticism is just. And yet it can't be the [[whole]] story, because the two least glossy - "Alice in Wonderland" and "Peter Pan" - are also the weakest. "Cinderella", on the other hand, set in a [[world]] in which the very dirt [[sparkles]], is clearly the [[best]].

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

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

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

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

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

"Cinderella" is Disney's [[revert]] to [[idiosyncrasies]] after an eight-year [[adjournment]], and [[either]] with it nor with any [[posterior]] movie [[ought]] he [[retrieval]] the raw brilliance of his early [[ages]]. Moreover he made [[items]] hard for himself by picking "Cinderella". She's a passive [[heroin]] and there's not much [[person]] can do about that. (Maybe I'm wrong on this score - I haven't seen the recent "Ever After".) Nonetheless it is remarkable how successful Disney was in bringing this unpromising story to life, without cutting across the grain of its spirit. --------------------------------------------- Result 108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] When I was little my parents took me along to the theater to see [[Interiors]]. It was one of many movies I watched with my [[parents]], but this was the only one we walked out of. Since then I had never [[seen]] [[Interiors]] until just recently, and I [[could]] have lived out the rest of my life without it. What a [[pretentious]], [[ponderous]], and painfully [[boring]] [[piece]] of 70's [[wine]] and cheese [[tripe]]. Woody Allen is one of my [[favorite]] [[directors]] but Interiors is by far the [[worst]] [[piece]] of [[crap]] of his [[career]]. In the [[unmistakable]] [[style]] of Ingmar Berman, Allen gives us a dark, angular, muted, insight in to the lives of a family wrought by the psychological damage caused by divorce, estrangement, career, love, non-love, halitosis, whatever. The film, intentionally, has no comic relief, no music, and is drenched in shadowy pathos. This film style can be best defined as expressionist in nature, using an improvisational method of dialogue to illicit a "more pronounced depth of meaning and truth". But Woody Allen is no Ingmar Bergman. The film is painfully slow and dull. But beyond that, I simply had no connection with or sympathy for any of the characters. Instead I felt only contempt for this parade of shuffling, whining, nicotine stained, martyrs in a perpetual quest for identity. Amid a backdrop of cosmopolitan affluence and baked Brie intelligentsia the story looms like a fart in the room. Everyone speaks in affected platitudes and elevated language between cigarettes. Everyone is "lost" and "struggling", desperate to find direction or understanding or whatever and it just goes on and on to the point where you just want to slap all of them. It's never about resolution, it's only about interminable introspective babble. It is nothing more than a psychological drama taken to an extreme beyond the audience's ability to connect. Woody Allen [[chose]] to make characters so immersed in themselves we feel left out. And for that reason I found this movie painfully self indulgent and spiritually draining. I see what he was going for but his insistence on promoting his message through Prozac prose and distorted film techniques jettisons it past the point of relevance. I highly recommend this one if you're feeling a little too happy and need something to remind you of death. Otherwise, let's just pretend this film never happened. When I was little my parents took me along to the theater to see [[Interior]]. It was one of many movies I watched with my [[relatives]], but this was the only one we walked out of. Since then I had never [[noticed]] [[Indoors]] until just recently, and I [[did]] have lived out the rest of my life without it. What a [[cocky]], [[onerous]], and painfully [[tiresome]] [[slice]] of 70's [[winemaking]] and cheese [[gut]]. Woody Allen is one of my [[favored]] [[administrators]] but Interiors is by far the [[hardest]] [[slice]] of [[dammit]] of his [[quarry]]. In the [[clear]] [[elegance]] of Ingmar Berman, Allen gives us a dark, angular, muted, insight in to the lives of a family wrought by the psychological damage caused by divorce, estrangement, career, love, non-love, halitosis, whatever. The film, intentionally, has no comic relief, no music, and is drenched in shadowy pathos. This film style can be best defined as expressionist in nature, using an improvisational method of dialogue to illicit a "more pronounced depth of meaning and truth". But Woody Allen is no Ingmar Bergman. The film is painfully slow and dull. But beyond that, I simply had no connection with or sympathy for any of the characters. Instead I felt only contempt for this parade of shuffling, whining, nicotine stained, martyrs in a perpetual quest for identity. Amid a backdrop of cosmopolitan affluence and baked Brie intelligentsia the story looms like a fart in the room. Everyone speaks in affected platitudes and elevated language between cigarettes. Everyone is "lost" and "struggling", desperate to find direction or understanding or whatever and it just goes on and on to the point where you just want to slap all of them. It's never about resolution, it's only about interminable introspective babble. It is nothing more than a psychological drama taken to an extreme beyond the audience's ability to connect. Woody Allen [[picked]] to make characters so immersed in themselves we feel left out. And for that reason I found this movie painfully self indulgent and spiritually draining. I see what he was going for but his insistence on promoting his message through Prozac prose and distorted film techniques jettisons it past the point of relevance. I highly recommend this one if you're feeling a little too happy and need something to remind you of death. Otherwise, let's just pretend this film never happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 109 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] 1927, and Hollywood had been on the map as the centre of the cinematic world for a little over a decade. Now that it had become the site of a multi-million dollar industry and the vertically integrated studio system had been established, some of those in the calmer quarters of this film-making factory were taking the time for a little self-reflection. The Last Command, while its heart may be the classic story of a once prestigious man fallen on hard times, frames that tale within a bleak look at how [[cinema]] unceremoniously recreates [[reality]], and how its production process [[could]] be [[mercilessly]] impersonal. It was written by Lajos Biro, who had been on the scene long enough to know.

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

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

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

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

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

Taking centre stage is a man who was at the time among Hollywood's most celebrated immigrants – Emil Jannings. Before coming to the States Jannings had worked mainly in comedy, being a master of the hammy yet hilariously well-timed performance, often as pompous authority figures or doddering old has-beens. He makes his entrance in The Last Command as the latter, and at first it looks as if this is to be another of Jannings's scenery-chomping caricatures. However, as the story progresses the actor [[receives]] to demonstrate his range, [[display]] by [[revolves]] [[tricky]] frailty, [[peaceful]] dignity and eventually awesome power and [[attendance]] in the finale. He never [[pretty]] stops being a blustering exaggeration (the German acting [[traditions]] knowing nothing of [[finesse]]), but he [[ceaselessly]] [[hold]] our attention with [[utter]] [[oversight]] over [[any]] facet of his performance.

The [[headmaster]] was another immigrant, [[despite]] one who had been [[approximately]] Hollywood a bit longer and had no background in the European [[movie]] [[industries]]. [[Though]] [[Jozef]] von Sternberg cultivated for himself the [[visuals]] of the artistic and imperious Teutonic [[Cine]] Meister (the "von" was made up, by the [[routing]]), and took a very [[characteristic]] [[approaching]] to the craft. Of [[remark]] in this [[imaging]] is his handling of pace and tone, a [[huge]] example being the first of the Russian flashback scenes. We open with a carefully-constructed chaos with movement in converging directions, which we the audience become part of as the camera pulls back and extras dash across the screen. Then, when Jannings arrives, everything settles down. Jannings's performance is incredibly sedate and measured, and when the players around him begin to mirror this the effect is as if his mere presence has restored order.

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

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

The Last Command could easily have ruffled a few feathers in studio offices, as tends to happen with any disparaging commentary on the film-making process, even a relatively tame example like this. At the very least, I believe many studio heads would have been displeased by the "behind-the-scenes" view, as it threatened the mystique of movie-making which was still very much alive at this point. As it turned out, such was the impact of the picture that Jannings won the first ever Academy Award for Best Actor, as well as a Best Writing nomination for Lajos Biro and (according to some sources, although the issue is a little vague) a nomination for Best Picture. This is significant, since the Academy was a tiny institution at this time and the first awards were more than ever a bit of self-indulgent back-slapping by the Hollywood elite. But elite or not, they recognised good material when they saw it, and were willing to reward it. --------------------------------------------- Result 110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (78%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Thunderbirds (2004)

[[Director]]: Jonathan Frakes

Starring: Bill Paxton, Ben Kingsley, Brady Corbet

5…4…3…2…1! Thunderbirds are GO!

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

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

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

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

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

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

[[Headmaster]]: Jonathan Frakes

Starring: Bill Paxton, Ben Kingsley, Brady Corbet

5…4…3…2…1! Thunderbirds are GO!

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

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

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

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

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

My rating for Thunderbirds is 1 ½ stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I am oh soooo glad I have not spent money to go to the cinema on it :-). It is nothing more than compilation of elements of few other classic titles like The Thing, Final Fantasy, The Abyss [[etc]]. framed in rather dull and [[meaningless]] scenario. I really can not figure out what was the purpose of creating this movie - it has absolutely [[nothing]] new to [[offer]] in its storyline which [[additionally]] is also [[senseless]]. Moreover there is [[nothing]] to watch - the FX'es [[look]] like there were taken from a second hand [[store]], you generally saw all of them in other movies. But it is definitely a good [[lullaby]]. I am oh soooo glad I have not spent money to go to the cinema on it :-). It is nothing more than compilation of elements of few other classic titles like The Thing, Final Fantasy, The Abyss [[cetera]]. framed in rather dull and [[unnecessary]] scenario. I really can not figure out what was the purpose of creating this movie - it has absolutely [[anything]] new to [[offering]] in its storyline which [[further]] is also [[wanton]]. Moreover there is [[anything]] to watch - the FX'es [[peek]] like there were taken from a second hand [[boutique]], you generally saw all of them in other movies. But it is definitely a good [[dodo]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Once again [[Jet]] Li [[brings]] his charismatic [[presence]] to the movie screen in the film Black [[Mask]]. In this film Li plays Tsui, an escapee from a super soldier program who seeks to regain the [[humanity]] that the program had taken away from him. To do this [[Tsui]] decides to [[become]] a [[librarian]] in order to live a normal and peaceful life, but [[fate]] demands that he clean up [[problems]] from his past before he can [[continue]] to seek peace. [[Other]] members of the [[super]] [[soldier]] [[program]] had escaped at the same time as Tsui, but they want to [[get]] even with the world [[rather]] than find [[inner]] peace. [[Thus]] [[Tsui]] [[becomes]] the only [[thing]] that can [[prevent]] his [[former]] team mates from releasing [[information]] that could cost [[many]] innocent people their [[lives]]. This [[film]] screams across the screen at a [[frantic]] pace and never [[lets]] its audience [[go]]. The martial arts is amazing, but because it uses wires it may not be [[appreciated]] as much as it [[deserves]] by American [[audiences]]. If you [[like]] [[action]] [[movies]] that have an interesting [[story]] and demand good acting performances because they [[deal]] with psychological as well as physical [[conflicts]], then Black [[Mask]] is for you. I am [[glad]] to see that some of Jet Li's movies are [[finally]] getting [[main]] [[stream]] [[release]] in the [[United]] States and [[look]] forward to seeing how the [[changes]] that that [[release]] will [[require]] ([[things]] like dubbing and soundtrack) will affect the [[film]]. This is one of Li's [[best]] [[films]], go out and see it on May 14 when it is [[released]] in [[America]]. Once again [[Spout]] Li [[poses]] his charismatic [[attendance]] to the movie screen in the film Black [[Hide]]. In this film Li plays Tsui, an escapee from a super soldier program who seeks to regain the [[mankind]] that the program had taken away from him. To do this [[Xu]] decides to [[becomes]] a [[library]] in order to live a normal and peaceful life, but [[destinies]] demands that he clean up [[disorders]] from his past before he can [[persist]] to seek peace. [[Else]] members of the [[peachy]] [[servicemen]] [[curriculum]] had escaped at the same time as Tsui, but they want to [[gets]] even with the world [[fairly]] than find [[indoor]] peace. [[Accordingly]] [[Suh]] [[becoming]] the only [[stuff]] that can [[obstructing]] his [[past]] team mates from releasing [[info]] that could cost [[multiple]] innocent people their [[life]]. This [[kino]] screams across the screen at a [[distraught]] pace and never [[enable]] its audience [[going]]. The martial arts is amazing, but because it uses wires it may not be [[complimented]] as much as it [[merited]] by American [[audience]]. If you [[likes]] [[activities]] [[movie]] that have an interesting [[histories]] and demand good acting performances because they [[addressing]] with psychological as well as physical [[squabbles]], then Black [[Conceal]] is for you. I am [[pleased]] to see that some of Jet Li's movies are [[ultimately]] getting [[principal]] [[flows]] [[freeing]] in the [[Unified]] States and [[glance]] forward to seeing how the [[amendment]] that that [[liberating]] will [[requisite]] ([[items]] like dubbing and soundtrack) will affect the [[movie]]. This is one of Li's [[optimum]] [[cinematography]], go out and see it on May 14 when it is [[publicized]] in [[Americans]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Being]] born in the 1960's I [[grew]] up watching the [[TV]] "[[Movies]] of the [[Week]]" in the early 70's and loved the [[creepy]] [[movies]] that were [[routinely]] shown including "Crowhaven Farm", "Bad Ronald", "Satan's School for [[Girls]]", "Kolchak the [[Night]] Stalker", etc, but this one is just [[plain]] [[dumb]].This is [[obviously]] the writer's [[trying]] to capitalize on the horrific [[Manson]] murders from a few [[years]] [[earlier]]. The movie stars Dennis Weaver of "McCloud" and "Duel" fame as a father who takes his [[family]] camping on a beach. The [[family]] encounters some hippies who for some [[reason]] decide to [[terrorize]] the [[family]]. The [[reason]] for this is never explained, and Weaver's pacifistic stance is [[hard]] to swallow. [[For]] God's sake, [[call]] the [[police]], beat the [[hell]] of them or [[something]], just don't sit there and [[whine]] about it. The acting is [[pretty]] lame, the [[story]] [[unbelievable]], etc. [[Susan]] Dey [[looks]] cute in a bikini but that's about it. Ignore this if it ever airs on [[TV]]. [[Ongoing]] born in the 1960's I [[growing]] up watching the [[TELEVISION]] "[[Film]] of the [[Weeks]]" in the early 70's and loved the [[terrifying]] [[film]] that were [[systematically]] shown including "Crowhaven Farm", "Bad Ronald", "Satan's School for [[Girl]]", "Kolchak the [[Nighttime]] Stalker", etc, but this one is just [[lowlands]] [[twit]].This is [[assuredly]] the writer's [[tempting]] to capitalize on the horrific [[Monsoon]] murders from a few [[ages]] [[formerly]]. The movie stars Dennis Weaver of "McCloud" and "Duel" fame as a father who takes his [[families]] camping on a beach. The [[families]] encounters some hippies who for some [[motif]] decide to [[terrify]] the [[families]]. The [[motif]] for this is never explained, and Weaver's pacifistic stance is [[tough]] to swallow. [[During]] God's sake, [[calls]] the [[policing]], beat the [[inferno]] of them or [[anything]], just don't sit there and [[mourn]] about it. The acting is [[belle]] lame, the [[narratives]] [[extraordinary]], etc. [[Suzan]] Dey [[seems]] cute in a bikini but that's about it. Ignore this if it ever airs on [[TELEVISIONS]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There has been a [[political]] documentary, of [[recent]] vintage, [[called]] Why We [[Fight]], which tries to [[examine]] the [[infamous]] Military Industrial Complex and its grip on this [[nation]]. It is [[considered]] both polemical and incisive in [[making]] its [[case]] against both that complex and the war [[fiasco]] we are currently [[involved]] in in Iraq. Yet, a far more famous series of films, with the same name, was made during World War Two, by Hollywood director Frank Capra. [[Although]] considered [[documentaries]], and having won Oscars in that [[category]], this [[series]] of seven [[films]] is really and [[truly]] mere agitprop, more in the vein of Leni Reifenstal's [[Triumph]] Of The Will, scenes of which Capra [[recycles]] for his own [[purposes]]. That [[said]], that [[fact]] does not [[mean]] it does not have [[vital]] [[information]] that [[subsequent]] generations of [[World]] [[War]] Two [[documentaries]] (such as the BBC's lauded The [[World]] At [[War]]) lacked, nor does that [[mean]] that its value as a [[primary]] [[source]] is any the less valuable. They are [[skillfully]] [[made]], and after recently [[purchasing]] some used DVDs at a discount [[store]], I found myself with the [[opportunity]] to [[select]] a free DVD with my purchase. I [[chose]] Goodtimes DVD's four [[DVD]] [[collection]] of the [[series]].

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

[[Overall]], the [[film]] [[series]] is well worth [[watching]], not only for the [[obvious]] reasons, but for the [[subtle]] [[things]] it [[reveals]], such as the use of the plural for terms like X [[millions]] when referring to [[dollars]], [[rather]] than the [[modern]] [[singular]], or the most overused [[graphic]] in the [[whole]] series- a Japanese [[sword]] piercing the [[center]] of [[Manchuria]]. [[Yet]], it [[also]] [[shows]] the [[complexities]] of trying to [[apply]] past standards to [[current]] wars. The lesson of [[World]] [[War]] One ([[avoid]] [[foreign]] entanglements) was not applicable to World War Two, whose own lesson (act early against dictatorships) has not been applicable in the three major wars America has fought since: Korea, Vietnam, nor Iraq. The fact that much of this series teeters on the uncertainties of the times it was made in only underscores its historic value in today's information-clogged times. It may not help you sort out the truth from the lies and propaganda of today, but at [[least]] you'll realize you are not the first to be in such a tenuous position, nor will you be the last. There has been a [[politics]] documentary, of [[newer]] vintage, [[phoned]] Why We [[Tussle]], which tries to [[probed]] the [[abominable]] Military Industrial Complex and its grip on this [[nationals]]. It is [[regarded]] both polemical and incisive in [[doing]] its [[lawsuit]] against both that complex and the war [[debacle]] we are currently [[implicated]] in in Iraq. Yet, a far more famous series of films, with the same name, was made during World War Two, by Hollywood director Frank Capra. [[Despite]] considered [[literature]], and having won Oscars in that [[class]], this [[serials]] of seven [[movie]] is really and [[really]] mere agitprop, more in the vein of Leni Reifenstal's [[Winning]] Of The Will, scenes of which Capra [[recycling]] for his own [[targeting]]. That [[indicated]], that [[facto]] does not [[meaning]] it does not have [[indispensable]] [[informations]] that [[later]] generations of [[Worldwide]] [[Warfare]] Two [[documentary]] (such as the BBC's lauded The [[Monde]] At [[Wars]]) lacked, nor does that [[imply]] that its value as a [[elementary]] [[origin]] is any the less valuable. They are [[cleverly]] [[introduced]], and after recently [[bought]] some used DVDs at a discount [[shops]], I found myself with the [[likelihood]] to [[picked]] a free DVD with my purchase. I [[elects]] Goodtimes DVD's four [[DVDS]] [[compiling]] of the [[serials]].

Rarely has [[anything]] free been so worth [[inestimable]]. [[Whilst]] there are no [[goodies]] on the DVDs, and the [[audible]] quality of the [[printing]] [[fluctuates]], these [[cinema]] [[supplying]] insight into the minds of Americans two thirds of a century [[earlier]], when [[racist]] was [[flagrant]] (as in [[various]] of the [[typical]] [[Werner]] [[Siblings]] pro-war [[funnies]] of the era), and there was [[anything]] [[amiss]] with [[gross]] distortion of facts. The seven [[cinema]], [[generated]] between 1942 and 1945, are Prelude To War, The [[Nazi]] [[Hit]], [[Rift]] And Conquer, The [[Battles]] Of Britain, The [[Battles]] Of Russia, The [[Battles]] Of China, and War [[Occurs]] To [[Latina]].

[[Holistic]], the [[cinematography]] [[serial]] is well worth [[staring]], not only for the [[flagrant]] reasons, but for the [[nuanced]] [[items]] it [[demonstrates]], such as the use of the plural for terms like X [[trillions]] when referring to [[bucks]], [[comparatively]] than the [[fashionable]] [[unique]], or the most overused [[graphs]] in the [[total]] series- a Japanese [[dagger]] piercing the [[centre]] of [[Manchu]]. [[Again]], it [[furthermore]] [[displaying]] the [[intricacies]] of trying to [[implement]] past standards to [[underway]] wars. The lesson of [[International]] [[Wars]] One ([[avert]] [[overseas]] entanglements) was not applicable to World War Two, whose own lesson (act early against dictatorships) has not been applicable in the three major wars America has fought since: Korea, Vietnam, nor Iraq. The fact that much of this series teeters on the uncertainties of the times it was made in only underscores its historic value in today's information-clogged times. It may not help you sort out the truth from the lies and propaganda of today, but at [[fewer]] you'll realize you are not the first to be in such a tenuous position, nor will you be the last. --------------------------------------------- Result 115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[watched]] this movie after seeing other comments on IMDb, [[even]] convincing my wife that it was a "unique horror movie." I [[wanted]] to [[like]] this movie, but was unable to.

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

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

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

The "love story" was good, but the [[terror]] aspect was [[abundantly]] [[mala]]. If the [[storytelling]] was just about a young man who [[decreased]] in love with a girl suffering from parasomnia, then it would have been a better movie.

The [[healthcare]] centre stretched credulity well past the limits, in fact it was quite [[absurd]]. The doctor [[fortunately]] ignors privacy [[statutes]] and professionalism. A nurse goes into a room for a routine feeding of a dangerous patient (without security escort), and drops the tray and runs out of the room [[howling]] for no [[evident]] [[motive]]. The forensic patient (and the film's villain) is tied up in a standing position [[abundantly]] clothed - [[manifestly]] for [[ages]]? None of it makes [[very]] [[feeling]].

The movie even had some [[protagonists]] that I've [[enjoyed]] in other [[matters]], such as the detectives, but still I can't recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The film released at the start of 2000 alongwith MELA both disasters So sad to start a millennium with such [[nonsense]]

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

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

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

Direction is outdated Music is bad

Anil tries hard looks too old in the younger role and too young in the older role yet good effort Rekha is adequate, Raveena too is okay Harish is bad Shakti Kapoor is terrible Aruna Irani is as usual Rajnikant is okay in a cameo The film released at the start of 2000 alongwith MELA both disasters So sad to start a millennium with such [[nonsensical]]

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

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

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

Direction is outdated Music is bad

Anil tries hard looks too old in the younger role and too young in the older role yet good effort Rekha is adequate, Raveena too is okay Harish is bad Shakti Kapoor is terrible Aruna Irani is as usual Rajnikant is okay in a cameo --------------------------------------------- Result 117 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] We [[always]] watch American [[movies]] with their particular accents from each region (south, west, etc). We have the same here. [[All]] foreign people must to watch this [[movie]] and need to have a open [[mind]] to accept another culture, besides American and European almost dominate the cinematographic [[industry]].

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

It's a real [[great]] [[movie]] and worst a rent even have it at home. We [[incessantly]] watch American [[cinematographic]] with their particular accents from each region (south, west, etc). We have the same here. [[Totality]] foreign people must to watch this [[flick]] and need to have a open [[esprit]] to accept another culture, besides American and European almost dominate the cinematographic [[industria]].

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

It's a real [[whopping]] [[kino]] and worst a rent even have it at home. --------------------------------------------- Result 118 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The problem with THE CONTRACTER is summed up by the [[opening]] scene . The CIA want an international [[terrorist]] dead so contact black ops assassin [[James]] [[Dial]] . The [[terrorist]] is appearing at the Old Bailey court in London which begs the question why do they want to bump off a terrorist if he's going to spend the rest of his life in jail ? He's going to be out of circulation either way . Didn't the CIA have a chance before he was arrested ? If by some chance he gets a not guilty verdict then kill him . There's no logical reason to kill someone who is going to spend life in a maximum security prison

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

This is a [[fairly]] [[poor]] thriller and don't be taken in by the " big name " cast . Wesley Snipes used to qualify as a film star but killed his career by starring in more and more inconsequental films . [[Charles]] Dance also appeared in big budget Hollywood productions such as LAST ACTION HERO and ALIEN 3 but again he's someone best known for appearing in straight to DVD fare these days , and he's basically playing a cameo role anyway . The likes of Lena Headey may go on to become big players in cinema but they'l certainly fail to put THE CONTRACTER on their resume The problem with THE CONTRACTER is summed up by the [[initiation]] scene . The CIA want an international [[terrorism]] dead so contact black ops assassin [[Jacques]] [[Markup]] . The [[terrorism]] is appearing at the Old Bailey court in London which begs the question why do they want to bump off a terrorist if he's going to spend the rest of his life in jail ? He's going to be out of circulation either way . Didn't the CIA have a chance before he was arrested ? If by some chance he gets a not guilty verdict then kill him . There's no logical reason to kill someone who is going to spend life in a maximum security prison

Since the premise sets up the story an audience might be choose to ignore the plot hole but the assination itself pours fuel upon the fire . Dial's colleague is killed by a police bullet and the taxi they're driving in crashes but Dial manages to escape . So the police were close enough to shoot someone but too far away to [[detain]] someone from a car crash ? The [[cinema]] of this [[genus]] of plot [[assent]] . Later Dial [[found]] a [[policemen]] [[detective]] pointing a gun at him saying " this [[airfields]] is surrounded by armed [[sheriffs]] " yet Dial manages to escape very easily without [[explanations]] . The [[total]] [[cinematography]] [[crooks]] its [[spectators]] by relying on [[matters]] that are never explained . This [[encompasses]] an important [[helps]] [[characters]] called Emily Day . Why does she [[aids]] [[Dialed]] even though he's a wanted fugitive ? Your [[suppose]] is as good as mine

This is a [[rather]] [[pauper]] thriller and don't be taken in by the " big name " cast . Wesley Snipes used to qualify as a film star but killed his career by starring in more and more inconsequental films . [[Karel]] Dance also appeared in big budget Hollywood productions such as LAST ACTION HERO and ALIEN 3 but again he's someone best known for appearing in straight to DVD fare these days , and he's basically playing a cameo role anyway . The likes of Lena Headey may go on to become big players in cinema but they'l certainly fail to put THE CONTRACTER on their resume --------------------------------------------- Result 119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] [[Almost]] from the word go this film is [[poor]] and [[lacking]] [[conviction]] but then again most people [[would]] struggle to show commitment to a script as uninspiring as this. The [[dialogue]] really does not [[flow]] and sometimes as in this case more is less (or should have been). This is also backed-up by odd scenes (e.g. the Cemetry slow-motion walk) that you think might lead somewhere but only seem to waste a few more seconds of your life.

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

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

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

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

It didn't. [[Hardly]] from the word go this film is [[pauper]] and [[shortage]] [[convictions]] but then again most people [[ought]] struggle to show commitment to a script as uninspiring as this. The [[dialog]] really does not [[flux]] and sometimes as in this case more is less (or should have been). This is also backed-up by odd scenes (e.g. the Cemetry slow-motion walk) that you think might lead somewhere but only seem to waste a few more seconds of your life.

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

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

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

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

It didn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Literally [[every]] aspect of this science-fiction low-budget [[flick]] falls under the categories that have been classified for its predecessors, contemporaries, and those to follow. Bad [[special]] [[effects]], a [[weak]] storyline, [[ridiculous]] [[amounts]] of blood and gore, annoying and [[pointless]] [[characters]], all that you can [[expect]]. "[[Attack]] of the Sabretooth" is about a [[new]] [[vacation]] [[resort]] where the proprietors are genetically engineering Smilodon [[cats]] for an [[attraction]]. The cats escape and begin to [[kill]] people, the [[guy]] running the [[show]] [[wants]] to [[save]] them and not [[warn]] the [[unsuspecting]] visitors about them, and there is a [[band]] of [[visitors]] and some [[employees]] who rebel and [[plan]] to [[kill]] the [[cats]].

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

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

"Attack of the Sabretooth" is a very [[poor]] [[film]]. Even for a low-budget sci-fi [[flick]], it is a very [[poor]] and [[cheap]] [[example]]. It will bore most viewers to tears, might be attractive for some, and will make you chuckle and laugh all the way through. And keep in mind, this is not a comedy, this is a cheap [[horror]] flick, so it's not suppose to be [[comical]]. Literally [[all]] aspect of this science-fiction low-budget [[movie]] falls under the categories that have been classified for its predecessors, contemporaries, and those to follow. Bad [[particular]] [[consequences]], a [[fragile]] storyline, [[silly]] [[sums]] of blood and gore, annoying and [[vain]] [[nature]], all that you can [[hopes]]. "[[Storming]] of the Sabretooth" is about a [[newest]] [[holidays]] [[recourse]] where the proprietors are genetically engineering Smilodon [[chats]] for an [[attract]]. The cats escape and begin to [[mata]] people, the [[man]] running the [[exhibition]] [[wanting]] to [[savings]] them and not [[alerted]] the [[naive]] visitors about them, and there is a [[bands]] of [[travelers]] and some [[employee]] who rebel and [[scheme]] to [[mata]] the [[felines]].

Special effects-wise, the [[filmmaking]] is about an [[averages]] [[successes]] given its budget. The sabretooths are [[depicted]] through poor CGI. [[Surprisingly]], [[while]], the cats [[peek]] more realistic in an up-close, [[scrupulous]] shot [[somewhat]] than the [[long]], more distant [[punches]] where the CGI is [[best]] [[cloaked]]. Their [[strikes]] are [[unwisely]] bloody and [[tasteless]]. [[Virtuous]] as you'd [[expecting]], they [[onslaught]], rip off some arms and legs, and leave very [[small]] behind. This is [[portions]] of the [[motif]] why the [[flick]] descends into poor schlock.

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

"Attack of the Sabretooth" is a very [[pauper]] [[cinema]]. Even for a low-budget sci-fi [[gesture]], it is a very [[pauper]] and [[inexpensive]] [[examples]]. It will bore most viewers to tears, might be attractive for some, and will make you chuckle and laugh all the way through. And keep in mind, this is not a comedy, this is a cheap [[monstrosity]] flick, so it's not suppose to be [[farcical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I am quite the Mitchell Leisen fan so it was a [[great]] [[anticipation]] that I rented this movie but the [[print]] I [[got]] was extremely [[bad]], so worn down from use and scorched seemingly beyond repair, the [[movie]] was so dark. So dark that in certain scenes that are cinematographed in the dark, you can't see a single thing. That said, I believe I [[share]] the same [[opinion]] as the first review of this movie. It [[starts]] out unusually and does not tote the lines and [[rhythms]] of your [[typical]] Hollywood 30's movie. [[Heck]], not even your [[typical]] Hollywod movie of any era. It seems the director has been influenced by the Europeans because there is a certain caustic realism to the proceedings from the opening shot which is so [[crafted]] in camera movement and placement as Maggie ([[Carole]] Lombard) and Skid (Fred Macmurray) meet. You half expect them to start singing "Make believe" from Show boat.It starts with a few laughs and poor Anthony in a one scene role where he speaks not a word of English gets slapped around by Freddie. Skids is a bum who doesn't care that he's a bum. That's why he signs up in the army where he can hide from the world. He's just been released though and in a set of screenplay shenanigans, she misses her boat for New York. This is when the [[movie]] kicks into high gear and we begin to get those French movie of the sixties vibes to the whole proceedings. The scenes are so well acted by Lombard and Cecil Cunningham, the movie gains a pulse. MacMurray is good too as he and Lombard fall for each other as she nurtures his talent for the trumpet. Then the [[temptress]] arrives in the form of Dorothy Lamour. Enough with plot. The movie has fantastic montage sequences that [[dazzled]] me. They are very [[good]]. And Lombard [[scores]] a home run in this movie but in the second half, a bit more is called of Freddie and he fails to deliver the goods. With a heavily melodramatic ending and an actor you don't believe, the movie falls short but since it is not your typical movie in structure, set design, and direction. It is worth a look. For what is what it was one of the 37 hits of the 1936-37 season. I don't know its exact rank though. I am quite the Mitchell Leisen fan so it was a [[whopping]] [[expectation]] that I rented this movie but the [[printouts]] I [[did]] was extremely [[naughty]], so worn down from use and scorched seemingly beyond repair, the [[cinematographic]] was so dark. So dark that in certain scenes that are cinematographed in the dark, you can't see a single thing. That said, I believe I [[exchanges]] the same [[avis]] as the first review of this movie. It [[initiating]] out unusually and does not tote the lines and [[paces]] of your [[symptomatic]] Hollywood 30's movie. [[Devil]], not even your [[symptomatic]] Hollywod movie of any era. It seems the director has been influenced by the Europeans because there is a certain caustic realism to the proceedings from the opening shot which is so [[drafted]] in camera movement and placement as Maggie ([[Carrol]] Lombard) and Skid (Fred Macmurray) meet. You half expect them to start singing "Make believe" from Show boat.It starts with a few laughs and poor Anthony in a one scene role where he speaks not a word of English gets slapped around by Freddie. Skids is a bum who doesn't care that he's a bum. That's why he signs up in the army where he can hide from the world. He's just been released though and in a set of screenplay shenanigans, she misses her boat for New York. This is when the [[kino]] kicks into high gear and we begin to get those French movie of the sixties vibes to the whole proceedings. The scenes are so well acted by Lombard and Cecil Cunningham, the movie gains a pulse. MacMurray is good too as he and Lombard fall for each other as she nurtures his talent for the trumpet. Then the [[seductress]] arrives in the form of Dorothy Lamour. Enough with plot. The movie has fantastic montage sequences that [[blind]] me. They are very [[alright]]. And Lombard [[dozens]] a home run in this movie but in the second half, a bit more is called of Freddie and he fails to deliver the goods. With a heavily melodramatic ending and an actor you don't believe, the movie falls short but since it is not your typical movie in structure, set design, and direction. It is worth a look. For what is what it was one of the 37 hits of the 1936-37 season. I don't know its exact rank though. --------------------------------------------- Result 122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A [[new]] [[way]] to [[enjoy]] Goldsworthy's work, Rivers and Tides allows [[fans]] to see his work in [[motion]]. [[Watching]] Goldsworthy build his [[pieces]], one develops an [[appreciation]] for [[every]] stone, leaf, and thorn that he [[uses]]. Goldsworthy [[describes]] how the flow of [[life]], the rivers, and the tides inspires and affects his [[work]]. [[Although]], I was happy the [[film]] [[covered]] the majority of Goldsworthy's [[pieces]] (no snowballs), I do feel it was a bit long. The film makers did a wonderful [[job]] of [[bringing]] Goldsworthy's work to life, and created a [[beautiful]] [[film]] that was a joy to watch. A [[newer]] [[routing]] to [[enjoys]] Goldsworthy's work, Rivers and Tides allows [[amateurs]] to see his work in [[petition]]. [[Staring]] Goldsworthy build his [[smithereens]], one develops an [[acknowledgment]] for [[any]] stone, leaf, and thorn that he [[use]]. Goldsworthy [[described]] how the flow of [[lifetime]], the rivers, and the tides inspires and affects his [[jobs]]. [[Despite]], I was happy the [[cinema]] [[covering]] the majority of Goldsworthy's [[smithereens]] (no snowballs), I do feel it was a bit long. The film makers did a wonderful [[employment]] of [[bring]] Goldsworthy's work to life, and created a [[glamorous]] [[movie]] that was a joy to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] How can a [[movie]] have Ozzy Osbourne and still suck? I just don't get it. [[Trick]] or Treat managed to do it. This sucks and likes it.

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

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

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

Trick or Treat is one of those [[cinematography]] I have to [[ultimatum]] people about. It is a vomit-inducing vile atrocity just [[implore]] to be viewed so you can feel that much [[worst]] about yourself. [[Gimmick]] or [[Addressing]] has no redeeming factors.

[[Onto]] a [[cinema]] about heavy metal, it sure doesn't [[seems]] to [[grasping]] what [[ponderous]] metal is or what it represents. This movie [[runs]] to make heavy [[metals]] [[glance]] lame and this was in 1986, probably one of [[hefty]] metal's strongest hours. That is quite a feat, however negative.

Trick or Treat = so [[negative]] you will be angry at yourself for having watched it. That simple [[equations]] will hopefully keep you away from this [[doofus]] and gutless film. --------------------------------------------- Result 124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm gettin' sick of movies that sound [[entertaining]] in a one-line [[synopsis]] then [[end]] up being equal to what you'd find in the bottom [[center]] of a compost [[heap]].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Okay, right there you have a cross-section of plots from "The Exorcist", "The Omen", "Ten Little Indians" and a few other lesser movies in the satanic-worshippers-run-amok [[bloodline]]. [[Nil]] of it is very [[entertain]] and for the most part, you'll cringe your way from scene to scene until it's over.

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

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

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

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

No stars. "Witchery" - these witches will give you itches. --------------------------------------------- Result 125 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I am not one of those people that will walk out of a [[movie]] that was [[based]] on [[source]] material and automatically [[say]], "The [[book]] was [[better]]." I know [[better]] than to [[demote]] the [[value]] of a [[movie]] just because it wasn't a faithful adaptation. There is a [[lengthy]] [[process]] and lots of [[decisions]] that go into making a [[movie]] that are sometimes out of the director's/editor's/cinematographer's/producer's control and [[certainly]] out of the [[original]] author's control. Therefore, it is unreasonable to expect a movie to be exactly the same, word for word, as a book or play or video game or Disneyland Ride, or whatever! A movie should be judged on its own standard and how it fits in society. Moreover, a successful movie should be made because the material is relevant to the society which it belongs and, if it is based on source material, its relevance needs to be reexamined and enhanced by the filmmakers.

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

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

Of course the movie is "good," the performances are outstanding, and the screenplay adaptation is apt, but so what? Why didn't it just stay as a play? Why, besides marketing and financial reasons, make it into a movie? It gave audiences nothing new to discus about the awful subject. I am not one of those people that will walk out of a [[cinematography]] that was [[predicated]] on [[roots]] material and automatically [[told]], "The [[workbook]] was [[optimum]]." I know [[optimum]] than to [[demotion]] the [[valuing]] of a [[kino]] just because it wasn't a faithful adaptation. There is a [[lang]] [[processes]] and lots of [[decision]] that go into making a [[cinema]] that are sometimes out of the director's/editor's/cinematographer's/producer's control and [[assuredly]] out of the [[upfront]] author's control. Therefore, it is unreasonable to expect a movie to be exactly the same, word for word, as a book or play or video game or Disneyland Ride, or whatever! A movie should be judged on its own standard and how it fits in society. Moreover, a successful movie should be made because the material is relevant to the society which it belongs and, if it is based on source material, its relevance needs to be reexamined and enhanced by the filmmakers.

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

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

Of course the movie is "good," the performances are outstanding, and the screenplay adaptation is apt, but so what? Why didn't it just stay as a play? Why, besides marketing and financial reasons, make it into a movie? It gave audiences nothing new to discus about the awful subject. --------------------------------------------- Result 126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Lock]] Up Your [[Daughters]] is one of the [[best]] high-spirited comedies I have ever seen.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is misunderstood [[because]] it lacks the "[[sociable]] [[feedback]]" values that [[numerous]] [[movie]] of the day (1969) required to be successful.

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

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

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

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

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

That it has never been [[publicized]] on either VHS or [[DVDS]] is truly a shame, since so [[innumerable]] bad movies are [[releasing]] [[all]] day. --------------------------------------------- Result 127 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] First of all, let me say the I am LDS or rather, I am a Mormon. So when I watched this film, I automatically gave it the benefit of the doubt. I can [[usually]] find something redeeming in every movie I watch. And this one was no exception. It does have its redeeming [[moments]]. But they are few and far between.

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

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

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

Sorry Halestorm. You can do better than this! First of all, let me say the I am LDS or rather, I am a Mormon. So when I watched this film, I automatically gave it the benefit of the doubt. I can [[fluently]] find something redeeming in every movie I watch. And this one was no exception. It does have its redeeming [[times]]. But they are few and far between.

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

It makes me wonder if the directors are [[truthfully]] LDS or LDS wannabes? This [[kino]] had so much potential! It [[did]] have [[truly]] shown our Church in a [[supportive]] light and helped the public to see not only what we have to offer, but also what we believe. [[Conversely]] it was only [[gently]] [[fun]] and left much to be desired. If I were not already LDS, I'd be left thinking Mormons are stupid, [[foolish]] and ashamed of their beliefs.

It is [[NOPE]] a film I will [[recommended]] to my nonLDS friends.

Sorry Halestorm. You can do better than this! --------------------------------------------- Result 128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I [[love]] this movie, but can't get what is in this [[movie]] tht is not to like. People who don't like this movie must be Richard Roeper and Roger Ebert. But I can't believe that is Mr. Carrey behind all that makeup. And I am sure that most of the actors and actresses in the movie has made film before this. And there is a new face in the movie. Taylor Momsen who plays Cindy Lou Who. As the opens, the Grinch (Jim Carrey) comes out of hiding. And causes some mean fun to the whos in Whoville. Sicne we know that the whos love Christmas. While The Grinch does not like christmas. And even makes fun of little Cindy Lou Who (Taylor Momsen) who is the daughter of the town's postmaster (Bill Irwin). The movie was directed by Ron Howard. And the narrtor's voice is done by Anthony Hopkins. And Jeffrey Tambor (Muppets From Space) is cast as the mayor of whoville. Who doesn't like talking about the Grinch close to Christmas time. I [[amore]] this movie, but can't get what is in this [[kino]] tht is not to like. People who don't like this movie must be Richard Roeper and Roger Ebert. But I can't believe that is Mr. Carrey behind all that makeup. And I am sure that most of the actors and actresses in the movie has made film before this. And there is a new face in the movie. Taylor Momsen who plays Cindy Lou Who. As the opens, the Grinch (Jim Carrey) comes out of hiding. And causes some mean fun to the whos in Whoville. Sicne we know that the whos love Christmas. While The Grinch does not like christmas. And even makes fun of little Cindy Lou Who (Taylor Momsen) who is the daughter of the town's postmaster (Bill Irwin). The movie was directed by Ron Howard. And the narrtor's voice is done by Anthony Hopkins. And Jeffrey Tambor (Muppets From Space) is cast as the mayor of whoville. Who doesn't like talking about the Grinch close to Christmas time. --------------------------------------------- Result 129 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] No mention if Ann Rivers Siddons adapted the [[material]] for "The House Next Door" from her 1970s [[novel]] of the same title, or someone else did it. This Lifetime-like movie was directed by Canadian director Jeff Woolnough. Having read the [[book]] a long time ago, we decided to take a [[chance]] when the film showed on a [[cable]] [[version]] of what was clearly a [[movie]] made for [[television]]. You know that when the critical moments precede the commercials, which of course, one can't find in this version we watched.

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

The film has a feeling of a cross between "Desperate Houswives" with "The Stepford Wives" and other better known features, [[combined]] with a [[mild]] dose of creepiness. The [[best]] thing about the [[movie]] was the house which serves as the setting. No mention if Ann Rivers Siddons adapted the [[materials]] for "The House Next Door" from her 1970s [[newer]] of the same title, or someone else did it. This Lifetime-like movie was directed by Canadian director Jeff Woolnough. Having read the [[workbook]] a long time ago, we decided to take a [[possibilities]] when the film showed on a [[wire]] [[stepping]] of what was clearly a [[filmmaking]] made for [[tv]]. You know that when the critical moments precede the commercials, which of course, one can't find in this version we watched.

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

The film has a feeling of a cross between "Desperate Houswives" with "The Stepford Wives" and other better known features, [[merging]] with a [[gentle]] dose of creepiness. The [[finest]] thing about the [[kino]] was the house which serves as the setting. --------------------------------------------- Result 130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] So that´s what I [[called]] a [[bad]], [[bad]] [[film]]... Poor acting, poor [[directing]], [[terrible]] writing!!!! I just can´t [[stop]] laughing at some scenes, because the [[story]] is [[meaningless]]!!! [[Don]]´t waste your [[time]] watching this [[film]]... [[Well]], I must [[recognize]] it has one or two [[good]] [[ideas]] but it´s sooooo [[badly]] writen... So that´s what I [[drew]] a [[negative]], [[amiss]] [[films]]... Poor acting, poor [[instructing]], [[scary]] writing!!!! I just can´t [[stopping]] laughing at some scenes, because the [[conte]] is [[worthless]]!!! [[Gift]]´t waste your [[times]] watching this [[cinematography]]... [[Good]], I must [[acknowledgement]] it has one or two [[buena]] [[reflections]] but it´s sooooo [[desperately]] writen... --------------------------------------------- Result 131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] H.G. Wells in 1936 was past his prime and the books of his that will survive were [[long]] [[gone]] by. He was coming to the end of his life and he was [[confronted]] to his [[dream]] gone sour. [[At]] the very [[beginning]] of the 20th century he [[defended]] the [[idea]] that the [[world]] was doomed because the [[evolution]] of species, natural biology, on one side, and [[Marxism]], [[market]] [[economy]] on the other side, were necessarily leading to the [[victory]] of the weaker over the [[stronger]] due to the [[simple]] [[criterion]] of number. The weaker were the [[mass]] of [[humanity]] and the stronger were the [[minority]] elite. He [[defended]] then a [[strict]] eugenic [[policy]] with the elimination of all those who were in a way or another weakening the human race. First of all the non-Caucasian, with the only exception of the Jews who would disappear thanks to mixed marriages. Then, within the Caucasian community all those who were not healthy, the alcoholics, the mentally disabled, all those who were genetically disabled, etc. That was not Hitler. That was H.[[G]]. Wells and that was not after the first world war. That was more than ten years before. And twenty years before the first world war he had published The Time Machine that [[defended]] the idea that the human "race", left to its own means and due to the vaster cosmological evolution of [[life]] on earth, [[would]] [[see]] the differentiation of the human "race" into two "species": the working [[class]] [[would]] become a subterranean [[laborious]] species and the bourgeoisie [[would]] become an idle surface species. The point was in the novel that the surface sophisticated and weak [[idle]] species was the prey of the other species who were the predators. Wells was convinced [[humanity]] was in [[danger]] and [[politicians]] were supposed to [[stop]] this evolution by imposing a [[strict]] eugenic policy. The first countries to follow this injunction were the [[Scandinavian]] [[countries]] who were [[also]] the last to [[drop]] it only very [[recently]] for some of them. The [[film]] here [[proposes]] a [[vision]] of 2036 with a [[world]] [[government]] that is [[absolutely]] [[dictatorial]] in the fact that there is no [[election]], no parliament, no really democratic [[institution]], only [[peace]] [[imposed]] by military conquest, and the government is [[dominated]] by one [[man]] or at the most one [[man]] and his few councilors. And in that [[future]] world all, [[absolutely]] all human [[beings]] are Caucasians. Wells was [[able]] to [[imagine]] humanity being [[completely]] white by 2036. [[Amazing]]. Wells [[envisaged]] some [[kind]] of a [[rebellion]] but that [[would]] be [[short]] lived and lead to nothing at all. The last sentences are the [[vision]] of this white civilization conquering the whole universe when contemplating the sky and its stars and planets. Frightening. And that was produced in 1936. All the more frightening since nowhere the slightest mention of Hitlerism, fascism, Japanese imperialism or Stalinism can be found. But it is essential to have that film in a good restored edition because it is crucial to have a full vision of H.G. Wells. We are obviously very far away from the Brave New World of absolute "democratic" social selection, or the Animal Farm of the dictatorship of the porcine proletariat, or the 1984 of the abstract mediatic dictatorship of Big Brother. This vision is at least just as much frightening as the three others. And I only want to compare Wells with the British science fiction writers of his days. It would be unfair to go beyond. This reveals that in England in these first three decades of the 20th century there was a tremendous fear among intellectuals: the fear that the future would only be somber, bleak and in the form of an impasse of some kind.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines H.G. Wells in 1936 was past his prime and the books of his that will survive were [[lengthy]] [[faded]] by. He was coming to the end of his life and he was [[faced]] to his [[dreams]] gone sour. [[For]] the very [[launch]] of the 20th century he [[championed]] the [[concept]] that the [[monde]] was doomed because the [[evolve]] of species, natural biology, on one side, and [[Marx]], [[markets]] [[economics]] on the other side, were necessarily leading to the [[triumph]] of the weaker over the [[bigger]] due to the [[mere]] [[criteria]] of number. The weaker were the [[mace]] of [[humane]] and the stronger were the [[minorities]] elite. He [[championed]] then a [[stiff]] eugenic [[politics]] with the elimination of all those who were in a way or another weakening the human race. First of all the non-Caucasian, with the only exception of the Jews who would disappear thanks to mixed marriages. Then, within the Caucasian community all those who were not healthy, the alcoholics, the mentally disabled, all those who were genetically disabled, etc. That was not Hitler. That was H.[[gram]]. Wells and that was not after the first world war. That was more than ten years before. And twenty years before the first world war he had published The Time Machine that [[championed]] the idea that the human "race", left to its own means and due to the vaster cosmological evolution of [[vie]] on earth, [[ought]] [[behold]] the differentiation of the human "race" into two "species": the working [[kinds]] [[ought]] become a subterranean [[uphill]] species and the bourgeoisie [[ought]] become an idle surface species. The point was in the novel that the surface sophisticated and weak [[dormant]] species was the prey of the other species who were the predators. Wells was convinced [[human]] was in [[jeopardy]] and [[politics]] were supposed to [[halt]] this evolution by imposing a [[stiff]] eugenic policy. The first countries to follow this injunction were the [[Nordic]] [[nationals]] who were [[apart]] the last to [[dropped]] it only very [[newly]] for some of them. The [[movie]] here [[proposing]] a [[sight]] of 2036 with a [[globe]] [[councils]] that is [[perfectly]] [[tyrannical]] in the fact that there is no [[elections]], no parliament, no really democratic [[creation]], only [[pacific]] [[dictated]] by military conquest, and the government is [[dominate]] by one [[guy]] or at the most one [[dude]] and his few councilors. And in that [[upcoming]] world all, [[utterly]] all human [[humans]] are Caucasians. Wells was [[capable]] to [[imagining]] humanity being [[perfectly]] white by 2036. [[Admirable]]. Wells [[prophesied]] some [[genre]] of a [[insurgent]] but that [[should]] be [[concise]] lived and lead to nothing at all. The last sentences are the [[conception]] of this white civilization conquering the whole universe when contemplating the sky and its stars and planets. Frightening. And that was produced in 1936. All the more frightening since nowhere the slightest mention of Hitlerism, fascism, Japanese imperialism or Stalinism can be found. But it is essential to have that film in a good restored edition because it is crucial to have a full vision of H.G. Wells. We are obviously very far away from the Brave New World of absolute "democratic" social selection, or the Animal Farm of the dictatorship of the porcine proletariat, or the 1984 of the abstract mediatic dictatorship of Big Brother. This vision is at least just as much frightening as the three others. And I only want to compare Wells with the British science fiction writers of his days. It would be unfair to go beyond. This reveals that in England in these first three decades of the 20th century there was a tremendous fear among intellectuals: the fear that the future would only be somber, bleak and in the form of an impasse of some kind.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines --------------------------------------------- Result 132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This may be the [[worst]] film [[adaptation]] of a Broadway musical ever. Even the [[music]] has been destroyed. Attenborough knows nothing about [[theater]] - almost every [[shot]] and moment ring false. I will say, though, that it is almost [[bad]] enough to be funny.

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

I saw the original production, and have listened to the album hundreds of times. Why, oh, why, did they do this? This may be the [[hardest]] film [[tailoring]] of a Broadway musical ever. Even the [[musica]] has been destroyed. Attenborough knows nothing about [[movies]] - almost every [[offed]] and moment ring false. I will say, though, that it is almost [[mala]] enough to be funny.

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

I saw the original production, and have listened to the album hundreds of times. Why, oh, why, did they do this? --------------------------------------------- Result 133 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Autobiography of founder of zoo in NYC [[starts]] out by being very cute and would be great family movie if it stayed there. however we get more and more involved with reality as [[gorilla]] grows up to be a wild thing not easily amenable to his "mother's" wishes - this might scare younger children, esp. scenes where Buddy tries to injure Gertrude. rather quick [[resolution]] at the [[end]]. below [[average]]. Autobiography of founder of zoo in NYC [[commencing]] out by being very cute and would be great family movie if it stayed there. however we get more and more involved with reality as [[enforcer]] grows up to be a wild thing not easily amenable to his "mother's" wishes - this might scare younger children, esp. scenes where Buddy tries to injure Gertrude. rather quick [[resolve]] at the [[terminates]]. below [[medium]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Stargate SG-1 follows and expands upon the Egyptian mythologies presented in Stargate. In the Stargate universe, humans were enslaved and transported to habitable planets by the Goa'uld such as Ra and Apophis. For millennia, the Goa'uld harvested humanity, heavily influencing and spreading human cultures. As a result, Earth cultures such as those of the Aztecs, Mayans, Britons, the Norse, Mongols, Greeks, and Romans are found throughout the known habitable planets of the galaxy. Many well-known mythical locations such as Avalon, Camelot, and Atlantis are found, or have at one time existed.

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

The parasitic Goa'uld use advanced technology to cast themselves as Egyptian Gods and are bent on galactic conquest and eternal worship. Throughout the first eight seasons, the Goa'uld are the primary antagonists. They are a race of highly intelligent, ruthless snake-like alien parasites capable of invading and controlling the bodies of other species, including humans. The original arch-enemy from this race was the System Lord Apophis (Peter Williams). Other System Lords, such as Baal and Anubis, play pivotal roles in the later seasons. In the ninth season a new villain emerges, the Ori. The Ori are advanced beings with unfathomable technology from another galaxy, also bent on galactic conquest and eternal worship. The introduction of the Ori accompanies a departure from the primary focus on Egyptian mythology into an exploration of the Arthurian mythology surrounding the Ori, their followers, and their enemies—the Ancients. --------------------------------------------- Result 135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] No redeeming features, this film is rubbish. Its jokes don't begin to be funny. The humour for children is pathetic, and the attempts to appeal to adults just add a tacky smuttishness to the whole miserable package. Sitting through it with my children just made me uncomfortable about what might be coming next. I couldn't enjoy the film at all. Although my child for whom the DVD was bought enjoyed the fact that she owned a new DVD, neither she nor her sisters expressed much interest in seeing it again, unlike with Monsters inc, Finding Nemo, Jungle Book, Lion King, etc. which all get frequent requests for replays. --------------------------------------------- Result 136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Fact: Stargate SG-1 is a cheesy sci-fi TV series.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So for those who decide to brush of Stargate SG-1 as yet another tacky sci-fi show, don't. Stick with it and you'll see what I'm talking about. --------------------------------------------- Result 137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Highly]] [[regarded]] at [[release]], but [[since]] [[rather]] [[neglected]]. [[Immense]] importance in the [[history]] of performing arts. A [[classic]] [[use]] of [[embedded]] plots. One of my favourite films. Why hasn't the soundtrack been re-released? [[Unimaginably]] [[considered]] at [[frees]], but [[because]] [[quite]] [[neglecting]]. [[Gargantuan]] importance in the [[historical]] of performing arts. A [[classical]] [[uses]] of [[onboard]] plots. One of my favourite films. Why hasn't the soundtrack been re-released? --------------------------------------------- Result 138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[like]] end-of-days movies. I like B-movies. I was [[hoping]] I [[would]] like this [[movie]].

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

If you're looking for an entertaining B-movie, look elsewhere. This movie is just [[boring]]. I [[fond]] end-of-days movies. I like B-movies. I was [[waiting]] I [[could]] like this [[cinematography]].

I [[would]] ignore the poor [[repercussions]], the often [[horrendous]] music, the cringe-inducing lines. I [[would]] ignore the [[unexplainable]] events, and the fact that the movie constantly relies on deus ex machina is excusable, given the subject matter. I [[wo]] ignore the fact that the people who [[struggling]] [[appetite]] and try to reach world peace are the bad guys. None of these things kill the movie. What [[slays]] this movie is that it's just plain and [[easy]] [[tiresome]]. [[Nada]] actually happens; almost all scenes in the movie are designed to push the movie creators' morals on the viewers, at the [[pricing]] of actually having a coherent story, or any kind of suspense.

If you're looking for an entertaining B-movie, look elsewhere. This movie is just [[tiresome]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The Ruth Snyder - Judd Gray [[murder]] in 1927 inspired Ogden Nash to write a Broadway [[play]] called Machinal. [[More]] famously, it inspired James M. Cain to write two short novels which anyone who has actually reached the point where they are reading this review would be familiar with - Double Indemnity and The [[Postman]] Always Rings Twice. Both became film noir classics of the 1940's, Double Indemnity being [[arguably]] the most [[perfect]] noir ever [[made]]. Some of the real-life elements of the Snyder-Gray story were captured by Cain - the old age and indifference of Albert Gray, Ruth's high sex drive, Ruth and Judd's passionate affair and complicity in the murder and that famous double indemnity insurance clause. Missing elements included the fact that the actual setting was a very urban Manhattan - Albert Snyder being a respected newspaper editor. The numerous [[incompetent]] and failed attempts were also ignored in order to cut to the chase.

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

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

This is a far greater study of the working class than of crime. The audience really gets the feeling of poverty and grime. The drifter is a complete tramp, the wife is no Lana Turner and may even have been a prostitute before marriage. Her husband is an obscene capitalist - obese, rude and arrogant. I think the casting was brilliant for this film. My only beef is with the overlong running time. Everything is drawn out too long and it would have been more effective if it had been more economical. Nevertheless, fans of noir and realism will definitely like Ossessione, as I did. The Ruth Snyder - Judd Gray [[manslaughter]] in 1927 inspired Ogden Nash to write a Broadway [[gaming]] called Machinal. [[Greater]] famously, it inspired James M. Cain to write two short novels which anyone who has actually reached the point where they are reading this review would be familiar with - Double Indemnity and The [[Mailman]] Always Rings Twice. Both became film noir classics of the 1940's, Double Indemnity being [[conceivably]] the most [[faultless]] noir ever [[introduced]]. Some of the real-life elements of the Snyder-Gray story were captured by Cain - the old age and indifference of Albert Gray, Ruth's high sex drive, Ruth and Judd's passionate affair and complicity in the murder and that famous double indemnity insurance clause. Missing elements included the fact that the actual setting was a very urban Manhattan - Albert Snyder being a respected newspaper editor. The numerous [[inept]] and failed attempts were also ignored in order to cut to the chase.

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

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

This is a far greater study of the working class than of crime. The audience really gets the feeling of poverty and grime. The drifter is a complete tramp, the wife is no Lana Turner and may even have been a prostitute before marriage. Her husband is an obscene capitalist - obese, rude and arrogant. I think the casting was brilliant for this film. My only beef is with the overlong running time. Everything is drawn out too long and it would have been more effective if it had been more economical. Nevertheless, fans of noir and realism will definitely like Ossessione, as I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 140 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Okay, I'll admit the [[casting]] in the film is REALLY strange--part of this is due to the plot, but I still had a [[bit]] of [[trouble]] believing [[Pierce]] Brosnan [[playing]] this lead (though he really did a pretty [[good]] job).

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

The acting and settings were great and I really liked the film (once I suspended disbelief about Brosnan). It didn't get widespread distribution--probably because it was pretty cerebral--not a Bond film nor a romance--just a really odd film about a remarkable man. Okay, I'll admit the [[cast]] in the film is REALLY strange--part of this is due to the plot, but I still had a [[bite]] of [[hassle]] believing [[Pearce]] Brosnan [[replay]] this lead (though he really did a pretty [[alright]] job).

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

The acting and settings were great and I really liked the film (once I suspended disbelief about Brosnan). It didn't get widespread distribution--probably because it was pretty cerebral--not a Bond film nor a romance--just a really odd film about a remarkable man. --------------------------------------------- Result 141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I've tried to [[like]] this [[film]], [[really]]. [[In]] watching it, all I can think is, "This guy gives me the creeps, I would have gotten a restraining order". It also [[calls]] out CODEPENDENCE in capital letters. [[Was]] this really the conversation before making the movie? "Let's make a film that puts two chronically depressed, socially inept people into a relationship which deepens their isolation and encourages them to complain about how bad their lives are!" From what I've seen in life is that the [[last]] [[thing]] on earth we find [[attractive]] in a potential mate is constant self-pity.

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

The mood of the movie is distinctly 80-ish; brooding and slow. Don't get me wrong, the film has its moments, just very few of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] One Star. That's all this documentary deserves. I haven't felt this [[disappointed]] in watching a movie, let alone a documentary, in quite some time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

And does it make sense to learn that this doc was NOT produced or directly involved with the same people who did the others in the series? Hmmm... One Star. That's all this documentary deserves. I haven't felt this [[disenchanted]] in watching a movie, let alone a documentary, in quite some time.

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

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

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

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

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

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

And does it make sense to learn that this doc was NOT produced or directly involved with the same people who did the others in the series? Hmmm... --------------------------------------------- Result 143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A [[girl]] is showering unknowing that a serial [[rapist]] is staring at her through the skylight. Detectives Martin Manners and Orville Stone is hot on his [[trail]], but not [[hot]] enough as they find him after he [[kills]], [[rapes]], and eats a nipple of the girl.He's the shot to [[death]]. One would [[hope]] that this would be the end of the [[film]]. Not because it's too horrifying, but because the [[level]] of acting is [[atrociously]] horrid. Sadly it's not the [[end]] and months later the rapist is [[resurrected]] as a zombie by a coven of satanists. So he continues where he [[left]] off, with the detectives on the [[case]] again, this [[time]] a flying [[baby]] is after him too (don't [[ask]]). There has been VERY [[good]] VERY low-budget [[movies]] ([[Street]] [[Trash]] and [[Filthy]] McNasty [[spring]] to mind), but this one is [[scraping]] the bottom of the [[barrel]]. [[Horrible]] acting, crappy dime [[store]] special [[effects]], lame [[attempt]] at [[comedy]] and oh yeah, and the ending [[sucks]] too.

My [[Grade]]: F

[[Eye]] Candy: [[Theresa]] Bestul [[gets]] [[fully]] [[nude]]; [[Anne]] [[R]]. [[Key]] [[gets]] topless A [[fille]] is showering unknowing that a serial [[violator]] is staring at her through the skylight. Detectives Martin Manners and Orville Stone is hot on his [[pathway]], but not [[caliente]] enough as they find him after he [[mata]], [[rape]], and eats a nipple of the girl.He's the shot to [[mortality]]. One would [[esperanza]] that this would be the end of the [[kino]]. Not because it's too horrifying, but because the [[echelon]] of acting is [[appallingly]] horrid. Sadly it's not the [[ends]] and months later the rapist is [[revived]] as a zombie by a coven of satanists. So he continues where he [[exited]] off, with the detectives on the [[cases]] again, this [[moment]] a flying [[honey]] is after him too (don't [[calls]]). There has been VERY [[alright]] VERY low-budget [[movie]] ([[Thoroughfare]] [[Rubbish]] and [[Soiled]] McNasty [[springs]] to mind), but this one is [[scrape]] the bottom of the [[canon]]. [[Gruesome]] acting, crappy dime [[shops]] special [[ramifications]], lame [[seeks]] at [[travesty]] and oh yeah, and the ending [[stinks]] too.

My [[Grades]]: F

[[Eyes]] Candy: [[Therese]] Bestul [[obtains]] [[abundantly]] [[nudes]]; [[Anna]] [[rs]]. [[Keys]] [[got]] topless --------------------------------------------- Result 144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] How is it [[possible]] that a [[movie]] this [[bad]] can be [[made]]. Bad acting. [[Bad]] script. [[Just]] an [[embarrassment]] all around. This is just one [[bad]] cliché after another.

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

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

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

This movie [[made]] [[hardly]] any money for a [[good]] reason. The appeal of black [[cowboy]] [[movies]] just isn't there. It's a shame they didn't have a [[good]] story to [[tell]]. How is it [[attainable]] that a [[cinematography]] this [[negative]] can be [[effected]]. Bad acting. [[Faulty]] script. [[Jen]] an [[awkwardness]] all around. This is just one [[negative]] cliché after another.

This [[flick]] [[genuinely]] has some [[overwhelming]] [[behalf]] [[star]] in it. [[Sadly]] they're singers and not [[protagonists]].

This movie [[accomplished]] [[almost]] any money for a good reason. The [[appealed]] of [[negro]] cowboy movies just isn't there. It's a [[pity]] they didn't have a [[buena]] story to [[told]].

This [[cinematography]] [[indeed]] has some [[immense]] [[behalf]] stars in it. [[Sadly]] they're singers and not actors.

This movie [[introduced]] [[almost]] any money for a [[alright]] reason. The appeal of black [[denim]] [[cinematography]] just isn't there. It's a shame they didn't have a [[buena]] story to [[telling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I managed to [[see]] this at the New York [[International]] Film [[Festival]] in [[November]] 2005 with my [[boyfriend]]. We were both [[quite]] impressed with the complexity of the plot and [[found]] it to be [[emotionally]] [[moving]]. It was very well [[directed]] with strong imagery. The visual [[effects]] were [[amazing]] - [[especially]] for a short. It had an [[original]] fantasy [[approach]] to a very real and [[serious]] [[topic]]: This [[film]] is about a young [[girl]] who is [[visited]] by a demon [[offering]] to [[help]] her situation with her [[abusive]] father. There is [[also]] a [[surprise]] [[twist]] at the end which [[caught]] me off guard. This leans [[towards]] the [[Gothic]] feel. I would [[love]] to [[see]] this as a full [[feature]] film. -- Carrie I managed to [[behold]] this at the New York [[Worldwide]] Film [[Fest]] in [[Nov]] 2005 with my [[dude]]. We were both [[rather]] impressed with the complexity of the plot and [[detected]] it to be [[excitedly]] [[transference]]. It was very well [[aimed]] with strong imagery. The visual [[effect]] were [[dazzling]] - [[notably]] for a short. It had an [[initial]] fantasy [[approaches]] to a very real and [[severe]] [[subjects]]: This [[flick]] is about a young [[chick]] who is [[toured]] by a demon [[delivering]] to [[assistance]] her situation with her [[improper]] father. There is [[similarly]] a [[surprises]] [[twisting]] at the end which [[apprehended]] me off guard. This leans [[vers]] the [[Goth]] feel. I would [[iove]] to [[seeing]] this as a full [[idiosyncrasies]] film. -- Carrie --------------------------------------------- Result 146 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I [[wanted]] to watch this movie because of Eliza Dushku, but she only has a smaller part in it, and her character isn't very likable. However, the [[main]] character, played by Melissa Sagemiller, is extremely [[beautiful]] and a perfect delight to look at [[throughout]] the movie. This is really [[nothing]] but a showcase for her looks and talent. She does a very good [[job]].

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

3 out of 10. I [[wished]] to watch this movie because of Eliza Dushku, but she only has a smaller part in it, and her character isn't very likable. However, the [[primary]] character, played by Melissa Sagemiller, is extremely [[resplendent]] and a perfect delight to look at [[in]] the movie. This is really [[anything]] but a showcase for her looks and talent. She does a very good [[labour]].

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

3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[If]] only [[ALL]] animation was this [[great]]. This [[film]] is classic because it is [[strong]] is two simple aspects: [[Story]] and [[Character]]. The characters in this [[film]] are [[beautifully]] personified. I felt for all of the [[characters]], and human-animal relationship in the [[movie]] [[works]] [[perfectly]]. The [[beautiful]] animation and 3-D computer animation hasn't [[worked]] better in any other [[film]]. This is a [[great]] movie for [[kids]], and for [[adults]] who [[want]] a classic hero's [[journey]]. 8 of 10. [[Unless]] only [[EVERY]] animation was this [[awesome]]. This [[flick]] is classic because it is [[vigorous]] is two simple aspects: [[Narratives]] and [[Nature]]. The characters in this [[filmmaking]] are [[divinely]] personified. I felt for all of the [[characteristics]], and human-animal relationship in the [[flick]] [[worked]] [[altogether]]. The [[glamorous]] animation and 3-D computer animation hasn't [[functioned]] better in any other [[cinematography]]. This is a [[resplendent]] movie for [[infantile]], and for [[grownups]] who [[wants]] a classic hero's [[trip]]. 8 of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 148 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] There are so [[many]] [[reasons]] as to why I [[rate]] the sopranos so [[highly]], one of its biggest triumphs being the cast and character building. Each character unfolds more and more each [[series]]. Also each series has an array of [[different]] 'small time characters' as well as the main. A [[good]] example of a [[character]] (who was only in three episodes) who you can feel for is [[David]] the compulsive gambler played [[brilliantly]] by Robert Patrick. [[Every]] little [[detail]] builds the [[perfect]] TV series. The show revolves round mob boss Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) who attempts to balance his life of crime with his role as father of two. The show is not afraid to be bold and powerful with its dialogue and imagery and this is what makes it so [[believable]]. Whilst Tony runs things with capos Paulie (Tony Sirico) and Silvio (Steve Van Zant) his nephew Christopher (Michael imperioli) looks for a promotion. Every episode also features Tony's other family in some way which includes his children and wife carmela soprano (Edie Falco). On top of these problems is his uncle Junior soprano (Dominic Chianese) is trying to get what he can out of Tony's businesses despite being under house arrest. All the acting is powerful and characters complex, but the two who stand out the most are; James Gandolfini who 'is' Tony Soprano. Also Michael Imperioli who plays Christopher, representing the younger (20-30) generation in crime. If David Chase had not created this [[masterpiece]] modern TV dramas of such caliber may not have existed, such as The Wire and Dexter. So the Sopranos is definitely the Godfather, Goodfellas and Pulp fiction of TV There are so [[innumerable]] [[motivation]] as to why I [[rates]] the sopranos so [[unimaginably]], one of its biggest triumphs being the cast and character building. Each character unfolds more and more each [[serials]]. Also each series has an array of [[several]] 'small time characters' as well as the main. A [[alright]] example of a [[personage]] (who was only in three episodes) who you can feel for is [[Davids]] the compulsive gambler played [[marvellously]] by Robert Patrick. [[Any]] little [[details]] builds the [[faultless]] TV series. The show revolves round mob boss Tony Soprano (James Gandolfini) who attempts to balance his life of crime with his role as father of two. The show is not afraid to be bold and powerful with its dialogue and imagery and this is what makes it so [[dependable]]. Whilst Tony runs things with capos Paulie (Tony Sirico) and Silvio (Steve Van Zant) his nephew Christopher (Michael imperioli) looks for a promotion. Every episode also features Tony's other family in some way which includes his children and wife carmela soprano (Edie Falco). On top of these problems is his uncle Junior soprano (Dominic Chianese) is trying to get what he can out of Tony's businesses despite being under house arrest. All the acting is powerful and characters complex, but the two who stand out the most are; James Gandolfini who 'is' Tony Soprano. Also Michael Imperioli who plays Christopher, representing the younger (20-30) generation in crime. If David Chase had not created this [[centerpiece]] modern TV dramas of such caliber may not have existed, such as The Wire and Dexter. So the Sopranos is definitely the Godfather, Goodfellas and Pulp fiction of TV --------------------------------------------- Result 149 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] THE JIST: See something else.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I realize as a Christian it's unedifying for me to say I disliked this film, but I can't in a good conscience recommend a film that I feel was horribly done. Perhaps it would've been better to make the first [[workbook]] into 2-3 films. Either way, Christians need to realize that to be taken seriously as filmmakers, we need to start by putting together a film in a quality way. I realize a lot of effort probably went into Left Behind, but that's the way I see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (74%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Really an amazing [[pile]] of pap!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Never, ever, ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Some people loved "The Aristocrats" and others [[hated]] it, frequently walking out in the middle. Reactions to Eddie Izzard aren't likely to be that extreme -- if you can handle a transvestite comedian (who says he likes girls) and has a vocabulary that makes, shall we say, enough use of the "f" word that his program would be one long beep if presented on network television. Many of Izzard's fans are so devoted that they see no [[flaws]] whatsoever in his performances. On the other hand, I thought this [[show]] was occasionally flatter than Izzard's chest but also more often than not funny and, in spots, [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. He has a way of connecting references from routines early in the show to his later routines. He's not a story teller. He's not a joke maker. He's not a frenetic fantasist like Robin Williams. He plays around with ideas, some of which work and some of which -- a routine with the San Francisco cable car and Alcatraz, for instance -- are completely unfunny. He has a way, however, of moving gracefully past the flopped routines and extending the ones that connect. I gave this performance a 7 and might be persuaded to raise it to an 8. But a 10? No way. Some people loved "The Aristocrats" and others [[despise]] it, frequently walking out in the middle. Reactions to Eddie Izzard aren't likely to be that extreme -- if you can handle a transvestite comedian (who says he likes girls) and has a vocabulary that makes, shall we say, enough use of the "f" word that his program would be one long beep if presented on network television. Many of Izzard's fans are so devoted that they see no [[demerits]] whatsoever in his performances. On the other hand, I thought this [[displaying]] was occasionally flatter than Izzard's chest but also more often than not funny and, in spots, [[altogether]] [[comical]]. He has a way of connecting references from routines early in the show to his later routines. He's not a story teller. He's not a joke maker. He's not a frenetic fantasist like Robin Williams. He plays around with ideas, some of which work and some of which -- a routine with the San Francisco cable car and Alcatraz, for instance -- are completely unfunny. He has a way, however, of moving gracefully past the flopped routines and extending the ones that connect. I gave this performance a 7 and might be persuaded to raise it to an 8. But a 10? No way. --------------------------------------------- Result 153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] gone in 60 seconds is a very [[good]] action comedy film that made over $100 [[million]] but got blasted by most [[critics]]. I personally thought this was a [[great]] film. The story was [[believable]] and has probobly the greatest cast ever for this type of movie including 3 academy award winners nicolas cage, robert duvall and the very hot anjolina [[jolie]]. other than the lame stunt at the end this is a [[perfect]] [[blend]] of [[action]] [[comedy]] and drama. my [[score]] is **** (out of ****) gone in 60 seconds is a very [[alright]] action comedy film that made over $100 [[billion]] but got blasted by most [[critiques]]. I personally thought this was a [[prodigious]] film. The story was [[credible]] and has probobly the greatest cast ever for this type of movie including 3 academy award winners nicolas cage, robert duvall and the very hot anjolina [[julie]]. other than the lame stunt at the end this is a [[faultless]] [[amalgam]] of [[activities]] [[travesty]] and drama. my [[notation]] is **** (out of ****) --------------------------------------------- Result 154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] From the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] I had a [[feeling]] like its a [[movie]] about another Jason's from [[Friday]] the 13th. And It is... Dispute that the movie starts interesting. But as the times goes by its just a [[pointless]] [[movie]] about [[muted]], [[supernatural]], silent serial killer. I mean he goes under the guy's bed without making any sound, not seen by anyone. He was [[supposed]] to be blind after failed [[execution]] but he walks and [[kills]] people like he used to. I'm tired of it. For me it's all over the same thing.

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

Well scene with tide up woman looked impressive but just at first time :} For that and for intriguing intro 2 [[stars]]. From the [[initiate]] of the [[cinematography]] I had a [[sensation]] like its a [[cinema]] about another Jason's from [[Yesterday]] the 13th. And It is... Dispute that the movie starts interesting. But as the times goes by its just a [[dispensable]] [[kino]] about [[silent]], [[uncanny]], silent serial killer. I mean he goes under the guy's bed without making any sound, not seen by anyone. He was [[suspected]] to be blind after failed [[enforcement]] but he walks and [[killing]] people like he used to. I'm tired of it. For me it's all over the same thing.

In another words - [[surreal]]. Too [[myriad]] mistakes and [[bewildering]] information.

Well scene with tide up woman looked impressive but just at first time :} For that and for intriguing intro 2 [[superstar]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 155 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] It seems evident from this [[adaptation]] that he did not. Not only did he leave the plot behind, he made up his own! The things that he chose to leave in were so [[ridiculously]] unbelievable that I was happy he chose to [[leave]] out some of the most important parts of the novel. The plot was hazy, inconsistent and [[choppy]] to say the least. I don't want to say anything mean-spirited about the [[actors]], but they can't [[act]]! Dickens is difficult, of course, but this is pathetic! Micawber was nothing more than a mid-nineteenth century Kramer, and the less said about Betsy Trotwood the better! If you want to see the real Copperfield, watch the wonderful 1999 BBC adaptation. As for the screenplay writer,I think he read the Cliff's Notes! It seems evident from this [[coping]] that he did not. Not only did he leave the plot behind, he made up his own! The things that he chose to leave in were so [[outrageously]] unbelievable that I was happy he chose to [[let]] out some of the most important parts of the novel. The plot was hazy, inconsistent and [[troubled]] to say the least. I don't want to say anything mean-spirited about the [[protagonists]], but they can't [[ley]]! Dickens is difficult, of course, but this is pathetic! Micawber was nothing more than a mid-nineteenth century Kramer, and the less said about Betsy Trotwood the better! If you want to see the real Copperfield, watch the wonderful 1999 BBC adaptation. As for the screenplay writer,I think he read the Cliff's Notes! --------------------------------------------- Result 156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Sorry]], [[gave]] it a 1, which is the [[rating]] I [[give]] to movies on which I [[walk]] out or fall asleep. [[In]] this case I [[fell]] [[asleep]] 10 minutes from the end, [[really]], [[really]] [[bored]] and not caring at all about what happened next. [[Dorry]], [[yielded]] it a 1, which is the [[assessments]] I [[lend]] to movies on which I [[walking]] out or fall asleep. [[Among]] this case I [[fall]] [[slumber]] 10 minutes from the end, [[truthfully]], [[truthfully]] [[bore]] and not caring at all about what happened next. --------------------------------------------- Result 157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] If you're as huge of a fan of an author as I am of Jim Thompson, it can be pretty dodgy when their [[works]] are converted to film. This is not the [[case]] with Scott Foley's rendition of AFTER DARK MY SWEET. A suspenseful, sexually charged noir [[classic]] that closely follows and does [[great]] justice to the [[original]] [[text]]. Jason Patrick and [[Rachel]] Ward give possibly the [[best]] performances of their [[careers]]. And the [[always]] [[phenomenal]] [[Bruce]] Dern might have even toped him self with this one. Like Thompson's [[book]] this movie [[creates]] a dark and [[surreal]] [[world]] where passion overcomes logic and the double cross is never far at hand. [[A]] [[must]] see for all fans of [[great]] noir film. ****!!! If you're as huge of a fan of an author as I am of Jim Thompson, it can be pretty dodgy when their [[collaborate]] are converted to film. This is not the [[example]] with Scott Foley's rendition of AFTER DARK MY SWEET. A suspenseful, sexually charged noir [[traditional]] that closely follows and does [[prodigious]] justice to the [[initial]] [[texts]]. Jason Patrick and [[Raquel]] Ward give possibly the [[bestest]] performances of their [[quarry]]. And the [[incessantly]] [[prodigious]] [[Bros]] Dern might have even toped him self with this one. Like Thompson's [[ledger]] this movie [[engenders]] a dark and [[bizarre]] [[globe]] where passion overcomes logic and the double cross is never far at hand. [[una]] [[should]] see for all fans of [[prodigious]] noir film. ****!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have had the pleasure of reading Martin Torgoff's book "Can't Find My [[Way]] [[Home]]" which is chock full of [[info]] on the drug [[culture]] of [[America]], spanning the years 1945-2000. This [[guy]] knows his stuff!! I [[found]] him to be an [[excellent]] spokesperson for this documentary. I particularly enjoyed watching the film clips from the hippie era, and the 70's stoner culture. The soundtrack was [[excellent]]. Whoever compiled it [[definitely]] was in touch with the tunes of each era. Hopefully they will [[package]] them and sell them as a CD set. I would [[highly]] [[recommend]] this to [[anyone]] interested in how the 1960's experiments with LSD [[forever]] [[changed]] American culture as we know it. One thing that was missing was any [[mention]] of [[George]] [[Jung]] (played by Johnny [[Depp]] in the movie "Blow"), who was supposedly responsible for much of the marijuana and cocaine coming into this [[country]] in the 60's-80's. I have had the pleasure of reading Martin Torgoff's book "Can't Find My [[Route]] [[Dwellings]]" which is chock full of [[information]] on the drug [[cultural]] of [[Americans]], spanning the years 1945-2000. This [[dude]] knows his stuff!! I [[unearthed]] him to be an [[admirable]] spokesperson for this documentary. I particularly enjoyed watching the film clips from the hippie era, and the 70's stoner culture. The soundtrack was [[sumptuous]]. Whoever compiled it [[categorically]] was in touch with the tunes of each era. Hopefully they will [[packets]] them and sell them as a CD set. I would [[unimaginably]] [[recommendations]] this to [[person]] interested in how the 1960's experiments with LSD [[indefinitely]] [[modification]] American culture as we know it. One thing that was missing was any [[cite]] of [[Jorge]] [[Yung]] (played by Johnny [[Dib]] in the movie "Blow"), who was supposedly responsible for much of the marijuana and cocaine coming into this [[nationals]] in the 60's-80's. --------------------------------------------- Result 159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[SPOILER]] ALERT ! ! ! Personally I don't understand why Pete did not help to [[save]] Williams life,I [[mean]] that would be great to know why William was motivated,or forced.I [[think]] Secret Service members are every day people,and there is a rumor the writer was a [[member]] of the [[Secret]] Service,now he's [[motivations]] are clear,well known.But as a [[rental]] this [[film]] will not [[satisfy]] you,cause the old but [[used]] twists,the average acting -these are just things in this film,only for keep you [[wait]] the [[end]].Clark Johnson as the director of S.W.A.T. did a far better work like this time,and I still wondering how the producers (for example Michael Douglas)left this film to theaters. [[DEFLECTORS]] ALERT ! ! ! Personally I don't understand why Pete did not help to [[rescues]] Williams life,I [[signify]] that would be great to know why William was motivated,or forced.I [[believing]] Secret Service members are every day people,and there is a rumor the writer was a [[members]] of the [[Secretive]] Service,now he's [[motifs]] are clear,well known.But as a [[rents]] this [[filmmaking]] will not [[cater]] you,cause the old but [[use]] twists,the average acting -these are just things in this film,only for keep you [[waits]] the [[ceases]].Clark Johnson as the director of S.W.A.T. did a far better work like this time,and I still wondering how the producers (for example Michael Douglas)left this film to theaters. --------------------------------------------- Result 160 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Casting]] aside many of the [[favorable]] comments that have obviously come from friends and/or relatives that pepper this and many other low budget independents listed on IMDb, one is lost when it [[comes]] to using these reviews as an accurate gauge. [[So]] eventually you have to go out and [[rent]] the [[flick]] just to see for yourself. One of the first things you must [[understand]] are the catch phrases that [[camouflage]] the reality of the [[movie]]. [[In]] this [[case]] the term "dark psychological thriller." Read: "[[hack]] [[writer]]/[[director]] who [[thinks]] he's an [[auteur]], who [[replaces]] plot, story, and action, with what he [[believes]] is a deep insight into the human soul. His great insight? Festering and repressed [[childhood]] traumas emerge to wreck havoc when we become adults. Wow, I bet Freud would be really impressed! Too many would be film makers like Kallio, who were raised on low budget horror flicks of the last few decades, fail to dig their own fresh grave. Instead, they fall into the pre-dug graves of the many other directors that came before them. They are content with rehashing old and tired horror [[clichés]] that they borrowed from a dozen or more films. The [[result]] is an unoriginal, uninspired, [[unbelievable]] [[waste]] of film stock. [[Pouring]] aside many of the [[affirmative]] comments that have obviously come from friends and/or relatives that pepper this and many other low budget independents listed on IMDb, one is lost when it [[arrives]] to using these reviews as an accurate gauge. [[Hence]] eventually you have to go out and [[leases]] the [[gesture]] just to see for yourself. One of the first things you must [[understanding]] are the catch phrases that [[concealment]] the reality of the [[cinema]]. [[For]] this [[example]] the term "dark psychological thriller." Read: "[[piracy]] [[novelist]]/[[superintendent]] who [[thoughts]] he's an [[author]], who [[substitution]] plot, story, and action, with what he [[sees]] is a deep insight into the human soul. His great insight? Festering and repressed [[children]] traumas emerge to wreck havoc when we become adults. Wow, I bet Freud would be really impressed! Too many would be film makers like Kallio, who were raised on low budget horror flicks of the last few decades, fail to dig their own fresh grave. Instead, they fall into the pre-dug graves of the many other directors that came before them. They are content with rehashing old and tired horror [[cliché]] that they borrowed from a dozen or more films. The [[conclusions]] is an unoriginal, uninspired, [[awesome]] [[squandering]] of film stock. --------------------------------------------- Result 161 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] John Ford is one of the most influential and best remembered American filmmakers in the [[history]] of [[film]], his name [[usually]] [[associated]] with the western film genre. However, John Ford's [[arguably]] [[best]] [[film]] is not a western at all but a seedy drama set in the Irish fight for independence in the early 1920s: 1935's The [[Informer]].

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

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

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

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

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

Often overshadowed by some of Ford's better known westerns like The Searchers or The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, The Informer is easily one of John Ford's best films - if not his very best. Beginning what would be a long career of Oscar nominations and wins for John Ford, The Informer won four Oscars including one for him for best director in 1936. Ford and company's use of shadows and light in the film is particularly engaging and vital to telling the story. Gypo's walk through the streets is narrated by the gloomy state of the town and the glaring accusations of the street lamps, each shadow constantly reminding him of his dark deed. Ford's command of this technique was amazing to watch; if The Informer was made 10 years later (thus making the genre requirements) it would probably be considered one of the best films noir of all time but that does not hinder it from being remembered as an excellent classic film. --------------------------------------------- Result 162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Watching]] this again after a [[gap]] of [[many]] [[years]] and [[remembering]] the flop it was [[upon]] its [[original]] release, I am surprised at how well it has held up. One of the reasons for its failure was that one generation just [[thought]] it was over [[indulgent]] [[crap]] and a [[younger]] one was disappointed that it did not [[show]] the full hippy [[glory]]. Seen now it is clear that Antonioni was already aware of and [[fascinated]] by the heady [[mix]] of [[fervent]] enthusiasm for [[change]] and a [[lack]] of any clear [[vision]] for the [[future]]. The lead [[pair]] are excellent and it is shameful that they took so much flak for the film's [[perceived]] [[failure]]. They are [[ideal]] and convey [[perfectly]] the various contradictions and [[demonstrate]] a [[pure]] delight in lovemaking. I [[blame]] others for the over [[emphasis]] on the student [[revolt]] sequences at the [[start]] but have to [[say]] that from there on in this is one of the directors most beautiful looking [[pictures]] and he certainly [[got]] the very best out of the [[man]] made and [[natural]] landscapes. [[Oh]], and I haven't even [[mentioned]] the [[highly]] explosive [[ending]]. [[Staring]] this again after a [[discrepancy]] of [[innumerable]] [[ages]] and [[reminds]] the flop it was [[after]] its [[preliminary]] release, I am surprised at how well it has held up. One of the reasons for its failure was that one generation just [[thinks]] it was over [[permissive]] [[bollocks]] and a [[youngest]] one was disappointed that it did not [[displaying]] the full hippy [[stardom]]. Seen now it is clear that Antonioni was already aware of and [[preoccupied]] by the heady [[amalgam]] of [[avid]] enthusiasm for [[alterations]] and a [[inadequacy]] of any clear [[eyesight]] for the [[futur]]. The lead [[couple]] are excellent and it is shameful that they took so much flak for the film's [[viewed]] [[inadequacy]]. They are [[idealistic]] and convey [[absolutely]] the various contradictions and [[proving]] a [[sheer]] delight in lovemaking. I [[guilt]] others for the over [[concentrate]] on the student [[insurgent]] sequences at the [[startup]] but have to [[says]] that from there on in this is one of the directors most beautiful looking [[imaging]] and he certainly [[gets]] the very best out of the [[males]] made and [[naturel]] landscapes. [[Ohhh]], and I haven't even [[talked]] the [[unimaginably]] explosive [[terminated]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I do [[find]] it a [[bit]] overrated. Maybe it's just because I've never seen a subtitled version (dubbing stinks!), but I just don't get into it like a lot of other people do. The finale is really [[great]] though as Jackie trashes a mall, a scene that plays in my head every time i go shopping! I do [[finds]] it a [[bite]] overrated. Maybe it's just because I've never seen a subtitled version (dubbing stinks!), but I just don't get into it like a lot of other people do. The finale is really [[whopping]] though as Jackie trashes a mall, a scene that plays in my head every time i go shopping! --------------------------------------------- Result 164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] In Bridgeport, the [[deranged]] high school teacher Richard Fenton (Johnathon Schaech) is obsessed by the [[teenager]] student Donna Keppel (Brittany Snow); she witnesses him murder her family to stay with her, but Richard is arrested and sent to prison for life. Three years later, the traumatized Donna is feeling better but is still under psychological treatment and taking pills. On her prom night, she goes with her boyfriend Bobby (Scott Porter) and two couples of friends to the Pacific Grad Hotel for the party. But the psychopath Richard has escaped from prison and is lodged in the same floor in the hotel chasing Donna, stabbing her friends and staff of the hotel that cross his path.

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

Title (Brazil): "A Morte Convida Para Dançar" ("The Death Invites to Dance") In Bridgeport, the [[crazy]] high school teacher Richard Fenton (Johnathon Schaech) is obsessed by the [[youth]] student Donna Keppel (Brittany Snow); she witnesses him murder her family to stay with her, but Richard is arrested and sent to prison for life. Three years later, the traumatized Donna is feeling better but is still under psychological treatment and taking pills. On her prom night, she goes with her boyfriend Bobby (Scott Porter) and two couples of friends to the Pacific Grad Hotel for the party. But the psychopath Richard has escaped from prison and is lodged in the same floor in the hotel chasing Donna, stabbing her friends and staff of the hotel that cross his path.

The forgettable slash "Prom Night" is a collection of clichés with a [[whole]] [[misses]] of originality. The [[silly]] story is shallow and silly, with a [[amiss]] acting of Johnathon Schaech in the role of an insane killer. The [[foreseeable]] screenplay is amazing [[because]] it is [[attainable]] to foresee what is going to happen in the next scenes. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "A Morte Convida Para Dançar" ("The Death Invites to Dance") --------------------------------------------- Result 165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[enjoyed]] a [[lot]] watching this movie. It has a [[great]] direction, by the already know Bigas [[Luna]], born in Spain. And it is precisely in Spain that the movie takes place, in Cataluña, to be more precise.

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

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

I also enjoyed the performance of the protagonist... 8/10 I [[liked]] a [[batch]] watching this movie. It has a [[whopping]] direction, by the already know Bigas [[Moon]], born in Spain. And it is precisely in Spain that the movie takes place, in Cataluña, to be more precise.

Luna [[studying]] once more the [[subject]] of an obcession, in this [[lawsuits]] the obcession of a young boy for the women's milk. There are some psychological [[concept]] in this [[conte]] such as the rejection complex that the elder son feels with the birth of his brother. In the movie this is what leads to the obcession of the [[youthful]] boy who suddenly sees all his mother's milk [[going]] to the [[lately]] born son. So he starts trying to find a breast who is able to feed him. He finds it in a woman recently arrived and from here on the movie is all [[about]] this.

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

I also enjoyed the performance of the protagonist... 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Did you know, that Anthony Kiedis, (singer from the Red Hot Chili Peppers) father is in this movie. Blackie Dammit, is Anthony's father. I noticed this after reading "Scar Tissue" Anthony's autobiography, and saw a picture of his father. I thought, "well, that guy kinda looks like that guy from that movie I saw in the eighties. Then I read more and it said his father was an actor that had a few small roles. After [[checking]] this site, and comparing with a search on the net, I [[realized]] it really is his father in the movie. It's [[funny]], because nowhere in the book does it mention him being in this movie. Perhaps his son was ashamed of his father's acting job in this flick, but he need not be. I think his father, Blackie, did a great job in the show. Did you know, that Anthony Kiedis, (singer from the Red Hot Chili Peppers) father is in this movie. Blackie Dammit, is Anthony's father. I noticed this after reading "Scar Tissue" Anthony's autobiography, and saw a picture of his father. I thought, "well, that guy kinda looks like that guy from that movie I saw in the eighties. Then I read more and it said his father was an actor that had a few small roles. After [[controlling]] this site, and comparing with a search on the net, I [[performed]] it really is his father in the movie. It's [[droll]], because nowhere in the book does it mention him being in this movie. Perhaps his son was ashamed of his father's acting job in this flick, but he need not be. I think his father, Blackie, did a great job in the show. --------------------------------------------- Result 167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] If I could [[give]] this film a real [[rating]], it would likely be in the minus [[numbers]]. [[While]] I respect the [[fact]] that [[somebody]] has to [[keep]] making these terrible "[[horror]]" films, [[seriously]], people, buying a ticket for this film is a [[waste]] of money you [[could]] be [[spending]] on something far more worth your [[time]].

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

Whoever made this version of "Prom Night", you screwed up. The [[actors]] could [[probably]] have done a [[decent]] [[job]] if it weren't for the [[questionable]] scripting. This was a [[terrible]] waste of a [[cinema]] trip. I'd sooner go and see "One Missed Call" again, at [[least]] that had some plot. If I could [[confer]] this film a real [[evaluation]], it would likely be in the minus [[digit]]. [[Although]] I respect the [[facto]] that [[person]] has to [[conserve]] making these terrible "[[terror]]" films, [[conscientiously]], people, buying a ticket for this film is a [[wastes]] of money you [[wo]] be [[outlay]] on something far more worth your [[moment]].

[[Albeit]] it being a horror [[cinematographic]], there is nothing scary about it, [[if]] the [[thoughts]] of [[see]] how [[myriad]] horror cliché's you can [[fitting]] in one [[cinematography]] scares you. If the rating had been higher, it [[certainly]] would have made for a better film in the long run.

Whoever made this version of "Prom Night", you screwed up. The [[players]] could [[assuredly]] have done a [[presentable]] [[employment]] if it weren't for the [[shady]] scripting. This was a [[dreaded]] waste of a [[theaters]] trip. I'd sooner go and see "One Missed Call" again, at [[slightest]] that had some plot. --------------------------------------------- Result 168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Overall]] I was rather [[impressed]] with the pilot. The initial first fifteen minutes were [[worrying]], as it did feel the creators were trying to create a science fiction version of The O.C but this fear is rectified when a terrorist incident occurs and from here the [[show]] [[steps]] into [[themes]] and situations that I very rarely see [[television]] tackle.

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

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

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

Based on the pilot I greatly look forward to seeing where 'Caprica' goes in the future and hopefully it will touch the greatness that BSG once did. [[Total]] I was rather [[surprising]] with the pilot. The initial first fifteen minutes were [[disquieting]], as it did feel the creators were trying to create a science fiction version of The O.C but this fear is rectified when a terrorist incident occurs and from here the [[exposition]] [[measuring]] into [[item]] and situations that I very rarely see [[tv]] tackle.

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

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

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

Based on the pilot I greatly look forward to seeing where 'Caprica' goes in the future and hopefully it will touch the greatness that BSG once did. --------------------------------------------- Result 169 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] I saw this little magnum opus for the first time very recently, on one of those dollar DVD's that seem to be everywhere nowadays, and was so moved by it that I cannot contain myself. For those who have never seen this mesmerizingly [[miserable]] Mexican import, and wish to view it without being prejudiced by anyone else's jaundiced commentary, there are undoubtedly substantial spoilers in what follows. So if you are one of those reckless individuals, stop reading at once and go and watch it for yourself. If you get drunk enough in advance, you might be fortunate enough to pass out before it's over.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Of course, one doesn't really expect any sense from a film like this, but at least it ought to be good for laughs. This one isn't. Forget it, buddy. There is a creeping sort of anarchy about this film, from its patched-together, tequila-drenched ambiance to its atrocious cinematography and agonizing musical score, that defies even the most sozzled attempts to get any MST3K type laughs out of it. If it's not even good for that, what the hell is it good for? If Montezuma's revenge could have somehow been digitally remastered and put on a DVD, it would have looked exactly like this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Dominick ([[Nicky]]) Luciano [[wears]] a 'Hulk' T-shirt and trudges off [[everyday]] to perform his duties as a garbage man. He uses his physical power in picking up other's trash and hauling it to the town dump. He reads comic-book hero stories and loves wrestlers and wrestling, Going to WrestleMania with his twin brother Eugene on their birthday is a yearly tradition. He talks [[kindly]] with the [[many]] people he comes in [[contact]] with during his day. He reads comic books, which he finds in the trash, with a young boy who he often passes by while on the garbage route. [[Unfortunately]], [[Dominick]] has a [[diminished]] ability to use his mind. He has a disability.

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

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

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

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

Dominick and Eugene was released in 1988, the same year as another film, Rainman, which won 5 Academy Awards. While Rainman was an achievement and helped increase the visibility with person with disabilities, it could be argued that Dominick and Eugene holds more valuable lessons for society. Whereas, Rainman demonstrated that mainstream American society might be able to learn from and care for a 'savant', if the 'savant' is the inheritor of a large estate. Dominick and Eugene show that a person with a disability might be able to care for and help save members of American society. The message of an independent person with disabilities may have been too strong for 1988. Hopefully someday society will see the strengths of individuals with disabilities, not as a threat, but as imperative for the strength of society. Dominick ([[Nick]]) Luciano [[door]] a 'Hulk' T-shirt and trudges off [[routine]] to perform his duties as a garbage man. He uses his physical power in picking up other's trash and hauling it to the town dump. He reads comic-book hero stories and loves wrestlers and wrestling, Going to WrestleMania with his twin brother Eugene on their birthday is a yearly tradition. He talks [[politely]] with the [[several]] people he comes in [[liaison]] with during his day. He reads comic books, which he finds in the trash, with a young boy who he often passes by while on the garbage route. [[Alas]], [[Dominik]] has a [[narrowed]] ability to use his mind. He has a disability.

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

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

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

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

Dominick and Eugene was released in 1988, the same year as another film, Rainman, which won 5 Academy Awards. While Rainman was an achievement and helped increase the visibility with person with disabilities, it could be argued that Dominick and Eugene holds more valuable lessons for society. Whereas, Rainman demonstrated that mainstream American society might be able to learn from and care for a 'savant', if the 'savant' is the inheritor of a large estate. Dominick and Eugene show that a person with a disability might be able to care for and help save members of American society. The message of an independent person with disabilities may have been too strong for 1988. Hopefully someday society will see the strengths of individuals with disabilities, not as a threat, but as imperative for the strength of society. --------------------------------------------- Result 171 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What can I say? I know this movie from start to finish. It's hilarious. It's an strong link to my past and will change the way I view film in the future. Hypothetically speaking :) The down-fall? There's no Socrates Johnson! --------------------------------------------- Result 172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Good sequel to [[Murder]] in a [[Small]] [[Town]]. [[In]] this one [[Cash]] and his [[police]] Lt. [[buddy]] unravel a sticky plot [[involving]] a [[Nazi]] [[criminal]], a philanthropic [[witch]], and a [[family]] of screw-ups and their wierdo helpers. As in the original, the [[viewer]] is [[treated]] to a [[nice]] [[little]] [[mystery]] with [[distinctive]] [[sights]] and [[sounds]] of pre-war [[America]]. [[Go]] [[see]] it. Good sequel to [[Assassinate]] in a [[Scant]] [[Municipal]]. [[During]] this one [[Money]] and his [[policing]] Lt. [[homeboy]] unravel a sticky plot [[implicating]] a [[Nazism]] [[felon]], a philanthropic [[magician]], and a [[familia]] of screw-ups and their wierdo helpers. As in the original, the [[onlooker]] is [[processed]] to a [[handsome]] [[scant]] [[riddle]] with [[idiosyncratic]] [[crosshairs]] and [[sound]] of pre-war [[Latina]]. [[Going]] [[consults]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Not [[even]] Bob [[Hope]], escorted by a raft of fine character [[actors]], can [[save]] this poorly written [[attempt]] at wartime [[comedy]], as his patented [[timing]] has little which which to work. The [[plot]] [[involves]] a Hollywood [[film]] [[star]] named Don Bolton ([[Hope]]), and his attempt to evade military service at the [[beginning]] of World [[War]] [[II]], followed by his [[enlistment]] by mistake in a confused [[attempt]] to court a colonel's daughter (Dorothy Lamour). Bolton's agent, played by Lynne Overman, and his assistant, portrayed by Eddie Bracken, enlist with him and the three are involved in various escapades regarding training exercises, filmed in the Malibu, California, hills. Paramount budgeted handsomely for this effort, employing some of its top specialists, but direction by the usually reliable David Butler was flaccid, and this must be [[attributed]] to a missing comedic element in the scenario. A shift toward the end of the film to create an opportunity for heroism by Bolton is still-born with [[poor]] stunt work and camera action in evidence. Oddly, Lynne Overman is given the best lines and this veteran master of the [[sneer]] does very well by them. Dorothy Lamour looks lovely and acts nicely, as well, and it is ever a delight to [[see]] and [[hear]] Clarence Kolb, as her father, whose voice is unique on screen or radio, but there is little they can do to save this film, cursed as it is with an error in script assignment. Not [[yet]] Bob [[Expectancy]], escorted by a raft of fine character [[protagonists]], can [[rescued]] this poorly written [[strives]] at wartime [[humour]], as his patented [[timeline]] has little which which to work. The [[intrigue]] [[encompasses]] a Hollywood [[movie]] [[superstar]] named Don Bolton ([[Esperanza]]), and his attempt to evade military service at the [[initiates]] of World [[Wars]] [[SECONDLY]], followed by his [[conscription]] by mistake in a confused [[try]] to court a colonel's daughter (Dorothy Lamour). Bolton's agent, played by Lynne Overman, and his assistant, portrayed by Eddie Bracken, enlist with him and the three are involved in various escapades regarding training exercises, filmed in the Malibu, California, hills. Paramount budgeted handsomely for this effort, employing some of its top specialists, but direction by the usually reliable David Butler was flaccid, and this must be [[accorded]] to a missing comedic element in the scenario. A shift toward the end of the film to create an opportunity for heroism by Bolton is still-born with [[pauper]] stunt work and camera action in evidence. Oddly, Lynne Overman is given the best lines and this veteran master of the [[sneering]] does very well by them. Dorothy Lamour looks lovely and acts nicely, as well, and it is ever a delight to [[behold]] and [[listen]] Clarence Kolb, as her father, whose voice is unique on screen or radio, but there is little they can do to save this film, cursed as it is with an error in script assignment. --------------------------------------------- Result 174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[studied]] Charlotte Bronte's novel in [[high]] school, and it left me with a [[stunning]] impression. Here was a beautiful novel about a young woman's [[struggle]] to find love and acceptance in the [[dark]] [[times]] of Victorian England. This young woman was Jane Eyre, a poor and plain [[character]] with a strong [[mind]] and will of her own. Her [[story]], which Bronte told through Jane's own eyes, was both sad and inspiring.

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

I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] this version of the [[classic]] Bronte [[tale]]. If you have not read the book before, then you can watch this [[production]] as a [[faithful]] [[introduction]] to this [[beautiful]] story. I [[study]] Charlotte Bronte's novel in [[highest]] school, and it left me with a [[sensational]] impression. Here was a beautiful novel about a young woman's [[combat]] to find love and acceptance in the [[darkened]] [[time]] of Victorian England. This young woman was Jane Eyre, a poor and plain [[nature]] with a strong [[intellect]] and will of her own. Her [[histories]], which Bronte told through Jane's own eyes, was both sad and inspiring.

As [[portions]] of our study, we watched the 1983 adaptation of the [[storytelling]], and it [[farted]] me away. The mini-series not only [[introduced]] the [[efforts]] to [[remain]] [[authentic]] to Bronte's [[initial]] [[texts]] and the essence of the [[storytelling]], but the actors who portrayed the [[nature]] were just [[fantastic]]. [[Whether]] Zelah Clarke (Jane Eyre) and Timothy Dalton (Jane's lover, by the [[behalf]] of Rochester) [[caught]] [[excellently]] the essence of their characters. I cannot imagine [[somebody]] [[further]] in their roles. (The other performances of Rochester in other versions such as the 2006 version lack the passion, [[energies]], and tenderness needed to [[describing]] Rochester accurately. I [[told]] that Timothy Dalton [[arises]] out on [[topped]] because he [[has]] all these characteristics in his portrayal of Rochester. Zelah Clarke not only [[seems]] like Jane Eyre, but she [[caught]] Jane's quiet, but firm and [[enthusiastic]] [[traits]] brilliantly. She holds in her [[passions]], like the Jane of the book, at the [[adequate]] [[times]] in the [[history]] but [[allowed]] her fire to come out in Jane's [[avid]] scenes. The [[chemical]] that [[Clark]] and Dalton [[describes]] in their scenes [[jointly]] is [[furthermore]] [[believable]] and [[authentic]] to [[Jeanne]] and Rochester's devoted [[relation]].) As well, the [[helping]] [[actresses]] [[further]] fit their [[duties]] [[altogether]], and the sets [[fitted]] the Gothic [[traits]] of the [[stories]].

I [[severely]] [[recommendation]] this version of the [[conventional]] Bronte [[fable]]. If you have not read the book before, then you can watch this [[productivity]] as a [[fiel]] [[intro]] to this [[glamorous]] story. --------------------------------------------- Result 175 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It's been close to ten years since I've seen either of the last two sequels to "Phantasm" - surely due to my still vivid remembrance of them not being very good. That being acknowledged to this day, I'm still a huge [[fan]] of the first two installments so I thought I'd go back and re-experience the 'final chapters'. [[Part]] three is [[definitely]] the [[worst]] of the series since it obviously takes itself less seriously and throws in a bunch of [[confusing]] stuff that doesn't make much [[sense]]... Again, kicking off right where the previous movie left us, [[Reggie]] saves Mike from the Tall Man who vows to come back for him later, but things aren't safe for long when they come across Jody who is inexplicably able to the take the form of a sphere. Apparently his soul is held prisoner by the Tall Man so Mike is then dragged into the sinister double-pronged Netherworld and Reg has to find him... Along the way, he meets up with a ten year-old kid and a nun-chuck wielding black chick named Rocky who assist him throughout his journey.

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

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

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

So, it's a "Phantasm" movie with very little gore, nudity, and quadruple-barrel shot guns. Need I say more? --------------------------------------------- Result 176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Dumb]] is as [[dumb]] does, in this thoroughly uninteresting, supposed black [[comedy]]. [[Essentially]] what starts out as [[Chris]] [[Klein]] trying to [[maintain]] a low profile, eventually morphs into an uninspired version of "The [[Three]] Amigos", only without any [[laughs]]. [[In]] order for black [[comedy]] to [[work]], it [[must]] be [[outrageous]], which "Play [[Dead]]" is not. In order for [[black]] [[comedy]] to [[work]], it [[cannot]] be [[mean]] spirited, which "Play [[Dead]]" is. What "Play [[Dead]]" [[really]] is, is a [[town]] full of nut [[jobs]]. Fred Dunst does [[however]] do a pretty fair imitation of [[Billy]] [[Bob]] Thornton's [[character]] from "A [[Simple]] [[Plan]]", while Jake Busey does a [[pretty]] [[fair]] [[imitation]] of, well, Jake Busey. - MERK [[Daft]] is as [[moronic]] does, in this thoroughly uninteresting, supposed black [[humour]]. [[Principally]] what starts out as [[Chrissy]] [[Kline]] trying to [[keep]] a low profile, eventually morphs into an uninspired version of "The [[Tres]] Amigos", only without any [[giggling]]. [[Throughout]] order for black [[farce]] to [[collaborated]], it [[needs]] be [[monstrous]], which "Play [[Dies]]" is not. In order for [[negra]] [[humour]] to [[works]], it [[notable]] be [[signify]] spirited, which "Play [[Deaths]]" is. What "Play [[Died]]" [[genuinely]] is, is a [[city]] full of nut [[work]]. Fred Dunst does [[still]] do a pretty fair imitation of [[Billie]] [[Boba]] Thornton's [[nature]] from "A [[Simpler]] [[Programmes]]", while Jake Busey does a [[quite]] [[justo]] [[mimicry]] of, well, Jake Busey. - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I found myself at sixes and sevens while [[watching]] this one. Altman's [[touch]] with zooms in and out were there, and I expected those devices to comment on characters and situations. Unfortunately, as far as I could see, they [[sometimes]] were gratuitous, sometimes witty, often barren for failing to point out some ironic or other connection. In particular, two zoom-outs from the gilt dome in savannah merely [[perplexed]]. To be fair, though, a few zooms (outs and ins) to Branagh [[heightened]] his character's increasing bewilderment, a la Pudgy McCabe's or Philip Marlow's. On the whole, the zooms were, well, inconsistent, and sometimes even trite.

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

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

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

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

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

I found myself at sixes and sevens while [[staring]] this one. Altman's [[toque]] with zooms in and out were there, and I expected those devices to comment on characters and situations. Unfortunately, as far as I could see, they [[sometime]] were gratuitous, sometimes witty, often barren for failing to point out some ironic or other connection. In particular, two zoom-outs from the gilt dome in savannah merely [[befuddled]]. To be fair, though, a few zooms (outs and ins) to Branagh [[redouble]] his character's increasing bewilderment, a la Pudgy McCabe's or Philip Marlow's. On the whole, the zooms were, well, inconsistent, and sometimes even trite.

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

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

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

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

Torn, in the end I judged it a 7.

--------------------------------------------- Result 178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] Bored with the normal, run-of-the-mill staple films to watch this Halloween that I've seen over and over again, I took a chance on "The Sentinel", hoping it could get my horror juices flowing again. Mind you, I had just come back from seeing the Dark Castle remake of "The House on Haunted Hill" - complete and utter crap. [[Thankfully]], "The [[Sentinel]]" [[BLEW]] ME AWAY! In a riviting story about a model who moves into a creepy building in Brooklyn Hights, the [[film]] offered everything that I hope to find in a good movie - (1) Campy and fantasically juicy characters, exchanges and dialogue, including hilaraious turns by Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum and especially, Martin Balsam, as an absent minded professor - (2) Horrifying Terror! Not to give a frame away, but there are scenes in this film that chilled me to my pancreas - (3) Fantastic gore, terrific make-up and wacky (if very uneven) direction from Michael Winner, which flows rather nicely with this unreal treat. If you loved "Evil Dead 2", "Dead Alive" and "Deep Rising" - this will be your queen of favourites. Just to emphasize my love for this film - after I watched it for the first time, jaw-dropped, I rewound it and watched it again. It is now one of favourites of all time. Do yourself a favour and check it out! Bored with the normal, run-of-the-mill staple films to watch this Halloween that I've seen over and over again, I took a chance on "The Sentinel", hoping it could get my horror juices flowing again. Mind you, I had just come back from seeing the Dark Castle remake of "The House on Haunted Hill" - complete and utter crap. [[Mercifully]], "The [[Sentry]]" [[FARTED]] ME AWAY! In a riviting story about a model who moves into a creepy building in Brooklyn Hights, the [[flick]] offered everything that I hope to find in a good movie - (1) Campy and fantasically juicy characters, exchanges and dialogue, including hilaraious turns by Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum and especially, Martin Balsam, as an absent minded professor - (2) Horrifying Terror! Not to give a frame away, but there are scenes in this film that chilled me to my pancreas - (3) Fantastic gore, terrific make-up and wacky (if very uneven) direction from Michael Winner, which flows rather nicely with this unreal treat. If you loved "Evil Dead 2", "Dead Alive" and "Deep Rising" - this will be your queen of favourites. Just to emphasize my love for this film - after I watched it for the first time, jaw-dropped, I rewound it and watched it again. It is now one of favourites of all time. Do yourself a favour and check it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 179 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Howling [[II]] (1985) was a complete 180 from the first [[film]]. Whilst the first film was campy and [[creepy]]. The second one was [[sleazy]] and cheesy. The [[production]] values on this one are pretty [[bad]] and the acting is [[atrocious]]. The brother of the anchorwoman [[werewolf]] from [[part]] one wants to find out what [[happened]] to his sis'. The "scene" from the first [[film]] was [[badly]] re-created. A [[skinny]] [[plain]] looking woman accompanies bro' (Reb Brown) to the old country ([[Romania]]) to [[uncover]] the [[mystery]] to her sister's murder/transformation/death. Christopher Lee [[appears]] and [[disappears]] over now and then as sort of a sage/guide to the two. Sybil Danning and her two biggest [[assets]] appear as Stirba, the head werewolf of the Romania. She also suffers from a bad case of morning face, ewww!

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

Best to avoid unless you're desperate or you lost the remote and you're too lazy to change the channel. Howling [[SECONDLY]] (1985) was a complete 180 from the first [[cinematography]]. Whilst the first film was campy and [[terrifying]]. The second one was [[salacious]] and cheesy. The [[productivity]] values on this one are pretty [[naughty]] and the acting is [[outrageous]]. The brother of the anchorwoman [[werewolves]] from [[parties]] one wants to find out what [[arrived]] to his sis'. The "scene" from the first [[movies]] was [[sorely]] re-created. A [[delgado]] [[lowlands]] looking woman accompanies bro' (Reb Brown) to the old country ([[Rumania]]) to [[unveils]] the [[enigma]] to her sister's murder/transformation/death. Christopher Lee [[appearing]] and [[fades]] over now and then as sort of a sage/guide to the two. Sybil Danning and her two biggest [[possessions]] appear as Stirba, the head werewolf of the Romania. She also suffers from a bad case of morning face, ewww!

[[Naughty]] [[flick]]. There's [[anything]] good about this [[wanker]]. I'm surprise Philippe Mora directed this picture because he's usually a [[alright]] film-maker. The film is so dark that you need a [[lantern]] to watch it (no, not the content but the film stock itself). To round the movie off you get a [[crummy]] "punk" performance from a Damned wannabe "Babel". Maybe if they forked over a couple of extra bucks they could've got the real deal instead of an imitation.

Best to avoid unless you're desperate or you lost the remote and you're too lazy to change the channel. --------------------------------------------- Result 180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I wish kids movies were still made this way; [[dark]] and deep. There was (get this) character development (and Charlie is the [[epitome]] of the dynamic character), plot development, superb animation, emotional involvement, and a rational, relatable, and consistent theme. If not for the handful of song-and-dance routines, you [[would]] never have [[thought]] this was a kids movie, and this is why I give it such a [[high]] rating. This movie is an [[excellent]] film, let alone for a kids' [[movie]]. Which brings me to my second point: this has got to be the darkest "kids'" movie I've seen in quite some time, this coming from a 22-year-old. I'd be shocked to see any child under the age of 8 not completely terrified throughout a great deal of the latter half and some of the first half of the movie, and it all ends with one of the saddest endings you could ever come across (ala "Jurassic Bark", for those of you who are 'Futurama' fans), and this is what makes this movie so good. Just because the movie universally evokes emotions we don't normally like to feel and assume are bad does not make the movie itself bad; in fact, it means it succeeded. Good funny movies are supposed to make us laugh; good horror movies are supposed to make us scared; good sad movies are supposed to make us sad. My point is, good movies are supposed to MOVE you, not simply entertain; this movie moved me.

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

Also, this movie is incredibly violent by today's standards for a kids' movie and contains subject matter that, by today's standards, may not be suitable for some children. Parents, I'd say watch it first. I'm not usually one to say anything about this kind of thing, but I just saw this yesterday and it came as a surprise even to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Strangler of the Swamp was made by low budget studio PRC and is [[certainly]] one of their [[best]] [[movies]] I've seen.

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

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

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

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

Rating: 3 and a half stars out of 5. Strangler of the Swamp was made by low budget studio PRC and is [[admittedly]] one of their [[optimum]] [[theater]] I've seen.

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

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

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

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

Rating: 3 and a half stars out of 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] On a distant [[planet]] a psychopath is saved from execution by a space monk. He releases a few fellow inmates and breaks out of the prison in a spaceship. They dock onto a ludicrously [[enormous]] spacecraft that is orbiting a supernova star. This massive craft is [[populated]] by only three people, presumably because the budget of the [[film]] did not [[extend]] to [[hiring]] many [[actors]]. Anyway, to [[cut]] a long story short, the three goodies [[end]] up in a game of [[cat]] and mouse with the baddies.

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

The film is fairly well [[acted]] and it works as an averagey sci-fi thriller. But [[nothing]] [[great]]. On a distant [[planetary]] a psychopath is saved from execution by a space monk. He releases a few fellow inmates and breaks out of the prison in a spaceship. They dock onto a ludicrously [[sizeable]] spacecraft that is orbiting a supernova star. This massive craft is [[manned]] by only three people, presumably because the budget of the [[kino]] did not [[prolonging]] to [[hire]] many [[protagonists]]. Anyway, to [[slice]] a long story short, the three goodies [[termination]] up in a game of [[gato]] and mouse with the baddies.

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

The film is fairly well [[behaved]] and it works as an averagey sci-fi thriller. But [[anything]] [[wondrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 183 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Wow, praise IMDb and Google, for I have been trying to remember the name of this f'ing [[awesome]] [[movie]] for over 15 years now. Slaughter High, man! Hells yeah!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All in all, yes, a crappy movie. But for nostalgia purposes and for humor factor this movie gets a 9 out of 10 from me. Either stay up every night real late and hope to catch this on same Late Late Late Movie show, or hunt down a VHS copy and dust off your VCR. --------------------------------------------- Result 184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] to be honest, i didn't watch all of the original 'howling', but those scenes i saw made it [[obvious]] that the first howling was a [[great]] movie. so great, that seven [[horrible]] sequels had to be made. they started off with "Howling II: Your Sister Is A Werewolf". i got this movie on VHS from my uncle sometime ago when he was giving away a bunch of old movies he bought back when Atari was brand new. i just watched it last night, and it wasn't really BAD, it was just weird. i mean, the whole thing with Sybil Danning going three-way with two of her werewolf minions was just out of place and quite disturbing (but kinda hot), Christopher lee about to stab a dead karen as if she's a vampire, etc. actually, this movie was actually like some sort of mish-mash of Dracula and The Lost Boys...except with werewolves, because everything Christopher Lee (whom played Dracula himself) was saying about werewolves pretty much ripped off from every other vampire movie (stake in the heart, garlic, the creature of the night must die AT NIGHT, and the ruler of werewolves lives in TRANSYLVANIA). not much for the acting, but the worst of it came from Annie McEnroe. i swear, at some point in the film i found myself rooting for the werewolves to rip her throat out, because that damn throat always had to say SOMETHING. Anyway, the plot is pretty silly and clichéd, so there's no real point in telling you, you could just read about it on Wikipedia. By the way, the thing that really makes me nauseous about this movie is the fact that it's the ONLY film out of all the seven sequels thats related in any way to the original (not counting Howling IV (1988), which was a remake of the original, or in other words, a sequel based on the same novel). so don't see this movie. there's no real horror, hardly any werewolves, and just horrible special fx. 3/10 to be honest, i didn't watch all of the original 'howling', but those scenes i saw made it [[manifest]] that the first howling was a [[large]] movie. so great, that seven [[spooky]] sequels had to be made. they started off with "Howling II: Your Sister Is A Werewolf". i got this movie on VHS from my uncle sometime ago when he was giving away a bunch of old movies he bought back when Atari was brand new. i just watched it last night, and it wasn't really BAD, it was just weird. i mean, the whole thing with Sybil Danning going three-way with two of her werewolf minions was just out of place and quite disturbing (but kinda hot), Christopher lee about to stab a dead karen as if she's a vampire, etc. actually, this movie was actually like some sort of mish-mash of Dracula and The Lost Boys...except with werewolves, because everything Christopher Lee (whom played Dracula himself) was saying about werewolves pretty much ripped off from every other vampire movie (stake in the heart, garlic, the creature of the night must die AT NIGHT, and the ruler of werewolves lives in TRANSYLVANIA). not much for the acting, but the worst of it came from Annie McEnroe. i swear, at some point in the film i found myself rooting for the werewolves to rip her throat out, because that damn throat always had to say SOMETHING. Anyway, the plot is pretty silly and clichéd, so there's no real point in telling you, you could just read about it on Wikipedia. By the way, the thing that really makes me nauseous about this movie is the fact that it's the ONLY film out of all the seven sequels thats related in any way to the original (not counting Howling IV (1988), which was a remake of the original, or in other words, a sequel based on the same novel). so don't see this movie. there's no real horror, hardly any werewolves, and just horrible special fx. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Although]] the [[recent]] re-telling of part of Homer's epic "[[Troy]]" with Brad [[Pitt]] was [[entertaining]] once, "Iphigenia" with the [[incandescent]] [[Irene]] Pappas is [[breathtaking]]. Unfolding in a [[natural]] [[setting]] with Greek [[actors]] [[speaking]] their own [[language]] lends such authenticity. A chance encounter with this [[film]] on one of DirecTV's [[many]] [[movie]] [[channels]] [[kept]] me interested in spite of my [[concentration]] problems. There is no glitter or "[[bling]]" in this movie, just a [[fabulously]] rich [[story]] impeccably told by actors so [[real]] one feels they are eavesdropping on a real family in turmoil. I think even Homer, if he really existed, would be proud of this telling.

JLH [[Albeit]] the [[latest]] re-telling of part of Homer's epic "[[Trojan]]" with Brad [[Beit]] was [[amusing]] once, "Iphigenia" with the [[lamp]] [[Irina]] Pappas is [[exciting]]. Unfolding in a [[naturel]] [[settings]] with Greek [[actresses]] [[talk]] their own [[linguistics]] lends such authenticity. A chance encounter with this [[cinematographic]] on one of DirecTV's [[multiple]] [[flick]] [[channel]] [[conserved]] me interested in spite of my [[concentrations]] problems. There is no glitter or "[[jewelry]]" in this movie, just a [[fantastically]] rich [[fairytales]] impeccably told by actors so [[actual]] one feels they are eavesdropping on a real family in turmoil. I think even Homer, if he really existed, would be proud of this telling.

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

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

Except that, it's a great game, with a great story, good graphics, excellent characters, great soundtrack... I recommend it! Surely! It can be a bit old, but still enjoyable! At least, on the Dreamcast... but the PS2 version shall be the same. --------------------------------------------- Result 188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This film [[features]] Ben [[Chaplin]] as a bored [[bank]] [[employee]] in England who orders a mail [[order]] bride from [[Russia]], recieves [[Nicole]] Kidman in the [[mail]] and [[gets]] more than he bargained for when, [[surprise]], she isn't what she [[appears]] to be. The [[story]] is [[fairly]] predictible and Chaplin underacts too much to the point where he [[becomes]] somewhat anoying. Kidman is [[actualy]] [[rather]] good in this role, [[making]] her character about the only [[thing]] in this [[film]] that is interesting. GRADE: C This film [[hallmarks]] Ben [[Chapin]] as a bored [[banque]] [[staffs]] in England who orders a mail [[orders]] bride from [[Moscow]], recieves [[Nichol]] Kidman in the [[mailroom]] and [[attains]] more than he bargained for when, [[surprises]], she isn't what she [[seem]] to be. The [[fairytales]] is [[rather]] predictible and Chaplin underacts too much to the point where he [[becoming]] somewhat anoying. Kidman is [[beleive]] [[quite]] good in this role, [[doing]] her character about the only [[stuff]] in this [[cinema]] that is interesting. GRADE: C --------------------------------------------- Result 189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A Chinese scholar who criticizes harshly the arrogant nationalist, warmongering policies of the ruling clique around the emperor in pre-war Japan, is accused of being a 'communist' and jailed for life. His loving wife, who supports totally her husband and his ideas, is left alone to save her family from starvation. This movie is a huge statue erected in praise of the role of the mother in the history of mankind. Sayuri Yoshinaga is not [[less]] than sublime in the title role and it was a monumental scandal that she didn't get an Asian Oscar for the [[best]] female role in 2009. It went to a young girl with very limited acting potential.

This deeply [[moving]] and most 'human' feature is a [[must]] [[see]] for all 'true children' on earth. A Chinese scholar who criticizes harshly the arrogant nationalist, warmongering policies of the ruling clique around the emperor in pre-war Japan, is accused of being a 'communist' and jailed for life. His loving wife, who supports totally her husband and his ideas, is left alone to save her family from starvation. This movie is a huge statue erected in praise of the role of the mother in the history of mankind. Sayuri Yoshinaga is not [[fewest]] than sublime in the title role and it was a monumental scandal that she didn't get an Asian Oscar for the [[optimum]] female role in 2009. It went to a young girl with very limited acting potential.

This deeply [[relocating]] and most 'human' feature is a [[should]] [[consults]] for all 'true children' on earth. --------------------------------------------- Result 190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Michael Jackson is not very popular in USA anymore, however in Europe (especially Germany) he has still got lots of fans. [[Many]] will say that this is a bad movie, and it is: it has no plot, it's full of cliches, Michael [[praises]] himself constantly.

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

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

However, as I'm an MJ fan, I should warn all Michael Jackson haters out there: DON'T watch this movie, you'd only make your hate increase... Michael Jackson is not very popular in USA anymore, however in Europe (especially Germany) he has still got lots of fans. [[Innumerable]] will say that this is a bad movie, and it is: it has no plot, it's full of cliches, Michael [[hailing]] himself constantly.

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

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

However, as I'm an MJ fan, I should warn all Michael Jackson haters out there: DON'T watch this movie, you'd only make your hate increase... --------------------------------------------- Result 191 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I spotted in the guide to films list for the Santa Barbara Film [[Festival]], where I went when I was in Hollywood, that this film was in screening. Basically there is an election for the new chairman of the Hong Kong Triads Wo Sing Society coming up, so you can imagine how much violence that is going to occur during this. The struggle is between "candidates" Lam Lok (Simon Yam) and Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai) for control of the oldest and most [[powerful]] Triad parts of the society. [[Also]] [[starring]] Louis Koo as Jimmy Lee, Nick [[Cheung]] as Jet, Cheung Siu Fai as Mr. So, Lam Suet as Big Head and Lam Ka Tung as Kun. There are some good realistic corruption themes and moments, just about enough action, apart from maybe when the cops get involved, but a sequel followed, so it's a pretty [[worthwhile]] crime drama thriller. [[Very]] good! I spotted in the guide to films list for the Santa Barbara Film [[Feast]], where I went when I was in Hollywood, that this film was in screening. Basically there is an election for the new chairman of the Hong Kong Triads Wo Sing Society coming up, so you can imagine how much violence that is going to occur during this. The struggle is between "candidates" Lam Lok (Simon Yam) and Big D (Tony Leung Ka Fai) for control of the oldest and most [[mighty]] Triad parts of the society. [[Moreover]] [[championships]] Louis Koo as Jimmy Lee, Nick [[Jang]] as Jet, Cheung Siu Fai as Mr. So, Lam Suet as Big Head and Lam Ka Tung as Kun. There are some good realistic corruption themes and moments, just about enough action, apart from maybe when the cops get involved, but a sequel followed, so it's a pretty [[advantageous]] crime drama thriller. [[Eminently]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I just saw this movie for the first time ever and I liked it. Her [[dancing]] was very [[entertaining]]. I read somewhere that she [[got]] the [[part]] in this movie because she knew how to [[dance]]. The scenery was [[great]] too. [[Yvonne]] is such a [[talented]] [[woman]] and [[beautiful]]. WE [[laughed]] at the silly [[kissing]] scenes, but that is what is [[great]] about [[old]] [[movies]]! I [[grew]] up with her on The Munsters and I am enjoying watching her in her earlier movies. They may not all be the best out there but still worth watching to see her [[act]] and [[sing]]. I am slowly [[purchasing]] all her [[movies]] and [[watching]] them as I [[receive]] them. I have a [[large]] [[collection]] of her [[memorabilia]]. I just saw this movie for the first time ever and I liked it. Her [[dancer]] was very [[amusing]]. I read somewhere that she [[gets]] the [[party]] in this movie because she knew how to [[dances]]. The scenery was [[fabulous]] too. [[Avon]] is such a [[gifted]] [[girls]] and [[wonderful]]. WE [[laugh]] at the silly [[hugging]] scenes, but that is what is [[huge]] about [[archaic]] [[filmmaking]]! I [[augmentation]] up with her on The Munsters and I am enjoying watching her in her earlier movies. They may not all be the best out there but still worth watching to see her [[law]] and [[sung]]. I am slowly [[buying]] all her [[filmmaking]] and [[staring]] them as I [[recieve]] them. I have a [[gargantuan]] [[collate]] of her [[recollections]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Also known as "Stairway to Heaven" in the US. During WWII British Peter Carter's (David Niven) plane is shot down in combat but he survives. He meets and falls in love with lovely June (Kim Hunter). But it seems a mistake was made in Heaven--he should have died! A French spirit comes to get him but he refuses. He is soon to plead his case in front of a Heavenly Tribunal that he should be allowed to live.

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

Sounds ridiculous but this is actually an [[unimaginable]] film. The script is good with the actors playing the roles completely straight-faced and it's beautifully directed--the scenes on Earth are in breath-taking Technicolor (I've never seen such beautiful blue skies) and the scenes in Heaven are in black and white! Niven is a little stiff at times but Hunter is just great (and very beautiful) and Roger Livesey is superb as a doctor trying to help Niven. The imagery throughout is amazing (especially the staircase and during the final trial sequence) and the special effects are truly great (considering the age of the film). There's also a very strange sequence when Niven runs into a totally nude young boy herding sheep! This is an absolutely beautiful, thought provoking film--highly recommended. This remains unknown in the US which is a shame. --------------------------------------------- Result 194 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] These [[reviews]] that [[claim]] this [[movie]] is so [[bad]] its good are going [[way]] overboard with that one. This [[movie]] does not have the guilty [[pleasure]] badness that [[Leonard]] [[Part]] 6, [[Battlefield]] [[Earth]] and Gigli had. Those movies were [[entertaining]] in their awfulness but this pile of dinosaur [[dung]] is so bad its painful. I haven't been in this much pain [[watching]] a [[bad]] movie since I watched Baby Geniuses and Superbabies. Before I start the review [[let]] me tell you the story. [[Theodore]] Rex is a $35 million dollar bust The New Line Cinema refused to put in [[theaters]]. They cut the losses sending it straight to video making it the most expensive straight-to-video movie in decades. Whoopi caved in to be in this disaster after a huge paycheck.

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

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

Don't let anybody tell you this monstrosity is [[bad]] enough to be enjoyable. I didn't see that when I watched this movie. All I saw was a train wreck that was written by people that must have had some sick admiration for movie Howard The Duck. The humor is on that level and Theodore Rex looks like the inbred cousin of Barney. Utterly painful from start to finish. These [[scrutiny]] that [[grievance]] this [[cinematographic]] is so [[horrid]] its good are going [[paths]] overboard with that one. This [[cinematography]] does not have the guilty [[glee]] badness that [[Leonardo]] [[Portions]] 6, [[Battleground]] [[Terrestrial]] and Gigli had. Those movies were [[droll]] in their awfulness but this pile of dinosaur [[excrement]] is so bad its painful. I haven't been in this much pain [[staring]] a [[amiss]] movie since I watched Baby Geniuses and Superbabies. Before I start the review [[leaving]] me tell you the story. [[Theodor]] Rex is a $35 million dollar bust The New Line Cinema refused to put in [[theatre]]. They cut the losses sending it straight to video making it the most expensive straight-to-video movie in decades. Whoopi caved in to be in this disaster after a huge paycheck.

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

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

Don't let anybody tell you this monstrosity is [[mala]] enough to be enjoyable. I didn't see that when I watched this movie. All I saw was a train wreck that was written by people that must have had some sick admiration for movie Howard The Duck. The humor is on that level and Theodore Rex looks like the inbred cousin of Barney. Utterly painful from start to finish. --------------------------------------------- Result 195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This was really a very [[bad]] [[movie]]. I am a [[huge]] [[fan]] of Italian [[Horror]], Argento, [[Mario]] Bava, Fulci and [[yes]], even our good [[friend]] here Lamberto [[sometimes]] comes out with a good one. I [[found]] the [[first]] two 'Demons' [[films]] to be [[highly]] [[entertaining]] - they were so bad they were [[great]] but this one is just so [[bad]] that it is [[really]], [[really]] [[bad]]. It is [[intensely]] boring, the [[story]] never goes [[anywhere]] and I [[hated]] the [[characters]] - the [[wife]] [[slapping]] husband and whiny cry-baby [[pain]] in the *** wife [[drove]] me [[mad]], there was [[nowhere]] near enough of the [[story]] [[devoted]] to the Ogre who was [[probably]] the [[best]] actor in the [[whole]] [[film]]. I [[turned]] it off about three quarters of the [[way]] through because I was very, very [[BORED]]! Don't [[bother]]. This was really a very [[inclement]] [[kino]]. I am a [[overwhelming]] [[ventilator]] of Italian [[Terror]], Argento, [[Maria]] Bava, Fulci and [[yep]], even our good [[buddies]] here Lamberto [[occasionally]] comes out with a good one. I [[finds]] the [[fiirst]] two 'Demons' [[film]] to be [[immeasurably]] [[amusing]] - they were so bad they were [[large]] but this one is just so [[horrid]] that it is [[truly]], [[truly]] [[inclement]]. It is [[densely]] boring, the [[history]] never goes [[wherever]] and I [[hate]] the [[nature]] - the [[women]] [[slapped]] husband and whiny cry-baby [[painless]] in the *** wife [[pushed]] me [[pissed]], there was [[anywhere]] near enough of the [[conte]] [[dedicated]] to the Ogre who was [[arguably]] the [[finest]] actor in the [[total]] [[films]]. I [[revolved]] it off about three quarters of the [[routing]] through because I was very, very [[DRILLED]]! Don't [[annoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[While]] the 3-D animation (the [[highlight]] of the [[show]]) did it's [[job]] well, most other [[elements]] [[fell]] flat. It was as [[though]] the [[filmmakers]] thought "well, it's gonna be 3-D so we don't have to [[work]] that [[hard]] on the plot or [[character]] [[development]]." And the [[fact]] that it's a children's [[movie]] is [[absolutely]] no excuse. The public is drawn to three dimensional characters (Shrek, Nemo's [[Dad]]) just as much as they are [[drawn]] to three dimensional [[graphics]]. The only dimension any of the main characters [[showed]] was two dimensional [[Scooter]] who [[twists]] the plot from [[time]] to [[time]] with his compulsion to [[eat]] everything in sight.

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

???!!!??? Did you just wanna tell the kids the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus don't exist while you're at it? [[Whilst]] the 3-D animation (the [[stress]] of the [[exhibition]]) did it's [[workplace]] well, most other [[facets]] [[decreased]] flat. It was as [[albeit]] the [[cinematographers]] thought "well, it's gonna be 3-D so we don't have to [[collaborated]] that [[arduous]] on the plot or [[nature]] [[evolution]]." And the [[facto]] that it's a children's [[films]] is [[entirely]] no excuse. The public is drawn to three dimensional characters (Shrek, Nemo's [[Pop]]) just as much as they are [[lured]] to three dimensional [[graph]]. The only dimension any of the main characters [[revealed]] was two dimensional [[Sidecar]] who [[kinks]] the plot from [[times]] to [[moment]] with his compulsion to [[comer]] everything in sight.

And the absolute kicker? [[Gaston]] Aldrin's appearance at the very [[termination]] (after watching a very [[robotics]] [[toon]] [[stepping]] of the same [[historic]] [[silhouette]] for an [[hours]] and half) comes on the screen and [[wrack]] everyone's [[alright]] time by calling the film's [[primary]] characters "contaminants" and [[advertises]] that the situation put forth on screen was actually an impossibility.

???!!!??? Did you just wanna tell the kids the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus don't exist while you're at it? --------------------------------------------- Result 197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[Horror]] [[Channel]] plays [[nothing]] but erotic soft porn Gothic flicks each night from 10pm till about 4 in the morning, but their 'scare' factor is very limited, if one exists at all. In fact I am sure I will find a multi-million pound lottery win more scary than anything this channel has to offer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No word of a lie, this film [[could]] put you off [[motion]] pictures for life. The [[Terror]] [[Canal]] plays [[none]] but erotic soft porn Gothic flicks each night from 10pm till about 4 in the morning, but their 'scare' factor is very limited, if one exists at all. In fact I am sure I will find a multi-million pound lottery win more scary than anything this channel has to offer.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No word of a lie, this film [[did]] put you off [[motions]] pictures for life. --------------------------------------------- Result 198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I argued with myself whether to rent this or not. I'm [[always]] [[afraid]] of renting [[something]] I've never heard of (don't [[remember]] this being in [[theaters]]). Great cast...that's what tipped the scales. 30 [[minutes]] in, I almost [[stopped]] watching it. The [[first]] few [[minutes]] are [[fun]] to watch, but [[unbelievable]]. It only gets worse after that. The [[writers]] of this [[movie]] could do a [[little]] [[research]] on future projects if they [[want]] to make their [[movies]] [[even]] a little better. Or they could just [[try]] [[writing]] [[something]] just a [[little]] bit [[believable]]. I give it a 3....a 1 for the writing (only because there are words)and a 2 for being [[able]] to [[get]] so [[many]] good [[actors]] to [[agree]] to do this [[movie]] despite having to read the [[script]]. [[Oh]] my [[god]] this movie sucks. I argued with myself whether to rent this or not. I'm [[constantly]] [[apprehensive]] of renting [[anything]] I've never heard of (don't [[rember]] this being in [[teatro]]). Great cast...that's what tipped the scales. 30 [[mins]] in, I almost [[stops]] watching it. The [[fiirst]] few [[mins]] are [[hilarious]] to watch, but [[amazing]]. It only gets worse after that. The [[authors]] of this [[cinematography]] could do a [[scant]] [[investigate]] on future projects if they [[wantto]] to make their [[film]] [[yet]] a little better. Or they could just [[strive]] [[handwriting]] [[anything]] just a [[kiddo]] bit [[reliable]]. I give it a 3....a 1 for the writing (only because there are words)and a 2 for being [[capable]] to [[got]] so [[innumerable]] good [[protagonists]] to [[concur]] to do this [[film]] despite having to read the [[screenplay]]. [[Ah]] my [[deus]] this movie sucks. --------------------------------------------- Result 199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Of course, the story line for this movie isn't the best, but the dances are wonderful. This story line is different from other Astaire-Rogers movies in that neither one is "chasing" the other. The dancing of Fred and Ginger is what makes this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 200 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It's curious that the two stars of Meet The People were a [[pair]] of [[movie]] stars who went into the new [[medium]] of television and [[became]] even bigger [[successes]] and who both went into the production end of [[things]] and [[enjoyed]] [[tycoon]] status on the [[small]] screen. Lucille Ball however was not a major star, that would [[come]] with [[television]]. As for Dick Powell he [[desperately]] [[wanted]] to [[get]] out of doing films like [[Meet]] The People and his [[career]] [[salvation]] [[would]] be coming in his next [[film]].

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

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

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

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

Dick Powell's next film was Murder My Sweet in which he finally bid a not so fond adieu to musicals. And Lucy would have to wait for television before the world got to see what she really could do. It's curious that the two stars of Meet The People were a [[torque]] of [[kino]] stars who went into the new [[average]] of television and [[came]] even bigger [[achievement]] and who both went into the production end of [[matters]] and [[loved]] [[magnate]] status on the [[scant]] screen. Lucille Ball however was not a major star, that would [[arriving]] with [[tv]]. As for Dick Powell he [[badly]] [[wished]] to [[obtains]] out of doing films like [[Satisfy]] The People and his [[quarries]] [[salut]] [[should]] be coming in his next [[cinematography]].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I could go on and on but suffice to say that tonight, I witnessed a train wreck. I need to go wash my eyes. 1 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Holes (2003, Dir [[Andrew]] Davis)

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

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

"I learn from failure." - Stanley Yelnats III (Henry Winkler) Holes (2003, Dir [[Andrews]] Davis)

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

I never [[genuinely]] had any [[purposes]] in watching 'Holes', and i [[owes]] admit, i only [[truthfully]] watched the [[filmmaking]], because i'm such a fan of Shia LaBeouf, but even if you are not a fan of him, then it doesn't matter. 'Holes' is one of those [[Disneyland]] film that the whole family can [[enjoys]]. The story is [[loverly]] written and incorporates a [[admirable]] idea of including flashbacks to the past. These are not [[embarrassing]] and really gives a great back story. All the cast are great. The young stars act well and the [[addendum]] of Jon Voight and Sigourney Weaver are a [[pleasure]]. Shia LaBeouf shows that even at 17, he can act without any [[vulnerabilities]]. This is one [[Disneyland]] film, you [[categorically]] would [[enjoys]] as a family.

"I learn from failure." - Stanley Yelnats III (Henry Winkler) --------------------------------------------- Result 203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] If I have to give this movie a score on a linear scale, then I have to give it a low score 3/10.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I kept thinking "I could make a movie like this with my home video camera" throughout the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I have been known to [[fall]] asleep during [[films]], but this is [[usually]] due to a combination of things including, really tired, being warm and comfortable on the sette and having just eaten a lot. However on this occasion I fell [[asleep]] because the film was rubbish. The plot development was constant. Constantly slow and boring. Things seemed to happen, but with no explanation of what was causing them or why. I admit, I may have missed part of the film, but i watched the majority of it and everything just seemed to happen of its own accord without any [[real]] concern for [[anything]] else. I [[cant]] recommend this film at all. I have been known to [[slumps]] asleep during [[cinematography]], but this is [[commonly]] due to a combination of things including, really tired, being warm and comfortable on the sette and having just eaten a lot. However on this occasion I fell [[slumber]] because the film was rubbish. The plot development was constant. Constantly slow and boring. Things seemed to happen, but with no explanation of what was causing them or why. I admit, I may have missed part of the film, but i watched the majority of it and everything just seemed to happen of its own accord without any [[actual]] concern for [[nothing]] else. I [[becuase]] recommend this film at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If this [[series]] [[supposed]] to be an [[improvement]] over Batman - The [[Animated]] [[Series]], I, for one, think it failed terribly. The character drawing is [[lousy]]... (Catwoman, for instance, looks [[awful]]...) But what [[really]] [[annoyed]] me is that it made Batman look [[like]] a sort of [[wimp]] who just can't take care of himself in a battle, without the help of two, even three sidekicks. I [[mean]], he's Batman, for God's sake! I know the comic [[books]], I know that Nightwing and Batgirl are [[supposed]] to be Batman's allies, besides Robin, but still... making Batman say that he needs help from them... What, he can't handle a few punches? In BTAS, he could face a dozen adversaries without any problem... He's getting old? Come on...

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

Batman - The Animated Series made history, with its animation, its stories and its characters... That really was a legend of Batman. The New Adventures series turned the legend into just another Batman flick. If this [[serials]] [[suspected]] to be an [[improves]] over Batman - The [[Animate]] [[Serials]], I, for one, think it failed terribly. The character drawing is [[crummy]]... (Catwoman, for instance, looks [[horrendous]]...) But what [[truthfully]] [[irritable]] me is that it made Batman look [[iike]] a sort of [[doormat]] who just can't take care of himself in a battle, without the help of two, even three sidekicks. I [[meaning]], he's Batman, for God's sake! I know the comic [[ledger]], I know that Nightwing and Batgirl are [[presumed]] to be Batman's allies, besides Robin, but still... making Batman say that he needs help from them... What, he can't handle a few punches? In BTAS, he could face a dozen adversaries without any problem... He's getting old? Come on...

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

Batman - The Animated Series made history, with its animation, its stories and its characters... That really was a legend of Batman. The New Adventures series turned the legend into just another Batman flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Brazilian films often get more positive appraisals than they actually deserve. Rather incredibly, Contra Todos (Against Everybody) (original title, which the producers discarded: God Against Everybody) [[got]] very low GPA (grade point average) in this website. It seems to be bluntly [[rejected]] by female spectators at large. Actually, it is not so [[brutal]]. I mean as far as graphical violence is concerned. Its brutality is intrinsic as it portrays would-be lumpens, I mean underdog citizens who in fact possess high-tech equipment, who coldly perform murder orders in exchange of "grana graúda". Is this post-modern man? Is his/her only worry a quick, almost impersonal, ultra permissive lay, amidst over satiating meals ? The picture is probably the [[best]] Brazilian film of 2004, so far. Its shining editing style, à la Godard, its curious soundtrack counterpoints, its more than efficient overall cast and, above all, its original narration, with subtle non-chronological hidden points that only come to light in the epilogue, deserve at least an 8 mark. Brazilian films often get more positive appraisals than they actually deserve. Rather incredibly, Contra Todos (Against Everybody) (original title, which the producers discarded: God Against Everybody) [[did]] very low GPA (grade point average) in this website. It seems to be bluntly [[disbelieve]] by female spectators at large. Actually, it is not so [[ferocious]]. I mean as far as graphical violence is concerned. Its brutality is intrinsic as it portrays would-be lumpens, I mean underdog citizens who in fact possess high-tech equipment, who coldly perform murder orders in exchange of "grana graúda". Is this post-modern man? Is his/her only worry a quick, almost impersonal, ultra permissive lay, amidst over satiating meals ? The picture is probably the [[optimum]] Brazilian film of 2004, so far. Its shining editing style, à la Godard, its curious soundtrack counterpoints, its more than efficient overall cast and, above all, its original narration, with subtle non-chronological hidden points that only come to light in the epilogue, deserve at least an 8 mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Okay, I know I shouldn't like this movie but I do. From Pat Morita's loveable interpretation of a Japanese stereotype to Jay Leno's annoying yell, I laughed [[throughout]] this [[movie]].As long as you take into account that this is not the best movie in the world, it's a [[good]] mvie.

My favorite part is Morita talking to his boss in Tokyo with the drinking a close second. Okay, I know I shouldn't like this movie but I do. From Pat Morita's loveable interpretation of a Japanese stereotype to Jay Leno's annoying yell, I laughed [[around]] this [[filmmaking]].As long as you take into account that this is not the best movie in the world, it's a [[alright]] mvie.

My favorite part is Morita talking to his boss in Tokyo with the drinking a close second. --------------------------------------------- Result 208 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] fact, Marc Blitzstein's off-Broadway adaptation of "Threepenny" was not so "bowdlerised" as is generally believed.

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

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

([[At]] one time, MGM [[also]] [[offered]] a 2-LP set of the *entire* play, doubtless as heavily censored.) [[Throughout]] fact, Marc Blitzstein's off-Broadway adaptation of "Threepenny" was not so "bowdlerised" as is generally believed.

(I have a special interest in "Threepenny"; my [[pope]] was part of the first full production in the [[USA]]; U of Illlinois [[Theatres]] Guild did it [[throughout]] the [[terminate]] of WW2. HJitler had been so nearly successful in [[repressing]] the play that they had to reconstruct the [[hyphen]] and score from recordings in two [[dissimilar]] languages {[[nor]] English}, a German prompter's [[hyphen]] and [[akin]] sources.) Blitzstein's adaptation -- not a "translation" -- which had the full [[approbation]] of Lotte Lenya -- was a [[lots]] closer to the original than [[often]] [[felt]].

The [[difficulty]] is that the version [[thereon]] that most people know is the MGM cast recording (recently available on Polygram on CD)(which [[encompasses]] Beatrice [[Arturo]] {as Lucy, the "[[overwhelming]] complete girl", and can't i [[consults]] her hands on [[hip]] and shoulders [[tossed]] back on that line -- Bea was a [[grands]] babe in the 50's}, Paul Dooley and [[Jon]] Astin) was heavily censored by Mike Curb, [[leader]] of MGM Records -- i mean, 17 (i [[believe]] it was) "[[Damn]]"s got [[chopped]] to just "[[jesus]]".

([[During]] one time, MGM [[additionally]] [[offers]] a 2-LP set of the *entire* play, doubtless as heavily censored.) --------------------------------------------- Result 209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[opening]] scenes move as fluidly as frozen velveeta. The [[attempt]] at dramatic dialogue only makes me wish I had better control of the fast [[forward]] control. Vampires are usually portrayed as sexy and intelligent or mangy disgusting creatures. This vampire tries to seduce his prey by imitating a lost puppy. I usually tally a body count, so there was a cat (which doesn't count) a bum, a girl who fell out of the sky with a sword in her (whatever that was about) and then the plot. Foley [[artists]] are respected for using celery to create the [[sound]] of a broken arm, but using the sound of biting into an apple for a vampire biting a victim is just plain silly. I liked Warlock, but this movie just stunk so bad that we turned it off, and it was so forgettable we rented it a year [[later]] only to [[turn]] it off again. The [[initiation]] scenes move as fluidly as frozen velveeta. The [[strives]] at dramatic dialogue only makes me wish I had better control of the fast [[forwards]] control. Vampires are usually portrayed as sexy and intelligent or mangy disgusting creatures. This vampire tries to seduce his prey by imitating a lost puppy. I usually tally a body count, so there was a cat (which doesn't count) a bum, a girl who fell out of the sky with a sword in her (whatever that was about) and then the plot. Foley [[painters]] are respected for using celery to create the [[sounds]] of a broken arm, but using the sound of biting into an apple for a vampire biting a victim is just plain silly. I liked Warlock, but this movie just stunk so bad that we turned it off, and it was so forgettable we rented it a year [[then]] only to [[turning]] it off again. --------------------------------------------- Result 210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This movie is a great [[example]] of how [[even]] some very [[funny]] jokes can go terribly wrong. i really expected at [[least]] something from this movie after seeing the add which was funny as hell but the movie wasn't half as good.

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

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

p.s the only [[saving]] [[grace]] of this [[film]] is mahesh manjrekar and the funny chappu bhai This movie is a great [[instances]] of how [[yet]] some very [[fun]] jokes can go terribly wrong. i really expected at [[fewer]] something from this movie after seeing the add which was funny as hell but the movie wasn't half as good.

The weird part is that the jokes are [[genuinely]] funny, the spoofs of the [[smoke]] [[prohibitions]], [[Jojo]] Bole... [[cetera]]. are genuinely good [[gags]] but i don't know whom to [[guilt]] this movie [[bust]] on.

The prime [[nominees]] [[maggio]] be:- 1) The hammers ( [[protagonists]]) and hammeresses ([[actors]]) and not [[yet]] the [[hilarious]] [[kinds]] 2) The [[headmaster]] 3)The [[pal]] who cast the [[protagonists]] and/or the [[headmaster]] Anyway if you are really [[truthfully]] bored and i [[imply]] [[genuinely]] [[seeing]] this [[cinematography]], or [[elsewhere]] [[got]] a [[copier]] of each and [[all]] [[advertisement]] or teaser of this [[films]] and laugh your [[tush]] of because those will be far funnier than the [[films]].

p.s the only [[saved]] [[gracia]] of this [[kino]] is mahesh manjrekar and the funny chappu bhai --------------------------------------------- Result 211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The film is almost [[laughable]] with Debbie Reynolds and Shelley Winters teaming up as the mothers of convicted murderers. With the horrible notoriety after the trial, the two women team up and leave N.Y. for California in order to open and song and dance studio for Shirley Temple-like girls.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The ending is of the macabre and who can forget Winters at the piano banging away with that totally insane look? --------------------------------------------- Result 212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[like]] this presentation - I have read Bleak House and I know it is so difficult to present the entire book as it should be, and even others like Little Dorrit - I have to admit they did a very good [[show]] with the staged Nicholas Nickelby. I love Diana Rigg and I could [[see]] the [[pain]] of Lady Dedlock, [[even]] through the expected arrogance of the aristocracy. I am sorry, I think she is the [[best]] Lady Dedlock... I am not sure who could have made a better Jarndyce, but I am OK with Mr. Elliott. It is not [[easy]] to present these long Dickens' books - Oliver Twist would be easier - this is a long, and if you don't care for all the legal situations can be dreary or boring. I think this [[presentation]] is entertaining enough not to be boring. I just LOVED Mr. Smallweed - it can be entertaining. There is always a child - Jo will break your heart here... I think we should be given a chance to judge for ourselves...

I have to say I loved the show. Maybe if I read the book again, as I usually do, after seeing the movie, maybe I can be more critical. In the meantime - I think it is a good presentation. I [[iike]] this presentation - I have read Bleak House and I know it is so difficult to present the entire book as it should be, and even others like Little Dorrit - I have to admit they did a very good [[showings]] with the staged Nicholas Nickelby. I love Diana Rigg and I could [[consults]] the [[pains]] of Lady Dedlock, [[yet]] through the expected arrogance of the aristocracy. I am sorry, I think she is the [[nicest]] Lady Dedlock... I am not sure who could have made a better Jarndyce, but I am OK with Mr. Elliott. It is not [[simple]] to present these long Dickens' books - Oliver Twist would be easier - this is a long, and if you don't care for all the legal situations can be dreary or boring. I think this [[submission]] is entertaining enough not to be boring. I just LOVED Mr. Smallweed - it can be entertaining. There is always a child - Jo will break your heart here... I think we should be given a chance to judge for ourselves...

I have to say I loved the show. Maybe if I read the book again, as I usually do, after seeing the movie, maybe I can be more critical. In the meantime - I think it is a good presentation. --------------------------------------------- Result 213 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] So [[many]] educational films are nothing more than mind-numbing drudgery, saved only by the fact that "MST3K" mocks them ("Why Study Industrial Arts?" comes to mind). "Hemo the [[Magnificent]]" is actually quite well [[done]]. It's all about blood, the heart, and the circulatory system. I admit that I don't remember everything from it, but it does a good job explaining everything, keeping it [[serious]] but entertaining. I guess that you can always count on June Foray (most famously the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, she plays a deer here).

Since "Hemo the Magnificent" itself may be hard to find, probably the best place to see it is in "Gremlins": a class is watching it while a gremlin is forming. So [[multiple]] educational films are nothing more than mind-numbing drudgery, saved only by the fact that "MST3K" mocks them ("Why Study Industrial Arts?" comes to mind). "Hemo the [[Handsome]]" is actually quite well [[effected]]. It's all about blood, the heart, and the circulatory system. I admit that I don't remember everything from it, but it does a good job explaining everything, keeping it [[severe]] but entertaining. I guess that you can always count on June Foray (most famously the voice of Rocky the Squirrel, she plays a deer here).

Since "Hemo the Magnificent" itself may be hard to find, probably the best place to see it is in "Gremlins": a class is watching it while a gremlin is forming. --------------------------------------------- Result 214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]]

Human Body --- WoW.

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

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

Our days are limited...

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

Thanks and Regards.



Human Body --- WoW.

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

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

Our days are limited...

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

Thanks and Regards.

--------------------------------------------- Result 215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The tragedy of the doomed ship Titanic has inspired many books and movies. The battle between nature and technology always caught man's imagination. The latest film concerning this tragedy in the Atlantic Ocean was written and directed by famous action movie filmmaker James Cameron. The story of "Titanic" involves two fictional characters (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) from different backgrounds (one is a hobo-artist, the other is an aristocrat) and how their love triumphs over societal barriers and the tragedy of a sinking ship that they happen to be on.

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

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

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

Although this film lacked artistical value in overall sense, the public could not resist a sentimental story starring Romeo (DiCaprio), and so the movie became a success. Now it is safe to say that the industry will be less hesitant to invest large amounts of money in a single motion picture, so it seems that "Titanic" did achieve something after all. The tragedy of the doomed ship Titanic has inspired many books and movies. The battle between nature and technology always caught man's imagination. The latest film concerning this tragedy in the Atlantic Ocean was written and directed by famous action movie filmmaker James Cameron. The story of "Titanic" involves two fictional characters (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) from different backgrounds (one is a hobo-artist, the other is an aristocrat) and how their love triumphs over societal barriers and the tragedy of a sinking ship that they happen to be on.

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

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

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

Although this film lacked artistical value in overall sense, the public could not resist a sentimental story starring Romeo (DiCaprio), and so the movie became a success. Now it is safe to say that the industry will be less hesitant to invest large amounts of money in a single motion picture, so it seems that "Titanic" did achieve something after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (75%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] The Wicker Man Has Done The Impossible! It replaced Cat Woman as the [[worst]] recent movie in my steel trap cinema mind. YES it's really that bad. So bad that when sitting down to write this review I thought to myself "If I had a choice to either see this movie again or to have red hot needles shoved in my eyes" I might actually go for the red hot needles.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Somewhere Uwe Boll is laughing at us all. --------------------------------------------- Result 217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] By Hook or By Crook is a [[tremendously]] innovative film from a pair of immensely smart and talented filmmakers, Harry Dodge and Silas Howard. They manage to tell an original story in a distinctive cinematic style, and it's beautifully shot by Ann T. Rosetti, and wonderfully written -- truly poetic.

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

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

The lead characters are true heroes and serve as a [[few]] [[genre]] of role model/inspiration for [[dyke]] dykes and trannies everywhere. This film has so much energy, so much [[heartbreaking]] passion and scruffy San Francisco heart to it. I can't recommend it [[unimaginably]] [[adequate]]!

The best [[dike]] buddy movie of all time! --------------------------------------------- Result 218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is just as [[good]] as the original 101 if not [[better]]. Of course, Cruella steals the [[show]] with her outrageous behaviour and outfits, and the movie was probably made because the public wanted to see more of Cruella. We see a lot more of her this time round. I also like Ioan Gruffudd as Kevin, the rather bumbling male lead. To use [[Paris]] as the climax of the movie was a clever idea. The [[movie]] is well worth [[watching]] whatever your age, provided you like animals. This is just as [[alright]] as the original 101 if not [[optimum]]. Of course, Cruella steals the [[shows]] with her outrageous behaviour and outfits, and the movie was probably made because the public wanted to see more of Cruella. We see a lot more of her this time round. I also like Ioan Gruffudd as Kevin, the rather bumbling male lead. To use [[Parisien]] as the climax of the movie was a clever idea. The [[kino]] is well worth [[staring]] whatever your age, provided you like animals. --------------------------------------------- Result 219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I got this movie from Netflix after a [[long]] waiting time, so I was anticipating it greatly when it arrived. My worst [[fears]] were that it would be plodding, as well as... well, you know what all the screaming fan girls were babbling about? GACKTnHYDE=hawt yaoi love? That sort of thing? Dreading it. I was very, very [[pleasantly]] surprised. The [[movie]] was [[surprisingly]] watchable, [[even]] if the filming and music did make it feel like [[someone]] was going to bust out a pair of nun-chucks every two scenes, and the acting on Gackt's part was quite good. Hyde, being, um, Hyde, acted as a quasi-romantic friend/gang member character that anyone who saw him on stage would hardly be surprised by. He's one of my two major beefs with the film itself. But the rest of the cast (including the child actors in the opening scene) were very good at doing what they did- which was, mostly, get shot at and yelled at. But my second problem was very minor, having to do with the goriness. It seemed way too suspense-horror to me- like every scene where someone is shot they either slump over, really most sincerely dead, or lay there burbling for a rather long time. But Sho just... takes the shots, repeatedly, keels over, bubbles a LOT while he talks, and makes Hyde cry. All in all, if you're a fan of any of the actors or just a j-film fan, it's definitely worth a watch. I got this movie from Netflix after a [[protracted]] waiting time, so I was anticipating it greatly when it arrived. My worst [[anxieties]] were that it would be plodding, as well as... well, you know what all the screaming fan girls were babbling about? GACKTnHYDE=hawt yaoi love? That sort of thing? Dreading it. I was very, very [[cheerfully]] surprised. The [[kino]] was [[unimaginably]] watchable, [[yet]] if the filming and music did make it feel like [[person]] was going to bust out a pair of nun-chucks every two scenes, and the acting on Gackt's part was quite good. Hyde, being, um, Hyde, acted as a quasi-romantic friend/gang member character that anyone who saw him on stage would hardly be surprised by. He's one of my two major beefs with the film itself. But the rest of the cast (including the child actors in the opening scene) were very good at doing what they did- which was, mostly, get shot at and yelled at. But my second problem was very minor, having to do with the goriness. It seemed way too suspense-horror to me- like every scene where someone is shot they either slump over, really most sincerely dead, or lay there burbling for a rather long time. But Sho just... takes the shots, repeatedly, keels over, bubbles a LOT while he talks, and makes Hyde cry. All in all, if you're a fan of any of the actors or just a j-film fan, it's definitely worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 220 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] An [[excellent]] [[example]] of "cowboy noir", as it's been [[called]], in which unemployed [[Michael]] ([[Nicolas]] Cage) loses out on a job because he insists on being honest (he's got a bum leg). With really nothing else he can do, he decides that for once he's going to lie. When he walks into a bar, and the owner Wayne (the late, great J.T. Walsh) mistakes him for a hit-man whom Wayne has hired to do in his sexy young wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle in [[fine]] [[form]]), [[Michael]] plays along and accepts Waynes' money. *Then* he goes to Suzanne and informs her of her husbands' intentions, and accepts *her* money to get rid of Wayne! If that didn't complicate things enough, the real hit-man, "Lyle from Dallas" (Dennis Hopper, in a perfect role for him) shows up and Michael is in even more trouble than before.

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

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

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

8/10 An [[sumptuous]] [[instances]] of "cowboy noir", as it's been [[telephoned]], in which unemployed [[Micheal]] ([[Nicola]] Cage) loses out on a job because he insists on being honest (he's got a bum leg). With really nothing else he can do, he decides that for once he's going to lie. When he walks into a bar, and the owner Wayne (the late, great J.T. Walsh) mistakes him for a hit-man whom Wayne has hired to do in his sexy young wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle in [[fined]] [[shape]]), [[Michele]] plays along and accepts Waynes' money. *Then* he goes to Suzanne and informs her of her husbands' intentions, and accepts *her* money to get rid of Wayne! If that didn't complicate things enough, the real hit-man, "Lyle from Dallas" (Dennis Hopper, in a perfect role for him) shows up and Michael is in even more trouble than before.

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

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

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

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 221 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In a summer that also boasted such repugnant stinkers as Snakes on a Plane and The Da Vinci Code, that's a pretty bold [[statement]]. But I stand by it nonetheless. Superman Returns, like King Kong 6 [[months]] before it, is overlong, hyper-indulgent and with CGI up to the eyeballs. My [[God]], this stuff is doing my [[head]] in.

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

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

Every year films like this get bigger and more bombastic. Pretty soon we'll have $300 million films. Studios need to realise that maybe they should start looking down instead of looking up. For all the money that Warner spent on this pile of crap, for all the resources that this movie cost to make...was it worth it? In my opinion, certainly not! This garbage has put me of Superman for life! In a summer that also boasted such repugnant stinkers as Snakes on a Plane and The Da Vinci Code, that's a pretty bold [[statements]]. But I stand by it nonetheless. Superman Returns, like King Kong 6 [[mois]] before it, is overlong, hyper-indulgent and with CGI up to the eyeballs. My [[Goodness]], this stuff is doing my [[leader]] in.

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

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

Every year films like this get bigger and more bombastic. Pretty soon we'll have $300 million films. Studios need to realise that maybe they should start looking down instead of looking up. For all the money that Warner spent on this pile of crap, for all the resources that this movie cost to make...was it worth it? In my opinion, certainly not! This garbage has put me of Superman for life! --------------------------------------------- Result 222 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] ... so what's in those [[missing]] 10 minutes that were so [[horrible]] they had to [[cut]] them out from the original film? We were three [[years]] into the film production code... [[Barbara]] Stanwyck had starred in the [[original]] [[play]], but here, [[Carole]] Lombard plays Maggie King. Co star Fred MacMurray is probably [[best]] known for "Double Indemnity", with Stanwyck, as well as his hit TV show "My Three Sons". [[Keep]] an eye out for a [[young]] Dorothy Lamour (Bob Hope movies) and the too-fabulous Franklin Pangborn, who spiced up just about every film put on tape. Of course, he works in the beauty salon on the ship! Add the sublime Charles Butterworth and Anthony Quinn. [[Good]] timing and clever banter at the [[beginning]]. Maggie's buddy Ella is played by Jean Dixon, who was the best friend in "Holiday" and "My Man Godfrey". In "Swing High", Maggie the tourist meets a soldier who is leaving the army. Maggie misses her boat when it leaves port and gets tangled up with the soldier. The dashing 20-something Quinn has a small scene at the local bar in Panama where Johnson (MacMurray) has been playing the trumpet. Maggie, Harry (Butterworth), and Skid band together and try to figure out how to get back to the States. Some good [[singing]] by Lamour. [[Good]] (but [[brief]]) acting performance by Cecil Cunningham as "[[Murph]]", the wise, helpful owner of the local saloon in Panama. While others have lamented at how bad it is, it wasn't so awful, and is even a little exotic, with the fake Central America locale setting for the first half of the film. ... so what's in those [[gone]] 10 minutes that were so [[abominable]] they had to [[chopping]] them out from the original film? We were three [[ages]] into the film production code... [[Barbarian]] Stanwyck had starred in the [[initial]] [[gaming]], but here, [[Carol]] Lombard plays Maggie King. Co star Fred MacMurray is probably [[better]] known for "Double Indemnity", with Stanwyck, as well as his hit TV show "My Three Sons". [[Retain]] an eye out for a [[youthful]] Dorothy Lamour (Bob Hope movies) and the too-fabulous Franklin Pangborn, who spiced up just about every film put on tape. Of course, he works in the beauty salon on the ship! Add the sublime Charles Butterworth and Anthony Quinn. [[Alright]] timing and clever banter at the [[launching]]. Maggie's buddy Ella is played by Jean Dixon, who was the best friend in "Holiday" and "My Man Godfrey". In "Swing High", Maggie the tourist meets a soldier who is leaving the army. Maggie misses her boat when it leaves port and gets tangled up with the soldier. The dashing 20-something Quinn has a small scene at the local bar in Panama where Johnson (MacMurray) has been playing the trumpet. Maggie, Harry (Butterworth), and Skid band together and try to figure out how to get back to the States. Some good [[singer]] by Lamour. [[Buena]] (but [[succinct]]) acting performance by Cecil Cunningham as "[[Murphy]]", the wise, helpful owner of the local saloon in Panama. While others have lamented at how bad it is, it wasn't so awful, and is even a little exotic, with the fake Central America locale setting for the first half of the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 223 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I'm a [[big]] [[fan]] of [[Pacino]] movies. He's one of, if not the best, actors of this genre. [[However]], this movie could've been a whole lot better even though it had a poor cast. All they had to do was tell the story of Carlito Brigante up until he went to jail. Instead it seemed like this was just one of many [[stories]] that could be told of Carlito. All or even some of the questions about his past that we wondered about in the original could've been answered. As far as I'm concerned, thats the only way you can make this movie. Instead we get this prequel that has almost NONE of the original characters in it, a character that plays a different part from the original (horrible move), and a totally different love interest for Carlito. Don't even get me started with Puffy. No way can I take that cat seriously as a gangsta after watching him dance in all his artists videos. Evertytime that dude opened his mouth I was waiting for him to start dancing. He made me laugh if anything. Mario Van Peeples surprised me with his role. I thought he was gonna give a lackluster performance due to his recent history. He did rather well. He was probably the most "believable" out of the entire cast in my opinion. Jay Hernandez did his best but doesn't have the skills right now in his career to take on this role. I appreciated his energy and his efforts though. Hard to follow up Pacino. The only way you could even have a clue about what kind of person Carlito was, is to watch the original. Otherwise, Carlito looks like a cold blooded killer in one scene then a spineless wimp in another. He was one of the baddest gangstas of his time but you would only see flashes of that in this movie. Maybe this is a pitiful way for Hollywood to try and make a 2nd prequel to cash in on this failure. Wouldn't surprise me.

Overall, in my opinion, this movie fell well short or what it could've been. The only reason I gave it a 3 was because I laughed a lot and Mario Van Peeples earned some respect back with me. A serious director should've taken this movie and actually put time into the story and turned it into an actual prequel. I'm extremely disappointed that this movie wasn't taken seriously. They would've been better off making this into a mini-series on HBO and actually telling the story like the original suggests. At the end of the movie, they had the nerve to suggest that Carlito would have to come back to the city. HEEELLLLO....thats the part everyone wants to see!!! Then again, this is all just my opinion. I can't tell you how to waste your money. I'm a [[immense]] [[breather]] of [[Deniro]] movies. He's one of, if not the best, actors of this genre. [[Conversely]], this movie could've been a whole lot better even though it had a poor cast. All they had to do was tell the story of Carlito Brigante up until he went to jail. Instead it seemed like this was just one of many [[tale]] that could be told of Carlito. All or even some of the questions about his past that we wondered about in the original could've been answered. As far as I'm concerned, thats the only way you can make this movie. Instead we get this prequel that has almost NONE of the original characters in it, a character that plays a different part from the original (horrible move), and a totally different love interest for Carlito. Don't even get me started with Puffy. No way can I take that cat seriously as a gangsta after watching him dance in all his artists videos. Evertytime that dude opened his mouth I was waiting for him to start dancing. He made me laugh if anything. Mario Van Peeples surprised me with his role. I thought he was gonna give a lackluster performance due to his recent history. He did rather well. He was probably the most "believable" out of the entire cast in my opinion. Jay Hernandez did his best but doesn't have the skills right now in his career to take on this role. I appreciated his energy and his efforts though. Hard to follow up Pacino. The only way you could even have a clue about what kind of person Carlito was, is to watch the original. Otherwise, Carlito looks like a cold blooded killer in one scene then a spineless wimp in another. He was one of the baddest gangstas of his time but you would only see flashes of that in this movie. Maybe this is a pitiful way for Hollywood to try and make a 2nd prequel to cash in on this failure. Wouldn't surprise me.

Overall, in my opinion, this movie fell well short or what it could've been. The only reason I gave it a 3 was because I laughed a lot and Mario Van Peeples earned some respect back with me. A serious director should've taken this movie and actually put time into the story and turned it into an actual prequel. I'm extremely disappointed that this movie wasn't taken seriously. They would've been better off making this into a mini-series on HBO and actually telling the story like the original suggests. At the end of the movie, they had the nerve to suggest that Carlito would have to come back to the city. HEEELLLLO....thats the part everyone wants to see!!! Then again, this is all just my opinion. I can't tell you how to waste your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Seven young people go to the forest looking for a bear.Soon they are all stalked and viciously murdered by a crazy Vietnam veteran."Trampa Infernal" is a pretty [[entertaining]] Mexican slasher that reminds me a lot "The Zero Boys".The film is fast-paced and there are some good death scenes like throat slashing or axe in the neck.Unfortunately there is not much [[gore]],so fans of grand-guignol will be disappointed.[[However]] if you are a fan of slasher movies give this [[rarity]] a look.Mexican horror flicks are quite obscure(I have seen only "Alucarda" and "Don't Panic"),so this should be another reason to see this enjoyable slasher.My rating:7 out of 10.Highly recommended. Seven young people go to the forest looking for a bear.Soon they are all stalked and viciously murdered by a crazy Vietnam veteran."Trampa Infernal" is a pretty [[droll]] Mexican slasher that reminds me a lot "The Zero Boys".The film is fast-paced and there are some good death scenes like throat slashing or axe in the neck.Unfortunately there is not much [[gora]],so fans of grand-guignol will be disappointed.[[Instead]] if you are a fan of slasher movies give this [[dearth]] a look.Mexican horror flicks are quite obscure(I have seen only "Alucarda" and "Don't Panic"),so this should be another reason to see this enjoyable slasher.My rating:7 out of 10.Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Wes Craven has been [[created]] a most successful killer-thriller movies of all [[time]]. After watching he's movies, you will [[find]] your [[new]] [[fears]]. People don't know, which Wes Craven's thriller [[movie]] is the best, because they all [[different]].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

And what can I say - this is the best killer-thriller movie in 21's century yet... --------------------------------------------- Result 226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I'm an admirer of Hal Hartley's films, [[especially]] 1997's "Henry Fool." "Fay Grim" is a sequel to that film, and has a similar style and sense of [[humor]]. The plot, however, is completely [[different]]. Fay Grim (played brilliantly by the [[iconic]] Parker Posey) tries to track down her missing husband's notebooks, and [[finds]] herself amid conspiracies and espionage. The supporting cast (most of the folks from the first film as well as Jeff Goldblum, Saffron Burrows, and a much-welcomed [[return]] from 90s indie-darling Elina Lowensohn) is [[excellent]] and the film has lots of surprises. The director claims this is part of a "Star Wars"-like trilogy, serving as the "Empire Strikes Back" of the series If this is true, I can't wait to see the third installment! I just hope I don't have to wait 10 more years for it. I'm an admirer of Hal Hartley's films, [[peculiarly]] 1997's "Henry Fool." "Fay Grim" is a sequel to that film, and has a similar style and sense of [[comedy]]. The plot, however, is completely [[assorted]]. Fay Grim (played brilliantly by the [[emblematic]] Parker Posey) tries to track down her missing husband's notebooks, and [[deems]] herself amid conspiracies and espionage. The supporting cast (most of the folks from the first film as well as Jeff Goldblum, Saffron Burrows, and a much-welcomed [[returnee]] from 90s indie-darling Elina Lowensohn) is [[handsome]] and the film has lots of surprises. The director claims this is part of a "Star Wars"-like trilogy, serving as the "Empire Strikes Back" of the series If this is true, I can't wait to see the third installment! I just hope I don't have to wait 10 more years for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Every once in a long while a movie will [[come]] along that will be so awful that I feel compelled to warn people. [[If]] I labor all my days and I can save but one soul from watching this movie, how great will be my joy.

Where to [[begin]] my discussion of pain. For starters, there was a musical montage every five minutes. There was no character development. Every character was a [[stereotype]]. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy foreign guy, etc. The [[script]] felt as if it were being written as the movie was being shot. The production value was so incredibly low that it felt like I was watching a junior high video presentation. Have the directors, producers, etc. ever even seen a movie before? Halestorm is getting worse and worse with every new entry. The concept for this movie sounded so funny. How could you go wrong with Gary Coleman and a handful of somewhat legitimate actors. But trust me when I say this, things went wrong, VERY WRONG. Every once in a long while a movie will [[arrive]] along that will be so awful that I feel compelled to warn people. [[Though]] I labor all my days and I can save but one soul from watching this movie, how great will be my joy.

Where to [[initiates]] my discussion of pain. For starters, there was a musical montage every five minutes. There was no character development. Every character was a [[stereotypes]]. We had swearing guy, fat guy who eats donuts, goofy foreign guy, etc. The [[hyphen]] felt as if it were being written as the movie was being shot. The production value was so incredibly low that it felt like I was watching a junior high video presentation. Have the directors, producers, etc. ever even seen a movie before? Halestorm is getting worse and worse with every new entry. The concept for this movie sounded so funny. How could you go wrong with Gary Coleman and a handful of somewhat legitimate actors. But trust me when I say this, things went wrong, VERY WRONG. --------------------------------------------- Result 228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked ! They took something from my childhood ,and raped it in an outhouse! This movie was so bad I wanted to go home and hold my "Dukes" dvds and cry in a corner. The cast was terrible ! It wasn't "The Dukes", it was Stiffler and Jackass driving a car. When was Boss Hogg evil? When was Rosco a tough guy? They never were ! Boss Hogg was greedy and Rosco was an idiot. When did Jesse smoke pot? He never did ! Now don't get me wrong,I'm very liberal and there's nothing wrong with a little chiba, but it had no place in this movie! The only thing good about this movie was the trailers before the movie and the end credits. It was a waste of money time and air. Avoid at all costs!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] [[First]] of all, the [[reason]] I'm giving this [[film]] 2 stars [[instead]] of 1 is because at [[least]] [[Peter]] Falk [[gave]] his usual [[fantastic]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[alone]] can [[get]] 10 [[stars]] for [[trying]] to [[save]] this [[otherwise]] utterly [[worthless]] [[attempt]] at [[making]] a [[movie]].

I was [[initially]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[comment]] that [[Andrew]] Stevens in this [[movie]] [[gave]] "the performance of his career." To me, it was the [[abysmal]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[ruined]] this movie, and so I was all [[prepared]] to hurl all [[sorts]] of insults at the [[person]] who [[made]] the aforementioned [[comment]]. Then I [[thought]] to myself, what [[else]] has [[Stevens]] [[done]]? So I [[checked]] and, you [[know]], that [[person]] was [[absolutely]] right. [[In]] the 17 [[years]] [[since]] this Columbo [[movie]] was [[made]], [[apparently]] [[every]] one of the 33 [[projects]] that [[Stevens]] has been in [[since]] then has been [[utter]] [[crap]], so it is [[doubtful]] that [[anybody]] has [[even]] [[seen]] the [[rest]] of his [[career]].

[[If]] you [[like]] [[Columbo]], see [[every]] other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and [[save]] the [[worst]] for [[last]]. [[Outset]] of all, the [[grounds]] I'm giving this [[movie]] 2 stars [[conversely]] of 1 is because at [[fewest]] [[Petr]] Falk [[supplied]] his usual [[magnificent]] performance as Lieutenant Columbo. He [[lonely]] can [[gets]] 10 [[celebrity]] for [[attempting]] to [[rescuing]] this [[else]] utterly [[vain]] [[seeks]] at [[doing]] a [[cinematography]].

I was [[firstly]] all fired up at reading one poster's [[commentaries]] that [[Andreu]] Stevens in this [[cinematography]] [[supplied]] "the performance of his career." To me, it was the [[terrible]] performance by Stevens that absolutely [[vandalized]] this movie, and so I was all [[ready]] to hurl all [[kinds]] of insults at the [[anybody]] who [[effected]] the aforementioned [[remarks]]. Then I [[figured]] to myself, what [[elsewhere]] has [[Stephens]] [[played]]? So I [[inspect]] and, you [[savoir]], that [[persons]] was [[downright]] right. [[Throughout]] the 17 [[olds]] [[because]] this Columbo [[cinematography]] was [[accomplished]], [[visibly]] [[all]] one of the 33 [[project]] that [[Stephens]] has been in [[because]] then has been [[unmitigated]] [[baloney]], so it is [[dubious]] that [[everybody]] has [[yet]] [[watched]] the [[repose]] of his [[quarry]].

[[Though]] you [[fond]] [[Colombo]], see [[all]] other of the 69 titles before watching this one. Do yourself a favor and [[rescue]] the [[hardest]] for [[final]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I don't understand how "2 of us" receive such a high rating... I thought that the first half dragged on and the second half [[didnt]] make [[sense]], followed by an [[unresolved]] [[climax]] which was not worth the trouble. However, I did [[like]] Jared Harris' performance of [[John]] Lennon which was worth the [[wasted]] 2 [[hours]]. I don't understand how "2 of us" receive such a high rating... I thought that the first half dragged on and the second half [[becuase]] make [[feeling]], followed by an [[unsolved]] [[orgasm]] which was not worth the trouble. However, I did [[iike]] Jared Harris' performance of [[Johannes]] Lennon which was worth the [[squandered]] 2 [[hour]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or perhaps dogs. This is a pretty [[good]] [[ensemble]] piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're curious already), and first-time director [[Bishop]] gives them their [[chance]], taking his time, letting the characters [[interact]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the return of "the big boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

For some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding film presence. And yes, with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and Richard Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" reunion party! Hint number one - read the title as "the Time of the Mad Dog," or perhaps dogs. This is a pretty [[alright]] [[whole]] piece (look at the cast and rent it - you know you're curious already), and first-time director [[Monseigneur]] gives them their [[likelihood]], taking his time, letting the characters [[interplay]] and chew the scenery as they wait - not enthusiastically - for the return of "the big boss" and whatever revenge ensues.

For some of us, the highlight is seeing Christopher Jones after his self-imposed exile from films; he remains a commanding film presence. And yes, with Christopher Jones, Larry Bishop and Richard Pryor involved, this IS the "Wild in the Streets" reunion party! --------------------------------------------- Result 232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (83%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Mark Frechette stars as [[Mark]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of killing a cop during a campus riot, and he flees all the way to the desert. He does so by stealing a small plane at the local airport, and flies it himself.

Once out flying over the desert, Mark spots a car from the air. A young woman named Daria steps out, and sees Mark circling in the plane. [[Mark]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to duck or get hit. When he lands, he becomes acquainted with Daria, who is strangely [[charmed]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for hours, Mark and Daria get naked, and make love in the sand. But with Mark evading the law, they realize that he needs to keep running. So Mark and Daria's brief tryst is quite poignant, because it doesn't get to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. Both films have a rambling, vague quality, along with complicated meanings and characters. Frechette was as reckless in person, as his character was in this film. A few years after making Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in real life. While serving his prison sentence, Mark died an ignoble death. He was killed by a 150 lb. weight, which fell on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[splendid]] cinematography, and special visual effects. The [[incredible]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a stroke of genius. Although not as ground-breaking a film as Easy Rider was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the early 70s counterculture. I [[recommend]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which showcase the upheaval, of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. Mark Frechette stars as [[Flagged]], a college radical leftist. Mark is accused of killing a cop during a campus riot, and he flees all the way to the desert. He does so by stealing a small plane at the local airport, and flies it himself.

Once out flying over the desert, Mark spots a car from the air. A young woman named Daria steps out, and sees Mark circling in the plane. [[Branded]] swoops the plane very low several times, causing Daria to duck or get hit. When he lands, he becomes acquainted with Daria, who is strangely [[seduced]] by Mark's aerial highjinks.

After engaging in soulful conversation for hours, Mark and Daria get naked, and make love in the sand. But with Mark evading the law, they realize that he needs to keep running. So Mark and Daria's brief tryst is quite poignant, because it doesn't get to develop into a full-blown romance.

Zabriski Point was the Eraserhead of the early 70s. Both films have a rambling, vague quality, along with complicated meanings and characters. Frechette was as reckless in person, as his character was in this film. A few years after making Zabriski Point, Frechette robbed a bank in real life. While serving his prison sentence, Mark died an ignoble death. He was killed by a 150 lb. weight, which fell on him when he was weightlifting.

The best thing about this movie was the [[grandiose]] cinematography, and special visual effects. The [[unimaginable]], slow-motion scenes of debris floating in the air after an explosion, were a stroke of genius. Although not as ground-breaking a film as Easy Rider was, Zabriski Point still resonated with the early 70s counterculture. I [[recommendations]] it, for those who like avant-guard films which showcase the upheaval, of the youth rebellion during the early 70s. --------------------------------------------- Result 233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] the [[Germans]] all stand out in the open and get mowed down with a machine gun. the Good [[guys]] never die, unless its for [[dramatic]] purposes. the "[[plot]]" has so many holes its [[laughable]]. (Where did the German soldiers go once they rolled the fuel tank towards the train? Erik Estrada? Please!) And the whole idea, hijacking a train? How moronic is that! The Germans KNOW where you are going to go, its not like you can leave the track and drive away! What a waste. I would rather bonk myself on the head with a ball peen hammer 10 times then have to sit through that again. I mean, seriously, it FELT like it was made in the 60s, but it was produced in 88!! 1988!! the A-Team is more believable than this horrid excuse for a movie. Only watch it if you need a good laugh. This [[movie]] is to Tele Sevalas what Green Beret was to John Wayne. the [[Germany]] all stand out in the open and get mowed down with a machine gun. the Good [[buddies]] never die, unless its for [[spectacular]] purposes. the "[[intrigue]]" has so many holes its [[nonsensical]]. (Where did the German soldiers go once they rolled the fuel tank towards the train? Erik Estrada? Please!) And the whole idea, hijacking a train? How moronic is that! The Germans KNOW where you are going to go, its not like you can leave the track and drive away! What a waste. I would rather bonk myself on the head with a ball peen hammer 10 times then have to sit through that again. I mean, seriously, it FELT like it was made in the 60s, but it was produced in 88!! 1988!! the A-Team is more believable than this horrid excuse for a movie. Only watch it if you need a good laugh. This [[films]] is to Tele Sevalas what Green Beret was to John Wayne. --------------------------------------------- Result 234 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] As far as I know, this show was never repeated on UK television after its original run in the late '60s / early '70s, and most episodes are now sadly "missing presumed wiped".

Series 6 from 1971 however still exists in its entirety, and I recently [[got]] the chance to watch it all, the best part of 4 decades on.

After rushing home from school, Freewheelers was essential viewing for me and many of my contemporaries back in those halcyon days of flared trousers, Slade and Chicory Tip. And [[watching]] it again brought a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally amusing [[fight]] scenes, plot holes wide enough to [[pilot]] a [[large]] ocean-going [[yacht]] through and the "[[frightfully]], frightfully" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a bygone (dare I [[say]] "golden") age of kids' TV [[drama]], when the [[shows]] were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't [[take]] themselves so [[seriously]]. Before they became [[obsessed]] with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's [[screenwriters]] have their [[young]] protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, [[drugs]], STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a [[modern]] [[audience]]" in these [[days]] of all-pervasive political correctness, the [[boss]] figure [[would]] be a black female, one of the [[young]] [[male]] [[heroes]] [[would]] be a [[Muslim]], the other [[would]] be a white lad confused about his [[sexuality]] and the [[girl]] [[would]] be an all-action go-getter with an [[IQ]] off the [[scale]], who'd be forever [[getting]] the [[lads]] out of [[scrapes]] and making them look [[foolish]] - in other words a [[million]] [[miles]] removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very [[much]] "of its [[time]]". But is that a [[bad]] [[thing]]? I for one don't [[think]] so. As far as I know, this show was never repeated on UK television after its original run in the late '60s / early '70s, and most episodes are now sadly "missing presumed wiped".

Series 6 from 1971 however still exists in its entirety, and I recently [[ai]] the chance to watch it all, the best part of 4 decades on.

After rushing home from school, Freewheelers was essential viewing for me and many of my contemporaries back in those halcyon days of flared trousers, Slade and Chicory Tip. And [[staring]] it again brought a nostalgic lump to the throat.

Never mind the bad / hammy acting, the unintentionally amusing [[battles]] scenes, plot holes wide enough to [[experiment]] a [[monumental]] ocean-going [[sailing]] through and the "[[hideously]], frightfully" RADA accents of the lead players.

No - forget all that. Because Freewheelers harks back to a bygone (dare I [[told]] "golden") age of kids' TV [[theater]], when the [[demonstrating]] were simply about rip-roaring fun and didn't [[taking]] themselves so [[severely]]. Before they became [[haunted]] with all the angst-laden "ishoos" that today's [[writers]] have their [[youthful]] protagonists fret over, such as relationships, pregnancy, [[pharmaceuticals]], STIs etc.

No doubt if it were "remade for a [[fashionable]] [[spectators]]" in these [[jours]] of all-pervasive political correctness, the [[chef]] figure [[should]] be a black female, one of the [[youthful]] [[men]] [[heroic]] [[ought]] be a [[Islam]], the other [[could]] be a white lad confused about his [[sexually]] and the [[daughter]] [[ought]] be an all-action go-getter with an [[QI]] off the [[scales]], who'd be forever [[obtain]] the [[guys]] out of [[scratches]] and making them look [[dumb]] - in other words a [[trillion]] [[kilometers]] removed from Wendy Padbury's deferential, ankle-spraining washer-upper.

It's a show that's very [[very]] "of its [[period]]". But is that a [[rotten]] [[stuff]]? I for one don't [[thinks]] so. --------------------------------------------- Result 235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] 1594 in Brazil, the Tupinambas Indians are friends of the Frenches and their enemies are the Tupiniquins, friends of the Portugueses. A Frenchman (Arduíno Colassanti) is captured by the Tupinambás, and in spite of his trial to convince them that he is French, they believe he is Portuguese. The Frenchman becomes their slave, and maritally lives with Seboipepe (Ana Maria Magalhães). [[Later]], he uses powder in the [[cannons]] that the Portuguese left behind to defeat the Tupiniquins in a battle. In order to celebrate the victory, the Indians decide to eat him.

"Como Era Gostoso o [[Meu]] Francês" is another [[great]] low budget movie of the great Brazilian director Nélson Pereira dos Santos. The screenplay is very original and the story is spoken in Tupi. The film is shot using natural light most of the time and is very realistic. The [[actors]] and actresses perform naked and Ana Maria Magalhães is [[magnificent]], showing a wonderful body and giving a stunning performance. The sound is produced by the Brazilian musician Zé Rodrix. This movie [[shows]] the beginning of the exploitation of my country by Europeans, focusing in the Portuguese and French at that time, trading with the Indians and exchanging combs and mirrors by our natural resources. This movie was awarded in the national festivals, such as the 1971 Brazilian Cinema Festival of Brasília (Festival de Brazília do Cinema Brasileiro) with Best Screenplay (Nelson Pereira dos Santos), Best Dialog (Nelson Pereira dos Santos and Humberto Mauro) and Best Cenograph (Régis Monteiro); Art Critics Association of São Paulo (Associação Paulista dos Críticos de Arte), with best Revelation of the Year (Ana Maria Magalhães) and some other prizes. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" ("How [[Tasty]] Was My Frenchman") [[For]] 1594 in Brazil, the Tupinambas Indians are friends of the Frenches and their enemies are the Tupiniquins, friends of the Portugueses. A Frenchman (Arduíno Colassanti) is captured by the Tupinambás, and in spite of his trial to convince them that he is French, they believe he is Portuguese. The Frenchman becomes their slave, and maritally lives with Seboipepe (Ana Maria Magalhães). [[Subsequent]], he uses powder in the [[canons]] that the Portuguese left behind to defeat the Tupiniquins in a battle. In order to celebrate the victory, the Indians decide to eat him.

"Como Era Gostoso o [[Minha]] Francês" is another [[whopping]] low budget movie of the great Brazilian director Nélson Pereira dos Santos. The screenplay is very original and the story is spoken in Tupi. The film is shot using natural light most of the time and is very realistic. The [[actresses]] and actresses perform naked and Ana Maria Magalhães is [[handsome]], showing a wonderful body and giving a stunning performance. The sound is produced by the Brazilian musician Zé Rodrix. This movie [[denotes]] the beginning of the exploitation of my country by Europeans, focusing in the Portuguese and French at that time, trading with the Indians and exchanging combs and mirrors by our natural resources. This movie was awarded in the national festivals, such as the 1971 Brazilian Cinema Festival of Brasília (Festival de Brazília do Cinema Brasileiro) with Best Screenplay (Nelson Pereira dos Santos), Best Dialog (Nelson Pereira dos Santos and Humberto Mauro) and Best Cenograph (Régis Monteiro); Art Critics Association of São Paulo (Associação Paulista dos Críticos de Arte), with best Revelation of the Year (Ana Maria Magalhães) and some other prizes. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): "Como Era Gostoso o Meu Francês" ("How [[Scented]] Was My Frenchman") --------------------------------------------- Result 236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The sects that capitalise on this film are well known for their claim to take the 'message' of the bible without any alteration or extra-biblical influence. The existence of this film is solely due to the fact that there is no such thing.

If you want to know what the born-again branch of Christianity were harping on about in the seventies just look up the word 'rapture' in a dictionary of cults and sects. It's quicker than sitting through this waste of celluloid.

Poor acting, uneven sound quality and a script that could just as easily have been written by Jack T Chick (paranoid Christian conspiracy theorist for those not familiar with the Evangelical scene). You could not really put this into the 'so bad it's good' category so its only audience are either those with a pamphlet collection looking to branch out or the extremely paranoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] she is [[little]] known today, Deanna Durbin was one of the most popular [[stars]] of the 1930s, a pretty teenager with a perky personality and a much-admired operatic singing voice. This 1937 was her first major film, and it [[proved]] a box-office [[bonanza]] for beleaguered Universal Studios.

THREE SMART GIRLS concerns three daughters of a divorced couple who rush to their long-unseen father when their still-faithful mother reveals he may soon remarry--with the firm intention of undermining his gold-digger girlfriend and returning him to their mother. Although the story is slight, the script is witty and the expert cast plays it with a neat screwball touch. Durbin has a pleasing voice and appealing personality, and such enjoyable character actors as Charles Winninger, Alice Brady, Lucile Watson, and Mischa Auer round out the cast. A an ultra-light amusement for fans of 1930s film.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer [[While]] she is [[scant]] known today, Deanna Durbin was one of the most popular [[celebrity]] of the 1930s, a pretty teenager with a perky personality and a much-admired operatic singing voice. This 1937 was her first major film, and it [[demonstrated]] a box-office [[windfall]] for beleaguered Universal Studios.

THREE SMART GIRLS concerns three daughters of a divorced couple who rush to their long-unseen father when their still-faithful mother reveals he may soon remarry--with the firm intention of undermining his gold-digger girlfriend and returning him to their mother. Although the story is slight, the script is witty and the expert cast plays it with a neat screwball touch. Durbin has a pleasing voice and appealing personality, and such enjoyable character actors as Charles Winninger, Alice Brady, Lucile Watson, and Mischa Auer round out the cast. A an ultra-light amusement for fans of 1930s film.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film about secret government mind experiments and the corrupt use of the citizenry by secretive and vile shadowy figures had the potential for being a really interesting movie. But for me, it failed. I won't elaborate much on the rather confusing plot line, but if you are looking for a detailed explanation, the comment by user "reluctantpopstar" gives a good description of it.

But it didn't work for me. I found it slow, which would be okay but for the fact that it seemed to go nowhere. The viewer is left in the dark about too many things to really be able to get a handle on this movie-in some films, one can argue that the filmmakers intended to provoke thought and left things ambiguous for that reason. I don't think that this is the case here.

As for the frequent long shots of two buildings that have been frequently mentioned by other users...I see that they do have a point-they give the viewer time to get another drink without missing any of the "action". And I suspect many viewers would welcome the opportunity to have several beverages on board to get through this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is one of the most boring horror films I have ever seen, as it's [[absolutely]] [[god]] [[awful]], John Carradine has very [[limited]] screen [[time]]. All the [[characters]] are boring, and the story is terrible, plus I could see the two twists at the end coming miles away!. The great setting and the creepy [[house]] definitely would have helped if it wasn't so damn boring, and there isn't one character to [[root]] for [[either]], plus I hope it makes it's [[way]] to the bottom 100, because it deserves to be there in my opinion. When John Carradine finally shows up at the end, it's a pretty good scene but it's already way too late, and the only other screen time he had was in flashbacks, plus the only really gory scene in the movie is when a character gets his face messed up by Bee's, as it was rather gory. I got this in a DVD Horror set called Back From The Grave and everyone really overacts in my opinion, plus it's lucky this was included in a set I bought otherwise I would have chucked this out the window!. This is one of the most [[boring]] [[Horror]] [[films]] I have ever seen, as It's [[absolutely]] god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time, and I say avoid it like the plague!, you don't want to go through the torture. The Direction is absolutely terrible!. Carl Monson does an absolutely [[terrible]]! job here, making every thing look cheap, wasting his potential on making creepy atmosphere and just [[keeping]] the film at an [[incredibly]] [[dull]] pace. The Acting is just as [[bad]]. John Carradine is good in his scene, but other then that he's hardly in the film other then flashback scenes. (Carradine Ruled!!). Merry [[Anders]] overacts here terribly as Laura, as she didn't convince me at all. Ivy Bethune is OK, and somewhat creepy, but also overacted, she did have a creepy smile at the end though. Rest of the cast, I didn't pay enough attention too, as I had a lot of trouble getting through it, but they were all really bad. Overall please avoid this,It's not worth the agony!. BOMB out of 5 This is one of the most boring horror films I have ever seen, as it's [[totally]] [[lord]] [[scary]], John Carradine has very [[limits]] screen [[moment]]. All the [[attribute]] are boring, and the story is terrible, plus I could see the two twists at the end coming miles away!. The great setting and the creepy [[domicile]] definitely would have helped if it wasn't so damn boring, and there isn't one character to [[racine]] for [[neither]], plus I hope it makes it's [[paths]] to the bottom 100, because it deserves to be there in my opinion. When John Carradine finally shows up at the end, it's a pretty good scene but it's already way too late, and the only other screen time he had was in flashbacks, plus the only really gory scene in the movie is when a character gets his face messed up by Bee's, as it was rather gory. I got this in a DVD Horror set called Back From The Grave and everyone really overacts in my opinion, plus it's lucky this was included in a set I bought otherwise I would have chucked this out the window!. This is one of the most [[dreary]] [[Terror]] [[cinematography]] I have ever seen, as It's [[wholly]] god awful, John Carradine has very limited screen time, and I say avoid it like the plague!, you don't want to go through the torture. The Direction is absolutely terrible!. Carl Monson does an absolutely [[horrendous]]! job here, making every thing look cheap, wasting his potential on making creepy atmosphere and just [[maintain]] the film at an [[exceptionally]] [[tiresome]] pace. The Acting is just as [[wicked]]. John Carradine is good in his scene, but other then that he's hardly in the film other then flashback scenes. (Carradine Ruled!!). Merry [[Andreas]] overacts here terribly as Laura, as she didn't convince me at all. Ivy Bethune is OK, and somewhat creepy, but also overacted, she did have a creepy smile at the end though. Rest of the cast, I didn't pay enough attention too, as I had a lot of trouble getting through it, but they were all really bad. Overall please avoid this,It's not worth the agony!. BOMB out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Though I've [[yet]] to review the [[movie]] in about two [[years]], I remember [[exactly]] what [[made]] my [[opinion]] [[go]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with [[mermaids]] as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. If you don't have the original director and actors handy...you're just looking to get your butt whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big issue was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same plan as her sister, the same minions (who, by the way, did not scare anyone. I had a three year old on my lap when I watched this movie, and she laughed hysterically.) She had no purpose being in there; I'd like to have seen Mom be the villain. I'm sure she would have done a better job than Little Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held none of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on Scuttle, Sebastian and Flounder. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. Though I've [[again]] to review the [[cinematography]] in about two [[ages]], I remember [[accurately]] what [[accomplished]] my [[vistas]] [[going]] as low as it did. Having loved the original Little Mermaid, and having been obsessed with [[sirens]] as a child could be, I decided I'd take the time to sit down and watch the sequel.

Disney, I've got a little message for you. If you don't have the original director and actors handy...you're just looking to get your butt whooped.

In the sequel, our story begins with a slightly older Ariel and her daughter, Melody. My first big issue was that Eric and the rest of the crew sang. Yes, I understand that Disney is big on sing-and-dance numbers, but really, that's what made Eric my favorite prince. He was calm, collected, and a genuine gentleman that knew how to have fun. And he DID. NOT. SING.

And then there's the villain. Oh, how could we forget the shivers that coursed down our spines whenever Ursula slunk onto the screen, terrifying both Ariel and audiences around the world? Unfortunately, that gene was not passed on to her seemingly useless sister, Morgana. Nothing was ever, EVER said about Morgana in the first movie; she just pops out of nowhere, trying to steal the baby. Oh, how cute. The younger sister is ticked off and instead of going after the trident, decides to kidnap a month-old baby. Gag me.

Other than being a flat character with no sense of originality in her, Morgana was just very unorthodox. The same plan as her sister, the same minions (who, by the way, did not scare anyone. I had a three year old on my lap when I watched this movie, and she laughed hysterically.) She had no purpose being in there; I'd like to have seen Mom be the villain. I'm sure she would have done a better job than Little Miss Tish over there.

King Triton held none of the respect he'd earned from me in the first movie, and don't even get me started on Scuttle, Sebastian and Flounder. Triton was a stern but loving father in the first movie, and in the second, it's almost like he's lost his will to knock fear into the hearts of his subjects. Scuttle, once a comic relief that made everyone laugh with his 'dingle-hopper' (yes, I'll admit it; I did call my fork a dingle-hopper from time to time after that). In this film, Scuttle's all but forgotten. A supporting character even in the first, he at least added something to the movie. He was rich with a flavor the others didn't have, and in the sequel, they all but stripped it from him entirely. Sebastian was still the same, but twice as worrisome as before. Disney, don't do that. Don't even try to mess with our favorite crab. Or our favorite little fat fish, who becomes a dad and has a multitude of very annoying children. He's fat, and he's bland, and he looks like he's going to flat line any second.

The walrus and penguin were unneeded, and after a while, you just start to resent everyone. Especially Melody, who has no depth to her whatsoever.

And one of these days, Disney, I'm kicking out of my life.

If I didn't love your originals so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] When I [[heard]] that Adrian Pasdar was in drag in this movie, my expectations that I would watch the entire movie were low. The only reasons I gave it a chance were the magnificent Julie Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[thought]] would be a broad "[[Mrs]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[turned]] out to be a gentle and [[insightful]] [[comedy]]. Pasdar is entirely credible and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to release the female part of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He transmits these needs to the audience in a thoroughly believable fashion. Julie Walters is magnificent, is as her habit, as the landlady who teaches him unconditional love. When I [[listened]] that Adrian Pasdar was in drag in this movie, my expectations that I would watch the entire movie were low. The only reasons I gave it a chance were the magnificent Julie Walters and the recommendation of a friend.

What i [[figured]] would be a broad "[[Ms]]. Doubtfire" type of farce [[revolved]] out to be a gentle and [[informative]] [[travesty]]. Pasdar is entirely credible and empathetic as the ambitious business man who needs to release the female part of his being by cross-dressing on occasions. He transmits these needs to the audience in a thoroughly believable fashion. Julie Walters is magnificent, is as her habit, as the landlady who teaches him unconditional love. --------------------------------------------- Result 242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a degree of verite and cinematic [[skill]] that disarms the [[viewer]], and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The [[dialogue]] is [[minimal]], but the [[pauses]] and [[silence]] [[poignant]].

Story--The [[conflict]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is volatile, as we saw recently jihad murders in the Netherlands and riots in France. [[While]] I harbor no love for [[Islam]], the departure from the [[West]] from Christian values [[holds]] no cause for [[celebration]].

The director of this film managed to mirror the two societies in a way that belabored neither, emphasizing the development of Aicha as an individual who became a champion, not so much in the ring, but to all those around her. Even her worst . . . I will stop here to avoid the spoiler. Cinematography--Compared to 'The Wrestler,' a degree of verite and cinematic [[expertise]] that disarms the [[bystander]], and then hypnotizes as well.

Acting--The [[discussions]] is [[lowest]], but the [[pausing]] and [[speechless]] [[harrowing]].

Story--The [[disputing]] in a 'balkanized' Denmark is volatile, as we saw recently jihad murders in the Netherlands and riots in France. [[Despite]] I harbor no love for [[Islamist]], the departure from the [[Westerner]] from Christian values [[held]] no cause for [[celebrate]].

The director of this film managed to mirror the two societies in a way that belabored neither, emphasizing the development of Aicha as an individual who became a champion, not so much in the ring, but to all those around her. Even her worst . . . I will stop here to avoid the spoiler. --------------------------------------------- Result 243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[For]] people interested in business and the corporate [[world]], this [[show]] is [[simply]] the best of the [[best]]. As one of the former contestants of the show wrote in his blog about this [[innovative]] show: People in [[business]] [[finally]] had an audience. The whole idea is perfect; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related tasks, set in the best place in the world, New York City. Donald Trump is perfect as the boss, [[even]] though his ego is bigger than the whole universe times infinity. He also makes a lot of questionable decisions about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: Great season overall, the best season of the "normal" ones. This season was the one that was most about actual business skills. Later on the series almost drowned in marketing related tasks with way too many product placements. Great and interesting contestants overall, with the most likable character ever in this series: Troy. I know I'm not the only person who suspect that the Trump World Tower-episode where he got fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick win this particular task.

Season 2: Also a [[great]] season. The tasks were still pretty much OK, and it had many interesting contestants. Jen M was terrible and should never had made it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the worst [[firing]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of book smarts vs. street smarts, but the cast was so utterly terrible (it turned out that Trump hated the cast as well) that the whole season was a total disaster. Best moments was the second episode (motel renovation), with PM Brian fired, a guy who added nothing but huge amounts of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[excellent]] season, much because of the interesting and entertaining contestants this season (especially Randall, Alla, Marcus and the total disaster whose name was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this show, ending with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I think we got robbed for the Randall vs. Alla final. I think Trump was afraid that she could have won, and prevented that from happening.

Season 5: A boring season with really no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. [[In]] people interested in business and the corporate [[worldwide]], this [[demonstrating]] is [[mere]] the best of the [[nicest]]. As one of the former contestants of the show wrote in his blog about this [[pioneering]] show: People in [[corporations]] [[eventually]] had an audience. The whole idea is perfect; having a group of businesspeople competing against each other in business-related tasks, set in the best place in the world, New York City. Donald Trump is perfect as the boss, [[yet]] though his ego is bigger than the whole universe times infinity. He also makes a lot of questionable decisions about whom to fire, which is one of the negatives about the show.

Season 1: Great season overall, the best season of the "normal" ones. This season was the one that was most about actual business skills. Later on the series almost drowned in marketing related tasks with way too many product placements. Great and interesting contestants overall, with the most likable character ever in this series: Troy. I know I'm not the only person who suspect that the Trump World Tower-episode where he got fired was rigged to have Amy and Nick win this particular task.

Season 2: Also a [[prodigious]] season. The tasks were still pretty much OK, and it had many interesting contestants. Jen M was terrible and should never had made it to the final, IMO. Also, this season had the worst [[gunfire]] ever (Pamela).

Season 3: Terrible. Actually, I liked the concept of book smarts vs. street smarts, but the cast was so utterly terrible (it turned out that Trump hated the cast as well) that the whole season was a total disaster. Best moments was the second episode (motel renovation), with PM Brian fired, a guy who added nothing but huge amounts of comedy value.

Season 4: An [[magnifique]] season, much because of the interesting and entertaining contestants this season (especially Randall, Alla, Marcus and the total disaster whose name was Toral). The "Take me out to the Boardroom" episode is one of the absolute classics of this show, ending with the well-remembered quadruple firing. Sadly, I think we got robbed for the Randall vs. Alla final. I think Trump was afraid that she could have won, and prevented that from happening.

Season 5: A boring season with really no special things to it. Brent was just an embarrassment and obviously only there to create drama. The tasks were terrible overall (how has creating a jingle anything to do with business at all?). I guess the best man won, but personally I couldn't care less.

Season 6: I can see why they wanted to try out L.A. as a new location for the show, but looking back it was a mistake. New York will always be the place for this. This season added so many new things, most of them terrible (like losing team having to sleep outside in tents, winning PM continues to be PM ,for example). The tasks were terrible and Trump also chose the wrong winner. James deserved it, no doubt.

Season 7: Celebrity edition. Best season ever. Totally different rules (like the use of rolodexes), but all fun and entertainment. The biggest problem was that many of the contestants were not real celebrities at all, especially the women where everyone were unknown to me except for Omarosa, who is a total disgrace to everything she takes part in. This looked to be Gene Simmon's season, but after he made a complete fool of himself during the Kodak task , another man emerged from the shadows: Piers Morgan. Never has anyone dominated a season like he did. He crushed his opponents and also came across as a guy with a great sense of humor (although some uptight Americans (not all Americans, of course, don't take me wrong) sadly didn't have the social skills to understand it). WAY TO GO PIERS!!

For fans of this i highly recommend the UK version starring Sir Alan Sugar as the boss. In fact, the British version is way better, and that says something since the American (and original) truly is a great show. One thing about the UK version is that the contestants normally tend to behave like decent human beings in the boardroom, unlike the constant yelling and rude behavior that takes place in the US version. --------------------------------------------- Result 244 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Right, then, he's [[absolutely]] brilliant. But you [[must]] be intelligent and quick to [[understand]] his humor. He [[covers]] (attacks?) all sorts of [[topics]], such as the first moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr Doktor Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the [[fool]].

Incidentally, I've [[watched]] his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[best]] [[work]]. He simply [[shines]].

What might [[go]] so far as to say he is Glorious. Right, then, he's [[abundantly]] brilliant. But you [[should]] be intelligent and quick to [[fathom]] his humor. He [[covered]] (attacks?) all sorts of [[item]], such as the first moon landing, Easter/Christmas, transvestitism, movies, and Herr Doktor Heimlich.

For those of you are averse to swearing, this isn't for you. While some of us punctuate with commas and periods, he uses the f-word. Also, if you can't laugh at yourself, never watch this; you will feel the [[jackass]].

Incidentally, I've [[observed]] his other stuff and even saw him perform live, and this is by far his [[optimum]] [[cooperating]]. He simply [[glitters]].

What might [[going]] so far as to say he is Glorious. --------------------------------------------- Result 245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] what a [[preposterous]] story ,murder blackmail,child [[sex]] allegations ,[[gays]] and the catholic [[church]].....absolute [[tripe]]. How is it that most UK based TV dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[include]] the obligortory Gay,its [[really]] [[getting]] [[tiresome]] now. Everybody accepts that there are [[Gay]] people in society just has there are other minority [[groups]],but we don't want it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in [[every]] single [[show]]. Apart from the above, the drama went from what could have been an interesting little story into a pantomime,the priest was a paedophile and there are gays running about every where,oh yes just to be totally PC one of the gay couple was black.i am surprised at c ecclestone for even contemplating this when he read the script. what a [[grotesque]] story ,murder blackmail,child [[sexuality]] allegations ,[[queers]] and the catholic [[churches]].....absolute [[gut]]. How is it that most UK based TV dramas ,sit coms etc have to [[including]] the obligortory Gay,its [[truthfully]] [[obtain]] [[bothersome]] now. Everybody accepts that there are [[Homosexuals]] people in society just has there are other minority [[panel]],but we don't want it ramming down our throats(i'll pass on this one) in [[all]] single [[shows]]. Apart from the above, the drama went from what could have been an interesting little story into a pantomime,the priest was a paedophile and there are gays running about every where,oh yes just to be totally PC one of the gay couple was black.i am surprised at c ecclestone for even contemplating this when he read the script. --------------------------------------------- Result 246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[pieces]] of this [[work]] were really [[memorable]]. - Id love to see another more current example of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd love to be part of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this extra in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I mean really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the [[movie]] I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. These things have been floating around in my head for damn near 10 years now. Some [[smithereens]] of this [[cooperating]] were really [[unforgettable]]. - Id love to see another more current example of cg showy offy stuff. Actually I'd love to be part of it.

If I'd would of had the chance to just say what i wanted and thats it, I wouldn't have to write all this extra in order to make "10 lines if text" as this website requires. I mean really? This almost discourages me, I mean luckily for the guys that made the [[filmmaking]] I really liked the Minds Eye - and it took me 3 times to have enough lines, I hope you don't get me on the misspelling. - yup you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] A [[lot]] of talk has been made about "psychological Westerns", but this is one of the very few that is [[truly]] in that genre. It has big name stars who perform very well, but it is the director who makes this such a [[good]] movie. Stewart Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to play a haggard retired buffalo hunter who is revered in the West as one of the [[best]]. Robert Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the usual young upstart, Taylor's character is middle aged, too), who wants to slaughter buffalo, and lures Granger into business with him. They hire two other big name actors, Lloyd Nolan and Russ Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is haunted by the buffalo he has killed, knowing that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they become extinct, the Native American way of life will greatly suffer. Taylor soon reveals a sadistic side, but it is a realistic saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern film, created by nerds and dorks. He is insecure, and needs human companionship. Still, he won't stop at murder. The end pits the two against each other, with a startling conclusion. The psychological effects of what they're doing are well depicted. A [[batches]] of talk has been made about "psychological Westerns", but this is one of the very few that is [[really]] in that genre. It has big name stars who perform very well, but it is the director who makes this such a [[alright]] movie. Stewart Granger loses his British safari hunter stereotype to play a haggard retired buffalo hunter who is revered in the West as one of the [[optimum]]. Robert Taylor plays the upstart (in contrast to the usual young upstart, Taylor's character is middle aged, too), who wants to slaughter buffalo, and lures Granger into business with him. They hire two other big name actors, Lloyd Nolan and Russ Tamblyn, into being their skinners. Granger is haunted by the buffalo he has killed, knowing that he may be to blame if they become extinct, knowing if they become extinct, the Native American way of life will greatly suffer. Taylor soon reveals a sadistic side, but it is a realistic saidism, unlike the one dimensional sadists of modern film, created by nerds and dorks. He is insecure, and needs human companionship. Still, he won't stop at murder. The end pits the two against each other, with a startling conclusion. The psychological effects of what they're doing are well depicted. --------------------------------------------- Result 248 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] From the first scene you are given [[clues]] as to what may be going on here. It [[becomes]] more and more obvious as the story rolls on. The acting is [[excellent]] throughout and these [[actors]] touch your [[soul]]. Even though I knew what was going to [[happen]] I was extremely puzzled by the [[motive]]. I'm [[still]] puzzled as to why [[Ben]] did what he did. We could see in his [[face]] "second thoughts", but the ultimate sacrifice [[seemed]] to [[go]] against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and touching story but it [[left]] me [[confused]]. Maybe that was the point of the [[film]]. I did like the [[film]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film choice. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! From the first scene you are given [[cues]] as to what may be going on here. It [[becoming]] more and more obvious as the story rolls on. The acting is [[awesome]] throughout and these [[actresses]] touch your [[alma]]. Even though I knew what was going to [[arise]] I was extremely puzzled by the [[reason]]. I'm [[nevertheless]] puzzled as to why [[Bin]] did what he did. We could see in his [[confronts]] "second thoughts", but the ultimate sacrifice [[appeared]] to [[going]] against his emotion and feelings. It was a very interesting and touching story but it [[exited]] me [[garbled]]. Maybe that was the point of the [[filmmaking]]. I did like the [[filmmaking]] and Wil Smith can wrack up another good film choice. This guy knows how to entertain an audience! --------------------------------------------- Result 249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I did not have too much interest in watching The Flock.Andrew Lau co-directed the masterpiece trilogy of Infernal Affairs but he had been fired from The Flock and he had been [[replaced]] by an [[emergency]] [[director]] called [[Niels]] [[Mueller]].I had the [[feeling]] that Lau had made a good [[film]] but it had not [[satisfied]] the study,so they fired him and hired another [[director]].This [[usually]] does not [[work]] well (let's remember The Invasion).But The [[Flock]] resulted to be [[better]] than what I [[expected]].It's not a great film but it's an interesting and [[entertaining]] [[thriller]].The [[character]] [[development]] is very well [[done]] and I [[could]] know the [[characters]] very well.[[Also]],the [[relationship]] between the two [[main]] [[characters]] is natural and [[credible]].[[Richard]] Gere and [[Claire]] [[Danes]] [[bring]] competent performances.Now,let's [[go]] to the [[negative]] [[points]].One [[element]] which really bothered me (there was a [[moment]] in which it [[irritated]] me) was the [[excess]] of edition tricks to give the [[movie]] more "[[attitude]]" and [[style]].That tricks feel out of place and their [[presence]] is arbitrary.Plus,I [[think]] the [[film]] should have been more ambitious.[[In]] [[spite]] of that,I [[recommend]] The Flock as a [[good]] thriller.It's not memorable at all,but it's [[entertaining]]. I did not have too much interest in watching The Flock.Andrew Lau co-directed the masterpiece trilogy of Infernal Affairs but he had been fired from The Flock and he had been [[substitutes]] by an [[emergencies]] [[headmaster]] called [[Katerina]] [[Muller]].I had the [[sense]] that Lau had made a good [[filmmaking]] but it had not [[pleased]] the study,so they fired him and hired another [[superintendent]].This [[fluently]] does not [[cooperated]] well (let's remember The Invasion).But The [[Herd]] resulted to be [[optimum]] than what I [[prophesied]].It's not a great film but it's an interesting and [[amusing]] [[thrillers]].The [[nature]] [[developments]] is very well [[performed]] and I [[wo]] know the [[features]] very well.[[Moreover]],the [[relations]] between the two [[principal]] [[traits]] is natural and [[plausible]].[[Richie]] Gere and [[Clair]] [[Danish]] [[brings]] competent performances.Now,let's [[going]] to the [[harmful]] [[dot]].One [[ingredients]] which really bothered me (there was a [[time]] in which it [[enraged]] me) was the [[surplus]] of edition tricks to give the [[flick]] more "[[attitudes]]" and [[styling]].That tricks feel out of place and their [[attendance]] is arbitrary.Plus,I [[ideas]] the [[filmmaking]] should have been more ambitious.[[During]] [[sadness]] of that,I [[recommendations]] The Flock as a [[alright]] thriller.It's not memorable at all,but it's [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ray Liotta and Tom Hulce shine in this sterling example of brotherly love and commitment. Hulce plays Dominick, (Nicky) a mildly mentally handicapped young man who is putting his 12 minutes younger, twin brother, Liotta, who plays Eugene, through medical school. It is set in Baltimore and deals with the issues of sibling rivalry, the unbreakable bond of twins, child abuse and good always winning out over evil. It is captivating, and filled with laughter and tears. If you have not yet seen this film, please rent it, I promise, you'll be amazed at how such a wonderful film could go un-noticed. --------------------------------------------- Result 251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Bah. Another [[tired]], desultory reworking of an out of copyright [[work]] never [[designed]] to be [[filmed]].

On the plus side, Toni Collette is superb as always (being an actual actress, you [[see]]), and there are some nicely [[handled]] handover cuts between scenes. There are even a few genuinely funny lines, and the filmwork, score and [[editing]] is competent, [[apart]] from a bizarre lapse into voiceover and [[speaking]] to the camera [[towards]] the conclusion.

But, ah, but. Much of the cast seems to be on autopilot, and they are [[almost]] all very [[clearly]] too [[old]] (and in one [[case]] too [[young]]) for their [[declared]] [[ages]]. [[Worse]], they are all [[speaking]] "Austinese", that [[peculiar]] falsetto self satisfied [[sing]] song that couldn't be further from the [[way]] people [[actually]] [[spoke]] in Austen's day ([[think]] Yosemite Sam, I [[kid]] you not). This is particularly sad, [[considering]] that we seem to finally be seeing the demise of the equally farcial "Fakespearan" that Olivier and his cronies were so fond of bellowing at the top of their [[lungs]].

And worst of all is Gwyneth Paltrow. She's only ever played one character in her films, and she [[stays]] [[true]] to form here, [[running]] through her [[entire]] range (smirking to [[sulking]]) in the first ten minutes, then just repeating herself for the [[rest]] of the overlong [[film]]. There is [[absolutely]] no [[chemistry]] between herself and any of her admirers, nor any [[apparent]] [[reason]] why they [[would]] be interested in her [[apart]].

In short, there is very [[little]] [[reason]] to watch [[Emma]]. It's an [[amiable]] [[enough]] adaptation, but if you're [[going]] to [[pack]] a film full of anacronisms (i.e. an appalingly [[thin]] [[lead]] who can't shoot a bow or [[handle]] a [[period]] accent) then you [[might]] as well do it [[properly]], as with the [[vastly]] superior "Clueless". Bah. Another [[weary]], desultory reworking of an out of copyright [[cooperates]] never [[destined]] to be [[videotaped]].

On the plus side, Toni Collette is superb as always (being an actual actress, you [[behold]]), and there are some nicely [[processed]] handover cuts between scenes. There are even a few genuinely funny lines, and the filmwork, score and [[edition]] is competent, [[also]] from a bizarre lapse into voiceover and [[speaks]] to the camera [[into]] the conclusion.

But, ah, but. Much of the cast seems to be on autopilot, and they are [[virtually]] all very [[naturally]] too [[antique]] (and in one [[examples]] too [[youthful]]) for their [[stated]] [[years]]. [[Worst]], they are all [[talking]] "Austinese", that [[unique]] falsetto self satisfied [[sings]] song that couldn't be further from the [[route]] people [[genuinely]] [[talking]] in Austen's day ([[reckon]] Yosemite Sam, I [[petit]] you not). This is particularly sad, [[reviewing]] that we seem to finally be seeing the demise of the equally farcial "Fakespearan" that Olivier and his cronies were so fond of bellowing at the top of their [[lung]].

And worst of all is Gwyneth Paltrow. She's only ever played one character in her films, and she [[remains]] [[genuine]] to form here, [[executing]] through her [[total]] range (smirking to [[moping]]) in the first ten minutes, then just repeating herself for the [[remainder]] of the overlong [[films]]. There is [[wholly]] no [[chemicals]] between herself and any of her admirers, nor any [[evident]] [[motives]] why they [[should]] be interested in her [[furthermore]].

In short, there is very [[petite]] [[motif]] to watch [[Emmy]]. It's an [[amicable]] [[satisfactorily]] adaptation, but if you're [[go]] to [[packaged]] a film full of anacronisms (i.e. an appalingly [[slender]] [[culminate]] who can't shoot a bow or [[handled]] a [[periods]] accent) then you [[apt]] as well do it [[correctly]], as with the [[considerably]] superior "Clueless". --------------------------------------------- Result 252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I can only [[believe]] that Garson Kanin must have been two people. The one who wrote the [[brilliant]] "A Double Life" and the funny "Born [[Yesterday]]" and co-wrote such [[excellent]] screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "Pat And Mike" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[tiresome]], sad drivel as "Bachelor [[Mother]]", "Some [[Kind]] Of A Nut", and this. The cast [[tries]], but the [[script]] is so tired and clichéd that [[even]] the [[efforts]] of the always wonderful [[Brenda]] Vaccaro are [[defeated]]. The [[script]] sinks to it's nadir in the truly offensive sequence in which Janssen's character tests Drivas's character to make sure he's not gay. An ugly sequence, but sadly one which could easily play in a film today. "Ethnic" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" jokes are still "good, clean, family fun". I can only [[believing]] that Garson Kanin must have been two people. The one who wrote the [[wonderful]] "A Double Life" and the funny "Born [[Today]]" and co-wrote such [[marvellous]] screenplays as "Adam's Rib" and "Pat And Mike" with his wife Ruth Gordon and then the one who wrote and/or directed such [[gruelling]], sad drivel as "Bachelor [[Mama]]", "Some [[Genre]] Of A Nut", and this. The cast [[endeavours]], but the [[screenplay]] is so tired and clichéd that [[yet]] the [[endeavor]] of the always wonderful [[Cynthia]] Vaccaro are [[conquered]]. The [[hyphen]] sinks to it's nadir in the truly offensive sequence in which Janssen's character tests Drivas's character to make sure he's not gay. An ugly sequence, but sadly one which could easily play in a film today. "Ethnic" jokes are now totally verboten, but "fag" jokes are still "good, clean, family fun". --------------------------------------------- Result 253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Frankly I'm rather incensed that on the basis of the dazzling reviews attributed to Steven Smith I wasted nearly two hours on his debut offering. Have they all been written by his pals? The action clunks along, the music is [[irritating]] and over used, the script is [[simply]] [[dire]] and the [[actors]] (with the [[exception]] of the gardener) mediocre at best. I do think we should [[support]] the efforts of a young filmmaker but [[saying]] it's brilliant when it's not will [[surely]] only [[encourage]] him to make the same [[mistakes]] again i.e. continuing to write his own scripts and using the same actors for another venture. Yes, it's his first film, low budget etc. - I get it, but it's also out there for members of the public to purchase and it's just not up to scratch. Frankly I'm rather incensed that on the basis of the dazzling reviews attributed to Steven Smith I wasted nearly two hours on his debut offering. Have they all been written by his pals? The action clunks along, the music is [[annoying]] and over used, the script is [[merely]] [[tragic]] and the [[protagonists]] (with the [[exemption]] of the gardener) mediocre at best. I do think we should [[succour]] the efforts of a young filmmaker but [[telling]] it's brilliant when it's not will [[definitely]] only [[stimulate]] him to make the same [[faults]] again i.e. continuing to write his own scripts and using the same actors for another venture. Yes, it's his first film, low budget etc. - I get it, but it's also out there for members of the public to purchase and it's just not up to scratch. --------------------------------------------- Result 254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Burlinson and Thornton give an outstanding performance in this movie, along with Dennehy. Although it is at first thought to be only about love, it really goes down deeper than that. The beauty of nature captures this movie, placing among one of the best I have ever seen. The horse scenes are absolutely fantastic!! Any horse-lovers out there will love this movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As I am no fan of almost any post-"Desperate Living" John Waters films, I [[warmed]] to "[[Pecker]]". After he emerged from the [[underground]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his [[earlier]] works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[fans]] [[looked]] and tasted like watered down liqueur. "Pecker", which doesn't attempt to [[regurgitate]] early successes, is a slight, quiet, humble commentary on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. Waters clearly knows this subject well because he has also exhibited and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic style is at ease with the subject. As I am no fan of almost any post-"Desperate Living" John Waters films, I [[reheated]] to "[[Penis]]". After he emerged from the [[subterranean]], Waters produced trash-lite versions of his [[formerly]] works ("Cry Baby", "Polyester", Hairspray") that to die-hard [[amateurs]] [[seemed]] and tasted like watered down liqueur. "Pecker", which doesn't attempt to [[regurgitating]] early successes, is a slight, quiet, humble commentary on the vagaries of celebrity and the pretentiousness of the art world. Waters clearly knows this subject well because he has also exhibited and sold (at ridiculous prices) some of the most amateurish pop art ever created that you couldn't imagine anyone being able to give away if it wasn't emblazoned with the Waters "name". Edward Furlong is fine as "Pecker" and Waters' non-histrionic style is at ease with the subject. --------------------------------------------- Result 256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This first installment of Crispin Glover's personal magnum opus asks you to think a little, and so can't be recommended for any viewer who doesn't want to sit and puzzle over Glover's imagery or follow the [[surprisingly]] [[simple]]—but weirdly obfuscated—thread of his narrative. To the more casual viewer, yes, it's probably going to come off as a confusing mish-mash of odd, startling, and disturbing imagery for imagery's sake.

You get the sense that Glover doesn't mind that this is the case, and he'll almost as gladly listen to why someone hated the film as to why they enjoyed it. Glover's innate eagerness for and about his work and how audiences interpret it is strongly communicated not only through the film itself, but also through the unusual question and answer sessions that he frequently conducts following showings; he clearly hopes that people will continue to think about what he has presented.

The easiest way to interpret and dismiss the film is to label it as Dada or nihilist, a juvenile attack on the modern movie industry from an actor who's worked both without and within. But there's a reason why Glover performs his slideshow before showing his movie, and it's not only to sell books; his books juxtapose and create a narrative from images and text that Glover pieced together, and What Is It? does similarly with imagery drawn from Western culture.

What Is It? is an endearing and compelling film in ways one hardly expects while viewing. Much has already been made about Glover's use of actors with Down's syndrome, and indeed that is one of the most initially striking aspects of the film. So jarring, in fact, that many seem to interpret it as some sort of far-reaching crusade to see a more realistic and/or dignified portrayal of the disabled in movies and television—or, on the absolute other end of the spectrum, as a kind of direct exploitation of the disabled. But it's not either, and maybe that's part of what makes this film so uncomfortable for many: the underlying agenda is not a political one or one of hatred, but one of looking beyond the mainstream culture into a kind of outsider ugliness. It's not a film about Down's syndrome, but it is a film that is owned by the actors with Down's syndrome who appear in it.

I'm the sort of person who is entirely gung-ho when it comes to ugliness and strangeness being portrayed so starkly that it is beautiful; happily for me, this is pretty much exactly how What Is It? presents itself to viewers. Glover uses the strange images of snails, death, and the disabled in part because he wants his audience to feel discomfort at either the sheer oddness of the imagery or the visceral reaction one has to the dying screams of an anthropomorphized snail. In some ways, the weirdly compelling (and occasionally downright grotesque) elements of What Is It? remind me of the work of the painter Francis Bacon… he of the infamous popes, yes, and the odd distortions of the human figure that inevitably make viewers cringe and want to look away. Like Bacon's paintings, Glover's film manages to be opulent and humble, grainy and polished, chaotic and well-realized… and the contradictions help to make it all the more disconcerting. But still this is not an entirely serious film, and it largely manages to sidestep the greatest pitfalls of pretension through the use of humor that, for the most part, derives from the use (and juxtaposition) of familiar items, images, and names of popular culture. And when What Is It? is funny, it is very funny.

Overall, What Is It? is an impressive first film from Glover as a director and writer, and his presence as an actor in the film proves not to be nearly the distraction one might expect it to be. Watching it is like being an observer in the kind of dream that isn't exactly good or bad, but just strange… and that leaves you feeling slightly grimy when you wake up. If that's the kind of art you enjoy, What Is It? is likely to exceed your expectations and be well-worth the effort of catching it in the theatre, along with The Big Slide Show and Glover himself. All in all, it's an experience you're unlikely to forget any time soon. This first installment of Crispin Glover's personal magnum opus asks you to think a little, and so can't be recommended for any viewer who doesn't want to sit and puzzle over Glover's imagery or follow the [[incredibly]] [[mere]]—but weirdly obfuscated—thread of his narrative. To the more casual viewer, yes, it's probably going to come off as a confusing mish-mash of odd, startling, and disturbing imagery for imagery's sake.

You get the sense that Glover doesn't mind that this is the case, and he'll almost as gladly listen to why someone hated the film as to why they enjoyed it. Glover's innate eagerness for and about his work and how audiences interpret it is strongly communicated not only through the film itself, but also through the unusual question and answer sessions that he frequently conducts following showings; he clearly hopes that people will continue to think about what he has presented.

The easiest way to interpret and dismiss the film is to label it as Dada or nihilist, a juvenile attack on the modern movie industry from an actor who's worked both without and within. But there's a reason why Glover performs his slideshow before showing his movie, and it's not only to sell books; his books juxtapose and create a narrative from images and text that Glover pieced together, and What Is It? does similarly with imagery drawn from Western culture.

What Is It? is an endearing and compelling film in ways one hardly expects while viewing. Much has already been made about Glover's use of actors with Down's syndrome, and indeed that is one of the most initially striking aspects of the film. So jarring, in fact, that many seem to interpret it as some sort of far-reaching crusade to see a more realistic and/or dignified portrayal of the disabled in movies and television—or, on the absolute other end of the spectrum, as a kind of direct exploitation of the disabled. But it's not either, and maybe that's part of what makes this film so uncomfortable for many: the underlying agenda is not a political one or one of hatred, but one of looking beyond the mainstream culture into a kind of outsider ugliness. It's not a film about Down's syndrome, but it is a film that is owned by the actors with Down's syndrome who appear in it.

I'm the sort of person who is entirely gung-ho when it comes to ugliness and strangeness being portrayed so starkly that it is beautiful; happily for me, this is pretty much exactly how What Is It? presents itself to viewers. Glover uses the strange images of snails, death, and the disabled in part because he wants his audience to feel discomfort at either the sheer oddness of the imagery or the visceral reaction one has to the dying screams of an anthropomorphized snail. In some ways, the weirdly compelling (and occasionally downright grotesque) elements of What Is It? remind me of the work of the painter Francis Bacon… he of the infamous popes, yes, and the odd distortions of the human figure that inevitably make viewers cringe and want to look away. Like Bacon's paintings, Glover's film manages to be opulent and humble, grainy and polished, chaotic and well-realized… and the contradictions help to make it all the more disconcerting. But still this is not an entirely serious film, and it largely manages to sidestep the greatest pitfalls of pretension through the use of humor that, for the most part, derives from the use (and juxtaposition) of familiar items, images, and names of popular culture. And when What Is It? is funny, it is very funny.

Overall, What Is It? is an impressive first film from Glover as a director and writer, and his presence as an actor in the film proves not to be nearly the distraction one might expect it to be. Watching it is like being an observer in the kind of dream that isn't exactly good or bad, but just strange… and that leaves you feeling slightly grimy when you wake up. If that's the kind of art you enjoy, What Is It? is likely to exceed your expectations and be well-worth the effort of catching it in the theatre, along with The Big Slide Show and Glover himself. All in all, it's an experience you're unlikely to forget any time soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Some [[moron]] who read or [[saw]] some [[reference]] to angels [[coming]] to [[Earth]], decided to [[disregard]] what he'd heard about the [[offspring]] of [[humans]] and [[angels]] being larger than [[normal]] [[humans]]. Reinventing them as [[mythical]] [[giants]] that were 40 feet tall, is beyond [[ridiculous]]. There was some [[historical]] [[references]] to [[housing]] and furniture in parts of the world, that were much larger than [[would]] be [[needed]] for standard [[humans]]. These were [[supposedly]] [[built]] on a scale that [[would]] [[lend]] itself to a 10 to 14 foot human, somewhat [[supporting]] the "David and Goliath" tale from the [[bible]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or artifacts that would support the [[idea]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[If]] I was rating this [[movie]] on my own scale, it would have been a [[negative]] [[value]] instead of a one... Some [[asinine]] who read or [[watched]] some [[references]] to angels [[forthcoming]] to [[Terra]], decided to [[ignore]] what he'd heard about the [[descent]] of [[beings]] and [[angel]] being larger than [[routine]] [[beings]]. Reinventing them as [[legendary]] [[titans]] that were 40 feet tall, is beyond [[nonsensical]]. There was some [[historic]] [[reference]] to [[lodgings]] and furniture in parts of the world, that were much larger than [[could]] be [[require]] for standard [[humankind]]. These were [[seemingly]] [[builds]] on a scale that [[could]] [[render]] itself to a 10 to 14 foot human, somewhat [[supportive]] the "David and Goliath" tale from the [[biblical]]. There is no mention in any historical references to buildings or artifacts that would support the [[ideas]] of a 40 foot tall being. [[Though]] I was rating this [[cinematography]] on my own scale, it would have been a [[prejudicial]] [[values]] instead of a one... --------------------------------------------- Result 258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I can't say I'm all that experienced in misty Mundae [[flicks]] having seen only a [[handful]], but it's [[obvious]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[respectable]] that the [[filmmakers]] were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[obvious]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is [[definitely]] a good [[thing]] as there isn't nearly [[enough]] [[plot]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil Nazi scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn star playing a Nazi scientist ever could), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in toilet roll and Misty - this film's version of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much less time than Angelina Jolie did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its shortcomings, this film could have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a start, and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even hotter Darian Caine. The pair gets to engage in all the lesbian sex that you would expect from a Seduction Cinema film and this is at the expense of the nonexistent plot, [[although]] that isn't really a bad thing. Obviously, this is a [[rubbish]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a bit of lesbian sex, you could do worse. I can't say I'm all that experienced in misty Mundae [[gestures]] having seen only a [[doorknob]], but it's [[discernible]] that this was made on a shoestring, and while it might have been [[reputable]] that the [[cinematographers]] were able to make a Tomb Raider rip-off inside a garage, it isn't because it's completely [[perceptible]] that this is what they were doing. The film only runs for forty five minutes, and this is [[indubitably]] a good [[stuff]] as there isn't nearly [[suitably]] [[intrigue]] here to stretch it out for any longer. It has something to do with an evil Nazi scientist (who looks about as evil as a porn star playing a Nazi scientist ever could), a mummy, which is clearly a man wrapped up in toilet roll and Misty - this film's version of Tomb Raider, who keeps her top on for much less time than Angelina Jolie did in the big budget version. I have to say that even in spite of its shortcomings, this film could have been better. It's got Misty Mundae for a start, and even better than that if you ask me is the fact that it also stars the even hotter Darian Caine. The pair gets to engage in all the lesbian sex that you would expect from a Seduction Cinema film and this is at the expense of the nonexistent plot, [[albeit]] that isn't really a bad thing. Obviously, this is a [[trash]] film - but the fact that it's short is to its credit, and if you're after a bit of lesbian sex, you could do worse. --------------------------------------------- Result 259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] All this [[talk]] about this being a [[bad]] [[movie]] is [[nonsense]]. As a matter of [[fact]] this is the [[best]] movie I've ever [[seen]]. It's an [[excellent]] story and the actors in the [[movie]] are some of the [[best]]. I [[would]] not [[give]] [[criticism]] to any of the actors. That [[movie]] is the [[best]] and it will always [[stay]] that [[way]]. All this [[conversation]] about this being a [[rotten]] [[filmmaking]] is [[laughable]]. As a matter of [[facto]] this is the [[nicest]] movie I've ever [[noticed]]. It's an [[fabulous]] story and the actors in the [[films]] are some of the [[bestest]]. I [[should]] not [[lend]] [[critique]] to any of the actors. That [[filmmaking]] is the [[bestest]] and it will always [[sojourn]] that [[pathway]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 260 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] In what [[could]] have been an otherwise run of the mill, mediocre film about infidelity in the sixties (the subtle "free-love" period), the creators of this film [[pile]] on ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario and [[top]] it all off with a [[trite]] little cherry on top, happily ever after ending. At no time did I ever feel sympathy for Diane Lane or Anna Paquin in their troublesome middle-class care free life, nor did I feel for the emasculated Liev Shrieber. The story [[line]] plods along slowly to its predictable, [[pathetic]] conclusion and the only thing interesting and watchable about this film is the stunning Diane Lane topless. Here's a hint, it occurs about 30 minutes into the film. Fast forward to that part and skip the rest. In what [[wo]] have been an otherwise run of the mill, mediocre film about infidelity in the sixties (the subtle "free-love" period), the creators of this film [[heap]] on ridiculous scenario after ridiculous scenario and [[superior]] it all off with a [[unremarkable]] little cherry on top, happily ever after ending. At no time did I ever feel sympathy for Diane Lane or Anna Paquin in their troublesome middle-class care free life, nor did I feel for the emasculated Liev Shrieber. The story [[bloodline]] plods along slowly to its predictable, [[deplorable]] conclusion and the only thing interesting and watchable about this film is the stunning Diane Lane topless. Here's a hint, it occurs about 30 minutes into the film. Fast forward to that part and skip the rest. --------------------------------------------- Result 261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A [[lot]] of the [[comments]] people have made strike me as (sorry) [[missing]] the point. Kasdan wants to present life, simply, ordinary life. The conventionally structured story, where characters have insights that change their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this much larger canvas. Several characters in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they move on. Sometimes they can hold onto their insights, sometimes they can't, and that's the way life really is. In other words, Kasdan jettisons [[conventional]] [[dramatic]] structure in favor of an [[exploration]] of the the ongoingness of [[life]] – there is no [[happy]] ending, only an eventual [[ending]]; and everything before that is [[still]] in [[process]], [[still]] [[always]] up for grabs – and, if you [[absolutely]] insist on a [[theme]], an [[exploration]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracle]]? Well, life itself, for a [[start]]. Then [[add]] in all the random [[incidents]] and cross-connections that make up a [[life]], or several interconnected [[lives]], and you have [[miracles]] by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[theme]] [[lightly]], [[rather]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[various]] [[ways]], most memorably by the [[device]], right in the [[center]] of the [[film]], of having Mac and his wife, lying in bed, each [[dreaming]] their own dreams, but as well [[showing]], [[later]] on in the film, how those dreams have the power, within the film, to shape reality. This is not a film with an easy or obvious message. You just have to let it play out in front of you, and then let it sit in your mind for a few days, a month, a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's best [[film]], his most mature, his most humane. A major meditation on life from one of our most gifted writers and directors. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been allowed to work for a number of years now, mostly due to studio constraints around "Dreamcatcher." Hopefully we haven't heard the last from Larry Kasdan. A great film from a great artist. Keep in mind that art does not have to rationalize itself completely in order to succeed. A [[batches]] of the [[feedback]] people have made strike me as (sorry) [[lacks]] the point. Kasdan wants to present life, simply, ordinary life. The conventionally structured story, where characters have insights that change their lives, and then fade out, music up, and the film is over, is absorbed into this much larger canvas. Several characters in this movie have just such illuminations, and then they move on. Sometimes they can hold onto their insights, sometimes they can't, and that's the way life really is. In other words, Kasdan jettisons [[classic]] [[whopping]] structure in favor of an [[exploring]] of the the ongoingness of [[vida]] – there is no [[cheerful]] ending, only an eventual [[ended]]; and everything before that is [[again]] in [[processes]], [[again]] [[repeatedly]] up for grabs – and, if you [[fully]] insist on a [[subject]], an [[exploring]] of the role of the miraculous in our lives. What is a [[miracles]]? Well, life itself, for a [[induction]]. Then [[adding]] in all the random [[occurrences]] and cross-connections that make up a [[vida]], or several interconnected [[life]], and you have [[miracle]] by the bucketful. Kasdan underscores this [[subject]] [[casually]], [[comparatively]] than insisting on it, and bolsters it in [[several]] [[methods]], most memorably by the [[apparatus]], right in the [[centro]] of the [[filmmaking]], of having Mac and his wife, lying in bed, each [[dreams]] their own dreams, but as well [[demonstrate]], [[thereafter]] on in the film, how those dreams have the power, within the film, to shape reality. This is not a film with an easy or obvious message. You just have to let it play out in front of you, and then let it sit in your mind for a few days, a month, a few years, and see what it has wrought there. This is, without a doubt, Kasdan's best [[movies]], his most mature, his most humane. A major meditation on life from one of our most gifted writers and directors. The tragedy is, of course, that he has not been allowed to work for a number of years now, mostly due to studio constraints around "Dreamcatcher." Hopefully we haven't heard the last from Larry Kasdan. A great film from a great artist. Keep in mind that art does not have to rationalize itself completely in order to succeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This was a [[horrible]] film! I gave it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the beautiful [[Porsche]] in the beginning... Other than that the [[story]] just [[plain]] sucked and [[cars]] racing through [[cities]] wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[probably]] what [[annoyed]] me the most, seldomly seen anything so constructed! This was a [[frightening]] film! I gave it 2 Points, one for Angelina Jolie and a second one for the beautiful [[Audi]] in the beginning... Other than that the [[conte]] just [[lowland]] sucked and [[carriages]] racing through [[municipalities]] wasn't so new in 1970. The Happyend was [[indubitably]] what [[indignant]] me the most, seldomly seen anything so constructed! --------------------------------------------- Result 263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I've been [[watching]] a [[lot]] of [[cartoon]] or [[animated]] movies because I have a baby [[girl]] who [[likes]] to watch [[TV]]. I began to watch this [[movie]] to [[see]] if I [[would]] [[like]] my little one to watch it... and no. [[At]] the [[beginning]] I thought it was such a [[cute]] [[movie]] like the Bambi [[movie]], but all the [[way]] it was like [[insinuating]] the ducky was a homosexual. The info said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at sports, but that was not the case. It just seems like a movie made for [[kids]] to [[learn]] to be okay being gay. It was also very sad, as far as the ducky's dad and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd like it, but I don't think I'm going to watch it again with my little one. I've been [[staring]] a [[batch]] of [[cartoons]] or [[animate]] movies because I have a baby [[daughter]] who [[fond]] to watch [[TELEVISIONS]]. I began to watch this [[cinematography]] to [[behold]] if I [[should]] [[iike]] my little one to watch it... and no. [[In]] the [[launches]] I thought it was such a [[loveable]] [[cinematography]] like the Bambi [[films]], but all the [[paths]] it was like [[suggesting]] the ducky was a homosexual. The info said that they were making fun of him because he wasn't good at sports, but that was not the case. It just seems like a movie made for [[enfants]] to [[learning]] to be okay being gay. It was also very sad, as far as the ducky's dad and all. I don't know, I guess if you're gay you'd like it, but I don't think I'm going to watch it again with my little one. --------------------------------------------- Result 264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] If the very thought of Arthur Askey twists your [[guts]], don't worry, you can still watch and love The Ghost Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room Boy, it is a [[film]] that is simply too damn good to be [[sunk]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I [[love]] Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[rather]] than unreasonably expecting him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The [[Ghost]] Train is so [[intensely]] [[atmospheric]] that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it transports you to, it is immersive in a way that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers managed to be during the desperate early '40s and it's a film that I would imagine few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without exception, extraordinarily good, perhaps Linden Travers lays it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a lonely railway station in wartime, she [[could]] hardly play a nutter and not stand out. The sad passing of the lovely Carole Lynne earlier this year broke the last link we had with this [[incredible]] [[film]] and now it really is in the past, but waiting patiently for us to press play. If the very thought of Arthur Askey twists your [[insides]], don't worry, you can still watch and love The Ghost Train, like the equally marvellous Back Room Boy, it is a [[movies]] that is simply too damn good to be [[shipwrecked]] by a single performance, even that of the lead actor. Personally, I [[adores]] Askey, perhaps it's because I go into his world, [[fairly]] than unreasonably expecting him to come into mine, which is a mistake too many people make. The [[Spector]] Train is so [[densely]] [[barometric]] that you couldn't conceivably watch it without being amazed at the deep, dark world it transports you to, it is immersive in a way that few cheap and cheerful flag-wavers managed to be during the desperate early '40s and it's a film that I would imagine few people have ever watched just the once. The cast are, without exception, extraordinarily good, perhaps Linden Travers lays it on a bit thick, but against the backdrop of a lonely railway station in wartime, she [[wo]] hardly play a nutter and not stand out. The sad passing of the lovely Carole Lynne earlier this year broke the last link we had with this [[unimaginable]] [[filmmaking]] and now it really is in the past, but waiting patiently for us to press play. --------------------------------------------- Result 265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] 1st [[watched]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene Levy): Corny comedy murder mystery with very few [[laughs]]. The [[movie]] [[appears]] to be [[based]] on an [[earlier]] [[Italian]] [[movie]] [[according]] to the credits but was re-written by two [[fairly]] popular American romantic comedy writers. But this one by [[Charles]] Shyer & [[Nancy]] Meyers does not cut it [[compared]] to their other efforts. The [[story]] is about a [[couple]] of down-and-out traveling [[Americans]], [[played]] by Richard [[Lewis]] and Sean Young, who stumble upon a lost [[dog]] and hope to make a fortune in [[reward]] [[money]] after seeing an [[ad]] in the paper for the dachsund's [[return]]. Upon trying to return it, they see a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's residence that they [[believe]] is attached to the rest of the dead [[body]] of the woman who is supposed to give them the [[money]]. They [[freak]] out and instead of contacting the [[police]] and telling them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[expecting]] to be framed for the murder. The other characters in the film are [[met]] on a [[train]] [[prior]] to this and hang [[around]] a Monte [[Carlo]] [[gambling]] resort doing [[various]] things to be pulled into the story. The other cast members [[include]] [[character]] [[actors]] John [[Candy]], [[James]] Belushi, Cybill [[Shepherd]], [[George]] Hamilton and others. [[After]] the police [[find]] out about the death, they [[start]] [[questioning]] the [[main]] characters and, of [[course]], they have to [[work]] thru their goofy lies to [[figure]] out what really happened. [[None]] of the character actors [[mentioned]] [[earlier]] can [[bring]] this [[movie]] out of it's mediocre state [[despite]] some [[funny]] moments mostly [[provided]] by the Belushi/[[Shepherd]] [[couple]]. This isn't a [[horrible]] movie, it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average movies out there and this is just another one for the [[pile]]. Try it, maybe you'll like it, probably you won't. 1st [[seen]] 12/26/2008 -(Dir-Eugene Levy): Corny comedy murder mystery with very few [[grin]]. The [[flick]] [[emerges]] to be [[base]] on an [[previous]] [[Ltalian]] [[cinematographic]] [[depending]] to the credits but was re-written by two [[comparatively]] popular American romantic comedy writers. But this one by [[Karel]] Shyer & [[Juventus]] Meyers does not cut it [[likened]] to their other efforts. The [[narratives]] is about a [[matches]] of down-and-out traveling [[America]], [[accomplished]] by Richard [[Louis]] and Sean Young, who stumble upon a lost [[hound]] and hope to make a fortune in [[bonuses]] [[cash]] after seeing an [[advertisement]] in the paper for the dachsund's [[comeback]]. Upon trying to return it, they see a hand sticking out of a garage door at the lady's residence that they [[reckon]] is attached to the rest of the dead [[organs]] of the woman who is supposed to give them the [[cash]]. They [[hippie]] out and instead of contacting the [[cop]] and telling them the truth they make out like runaways from the scene [[waits]] to be framed for the murder. The other characters in the film are [[fulfilled]] on a [[forming]] [[ago]] to this and hang [[about]] a Monte [[Carla]] [[betting]] resort doing [[diverse]] things to be pulled into the story. The other cast members [[encompass]] [[traits]] [[players]] John [[Chocolate]], [[Jacques]] Belushi, Cybill [[Vicar]], [[Georgie]] Hamilton and others. [[Upon]] the police [[unearth]] out about the death, they [[began]] [[questioned]] the [[primary]] characters and, of [[cours]], they have to [[works]] thru their goofy lies to [[silhouette]] out what really happened. [[Nos]] of the character actors [[quoted]] [[previously]] can [[brings]] this [[cinema]] out of it's mediocre state [[although]] some [[humorous]] moments mostly [[gave]] by the Belushi/[[Pastor]] [[match]]. This isn't a [[terrifying]] movie, it just isn't that good. There are plenty of average movies out there and this is just another one for the [[piles]]. Try it, maybe you'll like it, probably you won't. --------------------------------------------- Result 266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember watching this in the 1970s - then I have just recently borrowed a couple of episodes from our public library.

With a nearly 30 year hiatus, I have come to another conclusion. Most of the principals interviewed in this series - some at the center of power like Traudl Junge (Hitler's Secretary),Karl Doenitz (head of Germany's navy) Anthony Eden (UK) - are long gone but their first hand accounts will live on.From Generals and Admirals to Sergeants, Russian civilians, concentration camp survivors, all are on record here.

I can remember the Lord Mountbatten interview (killed in the 1970s)

This is truly a gem and I believe the producer of this series was knighted by Queen Elizabeth for this work - well deserved.

Seeing these few episodes from the library makes me want to buy the set.

This is the only "10" I have given any review but I have discovered like a fine bottle of wine, it is more appreciated with a little time... --------------------------------------------- Result 267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] WWE has produced some of the [[worst]] pay-per-views in its history over the past few months. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and December to [[Dismember]] were [[appalling]] to say the least and so it was relying on its B brand show, Smackdown! to attempt to end the [[year]] on a [[high]] [[note]]. Armageddon had two major gimmick matches in the Last Ride and Inferno matches, three Championships were on the line and an interesting main event in the shape of a tag team war featuring Batista and John Cena against King Booker and Finlay. However, it was an amendment to one of those Championship matches that brought us not only the match of the night but also now a match of the year candidate when Teddy Long gave us fans an early Christmas present. T-Lo changed the WWE Tag Team Championship match from Champions, London and Kendrick against to Regal and Taylor to a four team Ladder match including MNM and The Hardy Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this match too much as nothing I can say would be able to do it justice. This has to be seen to be believed. There were many high spots and many more brutal bumps and awkward landings. The one move I have to talk about however was the one that took Joey Mercury straight to the emergency room midway through the contest. Jeff Hardy jumped onto a ladder that was set up in the see saw position with Matt Hardy holding both members of MNM over the opposite end of it to take the full force. Unfortunately for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to protect his face and took the ladder full force in the nose and left eye. This was vicious. His face was instantly a mess for all to see and not surprisingly this ended Mercury's night early. We found out later he suffered a broken nose and cuts under his left eye. Be warned. This is not for the faint of heart. The ending to this roller-coaster of a match came after Paul London managed to grab both Championship belts for the victory. I have been watching wrestling for almost 15 years and it doesn't get any better than this match. Unbelievable.

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. WWE has produced some of the [[lousiest]] pay-per-views in its history over the past few months. Cyber Sunday, Survivor Series and December to [[Disembowel]] were [[excruciating]] to say the least and so it was relying on its B brand show, Smackdown! to attempt to end the [[annum]] on a [[supremo]] [[observes]]. Armageddon had two major gimmick matches in the Last Ride and Inferno matches, three Championships were on the line and an interesting main event in the shape of a tag team war featuring Batista and John Cena against King Booker and Finlay. However, it was an amendment to one of those Championship matches that brought us not only the match of the night but also now a match of the year candidate when Teddy Long gave us fans an early Christmas present. T-Lo changed the WWE Tag Team Championship match from Champions, London and Kendrick against to Regal and Taylor to a four team Ladder match including MNM and The Hardy Boyz.

I am not going to dwell on this match too much as nothing I can say would be able to do it justice. This has to be seen to be believed. There were many high spots and many more brutal bumps and awkward landings. The one move I have to talk about however was the one that took Joey Mercury straight to the emergency room midway through the contest. Jeff Hardy jumped onto a ladder that was set up in the see saw position with Matt Hardy holding both members of MNM over the opposite end of it to take the full force. Unfortunately for Mercury he didn't get his hands up to protect his face and took the ladder full force in the nose and left eye. This was vicious. His face was instantly a mess for all to see and not surprisingly this ended Mercury's night early. We found out later he suffered a broken nose and cuts under his left eye. Be warned. This is not for the faint of heart. The ending to this roller-coaster of a match came after Paul London managed to grab both Championship belts for the victory. I have been watching wrestling for almost 15 years and it doesn't get any better than this match. Unbelievable.

The night opened with only the 4th ever Inferno match. Kane took on MVP in a good match but it was all about the visual and not really about the action. There were a few close calls with the flames for both competitors but in the end it was Kane who forced MVP onto the flames after they both ended up outside the ring. MVP ran around the ring whilst his butt was on fire and there was a sick part of me that laughed watching this. May I suggest to Michael Hayes that MVP comes out next week on Smackdown! to Johnny Cash's Ring of Fire.

The other gimmick match of the night, and the second match of a triple main event was an all out war Last Ride match between Mr Kennedy and The Undertaker. This was a stiff match from start to finish and was the best of the series Undertaker and Kennedy have had yet. The used poles, chairs and one scene had The Undertaker thrown 15 feet from the Armageddon set onto what was suppose to be the concrete floor. Unfortunately it was plain to see that this was nothing but a crash mat and crowd didn't pop for this. The ending came after a chokeslam by The Dead Man to Kennedy on top of the hearse followed quickly by a match-winning tombstone.

In other notable happening from the card. Chris Benoit defeated Chavo Guerrero by submission in another stiff match. This was a very good bout with Benoit hitting 8 German suplexes on Chavo at one time. Benoit was also considering whether to put Vikki Guerrero in the sharpshooter or not. Luckily he came to his senses and let her go. This led to Chavo attempting the roll up only for it to be countered into the sharpshooter for the submission.

Another cracking match on the card was the Cruiserweight Championship contest between the longest reigning Champion in WWE, Gregory Helms and Jimmy Wang Yang. Featuring a lot of high flying and dangerous spots, some of which took place outside the ring, this was a match much more deserving of the crowd response than what it got. JBL put it best when he berated the fans in Richmond, Virginia for sitting on their hands during this one and at one point even started a boring chant. Helms picked up the duke after a jawbreaker type manoeuvre with his knees to Smackdowns! resident redneck.

The Boogeyman pinned The Miz in a worthless match. I hate The Boogeyman with a passion. Only worth listening too for JBL's ranting about Miz. JBL is comedy gold.

The last match of the night was main event number 3. World Heavyweight Champion, Batista and WWE Champion, John Cena teamed up to take on Finlay and the Champion of Champions, King Booker. There was no way the match could top the Tag Team Championship match from earlier on but it entertained none the less. The match would have been more memorable had it been given an extra five to ten minutes but how many times have I said that about WWE matches this year already. It was King Booker who was pinned at the end of the match after a big Batistabomb.

So 2006 is over for the WWE in regards to it's pay-per-view schedule. It started the year on a terrible note with New Year's Revolution but ended on a high one with Armageddon. This Ladder match will long be remembered as one of the greatest ladder matches of all time. My hat is off to all eight competitors who but their bodies on the line to give the fans one hell of a match. --------------------------------------------- Result 268 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] After going for a bike ride that day, lying beside a lake in a nature reserve, [[spending]] half an hour feeding and talking to a donkey who lived in a [[beautiful]] [[field]] with a [[small]] [[wood]] in it, this [[film]] [[made]] [[absolute]] [[sense]] to me.

The imagery of the [[film]] was [[beautiful]] and that is all you need. [[Switch]] off the [[conscious]] [[control]] knob of the [[mind]] and [[job]] done.

Reminded me of Baraka (1992) but with the added lesson of my previous paragraph.

This comment requires a minimum of ten lines, ten lines is the [[minimum]] not 9 lines but ten. After finishing counting all the lines you realise that there are less than ten even though less than ten lines is all that is needed to make my comment. After going for a bike ride that day, lying beside a lake in a nature reserve, [[expenditure]] half an hour feeding and talking to a donkey who lived in a [[magnifique]] [[campo]] with a [[tiny]] [[wooden]] in it, this [[kino]] [[introduced]] [[unmitigated]] [[sensing]] to me.

The imagery of the [[filmmaking]] was [[glamorous]] and that is all you need. [[Switched]] off the [[conscientious]] [[monitors]] knob of the [[esprit]] and [[labor]] done.

Reminded me of Baraka (1992) but with the added lesson of my previous paragraph.

This comment requires a minimum of ten lines, ten lines is the [[lesser]] not 9 lines but ten. After finishing counting all the lines you realise that there are less than ten even though less than ten lines is all that is needed to make my comment. --------------------------------------------- Result 269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I admit that I am a vampire addict: I have seen so many vampire [[movies]] I have [[lost]] count and this one is [[definitely]] in the [[top]] ten. I was very impressed by the [[original]] John Carpenter's Vampires and when I descovered there was a sequel I went straight out and [[bought]] it. This movie does not obey quite the same rules as the first, and it is not quite so dark, but it is close enough and I felt that it [[built]] [[nicely]] on the original.

Jon Bon Jovi was very good as Derek Bliss: his performance was likeable and yet hard enough for the viewer to believe that he might actually be able to survive in the world in which he lives. One of my favourite parts was just after he meets Zoey and wanders into the bathroom of the diner to check to see if she is more than she seems. His comments are beautifully irreverant and yet emminently practical which contrast well with the rest of the scene as it unfolds.

The other cast members were also well chosen and they knitted nicely to produce an entertaining and original film. It is not simply a rehash of the first movie and it has grown in a similar way to the way Fright Night II grew out of Fright Night. There are different elements which make it a fresh movie with a similar theme.

If you like vampire movies I would recommend this one. If you prefer your films less bloody then choose something else. I admit that I am a vampire addict: I have seen so many vampire [[theater]] I have [[forfeited]] count and this one is [[obviously]] in the [[supreme]] ten. I was very impressed by the [[upfront]] John Carpenter's Vampires and when I descovered there was a sequel I went straight out and [[buying]] it. This movie does not obey quite the same rules as the first, and it is not quite so dark, but it is close enough and I felt that it [[construct]] [[politely]] on the original.

Jon Bon Jovi was very good as Derek Bliss: his performance was likeable and yet hard enough for the viewer to believe that he might actually be able to survive in the world in which he lives. One of my favourite parts was just after he meets Zoey and wanders into the bathroom of the diner to check to see if she is more than she seems. His comments are beautifully irreverant and yet emminently practical which contrast well with the rest of the scene as it unfolds.

The other cast members were also well chosen and they knitted nicely to produce an entertaining and original film. It is not simply a rehash of the first movie and it has grown in a similar way to the way Fright Night II grew out of Fright Night. There are different elements which make it a fresh movie with a similar theme.

If you like vampire movies I would recommend this one. If you prefer your films less bloody then choose something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 270 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[rare]] films that is completely under the radar, but is totally [[worthwhile]]. It really reminds me of the old serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to see follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical [[audience]]. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely superfluous sacrifice scene there two too many for a family audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a Harry Potter-style magicfest that kids would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very believable. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. Doctor Mordrid is one of those [[scarce]] films that is completely under the radar, but is totally [[advantageous]]. It really reminds me of the old serials from the 30s and 40s. Which is why I'd have loved to see follow-up movies... but judging by the rest of Full Moon's output there simply weren't enough tits to satisfy the typical [[spectators]]. Unfortunately, thanks to a completely superfluous sacrifice scene there two too many for a family audience - which is unfortunate, because without em' this could have been a Harry Potter-style magicfest that kids would have eaten up. Both Jeffrey Combs and Yvette Nipar are great - I wasn't sure if Ms. Nipar hadn't wandered off an A-list picture onto this film, she was very believable. No, seriously! Anyway - it's a shame they didn't have the bucks to license Dr. Strange, because I think this could have been a total kiddie phenom. --------------------------------------------- Result 271 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A Bug's [[Life]] is a very good animated [[feature]]. This [[movie]] is for younger children, but it is [[also]] a [[great]] movie for people my age. The [[story]] is about an ant named Flik. He [[brought]] [[havoc]] [[onto]] his [[colony]] when he [[destroyed]] the [[food]] that were for the superior [[grasshoppers]]. He gets [[banished]] and he [[must]] find [[bigger]] [[bugs]] to [[fix]] the [[mess]]. This [[movie]] is a classic because it is a [[good]] movie and it is a Pixar [[movie]]. The animation is [[brilliant]] [[especially]] for the [[late]] 90's. The [[story]] is good, but a [[little]] more [[detail]] [[would]] be suffice. The voice acting is good as with most animation [[movies]]. The music is [[nice]] to [[listen]] to. Nothing special, but it [[earned]] an [[nomination]] for one of the music categories. Overall, this [[movie]] [[struck]] me as awestruck. This is a [[good]] [[movie]] for all [[families]]. I rate this movie 10/10. A Bug's [[Iife]] is a very good animated [[features]]. This [[kino]] is for younger children, but it is [[likewise]] a [[huge]] movie for people my age. The [[tales]] is about an ant named Flik. He [[introduced]] [[chaos]] [[during]] his [[colonies]] when he [[ravaged]] the [[dietary]] that were for the superior [[crickets]]. He gets [[banned]] and he [[should]] find [[larger]] [[beetles]] to [[remedy]] the [[chaos]]. This [[cinematic]] is a classic because it is a [[alright]] movie and it is a Pixar [[flick]]. The animation is [[sumptuous]] [[namely]] for the [[belated]] 90's. The [[conte]] is good, but a [[petite]] more [[clarification]] [[could]] be suffice. The voice acting is good as with most animation [[kino]]. The music is [[handsome]] to [[heed]] to. Nothing special, but it [[gained]] an [[nominations]] for one of the music categories. Overall, this [[kino]] [[pummeled]] me as awestruck. This is a [[alright]] [[cinematographic]] for all [[family]]. I rate this movie 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I [[think]] this could've been a [[decent]] [[movie]], and some of its parts are OK... but in whole it's a B [[movie]]. [[Same]] about the [[plot]], parts are OK but it has [[several]] holes and oddities that doesn't [[quite]] [[add]] up. Acting is mostly OK, I've [[seen]] [[worse]] of this too. :)

The [[beginning]] sets the level, with [[cars]] driving in the [[desert]], making "cool" but totally unnecessary [[jumps]] through some small dunes (In [[slow]] motion! Cool!), like the [[drivers]] had never [[seen]] [[sand]] before... It gets slightly better from there, but not much.

If you're gonna rent this, get another one too and use this one as a warm-up. Keep expectations low and it might work for you. I [[believing]] this could've been a [[dignified]] [[cinematography]], and some of its parts are OK... but in whole it's a B [[cinematography]]. [[Selfsame]] about the [[intrigue]], parts are OK but it has [[different]] holes and oddities that doesn't [[altogether]] [[inserting]] up. Acting is mostly OK, I've [[noticed]] [[lousiest]] of this too. :)

The [[commencing]] sets the level, with [[carriages]] driving in the [[deserts]], making "cool" but totally unnecessary [[rises]] through some small dunes (In [[slows]] motion! Cool!), like the [[motorists]] had never [[noticed]] [[sables]] before... It gets slightly better from there, but not much.

If you're gonna rent this, get another one too and use this one as a warm-up. Keep expectations low and it might work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] i can't believe that NONE of the official reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as though our culture accepts this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My biggest [[problem]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these assaults - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and pressured never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the movie is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both skilled fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more defined by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality must involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her attackers. She never even makes them apologize - rather, SHE seems apologetic. Overall, a depressing and upsetting movie, with some great cinematography and some cool fight scenes, but not as good as Hero by a long shot. i can't believe that NONE of the official reviews for this movie warn people that it contains two quite upsetting sexual assault scenes. It's as though our culture accepts this kind of behavior as simply sexual but not violent. My biggest [[difficulties]] with the movie is that it doesn't seem to condemn these assaults - as in, the woman who is repeatedly assaulted and pressured never holds the men accountable for their actions, and neither does anyone else. One man is stopped from completing the assault when someone throws a dagger at him, but he is reprimanded only with "you cannot force a woman to love you" rather than "you should never force a woman sexually, you jerk"... From a woman's point of view, the movie is a let down. It sort of "throws a bone" to women in letting them be both skilled fighters and leaders, but the movie is much more defined by the romance - which is characterized by the notion that human sexuality must involve an imbalance of power, with men dominating the woman they love. This amazing martial arts fighter doesn't use any of her fighting skills to try to fend off her attackers. She never even makes them apologize - rather, SHE seems apologetic. Overall, a depressing and upsetting movie, with some great cinematography and some cool fight scenes, but not as good as Hero by a long shot. --------------------------------------------- Result 274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]] [[quite]] a [[lot]]. I have [[always]] been a fan of Whoopi [[Goldberg]] and this movie only [[emphasizes]] it. She portrays a housewife in an African-American family which is moving up the social chain due to the husband's ([[Danny]] Glover) success as an attorney. She moves to an all white neighborhood where the people are friendly, yet a little [[awkward]] toward her. The various events that arise during the course of the movie make for SOME laughs but mostly appeal to the other [[emotions]]. This [[movie]] is not so much a [[comedy]] as a drama. I [[give]] it a [[strong]] 8/10. I highly [[recommend]] you [[catch]] it on TV or rent it soon. I [[liked]] this [[cinematography]] [[abundantly]] a [[batches]]. I have [[steadily]] been a fan of Whoopi [[Tucker]] and this movie only [[underlined]] it. She portrays a housewife in an African-American family which is moving up the social chain due to the husband's ([[Dani]] Glover) success as an attorney. She moves to an all white neighborhood where the people are friendly, yet a little [[clumsy]] toward her. The various events that arise during the course of the movie make for SOME laughs but mostly appeal to the other [[feelings]]. This [[filmmaking]] is not so much a [[travesty]] as a drama. I [[confer]] it a [[forceful]] 8/10. I highly [[recommends]] you [[catching]] it on TV or rent it soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Peter Sellers plays [[Dick]] Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cook]] for a [[pirate]] [[ship]] who takes over as [[captain]] after he murders the [[previous]] one. [[Although]] he's witnessed a [[treasure]] being buried, he begins [[losing]] his memory and the [[treasure]] map he obtains becomes blank. [[Thus]], [[Dick]] is forced to find someone who can see and [[communicate]] with [[ghosts]] (do you place an ad for that?) and [[help]] lead a path to the treasure. It's [[mind]] boggling how anyone [[could]] have bankrolled this [[pointless]] [[film]]. Former Goon Spike Milligan replaced Medak as [[director]], and given Medak's talents in the film The Ruling Class, you can probably guess which of the grainy, poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's chair. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was bombing even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible unease:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll pay for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for free.

And that's one of the GOOD jokes. It's amazing to me that much of Sellers prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was made available on VHS more than 15 years ago! How about someone stepping up to the plate and releasing in the US the well-received British TV program "A Show Called Fred" starring Sellers, Milligan, and directed by the great Richard Lester? Peter Sellers plays [[Pecker]] Scratcher (ha,ha), a [[cooker]] for a [[pirating]] [[starship]] who takes over as [[capt]] after he murders the [[anterior]] one. [[Despite]] he's witnessed a [[hoard]] being buried, he begins [[loosing]] his memory and the [[treasury]] map he obtains becomes blank. [[So]], [[Pecker]] is forced to find someone who can see and [[submit]] with [[ghostbusters]] (do you place an ad for that?) and [[helps]] lead a path to the treasure. It's [[esprit]] boggling how anyone [[would]] have bankrolled this [[senseless]] [[flick]]. Former Goon Spike Milligan replaced Medak as [[superintendent]], and given Medak's talents in the film The Ruling Class, you can probably guess which of the grainy, poorly lit scenes had Milligan in the director's chair. Peter Boyle makes a brief appearance in the film's first 10 minutes as the doomed pirate captain. He's probably quite thankful that Young Frankenstein was released the same year this was filmed and canned, so that he can keep this off his resume. Franciosa looks dashing as the handsome power-behind-Scratcher but he and Seller both look pretty desperate, with even Sellers' makeup and hair looking quite terrible. They had to know this movie was bombing even as they were filming it. With lines like these, I can understand any possible unease:

PIERRE: (about to be hanged) You'll pay for this.

SCRATCHER: No, I won't. I'll do it for free.

And that's one of the GOOD jokes. It's amazing to me that much of Sellers prolific material is still in the vaults, but this was made available on VHS more than 15 years ago! How about someone stepping up to the plate and releasing in the US the well-received British TV program "A Show Called Fred" starring Sellers, Milligan, and directed by the great Richard Lester? --------------------------------------------- Result 276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] It is [[obviously]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on [[stuff]] like this. How did they [[get]] away with [[making]] such a [[movie]]? This movie is all summed up in one word, [[SICK]]. [[Where]] do people [[get]] off [[making]], and watching these [[kinds]] of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't [[actually]] think they would allow this kid that is say [[maybe]] 12 if that [[actually]] [[sleep]] with this woman. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have rater not seen this. [[Where]] has the sanity of these people gone? [[Maybe]] the [[makers]] of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all [[types]] of sexual predators that pray upon [[children]], [[yet]] film [[makers]] make these [[types]] of [[movies]] that do nothing but [[provoke]] this [[type]] of [[behavior]]. I [[noticed]] that on a previous [[comment]] [[someone]] [[asked]] if there was a version where it [[showed]] them [[naked]]. This is a [[kid]] here, and [[someone]] is [[asking]] [[something]] like this? What is wrong with this [[picture]]? It is [[certainly]] illegal. Pedophiles pray on [[thing]] like this. How did they [[obtain]] away with [[doing]] such a [[films]]? This movie is all summed up in one word, [[UNWELL]]. [[Whenever]] do people [[obtain]] off [[doing]], and watching these [[sort]] of films. As I was watching the movie I didn't [[indeed]] think they would allow this kid that is say [[perhaps]] 12 if that [[indeed]] [[sleeping]] with this woman. Sorry if this is a spoiler to you but I would have rater not seen this. [[Hence]] has the sanity of these people gone? [[Perhaps]] the [[builders]] of this movie are pedophiles? Our society today is filled with all [[genre]] of sexual predators that pray upon [[childhood]], [[again]] film [[producers]] make these [[genre]] of [[cinematography]] that do nothing but [[provokes]] this [[genre]] of [[attitudes]]. I [[remarked]] that on a previous [[commentaries]] [[everybody]] [[wondered]] if there was a version where it [[revealed]] them [[nude]]. This is a [[petit]] here, and [[person]] is [[wondering]] [[somethin]] like this? What is wrong with this [[photograph]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] After watching about half of this I was ready to give up and turn it off, but I endured to the end. This is a movie that tries to be a romantic comedy and fails. The acting is poor---much worse than the acting in 80s T&A movies.

There are several attempts at humour that fail miserably and the movie is 100% predictable. Perhaps if you are a teenager this movie will hold some appeal, but for those that have seen many movies, you will know how the film turns out after the first 10 minutes. The rest of your time will be spent in agony waiting for the ending credits to roll.

Don't waste your time watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Must [[confess]] to having seen a few howlers in my [[time]], but this one is up there with the [[worst]] of them. [[Plot]] [[troubling]] to follow. Sex and violence [[thrown]] in to disorient and [[distract]] from the really poorly put [[together]] [[film]].

I can only [[imagine]] that the [[cast]] will [[look]] back on the [[end]] [[product]] and [[wish]] it to gather [[dust]] on a shelf not to be [[disturbed]] for a generation or two. Sadly, in my [[case]], I have the DVD. It will sit on the shelf and look at me from time to [[time]]. Must [[acknowledge]] to having seen a few howlers in my [[times]], but this one is up there with the [[hardest]] of them. [[Intrigue]] [[disturbing]] to follow. Sex and violence [[tossed]] in to disorient and [[amuse]] from the really poorly put [[jointly]] [[cinematography]].

I can only [[imagines]] that the [[casting]] will [[glance]] back on the [[ceases]] [[commodities]] and [[want]] it to gather [[stardust]] on a shelf not to be [[troubled]] for a generation or two. Sadly, in my [[lawsuits]], I have the DVD. It will sit on the shelf and look at me from time to [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "After the atomic [[bombs]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[explode]] in the Arctic, the [[creature]] 'Gammera' is released from his [[hibernation]]. The [[giant]] prehistoric turtle proceeds on a [[path]] to [[Tokyo]] and destroys anything in his path. The military and the scientific community [[rush]] to [[find]] a means to [[stop]] this [[monster]] before Tokyo is laid to [[waste]]," according to the DVD sleeve's [[synopsis]].

The re-produced for American [[audiences]] version of this, the first film in the "Gamera" series, adds English [[language]] [[material]] that is [[even]] funnier than the regularly dubbed Japanese fare. Clearly, the monster is following in the footsteps of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV series, musician Wes Farrell's ludicrous theme song heightens the US version's camp appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) Sandy Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ Dick O'Neill, Brian Donlevy, Albert Dekker, John Baragrey "After the atomic [[bombardment]] carried by a shot-down Soviet bomber [[blast]] in the Arctic, the [[ogre]] 'Gammera' is released from his [[hibernate]]. The [[jumbo]] prehistoric turtle proceeds on a [[way]] to [[Tokio]] and destroys anything in his path. The military and the scientific community [[haste]] to [[unearth]] a means to [[cease]] this [[creature]] before Tokyo is laid to [[squandering]]," according to the DVD sleeve's [[outline]].

The re-produced for American [[spectators]] version of this, the first film in the "Gamera" series, adds English [[parlance]] [[materials]] that is [[yet]] funnier than the regularly dubbed Japanese fare. Clearly, the monster is following in the footsteps of "Godzilla". Taking his cue from ABC's faddish "Batman!" TV series, musician Wes Farrell's ludicrous theme song heightens the US version's camp appeal.

*** Gammera the Invincible (12/15/66) Sandy Howard, Noriaki Yuasa ~ Dick O'Neill, Brian Donlevy, Albert Dekker, John Baragrey --------------------------------------------- Result 280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Father and son communicate very little. IN fact they speak different languages. BUt when the son drives his father 3000 miles for his pilgrimage's to Mecca, the conversations finally take place. they are difficult and growth is necessary on both parts.

This movie takes us into the hearts of these two travelers, and it is indeed a grand voyage for the audience as well as the two principals. The imagery throughout is impressive, especially the final scenes in Mecca. It underlines for me once again how much different the world can be, but also at the same time, how similar. The same was true for the father and son in this film.

See this movie. Tell your friends to see it. You'll be glad you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I [[felt]] [[asleep]], watching it!!! (and I had [[tickets]] for the midnight- [[premiere]]) [[Any]] questions? The most [[disturbing]] scene, as far as I can remember, was the techno-dance-i-dont-know-what-that-was-scene. By the [[way]] what an ending!? I [[believed]] [[slumber]], watching it!!! (and I had [[banknote]] for the midnight- [[debut]]) [[Everything]] questions? The most [[unnerving]] scene, as far as I can remember, was the techno-dance-i-dont-know-what-that-was-scene. By the [[paths]] what an ending!? --------------------------------------------- Result 282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I know I've already added a [[comment]] but I just [[wanted]] to [[clarify]] something...

I'm not some [[old]] fogey from the [[Baby]] [[Boom]] [[generation]] that [[grew]] up glued to a flickering b/w [[picture]] of [[Phil]] Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 [[years]] [[old]] before I was [[born]] but I had the [[pleasure]] of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko [[courtesy]] of BBC2. I wonder if I [[would]] have [[enjoyed]] [[Steve]] Martin's travesty if I hadn't [[seen]] or [[heard]] of Phil Silvers - I don't [[know]] - [[maybe]] I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who [[think]] this [[movie]] is worthy of a '10' [[admit]] that they haven't [[seen]] the original. I can only [[urge]] you to spend 21 minutes of your [[life]] watching a [[single]] episode. [[If]] after watching the original Ernie, [[Colonel]] [[Hall]], Ritzig & Emma, Duane Doberman, Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, [[Mullin]] et al you [[still]] [[think]] that [[Steve]] Martin's [[film]] is woth [[anything]] above a '2' - I'll stand you a [[pint]].... I know I've already added a [[observation]] but I just [[want]] to [[elucidate]] something...

I'm not some [[longtime]] fogey from the [[Honey]] [[Booming]] [[jill]] that [[heightened]] up glued to a flickering b/w [[images]] of [[Elephant]] Silvers, Jackie Gleason etc.

Bilko was already 20 [[yr]] [[archaic]] before I was [[ould]] but I had the [[joy]] of discovering Phil Silver's Bilko [[graceful]] of BBC2. I wonder if I [[should]] have [[adored]] [[Steven]] Martin's travesty if I hadn't [[noticed]] or [[listened]] of Phil Silvers - I don't [[savoir]] - [[conceivably]] I would have.

Some of the other reviewers who [[believe]] this [[cinematography]] is worthy of a '10' [[accept]] that they haven't [[noticed]] the original. I can only [[urged]] you to spend 21 minutes of your [[lives]] watching a [[lonely]] episode. [[Though]] after watching the original Ernie, [[Coronel]] [[Salle]], Ritzig & Emma, Duane Doberman, Henshaw, Dino, Flashman, Zimmerman, [[Mullen]] et al you [[again]] [[believing]] that [[Stephens]] Martin's [[kino]] is woth [[nothing]] above a '2' - I'll stand you a [[pints]].... --------------------------------------------- Result 283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Very]] different topic treated in this film. A straightforward and [[simple]] description of local Chinese customs, by looking at the daily operation of a public bath, run by the old owner and his retarded son, when older son returns home, wrongly believing his father has died. How every man in town makes his daily visit to chat, play games, discuss personal matters and get honest advice, besides the usual spa-like therapies. When old man dies, strong and loyal family ties make older son take charge, so public bath operation is not disrupted. And finally, the arrival of [[modernization]] to end this way of spending relaxed hours and getting along. The public bath has to be demolished, making place for a commercial complex to be constructed. [[Eminently]] different topic treated in this film. A straightforward and [[uncomplicated]] description of local Chinese customs, by looking at the daily operation of a public bath, run by the old owner and his retarded son, when older son returns home, wrongly believing his father has died. How every man in town makes his daily visit to chat, play games, discuss personal matters and get honest advice, besides the usual spa-like therapies. When old man dies, strong and loyal family ties make older son take charge, so public bath operation is not disrupted. And finally, the arrival of [[update]] to end this way of spending relaxed hours and getting along. The public bath has to be demolished, making place for a commercial complex to be constructed. --------------------------------------------- Result 284 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Massacre is a film directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial Ground) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. Now with this mix of great talent you would think this movie would have been a true gore fest. This could not be further from that. Massacre falls right on its face as being one of the most [[boring]] slasher films I have seen come out of Italian cinema. I was actually struggling to stay awake during the film and I have never had that problem with Italian horror films.

Massacre starts out with a hooker being slaughtered on the side of the road with an ax. This scene was used in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the movie as being an ax wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the next hour of the movie is SO boring. The movie goes on to a set of a horror film being filmed and there is a lot of character development during all these scenes but the characters in the movie are so dull and badly acted your interest starts to leak away. The last 30 minutes of the movie aren't so bad but still could have been much better. The gore in the movie was pathetic and since Fulci used most of the gore scenes in Nightmare Concert there was nothing new here. The end of the movie did leave a nice twist but there was still to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have since it is very rare. 4/10 stars Massacre is a film directed by Andrea Bianchi (Burial Ground) and produced by legendary Italian horror director Lucio Fulci. Now with this mix of great talent you would think this movie would have been a true gore fest. This could not be further from that. Massacre falls right on its face as being one of the most [[dreary]] slasher films I have seen come out of Italian cinema. I was actually struggling to stay awake during the film and I have never had that problem with Italian horror films.

Massacre starts out with a hooker being slaughtered on the side of the road with an ax. This scene was used in Fulci's Nightmare Concert. This isn't a bad scene and it raises your expectations of the movie as being an ax wielding slaughter. Unfortuanitly, the next hour of the movie is SO boring. The movie goes on to a set of a horror film being filmed and there is a lot of character development during all these scenes but the characters in the movie are so dull and badly acted your interest starts to leak away. The last 30 minutes of the movie aren't so bad but still could have been much better. The gore in the movie was pathetic and since Fulci used most of the gore scenes in Nightmare Concert there was nothing new here. The end of the movie did leave a nice twist but there was still to much unanswered and the continuity falls right through the floor.

This wasn't a very good film but for a true Italian horror freak (like myself) this movie is a must have since it is very rare. 4/10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is a [[great]] film.

I agreed to watch a chick flick and some how [[ended]] up with this. I had never heard of it or anyone in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is great! [[Eva]], [[Lake]] and Paul give [[amazing]] performances. The [[humour]] is consistently dry and [[witty]].

Paul Rudd pretty much plays the mike character from Friends (which works great). The other characters are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[characters]] are [[likable]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all work well.

[[In]] all a [[great]] feel-good [[film]] that really [[deserves]] a lot more credit than it [[gets]].

[[Everyone]] has their own tastes but I [[really]] don't [[understand]] the one star [[reviews]] for this. This is a [[whopping]] film.

I agreed to watch a chick flick and some how [[terminated]] up with this. I had never heard of it or anyone in it (excpet Mike from Friends).

But it is great! [[Ewa]], [[Lakes]] and Paul give [[staggering]] performances. The [[comedy]] is consistently dry and [[spiritual]].

Paul Rudd pretty much plays the mike character from Friends (which works great). The other characters are stereotypes and the plot is formulaic (I mean we are not talking 'Apocalypse Now' here) But the [[features]] are [[congenial]], the story is engaging, the soundtrack, production and direction all work well.

[[Across]] all a [[marvellous]] feel-good [[films]] that really [[merits]] a lot more credit than it [[attains]].

[[Someone]] has their own tastes but I [[truthfully]] don't [[comprehend]] the one star [[inspecting]] for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (71%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too long; some of

the content could have been saved for the sequel, Barry McKenzie Holds His Own, which desperately [[needed]] some new stuff anyway. [[Granted]], his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes annoying as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's songs are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 A huge hit upon release with Australian audiences, it can still be funny today, but its over-the-top political incorrectness and blunt, unsubtle humour can make it a bit of a cringer. It goes on far too long; some of

the content could have been saved for the sequel, Barry McKenzie Holds His Own, which desperately [[requisite]] some new stuff anyway. [[Accorded]], his ocker Aussie attitude is funny, but also becomes annoying as the film drags on. Some say Crocker's songs are the best bits, and they are certainly original, but "hilarious"? The Adventures of Barry McKenzie will go down as a landmark in Australian cinema, but we should do everything in our power to make sure that overseas audiences do not see the majority of Australians as Barry McKenzies (or, for that matter, Mick Dundees!). Rating: 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] this is the [[result]]. A piece of trash [[movie]] that doesn't deserve to [[even]] be classified as a [[movie]], it's just a bunch of [[stuff]] on a [[film]] [[reel]], that makes no sense whatsoever. Well back to the [[actors]], which from the get go seem to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would get a little amount of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[great]] [[horror]] film. Well it's a great [[horror]] anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the worse is the main guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a weakling to even sorta root for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST version. this is the [[findings]]. A piece of trash [[kino]] that doesn't deserve to [[yet]] be classified as a [[kino]], it's just a bunch of [[thing]] on a [[movie]] [[spool]], that makes no sense whatsoever. Well back to the [[players]], which from the get go seem to be just a bunch of friends who thought they would get a little amount of money together and try to make a movie that would be a [[prodigious]] [[terror]] film. Well it's a great [[abomination]] anyway, nevermind being a film. There's plenty of horrific acting in "Hobgoblins," but the worse is the main guy named Richard, who is just way too much of a weakling to even sorta root for. Well, when you cast a bunch of friends and try to make the film scary, on a less than shoestring budget, no less, this is what will happen. Oh well at least the MST3K version was hilarious. But this is still a horrid movie, that deserves all the bashing it gets. 9 for the MST version. --------------------------------------------- Result 288 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have only managed to see this [[classic]] for the first time a few weeks ago. Being made almost 30 years ago I thought the scary moments would be rather tame. Boy was I wrong. There are some [[great]] [[moments]] that sent shivers down my spine. Even the acting was great, Jamie Lee Curtis was fantastic and Donald Pleasance was superb.

On the downside it can be rather [[slow]] to start but once it [[gets]] going there is no stopping it. It makes all the copycats, e.g. Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream look very tame. I can't really say it is Carpenter's best because I have not seen many of his, the only one I can remember of his is Starman (I think he made it). Halloween is the crowning achievement of the horror genre. I have only managed to see this [[typical]] for the first time a few weeks ago. Being made almost 30 years ago I thought the scary moments would be rather tame. Boy was I wrong. There are some [[large]] [[times]] that sent shivers down my spine. Even the acting was great, Jamie Lee Curtis was fantastic and Donald Pleasance was superb.

On the downside it can be rather [[lento]] to start but once it [[receives]] going there is no stopping it. It makes all the copycats, e.g. Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream look very tame. I can't really say it is Carpenter's best because I have not seen many of his, the only one I can remember of his is Starman (I think he made it). Halloween is the crowning achievement of the horror genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a poor [[film]] by any standard. The [[story]] in [[Match]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[direction]] and [[writing]] a certain fascination (Woody Allen mixing his own [[culture]] with that of the [[classic]] English [[murder]] and exploring what can be [[done]] with it).

Scoop, [[however]] has [[none]] of this. It is poorly written, the two [[leads]] are hopelessly [[wooden]] and the [[story]] itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs requires at [[least]] some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French horns in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. This is a poor [[films]] by any standard. The [[histories]] in [[Teaming]] Point had a certain intrigue, and the [[directorate]] and [[write]] a certain fascination (Woody Allen mixing his own [[cultivation]] with that of the [[typical]] English [[killings]] and exploring what can be [[doing]] with it).

Scoop, [[still]] has [[nos]] of this. It is poorly written, the two [[leeds]] are hopelessly [[timber]] and the [[saga]] itself has no interest at all. The genre that it spoofs requires at [[fewer]] some sort of subplot with witty explanations and tie-ups (why are tarot cards and keys kept under French horns in locked rooms?).

Allen's delightful and witty versions of various Hollywood genres (Curse of the Jade Scorpion/Purple Rose of Cairo etc) have given us so much pleasure over the years. Even Hollywood Ending had a great central idea. Sadly his inspiration has deserted him this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] What a [[load]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies [[mutiny]] as brave and noble if it be for pacifist principles. The fairytale ends with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting promoted for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still payback for McCarthyism?

[[If]] I sound cynical it's because I am fed up with [[movies]] hawking a political agenda. The military brass in this movie are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war mongers. Sound familiar? Ever [[see]] a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson Tide stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, renounces his blood lust, suggests a promotion for the treasonous Ron Hunter, and repents by retiring from the service. A guy mutinies, takes command of your boat, puts the U.S at grave risk of receiving a nuclear first-strike, and you promote him???? What hogwash! What a [[onus]] of Leftist Hollywood bilge. This movie glorifies [[intifada]] as brave and noble if it be for pacifist principles. The fairytale ends with the pacifist character, played by Danzel Washington, actually getting promoted for his treason. What is it with these Hollywood tools? Is this still payback for McCarthyism?

[[Though]] I sound cynical it's because I am fed up with [[cinematography]] hawking a political agenda. The military brass in this movie are portrayed as, what else? Gung-ho war mongers. Sound familiar? Ever [[behold]] a movie where the CIA or any government agency is not evil? Think about it. Yet again, Crimson Tide stresses the point. The Hackman character, U-boat captain Ramsey, comes across like a raving lunatic, until the very end when, of course he comes to his senses, does a complete 360, renounces his blood lust, suggests a promotion for the treasonous Ron Hunter, and repents by retiring from the service. A guy mutinies, takes command of your boat, puts the U.S at grave risk of receiving a nuclear first-strike, and you promote him???? What hogwash! --------------------------------------------- Result 291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This film is a pure [[failure]]. I am a [[Steve]] [[Martin]] [[fan]], but [[even]] he can't [[save]] the [[tired]] [[idea]] and swiss cheese [[script]]. Think "[[Police]] [[Academy]] 7" and [[apply]] it to a military [[parody]]. [[Yuck]].

I [[DO]] NOT feel the other [[user]] [[comments]] [[reflected]] the poor [[rating]] this film received (and [[rightfully]] deserved!). It is [[extremely]] [[misleading]]. I have [[often]] [[seen]] this film marked down to $3.00 in the [[grocery]] [[store]] and now I [[certainly]] know why.

[[If]] only I [[could]] [[get]] my 90 minutes back... This film is a pure [[shortcoming]]. I am a [[Steven]] [[Martina]] [[breather]], but [[yet]] he can't [[economize]] the [[weary]] [[notions]] and swiss cheese [[hyphen]]. Think "[[Constable]] [[Oscars]] 7" and [[implement]] it to a military [[masquerade]]. [[Barf]].

I [[DOING]] NOT feel the other [[users]] [[remark]] [[manifested]] the poor [[assessments]] this film received (and [[lawfully]] deserved!). It is [[vitally]] [[deceitful]]. I have [[routinely]] [[saw]] this film marked down to $3.00 in the [[grocer]] [[storehouse]] and now I [[indubitably]] know why.

[[Though]] only I [[wo]] [[got]] my 90 minutes back... --------------------------------------------- Result 292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[waited]] and [[waited]] for this [[film]] to come out,the trailers [[seemed]] to be on for [[years]], it was worth it. I'm not a [[big]] fan of [[watching]] [[films]] over and over again but i cant wait for this to [[come]] out for all to buy! Not a [[big]] fan of Jim but this [[suited]] him [[perfectly]], there was so much to [[see]] and the 'feel good factor' is off the scale, [[perfect]] for [[Christmas]]. I [[think]] Ron did a fab [[job]] [[turning]] this into a [[film]], [[If]] you haven't [[seen]] it then do so, if you have, watch it again, i [[know]] you [[want]] to! I [[await]] and [[awaited]] for this [[cinematography]] to come out,the trailers [[sounded]] to be on for [[olds]], it was worth it. I'm not a [[gargantuan]] fan of [[staring]] [[filmmaking]] over and over again but i cant wait for this to [[coming]] out for all to buy! Not a [[massive]] fan of Jim but this [[readjusted]] him [[totally]], there was so much to [[seeing]] and the 'feel good factor' is off the scale, [[perfection]] for [[Claus]]. I [[reckon]] Ron did a fab [[employment]] [[turn]] this into a [[filmmaking]], [[Unless]] you haven't [[saw]] it then do so, if you have, watch it again, i [[savoir]] you [[wants]] to! --------------------------------------------- Result 293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Who wrote this? Some [[guy]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[screenplay]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've [[told]] him you're [[supposed]] to write dialog that sounds like something someone actually might say.

And who [[directed]] this? Scott Marshal? Son of Gerry Marshall. My the [[nut]] has [[fallen]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him [[know]] that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in New York, and it will [[look]] real, and you won't have to fake it with a blue screen for no reason. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't act. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only reason I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete opposite of a classic film. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[bad]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't pay to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't go on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater sooner. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The film starts out laughably bad, and then goes to the point of being so bad it becomes a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first act is ending, you realize it'll only get worse, and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. Who wrote this? Some [[boys]] named John Cohen. I guess this was the first [[scenarios]] he's ever worked on. Someone should've [[say]] him you're [[presumed]] to write dialog that sounds like something someone actually might say.

And who [[geared]] this? Scott Marshal? Son of Gerry Marshall. My the [[walnuts]] has [[decreased]] far from the tree. Someone might have wanted to let him [[savoir]] that you can, in fact, shoot a scene in a cab in New York, and it will [[gaze]] real, and you won't have to fake it with a blue screen for no reason. Might have also wanted to let him know he should stay away from Jessica Simpson, but hopefully he's learned that lesson now.

And Jessica Simpson... naturally she can't act. Hell, she makes Jessica Alba look like Audry Hepburn, and yet she's starring in this movie. OH wait, it was produced by her father. Okay, that's why she got the part. That's really the only reason I can think of.

So should I be surprised it's bad? No. Should I be amazed at how bad it is? I think a lot of people would if they saw as much of it as I did. I mean you expect a movie starring Jessica Simpson to be bad, but this... it's not just bad, it's the complete opposite of a classic film. Think of a great Woody Allen movie, this film is as [[mala]] as that film is good. It's the Anti-Annie Hall.

I am so glad I didn't pay to see it, I stopped watching ten minutes in cus I couldn't go on. No doubt I would've walked out of the theater sooner. In fact I wonder how many of the 6 people who saw it per theater actually stayed and watched the whole thing. The film starts out laughably bad, and then goes to the point of being so bad it becomes a kind of Chinese water torture. And then, around when the first act is ending, you realize it'll only get worse, and that's when you either need to leave, or kill yourself.

In conclusion, this film goes under the category of being so bad it should be used in place of water boarding at Guantanamo Bay. Although some prefer the water boarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Films such as Chocolat, Beau Travail, and others have propelled French director Claire Denis into the top echelon of the world's most unique and accomplished filmmakers and her 2004 film The Intruder (L'Intrus) adds to the depth of her portfolio. A cinematic poem that conveys a mood of abiding loneliness and loss, the film provides a glimpse into the psyche of a man who is deteriorating physically and mentally and who travels to various parts of the globe seeking redemption and peace but finds it hard to come by. Loosely based on Jean-Luc Nancy's memoir of a heart transplant, The Intruder is a film of such unrelenting opaqueness that even after two viewings it is difficult to describe it in other than subjective, impressionistic terms.

Louis Trebor (Michael Subor) is a man in his seventies who is likely dying of a heart condition and who, like the professor in Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries, attempts to come to terms with the mistakes of his life while he has time. It is clear that he is physically rugged and very wealthy but seems emotionally drained and the look on his face is one of quiet resignation. Though we see only one episode of violence, where he gets out of bed in the middle of night to kill an intruder, there is a sinister sense about him. He might be an intelligence officer, a foreign agent, or a hit man.

Whatever the case, he apparently is under some kind of surveillance and acts like a man that has been involved in criminal wrongdoing and is only now able to see the consequences. Facial close-ups throughout the movie create a strong sense of isolation. He lives with his dogs in a cabin in the Jura Mountains near the French-Swiss border and has an estranged son Sidney (Gregoire Collin) whom he has long neglected. Sidney lives nearby with his wife Antoinette (Florence Loiret-Caille) and their two children. In one telling scene, he meets up with his father on the street and calls him a lunatic, but that does not prevent him from taking his money.

When the film opens, we meet Antoinette, a Swiss border guard, who boards a van with a trained dog to sniff out some contraband. When she comes home, she is greeted by her husband who asks her with tongue-in-cheek if she has "anything to declare?" Other than these three individuals, the people and circumstances we see during the rest of the film may exist only in Louis' imagination. Louis has three women in his life and we meet them all in the film's first half hour: a pharmacist (Bambou) who prepares his medication, a neighbor (Béatrice Dalle) who is a dog breeder who refuses to care for his dogs when he goes away on a trip telling him that they are as crazy as he is, and a young Russian organ dealer (Katia Golubeva) who he tells he wants a "young man's heart".

Relentlessly, she stalks him throughout the film but it is apparently only in his mind. In the last section of the film, Louis travels to South Korea in search of a heart transplant and to Tahiti to deliver a gift to a different son, one whom he has not seen for many years or perhaps has never seen. His heart transplant, however, appears to be a metaphor for a man without a heart, a man whose life has been fascinating but ultimately directionless, intruding into other people's lives with little real empathy. The Intruder contains a haunting guitar soundtrack by Stuart Staples of the band Tindersticks, reminiscent of the guitar riff in Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man, and gorgeous cinematography by Denis regular Agnes Godard.

Godard creates memorable images that convey a mood of longing and regret: a heart beating alone in the snow, an infant in a sling looking up at his father for a good two minutes, the baby's expression gradually turning from morose to a half smile, colored streamers blowing from a newly christened ship, a massage in a dark room by a mysterious Korean masseuse, and the vast expanse of ocean seen from a bobbing ship deck. While The Intruder can be frustrating because of its elliptical nature, Denis forces us to respond out of our own experience, to understand the images on the screen on a very personal level. If there is any theme, a hint might be found in the opening that tells us what is revealed piecemeal in the film - "your worst enemies are hiding, in the shadow, in your heart." --------------------------------------------- Result 295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Not exactly my genre, this straight-to-DVD street fight action is one I only encountered due to a friend putting it on whilst we had a few [[beers]]. I'm relatively open minded, and [[quite]] a [[fan]] of Eamonn Walker, so I [[sat]] back ready to enjoy myself.

Blood and Bone is the story of Isiah Bone, an ex-con who becomes a street fighter for unclear reasons which eventually unfold as the film progresses. Blah blah blah.

What a [[tedious]] film. I understand that films like this don't rely hugely on plot, but do they have to stuff in such a silly, predictable and entirely stupid storyline? It may not be important, but by golly gum does it annoy me. Better no plot and pure action than a clíche-ridden fleabag mongrel of a narrative. Infused with entirely unfounded and unachieving sentimental drivel, it is the cinematic equivalent of a thin-skinned turkey stuffed with rotten innards. I should probably at this point mention what is, of course, the film's drawing point: the fighting. Even in itself, the fighting is rather poor. Bone manages to take out well established tough-man street fighters in single punches (a large oaf or two is the filmmakers' laughworthy attempt to rectify this inconsistency); fighters who never seem to conclude that attacking one by one is a foolish ploy. Even this is repetitive and stupid, arms broken and faces kicked with a steady alacrity that we get to see time and time again.

A run of the mill, film-by-numbers movie which fully deserves its straight to DVD status, doing absolutely nothing new and everything we've seen time and time again. And not [[even]] particularly well. Not exactly my genre, this straight-to-DVD street fight action is one I only encountered due to a friend putting it on whilst we had a few [[pints]]. I'm relatively open minded, and [[abundantly]] a [[breather]] of Eamonn Walker, so I [[oin]] back ready to enjoy myself.

Blood and Bone is the story of Isiah Bone, an ex-con who becomes a street fighter for unclear reasons which eventually unfold as the film progresses. Blah blah blah.

What a [[tiresome]] film. I understand that films like this don't rely hugely on plot, but do they have to stuff in such a silly, predictable and entirely stupid storyline? It may not be important, but by golly gum does it annoy me. Better no plot and pure action than a clíche-ridden fleabag mongrel of a narrative. Infused with entirely unfounded and unachieving sentimental drivel, it is the cinematic equivalent of a thin-skinned turkey stuffed with rotten innards. I should probably at this point mention what is, of course, the film's drawing point: the fighting. Even in itself, the fighting is rather poor. Bone manages to take out well established tough-man street fighters in single punches (a large oaf or two is the filmmakers' laughworthy attempt to rectify this inconsistency); fighters who never seem to conclude that attacking one by one is a foolish ploy. Even this is repetitive and stupid, arms broken and faces kicked with a steady alacrity that we get to see time and time again.

A run of the mill, film-by-numbers movie which fully deserves its straight to DVD status, doing absolutely nothing new and everything we've seen time and time again. And not [[yet]] particularly well. --------------------------------------------- Result 296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This movie [[surprised]] me! Not ever having heard of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this [[movie]] was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo style! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one John Woo and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it [[comes]] to action! The fact that "Moon Child" would feature a vampire convinced me even more! How can you go [[wrong]] with gun blazing [[vampires]]! [[Sounds]] promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It takes it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and loyalty! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very effective but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in plot this movie has an ambiance and slickness that makes it hard not to like this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[wonderful]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! This movie [[flabbergasted]] me! Not ever having heard of Hyde of Gackt I was not expecting much! The reason I wanted to watch this [[cinematographic]] was because somebody mentioned that the movie contained some serious action scenes in John Woo style! Normally I am very careful when this is claimed! There is only one John Woo and til this day there hasn't been one director that comes close to his brilliance when it [[happens]] to action! The fact that "Moon Child" would feature a vampire convinced me even more! How can you go [[fallacious]] with gun blazing [[vampire]]! [[Noises]] promising and interesting! The first thing I noticed about this movie that the pace was considerably slow! It takes it's time to set the mood! This movie contains some nice Hong Kong style action scenes! But "Moon Child" isn't an action movie! It is a drama about friendship and loyalty! The focus is on the characters and their relation to each other! The pop singers Hyde and Gackt do a good job in acting and are very believable as friends! The only problem I had was with the plot! A couple of times the movie seems to skip a few years without explaining what happened and why they had to skip! Example:When one member of the gang dies (very dramatic moment) Alexander Wang sees Kei (Hyde) drinking blood of one of the attackers! Without warning and explanation the movie skips 9 nine years and most of the friends aren't together anymore! Also without a proper reason given Son (Alexander Wang) and Sho (Gackt) have to kill each other! I know that this is done to add some serious drama! Because of the actors it is very effective but sometimes it does feel forced! Apart from the flaws in plot this movie has an ambiance and slickness that makes it hard not to like this movie! It is hard to explain why this movie is [[glamorous]]! But it just is! The overall experience you get is heartwarming and sincere! --------------------------------------------- Result 297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] The Rookie [[kept]] me [[smiling]] from [[beginning]] to end. [[Dennis]] Quaid [[played]] the role to [[perfection]]. The [[little]] [[boy]] that plays his [[son]] was [[fantastic]]. He [[made]] this a father-son [[movie]] to [[remember]]. The [[messages]] are [[good]] ones. Follow your [[dreams]]. [[Failing]] at the pursuit is alright as long as you [[try]]. The excitement is [[palpable]]. I believe this movie will be a [[classic]]. The Rookie [[maintained]] me [[grins]] from [[launching]] to end. [[Denny]] Quaid [[effected]] the role to [[faultless]]. The [[scant]] [[dude]] that plays his [[yarns]] was [[sumptuous]]. He [[introduced]] this a father-son [[flick]] to [[remind]]. The [[messaging]] are [[alright]] ones. Follow your [[daydream]]. [[Defect]] at the pursuit is alright as long as you [[attempted]]. The excitement is [[overt]]. I believe this movie will be a [[conventional]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I agree with the last reviewer that this movie had terrible acting. Yes, there was a lot of gore and some nudity. But it was overshadowed by a slow-moving, meaningless plot and dumb ending. Where was this supposed to be filmed anyway: a Canadian Chinatown or Hong Kong? Hostel was a much better movie and I would recommend seeing that instead. A technical annoyance I had with the DVD is that if you shut off the Spanish subtitles, they return after a few scenes and then you have to go back to the main menu and turn them off again. Also, don't waste your time on the deleted scenes because there's no audio and it just looks like tourist footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Powers Boothe turns in a stellar performance as 1970's [[cult]] figure Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple. Jones physical likeness to [[Jones]] is [[uncanny]] and the story is acted out chillingly. The movie keeps you [[riveted]] and is a [[must]] see for [[anyone]]. check it out. Powers Boothe turns in a stellar performance as 1970's [[religions]] figure Jim Jones of the Peoples Temple. Jones physical likeness to [[Jonesy]] is [[surprising]] and the story is acted out chillingly. The movie keeps you [[fascinated]] and is a [[ought]] see for [[nobody]]. check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As a [[kid]] I [[thought]] this movie was great. It had animals, it had beautiful [[music]], and it had my favorite [[actor]]: Michael J. Fox. Now, I still [[love]] this movie, for [[different]] reasons. It has well trained animals that are put through various stunts and scenes that look excellent on camera. It has [[beautiful]], well-written musical that fits the scenes perfectly, with rousing fast-paced melodies and the heart wrenching main theme, that still makes me [[cry]]. [[Even]] when people [[hum]] it. And it has my favorite [[actor]], Michael J. Fox.

Based on a book, this is the [[story]] of three house pets, an [[intelligent]], overly-trusting and considerably paternal lab by the name of Shadow, a witty and vain - but still smart - cat with a [[fear]] of water named [[Sassy]] and a street-smart ridiculously curious and slightly neurotic bulldog, Chance. The three are taken to a friend's farm when their family goes away. Dismayed and worried, the pets break out and plan a trip across the Sierra mountains for the trip of their lives. A truly incredible journey. So what, [[maybe]] [[home]] IS just over that [[mountain]]. But what if it isn't?

I suggest Homeward Bound for people that like the three [[amazing]] [[actors]] providing the voices for the lead animal [[characters]], and for [[anyone]] else that ... yeah, [[everyone]] [[go]] watch it. As a [[kiddo]] I [[figured]] this movie was great. It had animals, it had beautiful [[musicians]], and it had my favorite [[actress]]: Michael J. Fox. Now, I still [[amore]] this movie, for [[divergent]] reasons. It has well trained animals that are put through various stunts and scenes that look excellent on camera. It has [[glamorous]], well-written musical that fits the scenes perfectly, with rousing fast-paced melodies and the heart wrenching main theme, that still makes me [[crying]]. [[Yet]] when people [[humming]] it. And it has my favorite [[protagonist]], Michael J. Fox.

Based on a book, this is the [[history]] of three house pets, an [[shrewd]], overly-trusting and considerably paternal lab by the name of Shadow, a witty and vain - but still smart - cat with a [[affraid]] of water named [[Impudent]] and a street-smart ridiculously curious and slightly neurotic bulldog, Chance. The three are taken to a friend's farm when their family goes away. Dismayed and worried, the pets break out and plan a trip across the Sierra mountains for the trip of their lives. A truly incredible journey. So what, [[presumably]] [[household]] IS just over that [[mont]]. But what if it isn't?

I suggest Homeward Bound for people that like the three [[unbelievable]] [[actresses]] providing the voices for the lead animal [[characteristics]], and for [[somebody]] else that ... yeah, [[somebody]] [[going]] watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 301 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Modern viewers know this little film primarily as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Older]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna [[Loy]], and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of modifying perspectives, and with so [[many]] films [[today]] verily ulcerating with [[social]] and political [[commentary]], there is a [[natural]] [[curiosity]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[seemingly]] less provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only lightly softened by the coming of Levittowns and the like. Politics in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Loy]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to [[congresswoman]] Helen Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on [[communism]] (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a small role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his son, Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the odd fellow out was Cary Grant, whose strident conservatism reflected a majority political sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: Communism was a real perceived threat and the blacklist was just around the corner. It would be another decade before political activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. Modern viewers know this little film primarily as the model for the remake, "The Money Pit." [[Aging]] viewers today watch it with wisps of nostalgia: Cary Grant, Myrna [[Lui]], and Melvyn Douglas were all "superstars" in an easier, less complicated era. Or was it? Time, of course, has a way of modifying perspectives, and with so [[several]] films [[yesterday]] verily ulcerating with [[sociable]] and political [[remarks]], there is a [[naturel]] [[nosey]] to wonder about controversy in older, [[allegedly]] less provocative films. In "Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House," there may, therefore, be more than what audiences were looking for in 1948. There is political commentary, however subtle. Finding a house in the late 40s was a truly exasperating experience, only lightly softened by the coming of Levittowns and the like. Politics in the movie? The Blandings children always seem to be talking about progressive ideas being taught to them in school (which in real life would get teachers accused of communism). In real life, too, Myrna [[Lui]] was a housing activist, a Democrat, and a feminist. Melvyn Douglas was no less a Democratic firebrand: he was married to [[congressman]] Helen Gahagan Douglas, whom young Richard Nixon accused of being soft on [[communists]] (and which ruined her). Jason Robards, sr., has a small role in the film, but his political activism was no less noticeable. More importantly, his son, Jason Robards, jr., would be for many years a very active liberal Democrat. Almost the odd fellow out was Cary Grant, whose strident conservatism reflected a majority political sentiment in Hollywood that was already slipping. But this was 1948: Communism was a real perceived threat and the blacklist was just around the corner. It would be another decade before political activism would reappear in mainstream films, and then not so subtly. --------------------------------------------- Result 302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is probably one of the [[worst]] [[films]] i have ever [[seen]]. The events in it are completely random and make little or no sense. The fact that there is a sequel is so sickening i [[may]] [[come]] down with a [[case]] of cabin fever (I'M SO SORRY). I describe it as bug being smooshed to a newspaper because it seems to be different parts of things mixed together. [[e]].[[g]] Kevin the pancake loving [[karate]] [[kid]] is just freakishly weird on its own, then there's the cop who is slightly [[weird]] and [[perverted]], then the [[drug]] addict, then there's the fact that they [[attack]] some [[random]] [[guy]] who [[clearly]] needs help. then all of a sudden the main [[character]] is having sex with his friends girlfriend just because she [[says]] [[something]] [[stupid]] about a [[plane]] [[going]] down. then at the end some [[good]] [[old]] [[family]] racism followed by a [[rabbit]] [[operating]] on Kevin the [[karate]] [[kid]]. Its [[actually]] [[pretty]] despicable that they can [[use]] racism as a joke in this [[film]]. There is no [[reason]] for [[anyone]] to enjoy this [[film]] [[unless]] you [[love]] Eli [[Roth]], [[even]] that did not [[make]] me like this [[film]]. [[Hate]] is a [[strong]] word but [[seeing]] as it is the only word i am [[permitted]] to [[use]] it will have to do. [[BOYCOTT]] [[CABIN]] [[FEVER]] 2!!!!! This is probably one of the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] i have ever [[noticed]]. The events in it are completely random and make little or no sense. The fact that there is a sequel is so sickening i [[maggio]] [[arriving]] down with a [[lawsuits]] of cabin fever (I'M SO SORRY). I describe it as bug being smooshed to a newspaper because it seems to be different parts of things mixed together. [[f]].[[grams]] Kevin the pancake loving [[kicks]] [[enfant]] is just freakishly weird on its own, then there's the cop who is slightly [[odd]] and [[kinky]], then the [[narcotics]] addict, then there's the fact that they [[assaults]] some [[indiscriminate]] [[boy]] who [[unequivocally]] needs help. then all of a sudden the main [[characters]] is having sex with his friends girlfriend just because she [[said]] [[anything]] [[nonsensical]] about a [[airplanes]] [[go]] down. then at the end some [[alright]] [[antique]] [[families]] racism followed by a [[jackrabbit]] [[functioning]] on Kevin the [[kicks]] [[kiddo]]. Its [[indeed]] [[quite]] despicable that they can [[utilised]] racism as a joke in this [[cinematography]]. There is no [[motives]] for [[everybody]] to enjoy this [[cinema]] [[if]] you [[amour]] Eli [[Ruth]], [[yet]] that did not [[deliver]] me like this [[cinematography]]. [[Detest]] is a [[forceful]] word but [[witnessing]] as it is the only word i am [[enabled]] to [[utilizes]] it will have to do. [[RESISTING]] [[BUNGALOW]] [[CLASSICAL]] 2!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' [[First]] [[time]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sidney]] Lumet) has [[concocted]] a melodrama that [[explores]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to unthinkable extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the [[gradual]] but nearly complete implosion of a family by a much used but, here, very [[sensible]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this rather harrowing tale, we see all the motivations of the players in this case of a robbery gone very wrong.

Andy Hanson (Philip Seymour Hoffman) is a wealthy executive, married to an emotionally needy Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an expensive drug habit. His life is beginning to crumble and he needs money. Andy's ne're-do well younger brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in ruins - he is divorced from his shrewish wife Martha (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child support, and has borrowed all he can from his friends, and he needs money. Andy proposes a low-key robbery of a small Mall mom-and-pop jewelry store that promises safe, quick cash for both. The glitch is that the jewelry story belongs to the men's parents - Charles (Albert Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy advances Hank some cash and wrangles an agreement that Hank will do the actual robbery, but though Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' plan, he hires a friend to take on the actual job while Hank plans to be the driver of the getaway car. The robbery is horribly botched when Nanette, filing in for the regular clerk, shoots the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The disaster unveils many secrets about the fragile relationships of the family and when Nanette dies, Charles and Andy and Hank (and their respective partners) are driven to disastrous ends with surprises at every turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an easy film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp The full title of this film is 'May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows you're dead', a rewording of the old Irish toast 'May you have food and raiment, a soft pillow for your head; may you be 40 years in heaven, before the devil knows you're dead.' [[Firstly]] [[moment]] screenwriter Kelly Masterson (with some modifications by director [[Sid]] Lumet) has [[invented]] a melodrama that [[scrutinize]] just how fragmented a family can become when external forces drive the members to unthinkable extremes. In this film the viewer is allowed to witness the [[phased]] but nearly complete implosion of a family by a much used but, here, very [[rational]] manipulation of the flashback/flash forward technique of storytelling. By repeatedly offering the differing vantages of each of the characters about the central incidents that drive this rather harrowing tale, we see all the motivations of the players in this case of a robbery gone very wrong.

Andy Hanson (Philip Seymour Hoffman) is a wealthy executive, married to an emotionally needy Gina (Marisa Tomei), and addicted to an expensive drug habit. His life is beginning to crumble and he needs money. Andy's ne're-do well younger brother Hank (Ethan Hawke) is a life in ruins - he is divorced from his shrewish wife Martha (Amy Ryan), is behind in alimony and child support, and has borrowed all he can from his friends, and he needs money. Andy proposes a low-key robbery of a small Mall mom-and-pop jewelry store that promises safe, quick cash for both. The glitch is that the jewelry story belongs to the men's parents - Charles (Albert Finney) and Nanette (Rosemary Harris). Andy advances Hank some cash and wrangles an agreement that Hank will do the actual robbery, but though Hank agrees to the 'fail-safe' plan, he hires a friend to take on the actual job while Hank plans to be the driver of the getaway car. The robbery is horribly botched when Nanette, filing in for the regular clerk, shoots the robber and is herself shot in the mess. The disaster unveils many secrets about the fragile relationships of the family and when Nanette dies, Charles and Andy and Hank (and their respective partners) are driven to disastrous ends with surprises at every turn.

Each of the actors in this strong but emotionally acrid film gives superb performances, and while we have come to expect that from Hoffman, Hawke, Tomei, Finney, Ryan, and Harris, it is the wise hand of direction from Sidney Lumet that make this film so unforgettably powerful. It is not an easy film to watch, but it is a film that allows some bravura performances that demand our respect, a film that reminds us how fragile many families can be. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 304 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Almost 30 [[years]] later I [[recall]] this original PBS film as almost unbearably [[tender]]. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever matched this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This wonderful film is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. Almost 30 [[yrs]] later I [[reminded]] this original PBS film as almost unbearably [[offerings]]. Periodically, I check here at IMDb hoping that someone has had the good sense to purchase the rights and put it on a DVD. It's September of 2004, and I keep hoping -- deep sigh.

One of the two lead actors went on to a small career primarily in a prime-time evening soap; the other, Frances Lee McCain, was seen in small roles here and there for a few years. But nothing they did before or after ever matched this little movie which was produced, as I recall it, on a short-lived PBS series which showcased original screenplays by new and up-and-coming playwrights.

I watched it every time it was shown on PBS, maybe 2 or 3 times. That was before the era of VCRs, so I have no record of it, except in my mind's eye.

12/31/2006 addition to above: Happy New Year, ladies! This wonderful film is finally available on DVD at ladyslipper.org. My understanding is that the DVDs are burned from the writer's own personal copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I saw this piece of [[garbage]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it could be considered in any way an American Movie Classic. It was [[awful]] in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even consider doing this movie? I saw this piece of [[detritus]] on AMC last night, and wonder how it could be considered in any way an American Movie Classic. It was [[scary]] in every way. How badly did Jack Lemmon, James Stewart and the rest of the cast need cash that they would even consider doing this movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 306 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is full of major spoilers, so beware.

"Prix de Beaute" [[always]] suffers in [[comparison]] to the two films Louise [[Brooks]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[ways]], "Prix" is the quintessential Brooks film. Here she has a chance to be charming without the [[dark]] side of her Pabst [[collaboration]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[films]] don't is music. [[In]] this early French [[film]], the [[whole]] [[Louise]] Brooks mystique is fleshed out powerfully with a [[conjunction]] of [[image]], song and [[music]]. The Charleston is what [[seems]] most associated with [[Brooks]] (she was the first to dance it in [[Europe]]), but the essence of the actress comes [[across]] more [[strongly]] in the tango. The tango also plays a plot point in "Prix," being the music she danced with on her short rise to stardom after becoming Miss Europe. Later, when she has forsaken her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of jealous husband Andre, the longing for her forsaken fame becomes apparent when the same tango record is seen on her apartment record player. So appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to accompany the documentary about her life, "Looking for Lulu," a film narrated by Shirley Maclaine. The brazen and forceful quality of the tango epitomizes Louise Brooks' strong-headed but elegant and erotic individuality.

The song, "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," adds an immense amount of pathos to what is not a great [[film]] (but a very [[good]] one). By the way, Brooks' voice was not dubbed for the film by Edith Piaf as some have claimed. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't discovered until 1935. The song, however, is what Brooks' character, Lucienne, sings to Andre at the beginning of the film to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she sings for her screen test, which she views with the producers and managers who intend to shape her career. It continues on screen after husband Andre, who has followed her to the screening room, shoots and kills her. In a single shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. This is full of major spoilers, so beware.

"Prix de Beaute" [[permanently]] suffers in [[comparative]] to the two films Louise [[Creek]] made with G. W. Pabst, "Pandora's Box" and "Diary of a Lost Girl," but in some [[method]], "Prix" is the quintessential Brooks film. Here she has a chance to be charming without the [[dusky]] side of her Pabst [[cooperation]]. What "Prix" has that the Pabst [[kino]] don't is music. [[Among]] this early French [[cinematography]], the [[ensemble]] [[Louie]] Brooks mystique is fleshed out powerfully with a [[cooperate]] of [[photography]], song and [[musician]]. The Charleston is what [[appears]] most associated with [[Brook]] (she was the first to dance it in [[Eu]]), but the essence of the actress comes [[in]] more [[aggressively]] in the tango. The tango also plays a plot point in "Prix," being the music she danced with on her short rise to stardom after becoming Miss Europe. Later, when she has forsaken her fame in favor of a mundane existence as the wife of jealous husband Andre, the longing for her forsaken fame becomes apparent when the same tango record is seen on her apartment record player. So appropriate is the tango to Brooks it is used to accompany the documentary about her life, "Looking for Lulu," a film narrated by Shirley Maclaine. The brazen and forceful quality of the tango epitomizes Louise Brooks' strong-headed but elegant and erotic individuality.

The song, "Je n'ai qu'un amour, c'est toi," adds an immense amount of pathos to what is not a great [[cinematography]] (but a very [[buena]] one). By the way, Brooks' voice was not dubbed for the film by Edith Piaf as some have claimed. Piaf was born in 1915, and wasn't discovered until 1935. The song, however, is what Brooks' character, Lucienne, sings to Andre at the beginning of the film to cheer him up and express her deep affection for him. And at the climax it is the song she sings for her screen test, which she views with the producers and managers who intend to shape her career. It continues on screen after husband Andre, who has followed her to the screening room, shoots and kills her. In a single shot, with Lucinenne's dead body in repose at the bottom of the screen while her screen test continues above with the song she once sang to Andre, the essence of what movies do that other art forms do not is perfectly characterized. As Andre watches his now dead wife sing to him on screen, the murder weapon still smoking, he subtly smiles. She is now his forever, and by association, ours.

Coincidentally, Louise Brooks real life career crashed and burned after "Prix de Beaute," so it was also the death of her final starring roll as well. This film really seals the Brooks mystique more so than the Pabst films (which are superior films, no doubt). It also points out what it is about the movies that create the whole idea of the "cult" of the movies - where people like Brooks, James Dean and Marilyn Monroe live on more intensely after their death than when they were alive. --------------------------------------------- Result 307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The [[year]] is 1964. [[Ernesto]] "Che" Guevara, having been a Cuban citizen for the last five years,disappears from the face of the Earth,leaving a glum Fidel Castro to announce that he is probably dead,when in [[truth]], he has left Cuba to move to Bolivia to live an assumed identity. Whilst [[living]] in La Paz,Guevara undertakes an idea to overthrow the corrupt,bourgeois government there. Once again,[[Steven]] Soderberg takes up where 'Che:[[Part]] One' [[leaves]] off (only better this time). The pacing is more on [[target]],the job of acting is ever so [[fine]] (including a turn by a sickly looking Benecio Del Toro,as Che Guevara). [[Suffice]] it to say,it's probably best if you see both films,to get the true story of Guevara & what kind of a man he was (I had the [[rare]] open window of opportunity to see both films at one screening----talk about a long haul!). As with 'Che-Part 1:The Argentine',this film has no MPAA rating, but contains enough salty language & violence to [[easily]] snag it an 'R'. The [[annum]] is 1964. [[Ernest]] "Che" Guevara, having been a Cuban citizen for the last five years,disappears from the face of the Earth,leaving a glum Fidel Castro to announce that he is probably dead,when in [[veracity]], he has left Cuba to move to Bolivia to live an assumed identity. Whilst [[iife]] in La Paz,Guevara undertakes an idea to overthrow the corrupt,bourgeois government there. Once again,[[Steve]] Soderberg takes up where 'Che:[[Portion]] One' [[departs]] off (only better this time). The pacing is more on [[purposes]],the job of acting is ever so [[fined]] (including a turn by a sickly looking Benecio Del Toro,as Che Guevara). [[Adequate]] it to say,it's probably best if you see both films,to get the true story of Guevara & what kind of a man he was (I had the [[scarce]] open window of opportunity to see both films at one screening----talk about a long haul!). As with 'Che-Part 1:The Argentine',this film has no MPAA rating, but contains enough salty language & violence to [[conveniently]] snag it an 'R'. --------------------------------------------- Result 308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[think]] I should [[start]] this in [[saying]] that [[nearly]] any [[style]] of [[work]] can be [[entertaining]] in parts. The [[true]] [[test]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I gave the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who [[enjoy]] reading many blogs--that blogs can't [[compare]] with [[good]] novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with good film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a [[poor]] example of independent filmography. From [[start]] to [[finish]], FEM [[feels]] like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[even]] MySpace [[gets]] some [[pimping]].) [[If]] I [[wanted]] to [[see]] an hour of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[certainly]] grittier than the bubble gum [[atmosphere]] of the aforementioned [[media]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[story]]. It's like [[watching]] the mundaneness of [[life]], which I [[think]] most would agree is very [[naturally]] [[boring]]. And yet the creators of FEM want us to [[applaud]] it, their very postmodern film about [[making]] a film. Cue my [[yawn]].

Ultimately, I come away not caring the [[least]] bit about any of it. I'm shocked that I'm actually interested in taking time out to [[write]] this [[review]], [[even]]. It's not that FEM is [[downright]] [[bad]], because it isn't; it has a few moments where I crack a smile or think that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[happen]]. It's [[rather]] that it's just [[downright]]...mediocre. I feel so [[indifferent]] about it that it's [[almost]] fitting of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I hope the creators/"[[actors]]" in the [[film]] [[get]] out of debt from their [[efforts]]. They'll [[probably]] [[need]] it for when one of them moves out and moves on with [[life]].

See this movie if you've [[got]] [[time]] to waste and [[nothing]] [[much]] you [[want]] to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[worry]] that you've missed some [[great]], undiscovered talent. You really haven't. I [[reckon]] I should [[starts]] this in [[arguing]] that [[roughly]] any [[elegance]] of [[cooperate]] can be [[entertain]] in parts. The [[genuine]] [[proof]] is whether it is good from start to finish, which is the reason I gave the analogical title for this review. Most of us would agree--even those like me, who [[enjoying]] reading many blogs--that blogs can't [[compared]] with [[alright]] novel writing for a number of reasons. Likewise, FEM can't compare with good film making for a number of reasons, and I actually believe it's a [[pauper]] example of independent filmography. From [[beginnings]] to [[finis]], FEM [[thinks]] like a pieced together vlog. (Heck, [[yet]] MySpace [[got]] some [[procuring]].) [[Though]] I [[wanting]] to [[behold]] an hour of lonelygirl15--I don't--I'd go watch it. FEM, while [[definitely]] grittier than the bubble gum [[vibe]] of the aforementioned [[medias]], is so personal that it is without an interesting [[tale]]. It's like [[staring]] the mundaneness of [[lives]], which I [[reckon]] most would agree is very [[clearly]] [[dull]]. And yet the creators of FEM want us to [[praising]] it, their very postmodern film about [[doing]] a film. Cue my [[yawns]].

Ultimately, I come away not caring the [[less]] bit about any of it. I'm shocked that I'm actually interested in taking time out to [[writes]] this [[examine]], [[yet]]. It's not that FEM is [[wholly]] [[wicked]], because it isn't; it has a few moments where I crack a smile or think that maybe--just maybe--something of interest is about to [[arise]]. It's [[quite]] that it's just [[wholly]]...mediocre. I feel so [[oblivious]] about it that it's [[roughly]] fitting of an oxymoron: passionate indifference.

I hope the creators/"[[protagonists]]" in the [[cinematography]] [[gets]] out of debt from their [[endeavors]]. They'll [[undoubtedly]] [[needed]] it for when one of them moves out and moves on with [[lives]].

See this movie if you've [[did]] [[moment]] to waste and [[anything]] [[very]] you [[wish]] to do; otherwise, pass it by, and don't [[disturb]] that you've missed some [[wondrous]], undiscovered talent. You really haven't. --------------------------------------------- Result 309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Leave it to geniuses like Ventura Pons, the Spanish [[director]], to convince the [[higher]] ups in his country to subsidize this [[misguided]] attempt of a [[film]]. The [[sad]] state of the film industry in that country is a product of [[trying]] to [[make]] a film out of such [[thin]] material. [[Most]] of the [[pictures]] that are made in [[Spain]] [[fall]] under two categories: those about the Spanish [[Civil]] War, that love to [[present]] past [[history]] as the writers deem fit. The other [[type]] of films show the viewer with a lot of [[gratuitous]] [[sex]] because the 'creators' don't have anything interest to say.

As the film opens we get to watch Pere's penis as he attempts to cut it off and place it in one of the platters at a party. Later on, Sandra will show all she has been given for the audience to admire. The story of Pere's attraction to Sandra, a married woman that seems to be happily married, is false from the start.

Our only interest in watching the film centered on an earlier, better made picture by Mr. Pons, "Amic/Amat", but alas, it has nothing to do with the mess we are [[punished]] to watch in this venture. As far as the comments submitted in IMDb, all the negative votes come from Spanish viewers, which speaks volumes coming from them! Leave it to geniuses like Ventura Pons, the Spanish [[headmaster]], to convince the [[high]] ups in his country to subsidize this [[flawed]] attempt of a [[kino]]. The [[sorrowful]] state of the film industry in that country is a product of [[striving]] to [[deliver]] a film out of such [[slender]] material. [[More]] of the [[images]] that are made in [[Spaniards]] [[autumn]] under two categories: those about the Spanish [[Civilians]] War, that love to [[presented]] past [[historic]] as the writers deem fit. The other [[genre]] of films show the viewer with a lot of [[unjustified]] [[sexuality]] because the 'creators' don't have anything interest to say.

As the film opens we get to watch Pere's penis as he attempts to cut it off and place it in one of the platters at a party. Later on, Sandra will show all she has been given for the audience to admire. The story of Pere's attraction to Sandra, a married woman that seems to be happily married, is false from the start.

Our only interest in watching the film centered on an earlier, better made picture by Mr. Pons, "Amic/Amat", but alas, it has nothing to do with the mess we are [[sanctioned]] to watch in this venture. As far as the comments submitted in IMDb, all the negative votes come from Spanish viewers, which speaks volumes coming from them! --------------------------------------------- Result 310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I was so [[eager]] to see this one of my favorite TV [[shows]].I [[saw]] Universal trademark followed with a newly acquainted title and theme song which still impress me.Computer animation on some scenery like a solid title name"The Jetsons" or a dimension view of a spaceship approaching an amusement park and more made this version splendid and fantastic.Shortly after that till the [[end]]...I couldn't [[believe]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[forget]] all I had seen.Just [[songs]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. I was so [[desirous]] to see this one of my favorite TV [[demonstrate]].I [[watched]] Universal trademark followed with a newly acquainted title and theme song which still impress me.Computer animation on some scenery like a solid title name"The Jetsons" or a dimension view of a spaceship approaching an amusement park and more made this version splendid and fantastic.Shortly after that till the [[ceases]]...I couldn't [[reckon]] my eyes!!!!How lucky I was that I could [[forgot]] all I had seen.Just [[anthems]] by Tiffany and its theme song in new arrangement were in my head.Anyway,I wish to see this space-aged family (also The Flintstones and Yogi Bear) in all graphic computer design as Toy story or Bug's life.The best style for Hanna-Barbera's in my opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[first]] [[Cruel]] [[Intentions]], the [[original]], is my [[favorite]] [[movie]] of all time. It was an absolute masterpiece. [[So]] how on earth [[could]] they [[make]] a sequel so [[downright]] [[bad]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. [[In]] this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan Phillipe. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the first one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. The [[fiirst]] [[Merciless]] [[Intent]], the [[initial]], is my [[prefer]] [[cinematography]] of all time. It was an absolute masterpiece. [[Thereby]] how on earth [[wo]] they [[deliver]] a sequel so [[fully]] [[amiss]]. Sarah Michelle Gellar was perfect in the first movie. [[During]] this one, Amy Adams sucks. She is terrible. And couldn't they have found a chick who actually looked like Sarah Michelle Gellar? At least the same hair color!!! i mean come on. Robin Dunn isn't as bad as Adams, but he is absolutely terrible when compared to Ryan Phillipe. The Sebastian in the first film is devious, deceitful, and much more evil than the Sebastian in the prequel. And what is up with the story line. It basically goes like this...

1- Sebastian has a bad rep at his first school, so the movie says, although it mentions nothing about him and his dating life, and how he has been with girls 2- Sebastian moves to New York, and just suddenly decides he's going to turn himself around. He "falls in love" with Danielle (might i remind you that in the original, Sarah Michelle giller says quote "you broke up with THE FIRST PERSON you ever loved because i said to- so how can he have been in love in the prequel???). And he's all nice and charming, and all "good person", as he turns down sex from the chick his dad was doing.

3- He does a complete 180, and ends up in a threesome at the end of the movie, and then seducing Cherry.

I mean, its terrible. And i loved the first one so much. I haven't even seen the third one yet. I hope to god its better than this prequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] American film makers decided to make a film they think is Japanese. The [[characters]] all [[badly]] represented, the [[actors]] are not [[even]] Japanese and the set is [[cheap]], [[unreal]] and [[definitely]] doesn't [[represent]] Kyoto in Early 20ties and 30ties. Who ever read the book understand that the script writers didn't add any extra value to differentiate the movie from the script. Worse, they even changed the original plot line with a few goofs. Rob Marshall is using for his two main [[characters]] two well known Chinese actors who joined before in crouching tiger hidden dragon. Marshall probably saw one Chinese movie and tho they represent Japanese culture. Seeing those two actors together again even makes the movies more [[ridiculous]]. Quentine Tarantino's last scene in Kill Bill #1 is ten times more Japanese made than that of this movie. American film makers decided to make a film they think is Japanese. The [[personages]] all [[desperately]] represented, the [[protagonists]] are not [[yet]] Japanese and the set is [[cheaper]], [[surrealistic]] and [[assuredly]] doesn't [[constitute]] Kyoto in Early 20ties and 30ties. Who ever read the book understand that the script writers didn't add any extra value to differentiate the movie from the script. Worse, they even changed the original plot line with a few goofs. Rob Marshall is using for his two main [[traits]] two well known Chinese actors who joined before in crouching tiger hidden dragon. Marshall probably saw one Chinese movie and tho they represent Japanese culture. Seeing those two actors together again even makes the movies more [[nonsensical]]. Quentine Tarantino's last scene in Kill Bill #1 is ten times more Japanese made than that of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Joe Don's opening line [[says]] everything about this movie. It takes place on the island of Malta (the island of [[pathetic]] [[men]]) and involves Joe Don Baker tracking down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named [[Geronimo]] (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get arrested over and over agin. Everyone in the movie hates him, just like everyone hates Greydon Clark. I [[liked]] an earlier Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen year old boys. [[Avoid]] this movie at all costs!! Joe Don's opening line [[asserts]] everything about this movie. It takes place on the island of Malta (the island of [[unhappy]] [[man]]) and involves Joe Don Baker tracking down an Italian mobster. Joe Don's character is named [[Tallyho]] (pronounced Heronimo) and all he does in this movie is shoot people and get arrested over and over agin. Everyone in the movie hates him, just like everyone hates Greydon Clark. I [[loved]] an earlier Greydon picture, "Angel's Revenge" because it was a shirne for thriteen year old boys. [[Avert]] this movie at all costs!! --------------------------------------------- Result 314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This was the first movie I ever saw Ashley Judd in and the [[first]] film of Victor Nunez' that I ever say, and boy am I [[glad]] I did. Its' quiet tone, its' relaxed pace, its' realistic depiction of a young woman just starting out in life, its' fine depiction of the struggles she has to go through to make her mark in life, the decisions she makes based on real things, the people she meets - there is nothing [[wrong]] with this movie. It is as [[close]] to movie [[magic]] as I have ever seen outside of the " Star Wars " movies, and, given what those films are like, that means this film deserves a high rating indeed. Ashley Judds' acting, Mr. Nunez'writing, and its' great simple worthwhile story make this a [[fine]] coming-of-age story and a [[wonderful]] movie. This was the first movie I ever saw Ashley Judd in and the [[frst]] film of Victor Nunez' that I ever say, and boy am I [[gratified]] I did. Its' quiet tone, its' relaxed pace, its' realistic depiction of a young woman just starting out in life, its' fine depiction of the struggles she has to go through to make her mark in life, the decisions she makes based on real things, the people she meets - there is nothing [[amiss]] with this movie. It is as [[shuts]] to movie [[hallucinogenic]] as I have ever seen outside of the " Star Wars " movies, and, given what those films are like, that means this film deserves a high rating indeed. Ashley Judds' acting, Mr. Nunez'writing, and its' great simple worthwhile story make this a [[fined]] coming-of-age story and a [[glamorous]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[saw]] the [[movie]] with two grown [[children]]. [[Although]] it was not as [[clever]] as Shrek, I thought it was rather good. [[In]] a [[movie]] [[theatre]] [[surrounded]] by children who were on spring [[break]], there was not a sound so I know the children all liked it. There [[parents]] also seemed engaged. The [[death]] and [[apparent]] [[death]] of characters [[brought]] about the appropriate gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[realize]] this movie was made for kids. As such, it was successful although I [[liked]] it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! I [[noticed]] the [[cinematography]] with two grown [[kids]]. [[Nonetheless]] it was not as [[adept]] as Shrek, I thought it was rather good. [[For]] a [[filmmaking]] [[cinemas]] [[girded]] by children who were on spring [[breaks]], there was not a sound so I know the children all liked it. There [[parent]] also seemed engaged. The [[fatality]] and [[blatant]] [[killings]] of characters [[made]] about the appropriate gasps and comments. Hopefully people [[attain]] this movie was made for kids. As such, it was successful although I [[wished]] it too. Personally I liked the Scrat!! --------------------------------------------- Result 316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] After being hugely entertained by Mr. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically anticipated this film. I was [[hugely]] [[disappointed]]. It is a script reading not a [[film]], vulgar for the sake of being [[vulgar]], bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is rich and satisfying. [[Blame]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the theater waiting for the "good part;" it never came. I neither laughed nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? Hardly. After being hugely entertained by Mr. Brosnan's performance as a cad in "The Tailor of Panama" (which I rate 10/10 across the board: casting, acting, script, story, editing, pace, music, emotional impact, etc.), I enthusiastically anticipated this film. I was [[uncommonly]] [[frustrated]]. It is a script reading not a [[kino]], vulgar for the sake of being [[trashy]], bankrupt in every way that "The Tailor of Panama" is rich and satisfying. [[Culpa]] it on the screen writing and directing. I sat in the theater waiting for the "good part;" it never came. I neither laughed nor cried, although one line of dialog did make me smile. Worth $7? Hardly. --------------------------------------------- Result 317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a [[pleasant]] [[film]], [[even]] if the premise is [[silly]]. It was sort of a guilty [[pleasure]] to watch. Meg [[Ryan]] seems to be [[able]] to pull off roles in this kind of film (another example is Joe vs. the Volcano). That's what makes her a star, in part. Walter Matthau, of course, had that ability, too, and he [[really]] [[puts]] himself into the role, making an amusing, good-hearted [[Einstein]]. I suppose you could say they're both good at portraying loveable [[characters]], though loveable in different [[ways]] (loveable young women vs. loveable curmudgeon). This is a [[agreeable]] [[kino]], [[yet]] if the premise is [[imbecile]]. It was sort of a guilty [[glee]] to watch. Meg [[Laing]] seems to be [[capable]] to pull off roles in this kind of film (another example is Joe vs. the Volcano). That's what makes her a star, in part. Walter Matthau, of course, had that ability, too, and he [[truthfully]] [[poses]] himself into the role, making an amusing, good-hearted [[Brainiac]]. I suppose you could say they're both good at portraying loveable [[personage]], though loveable in different [[manner]] (loveable young women vs. loveable curmudgeon). --------------------------------------------- Result 318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Panic is a sneaky little gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to [[realize]], with great [[pleasure]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/director than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[quietly]] devastating scene after another, all enacted [[perfectly]] by William H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, Tracey Ullman, John Ritter, and the most [[remarkable]] child actor I've seen in a long [[time]], David Dorfman, as Macy's son, who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. Rich and rewarding, this film will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. Panic is a sneaky little gem of a film - you think you have it figured out by the first half hour only to [[achieving]], with great [[glee]], that Henry Bromell is a much better writer/director than that.

The film builds slowly, with one [[silently]] devastating scene after another, all enacted [[altogether]] by William H. Macy, Donald Sutherland, Neve Campbell, Tracey Ullman, John Ritter, and the most [[admirable]] child actor I've seen in a long [[moment]], David Dorfman, as Macy's son, who delivers his lines as if they're completely unscripted thoughts being created in his mind. Rich and rewarding, this film will stay with you long after the credits have rolled. --------------------------------------------- Result 319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] With the advent of the IMDb, this [[overlooked]] [[movie]] can now find an interested audience. Why? Because [[users]] here who do a search on two-time Academy Award winner Glenda Jackson can find 'The [[Return]] of The Soldier' [[among]] her [[credits]]. So can those checking out Oscar winner Julie Christie. [[Fans]] of Ann-Margret can give the title a click, as will those looking into the career of the great Alan Bates. Not to [[mention]] the added [[bonus]] of a movie with supporting heavyweights Ian Holm and Frank Finlay. Any movie with so [[many]] notables in it is rewarded by the IMDb, given all the cross-referencing that goes on here. So, why isn't this movie out on [[DVD]]? Don't the Producers realize the Internet Movie Database is a marketing gift for such a film? And 'The Return of The Soldier' is definitely a gem waiting to be discovered. Get with it, people. With the advent of the IMDb, this [[neglect]] [[kino]] can now find an interested audience. Why? Because [[customers]] here who do a search on two-time Academy Award winner Glenda Jackson can find 'The [[Restitution]] of The Soldier' [[between]] her [[appropriations]]. So can those checking out Oscar winner Julie Christie. [[Amateurs]] of Ann-Margret can give the title a click, as will those looking into the career of the great Alan Bates. Not to [[referenced]] the added [[premium]] of a movie with supporting heavyweights Ian Holm and Frank Finlay. Any movie with so [[multiple]] notables in it is rewarded by the IMDb, given all the cross-referencing that goes on here. So, why isn't this movie out on [[DVDS]]? Don't the Producers realize the Internet Movie Database is a marketing gift for such a film? And 'The Return of The Soldier' is definitely a gem waiting to be discovered. Get with it, people. --------------------------------------------- Result 320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I wouldn't call "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" simply a [[kiddie]] version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the former, it calls into [[question]] the [[security]] of bringing beings from one era into ours. But it really opens my [[eyes]] when I [[see]] who provided the voices: John Goodman, Rhea Perlman, Jay Leno, Walter Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a given actor, the "Cheers" woman, the "Tonight Show" host, the [[Most]] Trusted [[Name]] In News, a [[famous]] chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had something for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural history). True, it's escapism, but the perceptive kind. I would actually say that John Goodman doing Rex's voice here is sort of a precursor to his voice work in "Monsters Inc". Worth [[seeing]]. I wouldn't call "We're Back! A Dinosaur's Story" simply a [[kiddy]] version of "Jurassic Park". I found it more interesting than that. Like the former, it calls into [[issue]] the [[insurance]] of bringing beings from one era into ours. But it really opens my [[eye]] when I [[consults]] who provided the voices: John Goodman, Rhea Perlman, Jay Leno, Walter Cronkite, Julia Child, Kenneth Mars, Yeardley Smith, Martin Short and Larry King. To paraphrase that: a given actor, the "Cheers" woman, the "Tonight Show" host, the [[Anymore]] Trusted [[Denomination]] In News, a [[proverbial]] chef, the "Young Frankenstein" police chief, Lisa Simpson, one of the Three Amigos and the CNN guy.

But I guess that I shouldn't focus only on the cast. I thought that this movie had something for both children (purely fun) and adults (natural history). True, it's escapism, but the perceptive kind. I would actually say that John Goodman doing Rex's voice here is sort of a precursor to his voice work in "Monsters Inc". Worth [[see]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 321 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] This is the kind of [[movie]] that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not bloody [[true]]. I only watch it once in a while to make sure that it's as [[bad]] as I first thought it was.

Some kind of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having Boeing hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[airplane]] goes down in the Bermuda triangle and sinks pressurized to the bottoms, a kind of post-facto submarine.

It has one of those all-star casts, the stars either falling or barely above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack Lemon. He is so right. Except for George Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie instead. Oh, not "Airport" the original. That's no good either. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." This is the kind of [[cinematography]] that my enemies content I watch all the time, but it's not bloody [[real]]. I only watch it once in a while to make sure that it's as [[mala]] as I first thought it was.

Some kind of mobsters hijack a Boeing 747. (That, at least, is an improvement over having Boeing hijack a good part of the Pentagon.) The [[flight]] goes down in the Bermuda triangle and sinks pressurized to the bottoms, a kind of post-facto submarine.

It has one of those all-star casts, the stars either falling or barely above the horizon.

"We're on our own!", says pilot Jack Lemon. He is so right. Except for George Kennedy. He's in all these disaster movies.

Watch another movie instead. Oh, not "Airport" the original. That's no good either. Instead, watch a decent flick about stuck airplanes like "Flight of the Phoenix." --------------------------------------------- Result 322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[saw]] this movie again as an assignment for my management [[class]]. Were to [[mainly]] comment on the different management [[styles]] and [[ideas]] on quality(of the product). I did rent this one back in the eighties and I [[remember]] it to be good(but not [[great]])[[movie]]. I've always liked Michael Keaton's [[style]] and delivery. He was a [[perfect]] fit for the [[movie]].

I am surprised to see some of the low [[ratings]] for this movie. I grant you yes it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle comedy rather than a all-out comedy farce. I also find some of those that felt this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the dealers(meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a study of automakers during and before the time period that this movie covers. Parts are bit dry but I think you'll find that it backs up much the movie also. I [[watched]] this movie again as an assignment for my management [[homeroom]]. Were to [[essentially]] comment on the different management [[style]] and [[brainchild]] on quality(of the product). I did rent this one back in the eighties and I [[rember]] it to be good(but not [[formidable]])[[cinematography]]. I've always liked Michael Keaton's [[styles]] and delivery. He was a [[faultless]] fit for the [[kino]].

I am surprised to see some of the low [[notations]] for this movie. I grant you yes it's no Oscar winner but it does have decent comedic value. It's more of a subtle comedy rather than a all-out comedy farce. I also find some of those that felt this was an inaccurate film on cultural and business differences. I beg to differ. I grant you again that there are a lot of generalities and dramatizations but then again this is Hollywood film not a documentary. From what I've read about differences between Automakers on both sides of the Pacific at that time many of the principle ideas were accurate for the time.

Some of the basic differences were that Japanese workers made to feel as part of the company as a whole. Teamwork was emphasized. They perhaps made the company above all else. Where American workers had more of a management verses labor type of relationship. The individual was more important than the company. I'll probably get some hate email over that comment I'm sure.

Another difference was how quality was viewed and whose responsibility it was to fix. In many Japanese plants defects or problems are examined and fixed at the time it is discovered. Rather as one character in the movie put it "it was the dealers(meaning car dealer) problem".

Many of these things are probably dated but I'm sure some are still around as many US car makers are still struggling to keep up with the Japanese. If one is more interested in the subject of American, European and Japanese automakers I can recommend a book that studies this subject in more detail and was done around the same time period. The book is called "The machine that changed the world" by James Womack, Daniel Jones and Daniel Roos. It's about a study of automakers during and before the time period that this movie covers. Parts are bit dry but I think you'll find that it backs up much the movie also. --------------------------------------------- Result 323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most amazing, spiritually uplifting movie about the restoration of the gospel. Far better than any other film, or movie made about the restoration thus far. If you haven't seen it, hop on a plane to Salt Lake and see it now. You won't regret it! You truly get a sense of what the first saints had to struggle through, putting complete and total faith in there prophet Joseph Smith. You finally get some sort of comprehension of the things the prophet had to fight through and the persecutions he and his people faced. If you have any questions about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-days Saints and our humble beginnings just watch this movie, it will make complete and total sense afterward. --------------------------------------------- Result 324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was disgusting. Their should be a warning that some sadistic nasty writer is attempting to make a name for herself before being held hostage for an hour and a half watching garbage. What is garbage? The misuse of peoples time, the misuse of energy, and the waste of whatever type of educational system that taught her how to read and write. Talia you are a sick demented loser. Your psychiatrist needs to prescribe stronger medications for your problem.

The acting and plot gave me no choice but to fast forward through the middle of the garbage. I ended up at a scene that was uncalled for. If you want to learn how to shock people watch a Larry Clark movie. I lost all respect for the entire cast of this movie "no more support from me." How could actors or actresses sit on a set while such gross depictions of human behavior is manifested from the mind of a psycho? I feel sorry for all actors that took part in that scene. I think the devil now knows who the writer of this movie is; congratulations you won his attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I had known this movie was filmed in the exasperating and quease-inducing Dogme 95 style, I would never have rented it. Nevertheless, I took a dramamine for the seasickness and gave it a shot. I lasted a very, very, very long forty minutes before giving up. It's just boring, pretentious twaddle.

The last French movie I saw was "Romance" and it too was pretty dismal, but at least the camera was steady and not breathing down the necks of the characters all the time. I am baffled at the continuing popularity of Dogme 95 overseas -- it'll catch on in America about the same time as the next big outbreak of leprosy. (It's called Dogme 95 because that's the average number of times the actors are poked in the eye by the camera.)

--------------------------------------------- Result 326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I was going to bed with my gf [[last]] night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[channels]] until I came [[across]] this Chinese [[movie]] called the King of Masks. [[At]] [[first]] I [[thought]] it was going to be a Kung Fu movie, so I started watching it, and then it immediately [[captured]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The little girl in the movie was [[absolutely]] adorble. She was such a great actor for being so little. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the English was dubbed made it harder for me to tell...but she really seemed to be in character perfectly. I felt so bad for the girl as she kept trying to please her "boss" but everything just turned out rotten. lol. Even when she brings him another grandson, just so he can pass on his art...it turns out that kid was kidnapped, so he gets arrested and has 5 days to live. lol...whatever she touches in an effort to be nice to her grandpa, just backfires.

In the end, he sees how much love is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

Definitely a gem, and totally [[original]].

Scott I was going to bed with my gf [[final]] night, and while she was brushing her teeth, I flipped [[channel]] until I came [[during]] this Chinese [[filmmaking]] called the King of Masks. [[For]] [[fiirst]] I [[brainchild]] it was going to be a Kung Fu movie, so I started watching it, and then it immediately [[apprehended]] me in, and I had to finish it.

The little girl in the movie was [[totally]] adorble. She was such a great actor for being so little. Maybe the fact it was in Chinese, so the English was dubbed made it harder for me to tell...but she really seemed to be in character perfectly. I felt so bad for the girl as she kept trying to please her "boss" but everything just turned out rotten. lol. Even when she brings him another grandson, just so he can pass on his art...it turns out that kid was kidnapped, so he gets arrested and has 5 days to live. lol...whatever she touches in an effort to be nice to her grandpa, just backfires.

In the end, he sees how much love is in her and teaches her the art of masks...which is just so heartwarming after all the mishaps in the movie.

Definitely a gem, and totally [[upfront]].

Scott --------------------------------------------- Result 327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Ulysses as a film should in no way be compared with the novel, for they are two entirely different entities. However, that being said, the film still manages to maintain many of the elements that made the book work, but since it is a visual medium, it is more difficult to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I think this is the [[best]] [[film]] they could have made with the material... and this is from someone that routinely rants about films not being like their literary counterparts. I recommend the book, but the movie is still [[entertaining]]. Ulysses as a film should in no way be compared with the novel, for they are two entirely different entities. However, that being said, the film still manages to maintain many of the elements that made the book work, but since it is a visual medium, it is more difficult to pull of stream-of-consciousness. I think this is the [[better]] [[cinematography]] they could have made with the material... and this is from someone that routinely rants about films not being like their literary counterparts. I recommend the book, but the movie is still [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] And I [[absolutely]] [[adore]] Isabelle Blais!!! She was so cute in this movie, and far different from her role in "Quebec-Montreal" where she was more like a man-eater. I think she should have been nominated for a Jutra. I mean, Syvlie Moreau was good, but [[Isabelle]] was far [[superior]], IMO. Pelletier has done fine work for his first [[time]] out, and I [[noticed]] he snuck in a [[couple]] of his buddies from [[Rock]] et Belles Oreilles, Guy A. LePage & Andre Ducharme. It was fun to see them in this, I didn't know they were going to appear.

I don't think I've [[seen]] a romantic [[comedy]] from Quebec that I didn't like, and this one is as [[good]] as any I've had the pleasure to see. And if you're in the states and [[wondering]] how you can get a [[copy]] of the DVD, www.archambault.ca delivered it to me in less than a week. And I [[abundantly]] [[adores]] Isabelle Blais!!! She was so cute in this movie, and far different from her role in "Quebec-Montreal" where she was more like a man-eater. I think she should have been nominated for a Jutra. I mean, Syvlie Moreau was good, but [[Isobel]] was far [[upper]], IMO. Pelletier has done fine work for his first [[period]] out, and I [[saw]] he snuck in a [[couples]] of his buddies from [[Rocks]] et Belles Oreilles, Guy A. LePage & Andre Ducharme. It was fun to see them in this, I didn't know they were going to appear.

I don't think I've [[watched]] a romantic [[travesty]] from Quebec that I didn't like, and this one is as [[buena]] as any I've had the pleasure to see. And if you're in the states and [[asks]] how you can get a [[photocopied]] of the DVD, www.archambault.ca delivered it to me in less than a week. --------------------------------------------- Result 329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is a [[real]] [[eye]] candy. A [[world]] made of floating islands and flying ancient cities. Huge monsters whose preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their [[opponents]]... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in search of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we heard that song before. But You will [[forget]] that while looking at the spectacular scenery.

This [[movie]] is fun to watch while it [[lasts]]. But after [[leaving]] the cinema You'll be longing for a little bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What drove the knight crazy? Who built all these fabulous monuments, castles and cities... and why are they falling apart? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? Really, this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no Lord of the [[Rings]]. This is a [[actual]] [[ojo]] candy. A [[globe]] made of floating islands and flying ancient cities. Huge monsters whose preferred method of attack is hurling cathedrals at their [[haters]]... Who can resist that? An ancient prophecy, a bunch of underdog heroes and a cute princess in search of her hero... sounds familiar...? Yes we heard that song before. But You will [[overlook]] that while looking at the spectacular scenery.

This [[cinematic]] is fun to watch while it [[extends]]. But after [[letting]] the cinema You'll be longing for a little bit more story.

What is behind the 30-years-circle? What drove the knight crazy? Who built all these fabulous monuments, castles and cities... and why are they falling apart? And apart from that one bunch of farmers, where are the people? Really, this picture looks so intriguing, but it's no Lord of the [[Piercings]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd growing up in school. If you [[liked]] this movie, then I would suggest you watch [[Valentine]]. I just found out today that the guy who played Marty(Simon) killed himself a little after the movie was released which is a shame since he did a good job. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when Carol tricks him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was changing in the showers, Carols popular friends snuck into the bathroom and got everything ready, camera, electric shock, pole. When Marty open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab Marty and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They picked him up, dunked his head in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like cocaine but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. it's movies like these that make you wish that you never picked on the nerd growing up in school. If you [[wished]] this movie, then I would suggest you watch [[Valentines]]. I just found out today that the guy who played Marty(Simon) killed himself a little after the movie was released which is a shame since he did a good job. I wonder if it's because of the part he played in the movie. It starts out when Carol tricks him into going into the girls restroom to act like they were about to do it. When he was changing in the showers, Carols popular friends snuck into the bathroom and got everything ready, camera, electric shock, pole. When Marty open the curtain butt naked he realized that he was tricked. He tries to cover the shower up but the kids open it, grab Marty and starts being mean to him while the camera is rolling. They picked him up, dunked his head in the toliet while it was being flushed, and they electricuted him(slightly). When the kids are in detention, given by the coach, 2 of the boys give Marty a joint that will make him throw up. Skip breaks one of the glass windows in the gym using a brick to get the teacher to excuse him. While Marty is puking in the bathroom Skip sneaks into the Science Lab and mixes some stuff that looks like cocaine but not sure what it was. The lab blows up disfiguring him badly. 5 years later the kids who tormented him that day got invitations for a 5 year school reunion at the old school which was burn that day it exploded. One by one the people get killed off. I don't understand how the girl who drowned really drowned. she could have gotten back up after Marty left. She almost got out the first time. --------------------------------------------- Result 331 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of movie v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's focus on the [[movie]] and the [[message]].

I have rated this movie 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 years, and for a [[family]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/rock music, i'm 45. I know of Britney Spears but never realised she actually sang Stronger until i read the credits and these reviews. I didn't recognise her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch movies to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the movie and does it entertain me.

I watched this movie for the message. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a whole other story) so watched with the message in mind, as that is an area of interest. The movie is light, bright and breezy, great for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a great family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. I've read the other reviews and found some to be comparison of movie v real life (eg what it takes to get into music school), Britney Bashing, etc, etc. so let's focus on the [[cinema]] and the [[messaging]].

I have rated this movie 7 out of 10 for the age range 8 to 14 years, and for a [[families]] movie. For the average adult male.... 2 out of 10.

I like pop/rock music, i'm 45. I know of Britney Spears but never realised she actually sang Stronger until i read the credits and these reviews. I didn't recognise her poster on the wall so I was not worried about any 'self promotion'.

I watch movies to be entertained. i don't care about casting, lighting, producers, directors, etc. What is the movie and does it entertain me.

I watched this movie for the message. The world's greatest epidemic is low self-esteem (which is a whole other story) so watched with the message in mind, as that is an area of interest. The movie is light, bright and breezy, great for kids. I found the Texan twang began to fade throughout the movie and of course there are only so many ways to convey the give up/don't give up message, so yeh, it was a bit predictable. Great message though...should be more of them.

This movie is a great family movie, but for a bloke watching by himself, get Hannibal. --------------------------------------------- Result 332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Fonda brilliantly captures what we have long believed Abraham Lincoln was like. It is a fooler. Through Fonda's performance we are led to believe (on the surface) that Abraham Lincoln was a country bumpkin. But, through his confrontation with the lynch mob and especially during the court proceedings, you can see that beneath the exterior posturings is a brilliant man who has a very good command of what is going on around him and how to influence the people around him.

In this movie Henry Fonda shows that he has a very good grasp of how to present humor. It is an aspect of him that has been lost over the years. When he is telling stories and jokes he has the timing down perfect. There is a sequence in the trial that had me laughing quite hard. He shows this gift again in The Lady Eve in 1940.

The ending by John Ford is absolutely brilliant with Henry Fonda going to the top of a hill and in the distance a tremendous storm symbolic of the Civil War. He goes forward into history. The movie is fiction but the insight into Lincoln is tremendous. Definitely worth seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Hollow [[Man]] starts as brilliant but flawed scientist Dr. Sebastian Caine ([[Kevin]] Bacon) finally works out how to make things visible again after having been turned invisible by his own serum. They test the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it works perfectly, Caine & his team of assistant's celebrate but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine wants to be the first invisible human. He manages to persuade his team to help him & the procedure [[works]] well & Caine [[becomes]] invisible, however when they try to bring him back the serum fails & he remain invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but nothing works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather liked Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man delivers for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. Hollow [[Males]] starts as brilliant but flawed scientist Dr. Sebastian Caine ([[Kev]] Bacon) finally works out how to make things visible again after having been turned invisible by his own serum. They test the serum on an already invisible Gorilla & it works perfectly, Caine & his team of assistant's celebrate but while he should report the breakthrough to his military backers Caine wants to be the first invisible human. He manages to persuade his team to help him & the procedure [[cooperating]] well & Caine [[becoming]] invisible, however when they try to bring him back the serum fails & he remain invisible. The team desperately search for an antidote but nothing works, Caine slowly starts to lose his grip on reality as he realises what power he has but is unable to use it being trapped in a laboratory. But then again he's invisible right, he can do anything he wants...

Directed by Paul Verhoeven I rather liked Hollow Man. You know it's just after Christmas, I saw this a few hours ago on late night/early morning cable TV & worst of all I feel sick, not because of the film but because of the chocolates & fizzy pop I've had over the past week so I'll keep this one brief. The script by Andrew W. Marlowe has a decent pace about but it does drag a little during the middle & has a good central premise, it takes he basic idea that being invisible will make you insane just like in the original The Invisible Man (1933) film which Hollow Man obviously owes a fair bit. It manages to have a petty successful blend of horror, sci-fi & action & provide good entertainment value for 110 odd minutes. I thought the character's were OK, I thought some of the ideas in the film were good although I think it's generally known that Verhoeven doesn't deal in subtlety, the first thing he has the invisible Caine do is sexually molest one of his team & then when he gets into the outside world he has Caine rape a woman with the justification 'who's going to know' that Caine says to himself. Then of course there's the gore, he shows a rat being torn apart & that's just the opening scene after the credits, to be fair to him the violence is a bit more sparse this time around but still has a quite nasty & sadistic tone about it. Having said that I love horror/gore/exploitation films so Hollow Man delivers for me, it's just that it might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Director Verhoeven does a great job, or should that be the special effects boys make him look good. The special effects in Hollow Man really are spectacular & more-or-less flawless, their brilliant & it's as simple & straight forward as that. There's some good horror & action set-pieces here as well even if the climatic fight is a little over-the-top. I love the effect where Kevin Bacon disappears one layer at a time complete with veins, organs & bones on full show or when the reverse happens with the Gorilla. There's a few gory moments including a rat being eaten, someone is impaled on a spike & someone has their head busted open with blood splattering results.

With a staggering budget of about $95,000,000 Hollow Man is technically faultless, I can imagine the interviews on the DVD where some special effects boffin says they mapped Bacon's entire body out right down to he last vein which they actually did because you know everyone watching would notice if one of his veins were missing or in the wrong position wouldn't they? The acting was OK, Bacon made for a good mad scientist anti-hero type guy.

Hollow Man is one of hose big budget Hollwood extravaganzas where the effects & action take center stage over any sort of meaningful story or character's but to be brutally honest sometimes we all like that in a film, well I know I do. Good solid big budget entertainment with a slightly nastier & darker streak than the usual Hollywood product, definitely worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] As someone else mentioned, it begins with a [[bizarre]] prologue about a little blond girl killing a cat. Then the main story: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer (Shepard) meet by chance and take a trip into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with increasing irritation to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a kindly old lady who seems [[overly]] hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, anyone?) What happens next I will [[leave]] for the bold viewer to sort out because I most assuredly couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had made some attempt at logical story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and intriguing location for mysterious and occult occurrences. The verdant peaks could easily obscure supernatural forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. Just wish the whole thing made sense. You can view this film at archive.org. As someone else mentioned, it begins with a [[surreal]] prologue about a little blond girl killing a cat. Then the main story: a photographer (Gaffari) and a writer (Shepard) meet by chance and take a trip into the mountains. First they spend the night at an inn where the slightly deaf landlord gets hollered at, with increasing irritation to the audience, by Gaffari. Once in the mountains they seek shelter again and are invited in by a kindly old lady who seems [[exceedingly]] hospitable to strangers (Hansel and Gretel, anyone?) What happens next I will [[letting]] for the bold viewer to sort out because I most assuredly couldn't. Now, I like Eurohorror, and this woulda been better if only Artigot (writer AND director) had made some attempt at logical story telling. The backdrop (Pyrenees?) makes an excellent and intriguing location for mysterious and occult occurrences. The verdant peaks could easily obscure supernatural forces and those who command them. The photography is nice. Just wish the whole thing made sense. You can view this film at archive.org. --------------------------------------------- Result 335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I've long heard that to get their start in 'legitimate' films, many behind-the-camera types work on porno films.

The people who produced and directed this [[monstrosity]] stayed too long.

Poorly paced, [[staged]] and [[written]], it uses a lot of perfectly good [[talent]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[badly]].

Much sexual [[activity]] is teasingly [[implied]] here by the brassiere-popping [[host]] to the [[alien]] creature, but it never crosses the [[line]]...

You'll [[still]] [[want]] to [[shower]] afterwards, [[though]]. I've long heard that to get their start in 'legitimate' films, many behind-the-camera types work on porno films.

The people who produced and directed this [[horror]] stayed too long.

Poorly paced, [[orchestrated]] and [[writes]], it uses a lot of perfectly good [[talents]] (Diehl, Dorn, Eggert) [[desperately]].

Much sexual [[actions]] is teasingly [[unspoken]] here by the brassiere-popping [[reception]] to the [[extraterrestrial]] creature, but it never crosses the [[iine]]...

You'll [[nevertheless]] [[wish]] to [[bathroom]] afterwards, [[while]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 336 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] My family has watched Arthur Bach stumble and stammer since the movie first came out. We have most lines memorized. I watched it two weeks ago and still get tickled at the simple humor and view-at-life that Dudley Moore portrays. Liza Minelli did a wonderful job as the side kick - though I'm not her biggest fan. This movie makes me just enjoy watching movies. My favorite scene is when Arthur is visiting his fiancée's house. His conversation with the butler and Susan's father is side-spitting. The line from the butler, "Would you care to wait in the Library" followed by Arthur's reply, "Yes I would, the bathroom is out of the question", is my NEWMAIL notification on my computer. "Arthur is truly "funny stuff"! --------------------------------------------- Result 337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I read the reviews before i watched this movie, and i didn't believe them. I love crap [[movies]] and i expected this one to be average. It wasn't. This film makes Camp Blood 1 and 2 look like greats. The film contains bad acting, poor sound, poor confusing storyline, bad makeup- and it [[bored]] me so much i turned it off. even the nudity was [[rubbish]]! Did they even have a budget for this film? I don't think they did. You can tell if your gonna like this film or not in the first 5 minutes. if u want a good cheesy gory film go watch toxic avenger 4 or even camp blood. Avoid this trash - I watched it on TV and felt riped off, so don't spend anything on it. The best part is probably the end. I read the reviews before i watched this movie, and i didn't believe them. I love crap [[kino]] and i expected this one to be average. It wasn't. This film makes Camp Blood 1 and 2 look like greats. The film contains bad acting, poor sound, poor confusing storyline, bad makeup- and it [[drilled]] me so much i turned it off. even the nudity was [[litter]]! Did they even have a budget for this film? I don't think they did. You can tell if your gonna like this film or not in the first 5 minutes. if u want a good cheesy gory film go watch toxic avenger 4 or even camp blood. Avoid this trash - I watched it on TV and felt riped off, so don't spend anything on it. The best part is probably the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I read the [[novel]] some [[years]] ago and I [[liked]] it a [[lot]]. when I [[saw]] the [[movie]] I couldn't [[believe]] it... They [[changed]] everything I [[liked]] about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabel]] Allende (author) [[say]] about the [[movie]], but I think it sucks!!! I read the [[newer]] some [[olds]] ago and I [[loved]] it a [[batch]]. when I [[observed]] the [[film]] I couldn't [[think]] it... They [[amend]] everything I [[wished]] about the novel, even the plot. I wonder what did [[Isabelle]] Allende (author) [[says]] about the [[cinematography]], but I think it sucks!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 339 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[work]] at a Blockbuster [[store]] and every [[week]] we have [[movies]] that [[come]] in with just a few [[copies]], these are the kind of [[movies]] that the Sci-Fi [[channel]] [[shows]]. The [[kind]] of movie that nobody ever [[wants]], and only that [[idiots]] [[rent]], when they [[bring]] it back I ask them "was it any [[good]]?", they [[say]] "no we [[turned]] it off after 15 minutes!" [[Movies]] with terrible computer generated, [[super]] [[imposed]] [[monsters]] and such like, very [[unappealing]].

This is the same type of [[movie]] that Grendel is, and absolute [[waste]] of [[time]], if you want a [[reasonably]] (and only reasonably) good Beowulf based movie then [[try]] Beowulf & [[Grendel]] , starring Gerard Butler, who is also starring in the eagerly anticipated 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, later this year we have another Beowulf movie, with a [[star]] studded cast ranging from Anthony Hopkins and Brendan Gleeson, to Angelina [[Jolie]] and John Malkovich.

But don't let that get your hopes up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[big]] [[disappointment]].

And [[regarding]] [[rentals]], here is my [[rule]] of thumb: If there is only one or two [[copies]], don't rent it because its a [[load]] of [[crap]].( This is [[true]] 99.9% of the time, [[usually]] not [[true]] if the title is [[foreign]], or a documentary.) I [[collaboration]] at a Blockbuster [[storing]] and every [[chou]] we have [[movie]] that [[arriving]] in with just a few [[copying]], these are the kind of [[cinematography]] that the Sci-Fi [[chanel]] [[demonstrating]]. The [[genus]] of movie that nobody ever [[wanted]], and only that [[imbecile]] [[leases]], when they [[brings]] it back I ask them "was it any [[alright]]?", they [[said]] "no we [[transformed]] it off after 15 minutes!" [[Films]] with terrible computer generated, [[excellent]] [[meted]] [[monster]] and such like, very [[unattractive]].

This is the same type of [[cinematography]] that Grendel is, and absolute [[wastes]] of [[period]], if you want a [[sensibly]] (and only reasonably) good Beowulf based movie then [[endeavour]] Beowulf & [[Carnival]] , starring Gerard Butler, who is also starring in the eagerly anticipated 300, as King Leonidas of Sparta.

Plus, later this year we have another Beowulf movie, with a [[stars]] studded cast ranging from Anthony Hopkins and Brendan Gleeson, to Angelina [[Juli]] and John Malkovich.

But don't let that get your hopes up like we all did with Eragon, or we are all in for another [[grand]] [[disillusion]].

And [[concerning]] [[tenancy]], here is my [[regulations]] of thumb: If there is only one or two [[printouts]], don't rent it because its a [[burdens]] of [[horseshit]].( This is [[genuine]] 99.9% of the time, [[traditionally]] not [[genuine]] if the title is [[external]], or a documentary.) --------------------------------------------- Result 340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is one movie that will [[take]] [[time]] to get out of your head once you have seen it. The dialogs are close to [[perfect]], which was to be expected as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[simply]] giving their best, the story is [[simple]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure bliss!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is still the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[excellent]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb friend who is always blundering when you expect it least.

Thumbs up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[excellent]] play, and all the best for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. This is one movie that will [[taking]] [[period]] to get out of your head once you have seen it. The dialogs are close to [[faultless]], which was to be expected as it has been adapted from a play. The actors are [[merely]] giving their best, the story is [[mere]] and attractive. 88 minutes of pure bliss!

Yvan Attal is totally credible in his role, Sandrine Kiberlain is still the beautiful blonde (but not so dumb) providing as much pleasure to the eyes as to the ears, Jean-Paul Rouve is providing an [[handsome]] approximation of the total jerk (and proud to be such), and Marina Fois is the dumb friend who is always blundering when you expect it least.

Thumbs up to Bernard Rapp and associates for adapting this [[glamorous]] play, and all the best for future productions!

I wish there were more of these in nowadays production. If you liked it, you will also probably enjoy: "Un air de famille", and "Cuisine et dependances". Both were written and played by the couple Bacri/Jaoui. --------------------------------------------- Result 341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] An [[excellent]] [[movie]]. [[Superb]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young [[Irene]] [[Cara]]. [[Tony]] King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This [[movie]] was one of the last predominately "all [[black]]" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this [[movie]] actually had a plot, and was very well [[done]]. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. An [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Glamorous]] acting by Mary Alice, Phillip M. Thomas, and a young [[Irina]] [[Sided]]. [[Tonda]] King was very realistic in his role of Satin. This [[filmmaking]] was one of the last predominately "all [[negro]]" movies of the 70's and unlike the "blaxploitation" movies of that era, this [[cinematography]] actually had a plot, and was very well [[performed]]. The movie soundtrack, sung by Aretha Franklin, was popular on the R&B charts at the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] MINOR SPOILERS!

Well i just sat up late and watched this film, mainly because i enjoyed and rated some of Singleton's earlier work like "Boyz n the hood". However, i have to say this was a major disappointment and is everything i hate about contrived, clichéd, so-called "message" movies.

The acting is mainly poor,(pop stars and models do NOT necessarily make good actors...take note), the situations hard to swallow, (rape victim becomes overnight lesbian?...please!), but worst of all it reinforces every screwed up stereotype you can think of. By the second half of the film it has become cartoon like in its characterisation, making you lose any shred of empathy you may have had for its one-dimensional players.

Not once is any valid point made about the inherent causes of racism and cultural, sexual and political ignorance. As a result it merely ends up sensationalising the results of these problems. It's message is contradictory, resulting in a sense of confusion and a general lack of plot cohesion. As for the films conclusion i found it predictable, embarrassing, exploitative and mildly offensive. For a film called "Higher Learning" i have to say all i learned is to avoid seeing this ever again.

If you want a true comment on some of the themes that this film completely fails to elaborate upon then go hire "American History X"....unless you were just watching it for Tyra Banks then go hire a life. --------------------------------------------- Result 343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] An absurdly [[hilarious]] and [[strikingly]] human [[tale]] of the jealousies and infidelities [[surrounding]] a [[beetle]] [[marriage]], Russian animation [[pioneer]] Wladyslaw Starewicz's "Mest kinematograficheskogo operatora" ("The Cameraman's [[Revenge]]", or "The Revenge of a Kinematograph Cameraman") is a [[delight]] of early animation, brimming with highly-effective stop-motion puppetry and no [[shortage]] of [[imagination]].

Mr. and Mrs. Beetle have a completely uneventful [[marriage]], and both yearn for more excitement in their [[lives]]. Mr. Beetle's desires can only be satisfied by the beautiful exotic dancer at the "Gay Dragonfly" night club, whom he visits whenever he takes a "business trip" to the city. She is the only one who understands him. A fellow admirer of this dancer, an aggressive grasshopper, is jealous that Mr. Beetle has stolen his lady and, as fate would have it, he is also a movie cameraman. The devious grasshopper follows Mr. Beetle and his acquaintance to a hotel room, where he films their exploits through the keyhole.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Beetle has, likewise, acquired a friend to add excitement to her life. He is an artist, and he brings her a painting for a present, before they both settle down on the couch for some intimacy. At that moment, however, Mr. Beetle returns home and witnesses the entire spectacle. As Mr. Beetle bashes through the front door, the artist friend clambers up the chimney, but he doesn't escape without Mr. Beetle first venting his anger and frustration upon him.

There is a certain irony in the statement that follows: "Mr. Beetle is generous. He forgives his wife and takes her to a movie." He is generous enough to forgive her, and yet he had been equally unfaithful just minutes earlier. At this point in time, however, we still haven't forgotten the jealous movie cameraman who had been plotting his revenge, and it is no surprise when he turns out to be the projectionist for the film Mr. and Mrs. Beetle are attending. Suddenly intercut into the film they are enjoying is the footage of Mr. Beetle's disloyalty, and the angry wife hits him [[across]] the head with an umbrella, before the [[frightened]] and angry husband dives through the theatre screen in search of the grasshopper.

In the final scene, both Mr. and Mrs. Beetle, now [[somewhat]] more [[appreciative]] of each other, are serving time in prison for the fire that broke out when Mr. Beetle sought his final revenge. We do, indeed, hope that "the home life of the Beetles will be less exciting in the future…" This film may appear to be a mere story of the comings-and-goings of a miniscule insect species, but Starewicz is communicating so much more than that. This isn't a story about beetles – it is a story about us. And it's startlingly accurate, isn't it?! An absurdly [[humorous]] and [[alarmingly]] human [[storytelling]] of the jealousies and infidelities [[nearby]] a [[insect]] [[marries]], Russian animation [[pioneers]] Wladyslaw Starewicz's "Mest kinematograficheskogo operatora" ("The Cameraman's [[Retaliation]]", or "The Revenge of a Kinematograph Cameraman") is a [[glee]] of early animation, brimming with highly-effective stop-motion puppetry and no [[lacks]] of [[creativity]].

Mr. and Mrs. Beetle have a completely uneventful [[marrying]], and both yearn for more excitement in their [[life]]. Mr. Beetle's desires can only be satisfied by the beautiful exotic dancer at the "Gay Dragonfly" night club, whom he visits whenever he takes a "business trip" to the city. She is the only one who understands him. A fellow admirer of this dancer, an aggressive grasshopper, is jealous that Mr. Beetle has stolen his lady and, as fate would have it, he is also a movie cameraman. The devious grasshopper follows Mr. Beetle and his acquaintance to a hotel room, where he films their exploits through the keyhole.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Beetle has, likewise, acquired a friend to add excitement to her life. He is an artist, and he brings her a painting for a present, before they both settle down on the couch for some intimacy. At that moment, however, Mr. Beetle returns home and witnesses the entire spectacle. As Mr. Beetle bashes through the front door, the artist friend clambers up the chimney, but he doesn't escape without Mr. Beetle first venting his anger and frustration upon him.

There is a certain irony in the statement that follows: "Mr. Beetle is generous. He forgives his wife and takes her to a movie." He is generous enough to forgive her, and yet he had been equally unfaithful just minutes earlier. At this point in time, however, we still haven't forgotten the jealous movie cameraman who had been plotting his revenge, and it is no surprise when he turns out to be the projectionist for the film Mr. and Mrs. Beetle are attending. Suddenly intercut into the film they are enjoying is the footage of Mr. Beetle's disloyalty, and the angry wife hits him [[in]] the head with an umbrella, before the [[terrorised]] and angry husband dives through the theatre screen in search of the grasshopper.

In the final scene, both Mr. and Mrs. Beetle, now [[rather]] more [[acknowledging]] of each other, are serving time in prison for the fire that broke out when Mr. Beetle sought his final revenge. We do, indeed, hope that "the home life of the Beetles will be less exciting in the future…" This film may appear to be a mere story of the comings-and-goings of a miniscule insect species, but Starewicz is communicating so much more than that. This isn't a story about beetles – it is a story about us. And it's startlingly accurate, isn't it?! --------------------------------------------- Result 344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] There is a story (possibly apocryphal) about an [[exchange]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the start of Twelve [[Monkeys]]. Gilliam (allegedly) produced a long list (think about the aircraft one from the Fifth Element) and handed it to Butch Bruce. It was entitled "Things Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It ended with a simple message saying: "please don't do any of the above in my movie".

There is a [[fact]] about this [[movie]] ([[definitely]] [[true]]). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I would contend that these two factors played a huge role in creating the extraordinary (if not commercial) success that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve Monkeys is all that we have rightly come to expect from a Gilliam film. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and general (but [[magnificent]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his audience. Although the ending of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows heavily from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless movement of the characters towards their fate. It is this journey, and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all tend to suffer from the same weakness. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no denying that The Twelve Monkey's is a breath of fresh air in the tight-plotting department. Style, substance and form seem to merge in a way not usually seen from the ex-Python.

Whatever the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam also manages to get a first rate (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is excellent in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a suitably bonkers - and very scary - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this film was released. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered perspectives and the absurd one-way journey through time that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. There is a story (possibly apocryphal) about an [[shares]] between Bruce Willis and Terry Gilliam at the start of Twelve [[Ape]]. Gilliam (allegedly) produced a long list (think about the aircraft one from the Fifth Element) and handed it to Butch Bruce. It was entitled "Things Bruce Willis Does When He Acts". It ended with a simple message saying: "please don't do any of the above in my movie".

There is a [[facto]] about this [[cinematography]] ([[definitively]] [[veritable]]). Gilliam didn't have a hand in the writing.

I would contend that these two factors played a huge role in creating the extraordinary (if not commercial) success that is The Twelve Monkeys.

Visually, the Twelve Monkeys is all that we have rightly come to expect from a Gilliam film. It is also full of Gilliamesque surrealism and general (but [[resplendent]]) strangeness. Gilliam delights in wrong-footing his audience. Although the ending of the Twelve Monkeys will surprise no one who has sat through the first real, Gilliam borrows heavily from Kafka in the clockwork, bureaucratic relentless movement of the characters towards their fate. It is this journey, and the character developments they undergo, which unsettles.

I love Gilliam films (Brazil, in particular). But they do all tend to suffer from the same weakness. He seems to have so many ideas, and so much enthusiasm, that his films almost invariably end up as a tangled mess (Brazil, in particular). I still maintain that Brazil is Gilliam's tour de force, but there's no denying that The Twelve Monkey's is a breath of fresh air in the tight-plotting department. Style, substance and form seem to merge in a way not usually seen from the ex-Python.

Whatever the truth of the rumour above, Gilliam also manages to get a first rate (and very atypical) performance out of the bald one. Bruce is excellent in this film, as are all the cast, particularly a suitably bonkers - and very scary - Brad Pitt.

It's been over a decade since this film was released. When I watched it again, I realised that it hadn't really aged. I had changed, of course. And this made me look at the film with fresh eyes. This seems to me to be a fitting tribute to a film that, partly at least, is about reflections in mirrors, altered perspectives and the absurd one-way journey through time that we all make. A first rate film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I'm sure this is a [[show]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is almost close to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the location, style of the directing and its publicity – shows women walking around on the [[beach]] and all that. [[No]] wonder people have [[misconception]] and [[decide]] not to watch it.

It was wrong of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the [[show]], there are actually more thing going on, [[real]] juicy [[story]] and conflict, [[turn]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the hotel clerks, the manager, the owner and their complicated love life. Also enter the troublesome hotel's visitor and powerful man trying to steal the hotel. It actually more exciting than it sounds here.

I won't deny that the acting suck but it ain't that bad that you'll look away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is fitting pretty well with the scenario and the action is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is actually anything happen solidly so be patience.

Recommendation: I Really Do Enjoy Watching This. Zillion Times Better Than Expected.

Rating: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. I'm sure this is a [[spectacle]] no one is that familiar of and might not think good of it; after all it is almost close to Baywatch Hawaii. With the cast, the location, style of the directing and its publicity – shows women walking around on the [[beaches]] and all that. [[Nos]] wonder people have [[misinterpretation]] and [[decides]] not to watch it.

It was wrong of them to do that. Cause after I decide to watch the [[demonstrating]], there are actually more thing going on, [[actual]] juicy [[stories]] and conflict, [[turning]] out to be really exciting to watch and pretty much – addictive.

The story of the hotel clerks, the manager, the owner and their complicated love life. Also enter the troublesome hotel's visitor and powerful man trying to steal the hotel. It actually more exciting than it sounds here.

I won't deny that the acting suck but it ain't that bad that you'll look away. The story is not so consistence but good enough. The soundtrack is fitting pretty well with the scenario and the action is all the time. I took me couple of episode before there is actually anything happen solidly so be patience.

Recommendation: I Really Do Enjoy Watching This. Zillion Times Better Than Expected.

Rating: 7.5/10 (Grade: B)

Please Rate My Review After Reading It, Thanks. --------------------------------------------- Result 346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] I [[hate]] how this movie has [[absolutely]] no creative [[input]]. I [[know]] they're [[going]] for [[realism]], but to be frank I just don't want realism. Realism is boring. [[If]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[deal]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[least]] [[work]] in some good [[ideas]]. The direction only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking [[around]] a bit, but obviously I'm [[supposed]] to dig that because it makes stuff so much more realistic. Hitchcock used to say drama was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to see Rosetta walking to someplace, Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta eating a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that entertaining. There isn't really a deeper meaning either. I got so bored I started looking for some reflections on life in this movie but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm supposed to love this, but come on, there's nothing in there. I [[loathes]] how this movie has [[altogether]] no creative [[entry]]. I [[savoir]] they're [[go]] for [[lifelike]], but to be frank I just don't want realism. Realism is boring. [[Though]] I want to see daily life, I'll uhm, live. Tell me an interesting story and we'll talk. I can [[treating]] with the low production values, hell I'm a sucker for low production values, but at [[minus]] [[works]] in some good [[reflections]]. The direction only goes as far as grabbing a camcorder and walking [[almost]] a bit, but obviously I'm [[alleged]] to dig that because it makes stuff so much more realistic. Hitchcock used to say drama was essentially life with the dull bits cut out. I can only conclude this is not drama, not by a long shot. We get to see Rosetta walking to someplace, Rosetta working in a bakery, Rosetta eating a waffle, Rosetta carrying around bags of far, Rosetta walking back home, Rosetta walking someplace...it's just not that entertaining. There isn't really a deeper meaning either. I got so bored I started looking for some reflections on life in this movie but it's just plain realism, the most overrated quality in the business. I guess I'm supposed to love this, but come on, there's nothing in there. --------------------------------------------- Result 347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[On]] [[October]] of 1945, the American [[German]] [[descendant]] Leopold [[Kessler]] (Jean-Marc Barr) arrives in a post-war Frankfurt and his bitter Uncle [[Kessler]] (Ernst-Hugo Järegård) gets a [[job]] for him in the Zentropa train line as a sleeping [[car]] conductor. While [[traveling]] in the train [[learning]] his [[profession]], he [[sees]] the destructed occupied [[Germany]] and [[meets]] [[Katharina]] Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the daughter of the [[former]] [[powerful]] entrepreneur of transport business and [[owner]] of Zentropa, Max Hartmann (Jørgen Reenberg). Leopold stays neutral between the allied forces and the Germans, and becomes [[aware]] that there is a terrorist group called "Werewolves" killing the sympathizers of the allied and conducting subversive [[actions]] against the allied forces. He falls in love for [[Katharina]], and sooner she discloses that she was a "Werewolf". When Max commits suicide, Leopold is [[also]] pressed by the "Werewolves" and [[need]] to take a [[position]] and a decision.

"Europa" is an [[impressive]] and anguishing Kafkanian [[story]] of the great [[Danish]] [[director]] Lars von Trier. [[Using]] an expressionist [[style]] that [[recalls]] Fritz [[Lang]] and [[alternating]] a [[magnificent]] [[black]] & white [[cinematography]] with some colored details, this [[movie]] [[discloses]] a difficult period of Germany and some of the [[problems]] this great nation had to face after being defeated in the [[war]]. [[Very]] [[impressive]] the [[action]] of the occupation forces destroying resources that could permit a faster [[reconstruction]] of a destroyed country, and the corruption with the Jew that should identify Max. Jean-Marc Barr has an [[stunning]] performance in the role of man that wants to [[stay]] neutral but is [[manipulated]] everywhere by everybody. The hypnotic narration of [[Max]] [[Von]] Sydow is another [[touch]] of class in this [[awarded]] [[film]]. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Europa" [[Onto]] [[December]] of 1945, the American [[Deutsch]] [[descendent]] Leopold [[Gonzales]] (Jean-Marc Barr) arrives in a post-war Frankfurt and his bitter Uncle [[Melendez]] (Ernst-Hugo Järegård) gets a [[labor]] for him in the Zentropa train line as a sleeping [[motorcars]] conductor. While [[travelling]] in the train [[learn]] his [[occupational]], he [[believes]] the destructed occupied [[Deutschland]] and [[conforms]] [[Kathrin]] Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the daughter of the [[old]] [[forceful]] entrepreneur of transport business and [[landowners]] of Zentropa, Max Hartmann (Jørgen Reenberg). Leopold stays neutral between the allied forces and the Germans, and becomes [[cognizant]] that there is a terrorist group called "Werewolves" killing the sympathizers of the allied and conducting subversive [[measurements]] against the allied forces. He falls in love for [[Kathrin]], and sooner she discloses that she was a "Werewolf". When Max commits suicide, Leopold is [[further]] pressed by the "Werewolves" and [[require]] to take a [[posture]] and a decision.

"Europa" is an [[dramatic]] and anguishing Kafkanian [[histories]] of the great [[Danes]] [[headmaster]] Lars von Trier. [[Used]] an expressionist [[styling]] that [[recalling]] Fritz [[Lengthy]] and [[substitutes]] a [[impressive]] [[negro]] & white [[cinematographic]] with some colored details, this [[filmmaking]] [[divulge]] a difficult period of Germany and some of the [[disorders]] this great nation had to face after being defeated in the [[warfare]]. [[Extremely]] [[unbelievable]] the [[activity]] of the occupation forces destroying resources that could permit a faster [[rebuilding]] of a destroyed country, and the corruption with the Jew that should identify Max. Jean-Marc Barr has an [[unbelievable]] performance in the role of man that wants to [[sojourn]] neutral but is [[tampered]] everywhere by everybody. The hypnotic narration of [[Maxie]] [[Fon]] Sydow is another [[toque]] of class in this [[allotted]] [[cinematographic]]. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Europa" --------------------------------------------- Result 348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the manager of the New York's longest- established floating [[craps]] game, and he [[needs]] $1000 to secure a new location. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't woo [[uptight]] missionary Sarah Brown (Jean Simmons). 'Guys and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[great]] musical because it [[deftly]] [[blends]] the contrasting styles of film and stage. During a dazzling opening [[sequence]], crowds of pedestrians [[move]] in rhythm, stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's New York City is a glittering flurry of art deco colour and movement, a fantasy world so completely removed from reality that even the business of underground gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I write this review, I've just received word that Jean Simmons has passed away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the first time I'd seen her in a film, yet she dazzled me from the beginning. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed Sarah comes out of her shell following an alcohol [[binge]] in Havana, letting loose with an adorably playful [[rendition]] of "If I Were A Bell." Even though both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn decided not to dub their vocals, contending that "maybe you don't sound so good, but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. Nathan Detroit (Frank Sinatra) is the manager of the New York's longest- established floating [[shits]] game, and he [[should]] $1000 to secure a new location. Confident of his odds, he bets the city's highest-roller, Sky Masterson (Marlon Brando), that he can't woo [[tensed]] missionary Sarah Brown (Jean Simmons). 'Guys and Dolls (1955)' is such a [[whopping]] musical because it [[shrewdly]] [[mixture]] the contrasting styles of film and stage. During a dazzling opening [[sequences]], crowds of pedestrians [[budge]] in rhythm, stopping and starting as though responding to backstage cues. Even the walking movements themselves are stylised and angular, halfway between a walk and a dance. Mankiewicz's New York City is a glittering flurry of art deco colour and movement, a fantasy world so completely removed from reality that even the business of underground gambling and criminal thuggery seems perfectly genial.

As I write this review, I've just received word that Jean Simmons has passed away, age 80. This, unbelievably, was the first time I'd seen her in a film, yet she dazzled me from the beginning. Her idealistic and sexually-repressed Sarah comes out of her shell following an alcohol [[orgy]] in Havana, letting loose with an adorably playful [[extradition]] of "If I Were A Bell." Even though both Simmons and Brando were non-singers, producer Sam Goldwyn decided not to dub their vocals, contending that "maybe you don't sound so good, but at least it's you." Despite Goldwyn's backhanded confidence, the pair both do well to carry entire musical numbers themselves. Simmons suggests the same child-like liveliness that Audrey Hepburn might have brought to the role, and Brando exudes such self-assurance and charisma that it doesn't matter that his singing voice isn't quite there. --------------------------------------------- Result 349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Because 'cruel' would be the only word in existence to describe the intentions of these film [[makers]]. [[Where]] do you even [[begin]]? [[In]] a spout of b*tchiness, I'm going to start with the awful acting of [[nearly]] everybody in this movie. [[Scratch]] that. Nearly does not [[belong]] in that sentence. I can't think of [[even]] one [[character]] who was portrayed well. Although, in all [[fairness]], it [[would]] be nearly impossible to portray these zero dimensional characters in a successful [[way]]. Still, the girl who [[played]] [[Katherine]] (whose name I purposefully don't [[include]] - I'm pretending she doesn't exist) remains one of the [[worst]] [[actors]] I've ever seen, only [[eclipsed]] by the guy who played Sebastian. The story was God awful. It attempted to mirror the brilliance that was the first one but failed in so many ways. Pretty much every part of it was pointless - though I will admit (grudgingly) that the plot twist was quite good it its surprise. And the ending was at least slightly humorous. But this film is up there with the [[worst]] I've [[seen]]. Don't watch it. Just don't. There is absolutely no [[value]] in watching it. None. It only takes away the enjoyment of the first. Because 'cruel' would be the only word in existence to describe the intentions of these film [[industrialists]]. [[Everytime]] do you even [[lancer]]? [[During]] a spout of b*tchiness, I'm going to start with the awful acting of [[almost]] everybody in this movie. [[Graze]] that. Nearly does not [[belongs]] in that sentence. I can't think of [[yet]] one [[trait]] who was portrayed well. Although, in all [[equality]], it [[could]] be nearly impossible to portray these zero dimensional characters in a successful [[camino]]. Still, the girl who [[accomplished]] [[Catherine]] (whose name I purposefully don't [[containing]] - I'm pretending she doesn't exist) remains one of the [[gravest]] [[protagonists]] I've ever seen, only [[overshadowed]] by the guy who played Sebastian. The story was God awful. It attempted to mirror the brilliance that was the first one but failed in so many ways. Pretty much every part of it was pointless - though I will admit (grudgingly) that the plot twist was quite good it its surprise. And the ending was at least slightly humorous. But this film is up there with the [[hardest]] I've [[saw]]. Don't watch it. Just don't. There is absolutely no [[valuing]] in watching it. None. It only takes away the enjoyment of the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Well the previews looked [[funny]] and I [[usually]] don't [[go]] to [[movies]] on opening [[night]] especially with my [[kids]] because ......well you never [[know]]. Here is a [[movie]] that doesn't [[appeal]] either to children or adults as the [[jokes]] are too perverse for children and falls [[completely]] flat for [[entertainment]] [[purposes]] for [[adults]]. I was actually embarrassed to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T spells. Essentially what happens here is a total [[twisting]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her money. If that was a subplot, then maybe that would have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the whole movie and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the mom for who he really is. Take my advice and read the book and pass on the movie. Well the previews looked [[comical]] and I [[ordinarily]] don't [[going]] to [[movie]] on opening [[nuit]] especially with my [[enfant]] because ......well you never [[savoir]]. Here is a [[cinematography]] that doesn't [[appeals]] either to children or adults as the [[pleasantries]] are too perverse for children and falls [[entirely]] flat for [[entertainments]] [[intents]] for [[grownups]]. I was actually embarrassed to be with my 9 and 6 year old and having to explain to my 6 year old what S H * T spells. Essentially what happens here is a total [[twist]] of Dr. Seuss's classic. It adds an evil and lazy neighbor who wants to marry the children's mother for her money. If that was a subplot, then maybe that would have been fine but it ends up being the major plot around the whole movie and "the cat" plays more of a subplot role in exposing the neighbor to the mom for who he really is. Take my advice and read the book and pass on the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 351 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'd like to think myself as a fairly open minded guy and it takes a lot(!) for me to dislike a movie but this one is without a doubt one of the suckiest, crappiest movie I've ever seen!

I have no idea what's wrong with the people who gave it such a good rating here (imdb is usually pretty reliable when it comes to ratings)... the only thing I can imagine is that people must've voted during one or more conditions:

1. While being shitfaced / stoned out of their minds 2. They've received hard cash for the votes 3. Under gunpoint

I can't believe I wasted a good 1 h 45 min of my life for this pathetic excuse for a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] After a day at work, I sat down to relax and [[turned]] on the [[movie]] [[channels]]. The movie came up on the guide and [[sounded]] interesting so I tuned in just before it started. The first 30 minutes were enough to make me interested, but the [[lack]] of acting [[ability]] in Jamie Foxx and the [[slow]] plot movement made me [[want]] to get up and find food during the movie. If there is any credit to be given for acting in this movie it should go to David Morse who at least tries to make the movie interesting. All in all, don't plan on impressing your friends by picking this one as a [[renter]] for a movie night. After a day at work, I sat down to relax and [[transformed]] on the [[filmmaking]] [[canals]]. The movie came up on the guide and [[seemed]] interesting so I tuned in just before it started. The first 30 minutes were enough to make me interested, but the [[shortfall]] of acting [[capacity]] in Jamie Foxx and the [[slower]] plot movement made me [[wish]] to get up and find food during the movie. If there is any credit to be given for acting in this movie it should go to David Morse who at least tries to make the movie interesting. All in all, don't plan on impressing your friends by picking this one as a [[tenants]] for a movie night. --------------------------------------------- Result 353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Terry]] Gilliam [[traveled]] again to the future (he had already done it in "Brazil") to tell this story about a virus that's destroying the human race.

The [[script]] is totally crazy with some easy tricks on it but it's quite entertaining and Gilliam [[proves]] that he's got imagination (the futuristic scenes are just [[great]]). As for the cast, [[Bruce]] Willis and the beautiful Madeleine Stowe (whatever happened to her??) are just OK, but [[Brad]] [[Pitt]] is so [[annoying]], [[whenever]] he plays roles that are out of his hand he results so forced and he's not credible at all. He should just play good-looking successful young men.

*My rate: 7/10 [[Terri]] Gilliam [[visited]] again to the future (he had already done it in "Brazil") to tell this story about a virus that's destroying the human race.

The [[hyphen]] is totally crazy with some easy tricks on it but it's quite entertaining and Gilliam [[testify]] that he's got imagination (the futuristic scenes are just [[resplendent]]). As for the cast, [[Bros]] Willis and the beautiful Madeleine Stowe (whatever happened to her??) are just OK, but [[Bard]] [[Beit]] is so [[infuriating]], [[wherever]] he plays roles that are out of his hand he results so forced and he's not credible at all. He should just play good-looking successful young men.

*My rate: 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This whirling [[movie]] looks more like a combination of music-clips at MTV than as a real [[movie]]. There is no real [[story]] and as the [[movie]] goes on you [[ask]] yourself: "What is going to happen?"; but nothing [[happens]]. The [[story]] [[around]] [[Eric]] Cloeck, the frustrated [[writer]], is the only [[good]] thing. The other persons seem to have nothing in common: then why bring them together in a movie. With music you can make watchable the [[worst]] [[movie]]. [[When]] I open the tap and there comes water out with the music of Bach then most people will [[like]] to look at it but this is not a movie. The director should [[learn]] how to write a [[script]] for a movie of 100 [[minutes]] or more before starting to direct a movie. This whirling [[kino]] looks more like a combination of music-clips at MTV than as a real [[movies]]. There is no real [[histories]] and as the [[films]] goes on you [[asks]] yourself: "What is going to happen?"; but nothing [[occurs]]. The [[narratives]] [[throughout]] [[Erik]] Cloeck, the frustrated [[novelist]], is the only [[buena]] thing. The other persons seem to have nothing in common: then why bring them together in a movie. With music you can make watchable the [[gravest]] [[films]]. [[Whenever]] I open the tap and there comes water out with the music of Bach then most people will [[adores]] to look at it but this is not a movie. The director should [[learnt]] how to write a [[scripts]] for a movie of 100 [[mins]] or more before starting to direct a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Oh dear, this movie was [[bad]] for [[various]] reasons. I was expecting to see a very low score for this film and was a bit surprised by the over-all score.Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[idea]], the [[movie]] drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[minutes]]. The credits sequence at the start was so annoying too!In the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, wow, that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not seem to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! Oh dear, this movie was [[negative]] for [[numerous]] reasons. I was expecting to see a very low score for this film and was a bit surprised by the over-all score.Sorry, but to rate this highly as many have, is a joke! Once you get past the one shot/black and white movie gimmick, which was a nice [[brainchild]], the [[cinematography]] drags on, even at a run time of only 66 [[mins]]. The credits sequence at the start was so annoying too!In the van the guys suffer a flat tyre and change the wheel, wow, that was needed in the story! How slow were the guys chasing and actually managing to wound Campbell?? They did not seem to bother continue chasing him...sigh..I am only too glad I got this free with a special Edition of Evil Dead!! --------------------------------------------- Result 356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] NOTHING (3+ outta 5 stars) Another weird premise from the director of the movie "Cube". This time around there are two main characters who find themselves and their home transported to a mysterious white void. There is literally NOTHING outside of their small two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I [[thought]] the comedic tone [[established]] for this movie from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There needs to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[problem]] with the humour that was eventually derived from the plight of our two heroes (their final "showdown" was definitely a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[believable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) NOTHING (3+ outta 5 stars) Another weird premise from the director of the movie "Cube". This time around there are two main characters who find themselves and their home transported to a mysterious white void. There is literally NOTHING outside of their small two-story house. Intriguing to be sure, but I [[brainchild]] the comedic tone [[created]] for this movie from the get-go was extremely ill-conceived. There needs to be some humour, certainly... and I have no [[trouble]] with the humour that was eventually derived from the plight of our two heroes (their final "showdown" was definitely a hoot)... but I really think the movie would have been a lot better off if it had stayed more rooted in reality in the beginning. After watching the movie I watched the "Making of" feature on the DVD and a short trailer at the end is almost totally devoid of the "sillier" comedic aspects... making it look like a completely different (and slightly better) movie. The last half hour of the movie is where things really start to come together... similar in a way to the recent movie "Primer." The actors are fine when they are not overdoing the comedy shtick. They are really quite [[dependable]] in their more "normal" moments. I was probably ready to write this movie off as a failed experiment at the midway point... but it won me over by the end. (And keep watching past the credits for the final scene... just don't ask me to explain it.) --------------------------------------------- Result 357 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i needed a no-brainer in the [[summer]] heat, and the [[cover]] looked cool.

Of course I should've known better. This is a [[really]], [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]]. And it gets embarasing when the makers know it's bad, and try cover it up by [[adding]] some sexy/beautiful [[women]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you WOULD like a cool movie about a big reptile that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) Why, o' WHY! ...did I pick this one up? Well... i needed a no-brainer in the [[sommer]] heat, and the [[covers]] looked cool.

Of course I should've known better. This is a [[genuinely]], [[truthfully]] [[naughty]] [[movies]]. And it gets embarasing when the makers know it's bad, and try cover it up by [[add]] some sexy/beautiful [[girl]], and some sex-scenes to it. Well, folks... it does'nt cut it, does it!

If you WOULD like a cool movie about a big reptile that is actually very, very good, well-played and funny: go rent Lake Placid! (that is an order) --------------------------------------------- Result 358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Drew Barrymore was [[excellent]] in this film. This role is the type of role you don't normally see Drew play. Her typical role is as a woman looking for love. The storyline is [[also]] [[great]].

When Holly is implicated in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a guy who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a mental prison hospital for what they believe is murder is almost killed she is wrongfully accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has Multiple Personality Disorder. After that another woman becomes paranoid when she's around her. In the end though, they find out the truth. Drew Barrymore was [[glamorous]] in this film. This role is the type of role you don't normally see Drew play. Her typical role is as a woman looking for love. The storyline is [[apart]] [[large]].

When Holly is implicated in her mother's murder she moves to L.A. She moves in with a guy who becomes her lover. But her brother who is in a mental prison hospital for what they believe is murder is almost killed she is wrongfully accused. It is then revealed to her lover that she has Multiple Personality Disorder. After that another woman becomes paranoid when she's around her. In the end though, they find out the truth. --------------------------------------------- Result 359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Another Aussie masterpiece, this delves into the world of the unknown and the supernatural, and it does very well. It doesn't resort to the big special effects overkill like American flicks, it focuses more on emotional impact. A relatively simple plot that Rebecca Gibney & Co. bring to life. It follows the story of a couple who buy an old house that was supposedly home to a very old woman who never went outside, and whose husband disappeared in mysterious circumstances a century ago. Strange things begin to happen in the house, and John Adam begins to turn into the man who disappeared, who was actually a mass murderer. Highly recommended. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] The premise of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Though]] very little dialog is provided throughout the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone made the film [[quite]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods conveys a feeling of loneliness, which complements the quietness of the characters themselves. We can also sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the police of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and irrationality. This film successfully addresses these elements by visuals alone, rather than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad horror films use when the narrative is weak.

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this film provides viewers the experience of true atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this film a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. The premise of the story is simple: An old man living alone in the woods accidentally stumble upon a murder of a small child, and tries to convince the police that the murder has occurred. [[Nevertheless]] very little dialog is provided throughout the film, the visual narrative told by the camera's eye alone made the film [[rather]] engaging. The setting of the gray woods conveys a feeling of loneliness, which complements the quietness of the characters themselves. We can also sense helplessness in the old man's inability to convince the police of the murder, which parallels the silenced child's inability to tell her own story.

True horror lies in feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and irrationality. This film successfully addresses these elements by visuals alone, rather than relying on cheap sound effects or blood and gore that other bad horror films use when the narrative is weak.

Cleverly, the story unfolds at a slow pace to build up tension for a few creepy and startling moments. The ending is also unexpected and believable. Reminiscent of Japanese horror films, such as "The Ring," and "Dark Water," or English horror films, such as "Lady in Black," and "The Innocents," this film provides viewers the experience of true atmosphere horror. I recommend anyone who enjoys a good chilling to the bone scare to give this film a try.

By the way, if you haven't seen the films I just mentioned above, you might want to give them a try as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] I can give you four reasons to see this movie:

1. Four of the [[best]] filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[surprisingly]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest [[trouble]] in this [[country]] (and many others).

(POSSIBLE SPOILERS)

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... I can give you four reasons to see this movie:

1. Four of the [[bestest]] filmmakers in the contemporary Mexican cinema.

2. Four good stories, related into a big scheme.

3. A [[unimaginably]] good cast.

4. A bitter reflexion about the biggest [[hassle]] in this [[nationals]] (and many others).

(POSSIBLE SPOILERS)

Alejandro Gamboa opens this movie with a good story in a comedic mood about the authority practicing the extortion against regular people and still expecting to be appreciated by its efforts.

Then Antonio Serrano gets more dramatic in the second piece with a story heir to the Italian neorealism with a "Peter and the wolf"-like anecdote.

In the third story, the one that seems more independent from this series even in the context, Carlos Carrera tells us the story of a man being at the wrong place in the wrong moment. But after the recent lynching at Tlahuac and the tradition in this awful matter at the State of Mexico, this story couldn't be more updated.

And at the end, Fernando Sariñana returns to the dark humor in the "grand finale" in which he puts together the most of the characters from the past sequences in one of the better comedy pieces ever filmed. Reprising the center scene from one of his previous films "Todo el poder", Sariñana gives the final lesson of the theme. And by the way, give us the scene that steals the movie with Anna Ciochetti making a brief striptease.

Once the movie has ended, you get a bittersweet feeling about having looked at a good movie (and maybe enjoyed it) with a very painful subject. They say that in Mexico people laugh at their own disgrace and this is the best example. This film is a testimony of how Mexicans have learn to live in the middle of a crime state(and perhaps accepted it), between two fires: The criminals and the so-called authorities full of corruption. Even this movie is a wishful thinking because almost all the good people have been a victim of crime and they don't get this unhurt. If you had an assault without a scratch then you're lucky. Meanwhile, don't lose the chance to see this movie, highly recommended.

And it's a beautiful life in Mexico... --------------------------------------------- Result 362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was the second entry in the regular Columbo series, and it holds up well today. As I am able to look at it closely now on DVD and see how it is constructed, I am very impressed with the direction of Bernard L. Kowalski (who directed the fine MACHO CALLAHAN as well as countless TV episodes)--watch how the post-murder actions of the killer are shown on a split-screen effect on his two eyeglasses, watch how the murder itself is shown in montage fashion, watch the point-of-view shot from the perspective of the corpse. Also, the wild but impressive avant-garde musical score from noted jazzman Gil Melle was incredible and helped so much to create atmosphere. And the supporting performance of Brett Halsey as the golf pro was wonderful--such subtlety and complexity in a role that nine out of ten times would be a one-dimensional cutout. The "formula" had not yet been set when this episode was filmed, so there are still some surprises in Columbo's methods. Of course, Falk, Robert Culp, and Ray Milland are the highest-quality actors and it's a pleasure to see them work--all men are familiar from many other roles yet lose themselves in their characters here. In all, this entry in the Columbo series--and MANY of the others--are as well-crafted as a very good feature film. --------------------------------------------- Result 363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] There seems to be a surprisingly high number of 8-10 star reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may [[draw]] your own conclusions.

This is a very [[bad]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concept]] was kind of cute, and I was pleased to [[see]] the [[actresses]] who played Eve and Harmony on Angel getting work, but it didn't take long for the sheer awfulness of this film to make itself known.

Acting: The [[leads]] seemed competent [[enough]], but [[everyone]] else? [[Terrible]].

Plot: Chock full of holes big [[enough]] to drive a truck through.

[[Direction]]: Non-existent.

Humour: [[Did]] they [[really]] [[think]] people were [[going]] to laugh? [[Oh]] [[boy]].

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]: [[OK]]. there were some [[really]] [[beautiful]] [[women]] in this film. Not just the three main female characters, but right [[across]] the board. It was as if the [[producers]] [[hoped]] the [[scenery]] would [[keep]] [[male]] viewers so distracted they wouldn't notice how [[terrible]] everything [[else]] was. If so, they [[failed]] miserably.

In the right hands this [[could]] have been [[cute]] but darkly funny camp classic. It wasn't [[even]] close. There seems to be a surprisingly high number of 8-10 star reviews here from people who have never written an IMDb review before or since. Given the very low average rating given to the film by other people, I think you may [[attracts]] your own conclusions.

This is a very [[mala]] film. I'll admit it, I thought the [[concepts]] was kind of cute, and I was pleased to [[consults]] the [[actors]] who played Eve and Harmony on Angel getting work, but it didn't take long for the sheer awfulness of this film to make itself known.

Acting: The [[leeds]] seemed competent [[sufficiently]], but [[everybody]] else? [[Heinous]].

Plot: Chock full of holes big [[adequately]] to drive a truck through.

[[Directorate]]: Non-existent.

Humour: [[Got]] they [[genuinely]] [[reckon]] people were [[go]] to laugh? [[Ohhh]] [[guys]].

[[Eyes]] [[Sweets]]: [[ALRIGHT]]. there were some [[truthfully]] [[magnificent]] [[girl]] in this film. Not just the three main female characters, but right [[throughout]] the board. It was as if the [[producer]] [[desired]] the [[panorama]] would [[keeping]] [[men]] viewers so distracted they wouldn't notice how [[heinous]] everything [[further]] was. If so, they [[faulted]] miserably.

In the right hands this [[did]] have been [[lovable]] but darkly funny camp classic. It wasn't [[yet]] close. --------------------------------------------- Result 364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not sure it was the language or the poor acting, but everything about this movie feels and looks cheap and fake.

After seeing Der Untergang this is a huge disappointment. There's no connection between different scenes, and the acting is so incredibly poor I couldn't even believe people could make such a mess of something that had great potential.

And above all, everyone in Germany speaks English. Big mistake. The German language has a certain sound to it, and especially Hitler himself only sounds like Hitler when he's speaking/yelling German.

The way the story is told made me believe it was improvised on the spot, the characters were empty and the movie seems to be a collection of random events that could have happened.

Whether it's the English or the fact that I've already seen Der Untergang, everything about this movie was fake and ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The part where Meg visits the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" (implying poor sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[hilarious]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[wonderful]] [[movie]]. Very lovable and very intelligent too. Her innocent indignant expressions have you [[wishing]] she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psyche]]? The puzzle round in front of the press and audience was done well. It's awfully [[underrated]] and [[deserves]] accolades and attempts at a revival. It loses out one vote for including the highly improbable far fetched theory being bought by the US Govt. I don't see why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of approval on it! The part where Meg visits the mechanic and he says - "Is the piston firing short?" (implying poor sexual energy on the part of her fiancée) was [[comical]]. I love Meg Ryan and she is as sweet as ever in this [[funky]] [[cinema]]. Very lovable and very intelligent too. Her innocent indignant expressions have you [[desire]] she was yours. The hero handles the garage mechanic to physicist transformation well. Einstein had a romantic side to his [[psychology]]? The puzzle round in front of the press and audience was done well. It's awfully [[understated]] and [[merit]] accolades and attempts at a revival. It loses out one vote for including the highly improbable far fetched theory being bought by the US Govt. I don't see why it doesn't figure in the top 20 romantic comedies of the century. Great Movie, it has the presidential seal of approval on it! --------------------------------------------- Result 366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This movie was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't add up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a little strange. [[Stick]] to the [[first]] "[[Vampires]]", it's a good movie. "Vampires: Los Muetos" wasn't a [[good]] [[attempt]] of a sequel.

4/10 This movie was messed up. A sequel to "John Carpenter's Vampires", this didn't add up right. I'm not sure that I enjoyed this much. It was a little strange. [[Wand]] to the [[frst]] "[[Vamps]]", it's a good movie. "Vampires: Los Muetos" wasn't a [[buena]] [[tried]] of a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] So we compromised. This was a fairly [[charming]] film, I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not [[bad]] to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a great [[film]] to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. So we compromised. This was a fairly [[ravishing]] film, I liked the art direction (it felt far more "real" than most kids movies), and the costumes weren't too cutesy. The child actors were not [[unfavorable]] to watch (the adult performances trended toward cheesy). It was great that they showed how a bullied kid bullies others as well as kids standing up to bullying.

I don't know how many grown ups would want to see this for themselves, but it's a great [[cinema]] to take a kid to. And since "Barnyard" was apparently attended by 100+ kids at the same time, I'm REALLY glad we picked the sparsely attended showing of "worms" instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Phantom of the Mall is a film that fits best in the "easily forgotten" [[category]]. It's a pretty [[lousy]] variant on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad idea to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to turn over in his grave just yet. It could have been a lot [[worse]].

Phantom of the Mall has too many [[useless]] flashbacks in it and way too many [[boring]] [[sequences]] to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his [[girl]] who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot gets thickened by lots of pointless elements and [[annoying]] [[conspiracy]] theories. [[While]] it should just be an entertaining horror [[movie]], it desperately [[tries]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few [[innovative]] killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who [[want]] to see a relaxing horror [[movie]]. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too serious.

I'll try to finish with a few positive aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will certainly recognize him as Peter for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[unnecessary]]...it was good to [[see]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... Phantom of the Mall is a film that fits best in the "easily forgotten" [[categories]]. It's a pretty [[squalid]] variant on the famous story by Gaston Leroux, the Phantom of the Opera. Not a bad idea to itself, but the plot and production of this movie are way to weak to bring a decent homage to that story. On the bright side, Gaston Leroux doesn't has to turn over in his grave just yet. It could have been a lot [[worst]].

Phantom of the Mall has too many [[unnecessary]] flashbacks in it and way too many [[dull]] [[sequence]] to make it memorable. Also, the scriptwriters wanted to give too much draught to the story than necessary. And even though there's a lot of mystery getting build up about the character of Eric ... the basic plot is ordinary and déjà-vu. ***SPOILERS*** It's about a young couple that brutally gets torn apart because the boy gets killed in a fire. That fire was set to his house because he and his parents refused to sell their home in order to make room for a huge mall to be build. The boy survived the fire and he has hidden himself in the mall to avenge himself. Meanwhile he guards his [[chica]] who now works in the mall and tries to forget her loss ****END SPOILERS*** This pretty simple - but rather effective - plot gets thickened by lots of pointless elements and [[galling]] [[collusion]] theories. [[Despite]] it should just be an entertaining horror [[cinema]], it desperately [[endeavour]] to be an intelligent thriller...and that's not what the fans look for. There are a few [[revolutionary]] killings but they're not satisfying enough for people who [[wanting]] to see a relaxing horror [[filmmaking]]. And besides, Phantom of the Mall could have used at least a bit of humor!! This entire production - the cast included - takes itself way too serious.

I'll try to finish with a few positive aspects...Like for example, it stars Ken Foree !! Die-hard horror fans will certainly recognize him as Peter for Dawn of the Dead! That's like the horror milestone that yet has to find an equal. Even though his role in this movie is limited and even completely [[dispensable]]...it was good to [[behold]] him again. TV-movie fans will also recognize Morgan Fairchild as the mayor, she's a fine actress and an elegant lady. Pauly Shore is also in this but I can't stand him...so my opinion about him may be a bit biased. And finally, a bit of praise for the leading actress named Kari Whitman. She's an extremely beautiful girl and she does have a bit of talent...too bad she never made it to the top. Actually, this movie is her biggest achievement and that says enough about her career... --------------------------------------------- Result 369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Man With the Gun is pretty much forgotten now, but caused a minor storm of media interest back in 1955 when Robert Mitchum turned down both Jett Rink in Giant (which had actually been written for him and which was subsequently substantially reworked) and Charles Laughton's intended version of The Naked and the Dead to make it instead. Despite some obvious production problems and some harsh lighting that occasionally renders both Mitch and Jan Sterling in unflattering tones, it's a [[terrific]] dark western that more than stands [[comparison]] with his earlier Blood on the Moon as his 'town tamer' sets to work on a [[town]] that never had the chance to [[grow]] up before getting run down by the local badmen before turning out to – possibly – be almost as bad as the [[men]] he dispatches. [[Certainly]] his way of dealing with news of a death in the family – burning a saloon to the ground and goading its manager into [[trying]] to [[kill]] him – doesn't inspire much [[confidence]] in his stability. As well as a [[good]] script and a [[surprisingly]] good supporting turn from the usually [[irritating]] but here well cast [[Henry]] Hull, it also boasts a strikingly [[good]] early Alex North score, which even includes an early workout for one of his tormented emotional cues that would later turn up in Spartacus. Man With the Gun is pretty much forgotten now, but caused a minor storm of media interest back in 1955 when Robert Mitchum turned down both Jett Rink in Giant (which had actually been written for him and which was subsequently substantially reworked) and Charles Laughton's intended version of The Naked and the Dead to make it instead. Despite some obvious production problems and some harsh lighting that occasionally renders both Mitch and Jan Sterling in unflattering tones, it's a [[magnifique]] dark western that more than stands [[comparative]] with his earlier Blood on the Moon as his 'town tamer' sets to work on a [[municipality]] that never had the chance to [[raising]] up before getting run down by the local badmen before turning out to – possibly – be almost as bad as the [[males]] he dispatches. [[Obviously]] his way of dealing with news of a death in the family – burning a saloon to the ground and goading its manager into [[attempting]] to [[mata]] him – doesn't inspire much [[trusting]] in his stability. As well as a [[alright]] script and a [[terribly]] good supporting turn from the usually [[galling]] but here well cast [[Gregg]] Hull, it also boasts a strikingly [[buena]] early Alex North score, which even includes an early workout for one of his tormented emotional cues that would later turn up in Spartacus. --------------------------------------------- Result 370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Documentary starts in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[drag]] queens hold "balls". That's where they dress up [[however]] they like, [[strut]] their stuff in [[front]] of an [[audience]] and are voted on. We [[get]] to know many of the [[members]] and [[see]] how they all [[hold]] [[together]] and support each other. As one [[man]] [[says]] to another--"You have three [[strikes]] against you--you're black, gay and a drag queen". These are people who (sadly) are not [[accepted]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[want]] and be [[accepted]]. Then the film cuts to three years later (1989) and you see how things have changed (tragically for some).

Sounds depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are actually very funny and get a lot of humor out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and accept it with humor--just as they should. We find out they all live in "houses" run by various "mothers" and all help each other out. The sense of community in this film is fascinating.

When this film came out in 1990 it was controversial--and a big hit. It won Best Documentary Awards at numerous festivals--but was never even nominated for an Academy Award. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? Homophobia and racism all together.

Seen today it's still a [[great]] film--and a period piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they show no longer exists. The balls are still held but not in the spirit we see here. Also drag has become more "accepted" in society (for better or worse). And I've heard the houses are gone too. That's kind of sad. I WOULD like to know where these characters are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no idea about the others. And what DID happen to that 13 year old and 15 year old shown?

Still, it a one of a kind documentary--fascinating, funny and riveting. A must see all the way! A definite 10. Where's the DVD??? Documentary starts in 1986 in NYC where black and hispanic [[towed]] queens hold "balls". That's where they dress up [[instead]] they like, [[plank]] their stuff in [[newsweek]] of an [[audiences]] and are voted on. We [[obtain]] to know many of the [[lawmakers]] and [[consults]] how they all [[held]] [[jointly]] and support each other. As one [[dude]] [[asserts]] to another--"You have three [[attacks]] against you--you're black, gay and a drag queen". These are people who (sadly) are not [[embraced]] in society--only at the balls. There they can be whoever and whatever they [[wanted]] and be [[recognized]]. Then the film cuts to three years later (1989) and you see how things have changed (tragically for some).

Sounds depressing but it's not. Most of the people interviewed are actually very funny and get a lot of humor out of their situations. They're well aware of their position in society and accept it with humor--just as they should. We find out they all live in "houses" run by various "mothers" and all help each other out. The sense of community in this film is fascinating.

When this film came out in 1990 it was controversial--and a big hit. It won Best Documentary Awards at numerous festivals--but was never even nominated for an Academy Award. Their reason was "Black and hispanic drag queens are not Academy material". Fascinating isn't it? Homophobia and racism all together.

Seen today it's still a [[whopping]] film--and a period piece. It just isn't like that anymore--the NY they show no longer exists. The balls are still held but not in the spirit we see here. Also drag has become more "accepted" in society (for better or worse). And I've heard the houses are gone too. That's kind of sad. I WOULD like to know where these characters are now--I know two died of AIDS but I have no idea about the others. And what DID happen to that 13 year old and 15 year old shown?

Still, it a one of a kind documentary--fascinating, funny and riveting. A must see all the way! A definite 10. Where's the DVD??? --------------------------------------------- Result 371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Peter]] Falk is a [[diverse]] and accomplished actor. The [[movie]] is well written and the acting seems like real life. [[For]] all [[lovers]] of [[Columbo]] this is a [[superior]] [[piece]] of work. Because it [[shows]] what a [[talent]] Peter Falk is. He doesn't play a detective he plays a retired carpet salesman. By the time the credits begin to role you already want to watch it again. The interesting part of the [[movie]] is that the [[message]] will [[apply]] to [[every]] person that watches it; the [[depth]] of its' pertinence will be the only [[thing]] that [[varies]]. It is a [[shame]] that the [[liberals]] in Hollywood only promote smut and skin because this is the type of movie that the people in the business should be proud of. This would be a great movie to turn into a live stage play. [[Pete]] Falk is a [[divergent]] and accomplished actor. The [[cinema]] is well written and the acting seems like real life. [[In]] all [[stalkers]] of [[Colombo]] this is a [[higher]] [[slice]] of work. Because it [[denotes]] what a [[talents]] Peter Falk is. He doesn't play a detective he plays a retired carpet salesman. By the time the credits begin to role you already want to watch it again. The interesting part of the [[flick]] is that the [[messaging]] will [[implement]] to [[any]] person that watches it; the [[depths]] of its' pertinence will be the only [[stuff]] that [[fluctuates]]. It is a [[dishonour]] that the [[democrats]] in Hollywood only promote smut and skin because this is the type of movie that the people in the business should be proud of. This would be a great movie to turn into a live stage play. --------------------------------------------- Result 372 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I thought that for a first episode of a first series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was [[brilliant]]. I think it is a crime for [[anyone]] to [[say]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people [[say]] that it wasn't historically correct because it is supposed to be a Saturday night entertainment show not a boring history documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[brilliant]] start and i am going to love what will come next!! I have spoken to many people at my school and they [[love]] the [[show]]! we all think that it is brilliant entertainment and it has great stories to go with it. I thought that for a first episode of a first series it did really well. It was really fun and i thought the actors was [[shiny]]. I think it is a crime for [[person]] to [[tell]] that is was bad because it looked the right time. i find it really annoying when people [[told]] that it wasn't historically correct because it is supposed to be a Saturday night entertainment show not a boring history documentary so i think the costumes and settings were just right. A [[lustrous]] start and i am going to love what will come next!! I have spoken to many people at my school and they [[iove]] the [[display]]! we all think that it is brilliant entertainment and it has great stories to go with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Worst]] [[Bob]] Hope [[comedy]] ever(and that [[includes]] some heavy [[competition]]). Hope, on an [[island]] with sailors, dreams aloud of being in a bathtub with a geisha girl "steering his [[ship]]". [[Somebody]] certainly [[steered]] this Hope-hackery over the cliff, as it features Phyllis Diller and Gina Lollobrigida and still can't work up any [[laughs]] or [[excitement]]. Where's Bing Crosby when you [[really]] [[need]] him? [[Pire]] [[Spongebob]] Hope [[farce]] ever(and that [[encompass]] some heavy [[rivalries]]). Hope, on an [[isla]] with sailors, dreams aloud of being in a bathtub with a geisha girl "steering his [[vessel]]". [[Everybody]] certainly [[guided]] this Hope-hackery over the cliff, as it features Phyllis Diller and Gina Lollobrigida and still can't work up any [[giggling]] or [[exhilaration]]. Where's Bing Crosby when you [[genuinely]] [[gotta]] him? --------------------------------------------- Result 374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] As a veteran of many, many pretentious French films I [[thought]] I'd [[taken]] the worst the [[industry]] had to [[offer]] and was able to stomach [[anything]]. But not this. [[Pointless]], [[relentless]], violent, [[unpleasant]], [[meaningless]] ... The [[film]] has nothing to [[offer]] and is random hatred and aggression [[dressed]] up as [[pretentious]] art. [[Avoid]] at all [[costs]]. As a veteran of many, many pretentious French films I [[thinks]] I'd [[took]] the worst the [[industries]] had to [[delivering]] and was able to stomach [[nothing]]. But not this. [[Vain]], [[ruthless]], violent, [[nasty]], [[senseless]] ... The [[kino]] has nothing to [[offered]] and is random hatred and aggression [[clothed]] up as [[cocky]] art. [[Evade]] at all [[prices]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Let me start out by [[saying]] that I [[used]] to really like Betty Grable, particularly from "Down Argentine Way", but by the time she got around to this [[disaster]], she had also got "round" and frankly the [[whole]] [[film]] was an [[embarrassment]]. Costarred with Douglas Fairbanks JNr (who must have been fairly desperate) the story was [[bad]], the colours good, and the film far too [[long]]. It had some of the old standbys in it like Harry Davenport and Reginald Gardiner to [[try]] and stimulate interest but with no success. The music score was woeful, and I have to say not one tune was memorable in any way....as I was such a fan of Miss Grable, I always wish I had never seen this one! Let me start out by [[arguing]] that I [[utilized]] to really like Betty Grable, particularly from "Down Argentine Way", but by the time she got around to this [[catastrophes]], she had also got "round" and frankly the [[ensemble]] [[films]] was an [[shame]]. Costarred with Douglas Fairbanks JNr (who must have been fairly desperate) the story was [[unhealthy]], the colours good, and the film far too [[protracted]]. It had some of the old standbys in it like Harry Davenport and Reginald Gardiner to [[attempted]] and stimulate interest but with no success. The music score was woeful, and I have to say not one tune was memorable in any way....as I was such a fan of Miss Grable, I always wish I had never seen this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Extremely [[thin]] 'plot' of satanic rituals or some such mumbo-jumbo provides the hokey [[excuse]] to thread [[copious]] [[amounts]] of sex scenes together. Straight vanilla sex, [[masturbation]], lesbianism, S&M, bestiality, incest, and a few other sexual proliferation's all get their time in the spotlight here. The problem is the storyline is so [[dull]] that the rampant sexuality gets pretty tedious after awhile. Who knew that a film with an intimate goat/ girl encounter could be so damn boring? Well now I do.

Eye Candy: Venessa Hidalgo shows all; Helga Line provides T&A (both on display quite frequently); women viewers get the occasional penis.

My Grade: D+

Region 1 DVD Extras: Trailers for "Pick Up", "Legend of Eight Samurai", "Don't Answer the Phone", "Prime Evil", & "Sister Street Fighter" (also the same DVD holds a second feature movie "Evil Eye") Extremely [[slender]] 'plot' of satanic rituals or some such mumbo-jumbo provides the hokey [[alibis]] to thread [[hearty]] [[amount]] of sex scenes together. Straight vanilla sex, [[masturbate]], lesbianism, S&M, bestiality, incest, and a few other sexual proliferation's all get their time in the spotlight here. The problem is the storyline is so [[dreary]] that the rampant sexuality gets pretty tedious after awhile. Who knew that a film with an intimate goat/ girl encounter could be so damn boring? Well now I do.

Eye Candy: Venessa Hidalgo shows all; Helga Line provides T&A (both on display quite frequently); women viewers get the occasional penis.

My Grade: D+

Region 1 DVD Extras: Trailers for "Pick Up", "Legend of Eight Samurai", "Don't Answer the Phone", "Prime Evil", & "Sister Street Fighter" (also the same DVD holds a second feature movie "Evil Eye") --------------------------------------------- Result 377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (75%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it created a generation of wannabe computer hackers. The [[idea]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was novel and thrilling. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an annoying flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. You have to understand, when Wargames was released in 1983, it created a generation of wannabe computer hackers. The [[brainchild]] that a teenager could do anything of far reaching proportions, let alone deter a world war was novel and thrilling. Real computers were beginning to show up in people's homes, and for the first time, society was becoming interconnected in a way that made the movie's premise excitingly prescient. Granted, a talking computer that balanced it's free time between chess and global thermonuclear war was a bit far fetched, but the brilliant commentary on nuclear proliferation and the cold war made up for it. I've probably even heard of the hackers that this movie was actually based on.

Fast forward 25 years, and we have a horrible mutant of a thing that I loathe to call a "sequel", called Wargames: The Dead Code. I'll just dig right in. First of all, the plot hinges on a government operated gambling site where folks who win the games automatically become terror suspects. You're probably very confused right now. The idea is that eventually the terrorist will click on the sub-game within the web site called "The Dead Code" where they pilot a plane over a city, spraying it with bioweapons. At some point in the game, you have to choose between "sarin gas" and "anthrax", and if you choose "sarin", then you're automatically confirmed as a bioterrorism weapons expert and your family is taken into custody and interrogated. In the movie, this actually happens. However, since the payment for the game was made from a bank account that was suspicious, it obviously all makes sense.

Second, the avatar of the AI in this straight-to-DVD bomb is an annoying flash animation that keeps repeating the pop-up-ad-esquire sound bite "play with me baby". Because apparently in the future, advanced AI loses interest in intellectual pursuits like chess, and gets into porn.

Third, the motivation for these "hackers" is profit and women, as opposed to pure curiosity as in the original movie. For some reason, recent hacker movies feel the need to portray all young adults as average surfer dude kind of people who are just like everyone else. That may work for your average sitcom, but c'mon, you don't learn how to take over government computers by doing your hair, playing sports, and shopping at the mall, folks. The one novel thing I noticed was that at some point in the dialogue there is a reference to a Matt Damon movie, and then later there is the phrase, "Good Hunting, Will". I swear, they named the main character Will just for that phrase so they could send a high five to Mr. Damon. This Will kid isn't bad, but he was certainly wasn't like any obsessive hacker I've ever met. I can't fully state how annoyed I am that this movie shares the same name as the original, because it has absolutely nothing in common with it except… Professor Falken and Joshua (WOPR) make a reappearance in this movie, as a limp old man who apparently is dying of boredom, and a dilapidated old tic-tac-toe machine with a higher pitched voice. After some prodding, Joshua (the AI) has what appears to be sex with the new AI with the porn voice, a bunch of board games flash on the big screens, and the whole "The only way to win, is not to play" revelation is supposed to be the crowning moment. Except that those of us who saw the original, you know, those who would want to see this in the first place have already been there and done that. A recycled ending for a movie made from last month's compost.

The new movie was directed by a guy who's done 90210, and written by guys who do B movies. The original was directed by a guy who's been keeping himself busy with "Heroes", so you see the quality difference there. There was talk of a real remake, but I hope they don't destroy this classic all over again. I swear, if I have to, I'll visit every gambling web site until I find the one that's run by a psychotic government computer. The saving grace is that I was able to stream this on Netflix, so at least the only energy I expended watching this disaster was for breathing, clicking, and indigestion. --------------------------------------------- Result 378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Here's a [[real]] weirdo for you. It [[starts]] out with another take-off on the PSYCHO shower scene, on campus, then gets crazier when several coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The trouble starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the college cuties wanders into the woods, witnesses a murder by the sheriff and has her head blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, traps and slaughters the witless witnesses one by one. Tony March is on-target as the evil, shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's overall tone is truly disturbing. The ending is so abrupt you almost think the director ran out of film; it's also a study in despair. [[SHALLOW]] GRAVE is a [[must]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the world over. Here's a [[actual]] weirdo for you. It [[commenced]] out with another take-off on the PSYCHO shower scene, on campus, then gets crazier when several coeds and their doofy boyfriends head south for Spring Break. The trouble starts when they drive into the redneck county ruled by homicidal Sheriff Dean. One of the college cuties wanders into the woods, witnesses a murder by the sheriff and has her head blown open. Then it's lets-rip-off MACON COUNTY LINE-time as Dean stalks, traps and slaughters the witless witnesses one by one. Tony March is on-target as the evil, shotgun-happy Dean. The movie's overall tone is truly disturbing. The ending is so abrupt you almost think the director ran out of film; it's also a study in despair. [[SUPERFICIAL]] GRAVE is a [[should]] for misanthropes, misogynists and nihilists the world over. --------------------------------------------- Result 379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] There have been several films about Zorro, some even made in [[Europe]], [[e]].g. Alain Delon. This role has also been played by [[outstanding]] actors, such as Tyrone Power and Anthony Hopkins, but to me the best of all [[times]] has [[always]] been [[Reed]] Hadley. This serial gives you the opportunity to see an interesting western, where you will only [[discover]] the real villain, Don del Oro, at its [[end]]. The serial also has good performance of various actors of [[movies]] B like Ed Cobb, ex- Tarzan Jim Pierce, C. Montague Shaw, [[eternal]] [[villains]] like [[John]] Merton and Charles King, and a very [[good]] performance of Hadley as Zorro. He was [[quick]], [[smart]], used well his [[whip]] and sword, and his [[voice]] was the [[best]] for any Zorro. There have been several films about Zorro, some even made in [[Eu]], [[f]].g. Alain Delon. This role has also been played by [[unpaid]] actors, such as Tyrone Power and Anthony Hopkins, but to me the best of all [[dates]] has [[incessantly]] been [[Reid]] Hadley. This serial gives you the opportunity to see an interesting western, where you will only [[detecting]] the real villain, Don del Oro, at its [[termination]]. The serial also has good performance of various actors of [[kino]] B like Ed Cobb, ex- Tarzan Jim Pierce, C. Montague Shaw, [[incorruptible]] [[thugs]] like [[Johannes]] Merton and Charles King, and a very [[alright]] performance of Hadley as Zorro. He was [[hurry]], [[smarter]], used well his [[whips]] and sword, and his [[vowel]] was the [[better]] for any Zorro. --------------------------------------------- Result 380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Since Educating Rita, Julie Walters has been one of my role models, and her performance in this as a woman who helps the man she loves get in synch with his feminine side is magnificent. I would never have believed her character in the hands of a lesser actress, but Walters pulls it off with gusto and panache. Adrian Pasdar gives his best performance to-date in the male lead. --------------------------------------------- Result 381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] The [[Godfather]] Part I was a stunning look inside the fictional Corleone family and how an innocent young man was all but forced into circumstances he never wanted to have a part of. The Godfather [[Part]] [[II]] shows that young man's acceptance of his new role, his desensitization of character, as well as his [[complete]] [[loss]] of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[first]] two parts of this [[saga]] of this transformation of Michael Corleone make for one of the greatest [[tragedies]] in cinematic history.

[[Then]], along came The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex character that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather Part II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the unbelievably tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and abandoning the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the meaning of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible mess of a film that never should have been made. The only solution to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather movies is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's shockingly horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. The [[Nominating]] Part I was a stunning look inside the fictional Corleone family and how an innocent young man was all but forced into circumstances he never wanted to have a part of. The Godfather [[Portion]] [[SECONDLY]] shows that young man's acceptance of his new role, his desensitization of character, as well as his [[finishing]] [[losing]] of all innocence as he dives deeper and deeper into a life of crime. The [[frst]] two parts of this [[epic]] of this transformation of Michael Corleone make for one of the greatest [[macy]] in cinematic history.

[[Thus]], along came The Godfather Part III. Michael Corleone is now the aging Don of the Corleone family. He shows remorse for his previous actions not through subtle behaviors, but by trying to use his powers for good and admitting all his wrongdoings and regrets to others. Very cliche and uncharacteristic of the complex character that is Michael Corleone. Michael's plans to use his powers for good are derailed by an ambitious young disciple and his enemies. Michael's daughter is eventually a casualty of the ongoing mob wars and her death predictably leads to Michael realizing that his entire life as Don has been worthless for he has failed in the one thing that was the reason for putting himself into the position he was in: protecting his family.

The Godfather Part II ends with Michael Corleone reaching the lowest of the lows: having his own brother killed. Before Part III was made, the Godfather saga was an emotionally riveting tale of an innocent young man's journey into darkness with the unbelievably tragic end of Michael forgetting his roots and abandoning the one thing that has always mattered most to him and those around him: family loyalty. Part III paints the picture of Michael as a man who is and always has been just a victim of circumstance. This greatly corrupts the meaning of the first two films.

The Godfather Part III is a horrible mess of a film that never should have been made. The only solution to the problem that is this final installment of The Godfather movies is to pretend that it does not exist and that the saga actually ends with Michael's shockingly horrible act of having a member of his own family killed. --------------------------------------------- Result 382 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[different]] story.

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. While movie titles contains the word 'Mother', the first thing that comes to our mind will be a mother's love for her children.

However, The Mother tells a [[disparate]] story.

The Mother do not discuss the love between a mother and her child, or how she sacrifice herself for the benefit of her child. Here, Notting Hill director Roger Michell tells us how a mother's love for a man about half of her age hurts the people around her.

Before Daniel Craig takes on the role of James Bond, here, he plays Darren, a man who is helping to renovate the house of the son of the mother, and sleeping with her daughter as well. Anne Reid, who was a familiar face on TV series, takes up the challenging role of the leading character, May.

The story begins with May coping with the sudden loss of her husband, Toots, in a family visit to her son, Bobby. While she befriends Darren, a handyman who is doing some renovation in Bobby's house, she was shocked to found out that her daughter, Paula, was sleeping with Darren. At the same time, May was coping with life after the death of Toots. Fearing that Harry and Paula do not wanted her, May starts to find her life going off track, until she spends her afternoon with Darren.

Darren was nice and friendly to May, and May soon finds some affection on Darren. Instead of treating him like a friend, she treated the man who was about half her age with love of a couple. Later, May found sexual pleasure from Darren, where he gave her the pleasure she could never find on anyone else. And this is the beginning of the disaster that could lead to the break down of a family.

The Mother explores the inner world of a widow who wanted to try something she never had in her life, and solace on someone who is there for her to shoulder on. This can be told from May buying tea time snacks for Darren to fulfilling sexual needs from a man younger than her, where it eventually gave her more than she bargained for.

Anne Reid has made a breakthrough for her role of May, as she was previously best well known for her various role on TV series. As she do not have much movies in her career resume, The Mother has put her on the critic's attention. Daniel Craig, on the other hand, had took on a similar role in his movie career, such as Sylvia (2003) and Enduring Love (2004). If his reprising role of James Bond fails, film reviewers should not forget that he has a better performance in small productions in his years of movie career, and The Mother is one of them.

The Mother may not be everyone's favorite, but it is definitely not your usual matinée show to go along with tea and scones, accompanied by butter and jam. --------------------------------------------- Result 383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I think the [[biggest]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the [[end]], I expected the acting [[instructors]] of the cast to [[break]] in and apologize for how [[poor]] the acting was. When you [[consider]] the [[powerful]] subject, the [[brilliant]] scenery and the [[effort]] [[made]] in [[creating]] a [[wonderful]] set and spectacular images, it is a [[shame]] that [[little]] [[attention]] was given to acting.

I think the [[grandest]] disappointment in this film was that, right until the [[terminates]], I expected the acting [[teachers]] of the cast to [[outage]] in and apologize for how [[pauper]] the acting was. When you [[examining]] the [[emphatic]] subject, the [[wondrous]] scenery and the [[endeavours]] [[brought]] in [[establish]] a [[sublime]] set and spectacular images, it is a [[pity]] that [[petit]] [[beware]] was given to acting.

--------------------------------------------- Result 384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[film]] was absolutely...ugh i can't find the word oh wait... [[crap]]! I mean when it started i was like [[yeah]] this [[looks]] [[good]] and then after it was so [[boring]]. I [[nearly]] [[fell]] asleep and it had [[nothing]] to do with the [[fact]] that i [[caught]] a late [[showing]] because it was [[utter]] [[filth]]. Ram Gopal Varma has [[tried]] his [[best]] but the cast [[could]] never [[live]] up to the cast of the [[original]] Sholay i [[mean]] what was he [[thinking]] doing a [[remake]]. What was he [[trying]] to do? [[Be]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[win]] all the [[awards]] next year like he did for [[Black]]? Ajay and that other [[guy]] were good [[especially]] the other [[guy]] who [[played]] raj because out of all of them he was the one to [[look]] at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[destroying]] his own dignity by doing all these [[stupid]] [[films]]. [[First]] Nishabd then Cheeni Kum then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes [[got]] to [[gather]] a bit of his [[money]] and [[move]] as far away from Bollywood as [[possible]] before he [[loses]] all his [[respect]] and I'm [[telling]] you he's already [[past]] half his [[way]]. I mean all this is [[really]] good for the other [[actors]] like Shah Rukh Khan who's getting a [[really]] [[good]] [[name]] now because of the recent downfall of [[Amitabh]]. I never [[really]] [[liked]] him because he [[thinks]] he's [[God]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[going]] to be in that [[movie]].

[[If]] you [[want]] to [[save]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[something]] good [[go]] watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[movie]] ever and it's number one in the [[charts]]! This [[cinematography]] was absolutely...ugh i can't find the word oh wait... [[turd]]! I mean when it started i was like [[yup]] this [[seems]] [[alright]] and then after it was so [[dreary]]. I [[approximately]] [[plummeted]] asleep and it had [[anything]] to do with the [[facto]] that i [[grabbed]] a late [[displaying]] because it was [[total]] [[dirt]]. Ram Gopal Varma has [[attempted]] his [[finest]] but the cast [[did]] never [[iive]] up to the cast of the [[initial]] Sholay i [[meaning]] what was he [[think]] doing a [[redo]]. What was he [[attempt]] to do? [[Are]] like Sanjay Leeli Bhansani and [[gaining]] all the [[prix]] next year like he did for [[Negro]]? Ajay and that other [[buddy]] were good [[mainly]] the other [[buddy]] who [[served]] raj because out of all of them he was the one to [[glance]] at. What was Amitabh doing? He's [[ruining]] his own dignity by doing all these [[imbecile]] [[movie]]. [[Fiirst]] Nishabd then Cheeni Kum then Jhoom Barabar Jhoom and now this i mean hes [[did]] to [[assemble]] a bit of his [[cash]] and [[budge]] as far away from Bollywood as [[probable]] before he [[losing]] all his [[respecting]] and I'm [[saying]] you he's already [[previous]] half his [[camino]]. I mean all this is [[genuinely]] good for the other [[protagonists]] like Shah Rukh Khan who's getting a [[truly]] [[buena]] [[naming]] now because of the recent downfall of [[Bachchan]]. I never [[truly]] [[enjoyed]] him because he [[deems]] he's [[Christ]] and i just knew Abhishek was [[gonna]] to be in that [[cinematography]].

[[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[savings]] your £17.75 and spend it on [[somethin]] good [[going]] watch Heyy Babyy because that's just the funniest [[filmmaking]] ever and it's number one in the [[graphs]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Much about love & [[life]] can be learned from [[watching]] the folks at THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER.

Ernst Lubitsch had another quiet [[triumph]] added to his [[credit]] with this [[lovely]] film. With sparkling dialogue (courtesy of his longtime collaborator Samson Raphaelson) and wonderful performances from a [[cast]] of abundantly talented performers, he created a [[truly]] [[memorable]] [[movie]]. [[Always]] believing in playing up to the intelligence of his [[viewers]], and favoring sophistication over slapstick, the director [[concocted]] a scintillating [[cinematic]] repast seasoned with that elusive, enigmatic quality known as the ‘Lubitsch touch.'

Although the story is set in Budapest (and there is a jumble of accents among the players) this is of no consequence. The beautiful simplicity of the plot is that any great American city or small town could easily be the locus for the action.

Jimmy Stewart & Margaret Sullavan are wonderful as the clerks in love with romance and then with each other - without knowing it. Their dialogue - so adeptly handled as to seem utterly natural - perfectly conveys their confusion & quiet desperation as they seek for soul mates. Theirs is one of the classic love stories of the cinema.

Cherubic Frank Morgan has a more serious role than usual, that of a man whose transient importance in his little world is shattered when he finds himself to be a cuckold. An accomplished scene stealer, he allows no emotion to escape unvented. Additionally, Morgan provides the film with its most joyous few moments - near the end - when he determines that his store's newest employee, an impoverished youth, enjoys a memorable Christmas Eve.

Joseph Schildkraut adds another vivid depiction to his roster of screen portrayals, this time that of a toadying, sycophantic Lothario who thoroughly deserves the punishment eventually meted out to him. Gentle Felix Bressart has his finest film role as a family man who really can not afford to become involved in shop intrigues, yet remains a steadfast friend to Stewart.

Sara Haden graces the small role of a sales clerk. William Tracy is hilarious as the ambitious errand boy who takes advantage of unforeseen developments to leverage himself onto the sales force.

In tiny roles, Charles Halton plays a no-nonsense detective and Edwin Maxwell appears as a pompous doctor. Movie mavens will recognize Mary Carr & Mabel Colcord - both uncredited - in their single scene as Miss Sullavan's grandmother & aunt. Much about love & [[iife]] can be learned from [[staring]] the folks at THE SHOP AROUND THE CORNER.

Ernst Lubitsch had another quiet [[triumphal]] added to his [[credits]] with this [[sumptuous]] film. With sparkling dialogue (courtesy of his longtime collaborator Samson Raphaelson) and wonderful performances from a [[casting]] of abundantly talented performers, he created a [[honestly]] [[eventful]] [[cinematography]]. [[Incessantly]] believing in playing up to the intelligence of his [[audiences]], and favoring sophistication over slapstick, the director [[invented]] a scintillating [[cinematographic]] repast seasoned with that elusive, enigmatic quality known as the ‘Lubitsch touch.'

Although the story is set in Budapest (and there is a jumble of accents among the players) this is of no consequence. The beautiful simplicity of the plot is that any great American city or small town could easily be the locus for the action.

Jimmy Stewart & Margaret Sullavan are wonderful as the clerks in love with romance and then with each other - without knowing it. Their dialogue - so adeptly handled as to seem utterly natural - perfectly conveys their confusion & quiet desperation as they seek for soul mates. Theirs is one of the classic love stories of the cinema.

Cherubic Frank Morgan has a more serious role than usual, that of a man whose transient importance in his little world is shattered when he finds himself to be a cuckold. An accomplished scene stealer, he allows no emotion to escape unvented. Additionally, Morgan provides the film with its most joyous few moments - near the end - when he determines that his store's newest employee, an impoverished youth, enjoys a memorable Christmas Eve.

Joseph Schildkraut adds another vivid depiction to his roster of screen portrayals, this time that of a toadying, sycophantic Lothario who thoroughly deserves the punishment eventually meted out to him. Gentle Felix Bressart has his finest film role as a family man who really can not afford to become involved in shop intrigues, yet remains a steadfast friend to Stewart.

Sara Haden graces the small role of a sales clerk. William Tracy is hilarious as the ambitious errand boy who takes advantage of unforeseen developments to leverage himself onto the sales force.

In tiny roles, Charles Halton plays a no-nonsense detective and Edwin Maxwell appears as a pompous doctor. Movie mavens will recognize Mary Carr & Mabel Colcord - both uncredited - in their single scene as Miss Sullavan's grandmother & aunt. --------------------------------------------- Result 386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I have not read the novel, though I understand that this is somewhat different from it; the fact that I rather [[enjoyed]] this, coupled with the fact that this really is not my genre, leads me to the decision of not [[pursuing]] reading the book. Having not read a single word of Austen's writing, I really can't [[compare]] this to any of her work. What I can say is that almost every line of dialog in this is clever, witty, and well-delivered, as well as the [[biggest]] source of [[comedy]] in this. This made me laugh out [[loud]] a lot, with [[perfect]] British and verbal material. Every acting performance is spot-on, and Paltrow completely nails the role of a kind matchmaker. The characters are well-written, credible and consistent. I did find a couple of them extremely irritating, however, and while I think that at least some of that was meant to be funny, it tended to get repeated excessively, and it honestly wasn't amusing the first time they appeared. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and everything looks [[utterly]] [[gorgeous]]. Plot and pacing are [[great]], you're never bored. It does end in a *really* obvious manner, but maybe that's what the audience of these prefer. I can't claim that this did not entertain me, it did from start to finish, and I'd watch it again. There is brief language in this. I [[recommend]] this to any [[fan]] of romance stories. 7/10 I have not read the novel, though I understand that this is somewhat different from it; the fact that I rather [[appreciated]] this, coupled with the fact that this really is not my genre, leads me to the decision of not [[pursue]] reading the book. Having not read a single word of Austen's writing, I really can't [[comparative]] this to any of her work. What I can say is that almost every line of dialog in this is clever, witty, and well-delivered, as well as the [[larger]] source of [[travesty]] in this. This made me laugh out [[rowdy]] a lot, with [[faultless]] British and verbal material. Every acting performance is spot-on, and Paltrow completely nails the role of a kind matchmaker. The characters are well-written, credible and consistent. I did find a couple of them extremely irritating, however, and while I think that at least some of that was meant to be funny, it tended to get repeated excessively, and it honestly wasn't amusing the first time they appeared. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and everything looks [[quite]] [[handsome]]. Plot and pacing are [[large]], you're never bored. It does end in a *really* obvious manner, but maybe that's what the audience of these prefer. I can't claim that this did not entertain me, it did from start to finish, and I'd watch it again. There is brief language in this. I [[recommendation]] this to any [[ventilator]] of romance stories. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Guy walking around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[movie]] was [[completely]] [[senseless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the funeral of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not recommend the movie even to leave on while sleeping... Guy walking around without motive... I will never get those two hours of my life back. The guy kept on assuming identities and cheating on his pregnant wife. What was I thinking? How did this win a price anywhere? I understood he loved his father but other than that the [[kino]] was [[fully]] [[mindless]] to me. What was the purpose of walking so much and going to the funeral of a stranger for no apparent reason. How did this enrich his life??? Why did we have to see the dying old lady on her underwear????!!! Why???!!!!

I though it would be deep or about something more interesting. I do not recommend the movie even to leave on while sleeping... --------------------------------------------- Result 388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Jean-Claude Van Damme plays twin brothers Alex and Chad, both whom are martial arts expert who team up to take down the mobsters responsible for the murder of the [[parents]] in this [[empty]] headed martial arts actioner which doesn't have a plot that would make [[better]] use of the [[gimmick]] of having two Jean-Claude Van Dammes. Some [[okay]] actionscenes, but this is not one of Van Damme's best. Jean-Claude Van Damme plays twin brothers Alex and Chad, both whom are martial arts expert who team up to take down the mobsters responsible for the murder of the [[parenting]] in this [[emptiness]] headed martial arts actioner which doesn't have a plot that would make [[best]] use of the [[ploy]] of having two Jean-Claude Van Dammes. Some [[aight]] actionscenes, but this is not one of Van Damme's best. --------------------------------------------- Result 389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I thought this was a quiet [[good]] movie. It was [[fun]] to watch it. What I liked best where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[GREAT]]. I thought this was a quiet [[alright]] movie. It was [[droll]] to watch it. What I liked best where the 'Outtakes' at the end of the movie. They were [[RESPLENDENT]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 390 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The performances in this movie were [[fantastic]]. The dialogue was [[great]]. [[Jason]] Patric [[delivered]] a [[fantastic]] performance as "[[Kid]]" [[Collins]] in this [[wonderful]] [[adaptation]] of the Jim Thompson novel. Far superior to "The Grifters", which was a [[good]] movie, this film really stayed true to the pulp fiction/film noir [[roots]] from which the story [[came]]. I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to all [[film]] [[noir]] fans. The performances in this movie were [[unbelievable]]. The dialogue was [[prodigious]]. [[Jas]] Patric [[gave]] a [[unbelievable]] performance as "[[Kiddo]]" [[Corinth]] in this [[sumptuous]] [[adjustments]] of the Jim Thompson novel. Far superior to "The Grifters", which was a [[alright]] movie, this film really stayed true to the pulp fiction/film noir [[backgrounds]] from which the story [[arrived]]. I [[recommendations]] this [[filmmaking]] to all [[cinematography]] [[negro]] fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I have seen my fair share of comedy and standup movies but this one is so [[original]], so [[fresh]], it will make you wonder why you always walked right pass it in the video store. Murphy has some pretty raunchy jokes but this is just too [[funny]] to pass. If only every movie could be this funny. it should be called "107 minutes of the most [[incredible]] comedy" Murphy is a comic genius in this film and will make you say "this is the guy that did dr. doulittle!" He talkes about the ice cream man, shoe throwing mothers, his aunt with a mustache, racism, and everything else you could possibly think of and the ones you couldnt. Please if you ever see one comedy in your life this is it, if only all movies could be Delirious. I have seen my fair share of comedy and standup movies but this one is so [[preliminary]], so [[dulce]], it will make you wonder why you always walked right pass it in the video store. Murphy has some pretty raunchy jokes but this is just too [[droll]] to pass. If only every movie could be this funny. it should be called "107 minutes of the most [[unimaginable]] comedy" Murphy is a comic genius in this film and will make you say "this is the guy that did dr. doulittle!" He talkes about the ice cream man, shoe throwing mothers, his aunt with a mustache, racism, and everything else you could possibly think of and the ones you couldnt. Please if you ever see one comedy in your life this is it, if only all movies could be Delirious. --------------------------------------------- Result 392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[remembered]] by most today as one of the [[finest]] directors in Hollywood history, but this [[film]] [[proves]] that he is. Already a [[success]] by doing sophisticated American [[dramas]] such as A Letter to Three Wives and All About Eve as well as [[successfully]] adapting Shakespeare to life in Julius [[Caesar]], Mankiewicz does a [[marvelous]] [[job]] of bringing this [[hit]] Broadway [[play]] to [[film]] and does it with [[style]]. Marlon Brando is [[perfect]] as Sky Masterson, [[even]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only actor who [[could]] [[pull]] it off [[perfectly]] [[wit]] his [[sheer]] coolness and [[clarity]]. Frank Sinatra is a [[wonderful]] singer, as [[expected]], and does a [[good]] [[job]] of acting as Nathan Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[also]] very good as [[Sarah]] Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[great]] [[chemistry]]. All [[supporting]] [[actors]] do their [[part]], [[especially]] Sheldon [[Leonard]] as [[Harry]] the Horse in a very [[funny]] [[bit]]. Still, Mankiewicz should be given most of the credit for bringing a [[fine]] musical in its own [[right]] to the screen in such a [[way]] that it [[feels]] [[authentic]] in [[many]] scenes but is [[still]] a [[story]] in its own [[world]]. [[All]] in all, Guys and Dolls is a [[great]] musical and [[works]] on [[many]] [[levels]] it [[normally]] should not have. Joseph L. Mankiewicz is not [[recalled]] by most today as one of the [[meanest]] directors in Hollywood history, but this [[cinema]] [[demonstrates]] that he is. Already a [[avail]] by doing sophisticated American [[drama]] such as A Letter to Three Wives and All About Eve as well as [[satisfactorily]] adapting Shakespeare to life in Julius [[Cesare]], Mankiewicz does a [[sumptuous]] [[jobs]] of bringing this [[struck]] Broadway [[playing]] to [[filmmaking]] and does it with [[styles]]. Marlon Brando is [[irreproachable]] as Sky Masterson, [[yet]] if he can't sing too well. He is the only actor who [[would]] [[pulling]] it off [[absolutely]] [[waite]] his [[pure]] coolness and [[lucidity]]. Frank Sinatra is a [[awesome]] singer, as [[predicted]], and does a [[buena]] [[jobs]] of acting as Nathan Detroit. Jean Simmons is [[additionally]] very good as [[Baroness]] Brown and her scenes with Brando sizzle with [[huge]] [[chemicals]]. All [[helped]] [[actresses]] do their [[parties]], [[namely]] Sheldon [[Leonardo]] as [[Hari]] the Horse in a very [[comical]] [[bitten]]. Still, Mankiewicz should be given most of the credit for bringing a [[fined]] musical in its own [[rights]] to the screen in such a [[routing]] that it [[believes]] [[true]] in [[multiple]] scenes but is [[again]] a [[history]] in its own [[worldwide]]. [[Entire]] in all, Guys and Dolls is a [[prodigious]] musical and [[cooperating]] on [[numerous]] [[grades]] it [[fluently]] should not have. --------------------------------------------- Result 393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] What [[keeps]] us [[going]] - or at least what I feel the [[writer]] [[wanted]] us to keep us [[glued]] at an early point is our desire to know whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we [[discover]] that this is the [[story]] of Martinaud's imperfections and his difficulty in coping. When there is the revelation - we begin to sympathize and pity him because as the story progresses we are made to [[think]] he is the [[sick]], perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the distant gap he and his wife have even though they live on the same roof. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's shocking finale.

This movie demands your patience and it has certainly tried those of restless teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. Although there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we realize that Gallien isn't as clever as we are made to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 What [[retains]] us [[gonna]] - or at least what I feel the [[scriptwriter]] [[wanting]] us to keep us [[pasted]] at an early point is our desire to know whether Martinaud has done the dirty deed. Without spoiling so much, of course there is a red herring and a twist. But then we [[detect]] that this is the [[storytelling]] of Martinaud's imperfections and his difficulty in coping. When there is the revelation - we begin to sympathize and pity him because as the story progresses we are made to [[ideas]] he is the [[indisposed]], perverted pedophiliac that we're predisposed to have in mind. One of those things he has to cope with is the distant gap he and his wife have even though they live on the same roof. These problems of course are given their denouement in the film's shocking finale.

This movie demands your patience and it has certainly tried those of restless teenagers sitting at the rear. They were heckling obviously because they aren't partial to "central location" films. Although there is a bit of travelling, when we get to the woods and the beach. And we realize that Gallien isn't as clever as we are made to think he is.

The Inquisitor is 5/5 --------------------------------------------- Result 394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Thanks to a [[dull]], dimensionless screenplay by Neil Simon, and [[lackluster]] [[direction]] from Robert Moore, Chapter Two [[becomes]] a shrill showcase for [[Marsha]] Mason who [[received]] her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two giving the same performance here that she [[gave]] in Cinnderella Liberty(73), The Goodbye Girl(77), Audrey Rose(78) and Only When I Laugh(81);only this time she doesn't have a child to drag around. Chapter Two is the third and last feature film for Moore having previously [[directed]] Neil Simon's The Cheap Detective(78) and Murder By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the characters are mono-dimensional, the dialog is overly analytical, and there's virtually no establishing detail. The first half is a less-than-captivating, meet cute, coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the dreary second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at least they provide some welcome distraction. And last and least, there's an awful song played during the credits. Thanks to a [[uninspiring]], dimensionless screenplay by Neil Simon, and [[mediocre]] [[directorate]] from Robert Moore, Chapter Two [[becoming]] a shrill showcase for [[Mircea]] Mason who [[benefited]] her third of four Oscar nods for Chapter Two giving the same performance here that she [[yielded]] in Cinnderella Liberty(73), The Goodbye Girl(77), Audrey Rose(78) and Only When I Laugh(81);only this time she doesn't have a child to drag around. Chapter Two is the third and last feature film for Moore having previously [[oriented]] Neil Simon's The Cheap Detective(78) and Murder By Death(76). Caan is miscast, the characters are mono-dimensional, the dialog is overly analytical, and there's virtually no establishing detail. The first half is a less-than-captivating, meet cute, coy romance between a blinkered Caan and a chipper Mason, and the dreary second half makes you long for the first half. The NYC locations as well as Joe Bologna, and a painfully thin Valerie Harper are irrelevant, but at least they provide some welcome distraction. And last and least, there's an awful song played during the credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[terrible]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! Profanity, stupidity, self-indulgence, and bad acting all join forces for a true tour de force in [[spooky]] movie-making. Pesci's attempt to prove My Cousin Vinny was no fluke, shows the opposite instead. He is generally too lightweight and foulmouthed to handle the lead. A true must-miss! --------------------------------------------- Result 396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] This [[movie]], even though is about one of the most [[favorite]] [[topics]] of Mexican producers producers: the extreme [[life]] in our [[cities]], has a [[funny]] [[way]] to put it on the screen.

Four of the more [[important]] [[Mexican]] [[directors]], of the last [[times]], approach [[histories]] of our city framed in [[diverse]] literary sorts as it can be the farce or the satire, which gives us a film with a over exposed topic in our country, but narrated in a very [[different]] [[way]] which [[gives]] a freshness tone him.

With [[actors]] [[little]] [[known]], but that interprets of [[excellent]] [[way]] their paper, each one of the [[directors]] [[reflect]] in the [[stories]] the [[capacity]] by we have been [[identified]] [[anywhere]] in the [[world]], that [[capacity]] of laugh the pains and to [[make]] [[celebration]] of the [[sadness]]. [[Perhaps]] to [[many]] people in our [[country]] the [[film]] not have pleased, but I [[consider]] that people of other [[countries]] [[could]] [[find]] attractive and [[share]] the surrealism of the [[Mexican]]. This [[cinematography]], even though is about one of the most [[preferable]] [[theme]] of Mexican producers producers: the extreme [[vida]] in our [[town]], has a [[comical]] [[manner]] to put it on the screen.

Four of the more [[sizeable]] [[Wetback]] [[managers]], of the last [[moments]], approach [[stories]] of our city framed in [[divergent]] literary sorts as it can be the farce or the satire, which gives us a film with a over exposed topic in our country, but narrated in a very [[divergent]] [[camino]] which [[donne]] a freshness tone him.

With [[actresses]] [[scant]] [[familiar]], but that interprets of [[admirable]] [[camino]] their paper, each one of the [[administrators]] [[reflecting]] in the [[story]] the [[abilities]] by we have been [[detected]] [[somewhere]] in the [[globe]], that [[skills]] of laugh the pains and to [[deliver]] [[festivities]] of the [[heaviness]]. [[Possibly]] to [[multiple]] people in our [[nationals]] the [[movie]] not have pleased, but I [[considering]] that people of other [[nations]] [[would]] [[unearthed]] attractive and [[exchange]] the surrealism of the [[Wetback]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This film, in my [[opinion]], is, [[despite]] it's [[flaws]] (which I maintain are *few*), an [[utter]] masterpiece and a great and glorious piece of art.

What Mr. Bakshi has [[done]] here is to [[create]] an [[utterly]] [[beautiful]] film and has [[shown]] his [[immense]] talent and versatility as a [[director]] of animated films. He does not receive 1/100th of the credit he [[deserves]] for literally [[saving]] the art of animation for an adult audience. [[If]] it were not for [[Mr]]. Bakshi, I don't believe animation [[would]] have survived the Disney [[onslaught]]. What is more, with The [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]], he has not only [[created]] a [[beautiful]] animated [[film]], but he has [[created]] an [[entirely]] [[new]] art [[form]] - unfortunately one that never [[quite]] [[made]] it off the ground.

[[Most]] people will complain about the [[use]] of rotoscoping in the [[film]] (the [[use]] of [[live]] [[action]] [[images]] which are [[used]] as [[background]] [[images]] and [[often]] animated over [[using]] [[various]] [[techniques]] from what appears to be [[small]] [[amounts]] of tinting to full [[blown]] animation). But I feel that the people who complain about it [[simply]] cannot accept an art [[form]] which is out of the norm. [[No]], this is not Disney animation. [[No]] it's not live [[action]]. No, it's not "[[cheating]]" - what it is is a [[new]], [[fascinating]], and [[absolutely]] [[wonderful]] art [[form]]. [[Something]] so fresh, and so [[new]] that it [[feels]] [[completely]] at [[home]] in such a [[fantastic]] [[tale]] as "The [[Lord]] of the [[Rings]]". Bakshi's pioneering [[use]] of this [[technique]] [[brings]] the [[subtleties]] of Middle Earth to [[life]] is a very [[dark]] and [[mysterious]] [[way]], in [[particular]], the darker of Tolkien's creatures, [[particularly]] the Nazgul, are [[realized]] in a [[way]] that [[traditional]] animation or [[live]] [[action]] have not been [[able]] to [[accomplish]].

[[Peter]] S. Beagle's [[screenplay]] ([[based]] very [[little]], as I [[understand]] it, on an early draft by [[Chris]] Conkling) is a very loyal [[adaptation]] of Tolkien's works. [[Where]] possible he [[uses]] [[dialogue]] directly out of the novel and it [[feels]] at [[home]] in the [[world]] which Bakshi has created. There are [[many]] [[cuts]] that were [[made]] to fit the [[first]] [[book]] and 3/4 into a [[single]] 2 [[hour]] 15 minute [[film]], but there are very few [[changes]] to the storyline. There are a few [[holes]] which it [[would]] have been [[nice]] to have filled: The reforging of Narsil, the gifts of Galadriel, the Huorns at the battle of the Hornburg, but, again, with the time limitations he had (already the longest animated feature in history), these are certainly understandable (though it makes one wonder how they could have been explained in a sequel).

Also there is the delightful (one of my favorites) score by Leonard Rosenman (who also scored Barry Lyndon and Star Trek IV (the score for which is clearly based on his LotR work)). It is bombastic and audacious and, dare I say, perfect. It stands on it's own as an orchestral triumph, but when coupled with the images of the film, it enters a whole new world of symphonic perfection. So far from the typical Hollywoodland fare that it turns many people off.

The voice actors are wonderful. Of particular note is John Hurt as Aragorn who just oozes the essence of Strider.

The character design is also wonderfully unique, though not often to everyone's taste. But remember that it is the duty of the director of an adaptation to show you what he/she imagines, not what you might have imagined, and so Aragorn is realized with a distinctive Native American feel and Boromir appears in Viking inspired garb. This is perhaps not what you imagined, but I can only applaud Mr. Bakshi for showing us what he "saw". It also might be noted that he spent a significant amount of time with Priscilla Tolkien in developing the character outfits for the film.

One farther word - the Flight to the Ford sequence, in my opinion, is one of the most subtlety beautiful sequences ever to be caught on celluloid. Bakshi is not afraid to slow down the pace for a moment, and his mastery is clearly shown by the incredible tension is able to build. Bakshi's artistic ability and Tolkien's incredible work fuse in this sequence to a glorious peak which has yet to be equaled.

The recent DVD release (2001) by Warner Brothers, is sorely lacking. While we can offer our eternal thanks that the film is finally available in widescreen format, the package is woefully short of extras. How glorious it would have been to have had a director's commentary, been able to see the 20 minutes of extra footage that were removed for the theatrical release. Another delightful addition could have been the assembled the live action footage which was later animated over. Also present in the DVD release is the utterly horrible voiceover at the end of the film which is a departure from the simple voiceover which occurred in the very final frames of the film. This version is plastered and poorly rendered right over the musical climax of the score.

Of course, the greatest tragedy of all is that the sequel was never made. We will never be able to see Bakshi's interpretation of Gondor, of Shelob, of Faramir, of the Cracks of Doom, of Eowyn's battle with the Witch King or Gandalf's confrontation with him. We will never be graced with Bakshi's image of Denethor or the Palatir or the Paths of the Dead. It is a shame beyond all shames that we will, in the end, have to accept Peter Jackson's glitz and glitter Hollywood, action film version of these later events in Tolkien's masterpiece, but, I suppose even that is better than having no cinematic version at all.

David This film, in my [[view]], is, [[though]] it's [[failings]] (which I maintain are *few*), an [[unmitigated]] masterpiece and a great and glorious piece of art.

What Mr. Bakshi has [[doing]] here is to [[creations]] an [[quite]] [[ravishing]] film and has [[exhibited]] his [[sizable]] talent and versatility as a [[headmaster]] of animated films. He does not receive 1/100th of the credit he [[deserve]] for literally [[saves]] the art of animation for an adult audience. [[Unless]] it were not for [[Mister]]. Bakshi, I don't believe animation [[ought]] have survived the Disney [[attacking]]. What is more, with The [[Gods]] of the [[Ringing]], he has not only [[established]] a [[excellent]] animated [[cinema]], but he has [[engendered]] an [[abundantly]] [[newer]] art [[shape]] - unfortunately one that never [[very]] [[accomplished]] it off the ground.

[[More]] people will complain about the [[usage]] of rotoscoping in the [[cinema]] (the [[usage]] of [[vive]] [[measures]] [[image]] which are [[uses]] as [[backdrop]] [[image]] and [[commonly]] animated over [[employs]] [[disparate]] [[technologies]] from what appears to be [[tiny]] [[quantities]] of tinting to full [[molten]] animation). But I feel that the people who complain about it [[purely]] cannot accept an art [[shape]] which is out of the norm. [[None]], this is not Disney animation. [[None]] it's not live [[activities]]. No, it's not "[[deception]]" - what it is is a [[newer]], [[exciting]], and [[entirely]] [[sumptuous]] art [[shape]]. [[Anything]] so fresh, and so [[newer]] that it [[believes]] [[altogether]] at [[households]] in such a [[unbelievable]] [[fable]] as "The [[Gods]] of the [[Ringing]]". Bakshi's pioneering [[employs]] of this [[technologies]] [[poses]] the [[intricacies]] of Middle Earth to [[living]] is a very [[darkness]] and [[opaque]] [[routing]], in [[singular]], the darker of Tolkien's creatures, [[namely]] the Nazgul, are [[performed]] in a [[routing]] that [[classical]] animation or [[viva]] [[activities]] have not been [[capable]] to [[fulfil]].

[[Pieter]] S. Beagle's [[scripts]] ([[founded]] very [[tiny]], as I [[comprehend]] it, on an early draft by [[Kris]] Conkling) is a very loyal [[adaptations]] of Tolkien's works. [[Hence]] possible he [[utilised]] [[talks]] directly out of the novel and it [[believes]] at [[domicile]] in the [[globe]] which Bakshi has created. There are [[innumerable]] [[compressions]] that were [[introduced]] to fit the [[frst]] [[cookbook]] and 3/4 into a [[sole]] 2 [[hora]] 15 minute [[cinema]], but there are very few [[amend]] to the storyline. There are a few [[orifices]] which it [[ought]] have been [[pleasant]] to have filled: The reforging of Narsil, the gifts of Galadriel, the Huorns at the battle of the Hornburg, but, again, with the time limitations he had (already the longest animated feature in history), these are certainly understandable (though it makes one wonder how they could have been explained in a sequel).

Also there is the delightful (one of my favorites) score by Leonard Rosenman (who also scored Barry Lyndon and Star Trek IV (the score for which is clearly based on his LotR work)). It is bombastic and audacious and, dare I say, perfect. It stands on it's own as an orchestral triumph, but when coupled with the images of the film, it enters a whole new world of symphonic perfection. So far from the typical Hollywoodland fare that it turns many people off.

The voice actors are wonderful. Of particular note is John Hurt as Aragorn who just oozes the essence of Strider.

The character design is also wonderfully unique, though not often to everyone's taste. But remember that it is the duty of the director of an adaptation to show you what he/she imagines, not what you might have imagined, and so Aragorn is realized with a distinctive Native American feel and Boromir appears in Viking inspired garb. This is perhaps not what you imagined, but I can only applaud Mr. Bakshi for showing us what he "saw". It also might be noted that he spent a significant amount of time with Priscilla Tolkien in developing the character outfits for the film.

One farther word - the Flight to the Ford sequence, in my opinion, is one of the most subtlety beautiful sequences ever to be caught on celluloid. Bakshi is not afraid to slow down the pace for a moment, and his mastery is clearly shown by the incredible tension is able to build. Bakshi's artistic ability and Tolkien's incredible work fuse in this sequence to a glorious peak which has yet to be equaled.

The recent DVD release (2001) by Warner Brothers, is sorely lacking. While we can offer our eternal thanks that the film is finally available in widescreen format, the package is woefully short of extras. How glorious it would have been to have had a director's commentary, been able to see the 20 minutes of extra footage that were removed for the theatrical release. Another delightful addition could have been the assembled the live action footage which was later animated over. Also present in the DVD release is the utterly horrible voiceover at the end of the film which is a departure from the simple voiceover which occurred in the very final frames of the film. This version is plastered and poorly rendered right over the musical climax of the score.

Of course, the greatest tragedy of all is that the sequel was never made. We will never be able to see Bakshi's interpretation of Gondor, of Shelob, of Faramir, of the Cracks of Doom, of Eowyn's battle with the Witch King or Gandalf's confrontation with him. We will never be graced with Bakshi's image of Denethor or the Palatir or the Paths of the Dead. It is a shame beyond all shames that we will, in the end, have to accept Peter Jackson's glitz and glitter Hollywood, action film version of these later events in Tolkien's masterpiece, but, I suppose even that is better than having no cinematic version at all.

David --------------------------------------------- Result 398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Any [[film]] which begins with a cowhand shagging a female [[calf]] can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 yrs ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. [[OK]] every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like youngsters raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't [[show]] the [[whole]] kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we [[say]] - [[naughty]] traits. Each kibbutz had its own [[problems]], but [[hardly]] any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Israel]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). Yes, and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[wrong]] [[portrayal]] - probably on purpose too. Any [[cinema]] which begins with a cowhand shagging a female [[veal]] can't promise much. As for the stereotyping of the kibbutz as it was 50 yrs ago, well I was there and it just wasn't like that. [[ALRIGHT]] every kibbutz had just a small piece of something shown in the film (like youngsters raiding the kitchen at night) but you can't [[illustrates]] the [[ensemble]] kibbutz as being full of all those - shall we [[tell]] - [[nasty]] traits. Each kibbutz had its own [[difficulties]], but [[practically]] any kibbutz had all of them. The views of [[Lsrael]] were great. I still remember my youth in that Garden of Eden called the Emek (valley). Yes, and the acting was good too, so you see it wasn't all black - just a [[amiss]] [[portrait]] - probably on purpose too. --------------------------------------------- Result 399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Date]]." Super [[clever]] title and interesting [[premise]], but I don't think it delivered. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more likely, it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has [[lived]] his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now start worrying. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[supporting]] characters in the [[film]] didn't seem to have needs that blended into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did love the shots of Seattle, cinematography was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. Honestly, I was disappointed in "Expiration [[Dates]]." Super [[intelligent]] title and interesting [[hypothesis]], but I don't think it delivered. What was it about? The main character's desire to reconnect with his Native roots? Or, more likely, it was his need to overcome his fear of death. But, he wasn't set up as someone who has [[resided]] his life in fear -- it seems as if his life was going fine, but since doomsday is approaching he should now start worrying. I didn't buy it. Meanwhile, the [[helping]] characters in the [[cinematography]] didn't seem to have needs that blended into an overarching story. They were all just doing their thing, running parallel to the main character. Also, what was treated as a "curse" looked more like a coincidence. Who cursed the family? Why? When? Finally, why didn't he just plan on staying in his apartment all day on his birthday? Those are my criticisms, but I did love the shots of Seattle, cinematography was beautiful, acting was good in the times it wasn't outstanding. --------------------------------------------- Result 400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] "Hollywood North" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a civilized city like Toronto, in this case, later in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the director, [[probably]] [[saw]] a [[lot]] of the [[invaders]] from California that this [[movie]] [[seems]] to be the right [[way]] to [[deal]] with the arriving personalities [[trying]] to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Needless]] to [[say]], "Moon Lantern", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "Flight to Bogota", which has nothing to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are transformed into a [[cohesive]] movie at last.

The filming process is hilarious, and the acting, in general, is [[good]]. "Hollywood North" is an euphemism from the movie industry as they went to Canada to make movies because of tax breaks and cheaper costs in a civilized city like Toronto, in this case, later in Vancouver. Peter O'Brian, the director, [[arguably]] [[observed]] a [[batches]] of the [[infiltrators]] from California that this [[kino]] [[seem]] to be the right [[manner]] to [[treating]] with the arriving personalities [[try]] to capitalize on the economics that Canada presented.

[[Unhelpful]] to [[says]], "Moon Lantern", the successful novel written by a Canadian author is turned into "Flight to Bogota", which has nothing to do with the original film. A great egotistical has-been, Michael Baytes, who is obsessed with what is happening in Iran, is offered the lead part, which turns to be a disaster.

The film seems to be saying that too many cooks have spoiled the broth, which seems to be the case with the ultimate product, which is saved by its producer, Bobby Myers. With the help of Sandy Ryan, who has been around making a documentary of the film being shot in Toronto, parts of the film are transformed into a [[uniformity]] movie at last.

The filming process is hilarious, and the acting, in general, is [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Made]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[seen]] and [[enjoyed]] more often.

We open on a quiet little French village, scanning the roofs of the sleeping citizens. Then we [[hear]] something that sounds like a [[party]]. Upon investigating the uproar, two neighboring men are told the story of two men, supposedly friends, who picked two numbers for the lottery.

Our star of the picture has his number and his friend his. When he asks his friend, would he share half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his friend promptly says no. In fact, H.E. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so upset over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! [[Effected]] in 1931, this foreign film should be [[watched]] and [[liked]] more often.

We open on a quiet little French village, scanning the roofs of the sleeping citizens. Then we [[listened]] something that sounds like a [[parte]]. Upon investigating the uproar, two neighboring men are told the story of two men, supposedly friends, who picked two numbers for the lottery.

Our star of the picture has his number and his friend his. When he asks his friend, would he share half of the dough, should his ticket be the winning number, his friend promptly says no. In fact, H.E. double hockey sticks no! is the way he acts about it.

So when our man discovers he has the winning ticket and that it has been lost, through no fault of his own, he is frantic. Everyone is out for themselves, looking for this ticket, in something like a precursor to "The Great Race." Even though this is all a flashback, I was in knots the whole time and got so upset over every little thing in this all-for-me show-me-the-money cash-in-the-bank film. Watch Le Million today! --------------------------------------------- Result 402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What is it with Americans and their hang-up with religious gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling [[novel]] is incredible, but to pull it off as a movie you really [[need]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good actors have gone to heaven and we're left with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type journalist(!) trying to discover why a lot of people have simply disappeared. Oh yeah, there's a subplot about an evil world conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so cheaply, and with such inane dialogue, that it has sheer entertainment value in all of its unintended laughs. Not recommended for anyone with a 3-digit IQ. What is it with Americans and their hang-up with religious gobbledy-gook? To think this was a best-selling [[newer]] is incredible, but to pull it off as a movie you really [[requisite]] good acting and a script that delivers. In this case, all the good actors have gone to heaven and we're left with Kirk Cameron as a CNN-type journalist(!) trying to discover why a lot of people have simply disappeared. Oh yeah, there's a subplot about an evil world conspiracy and famine, or something. The good news is that this is done so cheaply, and with such inane dialogue, that it has sheer entertainment value in all of its unintended laughs. Not recommended for anyone with a 3-digit IQ. --------------------------------------------- Result 403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This movie is SOOOO [[funny]]!!! The acting is [[WONDERFUL]], the Ramones are sexy, the [[jokes]] are subtle, and the plot is just what every high schooler [[dreams]] of doing to his/her [[school]]. I [[absolutely]] [[loved]] the soundtrack as well as the [[carefully]] placed cynicism. [[If]] you [[like]] [[monty]] python, You will love this film. This [[movie]] is a tad bit "[[grease]]"esk (without all the [[annoying]] songs). The songs that are [[sung]] are [[likable]]; you [[might]] even [[find]] yourself singing these [[songs]] once the [[movie]] is through. This musical [[ranks]] number two in musicals to me (second next to the blues brothers). But please, do not [[think]] of it as a musical [[per]] [[say]]; seeing as how the [[songs]] are so likable, it is [[hard]] to tell a [[carefully]] choreographed scene is taking place. I [[think]] of this [[movie]] as more of a [[comedy]] with undertones of [[romance]]. You will be reminded of what it was like to be a [[rebellious]] [[teenager]]; [[needless]] to [[say]], you will be reminiscing of your [[old]] [[high]] [[school]] [[days]] after [[seeing]] this [[film]]. [[Highly]] [[recommended]] for both the family ([[since]] it is a very [[youthful]] but [[also]] for adults [[since]] there are [[many]] [[jokes]] that are funnier with age and [[experience]]. This movie is SOOOO [[amusing]]!!! The acting is [[GLAMOROUS]], the Ramones are sexy, the [[pranks]] are subtle, and the plot is just what every high schooler [[dreamt]] of doing to his/her [[tuition]]. I [[perfectly]] [[cared]] the soundtrack as well as the [[painstakingly]] placed cynicism. [[Unless]] you [[loves]] [[python]] python, You will love this film. This [[filmmaking]] is a tad bit "[[lard]]"esk (without all the [[exasperating]] songs). The songs that are [[singing]] are [[congenial]]; you [[probability]] even [[unearth]] yourself singing these [[lyrics]] once the [[cinematography]] is through. This musical [[categorize]] number two in musicals to me (second next to the blues brothers). But please, do not [[believe]] of it as a musical [[for]] [[says]]; seeing as how the [[lyrics]] are so likable, it is [[laborious]] to tell a [[elaborately]] choreographed scene is taking place. I [[believing]] of this [[filmmaking]] as more of a [[travesty]] with undertones of [[romanticism]]. You will be reminded of what it was like to be a [[rebelling]] [[youngsters]]; [[useless]] to [[says]], you will be reminiscing of your [[archaic]] [[higher]] [[tuition]] [[jours]] after [[witnessing]] this [[kino]]. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]] for both the family ([[because]] it is a very [[youths]] but [[additionally]] for adults [[because]] there are [[multiple]] [[pleasantries]] that are funnier with age and [[experiences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I originally saw this movie as a boy at the old Rialto Theatre as part of a Saturday afternoon matinée triple bill which also featured Vincent Price's "Last Man on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week afterwards! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies would prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so [[scared]]! [[Though]] all three films [[frightened]] me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most [[profound]] [[impact]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and missed the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), Gothic set design, strong acting, and suspense (especially the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and made a lasting impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a movie that showed up on the late show in Winnipeg. I couldn't quite remember the title (remember I didn't get to seen the beginning of the film and was scared witless), and to make matters worse, the film had been released under literally a dozen different movie titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of Terror, Castle of Terror, Long Night of Terror, etc...) and the USA/UK working title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, similar to dozens of other "b" horror and suspense films, making it illusive. But thanks to the internet and perseverance, I found it at last! What a treat to finally watch the film in its entirety after so many years! It may not have had quite the sheer emotional impact that it did when I was a boy, but as haunted house movies go, it's stands up well and compares favourably to similar iconic films of the period such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black Sunday," The film is a fine early effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It stars 60's scream queen icon Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada I originally saw this movie as a boy at the old Rialto Theatre as part of a Saturday afternoon matinée triple bill which also featured Vincent Price's "Last Man on Earth" and Mario Bava's "Nightmare Castle." I had nightmares about blood lusting ghosts for a week afterwards! Though I didn't know it then, all three movies would prove to be classics of the genre. No wonder I was so [[shitless]]! [[If]] all three films [[terrorized]] me, it was Castle of Blood that had the most [[deepest]] [[repercussions]].

It was the first on the bill. I didn't even get to see it from the beginning as we were late getting to the cinema and missed the first 20 minutes of the movie. That's lot to miss since the edited print only ran about 79 minutes (the unedited runs 87minutes). But despite this, the dark creepy atmosphere (complete with ruined castles, fog enshrouded cemeteries, shadows and cobwebs), Gothic set design, strong acting, and suspense (especially the last 20 minutes) scared the bejeepers out of me and made a lasting impression It took me years to finally get a copy of the film for my collection. Since it was a French - Italian import, it wasn't a movie that showed up on the late show in Winnipeg. I couldn't quite remember the title (remember I didn't get to seen the beginning of the film and was scared witless), and to make matters worse, the film had been released under literally a dozen different movie titles (aka Danze Macabre, Coffin of Terror, Castle of Terror, Long Night of Terror, etc...) and the USA/UK working title "Castle of Blood" was very generic, similar to dozens of other "b" horror and suspense films, making it illusive. But thanks to the internet and perseverance, I found it at last! What a treat to finally watch the film in its entirety after so many years! It may not have had quite the sheer emotional impact that it did when I was a boy, but as haunted house movies go, it's stands up well and compares favourably to similar iconic films of the period such as "The Haunting," "The Innocents" or "Black Sunday," The film is a fine early effort of Italian director Antonio Margheriti. It stars 60's scream queen icon Barbara Steele and features a well written screenplay by Sergio Corbucci about a sceptical writer (Georges Riviere) who, on a bet, spends the night in haunted house and unsuspectingly becomes part of an annual ongoing ghostly story. The hypnotic Steele is well cast as the ghostly love interest - as is Arturo Dominici as Dr. Carmus, and Margarete Robsahm as Julia.

Many of the tricks Margheriti employs to create the film's eerie atmosphere (cobwebs, creaking doors, fog, etc) are bound to seem cliché to a modern audience, but they work far more effectively in black and white than they ever could in modern day colour. Rather than using body counts and special effects, the film creates scares the old fashion way, relying on a good story, stylish direction, fine set production, interesting camera work, and strong acting performances. Margheriti does a marvellous job taking these elements and building the film's suspense as the horrifying paranormal secret of the house gradually reveals itself to the unwitting writer.

The film is not without faults. The pace drags at the beginning of the film (ironically, the 20 minutes I originally missed). This is probably worsened by Synapse films effort to restore the film to its original length. Though fans will likely appreciate the chance to see the film restored - in terms of the intro - it may have been more of hindrance than a help. The English voice dubs are merely passable and, in the restored scenes, the language shifts from English to French (English subtitles provided) which is sure to be annoying to some viewers.

However, Synapse Films deserves kudos for the quality of the print. Clearly some effort was put into its restoration and deservedly so.

I enjoyed the film immensely and highly recommend it to aficionados of 60's Italian Goth films, or anyone who enjoys a good ghost story.

Rob Rheubottom Winnipeg, MB Canada --------------------------------------------- Result 405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Orson Welles' "The Lady From Shanghai" does not have the brilliant [[screenplay]] of "[[Citizen]] Kane," e.g., but [[Charles]] Lawton, Jr.'s [[cinematography]], the [[unforgettable]] set pieces (such as the scene in the aquarium, the seagoing scene featuring a [[stunning]], blonde-tressed Rita Hayworth singing "[[Please]] Don't [[Love]] Me," and the [[truly]] [[amazing]] [[Hall]] of Mirrors climax), and the [[wonderful]] cast (Everett Sloane in his [[greatest]] performance, [[Welles]] in a [[beautifully]] under-played role, the afore-mentioned Miss Hayworth--Welles' [[wife]] at the time--at her most [[gorgeous]]) make for a very [[memorable]] filmgoing experience. The bizarre murder mystery plot is fun and compelling, not [[inscrutable]] at all. The viewer is surprised by the [[twists]] and turns, and Welles' closing [[line]] is an unheralded classic. "The [[Lady]] From Shanghai" gets four stars from this impartial arbiter. Orson Welles' "The Lady From Shanghai" does not have the brilliant [[screenplays]] of "[[Citizenship]] Kane," e.g., but [[Charl]] Lawton, Jr.'s [[movies]], the [[eventful]] set pieces (such as the scene in the aquarium, the seagoing scene featuring a [[marvellous]], blonde-tressed Rita Hayworth singing "[[Invite]] Don't [[Amour]] Me," and the [[really]] [[admirable]] [[Salle]] of Mirrors climax), and the [[sumptuous]] cast (Everett Sloane in his [[higher]] performance, [[Orson]] in a [[amazingly]] under-played role, the afore-mentioned Miss Hayworth--Welles' [[women]] at the time--at her most [[glamorous]]) make for a very [[landmark]] filmgoing experience. The bizarre murder mystery plot is fun and compelling, not [[impenetrable]] at all. The viewer is surprised by the [[spins]] and turns, and Welles' closing [[bloodline]] is an unheralded classic. "The [[Milady]] From Shanghai" gets four stars from this impartial arbiter. --------------------------------------------- Result 406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I regret that I've seen this movie. Can't believe that the creator of Best Intentions and Pelle the Conqueror could make such a bleak and boring film. What a waste! --------------------------------------------- Result 407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] "Antwone Fisher" tells of a young black U.S. Navy enlisted man and product of childhood abuse and neglect (Luke) whose hostility toward others gets him a stint with the base shrink (Washington) leading to introspection, self [[appraisal]], and a return to his roots. Pat, sanitized, and sentimental, "Antwone Fisher" is a [[solid]] feel-good [[flick]] about the reconciliation of [[past]] [[regrets]] and [[closure]]. [[Good]] old Hollywood style [[entertainment]] family values entertainment with just a [[hint]] of corn. (B) "Antwone Fisher" tells of a young black U.S. Navy enlisted man and product of childhood abuse and neglect (Luke) whose hostility toward others gets him a stint with the base shrink (Washington) leading to introspection, self [[assess]], and a return to his roots. Pat, sanitized, and sentimental, "Antwone Fisher" is a [[solids]] feel-good [[gesture]] about the reconciliation of [[former]] [[laments]] and [[shuts]]. [[Buena]] old Hollywood style [[amusement]] family values entertainment with just a [[allusion]] of corn. (B) --------------------------------------------- Result 408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Wow, I [[loved]] this film. It [[may]] not have had the [[funding]] and [[advertising]] that the latest hollywood blockbusters get but it [[packs]] twice the [[emotional]] [[punch]]. The tale revolves around this one family from Utah and it's the connections between the people in the family that provide the film with its punch. The main lead ([[Giovanni]] Ribisi) plays his part very well, at no [[time]] does he leave you to believe that he's acting all his [[feelings]]. It's his brother (Elias Koteas) who stole the [[show]] for me though. When the two were in scenes [[together]] they bounded their lines off of each other, giving fantastic performances. Great cast, [[great]] film. Wow, I [[worshipped]] this film. It [[maggio]] not have had the [[finance]] and [[ads]] that the latest hollywood blockbusters get but it [[packets]] twice the [[affective]] [[punching]]. The tale revolves around this one family from Utah and it's the connections between the people in the family that provide the film with its punch. The main lead ([[John]] Ribisi) plays his part very well, at no [[moment]] does he leave you to believe that he's acting all his [[sentiments]]. It's his brother (Elias Koteas) who stole the [[showings]] for me though. When the two were in scenes [[jointly]] they bounded their lines off of each other, giving fantastic performances. Great cast, [[awesome]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 409 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was eager to see "Mr. Fix It" because I'm a huge David Boreanaz fan. What I got, though, was a 1-1/2 hour nap. The premise seemed enjoyable: Boreanaz is Lance Valenteen, proprietor of a business called "Mr. Fix It", where dumped men enlist his help to get their girlfriends to take them back.

Among the problems with this movie are the editing, script, and acting. Although I've found Boreanaz delightful in his other film roles (with the exception of that "Crow" movie he did), this was disappointing. At times, his character was interesting and others, flat. The supporting cast reminded me of soap opera day players. I realize it wasn't a big-budget film, but some of the scene cuts and music just didn't seem right.

My advice: watch at your own risk. --------------------------------------------- Result 410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I found this film the first time when I was searching for some works in witch Stéphane Rideau had participate, still in an extraordinary ravishment caused by the astonishingly [[beautiful]] «Les roseaux sauvages» (in Portuguese, Juncos Silvestres), by André Téchiné. I was [[searching]] for similar [[movies]], in the come of age line. I found then «Presque Rien», a [[movie]] where the director Sébastien Lifshitz [[deliciously]] amazes us, earning a nomination by the Cannes [[festival]] in 2000. The story is about two guys, the [[kind]] «[[boy]] next door», Mathieu (Jérémie Elkaïm) and Cédric (Stéphane Rideau), who [[meet]] during the summer [[vacations]]. [[In]] a [[land]] far from where he lives, [[Mathieu]] [[spends]] is days at the [[beach]] with his [[sister]]. There he meets Cédric, a local, with whom he [[starts]] this estival and revealing [[relationship]], much by [[means]] of the sensual and seducer personality that Stéphane Rideau [[gives]] his [[characters]], (in «Les roseaux sauvages», 6 years [[younger]], he [[still]] [[preserves]] the innocence of the sweet seducer, witch matures here in experience). Exemplar in directing, in the amorous sequence, in the intimate and confessing [[description]] that is [[made]] about a [[boys]] first [[facing]] his ([[still]] [[ambiguous]]) sexuality and [[great]] love. The first [[love]], in its [[terrible]] [[progression]] ecstasy-despair. The best of the [[film]] is the [[best]] of France: the [[fervent]] [[passion]], the hot and excited rationalism, the [[brownish]] beauty, the [[simple]] and natural acceptance [[made]] by the families, [[although]] not without [[surprise]] and first [[anger]]. [[Still]], there is the [[beach]], the luminosity, the [[lightness]] e [[simplicity]] of summer, the [[freshness]] of breeze, the [[surge]]’s [[melody]], and the expressive [[eyes]] of an introverted Elkaïm (hesitant, hurt, [[puzzled]], [[passionate]]). The [[sex]] is not [[avoided]] nor exploited, it is treated as it is, with no exhibitionist [[intention]]. [[In]] virtue of [[pure]] [[talent]], this is a [[work]] of drama of [[uncommon]] quality, without cheap sentimentalism, [[showing]] an inevitably [[real]] [[image]] of two homosexual in their prime [[youth]] as any [[ordinary]] [[person]], although with a [[social]] [[fear]] of [[rejection]] and [[shame]]. It is well [[worthy]] being [[seen]], [[especially]] by those who [[adore]] French [[movies]] ([[although]] the DVD front cover is very lame, with the two [[actors]] in between [[tens]] of [[stars]], [[greased]] with brilliantine). A movie [[witch]], in my [[opinion]], deserves an 8-9! I found this film the first time when I was searching for some works in witch Stéphane Rideau had participate, still in an extraordinary ravishment caused by the astonishingly [[brilliant]] «Les roseaux sauvages» (in Portuguese, Juncos Silvestres), by André Téchiné. I was [[browse]] for similar [[kino]], in the come of age line. I found then «Presque Rien», a [[movies]] where the director Sébastien Lifshitz [[divinely]] amazes us, earning a nomination by the Cannes [[feast]] in 2000. The story is about two guys, the [[genera]] «[[guy]] next door», Mathieu (Jérémie Elkaïm) and Cédric (Stéphane Rideau), who [[cater]] during the summer [[vacation]]. [[For]] a [[earth]] far from where he lives, [[Mads]] [[expenditure]] is days at the [[beaches]] with his [[sisters]]. There he meets Cédric, a local, with whom he [[began]] this estival and revealing [[relations]], much by [[methods]] of the sensual and seducer personality that Stéphane Rideau [[offers]] his [[attribute]], (in «Les roseaux sauvages», 6 years [[youngest]], he [[again]] [[maintain]] the innocence of the sweet seducer, witch matures here in experience). Exemplar in directing, in the amorous sequence, in the intimate and confessing [[descriptions]] that is [[introduced]] about a [[guys]] first [[confront]] his ([[nevertheless]] [[vague]]) sexuality and [[awesome]] love. The first [[adores]], in its [[hideous]] [[advance]] ecstasy-despair. The best of the [[kino]] is the [[nicest]] of France: the [[impassioned]] [[fascination]], the hot and excited rationalism, the [[brown]] beauty, the [[simpler]] and natural acceptance [[introduced]] by the families, [[whereas]] not without [[amazement]] and first [[wrath]]. [[However]], there is the [[beaches]], the luminosity, the [[levity]] e [[simpler]] of summer, the [[coldness]] of breeze, the [[rebounds]]’s [[tune]], and the expressive [[eye]] of an introverted Elkaïm (hesitant, hurt, [[baffled]], [[heated]]). The [[sexually]] is not [[shunned]] nor exploited, it is treated as it is, with no exhibitionist [[purpose]]. [[During]] virtue of [[unadulterated]] [[talents]], this is a [[cooperates]] of drama of [[scarce]] quality, without cheap sentimentalism, [[exhibiting]] an inevitably [[actual]] [[photo]] of two homosexual in their prime [[adolescents]] as any [[mundane]] [[someone]], although with a [[societal]] [[affraid]] of [[denial]] and [[pity]]. It is well [[dignified]] being [[watched]], [[namely]] by those who [[adores]] French [[cinematography]] ([[nevertheless]] the DVD front cover is very lame, with the two [[actresses]] in between [[dozens]] of [[celebrity]], [[sabotaged]] with brilliantine). A movie [[magician]], in my [[avis]], deserves an 8-9! --------------------------------------------- Result 411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] 1st [[watched]] 8/3/2003 - 2 out of 10(Dir-Brad Sykes): [[Mindless]] 3-D movie about flesh-eating zombies in a 3 story within a [[movie]] chronicle. And [[yes]], we [[get]] to see zombies eating human flesh parts in 3D!! Wow, not!! That has been [[done]] time and time again in 2D in a zombie movie but what [[usually]] makes a zombie movie better is the underlying story not the actual flesh-eating. That's what made the [[original]] zombie classics good. The flesh-eating was just thrown in as an extra. We're actually [[bored]] throughout most of this 3-part chronicle because of the lame(twilight-zone like) easily understood and slow-pacingly revealed finale's. The last story is actually the story the movie started with(having a reporter investigating a so-called ghost town) and of course we get to see flesh eating zombie's in that one as well. Well, I think I've said enough. Watch the classics, not this 3D bore-feast. 1st [[saw]] 8/3/2003 - 2 out of 10(Dir-Brad Sykes): [[Unwise]] 3-D movie about flesh-eating zombies in a 3 story within a [[cinematography]] chronicle. And [[oui]], we [[got]] to see zombies eating human flesh parts in 3D!! Wow, not!! That has been [[accomplished]] time and time again in 2D in a zombie movie but what [[fluently]] makes a zombie movie better is the underlying story not the actual flesh-eating. That's what made the [[upfront]] zombie classics good. The flesh-eating was just thrown in as an extra. We're actually [[drilled]] throughout most of this 3-part chronicle because of the lame(twilight-zone like) easily understood and slow-pacingly revealed finale's. The last story is actually the story the movie started with(having a reporter investigating a so-called ghost town) and of course we get to see flesh eating zombie's in that one as well. Well, I think I've said enough. Watch the classics, not this 3D bore-feast. --------------------------------------------- Result 412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] William Wyler was to have directed this adaptation of Moss Hart's hit Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most unlikely helmsman: George Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[touch]] on the [[many]] documentary-like sequences of Air Corps training, and he [[invests]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanity]] than the [[genre]] [[generally]] [[allowed]], particularly in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and entirely white, save for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of newbies are nicer and more wholesome than in real life, and the speechifying about home and Mom and the wife and kid gets pretty thick, but it's [[efficient]] propaganda and undeniably [[stirring]]. Notable, too, for the all-military male cast, several of whom didn't reemerge for years: Lon McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, Martin Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, [[Gary]] Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Also]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't [[show]] up till an hour and a half into the [[picture]] but has some good little [[sequences]] as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn spouse. Too [[bad]] its [[rights]] are in a [[tangle]] and the only [[print]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox [[released]] it (to considerable [[success]]), the [[rights]] reverted to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[disingenuous]] and corny in spots, but it also [[captures]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it deserves to be more widely seen. William Wyler was to have directed this adaptation of Moss Hart's hit Broadway play with music/ recruiting poster-vivant, but his own military commitments intervened and it went to a most unlikely helmsman: George Cukor. The "women's director" has a sure [[toque]] on the [[multiple]] documentary-like sequences of Air Corps training, and he [[investing]] it with more unhackneyed [[humanistic]] than the [[sort]] [[ordinarily]] [[enabling]], particularly in wartime. Sure, the gee-whiz (and entirely white, save for one unbilled Chinese-American recruit) bunch of newbies are nicer and more wholesome than in real life, and the speechifying about home and Mom and the wife and kid gets pretty thick, but it's [[efficacious]] propaganda and undeniably [[twitching]]. Notable, too, for the all-military male cast, several of whom didn't reemerge for years: Lon McAllister, Edmond O'Brien, Martin Ritt, Red Buttons (in drag, as an Andrews Sister), Peter Lind Hayes, Karl Malden, Kevin McCarthy, [[Garry]] Merrill, Lee J. Cobb, and Don Taylor. [[Moreover]] for a very early glimpse of Judy Holliday, who doesn't [[demonstrating]] up till an hour and a half into the [[imaging]] but has some good little [[sequencing]] as O'Brien's worried-sick Brooklyn spouse. Too [[negative]] its [[right]] are in a [[muddle]] and the only [[printing]] anyone knows of is 16mm; evidently, after Twentieth Century Fox [[publicized]] it (to considerable [[accomplishments]]), the [[right]] reverted to the Army, and if there's a good 35mm print out there, it probably lies somewhere in the bowels of the Pentagon. It's [[hypocritical]] and corny in spots, but it also [[caught]] the rigors of military training and the terrors of war vividly, and it deserves to be more widely seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This [[movie]] [[sucked]] plain and simple. [[Okay]] so it's basically about a girl that gets raped, and to get revenge she gets another guy to rape the rapist. The rapist is a douche, but the girl victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the mood and start kissing and stuff, but when the rapist tries to have sex with her, she doesn't allow it so the rapist rapes her. And the thing is the rape scene for the girl is very short and it doesn't really expose or show anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting raped, it's a pretty long rape scene. There is basically [[nothing]] in the story that is worth watching.

3.2/10 This [[kino]] [[aspired]] plain and simple. [[Allright]] so it's basically about a girl that gets raped, and to get revenge she gets another guy to rape the rapist. The rapist is a douche, but the girl victim is partly to blame. I mean they both get in the mood and start kissing and stuff, but when the rapist tries to have sex with her, she doesn't allow it so the rapist rapes her. And the thing is the rape scene for the girl is very short and it doesn't really expose or show anything, but when it comes to the rapist getting raped, it's a pretty long rape scene. There is basically [[anything]] in the story that is worth watching.

3.2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 414 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Broadway and film actor-turned-director John Cassavetes (from Rosemary's Baby)[[creates]] a [[masterpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, Ben Gazzara, Joan Blondell, Paul Stewart, Zohra Lampert, Laura Johnson and there is a cameo by Peter Falk. The [[premise]] of the film: An aging stage and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan dies in a car accident trying to get her autograph. The movie has a slow pace and a dark, moody, frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's Baby without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones every successful actress has- she is getting old and she will become useless in her career. Furthermore, she feels she has lived a life that lacks any true spirituality, humanity and merit. She has lived only for her career- she has no children, doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The gradual disintegration of her personality is the meat of this film. She is falling apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands really gets into the character's tormented psyche and acts the part quite well. She is a terrific actress and this 70's film is a refreshing contrast to the often violent films of the period and or the disaster movies or adventure thrillers. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, cynical feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream movies and actors of the 70's generation. Either that or this movie is a product of the 70's which was itself cynical in many aspects- Nixon's deception, Watergate, Vietnam, etc. Although the production values are not great, and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting film with haunting moods. Kudos to the underrated and late director Cassavetes who died in the late 80's. Broadway and film actor-turned-director John Cassavetes (from Rosemary's Baby)[[begets]] a [[centerpiece]] with this 1977 film. It stars Gena Rowlands, John Cassavetes himself, Ben Gazzara, Joan Blondell, Paul Stewart, Zohra Lampert, Laura Johnson and there is a cameo by Peter Falk. The [[prerequisite]] of the film: An aging stage and film actress (Gena Rowlands)re-evaluates her life after an obscessed fan dies in a car accident trying to get her autograph. The movie has a slow pace and a dark, moody, frightening quality. It has a 60's cinematic look and it even reminded me of Polanski's Rosemary's Baby without the supernatural horror. The fears here are the ones every successful actress has- she is getting old and she will become useless in her career. Furthermore, she feels she has lived a life that lacks any true spirituality, humanity and merit. She has lived only for her career- she has no children, doesn't do charitable deeds, etc. The gradual disintegration of her personality is the meat of this film. She is falling apart. She's in a crisis. Gena Rowlands really gets into the character's tormented psyche and acts the part quite well. She is a terrific actress and this 70's film is a refreshing contrast to the often violent films of the period and or the disaster movies or adventure thrillers. It's a movie with lots of deep-seated emotion but has a cold, cynical feeling, as if Cassavetes is criticizing the mainstream movies and actors of the 70's generation. Either that or this movie is a product of the 70's which was itself cynical in many aspects- Nixon's deception, Watergate, Vietnam, etc. Although the production values are not great, and this film is not well-known, it's a very haunting film with haunting moods. Kudos to the underrated and late director Cassavetes who died in the late 80's. --------------------------------------------- Result 415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] High [[heels]] are tricksy [[things]]. They can elevate [[women]] (or cross-dressing [[men]]) to newfound heights, put forward a sharp statement of style and bring a touch of fragile elegance. Alternatively, they can be a perilous foot pain that will inevitably lead to trips, falls and ultimate tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a disappointment trip than a stylish high [[riser]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is [[stylish]] for sure, but in terms of plot it's a tongue-tied and [[tedious]] affair full of confusing, [[complex]] [[characters]] that never fully engage or [[make]] [[sense]]. A few moments of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The best bit comes at the beginning in a [[marvellously]] macabre case of manslaughter orchestrated by a [[child]]. From this brilliant [[bit]] of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid enough acting performances and there's some [[stylish]], arty [[direction]] that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, fractured mother-daughter relationship and a character who is alternately a judge, a transvestite and a police informer this [[could]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[Instead]] it's poor. High Heels stumbles for sure. High [[stubs]] are tricksy [[aspects]]. They can elevate [[mujer]] (or cross-dressing [[man]]) to newfound heights, put forward a sharp statement of style and bring a touch of fragile elegance. Alternatively, they can be a perilous foot pain that will inevitably lead to trips, falls and ultimate tragedy. Tacones lejanos is more of a disappointment trip than a stylish high [[elevators]].

Almodóvar's mother-daughter drama is [[elegant]] for sure, but in terms of plot it's a tongue-tied and [[tiresome]] affair full of confusing, [[knotty]] [[trait]] that never fully engage or [[deliver]] [[feeling]]. A few moments of comedy aside, Tacones lejanos just isn't interesting. The best bit comes at the beginning in a [[wonderfully]] macabre case of manslaughter orchestrated by a [[kid]]. From this brilliant [[bitten]] of black comedy things are looking up, but then the film comes to a heel.

There's solid enough acting performances and there's some [[tasteful]], arty [[directions]] that you'd expect from Almodóvar, but otherwise Tacones lejanos isn't an impressive piece of Spanish cinema. With a story of murder, showbiz, femininity, fractured mother-daughter relationship and a character who is alternately a judge, a transvestite and a police informer this [[wo]] have been a melodramatic powerhouse. [[Alternatively]] it's poor. High Heels stumbles for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who has studied any physics or cognitive science will walk out disgusted after 40 min., as my wife and I did. The ignorant masses might be entertained by the hand-waiving arguments and the absurd "conclusions" drawn (without even an attempt at a logical reason) from real science. I'm offended by such nonsense presented under the guise of "science". I can only conclude that the writers picked up a quantum physics book, didn't understand a word of it, then watched The Matrix about a thousand times, and proceeded to write this movie.

For example, the Washington DC crime experiment was done by The Transcendental Meditation Program. A brief search will reveal the science of their methods. (http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/t/tm/dissenter.htm)

Save your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] 2002's undeservedly popular "I [[Love]] the 80's" is an inane, idiotic, [[offensive]] and downright disgusting pop-culture [[mess]] of a [[show]] that was the first in a long-line of [[horrid]] television programming that ultimately [[spelled]] out the [[end]] of VH1, which was at one time the only [[real]] music-oriented channel left on TV! I [[used]] to practically [[live]] on VH1 up until the [[spring]] or winter, I forget which one now, of 2002 when [[garbage]] like this started to [[appear]] for [[absolutely]] no [[reason]] whatsoever. Out of sheer morbid curiosity (I'd [[guess]] that's what you'd call it) I had decided that I would go ahead and give it a look-see anyhow the first night it came on even though the advertisements looked like complete crap. At least I can honestly say that I wasn't a bit [[disappointed]] by it because my expectations were obviously bottom basement-level to begin with. The emphasis of this show I found out within the first 5 minutes was less on each year of the 1980's and what was and wasn't culturally significant or [[popular]] (which is what I was expecting to see), but instead more of an impromptu platform for a whole slew of really god-awful no-name comedians to [[display]] what they more than [[likely]] think is their comedic [[skills]] *rolls eyes*...more like lack-thereof if you [[ask]] me! It's [[pretty]] [[easy]] now to [[see]] why no one had ever [[heard]] of any of these [[idiots]] before they appeared on this [[show]] because they are all so [[terribly]] unfunny and [[pathetic]] in their [[attempts]] at so-called "humor" that I swear I could feel my intestines knot up with each and every rancid one-liner they shot off one after another! Altogether, I have no [[problem]] in saying that "I [[Love]] the 80's" was/is [[trash]] of the lowest denominator, and one of the main reasons why I almost never watch VH1 anymore. 2002's undeservedly popular "I [[Amour]] the 80's" is an inane, idiotic, [[onslaught]] and downright disgusting pop-culture [[jumble]] of a [[exhibit]] that was the first in a long-line of [[nasty]] television programming that ultimately [[spelt]] out the [[ends]] of VH1, which was at one time the only [[veritable]] music-oriented channel left on TV! I [[utilise]] to practically [[vive]] on VH1 up until the [[printemps]] or winter, I forget which one now, of 2002 when [[detritus]] like this started to [[appearing]] for [[wholly]] no [[motif]] whatsoever. Out of sheer morbid curiosity (I'd [[reckon]] that's what you'd call it) I had decided that I would go ahead and give it a look-see anyhow the first night it came on even though the advertisements looked like complete crap. At least I can honestly say that I wasn't a bit [[frustrating]] by it because my expectations were obviously bottom basement-level to begin with. The emphasis of this show I found out within the first 5 minutes was less on each year of the 1980's and what was and wasn't culturally significant or [[fashionable]] (which is what I was expecting to see), but instead more of an impromptu platform for a whole slew of really god-awful no-name comedians to [[shown]] what they more than [[apt]] think is their comedic [[competence]] *rolls eyes*...more like lack-thereof if you [[calls]] me! It's [[quite]] [[simple]] now to [[seeing]] why no one had ever [[hear]] of any of these [[nitwits]] before they appeared on this [[exhibit]] because they are all so [[exceptionally]] unfunny and [[unlucky]] in their [[endeavour]] at so-called "humor" that I swear I could feel my intestines knot up with each and every rancid one-liner they shot off one after another! Altogether, I have no [[difficulties]] in saying that "I [[Amour]] the 80's" was/is [[junk]] of the lowest denominator, and one of the main reasons why I almost never watch VH1 anymore. --------------------------------------------- Result 418 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[wonderful]] early musical [[film]] from Rene [[Clair]], as [[fun]] and witty as his [[silent]] "The Italian Straw [[Hat]]". Using sound in a expressive [[way]] and not just for [[dialogue]] and [[effects]], Clair [[influenced]] early musicals in America (the opera scene from A [[Night]] at the Opera is strongly [[influenced]] by Le [[Million]], for example). [[Should]] (but won't) be [[seen]] by all cinephiles, and the DVD from Criterion is [[exactly]] as [[good]] as you'd expect. There's not a [[ton]] of [[extras]], but most DVD extras I've [[seen]] are useless [[fluff]], and the Clair interview on disc is one I hadn't ever [[seen]]. [[Get]] it while it's still around. A [[funky]] early musical [[cinematography]] from Rene [[Claire]], as [[droll]] and witty as his [[mute]] "The Italian Straw [[Bonnet]]". Using sound in a expressive [[routes]] and not just for [[conversation]] and [[effect]], Clair [[impact]] early musicals in America (the opera scene from A [[Nocturnal]] at the Opera is strongly [[affecting]] by Le [[Millions]], for example). [[Owe]] (but won't) be [[noticed]] by all cinephiles, and the DVD from Criterion is [[accurately]] as [[alright]] as you'd expect. There's not a [[anvil]] of [[goodies]], but most DVD extras I've [[watched]] are useless [[grope]], and the Clair interview on disc is one I hadn't ever [[noticed]]. [[Obtain]] it while it's still around. --------------------------------------------- Result 419 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of Rowan Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it seems that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their [[work]], something that allows them to identify with [[audience]] members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. A Bug's [[Life]] has that same [[charm]], it has a connection with real [[life]] that [[allows]] us to easily [[suspend]] disbelief and [[accept]] a [[lot]] of talking [[insects]], because even though they [[talk]], they [[still]] ACT just like real bugs. It's like the team that [[made]] the [[movie]] found a [[way]] to bring us into the [[mind]] of a [[child]] and [[allow]] us to [[think]] like them, to imagine bugs the [[way]] a young mind does.

Honey, I [[Shrunk]] The Kids was one of my favorite [[films]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's Life is like a more [[realistic]] [[version]] of that movie, if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this style of story-telling just opens up so many more [[narrative]] [[possibilities]]. I try not to [[compare]] it to something like [[Toy]] [[Story]] (which I [[still]] maintain is the [[best]] computer animated [[film]] ever made), because the [[story]] of A Bug's Life is not [[quite]] as [[good]] as [[Toy]] Story's, but then again, [[almost]] nothing is. The [[important]] [[thing]] is that it is [[still]] [[wonderful]] fun.

The [[story]] [[concerns]] a colony of [[hard]] [[working]] [[bugs]] who have an impressively developed [[society]], [[mostly]] geared [[around]] [[building]] a harvest of [[food]], most of which will [[go]] to the [[tyrannical]] grasshoppers, [[vastly]] [[superior]] in strength and general [[meanness]], and hopefully [[still]] leave [[enough]] left over for the [[bugs]] to [[make]] it through the [[winter]]. We are [[treated]] to some [[visits]] from the [[grasshoppers]], who make it [[clear]] that if the [[bugs]] [[provide]] an unsatisfactory [[quantity]] of [[food]], the [[consequences]] will be dire. And incidentally, the [[similarities]] between this crippling [[level]] of [[food]] [[extraction]] is [[strikingly]] [[similar]] to Mao Tse-tung's [[vicious]] [[forcing]] of [[food]] from his own people during the "[[Great]] [[Leap]] Forward…"

The [[fun]] and [[excitement]] [[begins]] when Flik, the [[main]] [[character]], sets off on a [[quest]] to [[find]] a gang of [[appropriate]] warrior [[bugs]] to [[come]] back and help [[defend]] the [[colony]] against the [[grasshoppers]]. You see, he [[spilled]] all of the [[amassed]] [[food]] and placed [[everyone]] in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! Lately I have been watching a lot of Tom Hanks films and old Chaplin films and even some of Rowan Atkinson's early Bean performances, and it seems that all of them have their own unique charm that permeates throughout their [[jobs]], something that allows them to identify with [[spectators]] members of all ages, in a way that just makes you feel good. A Bug's [[Living]] has that same [[amulet]], it has a connection with real [[living]] that [[authorizes]] us to easily [[halted]] disbelief and [[accepting]] a [[lots]] of talking [[roaches]], because even though they [[conversations]], they [[however]] ACT just like real bugs. It's like the team that [[brought]] the [[flick]] found a [[routing]] to bring us into the [[intellect]] of a [[kids]] and [[permit]] us to [[believing]] like them, to imagine bugs the [[pathway]] a young mind does.

Honey, I [[Downsized]] The Kids was one of my favorite [[movie]] when I was younger, and to me, A Bug's Life is like a more [[reality]] [[stepping]] of that movie, if only because the animation is so breathtaking and this style of story-telling just opens up so many more [[narration]] [[opportunities]]. I try not to [[comparative]] it to something like [[Pawn]] [[Saga]] (which I [[however]] maintain is the [[better]] computer animated [[movie]] ever made), because the [[stories]] of A Bug's Life is not [[pretty]] as [[alright]] as [[Pawn]] Story's, but then again, [[virtually]] nothing is. The [[critical]] [[stuff]] is that it is [[yet]] [[noteworthy]] fun.

The [[saga]] [[worries]] a colony of [[stiff]] [[collaborating]] [[beetles]] who have an impressively developed [[societal]], [[predominantly]] geared [[throughout]] [[build]] a harvest of [[nutrition]], most of which will [[going]] to the [[imperious]] grasshoppers, [[drastically]] [[top]] in strength and general [[ruthlessness]], and hopefully [[yet]] leave [[sufficient]] left over for the [[insects]] to [[deliver]] it through the [[winters]]. We are [[processed]] to some [[tours]] from the [[locusts]], who make it [[unmistakable]] that if the [[insects]] [[delivering]] an unsatisfactory [[quantities]] of [[nutrition]], the [[impact]] will be dire. And incidentally, the [[parallels]] between this crippling [[tiers]] of [[meals]] [[extract]] is [[unimaginably]] [[akin]] to Mao Tse-tung's [[sadistic]] [[prompting]] of [[meals]] from his own people during the "[[Awesome]] [[Jump]] Forward…"

The [[entertaining]] and [[arousal]] [[launch]] when Flik, the [[primary]] [[personage]], sets off on a [[researching]] to [[unearth]] a gang of [[suitable]] warrior [[bedbugs]] to [[arriving]] back and help [[defender]] the [[colonies]] against the [[crickets]]. You see, he [[flipped]] all of the [[accumulated]] [[nutrition]] and placed [[anybody]] in great danger, so he feels it's his responsibility, but he inadvertently ends up hiring a struggling group of insect circus performers. Great for the audience, not so great for the safety of the clan.

The movie was released back in the late 90s, when so many films seemed to have been coming out in twos, like Armageddon and Deep Impact, Independence Day and The Arrival, A Bug's Life and Antz, etc. Comparisons between A Bug's Life and Antz are inevitable, although it seems clear to me that A Bug's Life is by far the superior film, and not only because it doesn't star Woody Allen stuttering and whining through the lead role. This is great family fun! --------------------------------------------- Result 420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] Telemundo should definitely [[consider]] making a DVD collection of the novela Xica! I know tons of people including myself who would like to be able to purchase the novela Xica! It is a very [[entertaining]] novela which is set in Brazil. The [[costumes]] worn by the actors are beautiful and the town in which the novela takes place is beautiful. Xica contains a [[lot]] of [[history]] of that [[time]] period. I wish Telemundo would televise it again even if it was a 2 in the morning. I would [[highly]] recommend watching Xica if it is ever shown again on Telemundo. I've e-mailed Telemundo a million times already to show the novela again but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears. The only cautionary statement about Xica is that it occasionally contains some harsh scenes therefore I would recommend that children under 14 do not watch Xica. [[Overall]] Xica [[merits]] a 10 out of 10! Telemundo should definitely [[scrutinize]] making a DVD collection of the novela Xica! I know tons of people including myself who would like to be able to purchase the novela Xica! It is a very [[amusing]] novela which is set in Brazil. The [[clothes]] worn by the actors are beautiful and the town in which the novela takes place is beautiful. Xica contains a [[batches]] of [[histories]] of that [[moment]] period. I wish Telemundo would televise it again even if it was a 2 in the morning. I would [[unimaginably]] recommend watching Xica if it is ever shown again on Telemundo. I've e-mailed Telemundo a million times already to show the novela again but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears. The only cautionary statement about Xica is that it occasionally contains some harsh scenes therefore I would recommend that children under 14 do not watch Xica. [[Holistic]] Xica [[deserved]] a 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen this movie about 6 times now. And each time I view it, I'm more impressed by the story and the acting. Its like watching a train wreck being set in motion. Its subtle in its approach, but very effective in reaching its goal.

Spoilers-> At the center of the story is a very nice dichotomy. On the one hand we have Deputy major, Eddy Calhoun (Cusack) unknowingly tearing at the old boys network that forms the hart of major of New York's Administration and on the other hand we have the mob boss Zappati who's deliberately trying to maintain the status quo through all means necessary. This situation nicely culminates in the end when Zappati orders Alselmo to make it easy on himself by killing himself and Calhoun ordering Pappas to do the same, politically speaking.

The movie also contains some really great one-liners such as (a personal weakness of mine): - You don't sum up a man's life in one moment - The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know

All in all, a great movie that deserves a much higher rating. --------------------------------------------- Result 422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] This [[film]] [[caught]] me off [[guard]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[ways]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to Kill,",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a different film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture TOGETHER! This [[kino]] [[apprehended]] me off [[watchman]] when it started out in a Cafe located in Arizona and a Richard Grieco,(Rex),"Dead Easy",'04, decides to have something to eat and gets all hot and bothered over a very hot, sexy waitress. While Rex steps out of the Cafe, he sees a State Trooper and asks him,"ARE YOU FAST?" and then all hell breaks loose in more [[mode]] than one. Nancy Allen (Maggie Hewitt),"Dressed to Kill,",'80, is a TV reporter and is always looking for a news scoop to broadcast. Maggie winds up in a hot tub and Rex comes a calling on her to tell her he wants a show down, Western style, with the local top cop in town. This is a different film, however, Nancy Allen and Richard Grieco are the only two actors who help this picture TOGETHER! --------------------------------------------- Result 423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Stefan is an x-con that five years ago got [[married]] to Marie. Their marriage has been stable until Stefan [[past]] catch up with them and he's offered to do a courier job. Stefan's job is a heroin delivery from Germany to Sweden which should go easily.

[[In]] Germany Stefan meet Elli, a girl from Bosnia that has been sold to a stripclub owner. Stefan [[dislikes]] what he sees and decide to help Elli out of her [[misery]]. Due to the [[fact]] that Elli's father during the [[war]] fleed to Sweden Elli now goes with Stefan to Sweden. To make up with the past Stefan [[promises]] Elli to help her find her father, no matter what it takes. Finally back in Sweden the whole situation seems to be more complicated than Stefan ever [[thought]] of..

This movie doesn't seem to [[fit]] in the ordinary class of swedish movies due to the fact that it's been americanized alot. Regina Lund and Cecilia Bergqvist makes it all [[average]], the [[effects]] makes the movie a little too much though. See it and jugde for yourself.

Stefan is an x-con that five years ago got [[wedding]] to Marie. Their marriage has been stable until Stefan [[yesteryear]] catch up with them and he's offered to do a courier job. Stefan's job is a heroin delivery from Germany to Sweden which should go easily.

[[For]] Germany Stefan meet Elli, a girl from Bosnia that has been sold to a stripclub owner. Stefan [[hates]] what he sees and decide to help Elli out of her [[squalor]]. Due to the [[facto]] that Elli's father during the [[warfare]] fleed to Sweden Elli now goes with Stefan to Sweden. To make up with the past Stefan [[pledging]] Elli to help her find her father, no matter what it takes. Finally back in Sweden the whole situation seems to be more complicated than Stefan ever [[think]] of..

This movie doesn't seem to [[fitting]] in the ordinary class of swedish movies due to the fact that it's been americanized alot. Regina Lund and Cecilia Bergqvist makes it all [[medium]], the [[influences]] makes the movie a little too much though. See it and jugde for yourself.

--------------------------------------------- Result 424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] The past few [[months]] I have [[collected]] Voyager seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my favourite character) and have just [[reached]] the end. I saw them when they were originally shown on TV here in the [[UK]] but had forgotten most of it. Am I satisfied with the ending? I think I am. [[Naturally]] as I fan I [[would]] have liked to have seen more about what happened to the [[characters]] when they got home but that's left to our [[imagination]]. In [[many]] [[ways]] "[[Endgame]]" is similar to Next Gen's "All [[Good]] Things…" The [[involvement]] of the crew in the [[future]], but [[mainly]] the [[captain]]. A new romance [[starting]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and Seven of Nine and Chakotay here), which [[results]] in [[death]] in the [[future]]. I [[truly]] [[loved]] "Endgame," fair to all characters, Neelix appears although he [[left]] the ship two [[episodes]] earlier. B'elanna gives birth to her daughter with loving husband Tom. Tuvok is ill but returning home means he can be cured. Harry has always been the most anxious and determined but admits the journey is important. The Doctor, in the future, is well respected by all and finally chooses the name Joe! But of course the Captain has the largest role, meeting her future self who wants to get the crew home earlier to prevent casualties. The Borg are involved, as they have played a massive part in this period of Voyager. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again fantastically, just her voice and acting method are [[magnificent]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen replaced by the movie Borg queen. Maybe she wasn't available though. The special effects are fantastic, the Borg sub space hub and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[wonderful]] idea to get inside a Borg sphere for protection, on the [[DVD]] special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Voyager]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! The past few [[mois]] I have [[gleaned]] Voyager seasons 4 to 7 on DVD (I only had 1 to 3 on video before that, because Kes is my favourite character) and have just [[totaled]] the end. I saw them when they were originally shown on TV here in the [[BRITONS]] but had forgotten most of it. Am I satisfied with the ending? I think I am. [[Patently]] as I fan I [[ought]] have liked to have seen more about what happened to the [[personage]] when they got home but that's left to our [[novelty]]. In [[several]] [[method]] "[[Prom]]" is similar to Next Gen's "All [[Alright]] Things…" The [[attendance]] of the crew in the [[forthcoming]], but [[essentially]] the [[captains]]. A new romance [[launches]] in the finale (Troi and Worf in Next Gen and Seven of Nine and Chakotay here), which [[findings]] in [[decease]] in the [[forthcoming]]. I [[truthfully]] [[worshipped]] "Endgame," fair to all characters, Neelix appears although he [[gauche]] the ship two [[spells]] earlier. B'elanna gives birth to her daughter with loving husband Tom. Tuvok is ill but returning home means he can be cured. Harry has always been the most anxious and determined but admits the journey is important. The Doctor, in the future, is well respected by all and finally chooses the name Joe! But of course the Captain has the largest role, meeting her future self who wants to get the crew home earlier to prevent casualties. The Borg are involved, as they have played a massive part in this period of Voyager. Alice Krige plays the Borg Queen again fantastically, just her voice and acting method are [[sumptuous]]. I feel sorry for Susanna Thompson though, the TV Borg queen replaced by the movie Borg queen. Maybe she wasn't available though. The special effects are fantastic, the Borg sub space hub and the Borg queen falling apart! It's very tense. Especially when they come out of the Borg subspace corridor and say their location is right where they thought they'd be after they'd said they'd have to go in a corridor that leads back to the delta quadrant. And what a [[sumptuous]] idea to get inside a Borg sphere for protection, on the [[DVDS]] special features they say it was like the Trojan horse. [[Travel]] could have continued. If it was more popular they would have stuck with their original idea of the crew realising the ship is their home, like in Harry's speech and what Tom said because his wife and child are there. And then they could have got home in a film!

Overall, Voyager was a bit hit and miss. The sixth season seemed to be one good one followed by one less than good one. The two episodes set in the Holographic Irish village are horrible! My perception of Seven of Nine was that she took over, it all revolved around her, which wasn't true. When she first appeared, season 4 was focused on her for too many of the episodes but it evened out after that. And her character is ingenious at times, 20 years as a Borg drone gradually rediscovering her humanity. I like her, especially in "Someone to Watch Over Me," "Imperfection," and "Human Error." When Naomi Wildman was scared of her initially but then became her friend often by her side, that was lovely. Chakotay became my least favourite character. Gone was the chemistry with Janeway (will they/won't they?) and you'd never think he was first officer, he's completely pushed aside most of the time. I loved seeing Tom and B'elanna's relationship blossom against the odds. I always liked Neelix a lot. Tuvok was good at times, especially when he lost his logic, gained emotion and was friends with Neelix. Harry was annoying at times but a okay character at other times. The Doctor is probably my favourite, seeing how far he comes and comedy situations he creates ("Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy" is fantastic!). Janeway is my favourite Captain of any series and you can tell Kate Mulgrew is really enjoying it.

I wish there was more, I love Voyager! --------------------------------------------- Result 425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] As I've noticed with a lot of IMDb comments, certain reviewers seem to demand that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. If I watch an action film, I want to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. If I watch a comedy, I want to have tears of laughter in my eyes. You get the idea. Therefore watching a horror film, I primarily [[want]] to be scared. The Grudge is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I also think is a great film). As I've noticed with a lot of IMDb comments, certain reviewers seem to demand that every film they see have smugly intelligent plots that wallow in there own cleverness. I am not one of those people. If I watch an action film, I want to see explosions, gunfire and heroics. If I watch a comedy, I want to have tears of laughter in my eyes. You get the idea. Therefore watching a horror film, I primarily [[wanted]] to be scared. The Grudge is a very scary film, in both it's well executed 'jump' scenes, and it's creepy imagery. I've been a horror film fan for many years, and I'm talking about the masters such as Dario Argento, rather than directors of some of the treadmill teen horror flicks that are churned out these days. If you want to be scared, watch this film. Way scarier than the original Japanese 'Ring' (which I also think is a great film). --------------------------------------------- Result 426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] [[Although]] Cinderella isn't the obvious [[choice]] for a sequel I [[love]] Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the mice writing a book for Cinderella was an inspired one. I enjoy writing stories myself and hope children will be encouraged by this. The three stories are cute & amusing, although the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I also enjoyed seeing Lucifer, Bruno, the Mice Chorus and all the rest. Pom Pom proved the perfect companion for Lucifer and I liked the Governess. A sequel [[done]] right for a [[change]]. My rating 8/10. [[Despite]] Cinderella isn't the obvious [[wahl]] for a sequel I [[adore]] Jaq and Gus so I didn't hesitate. The format of the mice writing a book for Cinderella was an inspired one. I enjoy writing stories myself and hope children will be encouraged by this. The three stories are cute & amusing, although the songs were forgettable. Jaq and Gus were my favourite characters but I also enjoyed seeing Lucifer, Bruno, the Mice Chorus and all the rest. Pom Pom proved the perfect companion for Lucifer and I liked the Governess. A sequel [[played]] right for a [[amendment]]. My rating 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] The only [[way]] this is a family drama is if parents explain everything [[wrong]] with its message.

SPOILER: they feed a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after killing its mother and at first pontificating about taking responsibility for their actions. They blame bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. The only [[camino]] this is a family drama is if parents explain everything [[amiss]] with its message.

SPOILER: they feed a deer for a year and then kill it for eating their food after killing its mother and at first pontificating about taking responsibility for their actions. They blame bears and deer for "misbehaving" by eating while they take no responsibility to use adequate locks and fences or even learn to shoot instead of twice maiming animals and letting them linger. --------------------------------------------- Result 428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Dripping with symbolism and filled with [[marvelous]] cinematography, Extase is so much more than the erotic drama we've all [[come]] to [[expect]]. This is [[almost]] a silent film, with what [[dialogue]] there is in German, and [[highly]] [[simplified]] German at that. Perhaps the filmmakers intended the [[film]] to reach the [[widest]] [[possible]] European audience, as anyone with even a [[little]] high school level [[Deutsch]] can easily dispense with the [[subtitles]]. The [[story]] is of little importance anyway, with the [[film]] succeeding on a cinematic [[level]], not a [[narrative]] one. Symbols of fecundity and the power of nature overwhelm the human characters--there are even scenes where flowers obscure the face of supposed star Hedy Lamarr--and there are moments here that will remind viewers of the works of Dreyer, Vertov, and Riefenstahl. If the film has any message to convey, I think it's a political one: bourgeois man is timid and impotent; working class man is a happy, productive creature; and woman is the creator, destined to be unfulfilled until she has borne a child. This blend of Soviet socialist realism and National Socialist dogma doesn't overwhelm the film by any means--it's a beauty to watch from beginning to end--but it does place it in a very distinct artistic era. And, oh yeah, Hedy does get her kit off. Dripping with symbolism and filled with [[glamorous]] cinematography, Extase is so much more than the erotic drama we've all [[arrive]] to [[waits]]. This is [[approximately]] a silent film, with what [[talks]] there is in German, and [[unimaginably]] [[simplifies]] German at that. Perhaps the filmmakers intended the [[flick]] to reach the [[greater]] [[probable]] European audience, as anyone with even a [[petite]] high school level [[Deutsche]] can easily dispense with the [[captions]]. The [[storytelling]] is of little importance anyway, with the [[movie]] succeeding on a cinematic [[grades]], not a [[descriptive]] one. Symbols of fecundity and the power of nature overwhelm the human characters--there are even scenes where flowers obscure the face of supposed star Hedy Lamarr--and there are moments here that will remind viewers of the works of Dreyer, Vertov, and Riefenstahl. If the film has any message to convey, I think it's a political one: bourgeois man is timid and impotent; working class man is a happy, productive creature; and woman is the creator, destined to be unfulfilled until she has borne a child. This blend of Soviet socialist realism and National Socialist dogma doesn't overwhelm the film by any means--it's a beauty to watch from beginning to end--but it does place it in a very distinct artistic era. And, oh yeah, Hedy does get her kit off. --------------------------------------------- Result 429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This Italian [[movie]] is [[basically]] a soap [[opera]] with skin.

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the actual tape inside said it was "X." The [[latter]] makes a lot more sense because there is a short scene near the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you could see Dutch actress Marishcka Detmers performing all sex on this [[guy]] - and, yes, you could see his penis in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline actress" had [[done]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the [[movie]] is ugly....a [[real]] [[waste]] of time and certainly not recommended despite Detmers' looks. This Italian [[cinematography]] is [[virtually]] a soap [[drama]] with skin.

The VHS box said it was rated "R" but the into on the actual tape inside said it was "X." The [[latest]] makes a lot more sense because there is a short scene near the end that was shocking. Even in the dark, you could see Dutch actress Marishcka Detmers performing all sex on this [[boy]] - and, yes, you could see his penis in her mouth. I read somewhere that this was the first time where a "mainline actress" had [[played]] something like this on screen.

Detmers parades around in the nude on several scenes but her face was even better than her body. She looked beautiful. Unfortunately, the [[cinema]] is ugly....a [[actual]] [[squander]] of time and certainly not recommended despite Detmers' looks. --------------------------------------------- Result 430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] You know a [[movie]] will not go well when John Carradine narrates (a.k.a. reads the [[script]] & plot [[synopsis]]) over his character's [[funeral]] [[procession]], a mere 5 minutes into the [[movie]]. The [[narration]] is his character's [[last]] will & testament. It stipulates that his [[estate]] be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a reality show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by [[John]] Carradine you expect this movie will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and pointless. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus music, bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and heaps of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be happy to still be alive, but the pain might be too great to bear alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab You know a [[films]] will not go well when John Carradine narrates (a.k.a. reads the [[screenplay]] & plot [[outline]]) over his character's [[funerary]] [[motorcade]], a mere 5 minutes into the [[cinema]]. The [[storytelling]] is his character's [[final]] will & testament. It stipulates that his [[estates]] be divided amongst his 4 children and servants. The children shall split $136 million equally, but if any should die then that share is split amongst the remainders. If all the children should die then it is divided amongst the servants. To be eligible, they must live in the family estate for a week. It sounds like the typical plot of a reality show.

There is little subtext as to the nature of the Deans. They are a powerful and severely dysfunctional family, but the real trouble starts with the drowning of that dog. From the opening voice-over by [[Jon]] Carradine you expect this movie will lead to a Machiavellian cat and mouse game with a twist ending.

That journey is painfully slow and pointless. We trudge through minutes of watching people sitting around, playing pool, throwing darts, the misuse of the "through the fish bowl" shot, dramatic conversations between silk cravat wearing men, constant bickering, misplaced circus music, bizarre flashbacks reminiscent of faux-German expressionism, the horror aesthetic of the 4th grade and heaps of dramatic overacting. This all inevitably leads to the expected & ungratifying ending. You will be happy to still be alive, but the pain might be too great to bear alone. Share children, share.

-Celluloid Rehab --------------------------------------------- Result 431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] it's [[amazing]] that so many people that i [[know]] haven't [[seen]] this [[little]] gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[GREAT]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 [[monkeys]] and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this [[film]] as a [[psycho]] is [[unnerving]], dark and right on target.

[[everyone]] else in the [[film]] [[gives]] [[excellent]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing greatly [[enhance]] the proceedings. the sense of dread for the characters keeps [[increasing]] as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[flaw]] i could find in this cult classic.

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 it's [[surprising]] that so many people that i [[savoir]] haven't [[watched]] this [[scant]] gem. everybody i have turned on to it have come back with the same reaction: WHAT A [[RESPLENDENT]] MOVIE!!

i've never much cared for Brad Pitt (though his turns in 12 [[chimpanzees]] and Fight Club show improvement) but his performance in this [[filmmaking]] as a [[loony]] is [[disconcerting]], dark and right on target.

[[anybody]] else in the [[filmmaking]] [[offers]] [[glorious]] performances and the movie's slow and deliberate pacing greatly [[reinforcement]] the proceedings. the sense of dread for the characters keeps [[hiked]] as they come to realize what has been really happening.

the only thing that keeps this from a 10 in my book, is that compared to what came before it, the ending is a bit too long and overblown. but that's the only [[malfunction]] i could find in this cult classic.

if you check this film out, try to get the letterboxed unrated director's cut for the best viewing option.

rating:9 --------------------------------------------- Result 432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Not [[knowing]] what this [[film]] was about, I [[checked]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I [[enjoyed]] it. [[Little]] [[seen]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Great]] story and [[characters]]. As a [[fan]] of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[exception]] for this film was the [[ending]]. [[However]], it is worth the rent. Not [[cognizant]] what this [[cinematographic]] was about, I [[ticked]] it out at the video store and after seeing it, I [[liked]] it. [[Scant]] [[noticed]] multi-genre flick from director Bernard Rose (Candyman, Immortal Beloved). [[Whopping]] story and [[features]]. As a [[ventilator]] of Glenne Healdy's, I was surprised of her british accent. The only [[exemption]] for this film was the [[ended]]. [[Instead]], it is worth the rent. --------------------------------------------- Result 433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If there was a 0 stars rating i would gladly hand it out to this absolutely horrid pile of waste. The fact that the actual summary is perfectly fine and that if it had been made different it could have been brilliant only makes it worse. The basic task of locking up a group of people in an experiment chamber is fine, but WHERES THE EXPERIMENT? All i see is a bunch of unintelligent surfers and blondes chatting about music and culture i don't know or want to know about... The challenges are pathetic and silly. The whole point of reality TV is to show REALITY. If you set a 'challenge' don't make them play with exaggerated props of food and stereotypical cultural elements in 'friday night games'. make them do an actual challenge. And as for 'earning' prize money, thats fine, if they actually earnt it! These people are nuts. If only they would make the show better, the actual idea would be glorious. But that ain't gonna happen! --------------------------------------------- Result 434 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] This [[series]] is set a year after the mission to Abydos in the movie Stargate. It [[explains]] a lot of the stuff that the movie [[neglected]] to [[mention]]. Such as, how was the Stargate activated without a human computer? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? How many are there?

The first episode has a retired Jack O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) recalled to active duty by General George Hammond due to an attack by the shut down Stargate from Apophis, a powerful Goa'uld who killed four men and kidnapped one woman. We meet Samantha Carter, a brilliant scientist who claims that she should have gone through the Stargate the first time, and is determined to go through now. We find out that Daniel got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of Gate addresses that they can dial. Then Daniel's wife gets captured by Apophis and becomes his new queen.

It continues in the second episode where General Hammond announces the formation of the SGC which includes nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which consists of Jack, Samantha and Daniel. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to rescue Daniel's wife and another one captured at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get captured, and just as Apophis gives the order to kill them and many other prisoners, a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, saves them and goes to Earth with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the beginning of the adventure. In the course of the show they have gone to the past and future, gotten transported to alternate realities, swapped bodies, grown old, met alien races which include a rebel alliance of Goa'uld called the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's Dad becomes a member, the Asgard, a cute little race in which we see Thor most often (he's Jack's buddy),and avoid global disaster by the skin of their teeth countless times.

The show was recently canceled, but lasted ten seasons. In season nine, a new enemy called the Ori came in flaunting brand new powers, new dangers and bringing to light new mysteries surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! This [[serials]] is set a year after the mission to Abydos in the movie Stargate. It [[explained]] a lot of the stuff that the movie [[omitted]] to [[cited]]. Such as, how was the Stargate activated without a human computer? Where did the Goa'uld (Ra's race) come from? How many are there?

The first episode has a retired Jack O'Neill (spelled with 2 Ls) recalled to active duty by General George Hammond due to an attack by the shut down Stargate from Apophis, a powerful Goa'uld who killed four men and kidnapped one woman. We meet Samantha Carter, a brilliant scientist who claims that she should have gone through the Stargate the first time, and is determined to go through now. We find out that Daniel got married on Abydos, and that there are hundreds of Gate addresses that they can dial. Then Daniel's wife gets captured by Apophis and becomes his new queen.

It continues in the second episode where General Hammond announces the formation of the SGC which includes nine teams, in which Jack's team will be SG-1 which consists of Jack, Samantha and Daniel. They go to Chulak, a Goa'uld homeworld to rescue Daniel's wife and another one captured at Abydos named Ska'ra. They get captured, and just as Apophis gives the order to kill them and many other prisoners, a Jaffa named Teal'c, First Prime of Apophis, saves them and goes to Earth with them, where he is made part of SG-1.

That was only the beginning of the adventure. In the course of the show they have gone to the past and future, gotten transported to alternate realities, swapped bodies, grown old, met alien races which include a rebel alliance of Goa'uld called the Tok'ra, in which Samantha's Dad becomes a member, the Asgard, a cute little race in which we see Thor most often (he's Jack's buddy),and avoid global disaster by the skin of their teeth countless times.

The show was recently canceled, but lasted ten seasons. In season nine, a new enemy called the Ori came in flaunting brand new powers, new dangers and bringing to light new mysteries surrounding the Stargate and its creators, the Ancients. Season nine and ten also saw the introduction to two new characters, Ben Browder as Cameron Mitchell, the new leader of SG-1 and Claudia Black as Vala MalDoran, a female human from another world who brings a new sense of fun to the team.

Very well-produced, interesting characters, fantastic Special effects and a subtle love interest between Samantha and Jack, this one has it all. A different way of travelling the galaxy, and different kinds of adventures, this is one show you don't want to miss. Unlock the gate and step through. You won't regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Not only is this movie a [[great]] film for basic cinematography ([[screenplay]], acting, [[setting]], etc.) but [[also]] for it's [[realism]]. This [[movie]] could take place in any farm or rural setting. It makes no [[difference]] if the movie takes place in Louisiana or if it [[would]] take place in Kansas. The story and the [[messages]] it includes would remain the same. This movie shows family values and connections for an older audience, while at the same time it shows youthful behavior for the younger viewers. Everyone who watches this will walk away with something having [[touched]] them personally, I know I did. The ending [[hits]] way too close to home for me not to burst into [[tears]] every time I watch it. The ending stresses the importance of farm safety, and everyone who has ever worked on a farm needs to see this film. Not paying attention and carelessness gets you into dangerous situations.

Not only is this movie a [[large]] film for basic cinematography ([[script]], acting, [[configured]], etc.) but [[similarly]] for it's [[pragmatism]]. This [[flick]] could take place in any farm or rural setting. It makes no [[diff]] if the movie takes place in Louisiana or if it [[ought]] take place in Kansas. The story and the [[message]] it includes would remain the same. This movie shows family values and connections for an older audience, while at the same time it shows youthful behavior for the younger viewers. Everyone who watches this will walk away with something having [[poked]] them personally, I know I did. The ending [[rattles]] way too close to home for me not to burst into [[rip]] every time I watch it. The ending stresses the importance of farm safety, and everyone who has ever worked on a farm needs to see this film. Not paying attention and carelessness gets you into dangerous situations.

--------------------------------------------- Result 436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have never commented on IMDb before, but I feel I have to after watching The Batman animation. Its absolute rubbish! Warner Brothers had the perfect animation series in Batman in the early 90s so what the hell are they doing trying to mess with the winning formula? I feel like writing a complaint letter to WB. The original animation was dark and brooding, exactly the way Batman was intended to be. WB had to mess this up with some tripe Batman of the Future. Now they produce this drivel. The Joker doesn't remotely resemble the Joker from DC comics. DC should sue. I urge everyone who agrees with me to email or write to WB and use people power to get back the original formula --------------------------------------------- Result 437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Utterly]] tactical, [[strange]] (watch for the kinky moment of a drop-dead gorgeous blonde acting as pull-string doll for some rich folks), pointless but [[undoubtedly]] [[compelling]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a stew of perplexedly unfocused ideas and random plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if somewhat anti-heroes) Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't get to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. [[Altogether]] tactical, [[nosy]] (watch for the kinky moment of a drop-dead gorgeous blonde acting as pull-string doll for some rich folks), pointless but [[obviously]] [[persuading]] late-night feature. This unhinged French production is a stew of perplexedly unfocused ideas and random plot illustrations centred on its very charismatic stars (if somewhat anti-heroes) Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. Really they don't get to do all that much, especially during the confined, lengthy mid-section where they hide themselves in a building during the Christmas break to crack a safe with 10,000 possible combinations. Oh fun! But this is when the odd, if intriguing relationship is formed between Delon and Bronson's characters. After a manipulative battle of wills (and childishly sly games against each other), the two come to an understanding that sees them honour each other's involvement and have a mutual respect. This would go on to play a further part in the twisty second half of the story with that undetectable curve-ball. Still their encounters early on suggest there's more, but what we get is vague and this is magnified by that 'What just happen there?' ending that might just make you jump. YEEEEAAAAAHHHHHHHHH! Glad to get that out of the system.

The pacing is terribly slow, but placidly measured for it and this seems purposely done to exhaust with its edgy, nervous underlining tension. Watch as the same process is repeated over and over again, and you know something is not quite right and the scheming eventually comes into play. Now everything that does happen feels too spontaneous, but the climax payoff is haunting. The taut, complex script is probably a little too crafty for its own good, but there are some neat novelties (Coins, glass and liquids… try not spilling) and visual symbolisms. Jean Herman's direction is efficiently sophisticated and low-key, but get a tad artificial and infuse an unwelcoming icy atmosphere. The sound FX features more as a potent note, than that of Francois DeRoubaix's funky score that's mainly kept under wrapped after its sizzling opening. Top drawers Delon (who's quite steely) and Bronson (a jovial turn) are solid, and work off each tremendously. Bernard Fresson chalks up the attitude as the Inspector who knows there's more going on than what is being led on. An attractive female cast features able support by Brigitte Fossey and Olga Georges-Picot.

A cryptically directionless, but polished crime drama maintained by its two leads and some bizarre inclusions. --------------------------------------------- Result 438 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This film is just a [[shame]]. Orlando, [[Florida]] [[seems]] to becoming a more recognized [[filmmaking]] area (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was shot in Central [[Florida]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across Africa and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will [[try]] to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect [[place]] to film The Brothers. It had the potential to give a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. After all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this area. But, The Brothers falls short probably because of a [[weak]] [[script]]. Both lead characters are flat with almost no development (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit boring). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also hope the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

This film is just a [[pity]]. Orlando, [[Fl]] [[seem]] to becoming a more recognized [[cinema]] area (like Vancouver's rise to prominance). The Brothers was shot in Central [[Fl]] and this short film is a bit of a setback for the area (which made great strides with the Indie film Walking Across Africa and the great HBO miniseries From Earth To The Moon).

I will [[seeks]] to be as honest as possible. I think Orlando was the perfect [[placing]] to film The Brothers. It had the potential to give a new spin on the 'Boy Band' craze. After all, both N'Sync and the Backstreet Boys come from this area. But, The Brothers falls short probably because of a [[vulnerable]] [[hyphen]]. Both lead characters are flat with almost no development (part of this could be the amatuer actors, but some of it is certainly the way the script was written).

Also a problem is the choice of jokes. Many of the jokes are too repetitive (they do come off funny the first time, but it does grow to be a bit boring). Some of the 'concert' scenes are staged poorly (and many of these scenes also don't seem to move the story along in any way).

I had high hopes for this one, but alas its a disappointing effort. I also hope the best for the upcoming feature based on this short. But I think the best thing for filmmaker John Figg is to move to different genres (quickly). Comedy isn't his strong suit. But, its indisputable that he definitely is one of the more prominant filmmakers in the Orlando area (its just a shame that right now he's infamous, not famous).

--------------------------------------------- Result 439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[admit]] I had no idea what to expect before [[viewing]] this [[highly]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common cold for all I knew. It began with [[great]] visuals, little snippets to grab your attention and cause your imagination to run wild. As it continued I [[learned]] quickly through voice overs what was taking place. A [[nice]] little neo noir [[story]] that I felt was not a [[waist]] of a few minutes of my time. The little [[clues]] given to the audience through visuals at the beginning [[give]] them a sense of [[accomplishment]] as they piece [[together]] the plot. Along with a nice [[twist]] at the end its a [[cool]] [[package]] overall. The score, though not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[felt]] a little dated, not [[adding]] [[anything]] to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt [[overly]] dramatic but fit [[perfectly]] with the feel of the [[overall]] [[piece]]. I [[walk]] away from this very [[satisfied]]. I was given a [[lot]] of information in a short [[period]] of [[time]] but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[rushed]] or pushed. [[Great]] [[job]]! I [[accepted]] I had no idea what to expect before [[visualizing]] this [[unimaginably]] stylized piece. It could have been the cure for a zombie virus or the common cold for all I knew. It began with [[whopping]] visuals, little snippets to grab your attention and cause your imagination to run wild. As it continued I [[learning]] quickly through voice overs what was taking place. A [[pleasurable]] little neo noir [[narratives]] that I felt was not a [[wrist]] of a few minutes of my time. The little [[cues]] given to the audience through visuals at the beginning [[confer]] them a sense of [[successes]] as they piece [[jointly]] the plot. Along with a nice [[twisting]] at the end its a [[groovy]] [[packing]] overall. The score, though not bad, gave the film almost a music video feel. It just [[smelled]] a little dated, not [[inserting]] [[nothing]] to further the storyline. Some of the performances felt [[unreasonably]] dramatic but fit [[entirely]] with the feel of the [[general]] [[slice]]. I [[walking]] away from this very [[persuaded]]. I was given a [[batch]] of information in a short [[schedules]] of [[moment]] but through great editing and voice-over work it didn't feel [[raced]] or pushed. [[Whopping]] [[labor]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I only recently found out that Madeleine L'Engle's [[novel]] had been turned into a TV movie by Disney and ordered the DVD. The book was a [[favorite]] of mine when I was a child and I read it several times.

Despite some of the child actors not [[resembling]] the characters as described in the novel, the Murry [[family]] is well [[cast]], with a likable (if too pretty) Meg at the center and a Charles Wallace who is convincing as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The first half hour is promising enough, doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan face is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special effects and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a disaster, presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but also because the design work lacks imagination and good judgement.

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. I only recently found out that Madeleine L'Engle's [[newer]] had been turned into a TV movie by Disney and ordered the DVD. The book was a [[preferable]] of mine when I was a child and I read it several times.

Despite some of the child actors not [[resembled]] the characters as described in the novel, the Murry [[families]] is well [[casting]], with a likable (if too pretty) Meg at the center and a Charles Wallace who is convincing as a child prodigy without becoming irritating.

The first half hour is promising enough, doing a good job in establishing the relationships between the lead characters and at setting the scene. Unfortunately as soon as the non-human characters appear the adaptation starts to unravel and once the children leave earth the whole thing falls apart. Alfre Woodward is too youthful looking and much too regal as the eccentric Mrs Whatsit (think Miriam Margolis or Joan Plowright instead) and Kate Nelligan face is so mask like and inexpressive, she must have visited Faye Dunaway's plastic surgeon in recent years. For some reason they make her Mrs Which look like Glinda from The Wizard of Oz when she should have resembled a benign Wicked Witch of the West.

In the end what lets this down most badly are the terrible special effects and art direction. I understand that this is a TV movie, but the CGI looked like something that could have been done 15 years earlier. Mrs Whatsits' centaur incarnation is a disaster as is the Chewbacca like suit for Aunt Beast, who in the novel is a velvety, elegant creature instead of the ungainly Big Foot like thing shown here. I could go on and on, nearly every artistic choice is a disaster, presumably because there wasn't a large enough budget to do this justice, but also because the design work lacks imagination and good judgement.

This really would have needed the sense of wonder Spielberg brought to his early films. What a shame that with the current popularity of adapting children's literary fantasy series nobody thought of adapting A Wrinkle in Time and it's sequels for the big screen, giving it the scope it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the film again this [[year]] as I am teaching the novel and find the [[changes]] in the film annoying - there is no appearance of the little boy in the novel and the ending has been changed. They kill him off in the film but the whole point is that he is haunted by the events at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the events behind him. Mr. Bentley is a far more sympathetic [[character]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a film which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. Have I just imagined this? Why am I so convinced there's actually another film version of this novel out there somewhere? I saw the film again this [[annum]] as I am teaching the novel and find the [[amend]] in the film annoying - there is no appearance of the little boy in the novel and the ending has been changed. They kill him off in the film but the whole point is that he is haunted by the events at Eel Marsh House for many years but does remarry and eventually put the events behind him. Mr. Bentley is a far more sympathetic [[personages]] in the novel, the scene in the film where Kipps sets fire to the office is plain daft, and the constant appearance of the toy soldier to signify the presence of the child is genuinely creepy but pointless - Kipps is haunted by the woman seeking revenge, not the child. I am sure I've seen a film which is better and closer to the novel and actually scarier. Have I just imagined this? --------------------------------------------- Result 442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I'm [[watching]] the series again now that it's out on [[DVD]] (yay!) It's [[striking]] me as fresh, as relevant and as intriguing as when it [[first]] [[aired]].

The central performances are [[gripping]], the scripts are [[layered]].

I'll [[stick]] my neck out and put it up there with The [[Prisoner]] as a [[show]] that'll be [[winning]] [[new]] [[fans]] and still be watched [[come]] 2035.

I've been asked to [[write]] some more line (it [[seems]] IMDb is as user unfriendly and anally retentively coded as ever! Pithy and to the point is clearly not the IMDb way.)

Well, unlike IMDb's [[submissions]] [[editors]], American [[Gothic]] understands that simplicity is everything.

[[In]] 22 episodes, the [[show]] [[covers]] more [[character]] development than [[many]] [[shows]] do in seven seasons. [[On]] top of which it questions personal ethics and [[strength]] of [[character]] in a [[way]] which [[challenges]] the [[viewer]] at every turn to [[ask]] themselves what they would choose and what they would think in a given situation.

When the show first [[aired]], I was still [[grieving]] for Twin [[Peaks]] and [[thought]] it [[would]] be a [[cheap]] [[knock]] off. [[Personally]] I'm [[starting]] to rate it more highly and suspect it will [[stand]] up better over the [[years]]. [[Reckon]] it don't get more [[controversial]] than that! I'm [[staring]] the series again now that it's out on [[DVDS]] (yay!) It's [[whopping]] me as fresh, as relevant and as intriguing as when it [[frst]] [[dispensed]].

The central performances are [[captivating]], the scripts are [[laminated]].

I'll [[wand]] my neck out and put it up there with The [[Inmate]] as a [[spectacle]] that'll be [[earning]] [[newer]] [[amateurs]] and still be watched [[arrived]] 2035.

I've been asked to [[writing]] some more line (it [[looks]] IMDb is as user unfriendly and anally retentively coded as ever! Pithy and to the point is clearly not the IMDb way.)

Well, unlike IMDb's [[presentation]] [[publishers]], American [[Goth]] understands that simplicity is everything.

[[For]] 22 episodes, the [[exhibit]] [[coverings]] more [[traits]] development than [[innumerable]] [[display]] do in seven seasons. [[Onto]] top of which it questions personal ethics and [[kraft]] of [[traits]] in a [[routing]] which [[difficulty]] the [[viewfinder]] at every turn to [[requesting]] themselves what they would choose and what they would think in a given situation.

When the show first [[dispensed]], I was still [[heartbreak]] for Twin [[Scip]] and [[thinks]] it [[should]] be a [[cheaper]] [[knocking]] off. [[Individual]] I'm [[launches]] to rate it more highly and suspect it will [[standing]] up better over the [[yrs]]. [[Guess]] it don't get more [[litigious]] than that! --------------------------------------------- Result 443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a [[huge]] [[mistake]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it [[dry]] - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a huge mistake. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it [[dry]] - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a [[great]] [[awry]]. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it [[driest]] - far more entertaining. Please do not waste +/- 2 hours of your life watching this movie - just don't. Especially if someone is fortunate to be snoozing at the side of you. Damn cheek if you ask me. I waited for something to happen - it never did. I am not one of those people to stop watching a movie part way through. I always have to see it through to the end. What a huge mistake. Do yourself a favour and go and paint a wall and watch it [[driest]] - far more entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Allen goes to the country (somewhere he hates going in real life) and has a weekend with his friends - which are the usual successful white middle-class bellyaching types that feature in many of his films.

I usually find something to amuse in Woody Allen comedies, but here he really falls totally [[flat]] on his [[face]]. Even the one-liners seem to have deserted him. The really is no plot (bar bits and pieces of cod Shakespeare) - but Allen seems to [[use]] the [[location]] to [[allow]] a semi-mystical air, which just makes the thing [[even]] more [[witless]] and half-baked.

It just doesn't [[work]] at any [[level]] and is just a giant bore. The [[best]] thing about this [[film]] ([[apart]] from the [[end]] [[credits]] [[coming]] up) is that the bad reviews [[seem]] to [[get]] him to wake up and realise that [[simply]] [[throwing]] [[together]] a slapdash [[script]] and [[casting]] your [[mates]] in it doesn't make for [[entertainment]]. Allen goes to the country (somewhere he hates going in real life) and has a weekend with his friends - which are the usual successful white middle-class bellyaching types that feature in many of his films.

I usually find something to amuse in Woody Allen comedies, but here he really falls totally [[apartment]] on his [[encounter]]. Even the one-liners seem to have deserted him. The really is no plot (bar bits and pieces of cod Shakespeare) - but Allen seems to [[utilise]] the [[positioning]] to [[enables]] a semi-mystical air, which just makes the thing [[yet]] more [[nonsensical]] and half-baked.

It just doesn't [[cooperates]] at any [[grades]] and is just a giant bore. The [[finest]] thing about this [[kino]] ([[also]] from the [[ceases]] [[credence]] [[come]] up) is that the bad reviews [[appears]] to [[gets]] him to wake up and realise that [[exclusively]] [[pelting]] [[jointly]] a slapdash [[hyphen]] and [[moulding]] your [[soulmates]] in it doesn't make for [[amusement]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Beat]] a [[path]] to this [[important]] documentary that looks like an attractive feature. Forbidden Lie$(2007) is [[simply]] a better (cinematic) version of Norma Khouri's book Forbidden Love, and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty woman, Lie$ is the very [[best]] in editorialised reality TV.

Cleverly edited and colourful, Broinowski's storytelling is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagree]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one slight problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded testimonials. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and totally engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The apparent con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her disillusionment in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in spoilers. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by Sydney Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was tempted back to the director to supposedly clear her name. She absconded supposedly because a) she's either terrified of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) [[Overpowers]] a [[trajectories]] to this [[sizeable]] documentary that looks like an attractive feature. Forbidden Lie$(2007) is [[exclusively]] a better (cinematic) version of Norma Khouri's book Forbidden Love, and THAT was a best-seller. An onion-peeling of literary fraud and of a pretty woman, Lie$ is the very [[optimum]] in editorialised reality TV.

Cleverly edited and colourful, Broinowski's storytelling is chaptered by moving silhouettes of Norma Khouri meaningfully blowing smoke. I [[disagreement]] (with Variety) that it's overlong; instead my one slight problem was with the episodic nature of its key players commenting on others' just-recorded testimonials. On a single watching your sense of narrative becomes mired.....so I watched it twice.

This Oscar-worthy effort is at once genuinely funny, upsetting, and totally engrossing as it documents one lie after another. The apparent con unfolded in the Australian State of Queensland via very personal swindles of Khouri's friends and fans(!). Clearly these friends are now "turned", the funniest on-camera line belonging to Khouri's QLD neighbour Rachel Richardson who speaks her disillusionment in flat, no-nonsense colloquialisms: "I think it's a load of sh!t. Personally".

We need to learn from their experience, hence my belief in spoilers. Any perennial lie-spinner caught out in a lie will just say anything to buy time to tell another lie.

There's some breathtaking footage of Khouri cackling derisively at duping this very documentarian, who instead presses her (con)"Artist" repeatedly for corroboration.

Since being busted by Sydney Morning Herald journalists Caroline Overington and David Knox a year after publication, Khouri has been on the run, but was tempted back to the director to supposedly clear her name. She absconded supposedly because a) she's either terrified of her sly, more-Italian-sounding-than-Greek husband, or b) because she needed her passport/visas to clear her name.

Unlikely.

A more plausible reason was that the FBI regained her trail in Queensland before she again skipped overseas (one guess: No, not Jordan). According to a closing card, Khouri is "still under investigation by the FBI" in 2007.

I guessed audiences might just give Khouri the benefit of the doubt once she invoked the need for utmost secrecy and subterfuge. Instead, the audiences I sat with slowly became just as disillusioned as the duped people on the screen. Once they caught on, there was plenty counter-derision and catcalls; earlier, stressed sighs had emanated from audiencemembers who just didn't know how to take Khouri's evolving contradictions.

The filmmaker gets props for so beautifully spanning this convoluted tale from beginning to end, not leaving anything out--not even her own self-sacrifice.

Anna opens her film with a sympathetic book narration by Khouri herself. The putated reason for authoring it is retold very believably at first--key to how a lifelong liar operates: in half-truths. Khouri is nevertheless a very pretty and smart 35yr-old with rather disarming charm, and surprisingly, worked-out biceps.

Gradually we're introduced to less-and-less-adulating Aussie journos, publishers and fans who at first bought the extent of Khouri's honour-killing accusations hook, line and sinker. Later we see their more rueful reactions, quite self-controlled and matter-of-fact, if some perhaps a little bitter.

It was Jordanian (anti-)honour-killing activists who took deepest umbrage at Khouri's fallacies because its pot-stirring forced them to reduce the pace of change. Honour-killings do happen in Jordan; it's just their prevalence that's at odds with Khouri's book--plus 72 other "facts". In 2003 these activists faxed (Australian) Random House with 73 painstakingly-checked objections.

The publishing houses across 4 continents who'd jumped at the chance to publish first-time author Khouri never tried to check any facts. Leaving any corroborration to a disclaimer in their author contract, they too were fair game. So a massive hot-topic fraud was as easy to perpetrate upon the world as typing it up in Internet cafes.

Later still we're shocked to discover that the "factual errors" extend to Khouri's bio as well. For one thing, she's not only not a 35yr-old virgin (her defence is that she merely didn't disabuse people of their assumptions), but she has a slickster husband and 2 teenagers! Sometimes she's just too fast-talking in her American accent. She also seems too-comfortable with cellphone technology and Western clothes. I realise observations like these might sound prejudicial to the very Jordanian women who don't need any Western paternalism from me, but when even cultural cues don't jibe in addition to Khouri's "facts", you've got to start questioning your source.

At some point the filmmaker came to the same conclusion. She makes an admirable effort to hold Khouri to account, in person, in Jordan. The last third is consumed with a fact-finding trip back to Amman, where one "fact" after another falls. Eventually Broinowski forces her (con)"Artist" to admit the decade-discrepancy in her story, and it's after this that Khouri records her derisive secret confession into her own digital camera. Secret, because in it Khouri's "American security guard" Jeremy is heard to have an Australian accent: he's an actor! (We never find out how Anna uncovered it.)

So this becomes the filmmaker's triumph, as she never flags in her tone or commitment. Her on-camera revelations lead her audience to learn from the mistakes of others given such a litany of reasonable doubt, FBI documents--and Khouri's most shocking initial crime.

Anna Broinowski (watch-list her now) is even clever enough to use the one artistic device (key players cross-commenting on footage) to kill two birds--making her audiences want to drink from the same well again.

In fact, despite her deceptively demure approach, she made me re-confirm that Overington and Knox really DID win their 2004 Walkleys in Investigate Journalism for their "Norma Khouri Investigation".

Broinowski MADE ME LOOK.(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Pathetic... worse than a bad made-for-TV movie. I can't believe that Spacey and Freeman were in this flick. For some reason Morgan Freeman's character is constantly talking about and saying "pussy" when referring to NSync boy's girlfriend. Morgan Freeman calling women "pussy" is just awkward... What the hell were the people behind this film thinking? Too many plot holes to imagine combined with the horrid acting, confusing camera angles, a lame script and cheap background music made this movie absolutely unbearable.

I rented this flop with low expectations.... but... well... it really sucked. --------------------------------------------- Result 447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Not [[even]] worth [[watching]] this [[tacky]] spoiler ruins everything about 'Annie'. The [[characters]] seem almost cheapened by the poorly written storyline and they low quality feeling to the production. It was very clearly made for [[TV]], [[yet]] if I found it on my television, I [[would]] flick it straight over. The [[children]] in the [[film]] do an alright [[job]], yet the adults acting is unbelievable and so the movie fails to really draw you in. This [[film]] [[lacked]] the music/[[dance]] numbers [[thats]] made the original brilliant and truly does take the shine of the Annie we all love. Johnson, as Annie is at [[times]] [[annoying]] and over acted..you cannot convince yourself that she truly is Annie. The differences in character appearance continued to [[irritate]] me throughout the duration of the film. Sad to say this sequel was a [[total]] flop. Not [[yet]] worth [[staring]] this [[insipid]] spoiler ruins everything about 'Annie'. The [[nature]] seem almost cheapened by the poorly written storyline and they low quality feeling to the production. It was very clearly made for [[TELEVISIONS]], [[nevertheless]] if I found it on my television, I [[ought]] flick it straight over. The [[childhood]] in the [[flick]] do an alright [[labour]], yet the adults acting is unbelievable and so the movie fails to really draw you in. This [[cinematography]] [[lacking]] the music/[[ballet]] numbers [[theres]] made the original brilliant and truly does take the shine of the Annie we all love. Johnson, as Annie is at [[period]] [[vexing]] and over acted..you cannot convince yourself that she truly is Annie. The differences in character appearance continued to [[disturb]] me throughout the duration of the film. Sad to say this sequel was a [[aggregate]] flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] John Travolta, the biggest honkeytonk in the world, and a mechanical bull...what more can you ask for! Yeah, you're probably not going to get many surprises or deep meaning in this one. Yet, I have always found it fairly [[enjoyable]] to watch this redneck [[romance]]. Bud (Travolta) and Sissy (Debra Winger) meet at Gilley's and [[fall]] in [[love]]. They have all the difficulties you might expect a hardcore redneck couple to have. The honkeytonk scenes are fun with dancing, mechanical bull riding, and -of course- the required brawls. It has a good, 1980 country soundtrack, featuring "Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places", "The Devil Went Down to Georgia", and "Hello Texas" by my favorite Jimmy Buffett. Break out your cowboy boots and have a boot-scootin' boogie!

*** (Out of 4) John Travolta, the biggest honkeytonk in the world, and a mechanical bull...what more can you ask for! Yeah, you're probably not going to get many surprises or deep meaning in this one. Yet, I have always found it fairly [[agreeable]] to watch this redneck [[romanticism]]. Bud (Travolta) and Sissy (Debra Winger) meet at Gilley's and [[declines]] in [[likes]]. They have all the difficulties you might expect a hardcore redneck couple to have. The honkeytonk scenes are fun with dancing, mechanical bull riding, and -of course- the required brawls. It has a good, 1980 country soundtrack, featuring "Looking for Love in All the Wrong Places", "The Devil Went Down to Georgia", and "Hello Texas" by my favorite Jimmy Buffett. Break out your cowboy boots and have a boot-scootin' boogie!

*** (Out of 4) --------------------------------------------- Result 449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (70%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I'm not going to criticize the [[movie]]. There isn't that much to talk about. It has good animal actions scenes which were probably pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's OK. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. I'm not going to criticize the [[films]]. There isn't that much to talk about. It has good animal actions scenes which were probably pretty astonishing at the time. Clyde Beatty isn't exactly a matinée idol. He's a little slight and not particularly good looking. But that's OK. He's the man in that lion cage. We know that when he can't take the time away from his lions to tend to his girlfriend, he will end up on an island with her and have to save the day. Someone said earlier that it is a history lesson. The scenes at the circus are of another day, especially the kids who hang around. I didn't realize that even back in the thirties, they sailed on three masted schooners. It looked like something out of 1860. I guess that's the stock footage they had. No wonder the thing got wrecked. They're always talking about fixing her up. There's even a dirigible. It tells us a little about male female relationships at the time, a kind of giggly silliness. But if you don't take it too seriously, you can have fun watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I thought it was not the best re-cap episode I've every seen (though my viewing partner handed me a tissue in anticipation of the Brendan Fraser moment...*sigh*). It was nice to [[see]] Cox outside of the [[incessantly]] brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for brief moments. I also enjoyed trying to place the episodes included by the length of the character's hair (or height, in case of JD) and the youthfulness of the earliest episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very Chevy Chase/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical slide (already acknowledged on Conan). A little side note, the song (now stuck in my head) from the janitor-induced dance montage was "Diner" by Martin Sexton. I thought it was not the best re-cap episode I've every seen (though my viewing partner handed me a tissue in anticipation of the Brendan Fraser moment...*sigh*). It was nice to [[seeing]] Cox outside of the [[always]] brittle "Coxism State" he is in these days, if only for brief moments. I also enjoyed trying to place the episodes included by the length of the character's hair (or height, in case of JD) and the youthfulness of the earliest episodes. I can also see how Zach might be well on the way to a very Chevy Chase/or is that Matthew Perry? prat-fall induced chemical slide (already acknowledged on Conan). A little side note, the song (now stuck in my head) from the janitor-induced dance montage was "Diner" by Martin Sexton. --------------------------------------------- Result 451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] SPOILERS. [[Strange]] people with generous [[tastes]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Script]]: [[Dreadful]]. As [[Tom]] and Dan are "getting to know each other," bantering about films, the [[talk]] is [[clearly]] that of one person, and I suspect it was the [[director]], who carefully worked his words to [[sound]] intelligent. At one point, Dan [[asks]], "Have you heard of the HIV virus?" and it [[sounds]] about as natural as asking, "Have you communicated with the nine alien [[races]]?"

Acting: White teeth do and a chiseled face do not a sensitive performer make. Speedman did well enough with what he was given, I suppose, but Marsden was terrible -- unsympathetic, unbelievable, and downright smug and smarmy throughout his captivity. There is an emptiness to his performances (also see Interstate 60).

Plot: Spare me! The moments of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and weak. Recall Marsden pretending to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't work, man!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are initiated with some schlocky sound taken from CSI and other crime dramas.

Most important of all, most dangerous, evil, and offensive, is the homophobia (external or internal, you decide) in a film in which HIV is considered a weapon. Tom says that Dan may have taken off the condom or not used it at all -- excuse me, where was Tom while they were having sex? There is some villainizing of the inserting partner which comes off as a villainizing of the gay man in general.

In sum: Beware! SPOILERS. [[Unusual]] people with generous [[flavors]] have been reviewing this film. Allow me to add balance by pointing out the following:

[[Hyphen]]: [[Scary]]. As [[Tum]] and Dan are "getting to know each other," bantering about films, the [[conversations]] is [[naturally]] that of one person, and I suspect it was the [[headmaster]], who carefully worked his words to [[sounds]] intelligent. At one point, Dan [[calls]], "Have you heard of the HIV virus?" and it [[sound]] about as natural as asking, "Have you communicated with the nine alien [[careers]]?"

Acting: White teeth do and a chiseled face do not a sensitive performer make. Speedman did well enough with what he was given, I suppose, but Marsden was terrible -- unsympathetic, unbelievable, and downright smug and smarmy throughout his captivity. There is an emptiness to his performances (also see Interstate 60).

Plot: Spare me! The moments of half-escape were not thrilling but irritating and weak. Recall Marsden pretending to try keys in the door and then throwing them down: "They don't work, man!" Tee-hee. And beware the semi black-and-white flashbacks, which are initiated with some schlocky sound taken from CSI and other crime dramas.

Most important of all, most dangerous, evil, and offensive, is the homophobia (external or internal, you decide) in a film in which HIV is considered a weapon. Tom says that Dan may have taken off the condom or not used it at all -- excuse me, where was Tom while they were having sex? There is some villainizing of the inserting partner which comes off as a villainizing of the gay man in general.

In sum: Beware! --------------------------------------------- Result 452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I've seen many [[horror]] [[shows]] over the years, like Nightstalker, that dealt with the Wendigo legend, so I was [[looking]] forward to an angry [[spirit]] [[causing]] [[mayhem]] to [[add]] [[flavor]] to the Halloween season. [[Man]] was I mistaken. The [[whole]] movie creates this sense of events about to [[happen]] that will be [[scary]] and creepy, but then delivers a very [[simplistic]] [[tale]] of [[revenge]] and murder over the loss of some property. Ve-ery [[scary]] - not! This movie has a lot in common with Cold Creek Manor, another [[total]] loser.

It's [[getting]] [[harder]] and [[harder]] to [[believe]] anything Hollywood puts forward about scary movies, since they rarely come through with anything original and spooky anymore. What idiots pay for such a bogus movie to be made? Go back to the drawing board fellas, and do something useful with those millions of greenbacks you have to throw around. I've seen many [[terror]] [[exhibitions]] over the years, like Nightstalker, that dealt with the Wendigo legend, so I was [[searching]] forward to an angry [[wits]] [[sparking]] [[devastation]] to [[adds]] [[fragrance]] to the Halloween season. [[Men]] was I mistaken. The [[overall]] movie creates this sense of events about to [[arise]] that will be [[fearful]] and creepy, but then delivers a very [[facile]] [[histories]] of [[retribution]] and murder over the loss of some property. Ve-ery [[fearful]] - not! This movie has a lot in common with Cold Creek Manor, another [[unmitigated]] loser.

It's [[obtaining]] [[tougher]] and [[louder]] to [[reckon]] anything Hollywood puts forward about scary movies, since they rarely come through with anything original and spooky anymore. What idiots pay for such a bogus movie to be made? Go back to the drawing board fellas, and do something useful with those millions of greenbacks you have to throw around. --------------------------------------------- Result 453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I wonder how much this [[movie]] actually has [[got]] to do with the 1984 [[movie]] "[[Bachelor]] [[Party]]", [[starring]] Tom Hanks. Is this [[movie]] even an official sequel? This movie is [[lacking]] in [[every]] [[department]] and you're [[obviously]] better off not watching it.

[[For]] a [[comedy]] this movie [[simply]] isn't good or [[funny]] enough. It relies [[mostly]] on the character's their [[stereotypical]] [[assessments]], [[rather]] then the movie actually [[features]] some good, original and funny [[moments]].

Of course there [[also]] is very little [[story]] present and the [[movie]] nude breast than [[script]] [[pages]]. You just keep waiting for things to finally start off. There is a main plot line in it somewhere but that one is so terribly unoriginal and gets executed so poorly in the movie that it feels more as if it's something non-existent. I guess there even is a message and moral story in it somewhere but this again is so terribly unoriginal and poorly done in the movie that it simply does not work out.

It's basically a typical teenage comedy, with lots of sex jokes and nudity, only without the teenage main characters, which makes the story all the more sad and tasteless. The movie makes some really wrong jokes, that are misplaced for any type of movie.

I [[regret]] ever watching this.

3/10 I wonder how much this [[films]] actually has [[did]] to do with the 1984 [[movies]] "[[Baccalaureate]] [[Parties]]", [[featuring]] Tom Hanks. Is this [[cinematography]] even an official sequel? This movie is [[shortage]] in [[each]] [[ministry]] and you're [[apparently]] better off not watching it.

[[At]] a [[humour]] this movie [[exclusively]] isn't good or [[hilarious]] enough. It relies [[especially]] on the character's their [[stereotyped]] [[rating]], [[fairly]] then the movie actually [[traits]] some good, original and funny [[times]].

Of course there [[apart]] is very little [[narratives]] present and the [[cinema]] nude breast than [[hyphen]] [[page]]. You just keep waiting for things to finally start off. There is a main plot line in it somewhere but that one is so terribly unoriginal and gets executed so poorly in the movie that it feels more as if it's something non-existent. I guess there even is a message and moral story in it somewhere but this again is so terribly unoriginal and poorly done in the movie that it simply does not work out.

It's basically a typical teenage comedy, with lots of sex jokes and nudity, only without the teenage main characters, which makes the story all the more sad and tasteless. The movie makes some really wrong jokes, that are misplaced for any type of movie.

I [[sadness]] ever watching this.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Whoa]] nelly! I've [[heard]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore [[horror]] [[reviewers]] really [[found]] it to be disappointing. Man was he right on the nose! This movie was [[acted]] by [[pure]] [[amateurs]]. They HAD to have [[done]] one take, maybe two on each scene, the movie [[seemed]] soooo rushed. The [[script]] was [[also]] poor....they had lines that tried to be [[unique]] but failed. [[Miserably]]. "[[Get]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Oh]] man, I [[hate]] it when movies try to do that. It [[happens]] all the [[time]] with comedies...but, with a horror movie and with below average [[actors]]....the results are [[incredibly]] [[pathetic]]. The lines and scenarios were all very predictable. But what made me feel so negative towards this movie was, again, the damn acting. It was awful. Besides by the little Asian guy who worked the booth. I thought he was [[great]].

The movie is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t tourist who are on a vacation in Asia. They end up at the wrong place and fall into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughterhouse]]. Sounds like a cool story. But watching someone with a bad case of diarrhea is [[probably]] more fun and intense to watch. The only reason this is considered horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a trace of suspense.

I [[like]] many other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little mitts on this. But unfortunately with a HUGE capital U, the movie was [[incredibly]] [[disappointing]]. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were also so so.

Everything about this movie screams amateur. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a sick sense of humor and taste for horror. I pray his next [[movie]] doesn't play out like another B horror flick...[[unless]] he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[disappointment]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've seen of him, he's a true, dedicated man to the genre. Good luck next time, because this was bad news. [[Wow]] nelly! I've [[hear]] a ton of mixed reviews for this...but one of my go to hardcore [[terror]] [[reviewer]] really [[detected]] it to be disappointing. Man was he right on the nose! This movie was [[worked]] by [[sheer]] [[lovers]]. They HAD to have [[accomplished]] one take, maybe two on each scene, the movie [[appeared]] soooo rushed. The [[hyphen]] was [[apart]] poor....they had lines that tried to be [[exclusive]] but failed. [[Spectacularly]]. "[[Got]] your meathooks off of me!" [[Ah]] man, I [[detested]] it when movies try to do that. It [[arrives]] all the [[period]] with comedies...but, with a horror movie and with below average [[players]]....the results are [[madly]] [[unhappy]]. The lines and scenarios were all very predictable. But what made me feel so negative towards this movie was, again, the damn acting. It was awful. Besides by the little Asian guy who worked the booth. I thought he was [[magnificent]].

The movie is about 5 stupid dumbsh!t tourist who are on a vacation in Asia. They end up at the wrong place and fall into the hands of a mafia run sex/[[slaughter]]. Sounds like a cool story. But watching someone with a bad case of diarrhea is [[arguably]] more fun and intense to watch. The only reason this is considered horror is because of the killing. There wasn't a trace of suspense.

I [[likes]] many other horror fans were dying to get their bloody little mitts on this. But unfortunately with a HUGE capital U, the movie was [[madly]] [[disappointed]]. I did enjoy the ankle break and the blood effects. The flabby chicks were also so so.

Everything about this movie screams amateur. This is Ryan Nicholson's first feature length, and for the most part he failed. There's no denying he has a sick sense of humor and taste for horror. I pray his next [[filmmaking]] doesn't play out like another B horror flick...[[if]] he tells us that's what it's gonna be. Even after this [[displeasure]] I'm willing to give Ryan another shot. From what I've seen of him, he's a true, dedicated man to the genre. Good luck next time, because this was bad news. --------------------------------------------- Result 455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (70%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] This may be the only film that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable world of the American college experience of the late 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retrospective]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with subtlety and nuance where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

All in all, a classic of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? This may be the only film that actually comes close to capturing on film the essentially uncapturable world of the American college experience of the late 60s-early 70s. Go ahead, name another movie that even approaches this one: "Getting Straight"? "RPM"? These are caricatures. "Return of the Secaucus Seven" has its moments, but that's a [[retroactive]] film about (self-obsessed) individuals more than a film about a time and a place depicted *in* that time and place. "Drive, He Said" portrays-- with subtlety and nuance where it should, and a swift kick in the shorts where that's the only appropriate way-- the anti-draft movement, the ambiguity of big-time college sports (especially when there's a war on), the sexual revolution of the period, and the general unreality of the day. Believe me, it was like that.

The whole cast deserves commendation (as does the director, of course) but particular praise should be reserved for Bruce Dern, as the basketball coach, and Karen Black, the hero's very unusual-- except for that time-- love interest. William Tepper, as the lead, also rates a real round of applause both for his perfect capturing of the student-athlete of the period and for actually playing real college basketball in the film (remember Anthony Perkins in "Tall Story"? Yikes!).

All in all, a classic of a kind-- and the last film someone currently in 6th grade should be writing comments on ("boring", "repellent"-- um, right, sonny, please go back to your Arnold movies). Why isn't this film available from imdb? --------------------------------------------- Result 456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I'm only rating this film as a 3 out of pity because it attempts to be worthwhile. I love to praise a [[great]] movie and I'm not biased toward "male" movies. Legally blonde was an excellent [[film]]. Georgia Rule on the other hand, was a [[disorganized]], [[weak]], poorly written, [[unrealistic]] [[example]] of movie making at its worst. by the [[end]] of the film I didn't [[care]] who was lying or if anything was resolved.

The most important thing in a film is a good STORY. This story is weak and never develops (just because the subject matter is deep, doesn't mean the story is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia Rule, the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple hours in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly written story, and the litter of weak dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. Every character was a mess. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you want to remind yourself what good movie making is NOT! I'm only rating this film as a 3 out of pity because it attempts to be worthwhile. I love to praise a [[tremendous]] movie and I'm not biased toward "male" movies. Legally blonde was an excellent [[filmmaking]]. Georgia Rule on the other hand, was a [[chaotic]], [[vulnerable]], poorly written, [[utopian]] [[cases]] of movie making at its worst. by the [[termination]] of the film I didn't [[healthcare]] who was lying or if anything was resolved.

The most important thing in a film is a good STORY. This story is weak and never develops (just because the subject matter is deep, doesn't mean the story is good). A good story has dynamic characters. A dynamic character is one that experiences a major character change, and is primed for that change over the course of the movie. In Georgia Rule, the character changes were abrupt and undeveloped. Secondly, there were too many ATTEMPTED dynamic characters. Pulling off a really good dynamic character is a tough job and takes time (you've only got a couple hours in a movie). That means that too many attempted dynamic characters will get too little attention to their personal change. Even if I ignore the poorly written story, and the litter of weak dynamic characters, I can't even say I liked anyone. Every character was a mess. That's fine if your're writing American Beauty but not when you're attempting a dramatic comedy. Georgia was a horrible mother, her daughter was a horrible mother and daughter, and Lohan was a horrible excuse for a human being (no I'm not cutting her any slack because she was molested, crap happens to everyone and we're all responsible for our own actions). The "Dudley Do Right" Mormon kid should have had the guts not to compromise his religion and commitments...and Simon, I mean seriously, what kind of guy lets a 17 year old girl who's been molested just stay over occasionally (unless he's an actor or a politician). This movie is worth watching if you want to remind yourself what good movie making is NOT! --------------------------------------------- Result 457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I guess when "Beat Street" [[made]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" came at the same [[time]]. The problem with "Flashdance" is that there was only one break dancing scene and the rest was jazz dance and [[ballet]]. That was one of the reasons why "Beat Street" was better. The only movie that could [[rival]] "Beat Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies focused on how dance had been used by people to express their [[utmost]] [[feelings]].

The break-dance scenes in "Beat Street" come just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I loved all of them. Almost all of the break tricks were featured in the break jam scenes: the jackhammer, the flares, the head spins, the suicide sit, the crazy legs, the mortal, the forward flip, the figure four---almost everything.

Like "The Warriors", "Beat Street" does have violence related to the gang life in the hip hop world...but in a much less violent way than the former. The only major fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti artist Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the New York City subway tracks.....fighting each other on the third rail and both dying by electrocution on that rail. Well, although that chase scene ended tragically, it was better that they died that way than having blood exploding from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the flick was graffiti related to the hip-hop culture, and rap music. A lot of rap music appeared in the flick, because hip-hop members used rap music as a diversion to the negative aspects of gang life. Even the theme song of the movie, which closed the curtain to the flick, was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the death of Ramon.

By the way, during the dance scene called 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female drummer in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn Chong was Sheila E. making a cameo appearance. I guess when "Beat Street" [[introduced]] a national appearance, "Flashdance" came at the same [[moment]]. The problem with "Flashdance" is that there was only one break dancing scene and the rest was jazz dance and [[dances]]. That was one of the reasons why "Beat Street" was better. The only movie that could [[challengers]] "Beat Street" seems to be "Footloose", because both movies focused on how dance had been used by people to express their [[severe]] [[sentiments]].

The break-dance scenes in "Beat Street" come just before the middle and at the end of the flick. And I loved all of them. Almost all of the break tricks were featured in the break jam scenes: the jackhammer, the flares, the head spins, the suicide sit, the crazy legs, the mortal, the forward flip, the figure four---almost everything.

Like "The Warriors", "Beat Street" does have violence related to the gang life in the hip hop world...but in a much less violent way than the former. The only major fight scene in "Beat Street" was when graffiti artist Ramon (which in the movie was abbreviated as "Ramo") is chased by a rival gang member on the New York City subway tracks.....fighting each other on the third rail and both dying by electrocution on that rail. Well, although that chase scene ended tragically, it was better that they died that way than having blood exploding from a gang gunshot.

Most of the gang stuff in the flick was graffiti related to the hip-hop culture, and rap music. A lot of rap music appeared in the flick, because hip-hop members used rap music as a diversion to the negative aspects of gang life. Even the theme song of the movie, which closed the curtain to the flick, was not just an homage to hip-hop culture--it also was an homage to the death of Ramon.

By the way, during the dance scene called 'Tango, Tango', I guess the female drummer in the pit orchestra conducted by actress Rae Dawn Chong was Sheila E. making a cameo appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It [[felt]] like I [[watched]] this [[movie]] thousand [[times]] before.It was [[absolutely]] [[predictable]].Every time the [[story]] tried to get a bit twisted,every time I awaited something interesting to happen, I saw nothing but what I [[expected]]. Like "The bread factory opened up another facility,because there was not enough bread". In two words:Flat story,that has become a cliché,bad acting,bad special effects...Only the dumb Russian cop,Vlad, was a bit [[funny]] while punishing around the bad guys.The pile of muscles was so incredibly [[STUPID]],that it made me laugh at him for a moment. I wonder why i waste my time spitting on that shame-of-a-movie... It won't get worse (because it is not possible) :D It [[believed]] like I [[saw]] this [[cinematography]] thousand [[time]] before.It was [[fully]] [[foreseeable]].Every time the [[fairytales]] tried to get a bit twisted,every time I awaited something interesting to happen, I saw nothing but what I [[foreseen]]. Like "The bread factory opened up another facility,because there was not enough bread". In two words:Flat story,that has become a cliché,bad acting,bad special effects...Only the dumb Russian cop,Vlad, was a bit [[humorous]] while punishing around the bad guys.The pile of muscles was so incredibly [[DOPEY]],that it made me laugh at him for a moment. I wonder why i waste my time spitting on that shame-of-a-movie... It won't get worse (because it is not possible) :D --------------------------------------------- Result 459 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[really]] like this movie. Bozz is an ultra-cool, not to be intimidated soldier who does not want to go to war. His persona is similar in a way to Yossarian in Catch-22, Joseph Heller's classic novel about men and war. This film, however, is not set in a war zone, but in a pre-war combat prep training. This [[wonderful]] [[film]] is all about the sickening realization that the Vietnam war was a mistake and those men who were pegged to be sacrificed for a losing cause.

Colin Farrell is brilliant as Bozz, a soldier who showed as much genuine love and compassion for his fellow soldier as he did disdain and irreverence for the establishment that was trying to kill him. Bozz is totally cool and non-plussed, testing and tweaking his military superiors, getting their goat at every opportunity. He is a Jesus Christ figure with a psychology degree, "saving" his fellow soldiers and showing the ones in genuine need, the way out of this man's army.

The acting and action is crisp and believable and as a "Sleeper", Tigerland goes down with Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket as one of the top three Vietnam films in my opinion.

FIVE STARS, a top pick. I [[truthfully]] like this movie. Bozz is an ultra-cool, not to be intimidated soldier who does not want to go to war. His persona is similar in a way to Yossarian in Catch-22, Joseph Heller's classic novel about men and war. This film, however, is not set in a war zone, but in a pre-war combat prep training. This [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] is all about the sickening realization that the Vietnam war was a mistake and those men who were pegged to be sacrificed for a losing cause.

Colin Farrell is brilliant as Bozz, a soldier who showed as much genuine love and compassion for his fellow soldier as he did disdain and irreverence for the establishment that was trying to kill him. Bozz is totally cool and non-plussed, testing and tweaking his military superiors, getting their goat at every opportunity. He is a Jesus Christ figure with a psychology degree, "saving" his fellow soldiers and showing the ones in genuine need, the way out of this man's army.

The acting and action is crisp and believable and as a "Sleeper", Tigerland goes down with Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket as one of the top three Vietnam films in my opinion.

FIVE STARS, a top pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] hello. i just watched this movie earlier [[today]] for the 14th time in 3 days. i am a history teacher that has wayyyyy too much time on my hands. i need a life. i [[found]] the movie containing a striking resemblance to broke back mountain. i also found that i look a lot like jean Lafitte if he were white. also, my [[favorite]] line in the entire movie was from Mr. Petey--"this baby can shoot a chipmunk's eye from 300 yards!!" oh, and my favorite scene in the movie was when the British were coming in, and the one drummer who was so devoted to his work, and he drummed till the death, as if that drum would end the war altogether....but it wouldn't. well, thats all i would like to say about this movie. OH, one more thing..bonnie brown is an insane physco bipolar mood swinging BEEYOTCH. that is all. hello. i just watched this movie earlier [[yesterday]] for the 14th time in 3 days. i am a history teacher that has wayyyyy too much time on my hands. i need a life. i [[detected]] the movie containing a striking resemblance to broke back mountain. i also found that i look a lot like jean Lafitte if he were white. also, my [[preferable]] line in the entire movie was from Mr. Petey--"this baby can shoot a chipmunk's eye from 300 yards!!" oh, and my favorite scene in the movie was when the British were coming in, and the one drummer who was so devoted to his work, and he drummed till the death, as if that drum would end the war altogether....but it wouldn't. well, thats all i would like to say about this movie. OH, one more thing..bonnie brown is an insane physco bipolar mood swinging BEEYOTCH. that is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 461 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] OK, the [[portrayal]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[WRONG]]. I do [[agree]] that [[Elvis]] [[looks]] rather [[good]] here, but [[yeah]], his skin [[color]] does seem to change during the [[movie]]. I was [[thinking]], OK,...he was never THAT tan in [[real]] life. It's some of the most obvious brown 'indian' makeup that I have ever [[seen]]. It's as [[bad]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the old Hollywood westerns who were played by Jewish and Italian American actors and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but typically lame story and mediocre songs, like in all of Elvis' later films. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him tied down to long term movie contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep thinking 'thank God' that Elvis stopped making movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character actors Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this movie, though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is absolutely AWFUL. It's The worst of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was Mr. Meredith doing this one just for the money or what? I do love certain Elvis movies, though. For example: 'Love Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', 'Viva Las Vegas'. I can even stand to watch his movie with future TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'Change Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

Oh well, at least Elvis made a FEW good films, but the mediocre and bad ones overwhelm the decent and good ones.

I'll always love ELVIS! Thank you, Thank you very much! OK, the [[depiction]] of the stereotyped 'indians' in this story is just plain [[INACCURATE]]. I do [[concur]] that [[Presley]] [[seem]] rather [[alright]] here, but [[yep]], his skin [[colors]] does seem to change during the [[film]]. I was [[thought]], OK,...he was never THAT tan in [[genuine]] life. It's some of the most obvious brown 'indian' makeup that I have ever [[noticed]]. It's as [[negative]] as the 'indians' on 'F-Troop' and the old Hollywood westerns who were played by Jewish and Italian American actors and not real Native Americans!

This movie is o.k., but typically lame story and mediocre songs, like in all of Elvis' later films. He just did them because Colonel Parker had him tied down to long term movie contacts to squeeze as much money out of Elvis as possible! I keep thinking 'thank God' that Elvis stopped making movies forever not long after this movie came out. It is cool to see character actors Joan Blondell, Katy Jurado, L.Q. Jones, Henry Jones and Burgess Meredith in this movie, though.

Burgess Meredith's 'indian' makeup is absolutely AWFUL. It's The worst of the bunch for sure. What were the filmmakers thinking? Was Mr. Meredith doing this one just for the money or what? I do love certain Elvis movies, though. For example: 'Love Me Tender', 'Jailhouse Rock', 'Viva Las Vegas'. I can even stand to watch his movie with future TV co-stars Mary Tyler Moore and Ed Asner,'Change Of Habit' in which Elvis plays an inner-city doctor.

Oh well, at least Elvis made a FEW good films, but the mediocre and bad ones overwhelm the decent and good ones.

I'll always love ELVIS! Thank you, Thank you very much! --------------------------------------------- Result 462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Though]] the [[story]] is [[essentially]] [[routine]], and the "[[surprise]]" [[ending]] is nothing but a [[bad]] [[joke]] on the audience, you can [[see]] what [[attracted]] these [[good]] [[actors]] to the [[project]] - it [[offers]] them the [[kind]] of [[roles]] in which [[good]] [[actors]] can [[shine]], and [[shine]] they do. The film is impeccably [[made]] - for its time. It was remade in 2000 as "Under [[Suspicion]]" and if you only [[want]] to see one [[version]] of the [[story]] (that's all it [[deserves]], really), I [[recommend]] the latter one, with Hopkins' up-to-date direction and the more explicit references to plot points that the [[original]] could only [[hint]] at. The [[ending]], [[however]], [[still]] blows. (**1/2) [[If]] the [[storytelling]] is [[broadly]] [[habitual]], and the "[[amazement]]" [[terminated]] is nothing but a [[horrid]] [[travesty]] on the audience, you can [[consults]] what [[attracts]] these [[buena]] [[actresses]] to the [[projects]] - it [[affords]] them the [[types]] of [[functions]] in which [[buena]] [[actresses]] can [[glisten]], and [[glisten]] they do. The film is impeccably [[introduced]] - for its time. It was remade in 2000 as "Under [[Distrust]]" and if you only [[wish]] to see one [[stepping]] of the [[history]] (that's all it [[merits]], really), I [[recommendations]] the latter one, with Hopkins' up-to-date direction and the more explicit references to plot points that the [[initials]] could only [[allusion]] at. The [[terminated]], [[nevertheless]], [[nonetheless]] blows. (**1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] One of the [[best]] true-crime movies ever made and very faithful to Truman Capote's [[book]] which invented the true-crime novel genre. Haunting Quincy Jones musical score and terrific acting by Scott Wilson and Robert Blake as Dick and Perry, the killers. Why Wilson didn't go on to be a big star after this [[movie]] is a mystery to me.

The black and white cinematography and editing in this movie are [[top]] notch. The re-creation of the murders is [[frightening]] and since it [[leaves]] the actual [[murders]] to your [[imagination]], even more [[scary]] than if they had shown the shotgun [[going]] off. The [[movie]] was [[filmed]] in the [[actual]] Clutter house which had been sold to another [[person]] after the murders. The movie has a very documentary feel---besides the scenes at the actual Clutter [[home]] other scenes were filmed at the gas stations and stores the killers actually went to. Nancy Clutter's beloved [[horse]], [[Babe]], is even in the movie. Will Geer has a great turn as the [[prosecutor]] in the short trial scene which is not only filmed in the [[actual]] [[courtroom]] but has several of the [[real]] Clutter [[murder]] jurors [[portraying]] themselves as the jury for the movie.

This is a [[solid]] movie, [[scary]] [[every]] time you see it. One of the [[optimum]] true-crime movies ever made and very faithful to Truman Capote's [[books]] which invented the true-crime novel genre. Haunting Quincy Jones musical score and terrific acting by Scott Wilson and Robert Blake as Dick and Perry, the killers. Why Wilson didn't go on to be a big star after this [[cinematographic]] is a mystery to me.

The black and white cinematography and editing in this movie are [[supreme]] notch. The re-creation of the murders is [[appalling]] and since it [[departs]] the actual [[assassinate]] to your [[creativity]], even more [[dreadful]] than if they had shown the shotgun [[go]] off. The [[filmmaking]] was [[videotaped]] in the [[real]] Clutter house which had been sold to another [[someone]] after the murders. The movie has a very documentary feel---besides the scenes at the actual Clutter [[domicile]] other scenes were filmed at the gas stations and stores the killers actually went to. Nancy Clutter's beloved [[horses]], [[Babies]], is even in the movie. Will Geer has a great turn as the [[prosecutors]] in the short trial scene which is not only filmed in the [[real]] [[salle]] but has several of the [[veritable]] Clutter [[homicide]] jurors [[describing]] themselves as the jury for the movie.

This is a [[solids]] movie, [[terrible]] [[any]] time you see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I agree with the above comment, I [[love]] the realism in this, and in many movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers seem to forget that. They take an every day problem and create a hugely dramatic scene and then come the [[end]] of the movie everything is perfect again, which I dislike because its not [[reality]]. Not meaning to [[say]] things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and come the end of the movie everything is perfect again. When people have eating disorders people don't just admit it and want to get better, and then life is peachy, it takes time, and I like how in this movie we grow with the characters, we go through the difficulties with them, getting better and worse, because it is a very important part of the movie. It gets into the minds of people with eating disorders, and [[shows]] the complications and pain, in a very realistic way, and I loved that. I also love how it [[shows]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from eating disorders, it is [[scary]] to see how people react when they find out, especially if they approve of it. I thought this movie was very [[touching]] and beautiful and well told, and defiantly one of my [[favourites]]. I agree with the above comment, I [[iove]] the realism in this, and in many movies (not just movies on eating disorders) the producers seem to forget that. They take an every day problem and create a hugely dramatic scene and then come the [[ceases]] of the movie everything is perfect again, which I dislike because its not [[realism]]. Not meaning to [[says]] things can't get better, and not meaning to say things don't in this movie, but it doesn't spend most of the movie creating all these problems, and come the end of the movie everything is perfect again. When people have eating disorders people don't just admit it and want to get better, and then life is peachy, it takes time, and I like how in this movie we grow with the characters, we go through the difficulties with them, getting better and worse, because it is a very important part of the movie. It gets into the minds of people with eating disorders, and [[exhibit]] the complications and pain, in a very realistic way, and I loved that. I also love how it [[showings]] The secrecy and betrayal people feel when suffering from eating disorders, it is [[spooky]] to see how people react when they find out, especially if they approve of it. I thought this movie was very [[touches]] and beautiful and well told, and defiantly one of my [[favorites]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] this movie had a lot of blood in it when the sabretooth attack it [[also]] i loved it when that guy and the women were having some good time and then the sabretooth attacked the women and ate her stomach and took the liver out. that was the best and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its [[front]] legs hilarious to make this movie better more action and less talking if you know what i mean and also please please people who [[made]] this movie don't make anothwer movie like this movies [[ending]] cause it was [[terrible]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that women in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending always there's 1 enemy left! OK damn it this movie [[sucks]] i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya this movie had a lot of blood in it when the sabretooth attack it [[further]] i loved it when that guy and the women were having some good time and then the sabretooth attacked the women and ate her stomach and took the liver out. that was the best and the 1ton sabretooth walking on its [[newsweek]] legs hilarious to make this movie better more action and less talking if you know what i mean and also please please people who [[effected]] this movie don't make anothwer movie like this movies [[ceases]] cause it was [[scary]] 1 sabretooth alive and killed that women in the end this movie reminds me of the grudges ending always there's 1 enemy left! OK damn it this movie [[stinks]] i can 't believe it i loved it when my lil bro got freaked from the attacks stomach takin out and the blood ya --------------------------------------------- Result 466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I remembered [[seeing]] this movie when i was a kid one day on the wonderful world of [[Disney]]. This movie has been in my memory for over 30 years and I have been looking for it. I would have to say that out of all the kids movies I saw back then,, this one [[stuck]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The story and [[images]] of this movie have been burned into my memory. To this day, I never did see it after that day back in the 70s, in [[fact]], I never remembered the title until an internet search earlier today disclosed it to me. I loved it and want my kids to see it.Does anybody know where I can find it? I remembered [[see]] this movie when i was a kid one day on the wonderful world of [[Disneyland]]. This movie has been in my memory for over 30 years and I have been looking for it. I would have to say that out of all the kids movies I saw back then,, this one [[constipated]] out more than all of them and after only seeing it once, I really hoped I would get to see it again. The story and [[visuals]] of this movie have been burned into my memory. To this day, I never did see it after that day back in the 70s, in [[facto]], I never remembered the title until an internet search earlier today disclosed it to me. I loved it and want my kids to see it.Does anybody know where I can find it? --------------------------------------------- Result 467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have never [[seen]] [[anything]] as awful as this [[movie]] for quite some [[time]]. The movie was [[boring]], long long and [[awful]] [[plot]]. The special [[effects]] [[sucks]] like hell - It's like watching a [[movie]] back in 1999. It's a [[total]] [[waste]] of an [[hour]] and a half of my [[time]]. [[Matthew]] Settle's performance was quite [[bad]]. I saw him in Band of Brothers playing Lt.Speirs, he wasn't THAT [[bad]]. [[In]] [[fact]] not bad at all. But in this [[film]], his acting wasn't [[convincing]] enough, it was [[quite]] [[bad]] and there wasn't any [[chemistry]] between the rest of the crew either. Plus, his eyes seems empty like he's not feeling it. It surprised me, really, because he was good in Band of Brothers.

[[Anyway]], don't [[even]] bother to watch this movie. It's a big big BIG waste of time. Even if you had to kill an hour or two, get something else to do besides watching this movie. Trust me, you'll [[regret]] it! I have never [[noticed]] [[nothing]] as awful as this [[cinematography]] for quite some [[times]]. The movie was [[bored]], long long and [[scary]] [[intrigue]]. The special [[impacts]] [[stinks]] like hell - It's like watching a [[flick]] back in 1999. It's a [[whole]] [[squander]] of an [[hours]] and a half of my [[period]]. [[Matthieu]] Settle's performance was quite [[wicked]]. I saw him in Band of Brothers playing Lt.Speirs, he wasn't THAT [[negative]]. [[Among]] [[facto]] not bad at all. But in this [[cinematography]], his acting wasn't [[persuading]] enough, it was [[perfectly]] [[mala]] and there wasn't any [[chem]] between the rest of the crew either. Plus, his eyes seems empty like he's not feeling it. It surprised me, really, because he was good in Band of Brothers.

[[Anyhoo]], don't [[yet]] bother to watch this movie. It's a big big BIG waste of time. Even if you had to kill an hour or two, get something else to do besides watching this movie. Trust me, you'll [[sorrow]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Robin [[Williams]] and [[Kurt]] Russell play guys in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[jeopardy]] by [[deciding]] (Russell somewhat reluctantly) to [[replay]] their [[heartbreaking]] tie with rival Bakersfield years after the fact. Williams is ok, but Russell is flat-out [[great]] as legendary Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could live without this [[rematch]]. Film is worth [[watching]] just to see the famed Remo in action. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. Robin [[William]] and [[Curt]] Russell play guys in their 30's who put their marraiges in [[threats]] by [[determining]] (Russell somewhat reluctantly) to [[playback]] their [[heartrending]] tie with rival Bakersfield years after the fact. Williams is ok, but Russell is flat-out [[super]] as legendary Taft quarterback Remo Hightower. Holly Palance does a nice and attractive turn as Williams' wife, who could live without this [[contrast]]. Film is worth [[staring]] just to see the famed Remo in action. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Such great actors such a disappointment. Marlon Brando plays and awful character, the movie is not funny at all, a subconscious message can be seen "IT IS A DAMN CRAP!!!", "IT SUUCKS SO BADLY!!", "THROW YOUR TV THROUGH WINDOW", and so on. It is simply [[disgusting]] and irksome. In addition to foolish plot, sense of humor, there is something else. The way the rooms are decorated, the colors. It makes me [[sick]], everything is so colourful that it might cause epilepsy. Usually I do not care about the decoration in movie but this from "Free Money" made me angry. Avoid at all costs! "Free Money" - probably for Charlie Sheen, Sutherland and Brando, but a viewer gets nothing! One watches it at cost of sanity. Such great actors such a disappointment. Marlon Brando plays and awful character, the movie is not funny at all, a subconscious message can be seen "IT IS A DAMN CRAP!!!", "IT SUUCKS SO BADLY!!", "THROW YOUR TV THROUGH WINDOW", and so on. It is simply [[sickening]] and irksome. In addition to foolish plot, sense of humor, there is something else. The way the rooms are decorated, the colors. It makes me [[unwell]], everything is so colourful that it might cause epilepsy. Usually I do not care about the decoration in movie but this from "Free Money" made me angry. Avoid at all costs! "Free Money" - probably for Charlie Sheen, Sutherland and Brando, but a viewer gets nothing! One watches it at cost of sanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] Late one night on a desolate road, in an empty saloon Martin Sheen spins a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola May have incurred the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film featuring their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[glad]] he did it! No character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I thought it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic programmers of the thirties and forties. Though guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it hard for me to dislike.

The whole production is a bit odd though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more palatable. Late one night on a desolate road, in an empty saloon Martin Sheen spins a yarn for Robert Carradine of Hopalong Cassidy and friends tracking a group of murderous cattle rustlers, who've killed a few men and kidnapped Cassidy's girl.

Writer/director Christopher Coppola May have incurred the wrath of William Boyd purists by daring to make a modern low budget film featuring their beloved Hoppy, but I'm [[happier]] he did it! No character should be so tied to an an actor that no one else ever be allowed to play him or her again!

I thought it was good fun and an interesting updating of the classic programmers of the thirties and forties. Though guilty of some bad acting, this is earnest enough and unpretentious, making it hard for me to dislike.

The whole production is a bit odd though, but I really enjoyed the scenes between Sheen and Carridine. The fact that we're watching a story within a story makes the oddness and exaggerations more palatable. --------------------------------------------- Result 471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): Well [[told]] account of farmers in China and their rise to prominence and struggles with what Mother nature throws at them. This movie is based on an award winning novel and chronicles a family starting with the son's arranged marriage to a slave girl. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest despite a [[somewhat]] hammy performance by the lead played by Paul Muni. It chronicles , Wong Long(the character played by Muni) and how he works the land, buys more land, eventually becomes very rich but then returns to the land where he originally started. The relationship between him and his wife, played by Luise Rainer, is the main thread of the story(besides the land itself) and despite the obvious non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good job of displaying the country and it's people. It's obvious that MGM used it's money to create a really good epic with this one in an era where they could probably afford it. The scene with the locusts is done exceedingly well and the rest of th movie really looks good warranting the Best Cinematography award at the Oscars in that year. The definitive definition of an epic is what this story is and it's pulled off pretty well. 1st watched 8/29/2009 - 7 out of 10 (Dir-Sidney Franklin): Well [[say]] account of farmers in China and their rise to prominence and struggles with what Mother nature throws at them. This movie is based on an award winning novel and chronicles a family starting with the son's arranged marriage to a slave girl. The movie does a good job of keeping your interest despite a [[rather]] hammy performance by the lead played by Paul Muni. It chronicles , Wong Long(the character played by Muni) and how he works the land, buys more land, eventually becomes very rich but then returns to the land where he originally started. The relationship between him and his wife, played by Luise Rainer, is the main thread of the story(besides the land itself) and despite the obvious non-Chinese actors it does a pretty good job of displaying the country and it's people. It's obvious that MGM used it's money to create a really good epic with this one in an era where they could probably afford it. The scene with the locusts is done exceedingly well and the rest of th movie really looks good warranting the Best Cinematography award at the Oscars in that year. The definitive definition of an epic is what this story is and it's pulled off pretty well. --------------------------------------------- Result 472 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] There's no getting around it-- this movie is [[terrible]]. I've seen the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial origins, but it's still just godawful. However, Peter Sellers' genius [[still]] shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. There's no getting around it-- this movie is [[spooky]]. I've seen the old Christopher Lee/Fu Manchu movies, I'm familiar with the characters and it's serial origins, but it's still just godawful. However, Peter Sellers' genius [[nevertheless]] shines through with his portrayal of Nayland Smith, with echoes of sadness, tragedy, and strength simmering through a stoic facade; it's a performance I place on par with Peter Cushing's portrayal of Van Helsing but done in a tenth of the cumulative screen time of all Cushing's "Dracula" movies. If the movie was done in a more serio-comic vein like BUBBA HO-TEP by way of the 1960's AVENGERS TV show, this could've been something special. If you're a Fu Manchu or Peter Sellers completest, this is something you need to see, but it's a pass for anyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] This is a [[great]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are [[excellent]] too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks This is a [[whopping]] movie! Most of us have seen Jurassic Park, where the Chaos Theory is summarized by telling about a butterfly's wings, causing a tornado on the other side of the planet. Well, Bug is all about that (or at least something, don't worry this is no spoiler) I'm definitely not a religious type and don't believe in pre-destined stuff, fate, etc, but this movie surely makes you wonder if coincidence really exists...

further more, the acting and camera are [[glamorous]] too, another prove that it's still possible to make a good movie without a zillion bucks --------------------------------------------- Result 474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] The [[world]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New York City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. [[Overpopulation]], air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this [[particular]] food stuff really made of? That question is at the [[heart]] of this admittedly somewhat dated but still [[intriguing]] [[film]], based on Harry Harrison's 1966 novel "Make Room! Make Room!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly [[cantankerous]] but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the [[world]] used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that part has become immortalized into cinematic [[history]].

Under the very professional guiding hand of [[director]] Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[FANTASTIC]] [[VOYAGE]]), SOYLENT [[GREEN]] is a fairly grim but thought-provoking [[look]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for [[filming]] as far back as 1968, after he had struck gold in the sci-fi genre with PLANET OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. The [[globe]] of the 1973 sci-fi drama SOYLENT GREEN is what we could be seeing if we aren't careful. It is a world in which New York City's population has topped the 40 million mark in the year 2022. [[Crowding]], air pollution, year-long heat waves, and food shortages are the rule. The only hope comes from a food product called Soylent Green. But what is this [[especial]] food stuff really made of? That question is at the [[nub]] of this admittedly somewhat dated but still [[mesmerizing]] [[cinematography]], based on Harry Harrison's 1966 novel "Make Room! Make Room!" Charlton Heston stars as Thorne, an NYPD detective who comes across the murder of a top corporate executive (Joseph Cotten). As it turns out, Cotten was on the board of directors of the Soylent Corporation, the people responsible for all those food stuffs that the people have to consume in lieu of the real thing. Heston believes that this wasn't just a garden-variety murder, that Cotten was bumped off for a reason. He gets a lot of help from his slightly [[irascible]] but very astute "book" (Edward G. Robinson, in his 101st and final cinematic appearance), and a few timely reminders of what the [[worldwide]] used to be like. What Robinson finds out about Soylent Green shocks him beyond all imagination; but before he can tell Heston all of what he knows, he has himself euthanized. And when Heston does indeed find out the secret of Soylent Green...well, that part has become immortalized into cinematic [[stories]].

Under the very professional guiding hand of [[headmaster]] Richard Fleischer (THE BOSTON STRANGLER; [[FUNKY]] [[TRIPS]]), SOYLENT [[ARCHER]] is a fairly grim but thought-provoking [[glance]] at a Dystopian future that humanity might be living if we don't curb our tendency to strip our planet of its natural resources. Indeed, this was a project that Heston himself had had in mind for [[photographing]] as far back as 1968, after he had struck gold in the sci-fi genre with PLANET OF THE APES--a fact that probably gets lost whenever his ultra-conservative political philosophy comes up in conversation (after all, SOYLENT GREEN is hardly a tract for unrestrained capitalism). Robinson, as always, is the consummate professional in his last role; the sequence where he is euthanized (as he looks at video of the world from a better era, set to the music of Tchaikovsky, Beethoven, and Grieg) is quite simply heartbreaking. The film also benefits from solid supporting help from Chuck Connors (as a very convincing heavy), Brock Peters (as Heston's superior), and Leigh Taylor-Young as the woman who tries to help Heston in his inquiries.

It must seem easy these days to dismiss SOYLENT GREEN for being dated. But those who do it ought to think twice; for this film's world may end up becoming ours in actuality if we don't watch what we do with what we have today. --------------------------------------------- Result 475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] When Ritchie [[first]] burst on to movie scene his films were [[hailed]] as [[funny]], witty, well directed and original. If one could compare the [[hype]] he had generated with his first two attempts and the almost universal loathing his last two outings have created one should consider - has Ritchie been found out? Is he really that talented? Does he really have any genuine original ideas? Or is he simply a pretentious and egotistical [[director]] who really [[wants]] to be Fincher, Tarantino and Leone all rolled into one [[colossal]] and disorganised [[heap]]? After watching [[Revolver]] one could be excused for thinking were did it all go wrong? What happened to his great sense of humour? Where did he get all these mixed and convoluted ideas from? Revolver tries to be clever, philosophical and succinct, it tries to be an intelligent psychoanalysis, it tries to be an intricate and complicated thriller. Ritchie does make a gargantuan effort to fulfil all these many objectives and invests great chunks of a script into existential musings and numerous plot twists. However, in the end all it serves is to construct a severely disjointed, unstructured and ultimately unfriendly film to the audience. Its plagiarism is so sinful and blatant that although Ritchie does at least attempt to give his own spin he should be punished for even trying to pass it off as his own work. So what the audience gets ultimately is a terrible screenplay intertwined with many pretentious oneliners and clumsy setpieces.

Revolver is ultimately an unoriginal and bland movie that has stolen countless themes from masterpieces like Fight Club, Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction. It aims high, but inevitably shots blanks aplenty.

Revolver deserves to be lambasted, it is a truly [[poor]] film masquerading as a wannabe masterpiece from a wannabe auteur. However, it falls flat on its farcical face and just fails at everything it wants to be and achieve. When Ritchie [[frst]] burst on to movie scene his films were [[welcomed]] as [[hilarious]], witty, well directed and original. If one could compare the [[threshing]] he had generated with his first two attempts and the almost universal loathing his last two outings have created one should consider - has Ritchie been found out? Is he really that talented? Does he really have any genuine original ideas? Or is he simply a pretentious and egotistical [[headmaster]] who really [[wanted]] to be Fincher, Tarantino and Leone all rolled into one [[jumbo]] and disorganised [[piling]]? After watching [[Pistol]] one could be excused for thinking were did it all go wrong? What happened to his great sense of humour? Where did he get all these mixed and convoluted ideas from? Revolver tries to be clever, philosophical and succinct, it tries to be an intelligent psychoanalysis, it tries to be an intricate and complicated thriller. Ritchie does make a gargantuan effort to fulfil all these many objectives and invests great chunks of a script into existential musings and numerous plot twists. However, in the end all it serves is to construct a severely disjointed, unstructured and ultimately unfriendly film to the audience. Its plagiarism is so sinful and blatant that although Ritchie does at least attempt to give his own spin he should be punished for even trying to pass it off as his own work. So what the audience gets ultimately is a terrible screenplay intertwined with many pretentious oneliners and clumsy setpieces.

Revolver is ultimately an unoriginal and bland movie that has stolen countless themes from masterpieces like Fight Club, Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction. It aims high, but inevitably shots blanks aplenty.

Revolver deserves to be lambasted, it is a truly [[pauper]] film masquerading as a wannabe masterpiece from a wannabe auteur. However, it falls flat on its farcical face and just fails at everything it wants to be and achieve. --------------------------------------------- Result 476 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] 'How To Lose Friends & [[Alienate]] People' is a [[superb]] [[film]]. A hilarious [[film]] from start to [[end]]. A lovely [[entertainer]]. Enjoyed it. Thumps Up!

Performances: Jason is fantastic. He's a [[treat]] to watch him from start to end. [[Jeff]] [[Bridges]] is excellent as the [[boss]]. He's a Legend. Megan [[Fox]] looks amazingly hot, and deliver a good performance. but dude, She's so [[hot]] [[man]]! Anderson is [[delightful]]. She doesn't look [[old]] at all, still [[hot]] indeed. Kristan Dunst [[looks]] lovely and does a pretty good job. Others are [[also]] pretty good.

'How To Lose Friends & [[Alienate]] People' is a excellent entertainer. Don't [[miss]] this flick! 'How To Lose Friends & [[Dispose]] People' is a [[magnifique]] [[flick]]. A hilarious [[flick]] from start to [[termination]]. A lovely [[entertainers]]. Enjoyed it. Thumps Up!

Performances: Jason is fantastic. He's a [[address]] to watch him from start to end. [[Jeffery]] [[Pont]] is excellent as the [[chef]]. He's a Legend. Megan [[Foxes]] looks amazingly hot, and deliver a good performance. but dude, She's so [[sexier]] [[bloke]]! Anderson is [[sumptuous]]. She doesn't look [[elderly]] at all, still [[sexier]] indeed. Kristan Dunst [[seems]] lovely and does a pretty good job. Others are [[additionally]] pretty good.

'How To Lose Friends & [[Dispose]] People' is a excellent entertainer. Don't [[mademoiselle]] this flick! --------------------------------------------- Result 477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I just [[recently]] [[watched]] this 1954 movie starring [[Vincent]] [[Price]] for the [[first]] time on Turner Classic Movies. Price portrays Don Gallico, a magician/inventor who is driven to murder when his boss steals several of his magical inventions (and also his wife, portrayed in a brief role by the lovely Eva Gabor). Even [[though]] [[Price]] is a [[murderer]], I actually [[found]] myself rooting for him, he is a [[sympathetic]] [[character]] who is driven mad by the greedy people around him who keep taking advantage of him.

Although this [[movie]] doesn't have the "horror" factor of some of his more [[famous]] [[roles]] (such as my favorite, "House of Wax") it nonetheless has enough going for it to keep the viewers interest.

This is a [[must]] for Vincent Price [[fans]]. I just [[freshly]] [[saw]] this 1954 movie starring [[Tome]] [[Prizes]] for the [[frst]] time on Turner Classic Movies. Price portrays Don Gallico, a magician/inventor who is driven to murder when his boss steals several of his magical inventions (and also his wife, portrayed in a brief role by the lovely Eva Gabor). Even [[despite]] [[Priced]] is a [[killer]], I actually [[detected]] myself rooting for him, he is a [[congenial]] [[personage]] who is driven mad by the greedy people around him who keep taking advantage of him.

Although this [[flick]] doesn't have the "horror" factor of some of his more [[acclaimed]] [[functions]] (such as my favorite, "House of Wax") it nonetheless has enough going for it to keep the viewers interest.

This is a [[should]] for Vincent Price [[amateurs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Nintendo]]!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[How]] could you do this to me? I can't [[believe]] it...this movie is [[actually]] [[worse]] than the first one. I went to see this at the theatre with my brother because my mother forced me to tag along....oh [[God]]...where do I even [[begin]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The ending REALLY SUCKED. If you liked this [[movie]], YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[said]] this was the greatest movie ever, you are a TOOL, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. This isn't a movie for anyone but crack-addled ten-year olds with Game Boys who think Pikachu is God. I'm still cry to this day thinking about that horrible turd of a movie....and then there was Pikachu's Adventure...don't even get me started on that horrible mess of a film. It is, in all truth, one of the most boring experiences of my entire life. Don't go watch this at any costs.

Bottom Line: Go out, find every copy of this movie that you can, and burn it. Burn them all, and then proceed to rent a GOOD movie, like Aliens...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the Future! [[Wii]]!!! YOU #%$@ERS!!! [[Mode]] could you do this to me? I can't [[believing]] it...this movie is [[indeed]] [[pire]] than the first one. I went to see this at the theatre with my brother because my mother forced me to tag along....oh [[Seigneur]]...where do I even [[embark]]? The plot SUCKED. The voice acting SUCKED. The animation SUCKED. The ending REALLY SUCKED. If you liked this [[film]], YOU SUCK TOO. And to Futuramafan1987, who [[indicated]] this was the greatest movie ever, you are a TOOL, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. This isn't a movie for anyone but crack-addled ten-year olds with Game Boys who think Pikachu is God. I'm still cry to this day thinking about that horrible turd of a movie....and then there was Pikachu's Adventure...don't even get me started on that horrible mess of a film. It is, in all truth, one of the most boring experiences of my entire life. Don't go watch this at any costs.

Bottom Line: Go out, find every copy of this movie that you can, and burn it. Burn them all, and then proceed to rent a GOOD movie, like Aliens...or Bowling For Columbine...or even Back to the Future! --------------------------------------------- Result 479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] If I had just seen the pilot of this [[show]] I [[would]] have rated it a 10. I was [[immediately]] [[hooked]] on this [[gorgeous]] new [[world]]. [[Subsequent]] [[episodes]] have not [[completely]] lived up to the promise, but I will [[keep]] [[watching]] and hope that it keeps [[getting]] better. The production [[values]] are [[incredible]] and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[mind]] that it doesn't seem to [[align]] perfectly with BSG because I am so intrigued by the premise and let's face it, they are two different shows. I'm [[thrilled]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[life]] (if only weekly) as I've [[missed]] them both. This is a show that requires a [[bit]] of thought from its audience and that is [[always]] a [[good]] thing. You kind of have to wrap your head around certain aspects of the show; [[things]] are not always as they seem and certainly there are shades of gray, both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, [[characters]] and, of course, the various virtual worlds. We all know how it ends, but the [[journey]] is looking to be quite a ride. If I had just seen the pilot of this [[display]] I [[ought]] have rated it a 10. I was [[expeditiously]] [[hook]] on this [[super]] new [[monde]]. [[Posterior]] [[spells]] have not [[fully]] lived up to the promise, but I will [[conserving]] [[staring]] and hope that it keeps [[obtaining]] better. The production [[value]] are [[unimaginable]] and the acting is first-rate. I don't [[intellect]] that it doesn't seem to [[aligned]] perfectly with BSG because I am so intrigued by the premise and let's face it, they are two different shows. I'm [[overjoyed]] that both Esai Morales and one of my all-time faves, Eric Stoltz, are back in my [[living]] (if only weekly) as I've [[flunked]] them both. This is a show that requires a [[bitten]] of thought from its audience and that is [[incessantly]] a [[buena]] thing. You kind of have to wrap your head around certain aspects of the show; [[items]] are not always as they seem and certainly there are shades of gray, both literally and figuratively, in plot lines, [[hallmarks]] and, of course, the various virtual worlds. We all know how it ends, but the [[itinerary]] is looking to be quite a ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Red Eye is a [[good]] little thriller to watch on a Saturday night. [[Intense]] acting, great villain and unexpected action.

Some might not want to see this [[movie]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the movie is on a plane and just talking. Don't worry they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 movie [[seems]] to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But surely [[enough]] he has [[fit]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those actors the film would have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 days Later. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was great. Just when your thinking its going to get boring they throw a twist at you. Luckily this isn't a long movie and doesn't feel like it either. Much better then the other flight movie Flight Plan.

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I recommend. Not too long and not too shabby.

8/10 Red Eye is a [[alright]] little thriller to watch on a Saturday night. [[Intensive]] acting, great villain and unexpected action.

Some might not want to see this [[filmmaking]] because it goes for a very short 85 Min's and 88% of the movie is on a plane and just talking. Don't worry they pull it off very well with the smart and witty dialog.

A PG-13 movie [[looks]] to be new grounds for director Wes Craven. But surely [[satisfactorily]] he has [[fitted]] as much violence as he possibly can into this thriller.

This movies strongest point is its cast. This film needed good actors to deliver the dialog and thrills. If they didn't have those actors the film would have been lost and boring. We had Rachel McAdams from Mean Girls and Wedding Crashers. Cillian Murphy from Batman Begins and 28 days Later. Rounding off this cast is Brian Cox from X-men 2.

The pacing in this film was great. Just when your thinking its going to get boring they throw a twist at you. Luckily this isn't a long movie and doesn't feel like it either. Much better then the other flight movie Flight Plan.

Here is my Flight Plan comment: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408790/usercomments-578

I recommend. Not too long and not too shabby.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Sometimes laughter in the middle of a horror film is a signal of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of Satan coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 cult classic The Wicker Man however, it made me [[think]] that this new Wickerman is about as scary as the South Park character, Scuzzlebut, the friendly forest monster with TV's Patrick Duffy for a leg and a celery stalk for an arm who's favorite hobby is weaving wicker baskets.

3 years ago a friend of mine in Hollywood told me that he heard that Nicolas Cage was going to do a remake of the film. I started laughing and my friend (Keith) got mad at me touting Nicolas Cage as a great actor. I just didn't think that he could pull it off and unfortunately for moviegoers I was right. Gone is the realness, the outstanding original music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. Instead we have horror movie clichés, affected acting and changes to the storyline that make any believability fall apart. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been inundated with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. Sometimes laughter in the middle of a horror film is a signal of its greatness. I remember the nervous laughter from the audience in the re-release of The Excorcist… really nervous laughter. It punctuated just how freaked out we all were watching the voice of Satan coming out of a 12 year old girl. In the case of the 2006 remake of the 1972 cult classic The Wicker Man however, it made me [[believe]] that this new Wickerman is about as scary as the South Park character, Scuzzlebut, the friendly forest monster with TV's Patrick Duffy for a leg and a celery stalk for an arm who's favorite hobby is weaving wicker baskets.

3 years ago a friend of mine in Hollywood told me that he heard that Nicolas Cage was going to do a remake of the film. I started laughing and my friend (Keith) got mad at me touting Nicolas Cage as a great actor. I just didn't think that he could pull it off and unfortunately for moviegoers I was right. Gone is the realness, the outstanding original music, the originality, the creepiness and the wonderfully powerful dialogue. Instead we have horror movie clichés, affected acting and changes to the storyline that make any believability fall apart. Like many of the countless Hollywood remakes we have been inundated with lately this feels like we are watching 4th graders on a playground "playing Wickerman".

The original film takes place on a remote Scottish Isle where a Scottish police officer is lured there to find a missing young girl named Rowan Morrison. In the new spin a California cop (Cage) is lured to an island of the coast of Washington state by his ex-girlfriend to find her missing daughter. She sends a photo and the missing daughter looks exactly like a young girl he tried to save in a fiery crash not long ago. The crash still haunts him in part because the girl's body was never found. Yet even after he gets a letter with her picture in it that connection is completely cast aside as he heads north, alone, to help his ex-girlfriend find her daughter. He arrives to find an island full of actors pretending to be the descendants of Wiccans, many of whom seem like they didn't get call backs for roles in The Village. And like The Village it isn't long before you realize there is nothing to be afraid of here. Not even the cloudy eyed blind sisters who speak in unison.

I think that the opportunity in Hollywood to make great amounts of money on a film often comes at great expense to the artistry. I think someone like Nicolas Cage who is in so many films these days loses touch with the magic that film can be when it gets to the point where he has a personal chef on the set preparing his snacks. We needed a bad re-make of the Wickerman like we needed yet another '9-11' movie. I'm starting to wonder if Nicolas changed his surname from Coppola because he wanted to or because he was pleaded with to do so. --------------------------------------------- Result 482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This should be a great film... Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two newspaper writers. Mike Nichols directing. Uh uh. It's dull dull dull! [[Pointless]] and predictable! Slow and unfocused!

It's a [[cookie]] cutter 'boy meets girl, boy [[marries]] girl, boy has [[affair]], girl leaves boy' [[story]]. Now [[theres]] an original [[concept]]! After [[squirming]] through two [[hours]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a [[comedy]], a romance, a tragedy or a soap opera. It was done in 1986. I'm sure all of us did things sixteen years ago that we rather would forget. I hope the damage to the reputations of Streep et al is [[beginning]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is beginning to fade. It's not that it's such a bad [[picture]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. This should be a great film... Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson co-starring as two newspaper writers. Mike Nichols directing. Uh uh. It's dull dull dull! [[Nonsensical]] and predictable! Slow and unfocused!

It's a [[crackers]] cutter 'boy meets girl, boy [[weddings]] girl, boy has [[fling]], girl leaves boy' [[tale]]. Now [[actualy]] an original [[notions]]! After [[wiggling]] through two [[hour]] (was it only two? It felt like six.)I wasn't sure whether it was a [[humour]], a romance, a tragedy or a soap opera. It was done in 1986. I'm sure all of us did things sixteen years ago that we rather would forget. I hope the damage to the reputations of Streep et al is [[outset]] to heal and that the emulsion on the master is beginning to fade. It's not that it's such a bad [[imagery]]. It's just that it's such an un-good one. --------------------------------------------- Result 483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (77%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Harold [[Pinter]] rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a man going to visit the husband of his lover and having it all go sideways. The original film starred Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this version and he's paired with Jude Law. Here the film is [[directed]] by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. Both Caine and Law are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the chemistry and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and enough of a reason to watch when the script's direction goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is crisp and sharp and often very witty and I understand why he was chosen to rewrite the play (which is updated to make use of surveillance cameras and the like).The problem is that how the script moves the characters around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his odd modern house with sliding doors and panels for no really good reason. Conversations happen repeatedly in different locations. I know Pinter has done that in his plays, but in this case it becomes tedious. Why do we need to have the pair go over and over and over the fact that Law is sleeping with Caine's wife? It would be okay if at some point Law said enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each time is the first time. The script also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of Law all that well. To begin with he's blindly angry to start so he has no chance to turn around and scare us.(Never mind a late in the game revelation that makes you wonder why he bothered) In the original we never suspected what was up. here we do and while it gives an edge it also somehow feels false since its so clear we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't see he's being set up. There are a few other instances but to say more would give away too much.

Thinking about the film in retrospect I think its a film of missed opportunities and missteps. The opportunities squandered are the chance to have better fireworks between Caine and Law. Missteps in that the choice of a garish setting and odd shifts in plot take away from the creation of a tension and a believable thriller. Instead we get some smart dialog and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work Harold [[Nunez]] rewrites Anthony Schaeffer's classic play about a man going to visit the husband of his lover and having it all go sideways. The original film starred Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine. Caine has the Olivier role in this version and he's paired with Jude Law. Here the film is [[geared]] by Kenneth Branaugh.

The acting is spectacular. Both Caine and Law are gangbusters in their respective roles. I really like the chemistry and the clashing of personalities. It's wonderful and enough of a reason to watch when the script's direction goes haywire.

Harold Pinter's dialog is crisp and sharp and often very witty and I understand why he was chosen to rewrite the play (which is updated to make use of surveillance cameras and the like).The problem is that how the script moves the characters around is awful. Michale Caine walks Law through his odd modern house with sliding doors and panels for no really good reason. Conversations happen repeatedly in different locations. I know Pinter has done that in his plays, but in this case it becomes tedious. Why do we need to have the pair go over and over and over the fact that Law is sleeping with Caine's wife? It would be okay if at some point Law said enough we've done this, but he doesn't he acts as if each time is the first time. The script also doesn't move Caine through his manipulation of Law all that well. To begin with he's blindly angry to start so he has no chance to turn around and scare us.(Never mind a late in the game revelation that makes you wonder why he bothered) In the original we never suspected what was up. here we do and while it gives an edge it also somehow feels false since its so clear we are forced to wonder why Law's Milo doesn't see he's being set up. There are a few other instances but to say more would give away too much.

Thinking about the film in retrospect I think its a film of missed opportunities and missteps. The opportunities squandered are the chance to have better fireworks between Caine and Law. Missteps in that the choice of a garish setting and odd shifts in plot take away from the creation of a tension and a believable thriller. Instead we get some smart dialog and great performances in a film that doesn't let them be real.

despite some great performances and witty dialog this is only a 4 out of 10 because the rest of the script just doesn't work --------------------------------------------- Result 484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[First]] things first: I'm not a conservative. And even though I would never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was opposed to the [[war]] in [[Iraq]] from day one. I think it's safe to say [[John]] Cusack and I would probably see eye-to-eye on politics, in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to [[talking]] about how [[great]] [[Adam]] Curtis' BBC [[docs]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a part of the choir Cusack is preaching to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the tailoring is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every intention of making an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as Robert Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the viewer, they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon.

The current state of US politics, foreign policy and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a result, tragic, pathetic and, [[regrettably]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as funny as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a hurry. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized Grosse Pointe Blank (one of his best films), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the collected works of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so obnoxious is none of the jokes or gags or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ [[Outset]] things first: I'm not a conservative. And even though I would never refer to myself as a liberal or a Democrat, I was opposed to the [[warfare]] in [[Iraqi]] from day one. I think it's safe to say [[Giovanni]] Cusack and I would probably see eye-to-eye on politics, in fact, I'm sure we'd become drinking buddies if we ever got to [[conversation]] about how [[resplendent]] [[Adams]] Curtis' BBC [[doc]] are. My point is this: don't discredit this review by thinking I'm not a part of the choir Cusack is preaching to in War, Inc. There's no question WI's politics are tailored to appeal to my demographic, but the problem is, the tailoring is substandard and the the film Cusack co- wrote, produced and stars in, fits worse than a cheap suit.

As they say "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Cusack, his co-writers, director Joshua Seftel and even the actors involved, no doubt had every intention of making an anti- war film every bit as biting and funny as Robert Altman's M*A*S*H, unfortunately for the viewer, they ended up with one as unfunny and unintelligent as Michael Moore's Canadian Bacon.

The current state of US politics, foreign policy and the war "effort" is already absurd and, as a result, tragic, pathetic and, [[sadly]] comical -- just watch The Daily Show and see for yourself. The bottom line is: you can't write material as funny as what the Bush administration provides us on a daily basis, so why try to compete?

The main problem with WI is that it feels it was put together in a hurry. To get it done, Cusack basically cannibalized Grosse Pointe Blank (one of his best films), changed the setting and crammed in a shopping list of ideas lifted from the collected works of Naomi Klein. Most of these ideas are rammed down your throat in the first twenty minutes of the film and what makes them so obnoxious is none of the jokes or gags or deliberately obvious references to Halliburton, the Neo-Cons and the US occupation of Iraq, are imaginative, clever or funny. The writers are so blinded by their own dogma they felt that by simply referencing these issues the film would be funny and subversive. The trouble is...it isn't. By now these ideas are yesterday's news and unless you've been living under or rock or are so blinded by ignorance, denial and sheer stupidity (read: a right-wing Christian), these jokes insultingly simple.

Perhaps WI would work if it was more nuanced, subversive, offensive and fattened up with detailed research/insights into the Occupation. As it is, the jokes and sight gags are all surface and are so bad, with so little finesse, subtlety or satirical wickedness, they did little more than make me groan. Homer Simpson once said "It's funny 'cause it's true" and The Daily Show proves this every night; War, Inc. however proves that just because it's true doesn't make it funny. The bottom line: hyperbole isn't required when it comes to lampooning US/Neo-Conservative politics...it's already a big enough joke.

http://eattheblinds.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------- Result 485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[At]] first glance, this film looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[focus]] on a plot to assassinate the President of the United States, a race against time, and plenty of Secret Service agents, the [[agency]] under the [[spotlight]] in The Sentinel.

But wait, the protagonist [[turns]] out to be Michael Douglas' character Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS agents are specially trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them [[special]] - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to run for his life while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First Lady (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical reference, who took the bullet in their respective tours of duty. While Eastwood's movie has a more enigmatic villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its lack of a central strong villain, preferring to share the assassination responsibility amongst many forgettable ex-KGB villains, and the mole within the Presidential Detail. With Douglas on the run from the law, he becomes similar to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the proverbial one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his smarts to outwit fellow agents, which turned out to be quite interesting to watch - despite slick processes, it still boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of today from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. [[During]] first glance, this film looks like the Keifer Sutherland series 24 for the big screen. With the [[concentrate]] on a plot to assassinate the President of the United States, a race against time, and plenty of Secret Service agents, the [[body]] under the [[concentrates]] in The Sentinel.

But wait, the protagonist [[revolves]] out to be Michael Douglas' character Pete Garrison instead, a veteran Secret Service agent famed for taking the bullet for Reagan in 1981. The SS agents are specially trained to "take the bullet", which is what makes them [[especial]] - who in the right mind will put themselves in the line of a bullet and a target? But Garrison gets implicated in the assassination plot, and has to run for his life while at the same time doing his bit of investigations into the plot. All this because of his failure in a polygraph test, due to his adulterous banging of the First Lady (Kim Basinger). Tsk.

There are shades of Clint Eastwood's In the Line of Fire. Both featured aging actors, and aging veteran has-been heroes with a bit of a historical reference, who took the bullet in their respective tours of duty. While Eastwood's movie has a more enigmatic villain in John Malkovich, The Sentinel suffered from its lack of a central strong villain, preferring to share the assassination responsibility amongst many forgettable ex-KGB villains, and the mole within the Presidential Detail. With Douglas on the run from the law, he becomes similar to Dr. Richard Kimble of The Fugitive, hunting the proverbial one-armed man while at the same time, relying on his smarts to outwit fellow agents, which turned out to be quite interesting to watch - despite slick processes, it still boils down to the performance and gullibility of individual agents.

Keifer Sutherland and Eva Longoria, top TV stars of today from 24 and Desperate Housewives, get relegated into support roles as the Secret Service investigators who are looking into Garrison's probable involvement in the assassination plot, and at times seem to have lept off the pages of CSI with their forensics skills. The beautiful couple had chemistry that could have resembled X-Files' Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, but alas these two had very little to do here. We know the reason why they're in the movie, and that is to get their fans into the theatres. Also, Longoria's role seemed unable to shake off her sexy-mama Gabrielle, and here, has her in fairly low cut blouses (Sutherland actually tells her to cover up) and tight pants (ogle-fest for fellow agents).

Nonetheless, it's still a pretty interesting look into the lives of probably the most highly charged and tense protection detail in the world, and the typical threats that they face daily, including the following up on every nutcase's threat on the life of the most powerful man in the world. It's a decent suspense and investigative thriller, with enough subplots to keep you entertained. But one thing though, like most ending action sequences, this one has a big enough loophole for you to fly a jumbo jet through. --------------------------------------------- Result 486 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is the kind of movie which shows the paucity of French cinema when it comes to making thrillers.The director's desire to "sound [[American]]" is so glaring that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[horrible]] murders,a [[plot]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[worst]] ever filmed.Add a steamy love scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to attract the huge adolescent audience.A violent and absurd conclusion,followed by a silent epilogue who could make a nice commercial for the côte d'azur,it's really the silence of the lame. This is the kind of movie which shows the paucity of French cinema when it comes to making thrillers.The director's desire to "sound [[Americana]]" is so glaring that you will not be fooled a minute,unless you have not seen a serial killer movie since "Peeping Tom".

Two male cops (or one and a half,more like,as you will see),[[horrific]] murders,a [[intrigue]] more complicated than complex.Charles Berling is not lucky with the genre(see the astoundlingly dumb "l'inconnu de Strasbourg" a couple of years ago).The scenes with his pregnant wife -which are supposed to be a counterpart for the otherwise noir atmosphere of the rest of the plot-are among the [[gravest]] ever filmed.Add a steamy love scene between them and a gory autopsy to get a PG 12 and thus to attract the huge adolescent audience.A violent and absurd conclusion,followed by a silent epilogue who could make a nice commercial for the côte d'azur,it's really the silence of the lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original [[release]] back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a little. The movie about Joe Buck (Jon Voight) coming from Texas to New York City to become a [[hustler]] is [[sometimes]] a [[little]] disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[tries]] to live as a [[hustler]], making money by the act of love. It does not work out as he [[planned]]. After a guy named Rico 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) first pulled a trick on him and stole some money they become friends. They live in an empty and very filthy apartment. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to try to make some money.

The movie was probably rated X for the main subject but on the way we see some strange things. The editing in this movie is great. We see dream sequences from Joe and Ratso interrupted by the real world in a nice and sometimes funny way. Dustin Hoffman, Jon Voight and the supporting actors give great performances. Especially Hoffman delivers some fine famous lines. The score is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[great]] [[movie]] that won the Best Picture Oscar for a good reason. 'Midnight Cowboy' was rated X with the original [[emancipate]] back in 1969. There are some scenes where you can understand that, just a little. The movie about Joe Buck (Jon Voight) coming from Texas to New York City to become a [[swindler]] is [[occasionally]] a [[petite]] disturbing. Dressed up as a cowboy he [[attempting]] to live as a [[swindler]], making money by the act of love. It does not work out as he [[projected]]. After a guy named Rico 'Ratso' Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman) first pulled a trick on him and stole some money they become friends. They live in an empty and very filthy apartment. Then Ratso gets sick and Joe has to try to make some money.

The movie was probably rated X for the main subject but on the way we see some strange things. The editing in this movie is great. We see dream sequences from Joe and Ratso interrupted by the real world in a nice and sometimes funny way. Dustin Hoffman, Jon Voight and the supporting actors give great performances. Especially Hoffman delivers some fine famous lines. The score is done by John Barry and sounds great. All this makes this a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]] that won the Best Picture Oscar for a good reason. --------------------------------------------- Result 488 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] This movie is so [[bad]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first [[citing]] the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. This movie is so [[mala]] it's funny. It stars Scott Backula as some coach, but that's not important, what is important is the large black fellow who plays 1st base. First off he has to be at least 75 years old, yet still plays minor league baseball, second he starts out the movie in the outfield despite not being able to walk, let alone run. Coach Backula brilliantly moves him to first [[quote]] the fact that when he attempts to run he stays in the same place for too long a period of time. Backula shows more brilliant coaching strategy in the end of the film, (SPOILER), he tells his star player "downtown" to hit a home run, clearly "downtown" viewed this as a good move. He hit the home run and won the game for his team, a minor league squad playing the Twins who were the class of the majors in the movie. Now if only Tony Muser, manager of the Royals, would be as smart a coach as Backula and tell his players to simply hit a home run in every at bat, the Royals would never end an inning let alone lose a game. --------------------------------------------- Result 489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore grew up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a [[movie]] about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was [[excited]].

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[different]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[beautiful]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a child, with the exception of one of her brothers. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from school you'd find out that she was truly wounded before she even set foot in an institution, she was always defensive and what would seem like an unwillingness to learn in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was unable to.

Marlene did not deserve the life she was given, with the lack of help she desperately needed to receive. It was the government and the people around her that aided further in her death by not attempting to understand her needs and why she did what she did. I still find myself angered that she was put in jail for self-defense from a man who tried to rape her. As her brother once said, "They didn't know what to do with her so they locked her away and it killed her." I believe in that with all my heart.

Rest in peace Marlene, you deserve it so much. Having lived in Ontario my whole life, in the same town that Marlene Moore grew up in, I've heard stories of her from my parents, grandparents and family members. So when I found out that they would be filming a [[filmmaking]] about her, and that the beginning would be shot on my street, and her house quite close to mine I was [[agitated]].

If you read the book Rock a Bye Baby, which is about Marlene Moore you get quite the [[assorted]] image of her as a person, she was considered awkwardly [[resplendent]] by people who really had the chance to know her with the exception of her own family who frequently abused her as a child, with the exception of one of her brothers. Also, if you live in my area and are intelligent enough to listen to those around you who knew her from school you'd find out that she was truly wounded before she even set foot in an institution, she was always defensive and what would seem like an unwillingness to learn in a school environment was actually embarrassment over the fact that she was unable to.

Marlene did not deserve the life she was given, with the lack of help she desperately needed to receive. It was the government and the people around her that aided further in her death by not attempting to understand her needs and why she did what she did. I still find myself angered that she was put in jail for self-defense from a man who tried to rape her. As her brother once said, "They didn't know what to do with her so they locked her away and it killed her." I believe in that with all my heart.

Rest in peace Marlene, you deserve it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] It's sad to view this film now that we know how the ANC got [[shafted]] by international capitalism. Biko [[died]] for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, [[outright]] apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority [[whites]], leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Klein]] [[writes]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a [[twofold]] strategy. First drawing on the [[ascendant]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly impartial experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much change accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. Viewing Cry Freedom in this light is [[deeply]] ironic --- actually tragic. The ANC has [[transformed]] itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. It's sad to view this film now that we know how the ANC got [[sandbagged]] by international capitalism. Biko [[dying]] for nothing much. Woods achieved little. Yes, [[unmitigated]] apartheid was abolished, but all the apparatus of power was reserved by the minority [[caucasians]], leaving the ANC government more or less impotent. As Naomi [[Kline]] [[written]] in The Shock Doctrine, in the talks between the black and white leaderships "the deKlerk government had a [[double]] strategy. First drawing on the [[upward]] Washington Consensus that there was no only one way to run an economy, it portrayed key sectors of economic decision making --- such as trade policy and the central bank --- as "technical" or "adminsitrative". Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly impartial experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC." The statistical results are horrifying, with not much change accomplished, and AIDS flourishing. Viewing Cry Freedom in this light is [[severely]] ironic --- actually tragic. The ANC has [[converting]] itself from being the solution to being the primary problem. --------------------------------------------- Result 491 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Dieter Bohlen, Germany's notorious composer and producer of slightly trashy pop hits like "You're my heart, you're my soul" felt the need to tell his story - and gracefully he decided to hire a [[ghost]] writer. The result was a [[funny]] book about his life. Well, more or less a fuzzy [[image]] of it. He didn't deny that he is a selfish asshole but the whole story was twisted to fit his image of himself. No word that he has probably beaten up his former wife and she ended up in hospital. However it was written in a funny [[style]] and a huge success after his appearance as jury member of the German version of "American Idol" - especially his unforgettable comments.

This should be the end of the story - really. In the hype of the mentioned "Idol" TV show called "Deutschland sucht den Superstar" (abbreviated DSDS) somebody must have come up with the terrible idea to make a movie out of the book. The result is "Dieter - der Film"

I have rarely seen a movie which tries so desperately to be funny and fails so completely. None of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's voice should have done that more. Obvious, childish, predictable and lengthy gags destroy any motivation to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They could have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a satire, but they failed. The story is totally uninteresting and the fact that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has nothing satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 Dieter Bohlen, Germany's notorious composer and producer of slightly trashy pop hits like "You're my heart, you're my soul" felt the need to tell his story - and gracefully he decided to hire a [[spector]] writer. The result was a [[fun]] book about his life. Well, more or less a fuzzy [[picture]] of it. He didn't deny that he is a selfish asshole but the whole story was twisted to fit his image of himself. No word that he has probably beaten up his former wife and she ended up in hospital. However it was written in a funny [[elegance]] and a huge success after his appearance as jury member of the German version of "American Idol" - especially his unforgettable comments.

This should be the end of the story - really. In the hype of the mentioned "Idol" TV show called "Deutschland sucht den Superstar" (abbreviated DSDS) somebody must have come up with the terrible idea to make a movie out of the book. The result is "Dieter - der Film"

I have rarely seen a movie which tries so desperately to be funny and fails so completely. None of the gags really hits the point. Naddel's voice and style of talking was getting on my nerves right away although Verona's voice should have done that more. Obvious, childish, predictable and lengthy gags destroy any motivation to watch this movie to the end within a few minutes. The content of the movie is a sloppy film adaption written sloppily down by a ghost writer based on Bohlen's sloppy idealized memory. They could have used this freedom to do almost everything. It was supposed to be a satire, but they failed. The story is totally uninteresting and the fact that the background voice is Bohlen himself guarantees that the whole film has nothing satirical at all.

It's no wonder that it was considered to bad for a cinema release. The probability that this thing would have rotten in some archive was quite high until recently when the current season of DSDS turned out to be a mediocre success. With the "friendly" help of Germany's biggest yellow press newspaper "BILD" and the desperate situation for the TV station RTL to have something in the program while the still unbeatable show "Wetten dass... ?" is running on Channel 2 the movie finally arrived in television - unfortunately.

Watching this movie is a waste of time - there are certainly better cartoons with much more fun and a story actually worth looking at.

Therefore: 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Pretty]] poor Firestarter [[clone]] that seems more like a [[bad]] TV movie than a [[bad]] [[feature]] film. [[How]] [[disappointing]] for this to [[come]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiment]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The boy [[born]] to the couple from the experiment constantly runs a fever of 100 degrees, and when he's an adult, people in his life start [[spontaneously]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on [[fire]] are well done, but when they get to the point that they are well done in another sense, they're obviously changed to dummies. When jets of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it looks silly rather than alarming the way it should. Also ridiculous is fire that evidently travels through phone lines and erupts in huge jets from the receiver's earpiece. How is that supposed to happen, exactly?

Something else that struck me as silly about the movie is when a character has visions of his late parents. We later see the exact same shots from those visions in home movies. [[Belle]] poor Firestarter [[clooney]] that seems more like a [[negative]] TV movie than a [[negative]] [[idiosyncrasies]] film. [[Mode]] [[depressing]] for this to [[arriving]] from Hooper and Dourif!

Government contractors do a human [[experiences]] with a Hydrogen bomb. The boy [[ould]] to the couple from the experiment constantly runs a fever of 100 degrees, and when he's an adult, people in his life start [[voluntarily]] combusting. He tries to find out why.

The people completely on [[feu]] are well done, but when they get to the point that they are well done in another sense, they're obviously changed to dummies. When jets of fire shoot out of characters' arms, it looks silly rather than alarming the way it should. Also ridiculous is fire that evidently travels through phone lines and erupts in huge jets from the receiver's earpiece. How is that supposed to happen, exactly?

Something else that struck me as silly about the movie is when a character has visions of his late parents. We later see the exact same shots from those visions in home movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watched this film in shire joy.

This is possibly one of the best films of all time. It has a timeless value, you can get so much out of it it's amazing. There are parts that are moving, funny, and just great.

All aspect are spot on, the portrayal of the story is perfect, every detail is 100% genuine, even small Irish subtleties have been covered.

The use of low and high shots gives two great views on Cristy (look out for that).

Daniel Day-Lewis's performance is incredible. I've never seen an actor do that, ever. It really is amazing.

And it's so great to watch, it flows so well, it's probably the closest thing yo can get to real life experience. I love it.

If you haven't seen it, you should see it. Don't have any doubts on it, there is something there for all. --------------------------------------------- Result 494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This really is the worst film I have ever seen. Ever. Period. I actually paid £3.50 to watch this steaming turd of a movie. Incredibly dull, poorly acted, dire script, often incoherent and too many scenes that don't seem to have any relevance to the overall film (like when Heath Ledger's priest partner get's nailed to a wall by a ghost...what was the point in that scene? answers on a postcard please...)

I should have got a medal for sticking with this film for it's entire running time. I would rather take a strong kick to the groin than sit through this film again.

This should be cast into IMDb's bottom 100. Hopefully my vote of 1/10 will help it on it's way. --------------------------------------------- Result 495 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Only]] the most [[ardent]] DORIS DAY [[fan]] could find this one [[even]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the wealth of material available for a story about New York City's most famous blackout, a film that could have dealt with numerous real-life stories of what people had to cope with, this scrapes the bottom of the barrel for [[lack]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is indignant because she suspects she may have been compromised on the night of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut lodgings, took a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a man who had done the same, wandering into the house by mistake.

Nobody is able to salvage this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As directed by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. [[Purely]] the most [[keen]] DORIS DAY [[breather]] could find this one [[yet]] bearable to watch. When one thinks of the wealth of material available for a story about New York City's most famous blackout, a film that could have dealt with numerous real-life stories of what people had to cope with, this scrapes the bottom of the barrel for [[shortfall]] of story-telling originality.

Once again Doris is indignant because she suspects she may have been compromised on the night of the blackout when she returned to her Connecticut lodgings, took a sleeping potion and woke up in the morning with a man who had done the same, wandering into the house by mistake.

Nobody is able to salvage this mess--not Doris, not ROBERT MORSE, TERRY-THOMAS, PATRICK O'NEAL or LOLA ALBRIGHT. As directed by Hy Averback, it's the weakest vehicle Day found herself in, committed to do the film because of her husband's machinations and unable to get out of it. Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This entry is [[certainly]] interesting for series fans (like myself), but [[yet]] it is [[mostly]] [[incomprehensible]]. The [[plot]] is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking [[effects]], to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

[[Try]] to [[see]] the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the [[gore]] that was cut to be re-rated "[[R]]". This entry is [[definitively]] interesting for series fans (like myself), but [[nonetheless]] it is [[largely]] [[inscrutable]]. The [[intrigue]] is confusing, as is the sequel continuity. Some striking [[influencing]], to be sure, but we never find out what it all really means.

[[Endeavour]] to [[behold]] the "NC-17" workprint version which contains the [[gora]] that was cut to be re-rated "[[rs]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. However, if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[impressive]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. I admit that for the first 20 minutes or so of this film I wasn't entirely sure I was going to sit through the whole thing. Like many other people, I found it pretty boring, and I wasn't entirely looking forward to an hour and a half of watching this guy bite icicles and stick them together. However, if you sit through the creation of his first work long enough to see the finished product, you get an idea of how [[unbelievable]] the rest of the film is. I really think it's sad that so many people found this impossibly boring or a retread of ideas done by other artists.

Rivers and Tides is a quiet study of some of the artwork and methods of Andy Goldsworthy, who makes his art entirely out of things in nature, generally resulting in pieces that will be consumed by nature through the normal process of entropy. It is slow moving and unglamorous, but I think that a lot of the point of the movie is to show that Goldsworthy's art does not need any accompaniment in order for it to be appreciated. I've even heard people complain about how he is always talking throughout the movie, rather than just letting nature and his artwork speak for themselves, which I just think is madness.

On the other hand, lots of people complain about CDs coming with the lyrics written out inside them. A lot of musicians as well think their music should mean whatever the listener wants it to mean without the musician showing the exact lyrics, I guess I'm just the kind of person that believes that I'd like to know what the artist was trying to accomplish with his or her artwork. I can still take it how I want to even if I know what it was meant to do. I can understand not wanting to hear him talk through the movie. He does, after all, lose his train of thought and find himself unable to explain some of his work at more than one occasion, but if you don't want Goldsworthy talk about his art while you're watching the film, feel free to turn the sound off. That's like not reading the lyrics if you don't want to know what a musician is singing and would rather interpret the words yourself.

I think that Andy Goldsworthy's work, which I had no idea existed before I watched this movie, is incredibly impressive, and I'm glad that this film was made in order to showcase it. Indeed, since his work is generally not the kind that can be transported into a studio, photography is the only medium other than film that can express it, and I really appreciated being able to see the work that goes into his art, and the way that only things from nature are used. Whether or not you appreciate certain aspects of how this film is presented, Goldsworthy's work is moving enough to overlook that, because the film is not the star, Goldsworthy's art is. And given the lack of any music or even the smallest special effects and the slow-moving nature of the film, it seems to me that director Thomas Riedelsheimer knows that. --------------------------------------------- Result 498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (87%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[While]] the British produced some [[hilarious]] and slick sitcoms in the 1990s - Ab Fab, Men Behaving Badly, One Foot in the [[Grave]], etc. - the 70s were the [[real]] golden age.

In the 1970s there were [[whole]] new territories to [[explore]], including the sexual revolution, feminism, and the slowly evolving awareness of a need for "sensitivity" that would, twenty years later, become Political Correctness. Attempts to grapple with the confusion of this thoroughly modern [[world]] were the [[subtle]] and not-so-subtle themes in everything from the skits of Monty Python's Flying Circus to sitcoms like Man About the House. (By the late 70s this "grappling" resulted in more meditative and bitter-sweet sitcoms such as the masterpiece Butterflies.)

Man About the House is a perfect example of the good Britcoms of the time - slightly genteel, cheeky, fresh, ingenuous, sometimes outrageous, with some well made observations on contemporary life. Compare it to a cynical 90s show such as Ab Fab, and it is hard to believe the two were created in the same country.

[[Man]] About the House is one of the [[great]] Britcoms of the 70s, right up there with Good [[Neighbors]] (The Good [[Life]]), and [[About]] the House's spin off George and [[Mildred]]. Its quality is attested to by the fact that - as with Good [[Neighbors]] - its creators, [[writers]], and [[many]] of its [[cast]] have had continued success in British [[television]]. [[Albeit]] the British produced some [[humorous]] and slick sitcoms in the 1990s - Ab Fab, Men Behaving Badly, One Foot in the [[Serious]], etc. - the 70s were the [[actual]] golden age.

In the 1970s there were [[entirety]] new territories to [[scrutinize]], including the sexual revolution, feminism, and the slowly evolving awareness of a need for "sensitivity" that would, twenty years later, become Political Correctness. Attempts to grapple with the confusion of this thoroughly modern [[worldwide]] were the [[nuanced]] and not-so-subtle themes in everything from the skits of Monty Python's Flying Circus to sitcoms like Man About the House. (By the late 70s this "grappling" resulted in more meditative and bitter-sweet sitcoms such as the masterpiece Butterflies.)

Man About the House is a perfect example of the good Britcoms of the time - slightly genteel, cheeky, fresh, ingenuous, sometimes outrageous, with some well made observations on contemporary life. Compare it to a cynical 90s show such as Ab Fab, and it is hard to believe the two were created in the same country.

[[Dude]] About the House is one of the [[whopping]] Britcoms of the 70s, right up there with Good [[Vicinity]] (The Good [[Living]]), and [[Around]] the House's spin off George and [[Gladys]]. Its quality is attested to by the fact that - as with Good [[Vicinity]] - its creators, [[authors]], and [[innumerable]] of its [[casting]] have had continued success in British [[televisions]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[daughter]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early [[promise]] as a painter. Taught by her father, Artemisia was born in an [[era]] that [[denied]] talented [[women]] the right to have their work seen side by side art created by [[men]]. Her [[tragic]] [[life]] is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Agnes]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The Passion of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[made]] us [[investigate]] more into the [[life]] of this woman, her work, and her [[legacy]]. We also read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a must read book by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" presents the fictionalized facts we have read about showing the early life of the young woman as she starts to paint. She was clearly influenced by the work of her father, by Caravaggio, Agostino Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her relationship and love affair with Tassi is the basis of the [[film]]. Artemisia, [[unfortunately]] couldn't go as far as she could have because of the prejudice against women in the arts. It didn't help either she caused a scandal where she is accused of being raped by Tassi. She had to go to Rome in order to distance herself from that unhappy time of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a beautiful Artemisia. She is a gorgeous creature who awakened passion in men. Michel Serrault plays Orazio, her father. Miki Maojlovic is seen as Tassi, the man who wanted Artemisia, but ended up in jail. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The [[film]] has a glossy [[finish]] that the camera work of Benoit Delhomme captures in all its splendor. The scenic locales of the film offer an idea of what inspired that school of painting to show in their canvases. The music by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with sure hand showing a visual style of her own. Artemisia Gentileschi, the [[maid]] of Orazio Gentileschi, showed an early [[promising]] as a painter. Taught by her father, Artemisia was born in an [[epoch]] that [[denies]] talented [[females]] the right to have their work seen side by side art created by [[male]]. Her [[disastrous]] [[iife]] is chronicled in this biographic film directed and co-written by [[Cordova]] Merlik.

Having read the novel "The Passion of Artemisia" by Susan Vreeland, [[brought]] us [[researches]] more into the [[living]] of this woman, her work, and her [[inheritance]]. We also read Mary Garrard's "Artemisia Gentileschi", which should be a must read book by all art lovers.

"Artemisia" presents the fictionalized facts we have read about showing the early life of the young woman as she starts to paint. She was clearly influenced by the work of her father, by Caravaggio, Agostino Tassi, and other Florentine painters of that period. Her relationship and love affair with Tassi is the basis of the [[movie]]. Artemisia, [[unluckily]] couldn't go as far as she could have because of the prejudice against women in the arts. It didn't help either she caused a scandal where she is accused of being raped by Tassi. She had to go to Rome in order to distance herself from that unhappy time of her life.

Valentina Cervi makes a beautiful Artemisia. She is a gorgeous creature who awakened passion in men. Michel Serrault plays Orazio, her father. Miki Maojlovic is seen as Tassi, the man who wanted Artemisia, but ended up in jail. Emmanuelle Devos appears for a moment.

The [[cinematographic]] has a glossy [[finalize]] that the camera work of Benoit Delhomme captures in all its splendor. The scenic locales of the film offer an idea of what inspired that school of painting to show in their canvases. The music by Krishna Levy serves well what we see. Agnes Merlik directed with sure hand showing a visual style of her own. --------------------------------------------- Result 500 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Bugs]] life is a good film. But to me, it doesn't really compare to movies like Toy story and stuff. Don't get me wrong, I liked this movie, but it wasn't as good as [[Toy]] [[story]]. The film has the visuals, the laughs, and others that Toy story had. But the film didn't feel quite as... I don't know, but I thought it was still a pretty [[good]] film.

A bugs [[life]]... I don't want to [[say]] this, is a [[film]] that I don't [[remember]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen Toy story in years, but I still remember it. I shouldn't have reviewed this film, but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the best work Pixar has done.

A bug's life:***/**** [[Insects]] life is a good film. But to me, it doesn't really compare to movies like Toy story and stuff. Don't get me wrong, I liked this movie, but it wasn't as good as [[Toys]] [[history]]. The film has the visuals, the laughs, and others that Toy story had. But the film didn't feel quite as... I don't know, but I thought it was still a pretty [[alright]] film.

A bugs [[iife]]... I don't want to [[tell]] this, is a [[filmmaking]] that I don't [[reminisce]]. I saw it years ago. Of course, I haven't seen Toy story in years, but I still remember it. I shouldn't have reviewed this film, but I am. I am giving it a thumbs up, though it's not exactly the best work Pixar has done.

A bug's life:***/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I can only [[assume]] that the other reviewers of this "[[film]]" are [[stockholders]] in the [[production]] [[company]], as this was [[quite]] [[possibly]] the [[worst]] movie I've [[seen]] in the last five [[years]]. From the opening shot of a [[Rabbi]] [[laughing]] uncontrollably for no apparent reason, it was [[clear]] that the [[actors]] in this film [[would]] kill to be considered "B-Level." Both my [[wife]] and I were in a [[great]] mood before starting this film, and we were genuinely [[looking]] forward to a funny popcorn movie. We knew we hadn't rented Citizen Kane, and we weren't expecting to see the most amazing movie ever. However, after 40 minutes of enduring the most painfully unfunny bit of garbage I've ever seen, we shut it off instead of wasting another minutes of our lives.

If a "comedy" with no laughs, terrible acting, thin plot and annoying characters are your thing, then this film is for you. Honestly, Troll 2 is better--at least I laughed at the popcorn sex scene.

I cannot justify writing a longer review of this picture because I've already wasted almost an hour trying to find one joke. I can only [[assumes]] that the other reviewers of this "[[cinematography]]" are [[shareholder]] in the [[productivity]] [[enterprise]], as this was [[rather]] [[perhaps]] the [[meanest]] movie I've [[noticed]] in the last five [[ages]]. From the opening shot of a [[Kike]] [[kidding]] uncontrollably for no apparent reason, it was [[definite]] that the [[protagonists]] in this film [[ought]] kill to be considered "B-Level." Both my [[femme]] and I were in a [[wondrous]] mood before starting this film, and we were genuinely [[searching]] forward to a funny popcorn movie. We knew we hadn't rented Citizen Kane, and we weren't expecting to see the most amazing movie ever. However, after 40 minutes of enduring the most painfully unfunny bit of garbage I've ever seen, we shut it off instead of wasting another minutes of our lives.

If a "comedy" with no laughs, terrible acting, thin plot and annoying characters are your thing, then this film is for you. Honestly, Troll 2 is better--at least I laughed at the popcorn sex scene.

I cannot justify writing a longer review of this picture because I've already wasted almost an hour trying to find one joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I like British humor, I believe it's one of the best in the world. I like almost every British sitcom (okay... maybe not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were great, but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of Gentlemen is just something good to make you [[sick]]. This show was good in some way; it helped me lost some weight because watching this piece of [[garbage]] make me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[even]] funny TV show and I wonder who is actually laughing at this stuff. I watched it for about 10 minutes and turned it off. It was so disgusting, watching men dressed in the woman with yellow teeth and urinating on the car... I mean... what's so funny about that??? It makes me wanna puke. No humor, just disturbing images and cheap, toilet laughs... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you go ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people watching and enjoying this must have some emotional problems. Garbage. I like British humor, I believe it's one of the best in the world. I like almost every British sitcom (okay... maybe not Monthy Python, some of the jokes were great, but some of them I didn't understand.), but this League of Gentlemen is just something good to make you [[ill]]. This show was good in some way; it helped me lost some weight because watching this piece of [[litter]] make me feel I'm not hungry anymore. This is really just disgusting, sick and not [[yet]] funny TV show and I wonder who is actually laughing at this stuff. I watched it for about 10 minutes and turned it off. It was so disgusting, watching men dressed in the woman with yellow teeth and urinating on the car... I mean... what's so funny about that??? It makes me wanna puke. No humor, just disturbing images and cheap, toilet laughs... I don't know... if you like this stuff... you go ahead... watch it... but to be honest, people watching and enjoying this must have some emotional problems. Garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The movie has a [[great]] written genre story. It features all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The [[way]] Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good relieving [[humor]], mostly involving the Columbo character. It's all written [[despite]] the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[concept]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel writer had been done more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an extremely well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some truly great and memorable sequences.

It's one of the slower moving Columbo movies, despite not having a too long running time. This style and approach doesn't always work out well for a Columbo movie but in this movie it does, which is perhaps not in the least thanks to the acting performances of the movie.

Most Columbo movie either starred a big well known star or a star from the early days of film-making, as the movie its murderer. This movie stars the rather unknown 81 year old Ruth Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is still well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a realistic and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like though. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations throughout her career, prior to her win for "Rosemary's Baby", in 1969. She has some great interaction as well with Peter Falk in their sequences together.

The movie also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even better than usual Columbo movie entry.

8/10 The movie has a [[whopping]] written genre story. It features all of the usual Columbo ingredients; The [[camino]] Lt. Columbo approaches and bonds to his suspect, the way the mystery unravels for him, Columbo's dog, the cat and mouse play, which is great in this one and luckily as well some good relieving [[comedy]], mostly involving the Columbo character. It's all written [[while]] the fact that it doesn't even have a truly original [[notions]]. Columbo hunting down a detective/murder novel writer had been done more than once before in a Columbo movie.

It's also an extremely well directed movie from James Frawley, who after this directed 5 more Columbo movies, in the '70's and '80's. He provided the movie with style and some truly great and memorable sequences.

It's one of the slower moving Columbo movies, despite not having a too long running time. This style and approach doesn't always work out well for a Columbo movie but in this movie it does, which is perhaps not in the least thanks to the acting performances of the movie.

Most Columbo movie either starred a big well known star or a star from the early days of film-making, as the movie its murderer. This movie stars the rather unknown 81 year old Ruth Gordon. She didn't starred in an awful lot of movies throughout her career but she is still well known to some, mostly for her role in "Rosemary's Baby", which also won her an Oscar. She had a realistic and somewhat unusual style of acting, which some people might not like though. It earned her 4 more Oscar nominations throughout her career, prior to her win for "Rosemary's Baby", in 1969. She has some great interaction as well with Peter Falk in their sequences together.

The movie also stars a still young G.D. Spradlin. I say young because I only know him from his latest productions out of his career, despite the fact that he already was 57 at the time of this Columbo production. He is still alive but retired from acting, ever since 1999.

An even better than usual Columbo movie entry.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[Minion]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Satan]] and whose goal is to get the key that will unlock the door where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will possess another. [[Anyone]] who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker [[rage]]. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a secret [[order]] of Templars, who is tasked to keep the key away from the minion. The movie begins a thousand years [[ago]], in the Middle East where a couple of knight templars flee from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[key]] winds up [[somewhere]] [[underground]] in [[New]] York. An archeologist is [[assigned]] to [[study]]/[[dig]] the [[place]] where the [[key]] was [[found]]. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[key]], and the [[movie]] becomes a long [[winded]] chase scene between the minion and Lukas and [[archeologist]].

The [[movie]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie [[lacks]] [[energy]], and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which [[willfully]] takes [[ideas]] from [[previous]] movies (especially The Terminator films). The fight scenes with the [[minion]] is troublesome, in that you never get the sense of how good or how bad a warrior this [[demon]] is. It "[[skillfully]]" [[becomes]] a one-man army when [[fighting]] a squad of templars but [[sucks]] when it comes to one-on one. And it's [[supposed]] to be around for a long time. All this goes to [[show]] that any [[sense]] of [[logic]] is just thrown down the drain for convenience. The whole idea of a secret order of Templars, a door to hell, and the key isn't well explained. We are merely to accept that they just exist. The movie seems to have been made with the feeling there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few bucks. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were somewhere else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. The [[Wench]] is about... well, a minion. A servant of [[Lucifer]] and whose goal is to get the key that will unlock the door where his master is trapped. He is some sort of demon who possess human beings and when the body dies will possess another. [[Someone]] who happens to be possessed will go on some berserker [[wrath]]. Dolph Lundgren plays Lukas, a member of a secret [[ordering]] of Templars, who is tasked to keep the key away from the minion. The movie begins a thousand years [[formerly]], in the Middle East where a couple of knight templars flee from the minion. Then flash forward to 1999, where the [[imperative]] winds up [[anywhere]] [[metro]] in [[Novel]] York. An archeologist is [[ascribed]] to [[explored]]/[[dug]] the [[placing]] where the [[fundamental]] was [[discovered]]. Needless to say, the minion is after the [[imperative]], and the [[cinema]] becomes a long [[exhausted]] chase scene between the minion and Lukas and [[archaeologist]].

The [[cinema]], is just that, a low budget B-movie flick. The movie [[missing]] [[energies]], and just trods along. You'll follow the chase but you won't ever feel involved in the story which [[advisedly]] takes [[reflections]] from [[former]] movies (especially The Terminator films). The fight scenes with the [[wench]] is troublesome, in that you never get the sense of how good or how bad a warrior this [[devil]] is. It "[[cleverly]]" [[become]] a one-man army when [[struggles]] a squad of templars but [[stinks]] when it comes to one-on one. And it's [[alleged]] to be around for a long time. All this goes to [[illustrating]] that any [[feeling]] of [[reasoning]] is just thrown down the drain for convenience. The whole idea of a secret order of Templars, a door to hell, and the key isn't well explained. We are merely to accept that they just exist. The movie seems to have been made with the feeling there's not much potential to the story but only enough to make a few bucks. Dolph Lundgren sure looks like he wish he were somewhere else.

The verdict: 2 of 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This seemed to be a [[good]] movie, I thought it [[would]] be a good movie, and throughout the movie I was [[hoping]] it would be a meaningful use of my time, and yes, I have to admit that the acting talent of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where truly commendable, but [[despite]] the best effort this [[movie]] falls short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it seemed was what Somnath Sen is [[trying]] to do. The final point [[comes]] short and the [[ending]] seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but movies unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American characters - they all seem to be carved out of the same block. Seems to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put together they make for a [[disappointing]] story. This seemed to be a [[buena]] movie, I thought it [[could]] be a good movie, and throughout the movie I was [[await]] it would be a meaningful use of my time, and yes, I have to admit that the acting talent of Dimple Kapadia and Deepti Naval where truly commendable, but [[although]] the best effort this [[cinematography]] falls short of effectively conveying a meaningful message, which it seems is it seemed was what Somnath Sen is [[striving]] to do. The final point [[occurs]] short and the [[ended]] seemed kind of unsatisfactory after all that happens; a bit like real life in that respect but movies unlike real life ends in about 2hrs and the ending should leave the audience satisfied, if indeed that was the director's intention. This falls short in that respect and that is what disappoints me the most.

Another aspect that concerned me was the national stereo-typing of the American characters - they all seem to be carved out of the same block. Seems to me that most American characters in Indian English movies are based upon how common Indians themselves perceive Americans to be like and it is clear that no effort has been made to bring any sense of depth or complexity to any American in the movie.

These two aspects put together they make for a [[frustrating]] story. --------------------------------------------- Result 506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (76%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] . . . or type on a computer keyboard, they'd probably give this eponymous film a rating of "10." After all, no elephants are shown being killed during the movie; it is not even implied that any are hurt. To the contrary, the master of ELEPHANT WALK, John Wiley (Peter Finch), complains that he cannot shoot any of the pachyderms--no matter how menacing--without a permit from the government (and his tone suggests such permits are not within the realm of probability). Furthermore, the elements conspire--in the form of an unusual drought and a human cholera epidemic--to leave the Wiley plantation house vulnerable to total destruction by the Elephant People (as the natives dub them) to close the story. If you happen to see the current release EARTH, you'll detect the Elephant People are faring less well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Taped this late night [[movie]] when I was in [[grade]] 11, watched it on [[fast]] forward. I sugest you do the same. I though it would be and [[action]] [[film]], but went to a cort tv [[type]] [[movie]]. In the end it [[fits]] in with the early 70's social activest type [[films]]. [[Glad]] I [[missed]] that era. 2/10 Taped this late night [[cinema]] when I was in [[octane]] 11, watched it on [[vite]] forward. I sugest you do the same. I though it would be and [[actions]] [[kino]], but went to a cort tv [[kinds]] [[films]]. In the end it [[adjusts]] in with the early 70's social activest type [[cinematography]]. [[Happier]] I [[mistook]] that era. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Simply]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Rise]] to [[Evil]], should tell you that this isn't going to attempt to be anything deep or do much with Hitler's character. [[Rather]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[see]] baby Hitler looking evil with [[evil]] [[music]] playing the background, we are [[given]] a view of Hitler that presents his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Saturday]] morning [[TV]] show. The [[film]] REALLY [[wants]] to make its [[case]] that [[Hitler]] was evil but does [[anyone]] [[need]] a [[movie]] to convince them that Hitler was evil? Ultimately, making him such a one-dimensionally [[evil]] character is both [[boring]] and confusing (one must [[ask]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the film cold ever [[persuade]] a nation to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This film had a great opportunity to take a [[figure]] who has committed some of the most horrible acts in the 20th century, and [[try]] to [[delve]] into his mind. Instead, it [[basically]] just [[says]], "Hey! [[Hitler]] was evil! Just thought you might like to know..." over and over again. The great [[irony]] is that the film still was [[attacked]] for [[presenting]] too [[sympathetic]] a [[view]] of the [[character]]. Give me a break. [[Simple]] put, this is a simplistic and one dimensional film. The title, The [[Climbs]] to [[Nefarious]], should tell you that this isn't going to attempt to be anything deep or do much with Hitler's character. [[Quite]], from the first minutes of the movie where we [[seeing]] baby Hitler looking evil with [[viciousness]] [[musicians]] playing the background, we are [[granted]] a view of Hitler that presents his as a cartoony supervillian, seemingly ripped right out of a [[Mondays]] morning [[TVS]] show. The [[kino]] REALLY [[wanted]] to make its [[examples]] that [[Nazi]] was evil but does [[nobody]] [[require]] a [[cinematography]] to convince them that Hitler was evil? Ultimately, making him such a one-dimensionally [[devilish]] character is both [[tiresome]] and confusing (one must [[enquired]] how the inept, phsycotic character in the film cold ever [[persuading]] a nation to follow him or be named Time's man of the year). This film had a great opportunity to take a [[silhouette]] who has committed some of the most horrible acts in the 20th century, and [[seeks]] to [[diving]] into his mind. Instead, it [[mainly]] just [[contends]], "Hey! [[Nazi]] was evil! Just thought you might like to know..." over and over again. The great [[satire]] is that the film still was [[mugged]] for [[introducing]] too [[empathy]] a [[standpoint]] of the [[characters]]. Give me a break. --------------------------------------------- Result 509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I was but a [[babe]] in [[arms]] when George Lucas was wowing the [[world]] with his out of this [[world]] [[Saga]] chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the [[notorious]] Darth Vadar but even today 20 years on I can appreciate the genius that is Lucas and the [[incredible]] [[imagination]] he's been blessed with. [[In]] A [[New]] [[Hope]] Lucas showed a [[new]] [[way]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such memorable characters as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[best]] loved of villains, the sinister Darth Vadar. [[In]] The Empire Strikes Back he went all out to show us Special Effects can [[add]] to a [[tale]] and [[managed]] to something no-one [[thought]] you could do on screen. He made a [[film]] with no specific end or [[beginning]] and it went down a [[treat]]. [[Return]] of the Jedi is a [[fitting]] [[end]] to a Saga that will [[stand]] the [[test]] of time.

When The Empire Srtikes Back [[ended]] with encasing of the lovable [[Rouge]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be [[delivered]] to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[discovery]] of a [[terrible]] truth about his [[Father]] we were left with the [[feeling]] that [[things]] were going from bad to worse. Vadar it seemed had won the day. How we [[asked]] could the [[rebels]] ever [[recover]] from this blow? [[In]] Lucas [[stunning]] and [[captivating]] [[final]] [[chapter]] we are kept on the edges of our [[seats]] from Han's [[daring]] [[rescue]] from Jabba's palace to the the final climactic [[battle]] on the [[Death]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke struggles between fulfilling his [[duties]] as a Jedi and [[rebel]] fighter and [[attempting]] to reawaken the good he [[believes]] is still in his Father's soul.

[[Old]] [[friends]] like the smooth [[talking]] Lando Calrissian and the ever [[lovable]] Chewbacca reunite for one [[final]] [[battle]] to [[end]] all [[battles]] as a [[new]] darker more [[dangerous]] [[enemy]] [[emerges]] in the [[form]] of the Emperor himself ( played by the [[brilliant]] Ian McDiarmiud.[[How]] he [[missed]] out on an Oscar is a mystery.) [[desperate]] to [[turn]] Luke to the Dark Side even if it means betraying his [[apprentice]] Darth Vadar.[[All]] in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[truly]] is a [[terrifying]] [[addition]] to the [[story]] and is the [[undisputed]] Master of the [[events]] that [[unfold]]. [[His]] new and [[improved]] [[Death]] Star spells [[disaster]] for the rebels but the [[brave]] group [[launch]] one last desperate attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as [[Han]] and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on [[inside]] Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. I was but a [[darling]] in [[weaponry]] when George Lucas was wowing the [[globe]] with his out of this [[globe]] [[Story]] chronicling the adventures of young Luke Skywalker and the [[celebrated]] Darth Vadar but even today 20 years on I can appreciate the genius that is Lucas and the [[unimaginable]] [[creativity]] he's been blessed with. [[Among]] A [[Newer]] [[Expectancy]] Lucas showed a [[novel]] [[routing]] to tell stories as he introduced us to such memorable characters as the plucky Princess Leia, the Rougish Han Solo and the spirited Luke Skywalker as well as that [[better]] loved of villains, the sinister Darth Vadar. [[Onto]] The Empire Strikes Back he went all out to show us Special Effects can [[added]] to a [[narratives]] and [[administering]] to something no-one [[ideas]] you could do on screen. He made a [[filmmaking]] with no specific end or [[initiating]] and it went down a [[processed]]. [[Returns]] of the Jedi is a [[fit]] [[termination]] to a Saga that will [[standing]] the [[testing]] of time.

When The Empire Srtikes Back [[finished]] with encasing of the lovable [[Khmer]] Han Solo in Carbonite to be [[handed]] to Jabba the Hut and young Luke reeling from the [[detecting]] of a [[hideous]] truth about his [[Pere]] we were left with the [[impression]] that [[items]] were going from bad to worse. Vadar it seemed had won the day. How we [[demanded]] could the [[rebellion]] ever [[retrieved]] from this blow? [[During]] Lucas [[staggering]] and [[mesmerizing]] [[ultimate]] [[sections]] we are kept on the edges of our [[seat]] from Han's [[bold]] [[salvage]] from Jabba's palace to the the final climactic [[warfare]] on the [[Dying]] Star between Luke and Vadar as Luke struggles between fulfilling his [[functions]] as a Jedi and [[revolt]] fighter and [[seeks]] to reawaken the good he [[thinks]] is still in his Father's soul.

[[Ancient]] [[mates]] like the smooth [[debating]] Lando Calrissian and the ever [[charmer]] Chewbacca reunite for one [[last]] [[tussle]] to [[terminating]] all [[battle]] as a [[newer]] darker more [[hazardous]] [[hater]] [[appears]] in the [[shape]] of the Emperor himself ( played by the [[shiny]] Ian McDiarmiud.[[Mode]] he [[miss]] out on an Oscar is a mystery.) [[hopeless]] to [[transforming]] Luke to the Dark Side even if it means betraying his [[trainee]] Darth Vadar.[[Entire]] in black with his red eyes,ghostly white disfigured face and sinister laugh he [[really]] is a [[alarming]] [[supplement]] to the [[saga]] and is the [[unassailable]] Master of the [[event]] that [[unfolds]]. [[Her]] new and [[enhanced]] [[Mortality]] Star spells [[catastrophe]] for the rebels but the [[fearless]] group [[began]] one last desperate attack to end the Empire's reign for good.

Lucas managed to incorporate three different stories at once and keep the action going so that the audience is riveted. We watch in excitement as [[Ambrose]] and Leia attempt to bring down the shield around the Death Star from the forest Moon of Endor with the help of some adorable Ewoks ( who I really do not believe take from the movie at all. In fact I feel they provide a sort reprieve from the tension of the battles at and in the Death Star) and hindered by legions of Stormtroopers and Imperial Officers. We cheer on Lando and the other pilots as they take on the mighty Imperial Fleet and risk life and limb to fly into the Deatn Star to destroy it once and for all. And we watch with bated breath as Vadar and the Emperor attempt to turn Luke to the Dark Side while he in turn tries to turn his Father back.

But for me the most difficult and yet compelling battles is that going on [[within]] Darth Vadar. For ROTJ is a battle of emotions and feelings. Vadar is caught between his loyalty to the Emporer and the Empire and his Fatherly inclinations to Luke. Never did I think that a mask could show emotion but some-how one can't but see the confusion and pain on Vadar's face during the final scenes as the Emporer turns on Luke. There is more depth and emotion to Vadar than I believed a villain, especially one more machine then man could have and that I think is what makes him so accessible. He is conflicted. The Apprentice as much as the Master. The Victim as much as the Villain. Without ruining the end too much Vadar's final scene is the most poignant and wonderful in the trilogy.

So in conclusion what can I say. George Lucas is the master of the Saga. Star Wars is the most compelling and engaging Sagas I've seen in a long time and I have yet to see another Saga rival it. Return of the Jedi has all the ingredients necessary to provide the ending Lucas masterpiece deserves. It's action, suspense, romance, tragedy, redemption, joy all rolled into one and it's memorable characters, wonderful special effects and catchy music make both a great movie in its own right and an ending that Lucas can be proud of. --------------------------------------------- Result 510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Disappearance]] is set in the Mojave [[desert]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Susan]] Dey) plus their two kids Katie (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan (Jamie Croft) a friend of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted mining town on the map called Weaver. No-one claims to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some pictures. Once at the town they take some pictures & have a look around but when it comes time to leave their car won't start & they have to spend the night there. While looking around they find a camcorder videotape which they play only to discover footage of a scared woman saying all her friends have disappeared, the next morning & their car has disappeared as things take a very sinister turn. What is Weaver's secret? Will the Henley's ever leave there alive...

Written, co-executive produced & directed by Walter Klenhard I have to say that Disappearance is one of the most [[frustrating]] films I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty good mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the single [[worst]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[script]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was sitting there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families car mysterious disappearing, the four recent graves, the thing in the abandoned mines, the supernatural sandstorm, the sudden & unexplained disappearance of Ethan & his just as unexplained reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron bomb being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know could have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most ambiguous, strange, surreal & downright frustrating ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these great ideas but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. [[Disappear]] is set in the Mojave [[walkabout]] as Jim (Harry Hamlin) & Patty Henley ([[Suzan]] Dey) plus their two kids Katie (Basia A'Hern) & Matt (Jeremey Lelliott) along with Ethan (Jamie Croft) a friend of the family are travelling along, they stop at a roadside diner & ask about an old deserted mining town on the map called Weaver. No-one claims to have heard of it but it's definitely there & the family decide to take a detour in order to check it out & take some pictures. Once at the town they take some pictures & have a look around but when it comes time to leave their car won't start & they have to spend the night there. While looking around they find a camcorder videotape which they play only to discover footage of a scared woman saying all her friends have disappeared, the next morning & their car has disappeared as things take a very sinister turn. What is Weaver's secret? Will the Henley's ever leave there alive...

Written, co-executive produced & directed by Walter Klenhard I have to say that Disappearance is one of the most [[disheartening]] films I have ever watched. For the first 85 minutes it was a pretty good mysterious mix of thriller & horror film but then we are treated to one of the single [[gravest]] endings ever in motion picture history. The [[hyphen]] suggest lots of different things but never elaborates or confirms & I was sitting there genuinely intrigued about what was going on, from the families car mysterious disappearing, the four recent graves, the thing in the abandoned mines, the supernatural sandstorm, the sudden & unexplained disappearance of Ethan & his just as unexplained reappearance, the Sheriff's sinister motives, the compass in the car going crazy, the crashed plane, the townspeople denying Weaver existed & the possible side effects of a neutron bomb being dropped near Weaver in the 40's but they are all tossed out of the window & for all we know could have been totally separate random events. Everything was coming along nicely & was set up for a big twist revelation but none was forthcoming & instead I was treated to the most ambiguous, strange, surreal & downright frustrating ending possible. If nothing else the ending contradicts much of what has gone before & leaves the viewer with more questions than answers. It's almost as if the makers had these great ideas but then didn't know what to do with them & just made the ending up on the spot. I just felt I put so much effort into watching the film which can be pretty slow at times without any sort of reward & in fact the ending felt more like a kick in the teeth or a good two finger salute!

Director Klenhard does a reasonable job here, the old ghost town has a certain atmosphere & the large expansive desert locations give a good sense of isolation. It's well made but what were they thinking with that ending? Nothing fits, nothing makes sense & it's just a huge frustrating mess that after sitting through the thing for nearly an hour & a half leaves you confused & wanting to know more. Despite being a horror film there's no blood or gore although there are one or two creepy moments here & there. The film actually reminds of The Hills Have Eyes (2006) remake for large parts as that is what the film is set-up to be before a bizarre ending which does nothing to bring any closure to the film.

Technically the film is good with high production values, good special effects, sets, locations & cinematography. Set in America but filmed in South Australia. The acting is fine from a decent cast.

Disappearance is a really odd film, for a long time it shapes up to be a neat little horror mystery thriller but it never explains anything which happens & the truly surreal ending just throws up more questions than answers. I really can't see anyone making head nor tail of this, I really can't. --------------------------------------------- Result 511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] As [[someone]] who has read the [[book]], I can say that this is vastly inferior to the big American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are various [[reasons]] for this. [[Firstly]], Emma is too unpleasant. Yes, she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to like - but the viewer shouldn't downright start to [[despise]] her. Secondly, [[Mr]] Knightly is miscast. His [[brooding]] and melancholy in this version are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the mood of the [[whole]] [[affair]] "off". [[Thirdly]], Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is supposed to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as utterly baffling because this narrative hasn't been adequately shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American actress trying to suppress her own accent at the beginning, to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. Finally, this dragged at the end. The book and the big film version end with the wedding of Emma and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the announcement of the wedding without actually showing us the ceremony.

All in all, a rather [[haphazard]] attempt. Read the book or rent the Paltrow version instead As [[anybody]] who has read the [[books]], I can say that this is vastly inferior to the big American version starring Gwyneth Paltrow. There are various [[motifs]] for this. [[Initially]], Emma is too unpleasant. Yes, she has faults, and isn't the easiest person to like - but the viewer shouldn't downright start to [[scorn]] her. Secondly, [[Hannes]] Knightly is miscast. His [[brood]] and melancholy in this version are better suited to a Bronte or Gaskell adaptation than Austen, and throw the mood of the [[ensemble]] [[fling]] "off". [[Third]], Samantha Morton is too strong an actress to be relegated to the role of Harriet; and why was she made to look so sickly? Harriet is supposed to be blonde and blooming - not to look as if she's going to be carried off by consumption in the next scene. Fourthly, the structure has been mucked up and scenes cut. At the end, when Emma decides she loves Mr Knightly, it comes across as utterly baffling because this narrative hasn't been adequately shown and carried along throughout the film. Fifthly, what was going on, exactly, with Mrs Elton's accent? She went from sounding like an American actress trying to suppress her own accent at the beginning, to all out American half-way through, and then back to English at the end. Finally, this dragged at the end. The book and the big film version end with the wedding of Emma and Mr Knightly. This version drags on confusingly after the announcement of the wedding without actually showing us the ceremony.

All in all, a rather [[random]] attempt. Read the book or rent the Paltrow version instead --------------------------------------------- Result 512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] First off, this really is my [[favorite]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally obsessed with this practically bloodless, cheesy, lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The director (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a FREDDY/JASON type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....CHECK THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. First off, this really is my [[preferable]] film ever. I don't need to give anyone a description because every a**hole does that. I am literally obsessed with this practically bloodless, cheesy, lame effects having', boom-stick showing', badly edited, 80's metal horror masterpiece. The director (I heard) had hoped for a hit at the box office so that he could do sequels and have a FREDDY/JASON type of deal for himself. Damn, I wish that could've went down like that! The soundtrack's banging'. The acting's good....CHECK THIS MOFO OUT. and any die-hard fans out there, feel free to email and chat sometime. Midgetorgy....I can be found at YAHOO. --------------------------------------------- Result 513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] was [[made]] by a bunch of white [[guys]] that went to school [[together]]. [[Well]] there's [[nothing]] [[wrong]] with that, except it looks [[like]] it was made by a bunch of white [[guys]] that went to school [[together]]. 90 percent of the cast are [[white]] [[males]] about same age. It's [[almost]] [[like]] watching a bunch of guys at [[boys]] [[camp]] who [[turned]] the camera on themselves. The [[movie]] has no plot. It [[simply]] repeats the same [[action]] of [[blood]] [[bath]] after [[blood]] bath. There are some [[funny]] scenes and [[comedic]] [[bits]]. But they don't [[redeem]] the flat monotony.

The graphic [[cartoon]] scenes are used to cover the stuff that was obviously beyond their budget or resources to do, and not done very well at that. Anything that can't be done with white guys running around on the beach covered in blood is done with [[cheap]] [[animation]].

I went to see this film after seeing the trailer, which makes it look like a Tarrentino piece. Well, the trailer scenes are as good as they ever [[get]]. Ther rest of it just repeats the same kind of mundane, inane comedy. It works at [[times]], but it gets [[boring]] after the same stuff comes at you over and over. It's more like a string of Satuday Night Live skits than a [[movie]]. It's a hit-you-over-the-head-with-it kind of comedy. I can see where the story idea is intriguing. But, in this film post apocalyptic America is much like Medevil England. In fact Wheatlry says the story ideas came from that era. He [[plans]] to make a Part 2. I guess he thinks he's Tarrentino or maybe doing a parody thing.

At the opening in LA, Wheatley mentioned he will bring back pretty much the same cast in part 2. He was asked if he might consider a more diverse cast in the next one, to which he replied, well yea, sure. This [[cinematography]] was [[brought]] by a bunch of white [[bloke]] that went to school [[jointly]]. [[Good]] there's [[none]] [[fallacious]] with that, except it looks [[iike]] it was made by a bunch of white [[bloke]] that went to school [[jointly]]. 90 percent of the cast are [[branca]] [[mens]] about same age. It's [[about]] [[iike]] watching a bunch of guys at [[fellas]] [[encampment]] who [[transformed]] the camera on themselves. The [[cinematography]] has no plot. It [[exclusively]] repeats the same [[efforts]] of [[chrissake]] [[bain]] after [[chrissakes]] bath. There are some [[hilarious]] scenes and [[slapstick]] [[tib]]. But they don't [[redeeming]] the flat monotony.

The graphic [[caricatures]] scenes are used to cover the stuff that was obviously beyond their budget or resources to do, and not done very well at that. Anything that can't be done with white guys running around on the beach covered in blood is done with [[inexpensive]] [[animate]].

I went to see this film after seeing the trailer, which makes it look like a Tarrentino piece. Well, the trailer scenes are as good as they ever [[got]]. Ther rest of it just repeats the same kind of mundane, inane comedy. It works at [[time]], but it gets [[dull]] after the same stuff comes at you over and over. It's more like a string of Satuday Night Live skits than a [[cinematography]]. It's a hit-you-over-the-head-with-it kind of comedy. I can see where the story idea is intriguing. But, in this film post apocalyptic America is much like Medevil England. In fact Wheatlry says the story ideas came from that era. He [[schematics]] to make a Part 2. I guess he thinks he's Tarrentino or maybe doing a parody thing.

At the opening in LA, Wheatley mentioned he will bring back pretty much the same cast in part 2. He was asked if he might consider a more diverse cast in the next one, to which he replied, well yea, sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[expect]] credibility with action movies where the superhero has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but recovering at lightning speed, and transforming innocuous gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no exception. But the movie has numerous [[assets]] : [[breathtaking]] scenery gorgeously photographed, stunning special and visual effects ( the first five minutes are gripping and give the tone of the film ), excellent musical score, welcome attempts at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a solid cast : two heroes ( Stallone, star and cowriter, has the lion's share of the footage, but the excellent Michael Rooker more than stands his ground ), a charming heroin ( Janine Turner ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless John Lithgow and deceivingly feminine Caroline Goodall, but also Rex Linn - in a longer than usual part and who makes the most of it, Leon, Craig Fairbrass ) Good, solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert wrote ( about another film )"It's the kind of movie you can sit back and enjoy as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking too much."

FORGET CREDIBILITY

You must not [[waits]] credibility with action movies where the superhero has to perform an endless string of unbelievable feats, being trodden upon in the process but recovering at lightning speed, and transforming innocuous gadgets in lethal weapons... especially when Renny Harlin is directing.

"CLIFFHANGER " is no exception. But the movie has numerous [[possessions]] : [[staggering]] scenery gorgeously photographed, stunning special and visual effects ( the first five minutes are gripping and give the tone of the film ), excellent musical score, welcome attempts at levity to relieve some of the tension, and a solid cast : two heroes ( Stallone, star and cowriter, has the lion's share of the footage, but the excellent Michael Rooker more than stands his ground ), a charming heroin ( Janine Turner ), and one of the most darstardy bunch of villains ever ( priceless John Lithgow and deceivingly feminine Caroline Goodall, but also Rex Linn - in a longer than usual part and who makes the most of it, Leon, Craig Fairbrass ) Good, solid entertainment then , if no credibility.As Roger Ebert wrote ( about another film )"It's the kind of movie you can sit back and enjoy as long as you don't make the mistake of thinking too much."

--------------------------------------------- Result 515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Whatever his name is (the writer and director) should be locked away in hopes garbage like this is never made again. This one is in a battle with some of the most awful movies of all time. Sometimes movies are bad in a way that they're actually sort of good. Not this one. This was so bad I got angry. Seriously. A drunken 10 year old could have come up with a better script. What a waste. ALL the actors were completely uninspired to work at all, the CGI was barely acceptable, the sequences of scenes were completely retarded and hurt the little bit of story there was, it's like he just decided, "I want this to happen and this to happen, but I don't care how we got there, just shoot it and put it in. Whatever, I'm going back to my trailer to pick my nose, if anyone calls for me, I'm not here." Shame on you whatever your name is. Shame on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] There was something here with the female lead having this perfect life she's [[always]] [[wanted]] after the worst [[life]] [[possible]], beginning as a [[child]] [[prostitute]] and winding up with Eric [[Roberts]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trust]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[destroys]] it in the end. It sounds [[weird]], but I like the position Dean Cain was in at the [[end]] and the choice he made. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time frame makes it clear it's his child and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's done, sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was pretty much one way) and then being part of his death. In better hands this [[would]] have been a better [[movie]], but for something I caught on late night cable, it's not bad. There was something here with the female lead having this perfect life she's [[constantly]] [[wanting]] after the worst [[living]] [[probable]], beginning as a [[kid]] [[prostitution]] and winding up with Eric [[Stevens]]. But her background makes it impossible for her to [[trusting]] Dean Cain and this utterly [[obliterating]] it in the end. It sounds [[strange]], but I like the position Dean Cain was in at the [[ends]] and the choice he made. He can't hurt her because he loves her and she's the mother of his child (I think the time frame makes it clear it's his child and not his brother's), but at the same he can't forgive her for all she's done, sleeping with his brother (which shows the love and obligation he felt was pretty much one way) and then being part of his death. In better hands this [[could]] have been a better [[cinema]], but for something I caught on late night cable, it's not bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] "Land of Plenty" is not a film. It is a tombstone for the directorial career of German [[Director]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The Million Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it perfectly [[clear]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's actually turned into a BAD [[director]], creating [[horribly]] [[weak]] and superficial [[stories]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is [[extreme]]. It's as if he completely [[forget]] everything he knew about cinema and started all over again - only to get sloppish results.

In a few [[words]], this film does not deserve your time. "Land of Plenty" is not a film. It is a tombstone for the directorial career of German [[Superintendent]] Wim Wenders.

Many felt it in "The Million Dollar Hotel" and now "Land of Plenty" makes it perfectly [[unequivocal]]; not only has Wenders lost it, he's actually turned into a BAD [[superintendent]], creating [[terrifyingly]] [[fragile]] and superficial [[fairytales]] and scenes.

One might argue that the "time you lose it" comes for every director, but Wenders' case is [[tremendous]]. It's as if he completely [[forgot]] everything he knew about cinema and started all over again - only to get sloppish results.

In a few [[mots]], this film does not deserve your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 518 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This quasi J-horror film followed a young woman as she returns to her childhood village on the island of Shikoku to sell the family house and meet up with old friends. She finds that one, the daughter of the village priestess, drowned several years earlier. She and Fumiko (another childhood friend) then learn that Sayori's mother is trying to bring her back to life with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and living are getting weak and the friends and villagers are seeing ghosts. [[Nothing]] was exceptional or even very good about this movie. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies This quasi J-horror film followed a young woman as she returns to her childhood village on the island of Shikoku to sell the family house and meet up with old friends. She finds that one, the daughter of the village priestess, drowned several years earlier. She and Fumiko (another childhood friend) then learn that Sayori's mother is trying to bring her back to life with black magic. Already the bonds between the dead and living are getting weak and the friends and villagers are seeing ghosts. [[Nada]] was exceptional or even very good about this movie. Unlike stellar J-horror films, the suspense doesn't really build, the result doesn't seem overly threatening and the ending borders on the absurd.

This movie is like plain white rice cooked a little too long so that it is bordering on mushy. Sometimes you get this at poor Asian restaurants or cook your own white rice a little too long. You end up eating it, because you need it with the meal, because what is Chinese or Japanese food without rice, but it almost ruins the meal because of the gluey, gooey tastelessness of it all. 3/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] And how many actors can he get to stand in for his own [[neurotic]], compulsive uber-New Yorker persona? [[In]] this [[film]] Woody is played by Will Ferrell in what is [[mercifully]] less a direct [[impersonation]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Celebrity]]." It's an annoyingly repetitive story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, [[everyone]] constantly patronizes expensive, [[exclusive]] restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to [[diseases]], and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his [[lust]] for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes [[succeeding]], sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[tired]] formula, and [[proof]] that Allen isn't [[really]] a [[great]] [[film]] [[artist]] at all. He just seems [[like]] a dirty [[old]] [[man]] with the libido and [[emotions]] of a 20-year-old who is [[intent]] [[upon]] [[telling]] the same [[boring]] [[old]] [[stories]] again and again. And how many actors can he get to stand in for his own [[paranoid]], compulsive uber-New Yorker persona? [[For]] this [[cinematography]] Woody is played by Will Ferrell in what is [[fortunately]] less a direct [[mimicry]] than the one Kenneth Branagh did in "[[Prestigious]]." It's an annoyingly repetitive story now: nebbishy, neurotic man with a wife or girlfriend falls madly in love with a shiksa queen upon which he projects all manner of perfection. Everyone lives in perfect gigantic apartments in great Manhattan neighborhoods, [[anybody]] constantly patronizes expensive, [[unique]] restaurants during which all the characters relate fascinating anecdotes and discuss arcane philosophy, there is always a trip to the Hamptons during which the nebbishy main character spazzes out about sand and physical exertion and possible exposure to [[illnesses]], and then of course, said main character feels guilty about his [[craving]] for the shiksa queen but pursues her anyway, sometimes [[succeeds]], sometimes failing, etc.

This a [[weary]] formula, and [[test]] that Allen isn't [[truly]] a [[wonderful]] [[cinematography]] [[artists]] at all. He just seems [[iike]] a dirty [[longtime]] [[bloke]] with the libido and [[passions]] of a 20-year-old who is [[objective]] [[after]] [[saying]] the same [[dreary]] [[former]] [[fairytales]] again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Lion King 1 1/2 is a very [[fun]] and addictive sequel. Don't [[expect]] the production values of a theatrical [[release]], but do expect the highest quality of direct to video release.

It is set up as Timon & Pumba [[begin]] watching the original Lion King in a [[darkened]] theater and [[abruptly]] [[switch]] [[tracks]] and [[begin]] narrating their own [[story]]. This is [[done]] with frequent comedic interruptions. For [[example]], during one particular [[tense]] [[moment]] a home shopping [[commercial]] pops on and a chagrined Pumba [[realizes]] he has sat on the remote. These [[little]] [[moments]] pepper the [[movie]], and whether you [[find]] them [[entertaining]] or not will [[greatly]] depend on your sense of [[humor]]. [[If]] you are [[particularly]] bothered by [[movies]] that deliberately remind the viewer is watching a movie, than this may not be your cup of tea.

[[Animation]] is the best they've invested in the [[Disney]] DTV line, and is [[integrated]] [[almost]] seamlessly with the [[original]] [[material]]. The newer, [[independent]] [[material]] [[uses]] a [[lot]] of the artistic [[style]] of the [[original]]. The [[voice]] talents are all well [[performed]], [[though]] I couldn't help [[thinking]] of Marge [[Simpson]] [[every]] [[time]] I [[heard]] [[Julie]] Kavner.

[[Many]] of the jokes in the [[movie]] will be well recognized by [[viewers]] as recycled over the generations, but are [[presented]] more with the familiarity of [[comfortable]] quirks of old friends than annoyingly repetitive.

The music has made me realize how much I enjoyed and miss a good musical integrated with a Disney feature. The toe-tapping opening feature of 'Dig A Tunnel' is well choreographed and hilarious. Timon and Pumba's take on the Lion King's opening sequence and their introduction to paradise are also amusing. The only problem was the reprise of the 'Dig A Tunnel' at the end of the movie, switching its lyrics and tune from defeatist to uplifting.

Story line is pretty well done, and the integration of new plot elements is done almost perfectly, though the final bit during the hyena chased stretched the storyline credibility a little. The new story doesn't seem to handle saccharine or emotionally charged moments to well, and does better when it is resorting to full comedy.

Overall, worth purchasing. If you like all the bonus features that come with a typical 2-disc set, then go for it. For the penny pincher who still is willing to invest on a good flick, wait until it drops four or more dollars and go rent it right away.

Damion Crowley. Lion King 1 1/2 is a very [[droll]] and addictive sequel. Don't [[hopes]] the production values of a theatrical [[liberate]], but do expect the highest quality of direct to video release.

It is set up as Timon & Pumba [[launched]] watching the original Lion King in a [[dark]] theater and [[brutally]] [[switched]] [[tracking]] and [[outset]] narrating their own [[storytelling]]. This is [[doing]] with frequent comedic interruptions. For [[case]], during one particular [[taut]] [[time]] a home shopping [[mercantile]] pops on and a chagrined Pumba [[recognizes]] he has sat on the remote. These [[scant]] [[times]] pepper the [[cinematography]], and whether you [[found]] them [[amusing]] or not will [[massively]] depend on your sense of [[humour]]. [[Unless]] you are [[namely]] bothered by [[cinematography]] that deliberately remind the viewer is watching a movie, than this may not be your cup of tea.

[[Animated]] is the best they've invested in the [[Disneyland]] DTV line, and is [[embedded]] [[hardly]] seamlessly with the [[preliminary]] [[materials]]. The newer, [[independant]] [[materials]] [[employs]] a [[batch]] of the artistic [[elegance]] of the [[upfront]]. The [[vowel]] talents are all well [[realized]], [[albeit]] I couldn't help [[ideology]] of Marge [[Simpsons]] [[any]] [[times]] I [[hear]] [[Jolly]] Kavner.

[[Innumerable]] of the jokes in the [[flick]] will be well recognized by [[spectators]] as recycled over the generations, but are [[tabled]] more with the familiarity of [[cozy]] quirks of old friends than annoyingly repetitive.

The music has made me realize how much I enjoyed and miss a good musical integrated with a Disney feature. The toe-tapping opening feature of 'Dig A Tunnel' is well choreographed and hilarious. Timon and Pumba's take on the Lion King's opening sequence and their introduction to paradise are also amusing. The only problem was the reprise of the 'Dig A Tunnel' at the end of the movie, switching its lyrics and tune from defeatist to uplifting.

Story line is pretty well done, and the integration of new plot elements is done almost perfectly, though the final bit during the hyena chased stretched the storyline credibility a little. The new story doesn't seem to handle saccharine or emotionally charged moments to well, and does better when it is resorting to full comedy.

Overall, worth purchasing. If you like all the bonus features that come with a typical 2-disc set, then go for it. For the penny pincher who still is willing to invest on a good flick, wait until it drops four or more dollars and go rent it right away.

Damion Crowley. --------------------------------------------- Result 521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The word 'classic' is thrown around too [[loosely]] nowadays, but this [[movie]] well [[deserves]] the appelation. The [[combination]] of Neil Simon, Walter Matthau ([[possibly]] the world's best [[living]] [[comic]] actor), and the late lamented George Burns [[make]] for a comic [[masterpiece]]. It is interesting to [[contemplate]] what the [[movie]] [[would]] have been like had not [[death]] prevented Jack Benny from playing [[George]] Burns' [[part]], as had been [[planned]]. As it is, the reunion scene in Matthau's [[apartment]] is not likely to be [[surpassed]] as a sidesplitter. [[Definitely]] one of my desert island [[films]].

"[[Enter]]!!!!!!!!!" The word 'classic' is thrown around too [[vaguely]] nowadays, but this [[cinema]] well [[merits]] the appelation. The [[jumpsuit]] of Neil Simon, Walter Matthau ([[presumably]] the world's best [[life]] [[comedian]] actor), and the late lamented George Burns [[deliver]] for a comic [[centerpiece]]. It is interesting to [[consider]] what the [[filmmaking]] [[should]] have been like had not [[killings]] prevented Jack Benny from playing [[Georgie]] Burns' [[parties]], as had been [[scheduled]]. As it is, the reunion scene in Matthau's [[condo]] is not likely to be [[topped]] as a sidesplitter. [[Categorically]] one of my desert island [[kino]].

"[[Intro]]!!!!!!!!!" --------------------------------------------- Result 522 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] A [[man]] and his wife get in a horrible car accident. When the wife is left in a persistent [[vegetative]] state, the man must choose between pulling the plug and letting her live. The decision is made even harder when he realizes her ghost wants to extract revenge on him and those around him.

This [[comes]] to us from director Rob Schmidt, who made "Wrong Turn" (a [[film]] I have not [[seen]]). With only one horror [[film]] under his [[belt]], and not a particularly [[notorious]] one at that, I was a bit reluctant to watch this episode, expecting Schmidt to be a "Master of Horror" in only the most liberal sense. My apologies to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the best one yet.

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme abundance! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a second time, but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! A [[males]] and his wife get in a horrible car accident. When the wife is left in a persistent [[asexual]] state, the man must choose between pulling the plug and letting her live. The decision is made even harder when he realizes her ghost wants to extract revenge on him and those around him.

This [[arrives]] to us from director Rob Schmidt, who made "Wrong Turn" (a [[kino]] I have not [[noticed]]). With only one horror [[flick]] under his [[strap]], and not a particularly [[proverbial]] one at that, I was a bit reluctant to watch this episode, expecting Schmidt to be a "Master of Horror" in only the most liberal sense. My apologies to him for my underestimation. As of episode 10 in a 13 episode season, this was actually the best one yet.

The issue of the "right to die" is dealt with and covered in enough detail to be a solid plot device. However, this is only the foundation on which the story revolves. Once the horror elements show up, the film goes from "decent" to "spectacular". Great acting, great plot, great dialogue, great suspense. I was a little creeped out at times (which is good) and most of all: the gore is in extreme abundance! I read a review of this episode prior to watching it, where the reviewer said there is a strong hint of "Hellraiser" in this. Through the first part of the show, I had no idea what they were talking about. Then there is a bit later where some images do remind me of "Hellraiser 2". However, I in no way wish to say that this takes away from the film. I can see no other way to create the effect that was created, and in my opinion this looks remarkably better than "Hellraiser 2".

Some plot twists show up later on, and might invite the viewer to give the film a second look. I didn't watch it a second time, but I think the beginning would make more sense if I had (not that it's confusing). The subplot with the dental hygienist is also nice, and I found myself going back and forth about whether I disliked the main character for his relationship with her or if I felt bad for him. He's somewhat of an anti-hero to the whole story, if you will. I feel inclined to cheer for him as the protagonist, but he's completely unlovable.

While the Stuart Gordon episode may be better and I'm excited about the "Washingtonians" episode, I think I could safely bet that this is the key episode of the season and by far the saving grace of what was otherwise lackluster and routine. When legends like John Carpenter let me down (again) I get a bit worried about the genre's future, but then a fresh face like Rob Schmidt comes along and gives me hope. This one is a keeper, and please bring Schmidt back for season 3! --------------------------------------------- Result 523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Steve Carell once again stars in a light romantic movie about choices, family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the [[movie]] I was [[expecting]] a flat-out comedy, lots of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[guess]] I was wrong. Sure the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a light Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a great performance. The movie itself really tackles true [[observations]] and that was a strong element I found. But, the ending felt a little bit rushed and predictable. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was [[great]] and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very important. Though, it came down to old, flat and predictable ending. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. Still a [[fun]] movie. Steve Carell once again stars in a light romantic movie about choices, family and pressure. By judging on the plot and cover art of the [[filmmaking]] I was [[await]] a flat-out comedy, lots of laughs and unrealistic elements, but I [[imagines]] I was wrong. Sure the movie had some comedy, but it felt much more of a light Drama to me and Steve Carell once again gave a great performance. The movie itself really tackles true [[sightings]] and that was a strong element I found. But, the ending felt a little bit rushed and predictable. Through-out, the cinematography was great, the acting was [[awesome]] and the message it delivered was obvious but yet still very important. Though, it came down to old, flat and predictable ending. I'd reckon if different choices were made at the end of the movie (perhaps for the bad, even) this movie would get better publicity. Still a [[droll]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Although]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in France lately and came across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[movie]] was [[amazing]], to [[say]] the least. A creative and [[unique]] film, the [[different]] [[directors]] each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[attempt]] to fit each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, however, renders the magic of each individual segment obsolete. When taken at face value, with each of the short segments taken as its own individual [[film]], the love stories [[together]] [[tell]] a [[beautiful]] [[message]].

The [[film]] is [[strikingly]] bizarre at times -- [[often]] to the point of [[confusion]] -- and each individual segment can be [[hard]] to follow. [[Still]], to a watcher who [[pays]] close attention to each of the [[segments]], the short plot lines [[become]] [[clear]] after a short [[time]]. The [[confusion]] is [[almost]] [[intriguing]]; it [[keeps]] you on the edge of your [[seat]] waiting for what will [[come]] next. It [[leaves]] the [[viewer]] [[wondering]] "[[Did]] that really just [[happen]]?" [[yet]] [[also]] [[leaves]] them [[satisfied]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] where the [[viewer]], [[upon]] [[leaving]] the [[theater]], can't actually [[decide]] whether they [[loved]] it or they [[hated]] it. The [[initial]] [[reaction]] is to go and watch it again and again, just to see these individual [[lives]] [[blend]] [[together]] into a [[cinematic]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to [[make]] the [[movie]] multilingual [[adds]] [[something]] to the [[spectrum]] of people who can [[relate]]. It [[adds]] to the [[reality]] of the [[film]] -- here, the American [[tourists]] [[speak]] [[English]], the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[film]] [[encompasses]] leads to an [[understanding]] of the [[international]] [[language]] of love.

From sickness to the [[supernatural]], the [[love]] of parents to the [[love]] of husbands, this [[film]] [[covers]] all the bases of romantic [[storytelling]]. [[In]] its [[beautiful]] and [[quirky]] [[way]], each [[unique]] [[event]] somehow [[falls]] into place to tell a [[story]]: that of all types, sizes, nationalities, and [[shapes]] of [[love]]. [[While]] I live in Minnesota, I have been studying in France lately and came across this bizarre gem of a film.

This [[cinema]] was [[astounding]], to [[told]] the least. A creative and [[exclusive]] film, the [[assorted]] [[administrators]] each lent something different to their interpretation of love in the City of Light. The first instinct is to [[endeavor]] to fit each one of these little stories into an overall storyline, much as can be done with 2003's Love Actually. This attempt, however, renders the magic of each individual segment obsolete. When taken at face value, with each of the short segments taken as its own individual [[flick]], the love stories [[jointly]] [[say]] a [[glamorous]] [[messages]].

The [[cinematic]] is [[unimaginably]] bizarre at times -- [[generally]] to the point of [[mess]] -- and each individual segment can be [[harsh]] to follow. [[However]], to a watcher who [[paying]] close attention to each of the [[pieces]], the short plot lines [[gotten]] [[unmistakable]] after a short [[times]]. The [[mess]] is [[hardly]] [[fascinating]]; it [[retains]] you on the edge of your [[seats]] waiting for what will [[arrived]] next. It [[sheets]] the [[viewfinder]] [[requests]] "[[Got]] that really just [[occur]]?" [[nonetheless]] [[additionally]] [[sheets]] them [[persuaded]] that it did, indeed, occur. It's the [[types]] of [[flick]] where the [[onlooker]], [[after]] [[exiting]] the [[theaters]], can't actually [[decides]] whether they [[worshipped]] it or they [[hates]] it. The [[preliminary]] [[reply]] is to go and watch it again and again, just to see these individual [[vie]] [[blended]] [[jointly]] into a [[cinematographic]] masterpiece.

The interesting decision to [[deliver]] the [[cinema]] multilingual [[added]] [[anything]] to the [[spectral]] of people who can [[pertaining]]. It [[added]] to the [[actuality]] of the [[films]] -- here, the American [[passengers]] [[speaks]] [[Brits]], the Parisians French, and so on. The number of people that the [[flick]] [[involves]] leads to an [[comprehend]] of the [[internationale]] [[parlance]] of love.

From sickness to the [[uncanny]], the [[loved]] of parents to the [[likes]] of husbands, this [[cinema]] [[cover]] all the bases of romantic [[stories]]. [[For]] its [[ravishing]] and [[fickle]] [[camino]], each [[unequalled]] [[events]] somehow [[drops]] into place to tell a [[stories]]: that of all types, sizes, nationalities, and [[ways]] of [[likes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 525 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct lack of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[appalling]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[clumsy]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very wooden, her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. ...though for a film that seems to be trying to market itself as a horror, there was a distinct lack of blood.

There was also a distinct lack of skilled directing, acting, editing, and script-writing.

Jeremy London put in one of most [[spooky]] performances I've ever seen - his "descent into the maelström" of madness is achingly self-aware and [[cumbersome]]. Oh look at him twitch! Oh look at him drink strong spirits! Oh look at him raise his brow, and cock his head at a jaunty angle! Oh look at his unwashed, greasy dark hair! Oh listen to his affectedly husky voice! He must be a tortured artist/writer/genius! Oh, yes, out comes the poet-shirt - it's another boy who thinks he's Byron. (Or Poe.) Oh for the love of... did someone give this guy a manual on "How To Act Good" or did they just pull him out of a cardboard box somewhere, the defunct little plastic toy-prize in a discontinued brand of bargain-bin cereal. Okay, that was a stupid line - but that's only because London's performance has melted my brain with its awfulness.

Katherine Heigl is cute, and very briar rose, but has yet to grow into her acting shoes in this film - she delivered her lines like she was being held up, in fact, her whole performance was very wooden, her poses as stiff as her lines - who knows, perhaps she was just reacting to, and trying to neutralise, Jeremy London's flailing excesses, but if that's the case, she takes it too far.

Notable is Arie Verveen as Poe - while his character's role is confused, he delivers the best performance of the piece. He, quite simply, looks right, but it's more than that - he has some sort of depth, I believed that he had a life beyond the dismal two-dimensional quality of the rest of the characters. Huh, maybe it's just because I like Poe, and could thus just let my mind wander and invent while he was on screen - whatever, he had an interest factor otherwise missing.

The rest of the characters are a faceless blur - there are all the usual caricatures: the perky blonde best-friend who's a bit of a floozy; the smitten local cop who's a bit of a dork; the protective older man who perhaps has too much un-fatherly interest in our heroine; the scheming old witch, etc., etc., yawn, yawn.

As with the 'distinct lack of blood for a horror movie' issue, none of the themes that they mention (and that London's character mentions - so scathingly - in his attack on Poe's writing) are followed through on. As another reviewer said - there was potential here: murder, incest, - genuinely shocking stuff, but instead they skirt away from the issues, and cut away from the violence (a raised candlestick swinging through the air - closing in on it's victim - then---cut to black! This is fine in a Noirish traditional horror, indeed, it's expected, and is fondly received when it happens - it's a dear convention, especially when accompanied by fake lightning bolts and intense Siouxie eye makeup - but in 'Descendant' it just comes across as clumsy, or as though the editor got queasy at the last minute and cut it out.) This could have either been a very tense psychological thriller - the horror of palingenesis/delusion/madness - or a simple (and fun) slasher movie: it tries to be both, or neither (something new and exciting!), but either way it fails dismally. The only horror element of this entire movie is it's epic dullness.

I think the editor (if there was one at all) must have been drunk when s/he chopped this thing up - there are awkwardly foreshortened scenes; scenes that appeared to be out of order (but that could have just been the poor script). LIkewise the director & cinematographer - there were some very strange shots and framing that I think were meant to be tributes to Hitchcock or Browning, but just ended up looking silly (again, fine in a noir, but this was trying to be something else.)

The whole thing perhaps may have been funny (in that way that previous reviewers have mentioned - "OMG how did this get made?!?") if I had been in the mood for some trash- bagging, unfortunately for me I had settled on the couch, with the lights down low, with the express intention of scaring myself silly - this is a very poor film, and I'm afraid I can't recommend it to people, not even for laughs.

Please, please, don't waste your time or money on this - either borrow a real horror/thriller film, or find yourself a copy of Poe's fantastical tales, either way, you'll have a far more enjoyable and frightening night than you could ever hope to achieve with this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The Comeback starts off looking promising, with a brutal death scene by a mask wearing killer. The [[mask]] itself is pretty cool too, and [[looks]] almost identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher film "Granny". From then on the film is [[mostly]] [[boring]]. We get a few more [[deaths]], which again are [[good]], but there's not enough of them. The [[reason]] the [[deaths]] are so good is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story [[behind]] the film is [[actually]] [[rather]] interesting and would have worked very well had it not been so [[boring]] for the most part.

I would [[avoid]] this [[unless]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not enough here to [[even]] [[make]] it an average slasher flick. The Comeback starts off looking promising, with a brutal death scene by a mask wearing killer. The [[hides]] itself is pretty cool too, and [[seems]] almost identical to the one used in the 1990's slasher film "Granny". From then on the film is [[basically]] [[tiresome]]. We get a few more [[dies]], which again are [[buena]], but there's not enough of them. The [[motives]] the [[killings]] are so good is because they are frenzied and bloody. The story [[backside]] the film is [[genuinely]] [[quite]] interesting and would have worked very well had it not been so [[tiresome]] for the most part.

I would [[avoidance]] this [[if]] you're a die-hard collector - there's not enough here to [[yet]] [[deliver]] it an average slasher flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] was exactly what I expected it to be when i first read the [[casting]]. I probably could have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[pack]] of Howler [[Monkeys]]. Alberto Tomba was [[surely]] a good [[skier]] but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[actor]] skills to [[earn]] his living. He can't play, he can't talk, he can't [[even]] move very good on mainland without his [[skis]]... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty blonde girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in dramatic roles but most probably for her nice legs. Nevertheless I must admit that she could be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's funny, especially considering that she isn't italian. I laughed all the time, watching this movie. I found it so [[ridiculous]] and [[meaningless]] that it actually made me laugh, loud, very [[loud]]. This [[cinematography]] was exactly what I expected it to be when i first read the [[foundry]]. I probably could have written a more exciting plot, it's a pity that they left it to a [[packet]] of Howler [[Chimps]]. Alberto Tomba was [[probably]] a good [[snowboarder]] but he has to thank God (and we too) that he does not have to rely on his [[protagonist]] skills to [[wins]] his living. He can't play, he can't talk, he can't [[yet]] move very good on mainland without his [[ski]]... Michelle Hunziker is a pretty blonde girl, and that's all. She obviously wasn't chosen for her astounding competence in dramatic roles but most probably for her nice legs. Nevertheless I must admit that she could be the Tomba's acting teacher, because he's even a worse actor than her, and that's funny, especially considering that she isn't italian. I laughed all the time, watching this movie. I found it so [[nonsensical]] and [[worthless]] that it actually made me laugh, loud, very [[vocal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Just after I [[saw]] the [[movie]], the [[true]] [[magic]] feeling of the Walt [[Disney]] [[movies]] came up in me and I realized me that it was a [[long]] [[time]] ago that I saw the 'real' magic in a movie.

The [[combination]] of the right music, speeches and magical effects [[brings]] the Disney feeling again into your body. [[Very]] [[special]] things I saw where the not-knowing effects in the [[movie]], started with the disney logo transforming into the Cinderella castle and ended as an old-story telling fairytale with your grandparents.

The magic has returned in me. I [[rate]] this movie 8 out of 10. Just after I [[noticed]] the [[movies]], the [[real]] [[hallucinogenic]] feeling of the Walt [[Disneyland]] [[movie]] came up in me and I realized me that it was a [[largo]] [[period]] ago that I saw the 'real' magic in a movie.

The [[combo]] of the right music, speeches and magical effects [[poses]] the Disney feeling again into your body. [[Eminently]] [[extraordinaire]] things I saw where the not-knowing effects in the [[filmmaking]], started with the disney logo transforming into the Cinderella castle and ended as an old-story telling fairytale with your grandparents.

The magic has returned in me. I [[rates]] this movie 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, pfft more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[guy]] has as much acting [[ability]] as [[Bill]] Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]] even [[worse]]. Crazed Hillbilles YEP! [[needless]] tit shot (with a [[real]] weird scar) YEP! crappy soundtrack YEP! I wish i could give the movie -10 [[stars]] but 1 is as low as it goes. Seriously i think someone was playing a joke on me when i saw this it cant be real...... the worse thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER MOVIES!...... guess its in [[demand]]. WOW what can i say. I like shity movies and i go out of my way to watch a corny action flick, but Snake Eater i would have rather had a nail driven into my pee hole while my grandma gave me a lap dance .Lorenzo Lamas, pfft more like Lorenzo Lameass this [[guys]] has as much acting [[skill]] as [[Billing]] Clinton has self control. It has all the goods to make a [[truly]] [[inclement]] [[kino]] even [[worst]]. Crazed Hillbilles YEP! [[dispensable]] tit shot (with a [[genuine]] weird scar) YEP! crappy soundtrack YEP! I wish i could give the movie -10 [[superstar]] but 1 is as low as it goes. Seriously i think someone was playing a joke on me when i saw this it cant be real...... the worse thing THERE IS 2MORE SNAKE EATER MOVIES!...... guess its in [[asks]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 530 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The first time I saw this movie, I fell in [[love]] with it. The atmosphere was what caught my attention first and foremost. I [[expected]] a gore fest, but instead [[got]] to watch a highly intelligent killer mess with my head to a chilling soundtrack (it's actually my ringer at the moment :P). The fact that I couldn't predict when he'd kill and when he'd disappear was a major [[plus]] in my book. Predictable [[horror]] [[movies]] bore me. Now, I know the storyline had some discrepancies, but, if you're like me, you don't even notice them until long after the movie's over and you're laying in bed mauling over the fact that you just witnessed a masterpiece in motion. Finally, as I mentioned, the soundtrack is [[timeless]]. It's one of my all time favorite theatrical scores, so I was very happy to hear that Rob Zombie is leaving it untouched in his remake. Speaking of the remake, I read a very comprehensive article on it and, now that I know that Mr. Zombie reveres John Carpenter, I have high hopes for his take on this [[classic]]. This movie is [[great]] for any time you have a craving for a spine tingling, but it's the [[perfect]] addition, opener, finale, you name it for an All Hallow's Eve movie marathon. :) The first time I saw this movie, I fell in [[iike]] with it. The atmosphere was what caught my attention first and foremost. I [[projected]] a gore fest, but instead [[ai]] to watch a highly intelligent killer mess with my head to a chilling soundtrack (it's actually my ringer at the moment :P). The fact that I couldn't predict when he'd kill and when he'd disappear was a major [[anymore]] in my book. Predictable [[monstrosity]] [[theater]] bore me. Now, I know the storyline had some discrepancies, but, if you're like me, you don't even notice them until long after the movie's over and you're laying in bed mauling over the fact that you just witnessed a masterpiece in motion. Finally, as I mentioned, the soundtrack is [[incorruptible]]. It's one of my all time favorite theatrical scores, so I was very happy to hear that Rob Zombie is leaving it untouched in his remake. Speaking of the remake, I read a very comprehensive article on it and, now that I know that Mr. Zombie reveres John Carpenter, I have high hopes for his take on this [[typical]]. This movie is [[remarkable]] for any time you have a craving for a spine tingling, but it's the [[irreproachable]] addition, opener, finale, you name it for an All Hallow's Eve movie marathon. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I don't [[think]] this is too [[bad]] of a show under the right conditions. I [[tolerated]] the first season.

[[Unfortunately]], this is a [[show]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God forbid anybody actually go to law school based on these shows, which I had heard was the [[case]] when I watched some interviews of the show. It just [[made]] me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[supposed]] to be the [[stars]] of the [[show]], are the most [[annoying]]. While this might be a compliment in some situations, it's certainly not here. Their constantly harassing the women on the show is funny at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've realized that this is as deep as the show is going to get. Trying to intersperse some serious, dramatic, and even tear-jerking moments in the middle of this mockery of a real show fails to compensate for the progressive loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to enjoy the show.

Alan Shore's flamboyant and gratuitous "public service announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. Denny Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's speech wearing a colonial outfit.

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I thought the show's attempts to deal with some contemporary issues were done with care.

I think the show's writers became aware that the sexual harassment displayed by Denny and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more inviting of them from the start. The thing is, I don't care if the sexual harassment treatment in the show is done well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the hopes that my libido will keep me coming back for more. I'm not a teenager anymore, and I think this show is promising if its goal wasn't to cater to the lowest common denominator to get ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I realized that it's really not gonna get much better than this. It's a shame because it's one of those shows I'd love to love. I don't [[thought]] this is too [[horrid]] of a show under the right conditions. I [[condoned]] the first season.

[[Sadly]], this is a [[exhibit]] about lawyers who aren't really lawyers. God forbid anybody actually go to law school based on these shows, which I had heard was the [[lawsuits]] when I watched some interviews of the show. It just [[accomplished]] me gag a bit.

That aside, Spader and Shatner, who are [[suspected]] to be the [[superstar]] of the [[illustrating]], are the most [[vexing]]. While this might be a compliment in some situations, it's certainly not here. Their constantly harassing the women on the show is funny at first. But since that's what they're doing literally all the time, I've realized that this is as deep as the show is going to get. Trying to intersperse some serious, dramatic, and even tear-jerking moments in the middle of this mockery of a real show fails to compensate for the progressive loss of interest I've been experiencing trying to enjoy the show.

Alan Shore's flamboyant and gratuitous "public service announcements" where he spouts off his opinions do not impress. Denny Crane is just annoying. I was embarrassed for him and for the writers of the show for Crane's speech wearing a colonial outfit.

I'm giving two stars because there are moments where I thought the show's attempts to deal with some contemporary issues were done with care.

I think the show's writers became aware that the sexual harassment displayed by Denny and Alan was getting overbearing even to those who were more inviting of them from the start. The thing is, I don't care if the sexual harassment treatment in the show is done well, but I just felt that the writer was insulting me with artificially implanting sexual banters all over the show in the hopes that my libido will keep me coming back for more. I'm not a teenager anymore, and I think this show is promising if its goal wasn't to cater to the lowest common denominator to get ratings.

Of course, I'm writing this after I realized that it's really not gonna get much better than this. It's a shame because it's one of those shows I'd love to love. --------------------------------------------- Result 532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Not only did they [[get]] the [[characters]] all [[wrong]], not only do the voices [[suck]], not only do the [[writers]] [[seriously]] [[need]] to get girlfriends, not only are the drawings really crude, but it seems [[like]] it was mainly created for ages 1-6. The only episode I've ever [[seen]] of this show that kept me [[watching]], was "A Mattter Of Family", because I [[liked]] the [[Robin]] character. And sometimes I think it's just a general copy of Batman The Animated Series. Example: In BTAS, Bruce is [[friends]] with Harvey Dent, yeah? Over a two episode story, he transforms into the unlikely villain, TwoFace. In the "Show" Bruce is Friends with that Ethan guy, and over a two episode story, he Transforms into the unlikely villain ClayFace. That was just a small example (That may not even be true), but in short, this is the WORST attempt on a Batman series. And That's saying something. Not only did they [[obtains]] the [[hallmarks]] all [[awry]], not only do the voices [[lick]], not only do the [[authors]] [[profoundly]] [[required]] to get girlfriends, not only are the drawings really crude, but it seems [[iike]] it was mainly created for ages 1-6. The only episode I've ever [[saw]] of this show that kept me [[staring]], was "A Mattter Of Family", because I [[wished]] the [[Reuben]] character. And sometimes I think it's just a general copy of Batman The Animated Series. Example: In BTAS, Bruce is [[pals]] with Harvey Dent, yeah? Over a two episode story, he transforms into the unlikely villain, TwoFace. In the "Show" Bruce is Friends with that Ethan guy, and over a two episode story, he Transforms into the unlikely villain ClayFace. That was just a small example (That may not even be true), but in short, this is the WORST attempt on a Batman series. And That's saying something. --------------------------------------------- Result 533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Not only was this the most expensive Canadian film ever shot in BC, but [[easily]] the [[worst]], never seeing the light of day. The [[director]] is not even Canadian, but British, and [[boy]] does it show. We are all made out to be a bunch of over-sexed dope fiends and morons. The spirit of what it means to be Canadian is [[absent]], and this is [[supposed]] to be the [[reason]] we [[fund]] this bunk. Of [[course]] the British character is normal. The [[rest]] are a [[crop]] of [[sitcom]] stereotype - can you say "Norm!!"? The cinematography ranges from pretty postcard images to murky indoor silhouettes. The actors always seem to be fidgetting. Are they as bored as the viewer, or is this the directors idea of cinema? Avoid this mess and check out some of Bruce Mcdonalds films. A true Canadian boy with something original to say cinematically. You won't be compelled to walk out on HIS films after 10 minutes. Not only was this the most expensive Canadian film ever shot in BC, but [[comfortably]] the [[hardest]], never seeing the light of day. The [[superintendent]] is not even Canadian, but British, and [[guy]] does it show. We are all made out to be a bunch of over-sexed dope fiends and morons. The spirit of what it means to be Canadian is [[nonexistent]], and this is [[suspected]] to be the [[raison]] we [[fonda]] this bunk. Of [[cours]] the British character is normal. The [[stays]] are a [[cultivation]] of [[comic]] stereotype - can you say "Norm!!"? The cinematography ranges from pretty postcard images to murky indoor silhouettes. The actors always seem to be fidgetting. Are they as bored as the viewer, or is this the directors idea of cinema? Avoid this mess and check out some of Bruce Mcdonalds films. A true Canadian boy with something original to say cinematically. You won't be compelled to walk out on HIS films after 10 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] This [[romantic]] [[adventure]] [[must]] have seemed [[shockingly]] subversive in its day. A [[wealthy]] upper [[class]] English [[woman]] schemes, plots and manipulates everyone around her for her own [[satisfaction]]. She [[uses]] her [[privileged]] position to [[embark]] on secret activities of a decidedly anti-social kind. There's a clever sex-role reversal as her activities prove her more daring and dashing than most of the male characters. But naturally there's a tall, dark and [[handsome]] stranger to [[keep]] up the [[love]] interest, and this wicked lady is not backward in coming forward when she [[meets]] the right [[man]].

The wishy-washy weakness and gullibility of [[every]] other [[character]] make the plot [[unconvincing]] in the extreme, but those who thirst for [[Romance]] will [[overlook]] that. This [[sentimental]] [[fling]] [[ought]] have seemed [[curiously]] subversive in its day. A [[richer]] upper [[sorts]] English [[daughters]] schemes, plots and manipulates everyone around her for her own [[contentment]]. She [[utilizes]] her [[prerogative]] position to [[begun]] on secret activities of a decidedly anti-social kind. There's a clever sex-role reversal as her activities prove her more daring and dashing than most of the male characters. But naturally there's a tall, dark and [[wondrous]] stranger to [[sustain]] up the [[amore]] interest, and this wicked lady is not backward in coming forward when she [[satisfies]] the right [[mec]].

The wishy-washy weakness and gullibility of [[each]] other [[nature]] make the plot [[inconclusive]] in the extreme, but those who thirst for [[Romanticism]] will [[forget]] that. --------------------------------------------- Result 535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is by far one of the most [[boring]] and [[horribly]] [[acted]] accounts of the early days of Adolf Hitler that I have ever watched. Robert Carlyle is a [[wonderful]] [[actor]], but to cast him as Hitler is just plain [[wrong]]. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[longtime]] friend and [[aid]], Haefengstal must have [[emitted]] cries of despair and anguish from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W [[playing]] a Nazi supporter, bad bad bad [[casting]]. This was not an enjoyable family film with a good historical [[background]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is insulting to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid though, she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

If you would like a tremendously fantastic and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, rent "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this baloney.

As a historical researcher of the Third Reich I can honestly tell you, this had me reaching for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. This is by far one of the most [[dreary]] and [[frighteningly]] [[worked]] accounts of the early days of Adolf Hitler that I have ever watched. Robert Carlyle is a [[exquisite]] [[protagonist]], but to cast him as Hitler is just plain [[amiss]]. To cast Liev Schrieber as Hitler's [[old]] friend and [[assistance]], Haefengstal must have [[freed]] cries of despair and anguish from the Simon Wiesenthal Centre. A J-W [[gaming]] a Nazi supporter, bad bad bad [[foundry]]. This was not an enjoyable family film with a good historical [[backgrounds]]. This was Hollywood rubbish at its finest, cashing in on the strength of a strong (but sorely under utilized) supporting cast of actors whom seemed to have all but disappeared from the acting radar in the past 5 years.

The fake German accents (vee vill vin zis var) is insulting to German people everywhere. My mother is German and she sat fuming at the sound of the voices which kept switching from American/English/German all in the same sentence. The supporting cast make better cardboard cutouts at the local video store than they do on screen. Jenna Malone as the fated Geli Raubal, was splendid though, she captured the innocence and confusion of this tragic young woman who ultimately ended her own life to escape what her future would have been like in Hitler's shadow.

If you would like a tremendously fantastic and historically accurate account of Hitler's early years leading up to and including the war/holocaust, rent "Inside the Third Reich" 1983 starring Rutger Hauer as Albert Speer and Derek Jacobi as Hitler. It was good and made more sense then this baloney.

As a historical researcher of the Third Reich I can honestly tell you, this had me reaching for my books to confirm its myriad of inaccuracies. --------------------------------------------- Result 536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is a [[baffling]] film.

The beauty in sexual relations between men and women is shown degraded by a set of men and women who can only be described as a collection of oddballs and misfits.

Greenaway acknowledges his inspiration to Fellini's film "8 1/2" but whereas Fellini is a titan of world cinema, Greenaway is not.

He has [[none]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his ability to [[convey]] feelings and emotions with a deftness of clarity.

He is pretentious, the film being divided into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the written notices only stay on screen for a few seconds, not long enough to be read by the audience with the result that they are mostly ignored.

As for the women, only two can be described as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by Natacha Amal. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the men retreat from the harsh light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway obviously wants to make the point that sexual fantasy does not lead to happiness. The women themselves are depressing since they render their services in exchange for money. Relations between men and women are debased into a commercial transaction.

There is no sense of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are several scenes that are deeply unpleasant :

The suggestion of an incestuous relationship between father and son, Philip and Storey Emmental played respectively by John Standing and Matthew Delamere. The callous disregard of both men that Giaconda is carrying their child, she in fact, gets pregnant twice, the first foetus being aborted and the second time, she is sent away to a destination chosen by the men from a flight book. Both men having sex with a woman who has no legs, (the half woman in the title). The beastiality that exists between Beryl, played by Amanda Plummer, with a pig named Hortense. Father and son sharing women between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. This is a [[puzzling]] film.

The beauty in sexual relations between men and women is shown degraded by a set of men and women who can only be described as a collection of oddballs and misfits.

Greenaway acknowledges his inspiration to Fellini's film "8 1/2" but whereas Fellini is a titan of world cinema, Greenaway is not.

He has [[nothingness]] of the maestro's lightness of touch nor his ability to [[transmit]] feelings and emotions with a deftness of clarity.

He is pretentious, the film being divided into chapters with a written introduction to each, as if the viewer has to be guided into the film except that the written notices only stay on screen for a few seconds, not long enough to be read by the audience with the result that they are mostly ignored.

As for the women, only two can be described as lookers, Palmira, played by Polly Walker and Giaconda played by Natacha Amal. The rest ooze with ordinariness. Both the women and the men retreat from the harsh light of reality into the dim shades of fantasy.

Greenaway obviously wants to make the point that sexual fantasy does not lead to happiness. The women themselves are depressing since they render their services in exchange for money. Relations between men and women are debased into a commercial transaction.

There is no sense of joy or happiness or love in the film, indeed there are several scenes that are deeply unpleasant :

The suggestion of an incestuous relationship between father and son, Philip and Storey Emmental played respectively by John Standing and Matthew Delamere. The callous disregard of both men that Giaconda is carrying their child, she in fact, gets pregnant twice, the first foetus being aborted and the second time, she is sent away to a destination chosen by the men from a flight book. Both men having sex with a woman who has no legs, (the half woman in the title). The beastiality that exists between Beryl, played by Amanda Plummer, with a pig named Hortense. Father and son sharing women between them. Women enjoying being beaten sexually. The father sleeping with the corpse of his dead wife.

Mercifully, none of these scenes are shown sexually, only hinted at.

The hinted degradation of women is such that there cannot be any wonder that the film was booed at when it was first premiered at Cannes. What is more extraordinary is that the actresses in the film lined up to defend it, showing yet again that there is no limit to the naivety of women and that women will fool themselves into being exploited by men.

Greenaway's directorial style is pretentious, it is a triumph of style over substance, a depiction of Film as Art accompanied by the abandonment of common sense.

Greenaway tries to attain the sublimity of surrealism but only succeeds in showing the banality of human relationships. --------------------------------------------- Result 537 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When a [[comedy]] movie [[boasts]] its marvelous soundtrack on the back cover you know your not dealing with a top notch movie. I rented this movie with [[friends]] [[expecting]] to get some chuckles but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[chosen]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been [[alright]] with a few changes. First off, the [[comedy]] was [[painful]]. Physical [[gags]] were poorly [[performed]] and placed. The fat [[kid]] in the movie made us want to [[kill]] ourselves, bless him for [[trying]] scene in and scene out but he was like a [[puppy]] [[begging]] for love. If he had been [[pulled]] from the movie everything might have been bearable. There were some funny jokes, I believe one was when the [[group]] of [[boys]] [[steal]] one of the parent's porn movies and it turns out to be gay porn. But to best sum up the comedy I will simply tell the opening gag for the fat kid. He wears a puke stained shirt and talks about not knowing when something is done.

To finish off, the editor of the movie could have saved the movie by removing the fat kid, cutting out 20 minutes of the school scenes and making an ending that is longer than thirty seconds of random bickering.

OH, BTW, there are two good elements that the movie possesses. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and [[performs]] his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming element to the movie is the beautiful [[Mrs]]. Ali Landry. Her character is [[ignored]] most of the movie which is a shame.

Don't [[waste]] your time [[even]] renting this one. It didn't appeal to me and I was part of the [[target]] [[audience]] (18 male). When a [[charade]] movie [[boasting]] its marvelous soundtrack on the back cover you know your not dealing with a top notch movie. I rented this movie with [[friendships]] [[await]] to get some chuckles but overall to get most of our laughs off each other making fun of the movie. We couldn't have [[selecting]] a worse movie.

The movie may have been [[allright]] with a few changes. First off, the [[humour]] was [[hurtful]]. Physical [[jokes]] were poorly [[done]] and placed. The fat [[petit]] in the movie made us want to [[mata]] ourselves, bless him for [[striving]] scene in and scene out but he was like a [[doggy]] [[beg]] for love. If he had been [[pull]] from the movie everything might have been bearable. There were some funny jokes, I believe one was when the [[panels]] of [[fellas]] [[stole]] one of the parent's porn movies and it turns out to be gay porn. But to best sum up the comedy I will simply tell the opening gag for the fat kid. He wears a puke stained shirt and talks about not knowing when something is done.

To finish off, the editor of the movie could have saved the movie by removing the fat kid, cutting out 20 minutes of the school scenes and making an ending that is longer than thirty seconds of random bickering.

OH, BTW, there are two good elements that the movie possesses. Kadeem Hardison plays his role wonderfully and [[perform]] his jokes so that none are missed or under-appreciated. The other redeeming element to the movie is the beautiful [[Corinne]]. Ali Landry. Her character is [[overlooked]] most of the movie which is a shame.

Don't [[squander]] your time [[yet]] renting this one. It didn't appeal to me and I was part of the [[intents]] [[viewers]] (18 male). --------------------------------------------- Result 538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[After]] "Beau travail", [[everybody]] was [[waiting]] for Claire [[Denis]] to make a follow-up masterpiece that never [[arrived]]. Now it has. [[Denis]] makes a quantum leap in this film, an orgy of [[gorgeous]] cinematography, elliptical editing and willfully obscure narrative [[events]] that feels strange and acts even stranger. There's a nominal [[plot]] (derived [[partly]] from the Jean-Luc [[Nancy]] book of the same name) about a mature man in need of a heart transplant and who [[seeks]] a Tahitian [[son]] he [[abandoned]] [[long]] ago; but mostly it's an [[exploration]] of the idea of intrusions personal and cultural. It [[takes]] a couple of viewings to [[fully]] [[comprehend]], and has pacing [[problems]] [[close]] to the [[end]], but it's [[still]] more [[advanced]] and [[gripping]] than [[anything]] [[else]] I've [[seen]] this year. Miss it at your peril. [[Upon]] "Beau travail", [[somebody]] was [[suspense]] for Claire [[Denise]] to make a follow-up masterpiece that never [[arrives]]. Now it has. [[Denny]] makes a quantum leap in this film, an orgy of [[glamorous]] cinematography, elliptical editing and willfully obscure narrative [[event]] that feels strange and acts even stranger. There's a nominal [[intrigue]] (derived [[partially]] from the Jean-Luc [[Nance]] book of the same name) about a mature man in need of a heart transplant and who [[attempting]] a Tahitian [[yarns]] he [[waived]] [[longer]] ago; but mostly it's an [[crawling]] of the idea of intrusions personal and cultural. It [[pick]] a couple of viewings to [[totally]] [[fathom]], and has pacing [[disorders]] [[nearer]] to the [[termination]], but it's [[nonetheless]] more [[advance]] and [[captivating]] than [[nothing]] [[further]] I've [[watched]] this year. Miss it at your peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Salvage is the [[worst]] so [[called]] horror film I've ever seen. There is nothing remotely horrific about it. It doesn't deserve to be in a genre so fine. First of all i don't see how so many people can [[think]] this [[piece]] of [[crap]] such a great movie. If I wrote something as [[boring]] and [[utterly]] ridiculous as this i would be laughed at and too embarrassed to subject others to the stupidity of it. Second: the acting is terrible and the lead actress is [[excruciatingly]] ugly. Third: the story sucks, its been used before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no excuse. Read the summery on the back of the case, it reveals the whole story. I do not recommend that you watch this movie unless you have 80 minutes to waste on something that will leave you regretting that you watched it. I feel really bad for those Crooks and the irony of their name. All hail Anthony Perkins!!!!!!!!! Salvage is the [[hardest]] so [[drew]] horror film I've ever seen. There is nothing remotely horrific about it. It doesn't deserve to be in a genre so fine. First of all i don't see how so many people can [[believe]] this [[slice]] of [[dammit]] such a great movie. If I wrote something as [[dull]] and [[quite]] ridiculous as this i would be laughed at and too embarrassed to subject others to the stupidity of it. Second: the acting is terrible and the lead actress is [[awfully]] ugly. Third: the story sucks, its been used before, and the excuse that its a cheap movie is no excuse. Read the summery on the back of the case, it reveals the whole story. I do not recommend that you watch this movie unless you have 80 minutes to waste on something that will leave you regretting that you watched it. I feel really bad for those Crooks and the irony of their name. All hail Anthony Perkins!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[absurdly]] loutish. Hysterical if viewed through the eyes of [[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theatre]] 3000, which I rate as a 10. I mean, the [[sight]] of this [[obese]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[enough]] to [[send]] you to the vomitory, if you [[make]] it that far into the film. This [[ugly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[likes]] of "Booty Call", "Pumpkinhead", "Swarm", and "The Smurfs Go To Bangladesh". A -gulp- film like this proves that sometimes actors, writers, producers, etc. get behind on their mortgage, or get stoned to the point of insanity. It begs the question "who was so stupid to finance such a whale?" But then, had good judgment prevailed and "Final Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the delightful spoof voice-over in "Mystery Science Theatre 3000"! Jimmy Dean could not have been more hammy or [[grotesquely]] loutish. Hysterical if viewed through the eyes of [[Puzzle]] [[Veda]] [[Cinema]] 3000, which I rate as a 10. I mean, the [[vision]] of this [[feta]], corn-fed hog trouncing around Malta should be [[satisfactorily]] to [[forwarded]] you to the vomitory, if you [[deliver]] it that far into the film. This [[grisly]], hysterical farce should be placed with the [[love]] of "Booty Call", "Pumpkinhead", "Swarm", and "The Smurfs Go To Bangladesh". A -gulp- film like this proves that sometimes actors, writers, producers, etc. get behind on their mortgage, or get stoned to the point of insanity. It begs the question "who was so stupid to finance such a whale?" But then, had good judgment prevailed and "Final Justice" never was, then we wouldn't have the delightful spoof voice-over in "Mystery Science Theatre 3000"! --------------------------------------------- Result 541 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I saw his movie in Dallas, Texas when it came out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to see the movie. After [[seeing]] the movie I can see why. The [[movie]] was not [[bad]], nor was it [[great]]. The problem with this movie was that it tried to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to wrap it around the Masters Saga. My biggest complaint is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They even used the same scenes from the Master Saga but with different dialogue. As a kid, I loved the movie. But unfortunately I haven't seen it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I love Robotech and can't wait for The Shadows Chronicles. I saw his movie in Dallas, Texas when it came out in 1986. I remember them giving out prizes for showing up to see the movie. After [[see]] the movie I can see why. The [[cinematic]] was not [[mala]], nor was it [[large]]. The problem with this movie was that it tried to tell a side story. They created a new story, new characters and tried to wrap it around the Masters Saga. My biggest complaint is that the plot is about a second wave of Robotech Masters attacking the Earth. They even used the same scenes from the Master Saga but with different dialogue. As a kid, I loved the movie. But unfortunately I haven't seen it as an adult and can't give a better review. Looking back I was disappointed but now I would love to see the movie and re-evaluate my stance on it. That being said, will someone please release this movie for the whole world to judge? I love Robotech and can't wait for The Shadows Chronicles. --------------------------------------------- Result 542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The wife of a stage producer in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling fashions in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already met on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a wedding ring should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers musical is eventually dragged back down to the earth by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[idiotic]] [[script]], which is full of juvenile behavior. Astaire and Rogers don't just 'meet cute'--they meet ridiculously (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she complains). Audiences of 1935 probably didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with flowers (after telling his friend he wants to remain "fancy free" in the love department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a little dancing couldn't cure! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately unreal as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** The wife of a stage producer in London hopes to fix up the American song-and-dance man starring in her husband's latest show with an acquaintance, an American girl who makes her living modeling fashions in society circles. Unfortunately, the couple has already met on their own, with the girl thinking the guy is actually the show producer married to her friend (the fact he's not wearing a wedding ring should have discouraged any misunderstandings!). Wafty Fred Astaire-Ginger Rogers musical is eventually dragged back down to the earth by Dwight Taylor and Allan Scott's [[foolish]] [[hyphen]], which is full of juvenile behavior. Astaire and Rogers don't just 'meet cute'--they meet ridiculously (he's tap-dancing like a madman in the hotel suite above hers and she complains). Audiences of 1935 probably didn't care how these two were going to get together--as long as they did so, and happily. Seen today, the central characters appear to have no motivation to end up in each other's arms: he plies her with flowers (after telling his friend he wants to remain "fancy free" in the love department) and she gives him the brush-off. Nothing that a little dancing couldn't cure! This glamorous twosome are as deliberately unreal as are the London and Venice settings, but we watch simply because the leads are Fred and Ginger. It's a fantasy for have-nots...ones who don't mind the dumbed-down plot. The musical moments do break up the monotony of the contrived scenario, yet fail to transcend the surrounding silliness. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[wonderful]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hooked]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! I wasn't born until 4 years after this [[admirable]] show first aired but luckily I managed to catch the reruns of the mid 90's and the rest is history......I was [[hook]]. The premise was pretty simple; two hardened Nemesis agents, Richard Barrett and Craig Stirling ( William Gaunt and Stuart Damon) are partnered up with an expert (if not young) Doctor and Biologist (Sharron Macready) to head behind the bamboo curtain to retrieve a dangerous biological agent from being used by red china. Whilst making their escape, their plane is hit by machine gun fire and they crash in the heart of the Himalayas where their lives are saved by a mysterious and previously undiscovered civilisation who heal and enhance the senses of the trio, thus setting the scene for many exciting adventures to come...

The series lasted for 30 hour long episodes and I guess it was its relatively short lived, one season run that has set it up for cult status.

Monty Berman, the producer, was notorious for making things as cheaply as possible and sometimes the show suffered for this with incredibly tacky sets - particularly in Episodes such as "Happening" ( a studio deputising for the Australian outback) and the 'snow' sets of "Operation Deep Freeze" and "The Beginning" but if you can get past this, and focus on the characters and the story lines, the show was really a lot of fun. It had a great mix of adventure, and plenty of deadpan humour (mainly from some terrific one liners from William Gaunt).

The chemistry from the three leads was fantastic - you get the sense that they were really having a lot of fun making the show and this is borne out in the 2005 reunion documentary where the three reunite after over 35 years to reminisce about the show (and laugh about Anthony Nicholls awful wig!!). They all shared equal screen time and all had their moments to shine. I have to say, I was always a Richard Barrett fan - I loved his sardonic humour along with that dangerous edge - he was certainly a man you didn't cross, and those eyes........the bluest eyes you would probably see on TV. I have also followed Bill Gaunts career with interest since. However, Craig Stirling certainly would have had his legion of female fans and I am sure Alexandra Bastedo had a whole queue of male fans swooning over her too.

The show also had a plethora of guest stars to entice with, including Donald Sutherland, Jeremy Brett, Peter Wyngarde, Burt Kwouk, Anton Rodgers, Kate O'Mara, Jenny Linden, Paul Eddington and Colin Blakely.

Notable episodes for me were : "Auto Kill", "The Interrogation", "The Fanatics", "The Mission" and "The Gilded Cage" but I am sure every one has their personal favourites.

If you do get a chance to watch this show for the first time, or to re watch it after many years, remember to watch it in the context of the time it was made and just sit back and enjoy - the characters and the chemistry from the three leads is what made this wonderful show for me and I don't think I will ever tire of it.

Enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (74%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I had been looking forward to seeing this film for a long time, after seeing "Return to Paradise," which I found to be gritty. I was so disappointed. The most realistic thing about it was the unpredictable [[ending]] which I think was partly stolen from "Return to Paradise."

Maybe I was expecting too much.

On the positive side Danes, Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I didnt like Danes's character and first and found her very annoying.

I couldnt see anything realistic about the film. It could of been done so much better, for example there could of been more emphasis on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be realistic. There could also of been more action and tension

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 I had been looking forward to seeing this film for a long time, after seeing "Return to Paradise," which I found to be gritty. I was so disappointed. The most realistic thing about it was the unpredictable [[terminated]] which I think was partly stolen from "Return to Paradise."

Maybe I was expecting too much.

On the positive side Danes, Beckinsale and Pullman were fantastic in their roles. Although I didnt like Danes's character and first and found her very annoying.

I couldnt see anything realistic about the film. It could of been done so much better, for example there could of been more emphasis on the prison conditions and the sheer horror. It was too cheery a movie to be realistic. There could also of been more action and tension

The best thing about this film is the "tragic" ending. I couldnt of predicted that. But by that time I really didnt care what happened to them.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] It's possible that A Man Called Sledge might have been done irreparable damage on the cutting room floor. Maybe someone will demand a director's cut one day, but I [[seriously]] doubt it.

James Garner decided to cash in on the [[spaghetti]] western [[market]] and in doing so brought a whole lot of [[Americans]] over to [[fill]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, John Marley. And of [[course]] we have Vic Morrow who both wrote and [[directed]] this film.

Garner always gets cast as likable rogues because he's so darn good at playing them. But he has played serious and done it well in films like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has broken away from his usual stereotyped part successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sledge]] notorious outlaw with a big price on his head. After partner Tony Young gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by John Marley.

Marley's spent time in the nearby territorial prison and it seems as though gold shipments are put under lock and key there on a rest stop for the folks transporting the stuff on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a heist.

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. Usually [[heist]] films show the protagonists going into a lot of methodical planning. Certainly that was the case in The War Wagon which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner decides to break into the prison as a prisoner of fake US Marshal Dennis Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which time the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If taking the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian westerns, during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the [[whole]] film has lost a [[lot]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. It's possible that A Man Called Sledge might have been done irreparable damage on the cutting room floor. Maybe someone will demand a director's cut one day, but I [[gravely]] doubt it.

James Garner decided to cash in on the [[sandwiches]] western [[mercado]] and in doing so brought a whole lot of [[Us]] over to [[filling]] the cast out. Folks like Dennis Weaver, Claude Akins, John Marley. And of [[cours]] we have Vic Morrow who both wrote and [[oriented]] this film.

Garner always gets cast as likable rogues because he's so darn good at playing them. But he has played serious and done it well in films like The Children's Hour and Hour of the Gun. He can and has broken away from his usual stereotyped part successfully. But A Man Called Sledge can't be counted as one of his successes.

He's got the title role as Luther [[Sleigh]] notorious outlaw with a big price on his head. After partner Tony Young gets killed in a saloon and Garner takes appropriate Eastwood style measures, he's followed from the saloon by John Marley.

Marley's spent time in the nearby territorial prison and it seems as though gold shipments are put under lock and key there on a rest stop for the folks transporting the stuff on a regular run. Garner gets his gang together for a heist.

Here's where the movie goes totally off the wall. Usually [[robbery]] films show the protagonists going into a lot of methodical planning. Certainly that was the case in The War Wagon which some other reviewer cited. But in this one Garner decides to break into the prison as a prisoner of fake US Marshal Dennis Weaver and cause a jailbreak at which time the gold will be robbed.

That was just too much to swallow. If taking the gold was this easy it should have been done a long time before. But I will say for those who like the blood and guts of Italian westerns, during that prison break there's enough there for three movies.

That's not the whole thing, of course the outlaws fall out and we have another gore fest before the film ends. But by that time the [[together]] film has lost a [[lots]] of coherency.

The great movie singer of the Thirties Allan Jones is listed in the credits. But for the life of me I can't find him in the film. Maybe a chorus of the Donkey Serenade might have made this better.

Couldn't have hurt any. --------------------------------------------- Result 546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of those el cheapo action adventures of the early 1980s that used to fill video rental stores solely to be taken out by adolescent boys in the hope of a cheap thrill.

Woeful down market attempt to cash in on the Death Wish phenomenon by substituting a moderately attractive woman for the visually challenging Bronson. Acting is terrible, sets are cheap, the baddies are, well, bad. Identification with any of the characters is unlikely.

Only redeeming feature is modest amount of gratuitous female nudity, a smattering of which is full frontal. Other than that, you can leave it... --------------------------------------------- Result 547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] A [[tragically]] [[wonderful]] [[movie]]... brings us to a Japan that does not exist anymore. Despite Hollywood's [[technical]] expertise, I have yet to [[see]] a (hollywood) movie that can match the authenticity of the atmosphere in this small town by the river near the sea... [[Tom]] Cruise's The Last Samurai looked liked the last [[installment]] of the Lord of The [[Rings]] in trying to capture rural Old Japan.

If you like serene but [[intense]] story lines, this is a [[must]] see film. It will be a respite from hollow flashy films much like the last 1000 blockbusters you saw. I think this is one of Kurosawa's better stories.

Even if it's a movie about geishas and brothels and the complicated rules that govern life in such settings, it did not turn into a skin flick. The characters are full of depth and act with much intensity. A [[woefully]] [[sumptuous]] [[kino]]... brings us to a Japan that does not exist anymore. Despite Hollywood's [[tech]] expertise, I have yet to [[consults]] a (hollywood) movie that can match the authenticity of the atmosphere in this small town by the river near the sea... [[Thom]] Cruise's The Last Samurai looked liked the last [[instalment]] of the Lord of The [[Ringing]] in trying to capture rural Old Japan.

If you like serene but [[vehement]] story lines, this is a [[should]] see film. It will be a respite from hollow flashy films much like the last 1000 blockbusters you saw. I think this is one of Kurosawa's better stories.

Even if it's a movie about geishas and brothels and the complicated rules that govern life in such settings, it did not turn into a skin flick. The characters are full of depth and act with much intensity. --------------------------------------------- Result 548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] The Plainsman is an [[entertaining]] western, no [[doubt]] a classic, which is actual even today. Gary Cooper is [[Wild]] [[Bill]] [[Hickok]], [[ideal]] for the role, together with John Wayne and [[James]] [[Stewart]], they were the [[best]] [[actors]] that [[played]] western [[heroes]] in their [[generation]]. Jean [[Arthur]] is [[great]] as Calamity Jane, nobody that I [[know]] played it [[better]] than her. Even if might not be historically [[accurate]], the [[film]] [[manages]] to [[capture]] the most [[important]] about [[Hickok]] and about the [[time]] it takes place. [[Sometimes]] you have to [[sacrifice]] [[History]] to make your point and that is what DeMille does here. The [[friendship]] of Hickok with Buffalo [[Bill]], the [[selling]] of [[rifles]] to the Indians by a [[great]] [[manufacturer]] to [[compensate]] for the losses he would have because of the [[end]] of the [[civil]] [[war]], Custer and [[Little]] Big Horn, the [[uneasy]] [[relationship]] between Buffalo Bill's wife, a [[religious]] [[woman]], with [[Hickok]] a [[man]] who had [[killed]] plenty, [[also]] the [[unusual]] love [[affair]] between [[Hickok]] and [[Calamity]] all this makes 'The Plainsman' a non [[conventional]] and interesting [[film]]. Anthony [[Quinn]] has a very short [[appearance]], that already [[shows]] what a [[great]] [[actor]] he was going to [[become]]. A [[lot]] of care was taken to [[show]] the [[original]] [[guns]] of that [[time]]. The Plainsman is an [[entertain]] western, no [[duda]] a classic, which is actual even today. Gary Cooper is [[Savage]] [[Billed]] [[Hickock]], [[ideals]] for the role, together with John Wayne and [[Jacobo]] [[Steward]], they were the [[bestest]] [[actresses]] that [[done]] western [[heroic]] in their [[jill]]. Jean [[Arturo]] is [[formidable]] as Calamity Jane, nobody that I [[savoir]] played it [[optimum]] than her. Even if might not be historically [[meticulous]], the [[kino]] [[administered]] to [[caught]] the most [[sizeable]] about [[Hickock]] and about the [[period]] it takes place. [[Occasionally]] you have to [[cull]] [[Stories]] to make your point and that is what DeMille does here. The [[friendliness]] of Hickok with Buffalo [[Billings]], the [[sold]] of [[rifle]] to the Indians by a [[awesome]] [[manufacturers]] to [[offset]] for the losses he would have because of the [[terminating]] of the [[civilian]] [[warfare]], Custer and [[Kiddo]] Big Horn, the [[uncomfortable]] [[relations]] between Buffalo Bill's wife, a [[nuns]] [[women]], with [[Hickock]] a [[males]] who had [[murdering]] plenty, [[similarly]] the [[strange]] love [[fling]] between [[Hickock]] and [[Calamities]] all this makes 'The Plainsman' a non [[classic]] and interesting [[films]]. Anthony [[Gwen]] has a very short [[apparition]], that already [[displays]] what a [[large]] [[actress]] he was going to [[becomes]]. A [[lots]] of care was taken to [[display]] the [[upfront]] [[shotgun]] of that [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I had [[pleasure]] to watch the short film "The Cure", by first [[time]] director Ryan Jafri. What really impress me are the camera work and [[music]].

I [[think]] [[many]] young filmmakers (as I myself am one of them) [[would]] experience [[hard]] [[time]] with [[cinematography]] when just start making of an [[indie]]. We [[see]] the output are not exactly what we imaged or below our ambitions. But this [[film]], directorial [[debut]] from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[color]], lighting, compositing all [[contribute]] to the story and emotion of the film.

And music, as a [[key]] element of film language, helps a [[great]] deal too.

It's hard to [[portray]] a woman's heart, her desire, her fear, especially in a short. But still, I have to admit I am not a fan of v/o (narration), especially when the film is advanced by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal feeling to some of the narrative part is, my guess was the narrator tried a bit too hard. So the energy pushes audience back from the emotion of the film.

Overall, it's a short film [[nicely]] done, I could see the input from a director. Way to go, Ryan! Greeting from China, looking forward to your next.

tim I had [[gladness]] to watch the short film "The Cure", by first [[period]] director Ryan Jafri. What really impress me are the camera work and [[musicians]].

I [[reckon]] [[innumerable]] young filmmakers (as I myself am one of them) [[should]] experience [[arduous]] [[moment]] with [[movie]] when just start making of an [[andy]]. We [[behold]] the output are not exactly what we imaged or below our ambitions. But this [[kino]], directorial [[infancy]] from a young director, handled very well on screen. The camera motion, [[dye]], lighting, compositing all [[assist]] to the story and emotion of the film.

And music, as a [[principal]] element of film language, helps a [[huge]] deal too.

It's hard to [[outline]] a woman's heart, her desire, her fear, especially in a short. But still, I have to admit I am not a fan of v/o (narration), especially when the film is advanced by narration, instead of shots and cuts. My personal feeling to some of the narrative part is, my guess was the narrator tried a bit too hard. So the energy pushes audience back from the emotion of the film.

Overall, it's a short film [[politely]] done, I could see the input from a director. Way to go, Ryan! Greeting from China, looking forward to your next.

tim --------------------------------------------- Result 550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] As a true Elvis [[fan]], this movie is a [[total]] embarrasment and the [[script]] is a [[disaster]]. The movie [[opens]] with the beautiful [[son]] "Stay Away" and the scenery of the [[Grand]] Canyon gives the viewer [[hope]] of something special. Elvis gets in the picture and his talent is wasted big time, especially on the rest of the featured songs. I [[sat]] through this movie twice, just to make sure it is a piece of [[junk]]!!! 1 out of 10!!! As a true Elvis [[breather]], this movie is a [[totals]] embarrasment and the [[hyphen]] is a [[catastrophes]]. The movie [[inaugurated]] with the beautiful [[yarns]] "Stay Away" and the scenery of the [[Tremendous]] Canyon gives the viewer [[amal]] of something special. Elvis gets in the picture and his talent is wasted big time, especially on the rest of the featured songs. I [[oin]] through this movie twice, just to make sure it is a piece of [[trash]]!!! 1 out of 10!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Dear]] [[Friends]] and [[Family]],

I [[guess]] if one [[teen]] wants to [[become]] biblical with another [[teen]], then that's their [[eternal]] damnation - just [[remember]] [[kids]], "birth control" doesn't mean "oral sex", I don't care what the honor [[student]] says. On the other hand, even if the senator's aid quotes himself as a "bit of a romantic [[guy]]", he's still only [[hitting]] on a high school girl. [[If]] she was my sister, I'd eat this guys kneecaps.

Other than that I found out that Mongolians don't kiss the same way the French do and that baseball [[players]] named Zoo like delicate [[undergarments]].

I think I'd [[almost]] [[rather]] watch Richie [[Rich]] one more time than suffer the indignity of this slip, slap, slop. [[Thank]] you, and good [[night]]. [[Dearest]] [[Friend]] and [[Familial]],

I [[imagines]] if one [[adolescence]] wants to [[gotten]] biblical with another [[youths]], then that's their [[timeless]] damnation - just [[remembering]] [[brats]], "birth control" doesn't mean "oral sex", I don't care what the honor [[pupil]] says. On the other hand, even if the senator's aid quotes himself as a "bit of a romantic [[blokes]]", he's still only [[knock]] on a high school girl. [[Though]] she was my sister, I'd eat this guys kneecaps.

Other than that I found out that Mongolians don't kiss the same way the French do and that baseball [[protagonists]] named Zoo like delicate [[underclothes]].

I think I'd [[roughly]] [[quite]] watch Richie [[Storied]] one more time than suffer the indignity of this slip, slap, slop. [[Thanked]] you, and good [[nocturnal]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I like films that don't [[provide]] the typical "happy ending," and that's my [[main]] reason for my liking of this movie. Alice Marano ([[Danes]]) and her best friend Darlene (Beckinsale) are arrested in Thailand for [[narcotics]] [[smuggling]] after a tip anonymously phoned in to the Thai authorities. The [[film]] does a [[solid]] [[job]] of [[keeping]] [[viewers]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[girls]] was involved, and Bill Pullman is [[perfect]] as their [[sleazy]] [[lawyer]]. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[terrific]] performance as his more kind, magnanimous wife, Yon, who is [[also]] an attorney. I wish the girls had been abused more in the prison, as another commenter has suggested, as I've heard that Thai prisons can be quite brutal. Where this [[film]] grabs me, however, is its ending. Alice subjects herself to a [[sentence]] of 96 [[years]] in [[total]] so that Darlene can be pardoned, and we (the [[viewers]]) realize that they are both innocent. Any [[film]] that defies my [[expectation]] of the ending wins extra points with me, and this well-acted drama is [[certainly]] [[deserving]]. I like films that don't [[render]] the typical "happy ending," and that's my [[principal]] reason for my liking of this movie. Alice Marano ([[Denmark]]) and her best friend Darlene (Beckinsale) are arrested in Thailand for [[drug]] [[smuggled]] after a tip anonymously phoned in to the Thai authorities. The [[kino]] does a [[solids]] [[labor]] of [[maintaining]] [[listeners]] guessing as to whether (or which) of the [[females]] was involved, and Bill Pullman is [[irreproachable]] as their [[sordid]] [[jurist]]. Jacqueline Kim turns in a [[sumptuous]] performance as his more kind, magnanimous wife, Yon, who is [[similarly]] an attorney. I wish the girls had been abused more in the prison, as another commenter has suggested, as I've heard that Thai prisons can be quite brutal. Where this [[movies]] grabs me, however, is its ending. Alice subjects herself to a [[sentencing]] of 96 [[yr]] in [[unmitigated]] so that Darlene can be pardoned, and we (the [[bystanders]]) realize that they are both innocent. Any [[cinematographic]] that defies my [[waits]] of the ending wins extra points with me, and this well-acted drama is [[admittedly]] [[merited]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I think this film has been somewhat overrated here. There are some things to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a [[science]] fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and [[cinematography]] are good, and the ideas are interesting enough (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[wooden]] performances from the lead actors, and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither [[likable]] nor unlikable. I realize that part of the story [[dictates]] that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) cipher, but I was utterly unable to work up any empathy for a character that just seemed like a boring, anonymous schlub of a man. What character transformation there is for this sad sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in conveying that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but fails at inspiring any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no real personality of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the biggest disappointments of this movie is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the worst kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big explosions and special effects. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly done, and at the end the characters seem even less likable than they did before some of the film's main plot threads were resolved.

The movie's not all bad, though. It does manage to maintain a certain low level of tension throughout most of it, despite the slow pacing (although I think I have a higher than average tolerance for slow-paced movies). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. I think this film has been somewhat overrated here. There are some things to admire in it; for one thing it deserves credit for being a [[veda]] fiction(ish) film which relies on its story instead of special effects and action sequences to carry the day. The supporting cast is good, the set design and [[filmmaking]] are good, and the ideas are interesting enough (though they are beginning to seem a little tired after the many mediocre Dark City / Memento / Fight Club clones of recent years). But the film is undone by poor characterization, [[wood]] performances from the lead actors, and a laughably bad ending.

The main problem I had was that the protagonist was neither [[sympathetic]] nor unlikable. I realize that part of the story [[imposes]] that he should be a bit of a (wait for it...) cipher, but I was utterly unable to work up any empathy for a character that just seemed like a boring, anonymous schlub of a man. What character transformation there is for this sad sack is artificially forced on him by the plot. Lead actor Jeremy Northam succeeds in conveying that the protagonist is confused and hapless, but fails at inspiring any sympathy for him. Opposite him, Lucy Liu does what she can with a character who has no real personality of her own, unless being the embodiment of a spy-movie cliché counts as personality.

One of the biggest disappointments of this movie is the ending. I won't give any spoilers here, but I will say that a surprise twist at the end was telegraphed pretty clearly at least 45 minutes before it occurred. Further, after being content to be a quirky, idea-oriented movie for the first hour or so, the last few scenes suddenly and terribly devolve into the worst kind of Hollywood pap, complete with big explosions and special effects. The revealing of the film's McGuffin at the end is poorly done, and at the end the characters seem even less likable than they did before some of the film's main plot threads were resolved.

The movie's not all bad, though. It does manage to maintain a certain low level of tension throughout most of it, despite the slow pacing (although I think I have a higher than average tolerance for slow-paced movies). And there are some moments when the unsettled, paranoiac feeling that director Vincenzo Natali was clearly trying to evoke rises to the surface. But in the end, these elements aren't enough to overcome the flaws in the film's acting and script. There is probably a good movie that covers these same themes and ideas, but this isn't it. --------------------------------------------- Result 554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Sharp, well-made [[documentary]] focusing on Mardi Gras beads. I have always [[liked]] this approach to film-making - [[communicate]] ideas about a larger, more complex, and often [[inscrutable]] phenomenon by breaking the issue down into something familiar and close to home.

I am sure most people have [[heard]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic motives behind profit and capitalism, and globalism's effect on poorer nations ([[however]] people feel about it). Rather than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's anything [[wrong]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

Outstanding and highly recommended. Need to see more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those involved in the making of this film. Sharp, well-made [[literature]] focusing on Mardi Gras beads. I have always [[wished]] this approach to film-making - [[submit]] ideas about a larger, more complex, and often [[incomprehensible]] phenomenon by breaking the issue down into something familiar and close to home.

I am sure most people have [[hear]] stories about sweatshops and understand the basic motives behind profit and capitalism, and globalism's effect on poorer nations ([[instead]] people feel about it). Rather than expound on these subjects and get up on a soapbox (not that there's anything [[incorrect]] with that, other than such documentaries typically preach to the converted), this documentary simply shows Mardi Gras beads, how they are manufactured, by what people, and under what conditions, and then how they are utilized by consumers at the end of the process. It openly and starkly investigates the motivations of everyone involved in the process, including workers, factory management, American importers, and finally, the consumer at the end of the chain.

I felt a little sickened by this; equally by the Mardi Gras revelers, but also by the way the workers in China have accepted their situation as normal and par for the course (even if they have some objections to the details of how they are managed). The footage of the street sweepers cleaning up the beads off the streets at the end, made a particular impression. But that was just my reaction; I can see how someone else might read this documentary a little differently.

Unlike other documentaries on this subject, I don't think you have to have any specific political opinion to be affected by this. This is ultimately a story about human beings and our relation to the goods we produce and consume. If you have ever bought a product made in the Far East, this should give you something to think about.

Outstanding and highly recommended. Need to see more documentaries like this. Kudos to all of those involved in the making of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I always enjoy this movie when it shows up on TV.

The one scene that always stands out, for me that is, is the one with the Myrna Loy and the painters foreman, where she gives him very explicit instructions on the colours and as soon as she goes away he turns the his guys and says "Did you get that, that's yellow, blue, green and white" --------------------------------------------- Result 556 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Justin goes home to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre tenants residing in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged drinking and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that nearly all the other reviewers on here saw??? [[Clever]], compelling, original, intense, clever, genius????!!? I witnessed [[none]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, trite, extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tension]] in the least bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD Extras: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" Justin goes home to live with his strict, hard-nosed police detective father, but it seems daddy has turned the upstairs into three makeshift apartments each with bizarre tenants residing in them. Straight-laced idealist Justin is thrust into the world of the occult, murder, under-aged drinking and other dastardly things. Ho-hum

Wow, have I seen the same film that nearly all the other reviewers on here saw??? [[Malin]], compelling, original, intense, clever, genius????!!? I witnessed [[nothingness]] of those things. What I DID see was an uninteresting, bland, trite, extremely clichéd low-budget thriller that was ripe with implausibilities and no [[tensions]] in the least bit as the killer is telegraphed as soon into the film as he gives his monologue/debate/discussion. And where are these humorous laugh-out-loud moments? I never so much as chuckled, perhaps because i was too busy struggling not to be put to sleep by the film.

My Grade: D

DVD Extras: Audio commentary with director Dave Campfield; Second commentary with various contributers as well as isolated music tracks; 4 featurettes (Making of, on the set, turning 1 room into 4, & Inside the black circle); Interviews with Felissa Rose, Desiree Gould, & Raine Brown; Alternate scenes; bloopers; a music video for 'Addiction'; A trailer for this movie; And trailers for "Shock-o-rama", "Chainsaw Sally", "Skin Crawl", "Sinful", "Bacterium", "Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon", & "Millennium Crises" --------------------------------------------- Result 557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] tries to be funny and fails miserably. The animation is just terrible, looks like a 2 year old threw it together in his sleep. Plot is dull and cliched. IF you have a young child, maybe rent it. but don't waste hard earned money to pay to see it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Good [[lord]], whoever made this turkey needs to be buried alive. I'm sorry, but the other reviewer must not have seen this movie, he must be watching something else, or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[saying]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the Wind? [[Unintentionally]] funny, massively [[unbelievable]] characters, absurd situations, looks like it was shot in Griffith Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in Griffith Park), [[crappy]] script, just about everything that could possibly be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. Should be required viewing for all prospective film makers as an example of how a movie could be horribly wrong. It reminds me of something a USC student may make for a film class.

Give this one a pass unless you do drugs and are into high camp. Good [[seigneur]], whoever made this turkey needs to be buried alive. I'm sorry, but the other reviewer must not have seen this movie, he must be watching something else, or have never seen a movie before... 9 out of ten stars? He's [[telling]] what, this is as good as Ben Hur or Gone With the Wind? [[Unwittingly]] funny, massively [[extraordinary]] characters, absurd situations, looks like it was shot in Griffith Park (which works out pretty well--MASH was shot in Griffith Park), [[shitty]] script, just about everything that could possibly be wrong with a movie all rolled into one package. Should be required viewing for all prospective film makers as an example of how a movie could be horribly wrong. It reminds me of something a USC student may make for a film class.

Give this one a pass unless you do drugs and are into high camp. --------------------------------------------- Result 559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Gender Bender sexes [[things]] up a [[bit]] for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a [[good]] [[story]], but an ending that is [[wanting]]. Gender Bender is also the x-files [[debut]] for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays Michael, a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[see]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular [[beginning]]. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they become turned onto him/her. However, when Andrew seduces Scully, she only because disoriented and groggy, and does not become attracted to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode reminds me of why it would sometimes be miserable to film up in British Columbia. Throughout the episode it is so wet, soggy, and muddy, it could not have been that much fun. Despite the disappointing [[ending]], Gender Bender is still a [[decent]] episode to view. Gender Bender sexes [[items]] up a [[bitten]] for the x-files. This episode has an interesting premise, a [[alright]] [[conte]], but an ending that is [[wanted]]. Gender Bender is also the x-files [[infancy]] for actor Nicholas Lea, better known as Alex Krycek. In this episode he plays Michael, a man attacked by one of "The Kindred". You need to see this episode just to [[consults]] Nic Lea's less than spectacular [[starting]]. An interesting thing about the Kindred's "power of seduction". When Marty does it to his victims, they become turned onto him/her. However, when Andrew seduces Scully, she only because disoriented and groggy, and does not become attracted to Andrew. Maybe it's because Marty has more experience at it than Andrew. This episode reminds me of why it would sometimes be miserable to film up in British Columbia. Throughout the episode it is so wet, soggy, and muddy, it could not have been that much fun. Despite the disappointing [[ended]], Gender Bender is still a [[presentable]] episode to view. --------------------------------------------- Result 560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I was [[expecting]] a very [[funny]] [[movie]]. [[Instead]], I got a [[movie]] with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[work]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was confusing. It would have been more funny if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[funny]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not even McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather confusing movie with a [[poor]] script. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. I was [[wait]] a very [[hilarious]] [[film]]. [[However]], I got a [[flick]] with a few funny jokes, and many that just didn't [[jobs]]. I didn't like the idea of bringing in Sherlock Holmes' and Moriarty's descendants. It was confusing. It would have been more funny if they just had someone new, instead of Moriarty resurrected. Some of the things were funny. Burt Kwouk was very [[amusing]], as always. McCloud on the horse was funny. The McGarrett from Hawaii 5-0 was not even McGarrett-like. Connie Booth obviously is very good with accents. She is from Indiana, but played English and a New Yorker pretty well. Unfortunately, she was not presented much into the script. I was expecting a more funny film. Instead, I got a rather confusing movie with a [[pauper]] script. Rather ironic, since both Booth and Cleese were together on this one. Maybe they were about to break up in 77. --------------------------------------------- Result 561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] If you [[liked]] the Grinch movie... go watch that again, because this was no where near as good a Seussian movie translation. Mike Myers' Cat is probably the most [[annoying]] character to "[[grace]]" the screen in recent times. [[His]] [[voice]]/accent is terrible and he laughs at his own jokes with an awful weasing sound, which is about the only [[laughing]] I heard at the [[theater]]. Not [[even]] the [[kids]] [[liked]] this one folks, and [[kids]] laugh at anything now. [[Save]] your money and go see Looney [[Tunes]]: Back in Action if you're [[really]] [[looking]] for a fun holiday family movie. If you [[wished]] the Grinch movie... go watch that again, because this was no where near as good a Seussian movie translation. Mike Myers' Cat is probably the most [[galling]] character to "[[gracia]]" the screen in recent times. [[Her]] [[vowel]]/accent is terrible and he laughs at his own jokes with an awful weasing sound, which is about the only [[kidding]] I heard at the [[theatres]]. Not [[yet]] the [[enfants]] [[enjoyed]] this one folks, and [[children]] laugh at anything now. [[Saved]] your money and go see Looney [[Melodies]]: Back in Action if you're [[truly]] [[search]] for a fun holiday family movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] As far as horror flicks go, this one is pretty darn good. While it may not be a classic tale of horror and suspense, it does provide many quality chuckles that make this movie a must see if you're into the horror/comedy genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I have no [[idea]] what idiots gave this movie a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes [[Film]] [[Festival]] because it was [[atrocious]]! I actually [[watched]] the [[entire]] [[thing]] simply because I couldn't [[believe]] that someone would make such a [[worthless]] [[film]]. There is [[nothing]] interesting about the [[plot]], the [[characters]] are devoid of [[depth]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[sort]] of ambiance with music or sound effects. Also, if you do decide to waste 2 [[hours]] of your [[life]] by watching this [[film]], be sure to [[bring]] [[something]] to [[throw]] up in because the [[cinematography]] is simply someone running [[around]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the time you can't [[even]] see the main [[subjects]]. This style has been [[used]] much more successfully in movies such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. In Rosetta, there is no plot and no suspense to which that style would lend anything. I should have known better when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was going to be horrible. I have no [[brainchild]] what idiots gave this movie a Palm D'Or at the 1999 Cannes [[Cinematographic]] [[Celebratory]] because it was [[nefarious]]! I actually [[observed]] the [[together]] [[stuff]] simply because I couldn't [[think]] that someone would make such a [[vain]] [[cinematography]]. There is [[anything]] interesting about the [[intrigue]], the [[characteristic]] are devoid of [[depths]] and there is no attempt at giving any [[sorting]] of ambiance with music or sound effects. Also, if you do decide to waste 2 [[hour]] of your [[iife]] by watching this [[movies]], be sure to [[bringing]] [[algo]] to [[toss]] up in because the [[film]] is simply someone running [[about]] with a hand-held camcorder and half the time you can't [[yet]] see the main [[themes]]. This style has been [[using]] much more successfully in movies such as "Blair Witch" because it creates suspense. In Rosetta, there is no plot and no suspense to which that style would lend anything. I should have known better when it came on at 2 o'clock in the morning that it was going to be horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 564 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (55%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] This is one of the most hilariously [[bad]] movies I have ever had the privilege to see.

I watched this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly incompetent team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun betting on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek entertainment it's a roaring success. This is one of the most hilariously [[horrid]] movies I have ever had the privilege to see.

I watched this on DVD with a bunch of friends one Friday night and we just couldn't stop laughing from start to finish.

The story is simple enough: terrorists hijack a convoy they think is carrying weapons grade uranium, but it's actually carrying a bunch of man-eating dinosaurs. Easy mistake to make. Cue a startlingly incompetent team of Army Special Forces to tackle the prehistoric beasts. They are led by Colonel Rance, played by Scott Valentine; a man who seems to have perfected 'Smell the fart' acting, as advocated by Joey in Friends.

There's plenty of gore and an awful lot of shooting, but unfortunately Rance's team seem to have a problem aiming their weapons in the general direction of a horde of giant, lumbering monsters. Also, the lights always seem to flicker and go out whenever a Velociraptor attacks (preumably so we can't see how bad the creature effects are).

Having said all that, we all had a great deal of fun betting on who was going to get their head bitten off next.

As a Jusassic Park / Aliens style action adventure this movie stinks worse than a dinosaur's crotch, but as ludicrous, tongue-in-cheek entertainment it's a roaring success. --------------------------------------------- Result 565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have nothing against religious movies. Religious people need something to watch on a Saturday night, I guess. But what really ticks me off is when the write-up on the DVD box does not indicate this fact to the potential viewer. Passing off religious propaganda as entertainment is NOT cool, bro.

And even if I was a religious person, I would have to agree with most of the other posters here, this movie was a mess. Poorly directed, poorly acted, poorly edited, and the attempt at a soundtrack was hilarious. The fake accents were terrible, the characters were mainly stereotypes, and continuity was out the window. The only reason we sat through this lame waste of time was that it was too late to watch another movie instead. Should have just gone to bed.

Absolutely no redeeming qualities to this movie, unless you are the religious type who will immediately endorse anything that will preach your beliefs to the unbelievers, even if it's a pile of garbage. If you aren't, avoid this at all costs. Do not be deceived by the box write-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is a [[film]] that makes you [[say]] 2 things... 1) I can do much [[better]] than this( acting,writing and directing) 2) this is so [[bad]] I [[must]] leave a [[review]] and [[warn]] others...

Looks as if it was [[shot]] with my flip video. I have too believe my friend who [[told]] me to watch this has a vendetta against me. I have noticed that there are some [[positive]] posts for this home [[video]]; Must have been left by crew members or people with something to do with this film. One of the [[worst]] 3 [[movies]] I have ever seen. hopefully the writers and director leave the business. not [[even]] [[talented]] enough to do commercials!!!!! This is a [[filmmaking]] that makes you [[tell]] 2 things... 1) I can do much [[best]] than this( acting,writing and directing) 2) this is so [[mala]] I [[owe]] leave a [[examine]] and [[warnings]] others...

Looks as if it was [[filmed]] with my flip video. I have too believe my friend who [[tell]] me to watch this has a vendetta against me. I have noticed that there are some [[favourable]] posts for this home [[videos]]; Must have been left by crew members or people with something to do with this film. One of the [[hardest]] 3 [[cinematography]] I have ever seen. hopefully the writers and director leave the business. not [[yet]] [[gifted]] enough to do commercials!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Rather [[nasty]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I actually liked this movie as a bit of a guilty pleasure. Lugosi is great here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite nasty in some places which makes it all most watchable. A fun little view. Rather [[foul]] piece of business featuring Bela Lugosi as a mad scientist (with yes, a Renfield-like assistant and his mother, a dwarf and yes, the scientist's wife (sounds like a Greenaway movie actually lol). Lugosi gives his wife injections from dead brides (why them? Who knows?) so that his wife can keep looking beautiful. He gets the brides after doing a pretty clever trick with some orchids that makes the brides collapse at the altar. After another bride bites the dust, a newspaper reporter just HAPPENS to be around for the scoop, and decides to snoop around for a story. She gets all sorts of clues about the orchids and Lugosi. Heaven knows where the police were. Soon she's off to Bela's lair, when she meets a sort of strange looking doctor who may or may not be eeeevil. It all cumulates in a totally far-fetched plan to have a fake wedding to capture the mad scientist, but it seems that the scientist has x-ray vision, as he foils her plans, Oh no! What will happen? I actually liked this movie as a bit of a guilty pleasure. Lugosi is great here, his hangers-on are all very very strange, the story is actually quite nasty in some places which makes it all most watchable. A fun little view. --------------------------------------------- Result 568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is the [[best]] [[movie]] I've ever [[seen]]!

[[Maybe]] it's because I [[live]] just a few [[miles]] from the [[village]] were the story take [[place]], and I know how [[things]] [[work]] out in this area in Sweden. The [[movie]] [[tells]] the [[truth]], believe me! It both criticizes and honors the lifestyle of Dalarna, and the producer wants people who watch the [[movie]] to be more [[opened]] minded and care more for your [[closest]] [[friends]] and relatives.

But if you [[live]] in another [[small]] [[village]] [[anywhere]] in Sweden (or another [[country]]) you will [[probably]] [[also]] [[recognize]] much from this [[movie]].

Thank you [[Maria]] [[Blom]]! This is the [[optimum]] [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[watched]]!

[[Potentially]] it's because I [[living]] just a few [[mile]] from the [[villager]] were the story take [[placing]], and I know how [[items]] [[cooperation]] out in this area in Sweden. The [[flick]] [[says]] the [[veracity]], believe me! It both criticizes and honors the lifestyle of Dalarna, and the producer wants people who watch the [[flick]] to be more [[started]] minded and care more for your [[nearest]] [[buddies]] and relatives.

But if you [[inhabit]] in another [[minimal]] [[villager]] [[somewhere]] in Sweden (or another [[nationals]]) you will [[presumably]] [[further]] [[recognizes]] much from this [[kino]].

Thank you [[Mariah]] [[Flowers]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she [[wants]] to [[burst]] out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The film is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is dismal. Which is rather odd as Lilia stoops to jiggle around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male If you haven't figured out what is going to happen in this film in the first five minutes then give it a couple more minutes. Lilia is a widow. She has been left on the shelf for too long and she [[wanna]] to [[bursting]] out. She has a teenage daughter which only highlights that she is not getting any younger. While checking up on her daughter she discovers a world she never dared...the cabaret, where she can belly dance in skimpy sequined outfits while men throw money at her. The film is very misogamist. It's portrayal of men is dismal. Which is rather odd as Lilia stoops to jiggle around for them, not for money, but just for the hell of it. When she succeeds in arousing them it makes her feel like a woman again. She does not wish to connect with them but she is addicted to the attention. The other dancers all are mostly aging women who look like men in drag and realize their time in the spotlight is short-lived. Not short enough I say. She does find romance, however brief , with you guessed it....No surprises here we didn't see coming. Though the ending is good you realize that it could have ended no other way. Maybe this film just isn't targeting my demographic- 30 Male --------------------------------------------- Result 570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I did not like the [[idea]] of the female turtle at all [[since]] 1987 we [[knew]] the TMNT to be four [[brothers]] with their teacher Splinter and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[great]] [[artists]] name like [[Leonardo]] , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Venus]] here doesn't have any [[meaning]] or [[playing]] any important part and I [[believe]] that the old TMNT series was much more better than that new one which contains Venus As a female turtle will not add any [[action]] to the [[story]] we [[like]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have [[new]] enemies in every [[part]] is a good point to have some [[action]] but to have a female [[turtle]] is a very [[weak]] point to have some [[action]], we [[wish]] to [[see]] more new of TMNT [[series]] but just as the same characters we knew in 1987 without that female turtle. I did not like the [[thinks]] of the female turtle at all [[because]] 1987 we [[overheard]] the TMNT to be four [[siblings]] with their teacher Splinter and their enemies and each one of the four brothers are named after the [[grand]] [[painters]] name like [[Leonard]] , Michelangleo, Raphel and Donatello so [[Zahra]] here doesn't have any [[sens]] or [[replay]] any important part and I [[believing]] that the old TMNT series was much more better than that new one which contains Venus As a female turtle will not add any [[efforts]] to the [[tale]] we [[loves]] the story of the TMNT we knew in 1987 to have [[nouveau]] enemies in every [[portions]] is a good point to have some [[actions]] but to have a female [[turtles]] is a very [[fragile]] point to have some [[measures]], we [[wants]] to [[behold]] more new of TMNT [[serials]] but just as the same characters we knew in 1987 without that female turtle. --------------------------------------------- Result 571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The penultimate [[collaboration]] between director [[Anthony]] [[Mann]] and [[star]] James [[Stewart]] ([[excluding]] the few [[days]] Mann [[worked]] on [[Night]] [[Passage]] before parting [[company]] with the star under less than [[amicable]] [[circumstances]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream look to offer another [[portrait]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[redemption]], fighting it every step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no great surprise which way Stewart turns at the end, he's a surprisingly callous critter along the way, even using his desire to just be left alone to excuse not warning a group of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the chance because it's not his problem. For most of the film there's really only a hair's breadth between him and McIntire, something the judge recognises [[immediately]], revelling in the [[company]] of a kindred spirit even as he's genially [[planning]] to lynch him. In [[many]] [[ways]] the townspeople who put their faith in him probably [[recognise]] it too - [[despite]] their [[appeals]] to his dead-and-buried better [[nature]], there's an [[unspoken]] acknowledgement that the only [[person]] who can [[stand]] up to the judge is someone [[almost]] as bad as he is.

As [[usual]] with Mann there's an [[exceptional]] use of high country locations, though for once the final [[showdown]] takes place on [[level]] ground, and the [[film]] is [[almost]] perfectly [[cast]] with [[strong]] [[support]] from [[Walter]] Brennan, [[Harry]] Morgan and Ruth Roman ([[though]] [[Corinne]] Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the [[great]] cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD [[transfer]], with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. The penultimate [[cooperates]] between director [[Antony]] [[Manni]] and [[superstar]] James [[Sylvain]] ([[disqualify]] the few [[jours]] Mann [[working]] on [[Overnight]] [[Crossing]] before parting [[businesses]] with the star under less than [[cordial]] [[situations]]), The Far Country belies its mainstream look to offer another [[portrayal]] of an embittered man dragged unwillingly to his own [[buyout]], fighting it every step of the way. This time he's a cattle driver whose response to labour problems - challenging troublesome cowhands to a gunfight at the end of the trail - results in his cattle being confiscated by John McIntire's larcenous judge of the Roy Bean school of law and order. Stealing them back and taking them across the Canadian border, he soon finds himself unwillingly drawn into the growing conflict between prospectors and the judge as he cheats or kills them out of their claims...

While it's no great surprise which way Stewart turns at the end, he's a surprisingly callous critter along the way, even using his desire to just be left alone to excuse not warning a group of prospectors of an impending avalanche when he has the chance because it's not his problem. For most of the film there's really only a hair's breadth between him and McIntire, something the judge recognises [[promptly]], revelling in the [[corporation]] of a kindred spirit even as he's genially [[programmed]] to lynch him. In [[various]] [[way]] the townspeople who put their faith in him probably [[realise]] it too - [[albeit]] their [[appellate]] to his dead-and-buried better [[characters]], there's an [[implied]] acknowledgement that the only [[persona]] who can [[standing]] up to the judge is someone [[practically]] as bad as he is.

As [[normal]] with Mann there's an [[unusual]] use of high country locations, though for once the final [[standoff]] takes place on [[levels]] ground, and the [[cinematographic]] is [[hardly]] perfectly [[casting]] with [[forceful]] [[assistance]] from [[Walters]] Brennan, [[Harri]] Morgan and Ruth Roman ([[while]] [[Lena]] Calvert's young romantic interest veers to the irritating). Sadly the [[huge]] cinematography of the Canadian Rockies is done few favours by a distinctly average DVD [[transferring]], with only the theatrical trailer as an extra. --------------------------------------------- Result 572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Your mind will not be satisfied by this no—budget doomsday thriller; but, pray, who's will? [[A]] youngish couple [[spends]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens masquerading as Church people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the ingenuity and the [[lack]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar movies. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but convent [[creeps]] as well. The [[villain]] of the movie is a well—known character [[actor]].

This wholly shameless slapdash seems a piece of convent—exploitation, that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly [[outdated]]. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! Your mind will not be satisfied by this no—budget doomsday thriller; but, pray, who's will? [[una]] youngish couple [[expenditure]] the actual end of the world in the hidden laboratory of some aliens masquerading as Church people.

Small _apocalyptically themed outing, END OF THE WORLD has the ingenuity and the [[absence]] of both brio and style of the purely '50s similar movies. And it's not only that, but EOTW plays like a hybrid—not only doomsday but convent [[willies]] as well. The [[rascal]] of the movie is a well—known character [[protagonist]].

This wholly shameless slapdash seems a piece of convent—exploitation, that significantly '70s genre which looks today so amusingly [[antiquated]]. Anyway, the convent's secret laboratory is some nasty piece of futuristic deco! Christopher Lee is the pride of End of the World; but the End of the World is not at all his pride! --------------------------------------------- Result 573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Penny]] [[Princess]] [[finds]] American working girl Yolande Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that lies in that triangle where France, Italy, and Switzerland meet called Lampidorra. It seems as though the Lampidorrans owe bills all over Europe and the main occupation of the country is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? Especially since Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

Anyway Penny Princess is a [[delightful]] [[blend]] of British farce and romantic comedy. Yolande Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I found a reason to be grateful for insomnia. [[Pence]] [[Princesa]] [[deems]] American working girl Yolande Donlon the inheritor of a small kingdom that lies in that triangle where France, Italy, and Switzerland meet called Lampidorra. It seems as though the Lampidorrans owe bills all over Europe and the main occupation of the country is smuggling due to its geography. An American multi-millionaire buys the place, but dies before he can take title. His nearest heir is Donlan.

But of course the estate has to go through probate in America and what are the Lampidorrans to do? Especially since Donlan who has now become a princess has forbade smuggling.

Enter Dirk Bogarde who is on a trip to Switzerland to learn about the cheese industry. It seems as though the Lampidorrans have a kind of cheese that they playfully refer to as Schmeeze. With a few bumps in the road, Schmeeze solves all the problems both financial, geopolitical, and romantic between Donlan and Bogarde.

How does Schmeeze work, well that's the gimmick to the whole film. But here's a hint. In Lover Come Back Jack Kruschen might just have gotten a hold of the secret of Schmeeze when he was busy inventing VIP for Rock Hudson and his advertising agency.

Anyway Penny Princess is a [[sumptuous]] [[mixing]] of British farce and romantic comedy. Yolande Donlon once again plays a role that Marilyn Monroe would have been cast in if the film had been made this side of the pond. Dirk Bogarde was well cast in the part which was at the beginning of his career as a romantic heart throb, way before anyone but him suspected he had the acting chops he had.

This film was sadly shown at three o'clock in the morning on TCM. But at least I found a reason to be grateful for insomnia. --------------------------------------------- Result 574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Criticism]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[may]] have discouraged many viewers from giving the [[film]] a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the [[entire]] production was over-hyped, [[etc]]. For this viewer, [[seeing]] the [[film]] on a [[DVD]] in the [[quiet]] of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are woven together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 years later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[delicate]] mood piece and the script by Minot and Cunningham is rich in atmosphere and subtle life lessons. Yes, there are gaps in the story that could have used more explanation, but in order to maintain the aura of nostalgia of a dying lady's words, such 'holes' are understandable. The film is graced by the presence of not only Redgrave, Richardson (Redgrave's true daughter), Collette, Gummer (Streep's true daughter), Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn Close, Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but also with an ensemble cast of brief but very solid performances. The setting is gorgeous (cinematography by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan A.P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("Being Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady Harp [[Critique]] of the film EVENING, based on the novel by Susan Minot and adapted for the screen by Minot and Michael Cunningham, has been harsh, so harsh that it [[maggio]] have discouraged many viewers from giving the [[flick]] a try. The primary criticism has centered on the fact that very little happens in this film about a dying woman's fretting over a mistake she made one summer in her youth, that famous actors were given very minor roles, that the [[total]] production was over-hyped, [[cetera]]. For this viewer, [[see]] the [[cinematography]] on a [[DVDS]] in the [[silencing]] of the home, a very different reaction occurred.

Ann Grant Lord (Vanessa Redgrave) is dying in her home by the ocean and her medication and memories allow her to share a man's name - 'Harris' - with her two grown daughters Nina (Toni Colette) and Constance (Natasha Richardson). As her daughters sit at her bedside Ann relives a particular summer when she was a bridesmaid for her best friend Lila (Mamie Gummer) - a marriage both Ann (Claire Danes as the youthful Ann) and Lila's alcoholic brother Buddy (Hugh Dancy) objected to, feeling that Lila was simply marrying a man of her class instead of the boy she had loved - Harris Arden (Patrick Wilson), her housekeeper's son who had become a physician. Harris, Buddy, Lila, and Ann are woven together in a series of infatuations and romances that have been kept secret until now, 50 years later, as Ann is dying. The older Lila (Meryl Streep) visits Ann at the end and the secrets are revealed: 'there are no such things as mistakes - life just goes on.' The film is a [[tricky]] mood piece and the script by Minot and Cunningham is rich in atmosphere and subtle life lessons. Yes, there are gaps in the story that could have used more explanation, but in order to maintain the aura of nostalgia of a dying lady's words, such 'holes' are understandable. The film is graced by the presence of not only Redgrave, Richardson (Redgrave's true daughter), Collette, Gummer (Streep's true daughter), Meryl Streep, Claire Danes, Eileen Atkins, Glenn Close, Hugh Dancy and Patrick Wilson, but also with an ensemble cast of brief but very solid performances. The setting is gorgeous (cinematography by Gyula Pados) and the musical score is by the inimitable Jan A.P. Kaczmarek. Lajos Koltai ("Being Julia') directs. Judge this film on your own.... Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've seen many of Guy Maddin's films, and liked most of them, but this one literally gave me a headache. John Gurdebeke's editing is way too frenetic, and, apart from a tour-de-force sequence showing a line of heads snapping to look at one object, does nothing but interfere with the actors' ability to communicate with the audience.

Another thing I disliked about this film was that it seemed more brutal than Maddin's earlier works--though his films have always had dark elements, his sympathy for the characters gave the movies an overriding feeling of humanity. This one seemed more like harshness for harshness' sake.

As I'm required to add more lines of text before IMDb will accept my review, I will mention that the actor playing "Guy Maddin" does manage to ape his facial expressions pretty well. --------------------------------------------- Result 576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[watched]] this with my whole [[family]] as a 9 [[year]] [[old]] in 1964 on our black and [[white]] TV. I [[remember]] my father remarking that "this is how it could have [[happened]] - Adam and Eve." I vividly [[remember]] the scene when Adam [[finds]] Eve, her eyes were blackened. I [[asked]] my [[father]] why were her eyes blackened and he told because she was tired and hungry. Having not [[seen]] this episode in 45 [[years]], I [[still]] remember it vividly - the TV [[transmissions]] back and forth with the [[home]] [[planet]], scenes of [[bombs]] [[shaking]] the [[headquarters]], with the [[final]] scene of the two [[walking]] off, Adam [[carrying]] his [[pack]] and Eve following. It may not have been a theatrical [[work]] of [[art]], but it [[certainly]] [[left]] an [[impression]] on me all these [[years]]. I [[saw]] this with my whole [[familia]] as a 9 [[annum]] [[former]] in 1964 on our black and [[blanca]] TV. I [[recalling]] my father remarking that "this is how it could have [[sweated]] - Adam and Eve." I vividly [[recollect]] the scene when Adam [[find]] Eve, her eyes were blackened. I [[requesting]] my [[fathers]] why were her eyes blackened and he told because she was tired and hungry. Having not [[noticed]] this episode in 45 [[yr]], I [[yet]] remember it vividly - the TV [[transmit]] back and forth with the [[house]] [[planets]], scenes of [[bombardment]] [[throbbing]] the [[headquarter]], with the [[ultimate]] scene of the two [[marching]] off, Adam [[transporting]] his [[bagging]] and Eve following. It may not have been a theatrical [[cooperating]] of [[artistry]], but it [[definitely]] [[gauche]] an [[printout]] on me all these [[yrs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The acting- fantastic. The story- [[amazing]]. The script- [[wonderful]].

Just a few [[ways]] to [[describe]] this [[movie]]. Yes, it's [[slow]] and it has [[mostly]] talking, but the whole [[story]] of all of their [[lives]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[thrown]] in and out makes you [[want]] to [[listen]] to [[every]] [[little]] [[thing]] to [[learn]] more about this haunting and [[tragic]] [[story]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is [[based]] off of and it has shown me even more light into this story and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the movie. I'm also to read the Exectioner's Song, which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore story. This movie made me think so much about the phrase "piering into the other side of the looking glass". You hear a song in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a punk band that wrote a song about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the things Gary gave as a transplant when he died) and as you listen to it, which is after the last time Mikal ever sees Gary, you look at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the song itself. This movie opened my eyes in that way and in many others. I recommend this movie(and the book) very very much. The acting- fantastic. The story- [[staggering]]. The script- [[glorious]].

Just a few [[avenues]] to [[contour]] this [[cinematography]]. Yes, it's [[deceleration]] and it has [[basically]] talking, but the whole [[fairytales]] of all of their [[life]] and how it's told with the flashbacks [[tossed]] in and out makes you [[wantto]] to [[heed]] to [[any]] [[scant]] [[stuff]] to [[learns]] more about this haunting and [[disastrous]] [[fairytales]]. I, myself, am reading the book that the movie is [[groundwork]] off of and it has shown me even more light into this story and answers some questions that were left unanswered in the movie. I'm also to read the Exectioner's Song, which is the 'other' half of the Gilmore story. This movie made me think so much about the phrase "piering into the other side of the looking glass". You hear a song in the movie called Gary Gilmore's Eyes, which is by a punk band that wrote a song about what it'd be like to have Gary Gilmore's eyes(which is one of the things Gary gave as a transplant when he died) and as you listen to it, which is after the last time Mikal ever sees Gary, you look at the whole situation a little differently if you were to only here the song itself. This movie opened my eyes in that way and in many others. I recommend this movie(and the book) very very much. --------------------------------------------- Result 578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Without being one of my [[favorites]], this is [[good]] for being a change of [[pace]]... even if only for a few minutes.

It all [[starts]] with a big fight between Tom, Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[suddenly]] Spike makes a heroic and [[admirable]] [[decision]]: he stops the fight and suggests that they all should be friends. So, all of them sign a peace treaty and become friends... which isn't going to last for [[long]].

Meanwhile, the three become affectionate, patient and kind to each other. They even save each other when one of them is in danger of life. The relationship goes nothing but excellent, until a very big steak appears and they all become greedy. The three are guilty to return to their usual fights and rivalries.

But still... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as friends is truly a delightful and grateful experience, even if only for a while.

Oh, by the way, as a curious fact, two songs from "The Wizard of Oz" are played here in instrumental versions: "We're off to see the Wizard" and "Somewhere over the rainbow". Without being one of my [[favourite]], this is [[alright]] for being a change of [[tempo]]... even if only for a few minutes.

It all [[commenced]] with a big fight between Tom, Jerry and Spike (who is renamed "Butch" here). They're all beating each other, but [[abruptly]] Spike makes a heroic and [[laudable]] [[rulings]]: he stops the fight and suggests that they all should be friends. So, all of them sign a peace treaty and become friends... which isn't going to last for [[lengthy]].

Meanwhile, the three become affectionate, patient and kind to each other. They even save each other when one of them is in danger of life. The relationship goes nothing but excellent, until a very big steak appears and they all become greedy. The three are guilty to return to their usual fights and rivalries.

But still... to see Tom, Jerry and Spike as friends is truly a delightful and grateful experience, even if only for a while.

Oh, by the way, as a curious fact, two songs from "The Wizard of Oz" are played here in instrumental versions: "We're off to see the Wizard" and "Somewhere over the rainbow". --------------------------------------------- Result 579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Gung Ho is one of those movies that you will want to [[see]] over and over again. [[Michael]] Keaton is put in charge of wooing a Japanese car company to come to his town [[thus]] creating jobs for the residents of Hadleyville. What [[happens]] after that is one [[hilarious]] moment after another. The two [[cultures]] clash and it is up to Keaton to hold things [[together]]. Look for [[great]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[George]] Wendt, [[Mimi]] [[Rogers]], John Turturro, Soh Yamamura and [[Sab]] Shimomo. [[All]] are [[perfectly]] cast. Don't be fooled by the low number [[rating]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[book]]. It is interesting to note that the [[town]] [[name]] of Hadleyville was [[also]] [[used]] in High [[Noon]]. [[Yes]], there is a [[real]] Hadleyville but in [[Oregon]]. Gung Ho is one of those movies that you will want to [[consults]] over and over again. [[Michele]] Keaton is put in charge of wooing a Japanese car company to come to his town [[accordingly]] creating jobs for the residents of Hadleyville. What [[comes]] after that is one [[comical]] moment after another. The two [[civilisation]] clash and it is up to Keaton to hold things [[jointly]]. Look for [[large]] performances from Keaton, Gedde Watanabe, [[Georgie]] Wendt, [[Moaning]] [[Rutgers]], John Turturro, Soh Yamamura and [[Ccs]] Shimomo. [[Totality]] are [[altogether]] cast. Don't be fooled by the low number [[evaluation]]. This is a 7.5 in my [[books]]. It is interesting to note that the [[ciudad]] [[names]] of Hadleyville was [[apart]] [[utilised]] in High [[Midday]]. [[Yup]], there is a [[actual]] Hadleyville but in [[Idaho]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Unless]] somebody enlightens me, I really have no idea what this movie is about. It [[looks]] like a picture with a message but it´s far from it. This movie tells [[pointless]] story of a New York [[press]] agent and about his problems. And, that´s basically all. When that agent is played by Pacino, one must [[think]] that it must be something [[important]]. But it takes no hard thinking to figure out how meaningless and [[dull]] this movie is. To one of the best actors in the world, Al [[Pacino]], this is the second movie of the [[year]] (the other is "Simone") that deserves the title "the most [[boring]] and the most [[pointless]] motion picture of the year". So, what´s going on, Al? [[If]] somebody enlightens me, I really have no idea what this movie is about. It [[seems]] like a picture with a message but it´s far from it. This movie tells [[futile]] story of a New York [[journalism]] agent and about his problems. And, that´s basically all. When that agent is played by Pacino, one must [[ideas]] that it must be something [[key]]. But it takes no hard thinking to figure out how meaningless and [[tiresome]] this movie is. To one of the best actors in the world, Al [[Deniro]], this is the second movie of the [[annum]] (the other is "Simone") that deserves the title "the most [[bored]] and the most [[senseless]] motion picture of the year". So, what´s going on, Al? --------------------------------------------- Result 581 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] My husband and I went to see this movie, being the horror movie buffs that we are. Two hours later I found myself wanting both my money and time back. I was so [[disappointed]]. The teasers for this film basically contained the best points of the film. There was [[nothing]] very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[comical]] than [[anything]]. After viewing other movies based on the works of Japanese writers, I have to [[conclude]] that what is deemed frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My advice: If you are a fan of true horror movies, save yourself the pain of sitting through this one. I can't really say that I would recommend renting it either, unless you have a free rental coming to you. My husband and I went to see this movie, being the horror movie buffs that we are. Two hours later I found myself wanting both my money and time back. I was so [[disenchanted]]. The teasers for this film basically contained the best points of the film. There was [[anything]] very scary about the film other than good timing on surprise entrances, etc. I found most of the 'scary' parts to be more [[hilarious]] than [[nothing]]. After viewing other movies based on the works of Japanese writers, I have to [[finish]] that what is deemed frightening in Japan is not what is frightening here in the US. My advice: If you are a fan of true horror movies, save yourself the pain of sitting through this one. I can't really say that I would recommend renting it either, unless you have a free rental coming to you. --------------------------------------------- Result 582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This is only a [[response]] to the yahoo who [[says]] this movie is more realistic than the classic, genre defining MASTERPIECE, [[Jaws]]. [[Yes]], brainiac, great whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, [[tiger]])have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. Humans don't often make it onto that menu, [[granted]], but the shark in the [[film]] was repeatedly pointed out to be exhibiting [[abnormal]] [[behavior]]. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer whale destroying nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, sinking several dozen thick hulled North Atlantic fishing boats and knowing when certain people, all friends of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to reach, are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this turd of a Jaws knock-off. [[Laughable]]. Great white sharks are also known to frequently chew on boats, protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the size of Bruce(if you don't know, look it up)would be more than capable of sinking a boat like The Orca(hey! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it would weigh upwards of 6,000 lbs. I could go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing(better acting, better effects, better music, better writing), [[Orca]] is [[crap]]([[BLATANT]] rip-off of Jaws, [[lousy]] [[writing]], abominable effects, most [[ridiculous]] plot this side of an Olson Twins flick). It doesn't take a masters from Columbia [[University]] to see that. Watch better movies. This is only a [[riposte]] to the yahoo who [[contends]] this movie is more realistic than the classic, genre defining MASTERPIECE, [[Gags]]. [[Yup]], brainiac, great whites(and other species of shark, bull, black-tip, oceanic white-tip, [[tigers]])have been known to populate areas where easy prey is found. Humans don't often make it onto that menu, [[attributed]], but the shark in the [[cinematographic]] was repeatedly pointed out to be exhibiting [[anomalous]] [[behaviour]]. It's not like it's never happened. The odds of a killer whale destroying nearly a whole town, singling out a human nemesis, sinking several dozen thick hulled North Atlantic fishing boats and knowing when certain people, all friends of the aforementioned "nemesis", are close enough to the water for it to reach, are so slim as to be laughable. Much like this turd of a Jaws knock-off. [[Ludicrous]]. Great white sharks are also known to frequently chew on boats, protective underwater cages and people on rafts and surfboards, as they look like seals from below. A shark the size of Bruce(if you don't know, look it up)would be more than capable of sinking a boat like The Orca(hey! that's the name of the blatant rip-off we're discussing!), as it would weigh upwards of 6,000 lbs. I could go on, but I don't need to. Jaws is amazing(better acting, better effects, better music, better writing), [[Orc]] is [[horseshit]]([[EVIDENT]] rip-off of Jaws, [[squalid]] [[handwriting]], abominable effects, most [[farcical]] plot this side of an Olson Twins flick). It doesn't take a masters from Columbia [[Academics]] to see that. Watch better movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[In]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, Scooter, Camillia, Dr. Teeth, Floyd, Animal, Janice, and Zoot are college graduates who [[decide]] to bring their successful college musical, Manhattan Melodies, to Broadway. Unfortunately, no producer will even meet with the Muppets. After being [[denied]] by too many producers, Scooter suggests that the Muppets decide to move on on their own. However, Kermit still believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he finally does and let's everybody know that he sold the show, Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[great]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding sequence filled with Muppets, including the Sesame Street cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only complaint is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The Electric Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys dog Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this movie, and he wasn't very well-known at the time). [[For]] this Muppet movie, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie, Gonzo, Rowlf, Scooter, Camillia, Dr. Teeth, Floyd, Animal, Janice, and Zoot are college graduates who [[decided]] to bring their successful college musical, Manhattan Melodies, to Broadway. Unfortunately, no producer will even meet with the Muppets. After being [[repudiated]] by too many producers, Scooter suggests that the Muppets decide to move on on their own. However, Kermit still believes that he can get his show on Broadway, but after he finally does and let's everybody know that he sold the show, Kermit get's amnesia and the others don't know where he is.

This features many [[resplendent]] scenes, including a live action sequence that introduced the Muppet Babies, a wedding sequence filled with Muppets, including the Sesame Street cast and Traveling Matt (from Fraggle Rock), Scooter as a movie theatre usher, and a scene where Rizzo and the other rats cook breakfast.

My only complaint is that more characters weren't included more. Sure, many of them appear at the wedding, but there should have been some significant roles for Bunsen, Beaker, Beauregard, and Sweetums, and Lips should have been part of The Electric Mayhem in this movie like he was in The Muppet Show's last season and The Great Muppet Caper, and Miss Piggys dog Foo Foo should have been with her as well (after all, Rizzo The Rat, also performed by Steve Whitmire, had a big part in this movie, and he wasn't very well-known at the time). --------------------------------------------- Result 584 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is the third parody of the [[scary]] [[movies]] and [[hopefully]] the last. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, Signs and 8 Mile for some weird [[reason]]. [[In]] my opinion this movie was very [[pointless]] and unnecessary and not [[even]] [[funny]]. I [[laughed]] [[maybe]] three [[times]] and that is not enough for a [[comedy]]. I really [[enjoyed]] the [[first]] two but this one was just [[plain]] dumb. [[If]] your [[jokes]] consist of [[corpses]] getting [[beat]] up and people [[constantly]] [[throwing]] [[stuff]] at each other then this [[movie]] is for you. [[In]] my [[opinion]], if your [[smart]] [[enough]] stay at [[home]] and [[save]] your money and please stop [[making]] these [[kind]] of movies, they just [[keep]] getting worse 3/10. This is the third parody of the [[fearsome]] [[cinematography]] and [[thankfully]] the last. This time the spoof is mainly on The Ring, Signs and 8 Mile for some weird [[motives]]. [[At]] my opinion this movie was very [[needless]] and unnecessary and not [[yet]] [[droll]]. I [[laugh]] [[perhaps]] three [[time]] and that is not enough for a [[farce]]. I really [[adored]] the [[frst]] two but this one was just [[plains]] dumb. [[Though]] your [[gags]] consist of [[carcasses]] getting [[overcame]] up and people [[always]] [[pelting]] [[thing]] at each other then this [[cinematography]] is for you. [[Among]] my [[vistas]], if your [[ingenious]] [[sufficient]] stay at [[domicile]] and [[saves]] your money and please stop [[doing]] these [[sorts]] of movies, they just [[conserving]] getting worse 3/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] [[Reviewed]] at the World [[Premiere]] screening Sept. 9, 2006 at the [[Isabel]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting [[premise]] but [[seemed]] to go on too long with too many shots of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The bits of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were especially striking. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was quite something as well. Scenes of the activity at the Three Gorges Dam project were also a complement to the Jia Khang-je films at TIFF (the feature Still Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were also built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, Producer Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on stage for a Q&A after the world premiere. Producer Noah Weinzweig was introduced from the audience and was thanked as the most key person that assisted in the on the ground access in China itself. [[Revisiting]] at the World [[Debut]] screening Sept. 9, 2006 at the [[Isobel]] Bader Theatre during the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF).

This had an interesting [[prerequisite]] but [[sounded]] to go on too long with too many shots of piles of eWaste (recycled computers, keyboards, cables etc. shipped over to China by the ton and then sorted and remade into new products to sell back) and other desolation.

The filmmakers tried to get more people interviews to boost the human element but were frequently prevented from doing so due to Chinese censorship. Still, what was there was interesting. The bits of a Shanghai high end real estate agent preening and strutting around showing off her luxurious mansion and gardens, intercut with the scenes of others living in medieval conditions were especially striking. The opening tracking shot of a 480m factory floor was quite something as well. Scenes of the activity at the Three Gorges Dam project were also a complement to the Jia Khang-je films at TIFF (the feature Still Life/Sanxia Haoren & the documentary Dong) which were also built around that subject.

Director Jennifer Baichwal, Producer Nick de Pencier, Cinematographer Peter Mettler and subject Edward Burtynsky were all there on stage for a Q&A after the world premiere. Producer Noah Weinzweig was introduced from the audience and was thanked as the most key person that assisted in the on the ground access in China itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Ascension is actually a step up in terms of what the original movie was in story and in special [[effects]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire hunter looking for the count himself (if you remember him, he was from the movie Dragon, The Bruce Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the kid who helps the woman he loves from a far steal Dracula's body from the slab. Diane Neal Is good as the woman who steals Dracula's body in order to finds a cure for her dying boyfriend, And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. Giving a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the rest of the cast in this movie, and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. Ascension is actually a step up in terms of what the original movie was in story and in special [[influences]]. Jason Scott Lee Is good as a vampire hunter looking for the count himself (if you remember him, he was from the movie Dragon, The Bruce Lee Story.') Jason London is funny as Luke, the kid who helps the woman he loves from a far steal Dracula's body from the slab. Diane Neal Is good as the woman who steals Dracula's body in order to finds a cure for her dying boyfriend, And Stephen Billington is great as Dracula himself. Giving a better performance than Gerard Butler did the count in the original film. Roy Scheider rounds out the rest of the cast in this movie, and he does a decent job as the mentor of Jason Scott Lee's character. This is the second sequel in the trilogy, and they are off to a good start. It's up in the air whether the last film will close the series out on a good note. --------------------------------------------- Result 587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] A [[great]] film this, and a shame that it will [[receive]] little attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on Channel Four.

The plot is a simple one but [[works]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like fantasy and hard-hitting [[nightmare]] is very well [[blurred]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the credit of those involved it doesn't [[show]] too often. It also hasn't [[dated]] that much either.

I was lucky enough to tape this off the telly when it was on a few years ago, and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; though as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to cinema would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is also very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the context of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that lightly) disturbing moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out tensions. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly recommended.

9/10

A [[whopping]] film this, and a shame that it will [[recieve]] little attention outside of arthouse circles and students who stay up until two in the morning to watch it on Channel Four.

The plot is a simple one but [[cooperating]] very effectively, the blurring between child-like fantasy and hard-hitting [[cabos]] is very well [[grainy]]. The budget looks pretty low, but to the credit of those involved it doesn't [[shows]] too often. It also hasn't [[dating]] that much either.

I was lucky enough to tape this off the telly when it was on a few years ago, and it has withstood half-a-dozen viewings. It's one of those films that won't appeal to all; though as usual, those with a more thoughtful approach to cinema would get a lot out of this.

Charlotte Buerke puts in a good performance as Anna, the spoilt brat and it is a shame she seems to have gone from the acting scene. Cross is also very good, carrying the stature of his character very well within the context of the picture.

There are some genuinely (and I don't say that lightly) disturbing moments in this film, both half-second shockers and more drawn-out tensions. Watch it with the lights out!

Highly recommended.

9/10

--------------------------------------------- Result 588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] From the Star of "[[MITCHELL]]", From the [[director]] of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would normally [[keep]] me from seeing this movie. And the [[worst]] part is that all the above mentioned statements are [[true]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Don]] Baker eats every other five [[minutes]] in this film. It's like a [[bad]] remake of "Coogan's Bluff" From the Star of "[[MICHEL]]", From the [[headmaster]] of "Joysticks" and "Angel's Revenge"!!! These are taglines that would normally [[conserving]] me from seeing this movie. And the [[hardest]] part is that all the above mentioned statements are [[genuine]]!!! Ugghhh... Joe [[Gifts]] Baker eats every other five [[mins]] in this film. It's like a [[mala]] remake of "Coogan's Bluff" --------------------------------------------- Result 589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] WOW!

I just was given this film from a friend of mine, who bought it for 1.98 at Walmart, and he felt that he got taken! It is beyond boring, most of the scenes are filmed in front of a green screen, the acting is somewhat improvised, almost as if they didn't have a script. The Martians are CGI, which look like they were done by a novice, or a Fan produced movie. I cannot stress just how bad this DVD really is!

Example: In one of the scenes, the martians are torturing a local female captive. She goes from a woman in front of a green screen, to a CGI copy of that woman. The change is totally noticeable, and when she is killed, you can see that it is a computer figure, looking like something from a game back in 1990!

If at all possible, avoid this movie like the plague! You can download two trailers from their site, and see how god-awful it really is! --------------------------------------------- Result 590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Spectacular]] Horror [[movie]] that will give you the [[chills]] once you [[get]] settled with it. The atmosphere is very [[creepy]] and stylish, the [[score]] is chilling, but the best about the [[movie]] is it's performances. It's [[rare]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[important]] [[part]] in the [[scare]] factor.

The story is very interesting and [[gets]] your [[attention]] [[since]] the first minutes. Though the woman in black does not have much screen time, she makes the necessary appearances to chill the audience in some [[brilliant]] scenes. The dialogs are very descriptive and [[make]] your imagination [[work]] and that's when it becomes really scary.

If you have the [[chance]], watch this on theater it's a totally [[different]] experience but as [[scary]] as this movie.

This is one of the [[best]] Ghost [[movies]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get [[scared]]. [[Dramatic]] Horror [[kino]] that will give you the [[goosebumps]] once you [[obtain]] settled with it. The atmosphere is very [[spooky]] and stylish, the [[scoring]] is chilling, but the best about the [[flick]] is it's performances. It's [[scarce]] to get scared by performances and this movie's solid acting plays an [[sizeable]] [[parties]] in the [[shitless]] factor.

The story is very interesting and [[got]] your [[beware]] [[because]] the first minutes. Though the woman in black does not have much screen time, she makes the necessary appearances to chill the audience in some [[glorious]] scenes. The dialogs are very descriptive and [[deliver]] your imagination [[jobs]] and that's when it becomes really scary.

If you have the [[likelihood]], watch this on theater it's a totally [[divergent]] experience but as [[awful]] as this movie.

This is one of the [[optimum]] Ghost [[theater]] ever and it's directed for people that want to get [[affraid]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Heather]] Graham couldn't [[play]] a convincing lesbian if her life [[depended]] on it. [[Who]] do the [[producers]] of the [[movie]] think they are? the ABSOLUTE [[WORST]], most [[UNREALISTIC]] [[movie]] i've [[seen]] in as [[long]] as i can [[remember]]. This movie is so [[bad]] that i felt compelled to sign-up on IMDb and [[make]] sure the [[rating]] of this "film" drops.

omg i'm [[Heather]] Graham, i just [[kissed]] a drunk [[chick]], so while she's passed out i'm REALLY [[going]] to pace around my room for HOURS [[asking]] myself frantically "WHAT HAVE I [[DONE]]?!".. Jesus heather, get over it and [[grow]] up... and i'd like to forward that same [[sentiment]] to the idiot [[producers]]... and while i'm at it, [[instead]] of this movie being all about an [[pathetic]] [[excuse]] for a [[coming]] out [[story]], [[perhaps]] it [[would]] have been more [[suitable]] to [[focus]] the plot [[onto]] a [[character]] who's mentally unstable... [[like]] your so-called "lesbian" [[character]]... after all, i [[know]] the first [[time]] i had gay sex, when i left the next morning i jumped to the [[sky]] in excitement in the middle of the [[street]]... honestly b*tch, get a grip...

WHAT A [[JOKE]]! and please note there are many [[many]] [[many]] more flaws and [[appallingly]] stupid aspects to this lame flick, but i'm so sick of even thinking about it anymore. bottom [[line]], if you're a [[smart]] [[person]] you'll [[hate]] this movie, and if you're not a [[smart]] person, then you'll love it... it's as simple as that. [[Keri]] Graham couldn't [[gaming]] a convincing lesbian if her life [[relied]] on it. [[Whom]] do the [[industrialists]] of the [[kino]] think they are? the ABSOLUTE [[MEANEST]], most [[UTOPIAN]] [[cinematography]] i've [[watched]] in as [[lengthy]] as i can [[reminisce]]. This movie is so [[wicked]] that i felt compelled to sign-up on IMDb and [[deliver]] sure the [[evaluations]] of this "film" drops.

omg i'm [[Naomi]] Graham, i just [[fucked]] a drunk [[nana]], so while she's passed out i'm REALLY [[go]] to pace around my room for HOURS [[wondering]] myself frantically "WHAT HAVE I [[PLAYED]]?!".. Jesus heather, get over it and [[heightened]] up... and i'd like to forward that same [[feeling]] to the idiot [[maker]]... and while i'm at it, [[alternatively]] of this movie being all about an [[deplorable]] [[alibi]] for a [[upcoming]] out [[fairytales]], [[potentially]] it [[could]] have been more [[opportune]] to [[centred]] the plot [[during]] a [[characteristics]] who's mentally unstable... [[iike]] your so-called "lesbian" [[trait]]... after all, i [[savoir]] the first [[times]] i had gay sex, when i left the next morning i jumped to the [[skye]] in excitement in the middle of the [[rue]]... honestly b*tch, get a grip...

WHAT A [[GIGGLE]]! and please note there are many [[numerous]] [[numerous]] more flaws and [[terrifically]] stupid aspects to this lame flick, but i'm so sick of even thinking about it anymore. bottom [[iine]], if you're a [[ingenious]] [[persona]] you'll [[despise]] this movie, and if you're not a [[canny]] person, then you'll love it... it's as simple as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I have not yet decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Worst]] [[Film]] I Have Ever Seen".

Even if you ignore the dodgy accents, low production values and [[appalling]] camera work this film has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] [[going]] for it. I only went to see it as I had read the [[book]] and wanted to see how they [[would]] work the complicated plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters appear with little to no explanation as to who they are and then proceed to play no valuable part in the narrative. Even the main characters act without reason so that by the time the film reaches it's climax you don't care what happens to any of them.

I can accept that books occasionally need to be rewritten to fit into films and that it is perhaps unfair to judge this film against the book it was adapted from. But after my friends and I came out of the cinema I had to spend most of the journey home explaining what was supposed to have happened.

They even change the true meaning of the books title "Rancid Aluminium" by squeezing it into yet another piece of pointless voice over just so they can allow the film to have a cool title.

A real mess of a film from start to finish. I have not yet decided whether this will replace Anaconda as "The [[Pire]] [[Films]] I Have Ever Seen".

Even if you ignore the dodgy accents, low production values and [[spooky]] camera work this film has [[abundantly]] [[anything]] [[go]] for it. I only went to see it as I had read the [[workbook]] and wanted to see how they [[could]] work the complicated plot into a 2 hour film.

The simple answer is - they didn't. Characters appear with little to no explanation as to who they are and then proceed to play no valuable part in the narrative. Even the main characters act without reason so that by the time the film reaches it's climax you don't care what happens to any of them.

I can accept that books occasionally need to be rewritten to fit into films and that it is perhaps unfair to judge this film against the book it was adapted from. But after my friends and I came out of the cinema I had to spend most of the journey home explaining what was supposed to have happened.

They even change the true meaning of the books title "Rancid Aluminium" by squeezing it into yet another piece of pointless voice over just so they can allow the film to have a cool title.

A real mess of a film from start to finish. --------------------------------------------- Result 593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When [[someone]] remakes a [[classic]] [[movie]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compared]] to the original. [[Also]], there's a [[chance]] that the remake is so [[radically]] [[different]] that it is just too unfamiliar to [[audiences]].

Well, the 1973 [[TV]] version of "[[Double]] Indemnity" has almost [[identical]] scenes and dialogue as the 1944 [[original]]. The main difference is that the [[remake]] just seems to have no [[energy]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering [[insurance]] agent Walter Neff in the [[original]]; Richard Crenna just [[seems]] world-weary and [[tired]]. [[Edward]] G. Robinson [[brought]] [[great]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton [[Keys]]; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[actor]], [[appears]] [[almost]] [[bored]] with the [[proceedings]]. Samantha Eggar is all wrong as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while [[Barbara]] Stanwyck was just [[superb]] in this [[wicked]] role, Eggar is [[overly]] polite and mannered and just [[seems]] [[way]] out of place.

Robert Webber, in the [[old]] [[Richard]] [[Gaines]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and [[John]] Fiedler [[taking]] the Porter Hall role as the [[crucial]] [[witness]], bring some life to the [[movie]]. [[In]] [[particular]], [[Webber]] recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

[[However]], after the [[movie]] [[starts]], the [[whole]] [[thing]] just [[sort]] of [[lies]] there, without any [[life]] or [[electricity]]. This is one [[film]] that never should have been remade. When [[anyone]] remakes a [[traditional]] [[cinematography]], the remake is always unfavorably [[compare]] to the original. [[Moreover]], there's a [[luck]] that the remake is so [[hugely]] [[diversified]] that it is just too unfamiliar to [[spectators]].

Well, the 1973 [[TELEVISION]] version of "[[Dual]] Indemnity" has almost [[same]] scenes and dialogue as the 1944 [[preliminary]]. The main difference is that the [[redo]] just seems to have no [[energies]] at all. Fred MacMurray was great as the lecherous, leering [[seguro]] agent Walter Neff in the [[initial]]; Richard Crenna just [[seem]] world-weary and [[weary]]. [[Edwards]] G. Robinson [[introduced]] [[prodigious]] manic energy to his role as MacMurray's boss Barton [[Essential]]; Lee J. Cobb, a fine [[protagonist]], [[appear]] [[roughly]] [[drilled]] with the [[trials]]. Samantha Eggar is all wrong as the conniving, back-stabbing Phyllis Dietrichson; while [[Barbarian]] Stanwyck was just [[magnificent]] in this [[mala]] role, Eggar is [[unreasonably]] polite and mannered and just [[seem]] [[routes]] out of place.

Robert Webber, in the [[former]] [[Ritchie]] [[Girdles]] role as Robinson's boss Norton, and [[Jon]] Fiedler [[adopting]] the Porter Hall role as the [[critical]] [[telltale]], bring some life to the [[cinematography]]. [[Across]] [[singular]], [[Weber]] recreates the Norton role well in a 1970s context.

[[Still]], after the [[kino]] [[beginnings]], the [[ensemble]] [[stuff]] just [[kinds]] of [[lurks]] there, without any [[lives]] or [[strom]]. This is one [[cinematography]] that never should have been remade. --------------------------------------------- Result 594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This [[movie]] was good for it's [[time]]. [[If]] you [[like]] Eddie Murpy this is a [[must]] have to [[add]] to your collection. [[Eddie]] was [[young]] and funny with his 80's haircut. Charlotte [[Lewis]], Eddie's costar is hot. This was one of her first movies and she was not [[bad]]. The graphics were good for the 80's. A lot of the actors went on to do other good movies you should check them out through IMDb. Other [[must]] have from Eddie is "Coming to America" and "48 hours". Another actor "Victor [[Wong]]" has a small [[part]] in this movie. Check out some of his older movies like "Big trouble in little china". If you liked the action movies from the 80's this is your movie. This [[kino]] was good for it's [[period]]. [[Unless]] you [[likes]] Eddie Murpy this is a [[ought]] have to [[inserting]] to your collection. [[Eddy]] was [[youngster]] and funny with his 80's haircut. Charlotte [[Louise]], Eddie's costar is hot. This was one of her first movies and she was not [[unfavourable]]. The graphics were good for the 80's. A lot of the actors went on to do other good movies you should check them out through IMDb. Other [[should]] have from Eddie is "Coming to America" and "48 hours". Another actor "Victor [[Hoang]]" has a small [[parte]] in this movie. Check out some of his older movies like "Big trouble in little china". If you liked the action movies from the 80's this is your movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 595 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I, [[like]] many other [[Bachchan]] [[fans]], having been [[eagerly]] awaiting the remake of Sholay. This [[movie]] was not it. [[Thank]] god they didn't let them use the name "Sholay" in the movie title. Ram Gopal's remake is not worthy of the title. The [[camera]] work, the [[locations]], the costumes, the totally out-of-place [[dancing]], the [[dialogue]] all [[combined]] to [[make]] the [[worst]] movie I have ever seen. You wonder if the cast of actors [[agreed]] to make this movie because they needed money and Ram Gopal was paying a lot of money for the cast. The only non-paid actor, the ant, was the only resemblance to the first movie. Abishek's role was totally ridiculous, did he need money to pay for the wedding to Ash? Save your money, your mind and your time, don't bother with this movie or the DVD when that comes out. I, [[loves]] many other [[Aishwarya]] [[admirers]], having been [[anxiously]] awaiting the remake of Sholay. This [[cinematography]] was not it. [[Gratitude]] god they didn't let them use the name "Sholay" in the movie title. Ram Gopal's remake is not worthy of the title. The [[cameras]] work, the [[places]], the costumes, the totally out-of-place [[danced]], the [[conversations]] all [[combine]] to [[deliver]] the [[gravest]] movie I have ever seen. You wonder if the cast of actors [[concurred]] to make this movie because they needed money and Ram Gopal was paying a lot of money for the cast. The only non-paid actor, the ant, was the only resemblance to the first movie. Abishek's role was totally ridiculous, did he need money to pay for the wedding to Ash? Save your money, your mind and your time, don't bother with this movie or the DVD when that comes out. --------------------------------------------- Result 596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ... and yet, we were told, there was another hour and 20 minutes left to go.

Why, oh, why wasn't there an editor to tell the writer/director to snip, snip, snip? Apparently that writer/director has previously done [[shorts]]; as a short, this would have been [[okay]]. But the [[lack]] of [[dialogue]] [[starts]] to grate after twenty minutes. The [[lack]] of much music [[glares]]. The background noises (talking, traffic, and especially a ubiquitous [[helicopter]]) get old [[really]] [[fast]]. But the [[worst]] [[failure]] is in [[story]]. There is [[precious]] [[little]] beyond a short.

After an hour we saw variations of the same scene over and over again. I nearly screamed at the screen, "We get it, we get it!!!!!" It's amazing that after that left the theatre, we could drive home, watch the Daily Show and parts of the Colbert Report, get ready for bed,and know that the audience was STILL trapped in the theatre.

It's not [[enough]] to indulge your vision. You have to give the audience enough to share your vision. ... and yet, we were told, there was another hour and 20 minutes left to go.

Why, oh, why wasn't there an editor to tell the writer/director to snip, snip, snip? Apparently that writer/director has previously done [[slacks]]; as a short, this would have been [[verywell]]. But the [[deficit]] of [[dialog]] [[begins]] to grate after twenty minutes. The [[shortages]] of much music [[stares]]. The background noises (talking, traffic, and especially a ubiquitous [[helicopters]]) get old [[truly]] [[quickly]]. But the [[worse]] [[deficit]] is in [[conte]]. There is [[treasured]] [[petite]] beyond a short.

After an hour we saw variations of the same scene over and over again. I nearly screamed at the screen, "We get it, we get it!!!!!" It's amazing that after that left the theatre, we could drive home, watch the Daily Show and parts of the Colbert Report, get ready for bed,and know that the audience was STILL trapped in the theatre.

It's not [[suffice]] to indulge your vision. You have to give the audience enough to share your vision. --------------------------------------------- Result 597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] And thats about all that is. This thing is [[slow]]. The [[actors]] have ability, they just don't seem [[motivated]] to put forth the effort. The plot isn't that [[great]] and is [[hampered]] further by the aforementioned slowness of it all. The accents, when there are any, are British. Uh, lots of these folks are [[supposed]] to be [[Danes]]. OK, OK, accents aren't that important. But language is. I don't think they used words like "yeah" and "OK" in Beowulf's day. And that supposedly way cool weapon his king [[gave]] him? Did he ever reload that thing? Did he ever sight it in? Or was Beowulf just that bad an aim? Well, his aim did at least match the computer graphics used in generating the monsters. Those were rather off too. Bad special effects. Bright spot? Just one that I can think of. Marina Sirtis has held up well over the years. And thats about all that is. This thing is [[slower]]. The [[protagonists]] have ability, they just don't seem [[reasoned]] to put forth the effort. The plot isn't that [[wondrous]] and is [[impeded]] further by the aforementioned slowness of it all. The accents, when there are any, are British. Uh, lots of these folks are [[suspected]] to be [[Denmark]]. OK, OK, accents aren't that important. But language is. I don't think they used words like "yeah" and "OK" in Beowulf's day. And that supposedly way cool weapon his king [[handed]] him? Did he ever reload that thing? Did he ever sight it in? Or was Beowulf just that bad an aim? Well, his aim did at least match the computer graphics used in generating the monsters. Those were rather off too. Bad special effects. Bright spot? Just one that I can think of. Marina Sirtis has held up well over the years. --------------------------------------------- Result 598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the most recent addition to a new wave of educational documentaries like "The Corporation" and "Fahrenheit 9/11." Its commentary is clear and unwavering as is the breathtaking cinematic style of this well crafted feature. The film manages to impose a powerful sense of how unsteady our world is as we rush toward an environmentally unsustainable future at lightning speed - while showing us the terrifying beauty in our pursuit of progress.

Truly a remarkable accomplishment which must be seen by all who care about the world we leave to our children. Bravo!

NB - this is also the only film (of 8) at Varsity theaters (Toronto) boasting a stick-on tag which reads... "To arrange group viewings please contact...." ... a further testament to the popularity and importance of this gem.

My bet... an academy award nomination for best documentary.

OB101 --------------------------------------------- Result 599 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] "The [[Grudge]]" is a remake of Shimizu's own series of popular Japanese horror films. [[Shimizu]] knows he is not [[dealing]] with anything new, so he does what any intelligent [[person]] [[would]] have done in his place: he forgets logic and [[concentrates]] in giving viewers a [[fun]] ride. He uses commonly known [[clichés]] associated with ghost stories but [[Shimizu]] plays with these [[elements]] in an [[imaginative]] [[manner]]. The nonlinear [[narrative]] is not a mere [[gimmick]] but an interesting way to [[present]] sequences from [[different]] [[perspectives]]. At the [[end]], all I can [[say]] is that if the only purpose of a horror [[film]] is to [[scare]] the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a [[theater]] with an audience and it was [[fun]] to see [[viewers]] [[go]] wild over this one. It probably doesn't play as well in your [[living]] [[room]]. "The [[Dent]]" is a remake of Shimizu's own series of popular Japanese horror films. [[Takagi]] knows he is not [[addressing]] with anything new, so he does what any intelligent [[persona]] [[should]] have done in his place: he forgets logic and [[concentration]] in giving viewers a [[droll]] ride. He uses commonly known [[cliché]] associated with ghost stories but [[Takagi]] plays with these [[components]] in an [[creative]] [[mode]]. The nonlinear [[narration]] is not a mere [[ruse]] but an interesting way to [[presented]] sequences from [[divergent]] [[views]]. At the [[ceases]], all I can [[said]] is that if the only purpose of a horror [[filmmaking]] is to [[shitless]] the audience (the same way a comedy is to make people laugh), this movie succeeded with flying colors. I watched it in a [[drama]] with an audience and it was [[droll]] to see [[audience]] [[going]] wild over this one. It probably doesn't play as well in your [[residing]] [[courtrooms]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forget]] this strange and [[bleak]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one unconventional aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was unforgettable. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) I was lucky enough to get a DVD copy of this movie recently and have now seen it for the 2nd time. The 1st time was on late night TV in Australia more than 20 years ago but I could never [[forgets]] this strange and [[dismal]] film..

Not many people like this film at all because it is so unconventional - the fact that there is hardly any spoken dialogue in this move - we just hear the thoughts of characters - is only one unconventional aspect of it.

Searching for a copy of this film I found out that the producer was dead, the main actor was dead, it was not kept in any British TV or film archives, that it was never released on video or DVD, that television networks around the world trashed it after their copyright ran out in the 80's. When it was first shown on TV in Australia there were no recordable devices for consumers.

On the second viewing recently, I could see why it was unforgettable. At times it is very tense and unbearably claustrophobic very like a Harold Pinter stage play.

Again, if anyone wants a DVD copy of this please email me and I'm sure we can work something out Regards Adam (whiteflokati@hotmail.com) --------------------------------------------- Result 601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has [[lost]] her mother and finds it [[hard]] to [[communicate]] with her [[father]], until one day in the basement of her [[apartment]] she finds a secret [[magic]] elevator which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she [[meets]] two other [[children]] who have lost their father and [[face]] poverty...

I was clicking through the channels and [[found]] this..I read the synopsis and suddenly saw Elisha Cuthbert...I [[thought]] [[okay]]....and watched the [[movie]].. i didn't [[realise]] Elisha had done films before....'The [[Girl]] Next Door and 24' Elisha [[provides]] a [[satisfactory]] performance, the plot is a [[little]] cheesy but the [[film]] [[works]]...Its [[amazing]] how this young [[girl]] went on to [[become]] the Hottest [[babe]] in Hollywood! Elisha Cuthbert plays Sue a fourteen year old girl who has [[forfeited]] her mother and finds it [[stiff]] to [[submit]] with her [[pere]], until one day in the basement of her [[condo]] she finds a secret [[sorcery]] elevator which takes her to back to the late 18th century were she [[satisfies]] two other [[kids]] who have lost their father and [[confronts]] poverty...

I was clicking through the channels and [[detected]] this..I read the synopsis and suddenly saw Elisha Cuthbert...I [[thinking]] [[allright]]....and watched the [[cinematography]].. i didn't [[understand]] Elisha had done films before....'The [[Chica]] Next Door and 24' Elisha [[offers]] a [[acceptable]] performance, the plot is a [[tiny]] cheesy but the [[movies]] [[cooperating]]...Its [[unbelievable]] how this young [[fille]] went on to [[gotten]] the Hottest [[babies]] in Hollywood! --------------------------------------------- Result 602 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] A very [[close]] and sharp discription of the bubbling and dynamic emotional world of specialy one 18year old guy, that makes his first experiences in his gay love to an other boy, during an vacation with a part of his family.

I [[liked]] this film because of his extremly [[clear]] and surrogated storytelling , with all this "Sound-close-ups" and quiet moments wich had been full of intensive moods.

A very [[shuts]] and sharp discription of the bubbling and dynamic emotional world of specialy one 18year old guy, that makes his first experiences in his gay love to an other boy, during an vacation with a part of his family.

I [[wished]] this film because of his extremly [[unambiguous]] and surrogated storytelling , with all this "Sound-close-ups" and quiet moments wich had been full of intensive moods.

--------------------------------------------- Result 603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is a terrible movie, terrible [[script]], [[bad]] direction and [[nonsensical]] ending. [[Also]], [[bad]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this movie was purgatory--you do it to [[unload]] enough [[bad]] movie [[karma]] to [[actually]] [[see]] a good one further down the line.

The [[movie]] [[presents]] a father and son who [[look]] like they couldn't every [[possibly]] have been [[related]]. The [[part]] of the [[male]] [[lead]] is not well [[written]] and [[seems]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[see]] the [[plot]] [[points]] a [[mile]] away. The [[actions]] of the [[female]] lead and that of her [[brother]], the [[cop]], [[also]] make no [[sense]]. [[So]], a [[major]] action on her [[part]] at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] makes no sense script-wise. This is a terrible movie, terrible [[hyphen]], [[mala]] direction and [[ludicrous]] ending. [[Moreover]], [[amiss]] performances, except from Clancy Brown who is criminally underused here, and Michael Pollard. Watching this movie was purgatory--you do it to [[download]] enough [[horrid]] movie [[mojo]] to [[indeed]] [[behold]] a good one further down the line.

The [[kino]] [[presenting]] a father and son who [[gaze]] like they couldn't every [[arguably]] have been [[tied]]. The [[parties]] of the [[virile]] [[culminate]] is not well [[wrote]] and [[seem]] uncharismatic in this role. You can [[behold]] the [[intrigue]] [[dot]] a [[mille]] away. The [[steps]] of the [[girl]] lead and that of her [[hermano]], the [[policeman]], [[moreover]] make no [[feeling]]. [[Thereby]], a [[considerable]] action on her [[parties]] at the [[ceases]] of the [[films]] makes no sense script-wise. --------------------------------------------- Result 604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] All the [[world]] [[said]] that the film Tashan [[would]] be a [[good]] movie with [[great]] pleasure, but this is not the case. Vijay Krishna Acharya made a [[serious]] [[mistake]] to take as an [[actress]] Kareena Kapoor. She was [[unbearable]] throughout the [[film]]. Her tom-boy [[look]] does not really goes well. Even the film the [[story]] of the [[film]] is not making sense at all. [[Everyone]] [[said]] that the Quetin Taratino of [[India]] is Vijay but its not at all Quetin. The [[talent]] Anil Kapoor was [[involved]] in this [[stupid]] [[movie]]. Anil is an [[actor]] of [[large]] [[caliber]] and this [[film]] is not. Akshay Kumar has also been a [[victim]] of this film as all is Saif. The Style and the Phoormola is not [[really]] good in this film i was disappointed All the [[globe]] [[indicated]] that the film Tashan [[ought]] be a [[buena]] movie with [[phenomenal]] pleasure, but this is not the case. Vijay Krishna Acharya made a [[severe]] [[error]] to take as an [[actor]] Kareena Kapoor. She was [[untenable]] throughout the [[cinema]]. Her tom-boy [[glance]] does not really goes well. Even the film the [[history]] of the [[cinematography]] is not making sense at all. [[Anybody]] [[say]] that the Quetin Taratino of [[Indies]] is Vijay but its not at all Quetin. The [[talents]] Anil Kapoor was [[entangled]] in this [[dolt]] [[cinema]]. Anil is an [[actress]] of [[colossal]] [[calibrate]] and this [[cinematographic]] is not. Akshay Kumar has also been a [[victims]] of this film as all is Saif. The Style and the Phoormola is not [[genuinely]] good in this film i was disappointed --------------------------------------------- Result 605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] ANTWONE FISHER is the story of a young emotionally troubled U.S. Navy seaman. His problems lead him to Jerome Davenport, a psychiatrist who helps him realize that his troubles stem from his childhood upbringing.

Get ready to shed a tear or two. The movie could thaw the coldest heart. I [[loved]] the story, which turns from something so very awful to happen to anyone into a [[positive]] ending. ANTWONE FISHER is a powerful movie, most importantly about forgiveness. Other important issues that get you thinking are child abuse, adoption, and foster care.

Oscar winner, Denzel Washington does an impressive job in his directorial debut. There were many scenes which I enjoyed watching. They included the beginning (dreams of a little boy – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending (dreams turned into reality), which beautifully tied the story together.

Another wonderful scene occurred when the doctor encouraged Antwone to search for his family to find answers to his questions about his family that abandoned him.

My favorite scene happened when the young man finally confronted his mother and her reaction towards him. Priceless.

All the actors represented their parts well.

In addition to directorial responsibilities, Mr. Washington continues to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting roles. He had a strong presence in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke demonstrated why he was so right for the part of Antwone Fisher. He portrayed very real and heart-tugging work.

Joy Bryant who played the part of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The chemistry flowed well between the romantic characters.

Novella Nelson who played the part of Mrs. Tate, a despicable character, deserves special mention.

Although we only see her for a few minutes, the actress who played Fisher's mother gave an outstanding performance.

Everyone should see ANTWONE FISHER. ANTWONE FISHER is the story of a young emotionally troubled U.S. Navy seaman. His problems lead him to Jerome Davenport, a psychiatrist who helps him realize that his troubles stem from his childhood upbringing.

Get ready to shed a tear or two. The movie could thaw the coldest heart. I [[worshipped]] the story, which turns from something so very awful to happen to anyone into a [[affirmative]] ending. ANTWONE FISHER is a powerful movie, most importantly about forgiveness. Other important issues that get you thinking are child abuse, adoption, and foster care.

Oscar winner, Denzel Washington does an impressive job in his directorial debut. There were many scenes which I enjoyed watching. They included the beginning (dreams of a little boy – check out the gigantic-sized pancakes!) and the ending (dreams turned into reality), which beautifully tied the story together.

Another wonderful scene occurred when the doctor encouraged Antwone to search for his family to find answers to his questions about his family that abandoned him.

My favorite scene happened when the young man finally confronted his mother and her reaction towards him. Priceless.

All the actors represented their parts well.

In addition to directorial responsibilities, Mr. Washington continues to show why he won an Oscar award and is successful in all his acting roles. He had a strong presence in this movie.

Actor, Derek Luke demonstrated why he was so right for the part of Antwone Fisher. He portrayed very real and heart-tugging work.

Joy Bryant who played the part of Cheryl, Antwone's love interest, resembled a ray of sunshine on the screen. The chemistry flowed well between the romantic characters.

Novella Nelson who played the part of Mrs. Tate, a despicable character, deserves special mention.

Although we only see her for a few minutes, the actress who played Fisher's mother gave an outstanding performance.

Everyone should see ANTWONE FISHER. --------------------------------------------- Result 606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (77%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the unity of two heroes from two great seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite bad. The great one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The bad one is truly bad, in fact it's the [[worst]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark Hamill, aka "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a kid who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a whole lot of adventures, eventually recovers it. (Since he's into fixing cars I guess you can call him "Lube Skywalker"). Along the way he meets a hooker with a heart of gold, and ends up facing off with a character played by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult film "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at earlier, the worst sci-fi film ever made. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also must say that this is one of the best/worst movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this muddled gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. I know no one cares, but I do. This film is historic for one reason. It is the unity of two heroes from two great seventies sci-fi films. Well, one is great, and one is quite bad. The great one is truly great, in fact it's the best. The bad one is truly bad, in fact it's the [[worse]]. Of course of the great I refer to "Star Wars" and it's star Mark Hamill, aka "Luke Skywalker", who is the hero of this film about a kid who gets his Vette swiped and then goes to Vegas (on a lead) and after a whole lot of adventures, eventually recovers it. (Since he's into fixing cars I guess you can call him "Lube Skywalker"). Along the way he meets a hooker with a heart of gold, and ends up facing off with a character played by Kim Milford, the hero from the seventies sci-fi cult film "Laserblast", which is, as I've hinted at earlier, the worst sci-fi film ever made. Milford plays the lead baddie whom Hamill must steal his car back from. I realize that no one cares about this meeting of two great sci-fi heroes, but I do. And I also must say that this is one of the best/worst movies of all time. Mark Hamill's acting needs the force, the plot needs extensive Jedi training, and the character of the hooker played by Annie Potts just might be the most annoying character of all time, ever, in any film I've ever seen. But it's a fun movie to watch on a weekend day, or a weekday night, late at night, very late. It's one of those films that meanders, looking for something but without quite finding it and yet, at the same time, it's entire purpose is, like free-form jazz, to simply exist as is. And it does. And what is, isn't that great, but you can't say it isn't entertaining, because for an hour and a half you might feel ripped off, but you won't feel cheated. So turn off your mind, relax, and enjoy this muddled gem without any expectations, and may the force be with you, always. --------------------------------------------- Result 607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] in 1976, my [[first]] year of living in New [[York]]. I went on to live there for the next 26 [[years]],but never saw anything as delicate and beautiful again as this small [[TV]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[forgotten]] it.

There are no sex scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[moving]], [[extraordinarily]] [[touching]] [[moments]] [[full]] of tension and excitement, all set within a conservative, Boston (I think), World War 1 environment where women played the role of devoted wife awaiting the return of husband from the war, and did not seek out a career and financial independence. Frances Lee McCain is superb in the role of career photographer and I have spent the next 30 odd years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no avail.

There has to be a video of this movie? Sure it should be on DVD but surely at least a video? I [[sawthe]] this [[cinematographic]] in 1976, my [[firstly]] year of living in New [[Yorke]]. I went on to live there for the next 26 [[yrs]],but never saw anything as delicate and beautiful again as this small [[TELEVISIONS]] movie. It was part of a PBS series as I recall, and I've never [[disregarded]] it.

There are no sex scenes to speak of, just delicate, [[transferring]], [[unimaginably]] [[affects]] [[times]] [[fullest]] of tension and excitement, all set within a conservative, Boston (I think), World War 1 environment where women played the role of devoted wife awaiting the return of husband from the war, and did not seek out a career and financial independence. Frances Lee McCain is superb in the role of career photographer and I have spent the next 30 odd years searching for her in equally challenging roles to no avail.

There has to be a video of this movie? Sure it should be on DVD but surely at least a video? --------------------------------------------- Result 608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[yet]] [[falls]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as suspense. There have been other attempts to make an [[engaging]] film about computers, such as [[Hackers]] and The Net. They all [[fall]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust seem to be nearly identical. These movie endings suffer from one huge error in perception: People in the PC business having this over-indulgent self ego that assumes the general population lives it's life waiting to hear the latest news about PC's and software. I have worked for many companies and industries, and they all seem to suffer from an expanded view of their own self-importance, as does this film.

The way they introduced plot lines was pathetic. Showing Milo, who is deathly allergic to Sesame Seeds, almost ingest one from a restaurant breadbasket crossed the line of stupidity. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure death. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as long as he did, braving the perils of Big Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and Big Mac buns.

Antitrust also doesn't provide much suspense. The patterned and predictable plot twists are easily figured out long before they are revealed (come on, was anyone REALLY stunned when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), thereby destroying any real shock value. And here again we have yet another film/story where at the end, the bad guys are chasing the good guys to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple Simon plot line for about 20 years. Still, I pressed on. Maybe the ending would be the payoff, but no. The completely ridiculous ending where we have the head of company security, another supposed evil guy, turn around and be the good guy that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was laughable. And of course, the news coverage of the arrest of Gary Winston is more fevered than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim Robbins, is a cardboard cutout of the same character Robbins played in Arlington Road. But that fits perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the years to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF channel. Antitrust falls right into that category of films that aspire to make some great point while being uplifting [[still]] [[slumps]] completely flat. I don't hate the film, but it is missing key elements, such as suspense. There have been other attempts to make an [[participate]] film about computers, such as [[Intruders]] and The Net. They all [[decrease]] short. The improbable ending of both The Net and Antirust seem to be nearly identical. These movie endings suffer from one huge error in perception: People in the PC business having this over-indulgent self ego that assumes the general population lives it's life waiting to hear the latest news about PC's and software. I have worked for many companies and industries, and they all seem to suffer from an expanded view of their own self-importance, as does this film.

The way they introduced plot lines was pathetic. Showing Milo, who is deathly allergic to Sesame Seeds, almost ingest one from a restaurant breadbasket crossed the line of stupidity. Only his 'girlfriend' prevented him from sure death. This makes one wonder how Milo could have survived as long as he did, braving the perils of Big Mac buns and Sesame Seed breadsticks, as they cloak themselves as, well.... Sesame Seed breadsticks and Big Mac buns.

Antitrust also doesn't provide much suspense. The patterned and predictable plot twists are easily figured out long before they are revealed (come on, was anyone REALLY stunned when Yee Jee Tso was killed?), thereby destroying any real shock value. And here again we have yet another film/story where at the end, the bad guys are chasing the good guys to 'get the disk'. We need to have a moratorium on this Simple Simon plot line for about 20 years. Still, I pressed on. Maybe the ending would be the payoff, but no. The completely ridiculous ending where we have the head of company security, another supposed evil guy, turn around and be the good guy that enables Milo to bring down N.U.R.V CEO Gary Winston was laughable. And of course, the news coverage of the arrest of Gary Winston is more fevered than when Hinckley or Oswald was brought into custody. Gary Winston, played by Tim Robbins, is a cardboard cutout of the same character Robbins played in Arlington Road. But that fits perfectly here in Antitrust, which should be called 'Anticlimactic' or 'Anti-Original'.

In the years to come, this film will likely be banished, to be shown only on your local third rate UHF channel. --------------------------------------------- Result 609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I guess you have to give some points for the sheer courage of writing a musical around a history lesson but how about some decent music?

Is the cartoonish acting of Howard DeSilva meant to pique the interest of otherwise jaded children?

Is William Daniels' campy contemporary (for the time) acting style meant to appeal to a 1960s/70s demographic?

Do we need all the "in-jokes" about NY & NJ? (I can hear the blue-haired Broadway audience guffawing on cue.)

Sorry, I find the whole piece dated, boring & the acting far too strident for the screen --------------------------------------------- Result 610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] This is the [[best]] [[series]] of its type I've seen all year. I can't help thinking it's just my luck - a series I love gets 6 episodes (and more next year) and the constant stream of cookie-cutter cop shows get never ending episodes.

I [[think]] the reasons New [[Tricks]] succeeds are [[many]]. The scripts are [[good]], and the [[mix]] of [[characters]] superb, The acting is [[top]] flight, and the blend of comedy and [[drama]] [[works]] a [[treat]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[reason]] I watch [[shows]] like this one.

The theme song is a favourite, and we were disappointed to find it isn't available in any published edition. Great stuff, BBC- a [[triumph]] of sense over sex-appeal (aside from the young constable nobody's there as eye-lolly, and even if he IS, he can still act!). This is the [[optimum]] [[serials]] of its type I've seen all year. I can't help thinking it's just my luck - a series I love gets 6 episodes (and more next year) and the constant stream of cookie-cutter cop shows get never ending episodes.

I [[ideas]] the reasons New [[Gimmicks]] succeeds are [[various]]. The scripts are [[alright]], and the [[mingling]] of [[trait]] superb, The acting is [[supreme]] flight, and the blend of comedy and [[theater]] [[cooperating]] a [[address]]. The stories aren't all that memorable, but that's not the [[reasons]] I watch [[display]] like this one.

The theme song is a favourite, and we were disappointed to find it isn't available in any published edition. Great stuff, BBC- a [[win]] of sense over sex-appeal (aside from the young constable nobody's there as eye-lolly, and even if he IS, he can still act!). --------------------------------------------- Result 611 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] Some of the [[best]] [[movies]] that are categorized as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and drama. "The Graduate" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are perfect examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or dramas with a lot of humor? In many respects, "The Odd Couple" falls into this same category of being both comedy yet [[highly]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human nature. Much of what happens may be funny to the audience but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV show of the 1970's, the original "Odd Couple" is not merely about a neat guy and messy guy who are forced to live together because of their marital situation. It's really about two opposites who must face why their marriages fell apart and how their detrimental idiosyncrasies reveal themselves outside of their marriage. Neatness, the characteristic of Felix Ungar (Jack Lemon perfectly cast) and messiness, the characteristic of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than simply neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned probably when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. Some of the [[optimum]] [[theater]] that are categorized as "comedies" actually blur between comedy and drama. "The Graduate" and "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", which were made also in the late 1960's are perfect examples. Are they comedies with dramatic undertones, or dramas with a lot of humor? In many respects, "The Odd Couple" falls into this same category of being both comedy yet [[unimaginably]] dramatic with deep underpinnings about human nature. Much of what happens may be funny to the audience but the characters are not laughing.

Despite the rather light-hearted TV show of the 1970's, the original "Odd Couple" is not merely about a neat guy and messy guy who are forced to live together because of their marital situation. It's really about two opposites who must face why their marriages fell apart and how their detrimental idiosyncrasies reveal themselves outside of their marriage. Neatness, the characteristic of Felix Ungar (Jack Lemon perfectly cast) and messiness, the characteristic of Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau), are only the beginning and somewhat superficial. As the story unfolds, we find there is a lot more to these men than simply neatness versus messiness.

Briefly, the story is really about Felix Ungar, who has to face an impending divorce from his wife Francis, who we never meet but is an important character throughout the story. On the verge of suicide, Ungar goes to the only place he knows: the apartment of Oscar Madison where a group of poker buddies hang out every so often. We learn that Ungar is not only a member of this "poker club" but the group knows what's happening to him and try, in their inept way, to help out. Madison figures the best way to help Ungar is to let him move in with him until his suicidal tendencies wear off.

Unfortunately for Madison, he doesn't know what he's getting himself into. Madison is a carefree happy-go-lucky if rather irresponsible slob who's refrigerator was last cleaned probably when Herbert Hoover was still in the White House. Madison's idea of serving snacks is grabbing moldy cheese and sticking them in between two pieces of bread, and then throwing the contents of a bag of chips on the table. On the other hand, he enjoys booze and women, in short having a good time.

Ungar is not only altogether different, he is diametrically opposite. He is not only an obsessive neatness nut that finds more joy in disinfecting the apartment than meeting women but he knows more than most women do about cooking and fine eating. At one point, he calls his ex-wife, not to talk about reconciling, but to get her recipe for meatloaf. At another moment, Ungar was going to spend the rest of the evening cutting cabbage for coleslaw. When Madison seems unimpressed, Ungar finally confesses he was only doing it for his roommate because he can't stand coleslaw. Who is this guy? But he has another endearing trait: Felix is also a hypochondriac. He obsesses about his health to the point where he makes strange noises in public places claiming he's helping his sinuses. He seems to have every health condition in the book. And if they made up more, Felix would probably have them. Ultimately, he is overly self-absorbed.

Running throughout the movie are references to marriage. At one point when Madison is trying to convince Ungar to move in, he says, "What do you want, a wedding ring?" But little does he know that it is not the neat guy who can't deal with the messy guy, but the other way around. Their friendship becomes an inadvertent hellish relationship. And the climax occurs when Oscar invites two lonely British sisters for a get-together with both comedic and tragic results. This is one of the best comedies of its type ever written and not to be missed, with superlative performances by Walter Matthau and Jack Lemon in roles that are hard to imagine better played by anyone else. It is unfortunate that writing of this caliber is sadly lacking from most comedies being produced today. --------------------------------------------- Result 612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] It should come as no shock to you when I say that [[Alone]] in the [[Dark]] is a [[crappy]] movie. To put it [[bluntly]], it's as if a dung [[monster]] defecated, [[ate]] the [[result]], and then [[vomited]]. The [[final]] product would still outshine this [[movie]].

Seemingly based on an [[ancient]] (!) Atari video game, the [[movie]] has something or other to do with a [[portal]] to the [[bowels]] of the earth, the unleashing of [[demons]], and [[ancient]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. ([[Guess]] which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization opened the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, [[conveniently]] enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty [[convoluted]] and [[incomprehensible]]. In similar movies, one might see the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are mentally with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much fun.

The acting is dreadful, save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. It should come as no shock to you when I say that [[Lonely]] in the [[Somber]] is a [[shitty]] movie. To put it [[candidly]], it's as if a dung [[monsters]] defecated, [[eat]] the [[consequence]], and then [[vomit]]. The [[latter]] product would still outshine this [[cinematography]].

Seemingly based on an [[antigua]] (!) Atari video game, the [[film]] has something or other to do with a [[gateway]] to the [[loins]] of the earth, the unleashing of [[fiends]], and [[longtime]] civilizations. Something about there being two worlds, that of darkness and that of light. ([[Imagines]] which one's ours.) Oh, and 10,000 years ago a really super-duper advanced civilization opened the portal, demons came over and had a blast, then wiped out the civilization. Which is why we've never heard of them, [[comfortably]] enough.

Christian Slater, perhaps pining for the days of Heathers and Pump up the Volume, plays Edward Carnby, a paranormal researcher to whom Something Bad happened when he was 10 years old. He's hot on the trail of one of the artifacts of said advanced civilization. Carnby used to be part of a secret institution called 713, which has been trying to figure out what happened to that long-ago civilization. But Carnby believed he wasn't going to be able to find the answers he sought, so he left the group.

But see, these beasties are out, and they get their prey in varying ways, such as gutting them, splitting them down the middle, implanting neurological control devices in them, or just turning them into killing zombies. Yes, it's another zombie movie.

That's about as distilled I can make the plot. It's pretty [[complicated]] and [[unfathomable]]. In similar movies, one might see the intrepid researcher/adventurer figure things out a step at a time, and when we the audience are mentally with the researcher, it's a lot of fun. But when the scenes shift from attack to attack with no perspective or context... not so much fun.

The acting is dreadful, save for Slater, who (although he almost seems embarrassed to be in the movie) showed he was capable of carrying the acting load. He had to; get this - Tara Reid is cast as a museum curator! Honest to goodness, I thought I'd seen the casting of a lifetime when Denise Richards was cast as a nuclear physicist in Tomorrow Never Dies. But Reid here matches Richards, crappy emoting for crappy emoting. Hightlights include Reid pronouncing "Newfoundland" as "New Fownd Land," Reid delivering most of her lines in a dazed, throaty monotone (kinda like she'd been on an all-night bender for the past week before filming), Reid - a museum curator, mind you - spending a lot of the movie in a midriff-bearing top and hip-hugger jeans. Oh yeah, she was as believable as Jessica Simpson giving stock quotes. Oh, why must the pretty ones be so dumb? (Note: I don't think Tara Reid's all that good looking. She looks like she's in perpetual need of food.) Almost everyone else in the cast is completely forgettable, except perhaps for Steven Dorff, who played Burke, one of the leaders of 713. Dorff's character wasn't terribly well developed, but nothing in the movie was, from the sets to the characters to Tara Reid. But I digress.

Anyway, the perplexing and utterly preposterous storyline is tough enough to follow with the film moving at such a breakneck pace, but director Uwe Boll tosses in a pounding, mind-deadening soundtrack; it's so loud you can't hear what the actors are saying in some of the scenes! That can't be right. Given the acting level, however, perhaps thanks are in order to Mr. Boll.

Oh, and a fun note. The opening moments of the movie include narration... of the words that are crawling across the screen at the same time. Remember the first Star Wars? You heard that now-familiar Star Wars theme while the prologue crawled. There was surely no need for narration; why do I need some doofus to read what's on the screen for me? Were the producers simply looking out for blind people? Maybe that also explains why the soundtrack was so loud - they were also looking out for hard-of-hearing people. Also, the narrator inexplicably had a lisp for the first few lines of the crawl - then lost it. Bizarre.

Alone in the Dark is a loud, dopey mishmash of dreadful acting, an incoherent script, and ham-handed directing. Hardly a note rings true. There's so much chaos that the audience simply gives up caring about the characters and roots for their demise. Even in the dark, the demonic creatures seem cooler and much more developed by comparison.

Ironically, since there were only three other people in the theater, I watched this Alone in the Dark. I wonder if Uwe Boll planned it that way? I can't quite give this the lowest rating, because I had low hopes for it to begin with - and because it never grabbed me enough for me to get worked up about it. It's atrocious, although Slater redeems himself a tiny bit. --------------------------------------------- Result 613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] CRY [[FREEDOM]] is an [[excellent]] primer for those [[wanting]] an overview of apartheid's [[cruelty]] in just a [[couple]] of [[hours]]. [[Famed]] director [[Richard]] Attenborough (GANDHI) is certainly no [[stranger]] to the genre, and the [[collaboration]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Mrs]]. [[Woods]], the main white [[characters]] in their book and in this [[film]], lends further authenticity to [[CRY]] [[FREEDOM]]. The [[video]] now in [[release]] [[actually]] [[runs]] a [[little]] over 2 and a half [[hours]] [[since]] 23 [[minutes]] of [[extra]] footage was [[inserted]] to make it a two [[part]] TV miniseries after the film's [[initial]] theatrical [[release]]. [[While]] the added length serves to heighten the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible flaw (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the African ones) may work out as a [[strength]]. Viewing CRYING FREEDOM as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger generation may now need to see it on film for full [[impact]]. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, [[hopefully]] [[driving]] them to [[change]]. Now twelve [[years]] after the movie's production, [[CRY]] FREEDOM is in many ways a more interesting film to watch. Almost ten years after black majority [[rule]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It therefore remains as imperative as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only heard of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In total contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, [[coloured]], Indian or Black!). And yes I did [[miss]] another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also [[highly]] [[recommended]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney [[Poitier]], who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. CRY [[FREEDOMS]] is an [[sumptuous]] primer for those [[wanted]] an overview of apartheid's [[brutality]] in just a [[pair]] of [[hour]]. [[Celebrity]] director [[Richards]] Attenborough (GANDHI) is certainly no [[outlander]] to the genre, and the [[works]] of the real-life Mr. and [[Astrid]]. [[Lumber]], the main white [[attribute]] in their book and in this [[movies]], lends further authenticity to [[WEEPING]] [[LIBERTY]]. The [[videos]] now in [[releases]] [[genuinely]] [[manages]] a [[tiny]] over 2 and a half [[hour]] [[because]] 23 [[mins]] of [[additional]] footage was [[inserting]] to make it a two [[portions]] TV miniseries after the film's [[incipient]] theatrical [[emancipate]]. [[Despite]] the added length serves to heighten the film's forgivable flaws: uneven character development and blanket stereotyping in particular, another possible flaw (the insistence on the white characters' fate over that of the African ones) may work out as a [[kraft]]. Viewing CRYING FREEDOM as a politically and historically educational film (as I think it should, over its artistic merits), the story is one which black Africans know only too well, though the younger generation may now need to see it on film for full [[consequences]]. It is the whites who have always been the film's and the book's target audience, [[thankfully]] [[drives]] them to [[amended]]. Now twelve [[olds]] after the movie's production, [[CRYING]] FREEDOM is in many ways a more interesting film to watch. Almost ten years after black majority [[ordinance]] has been at least theorically in place, 1987's CRY FREEDOM's ideals remain by and large unrealized. It therefore remains as imperative as ever for white South Africans, particularly the younger ones who have only heard of these actions to see it, and absorb the film's messages. In total contrast to American slavery and the Jewish Holocaust's exposure, South Africans' struggles have been told by a mere two or three stories: CRY FREEDOM, CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY (OK, Count it twice if you include the remake), and SARAFINA (did I miss one?). All three dramas also clumsily feature American and British actors in both the white and black roles. Not one South African actor has played a major role, white, [[dyed]], Indian or Black!). And yes I did [[mademoiselle]] another international South African drama, MANDELA and DEKLERK. Though this (also [[inordinately]] [[recommend]]) biopic was released after black majority rule was instituted, MANDELA was played by a Black American (Sidney [[Poitiers]], who also starred in the original S.A.-themed CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY), while the Afrikaner DeKlerk was played by a (bald) very British Michael Caine, a good performance if you can dismiss that the very essence of Afrikanerdom is vehement anti-British feelings. Until local SABC TV and African films start dealing with their own legacy, CRY FREEDOM is about as authentic as you'll get. As villified as the whites (particularly the Afrikaners) are portrayed in the film, any observant (non-casual) visitor to South Africa even now in 1999, not to mention 1977 when CRY FREEDOM takes place, will generally find white's attitudes towards blacks restrained, even understated. Looking at CRY FREEDOM in hindsight, it is amazing that reconciliation can take place at all, and it is. But CRY FREEDOM at time shows not much has really changed in many people's minds yet, and that the Black Africans' goal to FREEDOM and reconciliation is still ongoing. This is why if you're a novice to the situation, CRY FREEDOM, is your best introduction. --------------------------------------------- Result 614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] as a [[child]] and it [[broke]] my [[heart]]! [[No]] other [[story]] had such a unfinished [[ending]]... I [[grew]] up on [[many]] [[great]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so [[unusual]] - a [[story]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and [[choices]] that can't be undone, and the [[need]] for others. Chirin is made [[alone]] when the Wolf [[kills]] his [[mother]], but the [[Wolf]] is [[alone]], too, when Chirin follows him into the [[mountain]]. The [[Wolf]] doesn't [[kill]] the lamb, even [[though]] each [[night]] he [[says]] "[[maybe]] I'll [[eat]] you tomorrow." The [[tape]] of it I have is [[broken]] and [[degraded]] from age and [[use]]. I will [[repair]] it and watch the [[movie]] again someday and [[cry]] just as [[hard]] as I did as a child. [[Stories]] [[like]] this, with this [[depth]] and feeling, and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[rare]]. It is a [[sad]] [[story]], but I've never [[encountered]] any catharsis more [[beautifully]] [[made]]. I am [[glad]] I have [[seen]] this [[movie]], and I'm glad I [[saw]] it as a [[child]]. I [[sawthe]] this [[filmmaking]] as a [[infantile]] and it [[ruptured]] my [[coeur]]! [[Nos]] other [[stories]] had such a unfinished [[terminated]]... I [[rose]] up on [[several]] [[marvellous]] anime movies and this was one of my favourites, because it was so [[odd]] - a [[stories]] about unfairness, and cruelty, and loneliness, and life, and [[option]] that can't be undone, and the [[needs]] for others. Chirin is made [[exclusively]] when the Wolf [[homicide]] his [[mamas]], but the [[Lair]] is [[merely]], too, when Chirin follows him into the [[shan]]. The [[Loup]] doesn't [[mata]] the lamb, even [[while]] each [[overnight]] he [[said]] "[[potentially]] I'll [[ate]] you tomorrow." The [[cassettes]] of it I have is [[fractured]] and [[decayed]] from age and [[utilizing]]. I will [[repairs]] it and watch the [[filmmaking]] again someday and [[weep]] just as [[laborious]] as I did as a child. [[Histories]] [[iike]] this, with this [[depths]] and feeling, and this intricacy of meaning, are very [[scarce]]. It is a [[unfortunate]] [[history]], but I've never [[confronted]] any catharsis more [[staggeringly]] [[brought]]. I am [[happier]] I have [[watched]] this [[kino]], and I'm glad I [[sawthe]] it as a [[infantile]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I have [[loved]] this [[movie]] [[since]] I [[first]] [[saw]] it in 1979. I'm [[still]] [[amazed]] at how [[accurately]] [[Kurt]] Russell [[portrays]] [[Elvis]], right down to how he [[moves]] and the expressions on his [[face]]. Sometimes its [[scary]] how [[much]] he looks, acts, and talks like the [[real]] Elvis. [[Thankfully]] this is being [[released]] on DVD, so all of us that have been waiting can [[finally]] have an [[excellent]] quality [[version]] of the [[full]] [[length]] [[film]]. I have heard the detractors, who [[say]] that there are some inaccuracies, or some [[things]] left out, but I [[think]] that [[keeping]] in mind that [[John]] [[Carpenter]] only had about 2 1/2 hours to [[work]] with, and that this was being [[shown]] on [[television]] (just two years after Elvis's [[death]]!) that he did a fine [[job]] with this. In fact I haven't seen another [[Elvis]] [[movie]] that even [[comes]] close to this one. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. I have [[worshiped]] this [[filmmaking]] [[because]] I [[firstly]] [[watched]] it in 1979. I'm [[yet]] [[appalled]] at how [[exactly]] [[Curt]] Russell [[exposes]] [[Alves]], right down to how he [[shift]] and the expressions on his [[encounter]]. Sometimes its [[terrible]] how [[very]] he looks, acts, and talks like the [[actual]] Elvis. [[Mercifully]] this is being [[freed]] on DVD, so all of us that have been waiting can [[lastly]] have an [[sumptuous]] quality [[stepping]] of the [[fullest]] [[lifespan]] [[flick]]. I have heard the detractors, who [[told]] that there are some inaccuracies, or some [[items]] left out, but I [[thinking]] that [[maintaining]] in mind that [[Johannes]] [[Carpentry]] only had about 2 1/2 hours to [[working]] with, and that this was being [[exhibited]] on [[tvs]] (just two years after Elvis's [[fatalities]]!) that he did a fine [[employment]] with this. In fact I haven't seen another [[Alves]] [[cinematography]] that even [[occurs]] close to this one. [[Heavily]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There were good performances by Robin Williams and others but the movie was [[dull]] [[overall]] and very [[disappointing]] compared to the positive [[reviews]].

I thought Sy might [[become]] a serial [[killer]] who bores people to death: a forlorn [[guy]] in [[ugly]] clothes [[trails]] his [[victims]] [[around]] [[food]] [[courts]], [[quoting]] [[Oprah]] and [[reciting]] his medical [[history]] until they [[beg]] him to shoot them.

I think the movie mostly appeals to egomaniacs who [[think]] [[strangers]] are interested in their [[photos]]. I [[expect]] most retail workers want a [[break]] from the [[customers]]. There were good performances by Robin Williams and others but the movie was [[drab]] [[holistic]] and very [[depressing]] compared to the positive [[inspect]].

I thought Sy might [[becomes]] a serial [[murderer]] who bores people to death: a forlorn [[mec]] in [[nasty]] clothes [[trajectories]] his [[fatalities]] [[about]] [[foods]] [[tribunals]], [[citing]] [[Opera]] and [[memorizing]] his medical [[story]] until they [[beseech]] him to shoot them.

I think the movie mostly appeals to egomaniacs who [[reckon]] [[foreigner]] are interested in their [[imagery]]. I [[expecting]] most retail workers want a [[blackout]] from the [[shoppers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Film]] starts in 1840 Japan in which a man slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequence]]. Then it jumps to [[present]] day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted (Edward Albert), wife Laura (Susan George) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the house where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the [[makeup]] is hysterically bad) and make life [[hell]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's [[really]] [[hopeless]]. There's a bloody opening and ending and [[NOTHING]] happens in between. There is an [[attack]] by [[giant]] crabs which is just uproarious! They [[look]] so fake--I swear I saw the [[strings]] pulling one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex sequence in the first 20 minutes (probably just to show off George's body), another one about 40 minutes later (but that was necessary to the plot) and a [[really]] [[silly]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between Albert and Doug McClure must be seen to be believed.

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was pretty [[good]] as a family friend. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[lousy]] film. She gives this film a much needed lift--but can't [[save]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory opening and closing. That aside, this is a very [[boring]] film. [[Films]] starts in 1840 Japan in which a man slashes his wife and her lover to death and the commits suicide. It's a very gory, bloody [[sequences]]. Then it jumps to [[presenting]] day...well 1982 to be precise. Ted (Edward Albert), wife Laura (Susan George) and their annoying little kid move to Japan for hubby's work. They rent a house and--surprise! surprise--it just happens to be the house where the murders took place! The three dead people are around as ghosts (the [[composition]] is hysterically bad) and make life [[inferno]] for the family.

Sounds OK--but it's [[genuinely]] [[desperate]]. There's a bloody opening and ending and [[ANYTHING]] happens in between. There is an [[attacks]] by [[titan]] crabs which is just uproarious! They [[gaze]] so fake--I swear I saw the [[ropes]] pulling one along--and they're muttering!!!!! There's a pointless sex sequence in the first 20 minutes (probably just to show off George's body), another one about 40 minutes later (but that was necessary to the plot) and a [[genuinely]] [[beast]] exorcism towards the end. The fight scene between Albert and Doug McClure must be seen to be believed.

As for acting--Albert was OK as the husband and McClure was pretty [[buena]] as a family friend. But George--as always--is terrific in a [[squalid]] film. She gives this film a much needed lift--but can't [[economize]] it. I'm giving this a 2 just for her and the gory opening and closing. That aside, this is a very [[dreary]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 618 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] One of the [[last]] [[great]] musicals of the 60s. I was 7 [[years]] old the [[first]] [[time]] I [[saw]] this movie, and it's always been a favorite [[since]] then. The musical [[numbers]] are all memorable. [[In]] the 60s the people who were cast in musicals actually had musical talent (unlike a CERTAIN Academy Award nominated current musical based in a large midwestern city). All of the main roles were [[beautifully]] cast...Ron Moody [[shines]] as Fagin, as does Shani Wallis as Nancy. Oliver Reed was a menacing Bill Sikes (who thankfully has no musical numbers, lol), and Mark Lester as Oliver and Jack Wild as the Dodger were great too. Mark Lester comes across as an innocent waif, which was what Dickens intended when he wrote the book! Then, of course there are the dozens of dancers who perform in "consider yourself," "I'd Do Anything" "Who Will Buy" and "be Back Soon," many who were children! This is a great show for the whole family. One of the [[latter]] [[super]] musicals of the 60s. I was 7 [[yr]] old the [[fiirst]] [[period]] I [[noticed]] this movie, and it's always been a favorite [[because]] then. The musical [[numerals]] are all memorable. [[Among]] the 60s the people who were cast in musicals actually had musical talent (unlike a CERTAIN Academy Award nominated current musical based in a large midwestern city). All of the main roles were [[amazingly]] cast...Ron Moody [[glows]] as Fagin, as does Shani Wallis as Nancy. Oliver Reed was a menacing Bill Sikes (who thankfully has no musical numbers, lol), and Mark Lester as Oliver and Jack Wild as the Dodger were great too. Mark Lester comes across as an innocent waif, which was what Dickens intended when he wrote the book! Then, of course there are the dozens of dancers who perform in "consider yourself," "I'd Do Anything" "Who Will Buy" and "be Back Soon," many who were children! This is a great show for the whole family. --------------------------------------------- Result 619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] the [[writing]] of the [[journalists]] and the [[required]] over [[eager]] reckless press [[officer]] and [[sobbing]] [[grandma]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I cant [[blame]] the [[actors]], but [[surely]] [[someone]] [[must]] have [[said]] "are you joking I cant say this!"

This episode had a [[press]] perspective and [[police]] perspective, while the [[police]] [[perspective]] was standard [[enough]], the press perspective and [[characterization]] was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly unbelievable.

I notice that this was an HBO co production, if so then perhaps the sledgehammer stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was completely cringing during the press conference scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely ring true. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am still waiting for the suspense.

Skip Five Daysthis. the 2008/9 production with these characters is far better and more suspenseful even if the crime is over the top.

This story had unforgivable moments which can only be described as staggeringly unbelievable.

For a press officer to start a press conference without an investigating officer present to take press questions.

so unbelievable it felt like amateur hour.

I then began looking for Journalists called "Scoop" and for Perry White to make an appearance.

I saw the 2009 Hunter before "five days"[[made]] it to Australia, not [[realizing]] it was a prequel and was [[looking]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[around]] again.

[[Head]] shakingly [[awful]]. the [[writes]] of the [[reporters]] and the [[obliged]] over [[impatient]] reckless press [[officials]] and [[crying]] [[gran]] was ham-fisted and cliché ridden.

I cant [[blamed]] the [[protagonists]], but [[indubitably]] [[everyone]] [[ought]] have [[stated]] "are you joking I cant say this!"

This episode had a [[pressing]] perspective and [[cops]] perspective, while the [[cops]] [[standpoint]] was standard [[adequately]], the press perspective and [[profiling]] was overdrawn exaggerated and at points insultingly unbelievable.

I notice that this was an HBO co production, if so then perhaps the sledgehammer stereotypes can be explained in that light,

I was completely cringing during the press conference scene. it lacked any credibility and did not remotely ring true. 40 minutes into the first episode and I am still waiting for the suspense.

Skip Five Daysthis. the 2008/9 production with these characters is far better and more suspenseful even if the crime is over the top.

This story had unforgivable moments which can only be described as staggeringly unbelievable.

For a press officer to start a press conference without an investigating officer present to take press questions.

so unbelievable it felt like amateur hour.

I then began looking for Journalists called "Scoop" and for Perry White to make an appearance.

I saw the 2009 Hunter before "five days"[[accomplished]] it to Australia, not [[realising]] it was a prequel and was [[search]] forward to Bonneville and McTeer going [[roughly]] again.

[[Leiter]] shakingly [[scary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie the other day in a film school class, and I hadn't seen an Almodovar movie before but went in expecting it to be good. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a pointless film with only a couple of laughs mixed in with two hours of sheer boredom. High Heels is just a collection of random scenes that might have worked in their own separate movies but together don't add up to any kind of meaningful whole at all.

Or so I thought. Then, the next day, my film professor spent the entire class period explaining all of the movie's hidden little details, like how the mural depicting stereotypical flamenco dancers in the background of the drag queen scene is some kind of commentary on the lack of identity that Spain as a nation has developed under fascist rule. Apparently, the whole movie is chock full of clever little visual tricks and references like this.

Great, but you know what? It's still a bad movie. It takes more than depth and complexity to make a good film--you still need to give the audience a reason to keep paying attention, something to interest the viewer enough to actually care about all the subtle tricks. High Heels gives us strange, off-beat characters but keeps them in mostly mundane situations recycled from other movies, and Almodovar doesn't seem to be using them to make any kind of point. What is the significance, for example, of the Hitchcockian surprise character revelation that occurs towards the end of the film? Why is that even in there? Just to surprise us?

There is one funny scene that has to do with a news broadcast. And that's it, that's the only entertaining moment. The rest of the movie is just nonsensical filmic references and visual cues that apparently exist only for the sake of showing us how smart Pedro Almodovar is. But no matter what my film professor says, it takes more than self-indulgent trickery for a movie to be good. --------------------------------------------- Result 621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I gotta say, Clive Barker's [[Undying]] is by far the [[best]] horror game to have ever been made. I've played Resident Evil, Silent [[Hill]] and the Evil Dead and Castlevania games but none of them have [[captured]] the pure glee with which this game tackles its horrific [[elements]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[world]], and it [[shows]] as his hand is clearly everywhere in this [[game]]. Heck, even his voice is in the [[game]] as one of the main [[characters]]. Full of [[lush]] visuals and enough atmosphere to shake a stick at, [[Undying]] is the [[game]] to beat in my books as the [[best]] horror title. I just wish that this had made it to a console system but alas poor PC sales nipped that one in the bud. I gotta say, Clive Barker's [[Incorruptible]] is by far the [[optimum]] horror game to have ever been made. I've played Resident Evil, Silent [[Hale]] and the Evil Dead and Castlevania games but none of them have [[apprehended]] the pure glee with which this game tackles its horrific [[components]]. Barker is good at what he does, which is attach the horror to our [[globe]], and it [[displaying]] as his hand is clearly everywhere in this [[jeu]]. Heck, even his voice is in the [[gaming]] as one of the main [[nature]]. Full of [[opulent]] visuals and enough atmosphere to shake a stick at, [[Perpetual]] is the [[gaming]] to beat in my books as the [[nicest]] horror title. I just wish that this had made it to a console system but alas poor PC sales nipped that one in the bud. --------------------------------------------- Result 622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I [[would]] never have [[thought]] I [[would]] [[almost]] [[cry]] viewing one minute excerpted from a 1920 black and [[white]] [[movie]] without sound. Thanks to [[Martin]] Scorsese I did (the [[movie]] was from F. Borzage). You will start to understand (if it's not already the [[case]]), what makes a [[good]] [[movie]]. I [[ought]] never have [[figured]] I [[ought]] [[roughly]] [[crying]] viewing one minute excerpted from a 1920 black and [[bianca]] [[flick]] without sound. Thanks to [[Martins]] Scorsese I did (the [[kino]] was from F. Borzage). You will start to understand (if it's not already the [[lawsuit]]), what makes a [[alright]] [[cinematic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I [[knew]] about this as a similar programme as Jackass, and I saw one or two episodes on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British bloke were brought together by love of skateboarding, and a complete [[disregard]]/masochistic [[pleasure]] to harm themselves and their health and safety. They have had [[puking]], [[eating]] pubes-covered pizza, jumping in stinging nettles, naked paint balling, jokes on the smaller guy while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.g. army, cowboys, and many more insane stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. Starring Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical stuff and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho (Mike Locke) who does a lot, but is more popular for being short, fat and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Greatest]] Funny Moments. [[Very]] good! I [[knowed]] about this as a similar programme as Jackass, and I saw one or two episodes on Freeview, and it is the same, only more extreme. Basically three Welsh guys, and one mad British bloke were brought together by love of skateboarding, and a complete [[ignore]]/masochistic [[glee]] to harm themselves and their health and safety. They have had [[barfing]], [[catering]] pubes-covered pizza, jumping in stinging nettles, naked paint balling, jokes on the smaller guy while heavily sleeping/snoring, stunts in a work place, e.g. army, cowboys, and many more insane stunts that cause bruises, bumps, blood and vomit, maybe not just for themselves. Starring Matthew Pritchard who does pretty much anything, Lee Dainton also up for just about anything, Dan Joyce (the British one) who hardly does much physical stuff and has a OTT laugh, and Pancho (Mike Locke) who does a lot, but is more popular for being short, fat and lazy. It was number something on The 100 [[Highest]] Funny Moments. [[Much]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] What a [[disappointment]]! [[Piper]] Perabo is adorable, Tyra [[Banks]] is [[beautiful]] but [[pitiful]] as an actor and the [[talented]] and [[beautiful]] [[Maria]] Bello is wasted! Bello must have been embarrassed by some of the lines! The plot, script and [[premise]] is a [[joke]]!

I'm not against silly [[movies]], I [[think]] that [[Something]] About [[Mary]] is a masterpiece, but Coyote [[Ugly]] is a [[waste]] of 90 minutes........ What a [[displeasure]]! [[Flute]] Perabo is adorable, Tyra [[Bankers]] is [[terrific]] but [[sorrowful]] as an actor and the [[gifted]] and [[wondrous]] [[Mario]] Bello is wasted! Bello must have been embarrassed by some of the lines! The plot, script and [[supposition]] is a [[farce]]!

I'm not against silly [[film]], I [[reckon]] that [[Anything]] About [[Maryam]] is a masterpiece, but Coyote [[Awful]] is a [[wastes]] of 90 minutes........ --------------------------------------------- Result 625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply stick to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, came the two [[killer]] [[blows]] - [[plot]] and sentiment. Who really cared what happened to the tiger or whether Eddie Murphy made up with his daughter? Not me, that's for sure. Why oh why don't blockbuster movies simply stick to their selling point? Everyone in the cinema, young and old, was there to see talking animals make jokes, and whilst they did that we were all happy... And then, as with Lost In Space, came the two [[callin]] [[strokes]] - [[intrigue]] and sentiment. Who really cared what happened to the tiger or whether Eddie Murphy made up with his daughter? Not me, that's for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I was going to [[give]] it an 8, but since you people made 6.5 out of a lot better votes, I had to up my contribution. The river Styx was pure [[genius]]. [[Sure]], Woody was his perennial stuff, but at least his role was appropriate. The first half hour was really hilarious, and then the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] was [[easy]] to watch. The dialog was clever enough, and Woody's card tricks at the parties, along with the reaction from the upper crust, were [[fun]] to watch. This was much better than the newspaper [[critics]] made it sound out to be. And a plus, a little Sorcerer's Apprentice to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that Johansen is getting a bit frumpy? Charles Dance is always entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. I was going to [[confer]] it an 8, but since you people made 6.5 out of a lot better votes, I had to up my contribution. The river Styx was pure [[genie]]. [[Convinced]], Woody was his perennial stuff, but at least his role was appropriate. The first half hour was really hilarious, and then the [[resting]] of the [[kino]] was [[effortless]] to watch. The dialog was clever enough, and Woody's card tricks at the parties, along with the reaction from the upper crust, were [[funny]] to watch. This was much better than the newspaper [[detractors]] made it sound out to be. And a plus, a little Sorcerer's Apprentice to go along with it. And of course, did you notice that Johansen is getting a bit frumpy? Charles Dance is always entertaining, as was Hugh Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I saw this movie for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. [[Unfortunately]], these poor men were forced to carry a pretty [[dumb]] [[movie]]. I liked the idea that Dracula is actually a reincarnation of Judas Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things Christian, but there was so much camp that this idea was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to pay his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remind]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special features on the DVD more than the movie itself. I saw this movie for 2 reasons--I like Gerard Butler and Christopher Plummer. [[Tragically]], these poor men were forced to carry a pretty [[dolt]] [[kino]]. I liked the idea that Dracula is actually a reincarnation of Judas Iscariot, because it does explain his disdain for all things Christian, but there was so much camp that this idea was not realized as much as it could have been. I see this movie more as a way for the talented Gerard Butler to pay his dues before being truly recognized and a way for the legendary Christopher Plummer to [[remembering]] the public (me and the 5 other people who saw this film) that he still exists. I actually enjoyed the special features on the DVD more than the movie itself. --------------------------------------------- Result 628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Man the ending of this film is so terribly unwatchable and dated that my entire film aesthetics class laughed like crazy. Now most of the [[rest]] of the film was okay. It had a few [[unintentionally]] [[funny]] scenes but had a few real good [[camera]] shots and editing. [[Yes]] Alderich is a [[great]] director who made [[FLight]] Of The Phoenix and Whatever Happened [[TO]] [[Baby]] [[Jane]] among others. The problem isn't with direction, acting or anything technical. The [[movie]] is just [[destroyed]] in the third act. Why? The [[murders]], twists, turns and [[characters]] have all been revolving around [[NUCLEAR]] [[MATERIAL]]? What the [[heck]] was the [[writer]] [[smoking]] when he [[came]] up with that? The [[way]] it just [[comes]] out of nowhere may have been the [[biggest]] [[Deus]] Ex Machina in [[history]]. [[For]] all the complaints about Burton's Planet of the [[Apes]], THe [[life]] of David Gale or Notorious I [[think]] THIS is the [[worst]] ending ever. What a let down. Man the ending of this film is so terribly unwatchable and dated that my entire film aesthetics class laughed like crazy. Now most of the [[stays]] of the film was okay. It had a few [[unknowingly]] [[humorous]] scenes but had a few real good [[cameras]] shots and editing. [[Oui]] Alderich is a [[resplendent]] director who made [[vol]] Of The Phoenix and Whatever Happened [[POUR]] [[Babe]] [[Jeanne]] among others. The problem isn't with direction, acting or anything technical. The [[films]] is just [[vandalized]] in the third act. Why? The [[homicides]], twists, turns and [[features]] have all been revolving around [[NUKES]] [[MATERIALS]]? What the [[devil]] was the [[novelist]] [[tobacco]] when he [[became]] up with that? The [[paths]] it just [[happens]] out of nowhere may have been the [[strongest]] [[God]] Ex Machina in [[tale]]. [[During]] all the complaints about Burton's Planet of the [[Baboons]], THe [[vie]] of David Gale or Notorious I [[thoughts]] THIS is the [[hardest]] ending ever. What a let down. --------------------------------------------- Result 629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Ah, [[Bait]]. [[How]] do I hate thee? Let me [[count]] the ways. 1. You try to be [[funny]], but are [[corny]] and unenjoyable; every joke is predictable and expected, and when it comes, does not [[inspire]] laughter. [[Instead]], I want to hurl. 2. You [[try]] to be [[dramatic]], but are unbelievable; the woman overacts to a terrible degree, and the "bad guy" looks like Bill Gates, and is about as scary as...well, Bill Gates. (Just try to imagine Bill Gates trying to intimidate somebody with a [[gun]]. Doesn't [[work]], does it? A [[lawyer]], maybe, but not a gun. Doesn't fit.) As for Jamie Foxx, well, just watching him [[try]] to deliver a [[dramatic]] and heartfelt dialogue is [[ludicrous]], and makes me want to hurl. 3. You [[try]] to be action-packed, but instead are [[dull]] and dragging too [[many]] [[times]]. And when the action heats up, the tripod for the [[camera]] must have been lost, for the scenes wobble more than those in The Blair Witch Project, and I find myself [[nauseated]], and once again I want to [[hurl]]. 4. You try to be a [[good]] movie, but you failed, you FAILED, YOU FAILED! I [[would]] [[rather]] [[walk]] barefoot across the Sahara with a [[pack]] full of [[beef]] jerky and no water, no [[sunscreen]], and only [[Meryl]] Streep for [[company]]. This [[hell]] [[would]] be lovelier than a [[single]] minute more spent watching [[everyone]] in [[Bait]] [[overact]] their way through an idiotically written [[story]] with [[Bill]] [[Gates]] for a bad [[guy]], and let's not [[even]] [[talk]] about the [[massive]] [[bomb]] that goes off in a [[car]] that Jamie Foxx's [[character]] has just [[driven]] OFF A CLIFF, but [[somehow]] manages to [[escape]]...just [[kill]] me now, or do the right thing and [[promise]] me that somehow I'll never have to watch a [[movie]] that is this [[bad]], ever again. Ah, [[Lure]]. [[Mode]] do I hate thee? Let me [[comte]] the ways. 1. You try to be [[comical]], but are [[trite]] and unenjoyable; every joke is predictable and expected, and when it comes, does not [[inspires]] laughter. [[Conversely]], I want to hurl. 2. You [[attempting]] to be [[striking]], but are unbelievable; the woman overacts to a terrible degree, and the "bad guy" looks like Bill Gates, and is about as scary as...well, Bill Gates. (Just try to imagine Bill Gates trying to intimidate somebody with a [[pistol]]. Doesn't [[jobs]], does it? A [[attorneys]], maybe, but not a gun. Doesn't fit.) As for Jamie Foxx, well, just watching him [[endeavour]] to deliver a [[tremendous]] and heartfelt dialogue is [[nonsensical]], and makes me want to hurl. 3. You [[seeks]] to be action-packed, but instead are [[tiresome]] and dragging too [[multiple]] [[time]]. And when the action heats up, the tripod for the [[cameras]] must have been lost, for the scenes wobble more than those in The Blair Witch Project, and I find myself [[nauseous]], and once again I want to [[pelt]]. 4. You try to be a [[alright]] movie, but you failed, you FAILED, YOU FAILED! I [[should]] [[comparatively]] [[walking]] barefoot across the Sahara with a [[packet]] full of [[cattle]] jerky and no water, no [[lotion]], and only [[Streep]] Streep for [[businesses]]. This [[brothel]] [[could]] be lovelier than a [[lonely]] minute more spent watching [[anyone]] in [[Decoy]] [[exaggerate]] their way through an idiotically written [[history]] with [[Invoices]] [[Doors]] for a bad [[guys]], and let's not [[yet]] [[speaks]] about the [[overwhelming]] [[bombings]] that goes off in a [[automobile]] that Jamie Foxx's [[personage]] has just [[fueled]] OFF A CLIFF, but [[somewhere]] manages to [[elope]]...just [[murdered]] me now, or do the right thing and [[promised]] me that somehow I'll never have to watch a [[kino]] that is this [[amiss]], ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I went into this movie perhaps a [[bit]] [[jaded]] by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I surprised. This little [[treasure]] was [[pleasantly]] paced with a somber, dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[limited]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[movies]], this one leaves something to the [[imagination]], and [[Bill]] Paxton did a [[superb]] [[job]] at directing. Scenes shot inside the [[car]] as are well [[done]] and, after [[watching]] the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to [[see]] that some of the subtle, [[yet]] [[wonderful]] [[things]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[movie]], filled with grimness. Still, for the dark subject, a considerable portion of it is filmed in daylight, even some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is exceptional (Okay, I've always been a fan of Powers Booth), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which works extremely well for this type of film. If there is any one area where this film lacks, it is in the ending, which seems just a bit too contrived, but still works on a simpler level without [[destroying]] the mood or the message of the movie. What is the message? It's something that each individual decides for themself. Overall, on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the southern gothic genre (ie: "Body Heat" or "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. I went into this movie perhaps a [[bitten]] [[tired]] by the hack-and-slash films rampant on the screen these days. Boy, was I surprised. This little [[tesoro]] was [[cheerfully]] paced with a somber, dark atmosphere. More surprising yet was the very [[scant]] amount of blood actually shown. As with most good [[cinematic]], this one leaves something to the [[novelty]], and [[Billings]] Paxton did a [[extraordinaire]] [[labor]] at directing. Scenes shot inside the [[motorcars]] as are well [[effected]] and, after [[staring]] the "Anatomy of a Scene" episode at the end of the video tape, It was good to [[consults]] that some of the subtle, [[nonetheless]] [[funky]] [[aspects]] I had noticed were intentional and not just an "Oh, that looks good, keep it" type of direction. This is a moody [[kino]], filled with grimness. Still, for the dark subject, a considerable portion of it is filmed in daylight, even some of the more disturbing scenes. The acting is exceptional (Okay, I've always been a fan of Powers Booth), and never goes over the top. Au Contraire, it is very subdued which works extremely well for this type of film. If there is any one area where this film lacks, it is in the ending, which seems just a bit too contrived, but still works on a simpler level without [[demolished]] the mood or the message of the movie. What is the message? It's something that each individual decides for themself. Overall, on the 1-10 scale, this movie scores an 8 for those who like the southern gothic genre (ie: "Body Heat" or "Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil"), and about a 5 for those who don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] An MGM MINIATURE Short Subject.

The [[editor]] of the Cole County Clarion [[must]] decide what is the real IMPORTANT NEWS for his readers: an impending frost which may spell disaster to their crops, or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious gangster on their small town main street.

This is an [[enjoyable]] [[little]] one-reeler, featuring a good performance by comic Charles `Chic' Sale. Today's viewers will perhaps be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & somewhat goofy, Stewart shows many of the attributes which would make him a huge star in a very short time.

Often overlooked or neglected today, the one and two-reel short subjects were useful to the Studios as important training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for creating a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. Economical to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the perfect complement to the Studios' feature films. An MGM MINIATURE Short Subject.

The [[editorial]] of the Cole County Clarion [[should]] decide what is the real IMPORTANT NEWS for his readers: an impending frost which may spell disaster to their crops, or the sensational shooting-down of a notorious gangster on their small town main street.

This is an [[agreeable]] [[scant]] one-reeler, featuring a good performance by comic Charles `Chic' Sale. Today's viewers will perhaps be more interested in the appearance of uncredited James Stewart, as Sale's nephew/assistant. Slow talking & somewhat goofy, Stewart shows many of the attributes which would make him a huge star in a very short time.

Often overlooked or neglected today, the one and two-reel short subjects were useful to the Studios as important training grounds for new or burgeoning talents, both in front & behind the camera. The dynamics for creating a successful short subject was completely different from that of a feature length film, something like writing a topnotch short story rather than a novel. Economical to produce in terms of both budget & schedule and capable of portraying a wide range of material, short subjects were the perfect complement to the Studios' feature films. --------------------------------------------- Result 632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (55%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a character, was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and ended up nearly [[sacrificing]] her humanity in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant reminders of this struggle of the old and new, and the carnage (so to speak) along the way.

While the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it missed the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. Margret Laurence probably didn't intend on having any of her novels adopted for film, let alone the Stone Angel. Hagar, as a character, was one who constantly challenged the social norm (Gainsay who dare, anyone?), and ended up nearly [[undermining]] her humanity in the process. The symbols in the book (the Stone Angel, Silver Thread, etc, etc.) are constant reminders of this struggle of the old and new, and the carnage (so to speak) along the way.

While the film is reasonably faithful to the plot of the book (but it isn't really a plot kind-of storytelling, is it?), I think it missed the point on capturing the spirit of the film. Hagar's defiance (for the sake of defiance) was not there. Bram could have been a lot more crude than portrayed, and Hagar's father could have been played more "traditionally", so to speak. If the filmmaker would insisted on stronger portrayals, the film would drive the point straight to home.

Along the same vein, why should we see cell phones, organic produce, and other modernizations? Are we trying make some points for the sake of making some points (e.g., the Muslim girlfriend and the Native people). Hagar and co. are everything but politically correct in the book, so why should we see that in the film version. Modernization may be an excuse for a low-budget operation, but using that as an excuse to send subliminal politically-correct messages that are totally irrelevant to the novel (and the film) seems like throwing punches below the intellect.

There is also the audience. It seems that we have been conditioned to see bitter old people as cute and lovable. Why should be laugh every time Hagar is at her tantrums? I doubt Magaret Laurence wanted her readers to laugh at, or with, Hagar. These people are frustrated and are full of angst, and all we do is to laugh at them. I don't think it did Hagar and other folks in her situation any justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Ain't it [[hilarious]] when an average schmo [[leading]] a [[pathetic]] [[life]] suddenly has [[something]] [[outrageously]] [[magical]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to learn a few valuable lessons along the [[way]]? That formula never gets old, does it? It's such a [[sure]] fire [[way]] to make a [[classic]] film! Just [[look]] at [[major]] hits like Liar Liar and Big!... This [[must]] have been Rob Schneider's line of [[thinking]] when he [[made]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: [[Male]] Gigolo and followed it with The [[Animal]]. [[Since]] I've already traced the [[plot]] through [[sarcasm]], allow me to [[color]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser cop who's [[suddenly]] [[involved]] in a tragic [[accident]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[loopy]] [[veterinarian]] who [[loads]] him up with animal parts, [[causing]] him to whinny like a [[horse]] at [[inappropriate]] [[times]], [[run]] like a cheetah, etc. This [[movie]] is [[slightly]] more likable than other Schneider-starring flicks (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it [[almost]] feels like they [[want]] [[audiences]] to hate it by casting a [[reality]] TV star as the romantic lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[inserting]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not [[exist]]. Sorry - [[nothing]] memorably good except the production value. I just [[want]] to end this review by saying that slight references to other movies in a movie can be [[okay]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[cheap]]." Ain't it [[comical]] when an average schmo [[culminating]] a [[unhappy]] [[vida]] suddenly has [[anything]] [[shamefully]] [[magic]] happen to him, turning his life upside down and causing him to learn a few valuable lessons along the [[paths]]? That formula never gets old, does it? It's such a [[convinced]] fire [[paths]] to make a [[conventional]] film! Just [[gaze]] at [[momentous]] hits like Liar Liar and Big!... This [[ought]] have been Rob Schneider's line of [[idea]] when he [[accomplished]] semi-successful Deuce Bigalow: [[Mens]] Gigolo and followed it with The [[Wildlife]]. [[Because]] I've already traced the [[intrigue]] through [[satire]], allow me to [[colours]] it in more: Schneider plays a loser cop who's [[unexpectedly]] [[engaged]] in a tragic [[crash]] but is saved through surgery... by a [[potty]] [[vets]] who [[burden]] him up with animal parts, [[arousing]] him to whinny like a [[cheval]] at [[improper]] [[moments]], [[executing]] like a cheetah, etc. This [[filmmaking]] is [[moderately]] more likable than other Schneider-starring flicks (such as another lame same-plot follow-up The Hot Chick), but it [[hardly]] feels like they [[wanna]] [[viewers]] to hate it by casting a [[realism]] TV star as the romantic lead (Colleen Haskell from "Survivor") and [[add]] a cameo by Norm MacDonald. My favorite scene... just does not [[existing]]. Sorry - [[anything]] memorably good except the production value. I just [[wanting]] to end this review by saying that slight references to other movies in a movie can be [[aight]], but when it comes to lines being delivered the exact same way ("You can DO it!"), there's a word for that - "milking." Actually, here's another word - "[[inexpensive]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Like many people on this site, I saw this movie only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an overall feeling of disquiet is how I remember being [[affected]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever [[made]] [[available]] for home video.

Possible [[spoiler]]: I wonder if [[anyone]] else [[would]] agree that the [[basic]] [[plot]] setup and [[characters]] might have been derived from a 1960 British [[movie]], originally [[titled]] [[City]] of the [[Dead]], retitled Horror [[Hotel]] for the American [[release]]? There are some similarities [[also]] to a [[later]] British [[film]] The Wicker [[Man]].

One [[detail]] [[remains]] with me [[years]] after seeing the [[film]]. It's a [[small]] but [[significant]] moment [[near]] the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. As I [[recall]], a minister and his [[wife]] have [[stopped]] to [[aid]] some people by the side of the [[road]], [[circa]] 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming [[Ray]] Milland [[introduces]] himself and his ( [[daughter]]?), Yvette Mimieux, a [[beautiful]] [[young]] [[mute]] [[woman]]. [[While]] the [[preacher]] is [[helping]] [[Ray]] Milland with the [[wagon]], a [[rattlesnake]] slithers into [[view]] and [[coils]] menacingly, unobserved by any of the [[characters]] except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look [[scared]] at all, but stares at the [[snake]] with [[silent]] [[concentration]], until it goes away. With this [[strange]] [[little]] moment, we already realize there's [[something]] [[highly]] [[unusual]] about these [[seemingly]] [[normal]] folks, [[though]] the [[possible]] [[danger]] to the minister and his [[wife]] remains vague and uncertain for a [[long]] [[time]].

That one [[little]] scene [[stays]] with me vividly after all these [[years]], along with [[many]] others. The [[film]] has a haunting quality about it that won't let [[go]], and it's not [[surprising]] that people [[remember]] it so [[vividly]]. [[Someone]] ought to [[make]] this [[available]] for [[home]] video! Like many people on this site, I saw this movie only once, when it was first televised in 1971. Certain scenes linger in my memory and an overall feeling of disquiet is how I remember being [[afflicted]] by it. I would be fascinated to see it again, if it was ever [[introduced]] [[approachable]] for home video.

Possible [[deflector]]: I wonder if [[person]] else [[could]] agree that the [[fundamental]] [[intrigue]] setup and [[attribute]] might have been derived from a 1960 British [[flick]], originally [[entitled]] [[Town]] of the [[Dies]], retitled Horror [[Guesthouse]] for the American [[releasing]]? There are some similarities [[similarly]] to a [[afterward]] British [[kino]] The Wicker [[Males]].

One [[details]] [[remained]] with me [[olds]] after seeing the [[movie]]. It's a [[scant]] but [[sizable]] moment [[nearby]] the [[launching]] of the [[flick]]. As I [[reminded]], a minister and his [[women]] have [[halted]] to [[assistance]] some people by the side of the [[route]], [[roundabout]] 1870, somewhere out West. The friendly seeming [[Gleam]] Milland [[introduce]] himself and his ( [[girls]]?), Yvette Mimieux, a [[admirable]] [[youthful]] [[muffler]] [[girls]]. [[Despite]] the [[reverend]] is [[supporting]] [[Gleam]] Milland with the [[wagons]], a [[snake]] slithers into [[opinion]] and [[reels]] menacingly, unobserved by any of the [[traits]] except Yvette Mimieux. She doesn't look [[startled]] at all, but stares at the [[serpent]] with [[voiceless]] [[concentrations]], until it goes away. With this [[outlandish]] [[scant]] moment, we already realize there's [[anything]] [[extremely]] [[strange]] about these [[allegedly]] [[routine]] folks, [[if]] the [[probable]] [[menace]] to the minister and his [[women]] remains vague and uncertain for a [[lengthy]] [[times]].

That one [[tiny]] scene [[stay]] with me vividly after all these [[olds]], along with [[several]] others. The [[filmmaking]] has a haunting quality about it that won't let [[going]], and it's not [[impressed]] that people [[remind]] it so [[eloquently]]. [[Whoever]] ought to [[deliver]] this [[approachable]] for [[abode]] video! --------------------------------------------- Result 635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] This kind of "inspirational" [[saccharine]] is enough to make you [[sick]]. It telegraphs its sentiments like the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[removes]] from the audience its own interpretation and feeling by making the choices for it. The big finish is swimming in weeping orchestration that must supposed to work like jumper cables on a dead car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid enough to watch a film as simple-minded and sappy as this. Streep glows and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on display or if it's just that---a display, switched on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she could possibly find life in such a dud of film. Even though it's based on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances play like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. This kind of "inspirational" [[mawkish]] is enough to make you [[unwell]]. It telegraphs its sentiments like the biggest semaphore on earth. It [[clears]] from the audience its own interpretation and feeling by making the choices for it. The big finish is swimming in weeping orchestration that must supposed to work like jumper cables on a dead car; I guess you'd need such prompting to feel if you're stupid enough to watch a film as simple-minded and sappy as this. Streep glows and you wonder if she really has the depth of feeling on display or if it's just that---a display, switched on and off like a light. Because I can't for the life of me see how she could possibly find life in such a dud of film. Even though it's based on a true story, and an inspirational one at that I'm sure, the set-up, execution and performances play like a third-rate TV movie or half-witted high school drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] This is a [[cute]] and [[sad]] little [[story]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a beautiful Japanese woman who has run to California to escape from a failed relationship in Japan. Ken is a Japanese American manual laborer with aspirations of rock and roll stardom but little concrete to offer a potential partner. Kyoko "marries" Ken in order to be able to stay permanently in the U.S., with the understanding that although they will live together until she gets a "green card" the marriage will be in name only. It soon develops that the parties are not on the same wavelength - or perhaps in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration attorney I have seen such "arrangements" take on a life of their own, so I was pleased to see how well the filmmaker developed the dramatic possibilities of this situation. This is a [[mignon]] and [[regrettable]] little [[conte]] of cultural difference. Kyoko is a beautiful Japanese woman who has run to California to escape from a failed relationship in Japan. Ken is a Japanese American manual laborer with aspirations of rock and roll stardom but little concrete to offer a potential partner. Kyoko "marries" Ken in order to be able to stay permanently in the U.S., with the understanding that although they will live together until she gets a "green card" the marriage will be in name only. It soon develops that the parties are not on the same wavelength - or perhaps in the same "time zone", hence the title of the movie. As an immigration attorney I have seen such "arrangements" take on a life of their own, so I was pleased to see how well the filmmaker developed the dramatic possibilities of this situation. --------------------------------------------- Result 637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] While visiting Romania with his CIA dad, Tony(Adam Arkin), quite a talented high school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team finally to a victory over rival Simpson, is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not allowed many books, so she took up palm reading)that he would be [[bitten]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[would]] have thunk it..Tony is in fact bitten and his life would be forever changed. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his bomb shelter(!)under odd circumstances(firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the room and bounces around like a pinball gone berserk), Tony travels the land through endless years, until he's tired of packing, and returns decades(..and many US Presidents)later to hopefully lead his football team to a win over Simpson..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, think Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My favorite sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psychiatrist]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. While visiting Romania with his CIA dad, Tony(Adam Arkin), quite a talented high school quarterback seen as the savior to lead his team finally to a victory over rival Simpson, is told by a would-be palm-reader(..in Romania, the people are not allowed many books, so she took up palm reading)that he would be [[stung]] by a werewolf("When the moon is full, don't make any appointments..you will be busy."). Well, who [[ought]] have thunk it..Tony is in fact bitten and his life would be forever changed. After his father unfortunately dies in a mishap within his bomb shelter(!)under odd circumstances(firing at his werewolf son inside a metallic bomb shelter isn't a very good idea, especially if the bullet doesn't leave the room and bounces around like a pinball gone berserk), Tony travels the land through endless years, until he's tired of packing, and returns decades(..and many US Presidents)later to hopefully lead his football team to a win over Simpson..a task he abandoned long ago. What was once a very white, clean-cut high school has indeed changed into a ghetto of drug use, violence, and perversion. To get an idea of what the early 80's Full Moon High school's prom party resembles, think Studio 54 with teenagers..

Larry Cohen's parody of werewolf flicks, among others things, is crammed full of gags, homages, and in-jokes. My favorite sequences contain one in the sex-ed classroom where Tony reveals to the 80's class his werewolf transformation and the introductory scene to Dr. Brand(Alan Arkin, who steals the film when Kenneth Mars isn't on screen), quite possibly the worst [[psychiatry]] on Earth. His task to talk down a jumper leads to two men falling off a balcony..the jumper and a fireman (trying, at first, to talk him out of it), both fuming mad at Brand! Brand even tries to get Tony to sign a waver for his body's being donated to science so he can get his wife a fur coat! Kenneth Mars had me rolling in the floor as a homosexual football coach(..and later in the 80's as the Principal)who likes to pat his players on the behind..his scene where Tony's unloading the truth to the sex-ed class is classic. The film is loaded with inspired casting choices..just littered with funny characters and the cast interpretations..such as Ed McMahon as a very conservative military blowhard who actually looks identical to Joseph McCathy standing next to his photo in the bomb shelter(..always talking about commies), Joanne Nail as bulging eyed Ricky in present day who falls for the werewolf, Elizabeth Hartman(A Patch of Blue)as a mousy, nerdy sexually molested(..and molester)teacher who finds an attraction towards Tony, James Dixon as a deputy(..his great scene has him stealing a line from his police chief reciting it to Dr. Brand who begins mouthing the words to himself for memorization), Roz Kelly as Jane, an undyingly devoted female desiring Tony for only herself constantly demanding he ravish her, and Bill Kirchenbauer as Flynn, Tony's long-time pal and now the police chief who only got Jane after his friend left town. Can not forget JM J Bullock as Flynn's closeted gay son trying to fit in at the school hoping to find a dame with hilarious results.

I like how the film pays homage to the werewolf genre such as when he's on the prowl..he's often referred to in the papers as Jack the Nipper because he likes to bite his victims on the cheek..and I'm not talking face. He's seen more as an annoyance than danger. The homages to Carrie and Psycho are nice, and the violin shtick is also amusing. Cohen tosses so many zingers at the viewer, eventually one has to stick. Obviously in a comedy such as this, not every joke hits it's mark, but many do. The cast makes this worthwhile. The film looks cheap on the typical Larry Cohen budget. Notice the 50's scenes where the obvious old cast members that would show up down the road wear glaring wigs. Loved Adam in the lead..he is the perfect foil for the gags that follow him and the zingers he lets fly from Cohen's script. The film moves quickly, rarely catching a breath. I liked this horror comedy more than most it seems. --------------------------------------------- Result 638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] I have no idea why they made this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds. I suppose that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alas]], what ended up on the cutting-room floor was all the lovely wit and humour, [[leaving]] a film that was mere melodrama rather than an amusing exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the characters were shallow and uninteresting. They had poor Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is NOT cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have said they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very idea of such a corruption of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. I have no idea why they made this version of "Persuasion" when they already had that fine mini-series with Amanda Root and Ciaran Hinds. I suppose that they wanted to make a feature-length version, but of course a lot had to be deleted; [[alack]], what ended up on the cutting-room floor was all the lovely wit and humour, [[abandoning]] a film that was mere melodrama rather than an amusing exposition of English country manners and mores.

Also, the characters were shallow and uninteresting. They had poor Anne chasing up and down the streets after Captain Wentworth like a silly modern adolescent (and if you happen to be a silly modern adolescent reading this, let me tell you: running after a male like a female in heat is NOT cool). That is something a well-bred woman of the Napoleonic era would never have done, and certainly not this level-headed heroine.

Some have said they found this antic laughable; my reaction was not laughter, but outrage. The very idea of such a corruption of an Austen work is beneath contempt.

It was ghastly. --------------------------------------------- Result 639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] I saw this movie last month at a [[free]] [[sneak]] preview and I walked out. It was [[pretty]] [[horrible]]. In the [[process]] of [[trying]] too hard, they over [[acted]] and made a [[horrible]] [[movie]]. I was [[disappointed]] since I [[felt]] all the [[actors]] had [[made]] respectable [[choices]] in the [[past]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[hoping]] they would give out a [[survey]] at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] so I [[could]] [[tell]] them not to release this [[movie]]. I was [[lured]] in by the free [[aspect]] of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[waste]] of my time--and, usually, I'm very [[easily]] amused. It tried to be innovative and creative with the shots, ideas and filming, but because they threw together so many ideas at once, it [[failed]]. I'm not usually picky about movies and I usually don't feel the need to display my opinions about movies, but I had to warn everyone not to watch it. I registered on IMDb just to tell all of you guys I saw this movie last month at a [[extricate]] [[infiltration]] preview and I walked out. It was [[quite]] [[scary]]. In the [[processes]] of [[striving]] too hard, they over [[reacted]] and made a [[grisly]] [[films]]. I was [[disappointing]] since I [[smelled]] all the [[players]] had [[brought]] respectable [[opting]] in the [[yesteryear]] so this one couldn't be that far off the mark--but, I was wrong. I was [[awaiting]] they would give out a [[investigation]] at the [[ceases]] of the [[cinematography]] so I [[did]] [[told]] them not to release this [[cinematography]]. I was [[drawn]] in by the free [[facet]] of the preview, but it turned out to be a [[squandering]] of my time--and, usually, I'm very [[comfortably]] amused. It tried to be innovative and creative with the shots, ideas and filming, but because they threw together so many ideas at once, it [[faulted]]. I'm not usually picky about movies and I usually don't feel the need to display my opinions about movies, but I had to warn everyone not to watch it. I registered on IMDb just to tell all of you guys --------------------------------------------- Result 640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Man, I really find it hard to believe that the wonderful Alan Ball had anything to do with this mess. Having seen the first two episodes thus far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must see list. It's just got so many [[things]] [[working]] against it.

[[None]] of the actors cast are particularly good. [[Anna]] Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[awful]]. I [[remember]] her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much fun to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is marginally better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and aloof. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are given it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like nails on a chalkboard bad. Almost as awful is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of genius casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story seems to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. Out of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO shows but here at least they prolonged rough sex scenes involving Jason Stackhouse seem a bit over the top and pointless.

About the only nice thing I can really think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. Man, I really find it hard to believe that the wonderful Alan Ball had anything to do with this mess. Having seen the first two episodes thus far, I think I can safely say this show isn't going to be on my must see list. It's just got so many [[matters]] [[cooperated]] against it.

[[Nos]] of the actors cast are particularly good. [[Annas]] Paquin as the lead character Sookie, is just [[scary]]. I [[reminisce]] her being better in a lot of other things I've seen her in so maybe it's just the writing. She's not really much fun to look at either, there are moments where to be honest she looks downright ugly. The actor who plays Bill is marginally better, if only because his character is supposed to be sort of wooden and aloof. The other actors do their best but with the cliché characters with difficult to perform accents they are given it's a tough job. Tara is an absolute misery to watch, Rutina Wesley absolutely murders the accent. It's like nails on a chalkboard bad. Almost as awful is Nelsan Ellis, it's difficult to understand what he's even saying sometimes. Both his character as well as Tara's also seem a bit racist to me. I don't know, having a character say 'whycome' on an HBO show that isn't The Wire just seems a bit odd. Rounding out the cast so far are Sookie's doddering grandmother, her sex addict brother, and the only bit of genius casting I've seen in William Sanderson as the sheriff.

The story seems to be meandering towards it's destination at this point, with no real worry about keeping the viewer interested. The romance stuff is very Dark Shadow-sy. Although this show ups the camp factor from something like those old Dark Shadows episodes times about ten. At times it seemed so campy to me, that I just have to assume it was intended to be. But unlike a show such as Buffy, that pulled camp off masterfully, this show does not. Out of place with the campiness is the extreme gore and graphic sex of the show. I'm not averse to either of these when they are done well, as they have in many other HBO shows but here at least they prolonged rough sex scenes involving Jason Stackhouse seem a bit over the top and pointless.

About the only nice thing I can really think to say about this mess is that I liked the opening title sequence. HBO has had a string of bad luck with their shows lately, I hope they cancel this after the first season and try to get something better on the air. --------------------------------------------- Result 641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] "Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

Overall, the movie is [[nothing]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

"Freddy's Dead" did the smartest thing it could've done after the disappointment of the fifth film. It started from scratch. Sure, this "final" film in the saga is silly but at least it's original. Some of the visuals are even a bit breath-taking. And the story of Freddy's kid (Lisa Zane) returning to town to face her evil father is unique.

Overall, the movie is [[anything]] but another cartoon made to get kids in the theater. It has a bunch of good actors (Zane, Yaphet Kotto, and Lezlie Deane) who basically look dumb and wander around like sheep ready for slaughter. It's one-sided, it's a magic-trick, and, in the end, it's nothing but goofy, childish entertainment.

--------------------------------------------- Result 642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] It's such a shame that because of it's title this [[film]] will be [[avoided]] by people who [[hate]] football. [[Bend]] it Like Beckham is much more than a cheesy [[sports]] flick. The [[story]] line is touching and intelligent without being soppy, the [[jokes]] were [[laugh]] out [[loud]] funny, and the [[characters]] are well acted. Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley are brilliant as teenagers Jess and [[Jules]], putting in great performances both on and off the [[pitch]]. Anupam Kher is [[wonderful]] as Jess' [[worried]] father, and [[Jonathan]] Rhys-Meyers, who was so amazingly evil in 'Ride with the [[Devil]],' [[comes]] across so well as the [[nice]] [[guy]] for once, making full [[use]] of his [[gorgeous]] Irish accent! [[Even]] if you don't like football, go [[see]] this [[film]]. [[If]] [[anything]] it'll make you smile. It's such a shame that because of it's title this [[cinematographic]] will be [[averted]] by people who [[hates]] football. [[Kink]] it Like Beckham is much more than a cheesy [[sportsmen]] flick. The [[conte]] line is touching and intelligent without being soppy, the [[pleasantries]] were [[laughing]] out [[noisy]] funny, and the [[features]] are well acted. Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley are brilliant as teenagers Jess and [[Juliette]], putting in great performances both on and off the [[pitching]]. Anupam Kher is [[impressive]] as Jess' [[concerned]] father, and [[Jonathon]] Rhys-Meyers, who was so amazingly evil in 'Ride with the [[Devils]],' [[arrives]] across so well as the [[pleasant]] [[buddy]] for once, making full [[utilise]] of his [[brilliant]] Irish accent! [[Yet]] if you don't like football, go [[seeing]] this [[movie]]. [[Unless]] [[something]] it'll make you smile. --------------------------------------------- Result 643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Reign Over Me is a [[success]] due to the [[powerful]] work by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. While comedic actors going dramatic has been seen as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. [[Most]] of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a vulnerability that can burst at any moment. He [[might]] even be typecast for characters with such hidden anger [[problems]]. However, this performance has some considerable dramatic weight, unlike his roles in [[less]] comedic fare [[like]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

In the film, Alan Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his old college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't seen in several years. Five years before, Charlie suffered the overwhelming loss of his wife and three daughters in a plane crash. Charlie barely even recognizes Cheadle's character due to the repression of his memories and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until Alan persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually enabling him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has suppressed on his own terms.

Though writer-director Mike Binder doesn't show much sense of an individual style and some of his shots and transitions are a bit awkward, he does have a knack of getting decent to great performances from his actors while being a talented and funny writer. He shot this film with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing today, enabling the crew to shoot the night scenes with limited lighting. This kept the colorful backgrounds of New York City in focus, but resulted in creating frequent digital grain, which resembles blue specks scattered and moving on the screen.

Almost every main character in Reign Over Me gives a great performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and especially Liv Tyler are memorable in their respective roles as a frustrated wife to Cheadle's character and a psychiatrist. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their finest work to date. They completely owned this movie. Sandler actually plays a character that doesn't outwardly resemble or act like himself at all, partially credited to his Bob Dylan-esquire wig. Though Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. Reign Over Me is a [[avail]] due to the [[influential]] work by Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle. While comedic actors going dramatic has been seen as somewhat of a distraction, Sandler is no stranger to playing more serious roles. [[More]] of the characters he portrays have an unstable temperament and a vulnerability that can burst at any moment. He [[probability]] even be typecast for characters with such hidden anger [[disorders]]. However, this performance has some considerable dramatic weight, unlike his roles in [[least]] comedic fare [[iike]] Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish.

In the film, Alan Johnson (Cheadle) runs into his old college roommate, Charlie Finerman (Sandler), whom he hasn't seen in several years. Five years before, Charlie suffered the overwhelming loss of his wife and three daughters in a plane crash. Charlie barely even recognizes Cheadle's character due to the repression of his memories and consequent reclusive childish lifestyle since the accident. It isn't until Alan persists in engaging him in conversation that Charlie remembers who he is. Their renewed relationship that follows will allow Finerman to have a friend who doesn't speak about his loss, eventually enabling him to confront the thoughts and feelings he has suppressed on his own terms.

Though writer-director Mike Binder doesn't show much sense of an individual style and some of his shots and transitions are a bit awkward, he does have a knack of getting decent to great performances from his actors while being a talented and funny writer. He shot this film with a digital camera, as more and more filmmakers are doing today, enabling the crew to shoot the night scenes with limited lighting. This kept the colorful backgrounds of New York City in focus, but resulted in creating frequent digital grain, which resembles blue specks scattered and moving on the screen.

Almost every main character in Reign Over Me gives a great performance. Jada-Pinkett Smith and especially Liv Tyler are memorable in their respective roles as a frustrated wife to Cheadle's character and a psychiatrist. However, it is Sandler and Cheadle that give some of their finest work to date. They completely owned this movie. Sandler actually plays a character that doesn't outwardly resemble or act like himself at all, partially credited to his Bob Dylan-esquire wig. Though Cheadle's character has more screen time than Sandler, they both should be considered to be leading roles, as they equally support and help each other throughout the film.

Music also plays a great part in this film, especially the title song "Reign Over Me," or "Love, Reign O'er Me" by The Who, and later covered by Pearl Jam. In one of the most powerful moments of the film, Binder shows Sandler using music to shut out his feelings and memories, but this particular song provokes such intense emotion that rather than diminishing his anger, it incites his emotions. All an all, Reign Over Me is an enjoyable, sad, yet many times funny film, driven by its amazing leading performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Those individuals familiar with Asian cinema, as a whole, are aware that Japan is renowned, or [[notorious]], for it's hyper-violent films and [[Korea]] is now garnering a [[reputation]] for viciously [[brutal]] films. Dog Bites Dog, while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike film, nor is it as unapologetically brutal as some Koreas more ambitious [[efforts]], it is a [[perfect]] in between with its own [[brand]] of brutality all it's own. The greatest [[strength]] this [[film]] has though, [[like]] the [[greatest]] of the [[Japanese]] or Korean [[efforts]], is that the [[brutality]], [[rather]] than detracting from the [[film]], actually [[develops]] the [[characters]], if not, [[pushing]] the story forward. The two [[main]] [[characters]] are both [[incredibly]] vicious individuals with their own motivations and emotional underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[character]], for [[instance]], is on the edge from the very [[start]] and slowly and [[surely]], amidst [[various]] encounters with Chang's [[character]], it is [[revealed]] why he is. Without [[spoiling]] this [[part]] of the story too much, it involves the morally [[ambiguous]] [[nature]] of his father. Chang's [[character]], on the other hand, has his most primal instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[brutal]] [[efficiency]]. [[Surprisingly]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[human]] side, [[actually]] [[reveals]] a side to our animal [[nature]] which [[many]] [[forget]] about which is the [[natural]] [[ability]] to [[recognize]] a [[fellow]] [[broken]] animal (and no I am not [[talking]] about Sam Lee, [[rather]] Pei Pei's [[garbage]] dump [[girl]] [[character]]). Ultimately [[however]], for the first 80 [[minutes]] or so, it is a, more or [[less]], straight forward cat and [[mouse]], or [[Dog]] chase [[Dog]], [[film]] in which [[every]] encounter [[ends]] in at least one [[death]] ([[seriously]], once Sam Lee and Chang [[Square]] off, some one will [[die]]) and the [[fun]] [[part]] of movie is you never know who hands will commit the [[act]]. [[Which]] [[brings]] us to the film's one [[weakness]]. Unforunatley to [[delve]] into it [[would]] be [[yet]] another [[spoiler]] but, to put it [[simply]], it is guilty of pushing one of the [[main]] [[points]] of the [[film]] [[since]], [[rather]] then [[letting]] the point be [[made]] as is 80 minutes into the [[film]], the [[film]] goes on for another 20 [[minutes]] or so to further [[emphasize]] it. Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute mark to the [[climax]] and if the [[final]] [[act]] wasn't filled with sweet music (in fact if it, like the majority of the [[film]], kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh [[air]] from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. Those individuals familiar with Asian cinema, as a whole, are aware that Japan is renowned, or [[prestigious]], for it's hyper-violent films and [[Korean]] is now garnering a [[fame]] for viciously [[brute]] films. Dog Bites Dog, while not necessarily getting as hyper-violent as the craziest Miike film, nor is it as unapologetically brutal as some Koreas more ambitious [[activities]], it is a [[irreproachable]] in between with its own [[branded]] of brutality all it's own. The greatest [[kraft]] this [[filmmaking]] has though, [[iike]] the [[bigger]] of the [[Japan]] or Korean [[effort]], is that the [[barbarian]], [[fairly]] than detracting from the [[movie]], actually [[develop]] the [[personage]], if not, [[prompting]] the story forward. The two [[primary]] [[attribute]] are both [[terribly]] vicious individuals with their own motivations and emotional underpinning for being as such. Sam Lee's [[nature]], for [[lawsuit]], is on the edge from the very [[startup]] and slowly and [[obviously]], amidst [[multiple]] encounters with Chang's [[nature]], it is [[disclosed]] why he is. Without [[ruining]] this [[portion]] of the story too much, it involves the morally [[indistinct]] [[characters]] of his father. Chang's [[nature]], on the other hand, has his most primal instincts honed to, if not perfection, [[brute]] [[efficacy]]. [[Unimaginably]], Chang's story arch, while not necessarily revealing a more [[mankind]] side, [[indeed]] [[reveal]] a side to our animal [[traits]] which [[multiple]] [[overlook]] about which is the [[naturel]] [[competency]] to [[recognition]] a [[colleagues]] [[raped]] animal (and no I am not [[talk]] about Sam Lee, [[fairly]] Pei Pei's [[junk]] dump [[women]] [[nature]]). Ultimately [[instead]], for the first 80 [[mins]] or so, it is a, more or [[lowest]], straight forward cat and [[mice]], or [[Hound]] chase [[Puppy]], [[cinematic]] in which [[each]] encounter [[terminates]] in at least one [[killings]] ([[severely]], once Sam Lee and Chang [[Squared]] off, some one will [[killed]]) and the [[droll]] [[portion]] of movie is you never know who hands will commit the [[legislation]]. [[Whom]] [[poses]] us to the film's one [[inability]]. Unforunatley to [[dives]] into it [[ought]] be [[even]] another [[deflector]] but, to put it [[merely]], it is guilty of pushing one of the [[primary]] [[dotted]] of the [[filmmaking]] [[because]], [[comparatively]] then [[leave]] the point be [[introduced]] as is 80 minutes into the [[movie]], the [[movie]] goes on for another 20 [[mins]] or so to further [[stressing]] it. Don't [[gets]] me [[misguided]], if transitioned better from the 80 minute mark to the [[orgasm]] and if the [[ultimate]] [[law]] wasn't filled with sweet music (in fact if it, like the majority of the [[cinema]], kept the music to the barest minimum and let the disturbing sound effects do their job), it still could have worked and not detract from the film. As it is though, despite the third act having the most vicious and bloody of the encounters, the way it was handled made it feel tacked on, and almost, insults the viewers intelligence since it felt it had to go this far to get it across. Nevertheless, it is still a breath of fresh [[aerial]] from Hong Kong cinema since even the most bloody of the martial arts films never reaches the level of viciousness and brutality while keeping the the character archs in tact. --------------------------------------------- Result 645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] has [[beautiful]] scenery. [[Unfortunately]] it has no plot. [[In]] [[order]] to have a plot there must be a conflict. This [[movie]] had [[none]]. It spent two [[hours]] [[painting]] a beautifule scene and [[failed]] to ever place any activity in it. The [[picture]] trys to be artistic but fails to [[pay]] attentions to the [[fundamentals]] of [[story]] [[telling]].

[[If]] you [[love]] Montana [[scenery]] and fly [[fishing]] you will [[find]] some [[value]] in this film just don't [[expect]] a [[story]]. There isn't one. This [[kino]] has [[wondrous]] scenery. [[Sadly]] it has no plot. [[Among]] [[edict]] to have a plot there must be a conflict. This [[film]] had [[nos]]. It spent two [[hour]] [[paintings]] a beautifule scene and [[faulted]] to ever place any activity in it. The [[photography]] trys to be artistic but fails to [[wages]] attentions to the [[foundations]] of [[histories]] [[saying]].

[[Though]] you [[amore]] Montana [[panorama]] and fly [[peach]] you will [[unearthed]] some [[valuing]] in this film just don't [[expecting]] a [[history]]. There isn't one. --------------------------------------------- Result 646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Before the [[regular]] [[comments]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LOVE]] [[SONG]] is that while there's a running time listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring Media in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[input]] on this is [[appreciated]]!

Two friends with very rough [[lives]] take on the road for an adventure. What they wind up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two [[escaping]] by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the [[film]] is [[complicated]] by the the [[daft]] and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may dislike the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and continue a friendship, due to Glenaan's great performance. After all, there are many many reasons during their run that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to save himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a protective older brother to Spike, and the loyalty between the two is hard to break -- until things get too desperate.

While some of the cinematography is indeed artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful landscapes, rain, and vast gray skies offer a somber tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

Before the [[routine]] [[comment]], my main curiosity about THIS IS NOT A [[LIKES]] [[CHANSON]] is that while there's a running time listed on IMDb of 94 minutes, the DVD from Wellspring Media in the United States runs 88 minutes. Any [[entrances]] on this is [[enjoyed]]!

Two friends with very rough [[iife]] take on the road for an adventure. What they wind up in is just that, with one accidentally shooting a girl and the two [[leaking]] by foot into the countryside. Rather than just a big chase, the [[filmmaking]] is [[complicate]] by the the [[idiot]] and rather childlike Spike behaving inappropriately, and clutching his boom box like a teddy bear. Some viewers may dislike the story based solely upon the character Spike, but without a bit of frustration added to the story, the film would have been too easy. You'll notice the way the more stable character Heaton refers to Spike as "big man" in contrast to Spike's "kid out of control" attitude and behavior. Frankly, I too was aggravated by Spike's ridiculous actions, especially the spray can sniffing, but in a desperate situation it's apparent someone of his mentality would choose an temporary escape. But, Heaton was there to keep things in check up until things get way over his head as well.

Kenny Glenaan as Heaton is a marvel, and after a while I quit wondering why in the heck he would want to pick Spike up from prison and continue a friendship, due to Glenaan's great performance. After all, there are many many reasons during their run that would be a good idea for Heaton to just ditch Spike and try to save himself. I suppose Heaton felt like a protective older brother to Spike, and the loyalty between the two is hard to break -- until things get too desperate.

While some of the cinematography is indeed artsy, it does offer more flavor to story instead of just shots of the men running through the wilderness. The beautiful landscapes, rain, and vast gray skies offer a somber tone that increases the feel of the tragic circumstances. The score is unusual as well, and the use of Public Image Ltd.'s song "This Is Not A Love Song" and as the title of the film is quite smart.

Overall, it's understandable if you don't care for THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG as it's focused on two contrasting personalities escaping from another man determined to hunt them down (played by a cool, quiet David Bradley). It's not big-budget action entertainment. For the rest of us that enjoy seeking out something minimal and dramatic, it's time worthwhile spent, and it DOES offer some extremely tense moments that have you holding your breath a bit.

I'm really enjoying the films coming out of Scotland recently, with the likes of this one, Dog Soldiers, and The Devil's Tattoo. I'm also a bit thankful for the subtitles offered on this DVD, as the accents are sometimes lightning fast and difficult for some viewers like me to understand.

Frustrating, dark, and often tense, THIS IS NOT A LOVE SONG is very tragic yet engrossing storytelling.

--------------------------------------------- Result 647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so [[little]] actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[pointless]]. I can't really see what the motivation or "point" of this film is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film basically chronicles the last few years of Bettie's career in bondage modeling. Almost the entire film is comprised of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "famous" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the films run-time, and give virtually no insight into Bettie as a person. The film touches briefly on her short-lived legitimate acting pursuits, and her subsequent decision to leave the "business" and become religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of showing long and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a horrible film - there's just no substance to it. The other problem is that the actress that plays Bettie only really resembles her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other thing that irritated me, is that although Bettie did several topless modeling shoots - the only nudity in the film was a short segment shot in a zoo during the end credits. The film itself is obviously extremely low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's limitations - so no gripes from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from everyone involved. In fact - the most memorable thing about the whole film for me, was noticing during the end credits that the actor who played Irving Klaw's real name is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - check the cast list. Can't say that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and must own anything relating to her. And if you are that bad off - then you need to seek treatment anyway...4/10 I'm kinda torn on DARK ANGEL. The film appears to be a "loving" tribute to the greatest pin-up to ever live - but there is so [[kiddo]] actual "content" that the film itself is virtually [[senseless]]. I can't really see what the motivation or "point" of this film is - as there is very little biographical information provided in the narrative - so those who don't know much about Bettie aren't gonna know much more after watching DARK ANGEL either...

The film basically chronicles the last few years of Bettie's career in bondage modeling. Almost the entire film is comprised of "re-enactments" of some of Bettie's more "famous" photo-shoots and loops. These re-enactments take up literally 75% of the films run-time, and give virtually no insight into Bettie as a person. The film touches briefly on her short-lived legitimate acting pursuits, and her subsequent decision to leave the "business" and become religious - but all of this is pretty much glossed-over in favor of showing long and drawn-out re-enactment scenes...

DARK ANGEL isn't a horrible film - there's just no substance to it. The other problem is that the actress that plays Bettie only really resembles her in farther away shots - up-close it's a no-go. The other thing that irritated me, is that although Bettie did several topless modeling shoots - the only nudity in the film was a short segment shot in a zoo during the end credits. The film itself is obviously extremely low-budget, but does what it can set and costume-wise within it's limitations - so no gripes from me there. The acting is pretty wooden and unmemorable from everyone involved. In fact - the most memorable thing about the whole film for me, was noticing during the end credits that the actor who played Irving Klaw's real name is Dukey Flyswatter. No joke - check the cast list. Can't say that I recommend this one too highly unless you are a true Bettiefile completist and must own anything relating to her. And if you are that bad off - then you need to seek treatment anyway...4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It [[could]] have been a better film. It does [[drag]] at points, and the central story [[shifts]] from Boyer [[completing]] his mission to [[Boyer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham Greene is an author who is really [[hard]] to [[spoil]]. His stories are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, guilt and innocence (very relative terms in his [[world]] view), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Luis]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has sided with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts turns out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house [[keeper]], and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. Blimp type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in [[showing]] his dislike for [[foreigners]] in general.

The one ray of [[hope]] is [[Lauren]] Bacall (Rose Cullen), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an aristocrat - the daughter of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to say) almost sank her long career. She does act well, but the spark she showed in her first film was due to the dual effect of starring with Humphrey Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden foes all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. It [[wo]] have been a better film. It does [[trawl]] at points, and the central story [[modification]] from Boyer [[completed]] his mission to [[Boer]] avenging Wanda Hendrix's death, but Graham Greene is an author who is really [[laborious]] to [[wrack]]. His stories are all morality tales, due to his own considerations of Catholicism, guilt and innocence (very relative terms in his [[worldwide]] view), and the human condition.

Boyer is [[Louie]] Denard, a well-known concert pianist, who has sided with the Republicans in the Spanish Civil War. He has been sent to England to try to carry through an arms purchase deal that is desperately needed. Unfortunately for Denard he is literally on his own - everyone of his contacts turns out to be a willing turncoat for the Falagists of Spain. In particular Katina Paxinou (Mrs. Melendez) a grim boarding house [[keepers]], and Peter Lorre (Mr. Contreras) a teacher of an "esperanto" type international language. Wanda Hendrix is the drudge of a girl (Else) who works for Mrs. Melendez. The local diplomat, Licata (Victor Francken) is already a willing associate of the Falangists.

The Brits (Holmes Herbert, Miles Mander, and best - if not worst - of the lot, George Coulouris) don't give much hope to Boyer's cause (which he soon grasps may be Britain's before long). Herbert and Mander just retreat behind the official policy of neutrality ordered by the Ramsay MacDonald's and Stanley Baldwin's governments during the Civil War. Coulouris here is a typical Col. Blimp type - always impeccable in his native English diction, he is sharp in [[exhibiting]] his dislike for [[extraterrestrials]] in general.

The one ray of [[hopes]] is [[Lorraine]] Bacall (Rose Cullen), here trying to play her role as well as she can - but she can't really. She's an aristocrat - the daughter of a Press lord. It was Bacall's second film, and (sad to say) almost sank her long career. She does act well, but the spark she showed in her first film was due to the dual effect of starring with Humphrey Bogart and being directed by Howard Hawks. Boyer is a fine actor, but he's not Bogie, and Herman Shumlin is not Hawks. Her next film returned her to Bogie and Hawks again, and her star resumed it's ascendancy.

It's a bleak film (as was the novel). Boyer's mission never succeeds, as he has too many hidden foes all over the place. But the villains are likewise also losers - frequently with their lives.

With Dan Seymour as a suspicious foreign tenant of Katina Paxinou (and the man who destroys her). It is well worth watching to catch the Warner's lot of character actors doing their best given the weakness in direction. --------------------------------------------- Result 649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Well when [[watching]] this film late one night I was simple [[amazed]] by it's [[greatness]]. Fantastic script, great acting, costumes and special effects, and the plot twists, wow!! In fact if you can see the ending coming you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I would recommend this film to [[anyone]], especially if I don;t like them much.

Terrific Well when [[staring]] this film late one night I was simple [[horrified]] by it's [[size]]. Fantastic script, great acting, costumes and special effects, and the plot twists, wow!! In fact if you can see the ending coming you should become a writer yourself.

Great, I would recommend this film to [[nobody]], especially if I don;t like them much.

Terrific --------------------------------------------- Result 650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sunday would not be Sunday without an action movie, and when you want intense combat, you turn to Tom Berenger (Platoon).

Here he plays a sniper in the jungle going after rebels and drug lords. Life's a bitch, so he gets a green office type (Billy Zane) to help on the mission.

The film is in the hands of Luis Llosa, who stunk up Anaconda. he doesn't do much better here, but Berenger makes the movie worthwhile.

Sure, it may be a little long - who wants to see a lot of walking through the jungle, but is is good, tense action when the time is right. --------------------------------------------- Result 651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Something very [[strange]] [[happens]] when you [[talk]] about [[Global]] [[Warming]]: [[science]] goes out the [[window]] and "[[belief]]" and "consensus" [[becomes]] the [[topic]] of discussion.

It's because of that fact that I [[give]] a [[failing]] [[mark]] to Al Gore's documentary.

[[Instead]] of promoting intelligent discussion, he kept the [[debate]] at the level of "[[belief]]" and "consensus".

Of course, when you're trying to sell the world into spending [[trillions]] of dollars to "stop [[Global]] [[Warming]]" you may thing it's a [[problem]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the current warming was caused by humans. Maybe none of it, maybe some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the next Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have boiled the planet.

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[asked]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "consensus" is ostracized. Never mind that scientific inquiry is about straying from the consensus. Einstein didn't "believe" in the consensus, neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much scorn placed on those very researchers who [[would]] advance the field by asking the tough questions? [[If]] Global Warming is so [[incontrovertible]], surely a few people testing that theory can't be so threatening.

What is going on here? That's the movie I was hoping Al Gore would have made. Istead, he chose to shore up his support with the true "believers" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. Something very [[odd]] [[arises]] when you [[chatter]] about [[Globally]] [[Caliente]]: [[sciences]] goes out the [[wicket]] and "[[creed]]" and "consensus" [[become]] the [[themes]] of discussion.

It's because of that fact that I [[lend]] a [[shortcoming]] [[brands]] to Al Gore's documentary.

[[However]] of promoting intelligent discussion, he kept the [[conversations]] at the level of "[[faith]]" and "consensus".

Of course, when you're trying to sell the world into spending [[zillion]] of dollars to "stop [[Universally]] [[Caliente]]" you may thing it's a [[troubles]] to tell the scientific truth: we don't know how much of the current warming was caused by humans. Maybe none of it, maybe some of it, or maybe it has over-ceded the next Ice Age and we got really lucky not to have boiled the planet.

But the fact remains that we don't know.

so we're [[wondering]] to "believe" in the "consensus". Never mind that any scientist that strays from the "consensus" is ostracized. Never mind that scientific inquiry is about straying from the consensus. Einstein didn't "believe" in the consensus, neither did Copernicus or Galileo.

So why so much scorn placed on those very researchers who [[should]] advance the field by asking the tough questions? [[Though]] Global Warming is so [[unquestionable]], surely a few people testing that theory can't be so threatening.

What is going on here? That's the movie I was hoping Al Gore would have made. Istead, he chose to shore up his support with the true "believers" of the "consensus".

Sad, really. --------------------------------------------- Result 652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I watched this movie for its two hours and have [[absolutely]] no idea what it's about. [[Somebody]] got [[murdered]] or maybe they didn't and maybe somebody did it or maybe they didn't. This brought back memories of the good old days (bad old days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. Lately stinkers have been the exception but this [[confused]] hodge podge of [[trendy]] feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[mumbled]] [[dialogue]] makes up for lost time. I've never found Margaret Atwood's [[books]] easy to read. This movie continues that fine Canadian [[tradition]]. It isn't easy to watch. Maybe the trendy folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail parties will pretend they liked it. Us folks in the boonies are a little less pretentious. I watched this movie for its two hours and have [[entirely]] no idea what it's about. [[Everyone]] got [[kill]] or maybe they didn't and maybe somebody did it or maybe they didn't. This brought back memories of the good old days (bad old days?) when all CBC Canadian movies were stinkers. Lately stinkers have been the exception but this [[perplexed]] hodge podge of [[chic]] feminism, mind reeling flash backs and [[murmured]] [[dialog]] makes up for lost time. I've never found Margaret Atwood's [[ledger]] easy to read. This movie continues that fine Canadian [[traditions]]. It isn't easy to watch. Maybe the trendy folks at the chi chi Toronto cocktail parties will pretend they liked it. Us folks in the boonies are a little less pretentious. --------------------------------------------- Result 653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Jared Diamond [[made]] a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines.

But then in the third episode he [[says]] that when the Europeans in South Africa got too far north they ran into Zulu people and other tribes that *herded cattle and planted crops*. So what explains their [[lack]] of technological, economic, and artistic [[achievement]] if they had the [[key]] things the author claims are [[needed]] for [[success]]?

Diamond also claims germs in the form of smallpox (brought to North America by black slaves) were our biggest weapon. Well, if 150 Europeans can defeat 20,000 native warriors and 400 non-military South Africans can defeat 10,000 Zulus *without a single casualty* in either case, then I think you have to conclude that germs are irrelevant. With or without germs, we were going to succeed.

He says Malaria stopped Europeans from colonizing further North, killing "thousands" of Europeans while not affecting Africans. (I'd like to know real numbers but he doesn't say.) Then at the end he says today Malaria is killing thousands of Africans and that is why they can't catch up with us. So which is it, Jared? Did Malaria help the Africans by halting Eurpeans or hurt them? And how come Europe did okay despite massive plagues throughout our history?

He also seems far too eager to say that the reasons Europeans succeeded was because of dumb luck. At times when the evidence threatens to overwhelm his rickety theories he's reluctant to admit that maybe Europeans were successful because they worked for it. It's sad watch this [[obvious]] neo-Marxist contort reality to try to prove his point. Jared Diamond [[effected]] a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines.

But then in the third episode he [[tells]] that when the Europeans in South Africa got too far north they ran into Zulu people and other tribes that *herded cattle and planted crops*. So what explains their [[misses]] of technological, economic, and artistic [[attainment]] if they had the [[pivotal]] things the author claims are [[required]] for [[accomplishments]]?

Diamond also claims germs in the form of smallpox (brought to North America by black slaves) were our biggest weapon. Well, if 150 Europeans can defeat 20,000 native warriors and 400 non-military South Africans can defeat 10,000 Zulus *without a single casualty* in either case, then I think you have to conclude that germs are irrelevant. With or without germs, we were going to succeed.

He says Malaria stopped Europeans from colonizing further North, killing "thousands" of Europeans while not affecting Africans. (I'd like to know real numbers but he doesn't say.) Then at the end he says today Malaria is killing thousands of Africans and that is why they can't catch up with us. So which is it, Jared? Did Malaria help the Africans by halting Eurpeans or hurt them? And how come Europe did okay despite massive plagues throughout our history?

He also seems far too eager to say that the reasons Europeans succeeded was because of dumb luck. At times when the evidence threatens to overwhelm his rickety theories he's reluctant to admit that maybe Europeans were successful because they worked for it. It's sad watch this [[visible]] neo-Marxist contort reality to try to prove his point. --------------------------------------------- Result 654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This is one of the very [[worst]] [[films]] [[Clark]] Gable [[made]]. Only PARNELL was obviously [[worse]]. It is just so painfully [[clichéd]] and the dialog is so [[lousy]] that it is [[something]] neither Gable nor Jean Harlow should have been [[proud]] of making.

Gable is a [[heel]] whose illegal [[activities]] [[result]] in his [[girl]] going' to the [[slammer]] ([[like]] the [[gangster]] [[talk]]?). She [[holds]] out hope that he'll do the right thing but he just leaves her there--unknown to either of them, [[gosh]], that she's "in the [[family]] [[way]]". [[Eventually]], the rogue [[returns]] to do the right [[thing]] and somehow they tie this all together into a [[happy]] [[ending]]! They seemed to have [[forgotten]] about Gable's [[needing]] to [[take]] the rap and [[spend]] [[several]] years in the hoosegow. Leonard Maltin [[says]] "the stars are at their best here". By what standard? Best at [[producing]] [[unintended]] [[chuckles]]? Gimme a break!

PS--after [[saying]] this, my [[wife]] thinks Leonard Maltin is going to find me and [[kick]] my butt. [[Hmmm]]. [[However]], despite my comment, I think Mr. Maltin is the [[finest]] reviewer and human being on the [[planet]] (I hope that appeased him).

UPDATE--2/2/08. Because I disliked this [[film]] so [[much]] the first [[time]] (especially the [[ridiculous]] ending), I [[decided]] to watch it once again. [[After]] all, [[sometimes]] when I watch a [[film]] again I like it much more and realize that I was a bit too harsh. While that has been the case with several films in recent months, I still disliked this film--even the second time. Most of it was not because of the first half of the film. [[In]] the first half, Harlow's character was amazingly [[stupid]] but at [[least]] it was believable. But when she was [[sent]] to [[prison]], it was all [[clichés]] until the [[final]] [[ridiculous]] [[marriage]] scene [[occurred]]. The bottom line is that this [[sequence]] is [[embarrassingly]] dumb--it just makes no [[sense]] at all and is [[akin]] to [[turning]] the [[movie]] into some wacky fairy [[tale]] [[instead]] of a [[love]] [[story]] about two cons. I [[stand]] by my [[original]] [[review]] ([[despite]] all the "NOT HELPFULS") and [[think]] that aside from PARNELL and [[possibly]] [[POLLY]] [[AT]] THE [[CIRCUS]], it might just be the [[worst]] [[Gable]] [[film]]. This is one of the very [[hardest]] [[movie]] [[Clarke]] Gable [[effected]]. Only PARNELL was obviously [[lousiest]]. It is just so painfully [[cliché]] and the dialog is so [[crummy]] that it is [[anything]] neither Gable nor Jean Harlow should have been [[prideful]] of making.

Gable is a [[talon]] whose illegal [[measures]] [[resulting]] in his [[dame]] going' to the [[jail]] ([[iike]] the [[thug]] [[speak]]?). She [[possesses]] out hope that he'll do the right thing but he just leaves her there--unknown to either of them, [[christ]], that she's "in the [[families]] [[paths]]". [[Finally]], the rogue [[return]] to do the right [[stuff]] and somehow they tie this all together into a [[cheerful]] [[ended]]! They seemed to have [[neglected]] about Gable's [[requiring]] to [[taking]] the rap and [[expenditures]] [[various]] years in the hoosegow. Leonard Maltin [[tells]] "the stars are at their best here". By what standard? Best at [[generating]] [[fortuitous]] [[laughter]]? Gimme a break!

PS--after [[telling]] this, my [[femme]] thinks Leonard Maltin is going to find me and [[kicking]] my butt. [[Ahem]]. [[Still]], despite my comment, I think Mr. Maltin is the [[greatest]] reviewer and human being on the [[globe]] (I hope that appeased him).

UPDATE--2/2/08. Because I disliked this [[movie]] so [[very]] the first [[period]] (especially the [[absurd]] ending), I [[decides]] to watch it once again. [[Upon]] all, [[sometime]] when I watch a [[movie]] again I like it much more and realize that I was a bit too harsh. While that has been the case with several films in recent months, I still disliked this film--even the second time. Most of it was not because of the first half of the film. [[Across]] the first half, Harlow's character was amazingly [[foolish]] but at [[fewest]] it was believable. But when she was [[relayed]] to [[penitentiaries]], it was all [[clichéd]] until the [[definitive]] [[foolish]] [[marriages]] scene [[arose]]. The bottom line is that this [[sequencing]] is [[crudely]] dumb--it just makes no [[feeling]] at all and is [[similar]] to [[turn]] the [[filmmaking]] into some wacky fairy [[conte]] [[however]] of a [[loved]] [[stories]] about two cons. I [[stands]] by my [[initial]] [[exams]] ([[though]] all the "NOT HELPFULS") and [[thinks]] that aside from PARNELL and [[conceivably]] [[POLJE]] [[FOR]] THE [[CIRQUE]], it might just be the [[hardest]] [[Bobble]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Zentropa has much in common with The Third [[Man]], another noir-like film set among the rubble of postwar Europe. Like TTM, there is much inventive camera work. There is an [[innocent]] American who gets emotionally involved with a woman he doesn't really [[understand]], and whose naivety is all the more [[striking]] in contrast with the natives.

But I'd have to say that The [[Third]] Man has a more well-crafted storyline. Zentropa is a [[bit]] disjointed in this [[respect]]. Perhaps this is intentional: it is [[presented]] as a [[dream]]/nightmare, and making it too coherent [[would]] [[spoil]] the [[effect]].

This [[movie]] is unrelentingly grim--"[[noir]]" in more than one sense; one never sees the [[sun]] shine. Grim, but [[intriguing]], and [[frightening]]. Zentropa has much in common with The Third [[Dawg]], another noir-like film set among the rubble of postwar Europe. Like TTM, there is much inventive camera work. There is an [[blameless]] American who gets emotionally involved with a woman he doesn't really [[understands]], and whose naivety is all the more [[noteworthy]] in contrast with the natives.

But I'd have to say that The [[Thirdly]] Man has a more well-crafted storyline. Zentropa is a [[bitten]] disjointed in this [[respecting]]. Perhaps this is intentional: it is [[submitted]] as a [[daydreaming]]/nightmare, and making it too coherent [[ought]] [[ruin]] the [[implications]].

This [[cinematographic]] is unrelentingly grim--"[[negro]]" in more than one sense; one never sees the [[suen]] shine. Grim, but [[enigmatic]], and [[dreaded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] I think this movie was [[supposed]] to be [[shocking]]. But the only way in which it is indeed shocking is how shocking [[badly]] it's been made ...and [[simply]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hour]] of [[torment]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the [[characters]] in the [[movie]] (the five [[girls]]).

Sure the main [[characters]] get their bloody piece in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies [[per]] se. However all the violence in this [[film]] [[serves]] no [[end]] whatsoever. It's no spectacle other than that it's [[simply]] grotesque. It's so lame it [[even]] gets [[boring]], and really [[quick]] too.

The worst thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to [[copy]] the Blair Whitch Project, by [[filming]] with [[cheap]] hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) [[serves]] no [[end]] whatsoever. [[In]] the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an [[explanation]], [[namely]] they are their with a camera [[looking]] for the blair [[witch]]. [[In]] this film, there's no other [[explanation]] than: "[[Hey]] ya'll we [[wanted]] this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is [[also]] something to [[get]] depressed about. The [[girls]] are [[screaming]] so hysterically that [[many]] a [[time]] you can't make out what they're [[saying]]. [[Also]], no [[effort]] has been [[made]] to make [[anything]] any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than [[finally]], there's the soundtrack, which is just as [[bad]] as the [[rest]], and varies from [[cheap]] euro-house to the [[worst]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[advise]]: Don't watch this under [[ANY]] [[circumstances]]. I think this movie was [[suspected]] to be [[staggering]]. But the only way in which it is indeed shocking is how shocking [[desperately]] it's been made ...and [[solely]] is. It's one-and-a-half [[hora]] of [[haunt]]. Even more so for the viewer than for the [[personages]] in the [[kino]] (the five [[daughters]]).

Sure the main [[hallmarks]] get their bloody piece in a bad way, which is basically fine, since it's a horror-movie. And I (usually) like horror-movies. I've no problem with violence in these type of movies [[for]] se. However all the violence in this [[cinematography]] [[serve]] no [[ends]] whatsoever. It's no spectacle other than that it's [[mere]] grotesque. It's so lame it [[yet]] gets [[bore]], and really [[speedy]] too.

The worst thing (if the above wasn't bad enough for ya) about this movie is that they've tried to [[copies]] the Blair Whitch Project, by [[photographing]] with [[inexpensive]] hand-held-cameras. But (again, this too) [[serve]] no [[terminates]] whatsoever. [[Onto]] the "Blair Which", sure enough, there's an [[explanations]], [[notably]] they are their with a camera [[searching]] for the blair [[sorceress]]. [[Across]] this film, there's no other [[explanations]] than: "[[Salut]] ya'll we [[wished]] this to LOOK LIKE the Blair Whitch!!" The sound in the movie is [[similarly]] something to [[obtain]] depressed about. The [[daughter]] are [[shouting]] so hysterically that [[several]] a [[moment]] you can't make out what they're [[telling]]. [[Similarly]], no [[endeavour]] has been [[brought]] to make [[something]] any better, sound-wise or other wise.

Than [[ultimately]], there's the soundtrack, which is just as [[wicked]] as the [[repose]], and varies from [[inexpensive]] euro-house to the [[hardest]] grungy hard-rock...

My [[counsellor]]: Don't watch this under [[EVERYTHING]] [[situations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 657 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I guess every time I [[see]] one of these old movies from the 80's it [[puts]] me back at a simpler [[time]], no matter how [[corny]] they [[may]] seem [[today]]. This movie is a [[good]] one. I remember [[seeing]] it as a [[small]] [[kid]] and thinking it was the greatest movie ever. It has all the heroistic [[characters]] that a [[young]] cowboy wants to be. Now as an [[adult]], I can [[look]] back and [[laugh]] and [[still]] feel [[sad]], but this time I actually [[know]] what's going on. I did find one [[thing]] [[weird]]. [[How]] [[many]] people can move to Houston and hook up with [[Sissy]],[[get]] married,move into a trailer,have a [[falling]] out,cheat, have an uncle die,then [[get]] back [[together]], all in the course of a month? [[Only]] in [[America]]. I guess every time I [[behold]] one of these old movies from the 80's it [[begs]] me back at a simpler [[period]], no matter how [[dorky]] they [[maggio]] seem [[thursday]]. This movie is a [[alright]] one. I remember [[see]] it as a [[petite]] [[kiddo]] and thinking it was the greatest movie ever. It has all the heroistic [[attribute]] that a [[youthful]] cowboy wants to be. Now as an [[mature]], I can [[peek]] back and [[giggling]] and [[however]] feel [[deplorable]], but this time I actually [[savoir]] what's going on. I did find one [[stuff]] [[bizarre]]. [[Mode]] [[multiple]] people can move to Houston and hook up with [[Wuss]],[[gets]] married,move into a trailer,have a [[dwindling]] out,cheat, have an uncle die,then [[gets]] back [[jointly]], all in the course of a month? [[Merely]] in [[Latina]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A killer, cannibal rapist is killed by a crazed cop on the scene of his latest murder. At his grave a cult have gathered with [[plans]] to [[resurrect]] him by peeing onto the grave. This of course works and he awakes ripping the guys [[penis]] off and he is back into his old [[killing]] ways with an all new [[zombie]] look. The two cops one of who is going a little crazy about the scum of the city and has a [[drug]] [[problem]], are back on the [[case]]. Two of the original cult member also tries to [[stop]] the killer by resurrecting some other kind of dead thing. Thinking they have filed they leave but out from the grave comes a plastic [[baby]] doll that was [[used]] in the original [[resurrection]]. [[Sounds]] a bit confusing really but no its just rubbish.

The acting is terrible and one of the cops is the same guy that plays Dr [[Vincent]] van Gore in the faces of gore [[series]] and he is just as terrible as the annoying cop in this film. The other cop just about struggles to get his terrible lines out. Now I'm all for low budget cinema but this film is just [[terrible]]. If it wasn't for the very easy on the eye ladies and their nakedness I would probably have fallen asleep. There is a bit of gore but it's never more than some animal guts placed on the stomach of the victims. The zombie makeup on the other hand looks great and his foot long penis that he uses to rape his victims with is kind of funny at times. There is also a half decent scene where the killer falls in love with a sex doll. The doll with the chipmunks voice is the stupidest thing I have ever seen in a film. It is just a plastic toy on a fishing line.

The ending is extremely [[bad]]. You would expect the killer to put up much more of a fight than he does. God knows how they made enough money to make a sequel.

4/10 A killer, cannibal rapist is killed by a crazed cop on the scene of his latest murder. At his grave a cult have gathered with [[systems]] to [[reactivate]] him by peeing onto the grave. This of course works and he awakes ripping the guys [[pecker]] off and he is back into his old [[murders]] ways with an all new [[ghoul]] look. The two cops one of who is going a little crazy about the scum of the city and has a [[medications]] [[difficulties]], are back on the [[cases]]. Two of the original cult member also tries to [[stopped]] the killer by resurrecting some other kind of dead thing. Thinking they have filed they leave but out from the grave comes a plastic [[babe]] doll that was [[utilizing]] in the original [[resuscitation]]. [[Noises]] a bit confusing really but no its just rubbish.

The acting is terrible and one of the cops is the same guy that plays Dr [[Vicente]] van Gore in the faces of gore [[serial]] and he is just as terrible as the annoying cop in this film. The other cop just about struggles to get his terrible lines out. Now I'm all for low budget cinema but this film is just [[scary]]. If it wasn't for the very easy on the eye ladies and their nakedness I would probably have fallen asleep. There is a bit of gore but it's never more than some animal guts placed on the stomach of the victims. The zombie makeup on the other hand looks great and his foot long penis that he uses to rape his victims with is kind of funny at times. There is also a half decent scene where the killer falls in love with a sex doll. The doll with the chipmunks voice is the stupidest thing I have ever seen in a film. It is just a plastic toy on a fishing line.

The ending is extremely [[mala]]. You would expect the killer to put up much more of a fight than he does. God knows how they made enough money to make a sequel.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This isn't the [[best]] Bigfoot ever made, but by the [[recent]] [[standards]] of Nature gone [[awry]] movies, [[mostly]] showing on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality [[stuff]]. It has some action, some [[humor]], [[decent]] F/X and Bigfoot. CG is [[used]], but so are some practical [[F]]/X, which I like.

[[Overall]] this movie is worth a watch if you are a [[fan]] of B horror/sci-fi and need a fix. It's better than the [[movie]] [[Sasquatch]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be [[fooled]].

The acting is better than you may [[expect]] to [[find]] in a [[movie]] like this and the directing is more than [[adequate]]. [[Expect]] a [[bit]] of a lul as the [[characters]] are "[[developed]]", but know that [[things]] will [[pick]] up. [[If]] you are [[watching]] a DVD you may [[want]] to [[skip]] a [[chapter]] or two. This isn't the [[nicest]] Bigfoot ever made, but by the [[freshly]] [[standard]] of Nature gone [[incorrect]] movies, [[basically]] showing on the Sci-Fi channel, this is quality [[thing]]. It has some action, some [[comedy]], [[presentable]] F/X and Bigfoot. CG is [[using]], but so are some practical [[e]]/X, which I like.

[[General]] this movie is worth a watch if you are a [[admirer]] of B horror/sci-fi and need a fix. It's better than the [[cinema]] [[Bigfoot]] and not a sequel to it, so don't be [[hoodwinked]].

The acting is better than you may [[hopes]] to [[finds]] in a [[films]] like this and the directing is more than [[suitable]]. [[Expects]] a [[bitten]] of a lul as the [[nature]] are "[[worded]]", but know that [[items]] will [[opting]] up. [[Unless]] you are [[staring]] a DVD you may [[wanna]] to [[jumping]] a [[sections]] or two. --------------------------------------------- Result 660 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This [[movie]] is lame and not [[funny]] at all. The plot doesn't [[even]] make sense. Some scientist who [[works]] on the [[fringes]] of [[science]] opens a [[doorway]] to another dimension ([[maybe]] [[hell]]???) and his [[daughter]] gets sucked through it or something, then one day for no [[apparent]] [[reason]] she [[comes]] back and now she has [[big]] breasts and [[wears]] a skimpy [[outfit]] (I guess the demons in the other dimension made it for her?) The main [[character]] is a [[guy]] who [[wants]] to [[marry]] his girlfriend but she is gay so [[obviously]] she's more interested in her [[new]] girlfriend, and they [[stumble]] [[upon]] this witch spell book (they [[want]] to be witches or something???) and the [[evil]] spell ends up getting read again which is how the [[evil]] [[demon]] comes to [[earth]] which only the bikini top girl and the spurned guy in [[love]] can [[stop]] [[apparently]]. There is topless scenes for no [[reason]] and a [[guy]] in it who my [[boyfriend]] [[says]] is a well known wrestler but his [[part]] is [[completely]] unnecessary, obviously they [[made]] [[something]] up just to put him in it because then maybe wrestling fans will [[actually]] watch this [[pointless]] [[movie]]. I'm sure the topless [[girls]] doesn't [[hurt]] there either. The extra [[features]] on the DVD were [[even]] more confusing than the [[rest]] of the [[movie]], I thought it might [[help]] [[explain]] what was [[going]] on but it [[actually]] just [[made]] [[things]] more [[confusing]]. Who are these people and what are they doing? [[Basically]] this is a go-camping-to-make-out-then-fight-a-monster [[movie]] but there are a bunch of [[things]] (like the other dimension and book [[seller]]) than [[make]] it confusing. I didn't like the [[movie]] but it was only like five [[bucks]] so [[big]] [[deal]]. I don't [[recommend]] [[watching]] it [[though]] it was just too stupid, I can't [[think]] of any [[part]] of the [[movie]] that was good. This [[kino]] is lame and not [[droll]] at all. The plot doesn't [[yet]] make sense. Some scientist who [[cooperate]] on the [[outskirts]] of [[sciences]] opens a [[gate]] to another dimension ([[perhaps]] [[brothel]]???) and his [[maid]] gets sucked through it or something, then one day for no [[evident]] [[cause]] she [[arises]] back and now she has [[overwhelming]] breasts and [[door]] a skimpy [[attire]] (I guess the demons in the other dimension made it for her?) The main [[characters]] is a [[boy]] who [[wanting]] to [[marrying]] his girlfriend but she is gay so [[undoubtedly]] she's more interested in her [[nouveau]] girlfriend, and they [[faltering]] [[after]] this witch spell book (they [[wanted]] to be witches or something???) and the [[malicious]] spell ends up getting read again which is how the [[wicked]] [[devil]] comes to [[earthly]] which only the bikini top girl and the spurned guy in [[amore]] can [[stopping]] [[obviously]]. There is topless scenes for no [[motives]] and a [[guys]] in it who my [[buddy]] [[tells]] is a well known wrestler but his [[party]] is [[abundantly]] unnecessary, obviously they [[brought]] [[anything]] up just to put him in it because then maybe wrestling fans will [[indeed]] watch this [[dispensable]] [[movies]]. I'm sure the topless [[daughters]] doesn't [[harmed]] there either. The extra [[characters]] on the DVD were [[yet]] more confusing than the [[resting]] of the [[cinematography]], I thought it might [[helps]] [[clarifying]] what was [[go]] on but it [[genuinely]] just [[brought]] [[aspects]] more [[puzzling]]. Who are these people and what are they doing? [[Chiefly]] this is a go-camping-to-make-out-then-fight-a-monster [[filmmaking]] but there are a bunch of [[matters]] (like the other dimension and book [[dealers]]) than [[deliver]] it confusing. I didn't like the [[filmmaking]] but it was only like five [[usd]] so [[immense]] [[treat]]. I don't [[recommends]] [[staring]] it [[despite]] it was just too stupid, I can't [[believing]] of any [[portions]] of the [[flick]] that was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] In the colonies we're not all that familiar with Arthur Askey, so I nearly skipped this film (which had its TCM preview recently) on account of the negative comments here on his appearance in "Ghost Train" -- which I [[expected]] to be thoroughly annoying. [[Instead]] I was [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] to find myself laughing audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's comedy and his timing when delivering a line suggest what you'd get if Charlie Chaplin and Woody Allen had a baby. There is no comparing him to Bud Abbott or any of the other usual purveyors of comic relief who turn up in films of this genre. One can feel, moreover, the thread connecting Askey to British comedy 30 years later; at least it is clear from an American point of view that he has more in common with the Monty Python troupe than with any of his counterparts over here. As for the rest of the film -- the more movies you've seen, the more likely you'll guess at the ending, but it is still quite entertaining and atmospheric and worth waiting for its next appearance. In the colonies we're not all that familiar with Arthur Askey, so I nearly skipped this film (which had its TCM preview recently) on account of the negative comments here on his appearance in "Ghost Train" -- which I [[waited]] to be thoroughly annoying. [[Conversely]] I was [[cheerfully]] [[dumbfounded]] to find myself laughing audibly. The physical aspects of Askey's comedy and his timing when delivering a line suggest what you'd get if Charlie Chaplin and Woody Allen had a baby. There is no comparing him to Bud Abbott or any of the other usual purveyors of comic relief who turn up in films of this genre. One can feel, moreover, the thread connecting Askey to British comedy 30 years later; at least it is clear from an American point of view that he has more in common with the Monty Python troupe than with any of his counterparts over here. As for the rest of the film -- the more movies you've seen, the more likely you'll guess at the ending, but it is still quite entertaining and atmospheric and worth waiting for its next appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I knew this movie wasn't going to be amazing, but I thought I [[would]] give it a chance. I am a [[fan]] of [[Luke]] Wilson so I thought it had potential. [[Unfortunately]], a lot of the movie's dialog was very fake sounding and cheesy. I think that Aquafresh gave some [[money]] towards the production of the [[film]] because they were [[seriously]] dropping some [[hints]] throughout. There is a [[shot]] where the Aquafresh sign sticks out at you that you can't help but [[notice]] it. Maybe they should have focused on writing and acting more than how many times can we [[drop]] Aquafresh products in the movie without people getting annoyed. The movie had its moments, but I'm glad I didn't spend $9.50 to see it in the theater. I knew this movie wasn't going to be amazing, but I thought I [[could]] give it a chance. I am a [[breather]] of [[Matty]] Wilson so I thought it had potential. [[Regrettably]], a lot of the movie's dialog was very fake sounding and cheesy. I think that Aquafresh gave some [[moneys]] towards the production of the [[movies]] because they were [[severely]] dropping some [[suggestions]] throughout. There is a [[offed]] where the Aquafresh sign sticks out at you that you can't help but [[notification]] it. Maybe they should have focused on writing and acting more than how many times can we [[drops]] Aquafresh products in the movie without people getting annoyed. The movie had its moments, but I'm glad I didn't spend $9.50 to see it in the theater. --------------------------------------------- Result 663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Robert Taylor definitely [[showed]] himself to be a fine dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[Nonetheless]], this picture was far from [[great]] as shortly after this, Taylor [[fled]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

Stuart Granger hid his British accent and [[turned]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a bigot here and his hatred for the Indians really shows.

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre Madre in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The writing in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? Robert Taylor definitely [[evidenced]] himself to be a fine dramatic actor in his role as a gun-slinging buffalo hunter in this 1956 western. It was one of the few times that Taylor would play a heavy in a film. [[Still]], this picture was far from [[wondrous]] as shortly after this, Taylor [[eloped]] to television with the successful series The Detectives.

Stuart Granger hid his British accent and [[revolved]] in a formidable performance as Taylor's partner.

Taylor is a bigot here and his hatred for the Indians really shows.

Another very good performance here was by veteran actor Lloyd Nolan as an aged, drinking old-timer who joined in the hunt for buffalo as well. In his early scenes, Nolan was really doing an excellent take-off of Walter Huston in his Oscar-winning role in The Treasure of the Sierre Madre in 1948. Note the appearance of Russ Tamblyn in the film. The following year Tamblyn and Nolan would join in the phenomenal Peyton Place.

The writing in the film is stiff at best. By the film's end, it's the elements of nature that did Taylor in. How about the elements of the writing here? --------------------------------------------- Result 664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[When]] I [[go]] out to the [[video]] [[store]] to [[rent]] a [[flick]] I [[usually]] trust IMDb's [[views]] on a [[film]] and, until this one, had never [[seen]] a [[flick]] rated 7.0 or above on the [[site]] I did not [[enjoy]].

Sidney Lumet, a legendary [[director]] of some of the [[best]] [[films]] of the 20th century, [[really]] misstepped here by [[making]] one of the [[biggest]] [[mistakes]] a filmmaker can: [[filling]] a film's cast with thoroughly unlikeable characters with no [[real]] redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I [[like]] [[films]] with flawed [[characters]], but no [[matter]] how [[dark]] someone's [[personality]] is we all have a bit of light in there too, we're all [[shades]] of [[gray]] with some darker or brighter than others. [[Mr]]. Lumet [[crossed]] this line by filling this movie with totally [[unsympathetic]] and almost [[masochistic]] pitch-black characters.

Ethan Hawke's Hank is a 30-something whining, immature, [[irresponsible]] man-child divorced from a [[marriage]] with a wife that hates him and a [[daughter]] who thinks he's a loser, which he very much is. His indecisiveness and willingness to let others do the dirty work for him because he's too cowardly to do it himself leads directly to their [[bank]] robbery plan falling [[apart]] and mother getting killed. By the [[time]] he [[stands]] up to his older [[brother]] at the [[end]] of the [[film]], it's more [[pathetic]] than uplifting. Ethan Hawke plays his character well, but isn't [[given]] [[much]] to [[work]] with as he is portrayed as [[someone]] with a boot [[perpetually]] stamped on their [[face]] and he doesn't' [[particularly]] care that it's there.

[[Speaking]] of which his character's [[wife]] is equally as [[bad]]. Just about [[every]] [[single]] [[shot]] of the [[film]] she's in is her verbally berating him for [[rent]] and [[child]] [[support]] money and further [[grinding]] in his already non-existent self-esteem with [[insults]]. [[Seriously]], that's just about all the [[character]] does. Her harpy-like [[behavior]] [[borders]] on [[malevolent]].

[[Albert]] Finney plays their father [[Charles]], and while [[Mr]]. Finney has been a [[great]] [[actor]] for [[many]] decades, he [[spends]] about 90% of this [[film]] with the same [[mouth]] open half-grimace on his [[face]] like he's suffering from the world's [[worst]] bout of constipation. For someone who's been an actor as long as Mr. Finney, you think he'd be more apt at emoting. Even though he doesn't show it much, his character is supposedly grief stricken and anger-filled. And when he smothers Andy at the film's conclusion it's akin to Dr. Frankenstein putting the monster he helped create out of it's own misery.

Marisa Tomei isn't given much to do with her character. Stuck in an unhappy marriage with Andy and having an affair with his brother for some unfathomable reason. When Andy's world begins to spiral out of control she logically jumps ship, but it really doesn't make her any less selfish or self-serving than any other character in the film, but probably the one with the most common sense at least.

And finally we come to [[Andy]], played by the always good Philip Seymour Hoffman, is the only reason I rated this film a 3 instead of a 1. His performance of the heroin-addicted, embezzling financial executive who's "perfect crime" of robbing his parent's insured jewelry store goes awry is mesmerizing. His descent from calm master planner of a flawed scheme to unstable, deranged homicidal maniac is believable and tragic. Hoffman's character ends up being the film's chief villain, but it's hard to root against him given the alternatives are an emotionally castrated little brother and a father who's self-admitted poor early parenting led to his son's eventual psychosis and indirect, unintentional murder of his mother.

Ultimately this film is really only worth watching for PSH's great performance and it's family train wreck nature. Just don't expect there to be any characters worth cheering for, because there really aren't. [[Whenever]] I [[going]] out to the [[videos]] [[storage]] to [[leased]] a [[film]] I [[popularly]] trust IMDb's [[perspective]] on a [[cinematography]] and, until this one, had never [[noticed]] a [[film]] rated 7.0 or above on the [[sites]] I did not [[enjoys]].

Sidney Lumet, a legendary [[headmaster]] of some of the [[finest]] [[filmmaking]] of the 20th century, [[genuinely]] misstepped here by [[doing]] one of the [[greatest]] [[faults]] a filmmaker can: [[fills]] a film's cast with thoroughly unlikeable characters with no [[genuine]] redeeming qualities whatsoever.

I [[loves]] [[movie]] with flawed [[trait]], but no [[question]] how [[darkness]] someone's [[persona]] is we all have a bit of light in there too, we're all [[sunglasses]] of [[grey]] with some darker or brighter than others. [[Herr]]. Lumet [[traversed]] this line by filling this movie with totally [[oblivious]] and almost [[masochist]] pitch-black characters.

Ethan Hawke's Hank is a 30-something whining, immature, [[reckless]] man-child divorced from a [[marrying]] with a wife that hates him and a [[maid]] who thinks he's a loser, which he very much is. His indecisiveness and willingness to let others do the dirty work for him because he's too cowardly to do it himself leads directly to their [[banco]] robbery plan falling [[also]] and mother getting killed. By the [[period]] he [[stand]] up to his older [[sibling]] at the [[ends]] of the [[flick]], it's more [[unhappy]] than uplifting. Ethan Hawke plays his character well, but isn't [[bestowed]] [[very]] to [[collaborated]] with as he is portrayed as [[everyone]] with a boot [[consistently]] stamped on their [[encounter]] and he doesn't' [[notably]] care that it's there.

[[Speaks]] of which his character's [[femme]] is equally as [[wicked]]. Just about [[each]] [[lonely]] [[offed]] of the [[cinematography]] she's in is her verbally berating him for [[leases]] and [[kid]] [[help]] money and further [[crushing]] in his already non-existent self-esteem with [[slurs]]. [[Conscientiously]], that's just about all the [[characters]] does. Her harpy-like [[behavioral]] [[frontier]] on [[malevolence]].

[[Alberto]] Finney plays their father [[Karel]], and while [[Olli]]. Finney has been a [[splendid]] [[protagonist]] for [[numerous]] decades, he [[devotes]] about 90% of this [[cinematography]] with the same [[kisser]] open half-grimace on his [[confronts]] like he's suffering from the world's [[hardest]] bout of constipation. For someone who's been an actor as long as Mr. Finney, you think he'd be more apt at emoting. Even though he doesn't show it much, his character is supposedly grief stricken and anger-filled. And when he smothers Andy at the film's conclusion it's akin to Dr. Frankenstein putting the monster he helped create out of it's own misery.

Marisa Tomei isn't given much to do with her character. Stuck in an unhappy marriage with Andy and having an affair with his brother for some unfathomable reason. When Andy's world begins to spiral out of control she logically jumps ship, but it really doesn't make her any less selfish or self-serving than any other character in the film, but probably the one with the most common sense at least.

And finally we come to [[Andi]], played by the always good Philip Seymour Hoffman, is the only reason I rated this film a 3 instead of a 1. His performance of the heroin-addicted, embezzling financial executive who's "perfect crime" of robbing his parent's insured jewelry store goes awry is mesmerizing. His descent from calm master planner of a flawed scheme to unstable, deranged homicidal maniac is believable and tragic. Hoffman's character ends up being the film's chief villain, but it's hard to root against him given the alternatives are an emotionally castrated little brother and a father who's self-admitted poor early parenting led to his son's eventual psychosis and indirect, unintentional murder of his mother.

Ultimately this film is really only worth watching for PSH's great performance and it's family train wreck nature. Just don't expect there to be any characters worth cheering for, because there really aren't. --------------------------------------------- Result 665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A [[question]] for you : A family go to a new house and get stalked by [[demonic]] forces . Which film am I talking about ? Every horror film you`ve seen ? Yes that`s [[true]] but that`s not the [[answer]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by saying there`s a [[lot]] of [[teen]] [[angst]] scenes . Doesn`t [[help]] ? Well there`s lots of bits where the [[characters]] are stalked by a [[creature]] and you [[see]] the [[characters]] through the creature`s POV . [[No]] futher forward ? [[Okay]] there`s a dream sequence involving [[lots]] of [[blood]] ? Could still be any horror film you [[say]] . Oh gawd this could take weeks so I`ll say the film I`m [[talking]] about features loads of Aussies many of whom have [[appeared]] in [[NEIGHBOURS]] and HOME AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[aka]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[understand]] what the above [[exercise]] is about ? It`s about me [[pointing]] out how THE [[THIRD]] CIRCLE is [[absolutely]] no [[different]] from any horror [[film]] that`s been [[made]] A [[matter]] for you : A family go to a new house and get stalked by [[malicious]] forces . Which film am I talking about ? Every horror film you`ve seen ? Yes that`s [[authentic]] but that`s not the [[replies]] I`m looking for . I`ll narrow it down by saying there`s a [[lots]] of [[adolescent]] [[dread]] scenes . Doesn`t [[aid]] ? Well there`s lots of bits where the [[attribute]] are stalked by a [[ogre]] and you [[consults]] the [[hallmarks]] through the creature`s POV . [[Nos]] futher forward ? [[Verywell]] there`s a dream sequence involving [[lot]] of [[chrissakes]] ? Could still be any horror film you [[says]] . Oh gawd this could take weeks so I`ll say the film I`m [[chat]] about features loads of Aussies many of whom have [[seemed]] in [[NEIGHBOURHOOD]] and HOME AND AWAY . Yes that`s right the film is THE THIRD CIRCLE ( [[nickname]] CUBBYHOUSE ) and do you [[realise]] what the above [[workouts]] is about ? It`s about me [[indicating]] out how THE [[THIRDS]] CIRCLE is [[entirely]] no [[diversified]] from any horror [[movies]] that`s been [[effected]] --------------------------------------------- Result 666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] How do you spell washed up [[fat]] [[Italian]] who can barely [[pull]] off a martial arts move without needing some heart [[medication]]? In this movie we [[see]] [[Steven]] Seagal at his [[lowest]] [[level]] of accomplishment- [[since]] his [[career]] started it has been a [[steady]] decline into [[pathetic]] over indulgent behavior that has scuttled his [[career]]. [[In]] this movie it looks [[like]] most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his restaurant every day.

He is [[fat]], slow and very [[old]] looking in this [[movie]], [[hardly]] a martial arts action hero, more like a laughing stock clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of reasons why.

Plot: fat Italian guy with a big reputation on the force gets wind that a crime group may be playing around with a drug designed by the military to create the ultimate warrior response. This pretense, although pathetic and [[laughable]], gives opportunity for some over the top fight scenes that include blasting through walls like a comic book.

Did I mention this movie totally sucks and Steven Seagal is a complete joke? yeah. I did. How do you spell washed up [[waxen]] [[Italy]] who can barely [[pulling]] off a martial arts move without needing some heart [[medications]]? In this movie we [[behold]] [[Stephane]] Seagal at his [[fewer]] [[tier]] of accomplishment- [[because]] his [[professions]] started it has been a [[continued]] decline into [[unhappy]] over indulgent behavior that has scuttled his [[carrera]]. [[Onto]] this movie it looks [[iike]] most of his training consisted of ordering the fetuccini alfredo at his restaurant every day.

He is [[tallow]], slow and very [[longtime]] looking in this [[cinematography]], [[almost]] a martial arts action hero, more like a laughing stock clown.

It's time for Steven Seagal to retire- this movie is about 2 hours of reasons why.

Plot: fat Italian guy with a big reputation on the force gets wind that a crime group may be playing around with a drug designed by the military to create the ultimate warrior response. This pretense, although pathetic and [[ridicule]], gives opportunity for some over the top fight scenes that include blasting through walls like a comic book.

Did I mention this movie totally sucks and Steven Seagal is a complete joke? yeah. I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Cillian [[Murphy]] and Rachel McAdams star in this action/thriller written and directed by the [[master]] of [[suspense]], Wes Craven, himself. The whole [[movie]] [[starts]] with some [[trouble]] at The Lux Atlantic, a [[hotel]] in Miami. The [[problem]] is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the [[manager]] of the [[hotel]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the trouble begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be called Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the [[plane]], and [[crazy]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her house to see if her father is okay, and crazily enough, Rippner is already there. There is nearly twelve minutes of violence and strong intensity throughout that entire scene. In total, about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[great]] plot to it. Like I said, I will not [[give]] anything away because it's so shocking and thrilling and somewhat disturbing/frightening. And the acting from every single [[character]] in the movie, [[even]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch [[perfect]]. It was [[incredible]]. Everything was awesome in this movie! The acting, the music, the effects, the make-up, the directing, the editing, the writing, everything was [[wonderful]]! Wes Craven is definitely The Master of Suspense. Red [[Eye]] is [[definitely]] a must-see and is [[definitely]] worth spending your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it would never ever get [[boring]].

[[Red]] [[Eye]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[stars]].

Original MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Intense Sequences of Violence, and Language

My MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Very Intense Sequences of Violence, and Language

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, Disturbing Content Cillian [[Murph]] and Rachel McAdams star in this action/thriller written and directed by the [[maestro]] of [[wait]], Wes Craven, himself. The whole [[cinematography]] [[commenced]] with some [[hassle]] at The Lux Atlantic, a [[motel]] in Miami. The [[difficulty]] is all fixed by Lisa Reisert, the [[administrator]] of the [[guesthouse]]. Then she goes to the airport, and that's where all of the trouble begins. She meets Jackson Rippner, who doesn't like to be called Jack because of the name Jack the Ripper, if you know you him and I mean. Then they board the [[aircrafts]], and [[psycho]] enough, Rippner and Reisert sit next to each other. For the next half-hour, Lisa is terrorized, tormented, and terrified by Rippner. I won't give anything away. Then we move on to where Jack is chasing Lisa in the airport. Then Lisa goes to her house to see if her father is okay, and crazily enough, Rippner is already there. There is nearly twelve minutes of violence and strong intensity throughout that entire scene. In total, about 25 minutes of intense action comes at the end.

Not only was the movie intense but it had a [[whopping]] plot to it. Like I said, I will not [[lend]] anything away because it's so shocking and thrilling and somewhat disturbing/frightening. And the acting from every single [[traits]] in the movie, [[yet]] the ones with no lines at all, were all pitch [[perfecting]]. It was [[unimaginable]]. Everything was awesome in this movie! The acting, the music, the effects, the make-up, the directing, the editing, the writing, everything was [[handsome]]! Wes Craven is definitely The Master of Suspense. Red [[Ojo]] is [[admittedly]] a must-see and is [[admittedly]] worth spending your money on. You could watch this movie over and over and over again and it would never ever get [[dreary]].

[[Reid]] [[Eyes]] I have to say is better than 10 out of 10 [[celebrity]].

Original MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Intense Sequences of Violence, and Language

My MPAA rating: PG-13: Some Very Intense Sequences of Violence, and Language

My Canadian Rating: 14A: Violence, Frightening Scenes, Disturbing Content --------------------------------------------- Result 668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I am not a very good writer, so I'll [[keep]] this [[short]]. [[World]] at [[War]] is the [[best]] WWII [[documentary]] that I've [[seen]]. I've [[seen]] [[different]] WWII documentaries (not only English/[[North]] [[American]]) and this documentary [[seems]] to be the most complete WWII documentary that I've [[seen]]. I [[think]] it could [[talk]] a [[bit]] more about the [[Great]] Depression and why/how Hitler [[got]] to power, but it does a very good [[job]] at covering the [[war]]. It [[seems]] to be [[complete]] and objective/fair to [[everyone]]. It does not [[exaggerate]] or [[diminish]] [[roles]] of different nations. It has a [[lot]] of [[original]] footage, [[including]] [[color]] footage and [[many]] [[eye]] witnesses (it was [[made]] in 70's when a [[lot]] more were alive). It has [[great]] music and [[narrator]]. All-in-All I gave this one 10/10, because it's that good. (I haven't seen specials in DVD version so I cannot [[comment]] on those) I am not a very good writer, so I'll [[retaining]] this [[succinct]]. [[Globe]] at [[Warfare]] is the [[better]] WWII [[documentaries]] that I've [[noticed]]. I've [[watched]] [[various]] WWII documentaries (not only English/[[Nordic]] [[Americana]]) and this documentary [[looks]] to be the most complete WWII documentary that I've [[saw]]. I [[thinking]] it could [[discussing]] a [[bite]] more about the [[Awesome]] Depression and why/how Hitler [[gets]] to power, but it does a very good [[workplace]] at covering the [[wars]]. It [[looks]] to be [[finish]] and objective/fair to [[anybody]]. It does not [[inflate]] or [[decreases]] [[functions]] of different nations. It has a [[batch]] of [[preliminary]] footage, [[containing]] [[colors]] footage and [[multiple]] [[eyeball]] witnesses (it was [[brought]] in 70's when a [[lots]] more were alive). It has [[whopping]] music and [[announcer]]. All-in-All I gave this one 10/10, because it's that good. (I haven't seen specials in DVD version so I cannot [[remarks]] on those) --------------------------------------------- Result 669 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I can't remember many films where a bumbling idiot of a hero was so [[funny]] throughout. Leslie [[Cheung]] is such the antithesis of a hero that he's too dense to be seduced by a gorgeous vampire... I had the good [[luck]] to see it on a big screen, and to find a video to watch again and again. 9/10 I can't remember many films where a bumbling idiot of a hero was so [[droll]] throughout. Leslie [[Jang]] is such the antithesis of a hero that he's too dense to be seduced by a gorgeous vampire... I had the good [[likelihood]] to see it on a big screen, and to find a video to watch again and again. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I was glad to watch this [[movie]] free of [[charge]] as I am working in the hotel industry and this movie came lately to our movie library. [[Nothing]] against low budget movies, but this movie has [[horrible]] acting and directing. How can a [[movie]] as this one ever be made. The [[director]] should be blacklisted, and for all the [[poor]] [[actors]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[awful]]. There are just a few more movies out there which deserve to be called the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who make money with this movie should give it to charity, so at least it serves for a good reason.

In this case I would watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). I was glad to watch this [[kino]] free of [[burdens]] as I am working in the hotel industry and this movie came lately to our movie library. [[Nada]] against low budget movies, but this movie has [[scary]] acting and directing. How can a [[cinema]] as this one ever be made. The [[headmaster]] should be blacklisted, and for all the [[poorest]] [[players]], it is for sure not a jumping board into a career. Please make sure that you'll not watch this movie, the acting is lame, the camera and directing [[scary]]. There are just a few more movies out there which deserve to be called the "LOW 10". Another example would be "Dracula 3000". People who make money with this movie should give it to charity, so at least it serves for a good reason.

In this case I would watch it even another 10 (or at least one more time). --------------------------------------------- Result 671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I can't remember many details about the show, but i remember how passionate i was about it and how i was determined not to [[miss]] any episodes. [[Unfortunately]] at the time we had no VCR, so i haven't ever seen the series again. [[However]] i can remember [[strongly]] how i [[felt]] while [[watching]] it and how [[thrilled]] i was every time it came on. Sam Waterstone was my favorite [[actor]] these days (i think i was almost in love) and he remains one of my favorite actors to the day, mostly due to his appearance in the series. I would [[gladly]] [[buy]]/steal/[[download]] this series, i think i would go to great lengths in order to see it again and revisit a [[childhood]] long gone... [[Any]] [[ideas]]? Does anybody knows of a site devoted to the [[series]] or has the episodes on tape from their first airing? I can't remember many details about the show, but i remember how passionate i was about it and how i was determined not to [[mademoiselle]] any episodes. [[Unluckily]] at the time we had no VCR, so i haven't ever seen the series again. [[Conversely]] i can remember [[resolutely]] how i [[smelled]] while [[staring]] it and how [[ravi]] i was every time it came on. Sam Waterstone was my favorite [[actress]] these days (i think i was almost in love) and he remains one of my favorite actors to the day, mostly due to his appearance in the series. I would [[blithely]] [[procuring]]/steal/[[offload]] this series, i think i would go to great lengths in order to see it again and revisit a [[infantile]] long gone... [[Every]] [[insights]]? Does anybody knows of a site devoted to the [[serials]] or has the episodes on tape from their first airing? --------------------------------------------- Result 672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] They're not jawing journalists Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or witty detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansson are [[surprisingly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post Depression, Allen's writing filled with ironic self deprecation and plain old New York angst. Shades of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." Johansson, fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't hide his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not great but amusing, at times brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen humor. While there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not lost his touch of class. They're not jawing journalists Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell from "His Girl Friday" or witty detective William Powell and sassy lady Myrna Loy from Thin Man, but Woody Allen and Scarlett Johansson are [[terribly]] charming as amateur sleuths in Scoop. Their screwball repartee is more postmodern than post Depression, Allen's writing filled with ironic self deprecation and plain old New York angst. Shades of the old wit occur rarely, such as when he, as Sid, the Great Splendini magician, responds about his background: "I was born into the Hebrew persuasion, but when I got older I converted to narcissism." Johansson, fresh from Allen's Match Point as a bad girl, here gets to be a relatively good, sometimes ditsy journalism student caught in a murder mystery suitable for London: a serial killer. The plot is a reworking of his recent London-based thriller Match Point, right down to the upper-class sins and the "American Tragedy"/Place in the Sun boating "accident." As a matter of fact, Allen is reworking Manhattan Murder Mystery and Purple Rose of Cairo to name just a couple of other examples. I care not if he reworks; I would like the new material to be at least the equal of the originals, and, alas, it is just a reflection of his younger greatness.

Allen as director and actor can't hide his love for the actress, as he couldn't for Diane Keaton, and therefore takes a middling comedy into an appropriate place down the Allen canon, not great but amusing, at times brilliantly satirical: About the suspected upper-class murderer, Sid (Allen) quips, "I'd be very surprised if he killed one person." This is vintage Allen humor. While there are barely any bright literary allusions as in most of his film, he lards Scoop with music from Grieg, Tchaikovsky, and Strauss to let us know the Woodman has not lost his touch of class. --------------------------------------------- Result 673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This wasn't what i [[wanted]] to [[see]]. I [[bought]] this on DVD and under the [[movie]] i [[found]] myself irritated and [[turned]] off the [[movie]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were shooting at the father

2 The [[tribes]] was [[really]] [[annoying]]

3 the [[dinosaurs]] ([[mostly]])looked to [[faked]]

4 The [[bad]] [[scientist]] well he was [[annoying]]

5 The [[picture]] quality on the DVD was [[really]] [[bad]]

What i [[DID]] like:

1 The [[music]] by [[Jerry]] Goldsmith. This music is really great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this movie. Sadly the sound quality is not [[good]], but its [[OK]] for its time.

2 The first time we see the dinosaurs they [[inspire]] a sort of awe.

3 Baby is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The children who sees this film [[would]] hopefully learn that evil always loses. This wasn't what i [[wished]] to [[consults]]. I [[buying]] this on DVD and under the [[cinematography]] i [[detected]] myself irritated and [[transformed]] off the [[kino]] for a moment.

Heres what i didn't like:

1 They were shooting at the father

2 The [[clan]] was [[truly]] [[irritating]]

3 the [[dinosaur]] ([[principally]])looked to [[bogus]]

4 The [[amiss]] [[investigator]] well he was [[galling]]

5 The [[photographing]] quality on the DVD was [[truly]] [[wicked]]

What i [[AI]] like:

1 The [[musicians]] by [[Jiri]] Goldsmith. This music is really great. I have the bootleg soundtrack from this movie. Sadly the sound quality is not [[alright]], but its [[ALRIGHT]] for its time.

2 The first time we see the dinosaurs they [[inspirational]] a sort of awe.

3 Baby is kinda cute when he is in the water and is playing

4 That funny scene with the tent.

5 The children who sees this film [[could]] hopefully learn that evil always loses. --------------------------------------------- Result 674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Boy]] what a dud this [[mess]] was.But it only lasts an hour and I only [[paid]] a buck for it so I'll [[live]]....unlike the [[entire]] cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[starts]] having [[bodies]] turning up that have been drained of all their blood.The local yokels start talking about [[vampires]] ,of course,and a little more loudly after each body is found.The [[town]] [[sheriff]] or constable or whatever he is,played by [[awesome]] [[actor]] Melvyn Douglas,tries to tell them [[otherwise]].When he mentions the [[fact]] that the dead have one [[large]] hole on each side of the neck,[[instead]] of two holes close together, the [[locals]] simply then [[say]] it's a [[giant]] [[vampire]] bat.The constable [[insists]] that [[vampires]] do not [[exist]] and it [[must]] be a human [[culprit]] doing the [[killings]].

But Melvyn doesn't [[seem]] too bothered [[either]] [[way]].He [[spends]] most of his [[time]] [[trying]] to [[get]] into the pantaloons of his [[sweetie]],played by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mix]] is the [[town]] simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[always]] [[seemed]] to have played the same role in [[every]] [[movie]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by [[catching]] [[bats]] and [[drinking]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the [[town]] doctor who [[seemingly]] is [[trying]] to [[help]] the constable [[solve]] the [[crimes]].And [[boy]] does he ever [[stink]] as an [[actor]].Atwill is as [[close]] to cardboard in this role as he [[could]] [[get]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[also]] in this thing....lots of [[big]] [[names]] to be such a [[pile]] of guano.

Other than the terrible mis-title this [[movie]] has,the [[alternate]] name,"The Blood Sucker" is [[much]] better,this [[movie]] is also [[dull]] and plodding and just silly.

[[For]] me the [[high]] point of the [[movie]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[freaky]] [[town]] weirdo but other than him this [[movie]] didn't [[offer]] [[much]].And then when you [[find]] out the [[reason]] for the [[strange]] [[deaths]] and [[see]] the special [[effect]] thing that [[required]] all this blood you'll [[really]] be [[let]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[awful]] [[pictures]] but at [[least]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Think]] of this [[movie]] as a [[really]] [[bad]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. [[Guy]] what a dud this [[chaos]] was.But it only lasts an hour and I only [[pays]] a buck for it so I'll [[living]]....unlike the [[whole]] cast of this 1933 clunker who are all dust by now.

So anyway a small village [[started]] having [[agencies]] turning up that have been drained of all their blood.The local yokels start talking about [[bloodsucker]] ,of course,and a little more loudly after each body is found.The [[cities]] [[lawman]] or constable or whatever he is,played by [[wondrous]] [[protagonist]] Melvyn Douglas,tries to tell them [[alternately]].When he mentions the [[facto]] that the dead have one [[overwhelming]] hole on each side of the neck,[[however]] of two holes close together, the [[dwellers]] simply then [[told]] it's a [[monumental]] [[vamp]] bat.The constable [[stresses]] that [[vamps]] do not [[existent]] and it [[owes]] be a human [[guilt]] doing the [[murder]].

But Melvyn doesn't [[looks]] too bothered [[neither]] [[paths]].He [[devotes]] most of his [[period]] [[tempting]] to [[obtain]] into the pantaloons of his [[babe]],played by Faye Wray.Also in this [[mixture]] is the [[cities]] simpleton,played by Dwight Frye,who [[constantly]] [[sounded]] to have played the same role in [[each]] [[filmmaking]] he did.He further freaks out the townspeople by [[capturing]] [[bates]] and [[drank]] his own blood.Lionel Atwill plays the [[ciudad]] doctor who [[reportedly]] is [[seeking]] to [[supporting]] the constable [[tackle]] the [[offences]].And [[boys]] does he ever [[smelling]] as an [[actress]].Atwill is as [[nearer]] to cardboard in this role as he [[did]] [[got]].And Lionel Barrymore is [[apart]] in this thing....lots of [[immense]] [[naming]] to be such a [[battery]] of guano.

Other than the terrible mis-title this [[cinema]] has,the [[alternating]] name,"The Blood Sucker" is [[very]] better,this [[cinema]] is also [[tiresome]] and plodding and just silly.

[[Onto]] me the [[supreme]] point of the [[cinematography]] is watching Frye,he nails the [[bizarre]] [[ciudad]] weirdo but other than him this [[cinematography]] didn't [[delivering]] [[very]].And then when you [[unearthed]] out the [[motive]] for the [[unusual]] [[killings]] and [[behold]] the special [[consequence]] thing that [[requirement]] all this blood you'll [[genuinely]] be [[leave]] down.

Bela Lugosi did a lot of [[scary]] [[photographs]] but at [[fewest]] he was fun and interesting to watch.[[Believing]] of this [[filmmaking]] as a [[genuinely]] [[negative]] Lugosi clunker WITHOUT Lugosi and you'll get a feel for how miserably bad this mess was.

If you can't make a good 1930's horror film at least put Lugosi in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I [[thought]] Hedy Burress (who [[managed]] to [[escape]] from the watery [[grave]] of [[part]] one) was [[going]] to be in [[part]] 2 [[Guess]] not. I just [[think]] they should of [[killed]] her off like in [[Friday]] The 13th [[Part]] 2 (you know what I mean).

This [[movie]] like [[Scream]] 3, and Urban Legend 2 followed [[movies]] within a [[movie]].

This was PURE [[CRAP]]! The [[whole]] [[Movie]] [[within]] a [[Movie]] [[crap]].

[[BAD]] [[STAY]] AWAY! I [[ideas]] Hedy Burress (who [[administering]] to [[flee]] from the watery [[tomb]] of [[portions]] one) was [[go]] to be in [[parties]] 2 [[Reckon]] not. I just [[thinks]] they should of [[murdering]] her off like in [[Fridays]] The 13th [[Portions]] 2 (you know what I mean).

This [[cinematography]] like [[Shout]] 3, and Urban Legend 2 followed [[film]] within a [[cinema]].

This was PURE [[DAMNIT]]! The [[ensemble]] [[Movies]] [[inside]] a [[Kino]] [[damnit]].

[[NAUGHTY]] [[STAYS]] AWAY! --------------------------------------------- Result 676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far one of the worst movies i have ever seen, the poor special effects along with the poor acting are just a few of the things wrong with this film. I am fan of the first two major leagues but this one is lame! --------------------------------------------- Result 677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] This is a [[VERY]] [[entertaining]] [[movie]]. A few of the [[reviews]] that I have read on this forum have been written by people who, apparently, think that the film was an effort at serious drama. IT [[WAS]] NOT MADE THAT WAY....It is an [[extremely]] [[enjoyable]] [[film]], performed in a tongue in cheek manner. All of the actors are obviously having fun while entertaining us. The fight sequences are lively, brisk and, above all, not [[gratuitous]]. The so-called "Green Death", [[utilized]] on a couple of occasions, is not, as I read in one review, "gruesome". A couple of reviewers were very critical of the martial arts fight between Doc and Seas near the end of the film. Hey, lighten up... Again, I remind one and all that this is a fun film. Each phase of this "fight" was captioned, which added to the fun aspect. The actors were not trying to emulate Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan. This is NOT one of those martial arts films. Ron Ely looks great in this film and is the perfect choice to play Doc. Another nice touch is the unique manner in which the ultimate fate of the "bad guy" (Seas) is dealt with. I promise you that if you don't try to take this film very seriously and simply watch it for the entertainment value, you will spend 100 minutes in a most enjoyable manner. This is a [[MUCH]] [[droll]] [[kino]]. A few of the [[scrutiny]] that I have read on this forum have been written by people who, apparently, think that the film was an effort at serious drama. IT [[BECAME]] NOT MADE THAT WAY....It is an [[unimaginably]] [[pleasurable]] [[flick]], performed in a tongue in cheek manner. All of the actors are obviously having fun while entertaining us. The fight sequences are lively, brisk and, above all, not [[unreasonable]]. The so-called "Green Death", [[utilised]] on a couple of occasions, is not, as I read in one review, "gruesome". A couple of reviewers were very critical of the martial arts fight between Doc and Seas near the end of the film. Hey, lighten up... Again, I remind one and all that this is a fun film. Each phase of this "fight" was captioned, which added to the fun aspect. The actors were not trying to emulate Bruce Lee or Jackie Chan. This is NOT one of those martial arts films. Ron Ely looks great in this film and is the perfect choice to play Doc. Another nice touch is the unique manner in which the ultimate fate of the "bad guy" (Seas) is dealt with. I promise you that if you don't try to take this film very seriously and simply watch it for the entertainment value, you will spend 100 minutes in a most enjoyable manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Only reason I have seen 101 Dalmatians was its nominations for original song and costume design for the Oscars. I must admit that I was [[less]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella DeVil(by the way Glen Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only wait until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and tries to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I found all cast quite silly but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** Only reason I have seen 101 Dalmatians was its nominations for original song and costume design for the Oscars. I must admit that I was [[least]] than impressed with this film. In this sequel, Cruella DeVil(by the way Glen Close pulls off this role very well) is released from the hospital due to her good behaviour. She likes all sort of animals and locks all her furs away. From that point, we only wait until she starts having crises. Soon enough, she does and tries to make the best coat of fashion world, of course for herself and from fine Dalmatian fur. Apart from Glen Close, I found all cast quite silly but from a child's eye funny. That is fair enough as its target market is, I assume, children under 12. Quite a good entertainment for children and families, but didn't do much for me. * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have just recently purchased collection one of this [[awesome]] series and even after just watching three [[episodes]], I still am mesmerized by sleek styling of the [[animation]] and the slow, [[yet]] [[thoughtful]] [[actions]] of the story-telling. I am still a [[fan]].....with some [[minor]] pains.

Though this [[installment]] into the Gundam saga is very [[cool]] and has what the [[previous]] [[series]] had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[wrongs]] of [[war]] and not [[letting]] go of the need to have [[control]] or power over everything(sound familiar?), I have to say that this one gets a [[bit]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the lives of the main characters and their incessant need to belly-ache about every thing that happens and what they need to do to stop the OZ group from succeeding in their plans(especially the character called Wufei...I mean he whines more than an American character on a soap opera. Get a counselor,will ya?)

[[Besides]] for the over-exaggerated drama(I think that mostly comes from the dubbing of the English voice actors), this series is still very [[exciting]] and will still captivate me once again. I mean it can always be worse. It could be like the recent installment, SEED......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll chat about that one later. I have just recently purchased collection one of this [[unbelievable]] series and even after just watching three [[bouts]], I still am mesmerized by sleek styling of the [[animate]] and the slow, [[again]] [[pensive]] [[activities]] of the story-telling. I am still a [[groupie]].....with some [[small]] pains.

Though this [[instalment]] into the Gundam saga is very [[refrigerate]] and has what the [[anterior]] [[serials]] had-a stylish satiric way of telling about the [[evils]] of [[wars]] and not [[allowing]] go of the need to have [[surveillance]] or power over everything(sound familiar?), I have to say that this one gets a [[bitten]] too mellow-dramatic on continuing to explain the lives of the main characters and their incessant need to belly-ache about every thing that happens and what they need to do to stop the OZ group from succeeding in their plans(especially the character called Wufei...I mean he whines more than an American character on a soap opera. Get a counselor,will ya?)

[[Furthermore]] for the over-exaggerated drama(I think that mostly comes from the dubbing of the English voice actors), this series is still very [[fascinating]] and will still captivate me once again. I mean it can always be worse. It could be like the recent installment, SEED......eeeewwww, talk about mellow-dramatic....I'll chat about that one later. --------------------------------------------- Result 680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone think this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from [[great]]) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be fair.. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky teenagers! TERRIBLE. also, just what we understand about the house.. it apparently needs to use its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally bothered me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was better than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. i love horror films, low budget, 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's.. but how can anyone think this is a very good horror film? let's compare it to titles in a similar vein- haunted house films. the haunting, the changeling, the shining. or for a similar technology based horror film that was FAAAR better, (though still FAR from [[wondrous]]) Demon Seed. OK, i'll be fair.. let's compare it to made-for-TV horror films! don't go to sleep.. waaay creepier and better done. salem's lot, the night stalker, night gallery, even don't go in the basement or crowhaven farm were far better. *SPOILERS* first of all, for as good a scene as the bloody shower scene was, you have a scene like the opening scene.. oh boy! the garden hose comes alive to hose down some frisky teenagers! TERRIBLE. also, just what we understand about the house.. it apparently needs to use its video cameras to see what is going on, and it's a very emotional house. not a spirit, or demon, or entity, it's a house thats "possessed", but by what? we are led to believe an inanimate object learned to love suzie/margaret, our protagonist? now that I'm on the topic of suzie.. another scene that totally bothered me, this poor old crazy lady comes, tells you she was your nurse, pours her heart out, falls in the boiling pool, struggling in agony for 45 seconds, and what does margaret do? does she risk her hands being burnt to save this poor elderly woman that came there to warn her's life? no, she stands there and watches! the acting for the most part was better than average for a horror film, but that's where the positives end. for at least a more interesting, and fun horror film about an inanimate object that kills people watch death bed: the bed that eats. i have a feeling the people who rated this so highly either haven't watched it since it originally aired, or remembered it scaring them as children. this film was pretty much merit less. --------------------------------------------- Result 681 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Actor Paxton made his directorial debut with this chilling, [[dark]], and competently made thriller about a widowed mechanic (Paxton himself) who ropes his two sons into participating in savage ax murders, claiming that the victims are not human beings at all but "demons", and that they have been selected by God to destroy these "demons". This is all told in flashback by one of the sons, now grown up (Matthew McConaughey) to skeptical FBI agent (Powers Boothe).

[[Hard]] to automatically [[forget]] this film; better than most serial killer features, it's a twisty and unsettling tale told in straightforward fashion with a bare minimum of cinema gimmicks. Paxton, commendably, barely shows any blood at all until near the end. Well acted by all, especially the two child actors (Jeremy Sumpter of the recent "Peter Pan" and Matt O'Leary of "Spy Kids 2" and "Domestic Disturbance"). The only reason I deducted any points at all is because I can understand that some people may find all of this hard to stomach. In any event, it's an atypical thriller with a decent script.

8/10 Actor Paxton made his directorial debut with this chilling, [[gloom]], and competently made thriller about a widowed mechanic (Paxton himself) who ropes his two sons into participating in savage ax murders, claiming that the victims are not human beings at all but "demons", and that they have been selected by God to destroy these "demons". This is all told in flashback by one of the sons, now grown up (Matthew McConaughey) to skeptical FBI agent (Powers Boothe).

[[Laborious]] to automatically [[forgotten]] this film; better than most serial killer features, it's a twisty and unsettling tale told in straightforward fashion with a bare minimum of cinema gimmicks. Paxton, commendably, barely shows any blood at all until near the end. Well acted by all, especially the two child actors (Jeremy Sumpter of the recent "Peter Pan" and Matt O'Leary of "Spy Kids 2" and "Domestic Disturbance"). The only reason I deducted any points at all is because I can understand that some people may find all of this hard to stomach. In any event, it's an atypical thriller with a decent script.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] the performances of the main cast. Emma [[Lung]] is [[courageous]] and interesting. The director has developed performances where the characters are not one [[dimensional]]. A [[complex]] story with the [[changing]] between eras. Also [[appreciated]] the underlying story of the unions losing power and the effect of a large employer closing on a small town. I do not agree with the [[comment]] that the older man has to be attractive. There have be many relationships with older men and younger women - without the [[male]] being good looking. Depth of character can be appealing to the not so shallow. The [[film]] has a good look and the cinematography is [[also]] good. I [[truthfully]] [[appreciated]] the performances of the main cast. Emma [[Pulmonary]] is [[heroic]] and interesting. The director has developed performances where the characters are not one [[dimensions]]. A [[convoluted]] story with the [[shifting]] between eras. Also [[enjoyed]] the underlying story of the unions losing power and the effect of a large employer closing on a small town. I do not agree with the [[commentary]] that the older man has to be attractive. There have be many relationships with older men and younger women - without the [[males]] being good looking. Depth of character can be appealing to the not so shallow. The [[flick]] has a good look and the cinematography is [[similarly]] good. --------------------------------------------- Result 683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] In the 60's, having as the [[background]] the rehearsal and recording of "[[Sympathy]] for the Devil" in the classic album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus [[Marianne]] Faithful, Godard discloses other contemporary revolutionary and ideological movements – the Black Power through the Black [[Panthers]], the feminism, the communism, the [[fascism]] - entwined with the reading of a [[cheap]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another pretentious and [[boring]] [[mess]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the Stones and "Sympathy for the Devil" and it is nice to see them in the beginning of their careers; otherwise this documentary would be unbearable. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Sympathy for the Devil" In the 60's, having as the [[backdrop]] the rehearsal and recording of "[[Empathy]] for the Devil" in the classic album "Beggar's Banquet" by the revolutionary bad boy Rolling Stones – Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, Bill Wyman and Brian Jones – plus [[Marjan]] Faithful, Godard discloses other contemporary revolutionary and ideological movements – the Black Power through the Black [[Cougars]], the feminism, the communism, the [[antifascist]] - entwined with the reading of a [[inexpensive]] pulp political novel divided in the chapters: "The Stones Rolling; "Outside Black Novel"; "Sight and Sound"; "All About Eve"; "The Heart of Occident"; "Inside Black Syntax"; and, "Under the Stones the Beach".

"Sympathy for the Devil" is another pretentious and [[bored]] [[disarray]] of the uneven director Jean-Luc Godard. The narrative and the footages are awful, but fortunately I love the Stones and "Sympathy for the Devil" and it is nice to see them in the beginning of their careers; otherwise this documentary would be unbearable. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Sympathy for the Devil" --------------------------------------------- Result 684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] For me,this is one of the best movies i ever saw.Overcoming racism,struggling through life and proving himself he isn't just an ordinary "cookie" ,Carl Brashear is an amazing character to play ,who puts Cuba in his best light,best performance in his life.De Niro,who is a living legend gives THAT SOMETHING to the movie.Hated his character in movie,but he gives so much good acting to this film,great performance.And appearance of beautiful Charlize was and as always is a big plus for every movie. So if you haven't seen this movie i highly recommended for those who love bravery,greatness who seek inspiration.You must look this great drama. My Vote 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] the [[guy]] who [[wrote]], [[directed]] and [[stared]] in this shocking [[piece]] of trash should really consider a carer [[change]]. [[Yes]] [[Rob]] Stefaniuk, i mean you! Seriously, who [[funded]] this [[crap]]? there are so [[many]] [[talented]] writers out there whom [[money]] could be better [[spent]] on. I think the idea is [[great]] but the acting, script and directing is just [[plain]] [[awful]]! The [[jokes]] are so not [[funny]], I [[understand]] that they are [[supposed]] to be [[taking]] the [[mickey]]. [[BUT]] do it with [[style]], this [[movie]] is screaming 1995 Saturday night [[live]] skits. Why, I [[say]] again why do studios give money to [[hacks]] [[like]] Rob Stefaniuk - NEVER GIVE A [[COMEDIAN]] THE Opportunity TO [[WRITE]] DIRECT AND STAR IN [[HIS]] OWN MOVIE. DUH! the [[boy]] who [[texted]], [[oriented]] and [[gazed]] in this shocking [[slice]] of trash should really consider a carer [[changes]]. [[Yep]] [[Burgle]] Stefaniuk, i mean you! Seriously, who [[bankrolled]] this [[bollocks]]? there are so [[innumerable]] [[gifted]] writers out there whom [[cash]] could be better [[spending]] on. I think the idea is [[marvellous]] but the acting, script and directing is just [[lowland]] [[scary]]! The [[pleasantries]] are so not [[comical]], I [[understands]] that they are [[suspected]] to be [[adopting]] the [[miki]]. [[NEVERTHELESS]] do it with [[elegance]], this [[cinematography]] is screaming 1995 Saturday night [[living]] skits. Why, I [[says]] again why do studios give money to [[wankers]] [[iike]] Rob Stefaniuk - NEVER GIVE A [[COMIC]] THE Opportunity TO [[WRITES]] DIRECT AND STAR IN [[HIM]] OWN MOVIE. DUH! --------------------------------------------- Result 686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If The Man in the White Suit had been done in America, can't you see either Danny Kaye or Jerry Lewis trying on Alec Guinness's Sidney Stratton on for size?

This is one of the best of Alec Guinness's films and certainly one of the best that Ealing Studios in the United Kingdom ever turned out. It's so perfectly fits within the time frame of the new Labour government and the society it was trying to build. It's amazing how in times of crisis capital and labor can agree.

Alec Guinness this meek little schnook of a man is obsessed with the idea that he can invent clothing that will never need cleaning, that in fact repels all kinds of foreign matter the minute it touches the garment.

He's a persistent cuss and he does succeed. Of course the implications haven't really been thought through about the kind of impact clothing like that will have on society. In the end everyone is chasing him down like they would a fugitive, almost like Peter Lorre from M or Orson Welles in The Stranger or even Robert Newton in Oliver Twist.

It's the mark of a great comedy film that a potentially serious situation like that chase as described in some of the serious films I've mentioned can be played for laughs. Poor Guinness's suit is not only white and stain repellent, but it glows like a neon sign.

Other than Guinness the best performances are from Cecil Parker as yet another pompous oaf, Joan Greenwood as his siren daughter and Ernest Thesiger the biggest clothing manufacturer in the UK>

Come to think of it, did Paramount borrow that suit from Ealing and give it to John Travolta for Saturday Night Fever? --------------------------------------------- Result 687 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] There is a scene in Dan in Real Life where the family is competing to see which sex can finish the crossword puzzle first. The answer to one of the clues is Murphy's Law: anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. This is exactly the case for Dan Burns (Steve Carell, the Office) a columnist for the local newspaper. Dan is an expert at giving advice for everyday life, yet he comes to [[realize]] that [[things]] aren't so picture [[perfect]] in his own. Dan in Real Life is [[amazing]] at [[capturing]] these ironies of everyday life and is successful at [[embracing]] the [[comedy]], tragedy, and beauty of them all. Besides that this movie is pretty damn hilarious.

The death of his wife forces Dan to raise his three daughters all on his own... each daughter in their own pivotal stages in life: the first one anxious to try out her drivers license, the middle one well into her teenage angst phase, and the youngest one drifting away from early childhood. Things take a turn for Dan when he goes to Rhode Island for a family reunion and stumbles across an intriguing woman in a bookstore.

Her name is Marie (Juliette Binoche, Chocolat) and she is looking for a book to help her avoid awkward situations... which is precisely whats in store when they get thrown into the Burns Family household.

If you've seen Steve Carell in The Office or Little Miss Sunshine, you'd know that he is incomparable with comedic timing and a [[tremendously]] dynamic actor as well. Steve Carell is awesome at capturing all the emotions that come with family life: the frustration and sincere compassion. The family as well as the house itself provides a warm environment for the movie that contrasts the inner turmoil that builds throughout the movie and finally bursts out in a pretty suspenseful climax. The movie only falls short in some of the predictable outcomes, yet at the same time life is made up of both irony and predictability: which is an irony within itself.

Dan in Real Life is [[definitely]] worth seeing, for the sole enjoyment of watching all the funny subtleties we often miss in everyday life, and I'll most likely enjoy it a second time, or even a third. Just "put it on my tab." There is a scene in Dan in Real Life where the family is competing to see which sex can finish the crossword puzzle first. The answer to one of the clues is Murphy's Law: anything that can go wrong, will go wrong. This is exactly the case for Dan Burns (Steve Carell, the Office) a columnist for the local newspaper. Dan is an expert at giving advice for everyday life, yet he comes to [[accomplishing]] that [[items]] aren't so picture [[perfection]] in his own. Dan in Real Life is [[awesome]] at [[caught]] these ironies of everyday life and is successful at [[covering]] the [[parody]], tragedy, and beauty of them all. Besides that this movie is pretty damn hilarious.

The death of his wife forces Dan to raise his three daughters all on his own... each daughter in their own pivotal stages in life: the first one anxious to try out her drivers license, the middle one well into her teenage angst phase, and the youngest one drifting away from early childhood. Things take a turn for Dan when he goes to Rhode Island for a family reunion and stumbles across an intriguing woman in a bookstore.

Her name is Marie (Juliette Binoche, Chocolat) and she is looking for a book to help her avoid awkward situations... which is precisely whats in store when they get thrown into the Burns Family household.

If you've seen Steve Carell in The Office or Little Miss Sunshine, you'd know that he is incomparable with comedic timing and a [[terribly]] dynamic actor as well. Steve Carell is awesome at capturing all the emotions that come with family life: the frustration and sincere compassion. The family as well as the house itself provides a warm environment for the movie that contrasts the inner turmoil that builds throughout the movie and finally bursts out in a pretty suspenseful climax. The movie only falls short in some of the predictable outcomes, yet at the same time life is made up of both irony and predictability: which is an irony within itself.

Dan in Real Life is [[admittedly]] worth seeing, for the sole enjoyment of watching all the funny subtleties we often miss in everyday life, and I'll most likely enjoy it a second time, or even a third. Just "put it on my tab." --------------------------------------------- Result 688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] No, this wasn't one of the [[ten]] [[worst]] [[films]] of the 1980's, but it certainly skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks [[like]] it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else would you explain special [[effects]] pre-dating "An American Werewolf in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? While we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one woman who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, great Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to death and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she retains her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also looks much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I like Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen Wolf" was better than this. "Teen Wolf Too" was better than this, and that wasn't even so good.

No, this wasn't one of the [[dix]] [[gravest]] [[cinematographic]] of the 1980's, but it certainly skirts the bottom 100 somewhere. This movie looks [[iike]] it was put on the shelf for two or three years and then released in 1981. How else would you explain special [[influences]] pre-dating "An American Werewolf in London," disco still being considered cool, and Ronald Reagan not being the 40th President of the United States? While we're at it, let's not overlook those 1970's hairstyles in the 1950's and '60's. I've seen more of that here than in "Happy Days" & "Laverne & Shirley" combined.

The one woman who elevates this movie to the "so bad, it's good" category was the late, great Elizabeth Hartman, but just barely. Biff plays as Miss Montgomery, the mousey high school teacher who becomes a sexpot, a stereotype that's been done to death and is still being churned out by Hollywood today, but even as a "hot chick" she retains her mousey qualities. Her call for help is evidence of this. She also looks much better as Miss Wimp. "Seven bucks at the beauty parlor, shot to hell." She wasn't kidding.

This isn't to say that there aren't any good parts elsewhere, they're just few and far between, and I'm not just saying that because I like Hartman. Incidentally, "Teen Wolf" was better than this. "Teen Wolf Too" was better than this, and that wasn't even so good.

--------------------------------------------- Result 689 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] My kids recently started watching the reruns of this show - both the early episodes on the N, and the later ones on ABC Family - and they [[love]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what prompted all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "highly publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the web have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early episodes were so much better than the later episodes. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and themes remain largely the same throughout - but they do lose some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some light on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen (Mr. turner being another character who left) Oh well - maybe there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just glad to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't cut it for me) My kids recently started watching the reruns of this show - both the early episodes on the N, and the later ones on ABC Family - and they [[amour]] it. (I wasn't aware the show had even lasted past the first or second season) I'm curious as to what prompted all of the cast changes - I've seen them described as "highly publicized," and yet a half hours searching efforts on the web have revealed nothing but endless comments on how the early episodes were so much better than the later episodes. (Personally, I don't see a whole lot of difference - the scripts and themes remain largely the same throughout - but they do lose some great people along the way) My daughter has put the DVDs on her wish list, so perhaps the land of special features and commentary will shed some light on all of this. I also wish they'd done some self-referential humor about the changes - like on "Boy Meets World" where they drop the little sister for an entire season or so, and when a different actor later shows up playing her, they ask her where she's been and she says "upstairs," or when early series token geek "Minkus" shows up for the high school graduation, they ask him where he's been and he says "over there," pointing to the part of the classroom never shown by the camera, before saying "Hey, Mr. Turner, wait up!" and running off screen (Mr. turner being another character who left) Oh well - maybe there will be an E true Hollywood story on this or something? I was just glad to see Aunt Hilda show up for the finale - she was always one of my favorites - it's too bad it couldn't have been a more encompassing cast reunion. (The Zelda candle just didn't cut it for me) --------------------------------------------- Result 690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Ever wanted to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the Hayes Code was officially put into effect? Well, unfortunately "Convention City" is [[lost]], so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His Mate" to [[find]] out. For 1934, there is a remarkable amount of sexual innuendo and even exposed flesh. [[Just]] look at Jane's nude swim. While Tarzan is [[often]] thought of as b-adventure films made for young boys and no one else, this [[picture]] [[proves]] that the [[series]] was originally very adult. Over seventy [[years]] later, it is still as sexy as it was when it came out.

In addition to the envelope [[pushing]] taboo nature, it is a [[superb]] and exciting adventure story. I've always enjoyed the jungle films that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the genre I'd call great films. "Tarzan and His [[Mate]]" is by far the [[best]] [[film]] from this long gone subgenre. The sequences of the attacks on the safari by either apes or natives still manage to create tension today. Also, the animals are all too cool (espescially the apes throwing boulders). The acting won't win any major awards soon, but is certainly more than adequate for this type of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the smartest monkey in the jungle. One of the most [[entertaining]] examples of pre-code Hollywood out there. Ever wanted to know just how much Hollywood could get away with before the Hayes Code was officially put into effect? Well, unfortunately "Convention City" is [[outof]], so well just have to watch "Tarzan and His Mate" to [[unearth]] out. For 1934, there is a remarkable amount of sexual innuendo and even exposed flesh. [[Mere]] look at Jane's nude swim. While Tarzan is [[generally]] thought of as b-adventure films made for young boys and no one else, this [[visuals]] [[testifies]] that the [[serials]] was originally very adult. Over seventy [[yrs]] later, it is still as sexy as it was when it came out.

In addition to the envelope [[prompting]] taboo nature, it is a [[funky]] and exciting adventure story. I've always enjoyed the jungle films that Hollywood churned out in the 30s and the 40s, but there are few from the genre I'd call great films. "Tarzan and His [[Mating]]" is by far the [[bestest]] [[kino]] from this long gone subgenre. The sequences of the attacks on the safari by either apes or natives still manage to create tension today. Also, the animals are all too cool (espescially the apes throwing boulders). The acting won't win any major awards soon, but is certainly more than adequate for this type of picture. The film is once again stolen by Cheetah, the smartest monkey in the jungle. One of the most [[droll]] examples of pre-code Hollywood out there. --------------------------------------------- Result 691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who doesn't like this film is one who is afraid to explore his or her own demons. This film does make the viewer a little uncomfortable at times, but that is its intention. It asks you to look at your own life and confront the obstacles head on like Lou eventually does. It asks you to overcome the fear of perception and become who you are meant to be. Bret Carr holds up a mirror unlike any filmmaker has. The intention and the message is clear and profound. People's apprehension about this film stems only from their own insecurities. An open-minded viewer takes this inspirational message and runs with it. Sometimes a life- changing realization DOES come in a flash -- a light bulb going on. This story is real and changes the lives if its viewers in a real way. --------------------------------------------- Result 692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] There aren't [[many]] overcoming-the-odds stories quite like that of Christy [[Brown]]. Born with cerebral palsy in 1930s Dublin, his parents [[thought]] his [[handicap]] was mental as well as [[physical]]. Though eventually [[properly]] diagnosed, [[Brown]], in a lower working-class family with nearly 20 children, had to push himself just to be appreciated by his family. Through the use of his only fully-functioning limb, his left leg, he [[taught]] himself to write and [[paint]], both skills he developed expertly.

But what makes the [[film]] version of Brown's autobiography "My Left Foot" such a [[great]] retelling is its humility. Both director/writer Jim Sheridan and star [[Daniel]] Day-Lewis have [[managed]] to tell this [[story]] in a way that doesn't [[scream]] for attention and resort to melodrama. Cheesy [[struggles]] and scenes of [[frustration]] as well as [[glorious]] [[moments]] of minute victory are [[easy]] pitfalls of a [[story]] so miraculous, yet "My Left Foot" [[stays]] [[real]] and intrinsically inspired.

Day-Lewis is the [[easiest]] to [[highlight]]. Playing [[anyone]] with such [[serious]] [[physical]] impairments has to be a demanding task. Not only does Day-Lewis give us a very complete [[picture]] of [[Christy]], but he [[also]] [[manages]] to chronicle the [[growth]], [[improvement]] and [[inner]] [[change]] of the [[character]] in [[different]] [[stages]] of his [[life]]. He plays [[Christy]] at 17 when he had [[limited]] [[language]] [[capability]] and was [[emotionally]] [[volatile]] just as crisply as he does the intellectually [[learned]] [[Christy]] who struggles to cope with why he can't find non-platonic love. The [[latter]] [[theme]] is the film's [[strongest]] and it would've been [[nice]] for Sheridan and co-adapter Shane Connaughton to really flesh that out. [[Regardless]], Day-Lewis [[gets]] us to [[understand]] and [[sympathize]] with all those [[elements]], giving a performance that's so [[believable]] you [[often]] don't have [[time]] to [[think]] "[[wow]], he's such a [[great]] [[actor]]." Those are the most commendable performances.

Equally [[important]] but through more subtle means is Sheridan's [[work]] on the [[film]]. This [[story]] is about day-to-day [[life]] and [[struggles]]. [[Although]] Christy has such a [[unique]] set of circumstances hampering his life, his [[struggles]] are not unlike our own and Sheridan grasps that [[concept]] [[completely]]. Christy [[struggles]] with [[love]], parental [[attention]], [[questions]] of self- worth and [[capability]]. His [[struggles]] are just more physically manifested (literally and [[figuratively]]) than ours.

Sheridan gives us moments that capture the spirit of the large Brown family and Christy's unique place in it. The drama evolves naturally when tensions are highest and the humor comes in much the same way. The dinner scene when Christy learns that his doctor/teacher -- the woman he loves -- is going to marry his brother Peter is the film's finest example of both Day-Lewis and Sheridan's efforts. It's [[built]] up to so well by Sheridan that it [[comes]] out when we're ready and Day-Lewis takes us from there with his stunning work.

The other strong component of the film is Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown. I did not know she'd won the [[Oscar]], but there was something about her performances as Christy's loving and wise mother that just screamed Oscar-worthy. Her love for Christy and constant fighting for him just seems so convincing and heartfelt and she earns a lot of sympathy given her situation.

The emotional punch of the film given the story is surprisingly minimal. Perhaps that was part of the sacrifice of trying to create a film that feels organically human. The two should be reconcilable, but I imagine it's challenging to tell a story that feels true-to-life and one that provides enough dramatic moments to take our emotions on a roller coaster. The choice to downplay the latter was definitely the wise one for "My Left Foot." Brown's circumstances speak for themselves -- they don't need to be squeezed for weightier dramatic impact.

~Steven C

Visit my site moviemusereviews.com for more There aren't [[numerous]] overcoming-the-odds stories quite like that of Christy [[Brownish]]. Born with cerebral palsy in 1930s Dublin, his parents [[figured]] his [[handicapped]] was mental as well as [[corporal]]. Though eventually [[adequately]] diagnosed, [[Brownish]], in a lower working-class family with nearly 20 children, had to push himself just to be appreciated by his family. Through the use of his only fully-functioning limb, his left leg, he [[teach]] himself to write and [[painting]], both skills he developed expertly.

But what makes the [[movies]] version of Brown's autobiography "My Left Foot" such a [[whopping]] retelling is its humility. Both director/writer Jim Sheridan and star [[Danielle]] Day-Lewis have [[administered]] to tell this [[stories]] in a way that doesn't [[shout]] for attention and resort to melodrama. Cheesy [[fighting]] and scenes of [[disillusionment]] as well as [[excellent]] [[times]] of minute victory are [[simpler]] pitfalls of a [[stories]] so miraculous, yet "My Left Foot" [[rest]] [[veritable]] and intrinsically inspired.

Day-Lewis is the [[simplest]] to [[stressing]]. Playing [[anybody]] with such [[severe]] [[corporal]] impairments has to be a demanding task. Not only does Day-Lewis give us a very complete [[photographs]] of [[Christie]], but he [[likewise]] [[administered]] to chronicle the [[increase]], [[enhancement]] and [[indoor]] [[amendment]] of the [[trait]] in [[multiple]] [[stage]] of his [[living]]. He plays [[Christie]] at 17 when he had [[restrained]] [[linguistics]] [[proficiency]] and was [[excitedly]] [[shaky]] just as crisply as he does the intellectually [[learns]] [[Christie]] who struggles to cope with why he can't find non-platonic love. The [[last]] [[topic]] is the film's [[strictest]] and it would've been [[pleasant]] for Sheridan and co-adapter Shane Connaughton to really flesh that out. [[Whatever]], Day-Lewis [[obtains]] us to [[understood]] and [[sympathise]] with all those [[components]], giving a performance that's so [[dependable]] you [[generally]] don't have [[period]] to [[ideas]] "[[whoa]], he's such a [[huge]] [[actress]]." Those are the most commendable performances.

Equally [[notable]] but through more subtle means is Sheridan's [[jobs]] on the [[movies]]. This [[saga]] is about day-to-day [[iife]] and [[struggling]]. [[Despite]] Christy has such a [[sole]] set of circumstances hampering his life, his [[combats]] are not unlike our own and Sheridan grasps that [[notions]] [[altogether]]. Christy [[brawls]] with [[likes]], parental [[beware]], [[subjects]] of self- worth and [[capabilities]]. His [[combat]] are just more physically manifested (literally and [[metaphorically]]) than ours.

Sheridan gives us moments that capture the spirit of the large Brown family and Christy's unique place in it. The drama evolves naturally when tensions are highest and the humor comes in much the same way. The dinner scene when Christy learns that his doctor/teacher -- the woman he loves -- is going to marry his brother Peter is the film's finest example of both Day-Lewis and Sheridan's efforts. It's [[build]] up to so well by Sheridan that it [[arises]] out when we're ready and Day-Lewis takes us from there with his stunning work.

The other strong component of the film is Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown. I did not know she'd won the [[Oscars]], but there was something about her performances as Christy's loving and wise mother that just screamed Oscar-worthy. Her love for Christy and constant fighting for him just seems so convincing and heartfelt and she earns a lot of sympathy given her situation.

The emotional punch of the film given the story is surprisingly minimal. Perhaps that was part of the sacrifice of trying to create a film that feels organically human. The two should be reconcilable, but I imagine it's challenging to tell a story that feels true-to-life and one that provides enough dramatic moments to take our emotions on a roller coaster. The choice to downplay the latter was definitely the wise one for "My Left Foot." Brown's circumstances speak for themselves -- they don't need to be squeezed for weightier dramatic impact.

~Steven C

Visit my site moviemusereviews.com for more --------------------------------------------- Result 693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Live]]! Yes, but not kicking.

True [[story]]: Some time ago, a Dutch TV station made an announcement that they were going to air a new reality show. A contest rather. The main participant in this show would be a woman who was dying of something terrible and she would be [[donating]] her [[kidneys]] to one lucky person with progressive kidney failure. [[For]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[turd]], saying it was [[appalling]], [[immoral]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. Leaving everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. [[Viva]]! Yes, but not kicking.

True [[history]]: Some time ago, a Dutch TV station made an announcement that they were going to air a new reality show. A contest rather. The main participant in this show would be a woman who was dying of something terrible and she would be [[don]] her [[loins]] to one lucky person with progressive kidney failure. [[In]] real.

The country and the international media were all over this story like flies on a [[horseshit]], saying it was [[shocking]], [[unethical]], what-is-this-world-coming-to, and the like. In a way, I had to agree.

As the months passed, the tension built up to a degree that the government was mostly occupied by the issue of whether they should let this show go ahead or not, instead of running the country.

The show did air and right up to the last moment they were pushing ahead. And up to the last moment the country was up in arms, the Prime Minister making speeches, every newspaper writing about it, everyone in the country holding their breaths. And the network pushed on. Towards a new frontier in television. And they definitely succeeded in doing just that. They pushed the envelope.

The show aired and we all watched a terminally ill woman selecting the right candidate to receive her kidneys so he or she would live, whilst she would die shortly after.

And then, in the last moments of the show it was revealed that it was a partial hoax. The woman was not ill, but all the candidates were. There was no kidney auction. The whole show, that, with the publicity and the commercials and all the discussions, built up for months to a fantastic climax, was a publicity stunt to focus attention on the problem of major shortages in organ donors. The man who founded this particular network himself died of kidney disease.

Now THIS is television. Leaving everybody far behind in amazement.

Don't give me a poorly acted, poorly directed flick about some woman trying to get a Russian Roulette show on American TV.

As if.

*Spoiler* As if I'm going to believe they would get this through the FCC. As if I'm going to believe this would get through the US Supreme Court on the basis of free expression. As if I'm gonna believe the ridiculous ending where this woman pulled it off and has conscience issues because some guy shot himself on air.

It's all been done before. Watch Running Man with Arnold instead. At least it had a semi good ending.

*Spoiler* This is an appallingly bad piece of film, together with a ridiculous ending. So she gets shot in the end, is that supposed to make us movie going public feel better after we leave the theater because there was some kind of justice? Don't take my word for it, but I would say this: leave this one alone and watch a test pattern instead, you'll get more quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] I'm a big [[fan]] of B5, having caught on only at the end of season three. I faithfully watched all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, concluding that it was one of the most well-thought out story arcs to ever hit television. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well produced and as entertaining as anything to hit the theaters.

Which brings us to 'River of Souls'. Naturally, after seeing everything else, I had high expectations. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it suffers obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the total absence of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[worst]] of the episodes. I'm a big [[breather]] of B5, having caught on only at the end of season three. I faithfully watched all the previous seasons when it was syndicated, concluding that it was one of the most well-thought out story arcs to ever hit television. Even the filler episodes were interesting. The movies, also, were well produced and as entertaining as anything to hit the theaters.

Which brings us to 'River of Souls'. Naturally, after seeing everything else, I had high expectations. Martin Sheen appears to be acting in an Ed Wood movie rather than a serious Sci-Fi story. The story itself, might have looked good in outline form, even made it to the story board. However, it suffers obviously when it came time to filling this notion out into a two hour movie. There are no special effects to keep us entertained in the total absence of a compelling story. There are places where they were obviously short of time and just improvised the dialog to fill the story out. Had this made the regular season, it would have rated among the [[hardest]] of the episodes. --------------------------------------------- Result 695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[love]] this movie [[like]] no other. Another time I will try to explain its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[remarkable]] [[dialogue]], which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, bastards, or worse, and [[England]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television interview on an "arty program"): Mr Mackenzie what artists have impressed you most since you've been in England? (Barry's response)Flamin' bull-artists!

(while chatting up a naive young pom girl): Mr Mackenzie, I suppose you have hordes of Aboriginal servants back in Australia? (Barry's response) Abos? I've never seen an Abo in me life. Mum does most of the solid yacca (ie hard work) round our place.

This is just a [[taste]] of the hilarious [[farce]] of this bonser Aussie flick. If you can get a copy of it, watch and enjoy. I [[amore]] this movie [[iike]] no other. Another time I will try to explain its virtues to the uninitiated, but for the moment let me quote a few of pieces the [[sumptuous]] [[dialog]], which, please remember, is all tongue in cheek. Aussies and Poms will understand, everyone else-well?

(title song lyric)"he can sink a beer, he can pick a queer, in his latest double-breasted Bondi gear."

(another song lyric) "All pommies are bastards, bastards, or worse, and [[Brits]] is the a**e-hole of the universe."

(during a television interview on an "arty program"): Mr Mackenzie what artists have impressed you most since you've been in England? (Barry's response)Flamin' bull-artists!

(while chatting up a naive young pom girl): Mr Mackenzie, I suppose you have hordes of Aboriginal servants back in Australia? (Barry's response) Abos? I've never seen an Abo in me life. Mum does most of the solid yacca (ie hard work) round our place.

This is just a [[tasting]] of the hilarious [[travesty]] of this bonser Aussie flick. If you can get a copy of it, watch and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Any child old enough to sit up in front of a screen will be [[absolutely]] [[captivated]] by the beautifully drawn images and [[wonderful]] music in this heartfelt and [[humorous]] re-write of the Grimms' fairytale. They'll be singing 'Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo' before they can even formulate a complete sentence and will continue singing it till their dying days. It is a classic for all children, especially those adults who are young at heart. Any child old enough to sit up in front of a screen will be [[downright]] [[fascinated]] by the beautifully drawn images and [[glamorous]] music in this heartfelt and [[droll]] re-write of the Grimms' fairytale. They'll be singing 'Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo' before they can even formulate a complete sentence and will continue singing it till their dying days. It is a classic for all children, especially those adults who are young at heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***SPOILERS*** Seething with hatred and revenge half breed Zach Provo, James Coburn, had spent the last 11 years on a chain gang planing his escape. What Provo want's more then freedom is to even the score with the man who captured him and in the process, during a wild shootout, killed his Navajo wife: The former Pima County sheriff Sam Burgade, Charlton Heston.

Making his escape after killing two prison guards Provo makes his way towards Yuma knowing that that's not just where Burgade lives but where his his young daughter Susan, Barbara Hershey,resides as well. Using his fellow escaped convicts to lure Burgade into the vast Arizona Desert, by promising them $30,000.00 in gold coins that he buried there, Provo plans to exact his bloody vengeance on Burgade. But only after having him witness his daughter being brutally raped by his fellow convicts or are, in not being with a woman for years, as horny as a rabbit during mating season!

Brutal and very effective western that updates the John Wayne 1956 classic "The Searchers" in a father searching through dangerous Indian territory for his kidnapped daughter. Charlton Heston as the guilt-ridden Sam Burgade in his felling somehow responsible for killing Provo's wife and then having to face the fact that the same thing can very well happen to his daughter Susan is perfect in the role of the aging and retired sheriff. Charles Coburn as the vengeful half breed Zach Provo is also at his best as the obsessed with hatred and murder escaped convict.

The man who escaped with Provo are really not interest in his personal affairs but have no choice, in that he knows the territory like the back of his hand, but to go along with him. It's only the thought of them having their way with Susan, when Provo gives them the green light, as well as the buried $30,000.00 in gold coins that keeps them from breaking up and going their own way.

Also going along with Burgade is Susan's boyfriend Hal Brickman, Chris Mitchum, who proves in the end that he's as good as Burgade is, who felt that he just didn't have it in him, in both tracking down the escaped criminals as well as using common sense, which in this case Burgade lacks, in doing it.

***SPOILERS**** The unbelievably brutal and blood splattered showdown between Burgade and Provo is almost too much to sit through. Provo who's hatred of Burgade bordered on out right insanity wanted him to suffer a slow and excruciating death. it was that hatred that Bugrade took advantage of and, after taking some half dozen bullets, thus ended up putting the crazed and blood thirsty, as well as mindless, lunatic away for good! --------------------------------------------- Result 698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] From the pen of Richard Condon (The Manchurian [[Candidate]] 1962) comes this [[muddled]] tale of political intrigue and [[assassination]]. The [[story]], told in almost [[comic]] [[book]] [[fashion]] is [[difficult]] to swallow. All-star cast considered, this poor effort is not entirely the fault of the cast and crew: the novel was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[though]] at times the [[story]] is actually [[mocking]] the more [[sincere]] [[effort]] put forth in "Manchurian [[Candidate]]." A [[disappointment]] on all [[counts]]. From the pen of Richard Condon (The Manchurian [[Nominee]] 1962) comes this [[bewildered]] tale of political intrigue and [[assassinations]]. The [[conte]], told in almost [[hilarious]] [[ledger]] [[manner]] is [[complex]] to swallow. All-star cast considered, this poor effort is not entirely the fault of the cast and crew: the novel was replete with the same short-comings. It seems as [[nevertheless]] at times the [[history]] is actually [[kidding]] the more [[heartfelt]] [[endeavour]] put forth in "Manchurian [[Candidacy]]." A [[disillusion]] on all [[count]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I [[love]] this show!

[[Every]] [[time]] i watch an episode i [[repeat]] that line and [[remind]] myself how good of a show this is. I am a [[huge]] sci-fi fan and this show has [[grounds]] to be the most important science (fiction?) show in the [[history]] of [[film]]/TV. There are so [[many]] theories in this [[show]] about the universe i [[could]] [[start]] a religion. Its [[amazing]], season after season the show [[gets]] better and [[better]].

I've been a fan of MacGyver [[since]] i was 5 (19 now) and i [[find]] it so [[ironic]] that my 2 [[favorite]] [[TV]] [[shows]] of all [[time]] [[star]] [[Richard]] Dean Anderson. Its [[also]] interesting how each [[character]] is practically the [[opposite]] of the other.

Back when i first [[saw]] Stargate the [[movie]], i instantly liked it and [[considered]] it one of my [[favorite]] sci-fi flicks, then hearing a [[TV]] [[show]] [[would]] [[spin]] from it i [[got]] really excited, but didn't [[get]] showtime till the fifth season was [[almost]] over.

[[Though]], I'm [[disappointed]] to [[hear]] that [[Roland]] Emmerich and Dean Devlin [[wanted]] to do a [[trilogy]] of [[movies]] but the studio optioned the [[series]] instead.

Id say [[though]] that it turned out just fine. [[Maybe]] even better.

This show is [[amazing]], and i hope it never [[dies]]. Atlantis here we [[come]]! I [[iike]] this show!

[[Entire]] [[moment]] i watch an episode i [[repeating]] that line and [[reminding]] myself how good of a show this is. I am a [[sizable]] sci-fi fan and this show has [[rationale]] to be the most important science (fiction?) show in the [[stories]] of [[movie]]/TV. There are so [[multiple]] theories in this [[displayed]] about the universe i [[would]] [[cranking]] a religion. Its [[staggering]], season after season the show [[receives]] better and [[optimum]].

I've been a fan of MacGyver [[because]] i was 5 (19 now) and i [[unearth]] it so [[sarcastic]] that my 2 [[favored]] [[TELEVISION]] [[showcase]] of all [[moment]] [[stars]] [[Richie]] Dean Anderson. Its [[similarly]] interesting how each [[nature]] is practically the [[contrary]] of the other.

Back when i first [[observed]] Stargate the [[filmmaking]], i instantly liked it and [[deemed]] it one of my [[favored]] sci-fi flicks, then hearing a [[TELEVISION]] [[spectacle]] [[could]] [[spinning]] from it i [[get]] really excited, but didn't [[obtain]] showtime till the fifth season was [[practically]] over.

[[If]], I'm [[disenchanted]] to [[listened]] that [[Rowland]] Emmerich and Dean Devlin [[desired]] to do a [[triad]] of [[movie]] but the studio optioned the [[serials]] instead.

Id say [[if]] that it turned out just fine. [[Likely]] even better.

This show is [[unbelievable]], and i hope it never [[died]]. Atlantis here we [[coming]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Veteran sleazeball Bruno Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that clearly echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[movie]] on a [[minuscule]] [[budget]] - so that it already looks obscure when it's newly released.

After her daughter gets [[abducted]], a mother enters the dark world of underground pornography, because the kidnappers [[belong]] to an international [[organization]] that direct snuff films as [[long]] as the exclusive [[clients]] [[pay]] well. The search for her daughter does not only lead the mother across Europe, but also into [[prostitution]]. She goes to bed with some guys to get her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization lead by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's getting into great danger herself.

There is not much good to say about this one, even though it starts promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might expect from the director who made films like BLADE VIOLENT. SNUFF TRAP (which was first released in Russia!) is neither gory enough nor does it contain the amount of nudity and sex to really keep the viewer's attention. The plot isn't that special either, except maybe for the surprisingly many different locations throughout Europe. The ending is hugely disappointing. The acting isn't really remarkable either, except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She looks and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of Bruno Mattei's films. But it's good to see the man back on the helm again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. Veteran sleazeball Bruno Mattei is at it again with this erotic thriller that clearly echoes Joel Schumacher's 8MM. But, as expected, Mattei does his [[cinema]] on a [[miniscule]] [[budgets]] - so that it already looks obscure when it's newly released.

After her daughter gets [[kidnapping]], a mother enters the dark world of underground pornography, because the kidnappers [[belonging]] to an international [[organisations]] that direct snuff films as [[lang]] as the exclusive [[consumers]] [[payroll]] well. The search for her daughter does not only lead the mother across Europe, but also into [[prostitute]]. She goes to bed with some guys to get her clues. When she finally reaches contact with the snuff organization lead by the mysterious Doctor Hades, she's getting into great danger herself.

There is not much good to say about this one, even though it starts promising. Problem is that the movie is by far not as sleazy or explicit as one might expect from the director who made films like BLADE VIOLENT. SNUFF TRAP (which was first released in Russia!) is neither gory enough nor does it contain the amount of nudity and sex to really keep the viewer's attention. The plot isn't that special either, except maybe for the surprisingly many different locations throughout Europe. The ending is hugely disappointing. The acting isn't really remarkable either, except for Anita Auer who plays Doctor Hades: She looks and acts extremely creepy. You don't want to meet her like this in a dark alley (or Your bedroom, for that matter).

All in all, SNUFF TRAP only appeals to collectors of Bruno Mattei's films. But it's good to see the man back on the helm again: It was his first thriller since 1994's giallo GLI OCCHI DENTRO. --------------------------------------------- Result 701 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? Are you tripping of your head on [[Ecstasy]] pipes? There were so many of you. [[Did]] you do it for a dare? Is this some kind of cult? Or did [[Guy]] Richie himself sign up 788 times under different names?

Before I say [[anything]] [[else]], I'll say this. [[Just]] because you don't [[understand]] a [[film]] doesn't mean that it's not great. [[Maybe]] you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[film]] after you had a row with your [[wife]] and then weren't in the [[mood]]. Maybe there's a more [[fundamental]] stumbling block- like you just don't have the mental capacity or a highly enough developed philosophical [[sense]] to [[engage]] with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[end]] all buts.

[[PLEASE]] don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and [[please]] don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[think]] you are [[pretty]] [[smart]]. You may [[even]] [[think]] of yourself as [[somewhat]] of a [[romantic]] [[figure]]: an [[independent]] thinker championing a masterpiece against a chorus of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're embarrassing yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's time. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd recognise it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the crew, a waste of the caterers, and [[definitely]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[get]] them back you know) of anyone unlucky enough to [[sit]] through this unutterable, [[wretched]] [[mess]].

"No - [[wait]]," comes a [[voice]] in the [[darkness]]. "You just don't [[understand]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[means]] the story doesn't [[go]] in a STRAIGHT [[LINE]]. This is [[actually]] the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an AUTEUR. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you [[hear]]? -Because they couldn't deal with the [[COMPLEXITY]]. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. Okay. Who was it? Who gave Revolver 10 out of 10? Are you tripping of your head on [[Bliss]] pipes? There were so many of you. [[Got]] you do it for a dare? Is this some kind of cult? Or did [[Boys]] Richie himself sign up 788 times under different names?

Before I say [[nothing]] [[other]], I'll say this. [[Jen]] because you don't [[understood]] a [[movies]] doesn't mean that it's not great. [[Perhaps]] you've had a bad day at work, or you sat down to watch a [[movie]] after you had a row with your [[femme]] and then weren't in the [[humour]]. Maybe there's a more [[essential]] stumbling block- like you just don't have the mental capacity or a highly enough developed philosophical [[feeling]] to [[engaging]] with it. BUT. And this is a very, very big but. The XXL elephant-sized mega-but to [[ending]] all buts.

[[INVITES]] don't confuse incoherence for complexity, and [[invites]] don't confuse this two hour non-squirter for an interesting film. Really. You may [[believing]] you are [[belle]] [[clever]]. You may [[yet]] [[thinking]] of yourself as [[slightly]] of a [[sentimental]] [[silhouette]]: an [[autonomous]] thinker championing a masterpiece against a chorus of sheep-like naysayers. Please don't. You're embarrassing yourself.

Revolver's a waste of everyone's time. If you thought about if for a few minutes, you'd recognise it too. It was a waste of the cast, a waste of the crew, a waste of the caterers, and [[certainly]] a waste of the precious minutes (you can't [[gets]] them back you know) of anyone unlucky enough to [[seated]] through this unutterable, [[unlucky]] [[chaos]].

"No - [[expectation]]," comes a [[vocals]] in the [[dark]]. "You just don't [[comprehend]]. Its NON-LINEAR. That [[modes]] the story doesn't [[going]] in a STRAIGHT [[BLOODLINE]]. This is [[indeed]] the COMPLEX and SUBTLE work of an AUTEUR. It addresses difficult EXISTENTIAL questions. And anyway - they slated FIGHT CLUB when it first came out - didn't you [[listen]]? -Because they couldn't deal with the [[SOPHISTICATION]]. They're eating humble pie now. Bet you hate Lynch films too, doncha?"

Hate to disappoint you, but I am quite a big Lynch fan. I rather like Memento, so a narrative told in an unconventional fashion doesn't necessarily fill me with fear. And although I've only studied it briefly a few years ago, philosophy interests me greatly. I don't dislike Revolver for these reasons. I dislike it because it purports to be about weighty, big-brained topics but deals with them in such an insultingly superficial way as to be laughable. I'm not much of a chess player, but Richie's idea of how chess works seems to be that of a precocious four year old. I dislike it because the characters, without exception, totally alienated me. "Aha!" cries the Richie apologist. "Guy is cleverly tipping his hat to Brecht!" Just maybe you're right. I think its more likely that he just can't write a decent script for toffee.

Comparing Revolver with Fight Club is actually really instructive. Fight Club has acid-tongued, nihilistic dialogue that makes you laugh. Revolver has stale fortune cookie reject one-liners that make your ears bleed. Fight Club has a great twist that makes you reassess everything that has happened. Revolver has, as far as I can tell, several incomprehensible twists that offer no satisfaction because... well, they don't make sense. If you keep pulling the rug out from under people, they eventually kick you out of their house. And then they lock all the doors and windows. And they never let you back in. Ever.

Guy Richie seems to assume that being philosophical entails repeating a mantra of little buzz-phrases. Mostly they are spoken, but often they flash up on the screen with attributions. It's almost pathological.

But what makes this film particularly notable is the way in which something so incomprehensible can be married so neatly with all tired gangster clichés in the world. Ultimately its so inconsequential. You don't care about anything. You don't understand anything. You go home.

Actually, there was a bit I really liked: the uptight assassin who has a crisis of confidence. He's great. But I can't recommend you see the film just to see him. He's only in it for a few minutes.

Please believe me. It's horrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Passing stones [[definitely]] one of the [[best]] comedy [[independent]] films ever. You [[must]] have a sense of humor to fully enjoy this one. This [[film]] for some [[reason]] hasn't [[received]] its [[credit]] due. [[First]], [[lets]] start with the [[story]] line [[everyone]] loves a good [[treasure]] hunt. [[When]] a dead [[father]] [[leaves]] letters behind advising of a [[hidden]] treasure it not only [[brings]] two [[families]] [[together]] but [[starts]] a [[whirlwind]] [[adventure]]. [[Mix]] in a polish [[translator]], a comatose [[mother]], a crack-head with turrets syndrome, a [[twisted]] homosexual hypnotist, and one drag queen, money not only makes the [[world]] go [[round]] but can [[turn]] [[family]] into [[enemies]]. My favorite [[character]] in this [[film]] would have to be the sister/[[crack]] addict with turret's syndrome,her sudden out [[burst]] will have you [[crying]] and [[mimicking]] for [[weeks]]. Passing stones [[admittedly]] one of the [[optimum]] comedy [[autonomous]] films ever. You [[ought]] have a sense of humor to fully enjoy this one. This [[cinematographic]] for some [[rationale]] hasn't [[benefited]] its [[credence]] due. [[Firstly]], [[entitles]] start with the [[stories]] line [[somebody]] loves a good [[tesoro]] hunt. [[Whenever]] a dead [[fathers]] [[departs]] letters behind advising of a [[disguised]] treasure it not only [[poses]] two [[family]] [[jointly]] but [[start]] a [[whirlpool]] [[adventurer]]. [[Blends]] in a polish [[interpreters]], a comatose [[mummy]], a crack-head with turrets syndrome, a [[crooked]] homosexual hypnotist, and one drag queen, money not only makes the [[globe]] go [[redondo]] but can [[transforming]] [[families]] into [[adversaries]]. My favorite [[trait]] in this [[kino]] would have to be the sister/[[slit]] addict with turret's syndrome,her sudden out [[bursts]] will have you [[weeping]] and [[simulating]] for [[chow]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The 63 year reign of [[Queen]] Victoria is [[perhaps]] one of the most documented and popularly known historical [[reigns]] in British [[history]]. On the one hand, her [[story]] [[lacks]] the theatrics of [[earlier]] royals thanks to a [[change]] in [[social]] climate and [[attitudes]], and on the other her [[story]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[notably]] [[human]]. Taking on the [[earlier]] [[years]] of her [[life]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince [[Albert]] was [[taking]] [[forefront]], director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until recently [[remained]] in the [[unbeknownst]] shadows of the industry here takes Victoria's [[story]] and [[captures]] that human element so vital to her [[legacy]]. It's a [[story]] that [[feels]] [[extremely]] [[humble]] [[considering]] its exuberant [[background]], and [[yet]] that's [[partly]] what gives it a [[distinct]] edge here that separates it from the [[usual]] fare.

Taking a very direct and [[focused]] [[approach]] that centres in on a [[brief]] five or so year [[period]] between her ascension and [[marriage]] to [[Albert]], The Young Victoria does what so little [[period]] [[pieces]] of this nature [[offer]]. [[Instead]] of [[attempting]] a sprawling encapsulation of such a figure's entire [[life]], Vallée [[instead]] opts to [[show]] one of the [[lesser]] known intricacies of Victoria's early [[years]] which are [[easily]] [[overlooked]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The result is a feature that may disgruntle historians thanks to its relatively flippant regards to facts and the like, [[yet]] never to [[let]] document [[get]] in the [[way]] of extracting a [[compelling]] story, writer Julian Fellowes sticks to his guns and [[delivers]] a slightly romanticised [[yet]] convincing [[portrayal]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to fully capitalise on those elements with enough restraint to maintain integrity in regards to both the history involved and the viewer watching.

A major part in the [[joy]] of [[watching]] The [[Young]] Victoria [[play]] out [[however]] [[simply]] lies in the production values [[granted]] here that [[bring]] early 1800's Regal [[Britain]] to life with a [[vigorous]] [[realism]] so rarely achieved quite so [[strikingly]] by [[genre]] films. [[Everything]] from the costume [[designs]], sets, hair [[styles]], lighting and [[photography]] accentuates the grandiose [[background]] inherent to Victoria's story without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[watching]] Vallée's interpretation [[come]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that permeates the visual element; and then there's the film's score [[also]] which works [[tremendously]] to further the very [[elegant]] yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all involved which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of affection within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) The 63 year reign of [[Quinn]] Victoria is [[presumably]] one of the most documented and popularly known historical [[kingdoms]] in British [[story]]. On the one hand, her [[history]] [[lacked]] the theatrics of [[ago]] royals thanks to a [[amendment]] in [[sociable]] climate and [[behavior]], and on the other her [[histories]] is one that perpetuates because it is [[primarily]] [[mankind]]. Taking on the [[ago]] [[aged]] of her [[living]] where the budding romance between herself and the German Prince [[Hugh]] was [[picked]] [[vanguard]], director Jean-Marc Vallée who has only until recently [[remains]] in the [[unidentified]] shadows of the industry here takes Victoria's [[conte]] and [[apprehended]] that human element so vital to her [[inheritance]]. It's a [[saga]] that [[believes]] [[insanely]] [[lowly]] [[scrutinize]] its exuberant [[context]], and [[even]] that's [[partially]] what gives it a [[separate]] edge here that separates it from the [[normal]] fare.

Taking a very direct and [[focus]] [[approaches]] that centres in on a [[succinct]] five or so year [[calendars]] between her ascension and [[matrimony]] to [[Hugh]], The Young Victoria does what so little [[schedules]] [[smithereens]] of this nature [[supplying]]. [[Conversely]] of [[trying]] a sprawling encapsulation of such a figure's entire [[living]], Vallée [[conversely]] opts to [[showings]] one of the [[lowest]] known intricacies of Victoria's early [[olds]] which are [[readily]] [[ignored]] in favour of the more publicly known accolades. The result is a feature that may disgruntle historians thanks to its relatively flippant regards to facts and the like, [[however]] never to [[allowing]] document [[obtain]] in the [[manner]] of extracting a [[convincing]] story, writer Julian Fellowes sticks to his guns and [[affords]] a slightly romanticised [[even]] convincing [[depiction]]. Vallée takes this and runs, making sure to fully capitalise on those elements with enough restraint to maintain integrity in regards to both the history involved and the viewer watching.

A major part in the [[glee]] of [[staring]] The [[Jeune]] Victoria [[playing]] out [[instead]] [[merely]] lies in the production values [[bestowed]] here that [[bringing]] early 1800's Regal [[British]] to life with a [[energetic]] [[reality]] so rarely achieved quite so [[unimaginably]] by [[type]] films. [[Any]] from the costume [[design]], sets, hair [[style]], lighting and [[picture]] accentuates the grandiose [[context]] inherent to Victoria's story without ever over-encumbering it. Indeed, while [[staring]] Vallée's interpretation [[arrive]] to life here it is very hard not to be sucked in solely through the aesthetics that permeates the visual element; and then there's the film's score [[additionally]] which works [[vitally]] to further the very [[graceful]] yet personal tones that dominate Fellowes' script. Entwining the works of Schubert and Strauss into Victoria and Albert's story not only works as a point of reference for the characters to play with, but also melds to the work with an elegance and refrain that echoes composer Ilan Eshkeri's original work just as well.

Yet for all the poignant compositions, lush backdrops and immaculate costumes that punctuate every scene, the single most important factor here—and indeed to most period dramas—are the performances of the cast and how they help bring the world they exist in to life. Thankfully The Young Victoria is blessed with an equally immaculate ensemble of thespians both young and old that do a fantastic job of doing just that. Between the sweet, budding romance of Victoria (Emily Blunt) and Albert (Rupert Friend) and the somewhat antagonistic struggles of her advisors and the like (spearheaded by a terrific Mark Strong and Paul Bettany), the conflicts and warmth so prevalent to Fellowe's screenplay are conveyed perfectly here by all involved which helps keep the movie from being a plastic "nice to look at but dim underneath" affair so common with these outings.

In the end, it's hard to fault a work such as The Young Victoria. It's got a perfectly touching and human sense of affection within its perfectly paced romance, plus some historical significance that plays as an intriguing source of interest for those in the audience keen on such details. Of course, it may not take the cinematic world by storm and there lacks a certain significance to its overall presence that stops it from ever becoming more than just a poignantly restrained romantic period drama; yet in a sense this is what makes it enjoyable. Vallée never seems to be striving for grandeur, nor does he seem content at making a run-of-the-mill escapist piece for aficionados. Somewhere within this gray middle-ground lies The Young Victoria, sure to cater to genre fans and those a little more disillusioned by the usual productions; beautiful, memorable but most of all, human.

- A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net) --------------------------------------------- Result 704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Have you ever in your [[life]], gone out for a sport's activity, [[tried]] your best, and then found yourself in an [[important]] segment of it, where for a brief moment, you were [[given]] a chance to be a hero and a champion and . . . failed? I believe many of us have had that [[moment]] in our [[lives]]. This is the premise of the movie, "The Best of [[Times]]." In this story a middle age banker, named [[Jack]] Dundee ([[Robin]] [[Williams]]) suffers from the deep [[melancholy]] of a football [[mistake]], which [[happened]] [[years]] [[ago]], is inspired to re-play the game . . again. [[In]] [[order]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[great]] [[football]] [[quarterback]], Reno Hightower ([[Kurt]] Russell) to [[make]] a [[comeback]]. [[For]] Reno, who is [[satisfied]] with his present [[lot]] in [[life]], see's no need to [[change]] the [[past]] [[record]], which get's better as he [[ages]]. Added to both their [[problem]] is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their marriages are floundering and in need of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) habitually reminds him of the biggest drop. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to try and correct the greatest blunder of his life. [[Great]] [[fun]] for anyone wishing to enjoy their youth again. *** Have you ever in your [[vida]], gone out for a sport's activity, [[try]] your best, and then found yourself in an [[sizable]] segment of it, where for a brief moment, you were [[afforded]] a chance to be a hero and a champion and . . . failed? I believe many of us have had that [[time]] in our [[life]]. This is the premise of the movie, "The Best of [[Period]]." In this story a middle age banker, named [[Jacque]] Dundee ([[Robyn]] [[William]]) suffers from the deep [[melancholic]] of a football [[mistaken]], which [[arrived]] [[olds]] [[previously]], is inspired to re-play the game . . again. [[Among]] [[edict]] to accomplish this he must convince the once [[excellent]] [[soccer]] [[strategist]], Reno Hightower ([[Curt]] Russell) to [[deliver]] a [[revert]]. [[At]] Reno, who is [[pleased]] with his present [[lots]] in [[vida]], see's no need to [[shifting]] the [[yesteryear]] [[registering]], which get's better as he [[centuries]]. Added to both their [[trouble]] is the fact years have passed and in addition, both their marriages are floundering and in need of re-vamping. Not easy when his Father-in-law (Donald Moffat) habitually reminds him of the biggest drop. Nevertheless, Dundee is persistent and will do anything to try and correct the greatest blunder of his life. [[Whopping]] [[droll]] for anyone wishing to enjoy their youth again. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 705 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A lot has already been said on this movie and I' d like to join those who praised it. It's a [[highly]] [[unique]] [[film]] which uses elements of different genres: drama, comedy, gangster film without making a mess of it. At points you just laugh out loud, at other points you feel for the characters [[whose]] mistakes and failures you watch. Sabu's [[genius]] can be shown with regard to some [[sequences]] of the movie. One is that where all three men chasing one another have an erotic day dream about a young woman that they just passed by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and illustrates the characters of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same time. Another example of Sabu's genius is the part of the film where the runners get tired. First one of them, the typical loser among the three guys, hallucinates that the woman that left him for someone else is back again and you see them dancing with one another and in the next shot him dancing with himself which is deeply moving. All of the runners get to this point where they think that have something back they lost or are on track again. And at one part of the movie they stop chasing each other, running in line, just laughing.So here is it all the beauty and the ludicrousness of what we call life which Sabu manages to show throughout the film. His characters fail (do they at the end?) but he doesn't rob them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

A lot has already been said on this movie and I' d like to join those who praised it. It's a [[unimaginably]] [[unequalled]] [[cinematographic]] which uses elements of different genres: drama, comedy, gangster film without making a mess of it. At points you just laugh out loud, at other points you feel for the characters [[whom]] mistakes and failures you watch. Sabu's [[engineering]] can be shown with regard to some [[sequence]] of the movie. One is that where all three men chasing one another have an erotic day dream about a young woman that they just passed by on the street. This sequence is beautifully done and illustrates the characters of all three runners very well. It is erotic and funny at the same time. Another example of Sabu's genius is the part of the film where the runners get tired. First one of them, the typical loser among the three guys, hallucinates that the woman that left him for someone else is back again and you see them dancing with one another and in the next shot him dancing with himself which is deeply moving. All of the runners get to this point where they think that have something back they lost or are on track again. And at one part of the movie they stop chasing each other, running in line, just laughing.So here is it all the beauty and the ludicrousness of what we call life which Sabu manages to show throughout the film. His characters fail (do they at the end?) but he doesn't rob them of their dignity. "Monday" and "Postman Blues" that do justice to Sabu's claim that he is a genius. Go watch them!

--------------------------------------------- Result 706 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I actually liked this [[movie]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and pretty unlikely but still it [[kept]] my attention on a rainy afternoon. Until the end, that is. For her final performance at the prestigious classical conservatory where she has struggled to catch-up to the other classically trained students, what does the main character do? Wow them with her grasp and execution of this time honored musical tradition? [[No]]. She tortures and butchers the great [[sensuous]] Habanera from Carmen and turns it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe pop song. My ears [[bled]]! And, in the supreme moment of horror, her teachers gave her a standing ovation! Any teacher not in a Spears-induced fantasy would have failed her on the spot. Save your time, save your ears - skip this movie! I actually liked this [[films]] until the end. Sure, it was cheesy and pretty unlikely but still it [[conserved]] my attention on a rainy afternoon. Until the end, that is. For her final performance at the prestigious classical conservatory where she has struggled to catch-up to the other classically trained students, what does the main character do? Wow them with her grasp and execution of this time honored musical tradition? [[Nos]]. She tortures and butchers the great [[sensual]] Habanera from Carmen and turns it into an utterly forgettable Brittany Spears-wannabe pop song. My ears [[persecuted]]! And, in the supreme moment of horror, her teachers gave her a standing ovation! Any teacher not in a Spears-induced fantasy would have failed her on the spot. Save your time, save your ears - skip this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[great]] directors of Italy of the 40s and 50s were men who understood the medium, but it was Luchino Visconti, a man of vision, who [[dared]] to bring a film like to show what he was capable of doing. He [[clearly]] [[shows]] his [[genius]] early on in his distinguished [[career]] with "Ossessione", a film based on James Cain's "The [[Postman]] Always Ring Twice", which was [[later]] [[made]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[comparison]] with what Visconti achieved in the [[movie]]. Luchino Visconti and his collaborators on the screen included an uncredited Alberto [[Moravia]], a man who knew about the effect of [[passion]] on human beings.

The [[film]] has been well preserved in the DVD format we watched recently. The film is a must for all serious movie [[fans]] because we can [[see]] how Visconti's vision translated the text into a [[movie]] that rings true in a plausible way, something the American [[version]] [[lacked]].

What comes [[across]] [[watching]] the [[movie]], is the intensity which the [[director]] got from his key players. The [[magnificent]] [[Clara]] Calamai does an [[amazing]] [[job]] as Giovanna, the [[woman]] who has married an [[older]] man, but when Gino appears in her [[life]], all she [[wants]] to do is rid herself of the [[kind]] [[man]] who [[gave]] her an [[opportunity]] in [[life]]. Giovanna is one of the [[best]] [[creations]] in Ms. Calamai's [[achievements]] in the Italian [[cinema]]. The last [[sequence]] of the [[film]] [[shows]] [[Ms]]. Calamai at her best in the [[ironic]] [[twist]] that serves as the moral redemption for the monstrous [[crime]] that was committed.

[[Equally]] [[excellent]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[best]] [[actors]] of his generation who [[appears]] as Gino, the hunky [[man]] that [[awakens]] the obsessive [[passion]] in Giovanna. Gino is the perfect [[man]] for Giovanna, [[something]] that Mr. Girotti [[projects]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. [[Mr]]. Girotti makes the [[man]] [[come]] alive in a performance that seems so [[easy]], [[yet]] with another [[actor]] it [[might]] not have been so [[apparent]]. Juan DeLanda is [[seen]] as Giuseppe, the [[older]] [[man]] who [[fell]] in [[love]] with Giovanna. [[In]] fact, his [[character]] [[rings]] truer than his [[counterpart]] in the [[American]] [[film]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, [[also]] includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. Luchino Visconti was light years ahead of his contemporaries. The [[marvellous]] directors of Italy of the 40s and 50s were men who understood the medium, but it was Luchino Visconti, a man of vision, who [[ventured]] to bring a film like to show what he was capable of doing. He [[patently]] [[exposition]] his [[engineers]] early on in his distinguished [[vocational]] with "Ossessione", a film based on James Cain's "The [[Postmaster]] Always Ring Twice", which was [[afterward]] [[accomplished]] by Hollywood, but that version pales in [[compares]] with what Visconti achieved in the [[flick]]. Luchino Visconti and his collaborators on the screen included an uncredited Alberto [[Moravian]], a man who knew about the effect of [[enthusiasm]] on human beings.

The [[films]] has been well preserved in the DVD format we watched recently. The film is a must for all serious movie [[amateurs]] because we can [[consults]] how Visconti's vision translated the text into a [[films]] that rings true in a plausible way, something the American [[stepping]] [[lacks]].

What comes [[in]] [[staring]] the [[cinema]], is the intensity which the [[headmaster]] got from his key players. The [[excellent]] [[Clair]] Calamai does an [[excellent]] [[employment]] as Giovanna, the [[female]] who has married an [[aged]] man, but when Gino appears in her [[vida]], all she [[desires]] to do is rid herself of the [[genus]] [[males]] who [[handed]] her an [[luck]] in [[living]]. Giovanna is one of the [[optimum]] [[establishment]] in Ms. Calamai's [[attainment]] in the Italian [[theatre]]. The last [[sequencing]] of the [[films]] [[denotes]] [[Mrs]]. Calamai at her best in the [[sarcastic]] [[twisting]] that serves as the moral redemption for the monstrous [[offense]] that was committed.

[[Alike]] [[handsome]] is Massimo Girotti, one of the [[better]] [[actresses]] of his generation who [[seems]] as Gino, the hunky [[dawg]] that [[begs]] the obsessive [[enthusiasm]] in Giovanna. Gino is the perfect [[males]] for Giovanna, [[anything]] that Mr. Girotti [[project]] with such ease and sophistication not equaled before in the screen. [[Monsieur]]. Girotti makes the [[males]] [[coming]] alive in a performance that seems so [[uncomplicated]], [[even]] with another [[actress]] it [[apt]] not have been so [[flagrant]]. Juan DeLanda is [[watched]] as Giuseppe, the [[oldest]] [[males]] who [[plummeted]] in [[adore]] with Giovanna. [[For]] fact, his [[traits]] [[piercings]] truer than his [[counterparts]] in the [[Americana]] [[films]], where he is seen more as a buffoon.

The film is beautifully photographed by Domenic Scala and Aldo Tonti. They gave the film a naturalistic look that was the way Italian directors of the era favored. The original musical score of Giuseppe Rosati is perfect. Visconti, a man who loved opera and was one of the best directors, [[additionally]] includes arias by Bizet and Verdi that fit well in the context of the movie.

"Ossessione" is a film to treasure because we see a great Luchino Visconti at the top of his form. --------------------------------------------- Result 708 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[great]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I thought that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already [[thought]] that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[surprised]] at how [[fantastic]] he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his purposefully sudden and unexpected monologue. What's [[amazing]] about his role is that it's a character it's [[hard]] to say we've seen before. We've seen many emotionally scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his character is truly unpredictable and completely individual. It's a joy for the audience to be drawn in emotionally by him and be tugged every which way by someone whose problems, mindset, and provocations are completely different from most characters like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a completely different level. He is every man. He is the most normal possible person in the world, so much so that you will hardly find many characters like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is brilliant in that he is funny, jolting, smart, and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite brilliant because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the mere style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. As someone who has never condescended Adam Sandler in terms of talent, as is done to him and many comic actors like him, I walked in to Reign Over Me expecting a [[prodigious]] film, not simply because of his presence in the movie but because I thought that it looked very good overall. Even someone who already [[thinks]] that Sandler could deliver an effective dramatic performance is writing here that I was [[horrified]] at how [[sumptuous]] he is in it. He will make you weep, especially in his purposefully sudden and unexpected monologue. What's [[startling]] about his role is that it's a character it's [[laborious]] to say we've seen before. We've seen many emotionally scarred characters, many mentally retarded people, many loners, many passionate self-centered artists, but Sandler's Charlie Fineman is none of these. He may have a taste of each of them in some ways, but his character is truly unpredictable and completely individual. It's a joy for the audience to be drawn in emotionally by him and be tugged every which way by someone whose problems, mindset, and provocations are completely different from most characters like him.

Don Cheadle delivers an interesting performance on a completely different level. He is every man. He is the most normal possible person in the world, so much so that you will hardly find many characters like his either, or at least any that are played the way he plays Alan Johnson, whose name is even found on the assembly line. Cheadle is brilliant in that he is funny, jolting, smart, and stupid the way so many normal people are.

The rest of the cast is populated by actors and actresses who've hardly done anything in awhile in smaller but quite colorful roles. Jada Pinkett-Smith is the overly refined upper middle class wife, Donald Sutherland is the impatient but surprising judge, Robert Klein is Sandler's desensitized father-in-law.

Mike Binder's script is quite brilliant because it says something quite profound about the wonders of communication in all of its guises. It's much more subtle than, say, Babel, and has a much more close-to-home ideal.

The camera is only interested in the reality of its images as opposed to the mere style. This film struck me as sort of a sendback to the kitchen-sink style of the 1970s. Cinematography was grainy and unfastened, but that was its charm. It wasn't about attracting us to the camera itself and the gloss that would've diluted its stories with such.

The music, which plays a major role in the film, and its title, is very powerful. Near the beginning, you feel like you're in for another About Schmidt or Little Miss Sunshine sort of soundtrack, but you soon realize you're in for more than that. In fact, the film is packed with lots of music that stimulates a lot of the most emotional scenes.

Reign Over Me is a major statement not only for society but also for film itself. It goes to show that even the director of Blankman is capable of wonders. --------------------------------------------- Result 709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is one of my very favorites. It's hard to explain why. Maybe it's the innocence of Corin Nemec and his awkwardness paired with the boldness of Cheryl Pollak, but it definitely has something to do with the soundtrack. Also, some of the characters have little lines or movements or moments that are amusing in and of themselves. Finally, the story is one that always tugs at my heartstrings, and the last scene is so bittersweet. All in all, I love this movie; it's perfect for a gooey, sentimental girls' night. --------------------------------------------- Result 710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] I'm a pretty [[old]] dude, old [[enough]] to [[remember]] the taste of [[Oreos]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years [[ago]], when every taste for a [[kid]] was fresh. I wish I have [[somehow]] set some aside then is some magical suspended locker, so that I could [[taste]] those [[things]] [[today]]. This [[magical]] locker might [[even]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've drifted, physically and otherwise, a sort of [[dynamic]] [[chemistry]] of expectations. Over the half century, they would have had to adjust quite a bit, because you see I would have known that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a celebration of self and past, and story, and sense that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something almost as good. In the seventies, I really tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic pleasure — you know, movies smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the last to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I deferred until I thought I would be big enough to deserve it. Over the years, I would test myself, my ability to surround beauty and delineate it without occupying it. There probably are few Poles who have worked at this, practicing to deserve Chopin. Working to deserve womanness when I see it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

Recently, I achieved something like assurance that it was time to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the time when this would work optimally, because I had already seen and understood "9th Gate."

If you do not know this, it is about a man who innocently rents a room in which the previous tenant (about whom the story is named) jumped out the window, to die later after this man (played by Polanski) visits. What happens is that time folds and he becomes this woman. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the body that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. I'm a pretty [[archaic]] dude, old [[satisfactorily]] to [[remind]] the taste of [[Cookies]] and Coke as they were 50-55 years [[formerly]], when every taste for a [[infantile]] was fresh. I wish I have [[someplace]] set some aside then is some magical suspended locker, so that I could [[aftertaste]] those [[aspects]] [[yesterday]]. This [[quadrant]] locker might [[yet]] have adjusted the fabric of the food to account for how I've drifted, physically and otherwise, a sort of [[energetic]] [[chemical]] of expectations. Over the half century, they would have had to adjust quite a bit, because you see I would have known that I set them aside. Eating one now would be a celebration of self and past, and story, and sense that would almost make the intervening years an anticipated reward.

I didn't have enough sense to do that with original Coke. And I couldn't have invented one of those magical psychic lockers — not then. But I did something almost as good. In the seventies, I really tuned into Roman Polanski. He was a strange and exotic pleasure — you know, movies smuggled out of the Soviet block. Movies so sensitive to beauty that you cry for weeks afterward. Movies that make you want to live with Polish women, one, and then deciding that they would be the last to get it.

Here's what I did. I took what I knew would be my favorite Polanski movie and set it aside. I did not watch it. I deferred until I thought I would be big enough to deserve it. Over the years, I would test myself, my ability to surround beauty and delineate it without occupying it. There probably are few Poles who have worked at this, practicing to deserve Chopin. Working to deserve womanness when I see it. Trying to get the inners from the edges.

Recently, I achieved something like assurance that it was time to pull this out. I already knew that I was already past the time when this would work optimally, because I had already seen and understood "9th Gate."

If you do not know this, it is about a man who innocently rents a room in which the previous tenant (about whom the story is named) jumped out the window, to die later after this man (played by Polanski) visits. What happens is that time folds and he becomes this woman. We are fooled into believing that he is merely mad. But the way we follow him, he is not. He merely has flashes that the world is normal, and that the surrounding people are not part of a coven warping his reality.

The story hardly matters. What matters is how Polanksi shapes this thing, both in the way he inhabits the eye that only makes edges and in inhabiting the body that only consists of confused flesh. The two never meet. There is a dissonance that may haunt me for the next 30 years. Its the idea about and inside and an outside with no edges at all — at all except a redhead wig.

I know of no one else that could do this, this sketch that remains a sketch, this horror that remains natural.

To understand the genius of this, you have to know one of the greatest films ever made; "Rear Window." The genius of that film is the post-noir notion that the camera shapes the world; that the viewer creates the story. What Roman does is take this movie and turn it inside out. In Rear Window, the idea was that the on-screen viewer (Jimmy Stewart) was the anchor and everything else was fiction, woven as we watched. Here, the on screen apartment dweller is the filmmaker. We know this. We know that everything we see is true because he is the narrator. We know it is true that bodies shift identity, that times shift, that causality is plastic. We know that the narrator will kill us. We know that the narrator will leave us in a perpetual horror, on that edge that he imputes but never shows us and lets us imagine.

Ted's Evaluation -- 4 of 3: Every cineliterate person should experience this. --------------------------------------------- Result 711 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This [[scary]] and rather [[gory]] [[adaptation]] of Stephen King's [[great]] novel features [[outstanding]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really [[gruesome]] gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but [[genuinely]] unnerving.The [[depiction]] of the zombie [[child]] Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "[[New]] Nightmare")is [[equally]] [[noteworthy]],as what [[could]] [[easily]] have been a laughable [[character]] is made [[menacing]] and [[spooky]].As for the people,who [[think]] that this one isn't scary-watch it [[alone]] in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I [[guarantee]] you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror [[movies]] [[like]] this one or "The Texas Chain [[Saw]] Massacre" shouldn't be [[watched]] in [[group]].[[Recommended]] for horror [[fans]]! This [[terrible]] and rather [[gori]] [[readjustment]] of Stephen King's [[prodigious]] novel features [[marvellous]] central performances by Dale Midkiff,Fred Gwynne(who sadly died few years ago)and Denise Crosby and some really [[atrocious]] gore effects.Director Mary Lambert has a wonderful sense of visual style,and manages to make this one of the few versions of King's work that is not only worth seeing,but [[actually]] unnerving.The [[portrayal]] of the zombie [[kid]] Gage(Miko Hughes-later in "[[Newer]] Nightmare")is [[alike]] [[admirable]],as what [[wo]] [[readily]] have been a laughable [[characteristics]] is made [[threatening]] and [[creepy]].As for the people,who [[ideas]] that this one isn't scary-watch it [[only]] in the dark(eventually with your squeamish girlfriend)and I [[ensured]] you that "Pet Sematary" will creep you out.Some horror [[theater]] [[iike]] this one or "The Texas Chain [[Noticed]] Massacre" shouldn't be [[observed]] in [[clusters]].[[Recommendations]] for horror [[amateurs]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I'll be honest,I [[finally]] checked this [[movie]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and [[compelling]],[[particularly]] the three leads--or even the compelling [[story]] of a [[breach]] in the Presidential Secret Service(something,I've been informed through the DVD extras of this show,has [[yet]] to ever happen.Assuming that's true,that's [[remarkable]]!). I [[got]] it because it was directed and has a [[choice]] cameo by none other than Detective Meldrick Lewis!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the Street" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone remember "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,almost still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents(Martin Donovan and the foxy,somewhat hard to buy as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign characters and you have a fairly standard political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary line is about the best way to describe how this show plays out without giving spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the film itself was entertaining enough to keep most (myself included) interested. I'll be honest,I [[eventually]] checked this [[filmmaking]] not because of the stars--though they were reasonably watchable and [[persuading]],[[namely]] the three leads--or even the compelling [[histories]] of a [[violate]] in the Presidential Secret Service(something,I've been informed through the DVD extras of this show,has [[nevertheless]] to ever happen.Assuming that's true,that's [[fantastic]]!). I [[ai]] it because it was directed and has a [[chooses]] cameo by none other than Detective Meldrick Lewis!! Well,okay,Clark Johnson,one of my faves from "Homicide:Life on the Street" and a veteran (mostly) TV director. I'd say that he does about as good as he can with a project that is watchable but pretty average,despite the possibilities.

Veteran and ace Secret agent Pete Garrison(Michael Douglass)has to find out both who is blackmailing him AND who killed his friend,targeted and blew up an Air Force One chopper and is gunning for the Prez.(David Rasche. Anyone remember "Sledgehammer"?). His affair with the first lady(Kim Basinger,clearly one of the HOTTER first ladies we've ever had,fictional or real)is certainly not helping his standing. He's got to both ferret out the real mole in the service and avoid the hound dog like hunting of his former best friend and fellow agent and chief(Kiefer Sutherland,almost still completely in "24" mode). Throw in some other pivotal Service agents(Martin Donovan and the foxy,somewhat hard to buy as the gig Eva Longorria) and shady foreign characters and you have a fairly standard political thriller that doesn't aim as high as it purports and reaches the desired,if underwhelming,results.

The summary line is about the best way to describe how this show plays out without giving spoilers. The DVD extras to me seemed more insightful and interesting than the movie,though the film itself was entertaining enough to keep most (myself included) interested. --------------------------------------------- Result 713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I am [[currently]] doing film [[studies]] at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we watched and in my [[opinion]] it is a [[film]] with a very [[simple]] storyline but a complex back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"sounds quite exiting".

[[However]] you need to dig deeper to uncover the true feeling of the true genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trust]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for example the way Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this untouched love affair in our faces.

Overall this film is a good example of why British films should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low budget.

A [[Good]] film with an intricate story line, however it is definitely an acquired taste and is possibly not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. I am [[now]] doing film [[researches]] at A.S level and "this is not a love song" is a film we watched and in my [[view]] it is a [[movie]] with a very [[uncomplicated]] storyline but a complex back-story. If you scratch the surface you will find a thriller-chase film of two men running through the countryside from farmers, after committing a murder:-"sounds quite exiting".

[[Instead]] you need to dig deeper to uncover the true feeling of the true genre. As it is suggested, it is a love story between two homosexual lovers, filled with [[trusts]], deceit and betrayal. We are not told about this "love" directly through the film but the events that happen through out, for example the way Heaton acts towards Spike almost screams this untouched love affair in our faces.

Overall this film is a good example of why British films should not be dismissed as "rubbish" just because they are done on a low budget.

A [[Buena]] film with an intricate story line, however it is definitely an acquired taste and is possibly not suitable for the average fan of Hollywood blockbusters. --------------------------------------------- Result 714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As an animated film from 1978, this is pretty good--generally well above the standard of the days when [[Disney]] hadn't done [[anything]] good in [[years]] (and Tolkien [[cared]] little for Disney anyway). It gets [[major]] [[points]] for innovative and [[careful]] camera work, [[applying]] cinematic [[techniques]] with relative success. The much-maligned rotoscoping [[actually]] [[works]] pretty well, [[especially]] with the Ringwraiths, and the [[opening]] narration. However, it is so [[drastically]] overused--possibly as a money-saving technique--that it detracts from the [[overall]] [[effect]]. The same [[technique]] that makes wraiths spooky and otherworldly doesn't [[fare]] so well in the Prancing Pony.

As for the [[adaptation]] of the [[story]], it's [[actually]] [[quite]] [[good]]. We [[lose]] [[little]] bits here and there, [[minor]] details such as the [[Old]] Forest and Tom Bombadil, the Gaffer and the Sackville-Bagginses. We [[compress]] a few [[characters]], such as [[revising]] Legolas as one of Elrond's [[household]] and an [[old]] [[friend]] of Aragorn's, but that's a [[rather]] wise [[decision]] for [[film]]. [[In]] [[books]] you have room to include the references to the [[larger]] world of the Elves and Middle-Earth's [[vast]] [[history]]. [[In]] [[film]], you [[trade]] that for [[visuals]] and sound that [[convey]] the same [[elements]] in a [[different]] [[way]]. [[Nothing]] [[critical]] is [[truly]] [[lost]] here, and [[although]] I have [[minor]] quibbles about some of the [[changes]], I'm [[generally]] pretty happy with it.

If only the dratted [[writers]] had [[managed]] to [[remember]] Saruman's name--he's [[frequently]] referred to as Aruman, a [[decision]] [[probably]] [[made]] to [[make]] him more [[distinct]] from similarly-named Sauron; it took me a second [[viewing]] before I was certain I hadn't misheard it. It's [[also]] [[annoying]] that [[Boromir]] is a [[bloody]] [[stage]] [[viking]], and irritable from the [[start]]. [[However]], Gandalf is [[excellent]], and most of the [[rest]] of the voicework is [[excellent]]. [[If]] only John Hurt weren't too [[old]] to [[play]] [[Aragorn]]; I [[love]] his voice.

Of course, with the [[film]] [[ending]] at the midpoint of the [[story]], there's a [[vast]] [[disappointment]] [[built]] in. What makes it far, far worse is the [[altogether]] [[miserable]] [[job]] [[done]] by the Rankin & [[Bass]] crew on the sequel. That they were [[permitted]] to do [[Return]] of the King after butchering The Hobbit remains a huge mystery; they seem more interested in bad songs than in proper storytelling. For all its faults, this film's heart is solidly in place and it tries very hard to accomplish a nearly impossible task. I can only hope that the upcoming series of films keeps as true to its vision... As an animated film from 1978, this is pretty good--generally well above the standard of the days when [[Disneyland]] hadn't done [[something]] good in [[ages]] (and Tolkien [[loved]] little for Disney anyway). It gets [[considerable]] [[dots]] for innovative and [[conscientious]] camera work, [[executing]] cinematic [[technique]] with relative success. The much-maligned rotoscoping [[genuinely]] [[cooperated]] pretty well, [[notably]] with the Ringwraiths, and the [[commencement]] narration. However, it is so [[exponentially]] overused--possibly as a money-saving technique--that it detracts from the [[total]] [[effects]]. The same [[tech]] that makes wraiths spooky and otherworldly doesn't [[tariffs]] so well in the Prancing Pony.

As for the [[adjusting]] of the [[narratives]], it's [[genuinely]] [[rather]] [[alright]]. We [[wasting]] [[petite]] bits here and there, [[lesser]] details such as the [[Elderly]] Forest and Tom Bombadil, the Gaffer and the Sackville-Bagginses. We [[zipped]] a few [[traits]], such as [[revisiting]] Legolas as one of Elrond's [[households]] and an [[elderly]] [[boyfriend]] of Aragorn's, but that's a [[fairly]] wise [[rulings]] for [[cinematography]]. [[For]] [[ledger]] you have room to include the references to the [[biggest]] world of the Elves and Middle-Earth's [[wide]] [[historian]]. [[For]] [[cinema]], you [[commercial]] that for [[image]] and sound that [[transmit]] the same [[components]] in a [[multiple]] [[routes]]. [[Nada]] [[important]] is [[genuinely]] [[forfeited]] here, and [[despite]] I have [[smaller]] quibbles about some of the [[amendment]], I'm [[usually]] pretty happy with it.

If only the dratted [[authors]] had [[administering]] to [[remind]] Saruman's name--he's [[periodically]] referred to as Aruman, a [[decisions]] [[indubitably]] [[introduced]] to [[deliver]] him more [[separate]] from similarly-named Sauron; it took me a second [[opinion]] before I was certain I hadn't misheard it. It's [[additionally]] [[tiresome]] that [[Legolas]] is a [[bloodstained]] [[phase]] [[norse]], and irritable from the [[startup]]. [[Instead]], Gandalf is [[super]], and most of the [[remaining]] of the voicework is [[super]]. [[Unless]] only John Hurt weren't too [[elderly]] to [[gaming]] [[Boromir]]; I [[likes]] his voice.

Of course, with the [[flick]] [[terminated]] at the midpoint of the [[tale]], there's a [[grand]] [[displeasure]] [[constructed]] in. What makes it far, far worse is the [[totally]] [[unfortunate]] [[jobs]] [[performed]] by the Rankin & [[Sunfish]] crew on the sequel. That they were [[allow]] to do [[Comeback]] of the King after butchering The Hobbit remains a huge mystery; they seem more interested in bad songs than in proper storytelling. For all its faults, this film's heart is solidly in place and it tries very hard to accomplish a nearly impossible task. I can only hope that the upcoming series of films keeps as true to its vision... --------------------------------------------- Result 715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Okay, that was a pretty damn [[good]] episode. Much better than the credit it receives.

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I [[love]] that final shot. The atmosphere is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that many things that are left unexplained. why does it change sex? what's the purpose? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the later mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my favorites yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. Okay, that was a pretty damn [[alright]] episode. Much better than the credit it receives.

The camera work is splendid. Best yet. I [[amour]] that final shot. The atmosphere is fantastic, the costumes are great and the guest cast (minus the helpless victims) is strong.

What I don't like about this episode is that many things that are left unexplained. why does it change sex? what's the purpose? and they're aliens? what kind? why were they never shown again in the later mythology?

I'm giving this episode a high THREE stars. One of my favorites yet, but the plot holes bother me. Still... not gonna let it ruin my entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] 10 out of 10, this [[brilliant]], [[super]] [[documentary]] is a [[must]] [[see]], with [[film]] [[clips]] from the [[war]] which people did not seen for [[years]], untill this was screened in 1974. The [[film]] clips in this [[documentary]] from the [[war]] doesn't [[miss]] out anything, some of the clips [[left]] me dumbstuck. The whole [[series]] is over 20 [[episodes]] [[long]], and [[Sir]] Lawrence [[Olivier]] is the [[narrator]] and tells a [[stunning]] [[story]] of [[war]]. [[Simply]] this is [[still]] [[probably]] the [[best]] documentary of [[war]] [[still]], and now over 25 years [[old]] [[still]] is [[able]] to [[pack]] a [[tremendous]] [[punch]]. You must watch this at some time, even if it's a few [[episodes]], even at that you will still be [[blown]] away at the impact this [[documentary]] means to those who have been there suffered and died in the name of WAR, in a WORLD [[AT]] WAR.. 10 out of 10, this [[fantastic]], [[great]] [[literature]] is a [[should]] [[consults]], with [[movie]] [[trombones]] from the [[wars]] which people did not seen for [[ages]], untill this was screened in 1974. The [[movie]] clips in this [[literature]] from the [[wars]] doesn't [[mademoiselle]] out anything, some of the clips [[exited]] me dumbstuck. The whole [[serials]] is over 20 [[bouts]] [[longue]], and [[Sirs]] Lawrence [[Olivia]] is the [[announcer]] and tells a [[noteworthy]] [[fairytales]] of [[wars]]. [[Merely]] this is [[nonetheless]] [[presumably]] the [[optimum]] documentary of [[wars]] [[however]], and now over 25 years [[former]] [[nonetheless]] is [[capable]] to [[bagging]] a [[gargantuan]] [[punching]]. You must watch this at some time, even if it's a few [[bouts]], even at that you will still be [[molten]] away at the impact this [[literature]] means to those who have been there suffered and died in the name of WAR, in a WORLD [[DURING]] WAR.. --------------------------------------------- Result 717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 1st watched 2/28/2006 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Sydney Pollack):-DVD version I watched titled "3 Days of the Condor"- So so CIA drama full of laid-back performances making for a very laid-back movie. The premise of the story revolves around 7 out of 8 members of a CIA research group being killed with Robert Redford's character, codename = Condor, being the one that was left. Who killed them and why? That's what Redford tries to find out while trying to not be the 8th victim at the same time. Along the way, he gets Faye Dunaway's character involved involved, originally because he needs a place to hide, and then she eventually helps him out after a little lovey-dovey time. This is one of a handful of innocent guy on the run stories but this one doesn't have a lot of suspense. The flat performances don't help and the finish doesn't seal the deal for the audience enough either. Despite having a good director in Sydney Pollack and a group of classic performers, the story and the performances are not what they should be and therefore the movie is not what it should be. --------------------------------------------- Result 718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[see]] this [[movie]] for a very long time only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and charming smiling that way? I'm in love with that woman! I got what I expected...but only half. This [[film]] should [[deliver]] [[expectations]] for those who enjoy all kinds of romantic comedies or stories involving intelligent humor and light dramatic situations.

[[While]] I don't [[agree]] with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[movie]] is overrated; I must admit that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of flaws.

My main problem with the film is the lack of on screen chemistry between the main characters. There isn't a single scene previous to the climax that shows the main characters sharing a moment "of romance" or even a clue to suggest that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a moment is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the audience understand about a possible love interest. I didn't buy the dinner sequence.

[[Still]], the movie delivers very funny moments and has a [[strong]] dialogs that support such an ingenuous premise. I mean with [[ingenuous]] that it [[would]] be very difficult to execute such a farse by a 43 year old man in these days.

I understand it's a [[movie]] and that's why I [[accept]] it as a funny situation. Plus, the [[humor]] is versatile. There are [[moments]] involving S&M, funny lines with Chabat's [[best]] friend, some lesbian [[references]], funny [[situations]] involving the family women, and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is top notch and she's by far the reason to watch the [[movie]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and [[fine]], and demonstrates she's a versatile and talented actress who can pull out a comedic and [[dramatic]] performance in sheer [[brilliance]].

[[Alain]] Chabat is a [[fine]] actor and gives a very [[decent]] performance. I [[think]] the [[supporting]] cast do what they can.

The score, art direction, and other technical aspects are really good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. I have to be 100% honest with you fellow IMDb users. I wanted to [[seeing]] this [[cinematographic]] for a very long time only because of the poster. Doesn't Charlotte Gainsbourg looks extremely sexy and charming smiling that way? I'm in love with that woman! I got what I expected...but only half. This [[filmmaking]] should [[delivering]] [[predictions]] for those who enjoy all kinds of romantic comedies or stories involving intelligent humor and light dramatic situations.

[[Despite]] I don't [[concur]] with another fellow IMDb user who states that the [[filmmaking]] is overrated; I must admit that "Préte-moi ta main" has plenty of flaws.

My main problem with the film is the lack of on screen chemistry between the main characters. There isn't a single scene previous to the climax that shows the main characters sharing a moment "of romance" or even a clue to suggest that they're interested in each other.

In fact, the only scene were both share a moment is tremendously awkward (when both are in the couch) and does not help the audience understand about a possible love interest. I didn't buy the dinner sequence.

[[However]], the movie delivers very funny moments and has a [[vigorous]] dialogs that support such an ingenuous premise. I mean with [[naive]] that it [[should]] be very difficult to execute such a farse by a 43 year old man in these days.

I understand it's a [[kino]] and that's why I [[agreeing]] it as a funny situation. Plus, the [[mood]] is versatile. There are [[times]] involving S&M, funny lines with Chabat's [[bestest]] friend, some lesbian [[referencing]], funny [[instances]] involving the family women, and more.

Charlotte Gaionsbourg's performance is top notch and she's by far the reason to watch the [[filmmaking]]. She's funny, sexy, looks very thin and [[alright]], and demonstrates she's a versatile and talented actress who can pull out a comedic and [[whopping]] performance in sheer [[splendor]].

[[Alan]] Chabat is a [[fined]] actor and gives a very [[presentable]] performance. I [[believing]] the [[aiding]] cast do what they can.

The score, art direction, and other technical aspects are really good and give a dynamic look to the film.

Those who enjoy this kind of cinema should be pleased after the ending credits. It's a good example of feel good cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Others have already commented on the "decline" of director Tobe Hooper, but what about Brad Dourif? He was perfectly capable of selecting good projects (as he proved by starring in the same year's "Exorcist III"), so why did he agree to appear in this? Sure, he gives a suitably demented performance, and the film is not outright bad; it's just uninvolving, uninteresting and unappealing. That's three "un-"s too many. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I sincerely [[consider]] this movie as another poor [[effort]] of Dominican [[Movie]] [[Industry]]. The first 30 minutes of the movie are a [[little]] [[funny]] but then when they switch their role in the society (men doing what [[women]] [[usually]] do and [[women]] doing what [[men]] [[usually]] do) the [[movie]] falls. Becoming [[boring]] and not [[funny]] at all. They let many things without [[explanation]] and the [[end]] of the [[movie]] is [[predictable]]. I didn't like the [[way]] as a Roberto [[Angel]] [[played]] his character and his [[little]] either. I went to the [[movies]] theater [[hoping]] to [[see]] a [[good]] [[work]] but I went out really [[disappointed]].

I don't [[recommend]] this movie. I sincerely [[examine]] this movie as another poor [[endeavor]] of Dominican [[Cinema]] [[Industries]]. The first 30 minutes of the movie are a [[petit]] [[comical]] but then when they switch their role in the society (men doing what [[wife]] [[popularly]] do and [[wife]] doing what [[man]] [[commonly]] do) the [[filmmaking]] falls. Becoming [[dreary]] and not [[droll]] at all. They let many things without [[explanations]] and the [[ends]] of the [[cinematography]] is [[foreseeable]]. I didn't like the [[routing]] as a Roberto [[Angels]] [[accomplished]] his character and his [[small]] either. I went to the [[films]] theater [[awaiting]] to [[consults]] a [[buena]] [[collaborating]] but I went out really [[frustrated]].

I don't [[recommends]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land", but he is equally gifted as a director of occult Horror cinema, as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[proves]]. "The Sentinel", which is based on a novel by John Konvitz, who also wrote the screenplay, is a clever and [[immensely]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult Horror should consider [[missing]]. The [[film]] is obviously inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's Baby", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am concerned, it is also easily as unsettling as these more widely acclaimed films, and probably even creepier.

Allison Parker (Christina Raines) is a beautiful young New York model. Traumatized by events in her her past and not yet willing to marry her lawyer boyfriend (Chris Sarandon), Allison is in search for an apartment, and finds a big, incredibly nice one, which is also affordable, in an old mansion in Brooklyn. The new apartment, however, comes along with a bunch of very strange other tenants. And the sinister new neighbors soon become more than a little bothersome to Alice... This may not be an adequate plot synopsis, but I would hate to spoil any of this film's great moments, so I will not give any further plot description. What I will say, however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very creepy and effective film that profits from a great cast as well as an often bizarre and constantly uncanny atmosphere. The fact that director Michael Winner and writer John Konnvitz also acted as producers here certainly had its influence on the outcome. The film is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn mansion is a fantastic setting for this kind of film. As mentioned above, the atmosphere is obscure and creepy, and the film also includes several shock-moments and genuine scares. The film features many sinister and eccentric characters, and the cast is [[superb]]. Beautiful Christina Raines is great in her role of Allison Parker, [[lovable]] and yet on the cusp to losing her mind. Chris Sarandon is also very good as her boyfriend, a successful lawyer, and the supporting cast includes many big names, such as Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also includes stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director Michael Winner for a long time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! Michael Winner is probably best known for his revenge-themed films, such as "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land", but he is equally gifted as a director of occult Horror cinema, as "The Sentinel" of 1977 [[demonstrating]]. "The Sentinel", which is based on a novel by John Konvitz, who also wrote the screenplay, is a clever and [[unimaginably]] creepy religious chiller that no lover of occult Horror should consider [[vanished]]. The [[filmmaking]] is obviously inspired by successful occult classics such as "Rosemary's Baby", "The Exorcist" or "The Omen", but, as far as I am concerned, it is also easily as unsettling as these more widely acclaimed films, and probably even creepier.

Allison Parker (Christina Raines) is a beautiful young New York model. Traumatized by events in her her past and not yet willing to marry her lawyer boyfriend (Chris Sarandon), Allison is in search for an apartment, and finds a big, incredibly nice one, which is also affordable, in an old mansion in Brooklyn. The new apartment, however, comes along with a bunch of very strange other tenants. And the sinister new neighbors soon become more than a little bothersome to Alice... This may not be an adequate plot synopsis, but I would hate to spoil any of this film's great moments, so I will not give any further plot description. What I will say, however, is that "The Sentinel" is a very creepy and effective film that profits from a great cast as well as an often bizarre and constantly uncanny atmosphere. The fact that director Michael Winner and writer John Konnvitz also acted as producers here certainly had its influence on the outcome. The film is imaginatively photographed, and the eerie old Brooklyn mansion is a fantastic setting for this kind of film. As mentioned above, the atmosphere is obscure and creepy, and the film also includes several shock-moments and genuine scares. The film features many sinister and eccentric characters, and the cast is [[handsome]]. Beautiful Christina Raines is great in her role of Allison Parker, [[adorable]] and yet on the cusp to losing her mind. Chris Sarandon is also very good as her boyfriend, a successful lawyer, and the supporting cast includes many big names, such as Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Jerry Orbach, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger, before becoming really famous. The cast also includes stars like Ava Gardner, Horror icon John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, and, my personal favorite, the great Eli Wallach as a cynical homicide detective. I've been a great fan of director Michael Winner for a long time, mostly for films like "Death Wish" and "Chato's Land". "The Sentinel" is yet another great film in Winner's repertoire, and also the proof that the man is not only a master of hard-boiled revenge-cinema, but also of atmospheric occult Horror. All in all, "The Sentinel" is a creepy, intelligent, and amazingly bizarre occult chiller that is highly recommended to all Horror fans! --------------------------------------------- Result 722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Poor Whoopi Goldberg. Imagine her at a friend's dinner party, and she adds a comment to the in-depth political discussion going on. People just look at her and say, "Oh what would YOU know, you were the star of 'Theodore Rex'". How could anyone take her seriously after she lowered herself to be the star of this appalling piece of crap? Even little kids would be cringing in horror at this Thing. It reminded me of a particularly bad episode of 'Sigmund And The Sea Monsters'. Actually, come to think of it, 'Sigmund' was vastly superior to this.

And however did it get made? By plying the producer with an illegal substance before telling him about it? Watch this hideous abomination at your own peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This was one of the most [[ridiculous]] and [[badly]] [[directed]] movies I've [[seen]] in a very [[long]] time. I've never [[liked]] [[Spike]] [[Lee]], but thought I'd give this one a try: bad mistake. The [[movie]] is [[supposed]] to [[show]] how the [[Son]] of Sam [[real]] [[life]] murders affected a [[neighborhood]] in the [[summer]] of 1977; what it really did was [[center]] [[around]] the most [[boring]] characters that I [[doubt]] anyone [[cared]] for as far as their drug problems, [[marriage]] problems, and so on, etc. The scenes that [[depict]] the [[murders]] are just that, and [[nothing]] more; a shooting and then it's back to Saturday Night Fever! What's even more ridiculous is Spike Lee's choice to show up as a reporter in the movie: Spike, trust me, you're no Hitchcock, stay out of the movies, it makes them even worse off. The most silly scene had to be the dog speaking in a goofy voice, which was depicted in a scene before it where it was supposed to have been shot??? Spike, what were you thinking when you made this film? Not thinking at all is my guess. People who think they'll see a crime drama, take my advice and do not waste your time or money on this loser. You're better off watching Jerry Springer in this case! Waste of film, I gave it a 1 out of 10: awful dud. This was one of the most [[nonsensical]] and [[desperately]] [[oriented]] movies I've [[watched]] in a very [[lange]] time. I've never [[wished]] [[Fortification]] [[Rhee]], but thought I'd give this one a try: bad mistake. The [[cinema]] is [[presumed]] to [[showings]] how the [[Sons]] of Sam [[genuine]] [[iife]] murders affected a [[neighboring]] in the [[sommer]] of 1977; what it really did was [[centres]] [[about]] the most [[dreary]] characters that I [[duda]] anyone [[adored]] for as far as their drug problems, [[matrimony]] problems, and so on, etc. The scenes that [[illustrate]] the [[homicides]] are just that, and [[anything]] more; a shooting and then it's back to Saturday Night Fever! What's even more ridiculous is Spike Lee's choice to show up as a reporter in the movie: Spike, trust me, you're no Hitchcock, stay out of the movies, it makes them even worse off. The most silly scene had to be the dog speaking in a goofy voice, which was depicted in a scene before it where it was supposed to have been shot??? Spike, what were you thinking when you made this film? Not thinking at all is my guess. People who think they'll see a crime drama, take my advice and do not waste your time or money on this loser. You're better off watching Jerry Springer in this case! Waste of film, I gave it a 1 out of 10: awful dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] It is very hard to rate this film. As entertainment value for 21st century viewers, it fails miserably. [[However]], for the student of early sound films and history, it is a [[jewel]]. "Show of Shows" was a revue filmed to compete with MGM's successful "Hollywood Revue of 1929", which still survives intact complete with its Technicolor scenes.

The purpose of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and show that they could make the transition. However, Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice Lillie, and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their biggest talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone shorts strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is really enjoyable with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "Singin in the Bathtub", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna Loy. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it really is quite attractive. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. It is very hard to rate this film. As entertainment value for 21st century viewers, it fails miserably. [[Instead]], for the student of early sound films and history, it is a [[jewelry]]. "Show of Shows" was a revue filmed to compete with MGM's successful "Hollywood Revue of 1929", which still survives intact complete with its Technicolor scenes.

The purpose of the all-star revue was to showcase a particular studio's silent stars in speaking roles, and show that they could make the transition. However, Warner Bros. seems to have forgotten this and employs many acts and stars that they didn't even have under long-term contract such as Ben Turpin, Lloyd Hamilton, Beatrice Lillie, and even a marching band. Meanwhile, their biggest talent - Al Jolson - is noticeably absent. Even at a high salary he could not be compelled to join in. Almost every act is overly long and the film plays like a dozen or so Vitaphone shorts strung together with no continuity. The finale is also overly long, but it is really enjoyable with all of its dance numbers.

The highlights of the film are two numbers from Winnie Lightner - "Pingo Pongo" and "Singin in the Bathtub", a couple of numbers with Nick Lucas, John Barrymore performing Shakespeare, and the Chinese Fantasy "Li Po Li" with Nick Lucas and Myrna Loy. This last number is the only part of the film that survives in Technicolor, and it really is quite attractive. Reasonably enough, the players in these good acts were long-term Warner Bros. stars so perhaps the director knew how to play to their strengths since he was familiar with them.

This film acts as a snapshot at an odd point in film history - the year 1929, which was the bridge year between two eras - the silent and sound eras, and the roaring 20's and the Great Depression. Just two years later this same film would have had an entirely different cast, as Warner Bros. would abandon its silent era stars and the stars they hired just to produce the early musicals in favor of those stars that gave Warner Bros. its distinctive urban look and feel - James Cagney, Joan Blondell, Edward G. Robinson, and others. --------------------------------------------- Result 725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sundown - featuring the weakest, dorkiest vampires ever seen, accompanied by one of the most unfitting, pretentious scores ever written - and with Shane the vampire, who's every move and spoken word was so ridiculous that I burst out laughing half the times and rolled my eyes the rest.

The vampires don't seem to have any special powers at all - except for strength (sometimes), being able to switch off a lamp with their mind (one time) and... that's it, really. Ever imagine count Dracula worriedly recoiling from a fight 'cause he ran out of bullets? Neither did I. Practically any other movie-Dracula would eat this one for breakfast, skin his followers and use their bones as toothpicks.

The main plot of the movie is that a human family of four gets caught up in a vampire gang fight - Dracula's vs. some old geezer's. It could have been some good old B-flick fun, but the overly dramatic music was clearly written by someone who took this movie a bit too seriously, and ends up ruining the remaining part of the movie not already ruined by clay bats, mediocre acting and the laughable screenplay.

In the end it's just too silly to be funny. Sure, it has some amusing moments, but they're few, and far apart. --------------------------------------------- Result 726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] [[Basically]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[daughters]] deal with [[infidelity]]. The premise is interesting, the acting is good, and the [[music]], although [[sometimes]] abrupt and without direction, is [[pretty]] cool.

The [[problem]] is the plot. The husband dentist drops his wife off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a minor role) and then walks back in to give her something, but sees her with another man. The rest of the [[movie]] deals with his [[angst]] about this episode, his visual [[hallucinations]] and a [[macho]] alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former patient of his) and his fear in confronting his wife lest he will have to "do something about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes nowhere and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are missing: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't say. Who's she doing it with? Don't expect any answers on that either. Why does he want to keep the marriage going in spite of all this? Who knows. What purpose does all the kids vomiting serve? Where is this film going? Good performances by Campbell Scott and Hope Davis (and Denis Leary as comic relief)are completely wasted by this stilted nonsense which doesn't know if it wants to be American Beauty or a family film. A root canal is more interesting. Avoid it. [[Largely]], a dentist husband-wife team and their 3 [[dame]] deal with [[treason]]. The premise is interesting, the acting is good, and the [[musica]], although [[occasionally]] abrupt and without direction, is [[belle]] cool.

The [[difficulty]] is the plot. The husband dentist drops his wife off backstage at an opera before the show (she has a minor role) and then walks back in to give her something, but sees her with another man. The rest of the [[kino]] deals with his [[anguish]] about this episode, his visual [[nightmares]] and a [[masculine]] alter-ego (Denis Leary, a former patient of his) and his fear in confronting his wife lest he will have to "do something about it." I won't tell you the ending, but let me say that the film goes nowhere and the ending is like a sputtering whimper. The motivations of the characters are missing: Why is she cheating on him? He's a dentist, decent looking, good father. The film doesn't say. Who's she doing it with? Don't expect any answers on that either. Why does he want to keep the marriage going in spite of all this? Who knows. What purpose does all the kids vomiting serve? Where is this film going? Good performances by Campbell Scott and Hope Davis (and Denis Leary as comic relief)are completely wasted by this stilted nonsense which doesn't know if it wants to be American Beauty or a family film. A root canal is more interesting. Avoid it. --------------------------------------------- Result 727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Steve Carell has made a career out of portraying the slightly odd straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various supporting roles. In [[Virgin]], Carell has [[found]] a clever and [[hilarious]] script that [[perfectly]] capitalizes on his [[strengths]]. Carell plays [[Andy]] Stitzer, a middle aged man living a quiet, [[lonely]] [[life]]. Andy is a [[little]] [[odd]], but in an awkward nice guy [[sort]] of way. One [[night]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first [[time]], Andy accidentally reveals that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David (Paul Rudd), Jay (Romany Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease [[Andy]] about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent human being that Andy is, and they [[resolve]] to help him out by assisting him in [[ending]] his virginity. And so begins Andy's quest into adulthood. Andy is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[humor]] derives from his naiveté to the [[situations]] he [[finds]] himself in [[throughout]] the film. Some of the [[humor]] is [[crude]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well done [[intelligent]] [[comedy]]. In addition, I found some parts of the film actually pretty [[touching]] as Andy finds himself developing both romantic relationships and friendships perhaps for the [[first]] [[time]] in his life. I'm not trying to [[portray]] the movie as a love story or a drama; it's a rolling in your seats comedy. Still, every good comedy I have ever [[seen]] contains enough heart for you to care about the characters. A good comparison would be 'The Wedding Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a similar humor, but is perhaps a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I particularly loved the ending of the film, which I thought was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of 'Something About Mary'. Very light and fun; it leaves you laughing and smiling, which is exactly how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I would highly recommend. Steve Carell has made a career out of portraying the slightly odd straight guy, first on 'The Daily Show', and then in various supporting roles. In [[Virgins]], Carell has [[find]] a clever and [[comical]] script that [[altogether]] capitalizes on his [[fortresses]]. Carell plays [[Indie]] Stitzer, a middle aged man living a quiet, [[single]] [[lifetime]]. Andy is a [[scant]] [[unusual]], but in an awkward nice guy [[genre]] of way. One [[nuit]], while socializing with his co-workers for the first [[times]], Andy accidentally reveals that he is a virgin. His co-workers, David (Paul Rudd), Jay (Romany Malco), and Cal (Seth Rogen) initially tease [[Indie]] about his situation. But it's clear that all three have a certain respect for the decent human being that Andy is, and they [[resolutions]] to help him out by assisting him in [[terminated]] his virginity. And so begins Andy's quest into adulthood. Andy is the quintessential innocent, and the bulk of the [[mood]] derives from his naiveté to the [[instances]] he [[deems]] himself in [[across]] the film. Some of the [[comedy]] is [[coarse]] gross out stuff, but most of it is just well done [[termite]] [[farce]]. In addition, I found some parts of the film actually pretty [[affects]] as Andy finds himself developing both romantic relationships and friendships perhaps for the [[frst]] [[moment]] in his life. I'm not trying to [[describing]] the movie as a love story or a drama; it's a rolling in your seats comedy. Still, every good comedy I have ever [[watched]] contains enough heart for you to care about the characters. A good comparison would be 'The Wedding Crashers' from earlier this summer. Virgin has a similar humor, but is perhaps a bit more vulgar in some of its jokes. I particularly loved the ending of the film, which I thought was a perfect way to end the flick. Without giving anything away, it reminded me of 'Something About Mary'. Very light and fun; it leaves you laughing and smiling, which is exactly how you should feel when you finish a comedy. I would highly recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The only [[reason]] I give it a 2 is that filmography is so stylized these days such that it has at [[least]] [[something]] to [[comment]] on.

This [[film]] is [[asinine]]. It's like so [[many]] other 21st century grind [[house]] fodder. The [[gore]] is [[gratuitous]] and [[simply]] [[revolting]]. I didn't [[care]] about any of the [[characters]], but I did [[care]] that some cretin [[bothered]] to pen this [[crap]]: I'd [[complain]] about the [[money]] I [[spent]], but my [[date]] and I [[wisely]] [[left]] after 40 minutes and went to an adjoining [[theater]] to watch the adventurous and entertaining "[[Live]] Free or [[Die]] [[Hard]]," which [[probably]] [[got]] a much [[higher]] [[rating]] from me [[simply]] because I [[endured]] the [[utter]] [[poop]] of "[[Captivity]]" for 40 [[minutes]]. The only [[cause]] I give it a 2 is that filmography is so stylized these days such that it has at [[less]] [[algo]] to [[remark]] on.

This [[cinematography]] is [[witless]]. It's like so [[several]] other 21st century grind [[maison]] fodder. The [[gora]] is [[unprovoked]] and [[merely]] [[sickening]]. I didn't [[healthcare]] about any of the [[trait]], but I did [[caring]] that some cretin [[inconvenienced]] to pen this [[dammit]]: I'd [[moan]] about the [[cash]] I [[expenditure]], but my [[dates]] and I [[conservatively]] [[exited]] after 40 minutes and went to an adjoining [[theatres]] to watch the adventurous and entertaining "[[Vivo]] Free or [[Death]] [[Challenging]]," which [[arguably]] [[did]] a much [[greatest]] [[assessments]] from me [[exclusively]] because I [[experienced]] the [[absolute]] [[caca]] of "[[Incarceration]]" for 40 [[mins]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Have you seen The Graduate? It was hailed as the movie of its generation. But A River Runs Through It is the story about all generations. Long before Dustin Hoffman's [[character]] got all wrapped up in the traps of modern suburbia, Norman Maclean and his brother Paul were facing the same crushing pressures of growing up as they tried to find their place in the world. But how could a place like post WW1 Montana be a showcase for the American family, at a time when the Wild West still was not completely gone? Just what has Maclean [[tapped]] into that [[strikes]] so deeply at who we all are and what we have to go through to find ourselves? As the [[movie]] [[opens]], Norman is an old man, flyfishing beside a rushing river, trying to understand the course his own life has taken. The movie is literally a journey up through his own stream of consciousness, against time's current and back to when he was a boy. He and his younger brother Paul were the sons of a Presbyterian minister and devoted mother. The parents fit snugly into their roles. Mom takes care of house and home. Dad does the work of the Lord. The boys ponder what they will be when they grow up. Norm has it narrowed down to a boxer or a minister like his dad. Given the choice, little Paul would be the boxer, since he's told his first choice of pro flyfisherman doesn't even exist. The boys grow up and get into trouble with their pranks, fight to see who is tougher and do the things brothers do, all the while attending church and taking part in all other spiritual matters like flyfishing. They are at similar points in their lives before college. But when Norm returns from his six years at Dartmouth, things are very different. Paul is at the top of his game. Master flyfisherman. Grad of a nearby college and newspaper reporter who knows every cop on the beat and every judge on the bench. Norman is stunningly well educated for his day but has little idea what to do with his life, even as his father grills him about what he intends to do. You're left feeling that at least to Pops, God will call you to your life's work. But you have to stay open and ready to receive it -- all your life. Father has always taken his boys to reflect by the side of the river and contemplate God's eternal words. "Listen," their father urges. It's both Zen and Quakerly. Pretty radical for a stoic clergyman. But with all the beauty and contemplation, and even though the Macleans are truly a God-fearing, scripture-heeding household, how is it that Rev. Maclean's family is unraveling? Paul is true perfection as he fishes the river, but he's feeling the pull of gambling and boozing, while his family doesn't know how to keep him from winding up where he seems to be headed. Mom, Dad and Brother all seem to have the same quiet desperation of not knowing what they should be doing and why they can't seem to help. Pauly just waves it all off with a grin and his irresistible charm. But the junior brother is losing his grip. Norman starts getting his life on track, finding love and career, but Paul continues to slide. The family that loves him watches helplessly. Mother, Father, Brother flounder in their own ways trying to help, but none very effectively. How can a family that loves each other so much be so ill-equipped to handle this? How can someone be so artful and full of grace when out in God's nature, yet be somehow unfit or unwilling to fit into the constructs of society that God's peoples have made for themselves? These are all questions Norman will ponder his entire life. The eternal words beneath the smooth stones of the river forever haunt him, yet keep their secrets. The movie is beautiful to watch. This is certainly God's country, and filming it won an Oscar. Director Robert Redford plays with the story from the book and teases the narration a bit to follow the emotional pattern he's presenting, and it works well. But do go back and read the book, too. You'll see Norman made connections with his old man even deeper than the movie can suggest -- and you'll see the places where the storyteller's very words gurgle and sing right off the page with an exuberance of a river running through it, leading into the unknown. Have you seen The Graduate? It was hailed as the movie of its generation. But A River Runs Through It is the story about all generations. Long before Dustin Hoffman's [[personages]] got all wrapped up in the traps of modern suburbia, Norman Maclean and his brother Paul were facing the same crushing pressures of growing up as they tried to find their place in the world. But how could a place like post WW1 Montana be a showcase for the American family, at a time when the Wild West still was not completely gone? Just what has Maclean [[bugged]] into that [[bombard]] so deeply at who we all are and what we have to go through to find ourselves? As the [[kino]] [[opened]], Norman is an old man, flyfishing beside a rushing river, trying to understand the course his own life has taken. The movie is literally a journey up through his own stream of consciousness, against time's current and back to when he was a boy. He and his younger brother Paul were the sons of a Presbyterian minister and devoted mother. The parents fit snugly into their roles. Mom takes care of house and home. Dad does the work of the Lord. The boys ponder what they will be when they grow up. Norm has it narrowed down to a boxer or a minister like his dad. Given the choice, little Paul would be the boxer, since he's told his first choice of pro flyfisherman doesn't even exist. The boys grow up and get into trouble with their pranks, fight to see who is tougher and do the things brothers do, all the while attending church and taking part in all other spiritual matters like flyfishing. They are at similar points in their lives before college. But when Norm returns from his six years at Dartmouth, things are very different. Paul is at the top of his game. Master flyfisherman. Grad of a nearby college and newspaper reporter who knows every cop on the beat and every judge on the bench. Norman is stunningly well educated for his day but has little idea what to do with his life, even as his father grills him about what he intends to do. You're left feeling that at least to Pops, God will call you to your life's work. But you have to stay open and ready to receive it -- all your life. Father has always taken his boys to reflect by the side of the river and contemplate God's eternal words. "Listen," their father urges. It's both Zen and Quakerly. Pretty radical for a stoic clergyman. But with all the beauty and contemplation, and even though the Macleans are truly a God-fearing, scripture-heeding household, how is it that Rev. Maclean's family is unraveling? Paul is true perfection as he fishes the river, but he's feeling the pull of gambling and boozing, while his family doesn't know how to keep him from winding up where he seems to be headed. Mom, Dad and Brother all seem to have the same quiet desperation of not knowing what they should be doing and why they can't seem to help. Pauly just waves it all off with a grin and his irresistible charm. But the junior brother is losing his grip. Norman starts getting his life on track, finding love and career, but Paul continues to slide. The family that loves him watches helplessly. Mother, Father, Brother flounder in their own ways trying to help, but none very effectively. How can a family that loves each other so much be so ill-equipped to handle this? How can someone be so artful and full of grace when out in God's nature, yet be somehow unfit or unwilling to fit into the constructs of society that God's peoples have made for themselves? These are all questions Norman will ponder his entire life. The eternal words beneath the smooth stones of the river forever haunt him, yet keep their secrets. The movie is beautiful to watch. This is certainly God's country, and filming it won an Oscar. Director Robert Redford plays with the story from the book and teases the narration a bit to follow the emotional pattern he's presenting, and it works well. But do go back and read the book, too. You'll see Norman made connections with his old man even deeper than the movie can suggest -- and you'll see the places where the storyteller's very words gurgle and sing right off the page with an exuberance of a river running through it, leading into the unknown. --------------------------------------------- Result 730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] 'The Omen 4: The Awakening' is a made-for-television sequel to the original 'The Omen' film. Instead of Satan possessing the body of a little boy, he possesses the body of a little girl adopted by rich parents, who is bullied at school and who ends up getting revenge against those who do her wrong. The film seems to struggle with any horror factor, and a lot of the events that [[happen]] are [[simply]] silly rather than particularly [[frightening]], and it is difficult to believe that this little [[girl]] is [[Satan]], even with all of the events that surround it. I just did not find this film very suspenseful or [[frightening]], particularly when [[compared]] to the original. 'The Omen 4: The Awakening' is a made-for-television sequel to the original 'The Omen' film. Instead of Satan possessing the body of a little boy, he possesses the body of a little girl adopted by rich parents, who is bullied at school and who ends up getting revenge against those who do her wrong. The film seems to struggle with any horror factor, and a lot of the events that [[arise]] are [[purely]] silly rather than particularly [[horrendous]], and it is difficult to believe that this little [[fille]] is [[Lucifer]], even with all of the events that surround it. I just did not find this film very suspenseful or [[harrowing]], particularly when [[likened]] to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[City]] Hall takes on the politics of a city [[rather]] than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[shines]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[still]] goes for a smaller scale and [[puts]] the [[microscope]] on a few key players in a [[city]] [[wide]] scandal [[stumbled]] on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very [[familiar]] with elements of the thriller having done Mercury Rising, [[Malice]], and Domestic [[Disturbance]] and I [[think]] in many [[ways]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[genre]] that its almost to a fault. I [[mean]] [[City]] Hall is meant to be a political [[drama]], not a thriller but instead when all is [[said]] and done and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[film]] it [[feels]] and looks like a thriller but a [[decent]] one at that with very important part of the recipe that [[immediately]] makes it [[stand]] out...what else...or [[rather]] who else...Al Pacino. The [[film]] [[begins]] by giving you a really good [[look]] at life in the mayoral office and the [[inner]] workings of the city. As the [[film]] [[continues]] it [[broadens]] its [[political]] [[spectrum]] to [[include]] a [[democratic]] [[boss]], and his [[connections]] and then we are [[introduced]] to some of the goings on [[within]] the [[city]]. As [[events]] [[unfold]] a mystery [[begins]] and the political aspect is [[kind]] of left in the [[background]] but it still has a [[brilliant]] set up.

I [[absolutely]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I mean even if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[could]] I ever say it? The man is acting royalty. There is just something brilliant about his entire [[demeanor]]. [[In]] [[City]] Hall Pacino plays the [[New]] York [[City]] [[mayor]]. He has a [[sense]] of [[duty]] and honor and [[immediately]] appears to be a very upstanding politician. He [[also]] [[delivers]] one of the most [[powerful]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[seen]] at the 'James Bone' [[Funeral]]. I re-watched that speech four [[times]] and the first [[time]] I watched [[Pacino]] [[give]] it, my [[mouth]] gaped open and I [[almost]] [[wanted]] to [[stand]] up and [[applaud]]. Its [[brilliantly]] [[written]] and [[brilliantly]] [[delivered]] by [[Pacino]]. John Cusack, who I really do [[enjoy]] as an [[actor]], [[turns]] in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 [[Ville]] Hall takes on the politics of a city [[comparatively]] than country, state or any sort of major political table. Granted it [[glows]] on New York City which is a huge political arena, especially nowadays, but it [[again]] goes for a smaller scale and [[begs]] the [[microscopic]] on a few key players in a [[town]] [[broad]] scandal [[tripped]] on by the mayor's right hand. Director Harold Becker is a director very [[accustomed]] with elements of the thriller having done Mercury Rising, [[Mischief]], and Domestic [[Agitation]] and I [[ideas]] in many [[method]] he incorporates so many of the formulaic thriller [[genus]] that its almost to a fault. I [[imply]] [[Town]] Hall is meant to be a political [[theater]], not a thriller but instead when all is [[told]] and done and once you get to the meat and potatoes of the [[flick]] it [[thinks]] and looks like a thriller but a [[presentable]] one at that with very important part of the recipe that [[promptly]] makes it [[standing]] out...what else...or [[fairly]] who else...Al Pacino. The [[flick]] [[launched]] by giving you a really good [[peek]] at life in the mayoral office and the [[inside]] workings of the city. As the [[flick]] [[persisted]] it [[broadening]] its [[politician]] [[spectra]] to [[containing]] a [[congo]] [[chef]], and his [[connector]] and then we are [[instituted]] to some of the goings on [[inside]] the [[town]]. As [[incidents]] [[unfolding]] a mystery [[launched]] and the political aspect is [[types]] of left in the [[backdrop]] but it still has a [[shiny]] set up.

I [[totally]] hate talking about Al Pacino. I mean even if ONCE he didn't give a good performance how [[wo]] I ever say it? The man is acting royalty. There is just something brilliant about his entire [[behaviors]]. [[At]] [[Town]] Hall Pacino plays the [[Newest]] York [[Ville]] [[mayors]]. He has a [[sensing]] of [[duties]] and honor and [[promptly]] appears to be a very upstanding politician. He [[additionally]] [[furnishes]] one of the most [[influential]] and outright engaging speeches I've ever [[watched]] at the 'James Bone' [[Burials]]. I re-watched that speech four [[dates]] and the first [[moment]] I watched [[Deniro]] [[lend]] it, my [[kisser]] gaped open and I [[hardly]] [[wanna]] to [[standing]] up and [[congratulating]]. Its [[marvellously]] [[wrote]] and [[brightly]] [[gave]] by [[Deniro]]. John Cusack, who I really do [[enjoys]] as an [[actress]], [[revolves]] in a mediocre and overdone performance as the deputy Mayor Kevin Calhoun. He is kind of the focus of the film and him and Pacino have good chemistry together when they are on screen but there is just something in this performance...he seems like he's trying too hard. His accent is just bizarre, and although he is supposed to be cutthroat and intimidating he doesn't get seem to pull it off. Maybe he was having an off film. Bridget Fonda, on her way out of her high point stardom does an okay job as attorney for police widows Marybeth Cogan. Her performance is very similar to Cusack's in that she just doesn't seem to find her groove with this character. Danny Aiello is terrific although his character is a little under explored as democratic boss with ties to the mafia Frank Anselmo. Martin Landau makes a decent cameo as Judge under scrutiny Walter Stern.

The problem with City Hall is evident in my review of the characters and actors. Everyone is...okay. There is a lot of back story that they try to bring out without actually showing it and it unfortunately leaves you just a little bit confused about the whole conspiracy. And of course you have Al Pacino in a rather small supporting role but he's absolutely brilliant at it and outshines and overshadows every other actor in the film. It almost feels like maybe they are intimidated by him being on screen with them. So City Hall could have been this huge political epic drama/thriller but it felt cut and toned down to an average run of the mill one BUT it still has to be seen for Pacino and a different spin on the inner working of politics. If you just won't see this movie than find Pacino's speech at James Bone funeral because the word electrifying doesn't seem to give it justice but you can see what makes Al Pacino so incredible because in a mediocre film he pulls out this wallop of a speech and makes you feel it. If you're a John Cusack fan which I am...he's definitely done better but he is the main character and all in all he does get his justice. A decent movie but unfortunately potential loss. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[emotional]] powers and [[characters]] of Dominick and Eugene are the [[things]] that Hollywood doesn't make anymore. This is one of the most emotional, sensitive, and heart-felt [[movies]] that I have ever [[seen]]! Roy Liotta, Tom Hulce, and [[supporting]] actress Jamie [[Lee]] [[Curtis]], deliver Oscar Winning [[caliber]] performances! There are not enough words to express how [[great]] this [[movie]] is. Sure, people who are not into [[sentimental]] [[movies]] may not [[care]] as much as the [[rest]] of us about [[Dominick]] and [[Eugene]], but for the [[rest]] of us, this [[movie]] goes right to the [[heart]] and [[sole]] of compassion and [[humanity]]. You will never [[forget]] this [[film]], EVER!

*****[[SPOILERS]] BELOW*****

The [[simple]] [[yet]] eloquent [[story]] is [[masterfully]] told. Eugene is a med-school [[intern]] who faces [[long]] hours and a [[demanding]] [[work]] [[load]] at the hospital. His fraternal twin brother Dominick (born 12 minutes [[earlier]]) is a [[little]] slow and [[awkward]] because of brain [[damage]] due to a victim of abuse by their [[father]]. (A heartbreaking [[moment]] when this is [[found]] out in the [[film]] that will [[leave]] you in [[tears]]!) [[Eugene]] (a.k.a "Geno") faces a painful dilemma. He [[must]] [[decide]] whether to [[finish]] [[medical]] [[school]], which [[would]] [[mean]] [[accepting]] his [[residency]] in another [[city]] and [[leave]] [[Dominick]] (a.k.a "Nicky") [[behind]], or forfeit the [[rest]] of his [[education]] to [[take]] care of him. [[Nicky]] [[helps]] [[pay]] his brother's med-school tuition by [[working]] as a [[trash]] collector.

The [[questions]] of [[ethics]], morals, and [[responsibilities]] are [[masterfully]] [[blended]] in this landmark [[movie]]. [[Just]] when Gino thinks [[Nicky]] might be making [[progress]] [[toward]] [[independence]], [[Dominick]] turns [[around]] and winds up doing things like [[helping]] out a [[drug]] [[dealer]], or [[tying]] to [[use]] a [[faulty]] [[cord]] that he [[finds]] at the dump on an electrical [[appliance]].

Larry, is "The [[Character]]" and Nicky's partner on his garbage [[route]] who [[fills]] gullible Dominick's [[head]] with all [[kinds]] of [[stories]] like Geno and Jennifer (his girlfriend, whom he is tutoring in [[Clinical]] [[Pharmacology]]) going to Atlantic [[City]] and [[gambling]] away all their money. But deep down, you can [[see]] that Larry cares for him. On their rounds, [[Nicky]] [[also]] befriends a little [[boy]], whom we [[find]] out has [[also]] been beaten by his father. An end result is also tragic and the pain that you see on Nicky's face when it happens, speaks volumes.

The sensitivity that the two brothers share for each other can not be overstated enough. All Nicky wants to do is be loved and look for acceptance in anyway he can. (i.e he goes to church, loves Hulk Hogan) Geno loves Nicky more than anything in the world. But can his brother become independent enough so that Geno can pursue his dream of becoming a doctor? A brilliant film that should have gotten tons more recognition than it deserved, but unfortunately came out around the same time as Rain Man, which dealt with a similar issue. However, I like Dominick and [[Eugene]] better because it has a far stronger emotional component. Be forewarned that this movie is aimed right at the tear-ducts, so have Kleenex handy! What a film!!!! The [[sentimental]] powers and [[characteristic]] of Dominick and Eugene are the [[matters]] that Hollywood doesn't make anymore. This is one of the most emotional, sensitive, and heart-felt [[theater]] that I have ever [[noticed]]! Roy Liotta, Tom Hulce, and [[helped]] actress Jamie [[Rhee]] [[Cortes]], deliver Oscar Winning [[size]] performances! There are not enough words to express how [[whopping]] this [[filmmaking]] is. Sure, people who are not into [[romantic]] [[movie]] may not [[healthcare]] as much as the [[resting]] of us about [[Dominic]] and [[Buchanan]], but for the [[repose]] of us, this [[cinema]] goes right to the [[heartland]] and [[lone]] of compassion and [[mankind]]. You will never [[overlook]] this [[movies]], EVER!

*****[[TROUBLEMAKERS]] BELOW*****

The [[easy]] [[again]] eloquent [[saga]] is [[deftly]] told. Eugene is a med-school [[internship]] who faces [[longer]] hours and a [[demand]] [[cooperate]] [[payload]] at the hospital. His fraternal twin brother Dominick (born 12 minutes [[formerly]]) is a [[tiny]] slow and [[tricky]] because of brain [[harm]] due to a victim of abuse by their [[fathers]]. (A heartbreaking [[time]] when this is [[discovered]] out in the [[movie]] that will [[leaving]] you in [[sobs]]!) [[Gonzalez]] (a.k.a "Geno") faces a painful dilemma. He [[ought]] [[decided]] whether to [[complete]] [[physician]] [[tuition]], which [[ought]] [[imply]] [[agreeing]] his [[residing]] in another [[town]] and [[leaving]] [[Dominic]] (a.k.a "Nicky") [[backside]], or forfeit the [[remaining]] of his [[tuition]] to [[taking]] care of him. [[Nick]] [[aided]] [[salaries]] his brother's med-school tuition by [[worked]] as a [[junk]] collector.

The [[issues]] of [[morales]], morals, and [[accountability]] are [[ably]] [[mix]] in this landmark [[kino]]. [[Righteous]] when Gino thinks [[Nick]] might be making [[progressed]] [[into]] [[autonomy]], [[Dominic]] turns [[roughly]] and winds up doing things like [[supporting]] out a [[pharmaceuticals]] [[distributors]], or [[linking]] to [[utilized]] a [[incorrect]] [[cords]] that he [[deems]] at the dump on an electrical [[equipments]].

Larry, is "The [[Trait]]" and Nicky's partner on his garbage [[paths]] who [[fulfills]] gullible Dominick's [[chief]] with all [[types]] of [[story]] like Geno and Jennifer (his girlfriend, whom he is tutoring in [[Clinic]] [[Pharmaceuticals]]) going to Atlantic [[Ville]] and [[wagering]] away all their money. But deep down, you can [[consults]] that Larry cares for him. On their rounds, [[Nick]] [[further]] befriends a little [[dude]], whom we [[unearth]] out has [[additionally]] been beaten by his father. An end result is also tragic and the pain that you see on Nicky's face when it happens, speaks volumes.

The sensitivity that the two brothers share for each other can not be overstated enough. All Nicky wants to do is be loved and look for acceptance in anyway he can. (i.e he goes to church, loves Hulk Hogan) Geno loves Nicky more than anything in the world. But can his brother become independent enough so that Geno can pursue his dream of becoming a doctor? A brilliant film that should have gotten tons more recognition than it deserved, but unfortunately came out around the same time as Rain Man, which dealt with a similar issue. However, I like Dominick and [[Agnes]] better because it has a far stronger emotional component. Be forewarned that this movie is aimed right at the tear-ducts, so have Kleenex handy! What a film!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] SPOILER [[WARNING]]: There are some minor [[spoilers]] in this review. Don't read it beyond the [[first]] [[paragraph]] if you [[plan]] on [[seeing]] the [[film]].

The Disney [[Channel]] [[currently]] has a [[policy]] to [[make]] [[loads]] of [[movies]] and [[show]] one a [[month]] on the [[cable]] [[channel]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few [[good]] [[elements]] but [[still]] being a [[disappointment]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From Planet Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[something]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a real stinker. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and worse acting. Apparently, `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the holiday, because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV Guide, so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The plot was more far-fetched than normal. I usually let that slide, but here it just goes too far. Matthew Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his dad is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where kids all around the world can find and send him a dollar to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole concept is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, Matthew opens his own company's bank account and buys up most of his dad's business's stock. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his dad, but instead presents himself at board meetings as a cartoon image through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. SPOILER [[WARN]]: There are some minor [[troublemakers]] in this review. Don't read it beyond the [[fiirst]] [[subsection]] if you [[programmes]] on [[witnessing]] the [[cinematography]].

The Disney [[Canal]] [[now]] has a [[policies]] to [[deliver]] [[loading]] of [[filmmaking]] and [[shows]] one a [[mois]] on the [[wire]] [[chanel]]. Most of these are mediocre and drab, having a few [[alright]] [[facets]] but [[yet]] being a [[dissatisfaction]] (`Phantom of the Megaplex,' `Stepsister From Planet Weird,' `Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century'). Every once in a great while, they make [[anything]] really, really great (`Genius,' `The Other Me'). But once in a while The Disney Channel makes a huge mistake, and gives us a real stinker. This month (December 2000) The Disney Channel featured `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' which I thought was terrible due to poor writing and worse acting. Apparently, `The Brainiacs.com' was rushed out a few days before Christmas to get a jump on the holiday, because the plot has to do with toys. They even paid for a feature in the TV Guide, so I thought it must be better than the norm. I was in for a complete shock. Only Disney's `Model Behaviour' has been worse than this.

The plot was more far-fetched than normal. I usually let that slide, but here it just goes too far. Matthew Tyler gets very sick of his widowed father spending most of his time at work. His father owns a small toy factory that has taken out large loans at a scrupulous bank to stay afloat. Time and time again, his father has to skip out on the plans he makes with his son and daughter. Matthew decides that the only way he can spend time with his dad is if he becomes the boss and orders him to stay home. He gets a hair-brained idea to create a website where kids all around the world can find and send him a dollar to invest in a computer chip that his sister is inventing. That whole concept is full of fallacies. When kids send in millions of dollars, Matthew opens his own company's bank account and buys up most of his dad's business's stock. He is the secret boss, but he doesn't reveal this to his dad, but instead presents himself at board meetings as a cartoon image through a computer. That image itself is so complex (and ridiculous) that it isn't possible for someone to create it at home, much less someone who comes across as stupid as Matthew. To make a long plot short, Matthew orders his dad to spend more time having fun and doing stuff with his kids, but a federal agent shows up inquiring about Matthew's company, as it is fraudulent.

There's so much wrong here. As mentioned, the stuff they do here is impossible even for true geniuses, which these kids are not. The website, the cartoon image, the computer chip, even the stuff they are being taught in school, are far too advanced for these kids. The acting by most of the cast, especially Kevin Kilner, is terrible. Some familiar faces are wasted. Dom DeLuise plays the evil bank owner, but his part is a throwaway. He has one good scene with Alexandra Paul (who shows she has the ability to act) in which he explains his motives, but nothing more. And Rich Little is wasted in a small role as a judge. There's even some offensive and uncalled for anti-Russian jokes. But the greatest atrocities are the hard-hammered themes. These themes show up in many of The Disney Channel's films, but never before have these ultra-conservative messages been pounded so strongly. The typical `overworking parent' idea is really pushed hard, and after delivering it inappropriately in `The Ultimate Christmas Present,' seeing it again sours my mood. Family relations are important, but Disney must stop this endless preaching, because working is important to maintaining a workable family, too. Except for cancelling activities thanks to work, the father didn't come across as that bad, but I found it offensive when the grandmother told him `I don't like what I see.' Just as bad is the preaching of the idea that all single parents MUST marry if they want to raise their kids right. Enter Alexandra Paul, whose character, while important to the plot, is there solely to be the love interest for the father. This offensiveness only proves that the Disney brain trust lacks the brains to avoid scraping from the bottom of the Disney script barrel. Instead of letting this movie teach your kids how to commit serious fraud, wait for the next Disney Channel movie. It has to be better than this. Zantara's score: 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is the last of four swashbucklers from France I've scheduled for [[viewing]] during this Christmas season: the others (in order of viewing) were the uninspired THE BLACK TULIP (1964; from the same director as this one but not nearly as good), the surprisingly effective LADY Oscar (1979; which had originated as a Japanese manga!) and the splendid CARTOUCHE (1962). Actually, I had watched this one not too long ago on late-night Italian TV and [[recall]] not being especially bowled over by it, so that I was [[genuinely]] [[surprised]] by how much I [[enjoyed]] it this time around ([[also]] bearing in [[mind]] the [[baffling]] [[lack]] of enthusiasm [[shown]] towards the [[film]] here and [[elsewhere]] when it was [[first]] [[announced]] as an upcoming DVD release from [[Criterion]]).

Incidentally, FANFAN [[LA]] TULIPE has quite a [[bit]] in common with the afore-mentioned CARTOUCHE: not just cast and crew members ([[producers]] [[Georges]] Dancigers and [[Alexandre]] Mnouchkine, [[cinematographer]] [[Christian]] Matras, [[actor]] [[Noel]] Roquevert) but plot-wise as well – in fact, the [[hero]] is a womanizing [[soldier]] (Jean-Paul Belmondo's Cartouche had also had a [[brief]] military spell) who's loved by a fiery [[girl]] (in this [[case]], [[gypsy]] Gina Lollobrigida) while he's himself [[obsessed]] by an impossible [[love]] (here, it's [[none]] other than the king's [[daughter]])! As in the later [[film]], too, Fanfan (an ideally cast Gerard [[Philipe]] who, [[ironically]], is so full of [[life]] here that one finds it [[hard]] to [[believe]] that he [[would]] be [[stricken]] down by [[cancer]] within 7 years' [[time]]) is flanked by two fun-loving [[yet]] cowardly [[men]] (one of them is [[actually]] his [[superior]] [[officer]] and the heroine's own father) and opposed by an unscrupulous figure [[within]] his own [[ranks]] (the ageing Roquevert, with whom the [[hero]] [[eventually]] [[engages]] in a rooftop duel [[since]] he too has amorous designs on the [[gypsy]] [[girl]])!; for the [[record]], Lollobrigida will [[rejoin]] [[Philippe]] in her next [[film]], Rene Clair's [[delightful]] romantic fantasy LES BELLES DE NUIT (1952).

FANFAN [[proved]] to be a big box-office [[hit]] on its home-ground and even copped a [[surprising]] (but well-deserved) [[Best]] [[Direction]] award at Cannes over more [[renowned]] films like AN American IN Paris (1951), DETECTIVE STORY (1951), OTHELLO, UMBERTO D. and VIVA ZAPATA! In fact, its popularity ensured its re-release in a computer-colored version (presumably for the benefit of viewers who wouldn't touch a black-and-white product with a ten-foot pole) and the Criterion DVD itself contains a sample from this variant; being obviously a foreign-language title, there's also the dubious choice of an English-dubbed soundtrack but, even if these proved not especially painful to sit through considering, when all is said and done, there's simply no substitute for the original!

FANFAN LA TULIPE (a nickname given the hero by a young Genevieve Page as the celebrated Madame De Pompadour) contains about as much comedy as (the expected) action and romance; while some may find this overwhelming, I don't agree myself as I enjoyed the sharply satirical narration and, on the whole, this combination is comparable with Jerzy Skolimowski's equally droll THE ADVENTURES OF GERARD (1970). That said, the swordfights here are remarkably forceful for an essentially lighthearted enterprise (particularly a scuffle in the woods and the ambush at a convent) and the film itself rather adult at [[times]] (with numerous allusions to sexuality as well as coarse language adopted throughout) when viewed back-to-back with vintage Hollywood fare as I did now; the climax, then is quite ingenious: the enemy forces (who, amusingly, are made to speak in speeded-up gibberish!) are depleted by our heroic trio alone, much to the king's amazement who, as portrayed by Marcel Herrand – best-known for his role of leader of the Parisian underworld in Marcel Carne''s CHILDREN OF PARADISE (1945) – is himself something of a lecher.

P.S. An Italian TV channel has been threatening to screen Christian-Jaque's promising CHAMPAGNE FOR SAVAGES (1964) for months now but, despite programming it three times already (with a tentative fourth one slated for next week), they have yet to show it; even so, I do have three more films of his in my unwatched VHS pile (equally culled from late-night Italian TV screenings): the three-hour epic LA CHARTREUSE DE PARME (1948; also starring Gerard Philippe), THE SECOND TWIN (1967) and THE LEGEND OF FRENCHIE KING (1971; with Brigitte Bardot and Claudia Cardinale). This is the last of four swashbucklers from France I've scheduled for [[visualizing]] during this Christmas season: the others (in order of viewing) were the uninspired THE BLACK TULIP (1964; from the same director as this one but not nearly as good), the surprisingly effective LADY Oscar (1979; which had originated as a Japanese manga!) and the splendid CARTOUCHE (1962). Actually, I had watched this one not too long ago on late-night Italian TV and [[remind]] not being especially bowled over by it, so that I was [[truthfully]] [[horrified]] by how much I [[liked]] it this time around ([[apart]] bearing in [[esprit]] the [[disconcerting]] [[lacks]] of enthusiasm [[showed]] towards the [[filmmaking]] here and [[else]] when it was [[firstly]] [[advertised]] as an upcoming DVD release from [[Criteria]]).

Incidentally, FANFAN [[ANGELES]] TULIPE has quite a [[bite]] in common with the afore-mentioned CARTOUCHE: not just cast and crew members ([[manufacturers]] [[George]] Dancigers and [[Alexander]] Mnouchkine, [[photographer]] [[Kristen]] Matras, [[actress]] [[Claus]] Roquevert) but plot-wise as well – in fact, the [[heroin]] is a womanizing [[servicemen]] (Jean-Paul Belmondo's Cartouche had also had a [[briefing]] military spell) who's loved by a fiery [[daughters]] (in this [[lawsuit]], [[romani]] Gina Lollobrigida) while he's himself [[haunted]] by an impossible [[loves]] (here, it's [[nothing]] other than the king's [[girls]])! As in the later [[movies]], too, Fanfan (an ideally cast Gerard [[Phillipe]] who, [[sarcastically]], is so full of [[living]] here that one finds it [[tough]] to [[reckon]] that he [[could]] be [[impacted]] down by [[tumors]] within 7 years' [[times]]) is flanked by two fun-loving [[however]] cowardly [[males]] (one of them is [[genuinely]] his [[supremo]] [[agents]] and the heroine's own father) and opposed by an unscrupulous figure [[inside]] his own [[rankings]] (the ageing Roquevert, with whom the [[heroin]] [[lastly]] [[participates]] in a rooftop duel [[because]] he too has amorous designs on the [[pikey]] [[chick]])!; for the [[docket]], Lollobrigida will [[reintegrate]] [[Phillip]] in her next [[cinematography]], Rene Clair's [[sublime]] romantic fantasy LES BELLES DE NUIT (1952).

FANFAN [[evidenced]] to be a big box-office [[hitting]] on its home-ground and even copped a [[impressive]] (but well-deserved) [[Nicest]] [[Directorate]] award at Cannes over more [[prestigious]] films like AN American IN Paris (1951), DETECTIVE STORY (1951), OTHELLO, UMBERTO D. and VIVA ZAPATA! In fact, its popularity ensured its re-release in a computer-colored version (presumably for the benefit of viewers who wouldn't touch a black-and-white product with a ten-foot pole) and the Criterion DVD itself contains a sample from this variant; being obviously a foreign-language title, there's also the dubious choice of an English-dubbed soundtrack but, even if these proved not especially painful to sit through considering, when all is said and done, there's simply no substitute for the original!

FANFAN LA TULIPE (a nickname given the hero by a young Genevieve Page as the celebrated Madame De Pompadour) contains about as much comedy as (the expected) action and romance; while some may find this overwhelming, I don't agree myself as I enjoyed the sharply satirical narration and, on the whole, this combination is comparable with Jerzy Skolimowski's equally droll THE ADVENTURES OF GERARD (1970). That said, the swordfights here are remarkably forceful for an essentially lighthearted enterprise (particularly a scuffle in the woods and the ambush at a convent) and the film itself rather adult at [[dates]] (with numerous allusions to sexuality as well as coarse language adopted throughout) when viewed back-to-back with vintage Hollywood fare as I did now; the climax, then is quite ingenious: the enemy forces (who, amusingly, are made to speak in speeded-up gibberish!) are depleted by our heroic trio alone, much to the king's amazement who, as portrayed by Marcel Herrand – best-known for his role of leader of the Parisian underworld in Marcel Carne''s CHILDREN OF PARADISE (1945) – is himself something of a lecher.

P.S. An Italian TV channel has been threatening to screen Christian-Jaque's promising CHAMPAGNE FOR SAVAGES (1964) for months now but, despite programming it three times already (with a tentative fourth one slated for next week), they have yet to show it; even so, I do have three more films of his in my unwatched VHS pile (equally culled from late-night Italian TV screenings): the three-hour epic LA CHARTREUSE DE PARME (1948; also starring Gerard Philippe), THE SECOND TWIN (1967) and THE LEGEND OF FRENCHIE KING (1971; with Brigitte Bardot and Claudia Cardinale). --------------------------------------------- Result 735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Even in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[dangerous]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five [[years]] ago, it was not uncommon for women to die during childbirth. That is the [[theme]] of "[[Life]] [[Begins]]": a [[look]] at the "[[difficult]] [[cases]]" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Young]] plays the lead, a woman brought here from prison (what crime she [[committed]] is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's conflicted about the fact she's going to have to give her baby up after birth. She's in a ward with several other women, who share their joys and pain with each other.

Although Loretta Young is the lead, the outstanding performance, as usual, is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" women in the 1930s, showing up quite a bit in supporting roles, and sometimes getting the lead in B movies (Farrell played Torchy Blane in several installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant mother who doesn't want her children, since they'll only get in the way. She does everything she can to get in the way of the nurses, including smuggling liquor into the ward (this of course during the Prohibition days), and drinking like a fish -- apparently they'd never heard of fetal alcohol syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most movie of the early 1930s, it's not the women being bumbling idiots getting in the way of the heroic men -- that situation is reversed, with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran character actor Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "Life Begins", being an early talkie, treats the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's quite a [[charming]] [[little]] [[movie]]. Turner Classic show it, [[albeit]] infrequently; I've only [[seen]] it show up on a few days [[honoring]] Loretta [[Young]]. But it's [[highly]] [[recommended]] [[viewing]] when it does show up. Even in the 21st century, child-bearing is [[dicey]]: women have miscarriages, and give birth prematurely. Seventy-five [[olds]] ago, it was not uncommon for women to die during childbirth. That is the [[topics]] of "[[Living]] [[Commences]]": a [[glance]] at the "[[hard]] [[instance]]" ward of a maternity hospital. Loretta [[Youths]] plays the lead, a woman brought here from prison (what crime she [[commited]] is not germane to the plot) to give birth; she's conflicted about the fact she's going to have to give her baby up after birth. She's in a ward with several other women, who share their joys and pain with each other.

Although Loretta Young is the lead, the outstanding performance, as usual, is put in by Glenda Farrell. Farrell was one of Warner's "B" women in the 1930s, showing up quite a bit in supporting roles, and sometimes getting the lead in B movies (Farrell played Torchy Blane in several installments of the "Torchy" B-movie series.) Here, Farrell plays an expectant mother who doesn't want her children, since they'll only get in the way. She does everything she can to get in the way of the nurses, including smuggling liquor into the ward (this of course during the Prohibition days), and drinking like a fish -- apparently they'd never heard of fetal alcohol syndrome back in the 30s.

Interestingly, unlike most movie of the early 1930s, it's not the women being bumbling idiots getting in the way of the heroic men -- that situation is reversed, with the expectant fathers being quivering mounds of jelly. (Watch for veteran character actor Frank McHugh as one of the expectant fathers.) "Life Begins", being an early talkie, treats the subject with a fair dollop of melodrama, to be sure, but it's quite a [[ravishing]] [[scant]] [[films]]. Turner Classic show it, [[whereas]] infrequently; I've only [[noticed]] it show up on a few days [[glorifying]] Loretta [[Youngsters]]. But it's [[unimaginably]] [[suggested]] [[visualizing]] when it does show up. --------------------------------------------- Result 736 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I [[love]] this movie. It's wacky, funny, violent, [[surreal]], played out in a madman's head, and definitely not your [[usual]] comedy.

If you don't find the film amusing then I guess it's just not for your tastes, so this is a [[tough]] one to [[write]] a review for.

For reference, some other comedies I love are The Big Lebowski, The Princess Bride, and Zoolander (that one only got me the second time around). There are others, but my taste is definitely for the unusual, and I am willing to accept that most people just don't tend to like that kind of thing. I make no apologies for having an unusual sense of humour - at least I have one.

The scenes and characters of this particular movie are well put together, the verbal humour is hilarious, the situations are intriguing, the acting is very good (as you would expect of the cast), though the acting demands made of the cast by the script are not particularly high. The overall package makes for fun, funny, watchable yet violent entertainment. I [[iike]] this movie. It's wacky, funny, violent, [[bizarre]], played out in a madman's head, and definitely not your [[habitual]] comedy.

If you don't find the film amusing then I guess it's just not for your tastes, so this is a [[strenuous]] one to [[writing]] a review for.

For reference, some other comedies I love are The Big Lebowski, The Princess Bride, and Zoolander (that one only got me the second time around). There are others, but my taste is definitely for the unusual, and I am willing to accept that most people just don't tend to like that kind of thing. I make no apologies for having an unusual sense of humour - at least I have one.

The scenes and characters of this particular movie are well put together, the verbal humour is hilarious, the situations are intriguing, the acting is very good (as you would expect of the cast), though the acting demands made of the cast by the script are not particularly high. The overall package makes for fun, funny, watchable yet violent entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have been a Hindi movie buff since the age of 4 but never in my life have a watched such a moving and impacting movie, especially as a Hindi film. In the past several years, I had stopped watching contemporary Hindi movies and reverted to watching the classics (Teesri Kasam, Mere Huzoor, Madhumati, Mother India, Sholay, etc.) But this movie changed everything. It is one of the best movies I have ever seen. I found it not only to be moving but also found it to be very educational for someone who is a first generation Indian woman growing up in America. It helped me to understand my own family history, which was always something very abstract to me. But, to "see" it, feel it and understand it helped me to sympathize with the generations before me and the struggle that Indian people endured. The film helped to put many things into perspective for me, especially considering the current world events. I never thought that a movie could change the way I think like this before... it did. The plot is fantastic, the acting superb and the direction is flawless. Two thumbs up! --------------------------------------------- Result 738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[feature]] as director, and he [[shows]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his previous movies were heavy dramas. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can tell it is a pre code movie, and nothing like it was made in the US for quite a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would see - no widescreen shots or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have mentioned the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however provides a bit of spark.

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and faked - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. Mitchell Leisen's fifth [[idiosyncrasies]] as director, and he [[exposition]] his versatility by directing a musical, after his previous movies were heavy dramas. He also plays a cameo as the conductor.

You can tell it is a pre code movie, and nothing like it was made in the US for quite a while afterwards (like 30+ years). Leisen shot the musical numbers so they were like what the audience would see - no widescreen shots or from above ala Busby Berkeley. What I do find funny or interesting is that you never actually see the audience.

As others have mentioned the leads are fairly characterless, and Jack Oakie and Victor McLaghlan play their normal movie personas. Gertrude Michael however provides a bit of spark.

The musical numbers are interesting and some good (the Rape of the Rhapsody in particular is amusing) but the drama unconvincing and faked - three murders is too many and have minimal emotional impact on the characters. This is where this movie could have been a lot better. --------------------------------------------- Result 739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Just a few [[words]].... This [[movie]] [[really]] [[sucks]]. It's [[like]] those TV [[Movies]] with bad cast and plot. It's [[amazing]] how they [[could]] [[make]] this sequel [[worse]] than the III. Don't [[waste]] your [[time]] [[watching]] this [[crap]], even if you [[like]] the tremors movies. Just a few [[mots]].... This [[cinematography]] [[truthfully]] [[stinks]]. It's [[iike]] those TV [[Kino]] with bad cast and plot. It's [[terrific]] how they [[wo]] [[deliver]] this sequel [[lousiest]] than the III. Don't [[squandering]] your [[times]] [[staring]] this [[dammit]], even if you [[fond]] the tremors movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I saw it at the Legacy [[Theater]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in Salt Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will largely be based on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that aside it was very well made, well acted, and had a [[nice]] [[score]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[must]] to see it in the Legacy Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as picture quality, sound quality and ambiance in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would let me watch Batman Begins there! Being that I'm LDS and regard Joseph as a prophet, I was touched in several places and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie started! Anyway, I'm told that this film is available in several LDS Visitor Centers around the globe, if you have 70 minutes check it out because whether you believe Joseph Smith or not, he tells a fascinating story. I saw it at the Legacy [[Drama]] in the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in Salt Lake City this morning. I'm going to assume that one's level of enjoyment during this movie will largely be based on one's level of acceptance of Joseph's story.

However, that aside it was very well made, well acted, and had a [[pleasurable]] [[scoring]]. If you get to Salt Lake City, it is a [[should]] to see it in the Legacy Theater. I have never been in a nicer theater as far as picture quality, sound quality and ambiance in my entire life...I wonder if the Church would let me watch Batman Begins there! Being that I'm LDS and regard Joseph as a prophet, I was touched in several places and was brought to tears quite a few times...which I presume is expected since they handed out tissues BEFORE the movie started! Anyway, I'm told that this film is available in several LDS Visitor Centers around the globe, if you have 70 minutes check it out because whether you believe Joseph Smith or not, he tells a fascinating story. --------------------------------------------- Result 741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This could be looked at in many different ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just plain weird. The third one [[probably]] explains this [[movie]] best. It has strange themes and just has a [[strange]] plot. So who else but Christopher Walken would play in this no [[matter]] how [[bad]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would expect especially out of [[Ben]] Stiller. [[Jack]] Black I have always liked so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[somewhat]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not [[completely]] horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. This could be looked at in many different ways. This movie sucks, its good or its just plain weird. The third one [[arguably]] explains this [[films]] best. It has strange themes and just has a [[unusual]] plot. So who else but Christopher Walken would play in this no [[issue]] how [[inclement]], average or even how good it might be.

The acting was what you would expect especially out of [[Ibn]] Stiller. [[Gato]] Black I have always liked so you know what you will get out of him but this is not bad. Christopher Walken is always off the wall. He is always enjoyable to watch no matter how bad the movie is. Comedy wise it is [[slightly]] funny. This of course meaning that it does have its moments (though very few) but can get a little over top here and there which makes me feel like the movie is just desperate for laughs but of course not in a good way.

The directing was average as well. Barry Levinson is a slightly overrated director and really did not do a good job here. This movie seemed that it had a lot more potential and he did not do much to reach it. Just very average and did not seem like a lot of effort was put into making this film.

The writing is the key to a good comedy. Obviously that means the writing here failed. At best it is below average. Considering it does have its moments it was not too horrible. That is never a good thing to say about a movie though.

If not for Christopher Walken and it stupid ridiculous ending I would have given it a lower rating. He is always quite a character in his movies. Stil this is just a whacked out strange movie with strange characters that really don't go anywhere. Not [[absolutely]] horrible but I would not really recommend it though because it is a very forgettable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] There's something [[compelling]] and strangely [[believable]] about this episode. From the very [[beginning]], an [[atmosphere]] of tension is [[created]] by the [[knowledge]] that a certain [[planet]] is [[going]] to [[explode]] [[within]] a few [[hours]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evacuate]] the inhabitants, all of whom seem to have [[left]] already for parts [[unknown]], except for an [[elderly]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic advice about where all the [[citizens]] have gone to is interrupted by a crisis in which all three [[Enterprise]] crew [[members]] [[find]] themselves [[unexpectedly]] hurled into [[different]] eras of the planet's past. Kirk [[finds]] himself in a [[time]] [[period]] resembling 17th Century [[England]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[stories]], and the [[different]] [[hazardous]] [[situations]] the [[men]] [[find]] themselves in is [[superbly]] handled, with return to the present an [[unknown]] [[chance]], while the minutes are [[counting]] down to the planet's [[explosion]].

Imaginative [[writing]] and [[fine]] acting characterize this episode, with a [[touching]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[woman]] [[exiled]] to the Ice [[Age]], and Ian [[Wolfe]] as the urbane Librarian. [[Somewhat]] reminiscent of the [[classic]] episode [[City]] On The Edge of [[Forever]], this [[time]] travel story is a [[rich]] and [[compelling]] finale to the [[series]], which [[concluded]] one episode [[later]]. This has to be one of the [[best]] of the whole [[series]], [[especially]] [[remarkable]] [[given]] the generally lesser quality of the [[third]] season overall. There's something [[persuading]] and strangely [[credible]] about this episode. From the very [[commences]], an [[atmospheric]] of tension is [[generated]] by the [[expertise]] that a certain [[globe]] is [[gonna]] to [[detonated]] [[inside]] a few [[hour]]. Kirk, Spock and McCoy have beamed down to [[evacuated]] the inhabitants, all of whom seem to have [[exited]] already for parts [[unidentified]], except for an [[ancient]] librarian.

The librarian's polite but cryptic advice about where all the [[citizen]] have gone to is interrupted by a crisis in which all three [[Enterprising]] crew [[member]] [[finds]] themselves [[abruptly]] hurled into [[multiple]] eras of the planet's past. Kirk [[find]] himself in a [[period]] [[timeline]] resembling 17th Century [[Uk]], while Spock and McCoy are stranded in a desolate, frozen waste.

The intercutting between the two [[story]], and the [[various]] [[unsafe]] [[instances]] the [[males]] [[finds]] themselves in is [[divinely]] handled, with return to the present an [[unidentified]] [[probability]], while the minutes are [[count]] down to the planet's [[explode]].

Imaginative [[literary]] and [[alright]] acting characterize this episode, with a [[touch]] performance by Mariette Hartley as a [[wife]] [[banished]] to the Ice [[Aging]], and Ian [[Wolf]] as the urbane Librarian. [[Rather]] reminiscent of the [[traditional]] episode [[Town]] On The Edge of [[Indefinitely]], this [[period]] travel story is a [[wealthy]] and [[persuasive]] finale to the [[serial]], which [[conclude]] one episode [[subsequently]]. This has to be one of the [[better]] of the whole [[serials]], [[specifically]] [[noteworthy]] [[conferred]] the generally lesser quality of the [[thirdly]] season overall. --------------------------------------------- Result 743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] By 1976 the [[western]] was an exhausted genre and the makers of this [[film]] clearly knew it. [[Still]], instead of shelving the project and [[saving]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it anyway. Apparently in need of an interesting thread to get the audiences to come and see the film, they [[decided]] to make it as [[blatantly]] violent and [[unpleasant]] as possible. Hell, it [[worked]] for The [[Wild]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[work]] here? Of course, The [[Wild]] Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired lawman who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a bloodthirsty film indeed in which every time someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's tremendously [[disappointing]] really, because the star pairing sounds like a mouth-watering prospect. There's no sense of pace or urgency in the film either. It takes an eternity to get going, but when the action finally does come it is marred by the emphasis on nastiness. All in all, this might be the very [[worst]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his illustrious CV. By 1976 the [[westen]] was an exhausted genre and the makers of this [[cinematography]] clearly knew it. [[However]], instead of shelving the project and [[saved]] us from having to watch it, they went ahead and made it anyway. Apparently in need of an interesting thread to get the audiences to come and see the film, they [[decide]] to make it as [[clearly]] violent and [[nasty]] as possible. Hell, it [[cooperating]] for The [[Savage]] Bunch so why shouldn't it [[collaborate]] here? Of course, The [[Savage]] Bunch had the benefit of a superb script but the script of The Last Hard Men is plain old-fashioned rubbish.

It's hard to figure out what attracted Charlton Heston and James Coburn to their respective roles. Heston plays a retired lawman who goes after an escaped bunch of convicts led by a violent outlaw (Coburn). The hunt becomes even more personal when Heston's daughter (Barbara Hershey) is kidnapped by the convicts and subjected to sexual degradation.

This is a bloodthirsty film indeed in which every time someone dies it is displayed in over-the-top detail. It's tremendously [[depressing]] really, because the star pairing sounds like a mouth-watering prospect. There's no sense of pace or urgency in the film either. It takes an eternity to get going, but when the action finally does come it is marred by the emphasis on nastiness. All in all, this might be the very [[gravest]] film that Heston ever made. I'm sure it's one of the productions he is loathe to include on his illustrious CV. --------------------------------------------- Result 744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The memory of the "The Last Hunt" has stuck with me since I saw it in 1956 when I was 13. It is a movie that was far ahead of others at the time in that it addressed the treatment of the natives, the environment, and the ever present contrast between the short and long term effects of greed. It is as relevant today as in 1956, a cinemagraphic discussion of [[utmost]] depth and relevance. To top it off the setting is [[beautiful]] and the cinematography [[excellent]]. The memory of this [[movie]] will be with me to the end of my days. The memory of the "The Last Hunt" has stuck with me since I saw it in 1956 when I was 13. It is a movie that was far ahead of others at the time in that it addressed the treatment of the natives, the environment, and the ever present contrast between the short and long term effects of greed. It is as relevant today as in 1956, a cinemagraphic discussion of [[severe]] depth and relevance. To top it off the setting is [[glamorous]] and the cinematography [[magnifique]]. The memory of this [[cinematographic]] will be with me to the end of my days. --------------------------------------------- Result 745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is one of the [[dumbest]] films, I've ever seen. It [[rips]] off nearly ever type of thriller and manages to make a [[mess]] of them all.

There's not a [[single]] good line or [[character]] in the whole [[mess]]. If there was a [[plot]], it was an afterthought and as far as acting goes, there's [[nothing]] good to say so Ill say nothing. I honestly [[cant]] [[understand]] how this [[type]] of [[nonsense]] gets [[produced]] and actually [[released]], does somebody [[somewhere]] not at some [[stage]] think, 'Oh my [[god]] this [[really]] is a load of shite' and call it a day. Its [[crap]] like this that has people downloading illegally, the [[trailer]] [[looks]] like a [[completely]] [[different]] [[film]], at [[least]] if you have [[download]] it, you haven't wasted your [[time]] or [[money]] Don't waste your [[time]], this is painful. This is one of the [[silliest]] films, I've ever seen. It [[slams]] off nearly ever type of thriller and manages to make a [[disarray]] of them all.

There's not a [[exclusive]] good line or [[traits]] in the whole [[muddle]]. If there was a [[intrigue]], it was an afterthought and as far as acting goes, there's [[anything]] good to say so Ill say nothing. I honestly [[isnt]] [[realise]] how this [[genre]] of [[grotesque]] gets [[generated]] and actually [[liberated]], does somebody [[nowhere]] not at some [[phases]] think, 'Oh my [[heavens]] this [[genuinely]] is a load of shite' and call it a day. Its [[dammit]] like this that has people downloading illegally, the [[caravan]] [[seem]] like a [[absolutely]] [[distinct]] [[films]], at [[lowest]] if you have [[downloading]] it, you haven't wasted your [[period]] or [[cash]] Don't waste your [[period]], this is painful. --------------------------------------------- Result 746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Having never [[seen]] the original [[Dirty]] [[Harry]], I [[judged]] this [[movie]] on a clean slate. And I [[must]] say, I [[quite]] [[enjoyed]] it. [[Sure]], some of the acting by Sondre Locke [[made]] me a [[little]] squeemish - but [[hey]], it was the 80's. But [[even]] if you can't [[get]] past her (and I [[almost]] couldn't) or her [[revenge]] [[killings]] (which [[seemed]] a [[little]].. overdone ;P), it's worth it just for [[Dirty]] [[Harry]]. [[Or]] at the very [[least]], the [[bull]] [[dog]] he affectionately [[names]] 'MeatHead' :P

7/10. Having never [[watched]] the original [[Nasty]] [[Hare]], I [[deemed]] this [[films]] on a clean slate. And I [[should]] say, I [[rather]] [[liked]] it. [[Convinced]], some of the acting by Sondre Locke [[introduced]] me a [[kiddo]] squeemish - but [[cheerio]], it was the 80's. But [[yet]] if you can't [[gets]] past her (and I [[nearly]] couldn't) or her [[avenge]] [[murdering]] (which [[appeared]] a [[scant]].. overdone ;P), it's worth it just for [[Sordid]] [[Hare]]. [[Oder]] at the very [[less]], the [[taurus]] [[canine]] he affectionately [[naming]] 'MeatHead' :P

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 747 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[winning]] [[film]] in the [[spirit]] of cutting, dark comedy. Shot on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the early Coen brother's film Blood Simple ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to boot! Needs to [[seen]] more than once to [[appreciate]] all the elements that carry one scene to the next. Expect more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. First-time director Tom Kiesche turns in a [[winner]] [[movie]] in the [[esprit]] of cutting, dark comedy. Shot on a shoestring budget, yet had the flavor of the early Coen brother's film Blood Simple ... and throw in some Monty Python flavorings to boot! Needs to [[saw]] more than once to [[appreciative]] all the elements that carry one scene to the next. Expect more good things to come from this writer-director-actor. --------------------------------------------- Result 748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Was there a [[single]] [[positive]] to this film? Critics who knew nothing of video games could spot the gaming errors made. No damage taken with damage clearly visible towards the beginning being a primary example.

And I may have missed something, but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 suppose to be a game that had never [[played]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and even the girl, know so much about the game already? We're talking things that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Nothing]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more experienced. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their strongest points. The characters are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the youngest child) is a very silent, completely dry child cliché of a little kid who almost never talks because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even begin to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only value that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. If you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But unless you loved it as a kid there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very little that will prevent you from turning it off.

No sir, I didn't like it. Was there a [[exclusive]] [[auspicious]] to this film? Critics who knew nothing of video games could spot the gaming errors made. No damage taken with damage clearly visible towards the beginning being a primary example.

And I may have missed something, but wasn't Super Mario Bros. 3 suppose to be a game that had never [[accomplished]] before? Well if that IS the case, and I did not miss anything... how did Fred Savage's character, and even the girl, know so much about the game already? We're talking things that some people don't know about by their second or third play-through.

Beyond the factual and gaming errors there is the general low quality of the film itself. [[Nada]] here is honestly very memorable. The kid wasn't even that good at playing video games in the footage they showed. A lot of kids I knew way back in those days were significantly more experienced. On top of all this the acting and storyline are just mediocre at their strongest points. The characters are bland and completely uninteresting, the 'Wizard' (the youngest child) is a very silent, completely dry child cliché of a little kid who almost never talks because of a trauma. It isn't that this is unrealistic, it's the fact that it had to be thrown into the movie to actually even begin to form a plot that would exceed even 30 minutes.

Honestly, the only value that is to be found here is that of a nostalgic nature. If you grew up with this movie you're going to like it whether it was good or not. It was about kids playing video games, and at the time you saw it you likely had an obsession with the NES as well. But unless you loved it as a kid there just isn't anything that's going to keep you interested, and very little that will prevent you from turning it off.

No sir, I didn't like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Yes, the [[first]] "[[Howling]]" was a classic. [[A]] rather good werewolf [[movie]] that I admit started slowly, but gained momentum along the way to have a rather [[good]] [[finish]] then the anchorwoman changed into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on [[camera]]. [[Yes]] that made for an entertaining [[horror]] movie to be sure...well [[forget]] all of that as this movie has [[nothing]] to do with that [[film]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anchor]] [[woman]] is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they [[go]] from the [[little]] [[cozy]] retreat from the [[first]] [[movie]] to Transylvania or [[somewhere]] here where they [[must]] battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[world]] [[Christopher]] Lee was doing in this [[movie]], [[however]] I read the [[trivia]] here where it [[says]] he had never been in a [[werewolf]] [[movie]] before, but [[still]] read the [[script]] before you take a role. [[Maybe]] you [[could]] have [[gotten]] into "An American [[Werewolf]] in London" hell that [[could]] have been [[possible]]. It was set in London after all. [[Heck]], werewolves do not [[seem]] to figure [[much]] into this [[movie]] except for a [[rather]] [[bizarre]] and [[prolonged]] sex scene. [[In]] fact, the most [[memorable]] [[death]] in this [[movie]] for me was when the one gal [[started]] [[talking]] loudly and this one dude's ear's [[started]] bleeding. Yes, the [[fiirst]] "[[Yelling]]" was a classic. [[una]] rather good werewolf [[cinema]] that I admit started slowly, but gained momentum along the way to have a rather [[buena]] [[conclude]] then the anchorwoman changed into a cute werewolf only to be gunned down on [[cameras]]. [[Oui]] that made for an entertaining [[abomination]] movie to be sure...well [[forgets]] all of that as this movie has [[anything]] to do with that [[cinematography]]. Oh sure, they kind of make it out that the [[anker]] [[mujer]] is the same and that her brother or something is wanting to find out what and why things went down as they did, but they [[going]] from the [[scant]] [[comfortable]] retreat from the [[frst]] [[flick]] to Transylvania or [[somehow]] here where they [[owe]] battle evil magician werewolves or something. I often wonder what in the [[globe]] [[Christophe]] Lee was doing in this [[cinema]], [[nevertheless]] I read the [[trifles]] here where it [[contends]] he had never been in a [[werewolves]] [[flick]] before, but [[yet]] read the [[hyphen]] before you take a role. [[Perhaps]] you [[would]] have [[become]] into "An American [[Werewolves]] in London" hell that [[would]] have been [[probable]]. It was set in London after all. [[Devil]], werewolves do not [[looks]] to figure [[very]] into this [[cinema]] except for a [[comparatively]] [[freaky]] and [[long]] sex scene. [[At]] fact, the most [[landmark]] [[decease]] in this [[cinema]] for me was when the one gal [[began]] [[spoke]] loudly and this one dude's ear's [[opened]] bleeding. --------------------------------------------- Result 750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house crowd had the time of their cinematic lives. It's tasteless, groovy and very funny in a sixties kind of way. The Kraft Kitchen recipe sketch had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed bag, but the highs definitely [[beat]] the lows. By the way, whatever happened to Ken Shapiro?? We showed this movie at the local Film Society, and the art-house crowd had the time of their cinematic lives. It's tasteless, groovy and very funny in a sixties kind of way. The Kraft Kitchen recipe sketch had them laughing like maniacs. The rest is a mixed bag, but the highs definitely [[defeats]] the lows. By the way, whatever happened to Ken Shapiro?? --------------------------------------------- Result 751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[great]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. As you may know, the subject here was to ask eleven directors from all over the world to make each a short movie of 11 minutes, 9 seconds and one frame. We have here : - Samira Makhmalbaf (Iran) : what afghan refugee kids can understand to the towers collapsing ? Well, nothing. A great lesson. - Claude Lelouch (France) : a weak plot with a [[whopping]] cinematography... Just imagine a deaf woman living by the WTC who sees without understanding it that her dog barks... Well just see it. - Youssef Chahine (Egypt) : the greatest oriental movie maker has compassion... For everyone : for an us soldier who died ten years ago, for the people in the Wtc but also for a palestinian suicide-terrorist. Maybe the less tender movie towards the us. - Danis Tanovic (bosnia hrzgovia) : good images, makes us travel, for sure... Not a very good plot. Idrissa Oudraogo (Burkina Faso) : from one of the poorest country in the world, a tender and funny story about five boys who want to capture Osama Bin Laden... And they could have done it but nobody believes them when they tell they know where he is. Ken Loach (uk) : September 11, 1973, The Chile entered in a twenty-years long bloody dictature. Thousands of death, tortures : all that was offered to Chile by Henry Kissinger and the CIA, and knowing this changes very much your point of view ! I guess that is because of that particular short that no american movie distribution company accepted to release the movie in us theaters ! Loach forgot to point that 1973 is also the year when the WTC was built ! - Alejandro Gonzalez inarritu (Mexico) : impressing images that we all know too well, and a lot of black screens. I didn't get this one very much, it is more an artist video (to show in an exhibition) than a movie. - Amos Gitaï (Israël) : an absurd ballet of policemen, journalists, etc., around a burning car in Jerusalem. Very well done. - Mira Nair (India) : about the anti-islamic feeling that followed september the 11th. Very good actualy. - Sean Penn (us) : a funny little story that reminds us a fact usualy forgotten, the WTC did have a huge shadow, and some places now have a daylight they never had. - Shohei Imamura (Japan) : a different one. Here there is not even one word about the WTC, and the action takes place at the end of WWII. It has only one message : no war is holy. This short movie gives very deep feelings, but the director aparently would have done better with more than 11 minutes. --- so --- A great movie, a great attempt to take the world's temperature. I love it. --------------------------------------------- Result 752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is the [[single]] [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. [[Let]] me [[say]] that again: THIS IS THE [[SINGLE]] [[WORST]] [[MOVIE]] I [[HAVE]] EVER [[SEEN]].

It had all of the ear-marks of a [[bad]] movie: continuity errors, [[bad]] [[writing]], bad acting, [[bad]] production [[value]], bad music. I [[thought]] that there were a [[couple]] points to [[horror]] movies. The first is that it is supposed to be suspenseful enough to scare you. This movie gets and F in this category. The second point is that when a character [[dies]], or something bad happens to them, we are supposed to [[care]]. This movie gets an F in this regard as well.

The first story, a woman gets mauled by wolves after being afraid that this would happen to her. The next story, an OCD guy dies from not being careful and talks to a dead friend of his. Oh, and then there is the horrific, nail-biting story of a bad roommate. Come on, could you pick topics a little more interesting and a little less common than being alone in a house, being anal-retentive, and having a roommate? Turns out all of these [[stories]] where hallucinations, virtual reality induced by a Doctor who in turn uses it himself. Wow, stupid.

Let me explain something, I enjoy watching bad horror movies and laughing at how bad they are. I couldn't do that with this one. It was [[utter]] [[pain]] to [[sit]] and watch. Do not under any circumstance watch this [[movie]]. You WILL [[regret]] it. This is the [[exclusive]] [[meanest]] [[cinema]] I have ever [[noticed]]. [[Allowing]] me [[said]] that again: THIS IS THE [[EXCLUSIVE]] [[MEANEST]] [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] I [[HA]] EVER [[NOTICED]].

It had all of the ear-marks of a [[naughty]] movie: continuity errors, [[negative]] [[handwriting]], bad acting, [[negative]] production [[values]], bad music. I [[figured]] that there were a [[matching]] points to [[abomination]] movies. The first is that it is supposed to be suspenseful enough to scare you. This movie gets and F in this category. The second point is that when a character [[dying]], or something bad happens to them, we are supposed to [[caring]]. This movie gets an F in this regard as well.

The first story, a woman gets mauled by wolves after being afraid that this would happen to her. The next story, an OCD guy dies from not being careful and talks to a dead friend of his. Oh, and then there is the horrific, nail-biting story of a bad roommate. Come on, could you pick topics a little more interesting and a little less common than being alone in a house, being anal-retentive, and having a roommate? Turns out all of these [[fairytales]] where hallucinations, virtual reality induced by a Doctor who in turn uses it himself. Wow, stupid.

Let me explain something, I enjoy watching bad horror movies and laughing at how bad they are. I couldn't do that with this one. It was [[absolute]] [[heartbreak]] to [[seated]] and watch. Do not under any circumstance watch this [[cinematography]]. You WILL [[sadness]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] After [[watching]] the [[trailer]] I was [[surprised]] this [[movie]] never [[made]] it into [[theaters]], so I [[ordered]] the BluRay. I had a [[great]] time watching it and have to say that this movie is better than some [[major]] [[animation]] [[movies]] out there. Of course, it has its [[flaws]] but I can still really recommend it. The animation is well [[done]], very entertaining and [[unique]] and the [[story]] kept me [[watching]] it all the [[way]] to the end. Some of the backdrops are just drop-dead [[gorgeous]] and you can see the French talent [[behind]] it. I [[thought]] that [[Forest]] Whitaker's performance [[feels]] a bit [[lifeless]] but that is how the character Lian-Chu is [[depicted]] in this movie. [[So]] overall, thumbs up, I [[liked]] it a [[lot]] and I hope it is successful enough for all the studios [[involved]] to [[continue]] making great [[movies]] [[like]] this. I would [[recommend]] to give it a chance and be surprised how [[great]] a movie can be with such a small budget. Hektor alone is worth watching the movie since some of his moments are Stitch-like hilarious. After [[staring]] the [[camper]] I was [[startled]] this [[filmmaking]] never [[accomplished]] it into [[theater]], so I [[decreed]] the BluRay. I had a [[whopping]] time watching it and have to say that this movie is better than some [[sizable]] [[animate]] [[theater]] out there. Of course, it has its [[frailties]] but I can still really recommend it. The animation is well [[doing]], very entertaining and [[exclusive]] and the [[conte]] kept me [[staring]] it all the [[route]] to the end. Some of the backdrops are just drop-dead [[awesome]] and you can see the French talent [[backside]] it. I [[figured]] that [[Wald]] Whitaker's performance [[believes]] a bit [[lackluster]] but that is how the character Lian-Chu is [[exemplified]] in this movie. [[Accordingly]] overall, thumbs up, I [[wished]] it a [[batch]] and I hope it is successful enough for all the studios [[participating]] to [[incessant]] making great [[theater]] [[iike]] this. I would [[recommendation]] to give it a chance and be surprised how [[prodigious]] a movie can be with such a small budget. Hektor alone is worth watching the movie since some of his moments are Stitch-like hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 754 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] A story of amazing disinterest [[kills]] "The [[Psychic]]" over and over again. The characters and plot are completely uninteresting (as is Fulci's mad [[camera]] [[work]], which is usually a [[redeeming]] factor in his films), and any grasp of suspense is [[nowhere]] to be found. It's [[padded]] out to an [[insufferable]] degree--by the end, you won't be clamoring with excitement but stricken with boredom (and, like me, maybe an [[uncontrollable]] urge to fall asleep). Jennifer O'Neill's performance deserves occupancy in a better movie. Fulci gorehounds beware--there's just not much going on in "The [[Psychic]]."

3/10 A story of amazing disinterest [[slays]] "The [[Devin]]" over and over again. The characters and plot are completely uninteresting (as is Fulci's mad [[cameras]] [[cooperates]], which is usually a [[redeem]] factor in his films), and any grasp of suspense is [[somewhere]] to be found. It's [[stuffed]] out to an [[intolerable]] degree--by the end, you won't be clamoring with excitement but stricken with boredom (and, like me, maybe an [[unchecked]] urge to fall asleep). Jennifer O'Neill's performance deserves occupancy in a better movie. Fulci gorehounds beware--there's just not much going on in "The [[Clairvoyant]]."

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] I watched Grendel the other [[night]] and am compelled to put together a Public Service [[Announcement]].

Grendel is another version of Beowulf, the thousand-year-old Anglo-Saxon epic poem. The SciFi channel has a growing catalog of inoffensive and uninteresting movies, and the previews promised an inauthentic low-budget mini-epic, but this one [[refused]] to let me switch channels. It was [[staggeringly]], overwhelmingly, [[bad]]. I watched in fascination and horror at the train wreck you couldn't tear your eyes away from. I reached for a notepad and managed to capture part of what I was seeing. The following may contain spoilers or might just save your sanity. You've been warned.

- Just to get it over with, Beowulf's warriors wore horned helmets. Trivial issue compared to what came after. It also appears that the helmets were in a bin and handed to whichever actor wandered by next. Fit, appearance and function were apparently irrelevant.

- Marina Sirtis had obviously been blackmailed into doing the movie by the Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey circus. She managed to avoid a red rubber nose, but the clowns had already done the rest of her makeup.

- Ben Cross pretended not to be embarrassed as the king. His character, Hrothgar, must have become king of the Danes only minutes before the film opened and hadn't had a chance to get the crown resized to fit him yet.

- To facilitate the actors' return to their day jobs waiting tables, none were required to change their hairstyles at all. The variety of hair included cornrows, sideburns, buzz cuts and a mullet and at least served to distract from the dialog. To prove it was a multi-national cast, all were encouraged to retain whatever accent they chose.

- As is typical with this type of movie (at least since Mad Max), leather armor was a requirement. In this case it was odd-shaped, ill-fitting and brand-new.

- The female love interest, Ingrid, played by Alexis Peters, followed a long-standing tradition of hotties who should be watched with the volume turned completely down.

- The unintended focus of the movie was a repeating, compound crossbow with exploding bolts. It never needed to be loaded and even had a recoil when fired. It managed to shred the laws of physics, the integrity of the original legend, historical fact and plot suspense all by itself.

- Hrothgar's palace, Heorot, rather than being a Norse long hall, apparently was designed and constructed by artisans who sank with Atlantis.

- Beowulf arrived at the Danes' homeland in a two-masted stern-castled ship that originally was part of a set, the other two being the Santa Maria and the Pinta.

- Prince Unferth observed Beowulf's ship's approach using a telescope. Before you could recover from that astounding innovation, you got to see the ship from his point of view. Judging from the angle, the prince was in an aircraft of some sort.

- Fun fact 1: In Bulgaria, fire (as from a fireplace) creates light without heat. This explains why you could see the actors' breath whether indoors or out.

- Fun fact 2: Dark Age dancing in Denmark looks like slow dances I went to in the 8th grade.

- Fun fact 3: You, too, can make a catapult with a timed-release air-burst explosive. But, don't expect it to actually harm anything. Incidentally, Beowulf was apparently a veteran of World War II, yelling "Incoming!" to shred any remaining suspension of disbelief.

- Grendel was so upset and always in a snit because as a completely CGI creation he couldn't leave footprints. Even in snow.

- Grendel's mom ("Hag") was in a foul mood because she was a single mother and junior hadn't inherited her wings. Recessive gene, I suppose. By the way, we can now make an educated guess that Grendel's pop was probably Swamp Thing.

- Grendel and mom chose to randomly kill, fly away with or drag away their prey based only on a close reading of the next few pages of the script.

- Fun medical fact: Being slammed by a mythical beast hard enough to be thrown fifty feet against stone causes slight facial scratches that don't bleed much.

- The sword of legend Beowulf used to dispatch the Hag was as long as he was tall and would have contained enough steel to put a second deck on the Golden Gate Bridge. Luckily the wobbling dispelled any concerns over its weight.

- Best line of the movie: Prince Unferth had just been impaled by Hag and spit a quart of blood roughly six feet. Princess Ingrid cradled him gently and said, "You're going to be okay, my prince." So much for that job at the triage clinic.

I feel better now. I watched Grendel the other [[nighttime]] and am compelled to put together a Public Service [[Announces]].

Grendel is another version of Beowulf, the thousand-year-old Anglo-Saxon epic poem. The SciFi channel has a growing catalog of inoffensive and uninteresting movies, and the previews promised an inauthentic low-budget mini-epic, but this one [[spurns]] to let me switch channels. It was [[superbly]], overwhelmingly, [[wicked]]. I watched in fascination and horror at the train wreck you couldn't tear your eyes away from. I reached for a notepad and managed to capture part of what I was seeing. The following may contain spoilers or might just save your sanity. You've been warned.

- Just to get it over with, Beowulf's warriors wore horned helmets. Trivial issue compared to what came after. It also appears that the helmets were in a bin and handed to whichever actor wandered by next. Fit, appearance and function were apparently irrelevant.

- Marina Sirtis had obviously been blackmailed into doing the movie by the Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey circus. She managed to avoid a red rubber nose, but the clowns had already done the rest of her makeup.

- Ben Cross pretended not to be embarrassed as the king. His character, Hrothgar, must have become king of the Danes only minutes before the film opened and hadn't had a chance to get the crown resized to fit him yet.

- To facilitate the actors' return to their day jobs waiting tables, none were required to change their hairstyles at all. The variety of hair included cornrows, sideburns, buzz cuts and a mullet and at least served to distract from the dialog. To prove it was a multi-national cast, all were encouraged to retain whatever accent they chose.

- As is typical with this type of movie (at least since Mad Max), leather armor was a requirement. In this case it was odd-shaped, ill-fitting and brand-new.

- The female love interest, Ingrid, played by Alexis Peters, followed a long-standing tradition of hotties who should be watched with the volume turned completely down.

- The unintended focus of the movie was a repeating, compound crossbow with exploding bolts. It never needed to be loaded and even had a recoil when fired. It managed to shred the laws of physics, the integrity of the original legend, historical fact and plot suspense all by itself.

- Hrothgar's palace, Heorot, rather than being a Norse long hall, apparently was designed and constructed by artisans who sank with Atlantis.

- Beowulf arrived at the Danes' homeland in a two-masted stern-castled ship that originally was part of a set, the other two being the Santa Maria and the Pinta.

- Prince Unferth observed Beowulf's ship's approach using a telescope. Before you could recover from that astounding innovation, you got to see the ship from his point of view. Judging from the angle, the prince was in an aircraft of some sort.

- Fun fact 1: In Bulgaria, fire (as from a fireplace) creates light without heat. This explains why you could see the actors' breath whether indoors or out.

- Fun fact 2: Dark Age dancing in Denmark looks like slow dances I went to in the 8th grade.

- Fun fact 3: You, too, can make a catapult with a timed-release air-burst explosive. But, don't expect it to actually harm anything. Incidentally, Beowulf was apparently a veteran of World War II, yelling "Incoming!" to shred any remaining suspension of disbelief.

- Grendel was so upset and always in a snit because as a completely CGI creation he couldn't leave footprints. Even in snow.

- Grendel's mom ("Hag") was in a foul mood because she was a single mother and junior hadn't inherited her wings. Recessive gene, I suppose. By the way, we can now make an educated guess that Grendel's pop was probably Swamp Thing.

- Grendel and mom chose to randomly kill, fly away with or drag away their prey based only on a close reading of the next few pages of the script.

- Fun medical fact: Being slammed by a mythical beast hard enough to be thrown fifty feet against stone causes slight facial scratches that don't bleed much.

- The sword of legend Beowulf used to dispatch the Hag was as long as he was tall and would have contained enough steel to put a second deck on the Golden Gate Bridge. Luckily the wobbling dispelled any concerns over its weight.

- Best line of the movie: Prince Unferth had just been impaled by Hag and spit a quart of blood roughly six feet. Princess Ingrid cradled him gently and said, "You're going to be okay, my prince." So much for that job at the triage clinic.

I feel better now. --------------------------------------------- Result 756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This movie is [[supposed]] to be a "lighthearted" tale about Santa Claus and his "magical and mystical" wonders. But [[instead]] it comes off as being downright creepy. Two things in this movie that stand out in my [[mind]] as [[horrifying]] are 1) the way Santa looks.- Have you ever seen a more [[horrible]] looking Santa Claus? and 2) the "evil rep. of Satan" Pitch's just plain odd dances are just sickening to watch. Only watch this movie if it happens to be the MSTed version or if you like a very good laugh. I can't believe this is a children's movie. This movie is [[alleged]] to be a "lighthearted" tale about Santa Claus and his "magical and mystical" wonders. But [[alternatively]] it comes off as being downright creepy. Two things in this movie that stand out in my [[intellect]] as [[terrifying]] are 1) the way Santa looks.- Have you ever seen a more [[gruesome]] looking Santa Claus? and 2) the "evil rep. of Satan" Pitch's just plain odd dances are just sickening to watch. Only watch this movie if it happens to be the MSTed version or if you like a very good laugh. I can't believe this is a children's movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Here we are: two [[travelers]] from a [[distant]] futuristic world arrive on [[earth]]... one is on a desperate [[mission]] to [[preserve]] a [[life]], another is an inhuman killing machine determined to eliminate the [[woman]] who will [[give]] birth to the [[saviour]] of an [[entire]] [[race]].

[[So]] what [[could]] we [[call]] this killing machine? It's almost like he's some [[kind]] of [[destroyer]], or eradicator... sort of like an exterminator or [[something]]. What's the word I'm [[looking]] for... something that -terminates- things? [[Hmmmm]]....

[[Anyway]], the protector (who [[swiftly]] doffs the white tunic he [[stole]] from [[Luke]] Skywalker in [[favour]] of local [[clothing]]) [[finds]] the [[young]] [[woman]] first and impregnates her with a future-born hero-to-be. The [[evil]] [[uhhhh]]... "exterminator" [[kills]] some rednecks and steals their [[guns]] and [[clothes]], then [[attempts]] to [[locate]] the [[woman]] by [[visiting]] her workplace and [[asking]] [[around]] by looking menacingly into people's [[eyes]] and [[repeating]] her name threateningly.

Then [[begins]] a desperate [[race]] for survival as the seemingly deathless and unstoppable "exterminator" [[pursues]] the [[couple]] [[across]] the countryside. At some point he may [[acquire]] boots and a [[motorcycle]], but I'm not sure.

Perhaps, in an exciting finale, he will [[attempt]] to crush them under the [[wheels]] of an [[enormous]] tanker truck full of... acid. Then the truck will [[crash]]. They will be [[saved]]... but no! He will then re-emerge, as strong as ever. He will [[kill]] the protector and [[pursue]] the [[girl]] into a meat packing [[plant]], where in a terrifying [[finish]], he is pushed into a large piece of industrial [[chopping]] machinery, and destroyed once and for all.

But maybe I'm extrapolating too much... after all, I did [[stop]] watching this [[movie]] after [[Mr]]. Protector magically impregnates Sean [[Young]] by [[kissing]] her at a [[bar]], then tells her the child will be born in 3 days.

The [[costumes]] and [[effects]] are [[great]] in this [[movie]]... I [[loved]] them the first [[time]] I [[saw]] them on [[Star]] [[Trek]]: [[Next]] Generation too! Sean [[Young]] does another [[great]] [[turn]] as an unemotive Replicant, and career sweat-hog Stephen Baldwin is also on board as Young's Fat Cop Boyfriend. Not sure where he fits into the plot though... maybe he's an import from a different [[James]] Cameron movie? Here we are: two [[traveller]] from a [[aloof]] futuristic world arrive on [[terra]]... one is on a desperate [[tasks]] to [[conserve]] a [[living]], another is an inhuman killing machine determined to eliminate the [[femme]] who will [[lend]] birth to the [[salvatore]] of an [[overall]] [[errand]].

[[Thus]] what [[would]] we [[calling]] this killing machine? It's almost like he's some [[types]] of [[destroyers]], or eradicator... sort of like an exterminator or [[algo]]. What's the word I'm [[searching]] for... something that -terminates- things? [[Hmmm]]....

[[Writ]], the protector (who [[soon]] doffs the white tunic he [[steal]] from [[Matty]] Skywalker in [[supportive]] of local [[clothes]]) [[discovers]] the [[youthful]] [[femme]] first and impregnates her with a future-born hero-to-be. The [[wicked]] [[uhmm]]... "exterminator" [[assassinating]] some rednecks and steals their [[pistols]] and [[garment]], then [[tried]] to [[locating]] the [[femme]] by [[visited]] her workplace and [[wondering]] [[almost]] by looking menacingly into people's [[eye]] and [[repetitive]] her name threateningly.

Then [[beginnings]] a desperate [[races]] for survival as the seemingly deathless and unstoppable "exterminator" [[chasing]] the [[match]] [[throughout]] the countryside. At some point he may [[bought]] boots and a [[bicycles]], but I'm not sure.

Perhaps, in an exciting finale, he will [[attempted]] to crush them under the [[wheel]] of an [[monumental]] tanker truck full of... acid. Then the truck will [[collided]]. They will be [[rescued]]... but no! He will then re-emerge, as strong as ever. He will [[kills]] the protector and [[pursued]] the [[dame]] into a meat packing [[installation]], where in a terrifying [[completing]], he is pushed into a large piece of industrial [[cutting]] machinery, and destroyed once and for all.

But maybe I'm extrapolating too much... after all, I did [[stops]] watching this [[cinematography]] after [[Herr]]. Protector magically impregnates Sean [[Youth]] by [[kiss]] her at a [[solicitor]], then tells her the child will be born in 3 days.

The [[outfits]] and [[influences]] are [[terrific]] in this [[cinematography]]... I [[love]] them the first [[period]] I [[observed]] them on [[Stars]] [[Hiking]]: [[Impending]] Generation too! Sean [[Youthful]] does another [[magnificent]] [[turning]] as an unemotive Replicant, and career sweat-hog Stephen Baldwin is also on board as Young's Fat Cop Boyfriend. Not sure where he fits into the plot though... maybe he's an import from a different [[Jacobo]] Cameron movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A [[hilarious]] Neil Simon comedy that evokes laughs from [[beginning]] to end. The late Walter Matthau is the grouchy ex-comedian who is persuaded to join together with his ex-partner (the late Oscar-winner George Burns) for a final reunion show on stage.

Benjamin Martin is Matthau's agent and nephew, and the two have just as much chemistry as Matthau and Burns. I [[love]] Matthau's grumpy character--he's just the same as he [[always]] is, and [[yet]] [[also]] very [[different]].

Burns, as the absent-minded old man, is just as funny as Matthau.

Matthau: Want some crackers? I've got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: How about a plain cracker?

Matthau: I don't got plain. I got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: Okay

Matthau: They're in the cupboard in the kitchen.

Burns: Maybe later.

Or how about this:

Matthau: When I did black, the whites [[knew]] what I was saying!

You've got to see it in the movie to understand it!

All in all, a [[refreshingly]] [[hilarious]], sweet, heartfelt, [[warm]], belivable character comedy with a [[heart]] and some of the most [[memorable]] quotes of all time.

They just don't make them like this [[anymore]]! [[In]] a time when all the [[newest]] comedies are crude, [[juvenile]] and [[stupid]], this leans back towards the tender [[core]] of what [[comedy]] really is--funny [[characters]], smart and funny dialogue, and [[grand]] entertainment.

One of the [[best]] buddy comedies of all time, right up there with "[[Planes]], Trains and Automobiles," "Lethal Weapon," and "The Hard [[Way]]."

You may have a hard time finding this for rent or on TV, but trust me, it will be worth your time!

4.5/5 stars.

- John Ulmer A [[comic]] Neil Simon comedy that evokes laughs from [[started]] to end. The late Walter Matthau is the grouchy ex-comedian who is persuaded to join together with his ex-partner (the late Oscar-winner George Burns) for a final reunion show on stage.

Benjamin Martin is Matthau's agent and nephew, and the two have just as much chemistry as Matthau and Burns. I [[adores]] Matthau's grumpy character--he's just the same as he [[invariably]] is, and [[nevertheless]] [[similarly]] very [[disparate]].

Burns, as the absent-minded old man, is just as funny as Matthau.

Matthau: Want some crackers? I've got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: How about a plain cracker?

Matthau: I don't got plain. I got coconut, pineapple and graham.

Burns: Okay

Matthau: They're in the cupboard in the kitchen.

Burns: Maybe later.

Or how about this:

Matthau: When I did black, the whites [[knowed]] what I was saying!

You've got to see it in the movie to understand it!

All in all, a [[cheerfully]] [[funny]], sweet, heartfelt, [[caliente]], belivable character comedy with a [[heartland]] and some of the most [[landmark]] quotes of all time.

They just don't make them like this [[langer]]! [[For]] a time when all the [[new]] comedies are crude, [[teenagers]] and [[dopey]], this leans back towards the tender [[basic]] of what [[parody]] really is--funny [[attribute]], smart and funny dialogue, and [[whopping]] entertainment.

One of the [[optimum]] buddy comedies of all time, right up there with "[[Airliner]], Trains and Automobiles," "Lethal Weapon," and "The Hard [[Pathway]]."

You may have a hard time finding this for rent or on TV, but trust me, it will be worth your time!

4.5/5 stars.

- John Ulmer --------------------------------------------- Result 759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I would firstly [[say]] that somehow I remember seeing this [[movie]] in my early childhood, I couldn't read the subtitles and I thought Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not [[able]] to at [[least]] [[partially]] suspend your adult scepticism and embrace your inner seven your [[old]] you may [[want]] to avoid this movie. That [[said]], having just [[watched]] the [[restored]] 137 minute version on [[DVD]] I have to say I [[enjoyed]] it, [[though]] not as much as when I was seven ( I remembered the [[ending]] ).

There are [[aspects]] of the [[movie]] that are [[worthy]] of [[criticism]] , the first 15 minutes and [[final]] 15 minutes both have some really [[comic]] moments, my [[favourite]] being the [[contrast]] between scenes acted out in the [[final]] 10 minutes and the [[curious]] [[choice]] of backing [[music]] ( [[listen]] to the lyrics ).

[[For]] an [[action]] [[film]] there is a [[great]] [[deal]] of [[focus]] on the [[personal]] [[stories]] of certain [[soldiers]] and the social [[dynamics]] of the squad as the [[strain]] of their [[time]] [[travel]] [[takes]] its [[toll]]. By the [[ending]] of the [[movie]] I had decided that this was a [[good]] thing, when seven I [[though]] the 'relationship' guff was a [[bad]] [[thing]].

[[For]] an [[action]] [[film]] there is [[also]] plenty of gratifying gory [[action]], [[especially]] a [[couple]] of epic [[battle]] scenes between the platoon and hordes of Shogun era warriors. The [[makers]] of the [[movie]] have [[ensured]] that as [[many]] [[deaths]] as possible are [[bloody]] and, [[lets]] face it, [[humorous]]. I [[thought]] this was a [[splendid]] [[aspect]] of the [[movie]] when I was a kid, and I am not [[ashamed]] to [[say]] that I [[still]] do.

I [[also]] like the fact that the [[modern]] day [[soldiers]] in [[general]] don't [[spend]] the [[movie]] [[walking]] on [[egg]] [[shells]] trying to avoid [[altering]] the space [[time]] continuum, they've [[got]] heavy [[calibre]] machine guns, mortars, [[rocket]] launchers, a tank and a helicopter and they're hell bent on making feudal Japan theirs. Which is what I'd like to [[think]] any [[vigorous]] IMDb user [[would]] do in their [[boots]].

[[In]] [[short]] the [[movies]] worth [[watching]], it makes the [[viewer]] regret that there are not more [[movies]] made with a [[similar]] premise, and at the same [[time]] [[offers]] some [[hefty]] [[hints]] as to why a [[movie]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unique]]. I would firstly [[says]] that somehow I remember seeing this [[cinematographic]] in my early childhood, I couldn't read the subtitles and I thought Sonny Chiba was Sean Connery. But I did really like the concept. If you are not [[capable]] to at [[less]] [[partly]] suspend your adult scepticism and embrace your inner seven your [[former]] you may [[wanna]] to avoid this movie. That [[say]], having just [[seen]] the [[reestablished]] 137 minute version on [[DVDS]] I have to say I [[liked]] it, [[however]] not as much as when I was seven ( I remembered the [[terminating]] ).

There are [[things]] of the [[filmmaking]] that are [[commendable]] of [[critique]] , the first 15 minutes and [[ultimate]] 15 minutes both have some really [[sitcom]] moments, my [[preferred]] being the [[rematch]] between scenes acted out in the [[latter]] 10 minutes and the [[bizarre]] [[elects]] of backing [[musicians]] ( [[hear]] to the lyrics ).

[[Onto]] an [[measures]] [[flick]] there is a [[huge]] [[address]] of [[concentrations]] on the [[personally]] [[history]] of certain [[servicemen]] and the social [[vibrant]] of the squad as the [[strains]] of their [[period]] [[journey]] [[pick]] its [[tolls]]. By the [[ended]] of the [[filmmaking]] I had decided that this was a [[well]] thing, when seven I [[despite]] the 'relationship' guff was a [[rotten]] [[stuff]].

[[In]] an [[efforts]] [[cinematography]] there is [[additionally]] plenty of gratifying gory [[efforts]], [[namely]] a [[coupling]] of epic [[fight]] scenes between the platoon and hordes of Shogun era warriors. The [[producers]] of the [[filmmaking]] have [[secured]] that as [[innumerable]] [[killings]] as possible are [[murderous]] and, [[allowing]] face it, [[comical]]. I [[ideology]] this was a [[grandiose]] [[element]] of the [[filmmaking]] when I was a kid, and I am not [[humiliated]] to [[told]] that I [[yet]] do.

I [[moreover]] like the fact that the [[moderne]] day [[servicemen]] in [[overall]] don't [[expenditure]] the [[filmmaking]] [[walk]] on [[eggs]] [[missiles]] trying to avoid [[modify]] the space [[period]] continuum, they've [[gets]] heavy [[caliber]] machine guns, mortars, [[missile]] launchers, a tank and a helicopter and they're hell bent on making feudal Japan theirs. Which is what I'd like to [[believing]] any [[energetic]] IMDb user [[ought]] do in their [[booting]].

[[For]] [[succinct]] the [[movie]] worth [[staring]], it makes the [[viewfinder]] regret that there are not more [[movie]] made with a [[identical]] premise, and at the same [[period]] [[offering]] some [[sizeable]] [[suggestions]] as to why a [[filmmaking]] like G.I. Samurai is so [[unequalled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 760 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This film is beautiful to [[look]] at, but is like watching [[really]] [[bad]] experimental theater. The [[plot]] (if there was one) doesn't make any sense. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed actors wrestling and looking deep into each other's eyes. Lots of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. Mumbling and people wandering wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and bodies. By the time you get to the threesome on the roof with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a bottle of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. This film is beautiful to [[peek]] at, but is like watching [[truly]] [[inclement]] experimental theater. The [[intrigue]] (if there was one) doesn't make any sense. But it is very "artistic". Lots of shots of half-dressed actors wrestling and looking deep into each other's eyes. Lots of arty shots through windows and with people out of frame. Mumbling and people wandering wistfully. Lingering close-ups of faces and bodies. By the time you get to the threesome on the roof with the cat, you'll be ready to throw a bottle of KY at the screen.

It is supposed to be about a father and son's relationship, but you will just be wishing the two of them would just f*$& each other and get it over with. If you have always wanted to see bad Russian gay porn without any money shots, your wish has been granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (81%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I was the Production [[Accountant]] on this movie, and I also got to do some voice-over work on it, so I'm not entirely unbiased, but if it were awful, I would say so. I thought it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any means, but there were plenty of [[laughs]] along the way. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't yet reached their peak at the time we made this film. Susan Sarandon, of course, is one who has since gone on to much greater fame. Melanie Mayron was seen on TV on a weekly basis as a photographer in the "Thirty-Something" TV drama series. Robert Englund later became known as Freddie Krueger, still haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[favorite]] [[actors]] on this [[show]] was Dub Taylor, who played the sheriff. He was an excellent comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere person. We all had fun working on this show, and I think that fun comes through. I was the Production [[Accountancy]] on this movie, and I also got to do some voice-over work on it, so I'm not entirely unbiased, but if it were awful, I would say so. I thought it was a fun film, not a critically acclaimed masterpiece, by any means, but there were plenty of [[giggles]] along the way. The Bible states that laughter does good like a medicine, so watching this movie could be good for your health.

So many of the actors in this picture hadn't yet reached their peak at the time we made this film. Susan Sarandon, of course, is one who has since gone on to much greater fame. Melanie Mayron was seen on TV on a weekly basis as a photographer in the "Thirty-Something" TV drama series. Robert Englund later became known as Freddie Krueger, still haunting people's dreams. One of my personal [[preferable]] [[protagonists]] on this [[exhibit]] was Dub Taylor, who played the sheriff. He was an excellent comedic actor, and a truly nice, sincere person. We all had fun working on this show, and I think that fun comes through. --------------------------------------------- Result 762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I have to admit that I [[stuck]] this one out thinking something would have to happen, besides the [[dead]] [[body]] in the [[first]] scenes... and her [[disposal]] of him. I was [[wrong]]. It was a [[cinema]] verite of [[Betty]] hits the Beach encased for the first [[part]] by Mordant Morven. I really don't care what young lassies from Scotland do these days, who thy screw, what drugs they take. Visually, the [[stroll]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was pleasant and surely the high point for me. The nadir was the chop shop for her dead boyfriend. As the movie came to a close I had two thoughts... 1. That's all there is? 2. Now I see why her boyfriend killed himself. Rename it. "Bare Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my trip to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these things out. I have to admit that I [[sandwiched]] this one out thinking something would have to happen, besides the [[died]] [[agencies]] in the [[frst]] scenes... and her [[disposition]] of him. I was [[incorrect]]. It was a [[cinematic]] verite of [[Beatty]] hits the Beach encased for the first [[parties]] by Mordant Morven. I really don't care what young lassies from Scotland do these days, who thy screw, what drugs they take. Visually, the [[walk]] through the Cabo de Gata in Andalucia was pleasant and surely the high point for me. The nadir was the chop shop for her dead boyfriend. As the movie came to a close I had two thoughts... 1. That's all there is? 2. Now I see why her boyfriend killed himself. Rename it. "Bare Bitch Boredom, or What I did on my trip to Spain." I'm such a sucker for sticking these things out. --------------------------------------------- Result 763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I was never so bored in my [[life]]. Hours of [[pretentious]], self-obsessed heroin-addicted [[basket]] [[cases]] lounging [[around]] [[whining]] about their [[problems]]. It's [[like]] [[watching]] lizards molt. [[Even]] the sex scenes will induce a serious case of narcolepsy. If you have insomnia, rent this. I was never so bored in my [[vida]]. Hours of [[cocky]], self-obsessed heroin-addicted [[pail]] [[instances]] lounging [[throughout]] [[griping]] about their [[hassles]]. It's [[iike]] [[staring]] lizards molt. [[Yet]] the sex scenes will induce a serious case of narcolepsy. If you have insomnia, rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] One reason Pixar has endured so well, and been so successful, is that while their films remain technical marvels and visual mosaics, they have a story to match their style. And often very moving style at that: [[affecting]], charming and cross-generational. That a [[lot]] Anime (speaking in [[broad]] terms) and a [[great]] [[many]] other animations fail to [[match]] their [[technical]] virtuosity with real substance is, I think (and I might be [[wrong]]) [[partly]] because either the [[makers]] aren't [[bothered]] with [[character]] and plot and [[focus]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer [[effort]] that goes into [[making]] some animations is so [[enormous]], so enervating that they don't have the energy to [[create]] a really [[engaging]] [[story]].

That same cannot be [[said]] of Renaissance. There are [[flaws]] in its plot, but I'll [[get]] to that [[later]]. Those same [[flaws]], however, are not [[reflected]] in the [[visuals]] - Renaissance is [[nowt]] short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[images]] ([[sometimes]] so high-contrast that is [[nothing]] but one [[face]] or one beam of light visible) and [[incredible]] detail are always [[impressive]], [[always]] a [[joy]] to [[behold]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the [[grim]] offspring of [[Blade]] Runner and [[Brave]] [[New]] [[World]]; [[dark]], [[murky]], [[quite]] [[affluent]] and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, [[obsessed]] with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the [[squalor]] and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of [[monumental]], [[sophisticated]] [[architecture]].

It's a compelling environment, not [[entirely]] [[original]], but [[great]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' [[technology]] and [[incredible]] attention to human and design minutiae [[result]] in [[images]] a black-and-white [[photographer]] [[would]] [[die]] for. Not that the [[detail]] [[prevents]] [[entertainment]], because [[Christian]] Volckman [[crafts]] some [[superb]] [[action]] [[sequences]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[couple]] of [[gruesome]](ly imaginative) [[murders]], [[several]] tussles in the [[dark]] and a [[nasty]] dust-up in a [[gloomy]] [[apartment]]. The [[locations]] are [[great]], too (I [[want]] to visit the nightclub). [[While]] the central [[character]] of Karas is your [[regular]] off-the-shelf maverick [[cop]], the other two female [[characters]] (who are [[sisters]]) are the real motors of the movie. Coming from war-torn [[Eastern]] [[Europe]], products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own past).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the [[shenanigans]] of high-rolling Avalon [[CEO]] Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. One reason Pixar has endured so well, and been so successful, is that while their films remain technical marvels and visual mosaics, they have a story to match their style. And often very moving style at that: [[influencing]], charming and cross-generational. That a [[batches]] Anime (speaking in [[extensive]] terms) and a [[whopping]] [[innumerable]] other animations fail to [[matchmaking]] their [[tech]] virtuosity with real substance is, I think (and I might be [[erroneous]]) [[partially]] because either the [[producer]] aren't [[deranged]] with [[trait]] and plot and [[concentrated]] far too much on sound and image, or the sheer [[endeavor]] that goes into [[doing]] some animations is so [[overwhelming]], so enervating that they don't have the energy to [[creating]] a really [[participate]] [[narratives]].

That same cannot be [[indicated]] of Renaissance. There are [[irregularities]] in its plot, but I'll [[obtain]] to that [[then]]. Those same [[foibles]], however, are not [[manifested]] in the [[photographs]] - Renaissance is [[summat]] short of stunning. The ultra-high contrast [[image]] ([[occasionally]] so high-contrast that is [[anything]] but one [[confronts]] or one beam of light visible) and [[unbelievable]] detail are always [[noteworthy]], [[invariably]] a [[jubilation]] to [[see]]. The futuristic Paris on display is the [[dusky]] offspring of [[Bladed]] Runner and [[Gutsy]] [[Newer]] [[Globe]]; [[darkness]], [[obscure]], [[very]] [[wealthy]] and even clean, but shrouded in intrigue, corporate malfeasance, [[haunted]] with beauty (capital of the catwalk, after all) and disguising the [[wretchedness]] and neglect of its labyrinthine passages with a veneer of [[massive]], [[complex]] [[structure]].

It's a compelling environment, not [[fully]] [[initial]], but [[large]] all the same. The film's much-touted 'motion-capture' [[technician]] and [[unimaginable]] attention to human and design minutiae [[findings]] in [[picture]] a black-and-white [[photographic]] [[should]] [[dies]] for. Not that the [[details]] [[prevent]] [[amusement]], because [[Christians]] Volckman [[artisans]] some [[extraordinaire]] [[actions]] [[sequence]]: a hell-for-leather care chase, a [[coupling]] of [[atrocious]](ly imaginative) [[assassinate]], [[multiple]] tussles in the [[darkness]] and a [[nauseating]] dust-up in a [[morose]] [[condo]]. The [[location]] are [[super]], too (I [[wants]] to visit the nightclub). [[Despite]] the central [[traits]] of Karas is your [[routine]] off-the-shelf maverick [[police]], the other two female [[traits]] (who are [[siblings]]) are the real motors of the movie. Coming from war-torn [[East]] [[Eu]], products of a war, diaspora and a family spat, they're a compelling metaphor for Europe as a whole.

The film is tremendously atmospheric, its dizzying, swooping faux-camera moves and adult tone making for a very engaging experience. However, the plot... It never becomes more interesting than the initial hook, in which indefatigable plod Karas must find Ilona Tasuiev, a drop-dead gorgeous and pioneering scientist, after she's snatched from the street. The sinister corporation Avalon (is ANY corporation ever not sinister?), which she was working for on 'classified', projects are hell-bent on her retrieval, and soon Karas is up to his neck in official reprimands, dead bodies, cigarette-smoke and narrowly-missed bullets, and falling in love with Ilona's sister Bislane (very sympathetically voiced by Catherine McCormack), as he plumbs the depths of the city's sordid underbelly (and his own past).

Text-book noir, in other words, but while I enjoyed the film a lot more than Sin City (to which it bears a passing visual resemblance), the plot and resolution are dull, the theme of immortality being raised but never examined, and the [[adventures]] of high-rolling Avalon [[EXECS]] Paul Dellenbach are also dull , undercutting a lot of the dramatic tension. The basic ideas are familiar sci-fi genre materials, and there's a nagging sense that the visuals and atmosphere are disguising the mundane material.

However, the film as a whole is lucid and perfectly coherent, even if some of the scenarios the characters get into occasionally feel like excuses for displays of technical wizardry. But it's the projection of life in Paris circa 2054, the vision of community and creation of another city from the ground up that makes this film something to behold. I may be taking it too seriously, and if that's the case I can at least say that it's superbly made, extremely entertaining (and pretty mature, too), and with an ambiance like no other. --------------------------------------------- Result 765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[updates]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. Rewriting a [[movie]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can Wait" only shows that Rock's eye was on the box-office (this was strictly a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not strive for something loftier or more memorable than a silly reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific supporting cast (including the usually-reliable Regina King, the wonderful Mark Addy, Wanda Sykes, Eugene Levy, and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but Rock seems awkward and unsure of himself throughout. *1/2 from **** Chris Rock, apparently desperate for a cozy star-vehicle which would cross his appeal over to white and mainstream black audiences, [[refreshed]] the hit 1978 comedy "Heaven Can Wait" with an urban agenda. He plays a struggling comedian involved in a car accident who has his soul removed too soon from his body--consequently, his angels must find another body to place him in, and can only come up with that of a white businessman. Rewriting a [[cinematography]] as bland and sentimental as "Heaven Can Wait" only shows that Rock's eye was on the box-office (this was strictly a corporate move organized by the most mercenary of Hollywood players). Why not strive for something loftier or more memorable than a silly reincarnation comedy that culminates with an Evening at the Apollo? Terrific supporting cast (including the usually-reliable Regina King, the wonderful Mark Addy, Wanda Sykes, Eugene Levy, and terrific Frankie Faison) do what they can, but Rock seems awkward and unsure of himself throughout. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 766 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearer]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this movie too much. And I own all the discs of "Planet Earth" I had seen the rating for this movie very high , and read good reviews about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alas]], I went to the theater and the movie started , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and Discovery. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The movie continued and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet Earth".

We were very very disappointed , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't recognize. I have a feeling that I simply didn't remember them.

So finally what this movie really is , is a compilation of different footages from the different discs of "Planet Earth" , with a narration aimed at kids. Yes, the narration is quite kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! My title above says it all. Let me make it [[clearest]]. If you have seen the BBC's "Planet Earth" , which I am sure most of you have , then you are not gonna like this movie too much. And I own all the discs of "Planet Earth" I had seen the rating for this movie very high , and read good reviews about it. I was excited to check it out.

[[Alack]], I went to the theater and the movie started , I saw it was a Disney movie with production companies listing BBC and Discovery. And when they started the first scenes about the polar bear, I recognized them from my DVDs at home of "Planet Earth".

The movie continued and went on and on and on , me and my friends kept on recognizing the scenes were all from "Planet Earth".

We were very very disappointed , as I think 90% of the footage is from "Planet Earth" . I am saying 90% , because some of the scenes I didn't recognize. I have a feeling that I simply didn't remember them.

So finally what this movie really is , is a compilation of different footages from the different discs of "Planet Earth" , with a narration aimed at kids. Yes, the narration is quite kiddish. Let me give you an example. When they show the polar cubs walking away from the mother cub , the narrator says "The polar cubs are not like human kids. They don't always listen to their mothers" ( I don't remember the exact words , but this is how it is ) So in a nutshell. This is condensed "Planet Earth" for kids ! --------------------------------------------- Result 767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Actually my [[vote]] is a 7.5. Anyway, the [[movie]] was good, it has those [[funny]] parts that make it [[deserve]] to [[see]] it, don't misunderstand me, is not the funniest [[movie]] of the world, and its not even original because its a [[idea]] that we have [[seen]] before in other [[movies]], but this one has its own [[taste]], a [[friend]] of [[mine]] told me that this was a [[film]] for [[boyfriends]]... I [[think]] that not exactly but who cares? Also there is another [[movie]] that [[show]] us [[almost]] the same [[topic]], Chris [[Rock]] [[appears]] in it, the name is Down to Earth, [[men]], that one its a very [[funny]] movie, see both if you [[want]] and I know that you will agree that [[Mr]]. [[Rock]] won with his [[movie]]. I would [[liked]] that the protagonist male [[character]] were [[given]] to [[Ashton]] Kutcher, however, the [[film]] is [[good]]. Actually my [[voting]] is a 7.5. Anyway, the [[cinematography]] was good, it has those [[hilarious]] parts that make it [[deserved]] to [[behold]] it, don't misunderstand me, is not the funniest [[cinematography]] of the world, and its not even original because its a [[brainchild]] that we have [[noticed]] before in other [[movie]], but this one has its own [[aftertaste]], a [[boyfriend]] of [[mines]] told me that this was a [[filmmaking]] for [[grooms]]... I [[thinking]] that not exactly but who cares? Also there is another [[flick]] that [[displaying]] us [[hardly]] the same [[themes]], Chris [[Boulder]] [[appearing]] in it, the name is Down to Earth, [[males]], that one its a very [[droll]] movie, see both if you [[wanted]] and I know that you will agree that [[Mister]]. [[Boulder]] won with his [[flick]]. I would [[loved]] that the protagonist male [[nature]] were [[gave]] to [[Aston]] Kutcher, however, the [[movie]] is [[buena]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is entertaining [[enough]] due to an excellent performance by Virginia Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[lovely]]. [[However]] the reason the movie is so [[predictable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the [[book]] A Mother's Gift but I [[hope]] for [[Britney]] and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[Unless]] you consider ending a [[movie]] with what is essentially a music video an original [[idea]], the entire movie brings to mind the word plagiarized. This movie is entertaining [[adequately]] due to an excellent performance by Virginia Madsen and the fact that Lindsey Haun is [[loverly]]. [[Yet]] the reason the movie is so [[foreseeable]] is that we've seen it all before. I've haven't read the [[books]] A Mother's Gift but I [[esperanza]] for [[Rihanna]] and Lynne Spears sake it is completely different than this movie. [[If]] you consider ending a [[cinematography]] with what is essentially a music video an original [[concept]], the entire movie brings to mind the word plagiarized. --------------------------------------------- Result 769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] as a habit i always like to read through the 'hated it' reviews of any given movie. especially one that i'd want to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint sorta deal; i just like to see what people say on the flipside.

however, i do want to [[address]] one [[thing]]. [[many]] people that [[hated]] it called it, to paraphrase, 'beautiful, but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman maclean, a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. as a habit i always like to read through the 'hated it' reviews of any given movie. especially one that i'd want to comment on. and it's not so much a point-counterpoint sorta deal; i just like to see what people say on the flipside.

however, i do want to [[tackling]] one [[stuff]]. [[multiple]] people that [[despise]] it called it, to paraphrase, 'beautiful, but shallow,' some even going so far as to say that norm's desire yet inability to help his brother was a mundane plot, at best.

i'd like to disagree.

as a brother of a sibling who has a similar dysfunction, i can relate. daily, you see them abuse themselves, knowing only that their current path will inevitably lead them to self-destruction. and it's not about the specifics of what they did when; how or why paul decided to take up gambling and associating with questionable folks; it's really more how they are wired. on one hand, they are veritable geniuses, and on the other, painfully self-destructive (it's a lot like people like howard hughes — the same forces which drive them are the same forces which tear them apart) and all the while you see this, you know this, and what's worse, you realize you can't do a damn thing about it.

for norman maclean, a river runs through it was probably a way to find an answer to why the tragedy had to occur, and who was to blame. in the end, no one is, and often, there is no why. but it takes a great deal of personal anguish to truly come to this realization. sometimes it takes a lifetime. and sometimes it never comes at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[After]] becoming [[completely]] addicted to Six Feet Under, I didn't [[think]] there [[would]] ever be another show that [[would]] come close to being as good as this show. Well, I was [[wrong]]! [[Lost]] is spellbinding!! I absolutely [[love]] this show and cannot [[turn]] it off. The richness of the characters, the [[intricacies]] of the plot, the beautiful setting are all [[amazing]]. I am [[totally]] and [[completely]] [[hooked]]. I don't know how the creators do it, but each character [[touches]] me very deeply. I feel their joy, their pain, everything, right down to my [[core]]!!! I don't have cable so I've been renting the series on Netflix. When I put it on I watch all the episodes at once and feel sad when it is over. I can't wait for the next disc to arrive at my house. This is probably the [[best]] TV show I have ever seen!!! [[Upon]] becoming [[totally]] addicted to Six Feet Under, I didn't [[reckon]] there [[ought]] ever be another show that [[could]] come close to being as good as this show. Well, I was [[improper]]! [[Forfeited]] is spellbinding!! I absolutely [[iove]] this show and cannot [[transforming]] it off. The richness of the characters, the [[complexities]] of the plot, the beautiful setting are all [[unbelievable]]. I am [[perfectly]] and [[downright]] [[hook]]. I don't know how the creators do it, but each character [[touche]] me very deeply. I feel their joy, their pain, everything, right down to my [[nub]]!!! I don't have cable so I've been renting the series on Netflix. When I put it on I watch all the episodes at once and feel sad when it is over. I can't wait for the next disc to arrive at my house. This is probably the [[nicest]] TV show I have ever seen!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This movie has [[great]] [[style]], fantastic visuals and hot sex scenes with a beautiful woman. It falters at the [[end]] as the story twists get a little bit extreme.. but all in all, I would [[recommend]] this [[movie]] just because it has that [[good]] old Russian feel to it.. big, impressive, [[powerful]], [[bleak]] and brutal and at the same time beautiful in the old tradition of [[tragic]] beauty.

PLOT: A guy who can make a blade shoot out of his hand at will (not a spoiler since they show it in the trailer) when he is REALLY mad at you tries to have a girlfriend.. he discovers that after you kill one person with your sword hand, it's kind of hard to keep a stable relationship....

Sword boy is on the planet for a reason.. he just doesn't know what it is.. YET.

Lots of dark street fights with guys unexpectedly getting filleted creatively.

RUSSAIN w ENG subtitles.. slick worth a watch.. This movie has [[fantastic]] [[styles]], fantastic visuals and hot sex scenes with a beautiful woman. It falters at the [[termination]] as the story twists get a little bit extreme.. but all in all, I would [[recommends]] this [[flick]] just because it has that [[alright]] old Russian feel to it.. big, impressive, [[influential]], [[dim]] and brutal and at the same time beautiful in the old tradition of [[dire]] beauty.

PLOT: A guy who can make a blade shoot out of his hand at will (not a spoiler since they show it in the trailer) when he is REALLY mad at you tries to have a girlfriend.. he discovers that after you kill one person with your sword hand, it's kind of hard to keep a stable relationship....

Sword boy is on the planet for a reason.. he just doesn't know what it is.. YET.

Lots of dark street fights with guys unexpectedly getting filleted creatively.

RUSSAIN w ENG subtitles.. slick worth a watch.. --------------------------------------------- Result 772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] [[Murders]] are occurring in a Texas desert town. Who is responsible? Slight novelties of [[mystery]] and [[racial]] tensions (the latter really doesn't fit), but otherwise [[strictly]] for slasher fans, who will appreciate the [[gore]] and nudity, which are two [[conventional]] elements for these [[films]].

[[Dana]] Kimmell (of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 3 infamy) stars as the bratty quasi-detective teen.

*1/2 out of ****

MPAA: Rated [[R]] for violence and gore, nudity, and some [[language]]. [[Slayings]] are occurring in a Texas desert town. Who is responsible? Slight novelties of [[puzzle]] and [[ethnic]] tensions (the latter really doesn't fit), but otherwise [[tightly]] for slasher fans, who will appreciate the [[gora]] and nudity, which are two [[classic]] elements for these [[cinematography]].

[[Dan]] Kimmell (of FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 3 infamy) stars as the bratty quasi-detective teen.

*1/2 out of ****

MPAA: Rated [[rs]] for violence and gore, nudity, and some [[parlance]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh dear god. This was horrible. There is [[bad]], then there was this. This [[movie]] makes no [[sense]] at all. It runs all over the map and isn't clear about what its saying at all. The [[music]] seemed like it was [[trying]] to be like Batman. The fact that 'Edison' isn't a [[real]] [[city]], takes away. Since I [[live]] in Vancouver, watching this movie and recognizing all these places made it [[unbearable]]. Why didn't they make it a [[real]] [[city]]? The only [[writing]] that was [[decent]] was'Tilman' in which John Heard did a fantastic job. He was the only [[actor]] who played his role realistically and not over the top and campy. It was actually a shame to see John Heard play such a great bad guy with a lot of screen time, and the movie be a washout. Too [[bad]]. [[Hopefully]] someone [[important]] will [[see]] it, and at [[least]] [[give]] John [[Heard]] credit where [[credit]] is due, and [[hire]] him as lead bad guy again, which is where he should be. on the A [[List]]. Oh dear god. This was horrible. There is [[unhealthy]], then there was this. This [[movies]] makes no [[feeling]] at all. It runs all over the map and isn't clear about what its saying at all. The [[musica]] seemed like it was [[seek]] to be like Batman. The fact that 'Edison' isn't a [[genuine]] [[ville]], takes away. Since I [[vivo]] in Vancouver, watching this movie and recognizing all these places made it [[untenable]]. Why didn't they make it a [[true]] [[town]]? The only [[handwriting]] that was [[presentable]] was'Tilman' in which John Heard did a fantastic job. He was the only [[protagonist]] who played his role realistically and not over the top and campy. It was actually a shame to see John Heard play such a great bad guy with a lot of screen time, and the movie be a washout. Too [[amiss]]. [[Thankfully]] someone [[notable]] will [[seeing]] it, and at [[fewer]] [[lend]] John [[Hear]] credit where [[credits]] is due, and [[renting]] him as lead bad guy again, which is where he should be. on the A [[Lists]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Have you ever wished that you could escape your dull and stressful life at school or work and [[go]] on a magical adventure of your own, with one of your closest friends at your side, facing all sorts of dangers and villains, and unraveling the mystery of a lost civilization that's just [[waiting]] for someone to discover all its secrets? [[Even]] if you're not quite that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could simply experience what it's like to be a [[kid]] again, and not have a care in the [[world]], for just a couple of [[hours]]?

This is [[exactly]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Sky]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[young]] but very [[brave]] and ambitious [[engineer]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[town]] until one day, a [[girl]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[sky]] like an angel and takes him on a [[journey]] to a place far beyond the [[clouds]], while all the while they have pirates and military units [[hot]] on their trail. [[Simply]] put, it is just the [[incredible]] adventure that every kid dreams of at one point or another, and I can't help but feel my worries melt away every time I see it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[works]] and takes much place in the everyday world, the [[film]] is not as visually spectacular or deep in its storyline as Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or even Princess Mononoke. Still, I find it difficult to say that any of these films are [[superior]] over the other, because all three of those films are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being enigmatic, if not perplexing, especially for the youngest of viewers.

"Castle in the Sky", on the other hand, doesn't try so much to be an allegory of any kind, and it's not a coming-of-age story either; it is instead quite possibly one of the [[best]] [[depictions]] of the inside of a child's mind I've ever seen. Not only is the artwork beautiful, but the use of perspective from the kids' eyes is just amazing; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to see the enormous trees or clouds overhead, or the incredible sense of height from looking down at the ground or ocean while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't help but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a kid in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the film, when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. Have you ever wished that you could escape your dull and stressful life at school or work and [[going]] on a magical adventure of your own, with one of your closest friends at your side, facing all sorts of dangers and villains, and unraveling the mystery of a lost civilization that's just [[hoping]] for someone to discover all its secrets? [[Yet]] if you're not quite that much of a fantasy-lover, have you ever wished you could simply experience what it's like to be a [[infantile]] again, and not have a care in the [[worldwide]], for just a couple of [[hour]]?

This is [[accurately]] what Miyazaki's "Castle in the [[Heavens]]" is all about. Pazu, a [[youthful]] but very [[heroic]] and ambitious [[mechanics]], lives a rustic life in a mining [[towns]] until one day, a [[chick]] named Sheeta falls down from the [[celestial]] like an angel and takes him on a [[voyage]] to a place far beyond the [[cloud]], while all the while they have pirates and military units [[sexy]] on their trail. [[Sheer]] put, it is just the [[unimaginable]] adventure that every kid dreams of at one point or another, and I can't help but feel my worries melt away every time I see it.

As it is one of Miyazaki's older [[cooperating]] and takes much place in the everyday world, the [[movies]] is not as visually spectacular or deep in its storyline as Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or even Princess Mononoke. Still, I find it difficult to say that any of these films are [[higher]] over the other, because all three of those films are, at some point or another, mystical to the point of being enigmatic, if not perplexing, especially for the youngest of viewers.

"Castle in the Sky", on the other hand, doesn't try so much to be an allegory of any kind, and it's not a coming-of-age story either; it is instead quite possibly one of the [[optimum]] [[representations]] of the inside of a child's mind I've ever seen. Not only is the artwork beautiful, but the use of perspective from the kids' eyes is just amazing; whether it's the panning up of the "camera" to see the enormous trees or clouds overhead, or the incredible sense of height from looking down at the ground or ocean while hundreds of feet in the air, I just can't help but FEEL like I'm there with Pazu and Sheeta, just a kid in another world, far far away from reality.

Even the kids themselves don't have a complex relationship that suggests a need for hope like Ashitaka/San or Chihiro/Haku; Sheeta is Pazu's angel, having literally fallen into his life from the sky one day, the absolutely perfect person for him right from the very start. As the film progresses, more and more of their true adventurous childhood spirit comes out through their kind words and beautifully realistic facial expressions. Not only are they an adorable reminder of who I used to be, but their endearing friendship never lets up throughout the whole film, only growing stronger all the way to the last frame. For that reason, I've fallen in love with the two of them more than I have with any other Miyazaki couple.

At the same time, "Castle in the Sky" is such an easily accessible film because no matter what kind of casual moviegoer you may be, you'll be sure to find your fix here. Mystery, action, drama, comedy, suspense, sci-fi, romance, even some western...it's all here, just about everything people go to the movies for (except maybe horror). This why I can easily recommend it as a first Miyazaki film; it's perfect for those who have no expectations from having already seen the incredible otherworldliness of some of his more recent works.

Even the ending song of the film, when translated into English, conveys the sense of longing for the discovery of some kind of lost civilization, and some kind of soul-mate, that could not be found in our mundane lives. "The reason I long for the many lights is that you are there in one of them...The earth spins, carrying you, carrying us both who'll surely meet." Miyazaki has always provided poetic lyrics to make ending songs out of Joe Hiasashi's gorgeous scores, but this is the only one I've seen that's both a touching love song and an inspirational dream. I have found myself near tears just listening to it.

"Castle in the Sky" may not be Miyazaki's most developed, spectacular, or meaningful work, but it's absolutely perfect for what it really was meant to be: a true vision of childhood fantasy, and a wonderful escape from reality for any adults who wish they could have the same wonderful sense of imagination they had when they were just carefree little kids. Sit back, relax, and love it for what it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 775 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (60%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] This movie was so terrible it was almost good... almost. We love musicals, but not this one. Even with the terrible sound quality, poor cinematography, and many actors who can't sing or dance, Anthony Rapp actually managed to give a good performance (especially toward the end). The character Marjorie, a drunk lady, was enjoyable to watch, too.

The plot is very unexpected and could have been funny without terrible singing and cheezy piano music. Admittadly, some of the songs (fantabulous) are pretty catchy (but not in a good way).

Open House is a funny movie to watch simply because it is awful! We think it might be a good stage musical (with excellent actors). --------------------------------------------- Result 776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (88%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Netflix should mention this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. Superior in every way to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk Stockings turned out to be a big disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[lovely]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Very]] [[glad]] that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. Netflix should mention this short feature on the info for Silk Stockings. Superior in every way to that over-produced fluff. This had much better Cole Porter songs and lots more energy. Silk Stockings turned out to be a big disappointment. Fred was getting too old for this sort of thing, though the dances and Cyd are [[sumptuous]]. I will be on the watch for the Garbo--Melvyn Douglas version of Ninotchka. Was Peter Lorre ill during the making of Silk Stockings--he seems to be very passive in the more active numbers and with less lines? [[Eminently]] [[gratified]] that I ran across Paree--Paree by pure accident. Made the whole experience a lot more enjoyable. Bob Hope, as a simple "song and dance man' is pure joy. --------------------------------------------- Result 777 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I watched Lion king more times that all my friends put togther. Having a baby sister.. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like ok well let me see... the second one was significantly weaker... then i saw an ad for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like ok there we go again. After watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my [[expectations]] (for repetitevness) were broken. A [[truly]] [[lovely]] and [[original]] plot keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. I watched Lion king more times that all my friends put togther. Having a baby sister.. you know how it is. By now i memorized both the plot and the lines. After Lion king 2 came out i was like ok well let me see... the second one was significantly weaker... then i saw an ad for lion king 1 and 1/2... I was like ok there we go again. After watching the 1 1/2 i was like wow. All my [[outlook]] (for repetitevness) were broken. A [[really]] [[loverly]] and [[initial]] plot keeps you glued to your seat for the entire time. I have noticed that the cartoon was filled with so many comical moments that ROFlmao will apply here 100%.

I definetly recommend seeing the cartoon. --------------------------------------------- Result 778 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I vaguely remember Ben from my Sci-Fi fandom days of the '60s, I was doing several [[interviews]] & bios of obscure actors/actresses, most notably Ben, actress Fay Spain, and Jody Fair, who played Angela in 1961's The Young Savages. [[Ben]] was one of the people at a low-key Sci-Fi con in Chicago, about 1970, when I had a nice chat with him and his "career" and life. All these were published in some now-long-forgotten fanzine of the day. Wish I still had copies of those interviews, but time [[marches]] on, and any of those people surely wouldn't' remember me at all so many years later. Ben was a really nice fellow, ekeing out a living (The cons of those days didn't even pay their guest, unless, of course they were big-name stars, and even then the pay was a couple hundred dollars, at most! Good to know Ben's still alive & kicking! How 'bout a remake of Creature, but 50 years older! Ugly then, uglier now! I vaguely remember Ben from my Sci-Fi fandom days of the '60s, I was doing several [[discussion]] & bios of obscure actors/actresses, most notably Ben, actress Fay Spain, and Jody Fair, who played Angela in 1961's The Young Savages. [[Ibn]] was one of the people at a low-key Sci-Fi con in Chicago, about 1970, when I had a nice chat with him and his "career" and life. All these were published in some now-long-forgotten fanzine of the day. Wish I still had copies of those interviews, but time [[rallies]] on, and any of those people surely wouldn't' remember me at all so many years later. Ben was a really nice fellow, ekeing out a living (The cons of those days didn't even pay their guest, unless, of course they were big-name stars, and even then the pay was a couple hundred dollars, at most! Good to know Ben's still alive & kicking! How 'bout a remake of Creature, but 50 years older! Ugly then, uglier now! --------------------------------------------- Result 779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] A [[long]] [[time]] [[ago]], in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the [[original]] "[[Star]] [[Wars]]" film was released. He doesn't remember first seeing the movie, but he [[also]] doesn't [[remember]] [[life]] before it. He does remember the [[first]] "Star Wars" themed [[gift]] he got...a shoebox full of [[action]] figures from the original set. He was too [[young]] to [[fully]] appreciate how special that gift [[would]] be. But years later, he would [[get]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[best]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of action figures, ten of the final twelve he needed to complete his collection. It's now legendary in this boy's family how the last action figure he needed, Anakin Skywalker, stopped being produced and carried in stores, and how this boy went for about ten years (until he got into college) trying to track one down and finally bought it from someone on his dorm floor for a bag of beer nuggets (don't ask...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't review "Star Wars" as a movie. It represents absolutely everything good, fun and magical about my childhood. There's no separating it in my mind from Christmases, birthdays, summers and winters growing up. In the winter, my friends and I would build snow forts and pretend we were on Hoth (I was always Han Solo). My friends' dad built them a kick-ass tree house, and that served as the Ewok village. They also had a huge pine tree whose bottom branches were high enough to create a sort of cave underneath it, and this made a great spot to pretend we were in Yoda's home. I am unabashedly dorky when it comes to "Star Wars" and I think people either just understand that or they don't. I don't get the appeal of "Lord of the Rings" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no need to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ A [[lang]] [[moment]] [[earlier]], in a galaxy far, far away.....There was a boy who was only two years old when the [[upfront]] "[[Superstar]] [[Warfare]]" film was released. He doesn't remember first seeing the movie, but he [[moreover]] doesn't [[remind]] [[vie]] before it. He does remember the [[fiirst]] "Star Wars" themed [[gifts]] he got...a shoebox full of [[activity]] figures from the original set. He was too [[youthful]] to [[totally]] appreciate how special that gift [[ought]] be. But years later, he would [[got]] what to this day goes down as one of the [[optimum]] gifts he's ever received: another box full of action figures, ten of the final twelve he needed to complete his collection. It's now legendary in this boy's family how the last action figure he needed, Anakin Skywalker, stopped being produced and carried in stores, and how this boy went for about ten years (until he got into college) trying to track one down and finally bought it from someone on his dorm floor for a bag of beer nuggets (don't ask...it's a Northern Illinois University thing).

I can't review "Star Wars" as a movie. It represents absolutely everything good, fun and magical about my childhood. There's no separating it in my mind from Christmases, birthdays, summers and winters growing up. In the winter, my friends and I would build snow forts and pretend we were on Hoth (I was always Han Solo). My friends' dad built them a kick-ass tree house, and that served as the Ewok village. They also had a huge pine tree whose bottom branches were high enough to create a sort of cave underneath it, and this made a great spot to pretend we were in Yoda's home. I am unabashedly dorky when it comes to "Star Wars" and I think people either just understand that or they don't. I don't get the appeal of "Lord of the Rings" or "Star Trek" but I understand the rabid flocks of fans that follow them because I am a rabid fan of George Lucas's films.

I feel no need to defend my opinion of these movies as some of the greatest of all time. Every time I put them in the DVD player, I feel like I'm eight years old again, when life was simple and the biggest problem I had was figuring out how I was going to track down a figure of Anakin Skywalker.

Grade (for the entire trilogy): A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 780 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This [[movie]] is pretty [[cheesy]], but I do [[give]] it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's [[principles]]. There are some great moments in the film and the dialogue has some [[great]] moments as well.

The aerial [[assault]] sequence is perhaps the [[best]] part of the [[movie]].

I guess I really like the idea of what [[lengths]] a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. [[Sure]] it's not all that well done, but the [[premise]] is not at all [[bad]].

Tom This [[cinematographic]] is pretty [[corny]], but I do [[lend]] it credit for at least trying to provide some characterization for it's [[principle]]. There are some great moments in the film and the dialogue has some [[formidable]] moments as well.

The aerial [[aggression]] sequence is perhaps the [[optimum]] part of the [[filmmaking]].

I guess I really like the idea of what [[length]] a veteran will go for a fellow veteran. [[Convinced]] it's not all that well done, but the [[prerequisite]] is not at all [[unfavorable]].

Tom --------------------------------------------- Result 781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is just horrible, really horrible [[trash]]. [[Yes]], we've got beautiful naked women dancing and having sex. But while this may [[work]] in the [[mechanism]] of a porn [[movie]] – may have even been a [[hit]] as a porn [[movie]] – this tries to mask itself as a "[[film]]" with actual things to say, with real emotion and struggle. It isn't. It's an [[excuse]] to [[get]] some [[girls]] naked and have a fun time. I'm sure all of these women (and men) in this [[particular]] [[movie]] could have faired [[decently]] in the porn [[movie]] [[business]] of the 1970s . . . but not in the [[actual]] [[movie]] [[business]].

The acting was hackneyed, so [[bad]], I [[mean]] [[real]] [[terrible]]. The [[writing]] was [[even]] [[worse]]. I can't lay all [[blame]] on these [[actors]] – they had [[nothing]] to [[work]] with. The very [[broad]] [[structure]] or plot of the [[movie]] [[could]] [[possibly]] be [[done]] and [[done]] well with good writers and competent actors. The very [[broad]] [[structure]] or plot is that of a psychotic man who [[spends]] his time shooting people from afar, as a sniper. These [[shootings]] were [[motivated]] from [[men]] not [[respecting]] their [[women]] enough. [[If]] there was more [[writing]] - [[better]] writing, much [[better]] writing - and less [[gratuitous]] sexual imagery we [[might]] have something to [[work]] with.

This [[movie]] should have been shot, made and [[marketed]] a hardcore [[porn]] [[movie]] all along; it [[would]] have [[made]] more [[money]]. It [[practically]] is a hardcore porn [[film]] already, and it remains the only non-porn [[movie]] I've [[seen]] that [[shows]] a [[male]] [[erect]] [[penis]]. This is just horrible, really horrible [[dustbin]]. [[Oui]], we've got beautiful naked women dancing and having sex. But while this may [[cooperates]] in the [[mechanisms]] of a porn [[film]] – may have even been a [[befallen]] as a porn [[cinematographic]] – this tries to mask itself as a "[[kino]]" with actual things to say, with real emotion and struggle. It isn't. It's an [[alibis]] to [[gets]] some [[dame]] naked and have a fun time. I'm sure all of these women (and men) in this [[unique]] [[cinematography]] could have faired [[aright]] in the porn [[movies]] [[companies]] of the 1970s . . . but not in the [[real]] [[film]] [[companies]].

The acting was hackneyed, so [[mala]], I [[imply]] [[genuine]] [[scary]]. The [[literary]] was [[yet]] [[pire]]. I can't lay all [[guilt]] on these [[protagonists]] – they had [[anything]] to [[collaborated]] with. The very [[wide]] [[edifice]] or plot of the [[cinematography]] [[wo]] [[arguably]] be [[doing]] and [[performed]] well with good writers and competent actors. The very [[wide]] [[structural]] or plot is that of a psychotic man who [[spend]] his time shooting people from afar, as a sniper. These [[gunshot]] were [[motivating]] from [[man]] not [[respect]] their [[woman]] enough. [[Though]] there was more [[write]] - [[best]] writing, much [[best]] writing - and less [[unjustified]] sexual imagery we [[apt]] have something to [[works]] with.

This [[movies]] should have been shot, made and [[commercialized]] a hardcore [[interracial]] [[cinematography]] all along; it [[could]] have [[accomplished]] more [[cash]]. It [[hardly]] is a hardcore porn [[cinematography]] already, and it remains the only non-porn [[filmmaking]] I've [[watched]] that [[illustrates]] a [[virile]] [[constructing]] [[pecker]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 782 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A good cast and they do their best with what they're [[given]], but the [[story]] makes no sense, the characters' [[actions]] are [[inexplicable]], and there are too [[many]] [[moments]] of [[unintentional]] [[humor]], as when a [[man]] is [[killed]] by being [[pierced]] with [[pieces]] of a phonograph [[record]] or when they [[get]] the witch drunk to a hip [[hop]] [[beat]] and then [[hit]] her over the [[head]] with a [[bottle]] and she [[grabs]] her [[hostage]] and pouts off. The scene when the two [[witch]] and her victim (played by the same [[actress]]) are in the [[house]] [[together]] sets up like a 3 Stooges [[routine]], and the plot [[begs]] the question: if the [[witch]] [[wants]] to possess this other woman's soul, why doesn't she just do it [[instead]] of [[leading]] these people on this [[elaborate]] [[chase]]? Not to be missed is [[Christopher]] Walkin's eyeglasses and his automotive [[explanation]] of the afterlife (paraphrased): "The [[ancient]] Egyptianas - they wee materialists. They [[expected]] the body to [[last]] through eternity, [[like]] a [[used]] [[car]] that you souped up. But the Druids, they knew you couldn't [[drive]] in the afterlife. You had to [[get]] out and [[walk]]." [[Huh]]? The [[ending]] is [[absolutely]] indecipherable. [[Seems]] [[like]] they just ran out of [[film]]. A good cast and they do their best with what they're [[afforded]], but the [[histories]] makes no sense, the characters' [[measurements]] are [[unfathomable]], and there are too [[various]] [[times]] of [[accidental]] [[comedy]], as when a [[hombre]] is [[murder]] by being [[perforated]] with [[smithereens]] of a phonograph [[docket]] or when they [[got]] the witch drunk to a hip [[jump]] [[defeating]] and then [[hitting]] her over the [[leiter]] with a [[bottles]] and she [[seizes]] her [[ransom]] and pouts off. The scene when the two [[magician]] and her victim (played by the same [[actor]]) are in the [[habitation]] [[jointly]] sets up like a 3 Stooges [[routines]], and the plot [[provokes]] the question: if the [[sorceress]] [[desires]] to possess this other woman's soul, why doesn't she just do it [[however]] of [[culminating]] these people on this [[elaborated]] [[pursues]]? Not to be missed is [[Christophe]] Walkin's eyeglasses and his automotive [[explanations]] of the afterlife (paraphrased): "The [[antiquity]] Egyptianas - they wee materialists. They [[anticipated]] the body to [[final]] through eternity, [[iike]] a [[uses]] [[vehicular]] that you souped up. But the Druids, they knew you couldn't [[driving]] in the afterlife. You had to [[obtain]] out and [[marche]]." [[Eh]]? The [[terminated]] is [[perfectly]] indecipherable. [[Appears]] [[iike]] they just ran out of [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just saw this movie today at the Seattle International Film Festival, and enjoyed it thoroughly.

Great writing and direction, excellent and believable interaction among the cast, and great comic timing as well.

This movie touches on themes that are universal-family and separation. As a result, I can see European, Asian, and American audiences all finding points of similarity between this film and their own lives.

If all that wasn't enough, this has the potential to be the best underground date movie of the year...somebody distribute this in the USA, please!

Finally: thank you Maria Flom! It really is a great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 784 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This film actually works from a fairly original [[idea]] - I've never seen [[nymphs]] that were thrown out of heaven in a horror movie before anyway. [[However]], the way that it executes this idea isn't [[original]] in the slightest; we follow a bunch of [[kids]] that, for some reason decide to go on a trip into the forest. The fact that the forest is inhabited by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/nutcases/zombies etc; but [[really]], the monsters are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real asset that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror setting. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct lack of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only real highlight the film has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's nothing to recommend this film for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties woodland flicks, you might find some enjoyment here. This film actually works from a fairly original [[thoughts]] - I've never seen [[larvae]] that were thrown out of heaven in a horror movie before anyway. [[Still]], the way that it executes this idea isn't [[preliminary]] in the slightest; we follow a bunch of [[enfant]] that, for some reason decide to go on a trip into the forest. The fact that the forest is inhabited by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/nutcases/zombies etc; but [[genuinely]], the monsters are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real asset that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.

It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror setting. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct lack of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only real highlight the film has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's nothing to recommend this film for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties woodland flicks, you might find some enjoyment here. --------------------------------------------- Result 785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] A brilliant chess player [[attends]] a tournament and falls in love with a woman he meets there. On itself this [[would]] be a pretty bad angle on a story. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[also]] completely alienated from the [[world]] because of his brilliance at the game and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament [[tension]] to historic events that shaped the chess [[player]] and [[works]] [[quite]] [[nicely]]. It's easy to [[grow]] attached to the two [[main]] characters and [[easy]] to believe they might hit it off together like the way they do in this [[film]]. The added effect of the tournament is very [[good]] too and creates a nice tension setting.

I have no idea of the strength of the chess players as I don't play the game myself but it looks nice and believable. All in all, most of the film goes down very easily. It is also forgotten again very easily though. So it's nice to watch but nothing more than that.

7 out of 10 chess players caught between a rook and a hard place A brilliant chess player [[assist]] a tournament and falls in love with a woman he meets there. On itself this [[ought]] be a pretty bad angle on a story. So, there is more. There is the fact that the chess player is [[additionally]] completely alienated from the [[globe]] because of his brilliance at the game and the fact there is some history haunting the player.

This film steps back and forth from romantic frivolity to tournament [[voltage]] to historic events that shaped the chess [[protagonist]] and [[cooperating]] [[utterly]] [[courteously]]. It's easy to [[augmentation]] attached to the two [[principal]] characters and [[uncomplicated]] to believe they might hit it off together like the way they do in this [[movie]]. The added effect of the tournament is very [[alright]] too and creates a nice tension setting.

I have no idea of the strength of the chess players as I don't play the game myself but it looks nice and believable. All in all, most of the film goes down very easily. It is also forgotten again very easily though. So it's nice to watch but nothing more than that.

7 out of 10 chess players caught between a rook and a hard place --------------------------------------------- Result 786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I have seen several comments here about Brando using a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. [[When]] this [[movie]] was made, racism and discrimination were very strong in the South. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. Could this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in love with a woman of another race? The same [[way]] MASH was a subtle criticism of the Viet Nam war? Any [[thoughts]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "cold". Anyone who has been in Japan would understand. The Japanese people, at least in my experience, did not tend to show emotion in front of strangers. There were strict social rules, especially for men meeting single women. Americans in Japan were totally foreign to this culture, and the blunt attempts to meet women were shocking to the ladies. One trait of the Japanese was to smile when embarrassed or uncomfortable, which many American servicemen took as a sign that their advances were welcomed. Also remember that at the time represented in the movie, Japan had just been defeated, and the occupying forces were treated with reluctant acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very credible performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her interaction with the American actors brought back several memories of my own experiences in the country. I was able to meet a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. I have seen several comments here about Brando using a Southern accent, some of which felt it was a mistake. [[Whenever]] this [[kino]] was made, racism and discrimination were very strong in the South. The Jim Crow laws were still in effect. Civil Rights was in it's infancy. Could this have possibly been a subtle social commentary, a Southern man in love with a woman of another race? The same [[routing]] MASH was a subtle criticism of the Viet Nam war? Any [[thinking]]?

Another comment was made about Myoshi Umeki appearing "cold". Anyone who has been in Japan would understand. The Japanese people, at least in my experience, did not tend to show emotion in front of strangers. There were strict social rules, especially for men meeting single women. Americans in Japan were totally foreign to this culture, and the blunt attempts to meet women were shocking to the ladies. One trait of the Japanese was to smile when embarrassed or uncomfortable, which many American servicemen took as a sign that their advances were welcomed. Also remember that at the time represented in the movie, Japan had just been defeated, and the occupying forces were treated with reluctant acceptance. I think Myoshi Umeki gave a very credible performance of what her situation would have been. Watching her interaction with the American actors brought back several memories of my own experiences in the country. I was able to meet a pair of lovely young ladies who, after I convinced them I was not the typical American male, taught me their language and their culture during my time in their country. --------------------------------------------- Result 787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] this dolph lundgren vehicle is a [[fun]] die hard throwback action [[flick]], it isn't going to win any [[awards]] and its not very original but it [[delivers]] the [[goods]] you would want to see from a dolph lundgren movie. our man dolph is an ex soldier who is now a teacher at a tough inner city high school and when it gets taken over by terrorists its up to him to save the day. sure the script isn't going to win any [[Oscars]] its good [[fun]] and it has its fair share eplosive action. dolph lundgren gives a good enough performance but he comes alive more in the action scenes, and the rest of the cast are not the best actors but they hold it well. all in all detention is an enjoyable action flick, but youv'e seen it a million times before. this dolph lundgren vehicle is a [[droll]] die hard throwback action [[gesture]], it isn't going to win any [[scholarship]] and its not very original but it [[gives]] the [[commodities]] you would want to see from a dolph lundgren movie. our man dolph is an ex soldier who is now a teacher at a tough inner city high school and when it gets taken over by terrorists its up to him to save the day. sure the script isn't going to win any [[Oskar]] its good [[amusing]] and it has its fair share eplosive action. dolph lundgren gives a good enough performance but he comes alive more in the action scenes, and the rest of the cast are not the best actors but they hold it well. all in all detention is an enjoyable action flick, but youv'e seen it a million times before. --------------------------------------------- Result 788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Religious bigotry is rampant everywhere. [[Australia]] is not immune to it.

A dingo snatched a baby and the mother was tried and sent to prison for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before getting knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a [[prison]].

Buy or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[moving]] motion [[picture]] with a [[terrific]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her famous Aussie accent) and Sam Neill, whose accent is his native-born pronunciation, are [[outstanding]]. Those with supporting [[roles]] are [[also]] quite good.

You will [[remember]] this movie for many years.

See it! Religious bigotry is rampant everywhere. [[Australian]] is not immune to it.

A dingo snatched a baby and the mother was tried and sent to prison for having "killed" her own baby. I don't mean to spoil the story for you, but you need to know the basics before getting knee-deep in what caused this woman to find herself inside a [[penitentiaries]].

Buy or rent the movie and discover how deep-seated human hatred of those who are different continues to thrive around the globe.

This is a very [[displacement]] motion [[image]] with a [[sumptuous]] cast of actors.

Both Meryl Streep (with her famous Aussie accent) and Sam Neill, whose accent is his native-born pronunciation, are [[unpaid]]. Those with supporting [[functions]] are [[moreover]] quite good.

You will [[remind]] this movie for many years.

See it! --------------------------------------------- Result 789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (75%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This movie is a remake of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was [[great]], I suggest you see that one. This one is not so [[great]]. The last third of the movie is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to show some of the comic fun that got him to where he is today. However, I don't know what happened to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all seems real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. This movie is a remake of two movies that were a lot better. The last one, Heaven Can Wait, was [[large]], I suggest you see that one. This one is not so [[gorgeous]]. The last third of the movie is not so bad and Chris Rock starts to show some of the comic fun that got him to where he is today. However, I don't know what happened to the first two parts of this movie. It plays like some really bad "B" movie where people sound like they are in some bad TV sit-com. The situations are forced and it is like they are just trying to get the story over so they can start the real movie. It all seems real fake and the editing is just bad. I don't know how they could release this movie like that. Anyway, the last part isn't to bad, so wait for the video and see it then. --------------------------------------------- Result 790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I'm tired of people [[judging]] films on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[fantastic]] [[films]] that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the greatest actors of our time. I'm tired of people [[verdict]] films on their "historical accuracy". IT'S A MOVIE PEOPLE!! The writers and directors are supposed to put their own spin into the story! There are a number of movies out there that aren't entirely accurate with the history....Braveheart, Wyatt Earp, Gangs of New York, Geronimo: An American Legend, The Last of the Mohicans....all [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] that are mildly inaccurate historically. If you want to see a few great actors do what they do best, then I suggest you see this film and don't worry about the accuracy of the facts. Just enjoy the quality of the film, the storyline and one of the greatest actors of our time. --------------------------------------------- Result 791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Jeopardy has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only star is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a [[star]], of course.

Stanwyck is a [[tough]] lady once again as she runs into an [[escaped]] convict while seeking help for her trapped husband in the Mexican desert. The majority of the movie is [[focused]] on how she deals with her captor, who wants her to submit to him in exchange for his help. Some psychological battling there.

It's a [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] little [[movie]] - its short [[length]] makes it taut, and that Stanwyck is great should go without mention (but I'll still praise her every time). Jeopardy has the feel of being a stock movie of sorts - one of the movies that the studios pumped out inbetween big budget/box office ones. It's a mere 70 minutes and doesn't feature many sets, and the only star is Barbara Stanwyck. But what a [[stars]], of course.

Stanwyck is a [[stiff]] lady once again as she runs into an [[eloped]] convict while seeking help for her trapped husband in the Mexican desert. The majority of the movie is [[focussed]] on how she deals with her captor, who wants her to submit to him in exchange for his help. Some psychological battling there.

It's a [[terribly]] [[efficiency]] little [[cinematography]] - its short [[duration]] makes it taut, and that Stanwyck is great should go without mention (but I'll still praise her every time). --------------------------------------------- Result 792 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Surprisingly]] good. The acting was fun, the [[screenplay]] was fun, the [[music]] was cheesie fun, the plot was stupendously fun. This was a fun [[movie]] to watch and to give your brain some [[rest]]. Parts of the plot and quotes I [[found]] to be very [[creative]]. 7 out of 10. Actually for what it was, it would [[deserve]] a 10 out of 10. You are not supposed to [[compare]] this to an arthouse [[film]] or to a bloody slasher [[film]]. [[Unimaginably]] good. The acting was fun, the [[screenplays]] was fun, the [[musical]] was cheesie fun, the plot was stupendously fun. This was a fun [[cinematography]] to watch and to give your brain some [[stays]]. Parts of the plot and quotes I [[detected]] to be very [[imaginative]]. 7 out of 10. Actually for what it was, it would [[merit]] a 10 out of 10. You are not supposed to [[comparative]] this to an arthouse [[filmmaking]] or to a bloody slasher [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Hawked as THE MOST OFFENSIVE MOVIE EVER, GUARANTEED TO OFFEND EVERYONE- Guess what? It worked, I'm offended that we [[shelled]] out money to rent this. Two friends and I were bored and decided to see if all that bull about the movie that we saw on TV was true. Curse Comedy Central and all the other networks that pushed this garbage on us! It was by far the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've [[seen]] since Hollow Man. I generally avoid the crappy ones, but got sucked into this one. We have since beaten the prick who suggest we rent it, and his movie picking [[privileges]] have been [[revoked]]. There is [[nothing]] remotely [[funny]] about this movie...even the "adventures of dickman" scene was sophomoric at [[best]].. Color me p***ed. Thought maybe the [[production]] [[value]] was [[crap]] for some [[important]] [[reason]]...no..it just sucked. NEVER WATCH THIS! for any [[reason]] whatsoever. Not [[even]] with copious [[amounts]] of [[illegal]] [[substance]] [[would]] this [[movie]] be [[funny]]. That's [[saying]] ALOT. Please for the [[love]] of all that is [[holy]], if you [[cherish]] your sanity- never view this movie. It's [[many]] things- [[stupid]], [[pointless]], and [[worthless]] to [[name]] a few. But the main thing it was [[aiming]] for: offensively funny- it [[failed]] [[miserably]]. [[Crash]] and burn.... Hawked as THE MOST OFFENSIVE MOVIE EVER, GUARANTEED TO OFFEND EVERYONE- Guess what? It worked, I'm offended that we [[bombarded]] out money to rent this. Two friends and I were bored and decided to see if all that bull about the movie that we saw on TV was true. Curse Comedy Central and all the other networks that pushed this garbage on us! It was by far the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I've [[noticed]] since Hollow Man. I generally avoid the crappy ones, but got sucked into this one. We have since beaten the prick who suggest we rent it, and his movie picking [[privilege]] have been [[abolished]]. There is [[anything]] remotely [[comical]] about this movie...even the "adventures of dickman" scene was sophomoric at [[better]].. Color me p***ed. Thought maybe the [[productivity]] [[values]] was [[dammit]] for some [[crucial]] [[motives]]...no..it just sucked. NEVER WATCH THIS! for any [[cause]] whatsoever. Not [[yet]] with copious [[sums]] of [[unlawful]] [[substances]] [[ought]] this [[flick]] be [[hilarious]]. That's [[telling]] ALOT. Please for the [[adored]] of all that is [[santo]], if you [[precious]] your sanity- never view this movie. It's [[numerous]] things- [[foolish]], [[fruitless]], and [[vain]] to [[behalf]] a few. But the main thing it was [[aimed]] for: offensively funny- it [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]]. [[Collided]] and burn.... --------------------------------------------- Result 794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie [[starts]] out with a certain amount of [[promise]]; but, in my view, begins to lose it when the [[protagonist]] [[kidnaps]] the [[good]] Samaritan who comes to his [[aid]] when his [[car]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[stranger]] begins to [[fix]] his [[car]] while he is away making a phone call is [[implausible]] [[enough]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[country]] who can [[help]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence [[beginning]] writers are [[warned]] against [[using]] in their stories.

I [[found]] this movie average at best. Art [[direction]] could have been much better, as could have been cinematography. The acting was good, and so was Eva van der Gucht's singing. This movie [[initiates]] out with a certain amount of [[promises]]; but, in my view, begins to lose it when the [[player]] [[hijackings]] the [[alright]] Samaritan who comes to his [[assists]] when his [[automobile]] breaks down. That this well-meaning [[foreigner]] begins to [[remedy]] his [[vehicular]] while he is away making a phone call is [[improbable]] [[suitably]], but that she is one of the few people in the [[nations]] who can [[succour]] him put his family's life back on track is the type of coincidence [[begin]] writers are [[cautioned]] against [[used]] in their stories.

I [[discoveries]] this movie average at best. Art [[directions]] could have been much better, as could have been cinematography. The acting was good, and so was Eva van der Gucht's singing. --------------------------------------------- Result 795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I think you would have to be from the USA to get a lot of the jokes. But if you liked Princess Bride and Forest Gump, You would like this movie. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of course, but having the cameraman trip was obviously done on purpose. Killer Tomatoes is a hundred times better than Nepolean Dynamite. Just my [[opinion]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I know what I [[like]]. I couldn't [[stop]] laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. I think you would have to be from the USA to get a lot of the jokes. But if you liked Princess Bride and Forest Gump, You would like this movie. You can't compare the quality of the filming to those of course, but having the cameraman trip was obviously done on purpose. Killer Tomatoes is a hundred times better than Nepolean Dynamite. Just my [[view]]. I'm sure that people from France would not appreciate the caricatures of the French. So this film isn't for a world audience. And while I am not a trained film critic, I know what I [[iike]]. I couldn't [[parada]] laughing through the whole movie. My sides and my jaws were hurting at the end of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This movie is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of nine [[dollars]] that I've [[spent]] in a very, very long time. [[If]] you knew how often I went to the [[movies]] you'd probably [[say]], that's hard to imagine, but never-the-less, it's true! After seeing the trailer for this movie, I knew that I had to see it! If you're a [[fan]] of horror, mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[trailer]] is nothing less than intriguing and exciting; [[unfortunately]], the movie is none of these.

From the cinematography, to the script, to the acting, this movie is a complete flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie expecting some thrills, mystery, action, horror, or anything other than a waste of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so bad," you might be asking yourself. Let me tell you. The movie was neither mysterious nor suspenseful. Nothing about the movie made me the least bit "on edge," frightened, or curious. The script was at best laughable. There were numerous times throughout the film where the dialogue was just so ridiculous I began to write it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds later that it wasn't. The acting was absolutely dreadful. I like Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, every performance in this movie was incredibly below average. The cinematography was awful with not one moment of suspense or mystique. Finally, the story is completely transparent. You can see the end of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not usually a very harsh critic. Frankly, when I go to see a comedy I want to laugh and when I go to see a mystery/suspense/horror, I just want to be surprised. This movie was boring, poorly acted, poorly written, and an overwhelming disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see something else. This movie is the [[strongest]] [[wastes]] of nine [[usd]] that I've [[expenditure]] in a very, very long time. [[Though]] you knew how often I went to the [[kino]] you'd probably [[tell]], that's hard to imagine, but never-the-less, it's true! After seeing the trailer for this movie, I knew that I had to see it! If you're a [[ventilator]] of horror, mystery, and suspense, why wouldn't you? The [[camper]] is nothing less than intriguing and exciting; [[unhappily]], the movie is none of these.

From the cinematography, to the script, to the acting, this movie is a complete flop. If you're reading this, planning to go to the movie expecting some thrills, mystery, action, horror, or anything other than a waste of an hour and forty-five minutes I'm afraid you are in for disappointment.

"Why is it so bad," you might be asking yourself. Let me tell you. The movie was neither mysterious nor suspenseful. Nothing about the movie made me the least bit "on edge," frightened, or curious. The script was at best laughable. There were numerous times throughout the film where the dialogue was just so ridiculous I began to write it off as comic relief only to find out a few seconds later that it wasn't. The acting was absolutely dreadful. I like Nicholas Cage but this was a miss. Without exception, every performance in this movie was incredibly below average. The cinematography was awful with not one moment of suspense or mystique. Finally, the story is completely transparent. You can see the end of this movie coming a mile away.

I am not usually a very harsh critic. Frankly, when I go to see a comedy I want to laugh and when I go to see a mystery/suspense/horror, I just want to be surprised. This movie was boring, poorly acted, poorly written, and an overwhelming disappointment. Do yourself a favor and go see something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I missed the [[beginning]] of this film, which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've studied the fall of the Roman republic for years so I [[know]] the [[story]]. Then again, that might [[also]] be the reason why I [[disliked]] this [[film]].

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[extras]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't [[think]] they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which case it can be forgiven. The [[odd]] thing is that they sometimes go to [[great]] [[lengths]] to be historically accurate that it [[ends]] up getting [[confusing]]. Like [[throwing]] in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes later. Why [[even]] [[bring]] it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never [[even]] [[seen]]? And like calling Antonius by his [[actual]] [[name]] ([[Marcus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[strange]] English [[name]] [[Mark]] Antony in other scenes.

Though historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[could]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[ounce]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and [[completely]] [[lacking]] [[control]] of herself. [[Instead]] of being a [[clever]] and [[composed]] queen [[Cleopatra]] turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad [[case]] of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is [[also]] from poor script writing. Far too [[many]] [[stupid]] dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. I missed the [[initiates]] of this film, which might account for why I disliked it so much. On the other hand I've studied the fall of the Roman republic for years so I [[savoir]] the [[conte]]. Then again, that might [[similarly]] be the reason why I [[proscribed]] this [[cinematography]].

The film has more historical inaccuracies than [[goodies]]. Though it's so inaccurate that I don't [[believing]] they made an attempt for it to be correct, in which case it can be forgiven. The [[unusual]] thing is that they sometimes go to [[wondrous]] [[duration]] to be historically accurate that it [[end]] up getting [[confounding]]. Like [[hurling]] in Antonius' marriage to Octavia, and then pushing it aside two scenes later. Why [[yet]] [[brings]] it up if it serves no purpose for the plot and Octavia is never [[yet]] [[saw]]? And like calling Antonius by his [[real]] [[behalf]] ([[Markus]] Antonius) in some scenes, and by his [[unusual]] English [[denomination]] [[Dialed]] Antony in other scenes.

Though historical inaccuracies aside, the film [[wo]] still have been an entertaining watch if it wasn't for the leading lady. There isn't an [[jot]] of dignity in her. She's hysterical, dramatical, and [[fully]] [[missing]] [[checking]] of herself. [[However]] of being a [[adroit]] and [[encompassing]] queen [[Cleo]] turns into a hysterical teenager with a bad [[cases]] of PMS. 95% of that comes from the poor acting, but 5% is [[apart]] from poor script writing. Far too [[innumerable]] [[nonsensical]] dramatic scenes are written into the script. Sometimes you weren't watching Antonius and Cleopatra, you were watching immature versions of Dawson and Joey from "Dawson's Creek".

If you want to watch something about this period, watch... anything but this. --------------------------------------------- Result 798 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was initially dubious about this movie (merely because of the subject), but the richly drawn characters, the fabulous scenes of the buffalo hunt, and the dramatic conclusion make it well-worth watching. I initially had trouble distinguishing between the two buffalo hunters but as the movie progressed they increasingly distinguished themselves. I am still haunted by the final scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I've [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[adaptation]] of "Emma".I have [[seen]] it many [[times]] and am [[always]] looking forward to [[seeing]] it again.[[Though]] it only [[lasts]] 107 minutes, most of the novel [[plot]] and sub-plots were [[developed]] in a satisfactory [[way]]. All the [[characters]] are well-portrayed. [[Most]] of the [[dialogues]] come [[directly]] from the novel with no [[silly]] jokes added as in [[Emma]] Thompson's Sense and [[Sensibility]].

As a [[foreigner]], I particularly appreciate the [[perfect]] diction of the actors. The [[setting]] and costumes were beautiful. I find this version quite on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and Prejudice" but then the producer and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really good job portraying "Emma" of whom Jane Austen said she would create a heroin no-one but her would love. She is [[snobbish]] but has just enough youth and inexperience to be still likable. Mark Strong was also very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an easy part, I think, though he has not the charisma shown by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in Pride and Prejudice. Even the end scene (the harvest festival) which does not happen in the novel provides a fitting end except for when it shows Emma being cold and almost unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly reconciled with him, even telling him that she would have enjoyed the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange departure from the faithfulness otherwise [[shown]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more beautiful and elaborate than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. I've [[truthfully]] [[liked]] this [[readjust]] of "Emma".I have [[watched]] it many [[dates]] and am [[incessantly]] looking forward to [[see]] it again.[[If]] it only [[extends]] 107 minutes, most of the novel [[intrigue]] and sub-plots were [[worded]] in a satisfactory [[camino]]. All the [[attribute]] are well-portrayed. [[Anymore]] of the [[dialogue]] come [[squarely]] from the novel with no [[laughable]] jokes added as in [[Emmy]] Thompson's Sense and [[Sensibilities]].

As a [[extraterrestrials]], I particularly appreciate the [[faultless]] diction of the actors. The [[settings]] and costumes were beautiful. I find this version quite on a par with the 1995 miniseries "Pride and Prejudice" but then the producer and screenwriter were the same. Kate Beckinsale did a really good job portraying "Emma" of whom Jane Austen said she would create a heroin no-one but her would love. She is [[snobby]] but has just enough youth and inexperience to be still likable. Mark Strong was also very good at portraying Mr Knightley, not an easy part, I think, though he has not the charisma shown by Colin Firth's Mr Darcy in Pride and Prejudice. Even the end scene (the harvest festival) which does not happen in the novel provides a fitting end except for when it shows Emma being cold and almost unpleasant with Frank Churchill whereas in the novel she was thoroughly reconciled with him, even telling him that she would have enjoyed the duplicity, had she been in his situation. A strange departure from the faithfulness otherwise [[demonstrated]] throughout the film. I find the costumes more beautiful and elaborate than in other adaptations from Jane Austen's novels. --------------------------------------------- Result 800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[best]] movie ever made... But it is better than many of you have said. I still haven't [[seen]] a homo-themed movie better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narrative]] [[movies]], with a [[clear]] beginning, development and [[outcome]]. But European movies are less narrative, but makes you think much and feel.

[[Many]] of you didn't [[understand]] the sense of the [[movie]].. The [[purpose]] of this one is not [[show]] us a [[simple]] "summer loving movie", with commercial [[characters]] who "[[fall]] in [[love]] and live happy [[forever]]". Summer [[Holidays]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[every]] young boy who may feel identified with those boys.

Maybe some of you didn't [[understand]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, showed as flashbacks. These 3 moments are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they meet and love. - After a year and half living together in Nantes, Mathieu doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to suicide taking something, and Cedric brings him to hospital. Later, he appears talking with a psychiatrist to find the reason about he done that. - The last [[part]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, alone.. to think about how his life have changed, how his life become to be, and trying to find himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I said before... this is not a funny movie. If what someone want to see is meat, for that, we have Belami movies.

Presque Rien, what want to show us, is how cruel can be the life, for a young boy who is not sure about his feelings and not sure about what to do in life. [[Mathieu]] only wants to go away from home, and try to live the kind of life that he thought [[could]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed [[perfect]] at the beginning.. later is not as good as he thought, and he become troubled, and feel that he has lost the way of his life. He is lost and doesn't [[know]] what he really wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about feelings... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, depression, loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. Maybe "Presque Rien" is not the [[optimum]] movie ever made... But it is better than many of you have said. I still haven't [[saw]] a homo-themed movie better than this one.

You Americans are accustomed to watch very [[narration]] [[theater]], with a [[unambiguous]] beginning, development and [[results]]. But European movies are less narrative, but makes you think much and feel.

[[Innumerable]] of you didn't [[understanding]] the sense of the [[cinema]].. The [[targeting]] of this one is not [[illustrates]] us a [[uncomplicated]] "summer loving movie", with commercial [[traits]] who "[[declining]] in [[likes]] and live happy [[indefinitely]]". Summer [[Festivals]] and beach are only a background, and this movie is directed to [[any]] young boy who may feel identified with those boys.

Maybe some of you didn't [[fathom]] well this movie, because of its 3 parts, showed as flashbacks. These 3 moments are: - Summertime in Pornichet, when they meet and love. - After a year and half living together in Nantes, Mathieu doesn't go to a psychiatric himself. He tries to suicide taking something, and Cedric brings him to hospital. Later, he appears talking with a psychiatrist to find the reason about he done that. - The last [[portions]], is when Mathieu come back to Pornichet, in winter, alone.. to think about how his life have changed, how his life become to be, and trying to find himself.

It's possible that some people couldn't understand all this well, because all the scenes are mixed among them. But anyway, as I said before... this is not a funny movie. If what someone want to see is meat, for that, we have Belami movies.

Presque Rien, what want to show us, is how cruel can be the life, for a young boy who is not sure about his feelings and not sure about what to do in life. [[Matthew]] only wants to go away from home, and try to live the kind of life that he thought [[wo]] bring him the happiness.. But what seemed [[irreproachable]] at the beginning.. later is not as good as he thought, and he become troubled, and feel that he has lost the way of his life. He is lost and doesn't [[savoir]] what he really wants to do, or what makes him happy. He finally become depressed and tries to commit suicide.

So, funny? Is not a funny movie. Very hot scenes? only a few.. but this is not a movie for entertainment. Is all about feelings... friendship, love, happiness, unhappiness, pain, depression, loneliness... I, as many others, feel identified with life and problems of Mathieu, and that is what director wanted to do.. a movie who show us the cruel reality of a boy's life.

For me, the best homo-themed movie ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[loved]] this film. Not being a swooning Ed Wood Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "boundless enthusiasm" and acknowledge his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal story is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to find, that this film would be about understanding his turbulent life, rather than simply heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a mythology, leaving the cast and the viewer unexpectedly connected to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed Wood the best talking about him from all perspectives, positive and negative, and showing us their character as much as Ed's. We get insight into Ed's personal and professional life: from his romances, to his drinking, to his sexuality, to his friends, to his enemies, and even to his film making.

The film itself is shot in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of humor and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the surprisingly engaging and interconnected story.

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. I [[worshipped]] this film. Not being a swooning Ed Wood Jr. fan, I prefer to appreciate his "boundless enthusiasm" and acknowledge his shortcomings. His movies are fun, but his personal story is one racked with pain. I hoped, and was delighted to find, that this film would be about understanding his turbulent life, rather than simply heaping him with posthumous praise. From beginning to end, this film evolves from a documentary into a mythology, leaving the cast and the viewer unexpectedly connected to each other and to Ed Wood Jr.

What we get are people who knew Ed Wood the best talking about him from all perspectives, positive and negative, and showing us their character as much as Ed's. We get insight into Ed's personal and professional life: from his romances, to his drinking, to his sexuality, to his friends, to his enemies, and even to his film making.

The film itself is shot in a low-budget way that seems done out of respect for Ed, as if using the techniques of most theatrically released movies from 1996 would be disrespectful (sort of like wearing a nicer suit than the President). The set designer uses a sense of humor and also a great deal of insight when matching each cast member with their background.

Fans will be excited to hear personal testimony regarding Ed Wood controversies, and new comers will be amazed that this man was real. The DVD is full of impossible to find gems ("Crossroads of Lorado" and photo galleries), but the real treasure of this film is the surprisingly engaging and interconnected story.

Ed Wood had a habit of defining people through their association with him (for better or worse), to the point where one woman will go down in history as "Swimming Pool Owner" for once letting him and his friends be baptized in her pool. This ability to define a person's legacy comes through universally, as the most amazing effect of the film is to not only give a well rounded idea of the man that was Ed Wood Jr., but also to give a comprehensive view of the community that he created. Somehow, without ever having more that one cast member being interviewed on screen at a time, the connection that Ed Wood created amongst the various people in his life becomes clear, and the viewer is left with great sense of involvement.

Even the title hints at the B-list horror genre, but by the end, we see that even this is a kindness. What begins as unrelated stories by random people ends with the conclusion that all of the cast will be forever weaved into an unpredictably cohesive fabric that history will bring into haunting unity with Wood's legend.

In many ways a living contradiction, Ed Wood Jr. could not be condensed to a single viewpoint. This collaborative effort is the closest to knowing him that we can ever get. Being itself a juxtaposition of themes, it is at once respectful, provocative, thoughtful, gripping, fun, sad, kind, and fulfilling. --------------------------------------------- Result 802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I am an [[avid]] fan of violent exploitation [[cinema]], who would never attack a film for being violent or disturbing. I [[consider]] "Cannibal Holocaust" a masterpiece and will always defend [[controversial]] films like "Day Of The Woman" or "Last House on the Left" as genuine classics. Anyone who browses through my other user comments will notice that I am actually very pro-violence/gore when it comes to films. However, I do think that there should be at [[least]] some point to the violence. This piece of [[crap]] doesn't have any point whatsoever. The first [[film]] in the notorious "Guinea [[Pig]]" series, "The Devil's [[Experiment]]" (1985) is widely controversial, but, as [[opposed]] to [[many]] other [[controversial]] [[films]], this stinker has [[nothing]] at all to be [[recommended]] for. I [[must]] [[say]] that, before seeing any of the Guniea-Pig [[films]], I already had a feeling that I [[would]] [[hate]] this one, knowing what it was about. Due to its status as one of the most [[controversial]] [[films]] [[around]], [[however]], I [[decided]] I had to [[see]] it. I am very [[glad]] I didn't waste any [[money]] on this pile of crap, and I [[sure]] [[wish]] I hadn't wasted my [[time]] with it either.

This thing's [[story]] (I don't [[even]] [[want]] to call it a 'film'): It doesn't have one. [[Three]] scumbags [[torture]] a [[woman]] to death for some excruciating 40 minutes. That's it. There is no artistic [[value]], no 'shocking' story, no suspense; [[nothing]]. Simply the disbelief that a [[film]] that [[shows]] [[NOTHING]] except for a woman being tortured for no [[reason]] [[enjoys]] an [[enormous]] cult-following. It IS [[disturbing]], I [[give]] it that. Of course it is [[disturbing]] to watch a torture [[video]] for 40 minutes. What is more [[disturbing]], [[however]], is the fact that [[many]] people [[actually]] [[seem]] to regard this [[pile]] of [[garbage]] as some [[kind]] of masterpiece. I [[really]] [[cannot]] [[figure]] why. The [[fact]] that the gore [[effects]] [[look]] realistic cannot be the [[reason]], I hope. The [[girl]] who plays the [[victim]] isn't a very [[good]] actor, and reacts very [[calm]] to all the [[torture]]. That makes the film [[look]] less realistic, which is, in this [[single]] [[case]], a good [[thing]]. This is a [[film]] that is [[sickening]]; not for its [[gore]], but for its redundancy, its existence for the [[sole]] [[purpose]] of [[showing]] 40 [[minutes]] of torture.

I strongly oppose any form of censorship. Since this is 100% fake and nobody got hurt during its production, it IS legitimate to make such a film. However, I cannot think of a single reason why anyone would like this, other than the morbid desire to watch suffering and the enjoyment of torture. This film's sequel "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" gained notoriety when [[actor]] Charlie Sheen mistook it for an actual snuff film and informed the FBI. Fortuneately, the film turned out to be fake. Overall, "The Devil's Experiment" is a fake torture/snuff film that seems to have the sole purpose of looking as close to a real snuff film as possible.

"The Devil's Experiment" is one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune of sitting through. Don't torture yourself by giving this piece of crap a try for its controversial status. Do yourself a favor and avoid it. Zero stars out of 10, I wish there was a negative scale in order to appropriately rate this pile of crap. I am an [[impassioned]] fan of violent exploitation [[theaters]], who would never attack a film for being violent or disturbing. I [[reviewing]] "Cannibal Holocaust" a masterpiece and will always defend [[contested]] films like "Day Of The Woman" or "Last House on the Left" as genuine classics. Anyone who browses through my other user comments will notice that I am actually very pro-violence/gore when it comes to films. However, I do think that there should be at [[fewer]] some point to the violence. This piece of [[baloney]] doesn't have any point whatsoever. The first [[cinematography]] in the notorious "Guinea [[Hog]]" series, "The Devil's [[Testing]]" (1985) is widely controversial, but, as [[opposing]] to [[numerous]] other [[contentious]] [[film]], this stinker has [[anything]] at all to be [[suggested]] for. I [[owes]] [[tell]] that, before seeing any of the Guniea-Pig [[film]], I already had a feeling that I [[could]] [[hatred]] this one, knowing what it was about. Due to its status as one of the most [[contentious]] [[filmmaking]] [[throughout]], [[nevertheless]], I [[decide]] I had to [[behold]] it. I am very [[delighted]] I didn't waste any [[cash]] on this pile of crap, and I [[convinced]] [[wanna]] I hadn't wasted my [[moment]] with it either.

This thing's [[tale]] (I don't [[yet]] [[wanted]] to call it a 'film'): It doesn't have one. [[Tre]] scumbags [[tortured]] a [[dame]] to death for some excruciating 40 minutes. That's it. There is no artistic [[values]], no 'shocking' story, no suspense; [[anything]]. Simply the disbelief that a [[filmmaking]] that [[illustrates]] [[NOTHIN]] except for a woman being tortured for no [[reasons]] [[enjoy]] an [[colossal]] cult-following. It IS [[worrying]], I [[lend]] it that. Of course it is [[worrying]] to watch a torture [[videotape]] for 40 minutes. What is more [[disquieting]], [[yet]], is the fact that [[myriad]] people [[genuinely]] [[appears]] to regard this [[piles]] of [[litter]] as some [[genera]] of masterpiece. I [[genuinely]] [[significant]] [[silhouette]] why. The [[facto]] that the gore [[ramifications]] [[peek]] realistic cannot be the [[motif]], I hope. The [[women]] who plays the [[victims]] isn't a very [[alright]] actor, and reacts very [[composure]] to all the [[tortures]]. That makes the film [[peek]] less realistic, which is, in this [[exclusive]] [[lawsuits]], a good [[stuff]]. This is a [[filmmaking]] that is [[disgusting]]; not for its [[gora]], but for its redundancy, its existence for the [[unique]] [[goals]] of [[illustrating]] 40 [[mins]] of torture.

I strongly oppose any form of censorship. Since this is 100% fake and nobody got hurt during its production, it IS legitimate to make such a film. However, I cannot think of a single reason why anyone would like this, other than the morbid desire to watch suffering and the enjoyment of torture. This film's sequel "Flowers of Flesh and Blood" gained notoriety when [[actress]] Charlie Sheen mistook it for an actual snuff film and informed the FBI. Fortuneately, the film turned out to be fake. Overall, "The Devil's Experiment" is a fake torture/snuff film that seems to have the sole purpose of looking as close to a real snuff film as possible.

"The Devil's Experiment" is one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune of sitting through. Don't torture yourself by giving this piece of crap a try for its controversial status. Do yourself a favor and avoid it. Zero stars out of 10, I wish there was a negative scale in order to appropriately rate this pile of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Five [[passengers]] at a bus depot [[tell]] each other their scary [[dreams]] while waiting to be picked up. But is there more to these nightmares than [[meets]] the eye?

Lucky me, five [[bad]] movies for the [[price]] of one! Each segment features the very [[worst]] in acting, special [[effects]], make up and music. And these were [[supposed]] to be [[scary]]? Hmm.. I think I've been more freaked out during an episode of Teletubbies. I swear, you'll sit there like I was, bored to tears waiting in vain for something interesting to happen. Don't bother. It never does. In fact, I even stopped fast forwarding the commercials, as they were a good deal more entertaining than the main feature. AND the ending is the ultimate cop-out. Yep, none of this actually ever happened. If only the same could be said for the day I set my VCR to record this cobblers.. 2/10 Five [[traveller]] at a bus depot [[say]] each other their scary [[daydream]] while waiting to be picked up. But is there more to these nightmares than [[satisfies]] the eye?

Lucky me, five [[mala]] movies for the [[prix]] of one! Each segment features the very [[hardest]] in acting, special [[repercussions]], make up and music. And these were [[suspected]] to be [[fearful]]? Hmm.. I think I've been more freaked out during an episode of Teletubbies. I swear, you'll sit there like I was, bored to tears waiting in vain for something interesting to happen. Don't bother. It never does. In fact, I even stopped fast forwarding the commercials, as they were a good deal more entertaining than the main feature. AND the ending is the ultimate cop-out. Yep, none of this actually ever happened. If only the same could be said for the day I set my VCR to record this cobblers.. 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Being a fan of the first Lion King, I was [[definitely]] looking forward to this movie, but I [[knew]] there was really no way it [[could]] be as good as the original. I know that many Disney fans are wary of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed feelings of them as well.

While [[watching]] The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was regarding this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accept]] this [[movie]] as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) Being a fan of the first Lion King, I was [[categorically]] looking forward to this movie, but I [[overheard]] there was really no way it [[did]] be as good as the original. I know that many Disney fans are wary of the direct-to-video movies, as I have mixed feelings of them as well.

While [[staring]] The Lion King 1½, I tried to figure out what my own viewpoint was regarding this movie. Am I going to be so devout about The Lion King that I will nitpick at certain scenes, or am I just going to [[accepting]] this [[kino]] as just another look at The Lion King story? Most of the time, I found myself embracing the latter.

The Lion King 1½ definitely has its cute and funny moments. Timon and Pumbaa stole the show in the first movie and definitely deserved a movie that centered around them. People just love these characters! My favorite parts of the movie include the montage of Timon & Pumbaa taking care of young Simba and the surprise ending featuring some great cameos.

I could have done without many of the bathroom jokes though, like the real reason everyone bowed to baby Simba at the beginning of Lion King 1. I guess those types of jokes are for the younger set (which after all is the target audience. I don't think many kids are really concerned about Disney's profit margin on direct-to-video movies.)

However, I will say that I was somewhat annoyed when they directly tied in scenes from the original movie to this movie. I'm just too familiar with the original that those scenes just stuck out like sore thumbs to me. Something would be different with the music or the voices that it would just distract me.

As for the music, it wasn't too bad, but don't expect any classics to come from this movie. At least LK2 had the nice ballad, "Love Will Find a Way." As for the voicework, it was well done in this movie. Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella did a great job as always, and even new cast members, the classic comedic actor Jerry Stiller and Julie Kavner (best known as Marge Simpson), did a great job also. You can even enjoy these great voice talents even more by checking out the Virtual Safari on Disc 2 of the DVD. That feature is definitely a lot of fun!!

So all in all, The Lion King 1½ isn't a perfect movie, but it's cute and entertaining. I think many Lion King fans will enjoy it and appreciate it for what it is - a fun, lighthearted look at the Lion King masterpiece from our funny friends' perspectives.

My IMDb Rating: 7/10. My Yahoo! Grade: B (Good) --------------------------------------------- Result 805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Frailty is a non-gory [[horror]] [[film]] that [[achieves]] its [[chills]] by following the logic and impact of a man's [[delusion]]/obsession straight into depravity. Dad (we never learn his name) is a gentle man and loving father who's raising his sons [[alone]] after Mom died giving birth to the youngest son, [[Adam]]. The family's world flips upside down late one night when [[Dad]] rushes into the boys' [[room]] and tells them God has given him a [[vision]]. And what a vision – the entire family's job is to destroy demons, who, of course, are disguised in human form.

Proceeding from this premise, the movie is unflinching in following it. Dad kidnaps people/demons whom God has told him to destroy, binds them, lays his hand on them to see a vision of their evil, then kills them – while making his young sons watch. Fenton, the older boy, is horrified, seeing only a father who's turned into a crazed murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that Dad is following God's will. Eventually, Dad takes his sons on missions to [[abduct]] the "demons" that God has put on Dad's list, and finally, invites them to fully participate in God's mission for the family.

This is not, you understand, an abusive father. He loves his children. He is only following God's instructions: "This is our job now, son. We've got to do this." When Fenton, terrified and convinced his father has gone mad, says he'll report him to the police, his father explains, "If you do that, son, I'll die. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the children are under is unbearable and tragic, and warps their entire lives.(1) The movie's structure is similar to the one used in The Usual [[Suspects]]: a story in flashback, told in a police station to a FBI agent. The moody lighting, the stormy weather, and the eerie calm in the present day add to the menace of the backstory. I wanted to believe the unfolding horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her children by drowning them. Even then, I [[wanted]] to [[believe]] that I was [[watching]] a human [[tragedy]], [[rather]] than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the [[end]] about the veracity of Dad's [[vision]]. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a [[problem]] for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 Frailty is a non-gory [[monstrosity]] [[filmmaking]] that [[reaches]] its [[goosebumps]] by following the logic and impact of a man's [[illusion]]/obsession straight into depravity. Dad (we never learn his name) is a gentle man and loving father who's raising his sons [[solely]] after Mom died giving birth to the youngest son, [[Adams]]. The family's world flips upside down late one night when [[Pope]] rushes into the boys' [[salle]] and tells them God has given him a [[eyesight]]. And what a vision – the entire family's job is to destroy demons, who, of course, are disguised in human form.

Proceeding from this premise, the movie is unflinching in following it. Dad kidnaps people/demons whom God has told him to destroy, binds them, lays his hand on them to see a vision of their evil, then kills them – while making his young sons watch. Fenton, the older boy, is horrified, seeing only a father who's turned into a crazed murderer. Adam, the younger, is uncomfortable, but trusts that Dad is following God's will. Eventually, Dad takes his sons on missions to [[abducted]] the "demons" that God has put on Dad's list, and finally, invites them to fully participate in God's mission for the family.

This is not, you understand, an abusive father. He loves his children. He is only following God's instructions: "This is our job now, son. We've got to do this." When Fenton, terrified and convinced his father has gone mad, says he'll report him to the police, his father explains, "If you do that, son, I'll die. The angel was clear on this." The pressure that the children are under is unbearable and tragic, and warps their entire lives.(1) The movie's structure is similar to the one used in The Usual [[Defendants]]: a story in flashback, told in a police station to a FBI agent. The moody lighting, the stormy weather, and the eerie calm in the present day add to the menace of the backstory. I wanted to believe the unfolding horror was just a story, until I remembered the real-life parallel of Andrea Yates, who believed she was possessed by Satan and could save her children by drowning them. Even then, I [[wanting]] to [[believing]] that I was [[staring]] a human [[drama]], [[comparatively]] than a story of divine retribution.

The movie gave me no such comfort, though, as it gave strong clues at the [[ceases]] about the veracity of Dad's [[conception]]. And this, as much as some plot holes, posed a [[difficulties]] for me. Regardless of the accuracy of Dad's visions, regardless of the evil that his victims may have committed, where does anyone derive the authority to act as an angel of death? (1) Roger Ebert review, 4/12/02 --------------------------------------------- Result 806 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Based on one of the books by Gabriel Marquez and it might be brilliant literature, this cinema-adaption really sucks as it's more like fighting against sleep rather than enjoying some cinematographic delices. The story is about an old couple whose son died and living a life that is heavily dominated by poverty, and wherein the main character is a cock that hopefully one day brings some money for a forthcoming cockfight. I am in no mood to spill more words on this useless pretentious piece, just perhaps that you can see Salma Hayek in here, but sitting 90 minutes in front of your screen for just that? No gracias..... --------------------------------------------- Result 807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Very]] slow-paced, but intricately [[structured]] and [[ultimately]] very [[touching]]. A [[nice]], very true-to-life look at a [[small]] [[Florida]] [[beach]] town in the [[dead]] of [[winter]] -- I've been there, and this is [[absolutely]] accurate.

It's [[also]] the [[debut]] feature of actress [[Ashley]] [[Judd]], and she makes a [[big]] impression here. It's hard to [[believe]] this [[film]] is 12 years old -- I [[remember]] [[seeing]] it in [[theaters]], and I [[recently]] rented "Ruby" again. Except for the 80's looking [[clothes]], it has held up very [[nicely]]. Ashely is so [[radiant]] and [[touching]] here, that it's [[hard]] to think of her [[subsequent]] [[career]] without wincing. [[Boy]], [[talk]] about failing to [[fulfill]] your [[early]] [[promise]]! [[Anyone]] seeing Ashley here in "[[Ruby]] [[In]] [[Paradise]]" [[would]] assume this elegant, natural beauty went on to all [[kinds]] of interesting art [[films]] and [[serious]] acting -- instead she has [[become]] the "go to" [[girl]] for dumb [[action]] [[films]] and slasher movies! Very disappointing, but at least we have this [[lovely]] performance [[preserved]] to showcase her early promise.

As some other commenter's [[say]], this is not for [[everyone]] as it's very [[slow]] paced. This is not an [[action]] [[film]], nor is it really a romance. The [[director]] (Victor [[Nunez]], "Ulees Gold", another [[excellent]] [[character]] [[study]]) [[treats]] this [[ordinary]] young woman's [[life]] with deep respect, [[allowing]] her [[story]] to [[build]] slowly and with a [[lot]] of detail. [[In]] that [[way]], I [[think]] this is one of the most [[moving]] and respectful coming-of-age [[stories]] about young [[women]] that I can [[recall]] -- it's not about Ruby's sexual [[awakening]] or "how she [[lost]] her virginity", but about her [[life]] [[choices]] and her [[growing]] maturity.

[[A]] lovely [[film]], if you take the time to watch it...I [[think]] it would be a really [[excellent]] [[film]] to [[show]] [[teens]] and young [[girls]] (or [[boys]] for that matter) and give them a [[chance]] to [[think]] about and [[discuss]] it.

Particular kudos to director [[Nunez]], who [[also]] [[wrote]] the [[script]], which is so [[realistic]] and [[nicely]] detailed that I [[assumed]] all through the [[movie]] that it was [[based]] on a female-written novel or [[memoir]], but in fact it's [[Mr]]. Nunez's original [[work]]. Rated 8 out of 10. [[Eminently]] slow-paced, but intricately [[structural]] and [[lastly]] very [[affects]]. A [[handsome]], very true-to-life look at a [[scant]] [[Fl]] [[beaches]] town in the [[decedent]] of [[winters]] -- I've been there, and this is [[altogether]] accurate.

It's [[additionally]] the [[infancy]] feature of actress [[Ashlee]] [[Jude]], and she makes a [[gargantuan]] impression here. It's hard to [[reckon]] this [[cinematography]] is 12 years old -- I [[remembers]] [[witnessing]] it in [[theater]], and I [[freshly]] rented "Ruby" again. Except for the 80's looking [[clothe]], it has held up very [[courteously]]. Ashely is so [[radioactive]] and [[affects]] here, that it's [[arduous]] to think of her [[later]] [[vocational]] without wincing. [[Dude]], [[schmooze]] about failing to [[meet]] your [[swift]] [[promising]]! [[Person]] seeing Ashley here in "[[Robbie]] [[For]] [[Heaven]]" [[ought]] assume this elegant, natural beauty went on to all [[class]] of interesting art [[movie]] and [[severe]] acting -- instead she has [[gotten]] the "go to" [[chick]] for dumb [[activity]] [[cinematic]] and slasher movies! Very disappointing, but at least we have this [[cute]] performance [[kept]] to showcase her early promise.

As some other commenter's [[told]], this is not for [[anyone]] as it's very [[sluggish]] paced. This is not an [[activity]] [[movies]], nor is it really a romance. The [[superintendent]] (Victor [[Felicity]], "Ulees Gold", another [[super]] [[traits]] [[scrutinize]]) [[addresses]] this [[banal]] young woman's [[vie]] with deep respect, [[permits]] her [[tale]] to [[constructed]] slowly and with a [[batch]] of detail. [[During]] that [[pathway]], I [[ideas]] this is one of the most [[displacement]] and respectful coming-of-age [[tale]] about young [[females]] that I can [[reminding]] -- it's not about Ruby's sexual [[woken]] or "how she [[outof]] her virginity", but about her [[living]] [[chosen]] and her [[raising]] maturity.

[[una]] lovely [[kino]], if you take the time to watch it...I [[reckon]] it would be a really [[super]] [[flick]] to [[displays]] [[adolescents]] and young [[females]] (or [[guy]] for that matter) and give them a [[chances]] to [[thinks]] about and [[examines]] it.

Particular kudos to director [[Felicity]], who [[similarly]] [[authored]] the [[hyphen]], which is so [[reality]] and [[politely]] detailed that I [[shouldered]] all through the [[flick]] that it was [[founded]] on a female-written novel or [[memory]], but in fact it's [[Mister]]. Nunez's original [[cooperation]]. Rated 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Definitely]] a very [[good]] idea,screenplay was just OK.[[Could]] have been better,The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an adventure lover,A new idea about the lost world of Atlantis.Negatives are that I personally feel that this [[idea]] had so much more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better [[adventure]] than this.It wasn't bad at all but it [[would]] have been much better with some more runtime.[[Enjoyed]] it a [[lot]] though,[[Cant]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This movie is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy ending. [[Decidedly]] a very [[alright]] idea,screenplay was just OK.[[Wo]] have been better,The positives are that it doesn't bore you if you're an adventure lover,A new idea about the lost world of Atlantis.Negatives are that I personally feel that this [[think]] had so much more potential than this.They should've ended up with a better [[fling]] than this.It wasn't bad at all but it [[ought]] have been much better with some more runtime.[[Adored]] it a [[batch]] though,[[Thats]] say that it was boring or wasn't good..A good one for the people who like adventure animations like Sindbad,like The road to el Dorado.This movie is also recommended for people looking for a nice little adventure with a very nice happy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I had heard [[good]] [[things]] about this film and was, you guessed it, a [[bit]] disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite solid, in their simple 50s American setting. The [[reason]] I didn't rate this [[film]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pulled]] me out of the film a bit. [[Perhaps]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the film needed to be a bit longer. Maureen's character is quite underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and angry, but why is her sister shown to be more upset? Because she's a few years older? Hasn't the end rather undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the movie makes it seem that Maureen and Court have only just met, when he gets tractored (warning: this scene is surprisingly brutal, in retrospect it seems like it might have been trying to shock a bit. well it [[works]]!). It depends what you want - if you want the girls' happy story of young love that it seems like you're going to get, you're in for a surprise. Man in the Moon is both [[quaint]] and dreamy and a harsh coming of age film – a rather awkward combination? I liked the character of Court though, I can see what girls watching this might be watching. And I loved that they had the courage to both let him hurt the younger sister (most men would, most films wouldn't) and [[get]] killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings [[scale]]. [[For]] some reason I [[found]] Jason London on a tractor [[funny]]. I had heard [[buena]] [[aspects]] about this film and was, you guessed it, a [[bite]] disappointed. Reese Witherspoon is as promised surprisingly good, surprisingly confident, at a young age; really all the (small) cast are quite solid, in their simple 50s American setting. The [[justification]] I didn't rate this [[flick]] higher is mainly that towards the end, the grief shown by the older sister didn't seem so real and this [[pulling]] me out of the film a bit. [[Potentially]] we are expected to fill in the plot, or perhaps the film needed to be a bit longer. Maureen's character is quite underdeveloped I think. It is understandable that Dani (Reese W., the younger) would be traumatised and angry, but why is her sister shown to be more upset? Because she's a few years older? Hasn't the end rather undermined the rest of the film? The pacing of the movie makes it seem that Maureen and Court have only just met, when he gets tractored (warning: this scene is surprisingly brutal, in retrospect it seems like it might have been trying to shock a bit. well it [[cooperating]]!). It depends what you want - if you want the girls' happy story of young love that it seems like you're going to get, you're in for a surprise. Man in the Moon is both [[picturesque]] and dreamy and a harsh coming of age film – a rather awkward combination? I liked the character of Court though, I can see what girls watching this might be watching. And I loved that they had the courage to both let him hurt the younger sister (most men would, most films wouldn't) and [[gets]] killed.

7/10 on my pretty harsh ratings [[amplitude]]. [[Onto]] some reason I [[unearthed]] Jason London on a tractor [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[picked]] this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his exhaustive DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a [[truly]] [[bad]] [[film]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[bad]].

Solar Crisis is bad, but it doesn't [[reach]] that sweet spot of absolute pain that some movies are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sun]] is about to unleash a huge solar flare towards the earth that will essentially destroy it. In order to counter-act this imminent threat, humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew whose duty it is to fire an antimatter bomb (which the opening describes as "the biggest explosive ever") into the sun, which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a different angle, leaving earth unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you sounds like a bad episode of the original Star Trek. Even with an ensemble cast (Charlton Heston, Peter Boyle, and Jack Palance), Solar [[Crisis]] can [[barely]] [[manage]] that [[level]] of mediocrity, thanks to a [[plot]] that [[starts]] [[simple]], [[yet]] becomes increasingly [[nonsensical]] as [[time]] [[wears]] on.

The crowning [[achievement]] of this [[debacle]] of a movie is the [[addition]] of a villain character (played by Boyle) who [[insists]] on sabotaging the [[mission]]. Through [[means]] that are never [[explained]], he [[sends]] an [[evil]] minion with an [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] [[haircut]] to [[exercise]] some [[sort]] of [[vague]] electronic mind control over the space crew's genetically engineered scientist, played by [[female]] lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he [[sabotaging]] the mission? [[Because]] by his moronic viewpoint, he [[believes]] the [[flare]] won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become fabulously [[wealthy]] because he has dug his evil claws into the stock market. In effect, you have a villain with the most absurdly stupid motivation imaginable.

The film's plot becomes amazingly convoluted and develops very slowly, in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character risking an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid answer as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- I [[picks]] this title up from a friend who had it sitting in his exhaustive DVD/Video/Laserdisc collection, so luckily I didn't personally have to pay for it. I had an inkling that it would be a bad film, but I KNOW what a [[really]] [[inclement]] [[kino]] is after watching greats like Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things and The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, and now there is truly nothing that fazes me unless it is astoundingly [[naughty]].

Solar Crisis is bad, but it doesn't [[reaching]] that sweet spot of absolute pain that some movies are at.

Anyway, the general plot is that the [[sunshine]] is about to unleash a huge solar flare towards the earth that will essentially destroy it. In order to counter-act this imminent threat, humanity has assembled a spaceship and crew whose duty it is to fire an antimatter bomb (which the opening describes as "the biggest explosive ever") into the sun, which through some convoluted sci-fi logic will cause the flare to shoot out at a different angle, leaving earth unharmed.

Never mind that what I have just described to you sounds like a bad episode of the original Star Trek. Even with an ensemble cast (Charlton Heston, Peter Boyle, and Jack Palance), Solar [[Crises]] can [[hardly]] [[managerial]] that [[levels]] of mediocrity, thanks to a [[intrigue]] that [[startup]] [[easy]], [[again]] becomes increasingly [[ludicrous]] as [[times]] [[door]] on.

The crowning [[attaining]] of this [[meltdown]] of a movie is the [[supplement]] of a villain character (played by Boyle) who [[insist]] on sabotaging the [[tasks]]. Through [[mode]] that are never [[explains]], he [[dispatch]] an [[wicked]] minion with an [[grossly]] [[naughty]] [[hairdo]] to [[exercising]] some [[kind]] of [[fuzzy]] electronic mind control over the space crew's genetically engineered scientist, played by [[girl]] lead Annabel Schofield. Why is he [[scuttle]] the mission? [[Since]] by his moronic viewpoint, he [[deems]] the [[flaring]] won't happen and that when it doesn't, he will become fabulously [[rika]] because he has dug his evil claws into the stock market. In effect, you have a villain with the most absurdly stupid motivation imaginable.

The film's plot becomes amazingly convoluted and develops very slowly, in time tapping the use of characters who have only vague or uselessly brief roles in the storyline. I could sit here and explain in detail precisely what happens to demonstrate the sheer inability of the screenwriter to make a plot that actually clicks or holds your attention, but I am sitting here writing this review on Microsoft Word and I know for a fact that this would take three pages, and I would only succeed in losing your interest. But then again, you would probably get the same effect from watching the film.

Anyway, the film is miserably bogged down with exceedingly poor dialogue. Imagine if all that ever happened on the Star Trek Enterprise was that the characters spewed sci-fi jargon back and forth at each-other. Yes, I know, they already do that, but imagine if that's ALL they did, and that they used said jargon to set up vague and near-nonsensical scenes that produce no excitement, tension, or interest in the viewer whatsoever.

This is best exemplified at the point when a character in a Zero-G environment screws a bolt back onto a metal box before proceeding to cry in agony for a couple of minutes before suddenly exploding. The script alludes previously to the character risking an explosion, but doesn't bother to give any solid answer as to why or how this occurs, nor why he can't really escape. In totality, you have a sorry cross between the bizarre and the laughable.

Then we have several scenes where dramatic build-up leads to nothing. Jack Palance's performance is wasted on a character that serves only to drive the boy hero (don't ask) around the desert, before getting roughed up and killed by a bunch of suits. On his death-bed, Palance finally tells our boy hero his last name (while wearing a horrible bruised makeup job that makes it look like somebody put a balloon under his eyeball), which he kept quiet about before. Colonel Travis J. Richards. The boy repeats it quietly after he expires, giving viewers the impression that the name is of some significance later on in the film. Perhaps Charlton Heston's grizzled admiral character knows him and the plot will advance thereby once his name is repeated. Something. Anything.

Nope. Sorry. Any hopes you have will be dashed when this moment turns out only to be another of many pathetic, failed attempts at creating drama—for a character so flat and hackneyed that it will forever be a stain on Palance's career, just as those of the rest of the cast are similarly marred.

Completing the film is a painfully abrupt ending featuring Schofield piloting the bomb into the center of the sun in an effort to redeem her deeds while under the villain's spell, a climax which features another of the film's considerably well-done visual effects sequences that, even for the visibly elaborate care put into them, still always manage to make the film look just as chintzy as it really is. The saddest part about this film is the obviously large budget, tragically wasted on a stinker of a script and a supporting cast behind Boyle, Heston, and Palance that manage to nail the coffin shut with pure over-acting.

Grade: D- --------------------------------------------- Result 811 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[think]] the [[deal]] with this [[movie]] is that it has about 2 [[minutes]] of really, really [[funny]] moments and it makes a very good trailer and a lot of people [[came]] in with expectations from the [[trailer]] and this time the movie doesn't live up to the [[trailer]]. It's a little more [[sluggish]] and drags a little slowly for such an [[exciting]] premise, and i think i'm [[seeing]] from the comments people having a love/hate relationship with this movie.

[[However]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[considering]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so giddy and carefree that set among the conformity of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an excellent job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles stand out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, despite a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I found a rather intelligent film. The themes of conformity and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone conforms, or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a screwball comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. I [[thoughts]] the [[address]] with this [[cinematographic]] is that it has about 2 [[mins]] of really, really [[droll]] moments and it makes a very good trailer and a lot of people [[arrived]] in with expectations from the [[camper]] and this time the movie doesn't live up to the [[trailers]]. It's a little more [[slow]] and drags a little slowly for such an [[excite]] premise, and i think i'm [[see]] from the comments people having a love/hate relationship with this movie.

[[Instead]], if you look at this movie for what it is and not what it could have been [[scrutinize]] the talent of the cast, i think it's still pretty good. Julia Stiles is clearly the star, she's so giddy and carefree that set among the conformity of everyone else, she just glows and the whole audience falls in love with her along with Lee. The rest of the cast, of course, Lee's testosterone-filled coworkers, his elegant mother-in-law, his fratlike friend Jim and his bride-to-be all do an excellent job of fitting into stereotypes of conformity and boringness that make Stiles stand out in the first place.

Lee doesn't live up to his costars, i don't think, but you could view that as more that they're hard to live up to. Maybe that's one source of disappointment.

The movie itself, despite a bit of slowness and a few jokes that don't come off as funny as the writer's intended, is still pretty funny and I found a rather intelligent film. The themes of conformity and "taking the safe route" seemed to cleverly align on several layers. For example, there was the whole motif of how he would imagine scenarios but would never act on them until the last scene, or how he was listening to a radio program on the highway talking about how everyone conforms, or just how everything selma blair and julia stiles' characters said and did was echoed by those themes of one person being the safe choice and one being the risky choice.

The other good thing about the movie was that it was kind of a screwball comedy in which Jason Lee has to keep lying his way through the movie and who through dumb luck (example: the pharmacy guy turning out to be a good chef) and some cleverness on his part gets away with it for the most part.

While it wasn't as funny as i expected and there was a little bit of squandered talent, but overall it's still a good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (76%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] i wasn't a fan of seeing this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing eva longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[overall]] it was actually better then i expected but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was enough to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. i wasn't a fan of seeing this movie at all, but when my gf called me and said she had a free advanced screening pass i tagged along only for the sake of seeing eva longoria and laughing at jason biggs antics.

[[comprehensive]] it was actually better then i expected but not by much. this was like a hybrid of how to lose a guy in 10 days and just like heaven. a typical romantic comedy with its moments i guess. the movie was quite short though (around 85 min.) but it was enough to tell the whole story, build some character development and have a decent happy ending. the whole idea of a ghost haunting its former husband was a interesting plot to follow. eva did a good job of keeping up the sarcasm and paul rudd and the rest of the supporting cast (especially jason biggs) kept the laughs coming at a smooth pace.

overall i liked the movie only because it had a good amount of laughs to keep me going otherwise i would have given this movie a lower rating. hey its a chick flick and i'm reviewing this movie from a guy's persepctive alright, it would be more of a fair fight if females reviewied this movie and gave there thoughts about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 813 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is [[quite]] possibly THE [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. Again I [[made]] the [[mistake]] of [[buying]] the movie because the synapse on the back sounded [[cool]] and the front cover [[looked]] pretty cool too (After buying this and the movie "Malevolence" which I [[reviewed]] on here as well, I have learned my lesson). I love [[horror]] [[movies]] that take place in the woods or in the desert or on a farm. This supposedly takes place in the [[woods]] of Texas but was probably filmed in the director's backyard. The production was probably the [[worst]] I ever [[seen]]. The [[actors]] were [[absolutely]] the [[WORST]]. The [[story]] didn't have [[anything]] to do with what the back cover [[said]]. I even [[tried]] to [[sell]] it to F.Y.E and some other "[[mom]] and [[pop]]" [[store]] that [[buys]] used [[DVDs]] and neither would take it. [[Thats]] how [[awful]] this poor [[miserable]] [[excuse]] for a [[movie]] was. I have [[seen]] some [[bad]] [[movies]] before (Troll 2 for [[example]]) but this definitely [[takes]] the [[cake]]. I didn't [[think]] there was a worse [[movie]] than "Troll 2". Boy was I wrong! [[Do]] not [[buy]] this [[movie]] [[unless]] [[someone]] hands it to you for free but even than your stuck with it [[unless]] you [[throw]] it out which is what I am about to do!!!! This is [[rather]] possibly THE [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever [[noticed]]. Again I [[accomplished]] the [[blunder]] of [[procuring]] the movie because the synapse on the back sounded [[refrigerate]] and the front cover [[seemed]] pretty cool too (After buying this and the movie "Malevolence" which I [[exam]] on here as well, I have learned my lesson). I love [[terror]] [[kino]] that take place in the woods or in the desert or on a farm. This supposedly takes place in the [[wood]] of Texas but was probably filmed in the director's backyard. The production was probably the [[hardest]] I ever [[saw]]. The [[players]] were [[fully]] the [[HARDEST]]. The [[conte]] didn't have [[something]] to do with what the back cover [[says]]. I even [[try]] to [[sells]] it to F.Y.E and some other "[[mother]] and [[dad]]" [[shops]] that [[bought]] used [[dvd]] and neither would take it. [[Theyre]] how [[terrible]] this poor [[unhappy]] [[alibi]] for a [[kino]] was. I have [[noticed]] some [[negative]] [[film]] before (Troll 2 for [[cases]]) but this definitely [[pick]] the [[pudding]]. I didn't [[thinking]] there was a worse [[kino]] than "Troll 2". Boy was I wrong! [[Doing]] not [[procuring]] this [[kino]] [[if]] [[everyone]] hands it to you for free but even than your stuck with it [[if]] you [[toss]] it out which is what I am about to do!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I must admit I am a big [[fan]] of South [[Park]] and was [[expecting]] Basketball to be funny but nowhere near as good as it turned out to be! I [[think]] this is what happens when you mix David Zucker, Matt Stone, and [[Trey]] [[Parker]] together. This movie has so much [[replay]] value and at no point bothers to take itself seriously. The slap stick style humor mixed with Stone and [[Parker]] just [[works]] flawlessly. The [[kind]] of humor present in Basketball was not popular upon the time of it's release and had it [[come]] out [[today]] it would be a [[hit]]. Don't bother trying to be critical, just leave your brain at the door and expect endless laughs to come. [[Recommended]] to anyone with a good sense of humor. I must admit I am a big [[admirer]] of South [[Playpen]] and was [[wait]] Basketball to be funny but nowhere near as good as it turned out to be! I [[believe]] this is what happens when you mix David Zucker, Matt Stone, and [[Lilly]] [[Barker]] together. This movie has so much [[reproduction]] value and at no point bothers to take itself seriously. The slap stick style humor mixed with Stone and [[Barker]] just [[cooperating]] flawlessly. The [[types]] of humor present in Basketball was not popular upon the time of it's release and had it [[arrive]] out [[hoy]] it would be a [[strike]]. Don't bother trying to be critical, just leave your brain at the door and expect endless laughs to come. [[Recommendation]] to anyone with a good sense of humor. --------------------------------------------- Result 815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Where]] do you begin with a movie as [[bad]] as this?

Do you mention the [[cast]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[dreadful]] [[script]]?

No. You just [[say]] that anyone who [[pays]] money to [[see]] a film as poor as this needs their head looking at. I [[know]] I do. I respect those poor [[guys]] who saw it with little or no advance word from mags like Empire (usually a bad sign if a preview copy isn't available to the quality movie mags). However, cinemas really should [[start]] thinking about giving out [[refunds]] if the customer isn't happy with the finished product.

I went three days after it opened with two other mates. The only other person in the cinema was one bloke on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the country of just what a [[stinker]] this is.

Not since the days of The Avengers (1998) have I felt so short changed since watching a movie. If a mate comes round with this on video in a few months make sure he pays your electricity bill while watching it.

Tara Fitzgerald deserves an award for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen retains some dignity amid the cinematic carnage; Barry Foster should have been arrested on the set for his performance, Rhys Ifans does his career no favours after the success of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty secretary.

Mind you, considering she used to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting ability had to be pretty low to begin with.

The production values aren't bad considering the obviously limited budget but that script is atrocious. If you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable characters say "Fak!" for a couple of hours then this should be right up your street.

Otherwise, bargepoles required.

[[Everytime]] do you begin with a movie as [[negative]] as this?

Do you mention the [[casting]] of unlikeable heroes? The over-the-top acting? The [[awful]] [[hyphen]]?

No. You just [[tell]] that anyone who [[payroll]] money to [[consults]] a film as poor as this needs their head looking at. I [[savoir]] I do. I respect those poor [[boy]] who saw it with little or no advance word from mags like Empire (usually a bad sign if a preview copy isn't available to the quality movie mags). However, cinemas really should [[embark]] thinking about giving out [[repay]] if the customer isn't happy with the finished product.

I went three days after it opened with two other mates. The only other person in the cinema was one bloke on his own.

And that was on cheap night.

Either the ad campaign had failed dismally or word had spread through most of the country of just what a [[wanker]] this is.

Not since the days of The Avengers (1998) have I felt so short changed since watching a movie. If a mate comes round with this on video in a few months make sure he pays your electricity bill while watching it.

Tara Fitzgerald deserves an award for not cracking up - or walking off the set; Keith Allen retains some dignity amid the cinematic carnage; Barry Foster should have been arrested on the set for his performance, Rhys Ifans does his career no favours after the success of Notting Hill and only Dani Behr is halfway likeable as a busty secretary.

Mind you, considering she used to be in The Word, any viewers' expectations of her acting ability had to be pretty low to begin with.

The production values aren't bad considering the obviously limited budget but that script is atrocious. If you want to hear a bunch of unlikeable characters say "Fak!" for a couple of hours then this should be right up your street.

Otherwise, bargepoles required.

--------------------------------------------- Result 816 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the concept work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost [[obligated]] to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the worst role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. Not exactly a new story line, but this romantic comedy makes the concept work. A young man(John Cusack) and a drop dead gorgeous woman(Kate Beckinsale)keep meeting by chance and wonder if they are meant for each other. Although both are promised to others...oddly enough they still feel that their soul mate is out there somewhere. A little sappy in some places, but viva la love. Being a romantic I am almost [[compelled]] to be riveted. My favorite scene is where Cusack is on the ground and snow starts falling. The finale is almost too sweet, but most deserving. This is not one of Cusack's deeper roles, but who in the hell could not be smitten by Beckinsale. Notable support is provided by Jeremy Piven and Molly Shannon. John Corbett plays the worst role I've ever seen him in. On the other hand Eugene Levy is quirky and funny. Watch this with your soul mate. --------------------------------------------- Result 817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[regret]] the time and money I spent with it. There are no love stories between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional meetings and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't work out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? I've never been to Paris, but after seeing "Paris, Je t'aime" I'm crazy to visit this city! I've been to NY several times and I LOVE the city and its boroughs. I kinda expected to be touched by this film, to feel like jumping into a plane and fly there right away, but, lo and behold, I [[sadness]] the time and money I spent with it. There are no love stories between people or a person and the city. There's a lot of dysfunctional meetings and relations or people who know each other and it just doesn't work out fine. Maybe this reflects a characteristic of the city, where it's said to have thousands of people living on their own. Can't you find love in New York? --------------------------------------------- Result 818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[movie]] was just as [[good]] as some of the other westerns [[made]] by [[Anthony]] Mann and James [[Stewart]] like Winchester '73 and The [[Naked]] Spur, and much better than Thunder Bay and Bend Of The River. This [[film]] [[starts]] out like a [[run]] of the [[mill]] western but [[gets]] more complex as it goes along. It starts out with Jimmy Stewart and [[Walter]] Brennan [[arriving]] in [[Seattle]] and Stewart is charged with murder. He is found innocent but is cattle is [[stolen]] by a corrupt judge. Stewart then agrees to lead [[something]] but i forget what it is but Stewart only cares about getting his [[cattle]] back. As the movie goes along it's like [[Stewart]] only cares about himself just like his [[character]] in the Naked Spur. It [[gets]] [[much]] better at the halfway point after they arrive in [[Alaska]]. This is one of Stewart's [[better]] [[westerns]]. This [[kino]] was just as [[alright]] as some of the other westerns [[brought]] by [[Antony]] Mann and James [[Steward]] like Winchester '73 and The [[Nus]] Spur, and much better than Thunder Bay and Bend Of The River. This [[filmmaking]] [[begins]] out like a [[executing]] of the [[factories]] western but [[receives]] more complex as it goes along. It starts out with Jimmy Stewart and [[Walters]] Brennan [[incoming]] in [[Portland]] and Stewart is charged with murder. He is found innocent but is cattle is [[steal]] by a corrupt judge. Stewart then agrees to lead [[somethings]] but i forget what it is but Stewart only cares about getting his [[bovine]] back. As the movie goes along it's like [[Steward]] only cares about himself just like his [[nature]] in the Naked Spur. It [[obtains]] [[very]] better at the halfway point after they arrive in [[Ak]]. This is one of Stewart's [[optimum]] [[westerners]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This film is stale, and misses the [[mark]]. It is far off compared to the 89 Batman that it [[tries]] to coppy. That [[women]] singer whats her [[name]] can not [[act]], and we see why her film carrier died. Notice how this film died in the box office no one see this film on tv either. My uncle and dad were expecting Batman, and the films impression is more like Cop Rock. Not worth [[renting]] 3/10 This film is stale, and misses the [[brand]]. It is far off compared to the 89 Batman that it [[endeavour]] to coppy. That [[femmes]] singer whats her [[designation]] can not [[acts]], and we see why her film carrier died. Notice how this film died in the box office no one see this film on tv either. My uncle and dad were expecting Batman, and the films impression is more like Cop Rock. Not worth [[hire]] 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Mysterious [[murders]] in a European village [[seem]] the [[result]] of THE [[VAMPIRE]] BAT horde [[plaguing]] the [[terrified]] community.

This [[surprisingly]] [[effective]] [[little]] [[thriller]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's [[Poverty]] Row studios. The [[sparse]] production values and rough [[editing]] actually add to its eerie atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the viewer the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[dream]], which is appropriate for a thriller of this sort.

Even [[though]] the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite [[ludicrous]] and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his typically fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than look lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's terrified burgermeister. And little Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his weird roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most effective as a bat-loving lunatic. Mysterious [[assassinations]] in a European village [[looks]] the [[findings]] of THE [[VAMP]] BAT horde [[raging]] the [[horrified]] community.

This [[terribly]] [[efficacy]] [[scant]] [[thrillers]] was created by Majestic Pictures, one of Hollywood's [[Poorest]] Row studios. The [[dispersed]] production values and rough [[edit]] actually add to its eerie atmosphere and lend it an almost expressionistic quality. Overall, it leaves the viewer the feeling of being caught up in a bad [[slumber]], which is appropriate for a thriller of this sort.

Even [[despite]] the eventual explanation for the hideous crimes is quite [[laughable]] and is not given proper plot development, the film can boast of a good cast. Grave Lionel Atwill gives another one of his typically fine performances, this time as a doctor doing scientific research in an old castle. Beautiful Fay Wray plays his assistant in a role which requires her to do little more than look lovely & alarmed. Dour Melvyn Douglas appears as the perplexed police inspector who also happens to be, conveniently, Miss Wray's boyfriend.

Maude Eburne, who could be extremely funny given the right situation, steals most of her scenes as Miss Wray's hypochondriac aunt. Elderly Lionel Belmore plays the village's terrified burgermeister. And little Dwight Frye, who will always be remembered for his weird roles in the FRANKENSTEIN and Dracula films, here is most effective as a bat-loving lunatic. --------------------------------------------- Result 821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[first]] two seasons of this comedy series were very [[strange]] and they weren't very funny and had a drama element where [[Bill]] (the mother) was struggling with all the [[usual]] [[problems]] in [[life]] but that element was a bit [[depressing]] and didn't mix well with th comedy [[elements]] which is probably why it was [[dropped]]. [[After]] that it [[soon]] [[became]] one of the funniest comedy series the BBC have ever made! The chemistry between Bill and Ben's character's were very funny and there was always so many brilliant and memorable sketches in each series. The Christmas specials were hilarious and a real treat for Christmas.

The show came to a stop when the main actor Gary Olsen playing Bill passed away which was very sad because he was a brilliant actor in films such as Up 'n' Under and a very funny man RIP

This underrated show has sadly disappeared from our television screens and doesn't to be repeated that often - Though it does appear on UKTV Gold once in a while but it should be repeated on BBC one or two to show this brilliant Comedy to a new audience This [[fiirst]] two seasons of this comedy series were very [[outlandish]] and they weren't very funny and had a drama element where [[Bills]] (the mother) was struggling with all the [[routine]] [[troubles]] in [[iife]] but that element was a bit [[grim]] and didn't mix well with th comedy [[components]] which is probably why it was [[fallen]]. [[Afterwards]] that it [[early]] [[came]] one of the funniest comedy series the BBC have ever made! The chemistry between Bill and Ben's character's were very funny and there was always so many brilliant and memorable sketches in each series. The Christmas specials were hilarious and a real treat for Christmas.

The show came to a stop when the main actor Gary Olsen playing Bill passed away which was very sad because he was a brilliant actor in films such as Up 'n' Under and a very funny man RIP

This underrated show has sadly disappeared from our television screens and doesn't to be repeated that often - Though it does appear on UKTV Gold once in a while but it should be repeated on BBC one or two to show this brilliant Comedy to a new audience --------------------------------------------- Result 822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Remade today, this film [[would]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[comedy]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

Vastly disturbing; I haven't been able to [[look]] at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

Remade today, this film [[ought]] be a very creepy, very disturbing dark [[farce]]. Stalking, obsession, and a web of lies and manipulations are given a 1948 gloss of aren't-they-cute harmlessness. Drake plays the stalker, an unabashed user of people, alternately pathetic and manipulative, Grant plays the stalking victim, alternately angry and oblivious.

Vastly disturbing; I haven't been able to [[gaze]] at classic romances with the same suspension of disbelief since.

--------------------------------------------- Result 823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This movie is awesome for three main reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I [[absolutely]] [[loved]] that. There is a bold color theme throughout the movie with extraordinary costumes and picturesque sets. A photography which looks very costly (and probably was not) [[completes]] the look . I always enjoy those stories about groups of misfits/loners coming together and becoming a family . [[Sometimes]] they [[fall]] into clichés but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[flawed]], yet extremely [[likable]] characters. Alan Larkin is the best (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my favorite movie of last year Little Miss Sunshine…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their tricks are very funny. There is a mix of humor and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a lot. And of course it is all about the Magician theme . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. This movie is awesome for three main reasons. It is esthetically beautiful. I [[utterly]] [[worshiped]] that. There is a bold color theme throughout the movie with extraordinary costumes and picturesque sets. A photography which looks very costly (and probably was not) [[finishing]] the look . I always enjoy those stories about groups of misfits/loners coming together and becoming a family . [[Occasionally]] they [[dipped]] into clichés but this one does not. This group of actors really portrays well [[misguided]], yet extremely [[likeable]] characters. Alan Larkin is the best (between him , the van and the road movie theme, I could not help but remember my favorite movie of last year Little Miss Sunshine…) . I discovered Fabrizio Bentivoglio , very interesting actor, and just got annoyed a tiny little bit by Til Schweiger performance at times . The opening scene, all the scenes where they mess up their tricks are very funny. There is a mix of humor and emotion throughout the film. I like the end a lot. And of course it is all about the Magician theme . A good magician is making the audience look where he wants them to, to create an illusion. Which happens to be exactly what a movie director does and that's why they call it movie magic. --------------------------------------------- Result 824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] When I first heard about the title, I [[thought]] of 'The Simpsons', just like so many other reviewers, but when I saw the [[cast]], I was completely [[stunned]], that so many [[great]] character-actors would actually be in this! First of all, we have Christopher Walken (Deer Hunter, Pulp Fiction), who plays the title character, McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, Predator 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos fails the mission, Christina goes to McBain for help.

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token tough black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous movie, "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I think not. There is also a lot of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most notable one being that McBain himself wears a welders-mask when Christina sees him for the first time, when he is working on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other guys in the Vietnam-pack are: The rich guy who can afford all sorts of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce (Michael Ironside, Total Recall, Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by Jay Patterson, who doesn't look like the guy the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't seen him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! When I first heard about the title, I [[brainchild]] of 'The Simpsons', just like so many other reviewers, but when I saw the [[casting]], I was completely [[dumbfounded]], that so many [[prodigious]] character-actors would actually be in this! First of all, we have Christopher Walken (Deer Hunter, Pulp Fiction), who plays the title character, McBain. He is rescued from a Vietnam POW-camp by some of his buddies, one of which is Santos (Chick Vennera, Yanks), who splits a HUNDRED DOLLAR BILL with McBain (Vietnam soldiers are loaded with cash apparently), and tells him that he can re-do the favor to him, if he ever gets into trouble.

Then, 18 years later, Santos and his sister Christina (Maria Conchita Alonso, The Running Man, Predator 2) join the rebels in Colombia trying to get rid of their evil dictator, El Presidente (Victor Argo, Taxi Driver, King of New York), and when Santos fails the mission, Christina goes to McBain for help.

McBain then asks his good ol' Vietnam buddies to help him. First there's the token tough black guy, Eastland, played by "American Ninja"'s Steve James, who was also in director James Glickenhaus' previous movie, "The Exterminator", where the exterminator's real name also was Eastland, coincidence? I think not. There is also a lot of other references to The Exterminator, among other things, the most notable one being that McBain himself wears a welders-mask when Christina sees him for the first time, when he is working on a welding-job on top of a bridge!

The other guys in the Vietnam-pack are: The rich guy who can afford all sorts of equipment for the team, Frank Bruce (Michael Ironside, Total Recall, Starship Troopers), and then there's the doc, Dalton, (played by Jay Patterson, who doesn't look like the guy the IMDb is linking to, and I haven't seen him in other movies, so who knows), and last but not least, there's the cop, Gill, who has had enough of his unsatisfying job, he's played by Thomas G. Waites, who some of us might remember from The Warriors and The Thing.

And in other big roles, we find Luis Guzmán (Boogie Nights, Carlito's Way), as a small-time drug-dealer who can't get a decent job. Also, there is Dick Boccelli as the drug-dealing kingpin who gets hung up in a crane on top of a roof by the McBain-gang, almost Exactly in the same way he got hung up over a meat-grinder by John Eastland in the EXTERMINATOR-movie! Now, I haven't seen Glickenhaus' "Shakedown/Blue Jean Cop" yet, but I'm almost ready to bet half a hundred-dollar bill that Boccelli gets hung up in that movie too!

Well, back to the plot of this movie.. they go off to Colombia and saves the day, yay! But who cares about the plot anyway, the cast is great, and the action-scenes are very well done, and you're never bored while watching this movie! Highly recommended to all action-lovers! --------------------------------------------- Result 825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Billy Crystal co-wrote, co-produced and stars in this extremely [[safe]] and comfy comedy-drama about fathers and sons, adult irresponsibility, and growing old. Billy plays a heart surgeon who has a heart attack (ha ha) which causes him to seek out his estranged father (Alan King), a movie-extra who fancies himself a big star. The script is sub-Neil Simon [[nonsense]] with one-liners galore, a flat, inexpressive [[direction]] by Henry Winkler (stuck in sitcom mode), and family-conflict at the [[ready]]. Crystal and [[King]] [[try]] their best, but King is over-eager and frequently over-the-top. JoBeth Williams has another one of her thankless roles, but manages to bring her innate, down-home class to the proverbial girlfriend character. It's a comedy, I guess, but one that blinks back the tears...shamefully. ** from **** Billy Crystal co-wrote, co-produced and stars in this extremely [[safest]] and comfy comedy-drama about fathers and sons, adult irresponsibility, and growing old. Billy plays a heart surgeon who has a heart attack (ha ha) which causes him to seek out his estranged father (Alan King), a movie-extra who fancies himself a big star. The script is sub-Neil Simon [[foolish]] with one-liners galore, a flat, inexpressive [[orientation]] by Henry Winkler (stuck in sitcom mode), and family-conflict at the [[prepped]]. Crystal and [[Emperor]] [[strive]] their best, but King is over-eager and frequently over-the-top. JoBeth Williams has another one of her thankless roles, but manages to bring her innate, down-home class to the proverbial girlfriend character. It's a comedy, I guess, but one that blinks back the tears...shamefully. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Just [[watched]] this early Bugs Bunny (first time he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as linked from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' first time directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a result, Bugs has a [[different]] voice provided by Mel Blanc than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. In fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy boy" type personality of that time). Anyway, after Elmer buys his pet, Bugs goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio real loud, pretending to die after his master repeatedly throws him out of his shower, and saying "Turn off those lights!" whenever Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the different voice, Bugs is definitely his mischievous self and I laughed myself blue the whole time! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the house to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental breakdown at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I highly recommend Elmer's Pet Rabbit. Just [[observed]] this early Bugs Bunny (first time he's named here) and Elmer Fudd cartoon on the ThadBlog as linked from YouTube. This was Chuck Jones' first time directing the "wascally wabbit" and as a result, Bugs has a [[disparate]] voice provided by Mel Blanc than the Brooklyn/Bronx one we're more familiar with. In fact, according to Thad, he's channeling Jimmy Stewart (his "shy boy" type personality of that time). Anyway, after Elmer buys his pet, Bugs goes all obnoxious on him by turning the radio real loud, pretending to die after his master repeatedly throws him out of his shower, and saying "Turn off those lights!" whenever Elmer catches him in his bed. Even with the different voice, Bugs is definitely his mischievous self and I laughed myself blue the whole time! According to Thad, there was an additional scene at the end of Elmer just giving the house to Bugs after the hell he went through but that was probably considered too sad since he suffers a mental breakdown at that point so it's just as well that cut scene is lost. Anyway, I highly recommend Elmer's Pet Rabbit. --------------------------------------------- Result 827 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] the town of Royston Vasey is a weird, but [[wonderful]] place. The [[characters]] would be just wrong and too [[disturbing]] but the [[fantastically]] brilliant [[writing]] means that it works, and it [[works]] very well. [[Most]] people will [[know]] others with a touch of some characters, but hopefully no one knows people with extremes of personalities such as Tubbs and [[Edward]], the stranger-hating [[owners]] of the local [[shop]], or the pen-obsessed [[Pauline]] who [[treats]] "dole [[scum]]" with much contempt.That was only a few of the [[strange]] inhabitants. The [[TV]] [[works]] consists of 3 series and a [[Christmas]] special. There are references to [[many]] horror [[films]], such as the wicker [[man]]. A more recent [[addition]] to the [[range]] of works is a [[film]], the league of gentlemens apocalypse, of which I will not [[say]] [[much]] but highly recommend. All in all the league of gentlemen is a hilarious [[comedy]] show with genius writing and brilliantly bonkers characters. I would definitely say that it is worth watching as you [[wont]] regret it! the town of Royston Vasey is a weird, but [[fabulous]] place. The [[trait]] would be just wrong and too [[alarming]] but the [[insanely]] brilliant [[writes]] means that it works, and it [[cooperate]] very well. [[More]] people will [[savoir]] others with a touch of some characters, but hopefully no one knows people with extremes of personalities such as Tubbs and [[Edwards]], the stranger-hating [[landowners]] of the local [[shops]], or the pen-obsessed [[Tracy]] who [[deals]] "dole [[froth]]" with much contempt.That was only a few of the [[freaky]] inhabitants. The [[TELEVISION]] [[cooperating]] consists of 3 series and a [[Claus]] special. There are references to [[innumerable]] horror [[cinema]], such as the wicker [[men]]. A more recent [[supplement]] to the [[ranging]] of works is a [[cinema]], the league of gentlemens apocalypse, of which I will not [[says]] [[very]] but highly recommend. All in all the league of gentlemen is a hilarious [[travesty]] show with genius writing and brilliantly bonkers characters. I would definitely say that it is worth watching as you [[habit]] regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Schlocky '70s horror films...ya gotta love 'em. In contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do [[something]] [[scary]] and do not resort to a tired formula.

This is a B [[movie]] about the making of a B movie...that went [[horribly]] wrong. Faith Domergue (This Island Earth) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen making a movie about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight schedule. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the director.

The horror builds slowly; a dead cat here, John Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, yes seven murders. (At least there's truth in advertising.) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was poor Faith to know that those darn Tibetian chants would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. Schlocky '70s horror films...ya gotta love 'em. In contrast to today's boring slasher flicks, these K-tel specials actually do [[somethings]] [[fearful]] and do not resort to a tired formula.

This is a B [[cinema]] about the making of a B movie...that went [[frightfully]] wrong. Faith Domergue (This Island Earth) stars as an over-the-hill, B movie queen making a movie about a series of grisly murders that befell a family in their home. Her boyfriend/director, who looks and acts like Gordon Jump with an attitude, is filming on location and on a tight schedule. The Ken doll co-star discovers a book of Tibetian chants that they work into the script to add "realism". Unfortunately, "realism" is something they could have done without.

John Carradine, having long since given up looking for the 17th gland (The Unearthly), now eeks out a humble existence as the caretaker for the estate. He goes about his daily work, but always seems to run afoul of the director.

The horror builds slowly; a dead cat here, John Carradine entering a grave there, finally culminating in seven, yes seven murders. (At least there's truth in advertising.) It's just sad that the ghoul didn't understand that there was a movie being made above him. How was poor Faith to know that those darn Tibetian chants would actually work? Face it, you just can't go around tugging on Satan's coat and expect him to take it lying down.

Sterno says perform an autopsy on The House of Seven Corpses. --------------------------------------------- Result 829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Despite]] some [[reviews]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I [[found]] the story totally engrossing and [[even]] if some [[critics]] have [[described]] the [[love]] [[story]] as '[[Mills]] and Boon', so what? It is good to [[see]] a warm, [[touching]] [[story]] of [[real]] [[love]] in these cynical [[times]]. [[Many]] in the audience were sniffing and surreptitiously dabbing their eyes. You really [[believe]] that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, [[even]] though, for political reasons, it was an arranged marriage. I did feel though that Sir John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is perhaps played too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the real father of Victoria (as a result of an affair with her mother The Duchess of Kent) it would have been interesting to explore this theory. Emily Blunt is totally convincing as the young Princess, trapped in the stifling palace with courtiers and politicians out to manipulate her. She brilliantly portrays the strength of character and determination that eventually made Victoria a great Queen of England, which prospered as never before, under her long reign. I believe word of mouth recommendations will ensure great success for this most enjoyable and wonderful looking movie. [[Albeit]] some [[scrutinize]] being distinctly Luke-warm, I [[detected]] the story totally engrossing and [[yet]] if some [[detractors]] have [[outlines]] the [[loves]] [[histories]] as '[[Steelworks]] and Boon', so what? It is good to [[consults]] a warm, [[affects]] [[histories]] of [[actual]] [[likes]] in these cynical [[dates]]. [[Various]] in the audience were sniffing and surreptitiously dabbing their eyes. You really [[believing]] that the young Victoria and Albert are passionately fond of each other, [[yet]] though, for political reasons, it was an arranged marriage. I did feel though that Sir John Conroy, who was desperate to control the young Queen, is perhaps played too like a pantomime villain. As it is rumoured that he was in fact, the real father of Victoria (as a result of an affair with her mother The Duchess of Kent) it would have been interesting to explore this theory. Emily Blunt is totally convincing as the young Princess, trapped in the stifling palace with courtiers and politicians out to manipulate her. She brilliantly portrays the strength of character and determination that eventually made Victoria a great Queen of England, which prospered as never before, under her long reign. I believe word of mouth recommendations will ensure great success for this most enjoyable and wonderful looking movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I don't know how and where do the [[Iranian]] [[directors]] get their inspiration in coming up with a plot like this. In fact, it's a very [[simple]] plot that many directors could come up with --- but [[may]] not be [[able]] to project it [[onto]] a movie the way Jafar Panahi did.

The film is like 2 worlds revolving at the same time, one connected to the other - the football match and the battle between sexes that's going on behind the walls of the stadium.

It makes you feel like you are in the movie and you're one of the characters, and while watching the movie, as if you also would like to have a glimpse of the football match. You will feel exactly the same excitement and sentiments as those female actors in the movie. It's gripping in a way that you wanted to see the ending, you will want to find out the verdict, you'll be dying to see what will happen to the girls.

I like the intermittent conversations between the smoking girl and one of the military trainee. It's like venus VS mars, it really shows the difference in the thinking of men and women and the struggle of women to get equal rights and opportunity especially in a very patriarchal society like Iran.

This is the [[second]] movie of Jafar Panahi that I have seen (the first being Crimson Gold) and am looking forward to watching some more.

Am already hooked with Iranian movies and this one is a must-see! I don't know how and where do the [[Teheran]] [[administrators]] get their inspiration in coming up with a plot like this. In fact, it's a very [[uncomplicated]] plot that many directors could come up with --- but [[maggio]] not be [[capable]] to project it [[in]] a movie the way Jafar Panahi did.

The film is like 2 worlds revolving at the same time, one connected to the other - the football match and the battle between sexes that's going on behind the walls of the stadium.

It makes you feel like you are in the movie and you're one of the characters, and while watching the movie, as if you also would like to have a glimpse of the football match. You will feel exactly the same excitement and sentiments as those female actors in the movie. It's gripping in a way that you wanted to see the ending, you will want to find out the verdict, you'll be dying to see what will happen to the girls.

I like the intermittent conversations between the smoking girl and one of the military trainee. It's like venus VS mars, it really shows the difference in the thinking of men and women and the struggle of women to get equal rights and opportunity especially in a very patriarchal society like Iran.

This is the [[secondly]] movie of Jafar Panahi that I have seen (the first being Crimson Gold) and am looking forward to watching some more.

Am already hooked with Iranian movies and this one is a must-see! --------------------------------------------- Result 831 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I remember this show being on the [[television]] when I was a kid back in the early 1990s, and there was this [[rage]] about kids with goofy leotards doing kung fu on one another and riding around in plastic [[dinosaurs]]. It was called power rangers. I remember that little [[kids]] would go around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the show was banned in many school districts all over the country because this [[show]] [[taught]] [[kids]] how to fight each other in [[solving]] their differences.

I never really [[thought]] of this as a show, [[especially]] when better shows like The Tick were [[playing]] on [[Fox]] Kids. Most older [[teens]] [[always]] [[looked]] at power rangers in a ridiculous and scornful manner, and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at best. The colored rangers costumes look like stuff you would work out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic nonsense. Then you get into the acting, and of course those really [[laughable]] haircuts. All the guys run around with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always wear the same clothes everyday, and then change into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[toys]] are especially ridiculous as well, and was the joke of many late night talk show [[hosts]]. And of course two of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]], and I do mean two of the [[worst]] movies ever [[made]] were based on this show with nearly every critic trashing both the films, and the [[shows]] it was [[based]] on.

Power [[rangers]] is [[nothing]] more than a [[bad]] [[television]] commericial for [[especially]] [[bad]] toy merchandising. As an [[adult]], I don't look at it fondly, but rather as another [[embarrassment]] of 1990s kids [[shows]], fashion and guys' earrings. I remember this show being on the [[televisions]] when I was a kid back in the early 1990s, and there was this [[furor]] about kids with goofy leotards doing kung fu on one another and riding around in plastic [[dinosaur]]. It was called power rangers. I remember that little [[brats]] would go around hitting each other and then the shirts and the stuff from the show was banned in many school districts all over the country because this [[exhibitions]] [[learnt]] [[enfants]] how to fight each other in [[resolved]] their differences.

I never really [[think]] of this as a show, [[mostly]] when better shows like The Tick were [[replay]] on [[Foxes]] Kids. Most older [[teenager]] [[unceasingly]] [[seemed]] at power rangers in a ridiculous and scornful manner, and it's not hard to wonder why. The footage is ridiculous at best. The colored rangers costumes look like stuff you would work out in and the dinosaurs look like plastic nonsense. Then you get into the acting, and of course those really [[silly]] haircuts. All the guys run around with earrings on, half of them are wearing 90's mullets, and they always wear the same clothes everyday, and then change into leotard wearing power rangers.

The [[playthings]] are especially ridiculous as well, and was the joke of many late night talk show [[host]]. And of course two of the [[hardest]] [[films]] ever [[effected]], and I do mean two of the [[meanest]] movies ever [[brought]] were based on this show with nearly every critic trashing both the films, and the [[exhibition]] it was [[base]] on.

Power [[ringers]] is [[anything]] more than a [[naughty]] [[televisions]] commericial for [[namely]] [[naughty]] toy merchandising. As an [[adulthood]], I don't look at it fondly, but rather as another [[shame]] of 1990s kids [[illustrates]], fashion and guys' earrings. --------------------------------------------- Result 832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] First of all I would like to point out that this film has absolutely [[nothing]] to see with the Dutch folklore [[story]] of the ghost ship that is also called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this film, you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not see sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[exciting]]. It is not the story of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[thought]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very bad in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It seems to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in feces at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch director, you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. First of all I would like to point out that this film has absolutely [[anything]] to see with the Dutch folklore [[histories]] of the ghost ship that is also called THE FLYING DUTCHMAN. In this film, you will not see a single sailing boat. You will not see sailors, ghosts, or anything remotely [[breathtaking]]. It is not the story of the ghost ship, and I wish they had notified it in the main credits or I wouldn't have watched it, because I really [[brainchild]] it was the film about the legend. It seems many people think the film has to do with the legend of the ghost ship, since the film is listed on the Wikipedia page for the "Flying Dutchman" legend... I don't understand why. It is maybe based on the resembling legend called "The Wandering Jew"? Or maybe did they just adapt the worst parts of the legend? The film begins with a fight sequence that would let anyone hope the film will have battle scenes. Unfortunately, it is the only battle scene of the film. Then you see Daniel Emilfork (who was Krank in City of Lost Children) for about two seconds, and that would let anyone hope the film will have good acting. Unfortunately he is very bad in the film. The same thing can be said about Italian actor Nino Manfredi, who was one of Italia's best actors ever, and who here is condemned to embody a crazy bird wrangler with no back story whose only purpose is to seem to be the "wise man" of the film. And boy, does that film need wiseness! Every other character of the story seems to enjoy swimming in excrement, yelling, torturing others (in excrement), fornicating (in excrement) or laying in excrement some more just for the fun of it. It seems to be such fun that each character of the story gets to have his or her turn being dumped in feces at a point or another. Coming from a Dutch director, you might think that extreme dirtiness and shockingly real filth are necessary elements in a period piece, elements which contributed to make Dutch filmmaker Paul Verhoeven's film, "Flesh + Blood", such a great film. The thought of "Flesh + Blood" would let anyone hope that a film similarly filthy and visually straight-forward would be good. Unfortunately, and unlike "Flesh + Blood", there is no dramatic progression, no fights, no good acting, and put simply, no "Flesh and Blood". The photography, as the opening sequence unfolds, is well-done and enticing. This too, stops very early in the film. The music, from Nicola Piovani (of "La vità e bella" fame) is repetitive and annoying, when not irrelevant (it sometimes implies that there is grandeur in a sequence, while on screen the actors are splashing in liquid dung). Throughout the first "act" of the film, which lasts nothing less than an hour (!), the film takes place within the same perimeter, which is around the farm where the main characters live. The characters play with excrement a lot, drown in it, play in it. A long period of time elapses through numerous ellipses to allows the main character, a young boy who loves to play in excrement, to become older and play in excrement some more. The bird-man talks a lot to say foolish things in Italian. Spanish conquistadors speak French. Nothing makes sense. Everything is confused and takes hours to happen. Then there is a second act called "the Ship", in which we see what might have been a ship, a long time ago, but which is now remains of a ship (covered with excrement did I mention?). The main character, while walking a bit further away from the farm, just happens to run into it, and decides it's really cool so let's live in it. The hunchback who lived in it before is trying to kill him, but he doesn't really mind because (did I mention?) he's not very bright. He thinks the ship can navigate and hopes to sail on it, until more conquistadors show up (at least they seemed to be conquistadors because of the Don Quixote style hats but as I've said it's really confused who's who), make the Dutchman a prisoner, along with the retarded hunchback, and they burn the ship to the ground. The last part of the film, which is really hard to bear for the spectator because it just consists of even more excrement with even more retarded middle-age peasants fighting in it, takes place in a mad asylum. Yet more torture and drowning each other with feces. Yet more loitering for the director, who seems to have definitely given up on his job, or passed onto the second crew camera assistant to do the rest of the job. In the end, a lot of the mentally-challenged new "friends" that the Dutchman made die. The woman he had sex with who was his brother's wife to begin with tries to have him meet his son. The Dutchman and his son talk. The film ends after two hours of dungy images and calamitous acting and technical performances. Then the credits roll and the spectator fells immensely free from having to watch atrocious films with no plot that pretend to be something exciting like fantasy films based on legends, while they are nothing but a mere catalog of how full of excrement some films can get when they don't have enough financing powers to put battles instead or even horses. --------------------------------------------- Result 833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Before this made for [[TV]] [[movie]] [[began]], I had [[relatively]] low expectations. That's because it was made after the [[final]] episode of the [[series]] had [[aired]] and many of the series originals were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant [[appearance]]. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely handicapped.

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of [[spooky]] mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty silly and [[pointless]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I felt like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was fluff, but it did provide a few laughs--something the other dreary plot was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. Before this made for [[TELEVISIONS]] [[cinematography]] [[inaugurated]], I had [[comparatively]] low expectations. That's because it was made after the [[definitive]] episode of the [[serials]] had [[dispensed]] and many of the series originals were gone. There is no President Sheridan, Delenn, Lennier, Londo, Vir, G'kar or Lyta. If you remember, on the second to last episode of the series, all the regulars except Zack, Vir and Captain Lockley left B-5 permanently. Now for this film they did bring back Garibaldi (who was not in the last B-5 movie) to join Zack and the Captain and the Doctor makes a brief and irrelevant [[semblance]]. But because so much is gone of the old chemistry, this film already is severely handicapped.

The movie is about a Soul Hunter (Martin Sheen) who is led to Babylon 5 in search of a globe filled with souls that had been stolen from a hidden repository by an archaeologist (Ian McShane). A lot of [[gruesome]] mumbo-jumbo stuff occurs but frankly it was all pretty silly and [[unusable]]. Yeah, yeah, the station nearly blew up but was saved and all, but frankly I felt like it was a case of "been there done that--and done that a lot better in the past".

The secondary plot, provided more for comic relief, was much more interesting, as an entrepreneur installed a holo-brothel and those in command weren't sure what to do about it and when they tried to pressure them to close, they were slapped with a lawsuit. This was fluff, but it did provide a few laughs--something the other dreary plot was surely lacking.

By the way, Sheen at first did a good job playing the Should Hunter--with his wild eyes and bizarre delivery. However, repeatedly throughout the episode he fell out of character. This should have been spotted and corrected.

So the final verdict is this is only for total die-hard B-5 nuts (like myself). Others seeing it might assume the series sucked--which is a great injustice. This is a great example of a show not knowing when to quit. --------------------------------------------- Result 834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Jewish newspaper [[reporter]] Justin Timberlake (as Joshua "Josh" Pollack) is puzzled when a courtroom defendant whispers "[[Thank]] you" to testifying [[officer]] LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he leaves the witness stand. In the [[opening]] [[sequences]] of this [[film]], you are given the [[explanation]]. You will [[see]] [[Mr]]. Cool J's [[devilish]] detective partner Dylan McDermott (as Frances "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NOT]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as Isaiah Charles). The cops in the [[city]] of "Edison" are so [[corrupt]] they shoot their suspects, steal their [[money]], and [[snort]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his girlfriend (herein, called "Pussy") or win a Pulitzer, the city's corruption does NOT sit well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake [[decides]] to investigate the corruption, which reaches both unexpected scope and life-threatening levels of danger. [[Writer]]/director David J. Burke keeps the film above water, but just [[barely]]. LL Cool J [[beats]] Timberlake in the "pop star to movie star" sweepstakes (aka the "rapper to actor" progression). Mr. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely supporting actors Morgan Freeman (as Moses Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.T. means First Response Assault and Tactical, but it's more important to know that "Edison (Force)" stars Justin Timberlake and LL Cool J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. Burke ~ Justin Timberlake, LL Cool J, Morgan Freeman, Dylan McDermott Jewish newspaper [[correspondents]] Justin Timberlake (as Joshua "Josh" Pollack) is puzzled when a courtroom defendant whispers "[[Appreciation]] you" to testifying [[officials]] LL Cool J (as Rafe Deed) as he leaves the witness stand. In the [[initiation]] [[sequencing]] of this [[cinematographic]], you are given the [[explanations]]. You will [[behold]] [[Monsieur]]. Cool J's [[evil]] detective partner Dylan McDermott (as Frances "Laz" Lazerov) decide [[NAH]] to murder Damien Dante Wayans (as Isaiah Charles). The cops in the [[ville]] of "Edison" are so [[corrupted]] they shoot their suspects, steal their [[cash]], and [[sniff]] their dope. Whether he's out to impress his girlfriend (herein, called "Pussy") or win a Pulitzer, the city's corruption does NOT sit well with the noble Mr. Timberlake.

Timberlake [[decided]] to investigate the corruption, which reaches both unexpected scope and life-threatening levels of danger. [[Novelist]]/director David J. Burke keeps the film above water, but just [[hardly]]. LL Cool J [[defeats]] Timberlake in the "pop star to movie star" sweepstakes (aka the "rapper to actor" progression). Mr. McDermott has fun with his role. Lending gravitas to the proceedings are sagely supporting actors Morgan Freeman (as Moses Ashford) and Kevin Spacey (as Levon Wallace). F.R.A.T. means First Response Assault and Tactical, but it's more important to know that "Edison (Force)" stars Justin Timberlake and LL Cool J, not Morgan Freeman and Kevin Spacey (who seems lost).

**** Edison (9/17/05) David J. Burke ~ Justin Timberlake, LL Cool J, Morgan Freeman, Dylan McDermott --------------------------------------------- Result 835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck (Jon Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one degrading experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very [[dark]], disturbing [[yet]] [[fascinating]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you disoriented and off center--but I couldn't stop watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A great film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. Young, handsome, muscular Joe Buck (Jon Voight) moves from Texas to New York thinking he'll make a living by being a stud. He gets there and finds out quickly that it isn't going to be easy--he goes through one degrading experience after another. At the end of his rope he hooks up with crippled, sleazy Ratso Rizzo (Dustin Hoffman). Together they try to survive and get out of the city and move to Florida. But will they make it?

Very [[gloom]], disturbing [[even]] [[mesmerizing]] movie. Director John Schelsinger paints a very grimy portrait of NYC and its inhabitants. In that way it's dated--the city may have been this bad in 1969 but it's cleaned up considerably by now. He also uses every camera trick in the book--color turning to black & white; trippy dream sequences; flash forwards; flash backs (especially involving a rape); shock cuts; weird sound effects...you name it. It keeps you disoriented and off center--but I couldn't stop watching.

There isn't much of a story--it basically centers on the friendship between Rizzo and Buck. There is an implication that they may have been lovers (the final shot sort of shows that). It's just a portrait of two damaged characters trying to survive in a cold, cruel, urban jungle.

This was originally rated X in 1969--the only reason being that the MPAA didn't think that parents would want their children to see this. Nevertheless, it was a big hit with high schoolers (back then X meant no one under 17). It also has been the only X rated film ever to win an Academy Award as Best Picture. Hoffman and Voight were up for acting awards as was (mysteriously) Sylvia Miles who was in the picture for a total of (maybe) 5 minutes! It was eventually lowered to an R (with no cuts) when it was reissued in 1980.

Also the excellent song "Everybody's Talkin'" was introduced in this film--and became a big hit.

A great film---but very dark. I'm giving it a 10. DON'T see it on commercial TV--it's cut to ribbons and incomprehensible. --------------------------------------------- Result 836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (73%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Someone]], some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in horror films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a spooky house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. So I was looking forward to this thriller where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good start for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. [[Person]], some day, should do a study of architecture as it figures in horror films; of all those explorations of weirdly laid out mansions, searches for secret passageways and crypts, trackings of monsters through air ducts, and so forth. Offhand I can recall only a few films in which architecture played a major role throughout--"Demon Seed," "Cube," the remake of "Thirteen Ghosts"--but it's at the heart of every story about a spooky house or church or crypt; it's all about the character and the affect of spaces, passages, and walls. So I was looking forward to this thriller where it promised to be central. The idea is this: An architect has built--actually, rebuilt--for himself a huge and rambling house; his wife has just left him, mainly because of his own self-centeredness, but also, it is intimated, because she can't get used to the place since he remodeled it. Living in unaccustomed solitude (real this time, rather than virtual), he comes to suspect that somebody else--a stranger who had come to the door one evening asking to use the phone and then suddenly disappeared--is living into the house with him; only the place is big enough so that he never sees him.

This is a good start for a melodrama, whose development one would expect to follow some such lines as these: After searching the house for the intruder a few times without success, the architect resorts to his blueprints to undertake more systematic searches, trying in various ways to surprise, intercept, or ambush the intruder, maybe by means of some special features he built into the structure. Meanwhile the intruder has discovered hiding places and back ways between places that the architect didn't foresee or doesn't remember. The movie would turn into a cat-and-mouse game, a hunt, a battle; and finally, in trying to trap the intruder, the architect himself would end up trapped in his own creation, in some way he didn't expect. Then he would be forced to think himself out of it--and maybe at the same time out of his own self-imposed isolation--and in a final twist would nail, and maybe even kill, the ****er.

Nothing like this happens in this movie; the house is just a house, the architect is just a guy, and his nemesis is of an unknown character, if he exists at all. Here is what does happen in the movie: Once the intruder is installed in the house--if he is--the architect begins hearing noises, but when he goes to investigate finds nothing. He calls the police, they think he's slightly nuts; he persuades his estranged wife to spend the night, she thinks he's more nuts. At last, more or less accidentally, he runs into the intruder (doesn't get a good look, but figures, who else could it be?--not a hard question, in a story with, to that point, fewer than three principal characters), whereupon he locks the doors, lowers the grills on the windows, throws away the key (I don't know why he thought this necessary), and leaves his victim to starve. I missed why this was a given: the doors and walls are made of steel? In any event, the architect takes to sleeping in his car. And since the idea of the movie has languished undeveloped and cannot now be developed further, something else must be devised to take its place. And this is it: The architect--are you ready?--moves into the house of the man who (presumably) moved into his, and lives there in the same way. How is this possible? It is not, but the movie takes this route to try and make it seem so: The architect has drawn a picture of the man who came to his door; and when he leaves the house he takes the picture with him; and while sitting in his car, he throws the picture into the street; and two kids pick it up and observe that it looks like Martin, their neighbor; whereupon the architect asks where his house is and the kids point the way.

If this sequence seems to verge on the implausible, what ensues plunges right in. The architect takes up residence with Martin's wheelchair-ridden wife, unbeknownst to her; so stealthy in his moves and so cunning in his reading of his hostess that he's able always to leave a room just as she enters or to duck out of sight just as she turns around. Throughout this section the movie is clever in one way, making (or leaving it to the viewer to make) the point that his life with this stranger, who doesn't know he's there, is in essence the same life he lived with his wife, as a virtual recluse with her as a convenient buffer. But at the same time, his inability to live in the world makes his transformation into Raffles the cat-burglar entirely incredible. Not to go into the series of twists at the end--including another murder achieved by locking someone in behind another invincible door--this one in front of a landing so flimsy that it collapses under the weight of a wheelchair; two nice people who take murder in stride; and (before the story started) the unnoticed construction of a tunnel under several houses.... To the final, long-anticipated twist, the movie adds another, to make it even more offensive, and then...ends.

Here is a story that depends on the development of two things--the idea of the stranger in the house, and the character of the man whose house it is--and fumbles both. The first fumble makes it boring; the second made me angry, as it pushed its main character farther and farther along a more and more zigzaggy path, and never offered any explanation for the character who most required one: Martin the tunnel-builder and sneak-tenant. The story should be redone by someone, some day. --------------------------------------------- Result 837 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was eager to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. [[Nothing]] left. The [[movie]] had big holes and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the journalist by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, killing the action and viewers patience, nothing happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a poor movie, which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. This was my first, and probably the last Angelopoulos movie. I was eager to get into it, as it featured Mastroianni, one of my favorite actors and was a film By Theo, of whom I've heard a lot. The opening was promising, a long shot over a jeep of soldiers across the Albanian-Greek border. OK! but that was all. [[Nada]] left. The [[kino]] had big holes and I don't know which to mention first. The main plot of the story is revealed to the journalist by the old woman. during a long walk. It's like a 15 minutes monologue, killing the action and viewers patience, nothing happening on screen for 15 or even 20 minutes, apart this old lady telling a story. All that is presumed to be shown through action, was simply told to the camera by the old lady. In a moment, the equippe of TV was heading to the bar. They turn the corner and immediately the winter begins! Probably, shot in different days, continuity leaked. A lot of problems with the story-telling, it went from absurd to irrational never sticking to a style, making the viewer asking questions that never got answers. Poor Mastroianni, given a role which lacked integrity or charm. On the other hand, as many Greeks or Albanians or Balcan people would agree with, the movies showed lot of historic, ethnic, or politically incorrectness, just for the sake of making a movie about "humanity" as a red in another review. A lot more to say, but no time to lose on a poor movie, which was not movie at all, but lunacies of a person impressed on film and paid with state money. --------------------------------------------- Result 838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[film]] had a great cast [[going]] for it: [[Christopher]] [[Lee]], Dean Jagger, Macdonald [[Carey]], Lew Ayres -- solid b-movie [[actors]] all. But this [[downer]] of a [[movie]] didn't use any of them to any [[sort]] of [[advantage]], with [[none]] of their characters [[even]] meeting on screen (though Christopher Lee does get to play opposite himself in [[several]] scenes).

The [[motivations]] for the [[aliens]] in this movie seem to [[change]] at the [[drop]] of a [[hat]]. First, they just want to [[repair]] their [[ship]] and [[leave]], then they [[turn]] on the [[main]] [[character]] by [[killing]] most of his [[friends]] and not [[releasing]] his [[wife]] after he [[gets]] them the [[crucial]] [[part]] they [[need]]. Then, out of [[nowhere]], this "peaceful" race decides they have to [[destroy]] the [[planet]] because it causes too [[many]] "diseases" ([[though]] they do [[offer]] the [[main]] [[character]] and his [[wife]] a [[spot]] in their society).

Most of the [[film]] is [[spent]] watching the [[man]] and wife [[drive]] or [[walk]] or stand around or [[sit]] at desks doing nothing. You [[almost]] [[wish]] they had [[gotten]] [[taken]] out with the [[rest]] of the [[planet]] at the end, just in vengeance for [[boring]] us to death.

[[Unless]] you really like [[Chris]] Lee or seventies low-budget sci-fi, I'd give this one a miss. It [[falls]] into that [[narrow]] range of [[wasted]] celluloid between Star Odyssey and [[UFO]]: [[Target]] [[Earth]]. This [[cinematography]] had a great cast [[go]] for it: [[Cristobal]] [[Rhee]], Dean Jagger, Macdonald [[Carrey]], Lew Ayres -- solid b-movie [[protagonists]] all. But this [[donner]] of a [[cinematography]] didn't use any of them to any [[genre]] of [[parti]], with [[nos]] of their characters [[yet]] meeting on screen (though Christopher Lee does get to play opposite himself in [[numerous]] scenes).

The [[motifs]] for the [[foreigner]] in this movie seem to [[amend]] at the [[autumn]] of a [[bonnet]]. First, they just want to [[remedy]] their [[vessels]] and [[letting]], then they [[transforming]] on the [[primary]] [[trait]] by [[assassinated]] most of his [[friendships]] and not [[liberated]] his [[woman]] after he [[get]] them the [[imperative]] [[party]] they [[necessity]]. Then, out of [[everywhere]], this "peaceful" race decides they have to [[ruining]] the [[globe]] because it causes too [[countless]] "diseases" ([[despite]] they do [[delivering]] the [[primary]] [[characters]] and his [[femme]] a [[stain]] in their society).

Most of the [[cinematography]] is [[expended]] watching the [[bloke]] and wife [[driving]] or [[stroll]] or stand around or [[seated]] at desks doing nothing. You [[hardly]] [[wanting]] they had [[become]] [[took]] out with the [[remainder]] of the [[planets]] at the end, just in vengeance for [[bored]] us to death.

[[If]] you really like [[Kris]] Lee or seventies low-budget sci-fi, I'd give this one a miss. It [[waterfalls]] into that [[limited]] range of [[squandered]] celluloid between Star Odyssey and [[UFOS]]: [[Aimed]] [[Lands]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Well, my goodness, am I [[disappointed]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[company]] will not ruin a film, who's original was a fantastic and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, subtlety, where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is wonderfully photographed; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script puts it's fine actors to the test..asking them to deliver the kind of stilted dialogue that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual effects come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric mess...but things had gone terribly wrong long before that.

Everything in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this old haunted house monstrosity...only groans. Check out the original instead.

Well, my goodness, am I [[disappoint]]. When I first heard news of a remake of Robert Wise's 1963 film, "The Haunting", I had a fear that it would be ruined by an abundance of summer-movie sized visual effects. But, deep down, I had faith. Surely, with such a talented cast intact...De Bont and [[companies]] will not ruin a film, who's original was a fantastic and frightening movie that understood the delicate art of subtlety. Well, subtlety, where are you now!!?? My fears have manifested...a promising movie has gone wrong. Yes, Eugenio Zannetti's production design is jaw-dropping; the movie is wonderfully photographed; and composer Jerry Goldsmith can never EVER do wrong. But, the script puts it's fine actors to the test..asking them to deliver the kind of stilted dialogue that is only spoken in movies. In the end, the always wonderful Lili Taylor is the only performer to escape with some dignity...and that's just barely. But, the crime of all crimes is that the horror is shown to us. We can no longer use our imaginations, feel that horrible dread of fear of the unknown. No, we get some visual effects to SHOW US what we're supposed to be afraid of...and you know what? As wonderfully realized as they are...the visual effects come off as sort of silly. And the climax is a phantasmogoric mess...but things had gone terribly wrong long before that.

Everything in The Haunting is overdone and overblown. I'm afraid there are no real thrills or creaks in this old haunted house monstrosity...only groans. Check out the original instead.

--------------------------------------------- Result 840 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] SPOILERS

A [[buddy]] of mine said NEXT [[MOVIE]] was the best Cheech & [[Chong]] flick and went out of his [[way]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[BROTHERS]]. NEXT MOVIE has no plot, has no pacing, [[really]] has no anything of what [[defines]] a movie ... but it is funny. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Chong]] [[show]] some heart.

Well, in this little [[paragraph]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[movie]], nothing [[happens]] that [[would]] [[usually]] [[start]] a [[story]]. I will just [[say]] that Cheech 's cousin [[shows]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Chong]] [[made]] Cheech drink the pee twice? What about the rooster? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's [[first]] [[movie]] appearance? You [[would]] have to watch the [[movie]] yourself to [[enjoy]] it. I don't [[think]] [[NEXT]] MOVIE has strong enough balls to make it awesome, but the movie has heart and hey, my buddy let me borrow it so it gets a 7. SPOILERS

A [[copulate]] of mine said NEXT [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] was the best Cheech & [[Chung]] flick and went out of his [[paths]] to have me borrow it and THE BLUES [[FRATERNAL]]. NEXT MOVIE has no plot, has no pacing, [[truly]] has no anything of what [[defining]] a movie ... but it is funny. And for what it is worth, Cheech and [[Zheng]] [[spectacle]] some heart.

Well, in this little [[subsection]] I put in the plot, but being that four-fifths of the [[cinema]], nothing [[arrives]] that [[should]] [[habitually]] [[launches]] a [[histories]]. I will just [[tell]] that Cheech 's cousin [[displaying]] up.

Was there no other funnier moment when [[Jeong]] [[effected]] Cheech drink the pee twice? What about the rooster? Was that Pee-Wee Herman's [[fiirst]] [[movies]] appearance? You [[could]] have to watch the [[films]] yourself to [[enjoys]] it. I don't [[believing]] [[FORTHCOMING]] MOVIE has strong enough balls to make it awesome, but the movie has heart and hey, my buddy let me borrow it so it gets a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Uncompromising [[look]] at a suburb in 21st century [[Vienna]] [[mixing]] the stories of six groups of characters by [[former]] documentary maker U.Seidl is a [[provocative]], minimalistic and [[intense]] [[piece]] of observation cinema.

After the world-wide spread of Big Brother reality shows, Hundstage takes modern voyeurism to an unsettling, profound level. Hard to like but unignorable piece of European art-cinema might [[seem]] cruel and seedy, [[yet]] manages to convey the nihilistic alienated feeling of modern society in a praiseworthy manner.

A must for lovers of world cinema. Uncompromising [[peek]] at a suburb in 21st century [[Viennese]] [[amalgam]] the stories of six groups of characters by [[antigua]] documentary maker U.Seidl is a [[inflammatory]], minimalistic and [[intensive]] [[slice]] of observation cinema.

After the world-wide spread of Big Brother reality shows, Hundstage takes modern voyeurism to an unsettling, profound level. Hard to like but unignorable piece of European art-cinema might [[looks]] cruel and seedy, [[even]] manages to convey the nihilistic alienated feeling of modern society in a praiseworthy manner.

A must for lovers of world cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This self proclaimed "very talented artist" have directed easily the [[worst]] Spanish [[film]] of the 21st century. [[Lack]] of emotion, coherence, rhythm, skills, humor... it repeats the same situation over and over again. It shows no character development. It does not [[even]] show any violent and/or sexual content, and it does not add anything new to the psycho-killer sub genre. [[So]] lame it should be shown at film schools as an example of "what not to do" in a first movie.

BTW where the [[hell]] is the "talent"? there are scenes which have been shot almost identically; there are scenes which have two or more master shots and it is quite awful to see the action jumping from one master shot to another without a reason. The camera almost never moves, as if the "very [[talented]] [[artist]]" was afraid of showing his lack of visual [[skills]]. The actors playing the main roles act like [[amateurs]], and the supporting cast is [[hardly]] believable. There are more holes than plot in the script (if ever there was one)...

A [[really]] [[disheartening]] movie, and a whatsoever talented director. This self proclaimed "very talented artist" have directed easily the [[lousiest]] Spanish [[cinematography]] of the 21st century. [[Shortfall]] of emotion, coherence, rhythm, skills, humor... it repeats the same situation over and over again. It shows no character development. It does not [[yet]] show any violent and/or sexual content, and it does not add anything new to the psycho-killer sub genre. [[Consequently]] lame it should be shown at film schools as an example of "what not to do" in a first movie.

BTW where the [[whorehouse]] is the "talent"? there are scenes which have been shot almost identically; there are scenes which have two or more master shots and it is quite awful to see the action jumping from one master shot to another without a reason. The camera almost never moves, as if the "very [[gifted]] [[performers]]" was afraid of showing his lack of visual [[capacities]]. The actors playing the main roles act like [[lovers]], and the supporting cast is [[practically]] believable. There are more holes than plot in the script (if ever there was one)...

A [[genuinely]] [[discouraging]] movie, and a whatsoever talented director. --------------------------------------------- Result 843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[found]] the [[film]] [[quite]] expressive , the [[way]] the main character was [[lost]] but at the same much more [[clear]] about certain things in [[life]] than people who mocked him ( his flatmate for example ) .

he was [[tortured]] and you [[loved]] to watch him being [[tortured]] ! it had this perverted side which was [[frightening]] but we were all [[happy]] to see him [[come]] out of the [[misery]] again .

it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we [[love]] to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him [[survive]] ...

. I [[detected]] the [[kino]] [[pretty]] expressive , the [[camino]] the main character was [[forfeited]] but at the same much more [[unambiguous]] about certain things in [[living]] than people who mocked him ( his flatmate for example ) .

he was [[torturing]] and you [[worshiped]] to watch him being [[torturing]] ! it had this perverted side which was [[dreaded]] but we were all [[joyous]] to see him [[coming]] out of the [[wretchedness]] again .

it was like a game character or pan-man through a mine-land or to enemy and we [[likes]] to watch him under sniper attack or fire but then at the end we are happy to see him [[outlast]] ...

. --------------------------------------------- Result 844 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie gets it right. As a former USAF Aviation Cadet, I can tell you this movie has it all. The tedium of the application process. The waiting for word. The joy of acceptance. The worry about making it through the course. The sorrow of watching one's buddies (perhaps the best of them)wash out. The anguish of paying the ultimate price - the death of fllow student airmen. The glory of graduation. Always the flying, the flying, the flying. Many are called but few are chosen. We did for pay what we would have eagerly paid to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] How can the [[viewer]] rating for this [[movie]] be just 5.4?! [[Just]] the [[lovely]] [[young]] Alisan Porter should automatically [[start]] you at 6 when you decide your rating. James Belushi is good in this too, his [[first]] good serious role, I hadn't liked him in [[anything]] but About Last [[Night]] until this. He was pretty good in Gang Related with [[Tupac]] [[also]]. Kelly Lynch, you [[gotta]] love her. Well, I do. I'm only [[wondering]] what [[happened]] to Miss [[Porter]]?

i [[gave]] Curly Sue a 7 How can the [[viewfinder]] rating for this [[filmmaking]] be just 5.4?! [[Mere]] the [[loverly]] [[youngster]] Alisan Porter should automatically [[booting]] you at 6 when you decide your rating. James Belushi is good in this too, his [[frst]] good serious role, I hadn't liked him in [[somethings]] but About Last [[Nuit]] until this. He was pretty good in Gang Related with [[Shakur]] [[furthermore]]. Kelly Lynch, you [[ought]] love her. Well, I do. I'm only [[demand]] what [[arrived]] to Miss [[Janitor]]?

i [[supplied]] Curly Sue a 7 --------------------------------------------- Result 846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Joan [[Fontaine]] stars as the villain in this Victorian era film. She convincingly plays the married woman who has a lover on the side and also sets her sights on a wealthy man, Miles Rushworth who is played by Herbert Marshall. Mr. Marshall is quite good as Miles. Miss Fontaine acted her part to perfection--she was at the same time cunning, calculating, innocent looking, frightened and charming. It takes an actress with extraordinary talent to pull that off. Joan Fontaine looked absolutely gorgeous in the elegant costumes by Travis Banton. Also in the film is Joan's mother, Lillian Fontaine as Lady Flora. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this [[film]]. Joan [[Fountain]] stars as the villain in this Victorian era film. She convincingly plays the married woman who has a lover on the side and also sets her sights on a wealthy man, Miles Rushworth who is played by Herbert Marshall. Mr. Marshall is quite good as Miles. Miss Fontaine acted her part to perfection--she was at the same time cunning, calculating, innocent looking, frightened and charming. It takes an actress with extraordinary talent to pull that off. Joan Fontaine looked absolutely gorgeous in the elegant costumes by Travis Banton. Also in the film is Joan's mother, Lillian Fontaine as Lady Flora. I [[unimaginably]] [[recommending]] this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I really [[liked]] this Summerslam due to the look of the arena, the curtains and just the look overall was interesting to me for some reason. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the main event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a huge fat man vs a strong man but I'm [[glad]] [[times]] have changed. It was a terrible main event just like every match Luger is in is terrible. Other matches on the card were Razor Ramon vs Ted Dibiase, Steiner Brothers vs Heavenly Bodies, Shawn Michaels vs Curt Hening, this was the event where Shawn named his big monster of a body guard Diesel, IRS vs 1-2-3 Kid, Bret Hart first takes on Doink then takes on Jerry Lawler and stuff with the Harts and Lawler was always very interesting, then Ludvig Borga destroyed Marty Jannetty, Undertaker took on Giant Gonzalez in another terrible match, The Smoking Gunns and Tatanka took on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna defended the world title against Lex Luger this match was boring and it has a terrible [[ending]]. However it deserves 8/10 I really [[wished]] this Summerslam due to the look of the arena, the curtains and just the look overall was interesting to me for some reason. Anyways, this could have been one of the best Summerslam's ever if the WWF didn't have Lex Luger in the main event against Yokozuna, now for it's time it was ok to have a huge fat man vs a strong man but I'm [[gratified]] [[dates]] have changed. It was a terrible main event just like every match Luger is in is terrible. Other matches on the card were Razor Ramon vs Ted Dibiase, Steiner Brothers vs Heavenly Bodies, Shawn Michaels vs Curt Hening, this was the event where Shawn named his big monster of a body guard Diesel, IRS vs 1-2-3 Kid, Bret Hart first takes on Doink then takes on Jerry Lawler and stuff with the Harts and Lawler was always very interesting, then Ludvig Borga destroyed Marty Jannetty, Undertaker took on Giant Gonzalez in another terrible match, The Smoking Gunns and Tatanka took on Bam Bam Bigelow and the Headshrinkers, and Yokozuna defended the world title against Lex Luger this match was boring and it has a terrible [[terminated]]. However it deserves 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Don't [[get]] me [[wrong]], I'm a [[huge]] fan of many of Woody's movies, [[obviously]] his late 70's [[masterpieces]] ([[Annie]] [[Hall]],[[Interiors]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's [[dramas]] (Hannah, [[Crimes]] and Misdemeaners,[[Husbands]] and [[Wives]]) in fact I [[even]] [[liked]] some of his more [[recent]] [[efforts]] (Melinda, [[Anything]] [[Else]], Small [[Time]] [[Crooks]]) but this was [[abysmal]], I [[though]] it couldn't possibly be any [[worse]] than last years [[Match]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily plotted - basically a cross between Match Point, Manhattan Murder Mystery and Small Time Crooks,with all the jokes taken out - Woody seems to be on the way out as well, slurring most of his lines and delivering 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I mean that with all due respect...' over and over until the blandness of it all becomes to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to work with him but they should at least read the script first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so much better than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 miles behind it.

It wouldn't be so tragic if we didn't have so many great Woody films to compare this to - but it is clear that his best days are behind him and judging by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he becomes an industry joke.

[[Embarrassingly]] [[bad]] Don't [[got]] me [[faulty]], I'm a [[prodigious]] fan of many of Woody's movies, [[plainly]] his late 70's [[antiques]] ([[Annette]] [[Salle]],[[Inside]], Manhattan)and most of his late 80's/early 90's [[opera]] (Hannah, [[Offenses]] and Misdemeaners,[[Maris]] and [[Handcuffs]]) in fact I [[yet]] [[loved]] some of his more [[freshly]] [[activities]] (Melinda, [[Nothing]] [[Further]], Small [[Times]] [[Villains]]) but this was [[frightful]], I [[while]] it couldn't possibly be any [[lousiest]] than last years [[Pairing]] Point but how wrong I was.

It was lazily plotted - basically a cross between Match Point, Manhattan Murder Mystery and Small Time Crooks,with all the jokes taken out - Woody seems to be on the way out as well, slurring most of his lines and delivering 'hilarious' catchphrases 'I mean that with all due respect...' over and over until the blandness of it all becomes to much to bare.

I know that most actors are queuing up to work with him but they should at least read the script first - Scarlett Johansson and Hugh Jackman are so much better than this - and Woody should really take a more behind the camera role in future, if he has any sense about 20 miles behind it.

It wouldn't be so tragic if we didn't have so many great Woody films to compare this to - but it is clear that his best days are behind him and judging by this effort, Woody should call it a day before he becomes an industry joke.

[[Shamelessly]] [[negative]] --------------------------------------------- Result 849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] just below the surface [[lies]] what? a simply [[awful]] [[movie]] is what.

as other [[viewers]] have [[justifiably]] [[commented]], the storm sequences are just [[plain]] [[ridiculous]]. [[chopping]] already sodden firewood in the pouring [[rain]]? now that's smart. menace? foreboding? sexual [[tension]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & overly contrived.

i [[want]] to [[say]] [[thank]] [[god]] for mia sara's [[shower]] scene but in [[retrospect]] i think the producers of the [[film]], having seen the completed mess realised that they had to put something in to make it half way worthwhile at all. so it just [[becomes]] yet another [[contrivance]]. do yourself a favour and give this a miss. just below the surface [[resides]] what? a simply [[frightening]] [[cinematography]] is what.

as other [[moviegoers]] have [[correctly]] [[remarked]], the storm sequences are just [[lowlands]] [[grotesque]]. [[chopped]] already sodden firewood in the pouring [[acids]]? now that's smart. menace? foreboding? sexual [[tensions]]? for those read dull & contrived, dull & contrived and dull & overly contrived.

i [[wantto]] to [[said]] [[thanked]] [[seigneur]] for mia sara's [[bathroom]] scene but in [[retrospective]] i think the producers of the [[kino]], having seen the completed mess realised that they had to put something in to make it half way worthwhile at all. so it just [[becoming]] yet another [[invention]]. do yourself a favour and give this a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This [[film]] is a [[lyrical]] and romantic memoir told through the eyes an eleven year [[old]] [[boy]] [[living]] in a [[rural]] [[Cuban]] [[town]] the [[year]] of the Castro revolution. It is an [[obviously]] [[genuine]] [[worthy]] labor of love.

The names CUBA [[LIBRE]] and [[CUBAN]] BLOOD are merely attempts to [[wrongly]] [[market]] this as an [[action]] [[film]]. [[DREAMING]] [[OF]] [[JULIA]] makes much more sense. It has more in common with European [[cinema]] than with RAMBO and the revolution is merely an [[inconvenience]] to people's daily [[lives]] and pursuits. That fact [[alone]] makes the film more [[honest]] than most works [[dealing]] with this [[time]] [[period]] in [[Cuban]] [[history]].

The excessive [[use]] of the voice-over narrator does [[undermine]] the [[story]] but the [[film]] makes up for it with unqualified clips from Hollywood [[films]] that [[say]] so much more visually than the [[narrator]] [[could]].

The [[comparisons]] to [[CINEMA]] PARADISO and are fair [[game]] as the [[film]] does wax [[melancholy]] about [[movies]], but there is an underlying [[pain]] at the loss of a lifestyle that [[surpasses]] lost love.

The revolution, [[like]] the [[film]] JULIE, never [[seems]] to have an ending. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[operatic]] and romantic memoir told through the eyes an eleven year [[former]] [[dude]] [[residing]] in a [[agrarian]] [[Cubans]] [[city]] the [[annum]] of the Castro revolution. It is an [[patently]] [[authentic]] [[meritorious]] labor of love.

The names CUBA [[FREE]] and [[CUBA]] BLOOD are merely attempts to [[improperly]] [[marketplace]] this as an [[efforts]] [[cinematography]]. [[DAYDREAM]] [[DU]] [[YULIA]] makes much more sense. It has more in common with European [[cine]] than with RAMBO and the revolution is merely an [[nuisance]] to people's daily [[life]] and pursuits. That fact [[merely]] makes the film more [[truthful]] than most works [[deal]] with this [[moment]] [[periods]] in [[Cuba]] [[stories]].

The excessive [[employs]] of the voice-over narrator does [[undermines]] the [[storytelling]] but the [[kino]] makes up for it with unqualified clips from Hollywood [[cinematography]] that [[says]] so much more visually than the [[announcer]] [[did]].

The [[comparing]] to [[CINEMATOGRAPHIC]] PARADISO and are fair [[games]] as the [[cinematography]] does wax [[mournful]] about [[cinematography]], but there is an underlying [[grief]] at the loss of a lifestyle that [[exceeds]] lost love.

The revolution, [[iike]] the [[cinematography]] JULIE, never [[seem]] to have an ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] this movie is not good.the [[first]] one [[almost]] sucked,but had that [[unreal]] [[ending]] to [[make]] it worth watching.this one has [[nothing]].there's zero scare,zero tension or [[suspense]].this isn't [[really]] a [[horror]] [[movie]].most of the kills don't show anything.there's no gore to speak of.this could almost be a [[TV]],except for a bit of nudity and a bit of violence.the acting is not very [[good]],either.and don't get me started on the dialogue.as for the surprise ending,[[surprise]],there isn't one.i suppose it could have been worse,although i don't see how.but then again,it is less than 80 minutes long,so i guess that's a good thing.although it felt a lot longer. apparently this is the cut version of the film.i found it for a very cheap price,but it still not worth it.if you want the uncut more graphic version,check out the Anchor Bay edition.anyway,this version of Sleepaway Camp II:Unhappy Campers gets a big fat 1/10 from me. p.s.if you watch this movie,you will probably be a bored and unhappy camper.if you are a real fan,you might want to pick up Anchor Bay's Sleepaway Camp(with survival kit) three disc collection containing the first three movies uncut and with special features this movie is not good.the [[fiirst]] one [[practically]] sucked,but had that [[surreal]] [[ended]] to [[deliver]] it worth watching.this one has [[anything]].there's zero scare,zero tension or [[wait]].this isn't [[genuinely]] a [[terror]] [[cinematography]].most of the kills don't show anything.there's no gore to speak of.this could almost be a [[TELEVISION]],except for a bit of nudity and a bit of violence.the acting is not very [[buena]],either.and don't get me started on the dialogue.as for the surprise ending,[[astonishment]],there isn't one.i suppose it could have been worse,although i don't see how.but then again,it is less than 80 minutes long,so i guess that's a good thing.although it felt a lot longer. apparently this is the cut version of the film.i found it for a very cheap price,but it still not worth it.if you want the uncut more graphic version,check out the Anchor Bay edition.anyway,this version of Sleepaway Camp II:Unhappy Campers gets a big fat 1/10 from me. p.s.if you watch this movie,you will probably be a bored and unhappy camper.if you are a real fan,you might want to pick up Anchor Bay's Sleepaway Camp(with survival kit) three disc collection containing the first three movies uncut and with special features --------------------------------------------- Result 852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Airwolf The Movie, A variation on the original 2 part pilot, Yet the [[movie]] [[although]] [[shorter]], does [[contain]] extra footage Unseen in the 2 hour pilot The pilot is much more of a pilot than the movie Where as a pilot movie is normally the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and [[cuts]] there.

Worth a look, even if you have the season 1 [[DVD]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust online shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was truly 1 of the 80's most under rated [[shows]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress pictures are over at http://Airwolf.org Also with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's finally here to stay :) Airwolf The Movie, A variation on the original 2 part pilot, Yet the [[filmmaking]] [[while]] [[shortest]], does [[contained]] extra footage Unseen in the 2 hour pilot The pilot is much more of a pilot than the movie Where as a pilot movie is normally the same (2 parter combined) But the movie is actually a different edit with extras here and [[clippings]] there.

Worth a look, even if you have the season 1 [[DVDS]] set, I'd still pick up a copy of the "movie" It's still in some shops like virgin, Woolworths and the likes of mixed media stores, although it generally needs ordering, But it saves needing to buy online (as many of us still don't do or trust online shopping) but if you look around airwolfs in stores

Airwolf was truly 1 of the 80's most under rated [[display]].

A full size Airwolf is currently being re-built for a Helicopter Museum :) Info and work in progress pictures are over at http://Airwolf.org Also with Airwolf Mods for Flashpoint and Flight Sim Games It seams she's finally here to stay :) --------------------------------------------- Result 853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Haunted [[Boat]] [[sells]] itself as 'The Fog' meets 'Open Water'. [[In]] [[many]] [[ways]] this is [[accurate]]. There are scares and [[weird]] looking people to keep you interested.

[[However]] the acting [[ability]] is poor at [[best]]. Showing clear signs that this is merely a bunch of friends making a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the [[best]] of their ability. When you [[accept]] the low budget makes it very [[difficult]] for special effects, with the ghosts looking pretty much like men with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and strange. But it suffers for using too many twists and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you bored and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. Ignoring the irrelevant twisting every 5 seconds near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the climax.

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an evening in front of the T.V. Haunted [[Battleship]] [[sell]] itself as 'The Fog' meets 'Open Water'. [[For]] [[innumerable]] [[modes]] this is [[meticulous]]. There are scares and [[strange]] looking people to keep you interested.

[[Conversely]] the acting [[capacities]] is poor at [[optimum]]. Showing clear signs that this is merely a bunch of friends making a horror film. Which in all credit they do to the [[finest]] of their ability. When you [[admit]] the low budget makes it very [[complex]] for special effects, with the ghosts looking pretty much like men with rubber masks on.

Many aspects of the film are creepy and strange. But it suffers for using too many twists and turns in a short space of time which just leaves you bored and confused. In terms of keeping you awake the film does it very well. Ignoring the irrelevant twisting every 5 seconds near the end, you actually want to know what is going on. And are willing to wait the 1hr 35 minutes for the climax.

This is no Ghost Ship but it'll definitely do for an evening in front of the T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Being]] a [[fan]] of [[cheesy]] [[horror]] movies, I saw this in my [[video]] shop and thought I would [[give]] it a [[try]]. Now that I've [[seen]] it I wish it upon no living [[soul]] on the [[planet]]. I get my [[movie]] [[rentals]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my moneys worth. I've [[seen]] some [[bad]] cheesy horror [[movies]] in my [[time]], hell I'm a [[fan]] of them, but this was just an [[insult]]. [[Ongoing]] a [[ventilator]] of [[dorky]] [[terror]] movies, I saw this in my [[videotaped]] shop and thought I would [[confer]] it a [[tries]]. Now that I've [[watched]] it I wish it upon no living [[alma]] on the [[planetary]]. I get my [[kino]] [[tenancy]] for free, and I feel that I didn't get my moneys worth. I've [[watched]] some [[amiss]] cheesy horror [[movie]] in my [[times]], hell I'm a [[breather]] of them, but this was just an [[snub]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a definitely [[incorrect]] assumption. This is an adaptation of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. Though the title may suggest examples of the 10 commandments, it is a definitely [[amiss]] assumption. This is an adaptation of 9 SEEMINGLY unrelated stories from Giovanni Bocaccio's 14th century "Decameron" story collection.

Set within a medieval Italian town's largely peasant population, it is a diatribe on the reality of sex (and its consequences) within that world and time. A realistic view of Life within this world, it sometimes feels like a journey back in time.

Given the depicted human element of its time, one can also see the more adventurous side of morality in its protagonists - as well as the ironies of Life, at times. Or it may also be viewed as a general satire of the Catholic Church's rules.

Nothing terribly special, but definitely interesting if one comes with no expectations or assumptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] this is the [[best]] sci-fi that I have [[seen]] in my 29 [[years]] of [[watching]] sci-fi. I [[also]] [[believe]] that [[Dark]] Angel will [[become]] a [[cult]] favorite. The [[action]] is [[great]] but [[Jessica]] Alba is the [[best]] and most [[gorgeous]] star on TV today. this is the [[optimum]] sci-fi that I have [[noticed]] in my 29 [[olds]] of [[staring]] sci-fi. I [[similarly]] [[believing]] that [[Gloom]] Angel will [[gotten]] a [[religions]] favorite. The [[activity]] is [[gorgeous]] but [[Jennifer]] Alba is the [[optimum]] and most [[ravishing]] star on TV today. --------------------------------------------- Result 857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[When]] you [[compare]] what [[Brian]] De [[Palma]] was doing in the 80's to what passes for entertainment [[today]], his films [[keep]] looking better and better. "Dressed To Kill, "Blow Out", "Body Double", "Scarface" and "Carlito's [[Way]]" are all [[superb]] [[works]] of a cinematic craftsman at the [[peak]] of his powers. The guy had a long run of better than average films. This is pure Hitchcock with an 80's dash of lurid perversion, an [[affectionately]] [[told]] [[tale]] of [[lust]] and [[murder]] with plenty of twists, huge helpings of style, a [[stunning]] Pino Donaggio [[score]], and a trashy, giallo-inspired plot. De Palma's [[love]] of complex camera-work and luscious, blood-smudged [[visuals]] [[helps]] overcome the logical holes while the [[terrific]] performances of Dennis Franz, Keith Gordon (a [[good]] director in his own right), Nancy Allen (De Palma's [[wife]] at the [[time]]) and Michael Caine make [[every]] scene [[special]]. Let the virtuoso take you on a [[surreal]], [[scary]], erotically [[charged]] [[odyssey]] and you'll enjoy [[every]] [[frame]] of "Dressed To [[Kill]]". [[Whenever]] you [[comparative]] what [[Bryan]] De [[Palm]] was doing in the 80's to what passes for entertainment [[thursday]], his films [[preserve]] looking better and better. "Dressed To Kill, "Blow Out", "Body Double", "Scarface" and "Carlito's [[Routing]]" are all [[glamorous]] [[cooperating]] of a cinematic craftsman at the [[heyday]] of his powers. The guy had a long run of better than average films. This is pure Hitchcock with an 80's dash of lurid perversion, an [[fondly]] [[tells]] [[fairytales]] of [[thirsty]] and [[assassinate]] with plenty of twists, huge helpings of style, a [[unbelievable]] Pino Donaggio [[scoring]], and a trashy, giallo-inspired plot. De Palma's [[likes]] of complex camera-work and luscious, blood-smudged [[imaging]] [[helping]] overcome the logical holes while the [[awesome]] performances of Dennis Franz, Keith Gordon (a [[alright]] director in his own right), Nancy Allen (De Palma's [[women]] at the [[moment]]) and Michael Caine make [[any]] scene [[particular]]. Let the virtuoso take you on a [[bizarre]], [[awful]], erotically [[accused]] [[epic]] and you'll enjoy [[any]] [[fabric]] of "Dressed To [[Assassinate]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (54%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I saw this in the theater when it came out, and just yesterday I saw it again on cable. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the feeling of just how [[revolting]] this film is. The whole bunch of characters are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to celebrate people "finding themselves". The nice guys finish last, the jerky guys make out great, the jerkiest guys do best. The girls are all boy toy pushovers. Only one character ("Wendy") is seen doing anything remotely useful to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved virginity in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're supposed to think is romantic. What this really is is Hollywood's concept of young America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. I saw this in the theater when it came out, and just yesterday I saw it again on cable. This I was able to reacquainted myself with the feeling of just how [[sickening]] this film is. The whole bunch of characters are self-absorbed narcisstic preeners. Worst of all, it reinforces every negative stereotype about 20-something dating, even as it purports to celebrate people "finding themselves". The nice guys finish last, the jerky guys make out great, the jerkiest guys do best. The girls are all boy toy pushovers. Only one character ("Wendy") is seen doing anything remotely useful to society, and she dispenses with her long-saved virginity in a throwaway one-night stand with a scumbag, in a lushly filmed scene that we're supposed to think is romantic. What this really is is Hollywood's concept of young America: permissive, detached, promiscuous, conceited. --------------------------------------------- Result 859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Her]] [[Deadly]] [[Rival]] (1995): Starring [[Harry]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair, Sean [[Bridges]], Robin Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa Suzanne McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, Jeff Sumerel, Daria Sanford....Director [[James]] Hayman, Screenplay Dan Vining.

Actor Harry Hamlin (of LA Law fame, Clash of The Titans and other films) seems [[perfectly]] cast in this "Lifetime" type film directed by James Hayman and [[released]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna would later work on a film about sex addiction. "Her Deadly Rival" is, at first glance, similar to the better known Hollywood box-office hit "Fatal Attraction". In "Rival", happily married couple Jim and Kris Lanford move into a new home in the typically beautiful suburbs. They have the seemingly perfect marriage- they are deeply in love, despite a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[admirer]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her identity is never revealed, despite an attempt by Jim and even investigators to discover who she is. She constantly harasses Jim through phone calls and letters. His marriage nearly flounders as his wife begins to think he's having an affair and trying to cover it up. While Harry Hamlin, Annie Potts and the rest of the cast - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[drama]] and has its [[good]] moments. There is a [[twist]] at the end. Spoiler Alert. All I have to say is "her deadly rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[marriage]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Especially]] [[moving]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. [[His]] [[Murderous]] [[Competing]] (1995): Starring [[Hare]] Hamlin, Annie Potts, Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair, Sean [[Bridging]], Robin Dallenbach, Wilbur Fitzgerald, Dale Frye, Stan Kelly, Deborah Hobart, David Lenthall, Lorri Lindberg, Chuck Kinlaw, Amy Parrish, Melissa Suzanne McBride, Ralph Wilcox, Al Wiggins, Jeff Sumerel, Daria Sanford....Director [[Jacobo]] Hayman, Screenplay Dan Vining.

Actor Harry Hamlin (of LA Law fame, Clash of The Titans and other films) seems [[abundantly]] cast in this "Lifetime" type film directed by James Hayman and [[emitted]] in 1995. He and his wife Lisa Rinna would later work on a film about sex addiction. "Her Deadly Rival" is, at first glance, similar to the better known Hollywood box-office hit "Fatal Attraction". In "Rival", happily married couple Jim and Kris Lanford move into a new home in the typically beautiful suburbs. They have the seemingly perfect marriage- they are deeply in love, despite a routine lifestyle. But then a mysterious [[groupie]] sets her eyes on Jim. Her identity is never revealed, despite an attempt by Jim and even investigators to discover who she is. She constantly harasses Jim through phone calls and letters. His marriage nearly flounders as his wife begins to think he's having an affair and trying to cover it up. While Harry Hamlin, Annie Potts and the rest of the cast - Lisa Zane, Tommy Hinkley, Susan Diol, Roma Maffia, Robert C. Treveiler, D. L. Anderson, William Blair- each seem to be straight out of a soap opera. But this is a very suspense-filled [[tragedy]] and has its [[alright]] moments. There is a [[twisting]] at the end. Spoiler Alert. All I have to say is "her deadly rival" was only herself. Based on a supposedly actual case, Jim's wife Kris suffered from multiple personality disorder and that was what ruined her [[matrimony]]. Even if the story is not terribly impressive, even if the acting is only a step above soap opera acting, this film has its moments. [[Namely]] [[relocating]] are the intimate scenes between Jim and his wife and the final scene in which, when Jim learns the truth, he can't believe what he has just heard. The movie is probably a little too long and boring in some parts but it's the kind of TV movie that usually does well, especially on Lifetime, which continues to produce films of this kind, of the "domestic thriller" type, or seduction stories. Trashy but everyone likes trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I'll be honest. The only reason I [[watched]] this one on TV is that it's in the IMDb bottom 100. And right now, I'm [[wondering]] if the [[hour]] and a half of my life really was worth another 'check' on that same list.

Van Damme is Luc Deveraux, who finds himself on a huge [[fight]] with the Universal Soldiers after the main computer pulled a 'HAL' to [[defend]] itself. And yes, after all the obligate [[explosions]], shoot-outs and chases he is the [[last]] one [[standing]]. [[Combined]] with [[terrible]] acting and a bit of a [[boring]] set-up it makes sure it's place in the infamous [[list]] is just.

Only for the [[idiots]] like me who [[want]] to watch that full list. 2/10. I'll be honest. The only reason I [[seen]] this one on TV is that it's in the IMDb bottom 100. And right now, I'm [[requested]] if the [[hora]] and a half of my life really was worth another 'check' on that same list.

Van Damme is Luc Deveraux, who finds himself on a huge [[struggle]] with the Universal Soldiers after the main computer pulled a 'HAL' to [[defending]] itself. And yes, after all the obligate [[detonation]], shoot-outs and chases he is the [[latter]] one [[stands]]. [[Merged]] with [[gruesome]] acting and a bit of a [[dreary]] set-up it makes sure it's place in the infamous [[listings]] is just.

Only for the [[dorks]] like me who [[wish]] to watch that full list. 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 861 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "A Bug's [[Life]]" is [[like]] a favorite candy bar -- it's chock-full of [[great]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[character]] has a nice "arc" (a growth or change). By comparison, the only characters in "[[Toy]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learns]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who overcomes his [[resentment]] of Buzz. There are tons of laughs and cute moments in "A Bug's Life". All of the actors turn in great voice work, and the animation, both the motion and detail, is [[superb]].

This serious [[movie]] buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie certainly deserves the "10" I gave it. "A Bug's [[Living]]" is [[iike]] a favorite candy bar -- it's chock-full of [[marvellous]] little bits that add up to something really tasty.

The story couldn't have been better; it's clever, has "heart" (emotion), and every [[nature]] has a nice "arc" (a growth or change). By comparison, the only characters in "[[Toys]] Story" to have an "arc" are Buzz, who [[learn]] to love being a toy, and Woody, who overcomes his [[indignation]] of Buzz. There are tons of laughs and cute moments in "A Bug's Life". All of the actors turn in great voice work, and the animation, both the motion and detail, is [[marvellous]].

This serious [[kino]] buff doesn't throw around "10"s lightly, but this movie certainly deserves the "10" I gave it. --------------------------------------------- Result 862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Starfucker (which reads Starstruck on my box) was the most amazing movie I have ever seen. I thought that it was one of the best movies I have ever seen. So why not a 10? Nothing is perfect. Jamie Kennedy proves why he is one of my favorite actors in this very interesting look at a darker side of Hollywood. I have forced a few others to watch the movie and they all agreed that it was an outstanding flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I have heard a lot about this film, with people writing me telling me I should see it, as I am a [[fan]] of extremely bloody, gory movies. I [[got]] my hands on it almost right away, but one thing or another always kept me from watching it- until now. I would have been better off not remembering I even had it.

This movie was [[atrocious]]. The [[worst]] thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and utterly disappointed.

The film [[begins]] good enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The first scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any used in this film!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets worse and worse. I found myself pointing out mistake after mistake. There's just too much. Add that to the fact that what could have and should have been a great serial-killer movie turns into some demonic/supernatural/monster movie at the end...no thank you! It should have been kept as a creepy guy butchering people in the subway- OK, with a conspiracy theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? Plausible, doable...and a lot better I think than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. I have heard a lot about this film, with people writing me telling me I should see it, as I am a [[breather]] of extremely bloody, gory movies. I [[gets]] my hands on it almost right away, but one thing or another always kept me from watching it- until now. I would have been better off not remembering I even had it.

This movie was [[despicable]]. The [[hardest]] thing though is that it could have been so much better than it actually was. I know it was a story by Clive Barker and all, and no I have not read that story- but it appears to me that if you haven't then you will be, as I was, completely clueless and utterly disappointed.

The film [[outset]] good enough- the actors are convincing, the story interesting. The first scene is bloody- a great way to catch your attention. I thought the blood looked a bit bad, but seeing as it was the very first scene I did hope for improvement later on. I was wrong.

The blood and effects are so horrible, it was almost an insult to my intelligence to be expected to believe that, for instance, someone could knock a person's head right off their shoulders using only a meat hammer. WTF? CGI blood (did they even use ANY "real" blood at all? My home made stuff looks better than any used in this film!), unbelievable acts of dismemberment (eyeballs popping out just from getting hit in the back of the head; arms cut neatly off- does no one remember there are BONES all throughout our bodies?!), too-dark scenes (every scene is either an odd yellow color, or in hidden in shadows)...it just gets worse and worse. I found myself pointing out mistake after mistake. There's just too much. Add that to the fact that what could have and should have been a great serial-killer movie turns into some demonic/supernatural/monster movie at the end...no thank you! It should have been kept as a creepy guy butchering people in the subway- OK, with a conspiracy theory thrown in- and an overzealous photographer. Maybe they murder people and sell the meat via the meat plant? Plausible, doable...and a lot better I think than the "real" story. That could have and should have worked. Instead it became a "creatures living at the end of the old tunnel and everyone knows about it but you, and unless you read the book, well...you just won't ever understand it" fiasco. Tragic, what an awful thing to do to a movie with such potential. If you like mindless fake blood and gore, you'll love this. But if you have half a brain in your head then you will completely hate it. Stay away- far, far away. --------------------------------------------- Result 864 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I have always been a [[huge]] James [[Bond]] fanatic! I have seen [[almost]] all of the films except for Die Another Day, and The World Is Not Enough. The graphic's for [[Everything]] [[Or]] [[Nothing]] are [[breathtaking]]! The voice [[talents]]......... [[WOW]]! I LOVE PIERCE BROSNAN! He is [[finally]] [[Bond]] in a [[video]] game! HE IS BOND! I enjoyed the [[past]] Bond [[games]]: Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, [[Agent]] Under [[Fire]], and Nightfire. This one is [[definitely]] the [[best]]! [[Finally]], [[Mr]]. Brosnan, (may I [[call]] him Mr. Brosnan as a sign of respect? [[Yes]] I can!) He was phenomenally exciting to hear in a video [[game]]....... [[AT]] [[LONG]] [[LAST]]! DUH! I've seen him [[perform]] with [[Robin]] [[Williams]], and [[let]] me [[tell]] you, they make a [[great]] team. [[Pierce]] Brosnan is [[funny]], [[wickedly]] [[handsome]] ( I [[mean]] to [[say]] [[wickedly]] in a [[good]] [[way]],) and just one of those actor's who you [[would]] [[want]] to [[walk]] up to and wrap your [[arms]] [[around]] and hug, [[saying]]: "[[Pierce]] Brosnan, thank you for being James [[Bond]]," "If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't know who James [[Bond]] is." He's a [[great]] [[actor]]! I am a huge fan of Willem Dafoe even though I've [[seen]] him in a couple of movies. His role as Nikolai Diavalo was [[brilliant]]. ([[Did]] I spell the character's [[name]] right?) [[LOL]]!!!! He does a [[great]] [[job]] with an accent. [[Sometimes]] I can't even [[hear]] an [[accent]]. I have [[seen]] Willem, I [[mean]] Mr. Dafoe, [[perform]] in two [[movies]]: Finding [[Nemo]], and Spider-Man with my [[favorite]] actress: [[KIRSTEN]] DUNST! SHE [[ROCKS]]! [[Anyway]], He never [[ceases]] to [[amaze]]. And Richard [[Kiel]], [[wow]], he's [[definitely]] [[got]] the [[part]] of Jaw's [[nailed]]. I've [[seen]] him in the movie's and he's [[awesome]]! As a matter of fact, my Grandparent's have [[met]] Mr. Kiel, and I was jealous when they [[told]] me. But, [[Kirsten]] Dunst is at the top of my [[list]] of Celebritie's that I [[want]] to meet. [[John]] Cleese was [[breathtaking]]. I have never [[seen]] a [[better]] [[person]] play as the wisecracking, and gadget creating Q! [[Mr]]. Cleese was [[hilarious]]! I've seen him work with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. He's awesome! John Cleese's most recent project is Shrek 2 starring Mike Myer's, Cameron Diaz, Julie Andrew's and Eddie Murphy. ( Shrek 2 is now in theatre's!) GOOD LUCK 007! Oh, yeah, and as Q alway's says: "Grow up 007!" I have always been a [[gargantuan]] James [[Bonding]] fanatic! I have seen [[approximately]] all of the films except for Die Another Day, and The World Is Not Enough. The graphic's for [[Entire]] [[Orr]] [[Anything]] are [[astounding]]! The voice [[talent]]......... [[WHOA]]! I LOVE PIERCE BROSNAN! He is [[eventually]] [[Bonding]] in a [[videotape]] game! HE IS BOND! I enjoyed the [[former]] Bond [[gaming]]: Goldeneye, The World Is Not Enough, [[Officers]] Under [[Wildfire]], and Nightfire. This one is [[categorically]] the [[optimum]]! [[Ultimately]], [[Herr]]. Brosnan, (may I [[invitation]] him Mr. Brosnan as a sign of respect? [[Yeah]] I can!) He was phenomenally exciting to hear in a video [[gaming]]....... [[UNDER]] [[LONGER]] [[LATTER]]! DUH! I've seen him [[fulfill]] with [[Robyn]] [[William]], and [[leave]] me [[told]] you, they make a [[awesome]] team. [[Pearce]] Brosnan is [[fun]], [[devilishly]] [[nice]] ( I [[meaning]] to [[said]] [[devilishly]] in a [[buena]] [[routes]],) and just one of those actor's who you [[could]] [[wants]] to [[walking]] up to and wrap your [[weapons]] [[about]] and hug, [[telling]]: "[[Pearce]] Brosnan, thank you for being James [[Bonds]]," "If it wasn't for you, I wouldn't know who James [[Bonds]] is." He's a [[awesome]] [[protagonist]]! I am a huge fan of Willem Dafoe even though I've [[watched]] him in a couple of movies. His role as Nikolai Diavalo was [[shiny]]. ([[Could]] I spell the character's [[behalf]] right?) [[JK]]!!!! He does a [[huge]] [[workplace]] with an accent. [[Intermittently]] I can't even [[heed]] an [[focus]]. I have [[noticed]] Willem, I [[imply]] Mr. Dafoe, [[performs]] in two [[cinematography]]: Finding [[Lyme]], and Spider-Man with my [[favored]] actress: [[KRISTIN]] DUNST! SHE [[RATTLE]]! [[Anyways]], He never [[end]] to [[astonishment]]. And Richard [[Keel]], [[whoa]], he's [[assuredly]] [[did]] the [[portions]] of Jaw's [[pinched]]. I've [[watched]] him in the movie's and he's [[funky]]! As a matter of fact, my Grandparent's have [[complied]] Mr. Kiel, and I was jealous when they [[said]] me. But, [[Kristin]] Dunst is at the top of my [[listings]] of Celebritie's that I [[wants]] to meet. [[Johannes]] Cleese was [[exciting]]. I have never [[noticed]] a [[nicer]] [[someone]] play as the wisecracking, and gadget creating Q! [[Mister]]. Cleese was [[comic]]! I've seen him work with Pierce Brosnan in Goldeneye and Tommorow Never Dies. He's awesome! John Cleese's most recent project is Shrek 2 starring Mike Myer's, Cameron Diaz, Julie Andrew's and Eddie Murphy. ( Shrek 2 is now in theatre's!) GOOD LUCK 007! Oh, yeah, and as Q alway's says: "Grow up 007!" --------------------------------------------- Result 865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Are you kidding me?! A show highlighting someone who opens cans and envelopes for a meal? How talented do you have to be to do this? She MAY be able to cook but it is NOT portrayed in this half-hour stomach churning painful production. I know she has a Martha-Stewart-esquire empire. So does Warren Buffett but I don't see him with fake knockers opening cans of cream corn and Alpo.

She has a nephew named...Brycer. Brycer? Stop talking about anyone a name that stupid.

More time is spent on "table-scapes" than actual cooking. Who has that kind of time?! Silicon should be on your spatula, not on my TV. This show should be on Cartoon Network, NOT Food Network. --------------------------------------------- Result 866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] 9/10- 30 minutes of pure holiday terror. Okay, so it's not that scary. But it sure is [[fun]].

The Crypt Keeper (John Kassir) tales a tale of holiday [[FEAR]], giving us all Christmas Goose... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should really be careful what you AXE Santa for. Have a Scary Christmas and a Happy New Fear. Okay I'll stop.

Okay, so in the story, a greedy wife (Best screamer in the world, Mary Ellen Trainor) kills her husband (Marshall Bell, the coach who gets towel whipped to death in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her plan is ruined when a crazy killer dressed in a Santa suit (Larry "Dr. Giggles" Drake) comes her way.

If you look it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third viewing). But if you haven't seen it, I suggest you do. 9/10- 30 minutes of pure holiday terror. Okay, so it's not that scary. But it sure is [[droll]].

The Crypt Keeper (John Kassir) tales a tale of holiday [[ANGST]], giving us all Christmas Goose... GosseBUMPS That is. Bwahahahahha. You should really be careful what you AXE Santa for. Have a Scary Christmas and a Happy New Fear. Okay I'll stop.

Okay, so in the story, a greedy wife (Best screamer in the world, Mary Ellen Trainor) kills her husband (Marshall Bell, the coach who gets towel whipped to death in ANOES 2) for the money. BUT, her plan is ruined when a crazy killer dressed in a Santa suit (Larry "Dr. Giggles" Drake) comes her way.

If you look it up on YouTube, you can watch it for free, but most of you have already seen this (my third viewing). But if you haven't seen it, I suggest you do. --------------------------------------------- Result 867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] When I was in school I [[made]] a [[film]] about a [[couple]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I realized halfway through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian cinema: sodden lyricism married to vacant, metaphor-burdened stabs at social commentary. But whatever my own film's failings I feel much better after seeing this...this...thing. [[For]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[minutes]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[every]] [[pointless]] [[bit]] of [[business]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[relentless]] minutes. The [[male]] [[lead]] is just [[incredible]], a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[given]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical insights culled from the U of [[T]] [[pub]], and he is [[given]] [[lots]] and [[lots]] of space to make us [[hate]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[act]] [[would]] make [[even]] less sense, as a [[couple]] snarky [[dudes]] show up to [[provide]] distant and [[thoroughly]] [[unhelpful]] echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any easier to watch the caged creep whimper "[[please]]" in closeup until the [[magazine]] runs out. I take back what I [[said]] about AUTUMN BORN, which at [[least]] had the [[courage]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematic]] [[crater]] is and will remain the very [[worst]] Canadian [[movie]] of all time. [[At]] [[least]], I [[really]] [[really]] [[hope]] so. When I was in school I [[brought]] a [[cinematography]] about a [[coupling]] roaming around in the trees and talking, and I realized halfway through editing that this was not just a failing aesthetic strategy but a cliché of Canadian cinema: sodden lyricism married to vacant, metaphor-burdened stabs at social commentary. But whatever my own film's failings I feel much better after seeing this...this...thing. [[During]] one thing, mine ran 20 [[mins]], not 85, and had more content at that: [[each]] [[nonsensical]] [[bite]] of [[corporations]] here is fawned over for four, five, six [[unforgiving]] minutes. The [[virile]] [[culminate]] is just [[phenomenal]], a brow-beating, loudmouthed creep [[afforded]] to outbursts of drama-class improv in between philosophical insights culled from the U of [[ton]] [[peacock]], and he is [[awarded]] [[lot]] and [[alot]] of space to make us [[hating]] him. Admittedly if he weren't such an a**hole then the third [[ley]] [[could]] make [[yet]] less sense, as a [[match]] snarky [[blokes]] show up to [[provides]] distant and [[carefully]] [[dispensable]] echoes of 'exploitation' values; but it doesn't make it any easier to watch the caged creep whimper "[[invite]]" in closeup until the [[magazines]] runs out. I take back what I [[told]] about AUTUMN BORN, which at [[less]] had the [[valor]] of its own misbegotten lechery: this [[cinematographic]] [[craters]] is and will remain the very [[pire]] Canadian [[cinematography]] of all time. [[Under]] [[fewest]], I [[genuinely]] [[genuinely]] [[esperanza]] so. --------------------------------------------- Result 868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[God]], I was bored out of my head as I watched this [[pilot]]. I had been [[expecting]] a lot from it, as I'm a [[huge]] [[fan]] of James Cameron (and not just since "Titanic", I [[might]] [[add]]), and his name in the credits I [[thought]] would be a guarantee of quality (Then again, he [[also]] [[wrote]] the leaden Strange Days..). But the thing [[failed]] [[miserably]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of duration. In all that time, it barely went beyond its two line [[synopsis]], and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of coherent plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! [[Heavens]], I was bored out of my head as I watched this [[flyboy]]. I had been [[awaited]] a lot from it, as I'm a [[prodigious]] [[breather]] of James Cameron (and not just since "Titanic", I [[conceivably]] [[adds]]), and his name in the credits I [[figured]] would be a guarantee of quality (Then again, he [[apart]] [[texted]] the leaden Strange Days..). But the thing [[faulted]] [[spectacularly]] at grabbing my attention at any point of its almost two hours of duration. In all that time, it barely went beyond its two line [[recap]], and I would be very hard pressed to try to figure out any kind of coherent plot out of all the mess of strands that went nowhere. On top of that, I don't think the acrobatics outdid even those of any regular "A-Team" episode. As for Alba, yes, she is gorgeous, of course, but the fact that she only displays one single facial expression the entire movie (pouty and surly), makes me also get bored of her "gal wit an attitude" schtick pretty soon. You can count me out of this one, Mr. Cameron! --------------------------------------------- Result 869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Do you guys wanna know a [[secret]]?. This movie [[sucks]]. Well actually i don't know because if you allow yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original movies, then perhaps you may [[find]] this movie [[astounding]] (this movie being a plagiarised copy of i [[know]] what you did last summer). The [[first]] 30 [[minutes]] of the movie is based on a typical story setting; a bunch of so-called cool [[teenagers]] relishing their [[vacation]] in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the juveniles they are. The only [[insight]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a pretentious sense of adolescent decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near unprecedented killings. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a mystery to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did however amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the director and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. Do you guys wanna know a [[confidential]]?. This movie [[stinks]]. Well actually i don't know because if you allow yourself to be indulged by plagiarised versions of original movies, then perhaps you may [[unearthed]] this movie [[phenomenal]] (this movie being a plagiarised copy of i [[savoir]] what you did last summer). The [[fiirst]] 30 [[mins]] of the movie is based on a typical story setting; a bunch of so-called cool [[adolescence]] relishing their [[holiday]] in Florida and being themselves by behaving very much like the juveniles they are. The only [[vision]] we get at this point is the extent to which the director succeeded in illustrating a pretentious sense of adolescent decadence within the characters. The second half hour of the movie gains a little momentum and begins to illustrate a start to the no- where-near unprecedented killings. The third half hour of the movie will most definitely remain a mystery to me because i switched it off before i could further delude myself into thinking that the movie may still have something interesting and original left to show. As far as the story is concerned, it can easily be explained in a few lines. A bunch of teenagers go to Florida on vacation. While they are busy partying, they slowly (and i mean SLOWLY) begin to get killed because they know some sort of silly secret. The only thread to the killings is that all victims were matriculates of a common high school. One thing that did however amaze me about this movie, was how much betty (im not sure about her name..the blonde character) looks like reese witherspoon. Another thing that amazed me about the movie was that it made me jump from my seat a few times. Does that make it a work of art? absolutely not because my 12 year old niece made me drop a glass of orange juice because she "boo'ed" me when i was just about to go through the guest room door..whats the difference between the director and my 12 year old niece????

Do you wanna know a secret??? I'm not sure about you guys, but i don't.. --------------------------------------------- Result 870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's one line that makes it worth to [[rent]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[else]]: this is just a very [[bad]] horror flick. The female [[characters]] are typical [[horror]] movies females. They are [[wooden]], annoying and dumb. You are [[glad]] when they are killed off. [[Long]] [[live]] the strong female character in a [[horror]] [[movie]]!! There's one line that makes it worth to [[leasing]] for Angel fans. Everyone [[elsewhere]]: this is just a very [[mala]] horror flick. The female [[characteristic]] are typical [[abomination]] movies females. They are [[wood]], annoying and dumb. You are [[happier]] when they are killed off. [[Lengthy]] [[living]] the strong female character in a [[abomination]] [[cinematography]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] The coming attractions to "The Order" make it seem like a decent horror mystery/thriller, but what we get is a plot that has [[potential]] to be excellent all [[thrown]] together to form a [[pile]] of [[garbage]].

First off the whole movie consists of terrible [[dialogue]] and god [[awful]] special affects. The acting was also [[nothing]] to be proud of, but Keath Ledger (I think I spelled that right.) saved the movie in this [[category]].

For heaven's sake: DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE! The coming attractions to "The Order" make it seem like a decent horror mystery/thriller, but what we get is a plot that has [[prospective]] to be excellent all [[threw]] together to form a [[battery]] of [[detritus]].

First off the whole movie consists of terrible [[conversations]] and god [[heinous]] special affects. The acting was also [[anything]] to be proud of, but Keath Ledger (I think I spelled that right.) saved the movie in this [[categories]].

For heaven's sake: DON'T SEE THIS MOVIE! --------------------------------------------- Result 872 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "A Guy Thing" may not be a classic, but it sure is a good, funny comedy. The plot focuses on Paul (Jason Lee), who wakes up the morning after his bachelor party with no memory and Becky (Julia Stiles) lying naked in his bed. Before he can figure out what happened, he rushes Becky out of his apartment because his fiance Karen (Selma Blair) is coming. After that, as you could imagine, chaos ensues.

Almost every single scene in "A Guy Thing" delivers loud laughs. The funniest moments come from when Paul imagines what could happen if he tells Karen. Selma Blair is a truly talented comedian, and the worst thing about this film is that she goes underused. Although, she turns out to be more funny than Stiles' character, who actually isn't that interesting. Of course, not every comedy is perfect.

As I said, "A Guy Thing" is no classic, but it's not bad either, 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Despite]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) important and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[mercifully]] quickly. The script makes [[little]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[trite]], and John Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of music. His performance is one-note and [[irritating]].

The only [[positive]] thing to be said is that [[Harvey]] Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. [[While]] unfortunately thinking itself to be (a) intelligent, (b) important and (c) interesting, fortunately this movie is over [[joyfully]] quickly. The script makes [[kiddo]] sense, the whole idea of the sado-masochistic relationship between the two main characters is strangely [[commonplace]], and John Lydon shows us all, in the space of one movie, why he should never have let himself out of music. His performance is one-note and [[vexing]].

The only [[auspicious]] thing to be said is that [[Harve]] Keitel manages to deliver a good turn. His later Bad Lieutenant would show just how badly good actors can act, but mercifully his performance here is restrained. --------------------------------------------- Result 874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[love]] this one. It's a stream of consciousness 70's Sci-fi [[spectacular]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! If you love cult 70's Sci-fi the way I do, or if you like movies such as "Repo Man" or "Buckaroo Bonzai" than you're going to [[iike]] this one. It's a stream of consciousness 70's Sci-fi [[dramatic]], including a 22nd century junkyard and the Earth a million years from now. This movie is pure 70's. Put on Steve Miller's "Fly Like An Eagle" or Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon" and you're ready to go! --------------------------------------------- Result 875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Eddie]] Murphy [[Delirious]] is [[undoubtedly]] the funniest thing I have ever seen in my [[life]]. When I [[saw]] it for the first time about 2 years ago I was in stitches for [[weeks]] after it. To [[date]] I have [[seen]] it a further 17 [[times]] and i [[still]] laugh my ass off each time. [[For]] those who dont know [[Eddie]] Murphy was a brilliant stand up comedian before he was a Hollywood [[superstar]]. There is not one [[dull]] spot in this piece of [[genius]] unlike Eddie Murphy Raw which was released in 1987 which goes flat during the middle. If you are not the sort of [[person]] who can't [[stand]] swearing then I wouldn't advise you to [[see]] it as you will [[probably]] [[hear]] [[swearing]] of some [[form]] [[every]] 5-10 seconds. I [[gave]] this a 10 out of 10 because it [[displays]] the [[greatest]] [[comic]] [[genius]] of them all at his best. [[Eddy]] Murphy [[Delirium]] is [[probably]] the funniest thing I have ever seen in my [[vida]]. When I [[observed]] it for the first time about 2 years ago I was in stitches for [[chou]] after it. To [[dates]] I have [[saw]] it a further 17 [[moments]] and i [[however]] laugh my ass off each time. [[During]] those who dont know [[Eddy]] Murphy was a brilliant stand up comedian before he was a Hollywood [[stars]]. There is not one [[tiresome]] spot in this piece of [[engineers]] unlike Eddie Murphy Raw which was released in 1987 which goes flat during the middle. If you are not the sort of [[someone]] who can't [[standing]] swearing then I wouldn't advise you to [[consults]] it as you will [[presumably]] [[overheard]] [[cuss]] of some [[forms]] [[each]] 5-10 seconds. I [[handed]] this a 10 out of 10 because it [[showings]] the [[biggest]] [[comedian]] [[prodigy]] of them all at his best. --------------------------------------------- Result 876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a puzzle: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses [[seriously]], with [[sardonic]] intent or operates in [[complete]] [[oblivion]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[brilliant]] visuals in the world (and this has some outstanding ones) cannot hide a [[negligence]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to deliver inane dialogue, embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in preponderance and disbelief has to be truly suspended. Another violent, angry fantasy from Paul Verhoeven. Verhoeven is a puzzle: it's difficult to tell whether he takes his sordid impulses [[severely]], with [[wry]] intent or operates in [[finished]] [[wayside]]. He also seems completely ignorant of the fact that all the [[gorgeous]] visuals in the world (and this has some outstanding ones) cannot hide a [[remiss]] to story, dialogue and performance. Kevin Bacon plays a corrupt scientist who has discovered invisibility and uses it to drive himself into moral bankruptcy. Bacon is normally a likable actor who occasionally shows his dark side (`The River Wild') in an attempt to offset his boyish looks; given the material, however, Bacon isn't nearly hateful enough to compel. The other principals are Elisabeth Shue and Josh Brolin, neither of whom are gifted enough to make a solid impression and who, when forced to deliver inane dialogue, embarrass themselves. The climax is a study in preponderance and disbelief has to be truly suspended. --------------------------------------------- Result 877 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I've never been a huge [[fan]] of Mormon films. Being a Mormon, I've always felt that the humor was too exclusive to the LDS community and made us seem like a bunch of [[obsessive]] [[wackos]]. I was [[hoping]] this would be the breath of fresh air, the Halestorm [[movie]] I [[could]] finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list talent like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, Andrew Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this would have to be at least a little funny. And besides, [[church]] basketball is [[ripe]] with [[potential]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I must say, [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[movie]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. Every joke fell flat, and every [[opportunity]] for a genuinely [[funny]] gag went [[ignored]]. The [[dialogue]] was bland, and the film had some of the [[worst]] [[character]] [[development]] I have ever seen. [[Every]] single [[character]] but Wilson's was [[less]] than one-dimensional. It's [[hard]] to [[believe]] that after nine re-writes the [[film]] was [[still]] as mind-numbingly [[stale]] as the train wreck I witnessed. I can't put into words the rage I felt [[sitting]] through this. My [[friends]] and I were [[extras]] in the [[final]] [[game]] scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington [[City]], UT. Kurt Hale, the director, was there, and I must say, I [[avoided]] all contact with him after the [[show]]. He waited at the door, seemingly ready for feedback. I couldn't bring myself to tell him that his film not only ripped away a good hour and a half of my life, but it left a nasty, painful scar that I will never forget.

Here are a few specific problems I had: There was a minor love story subplot between the janitor and the chubby piano player, but these two characters came out of nowhere, and were impossible to care about, so my friends and I were left constantly wondering why we were supposed to care about these two lame, uninteresting characters. There were many subplots that popped up every now and then, each promising the audience the chance for laughs, but each one came and went in a puff of smoke, ending before you could even start caring. This was pretty much how the whole movie felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the first REAL funny Mormon movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through I've never been a huge [[breather]] of Mormon films. Being a Mormon, I've always felt that the humor was too exclusive to the LDS community and made us seem like a bunch of [[fixated]] [[crackpots]]. I was [[expecting]] this would be the breath of fresh air, the Halestorm [[cinema]] I [[did]] finally discuss with my non-Mormon friends.

Boy, was I wrong.

I figured, since this had B-list talent like Clint Howard, Gary Coleman, Andrew Wilson, and Fred Willard (one of my favorites), this would have to be at least a little funny. And besides, [[churches]] basketball is [[mature]] with [[prospective]] for plenty of hilarious gags and such. But I must say, [[around]] the [[whole]] [[film]], it seemed as though no one knew what they were doing. Every joke fell flat, and every [[opportunities]] for a genuinely [[hilarious]] gag went [[omitted]]. The [[discussions]] was bland, and the film had some of the [[hardest]] [[characters]] [[developments]] I have ever seen. [[Everything]] single [[characters]] but Wilson's was [[least]] than one-dimensional. It's [[harsh]] to [[believing]] that after nine re-writes the [[cinema]] was [[yet]] as mind-numbingly [[rancid]] as the train wreck I witnessed. I can't put into words the rage I felt [[seated]] through this. My [[freund]] and I were [[goodies]] in the [[definitive]] [[games]] scene, so we went to the premiere in Washington [[Ville]], UT. Kurt Hale, the director, was there, and I must say, I [[shunned]] all contact with him after the [[exhibition]]. He waited at the door, seemingly ready for feedback. I couldn't bring myself to tell him that his film not only ripped away a good hour and a half of my life, but it left a nasty, painful scar that I will never forget.

Here are a few specific problems I had: There was a minor love story subplot between the janitor and the chubby piano player, but these two characters came out of nowhere, and were impossible to care about, so my friends and I were left constantly wondering why we were supposed to care about these two lame, uninteresting characters. There were many subplots that popped up every now and then, each promising the audience the chance for laughs, but each one came and went in a puff of smoke, ending before you could even start caring. This was pretty much how the whole movie felt.

This film was a major letdown, and I feel bad for everyone who's expecting the first REAL funny Mormon movie. True, the jokes in this one aren't too exclusive to Mormons. Then again, it's hard to tell what was a joke and what was a loud ringing sensation in my ears.

Please, do NOT see this movie. Keep in your mind the fantasy that this movie is hilarious. Spare yourself the disappointment I went through --------------------------------------------- Result 878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a straight to video-movie. It's the story about a man who believes his daughter [[could]] be a [[star]]. The only thing he [[needs]] is to get her on stage, [[surrounded]] by cameras and [[reporters]]. A simple [[plan]] for which he has to kidnap and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[movie]] is not the basic [[plot]], but how it is made. [[Everything]] is supposed to be [[funny]], but it isn't. It is trivial and [[clumsy]], the characters are shallow, and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The last sequence is probably the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[pathetic]] the whole set-up is. 'Iedereen Beroemd' has everything we can expect from a straight to video-movie. It's the story about a man who believes his daughter [[wo]] be a [[stars]]. The only thing he [[must]] is to get her on stage, [[girded]] by cameras and [[journalist]]. A simple [[schemes]] for which he has to kidnap and do some blackmail. The problem with the [[cinematographic]] is not the basic [[intrigue]], but how it is made. [[Eveything]] is supposed to be [[comical]], but it isn't. It is trivial and [[awkward]], the characters are shallow, and the end-sequence is totally without climax or emotion. The last sequence is probably the only scene where you feel like laughing, but only at how [[deplorable]] the whole set-up is. --------------------------------------------- Result 879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have [[seen]] just about all of Miyazaki's [[films]], and they are all beautiful and captivating. But this one [[rises]] above the [[rest]]. This movie [[totally]] [[impressed]] me!

I fell in love with Pazu and Sheeta, and their sweet, caring [[friendship]]. They were what [[made]] the [[movie]] for me. Of course, the animation is also superb and the music captures the [[feelings]] in the [[film]] [[perfectly]]. But the [[characters]] are the [[shining]] point in this movie: they are so well developed and full of personality.

Now, [[let]] me [[clarify]]: I'm [[really]] talking about the Japanese [[version]] of the [[movie]] (with [[English]] subs). While the English dub is good (mostly), it simply pales in [[comparison]] to the [[original]] [[language]] version. The [[voices]] are better, the [[dialogue]], everything. [[So]] I [[suggest]] seeing (and hearing) the movie the way it originally was. I have [[saw]] just about all of Miyazaki's [[cinematography]], and they are all beautiful and captivating. But this one [[hiked]] above the [[repose]]. This movie [[altogether]] [[surprising]] me!

I fell in love with Pazu and Sheeta, and their sweet, caring [[amity]]. They were what [[introduced]] the [[flick]] for me. Of course, the animation is also superb and the music captures the [[affections]] in the [[kino]] [[absolutely]]. But the [[trait]] are the [[glittering]] point in this movie: they are so well developed and full of personality.

Now, [[leaving]] me [[explaining]]: I'm [[genuinely]] talking about the Japanese [[stepping]] of the [[flick]] (with [[Brits]] subs). While the English dub is good (mostly), it simply pales in [[compare]] to the [[upfront]] [[linguistics]] version. The [[voice]] are better, the [[talks]], everything. [[Accordingly]] I [[proposing]] seeing (and hearing) the movie the way it originally was. --------------------------------------------- Result 880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] There are a [[couple]] of prior comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of clichés throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about Elizabeth Berkly's awful performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never [[seen]] - and her performance here, while not [[awful]], is [[barely]] up to the [[standards]] of Lifetime's worse [[fare]]. There was not a hint of [[depth]] to her [[character]], but then there probably shouldn't have been. If so, it would have placed the film completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or charisma - not a trace - in any one character, performer, or [[portrayal]].

The principal's handling of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had kissed her in the hall was laughable. Her husband's initial reaction and [[advice]] were likewise (Forrest Gump, attacking Jenny's boyfriend in his car provided a more realistic, intelligent action, and, hell, he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous lawyer (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student actually performed something probably worthy of praise in his performance: he was both laughable and thoroughly [[annoying]] at the same time, no mean feat. Her [[attorney]] was more of an insensitive nerd, also not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[rather]] enjoyed this part), the police were such a collection of insensitive oafs, that you'd rather depend upon Barney Fife, without Andy, to handle all law enforcement and investigation in your community. I know that most real-like cops fall a bit short of the sharpness, intelligence and empathy of the level displayed by most characters on the "Law and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level seem to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." There are a [[matches]] of prior comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of clichés throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.

I'd read about Elizabeth Berkly's awful performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never [[noticed]] - and her performance here, while not [[atrocious]], is [[hardly]] up to the [[norms]] of Lifetime's worse [[tariff]]. There was not a hint of [[depths]] to her [[personages]], but then there probably shouldn't have been. If so, it would have placed the film completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or charisma - not a trace - in any one character, performer, or [[portrait]].

The principal's handling of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had kissed her in the hall was laughable. Her husband's initial reaction and [[counsels]] were likewise (Forrest Gump, attacking Jenny's boyfriend in his car provided a more realistic, intelligent action, and, hell, he was mentally-challenged).

The smarmy, unctuous lawyer (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student actually performed something probably worthy of praise in his performance: he was both laughable and thoroughly [[troublesome]] at the same time, no mean feat. Her [[procurator]] was more of an insensitive nerd, also not unknown in the profession.

Finally (and frankly, I [[quite]] enjoyed this part), the police were such a collection of insensitive oafs, that you'd rather depend upon Barney Fife, without Andy, to handle all law enforcement and investigation in your community. I know that most real-like cops fall a bit short of the sharpness, intelligence and empathy of the level displayed by most characters on the "Law and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level seem to be a staple on "Lifetime."

Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."

This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera.

But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.

This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." --------------------------------------------- Result 881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] David Burton([[Richard]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate taxation(..and suffers from unusual [[dreams]] which bother him seeing this aboriginal [[man]] [[shrouded]] in darkness), who is called on to take a case concerning a group of aboriginals charged with the murder of one of their own named Billy..we see that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his heart. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down polluted dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "deformed" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David pursues the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic drama builds it's story methodically and is completely original and unpredictable. With Peter Weir in charge, the film is visually arresting as we see these very overwhelming images of possible doom towards civilization, but the film's most compelling angle is [[certainly]] David's journey to find that monumental truth that plagues him as he questions Charlie and Chris countlessly, at first to help his men get off from a crime they didn't commit, and ultimately to find out what he has to do with anything catastrophic that is occurring or might occur later. David Burton([[Ritchie]] Chamberlain, quite good)is a lawyer, more adept at handling corporate taxation(..and suffers from unusual [[dreamt]] which bother him seeing this aboriginal [[dawg]] [[wrapped]] in darkness), who is called on to take a case concerning a group of aboriginals charged with the murder of one of their own named Billy..we see that he tries to steal stones with ritual painting on them and is killed when a leader of an aboriginal tribe named Charlie(Nandjiwarra Amagula)uses a "death bone" to stop his heart. Meanwhile, revolving around David, bizarre weather patterns effect Sydney such as rain beating down polluted dirt and rock-sized hail during bright blue skies(with no sights of clouds, such as the one that hits a school in central Australia), not to mention, a "deformed" rainbow which is split(!)into groups. As David pursues the case he finds that he is far closer to the weird events taking place than he could ever realize. One aboriginal named Chris(David Gulpilil)appears to him in a dream holding a stone with blood and he finds that this man is one of those he is to represent at trial! He finds that it's quite possible, after some strange meetings with Charlie and conversations with Chris, that he very well might be linked to a spirit named Mulkurul and that his dreams are actual premonitions of possible horrors yet to come.

Absorbing apocalyptic drama builds it's story methodically and is completely original and unpredictable. With Peter Weir in charge, the film is visually arresting as we see these very overwhelming images of possible doom towards civilization, but the film's most compelling angle is [[admittedly]] David's journey to find that monumental truth that plagues him as he questions Charlie and Chris countlessly, at first to help his men get off from a crime they didn't commit, and ultimately to find out what he has to do with anything catastrophic that is occurring or might occur later. --------------------------------------------- Result 882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] This [[movie]] is probably my favorite [[movie]] of all [[time]]. Miriam Flynn is [[excellent]] as [[Bunny]] Packard. Zane Buzby as Delores is [[comic]] [[genius]]. The rest of the cast is [[amazing]], and the [[film]] is really really funny. A definite [[satire]] of [[horror]] [[films]], with a zany twist. [[If]] you enjoy a fun, [[comedy]] [[filled]] evening, then go and rent this [[classic]]. You'll laugh all the [[way]] through! This [[cinema]] is probably my favorite [[kino]] of all [[period]]. Miriam Flynn is [[glamorous]] as [[Rabbits]] Packard. Zane Buzby as Delores is [[comedy]] [[genie]]. The rest of the cast is [[awesome]], and the [[kino]] is really really funny. A definite [[sarcasm]] of [[monstrosity]] [[cinematographic]], with a zany twist. [[Unless]] you enjoy a fun, [[travesty]] [[filling]] evening, then go and rent this [[typical]]. You'll laugh all the [[routing]] through! --------------------------------------------- Result 883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The funny sound that you may hear when you eyeball this execrable version of Jules Verne's classic "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is Verne spinning in his grave. The only thing about this 80 minute opus that has anything to do with "Journey to the Center of the Earth" is the title. Otherwise, everything else in this lackluster production is new and not worth watching. In fact, the director has written here at IMDb.COM that he directed only eight minutes of "Journey to the Center of the Earth" and the studio tacked on part of "Dollman" helmer Albert Pyun's sequel to his own "Alien from L.A." with Kathy Ireland. Evidently, the producers ran out of money and to satisfy overseas contractual obligations, they grafted Pyun's sequel onto director Rusty Lemorande's movie. Please, don't rent or buy this wretched piece of garbage.

Unlike director Henry Levin's period piece "Journey to the Center of the Earth" (1959) with James Mason and Pat Boone, Lemorande's "Journey to the Center of the Earth" takes place in contemporary times in Hawaii. Two fellows, a British nanny, and a dog are brought together for the adventure of a lifetime purely by coincidence. Richard (Paul Carafotes of "Blind Date") and his comic book obsessed brother Bryan (Ilan Mitchell-Smith of "Weird Science") are going out to explore a cave. The heroine, Crystina (Nicola Cowper of "Underworld"), works for a domestic service called 'Nannies R Us.' Being a nanny has been Crystina's life-long dream, but she has made a less of all five of her nanny jobs. Nevertheless, her sympathetic supervisor, Ms. Ferry (Lynda Marshall of "Africa Express"), sends her to Hawaii. Crystina's new client, rock star Billy Foul (Jeremy Crutchley of "Doomsday") who is scheduling one last concert to revive his flagging career, has a dog named Bernard. Foul wants Crystina to take Bernard to a doggie day spa. Crystina is waiting on the arrival of her taxi when a careless motel attendant accidentally puts the basket that conceals Bernard in Richard's jeep. You see, Foul has hidden his canine in a basket because motel management strictly prohibits pets on their premises. Foul has disguised the dog as a human baby. Anyway, Crystina catches a cab and tells the driver follow Richard.

After she catches up with them to get her dog, the cabbie cruises away and abandons her. Crystina demands that Richard drive her back to town, but he has other plans. Unhappily, Crystina joins the guys and they get lost, and then find themselves in the lost city of Atlantis, a police state ruled by a dictator, at the center of the Earth. The rulers of Atlantis repeatedly notify their citizens that life on the surface does not exist. Our heroes and heroine stumble onto Atlantis quite by accident. Atlantis resembles a disco and everybody looks like they are straight out of a punk rock opera. The ruler of Atlantis, General Rykov (Janet Du Plessis of "Operation Hit Squad"), is orchestrating a raid on the surface with clones of the first human, Wanda Saknussemm (Kathy Ireland of "Necessary Roughness"), to visit Atlantis. Predictably, General Rykov machinations to rule Atlantis and overthrow the Earth fails, and our heroes and heroine save the day.

"Journey to the Center of the Earth" is an abomination. The movie seems to be a comedy despite its superficial satire about dictatorships. Albert Pyun is one of my favorite low budget action directors, but he blew it on this lightweight shambles of a science fiction saga. --------------------------------------------- Result 884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Come on, what is the deal with this show, Power [[Rangers]] anyways? I always felt that the show, which was originally [[brought]] over from Japan in a [[better]] form, took what was [[great]] in Japan, and turned into one of the most ridiculous and pointless excuses in toy merchandising history! There is [[absolutely]] no point with this [[show]] whatsoever.

The bad haircuts, bad costumes, earrings, etc, all show what was [[ridiculous]] back in the 1990s From the two idiots, Bulk and Skull, to the "duhs", of the main cast, Jason, Trini, Tommy, Kimberly, Billy and Zack, I just want to say one thing: GIVE ME A BREAK!

Saban brought this from Japan, and then Disney bought the rights to this show around five years ago.

Now the public has to endure reruns of this show on the Disney channel and such.

All I can say once again is give me a break! Come on, what is the deal with this show, Power [[Ringers]] anyways? I always felt that the show, which was originally [[lodged]] over from Japan in a [[best]] form, took what was [[wondrous]] in Japan, and turned into one of the most ridiculous and pointless excuses in toy merchandising history! There is [[altogether]] no point with this [[exhibitions]] whatsoever.

The bad haircuts, bad costumes, earrings, etc, all show what was [[nonsense]] back in the 1990s From the two idiots, Bulk and Skull, to the "duhs", of the main cast, Jason, Trini, Tommy, Kimberly, Billy and Zack, I just want to say one thing: GIVE ME A BREAK!

Saban brought this from Japan, and then Disney bought the rights to this show around five years ago.

Now the public has to endure reruns of this show on the Disney channel and such.

All I can say once again is give me a break! --------------------------------------------- Result 885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Oh Geez... There are so many other films I want to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he wanted - Yeah...

I [[used]] to watch this show when I was in college...it was mindless, kinda fun, and somewhat action-oriented. The show had a good heart tho...and the characters were cute; no one ever got killed or even hurt badly... it was like a cartoon come to life. Cut to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[work]]. As others have said, there simply isn't a cohesive story and the performances are weird...almost annoying - [[definitely]] not faithful to the original characters...the whole thing is a like a Mad TV skit and it lasts over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED watching a film. What were they thinking? As best I can tell, must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can say is, let this one die a quick death. It makes the original Dukes of Hazzard seem like Masterpiece Theater...

I think the only remake left to do from TV is Gilligan's Island... Good Luck! Oh Geez... There are so many other films I want to see out there... I got stuck with my nephew for the weekend and this is what he wanted - Yeah...

I [[utilize]] to watch this show when I was in college...it was mindless, kinda fun, and somewhat action-oriented. The show had a good heart tho...and the characters were cute; no one ever got killed or even hurt badly... it was like a cartoon come to life. Cut to 2005...What happened? This one doesn't [[collaboration]]. As others have said, there simply isn't a cohesive story and the performances are weird...almost annoying - [[surely]] not faithful to the original characters...the whole thing is a like a Mad TV skit and it lasts over 100 minutes! This was one of the few times I've been EMBARRASSED watching a film. What were they thinking? As best I can tell, must've been for the product marketing, toys, etc. All I can say is, let this one die a quick death. It makes the original Dukes of Hazzard seem like Masterpiece Theater...

I think the only remake left to do from TV is Gilligan's Island... Good Luck! --------------------------------------------- Result 886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] There is great detail in A Bug's Life. Everything is covered. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the [[bad]] guys in this film actually [[seemed]] [[bad]]. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. Check this one out. There is great detail in A Bug's Life. Everything is covered. The film looks great and the animation is sometimes jaw-dropping. The film isn't too terribly orignal, it's basically a modern take on Kurosawa's Seven Samurai, only with bugs. I enjoyed the character interaction however and the [[unhealthy]] guys in this film actually [[looked]] [[mala]]. It seems that Disney usually makes their bad guys carbon copy cut-outs. The grasshoppers are menacing and Hopper, the lead bad guy, was a brillant creation. Check this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] Goodnight, Mister Tom [[begins]] in an impossibly exquisite [[village]] in the south of England where the [[sun]] always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a load of sentimental [[claptrap]] it is. [[In]] fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy [[formula]]. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my wife enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I disliked it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

Goodnight, Mister Tom [[launches]] in an impossibly exquisite [[villager]] in the south of England where the [[sunshine]] always seems to shine. Before we have much idea of the period we hear a radio announcement of the declaration of World War II. Soon a train blowing clouds of steam brings refugee children from London and when shy little William is billeted with reluctant, gruff old Tom (who you just know will turn out to have a heart of gold) our tale begins.

And what a load of sentimental [[absurd]] it is. [[For]] fact it's just the old odd-couple buddy [[formulas]]. Aren't any new stories being written?

As I suggested there's hardly any period feel in the village and not much more in London apart from the odd old ambulance rattling around. And certainly no hint of the horror of the Blitz as London's citizens file politely into air-raid shelters. Even when the local schoolteacher's husband is declared missing presumed killed, he is later restored to life.

I found `Goodnight, Mister Tom' cliched and obvious and John Thaw's accent conjured up a picture of Ronnie Barker of the Two Ronnies with a straw in his mouth doing his `country bumpkin' accent.

Incidentally my wife enjoyed this movie for all the reasons that I disliked it and looking at fellow-imdb reviewers I seem to be in a minority of one.

--------------------------------------------- Result 888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As a [[fan]] of Paris Je'Taime, I went to [[see]] [[New]] York, I Love You with very [[high]] expectations. I [[gladly]] walked out with all my expectations [[met]]. It was [[funny]], [[sweet]], fast-paced, and [[entertaining]]. The [[film]] starts out with two cab hoppers ([[Bradley]] Cooper & Justin Bartha) [[trying]] to [[get]] to the same [[area]] but [[arguing]] which [[way]] to [[go]]. That was funny, and then the [[film]] goes into some of the [[best]] skits I have ever [[seen]] [[anywhere]]. There were four amazing ones out of all the good ones. Those four I will start talking about. One features Shia LaBeouf as a bellhop at a [[hotel]] who [[finds]] [[love]] in an [[old]] lady. The next one [[features]] Orlando Bloom as a [[music]] [[maker]] who is doing [[business]] with a [[woman]] [[played]] by [[Christina]] Ricci. Another one [[features]] [[Anton]] Yelchin and Olivia Thirbly as two people going to prom, Thirbly's [[character]] being [[handicapped]]. The [[best]] one [[features]] Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman as a [[bickering]] [[old]] [[couple]]. I will [[bring]] to your attention that Nataile Portman makes an [[impressive]] directorial [[debut]] directing, and [[writing]] a [[skit]] about a caretaker, and Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q are [[excellent]] as a flirting [[man]] and a hooker. [[New]] York, I Love You is [[definitely]] as good, if not [[better]] than the 2006 Paris Je'Taime. The skits are well-paced, and the [[film]] [[shows]] how [[indie]] [[films]] should [[really]] be. The [[film]], [[however]], does not have as [[many]] [[famous]] [[directors]] as Paris Je'Taime, which is why it was [[fantastic]] to live up to its excellence. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[laugh]], [[see]] some [[great]] [[dramatic]] [[effects]], [[see]] an [[amazing]] [[amount]] of [[great]] performances, and just plain be [[entertained]] then [[definitely]] go see [[New]] York, I [[Love]] You. As a [[groupie]] of Paris Je'Taime, I went to [[seeing]] [[Newest]] York, I Love You with very [[alto]] expectations. I [[blithely]] walked out with all my expectations [[complied]]. It was [[comical]], [[sugary]], fast-paced, and [[droll]]. The [[cinematography]] starts out with two cab hoppers ([[Bernardo]] Cooper & Justin Bartha) [[tempting]] to [[gets]] to the same [[zones]] but [[claiming]] which [[manner]] to [[going]]. That was funny, and then the [[filmmaking]] goes into some of the [[optimum]] skits I have ever [[watched]] [[nowhere]]. There were four amazing ones out of all the good ones. Those four I will start talking about. One features Shia LaBeouf as a bellhop at a [[motel]] who [[find]] [[likes]] in an [[elderly]] lady. The next one [[featured]] Orlando Bloom as a [[musician]] [[producer]] who is doing [[corporations]] with a [[girls]] [[done]] by [[Kristina]] Ricci. Another one [[characters]] [[Anthony]] Yelchin and Olivia Thirbly as two people going to prom, Thirbly's [[traits]] being [[disabled]]. The [[better]] one [[traits]] Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman as a [[squabbling]] [[ancient]] [[couples]]. I will [[bringing]] to your attention that Nataile Portman makes an [[awesome]] directorial [[infancy]] directing, and [[literary]] a [[sketch]] about a caretaker, and Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q are [[awesome]] as a flirting [[males]] and a hooker. [[Novel]] York, I Love You is [[admittedly]] as good, if not [[best]] than the 2006 Paris Je'Taime. The skits are well-paced, and the [[movie]] [[displayed]] how [[andy]] [[movie]] should [[truthfully]] be. The [[kino]], [[instead]], does not have as [[multiple]] [[notorious]] [[administrators]] as Paris Je'Taime, which is why it was [[marvellous]] to live up to its excellence. [[Unless]] you [[wants]] to [[giggling]], [[seeing]] some [[whopping]] [[whopping]] [[ramifications]], [[behold]] an [[unbelievable]] [[quantity]] of [[marvellous]] performances, and just plain be [[distracted]] then [[obviously]] go see [[Newer]] York, I [[Likes]] You. --------------------------------------------- Result 889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Horrible]] acting, [[Bad]] [[story]] line, cheesy [[makeup]], and this is just the tip of the [[iceberg]]. I have never [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[movie]] in my [[life]], 5 [[minutes]] in I [[decided]] to fast forward to [[see]] if [[anything]] [[redeeming]] [[would]] happen... It didn't. ([[Aside]] from a [[nice]] breast [[shot]]) The movie apparently was filmed in some furniture warehouse, and the same [[warehouse]] was used for at [[least]] 90% of the sets. You even [[see]] this same red [[chair]] in [[several]] [[different]] "[[locations]]" [[If]] you are [[going]] to make a film at least [[rent]] an office building and an apartment, not some [[warehouse]] which will echo all your actor's [[dialog]].. ([[Note]] to [[producers]]) [[Renting]] a [[small]] office space and an [[apartment]] for a [[month]] is much [[cheaper]] than an entire [[warehouse]], and both are [[quite]] a [[bit]] more versatile and believable) If you [[spend]] your [[money]] to [[rent]] this people I [[hope]] you [[got]] it with a [[return]] [[guarantee]]... You will be [[demanding]] your [[money]] back... I only [[spent]] $2.99 to [[rent]] this tonight and I feel [[ripped]] off. [[Frightful]] acting, [[Wicked]] [[stories]] line, cheesy [[composition]], and this is just the tip of the [[iceman]]. I have never [[watched]] a [[lousiest]] [[cinematography]] in my [[vie]], 5 [[mins]] in I [[decides]] to fast forward to [[behold]] if [[nothing]] [[redeem]] [[could]] happen... It didn't. ([[Sideways]] from a [[delightful]] breast [[kiiled]]) The movie apparently was filmed in some furniture warehouse, and the same [[warehouses]] was used for at [[less]] 90% of the sets. You even [[behold]] this same red [[presidents]] in [[diverse]] [[diverse]] "[[sites]]" [[Though]] you are [[go]] to make a film at least [[rented]] an office building and an apartment, not some [[platt]] which will echo all your actor's [[dialogues]].. ([[Notes]] to [[producer]]) [[Leases]] a [[petite]] office space and an [[condo]] for a [[months]] is much [[cheap]] than an entire [[platt]], and both are [[utterly]] a [[bitten]] more versatile and believable) If you [[dedicate]] your [[cash]] to [[leases]] this people I [[esperanza]] you [[did]] it with a [[comeback]] [[guaranty]]... You will be [[exacting]] your [[cash]] back... I only [[expended]] $2.99 to [[leases]] this tonight and I feel [[torn]] off. --------------------------------------------- Result 890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I fell in [[love]] with this silent action [[drama]]. [[Kurt]] Russell and only Kurt Russell could have played this so well. Raised from childhood to know nothing but war and fighting, Todd (Kurt Russell) is dumped on a planet after being made obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The [[stage]] is set and another classic icon of action movies was born - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not Bruce Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and made it entirely his - original, [[daring]], and all too human. I miss the fact that sequels were never made.

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/jbc33/ I fell in [[iike]] with this silent action [[tragedy]]. [[Curt]] Russell and only Kurt Russell could have played this so well. Raised from childhood to know nothing but war and fighting, Todd (Kurt Russell) is dumped on a planet after being made obsolete by genetically engineered soldiers.

The [[ballpark]] is set and another classic icon of action movies was born - SOLDIER. Not Rambo, not Schwarzenegger, not Bruce Willis, not Mel Gibson, not Jason Statham - Kurt Russell owns this role and made it entirely his - original, [[audacity]], and all too human. I miss the fact that sequels were never made.

10/10

-LD

_________

my faith: http://www.angelfire.com/ny5/jbc33/ --------------------------------------------- Result 891 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] A chemist [[develops]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[delightful]] Ealing Studios [[comedy]], Guinness is [[marvelous]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While telling an engaging [[story]], the film also raises some intriguing [[questions]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who would go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. A chemist [[develop]] a fabric that never gets dirty or wears out, but it is seen as a threat to the survival of various industries. In this [[delectable]] Ealing Studios [[farce]], Guinness is [[marvellous]] as the mild-mannered but persistent chemist. Greenwood, with her sensual voice, plays the love interest; Parker is her harried father. Thesiger is amusing as a patriarch of the fabric industry. While telling an engaging [[conte]], the film also raises some intriguing [[matters]] about science, the economy, and politics. It is adeptly directed by Mackendrick, who would go on to make "The Ladykillers" and the sublime "Sweet Smell of Success" later in the 1950s. --------------------------------------------- Result 892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A surprising misfire from the usually [[reliable]] Larry Cohen (God Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full Moon High tries so hard to be funny and fails [[miserably]], [[even]] with decent turns by Ed McMahon(!) and Kenneth Mars. Alan Arkin looks embarrassed throughout his performance and son Adam simply looks numb. This makes Teen Wolf [[look]] like a comedy classic. A surprising misfire from the usually [[believable]] Larry Cohen (God Told Me Too, Q, etc.), Full Moon High tries so hard to be funny and fails [[spectacularly]], [[yet]] with decent turns by Ed McMahon(!) and Kenneth Mars. Alan Arkin looks embarrassed throughout his performance and son Adam simply looks numb. This makes Teen Wolf [[gaze]] like a comedy classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Greenaway's films pose as [[clever]], erudite and innovative. [[Yet]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of films made in the World [[War]] 1 [[era]] of film-making: the frame composition, use of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream movies with this style but it is not new. Perhaps like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the past than in looking forward as an authentic [[innovator]] would or could.

[[Yet]] Greenaway's [[biggest]] [[failing]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is mechanical and logical but without the vitality of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is tedium: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his actors over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a bored, smug air like narcissistic adolescents.

This film, despite its design and lighting, is meretricious. Greenaway's films pose as [[shrewd]], erudite and innovative. [[Again]] his style and grammar originate and remind viewers of films made in the World [[Warfare]] 1 [[epoch]] of film-making: the frame composition, use of mid-shot, the static camera. It may be well to rub against mainstream movies with this style but it is not new. Perhaps like that other "innovator", TS Eliot, he draws more from the past than in looking forward as an authentic [[inventors]] would or could.

[[Though]] Greenaway's [[widest]] [[weakness]] is that he cannot write. His dialog and even plot structure is mechanical and logical but without the vitality of another dramatic logician, Brecht. Where this weakness is most apparent is in his humor, which is poised and logical, so the joke is dead before it's delivered. The result is tedium: if it's not funny, it has failed: ask a stand-up comedian to justify their act if the audience doesn't respond. Perhaps the well-read director could learn something from Freud on humor.

Finally, like Woody Allen, Greenaway has manipulated his actors over the years to work like clones. They speak the lines with a bored, smug air like narcissistic adolescents.

This film, despite its design and lighting, is meretricious. --------------------------------------------- Result 894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This movie was 100% boring, i swear i almost died from boredom at the theater. It [[wasnt]] funny and didnt really hve that much [[action]] in it either, it was [[BORING]] and i [[hope]] whoever out there that liked this movie, god be with you in the future when you find out what this movie was really like and try to jump off a bridge or something like that This movie was 100% boring, i swear i almost died from boredom at the theater. It [[actualy]] funny and didnt really hve that much [[efforts]] in it either, it was [[DREARY]] and i [[esperanza]] whoever out there that liked this movie, god be with you in the future when you find out what this movie was really like and try to jump off a bridge or something like that --------------------------------------------- Result 895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Mean-spirited, ugly, [[nasty]] retro-action thriller, about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[desire]] to [[apologize]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and see this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a powerful example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and effective. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to ignore. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a great performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. Mean-spirited, ugly, [[sordid]] retro-action thriller, about a bodyguard who is determined to find (and destroy!), the killers of the girl he was supposed to protect. This film is almost an anachronism in today's politically correct atmosphere. Director Scott doesn't have any [[willingness]] to [[excuse]] for the inherently immorality behind the film's dramatic structure. Scott is either not aware or doesn't care for 30 years of social advances. I really don't think we will see a more violent film any time soon, so you better go and see this one while you can. Despite its relentless grimness, I think the movie is a powerful example of cinema at its most sinister, exploitative, and effective. Scott has a tough thing to sell, but I think I'm a buyer. The extraordinary technical aspects of this film are just too effective for me to ignore. Scott's directorial choices are simply astonishing, and he pulls a great performance out of Denzel Washington. Sensitive souls need to stay away from this one, but I recommended it to those viewers looking for a great, action-filled movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (76%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is pathetic and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my book as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[bad]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are bored and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. i got a copy from the writer of this movie on soulseek. I have to say it is pathetic and just plain painful to watch the two cops act, but i watched the movie as a joke and since it is a homage to august's underground which i happened to have seen it is in my book as an awesome movie. Its quality and everything about it is pretty [[negative]] but its entertaining and something to talk about amongst your friends. Reminds me of troma but good stuff. I recommend seeing this under two conditions, if you are bored and need a good laugh, or high, otherwise just let it be. Recommended download for sure. o and the killings are pretty funny. like when the zombie rips the Satan worshipers dick off and stabs someone in the head with it. --------------------------------------------- Result 897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] It's really [[rare]] that you get an inside view at a media deception that has been so widely reported as official "truth" and caught so many "news" agencies with their pants down. This [[movie]], in my view, deserves every price there is in journalism - it's objective (yes!), [[courageous]] and a [[real]] "[[scoop]]". It can do without comment, fake scenes or leading questions - everyone, including Chavez equally [[gets]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. It's really [[uncommon]] that you get an inside view at a media deception that has been so widely reported as official "truth" and caught so many "news" agencies with their pants down. This [[filmmaking]], in my view, deserves every price there is in journalism - it's objective (yes!), [[plucky]] and a [[veritable]] "[[spoon]]". It can do without comment, fake scenes or leading questions - everyone, including Chavez equally [[receives]] to make fools of themselves in their own words. The filmmakers "only" had to keep track of events and keep their cameras rolling.

The Venezuelan elite teaches us "How to depose of a President and sell it as a victory of democracy". It's amazing that they lost in the end - so far. From what I know, the biggest TV station involved only got its terrestrial license revoked, they're still broadcasting via cable and satellite. I highly doubt whether George W. or Barack Obama would be that tolerant after an attempted coup. But then, they don't have to worry.

The fact that the "Chavez supporters shoot innocent civilians" scam was so willingly repeated around the world reveals just how biased the so-called "free" (established) media really has become, or has always been, only more so. An important lesson to anyone interested in what "really" goes on in the world.

The famous "objectivity" challenge always comes into play when journalists dare to oppose the mainstream view, or reveal unwelcome facts that accuse "us" - it has been true with the effects of the Atomic bomb, the US secret history of spreading "democracy" around the world or the Iraq war that, according to Johns Hopkins, has killed 1,3 million Iraquis by now, not to mention the 60,000 Afghans (in 2003) that are never mentioned. To be objective, Saddam Hussein was less damaging to his people than the US. And the US is ready & willing to be more damaging to the Iranians that he was.

I'm quite curious about the upcoming trial of some Khmer Rouge leaders before the International Tribunal in The Hague, whether there will be any mention of "our" involvement in supporting and training Pol Pot's guerrillas in the 80's, when they had been largely defeated by the Vietnamese. Probably not.

All the more reason to turn to the Independent media for balance, if not exposure of fraud. --------------------------------------------- Result 898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] What a [[wonderful]], fanciful [[movie]] "Stardust" is.

I [[could]] easily end it with that one statement and suffice to say, one [[could]] take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "[[Stardust]]" makes us [[remember]] why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike glee we all long for.

"Stardust" is full of all the characters we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. What a [[sumptuous]], fanciful [[filmmaking]] "Stardust" is.

I [[did]] easily end it with that one statement and suffice to say, one [[would]] take it as a very strong recommendation to go see it.

At a time when Hollywood seems bent on forcing remakes and sequels down our throats, "[[Dust]]" makes us [[remind]] why we go to the movies in the first place - to escape reality for a couple of hours and explore other lives, other times, or other planets. Ironically, "Stardust" takes us to all three places effortlessly and with a childlike glee we all long for.

"Stardust" is full of all the characters we remember as children: princes, witches, pirates, ghosts and scoundrels. It has the damsel in distress, the hero, the rogues, the obstacles, spells, antidotes, charms, and even a touch of light-speed to make it quasi modern.

"Stardust" is about a man from the town of Wall, which is conveniently situated next to a wall that separates their town from a magical kingdom. The only way past the wall is through a breech that is diligently guarded by a scruffy old codger (played wonderfully by David Kelly). One day a young man from Wall named Ben Barnes out maneuvers the old guard and escapes through the breech. He happens upon an enchanted kingdom called Stormhold where he meets a chained (and very sexy) young lady named Una. She is held captive by a witch and leashed by an unbreakable chain. While the witch is away, Una seduces Ben and sends him on his way. Ben returns to Wall without incident and continues his life. But nine months later he is summoned to the wall breech where the old guard hands him what you might expect - a baby boy.

The boy, named Tristan grows up to be a rather hapless young man (Charlie Cox) who is smitten with a girl way out of his league and also betrothed to another. Nevertheless, the young lady (named Victoria and played Sienna Miller) goes out once with Tristain and he confesses his love to her. After they espy a falling star, she tells him he can have her if he retrieves the star and brings it back to her. He agrees and sets out on his quest, which will take him to the other side of the wall.

Meanwhile in the kingdom of Stormhold, the old king (perfectly played by Peter O'Toole) is dying. He calls his remaining living sons to tell them who shall succeed him to the throne. His sons' names are Primus, Secondus, Sextmus, and Septimus. The other sons where killed by the other brothers in a humorous competition to see who lives to get the throne.

Anyway, he tosses his ruby charm to the sky and Voila, that what brings the star to earth.

The star crashes in the form of a beautiful woman named Yvaine (Clare Danes) and she, of course, is wearing the charm. But little does she know she is now being persuaded by Tristain, the Princes, and also an aging witch named Lamia (Michelle Pfeiffer) who wants to cut out the stars heart to regain her own youth.

Complicated? Yes. But it all comes together as the adventure unfolds.

Tristain is the first to find Yvaine but is so blinded by his devotion to Victoria he doesn't recognize the growing bond between he and Yvaine. His initial interest lie only in returning Yvaine to Victoria as proof of his love. But he must get past the princes and Lamia first. The princes aren't that big an issue as they are constantly trying to kill each other - and just as in "Pirates of the Caribbean" - never has death been so funny.

But Tristain also encounters the witch who enslaved his mother (though he doesn't know it's his mother) and a band of flying pirates led by Robert DeNiro.

His is the most important character in the movie and DeNiro plays it to a tee. He steals the movie with his toughness and soon we learn an undercover secret that will leave audiences on the floor with laughter. Though his role is small in length, DeNiro is extraordinary!

Michelle Pfeiffer is wonderful as Lamia - a sexy evil witch. Claire Danes is most appropriate as the confused and distressed Yvaine. She makes a perfect damsel. Jason Flemyng, Adam Buston, Rupert Everett, and Mark Strong add the perfect dose of levity as the fighting princes whom, as they die return as ghosts ala "Blithe Spirit" and "High Spirits".

Moreover director Matthew Vaughn, whose only other directing experience was "Layer Cake", weaves an enchanting tale that everyone will enjoy.

"Stardust" may be too complex for young children, but anyone over the age of 13 will want to see this movie multiple times. It's that good. "Stardust" is what movies are supposed to be. Perfectly written, perfectly cast, perfectly directed, and perfectly acted. In other words...perfect. --------------------------------------------- Result 899 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is [[possibly]] the [[best]] short [[crime]] drama I've ever [[seen]]. The acting is [[superb]] [[especially]] Amanda Burton who's [[character]] goes from [[scary]] to [[sweet]] to disturbing to [[sad]] and then some...She does an [[amazing]] [[job]] balancing Rachels/Carlas [[feelings]] and acting out the [[pain]] of someone who's lost a [[child]], its so [[believable]] that it [[feels]] more like a [[real]] [[life]] [[story]] then a [[drama]]. The other [[actors]] are of [[course]] [[great]] too which they [[usually]] are in British TV/[[Film]]. The [[ending]],which I'm not going to give away,is [[fantastic]] [[mainly]] because you don't [[really]] [[get]] one... (you'll get what I [[mean]] after you've [[seen]] it) This is well worth [[buying]] and seeing over and over again and if you're not [[touched]] by this you're one [[cold]] hearted [[person]]. This is [[arguably]] the [[optimum]] short [[felony]] drama I've ever [[watched]]. The acting is [[handsome]] [[notably]] Amanda Burton who's [[nature]] goes from [[horrible]] to [[sugary]] to disturbing to [[regrettable]] and then some...She does an [[unbelievable]] [[labour]] balancing Rachels/Carlas [[sentiments]] and acting out the [[painless]] of someone who's lost a [[infantile]], its so [[dependable]] that it [[thinks]] more like a [[actual]] [[iife]] [[fairytales]] then a [[theater]]. The other [[players]] are of [[cours]] [[formidable]] too which they [[normally]] are in British TV/[[Flick]]. The [[terminated]],which I'm not going to give away,is [[glamorous]] [[basically]] because you don't [[truly]] [[obtains]] one... (you'll get what I [[imply]] after you've [[noticed]] it) This is well worth [[purchases]] and seeing over and over again and if you're not [[poked]] by this you're one [[frigid]] hearted [[someone]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] In 1692 Salem, a devious child's lies about a slave's involvement in witchcraft [[sends]] an entire community into an uproar. Costume drama starring Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, though neither is it a vivid depiction of contagious hysteria. [[Worked]] on by three writers (Walter Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and Bradley King), the story elements are [[rather]] interesting (especially coming out of Hollywood in 1937), though to anyone who has since read Arthur Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on display here won't be [[tolerated]] for very long. Biggest problem with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** In 1692 Salem, a devious child's lies about a slave's involvement in witchcraft [[despatch]] an entire community into an uproar. Costume drama starring Claudette Colbert and Fred MacMurray isn't stuffy, though neither is it a vivid depiction of contagious hysteria. [[Cooperating]] on by three writers (Walter Ferris, Durward Grimstead, and Bradley King), the story elements are [[quite]] interesting (especially coming out of Hollywood in 1937), though to anyone who has since read Arthur Miller's "The Crucible", the hoked-up melodrama on display here won't be [[condoned]] for very long. Biggest problem with the picture may lie in the casting: Colbert and MacMurray are an ill-matched pair of lovers hindered by the witch-hunt, MacMurray being far too contemporary a presence for these surroundings. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 901 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Bored Londoners Henry Kendall and Joan Barry (as Fred and Emily Hill) receive an advance on an inheritance. They use the money go traveling. Their lives become more [[exciting]] as they begin relationships with exotic Betty Amann (for Mr. Kendall) and lonely Percy Marmont (for Ms. Barry). But, they remain as [[boring]] as they were before. [[Arguably]] [[bored]] [[director]] Alfred Hitchcock tries to liven up the well-titled (as quoted in the film, from Shakespeare's "The Tempest") "Rich and Strange" by ordering up some camera trickery. An opening homage to King Vidor's "The Crowd" is the highlight. The low point may be the couple dining on Chinese prepared cat.

*** Rich and Strange (12/10/31) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Henry Kendall, Joan Barry, Percy Marmont, Elsie Randolph Bored Londoners Henry Kendall and Joan Barry (as Fred and Emily Hill) receive an advance on an inheritance. They use the money go traveling. Their lives become more [[exhilarating]] as they begin relationships with exotic Betty Amann (for Mr. Kendall) and lonely Percy Marmont (for Ms. Barry). But, they remain as [[dreary]] as they were before. [[Indubitably]] [[drilled]] [[headmaster]] Alfred Hitchcock tries to liven up the well-titled (as quoted in the film, from Shakespeare's "The Tempest") "Rich and Strange" by ordering up some camera trickery. An opening homage to King Vidor's "The Crowd" is the highlight. The low point may be the couple dining on Chinese prepared cat.

*** Rich and Strange (12/10/31) Alfred Hitchcock ~ Henry Kendall, Joan Barry, Percy Marmont, Elsie Randolph --------------------------------------------- Result 902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Greetings again from the darkness. What ever happened to the great Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favorites]] in "Avalon" and "Diner". He had some fine movies as well ("Rainman"), but always provided something of interest ... until now. I [[believe]] the worst thing you can ever [[say]] about a comedy is that it is boring. "[[Envy]]" is the [[definition]] of boring. Never of big [[fan]] of pure slap stick ("Dumb and Dumber"), I was just [[stunned]] at how god-awful this [[movie]] is. There are [[maybe]] 2 chuckles in the [[whole]] [[thing]] - if you can [[pay]] attention that long. The [[best]] [[part]] of the film is the running gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[If]] the [[film]] had been [[written]] as well as the [[song]], it [[would]] have been tolerable. Rachel Weisz is a wonderful actress and I realize they all [[want]] to do comedy (even Julianne Moore), but the real [[world]] exposes one weaknesses. SNL cast member Amy Poehler is her usual over the top in her role as trailer park trash turned princess. The disaster of the film is Jack Black and Ben Stiller. The first work commute together [[flashes]] some [[promise]], but after that their [[chemistry]] disappears due to the [[poor]] [[script]]. This [[script]] is like most of Jack Black's character's ideas - not a bad [[thought]], but no [[hope]] for [[success]]. Greetings again from the darkness. What ever happened to the great Barry Levinson? He directed two of my all-time [[favourite]] in "Avalon" and "Diner". He had some fine movies as well ("Rainman"), but always provided something of interest ... until now. I [[believing]] the worst thing you can ever [[says]] about a comedy is that it is boring. "[[Begrudge]]" is the [[definitions]] of boring. Never of big [[ventilator]] of pure slap stick ("Dumb and Dumber"), I was just [[awed]] at how god-awful this [[cinematography]] is. There are [[conceivably]] 2 chuckles in the [[ensemble]] [[stuff]] - if you can [[wages]] attention that long. The [[finest]] [[parties]] of the film is the running gag of the title song by a Redbone sound-alike. [[Though]] the [[cinema]] had been [[typed]] as well as the [[chanson]], it [[could]] have been tolerable. Rachel Weisz is a wonderful actress and I realize they all [[wish]] to do comedy (even Julianne Moore), but the real [[monde]] exposes one weaknesses. SNL cast member Amy Poehler is her usual over the top in her role as trailer park trash turned princess. The disaster of the film is Jack Black and Ben Stiller. The first work commute together [[flashing]] some [[promising]], but after that their [[chemicals]] disappears due to the [[poorest]] [[hyphen]]. This [[screenplay]] is like most of Jack Black's character's ideas - not a bad [[thoughts]], but no [[amal]] for [[avail]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A team of [[archaeologists]] uncover a [[real]] treasure – the Crown of the Queen of Sheeba. From [[Egypt]], the crown is to be transferred via steamship to San [[Francisco]]. But it won't be an easy [[journey]]. There are plenty of would-be [[thieves]] who [[would]] love to [[get]] their hands on the priceless jewels contained in the crown. [[Fortunately]] for all [[involved]], Mr. Moto is on hand to guard the crown on its journey. However, that doesn't [[mean]] someone won't try to get their hands on the treasure.

After the disappointment of Mr. Moto's Gamble, I went into Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation hoping for the best, but, admittedly, fearing the worst. But within the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that features anything to do with archaeological digs in Egypt. And seeing Moto disguised as a German archaeologist (Imagine that, Peter Lorre playing a German?), the beginning scenes really [[drew]] me in. [[While]] the movie may have quickly shifted to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[enjoyable]]. Dark, sinister characters lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; sophisticated and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of elements found in a lot of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[love]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's got 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill in a nice little role, comic relief from G.P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a return to form for Mr. Moto. I've already mentioned his disguise in the movie's opening scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out near the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't even [[mentioned]] the wonderful performance turned in by Lorre. Any way you look at it, Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation is a winner.

As much as I hate that the Mr. Moto series had to end after this installment, it's understandable when you think about it. WWII was just around the corner. And after Pearl Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. A team of [[archeologists]] uncover a [[actual]] treasure – the Crown of the Queen of Sheeba. From [[Egyptian]], the crown is to be transferred via steamship to San [[Francis]]. But it won't be an easy [[traveling]]. There are plenty of would-be [[rustlers]] who [[could]] love to [[obtain]] their hands on the priceless jewels contained in the crown. [[Mercifully]] for all [[participating]], Mr. Moto is on hand to guard the crown on its journey. However, that doesn't [[signify]] someone won't try to get their hands on the treasure.

After the disappointment of Mr. Moto's Gamble, I went into Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation hoping for the best, but, admittedly, fearing the worst. But within the first 10 seconds of the film, I knew I would find it more enjoyable. I'm a sucker for a 1930s style mystery that features anything to do with archaeological digs in Egypt. And seeing Moto disguised as a German archaeologist (Imagine that, Peter Lorre playing a German?), the beginning scenes really [[called]] me in. [[Though]] the movie may have quickly shifted to the less exotic San Francisco, it remained just as [[pleasurable]]. Dark, sinister characters lurking in the rainy night; gunshots fired from open windows that narrowly miss the hero's head; sophisticated and supposed foolproof alarm systems just begging for someone to test them; and master criminals believed to be dead – these are the kind of elements found in a lot of the really good 1930s mysteries that I [[iike]]. And Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation's got 'em all. A couple other bonuses for me included the always enjoyable Lionel Atwill in a nice little role, comic relief from G.P. Huntley that's actually funny, and a return to form for Mr. Moto. I've already mentioned his disguise in the movie's opening scenes, well the athletic Moto comes out near the film's finale. Moto is a like a Whirling Dervish of activity as he goes after his prey. All this and I haven't even [[alluded]] the wonderful performance turned in by Lorre. Any way you look at it, Mr. Moto Takes a Vacation is a winner.

As much as I hate that the Mr. Moto series had to end after this installment, it's understandable when you think about it. WWII was just around the corner. And after Pearl Harbor, a movie with a Japanese hero wouldn't have gone over very well. At least the Mr. Moto series ended on a very positive note. --------------------------------------------- Result 904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] After having seen Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I [[started]] watching this [[movie]] nothing really seemed unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the brutality and edge of this film is truly visible. As I watched Drew(Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a seemingly retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very believable and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and suspense I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally excellent. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the great cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest thing of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. After having seen Deliverance, movies like Pulp Fiction don't seem so extreme. Maybe by today's blood and bullets standards it doesn't seem so edgy, but if you think that this was 1972 and that the movie has a truly sinister core then it makes you think differently.

When I [[embark]] watching this [[flick]] nothing really seemed unusual until I got to the "Dueling Banjos" scene. In that scene the brutality and edge of this film is truly visible. As I watched Drew(Ronny Cox,Robocop)go head to head with a seemingly retarted young boy it really shows how edgy this movies can get. When you think that the kid has a small banjo, which he could of probably made by hand, compared to Drew's nice expensive guitar, you really figure out just how out of their territory the four men are.

As the plot goes it's very believable and never stretches past its limits. But what really distinguishes this film, about four business men who get more than they bargained for on a canoe trip, is that director John Boorman(Excalibur) breaks all the characters away from plain caricatures or stereotypes. So as the movie goes into full horror and suspense I really cared about all four men and what would happen to them.

The acting is universally excellent. With Jon Voight(Midnight Cowboy, Enemy of the State) and Burt Reynolds(Boogie Nights, Striptease) leading the great cast. Jon Voight does probably the hardest thing of all in this film and that is making his transformation from family man to warrior very believable. Unlike Reynolds whose character is a warrior from the start, Voight's character transforms over the course of the movie. Ned Beatty(Life) is also good in an extremely hard role, come on getting raped by a hillbilly, while Ronny Cox turns in a believable performance.

One thing that really made this movies powerful for me is that the villains were as terrifying as any I had ever seen. Bill Mckinney and Herbert "Cowboy" Coward were excellent and extremely frightening as the hillbilly's.

Overall Deliverance was excellent and I suggest it to anyone, except for people with weak stomachs and kids. 10/10. See this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 905 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Sudden [[Impact]] was overall better than The [[Enforcer]] in my opinion. It was [[building]] up to be a [[great]] [[movie]], but then I [[saw]] the villain(s) and was disappointed.

Sudden Impact was different than the previous installments. The plot went a different direction in this movie, as Dirty Harry doesn't take as much of a police approach this time around. We also don't see the villain(s) until later, which means less screen time for them, which is better for us all.

Clint Eastwood once again steals the show as Dirty Harry, enough said. Pat Hingle was enjoyable as Chief Jannings, Harry's new assigned boss. Bradford Dillman seemed to change his name to Captain Briggs here, either way, he wasn't any different. Michael Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying superior. I personally enjoyed Kevyn Major Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a vendetta against Harry. Albert Popwell was excellent as Horace, Harry's buddy. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a famous lesbian around town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a pervert. Now for the really bad part. Sandra Locke, Eastwood's long-time lover was horribly miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul Drake was just horrible as Mick.

The movie would have been so much better if not for better writing and acting on some parts.

8/10. Sudden [[Effects]] was overall better than The [[Gorilla]] in my opinion. It was [[constructing]] up to be a [[large]] [[films]], but then I [[watched]] the villain(s) and was disappointed.

Sudden Impact was different than the previous installments. The plot went a different direction in this movie, as Dirty Harry doesn't take as much of a police approach this time around. We also don't see the villain(s) until later, which means less screen time for them, which is better for us all.

Clint Eastwood once again steals the show as Dirty Harry, enough said. Pat Hingle was enjoyable as Chief Jannings, Harry's new assigned boss. Bradford Dillman seemed to change his name to Captain Briggs here, either way, he wasn't any different. Michael Currie is decent as Lt. Donnelly, Harry's annoying superior. I personally enjoyed Kevyn Major Howard as Hawkins, the young punk who has a vendetta against Harry. Albert Popwell was excellent as Horace, Harry's buddy. Audrie J. Neenan was good as Ray Parkins, a famous lesbian around town. Jack Thibeau was well cast as Kruger, a pervert. Now for the really bad part. Sandra Locke, Eastwood's long-time lover was horribly miscast as Jennifer Spencer, Harry's love interest. And Paul Drake was just horrible as Mick.

The movie would have been so much better if not for better writing and acting on some parts.

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[If]] only Eddie Murphy were born 10 years later. Then we'd all [[remember]] it. But even I was only 4 when it [[came]] out. If you haven't [[seen]] it yet, rent Dr. Dolittle, Showtime, I spy, Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family comedy movies - then watch this. Hands down, you'll laugh 90% of the [[time]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the tears from your eyes.

It really needs to be watched more then once to [[understand]] all the jokes. From crude humor to a [[joke]] for [[kids]]!(if you've seen it you'll laugh here) - you'll love his stuff. If you can, (or are a big fan) try to download clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the shows are different as you'd imagine and he has even more funny jokes.

But this is like the "best of" Eddie Murphy 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can say is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like comedy, don't have a sense of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[great]] Eddie Murphy [[classic]] and possibly make someone miss out on it.

If you wanna know how Eddie got Beverly Hills Cop and got famous from it- Delirious is it. [[Unless]] only Eddie Murphy were born 10 years later. Then we'd all [[remind]] it. But even I was only 4 when it [[became]] out. If you haven't [[noticed]] it yet, rent Dr. Dolittle, Showtime, I spy, Pluto Nash and all Eddie's family comedy movies - then watch this. Hands down, you'll laugh 90% of the [[moment]]. The other 10% you'll be wiping the tears from your eyes.

It really needs to be watched more then once to [[fathom]] all the jokes. From crude humor to a [[travesty]] for [[infantile]]!(if you've seen it you'll laugh here) - you'll love his stuff. If you can, (or are a big fan) try to download clips from Eddie's acts. Allot of the shows are different as you'd imagine and he has even more funny jokes.

But this is like the "best of" Eddie Murphy 'X-rated' if you will.

And all I can say is please don't watch Delirious if you don't like comedy, don't have a sense of humor or are not fun to hang out with. You will only put down this [[large]] Eddie Murphy [[typical]] and possibly make someone miss out on it.

If you wanna know how Eddie got Beverly Hills Cop and got famous from it- Delirious is it. --------------------------------------------- Result 907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Clint Eastwood reprises his role as Dirty Harry who this time is on the case of a [[vigilante]] (Sondra Locke)who is killing the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival many years ago. Eastwood makes the role his and the movie is mainly more action then talk, not that I'm complaining. Sudden Impact is indeed [[enjoyable]] entertainment. Clint Eastwood reprises his role as Dirty Harry who this time is on the case of a [[militiaman]] (Sondra Locke)who is killing the people that raped her and her sister at a carnival many years ago. Eastwood makes the role his and the movie is mainly more action then talk, not that I'm complaining. Sudden Impact is indeed [[pleasurable]] entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "The Garden of Allah" is a prime [[example]] of "popular women's literature", [[turn]] of the XXth century style, combining all the power of [[unbridled]] erotic and exotic reveries with the [[stimulating]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic bite of Catholic [[guilt]]. [[Just]] as [[Jane]] Eyre couldn't really be happy until her [[castle]] burned down around her and her lover was permanently [[maimed]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't find true fulfillment in her marriage until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his first wife (and her castle burned down around her), or poor Psyche couldn't leave well enough alone and had to extract Cupid's secret at all costs, Domini, the devout Catholic [[heroine]] of this [[piece]] of [[tripe]], can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently marrying a man who has [[renounced]] his sacred religious vows. Like all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[vapours]], this one relies on the [[oldest]] [[tricks]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any ultimate sexual ecstasy can be indulged in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a high enough price for it in atonement in the last act. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[salon]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[could]] have been much worse and it often was...

Without the religious [[overtones]], the film's plot is that of your basic porn flick: Oversexed monk driven mad by abstinence escapes to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic heiress before reintegrating his monastery, all passion spent, leaving her to clean up his mess. And I really [[resent]] another commentator's comparison with Anatole France's "Thais", a sophisticated novel whose intention was to make fun of the whole concept of Catholic sexual repression, some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same name, thankfully.

But what makes this picture unique in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the enormous constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this cinematic wet dream come to shimmering, vibrant life. Imperishable Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. "The Garden of Allah" is a prime [[case]] of "popular women's literature", [[converting]] of the XXth century style, combining all the power of [[unfettered]] erotic and exotic reveries with the [[invigorating]] glamour of fake mysticism and the sado-masochistic bite of Catholic [[blame]]. [[Righteous]] as [[Jin]] Eyre couldn't really be happy until her [[castillo]] burned down around her and her lover was permanently [[mauled]] for his sins, or the heroine of "Rebecca" couldn't find true fulfillment in her marriage until her lordly husband was put on trial for the murder of his first wife (and her castle burned down around her), or poor Psyche couldn't leave well enough alone and had to extract Cupid's secret at all costs, Domini, the devout Catholic [[idol]] of this [[slice]] of [[gut]], can only find true sexual realization by inadvertently marrying a man who has [[waived]] his sacred religious vows. Like all such narratives aiming to stimulate the female reader and induce the [[steamed]], this one relies on the [[eldest]] [[stratagems]] in the book: basic misunderstandings and the inability to express one's true feelings at the right place and at the right time until it is too late. The logic is that any ultimate sexual ecstasy can be indulged in as long as one is willing to eventually pay a high enough price for it in atonement in the last act. It is Paul Claudel reduced to beauty [[parlor]] magazine standards. Oh well... It [[did]] have been much worse and it often was...

Without the religious [[nuances]], the film's plot is that of your basic porn flick: Oversexed monk driven mad by abstinence escapes to the desert where he has a few rolls in the dunes with a romantic, shapely but naive Catholic heiress before reintegrating his monastery, all passion spent, leaving her to clean up his mess. And I really [[detest]] another commentator's comparison with Anatole France's "Thais", a sophisticated novel whose intention was to make fun of the whole concept of Catholic sexual repression, some of which transpired in Massenet's opera of the same name, thankfully.

But what makes this picture unique in the annals of commercial female eroticism, of course, is the enormous constellation of talents gathered under one banner to make this cinematic wet dream come to shimmering, vibrant life. Imperishable Technicolor photography that will outlive us all, a truckload of worthy character actors (including one cute dog), a music score by Max Steiner that seems determined to accomplish the "composed film" that Michael Powell (who, ironically, had a bit part in the 1927 silent version) always dreamed about, tittering at times on the brink of dissonance but always coming through in splendid symphonic, operatic exoticism, a dream-like atmosphere where material considerations are no object, characters travel as if by magic from one spot to the next, dialog is sparse, vague and suggestive, the art direction is close to celestial, flower arrangements appear in the humblest hut or tent, the heroine's wardrobe is inexhaustible and all the male characters are either aristocrats, saints, doomed but horny sinners, mystics or poets.

Ahh... Hollywood! The MGM DVD presentation of this film is bare bones but impeccable. The bit rate is very high throughout, the colour registration is almost always perfect and the 2.0 mono sound truly does justice to Max Steiner's score and to Boyer's penultimate confession.

A historical note on this sort of "women's subject": The following year (1937), Julien Duvivier, visibly inspired by "The Garden of Allah", directed "Carnet de Bal", where a very similar clothes-horse butter-won't-melt-in-her-mouth heroine (widowed after taking care of an ailing husband in the exotic remoteness of some impossibly romantic Alpine lakeside villa) wants to discover what she has missed by looking up the male dancers in her first dance book. She finds them all in time, only to realize that whatever feeling there was at one point between her beaus and herself were either misunderstood, overestimated or else had lifelong tragic consequences. It was Duvivier's cynical way of telling us to beware of impossibly idealistic notions and that we all need to grow up sooner or later. --------------------------------------------- Result 909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This is a [[clever]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic rather than strange or tragic. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 America, works in a laboratory. He is constantly griping about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - autos haven't appeared yet). Griping to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in modern America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on CANDID CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. This is a [[canny]] episode of TWILIGHT ZONE that was comic rather than strange or tragic. Buster Keaton is Woodrow Mulligan, a janitor from 1890 America, works in a laboratory. He is constantly griping about the life problems around him: meat is too expensive (it's like $1.00 / lb. Unheard of!). He is always yelling after crazy speeders (on bicycles - autos haven't appeared yet). Griping to the end, he sees a helmet like device by a scientist, and puts it on and tries it. Suddenly he is in modern America. The beginning was a seven minute silent film. Now it is all noise, all talking, all beeping, all blowing. Keaton is here only a few minutes when he realizes that the world has changed and not for the better. He runs into Stanley Adams, a Professor Rollo, who realizes that Mulligan is from c. 1890 (he mentions President Cleveland). Rollo has always wanted to live in that charming, quiet age. He helps Mulligan get the helmet repaired, and they go back in time. Rollo gets bored after awhile, due to the lack of scientific equipment that he can use. Mulligan puts the helmet on him and sends him into the future. But now Woodrow is fully content with the quiet, simple age he lives in. He has found contentment.

In his last fifteen years Buster Keaton was frequently on television (many times for Allan Funt on CANDID CAMERA, where he could help set up sight gag tricks on the public). He did make a few films as well (most notably A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM and THE RAILRODDER). But he occasionally popped up in television plays and episodes. He is in his element here, presumably advising the director (old comedy film director Norman McLeod - he directed the Marx Brothers in HORSE FEATHERS) on the tricks he could do. Watch how Stanley Adams and he time Adams picking him up when he is snatching a pair of trousers he needs. In terms of timing it reminds one of gags he did in the 20s in films like SHERLOCK JR. The episode does show Keaton in fine fettle for a man in his sixties.

The appearances of Jesse White (here as a repairman, of all things) is always welcome. But look a bit at "Professor Rollo". Stanley Adams was a well known figure in movies and television from the 1950s onward to his tragic suicide in 1977. Plump, with unkempt appearance, and heavy, booming voice, his best known dramatic role was as the wrestling promoter in the film version of REQUIEM FOR A HEAVYWEIGHT (he wants Anthony Quinn to be a wrestler wearing a costume as an Indian). His best known television appearance was as the space trader who introduces the crew of the Starship Enterprise in STAR TREK to those furry, fertile little creatures "Tribbles" (as in "The Trouble With"). Adams was always worth watching (like Jesse White, and certainly like Keaton), enhancing most of the productions he appeared in. I have never understood his suicide, but it was a sad end to a first rate character performer. --------------------------------------------- Result 910 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The small California [[town]] of Diablo is plagued with mysterious [[deaths]] after sheriff Robert Lopez unearths an ancient box.Legend has it that the box holds the sixteenth-century Mexican [[demon]] named Azar.FBI [[agent]] Gil Vega is [[sent]] to investigate the murders and joins forces with the sheriff's daughters,Dominique and Mary to [[fight]] with evil and bloodthirsty demon."The Legend of Diablo" is an [[absolute]] [[garbage]].The film lacks [[scares]] and gore,the acting is amateurish and the [[direction]] is bad.The animation is the only one aspect of the [[film]] I [[enjoyed]].I'm a big [[fan]] of indie horror flicks,for example I [[loved]] "Torched","Live Feed","Bone Sickness" or "Neighborhood Watch",unfortunately "The Legend of Diablo" is a huge misfire.Definitely one to [[avoid]]. The small California [[cities]] of Diablo is plagued with mysterious [[fatalities]] after sheriff Robert Lopez unearths an ancient box.Legend has it that the box holds the sixteenth-century Mexican [[devil]] named Azar.FBI [[officers]] Gil Vega is [[dispatch]] to investigate the murders and joins forces with the sheriff's daughters,Dominique and Mary to [[struggles]] with evil and bloodthirsty demon."The Legend of Diablo" is an [[unmitigated]] [[litter]].The film lacks [[terrifies]] and gore,the acting is amateurish and the [[directions]] is bad.The animation is the only one aspect of the [[kino]] I [[adored]].I'm a big [[breather]] of indie horror flicks,for example I [[adored]] "Torched","Live Feed","Bone Sickness" or "Neighborhood Watch",unfortunately "The Legend of Diablo" is a huge misfire.Definitely one to [[avert]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is one of those movies that's [[trying]] to be moody and tense, and [[instead]], ends up tripping all over itself. Having seen it at a queer film festival, I was intrigued by the "young college threesome gone wrong" write-up, however, over-all ended up [[quite]] [[disappointed]].

It's hard to critique a "true story" since there's not much that can be done about the plot - but I [[found]] this disjointed, melodramatic and wholly [[depressing]]. It's dark and almost sinister, painting a darn creepy flash of the seventies with imposing music and jerky close-ups. It just doesn't work - some scenes where so cheesy that instead of hushed awe, my audience was supressing snickers and rolling eyes.

The story has an interesting premise, but this just spins downward into a dark, [[miserable]] spiral. This is one of those movies that's [[seeking]] to be moody and tense, and [[conversely]], ends up tripping all over itself. Having seen it at a queer film festival, I was intrigued by the "young college threesome gone wrong" write-up, however, over-all ended up [[rather]] [[frustrated]].

It's hard to critique a "true story" since there's not much that can be done about the plot - but I [[discoveries]] this disjointed, melodramatic and wholly [[somber]]. It's dark and almost sinister, painting a darn creepy flash of the seventies with imposing music and jerky close-ups. It just doesn't work - some scenes where so cheesy that instead of hushed awe, my audience was supressing snickers and rolling eyes.

The story has an interesting premise, but this just spins downward into a dark, [[sorrowful]] spiral. --------------------------------------------- Result 912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Apparently Shakespeare equals high brow which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[something]] for what it [[really]] is. [[At]] one point in this film, someone (I [[believe]] Pacino's [[producer]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses think about Shakespeare through the vehicle of RICHARD III. [[Instead]] he decides to shoot a [[chopped]] up play with random comments [[sprinkled]] throughout. Some scenes [[seemed]] to be [[included]] as home movies for Al (was there really [[ANY]] [[reason]] for the quick visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[laugh]] about something unexpected which happens there?), and, before the film has really even begun, we are treated to seeing Al prance around and act cute and funny for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but apparently it's how Al really behaves in person.

[[Enough]] rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't [[even]] [[make]] it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of [[actors]] and has witnessed this [[kind]] of thing from the outside, it's [[unbearable]]. "Look at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a [[screeching]] [[halt]], which it never recovers from. She has [[nothing]] to [[add]] in the [[discussion]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to [[bring]] in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[dreadful]], to boot. 3) the only things you really learn from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that [[Pacino]] shouldn't be [[directing]] films (or doing Richard in the first [[place]]). I'd [[rather]] watch [[BOBBY]] DEERFIELD than this.

[[Lastly]], read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. [[In]] 1997 I saw the [[play]] [[performed]] at the [[University]] of Washington [[Ethnic]] Cultural [[Theater]], and it made what we see in this film seem like high school [[drama]] (except for the [[gratuitous]] throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying [[nada]]. Apparently Shakespeare equals high brow which equals in turn a bunch of folks not seeing [[algo]] for what it [[truthfully]] is. [[For]] one point in this film, someone (I [[think]] Pacino's [[producers]]) warns him that film is getting off track, that it was once about how the masses think about Shakespeare through the vehicle of RICHARD III. [[Alternatively]] he decides to shoot a [[cutting]] up play with random comments [[sprinkle]] throughout. Some scenes [[sounded]] to be [[inscribed]] as home movies for Al (was there really [[EVERYTHING]] [[reasons]] for the quick visit to Shakespeare's birthplace, other than for a [[laughter]] about something unexpected which happens there?), and, before the film has really even begun, we are treated to seeing Al prance around and act cute and funny for the camera. I thought his silly act with Kay near the end of GODFATHER III with the knife to his throat was AN ACT - but apparently it's how Al really behaves in person.

[[Sufficiently]] rambling. Here's a shotgun smattering of why I didn't [[yet]] [[deliver]] it 3/4 of the way through this: 1) pretentious - Al always knows when the camera is on him, whether he's acting as Richard or in a 'real' conversation with someone - you can see it in the corner of his eyes, also, some of the actors around the rehearsal table become untethered and wax hammy to the extreme. If anyone reading this has ever spent any time with an group of [[protagonists]] and has witnessed this [[genre]] of thing from the outside, it's [[unsustainable]]. "Look at me, chewing all the scenery!" 2) Winona Ryder. When she appears as Lady Anne, this film comes to a [[screech]] [[stopping]], which it never recovers from. She has [[anything]] to [[adds]] in the [[discuss]] scenes but the camera lingers on her to [[bringing]] in the kiddoes. Her performance is [[horrendous]], to boot. 3) the only things you really learn from this are told to you by the very scholars the filmmakers are trying to keep out of the picture. Of course, you also learn that [[Deniro]] shouldn't be [[instructing]] films (or doing Richard in the first [[placing]]). I'd [[quite]] watch [[BUBI]] DEERFIELD than this.

[[Finally]], read the play and learn it for yourself. Go out and see it performed. [[Throughout]] 1997 I saw the [[playing]] [[accomplished]] at the [[Academia]] of Washington [[Ethnicity]] Cultural [[Teatro]], and it made what we see in this film seem like high school [[dramas]] (except for the [[unfounded]] throat slashing of Clarence! My God! Was that necessary?!)

It's all just a bunch of sound and fury, signifying [[anything]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 913 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Probably the finest fantasy film ever made. Sumptuous colour, spectacular sets, incredible, spot-on Miklos Rosza musical score that is perfect for each scene and mood. Acting is superb as well in what could have been stiff and pretentious in lesser hands, but here the poetic dialog is deftly, sensitively spoken (the humour is subtle and delightful as well).

Doubtless Spielberg and Lucas were enthralled by this one. Along with "The Four Feathers" (1939), one of the two finest motion pictures released by Alexander Korda and London Films---and one of the finest motion pictures ever made.

A true, compelling classic! --------------------------------------------- Result 914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[mildly]] entertaining British movie about a German police commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish comedian that he killed 15 years earlier while serving under Hitler in the SS. The ghost comes back and wants his killer to live as a Jew to atone for the murders he committed.

Otto, the German policeman actually knows this ghost's name because, the last thing he did before he died was said, in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The policeman didn't speak Yiddish, so he asked around until he found the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an impression that everybody involved with that killing learned and remembered the comedian's name, Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of men who are murdered in the jurisdiction of the police commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The men are murdered with a set of knives that are missing from the local butcher. The butcher announces that his knives are missing while the commissioner is in the store to get a liver and onion sandwich, so the commissioner is a suspect. The first man is killed while making love to the butcher's wife, so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher maintains that he would be very busy if he killed every man that slept with his wife. All the men are killed immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I think I might be a bit angrier than the ghost of Genghis Cohn if I was killed like he was. He seems to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British movie and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very funny.

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just kind of goofy. I thought it should have been a little more serious than it was. The movie turns out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The movie gave me a tiny look into Jewish culture, but was only skin-deep. Do all Jews love liver and onion sandwiches? Do they all say `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. Genghis Cohn is a (very) [[smoothly]] entertaining British movie about a German police commissioner in the late 1950's who is haunted by the ghost of a Jewish comedian that he killed 15 years earlier while serving under Hitler in the SS. The ghost comes back and wants his killer to live as a Jew to atone for the murders he committed.

Otto, the German policeman actually knows this ghost's name because, the last thing he did before he died was said, in Yiddish, `Kiss my ass'. The policeman didn't speak Yiddish, so he asked around until he found the meaning. The `kiss my ass' left such an impression that everybody involved with that killing learned and remembered the comedian's name, Genghis Cohn.

There are a bunch of men who are murdered in the jurisdiction of the police commissioner, and there are no helpful clues. The men are murdered with a set of knives that are missing from the local butcher. The butcher announces that his knives are missing while the commissioner is in the store to get a liver and onion sandwich, so the commissioner is a suspect. The first man is killed while making love to the butcher's wife, so the butcher is a suspect. But the butcher maintains that he would be very busy if he killed every man that slept with his wife. All the men are killed immediately after the climax of lovemaking.

I think I might be a bit angrier than the ghost of Genghis Cohn if I was killed like he was. He seems to be very good-natured about it, as if he was just in a mild car accident. I can only guess that it is because it is a British movie and they are known for being a very polite people. He uses some of his material from his stand-up routing, and I just didn't find it very funny.

I gave this movie a 4 because it was just kind of goofy. I thought it should have been a little more serious than it was. The movie turns out to be a murder mystery (where did this come from?), and it seemed that Genghis should have been more helpful than he was. The movie gave me a tiny look into Jewish culture, but was only skin-deep. Do all Jews love liver and onion sandwiches? Do they all say `shtoop' and `meshuganah' in their daily vocabulary? Isn't there more important stuff that we should know about the culture?

I saw this movie at a Jewish community center in Berkeley, CA, and I was the only person in the room whose hair was not fully gray or white. (I have no gray or white hair.) There were 18 of us, and after the movie they stayed for about 20 minutes to discuss the movie. There were 2 main concerns expressed there: 1. The movie was way too light-hearted and future generations might not understand the gravity of what happened and 2. As the Holocaust survivors are dying off, future generations will not know what really happened. I thought that this second concern was ridiculous and I told them I thought they didn't need to worry because there is tons of literature out there and there will always be people who like to watch movies, like myself. The murder of 6,000,000 people by a very bad man will not ever be forgotten. I write this last paragraph because they charged me with telling others about my experience that day. --------------------------------------------- Result 915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This is a straight-to-video movie, so it should go without [[saying]] that it's not going to rival the first Lion [[King]], but that said, this was downright [[good]].

My [[kids]] [[loved]] this, but that's a given, they love anything that's a cartoon. The big [[shock]] was that *I* [[liked]] it too, it was laugh out loud funny at some parts (even the [[fart]] jokes*), had lots of rather creative tie-ins with the first movie, and even some jokes that you had to be older to understand (but without being risqué like in Shrek ["do you think he's compensating for something?"]).

A special note on the fart jokes, I was surprised to find that none of the jokes were just toilet noises (in fact there were almost no noises/imagery at all, the references were actually rather subtle), they actually had a setup/punchline/etc, and were almost in good taste. I'd like my kids to think that there's more to humor than going to the bathroom, and this movie is fine in those regards.

Hmm what else? The music was so-so, not nearly as creative as in the first or second movie, but plenty of fun for the kids. No painfully corny moments, which was a blessing for me. A little action but nothing too scary (the Secret of NIMH gave my kids nightmares, not sure a G rating was appropriate for that one...)

All in all I'd say this is a great movie for kids of any age, one that's 100% safe to let them watch (I try not to be overly sensitive but I've had to jump up and turn off the TV during a few movies that were less kid-appropriate than expected) - but you're safe to leave the room during this one. I'd say stick around anyway though, you might find that you enjoy it too :) This is a straight-to-video movie, so it should go without [[telling]] that it's not going to rival the first Lion [[Emperor]], but that said, this was downright [[alright]].

My [[infantile]] [[worshiped]] this, but that's a given, they love anything that's a cartoon. The big [[shocked]] was that *I* [[wished]] it too, it was laugh out loud funny at some parts (even the [[pets]] jokes*), had lots of rather creative tie-ins with the first movie, and even some jokes that you had to be older to understand (but without being risqué like in Shrek ["do you think he's compensating for something?"]).

A special note on the fart jokes, I was surprised to find that none of the jokes were just toilet noises (in fact there were almost no noises/imagery at all, the references were actually rather subtle), they actually had a setup/punchline/etc, and were almost in good taste. I'd like my kids to think that there's more to humor than going to the bathroom, and this movie is fine in those regards.

Hmm what else? The music was so-so, not nearly as creative as in the first or second movie, but plenty of fun for the kids. No painfully corny moments, which was a blessing for me. A little action but nothing too scary (the Secret of NIMH gave my kids nightmares, not sure a G rating was appropriate for that one...)

All in all I'd say this is a great movie for kids of any age, one that's 100% safe to let them watch (I try not to be overly sensitive but I've had to jump up and turn off the TV during a few movies that were less kid-appropriate than expected) - but you're safe to leave the room during this one. I'd say stick around anyway though, you might find that you enjoy it too :) --------------------------------------------- Result 916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I have only [[recently]] been [[able]] to [[catch]] up with the [[films]] of Marilyn [[Miller]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[UK]].I have been much [[intrigued]] over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some stars of this era like Jolson some of the [[magic]] [[still]] shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her [[dancing]] seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[singing]] somewhat [[limited]] and as an actress she makes Ruby Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[film]] as the public had grown tired of musicals virtually all of the musical numbers have been [[deleted]].So we are left with a comedy of that period with [[little]] real appeal.She was being paid $500000 for this!So i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I think that the truth is nearer the later than the former. I have only [[lately]] been [[capable]] to [[captures]] up with the [[cinematic]] of Marilyn [[Mailer]] since they are not shown on TCM in the [[ENGLAND]].I have been much [[puzzled]] over the years because this was one of the superstars of the 20s.What was she really like.To some stars of this era like Jolson some of the [[quadrant]] [[yet]] shines through,but alas not for Miller.Her [[danced]] seems awkward and poorly choreographed,her [[sing]] somewhat [[restrained]] and as an actress she makes Ruby Keeler seem like Hepburn.Even worse in this [[kino]] as the public had grown tired of musicals virtually all of the musical numbers have been [[abolished]].So we are left with a comedy of that period with [[kiddo]] real appeal.She was being paid $500000 for this!So i have only two conclusion.Either she was poorly served by the cinema or she had no talent at all.I think that the truth is nearer the later than the former. --------------------------------------------- Result 917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (81%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I saw this movie on the film festival of Rotterdam (jan '06) and followed the discussion between director and public afterwards. Many people reacted shocked and protesting. He will get a lot of negative critics. But: the world is cruel like this, and it's not funny. People don't like it. That itself doesn't mean that the movie is bad. I can see that difference. Don't shoot the messenger that shows us the world outside our 'hubble'! Nevertheless I think this a bad movie. Film-technically it's a good one. Nice shots and script, most good fitting music, great actors. The director pretends to make a psychological movie, - the psychology however is of poor quality. Describing such a powerful violence itself is not the art. The art would be a powerful description of the psychological process behind that violence. How does a shy boy come to such a cruelty? The director pretends to describe that, - but is not good in that.

The director used several times the word the 'selfishness' of people, mentioning for instance the teacher. Only: this teacher wasn't selfish,- just someone in several roles, caring for his pupils, ánd worried about his script. I think it's a simplification to call him selfish. The atmosphere in the village is creepy, and the mother made awful mistakes ('you terribly let me down…') but it doesn't become believable for me, that there is caused súch a lot of pain, that the shyest boy comes to such terrible things. In fact, reality is far more complex than the way, this film describes – and it needs far better descriptions. The interesting thing would be: how does it work? Describe that process for me please, so that we understand.

With the written phrase on the end, the director said to point to an alternative way of life. It was the other extreme, and confirmed for me that director and scriptwriter are bad psychologists, promoting black/white-thinking. The connection between violence in films and in society has been proved. Use such a violence gives the responsibility to use it right. There are enough black/white-thinkers in the world, causing lots of war and misery. I hope, this movie won't be successful. --------------------------------------------- Result 918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Like most comments I [[saw]] this film under the [[name]] of The Witching which is the reissue title. Apparently Necromancy which is the original is better but I [[doubt]] it.

[[Most]] scenes of the witching still [[include]] most necromancy scenes and these are [[still]] [[bad]]. In many ways I think the added nudity of the witching at [[least]] added some entertainment [[value]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[standing]] around [[variety]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This movie is so inherently awful it's difficult to know what to criticise first. The [[dialogue]] is awful and straight out of the Troma locker. At least Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the possessed kid in The [[Innocents]] would you believe!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy voice. Welles seems merely waiting for his pay [[cheque]]. The other female lead has a creepy face so I don't know why Pamela thought she could trust her in the film! And the doctor is pretty bad too. He also looks worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes changing for no reason and editing is [[choppy]]. This is because the witching is a copy and paste job and not a subtle one at that. [[Only]] the [[lighting]] is OK. The sound is also [[dreadful]] and it's difficult to hear with the appalling new soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' mother is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously [[bad]] at acting that at [[least]] it provides some [[unintentional]] [[laughs]].

[[Really]] this film (the witching at [[least]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[many]] sane fans as it's [[pretty]] unwatchable and I [[actually]] [[found]] it mind-numbingly [[dull]]!

The [[best]] [[bit]] was when the [[credits]] rolled - [[enough]] [[said]] so simply better to this poor [[excuse]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! Like most comments I [[seen]] this film under the [[names]] of The Witching which is the reissue title. Apparently Necromancy which is the original is better but I [[duda]] it.

[[More]] scenes of the witching still [[encompass]] most necromancy scenes and these are [[yet]] [[negative]]. In many ways I think the added nudity of the witching at [[fewer]] added some entertainment [[values]]! But don't be fooled -there's only 3 scenes with nudity and it's of the people [[stands]] around [[diversity]]. No diabolique rumpy pumpy involved!

This movie is so inherently awful it's difficult to know what to criticise first. The [[discussions]] is awful and straight out of the Troma locker. At least Troma is tongue in cheek though. This is straight-faced boredom personified. The acting is variable with Pamela Franklin (Flora the possessed kid in The [[Blameless]] would you believe!) the worst with her high-pitched screechy voice. Welles seems merely waiting for his pay [[cheques]]. The other female lead has a creepy face so I don't know why Pamela thought she could trust her in the film! And the doctor is pretty bad too. He also looks worringly like Gene Wilder.

It is ineptly filmed with scenes changing for no reason and editing is [[tumultuous]]. This is because the witching is a copy and paste job and not a subtle one at that. [[Purely]] the [[light]] is OK. The sound is also [[heinous]] and it's difficult to hear with the appalling new soundtrack which never shuts up. The 'ghost' mother is also equally rubbish but the actress is so hilariously [[naughty]] at acting that at [[lowest]] it provides some [[coincidental]] [[laugh]].

[[Genuinely]] this film (the witching at [[less]]) is only for the unwary. It can't have [[various]] sane fans as it's [[belle]] unwatchable and I [[indeed]] [[uncovered]] it mind-numbingly [[dreary]]!

The [[nicest]] [[bitten]] was when the [[credence]] rolled - [[sufficiently]] [[say]] so simply better to this poor [[alibi]] for a movie LIKE THE PLAGUE! --------------------------------------------- Result 919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is unlike any other movie, the [[closest]] thing I can compare it to is a Woody Allen [[film]]... But where as Woody Allen is constantly fathoming human [[foibles]] Bret [[Carr]] [[appears]] to be trying to [[figure]] out a way to [[get]] to grips with that one [[crippling]] insecurity that tends to define us for better or worse. In the Case of Lou, it is the root cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a singular [[child]] hood [[trauma]] that is [[revealed]] through flash backs.

There are so [[many]] [[strangely]] neurotic people in the [[world]] and I [[believe]] they all [[deserve]] a chance for redemption, although diversity of human character is after all what makes the world such an [[intriguing]] place, so [[maybe]] we shouldn't [[fix]] our [[neurosis]] [[anymore]] than we should [[fix]] our noses or Breasts.

This is an [[indie]] film shot on a [[long]] shoestring, but the production values are [[tremendous]] as is the scope of the [[film]]. I feel like its a [[quirky]] Gem for the self-help market. I really [[look]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[could]] [[imagine]] a career along the lines of Woody Allen or Albert Brooks, although usually when a guy like this breaks through, he goes off and makes " X MEN" and his humble quirky origins are soon forgotten or are they.... X Men is aout a bunch of freaks if i remember correctly :) This is unlike any other movie, the [[nearer]] thing I can compare it to is a Woody Allen [[flick]]... But where as Woody Allen is constantly fathoming human [[gaps]] Bret [[Karr]] [[appearing]] to be trying to [[silhouette]] out a way to [[obtain]] to grips with that one [[debilitating]] insecurity that tends to define us for better or worse. In the Case of Lou, it is the root cause of his stuttering, which can be traced back to a singular [[infantile]] hood [[traumas]] that is [[demonstrated]] through flash backs.

There are so [[numerous]] [[suspiciously]] neurotic people in the [[worldwide]] and I [[believing]] they all [[merit]] a chance for redemption, although diversity of human character is after all what makes the world such an [[enigmatic]] place, so [[presumably]] we shouldn't [[repairing]] our [[neuroses]] [[longer]] than we should [[remedy]] our noses or Breasts.

This is an [[andi]] film shot on a [[lengthy]] shoestring, but the production values are [[gargantuan]] as is the scope of the [[movie]]. I feel like its a [[lunatic]] Gem for the self-help market. I really [[glance]] forward to seeing what this filmmaker does next, i [[would]] [[presume]] a career along the lines of Woody Allen or Albert Brooks, although usually when a guy like this breaks through, he goes off and makes " X MEN" and his humble quirky origins are soon forgotten or are they.... X Men is aout a bunch of freaks if i remember correctly :) --------------------------------------------- Result 920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] E! TV is a great channel and Talk Soup is so funny,in a flash you can view the episodes change. We want more funny writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron Saint of the mindless masses... He is a truly talented, gifted writer, actor, comic, producer,director, and creative consultant.Anna Nicole [[loved]] him , but he was not a $$$$Billionaire so he left him for a [[Billionaire]]. [[Many]] super stars wanted to make [[films]] with the actor Stan Evans, who has a "Humphrey Bogart" {Clark [[Gable]]}acting style. He should make many more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. Elvis has left the building!!!!! E! TV is a great channel and Talk Soup is so funny,in a flash you can view the episodes change. We want more funny writings by the best writer ever Stan Evans.. The patron Saint of the mindless masses... He is a truly talented, gifted writer, actor, comic, producer,director, and creative consultant.Anna Nicole [[worshipped]] him , but he was not a $$$$Billionaire so he left him for a [[Millionaire]]. [[Multiple]] super stars wanted to make [[filmmaking]] with the actor Stan Evans, who has a "Humphrey Bogart" {Clark [[Bobble]]}acting style. He should make many more movies. Maybe with Stephen Spielberg, or perhaps many other talented producers.We wish him a moment of FAME with a great fortune to gain. Has he produced any mock-U-dramas? or perhaps any docudrama??? A project about Bernie Madhoff would be a great TV movie written by STAN EVANS. How many screenplays has he written?? Is he under $$$$$$$$$$$$billion contract with Disney?? He should earn more than $50 Million... He could also write a TV movie about the late KING OF POP.. Michael Jackson. We want to view a lot more of and by Stan Evans in the movies and on TV. Thank you so very much. Elvis has left the building!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 921 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The first time I [[saw]] this [[film]], I was in shock for days afterwards. Its painstaking and absorbing treatment of the subject [[holds]] the [[attention]], helped by good acting and some really intriguing music. The [[ending]], quite simply, had me gasping. First [[rate]]! The first time I [[observed]] this [[flick]], I was in shock for days afterwards. Its painstaking and absorbing treatment of the subject [[possesses]] the [[beware]], helped by good acting and some really intriguing music. The [[terminating]], quite simply, had me gasping. First [[rates]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] The plot has already been described by other reviewers, so I will simply add that my reason for [[wanting]] to see this film was to [[see]] Gabrielle Drake in all her undoubted glory.

[[Miss]] [[Drake]] has to be one of the [[sexiest]], prettiest examples of "[[posh]] totty" to have been [[committed]] to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally exquisite Jane Asher comes close. What was it about [[actresses]] with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired [[Gabrielle]], her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very [[cheaply]] made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. The plot has already been described by other reviewers, so I will simply add that my reason for [[desiring]] to see this film was to [[consults]] Gabrielle Drake in all her undoubted glory.

[[Mademoiselle]] [[Gregg]] has to be one of the [[hottest]], prettiest examples of "[[luxury]] totty" to have been [[commit]] to celluloid. Of her era and ilk, only the equally exquisite Jane Asher comes close. What was it about [[actors]] with musical brothers? (Nick Drake and Peter Asher) For those who like me have admired [[Gabriel]], her scenes in this movie will not disappoint. She has a magnificent figure and none of it is left to the imagination here.

As a whole, the movie is very poor and being of its time, very [[cheap]] made. The song that covers the opening credits seems to go on forever and is appalling. --------------------------------------------- Result 923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is so awful, it is hard to find the right words to describe it!

At first the story is so ridiculous.A narrow-minded human can write a better plot! The actors are boring and untalented, perhaps they were compelled to play in this cheesy Film.

The camera receptions of the National Forest are the only good in this whole movie. I should feel ashame, because I paid for this lousy Picture.

Hopefully nobody makes a sequel or make a similar film with such a worse storyline :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[However]], I was eager to [[get]] the [[heck]] out of the [[seats]] as soon as Big Rig [[ended]]. Big Rig is comprised of several "big rig" drivers who set out to deliver goods driven across the United States. The characters are all [[wonderful]] people, [[however]] the filmmakers never [[dug]] deep into the complexity of them as people. Instead, the story meanders as much as the maps in the film are meant to guide, but never do. [[At]] most, we get lost. We - the audience - end up going nowhere and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The storytelling is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through propaganda that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. I was interested in the title and description of Big Rig while attending the SXSW Film Festival in Austin, TX. [[Instead]], I was eager to [[obtains]] the [[devil]] out of the [[seat]] as soon as Big Rig [[terminated]]. Big Rig is comprised of several "big rig" drivers who set out to deliver goods driven across the United States. The characters are all [[magnificent]] people, [[conversely]] the filmmakers never [[gouged]] deep into the complexity of them as people. Instead, the story meanders as much as the maps in the film are meant to guide, but never do. [[In]] most, we get lost. We - the audience - end up going nowhere and, like the direction of the storytelling, end up somewhere but without direction, location, or plot. Why are we here? Where are we? How did we get here? The storytelling is sloppy and the directors' intent on "humanizing" a group of people who they regard as "overlooked" and "invisible" comes across as unconsciously and irritatingly condescending. The problem here here lies in the perspective of the directors instead of the truck drivers. The directors bring their own naive assumptions about truckers forward and then simply edit the film to confirm those assumptions. Overall, the story lacks any tension, the film is entirely too long (should have been a 15 min sketch), the big question of "So what" is never answered, and the entire film is one piece of see-through propaganda that does nothing to further "enlighten" (as the directors claim) the outside world about big riggers. --------------------------------------------- Result 925 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] (spoilers)The one truly memorable part of this otherwise rather [[dull]] and [[tepid]] bit of British cuisine is Steiner's henna rinse, one of the worst dye jobs ever. That, and the magnificent caterpillar eyebrows on the old evil dude who was trying to steal Steiner's invention. MST3K does an admirable job of making a [[wretchedly]] [[boring]] and [[grey]] film funny.I particularly like it when [[Crow]] [[kills]] Mike with his 'touch of death', and when he revives him in the theatre, Mike cries "Guys, I died, I saw eternal truth and beauty! oh, it's this movie..." That would be a letdown, having to come back from the afterlife to watch the rest of The Projected Man. The film could make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the film were wicked: police inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"Shocking, isn't it?" police inspector-"That's LOwe, all right" Tom Servo-"Very low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I get on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but knock yourself out" MST3K is definitely the only way to watch this snoozer. (spoilers)The one truly memorable part of this otherwise rather [[uninspiring]] and [[lukewarm]] bit of British cuisine is Steiner's henna rinse, one of the worst dye jobs ever. That, and the magnificent caterpillar eyebrows on the old evil dude who was trying to steal Steiner's invention. MST3K does an admirable job of making a [[atrociously]] [[dreary]] and [[grays]] film funny.I particularly like it when [[Raven]] [[slain]] Mike with his 'touch of death', and when he revives him in the theatre, Mike cries "Guys, I died, I saw eternal truth and beauty! oh, it's this movie..." That would be a letdown, having to come back from the afterlife to watch the rest of The Projected Man. The film could make a fortune being sold as a sleep aide. Some of the puns in the film were wicked: police inspector-"electrocution!" Crow-"Shocking, isn't it?" police inspector-"That's LOwe, all right" Tom Servo-"Very low, right down by the floor!" police inspector-"Can I get on?" Tom Servo-"He's dead, but knock yourself out" MST3K is definitely the only way to watch this snoozer. --------------------------------------------- Result 926 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful Red Queen figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[disappointment]], but surprise, surprise, I [[loved]] it. Convoluted nonsense of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, let alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a dream. Fabulous ladies in fabulous outfits in wonderful settings and the whole thing constantly on the move and accompanied by a wonderful Bruno Nicolai score. He may not be Morricone but in these lighter pieces he might as well be so. Really enjoyable with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. When I saw the elaborate DVD box for this and the dreadful Red Queen figurine, I felt certain I was in for a big [[dissatisfaction]], but surprise, surprise, I [[worshipped]] it. Convoluted nonsense of course and unforgivable that such a complicated denouement should be rushed to the point of barely being able to read the subtitles, let alone take in the ridiculous explanation. These quibbles apart, however, the film is a dream. Fabulous ladies in fabulous outfits in wonderful settings and the whole thing constantly on the move and accompanied by a wonderful Bruno Nicolai score. He may not be Morricone but in these lighter pieces he might as well be so. Really enjoyable with lots of colour, plenty of sexiness, some gory kills and minimal police interference. Super. --------------------------------------------- Result 927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] By God, it's been a long time since I saw this. Probably about 18 years ago?

The movie tells us (kids) all about human blood and the circulatory system. Very professionally put together--Disney-style animation, plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

[[Kind]] of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." By God, it's been a long time since I saw this. Probably about 18 years ago?

The movie tells us (kids) all about human blood and the circulatory system. Very professionally put together--Disney-style animation, plus human actors--it was directed by Frank Capra, for pete's sake!

[[Types]] of an overkill. I wonder if the very high production value is worth what amounts to a film-strip's worth of information on the human body? But boy will those kids watching it learn: even now I can clearly remember Dr. Baxter being challenged by Hemo himself to name what common material most resembles human blood, to which the Doctor immediately answers "sea water." --------------------------------------------- Result 928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie sucked. It really was a waste of my life. The acting was atrocious, the plot completely implausible. Long, long story short, these people get "terrorized" by this pathetic "crazed killer", but completely fail to fight back in any manner. And this is after they take a raft on a camping trip, with no gear, and show up at a campsite that is already assembled and completely stocked with food and clothes and the daughters headphones. Additionally, after their boat goes missing, they panic that they're stuck in the woods, but then the daughters boyfriend just shows up and they apparently never consider that they could just hike out of the woods like he did to get to them. Like I said, this movie sucks. A complete joke. Don't let your girlfriend talk you into watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Anna (Ursula Andress) is brought in as an official R.N. by ex-lover Benito Varotto (Duilio [[Del]] Prete), ostensibly to nurse an aging widower, [[Count]] Leonida Bottacin (Mario Piso), back to health after a heart attack. But Benito is actually leading a [[group]] of heirs and businessmen, including American entrepreneur Mr. Kitch (Jack Palance), with ulterior motives, [[reflected]] by what [[Anna]] [[hopefully]] will [[actually]] [[accomplish]] with the [[Count]]. He has a [[history]] of, well, liking women, and [[would]] be actually a [[bit]] more "[[vulnerable]]" as he is [[cured]]. The [[bad]] [[guys]] [[get]] derailed as [[Anna]] does not go along and [[grows]] closer to the Count. The [[ending]] might be said to be [[ironic]], but it is [[probably]] better [[described]] as predictable.

But so much for plot--this film is [[totally]] an erotic comedy, from start to finish, and oh how [[good]]. There are many nude scenes, including ones of Anna and Jole, one of the [[malevolent]] heiresses, played by Luciana Paluzzi. Both Ursula and Luciana are noteworthy continental ex-Bond women, and thus fulfill the fantasies of male viewers. As she did in Thunderball (remember Fiona Volpe), Luciana plays a femme fatale, sort of, although [[less]] elegantly.

Perhaps the best scene is Anna's (slow) complete strip and jump in bed with the [[young]] Adone, the "other [[patient]]" (who [[incredibly]] is resisting), in an attempt to find out what he knows about the plot. But [[even]] at this point she is already two-faced (for the better), for she has [[decided]] not to go along. However, Benito is more than a two-timer with [[women]], having had [[lengthy]] flings in the past with both [[Anna]] and Jole, and the [[rival]] [[best]] erotic scene follows an invective-filled (to put it mildly) [[argument]] between him and Jole. This is a standing-up [[encounter]] in which Luciana is down to black [[panties]] only. Another [[nice]] one is Ursula swimming fully [[naked]] in the estate's pool. The [[Count]] is free, as the [[client]], to put his hands wherever he [[wants]] to on Ursula, and he takes [[advantage]]. Hey, [[somehow]] I've [[gone]] back to the actresses' [[names]] in my [[descriptions]]. Erotic scenes [[involving]] other women include an amusing [[naked]] [[wine]] cellar chase. "The Sensuous Nurse" is compact, 77 minutes, but it doesn't need to be--it is enjoyable without interruption, start to finish. Definitely recommended.

Anna (Ursula Andress) is brought in as an official R.N. by ex-lover Benito Varotto (Duilio [[Dell]] Prete), ostensibly to nurse an aging widower, [[Counts]] Leonida Bottacin (Mario Piso), back to health after a heart attack. But Benito is actually leading a [[panels]] of heirs and businessmen, including American entrepreneur Mr. Kitch (Jack Palance), with ulterior motives, [[manifested]] by what [[Annas]] [[luckily]] will [[indeed]] [[achieve]] with the [[Tally]]. He has a [[stories]] of, well, liking women, and [[should]] be actually a [[bite]] more "[[weak]]" as he is [[straightened]]. The [[unfavorable]] [[lads]] [[obtains]] derailed as [[Anne]] does not go along and [[heighten]] closer to the Count. The [[terminated]] might be said to be [[ironical]], but it is [[presumably]] better [[describing]] as predictable.

But so much for plot--this film is [[abundantly]] an erotic comedy, from start to finish, and oh how [[alright]]. There are many nude scenes, including ones of Anna and Jole, one of the [[maleficent]] heiresses, played by Luciana Paluzzi. Both Ursula and Luciana are noteworthy continental ex-Bond women, and thus fulfill the fantasies of male viewers. As she did in Thunderball (remember Fiona Volpe), Luciana plays a femme fatale, sort of, although [[least]] elegantly.

Perhaps the best scene is Anna's (slow) complete strip and jump in bed with the [[youthful]] Adone, the "other [[ill]]" (who [[inordinately]] is resisting), in an attempt to find out what he knows about the plot. But [[yet]] at this point she is already two-faced (for the better), for she has [[opted]] not to go along. However, Benito is more than a two-timer with [[females]], having had [[long]] flings in the past with both [[Anne]] and Jole, and the [[adversary]] [[better]] erotic scene follows an invective-filled (to put it mildly) [[controversy]] between him and Jole. This is a standing-up [[encountered]] in which Luciana is down to black [[boxers]] only. Another [[pleasurable]] one is Ursula swimming fully [[nude]] in the estate's pool. The [[Comte]] is free, as the [[customer]], to put his hands wherever he [[desires]] to on Ursula, and he takes [[advantages]]. Hey, [[somewhere]] I've [[extinct]] back to the actresses' [[name]] in my [[description]]. Erotic scenes [[involve]] other women include an amusing [[nude]] [[vin]] cellar chase. "The Sensuous Nurse" is compact, 77 minutes, but it doesn't need to be--it is enjoyable without interruption, start to finish. Definitely recommended.

--------------------------------------------- Result 930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] there is a story, but more essentially, the [[world]] of this film begins in chaos and [[comes]] to [[order]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[celebration]] of [[life]] and an [[optimistic]] [[assertion]] of objective truth and good. representing along an [[axis]] [[unexplored]] in [[previous]] [[cinema]], this [[film]] should be [[taught]] in [[every]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* there is a story, but more essentially, the [[worldwide]] of this film begins in chaos and [[occurs]] to [[orders]] over the course of ten minutes.

it is a [[festivals]] of [[iife]] and an [[optimists]] [[contention]] of objective truth and good. representing along an [[axle]] [[unidentified]] in [[former]] [[cine]], this [[filmmaking]] should be [[lectured]] in [[any]] high school.

*CHIASMUS* --------------------------------------------- Result 931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Just]] in time to capitalize on the long-awaited movie [[version]] of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD [[release]] of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly [[black]] cast and a story [[revolving]] around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the resemblance [[basically]] ends. [[Written]] by Joel Schumacher well before he became a big-league director of mainstream studio product ("Batman Forever", "The Phantom of the Opera"), this movie seems grittier on the surface. True to form, however, Schumacher [[weakens]] the storyline and character development by injecting an abundance of clichés and eye-rolling one-liners. With little affinity for staging musical numbers, Sam O'Steen, a highly regarded film editor but neophyte director, helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic structure.

The story follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet Sparkle - as they sing in the church choir, meet smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then find their first taste of success as a singing group - first as a sweater-wearing quintet called the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio known as Sister and the Sisters. But naturally there are problems beyond the silly name for the group - Sister gets involved with nasty drug dealer Satin Struthers who beats her and turns her into a cocaine junkie; Levi goes to prison for getting caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix gets frustrated by failure and unwisely turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial help; Delores just gets plain fed up; and poor little Sparkle has to decide what kind of future she wants. A big plus is that R&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into Your Heart", a real winner.

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted plot turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". [[Only]] in time to capitalize on the long-awaited movie [[stepping]] of "Dreamgirls" is the DVD [[freed]] of this semi-forgotten 1976 musical melodrama that also takes the rise of the Supremes as its inspiration. Released five years before the Broadway opening of "Dreamgirls" and partially set in the same period, it has a predominantly [[negra]] cast and a story [[rotating]] around an up-and-coming girl group, and that's where the resemblance [[principally]] ends. [[Authored]] by Joel Schumacher well before he became a big-league director of mainstream studio product ("Batman Forever", "The Phantom of the Opera"), this movie seems grittier on the surface. True to form, however, Schumacher [[undermines]] the storyline and character development by injecting an abundance of clichés and eye-rolling one-liners. With little affinity for staging musical numbers, Sam O'Steen, a highly regarded film editor but neophyte director, helms the production like a low-budget TV-movie with a frustratingly episodic structure.

The story follows three Harlem sisters - sexy Sister, self-righteous Delores and sweet Sparkle - as they sing in the church choir, meet smooth-talking but well-intentioned boys Stix and Levi, and then find their first taste of success as a singing group - first as a sweater-wearing quintet called the Hearts and then as a glitzy trio known as Sister and the Sisters. But naturally there are problems beyond the silly name for the group - Sister gets involved with nasty drug dealer Satin Struthers who beats her and turns her into a cocaine junkie; Levi goes to prison for getting caught in a drug pick-up for Satin; Stix gets frustrated by failure and unwisely turns to some Jewish mobsters for financial help; Delores just gets plain fed up; and poor little Sparkle has to decide what kind of future she wants. A big plus is that R&B great Curtis Mayfield wrote the atmospheric songs, some catchy and one, "Look Into Your Heart", a real winner.

The solid cast does its best under the contrived circumstances. Lonette McKee's valiant attempt to make Sister a tragic figure is undercut by some of the ham-fisted plot turns, including a sad Billie Holliday-like turn at the mike. Before they hit it big on primetime TV, Philip Michael Thomas and Dorian Harewood portray Stix and Levi with boyish vitality if not much credibility. The best work comes from Mary Alice in a relatively silent turn as the girls' patient mother and a pre-"Fame" Irene Cara who effortlessly exudes sincerity in the title role (though her costumer and hair stylist should be shot for the hideous look she achieves in the final scene). The DVD just comes with the original theatrical trailer complete with an unctuous voice-over by DJ Casey Kasem and a bonus CD of five of the film's songs performed not by the original cast but by Aretha Franklin off her 1976 recording of the soundtrack. It's not a terrible movie, just an interesting if lacking curio that happens to cover the same ground as "Dreamgirls". --------------------------------------------- Result 932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] For die-hard Judy Garland fans only. There are two (2) numbers that are really good -- one where she does a number with an older cleaning lady (you've all seen the pics), and a pretty good number at the very end. There are a couple of scenes where the lines are funny. But, [[basically]], the script is so bad and the movie so [[dated]] that it's hard not to cringe at the awfulness throughout. But it's worth the 2.50 to [[rent]] the movie -- just be prepared to fast-forward it. For die-hard Judy Garland fans only. There are two (2) numbers that are really good -- one where she does a number with an older cleaning lady (you've all seen the pics), and a pretty good number at the very end. There are a couple of scenes where the lines are funny. But, [[broadly]], the script is so bad and the movie so [[dating]] that it's hard not to cringe at the awfulness throughout. But it's worth the 2.50 to [[rentals]] the movie -- just be prepared to fast-forward it. --------------------------------------------- Result 933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely understand how you can be [[dragged]] into a film because you relate to the subject ( and you have). This film is terrible, the main character would give any charlie brown subtitler a run for his money he just constantly mumbles which is always a [[laugh]], most scenes just feel awkward with characters more often than not gazing across to another with a look of...its your line now, then i will react. [[Best]] British [[comedy]]? [[Please]] buddy, have a strong word with your bad bad self...at the end of the day ...the sun goes down...and this film is Awful. I [[mean]] well [[done]] to the people involved...they have made a film...and maybe motorbike enthusiasts may be into it but people that still live here on earth with an actual sense of humour will struggle with this more than smiling at the Christmas present they're nan bought them...was that overly harsh? i do apologise... But the opposite, sorry bud, i completely understand how you can be [[languished]] into a film because you relate to the subject ( and you have). This film is terrible, the main character would give any charlie brown subtitler a run for his money he just constantly mumbles which is always a [[giggling]], most scenes just feel awkward with characters more often than not gazing across to another with a look of...its your line now, then i will react. [[Better]] British [[travesty]]? [[Invite]] buddy, have a strong word with your bad bad self...at the end of the day ...the sun goes down...and this film is Awful. I [[meaning]] well [[played]] to the people involved...they have made a film...and maybe motorbike enthusiasts may be into it but people that still live here on earth with an actual sense of humour will struggle with this more than smiling at the Christmas present they're nan bought them...was that overly harsh? i do apologise... --------------------------------------------- Result 934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I haven't read this book, but all through the movie I was awestruck with only one thought in my head: This is so Vonnegut. I have never seen an author, all of the [[intelligence]] and life behind the workings of a novel, translated so well to film. This [[movie]] had the same complexities [[found]] in Vonnegut's novels: the jokes were often meaningful and symbolic, and the dramatic [[events]] and symbols were [[often]] [[also]] jokes.

Campbell was [[also]] a very Vonnegut [[character]], portrayed [[perfectly]] by Nick Nolte. He had all of the earmarks of a Vonnegut "[[hero]]": lack of concern for political [[boundaries]], ironic [[dark]] humor giving way to dumb inactivity in [[response]] to [[stress]], and an unwillingness to push his version of reality on those around him.

Overall, I was [[constantly]] [[surprised]] and impressed as I watched this movie. It was the same [[feeling]] I had reading "Cat's Cradle," my first Vonnegut novel, as if the most [[perfectly]] oddball thing that [[could]] [[happen]], he thought of THAT, and he [[made]] it [[real]] and [[important]]. [[Yes]], he has nothing but army surplus "White [[Christmas]]" [[albums]]. So it goes! I haven't read this book, but all through the movie I was awestruck with only one thought in my head: This is so Vonnegut. I have never seen an author, all of the [[intelligentsia]] and life behind the workings of a novel, translated so well to film. This [[kino]] had the same complexities [[uncovered]] in Vonnegut's novels: the jokes were often meaningful and symbolic, and the dramatic [[incidents]] and symbols were [[normally]] [[additionally]] jokes.

Campbell was [[apart]] a very Vonnegut [[traits]], portrayed [[altogether]] by Nick Nolte. He had all of the earmarks of a Vonnegut "[[superhero]]": lack of concern for political [[restrict]], ironic [[darkness]] humor giving way to dumb inactivity in [[replies]] to [[highlights]], and an unwillingness to push his version of reality on those around him.

Overall, I was [[unceasingly]] [[horrified]] and impressed as I watched this movie. It was the same [[impression]] I had reading "Cat's Cradle," my first Vonnegut novel, as if the most [[totally]] oddball thing that [[wo]] [[occur]], he thought of THAT, and he [[introduced]] it [[actual]] and [[sizable]]. [[Yep]], he has nothing but army surplus "White [[Claus]]" [[album]]. So it goes! --------------------------------------------- Result 935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I show this film to university students in speech and media law because its lessons are timeless: Why speaking out against injustice is important and can bring about the changes sought by the oppressed. Why freedom of the press and freedom of speech are essential to democracy. This is a must-see story of how apartheid was brought to the attention of the world through the activism of Steven Biko and the journalism of Donald Woods. It also gives an important lesson of free speech: "You can blow out a candle, but you can't blow out a fire. Once the flame begins to catch, the wind will blow it higher." (From Biko by Peter Gabriel, on Shaking the Tree). --------------------------------------------- Result 936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] SEVEN [[POUNDS]]: EMOTIONALLY [[FLAT]], [[ILLOGICAL]], MORALLY DISTURBING

The [[movie]] was distributed in Italy as "Seven Souls". I was curious about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "pound" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, aimed at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed incident, to which Ben yields, but incapable of conveying true emotional involvement. I really didn't like the idea at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however devoured by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being improbable, it makes no sense. I would have liked, and I think it would have been more positive if, in the end, Ben had decided to abandon the idea of committing suicide and go on living, thus helping those same people, and maybe many more, just standing near them, and helping them through his presence. He wouldn't have saved their lives miraculously, of course: this would have probably caused more suffering, but I think it could have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are many illogical and disturbing things: the initial reference to God's creation in seven days (which, by the way, according to the Bible, are six!): what does it mean? And what about a woman suffering from heart-disease which prevents her from running and even from singing without feeling bad, who can have normal sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure nonsense, not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and emotional one. SEVEN [[POUND]]: EMOTIONALLY [[APARTMENT]], [[IRRATIONAL]], MORALLY DISTURBING

The [[films]] was distributed in Italy as "Seven Souls". I was curious about the original title and, after some research, I found out that it refers to Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, where the usurer Shylock makes a terrible bond with the merchant Antonio, who will have to give him a "pound" of his flesh, in case he is not able to repay his debt. Whereas the Italian translation makes Ben's plan something deeply human, characterized by human sympathy, the original one, though cultivated enough to remain unperceived by anyone, makes it, just in its reference to the flesh, something cold, rational, deep-rooted in the physical side of man. Unfortunately, I think that the real quality of Ben's plan is revealed by the original title: it'a a cold machination, aimed at "donating" parts of his body, but lacking any authentic human empathy, at least the audience is not given the chance to see or perceive any pure relation of souls within the whole movie. The only exception is the love-story with the girl, which seems to be a sort of non-programmed incident, to which Ben yields, but incapable of conveying true emotional involvement. I really didn't like the idea at the core of the movie: the idea that a person, however devoured by the pain for the death of his beloved and of other people he himself has caused, takes the resolute decision to expiate his sense of guilt through suicide: besides being improbable, it makes no sense. I would have liked, and I think it would have been more positive if, in the end, Ben had decided to abandon the idea of committing suicide and go on living, thus helping those same people, and maybe many more, just standing near them, and helping them through his presence. He wouldn't have saved their lives miraculously, of course: this would have probably caused more suffering, but I think it could have been more constructive from a human, and moral point of view. There are many illogical and disturbing things: the initial reference to God's creation in seven days (which, by the way, according to the Bible, are six!): what does it mean? And what about a woman suffering from heart-disease which prevents her from running and even from singing without feeling bad, who can have normal sex with a man who, feeling, as it should be, destroyed by the death of his wife and having donated organs and pieces of his body, doesn't seem to feel so much tried, both emotionally and physically, from his impaired condition? The movie is saved by good acting, but all the rest is pure nonsense, not only from a logical point of view, but also from a human and emotional one. --------------------------------------------- Result 937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I was [[really]] [[impressed]] with this film. The [[writing]] was [[fantastic]], and the [[characters]] were all [[rich]], and [[simple]]. It's very easy to [[get]] [[emotionally]] [[attached]] to all of them. The creators of this [[movie]] really [[hit]] the nail [[right]] on the [[head]] when it comes to [[creating]] [[real]] life [[characters]], and getting the viewer sucked right into their [[world]]. [[Further]], the music is [[terrific]]. They [[employed]] some independents to do the [[score]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[fantastic]] [[job]] adding to the [[movie]]. If you have a [[chance]] to catch this movie in a [[small]] [[theater]] or at a film festival (like I did), I highly recommend that you go see it. Also, on a personal note, Paget Brewster is beautiful in this movie. That's reason enough to go check it out. I was [[truthfully]] [[surprising]] with this film. The [[literary]] was [[admirable]], and the [[nature]] were all [[wealthy]], and [[mere]]. It's very easy to [[gets]] [[excitedly]] [[annexed]] to all of them. The creators of this [[cinematography]] really [[pummeled]] the nail [[rights]] on the [[jefe]] when it comes to [[establish]] [[actual]] life [[personages]], and getting the viewer sucked right into their [[monde]]. [[Farther]], the music is [[glamorous]]. They [[employ]] some independents to do the [[scoring]], and some of the soundtrack, and they do a [[handsome]] [[jobs]] adding to the [[movies]]. If you have a [[luck]] to catch this movie in a [[minimal]] [[drama]] or at a film festival (like I did), I highly recommend that you go see it. Also, on a personal note, Paget Brewster is beautiful in this movie. That's reason enough to go check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A really great movie and true story. Dan Jansen the Greatest skater ever. A touching and beautiful movie the whole family can enjoy. The story of Jane Jansens battle with cancer and Dan Jansen love for his sister. Of a important promise made by Jansen to win a gold medal to prove his sister Jane was right to believe in his talent in speed skating was justified. This picture is well worth the time. I wish they would make more films of this quality. Thank you for a great film with excellent actors and an excellent story. It is a very touching story about a beautiful family support and faith for their children and a special dream for their youngest son and his sister. --------------------------------------------- Result 939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (77%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Cornel Wilde and three dumbbells [[search]] for sunken treasure in the south Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a group of territorial sharks with cute little sneers on their hungry faces. Wilde and his merry men must find a way to take themselves off the menu so they can begin [[excavating]] an old Spanish galleon filled with gold bullion.

After the crew engages in a small [[eternity]] of pushing, shoving, arguing, and listening to Wilde's [[annoying]] health [[tips]], 5 crazy convicts board the boat and complicate things. Now it is a battle of wits as to who gets the treasure and who gets to see what the inside of a shark's stomach looks like.

At least Wilde is in shape wearing exactly the same thing he wore in 'The Naked Prey' 10 years earlier and he has remained in excellent condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. Cornel Wilde and three dumbbells [[quest]] for sunken treasure in the south Atlantic.

The treasure-hunters led by Wilde fight a group of territorial sharks with cute little sneers on their hungry faces. Wilde and his merry men must find a way to take themselves off the menu so they can begin [[digging]] an old Spanish galleon filled with gold bullion.

After the crew engages in a small [[virginity]] of pushing, shoving, arguing, and listening to Wilde's [[galling]] health [[advice]], 5 crazy convicts board the boat and complicate things. Now it is a battle of wits as to who gets the treasure and who gets to see what the inside of a shark's stomach looks like.

At least Wilde is in shape wearing exactly the same thing he wore in 'The Naked Prey' 10 years earlier and he has remained in excellent condition.

Made on a budget of 75 cents. --------------------------------------------- Result 940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] The script for this [[Columbo]] [[film]] [[seemed]] to be pulled right out of a sappy 1980's soap opera. Deeply character-driven [[films]] are [[great]], but only if the [[characters]] are [[compelling]]. And in this film the only thing [[compelling]] was my [[desire]] to [[change]] the [[channel]]. The villain's dialog sounds as if it were [[written]] by a romance novelist. The great Lt. [[Columbo]] himself is no where near his [[famous]], lovable, self-effacing, crumpled self; and the [[bride]]/[[kidnap]] victim is a whimpering, one-dimensional damsel-in-distress (she cowers in [[fear]] from a [[tiny]] scalpel [[held]] flimsily in the hand of her [[abductor]] - [[come]] on!!! I [[could]] have [[knocked]] the scalpel out of his hand and kicked him in the you-know-what in 2 seconds). [[In]] any [[sense]] of [[reality]], this [[character]] [[would]] have at [[least]] [[TRIED]] to [[struggle]] or [[fight]] back at least a little. And [[speaking]] of [[reality]]....the [[story]] revolves around a [[kidnapping]] which is [[worked]] and [[solved]] by the [[police]]. The [[POLICE]]?? [[Give]] me a break. Everyone knows the FBI takes over [[EVERY]] [[kidnapping]] case. This was [[NO]] [[Columbo]], just a shallow and [[totally]] [[predictable]] [[crime]] [[drama]] with our [[familiar]] Lt. Columbo written in and stretched to 2 [[hours]]. The script for this [[Colombo]] [[movies]] [[appeared]] to be pulled right out of a sappy 1980's soap opera. Deeply character-driven [[filmmaking]] are [[magnificent]], but only if the [[trait]] are [[convincing]]. And in this film the only thing [[cogent]] was my [[willingness]] to [[modify]] the [[chanel]]. The villain's dialog sounds as if it were [[authored]] by a romance novelist. The great Lt. [[Colombo]] himself is no where near his [[acclaimed]], lovable, self-effacing, crumpled self; and the [[fiance]]/[[kidnapping]] victim is a whimpering, one-dimensional damsel-in-distress (she cowers in [[panic]] from a [[minimal]] scalpel [[hold]] flimsily in the hand of her [[captor]] - [[arrive]] on!!! I [[did]] have [[hit]] the scalpel out of his hand and kicked him in the you-know-what in 2 seconds). [[Among]] any [[feeling]] of [[realism]], this [[characters]] [[could]] have at [[less]] [[ATTEMPTING]] to [[combat]] or [[battles]] back at least a little. And [[speaks]] of [[realism]]....the [[narratives]] revolves around a [[snatched]] which is [[collaborating]] and [[resolve]] by the [[cop]]. The [[COP]]?? [[Lend]] me a break. Everyone knows the FBI takes over [[EVERYTHING]] [[abduction]] case. This was [[NOS]] [[Colombo]], just a shallow and [[fully]] [[foreseeable]] [[misdemeanors]] [[tragedy]] with our [[accustomed]] Lt. Columbo written in and stretched to 2 [[hour]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This had a good story...it had a [[nice]] pace and all characters are developed cool.

I've watched a [[whole]] bunch of movies in the [[last]] two [[weeks]] and this had to be the [[best]] one I've seen in the two [[weeks]].

Jason Bigg's [[character]] was the best though.

[[Even]] [[though]] it was [[small]], it was cleverly [[crafted]] from the very [[beginning]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, [[direction]], [[performing]], sound, [[design]] [[overall]] in all [[capacity]] just was really [[thought]] out pretty cool.

This film scored pretty [[high]] out of all the movie's I've [[seen]] [[lately]] - and the rest were [[big]] budget or [[better]] publicized.

[[Good]] [[job]] in writing. This had a good story...it had a [[pleasurable]] pace and all characters are developed cool.

I've watched a [[overall]] bunch of movies in the [[final]] two [[chow]] and this had to be the [[optimum]] one I've seen in the two [[chow]].

Jason Bigg's [[characteristics]] was the best though.

[[Yet]] [[despite]] it was [[petite]], it was cleverly [[worded]] from the very [[commences]].

This may be a romantic comedy and I don't like most, but the writing, [[directorate]], [[fulfilling]], sound, [[designs]] [[entire]] in all [[dexterity]] just was really [[thoughts]] out pretty cool.

This film scored pretty [[higher]] out of all the movie's I've [[noticed]] [[newly]] - and the rest were [[gargantuan]] budget or [[optimum]] publicized.

[[Alright]] [[employment]] in writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Indian Summer is a [[warm]], multi-character [[film]], that would make a fine afternoon film (with a [[bit]] of editing).

The [[film]] begins in the [[past]] with a [[group]] of [[children]] being [[shown]] a moose, which sets the tone [[perfectly]] before [[cutting]] into the present, when a group of adults from the "[[golden]] age" of the camp are invited back again to [[spend]] a few weeks [[holiday]] by the head of the camp, Uncle Lou. The [[film]] then [[allows]] the [[viewer]] to spend time with these [[characters]] as they remember their times at the camp, and form new memories in their [[latest]] stay.

The film succeeds in the [[great]] way it brings across its characters in this [[gorgeous]] setting, and allows them room to develop without having to worry about plot developments. Watching these people reminisce, and their [[relationships]] with each other is what the [[film]] is all about and why it works so well. It never goes to over the [[top]] and melodramatic, always [[keeping]] its warmth, charm and realism. I've never seen a [[film]] where [[nostalgia]] is [[captured]] so well, and found myself getting drawn in [[despite]] never having been to one of these camps as a child myself.

For a warm, nostalgic [[character]] [[movie]], I [[sincerely]] [[recommend]]. Indian Summer is a [[caliente]], multi-character [[cinematographic]], that would make a fine afternoon film (with a [[bitten]] of editing).

The [[flick]] begins in the [[preceding]] with a [[groupings]] of [[kiddies]] being [[illustrated]] a moose, which sets the tone [[altogether]] before [[chopped]] into the present, when a group of adults from the "[[dorado]] age" of the camp are invited back again to [[dedicate]] a few weeks [[vacation]] by the head of the camp, Uncle Lou. The [[flick]] then [[authorizes]] the [[bystander]] to spend time with these [[attribute]] as they remember their times at the camp, and form new memories in their [[newest]] stay.

The film succeeds in the [[whopping]] way it brings across its characters in this [[glamorous]] setting, and allows them room to develop without having to worry about plot developments. Watching these people reminisce, and their [[relations]] with each other is what the [[kino]] is all about and why it works so well. It never goes to over the [[superior]] and melodramatic, always [[maintaining]] its warmth, charm and realism. I've never seen a [[kino]] where [[yearning]] is [[catching]] so well, and found myself getting drawn in [[although]] never having been to one of these camps as a child myself.

For a warm, nostalgic [[nature]] [[movies]], I [[cordially]] [[recommending]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] this movie [[probably]] had a $750 budget, and [[still]] managed to [[surpass]] [[Titanic]]. i rented this the day i crashed my mom's car, and it was the only thing that [[cheered]] me up beyond [[belief]]! it has to be [[tied]] with 'The Assult of the [[Killer]] Bimbos'. Things to look for are: 1. The [[drive]] in blow [[job]] chinese [[girl]] scene 2. The bleach blonde in the sassoon shirt who never changes 3. The Flinstone-like [[screech]] out driving 4. The clashing ensemble worn by the redhead right before she gets [[killed]] (don't worry, i'm not ruining any surprises, for it's soooo predictable) 5. The guy who finds it necessary to howl. 6. The mental patient who plays a convincing job of being insane by poking out the eyes of a maniquen. 7. The hour long chase at the [[end]] [[involving]] the [[teacher]] and the priest. 8. the womman [[writing]] grafitti on the [[bathroom]] [[wall]]. 9. last, but not least, the [[wonderful]] [[special]] effects--especially the stab in the boob that made a... heaven help me... popping noise.

enjoy!

this movie [[assuredly]] had a $750 budget, and [[nonetheless]] managed to [[overtake]] [[Herculean]]. i rented this the day i crashed my mom's car, and it was the only thing that [[chanted]] me up beyond [[faith]]! it has to be [[tying]] with 'The Assult of the [[Slayer]] Bimbos'. Things to look for are: 1. The [[drives]] in blow [[workplace]] chinese [[chick]] scene 2. The bleach blonde in the sassoon shirt who never changes 3. The Flinstone-like [[shriek]] out driving 4. The clashing ensemble worn by the redhead right before she gets [[massacred]] (don't worry, i'm not ruining any surprises, for it's soooo predictable) 5. The guy who finds it necessary to howl. 6. The mental patient who plays a convincing job of being insane by poking out the eyes of a maniquen. 7. The hour long chase at the [[terminate]] [[implicating]] the [[profesor]] and the priest. 8. the womman [[handwriting]] grafitti on the [[toilettes]] [[wail]]. 9. last, but not least, the [[glamorous]] [[especial]] effects--especially the stab in the boob that made a... heaven help me... popping noise.

enjoy!

--------------------------------------------- Result 944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Let]] me [[start]] out by [[saying]] i will [[try]] not to put too many [[spoilers]] in this. Normally I [[enjoy]] [[Robin]] Williams movies, however this gem was not one of them. It was [[billed]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was anything but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theater]] opening day, 2 walked out, for good [[reason]]. The [[movie]] was in my opinion poorly written and directed. The acting was [[alright]] but again there wasn't [[anything]] to [[work]] with. The [[movie]] is about A storyteller who reads a good [[book]] by a dying [[kid]]. [[However]] *insert spooky here* no one can [[verify]] the kids existence. [[So]] Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[try]] and [[find]] the author, however all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[boys]] caretaker. There thats it, [[thats]] all. You [[wait]] for about an [[hour]] and a half and movie ends. It had as [[many]] thrills and [[chills]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[really]] nothing to do with the [[story]], and the movie had a little [[profanity]] but it [[seemed]] to be [[thrown]] in there for [[absolutely]] no [[reason]] and [[made]] [[little]] [[sense]]. [[In]] conclusion i [[really]] can't [[write]] a decent [[review]] on this [[film]] because there was nothing to it, it was as captivating as [[watching]] paint dry. I [[gave]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was [[alright]] and it wasn't [[directed]] by Uwe Boll. [[Allowing]] me [[initiation]] out by [[telling]] i will [[strive]] not to put too many [[troublemakers]] in this. Normally I [[enjoying]] [[Reuben]] Williams movies, however this gem was not one of them. It was [[billing]] as a suspenseful thriller. The night listener was anything but. To be blunt there were 6 people in the [[theatres]] opening day, 2 walked out, for good [[reasons]]. The [[cinematography]] was in my opinion poorly written and directed. The acting was [[allright]] but again there wasn't [[algo]] to [[collaborated]] with. The [[film]] is about A storyteller who reads a good [[ledger]] by a dying [[petit]]. [[Still]] *insert spooky here* no one can [[check]] the kids existence. [[Accordingly]] Williams goes to Wisconsin to [[strive]] and [[unearthed]] the author, however all he gets is a headache and excuses from the [[guys]] caretaker. There thats it, [[theres]] all. You [[suspense]] for about an [[hours]] and a half and movie ends. It had as [[countless]] thrills and [[willies]] as a dentist office visit. The homosexual undertones, or overtones had [[genuinely]] nothing to do with the [[history]], and the movie had a little [[rudeness]] but it [[appeared]] to be [[threw]] in there for [[altogether]] no [[cause]] and [[accomplished]] [[tiny]] [[feeling]]. [[Throughout]] conclusion i [[genuinely]] can't [[writes]] a decent [[reviews]] on this [[kino]] because there was nothing to it, it was as captivating as [[staring]] paint dry. I [[yielded]] it a 2 because the acting for what it was worth was [[good]] and it wasn't [[aimed]] by Uwe Boll. --------------------------------------------- Result 945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] film for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[someone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. This was a [[frustrating]] film for me. It came to me via a boxed set entitled, "Classic Film Noir," which was a gift from [[everyone]] who knows I typically enjoy films done in that style (I insist that noir is a style, not a genre). I do not think it is a noir film at all. There seems to be a tendency these days to label and market every black and white B movie made from 1947 to 1955 as noir, and the label does not always fit. There is a persecuted male protagonist, Ed Cullen (Lee J. Cobb), and most of the film's action takes place indoors. Those are just about the only noir elements that I could see. There is no pervasive paranoia, or any real reason why one should sympathize with Ed Cullen. Jane Wyatt was overdressed and unconvincing as a femme fatale. I do not want to spoil this film for potential viewers. However, I would be interested in hearing what other connoisseurs of film noir have to say about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] When I was a kid we always used to be babysat, and we always used to rent a film or see a film at the cinema. This is one of the films we watched. This is one of the [[stupidest]] films I've ever [[seen]], I think it might [[even]] be a Walt Disney Pictures [[film]]! A [[martian]] is [[dropped]] on [[earth]], turns into a human, befriends a human, and is [[trying]] everything he can to [[get]] back [[home]]. But he is distracted by the wonders of the [[Earth]]. The only [[good]] comment I can [[give]] is the [[choice]] of [[actors]], Back to the Future's Christopher Lloyd as the martian, Uncle Martin, Dumb and Dumber's Jeff Daniels as Tim O'Hara, Elizabeth Hurley as Brace Channing and Daryl Hannah as Lizzie. But apart from that it's [[complete]] [[crap]]. Poor! When I was a kid we always used to be babysat, and we always used to rent a film or see a film at the cinema. This is one of the films we watched. This is one of the [[silliest]] films I've ever [[noticed]], I think it might [[yet]] be a Walt Disney Pictures [[movies]]! A [[marciano]] is [[tumbled]] on [[lands]], turns into a human, befriends a human, and is [[try]] everything he can to [[gets]] back [[abode]]. But he is distracted by the wonders of the [[Land]]. The only [[buena]] comment I can [[confer]] is the [[selection]] of [[protagonists]], Back to the Future's Christopher Lloyd as the martian, Uncle Martin, Dumb and Dumber's Jeff Daniels as Tim O'Hara, Elizabeth Hurley as Brace Channing and Daryl Hannah as Lizzie. But apart from that it's [[finish]] [[baloney]]. Poor! --------------------------------------------- Result 947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Where]] the Sidewalk [[Ends]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another Begins

This is a prototypical film noir, and as such, pretty [[flawless]], from both style and content points of view. The photography and night settings are [[first]] rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[ooze]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on faces pure expressionism. I can watch this kind of [[film]] for the visuals alone, [[even]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[first]] rate here, and the plot features what I consider the core of most noir films, the alienated male lead (representing the many men returning home to a changed United States after the war and feeling lost themselves). In fact, not only is Dana Andrews really convincing as the troubled, loner detective, he has a small but important counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an decorated ex-GI fallen onto hard times and booze. The fact the one man kills the other might be of monumental significance, overall-- the regular guy struggling through his inner problems to success while the medal-wearing soldier slips into an accidental death with a silver plate in his head. The woman transitions from one to the other--we assume they marry and have children as suggested earlier in the movie. Even if this is pushing an interpretation onto it after the fact, we can still see the path of one man with some psychological baggage careening through a crisis to the highest kind of moral order--turning himself in for a small crime just at the point he has actually gotten away with it.

This movie belongs to Andrews. He plays a far more restrained and moving type than Kirk Douglas plays in a similar role in William Wyler's Detective Story made just one year later, and Andrews certainly is less theatrical. You could easily see both movies side by side for a textbook compare and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally struggling through it all, and Douglas as Detective McLeod is not, might explain why one man gets his girl and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney pulls off a hugely sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "pretty" type of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you want Dixon to actually marry.

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. [[Whenever]] the Sidewalk [[End]] (1950)

Where One Ends, Another Begins

This is a prototypical film noir, and as such, pretty [[faultless]], from both style and content points of view. The photography and night settings are [[frst]] rate (cinematographer Joseph LaShelle lets the drama [[muck]] in scene after scene), and the close-ups on faces pure expressionism. I can watch this kind of [[cinematographic]] for the visuals alone, [[yet]] when the actors struggle and the plot stinks.

But the acting is [[frst]] rate here, and the plot features what I consider the core of most noir films, the alienated male lead (representing the many men returning home to a changed United States after the war and feeling lost themselves). In fact, not only is Dana Andrews really convincing as the troubled, loner detective, he has a small but important counterpart in the film, the lead female's (first) husband, an decorated ex-GI fallen onto hard times and booze. The fact the one man kills the other might be of monumental significance, overall-- the regular guy struggling through his inner problems to success while the medal-wearing soldier slips into an accidental death with a silver plate in his head. The woman transitions from one to the other--we assume they marry and have children as suggested earlier in the movie. Even if this is pushing an interpretation onto it after the fact, we can still see the path of one man with some psychological baggage careening through a crisis to the highest kind of moral order--turning himself in for a small crime just at the point he has actually gotten away with it.

This movie belongs to Andrews. He plays a far more restrained and moving type than Kirk Douglas plays in a similar role in William Wyler's Detective Story made just one year later, and Andrews certainly is less theatrical. You could easily see both movies side by side for a textbook compare and contrast session. The fact that Andrews as Detective Dixon is morally struggling through it all, and Douglas as Detective McLeod is not, might explain why one man gets his girl and the other doesn't. Gene Tierney pulls off a hugely sympathetic, demurring, and ultimately conventional and "pretty" type of woman--not just a cardboard desirable, but someone you want Dixon to actually marry.

The criminal plot is really secondary to the main drama, but is effective enough in its play with types and clichés. The bit parts are kept snappy, the small details (like the portable craps table) nice touches, far from the character actors or the glamour of gambling in Casablanca. But then, Curtiz's great movie is iconic even in the details--it makes no effort to be subtle and real and penetrating, but instead is sweeping and memorable and inspiring. They come at opposite ends of the war, and represent opposite possibilities for their leading men. Bogart is beginning his active duty, Dixon, and the man Dixon has killed, are all through. Through, thoroughly, but not washed up.

It's no accident that many, possibly most, film noirs have what you would call "happy" endings. The man overcomes his adversaries and transforms his inner self, and the moviegoer, then and now, understands just how beautiful that must feel. --------------------------------------------- Result 948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and reproduce themselves. So far for the horror-elements this movie has. All the [[rest]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[like]] a [[really]] [[retarded]] comedy that's so [[stupid]] you won't find it [[funny]] anymore after about 15 [[minutes]]. I can imagine little kids cheering for these little boogers, but adults will be left with only those supposedly "[[smart]]" references translating to on-screen stuff like Capt. Kirk's log [[entries]] from STAR [[TREK]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a blatant [[statement]] from the filmmakers going "Look! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' success here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint Eastwood telling us... what about his western movies exactly? That last one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves seems to be a bad thing. Don't know where they got that idea from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable film to sit through, for that matter. It's just really, [[really]] [[dumb]]. And if you manage to crack a smile while watching it, you'll probably feel as dumb yourself for having done that after the film's finished.

Good Badness? Yes, but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're looking for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. Ridiculous-looking little boogers that spawn foam and reproduce themselves. So far for the horror-elements this movie has. All the [[roosting]] of MUNCHIES plays out [[iike]] a [[genuinely]] [[moronic]] comedy that's so [[moronic]] you won't find it [[comical]] anymore after about 15 [[mins]]. I can imagine little kids cheering for these little boogers, but adults will be left with only those supposedly "[[malin]]" references translating to on-screen stuff like Capt. Kirk's log [[entrances]] from STAR [[WALKABOUT]], the most well-known scene from E.T., a blatant [[declaration]] from the filmmakers going "Look! We're cashing in on GREMLINS' success here!" and a cardboard cut-out of Clint Eastwood telling us... what about his western movies exactly? That last one was totally lost on me... Oh yes, and chemical waste disposal in caves seems to be a bad thing. Don't know where they got that idea from.

Not to say that MUNCHIES is the most insufferable film to sit through, for that matter. It's just really, [[genuinely]] [[foolish]]. And if you manage to crack a smile while watching it, you'll probably feel as dumb yourself for having done that after the film's finished.

Good Badness? Yes, but only if "dumb", "retarded" & "ridiculous" are criteria you're looking for. 3/10 and, well, uhm, 6/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Any]] movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European Vacation" is [[unlikely]] to [[rectify]] that situation. The [[appalling]] Griswalds are just that - [[appalling]].They are not [[funny]]. Clearly Mr Chevy Chase thinks he's funny, after all Miss B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's getting paid for it and didn't have to fork out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same old same old TV performers, Messrs Idle,Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same old same old tired clichés,Mr Chase gets lost in the hotel corridor....yawn,yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham Palace,Big Ben......I feel cheated that we never saw bobbies on bicycles two-by-two.........rosie red cheeks on the little chil - dren,need I go on? The English are buffoons,the French vicious - tongued Yank-haters.The Germans pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,Clark),and the Italians lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to death,Mr Chase gurns desperately,Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are embarrassingly bad. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never lose money by underestimating public taste. [[Every]] movie with "National Lampoon" in the title is absolutely guaranteed to die a death in London,England,Paris,France,Rome,Italy,and anywhere in Germany.It may be an institution in the U.S. but it is practically unknown in Europe to the larger audience."National Lampoon's European Vacation" is [[improbable]] to [[redress]] that situation. The [[terrible]] Griswalds are just that - [[horrifying]].They are not [[fun]]. Clearly Mr Chevy Chase thinks he's funny, after all Miss B.di Angelo laughs a lot at his jokes,but she's getting paid for it and didn't have to fork out £2.50 for the privilege. The section set in England is typical.The same old same old TV performers, Messrs Idle,Smith,Coltrane,Miss M.Lippman trot out the same old same old tired clichés,Mr Chase gets lost in the hotel corridor....yawn,yawn,yawn.. Bucking - ham Palace,Big Ben......I feel cheated that we never saw bobbies on bicycles two-by-two.........rosie red cheeks on the little chil - dren,need I go on? The English are buffoons,the French vicious - tongued Yank-haters.The Germans pompous and puffed up,(don't mention the war,Clark),and the Italians lecherous bottom-pinchers.Have I forgotten anything? Every possible "comic" situation is worked to death,Mr Chase gurns desperately,Miss di Angelo dimples sweetly,the children are embarrassingly bad. The fact that this franchise ran as long as it did must bring comfort to those who propound that you never lose money by underestimating public taste. --------------------------------------------- Result 950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'The Last Wave' is far more than the sum of its parts. It's not merely a disaster film, not simply an exploration into Australian Aboriginal spirituality, and certainly more than a simple court drama. Writer/Director Peter Weir manages to take these elements to the next level to produce a truly effective and thought-provoking film with the same eerie atmosphere he gave to 'Picnic At Hanging Rock' two years earlier, that you will continue to remember years later.

When lawyer David Burton (Chamberlain) is called to defend Chris Lee (Gulpilil) over the death of an Aboriginal for which he may or may not be directly responsible, he finds himself not merely struggling to get the truth from Lee, but making sense of what he hears when it does come. As with the Aboriginal belief that there are two worlds - the everyday and the Dreamtime, the truth exists on two completely different levels, with ramifications more disastrous than Burton could ever have imagined.

No doubt the reason why 'Picnic At Hanging Rock' is better remembered is because of its enduring mystery. We are led along the same path but forced to find answers for ourselves. In 'The Last Wave', we can piece everything together by the end of the film. However, even with all the information, we have to choose how much of it we want to believe, because the film takes us beyond the borders of our normal realities.

On the production side, Weir uses his budget to great effect, progressively building a sense of doom in everything from soft lighting, to heavy rain, to good use of sound. The incidental music is unobtrusive, never trying to be grandiose. Richard Chamberlain manages to convey the bafflement the audience would doubtless feel as he tries to unravel the mystery. David Gulpilil excellently portrays a man trapped between two worlds, wanting to do the right thing, but afraid because he already knows the ending.

Put all these things together, and you have a perfect example of why David Weir is a familiar name in cinema thirty years on. Strongly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (83%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am amazed at the amount of praise that is heaped on this movie by other commentators. To me it was rather a disappointment, especially the [[combination]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[work]] at all (in Vonnegut's book Slaughterhouse Five and even in George Roy Hill's adaptation for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I miss some central points? Or did I fail to spot the lines that supposedly connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. I am amazed at the amount of praise that is heaped on this movie by other commentators. To me it was rather a disappointment, especially the [[conjunction]] of historical facts, fantasy and the main character's internal turmoil does not [[cooperating]] at all (in Vonnegut's book Slaughterhouse Five and even in George Roy Hill's adaptation for the screen it does). Credibility is often overstretched. Too many questions are left open. Did I miss some central points? Or did I fail to spot the lines that supposedly connect the dots?

A boy called Campbell, Jr., grows up in upstate New York. At home his father has many technical trade papers and one book. It has photographs of heaps of dead bodies in it. The boy leafs through the book, his dad doesn't like his doing that. What should this tell me? The family moves away from upstate New York to Berlin. BANG. It is 1938, the boy is a married man in Berlin and a theater playwright. What kind of plays does he write? In what language? Is he successful? His wife is an actress and looks glamorous. The parents move back to the USA and invite their son to do the same. He does not. Why? Because having grown up in Germany he feels more German than American? Because he is successful? Because his wife is? Because he likes his life there? Because he likes the Nazis? Because he is just plain lazy and doesn't like change? Don't ask me.

Possibly, the man just does not care, is not interested in politics, is a kind of an existentialist. He states that he is deeply in love with his wife. He speaks of his Republic of Two (meaning he and his wife). There is little to no evidence proving his love for his wife in the movie, it much more seems a Republic of One.

On the request of an American agent Campbell, Jr., agrees to broadcast anti Semitic Nazi hate propaganda to American listeners as a device for transmitting encrypted messages to American authorities who read between the lines. The crucial meeting with the agent on a Berlin park bench is short, unexciting and anti climactic, the decision to play along comes pretty easily with no explanation, the rise up to broadcaster seems to be uneventful and apparently fast.

So now we have Campbell, Jr., presenting himself over the air as the Last Free American. The scheme for transmitting secret messages is fairly realistic and exciting - although one wonders what happened when Campbell, Jr., really and honestly had to cough, hiccup etc. (must have scrambled the messages terribly). Anyway, the Nazis lose, the wife dies (touring in the Crimean for German troops - I never heard such tours really happened on German front lines in WW II), Campbell, Jr., says he goes to the Russian front but does not go, is captured by an American soldier who recognizes his mug (how come?), is dragged to a sight-seeing tour in Auschwitz, is then released and resettled with the help of the Crucial Agent somewhere in the City of New York.

AND THIS IS WHERE THE STORY REALLY STARTS

BANG. From now on it is like a short story by Paul Auster. It is 1961, Campbell, Jr., lives in New York tenement as a has-been and mourns the loss of his wife. Nobody really cares - or do they? Yes, somehow they do, and his neighbors offer some sort of distraction. Auschwitz survivors. A painter. Some American supremacists „discover" him and want him to be their figurehead. They even find his presumed dead wife for him, or is she his wife? Anyway, in the end Campbell, Jr., calls in at the Israeli consulate, and they obligingly give him the Big War Criminal treatment, placing him in the cell adjacent to Adolf Eichmann's. He writes his life story and, once this task finished, hangs himself on the typewriter's ribbons without getting sooty the least bit.

While I can see that there must be an issue of guilt and of loss, I just had the impression that the main character is a person who at all times is pretty indifferent to everything and hardly capable of love for anyone. So I found it difficult to sympathize for this looser who mourns his loss. Amazingly, many reviewers focus on his status as a potential war hero, having put his reputation at stake for playing the Last Free American. I assume according to them this took a lot of courage. As a matter of fact, however, the movie suggests that by accepting the assignment Campbell created for himself a win-win situation, as he would have been politically on the safe side no matter who had won the war. The danger of his being uncovered never comes up during the first part of the story.

One might argue, that the whole story is a dreamlike fantasy and that nobody should bother with historical accuracy or a logical development of the story which explains everything. But even then it fails to make a point, primarily, I suspect, because the love affair in the Republic of Two falls completely flat. This is a pity, especially if you consider that the wife was played by Sheryl Lee, a talented, versatile and sensuous actress. She has much too little screen time and is forced to use a ridiculous German accent. Another somehow neglected aspect are the different texts (confession, broadcast and hidden messages), but I guess this is largely unfilmable. Maybe I should give the book a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 952 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This is [[absolutely]] the [[worst]] [[trash]] I have ever [[seen]]. When I [[saw]] it in the [[theater]] (arghhh!), it took 15 [[full]] [[minutes]] before I [[realized]] that what I was seeing was the [[feature]], not a [[sick]] [[joke]]! This is [[fully]] the [[meanest]] [[dustbin]] I have ever [[noticed]]. When I [[seen]] it in the [[cinema]] (arghhh!), it took 15 [[fullest]] [[mins]] before I [[effected]] that what I was seeing was the [[trait]], not a [[indisposed]] [[travesty]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I stumbled across rerun syndication of this show several years ago, and fell in [[love]] with it. It [[features]] Téa Leoni and [[Holland]] Taylor and kept me [[laughing]], one episode after the next. I [[guess]] it didn't [[make]] it so [[big]], and was cancelled after a few seasons, but I believe it was a [[good]] run, and would [[suggest]] [[watching]] it...if the opportunity arises. I stumbled across rerun syndication of this show several years ago, and fell in [[likes]] with it. It [[feature]] Téa Leoni and [[Netherlands]] Taylor and kept me [[chuckles]], one episode after the next. I [[reckon]] it didn't [[deliver]] it so [[gargantuan]], and was cancelled after a few seasons, but I believe it was a [[alright]] run, and would [[proposing]] [[staring]] it...if the opportunity arises. --------------------------------------------- Result 954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Undoubtedly]] the [[best]] heavy metal horror [[item]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[admittedly]] doesn't sound like much [[considering]] how utterly abysmal [[many]] other entries in this odd little [[fright]] film sub-genre like "Hard Rock Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Terror]] on Tour," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the [[excessive]] splatter and needlessly flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a hilarious bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy metal aficionado who's constantly picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with painfully credible accuracy). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his rock star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out portrayal by Tony Fields) perishes in a hotel fire. Hip local disc jockey Nuke (KISS front-man Gene Simmons in a cool cameo) [[hooks]] Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when played backwards resurrects Curr's malevolent spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile scumbags who make poor Eddie's life the proverbial living hell, only to have meek Eddie prove to be a most reluctant would-be accomplice. It's up to Eddie, assisted by token nice girl Leslie Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

Ably directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing said fellow does to qualify for that special status. [[Admittedly]] the [[optimum]] heavy metal horror [[items]] made in the manically headbangin' 80's, which [[assuredly]] doesn't sound like much [[consider]] how utterly abysmal [[numerous]] other entries in this odd little [[frightened]] film sub-genre like "Hard Rock Zombies," "Blood Tracks," "[[Horror]] on Tour," and the especially ungodly Jon-Mikl Thor-starring stinker "Rock'n'Roll Nightmare" tended to be. That aside, this one still deserves props for downplaying the [[flamboyant]] splatter and needlessly flashy special f/x razzle-dazzle in favor of focusing on adolescent high school characters who are depicted with greater acuity and plausibility than the norm for a mid-80's teen-targeted scarefest. Moreover, the film's pointed sardonic parodying of both ridiculously overblown 80's heavy metal stupidity and the nauseating self-righteousness of the uptight killjoy conservative stiffs who claimed it was the devil's music are very clever and on the money funny (famed Greed Decade heavy metal god Ozzy Osbourne has a hilarious bit as a smarmy anti-metal TV evangelist!).

Marc Price (the hopelessly dweeby Skippy on "Family Ties") gives a surprisingly strong and winning performance as Eddie "Ragman" Weinbauer, a geeky, socially awkward and severely persecuted heavy metal aficionado who's constantly picked on by the stuck-up jerk preppie bullies who make up the majority of the student body at Lakeridge High School (the cruelty and mean-spiritedness of the high school kids is nailed with painfully credible accuracy). Eddie's life takes a turn for the worse when his rock star idol Sammi Curr (an impressively whacked-out portrayal by Tony Fields) perishes in a hotel fire. Hip local disc jockey Nuke (KISS front-man Gene Simmons in a cool cameo) [[fishhooks]] Eddie up with Sammi's final, unreleased album, which when played backwards resurrects Curr's malevolent spirit back from the dead. Sammi encourages Eddie to sic him on all the vile scumbags who make poor Eddie's life the proverbial living hell, only to have meek Eddie prove to be a most reluctant would-be accomplice. It's up to Eddie, assisted by token nice girl Leslie Graham (likeably essayed by the lovely Lisa Orgolini), to stop Sammi before things get too out of hand.

Ably directed with commendable thoughtfulness and sensitivity by character actor Charles Martin Smith (who also briefly appears as a nerdy school teacher), smartly written by Michael S. Murphy, Joel Soisson, and Rhet Topham, and capably acted by a uniformly up-to-snuff cast, this surefire sleeper even comes complete with a handful of nifty "jump" moments (an outrageous attack in the back of a car by a grotesquely lecherous long-tongued mutant thingie rates as the definite highlight), a rousing "Carrie"-style high school dance slaughter sequence, a neatly utilized Halloween setting, revenge being correctly shown as a truly ugly business, and a solid central message that you shouldn't make a particular over-hyped person your hero strictly because of the calculated anti-establishment posturing said fellow does to qualify for that special status. --------------------------------------------- Result 955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'll start by apologizing to filmmakers everywhere for using the terms "filmmaker", "film", or "movie" in connection with this, but "criminal" and "crime against humanity" seem a bit harsh.

The writing: pathetic.

The directing: pathetic.

The acting: pathetic.

The cinematography: too inept for words.

The technical skills used to assemble this atrocity: NONE WHATSOEVER.

This lump of waste could hardly be called cinema. The majority of family home movies come closer to earning that distinction than Revenge Quest. No, this is just a 10 car pile-up caught on video.

We'll skip the plot in this review, because there are far too many holes to be covered at once. Let's just say that it stinks worse than the rest of this movie. To call the acting one-dimensional would be giving them credit. What little there is, is atrocious to begin with, and made much worse by the terrible video and editing.

The worst part of this atrocity, though, apart from the plot, would have to be the effects... or rather the disturbing lack thereof. There are no blanks in the guns, no flashpots, and what few sound effects existed were either stock "gun" sounds, or they were generated by mouth (yeah, you read that right). The filmmaker actually had the audacity to record a "shh" sound for the elevator doors; I guess he felt it made them sound more futuristic. This is supposed to be set in the year 2031, after all. That doesn't explain the sounds he created by mouth for the fist-fight scenes, however.

If it wasn't bad enough that the sound quality is terrible (he just used the microphone that was mounted on the video camera, and it shows), the use of stock gun sounds was almost worse than not using any sounds at all. The sound effects stand out from the rest of the soundtrack like a drunken yak in a herd of sheep, and they're just as clumsy. Picture this: The bad guy enters an office building searching for his prey. A lady starts to run in fear. He raises his gun (an uzi), and shakes it. We hear a sound that is clearly not an uzi. The woman runs away from camera, and suddenly a single blood pack (only 1) explodes on her back (looked like she was hit by a paintball), and she falls flat on her face.

Bear in mind that my description does far too much justice to the ineptitude of the actual sequence.

In another sequence, one which almost- but not quite- makes the movie funny enough to watch, takes place in a stairwell. The bad guy chases the good guy and the lady he's protecting down the stairs, shaking his plastic uzi all the way. You may wish to duck; there are badly timed sound effects flying all over the place.

I supposed Alan DeHerrera can't be locked away for conceiving of this train wreck, but he did follow through all the way to editing and releasing it. If there's any justice, there's bound to be some karma out there with his name on it.

Should you decide to watch this lump of industrial waste- and I would strongly advise against it- be sure to watch for the entire scenes lifted nearly verbatim from Bladerunner, and the AM radio that doubles as a walkie-talkie. Try not to focus too hard on the plot; it will only hurt you more if you do.

0 stars of 10. And that's being generous. --------------------------------------------- Result 956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Wow]]! [[So]] much [[fun]]! Probably a [[bit]] much for normal American [[kids]], and really it's a stretch to [[call]] this a kid's [[film]], this [[movie]] reminded me a [[quite]] a [[bit]] of Time Bandits - very Terry Gilliam all the way through. [[While]] the [[overall]] narrative is pretty much straight forward, Miike still throws in A [[LOT]] of [[surreal]] and Bunuel-esquire moments. The [[whole]] first act violently juxtaposes from scene to scene the normal family [[life]] of the [[main]] kid/[[hero]], with the spirit [[world]] and the [[evil]] than is [[ensuing]] therein. And while the ending does have a [[bit]] of an [[ambiguous]] aspect that are common of Miike's [[work]], the layers of [[meaning]] and [[metaphor]], [[particularly]] the anti-war / anti-revenge message of human [[folly]], is pretty damn poignant. As manic and imaginatively fun as other [[great]] Miike [[films]], only [[instead]] of over the [[top]] torture and gore, he [[gives]] us an endless [[amount]] of monsters and yokai from Japanese folk-lore creatively conceived via CG and puppetry wrapped into an imaginative multi-faceted [[adventure]]. F'n [[rad]], and one of Miike's [[best]]! [[Whew]]! [[Thus]] much [[droll]]! Probably a [[bitten]] much for normal American [[infantile]], and really it's a stretch to [[invitation]] this a kid's [[cinematography]], this [[cinematic]] reminded me a [[rather]] a [[bitten]] of Time Bandits - very Terry Gilliam all the way through. [[Despite]] the [[comprehensive]] narrative is pretty much straight forward, Miike still throws in A [[BATCHES]] of [[bizarre]] and Bunuel-esquire moments. The [[total]] first act violently juxtaposes from scene to scene the normal family [[iife]] of the [[principal]] kid/[[superhero]], with the spirit [[globe]] and the [[diabolic]] than is [[resulting]] therein. And while the ending does have a [[bite]] of an [[woolly]] aspect that are common of Miike's [[collaborating]], the layers of [[mean]] and [[analogy]], [[namely]] the anti-war / anti-revenge message of human [[stupidity]], is pretty damn poignant. As manic and imaginatively fun as other [[phenomenal]] Miike [[movie]], only [[conversely]] of over the [[superior]] torture and gore, he [[furnishes]] us an endless [[sums]] of monsters and yokai from Japanese folk-lore creatively conceived via CG and puppetry wrapped into an imaginative multi-faceted [[adventurer]]. F'n [[dln]], and one of Miike's [[nicest]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] *May contain spoilers*

I bent over backwards to be [[fair]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I [[knew]] it lasted a whole [[week]] in theaters. I [[knew]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't expecting a deep and thoughtful examination of class, culture and sexuality [[like]] we got in the Italian original. The benefit of the [[doubt]] lasted a whole ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, pretentious, nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant friends (the brunette woman is as bad as Madonna, exhibiting some really dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character delights in humiliating and treating like dirt in every scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? Simply because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them get marooned on a deserted Mediterranean island the tables will be turned and he will teach her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they fall in love despite having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the movie.

"Swept Away" is a silly, simplistic, [[superficial]] movie from beginning to end. Madonna gives a typically [[wooden]] performance. There are many dumb scenes: Madonna singing and dancing atrociously at the demand of Giannini, a fantasy scene with Madonna and a lot of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the butt. Guy Ritchie does his "stylish" editing which is laughable here. The film contains some of the [[worst]] dialog I've heard in a major movie in several years. The ending is sappy and implausible. It's basically "The Blue Lagoon" meets "Overboard" minus the nudity of the former and the sense of humor of the latter.

Maybe Madonna's ego is so big that she insists on continuing to prove herself as a competent actress. Please give it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[worst]] movie though. That distinction still belongs to "Shanghai Surprise". She hasn't made anything worse than that...yet. *May contain spoilers*

I bent over backwards to be [[justo]] to this film. I knew it starred Madonna. I [[knowed]] it lasted a whole [[chou]] in theaters. I [[knowed]] it got a lot of bad reviews. I wasn't expecting a deep and thoughtful examination of class, culture and sexuality [[iike]] we got in the Italian original. The benefit of the [[duda]] lasted a whole ten minutes.

Madonna plays a rich, pretentious, nit-witted Gorgon who goes on vacation with her henpecked husband and flippant friends (the brunette woman is as bad as Madonna, exhibiting some really dumb facial expressions). Adriano Giannini plays the ship's first-mate who the Madonna character delights in humiliating and treating like dirt in every scene they have together. Why is she such a bitch to him? Simply because the plot requires it so that later when the two of them get marooned on a deserted Mediterranean island the tables will be turned and he will teach her a lesson. Just as inexplicable is how they fall in love despite having nothing in common and having abused each other for two-thirds of the movie.

"Swept Away" is a silly, simplistic, [[shallow]] movie from beginning to end. Madonna gives a typically [[wood]] performance. There are many dumb scenes: Madonna singing and dancing atrociously at the demand of Giannini, a fantasy scene with Madonna and a lot of scenes where he slaps her and kicks her in the butt. Guy Ritchie does his "stylish" editing which is laughable here. The film contains some of the [[lousiest]] dialog I've heard in a major movie in several years. The ending is sappy and implausible. It's basically "The Blue Lagoon" meets "Overboard" minus the nudity of the former and the sense of humor of the latter.

Maybe Madonna's ego is so big that she insists on continuing to prove herself as a competent actress. Please give it up, Madge, for our sake as well as yours. This isn't her [[lousiest]] movie though. That distinction still belongs to "Shanghai Surprise". She hasn't made anything worse than that...yet. --------------------------------------------- Result 958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. [[If]] the ranking had a [[zero]], this movie [[would]] [[get]] it. The dinosaurs were [[awful]]. The storyline was [[ridiculous]]. The acting really doesn't [[qualify]] to be called acting. The only [[reason]] I [[even]] remember the [[name]] of the [[movie]] so well is because my family still talks about how [[BAD]] it [[really]] was. I saw the movie as a child when it was released in the theater and it was so bad that it became the makings of a family joke. [[Though]] the ranking had a [[null]], this movie [[should]] [[gets]] it. The dinosaurs were [[frightful]]. The storyline was [[foolish]]. The acting really doesn't [[entitle]] to be called acting. The only [[reasons]] I [[yet]] remember the [[denomination]] of the [[cinematography]] so well is because my family still talks about how [[HORRID]] it [[truthfully]] was. --------------------------------------------- Result 959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual [[themes]] of truth and perception of [[reality]] and opts for a [[depressing]] take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a [[style]] that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this [[movie]] is a [[rare]] dud in this auteur body of [[excellent]] [[work]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of [[earlier]] Kurosawa [[pictures]].

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. Kurosawa, fresh into color, losses sight of his usual [[topic]] of truth and perception of [[realist]] and opts for a [[dismal]] take on Tokyo's slums. Kurosawa stretches for a [[styling]] that was, in my opinion, his antithesis- that is to say, I feel as if Kurosawa wanted to make an Ozu picture. Poorly paced, poorly conceived, this [[cinematographic]] is a [[scarce]] dud in this auteur body of [[sumptuous]] [[jobs]]. While Ikiru, while being mundane and depressing, was still interesting and well paced, and while Stray Dog depicted the slums and social poverty of Japan without being too heavy handed or boring, do desu ka den has all the somberness that one could expect with its content, with none of the redeeming qualities of [[previous]] Kurosawa [[imaging]].

Be warned, this is not a movie that Kurosawa should be judged by. --------------------------------------------- Result 960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Claire]] [[Denis]] has [[demonstrated]] repeatedly that [[film]] does not [[need]] to tell a story, that it is [[sufficient]] to [[create]] an experience that [[allows]] the [[viewer]] to [[take]] the [[ingredients]] and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea [[within]] the framework of a most non-linear [[film]] is the older man [[living]] on the French-Swiss border, a [[man]] [[devoted]] to his dogs, who [[still]] has a lover, but whose cardiac status [[increasingly]] threatens his [[life]]. He has a son with a [[little]] [[family]] who infrequently [[meet]] with him, but when he [[discovers]] he is in [[need]] of a [[heart]] transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtain]] a [[heart]] transplant on the black [[market]] and to [[rekindle]] a [[long]] [[lost]] relationship with a [[son]] he had [[form]] a Tahitian women [[years]] [[ago]].

What [[Denis]] does with this [[outline]] of a story is use her camera to [[explore]] the [[loneliness]] of the [[soul]], the [[vastness]] of nature, man's interaction with people vs animals, etc. Much of the [[time]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we [[try]] too [[hard]] to [[connect]] all the [[dots]] laid out before us in [[beautiful]] [[pictures]]. [[Life]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[integrate]], process, and [[make]] of it what we will.

In using this form of [[film]] [[making]] (much as she did in the [[strangely]] [[beautiful]] '[[Beau]] Travail') Claire Denis has developed a [[signature]] [[technique]]. Whether or not the viewer [[finds]] the [[finished]] [[product]] [[rewarding]] has much to do with our individual [[methods]] of processing [[visual]] and [[conceptual]] [[information]]. This is an interesting and visually [[captivating]] [[film]], but many [[viewers]] will [[find]] it an overly long discourse about very little. Perhaps watching again will change that. Grady Harp [[Clara]] [[Denny]] has [[protested]] repeatedly that [[flick]] does not [[requisite]] to tell a story, that it is [[adequate]] to [[creating]] an experience that [[authorizes]] the [[onlooker]] to [[taking]] the [[ingredient]] and make of them what they will.

Ostensibly the idea [[inside]] the framework of a most non-linear [[filmmaking]] is the older man [[residing]] on the French-Swiss border, a [[dude]] [[dedicated]] to his dogs, who [[nonetheless]] has a lover, but whose cardiac status [[steadily]] threatens his [[vie]]. He has a son with a [[kiddo]] [[families]] who infrequently [[satisfy]] with him, but when he [[detected]] he is in [[requisite]] of a [[heartland]] transplant he opts for going to Tahiti via Japan to [[obtained]] a [[heartland]] transplant on the black [[marketplace]] and to [[revive]] a [[prolonged]] [[outof]] relationship with a [[sons]] he had [[forms]] a Tahitian women [[ages]] [[formerly]].

What [[Denise]] does with this [[outlines]] of a story is use her camera to [[investigated]] the [[lonely]] of the [[alma]], the [[magnitude]] of nature, man's interaction with people vs animals, etc. Much of the [[moment]] the 'film' doesn't make sense, but that is because we [[attempts]] too [[laborious]] to [[linking]] all the [[points]] laid out before us in [[fantastic]] [[photography]]. [[Vie]] is sort of like that: we look, see, observe, [[incorporating]], process, and [[deliver]] of it what we will.

In using this form of [[movie]] [[doing]] (much as she did in the [[bizarrely]] [[handsome]] '[[Handsome]] Travail') Claire Denis has developed a [[signing]] [[tech]]. Whether or not the viewer [[found]] the [[finalized]] [[merchandise]] [[reward]] has much to do with our individual [[procedures]] of processing [[optic]] and [[conceptually]] [[info]]. This is an interesting and visually [[mesmerizing]] [[kino]], but many [[audience]] will [[unearthed]] it an overly long discourse about very little. Perhaps watching again will change that. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This animation TV [[series]] is [[simply]] the [[best]] [[way]] for children to learn how the human [[body]] [[works]]. Yes, this is biology but they will never [[tell]] it is.

I [[truly]] think this is the [[best]] part of this [[stream]] of "educational cartoons". I do remember you can find little books and a plastic body in several parts: skin, skeleton, and of course: organs.

In the same stream, you'll find: "Il était une fois l'homme" which relate the human History from the big bang to the 20th century. There is: "Il était une fois l'espace" as well (about the space and its exploration) but that one is more a fiction than a description of the reality since it takes place in the future. This animation TV [[serial]] is [[exclusively]] the [[better]] [[routing]] for children to learn how the human [[cadaver]] [[cooperating]]. Yes, this is biology but they will never [[telling]] it is.

I [[truthfully]] think this is the [[optimum]] part of this [[creeks]] of "educational cartoons". I do remember you can find little books and a plastic body in several parts: skin, skeleton, and of course: organs.

In the same stream, you'll find: "Il était une fois l'homme" which relate the human History from the big bang to the 20th century. There is: "Il était une fois l'espace" as well (about the space and its exploration) but that one is more a fiction than a description of the reality since it takes place in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[While]] the acting and [[directing]] could be argued as having some merit - the storyline is a very [[poor]] wannabe [[Vietnam]] [[movie]] with the country [[name]] [[simply]] [[changed]].

At the very [[least]], for a movie to hold some credibility, [[try]] and have some semblance of [[accuracy]] in [[equipment]], [[weapons]] and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[misrepresentation]] of the [[behaviour]] of the [[troops]] as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[use]] as silly [[propaganda]] about the South African [[Defence]] Force, it serves [[little]] [[purpose]] - [[definitely]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[movie]] [[makers]] - this is how not to make a [[war]] [[movie]]. Do some [[research]], and have some [[pride]] in your product. [[Whereas]] the acting and [[instructing]] could be argued as having some merit - the storyline is a very [[poorest]] wannabe [[Hanoi]] [[films]] with the country [[behalf]] [[straightforward]] [[modify]].

At the very [[fewer]], for a movie to hold some credibility, [[endeavour]] and have some semblance of [[precision]] in [[devices]], [[weapon]] and tactics. Nevermind the gross [[falsification]] of the [[conduct]] of the [[forces]] as a norm.

Aside for the limited [[usage]] as silly [[advocacy]] about the South African [[Defences]] Force, it serves [[kiddo]] [[objective]] - [[assuredly]] no entertainment value.

Aspiring [[kino]] [[producer]] - this is how not to make a [[wars]] [[filmmaking]]. Do some [[researches]], and have some [[stolz]] in your product. --------------------------------------------- Result 963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is some of the worst crap I have ever seen. I literally got a sharp pain in my head while watching this movie. The CGI was awful, and the story was just a waste of ink. Dean Cain's character was Mr-Super-Intuitive-I-can-figure-out-anything, except he can't seem to work his own helicopter correctly. The biggest problem was the split screen camera work. I felt like I was watching the Brady Bunch or something, only it wasn't different people in the boxes, just close ups and different views of the same thing. I can only figure that the actors really needed the money, because this movie wasn't worth the film it was shot on. --------------------------------------------- Result 964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Cheezy action [[movie]] starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the neighborhood and the student body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while [[watching]] over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a [[fight]] to the [[death]]. [[Jaw]] [[dropping]] throw back to the exploitation films of the late grindhouse era where bad guys dressed as punks and some of the bad women had day glow hair. What a [[stupid]] movie. Watchable in a I can?t believe people made this sort of way, this is an action film that was probably doomed from the get go before the low budget, fake breakaway sets and [[poor]] action direction were [[even]] a twinkle in a producers eye. Watch how late in the film as cars drive through the school (don?t ask) they crash into the security turret (don?t ask since it looks more like a prison then a high school) and smash its barely constructed form apart(it doesn't look like it did in earlier shots). What hath the gods of bad movies wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was [[directed]] (?) by Sydney J Furie, a really good [[director]] who made [[films]] like The Boys in Company C. Has his [[ability]] failed him, or was this [[hopeless]] from the get go and he didn't [[even]] bother? It?s a [[turkey]]. A watchable one but a turkey [[none]] the less. Cheezy action [[kino]] starring Dolph Lungren. Lungren is a one time military man who has retreated into a teaching job. But the changes in the neighborhood and the student body have left him frustrated and he decides that he?s going to hang it up. Things get dicey when while [[staring]] over a bunch of students in detention some robbers take over the school as a base of operation for an armored car robbery. Its Dolph versus the baddies in a [[struggles]] to the [[mortality]]. [[Chin]] [[tumbling]] throw back to the exploitation films of the late grindhouse era where bad guys dressed as punks and some of the bad women had day glow hair. What a [[silly]] movie. Watchable in a I can?t believe people made this sort of way, this is an action film that was probably doomed from the get go before the low budget, fake breakaway sets and [[pauper]] action direction were [[yet]] a twinkle in a producers eye. Watch how late in the film as cars drive through the school (don?t ask) they crash into the security turret (don?t ask since it looks more like a prison then a high school) and smash its barely constructed form apart(it doesn't look like it did in earlier shots). What hath the gods of bad movies wrought? Actually I?m perplexed since this was [[oriented]] (?) by Sydney J Furie, a really good [[superintendent]] who made [[film]] like The Boys in Company C. Has his [[skill]] failed him, or was this [[desperate]] from the get go and he didn't [[yet]] bother? It?s a [[ankara]]. A watchable one but a turkey [[nothingness]] the less. --------------------------------------------- Result 965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i was kinda interested in this movie as a trashy cannibal flick. i was thoroughly disappointed. it was the same kind of disappointment i felt watching 'friday the 13th: jason takes manhattan'. so much potential wasted!

the opening scene is a decent attention grabber. then it grinds to a halt. copious breasts and egregious 80s fashion cannot help this movie. the only things eating near this island of cannibal monks are the piranha! i'm not asking for 'cannibal holocaust' level of gore, but i was looking for cheap over-the-top exploitative gore. i got none of that.

i found a couple parts of the fight scenes somewhat intriguing, hence the 2 stars. i don't think its really worth the time it takes to watch it, though. i could see showing it at a party where nobody cares about what is going on and you just want something on in the background. but i would not tell anyone, "oh, dude, you GOTTA see this movie." it is neither good enough nor bad enough to warrant much attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 966 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Back in 2004 I saw "True", Tom Tykwer's contribution to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me appreciate the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the whole film, and I would even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[finally]] saw it, courtesy of the [[internet]].

First of all I must say that it looks [[AWESOME]]. The photography is [[BEAUTIFUL]] in every short and shot, at the worst being nothing special - but still [[brilliant]] and clear. Later I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K gives more justice to all the DP's work. My special favorites are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that sunlight!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de la Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I like them all: "True" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" still makes me nervous with those brilliant colours (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. Beautiful.

Yes, these are some [[BEAUTIFUL]] short films.

Now let's get onto the content. I very much (and I mean VERY MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully felt. You never have have the same themes or treatment between two shorts, and I think the formula is restrictive enough to let all these artists explore beautiful and deepening things inside the shorts. I [[loved]] [[coming]] from a [[simple]] love story into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social commentary into a terror comedy into a humble monologue. I love surprises! And this film has them! It's great they took a chance to let all these director's flesh out things that are not usual in mainstream cinema (which I have come to heavily despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can breath the breathing space these people had.

I like the small time and I love the acting. I love the simplicity and I love the love. I like the simple feelings and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! Back in 2004 I saw "True", Tom Tykwer's contribution to Paris Je T'aime. When I saw it I loved it and became thrilled. It became my favorite short film and made me appreciate the format so much. Of course I wanted to watch the whole film, and I would even check who was attached, etc.

Yesterday I [[ultimately]] saw it, courtesy of the [[cyber]].

First of all I must say that it looks [[SUMPTUOUS]]. The photography is [[AWESOME]] in every short and shot, at the worst being nothing special - but still [[glamorous]] and clear. Later I read the trivia here, and maybe it's how scanning in 6K gives more justice to all the DP's work. My special favorites are the "Quais de Seine" first scene (that sunlight!), the Sin City-esquire (but better for me) "Quartier de la Madeleine", and "14th Arrondisement" - but you know, what the hell I like them all: "True" or "Faubourg Saint-Denis" still makes me nervous with those brilliant colours (my eyes, they tremble!) and "Quartier Latin" is gold imprisoned on silver. Beautiful.

Yes, these are some [[GLAMOROUS]] short films.

Now let's get onto the content. I very much (and I mean VERY MUCH) like the eclecticism that is so successfully felt. You never have have the same themes or treatment between two shorts, and I think the formula is restrictive enough to let all these artists explore beautiful and deepening things inside the shorts. I [[cared]] [[forthcoming]] from a [[uncomplicated]] love story into a crazy-Chinese-musical-in-Paris-with-Barbet-Schroeder into a social commentary into a terror comedy into a humble monologue. I love surprises! And this film has them! It's great they took a chance to let all these director's flesh out things that are not usual in mainstream cinema (which I have come to heavily despise). It's not heavily experimental, but I can breath the breathing space these people had.

I like the small time and I love the acting. I love the simplicity and I love the love. I like the simple feelings and the beauty and the eclecticism and in general it's a film that is very very very nice to see, alone or with someone. To simply feel. It left me feeling very good.

There is something about the earnestness in it... it's so frank...

What I didn't like? Well, for me there are two shorts that aren't exactly the best - "Quais de Seine" (which is good natured, sure, and maybe even necessary, but feels too much like a commercial?) and "Père-Lachaise" that even though I love the acting, I felt it's themes were forced. But that of course, is just me. "Tour Eiffel" I also didn't love but I think is probably because of my very different sensibility from that of Sylvain Chomet? I don't know if this film has a special interest for people who already know the actor's and directors, and so they can delight in their interaction, in the surprises (look out for Alexander Payne in a funny role) and basically in "what will this director do with this?" great question. I enjoyed it very much in that way.

I repeat now: Most shorts I loved and all of them together form a beautiful and energetic mix. I definitely recommend it. Definitely!!! So, watch it if you like Eclectic Beautiful Love! --------------------------------------------- Result 967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] A bondage, humiliation, S&M [[show]], and not much else. The plot is flat, [[really]] just a [[banal]] [[setup]] for the [[stylishly]] depraved set-pieces. The host of the aforementioned show, a [[silly]] little [[man]] who spouts drivel while prancing [[around]] the [[stage]] in dresses, was [[almost]] as painfully distracting as the attempts at [[artful]] editing. The dream-like [[ending]] felt tacked on. To the film's credit though, [[Aya]] Sugimoto was fairly convincing as the tortured [[lead]]. Flower and Snake has been compared with Eyes [[Wide]] [[Shut]] but aside from some minor surface similarities, Kubrick's is easily the more layered, artistic, and atmospheric picture. A bondage, humiliation, S&M [[exhibition]], and not much else. The plot is flat, [[truthfully]] just a [[ordinary]] [[configure]] for the [[sleek]] depraved set-pieces. The host of the aforementioned show, a [[ludicrous]] little [[bloke]] who spouts drivel while prancing [[throughout]] the [[stages]] in dresses, was [[hardly]] as painfully distracting as the attempts at [[adroit]] editing. The dream-like [[ended]] felt tacked on. To the film's credit though, [[Arya]] Sugimoto was fairly convincing as the tortured [[culminate]]. Flower and Snake has been compared with Eyes [[Broader]] [[Shutting]] but aside from some minor surface similarities, Kubrick's is easily the more layered, artistic, and atmospheric picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I had never heard of this film prior to seeing it, I wondered if it was an independent film, and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[decided]] to chance it. Basically drifter Michael Williams ([[Nicolas]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, looking for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne Brown (Pleasantville's J.T. Walsh) he is given a large sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has hired to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[correct]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he decides he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he chases Michael shooting a big gun, until he gets in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But things get complicated when Michael realises Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, apart from [[maybe]] a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got quite a good film noir feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Very]] good! I had never heard of this film prior to seeing it, I wondered if it was an independent film, and I was correct, but with a good cast I [[opted]] to chance it. Basically drifter Michael Williams ([[Nikolaus]] Cage) is in the town Red Rock, Wyoming, looking for a job, and meeting bar owner Wayne Brown (Pleasantville's J.T. Walsh) he is given a large sum of money, mistaken for a hit-man he has hired to kill his unfaithful wife Suzanne (Lara Flynn Boyle). He does not [[rightness]] him, takes the money, and goes to warn Suzanne, and after she makes him a counteroffer, he decides he needs to leave. When Wayne knows his real identity, he chases Michael shooting a big gun, until he gets in a car with Lyle from Dallas (Dennis Hopper). But things get complicated when Michael realises Lyle is the hit-man he was mistaken for, and he makes a quick retreat. He goes back to Suzanne, and knowing they are both in danger, they plan to leave town together, and add another complication by falling for each other. Before they leave however, Suzanne insists they go and steal a big amount money in the safe. Of course things aren't going to go smoothly, and Wayne and Lyle catch up to them, and Lyle forces them and now tied-up Wayne to go and get the buried money. In the end, Lyle and Wayne both get what they deserve, Michael and Suzanne do get on a moving train together, but it is obvious she cares more about the money, and she gets what she deserves too. Also starring Craig Reay as Jim, Vance Johnson as Mr. Johnson, Timothy Carhart as Deputy Matt Greytack, Dwight Yoakam as Truck Driver and Robert Apel as Howard. The performances, apart from [[likely]] a lame Boyle, are all fine and dandy, and it has got quite a good film noir feel for a black comedy thriller. [[Much]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Honestly, when I saw this movie years ago I immediately [[wanted]] to turn it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I realized that the actor playing Navin stole the [[show]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me shake my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing going for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[taking]] [[nothing]] away from Marty. The movie really shocked me by how close it was to the original Jerk, but then again, it was SO MUCH MORE. I really think that if this movie was released first, and I saw the Steve Martin movie 2nd, I'd think the 2nd was a cheap rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD statement, but it's true. I actually like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I wish I could get a copy of it for my collection. I urge you to see it if you can find it. Honestly, when I saw this movie years ago I immediately [[wanna]] to turn it off. As I sat there for the next 10 minutes or so, I realized that the actor playing Navin stole the [[showings]]. His facial expressions and comedic demeanor makes me shake my head as to WHY he hasn't been in more comedies. He has this "Marty Feldman" thing going for him but MUCH, MUCH more talent...[[picked]] [[anything]] away from Marty. The movie really shocked me by how close it was to the original Jerk, but then again, it was SO MUCH MORE. I really think that if this movie was released first, and I saw the Steve Martin movie 2nd, I'd think the 2nd was a cheap rip-off. I know it sounds like a BOLD statement, but it's true. I actually like Steve Martin a great deal, but his performance is 2nd to the actor in The Jerk Too. I wish I could get a copy of it for my collection. I urge you to see it if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it [[continued]] to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was amazed..."Before Sunrise" is one of the few [[films]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. I must admit that at the beginning, I was sort of reticent about watching this movie. I thought it was this stupid, little, romantic film about a French woman who meets in the train an American and decides to visit Vienna with him. I was not actually enchanted about this kind of script, since it [[incessant]] to make me believe that it is just a movie. Still, I watched it! And I was amazed..."Before Sunrise" is one of the few [[cinematographic]] who dare to talk in a rather philosophical way, wondering about the fact that in the moment of our birth, we are sentenced to death, or that it is a middling idea that fact that a couple should rest together for eternity, or that, we, humans, can afford sometimes to live in fairy-tales.

The ending was wonderfully chosen (we do not know if they will meet again in six months, at six o'clock, in Vienna's station) -in our optimism, we sincerely hope so. The actors acted in a very good manner, so, that, I began to believe that I, myself could live a love-story just like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] You talking' to Me? (1987) is a [[pretty]] [[bad]] movie starring some [[dude]] who I have never seen before or since starring as a guy from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[tries]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he learns the hard facts of life, he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he scores with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a real lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx You talking' to Me? (1987) is a [[quite]] [[mala]] movie starring some [[buddy]] who I have never seen before or since starring as a guy from the neighborhood who tries to become an actor. He has a heavy jones for Taxi Driver as [[endeavours]] to use that shtick to make it big. When he learns the hard facts of life, he does what everyone else does, changes his image! He goes from good fella to a surf's up dude over night. His friend can't believe the change (but he scores with Faith Ford and get's a cool paying gig). Can this young punk keep his street cred whilst making it big?

This is a real lame movie that tries too hard to incorporate too many things at once. An interesting idea that falls apart due to poor execution. Who knows, maybe somebody will pick up the ball and run because the film makers fumbled the ball this time.

Don't waste your time with this movie. Unless you want to see a hot Faith Ford and a young Bubba from Forest Gump.

xx --------------------------------------------- Result 972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[In]] a year of pretentious muck like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of Charlie Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly hard to watch but about three times as [[important]]. "Frownland" is a labor of [[love]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over years by friends. It traces a man who cannot communicate through his thoroughly authentic, REAL Brooklyn world. The people that you see are a step beyond even the stylization of the "mumblecore" movement. They are real people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to change, unable. The real world to them is their own set of delusions and because this is a film about people who are so profoundly out of touch, it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without proper light, money or any of the other factors that would make a film "slick", but its honesty can not be understated, a fact that would cause a room full of people to dismiss it and for Richard Linklater to give it an award as he did at SXSW. This does remind of films like "Naked" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a film that is not for everyone, but one that challenges you to watch and grows on you the longer you think about it. [[Among]] a year of pretentious muck like "Synecdoche, New York" a film born out of Charlie Kaufman's own self-indulgence, comes a film that is similarly hard to watch but about three times as [[critical]]. "Frownland" is a labor of [[likes]] by the crew, the actors and the filmmaker, shot over years by friends. It traces a man who cannot communicate through his thoroughly authentic, REAL Brooklyn world. The people that you see are a step beyond even the stylization of the "mumblecore" movement. They are real people, painfully trapped in their own self-contained neuroses, unwilling to change, unable. The real world to them is their own set of delusions and because this is a film about people who are so profoundly out of touch, it is very difficult to watch. It is 16mm film-making without proper light, money or any of the other factors that would make a film "slick", but its honesty can not be understated, a fact that would cause a room full of people to dismiss it and for Richard Linklater to give it an award as he did at SXSW. This does remind of films like "Naked" or the best of the "mumblecore". It is a film that is not for everyone, but one that challenges you to watch and grows on you the longer you think about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Take]] young, pretty people, put them in an exotic locale, stick in a few [[bad]] guys, have the two lead characters [[find]] romance after a couple of heavy [[breathing]] scenes, create the flimsiest of plots, then [[work]] out a happy ending for everybody (other than the three or four who get murdered, of course) That's the classic (and successful) [[format]] of the Harlequin [[Romance]]. It's not very good but then it's not very [[bad]] either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the location stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't use the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. [[Taking]] young, pretty people, put them in an exotic locale, stick in a few [[unfavourable]] guys, have the two lead characters [[found]] romance after a couple of heavy [[inhaling]] scenes, create the flimsiest of plots, then [[cooperates]] out a happy ending for everybody (other than the three or four who get murdered, of course) That's the classic (and successful) [[layout]] of the Harlequin [[Romantic]]. It's not very good but then it's not very [[wicked]] either, like most of the little yellow pocket books. And the location stuff in Budapest is especially interesting, even if they didn't use the wonderful old train station (designed by Gustave Eifel) or show the city's famous thermal baths. --------------------------------------------- Result 974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] THIS POST MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS :

[[Although]] it was 5 [[years]] after the series ended and WB was currently working on Justice League, this animated movie is a [[welcome]] [[addition]] to the video [[library]]. Why? Well, if Mask of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 episodes of Batman: The Animated Series and SubZero compliments the 15 episodes of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then [[Mystery]] of the Batwoman compliments the final 24 episodes of the Gotham Knights version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again delivers a [[voice]] over performance that is [[nothing]] short of excellence and perfection. I admit I was a bit leery when I heard about Batwoman and all I could think about were the old 50's comics of Batman. But I was blown away by the Batwoman character, her look, her costume (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the costume on Batman Beyond)and the fact that this movie keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you want to know who Batwoman is, then buy or rent the DVD. Barbara Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I think the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and Barbara had something going on between them like they did in Batman Beyond. Tim Drake appears as Robin, but his role is a small one and sadly, there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which leads me to believe he has established himself in Bludhaven (his city in the comics).

Of the three suspects for Batwoman, my favorite is Kathy Duquesne, who looks an awful lot like Halle Berry. Kelly Ripa did a great job as one of the other suspects. When it comes to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they replaced Paul Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. Same thing goes for Robin. The new guy did okay, but just as I was starting to get used to Matt Valencia, they replaced him. It's interesting to note that Kevin Michael Richardson, who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the voice of the Joker in "The Batman" series. And we finally see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped since he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. THIS POST MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS :

[[Albeit]] it was 5 [[yrs]] after the series ended and WB was currently working on Justice League, this animated movie is a [[bienvenidos]] [[supplement]] to the video [[librarian]]. Why? Well, if Mask of the Phantasm compliments the first 70 episodes of Batman: The Animated Series and SubZero compliments the 15 episodes of the Adventures of Batman and Robin, then [[Conundrum]] of the Batwoman compliments the final 24 episodes of the Gotham Knights version of Batman. Kevin Conroy once again delivers a [[vowel]] over performance that is [[anything]] short of excellence and perfection. I admit I was a bit leery when I heard about Batwoman and all I could think about were the old 50's comics of Batman. But I was blown away by the Batwoman character, her look, her costume (which I assumed inspired Bruce Wayne to create the costume on Batman Beyond)and the fact that this movie keeps you guessing who Batwoman is all the way through. If you want to know who Batwoman is, then buy or rent the DVD. Barbara Gordon makes a cameo appearance and I think the writers were trying to hint that Bruce and Barbara had something going on between them like they did in Batman Beyond. Tim Drake appears as Robin, but his role is a small one and sadly, there is no sign of or mention of Dick Grayson alias Nightwing, which leads me to believe he has established himself in Bludhaven (his city in the comics).

Of the three suspects for Batwoman, my favorite is Kathy Duquesne, who looks an awful lot like Halle Berry. Kelly Ripa did a great job as one of the other suspects. When it comes to the villains, I'm glad the Penguin was one of them, but I did not like the fact that they replaced Paul Williams with David Ogden Stiers. Pengy just didn't sound right. Same thing goes for Robin. The new guy did okay, but just as I was starting to get used to Matt Valencia, they replaced him. It's interesting to note that Kevin Michael Richardson, who voices Carlton Duquesne is now the voice of the Joker in "The Batman" series. And we finally see what Rupert Thorne looks like revamped since he didn't show up in the Gotham Knights episodes. The late John Vernon will be missed. Although I enjoyed Henry Silva as the voice of Bane, if he had to be replaced, they got the right man in the form of Hector Elizondo. I only wish they could have used Two Face, Riddler, or the scary new version of the Scarecrow.

The musical score and especially the soft sounding intro were superb. I wish that was on a soundtrack and I especially enjoyed the beautiful and talented Cherie in the Iceberg Lounge along with her song, Betcha Neva. While some feel that this movie is weaker than the Mask of the Phantasm and Subzero, I find it just as strong and enjoyable as the rest, plus like I said earlier, it's a full length movie based off the Gotham Knights version of Batman, which I think gives a good balance. I would at least recommend renting this DVD first before buying it for those who might be leery of this movie, but personally, it's well worth the purchase. I give Mystery of the Batwoman a 9. --------------------------------------------- Result 975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am normally a Spike Lee fan. It [[takes]] some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, [[Lee]] is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or Bamboozled (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear story in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd [[reason]] Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the decay of the film. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** I am normally a Spike Lee fan. It [[pick]] some time to really get into his "mojo", but once you see the clear message and the ability to tell the story that is close to his heart, [[Rhee]] is a genius. Unlike The 25th Hour or Bamboozled (two of my favorite films of his), there was no clear story in this film. I was able to understand the struggle between Washington and the choice to play well or be influenced by others, but for some odd [[cause]] Lee was never able to get the true feeling out. Washington did a decent job with what was handed to him, but you could tell that this was not Lee's favorite film. Not only did Lee direct this film, but he also wrote it. You could tell. The camera work was horrid and the writing only contributed to the decay of the film. This film was coming full circle and it wasn't going to be pretty. Lee was not 100% behind this film as he was with Do the Right Thing. Of all the films I have seen Lee direct, this was the brightest and more modest of his films. It was almost as if he created a Hollywood movie instead of one that was all his own. I don't know if he saw the money from Do the Right Thing and ran with it, or what … but this film did not demonstrate his true talent.

For anyone out there that has seen this film, and perhaps stopped watching anything directed by Spike Lee afterwards due to this film, I suggest you give him a second chance. Don't get me wrong, I see exactly where you are coming from with this film and why you would want to put this behind you, but Lee does grow up. His work becomes more of his own, and you can see the transformation from a desire to make money to just wanting to make good films. It took me awhile to watch The 25th Hour, but when I did, it was sheer brilliance. Perhaps it was the actors, perhaps the story, but Lee crafted an amazing film out of one man's journey into the unknown. I guess that is what I was hoping Mo' Better Blues would turn out to be. This really dark journey into the life of a man that really never grew up, but instead all I got was Denzel being Denzel. He really is one of the most versatile actors of this generation, and I do consider him the Sydney Poitier of cinema, but this was not the film to showcase his talent.

Another issue that I had with this film was the use of Spike's sister playing one of the love interests. I don't know about you, and your family, but I do not think that I could have filmed a sex scene with my sister. I don't care who the actor is or how much money I am getting paid, I would never do it. It is just something that I never wish to see, but apparently that is different for Spike. He went ahead and showed the full nude image of his sister without any remorse. It was sad and it even made me blush. Also, I need somebody to answer me this. What was Flavor Flav doing introducing this film? So, I am sitting there on my couch, ready to start the film, when suddenly there is a voice from the past spelling out the studio that made this film, then he acknowledges himself. That did not build for a strong remaining of the story. Again, I felt that Lee was going for money on this film instead of actual talent. Perhaps that is how he could afford both Denzel and Wesley in the same movie without any explosions.

There were two great scenes in this film that made it worth watching through to the end. Don't get me wrong, this was a very bad movie, but there is always a diamond in every alleyway. The scene when Bleek accidentally forgets which woman he is with was mesmerizing. He continually went back and forth, weaving truth to confusion in a way that proved that Lee was actually behind the camera. It was a visionary scene that was probably lost in the shuffle due to the remaining poor scenes. The other scene that was worth watching was the way that Lee introduced and ended the film. By keeping the same pacing and direction, he was able to bring this tragic character around full circle and give him the chance to change his life. Other than these two moments, the rest of the film was pure rubbish, not worth viewing unless you are about to go blind.

Grade: ** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Jodie]] [[Foster]], Cherie Currie (the [[former]] lead [[singer]] of the seminal all-girl rock group the Runaways in her remarkably able acting [[debut]]), Marilyn Kagan, and Kandice Stroh are [[uniformly]] [[believable]], [[splendid]] and [[touching]] as the titular quartet, who are a tight-knit [[clique]] of [[troubled]], [[fiercely]] loyal [[adolescent]] [[girls]] with negligent, uncaring, self-absorbed [[parents]] who do their best to [[grow]] up and fend for themselves in the affluent San Fernando Valley, California suburbs. The [[girls]] are [[forced]] to make [[serious]] decisions about [[sex]], [[drugs]], [[alcohol]], [[commitment]], and so on at a [[tender]] young age when they're not [[fully]] [[prepared]] to [[completely]] own up to the [[potentially]] harmful [[consequences]] of said decisions. Foster, [[giving]] one of her most [[perceptive]], [[affecting]] and [[underrated]] performances to [[date]], is [[basically]] the group's den [[mother]] who presides over the well-being of both herself and the others; she's [[especially]] [[concerned]] about the good-hearted, but [[reckless]] and self-destructive Currie, whose carelessly hedonistic lifestyle makes her [[likely]] to [[meet]] an untimely [[end]].

This [[picture]] [[offers]] a poignant, [[insightful]], often devastatingly [[credible]] and thoroughly absorbing [[examination]] of [[broken]], dysfunctional [[families]] which [[exist]] directly underneath suburbia's neatly manicured surface and the [[tragic]] net result of such [[families]]: tough, resilient, but [[unhappy]] and [[vulnerable]] [[kids]] who have to [[confront]] the [[trials]] and tribulations of [[growing]] up on their own because their [[parents]] are either too inconsiderate or even nonexistent. Adrian ("Fatal Attraction," "Jacob's Ladder") Lyne's [[direction]] is both [[sturdy]] and observant while Gerald Ayres' [[script]] is somewhat [[messy]] and rambling, but [[overall]] [[still]] accurate in its frank, gritty, unsentimental depiction of your average latchkey kid's nerve-wrackingly [[chaotic]], capricious and [[unpredictable]] [[everyday]] [[life]]. [[Leon]] Bijou's soft, dewy, [[almost]] pastoral [[cinematography]] properly suggests a delicate and [[easily]] [[breakable]] [[sense]] of tranquility and innocence. Giorgio Moroder arranged the excellent score, which makes particularly effective [[use]] of Donna Summer's elegiac "On the Radio." The top-notch [[cast]] [[includes]] Sally [[Kellerman]] as Foster's neurotic, [[insecure]], peevish mother, Scott Baio as a sweet skateboarder [[dude]], Randy Quaid as Kagan's rich older boyfriend, British 60's pop singer Adam Faith as Foster's feckless, absentee rock promoter father, and Lois Smith as Kagan's smothering, overprotective mother. Appearing in brief bits are Robert Romanus (Mike Damone "[[Fast]] Times at Richmont High") as one of Foster's morose ex-boyfriends and a gawky, braces-wearing [[Laura]] Dern as an obnoxious party crasher. Achingly authentic, engrossing and deeply moving (Currie's grim ultimate fate is very heart-breaking), "Foxes" is quite simply one of the most unsung and under-appreciated [[teen]] movies made about early 80's adolescence. [[Jodi]] [[Encourages]], Cherie Currie (the [[antigua]] lead [[songbird]] of the seminal all-girl rock group the Runaways in her remarkably able acting [[infancy]]), Marilyn Kagan, and Kandice Stroh are [[evenly]] [[dependable]], [[handsome]] and [[affects]] as the titular quartet, who are a tight-knit [[syndicate]] of [[disordered]], [[vigorously]] loyal [[teen]] [[female]] with negligent, uncaring, self-absorbed [[parenting]] who do their best to [[increases]] up and fend for themselves in the affluent San Fernando Valley, California suburbs. The [[females]] are [[obliged]] to make [[grave]] decisions about [[sexuality]], [[medicines]], [[ethanol]], [[pledges]], and so on at a [[bids]] young age when they're not [[altogether]] [[authored]] to [[abundantly]] own up to the [[presumably]] harmful [[implications]] of said decisions. Foster, [[confer]] one of her most [[subtle]], [[impacts]] and [[underestimated]] performances to [[dates]], is [[broadly]] the group's den [[mom]] who presides over the well-being of both herself and the others; she's [[specifically]] [[preoccupied]] about the good-hearted, but [[rash]] and self-destructive Currie, whose carelessly hedonistic lifestyle makes her [[apt]] to [[cater]] an untimely [[terminate]].

This [[image]] [[offered]] a poignant, [[informative]], often devastatingly [[plausible]] and thoroughly absorbing [[exams]] of [[ruptured]], dysfunctional [[family]] which [[exists]] directly underneath suburbia's neatly manicured surface and the [[dire]] net result of such [[family]]: tough, resilient, but [[pathetic]] and [[susceptible]] [[children]] who have to [[face]] the [[trial]] and tribulations of [[increased]] up on their own because their [[parenting]] are either too inconsiderate or even nonexistent. Adrian ("Fatal Attraction," "Jacob's Ladder") Lyne's [[orientation]] is both [[hardy]] and observant while Gerald Ayres' [[screenplay]] is somewhat [[chaotic]] and rambling, but [[general]] [[nonetheless]] accurate in its frank, gritty, unsentimental depiction of your average latchkey kid's nerve-wrackingly [[messy]], capricious and [[erratic]] [[routine]] [[lifetime]]. [[Leo]] Bijou's soft, dewy, [[hardly]] pastoral [[movies]] properly suggests a delicate and [[comfortably]] [[weak]] [[sensing]] of tranquility and innocence. Giorgio Moroder arranged the excellent score, which makes particularly effective [[employs]] of Donna Summer's elegiac "On the Radio." The top-notch [[casting]] [[involves]] Sally [[Keller]] as Foster's neurotic, [[insecurity]], peevish mother, Scott Baio as a sweet skateboarder [[boy]], Randy Quaid as Kagan's rich older boyfriend, British 60's pop singer Adam Faith as Foster's feckless, absentee rock promoter father, and Lois Smith as Kagan's smothering, overprotective mother. Appearing in brief bits are Robert Romanus (Mike Damone "[[Expedited]] Times at Richmont High") as one of Foster's morose ex-boyfriends and a gawky, braces-wearing [[Laure]] Dern as an obnoxious party crasher. Achingly authentic, engrossing and deeply moving (Currie's grim ultimate fate is very heart-breaking), "Foxes" is quite simply one of the most unsung and under-appreciated [[adolescence]] movies made about early 80's adolescence. --------------------------------------------- Result 977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This has [[got]] to [[go]] down as almost one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] of all time. Awful acting, awful script... and they were the good points! One to Definitely [[miss]]! The jokes, if you [[could]] [[call]] them that, were so [[predictable]] as to be [[pathetic]]. Pamela Anderson is [[still]] relying on her [[body]] to detract from the [[fact]] that her acting is just as [[plastic]]! I sat [[willing]] to give it a [[chance]], [[hoping]] that it was going to improve which, alas, it didn't! [[If]] it was a choice between this and a [[book]], I suggest you settle down for a good read! I [[like]] Denise Richards, which is why I gave this movie a go, but why she has let her self be cast in this movie is beyond me! This has [[did]] to [[going]] down as almost one of the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] of all time. Awful acting, awful script... and they were the good points! One to Definitely [[mademoiselle]]! The jokes, if you [[did]] [[calling]] them that, were so [[foreseeable]] as to be [[unhappy]]. Pamela Anderson is [[yet]] relying on her [[organ]] to detract from the [[facto]] that her acting is just as [[plastics]]! I sat [[desirous]] to give it a [[opportunities]], [[expecting]] that it was going to improve which, alas, it didn't! [[Though]] it was a choice between this and a [[workbook]], I suggest you settle down for a good read! I [[iike]] Denise Richards, which is why I gave this movie a go, but why she has let her self be cast in this movie is beyond me! --------------------------------------------- Result 978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unexpected]] boredom. [[First]], I was wondering how it is possible to produce something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was convincing myself that it's only a few more minutes, and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[kinda]] proud of as I consider watching this movie as a great test for human's patience and [[crap]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? Well, as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a try and if you're strong willed enough, you may even last to the end... The movie lacks coherence and characters seem to have no common sense at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw somewhere before, and they seem to be put in this movie just to fill the film reel. These were over 80 minutes of semi [[unintended]] boredom. [[Fiirst]], I was wondering how it is possible to produce something like that. Then, reaching 70th minute I was convincing myself that it's only a few more minutes, and I lasted to the very end which I'm [[sorta]] proud of as I consider watching this movie as a great test for human's patience and [[bollocks]] tolerance. Was it worth watching at all? Well, as I wrote above, if you want to test yourself, give it a try and if you're strong willed enough, you may even last to the end... The movie lacks coherence and characters seem to have no common sense at all. All happenings in the movie, you can be sure you saw somewhere before, and they seem to be put in this movie just to fill the film reel. --------------------------------------------- Result 979 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Wow, a movie about NYC politics [[seemingly]] written by someone who has never set foot in NYC. You know there's a problem when at one moment you expect the credits to roll and the [[movie]] [[continues]] on for another half [[hour]]. The [[characters]] are boring, [[John]] Cusack's accent is [[laughable]], and the plotline teeters between boring and [[laughable]]. A [[horrible]] movie. Wow, a movie about NYC politics [[reportedly]] written by someone who has never set foot in NYC. You know there's a problem when at one moment you expect the credits to roll and the [[kino]] [[persisted]] on for another half [[hours]]. The [[trait]] are boring, [[Johannes]] Cusack's accent is [[ridicule]], and the plotline teeters between boring and [[ludicrous]]. A [[frightening]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The problem with "The Killer Elite" is that just by [[seeking]] this film out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[effort]] into the experience than many of its principals did, particularly [[director]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at [[least]] one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with [[cocaine]]. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell apart.

It's a shame, because the [[concept]] behind the film is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise much. Mike Locken (James Caan) and George Hansen (Robert Duvall) are private contractors who do a lot of dirty work for the CIA. They move quick, live well, and seem like the best of friends - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An opening scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's murky motivation. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they work for ComTeg, then adds with obvious tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might employ such an organization for any purpose is, of course, preposterous." That's a pretty clever way of letting the audience know all bets are off.

Add to that a traditionally strong Peckinpah backup cast, including Burt Young, Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular Bo Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, including the celebrated Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and bad chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. The problem with "The Killer Elite" is that just by [[searching]] this film out, and investing time to watch it, you are putting more [[endeavor]] into the experience than many of its principals did, particularly [[headmaster]] Sam Peckinpah.

The already volatile Peckinpah was heading into rough weather with this film. According to at [[lowest]] one biographer, this was where he became acquainted with [[coca]]. Add to that his binge drinking, and it's no wonder things fell apart.

It's a shame, because the [[concepts]] behind the film is a good one, and the first ten minutes promise much. Mike Locken (James Caan) and George Hansen (Robert Duvall) are private contractors who do a lot of dirty work for the CIA. They move quick, live well, and seem like the best of friends - then something happens to shatter their brotherhood.

An opening scene shows them blowing up a building - why exactly we aren't told, par for the course in terms of this film's murky motivation. But the implication is these guys hurt people and don't really care - antiheroes much like the Wild Bunch of Peckinpah's not-so-long-ago. An opening title tells us they work for ComTeg, then adds with obvious tongue in cheek "...the thought the CIA might employ such an organization for any purpose is, of course, preposterous." That's a pretty clever way of letting the audience know all bets are off.

Add to that a traditionally strong Peckinpah backup cast, including Burt Young, Gig Young, and Peckinpah regular Bo Hopkins in the plum role of a madman who can't pass up an opportunity to be shot at for $500 a day, and you only wish that the scriptwriters, including the celebrated Sterling Silliphant, tried to do something more with the story than turn it into a platform for lazy one-liners and bad chop-socky knockoffs. An attempt at injecting a dose of liberal social commentary is awkwardly shoehorned in. "You're so busy doing their dirty work, you can't tell who the bad guys are," someone tells Locken, as if either he or we need it pointed out.

Worse still are Peckinpah's clumsy direction and sluggish pacing. We're 40 minutes into the film before we get our first battle scene, a completely chaotic collection of random shots where a bunch of people we haven't even met before are seen fighting at San Francisco Airport, their battle intercut with a conversation in an office suite.

By the end of the film, what's left of the cast is having a battle inside a fleet of mothballed Victory Ships, ninjas running out in the open to be gunned down while Caan tosses off one liners that undercut any hint of real suspense. "Lay me seven-to-five, I'll take the little guy," he wisecracks just before a climatic samurai duel between two ninja warriors - from China, which we all know is the land of the Ninja. (The battle takes place in San Francisco, but surprisingly no Mounties arrive to break things up.)

Caan is much better in smaller scenes, like when Locken, recovering from some nasty injuries, is told by one of his bosses, played by a smooth Arthur Hill, that he's been "Humpty-dumped" by the organization. Caan refuses to stay down, and his recovery scenes, though momentum-killing for the movie, feature fine acting from him and Amy Heflin, Van's daughter, as a supportive nurse. Caan was one of the 1970s' best actors, and his laconic byplay with Heflin, Duvall, Hopkins, and both Youngs give "Killer Elite" real watchability.

But you don't watch "Killer Elite" thinking about that. You watch it thinking of the film that got away. --------------------------------------------- Result 981 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Lost is the best TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very controversial issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[highly]] complex.For instance,who is Jacob?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A lot of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is undeniably the greatest TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. Lost is the best TV series there is.First of all,it has GREAT actors and wonderful directing.The writing is a very controversial issue because in the first two seasons the writing was extraordinary but after season 3 the writing became [[inordinately]] complex.For instance,who is Jacob?Why are there polar bears on the island?What's the fog?How did the island disappear?Who is Richard Alpert?A lot of people think that the writers are lost and that they have raised a lot of questions and mysteries that they can't explain.I believe these people are wrong.I have confidence in the writers.I think that if the mysteries are revealed from now all the charm of the series will be gone.Anyway,lost is undeniably the greatest TV series and it will continue to be for a long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I just viewed the [[film]] two days ago, and I was filled with anticipation, being that Paris is my second favorite city in Europe and I spent a very romantic 18 months there in the '80's. I was somewhat disappointed that most of this group of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not capture the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Nor]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much darkness, not only literally but figuratively. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The uplifting, good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. I just viewed the [[cinematography]] two days ago, and I was filled with anticipation, being that Paris is my second favorite city in Europe and I spent a very romantic 18 months there in the '80's. I was somewhat disappointed that most of this group of vignettes, while original and artistically done, did not capture the "light" and beauty of the city very well.[[Ni]] enough of the romance! We saw none of the tree-lined boulevards... There was too much darkness, not only literally but figuratively. Some of the plots manipulated the viewer it seemed, and let him/her down "flat "(the Marais sequence, the coiffure salesman sequence, to give two examples). The uplifting, good ones: The Mime sequence, the cemetery, the Montmartre (though it left too much to the viewer to comprehend), the "Cowboy" vignette ,and the Sacre Coeur-- seemed few and far between, and I would have liked to have seen such a wonderful actor as Orlando Bloom be in something that would have showcased his originality more. --------------------------------------------- Result 983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Had this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[fine]] movie but [[overly]] long with a tedious subplot, i.e., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. Had this film been put together a tad better, it would be up there with the best of Astaire and Rogers. As it is, it's a [[alright]] movie but [[disproportionately]] long with a tedious subplot, i.e., Randolph Scott romancing Rogers' sister, played by Harriet Hilliard (that's Ozzie Nelson's wife to you baby boomers).

Astaire and Scott are two Navy men. Scott meets Hilliard the first time when she looks like a stereotypical librarian, and later on after Ginger Rogers has asked her friend (a blond but unmistakable Lucille Ball) to glamor her up. Meanwhile, Astaire tries to pick up where he and his old dancing partner left off. The result is some wonderful dance numbers, with Astaire and Rogers as a team as well as separately: "I'm Putting All My Eggs in One Basket," "Let Yourself Go," and "I'd Rather Lead the Band." Hilliard is sweet but a little lethargic as a plain Jane turned glamor girl, although she sings her two songs well, "But Where Are You?" and "Get Thee Behind Me, Satan" - one poster didn't care for that song, but I love the title. Rogers is vivacious, and a youthful Astaire is a dynamo.

The highlight of the movie comes at the end with "Let's Face the Music and Dance," one of the most achingly beautiful songs ever written and certainly one of the most brilliantly executed by Rogers and Astaire. In it, they epitomize '30s glamor and fantasy. It is truly to be treasured and watched again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 984 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] I can't [[believe]] I [[waste]] my [[time]] watching this [[garbage]]! I did because Leonard Maltin gave it an "AA" rating, and for TV movies this is [[usually]] a [[reliable]] indicator of some quality [[entertainment]].

The acting was OK, but whoever wrote it should be [[forever]] [[denied]] access to any medium of communication. The plot is ludicrous, the motivations of the "bad guys" totally absent, and the various [[family]] interactions [[silly]] and shallow. For [[example]], [[Dad]] preaches that violent reaction to [[aggression]] is [[BAD]], but he [[turns]] out to be an "admirable" [[person]] NOT because of his "ignore the idiots" philosophy, but because he's pretty good with his fists...

The ONLY [[message]] I was able to glean from this pap was that the nuclear family is Good and alternate living arrangements are Bad. Oh, and Bad people happen to Good people. I can't [[reckon]] I [[wastes]] my [[period]] watching this [[detritus]]! I did because Leonard Maltin gave it an "AA" rating, and for TV movies this is [[fluently]] a [[believable]] indicator of some quality [[amusement]].

The acting was OK, but whoever wrote it should be [[endlessly]] [[overruled]] access to any medium of communication. The plot is ludicrous, the motivations of the "bad guys" totally absent, and the various [[families]] interactions [[absurd]] and shallow. For [[case]], [[Pere]] preaches that violent reaction to [[mugging]] is [[ROTTEN]], but he [[revolves]] out to be an "admirable" [[persona]] NOT because of his "ignore the idiots" philosophy, but because he's pretty good with his fists...

The ONLY [[messages]] I was able to glean from this pap was that the nuclear family is Good and alternate living arrangements are Bad. Oh, and Bad people happen to Good people. --------------------------------------------- Result 985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I have to admit that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 film was a [[huge]] [[disappointment]]. Specially when taken into consideration that this is a Tim Burton film. He is defenetly one of the most original and, might I say, cool directors Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a great [[fan]] of his work, but something obviously went wrong with his latest flick, The Planet of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[original]] [[film]]. [[When]] it first came out people expected just another cheezie 70's science fiction film, but a very surprise anding totally proved that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An obvious anti-war message. Fear of the cold war, where it was taking the world and fear of the use of nuclear weapons played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film rise above all expectations and it became a instant classic. Although, the new film, the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. No message, no ideals behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and creepy settings were excellent and of course the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not enough to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[badly]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It looks like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no reasonable answers to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet (given that there were only chimps in the space ship that crash-landed on the planet) Where the hell did all of those humans come from? How were a few chimps able to evolve into a huge raise of all kinds of monkeys in only a few thousands years. (I mean it took a few million years for us to evolve from monkey to man!)

And finally, the bad surprise ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. I have to admit that this "re-imagining" of the original 1968 film was a [[considerable]] [[disillusion]]. Specially when taken into consideration that this is a Tim Burton film. He is defenetly one of the most original and, might I say, cool directors Hollywood has produced.

I am personally a great [[breather]] of his work, but something obviously went wrong with his latest flick, The Planet of the Apes. I really enjoyed the [[upfront]] [[kino]]. [[Whenever]] it first came out people expected just another cheezie 70's science fiction film, but a very surprise anding totally proved that theory wrong. It had indeed a clear cut message. An obvious anti-war message. Fear of the cold war, where it was taking the world and fear of the use of nuclear weapons played a big role in the mind of the film-makers. Those reasons made the film rise above all expectations and it became a instant classic. Although, the new film, the "re-making" or whatever, leaves us with nothing. No message, no ideals behind it. It is just another money-minded summer blockbuster.

Visually Tim Burton does not let you down. The dark and creepy settings were excellent and of course the make up was terrific.

Obviously that is not enough to keep people intrested in a film. There has to be an exciting plot or storyline. In this movie the plot is highly uninteresting and it is extremely [[sorely]] thought out. The script is very lame and it is full of gaps. It looks like this film had been written in a big hurry. The explanation for why the apes where there, and why the ruled the planet was indeed very stupid and proved the script-writers ignorance.

It raised a lot of questions, which had no reasonable answers to.

For example; Why did the apes speak English?, why were there other ape-species than chimps on the planet (given that there were only chimps in the space ship that crash-landed on the planet) Where the hell did all of those humans come from? How were a few chimps able to evolve into a huge raise of all kinds of monkeys in only a few thousands years. (I mean it took a few million years for us to evolve from monkey to man!)

And finally, the bad surprise ending was just plane dumb. It was probably just thrown in because the original film had such an end, then they felt that the audience were expecting the same kind of ending. The ending also raises a lot of questions, which I KNOW, don´t have intelligent answears. Did Theid learn to work the space ship?, which was power-less, and learnt to fly back in time and take over the earth single hand?, and, what did he do, breed with all the women? And lets say that that would happen, I higly doubt that history would stay the same, like Washington would be built exactly like it is today! (I mean wouln't there be a huge banana instead of the memorial?)

Well, just to say something posative about the film. Some of the cast was great. Helen Bonham Carter's character was interesting and well-acted, as for Tim Roth as Theid. He was very good, a little exaturated at some points of the film. Michael Clark Duncan was also fine. I was not happy with Marc Whalberg. He is not much of an actor, and plays here a very macho colour-less character. Very unbielevable and is nothing compared to Hestons character in the original. And the main female character had no reason or place in the film. She was just casted for the looks. Hardly said a word throughout the entire film.

Well, I think that in the future when people think about the Planet of the apes, they will think about the original one. The latest will soon be forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[problem]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those pesky Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. This is a well made informative film in the vein of PBS Frontline. The [[troubles]] is, Frontline already did this piece and managed to bring L. Paul Bremer in to tell his side of the story. More troubling is the fact that the director of the film, Charles Ferguson--a former think tank wonk, was a war supporter until the occupation went south. What did he think would happen?

The invasion of Poland went really well too until it was messed up by those pesky Nazis.And that is what this film feels like--an apology for occupation rather than a deconstruction of the act of war itself.

Ferguson seems to suggest that the war could have been run better--as if any war can be better. --------------------------------------------- Result 987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Roman]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[rents]] an apartment in [[France]].The previous [[tenant]] is in a hospital after a suicide [[attempt]].He goes to see her there where he also [[meets]] Stella ([[Isabelle]] Adjani), the [[friend]] of Simone.He and [[Stella]] become pretty close.[[Later]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[begins]] to [[think]] the [[landlord]] and the [[neighbors]] are [[trying]] to [[change]] him into Simone so that [[eventually]] he [[would]] [[also]] jump out of the [[window]].Le Locataire (The [[Tenant]]) from 1976 is the [[last]] film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[previous]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[also]] [[superb]].[[Isabelle]] Adjani with her big glasses is [[wonderful]].The [[landlord]], Monsieur Zy is [[played]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays Madame Dioz.The fantastic Shelley Winters is The [[Concierge]].The [[Tenant]] is something very [[scary]] from time to [[time]].It gives a lot of that psychological scare.This [[film]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so fascinating. [[Romana]] Polanski plays Trelkovsky who [[lease]] an apartment in [[Francia]].The previous [[renters]] is in a hospital after a suicide [[strive]].He goes to see her there where he also [[fulfils]] Stella ([[Isobel]] Adjani), the [[boyfriend]] of Simone.He and [[Stell]] become pretty close.[[Subsequently]] Simone dies.Trelkovsky [[commenced]] to [[thinks]] the [[proprietors]] and the [[adjoining]] are [[striving]] to [[modify]] him into Simone so that [[lastly]] he [[ought]] [[further]] jump out of the [[luna]].Le Locataire (The [[Renter]]) from 1976 is the [[latter]] film of Polanski's apartment trilogy.The [[anterior]] ones were Repulsion and Rosemary's Baby.Roman Polanski does not do good job only as the director but his acting is [[likewise]] [[sumptuous]].[[Isabella]] Adjani with her big glasses is [[noteworthy]].The [[proprietor]], Monsieur Zy is [[done]] by the great Melvyn Douglas.Jo Van Fleet plays Madame Dioz.The fantastic Shelley Winters is The [[Landlady]].The [[Tenants]] is something very [[awful]] from time to [[moment]].It gives a lot of that psychological scare.This [[kino]] is not the easiest one to understand or explain but that makes it all so fascinating. --------------------------------------------- Result 988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But sentiment at the expense of narrative honesty? [[Nobody]] should love that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the Deep South during the early 1900s, and tells the story of Celie and Nettie, two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple flowers, an idyllic haven which is promptly shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This motif – innocence interrupted by men – permeates the entire film.

The film then launches into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice impregnated by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, incongruous comedy and overly exuberant camera work. The cumulative effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused Stanley Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of misplaced comedy inserted to make him look like a bumbling fool. A film in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. "Spielberg loves the smell of sentiment in the morning. But sentiment at the expense of narrative honesty? [[Anyone]] should love that." - Lucius Shepard

"The Color Purple" takes place in the Deep South during the early 1900s, and tells the story of Celie and Nettie, two African American sisters. The film opens with the girls playing in a field of purple flowers, an idyllic haven which is promptly shattered by the appearance of their stepfather. This motif – innocence interrupted by men – permeates the entire film.

The film then launches into a series of short sequences. Celie is revealed to have been twice impregnated by her stepfather, gives birth in a dirty barn, has her newborn child taken away and is forced to marry a local widow named Albert Johnson, a violent oaf who rapes her repeatedly, forcing her to cook, clean and look after his children.

All these horrific scenes are given little screen time, and are instead surrounded by moments of pixie-dust cinematography, a meddlesome symphonic score, incongruous comedy and overly exuberant camera work. The cumulative effect is like the merging of a Disney cartoon and a rape movie, a jarring aesthetic which caused Stanley Kubrick to remark that "The Color Purple" made him so nauseated that he had to turn it off after ten minutes. Ten minutes? He lasted a long time.

The film is often said to deal which "racism", "sexism" and "black culture", but this is not true. Alice Walker, the author of the novel upon which the film is based, claims to be a bisexual but is actually a closet lesbian. Her book is a lesbian fantasy, a story of female liberation and self-discovery, which paints men as violent brutes who stymie women. For Walker, the only way out of this maze is for women to bond together in a kind of lesbian utopia, black sisterhood and female independence celebrated.

Spielberg's film, however, re-frames Walker's story through the lens of comforting American mythologies. This is a film in which the salvific power of Christianity overcomes the natural cruelty of men. A film in which Albert finds himself in various ridiculous situations, moments of misplaced comedy inserted to make him look like a bumbling fool. A film in which all the characters are derived from racist minstrel shows, the cast comprised of lecherous men (always beaming with devilish smiles and toothy grins), stereotypical fat mammies, jazz bands and gospel choirs.

This is a film in which black people are naturally childlike, readily and happily accepting their social conditions. A film in which black people are over-sexed, carnal sensualists dominated by violent passions. A film in which poverty and class issues are entirely invisible (Albert lives in a huge house) and black men are completely inept. This is not the Old South, this is the Old South as derived from "Gone With The Wind", MGM Muscals, "Song of the South", Warner Cartoons, "Halleluha!" and banned Disney movies. In other words, it's the South as seen by a child raised on 50s TV. It's all so cartoonish, so racist in the way it reduces these human beings to one dimensional ethnic stereotypes, that black novelist Ishmael Reed famously likened it to a Nazi conspiracy.

Of course, in typical Spielberg fashion the film ends with family bonds being healed. This reconciliation was in Walker's novel, but Spielberg goes further by having every character in the story reconcile with their kin.

Beyond Walker's hate letter to black men and Spielberg's bizarre caricaturing of black life, we are shown nothing of the black community. We have only the vaguest ideas as to how any of these characters make a living and no insight into how they interact with others in their community. Instead, Spielberg's camera jumps about, desperately fighting for our attention (one of Celie's kitchen contraptions seems like it belongs in a "Home Alone" movie), every emotion over played, the director never stopping to just observe something or to allow a little bit of life to simply pass by. Couple this with Quincy Jones' ridiculously "white" music, and you have one of the strangest films in cinema history: an angry feminist tract filmed by a white Jew in the style of Disney and Griffith, scored by a black man trying to emulate John Williams.

Problematic too is the lack of white characters. Consider this: the men in this film aren't portrayed as being rough to each other, nor do they dominate women because they are brutalised by a racist society which reduces their manhood. No, they are cruel by nature. And the women, whether quietly suffering like Celie or rebellious and tough like her sister, persevere and survive only because the men are too stupid to destroy them. A better film would not have focused solely on the oppression of women as it occurs among the oppressed, rather, it would have shown that it is societal abuse which has led to spousal abuse, that enslaved black women are forced to perform the very same tasks as their male counterparts (whilst still fulfilling traditional female roles) and that African American domestic violence occurs largely because of economic factors, women unable to support themselves and their children alone.

And so there's a hidden ideology at work here. Late in the film one character tells another that since he didn't respect his wife, she wound up getting severely beaten and imprisoned by whites. The implication is that blacks need to return to their African roots to restore their own dignity and that it is their fault that whites unjustly crush them. ie- Respect one another in your poor minority community and you won't run afoul of the dominant white culture.

3/10 - A failure to confront sex and lesbianism, inappropriate musical numbers, countless sequence loaded with extraneous visual pizazz, incongruous comic business, emphatic music cues, and wildly hyped emotionality, all contribute to rendering "The Color Purple" worthless. --------------------------------------------- Result 989 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie is [[basically]] about some [[girls]] in a Catholic school that end up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[act]] they decide to take off to Florida for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some guys in a local diner and decide that they would both meet up with each other in another [[location]] later on. The girls end up on a road side near the [[woods]] and [[stop]] for awhile and while one of the girls [[decides]] to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the killer. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this movie who just can't put two and two together much less some [[lousy]] detective work at that. The best part was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this man and the bare chest scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie [[reminds]] me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same motive just a different character part. It's not a movie worth renting not [[even]] for an 80's low-budget movie and the ending was the [[worst]] ending I have ever seen in a movie and it left me wanting my money back! This movie is [[broadly]] about some [[daughters]] in a Catholic school that end up getting into trouble because of putting red dye in one in one of their school mates shampoo and after being reprimanded for this [[law]] they decide to take off to Florida for a vacation. On their way there they meet up with some guys in a local diner and decide that they would both meet up with each other in another [[positioning]] later on. The girls end up on a road side near the [[wood]] and [[ceasing]] for awhile and while one of the girls [[decide]] to walk around a bit she sees a murder happen in which the local sheriff himself is involved. She becomes scared and runs to tell the others what happened. The other girls decide to go take a look with her and two of them get killed by the killer. Then the two remaining girls are caught by the killer and are placed in local jail cell. The deputy sheriff meanwhile is keeping watch over the girls and despite their insistence that the sheriff is the killer he ignores them both and acts as ignorant and everybody else in this movie who just can't put two and two together much less some [[squalid]] detective work at that. The best part was the rape scene between the killer and one of the girls where he decides to rape her in her jail cell and it seems that the girl actually WANTS to be raped by this man and the bare chest scene I admit was good but before their lips meet he has other things in mind. This movie [[remembered]] me of the low-budget thriller "Blood Song" with Frankie Avalon staring in it, the same motive just a different character part. It's not a movie worth renting not [[yet]] for an 80's low-budget movie and the ending was the [[gravest]] ending I have ever seen in a movie and it left me wanting my money back! --------------------------------------------- Result 990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] ** Warning - this [[post]] may [[contain]] [[spoilers]] **

I only got a Gamecube in [[September]] 2005, and the first two [[games]] I [[bought]] were James [[Bond]] [[games]], the decent [[Agent]] Under Fire and the [[dull]] Goldeneye Rogue [[Agent]]. The [[next]] [[game]] I [[planned]] to [[get]] was [[Everything]] or [[Nothing]], because my [[friend]] told me that it was better than the two [[games]] I already had. I have to [[say]], he was right.

I [[bought]] this for a [[tenner]] in HMV, and when I got [[home]], I slammed it in to my Cube and [[played]] it for hours on [[end]]. It was [[much]] [[better]] than my other two [[games]], and there was a much better and more interesting storyline. [[Graphics]] were some of the [[best]] I have [[seen]] (but now that the XBOX 360 has [[come]] out, Farcry Instincts Predator has some of the [[best]] [[graphics]] known to [[man]]). The storyline was clever; [[mad]] [[man]] (Willem Dafoe, named as Nikolai Diavolo) and [[beautiful]] henchwoman (Heidi Klum, named as Katya Nadanova), [[try]] to [[destroy]] the [[world]] with [[tiny]] nanobots, which at the start of the [[game]], you, James Bond, have to [[destroy]] on a train. The [[bad]] [[thing]] is that one of them is [[hidden]] in Katya's boobs. You then have to [[thwart]] their [[plans]] and save the [[world]].

The [[great]] thing about this game is that it actually has [[actors]] voicing the [[characters]], such as Cleese voicing Q. There are 27 [[levels]], some of them short and some of them [[pretty]] long and [[tricky]].

Gameplay - 10/10 Graphics - 9/10 [[Sound]] - 9/10 [[Replay]] value - 7/10 Multiplayer - 8/10

I give this [[game]] a [[grand]] [[total]] of 90% ** Warning - this [[posting]] may [[containing]] [[troublemakers]] **

I only got a Gamecube in [[Nov]] 2005, and the first two [[gaming]] I [[purchased]] were James [[Bonding]] [[game]], the decent [[Officers]] Under Fire and the [[boring]] Goldeneye Rogue [[Officers]]. The [[future]] [[gaming]] I [[projected]] to [[gets]] was [[Entire]] or [[Anything]], because my [[boyfriend]] told me that it was better than the two [[gaming]] I already had. I have to [[told]], he was right.

I [[procured]] this for a [[fiver]] in HMV, and when I got [[housing]], I slammed it in to my Cube and [[served]] it for hours on [[ceases]]. It was [[very]] [[optimum]] than my other two [[gaming]], and there was a much better and more interesting storyline. [[Graph]] were some of the [[better]] I have [[noticed]] (but now that the XBOX 360 has [[arrive]] out, Farcry Instincts Predator has some of the [[better]] [[graphs]] known to [[men]]). The storyline was clever; [[lunatic]] [[males]] (Willem Dafoe, named as Nikolai Diavolo) and [[excellent]] henchwoman (Heidi Klum, named as Katya Nadanova), [[attempts]] to [[destruction]] the [[globe]] with [[smallest]] nanobots, which at the start of the [[gaming]], you, James Bond, have to [[ruining]] on a train. The [[rotten]] [[stuff]] is that one of them is [[disguised]] in Katya's boobs. You then have to [[abort]] their [[systems]] and save the [[worldwide]].

The [[resplendent]] thing about this game is that it actually has [[actresses]] voicing the [[attribute]], such as Cleese voicing Q. There are 27 [[grades]], some of them short and some of them [[quite]] long and [[problematic]].

Gameplay - 10/10 Graphics - 9/10 [[Sounds]] - 9/10 [[Playback]] value - 7/10 Multiplayer - 8/10

I give this [[games]] a [[whopping]] [[generals]] of 90% --------------------------------------------- Result 991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Certain elements of this film are dated, of course. An all white male crew, for instance. And like most Pre-Star [[Wars]] Science Fiction, it tends to [[take]] too [[long]] admiring itself.

But, still, no [[movie]] has ever capture the flavor of Golden Age Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to provide the musical score. Robbie the Robot epitomized the Asimov robots, and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The Tempest". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who finds his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated Science Fiction as an adult genre, perhaps the first. Certain elements of this film are dated, of course. An all white male crew, for instance. And like most Pre-Star [[Warfare]] Science Fiction, it tends to [[taking]] too [[largo]] admiring itself.

But, still, no [[cinematography]] has ever capture the flavor of Golden Age Science Fiction as this one did, even down to the use of the "electronic tonalities" to provide the musical score. Robbie the Robot epitomized the Asimov robots, and was the inspiration for all that followed, from C3PO to Data.

The plot line, of course, is Shakespeare's "The Tempest". Morbius is Prospero, and exiled wizard who finds his kingdom invaded by interlopers... It was a movie that treated Science Fiction as an adult genre, perhaps the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I love the munna bhai MBBS but "Lagge raho..." SUX really SUX. I have never seen such a [[boring]] [[movie]] in my [[whole]] [[life]]. And these high [[ratings]] really [[astonished]] me that wat [[happened]] to the taste of Indian cinema [[viewers]] ??

**MAY BE SPOILER**

An educated [[girl]] needs an advice from a Bhai, people discussing their personal prob. on phones come on man from which part of the world u r ??? I agree that films should be fictitious but these things are really indigestible.

2 out of 10. (2 [[stars]] is for 15 mins good starting) I love the munna bhai MBBS but "Lagge raho..." SUX really SUX. I have never seen such a [[tiresome]] [[cinematography]] in my [[ensemble]] [[vida]]. And these high [[appraisals]] really [[surprised]] me that wat [[arrived]] to the taste of Indian cinema [[moviegoers]] ??

**MAY BE SPOILER**

An educated [[dame]] needs an advice from a Bhai, people discussing their personal prob. on phones come on man from which part of the world u r ??? I agree that films should be fictitious but these things are really indigestible.

2 out of 10. (2 [[celebrity]] is for 15 mins good starting) --------------------------------------------- Result 993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] This show made me feel physically [[sick]], and totally detached from British society as a whole. It was programmes such as this and Blue Peter that [[pretended]] that there were/are no class divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may find this.." or "Go into your back garden tonight and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class kids who never never had a "loft", and a "back garden" which was nothing more than a 1 meter square of balcony on the 14th floor of a council block? Public service broadcasting - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to see those stupid, middle class, up-their-own-backside kids mess about with bits of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a favour, and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me sick This show made me feel physically [[unwell]], and totally detached from British society as a whole. It was programmes such as this and Blue Peter that [[doctored]] that there were/are no class divisions in Britain. They'd always say things like; "Go into your loft and you may find this.." or "Go into your back garden tonight and..." - what about us 'scummy' working class kids who never never had a "loft", and a "back garden" which was nothing more than a 1 meter square of balcony on the 14th floor of a council block? Public service broadcasting - yeah right! And on top of that, it was awfully depressing to see those stupid, middle class, up-their-own-backside kids mess about with bits of old plastic having 'fun'... do me a favour, and "why don't you" go and slit your wrists or do a coke overdose on "Mama and Papa's" money... you make me sick --------------------------------------------- Result 994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] A female executioner (played by the sexy Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun job of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a way to go. Lucky this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[starts]] out real slow. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[gets]] better as it moves along. And ends with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. A female executioner (played by the sexy Jennifer Thomas II) has the fun job of fulfilling all the fantasies of all the men on death row before they meet their maker. And what a way to go. Lucky this film is not real, or we would have a lot more people in this world on death row.

It [[launched]] out real slow. Low light and bad acting, like most (B) films. It [[receives]] better as it moves along. And ends with a bang.

I would rate it very high on the low cost, very sexy movies of the 90's. It's a must see once the kids are away or in bed. --------------------------------------------- Result 995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Boasting an all-star cast so [[impressive]] that it almost seems like the "Mad Mad Mad Mad World" of horror pictures, "The Sentinel" (1977) is [[nevertheless]] an effectively creepy film centering on the relatively unknown actress [[Cristina]] Raines. In this one, she plays a fashion model, Alison Parker, who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't think I'm giving away too much at this late date) very close to the gateway of Hell. And as a tenant in this building, she suffers far worse conditions than leaky plumbing and the occasional water bug, to put it mildly! Indeed, the scene in which Alison encounters her noisy upstairs neighbor is truly terrifying, and should certainly send the ice water coursing down the spines of most viewers. Despite many critics' complaints regarding Raines' acting ability, I thought she was just fine, more than ably holding her own in scenes with Ava Gardner, Burgess Meredith, Arthur Kennedy, Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The picture builds to an effectively eerie conclusion, and although some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as topless cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and although shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this house really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn Queens Expressway. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! Boasting an all-star cast so [[admirable]] that it almost seems like the "Mad Mad Mad Mad World" of horror pictures, "The Sentinel" (1977) is [[however]] an effectively creepy film centering on the relatively unknown actress [[Kristina]] Raines. In this one, she plays a fashion model, Alison Parker, who moves into a Brooklyn Heights brownstone that is (and I don't think I'm giving away too much at this late date) very close to the gateway of Hell. And as a tenant in this building, she suffers far worse conditions than leaky plumbing and the occasional water bug, to put it mildly! Indeed, the scene in which Alison encounters her noisy upstairs neighbor is truly terrifying, and should certainly send the ice water coursing down the spines of most viewers. Despite many critics' complaints regarding Raines' acting ability, I thought she was just fine, more than ably holding her own in scenes with Ava Gardner, Burgess Meredith, Arthur Kennedy, Chris Sarandon and Eli Wallach. The picture builds to an effectively eerie conclusion, and although some plot points go unexplained, I was left feeling more than satisfied. As the book "DVD Delirium" puts it, "any movie with Beverly D'Angelo and Sylvia Miles as topless cannibal lesbians in leotards can't be all bad"! On a side note, yesterday I walked over to 10 Montague Terrace in Brooklyn Heights to take a look at the Sentinel House. Yes, it's still there, and although shorn of its heavy coat of ivy and lacking a blind priest/nun at the top-floor window, looks much the same as it did in this picture. If this house really does sit atop the entrance to Hell, I take it that Hell is...the Brooklyn Queens Expressway. But we New Yorkers have known THAT for some time! --------------------------------------------- Result 996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Sure, it's a 50's drive-in special, but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[touches]] with [[unexpected]] dollops of humor. Catch the redoubtable Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the [[bucks]] to film in color, a wise decision, since the blob would not show up well in b&w. Yes, the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a lot of fun, drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. Sure, it's a 50's drive-in special, but don't let that fool you. In my little book, there are a number of intelligent [[afflicts]] with [[unplanned]] dollops of humor. Catch the redoubtable Mrs. Porter who's supposed to keep an eye on the doc's place. She not only steals the scene, but darn near the whole movie. And where did those indie producers come up with the [[usd]] to film in color, a wise decision, since the blob would not show up well in b&w. Yes, the result is ragged around the edges as the number of goofs illustrate. But except for several of the teens, the non-Hollywood cast performs well. Then too, the byplay among hot-rodders and cops comes across as lively and entertaining. Pretty darn good for a couple of directors more at home in a pulpit than on a sound stage. Apparently, they wanted to portray teens in a positive light at a time when the screen was filled with "juvenile delinquents". Then again, the 27-year old McQueen hardly qualifies in the age department, but manages the hot-rodder attitude anyway. The movie was a hit at the time, helped along, no doubt, by the catchy title tune that got a lot of radio play. And except for the unfortunate final effects, the movie is still a lot of fun, drive-in or no drive-in. Meanwhile, I'm awaiting the blob's return now that the polar icecap is turning into, shall we say, refrigerator water. --------------------------------------------- Result 997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[saw]] this [[Documentary]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a [[small]] 200-seat Cinema at the top of the [[main]] building at the Cannes [[Film]] Festival.

I [[absolutely]] was into it. I love the [[mix]] of awesomely [[made]] [[fictional]] scenes. It is [[amazing]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were [[filmed]] in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[music]] is so [[nice]].

I [[rate]] this experience 9/10.

* spoilers ahead *

The Documentary tells about awesome Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the black man playing the guitar and singing. It is really [[amazing]]. But this also mixes in new bands and that is maybe one thing I [[might]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant use of links to modern rock-bands playing those Blues songs in a modern way. I didn't really appreciate their trashed way of playing such awesome Blues songs. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical taste I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista Social Club.

The Documentary was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the little cinema, that the next day this Documentary was shown for everyone and normal tourists on the beach of the Croisette at the open-air cinema. Though the [[sand]], the quality of the [[projection]] and the bad quality of the sound [[probably]] made it a [[difficult]] experience to [[enjoy]] for the thousands of people who were sitting in the sand that [[night]]. I [[sawthe]] this [[Literature]] at the Cannes Film Festival, in a [[minimal]] 200-seat Cinema at the top of the [[principal]] building at the Cannes [[Flick]] Festival.

I [[totally]] was into it. I love the [[blends]] of awesomely [[introduced]] [[fictitious]] scenes. It is [[awesome]] set-design. The scenes look really like they were [[videotaped]] in 1920ies or 1930ies.

And the [[musician]] is so [[pleasurable]].

I [[rates]] this experience 9/10.

* spoilers ahead *

The Documentary tells about awesome Blues-men, with black-and-white old-looking scenes of the black man playing the guitar and singing. It is really [[unbelievable]]. But this also mixes in new bands and that is maybe one thing I [[conceivably]] dislike in this Documentary. It is the too abundant use of links to modern rock-bands playing those Blues songs in a modern way. I didn't really appreciate their trashed way of playing such awesome Blues songs. This is the same kind of un-perfect musical taste I found when watching Wim Wenders Buena Vista Social Club.

The Documentary was such a standing-ovation at this first screening in the little cinema, that the next day this Documentary was shown for everyone and normal tourists on the beach of the Croisette at the open-air cinema. Though the [[sables]], the quality of the [[projections]] and the bad quality of the sound [[indubitably]] made it a [[laborious]] experience to [[enjoys]] for the thousands of people who were sitting in the sand that [[nuit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Must]] have been [[hanging]] out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", [[WAY]] too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why bother to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. Ever notice how in his later movies Burt Reynolds' laugh sounds like screeching brakes?

[[Owe]] have been [[dangling]] out with Hal Needham too much.

And from the looks of "Stroker Ace", [[CAMINO]] too much.

Can you believe this was based on a book? Neither could I, but it was. And probably not a best-seller, I'll wager.

Burt's another good-old-boy in the NASCAR circuit who hitches up with Beatty as a fried chicken magnate with designs on his team. Anderson provides what love interest there is and Nabors does his umpteenth Gomer Pyle impression as faithful mechanic/best friend Lugs.

A lot of people here are friends of Burt's or Hal's. Others must have needed the work. And even real NASCAR drivers get in on the act, and look to have more talent than those with SAG cards.

As far as laughs go, Bubba Smith (pre-"Police Academy") gets them as Beatty's chauffeur. And Petersen, in full Elvira mode, gets lots of appreciative leers as a lady who wants to get to know Lugs real well. REAL WELL.

It's a shame that Burt threw away as much time and effort in a film like "Stroker Ace" where it didn't matter whether he bothered to act or not. They didn't bother to write a character for him, why bother to act?

Two stars. Mostly for Petersen, and for the out-takes at the end. Now THEY'RE funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Larry Fessenden has been thrashed by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[mistake]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people [[expecting]] anything that will be gory and instantly [[satisfying]].

"Wendigo" is basically a [[film]] that seems to be [[told]] from the mind of the [[young]] [[Miles]]. [[Things]] that are not readily understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and ultimately dominate their fears and the menacing [[world]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the mother, is a psychologist, but she has no clue to what is going on in the mind of her son. This is also a story of alienation. It's clear that the father, George, is a distant figure, perhaps a workaholic, who seems to be living in a different world.

Miles' fears reach a point of crisis during the week end in the country. That part of New York state, with its winter landscape, barren trees, play havoc on the little boy's imagination. It doesn't help that he encounters a strange figure in town, it creates even more doubts in his young mind. Ultimately, Miles' world comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even evoking the Wendigo spirit.

The film is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is excellent, no matter where movie she is in. Jake Weber is perfect as the distant father who has an opportunity to come closer to a son he doesn't understand. Erik Per Sullivan, as Miles, conveys the inner turmoil within him. I thought he was extremely effective since the whole movie is Miles own take on what's going on around him. Finally, John Spredakos is perfect as the menacing Otis, a man who resents the world for the way he has turned out.

Instead of putting this movie down, future viewers should approach it with a open mind. Larry Fessenden has been thrashed by most of the comments on this forum. Well, the worst [[awry]], evidently, is the marketing of the movie and the way the DVD might have been targeted. Obviously, this is not a true horror movie, at least, not for people [[hoping]] anything that will be gory and instantly [[pleasing]].

"Wendigo" is basically a [[filmmaking]] that seems to be [[say]] from the mind of the [[youthful]] [[Kilometre]]. [[Aspects]] that are not readily understood by children tend to stay in their young minds and ultimately dominate their fears and the menacing [[worldwide]] they can't comprehend. It is obvious that Kim, the mother, is a psychologist, but she has no clue to what is going on in the mind of her son. This is also a story of alienation. It's clear that the father, George, is a distant figure, perhaps a workaholic, who seems to be living in a different world.

Miles' fears reach a point of crisis during the week end in the country. That part of New York state, with its winter landscape, barren trees, play havoc on the little boy's imagination. It doesn't help that he encounters a strange figure in town, it creates even more doubts in his young mind. Ultimately, Miles' world comes crashing down on him and he can't do anything, even evoking the Wendigo spirit.

The film is well paced and acted. Patricia Clarkson is excellent, no matter where movie she is in. Jake Weber is perfect as the distant father who has an opportunity to come closer to a son he doesn't understand. Erik Per Sullivan, as Miles, conveys the inner turmoil within him. I thought he was extremely effective since the whole movie is Miles own take on what's going on around him. Finally, John Spredakos is perfect as the menacing Otis, a man who resents the world for the way he has turned out.

Instead of putting this movie down, future viewers should approach it with a open mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 1000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is certainly one of the most [[bizarre]] films ever made - even for Fellini. [[About]] the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual challenge. Sutherland makes a curiously unappealing Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to engage the viewer. The art direction and costume design are however OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the disjointed, pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This viewer was grateful. This is certainly one of the most [[inquisitive]] films ever made - even for Fellini. [[Around]] the only one more bizarre is his SATYRICON. This is a two and a half hour romp through a strange nightmarish world of decadence, opulence and sexual challenge. Sutherland makes a curiously unappealing Casanova and the odd goings on in a series of unrelated vignettes taken from the great lover's autobiography fail to engage the viewer. The art direction and costume design are however OUTSTANDING. The Academy missed on not even nominating the former but did itself justice by rewarding an OSCAR for the latter. Also nominated (oddly) was the disjointed, pointless and almost inacessible screenplay. Go figure!! The film on video is only 150 minutes, 16 minutes short of the original running time. This viewer was grateful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This [[movie]] is a [[great]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this [[girl]] comes to destroy the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she listens to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." This [[flick]] is a [[whopping]] way for the series to finally end. Peter (the boy from Puppet Master III) is all grown up and is now the Puppet Master. Well, this [[female]] comes to destroy the puppets and learn Toulon's secrets but instead she listens to the story about the puppets. Most of this movie is footage from Puppet Master II, Puppet Master III, Puppet Master 4, Puppet Master 5, Curse of the Puppet Master, and Retro Puppet Master (sorry... But I guess Paramount wouldn't let them use scenes from 1). Personally I wish Puppet Master Vs. Demonic Toys would finally be made but the way this movie ends they basically say "This is THE final movie in the series..." --------------------------------------------- Result 1002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] If I [[could]] [[go]] back, even as an adult and [[relive]] the days of my Summer's spent at camp...I would be there so [[fast]]. The [[Camps]] I went to weren't even this great. They were in Texas where the mosquitoes actually carry people off but we had horses and fishing. The movie cinematography was astounding, the [[characters]] [[funny]] and [[believable]] [[especially]] Perkins, Pollack and Arkin. Sam Raimi's [[character]] and sub-antics were priceless. So who ever [[thought]] this [[movie]] was lame...I have deep pity for because they can't [[suspend]] their disbelief long enough to imagine camp life again as an adult or they never went as kids. The whole point was that these people had an opportunity to regress and become juvenile again and so they did at every opportunity. I wish I could. It was funny, intelligent, beautifully scripted, brilliantly cast and the artistry takes me back so I want to watch it over and over just for the scenery even. Sorta like Dances with Wolves and LadyHawk...good movies but the wilderness becomes a character as much as the actors. Rent it, see it, buy it and watch it over and over and over...never gets old. ;0) If I [[did]] [[going]] back, even as an adult and [[reanimate]] the days of my Summer's spent at camp...I would be there so [[expeditiously]]. The [[Campos]] I went to weren't even this great. They were in Texas where the mosquitoes actually carry people off but we had horses and fishing. The movie cinematography was astounding, the [[hallmarks]] [[comical]] and [[dependable]] [[predominantly]] Perkins, Pollack and Arkin. Sam Raimi's [[personage]] and sub-antics were priceless. So who ever [[brainchild]] this [[cinematographic]] was lame...I have deep pity for because they can't [[suspending]] their disbelief long enough to imagine camp life again as an adult or they never went as kids. The whole point was that these people had an opportunity to regress and become juvenile again and so they did at every opportunity. I wish I could. It was funny, intelligent, beautifully scripted, brilliantly cast and the artistry takes me back so I want to watch it over and over just for the scenery even. Sorta like Dances with Wolves and LadyHawk...good movies but the wilderness becomes a character as much as the actors. Rent it, see it, buy it and watch it over and over and over...never gets old. ;0) --------------------------------------------- Result 1003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Farewell]] [[Friend]] [[aka]] [[Adieu]] L'Ami/[[Honour]] [[Among]] [[Thieves]] isn't perfect but it is a neat and [[entertaining]] thriller that sees mismatched demobbed French [[Algerian]] War veterans Alain Delon and Charles Bronson [[trapped]] in the same basement vault, one to [[return]] stolen bonds, the other to clean out the two million in [[wages]] [[sitting]] there over the [[Christmas]] weekend. Naturally things aren't [[quite]] that simple even after they open the vault, leading to some neat [[twists]] and turns. On the debit side, there's a very [[bizarre]] striptease scene in a [[car]] park, Bronson has a very irritating Fonzie-like catchphrase he uses at the most [[inopportune]] moments, Brigitte Fossey, [[sporting]] [[perhaps]] the most hideously misconceived hairstyle of the 60s (it makes her look like a bald [[woman]] [[whose]] wig is [[blown]] back off the [[top]] of her [[head]] by a high [[wind]]), is something of a [[liability]] – her "I'll cook [[spaghetti]]! I'll [[learn]] to make love well! I'll read Shakespeare!" [[speech]] is hysterical in all the wrong [[ways]] – and it's a [[shame]] about the [[horrible]] [[last]] line/shot, but otherwise this is a [[surprisingly]] [[entertaining]] and unpretentious number that's worth [[checking]] out if you can find a decent print.

[[Cinema]] Club's [[UK]] DVD only [[offers]] the English soundtrack, but [[since]] Delon voices himself and the [[rest]] of the [[cast]] are [[fairly]] well [[dubbed]] that's no [[great]] [[problem]], [[especially]] [[since]] the widescreen transfer is pretty [[good]] quality. [[Bye]] [[Buddies]] [[alias]] [[Adios]] L'Ami/[[Honours]] [[In]] [[Bandits]] isn't perfect but it is a neat and [[amuse]] thriller that sees mismatched demobbed French [[Algiers]] War veterans Alain Delon and Charles Bronson [[ambushed]] in the same basement vault, one to [[returning]] stolen bonds, the other to clean out the two million in [[wage]] [[seated]] there over the [[Claus]] weekend. Naturally things aren't [[altogether]] that simple even after they open the vault, leading to some neat [[spins]] and turns. On the debit side, there's a very [[outlandish]] striptease scene in a [[automobile]] park, Bronson has a very irritating Fonzie-like catchphrase he uses at the most [[unseemly]] moments, Brigitte Fossey, [[athletes]] [[maybe]] the most hideously misconceived hairstyle of the 60s (it makes her look like a bald [[daughters]] [[who]] wig is [[molten]] back off the [[superior]] of her [[leader]] by a high [[turbine]]), is something of a [[accountability]] – her "I'll cook [[sandwiches]]! I'll [[learns]] to make love well! I'll read Shakespeare!" [[speeches]] is hysterical in all the wrong [[method]] – and it's a [[pity]] about the [[hideous]] [[latter]] line/shot, but otherwise this is a [[unimaginably]] [[amusing]] and unpretentious number that's worth [[controls]] out if you can find a decent print.

[[Filmmaking]] Club's [[ENGLAND]] DVD only [[offering]] the English soundtrack, but [[because]] Delon voices himself and the [[remaining]] of the [[casting]] are [[relatively]] well [[nicknamed]] that's no [[formidable]] [[issues]], [[concretely]] [[because]] the widescreen transfer is pretty [[buena]] quality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Jackie Chan name is synonomus to stunts. This movie never [[let]] you down.The opening best chase scene and last roll down scene from the pole is so [[risky]] than one wonder ,if he knows the meaning of fear.This movie comes very close to Jackie's [[best]] which is PROJECT A.But the [[main]] [[difference]] being that PROJECT A contains three stars where as in this movie Jackie [[carries]] the film entirely on his shoulders.This is perhaps the main reason that this movie made [[jackie]] an biggest martial arts star followed by Bruce Lee.The film has nice comic [[touches]] too. What makes this film [[work]] is Jakie's [[ability]] to [[show]] his venerable side which his in contract to the typical martial arts action hero.This movie was followed by a sequel which was good but was quite tame in comparison to its predecessor. Jackie Chan name is synonomus to stunts. This movie never [[leave]] you down.The opening best chase scene and last roll down scene from the pole is so [[unsafe]] than one wonder ,if he knows the meaning of fear.This movie comes very close to Jackie's [[better]] which is PROJECT A.But the [[leading]] [[dispute]] being that PROJECT A contains three stars where as in this movie Jackie [[carrying]] the film entirely on his shoulders.This is perhaps the main reason that this movie made [[jacqui]] an biggest martial arts star followed by Bruce Lee.The film has nice comic [[touch]] too. What makes this film [[cooperating]] is Jakie's [[dexterity]] to [[exhibitions]] his venerable side which his in contract to the typical martial arts action hero.This movie was followed by a sequel which was good but was quite tame in comparison to its predecessor. --------------------------------------------- Result 1005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Lynn Hollister, a small-town lawyer, travels to the [[nearby]] big city on [[business]] connected with the death of his [[friend]] Johnny. ([[Yes]], Lynn is a [[man]] [[despite]] the feminine-sounding Christian name. Were the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that John Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's death to have been an [[accident]], but soon realises that Johnny was murdered. Further investigations reveal a web of corruption, criminality and election rigging connected to [[Boss]] Cameron, the [[leading]] light in city 's political machine.

That sounds like the plot of a gritty crime thriller, possibly made in the film noir style which was starting to become popular in 1941. It isn't. "A Man Betrayed", despite its theme, is more like a light romantic comedy than a crime drama. Hollister falls in love with Cameron's attractive daughter Sabra, and the film then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This film might just have worked if it had been made as a straightforward serious drama. One reviewer states that John Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't play a cowboy in every movie, and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised crime would probably have been well within his compass. Where I do agree with that reviewer is when he says that Wayne was no Cary Grant impersonator. Romantic comedy just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that actors could be required to play any part their bosses demanded of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few major stars working for Republic Pictures they doubtless wanted to get as much mileage out of him as they could.

That said, not even Cary Grant himself could have made "A Man Betrayed" work as a comedy. That's not a reflection on his comic talents; it's a reflection on the total [[lack]] of amusing material in this film. I doubt if anyone, no matter how well developed their sense of humour might be, could find anything to laugh at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful comedy; it just prevents it from being taken seriously as anything else. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 Lynn Hollister, a small-town lawyer, travels to the [[neighbour]] big city on [[firms]] connected with the death of his [[friends]] Johnny. ([[Oui]], Lynn is a [[males]] [[though]] the feminine-sounding Christian name. Were the scriptwriters trying to make a snide reference to the fact that John Wayne's birth name was "Marion"?) Hollister at first believes Johnny's death to have been an [[casualty]], but soon realises that Johnny was murdered. Further investigations reveal a web of corruption, criminality and election rigging connected to [[Chef]] Cameron, the [[culminating]] light in city 's political machine.

That sounds like the plot of a gritty crime thriller, possibly made in the film noir style which was starting to become popular in 1941. It isn't. "A Man Betrayed", despite its theme, is more like a light romantic comedy than a crime drama. Hollister falls in love with Cameron's attractive daughter Sabra, and the film then concentrates as much on their resulting romance as on the suspense elements.

This film might just have worked if it had been made as a straightforward serious drama. One reviewer states that John Wayne is not at all believable as a lawyer, but he couldn't play a cowboy in every movie, and a tough crusading lawyer taking on the forces of organised crime would probably have been well within his compass. Where I do agree with that reviewer is when he says that Wayne was no Cary Grant impersonator. Romantic comedy just wasn't up his street. One of the weaknesses of the studio system is that actors could be required to play any part their bosses demanded of them, regardless of whether it was up their street or not, and as Wayne was one of the few major stars working for Republic Pictures they doubtless wanted to get as much mileage out of him as they could.

That said, not even Cary Grant himself could have made "A Man Betrayed" work as a comedy. That's not a reflection on his comic talents; it's a reflection on the total [[deficits]] of amusing material in this film. I doubt if anyone, no matter how well developed their sense of humour might be, could find anything to laugh at in it. The film's light-hearted tone doesn't make it a successful comedy; it just prevents it from being taken seriously as anything else. This is one of those films that are neither fish nor flesh nor fowl nor good red herring. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] once as a kid on the late-late show and [[fell]] in love with it.

It took 30+ [[years]], but I recently did [[find]] it on [[DVD]] - it wasn't cheap, either - in a catalog that specialized in war movies. We watched it last night for the first time. The [[audio]] was good, however it was [[grainy]] and had the trailers between [[reels]]. Even so, it was better than I [[remembered]] it. I was also impressed at how [[true]] it was to the play.

The [[catalog]] is [[around]] here [[someplace]]. If you're [[sincere]] in finding it, [[fire]] me a missive and I'll see if I can [[get]] you the info. cartwrightbride@yahoo.com I [[noticed]] this [[cinematography]] once as a kid on the late-late show and [[declined]] in love with it.

It took 30+ [[yr]], but I recently did [[finds]] it on [[DVDS]] - it wasn't cheap, either - in a catalog that specialized in war movies. We watched it last night for the first time. The [[aural]] was good, however it was [[foggy]] and had the trailers between [[spools]]. Even so, it was better than I [[reminds]] it. I was also impressed at how [[veritable]] it was to the play.

The [[cataloguing]] is [[approximately]] here [[anyplace]]. If you're [[heartfelt]] in finding it, [[wildfire]] me a missive and I'll see if I can [[gets]] you the info. cartwrightbride@yahoo.com --------------------------------------------- Result 1007 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Another [[horror]] [[flick]] in which a goof-ball [[teenager]] battles a madman and his [[supernatural]] sidekick who want to [[take]] over?! [[Yes]], but the fact that this one was from Canada gives it a [[slightly]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome teenager Jim Majelewski getting put into a treatment whose leader turns out to be a cult leader aided by a big ugly "brain". Can Jim stop him? I [[guess]] that since our northern neighbor has accomplished all that they have accomplished, they're entitled to make at least one [[ridiculous]] horror movie. But [[still]], they'll probably want to be known for having national health care and all.

The bad guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who made this movie? Another [[terror]] [[gesture]] in which a goof-ball [[adolescence]] battles a madman and his [[uncanny]] sidekick who want to [[taking]] over?! [[Yeah]], but the fact that this one was from Canada gives it a [[somewhat]] different feel. "The Brain" has troublesome teenager Jim Majelewski getting put into a treatment whose leader turns out to be a cult leader aided by a big ugly "brain". Can Jim stop him? I [[reckon]] that since our northern neighbor has accomplished all that they have accomplished, they're entitled to make at least one [[nonsense]] horror movie. But [[however]], they'll probably want to be known for having national health care and all.

The bad guy had a brain. Why didn't the people who made this movie? --------------------------------------------- Result 1008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the greatest movies ever maybe even the greatest movie ever. I had forgotten about the movie for about 12 years. Until I saw an add on TV for ADGTH and it brought back fond memories of me watching it when I was a little kid. And when I watched it a few nights ago I became addicted to the movie. Usually I don't like animated family movies but this one is special it is the perfect family movie.

The ending of the movie always touches my heart and saddens me very much but that is what makes this movie amazing better than all of the garbage that is coming out for kid movies today. I mean the movie is G rated and it is about 2 dogs who are involved with gambling, there is a lot of smoking, drinking, murder, death and hell depicted in the movie. Which I Believe makes the movie from good to great. I mean movies today don't bring reality to kids and in this movie they did.

RIP Judith Barsi & Dom DeLuise --------------------------------------------- Result 1009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] What is this ? A low budget [[sex]] comedy ? Anyway it [[describes]] perfectly the people in [[Spain]]. They could come up with a better idea, I [[mean]] they do this kind of movies since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[teen]] comedy nor a family one (you can't [[let]] your 12 year old watch 2 guys in bed kissing, he'll never [[want]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[R]]", because only people 35+ [[seem]] to laugh watching :S I'm truly disappointed, maybe I don't like [[gays]] (which is quite an important [[part]] of the movie).

Foreign humor is awful in films (except Kusturica), stick with doing dramas! If you want a new comedy try Talladega Nights What is this ? A low budget [[sexuality]] comedy ? Anyway it [[depicts]] perfectly the people in [[Spaniards]]. They could come up with a better idea, I [[signify]] they do this kind of movies since the 60s.. and people like them ! This is neither a [[adolescent]] comedy nor a family one (you can't [[leaving]] your 12 year old watch 2 guys in bed kissing, he'll never [[wanna]] to go to Spain). This should be rated "[[rs]]", because only people 35+ [[seems]] to laugh watching :S I'm truly disappointed, maybe I don't like [[gay]] (which is quite an important [[portions]] of the movie).

Foreign humor is awful in films (except Kusturica), stick with doing dramas! If you want a new comedy try Talladega Nights --------------------------------------------- Result 1010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I've [[seen]] this [[film]] because I had do (my [[job]] [[includes]] seeing [[movies]] of all [[kinds]]). I couldn't stop [[thinking]] "who gave money to make such an awful film and [[also]] [[submit]] it to Cannes Festival!" It wasn't only [[boring]], the [[actors]] were awful as well. It was one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I've ever seen. I've [[noticed]] this [[cinematography]] because I had do (my [[labour]] [[consists]] seeing [[kino]] of all [[type]]). I couldn't stop [[think]] "who gave money to make such an awful film and [[apart]] [[communicate]] it to Cannes Festival!" It wasn't only [[dull]], the [[protagonists]] were awful as well. It was one of the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1011 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (87%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I am [[surprised]] at IMDb's low rating of this movie. With all due respect, its low rating is representative of the IQ level of those who rated it so poor. They would rather see a movie with cheap thrills, a bigger budget, and more gore.

The first [[misconception]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film mislead you into believing it is one. It is a psychological thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual experience when watching a movie. Reel.com's review is the perfect example of how I feel about this movie. All the other negative reviews doesn't make much sense. It's almost as if trying to make an original movie for a change- very rare these days- is something bad and not worth it.

I will reveal some spoilers for the morons who said it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and performing experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she really was an evil Nazi who would kill without warning. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at first viewing, we sympathize with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the movie is a testament to the film's direction and writing.

I definitely feel that this movie should at least be rated in the 6's range on originality alone. I recommend this movie for the people on the other end of the IQ scale- aka smart people- since this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch Scream or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. For such a low budget film, you are amazed that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be fooled by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I actually recommend buying the film since a first viewing on a rent will not do this justice. I am [[flabbergasted]] at IMDb's low rating of this movie. With all due respect, its low rating is representative of the IQ level of those who rated it so poor. They would rather see a movie with cheap thrills, a bigger budget, and more gore.

The first [[misunderstanding]] by people is that this is a horror film. It is not, nor does the film mislead you into believing it is one. It is a psychological thriller. It is for people who actually want an intellectual experience when watching a movie. Reel.com's review is the perfect example of how I feel about this movie. All the other negative reviews doesn't make much sense. It's almost as if trying to make an original movie for a change- very rare these days- is something bad and not worth it.

I will reveal some spoilers for the morons who said it was boring and didn't make sense. Martha was brainwashing herself and performing experiments on herself to be a caring mother while she really was an evil Nazi who would kill without warning. The evidence is all in the pudding and the fact that at first viewing, we sympathize with this cold-blooded monster for the duration of the movie is a testament to the film's direction and writing.

I definitely feel that this movie should at least be rated in the 6's range on originality alone. I recommend this movie for the people on the other end of the IQ scale- aka smart people- since this movie is obviously being butchered by those who would rather watch Scream or Freddy's Nightmare.

Kudos to the acting as well. For such a low budget film, you are amazed that this movie didn't hit your local cinema with the great direction, writing, and acting. Please don't be fooled by the rating by IMDb. This movie is worth it. I actually recommend buying the film since a first viewing on a rent will not do this justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I can't stand it when people go see a movie when they know they won't like it. My [[mom]] likes violent movies, so why did she see it? She rated it just to bring down the [[rating]]. [[So]] I know that's why it didn't have a [[higher]] rating. I [[give]] it a 6/10 I can't stand it when people go see a movie when they know they won't like it. My [[mam]] likes violent movies, so why did she see it? She rated it just to bring down the [[assessment]]. [[Accordingly]] I know that's why it didn't have a [[superior]] rating. I [[confer]] it a 6/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Story starts slow and [[nothing]] funny happens for a while. All the action is in the end, but you won't have to laugh because the movie is funny, but because the story is [[pathetic]].

The funniest part is when Harvey 'I'm not Paranoia' Keitel really loses it and the judge starts a massacre. Oscars for this guy! Story starts slow and [[anything]] funny happens for a while. All the action is in the end, but you won't have to laugh because the movie is funny, but because the story is [[deplorable]].

The funniest part is when Harvey 'I'm not Paranoia' Keitel really loses it and the judge starts a massacre. Oscars for this guy! --------------------------------------------- Result 1014 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[exciting]] [[movie]] ive seen in recent years. It transcends all [[expectations]] and is [[truly]] a [[work]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and story of [[divine]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[viewers]] with its [[majesty]]. This [[movie]] is wonderously crafted through the use of [[high]] tech cgi which [[allows]] [[fans]] of the fantasy genre to [[see]] their [[visions]] [[come]] to life. The acting is [[perfect]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I [[would]] [[think]] you'd [[keep]] more to yourself.

Unlike the comments of [[many]], the plot is actually quite [[EASY]] to follow while maintaining a quick pace that [[adds]] a sense of urgency. [[Anyone]] that cannot keep [[track]] of the [[different]] [[characters]] simply [[must]] not be paying attention [[since]] or are used to such levels of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and layered with [[themes]] so epic that they will leave you gasping for air. Legend of Zu is on a level of greatness so high that perhaps many people are put off by its grandeur. Allow yourself to be completely engulfed within its fantastical vision and you will grow to [[love]] this movie. Legend of Zu is possibly the most [[excite]] [[filmmaking]] ive seen in recent years. It transcends all [[prognosis]] and is [[really]] a [[cooperating]] of art. With unmatched visual sceneries and story of [[heavenly]] proportions, Legend of Zu proceeds to blow over its [[onlookers]] with its [[empress]]. This [[flick]] is wonderously crafted through the use of [[higher]] tech cgi which [[permitting]] [[amateurs]] of the fantasy genre to [[consults]] their [[conceptions]] [[arrive]] to life. The acting is [[faultless]] for this type of movie; if you were an immortal with supernatural powers I [[ought]] [[believing]] you'd [[preserving]] more to yourself.

Unlike the comments of [[several]], the plot is actually quite [[UNCOMPLICATED]] to follow while maintaining a quick pace that [[add]] a sense of urgency. [[Whoever]] that cannot keep [[tracking]] of the [[multiple]] [[attribute]] simply [[ought]] not be paying attention [[because]] or are used to such levels of sophistication as the titanic. The plot is engaging and layered with [[item]] so epic that they will leave you gasping for air. Legend of Zu is on a level of greatness so high that perhaps many people are put off by its grandeur. Allow yourself to be completely engulfed within its fantastical vision and you will grow to [[iike]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] Shinjuku Triad Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film festivals. Why? Could your censors stomach a film where policemen anally rape male and female suspects to get them to talk (and the victims enjoy it) or see an old lady have her eye torn out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[shocks]] in store for viewers of this ultraviolent cops and gangsters [[story]]. It makes Clockwork Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

Should you see this film? YES It is [[fantastic]] and [[essential]] viewing for [[fans]] of Asian cinema. The shocking moments are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[characters]]. If you like this make sure you [[catch]] Dead or Alive which is very similar (barring the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a talent like Miike working at the same time as Takeshi Kitano. The best chance of seeing this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off try hunting for a Hong Kong version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. Shinjuku Triad Society: Chinese Mafia Wars is unlikely to get distribution in the West outside film festivals. Why? Could your censors stomach a film where policemen anally rape male and female suspects to get them to talk (and the victims enjoy it) or see an old lady have her eye torn out of her skull? These are just a few of the [[convulsions]] in store for viewers of this ultraviolent cops and gangsters [[histories]]. It makes Clockwork Orange which was banned for years in the UK look like a Disney cartoon.

Should you see this film? YES It is [[unbelievable]] and [[necessary]] viewing for [[amateurs]] of Asian cinema. The shocking moments are there to illustrate what goers on in the world of these [[attribute]]. If you like this make sure you [[capture]] Dead or Alive which is very similar (barring the insane ending in DOA of course). Great for Japan that they have a talent like Miike working at the same time as Takeshi Kitano. The best chance of seeing this film outside a Takashi Miike retrospective at a film festival is on DVD. If I haven't put you off try hunting for a Hong Kong version on the web as I'm sure it will come out in that country. --------------------------------------------- Result 1016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It's been so [[long]] [[since]] I've [[seen]] this [[movie]] (at least 15 [[years]]) and [[yet]] it still haunts me with a [[vivid]] [[image]] of the horrific [[consequences]] that [[prisoners]] of [[war]] can [[face]] despite the terms of the Geneva Convention.

A [[unit]] of Australian [[underwater]] demolitions [[experts]] are [[captured]] in an [[archipelago]] near Japan following a successful [[mission]] to set mines in a Japanese [[harbor]].

Once in [[prison]] these [[men]] [[expect]] the same [[treatment]] as any other [[POWs]] but to their dismay [[soon]] learn from a friendly Japanese [[prison]] guard that they are being tried as [[spies]] since they were out of uniform when [[captured]]. The [[consequences]] of such an infraction, by Japanese martial [[code]], is [[execution]] by beheading.

Despite their pleas, and the pleas of the [[sympathetic]] [[prison]] guard, the day of reckoning approaches like a ticking [[time]] bomb. The [[tension]] is so [[high]] you will actually hear the ticking, though it [[may]] just be your [[chest]] pounding with the [[percussion]] of a marching [[execution]] squad.

The ending is actually too painful to reenact in my [[head]] much less write it here. But I can promise you-- you'll never [[forget]] it. [[Good]] [[luck]] finding the video in the U.S. It's been so [[longer]] [[because]] I've [[saw]] this [[flick]] (at least 15 [[yrs]]) and [[even]] it still haunts me with a [[alive]] [[picture]] of the horrific [[impacts]] that [[inmate]] of [[warfare]] can [[faces]] despite the terms of the Geneva Convention.

A [[units]] of Australian [[submarine]] demolitions [[specialists]] are [[catching]] in an [[islands]] near Japan following a successful [[missions]] to set mines in a Japanese [[ports]].

Once in [[jail]] these [[male]] [[expects]] the same [[processing]] as any other [[captives]] but to their dismay [[promptly]] learn from a friendly Japanese [[internment]] guard that they are being tried as [[espionage]] since they were out of uniform when [[catching]]. The [[results]] of such an infraction, by Japanese martial [[encryption]], is [[implementing]] by beheading.

Despite their pleas, and the pleas of the [[likeable]] [[incarceration]] guard, the day of reckoning approaches like a ticking [[period]] bomb. The [[voltage]] is so [[higher]] you will actually hear the ticking, though it [[maggio]] just be your [[torso]] pounding with the [[percussive]] of a marching [[implementation]] squad.

The ending is actually too painful to reenact in my [[jefe]] much less write it here. But I can promise you-- you'll never [[overlook]] it. [[Alright]] [[likelihood]] finding the video in the U.S. --------------------------------------------- Result 1017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was [[saved]] before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was [[forced]] to watch it in a youth [[group]] at my church. This movie was [[highly]] [[disturbing]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. I was raised in a "very Christian" household since birth. I was [[rescuing]] before I saw this movie and the rest of the series and was [[compelled]] to watch it in a youth [[groupings]] at my church. This movie was [[vitally]] [[troubling]]. I saw it when I was about 12 years old and literally had nightmares about it for years. I used to lay awake in bed and listen for the sounds of my mom's footsteps upstairs. If I didn't hear her footsteps, I would sneak upstairs to make sure she hadn't been raptured. I used to pray so hard every night for salvation because I was terrified of Jesus forgetting me. This is definitely not something I will show to my kids until they are much older, if at all. It took me years to shake the fear that this movie gave me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Amicus made close to a good half dozen of these horror anthologies in the 70's, and this, from leading [[horror]] scribe Robert Bloch, is one of their [[best]] efforts. There are four stories, all worthwhile, but two -- "Sweets For The Sweet" and "Method For Murder" -- distinguish themselves as [[highly]] [[effective]] [[journeys]] into fear.

In "Sweets", Christopher Lee plays an impatient widower whose lovely daughter (Chloe Franks) becomes resentful of his neglect and brutish intolerance, so she sculpts a voodoo doll with which she expresses her distaste for his methods. Franks is a beautiful figure of mischievous evil and delivers one of the greatest child performances in a horror film since Martin Stephens in "The Innocents". This installment is directed with great subtlety and the final outrage, occurring off-screen, is a moment of purest horror.

"Method of Murder" is about a horror novelist (Denholm Elliott) who is menaced by one of his own creations, the creepy Dominic. This episode is striking for its simplicity and stark terror. Dominic may or may not be real, so director Peter Duffell has a great time playing with our expectations. The brief shots of Dominic reflected in a pond or seen as a fleeting phantasm in a meadow are truly haunting.

The original poster art, featuring a skeletal figure clasping a tray holding Peter Cushing's severed head, was a rich enticement for punters fixed on fear. Amicus made close to a good half dozen of these horror anthologies in the 70's, and this, from leading [[terror]] scribe Robert Bloch, is one of their [[optimum]] efforts. There are four stories, all worthwhile, but two -- "Sweets For The Sweet" and "Method For Murder" -- distinguish themselves as [[unimaginably]] [[efficacious]] [[itinerary]] into fear.

In "Sweets", Christopher Lee plays an impatient widower whose lovely daughter (Chloe Franks) becomes resentful of his neglect and brutish intolerance, so she sculpts a voodoo doll with which she expresses her distaste for his methods. Franks is a beautiful figure of mischievous evil and delivers one of the greatest child performances in a horror film since Martin Stephens in "The Innocents". This installment is directed with great subtlety and the final outrage, occurring off-screen, is a moment of purest horror.

"Method of Murder" is about a horror novelist (Denholm Elliott) who is menaced by one of his own creations, the creepy Dominic. This episode is striking for its simplicity and stark terror. Dominic may or may not be real, so director Peter Duffell has a great time playing with our expectations. The brief shots of Dominic reflected in a pond or seen as a fleeting phantasm in a meadow are truly haunting.

The original poster art, featuring a skeletal figure clasping a tray holding Peter Cushing's severed head, was a rich enticement for punters fixed on fear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] OK, I know that a lot of people will probably resent this [[review]] as Watership [[Down]] is a "[[classic]]" and a standard part of most people's [[childhood]], but seeing this film for the [[first]] [[time]] at the tender age of 18, I [[must]] admit: I [[really]] [[hated]] it.

We [[watched]] this [[film]] because my sister had read the [[book]] and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an [[exception]]. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly [[dull]]. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic story about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the characters were uninspiring, annoying, dull and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. OK, I know that a lot of people will probably resent this [[exam]] as Watership [[Downwards]] is a "[[typical]]" and a standard part of most people's [[infantile]], but seeing this film for the [[firstly]] [[times]] at the tender age of 18, I [[owes]] admit: I [[genuinely]] [[resent]] it.

We [[seen]] this [[movies]] because my sister had read the [[workbook]] and really enjoyed it, and many people who whimpered at the very words "Watership Down"- their memories of seeing the film as children and having their emotions torn at the seams- recommended it. To be honest, I wish I hadn't bothered. I gave it the benefit of the doubt; generally I don't like to stop watching a film half way through. This was an [[exceptions]]. It was really, really, excruciatingly, sickeningly [[boring]]. This film was possibly the slowest thing I've ever watched (imagine a doped-up snail in space), and really didn't "do it" for me. The art was alright; the backgrounds were nicely made if not a little bland and twee, yet the rabbits themselves were not very endearing and the animation was quite jumpy and poorly produced.

I'm not going to go into huge details about the storyline; basically it is the tale of a group of rabbits who leave their warren due to the infiltration of humans in the area. Generally a moralistic story about the perils of human interactions on the environment, it uses anthropomorphic rabbits to put the message across. For me, I kind of wished that they would get gassed, not because I'm a horrible sadistic person, but because the characters were uninspiring, annoying, dull and generally quite rude (oh I'm so terribly English). I found that I was constantly looking at the clock whilst watching the film, and it took a whole 20 minutes or so before anything actually happened, and even that was a terrible anticlimax.

If I were to praise it in any way, I'd have to admit that the concept of showing children the perils of building on the countryside and hopefully unveiling the arrogance of humans etc etc is quite well-meaning. Maybe it is all in general sanctimonious and preachy, but the message it's trying to put forth is good in its nature. The musical score was not bad, too.

So, to conclude, this film is pretty poor. I couldn't watch it the whole way through, or I'd probably be forced to eat my own legs in sheer boredom. Granted, it isn't "Torque" bad, but it still doesn't rate highly in my eyes, so I've given it a 2/10.

Hope this helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining dialogue? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought [[kids]] such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders shines "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my delight, the rest of the episodes were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the characters. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but still fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen angst and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most entertaining engineer since Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some depth that most child characters don't have, and of course in the middle of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's trouble, Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: James Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here either. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! If you are viewing this show for the first time, you may start wondering if you are in an alternate reality. Colorful and imaginative characters? Entertaining dialogue? Plots that seem to have some depth to them, even creating atmospheres of suspense and drama at times? I mean, this is a syndicated children's show right? This is the same venue that has brought [[infantile]] such drek as "Pokemon", "Pepper Ann", "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", and "VR Troopers" (please note that three of the titles mentioned above are crass Japanese exports, courtesy of the Fox Network and Saban Entertainment). Don't worry, you are just sampling some of the quality fare that was available to kids during the late 1980's and early 1990's. Some examples of this period would be "Transformers", "Garfield and Friends", "Captain Power", and "C.O.P.S." (a cartoon NOT to be confused with the live action show on Fox). Besides these prime examples, Disney also returned to syndicated programs for kids, coming up with a lineup called "The Disney Afternoon". Aside from a dumbed-down show called "The Gummi Bears", early shows like "Darkwing Duck", "Duck Tales", and "Chip 'N Dale's Rescue Rangers" gave credence to the Disney animation teams that were also turning out theatrical classics like "The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "The Rescuers Down Under", and "The Great Mouse Detective". But above all these wonders shines "TaleSpin". The premiere of "Plunder and Lightning" was a two-hour thrill ride, and won an Emmy. Much to my delight, the rest of the episodes were up to par on the promise of the premiere.

While I enjoy the plots and dialogue, I guess for me the greatest attraction are the characters. There's Rebecca Cunningham, an independent female, but still fallible; Kit Cloudkicker, full of pre-teen angst and optimism; Louie, with his loyalty and support; Frank Wildcat, the most entertaining engineer since Scotty on the original "Star Trek"; Molly Cunningham, cute and witty, but with some depth that most child characters don't have, and of course in the middle of it all, there's Baloo, whom I would describe as a slobby version of James Bond. This is because whenever there's trouble, Baloo saves the day with the assistance of his sleeker-than-most, fastest-of-all Sea Duck (Read: James Bond's Aston Martin). Of course every great show has to have great villains, and TaleSpin doesn't disappoint here either. From the megalomania of businesstiger Shere Kahn, to the vain and always failing air pirate Don Karnage, to the hilarious and inept Soviet-satirized Thembrians. The animation is good, the music appropriate, and the episodes are (for me) the finest that children's programming has ever had to offer. Great fun for the WHOLE family! --------------------------------------------- Result 1021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is [[definitely]] an appropriate [[update]] for the [[original]], except that "party on the left is now party on the right." [[Like]] the original, this movie [[rails]] against a federal government which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how tenuous our political liberties are in an [[era]] of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal [[government]]. Kowalski serves as a [[metaphor]] for Waco and Ruby Ridge, where the US government, with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw around words like "white supremacist" and "right wing extremists as well as trumped-up drug charges to abridge the most fundamental of its' citizens rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film could be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and countless others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he brilliantly portrays "the voice," and that sums up the dangerous (to some) message of this film.

This is [[conclusively]] an appropriate [[modernize]] for the [[upfront]], except that "party on the left is now party on the right." [[Iike]] the original, this movie [[trails]] against a federal government which oversteps its bounds with regards to personal liberty. It is a warning of how tenuous our political liberties are in an [[epoch]] of an over-zealous, and over-powerful federal [[govt]]. Kowalski serves as a [[analogy]] for Waco and Ruby Ridge, where the US government, with the cooperation of the mainstream media, threw around words like "white supremacist" and "right wing extremists as well as trumped-up drug charges to abridge the most fundamental of its' citizens rights, with the willing acquiescence of the general populace. That message is so non-PC, I am stunned that this film could be made - at least not without bringing the Federal government via the IRS down on the makers like they did to Juanita Broderick, Katherine Prudhomme, the Western Journalism Center, and countless others who dared to speak out. "Live Free or Die" is the motto on Jason Priestly's hat as he brilliantly portrays "the voice," and that sums up the dangerous (to some) message of this film.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I Am Curious is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of Lena and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of [[Lena]] and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[bizarre]] [[mixture]] of political/war rallies, Dr. King, serious political [[interviews]], flopping breasts, and pubic [[hair]]. The film [[feels]] more like a [[fictional]] documentary than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be bored dry watching this film. Unlike many other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overdone]] for what it is. If you want to see real porn, I'm sure there are better choices. The pervasive nudity is a major distraction from whatever plot there is. I think the cast did a fine job however. They played their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to seeing in the American films during this time. I Am Curious is really two films in one - half of it is the sexual experimental side of Lena and the other half is her curiosity with political/socialism. Whatever the director's intention, the two don't really mesh together. The director should have just stuck with the romantic side of [[Lina]] and made a separate movie for the politics. There is a [[surreal]] [[blend]] of political/war rallies, Dr. King, serious political [[conversations]], flopping breasts, and pubic [[headdress]]. The film [[thinks]] more like a [[notional]] documentary than a movie. Other than the interesting sex scenes, you'll be bored dry watching this film. Unlike many other reviewers, I think the nude/sexual scenes are [[overkill]] for what it is. If you want to see real porn, I'm sure there are better choices. The pervasive nudity is a major distraction from whatever plot there is. I think the cast did a fine job however. They played their parts believably. There is little of the over-the-topness I'm so used to seeing in the American films during this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] In Budapest, Margaret Sullavan (as Klara [[Novak]]) gets a job as clerk in a gift shop; there, she bickers with co-worker James Stewart (as Alfred Kralik). The two don't get along on the job because each has fallen in love with a unseen pen pal. Watching Ernst Lubitsch direct these stars through the inevitable is predictably [[satisfying]].

Even better is a sub-plot involving shop owner Frank Morgan (as Hugo Matuschek), who suspects his wife is having an affair. Hiring a private detective, Mr. Morgan confirms his wife of 22 years is having sex with one of his younger employees. Morgan, painfully realizing, "She just didn't want to grow old with me," and the supporting characters are what keeps this film from getting old.

********* The Shop Around the Corner (1/12/40) Ernst Lubitsch ~ James Stewart, Margaret Sullavan, Frank Morgan, Joseph Schildkraut In Budapest, Margaret Sullavan (as Klara [[Nowak]]) gets a job as clerk in a gift shop; there, she bickers with co-worker James Stewart (as Alfred Kralik). The two don't get along on the job because each has fallen in love with a unseen pen pal. Watching Ernst Lubitsch direct these stars through the inevitable is predictably [[gratifying]].

Even better is a sub-plot involving shop owner Frank Morgan (as Hugo Matuschek), who suspects his wife is having an affair. Hiring a private detective, Mr. Morgan confirms his wife of 22 years is having sex with one of his younger employees. Morgan, painfully realizing, "She just didn't want to grow old with me," and the supporting characters are what keeps this film from getting old.

********* The Shop Around the Corner (1/12/40) Ernst Lubitsch ~ James Stewart, Margaret Sullavan, Frank Morgan, Joseph Schildkraut --------------------------------------------- Result 1024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but actually I don't understand the reason of all the fuss.

I [[liked]] many points of the movie, some of the [[quotes]] really cheered me up, but the stereotyped characters are present again, like in every Hungarian film, and the story is also pretty [[dull]]. I [[liked]] the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[film]] just BORING.

Rudolf Péter is good as always, Reviczky is brilliant also, but the others are just there... doing nothing.

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? As I am from Hungary I have heard many people saying better and better things about Üvegtigris so far, but actually I don't understand the reason of all the fuss.

I [[loved]] many points of the movie, some of the [[citations]] really cheered me up, but the stereotyped characters are present again, like in every Hungarian film, and the story is also pretty [[dreary]]. I [[loved]] the first half, but then I started to get bored, and then I found the whole [[cinematographic]] just BORING.

Rudolf Péter is good as always, Reviczky is brilliant also, but the others are just there... doing nothing.

How many years still have to pass for a GOOD Hungarian film??? --------------------------------------------- Result 1025 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The [[Treasure]] [[Island]] [[DVD]] should be [[required]] [[viewing]] in any film production [[course]]! It's a [[textbook]] [[example]] of how [[NOT]] to [[make]] a [[movie]]. Watching the movie and then listening to the writer/director's commentary demonstrates graphically the vast chasm between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his audience about them. Call me old-fashioned, but I think of movies as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the hell the director is talking about. The director's avowed purpose is to make a movie void of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, alas, is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing premise, rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. Someone with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling could create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. The [[Treasured]] [[Lsland]] [[DVDS]] should be [[need]] [[visualizing]] in any film production [[cours]]! It's a [[manuel]] [[examples]] of how [[NAH]] to [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]]. Watching the movie and then listening to the writer/director's commentary demonstrates graphically the vast chasm between what he knows about the characters and what he communicates to his audience about them. Call me old-fashioned, but I think of movies as a means of communication, and communication isn't complete if the audience doesn't know what the hell the director is talking about. The director's avowed purpose is to make a movie void of "Hollywood conventions". Among those conventions, alas, is consistency of character and clarity of concept. The director himself realizes that audiences often don't understand points where he has purposely avoided a "Hollywood cliché". However, he never seems to grasp the idea that clichés exist for a reason. They are shorthand for conveying complex ideas quickly and clearly. It's fine to avoid them, but they need to be replaced with some other way of communicating the same idea, not simply eliminated. The film is built on an intriguing premise, rich with potential. Two puppets are assigned to fabricate a personality and background for an unidentified corpse that is to be used in a disinformation mission in the closing days of WWII. Soon each begins to populate their personal fantasies with the character and their invention becomes increasingly real to them. Someone with less disdain for the "Hollywood convention" of traditional storytelling could create a wonderful film with this idea. This film certainly isn't it! The puppets do everything they can to bring consistency to these characters, but they are all too often defeated by the dazed and confused script. In particular, I'm becoming increasingly impressed by Gonzo, who plays the lively corpse. In a number of muppet films, he always stands out as a very charismatic puppet. --------------------------------------------- Result 1026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Greetings from this [[Portuguese]] guy :)

I [[believe]] The Sopranos are one of the best production ever, it has reality and fiction mixed in such a [[way]], that it's hard to see the [[difference]]. It has the same quality as GodFather! James Gandolfini fits at the paper as a glove! I [[would]] love The Sopranos [[would]] never [[finish]] at all. It's [[perfect]]! It should be a [[subject]] in school :) I [[saw]] Sopranos when I was a kid, but I was too young to stay waked until the episode ends, so now I [[bought]] the all Episodes in [[DVD]] [[format]] and I am watching all episodes at [[home]] before and after [[dinner]] and I am [[getting]] addicted, like I did with [[Prison]] [[Break]]. [[In]] my opinion [[Prison]] [[Break]] and The Sopranos are the best-ever series made for television. The argument of both are [[splendid]] and the actors are [[perfect]]. [[Congratulations]] for such a [[work]].

Sorry about my English. [[Thanks]] for reading. Greetings from this [[Portugese]] guy :)

I [[reckon]] The Sopranos are one of the best production ever, it has reality and fiction mixed in such a [[camino]], that it's hard to see the [[discrepancy]]. It has the same quality as GodFather! James Gandolfini fits at the paper as a glove! I [[ought]] love The Sopranos [[could]] never [[complete]] at all. It's [[faultless]]! It should be a [[topic]] in school :) I [[witnessed]] Sopranos when I was a kid, but I was too young to stay waked until the episode ends, so now I [[buys]] the all Episodes in [[DVDS]] [[layout]] and I am watching all episodes at [[household]] before and after [[lunch]] and I am [[obtaining]] addicted, like I did with [[Incarcerated]] [[Rupture]]. [[For]] my opinion [[Imprisons]] [[Interruption]] and The Sopranos are the best-ever series made for television. The argument of both are [[super]] and the actors are [[irreproachable]]. [[Felicitations]] for such a [[jobs]].

Sorry about my English. [[Thanking]] for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 1027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Yet another example of what British cinema can achieve: a [[simple]] [[story]], told and acted well. Brenda Blethyn gives a [[layered]] and warming performance as the recently widowed and financially straitened Grace, [[ably]] assisted by a solid supporting [[cast]]. The "quirky small town" card [[gets]] played to the hilt, similar to [[many]] TV series and films that have come from the British Isles in recent years (Ballykissangel, Hamish Macbeth and others come to mind). [[Like]] the forementioned, this [[film]] makes use of some ravishingly [[beautiful]] [[rural]] scenery, in this case the wet and wild Cornish coast.

Some viewers might find wholesale acceptance of cannabis use a bit challenging, others might find the ending just a little too cute and safe. But it's an [[enjoyable]] spliff, to be sure. Yet another example of what British cinema can achieve: a [[mere]] [[saga]], told and acted well. Brenda Blethyn gives a [[laminated]] and warming performance as the recently widowed and financially straitened Grace, [[skilfully]] assisted by a solid supporting [[casting]]. The "quirky small town" card [[got]] played to the hilt, similar to [[various]] TV series and films that have come from the British Isles in recent years (Ballykissangel, Hamish Macbeth and others come to mind). [[Iike]] the forementioned, this [[filmmaking]] makes use of some ravishingly [[ravishing]] [[agricultural]] scenery, in this case the wet and wild Cornish coast.

Some viewers might find wholesale acceptance of cannabis use a bit challenging, others might find the ending just a little too cute and safe. But it's an [[congenial]] spliff, to be sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I saw this film first in the Soviet Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[incredibly]] unwise - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and find themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and fundamentally severe ladies. The men now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of extremely silly clichés follow - sex-drive, constant masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots certainly they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here wooden and strangely bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and repeats on saying phrases like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't done anything to her!". This was intended to be a comedy, instead, it turned out to be a vapid farce, full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your time on it - this is just [[bad]]. I saw this film first in the Soviet Union and many erotic scenes were simply edited out by the censorship committee. But then, in Poland in 2000, I watched it in a complete form. And so what? The plot is [[stunningly]] unwise - 2 men survive the genetic catastrophe and find themselves on the planet full of feminist strong, straight and fundamentally severe ladies. The men now try to fight it and then the whole bunch of extremely silly clichés follow - sex-drive, constant masculine desire for sex, feminists who are shown like complete idiots (you may agree with them or not, but idiots certainly they are not), and so on. The performance even of the stellar Jerzy Stuhr is here wooden and strangely bad - he just pulls unfunny faces and repeats on saying phrases like "I am in the elevator with a nude chick and I haven't done anything to her!". This was intended to be a comedy, instead, it turned out to be a vapid farce, full of predictable jokes and below-the-waist innuendos. Do not waste your time on it - this is just [[naughty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Incredibly]] intriguing and captivating, I found it [[impossible]] to [[turn]] away once I [[began]] to watch. I am [[usually]] one of the [[harshest]] [[critics]] but to me this film was just [[brilliant]], strange as this may sound I could almost smell the air and feel the textures of the locations.

From a cinematographic I thought there was great use of light and texture. From the orange glow of the summer light, down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a distinct air of realism to me.

From a character perspective I thought the notion of Victor Vargas as almost the glue that connects the story was quite inspired, each of the other members of the family having a more complete background simply caused greater intrigue in the main character himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the grandmother and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly realistic. The awkwardness, the accent, the cooking and even down to the comments made felt so authentic to me.

I think this film worked for me because I began to watch it with no expectations and found it completely immersing and brought back memories of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. [[Inordinately]] intriguing and captivating, I found it [[unable]] to [[converting]] away once I [[launches]] to watch. I am [[routinely]] one of the [[trickiest]] [[detractors]] but to me this film was just [[glamorous]], strange as this may sound I could almost smell the air and feel the textures of the locations.

From a cinematographic I thought there was great use of light and texture. From the orange glow of the summer light, down to the plastic wrapped couch all had a distinct air of realism to me.

From a character perspective I thought the notion of Victor Vargas as almost the glue that connects the story was quite inspired, each of the other members of the family having a more complete background simply caused greater intrigue in the main character himself.

Beyond that, having known someone just like the grandmother and having been on the receiving end of just such a situation, I can say the situation felt particularly realistic. The awkwardness, the accent, the cooking and even down to the comments made felt so authentic to me.

I think this film worked for me because I began to watch it with no expectations and found it completely immersing and brought back memories of teenage emotion, well worth a watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] *** Spoilers*

My dad had [[taped]] this movie for me when I was 3. By age 5, I had [[watched]] it over 400 [[times]]. I just [[watched]] it and watched it. And I [[still]] do today! It has a [[grim]] storyline, a lamb's mother is [[killed]] by a wolf--a very emotional scene--and wants to become a wolf, like him. After years of training, the [[lamb]] is [[made]] into a really REALLY evil looking [[thing]]. He and the wolf travel to his old barn, but he cannot kill the lambs, no matter how much he wishes to. He ends up killing the wolf, but is no longer seen as a lamb by his former friends, and can't return to his previous way of life.

The art is beautiful, the songs are..well, okay, and the voice acting is better than some things today.

All in all, you just *have* to see this movie, it is a great masterpiece. Although, it's very hard to find today.

*** Spoilers*

My dad had [[strapped]] this movie for me when I was 3. By age 5, I had [[observed]] it over 400 [[period]]. I just [[seen]] it and watched it. And I [[again]] do today! It has a [[dismal]] storyline, a lamb's mother is [[die]] by a wolf--a very emotional scene--and wants to become a wolf, like him. After years of training, the [[mutton]] is [[accomplished]] into a really REALLY evil looking [[stuff]]. He and the wolf travel to his old barn, but he cannot kill the lambs, no matter how much he wishes to. He ends up killing the wolf, but is no longer seen as a lamb by his former friends, and can't return to his previous way of life.

The art is beautiful, the songs are..well, okay, and the voice acting is better than some things today.

All in all, you just *have* to see this movie, it is a great masterpiece. Although, it's very hard to find today.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is a very sad movie. Really. [[Nothing]] happens in this movie. The [[Script]] is bad!!! I guess they've just copy-paste the first 15 pages to 90 pages. The Producers must have thought let's create a Hollywood movie here in Belgium. They didn't succeed. Now in the third week it is only running in Antwerp and Brussels at 22h45 or something. In the past we have had really good movies in Belgium, like Daens. [[Shades]] is a [[waste]] of your time. Maybe you could sneak in the theater after you've seen a real movie. If you've seen 10 minutes of Shades, you've seen it all. It was advertised to death on local radio and TV. I hope it will disappear in the Shades soon. This is a very sad movie. Really. [[Anything]] happens in this movie. The [[Hyphen]] is bad!!! I guess they've just copy-paste the first 15 pages to 90 pages. The Producers must have thought let's create a Hollywood movie here in Belgium. They didn't succeed. Now in the third week it is only running in Antwerp and Brussels at 22h45 or something. In the past we have had really good movies in Belgium, like Daens. [[Hues]] is a [[squander]] of your time. Maybe you could sneak in the theater after you've seen a real movie. If you've seen 10 minutes of Shades, you've seen it all. It was advertised to death on local radio and TV. I hope it will disappear in the Shades soon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] "The Matador" [[stars]] [[Pierce]] Brosnan as a burned out [[assassin]]. He's [[James]] [[Bond]] gone to seed, in too-tight, garish clothes, gold chains, and an ugly haircut. Our [[struggling]] [[assassin]], Julian Noble, is in Mexico, trying to [[regain]] his nerve. [[Staying]] at the same hotel is a [[likable]], down-on-his luck businessman Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear), also trying to regain his [[equilibrium]]. Danny is [[desperate]] to [[close]] a [[deal]] and return to his wife in Denver (Hope Davis) with [[good]] news.

Noble and Wright [[unexpectedly]] become friends. Wright convinces Noble to reveal certain techniques, which he demonstrates at a bullfight. Noble is eventually [[targeted]] by his employers and shows up in Denver.

Writer and director Richard Shepard did the Q&A after this [[delightful]] [[movie]] at the [[Austin]] Film [[Festival]]. Shepard was also down on his luck. After suffering the loss of his agent and rejection of recent scripts, he [[decided]] to write a story no one would buy and create a [[character]] no one would want to play. Then Pierce Brosnan [[called]]. Brosnan [[regains]] his equilibrium in this [[movie]]. (There is [[life]] after [[Bond]]!) He has a [[wonderful]] flair for self-deprecating comedy. Don't [[miss]] it.

Stay for the [[closing]] credits to read what the filmmakers [[say]] about bullfighting. I look forward to more of [[Richard]] Shepard's projects. "The Matador" [[celebrity]] [[Pearce]] Brosnan as a burned out [[callin]]. He's [[Jacobo]] [[Bonds]] gone to seed, in too-tight, garish clothes, gold chains, and an ugly haircut. Our [[wrestling]] [[slayer]], Julian Noble, is in Mexico, trying to [[retrieve]] his nerve. [[Residing]] at the same hotel is a [[likeable]], down-on-his luck businessman Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear), also trying to regain his [[balance]]. Danny is [[hopeless]] to [[shuts]] a [[treat]] and return to his wife in Denver (Hope Davis) with [[alright]] news.

Noble and Wright [[abruptly]] become friends. Wright convinces Noble to reveal certain techniques, which he demonstrates at a bullfight. Noble is eventually [[aimed]] by his employers and shows up in Denver.

Writer and director Richard Shepard did the Q&A after this [[ravishing]] [[cinematographic]] at the [[Austen]] Film [[Fest]]. Shepard was also down on his luck. After suffering the loss of his agent and rejection of recent scripts, he [[opted]] to write a story no one would buy and create a [[characters]] no one would want to play. Then Pierce Brosnan [[termed]]. Brosnan [[recovering]] his equilibrium in this [[cinematographic]]. (There is [[vida]] after [[Bonds]]!) He has a [[sumptuous]] flair for self-deprecating comedy. Don't [[mademoiselle]] it.

Stay for the [[nears]] credits to read what the filmmakers [[says]] about bullfighting. I look forward to more of [[Richie]] Shepard's projects. --------------------------------------------- Result 1033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] WARNING: [[REVIEW]] CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five films in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. [[However]], just two years on and I find I can't remember enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[recall]], some of the sequels – Dream Warriors in particular – weren't as [[bad]] as is often made out, though even the original was no classic. Generally, the predictability of the premise (if people fall asleep they get murdered in their dreams) doesn't lend itself to narrative tension. But while I cannot recall much of the first five films, I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's Dead.

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be judged by the fact that the film was promoted solely on the character's demise. The fact that the movie's conclusion is not even hidden, but in fact the entire purpose for the film's being goes to illustrate how vacant, soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's [[mockery]] of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[tripe]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is [[garbage]] – but you're paying to see it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[insensitive]] [[depiction]] of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so [[rudimentary]]? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

WARNING: [[REVISITED]] CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS

A couple of years back I managed to see the first five films in this franchise, and was planning to do an overview of the whole Elm St. series. [[Still]], just two years on and I find I can't remember enough about them in order to do it – I guess they couldn't have made much of an impression. From what I do [[reminding]], some of the sequels – Dream Warriors in particular – weren't as [[amiss]] as is often made out, though even the original was no classic. Generally, the predictability of the premise (if people fall asleep they get murdered in their dreams) doesn't lend itself to narrative tension. But while I cannot recall much of the first five films, I do know they never plumbed the depths of Freddy's Dead.

An indication of how sick of Freddy the public was at this point can be judged by the fact that the film was promoted solely on the character's demise. The fact that the movie's conclusion is not even hidden, but in fact the entire purpose for the film's being goes to illustrate how vacant, soulless and cynical this venture was.

Taking the morally questionable idea of having a child molester as the charismatic villain, Robert Englund's in-no-way-scary interpretation booms with laughter. I always thought Freddy's [[farce]] of the teenage victims was less aimed at the characters than at the teenage audience that could ever watch this [[gut]]. It's like Englund's crying out "we know this is [[detritus]] – but you're paying to see it, so who's the one laughing?" And I'm sure victims of child abuse would be disheartened to see such an [[oblivious]] [[portrait]] of their plight. Was Freddy's appearance in the films always so [[elemental]]? All he gets to do here is a few "haaaaaaaaaaaaaarr – har – har – hars" and that's it. If this was the only Elm St. film you'd ever seen you wouldn't get to know the character at all. Even as the character pre-death in a flashback Englund plays him as a boo-hiss pantomime villain with a slop of Transatlantic (ie. overstated, misplaced and not at all funny) irony.

Acting is almost universally poor. Just look at how many times Breckin Meyer overacts with his hand gestures and body language. Only Kananga himself, Yaphet Kotto, keeps his dignity. And when Roseanne, Tom Arnold and Alice Cooper show up, you can almost visibly see the film sinking further into the mire. The script, too, is absolutely lousy, almost wholly without merit. Carlos (Ricky Dean Logan) opens a road map, upon which the Noel Coward-like Freddy has wittily written "you're f**ked". When prompted for the map, Carlos responds "well the map says we're f**ked". Who wrote the screenplay, Oscar Wilde?

Or how about the scene where Carlos is tortured by Freddy, his hearing enhanced to painful levels? So Freddy torments him by threatening to drop a pin – a potentially fatal sound, given that all sounds are magnified. Oddly, the fact that Carlos shouts at the top of his voice for him not to drop it seems to have no effect. "Nice hearing from you, Carlos", quips Freddy, hoping some better lines will come along. It's also worth noting that dream sleep doesn't occur instaneously, so being knocked unconscious wouldn't allow instant access into Freddy's world. Though as part of the narrative contains a human computer game and a 3-D finale plot logic isn't that high on the list of requirements.

The teenagers heading the cast this time are really the most obnoxious, dislikeable group in the whole series. Tracy (Lezlie Deane) is the only one who gets to greet Freddy with "shut the f**k up, man" and a kick in the scallops. And was incongruous pop music always part of the ingredients? Freddy's Dead. No laughs. No scares. No interest. No fun.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Bizarre take on the Cinderella tale. Terribly poor [[script]], but Kathleen Turner turns in a pretty decent [[evil]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The period costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. Fast forward until you see something interesting and save yourself the full 90 minutes of drivel.

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". Bizarre take on the Cinderella tale. Terribly poor [[hyphen]], but Kathleen Turner turns in a pretty decent [[wickedness]] step-mother performance.

Visually stunning in some parts, but that's about it. The period costumes range from the Elizabethan era to the 1990s. Fast forward until you see something interesting and save yourself the full 90 minutes of drivel.

If you're really in the mood for a Cinderella story - I suggest "Ever After: A Cinderella Story" or "The Glass Slipper". --------------------------------------------- Result 1035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I'd have to say that this was a little [[embarrassing]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; made in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a starring role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of muddled, with missed [[opportunities]] for what [[could]] have been an entertaining hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for example, which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel gimmick that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? I'd have to say that this was a little [[distracting]] for the 'King of the Cowboys'; made in 1948, the picture came out a decade after Roy Rogers' earliest pictures in which he had a starring role. Roy's character comes off as a bit clueless in this one, along with his female co-star Jane Frazee, who alternates her allegiance between Roy and Robert Livingston, portraying chief bad guy Bill Regan. The whole story seems kind of muddled, with missed [[possibility]] for what [[wo]] have been an entertaining hour or so. Like the legend of the 'Hangman's Hotel' for example, which says the hanged man comes to life at midnight. With Andy Devine in the cast as Cookie Bullfincher, you would think the story would get a little mileage out of that set up. Instead, you have some convoluted proceedings that would have been better served if this had been a Bowery Boys flick. It was a sad attempt at a haunted hotel gimmick that relied on poor old Genevieve, who truth be told, wound up getting more screen time than Trigger, who's contract as 'Smartest Horse in the Movies' didn't have anything to say about getting upstaged by a mule. And then you have Foy Willing and his Riders of the Purple Sage replacing Bob Nolan and the Sons of the Pioneers for your musical interlude. I don't know about you, but it was already half way into the picture and I was still looking for Pat Brady - oh well!

Yet there was still an interesting element to be found here if you were looking hard enough, and that turned out to be Roy's athletic dismount of Trigger while still on the run from the bad guys. OK, it was probably a stunt double, but I haven't seen that one before in a couple hundred Westerns.

Jane Frazee does the honors as the female lead in this picture, as she would in four other films opposite Roy in the 1947/1948 time frame. In "Under California Stars", she appeared as Andy Devine's cousin, appropriately named Caroline Bullfincher. You're never quite convinced what side she'll come in on in this story though, since she starts out pretending to be someone she's not, and winds up on the good guy side almost by accident.

Fans of the old Laurel and Hardy films might be as surprised as I was to see James Finlayson here as the Sheriff of Sintown. I would have liked a little more comedy relief written into his role, but he played it pretty straight after all. I had to wonder, when it was all over, why he and old Vanderpool (Charle Coleman) wound up in the mine shaft with Cookie when there was no reason for that to be. Just a way to close it out I guess, with about as much thought as went into the rest of the picture. I hate to be that harsh, but if you've seen enough Roy Rogers flicks, you've got to know that this was not one of his finer efforts.

Say, Sintown - I wonder if that's the same place that grew up to be Sin City? --------------------------------------------- Result 1036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[surprised]] at just how much I [[enjoyed]] this most thoughtfully delivered drama, which owing to its [[rather]] unimpressive 6.6 [[rating]], I [[nearly]] missed; as I rarely [[give]] the [[time]] of day to any [[movie]] rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so [[glad]] I [[gave]] Stone Angel the [[viewing]] it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[increasingly]] [[rare]] sensitive, soulful and thoughtful [[sorts]] of person [[left]] on this earth in [[living]] [[form]].

I [[must]] [[say]] that in many [[ways]] ([[though]] not all), viz. its themes, [[execution]], style, [[production]] etc., Stone Angel very [[much]] [[reminded]] me of the [[much]] [[praised]] "The [[Notebook]]". I am so [[surprised]] that other [[commentators]] didn't [[pick]] up on the [[many]] similarities which [[repeatedly]] [[struck]] me [[throughout]] this [[movie]], so I can only [[assume]] that those who've [[written]] [[comments]] have [[yet]] to [[see]] the [[Notebook]]. They may not share any Alzheimer's [[theme]], [[yet]] I can confidently [[say]] that if you very [[much]] [[enjoyed]] "The [[Notebook]]" you will [[certainly]] find much to engage your [[time]] most fruitfully with "The Stone [[Angel]]". But even If you've not [[seen]] The Notebook, nor read the [[book]] on which this move is [[based]], (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should [[definitely]] find much to hold your attention [[firmly]] - as long as your [[favourite]] [[genres]] don't [[include]] fast paced [[action]] thrillers. This is a [[movie]] for [[thinkers]] and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life [[changes]] as the [[years]] pass, and what might have happened in one's [[life]] as one [[gazes]] back through the [[years]].

This bizarrely underrated [[yet]] [[great]] [[movie]] really [[deserves]] a [[rating]] of approximately 8/10. I can only blame its [[current]] lowish [[rating]] of 6.6/10 on the 11% of idiots who [[gave]] it 1/10. [[After]] all it has [[attracted]] [[less]] than 300 [[votes]] at the time of my writing this [[comment]]. [[Nonetheless]], if those 11% who [[gave]] it the [[lowest]] [[ranking]] possible were really [[expecting]] [[car]] [[chases]] and [[explosions]] why didn't they look... for even a few [[seconds]] at the movie's [[premise]] and promotional lines? [[Oh]] dear... Whatever the [[world]] is [[coming]] to, don't [[miss]] this most [[underrated]] gem of a [[movie]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[ten]] doesn't include Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). I was [[horrified]] at just how much I [[appreciated]] this most thoughtfully delivered drama, which owing to its [[quite]] unimpressive 6.6 [[scoring]], I [[about]] missed; as I rarely [[lend]] the [[moment]] of day to any [[cinematography]] rated below 7/10. Having said that, I'm so [[happier]] I [[handed]] Stone Angel the [[visualizing]] it so very much deserved. And so should you, if you are one of the [[steadily]] [[scarce]] sensitive, soulful and thoughtful [[type]] of person [[exited]] on this earth in [[residing]] [[forms]].

I [[needs]] [[says]] that in many [[methods]] ([[if]] not all), viz. its themes, [[implementation]], style, [[productivity]] etc., Stone Angel very [[very]] [[recalling]] me of the [[very]] [[praises]] "The [[Laptop]]". I am so [[horrified]] that other [[analysts]] didn't [[elects]] up on the [[several]] similarities which [[systematically]] [[knocked]] me [[during]] this [[filmmaking]], so I can only [[assumes]] that those who've [[authored]] [[observations]] have [[even]] to [[seeing]] the [[Laptop]]. They may not share any Alzheimer's [[topic]], [[however]] I can confidently [[says]] that if you very [[very]] [[appreciated]] "The [[Portable]]" you will [[surely]] find much to engage your [[times]] most fruitfully with "The Stone [[Angels]]". But even If you've not [[watched]] The Notebook, nor read the [[books]] on which this move is [[founded]], (which, incidentally, I haven't either) you should [[surely]] find much to hold your attention [[flatly]] - as long as your [[favored]] [[genera]] don't [[containing]] fast paced [[activity]] thrillers. This is a [[movies]] for [[philosophers]] and those who like to reminisce about time's passing, how life [[change]] as the [[ages]] pass, and what might have happened in one's [[living]] as one [[stares]] back through the [[ages]].

This bizarrely underrated [[however]] [[resplendent]] [[cinematography]] really [[merits]] a [[scoring]] of approximately 8/10. I can only blame its [[underway]] lowish [[evaluating]] of 6.6/10 on the 11% of idiots who [[supplied]] it 1/10. [[Upon]] all it has [[attracts]] [[fewer]] than 300 [[voting]] at the time of my writing this [[remark]]. [[Yet]], if those 11% who [[delivered]] it the [[minimal]] [[grading]] possible were really [[awaiting]] [[motors]] [[pursues]] and [[bomb]] why didn't they look... for even a few [[secs]] at the movie's [[hypothesis]] and promotional lines? [[Ohhh]] dear... Whatever the [[monde]] is [[come]] to, don't [[mademoiselle]] this most [[underestimated]] gem of a [[films]] - but only *if* you have a brain (i.e., your top [[dix]] doesn't include Transformers, Fight Club nor The Terminator). --------------------------------------------- Result 1037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] this is [[really]] [[films]] outside (not in a motel [[room]]). With [[real]] costumes (not only strings and [[swimsuits]]). You have to [[see]] this movie. it's the only [[porn]] [[movie]] I [[know]] that is worth watching between the sex scenes.

[[Bon]] [[Cinema]]

[[Laurent]] this is [[truthfully]] [[filmmaking]] outside (not in a motel [[bedroom]]). With [[veritable]] costumes (not only strings and [[bikinis]]). You have to [[consults]] this movie. it's the only [[interracial]] [[kino]] I [[savoir]] that is worth watching between the sex scenes.

[[Bona]] [[Theatre]]

[[Lawrence]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] There are few [[films]] or [[movies]] I consider favorites over the [[years]]. The Gospel road was one of them. I [[watched]] this as a [[young]] teen and would like the opportunity to watch it again. My [[favorite]] parts were the fact that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[supper]] was a huge meal,

3/ he liked playing with the [[children]],

4/His death was for all people and for all [[time]].

The [[movie]] may not have been theologically sound or high quality acting, but it [[touched]] my heart at that time. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a brave venture. If it ever comes out on [[DVD]], I will purchase it purely for sentimental reasons. There are few [[cinematography]] or [[films]] I consider favorites over the [[olds]]. The Gospel road was one of them. I [[observed]] this as a [[youthful]] teen and would like the opportunity to watch it again. My [[preferential]] parts were the fact that

1/Jesus was blond,

2/the last [[banquets]] was a huge meal,

3/ he liked playing with the [[kiddies]],

4/His death was for all people and for all [[period]].

The [[cinematographic]] may not have been theologically sound or high quality acting, but it [[poked]] my heart at that time. Besides I am a Johnny Cash fan and it was a brave venture. If it ever comes out on [[DVDS]], I will purchase it purely for sentimental reasons. --------------------------------------------- Result 1039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] This was shown on the biography channel and was about as informative as a children's comic! I [[gave]] it 2 out of 10 for it's attention to detail because for the most part it had a 70s feel to it and the three ladies that [[played]] the original three angels [[looked]] like them so the make-up was good.

This was [[supposed]] to be a biography on the biography [[channel]] but it was [[void]] of everything that is normally / [[usually]] seen in one of their biographies. No interviews with surviving cast members, crew members, production team members etc., or their friends, families, and any biographers of those people. In fact I know just as much now about the programme as I did before I watched this film that was based on the (supposedly) biographical book. As for actually learning something that no-one knew about the program and wasn't common knowledge well that never happened. This was shown on the biography channel and was about as informative as a children's comic! I [[given]] it 2 out of 10 for it's attention to detail because for the most part it had a 70s feel to it and the three ladies that [[accomplished]] the original three angels [[seemed]] like them so the make-up was good.

This was [[presumed]] to be a biography on the biography [[chanel]] but it was [[vacuum]] of everything that is normally / [[fluently]] seen in one of their biographies. No interviews with surviving cast members, crew members, production team members etc., or their friends, families, and any biographers of those people. In fact I know just as much now about the programme as I did before I watched this film that was based on the (supposedly) biographical book. As for actually learning something that no-one knew about the program and wasn't common knowledge well that never happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 1040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Well, it was funny in [[spots]]. This film is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a film that sits on the [[video]] [[shelf]] and gathers [[dust]]. Rent this one after you seen everything else. Beats boredom, but not by that much. My wife like like this film better then I do, maybe its not that bad. Well, it was funny in [[flecks]]. This film is a 4 or maybe a 3. Its a film that sits on the [[videos]] [[bookshelf]] and gathers [[stardust]]. Rent this one after you seen everything else. Beats boredom, but not by that much. My wife like like this film better then I do, maybe its not that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I'd have [[given]] this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Lifetime]]" presentation actually filmed in the location represented in the [[story]] - here, New [[York]] [[City]]. Most on this channel, whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the [[top]] [[rating]] - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been done many times, in many variations, with several very similar to this specific one. It's also been done pretty often on the big screen, with mega-stars, past and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and many more. I can think of at least 10-12 more, just as prominent, past to present, off the top of my head, who could be added now, and there are probably many others which could be brought to mind.

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my opinion, this is by far one of the [[best]] of this [[genre]] I've seen. I caught it by chance on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was taking a couple of hours following a particularly hectic week. I'd never run across this flick in the 8 years since it was made. And, while the two leads have done enough to be known to most, they were completely unknown to me. The only two actors I knew were Phyllis Newman (Anna's mother) whom I'd seen in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli (Henry, Charlie's best friend) who was outstanding as "Gramma," the menacing juice loan, tough, street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and coupling between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all later, is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no difference to the enjoyment here (in fact, it enhances it).

Checking some other comments, I agree completely with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination presented, and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. I'd have [[yielded]] this film a few stars, simply because it was a "[[Vie]]" presentation actually filmed in the location represented in the [[fairytales]] - here, New [[Yorke]] [[Town]]. Most on this channel, whether "set" there, in rural Iowa, Oregon, Virginia, L.A. etc., are filmed in Vancouver, Ottawa, Toronto or some other Canadian locale.

But if there ever were one deserving the [[superior]] [[valuation]] - 10* on this site, it's this movie. Certainly not for originality, for this story has been done many times, in many variations, with several very similar to this specific one. It's also been done pretty often on the big screen, with mega-stars, past and present, from Cary Grant, James Garner, Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, et al - and Deborah Kerr, Doris Day, Meg Ryan, and many more. I can think of at least 10-12 more, just as prominent, past to present, off the top of my head, who could be added now, and there are probably many others which could be brought to mind.

Not to drone on, but my point is that, in my opinion, this is by far one of the [[better]] of this [[gender]] I've seen. I caught it by chance on a mid-day Friday, at a time when I had the TV on only because I was taking a couple of hours following a particularly hectic week. I'd never run across this flick in the 8 years since it was made. And, while the two leads have done enough to be known to most, they were completely unknown to me. The only two actors I knew were Phyllis Newman (Anna's mother) whom I'd seen in some things from her younger days, and Michael Rispoli (Henry, Charlie's best friend) who was outstanding as "Gramma," the menacing juice loan, tough, street guy from "Rounders."

The chance meeting and coupling between both leads' best friends, as a sub-story romance, with the correlation of their being such to Anna and Charlie being only revealed to all later, is an oft-done plot contrivance within the genre, but makes no difference to the enjoyment here (in fact, it enhances it).

Checking some other comments, I agree completely with those which are the most positive. The primary word describing this film is ENGAGING, in caps. This adjective describes the performers; the characters; the chemistry between and among all of the characters, in whatever combination presented, and all of the supporting and even minor roles.

I love films with a "harder edge:" "Rounders;" the escapist Schwarzenegger/Stallone fare; "Goodfellows;" even the classics like "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," "Citizen Kane." But for pure, uncomplicated enjoyment, this one was outstanding. With a bare fraction of their budgets, it was equal to the results achieved by "You've Got Mail" and "Sleepless in Seattle." And Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan couldn't have done better than Natasha Henstridge and Michael Vartan here; the co-stars and support personnel here were equivalent to those in these mega-films, as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A 14 year old [[girl]] develops her first serious crush on the 17 [[year]] old [[boy]] that lives near by, while [[simultaneously]] [[trying]] to overcome her [[feelings]] of [[inadequacy]] in [[comparison]] to her older sister. That is the [[simple]] premise of this [[beautiful]], poetic [[coming]] of age [[film]] from Director [[Robert]] Mulligan. Mulligan is famous for [[previously]] directing Summer of '42 in 1971 and To [[Kill]] A Mockingbird in 1962, two [[giants]] of the coming of age [[genre]]. Here he directs newcomers in the principal roles: Reese Witherspoon, in her film debut, as the 14 year old [[girl]]; Emily Warfield, as the [[older]] sister; Jason London, as [[Court]], the 17 year old [[boy]]. [[Reese]] Witherspoon is [[astonishingly]] [[good]] in her film debut, [[displaying]] [[every]] emotion that a 14 [[year]] old [[girl]] feels in [[experiencing]] [[young]] [[love]] and [[hurt]], never [[striking]] a [[false]] note. Warfield and London are both [[equally]] good as well. The film accurately depicts each adolescent's [[thoughts]] or feelings in regard to love with [[heartfelt]] sensitivity, never crossing over into maudlin excess even once. [[Kudos]] to the autobiographical screenplay from Jenny Wingfield; this is one of the very few [[films]] about young love that is honest and consistent in tone without being emotionally dishonest or sensationalist. The music is [[wonderfully]] simple, accentuating the tone and mood from scene to scene, but never [[becoming]] intrusive. The [[beautiful]] cinematography is by famed horror [[director]] Freddie Francis, who was in his 70's when this was shot. Tess Harper and Sam Waterston play the girls' parents with dead aim accuracy for 1957, caring, strict, and emotionally simple. Gail Strickland is good also as the boy's mother. There are feelings to sort out, lessons to learn, and truths to [[face]] in this sweet-natured film that packs an emotional wallop. To date, this is [[Robert]] Mulligan's last film. This is one of the very [[best]] [[films]] of 1991. **** of 4 stars. A 14 year old [[daughter]] develops her first serious crush on the 17 [[annum]] old [[dude]] that lives near by, while [[concurrently]] [[attempt]] to overcome her [[moods]] of [[lack]] in [[comparisons]] to her older sister. That is the [[mere]] premise of this [[glamorous]], poetic [[incoming]] of age [[flick]] from Director [[Roberto]] Mulligan. Mulligan is famous for [[formerly]] directing Summer of '42 in 1971 and To [[Whack]] A Mockingbird in 1962, two [[titans]] of the coming of age [[gender]]. Here he directs newcomers in the principal roles: Reese Witherspoon, in her film debut, as the 14 year old [[chica]]; Emily Warfield, as the [[elderly]] sister; Jason London, as [[Courthouse]], the 17 year old [[bloke]]. [[Reyes]] Witherspoon is [[unimaginably]] [[buena]] in her film debut, [[exhibiting]] [[any]] emotion that a 14 [[annum]] old [[daughter]] feels in [[witnessing]] [[youthful]] [[loves]] and [[harmed]], never [[awesome]] a [[untrue]] note. Warfield and London are both [[alike]] good as well. The film accurately depicts each adolescent's [[idea]] or feelings in regard to love with [[sincere]] sensitivity, never crossing over into maudlin excess even once. [[Laurels]] to the autobiographical screenplay from Jenny Wingfield; this is one of the very few [[kino]] about young love that is honest and consistent in tone without being emotionally dishonest or sensationalist. The music is [[surprisingly]] simple, accentuating the tone and mood from scene to scene, but never [[become]] intrusive. The [[excellent]] cinematography is by famed horror [[headmaster]] Freddie Francis, who was in his 70's when this was shot. Tess Harper and Sam Waterston play the girls' parents with dead aim accuracy for 1957, caring, strict, and emotionally simple. Gail Strickland is good also as the boy's mother. There are feelings to sort out, lessons to learn, and truths to [[confront]] in this sweet-natured film that packs an emotional wallop. To date, this is [[Roberto]] Mulligan's last film. This is one of the very [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] of 1991. **** of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Chang Cheh's "Shaolin [[Temple]]" might very well be the highwater mark of the Shaw [[Brothers]] martial [[arts]] [[film]] cycle. This rousing kung [[fu]] [[epic]] boasts an [[amazing]] cast - a veritable who's who of the Shaw stable. [[Though]] the plot is fairly standard and the fight [[choreography]] is superb as usual, it is Cheh's handling of the [[subject]] matter that makes this film [[remarkable]] and [[enjoyable]]. The sense of reverence displayed for the history and traditions of the Shaolin Temple is palpable in every frame. Not unlike William Keighley's paean to the fabled Fighting 69th in that same self titled film or John Ford's salute to West Point in "The Long Gray Line," Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" is a lovingly crafted ode in that same style.

The cultural correlation I am tempted to make, is to compare the Shaolin Temple to the Alamo. Watching this film will give the same admiring and nostalgic feelings that you experienced many years ago in grade school history when you learned of the courage and sacrifice of those doomed heroes of the Alamo. At the end of the film, you too might be tempted to call out, Remember the Shaolin Temple! Chang Cheh's "Shaolin [[Templar]]" might very well be the highwater mark of the Shaw [[Plymouth]] martial [[humanities]] [[cinematography]] cycle. This rousing kung [[foo]] [[manas]] boasts an [[unbelievable]] cast - a veritable who's who of the Shaw stable. [[If]] the plot is fairly standard and the fight [[choreographer]] is superb as usual, it is Cheh's handling of the [[subjected]] matter that makes this film [[sumptuous]] and [[agreeable]]. The sense of reverence displayed for the history and traditions of the Shaolin Temple is palpable in every frame. Not unlike William Keighley's paean to the fabled Fighting 69th in that same self titled film or John Ford's salute to West Point in "The Long Gray Line," Cheh's "Shaolin Temple" is a lovingly crafted ode in that same style.

The cultural correlation I am tempted to make, is to compare the Shaolin Temple to the Alamo. Watching this film will give the same admiring and nostalgic feelings that you experienced many years ago in grade school history when you learned of the courage and sacrifice of those doomed heroes of the Alamo. At the end of the film, you too might be tempted to call out, Remember the Shaolin Temple! --------------------------------------------- Result 1044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In fact, it never was. I'm not sure why Billy Crystal wanted to recreate a 1940s screwball comedy. What a vacuous shambles! None of these people come close to a Cary Grant, Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn, etc, and anyway, today's audience isn't as receptive to this facile muck. Writing is trivial. The hackneyed plot is razor thin and obvious. The chemistry between the leading characters is non-existent. It's interesting that Julia Roberts seems to think she's a reincarnation of some big star from the "golden age of Hollywood", whenever that may be. It's an effect she tries and fails to attain yet again with Richard Gere in Runaway Bride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Hilariously [[obvious]] "drama" about a bunch of high school (I think) kids who enjoy non-stop hip-hop, break dancing, graffiti and trying to become a dj at the Roxy--or something. To be totally honest I was so bored I forgot! Even people who [[love]] the music agree this movie is terribly acted and--as a drama--failed dismally. We're [[supposed]] to find this [[kids]] likable and nice. I found them bland and [[boring]]. The one that I REALLY [[hated]] was Ramon. He does graffiti on [[subway]] trains and this is looked upon as great. Excuse me? He's defacing public property that isn't his to begin with. Also these "great" kids tap into the city's electricity so they can hold a big dance party at an abandoned building. Uh huh. So we're supposed to find a bunch of law breakers lovable and fun.

I could forgive all that if the music was good but I can't stand hip hop. The songs were--at best--mediocre and they were nonstop! They're ALWAYS playing! It got to the point that I was fast-forwarding through the many endless music numbers. (Cut out the music and you haver a 30 minute movie--maybe) There are a few imaginative numbers--the subway dance fight, a truly funny Santa number and the climatic Roxy show. [[If]] you love hip hop here's your movie. But it you're looking for good drama mixed in--forget it. Also HOW did this get a PG rating? There's an incredible amount of swearing in this. Hilariously [[observable]] "drama" about a bunch of high school (I think) kids who enjoy non-stop hip-hop, break dancing, graffiti and trying to become a dj at the Roxy--or something. To be totally honest I was so bored I forgot! Even people who [[amour]] the music agree this movie is terribly acted and--as a drama--failed dismally. We're [[alleged]] to find this [[enfants]] likable and nice. I found them bland and [[dreary]]. The one that I REALLY [[disliked]] was Ramon. He does graffiti on [[mtr]] trains and this is looked upon as great. Excuse me? He's defacing public property that isn't his to begin with. Also these "great" kids tap into the city's electricity so they can hold a big dance party at an abandoned building. Uh huh. So we're supposed to find a bunch of law breakers lovable and fun.

I could forgive all that if the music was good but I can't stand hip hop. The songs were--at best--mediocre and they were nonstop! They're ALWAYS playing! It got to the point that I was fast-forwarding through the many endless music numbers. (Cut out the music and you haver a 30 minute movie--maybe) There are a few imaginative numbers--the subway dance fight, a truly funny Santa number and the climatic Roxy show. [[Though]] you love hip hop here's your movie. But it you're looking for good drama mixed in--forget it. Also HOW did this get a PG rating? There's an incredible amount of swearing in this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Julia (Kristina Copeland) travels with her husband Steven Harris (Steven Man) and their baby son Alex to spend a couple of days with her family in Savage Island, an island of their own. The couple expects to resolve their issues along the weekend in the remote island. While waiting for the boat, Julia and Steven meet two weird men in the harbor, and when her brother Peter (Brendan Beiser) arrives, he explains that a family of hillbilly squatters is living in the island. The reckless Peter smoke pot while driving the truck in the night and turns the headlight off to show off; however, he accidentally runs over the young son of the Savage's family, but in the dark he believes he has hit an animal. Later, the Savage family claims Alex as a compensation for their lost son. The Young family does not accept the trade, and they initiate a deadly war between families.

"Savage Island" is a very low-budget movie, with a stupid screenplay, amateurish cinematography but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[absurd]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The [[logical]] procedure [[would]] be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many flaws in this [[flick]] that I could spend many lines writing about this subject. I believe this film was filmed with a home video camera so [[awful]] the images are. The good cast deserved a better material to work. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Ilha de Sangue" ("Island of Blood") Julia (Kristina Copeland) travels with her husband Steven Harris (Steven Man) and their baby son Alex to spend a couple of days with her family in Savage Island, an island of their own. The couple expects to resolve their issues along the weekend in the remote island. While waiting for the boat, Julia and Steven meet two weird men in the harbor, and when her brother Peter (Brendan Beiser) arrives, he explains that a family of hillbilly squatters is living in the island. The reckless Peter smoke pot while driving the truck in the night and turns the headlight off to show off; however, he accidentally runs over the young son of the Savage's family, but in the dark he believes he has hit an animal. Later, the Savage family claims Alex as a compensation for their lost son. The Young family does not accept the trade, and they initiate a deadly war between families.

"Savage Island" is a very low-budget movie, with a stupid screenplay, amateurish cinematography but surprisingly good acting. The flawed story is totally [[nutty]], and there are many unbelievable situations. For example, how could two men leave two women with the baby alone in the road during the night with the menace of the deranged family? The [[rational]] procedure [[ought]] be going immediately to the continent and bringing police force to rescue Peter. Then the Young family vanishes; Julia and Steven leave their car in the continent and their house and friends, and nobody chases them? Peter calls his sister Julia of Alex when he arrives with the boat in the beginning. There are so many flaws in this [[gesture]] that I could spend many lines writing about this subject. I believe this film was filmed with a home video camera so [[scary]] the images are. The good cast deserved a better material to work. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Ilha de Sangue" ("Island of Blood") --------------------------------------------- Result 1047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I may have this wrong, but a chair had something to do with the death of this woman's father. That [[movie]] was [[terrible]]! This is not a movie for those who [[love]] a good suspense movie. [[Bad]] suspense movie! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big [[fan]] of [[lifetime]] [[movies]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 I watched it with my mom and we were like...

What the hell? We didn't get it at all. I may have this wrong, but a chair had something to do with the death of this woman's father. That [[filmmaking]] was [[scary]]! This is not a movie for those who [[loved]] a good suspense movie. [[Mala]] suspense movie! *shakes cane at movie* I'm never seeing it again. And I'm a big [[breather]] of [[vie]] [[film]], too! They kinda need to quit trying to make movies outta books. It's driving me crazy!!!

And Whit was butt-ugly and yet, she loves him more than Hugh, who was a TINY bit nicer-looking.

My rating: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1048 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Bo [[Derek]] might have had a [[career]] had she not let her late husband, John, take over as her director. It's a [[real]] [[shame]], no really, with the right [[direction]] and the right part (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't win any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has made it big in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[problem]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her appearance in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the sex symbol of the 1980s." Problem is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's time. Maybe he knew her limitations as an actress, perhaps that is why he fashioned movies for her that concentrated on her body, not her acting skills. But it got old real quick. It didn't help matters any that the films of John and Bo Derek are (let's be honest) really, really [[bad]]. And bad sums up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the Apes.

You know what's worst? This film is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not even Bo's stunning looks and figure can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) hams it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid career as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic actor, he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book though. She stood by John until his dying day, has a true love of animals and nature and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the dumb blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? Bo [[Derrick]] might have had a [[carrera]] had she not let her late husband, John, take over as her director. It's a [[genuine]] [[pity]], no really, with the right [[directions]] and the right part (see "10"), Bo was okay. She wouldn't win any awards even at her best, but she is no worse than many an actress who has made it big in the past 15 years or so based on looks alone. But therein lay the [[difficulties]], John was determined to ride the wave that Bo created with her appearance in 10, that of Bo being the "perfect 10," "the hottest woman in America," "the sex symbol of the 1980s." Problem is, in John's hands, this wave crashed with a resounding thud in only a few year's time. Maybe he knew her limitations as an actress, perhaps that is why he fashioned movies for her that concentrated on her body, not her acting skills. But it got old real quick. It didn't help matters any that the films of John and Bo Derek are (let's be honest) really, really [[mala]]. And bad sums up their take on Edgar Rice Burrough's literary icon, the Lord of the Jungle, Tarzan of the Apes.

You know what's worst? This film is boring! Make me laugh, make me cry, just don't bore me. Not even Bo's stunning looks and figure can rouse any interest, and that is what the film is of course built around. Richard Harris (God bless his soul, he and Bo were previously in Orca btw) hams it up and makes his scenes at least a little interesting and Miles O'Keefe makes a physically impressive Tarzan. Maybe he got the last laugh, after being hit with a ton of venom from the critics over this film, Miles went on to a solid career as a B movie icon, in films that were not great art, but a million times more fun than this one. But other than that, it's Bo's body,and you can only see it so many times before you long for something else to go with it. Tarzan the Ape Man has nothing else. John Derek was a truly dynamic actor, he was not a director. He should have stayed with his strength. This film unfolds at a mind numbingly slow pace and nothing really happens in the action scenes. Burrough's Tarzan was all about excitement and wish fulfillment (who wouldn't want to be as agile, strong and good looking as Lord Greystoke?) and fun! You get none of that here. Watch it, and you will have wasted 107 minutes of your life. On second thought, you may come away with a valuable lesson, how not to handle someone's movie career.

Bo Derek is all right in my book though. She stood by John until his dying day, has a true love of animals and nature and even looks back with a giggle at her time in the spotlight. She has also proven that she is not the dumb blonde many want her to make her out to be. If she could survive Tarzan and Bolero, she can survive anything. So come back Bo, all is forgiven.

And as an aside, is the Steve Strong who plays the bad guy the same Steve Strong who a brief pro wrestling career? --------------------------------------------- Result 1049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty probably won't wear off on the first, second or third [[viewing]], but you?ll be drawn in by the [[characters]] which are so simple yet [[intriguing]], that you may find yourself actually caring for them in an [[unexpected]] [[way]], which [[may]] or [[may]] not make you feel a [[little]] [[childish]] due to the medium.

Disney continues to firmly [[hold]] the title of "[[Greatest]] Animation in the World", with "A Bug?s [[Life]]" standing as one of their [[greatest]] achievements. One of the innovative attachments being the [[delightful]] "out-takes" [[added]] to the [[end]] of the [[film]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m [[told]] the VHS [[cassette]] has one alternating version per [[tape]]. The [[DVD]] also features "[[Gerry]]?s [[Game]]" which is a [[delightful]] [[little]] PIXAR short that was [[also]] [[shown]] [[prior]] to the [[film]] in [[theaters]].

This is by far the [[superior]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[pretty]] good, but lacks something in the animation and in the [[story]] development and characters. [[If]] you [[look]] at the star voices of both films, "Antz" is largely cast with big name "movie" stars with a few [[familiar]] "TV" star voices, where "A Bug?s Life" is just the opposite, loaded with "TV" stars with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[exception]]. But the difference in quality is distinct and obvious.

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go head to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[kind]] of [[film]] that almost makes me wish I had children to [[share]] it with. [[Don]]?t think for a second that this is just a movie for [[kids]], [[though]]. You will marvel at the incredibly sophisticated computer animation, and the novelty probably won't wear off on the first, second or third [[visualization]], but you?ll be drawn in by the [[personages]] which are so simple yet [[exciting]], that you may find yourself actually caring for them in an [[unanticipated]] [[camino]], which [[maggio]] or [[maggio]] not make you feel a [[petite]] [[boyish]] due to the medium.

Disney continues to firmly [[holds]] the title of "[[Bigger]] Animation in the World", with "A Bug?s [[Iife]]" standing as one of their [[higher]] achievements. One of the innovative attachments being the [[sumptuous]] "out-takes" [[adding]] to the [[terminating]] of the [[flick]]. The DVD has two sets of these out-takes where as I?m [[tell]] the VHS [[tape]] has one alternating version per [[cassette]]. The [[DVDS]] also features "[[Jerry]]?s [[Ballgame]]" which is a [[scrumptious]] [[petite]] PIXAR short that was [[moreover]] [[displayed]] [[anterior]] to the [[flick]] in [[teatro]].

This is by far the [[supremo]] insect-film in comparison to Dreamworks? "Antz", which in all fairness is [[belle]] good, but lacks something in the animation and in the [[histories]] development and characters. [[Unless]] you [[gaze]] at the star voices of both films, "Antz" is largely cast with big name "movie" stars with a few [[colloquial]] "TV" star voices, where "A Bug?s Life" is just the opposite, loaded with "TV" stars with Kevin Spacey as the only stand out [[exemption]]. But the difference in quality is distinct and obvious.

Dreamworks can?t be blamed or surprised though, when you go head to head with Disney, you have your work cut out for you. This is the [[type]] of [[cinematography]] that almost makes me wish I had children to [[exchanges]] it with. [[Donation]]?t think for a second that this is just a movie for [[youths]], [[if]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Any one who saw the original [[would]] have to go out and destroy this [[dreadful]] remake. Alex Baldwin trying to [[imitate]] the late [[Steve]] Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[work]]. [[While]] Baldwin has done some [[admirable]] [[work]] this is a [[flop]] from start to finish. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for Kim in the role of Ali McGraw enough said. McQueen looked dangerous, [[menacing]] and believable as Doc, the film had [[excitement]] and suspense,Baldwin and company [[made]] this into a comedy,I laughed the one and only time I saw this [[miserable]] [[film]]. And that dreadful hairstyle for Michael Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! Did the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you wish to see movie-making the way it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! Any one who saw the original [[could]] have to go out and destroy this [[scary]] remake. Alex Baldwin trying to [[emulate]] the late [[Stephens]] Mcqueen in a word for word remake just doesn't [[works]]. [[Despite]] Baldwin has done some [[sumptuous]] [[works]] this is a [[bust]] from start to finish. McQueen had charisma, never try to compete with a star. As for Kim in the role of Ali McGraw enough said. McQueen looked dangerous, [[endangering]] and believable as Doc, the film had [[arousal]] and suspense,Baldwin and company [[accomplished]] this into a comedy,I laughed the one and only time I saw this [[unlucky]] [[cinematography]]. And that dreadful hairstyle for Michael Madsen who is one of today's more exciting and believable actors! Did the makeup people have it in for Michael, what were they thinking.If you wish to see movie-making the way it was under Sam Peckinpah's direction Get the original! --------------------------------------------- Result 1051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[In]] the 1930s studios [[would]] [[use]] short films [[like]] this one [[sort]] of as testing grounds for new actors, given their relative ease of production in comparison with full length feature films, so it's interesting that this one should [[star]] [[Shirley]] Temple, who had long since established herself as The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would imagine that would have been Frank Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother Sonny in the movie and delivered a comparatively less impressive performance. [[Then]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was probably not an easy act to accompany.

The film opens with an unimpressive sight gag involving a leaky ceiling, which I suppose was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, illustrate the working class status of the family in the movie, and provide a [[clean]] transition into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie illustrates what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor guy as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. [[For]] the 1930s studios [[should]] [[utilise]] short films [[iike]] this one [[genre]] of as testing grounds for new actors, given their relative ease of production in comparison with full length feature films, so it's interesting that this one should [[superstar]] [[Sylvie]] Temple, who had long since established herself as The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. Then again, she probably wasn't the one being tested, I would imagine that would have been Frank Coghlan Jr., who played Shirley's brother Sonny in the movie and delivered a comparatively less impressive performance. [[Thereafter]] again, a 9-year-old Shirley Temple was probably not an easy act to accompany.

The film opens with an unimpressive sight gag involving a leaky ceiling, which I suppose was designed to have Shirley Temple give a scornful look at the ceiling, illustrate the working class status of the family in the movie, and provide a [[cleanliness]] transition into the next scene, which features Shirley gleefully stomping in the rain.

It's Sonny'y birthday, and his father makes occasional and horrendously botched efforts to hide the fact that he wants to give Sonny a dog that he really wants for himself, but Sonny is afraid of dogs because he was bitten by one once and has been creeped out ever since. It's curious that, when his father insists on getting a dog, Sonny decides to run away from home rather than have a dog in the house, and as he is running away with no destination in sight, it's also curious that the movie illustrates what seems to be an indifference to homeless people that surpasses even the astounding indifference that exists today.

Sonny passes a man cooking bacon in an iron skillet at the side of the train tracks (right after a train flew by which, given how close to the tracks he was, you would think would have blown the guy right off the tracks, but no matter). After Sonny gives up on sharing breakfast due to the sour stare that his gleeful smile receives from the guy, he continues on and the homeless guy disappears from the movie. It's interesting to consider what a longer film would have done, because this one leaves this poor guy as a loose end.

Not that that matters, Sonny soon hears a dog whining underneath a trestle as he passes over it, and jumps down to find a dog covered in burrs. It might seem trite that he immediately takes the dog up and adopts it since he just left home because of his fear of dogs, but it seemed to me that he just needed to be reminded not of his power over dogs, but of their lack of power over him. As soon as he saw a dog in need he overcame his fear.

Hey, if that's all it takes, all I have to do is find a helpless spider and I'm set!

It's a very convenient movie in which everything works out exactly as it is supposed to, but it's cute enough and enjoyable enough (and short enough, as it were) to still be a fun movie. We already don't expect an epic plot in a 19-minute film, but Pardon My Pups still packs in a substantial amount of story and character development in its short running time. And it also features a fight scene at the end of the movie that must have made Charlie Chaplin proud. I am hardly an expert of Shirley Temple's films, but it's not hard to see how she became The Most Famous Child Star of All Time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I bought this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in almost mint condition, and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't [[believe]] my [[luck]]. You go through the whole realm of emotions and it [[attempts]] to get over a [[complex]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist stance of the Mandela Party, undoubtedly. Despite its enormous length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a book one couldn't put down. Perhaps the songs are not all that memorable, but the spirit of the thing glows on forever. I cannot understand comments that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the book too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[treasure]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

I bought this cheap from the rental remnant at our local store. It was in almost mint condition, and I'd never heard of it before. Clearly nobody else had either.

I can't [[think]] my [[chance]]. You go through the whole realm of emotions and it [[attempting]] to get over a [[knotty]] message - the very moral and non-triumphalist stance of the Mandela Party, undoubtedly. Despite its enormous length (I had to watch it in two sittings) - it was like a book one couldn't put down. Perhaps the songs are not all that memorable, but the spirit of the thing glows on forever. I cannot understand comments that a musical (clearly designed for stage) is not realistic! I've seen "South Pacific" and read the book too, and can guarantee that musical is not realistic compared to the book. I'll [[treasury]] this little find until it wears out. One day they'll make this again on a better budget.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Okay]], I've tried and I've [[tried]], but I [[STILL]] DON'T [[GET]] this [[Guy]] Maddin [[thing]]. [[Tales]] From the Gimli Hospital [[left]] me [[cold]], that [[movie]] about the Austrian [[villagers]] and the one about the Ice Nymph were pretty to [[look]] but [[lacking]] in the [[story]] department...and this nudie [[movie]] about [[abortion]] and hockey is just [[boring]]. I'm glad Maddin has an [[appreciation]] for [[silent]] film, but I [[dislike]] his [[films]] for the same [[reason]] I [[dislike]] the [[films]] of Quentin Tarantino: they're empty homages to [[better]], more [[imaginative]] films--films that [[advanced]] the art [[form]] or broke new ground--and are all [[style]] and no [[substance]]. No [[amount]] of [[jump]] cuts and [[odd]] camera [[angles]] can [[disguise]] the fact that Maddin is an unoriginal David Lynch wannabe, [[though]] he DOES have one [[advantage]] over Tarantino: he [[generally]] doesn't write embarrassing [[dialogue]], because most of his films rely on intertitles. The bottom [[line]] is, Maddin's schtick is [[clever]] [[clever]] film-making for aspiring film majors. [[Alright]], I've tried and I've [[try]], but I [[YET]] DON'T [[GOT]] this [[Pal]] Maddin [[stuff]]. [[Histories]] From the Gimli Hospital [[gauche]] me [[chilled]], that [[movies]] about the Austrian [[dwellers]] and the one about the Ice Nymph were pretty to [[peek]] but [[lacked]] in the [[saga]] department...and this nudie [[cinematography]] about [[miscarriages]] and hockey is just [[tiresome]]. I'm glad Maddin has an [[thank]] for [[quiet]] film, but I [[aversion]] his [[kino]] for the same [[raison]] I [[aversion]] the [[film]] of Quentin Tarantino: they're empty homages to [[optimum]], more [[resourceful]] films--films that [[advances]] the art [[forma]] or broke new ground--and are all [[elegance]] and no [[substances]]. No [[somme]] of [[hop]] cuts and [[unusual]] camera [[corners]] can [[hide]] the fact that Maddin is an unoriginal David Lynch wannabe, [[albeit]] he DOES have one [[parti]] over Tarantino: he [[often]] doesn't write embarrassing [[dialogues]], because most of his films rely on intertitles. The bottom [[linea]] is, Maddin's schtick is [[astute]] [[skilful]] film-making for aspiring film majors. --------------------------------------------- Result 1054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Another comedy about a [[plucky]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the forties) global world with only native wit and pluck to guide them, this is a [[fine]] entry in the Ealing cannon. Terry-Thomas [[sparkles]] as usual in the lead, as a feckless ministry man led to the brink of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of starts attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a great romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John Le Mesurier plays against type as a rugged revolutionary leader. Lots of fun is had by all, especially the viewer; perhaps not in the very top echelon of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. Another comedy about a [[valiant]] little country struggling through the jungle of the modern (for the forties) global world with only native wit and pluck to guide them, this is a [[fined]] entry in the Ealing cannon. Terry-Thomas [[sparklers]] as usual in the lead, as a feckless ministry man led to the brink of disaster when a nation he is supposedly in charge of starts attracting the interest of the world, Ian Bannen makes a great romantic lead, Peter Sellers puts in one of his quieter performances as a corrupt politico and the uber-suave John Le Mesurier plays against type as a rugged revolutionary leader. Lots of fun is had by all, especially the viewer; perhaps not in the very top echelon of Ealing classics, but pretty high up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] What can I [[say]]? I [[think]] I have to [[write]] "[[Spoiler]] [[alert]]" and then "[[reveal]]" they [[used]] the F-word a LOT in this [[movie]] - like in [[every]] two sentences. I did not like this [[movie]] at all - too [[much]] hints on sexual perversions, sidesteps and [[cheating]]. And that [[swearing]] was [[totally]] out the [[window]]. I [[gave]] this [[movie]] "3" and two of those [[points]] are for Mira Sorvino's sexy [[movements]] on the [[dance]] [[floor]]. What can I [[said]]? I [[ideas]] I have to [[handwriting]] "[[Baffle]] [[warn]]" and then "[[disclosing]]" they [[utilised]] the F-word a LOT in this [[cinematography]] - like in [[each]] two sentences. I did not like this [[kino]] at all - too [[very]] hints on sexual perversions, sidesteps and [[hoodwink]]. And that [[oath]] was [[abundantly]] out the [[windows]]. I [[yielded]] this [[film]] "3" and two of those [[dot]] are for Mira Sorvino's sexy [[movement]] on the [[danse]] [[flooring]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I grew up watching this movie ,and I [[still]] love it just as much today as when i was a [[kid]]. Don't [[listen]] to the critic [[reviews]]. They are not [[accurate]] on this [[film]].[[Eddie]] Murphy [[really]] [[shines]] in his roll.You can sit down with your [[whole]] family and [[everybody]] will enjoy it.I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to everybody to [[see]]. It is a [[comedy]] with a touch of fantasy.With [[demons]] ,[[dragons]],and a [[little]] bald [[kid]] with [[God]] like powers.This [[movie]] takes you from L.A. to [[Tibet]] , of into the [[amazing]] [[view]] of the wondrous [[temples]] of the [[mountains]] in [[Tibet]].Just a [[beautiful]] view! [[So]] [[go]] do your self a favor and snatch this one up! You [[wont]] regret it! I grew up watching this movie ,and I [[however]] love it just as much today as when i was a [[children]]. Don't [[listens]] to the critic [[exams]]. They are not [[correct]] on this [[movie]].[[Eddy]] Murphy [[truthfully]] [[glows]] in his roll.You can sit down with your [[overall]] family and [[anyone]] will enjoy it.I [[recommendations]] this [[filmmaking]] to everybody to [[behold]]. It is a [[travesty]] with a touch of fantasy.With [[minions]] ,[[dragoons]],and a [[scant]] bald [[enfant]] with [[Jeez]] like powers.This [[cinematography]] takes you from L.A. to [[Tibetan]] , of into the [[noteworthy]] [[avis]] of the wondrous [[synagogues]] of the [[montes]] in [[Tibetans]].Just a [[resplendent]] view! [[Accordingly]] [[going]] do your self a favor and snatch this one up! You [[habit]] regret it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is only the second time I stopped a video/[[DVD]] part way through.

I was willing to give this [[film]] the [[benefit]] of the doubt at first, even [[though]] it managed to be both shallow, [[clichéd]] and stupid.. AND joyless, plodding and [[pretentious]].

It was like an After School Special [[directed]] by that weird grade nine kid who thinks nobody [[understands]] him... creepy and sad, with voice-over narration that only the most deluded adolescent would consider [[poetry]]... and some [[singing]], and... no, really, the poor child's suffering...

[[Enough]], already, especially when it morphed into a brazen, [[clumsy]], and insulting Clockwork Orange ripoff. And did I [[mention]] the [[singing]]?

This isn't the [[worst]] [[film]] I've ever [[seen]], but [[certainly]] the one I've felt [[least]] compelled to sit through. I don't recommend it to anyone. This is only the second time I stopped a video/[[DVDS]] part way through.

I was willing to give this [[cinematography]] the [[interests]] of the doubt at first, even [[despite]] it managed to be both shallow, [[clichés]] and stupid.. AND joyless, plodding and [[cocky]].

It was like an After School Special [[oriented]] by that weird grade nine kid who thinks nobody [[realises]] him... creepy and sad, with voice-over narration that only the most deluded adolescent would consider [[poem]]... and some [[sung]], and... no, really, the poor child's suffering...

[[Sufficient]], already, especially when it morphed into a brazen, [[awkward]], and insulting Clockwork Orange ripoff. And did I [[cited]] the [[chant]]?

This isn't the [[meanest]] [[films]] I've ever [[noticed]], but [[indubitably]] the one I've felt [[slightest]] compelled to sit through. I don't recommend it to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Back when I was a kid and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 [[movies]] and we [[watched]] the [[hell]] out of all of them.

I was at a yard sale the other day and I saw this VHS copy of BLOOD LEGACY and I buy any horror movie I don't have and I knew this movie looked familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had bought. She had sold it years ago in a yard sale I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I bought it and it refreshed my memory because of a few scenes. I am not sure how I felt about it as a kid but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and enjoy anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain requirements in order for me to consider it "good" and this one fell very [[short]]. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death types. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. Back when I was a kid and I lived with my sister, she bought every horror movie she could find and this was one of them. VCR'S had just became a household item and we didn't have but about 150 [[cinematography]] and we [[observed]] the [[hellfire]] out of all of them.

I was at a yard sale the other day and I saw this VHS copy of BLOOD LEGACY and I buy any horror movie I don't have and I knew this movie looked familiar. I thought for a second and realized it was one that my sister had bought. She had sold it years ago in a yard sale I am guessing - who knows.

I didn't recall anything at all about it and I watched it the night I bought it and it refreshed my memory because of a few scenes. I am not sure how I felt about it as a kid but I am sure I enjoyed it because it was new to me and I'd watch and enjoy anything back then.

I am a horror freak, but there are certain requirements in order for me to consider it "good" and this one fell very [[concise]]. It was one of those talk talk talk and bore me to death types. What death scenes you see are done using the shadow on the wall followed by blood splatter and thats if you're lucky you get that much.

The story is good and I have seen a few with similar plots, so I think this one should be buried and forgotten. Don't watch this people unless you're hard up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] The [[opening]] scene of this film sets the pace for the entirety of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[television]] movie quality. The snow drenched scenery is [[gorgeous]], yet the characters held with in it have a similar quality to that of looking at a photograph of such scenery, the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[little]] bearing on 'real' conversations at all seemingly. Any emotional insight is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the way in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a incomprehensible situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious lack of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is particularly unrealistic. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[underdeveloped]]. The main characters are empty husks of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly void of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. The [[open]] scene of this film sets the pace for the entirety of its ninety minutes. The shots are generic, conventional, and of [[tv]] movie quality. The snow drenched scenery is [[wondrous]], yet the characters held with in it have a similar quality to that of looking at a photograph of such scenery, the overwhelming feeling being that of distance. Some of the editing is fairly high quality and the work of an veteran professional, the dialogue however is clunky and artificial, having [[kiddo]] bearing on 'real' conversations at all seemingly. Any emotional insight is displaced in favour of swearing, which is of course the way in which everyone shows their true feelings. The action is slow and underwhelming, the overall feeling being one of someone trickling cold water over your head, but so slowly that you barely notice, yet eventually you feel pathetic and slightly sorry for yourself for being caught in such a incomprehensible situation.

The mixture of genres that the Fessenden has seemingly tried to use; psychological thriller, horror and family drama, although commendable suffers from a serious lack of tension and interesting dialogue. The way in which the husband, wife and child trio interact is particularly unrealistic. The themes of family relationships being played out in haunting setting have been covered countless times before by far superior films, an instant example being that of The Shining (1980). The family unit here are torn by innocuous troubles which are hard to understand or sympathise with considering the relative ambiguity of the script.

The family unit is hardly stalked throughout the film, Fessenden playing down the thriller possibilities of the narrative in favour of a slow family drama for the majority of the running time. The 'stalker' figure Otis has few apparent motives for his behaviour and despite being perhaps the most interesting and well acted character is still very [[undeveloped]]. The main characters are empty husks of people who it was extremely hard to relate to, their relationships with each other being particularly void of any sentiment or feeling. Although the ignorance of the Erik per Sullivan's young character by his parents is presumably part of the story, surely any reasonable person would question their son if he allegedly spoke to someone who seemingly doesn't exist? People can accept this film as intelligent because of its relative lack of conventional aspects regarding creature based horror movies but this film fails in respect of whichever genre you wished to pigeonhole it in. You can read deep psychological meanings into every single minute detail of anything if you should so wish to but I think people would be better off over analysing their carpet for some deep emotional meaning, rather than these vacuous sub-human creations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[film]] is [[amazing]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the idea jumps and the surrealistic dreams... Really [[great]]! People who love cult movies or very dark thrillers will [[find]] this [[fantastic]]. It seems a little to the [[films]] of David Lynch: the strange story, the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains almost no [[plot]]. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[drawback]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I would give it a 10 out of 10. But that's missing, and that's why I gave the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth watching. Search that DVD and you'll be rewarded! This [[cinematographic]] is [[unbelievable]] - it's just like a nightmare. The bizarre story, the dark decors, the swarming insects everywhere, the idea jumps and the surrealistic dreams... Really [[large]]! People who love cult movies or very dark thrillers will [[unearth]] this [[unbelievable]]. It seems a little to the [[movie]] of David Lynch: the strange story, the bizarre dreams, the red curtains. Nuit Noire contains almost no [[intrigue]]. It's rather a succession of surrealistic happenings, nightmares and meetings. That's a [[inadequacy]]. If the film had a really fascinating plot full of tension with a captivating denouement, I would give it a 10 out of 10. But that's missing, and that's why I gave the movie an 8. Nuit Noire is a film worth watching. Search that DVD and you'll be rewarded! --------------------------------------------- Result 1061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is horrible! It rivals "Ishtar" in the number of [[embarrassingly]] bad [[moments]]. I [[would]] have rated it lower than a 3, [[save]] for a [[couple]] of [[funny]] lines; but, [[overall]], this [[film]] was [[crap]]! It looked [[like]] they made it over a [[weekend]] at some bankrupt [[resort]] somewhere. Joe [[Roth]] should join Elaine May on the [[directing]] sidelines forever! This [[films]] is horrible! It rivals "Ishtar" in the number of [[crudely]] bad [[times]]. I [[could]] have rated it lower than a 3, [[rescues]] for a [[coupling]] of [[comical]] lines; but, [[holistic]], this [[cinematography]] was [[baloney]]! It looked [[iike]] they made it over a [[weekends]] at some bankrupt [[resorting]] somewhere. Joe [[Ruth]] should join Elaine May on the [[instructing]] sidelines forever! --------------------------------------------- Result 1062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Love is overwhelming... In all it's manifestations... Gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous... Tudor Chirila, Maria Popistasu and Ioana Barbu, one [[truly]] dramatic [[story]] about love in all it's shapes, a story about the undecipherable ways of young hearts, about life and lost innocence all directed by the skillful eye of Tudor Giurgiu. With a [[magnificent]] soundtrack featuring Faultline & Chris Martin and Vama Veche it [[surprises]] in every way leaving behind the sour taste of misunderstanding love... Truly [[remarkable]]... Is it me or is Romanian cinematography slowly but surely advancing and gaining respect? This is a [[brilliant]] film... Two thumbs up to everybody involved. Love is overwhelming... In all it's manifestations... Gorgeous, absolutely gorgeous... Tudor Chirila, Maria Popistasu and Ioana Barbu, one [[honestly]] dramatic [[histories]] about love in all it's shapes, a story about the undecipherable ways of young hearts, about life and lost innocence all directed by the skillful eye of Tudor Giurgiu. With a [[awesome]] soundtrack featuring Faultline & Chris Martin and Vama Veche it [[dumbfounded]] in every way leaving behind the sour taste of misunderstanding love... Truly [[admirable]]... Is it me or is Romanian cinematography slowly but surely advancing and gaining respect? This is a [[lustrous]] film... Two thumbs up to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I was fooled to rent this movie by its impressive [[cover]]. [[Alas]]. It is easily one of the [[worst]] movies ever made. Judging by the acting of the film characters, it's more a comedy than a horror film. No surprise why no one else has written comments on the imdb. [[Avoid]] it. I was fooled to rent this movie by its impressive [[covering]]. [[Alack]]. It is easily one of the [[gravest]] movies ever made. Judging by the acting of the film characters, it's more a comedy than a horror film. No surprise why no one else has written comments on the imdb. [[Shirk]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This picture was [[banned]] from American movies houses in the 1930 because of nudity by Hedy Lamarr, (Eva Hermann) which caused all kinds of problems among the ladies in the 1930's but not so much for the male population. This story concerns a young woman named Eva Hermann who gets married to an older man and is carried over the threshold on the wedding night and the husband never consummates the marriage and worries about all kinds of very petty things like his shoes and killing bugs. Eva leaves her husband's house and lives with her father and tries to explain her situation. On a hot Summer day Eva takes a ride on her horse and decides to go for a swim naked in a lake in the woods. Her horse runs off and she runs after him and is observed by a young man who finds her clothes and returns them to Eva. These two people become very acquainted and there is a romance that starts to bloom. There are many more interesting problems that arise as you view this film to its very end. Enjoy a great Classic film which was a Shocker Film in 1933. Enjoy. This picture was [[banished]] from American movies houses in the 1930 because of nudity by Hedy Lamarr, (Eva Hermann) which caused all kinds of problems among the ladies in the 1930's but not so much for the male population. This story concerns a young woman named Eva Hermann who gets married to an older man and is carried over the threshold on the wedding night and the husband never consummates the marriage and worries about all kinds of very petty things like his shoes and killing bugs. Eva leaves her husband's house and lives with her father and tries to explain her situation. On a hot Summer day Eva takes a ride on her horse and decides to go for a swim naked in a lake in the woods. Her horse runs off and she runs after him and is observed by a young man who finds her clothes and returns them to Eva. These two people become very acquainted and there is a romance that starts to bloom. There are many more interesting problems that arise as you view this film to its very end. Enjoy a great Classic film which was a Shocker Film in 1933. Enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I believe that The Sopranos is an awesome show because of all the supporting characters in it. i have bought every video so far and am waiting for the rest to be released. In all 42 episodes so far, the best one is definitely episode #3, Denial, Anger, Acceptance. This episode deals with my most favorite character of all time in The Sopranos. His name was Brendan Filone. He was killed for hijacking the wrong truck and accidentally killing a truck driver. Brendan was awesome because he was actually one of the few characters who actually stood against Tony and his gang. In the end, he ended up getting shot through the eye while taking a bath, and that's my most favorite scene ever in the history of The Sopranos. Brendan Filone is # 1 for me. And my # 2 most favorite character ever was Matthew Bevilaqua, who was killed after attempting to murder Christopher Moltisanti. Tony and Pussy shoot him in Hucklebarney park after they catch and torture him. My # 3 most favorite character is Sean Gismonte, who was killed right after shooting Christopher. And finally, my # 4 most favorite character is Chucky Signore, one of Uncle Junior's henchmen. He was killed on a boat by Tony. All the awesome characters are dead. That's the only bad thing about the Sopranos. All the cool guys always get killed. You know what would be great to change about the Sopranos? They should have a whole episode where they show all the dead supporting characters in hell and they are all trying to torture Chris, Tony, Uncle Junior, Silvio, and Paulie, because they need to get their revenge. Brendan Filone shall strike back!!!!!!!!!1 --------------------------------------------- Result 1066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Not sure why it doesn't play in Peoria, apparently, but this is a very [[funny]], clever British [[comedy]]. It's set at the end of the "swinging sixties". Peter Sellars is fantastic as the rich, forty-something serial womaniser. The perfectly delectable Goldie Hawn, playing a 19 year American girl in London, is, [[initially]], Sellars' "catch of the day". But the urbane TV food [[critic]] can't stop himself from falling for the dizzy American [[blond]].

Humour, pathos, [[great]] script, strong performances from the leads and supporting caste.

It's a [[great]] film, and the best gag is the very last line.

Try it, you'll like it. Not sure why it doesn't play in Peoria, apparently, but this is a very [[droll]], clever British [[travesty]]. It's set at the end of the "swinging sixties". Peter Sellars is fantastic as the rich, forty-something serial womaniser. The perfectly delectable Goldie Hawn, playing a 19 year American girl in London, is, [[originally]], Sellars' "catch of the day". But the urbane TV food [[criticism]] can't stop himself from falling for the dizzy American [[pallid]].

Humour, pathos, [[large]] script, strong performances from the leads and supporting caste.

It's a [[large]] film, and the best gag is the very last line.

Try it, you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1067 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Considering]] its [[popularity]], I found this movie a [[huge]] [[disappointment]]. Maybe I was expecting too much from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial [[arts]] films of the 1970s, but I could never figure out why. The story is uninteresting. It is [[also]] a very talky movie with [[sporadic]] [[action]] sequences. My [[biggest]] [[problem]] with the movie was that the [[story]] does not [[offer]] a [[character]] that I [[could]] [[root]] for, since the [[intended]] hero is an [[idiot]]. [[Director]] Chang has no [[sense]] of [[style]], and he is [[unable]] to [[hide]] the [[glaring]] [[imperfections]] [[found]] in the narrative. I know this is not [[supposed]] to be high art, but I [[found]] the movie [[boring]]. [[Definitely]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status [[escapes]] me. I [[recommend]] you to skip it. [[Reviewing]] its [[vogue]], I found this movie a [[sizeable]] [[displeasure]]. Maybe I was expecting too much from this film. After all, it is one of the most well known martial [[arte]] films of the 1970s, but I could never figure out why. The story is uninteresting. It is [[likewise]] a very talky movie with [[casual]] [[efforts]] sequences. My [[strongest]] [[difficulty]] with the movie was that the [[tales]] does not [[delivers]] a [[nature]] that I [[did]] [[rooted]] for, since the [[destined]] hero is an [[silly]]. [[Superintendent]] Chang has no [[sensing]] of [[styles]], and he is [[impossible]] to [[disguising]] the [[seeming]] [[drawbacks]] [[finds]] in the narrative. I know this is not [[suspected]] to be high art, but I [[detected]] the movie [[bored]]. [[Certainly]] not the best example of this much-beloved genre. Its cult status [[evades]] me. I [[recommendations]] you to skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1068 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] We [[first]] [[watched]] this [[film]] as part of a [[festival]] of [[new]] Argentine [[films]] in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Although]] we liked it, we didn't think it was extraordinary. Watching it for a [[second]] [[time]], we found a [[different]] [[meaning]] in this [[look]] at life in [[Buenos]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua [[administration]] was [[ending]]. The [[country]] was in [[turmoil]] after the economy, which had flourished [[earlier]] in the 1990s, under the artificially climate [[President]] Menen [[created]]. It was a [[time]] when [[bank]] [[accounts]] in dollars were [[frozen]] and people got themselves [[living]] a nightmare.

The [[story]] [[begins]] just as Santamarina, a [[bank]] [[employee]], is [[fired]] because the [[collapse]] of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his [[wife]], she [[locks]] him out of the [[apartment]] and he, for all [[practical]] [[purposes]], [[becomes]] a homeless [[man]]. He [[takes]] to the streets [[trying]] to make [[ends]] [[meet]].

The other [[story]] introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's [[almost]] a [[miracle]] he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a [[small]] [[restaurant]] in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to [[worse]], when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, [[comes]] to help [[father]] and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she [[realizes]] the [[unhappy]] circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his [[trips]] through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the [[meaning]] of an innocent [[life]] in their [[lives]] will cement their [[love]].

Ariel, who has [[met]] the [[gorgeous]] Laura at [[work]], [[begins]] a [[turbulent]] and heavy sexual [[affair]] with his [[beautiful]] co-worker, who [[unknown]] to him, is [[involved]] in a lesbian [[affair]]. Ariel who free [[lances]] by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a [[passion]] for [[Laura]], but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the [[nuances]] of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the [[turmoil]] of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. We [[fiirst]] [[saw]] this [[filmmaking]] as part of a [[celebratory]] of [[newer]] Argentine [[cinematography]] in 2000 at the Walter Reade. [[Despite]] we liked it, we didn't think it was extraordinary. Watching it for a [[secondly]] [[period]], we found a [[divergent]] [[mean]] in this [[gaze]] at life in [[Beyonce]] Aires.

The film takes place in one of the darkest days of Argentina, as the DeLaRua [[admin]] was [[end]]. The [[nations]] was in [[unrest]] after the economy, which had flourished [[ago]] in the 1990s, under the artificially climate [[Presidents]] Menen [[generated]]. It was a [[period]] when [[banking]] [[accounting]] in dollars were [[froze]] and people got themselves [[residing]] a nightmare.

The [[history]] [[launches]] just as Santamarina, a [[banking]] [[personnel]], is [[sacked]] because the [[flop]] of the economy. Instead of receiving sympathy from his [[woman]], she [[locking]] him out of the [[apartments]] and he, for all [[concrete]] [[purpose]], [[becoming]] a homeless [[dude]]. He [[pick]] to the streets [[tempting]] to make [[terminates]] [[fulfill]].

The other [[history]] introduces us to Ariel, a young Jew, interviewing for a job in a Spanish company. It's [[practically]] a [[miracles]] he gets the job. His father, Simon, owns a [[tiny]] [[catering]] in the Jewish quarter of "El Once" in the center of the city. Things go from bad to [[worst]], when Ariel's mother dies suddenly. Only Estela, the young woman who is in love with Ariel, [[arrives]] to help [[fathers]] and son.

Santamarina, who is a clean man, has to resort to take showers wherever he can. He chooses a ladies' room in one of the subway stations. When the attendant, Elsa, finds him naked, she becomes furious, but she comes to her senses when she [[recognizes]] the [[pathetic]] circumstances of this man who has seen better times. They become romantically involved, and Santamarina in one of his [[trip]] through the street garbage, finds an infant. Elsa, while surprised, wants to do the right thing. But Santamarina convinces her of the [[mean]] of an innocent [[living]] in their [[vie]] will cement their [[likes]].

Ariel, who has [[complied]] the [[excellent]] Laura at [[jobs]], [[commenced]] a [[restless]] and heavy sexual [[fling]] with his [[excellent]] co-worker, who [[unfamiliar]] to him, is [[embroiled]] in a lesbian [[fling]]. Ariel who free [[hauls]] by photographing weddings and other occasions, feels a [[enthusiasm]] for [[Laure]], but he realizes what Estela has sacrificed in order to help his father and still loves him.

Daniel Burman, whose "El Abrazo Partido" we thought was excellent, did wonders with this film. Things are put in its proper perspective after a second viewing recently and we must apologize for not having perceived it the first time around. If anything, this second time, the [[niceties]] of the screen play Mr. Burman and Emiliano Torres wrote, make more sense because they reflect the [[agitation]] of what the country was living during those dark days.

Daniel Hendler, who plays Ariel, has collaborated with Mr. Burman before to surprising results. He is not 'movie star pretty', yet, he is handsome. This actor projects a tremendous sincerity in his work. Enrique Pineyro is another magnificent surprise. His Santamarina is disarming. In spite of all the bad things that have fallen on him, he keeps a rosy attitude toward everyone he meets. Stefania Sandrelli, the interesting Italian actress, makes a great contribution to the film with her Elsa. Hector Alterio, one of the best Argentine actors plays the small part of Simon. The gorgeous Chiara Coselli is seen as Laura and Melina Petrielli appears as the noble Estela.

"Esperando al mesias" proves Daniel Burman is a voice to be reckoned with in the Argentine cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] When i finally had the opportunity to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in Europe)on an import Region 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this zombie epic is.The [[transfer]] is just about [[immaculate]],as good as it's ever going to look [[unless]] Anchor Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The sound is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),intestinal munching,zombie babies and so much more i lost track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,especially of the Italian kind.There is some excellent set pieces and cinematography to be found,i think people don't give it enough credit,if you see a clean print,and not some horrendous pirate copy,it's a whole other experience entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i realize it's inconsistent plotwise,the dubbing is horrible,the acting is stiff,and it's sense of irreverence is celebrated in grand fashion,but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best horror films ever made,you can't make a film this bad,so good,on purpose.It's accidental genius of the highest order.If they played it for laughs it would have been a disaster,but they played it straight as an arrow and the result is a terrific cult classic that thumbs it's nose at any and all traditional moviemaking standards.

Tons of action sequences,exotic locales,excellent set design,good,sometimes great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and inconsistent but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. When i finally had the opportunity to watch Zombie 3(Zombie Flesheaters 2 in Europe)on an import Region 2 Japanese dvd,i was blown away by just how entertaining this zombie epic is.The [[conveyance]] is just about [[spotless]],as good as it's ever going to look [[if]] Anchor Bay gets a hold of it.The gore truly stands out like it should and you can really appreciate the excellent makeup and gore fx.The sound is also terrific.It's only 2 channel dolby but if you have a receiver with Dolby Prologic 2,you can really appreciate the cheesy music(actually a very good score),and the effective although cheap sound effects.It never sounded so good,and the excellent transfer adds to the overall enjoyment.

I never realized just how much blood flows in this film,it's extremely brutal with exploding head shots,exploding puss filled mega pimples,a cleaver to a zombies throat,a woman's burned off extremities(how come it did'nt burn the guy also),intestinal munching,zombie babies and so much more i lost track.

This is no doubt for hardcore Zombie action fans,especially of the Italian kind.There is some excellent set pieces and cinematography to be found,i think people don't give it enough credit,if you see a clean print,and not some horrendous pirate copy,it's a whole other experience entirely.

This film never lets up for a second,and i realize it's inconsistent plotwise,the dubbing is horrible,the acting is stiff,and it's sense of irreverence is celebrated in grand fashion,but that's part of it's charm.

To me this is one of the best horror films ever made,you can't make a film this bad,so good,on purpose.It's accidental genius of the highest order.If they played it for laughs it would have been a disaster,but they played it straight as an arrow and the result is a terrific cult classic that thumbs it's nose at any and all traditional moviemaking standards.

Tons of action sequences,exotic locales,excellent set design,good,sometimes great cinematography,wonderfully cheesy acting,and inconsistent but still interesting plot,great makeup effects,beautiful women who can kick butt,excellent music,and sometimes hilarious,sometimes creepy,but always entertaining zombies.How can you go wrong with this film,it has it all,a cult classic that stands the test of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] Fantastically [[putrid]]. I don't [[mean]] to [[imply]] above that only a few people should [[avoid]] "[[Doc]] [[Savage]]." [[Almost]] [[every]] demographic [[group]] would be [[bored]] by this [[trivial]], TV-movie-quality production. It's a little like the 60's "Batman" TV series, except it's not funny. [[Even]] [[accidentally]]. You're better off taking a [[nap]]. Fantastically [[fetid]]. I don't [[meaning]] to [[insinuate]] above that only a few people should [[avoided]] "[[Docs]] [[Sauvage]]." [[Around]] [[any]] demographic [[groupings]] would be [[bores]] by this [[inconsequential]], TV-movie-quality production. It's a little like the 60's "Batman" TV series, except it's not funny. [[Yet]] [[coincidentally]]. You're better off taking a [[naps]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[really]] like Miikes movies about [[Yakuza]], this one I [[saw]] about 2 [[years]] [[ago]] and it [[really]] fu**ed my head. Never before [[seen]] such a sick and twisted thing. The [[Story]] is [[good]] and the [[actors]] do their thing very well. I haven't seen the UK or Japan version, but I have to say that I believe that the German [[DVD]] is a bit [[censored]]. If you haven't seen the movie already and live in Germany maybe you better look out for a DVD from the Nederlands or Austria. The I-ON DVD contains a lot of very hard and nasty scenes, but at the showdown I felt that something was missing, about one or two very short scenes.

[[All]] in all a good perverted movie with crazy [[characters]] and a high level of violence, that's what I like Miike for!! I [[truthfully]] like Miikes movies about [[Bully]], this one I [[watched]] about 2 [[yrs]] [[formerly]] and it [[truly]] fu**ed my head. Never before [[watched]] such a sick and twisted thing. The [[Conte]] is [[alright]] and the [[actresses]] do their thing very well. I haven't seen the UK or Japan version, but I have to say that I believe that the German [[DVDS]] is a bit [[admonish]]. If you haven't seen the movie already and live in Germany maybe you better look out for a DVD from the Nederlands or Austria. The I-ON DVD contains a lot of very hard and nasty scenes, but at the showdown I felt that something was missing, about one or two very short scenes.

[[Entire]] in all a good perverted movie with crazy [[nature]] and a high level of violence, that's what I like Miike for!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film [[would]] [[usually]] [[classify]] as the worst movie production ever. Ever. But in my [[opinion]] it is possibly the funniest. The horrifying direction and screenplay makes this [[film]] priceless. I bought the [[movie]] whilst sifting through the [[bargain]] DVD's at my local [[pound]] [[shop]]. Me and some [[friends]] then [[watched]] it, [[admittedly]] whilst [[rather]] [[drunk]]. It soon [[occurred]] that this wasn't any [[normal]] [[film]]. Instead a priceless relic of what will probably be James Cahill's [[last]] film. [[At]] first we were [[confused]] and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but thankfully in our abnormal state no-one could be bothered. Instead we watched the [[film]] right through. At the end we soon [[realised]] we had found any wasters [[dream]], something that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, [[whilst]] laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon [[showed]] all our other [[friends]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[abysmal]] [[film]]. This was a [[film]] that you can [[truly]] wet yourself laughing at. This was a [[film]] that anyone can [[enjoy]]. This was [[genius]]. This film [[ought]] [[fluently]] [[categorize]] as the worst movie production ever. Ever. But in my [[avis]] it is possibly the funniest. The horrifying direction and screenplay makes this [[kino]] priceless. I bought the [[movies]] whilst sifting through the [[bargaining]] DVD's at my local [[lbs]] [[shopping]]. Me and some [[buddies]] then [[observed]] it, [[assuredly]] whilst [[quite]] [[drunken]]. It soon [[arose]] that this wasn't any [[habitual]] [[cinematography]]. Instead a priceless relic of what will probably be James Cahill's [[final]] film. [[Under]] first we were [[disoriented]] and were screaming for the DVD player to be turned off but thankfully in our abnormal state no-one could be bothered. Instead we watched the [[cinematography]] right through. At the end we soon [[realized]] we had found any wasters [[dreaming]], something that you can acceptably laugh at for hours, [[notwithstanding]] laughing for all the wrong reasons. We soon [[evidenced]] all our other [[homies]] and they too agreed, this wasn't a work of [[terrible]] [[cinematographic]]. This was a [[movie]] that you can [[honestly]] wet yourself laughing at. This was a [[cinematography]] that anyone can [[enjoys]]. This was [[engineering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Now what's wrong with the [[actors]] that took part in that crap? [[Michael]] Dorn should stick to the Star Treck merchandise. John Diehl, does anyone remember him in Miami Vice? Liked him there... Well, whatever - what can one [[expect]] from a movie with one of the lifeguards from baywatch in the lead? Nothing, and that's what we [[get]]. None of the characters is [[even]] likable, the special [[effects]] are hilarious (but not [[funny]]). The story is a (very bad) joke. There is no logic whatsoever for what's happening. I got the feeling that the film makers were trying some kind of "Attack of the killer tomatoes" kind of thing. Especially in the scene where all the important people were discussing national security in some kind of a closet...

If you happen to see it on TV, switch channels - your TV set will be ever thankful. Now what's wrong with the [[players]] that took part in that crap? [[Michel]] Dorn should stick to the Star Treck merchandise. John Diehl, does anyone remember him in Miami Vice? Liked him there... Well, whatever - what can one [[hopes]] from a movie with one of the lifeguards from baywatch in the lead? Nothing, and that's what we [[obtain]]. None of the characters is [[yet]] likable, the special [[impact]] are hilarious (but not [[droll]]). The story is a (very bad) joke. There is no logic whatsoever for what's happening. I got the feeling that the film makers were trying some kind of "Attack of the killer tomatoes" kind of thing. Especially in the scene where all the important people were discussing national security in some kind of a closet...

If you happen to see it on TV, switch channels - your TV set will be ever thankful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The Danes character [[finally]] let's [[Buddy]] have the awful [[truth]]. ""Leave me alone, [[kiss]] [[men]] if you want to," she [[screams]] self-righteously in front of [[everyone]], [[thus]] destroying the man who has been in love with her for so long. [[Nice]] girl. This might be the [[place]] to reconsider all of the giggly charm that [[Danes]] pours into this character. [[Great]] [[reason]] to feel [[sympathy]] for her [[lying]] in bed and [[dying]], but hey, remember, there are no [[mistakes]], except, maybe, [[seeing]] this [[film]].

Wait a minute. This irony is intended! This is actually a [[masterpiece]] of [[ironic]] wit, yes! But somehow I [[doubt]] that's what the creators of this film had in mind, sadly. Maybe there are a few [[mistakes]], after all. The Danes character [[lastly]] let's [[Mate]] have the awful [[veracity]]. ""Leave me alone, [[hug]] [[males]] if you want to," she [[cris]] self-righteously in front of [[someone]], [[accordingly]] destroying the man who has been in love with her for so long. [[Handsome]] girl. This might be the [[placing]] to reconsider all of the giggly charm that [[Denmark]] pours into this character. [[Fantastic]] [[motive]] to feel [[condolences]] for her [[lies]] in bed and [[died]], but hey, remember, there are no [[faults]], except, maybe, [[witnessing]] this [[cinematography]].

Wait a minute. This irony is intended! This is actually a [[centerpiece]] of [[sarcastic]] wit, yes! But somehow I [[duda]] that's what the creators of this film had in mind, sadly. Maybe there are a few [[faults]], after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] VIVAH in my [[opinion]] is the [[best]] movie of 2006, coming from a director that has proved successful throughout his career. I am not too [[keen]] in romantic movies these [[days]], because i see them as "old wine in a new bottle" and so predictable. [[However]], i have watched this movie three times now...and believe me it's an [[awesome]] movie.

VIVAH goes back to the traditional route, [[displaying]] simple [[characters]] into a sensible and [[realistic]] [[story]] of the journey between engagement and [[marriage]]. The [[movie]] entertains in all manners as it can be reflected to what we do (or would do) when it comes to [[marriage]]. In that sense Sooraj R. Barjatya has done his homework well and has depicted a very realistic story into a well-made [[highly]] entertaining movie.

Several sequences in this movie catch your interest immediately:

* When Shahid Kapoor comes to see the bride (Amrita Rao) - the way he tries to look at her without making it too obvious in front of his and her family. The song 'Do Anjaane Ajnabi' goes well with the mood of this scene.

* The first conversation between Shahid and Amrita, when he comes to see her - i.e. a shy Shahid not knowing exactly what to talk about but pulling of a decent conversation. Also Amrita's naive nature, limited eye-contact, shy characteristics and answering softly to Shahid's questions.

* The emotional breakdown of Amrita and her uncle (Alok Nath) when she feeds him at Shahid's party in the form of another's daughter-in-law rather than her uncle's beloved niece.

Clearly the movie belongs to Amrita Rao all the way. The actress portrays the role of Poonam with such conviction that you cannot imagine anybody else replacing her. She looks beautiful throughout the whole movie, and portrays an innocent and shy traditional girl perfectly.

Shahid Kapoor performs brilliantly too. He delivers a promising performance and shows that he is no less than Salman Khan when it comes to acting in a Sooraj R. Barjatya film. In fact Shahid and Amrita make a cute on-screen couple, without a shadow of doubt. Other characters - Alok Nath (Excellent), Anupam Kher (Brilliant), Mohan Joshi (Very good).

On the whole, VIVAH delivers what it promised, a well made and realistic story of two families. The movie has top-notch performances, excellent story and great music to suit the film, as well as being directed by the fabulous Sooraj R. Barjatya. It's a must see! VIVAH in my [[view]] is the [[optimum]] movie of 2006, coming from a director that has proved successful throughout his career. I am not too [[eager]] in romantic movies these [[jours]], because i see them as "old wine in a new bottle" and so predictable. [[Instead]], i have watched this movie three times now...and believe me it's an [[unbelievable]] movie.

VIVAH goes back to the traditional route, [[demonstrating]] simple [[characteristics]] into a sensible and [[practical]] [[stories]] of the journey between engagement and [[marry]]. The [[cinema]] entertains in all manners as it can be reflected to what we do (or would do) when it comes to [[marriageable]]. In that sense Sooraj R. Barjatya has done his homework well and has depicted a very realistic story into a well-made [[unimaginably]] entertaining movie.

Several sequences in this movie catch your interest immediately:

* When Shahid Kapoor comes to see the bride (Amrita Rao) - the way he tries to look at her without making it too obvious in front of his and her family. The song 'Do Anjaane Ajnabi' goes well with the mood of this scene.

* The first conversation between Shahid and Amrita, when he comes to see her - i.e. a shy Shahid not knowing exactly what to talk about but pulling of a decent conversation. Also Amrita's naive nature, limited eye-contact, shy characteristics and answering softly to Shahid's questions.

* The emotional breakdown of Amrita and her uncle (Alok Nath) when she feeds him at Shahid's party in the form of another's daughter-in-law rather than her uncle's beloved niece.

Clearly the movie belongs to Amrita Rao all the way. The actress portrays the role of Poonam with such conviction that you cannot imagine anybody else replacing her. She looks beautiful throughout the whole movie, and portrays an innocent and shy traditional girl perfectly.

Shahid Kapoor performs brilliantly too. He delivers a promising performance and shows that he is no less than Salman Khan when it comes to acting in a Sooraj R. Barjatya film. In fact Shahid and Amrita make a cute on-screen couple, without a shadow of doubt. Other characters - Alok Nath (Excellent), Anupam Kher (Brilliant), Mohan Joshi (Very good).

On the whole, VIVAH delivers what it promised, a well made and realistic story of two families. The movie has top-notch performances, excellent story and great music to suit the film, as well as being directed by the fabulous Sooraj R. Barjatya. It's a must see! --------------------------------------------- Result 1076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of late 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[pretty]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is unmistakably an [[extremely]] low-budget venture! While not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of unintentional laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! I had never heard of this one before it turned up on Cable TV. It's very typical of late 50s sci-fi: sober, depressing and not a little paranoid! Despite the equally typical inclusion of a romantic couple, the film is [[quite]] much put across in a documentary style - which is perhaps a cheap way of leaving a lot of the exposition to narration and an excuse to insert as much stock footage as is humanly possibly for what is unmistakably an [[vitally]] low-budget venture! While not uninteresting in itself (the-apocalypse-via-renegade-missile angle later utilized, with far greater aplomb, for both DR. STRANGELOVE [1964] and FAIL-SAFE [1964]) and mercifully short, the film's single-minded approach to its subject matter results in a good deal of unintentional laughter - particularly in the scenes involving an imminent childbirth and a gang of clueless juvenile delinquents! --------------------------------------------- Result 1077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] this movie, and at [[times]], I was unnerved [[believing]] this [[movie]] '[[saw]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[come]]. Re-watch Star [[Wars]], Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[responsible]] [[parent]] (I'm speaking to those who are [[parents]] now), I (you) would not [[let]] my (your) child ever partake of this [[video]] [[festival]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[satanic]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a chilled 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[alien]], rodential, and [[wholly]] [[malevolent]] - like the Bogey man [[made]] flesh, [[invisible]] to [[adults]], [[tempting]] [[children]] with lifestyles they [[could]] never afford (without the [[income]] [[made]] [[possible]] by [[years]] of self denial and [[prudent]] stewardship). He is a peddler of [[easy]] [[answers]], and [[false]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I [[pray]] (I [[mean]] this literally and [[figuratively]], with an [[emphasis]] on the former) that this [[movie]] has not [[made]] the format [[jump]] to DVD. It is my [[hope]] that this type of 'yellow film making' [[died]] an un-mourned [[death]] in the [[cold]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also [[loves]] [[pizza]]. I [[forgot]] to mention that. It [[comes]] up a lot. I [[observed]] this movie, and at [[moments]], I was unnerved [[think]] this [[cinematography]] '[[seen]] me.' Munchie sullies the 'farce' for years to [[coming]]. Re-watch Star [[Warfare]], Don't-watch Munchie.

As a [[answerable]] [[parents]] (I'm speaking to those who are [[relatives]] now), I (you) would not [[allowing]] my (your) child ever partake of this [[videotape]] [[festivals]] of the pseudo-occult. To insinuate Munchie is [[malevolent]], to a co-viewer, is likely to illicit a chilled 'duh.' He is fiendish, [[foreign]], rodential, and [[perfectly]] [[baleful]] - like the Bogey man [[brought]] flesh, [[unseen]] to [[adult]], [[seductive]] [[childhood]] with lifestyles they [[wo]] never afford (without the [[incomes]] [[introduced]] [[attainable]] by [[ages]] of self denial and [[watchful]] stewardship). He is a peddler of [[simple]] [[answering]], and [[fictitious]] ideals. He is everything the morally conscious viewer is not. He is the devil's own Ron Popeil.

I [[praying]] (I [[meaning]] this literally and [[metaphorically]], with an [[concentrating]] on the former) that this [[cinematography]] has not [[introduced]] the format [[jumps]] to DVD. It is my [[esperanza]] that this type of 'yellow film making' [[decease]] an un-mourned [[mortality]] in the [[frigid]] nights of 1994.

Munchie also [[love]] [[pizzeria]]. I [[forget]] to mention that. It [[occurs]] up a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 1078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Now I had the best [[intentions]] when watching this one. I like some of Tony Scott's [[work]], [[also]] a [[friend]] of mine told me it was a [[great]] movie, even [[though]] I [[heard]] [[otherwise]] from other people. But this was [[simply]] [[hopeless]].

In my humble opinion, Tony Scott was trying too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[elaborate]].

Miss Knightley was overacting, and not in a [[good]] way. The people who did perform well, were Mickey Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and Christopher Walken, but their screen [[time]] just wasn't able to save the movie.

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, yet somehow it felt [[like]] they were written by [[someone]] other than the main writer. A certain [[tune]] was used [[around]] 4 times, which [[really]] started to bug after the second [[time]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[using]] the same [[tune]] more than once.

Also, the editing really went out on this one, as the cutting rate is [[rather]] high. Oh, and the repetitive echoing of some of Keira's lines simply [[sounded]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

Basically, my [[opinion]] is that if you want to see an action-flick that is high-paced and "somewhat" funny, and you don't care about everything I mentioned above, you might like it.

(On a side note: I'm not a Keira [[Knightley]] [[fan]].) Now I had the best [[purposes]] when watching this one. I like some of Tony Scott's [[cooperate]], [[further]] a [[amigo]] of mine told me it was a [[sublime]] movie, even [[while]] I [[listened]] [[alternately]] from other people. But this was [[exclusively]] [[desperate]].

In my humble opinion, Tony Scott was trying too hard. It was all just too much. Allow me to [[develop]].

Miss Knightley was overacting, and not in a [[buena]] way. The people who did perform well, were Mickey Rourke, Edgar Ramirez, and Christopher Walken, but their screen [[period]] just wasn't able to save the movie.

There were a few scenes that jumped out in their originality, yet somehow it felt [[iike]] they were written by [[everyone]] other than the main writer. A certain [[tuning]] was used [[nearly]] 4 times, which [[genuinely]] started to bug after the second [[period]]. I'm a firm believer of not [[used]] the same [[melody]] more than once.

Also, the editing really went out on this one, as the cutting rate is [[somewhat]] high. Oh, and the repetitive echoing of some of Keira's lines simply [[rang]] cheesy after hearing it for the second, third, fourth time, and so on.

Basically, my [[viewing]] is that if you want to see an action-flick that is high-paced and "somewhat" funny, and you don't care about everything I mentioned above, you might like it.

(On a side note: I'm not a Keira [[Keira]] [[admirer]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 1079 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Don't be [[deceived]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews [[quoted]] on the DVD box. "[[Wildly]] [[entertaining]].", "a [[seriously]] [[scary]] freakout.", and the [[worst]] of all, "ON PAR WITH JAWS." This [[movie]] is [[none]] of the above.

[[Normally]] I don't bother with [[writing]] bad reviews for [[films]] but I can't [[believe]] this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[deserve]] it.

After a so-so opening daylight attack by a [[monster]] [[created]] by, what [[else]], [[chemicals]] [[dumped]] by lazy [[scientists]], this movie goes [[absolutely]] [[nowhere]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Basically]] and improbably, a [[girl]] is snagged by the [[monster]] (I'll [[give]] them points for a [[good]] creature [[design]] but this ain't no WETA [[creation]]) and her semi-comical [[family]] [[spend]] an hour-and-a-half [[tracking]] her down...in the sewers [[surrounding]] the Han river. Their [[search]] [[lacks]] any suspense-again, [[someone]] [[called]] this on par with Jaws?-and by the [[time]] they find her you [[realize]] it was all pretty much [[pointless]]. Other than that, a [[big]] [[bulk]] of the [[movie]] is [[committed]] to a [[government]] [[quarantine]] that culminates in one [[funny]] scene [[involving]] a [[guy]] spitting in a gutter in front of a [[crowded]] bus stop.

Blech. This was [[bad]]. I'm not [[kidding]]. You [[want]] to [[see]] a [[rotten]] monster movie? [[Rent]] [[Deep]] [[Rising]]. At [[least]] you'll [[save]] 30 [[minutes]] of your [[life]]. Don't be [[hoodwinked]] as I was by the 'glowing' reviews [[mentioned]] on the DVD box. "[[Brutally]] [[droll]].", "a [[gravely]] [[dreadful]] freakout.", and the [[hardest]] of all, "ON PAR WITH JAWS." This [[cinematography]] is [[nothing]] of the above.

[[Fluently]] I don't bother with [[handwriting]] bad reviews for [[movies]] but I can't [[believing]] this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't [[merited]] it.

After a so-so opening daylight attack by a [[creature]] [[engendered]] by, what [[elsewhere]], [[chemical]] [[dump]] by lazy [[scientist]], this movie goes [[perfectly]] [[wherever]] and it goes there sloooowly. [[Mainly]] and improbably, a [[fille]] is snagged by the [[creature]] (I'll [[lend]] them points for a [[alright]] creature [[designs]] but this ain't no WETA [[creations]]) and her semi-comical [[families]] [[spends]] an hour-and-a-half [[tracks]] her down...in the sewers [[surrounds]] the Han river. Their [[searches]] [[missing]] any suspense-again, [[everyone]] [[drew]] this on par with Jaws?-and by the [[times]] they find her you [[accomplishing]] it was all pretty much [[vain]]. Other than that, a [[immense]] [[wholesale]] of the [[cinematography]] is [[commit]] to a [[administrations]] [[midlife]] that culminates in one [[hilarious]] scene [[encompassing]] a [[man]] spitting in a gutter in front of a [[overcrowded]] bus stop.

Blech. This was [[mala]]. I'm not [[shitting]]. You [[wanting]] to [[behold]] a [[mala]] monster movie? [[Rentals]] [[Profound]] [[Climb]]. At [[fewest]] you'll [[saved]] 30 [[mins]] of your [[lives]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part [[II]]". The original script for "First Blood" had John Rambo committing [[suicide]] at the end of the film, but this was changed to allow him to live, not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone obviously [[thought]] that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the hero of two more films in the eighties, plus the recently released fourth [[instalment]].

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part II", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", although this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. Unfortunately for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[hellish]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The rest of the film is more or less one long battle between Rambo and a few allies (including a beautiful Vietnamese girl) and the evil commie soldiers and their Russian allies. Most of the evil commies, of course, end up dead, although I was surprised to learn from your "trivia" section that the total death toll was as low as 67. At times it seemed as though Rambo was trying to wipe out the entire Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 By rights, there should never have been a "First Blood Part [[SECONDLY]]". The original script for "First Blood" had John Rambo committing [[suicides]] at the end of the film, but this was changed to allow him to live, not because the producers wanted to make a sequel but because test audiences found the original ending too depressing. Nevertheless, someone obviously [[brainchild]] that the character was too good to waste, because he ended up as the hero of two more films in the eighties, plus the recently released fourth [[installment]].

The official title of this film was "Rambo: First Blood Part II", but it is more commonly known simply as "Rambo". It starts with the title character in jail, where he is presumably expiating the crimes he committed in "First Blood", although this is never made too explicit. He is removed from prison by his former commanding officer, Colonel Trautman, for a secret mission. Rambo is to return to Vietnam to investigate reports that American POWs are still being held captive by the Communist regime. He is under strict instructions not to attempt to rescue any prisoners or to engage the enemy; his is to be simply a fact-finding mission.

What Rambo does not realise is that he is being set up, not by Trautman, who is portrayed as brave, honourable and incorruptible, but by the organiser of the mission, a military bureaucrat named Murdock. Murdock intends that the mission will prove that there are no American prisoners in Vietnam, partly because that will improve relationships between the American and Vietnamese governments, partly because it will make his own life easier. Unfortunately for Murdock, Rambo discovers that not only are Americans still being held prisoner, they are also being kept in [[infernal]] conditions. Of course, he is far too much of a hero to leave them to their fate, and tries to rescue them. The rest of the film is more or less one long battle between Rambo and a few allies (including a beautiful Vietnamese girl) and the evil commie soldiers and their Russian allies. Most of the evil commies, of course, end up dead, although I was surprised to learn from your "trivia" section that the total death toll was as low as 67. At times it seemed as though Rambo was trying to wipe out the entire Vietnamese army.

The tone of this film is very different from the first. In "First Blood" Rambo was unquestionably a criminal, even though his responsibility for his crimes was lessened by severe provocation and by his mental instability. In "Rambo" he is a bona fide all-American hero. A few years earlier the director, George Pan Cosmatos, had made "The Cassandra Crossing", a biased piece of left-wing anti-American propaganda. Cosmatos, however, was nothing if not versatile, and "Rambo" proves that he could also turn his hand to biased right-wing pro-American propaganda. The one thing the two films have in common is that both are laughably bad.

"First Blood" had its faults, but it also had its virtues. Its stance, that the anti-war movement was partly to blame for the problems faced by Vietnam vets in readjusting to civilian life, was a controversial one, but at least the film was trying to make a statement about war, social attitudes to war, and the roots of violence in society. "Rambo", by contrast, has very few virtues, except that the action sequences are well enough done to please those who like that sort of thing. It is essentially a sort of jingoistic revenge fantasy for those Americans who were still sore about the Vietnam war. Rambo re-fights the war single-handed, and this time the right side wins. Take that, Charlie Cong!

By this point, no doubt, the film's admirers (and there seem to be plenty- more than 2,000 voters have already given it ten stars) will have concluded that I am a liberal commie-loving pinko. Far from it- in fact, I have always despised Communism as a pernicious ideology. What I dislike about the film is not its politics but its lack of subtlety and its suggestion that the solution to all problems, including ideological disputes, is to go in with all guns blazing and to try and kill as many people as possible. It makes no attempt to understand the political complexities of South-East Asia or why not everyone in the region was pro-American. For all its anti-Communism, the film is the sort of moronic sledgehammer propaganda that the Communists were very good at churning out themselves- except that they attributed all the world's problems to Capitalism, or Imperialism, or Revisionism, or whatever other ism they had taken a dislike to. Compared to "Rambo", "The Green Berets" was a masterly piece of political analysis. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid foundation for what "could have been" a good all-original film.

[[Unfortunately]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules White decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, giving us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 Having low expectations going in, the opening new footage (clocked at over five minutes) of 'Husbands' came as a pleasant surprise. I won't say the new footage was grade A material, but it provided a very solid foundation for what "could have been" a good all-original film.

[[Regrettably]], this was put together in 1955, during a time of one day shooting schedules. After the new footage, Jules White decided to just thumbtack stock footage from 'Brideless Groom' into this short, making for a not-so-smooth story transition, which Jules and Felix Adler try to remedy with a quickie bit of new footage at the end, giving us the old, worn-out ending of the boys (Moe & Larry in this case) getting shot in the butt.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I [[saw]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[bad]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[cringe]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen would have worked wonders with the [[outlandish]] plot, and Baldwin's part could have been played with gusto by Leslie Nelson.it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few minutes i watched was for the lovely Nicole she was so hot around 93, has Baldwin ever made a good movie? Pullman played his stock in trade "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his mouth when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. I [[noticed]] this movie a few years back on the BBC i sat thru it. How? i don't know,this is way up there in the "so [[inclement]] it'Good " charts Kidman ,Baldwin,and Pullman must [[shudder]] when they see it now.I think Woody Allen would have worked wonders with the [[inquisitive]] plot, and Baldwin's part could have been played with gusto by Leslie Nelson.it was on again tonight i tried to watch it again but life's too short. the few minutes i watched was for the lovely Nicole she was so hot around 93, has Baldwin ever made a good movie? Pullman played his stock in trade "nice but dim" character the F-word coming out of his mouth when the lady from "frasier" miscast ed as a detective accuses him of murder sounds so wrong. stay well away. --------------------------------------------- Result 1083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Pakeezah is in my mind the [[greatest]] achievement of Indian [[cinema]]. The [[film]] is visually [[overwhelming]] but [[also]] [[emotionally]] [[breathtaking]]. The music, the [[songs]], the sets, the [[costumes]], the cinematography, in fact [[every]] [[creative]] element is worthy of superlatives. Pakeezah is in my mind the [[higher]] achievement of Indian [[cine]]. The [[cinematographic]] is visually [[prodigious]] but [[apart]] [[romantically]] [[breathless]]. The music, the [[lyrics]], the sets, the [[costume]], the cinematography, in fact [[any]] [[imaginative]] element is worthy of superlatives. --------------------------------------------- Result 1084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The [[movie]] had a good [[concept]], but the execution just didn't live up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[M]]". A [[child]] killer has begun [[terrorizing]] a city. The lead [[detectives]] (Dennis Hopper and Frederic [[Forest]]) have never [[dealt]] with a serial [[killer]] before. The Mayor and the Police Chief, in desperation, [[secretly]] [[hire]] the local [[mob]] to [[speed]] things up...to go [[places]] and do things that the [[police]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bring]] an end to this mess as soon as possible.

To be fair, this [[film]] DOES genuinely have some [[good]] things to [[offer]].

[[Besides]] the [[concept]], I [[liked]] the [[look]] of the killer's [[hideout]]. Norman [[Bates]] has his [[basement]]. This [[guy]] has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. [[Dennis]] Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual [[investigation]] process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how bad this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually [[liked]] were two pick-pockets you [[meet]] about half-way through the [[movie]]. [[Considering]] that they're minor characters, I'd [[call]] that a [[bad]] sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante [[movie]] or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie [[elements]] too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. The [[cinematographic]] had a good [[conceptions]], but the execution just didn't live up to it.

What is this concept? Well, story-wise, it's "Dirty Harry" meets "[[meters]]". A [[enfants]] killer has begun [[terrorising]] a city. The lead [[informers]] (Dennis Hopper and Frederic [[Forestier]]) have never [[addressed]] with a serial [[callin]] before. The Mayor and the Police Chief, in desperation, [[surreptitiously]] [[rental]] the local [[rabble]] to [[swiftness]] things up...to go [[spaces]] and do things that the [[policemen]] wouldn't be able to in order to [[bringing]] an end to this mess as soon as possible.

To be fair, this [[cinematography]] DOES genuinely have some [[alright]] things to [[delivering]].

[[Furthermore]] the [[notions]], I [[loved]] the [[glance]] of the killer's [[hideaway]]. Norman [[Bats]] has his [[cellar]]. This [[blokes]] has an eerie sewer. In some of the shots, the light bounces off the water and creates rippling reflections on the walls; often giving these scenes a creepy, dreamlike quality.

The acting was good too. [[Denys]] Hopper is one of those actors who gets better with age.

Once you get past that, however, it more-or-less goes downhill.

The film is paced way too fast. The actual [[inquiries]] process from both teams feels very rushed as opposed to feeling intricate and fascinating. This could have been fixed in two ways: either make the film longer or cut out some of the many subplots. Either of these would have allowed the crew to devote more time to the actual mystery.

For an example of how bad this is, one of the crucial clues that helps them zero in on just the right suspect is this: at one point in his life, the suspect went to a pet shop...That's right...I'm being totally serious here. It's like they went from point A (the first clue) to point Z (the suspect) and skipped over all the "in-between" steps.

Then there's the characters. The only ones I actually [[wished]] were two pick-pockets you [[respond]] about half-way through the [[cinema]]. [[Recital]] that they're minor characters, I'd [[invitation]] that a [[naughty]] sign.

Finally, there's the mob angle. This is the one that gets me the most because THIS is why I coughed up the $3 to buy the DVD in the first place. I mean, what a hook! There's been an absolute glut of serial killer flicks in the last 10-15 years. The mob angle was a gimmick that COULD have helped it rise above the rest..., but it didn't.

I figured the gangsters's methods would be brutal, but fun and thrilling at the same time; kind of like a vigilante [[cinema]] or something...maybe they'd even throw in some heist movie [[component]] too. We ARE talking about criminals, after all. Instead, we're given some of the most repulsive protagonists committed to celluloid. The detectives question witnesses. What does the mob do? They interrogate and kill them. It's not even like these witnesses are really even that bad either. I actually found the criminals less likable than the killer they're hunting.

Unless the good points I mentioned are enough to get your interest, I'd say give this one a miss. Maybe some day, they'll reuse the same story idea and do it RIGHT. I hope so. I hate to see such a good concept go to waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 1085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This so-called "documentary" [[tries]] to tell that USA faked the moon-landing. Year right.

All those who have actually studied the case knows different.

First of all: there is definitely proof. When the astronauts was on the moon, they brought back MANY pounds of rock from the moon - for geological studies. These where spread around the world to hundreds of labs, who tested them. And they all concluded that they came from the same planet, not earth: because the inner isotopes of the basic elements are different from those found on earth, but similar to those calculated to be on the moon. I.E. the conspiracy theorists never studies anything: they only take the thing that fit into their theory and ignores the rest.

Another wrongful claim from them is that their was wind in the hangar where they shot the moon landing, I.E. the flag moves. There is a logical explanation: the astronaut moved it with his hand, so it moved. And what proves this: well, if the conspiracy theorists even studied the footage, they would see that the flag NEVER moves after the astronaut have let it be, I.E. the conspiracy theorists are bad-scientists, they cant study a subject properly, or only studies it until they have what they came for, so that they can make a lie from that, and make a profit (I.E. this so-called "documentary").

A claim says that it cant possible have been filmed on the moon because all the shadows come from different places, because there are different light-sources, the artificial lighting from the studio. Once again the conspiracy theorists are wrong (as usual), the same would happen in an earth desert at night, with no light-sources. But i doubt that any Conspiracy theorists have ever been outside their grandmothers basement for more than how many days a Star Treck-convention is held over.

The Conspiracy theorists are in denial, BIG TIME. They only see what they want to see. So they make up all these lies to seem important - that is a fact. This so-called "documentary" [[endeavours]] to tell that USA faked the moon-landing. Year right.

All those who have actually studied the case knows different.

First of all: there is definitely proof. When the astronauts was on the moon, they brought back MANY pounds of rock from the moon - for geological studies. These where spread around the world to hundreds of labs, who tested them. And they all concluded that they came from the same planet, not earth: because the inner isotopes of the basic elements are different from those found on earth, but similar to those calculated to be on the moon. I.E. the conspiracy theorists never studies anything: they only take the thing that fit into their theory and ignores the rest.

Another wrongful claim from them is that their was wind in the hangar where they shot the moon landing, I.E. the flag moves. There is a logical explanation: the astronaut moved it with his hand, so it moved. And what proves this: well, if the conspiracy theorists even studied the footage, they would see that the flag NEVER moves after the astronaut have let it be, I.E. the conspiracy theorists are bad-scientists, they cant study a subject properly, or only studies it until they have what they came for, so that they can make a lie from that, and make a profit (I.E. this so-called "documentary").

A claim says that it cant possible have been filmed on the moon because all the shadows come from different places, because there are different light-sources, the artificial lighting from the studio. Once again the conspiracy theorists are wrong (as usual), the same would happen in an earth desert at night, with no light-sources. But i doubt that any Conspiracy theorists have ever been outside their grandmothers basement for more than how many days a Star Treck-convention is held over.

The Conspiracy theorists are in denial, BIG TIME. They only see what they want to see. So they make up all these lies to seem important - that is a fact. --------------------------------------------- Result 1086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. Simply put, the [[movie]] was spectacularly average. It's not [[bad]], but it's really not very good. The editing is good; the film is well-paced. The direction is competent and assured. The story is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, Bloom, and the normally great Watts and Rush. The accents are impenetrable if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the end of the film, I was neither bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. The only reason I wanted to see this was because of Orlando Bloom. Simply put, the [[cinematographic]] was spectacularly average. It's not [[unfavorable]], but it's really not very good. The editing is good; the film is well-paced. The direction is competent and assured. The story is plodding. The film is averagely acted by Ledger, Bloom, and the normally great Watts and Rush. The accents are impenetrable if you're from the US so just sit back and enjoy the scenery (or as I like to call it, Orlando Bloom). By the end of the film, I was neither bored nor moved. Some people have asked what happened to Ned Kelly at the end of the movie. I have to say, I so did not care by that point.

Really, the only reason I can recommend this is that Orlando Bloom kind of, sort of shows some hints of range (although the oft-present "I'm pretty and confused" look is prominent), so fangirls may find it worth the matinee price. Other than that, just don't see it. It's neither good enough nor bad enough to be entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 1087 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Welcome to Our Town, welcome to your [[town]]? As we are [[introduced]] into the worlds of its [[townsfolk]] of 1901 America, this three act [[play]] is opened before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular families; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely middle America at the turn of the century, and the progressive way of life of the American Dream and its saccharine [[overtones]] that can seem a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the anxieties and woes of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this predicament that the dead, as they return to revisit and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and squandered.

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also seems more apparent too, feeling more of a propaganda stunt on the moral lecturing on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" town, this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native American and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can live up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took part in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town starts off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more important than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. Welcome to Our Town, welcome to your [[ville]]? As we are [[made]] into the worlds of its [[townspeople]] of 1901 America, this three act [[gaming]] is opened before us with the help of "The Stage Manager", a visual narrator if you like. After his initial introductions, we are lead into the homes of two particular families; The Webb's and the Gibb's.

This is most definitely middle America at the turn of the century, and the progressive way of life of the American Dream and its saccharine [[nuances]] that can seem a little biased in this dream town. Here we see the everyday lives of some of its 2642 populace of Grover's Corners, New Hampshire, even if there are, too, the migrant Polish workers that add another 500 to is numbers, they, never get a look-in.

Once the daily lives of these families have been introduced; wives cooking, children home-working, fathers working, kids falling in love and the clean picket-fences painted white, the second act is started three years later, after young George (a young and unrecognisable William Holden, then aged 22) and Emily have fallen in love and intend to marry. Blossoming lovebirds reaching for the stars and reaching, too, a turning point in their own lives, from the nest they lived and now, into the anxieties and woes of young adulthood they nervously step. The third act is slightly more sour and foreboding, it is in this act that the movies intentions become apparent, here we see not life, not celebration but death, and it is in this predicament that the dead, as they return to revisit and reconcile their own life past, are here to remind us, to tell us, that life, and every last minute, every precious breath is not to be wasted and squandered.

It is in this last third that the movies own political stance also seems more apparent too, feeling more of a propaganda stunt on the moral lecturing on, and by, middle America and how it should direct its home and how it should also put it in order. This isn't just about "Our" town, this is moral diction aimed at "Our" souls and how America can better itself if its peoples', (excluding the Poles, the Irish, the Native American and the freed ethnic minorities', and minorities' in general, plus the supporting backbone of the Americana's who, still, have not had a fair part in this narrative), such as the middle classes, can live up to the expectations of the American Dream through honest, decent living. The purveyors of the American Dream with special invitation only.

I was entertained, slightly, by this movie too, but I felt that its narrative held a stronger impact than anything else that took part in it albeit the bland acting, the musical score or how well, or not, it was made. This was the movies intention to exclude other groups, and to only include the likes of the Webb's and the Gibb's, in the future of the developing country of the USA, a good movie, but also a slightly biased in its stance, I thought.

Taken from the play by US' born Thornton Wilder (1897 - 1975) this Pulitzer Prize winning play, and six Academy Award nominated movie, was the focal point on the perpetual motion of life and its three main attributes; Life, love and death, the plays translation onto celluloid comes across as a slightly to the right blurb of social consciousness. Our Town starts off with what seems a lesson in pointlessness, like other towns, nothing too exciting ever happens here, if anything at all, this town only has the "right sort of people", you can still leave your back-door unlocked here, we are seeing the developing lives of these two families, but it is their moral and social stance that is more important than them themselves. Our Town may just have been "Any Town", just as long as you came from the right part of town that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was [[hoping]] for some [[sort]] of in-depth background information on the Apollo 11 mission and what I got was some decent [[interview]] material with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people involved in the mission, linked by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[worst]] tradition of TV production.

If you could cut out the voice-over and [[change]] the spin of the [[program]] to a positive testament of how people can overcome setbacks to achieve a goal out of the ordinary then this could've been great - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[life]] whilst watching a 60 minute programme. I want those minutes back. I was [[awaiting]] for some [[kinds]] of in-depth background information on the Apollo 11 mission and what I got was some decent [[interrogation]] material with Buzz Aldrin Gene Krantz and other people involved in the mission, linked by over-hyped disaster-predicting sensationalising voice-over in the [[hardest]] tradition of TV production.

If you could cut out the voice-over and [[amendments]] the spin of the [[programme]] to a positive testament of how people can overcome setbacks to achieve a goal out of the ordinary then this could've been great - but I feel I've wasted about 45 minutes of my [[lifetime]] whilst watching a 60 minute programme. I want those minutes back. --------------------------------------------- Result 1089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] With the release of Peter Jackson's famed "Lord of the Rings" [[trilogy]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the Rings film as inferior. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film adaptation of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[prevent]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering [[effort]]. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's film and there are some clear similarities between their adaptations.

The film's colorful picturesque backdrops are [[excellent]] and the score is memorable. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the characters. The pairs of Pippin and Merry and Eowyn and Galadriel are mostly indistinguishable from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these points didn't bother me very much. However, the Nazgul are [[aptly]] drawn and made sufficiently eerie. The only character representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to look unbecomingly silly.

This film is novel for its animation techniques. In addition to hand-drawn characters, live actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite apparent which characters are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the less I found that the film's style was a novelty. The use of rotoscoped live actors for the battle scenes was a good decision and helped these scenes turn out well.

The voice acting was generally of high quality. Particularly good was John Hurt, who provided an authoritative voice for [[Aragorn]]. [[Aragorn]] isn't a favorite character of mine from the stories, but backed by John Hurt's voice he was my favorite character in this adaptation. My other favorite was William Squire, whose voice is appropriately strong for Gandalf. The only actor who seemed inappropriate was Michael Scholes as Sam, whose voice acting was irritating and added to Sam's unfortunately silly image. The only other [[bothersome]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of character and place names. Particularly strange was the decision to frequently have Saruman referred to as "Aruman".

In producing this film, Ralph Bakshi expected to have the ability to produce two films. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to breeze through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were tremendous.

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. With the release of Peter Jackson's famed "Lord of the Rings" [[triad]], it is even easier to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated Lord of the Rings film as inferior. I agree with the majority that Jackson's trilogy is the essential film adaptation of Tolkien's work, but that does not [[preclude]] me from enjoying Bakshi's ambitious pioneering [[endeavors]]. Jackson has admitted that he received at least some inspiration from seeing Bakshi's film and there are some clear similarities between their adaptations.

The film's colorful picturesque backdrops are [[magnifique]] and the score is memorable. I was for the most part satisfied by the drawings of the characters. The pairs of Pippin and Merry and Eowyn and Galadriel are mostly indistinguishable from each other visually, the Balrog and Treebeard were unimpressive, but these points didn't bother me very much. However, the Nazgul are [[justifiably]] drawn and made sufficiently eerie. The only character representation I was bothered by was Sam's; he was made to look unbecomingly silly.

This film is novel for its animation techniques. In addition to hand-drawn characters, live actors are incorporated into the animation through rotoscoping. It is quite apparent which characters are hand-drawn and which are rotoscoped, but none the less I found that the film's style was a novelty. The use of rotoscoped live actors for the battle scenes was a good decision and helped these scenes turn out well.

The voice acting was generally of high quality. Particularly good was John Hurt, who provided an authoritative voice for [[Faramir]]. [[Boromir]] isn't a favorite character of mine from the stories, but backed by John Hurt's voice he was my favorite character in this adaptation. My other favorite was William Squire, whose voice is appropriately strong for Gandalf. The only actor who seemed inappropriate was Michael Scholes as Sam, whose voice acting was irritating and added to Sam's unfortunately silly image. The only other [[tiresome]] part of the voice acting is the mispronunciation of character and place names. Particularly strange was the decision to frequently have Saruman referred to as "Aruman".

In producing this film, Ralph Bakshi expected to have the ability to produce two films. Hence, this film contains about half the story, from the start of "The Fellowship of the Ring" to the end of the battle at Helm's Deep in "The Two Towers". The obvious implication of this is that the film's story is a highly condensed version of the story from the books. I enjoy the original stories and more thorough adaptations, but the liberties taken to compress the story didn't bother me, even the choice to leave Arwen out of the story. Enough of the key elements of the story were in this film to keep me engaged for the duration and there was even a novelty in being able to breeze through half the Lord of the Rings story in 132 minutes. The battle scenes were impressive and in particular the orc march to and battle at Helm's Deep were tremendous.

Ralph Bakshi's version of "The Lord of the Rings" isn't perfect and no doubt a number of Lord of the Rings readers lament the cuts to the story. However, for me the drawbacks of this film were minor compared to the thrill of seeing an effective adaptation of half of a great trilogy. My only strong lament is that I am unable to see the second part of this "first great tale" of The Lord of the Rings since Bakshi was not given the budget to create a sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1090 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THE MAN IN THE MOON is a warm and moving coming of age drama centering around a farming family in the 1950's. The main story follows a 14-year old girl (Reese Witherspoon) who develops a crush on a 17-year old neighbor (Jason London) who ends up falling for her older sister (Emily Warfield) and how an unexpected tragedy alters this family's dynamics forever. The 1950's are lovingly evoked here and the screenplay gives you characters you come to care about almost immediately. Witherspoon already begins to show the Oscar-winning talent she would develop in this early role and London makes a charming leading man. Warfield lends a quiet maturity to the role of the older sister that is effective as well. Kudos to Sam Waterston and Tess Harper who play the girls' parents and Gail Strickland, who plays London's mom. I was unexpectedly moved by this quiet and affecting drama that stirs up strong emotions and gives deeper meaning to the phrase "family ties." --------------------------------------------- Result 1091 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I [[love]] this movie. It is great [[film]] that [[combines]] English and Indian cultures with feminist-type [[issues]], such as girls [[wanting]] to [[play]] [[sports]] that were previously [[reserved]] for men. It [[shows]] the struggles of both an Indian [[person]] [[wanting]] to [[break]] outside her [[cultural]] [[barriers]] and women wanting to [[break]] outside the gender [[restrictions]] [[found]] in [[sports]], [[especially]] in [[England]] at the [[time]]. I feel that the cultural struggles are more [[emphasized]] than the other [[issues]].

[[In]] [[contrast]] to the other comment, I do not [[think]] this [[movie]] is anything like Dirty [[Dancing]] or any other such [[chick]] flick. This [[move]] is [[loved]] by many [[types]] of people, [[men]] and [[women]], young and [[old]] alike. I [[iove]] this movie. It is great [[movies]] that [[amalgamated]] English and Indian cultures with feminist-type [[issue]], such as girls [[wants]] to [[gaming]] [[athletes]] that were previously [[booked]] for men. It [[denotes]] the struggles of both an Indian [[someone]] [[wishing]] to [[interruption]] outside her [[culturally]] [[constraints]] and women wanting to [[interruption]] outside the gender [[limits]] [[detected]] in [[athletics]], [[specifically]] in [[Britain]] at the [[times]]. I feel that the cultural struggles are more [[insisted]] than the other [[problem]].

[[During]] [[rematch]] to the other comment, I do not [[reckon]] this [[filmmaking]] is anything like Dirty [[Choreography]] or any other such [[nana]] flick. This [[budge]] is [[worshiped]] by many [[typing]] of people, [[mens]] and [[woman]], young and [[elderly]] alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 1092 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This is one of the silliest movies I have ever had the [[misfortune]] to watch! I should have [[expected]] it, after [[seeing]] the first two, but I keep getting suckered into these [[types]] of movies with the idea of "[[Maybe]] they did it right this [[time]]". Nope - not [[even]] [[close]].

Where do I [[begin]]? How about with the [[special]] [[effects]]... To [[give]] you an [[idea]] of what passes for SFX in this [[movie]], at one point a soldier is [[shooting]] at a "Raptor" as it runs down a hallway. Even with [[less]] than a second of screen [[time]], the viewer can easily [[see]] that it is just a man with a tail [[apparently]] [[taped]] to him [[running]] [[around]]. [[Bad]] bad bad bad.

How about the acting? If that's what you can [[call]] it. There is one [[character]] who, I [[suppose]], is [[supposed]] to be from the [[south]]. [[However]], after living in the [[south]] for six [[years]] now, I have never heard this [[way]] of [[talking]]. Perhaps he has some [[sort]] of [[weird]] disability - the [[inability]] to [[talk]] [[normally]]. I [[find]] it [[fascinating]] that the [[character]] does [[nothing]] that requires him to have that [[accent]] - therefore there was no [[reason]] for the [[actor]] to [[try]] to do one.

How about the plot? It's [[pretty]] [[basic]] - [[Raptors]] [[escape]], people with guns [[must]] [[hunt]] them down. I'm [[starting]] to wonder why the [[dinosaurs]] in these [[movies]] always seem to run into the [[nearest]] system of tunnels... wouldn't they [[stay]] outside to hunt prey? [[Oh]] well, at [[least]] they have the [[good]] [[sense]] to [[appear]] very very [[little]] in the [[movie]] which [[supposedly]] [[revolves]] [[around]] them.

Other [[things]] - Let's say you are in a building and you know that there are man eating [[raptors]] [[running]] [[around]] in it. Would you [[decide]] to take [[time]] out to have an [[argument]] about who is [[better]] - Army or [[Marine]]? And then [[decide]] to have an arm [[wrestling]] [[contest]] to [[settle]] it? How about the [[idiotic]] [[idea]] that they have to track down the [[raptors]] - [[Split]] up into groups of two. Didn't they ever watch any [[horror]] [[movies]] ([[Or]] at [[least]] an episode of Scooby Doo)? [[In]] short, this is one of the dumber [[movies]] out there. Miss it [[unless]] you [[want]] to groan your [[way]] through a [[movie]]. This is one of the silliest movies I have ever had the [[woe]] to watch! I should have [[prophesied]] it, after [[see]] the first two, but I keep getting suckered into these [[sorts]] of movies with the idea of "[[Possibly]] they did it right this [[times]]". Nope - not [[yet]] [[nearer]].

Where do I [[outset]]? How about with the [[particular]] [[influences]]... To [[lend]] you an [[ideals]] of what passes for SFX in this [[cinematography]], at one point a soldier is [[gunshot]] at a "Raptor" as it runs down a hallway. Even with [[fewest]] than a second of screen [[times]], the viewer can easily [[behold]] that it is just a man with a tail [[seemingly]] [[recorded]] to him [[executing]] [[almost]]. [[Faulty]] bad bad bad.

How about the acting? If that's what you can [[invitation]] it. There is one [[characters]] who, I [[reckon]], is [[suspected]] to be from the [[southern]]. [[Yet]], after living in the [[southward]] for six [[ages]] now, I have never heard this [[paths]] of [[discussing]]. Perhaps he has some [[sorting]] of [[odd]] disability - the [[disability]] to [[discussion]] [[traditionally]]. I [[unearthed]] it [[riveting]] that the [[characters]] does [[anything]] that requires him to have that [[focus]] - therefore there was no [[motif]] for the [[protagonist]] to [[strive]] to do one.

How about the plot? It's [[quite]] [[fundamental]] - [[Buzzards]] [[escaping]], people with guns [[owes]] [[chasing]] them down. I'm [[begins]] to wonder why the [[dinosaur]] in these [[cinema]] always seem to run into the [[earliest]] system of tunnels... wouldn't they [[stays]] outside to hunt prey? [[Ah]] well, at [[fewer]] they have the [[alright]] [[feeling]] to [[emerge]] very very [[petite]] in the [[cinematography]] which [[seemingly]] [[spins]] [[throughout]] them.

Other [[aspects]] - Let's say you are in a building and you know that there are man eating [[raptor]] [[executing]] [[nearly]] in it. Would you [[deciding]] to take [[moment]] out to have an [[controversy]] about who is [[best]] - Army or [[Sailor]]? And then [[decided]] to have an arm [[struggle]] [[competitions]] to [[solved]] it? How about the [[moronic]] [[notions]] that they have to track down the [[buzzards]] - [[Divides]] up into groups of two. Didn't they ever watch any [[terror]] [[filmmaking]] ([[Nor]] at [[lowest]] an episode of Scooby Doo)? [[At]] short, this is one of the dumber [[kino]] out there. Miss it [[if]] you [[wantto]] to groan your [[paths]] through a [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] There are some [[great]] philosophical [[questions]]. What is the [[purpose]] of [[life]]? What happens when we [[die]]? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[BAD]]??? The premise is [[absurd]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The [[special]] [[effects]] are overdone. And the [[movie]] is one [[unending]] [[gun]] [[battle]] [[among]] some of the [[lousiest]] shots Hollywood ever produced. But then, if they had been [[good]] shots, everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no [[movie]]. Too bad it didn't [[happen]] that [[way]]. Tempted to [[turn]] it off [[several]] times, I stuck with it to see just how bad it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the last line is the crowning stupidity of the whole dopey, dismal scenario.It is not [[even]] [[worthy]] of second feature status at a third rate drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the film, I [[worry]] deeply about its impact on young audiences. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[banal]] cinema on a Brobdingnagian scale! There are some [[magnificent]] philosophical [[subjects]]. What is the [[aimed]] of [[iife]]? What happens when we [[decease]]? And WHY DO THEY MAKE MOVIES THIS [[NAUGHTY]]??? The premise is [[nutty]]. Thre acting is one dimensional. The [[peculiar]] [[repercussions]] are overdone. And the [[cinematographic]] is one [[undying]] [[weapon]] [[bataille]] [[in]] some of the [[trickiest]] shots Hollywood ever produced. But then, if they had been [[buena]] shots, everybody would have been dead in the first five minutes and there would be no [[kino]]. Too bad it didn't [[arise]] that [[routes]]. Tempted to [[transforming]] it off [[diverse]] times, I stuck with it to see just how bad it could get. Glad I did because (SPOILER?) the last line is the crowning stupidity of the whole dopey, dismal scenario.It is not [[yet]] [[commendable]] of second feature status at a third rate drive-in in off season. Apart from the general awfulness of the film, I [[disturb]] deeply about its impact on young audiences. The Americans crank out crap like this and then wonder why events like Columbine happen. This is truly [[corny]] cinema on a Brobdingnagian scale! --------------------------------------------- Result 1094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] by Dane [[Youssef]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[indictment]] of blaxploitation films and negative black [[stereotypes]], as well as a look at life black in modern [[America]] (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[dropped]] it like a [[hot]] potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi film, controversial, [[thrilling]], and a must-see [[almost]] by definition [[alone]]. Not just another random "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by Ralph Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but actually seems to show love, beauty and heart in the strangest places.

"Coonskin" tells a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world alone makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates tells a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian mob is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, hip, deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs extremism. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or minority of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef by Dane [[Joseph]]

"Coonskin" is film, by the one and only Ralph Bakshi, is reportedly a satirical [[indictments]] of blaxploitation films and negative black [[preconceptions]], as well as a look at life black in modern [[Americas]] (modern for the day, I mean--1975). Paramount [[slid]] it like a [[sexier]] potato that just burst into flame.

But this is a Bakshi film, controversial, [[exciting]], and a must-see [[virtually]] by definition [[lonely]]. Not just another random "shock-jock" of a movie which tries to shock for the sake of shock. It's by Ralph Bakshi. Anyone who knows the name knows that if HE made a movie, he has something big to say...

Although it's roots are based in cheap blaxploitation, "Coonskin" isn't just another campy knock-off of mainstream white film or any kind of throwaway flick. "Coonskin" wants to be more. It aims it's sights higher and fries some much bigger fish.

The movie doesn't just poke fun at the genre. Nor does it just indict black people, but actually seems to show love, beauty and heart in the strangest places.

"Coonskin" tells a story out of some convicts awaiting a jail-break. The fact that it's even possible to break out of a prison in the "Coonskin" world alone makes it old-fashioned.

One of the inmates tells a story about a trio of black brothers in Harlem named Brother Bear, Brother Rabbit, Preacher Fox who want respect and a piece of the action and are willing to get it by any means necessary. The Itallian mob is running all the real action.

Big name black musicians star: Barry White and Scatman Crothers, as well as Charles Gordone, the first black playwright to take home the Pulitzer. Something big is happening here obviously.

The movie plays out like a descent into this world, this side of the racial divide. From an angry, hip, deep, soulful black man with a hate in his heart and a gun in his hand.

Bakshi's films never know the meaning of the word "sublety." This one looks like it's never even heard of the word. But maybe a subject like this needs extremism. Real sledgehammer satire. Some subjects can't be tackled gently.

Bakshi is god-dammed merciless. Here, no member or minority of the Harlem scene appears unscathed.

The characters here are "animated" to "real" all depending on what the mood and situation are. The animated characters and the human ones all share the same reality and are meant to be taken just as literally.

Bakshi never just shows ugly caricatures just for shock value. He always has something to say. Nor is black-face is gratuitously. Here, unlike in Spike Lee's "Bamboozled," he seems to be using it to try and really say something.

Like 99.9% of all of Bakshi's films, this one incorporates animation and live-action. Usually at the same time. Bakshki isn't just being gimmicky here. All of this technique is all intertwined, meshing together while saying something.

Somehow, this one feels inevitably dated. Many of these types of films (Bakshi's included) are very topical, very spur of the moment. They reflect the certain trend for the day, but looking back of them years later, there's just an unmistakable feeling of nostalgia (as well as timeless truth).

Even though the music, clothes, slang and the city clearly looks like photos that belong in a time capsule, the attitude, the spirit and the heart remain the same no matter what f--king ear it is. Anyone who's really seen the movies, the state of things and has been in company of the people know what I'm talking about.

Even some of the of the black characters are a bunny (junglebunny), a big ol' bear and a fox. One of the most sour and unsavory racist characters is a dirty Harlem cop who's hot on the trail of these "dirty n-----s" after the death of a cop. But for him, it's not just business. Nor is it for the rest of the brothers who wear the shield. It's just pure sadistic racist pleasure of hurting blacks.

The sequence involving the Godfather and his lady is one of the most moving pieces in the whole film, of which there are many. It plays out like an opera or a ballet.

The promo line: WARNING: "This film offends everybody!" This is not just hype. Proceed with extreme caution.

You have been warned...

by Dane Youssef --------------------------------------------- Result 1095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This could have been the gay counterpart to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a huge chain of [[empty]] episodes in which [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] occurs. The characters are uni-dimensional and have no other [[development]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting aesthetic proposition like having almost no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in examining the psychology of its characters with some dignity, and achieving true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" film by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if someone can identify with its heavy banality, I guess that's fine. This could have been the gay counterpart to Gone With The Wind given its epic lenght, but instead it satisfied itself by being a huge chain of [[hollow]] episodes in which [[abundantly]] [[anything]] occurs. The characters are uni-dimensional and have no other [[evolution]] in the story (there's actually no story either) than looking for each other and kissing. It's a shame that an interesting aesthetic proposition like having almost no dialog is completely wasted in a film than makes no effort in examining the psychology of its characters with some dignity, and achieving true emotional resonance. On top of that, it pretends to be an "art" film by using the worst naive clichés of the cinematic snobbery. But anyway, if someone can identify with its heavy banality, I guess that's fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 1096 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As a physics student, I've [[become]] [[aware]] of many [[idiot]] [[professors]], and other so-called experts, in the field. As I continue with my studies, I learn more and more about real physics experiments [[going]] on, and about the people who are doing things right.

Then, my friends tell me of this "physics [[movie]]" they [[want]] to see. Knowing nothing of it, I'm [[excited]], [[hoping]] that the information will be presented well.

I've done REAL quantum mechanics; this wasn't it.

This [[movie]] [[starts]] with the [[basic]] [[assumption]] that [[anything]] that [[occurs]] to a subatomic [[particle]] can, and will, [[occur]] to you, if you just [[open]] your eyes. Let's [[think]] about that, for just a moment.

Our [[bodies]] are [[composed]] of somewhere [[around]] 10^30 such subatomic particles. That is a [[million]] [[billion]] [[billion]] [[billion]] particles! The more "mysterious" quantum [[effects]] of just two particles can have a 50% probability of [[cancelling]] each other out [[completely]]. As you [[add]] more and more particles into the [[mix]], it [[becomes]] [[almost]] impossible to have a [[large]] net quantum [[result]]. To [[tell]] us to [[believe]] that this is a valid assumption, with no rationality behind it...it's just [[stupid]].

My friend, [[also]] in [[physics]], and I [[counted]] 3 [[facts]] during the course of this [[movie]]. But they were presented in the most [[misleading]] [[manner]] I've EVER [[SEEN]].

I cannot say as much for the neural [[portion]] of the [[movie]], as I have not had any [[kind]] of [[medical]] training. It [[seemed]] as though it might have had a [[slight]] [[bit]] more truth to it, [[remembering]] my days in biology, but I cannot [[say]].

At least this film had a [[redeeming]] quality: the dancing peptides (or whatever they actually were) scene. Not to [[ruin]] the invaluable plot that drives this movie, but the [[main]] [[character]] goes to a [[wedding]], where she [[sees]] all [[different]] [[types]] of personalities "driven" by their peptides*, and then the [[film]] cuts to the [[dance]] [[floor]], where we are spliced between people [[dancing]], sometimes [[surrounded]] by CG peptides, and a [[fully]] CG scene, filled with dancing peptides. The [[film]], at that point, was [[trying]] to [[tell]] us how we're "addicted to emotions," so we're treated to the full song of that smash hit, "Addicted to Love."

This scene was redeeming, because anyone who [[could]] go through THAT scene, and still take this [[movie]] seriously...well, you are the ones that need to "open your eyes." As a physics student, I've [[becomes]] [[conscious]] of many [[dolt]] [[educator]], and other so-called experts, in the field. As I continue with my studies, I learn more and more about real physics experiments [[gonna]] on, and about the people who are doing things right.

Then, my friends tell me of this "physics [[movies]]" they [[wish]] to see. Knowing nothing of it, I'm [[thrilled]], [[awaiting]] that the information will be presented well.

I've done REAL quantum mechanics; this wasn't it.

This [[cinematography]] [[launches]] with the [[fundamental]] [[hypothesis]] that [[nothing]] that [[arises]] to a subatomic [[particles]] can, and will, [[emerge]] to you, if you just [[opens]] your eyes. Let's [[reckon]] about that, for just a moment.

Our [[institutions]] are [[comprising]] of somewhere [[throughout]] 10^30 such subatomic particles. That is a [[trillion]] [[trillion]] [[trillion]] [[trillion]] particles! The more "mysterious" quantum [[influence]] of just two particles can have a 50% probability of [[repealed]] each other out [[wholly]]. As you [[adding]] more and more particles into the [[mixture]], it [[become]] [[hardly]] impossible to have a [[tremendous]] net quantum [[consequence]]. To [[say]] us to [[reckon]] that this is a valid assumption, with no rationality behind it...it's just [[foolish]].

My friend, [[apart]] in [[physicist]], and I [[accounted]] 3 [[truths]] during the course of this [[cinema]]. But they were presented in the most [[false]] [[modes]] I've EVER [[SAW]].

I cannot say as much for the neural [[part]] of the [[cinematography]], as I have not had any [[sorting]] of [[physician]] training. It [[appeared]] as though it might have had a [[lightweight]] [[bitten]] more truth to it, [[remembers]] my days in biology, but I cannot [[said]].

At least this film had a [[redeem]] quality: the dancing peptides (or whatever they actually were) scene. Not to [[spoil]] the invaluable plot that drives this movie, but the [[primary]] [[nature]] goes to a [[wedlock]], where she [[believes]] all [[varied]] [[genera]] of personalities "driven" by their peptides*, and then the [[cinema]] cuts to the [[choreography]] [[storey]], where we are spliced between people [[choreography]], sometimes [[encircled]] by CG peptides, and a [[wholly]] CG scene, filled with dancing peptides. The [[cinematography]], at that point, was [[seeking]] to [[told]] us how we're "addicted to emotions," so we're treated to the full song of that smash hit, "Addicted to Love."

This scene was redeeming, because anyone who [[did]] go through THAT scene, and still take this [[cinema]] seriously...well, you are the ones that need to "open your eyes." --------------------------------------------- Result 1097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[CITY]] [[HALL]] is a [[somewhat]] [[mixed]] [[bag]]. [[Part]] vignettes of NYC political [[life]], and [[part]] moralizing [[tale]]. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple [[times]] when he chews the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he [[shines]]. John Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[flawless]] performance, without going into caricature of a New Orleans dialect, or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is also very good. I [[love]] showtunes, too.

The major [[problem]] with CITY HALL, and it is a [[good]] movie in many ways, is the general feeling of a lack of momentum. It comes off more like a documentary, than a motion picture. We see the action or follow the story from a detached perspective, and naturally, the viewer doesn't become involved. When the viewer doesn't get involved to a certain degree, they become apathetic towards the characters, and eventually, the plot.

This [[tends]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, detail divulging finale, came off as a "Hmmm...uh...okay." They say you "Can't fight city hall," as the tread worn cliche goes. Yet, it still can't stop you from thinking what might have been, if they had just tightened up the screenplay and pacing of this movie. [[TOWN]] [[SALLE]] is a [[rather]] [[blended]] [[satchel]]. [[Parte]] vignettes of NYC political [[vida]], and [[parte]] moralizing [[fable]]. Al Pacino, a Dukakis-esque Boss with Presidential dreams, gives an oft times sullen or subdued performance. There's a couple [[moments]] when he chews the scenery, and in the case of CITY HALL, this is where he [[glows]]. John Cusack gives a subdued and generally [[irreproachable]] performance, without going into caricature of a New Orleans dialect, or sliding into melodrama during the films climax. Danny Aiello as a burrough political chief, is also very good. I [[likes]] showtunes, too.

The major [[trouble]] with CITY HALL, and it is a [[buena]] movie in many ways, is the general feeling of a lack of momentum. It comes off more like a documentary, than a motion picture. We see the action or follow the story from a detached perspective, and naturally, the viewer doesn't become involved. When the viewer doesn't get involved to a certain degree, they become apathetic towards the characters, and eventually, the plot.

This [[strives]] to alienate, and what should have been a riveting, detail divulging finale, came off as a "Hmmm...uh...okay." They say you "Can't fight city hall," as the tread worn cliche goes. Yet, it still can't stop you from thinking what might have been, if they had just tightened up the screenplay and pacing of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] They screwed up this story! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[love]] the [[original]] movie, I read the [[book]] and I love it! The reason why the [[original]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no gore. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I hate this damn remake! They screwed up this story! In the end Nell is all heroic and taking on for the team to save all their asses from Hill House and a bunch of nonsense like that! They added heads getting chopped, wires cutting peoples faces, and the ceiling turning into a giant hand! What the hell is that about??? I own and [[amore]] the [[upfront]] movie, I read the [[ledger]] and I love it! The reason why the [[upfront]] movie and the book are so great is because it scares you so much without even showing the ghost. There is no gore. There is no ceiling hand. It is only the ghost ad how ghosts can truly kill a person. They cannot kill us, they cannot throw us about the room or fly a knife into our head. No. They can only drive us mad. Taking away all our senses of security. Nell was a selfish woman. She only wanted good things for herself. Yes, she cared a little for the others, but not too much. David Self and Jan de Bont have taken a crap on this great story! I hate this damn remake! --------------------------------------------- Result 1099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Jim Belushi is having a mid life crisis, nothing is going right, when his [[car]] goes out on him..he goes into an empty [[bar]] where Michael Caine shows him what life wouldve been like if one event in high school had come out differently.. A good [[premise]] with some moments..but mostly flat and uninteresting. on a [[scale]] of one to [[ten]]..3 Jim Belushi is having a mid life crisis, nothing is going right, when his [[vehicular]] goes out on him..he goes into an empty [[solicitors]] where Michael Caine shows him what life wouldve been like if one event in high school had come out differently.. A good [[supposition]] with some moments..but mostly flat and uninteresting. on a [[greatness]] of one to [[tio]]..3 --------------------------------------------- Result 1100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] That is the only thing I can positive to [[say]] about this movie. Cleveland is the [[star]], I've been there and never saw the city [[look]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This movie moves ahead at such a pace they hope you won't [[notice]] the lack of real world relevance. People running around and shooting [[guns]] without any [[consequence]]. For example, there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the cops don't show up there till much later in the movie. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. That is the only thing I can positive to [[told]] about this movie. Cleveland is the [[stars]], I've been there and never saw the city [[gaze]] this good. Beautiful river and cityscapes.

This movie moves ahead at such a pace they hope you won't [[noticing]] the lack of real world relevance. People running around and shooting [[muskets]] without any [[impacts]]. For example, there is a shoot out at Rob Lowe's character's house- two cars are stolen, and yet the cops don't show up there till much later in the movie. Murder for hire never looked so implausible.

Whoever wrote this movie should be on the receiving end of one the movies countless stray bullets. Many of the actors in this movie are so much better than this. I check the date of the movie just to make sure it wasn't written during the writers strike but alas this was not the case. This movie is currently in rotation on Universal's HD channel- unless you want to drool of over Lowe there is no reason to watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[found]] this a bit [[hard]] to follow to the extent that it seemed to dip in the middle while I tried to make head or tail of who was fighting who and why. One of the [[problems]] is the cultural/language one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[problem]] of which we know little and because we are simply reading English subtitles inevitably loose some of the [[subtleties]]. Another problem is that there [[seem]] to be just too many only half explained twists and coincidences. [[Nevertheless]], it [[seems]] [[unlikely]] that there is a wholly bad Miiki [[film]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[stylish]] and bone crunching violence, a window upon some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a [[decent]] ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. I [[unearthed]] this a bit [[laborious]] to follow to the extent that it seemed to dip in the middle while I tried to make head or tail of who was fighting who and why. One of the [[trouble]] is the cultural/language one. Here we have a Chinese/Taiwanese/Japanese [[trouble]] of which we know little and because we are simply reading English subtitles inevitably loose some of the [[niceties]]. Another problem is that there [[looks]] to be just too many only half explained twists and coincidences. [[Nonetheless]], it [[looks]] [[improbable]] that there is a wholly bad Miiki [[filmmaking]] and this certainly is not that. Plenty of [[tasteful]] and bone crunching violence, a window upon some less than orthodox sexual goings on plus the family aspect. All in all a [[presentable]] ride but maybe checking out the storyline might actually be helpful before watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is the [[Columbo]] that [[got]] directed by [[Steven]] Spielberg at an early point in his [[career]]. It's [[nothing]] sensational but some small hint of [[great]] [[things]] to [[come]] for Spielberg can be seen in this movie. The movie is basically in the same style as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tend]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo character alone. The kind of character quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't call this movie the work of- and [[fine]] example of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This [[movie]] began really well and very promising but after it's fine opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie [[became]] [[sort]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's mostly a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not dull because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[quite]] ingenious and the concept of having a crime story writer murdering his writing partner [[showed]] some [[great]] and interesting potential. The [[story]] [[however]] didn't really [[explored]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a [[good]] one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of Jack Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then [[Columbo]], due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible hints, leading away from himself. But of course Columbo knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a [[good]] [[overall]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fine]] and [[perfectly]] watchable Columbo [[movie]] but don't [[let]] the [[name]] of Spielberg attached to it [[rise]] your expectations for it too [[highly]].

7/10 This is the [[Colombo]] that [[gets]] directed by [[Stevens]] Spielberg at an early point in his [[quarries]]. It's [[anything]] sensational but some small hint of [[prodigious]] [[aspects]] to [[arrived]] for Spielberg can be seen in this movie. The movie is basically in the same style as most of Spierlberg's '70's movies and TV works. So that means that some characters [[tending]] to show some quirkiness's and no I'm not just talking about the Columbo character alone. The kind of character quirkiness which perhaps can be best seen in the 1975 Spielberg movie "Jaws". But other than some small hints of typical early Spielberg elements, you can't call this movie the work of- and [[fined]] example of a rising director star. Not that its bad, of course it isn't but as I said earlier, it also isn't anything too sensational.

This [[filmmaking]] began really well and very promising but after it's fine opening, in which as always the murder occurred, the movie [[was]] [[sorts]] of more slow and also dull to watch. Dull because it's mostly a Columbo movie by the book that doesn't have real memorable moments in it, not dull because it's a boring movie to watch.

The murder itself was [[rather]] ingenious and the concept of having a crime story writer murdering his writing partner [[proved]] some [[prodigious]] and interesting potential. The [[stories]] [[yet]] didn't really [[investigating]] all of its possibilities. At least that's the feeling this movie left me with.

The movie was still a [[alright]] one to watch nevertheless thanks to the character of Jack Cassidy, who thinks he's smarter then [[Colombo]], due to his mystery/crime writing experience and tries to give him all kinds of possible hints, leading away from himself. But of course Columbo knows better and he is his number one suspect from the first moment on but he as usual plays the game along.

The movie does have a [[alright]] [[general]] style and uses some fine camera position and editing. Funny to see that also most of this was all mostly consistent with Spielberg's later work, especially some of the camera-angles.

A [[fined]] and [[entirely]] watchable Columbo [[cinematic]] but don't [[letting]] the [[behalf]] of Spielberg attached to it [[climbing]] your expectations for it too [[inordinately]].

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[guess]] this movie will only work on people who were all turned off by the giant hype of Lord of the [[Rings]]. Well, so I was. And so I really [[love]] this movie. Especially I like all those flawless superheroes from LotR being so perfectly and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[brilliantly]] is the counterpart of Gandalf (the brave and wise and completely humorless know-it-all wizard): Almghandi, the cowardice and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a simply bucket with eye holes as a helmet. Aragorns alter ego is yet another accident prone idiot who tries to fix his broken sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with scotch tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) indeed has some strong resemblance with Brad Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh I [[imagines]] this movie will only work on people who were all turned off by the giant hype of Lord of the [[Piercings]]. Well, so I was. And so I really [[iike]] this movie. Especially I like all those flawless superheroes from LotR being so perfectly and disrespectfully parodied. Most [[marvellously]] is the counterpart of Gandalf (the brave and wise and completely humorless know-it-all wizard): Almghandi, the cowardice and brain dead transvestite. Sauron's counterpart ("Sauraus" from East Germany, of course) is wearing a simply bucket with eye holes as a helmet. Aragorns alter ego is yet another accident prone idiot who tries to fix his broken sword ("Ulrike" the legend) with scotch tape. And "Strunzdumm" (the counterpart of Wormtong) indeed has some strong resemblance with Brad Dourif! And don't forget Grmpfli and Heidi... huh-huh --------------------------------------------- Result 1104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I agree totally with the last commenter this could be the [[worst]] movie ever made .I too had to fast forward through most of this movie. Michael Madsen must have [[done]] this movie as a favor to [[someone]].The [[picture]] quality is [[grainy]] all the way through .And what little plot there is,is just [[plain]] [[stupid]] .I give this movie a 1 out of 10 if I could give it a [[lower]] score I would .Don't waste your time on this movie or you'll regret it. I agree totally with the last commenter this could be the [[hardest]] movie ever made .I too had to fast forward through most of this movie. Michael Madsen must have [[accomplished]] this movie as a favor to [[person]].The [[imagery]] quality is [[foggy]] all the way through .And what little plot there is,is just [[lowlands]] [[nonsensical]] .I give this movie a 1 out of 10 if I could give it a [[reduced]] score I would .Don't waste your time on this movie or you'll regret it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1105 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This movie is about a young [[scientist]] who creates a [[serum]] that re-animates the [[dead]]. He first uses it on his brother when he is shot dead in a drive by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very slowly and in other scenes they run pretty fast which makes [[little]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the story doesn't [[help]] the film. The [[makeup]] consists of [[blood]] on the face of the [[zombies]]. The budget for this film I'm sure was very limited. I believe the film could have been better made had the story been more original and with a better budget. If you wan't to see a good zombie flick don't see this one. This movie is about a young [[savant]] who creates a [[sera]] that re-animates the [[death]]. He first uses it on his brother when he is shot dead in a drive by. His brother then infects the other gang members.In some scenes the zombies are seen walking very slowly and in other scenes they run pretty fast which makes [[petite]] sense. The acting is mediocre but the story doesn't [[pomoc]] the film. The [[composition]] consists of [[transfusion]] on the face of the [[walkers]]. The budget for this film I'm sure was very limited. I believe the film could have been better made had the story been more original and with a better budget. If you wan't to see a good zombie flick don't see this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This film is like marmite. You either [[love]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film expecting a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film expecting a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this [[film]] expecting to see one of the most deranged characters ever put to film in the form of Harry Russo you will [[love]] it. John Giancaspro is absolutely [[brilliant]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the best thing since sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. This film is like marmite. You either [[iike]] it or you hate it. If you go into this film expecting a proper film with decent production values, a good plot and great characters you'll hate it. If you go into this film expecting a low budget slasher you'll probably hate it.

If you go into this [[flick]] expecting to see one of the most deranged characters ever put to film in the form of Harry Russo you will [[amour]] it. John Giancaspro is absolutely [[lustrous]] in his over the top portrayal of the insane, murderous coke fiend.

The special effects are abysmal at best but really, who cares? If you're the kind of person who's prepared to watch a film Schizophreniac: The Whore Mangler you've undoubtedly seen scores of horror films filled with gore. With the budget this film was made for even if they had tried it probably would've mediocre at best. I'd much rather be able to laugh at something abysmal than be unaffected by the mediocre.

To sum it up, you'll probably hate this film but if you're one of the few who decide to see it anyway it'll become the best thing since sliced bread #2 I hate marmite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[excellent]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. The first series of Lost kicked off with a bang... literally and slowly decreased in pace. This may have put some viewers off and people who started to watch halfway through would either be bored or just plain confused.

I would advise people new to the world of Lost to simply watch from the beginning and don't get pt off by the slower episodes. The acting throughout is [[sumptuous]] but why have 5 series' planned... WHY??? All this means is that there will be no answers for at least 4 years, oh well, i'll keep watching if it keeps the tension up and dialogue flowing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1108 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] Shot in the Heart is [[wonderful]]. It [[brilliantly]] illustrates the plight of Gary Gimore, a convicted murder who [[requested]] death. Shot in the Heart [[shows]] the ordeal that Gilmore's [[family]], [[torn]] up by hatred, went through. This movie is an [[incredible]] psychological study, and is [[wonderfully]] [[depressing]] and uplifting. 10/10 Shot in the Heart is [[noteworthy]]. It [[wonderfully]] illustrates the plight of Gary Gimore, a convicted murder who [[solicited]] death. Shot in the Heart [[exhibitions]] the ordeal that Gilmore's [[families]], [[ripped]] up by hatred, went through. This movie is an [[unimaginable]] psychological study, and is [[surprisingly]] [[disappointing]] and uplifting. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] One of Boris Karloff's [[real]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff ([[looking]] about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a [[dull]] mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. One of Boris Karloff's [[true]] clinkers. Essentially the dying Karloff ([[searching]] about 120 years older than he was)is a scientist in need of cash to finish his experiments before he dies. Moving from Morocco where his funding is taken over by someone else he goes to the South of France where he works a s physician while trying to scrap enough money to prove his theories. Desperate for money he makes a deal with the young rich wife of a cotton baron who is dying. She will fund him if he helps her poison the husband so she can take his money and carry on with a gigolo (who I think is married). If you think I got that from watching the movie you're wrong, I had to read what other people posted to figure out happened. Why? because this movie had me lost from two minutes in.I had no idea what was going on with its numerous characters and multiple converging plot lines. Little is spelled out and much isn't said until towards the end by which time I really didn't care. Its a [[uninspiring]] mess of interest purely for Karloff's performance which is rather odd at times. To be honest this is the only time I've ever seen him venture into Bela Lugosi bizarre territory. Its not every scene but a few and makes me wonder how much they hung out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As a cinema fan White Noise was an [[utter]] [[disappointment]], as a filmmaker the [[cinematography]] was pretty good, nicely lit, good camera work, reasonable [[direction]]. But as a film it just seamed as [[predictable]] as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the market has recently been flooded with. Although it did have a little bit of the 'chill factor' the whole concept of the E.V.O (Electronic Voice Phenomena) did'not seem believable. This movie did not explain the reasonings for certain occurrences but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the main character portrayed no emotion, like many recent thriller/horror movies.

Definitely not a movie I will be buying on DVD and would not recommend anyone rushes out to see it. As a cinema fan White Noise was an [[total]] [[disillusion]], as a filmmaker the [[film]] was pretty good, nicely lit, good camera work, reasonable [[directorate]]. But as a film it just seamed as [[foreseeable]] as all the other 'so called' horror movies that the market has recently been flooded with. Although it did have a little bit of the 'chill factor' the whole concept of the E.V.O (Electronic Voice Phenomena) did'not seem believable. This movie did not explain the reasonings for certain occurrences but went ahead with them. The acting was far from mind blowing the main character portrayed no emotion, like many recent thriller/horror movies.

Definitely not a movie I will be buying on DVD and would not recommend anyone rushes out to see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I enjoy quality crapness, and this ranks up there with some of the finest. the cg is out of this world, or at [[least]] pre-dates our [[world]], and the insanity of a 6 foot [[bloke]] in a rat outfit [[chasing]] after people is laughably [[bad]]. I quite [[enjoyed]] some of this, but the acting is so [[goddamn]] [[awful]], and [[even]] the obligatory [[nude]] scene doesn't really have any baps out in it. just a [[complete]] [[waste]] of time if ever i saw one. I don't know who wasted more [[time]], me [[watching]] this, or the [[poor]] saps who got dragged into making it in the faint hope that this will launch their acting careers. I can [[assure]] you, it wont. However, on a brighter note, I have managed to successfully do the 6 [[degrees]] of Kevin Bacon from this movie, so I think it was almost worthwhile watching the 91 minutes of it. I enjoy quality crapness, and this ranks up there with some of the finest. the cg is out of this world, or at [[lowest]] pre-dates our [[worldwide]], and the insanity of a 6 foot [[fella]] in a rat outfit [[hunt]] after people is laughably [[horrid]]. I quite [[liked]] some of this, but the acting is so [[fucking]] [[spooky]], and [[yet]] the obligatory [[nudes]] scene doesn't really have any baps out in it. just a [[finishes]] [[squandering]] of time if ever i saw one. I don't know who wasted more [[period]], me [[staring]] this, or the [[pauper]] saps who got dragged into making it in the faint hope that this will launch their acting careers. I can [[assured]] you, it wont. However, on a brighter note, I have managed to successfully do the 6 [[grades]] of Kevin Bacon from this movie, so I think it was almost worthwhile watching the 91 minutes of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I [[grew]] up with H.R. Pufnstuff and the dashingly talented Jack Wild and now my daughters are adoring fans of Jack Wild too. This [[movie]] is exactly what movies should be: fun and entertaining. This movie is not [[limited]] to children either. A lot of the dialogue is directed to adults and Witchiepoo's performance is something you do not [[want]] to [[miss]]. The [[music]] in this movie suited [[Jack]] [[Wild]] and Mama Cass [[beautifully]]. And as a Jack Wild fan, I [[would]] never [[miss]] the chance to watch him dance or hear him sing. Knowing the [[hard]] [[life]] that Jack had now makes this movie even more [[wonderful]] [[especially]] when he [[sings]] the [[opening]] song "[[If]] I [[Could]]". It makes me [[pause]] in loving [[adoration]] for him for [[giving]] me [[wonderful]] [[childhood]] [[memories]] that I am now passing on to my children. Let's all go to [[Living]] Island where there is friendship and fun! And [[keep]] [[Jack]] Wild's [[memory]] alive by passing Pufnstuff on to others. I [[raise]] up with H.R. Pufnstuff and the dashingly talented Jack Wild and now my daughters are adoring fans of Jack Wild too. This [[cinema]] is exactly what movies should be: fun and entertaining. This movie is not [[restrained]] to children either. A lot of the dialogue is directed to adults and Witchiepoo's performance is something you do not [[wanna]] to [[mademoiselle]]. The [[musician]] in this movie suited [[Jacque]] [[Savage]] and Mama Cass [[marvellously]]. And as a Jack Wild fan, I [[should]] never [[mademoiselle]] the chance to watch him dance or hear him sing. Knowing the [[strenuous]] [[iife]] that Jack had now makes this movie even more [[sumptuous]] [[concretely]] when he [[exalt]] the [[introductory]] song "[[Unless]] I [[Wo]]". It makes me [[pauses]] in loving [[veneration]] for him for [[conferring]] me [[phenomenal]] [[preschool]] [[memoirs]] that I am now passing on to my children. Let's all go to [[Inhabit]] Island where there is friendship and fun! And [[preserve]] [[Jacques]] Wild's [[memoir]] alive by passing Pufnstuff on to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] the costumes, the dialog, historical accuracy are [[terrible]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was accurate ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not strangle the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor editing - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. the costumes, the dialog, historical accuracy are [[frightful]]. For instance, - Stacey Dash and the hanging scene. The noose was accurate ( as for as I could tell), but that type of noose broke the person's neck. Ms. Dash is left hanging at the end of the rope with no ill effects until the rope was shot. This type of not did not strangle the person, it killed them at the end of the drop.

And right before they go in to rob a bank (in a flashback), they pause on the street for a group hug - with their bandannas hiding their faces - that would have been obvious to people on the street.

The poor editing - that is a battery pack under that shirt and it is obvious, the clip of the "long ride" shows them riding along, then reverses the film.

I did like the fact that they kept the scene with the horse taking a crap - it seemed symbolic. The entire movie was crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] I [[saw]] this film [[earlier]] today, and I was amazed at how accurate the dialog is for the main characters. It didn't feel like a [[film]] - it [[felt]] more like a documentary (the [[part]] I liked best). The leading [[ladies]] in this film [[seemed]] as [[real]] to me as any fifteen year-old girls I know.

All in all, a very [[enjoyable]] film for those who enjoy [[independent]] films. I [[observed]] this film [[formerly]] today, and I was amazed at how accurate the dialog is for the main characters. It didn't feel like a [[movie]] - it [[deemed]] more like a documentary (the [[portions]] I liked best). The leading [[madams]] in this film [[looked]] as [[veritable]] to me as any fifteen year-old girls I know.

All in all, a very [[pleasurable]] film for those who enjoy [[independant]] films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[enough]], this [[movie]] shows cows being [[butchered]] graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five [[minutes]] while the protagonist is narrating her early life as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at work says he would have gone with him if he was a [[girl]]. Is this person a [[psycho]], a masochist, just a doomed [[queen]] who takes things too far? And what [[sort]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Just]] that he didn't get [[adopted]] and had to [[live]] it out with [[nuns]] who at first [[loved]] him and then later [[hated]] him because he was unruly. He [[tries]] to [[explain]] to us the [[reasons]] he did what he did, but it's [[really]] [[really]] so [[hard]] to [[empathize]]. Such [[sad]] and unusual self [[destruction]]. Was it [[supposed]] to be [[funny]]? What was it all about [[really]]? As if the storyline wasn't depressing [[suitably]], this [[cinema]] shows cows being [[culled]] graphically in a slaughterhouse for all of five [[mins]] while the protagonist is narrating her early life as a butcher. Weird stuff. Then there's the core premise of the hero/heroine who goes and cuts his dick off because a he's besot-ten with at work says he would have gone with him if he was a [[daughters]]. Is this person a [[fou]], a masochist, just a doomed [[reine]] who takes things too far? And what [[kind]] of traumatic childhood did he have? [[Mere]] that he didn't get [[passed]] and had to [[living]] it out with [[nun]] who at first [[adores]] him and then later [[resent]] him because he was unruly. He [[strives]] to [[clarify]] to us the [[motifs]] he did what he did, but it's [[truthfully]] [[truthfully]] so [[stiff]] to [[empathise]]. Such [[sorrowful]] and unusual self [[demolition]]. Was it [[presumed]] to be [[humorous]]? What was it all about [[genuinely]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 1116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've never been impressed by JD anyway, and Final Justice (which I hadn't seen prior to its MST3k airing) proves to be no exception. It's not that the character is any less likeable than Mitchell: it's just that there's less that Geronimo ("Call me 'Heronimo') to dislike.

In fact, one suspects that Mitchell and Final Justice were all schemes of a revenge-seeking agent of Joe Don's trying to get the "star" killed by inducing a heart attack.

Joe Don must have found a new agent, since he's now graduated to "comic relief" in James Bond movies. The problem is, it's hard to tell the difference between his comedy characters there, and his "serious" characters in his action-movies like this one.

As for the plot...umm, what plot? They repeat the same set pieces so repeatedly you'll think you were watching Groundhog's Day 2. Presumably, the fact they keep using the same scene of Geronimo getting out of jail is supposed to be comic relief of some sort. Ummm, yeah, whatever.

On the plus side, the Malta scenery is pretty gorgeous, so that kicked it up to a 2 for me. One suspects this flick set Maltese tourism back a couple of decades, though. --------------------------------------------- Result 1117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to rapper EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[listened]] to [[rap]] this movie was [[boring]] and there was no point in the [[movie]] where i said thats interesting or i didn't [[know]] that. another thing that bugged me was it made it [[look]] like anything in his life he did was very easy there was no struggle he made jail look easy, selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[realistic]]. i think if the movie where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an impact maybe!!! good rap [[movies]] hustle and flow, get rich or die trying not notorious if you didn't live in the 90's or didn't listen to rapper EVER!! this movie might be OK for you, but any for any fan or any single person who ever [[heard]] to [[rapper]] this movie was [[tiresome]] and there was no point in the [[cinema]] where i said thats interesting or i didn't [[savoir]] that. another thing that bugged me was it made it [[peek]] like anything in his life he did was very easy there was no struggle he made jail look easy, selling drugs, and even rapping it wasn't [[practical]]. i think if the movie where released in about 15 years from now it might have more of an impact maybe!!! good rap [[cinematography]] hustle and flow, get rich or die trying not notorious --------------------------------------------- Result 1118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] With all this stuff [[going]] down at the moment with [[MJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. Maybe i just want to get a certain insight into this guy who i thought was really cool in the eighties just to maybe make up my mind whether he is guilty or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biography]], [[part]] [[feature]] [[film]] which i [[remember]] going to [[see]] at the cinema when it was originally [[released]]. Some of it has [[subtle]] messages about MJ's feeling towards the press and also the obvious message of [[drugs]] are bad m'kay.

Visually impressive but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so unless you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an egotist for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is convincing as a psychopathic all powerful drug lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying drugs etc so i dunno, maybe he just hates MJ's music.

Lots of cool things in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad sequence as usually directors hate working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom line, this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a wholesome message and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. With all this stuff [[gonna]] down at the moment with [[DJ]] i've started listening to his music, watching the odd documentary here and there, watched The Wiz and watched Moonwalker again. Maybe i just want to get a certain insight into this guy who i thought was really cool in the eighties just to maybe make up my mind whether he is guilty or innocent. Moonwalker is part [[biographies]], [[portions]] [[idiosyncratic]] [[flick]] which i [[rember]] going to [[behold]] at the cinema when it was originally [[liberated]]. Some of it has [[nuanced]] messages about MJ's feeling towards the press and also the obvious message of [[pharmaceuticals]] are bad m'kay.

Visually impressive but of course this is all about Michael Jackson so unless you remotely like MJ in anyway then you are going to hate this and find it boring. Some may call MJ an egotist for consenting to the making of this movie BUT MJ and most of his fans would say that he made it for the fans which if true is really nice of him.

The actual feature film bit when it finally starts is only on for 20 minutes or so excluding the Smooth Criminal sequence and Joe Pesci is convincing as a psychopathic all powerful drug lord. Why he wants MJ dead so bad is beyond me. Because MJ overheard his plans? Nah, Joe Pesci's character ranted that he wanted people to know it is he who is supplying drugs etc so i dunno, maybe he just hates MJ's music.

Lots of cool things in this like MJ turning into a car and a robot and the whole Speed Demon sequence. Also, the director must have had the patience of a saint when it came to filming the kiddy Bad sequence as usually directors hate working with one kid let alone a whole bunch of them performing a complex dance scene.

Bottom line, this movie is for people who like MJ on one level or another (which i think is most people). If not, then stay away. It does try and give off a wholesome message and ironically MJ's bestest buddy in this movie is a girl! Michael Jackson is truly one of the most talented people ever to grace this planet but is he guilty? Well, with all the attention i've gave this subject....hmmm well i don't know because people can be different behind closed doors, i know this for a fact. He is either an extremely nice but stupid guy or one of the most sickest liars. I hope he is not the latter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1119 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The movie [[starts]] off in a classroom setting where not surprisingly, our [[main]] actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Later]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[answer]] was simple for a [[child]] she is; coz she's already known the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may [[thought]] of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much critics and go for it, you'll notice the typical [[elements]] of Malaysia. The [[movie]] basically focuses on 10 year old Orked who met 12 year old Mukhsin in a game of which many would think of it as a boy's game. Running out of players, Mukhsin (who was new in that village) was forced to allow Orked into the game, in which she eagerly showed the male side of her. Orked is no such ordinary girl as she depicts more of the male behavior as you will see in the movie, defending Mukhsin from much violent encounter with her school-bullies, throwing one of the bully's bag out from the school bus window, throwing punches and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were awesome buddies, and stick closer than that, but with a slightest of misunderstanding in which most of us would all respond to in the same way, parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin left town.

Now the movie depicts the first love between Orked and Mukhsin, they started out as friends, but slowly evolving into somewhat more of a closer relationship and then towards BGR. You would notice, the changes Yasmin made in the movies for each of the main actor and the actress when they go through love. The different character was portrayed with eagerness and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[random]] but it depicted so much reality in it that you'd be [[stuck]] on the screen for a [[long]] time. You will [[love]] the [[movie]] for what it is, and not because that you [[want]] to be patriotic to the local scenes, [[coz]] it [[means]] much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. The movie [[commences]] off in a classroom setting where not surprisingly, our [[principal]] actress, Orked was seen in a Chinese Language class. [[Thereafter]] in the film, she was asked on why (by Mukhsin) that she was sent to learn Mandarin. Her [[replying]] was simple for a [[kids]] she is; coz she's already known the Malay Language well.

It's a bit of a romance one may [[figured]] of it, but once you've stopped yourself from reading too much critics and go for it, you'll notice the typical [[ingredients]] of Malaysia. The [[filmmaking]] basically focuses on 10 year old Orked who met 12 year old Mukhsin in a game of which many would think of it as a boy's game. Running out of players, Mukhsin (who was new in that village) was forced to allow Orked into the game, in which she eagerly showed the male side of her. Orked is no such ordinary girl as she depicts more of the male behavior as you will see in the movie, defending Mukhsin from much violent encounter with her school-bullies, throwing one of the bully's bag out from the school bus window, throwing punches and kicks on Mukhsin's brother where after he teased Mukhsin and so on and so forth. Both were awesome buddies, and stick closer than that, but with a slightest of misunderstanding in which most of us would all respond to in the same way, parted the both of them until the day when Mukhsin left town.

Now the movie depicts the first love between Orked and Mukhsin, they started out as friends, but slowly evolving into somewhat more of a closer relationship and then towards BGR. You would notice, the changes Yasmin made in the movies for each of the main actor and the actress when they go through love. The different character was portrayed with eagerness and mild humor. The scenes were all in [[haphazard]] but it depicted so much reality in it that you'd be [[jammed]] on the screen for a [[longer]] time. You will [[likes]] the [[kino]] for what it is, and not because that you [[wanna]] to be patriotic to the local scenes, [[cuz]] it [[method]] much more.

As the movie envelopes around the two love birds, it also manages to find its lens towards Orked's parents, her mother who was educated in England, speaks very good English and in which, her husband and the caretaker in the house with very much attempt tries to speak back their own kind of English, which was humor all the way indeed. Let me just explain to you why humor can be such a prominent thing in this movie. And that explanation or description that you may portray can be given in only one word and that is RANDOMNESS. Often more than not, we don't learn to laugh at ourselves, and when we do, we do it at the expense of others. It is just like what the movie Just Follow Law by Jack Neo would have mentioned - Often when we are ourselves, we don't see the person in us we are, but when only when we are in another person's body, then only would we learn to see who we really are. And that is how humor applies as well, more so than just dignity.

The movie was filled with such randomness that the typical facts of our routine lives as we carried it out could be all the way filled with laughter if we want it to be.

The other focus of this movie was on how Orked's neighbor, a couple in which the husband is no longer loving to his wife, and wanted to find another. Pak Koboi as what he's nicked after was seen polishing his motorbike daily and would take it out for a ride with his newly found girlfriend. The producer did not fail to show you perhaps why the husband wanted to find another wife. The wife was a real hurler or KPC as we Chinese would call it, having interrupting on other people's business and sending her own daughter to tease Orked in words only adults would use. After all, what goes around, comes around, and that's probably why bad things kinda want to happen to her. In every time, being nice to people around you won't hurt at all, unless you have an ego to protect, but then again, what's it worth? The movie also centers around Mukhsin's brother, Hussein who would go out to town everyday until very late at night, smoking, drinking, and also finding 'girls'. He's the total opposite of Mukhsin, but that's all perhaps because of family problems. Both the brothers were staying with their aunt and the parents were far away from them. I will not reveal more of the story line as it would spoil much of the interest in wanting to find it out for yourself, but the slightest of all elements in which the producer wanted to send a message across to the viewers is the life of us all. She wanted us, me at least to view life from our own perspective when we are not ourselves. Movies in a way, take us out from our own body, places us in the character's position, and use our empty mind then to view on the happenings of it. Depending on the type and genre of the movie, you will be mesmerized by how a good movie such as this would portray and imply a significant impact on you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] [[First]] off [[let]] me [[say]] that this has to be on the [[top]] of my [[list]] of boring [[movies]]. [[Nothing]], and I [[mean]] [[nothing]] in this [[movie]] is [[even]] remotely thrilling. Most of it is very [[confusing]] and as it [[progresses]] you just [[wish]] it would [[end]]!! Some people [[want]] a [[movie]] that makes them "[[think]]" through the [[entire]] [[thing]], to which I [[say]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. [[Which]] [[brings]] me back to this [[stinker]], entertainment it is not. This [[movie]] is stupid and a [[complete]] [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[Seems]] that most here [[agree]] [[also]]. Most of this didn't make any [[sense]], and by the [[time]] you [[think]] you have one scene [[figured]] out another lame scene [[comes]] [[around]] and....well I [[guess]] you [[see]] where this is going. [[Avoid]], this one [[sucks]]....[[bad]]!! [[Firstly]] off [[leaving]] me [[said]] that this has to be on the [[superior]] of my [[lists]] of boring [[films]]. [[None]], and I [[meaning]] [[anything]] in this [[films]] is [[yet]] remotely thrilling. Most of it is very [[puzzling]] and as it [[evolves]] you just [[wishing]] it would [[ceases]]!! Some people [[wanting]] a [[film]] that makes them "[[thinking]]" through the [[together]] [[stuff]], to which I [[told]]..."More power to you"!! I on the other hand just want to be entertained. [[Whom]] [[bring]] me back to this [[tosser]], entertainment it is not. This [[cinema]] is stupid and a [[finishes]] [[wastes]] of [[period]]. [[Seem]] that most here [[concur]] [[apart]]. Most of this didn't make any [[feeling]], and by the [[moment]] you [[reckon]] you have one scene [[thought]] out another lame scene [[happens]] [[almost]] and....well I [[guesses]] you [[seeing]] where this is going. [[Avert]], this one [[stinks]]....[[negative]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] At [[first]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really pull off a funny Christmas movie,, boy was i wrong, my [[daughter]] [[invited]] me to watch this with her and i was not [[disappointed]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really [[liked]] [[Christina]] Appelagate, and Catherine O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really [[sold]] me,, i mean,, too put up with [[family]],, at the table for people you only hardly see but once or [[twice]] a [[year]],, and [[probably]] don't [[get]] along with [[anyway]],, you really do [[need]] as much alcohol as you're system can [[stand]] to [[deal]] with Christmas,, so i [[thought]] that the [[premise]] was good there, [[buying]] the family with 250000 [[dollars]], was a [[little]] on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to work [[pretty]] [[good]] for me,, cause it was a riot all the [[way]] through, it [[shows]] the [[class]] [[struggle]] of the different families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[including]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[teenage]] boy. all in all i [[loved]] this movie and will watch it again next Christmas or sooner if my daughter wants too. At [[frst]] i didn't think that Ben Affleck could really pull off a funny Christmas movie,, boy was i wrong, my [[girls]] [[calls]] me to watch this with her and i was not [[disenchanted]] at all. James Gandolfini was funny,, i really [[wished]] [[Kristina]] Appelagate, and Catherine O' Hara was good too, the storyline is what really [[sells]] me,, i mean,, too put up with [[families]],, at the table for people you only hardly see but once or [[doubly]] a [[annum]],, and [[certainly]] don't [[gets]] along with [[anyhoo]],, you really do [[required]] as much alcohol as you're system can [[stands]] to [[addressing]] with Christmas,, so i [[think]] that the [[hypothesis]] was good there, [[acquiring]] the family with 250000 [[dollar]], was a [[tiny]] on the far fetched side,, but it turned out to work [[belle]] [[alright]] for me,, cause it was a riot all the [[manner]] through, it [[displaying]] the [[classroom]] [[battle]] of the different families. it has lot's of funny moments, [[encompass]] embarrassing stuff on the computer for a [[adolescence]] boy. all in all i [[worshiped]] this movie and will watch it again next Christmas or sooner if my daughter wants too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a long time.I am asking the writer to please write a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the movie needs to [[continue]] for a long time. I would love to see Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. Monarch Cove was one of the best Friday night's drama shown in a long time.I am asking the writer to please write a long series and air it on Lifetime, SOON.Each person was very interesting and did a wonderful job with their lines to make the plot come true. However, the movie needs to [[incessant]] for a long time. I would love to see Bianca and Jake's child grow-up and get a major role in the movie, along with the new grandparents planning for her educational future. Also, bring kathy back to see her niece and help foster her life.It was great seeing the grandparents work out their problems, but the family business needed to be restored to working status,and let us see how Jake and Bianca survive through the marriage years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign [[films]] I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of [[action]]" as [[many]] of the best international [[films]] do not live up to the Western Hollywood model of cinematic storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the foreign film arena. I [[enjoy]] that many foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular film offered no redemptive [[value]] for the [[time]] I [[wasted]] watching it. No meaningful character development, no engaging story arc, no [[way]] to get emotionally involved with any of the characters on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their slaves, and a little girl gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

While the above paragraph is poignant and dramatic, this movie will bore you while playing out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to finish it, and I wouldn't have even done that were it not for the positive ratings.

[[Unless]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly suggest steering clear of this one. I am astounded at the positive reviews for this thoroughly uninspiring film.

Often with foreign [[cinematography]] I skip over reviews that complain about slow pace and seeming "absence of [[measures]]" as [[various]] of the best international [[filmmaking]] do not live up to the Western Hollywood model of cinematic storytelling.

I enjoy the frequent artfulness and lack of cliché in the foreign film arena. I [[enjoying]] that many foreign films don't tie things up in a neat palatable little bow.

That said, this particular film offered no redemptive [[valuing]] for the [[times]] I [[squandered]] watching it. No meaningful character development, no engaging story arc, no [[camino]] to get emotionally involved with any of the characters on screen.

Synopsis: A bunch of emotionally immature uptight prejudiced colonials mistreat their slaves, and a little girl gets hurt by her only friend when the "house-boy" finally gets fed up and takes his abuse out on her.

While the above paragraph is poignant and dramatic, this movie will bore you while playing out the scenario. I was so unengaged that it took three sittings to finish it, and I wouldn't have even done that were it not for the positive ratings.

[[If]] you have an academic interest in the period I strongly suggest steering clear of this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I've been going through the AFI's list of the top 100 comedies, and I [[must]] say that this is truly one of the [[worst]]. Not just of the 90 movies on the list I've seen, but of any movie I've ever seen. Drunks are funny sometimes, Dudley isn't. Liza [[almost]] made it worthwhile, but alas... just go watch Arrested Development if you want to see her in something good. Seriously, Dudley laughing and [[drinking]] is [[supposed]] to be funny? I [[would]] highly recommend almost ANY other movie on the AFI's top 100 comedies for more laughs than this. If you want to see a funnier "drunk", try The Thin Man. Funnier movie in general, any Marx Brothers movie will kill (especially if you're as drunk as Arthur). I've been going through the AFI's list of the top 100 comedies, and I [[owes]] say that this is truly one of the [[hardest]]. Not just of the 90 movies on the list I've seen, but of any movie I've ever seen. Drunks are funny sometimes, Dudley isn't. Liza [[nigh]] made it worthwhile, but alas... just go watch Arrested Development if you want to see her in something good. Seriously, Dudley laughing and [[drinkable]] is [[suspected]] to be funny? I [[ought]] highly recommend almost ANY other movie on the AFI's top 100 comedies for more laughs than this. If you want to see a funnier "drunk", try The Thin Man. Funnier movie in general, any Marx Brothers movie will kill (especially if you're as drunk as Arthur). --------------------------------------------- Result 1125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The film begins with a bunch of kids in reform school and focuses on a kid named 'Gabe', who has apparently worked hard to earn his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new neighborhood to make a fresh start and soon Gabe meets up with the Dead End Kids. The Kids in this film are little punks, but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other previous films and down deep, they are well-meaning punks. However, in this [[neighborhood]] there are [[also]] some criminals who are perpetrating insurance fraud through arson and see Gabe as a convenient scapegoat--after all, he'd been to reform school and no one would believe he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be sent back to "The Big House", it's up to the rest of the gang to save him and expose the real crooks.

The "Dead End [[Kids]]" appeared in several Warner [[Brothers]] [[films]] in the late 1930s and the films were generally very [[good]] (particularly ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES). [[However]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the films, to put it charitably, were very weak and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the whole show and the group being renamed "The Bowery Boys". Because ANGELS WASH THEIR FACES had the excellent writing and production values AND Hall and Gorcey were not constantly mugging for the camera, it's a pretty [[good]] film--and almost [[earns]] a score of 7 (it's [[REAL]] [[close]]). In [[fact]], while this isn't a [[great]] [[film]] aesthetically, it's [[sure]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will [[give]] it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly [[towards]] the end when the kids take the law into their own hands and Reagan ignores the Bill of Rights--but it was also quite entertaining. The Dead End Kids are doing their best performances and Ronald Reagan and Ann Sheridan provided excellent support. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but somehow it was still funny and rather charming--so if you can suspend disbelief, it works well. The film begins with a bunch of kids in reform school and focuses on a kid named 'Gabe', who has apparently worked hard to earn his parole. Gabe and his sister move to a new neighborhood to make a fresh start and soon Gabe meets up with the Dead End Kids. The Kids in this film are little punks, but they are much less antisocial than they'd been in other previous films and down deep, they are well-meaning punks. However, in this [[vicinity]] there are [[apart]] some criminals who are perpetrating insurance fraud through arson and see Gabe as a convenient scapegoat--after all, he'd been to reform school and no one would believe he was innocent once he was framed. So, when Gabe is about ready to be sent back to "The Big House", it's up to the rest of the gang to save him and expose the real crooks.

The "Dead End [[Kid]]" appeared in several Warner [[Fraternal]] [[cinematography]] in the late 1930s and the films were generally very [[buena]] (particularly ANGELS WITH DIRTY FACES). [[Conversely]], after the boys' contracts expired, they went on to Monogram Studios and the films, to put it charitably, were very weak and formulaic--with Huntz Hall and Leo Gorcey being pretty much the whole show and the group being renamed "The Bowery Boys". Because ANGELS WASH THEIR FACES had the excellent writing and production values AND Hall and Gorcey were not constantly mugging for the camera, it's a pretty [[alright]] film--and almost [[profit]] a score of 7 (it's [[ACTUAL]] [[shut]]). In [[facto]], while this isn't a [[large]] [[flick]] aesthetically, it's [[persuaded]] a lot of fun to watch, so I will [[lend]] it a 7! Sure, it was a tad hokey-particularly [[circa]] the end when the kids take the law into their own hands and Reagan ignores the Bill of Rights--but it was also quite entertaining. The Dead End Kids are doing their best performances and Ronald Reagan and Ann Sheridan provided excellent support. Sure, this part of the film was illogical and impossible but somehow it was still funny and rather charming--so if you can suspend disbelief, it works well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A squashy slapstick mess posing as a [[comedy]]. Elvis Presley plays an Indian bull-riding champ who leaves the rodeo for a stay at home on his folks' desert-spread in Arizona, where government suits have just invested in the family's herd of cattle (which is in dire need of a stud). What director Peter Tewksbury is in [[dire]] need of is some narrative [[skills]], though what he [[lacks]] in assessment he makes up for in [[sloppy]] comedic montages (his social commentary isn't exactly pointed, but Tewksbury does have a satiric bend to his outlandishness and there are some funny scenes). Despite colorful supporting turns by Katy Jurado and Joan Blondell, the general wackiness [[gets]] [[way]] out of hand, and there's too much hoopin' and hollerin' to [[sustain]] much interest. As for [[Elvis]], he's loose and frisky throughout--and while it's [[nice]] to [[see]] him having [[fun]] on-screen, one has to wonder if he had just given up on movies at this point. This shambles of a picture has a distinct what-the-hell feel to it, and though spirits are high, the returns are mostly low. *1/2 from **** A squashy slapstick mess posing as a [[humour]]. Elvis Presley plays an Indian bull-riding champ who leaves the rodeo for a stay at home on his folks' desert-spread in Arizona, where government suits have just invested in the family's herd of cattle (which is in dire need of a stud). What director Peter Tewksbury is in [[tragic]] need of is some narrative [[jurisdiction]], though what he [[missing]] in assessment he makes up for in [[remiss]] comedic montages (his social commentary isn't exactly pointed, but Tewksbury does have a satiric bend to his outlandishness and there are some funny scenes). Despite colorful supporting turns by Katy Jurado and Joan Blondell, the general wackiness [[obtains]] [[ways]] out of hand, and there's too much hoopin' and hollerin' to [[keeping]] much interest. As for [[Alves]], he's loose and frisky throughout--and while it's [[delightful]] to [[seeing]] him having [[entertaining]] on-screen, one has to wonder if he had just given up on movies at this point. This shambles of a picture has a distinct what-the-hell feel to it, and though spirits are high, the returns are mostly low. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[doubt]] the [[best]] [[film]] Rainer Werner Fassbinder ever [[made]] and even with the [[marvelous]] script the film is enhanced by a [[great]] performance by Hanna Schygulla. Film starts out with Maria (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister must scrape by to survive. Maria decides to get a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named Bill (Greg Eagles) and they start to see one another on a steady basis. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the war so she gets very serious with Bill. But one day while getting intimate with Bill they see Hermann at the door. He hasn't died and when he enters the room a scuffle occurs and Maria breaks a bottle over Bill's head and he dies. Hermann takes the blame and he is sentenced to a long term in jail so Maria tells him that she will succeed at something and get him out. The war has ended and Germany must rebuild and one day on a train Maria meets Karl Oswald (Ivan Desny) who is a successful businessman in textiles and she uses her charms to get a job. Maria is determined to do well and climbs the corporate ladder and becomes Karl's mistress. She tells him that she will never marry him but he is in love with her. Hermann gets out of jail but goes to Canada to try and get over everything that Maria has done since he has been locked up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day Karl dies and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria buys her own house. Then Hermann finally comes home to his wife and they are both ready to start they're marriage even though they have been married for some time now. But Maria leaves the gas on the stove and the house explodes with both of them still in it.

There are so many interesting things in this film that its one of those movies that can be studied and talked about to great lengths. Like in all Fassbinder films the use of color is used in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This is without a [[duda]] the [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] Rainer Werner Fassbinder ever [[brought]] and even with the [[sumptuous]] script the film is enhanced by a [[whopping]] performance by Hanna Schygulla. Film starts out with Maria (Schygulla) and Hermann Braun (Klaus Lowitsch) just getting married as the bombs continue to fall and Hermann is shipped out towards the waning days of the war and now Maria and her mother and sister must scrape by to survive. Maria decides to get a job as a dancer/prostitute in a club that caters to American GI's and she meets a black Army soldier named Bill (Greg Eagles) and they start to see one another on a steady basis. Maria hears that her husband Hermann has died in the war so she gets very serious with Bill. But one day while getting intimate with Bill they see Hermann at the door. He hasn't died and when he enters the room a scuffle occurs and Maria breaks a bottle over Bill's head and he dies. Hermann takes the blame and he is sentenced to a long term in jail so Maria tells him that she will succeed at something and get him out. The war has ended and Germany must rebuild and one day on a train Maria meets Karl Oswald (Ivan Desny) who is a successful businessman in textiles and she uses her charms to get a job. Maria is determined to do well and climbs the corporate ladder and becomes Karl's mistress. She tells him that she will never marry him but he is in love with her. Hermann gets out of jail but goes to Canada to try and get over everything that Maria has done since he has been locked up.

*****SPOILER ALERT*****

One day Karl dies and leaves Maria just about everything in his will and Maria buys her own house. Then Hermann finally comes home to his wife and they are both ready to start they're marriage even though they have been married for some time now. But Maria leaves the gas on the stove and the house explodes with both of them still in it.

There are so many interesting things in this film that its one of those movies that can be studied and talked about to great lengths. Like in all Fassbinder films the use of color is used in a very interesting way. As the film begins the tones are brown and gray to represent war torn Germany but as Maria starts to become successful they change to bright rich colors like red and white. The rebuilding of Germany with all the sounds of construction are used as only backdrop and the film stays focused on the exploits of Maria. Fassbinder did want the sounds of rebuilding to remind us of what was going on in Germany at that time. Hanna Schygulla was never better and her performance is the key to the success of this film. With a lesser actress this would have been just another interesting film but Schygulla is so strong that her performance elevates this film to an elite status. Schygulla shows Maria as very determined and smart but at the same time she uses her beauty and femininity to get what she wants. She's not embarrassed nor does she feel guilty about this and Fassbinder wanted to show Maria as a woman who practically sells her soul to survive. Schygulla wasn't nominated for an Academy Award but she gave a great performance that will stand the test of time. Fassbinder himself appears in the film as a peddler and his own mother Lilo Pempeit plays Frau Ehmke. I have heard many things about the ending of the film and it has to do with whether Maria purposely left the gas on. Later in the bathroom she is running water over her wrist and she appears to be sad. This is only speculation and if you think I'm wrong please e-mail me. I think she was overly excited by Hermann being home and left it on by accident (Remember her putting on a dress for no reason?). Then when the will is being read to her its at that point that she learns that Hermann and Karl had become friendly without her knowledge and I think she felt that everything she had done was for nothing. Thats the reason for the bathroom scene. So when the house explodes its by accident. But I think the reason for Fassbinder having an ending like that is to show that anyone who would sell their soul has no business living. Fassbinder was fascinated by survivors but he was also incredibly passionate. In his view Maria can't have it both ways. A fascinating film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[In]] 1958, Clarksberg was a famous speed trap town. Much revenue was generated by the Sheriff's Department catching speeders. The ones who tried to outrun the Sheriff? Well, that gave the Sheriff a chance to push them off the Clarksberg Curve with his Plymouth cruiser. For example, in the beginning of the movie, a couple of servicemen on leave trying to get back to base on time are pushed off to their deaths, if I recall correctly. Then one day, a stranger drove into town. Possibly the [[coolest]] hot rodder in the world. Michael McCord. Even his name is a car name, as in McCord gaskets. In possibly the ultimate hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford coupe. The colors of death, evil and hellfire. He gets picked up for speeding by the Sheriff on purpose. He checks out the lay of the land. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg government is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": recreate the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. [[For]] 1958, Clarksberg was a famous speed trap town. Much revenue was generated by the Sheriff's Department catching speeders. The ones who tried to outrun the Sheriff? Well, that gave the Sheriff a chance to push them off the Clarksberg Curve with his Plymouth cruiser. For example, in the beginning of the movie, a couple of servicemen on leave trying to get back to base on time are pushed off to their deaths, if I recall correctly. Then one day, a stranger drove into town. Possibly the [[coldest]] hot rodder in the world. Michael McCord. Even his name is a car name, as in McCord gaskets. In possibly the ultimate hot rod. A black flamed '34 Ford coupe. The colors of death, evil and hellfire. He gets picked up for speeding by the Sheriff on purpose. He checks out the lay of the land. He is the brother of one of the Sheriff's victims. He knows how his brother died. The Clarksberg government is all in favor of the Sheriff. There's only one way to get justice served for the killing of his brother and to fix things so "this ain't a-ever gonna happen again to anyone": recreate the chase and settle the contest hot-rodder style to the death. He goes out to the Curve and practices. The Sheriff knows McCord knows. The race begins... This is a movie to be remembered by anyone who ever tried to master maneuvering on a certain stretch of road. --------------------------------------------- Result 1129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] It is noteworthy that mine is only the third review of this film, [[whereas]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World War, has to date attracted nearly a hundred [[comments]]. Like a previous reviewer, I am [[intrigued]] by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One difference between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, [[concentrating]] on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' covers not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, thoughtful bent, comparable to the liberal intellectuals he played in some of his other films. At times, he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

Whereas Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the criticism has been made that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's less attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a fair one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. It is noteworthy that mine is only the third review of this film, [[although]] `Patton- Lust for Glory', producer Frank McCarthy's earlier biography of a controversial American general from the Second World War, has to date attracted nearly a hundred [[sightings]]. Like a previous reviewer, I am [[disconcerted]] by why one film should have received so much more attention than the other.

One difference between the two films is that `Patton' is more focused, [[emphasis]] on a relatively short period at and immediately after the end of the Second World War, whereas `MacArthur' covers not only this war but also its subject's role in the Korean war, as well as his period as American governor of occupied Japan during the interlude.

The main difference, however, lies in the way the two leaders are played. Gregory Peck dominates this film even more than George C. Scott dominated `Patton'. Whereas Scott had another major star, Karl Malden, playing opposite him as General Bradley, none of the other actors in `MacArthur' are household names, at least for their film work. Scott, of course, portrayed Patton as aggressive and fiery-tempered, a man who at times was at war with the rest of the human race, not just with the enemy. I suspect that in real life General MacArthur was as volcanic an individual as Patton, but that is not how he appears in this film. Peck's MacArthur is of a more reflective, thoughtful bent, comparable to the liberal intellectuals he played in some of his other films. At times, he even seems to be a man of the political left. Much of his speech on the occasion of the Japanese surrender in 1945 could have been written by a paid-up member of CND, and his policies for reforming Japanese society during the American occupation have a semi-socialist air to them. In an attempt to show something of MacArthur's gift for inspiring leadership, Peck makes him a fine speaker, but his speeches always seem to owe more to the studied tricks of the practised rhetorician than to any fire in the heart. It is as if Atticus Finch from `To Kill a Mockingbird' had put on a general's uniform.

Whereas Scott attempted a `warts and all' portrait of Patton, the criticism has been made that `MacArthur' attempts to gloss over some of its subject's less attractive qualities. I think that this criticism is a fair one, particularly as far as the Korean War is concerned. The film gives the impression that MacArthur was a brilliant general who dared stand up to interfering, militarily ignorant politicians who did not know how to fight the war and was sacked for his pains when victory was within his grasp. Many historians, of course, feel that Truman was forced to sack MacArthur because the latter's conduct was becoming a risk to world peace, and had no choice but to accept a stalemate because Stalin would not have allowed his Chinese allies to be humiliated. Even during the Korean scenes, Peck's MacArthur comes across as more idealistic than his real-life original probably was; we see little of his rashness and naivety about political matters. (Truman 's remark `he knows as much about politics as a pig knows about Sunday' was said about Eisenhower, but it could equally well have been applied to MacArthur's approach to international diplomacy). Perhaps the film's attempt to paint out some of MacArthur's warts reflects the period in which it was made. The late seventies, after the twin traumas of Vietnam and Watergate, was a difficult time for America, and a public looking for reassurance might have welcomed a reassuringly heroic depiction of a military figure from the previous generation. Another criticism I would make of the film is that it falls between two stools. If it was intended to be a full biography of MacArthur, something should have been shown of his early life, which is not covered at all. (The first we see of the general is when he is leading the American resistance to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines). One theme that runs throughout the film is the influence of General MacArthur's father, himself a military hero. I would have liked to see what sort of man Arthur MacArthur was, and just why his son considered him to be such a hero and role model. Another interesting way of making the film would have been to concentrate on Korea and on MacArthur's clash with Truman, with equal prominence given to the two men and with actors of similar stature playing them. The way in which the film actually was made seemed to me to be less interesting than either of these alternative approaches.

It would be wrong, however, to give the impression that I disliked the film altogether. Although I may not have agreed with Peck's interpretation of the main role, there is no denying that he played it with his normal professionalism and seriousness. The film as a whole is a good example of a solid, workmanlike biopic, thoughtful and informative. It is a good film, but one that could have been a better one. 7/10.

On a pedantic note, the map which MacArthur is shown using during the Korean War shows the DMZ, the boundary between the two Korean states that did not come into existence until after the war. (The pre-war boundary was the 38th parallel). Also, I think that MacArthur was referring to the `tocsin' of war. War may be toxic, but it is difficult to listen with thirsty ear for a toxin. --------------------------------------------- Result 1130 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Visually [[stunning]] and [[full]] of Eastern Philosophy, this [[amazing]] martial arts [[fantasy]] is [[brought]] to you by master [[director]] [[Tsui]] Hark, the man behind some of the best films Hong [[Kong]] [[cinema]] has produced. The special effects are [[beautiful]] and imaginative. The plot is a bit on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[change]] from [[films]] that [[treat]] their audience as if they were [[morons]]. [[If]] [[thinking]] is not your [[forte]], [[however]], this may not be your movie. [[Maybe]] you should go [[see]] the [[latest]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are looking for something more, he's where you will find it. Visually [[unbelievable]] and [[fullest]] of Eastern Philosophy, this [[admirable]] martial arts [[utopia]] is [[lodged]] to you by master [[headmaster]] [[Suh]] Hark, the man behind some of the best films Hong [[Hong]] [[movie]] has produced. The special effects are [[magnifique]] and imaginative. The plot is a bit on the cerebral side, but is a refreshing [[amendment]] from [[cinema]] that [[processing]] their audience as if they were [[retards]]. [[Unless]] [[ideology]] is not your [[fort]], [[still]], this may not be your movie. [[Potentially]] you should go [[consults]] the [[newest]] from the Hollywood studio's no brain club, but if you are looking for something more, he's where you will find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Amazing]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? [[Unbelievable]] documentary. Saw it on original airdate and on DVD a few times in the last few years. I was shocked that it wasn't even nominated for a Best Documentary Oscar for 2002, the year it was released. No other documentary even comes close.

It was on TV recently for the 5th anniversary, but I missed the added "where are they now" segment at the end, except I did catch that tony now works for the hazmat unit.

I've seen criticism on documentary film-making from a few on this list. I can't see how this could have been done any different. They had less than 6 months to assemble this and get it on the air. The DVD contains more material and background.

I'm also surprised that according to IMDb.com, the brother have had no projects in the four years since. What have they been doing? --------------------------------------------- Result 1132 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is a movie that should be seen by everyone if you want to see great acting. Mr. [[Torn]] and [[Ms]] Farrel do an outstanding job. I think they should have it on TV again so a new audience can enjoy it. Wonderful performances.

It [[gives]] you a real feel of what the pioneers had to go through both physically and [[emotionally]]. Great unheard of movie.

It was done when Ms. Farrel was very [[young]]. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[certainly]] is not a [[comedy]] and she is just [[wonderful]]. There is very [[little]] dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[real]]. Mr. [[Torn]] as [[always]] is a great presence and just his breathing has [[great]] [[feeling]]. I must see movie. This is a movie that should be seen by everyone if you want to see great acting. Mr. [[Ripped]] and [[Mrs]] Farrel do an outstanding job. I think they should have it on TV again so a new audience can enjoy it. Wonderful performances.

It [[donne]] you a real feel of what the pioneers had to go through both physically and [[excitedly]]. Great unheard of movie.

It was done when Ms. Farrel was very [[jeune]]. I had always thought of her as a comedian, but this [[surely]] is not a [[travesty]] and she is just [[admirable]]. There is very [[tiny]] dialogs, but that just make it seem more [[veritable]]. Mr. [[Ripped]] as [[invariably]] is a great presence and just his breathing has [[huge]] [[sentiment]]. I must see movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] You [[could]] stage a version of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" with sock [[puppets]] and I'll [[probably]] watch it. Ever since I was a [[child]], this has been one of my favorite stories. Maybe it's the [[idea]] that there is good in everyone, and that [[therefore]] no one is beyond redemption, that [[appeals]] to me, but for whatever reason I never [[miss]] an opportunity to watch one of the many screen adaptations of this timeless classic when they're on TV as they inevitably are this [[time]] of [[year]].

What makes this version really [[stand]] out is the [[somber]] gravitas that the cast bring to their respective roles. Lines we've [[heard]] [[dozens]] of times in the [[past]] [[take]] on a [[whole]] new intensity, and each [[character]] [[becomes]] more [[real]] and [[believable]] in the hands of this [[wonderful]] ensemble.

[[George]] C. Scott was [[nominated]] for an [[Emmy]] in 1985 for this role. It is to his everlasting credit that [[rather]] than sleepwalking through this oft-portrayed role of Scrooge, he [[instead]] gave it a fresh [[interpretation]] that was, in my opinion, one of his finest performances ever. He [[wisely]] did not [[attempt]] a British accent, instead delivering his lines in that [[famous]] gravelly [[voice]]. [[His]] Scrooge is not merely a [[cranky]] [[old]] [[man]] (as he is so often portrayed), but a man who [[harbors]] a profound anger against the world. As he is visited in turn by each of the Three Spirits, we understand how this anger took root, [[grew]], and ultimately strangled his soul. As he is forced to review his life, we see him alternately softening, and then relapsing again into unrepentant obstinacy. And in the great dramatic scene when he, kneeling and weeping at his own grave, begs for mercy as he attempts to convince the third spirit of his [[repentance]] and desire to alter his life, we see a man who has been utterly broken and brought to his knees literally and figuratively. Scott has made Scrooge utterly believable and painfully human.

Impressive as Scott's performance is, the ensemble of supporting actors contributes significantly the this version's dark beauty. Fred Holywell, Scrooge's nephew, is an excellent example of this. Often portrayed as an affable buffoon, here he is played by Roger Rees with an emotional intensity missing from earlier portrayals. When he implores Scrooge, "I ask nothing of you. I want nothing from you. Why can't we be friends?", we see in his face not only his frustration, but his pain at Scrooge's self-imposed separation from his only living relative. It is a moving performance, and one of the movie's most dramatic scenes.

Even more magnificent is the performance given by the wonderful English actor Frank Finlay as Scrooge's late partner, Jacob Marley. In most versions of this tale, the scene with Marley tends to be a bit of a low point in the film, simply because it's difficult to portray a dead man convincingly, and the results are usually just plain silly (ooooh, look, it's a scary ghost.......not!) In this version, it is perhaps the most riveting scene in the whole movie. Marley's entrance, as the locks on Scrooge's door fly open of their own accord and the sound of chains rattling echo throughout the house, is wonderfully creepy. But Finlay's Marley is no ethereal spirit. He is a tortured soul, inspiring both horror and pity. Marley may be a ghost, but his rage and regret over a life wasted on the pursuit of wealth, and his despair at his realization that his sins are now beyond redress, are still very human. As portrayed by Finlay, we have no problem believing that even the flinty Scrooge would be shaken by this nightmarish apparition. Finlay really steals the scene here, something not easy to do when you're opposite George C. Scott.

And it just goes on and on, one remarkable performance after another, making it seem like you're experiencing this story for the first time. Edward Woodward (remember him from the Equalizer?) is by turns both jovial and menacing as the Ghost of Christmas Present. When he delivers the famous line, "it may well be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than MILLIONS like this poor man's child" he is no longer a jolly Santa Claus surrogate, but an avenging angel who gives Scrooge a much needed verbal spanking.

Susannah York is a wonderfully tart tongued Mrs. Cratchit, and David Warner brings marvelous depth to the long suffering Bob Cratchit, a man who goes through life bearing the triple crosses of poverty, a sick child, and an insufferable boss. His face alternately shows his cheerful courage, and also, at times, his weariness, in the face of intolerable circumstances. Later, in the scene in which Scrooge is shown by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come the Cratchit family after the death of Tiny Tim, Warner's performance, while hardly uttering a word, will move you to tears. You [[did]] stage a version of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol" with sock [[marionettes]] and I'll [[presumably]] watch it. Ever since I was a [[kid]], this has been one of my favorite stories. Maybe it's the [[thinking]] that there is good in everyone, and that [[thereby]] no one is beyond redemption, that [[appeal]] to me, but for whatever reason I never [[mademoiselle]] an opportunity to watch one of the many screen adaptations of this timeless classic when they're on TV as they inevitably are this [[moment]] of [[annum]].

What makes this version really [[standing]] out is the [[pessimistic]] gravitas that the cast bring to their respective roles. Lines we've [[listened]] [[scores]] of times in the [[former]] [[taking]] on a [[ensemble]] new intensity, and each [[personage]] [[becoming]] more [[authentic]] and [[trustworthy]] in the hands of this [[glamorous]] ensemble.

[[Georgie]] C. Scott was [[appointing]] for an [[Emmys]] in 1985 for this role. It is to his everlasting credit that [[somewhat]] than sleepwalking through this oft-portrayed role of Scrooge, he [[alternatively]] gave it a fresh [[explanations]] that was, in my opinion, one of his finest performances ever. He [[conservatively]] did not [[strive]] a British accent, instead delivering his lines in that [[prestigious]] gravelly [[vocals]]. [[Her]] Scrooge is not merely a [[grouchy]] [[elderly]] [[guy]] (as he is so often portrayed), but a man who [[ports]] a profound anger against the world. As he is visited in turn by each of the Three Spirits, we understand how this anger took root, [[hiked]], and ultimately strangled his soul. As he is forced to review his life, we see him alternately softening, and then relapsing again into unrepentant obstinacy. And in the great dramatic scene when he, kneeling and weeping at his own grave, begs for mercy as he attempts to convince the third spirit of his [[contrition]] and desire to alter his life, we see a man who has been utterly broken and brought to his knees literally and figuratively. Scott has made Scrooge utterly believable and painfully human.

Impressive as Scott's performance is, the ensemble of supporting actors contributes significantly the this version's dark beauty. Fred Holywell, Scrooge's nephew, is an excellent example of this. Often portrayed as an affable buffoon, here he is played by Roger Rees with an emotional intensity missing from earlier portrayals. When he implores Scrooge, "I ask nothing of you. I want nothing from you. Why can't we be friends?", we see in his face not only his frustration, but his pain at Scrooge's self-imposed separation from his only living relative. It is a moving performance, and one of the movie's most dramatic scenes.

Even more magnificent is the performance given by the wonderful English actor Frank Finlay as Scrooge's late partner, Jacob Marley. In most versions of this tale, the scene with Marley tends to be a bit of a low point in the film, simply because it's difficult to portray a dead man convincingly, and the results are usually just plain silly (ooooh, look, it's a scary ghost.......not!) In this version, it is perhaps the most riveting scene in the whole movie. Marley's entrance, as the locks on Scrooge's door fly open of their own accord and the sound of chains rattling echo throughout the house, is wonderfully creepy. But Finlay's Marley is no ethereal spirit. He is a tortured soul, inspiring both horror and pity. Marley may be a ghost, but his rage and regret over a life wasted on the pursuit of wealth, and his despair at his realization that his sins are now beyond redress, are still very human. As portrayed by Finlay, we have no problem believing that even the flinty Scrooge would be shaken by this nightmarish apparition. Finlay really steals the scene here, something not easy to do when you're opposite George C. Scott.

And it just goes on and on, one remarkable performance after another, making it seem like you're experiencing this story for the first time. Edward Woodward (remember him from the Equalizer?) is by turns both jovial and menacing as the Ghost of Christmas Present. When he delivers the famous line, "it may well be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than MILLIONS like this poor man's child" he is no longer a jolly Santa Claus surrogate, but an avenging angel who gives Scrooge a much needed verbal spanking.

Susannah York is a wonderfully tart tongued Mrs. Cratchit, and David Warner brings marvelous depth to the long suffering Bob Cratchit, a man who goes through life bearing the triple crosses of poverty, a sick child, and an insufferable boss. His face alternately shows his cheerful courage, and also, at times, his weariness, in the face of intolerable circumstances. Later, in the scene in which Scrooge is shown by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come the Cratchit family after the death of Tiny Tim, Warner's performance, while hardly uttering a word, will move you to tears. --------------------------------------------- Result 1134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Im not a big Tim Matheson fan but i have to admit i [[liked]] this film.It was dark and a small bit disturbing with some scenes a bit edgy,i don't know were to classify this film its a bit SF and a bit horror slash thriller.I [[saw]] this at about 2.00am or so on my local [[channel]] there was nothing else on so i [[decided]] to watch it.[[If]] you have not [[seen]] this [[film]] [[id]] [[recommend]] it its not really that bad,the characters are interesting enough but not really explored to their full potential which could have made this film even more better.I don,t know if this film went to the cinema but it felt like it was made for TV or went straight to video,i for one would buy this if it,s on DVD it fits well with my type of film and has a small bit of the X-FILES story attached to it.Government undertakings or shifty corporations involved in dodgy shadowy dealings.Overall a good film. Im not a big Tim Matheson fan but i have to admit i [[wished]] this film.It was dark and a small bit disturbing with some scenes a bit edgy,i don't know were to classify this film its a bit SF and a bit horror slash thriller.I [[witnessed]] this at about 2.00am or so on my local [[canals]] there was nothing else on so i [[opted]] to watch it.[[Unless]] you have not [[noticed]] this [[cinematography]] [[ids]] [[recommends]] it its not really that bad,the characters are interesting enough but not really explored to their full potential which could have made this film even more better.I don,t know if this film went to the cinema but it felt like it was made for TV or went straight to video,i for one would buy this if it,s on DVD it fits well with my type of film and has a small bit of the X-FILES story attached to it.Government undertakings or shifty corporations involved in dodgy shadowy dealings.Overall a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Would]] have [[better]] [[strengthened]] [[considerably]] by making it as a

50 minute episode of the [[Outer]] [[Limits]]. Too much [[superfluous]] material and [[stuff]] like the chief [[bad]] [[guy]] [[looking]] like he'd [[escaped]] from The [[Phantom]] of the Opera didn't [[help]]. The whole '[[Night]] of the [[Living]] Dead' [[sequence]] was [[extremely]] [[silly]] and [[quite]] [[unnecessary]]. [[After]] all, if the dead were to [[punish]] [[anyone]] for their [[sins]], now [[remind]] me [[exactly]] who was killing [[everyone]] again? [[Ought]] have [[optimum]] [[reinforced]] [[immensely]] by making it as a

50 minute episode of the [[Exterior]] [[Limitations]]. Too much [[dispensable]] material and [[thing]] like the chief [[unfavourable]] [[blokes]] [[researching]] like he'd [[evaded]] from The [[Gremlin]] of the Opera didn't [[aids]]. The whole '[[Nocturnal]] of the [[Vie]] Dead' [[sequencing]] was [[vitally]] [[beast]] and [[rather]] [[dispensable]]. [[Upon]] all, if the dead were to [[chastise]] [[person]] for their [[iniquities]], now [[remember]] me [[precisely]] who was killing [[anyone]] again? --------------------------------------------- Result 1136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] ****SPOILERS**** [[Powerhouse]] movie that [[shows]] how men in desperate situations can go so far as sacrifice their best friends and family members and not realize what monsters that they are by doing it. Until like in the case of bull-like Gypo Noland, Victor Mclaglen, it's too much too [[late]].

It's 1922 and the hight of the Black & Tan Irish revolt against the mighty British Empire with the Tans, British occupying troops, on the lookout for wanted Irish Republican rebel Frankie McPhillip, Wallace Ford, wanted for the killing of a Briish soldier. Gypo a good, really the best, friend of the fugitive McPhillip is down on his luck not having a job with his girlfriend Katie, Margot Grahame, forced to turn tricks in the Dublin red-light district in order to pay her rent.

After an outraged Gypo worked over a potential John who want's to spend a few hours with Katie, for a shilling or two, an angry Katie tells the not so bright Gyro that he's preventing her for supporting herself with the only bankable asset she has , her body. Katie also tells Gypo that he should wake up to reality and realize what a desperate situation that she's in. Telling the mind-numbed Gypo that it would only cost ten pound sterling for her to go to America, and get out of the poverty of Ireland, Gypo suddenly remembers a poster of his good friend Frankie McPhillip that he just saw announcing a reward of 20 pound sterling. Thats enough money for both him and Kaite to travel to America.

Gypo going to a local Dublin flop house and soup kitchen to get a free meal is startled to run into his friend Frankie McPhillip. Frankie tells him that he snuck into Dublin to see both his mother Mrs. McPhillip and sister Mary, Una O'Connor & Heather Angel, and if he can make sure that everything is safe for him to go home and later leave for his Irish Republican unit outside the city.

All Gypo can see in Frankie's face is the 20 pound sterling reward for him being turned into the police! Without as much of a second thought, after he assured Frankie that everything is all right, Gypo secretly goes to the police and informs on his friend who's later shot and killed in a police and Tan shootout in his moms house.

With the deed done the chief of police hands over the 20 pound sterling, much like thirty pieces of silver, to an almost emotionless Gypo who takes it and sneaks out the back door of the police station so that one one can see him. You can see in the police chief's face and actions that he has nothing but utter contempt for Gypo's betrayal of his friend Frankie McPhillip. Even though he was wanted for murder and an enemy of the British Empire. That's how low traitors or informers are held even by those whom they secretly work for.

Gypo turns out to be his own worst enemy after his betrayal of Frankie as his conscience takes control of his mind. Gypo sees and hears everyone, including his unsuspecting girlfriend Katie, pointing a finger and implicating him in Frankie's betrayal and death at the hands of the British authorities. Gypo's guilty mind has him getting himself royally and gloriously drunk, on the reward money, that by the time he's forced to to admit his crime to his Irish Republican Army colleagues, who had the almost dead drunk and slobbering Gypo on trial, the money was just about gone in his partying drinking and whoring.

Whatever good feelings, if that's possible, that you had for the weak minded and strong shouldered Gypo was completely demolished when in an act of total desperation, in order to keep from getting shot, he falsely implicate an innocent man Mulligan, Donald Meek, in his crime of informing on his friend Frankie McPhillip. Which is quickly exposed as a total fabrication by non other then the guilt-ridden Gypo himself. The dye is then cast as straws are drawn for who would be the one to put a bullet in Gypo's head for the final gut spilling chapter of this heart wrenching and unforgettable Crime & Punishment classic. ****SPOILERS**** [[Locomotive]] movie that [[denotes]] how men in desperate situations can go so far as sacrifice their best friends and family members and not realize what monsters that they are by doing it. Until like in the case of bull-like Gypo Noland, Victor Mclaglen, it's too much too [[tardy]].

It's 1922 and the hight of the Black & Tan Irish revolt against the mighty British Empire with the Tans, British occupying troops, on the lookout for wanted Irish Republican rebel Frankie McPhillip, Wallace Ford, wanted for the killing of a Briish soldier. Gypo a good, really the best, friend of the fugitive McPhillip is down on his luck not having a job with his girlfriend Katie, Margot Grahame, forced to turn tricks in the Dublin red-light district in order to pay her rent.

After an outraged Gypo worked over a potential John who want's to spend a few hours with Katie, for a shilling or two, an angry Katie tells the not so bright Gyro that he's preventing her for supporting herself with the only bankable asset she has , her body. Katie also tells Gypo that he should wake up to reality and realize what a desperate situation that she's in. Telling the mind-numbed Gypo that it would only cost ten pound sterling for her to go to America, and get out of the poverty of Ireland, Gypo suddenly remembers a poster of his good friend Frankie McPhillip that he just saw announcing a reward of 20 pound sterling. Thats enough money for both him and Kaite to travel to America.

Gypo going to a local Dublin flop house and soup kitchen to get a free meal is startled to run into his friend Frankie McPhillip. Frankie tells him that he snuck into Dublin to see both his mother Mrs. McPhillip and sister Mary, Una O'Connor & Heather Angel, and if he can make sure that everything is safe for him to go home and later leave for his Irish Republican unit outside the city.

All Gypo can see in Frankie's face is the 20 pound sterling reward for him being turned into the police! Without as much of a second thought, after he assured Frankie that everything is all right, Gypo secretly goes to the police and informs on his friend who's later shot and killed in a police and Tan shootout in his moms house.

With the deed done the chief of police hands over the 20 pound sterling, much like thirty pieces of silver, to an almost emotionless Gypo who takes it and sneaks out the back door of the police station so that one one can see him. You can see in the police chief's face and actions that he has nothing but utter contempt for Gypo's betrayal of his friend Frankie McPhillip. Even though he was wanted for murder and an enemy of the British Empire. That's how low traitors or informers are held even by those whom they secretly work for.

Gypo turns out to be his own worst enemy after his betrayal of Frankie as his conscience takes control of his mind. Gypo sees and hears everyone, including his unsuspecting girlfriend Katie, pointing a finger and implicating him in Frankie's betrayal and death at the hands of the British authorities. Gypo's guilty mind has him getting himself royally and gloriously drunk, on the reward money, that by the time he's forced to to admit his crime to his Irish Republican Army colleagues, who had the almost dead drunk and slobbering Gypo on trial, the money was just about gone in his partying drinking and whoring.

Whatever good feelings, if that's possible, that you had for the weak minded and strong shouldered Gypo was completely demolished when in an act of total desperation, in order to keep from getting shot, he falsely implicate an innocent man Mulligan, Donald Meek, in his crime of informing on his friend Frankie McPhillip. Which is quickly exposed as a total fabrication by non other then the guilt-ridden Gypo himself. The dye is then cast as straws are drawn for who would be the one to put a bullet in Gypo's head for the final gut spilling chapter of this heart wrenching and unforgettable Crime & Punishment classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 1137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just the ultimate masterpiece in my opinion. Every line, every phrase, every picture is exactly in place and Lindsay Crouse and Joe Mantegna are just THE cool shrink and the sleazy con-man, so well cast. 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[Education]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[could]] have been. Little Tree's education is about things like the circle of life and how you should look at a star to help you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the idiot back talks the teacher at the boarding school place he starts crying and talking to the sky. Oh my gosh. Sure, the lady was a little harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the audience [[thinking]] that Little Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! Talking to a star is not going to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring guardians are not always right. The [[Upbringing]] of Little Tree is just not as good as it [[did]] have been. Little Tree's education is about things like the circle of life and how you should look at a star to help you. Whatever happened to the three R's? Readin' 'Ritin' and 'Rithmetic? When the idiot back talks the teacher at the boarding school place he starts crying and talking to the sky. Oh my gosh. Sure, the lady was a little harsh, but then James Cromwell's character comes and takes him away, leaving the audience [[thoughts]] that Little Tree was absolutely right. He should learn to adapt to new discipline. Those were the times! Talking to a star is not going to change a thing! Little Tree needs to learn that his adoring guardians are not always right. --------------------------------------------- Result 1139 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[incredibly]] overrated anime television series (26 episodes, 25 [[minutes]] each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his girl classmates) who pilots a giant robot to defend Japan against invading beings called Angels. There is very little explanation given to the Angels or why their numbers have increased in recent times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no apparent reason (why not attack all at once instead of at spaced out intervals that are convenient for the humans you're attempting to destroy?). The robot fight scenes attempt to employ a variety of obstacles, but the action itself is poorly executed and [[boring]] to watch. Almost every episode seems like a waste of space where nothing of interest occurs.

Some might be intrigued by fans who mention the (very few) symbolic references herein, but that's all they are - shallow one-liners to [[religious]] or philosophical concepts that are [[randomly]] tossed in with zero [[craftsmanship]]. As a whole the series is incredibly [[tedious]] due to the superficiality of the characters, who are really nothing more than self-pitying crybabies. The psychology is pathetic, with [[hopelessly]] simplistic conflicts like "I hate my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no progression beyond their face value. It's no understatement to say that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing garbage during the final episodes with their endless, angst-ridden diatribes of [[excessively]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is totally meaningless).

I'm not kidding when I say that this series just got [[worse]] and [[worse]] as it progressed. Every day I'd look at the DVD set sitting on my living room table and say to myself, "Damn, I've gotta watch the next episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The real kicker was that the episodes were only 25 minutes long, yet they were somehow able to digress into a completely uninteresting borefest within the opening 10 minutes. This is coming from a guy who will happily sit through 150-minute films with [[glacial]] pacing, so my criticism of this series is most [[damning]] indeed.

Never in my entire life have I [[despised]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already purchased it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of [[pure]], unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. This [[stunningly]] overrated anime television series (26 episodes, 25 [[mins]] each) is about a 14-year-old boy (and two of his girl classmates) who pilots a giant robot to defend Japan against invading beings called Angels. There is very little explanation given to the Angels or why their numbers have increased in recent times, and they just seem to pop out of nowhere for no apparent reason (why not attack all at once instead of at spaced out intervals that are convenient for the humans you're attempting to destroy?). The robot fight scenes attempt to employ a variety of obstacles, but the action itself is poorly executed and [[bored]] to watch. Almost every episode seems like a waste of space where nothing of interest occurs.

Some might be intrigued by fans who mention the (very few) symbolic references herein, but that's all they are - shallow one-liners to [[church]] or philosophical concepts that are [[arbitrarily]] tossed in with zero [[handicraft]]. As a whole the series is incredibly [[monotonous]] due to the superficiality of the characters, who are really nothing more than self-pitying crybabies. The psychology is pathetic, with [[irretrievably]] simplistic conflicts like "I hate my father" repeated over and over and over and over again with no progression beyond their face value. It's no understatement to say that these characters plunge this series from time-wasting mediocrity to anger-inducing garbage during the final episodes with their endless, angst-ridden diatribes of [[disproportionately]] repetitive psychobabble (some of which is totally meaningless).

I'm not kidding when I say that this series just got [[worst]] and [[lousiest]] as it progressed. Every day I'd look at the DVD set sitting on my living room table and say to myself, "Damn, I've gotta watch the next episode at some point. (sigh) I may as well slug through another one tonight." The real kicker was that the episodes were only 25 minutes long, yet they were somehow able to digress into a completely uninteresting borefest within the opening 10 minutes. This is coming from a guy who will happily sit through 150-minute films with [[frigid]] pacing, so my criticism of this series is most [[stinging]] indeed.

Never in my entire life have I [[flouted]] watching a series as much as "Evangelion." I had already purchased it based off of all the fanatical comments on IMDb, and I certainly wasn't going to let it collect dust after spending my hard-earned money. What followed was 10 hours of [[pur]], unmitigated torture. My love/hate relationship with anime is turning into a hate/love relationship after this highly acclaimed disaster.

"Evangelion" represents everything anime should NOT be - massive quantities of dull, pretentious tripe under the guise of intelligent cinema. The universal acclaim for this piece of crap is simply unbelievable; and the ridiculous assertions by fans that this series as "one of mankind's greatest achievements" is probably the most stupifying comment I've ever heard on IMDb - and I've seen some doozies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I [[would]] of given this [[film]] a zero out of ten, but i will [[give]] it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I Love Rani very [[much]] and have a [[respect]] that she is a [[great]] actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie kissing Kamal, but its no big [[deal]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this film [[noticeable]], [[lets]] [[actually]] talk about this film. Is it good or [[bad]], I think its a completely [[rubbish]] movie that made me [[yawn]]. Me being a Fantastic critic, you can see my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The movie is not entertaining is one thing and if this is suppose to be hard hitting cinema, why is there no morale in this movie. Its a biased movie thats not a true story and it stinks. Watching [[Kamal]] kissing these actresses makes me sick, Man cant kiss properly anyway. I [[ought]] of given this [[cinematography]] a zero out of ten, but i will [[lend]] it a two. Reason One is that Shah Rukh Khan appears in the film, which is not really a reason. Last Point is that Rani Appears in this film and does a smooch with Kamal. I Love Rani very [[very]] and have a [[respecting]] that she is a [[sublime]] actress. Which is why i didn't enjoy her in this movie kissing Kamal, but its no big [[treat]]. Anyway enough of the bedroom scenes that made this film [[notable]], [[enables]] [[genuinely]] talk about this film. Is it good or [[unhealthy]], I think its a completely [[detritus]] movie that made me [[yawns]]. Me being a Fantastic critic, you can see my other 250+ review's by clicking on my name, I have great taste. The movie is not entertaining is one thing and if this is suppose to be hard hitting cinema, why is there no morale in this movie. Its a biased movie thats not a true story and it stinks. Watching [[Kemal]] kissing these actresses makes me sick, Man cant kiss properly anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] If you [[hate]] redneck accents, you'll hate this movie. And to [[make]] it [[worse]], you see Patrick Swayze, a has been trying to be a redneck. I really can't stand redneck accents. I [[like]] Billy Bob Thornton, he was good in Slingblade, but he was [[annoying]] in this movie. And what kind of [[name]] is Lonnie [[Earl]]? [[How]] [[much]] more hickish can this movie [[get]]? The storyline was [[stupid]]. I'm usually not this judgemental of movies, but I couldn't [[stand]] this [[movie]]. [[If]] you [[want]] a good [[Billy]] [[Bob]] Thornton movie, [[go]] see Slingblade.

My [[mom]] found this [[movie]] for $5.95 at [[Wal]] Mart...figures...I [[think]] I'll wrap it up and [[give]] it to my [[Grandma]] for [[Christmas]]. It [[could]] just be that I can't stand redneck accents [[usually]], or that I can't stand Patrick Swayze. Maybe if [[Patrick]] Swayze wasn't in it. I didn't [[laugh]] once in the [[movie]]. I [[laugh]] at anything [[stupid]] usually. [[If]] they had [[shown]] [[someones]] [[fingers]] getting smashed, I [[might]] have [[laughed]]. people's [[fingers]] getting smashed by [[accident]] always makes me laugh. If you [[detest]] redneck accents, you'll hate this movie. And to [[deliver]] it [[lousiest]], you see Patrick Swayze, a has been trying to be a redneck. I really can't stand redneck accents. I [[iike]] Billy Bob Thornton, he was good in Slingblade, but he was [[vexing]] in this movie. And what kind of [[names]] is Lonnie [[Comte]]? [[Mode]] [[very]] more hickish can this movie [[obtains]]? The storyline was [[dopey]]. I'm usually not this judgemental of movies, but I couldn't [[stands]] this [[cinematography]]. [[Though]] you [[wanting]] a good [[Pele]] [[Spongebob]] Thornton movie, [[going]] see Slingblade.

My [[mammy]] found this [[flick]] for $5.95 at [[Wally]] Mart...figures...I [[ideas]] I'll wrap it up and [[lend]] it to my [[Grandmother]] for [[Claus]]. It [[wo]] just be that I can't stand redneck accents [[habitually]], or that I can't stand Patrick Swayze. Maybe if [[Patrik]] Swayze wasn't in it. I didn't [[laughter]] once in the [[cinematography]]. I [[laughing]] at anything [[ludicrous]] usually. [[Though]] they had [[displayed]] [[elses]] [[pinkies]] getting smashed, I [[apt]] have [[laughs]]. people's [[pinkies]] getting smashed by [[crash]] always makes me laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It's very sad that Lucian Pintilie does not [[stop]] making [[movies]]. They [[get]] [[worse]] [[every]] time. [[Niki]] and Flo (2003) is a [[depressing]] [[stab]] at the camera. It's unfortunate that from the [[many]] [[movies]] that are [[made]] yearly in Romania , the [[worst]] of them [[get]] to be [[sent]] abroad ( [[e]].g. Chicago [[International]] [[Film]] [[Festival]]). This [[movie]] without a plot , acting or [[script]] is a [[waste]] of time and money. Score: 0.02 out of 10. It's very sad that Lucian Pintilie does not [[halt]] making [[film]]. They [[got]] [[worst]] [[any]] time. [[Nikkei]] and Flo (2003) is a [[somber]] [[knife]] at the camera. It's unfortunate that from the [[multiple]] [[cinematography]] that are [[introduced]] yearly in Romania , the [[hardest]] of them [[obtain]] to be [[dispatching]] abroad ( [[f]].g. Chicago [[World]] [[Cinema]] [[Festivals]]). This [[cinematography]] without a plot , acting or [[screenplay]] is a [[wastes]] of time and money. Score: 0.02 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I really [[liked]] this version of 'Vanishing Point' as opposed to the 1971 version. I found the 1971 version quite boring. If I can get up in the middle of a movie a few times(as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that great. Of course, this could be due to the fact that I was only nine at the time the 1971 version was brought out. However, I have seen many remakes, where I have liked the original and older one better. I found that the plot of the 1997 version was more understandable and had basically kept true to the original without [[undermining]] the meaning of the 1971 version. In my opinion, I felt the 1997 version had more excitement and wasn't so "blase".(Boring) I really [[wished]] this version of 'Vanishing Point' as opposed to the 1971 version. I found the 1971 version quite boring. If I can get up in the middle of a movie a few times(as I did with the 1971 version) than to me, it is not all that great. Of course, this could be due to the fact that I was only nine at the time the 1971 version was brought out. However, I have seen many remakes, where I have liked the original and older one better. I found that the plot of the 1997 version was more understandable and had basically kept true to the original without [[eroding]] the meaning of the 1971 version. In my opinion, I felt the 1997 version had more excitement and wasn't so "blase".(Boring) --------------------------------------------- Result 1144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The short that starts this film is the [[true]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken randomly in the parking lot of a television station where Gary works in the town of Beaver. [[Gary]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Lo]] and [[behold]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[staggering]] performace as Olivia Newton Dawn. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[story]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. When it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the real Gary and all his shining idiocy. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. The short that starts this film is the [[veritable]] footage of a guy named Gary, apparently it was taken randomly in the parking lot of a television station where Gary works in the town of Beaver. [[Gari]] is a little "different"; he is an impersonator and drives an old Chevy named Farrah (after Fawcett). [[Oscillator]] and [[see]] the filmmaker gets a letter from Gary some time later inviting him to return to Beaver to get some footage of the local talent contest he has put together, including Gary's [[shocking]] performace as Olivia Newton Dawn. Oh, my. The two shorts that follow are Gary's [[history]], the same one you just witnessed only the first is portrayed by Sean Penn and the second by Crispin Glover titled "The Orkly Kid." If you are in the mood for making fun of someone this is definitely the film to watch. I was doubled over with laughter through most of it, especially Crispins performance which could definitely stand on it's own. When it was over, I had to rewind the film to once again watch the real Gary and all his shining idiocy. Although Olivia was the focus, I would have liked to have seen one of the "fictitious" shorts take a jab at Gary's Barry Manilow impersonation, whic h was equally ridiculous. --------------------------------------------- Result 1145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] yes i have a copy of it on VHS uncut in great [[condition]] that i transfered to DVD and if [[anyone]] one wants to bring back the memories of a Christmas classic [[please]] emil me at dmd2222@verizon.net.i [[searched]] everywhere and i [[found]] nothing on this and i thought that i cant be the only one on this planet that has this classic on tape there has to be other people and if they do i fit in with them being that very very few that has this [[classic]] so i consider myself lucky and i have all of the muppets [[Christmas]] except one that [[john]] denver did with the [[muppets]] again i [[thinks]] its [[called]] a smokey [[mountain]] [[holiday]] im not to [[sure]] but its [[close]]. yes i have a copy of it on VHS uncut in great [[stipulation]] that i transfered to DVD and if [[nobody]] one wants to bring back the memories of a Christmas classic [[invite]] emil me at dmd2222@verizon.net.i [[frisked]] everywhere and i [[find]] nothing on this and i thought that i cant be the only one on this planet that has this classic on tape there has to be other people and if they do i fit in with them being that very very few that has this [[typical]] so i consider myself lucky and i have all of the muppets [[Claus]] except one that [[jon]] denver did with the [[marionettes]] again i [[deems]] its [[termed]] a smokey [[mont]] [[holidays]] im not to [[persuaded]] but its [[shut]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[unusual]] as God than [[George]] [[Burns]]? This [[film]] sure was better than that bore, "Oh, [[God]]". I was [[totally]] [[engrossed]] and LMAO all the [[way]] through. Carrey was [[perfect]] as the out of sorts anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the frustrated girlfriend in her usual well [[played]] performance. I, for one, don't consider her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my favorite scene was when Carrey opened up the file cabinet thinking it could never hold his life history. See if you can spot the file in the cabinet that holds the events of his bathroom [[humor]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Well]] [[written]] and even better [[played]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's [[best]]. Well, was Morgan Freeman any more [[exceptional]] as God than [[Georgie]] [[Incinerate]]? This [[movies]] sure was better than that bore, "Oh, [[Jeez]]". I was [[downright]] [[absorbed]] and LMAO all the [[camino]] through. Carrey was [[irreproachable]] as the out of sorts anchorman wannabe, and Aniston carried off her part as the frustrated girlfriend in her usual well [[effected]] performance. I, for one, don't consider her to be either ugly or untalented. I think my favorite scene was when Carrey opened up the file cabinet thinking it could never hold his life history. See if you can spot the file in the cabinet that holds the events of his bathroom [[comedy]]: I was rolling over this one. [[Good]] [[typed]] and even better [[effected]] out, this comedy will go down as one of this funnyman's [[nicest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[main]] problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't [[really]] saying what it [[thinks]] it's [[saying]].

[[In]] an [[audacious]] - I hesitate to [[use]] the word "inspired" - act of street [[theater]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two student filmmakers from the [[Czech]] Republic, pulled off a major corporate [[hoax]] to serve as the basis for their movie: they deliberately fabricated a phony "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart Super Store), built an [[entire]] ad campaign around it - replete with billboards, radio and TV spots, an official logo, a catchy theme song and photos of fake merchandise - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" would show up to their creation on opening day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually existed.

One might well ask, "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[question]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that satisfying a one. Essentially, we're told that the purpose of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of advertising. And the movie makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. higher) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the advertisements encouraging them to join the European Union. Fair enough - especially when one considers that the actual advertisers who agree to go along with the stunt declaim against the unethical nature of lying to customers, all the while justifying their collaboration in the deception by claiming it to be a form of "research" into what does and does not work in advertising. In a way, by allowing themselves to be caught on camera making these comments, these ad men and women are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor unsuspecting people who are the primary target of the [[ruse]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not hit its intended target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who ultimately come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they [[proceed]] to [[make]] fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. The [[primary]] problem with the documentary "Czech Dream" is that isn't [[truly]] saying what it [[ideas]] it's [[telling]].

[[At]] an [[courageous]] - I hesitate to [[utilizes]] the word "inspired" - act of street [[teatro]], Vit Klusak and Filip Remunda, two student filmmakers from the [[Czechoslovak]] Republic, pulled off a major corporate [[trickery]] to serve as the basis for their movie: they deliberately fabricated a phony "hypermarket" (the Eastern European equivalent of Costco or Wal Mart Super Store), built an [[whole]] ad campaign around it - replete with billboards, radio and TV spots, an official logo, a catchy theme song and photos of fake merchandise - and then waited around to see just how many "dopes" would show up to their creation on opening day. They even built a makeshift façade to convince people that the store itself actually existed.

One might well ask, "Why do such a thing?" Well, that's a very good [[matter]], but the answer the filmmakers provide isn't all that satisfying a one. Essentially, we're told that the purpose of the stunt was to show how easily people can be manipulated into believing something - even something that's not true - simply through the power of advertising. And the movie makers run for moral cover by claiming that the "real" (i.e. higher) purpose for the charade is to convince the Czech people not to fall for all the advertisements encouraging them to join the European Union. Fair enough - especially when one considers that the actual advertisers who agree to go along with the stunt declaim against the unethical nature of lying to customers, all the while justifying their collaboration in the deception by claiming it to be a form of "research" into what does and does not work in advertising. In a way, by allowing themselves to be caught on camera making these comments, these ad men and women are as much dupes of the filmmakers as the poor unsuspecting people who are the primary target of the [[trick]].

But, in many ways, the satirical arrow not only does not hit its intended target, it ironically zeroes right back around on the very filmmakers who launched it. For it is THEY THEMSELVES and NOT the good-hearted and naturally trusting people who ultimately come off as the unethical and classless ones here, as they [[proceeding]] to [[deliver]] fools out of perfectly decent people, some of them old and handicapped and forced to travel long distances on foot to get to the spot. And what is all this supposed to prove anyway? That people are "greedy" because they go to the opening of a new supermarket looking for bargains? Or that they're stupid and gullible because they don't suspect that there might not be an actual market even though one has been advertised? Such vigilance would require a level of cynicism that would make it virtually impossible to function in the real world.

No, I'm afraid this smart-alecky, nasty little "stunt" only proves what complete and utter jerks the filmmakers are for making some really nice people feel like idiots. And, indeed many of them, when they finally discover the trick that's been played on them, react with a graciousness and good humor I'm not sure I would be able to muster were I to find myself in their position.

I'm not saying that the movie isn't gripping - something akin to witnessing a massive traffic accident in action - but, when the dust has finally settled and all the disappointed customers return red-faced and empty-handed to their homes, we can safely declare that they are not the ones who should be feeling ashamed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The Perfectly [[Stupid]] Weapon. I think the guys dancing at the beginning of one of Steven Segal's movies was intented to mock Jeff doing his forms to dance music at the beginning of this [[stupid]] movie. The plot is predictable, the fights were fair and Jeff acts about as well as the sofa he beats with some sort of weapon in one scene. The Perfectly [[Dopey]] Weapon. I think the guys dancing at the beginning of one of Steven Segal's movies was intented to mock Jeff doing his forms to dance music at the beginning of this [[dolt]] movie. The plot is predictable, the fights were fair and Jeff acts about as well as the sofa he beats with some sort of weapon in one scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 1149 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Remember Ralph Bakshi? The guy that was an animator on Terrytoons, then on Paramount Cartoon Studios, after that, he was a director on Fritz the Cat 1 & 2 and Heavy Traffic? Well, this is Coonskin. And it's actually pretty good. Racist, but good. The movie takes place in Harlem Nights (No, duh, it was a working title.) but with a twist that becomes a lampoon of a Disney movie, Song of the South.

It's about Sampson (Barry White) and the Preacherman (Charles Gordone) rush to help their friend, Randy (Philip Michael Thomas) escape from prison, but are stopped by a roadblock and wind up in a shootout with the police. While waiting for them, Randy unwillingly listens to fellow escapee Pappy (Scatman Crothers), as he begins to tell Randy a story about "three guys, I used to know, just like you and your friends". Pappy's story is told in animation set against live-action background photos and footage.

Brother Rabbit (voice of Thomas), Brother Bear (voice of White), and Preacher Fox (voice of Gordone) decide to pack up and leave their Southern settings after the bank mortgages their home and sells it to a man who turns it into a brothel. Arriving in Harlem, Rabbit, Bear, and Fox find that it isn't all that it's made out to be. They encounter a con man named Simple Savior, a phony revolutionary leader who purports to be the "cousin" of Black Jesus, and that he gives his followers "the strength to kill whites". In a flashy stage performance in his "church", Savior acts out being brutalized by symbols of black oppression—represented by images of John Wayne, Elvis Presley and Richard Nixon, before asking his parishioners for "donations".

Rabbit first goes up against Madigan, a virulently racist and homophobic white police officer and the bag man for the Mafia, who demonstrates his contempt for African Americans in various ways, including a refusal to bathe before an anticipated encounter with them (he believes they're not worth it). When Madigan finds out that Rabbit has been taking his payoffs, he and his cohorts, Ruby and Bobby, are led to a nightclub called "The Cottontail".

A black stripper distracts him while an LSD sugar cube is dropped into his drink. Madigan, while under the influence of his spiked drink, is then maneuvered into a sexual liaison with a stereotypically effeminate gay man, and then shoved into clothes that women were representative of the racist archetype, adorned in something racist, and finally shoved out the back of the club where he discovers that Ruby and Bobby are dead.

Then, while recovering from his delirium of being drugged, shoots his gun around randomly, and is shot to death by the police after shooting one of them.

Rabbit, Bear, Fox and the opponent boxer rush out of the boxing arena as it blows up. The live-action story ends with Randy and Pappy escaping while being shot at by various white cops, but managing to make it out alive.

This movie was controversial at that time of release, and was re-edited by the director several times under the title, Street Fight, which is obvious, since Street Fight is a 2005 documentary about racism in the streets. In fact, this movie has the same subject as the documentary.

That caused Bryanston Pictures, the distributor of this film and the original Tobe Hopper classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, to go out of business. Because Paramount wanted to produce and distribute this film, but due to racism, Bryanston took over Bakshi's production.

Despite the controversy, it was worth the entertainment. The animation was awesome at that time, the plot makes sense, and it's actually funny too.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] What a [[shame]] that a really [[competent]] director like Andre de Toth who [[specialized]] in slippery, shifting alliances didn't [[get]] hold of this [[concept]] first. He [[could]] have [[helped]] bring out the real [[potential]], especially with the interesting [[character]] [[played]] by William Bishop. As the movie stands, it's [[pretty]] much of a [[mess]] (as asserted by reviewer Chipe). The [[main]] problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[script]]. The strength [[lies]] in an excellent [[cast]] and an interesting general concept-- characters pulled in different directions by conflicting forces. What was [[needed]] was [[someone]] with vision enough to [[pull]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[script]] into some kind of coherent whole, instead of the sprawling, awkward mess that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting location and studio shots, and gotten the locations out of the all-too-obvious LA outskirts. The real shame lies in a waste of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[lowly]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, could have been so much more. What a [[pity]] that a really [[proficient]] director like Andre de Toth who [[specializing]] in slippery, shifting alliances didn't [[obtain]] hold of this [[concepts]] first. He [[did]] have [[helps]] bring out the real [[prospective]], especially with the interesting [[nature]] [[accomplished]] by William Bishop. As the movie stands, it's [[belle]] much of a [[muddle]] (as asserted by reviewer Chipe). The [[primary]] problems are with the direction, cheap budget, and poor [[hyphen]]. The strength [[resides]] in an excellent [[casting]] and an interesting general concept-- characters pulled in different directions by conflicting forces. What was [[required]] was [[person]] with vision enough to [[pulls]] together the positive elements by reworking the [[screenplay]] into some kind of coherent whole, instead of the sprawling, awkward mess that it is, (try to figure out the motivations and interplay if you can). Also, a bigger budget could have matched up contrasting location and studio shots, and gotten the locations out of the all-too-obvious LA outskirts. The real shame lies in a waste of an excellent cast-- Hayden, Taylor (before his teeth were capped), Dehner, Reeves, along with James Millican and William Bishop shortly before their untimely deaths. Few films illustrate the importance of an auteur-with-vision more than this [[modest]] obscure Western, which, in the right hands, could have been so much more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1151 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Action & [[Adventure]].[[Billie]] Clark is twenty [[years]] old, very pretty, and without a care in the world,until a [[brutal]] street gang violates her life, and she turns into an [[ALLEY]] CAT bent on revenge! When the gang attacks her grandparents house and her car, Billie uses her black belt prowess to fight them off. But at the same time she [[earns]] their hatred, and she and her [[grandparents]] are marked for vengence.When her grandparents lose their lives to the [[brutal]] thugs. [[Billie]] [[becomes]] like a cat stalking her prey-and no [[prison]],police force,boyfriend,or crooked judge can get in the way of her avenging claws. She's a one-woman vigilante squad,a martial arts queen,a crack shot with no mercy. She's the ALLEY CAT.Watch for the dramatic ending versus the Gang leader! Rated R for Nudity & Violence, Other Films with Karin Mani: Actress - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) .... Janie Soon Lee , "From Here to Eternity" (1979) (mini) TV Series .... Tawny, Filmography as: Actress, Stunts - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) (stunts)P.S. She should have been Catwoman in the Batman Movie!

Action & [[Fling]].[[Billy]] Clark is twenty [[olds]] old, very pretty, and without a care in the world,until a [[brute]] street gang violates her life, and she turns into an [[DRIVEWAY]] CAT bent on revenge! When the gang attacks her grandparents house and her car, Billie uses her black belt prowess to fight them off. But at the same time she [[gain]] their hatred, and she and her [[grandmothers]] are marked for vengence.When her grandparents lose their lives to the [[ferocious]] thugs. [[Beli]] [[becoming]] like a cat stalking her prey-and no [[penitentiaries]],police force,boyfriend,or crooked judge can get in the way of her avenging claws. She's a one-woman vigilante squad,a martial arts queen,a crack shot with no mercy. She's the ALLEY CAT.Watch for the dramatic ending versus the Gang leader! Rated R for Nudity & Violence, Other Films with Karin Mani: Actress - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) .... Janie Soon Lee , "From Here to Eternity" (1979) (mini) TV Series .... Tawny, Filmography as: Actress, Stunts - filmography,Avenging Angel (1985) (stunts)P.S. She should have been Catwoman in the Batman Movie!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] One of the [[best]] [[love]] stories I have ever [[seen]]. It is a bit like watching a train [[wreck]] in [[slow]] [[motion]], but [[lovely]] [[nonetheless]]... [[Big]] Edie and Little Edie [[seem]] a bit like family members after watching this movie repeatedly, and are [[infinitely]] quotable: "It's a goddamned [[beautiful]] day, now will you just shut up?" The [[opening]] explanation of [[Little]] Edie's [[costume]] only [[promises]] that the movie will live on forever, and so will Big Edie "The World [[Famous]] [[Singer]]" and Little Edie " The [[World]] [[Famous]] [[Dancer]]." One of the [[bestest]] [[adores]] stories I have ever [[noticed]]. It is a bit like watching a train [[ruins]] in [[slows]] [[motions]], but [[loverly]] [[however]]... [[Gargantuan]] Edie and Little Edie [[seems]] a bit like family members after watching this movie repeatedly, and are [[immeasurably]] quotable: "It's a goddamned [[marvelous]] day, now will you just shut up?" The [[initiation]] explanation of [[Scant]] Edie's [[standup]] only [[vowed]] that the movie will live on forever, and so will Big Edie "The World [[Celebrity]] [[Diva]]" and Little Edie " The [[Monde]] [[Proverbial]] [[Dancers]]." --------------------------------------------- Result 1153 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a film evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was extremely [[awful]]. After watching less than half a minute we decided to fast forward only stopping at some [[laughable]] "[[highlights]]" or should i say "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this film was produced here in my homeland Denmark...that must have been the biggest [[mistake]] this country ever made. Hello I am from Denmark, and one day i was having a film evening with my friends. One brought this movie with him "Russian terminator" and it was extremely [[spooky]]. After watching less than half a minute we decided to fast forward only stopping at some [[nonsensical]] "[[emphasize]]" or should i say "lowlights" in the movie. I was actually mostly surprised to find out that this film was produced here in my homeland Denmark...that must have been the biggest [[awry]] this country ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] It SURPRISINGLY had a [[plot]]! ;) I've seen movies with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[cheap]] movie like this, and also the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no real reason for most things people do and the way they react to what happens. [[Although]] I do think that about a lot of movies, in this case it was [[horrible]], of course.

It ripped off some movies SO badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've seen worse. The movie was bad but I've seen worse. Watching this film is an experience between boredom, laughing fits, death wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low level.

So if you like gory movies with stupid plots this one is the right film for you.

I gave it 3/10, because it CAN be entertaining if you don't expect to see a good movie and you're in the right mood. It SURPRISINGLY had a [[intrigue]]! ;) I've seen movies with less plot (I don't wanna mention Asian movies but...). I thought the camera wasn't bad at all for a [[inexpensive]] movie like this, and also the atmosphere wasn't too bad. There is no real reason for most things people do and the way they react to what happens. [[While]] I do think that about a lot of movies, in this case it was [[scary]], of course.

It ripped off some movies SO badly just for single scenes. The acting was bad but I've seen worse. The movie was bad but I've seen worse. Watching this film is an experience between boredom, laughing fits, death wish, sadism, horniness and entertainment on a low level.

So if you like gory movies with stupid plots this one is the right film for you.

I gave it 3/10, because it CAN be entertaining if you don't expect to see a good movie and you're in the right mood. --------------------------------------------- Result 1155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] My husband and I [[enjoy]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 month old baby does. We have [[bought]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and listen to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They encourage children to be active, share and care. They always have a positive message along with [[fun]] entertainment. [[Every]] time our [[son]] [[hears]] the [[theme]] song he quickly [[turns]] his head toward the television and starts bouncing up and down in excitement. Dee Dee is a [[wonderful]] singer, she has a great voice. [[Moe]] is a great dancer. I would recommend The DoodleBops to anyone with children. Our favorite song is The Bird [[Song]]. You just can not help but smile and want to dance when you hear it. My husband and I [[enjoys]] The DoodleBops as much as our 8 month old baby does. We have [[buying]] him DVD's and CD's just so we can watch and listen to them ourselves. They are fun, energetic, and very entertaining. They encourage children to be active, share and care. They always have a positive message along with [[droll]] entertainment. [[Entire]] time our [[sons]] [[listens]] the [[subject]] song he quickly [[revolves]] his head toward the television and starts bouncing up and down in excitement. Dee Dee is a [[glamorous]] singer, she has a great voice. [[Ome]] is a great dancer. I would recommend The DoodleBops to anyone with children. Our favorite song is The Bird [[Chanson]]. You just can not help but smile and want to dance when you hear it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I am writing this review having [[watched]] it [[several]] months ago....the trailer looked promising [[enough]] for me to [[buy]] this lame [[excuse]] for a [[movie]]. It is a [[complete]] [[joke]]....and literally a spit in the [[face]] of [[real]] [[classics]] of the [[early]] generation of [[horror]] like Texas [[Chainsaw]] [[Massacre]] (1974) which they [[even]] had the gall to [[compare]] itself to on the back of the [[cover]] art. The [[producer]] who [[played]] Brandon should [[go]] flip [[burgers]] and [[serve]] up [[greasy]] hamburgers....[[hell]] he might not [[even]] be good at that [[either]]! The [[lighting]] was [[bad]] bad bad and a [[big]] [[annoyance]] through out the film you couldn't even [[see]] the actor's [[faces]] [[sometimes]]. I don't [[even]] [[remember]] the [[rest]] of the cast [[members]] which is [[sad]] [[really]], bad they never do [[anything]] to impress you to [[make]] them memorable. That's all the [[time]] I will [[waste]] on this [[review]] [[PLEASE]] [[stay]] as far away as you can from this [[pile]] of junk [[even]] if you [[get]] it for 25 [[cents]] don't do it [[buy]] s piece of [[gum]] at [[least]] IT [[would]] [[keep]] you entertained!

[[If]] you [[want]] [[good]] quality low budget fun, far better than this... then [[check]] out a [[Jeff]] Hayes [[film]]....because it takes talent to [[make]] it in [[horror]] and the [[kid]] has it!

I [[gave]] this 1 [[star]] just for the [[cover]] [[art]]....[[thats]] the only [[thing]] worth liking abut this so called "[[film]]"

-Rick Blalock I am writing this review having [[observed]] it [[myriad]] months ago....the trailer looked promising [[sufficiently]] for me to [[acquiring]] this lame [[pretext]] for a [[cinematography]]. It is a [[finishes]] [[giggle]]....and literally a spit in the [[confront]] of [[genuine]] [[masterpieces]] of the [[swift]] generation of [[abomination]] like Texas [[Sawing]] [[Slaughter]] (1974) which they [[yet]] had the gall to [[comparative]] itself to on the back of the [[covered]] art. The [[manufacturers]] who [[done]] Brandon should [[going]] flip [[hamburger]] and [[serving]] up [[lard]] hamburgers....[[dammit]] he might not [[yet]] be good at that [[nor]]! The [[light]] was [[mala]] bad bad and a [[immense]] [[discomfort]] through out the film you couldn't even [[seeing]] the actor's [[confronting]] [[sometime]]. I don't [[yet]] [[recalling]] the [[stays]] of the cast [[member]] which is [[sorrowful]] [[genuinely]], bad they never do [[algo]] to impress you to [[deliver]] them memorable. That's all the [[period]] I will [[squandering]] on this [[examination]] [[INVITES]] [[staying]] as far away as you can from this [[piling]] of junk [[yet]] if you [[obtains]] it for 25 [[pennies]] don't do it [[acquiring]] s piece of [[eraser]] at [[fewest]] IT [[could]] [[preserve]] you entertained!

[[Though]] you [[wanting]] [[alright]] quality low budget fun, far better than this... then [[checking]] out a [[Humberto]] Hayes [[filmmaking]]....because it takes talent to [[deliver]] it in [[terror]] and the [[enfant]] has it!

I [[yielded]] this 1 [[superstar]] just for the [[covered]] [[artistry]]....[[havent]] the only [[stuff]] worth liking abut this so called "[[movie]]"

-Rick Blalock --------------------------------------------- Result 1157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (66%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the [[good]] points of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of course, I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly debated elsewhere.

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - A strong ecological concern - Anti-militarist positions - Fascinating insights about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A killer scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. No, there is another !

Because every Star Wars fan had to have an opinion about I, II & III and because that opinion was biased since we missed so much the atmosphere and the characters of the original trilogy, I will state the [[alright]] points of "The Return of the Jedi" and a few corresponding bad points of the prequel. Of course, I loved the music, the special effects, the two droids, but this has been overly debated elsewhere.

What we get in the original trilogy and in this particular movie : - A strong ecological concern - Anti-militarist positions - Fascinating insights about the Jedi Order and the Force - Cute creatures - Harrison Ford's smile - A killer scene : Near the ending, when Vader looks alternatively at his son and at the Emperor. The lightning of the lethal bolts reflected on his Black helmet. And when he grabs and betrays his Master to save Luke, thereby risking his own life ! Oh, boy !

What is wrong in the prequel INMHO : - the whole "human factor" element that the original cast was able to push forward is somehow missing - The Force seems to be more about superpowers and somersaults, than about wisdom - Too many Jedis at once and too many Light Sabers on the screen - The lack of experience of a few actors too often threatens the coherence of the plot

By the way, if you enjoy the theory of the Force as explained by Obi Web (Obi Wen, I mean) and Yoda, then you should read a few books about Buddhism and the forms it took in Ancient Japan.

The magic of Star Wars, IMHO lies mainly in the continuing spiritual heritage from a master to his apprentice, from a father to his son, albeit the difficulties. "De mon âme à ton âme", (from my soul to yours), as would write Bejard to the late Zen master T. Deshimaru. --------------------------------------------- Result 1158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was the best movie I have ever seen. Being LDS I highly recommend this movie because you are able to feel a more understanding about the life of Joseph Smith. Although the movie was not made with highly acclaimed actors it is a remarkable and life changing movie that can be enjoyed and appreciated by everyone. I saw this movie with my family and I can bear witness that we have all had a change of heart. This movie allows people to really understand how hard the life was for the prophet and how much tribulation he was faced with. After I saw this movie,there was not a single dry eye in the entire room. Everyone was touched by what they saw and I have not been the same since I have seen it. I highly recommend this movie for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 1159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (84%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as blasphemous, circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. Sex this up a bit with some [[overt]] supernatural mojo, let the concept wander where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "Stigmata"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious intrigue, dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. In the bygone days of the Catholic Church, a sin-eater was an individual that, through ritual, would take the sins of a dying person upon themselves. Often, these people were excommunicate or similar individuals who the church would not absolve, thereby denying them entrance into Heaven. The sin-eaters were seen as blasphemous, circumventing the chruch's monopoly on redemption. Sex this up a bit with some [[palpable]] supernatural mojo, let the concept wander where it may, and you have "The Order", a movie that combines "Stigmata"'s religious anti-authoritarianism, "The X-Files"' paranormal investigation, and "The Thorn Birds"' sexual spirituality into an odd melange that sometimes works.

Alex (Heath Ledger) is a rogue priest, one of the last members of the Order of the Carolingians, a semi-heretical order of knowledge-seeking, demon-fighting priests. When Alex's mentor is found dead under bizarre circumstances, Bishop Driscoll (Peter Weller) sends Alex to investigate. Tagging along are fellow Carolingian Thomas (Mark Addy) and Mara (Shannyn Sossman), who was subject to one of Alex's exorcisms a year prior. The three go to Rome to investigate and are drawn into a dark underworld of bizarre Catholic heresy, ominous prophecies, demonic intrusions, and a man claiming to be the last surviving Sin-Eater (Benno Furmann).

Written and directed by Brian Helgeland (who worked with the same principals on the scattershot and half-hearted "A Knight's Tale"), the film is an odd one, and difficult to classify. It wants to be several things at once -- supernatural thriller, religious intrigue, dramatic television pilot -- and only sometimes succeeds at any of them. This isn't helped by the slow pace or the fact that most of the actors seem to be sleepwalking through their performances with occasional bursts of brilliance. Ledger, in particular, has a particularly stunning scene of despair in an otherwise monochromatic performance. Sossman, however, displayed the same disconnected performance that she's given in all of her films (most notably in "The Rules Of Attraction").

The plot itself meanders back and forth between several different story arcs, leading you to wonder which is the main one with each arc containing its share of red herrings. Large gaps of narrative appear to be lost between scenes at times, which can be confusing for many, but this is also one of the film's saving graces. The structure of the film -- coupled by the fact that there is never a truly clear antagonist until the very end of the film -- forces the viewer to analyze and reason in a time when most films are blatantly obvious about everything (the exception to this is historical background on the Carolingians and the practice of sin-eating, both of which are explained in dry exposition). Even at the beginning of the film, character relationships and history are inferred instead of explained. Combine this with the on-location shooting and judicious use of special effects, and you have a very old-world supernatural thriller, with even the opening credits reminiscent of something from the late 70's/early 80's.

A brief mention here, as well, for the subtle and organic score by David Torn, a combination of minimalist orchestration and Lisa Gerrard-style exotic vocals. A very nice score that is evocative without being bombastic and exists in a very deceptive simplicity.

A confusing plot, a lack of purpose, and sometimes sleepy performances would often damn a movie, but for some reason, "The Order" remains watchable. Many people will be very turned off by the movie for its odd sensibilities, and some may even become angry that they are forced to engage the higher functions of their brain to understand it. Still, the film's sheer intangibility will prevent it from being either a critical or commercial success until the DVD, which I'm sure will be stocked with copious amounts of deleted scenes. A recommended film only for people who like to think while they watch. 6 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I had to see this gem twice to really [[appreciate]] all of it. [[When]] a widowed [[father]] of two [[interrupts]] his two sons' [[sleep]] with a shocking revelation, they are torn between believing him and not. As the [[horrifying]] events of this [[tale]] [[unfold]], we learn a lot about the [[father]], about his two sons, and about their destinies. With [[shocking]] twist after [[shocking]] twist, this film never [[allows]] for a [[lull]] in the plot. Bill Paxton plays the father, but the most notable performances are that of his [[older]] son, Fenton, [[played]] by [[Matthew]] O'Leary and his [[younger]] [[son]], Adam, [[played]] by Jeremy Sumpter. This is one of the [[best]] thrillers that I have [[seen]] in a while, and you will [[want]] to watch this a few [[times]] to [[appreciate]] [[every]] [[intricate]] [[aspect]] of the plot. I give this [[film]] a 9/10. I had to see this gem twice to really [[appreciative]] all of it. [[Whenever]] a widowed [[fathers]] of two [[breaks]] his two sons' [[slept]] with a shocking revelation, they are torn between believing him and not. As the [[appalling]] events of this [[fable]] [[unfolding]], we learn a lot about the [[fathers]], about his two sons, and about their destinies. With [[alarming]] twist after [[appalling]] twist, this film never [[allowed]] for a [[composure]] in the plot. Bill Paxton plays the father, but the most notable performances are that of his [[oldest]] son, Fenton, [[effected]] by [[Mathew]] O'Leary and his [[youngest]] [[yarns]], Adam, [[accomplished]] by Jeremy Sumpter. This is one of the [[optimum]] thrillers that I have [[saw]] in a while, and you will [[desiring]] to watch this a few [[dates]] to [[appreciative]] [[any]] [[tortuous]] [[facet]] of the plot. I give this [[flick]] a 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (66%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very opening credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a movie that [[simply]] requires multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** From its very opening credits this fantastic movie sets the record straight: it's an instant classic. It doesn't take long to realize that this movie is big, bigger than `Kindergarten Cop' or `Police Academy 7.' The sheer greatness of it left me speechless as I walked out of the movie theater and proceeded right back to the ticket counter to purchase myself another dozen of tickets.

This is a movie that [[exclusively]] requires multiple viewings. The first watching will surely leave you with that strange `Huh?' feeling, but don't feel embarrassed - it happens to the best of us. The story is so diabolically clever that one has to wonder about the mortality of its authors. What seems to be a simple story of an idiot infiltrating the FBI, turns out to be an allegorical story that works on several levels and teaches us all about the really important things in life. The complexity of the plot structure will baffle you on your first viewing, but don't give up! Not until my sixth or seventh viewing did I only begin to unravel some of the hidden mysteries of `Corky Romano.' And watch out for the unexpected twist at the end, otherwise you might be caught completely off guard when it is revealed that FBI agent Brick Davis is FBI's most-wanted criminal, Corky is not a real FBI agent, Pops Romano is innocent, Peter Romano admits he's illiterate and Paulie Romano comes out of the closet as a homosexual. Surprised the hell out of me, I can tell you that much.

Chris Kattan's comedic talents are unmatched as he leads his character Corky Romano through a maze of totally unpredictable situations. Reminiscent of John Reynolds' performance in `Manos, the Hands of Fate,' Kattan takes on innumerable multiple personalities and tackles all scenes with perfect comedic timing. However, Kattan is not just about comedy. He is a master of drama as well, as he controls the audience's feelings with the slightest moves of his face. His facial expressions reflect life itself, in a way. For example, in the scene in which he farts into his brothers' faces, you can see the expression of social injustice and alienation clearly reflected on his anguished face. At a moment like that, it's hard to find a dry eye in the house.

Screenwriters David Garret and Jason Ward are the real heroes of `Corky Romano.' With a story of such proportions, it's easy to understand why two experienced writers had to be employed to complete this ambitious project. Their skillful storytelling and unorthodox structuring makes `Pulp Fiction' look like a mediocre Saturday Night Live skit. Garret and Ward's story is so compelling and alluring that it grips you by your hair, swallows you entirely, shakes you around and spits you right out. At the end of the out-of-this-world experience known as `Corky Romano' you find yourself a different person with different worldviews and different ideas, and with only one question on your mind:

Why, God? Why?!? --------------------------------------------- Result 1162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] "[[ASTONISHING]]" [[Screams]] the LA Times from the front of the DVD box. They [[must]] have been referring to the fact that such a [[sorry]] [[piece]] of [[crap]] was ever [[released]]. The film revolves around a bunch of girls who have a disease which forces them to become cannibals, and murder innocent people just to [[stay]] [[alive]]. Their [[skin]] peels off throughout the [[film]], we [[also]] see [[severed]] legs, [[heads]] etc that are about as convincing as a Halloween Fuzzy Felt set. There is an [[awful]] lot of talking b*ll**ks, a bit of human cuisine and some weird zombie hunter chap who [[imprisons]] the [[sufferers]] of said skin illness in his closet strapped to a chair, before stabbing them in the head, [[chopping]] them into bits...

You get the picture. Considering there is no acting talent on display at all, and the gore is laughably unrealistic, what is the point of this whole farrago? Again looking at the video box, the guy responsible for it is an "underground cult [[director]]". Would that be like those weird religious [[cults]] where they brainwash you into thinking one way when clearly the opposite is true? Because that's the only possible reason I can think of for anyone to derive pleasure by [[watching]] this [[tax]] write-off. Then, on the same paragraph he [[compares]] himself to Mike Leigh, Ken Loach and George Romero. HAHAHAHAHA oh [[stop]] it. Now you're just being silly.

Do you enjoy this [[film]]? Are you offended by the above opinion? If so, you must be a member of said cult. Do they pocket your wages? Do they let you see other family members? Do they force you to watch Andrew Parkinson films till you think he's the best director since A.Hitchcock? Do tell... this sounds like a Panorama special brewing to me. And say hello to the critic of the LA times when you return to your colony, will you? 0/10 "[[IMPRESSIVE]]" [[Cree]] the LA Times from the front of the DVD box. They [[owe]] have been referring to the fact that such a [[desolated]] [[slice]] of [[bollocks]] was ever [[liberated]]. The film revolves around a bunch of girls who have a disease which forces them to become cannibals, and murder innocent people just to [[staying]] [[vibrant]]. Their [[epidermis]] peels off throughout the [[cinema]], we [[similarly]] see [[sectioned]] legs, [[leaders]] etc that are about as convincing as a Halloween Fuzzy Felt set. There is an [[scary]] lot of talking b*ll**ks, a bit of human cuisine and some weird zombie hunter chap who [[gaol]] the [[patients]] of said skin illness in his closet strapped to a chair, before stabbing them in the head, [[chopped]] them into bits...

You get the picture. Considering there is no acting talent on display at all, and the gore is laughably unrealistic, what is the point of this whole farrago? Again looking at the video box, the guy responsible for it is an "underground cult [[superintendent]]". Would that be like those weird religious [[cult]] where they brainwash you into thinking one way when clearly the opposite is true? Because that's the only possible reason I can think of for anyone to derive pleasure by [[staring]] this [[taxation]] write-off. Then, on the same paragraph he [[comparisons]] himself to Mike Leigh, Ken Loach and George Romero. HAHAHAHAHA oh [[stopping]] it. Now you're just being silly.

Do you enjoy this [[kino]]? Are you offended by the above opinion? If so, you must be a member of said cult. Do they pocket your wages? Do they let you see other family members? Do they force you to watch Andrew Parkinson films till you think he's the best director since A.Hitchcock? Do tell... this sounds like a Panorama special brewing to me. And say hello to the critic of the LA times when you return to your colony, will you? 0/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] i was hoping this was going to be good as a fan of timothy dalton's james bond and although it wasn't his deserved '3rd bond outing' it was a [[laugh]]. Belushi brought some good humour to his part and dalton hammed it up nicely, but was probably underused. his part was liked a camped up version of jack nicholson in a few good men. the other brit in it was a bit shocking, but overal it was a laugh. i was hoping this was going to be good as a fan of timothy dalton's james bond and although it wasn't his deserved '3rd bond outing' it was a [[giggling]]. Belushi brought some good humour to his part and dalton hammed it up nicely, but was probably underused. his part was liked a camped up version of jack nicholson in a few good men. the other brit in it was a bit shocking, but overal it was a laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] And I thought The [[Beach]] was bad, with the [[difference]] that this [[movie]] has one of the greatest actors of our [[time]], Nicolas Cage. Don't [[blame]] him for the [[awful]] [[script]], if any one can [[make]] any sense of what the [[hell]] was the point of that movie, give your self a pat on the back. Its a [[cross]] between The Village and a crappier [[script]]. Its [[starts]] off kinda catching your eye, and then as it goes further into the plot, it just makes no [[sense]], and don't [[get]] me [[started]] about the ending!!!! What was that? The only [[thing]] that makes this movie [[exist]] is [[Nicolas]] Cage usual great [[humor]], and his ability to be funny in the [[weirdest]] situations. [[If]] you [[go]] to a blockbuster and this is the only movie to watch, [[save]] yourself five [[bucks]] and just [[go]] back [[home]] and [[turn]] put some thing on fire and when some ones [[asks]] you why, just [[say]] the [[stupidest]] thing that [[comes]] into your [[mind]], and there you go! And I thought The [[Beaches]] was bad, with the [[divergence]] that this [[cinematographic]] has one of the greatest actors of our [[moment]], Nicolas Cage. Don't [[culpa]] him for the [[scary]] [[scripts]], if any one can [[deliver]] any sense of what the [[hellfire]] was the point of that movie, give your self a pat on the back. Its a [[traverse]] between The Village and a crappier [[hyphen]]. Its [[beginnings]] off kinda catching your eye, and then as it goes further into the plot, it just makes no [[sensing]], and don't [[got]] me [[beginning]] about the ending!!!! What was that? The only [[stuff]] that makes this movie [[existent]] is [[Nikolaus]] Cage usual great [[comedy]], and his ability to be funny in the [[oddest]] situations. [[Though]] you [[going]] to a blockbuster and this is the only movie to watch, [[saved]] yourself five [[dollars]] and just [[going]] back [[house]] and [[turning]] put some thing on fire and when some ones [[applications]] you why, just [[tell]] the [[lamest]] thing that [[happens]] into your [[esprit]], and there you go! --------------------------------------------- Result 1165 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "A trio of treasure hunters is searching the West Indies for a hidden fortune. The lure of gold makes for a [[rise]] in tension as the men come closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea divers hope to track down the gold, but find that greed and hatred leads to murder," according to the DVD sleeve's [[synopsis]]. "Manfish" is the name of their boat, not a monster. The skeleton who [[gives]] muscular Captain John Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the treasure map is very good. [[Old]] salt [[Victor]] Jory (as [[Professor]]) provides the other half of the [[map]]. First [[mate]] [[Lon]] Chaney Jr. (as [[Swede]]) plays dumb, and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) guards the rum (not very well, obviously). Serious [[editing]] and continuity problems mar the picture, which otherwise might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. Lee Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. "A trio of treasure hunters is searching the West Indies for a hidden fortune. The lure of gold makes for a [[augmentation]] in tension as the men come closer to the treasure's location. The deep-sea divers hope to track down the gold, but find that greed and hatred leads to murder," according to the DVD sleeve's [[recap]]. "Manfish" is the name of their boat, not a monster. The skeleton who [[donne]] muscular Captain John Bromfield (as Brannigan) his half of the treasure map is very good. [[Archaic]] salt [[Vittorio]] Jory (as [[Educator]]) provides the other half of the [[cartography]]. First [[mating]] [[Ldn]] Chaney Jr. (as [[Rutabaga]]) plays dumb, and sexy Tessa Prendergast (as Alita) guards the rum (not very well, obviously). Serious [[edited]] and continuity problems mar the picture, which otherwise might have amounted to something.

*** Manfish (2/56) W. Lee Wilder ~ John Bromfield, Victor Jory, Lon Chaney Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 1166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[got]] this [[movie]] out of [[Blockbuster]] in one of those racks were you can [[get]] like 5 [[movies]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to [[say]] I [[got]] my money's worth on this one. I had expected [[horrible]] [[dialogue]], crappy monsters, and [[shaky]] cameras. Well, as Meatloaf [[said]], two outta three ain't bad.

The acting is [[bad]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[seen]]. Or [[maybe]] I've [[watched]] so [[many]] low budget [[movies]] recently I've lost [[perspective]]. There are some [[bits]] were the acting is downright terrible, but for the most [[part]] it's of at [[least]] [[High]] [[School]] [[Play]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this [[movie]] is [[probably]] the second-worst [[part]]. The [[first]] thing I [[thought]] when I [[saw]] it (and I [[noticed]] another reviewer [[agreed]] with me) was that a [[man]] in an ape suit [[would]] have been [[better]]. Clunky stop-motion [[animation]] would have [[looked]] better.

So you may be [[asking]] why I [[call]] the CG the second-worst [[part]]. That's because the very [[worst]] [[part]] of the [[movie]] is the sound [[effects]]. They are [[loud]], [[annoying]], and [[constant]]. I've been camping, I know what [[insects]] sound like in the [[woods]] at night, and while they can be [[loud]], they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[movie]]. [[Usually]] when the "[[background]]" sounds [[drown]] out the movie's [[dialogue]], it's a [[bad]] thing, but from what I [[caught]] of the [[dialogue]] of this [[film]], I wasn't missing much.

The [[action]] was infrequent and [[boring]]. The [[tension]] was non-existent, as was any [[sense]] of [[empathy]] with the [[characters]]. [[Speaking]] of the characters, they were all cookie-cutter and [[bland]]. The only [[mildly]] engaging byplay was between...[[actually]], I can't [[think]] of [[anything]]. There was a line or two that [[made]] me crack a [[wan]] [[smile]], but that was about it.

The [[cinematography]] was decent, a [[step]] or two above what you'd [[normally]] [[see]] in a [[movie]] like this. [[However]], it [[still]] had that "[[home]] [[movie]]" quality to it that you get with [[movies]] made on pocket [[change]] and a prayer.

If you're like me and get a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, think about grabbing it. [[Otherwise]], stay away at all costs. I [[gets]] this [[cinematography]] out of [[Blockbusters]] in one of those racks were you can [[gets]] like 5 [[cinematography]] for 20 bucks. I'd have to [[tell]] I [[did]] my money's worth on this one. I had expected [[vile]] [[conversations]], crappy monsters, and [[unstable]] cameras. Well, as Meatloaf [[asserted]], two outta three ain't bad.

The acting is [[amiss]], though not as bad as some movies I've [[saw]]. Or [[potentially]] I've [[seen]] so [[several]] low budget [[cinematography]] recently I've lost [[perspectives]]. There are some [[tib]] were the acting is downright terrible, but for the most [[portions]] it's of at [[less]] [[Higher]] [[Scholastic]] [[Playing]] level.

The CG for the Sasquatch in this [[cinematography]] is [[maybe]] the second-worst [[parte]]. The [[outset]] thing I [[ideology]] when I [[witnessed]] it (and I [[remarked]] another reviewer [[consented]] with me) was that a [[bloke]] in an ape suit [[should]] have been [[best]]. Clunky stop-motion [[animate]] would have [[seemed]] better.

So you may be [[requesting]] why I [[calling]] the CG the second-worst [[parties]]. That's because the very [[pire]] [[parties]] of the [[filmmaking]] is the sound [[implications]]. They are [[rowdy]], [[vexing]], and [[continuous]]. I've been camping, I know what [[roaches]] sound like in the [[forest]] at night, and while they can be [[rowdy]], they're not deafening like the cacophony in this [[cinematography]]. [[Generally]] when the "[[context]]" sounds [[drowning]] out the movie's [[conversation]], it's a [[negative]] thing, but from what I [[captures]] of the [[conversation]] of this [[cinematography]], I wasn't missing much.

The [[actions]] was infrequent and [[bore]]. The [[tensions]] was non-existent, as was any [[feeling]] of [[compassion]] with the [[character]]. [[Conversation]] of the characters, they were all cookie-cutter and [[insipid]]. The only [[slightly]] engaging byplay was between...[[indeed]], I can't [[believing]] of [[something]]. There was a line or two that [[accomplished]] me crack a [[cove]] [[mouse]], but that was about it.

The [[filmmaking]] was decent, a [[steps]] or two above what you'd [[often]] [[behold]] in a [[flick]] like this. [[Still]], it [[nevertheless]] had that "[[house]] [[flick]]" quality to it that you get with [[cinema]] made on pocket [[amendments]] and a prayer.

If you're like me and get a kick out of shoestring budget genre flicks, and you see this one in the dollar bin, think about grabbing it. [[Else]], stay away at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I've seen this movie today for the [[first]] [[time]] and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[poor]] message.

First of all, the [[directing]] itself is [[quite]] [[good]], the actors played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[alone]] doesn't [[make]] a movie. No story at all, no message behind beautiful [[exploited]] [[talents]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a director is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's missing the whole 7 minutes.

There for a simple 4 rating. I've seen this movie today for the [[fiirst]] [[moment]] and I never heard of it before, probably because of it's [[pauper]] message.

First of all, the [[instructing]] itself is [[utterly]] [[buena]], the actors played well and the CGI (I'm not a fan of CGI) is magnificent. But that [[jen]] doesn't [[deliver]] a movie. No story at all, no message behind beautiful [[utilized]] [[talent]].

Or do I have to make people remember, the art of a director is not only your vision but to know how to tell a story. And this is what's missing the whole 7 minutes.

There for a simple 4 rating. --------------------------------------------- Result 1168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] This was one film i [[wanted]] to watch always when it released The promos were eye catching and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the [[film]] isn't that good

It has lot of flaws

The start is good and till the murder everything goes well but the [[film]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the songs that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in love leaves more doubts and flaws and then How come Govinda turns into a rich criminal from a poor villager?

The last flashback too is prolonged and also the entire clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is okay, Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda tries a negative role and does very well in it though he overdoes it too much at times Karisma is good but irritates at times with her cries Tabu is okay Nirmal Pandey still doesn't know the difference between loud screaming and acting rest are okay This was one film i [[wanting]] to watch always when it released The promos were eye catching and Govinda in a negative role was a surprise

But the [[kino]] isn't that good

It has lot of flaws

The start is good and till the murder everything goes well but the [[kino]] falls flat when the romance track starts between Govinda and Karisma and the songs that follow

Then the twist about Govinda and Tabu being in love leaves more doubts and flaws and then How come Govinda turns into a rich criminal from a poor villager?

The last flashback too is prolonged and also the entire clash between Govinda-Karisma and Tabu

N Chandra disappoints Music is okay, Bahot Khoobsurat stands out

Govinda tries a negative role and does very well in it though he overdoes it too much at times Karisma is good but irritates at times with her cries Tabu is okay Nirmal Pandey still doesn't know the difference between loud screaming and acting rest are okay --------------------------------------------- Result 1169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] What a gem of a movie, so [[good]] that they made a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire movies, we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't want to be in this film, but may be that's just all part of the decadent ambiance.

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must track it down.

When I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? What a gem of a movie, so [[buena]] that they made a sequel.

The film starts off really good with a nasty monster who eats a few people and a party where the 2 main characters first set eyes on each other.

Bendan Hughes plays the eccentric Vlad, a bit of an inkling there to who this character is, who has moved into town and uses the services of a particular real estate agent to find him a house.

Hell, we've all seen vampire movies, we know the format.

The movie is watchable, but the actors' performances are very wooden and they seem as they don't want to be in this film, but may be that's just all part of the decadent ambiance.

Didn't like the ending, but there is a sequel, must track it down.

When I watched the film I thought Brendan Hughes didn't really fit the part. Later on, I couldn't stop thinking about him, he sort of exudes an eerie sensuality, so maybe he was right for the part.

BRENDAN HUGHES Last seen in 'Hitler - the rise of evil' as Lt. Guffman.

Where is he now? --------------------------------------------- Result 1170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Recently when i was [[shopping]], i [[saw]] the box-set of Americian Gothic, and i thought 'I [[remember]] that!' I used to set my alarm to [[get]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remember]] it mostly because it was [[really]] scary and [[weird]], no [[person]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[annoyed]] me [[though]] was they did the same [[thing]] to the box-set as when on TV. Episodes in funny order, I kept thinking when does Dr Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - Just look at shows like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To finish - If you've not seen this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = YOU MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. Recently when i was [[shops]], i [[observed]] the box-set of Americian Gothic, and i thought 'I [[reminisce]] that!' I used to set my alarm to [[obtain]] back up & watch this when it was on CH 4 in 1996 at 1.30am (i was 14). I [[remind]] it mostly because it was [[truly]] scary and [[outlandish]], no [[someone]] could ever be as frightening as Lucas Buck (with a B!!) No one ever was anyway.

What [[outraged]] me [[despite]] was they did the same [[stuff]] to the box-set as when on TV. Episodes in funny order, I kept thinking when does Dr Matt leave??? - they made it so confusing.

However this is not the writers, producers or directors fault (its TV people in background the money makers They still do the same - Just look at shows like Carnivale and Farscape they don't like originality in studios!!!!!)

To finish - If you've not seen this and you call yourself a Sci-Fi Fantasy, Horror, supernatural drama..Fan = YOU MUST. They even said the same in SFX when reviewing the box-set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying indie movie for 14 year olds.Do I have to write eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the rather forward and rude advances of Jack Black.This movie is a PG 13 version of an indie [[film]].I really like a [[movie]] that has the courage to [[explore]] [[Mexican]] culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[choke]] on its cultural [[rudeness]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. Jack Black is an annoying character.This is an annoying indie movie for 14 year olds.Do I have to write eight more lines?Ana de la Reguera is dang fine to look at,as a Mexican nun who puts up with the rather forward and rude advances of Jack Black.This movie is a PG 13 version of an indie [[movies]].I really like a [[kino]] that has the courage to [[analyzed]] [[Wetback]] culture.This movie explores Mexican culture-deeply. I just [[suffocate]] on its cultural [[discourtesy]]:Jack Black is just so rude. A white person like Jack Black is not my most valuable emissary into Mexican culture, as it were.Mexican Wrestling culture is not the most diaphanous venue a white guy, such as myself could seek.I suspect Mexico is more culturally opaque than Jack Black has presented here.

I think IMDb changed my review.Has anyone else had his review changed as well?Just a question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Absolutely one of my [[favorite]] movies of all time. I have seen it at least a hundred times and I can't go through it without crying. I defy anyone to watch the reunion of Celie and Nettie, or Shug and father and not feel your eyes getting misty. Whoopie Goldberg should have one an award for amazing portrayal. And for the person who said you can't love the movie if you loved the [[book]], wrong! Im a [[testament]] to that. Absolutely one of my [[preferable]] movies of all time. I have seen it at least a hundred times and I can't go through it without crying. I defy anyone to watch the reunion of Celie and Nettie, or Shug and father and not feel your eyes getting misty. Whoopie Goldberg should have one an award for amazing portrayal. And for the person who said you can't love the movie if you loved the [[workbook]], wrong! Im a [[wills]] to that. --------------------------------------------- Result 1173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The film is a bit tedious. It's mostly a [[silent]] film, with the bulk o the [[story]] provided through a series of voice-overs. [[While]] making a silent [[film]] like this is not such a [[bad]] [[idea]], this is one of those films where the [[lack]] of dialog and the repetitive early scenes make it [[simply]] tedious. You don't understand the reason for the tedium until well into the [[picture]], and by then it's too late. The first 40 [[minutes]] of [[film]] is something of a slow piece of [[Mexican]] soft [[porn]], and [[unimaginative]] soft [[porn]] at that. Later in the film the style of the first 40 minutes [[starts]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the audience is lost. There is some nice location shooting at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. I've often wondered why more films aren't shot there. The campus is built on the edge of lava fields that lend the campus a very otherworldly feel. My biggest [[problem]] with the film is that the director/writer has made the film the way he wanted to see it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[story]] will view it. You can't ignore the audience when you [[tell]] a story. The film is a bit tedious. It's mostly a [[quiet]] film, with the bulk o the [[saga]] provided through a series of voice-overs. [[Despite]] making a silent [[cinematic]] like this is not such a [[unfavourable]] [[thoughts]], this is one of those films where the [[shortfall]] of dialog and the repetitive early scenes make it [[straightforward]] tedious. You don't understand the reason for the tedium until well into the [[photograph]], and by then it's too late. The first 40 [[mins]] of [[movie]] is something of a slow piece of [[Mexico]] soft [[interracial]], and [[uninspired]] soft [[interracial]] at that. Later in the film the style of the first 40 minutes [[embark]] to makes sense, but it's too late, because by then the audience is lost. There is some nice location shooting at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. I've often wondered why more films aren't shot there. The campus is built on the edge of lava fields that lend the campus a very otherworldly feel. My biggest [[difficulties]] with the film is that the director/writer has made the film the way he wanted to see it without regard for how a viewer who doesn't know the [[saga]] will view it. You can't ignore the audience when you [[say]] a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] It is [[ironic]] that during the '50s, when Douglas Sirk was at his most successful in terms of [[audience]] appeal, he was [[virtually]] [[ignored]] by the critics… He is now seen, [[however]], as a director of formidable [[intellect]] who achieved his [[best]] [[work]] in melodrama…

"[[Written]] on the Wind" is about the [[downfall]] of a Texan [[oil]] dynasty surrounded by [[worthless]] [[reputation]], [[alcoholism]], and nymphomania… It is about the [[twisted]], [[fatal]] connections between [[sex]], power, and [[money]]...

[[Stack]] draws a [[compelling]] [[portrait]] of a [[tormented]] drunken [[destroyed]] by [[frustration]], arrogance, [[jealousy]], [[insanity]], and some deep [[insecurities]]…

Dorothy Malone succeeds as an attractive [[woman]] with an excessive sexual appetites, degrading herself for Hudson and to other fellows in town… Her best line: "I'm [[filthy]]." In one frantic scene, we see her shaking, quivering and sweating to a provocative mambo… In another [[weeping]] alone over a model oil-derrick at her father's desk—symbol of excessive wealth and masculine tyranny…

The frenetic atmosphere is both made palatable and intensified by Sirk's [[magnificent]] use of [[colors]], lights, and careful use of mirrors… It is [[ironical]] that during the '50s, when Douglas Sirk was at his most successful in terms of [[audiences]] appeal, he was [[basically]] [[disregarded]] by the critics… He is now seen, [[conversely]], as a director of formidable [[intelligence]] who achieved his [[optimum]] [[working]] in melodrama…

"[[Handwritten]] on the Wind" is about the [[ruin]] of a Texan [[hydrocarbon]] dynasty surrounded by [[useless]] [[notoriety]], [[alcohol]], and nymphomania… It is about the [[deformed]], [[murderous]] connections between [[sexuality]], power, and [[moneys]]...

[[Stacking]] draws a [[cogent]] [[portrayal]] of a [[disturbed]] drunken [[clobbered]] by [[disappointment]], arrogance, [[jealous]], [[stupidity]], and some deep [[insecurity]]…

Dorothy Malone succeeds as an attractive [[girls]] with an excessive sexual appetites, degrading herself for Hudson and to other fellows in town… Her best line: "I'm [[nasty]]." In one frantic scene, we see her shaking, quivering and sweating to a provocative mambo… In another [[mourning]] alone over a model oil-derrick at her father's desk—symbol of excessive wealth and masculine tyranny…

The frenetic atmosphere is both made palatable and intensified by Sirk's [[handsome]] use of [[dye]], lights, and careful use of mirrors… --------------------------------------------- Result 1175 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] It seems to me that Stephen King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited stuff that he [[wanted]] to write without 'contaminating' his '[[brand]] name'. If you look back at the "Bachman [[Books]]" (Running [[Man]], The Long Walk, Roadwork, [[Thinner]]) you notice they have a sealed-in feeling of airlessness and [[hopelessness]] about them that is distinct from mainstream King. I realize that we are [[talking]] about the guy whose first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled teenage girl slaughtering everyone at her high school prom...but mainstream King always at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the proceedings a bit, and mostly have endings that offer at least a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and always end badly. (BTW, "Pet Semetary" could have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't revealed the alias by then. And "The Dark Half" seems to be at least partially about his "Bachman" persona.)

"Thinner" was the last Bachman book, and man, with its themes of class warfare, revenge, and death by starvation, it is nasty. So it should be no surprise that the movie follows suit.

What is a surprise is that the adaptation seems to be filmed at a "TV Movie Of the Week" level of talent [[instead]] of something worthy of a theatrical release. (These days, something like this would probably go directly to DVD or cable). The [[makeup]] work and the striking [[motif]] (starving to death in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished American middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you [[watching]] this misfire.

What went [[wrong]]? My first thought is that the [[director]] was going for the nasty Bachman vibe, but he [[also]] somehow [[sucked]] all the interest out of the [[movie]] with [[poor]] [[casting]] [[choices]] - the [[actors]] here (with the [[exception]] of Joe Monetegna) [[simply]] can't carry the movie. And then he squished the warmth and life out of the rest of the movie with [[awkward]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't leave the plot alone, and his changes don't really help. The script and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the theme and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. It seems to me that Stephen King's "Bachman" pen-name was a way for him to put out some of the grimmer, rawer, more mean-spirited stuff that he [[wanna]] to write without 'contaminating' his '[[trademarks]] name'. If you look back at the "Bachman [[Ledger]]" (Running [[Men]], The Long Walk, Roadwork, [[Skinnier]]) you notice they have a sealed-in feeling of airlessness and [[desperation]] about them that is distinct from mainstream King. I realize that we are [[chitchat]] about the guy whose first novel featured a humiliated, blood-covered, emotionally crippled teenage girl slaughtering everyone at her high school prom...but mainstream King always at have characters and plot elements that leaven the grimness of the proceedings a bit, and mostly have endings that offer at least a glimpse of hope and human feeling. Bachman books are just plain mean and always end badly. (BTW, "Pet Semetary" could have easily been a Bachman book if King hadn't revealed the alias by then. And "The Dark Half" seems to be at least partially about his "Bachman" persona.)

"Thinner" was the last Bachman book, and man, with its themes of class warfare, revenge, and death by starvation, it is nasty. So it should be no surprise that the movie follows suit.

What is a surprise is that the adaptation seems to be filmed at a "TV Movie Of the Week" level of talent [[conversely]] of something worthy of a theatrical release. (These days, something like this would probably go directly to DVD or cable). The [[composition]] work and the striking [[motifs]] (starving to death in the midst of plenty, a metaphor for the overfed, undernourished American middle class if there ever was one) is all that keeps you [[staring]] this misfire.

What went [[flawed]]? My first thought is that the [[superintendent]] was going for the nasty Bachman vibe, but he [[further]] somehow [[aspired]] all the interest out of the [[kino]] with [[pauper]] [[moulding]] [[pick]] - the [[protagonists]] here (with the [[exceptions]] of Joe Monetegna) [[exclusively]] can't carry the movie. And then he squished the warmth and life out of the rest of the movie with [[troublesome]] pacing and scene structure. Plus he couldn't leave the plot alone, and his changes don't really help. The script and dialog ought to work, but mostly the movie just lies there. Everything is muffled, dull, airless, and no fun to watch...with the vivid exception of the spectacle of the main character getting....thinner, and thinner, and thinner.

As other have pointed out, "Thinner" is by no means the worst King movie ever made (or even the second worst). And it does have a dreadful, compelling fascination owing to the theme and the careful makeup work. But first time viewers should approach this one with lowered expectations. --------------------------------------------- Result 1176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (69%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Jamie Foxx is [[fun]] but this movie has been done before. The bad guy plays a "malkovichian" character from "In the Line of Fire". The cops will do anything to find the bad guy - and of course the good guy has two sets of bad guys and one set of cops after him - all the while he is just trying to turn over a new leaf... Jamie Foxx is [[droll]] but this movie has been done before. The bad guy plays a "malkovichian" character from "In the Line of Fire". The cops will do anything to find the bad guy - and of course the good guy has two sets of bad guys and one set of cops after him - all the while he is just trying to turn over a new leaf... --------------------------------------------- Result 1177 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie is [[truly]] boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but [[simply]] because the [[movie]] is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love [[movies]] from [[Chen]] Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am [[disappointed]] such a [[poor]] [[movie]] [[could]] [[come]] out of China. It [[totally]] [[seems]] to [[ignore]] the [[audience]] and the [[director]] seems to have [[made]] the movie for himself. The [[shots]] of a [[person]] standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The [[cinematography]] and video quality are unbelievably [[bad]]. I looked this [[film]] up on the Net and it seems like people [[actually]] like this [[film]]. The only explanation i have for this is that some film [[buffs]] [[think]] that if a [[film]] is not in [[English]] it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would [[like]] this. this is not an [[art]] [[film]] it's of [[waste]] of celluloid.(That's if they [[actually]] [[shot]] it on [[film]] , which they didn't) This movie is [[genuinely]] boring. It was banned in Chinese cinema and i can see why. It's not because it's critical of the communist regime but [[exclusively]] because the [[movies]] is of such low quality. I would never want to pay money to watch this. I love [[movie]] from [[Shen]] Kaige and Zhang Yimou and i am [[frustrating]] such a [[poorest]] [[cinematography]] [[wo]] [[coming]] out of China. It [[absolutely]] [[seem]] to [[neglecting]] the [[spectators]] and the [[superintendent]] seems to have [[accomplished]] the movie for himself. The [[beatings]] of a [[individuals]] standing there doing nothing for up to a minute are hilarious and there's plenty of them. The [[movie]] and video quality are unbelievably [[amiss]]. I looked this [[cinematography]] up on the Net and it seems like people [[genuinely]] like this [[cinematography]]. The only explanation i have for this is that some film [[stalkers]] [[believing]] that if a [[cinematographic]] is not in [[Brits]] it is automatically good. I can't see any reason why people would [[loves]] this. this is not an [[artistry]] [[kino]] it's of [[wastes]] of celluloid.(That's if they [[indeed]] [[kiiled]] it on [[flick]] , which they didn't) --------------------------------------------- Result 1178 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is the absolute [[worst]] movie I have ever seen!! There was absolutely [[nothing]] good to say about this movie. I have [[seen]] some bad [[movies]] but this one takes it. There is no [[plot]] and most of the [[movie]] you are [[either]] fast [[forwarding]] the [[movie]] to [[get]] it done faster or you are [[wondering]] what the hell is going on because you can't seriously think that [[someone]] thought of this movie and you are watching it. I feel sorry for anyone who has to sit through this painful hour and a half. Please [[take]] my [[advice]] and DO [[NOT]] WATCH this movie for I know you will think it is the biggest waste of time you have ever spent in your life. This is the absolute [[hardest]] movie I have ever seen!! There was absolutely [[anything]] good to say about this movie. I have [[noticed]] some bad [[kino]] but this one takes it. There is no [[intrigue]] and most of the [[cinematographic]] you are [[neither]] fast [[transmitting]] the [[cinematic]] to [[obtain]] it done faster or you are [[request]] what the hell is going on because you can't seriously think that [[everyone]] thought of this movie and you are watching it. I feel sorry for anyone who has to sit through this painful hour and a half. Please [[taking]] my [[counseling]] and DO [[NOPE]] WATCH this movie for I know you will think it is the biggest waste of time you have ever spent in your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (85%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was incredibly [[different]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. This film Evil Breed: The legend of samhain contains very little thought or effort. It is ridiculed with specs of ultra fast "slasher" style death and plain disgusting acts of death. The acting was rated a D as the actors show very little ability, and the stupidity of them in the film is too questionable. The way they portrayed what people their ages act like was incredibly [[divergent]]. The odd split of porn is fit in thought it really doesn't offer much, and any area that is respectable but is quite quickly run down with absolute gut wrenching death. Example is the poor fellow whom is disemboweled from his anus, and the scene lasts for about 5 minutes. It is terribly obvious of how little of a fight the kids put up. This film is a good choice for someone who likes to watch some awful deaths and practically torture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Eye in the Labyrinth is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it really is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[despite]] some [[problems]], this is certainly a very interesting little [[film]]. I'm [[hesitant]] to [[call]] it a Giallo because the [[film]] doesn't [[feature]] most of the things that make these [[films]] what they are; but [[many]] genre entries break the mould, and this would seem to be one of them. The film doesn't feature any brutal murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[made]] up for with a [[surreal]] atmosphere and a plot just about [[confusing]] enough to remain interesting for the duration. The plot seems [[simple]] enough in that it focuses on a doctor who is murdered by Julie, his [[patient]] who, for some [[reason]], she sees him as her lover and father and is offended when he walks out on her. We then relocate to a big house lived in by a number of people, but nothing is really what it seems as there are a number of secrets surrounding various [[events]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The film [[seems]] to be professing something about how the mind is like a labyrinth. This never [[really]] comes off, and I preferred to just sit back and [[enjoy]] what was going on rather than worrying about what point (if any) the film is trying to [[make]]. Eye in the Labyrinth is directed by Mario Caiano, the director behind the [[excellent]] Night of the Doomed some years earlier. He doesn't create the atmosphere as well in this film as he did in the earlier one; but the [[surreal]] aspects of the story come off well, and the mystery is [[always]] kept up which stops the film from becoming boring. The [[film]] [[stars]] Rosemary [[Dexter]], who provides eye candy [[throughout]] and [[also]] delivers a [[good]] performance. [[Most]] of the [[rest]] of the cast aren't really worth mentioning, with the [[exceptions]] of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the villain of the [[piece]] and Alida Valli, whom cult [[fans]] will [[remember]] from a whole [[host]] of [[excellent]] [[cult]] flicks. The [[film]] does [[explain]] itself at the [[end]]; which is [[lucky]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[little]] [[confused]] by then! [[Overall]], this may not be [[classic]] [[stuff]]; but its [[good]] [[enough]] and worth seeing. Eye in the Labyrinth is not your average Giallo...and to be honest, I'm not really sure that it really is a Giallo; but Giallo or not, [[while]] some [[disorders]], this is certainly a very interesting little [[films]]. I'm [[unwilling]] to [[invitation]] it a Giallo because the [[flick]] doesn't [[characteristics]] most of the things that make these [[cinematography]] what they are; but [[multiple]] genre entries break the mould, and this would seem to be one of them. The film doesn't feature any brutal murders as many Giallo's do, but this is [[effected]] up for with a [[bizarre]] atmosphere and a plot just about [[disconcerting]] enough to remain interesting for the duration. The plot seems [[mere]] enough in that it focuses on a doctor who is murdered by Julie, his [[patients]] who, for some [[justification]], she sees him as her lover and father and is offended when he walks out on her. We then relocate to a big house lived in by a number of people, but nothing is really what it seems as there are a number of secrets surrounding various [[incidents]] that happened before Julie's arrival...

The film [[looks]] to be professing something about how the mind is like a labyrinth. This never [[genuinely]] comes off, and I preferred to just sit back and [[enjoying]] what was going on rather than worrying about what point (if any) the film is trying to [[deliver]]. Eye in the Labyrinth is directed by Mario Caiano, the director behind the [[super]] Night of the Doomed some years earlier. He doesn't create the atmosphere as well in this film as he did in the earlier one; but the [[bizarre]] aspects of the story come off well, and the mystery is [[steadily]] kept up which stops the film from becoming boring. The [[cinematography]] [[superstar]] Rosemary [[Dex]], who provides eye candy [[during]] and [[additionally]] delivers a [[buena]] performance. [[More]] of the [[remaining]] of the cast aren't really worth mentioning, with the [[exemption]] of Adolfo Celi, who is good as the villain of the [[slice]] and Alida Valli, whom cult [[buffs]] will [[remembering]] from a whole [[reception]] of [[funky]] [[religions]] flicks. The [[flick]] does [[clarification]] itself at the [[ceases]]; which is [[fortunate]] as I'm sure I'm not the only viewer who was more than a [[scant]] [[baffled]] by then! [[Holistic]], this may not be [[traditional]] [[thing]]; but its [[alright]] [[sufficiently]] and worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] According to IMDb [[Takashi]] Miike's [[Master]] of Horror-segment, Imprint, was [[banned]] in the US. [[So]] I [[figured]] I'd translate the Swedish [[review]] I just wrote for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[expectations]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Takashi]] Miike's episode in the [[Masters]] of [[Horror]] [[series]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Imprint]] did in deed look very promising.

The [[story]] [[mostly]] takes place in a remote Japanese [[bordello]], some [[time]] during the 19th century, and it tells the [[tale]] of a [[journalist]] [[searching]] for Komomo, the [[woman]] he left behind and whom he [[promised]] to return for. [[Tired]] and dejected he arrives at the bordello, [[hoping]] that this will be the [[end]] of his very [[long]] [[journey]]. It [[turns]] out that one of the prostitutes, a deformed and [[quiet]] [[girl]], know about Komomo, and the desperate [[man]] makes her [[tell]] him where she is and what has happened to her [[since]] he left. The story she tells him is as [[deplorable]] as it is [[hard]] to swallow...

The [[first]] thing that [[hit]] me about the episode was how unnatural it [[seemed]] that the Japanese cast for the most [[part]] [[spoke]] fluent American-English. But I will [[leave]] it at that, it's not that [[big]] a [[deal]]. What IS a [[big]] [[deal]] [[however]] is how [[miserable]] the [[rest]] of it was. Miike's [[tale]] moves at such a slow [[pace]] that I couldn't [[help]] [[looking]] at my watch [[several]] [[times]] during the 63 minutes. The [[extended]] torure-scene, that takes place [[somewhere]] in the middle of the [[movie]], [[felt]] so unmotivated - and pornographically intrusive - that not [[even]] THAT scene [[became]] interesting. I [[felt]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no [[sense]] of [[style]] or [[purpose]]. The only scenes that [[provoked]] any [[kind]] of emotion out of me were the [[images]] of bloody [[fetuses]] [[rolling]] along the bottom of the [[swiftly]] [[flowing]] water...and, in all [[honesty]], the only [[emotions]] they [[provoked]] were [[feelings]] of [[disgust]].

The [[journalist]] [[seeking]] the [[love]] he left behind is played by [[Billy]] Drago, for me most [[memorable]] as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad [[assassin]] in Brian De [[Palmas]] The Untouchables (1987). I've [[always]] [[found]] Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of [[Red]] Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! According to IMDb [[Hau]] Miike's [[Masters]] of Horror-segment, Imprint, was [[outlaw]] in the US. [[Hence]] I [[thought]] I'd translate the Swedish [[revising]] I just wrote for it...

It was hard to NOT have any sort of [[prospects]] from Ichi The Killer-director [[Hau]] Miike's episode in the [[Master]] of [[Terror]] [[serial]]. And the DVD-cover of [[Footprint]] did in deed look very promising.

The [[tales]] [[especially]] takes place in a remote Japanese [[hell]], some [[times]] during the 19th century, and it tells the [[narratives]] of a [[correspondents]] [[looking]] for Komomo, the [[femme]] he left behind and whom he [[promise]] to return for. [[Weary]] and dejected he arrives at the bordello, [[waits]] that this will be the [[ends]] of his very [[lang]] [[voyager]]. It [[revolves]] out that one of the prostitutes, a deformed and [[silent]] [[daughters]], know about Komomo, and the desperate [[bloke]] makes her [[telling]] him where she is and what has happened to her [[because]] he left. The story she tells him is as [[sorrowful]] as it is [[difficult]] to swallow...

The [[outset]] thing that [[knocked]] me about the episode was how unnatural it [[appeared]] that the Japanese cast for the most [[portions]] [[talking]] fluent American-English. But I will [[let]] it at that, it's not that [[enormous]] a [[addresses]]. What IS a [[mammoth]] [[dealing]] [[nevertheless]] is how [[sorrowful]] the [[stays]] of it was. Miike's [[fable]] moves at such a slow [[cadence]] that I couldn't [[aiding]] [[searching]] at my watch [[different]] [[moments]] during the 63 minutes. The [[lengthy]] torure-scene, that takes place [[nowhere]] in the middle of the [[film]], [[believed]] so unmotivated - and pornographically intrusive - that not [[yet]] THAT scene [[was]] interesting. I [[believed]] like it was violent just for the sake of violence itself - with no [[sensing]] of [[elegance]] or [[intending]]. The only scenes that [[engendered]] any [[sorting]] of emotion out of me were the [[picture]] of bloody [[foetuses]] [[roll]] along the bottom of the [[soon]] [[circulating]] water...and, in all [[frankness]], the only [[feelings]] they [[engendered]] were [[emotions]] of [[distaste]].

The [[newspaperman]] [[searching]] the [[amour]] he left behind is played by [[Pele]] Drago, for me most [[unforgettable]] as Frank Nitti - Al Capones whiteclad [[murderer]] in Brian De [[Palma]] The Untouchables (1987). I've [[steadily]] [[uncovered]] Dragos portrayal of Nitti to be very icy (and I mean that in a good way), and that is probably why I was almost annoyed when I found him to be so terrible (NOT in a good way) in this one. His acting seems to flow between no feelings or empathy whatsoever to displays of some really bad overacting. When his character is supposed to react to the awful things Komomo has been subjected to I was sitting in the sofa, twisting and turning in an attempt to escape the horrible actingjob put forth by Drago. I'm grateful that most of the story is told by Yuoki Kudoh (Memoirs of a geisha, 2005), who plays the deformed prostitute.

The finale is probably supposed to be chocking, maybe even revolting and horrid, but I just found it to be kind of...you know... "blah" (and I looked at my watch again, for the umptieth time, just wishing the crappy episode would end). Maybe the finale caused me to smile just a bit, but that's only because I couldn't help thinking of an episode of [[Reid]] Dwarf, and the upside-down chins of Craig Charles and Danny John-Jules, with eyes glued on them to make them look like aliens... Lucky you, if you've seen that episode and now decide to see Imprint, I will forever have ruined the visuals of the ending for you.

My first thought, when Imprint finally ended, was that the only thing that made the pain of watching it worth it, was hearing the main title theme by Edward Shearmur (the same music I believe is used in every episode of this series), and that - if anything - is a big friggin warning, don't you think?

One might point to the costume design, by Michiko Kitamura, and say that there, at least, is something NOT lacking in style and refinement...but there are so many other films and TV-shows that is so much better at showing off the Japanese "geisha-fashion". This is nothing but inferior and I am disappointed. Takashi Miike's Masters of Horror-episode is boring, uninspiring and pointless. In other words; It's really, really BAD! --------------------------------------------- Result 1182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] For anyone with a moderate sensibility, a moderate [[feeling]] of the human and [[humane]] condition, for anyone capable of [[getting]] above the Hollywood ilk, for anyone who is satisfied seeing [[cinema]] which does not have a [[series]] of Seagals/Willis/Van Dammes [[blasting]] the brains out of [[anybody]] or seeing who gets into bed with whom, for anyone whose intellectual [[level]] [[reaches]] a [[capacity]] to [[grasp]], sympathise with, [[comprehend]], laugh WITH, cry [[WITH]] [[natural]] [[tender]] heart-warming [[hilarious]] [[compassionate]] [[HUMAN]] BEINGS, `Le Huitième Jour' is [[waiting]] for you. Jaco van Dormael has not [[achieved]] simply a masterpiece, that [[would]] have been too simplistic; he has [[achieved]] one of those [[rare]] [[monumental]] [[works]] of art in the [[cinematographic]] [[world]] which defies any kind of encapsuling. Is it a [[drama]]? Is it a [[comedy]]? [[No]]: it is the [[story]] of Georges, a [[wonderful]] funny pitiful laughable [[loving]] [[frightened]] [[beautiful]] personality, a sufferer of the Downes Syndrome. It is a [[story]] which has you [[laughing]] through your [[tears]], but this is not one of those [[classic]] tear-jerkers; this [[film]] moves through a world that has you at once mixing your feelings of [[compassion]] or [[pity]] or even shame with those of admiration, warmth and even [[love]]. A successful [[banking]] [[salesman]], Harry, bumps into Georges: they were both [[going]] in [[opposite]] [[directions]] with [[absolutely]] [[opposing]] [[ideas]], [[problems]] and [[priorities]]; skillfully van Dormael melts these two unlikely [[men]] into a warm [[friendship]], but which is so much more than the good [[buddy]] [[friendship]] of those having a [[beer]] down the [[road]]. This is a [[relationship]] which develops into a [[profound]] [[needing]] by both for the other. The cuasi-surrealist scenes [[fit]] in [[perfectly]]: [[Georges]] [[recalls]] (or invents) past scenes of his [[life]] while either day-dreaming or sleeping; [[even]] the [[almost]] phantasmagorical [[final]] scene is [[totally]] [[correct]]. The only scene which might be [[considered]] a [[little]] out of [[place]] is when they steal a [[bus]] and [[drive]] it out of the show-rooms. [[However]], this does not detract from the [[whole]]. This [[film]] is a [[monument]]. [[Even]] if your [[French]] is not up to much, [[please]] bear [[seeing]] it with sub-titles. `Le Huitième Jour' is worth the trouble. As for [[anything]] [[else]], well, just read the following [[commentaries]] – I go along with all of them. This [[film]] is a [[joy]], it is [[majestic]], it is [[unique]]. [[If]] you have [[seen]] `Rain Man' which I [[consider]] an excellent film, you must see this one: it is far superior because it has not the superficial veneer of famous Hollywood-produced world-renowned actors; it has Pascal Duquenne and Daniel Auteuil – TEN oscars for these two, and three more for Jaco van Dormael. Who cares…………? Yes: 11 out of 10 if the IMDb rating doesn't break down under the strain.

Magnifique! Chapeau! For anyone with a moderate sensibility, a moderate [[sense]] of the human and [[humanist]] condition, for anyone capable of [[obtaining]] above the Hollywood ilk, for anyone who is satisfied seeing [[movie]] which does not have a [[serials]] of Seagals/Willis/Van Dammes [[shattering]] the brains out of [[person]] or seeing who gets into bed with whom, for anyone whose intellectual [[grades]] [[attained]] a [[proficiency]] to [[grasping]], sympathise with, [[understanding]], laugh WITH, cry [[AVEC]] [[naturel]] [[bidding]] heart-warming [[comic]] [[benevolent]] [[MANKIND]] BEINGS, `Le Huitième Jour' is [[suspense]] for you. Jaco van Dormael has not [[fulfilled]] simply a masterpiece, that [[ought]] have been too simplistic; he has [[obtained]] one of those [[seldom]] [[large]] [[collaborate]] of art in the [[cinematic]] [[globe]] which defies any kind of encapsuling. Is it a [[theater]]? Is it a [[parody]]? [[Nope]]: it is the [[storytelling]] of Georges, a [[super]] funny pitiful laughable [[affectionate]] [[scared]] [[exquisite]] personality, a sufferer of the Downes Syndrome. It is a [[narratives]] which has you [[giggling]] through your [[tear]], but this is not one of those [[classical]] tear-jerkers; this [[movie]] moves through a world that has you at once mixing your feelings of [[compassionate]] or [[shame]] or even shame with those of admiration, warmth and even [[loved]]. A successful [[bankers]] [[vendors]], Harry, bumps into Georges: they were both [[go]] in [[inverse]] [[instructions]] with [[entirely]] [[opposed]] [[idea]], [[disorders]] and [[priority]]; skillfully van Dormael melts these two unlikely [[man]] into a warm [[friendly]], but which is so much more than the good [[guy]] [[goodwill]] of those having a [[casket]] down the [[routing]]. This is a [[relations]] which develops into a [[deepest]] [[requiring]] by both for the other. The cuasi-surrealist scenes [[fitted]] in [[entirely]]: [[George]] [[reminded]] (or invents) past scenes of his [[vida]] while either day-dreaming or sleeping; [[yet]] the [[practically]] phantasmagorical [[latter]] scene is [[altogether]] [[exact]]. The only scene which might be [[regarded]] a [[petite]] out of [[placing]] is when they steal a [[buses]] and [[driving]] it out of the show-rooms. [[Still]], this does not detract from the [[total]]. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[memorials]]. [[Yet]] if your [[Frenchman]] is not up to much, [[invites]] bear [[witnessing]] it with sub-titles. `Le Huitième Jour' is worth the trouble. As for [[nothing]] [[otherwise]], well, just read the following [[feedback]] – I go along with all of them. This [[cinematic]] is a [[jubilation]], it is [[regal]], it is [[unequalled]]. [[Unless]] you have [[watched]] `Rain Man' which I [[consideration]] an excellent film, you must see this one: it is far superior because it has not the superficial veneer of famous Hollywood-produced world-renowned actors; it has Pascal Duquenne and Daniel Auteuil – TEN oscars for these two, and three more for Jaco van Dormael. Who cares…………? Yes: 11 out of 10 if the IMDb rating doesn't break down under the strain.

Magnifique! Chapeau! --------------------------------------------- Result 1183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Fot the most part, this movie [[feels]] [[like]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The [[direction]] is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Denise]] Crosby, particularly, delivers her lines [[like]] she's cold reading them off a cue card. [[Only]] one [[thing]] makes this film worth watching, and that is once Gage comes back from the "Semetary." There is something disturbing about watching a small child murder someone, and this movie might be more than some can handle just for that reason. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This film only does one thing right, but it knocks that one thing right out of the park. Worth seeing just for the last 10 minutes or so. Fot the most part, this movie [[thinks]] [[iike]] a "made-for-TV" effort. The [[directorate]] is ham-fisted, the acting (with the exception of Fred Gwynne) is overwrought and soapy. [[Deniz]] Crosby, particularly, delivers her lines [[iike]] she's cold reading them off a cue card. [[Exclusively]] one [[stuff]] makes this film worth watching, and that is once Gage comes back from the "Semetary." There is something disturbing about watching a small child murder someone, and this movie might be more than some can handle just for that reason. It is absolutely bone-chilling. This film only does one thing right, but it knocks that one thing right out of the park. Worth seeing just for the last 10 minutes or so. --------------------------------------------- Result 1184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A Bugs Life is a great film that is not just for kids but for adults too. The story is set around a colony of ants and their struggle against the evil Grasshoppers who come back every year and steal their food ( A Mirror of the Magnifiscent seven). There is some wonderfull computer animation and the voices are great too. You will love it!! 8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Fascinating]] yet [[unsettling]] [[look]] at [[Edith]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter (Little Edie) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent infested, rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the city. It becomes quite clear very [[quickly]] that these two are well past eccentric. [[Little]] Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mindset]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the [[conversations]] were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is perfect and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big Edie actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very captivating yet one gets the feeling that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the world has simply past these two by. Their hopes and dreams as decayed as the mansion they live in. Despite their bickering these two need each other more than ever. For without the other there would be no refuge from the loneliness. Most amazing line comes from Big Edie whose many cats relieve themselves throughout her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply unbelievable. [[Mesmerizing]] yet [[ominous]] [[gaze]] at [[Gertrude]] Bouvier Beale (Big Edie) and her daughter (Little Edie) aunt and first cousin to the late Jacquelyn Kennedy Onasis. They live in a rodent infested, rundown mansion which was considered a health hazard by the city. It becomes quite clear very [[expeditiously]] that these two are well past eccentric. [[Scant]] Edie seems to be the most off as she acts with the [[mentality]] of a ten year old even though she is actually 53. The content is pretty much made up of two things. The first are the [[dialogue]] were Little Edie lambastes Big Edie for driving away all her potential suitors and ruining her aspiring career as writer, actress, and dancer. These discussions usually become very rhetorical, nonsensical, and often times amusing. The second part consists of long bouts of attempted singing by both parties. Each of course thinks their singing is perfect and it's only the other who sounds bad. In one amazing scene Big Edie actually physically attacks Little Edie with her cane just to get her to stop her warbling. Very captivating yet one gets the feeling that their is some serious exploitation going on here and the subjects are just too far gone to know it. The filmmakers seem to treat this like a freak show at the circus, coming each day to record (and chuckle) at whatever bizarre behavior may come about. Ultimately this is a sad picture as it shows how the world has simply past these two by. Their hopes and dreams as decayed as the mansion they live in. Despite their bickering these two need each other more than ever. For without the other there would be no refuge from the loneliness. Most amazing line comes from Big Edie whose many cats relieve themselves throughout her bedroom. Her response to a complaint about the smell is simply unbelievable. --------------------------------------------- Result 1186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This movie is one of the most [[provocative]] Jesus movies I have ever seen. It does not seek to tell the whole story, but only to portray an interpretive expression of the last day of Jesus Christ. It is darkly witty, playful and seriously faithful to elements of the Jewish tradition and to modern scriptural interpretation. Judas is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister evil that we sometimes imagine, but a grossly mistaken man, horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is playful and serious, faithful and committed--very human while also divine. The final dialog is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of small talk that two powerful men might do when they have just committed an atrocity. I would watch this movie again and recommend it to others. This movie is one of the most [[inflammatory]] Jesus movies I have ever seen. It does not seek to tell the whole story, but only to portray an interpretive expression of the last day of Jesus Christ. It is darkly witty, playful and seriously faithful to elements of the Jewish tradition and to modern scriptural interpretation. Judas is much more ordinary than other portrayals, not the dark and sinister evil that we sometimes imagine, but a grossly mistaken man, horribly misguided in his zeal. Chris Saranden's Jesus is playful and serious, faithful and committed--very human while also divine. The final dialog is thoughtfully done and serves as the kind of small talk that two powerful men might do when they have just committed an atrocity. I would watch this movie again and recommend it to others. --------------------------------------------- Result 1187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] IQ is a cute romantic comedy featuring two [[great]] actors that seem to click well on screen. Plot is a typical guy wrong for girl, guy gets girl format, but makes the solid point that one must love with the heart and not the the mind. Addition of Albert Einstein and his band of geniuses provides excellent comic relief. Overall, a [[good]] [[movie]]. Not great, but [[good]] IQ is a cute romantic comedy featuring two [[prodigious]] actors that seem to click well on screen. Plot is a typical guy wrong for girl, guy gets girl format, but makes the solid point that one must love with the heart and not the the mind. Addition of Albert Einstein and his band of geniuses provides excellent comic relief. Overall, a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]]. Not great, but [[buena]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie was [[terrible]]. The plot sucked, the acting was [[bad]], the [[editing]] was inept and this [[movie]] makes me [[want]] to poke my eyes out. I [[wish]] I had the [[time]] I [[spent]] watching this [[movie]] back. The balloon scene was stupid, the [[Mormon]] jokes are [[really]] [[old]], the soundtrack [[sucked]], I [[saw]] no [[chemistry]] between the two [[leads]], it's full of [[stereotypes]], [[stupid]] [[local]] "celeb" cameo's..most [[noted]] was [[Del]] "I'm [[going]] to [[drive]] as [[fast]] as I want to.." [[computer]] [[idiot]]. What is [[worst]] is that these actors had to [[play]] themselves on the [[spiritual]] side and [[even]] they screwed that up. This [[movie]] [[help]] [[create]] a long [[line]] of lackluster [[efforts]] to mainstream LDS beliefs into Hollywood. I.E. The RM, [[Church]] ball, etc. etc. I [[would]] [[forgo]] watching this [[movie]] and [[instead]] [[run]] [[head]] first into a brick wall. You will be more [[entertained]] than watching this [[poor]] [[excuse]] for a [[show]]. This movie was [[scary]]. The plot sucked, the acting was [[unfavourable]], the [[edition]] was inept and this [[cinematography]] makes me [[wanted]] to poke my eyes out. I [[want]] I had the [[times]] I [[spending]] watching this [[cinematography]] back. The balloon scene was stupid, the [[Mormons]] jokes are [[genuinely]] [[former]], the soundtrack [[aspired]], I [[observed]] no [[chem]] between the two [[leeds]], it's full of [[prejudices]], [[dopey]] [[locale]] "celeb" cameo's..most [[commented]] was [[Dell]] "I'm [[go]] to [[drives]] as [[expeditiously]] as I want to.." [[computers]] [[moronic]]. What is [[worse]] is that these actors had to [[gaming]] themselves on the [[psychotropic]] side and [[yet]] they screwed that up. This [[cinematography]] [[support]] [[creations]] a long [[linea]] of lackluster [[action]] to mainstream LDS beliefs into Hollywood. I.E. The RM, [[Churches]] ball, etc. etc. I [[could]] [[forswear]] watching this [[cinema]] and [[conversely]] [[running]] [[leader]] first into a brick wall. You will be more [[distracted]] than watching this [[poorest]] [[alibi]] for a [[exhibition]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] What a [[wonderful]] movie, eligible for so many labels it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely use polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, charm, pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. What a [[sumptuous]] movie, eligible for so many labels it never gets: Science fiction, film-noir, with a script and dialog of high intelligence which assumes an educated, cultured audience.....the kind of English language movie only done in pre-1960 England (and shown only in USA art movie houses when it first arrived), and never, ever done in the USA.

Main characters in The Man In The White Suit(1951) starring Sir Alec Guiness and Joan Greenwood routinely use polysyllabic, science reference words like "polymer" and discuss and explain concepts of chemistry like "long chain molecules" and then communicate the importance of these to the average man and the benefits science provides him.

The Man In The White Suit (1951) is the opposite of the video-game explosion movies which now (2009) dominate world cinema, and certainly dominate major USA cinema.......it's a carefully acted, intelligently told story delivered by gifted and believable educated English actors (who play educated, accomplished people), and it's all done with comedy, charm, pathos, and sense of irony which ancient Greek dramatists would have approved of.

Everybody should see this movie, and someday, somehow, some worthy filmmaker and his supporters should make another like it.

It's wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 1190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] What an [[overlooked]] 80's soundtrack. I [[imagine]] John Travolta sang some of the songs but in [[watching]] the movie it did seem to personify everything that was 80s cheese. Clearly movies that [[rely]] on mechanical bulls, [[bartenders]] and immature relationships were in style. The [[best]] was his lousy [[Texas]] accent. Compare that to Friday [[Night]] Lights.I suggest watching Cocktail and Stir Crazy to start [[really]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Made]] in [[America]] with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Goldberg]] is an awesomely bad [[movie]]. I was so [[shocked]] to [[realize]] I had never [[watched]] it. One more weird [[movie]] of this [[genre]] would have to [[include]] Cadilac Man with Robin Williams. Just remember all of these BIG [[stars]] played big [[roles]] in these CHEESY movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin [[Williams]] and John Travolta What an [[disregarded]] 80's soundtrack. I [[envision]] John Travolta sang some of the songs but in [[staring]] the movie it did seem to personify everything that was 80s cheese. Clearly movies that [[depend]] on mechanical bulls, [[waiters]] and immature relationships were in style. The [[better]] was his lousy [[Texan]] accent. Compare that to Friday [[Nocturne]] Lights.I suggest watching Cocktail and Stir Crazy to start [[truthfully]] getting into the dumbing down of film. Also, as a side note [[Introduced]] in [[Latina]] with Ted Danson and Whoopie [[Tucker]] is an awesomely bad [[cinematography]]. I was so [[appalled]] to [[realising]] I had never [[observed]] it. One more weird [[cinematographic]] of this [[gender]] would have to [[containing]] Cadilac Man with Robin Williams. Just remember all of these BIG [[celebrity]] played big [[functions]] in these CHEESY movies.. Tom Cruise, Richard Pryor, Robin [[William]] and John Travolta --------------------------------------------- Result 1191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] What can I say about Cruel intentions 2? Well, I can say in all honesty, I will only watch this film again if I am fastened to a chair and have my eyes opened clockwork-orange-style.

The film 'stars' Robin Dunne (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[awful]] [[impression]] of Ryan Phillipe [[made]] me [[cringe]] [[throughout]]. In a case of [[terrible]] [[casting]], Dunne attempts (and fails) to carry off [[playing]] a handsome charismatic, [[charmer]]. Since the actor is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the character is left wholly [[unbelievable]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one time), tries to pick up where Sarah Michelle Gellar left off and bring scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[lacking]] in any real emotion, often she looked like she was reading cue cards just off camera. There were two good actors in the film however, Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and Mimi Rogers (Mrs Kensington in Austion Powers), [[made]] very good and entertaining performances as the parents of Sebastian and Katherine and are the only [[reason]] why I rated the film as a 2, not a 1.

The film itself is a poor version of the original, with such lows as carbon copy's of dialogue and mimicked scenes which lacked the originality of the previous film.

I think that as a TV show, it might have worked, but if it had been recasted with people who could actually act in the main parts. What can I say about Cruel intentions 2? Well, I can say in all honesty, I will only watch this film again if I am fastened to a chair and have my eyes opened clockwork-orange-style.

The film 'stars' Robin Dunne (No, I never heard of him either), whose [[frightening]] [[printout]] of Ryan Phillipe [[introduced]] me [[shudder]] [[in]]. In a case of [[dreaded]] [[pouring]], Dunne attempts (and fails) to carry off [[gaming]] a handsome charismatic, [[delightful]]. Since the actor is not handsome, nor charismatic nor charming, the character is left wholly [[fabulous]]. Amy Adams, (she was in an episode of buffy one time), tries to pick up where Sarah Michelle Gellar left off and bring scheming Katherine to life... However, Adams is not that good a an actress and her performance was flat and [[missing]] in any real emotion, often she looked like she was reading cue cards just off camera. There were two good actors in the film however, Barry Flatman (Saw 2 & Saw 3) and Mimi Rogers (Mrs Kensington in Austion Powers), [[introduced]] very good and entertaining performances as the parents of Sebastian and Katherine and are the only [[raison]] why I rated the film as a 2, not a 1.

The film itself is a poor version of the original, with such lows as carbon copy's of dialogue and mimicked scenes which lacked the originality of the previous film.

I think that as a TV show, it might have worked, but if it had been recasted with people who could actually act in the main parts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Man, what the hell were the people who [[made]] this film on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' transformation, folks. We're talking some of the [[worst]] [[makeup]] ever captured on [[film]] here. I can just [[imagine]] some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to [[roll]] in fur. That's how [[bad]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[better]]. Minutes are wasted as the [[scenery]] chewing male [[actors]] waffle on about [[Daniela]] and her condition or [[something]] (I can't remember, but the [[dialogue]] is so [[bad]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cry]]).

The [[funny]] [[thing]] is [[Daniela]] isn't [[even]] a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[mental]] [[whenever]] there is a man [[around]] (understandable, as she was raped as a [[child]]) so she [[thinks]] she becomes a [[werewolf]] like her ancestor (the opening scene). She can't [[help]] but [[tear]] out the throat of [[every]] man she meets, and she only [[wants]] to be loved! [[Things]] [[start]] [[looking]] up for [[Daniela]] as she meets and falls in [[love]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. [[Check]] out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[see]] (laughing and hugging after diving headfirst through a [[window]]).

Daniela's luck doesn't hold out as the [[film]] takes a brutal turn, she is suddenly viciously beaten and raped by a group of thugs who kill the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your grave", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But hey, that's the game you play when you're a film geek. Man, what the hell were the people who [[effected]] this film on? And more importantly where can I get some? The opening scene sets the tone for the film: a woman writhing naked in a circle of fire, transforming into a werewolf. And this is no Rick Baker 'American werewolf' transformation, folks. We're talking some of the [[gravest]] [[composition]] ever captured on [[kino]] here. I can just [[reckon]] some stoned Italian spreading glue on naked Annik Borel (who plays Daniela, the film's protagoness (is that a word?)), and asking her to [[rolling]] in fur. That's how [[amiss]] it is.

From here on in it doesn't get much [[best]]. Minutes are wasted as the [[landscapes]] chewing male [[protagonists]] waffle on about [[Daniel]] and her condition or [[somethin]] (I can't remember, but the [[dialogues]] is so [[naughty]] if you don't laugh at it you'll [[cries]]).

The [[hilarious]] [[stuff]] is [[Daniel]] isn't [[yet]] a werewolf, she's a psycho who goes [[spiritual]] [[where]] there is a man [[almost]] (understandable, as she was raped as a [[children]]) so she [[feels]] she becomes a [[werewolves]] like her ancestor (the opening scene). She can't [[succour]] but [[tears]] out the throat of [[each]] man she meets, and she only [[wanna]] to be loved! [[Items]] [[initiation]] [[searching]] up for [[Daniel]] as she meets and falls in [[amour]] with a buff stuntman who doesn't trigger her 'episodes'. [[Verified]] out the montage here, one of the cheesiest you'll ever [[seeing]] (laughing and hugging after diving headfirst through a [[windows]]).

Daniela's luck doesn't hold out as the [[cinematography]] takes a brutal turn, she is suddenly viciously beaten and raped by a group of thugs who kill the stuntman. Reminiscent of "I spit on your grave", Daniela extracts bloody vengeance on her rapists.

This is 100 minutes of my life I will never get back. But hey, that's the game you play when you're a film geek. --------------------------------------------- Result 1193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Okay, we've got extreme Verhoeven violence (Although not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've got plenty of sex and nudity, but [[something]] is missing...Oh, yes, it's [[missing]] the intelligence that Paul Verhoeven is [[known]] for in his sci-fi movies. I [[admire]] the [[way]] Verhoeven [[introduces]] the [[characters]] and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven [[films]], the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to fall into the comedy [[genre]]. The acting overall was above average compared to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow Man a good movie is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the amazing special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make Hollow Man an entertaining movie. Grade: B Okay, we've got extreme Verhoeven violence (Although not as extreme as other Verhoeven flicks), we've got plenty of sex and nudity, but [[algo]] is missing...Oh, yes, it's [[lacking]] the intelligence that Paul Verhoeven is [[renowned]] for in his sci-fi movies. I [[admired]] the [[camino]] Verhoeven [[introducing]] the [[character]] and how they have a sense of humor, but unlike most Verhoeven [[cinematic]], the movie itself doesn't have enough humor for it to fall into the comedy [[gender]]. The acting overall was above average compared to most slasher films.

What makes Hollow Man a good movie is not the story, not the cast or characters, but the amazing special effects work that would otherwise make a film like this impossible. The crew has truly made an invisible man, without the use of things like a floating hat suspended on piano wires and other practical effects (effects done on set). The most stunning effects scenes are not seen while Kevin Bacon is invisible, they are when Kevin Bacon is becoming invisible and visible.

The problem is that this invisible man story deserves to be more imaginitive. Here, it takes place at a lab for the most part. I would have enjoyed seeing the invisible Kevin Bacon robbing a bank and getting away with it, or let's say steal something from people's purses, or something like that. But what is shown is decent enough to make Hollow Man an entertaining movie. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Astaire and [[Rogers]] at the [[height]] of their [[popularity]]. [[In]] 1936 [[Americans]] [[thought]] of the [[Navy]] as a place for [[song]] and [[dance]]. WWII was [[still]] a few years away. [[Fred]] and [[Ginger]] [[dance]] up the town.

The plot is [[decent]], but who cares... By the [[way]], [[notice]] the cameo roles for Betty Grable and a glamorous Lucile Ball.

A load of Irving Berlin songs, [[including]] the [[famous]] "Let's [[Face]] the [[Music]] and [[Dance]]". [[In]] that scene, Ginger's heavy swooping dress smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[almost]] knocks him [[unconscious]]. Fred [[insisted]] on [[keeping]] the take as the [[dancing]] was [[superb]] [[nonetheless]].

Ginger once commented that she was a better dancer than Fred, [[since]] she had to do all the same [[moves]], in [[step]], and [[backwards]]...

Come to [[think]] of it, Fred's [[voice]] was nice too. The [[man]] was effortless in motion.

Here's a movie to cozy up on the couch with a loved-one, [[kick]] off the [[shoes]], and [[enjoy]] the entertainment. Astaire and [[Rutgers]] at the [[elevation]] of their [[vogue]]. [[Onto]] 1936 [[Us]] [[figured]] of the [[Armada]] as a place for [[chanson]] and [[danse]]. WWII was [[however]] a few years away. [[Freda]] and [[Kang]] [[danced]] up the town.

The plot is [[presentable]], but who cares... By the [[routing]], [[notifications]] the cameo roles for Betty Grable and a glamorous Lucile Ball.

A load of Irving Berlin songs, [[consisting]] the [[acclaimed]] "Let's [[Confronts]] the [[Musical]] and [[Ballet]]". [[For]] that scene, Ginger's heavy swooping dress smacks Fred in the face during one of her spins and [[practically]] knocks him [[subconscious]]. Fred [[highlighted]] on [[preserving]] the take as the [[ballet]] was [[sumptuous]] [[however]].

Ginger once commented that she was a better dancer than Fred, [[because]] she had to do all the same [[shift]], in [[stride]], and [[backward]]...

Come to [[believe]] of it, Fred's [[vowel]] was nice too. The [[males]] was effortless in motion.

Here's a movie to cozy up on the couch with a loved-one, [[kicking]] off the [[shoe]], and [[enjoying]] the entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 1195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Most Stoogephiles consider this to be the best Stooges short bar none, and they're right. Curly is a scream dressed up in drag as "Senorita Cucaracha", and Moe and Larry are in top form as "Senor Mucho" and "Senor Gusto", respectively. Christine McIntyre's beautiful operatic voice is given full rein--she actually was a trained opera singer--and it's wonderful. The great Gino Corrado is hilarious as a pompous Italian singer terrorized by the Stooges at a society party. Some truly funny gags, good direction and very tight editing make this rise to the very top of the Stooges' prolific output. What's even more amazing is that Curly was having severe health problems at the time, and in several of the shorts he made during this period, you can see that he is obviously ill; his timing is way off, he speaks very slowly and haltingly, and has trouble getting around. Fortunately, his health was in an upswing when he made this film, and it shows. Classic Stooge comedy, and enjoyed by even non-Stooge fans (I had a girlfriend who couldn't stand the Stooges, but even she laughed at this one). A must-see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] Flat, ordinary thriller about a conniving woman who deceives all those she [[supposedly]] loves in order to boost her bank [[account]]. [[Nicole]] Kidman plays the [[deceptive]] Tracey, married to the doting Andy (Bill Pullman). When an old school friend of Andy's named Jed Hill (Alec Baldwin) turns up as the [[resident]] [[surgeon]], trouble is not far behind him.

[[Script]] [[fails]] in that it does not carefully [[develop]] the promising [[premise]] into an effective, tantalising thriller, and the [[severe]] [[lack]] of character [[motivation]], background and development leaves the whole [[show]] reaching. [[None]] of the cast are able to generate interest in their [[shallow]] [[characters]], [[especially]] Bill Pullman, whose own [[inexplicably]] curious [[Andy]] is impossible to believe.

Poor director Harold Becker is left trying to resurrect an impossibly dead [[project]], and is unable to make entertainment from any of it. By the time the 'secret' of the plot is revealed, you just won't care.

At [[least]] the cinematography has Massachusetts looking good. Also stars George C. Scott, Peter Gallagher and Josef Sommer.

[[Sunday]], [[February]] 25, 1996 - T.V. Flat, ordinary thriller about a conniving woman who deceives all those she [[seemingly]] loves in order to boost her bank [[accounts]]. [[Nicol]] Kidman plays the [[dishonest]] Tracey, married to the doting Andy (Bill Pullman). When an old school friend of Andy's named Jed Hill (Alec Baldwin) turns up as the [[capita]] [[surgeons]], trouble is not far behind him.

[[Hyphen]] [[fail]] in that it does not carefully [[formulating]] the promising [[supposition]] into an effective, tantalising thriller, and the [[serious]] [[shortfall]] of character [[motif]], background and development leaves the whole [[exhibitions]] reaching. [[Nos]] of the cast are able to generate interest in their [[superficial]] [[personages]], [[peculiarly]] Bill Pullman, whose own [[inextricably]] curious [[Andi]] is impossible to believe.

Poor director Harold Becker is left trying to resurrect an impossibly dead [[projects]], and is unable to make entertainment from any of it. By the time the 'secret' of the plot is revealed, you just won't care.

At [[fewer]] the cinematography has Massachusetts looking good. Also stars George C. Scott, Peter Gallagher and Josef Sommer.

[[Sonntag]], [[December]] 25, 1996 - T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 1197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I just got back from this free screening, and this "Osama [[Witch]] Project" is the hands-down [[worst]] [[film]] I've [[seen]] this [[year]], worse than even "Catwoman" - which had the [[decency]] to at [[least]] pass itself off as fiction.

[[In]] "[[September]] Tapes," a "[[film]] crew" of "documentary journalists" heads to [[Afghanistan]] - [[despite]] being thoroughly unprepared for the [[trip]], the conditions and, oh [[yeah]], the psychotic and [[ridiculous]] vendetta of their filmmaker [[leader]] to [[avenge]] his wife's [[death]] on [[Sept]]. 11 - to [[track]] down Osama [[bin]] Laden.

They "[[made]]" eight [[tapes]] on their journey, which now "document" their [[travels]] and, of course, their [[attempts]] to [[kill]] the terrorist [[leader]]. (The eight tapes, [[thankfully]], all [[end]] at [[points]] [[significant]] in the narrative, which is [[convenient]] for a "documentary.")

The psychotic, [[idiotic]] protagonist - who is given to [[long]], [[significant]] [[speeches]] that he [[probably]] [[learned]] watching "MacGyver" - cares [[nothing]] for his own [[life]] or the [[life]] of his innocent [[crew]] as he [[gets]] them further and further into [[danger]] through a series of [[completely]] [[dumb]] mishaps. I don't know why he didn't just [[wear]] a sign on his back that said "Shoot me."

The crew's [[translator]], [[supposedly]] their [[sensible]] voice-of-reason, does [[little]] more than [[whine]] and [[gets]] [[baffled]] as the [[idiot]] [[hero]] [[leads]] them into doom.

You [[wish]] they'd brought along [[someone]] on their [[trip]] to [[call]] them all [[morons]].

[[Around]] "[[Tape]] 4," I [[began]] [[rooting]] for the [[terrorists]] to shoot the film [[crew]]. I just got back from this free screening, and this "Osama [[Magician]] Project" is the hands-down [[pire]] [[cinematography]] I've [[noticed]] this [[annum]], worse than even "Catwoman" - which had the [[respectability]] to at [[less]] pass itself off as fiction.

[[Throughout]] "[[December]] Tapes," a "[[movie]] crew" of "documentary journalists" heads to [[Afghani]] - [[albeit]] being thoroughly unprepared for the [[journey]], the conditions and, oh [[yes]], the psychotic and [[absurd]] vendetta of their filmmaker [[chef]] to [[vengeance]] his wife's [[killings]] on [[September]]. 11 - to [[trajectory]] down Osama [[ben]] Laden.

They "[[accomplished]]" eight [[videos]] on their journey, which now "document" their [[journey]] and, of course, their [[endeavors]] to [[mata]] the terrorist [[head]]. (The eight tapes, [[gladly]], all [[terminating]] at [[dot]] [[notable]] in the narrative, which is [[expedient]] for a "documentary.")

The psychotic, [[moronic]] protagonist - who is given to [[lang]], [[major]] [[statements]] that he [[arguably]] [[learnt]] watching "MacGyver" - cares [[anything]] for his own [[lives]] or the [[vida]] of his innocent [[crewmen]] as he [[got]] them further and further into [[endangerment]] through a series of [[fully]] [[foolish]] mishaps. I don't know why he didn't just [[wearing]] a sign on his back that said "Shoot me."

The crew's [[interpreter]], [[reportedly]] their [[judicious]] voice-of-reason, does [[petite]] more than [[moan]] and [[obtains]] [[bemused]] as the [[jerk]] [[heroin]] [[leeds]] them into doom.

You [[wanna]] they'd brought along [[anybody]] on their [[excursions]] to [[invitation]] them all [[imbeciles]].

[[Almost]] "[[Tapes]] 4," I [[inaugurated]] [[racine]] for the [[terrorism]] to shoot the film [[crewman]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Avoid]] this one, [[unless]] you want to watch an expensive but [[badly]] made movie. Example? The sound is good but the [[dialogue]] is not clear - a cardinal [[sin]] in a French film.

This film attempts to combine western, drug intrigue and ancien regime costume epic. What? Well, consider this. The cowboy music is hilarious during sword fights. [[Or]] how about the woman in her underwear, holding a knife and jumping up and down on the bed?

Someone should do a 'What's Up Tiger Lily' on this [[bomb]]. Rewrite the [[script]] and then either dub or subtitle it. Heck, it's almost that now. (BTW, Gerard Depardieu and Carole Bouquet, both known to American audiences, have roles.) [[Stave]] this one, [[if]] you want to watch an expensive but [[desperately]] made movie. Example? The sound is good but the [[discussions]] is not clear - a cardinal [[oin]] in a French film.

This film attempts to combine western, drug intrigue and ancien regime costume epic. What? Well, consider this. The cowboy music is hilarious during sword fights. [[Neither]] how about the woman in her underwear, holding a knife and jumping up and down on the bed?

Someone should do a 'What's Up Tiger Lily' on this [[blaster]]. Rewrite the [[scripts]] and then either dub or subtitle it. Heck, it's almost that now. (BTW, Gerard Depardieu and Carole Bouquet, both known to American audiences, have roles.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[First]] of all I [[saw]] this [[movie]] without knowing anything about it I just knew that Joel Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A friend and I went to see it at a Danish film festival called the night-film festival which is a lot of different movies shown after hours the festival pretty much specializes in showing movies that wouldn't otherwise be shown in Danish theaters.

Anyway My friend and I went to [[see]] it and we were astonished at how [[real]] it seemed and that it really [[struck]] a cord with our [[feelings]], we really got [[caught]] up in the plot without being able to figure out the ending which is a great [[plus]] in our book.

The film is recorded in a style that reminds me of the Danish initiative "dogma 95" which was started by 4 Danish directors including Lars Von Trier (Dancer In the Dark).

In conclusion the [[movie]] is really worth seeing it gives a different [[perspective]] on how things were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being expected to serve their country in battle a long way from home.

Also Colin Farrell is exceptional in this movie I haven't seen him before but I can't [[wait]] to see more of him.

Lars P. Helvard [[Outset]] of all I [[watched]] this [[filmmaking]] without knowing anything about it I just knew that Joel Schumacher did it and that was enough for me. A friend and I went to see it at a Danish film festival called the night-film festival which is a lot of different movies shown after hours the festival pretty much specializes in showing movies that wouldn't otherwise be shown in Danish theaters.

Anyway My friend and I went to [[consults]] it and we were astonished at how [[veritable]] it seemed and that it really [[slugged]] a cord with our [[sentiments]], we really got [[apprehended]] up in the plot without being able to figure out the ending which is a great [[anymore]] in our book.

The film is recorded in a style that reminds me of the Danish initiative "dogma 95" which was started by 4 Danish directors including Lars Von Trier (Dancer In the Dark).

In conclusion the [[cinematographic]] is really worth seeing it gives a different [[viewpoint]] on how things were for the American G.I. Joe coming out of school being expected to serve their country in battle a long way from home.

Also Colin Farrell is exceptional in this movie I haven't seen him before but I can't [[hoping]] to see more of him.

Lars P. Helvard --------------------------------------------- Result 1200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The fluttering of [[butterfly]] wings in the Atlantic can unleash a [[hurricane]] in the [[Pacific]]. According to this [[theory]] ([[somehow]] [[related]] to the [[Chaos]] Theory, I'm not sure [[exactly]] how), [[every]] action, no [[matter]] how [[small]] or [[insignificant]], will [[start]] a chain [[reaction]] that can lead to [[big]] [[events]]. This [[small]] [[jewel]] of a film shows us a series of seemingly-unrelated characters, most of them in Paris, whose [[actions]] will affect each others' [[lives]]. (The six-degrees-of-separation [[theory]] can be applied as well.) Each [[story]] is a facet of the [[jewel]] that is this [[film]]. The acting is finely-tuned and nuanced (Audrey Tautou is luminous), the [[stories]] mesh plausibly, the humor is just right, and the viewer leaves the theatre nodding in agreement. The fluttering of [[papillon]] wings in the Atlantic can unleash a [[cyclone]] in the [[Placid]]. According to this [[doctrine]] ([[somewhere]] [[relating]] to the [[Clutter]] Theory, I'm not sure [[precisely]] how), [[any]] action, no [[topic]] how [[scant]] or [[irrelevant]], will [[launch]] a chain [[replies]] that can lead to [[gargantuan]] [[incidents]]. This [[scant]] [[jewelry]] of a film shows us a series of seemingly-unrelated characters, most of them in Paris, whose [[measurements]] will affect each others' [[iife]]. (The six-degrees-of-separation [[doctrines]] can be applied as well.) Each [[fairytales]] is a facet of the [[jewelry]] that is this [[flick]]. The acting is finely-tuned and nuanced (Audrey Tautou is luminous), the [[fairytales]] mesh plausibly, the humor is just right, and the viewer leaves the theatre nodding in agreement. --------------------------------------------- Result 1201 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] When DEATHTRAP was [[first]] released, the poster--reproduced on the cover of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[appropriate]] [[image]]: originally [[written]] for the stage by Ira Levin, who authored such memorable works as ROSEMARY'S [[BABY]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[direction]] it translates to the screen [[extremely]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[films]] that it is very difficult to [[discuss]], for to do so in any detail gives away the very plot for which it is famous. But the opening premise is extremely clever: Sidney Bruhl (Michael Caine) is the famous author of mystery plays, but these days he seems to have lost his touch. After a particularly brutal opening night, an old student named Clifford Anderson (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has written. It is called "Deathtrap," and Sidney recognizes it as a surefire hit. Just the sort of hit that would revive his career... indeed, a hit to die for. And when Clifford visits to discuss the play, events suddenly begin to twist in the most unexpected manner possible.

Like Anthony Shaffer's equally twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is really a story more at home on the stage than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance offers. Still, under the expert guidance of director Sidney Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. Much of this is due to the cast, which is remarkably fine. Michael Caine gives a truly brilliant performance, Dyan Cannon is funny and endearing as Sidney's relentlessly anxious wife, and Christopher Reeve gives what might be the single [[finest]] performance in his regrettably short acting career. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer When DEATHTRAP was [[firstly]] released, the poster--reproduced on the cover of this DVD--offered a graphic akin to a Rubik's Cube. It is an [[adequate]] [[visuals]]: originally [[writes]] for the stage by Ira Levin, who authored such memorable works as ROSEMARY'S [[HONEY]] and THE STEPFORD WIVES, the play was one of Broadway's most famous twisters, and under Sidney Lumet's [[directorate]] it translates to the screen [[unimaginably]] well.

DEATHTRAP is one of those [[film]] that it is very difficult to [[examines]], for to do so in any detail gives away the very plot for which it is famous. But the opening premise is extremely clever: Sidney Bruhl (Michael Caine) is the famous author of mystery plays, but these days he seems to have lost his touch. After a particularly brutal opening night, an old student named Clifford Anderson (Christopher Reeve) sends him a script for a play he has written. It is called "Deathtrap," and Sidney recognizes it as a surefire hit. Just the sort of hit that would revive his career... indeed, a hit to die for. And when Clifford visits to discuss the play, events suddenly begin to twist in the most unexpected manner possible.

Like Anthony Shaffer's equally twisty SLEUTH, DEATHTRAP is really a story more at home on the stage than the screen--to reach full power it needs the immediacy that a live performance offers. Still, under the expert guidance of director Sidney Lumet, it makes a more-than-respectable showing on the screen. Much of this is due to the cast, which is remarkably fine. Michael Caine gives a truly brilliant performance, Dyan Cannon is funny and endearing as Sidney's relentlessly anxious wife, and Christopher Reeve gives what might be the single [[meanest]] performance in his regrettably short acting career. If you can't see it in a first-rate theatrical production, this will more than do until one comes along.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 1202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] The [[rating]] is only a 5 because it's a [[movie]] that could have used better acting and direction (or at least music!). [[However]], for the [[achievements]] of Walt Whitman, it [[deserves]] a 10. A [[previous]] poster [[calls]] the movie cheesy, [[however]], I [[think]] it's a [[simple]] case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The [[film]] [[makers]] were apparently more interested in getting the story out there than to have a Hollywood [[shiny]] feature film. And for this, I [[applaud]] them - the fact it is non-mainstream [[reflects]] the [[life]] of Whitman as well. This [[film]] is more documentary than for the sake of acting. To be fascinated with a story such as this, when you rarely hear of these types of stories that shape current day mental health, is the most important thing. I found it a highly enjoyable look at history. The [[punctuation]] is only a 5 because it's a [[filmmaking]] that could have used better acting and direction (or at least music!). [[Conversely]], for the [[attainment]] of Walt Whitman, it [[deserved]] a 10. A [[anterior]] poster [[request]] the movie cheesy, [[conversely]], I [[ideas]] it's a [[uncomplicated]] case of not seeing the forest for the trees. The [[filmmaking]] [[manufacturer]] were apparently more interested in getting the story out there than to have a Hollywood [[lustrous]] feature film. And for this, I [[commend]] them - the fact it is non-mainstream [[reflecting]] the [[iife]] of Whitman as well. This [[cinematographic]] is more documentary than for the sake of acting. To be fascinated with a story such as this, when you rarely hear of these types of stories that shape current day mental health, is the most important thing. I found it a highly enjoyable look at history. --------------------------------------------- Result 1203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full text of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has going for it, [[lacking]] in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[dreadful]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally lacks passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge mistake that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is unable to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't empathize with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as bad as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. This is the first of "The Complete Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare" BBC series I've seen, and if all of them are like this, I might watch no more. Being practically the full text of the play is everything this "Romeo & Juliet" has going for it, [[missing]] in all other departments. Alvin Rakoff reveals himself as a [[frightful]] director, both in the technical and artistic aspects. In the former, because he commits mistakes that even a first grade film student would wisely avoid. Take in consideration, for example, the badly edited first shot of Abraham and Balthasar in the opening scene, or the Nurse's entering of Friar Lawrence's cell, asking where's Romeo with him being so very in front of her that she'd clearly see him even if she was blind. And, in the latter, because every single one of the performers is misdirected, even if some of them are good actors. Rebecca Saire looks exactly the way I've always imagined Juliet to look like, and she doesn't seem to be a bad actress for a teenager, but her performance totally lacks passion of any kind. Patrick Ryecart as Romeo is even worse, being not only as dull as Juliet, but also way too old and not even good-looking, coming across as a combination of Malcolm McDowell and the Chucky doll. Putting them together makes impossible to think they feel anything for each other, let alone being the main players of the greatest love story ever written. Alan Rickman, in his screen debut, plays Tybalt like if he was Darth Vader, which is a huge mistake that takes away the complexity that Shakespeare intended, no character being a hero or a villain but all flawed human beings. This Tybalt is so mean-looking that we don't believe the characters' pity after his demise. As for Paris, I kept thinking of "Prince Valium" from Spaceballs. Only Celia Johnson manages to do the character of the Nurse some justice.

At 168 minutes, this production is unable to make us empathize with the characters, because the characters don't empathize with each other and never seen to believe their own roles. The best screen version is still Franco Zeffirelli's. But, to be fair, this BBC one isn't nearly as bad as abominations like George Cukor's flamboyant geriatric version, or the crime against Humanity that is Baz Luhrmann's feature-length MTV video. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1204 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] One piece of trivia that is [[often]] [[forgotten]] about this family [[film]] is one of business.

At the time, in 1994, this movie held the record for the biggest movie [[premiere]] in motion picture history (and may continue to hold). It was held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - no doubt in honor of the original film's "Angels" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this remake they "[[haunt]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the long gone Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the Pittsburgh Pirates and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at Heinz Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 fans. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. One piece of trivia that is [[habitually]] [[omitted]] about this family [[cinematographic]] is one of business.

At the time, in 1994, this movie held the record for the biggest movie [[debut]] in motion picture history (and may continue to hold). It was held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania - no doubt in honor of the original film's "Angels" who "haunted" the Pittsburgh Pirates. In this remake they "[[torments]]" the California Angels.

Anyway, the premiere was held at the long gone Three Rivers Stadium which was the home of the Pittsburgh Pirates and the Pittsburgh Steelers at the time (the Pirates are now housed in PNC Park and the Steelers at Heinz Field). The premiere was held on a movie screen that was five stories in height inside the stadium and held (and may even continue to hold) the record for the largest movie premiere in history, shown to 60,000 fans. Danny Glover, Tony Danza and Christopher Lloyd were all in attendance to the admiration of thousands of sports fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1205 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] How they got Al Pacino to [[play]] in this movie is beyond me. This movie is [[absolutely]] [[terrible]]. I discovered, after reading some of the other [[reviews]], that a [[couple]] of people actually [[enjoyed]] this [[film]], which deeply [[puzzles]] me, because I do not see how anyone in their right mind [[could]] possibly [[enjoy]] a movie as [[awful]] as Revolution. It's not just that it's a bad [[movie]], with a lame plot and [[overall]] strangeness that is [[extremely]] [[unpleasant]], but it seems as if the [[filmmakers]] were [[either]] [[mentally]] [[retarded]] (which is a very [[possible]] explanation as to why this movie sucks like it does, though it probably still sucks even compared to other films made by retards) or deliberately made every [[illogical]] decision to make this movie suck as much as possible. For example, we see Donald Sutherland running around with a huge, fat ugly mole on his face. He does not normally have a mole. The mole does not add to his character. It is extremely ugly and distracting. It's not like Robert De Niro's mole; it's much worse. Why the hell has he got that mole? It's as if the filmmakers just said, "Let's see, how could we make this movie even worse than it already is? I know, let's give Mr. Sutherland a giant, ugly-ass mole right on his face."

Another example of the filmmakers' stupidity is the character Ned. We see, for the first three-quarters of the movie, young Ned. At one point, "six months later" appears on the screen. We see Ned again, and it is, of course, the same actor playing the boy. Five minutes later, "three weeks later" appears on the screen, and all of a sudden we've got a different actor playing as the now older Ned. What, do they think we're idiots? Good God! Again, it's like the filmmakers are saying, "How can we possibly make it any worse? I don't think we can...Oh wait! I just had a terrible idea!" I know a kid doesn't grow much in half a year, which is fine, but he at least grows more than he does in three weeks. Just don't get another actor to play Ned, or at least get him to play the five minutes when he's three weeks younger. Furthermore, the kid who plays the "older" Ned does not look any older than "young" Ned. As a matter of fact, he just looks completely different, much skinnier, and no taller or older than the original actor, which is very confusing, as I, like any rational human being, thought at first that it was a new and different character.

What, did the first kid die while they were filming the movie? Because he was in it for the first hour and a half, and then all of a sudden, three weeks later, the guy from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is playing Ned for the last five minutes of the movie. And even if the original actor did die, the filmmakers should have at least gotten an actor who looks like him to play the remainder of his role, and re-shoot the measly five minutes of "six months later" scenes. Better yet, just scrap the movie completely, never finish it and never release, never even tell anybody about it, because by that point they should have realized that their movie sucks and in finishing it they would only waste more money and time and succeed in making one of the worst movies of all time.

I'm not saying that this movie is so bad you shouldn't watch it; it's so bad that you SHOULD watch it, just to see how badly it sucks. It's terrible, terrible. How they got Al Pacino to [[playing]] in this movie is beyond me. This movie is [[altogether]] [[scary]]. I discovered, after reading some of the other [[examinations]], that a [[pair]] of people actually [[loved]] this [[kino]], which deeply [[riddles]] me, because I do not see how anyone in their right mind [[did]] possibly [[enjoys]] a movie as [[heinous]] as Revolution. It's not just that it's a bad [[cinematography]], with a lame plot and [[holistic]] strangeness that is [[considerably]] [[nasty]], but it seems as if the [[cinematographers]] were [[neither]] [[spiritually]] [[moronic]] (which is a very [[attainable]] explanation as to why this movie sucks like it does, though it probably still sucks even compared to other films made by retards) or deliberately made every [[absurd]] decision to make this movie suck as much as possible. For example, we see Donald Sutherland running around with a huge, fat ugly mole on his face. He does not normally have a mole. The mole does not add to his character. It is extremely ugly and distracting. It's not like Robert De Niro's mole; it's much worse. Why the hell has he got that mole? It's as if the filmmakers just said, "Let's see, how could we make this movie even worse than it already is? I know, let's give Mr. Sutherland a giant, ugly-ass mole right on his face."

Another example of the filmmakers' stupidity is the character Ned. We see, for the first three-quarters of the movie, young Ned. At one point, "six months later" appears on the screen. We see Ned again, and it is, of course, the same actor playing the boy. Five minutes later, "three weeks later" appears on the screen, and all of a sudden we've got a different actor playing as the now older Ned. What, do they think we're idiots? Good God! Again, it's like the filmmakers are saying, "How can we possibly make it any worse? I don't think we can...Oh wait! I just had a terrible idea!" I know a kid doesn't grow much in half a year, which is fine, but he at least grows more than he does in three weeks. Just don't get another actor to play Ned, or at least get him to play the five minutes when he's three weeks younger. Furthermore, the kid who plays the "older" Ned does not look any older than "young" Ned. As a matter of fact, he just looks completely different, much skinnier, and no taller or older than the original actor, which is very confusing, as I, like any rational human being, thought at first that it was a new and different character.

What, did the first kid die while they were filming the movie? Because he was in it for the first hour and a half, and then all of a sudden, three weeks later, the guy from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is playing Ned for the last five minutes of the movie. And even if the original actor did die, the filmmakers should have at least gotten an actor who looks like him to play the remainder of his role, and re-shoot the measly five minutes of "six months later" scenes. Better yet, just scrap the movie completely, never finish it and never release, never even tell anybody about it, because by that point they should have realized that their movie sucks and in finishing it they would only waste more money and time and succeed in making one of the worst movies of all time.

I'm not saying that this movie is so bad you shouldn't watch it; it's so bad that you SHOULD watch it, just to see how badly it sucks. It's terrible, terrible. --------------------------------------------- Result 1206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The autobiography on which this movie is based remains one of the most heart-rending [[books]] I have ever read. It tells the [[amazing]] [[stories]] of two sisters, both who [[earned]] [[devotion]] and respect [[working]] well into their 70's as a [[teacher]] and a [[dentist]], then lived another 30 [[years]] with dignity. Ruby Dee steals the [[film]] with her [[perfectly]] [[nuanced]] performance as the rebellious "blacker" [[Bessie]], the dentist. She not only expresses her anger, angst, and [[wisdom]] well; she [[lets]] you know exactly where they've [[come]] from [[using]] an [[economy]] of [[words]]. Diahnn [[Carroll]] has the feel of the [[older]] sister, the teacher, down [[perfectly]], but I'm [[afraid]] she never makes me [[believe]] that she's over 100. No [[matter]] -- the [[stories]] are well worth [[telling]]. Amy Madigan is a [[bit]] too [[extreme]] and intrusive in acting overwhelmed and [[insecure]] in the first half of the [[movie]] as the Caucasian NY [[Times]] reporter. This, too, is only a [[minor]] distraction. The [[stories]], all [[true]], are the [[attraction]] and [[although]] two or three [[get]] [[slightly]] [[damaged]] in the translation, most of them make it through just fine.

I [[recommend]] the book as [[essential]] reading to all people I [[recommend]] any [[books]] to. I cannot [[quite]] but this TV-movie in that rarefied [[air]], but it [[certainly]] [[captures]] enough of the flavor to be [[highly]] [[worthwhile]] in its own [[right]]. The autobiography on which this movie is based remains one of the most heart-rending [[book]] I have ever read. It tells the [[unbelievable]] [[storytelling]] of two sisters, both who [[gained]] [[dedication]] and respect [[worked]] well into their 70's as a [[educators]] and a [[orthodontist]], then lived another 30 [[olds]] with dignity. Ruby Dee steals the [[cinematography]] with her [[entirely]] [[subtle]] performance as the rebellious "blacker" [[Gladys]], the dentist. She not only expresses her anger, angst, and [[intellect]] well; she [[allowing]] you know exactly where they've [[coming]] from [[employs]] an [[economies]] of [[mots]]. Diahnn [[Carole]] has the feel of the [[elderly]] sister, the teacher, down [[totally]], but I'm [[freaked]] she never makes me [[think]] that she's over 100. No [[issue]] -- the [[history]] are well worth [[saying]]. Amy Madigan is a [[bitten]] too [[severe]] and intrusive in acting overwhelmed and [[unsure]] in the first half of the [[flick]] as the Caucasian NY [[Time]] reporter. This, too, is only a [[marginal]] distraction. The [[histories]], all [[real]], are the [[lure]] and [[despite]] two or three [[obtain]] [[mildly]] [[harmed]] in the translation, most of them make it through just fine.

I [[recommendation]] the book as [[fundamental]] reading to all people I [[recommendation]] any [[book]] to. I cannot [[utterly]] but this TV-movie in that rarefied [[aeronautics]], but it [[obviously]] [[apprehended]] enough of the flavor to be [[unimaginably]] [[valid]] in its own [[rights]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1207 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I expected a bad [[movie]], and got a [[bad]] movie. But I couldn't really [[imagine]] in my worst fantasy how [[bad]] this movie was. I don't even [[want]] to try to [[explain]] what [[Blood]] [[Surf]] is about. Is not about blood [[surfing]], but a big a$$ crocodile. They are complaining about the fake [[shark]] in Jaws, but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the end. Here the crocodile is shown a lot of times, and it's the [[worst]] fake crocodile I have ever seen, and they don't try to hide it. If you want to see a good fake crocodile watch Lake Placid.

The director had an opportunity to make a decent surf/shark movie, but he had to make a bad b-monster movie. He had the chance to make an original surf movie, but he wanted to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it got some nudity, and a sex scene that is taken straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half bad either, and Kate Fischer looks good. Too bad she doesn't take her top off. The lead actors aren't bad either. They had some potential. The location was beautiful and the movie [[start]] good with some nice surf scenes. The blame is on the untalented writer and director. The dialogue is some of the [[worst]] I have ever seen, and the script is really [[badly]] written, and the director got no talent what so ever, and not much of a fantasy either.

Don't watch it. Even if you want to watch the beautiful Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate nude, and watch Lake Placid if you want some good crocodile action.

3/10 because I'm in a good mood, and Maureen Larrazabal looks good naked, and Kate looks good (but is bad actress,)and Dex Miller, Joel West and Matt Borlenghi did a good job with the piece of sh#t they had to [[work]] with. I expected a bad [[flick]], and got a [[negative]] movie. But I couldn't really [[reckon]] in my worst fantasy how [[wicked]] this movie was. I don't even [[desiring]] to try to [[clarification]] what [[Chrissake]] [[Surfer]] is about. Is not about blood [[surfer]], but a big a$$ crocodile. They are complaining about the fake [[sharks]] in Jaws, but Spielberg was wise and didn't show the shark until the end. Here the crocodile is shown a lot of times, and it's the [[gravest]] fake crocodile I have ever seen, and they don't try to hide it. If you want to see a good fake crocodile watch Lake Placid.

The director had an opportunity to make a decent surf/shark movie, but he had to make a bad b-monster movie. He had the chance to make an original surf movie, but he wanted to make a monster movie. So you have understand how bad this movie is, does it have some good parts? Not really, it got some nudity, and a sex scene that is taken straight out of a playboy movie. The acting isn't half bad either, and Kate Fischer looks good. Too bad she doesn't take her top off. The lead actors aren't bad either. They had some potential. The location was beautiful and the movie [[initiated]] good with some nice surf scenes. The blame is on the untalented writer and director. The dialogue is some of the [[gravest]] I have ever seen, and the script is really [[sorely]] written, and the director got no talent what so ever, and not much of a fantasy either.

Don't watch it. Even if you want to watch the beautiful Kate Fischer. It isn't worth it. Watch Sirens to watch Kate nude, and watch Lake Placid if you want some good crocodile action.

3/10 because I'm in a good mood, and Maureen Larrazabal looks good naked, and Kate looks good (but is bad actress,)and Dex Miller, Joel West and Matt Borlenghi did a good job with the piece of sh#t they had to [[collaborating]] with. --------------------------------------------- Result 1208 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[watched]] this film for 45 [[minutes]] and counted 9 mullets. That's a mullet [[every]] 5 minutes. [[Seriously]] [[though]], this film is living proof that formula works. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[heroine]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. Pure magic. I [[seen]] this film for 45 [[mins]] and counted 9 mullets. That's a mullet [[each]] 5 minutes. [[Earnestly]] [[whilst]], this film is living proof that formula works. If it ain't broke, it don't need fixin. A streetwise-yet-vulnerable [[idol]], a hardened ex-cop martial arts master with a heart of gold and a serial killer with 'issues'. Pure magic. --------------------------------------------- Result 1209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I [[absolutely]] fail to see what is [[funny]] in this film. The [[humor]] [[seems]] to be destined for corpses. It's slow. The [[story]] is too simple to be true. The characters do not raise [[much]] sympathy, a few non-important characters aside. [[Nothing]] surprising [[happens]]. What did the writers of this [[script]] think? "Oooo funny! Let's [[make]] some [[old]] lady's [[high]] on pot! Let's [[make]] them.... giggle! Let's [[make]] them... behave like little [[children]]!! Oooo, yes, that's absolutely [[brilliant]] and original!"

This film has [[irritated]] me most from all the [[films]] I've seen in the last five [[years]]. I [[altogether]] fail to see what is [[hilarious]] in this film. The [[humour]] [[seem]] to be destined for corpses. It's slow. The [[histories]] is too simple to be true. The characters do not raise [[very]] sympathy, a few non-important characters aside. [[Anything]] surprising [[arrives]]. What did the writers of this [[screenplay]] think? "Oooo funny! Let's [[deliver]] some [[longtime]] lady's [[supreme]] on pot! Let's [[deliver]] them.... giggle! Let's [[deliver]] them... behave like little [[enfants]]!! Oooo, yes, that's absolutely [[magnificent]] and original!"

This film has [[indignant]] me most from all the [[cinema]] I've seen in the last five [[ages]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[must]] say that I am fairly [[disappointed]] by this "[[horror]]" movie. I did not get scared [[even]] once while watching it. It [[also]] is not very suspenseful [[either]].... I was able to [[guess]] the ending half [[way]] through the movie... So.. what's [[left]]?

"The Ring" is a trully scary [[movie]]... I wish other movies would stop copying from it (e.g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please [[give]] me some originality.

Will not recommend this movie. I [[should]] say that I am fairly [[disenchanted]] by this "[[monstrosity]]" movie. I did not get scared [[yet]] once while watching it. It [[apart]] is not very suspenseful [[neither]].... I was able to [[suppose]] the ending half [[paths]] through the movie... So.. what's [[exited]]?

"The Ring" is a trully scary [[cinema]]... I wish other movies would stop copying from it (e.g. the trade-mark: long hair). Please [[lend]] me some originality.

Will not recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Oh [[Dear]] [[Lord]], [[How]] on [[Earth]] was any [[part]] of this [[film]] ever [[approved]] by [[anyone]]? It [[reeks]] of cheese from start to [[finish]], but it's not [[even]] [[good]] cheese. It's the scummiest, moldiest, most [[tasteless]] cheese there is, and I cannot believe there is [[anyone]] out there who actually, truly enjoyed it. Yes, if you saw it with a [[load]] of [[drunk]]/stoned [[buddies]] then some bits might be [[funny]] in a sad [[kind]] of [[way]], but for the [[rest]] of the [[audience]] the only entertaining parts are when said group of buddies are throwing popcorn and [[abusive]] insults at each other and the screen. I watched it with an up-for-a-few-laughs guy, having had a few beers in preparation to chuckle away at the film's expected crapness. We got the crapness (plenty of it), but not the chuckles. It doesn't even qualify as a so-bad-it's-good movie. It's just plain bad. Very, very bad. Here's why (look away if you're spoilerphobic): The movie starts out with a guy beating another guy to death. OK, I was a few minutes late in so not sure why this was, but I think I grasped the 'this guy is a bit of a badass who you don't want to mess with' message behind the ingenious scene. Oh, and a guy witnesses it. So, we already have our ultra-evil bad guy, and wussy but cute (apparently) good [[guy]]. Cue Hero. Big Sam steps on the scene in the usual fashion, saving good guy in the usual inane way that only poor action films can accomplish, i.e. Hero is immune to bullets, everyone else falls over rather clumsily. Cue first plot hole. How the bloody hell did Sammy know where this guy was, or that he'd watched the murder. Perhaps this, and the answers to all my plot-hole related questions, was explained in the 2 minutes before I got into the cinema, but I doubt it. In fact, I'm going to stop poking holes in the plot right here, lest I turn the movie into something resembling swiss cheese (which we all know is good cheese). So, the 'plot' (a very generous word to use). Good guy must get to LA, evil guy would rather he didn't, Hero Sam stands between the two. Cue scenery for the next vomit-inducing hour - the passenger plane. As I said, no more poking at plot holes, I'll just leave it there. Passenger plane. Next, the vital ingredient up until now missing from this gem of a movie, and what makes it everything it is - Snakes. Yay! Oh, pause. First we have the introduction to all the obligatory characters that a lame movie must have. Hot, horny couple (see if you can guess how they die), dead-before-any-snakes-even-appear British guy (those pesky Brits, eh?), cute kids, and Jo Brand. For all you Americans that's an English comic famous for her size and unattractiveness. Now that we've met the cast, let's watch all of them die (except of course the cute kids). Don't expect anything original, it's just snake bites on various and ever-increasingly hilarious (really not) parts of the body. Use your imagination, since the film-makers obviously didn't use theirs.

So, that's most of the film wrapped up, so now for the best bit, the ending. As expected, everything is just so happy as the plane lands that everyone in sight starts sucking face. Yep, Ice-cool Sammy included. But wait, we're not all off the plane yet! The last guy to get off is good guy, but just as he does he gets bitten by a (you guessed it) snake (of all things). Clearly this one had been hiding in Mr. Jackson's hair the whole time, since it somehow managed to resist the air pressure trick that the good old hero had employed a few minutes earlier, despite the 200ft constrictor (the one that ate that pesky British bugger) being unable to. So, Sam shoots him and the snake in one fell swoop. At this point I prayed that the movie was about to make a much-needed U-turn and reveal that all along the hero was actually a traitor of some sort. But no. In a kind of icing on the cake way (but with stale cheese, remember), it is revealed that the climax of the film was involving a bullet proof vest. How anyone can think that an audience 10 years ago, let alone in 2006 would be impressed by their ingenuity is beyond me, but it did well in summing up the film.

Actually, we're not quite done yet. After everyone has sucked face (Uncle Sam with leading actress, good guy with Tiffany, token Black guy with token White girl, and the hot couple in a heart warming bout of necrophilia), it's time for good guy and hero to get it on....In Bali!!! Nope, it wasn't at all exciting, the exclamation marks were just there to represent my utter joy at seeing the credits roll. Yes, the final shot of the film is a celebratory surfing trip to convey the message that a bit of male bonding has occurred, and a chance for any morons that actually enjoyed the movie to whoop a few times. That's it. This is the first time I've ever posted a movie review, but I felt so strongly that somebody must speak out against this scourge of cinematography. If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L.Jackson, air hostesses, bad guys, surfing, dogs in bags or English people, then please, please don't see this movie. It will pollute your opinion of all of the above so far that you'll never want to come into contact with any of them ever again. Go see United 93 instead. THAT was good. Oh [[Beloved]] [[Sire]], [[Mode]] on [[Terra]] was any [[parties]] of this [[movie]] ever [[authorised]] by [[everybody]]? It [[smell]] of cheese from start to [[complete]], but it's not [[yet]] [[alright]] cheese. It's the scummiest, moldiest, most [[tacky]] cheese there is, and I cannot believe there is [[everyone]] out there who actually, truly enjoyed it. Yes, if you saw it with a [[onus]] of [[drunkard]]/stoned [[cronies]] then some bits might be [[droll]] in a sad [[genre]] of [[camino]], but for the [[roosting]] of the [[spectators]] the only entertaining parts are when said group of buddies are throwing popcorn and [[unseemly]] insults at each other and the screen. I watched it with an up-for-a-few-laughs guy, having had a few beers in preparation to chuckle away at the film's expected crapness. We got the crapness (plenty of it), but not the chuckles. It doesn't even qualify as a so-bad-it's-good movie. It's just plain bad. Very, very bad. Here's why (look away if you're spoilerphobic): The movie starts out with a guy beating another guy to death. OK, I was a few minutes late in so not sure why this was, but I think I grasped the 'this guy is a bit of a badass who you don't want to mess with' message behind the ingenious scene. Oh, and a guy witnesses it. So, we already have our ultra-evil bad guy, and wussy but cute (apparently) good [[bloke]]. Cue Hero. Big Sam steps on the scene in the usual fashion, saving good guy in the usual inane way that only poor action films can accomplish, i.e. Hero is immune to bullets, everyone else falls over rather clumsily. Cue first plot hole. How the bloody hell did Sammy know where this guy was, or that he'd watched the murder. Perhaps this, and the answers to all my plot-hole related questions, was explained in the 2 minutes before I got into the cinema, but I doubt it. In fact, I'm going to stop poking holes in the plot right here, lest I turn the movie into something resembling swiss cheese (which we all know is good cheese). So, the 'plot' (a very generous word to use). Good guy must get to LA, evil guy would rather he didn't, Hero Sam stands between the two. Cue scenery for the next vomit-inducing hour - the passenger plane. As I said, no more poking at plot holes, I'll just leave it there. Passenger plane. Next, the vital ingredient up until now missing from this gem of a movie, and what makes it everything it is - Snakes. Yay! Oh, pause. First we have the introduction to all the obligatory characters that a lame movie must have. Hot, horny couple (see if you can guess how they die), dead-before-any-snakes-even-appear British guy (those pesky Brits, eh?), cute kids, and Jo Brand. For all you Americans that's an English comic famous for her size and unattractiveness. Now that we've met the cast, let's watch all of them die (except of course the cute kids). Don't expect anything original, it's just snake bites on various and ever-increasingly hilarious (really not) parts of the body. Use your imagination, since the film-makers obviously didn't use theirs.

So, that's most of the film wrapped up, so now for the best bit, the ending. As expected, everything is just so happy as the plane lands that everyone in sight starts sucking face. Yep, Ice-cool Sammy included. But wait, we're not all off the plane yet! The last guy to get off is good guy, but just as he does he gets bitten by a (you guessed it) snake (of all things). Clearly this one had been hiding in Mr. Jackson's hair the whole time, since it somehow managed to resist the air pressure trick that the good old hero had employed a few minutes earlier, despite the 200ft constrictor (the one that ate that pesky British bugger) being unable to. So, Sam shoots him and the snake in one fell swoop. At this point I prayed that the movie was about to make a much-needed U-turn and reveal that all along the hero was actually a traitor of some sort. But no. In a kind of icing on the cake way (but with stale cheese, remember), it is revealed that the climax of the film was involving a bullet proof vest. How anyone can think that an audience 10 years ago, let alone in 2006 would be impressed by their ingenuity is beyond me, but it did well in summing up the film.

Actually, we're not quite done yet. After everyone has sucked face (Uncle Sam with leading actress, good guy with Tiffany, token Black guy with token White girl, and the hot couple in a heart warming bout of necrophilia), it's time for good guy and hero to get it on....In Bali!!! Nope, it wasn't at all exciting, the exclamation marks were just there to represent my utter joy at seeing the credits roll. Yes, the final shot of the film is a celebratory surfing trip to convey the message that a bit of male bonding has occurred, and a chance for any morons that actually enjoyed the movie to whoop a few times. That's it. This is the first time I've ever posted a movie review, but I felt so strongly that somebody must speak out against this scourge of cinematography. If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L.Jackson, air hostesses, bad guys, surfing, dogs in bags or English people, then please, please don't see this movie. It will pollute your opinion of all of the above so far that you'll never want to come into contact with any of them ever again. Go see United 93 instead. THAT was good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1212 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The title says it all. "[[Tail]] [[Gunner]] [[Joe]]" was a [[tag]] [[given]] to the Senator which [[relied]] upon the ignorance of the [[public]] about World War [[II]] [[aircraft]]. The [[rear]] facing moving guns relied upon a latch that would prevent the rear gunner from shooting off the tail of the airplane by preventing the gun from firing when it pointed at the tail. When the Senator was [[practicing]] on the ground one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[airplane]]. He couldn't have [[done]] that if the gun had been [[properly]] aligned. The gunnery officer [[responsible]] for that admitted, in public, before a [[camera]], that he was [[responsible]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senator]]. The fact that the film did not report that fact, shows how one-sided it is. This film was designed to do one thing, destroy the [[reputation]] of a complex person.

A much better [[program]] was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary disadvantages to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public likes simple stories, one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. The title says it all. "[[Pecker]] [[Sniper]] [[Kawa]]" was a [[etiquette]] [[yielded]] to the Senator which [[rested]] upon the ignorance of the [[populace]] about World War [[SECONDLY]] [[aeroplane]]. The [[backseat]] facing moving guns relied upon a latch that would prevent the rear gunner from shooting off the tail of the airplane by preventing the gun from firing when it pointed at the tail. When the Senator was [[exercising]] on the ground one day, he succeeded in shooting off the tail of the [[aeronautics]]. He couldn't have [[effected]] that if the gun had been [[correctly]] aligned. The gunnery officer [[accountable]] for that admitted, in public, before a [[cameras]], that he was [[liable]] -- he had made the error, not the [[Senators]]. The fact that the film did not report that fact, shows how one-sided it is. This film was designed to do one thing, destroy the [[repute]] of a complex person.

A much better [[programs]] was the PBS special done on him. He was a hard working, intelligent, ambitious politician who overcame extraordinary disadvantages to rise to extraordinary heights. He made some mistakes, some serious mistakes, but shooting the tail off an airplane was not one of them.

The popularity of this film is due to the fact that the public likes simple stories, one=sided stories, so that they don't have to think. --------------------------------------------- Result 1213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Randall "Memphis" Raines is a retired master car thief who is forced back into the "game" when his younger brother [[faces]] death for not filling an order for British [[crime]] boss Raymond Calitri. The job involves "[[lifting]]" 50 cars in 24 hours or Calitri will [[enact]] his punishment. [[So]] Raines quickly assembles a crew he can trust and sets about the task to hand. But the police are on to him and some of the cars on the list are not [[easy]] takes. It would seem a near impossible job to complete.

It's got quite a cast has Gone In 60 Seconds, Nicolas Cage, Angelina [[Jolie]], Robert Duvall, Will Patton, Delroy Lindo, Vinnie Jones, Giovanni Ribisi, Christopher Ecclestone, Scott Caan & Timothy Olyphant. All of whom deserve better. Enough acting horsepower there to propel a Porsche 998 Turbo. Trouble is, is that this is very much a case of too many cars overstocking the car park, mucho [[characters]], not enough zest. From the off we are in no doubt that this is a Bruckheimer/Simpson production, bonkers script laced with loud noises and lashings of cheese, scattergun editing, and directed with [[sledgehammer]] subtly by Dominic Sena. It's essentially a big budget remake of H.B. Halicki's 1974 indie movie of the same name, with the premise offering up the potential for an [[adrenalin]] [[fuelled]] car based movie. Potential that [[sadly]] is never realised. There's one or two high impact moments, daft for [[sure]], but enjoyable none the less. But if you pardon the pun, the film never gets out of first gear, it's more content to labour with its [[ream]] of characters who [[mope]] about trying to make the boorish [[screenplay]] {Scott Rosenberg} [[work]].

[[Car]] fans will get [[something]] from it {the [[cars]] are ace on the eye}, as will fans of [[unintentional]] comedy movies {check out Ecclestone's carpenter grief moment}. But no, it's really rather [[poor]] all told. 4/10 Randall "Memphis" Raines is a retired master car thief who is forced back into the "game" when his younger brother [[facing]] death for not filling an order for British [[offending]] boss Raymond Calitri. The job involves "[[hoisting]]" 50 cars in 24 hours or Calitri will [[enactment]] his punishment. [[Thereby]] Raines quickly assembles a crew he can trust and sets about the task to hand. But the police are on to him and some of the cars on the list are not [[uncomplicated]] takes. It would seem a near impossible job to complete.

It's got quite a cast has Gone In 60 Seconds, Nicolas Cage, Angelina [[Juli]], Robert Duvall, Will Patton, Delroy Lindo, Vinnie Jones, Giovanni Ribisi, Christopher Ecclestone, Scott Caan & Timothy Olyphant. All of whom deserve better. Enough acting horsepower there to propel a Porsche 998 Turbo. Trouble is, is that this is very much a case of too many cars overstocking the car park, mucho [[attribute]], not enough zest. From the off we are in no doubt that this is a Bruckheimer/Simpson production, bonkers script laced with loud noises and lashings of cheese, scattergun editing, and directed with [[mallet]] subtly by Dominic Sena. It's essentially a big budget remake of H.B. Halicki's 1974 indie movie of the same name, with the premise offering up the potential for an [[adrenaline]] [[spurred]] car based movie. Potential that [[tragically]] is never realised. There's one or two high impact moments, daft for [[convinced]], but enjoyable none the less. But if you pardon the pun, the film never gets out of first gear, it's more content to labour with its [[hone]] of characters who [[depressive]] about trying to make the boorish [[scenarios]] {Scott Rosenberg} [[cooperation]].

[[Auto]] fans will get [[anything]] from it {the [[auto]] are ace on the eye}, as will fans of [[accidental]] comedy movies {check out Ecclestone's carpenter grief moment}. But no, it's really rather [[poorest]] all told. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have [[enjoyed]] Criminal [[Intent]] series of Law and [[Order]] for a [[long]] [[time]]. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is rather [[hard]] and seems a bit bitter in the Criminal Intent [[Series]]. [[See]] her other side in this [[movie]].

This [[movie]] shows the [[marvelous]] soft side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal Intent [[fan]] this movie is a [[revelry]] in her acting and you get a pretty darn good yarn of family [[hardships]] in the South.

I did not like [[Albert]] Finneys role in this [[movie]] because he did such a convincing acting [[job]] of the older [[Southern]] [[fellow]] that is hard headed and intolerant and unaccepting of [[change]]. He reminds me of so many men from my youth and the portrayal is divine, but you will likely find him hard to like in this movie.

Katryn Erbe is easy to like in this movie and why I [[recommend]] it as a 10 star for Criminal Intent, law and order fans. I have [[liked]] Criminal [[Aimed]] series of Law and [[Ordering]] for a [[largo]] [[period]]. Kathryn Erbe, Det. Alexandra Eames, the female detective is rather [[stiff]] and seems a bit bitter in the Criminal Intent [[Serial]]. [[Consults]] her other side in this [[flick]].

This [[flick]] shows the [[glamorous]] soft side of this talented actresses and if you are a Criminal Intent [[groupie]] this movie is a [[jubilation]] in her acting and you get a pretty darn good yarn of family [[hardship]] in the South.

I did not like [[Alberto]] Finneys role in this [[cinematographic]] because he did such a convincing acting [[jobs]] of the older [[Southerly]] [[coworkers]] that is hard headed and intolerant and unaccepting of [[modify]]. He reminds me of so many men from my youth and the portrayal is divine, but you will likely find him hard to like in this movie.

Katryn Erbe is easy to like in this movie and why I [[recommendations]] it as a 10 star for Criminal Intent, law and order fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Let]] me give a quick summery of the film: A rotten, rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he grants 3 wishes but, being good natured, also helps [[Max]] with his personal life, as he has to deal with bullies and a father mixed up in organized crime. [[During]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's [[dismal]] rap [[skills]]).

This movie proves what we all know: Athletes need to stick to sports. I admit that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but EVERYTHING about this [[waste]] of film is horrible. The [[characters]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[even]] worth mentioning, the dialog is a joke, and Shaq is only a quarter of the problem. Hell, even if Denzel Washington played Kazaam this movie would still be a joke. I know that the movie only drew ANYBODY was because Shaq was so big (no pun intended) at the time. I honestly cannot think of a [[single]] [[positive]] [[thing]] to say about this [[waste]] of [[time]]. Shaq should have put the time had used to make this movie toward practicing free throws. [[Allowing]] me give a quick summery of the film: A rotten, rude kid named Max stumbles upon a radio that contains Kazaam: a rapping genie. Like all genies, he grants 3 wishes but, being good natured, also helps [[Maxie]] with his personal life, as he has to deal with bullies and a father mixed up in organized crime. [[Onto]] all this, Kazaam raps from time to time, (also showcasing Shaq's [[grim]] rap [[aptitude]]).

This movie proves what we all know: Athletes need to stick to sports. I admit that it never looked like an Oscar-worthy movie, but EVERYTHING about this [[wastes]] of film is horrible. The [[personage]] are either unlikable or stupid, the plot is not [[yet]] worth mentioning, the dialog is a joke, and Shaq is only a quarter of the problem. Hell, even if Denzel Washington played Kazaam this movie would still be a joke. I know that the movie only drew ANYBODY was because Shaq was so big (no pun intended) at the time. I honestly cannot think of a [[lonely]] [[favourable]] [[stuff]] to say about this [[wastes]] of [[times]]. Shaq should have put the time had used to make this movie toward practicing free throws. --------------------------------------------- Result 1216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I am sad that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be made into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was barely [[shown]] in the film , [[probably]] the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and Bloody Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[script]]. Instead we were forced to watch fictitious characters that never developed into anyone we cared about. how sad. The costumes were [[wonderful]] however, as was the location shooting in Missouri. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and try again, or some other film maker will look into the tremendous wealth of material to write a screen play on . I am sad that a period of history that is so fascinating and so rich in material for film can be made into a ho-hum event . Wm C Quantrill was barely [[revealed]] in the film , [[indubitably]] the most intriquing figure of the period. Frank James was never mentioned, Cole Younger , ditto , and Bloody Bill Anderson , who would weep for his murdered sister every time he went into battle was completely absent in the [[hyphen]]. Instead we were forced to watch fictitious characters that never developed into anyone we cared about. how sad. The costumes were [[funky]] however, as was the location shooting in Missouri. I hope Ang Lee will make another film from the period and try again, or some other film maker will look into the tremendous wealth of material to write a screen play on . --------------------------------------------- Result 1217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Women]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's [[film]] Piedras. Although editor's [[cut]] here and there might [[help]] the film, it is exciting and enjoyable with an [[intense]] [[mark]] from [[Pedro]] Almodovar's [[latest]] [[films]]. 5 [[different]] [[women]] are [[coping]] with their male [[partners]] and families. Beginning with [[several]] [[different]] [[stories]] bound to [[meet]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[portraits]] his women [[characters]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society lady with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[house]] madam taking [[care]] of her [[disabled]] [[daughter]], a [[drug]] addict [[dancer]] obsessed with her [[former]] [[boyfriend]] and a taxi-driver taking [[care]] of her late husband's [[disturbed]] kids, all [[roaming]] the streets of Madrid in well [[designed]] scenes. [[Using]] some of Almodovar's [[familiar]] actresses, the [[director]] [[succeeds]] in it's [[first]] [[film]] to give depth to all the [[characters]] sharing the [[film]], and to [[create]] [[genuine]] [[sympathy]] with each of them. The [[women]] [[controls]] the plot [[line]], and the [[men]] are bound to be [[left]] with each other, [[eventually]]... [[Surprisingly]] good for a [[first]] [[film]], and worth the [[time]] in any [[standard]]. It is [[noticeable]] that [[Salazar]] [[hesitated]] in some needed [[guidelines]] to the actresses, but an impressible [[act]] is [[shown]] anyway on the screen, [[especially]] by Monica Cervera, which [[played]] in his former short [[film]].

A [[must]] to all Almodovar's [[fans]], and [[enjoyable]] to all. [[Mujer]] have never looked so attractive and pathetic as in Salazar's [[flick]] Piedras. Although editor's [[chop]] here and there might [[aiding]] the film, it is exciting and enjoyable with an [[intensive]] [[markup]] from [[Peter]] Almodovar's [[newer]] [[movie]]. 5 [[several]] [[girl]] are [[adapting]] with their male [[partner]] and families. Beginning with [[multiple]] [[multiple]] [[history]] bound to [[cater]] as the plot goes on, Salazar [[headshots]] his women [[features]] in the same neurotic and border-line behaviour familiar to Almodovar. A kleptomaniac high society lady with a fattish to smaller shoes, a burlesque [[housing]] madam taking [[caring]] of her [[incapacitated]] [[girlie]], a [[pharmaceuticals]] addict [[dancers]] obsessed with her [[old]] [[dude]] and a taxi-driver taking [[caring]] of her late husband's [[bothered]] kids, all [[wandering]] the streets of Madrid in well [[destined]] scenes. [[Utilize]] some of Almodovar's [[colloquial]] actresses, the [[headmaster]] [[succeed]] in it's [[firstly]] [[cinematography]] to give depth to all the [[features]] sharing the [[kino]], and to [[creating]] [[real]] [[condolences]] with each of them. The [[wife]] [[monitoring]] the plot [[linea]], and the [[male]] are bound to be [[gauche]] with each other, [[ultimately]]... [[Unimaginably]] good for a [[fiirst]] [[flick]], and worth the [[period]] in any [[standards]]. It is [[notable]] that [[Yap]] [[grinned]] in some needed [[directives]] to the actresses, but an impressible [[law]] is [[evidenced]] anyway on the screen, [[namely]] by Monica Cervera, which [[effected]] in his former short [[cinematic]].

A [[should]] to all Almodovar's [[amateurs]], and [[pleasurable]] to all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "[[Party]] [[Girl]]" capitalizes on the [[tremendous]] [[charm]] of [[Parker]] Posey. In fact, at times, the movie seems to be a vehicle in which Ms. Posey is allow to play herself, as she normally is in real life.

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treat]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. Von Scherler Mayer takes us on a wild trip into lower Manhattan to show us this aimless soul whose life is dedicated to have fun in the different clubs she constantly frequents. This is an era that still was more naive than what that area and the adjacent Meat Market districts became. At least, there are no pretensions in the films and we see down to earth people going about their lives in a normal way, if we can call it that way.

Parker Posey makes an amazing Mary. It's because of Parker Posey we enjoy the movie more than if another actress would have played Mary. She is the whole picture. The rest of the cast is good. "[[Parte]] [[Chick]]" capitalizes on the [[impressive]] [[amulet]] of [[Barker]] Posey. In fact, at times, the movie seems to be a vehicle in which Ms. Posey is allow to play herself, as she normally is in real life.

The film, directed by Daisy Von Scherler Mayer, is a [[treatment]] for Ms. Posey's fans. Ms. Von Scherler Mayer takes us on a wild trip into lower Manhattan to show us this aimless soul whose life is dedicated to have fun in the different clubs she constantly frequents. This is an era that still was more naive than what that area and the adjacent Meat Market districts became. At least, there are no pretensions in the films and we see down to earth people going about their lives in a normal way, if we can call it that way.

Parker Posey makes an amazing Mary. It's because of Parker Posey we enjoy the movie more than if another actress would have played Mary. She is the whole picture. The rest of the cast is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]]

I have seen this movie many times. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not [[recently]]. However, Etched in my memory never to [[leave]] me is a scene in which Mickey Rooney, -"Killer Mears" knows that he is to be executed and it's getting close to the moment of truth, He dances, and cries, and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the gambit of ever emotion. Never have I seen such a [[brilliant]] performance by any actor living or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey Rooney, yes, "Andy Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my opinion to myself for years thinking, surely I must be alone in this viewpoint. About 15 years or so after I saw this film for the last time on television, I chanced to read the old Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The question was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the question was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the greatest actors of all time, whom then do YOU consider to be among the greatest actors?" His answer was, "Peter Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I immediatly flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with Mikey Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot remember a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I gave it a 10 just on the face of his performance.

I have seen this movie many times. At least a Dozen. But unfortunatly not [[freshly]]. However, Etched in my memory never to [[walkout]] me is a scene in which Mickey Rooney, -"Killer Mears" knows that he is to be executed and it's getting close to the moment of truth, He dances, and cries, and laughs, he vacillates from hesteria to euphoria and runs the gambit of ever emotion. Never have I seen such a [[sumptuous]] performance by any actor living or dead, past or present. It was then I know for sure that Mickey Rooney, yes, "Andy Hardy" was and is a actor of great genius. However I kept it, my opinion to myself for years thinking, surely I must be alone in this viewpoint. About 15 years or so after I saw this film for the last time on television, I chanced to read the old Q & A section of the Los Angeles Times. The question was posed to Lawrence Olivier, and the question was: "Mr. Olivier You are considered one of the greatest actors of all time, whom then do YOU consider to be among the greatest actors?" His answer was, "Peter Finch and Mickey Rooney" I was stunned, but not surprised. I immediatly flashed back to his "Killer Mears" And I felt very good for having seen this great ability in him, and now having my view supported by another whos work I admired.. Later of course there was "Bill" and many other great moments with Mikey Rooney. This film, "The Last Mile" should be seen by all acting students. I Frankly cannot remember a great deal about the film after all these years but Mr. Rooney in it, will never leave me. If anyone out there remembers this film the same as I do? I would be interested in hearing from you. For this picture etched in my heart alone I gave it a 10 just on the face of his performance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] There are some [[extremely]] talented black [[directors]] Spike Lee,Carl Franklin,[[Billy]] Dukes,Denzel and a host of others who [[bring]] well [[deserved]] credit to the [[film]] [[industry]] . Then there are the Wayans Brothers who at one [[time]](15,[[years]] [[ago]]) had an [[extremely]] [[funny]] [[television]] show'In [[Living]] Colour' that launched the [[career]] of Jim Carrey amongst others . [[Now]] we have [[stupidity]] [[substituting]] for humour and gross out [[gags]](toilet [[humour]]) as the standard operating [[procedure]] . People are not as stupid as those portrayed in 'Little Man' they couldn't possibly be . A baby with a full set of teeth and a tattoo is accepted as being only months old ? Baby comes with a five o'clock shadow that he shaves off . It is intimated that the baby has sex with his foster mother behind her husbands,Darryl's, back .Oh, yea that is just hilarious . As a master criminal 'Little Man' is the stupidest on planet earth . He stashes a stolen rock that is just huge in a woman's purse and then has to pursue her . Co-star Chazz Palminteri,why Chazz, offers the best line: "I'm surrounded by morons." Based, without credit, on a Chuck Jones cartoon, Baby Buggy Bunny . This is far too stupid to be [[even]] remotely [[funny]] . A clue as to how [[bad]] this film is Damon Wayans appeared on Jay Leno the other night,prior to the [[BAT]] awards and he did not,[[even]] [[mention]] this [[dreadful]] [[movie]] . When will Hollywood [[stop]] green lighting trash from the Wayans Brothers . When they [[get]] over their white mans [[guilt]] in all [[likelihood]] . There are some [[remarkably]] talented black [[administrators]] Spike Lee,Carl Franklin,[[Billie]] Dukes,Denzel and a host of others who [[bringing]] well [[deserve]] credit to the [[flick]] [[industria]] . Then there are the Wayans Brothers who at one [[moment]](15,[[olds]] [[beforehand]]) had an [[supremely]] [[hilarious]] [[tv]] show'In [[Inhabit]] Colour' that launched the [[professions]] of Jim Carrey amongst others . [[Presently]] we have [[craziness]] [[alternating]] for humour and gross out [[jaws]](toilet [[mood]]) as the standard operating [[procedures]] . People are not as stupid as those portrayed in 'Little Man' they couldn't possibly be . A baby with a full set of teeth and a tattoo is accepted as being only months old ? Baby comes with a five o'clock shadow that he shaves off . It is intimated that the baby has sex with his foster mother behind her husbands,Darryl's, back .Oh, yea that is just hilarious . As a master criminal 'Little Man' is the stupidest on planet earth . He stashes a stolen rock that is just huge in a woman's purse and then has to pursue her . Co-star Chazz Palminteri,why Chazz, offers the best line: "I'm surrounded by morons." Based, without credit, on a Chuck Jones cartoon, Baby Buggy Bunny . This is far too stupid to be [[yet]] remotely [[droll]] . A clue as to how [[wicked]] this film is Damon Wayans appeared on Jay Leno the other night,prior to the [[WALLOP]] awards and he did not,[[yet]] [[referenced]] this [[gruesome]] [[film]] . When will Hollywood [[stopping]] green lighting trash from the Wayans Brothers . When they [[gets]] over their white mans [[culpa]] in all [[possibility]] . --------------------------------------------- Result 1221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] *SPOILERS*

This is only the second pay-per-view I've given a [[perfect]] 10, the first being the 1991 Royal Rumble. It was full of exciting matches that weren't memorable, just disposable [[fun]]. And that's why I [[love]] it.

The opening match between Razor and DiBiase, as well as Ludvig Borga vs. Marty Jannetty were the only low points. They were OK matches, but DiBiase deserved better in his final pay per view match. These days, a match like this would have run-ins and a bigger climax for Razor's first major babyface push. And Jannetty, fresh off a Intercontinental title run, could have had a better match with Borga. But I don't think anyone really cared. They just needed a Borga push on pay per view television.

IRS and The Kid were great, as were Michaels and Perfect. I wish Perfect could have won, but Michaels lies down for no one. Notice how right after this, he left the WWF so he wouldn't have to job to Razor. Bret Hart had two great brawls with Doink (notice how everyone's best match is against the Hit-man) and then Lawler. Their rivalry was a classic; that's why that year's Feud of the Year was a no-brainer. How often do you see two legends win Feud of the Year this late in their careers?

The Steiners-Heavenly Bodies match was one of the best of the year. Who knew the Bodies could hold their own against one of the best teams ever?

Many say that the Undertaker-Giant Gonzalez match was a waste of time. But I loved it. Remember, what made the old WWF (as in, pre-WWE) great was the mix of athleticism and freak show. Is there a soul out there who didn't like Akeem?

The main event wasn't bad, although nowhere near match of the year status. They put Lex Luger over well, but made a wise choice in having Yokozuna keep the belt. He was the first heel since Superstar Graham to hold the belt for more than two months. Nowadays, heels are champions all the time. But from the beginning of the WWWF through the WWF of the 90s, if you blinked, you missed a heel title reign.

As an old school wrestling fan, this one and SummerSlam '88 are my favorites. *SPOILERS*

This is only the second pay-per-view I've given a [[irreproachable]] 10, the first being the 1991 Royal Rumble. It was full of exciting matches that weren't memorable, just disposable [[droll]]. And that's why I [[iike]] it.

The opening match between Razor and DiBiase, as well as Ludvig Borga vs. Marty Jannetty were the only low points. They were OK matches, but DiBiase deserved better in his final pay per view match. These days, a match like this would have run-ins and a bigger climax for Razor's first major babyface push. And Jannetty, fresh off a Intercontinental title run, could have had a better match with Borga. But I don't think anyone really cared. They just needed a Borga push on pay per view television.

IRS and The Kid were great, as were Michaels and Perfect. I wish Perfect could have won, but Michaels lies down for no one. Notice how right after this, he left the WWF so he wouldn't have to job to Razor. Bret Hart had two great brawls with Doink (notice how everyone's best match is against the Hit-man) and then Lawler. Their rivalry was a classic; that's why that year's Feud of the Year was a no-brainer. How often do you see two legends win Feud of the Year this late in their careers?

The Steiners-Heavenly Bodies match was one of the best of the year. Who knew the Bodies could hold their own against one of the best teams ever?

Many say that the Undertaker-Giant Gonzalez match was a waste of time. But I loved it. Remember, what made the old WWF (as in, pre-WWE) great was the mix of athleticism and freak show. Is there a soul out there who didn't like Akeem?

The main event wasn't bad, although nowhere near match of the year status. They put Lex Luger over well, but made a wise choice in having Yokozuna keep the belt. He was the first heel since Superstar Graham to hold the belt for more than two months. Nowadays, heels are champions all the time. But from the beginning of the WWWF through the WWF of the 90s, if you blinked, you missed a heel title reign.

As an old school wrestling fan, this one and SummerSlam '88 are my favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I was aware of Rohmer's [[admiration]] for the late [[works]] of the ones he [[considered]] like [[great]] cineasts, and that [[normal]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very last movies ; [[yes]], the "politique des auteurs" also has its dark side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself [[wanted]], for what may be his [[last]] [[movie]], to perpetuate this tradition of great directors, who [[made]] a last senile movie, by adapting Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[ridiculous]] aesthetic codes, witch just look like a parody of Rosselini's last movies (the ones he made for TV from Descartes or Marx's lives).

In his version of "Perceval", Rohmer refused to film real landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age classical representation of things. The director apparently changed his mind when the XVII century is involved, and films actors, dressed like 1600's peasants reciting their antic text surrounded by contemporary trees and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more ridiculous than Luchini and its fake trees. It's not that the story itself is stupid, but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices seems so childish and amateurism that it rapidly becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not even talking about the irritating pronunciation of the actors, the annoying and sad humorist tries by Rodolphe Pauly, the ridiculous soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the strange fascination for trasvestisment!).

The radical aesthetic of the film ultimately makes it looks like a joke, which mixes a soft-erotic movie made for TV with theological scholastic discussions (sic !). At the beginning of the movie, Rohmer teaches us that the original french region of the story is now disfigured by modernity, and that's why he had to film "L'Astrée" in other parts of the country. However, I'm sure the movie would have look more modern and interesting, if Rohmer would have actually still filmed the same story in a modern area with same narrative codes and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. I was aware of Rohmer's [[awe]] for the late [[collaborate]] of the ones he [[regarded]] like [[super]] cineasts, and that [[usual]] spectators generally considered as artistic failures (as Renoir's or Chaplin's very last movies ; [[yep]], the "politique des auteurs" also has its dark side). But with "Les amours d'Astrée et de Céladon", it's as if Rohmer himself [[wished]], for what may be his [[latter]] [[films]], to perpetuate this tradition of great directors, who [[effected]] a last senile movie, by adapting Urfé's "L'astrée", with [[farcical]] aesthetic codes, witch just look like a parody of Rosselini's last movies (the ones he made for TV from Descartes or Marx's lives).

In his version of "Perceval", Rohmer refused to film real landscapes in order to give a re-transcription of what may have been a middle age classical representation of things. The director apparently changed his mind when the XVII century is involved, and films actors, dressed like 1600's peasants reciting their antic text surrounded by contemporary trees and landscapes. But the all thing looks even more ridiculous than Luchini and its fake trees. It's not that the story itself is stupid, but the way Rohmer mixes naturalism with artifices seems so childish and amateurism that it rapidly becomes involuntarily funny (and I'm not even talking about the irritating pronunciation of the actors, the annoying and sad humorist tries by Rodolphe Pauly, the ridiculous soft-erotic tone, the poor musical tentatives, or the strange fascination for trasvestisment!).

The radical aesthetic of the film ultimately makes it looks like a joke, which mixes a soft-erotic movie made for TV with theological scholastic discussions (sic !). At the beginning of the movie, Rohmer teaches us that the original french region of the story is now disfigured by modernity, and that's why he had to film "L'Astrée" in other parts of the country. However, I'm sure the movie would have look more modern and interesting, if Rohmer would have actually still filmed the same story in a modern area with same narrative codes and artistically decisions. This film may interest a few historians, but most of the cinephiles may laugh at this last and sad Rohmer's movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] After the [[success]] of the second instalment, Richard Curtis and Ben [[Elton]] decided that Blackadder should have a third appearance. This time instead of Tudor times or Elizabethan times, Edmund Blackadder (BAFTA nominated Rowan Atkinson) is living in the time of the French Revolution. Accompanied by the now stupid but lovable Baldrick (Tony Robinson) Blackadder is the "faithful" butler to George, the Prince Regent of Wales (Hugh Laurie). Throughout this third series to the [[wonderfully]] written sitcom Blackadder tries everything he can to get rich and [[powerful]]. He tries electing a lord for a rotten borough, tries to sell a book, tries to win a bet about The Scarlet Pimpernel, tries to be a highway man and finally poses as the Prince. This is a very [[good]] [[instalment]] to the popular comedy. Includes appearances from Robbie Coltrane, Tim McInnerny, Miranda Richardson and Stephen Fry. It won the BAFTA for Best Comedy Series, and it was nominated for Best Design and Best Make Up. Rowan Atkinson was number 18 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 24 on The Comedians' Comedian, and he was number 8 on Britain's Favourite Comedian, Edmund Blackadder was number 3 on The 100 Greatest TV Characters, and he was number 3 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and Blackadder (all four series) was number 2 on Britain's Best Sitcom. Outstanding! After the [[avail]] of the second instalment, Richard Curtis and Ben [[Alton]] decided that Blackadder should have a third appearance. This time instead of Tudor times or Elizabethan times, Edmund Blackadder (BAFTA nominated Rowan Atkinson) is living in the time of the French Revolution. Accompanied by the now stupid but lovable Baldrick (Tony Robinson) Blackadder is the "faithful" butler to George, the Prince Regent of Wales (Hugh Laurie). Throughout this third series to the [[marvellously]] written sitcom Blackadder tries everything he can to get rich and [[forceful]]. He tries electing a lord for a rotten borough, tries to sell a book, tries to win a bet about The Scarlet Pimpernel, tries to be a highway man and finally poses as the Prince. This is a very [[alright]] [[instalments]] to the popular comedy. Includes appearances from Robbie Coltrane, Tim McInnerny, Miranda Richardson and Stephen Fry. It won the BAFTA for Best Comedy Series, and it was nominated for Best Design and Best Make Up. Rowan Atkinson was number 18 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 24 on The Comedians' Comedian, and he was number 8 on Britain's Favourite Comedian, Edmund Blackadder was number 3 on The 100 Greatest TV Characters, and he was number 3 on The World's Greatest Comedy Characters, and Blackadder (all four series) was number 2 on Britain's Best Sitcom. Outstanding! --------------------------------------------- Result 1224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] the same vein as Natural Born [[Killers]], another [[movie]] that was not so popular with [[critics]] because of its excessive violence but that I [[also]] [[loved]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[clearly]] glamorizes violence, but I like to [[think]] that it [[turns]] that [[around]] in the final act. Kind of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[drugs]] at first, but shows the [[bad]] side by the [[end]] of the movie, which is far [[worse]] than the [[good]] side is good. David Duchovny plays [[Brian]] [[Kessler]], an artistic yuppie with an [[even]] more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[understand]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and [[Michelle]] Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners ([[Brad]] Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, [[sees]] the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to [[deal]] with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a curious [[ability]] to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to clichés or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is fascinated with Early's status as an [[outlaw]], as seen in the scene where [[Brian]] shoots Early's [[gun]]. Never having fired a [[gun]] before, he's as [[fascinated]] as a [[little]] [[kid]]. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele [[reveals]] such things in her childlike [[way]] as the fact that Early "[[broke]] her" of [[smoking]] and that she's not [[allowed]] to [[drink]] (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it [[seems]] a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder [[sites]] and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. [[For]] the same vein as Natural Born [[Assassins]], another [[filmmaking]] that was not so popular with [[critiques]] because of its excessive violence but that I [[similarly]] [[worshipped]], Kalifornia is a movie that [[patently]] glamorizes violence, but I like to [[thinks]] that it [[revolves]] that [[about]] in the final act. Kind of like how The Basketball Diaries glamorizes [[medicines]] at first, but shows the [[unfavorable]] side by the [[ends]] of the movie, which is far [[worst]] than the [[alright]] side is good. David Duchovny plays [[Bryan]] [[Jerome]], an artistic yuppie with an [[yet]] more artistically yuppie girlfriend, who is into that violent sexy black and white photography generally reserved for, I don't know where, places where nudity passes for art. Maybe it really does and I just don't [[comprehend]] it. At any rate, Brian and Carrie (Duchovny and [[Michele]] Forbes, who fits the role flawlessly), make the perfect couple to go on a documentary tour of famous murder sites. Brian, the writer, will write the book, Carrie can take the pictures.

Being artistic types, Brian and Carrie are not quite financially prepared for such a trip, so they put out an ad for someone to share gas and travel expenses, and are contacted by Early Grace and Adele Corners ([[Bard]] Pitt and Juliette Lewis). Early is on parole and assigned to janitorial work at the local university by his parole officer, [[deems]] the ad on a bulletin board, and decides to leave the state for a while, violating his parole but also leaving the scene of his landlord's murder so he won't have to [[addressing]] with a pesky murder investigation. Two birds with one stone, you know.

The movie has a curious [[skills]] to portray two stereotypes, the artsy yuppies and the greasy trailer trash, without resorting to clichés or even ending up with caricatures of either type. Brian and Carrie are artsy liberals, but while Carrie catches on to Early and Adele, Brian is fascinated with Early's status as an [[proscribed]], as seen in the scene where [[Bryan]] shoots Early's [[shotgun]]. Never having fired a [[shotgun]] before, he's as [[enthralled]] as a [[tiny]] [[infantile]]. While Adele and Carrie are back at a hotel and Adele [[unveils]] such things in her childlike [[pathway]] as the fact that Early "[[snapped]] her" of [[smokes]] and that she's not [[authorizing]] to [[drinkin]] (Early doesn't think women should), Early and Brian are out at the local bar. Brian reacts nervously to a drunk trying to start a fight with him, and Early first gives advice to Brian on what to do and then steps in and dishes out a quick lesson for the guy. "Hit him, Bri, it's comin'." This is one of my favorite scenes in the movie, partly because it's so funny what Early gleefully says as the guy's friends drag him away, bloodied and battered, but also because as it is intercut with the girls back at the hotel, we learn so much all at once about the two couples, their differences, and the conflicts that are likely to come up because of them. And besides that, because Brian benefited from Early's actions and Carrie is appalled by what she hears from Adele, it also illustrates the different way that Carrie and Brian react to Early and Adele.

Clearly, by now, you can tell that this is not your typical odd couple type of thriller, where the city folk run into the country folk and all sorts of stereotypical mayhem ensues. On one hand it [[appears]] a little too convenient that Brian and Carrie go on a tour of murder [[locations]] and just happen to be accompanied by a real life murderer, but on the other hand it's a great way to counteract the glorifying of murder that is inherent within a cross-country trip designed to bring fame to murderers and their crimes. While studying the actions of past murderers, Brian and Carrie ultimately find themselves face to face with the very material that they are studying, and realize that murder is not as pretty or morbidly fascinating when it's in your face as it is through disconnected studies of murders past.

I am constantly amazed at Brad Pitt's versatility as an actor. Consider, for example, his roles in movies like Kalifornia, 12 Monkeys, Fight Club, and Ocean's 11 and 12. Pitt is like Tom Hanks in that he can change his appearance drastically or just enough to fit a given character, and is completely believable. Incidentally, I tried in vain to be Early Grace for Halloween this year, but just couldn't get the hair and beard right. I even got the hat right, which initially I thought would be the hardest part.

It's easy to understand why a lot of people disliked Kalifornia or why they think that it glorifies violence and murder, but I think that whatever glorifying it does is done with the intention of clarifying the audience's understanding of its subject matter. A film that didn't glorify violence, at least initially, could never be as effective as Kalifornia, but the movie structures it perfectly. The glorification is all embodied in Brian's and Carrie's fascination with the idea of murder and the auras of the places in which is happened, but their realization, and ours, is embodied in the real thing, which they encounter with Early and Adele. The movie's very purpose is to describe that difference between idealizing violence and seeing the horror of it up close and for real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1225 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is without a doubt one of the [[worst]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER made. What´s worse, my old hero Dolph is in it and he´s starring it. Jesus... The story is [[actually]] quite good but the way it´s carried out [[made]] even my [[body]] hurt. The [[fighting]] scenes for [[starters]] are about as well choreographed as a fight between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[actors]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks [[also]], [[perform]] so [[badly]] you can´t help but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all friends of the director, who by the way must have been absent most, if not all, of the time. This is §12 million spent in an [[unimaginable]] way, because by the look of the effects and scenery, the cost can´t be a cent above §1000. This is without a doubt one of the [[lousiest]] movies EVER, I emphasize, EVER made. What´s worse, my old hero Dolph is in it and he´s starring it. Jesus... The story is [[indeed]] quite good but the way it´s carried out [[accomplished]] even my [[cadaver]] hurt. The [[battles]] scenes for [[novices]] are about as well choreographed as a fight between two drunks slugging it out in the gutter. The [[protagonists]], except for Dolph who kinda sucks [[further]], [[fulfil]] so [[desperately]] you can´t help but wonder if their reason for being there is that they´re all friends of the director, who by the way must have been absent most, if not all, of the time. This is §12 million spent in an [[incredible]] way, because by the look of the effects and scenery, the cost can´t be a cent above §1000. --------------------------------------------- Result 1226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The effects of job related stress and the pressures born of a moral dilemma that pits conscience against the obligations of a family business (albeit a unique one) all brought to a head by-- or perhaps the catalyst of-- a midlife crisis, are examined in the dark and absorbing drama, `Panic,' written and directed by Henry Bromell, and starring William H. Macy and Donald Sutherland. It's a telling look at how indecision and denial can bring about the internal strife and misery that ultimately leads to apathy and that moment of truth when the conflict must, of necessity, at last be resolved.

Alex (Macy) is tired; he has a loving wife, Martha (Tracey Ullman), a precocious six-year-old son, Sammy (David Dorfman), a mail order business he runs out of the house, as well as his main source of income, the `family' business he shares with his father, Michael (Sutherland), and his mother, Deidre (Barbara Bain). But he's empty; years of plying this particular trade have left him numb and detached, putting him in a mental state that has driven him to see a psychologist, Dr. Josh Parks (John Ritter). And to make matters worse (or maybe better, depending upon perspective), in Dr. Parks' waiting room he meets a young woman, Sarah Cassidy (Neve Campbell), whose presence alone makes him feel alive for the first time since he can remember. She quickly becomes another brick in the wall of the moral conflict his job has visited upon him, as in the days after their meeting he simply cannot stop thinking about her. His whole life, it seems, has become a `situation'-- one from which he is seemingly unable to successfully extirpate himself without hurting the ones he loves. He can deny his age and the fact that he has, indeed, slipped into a genuine midlife crisis, but he is about to discover that the problems he is facing are simply not going to go away on their own. He's at a crossroads, and he's going to have to decide which way to go. And he's going to have to do it very soon.

From a concept that is intrinsically interesting, Bromell has fashioned an engrossing character study that is insightful and incisive, and he presents it is a way that allows for moments of reflection that enable the audience to empathize and understand what Alex is going through. He makes it very clear that there are no simple answers, that in real life there is no easy way out. His characters are well defined and very real people who represent the diversity found in life and, moreover, within any given family unit. The film resoundingly implies that the sins of the father are irrefutably passed on to the progeny, with irrevocable consequences and effects. When you're growing up, you accept your personal environment as being that of the world at large; and often it is years into adulthood that one may begin to realize and understand that there are actually moral parameters established by every individual who walks upon the planet, and that the ones set by the father may not be conducive to the tenets of the son. And it is at that point that Alex finds himself as the story unfolds; ergo, the midlife crisis, or more specifically, the crisis of conscience from which he cannot escape. It's a powerful message, succinctly and subtly conveyed by Bromell, with the help of some outstanding performances from his actors.

For some time, William H. Macy has been one of the premiere character actors in the business, creating such diverse characters as Quiz Kid Donnie Smith in `Magnolia,' The Shoveler in `Mystery Men' and Jerry Lundegaard in `Fargo.' And that's just a sampling of his many achievements. At one point in this film, Sarah mentions Alex's `sad eyes,' and it's a very telling comment, as therein lies the strength of Macy's performance here, his ability to convey very real emotion in an understated, believable way that expresses all of the inner turmoil he is experiencing. Consider the scene in which he is lying awake in bed, staring off into the darkness; in that one restless moment it is clear that he is grappling, not only with his immediate situation, but with everything in his life that has brought him, finally, to this point. In that scene you find the sum total of a life of guilt, confusion and uncertainty, all of which have been successfully suppressed until now; all the things that have always been at the core of Alex's life, only now gradually breaking through his defense mechanisms and finally surfacing, demanding confrontation and resolution. It's a complex character created and delivered by Macy with an absolute precision that makes Alex truly memorable. It's a character to whom anyone who has ever faced a situation of seemingly insurmountable odds will be able to relate. It's a terrific piece of work by one of the finest actors around.

Sutherland is extremely effective, as well; his Michael is despicably sinister in a way that is so real it's chilling. It's frightening, in fact, to consider that there are such people actually walking the earth. This is not some pulp fiction or James Bond type villain, but a true personification of evil, hiding behind an outward appearance that is so normal he could be the guy next door, which is what makes it all the more disconcerting. And Sutherland brings it all to life brilliantly, with a great performance.

Neve Campbell looks the part of Sarah, but her performance (as is the usual case with her) seems somewhat pretentious, although her affected demeanor here just happens to fit the character and is actually a positive aspect of the film. If only she would occasionally turn her energies inward, it would make a tremendous difference in the way she presents her characters. `Panic,' however, is one of her best efforts; a powerful film that, in the end, is a journey well worth taking. 9/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "I have looked into the [[eye]] of this island, and what I [[saw]] was [[beautiful]]," proclaims one of the [[main]] [[characters]] in ABC's award [[winning]] television show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of plane crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the [[show]] a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[large]] group of [[characters]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation becomes more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[ordinary]] island, either - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the lack of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[execution]] is [[superb]]. The [[island]] is a [[character]] all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the [[time]] of writing this review, only the first two seasons have [[aired]], and they're filled with [[strong]] [[episodes]]. My only mild [[criticism]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then [[fortunately]] comes back in [[admirable]] shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "[[Lost]]" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. "I have looked into the [[ocular]] of this island, and what I [[watched]] was [[glamorous]]," proclaims one of the [[principal]] [[personage]] in ABC's award [[wins]] television show "Lost". The series could be summarized as a drama story about a group of plane crash survivors stranded on an unknown island, but that would be doing the [[display]] a disservice. "Lost" follows a [[gargantuan]] group of [[personage]] who come into conflict with the island, each other, and ultimately themselves as they struggle with their new way of life and their dependency on each other. The situation becomes more complicated when it becomes clear this isn't an [[normal]] island, either - and that they may not be alone.

My initial fear after hearing the concept of this series was the lack of new stories they could tell us after a certain period, but this proved to be unfounded. The narrative flows naturally, the dialogue is witty, the characters are memorable and the [[executes]] is [[extraordinaire]]. The [[lsland]] is a [[nature]] all on its own, and to understand this comment you'd have to see the series for yourself, which only goes to show its originality and greatness.

At the [[period]] of writing this review, only the first two seasons have [[circulated]], and they're filled with [[vigorous]] [[bouts]]. My only mild [[critique]] is that the second season seems to slow down a bit halfway, but then [[mercifully]] comes back in [[glamorous]] shape for the final episodes.

If I can recommend one television series you should be following right now, it would certainly be this one. If you like excitement, adventure, character driven stories, an extremely strong cast and crew, beautiful locations, and an island that seems more spiritual than natural, "[[Forfeited]]" is for you. Just be sure you start at the beginning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] OK, I [[kinda]] like the [[idea]] of this [[movie]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I [[kinda]] identify with some of the [[stories]]. Even the sometimes tacky and meaningless dialogue [[seems]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[movie]] would have been forgivable.

I'm [[trying]] as hard as possible not to trash this movie like the others did, but it's not that easy when the [[filmmakers]] weren't trying at all.

The editing in this movie is terrible! [[Possibly]] the [[worst]] editing I've ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]! There are [[things]] that you don't have to [[go]] to [[film]] school to [[learn]], leaning [[good]] [[editing]] is not one of them, but [[identifying]] a [[bad]] one is.

[[Also]], the shot... [[Oh]] my [[God]] the [[shots]], just [[awful]]! I can't [[even]] go into the [[details]], but we [[sometimes]] just [[see]] random things popping up, and that, in [[conjunction]] with the [[editing]] will [[give]] you the most [[painful]] [[film]] [[viewing]] [[experience]].

This movie being [[made]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[excuse]] also. I've seen short [[films]] on youtube with a lot more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this movie is [[nothing]] but a masturbation of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! In [[conclusion]], this movie is like what a [[really]] lazy [[amateur]] porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[lousy]] sex scenes separated by long [[boring]] [[conversations]] and one disgusting masturbation scene. If that's not your kind of thing, [[avoid]] this at all cost! OK, I [[sorta]] like the [[thinking]] of this [[cinematography]]. I'm in the age demographic, and I [[sorta]] identify with some of the [[story]]. Even the sometimes tacky and meaningless dialogue [[appears]] semi-realistic, and in a different [[cinema]] would have been forgivable.

I'm [[attempts]] as hard as possible not to trash this movie like the others did, but it's not that easy when the [[cinematographers]] weren't trying at all.

The editing in this movie is terrible! [[Presumably]] the [[hardest]] editing I've ever [[noticed]] in a [[cinematography]]! There are [[matters]] that you don't have to [[going]] to [[movies]] school to [[learned]], leaning [[buena]] [[edition]] is not one of them, but [[identify]] a [[negative]] one is.

[[Moreover]], the shot... [[Aw]] my [[Christ]] the [[punches]], just [[scary]]! I can't [[yet]] go into the [[detail]], but we [[sometime]] just [[seeing]] random things popping up, and that, in [[combination]] with the [[edit]] will [[lend]] you the most [[hurtful]] [[cinematography]] [[visualize]] [[experiences]].

This movie being [[introduced]] on low or no budget with 4 cast and crew is not an [[apologize]] also. I've seen short [[cinematic]] on youtube with a lot more artistic integrity! Joe, Greta, I don't know what the heck you were thinking, but this movie is [[anything]] but a masturbation of both your egos. You should be ashamed of yourselves! In [[conclude]], this movie is like what a [[truly]] lazy [[enthusiast]] porn movie will be if it was filled with 3 or 4 [[squalid]] sex scenes separated by long [[dreary]] [[chitchat]] and one disgusting masturbation scene. If that's not your kind of thing, [[avoidance]] this at all cost! --------------------------------------------- Result 1229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] After perusing the large amount of comments on this movie it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, extremely literate, and intelligent. They know the history of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can reach in the hands of a gifted author. [[For]] many [[years]] science fiction languished in the basement of literature. Considered my most critic to be [[little]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this history, and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, Bradbury, and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are extremely uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, weak premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains little of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this movie isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. After perusing the large amount of comments on this movie it is clear that there are two kinds of science fiction movie-goers. There are the ones who are well read, extremely literate, and intelligent. They know the history of the genre and more importantly they know to what heights it can reach in the hands of a gifted author. [[At]] many [[yrs]] science fiction languished in the basement of literature. Considered my most critic to be [[petit]] more than stories of ray guns and aliens meant for pre-pubescent teenagers. Today's well read fan knows well this history, and knows the great authors Asimov, Heinlein, Bradbury, and Ellison, who helped bring science fiction out of that basement. In doing so they created thought provoking, intelligent stories that stretched the boundaries and redefined the human condition. This well informed fans are critical of anything Hollywood throws at them. They are not critical for it's own sake, but look upon each offering with a skeptical eye. (As they should as Hollywood's record has been less than stellar.) To these fans the story must take supreme importance. They cannot be fooled by flashy computer graphics, and non stop action sequences. When the emperor has no clothes they scream it the loudest.

The second type of science fiction movie goer has little knowledge about the written aspect of the genre. (Look at many of the above comments that state "Well I haven't read the book or anything by this author...) Their total exposure to science fiction is from movies or the Scifi channel. They are extremely uncritical, willing to overlook huge plot holes, weak premises, and thin story lines if they are given a healthy dose of wiz bang action and awesome special effects. They are, in effect, willing to turn off their critical thinking skills (or maybe they never had them!) for the duration of the movie. Case in point, I Robot. While supposedly based on Asimov's short stories and named after one of his novels, it contains little of what Asimov wrote and even less of what he tried to tell us about humanity and our robotic creations. (Those of you that will run out and buy I, Robot will be very much surprised-this movie isn't even based on that story at all!)

The film has enormous plot holes, that at some points are stretched to the limits of credulity. I won't point them out. I won't spoon feed you. You need to practice you thinking skills and discover them for yourself. The characters, which are named after many of Asimov's characters, do not possess the critical intelligence that was a hallmark of his stories. The plot itself with all it's action sequences goes against everything that the author stood for. His belief that humanity possesses the capacity to solve problems using their minds, not their fists, is vital to understanding his vision of the future. In short, other than the name, their is very little of Isaac in anything about this movie. There will always be those uncritical (i.e. unthinking) who will state: "The movie doesn't have to be like the book. Due to the medium, movies sometimes require that changes be made." But what about a case where the movie never even tried to stay close to the book (or books) from the start? What if all they took from the written work was the title? This begs the question: Why tarnish a great body of work by slapping it's title on your vacuous piece of crap? Save money and don't buy the rights to the works. Title it something else. Don't use the character's names. Believe me no one will accuse you of plagiarism. In fact it won't matter what you title it to the unread moviegoer who accepts everything you throw at him. But it will upset those who read, who think, who are unwilling to simply let you give them a pretty light show.

I, Robot, like much of Hollywood's take on the genre, pushes Science fiction back down into that basement it lived in years ago. Hollywood could not do this alone. It takes an uncritical mindless audience that will accept puerile dredge like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Though]] derivative, "[[Labyrinth]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old show. Finally a story allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not easy playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American way" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[permitting]] him to show how one might react if he/she discovers that all that he [[knew]] may be a lie, was [[quite]] [[believable]].

Welling rose to the occasion marvelously.

As always, Michael Rosenbaum, as the "handicapped" Lex, delivered, as did Kristen Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed Lana. Allison Mack, the ever-present Chloe, also scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background added to the tone of the installment and made for an engaging drama. [[While]] derivative, "[[Maze]]" still stands as the highlight of the mid-half of the six-year-old show. Finally a story allows Welling to show how he has grown as an actor. It's not easy playing a character that is the embodiment of "truth, justice, and the American way" on a weekly basis with very little variation. His performance, [[authorizing]] him to show how one might react if he/she discovers that all that he [[overheard]] may be a lie, was [[pretty]] [[dependable]].

Welling rose to the occasion marvelously.

As always, Michael Rosenbaum, as the "handicapped" Lex, delivered, as did Kristen Kreuk as a too-sweet-to-be-believed Lana. Allison Mack, the ever-present Chloe, also scored as a slightly "off-her-rocker" version.

The use of an annoying hum in the background added to the tone of the installment and made for an engaging drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 1231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] I [[bought]] this while I was playing chess in Hastings. I am from Denmark though. It is very [[good]]. [[Definitely]] with an understanding of the horror genre. The monster towards the end is very [[scary]]. People who [[criticise]] this on IMDB should [[recall]] that it was a huge succes among serious horror critics.

I [[procured]] this while I was playing chess in Hastings. I am from Denmark though. It is very [[alright]]. [[Admittedly]] with an understanding of the horror genre. The monster towards the end is very [[appalling]]. People who [[critique]] this on IMDB should [[reminded]] that it was a huge succes among serious horror critics.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A [[nice]] Shirely Temple short. Child actors screaming their lines seemed to be the norm for that day and time. Perhaps being "seen and not heard" needed to be made up for. Aside from that this is [[fun]]. Given the films era there are certain [[aspects]] of the [[thing]], from a social viewpoint, that strike me as both very progressive and liberal. I won't go into those here, I'd rather not spoil it for you but let you watch it for yourself and see if you spot those [[elements]]. As early on as it was its easy to see from this short the fascination that was already developing for Temple. That makes it worth watching if you're a Temple fan. For others its a cool way to kill ten minutes while you're waiting for your good night glass of milk to warm up on the stove. A [[handsome]] Shirely Temple short. Child actors screaming their lines seemed to be the norm for that day and time. Perhaps being "seen and not heard" needed to be made up for. Aside from that this is [[droll]]. Given the films era there are certain [[things]] of the [[stuff]], from a social viewpoint, that strike me as both very progressive and liberal. I won't go into those here, I'd rather not spoil it for you but let you watch it for yourself and see if you spot those [[ingredient]]. As early on as it was its easy to see from this short the fascination that was already developing for Temple. That makes it worth watching if you're a Temple fan. For others its a cool way to kill ten minutes while you're waiting for your good night glass of milk to warm up on the stove. --------------------------------------------- Result 1233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I should have [[figured]] that any [[movie]] with the Poltergeist [[lady]] in it isn't going to be good. It actually [[starts]] out [[okay]], but during the first [[murder]] scene you find out that the movie you're [[watching]] is a movie [[inside]] of a [[movie]]. There's people sitting in a movie theatre watching that movie. One girl in the [[audience]] is so [[annoying]] that I would have turned around and [[strangled]] her. A bit strange, but far from [[good]]. I should have [[imagined]] that any [[cinematography]] with the Poltergeist [[milady]] in it isn't going to be good. It actually [[launched]] out [[ok]], but during the first [[kills]] scene you find out that the movie you're [[staring]] is a movie [[within]] of a [[cinematography]]. There's people sitting in a movie theatre watching that movie. One girl in the [[viewers]] is so [[vexing]] that I would have turned around and [[choked]] her. A bit strange, but far from [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] From everything I'd read about the movie, I was excited to support a film with a Christian theme. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally done. Especially the writing! Without good writing a movie doesn't have a chance. The writer/director said in an interview that he didn't want to give away how the title relates to the story. Believe me, it was [[NO]] big surprise. I kept waiting for the teenage/young adult back-story to unfold, but it never did. As someone who has gone through a divorce, I was very [[disappointed]]. This [[movie]] would have been NO comfort to me when I first went through the emotional turmoil that divorce can bring to your life as a Christian! From everything I'd read about the movie, I was excited to support a film with a Christian theme. Everything about the movie was very unprofessionally done. Especially the writing! Without good writing a movie doesn't have a chance. The writer/director said in an interview that he didn't want to give away how the title relates to the story. Believe me, it was [[NOS]] big surprise. I kept waiting for the teenage/young adult back-story to unfold, but it never did. As someone who has gone through a divorce, I was very [[frustrating]]. This [[kino]] would have been NO comfort to me when I first went through the emotional turmoil that divorce can bring to your life as a Christian! --------------------------------------------- Result 1235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[At]] [[last]]! A [[decent]] British [[comedy]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a TV series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive tale of discovery, dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are gentle fools with a penchant for failure and each at a turning point in their lives, giving a sensitive, emotional trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous comedy together. The chemistry between the three amigos is palpable and makes for a [[touching]] companionship with [[hilarious]] dialogue and some [[classic]] comedic moments. It [[feels]] part Withnail and I, part American Werewolf in London, and part Quadraphenia (but only because of the bike gangs, and Phil Daniels). In fact, Phil Daniels' lovable rogue reminds you of Danny the dealer in Withnail and I, with his scholarly approach and scientific commitment to drugs. This is a great film, particularly for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the past, who will relate to many moments in the film. A personal favourite is the brilliant scene in the Welsh corner shop, buying munchies while tripping on 'shrooms. This gentle [[comedy]] will warm the cockles of your heart and have you laughing out loud. And you don't have to ride bikes or even like them to enjoy it. But it'll add to it if you do. Brilliant. [[During]] [[latter]]! A [[presentable]] British [[travesty]] that isn't centred around some mockney bank robbers or spun off from a TV series. John Ivay's film is a psychoactive tale of discovery, dressed in biker gear. The three protagonists are gentle fools with a penchant for failure and each at a turning point in their lives, giving a sensitive, emotional trio of sub-plots to sew the riotous comedy together. The chemistry between the three amigos is palpable and makes for a [[touch]] companionship with [[comical]] dialogue and some [[conventional]] comedic moments. It [[deems]] part Withnail and I, part American Werewolf in London, and part Quadraphenia (but only because of the bike gangs, and Phil Daniels). In fact, Phil Daniels' lovable rogue reminds you of Danny the dealer in Withnail and I, with his scholarly approach and scientific commitment to drugs. This is a great film, particularly for those who've dabbled in psychoactive substances in the past, who will relate to many moments in the film. A personal favourite is the brilliant scene in the Welsh corner shop, buying munchies while tripping on 'shrooms. This gentle [[comedian]] will warm the cockles of your heart and have you laughing out loud. And you don't have to ride bikes or even like them to enjoy it. But it'll add to it if you do. Brilliant. --------------------------------------------- Result 1236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Rather then long dance sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[would]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[dynamic]] and IMPORTANT rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri made the movie [[lack]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the book you would not really understand why Sayuri loved the Chairman and why Mameha became her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate script they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. Rather then long dance sequences and close ups of the characters which made the film drag on - the movie [[could]] have been better served explaining the story and motivations of the characters.

The marginalisation of Nubo, the minister, auntie, mother - and the dumbing down of the [[energetic]] and IMPORTANT rivalry between hatsumo and mameha and hatsumo and sayuri made the movie [[deficit]] any real depth. If you hadn't read the book you would not really understand why Sayuri loved the Chairman and why Mameha became her mentor at all.

Visually the film was stunning - and the actors all did the best with the C rate script they were given, but that was all that was good about this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] does anyone think that this show actually helps some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[channels]] and come upon this show i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his [[viewers]] are like him or if they are good people and think they will have a better life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[little]] [[consequence]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no longer has the same affects as it once did (thank god). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. does anyone think that this show actually helps some people, or does it only anger the people who watch it? when i am flipping through the [[canals]] and come upon this show i half to watch out of morbid curiosity. i understand that pat Roberson is not all together. what i do not know is if his [[onlookers]] are like him or if they are good people and think they will have a better life if they listening to what he has to say. pat Roberson is of [[petite]] [[aftermath]]. he is an old man who thinks in an old way. fear of damnation no longer has the same affects as it once did (thank god). now if someone will please answer my question i will be dodging lightning bolts for the rest of eternity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1238 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This movie is [[funny]] and suitable for any age. It is [[definitely]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[fine]] job playing folks in the mid-western town of Big Bean, Illinois. Where we must assume nothing ever happens since the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the Interstate. The location appeals as suitably boring and totally unlikely for the invasion of earth by Martians. But these Martians are totally [[inept]], despite being well-equipped with an arsenal of suitably ghastly and deadly [[weapons]]... including one set on eradicating the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to make us the viewers and the locals wish to help them... leave earth. J. J. Anderson playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just great lines. Watch this movie for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[enjoyable]] it is. This movie is [[droll]] and suitable for any age. It is [[categorically]] family-type entertainment. The cast does a [[alright]] job playing folks in the mid-western town of Big Bean, Illinois. Where we must assume nothing ever happens since the excitement (pre-invasion) of the decade is the new (and only) exit ramp from the Interstate. The location appeals as suitably boring and totally unlikely for the invasion of earth by Martians. But these Martians are totally [[incompetent]], despite being well-equipped with an arsenal of suitably ghastly and deadly [[armes]]... including one set on eradicating the Martians, too! The Martians dead-pan their lines and throw in just the right accents to make us the viewers and the locals wish to help them... leave earth. J. J. Anderson playing the very young Halloween carnivorous duck has just great lines. Watch this movie for laugher and entertainment; thought-provoking it isn't. But subtle and [[pleasurable]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1239 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. Renting Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[missed]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[surprise]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are powerfully presented when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they get it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is top notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a master stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a brilliant choice! And Lucy Liu is also just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch movies several times within days - this is one of them. Trawling through the Sci Fi weeklies section of the local Video Rentals store I was losing hope of finding any good movies I hadn't yet seen. Renting Cypher was like a punt on a possibly very lame horse. My son is so jaded with current "B" Science Fiction that he hasn't bothered seeing this yet.

It must be noted I didn't see anything about Cypher when it was released in Australia. It must have been very quiet or I just [[flunked]] it.

Well this WAS a really pleasant [[surprising]]! This is also no B movie. It's not a "blockbuster" of the epic variety and doesn't try to be - more a quiet movie that needs to be seen several times for it's plot to be fully savoured.

The special effects are powerfully presented when they are used - my only complaint is the super helo is a leetle obviously CGI at first view, but they get it right at it's 2nd appearance, & that aside everything else is top notch. In any case the affects are secondary.

I won't give anything away about the plot. The plot structure has a Russian Doll aspect a little reminiscent of Basic Instinct (though with very different content).

Just I will say that Choosing Jeremy Northam for the lead was a master stroke. The actor was born in Cambridge ENGLAND, and his accent for this film hits the ear as a sort of extremely forced New England dialect, it's a tad off key. See the final twist of the plot and you'll see why that is such a brilliant choice! And Lucy Liu is also just right with her "will she kiss me - will she shoot me" edge.

I rarely watch movies several times within days - this is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] As a [[big]] fan of the [[original]] [[film]], it's [[hard]] to watch this [[show]]. The garish set decor and [[harshly]] lighted sets rob any [[style]] from this [[remake]]. The [[mood]] is never there. Instead, it has the [[look]] and feel of so many television [[movies]] of the [[Seventies]]. Crenna is not a [[bad]] choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy wardrobe and "[[swank]]" apartment don't [[fit]] the mood of the [[original]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to make it work but Samantha Egger is a really [[bad]] choice. The English [[accent]] and California [[looks]] can't hold a candle to Barbara Stanwick's velvet voice and sex appeal. Lee J.Cobb tries mightily to fashion Barton Keyes,but even his performance is just gruff, without [[style]].

It [[feels]] [[like]] the TV movie it was and again [[reminds]] me of what a remarkable film the original still is. As a [[gargantuan]] fan of the [[upfront]] [[kino]], it's [[tough]] to watch this [[exhibit]]. The garish set decor and [[heavily]] lighted sets rob any [[styling]] from this [[redo]]. The [[atmosphere]] is never there. Instead, it has the [[gaze]] and feel of so many television [[cinema]] of the [[Seventy]]. Crenna is not a [[negative]] choice as Walter Neff, but his snappy wardrobe and "[[chic]]" apartment don't [[fitting]] the mood of the [[initial]], or make him an interesting character.He does his best to make it work but Samantha Egger is a really [[faulty]] choice. The English [[focusing]] and California [[seems]] can't hold a candle to Barbara Stanwick's velvet voice and sex appeal. Lee J.Cobb tries mightily to fashion Barton Keyes,but even his performance is just gruff, without [[styles]].

It [[deems]] [[iike]] the TV movie it was and again [[recalls]] me of what a remarkable film the original still is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1241 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Rarely do I see a [[film]] that I am totally engrossed with; this was one of them. It had good acting, dialogue, plot, and the scenery was [[beautiful]]. I laughed out loud many times, especially the scene dealing with the kitchen raid. The slapstick comedy performed by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I [[admit]] that I am a sucker for slapstick. The story dealt with a group of people in their 30's coming back to a summer camp that they had attended 20 years previously. It was a farewell week of camping, as the place would be closed down permanently at the end of the season. As adults the camp looked different, and they felt differently about it and each other. I recommend this funny, [[moving]] movie to all.

Rarely do I see a [[filmmaking]] that I am totally engrossed with; this was one of them. It had good acting, dialogue, plot, and the scenery was [[sumptuous]]. I laughed out loud many times, especially the scene dealing with the kitchen raid. The slapstick comedy performed by the lunkhead hired hand had me one the floor, but I [[recognized]] that I am a sucker for slapstick. The story dealt with a group of people in their 30's coming back to a summer camp that they had attended 20 years previously. It was a farewell week of camping, as the place would be closed down permanently at the end of the season. As adults the camp looked different, and they felt differently about it and each other. I recommend this funny, [[shifting]] movie to all.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I watch a lot of films, good, bad and indifferent; there is usually something of interest to fixate upon, even if it is only set design, or the reliable labor of a good character actor, or the fortuitous laughter that emerges from watching ineptitude captured forever.

However, I was quite [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham Greene has been translated into film many times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential Agent" is one of those lesser vehicles, yet it manages to get me somewhere anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's depictions as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost complete non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to work in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. Yet I found that plodding accentuated rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was compelled to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The film does not rise to the level of art, and thus cannot hope to answer such questions, but it is much more than mere entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly drawn. The lack of glitz, of "bubble," of narrative "bounce" help to make this movie very worthwhile.

And there is no happy ending, for history wrote the ending. I watch a lot of films, good, bad and indifferent; there is usually something of interest to fixate upon, even if it is only set design, or the reliable labor of a good character actor, or the fortuitous laughter that emerges from watching ineptitude captured forever.

However, I was quite [[cheerfully]] [[dumbfounded]] by this film, one I had never seen before. Graham Greene has been translated into film many times of course, in such masterpieces as "Thin Man" and in lesser vehicles. "Confidential Agent" is one of those lesser vehicles, yet it manages to get me somewhere anyway, despite lackluster direction, the incongruity of Bacall and Boyer's depictions as (respectively) British and Spanish, and the almost complete non-existence of any chemistry between the two leads. In some ways, this last "problem" actually begins to work in the film's favor, for how can love really blossom in the killing atmosphere of fascism and capitalism meeting about one person's tragedy? The most compelling aspect of the film arises directly from Greene's complex and guilt-ridden psychology, which pervades the film. I know some see the deliberate pacing here as dull, and I can understand that. Yet I found that plodding accentuated rather than detracted from what is a claustrophobic world. I was compelled to watch, not by any great acting (although Boyer is marvelous as usual, managing to convey a rich mixture of world-weariness, tragedy, hope, and fervor with his magnificent voice and yearning eyes), but by the down-spiraling rush of one man's slim hopes against a world of oppression and money. What is a thief? What good is love in the face of death? Where does mere profit-taking end and exploitation begin? The film does not rise to the level of art, and thus cannot hope to answer such questions, but it is much more than mere entertainment, and its murders and guilts are very grimly drawn. The lack of glitz, of "bubble," of narrative "bounce" help to make this movie very worthwhile.

And there is no happy ending, for history wrote the ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 1243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is another one of those 'humans [[vs]] [[insects]]/eco-horror' features; a [[theme]] that was [[popular]] in the [[late]] 70's. Only you can't [[really]] [[call]] it horror. There's zero [[suspense]] and no gruesome [[events]]. [[In]] other [[words]]: this [[movie]] is [[pretty]] lame. It's not that it's [[really]] bad or [[something]]; it's just very [[boring]]. A construction site near a hotel uncovers a big nest of [[ants]]. [[Later]] on we learn that, probably due to [[different]] [[sorts]] of pesticides used in the [[past]], their bite became [[poisonous]]. Some people [[get]] bitten and [[rushed]] to the [[hospital]] and it takes [[ages]] for the residents of the [[hospital]] to [[figure]] out what's [[going]] on. Robert Foxworth [[figures]] it out [[first]] and then you can see him go berserk with a [[digging]] [[machine]] for what [[seems]] like [[several]] hours. [[Then]] they [[flee]] in the [[house]], waiting to [[get]] rescued. And, [[man]], you should [[see]] all the [[efforts]] they [[make]] for [[rescuing]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they [[even]] [[use]] a [[big]] helicopter. All the time when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all [[got]] shoes on. [[Just]] run out of the [[building]]. I'm [[sure]] a bunch of ants won't [[catch]] up with you." It's all [[pretty]] [[ridiculous]].

Of course, [[lots]] of close-ups of crawling ants are [[shown]] [[throughout]] the [[whole]] [[movie]]. Ants in the [[garden]]. Ants in the [[garbage]]. Ants in the [[kitchen]]. Ants on the [[roof]]. Ants in the [[bedroom]]. Ants in the [[sink]]. And the [[best]] [[part]]: Ants crawling on people's [[faces]] while the [[actors]] are [[breathing]] through straws. But when you [[see]] groups of ants in wider [[shots]], they indeed [[look]] like black rice the set [[designers]] glued to the wall.

One [[small]] [[surprise]] came near the [[end]]. [[No]], it has [[nothing]] to do with a twist in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy made an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[say]]? This movie is [[called]] IT [[HAPPENED]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD MANOR but the box-art of my [[copy]] read ANTS and the title during the [[opening]] [[credits]] was [[PANIC]] [[AT]] LAKEWOOD MANOR. There you have it. Now, since this is a made-for-TV movie from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely mild in my final rating. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, [[shocks]] and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an [[annoying]] itch. This is another one of those 'humans [[versus]] [[cockroaches]]/eco-horror' features; a [[topics]] that was [[fashionable]] in the [[belated]] 70's. Only you can't [[truly]] [[invitation]] it horror. There's zero [[wait]] and no gruesome [[event]]. [[Among]] other [[mots]]: this [[cinematography]] is [[belle]] lame. It's not that it's [[truly]] bad or [[somethings]]; it's just very [[tiresome]]. A construction site near a hotel uncovers a big nest of [[mules]]. [[Then]] on we learn that, probably due to [[distinct]] [[class]] of pesticides used in the [[former]], their bite became [[poison]]. Some people [[obtain]] bitten and [[raced]] to the [[hospitals]] and it takes [[years]] for the residents of the [[hospitals]] to [[silhouette]] out what's [[go]] on. Robert Foxworth [[digits]] it out [[firstly]] and then you can see him go berserk with a [[excavation]] [[machines]] for what [[appears]] like [[different]] hours. [[Subsequently]] they [[fled]] in the [[maison]], waiting to [[obtain]] rescued. And, [[men]], you should [[seeing]] all the [[action]] they [[deliver]] for [[rescued]] them. I won't spoil too much, but at one point they [[yet]] [[used]] a [[substantial]] helicopter. All the time when I was watching this, I sat there thinking "Come on, people, you all [[ai]] shoes on. [[Mere]] run out of the [[construction]]. I'm [[persuaded]] a bunch of ants won't [[captured]] up with you." It's all [[quite]] [[grotesque]].

Of course, [[batch]] of close-ups of crawling ants are [[exhibited]] [[across]] the [[ensemble]] [[cinematography]]. Ants in the [[gardens]]. Ants in the [[refuse]]. Ants in the [[cook]]. Ants on the [[roofs]]. Ants in the [[chamber]]. Ants in the [[sinking]]. And the [[finest]] [[parties]]: Ants crawling on people's [[confronting]] while the [[protagonists]] are [[breath]] through straws. But when you [[behold]] groups of ants in wider [[punches]], they indeed [[gaze]] like black rice the set [[architects]] glued to the wall.

One [[petite]] [[surprises]] came near the [[terminates]]. [[Nos]], it has [[none]] to do with a twist in the plot. It was just that Brian Dennehy made an appearance as a chief-fireman. Ehrr... What more can I [[said]]? This movie is [[termed]] IT [[ARRIVED]] [[IN]] LAKEWOOD MANOR but the box-art of my [[copying]] read ANTS and the title during the [[initiation]] [[appropriations]] was [[TERROR]] [[IN]] LAKEWOOD MANOR. There you have it. Now, since this is a made-for-TV movie from the 70's, I'll be once again extremely mild in my final rating. Now, THE SAVAGE BEES, another 'humans vs insects' TV-movie from 1976 was much better than this one. I even feel I have to go back and add a few points to its rating after having seen ANTS. Lacking suspense, action, thrills, [[convulsions]] and creepiness, the only thing you'll be left with after seeing ANTS is an [[exasperating]] itch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such weapons as flamethrowers, you would think they would have been caught before someone writing for a weekly coupon newspaper overheard someone saying 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish [[minutes]] back. Life is too precious to [[rent]] this [[movie]].

I feel [[bad]] for the big named [[actors]] that made the [[mistake]] of making this movie.

If you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this movie. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young girls, who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. How can there be that many corrupt cops without any one of them slipping up? With enough cops to run a mini-war that include such weapons as flamethrowers, you would think they would have been caught before someone writing for a weekly coupon newspaper overheard someone saying 'thanks' to a corrupt cop.

You will never get your 90ish [[mins]] back. Life is too precious to [[tenancy]] this [[kino]].

I feel [[amiss]] for the big named [[protagonists]] that made the [[blunder]] of making this movie.

If you like Justin Timberlake, feel free to rent this movie. He does have a very major part in it, so fans might enjoy seeing him.

However, I believe most of his fans are young girls, who may be turned off by the violence in this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Even by 1942 standards of movie-making the setup which HER [[CARDBOARD]] LOVER presents was dated to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[done]] much better in classics such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these movies features women with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the worst part of it is Shearer herself. For an actress used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon seems to put her into throes of complete over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a part of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only fuels the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. Even by 1942 standards of movie-making the setup which HER [[LUGE]] LOVER presents was dated to the extreme. The machinations of one half of a pair (of husband/wife, ex-husband/ex-wife) to get the other back at the threat of marriage to another, divorce, or an eventual separation by means of jealousy, humiliation, or other schemes had been [[completed]] much better in classics such as HIS GIRL Friday and THE PHILADELPHIA STORY. Both of these movies features women with a strong, indomitable screen presence and who played independent, proto-feminist characters. In both movies, both women were estranged/divorced from their (witty) first husbands and set to marry colorless men who were their exact opposite, and both would be bamboozled into rejecting their soon-to-be husbands and re-igniting their passion for each other.

The plot in HER CARDBOARD LOVER switches the gender: here, it's Norma Shearer in the Cary Grant role out, this time, to ward off an ex-boyfriend (George Sanders) by means of hiring Robert Taylor to pose as her gigolo. The problem is, Shearer is much too old to be playing a role more suited to an actress in her mid-to-late twenties; Sanders is about as involved as a piece of furniture for the most -- any man who would be in love with his fiancée, on seeing a strange man come out of her bathroom as happens here, would knock the lights out of him and cause a huge scene. Not here. And Robert Taylor plays his part as if he were trying to channel Cary Grant half the time, not in speech inflections but in overall essence.

But the worst part of it is Shearer herself. For an actress used to parts which gave her a sense of intellectual sexiness and dramatic presence, playing Consuelo Craydon seems to put her into throes of complete over-acting, over-emoting, and over-gesturing which, while still a part of her style of acting and more appropriate ten years earlier, makes her look like an extremely mannered performer wrenching the joke out of a situation like water from a fairly dry sponge. It only fuels the fires that tell the theory which gives Irving Thalberg the maker of her career and chooser of (most of her) roles; why she passed on roles such as Charlotte Vale and Mrs. Miniver on mega-hits NOW VOYAGER and MRS. MINIVER is a mystery, but then again, most accounts also state that by this time she had just burnt out from acting, that she'd had lost interest in the whole thing altogether and it's no secret that anyone who has experienced this sort of thing has essentially lost focus and can't wait until retirement or the end of a contract is near to leave as soon as possible. Such could be the case here. She seems lost, she seems tired, she seems ill at ease, going through autopilot instead of living the part. After this film she would make no more, but would be responsible of discovering Janet Leigh who would come into her own as a screen star during the late 40s and into the 60s. --------------------------------------------- Result 1246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] OK, here is my personal list of [[top]] Nicktoons shows as in [[today]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[show]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a simple but great animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - brings the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The stories are enjoyable (fans' episodes would be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the humor is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. OK, here is my personal list of [[topped]] Nicktoons shows as in [[hoy]]:

1. All Grown Up/SpongeBob SquarePants

2. My Life as a Teenage Robot

3. Invader Zim

4. CATSCRATCH/Rugrats

Notice a word with only capital letters? That means this is the Nick [[spectacle]] I'm going to talk about.

"Catscratch" is basically a simple but great animated comedy about three wealthy cats - Mr. Blik, Gordon, and Waffles - who get into weird and REALLY surreal situations, from attempting to join Human Kimberely's slumber party for root beer to saving a planet of slugs from the evil spaceship. This is one Nick show that you will simply have your funny bone tickled sooner or later! The theme song is catchy and memorable. Voice actors - including Wayne Knight from the "Seinfield" franchise - brings the characters to fresh life with very quirky personalities. The stories are enjoyable (fans' episodes would be "King of All Root Beer" and "Gordon's Lucky Claw"). And the humor is all done in some style of Earthworm Jim.

So in conclusion, "Catscratch" is one of the Nicktoons series, like "Invader Zim" and "MLAATR", which becomes very, very popular all over the world in just 3 seasons or less. --------------------------------------------- Result 1247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I have yet to read a negative professional review of this [[movie]]. I guess I must have missed something. The [[beginning]] is intriguing, the three main characters meet late at night in an otherwise empty bar and [[entertain]] each other with invented stories. That's the best [[part]]. After the three go their separate ways, the film splits into three threads. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an eye [[opening]] curiosity. [[Unfortunately]], the [[director]] beat this one to death, even injecting a wild [[plot]] line that leads nowhere in particular. Bottom [[line]]: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from insomnia, view it in bed and you will have a good night sleep. I have yet to read a negative professional review of this [[cinematography]]. I guess I must have missed something. The [[launches]] is intriguing, the three main characters meet late at night in an otherwise empty bar and [[distract]] each other with invented stories. That's the best [[parte]]. After the three go their separate ways, the film splits into three threads. That's when boredom sets in. Certainly, the thread with the Felliniesque babushkas who make dolls out of chewed bread is at first an eye [[opens]] curiosity. [[Unhappily]], the [[superintendent]] beat this one to death, even injecting a wild [[intrigue]] line that leads nowhere in particular. Bottom [[bloodline]]: a two-hour plot-thin listlessness. If you suffer from insomnia, view it in bed and you will have a good night sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 1248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I love [[John]] Saxon in anything he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a movie that should have more aptly been been titled "[[Please]] Do Not Watch This Movie Called: Zombie [[Death]] House". The $1000 dollar Shock Insurance Certificate is dear Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you spend 14 dollars on a filmed dump churned out by a major 70's cheese legend. Ray being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco ceilings on a Ford Falcon. Just plain [[bad]] now, the both of them- and [[boring]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this old stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the dollar video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE ONLY WAY TO DO SERVICE TO THIS TRIPE IS TO RELEASE IT ON THE DOLLAR MARKET FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black Christmas, Nightmare on Elm Street or The Glove. I love [[Johannes]] Saxon in anything he's in. The one time he takes over the camera though he directs a movie that should have more aptly been been titled "[[Invites]] Do Not Watch This Movie Called: Zombie [[Decease]] House". The $1000 dollar Shock Insurance Certificate is dear Fred Olen Ray's tricky way of making you spend 14 dollars on a filmed dump churned out by a major 70's cheese legend. Ray being the front man at RetroMedia. Ray by the way makes Charles Band look hotter than stucco ceilings on a Ford Falcon. Just plain [[inclement]] now, the both of them- and [[dreary]] besides. It's great that Ray is digging up this old stuff and in some cases it's public domain like the rest of the dollar video hucksters but in the case of Zombie Death House- (the word "Zombie" sloppily superimposed to add ownership and interest on the part of F.O.R.) THE ONLY WAY TO DO SERVICE TO THIS TRIPE IS TO RELEASE IT ON THE DOLLAR MARKET FOR THE CURIOUS COLLECTOR AND FANS OF SAXON!!! If you wanna see real Saxon, pick up Black Christmas, Nightmare on Elm Street or The Glove. --------------------------------------------- Result 1249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Prix]] de Beauté was [[made]] on the cusp of the [[changeover]] from [[silence]] to sound, which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally conceived as a silent, it was released with a dubbed soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[speaking]] [[Louise]] Brooks' lines, but was released as a [[silent]] in Italy and other parts of Europe. I was [[lucky]] enough to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[flawless]] [[new]] restoration of an Italian silent [[print]] at the Tribeca Film [[Festival]]. I haven't [[seen]] the talkie version [[yet]], but I think it's safe to assume the silent version is much more [[satisfying]], since by all [[reports]] the [[dubbing]] is poorly [[done]] (Louise [[Brooks]] is clearly speaking [[English]], so there's no [[way]] her [[lips]] could be matched.) Also, the film is made [[entirely]] in the silent style, with few titles and little [[need]] for dialogue. Prix [[de]] Beauté tells its [[story]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The opening is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splashing]] at a public [[beach]]. [[Throughout]] the [[film]] there is an emphasis on visual detail, on clothing, machinery, decoration, and symbolic images such as a caged [[bird]], a [[heap]] of [[torn]] photographs, a diamond [[bracelet]]. This is [[silent]] [[film]] [[technique]] at its [[pinnacle]].

Louise Brooks, of course, is responsible for saving the [[film]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[heartbreaking]] to reflect that this was her last [[starring]] role. Lustrously beautiful, she dominates the [[film]] with her [[charisma]] and also gives a [[perfectly]] natural [[yet]] [[highly]] charged performance. [[Her]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[films]] for which she's best known, is a woman we can [[fully]] understand and [[sympathize]] with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typist]] with a possessive [[fiancé]], who [[yearns]] to [[get]] more out of [[life]] and secretly enters a beauty contest, with immediate success. She is then [[torn]] between the [[excitement]] of her [[glamorous]] [[new]] [[life]] and her [[love]] for the [[man]] who [[insists]] she [[give]] it all up or [[lose]] him. [[All]] of the [[characters]] are [[drawn]] with [[nuance]]. The fiancé inspires pity and is not merely a brute: he [[loves]] Lucienne, but is a [[limited]] [[man]] who can't cope with her having a life [[apart]] from him or [[attracting]] the attentions of other [[men]]. Even the "other [[man]]" in the [[story]] is not the [[simple]] [[slimeball]] we first [[take]] him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted [[audience]] members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. [[Price]] de Beauté was [[introduced]] on the cusp of the [[transition]] from [[mute]] to sound, which came a little later in Europe than in Hollywood. Originally conceived as a silent, it was released with a dubbed soundtrack in France, with a French actress [[discussing]] [[Louie]] Brooks' lines, but was released as a [[silencing]] in Italy and other parts of Europe. I was [[fortunate]] enough to see the Cineteca di Bologna's [[faultless]] [[newest]] restoration of an Italian silent [[prints]] at the Tribeca Film [[Fest]]. I haven't [[saw]] the talkie version [[even]], but I think it's safe to assume the silent version is much more [[satisfactory]], since by all [[report]] the [[copying]] is poorly [[doing]] (Louise [[Creek]] is clearly speaking [[Englishman]], so there's no [[manner]] her [[mouths]] could be matched.) Also, the film is made [[altogether]] in the silent style, with few titles and little [[require]] for dialogue. Prix [[of]] Beauté tells its [[stories]] visually, with exciting, imaginative camera-work. The opening is instantly kinetic, with rapidly-cut scenes of urban life and swimmers [[splash]] at a public [[beaches]]. [[In]] the [[flick]] there is an emphasis on visual detail, on clothing, machinery, decoration, and symbolic images such as a caged [[birds]], a [[piling]] of [[tear]] photographs, a diamond [[cuff]]. This is [[voiceless]] [[flick]] [[techniques]] at its [[climax]].

Louise Brooks, of course, is responsible for saving the [[filmmaking]] from obscurity. Seeing this makes it only more [[upsetting]] to reflect that this was her last [[featuring]] role. Lustrously beautiful, she dominates the [[cinematography]] with her [[seduction]] and also gives a [[fully]] natural [[nonetheless]] [[unimaginably]] charged performance. [[His]] role here, more than in the Pabst [[film]] for which she's best known, is a woman we can [[altogether]] understand and [[sympathise]] with. She plays Lucienne Garnier, a [[typewritten]] with a possessive [[fiancée]], who [[yearn]] to [[obtains]] more out of [[iife]] and secretly enters a beauty contest, with immediate success. She is then [[ripped]] between the [[agitation]] of her [[excellent]] [[newest]] [[iife]] and her [[likes]] for the [[males]] who [[stresses]] she [[lend]] it all up or [[wasting]] him. [[Every]] of the [[characteristics]] are [[lured]] with [[undertone]]. The fiancé inspires pity and is not merely a brute: he [[likes]] Lucienne, but is a [[scant]] [[males]] who can't cope with her having a life [[moreover]] from him or [[lure]] the attentions of other [[hombre]]. Even the "other [[males]]" in the [[fairytales]] is not the [[uncomplicated]] [[shitbag]] we first [[taking]] him for, though his intentions may be just as possessive as the fiancé's.

*************************WARNING: SPOILERS BELOW*****************

The film has many fine set pieces, including Lucienne's triumph in the "Miss Europe" contest, shown through the comic reactions of assorted [[audiences]] members, who wind up pelting the heroine with flowers; her misery as a housewife, peeling potatoes while the pendulum of the cuckoo clock marks time behind her; a nightmarish trip to a fun-fair (in the silent version, this occurs late in the film, after her marriage) at which Lucienne, crushed among the low-lifes and depressed by her husband's macho antics, decides that she can't go on with her present existence; and especially the final scene in the projection room where she views her talkie screen test. Louise Brooks may never have looked more beautiful than she does here, with the projector's beam flickering on her alabaster profile, her shoulders swathed in white fur, her face incandescent under the black helmet of hair as she watches herself singing on screen. The double shot of her exquisite corpse and her still-living image on the screen is particularly poignant: Louise Brooks' image, like Lucienne's, remains immortal despite her frustratingly aborted film career. --------------------------------------------- Result 1250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Even though this was a disaster in the box office, It is my favorite [[film]]. It gives a [[powerful]] [[message]] of [[family]]. It has a lot of violence and has one song with a bunch of [[girls]] in [[bikinis]]. [[Compared]] to other bollywood [[films]], the [[action]] scenes in this movie are more [[realistic]]. It is an [[incredible]] [[combination]] of Akshay [[Kumar]] and Amitabh [[Bachchan]]. If you [[want]] to see the Indian Godfather, Amitabh portrays that in this [[film]]. Don't read [[reviews]] by critic, they're just ignorant. This movie has good [[mix]] of [[comedy]], romance, [[drama]], and [[especially]] [[action]]. So if you [[want]] to [[see]] [[action]] more [[realistic]] than Main Hoon Na([[still]] good [[movie]]), this is the [[movie]]. Even though this was a disaster in the box office, It is my favorite [[cinema]]. It gives a [[influential]] [[messages]] of [[families]]. It has a lot of violence and has one song with a bunch of [[daughter]] in [[bikini]]. [[Comparing]] to other bollywood [[cinematography]], the [[actions]] scenes in this movie are more [[realist]]. It is an [[unimaginable]] [[combo]] of Akshay [[Sharma]] and Amitabh [[Aishwarya]]. If you [[desiring]] to see the Indian Godfather, Amitabh portrays that in this [[movie]]. Don't read [[appraisals]] by critic, they're just ignorant. This movie has good [[mixtures]] of [[parody]], romance, [[dramas]], and [[specially]] [[activities]]. So if you [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] [[activities]] more [[practical]] than Main Hoon Na([[again]] good [[films]]), this is the [[flick]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I have [[absolutely]] no knowledge of author [[Phillipa]] [[Pearce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[GARDEN]] is typical of her work I probably would have had [[little]] interest in her books as a child . When I was a child I wasn`t really interested in litreture [[unless]] it had soldiers fighting [[monsters]] complete with a high body count

Judging by this [[film]] version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle class kids since much of the story of [[revolves]] around protagonist Tom Long moving to a house with no garden then suddenly finding a metaphysical one . Having a garden of your own was no doubt something that working class people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden subtext there somewhere . There`s also a romance involving a young girl called Hattie but again are cynical kids amoured by love stories ? Perhaps the [[worst]] criticism is that very little in the way of excitement or adventure happens within the narrative

This is a childrens [[film]] that seems dated by its source . It`s inoffensive but I`m surprised by its high rating by the IMDB voters . I wonder how many of them would have given it so many high marks if they were 10 year olds who`d just seen the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? I have [[abundantly]] no knowledge of author [[Philippa]] [[Pierce]] or any of her novels and if TOM`S MIDNIGHT [[JARDIN]] is typical of her work I probably would have had [[petite]] interest in her books as a child . When I was a child I wasn`t really interested in litreture [[if]] it had soldiers fighting [[monster]] complete with a high body count

Judging by this [[kino]] version of TOM`S MIDNIGHT GARDEN I guess Pearce writes for lower middle class kids since much of the story of [[spins]] around protagonist Tom Long moving to a house with no garden then suddenly finding a metaphysical one . Having a garden of your own was no doubt something that working class people didn`t have in the 1950s so I guess there`s some political class ridden subtext there somewhere . There`s also a romance involving a young girl called Hattie but again are cynical kids amoured by love stories ? Perhaps the [[hardest]] criticism is that very little in the way of excitement or adventure happens within the narrative

This is a childrens [[movie]] that seems dated by its source . It`s inoffensive but I`m surprised by its high rating by the IMDB voters . I wonder how many of them would have given it so many high marks if they were 10 year olds who`d just seen the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy ? --------------------------------------------- Result 1252 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Surely]] one of the [[best]] British films ever [[made]], if not one of the [[best]] films ever [[made]] [[anywhere]]. [[Script]], [[cinematography]], [[direction]] and acting in a class on their own. This [[film]] [[works]] on so [[many]] [[levels]]. So why is it [[completely]] [[unavailable]] on tape, [[DVD]]. Never [[shown]] on [[TV]]? Why is it [[hidden]] away when it is [[regularly]] [[shown]] at the National [[Film]] [[Theatre]] in London to packed [[houses]]? [[Admittedly]] one of the [[better]] British films ever [[brought]], if not one of the [[better]] films ever [[introduced]] [[nowhere]]. [[Hyphen]], [[movies]], [[directions]] and acting in a class on their own. This [[cinema]] [[cooperating]] on so [[multiple]] [[echelons]]. So why is it [[utterly]] [[unattainable]] on tape, [[DVDS]]. Never [[showed]] on [[TELEVISION]]? Why is it [[stealth]] away when it is [[systematically]] [[showed]] at the National [[Flick]] [[Theater]] in London to packed [[household]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 1253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] 'Shock Corridor (1963)' was my [[first]] film from Samuel [[Fuller]], and there I was [[impressed]] with the director's [[astute]] [[blending]] of B-movie and big-budget aesthetics, even if the story itself was pure schlock. 'Pickup on South Street (1953)' was released a decade earlier in Fuller's career, obviously produced on a larger [[budget]] from a big-name studio, Twentieth Century-Fox. Nevertheless, the visuals are still notable in that there's a somewhat raw, naturalistic element to the photography, not unlike Dassin's 'The Night and the City (1950)' and Kazan's '[[Panic]] in the Streets (1950)' {the [[latter]] was [[also]] shot by [[cinematographer]] Joe McDonald}. [[In]] some scenes, Fuller shoves the [[camera]] so [[close]] to his actors' [[faces]] that they're out of [[focus]], [[bluntly]] [[registering]] the intimate [[thoughts]], [[emotions]] and brief inflections that are communicated through that most revealing of facial [[features]], the [[eye]]. [[Though]] ([[unexpectedly]]) prone to melodrama, and with just a hint of anti-Communist propaganda, 'Pickup on South Street' is a [[strong]] [[film]] noir that succeeds most outstandingly in its evocation of setting – the underground of [[New]] York [[City]].

When just-out-of-prison pickpocket [[Skip]] McCoy ([[Richard]] Widmark) snags the [[purse]] of a [[woman]] on the subway (Jean [[Peters]]), he [[pockets]] more than he'd originally bargained for. The [[woman]], Candy, and her [[cowardly]] ex-boyfriend Joey ([[Richard]] [[Kiley]]) had been [[smuggling]] top-secret [[information]] to the [[Communists]], and McKoy has [[unexpectedly]] [[retrieved]] an [[important]] roll of micro-film. Will he [[turn]] in the MacGuffin to the [[proper]] [[authorities]], or [[sell]] it to the [[highest]] bidder? If 'Pickup on [[South]] Street' has a [[flaw]], it's that the [[story]] [[seems]] [[designed]] [[solely]] to [[bolster]] an anti-Communist agenda, reeking of propaganda like nothing [[since]] WWII {Dwight Taylor, who supplied the story, [[also]] [[notably]] [[wrote]] 'The [[Thin]] [[Man]] Goes Home (1944),' the only propagandistic [[movie]] of the series}. For no apparent [[reason]], every identifiable character – even the smugly self-serving Skip McCoy – eventually becomes a self-sacrificing patriot, the transformation predictable from the outset. In traditional film noir, the unapologetic criminal always gets his comeuppance, the rational punishment for his sins, but apparently not when they've served their country; patriotism wipes the slate clean.

Richard Widmark, an actor who I'm really beginning to like, plays the haughty pickpocket with composure, though always with that hint of ill-ease that suggests he's biting off more than he can chew. The opening scene on the train is the film's finest, as McCoy breathlessly and silently fishes around in his victim's hand bag, recalling Bresson's 'Pickpocket (1959).' Thelma Ritter is terrific as a tired street-woman who'll peddle information to anybody willing to pay for it (though, of course, she draws the line at Commies). Jean Peters is well-cast as the trashy dame passing information to the other side, playing the role almost completely devoid of glamour; Fuller reportedly cast the actress on the observation that she had the slightly bow-legged strut of a prostitute. Nevertheless, Peters must suffer a contrived love affair with Widmark that really brings down the film's attempts at realism. Fascinatingly, upon its release, 'Pickup on South Street' was promptly condemned as Communist propaganda by the FBI, and the Communist Party condemned it for being the exact opposite. Go figure. 'Shock Corridor (1963)' was my [[outset]] film from Samuel [[Fowler]], and there I was [[surprising]] with the director's [[canny]] [[mixture]] of B-movie and big-budget aesthetics, even if the story itself was pure schlock. 'Pickup on South Street (1953)' was released a decade earlier in Fuller's career, obviously produced on a larger [[budgets]] from a big-name studio, Twentieth Century-Fox. Nevertheless, the visuals are still notable in that there's a somewhat raw, naturalistic element to the photography, not unlike Dassin's 'The Night and the City (1950)' and Kazan's '[[Fear]] in the Streets (1950)' {the [[lastly]] was [[moreover]] shot by [[photographer]] Joe McDonald}. [[At]] some scenes, Fuller shoves the [[cameras]] so [[nearer]] to his actors' [[confronting]] that they're out of [[concentrations]], [[plainly]] [[inscription]] the intimate [[thinks]], [[feelings]] and brief inflections that are communicated through that most revealing of facial [[traits]], the [[eyes]]. [[Albeit]] ([[suddenly]]) prone to melodrama, and with just a hint of anti-Communist propaganda, 'Pickup on South Street' is a [[forceful]] [[movie]] noir that succeeds most outstandingly in its evocation of setting – the underground of [[Novel]] York [[Town]].

When just-out-of-prison pickpocket [[Skipped]] McCoy ([[Richards]] Widmark) snags the [[backpack]] of a [[women]] on the subway (Jean [[Peter]]), he [[bags]] more than he'd originally bargained for. The [[women]], Candy, and her [[dastardly]] ex-boyfriend Joey ([[Richards]] [[Killy]]) had been [[trafficking]] top-secret [[info]] to the [[Communist]], and McKoy has [[suddenly]] [[fetched]] an [[sizable]] roll of micro-film. Will he [[converting]] in the MacGuffin to the [[adequate]] [[administrations]], or [[sells]] it to the [[higher]] bidder? If 'Pickup on [[Southern]] Street' has a [[inadequacy]], it's that the [[stories]] [[seem]] [[intended]] [[merely]] to [[reinforced]] an anti-Communist agenda, reeking of propaganda like nothing [[because]] WWII {Dwight Taylor, who supplied the story, [[further]] [[specifically]] [[authored]] 'The [[Geez]] [[Dawg]] Goes Home (1944),' the only propagandistic [[cinematic]] of the series}. For no apparent [[justification]], every identifiable character – even the smugly self-serving Skip McCoy – eventually becomes a self-sacrificing patriot, the transformation predictable from the outset. In traditional film noir, the unapologetic criminal always gets his comeuppance, the rational punishment for his sins, but apparently not when they've served their country; patriotism wipes the slate clean.

Richard Widmark, an actor who I'm really beginning to like, plays the haughty pickpocket with composure, though always with that hint of ill-ease that suggests he's biting off more than he can chew. The opening scene on the train is the film's finest, as McCoy breathlessly and silently fishes around in his victim's hand bag, recalling Bresson's 'Pickpocket (1959).' Thelma Ritter is terrific as a tired street-woman who'll peddle information to anybody willing to pay for it (though, of course, she draws the line at Commies). Jean Peters is well-cast as the trashy dame passing information to the other side, playing the role almost completely devoid of glamour; Fuller reportedly cast the actress on the observation that she had the slightly bow-legged strut of a prostitute. Nevertheless, Peters must suffer a contrived love affair with Widmark that really brings down the film's attempts at realism. Fascinatingly, upon its release, 'Pickup on South Street' was promptly condemned as Communist propaganda by the FBI, and the Communist Party condemned it for being the exact opposite. Go figure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is a very [[entertaining]] flick, considering the [[budget]] and its length. The storyline is [[hardly]] ever touched on in the movie [[world]] so it [[also]] [[brought]] a [[sense]] of novelty. The acting was [[great]] (P'z to [[Dom]]) and the [[cinematography]] was also very well [[done]]. I [[recommend]] this movie for anyone who's into thrillers, it will not [[disappoint]] you! This is a very [[droll]] flick, considering the [[budgets]] and its length. The storyline is [[barely]] ever touched on in the movie [[monde]] so it [[apart]] [[tabled]] a [[sensing]] of novelty. The acting was [[awesome]] (P'z to [[Stupidly]]) and the [[films]] was also very well [[performed]]. I [[recommendations]] this movie for anyone who's into thrillers, it will not [[defraud]] you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Actress]] Ruth Roman's real-life [[philanthropic]] [[gesture]] to [[help]] [[entertain]] [[troops]] [[arriving]] from and [[leaving]] for the Korean [[War]] at an [[air]] [[base]] near [[San]] [[Francisco]] jump-started this all-star Warner Bros. [[salute]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[make]] guest appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully [[green]] and [[skinny]] [[Air]] Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who looks [[like]] he should be [[delivering]] newspapers from his bicycle). [[Seems]] the Corporal has [[fooled]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when actually he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and plucky song numbers are most pleasant. Roman is also here, looking glamorous, while James Cagney pokes fun at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae sings in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a hospital bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[causing]] one to wonder, "Did they run out of sets?" For undemanding viewers, an interesting [[flashback]] to another time and place. [[Still]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[aspects]] render "Starlift" [[strictly]] a second-biller. *1/2 from **** [[Actor]] Ruth Roman's real-life [[charities]] [[flick]] to [[succour]] [[amuse]] [[forces]] [[arrived]] from and [[letting]] for the Korean [[Wars]] at an [[aviation]] [[foundations]] near [[Saint]] [[Francis]] jump-started this all-star Warner Bros. [[greet]] to patriotism and song. Many celebrities [[deliver]] guest appearances while a love-hate romance develops between a budding starlet and a painfully [[greene]] and [[delgado]] [[Aerial]] Force Corporal (Ron Hagerthy, who looks [[iike]] he should be [[offered]] newspapers from his bicycle). [[Appears]] the Corporal has [[tricked]] the actress into thinking he's off to battle when actually he's part of a airplane carrier crew, flying to and from Honolulu (you'd think she'd be happy he was staying out of harm's way, but instead she acts just like most childish females in 1950s movies). Doris Day is around for the first thirty minutes or so, and her distinct laugh and plucky song numbers are most pleasant. Roman is also here, looking glamorous, while James Cagney pokes fun at his screen persona and Gordon MacRae sings in his handsome baritone. Jane Wyman sings, too, in a hospital bedside reprise following Doris Day's lead, [[wreaking]] one to wonder, "Did they run out of sets?" For undemanding viewers, an interesting [[flash]] to another time and place. [[However]], the low-rent production and just-adequate technical [[things]] render "Starlift" [[rigorously]] a second-biller. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I have [[seen]] the freebird movie and [[think]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they reminded me of some good [[times]] i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the [[film]] director getting in on the acting, well [[done]] [[jon]] ! At the end a [[new]] [[crop]] gets mentioned, in [[Ireland]] is this the foundation for a 2nd film? hope so keep them coming. [[Great]] film , well [[written]], realistic characters ! I have [[watched]] the freebird movie and [[thinking]] its great! its laid back fun, about time the British film industry came through with something entertaining!! its good how the guy who met them at the service station gets mentioned way into the film in the news agents, nice touch. The acting was convincing (i am a biker) they reminded me of some good [[dates]] i have had in the bike scene. It was good to see the [[flick]] director getting in on the acting, well [[completed]] [[john]] ! At the end a [[newer]] [[crops]] gets mentioned, in [[Irish]] is this the foundation for a 2nd film? hope so keep them coming. [[Whopping]] film , well [[writes]], realistic characters ! --------------------------------------------- Result 1257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] With these people faking so [[many]] [[shots]], using [[old]] footage, and gassing animals to [[get]] them out, not to [[mention]] that some of the scenes were filmed on a [[created]] set with [[actors]], what's to [[believe]]? [[Old]] film of [[countries]] is [[nice]], but the animal [[abuse]] and [[degradation]] of natives is painful to watch in these [[films]]. I know, [[racism]] is OK in these [[old]] [[films]], but there is more to that to make this couple [[lose]] [[credibility]]. Portrayed as [[fliers]], they never [[flew]] their [[planes]], Martin Johnson was an ex-vaudevillian, [[used]] friends like Jack London for financial [[gain]] while stiffing them of royalties, denying his wife's apparent depression, using her as a cute prop, all this makes these films unbearable. They were by no means the first to [[travel]] to these lands, or the first to write about them. He was OK as a filmmaker and photographer, but that's about it. With these people faking so [[countless]] [[beatings]], using [[longtime]] footage, and gassing animals to [[got]] them out, not to [[mentioned]] that some of the scenes were filmed on a [[established]] set with [[protagonists]], what's to [[think]]? [[Archaic]] film of [[nationals]] is [[delightful]], but the animal [[abuses]] and [[deteriorating]] of natives is painful to watch in these [[cinema]]. I know, [[racist]] is OK in these [[former]] [[film]], but there is more to that to make this couple [[losing]] [[credence]]. Portrayed as [[aviators]], they never [[travelled]] their [[aeroplanes]], Martin Johnson was an ex-vaudevillian, [[employs]] friends like Jack London for financial [[earn]] while stiffing them of royalties, denying his wife's apparent depression, using her as a cute prop, all this makes these films unbearable. They were by no means the first to [[journey]] to these lands, or the first to write about them. He was OK as a filmmaker and photographer, but that's about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] One of the most [[excellent]] movies ever produced in [[Russia]] and [[certainly]] the best one made during the [[decline]] of the [[USSR]]. [[Incredibly]] [[clever]], [[hilarious]] and [[dramatic]] at the same [[time]]. [[Superb]] acting. Overall a [[masterpiece]]. [[Score]] it 10/10.

One of the most [[handsome]] movies ever produced in [[Moscow]] and [[admittedly]] the best one made during the [[lowering]] of the [[SOVIET]]. [[Unimaginably]] [[smarter]], [[comic]] and [[noteworthy]] at the same [[period]]. [[Sumptuous]] acting. Overall a [[centerpiece]]. [[Notation]] it 10/10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Banned]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the [[UK]], Unhinged has naturally gained [[quite]] a [[bit]] of [[notoriety]]. However, the most shocking thing I found about the [[film]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The [[bloodletting]] I [[could]] [[handle]]: the terrible acting, shoddy editing, awful [[direction]], [[lousy]] [[script]] and abysmal soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three girls on their [[way]] to a [[music]] [[festival]] crash into a [[ravine]] during a [[storm]]. They are [[rescued]] by a friendly stranger who takes them to a [[nearby]] [[house]]. The [[owner]] of the [[house]], a batty [[old]] [[lady]], and her spinster [[daughter]], [[welcome]] the [[girls]] in, allowing them to stay for a few days in [[order]] to [[recuperate]]. However, [[someone]] doesn't [[want]] the [[girls]] to [[leave]]—ever! One by one they [[fall]] victim to an [[unseen]] assailant.

Taking a [[long]] time to get going and featuring some of the [[worst]] performances ever in a horror [[film]] (and that [[takes]] some doing), Unhinged is a [[truly]] [[awful]] [[film]]. The music is a [[total]] [[mess]] (it [[sounds]] like a three [[year]] [[old]] has been [[let]] [[loose]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the [[movie]] perfectly. [[Only]] a [[couple]] of bloody scenes towards the [[end]] and a bit of [[gratuitous]] nudity [[save]] [[Unhinged]] from getting the [[lowest]] [[possible]] [[score]].

[[If]] you are a horror completist (and [[unfortunately]], I am), you will [[want]] to see this in [[order]] to tick it off the [[Video]] [[Nasty]] watch-list. But be [[warned]]—it is really, [[really]] [[bad]]. [[Banished]] as a 'Video Nasty' in the [[BRITISH]], Unhinged has naturally gained [[very]] a [[bite]] of [[repute]]. However, the most shocking thing I found about the [[cinematography]] was its amateurishness in all departments. The [[bloodbath]] I [[wo]] [[manipulate]]: the terrible acting, shoddy editing, awful [[directorate]], [[squalid]] [[hyphen]] and abysmal soundtrack were much harder to take.

Three girls on their [[routing]] to a [[musicians]] [[feast]] crash into a [[cliff]] during a [[tempest]]. They are [[save]] by a friendly stranger who takes them to a [[adjacent]] [[maison]]. The [[landowners]] of the [[maison]], a batty [[longtime]] [[ladies]], and her spinster [[girls]], [[greet]] the [[woman]] in, allowing them to stay for a few days in [[edict]] to [[recovers]]. However, [[everyone]] doesn't [[wanted]] the [[woman]] to [[walkout]]—ever! One by one they [[decreased]] victim to an [[unnoticed]] assailant.

Taking a [[lengthy]] time to get going and featuring some of the [[hardest]] performances ever in a horror [[filmmaking]] (and that [[pick]] some doing), Unhinged is a [[genuinely]] [[spooky]] [[films]]. The music is a [[whole]] [[muddle]] (it [[noises]] like a three [[annum]] [[former]] has been [[allowing]] [[slack]] on a synthesiser) and as such, it complements the [[cinema]] perfectly. [[Exclusively]] a [[matches]] of bloody scenes towards the [[termination]] and a bit of [[baseless]] nudity [[saving]] [[Deranged]] from getting the [[slightest]] [[probable]] [[punctuation]].

[[Though]] you are a horror completist (and [[tragically]], I am), you will [[wantto]] to see this in [[edict]] to tick it off the [[Videotape]] [[Naughty]] watch-list. But be [[cautioned]]—it is really, [[genuinely]] [[naughty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's really unfortunate that most people outside of Canada think that the only things that Canada produces are snow, mounties and hockey players. This film is the second superlative Canadian film I have seen within the past few weeks (the first was "The Red Violin"), far better than all but the best Hollywood efforts.

Gustad Noble is anything but that; he is a middle-aged Parsi bank employee in Bombay in the 1970s. This film sensitively explores various things that happen to him concerning his family, his friends and his work, and their effect on him. At the same time, it is a fascinating, and, I would assume, accurate, portrayal of middle-class, urban life in India at the time.

However, I was somewhat prepared for this, having read Rohinton Mistry's book a few years ago. The film, as might be expected, cannot capture all the complexities of the book, but, if you want to read a really good book, and see a really good film, read and see "Such a Long Journey". --------------------------------------------- Result 1261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] A so common [[horror]] story about a luxury [[building]] at Brooklyn which hides the gates to hell. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the movie of the polish filmmaker in any aspect possible. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more surprising from this film is the cast: it is full of great names of American cinema (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: [[barely]] [[entertaining]].

*My rate: 4/10 A so common [[terror]] story about a luxury [[build]] at Brooklyn which hides the gates to hell. It is reminiscent of Polanski's "The Tenant" (released a year before "The sentinel"), but is too far from the movie of the polish filmmaker in any aspect possible. "The tenant" was so disturbing, whereas "The sentinel" is not at all.

What it's more surprising from this film is the cast: it is full of great names of American cinema (Burguess, Gardner, Wallach), veteran actors acting for food (I guess).

Verdict: [[hardly]] [[droll]].

*My rate: 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1262 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I'm one of those people who [[usually]] watch [[programs]] and keep my [[feelings]] about a show private. However, Pushing [[Daisies]] is my exception. I became curious about the program from the commercials that aired which gave glimpses of the premise of the show. I was [[skeptical]] about it at first, especially after the finale of Six Feet Under was [[still]] in my head. Here we [[go]] again, I [[thought]]. I watched the [[first]], second, third and all the other episodes. Wow! [[First]] of all, I thought it took the subject of death and presented in a [[way]] that was [[palatable]] without being [[morbid]]. The characters were engaging and I like the thought of Ned the main character not being able to literally touch the love of his life, Chuck without the consequences of her dying.

Most of the characters have a longing for things they can't have. Besides Ned and Chuck, Olive longs for Ned. Lily and Vivian longs for their niece Chuck and Emerson is always longing for the monetary rewards from the mysterious deaths they solve. I think the characters are picture perfect and believable. I like how Emerson who is black plays off of the rest of the characters since as an African American; I like the subtle cultural humor that sometimes comes from him.

All in all, this visual fairytale is one of the most valuable pieces of entertainment that I've seen out of the 2007 season. I think the show has enough romance for the romantics and enough who-done-it for the mystery buffs. I just wish the writers would get back to work, so that the show can continue to evolve. I'm one of those people who [[fluently]] watch [[curriculum]] and keep my [[passions]] about a show private. However, Pushing [[Margaritas]] is my exception. I became curious about the program from the commercials that aired which gave glimpses of the premise of the show. I was [[incredulous]] about it at first, especially after the finale of Six Feet Under was [[yet]] in my head. Here we [[going]] again, I [[thinking]]. I watched the [[frst]], second, third and all the other episodes. Wow! [[Outset]] of all, I thought it took the subject of death and presented in a [[ways]] that was [[acceptable]] without being [[illness]]. The characters were engaging and I like the thought of Ned the main character not being able to literally touch the love of his life, Chuck without the consequences of her dying.

Most of the characters have a longing for things they can't have. Besides Ned and Chuck, Olive longs for Ned. Lily and Vivian longs for their niece Chuck and Emerson is always longing for the monetary rewards from the mysterious deaths they solve. I think the characters are picture perfect and believable. I like how Emerson who is black plays off of the rest of the characters since as an African American; I like the subtle cultural humor that sometimes comes from him.

All in all, this visual fairytale is one of the most valuable pieces of entertainment that I've seen out of the 2007 season. I think the show has enough romance for the romantics and enough who-done-it for the mystery buffs. I just wish the writers would get back to work, so that the show can continue to evolve. --------------------------------------------- Result 1263 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The only [[reason]] I [[even]] [[watched]] this was because I found it at my local [[library]] (and will berate them [[mercilessly]] for having wasted public [[monies]] on it), and despite the [[plethora]] of tits and ass, it didn't take long to realize that the fast-forward button was my friend. [[Terrible]] direction, pedestrian camera work, sporadically bad-to-nearly-passable acting, chintzy effects, and one of the [[worst]] screenplays I've had the [[displeasure]] of [[seeing]] brought to life (such as it was, horribly crippled and [[mutilated]]) in a long, long time. Best laughs actually come from the "Making of..." featurette, in which the poor saps involved with this HDV [[mess]] attempt to justify their lame efforts as if they had been working on something special, instead of something that won't be utterly forgotten next week. Wait! Except for the fact that somehow someone lured Tippi "The Birds" Hedren, of all people, into doing a bit part, along with Kane "Friday the 13th" Hodder! How this came to pass, I'll never know, and to be honest, I don't really [[care]]. Watch at your own risk, and don't say you haven't been [[warned]]. This is film-making at its [[pretentious]], craven [[worst]]. It only [[gets]] a 2 from me for having some good-looking naked [[women]], and [[even]] then, just [[barely]]. The only [[cause]] I [[yet]] [[observed]] this was because I found it at my local [[bookshops]] (and will berate them [[relentlessly]] for having wasted public [[moneys]] on it), and despite the [[multitude]] of tits and ass, it didn't take long to realize that the fast-forward button was my friend. [[Horrible]] direction, pedestrian camera work, sporadically bad-to-nearly-passable acting, chintzy effects, and one of the [[hardest]] screenplays I've had the [[discontent]] of [[witnessing]] brought to life (such as it was, horribly crippled and [[maimed]]) in a long, long time. Best laughs actually come from the "Making of..." featurette, in which the poor saps involved with this HDV [[disarray]] attempt to justify their lame efforts as if they had been working on something special, instead of something that won't be utterly forgotten next week. Wait! Except for the fact that somehow someone lured Tippi "The Birds" Hedren, of all people, into doing a bit part, along with Kane "Friday the 13th" Hodder! How this came to pass, I'll never know, and to be honest, I don't really [[caring]]. Watch at your own risk, and don't say you haven't been [[advised]]. This is film-making at its [[cocky]], craven [[hardest]]. It only [[obtains]] a 2 from me for having some good-looking naked [[femmes]], and [[yet]] then, just [[scarcely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Wow this was a [[great]] [[Italian]] "[[ZOMBIE]]" [[movie]] by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio [[started]] this movie and was ill so the great Bruno took over and it turned out surprisingly better than I [[expected]] it to turn out so if you have seen "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[must]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[great]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! Wow this was a [[whopping]] [[Ltalian]] "[[GHOUL]]" [[cinematographic]] by two great director's Luci Fulci ("ZOMBIE") and Bruno Mattie ("HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD") Lucio [[initiates]] this movie and was ill so the great Bruno took over and it turned out surprisingly better than I [[projected]] it to turn out so if you have seen "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD" directed by Bruno Mattie and if you saw "ZOMBIE" directed by Lucio Fulci and liked both or one of theme then this is a movie you [[ought]] watch it has great "ZOMBIE" make-up witch equals great looking "ZOMBIES" has a funny "ZOMBIE" flying head!And "ZOMBIE" birds that spit acid at you and turns you into a "ZOMBIE" (That Only Happed To Two People) but they are mainly just the great toxic "ZOMBIES" like in Bruno Matties "HELL OF THE LIVING DEAD".So if you like Italian "ZOMBIE" movies or just "ZOMBIE" movie's in general than check this one out its a [[large]] Italian "ZOMBIE" movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold Case since its premiered ([[especially]] now that it [[immediately]] follows The [[Amazing]] [[Race]], but this was one of the [[best]] [[instances]] of writing and acting I've [[seen]] from the [[house]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[especially]] of the younger officers, was spot on, and the script and editing, the soundtrack, and the acting [[made]] this episode a [[tour]] d'force. [[If]] I were the producers I [[would]] submit this episode for [[Emmy]] consideration. It [[amazing]] how [[complete]] a [[portrait]] was made of Coop and [[Jimmy]] within the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a [[lot]] of talented people doing their [[best]]. I hope there's is advance warning of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll notice a lot that I did not notice the first time around. I've watched a bunch of episodes of Cold Case since its premiered ([[peculiarly]] now that it [[promptly]] follows The [[Unbelievable]] [[Racing]], but this was one of the [[optimum]] [[cases]] of writing and acting I've [[watched]] from the [[housing]] of Bruckheimer. The casting, [[mostly]] of the younger officers, was spot on, and the script and editing, the soundtrack, and the acting [[effected]] this episode a [[touring]] d'force. [[Unless]] I were the producers I [[ought]] submit this episode for [[Emma]] consideration. It [[startling]] how [[finish]] a [[portrayal]] was made of Coop and [[Jimi]] within the confines of s 48 minute episode; that takes a [[batches]] of talented people doing their [[nicest]]. I hope there's is advance warning of when this episode is repeated, because I'm sure I'll notice a lot that I did not notice the first time around. --------------------------------------------- Result 1266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] [[features]] a gorgeous [[brunette]] named [[Danielle]] [[Petty]]. She has stunning green eyes, and is in the first few scenes and the last scene. She is the only [[thing]] about this [[movie]] that is not repulsive. She [[may]] not have a [[future]] as an actress, because this kind of movie is the kind of [[offensive]] [[disaster]] that kills careers.

The [[movie]] itself has [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] to recommend it. It is not a good [[horror]] [[film]], or a good fake journalistic [[report]], or remotely well done. There is no [[skill]] apparent in it's [[production]]. It is like a bad [[student]] film. The story's horrific elements do not make you sick, it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I [[would]] [[give]] this [[movie]] [[ZERO]] stars if I [[could]]. This [[filmmaking]] [[trait]] a gorgeous [[chestnut]] named [[Daniel]] [[Trite]]. She has stunning green eyes, and is in the first few scenes and the last scene. She is the only [[stuff]] about this [[cinematography]] that is not repulsive. She [[maggio]] not have a [[impending]] as an actress, because this kind of movie is the kind of [[abusive]] [[calamities]] that kills careers.

The [[kino]] itself has [[fully]] [[anything]] to recommend it. It is not a good [[terror]] [[movies]], or a good fake journalistic [[reports]], or remotely well done. There is no [[aptitude]] apparent in it's [[productivity]]. It is like a bad [[learners]] film. The story's horrific elements do not make you sick, it is the fact that it is so poorly done that makes you sick. I [[should]] [[confer]] this [[filmmaking]] [[NOTHINGNESS]] stars if I [[did]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Hal Hartley's Henry Fool was an independent film masterpiece and certainly his [[best]] work. It has immense character depth, subtle, complicated dialogue, and an excellent, emotional ending which captivates. I remember [[pausing]] it several times during my first viewing to absorb what I was seeing and feeling. Henry Fool was a [[complete]] [[movie]] from [[start]] to finish, and needed no sequel.

[[Thus]] I was [[surprised]] when I heard about [[Fay]] Grim. [[Fay]] was not one of the main characters of the first film and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world vanity and ignorance for her brother Simon to be forced to deal with as he matures. In her own movie, Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very different road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult journey as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie contains several fondly remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a harsh, boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through contrast unearths the inner wise woman which had not been previously developed or nurtured by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's [[struggle]] and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to [[soften]] only just enough to regain Henry. At first, fans of Henry Fool may find themselves wondering how the movie can even be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intense]] [[film]] with spy game antics and physical comedy. But this is where the subtlety of Fay Grim lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative chaos in staid order. Parker Posey is an excellent actress who captures Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. Hal Hartley's Henry Fool was an independent film masterpiece and certainly his [[nicest]] work. It has immense character depth, subtle, complicated dialogue, and an excellent, emotional ending which captivates. I remember [[hiatus]] it several times during my first viewing to absorb what I was seeing and feeling. Henry Fool was a [[finish]] [[movies]] from [[embark]] to finish, and needed no sequel.

[[Accordingly]] I was [[horrified]] when I heard about [[Fey]] Grim. [[Fey]] was not one of the main characters of the first film and seemed to exist more as the troubling imposition of real-world vanity and ignorance for her brother Simon to be forced to deal with as he matures. In her own movie, Fay matures herself, though her maturity takes a very different road. Simon went from near autistic isolation to a merely somewhat-introverted genius. Fay starts her adult journey as an immature, utterly normal, spoiled child and responds to the onslaught of ridiculous circumstances by becoming a mature, utterly normal, experienced adult who holds no advantages. She deals with problems the way any human does, with determination, a little thought, and weary disdain. While Simon learned to control his mind, Fay learns to control her emotion.

The movie contains several fondly remembered elements of its prequel, but differs vastly in tone for most of the film. Henry fool showed you a harsh, boring, ignorant world which contrasted with Simon's inner passion and creativity. In Fay Grim, the world is a lively, crazy, emotional place which shows the silliness of her young life, and through contrast unearths the inner wise woman which had not been previously developed or nurtured by her similarly weak mother.

The movie is in two parts, the first dealing with the beginning of Fay's [[fight]] and subsequent hardening due to authoritarian hostility, and the second dealing with her battle to [[sweeten]] only just enough to regain Henry. At first, fans of Henry Fool may find themselves wondering how the movie can even be considered a sequel, and thinking it is profane to follow such an [[intensive]] [[movies]] with spy game antics and physical comedy. But this is where the subtlety of Fay Grim lies. The sequel is about Fay's journey, and as I said before, hers is one of finding the life-giving sanity in chaos, not the creative chaos in staid order. Parker Posey is an excellent actress who captures Hal Hartley's tongue in cheek humor perfectly. Elina Löwensohn perhaps eclipses her in emotional commitment to the role, allowing Parker to play both straight man and comic against the lively, stage-like comedy happening around her.

With the entrance of Henry into the picture, the movie begins to take a sobering turn. Hal Hartley's movies are all plays, and every play must come full circle. By the end, you are shown Fay's newly developed character and integrity are the offspring of her time with the fatally intense Henry, whose piercing honesty and unique passion lights a spark in anyone he meets.

Fay Grim is an excellent movie which does not surpass Henry Fool, but shows through Hal's range that the nuances of his art are the proof of his genius.

Honestly, I think anyone who bashes this movie not only missed the point by a mile (and especially the subtlety in Parker Posey's acting), but could not have been much interested the movie Henry Fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I should preface this by [[stating]] that I am a Dolph Lundgren fan. The [[man]] [[turns]] out some of the funniest [[action]] clichés imaginable and [[Detention]] is [[probably]] my personal [[favorite]]. *Spoiler* [[even]] [[though]] there is no such [[thing]] as a Dolph [[spoiler]] since the [[scripts]] are so [[absurd]] to [[begin]] with: a chase scene with a handicapped kid carrying a [[pistol]] [[versus]] a guy on a Harley with a sub-machine gun, through a high school [[hallway]] and the [[kid]] [[wins]]? Good [[game]], the [[Oscar]] goes to Detention. Dolph, if you're reading this, thanks for the laughs, old friend.

In summary: Terrific movie that is a [[guaranteed]] laugh. I [[recommend]] inviting some friends over for this and [[forcing]] them to sit through it. Hilarious. I should preface this by [[arguing]] that I am a Dolph Lundgren fan. The [[dude]] [[revolves]] out some of the funniest [[activity]] clichés imaginable and [[Detained]] is [[arguably]] my personal [[prefers]]. *Spoiler* [[yet]] [[albeit]] there is no such [[stuff]] as a Dolph [[deflectors]] since the [[alphabets]] are so [[nutty]] to [[starts]] with: a chase scene with a handicapped kid carrying a [[revolver]] [[against]] a guy on a Harley with a sub-machine gun, through a high school [[passageway]] and the [[petit]] [[won]]? Good [[jeu]], the [[Oskar]] goes to Detention. Dolph, if you're reading this, thanks for the laughs, old friend.

In summary: Terrific movie that is a [[ensured]] laugh. I [[recommended]] inviting some friends over for this and [[prompting]] them to sit through it. Hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 1269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] has [[great]] acting, [[great]] [[photography]] and a very strong [[story]] [[line]] that [[really]] makes you [[think]] about who you are, how you [[define]] yourself, how you [[fit]] in, whether you [[accept]] to [[play]] a role or break free... There already are [[excellent]] [[comments]] [[dealing]] with these [[aspects]]. I [[want]] to comment on the [[formal]] [[setting]] of the film. [[Basically]], it's two people on a [[roof]]. There is [[unity]] of place and time, with 2 [[protagonists]], and the radio acting as the choir. [[Many]] [[directors]] have [[turned]] Greek tragedies into [[film]], many [[directors]] have [[filmed]] [[contemporary]] stories as if they were a Greek [[tragedy]], but no [[director]], in my [[opinion]], has [[succeeded]] as [[admirably]] as Ettore Scola in [[approaching]] the purity and force of the [[great]] Greek [[tragedies]] both in [[story]] [[line]] and [[formal]] setting. A masterpiece. This [[kino]] has [[fabulous]] acting, [[wonderful]] [[photographer]] and a very strong [[history]] [[iine]] that [[genuinely]] makes you [[thought]] about who you are, how you [[identifies]] yourself, how you [[fitted]] in, whether you [[accepted]] to [[playing]] a role or break free... There already are [[super]] [[sightings]] [[deal]] with these [[facets]]. I [[wanting]] to comment on the [[servant]] [[configure]] of the film. [[Fundamentally]], it's two people on a [[rooftop]]. There is [[uniformity]] of place and time, with 2 [[actors]], and the radio acting as the choir. [[Several]] [[administrators]] have [[revolved]] Greek tragedies into [[kino]], many [[administrators]] have [[videotaped]] [[current]] stories as if they were a Greek [[drama]], but no [[superintendent]], in my [[opinions]], has [[successes]] as [[marvellously]] as Ettore Scola in [[nearing]] the purity and force of the [[marvellous]] Greek [[macy]] both in [[stories]] [[iine]] and [[official]] setting. A masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Slow and nice [[images]] changed one another, with sometimes annoying [[music]] (you know Bjork) in [[background]], for the first 75% of the movie. If you did not have enough sleep, that's a good time.

But, in the last 20% of the movie director decides to bring idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M images: "spiritual lovers" are [[cutting]] each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much disturbing and actually changed general impression of blend of abstract art and images of modern Japanese mystery.

Operator and director are great, but weird.

Did not enjoy it at all. Slow and nice [[picture]] changed one another, with sometimes annoying [[musica]] (you know Bjork) in [[context]], for the first 75% of the movie. If you did not have enough sleep, that's a good time.

But, in the last 20% of the movie director decides to bring idea of re-birth, re-incarnation or else, through S&M images: "spiritual lovers" are [[chopping]] each others bodies with knives. For me it was very much disturbing and actually changed general impression of blend of abstract art and images of modern Japanese mystery.

Operator and director are great, but weird.

Did not enjoy it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] If you haven't seen the gong show TV series then you won't like this movie much at all, not that knowing the [[series]] makes this a great movie.

I give it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[things]] make it kind of amusing that help [[make]] up for its [[obvious]] [[problems]].

1) It's a funny [[snapshot]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You get a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) If you haven't seen the gong show TV series then you won't like this movie much at all, not that knowing the [[serials]] makes this a great movie.

I give it a 5 out of 10 because a few [[matters]] make it kind of amusing that help [[deliver]] up for its [[perceptible]] [[disorders]].

1) It's a funny [[instantaneous]] of the era it was made in, the late 1970's and early 1980's. 2) You get a lot of funny cameos of people you've seen on the show. 3) It's interesting to see Chuck (the host) when he isn't doing his on air TV personality. 4) You get to see a lot of bizarre people doing all sorts of weirdness just like you see on the TV show.

I won't list all the bad things because there's a lot of them, but here's a few of the most prominent.

1) The Gong Show Movie has a lot of the actual TV show clips which gets tired at movie length. 2) The movie's story line outside of the clip segments is very weak and basically is made up of just one plot point. 3) Chuck is actually halfway decent as an actor, but most of the rest of the actors are doing typical way over the top 1970's flatness.

It's a good movie to watch when you don't have an hour and a half you want to watch all at once. Watch 20 minutes at a time and it's not so bad. But even then it's not so good either. ;) --------------------------------------------- Result 1272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "wow, finally, some entertainment." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to face it, these news reporters (if one can even call them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "playing around" time.

At first, I thought Jillian was a breathe of fresh air. But [[seriously]], this woman has got not the [[least]] [[bit]] of [[journalist]] in her. She is very [[unprofessional]]. She keeps on interrupting Steve when he starts [[informing]] the viewers about a certain news report. It's just really become annoying to the point that I can't watch it anymore.

Jillian is NOT a good journalist. Hell, she's more of a celebrity who [[loves]] being a celebrity. Hence, she instantly transforms into a celebrity around celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and quite possibly perceives her relationship with celebrities more important than being a rightfully insatiable journalist- and that's all I can say about her.

Also (disappointingly), this show has more entertainment news than necessary news reports about the world, the government, the US, or something that will benefit and/or serve the public's best interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they talk about comes off as a commercial product. On the other hand, their field reporters are [[interestingly]] tolerable...

I believe "Good Day LA" is for young teenagers and celebrities, and it is definitely not for people who actually CARE about the news.

SIDE NOTE: (I'd really rather watch KTLA. However, they try so hard to be entertaining sometimes. They're still a bit dull though. Oh well, I'll stick to NBC's "Today." ABC's "Good Morning America" is also okay... as long as Diane Sawyer doesn't become way too serious.) When I first tuned in on this morning news, I thought, "wow, finally, some entertainment." It was slightly amusing for a week or so... But we have to face it, these news reporters (if one can even call them that) have WAY TOO MUCH "playing around" time.

At first, I thought Jillian was a breathe of fresh air. But [[earnestly]], this woman has got not the [[fewer]] [[bitten]] of [[correspondents]] in her. She is very [[amateurish]]. She keeps on interrupting Steve when he starts [[enlighten]] the viewers about a certain news report. It's just really become annoying to the point that I can't watch it anymore.

Jillian is NOT a good journalist. Hell, she's more of a celebrity who [[iike]] being a celebrity. Hence, she instantly transforms into a celebrity around celebrities whom she's supposed to be interviewing. She's not very professional and quite possibly perceives her relationship with celebrities more important than being a rightfully insatiable journalist- and that's all I can say about her.

Also (disappointingly), this show has more entertainment news than necessary news reports about the world, the government, the US, or something that will benefit and/or serve the public's best interest. They're too focus on sensationalism that everything they talk about comes off as a commercial product. On the other hand, their field reporters are [[stunningly]] tolerable...

I believe "Good Day LA" is for young teenagers and celebrities, and it is definitely not for people who actually CARE about the news.

SIDE NOTE: (I'd really rather watch KTLA. However, they try so hard to be entertaining sometimes. They're still a bit dull though. Oh well, I'll stick to NBC's "Today." ABC's "Good Morning America" is also okay... as long as Diane Sawyer doesn't become way too serious.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1273 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm a [[fan]] of [[arty]] [[movies]], but regretfully I have to report this movie to be [[pretentious]] drivel. Agonisingly slow to develop a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. Even after bad [[movies]] I feel that I [[learn]] something, or [[enjoyed]] some aspect, but there there was [[nothing]] to [[appreciate]]. The premise was not uninteresting, but the [[movie]] [[starts]] and [[ends]] there. The acting was OK, though the characters were [[utterly]] boring. For the protagonist to [[aim]] at such an audacious [[goal]], she is [[mightily]] [[empty]]. Pity. I usually enjoy movies that are unformulaic, but [[lack]] of formula should not be [[confused]] with zero content. I'm a [[breather]] of [[artsy]] [[film]], but regretfully I have to report this movie to be [[cocky]] drivel. Agonisingly slow to develop a non-existent plot based on a promising premise, the experience is, shall we say, trying. Even after bad [[kino]] I feel that I [[learnt]] something, or [[adored]] some aspect, but there there was [[nada]] to [[appreciates]]. The premise was not uninteresting, but the [[cinema]] [[launched]] and [[culminates]] there. The acting was OK, though the characters were [[quite]] boring. For the protagonist to [[aiming]] at such an audacious [[intent]], she is [[powerfully]] [[emptiness]]. Pity. I usually enjoy movies that are unformulaic, but [[shortfall]] of formula should not be [[puzzled]] with zero content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Raggedy Ann & [[Andy]] is the [[first]] [[movie]] I ever saw in the theaters. My [[dad]] took my sister and I, and the funny thing is - when we got home, dad asked us "what do you want to do now?" and we said we want to watch Raggedy Ann & Andy again! lol, and my dad actually took us back to the theatre to watch it again -- at least that's how I [[remember]] it. I was five years old at the time.

This [[movie]] was pretty [[scary]] for a five year old. The scene with the giant ocean of sweets, and the hypnotic camel scene.. i don't remember a lot from this film, naturally, the beginning was magical, and a few scenes -- I wish I could find it again, and will likely seek it out now.

I remember I loved Raggedy Ann & Andy. Raggedy Ann & [[Indie]] is the [[frst]] [[flick]] I ever saw in the theaters. My [[daddy]] took my sister and I, and the funny thing is - when we got home, dad asked us "what do you want to do now?" and we said we want to watch Raggedy Ann & Andy again! lol, and my dad actually took us back to the theatre to watch it again -- at least that's how I [[rember]] it. I was five years old at the time.

This [[filmmaking]] was pretty [[awful]] for a five year old. The scene with the giant ocean of sweets, and the hypnotic camel scene.. i don't remember a lot from this film, naturally, the beginning was magical, and a few scenes -- I wish I could find it again, and will likely seek it out now.

I remember I loved Raggedy Ann & Andy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] As a community theater actor who [[works]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too [[seriously]], I'm [[always]] amused by those who treat it as [[Great]] Art. This movie skewers the "Actor's Craft" [[mercilessly]] while dishing up a [[lot]] of good laughs.

A ham actor on location for a movie [[bears]] a resemblance to the [[dictator]]. When the dictator dies of a [[heart]] attack from too much [[drink]] and [[food]], the [[actor]] is kidnapped and [[forced]] to play "the part of a [[lifetime]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the secret service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[fall]] in [[love]] with him and vice [[versa]], and turns the tables on his [[captors]] [[beautifully]].

[[Lots]] of [[great]] shtick by the leads, lots of good work by some [[unknown]] [[supporting]] [[actors]], [[particularly]] the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan Winters plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[exceptional]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of beautiful locations (in Brazil), a humorous script, and [[good]] actors doing their thing and looking like they're actually having fun and not going through the usual existential angst about what is only play-acting! As a community theater actor who [[work]] hard at it but doesn't take acting too [[severely]], I'm [[repeatedly]] amused by those who treat it as [[Whopping]] Art. This movie skewers the "Actor's Craft" [[viciously]] while dishing up a [[batches]] of good laughs.

A ham actor on location for a movie [[carry]] a resemblance to the [[dictatorship]]. When the dictator dies of a [[heartland]] attack from too much [[drank]] and [[nutrition]], the [[protagonist]] is kidnapped and [[obligated]] to play "the part of a [[lifespan]]" by the neo-Nazi head of the secret service. He plays it to the hilt, gets the dictator's girlfriend to [[drops]] in [[likes]] with him and vice [[inverse]], and turns the tables on his [[perps]] [[divinely]].

[[Batch]] of [[large]] shtick by the leads, lots of good work by some [[unidentified]] [[assist]] [[actresses]], [[namely]] the household staff and two members of the palace guard, and fun little cameos abound. Sammy Davis Jr. makes light of himself, Jonathan Winters plays a semi-retired American businessman with something else going on, and Raul Julia, Sonia Braga, and above all Richard Dreyfuss are [[extraordinaire]].

This is a dumb movie, but it has lots of beautiful locations (in Brazil), a humorous script, and [[alright]] actors doing their thing and looking like they're actually having fun and not going through the usual existential angst about what is only play-acting! --------------------------------------------- Result 1276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (86%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] You believe in God or you don't. You believe in Jesus or you don't. You believe He is the Son of God or you don't. The choice is up to you.

Director Denys Arcand has really done everything he could to bring back Jesus to a mere historic figure, social worker, son of two humans, instead of the Son of God the Holy Spirit and Mary, Who opened Heaven again for us. Encouraging the Big Bang, a world come from evolution, instead of seeing the beauty of creation. The film depicts a theologian bringing some "modern findings" to the actor who plays Jesus in the Passion Play, who happily incorporates them in his play.

The depicted priest who runs the sanctuary where the Passion Play is performed in Montreal has a sexual relation with one of the female players of the Passion Play instead of showing his love for God through celibacy. More often than not the director's abhorrence of the Church is clearly visible.

The director has tried to make a parallel between Jesus' life and the Passion Play actor's life. This is an admirable attempt, but depicting the Resurrection with the transplantation of the Passion Play actor's organs in other bodies signifies how the director thinks about Jesus.

My opinion is not important, God's opinion is, but I wouldn't want to stand in the shoes of the director and actors when standing before Jesus' throne. --------------------------------------------- Result 1277 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] **** Includes [[Spoilers]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've seen all the [[great]] ones another pops up to surprise me. I had never [[seen]] this film before. It was a [[treat]], off the beaten path too...not just the path to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror film made in the 1940s that dared to try [[something]] VERY [[different]]. The pretty girl is (gulp) fearless for a change and saves the men, including the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This girl was the complete opposite of most women in films of that time, no screaming at her own shadow, no fainting from fright, no tripping over a leaf as she runs. This gal wasn't afraid to live alone in a secluded hut far away from the rest of the villagers. Not only that but the place was on a foggy swamp rumored to be haunted. Heck she even takes naps on the swamp grass outdoors...like a regular 1940s version of Ripley. No snake, gator or ghostly strangler would dare bother this gal. Books on early feminist films should be sure to include this overlooked [[work]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those wonderfully atmospheric classic B/W horror films they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to wear your cast iron turtle neck for protection. **** Includes [[Troublemakers]] ****

I've been a horror film fan now for many decades. Just when I think I've seen all the [[super]] ones another pops up to surprise me. I had never [[noticed]] this film before. It was a [[address]], off the beaten path too...not just the path to the swamp ferry boat either. Here was a horror film made in the 1940s that dared to try [[anything]] VERY [[multiple]]. The pretty girl is (gulp) fearless for a change and saves the men, including the man she loves, from the monster ! How is that for a twist. This girl was the complete opposite of most women in films of that time, no screaming at her own shadow, no fainting from fright, no tripping over a leaf as she runs. This gal wasn't afraid to live alone in a secluded hut far away from the rest of the villagers. Not only that but the place was on a foggy swamp rumored to be haunted. Heck she even takes naps on the swamp grass outdoors...like a regular 1940s version of Ripley. No snake, gator or ghostly strangler would dare bother this gal. Books on early feminist films should be sure to include this overlooked [[cooperating]].

See this if you are a fan, like me, of those wonderfully atmospheric classic B/W horror films they made only in the 30s and 40s. And be sure to wear your cast iron turtle neck for protection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] Deliverance is the fascinating, haunting and [[sometimes]] even [[disturbing]] tale by James [[Dickey]], turned into a [[brilliant]] movie by John Boorman. It's about four businessmen, [[driven]] by [[manhood]] and macho-behavior, who're [[spending]] a canoeing weekend [[high]] up in the mountains. Up there, they're [[faced]] with [[every]] darkest side of man and [[every]] worst [[form]] of human misery...[[poverty]], buggery and [[even]] [[physical]] harassment! These four [[men]] [[intended]] to [[travel]] down the [[river]] for [[adventure]] and excitement but their [[trip]] [[soon]] [[changes]] into an odyssey through a violent and lurking mountain-land, [[completely]] estranged from all [[forms]] of [[civilisation]]. [[All]] these [[elements]] actually make Deliverance one of the most nightmarish [[films]] I've ever [[seen]]. [[Just]] about everything that [[happens]] to these [[men]], you pray that you'll never [[find]] yourself to be in a [[similar]] situation. Pure [[talking]] [[cinema]], Deliverance is a very [[important]] [[movie]] as well. [[John]] Boorman's [[best]] ([[closely]] followed by Zardoz and Excalibur) was - and [[still]] is - a very influential [[film]] and it [[contains]] [[several]] [[memorable]] scenes that already [[featured]] in numberless other [[movies]]. [[Just]] [[think]] about the [[terrific]] "Duelling banjos" musical [[score]] and, of course, the [[unforgettable]] homosexual "squeal [[like]] a [[pig]]" rape scene. All the [[actors]] [[deliver]] ([[haha]]) [[perfect]] acting performances. [[Especially]] [[Jon]] Voight. [[A]] [[must]] see [[motion]] picture!! Deliverance is the fascinating, haunting and [[intermittently]] even [[disconcerting]] tale by James [[Cough]], turned into a [[glamorous]] movie by John Boorman. It's about four businessmen, [[stimulated]] by [[virility]] and macho-behavior, who're [[spends]] a canoeing weekend [[higher]] up in the mountains. Up there, they're [[encountered]] with [[each]] darkest side of man and [[all]] worst [[shape]] of human misery...[[needy]], buggery and [[yet]] [[corporal]] harassment! These four [[males]] [[designed]] to [[travels]] down the [[rivers]] for [[adventurer]] and excitement but their [[tour]] [[promptly]] [[modification]] into an odyssey through a violent and lurking mountain-land, [[fully]] estranged from all [[shapes]] of [[civilisations]]. [[Entire]] these [[components]] actually make Deliverance one of the most nightmarish [[movie]] I've ever [[noticed]]. [[Jen]] about everything that [[arises]] to these [[males]], you pray that you'll never [[unearthed]] yourself to be in a [[analogous]] situation. Pure [[talks]] [[cine]], Deliverance is a very [[sizable]] [[films]] as well. [[Johannes]] Boorman's [[nicest]] ([[intimately]] followed by Zardoz and Excalibur) was - and [[however]] is - a very influential [[movie]] and it [[involves]] [[various]] [[eventful]] scenes that already [[traits]] in numberless other [[theater]]. [[Jen]] [[believing]] about the [[super]] "Duelling banjos" musical [[notation]] and, of course, the [[eventful]] homosexual "squeal [[iike]] a [[pork]]" rape scene. All the [[protagonists]] [[delivering]] ([[hah]]) [[irreproachable]] acting performances. [[Notably]] [[John]] Voight. [[una]] [[ought]] see [[petition]] picture!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1279 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is such a great [[movie]] to watch with [[young]] [[children]]. I'm [[always]] looking for an [[excuse]] to watch it over & over. Gena was [[good]], Cheech was fun,the [[Russian]] was [[good]], [[Maria]] was adorable & of course Paulie was the [[best]]! This is such a great [[kino]] to watch with [[youths]] [[kiddies]]. I'm [[perpetually]] looking for an [[apologizing]] to watch it over & over. Gena was [[buena]], Cheech was fun,the [[Russians]] was [[buena]], [[Mariah]] was adorable & of course Paulie was the [[better]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Race car drivers say that 100 mph seems fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian Dog seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly [[bizarre]] till you've [[seen]] the works of C. Frederic Hobbs. Race fans, there is [[NOTHING]] in all the world of film like the works of C. Frederic Hobbs.

Alabama's Ghost comes as close as any of his films to having a coherent plot, and it only involves hippies, rock concerts, voodoo, ghosts, vampires, robots, magicians, corrupt multinational corporations, elephants and Mystery Gas. And the Fabulous Woodmobile, cruising the Sunset District in San Francisco, of course.

What's really startling is that somebody gave him a LOT of money to make Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, lighting, hundreds of extras, costumes, lots and lots of effects. Somehow that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some awful cheeseball like Night of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at least some part of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously making the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? Race car drivers say that 100 mph seems fast till you've driven 150, and 150 mph seems fast till you've driven 250.

OK.

Andalusian Dog seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Eraserhead, and Eraserhead seems breathtakingly bizarre till you've seen Begotten.

And Begotten seems breathtakingly [[surreal]] till you've [[saw]] the works of C. Frederic Hobbs. Race fans, there is [[NADA]] in all the world of film like the works of C. Frederic Hobbs.

Alabama's Ghost comes as close as any of his films to having a coherent plot, and it only involves hippies, rock concerts, voodoo, ghosts, vampires, robots, magicians, corrupt multinational corporations, elephants and Mystery Gas. And the Fabulous Woodmobile, cruising the Sunset District in San Francisco, of course.

What's really startling is that somebody gave him a LOT of money to make Alabama's Ghost. There's sets, lighting, hundreds of extras, costumes, lots and lots of effects. Somehow that makes Alabama's Ghost SO WRONG. You watch some awful cheeseball like Night of Horror or Plutonium Baby, and at least some part of the weirdness is excusable on the basis that they were obviously making the film off the headroom on their Discover cards. But Alabama's Ghost was made with an actual budget, and that's EVIL. I mean, I've got a script about a tribe of cannibals living in Thunder Bay, Ontario, building a secret temple in the woods out of Twizzlers, and nobody's beating down MY door waving a checkbook - how did this guy get the funds for FOUR of the flakiest movies ever made? --------------------------------------------- Result 1281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Don't [[waste]] 90 [[minutes]] of your [[time]] on "Fast [[Food]], [[Fast]] [[Women]]." It's annoyingly episodic [[script]] with three [[story]] lines patched [[together]] is laughably [[bad]] due to predictable writing, horrific acting, and [[even]] [[bad]] music. I [[found]] the anorexic main [[character]] [[upsetting]] to watch [[every]] time she was on screen. [[SHE]] [[needs]] the [[fast]] [[food]].

[[Spend]] the 90 [[minutes]] you'd [[devote]] to this [[turkey]] doing something more [[exciting]]...like trimming your [[toenails]]. You'd have more entertainment [[value]].

The only [[redeeming]] [[thing]] about this [[film]] is [[Louise]] Lasser, but she deserves [[much]] [[better]] than this [[tired]] [[script]]. It's as [[impotent]] as the [[elder]] [[guy]] she [[courts]] in the [[movie]].

[[VIEWER]] [[BEWARE]]! Don't [[wastes]] 90 [[mins]] of your [[period]] on "Fast [[Alimentary]], [[Faster]] [[Femmes]]." It's annoyingly episodic [[hyphen]] with three [[saga]] lines patched [[jointly]] is laughably [[negative]] due to predictable writing, horrific acting, and [[yet]] [[naughty]] music. I [[finds]] the anorexic main [[nature]] [[heartrending]] to watch [[all]] time she was on screen. [[ELLE]] [[must]] the [[rapid]] [[feeding]].

[[Expended]] the 90 [[mins]] you'd [[dedicate]] to this [[ankara]] doing something more [[exhilarating]]...like trimming your [[nails]]. You'd have more entertainment [[values]].

The only [[redeem]] [[stuff]] about this [[cinematography]] is [[Luiz]] Lasser, but she deserves [[very]] [[optimum]] than this [[mangy]] [[hyphen]]. It's as [[defenceless]] as the [[seniors]] [[dude]] she [[courthouse]] in the [[films]].

[[BYSTANDER]] [[ATTENTION]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] From [[around]] the [[time]] Europe [[began]] fighting World War II, until the war's end, Hollywood (with [[significant]] [[prodding]] from the [[government]]) [[made]] [[tons]] of [[movies]] which were [[designed]] to [[try]] and [[get]] [[young]] [[men]] to [[enlist]] in the Army, by [[making]] the life of a serviceman appear "[[cool]]." This is by far the sloppiest, implying that the [[life]] of a [[soldier]] is devoid of [[work]], you [[get]] the [[best]] [[food]], and you [[get]] to [[lie]] around all day [[listening]] to Ann Miller on the [[radio]]. I am far too young to have [[participated]] in WWII, but I [[think]] that there was more to it than that. There is the barest cat's [[whisker]] of a plot, and a bunch of musical [[numbers]] [[featuring]] some of the day's [[leading]] acts.

I [[think]] that by 1943, [[even]] the most naive of civvies [[knew]] that there was more going on [[overseas]] than the wacky hijinks [[portrayed]] in this [[movie]]. [[While]] I am sure that it was [[meant]] to be [[viewed]] as escapist [[entertainment]], I can't [[help]] but wonder if the family and [[loved]] ones of [[men]] [[fighting]] in the [[war]], were [[amused]] or repulsed by this trivialization of their loved ones' [[sacrifice]]. From [[throughout]] the [[times]] Europe [[commencing]] fighting World War II, until the war's end, Hollywood (with [[important]] [[nudging]] from the [[goverment]]) [[accomplished]] [[tonne]] of [[cinematography]] which were [[styled]] to [[trying]] and [[obtains]] [[jeune]] [[mens]] to [[enrol]] in the Army, by [[doing]] the life of a serviceman appear "[[refrigerate]]." This is by far the sloppiest, implying that the [[lives]] of a [[solider]] is devoid of [[jobs]], you [[gets]] the [[nicest]] [[nourishment]], and you [[gets]] to [[lies]] around all day [[listen]] to Ann Miller on the [[radios]]. I am far too young to have [[participating]] in WWII, but I [[ideas]] that there was more to it than that. There is the barest cat's [[moustache]] of a plot, and a bunch of musical [[digit]] [[features]] some of the day's [[culminating]] acts.

I [[reckon]] that by 1943, [[yet]] the most naive of civvies [[overheard]] that there was more going on [[foreign]] than the wacky hijinks [[depicted]] in this [[cinematography]]. [[Although]] I am sure that it was [[signified]] to be [[regarded]] as escapist [[amusement]], I can't [[helped]] but wonder if the family and [[love]] ones of [[man]] [[tussle]] in the [[wars]], were [[tickled]] or repulsed by this trivialization of their loved ones' [[slaughter]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[rented]] this [[film]] in DVD form without knowing [[anything]] at all about it, [[part]] of a [[winter]] marathon of [[watching]] a [[film]] every [[night]]. [[After]] [[several]] [[awful]] American action adventure [[films]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Life]]) Zhu Warriors struck me as [[brilliantly]] [[original]] filmmaking. The story is complete [[nonsense]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete [[lack]] of [[irony]] [[refreshing]], and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and directness of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are astonishingly beautiful. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are believable.

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the beautiful simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

I [[leases]] this [[filmmaking]] in DVD form without knowing [[somethings]] at all about it, [[parte]] of a [[winters]] marathon of [[staring]] a [[filmmaking]] every [[nuit]]. [[Upon]] [[numerous]] [[abhorrent]] American action adventure [[cinema]] (Ballistic, Daredevil, Cradle of [[Iife]]) Zhu Warriors struck me as [[beautifully]] [[preliminary]] filmmaking. The story is complete [[stupidity]], but I found the film's sincerity, good- heartedness and complete [[inadequacy]] of [[paradox]] [[freshen]], and the film looks spectacular. Sure, the special effects are not technically as flawless as those produced by Hollywood, but the filmmakers wisely are more interested in color, composition and movement than realism and so many of the shots are breathtaking. In one shot, two of the superhuman characters stand on craggy spires of rock, a huge moon rising before them, the image perfectly balanced by the three elements. In another, a princess-warrior spires through the heavens behind her glowing sword like a heat-seeking missile. And the colors explode from shot to shot, used to express emotion rather than to represent reality.

The characters have the same simplicity and directness of comic book characters, offering no great depth in themselves but referring to archtypes that resonate more deeply. Physically, several of the actors are astonishingly beautiful. They play their roles straight up, without irony or guile, and so are believable.

Most strange of all, despite the clumsiness of plot and thin characterizations, I found myself very near tears at the end, moved by the beautiful simplicity of the actors and the wildly original, good-hearted vision of the director.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I am and was very [[entertained]] by the [[movie]]. It was my all time favorite [[movie]] of 1976. Being [[raised]] in the 70's , I was so in love with [[Kris]] Kristoffersons [[look]] and [[demeanor]],of course I am no [[movie]] [[critic]],but for the [[time]] era,I think it was very [[good]]. I very [[much]] like the combo of Streisand and Kristofferson. I [[thought]] they [[worked]] very well together. I have seen the [[movie]] [[many]] [[times]] and [[still]] [[love]] the two of them as Esther and [[John]] Norman. I am a very [[huge]] fan of [[Kris]] and see him in concert when I can. What a talented [[singer]] song writer,not to [[mention]],[[actor]]. I have [[seen]] him in [[many]] [[movies]],but [[still]] [[think]] back to A star is [[Born]]. I am and was very [[distracted]] by the [[cinematography]]. It was my all time favorite [[kino]] of 1976. Being [[hiked]] in the 70's , I was so in love with [[Chris]] Kristoffersons [[glance]] and [[behavioural]],of course I am no [[kino]] [[criticism]],but for the [[moment]] era,I think it was very [[alright]]. I very [[very]] like the combo of Streisand and Kristofferson. I [[thoughts]] they [[cooperation]] very well together. I have seen the [[flick]] [[several]] [[moments]] and [[however]] [[adores]] the two of them as Esther and [[Jon]] Norman. I am a very [[gargantuan]] fan of [[Chris]] and see him in concert when I can. What a talented [[singers]] song writer,not to [[referenced]],[[actress]]. I have [[saw]] him in [[various]] [[kino]],but [[yet]] [[reckon]] back to A star is [[Birthed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] MacArthur is a great movie with a [[great]] story about a great man…[[General]] Douglas MacArthur. This is of course, the [[story]] of one of America's great military figures, and a figure [[made]] familiar to me from the earliest moments of my memory. Though there is a continuity issue (there may be others) e.g. MacArthur's [[speech]] portrayed in the [[film]] as his 1962 [[address]] to the U.S. Military Academy on accepting the Thayer award did not contain the phrase "[[old]] soldiers never die; they just [[fade]] away." (That was in his [[speech]] to [[Congress]] upon his [[dismissal]] by [[President]] Truman) in 1951 for his alleged [[insubordination]] (these two did not see eye to eye!) Gregory Peck is im-Peck-able as the general who vowed he would return to the Philippines in World War II. The film moves quickly and easily with the General, his family and his staff from the beginning of the Second World War to the end of his service career. This film would be of much greater significance to one familiar with both WW II and the Korean War. Nevertheless, Peck's portrayal of this great man who fought the twin evils of fascism and communism and who hated war as only a soldier can is a memorable one indeed. "In war there is no substitute for victory." MacArthur is a great movie with a [[large]] story about a great man…[[Overall]] Douglas MacArthur. This is of course, the [[stories]] of one of America's great military figures, and a figure [[accomplished]] familiar to me from the earliest moments of my memory. Though there is a continuity issue (there may be others) e.g. MacArthur's [[rhetoric]] portrayed in the [[flick]] as his 1962 [[deal]] to the U.S. Military Academy on accepting the Thayer award did not contain the phrase "[[longtime]] soldiers never die; they just [[fading]] away." (That was in his [[rhetoric]] to [[Capitol]] upon his [[sacking]] by [[Chairwoman]] Truman) in 1951 for his alleged [[disobedience]] (these two did not see eye to eye!) Gregory Peck is im-Peck-able as the general who vowed he would return to the Philippines in World War II. The film moves quickly and easily with the General, his family and his staff from the beginning of the Second World War to the end of his service career. This film would be of much greater significance to one familiar with both WW II and the Korean War. Nevertheless, Peck's portrayal of this great man who fought the twin evils of fascism and communism and who hated war as only a soldier can is a memorable one indeed. "In war there is no substitute for victory." --------------------------------------------- Result 1286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] [[House]] of Games is a [[wonderful]] [[movie]] at [[multiple]] [[levels]]. It is a [[fine]] mystery and a [[shocking]] thriller. It is blessed with [[marvelous]] performances by [[Lindsay]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a [[strong]], [[strong]] cast of [[supporting]] [[players]], and it [[introduces]] [[Ricky]] [[Jay]], card sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and historian of [[magic]]. Its dialogue, written by David Mamet, is [[spoken]] as if in a play of manners and [[gives]] the [[movie]] (in which [[reality]] is [[often]] in [[question]]) an [[extra]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, [[House]] of [[Games]] is a convincing glimpse into the [[unknown]] [[world]] of [[cheats]] and con [[men]], diametrically [[different]] from The Sting, which was [[played]] [[merely]] for [[glamour]] and yuks. [[At]] this [[level]] it does [[succeed]] [[admirably]].

However, you cannot [[escape]] the [[examination]] at a [[deeper]] level of the [[odyssey]] of a [[woman]] from complacent professional [[competence]] to [[incredible]] strength and self [[realization]]. The only [[movie]] I know of which [[treats]] the [[theme]] of [[emergence]] of personal strength in a woman in as worthy a [[way]] is the [[underrated]] Private Benjamin. That thoroughly [[enjoyable]] [[movie]] unfortunately diffuses its [[focus]], hopping among [[several]] [[themes]] and exploiting the [[fine]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[easy]] [[laughs]]. [[House]] of [[Games]] sticks to its [[business]]. As Poe once [[said]] of a good short [[story]], it [[drives]] [[relentlessly]] to its [[conclusion]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Louise]], a big [[budget]] commercial money [[maker]] with the [[despicable]] [[theme]] that [[women]] are doomed, whether or not they [[realize]] their inner strengths. What tripe.

As [[usual]] you [[really]] [[ought]] to see this [[film]] in a [[movie]] [[theater]]. It should be a natural for [[film]] festivals. [[Nominate]] it for one near you if you [[get]] the [[chance]].

I [[bought]] the [[original]] version of [[House]] of [[Games]] and [[gave]] it to my 23 year old [[daughter]]. Better she should [[see]] it on a [[TV]] than not at all. [[Household]] of Games is a [[excellent]] [[kino]] at [[assorted]] [[grades]]. It is a [[fined]] mystery and a [[alarming]] thriller. It is blessed with [[glorious]] performances by [[Lindsey]] Crouse and Joe Montegna, and a [[vigorous]], [[vigorous]] cast of [[aiding]] [[actors]], and it [[introduce]] [[Rick]] [[Jae]], card sharp extraordinaire, prestidigitator and historian of [[witchcraft]]. Its dialogue, written by David Mamet, is [[talked]] as if in a play of manners and [[provides]] the [[filmmaking]] (in which [[realist]] is [[routinely]] in [[issue]]) an [[extras]] dimension of unrealness.

On the face of it, [[Household]] of [[Gaming]] is a convincing glimpse into the [[unrecognized]] [[globe]] of [[crooks]] and con [[males]], diametrically [[several]] from The Sting, which was [[done]] [[solely]] for [[fascination]] and yuks. [[During]] this [[levels]] it does [[succeeding]] [[marvellously]].

However, you cannot [[flee]] the [[inspect]] at a [[closer]] level of the [[epic]] of a [[female]] from complacent professional [[ability]] to [[staggering]] strength and self [[implementation]]. The only [[flick]] I know of which [[addresses]] the [[subjects]] of [[onset]] of personal strength in a woman in as worthy a [[manner]] is the [[understated]] Private Benjamin. That thoroughly [[pleasant]] [[cinematography]] unfortunately diffuses its [[concentrations]], hopping among [[multiple]] [[subjects]] and exploiting the [[fined]] performance of Goldie Hawn to chase after some [[simple]] [[chuckles]]. [[Households]] of [[Game]] sticks to its [[corporations]]. As Poe once [[asserted]] of a good short [[histories]], it [[driving]] [[ceaselessly]] to its [[conclusions]].

There is another strain of movies-about-women, epitomized by Thelma and [[Louie]], a big [[budgets]] commercial money [[producer]] with the [[obnoxious]] [[subjects]] that [[females]] are doomed, whether or not they [[attain]] their inner strengths. What tripe.

As [[normal]] you [[genuinely]] [[would]] to see this [[cinematographic]] in a [[filmmaking]] [[drama]]. It should be a natural for [[movies]] festivals. [[Appointing]] it for one near you if you [[obtain]] the [[opportunities]].

I [[buys]] the [[preliminary]] version of [[Household]] of [[Game]] and [[given]] it to my 23 year old [[girls]]. Better she should [[seeing]] it on a [[TVS]] than not at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I don't see how anyone who [[even]] likes Van Damne could like this movie.

The movie actually [[starts]] out with some promise. I would [[say]] the [[action]] scenes at the [[beginning]] of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[However]], the [[film]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the director could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain ridiculous. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most disappointing endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. I don't see how anyone who [[yet]] likes Van Damne could like this movie.

The movie actually [[startup]] out with some promise. I would [[told]] the [[efforts]] scenes at the [[initiates]] of the movie is excellent. The actions scenes with the family ward trying to save the twins is a great start and is good lead in to the main story. [[Conversely]], the [[kino]] is all down hill from there.

It would have been nice if the director could have stayed with the original premise. That is the brothers are born in different parts of the world and thus learn different skills. One brother is supposed to be skilled in Martial Arts, but the other brother is supposed to be skilled in firearms. How convenient when the time arises that the brother who has never picked up a gun before all of the sudden is a great marksman, and the brother who has not been taught any martial arts is all of the sudden doing the splits and high kicks.

The plot, action, etc. are just plain ridiculous. My favorite scenes? How about when Van Damne is confronting an armed soldier with an AK-47. The soldier is about 100 yards away. Instead of aiming and shooting at Van Damne he is doing a war cry like he is wielding a battle axe and running at him. Van Damne proceeds to pick up a pistol from a fallen soldier and shoots him,...while he is still about 75 to 80 yards away.

This movie has one of the most disappointing endings. Bolo Yeung is a skilled martial artist. However, instead of choreographing a decent fight. Bolo is throwing barrels at Van Damne like Donkey Kong. Absolutely aggravating movie that had so much promise. If your a Van Damne fan, save your time and see Hard Target or one of his earlier films. --------------------------------------------- Result 1288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[bad]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[played]] the first crewmember [[infected]], who dies from terminal [[depression]]. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[caused]] the depression. This movie is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming [[character]] in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony [[wife]], or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[cinematography]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special [[effects]], many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to [[simulate]] hordes of bats flying. Not the [[worst]] [[film]] I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom [[ranks]], definitely. (spoilers)Wow, this is a [[naughty]] one. I did a double take when watching an old Star Trek episode the other day-it was the one where everyone gets infected with that space sickness and then go a bit nuts-and there was Stewart Moss, a.k.a the unlikable 'hero' of It Lives by Night! He [[accomplished]] the first crewmember [[infested]], who dies from terminal [[doldrums]]. All I could think was that he'd watched his own movie too many times, that's what [[triggered]] the depression. This movie is full of truly unlikable people. There is no redeeming [[nature]] in the film, not one. It's very hard to feel bad about Dr. Beck's turning into a bat(or whatever he actually turned into), because you just don't like him. And you don't like his shrill, bony [[femme]], or the nasty sleazy Sgt. Ward, or Dr. Mustache Love...So why would you invest any time or energy in this movie? Where there is no empathy with the characters, there is no reason to bother caring about it. Not to mention the horrible [[films]], which made it look like they'd filmed the movie through urine, and the five cent bat special [[impact]], many of which appeared to be pieces of paper thrown into a fan to [[mimic]] hordes of bats flying. Not the [[gravest]] [[cinema]] I've ever seen on MST3K, but down there in the bottom [[categorize]], definitely. --------------------------------------------- Result 1289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[End]] of the World is an uneventful [[movie]], which is odd since it is [[supposed]] to be about the total destruction of the [[earth]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) [[facility]] guarded by four security [[men]]. His first [[job]] is monitoring [[transmissions]] to and from space (although this [[actually]] seems more like a [[hobby]] he does when not working on job #2). [[Job]] #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the [[scientist]] brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to decipher; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the movie goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher Lee is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, [[Lee]] gives a [[lackluster]] performance along the lines of his [[appearance]] in [[Howling]] II. This [[movie]] is [[boring]], but it has [[enough]] [[stupid]] elements that you [[might]] want to [[suffer]] through it once if you [[like]] [[Christopher]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[stock]] footage of the [[earth]] being destroyed. [[Ends]] of the World is an uneventful [[films]], which is odd since it is [[suspected]] to be about the total destruction of the [[tierra]]. The main character is some kind of scientist, I'm not exactly sure what kind. He has two jobs at a government(?) [[centres]] guarded by four security [[hombre]]. His first [[labour]] is monitoring [[transmit]] to and from space (although this [[indeed]] seems more like a [[leisure]] he does when not working on job #2). [[Workplace]] #2 requires him to put on a protective suit and go into a dark room...at least that's the best I can figure. Apparently the "plant" is not exactly top-secret, as the [[researchers]] brings his wife there. She hangs out (they're on their way to a dinner) while he discovers a message from space: Major Earth Disruption, repeated over and over. He says something about it being the first message from space he's ever been able to decipher; his wife tells him they're going to be late for the dinner party. So they leave and go to the party (!?!). Moments later he finds out that China has suffered a major earthquake. From there, the movie goes... nowhere! Yes, Christopher Lee is in it, but that really doesn't help much. Besides, [[Rhee]] gives a [[mediocre]] performance along the lines of his [[apparition]] in [[Shout]] II. This [[cinematographic]] is [[bored]], but it has [[sufficient]] [[imbecile]] elements that you [[apt]] want to [[undergo]] through it once if you [[iike]] [[Christophe]] Lee or Z-grade sci-fi. Plus, there's lots of [[stockpiles]] footage of the [[overland]] being destroyed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[loved]] watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in grammar [[school]] and would [[get]] home do my homework and by 4:30 [[would]] be ready to watch ''Sea Hunt '' and [[Mike]] Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[loved]] it ! He took to you a place not very accessible at that [[time]] , under the [[great]] blue sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or even before [[Cousteau]] became common , there was Mike [[Nelson]] [[sparking]] the [[imagination]] of kids .I'd be [[willing]] to [[wager]] that more than a few kids [[developed]] their [[passion]] for oceanography or biology or one of the [[sciences]] from watching this [[show]] .[[Underwater]] [[photography]] [[also]] progressed , the [[fascination]] for [[exploration]] is [[easily]] [[stimulated]] thru [[watching]] this [[show]] . Watch and [[enjoy]] !!! I [[worshipped]] watching ''Sea Hunt '' back in the day , I was in grammar [[tuition]] and would [[gets]] home do my homework and by 4:30 [[should]] be ready to watch ''Sea Hunt '' and [[Mick]] Nelson in his underwater adventures .I [[liked]] it ! He took to you a place not very accessible at that [[period]] , under the [[excellent]] blue sea . Pre ''Thunderball '' or even before [[Smith]] became common , there was Mike [[Nielsen]] [[provoking]] the [[novelty]] of kids .I'd be [[desirous]] to [[chickened]] that more than a few kids [[elaborated]] their [[fervour]] for oceanography or biology or one of the [[science]] from watching this [[spectacle]] .[[Submarine]] [[photographer]] [[apart]] progressed , the [[glamour]] for [[explorer]] is [[conveniently]] [[spurred]] thru [[staring]] this [[exposition]] . Watch and [[enjoys]] !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (78%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] During the Civil War, there were many cases of divided [[loyalties]]; [[obviously]], many occurred "In the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young father Owen Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter Gladys Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan During the Civil War, there were many cases of divided [[allegiances]]; [[certainly]], many occurred "In the Border States", where North met South by happenstance of geography. From the border, young father Owen Moore goes off to join the Union Army. Shortly, Confederate soldier Henry B. Walthall, separated from his regimen, wanders onto the enemy's property, desperate for water; he finds a supply where the Unionist's young daughter Gladys Egan sits. When the Yankee soldiers track him down, Little Gladys innocently helps the Confederate hide. Later, when he returns to kill her father, the little girl's kindness is remembered. A sweet, small story from director D.W. Griffith. Location footage and humanity are lovingly displayed.

**** In the Border States (6/13/10) D.W. Griffith ~ Henry B. Walthall, Owen Moore, Gladys Egan --------------------------------------------- Result 1292 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] A [[dreary]], [[hopelessly]] [[predictable]] [[film]] set in a most unpleasant setting (lower Coachella Valley). Acting is as amateurish as any I've seen. [[Looks]] like a screenwriting 101 script. However, it does [[function]] as a great sedative. A [[depressing]], [[irrevocably]] [[foreseeable]] [[flick]] set in a most unpleasant setting (lower Coachella Valley). Acting is as amateurish as any I've seen. [[Seem]] like a screenwriting 101 script. However, it does [[operation]] as a great sedative. --------------------------------------------- Result 1293 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] 'The Curse of Frankenstein' [[sticks]] faithfully to [[Mary]] Shelley's [[story]] for one word of the title, which wouldn't be so bad if the changes were any good at all. The tragedy of the creature destroying Frankenstein's family has been completely excised and replaced with... nothing. The heart and moral centre of the story is [[gone]]. It doesn't [[help]] that this [[Frankenstein]] is a conniving, devious murderer; he deserves everything he [[gets]]. The plot is [[basically]] a shallow checklist of Frankenstein clichés. Even taken on its own terms, this is rubbish: a bland, rambling [[film]] featuring a shite-looking [[creature]] with a pudding [[bowl]] [[haircut]]. As it's the first of Hammer's [[horror]] [[films]], [[directed]] by [[Terence]] [[Fisher]] and starring [[Peter]] Cushing and [[Christopher]] Lee, its [[place]] in [[horror]] [[history]] is secure. But it's [[crap]]. 'The Curse of Frankenstein' [[batons]] faithfully to [[Maryam]] Shelley's [[stories]] for one word of the title, which wouldn't be so bad if the changes were any good at all. The tragedy of the creature destroying Frankenstein's family has been completely excised and replaced with... nothing. The heart and moral centre of the story is [[missing]]. It doesn't [[assists]] that this [[Casanova]] is a conniving, devious murderer; he deserves everything he [[attains]]. The plot is [[principally]] a shallow checklist of Frankenstein clichés. Even taken on its own terms, this is rubbish: a bland, rambling [[kino]] featuring a shite-looking [[ogre]] with a pudding [[bowls]] [[hairdo]]. As it's the first of Hammer's [[abomination]] [[kino]], [[oriented]] by [[Jacques]] [[Fisherman]] and starring [[Petr]] Cushing and [[Cristobal]] Lee, its [[placing]] in [[monstrosity]] [[stories]] is secure. But it's [[baloney]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1294 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[plot]] is plausible but [[banal]], i.[[e]]., [[beautiful]] and [[neglected]] [[wife]] of [[wealthy]] and [[powerful]] [[man]] has a [[fling]] with a [[psychotic]] [[hunk]], then [[tries]] to [[cover]] it up as the [[psycho]] [[stalks]] and blackmails her. But, what develops from there is stupefyingly [[illogical]]. [[Despite]] the [[resources]] that are [[available]] to the [[usual]] [[couple]] who has [[money]] and [[influence]], our privileged hero and [[heroine]] appear to have only one domestic, their [[attorney]] and local [[police]] (who [[say]] they can do nothing) at their [[disposal]] while they grapple with suspense and terror. They have no private [[security]] [[staff]] (only a fancy [[security]] system that they mishandle), household or [[grounds]] [[staff]], chauffeurs, etc. Not [[even]], [[apparently]], the [[funds]] to [[hire]] private round-the-clock [[nurses]] to [[care]] for the [[hero]] when he suffers life-threatening [[injuries]], [[leaving]] [[man]] and [[wife]] [[alone]] and [[vulnerable]] in their mansion. Our heroine is portrayed as having the [[brains]] of a doorknob and our hero, a tycoon, [[behaves]] in the most unlikely and [[irrational]] [[manner]]. The [[production]] is an [[insult]] to [[viewers]] who [[wasted]] their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the [[talents]] of veteran [[actors]] Oliva Hussey and [[Don]] [[Murray]] (what were they thinking?). And, [[shame]] on Lifetime [[TV]] for [[insulting]] the [[intelligence]] of its [[audience]] for this insipid [[offering]]. The [[intrigue]] is plausible but [[ordinary]], i.[[f]]., [[delightful]] and [[omitted]] [[femme]] of [[richer]] and [[forceful]] [[guy]] has a [[adventure]] with a [[crazed]] [[bite]], then [[strives]] to [[covered]] it up as the [[fou]] [[canes]] and blackmails her. But, what develops from there is stupefyingly [[preposterous]]. [[While]] the [[finances]] that are [[approachable]] to the [[ordinary]] [[pair]] who has [[moneys]] and [[affecting]], our privileged hero and [[idol]] appear to have only one domestic, their [[procurator]] and local [[cops]] (who [[tell]] they can do nothing) at their [[disposition]] while they grapple with suspense and terror. They have no private [[insurance]] [[workforce]] (only a fancy [[insurance]] system that they mishandle), household or [[reason]] [[employees]], chauffeurs, etc. Not [[yet]], [[visibly]], the [[finance]] to [[recruiting]] private round-the-clock [[nursing]] to [[healthcare]] for the [[superhero]] when he suffers life-threatening [[lesion]], [[letting]] [[hombre]] and [[woman]] [[lonely]] and [[weak]] in their mansion. Our heroine is portrayed as having the [[neurons]] of a doorknob and our hero, a tycoon, [[reacts]] in the most unlikely and [[wanton]] [[modes]]. The [[productivity]] is an [[snub]] to [[bystanders]] who [[squandered]] their time with this drivel and a crime for having wasted the [[talent]] of veteran [[players]] Oliva Hussey and [[Donating]] [[Moray]] (what were they thinking?). And, [[pity]] on Lifetime [[TELEVISION]] for [[degrading]] the [[intelligentsia]] of its [[viewers]] for this insipid [[offer]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1295 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "The [[Godfather]]", "Citizen Kane", "[[Star]] [[Wars]]", "[[Goodfellas]]" [[None]] of the above [[compare]] to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every character has [[layers]] [[upon]] [[layers]] of absolute verity, [[completely]] and utterly three [[dimensional]]. We [[care]] about Tony Soprano [[wholeheartedly]], despite the fact that in the simplest model of good vs. [[evil]], he is evil. Soprano is the most provocative, intricate, and fascinating protagonist ever [[created]] to this point in history. If you're in the [[mood]] to be overtly [[challenged]] as a [[viewer]], and to be [[forever]] altered on your [[feelings]] [[toward]] entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defy]] [[anybody]] to sit down and watch the very first episode of Season 1, and not want to [[continue]] with the [[series]]. Each season is completely [[brilliant]] in its own way. DVDs are essential to anybody's collection **** of out 4 "The [[Nominating]]", "Citizen Kane", "[[Superstar]] [[Warfare]]", "[[Buddies]]" [[No]] of the above [[comparative]] to the complex brilliance of "The Sopranos". Each and every character has [[tiers]] [[afterward]] [[diaper]] of absolute verity, [[altogether]] and utterly three [[dimensions]]. We [[healthcare]] about Tony Soprano [[truthfully]], despite the fact that in the simplest model of good vs. [[devilish]], he is evil. Soprano is the most provocative, intricate, and fascinating protagonist ever [[established]] to this point in history. If you're in the [[ambiance]] to be overtly [[challenge]] as a [[onlooker]], and to be [[indefinitely]] altered on your [[affections]] [[about]] entertainment, watch "The Sopranos". I [[defiance]] [[everyone]] to sit down and watch the very first episode of Season 1, and not want to [[sustained]] with the [[serials]]. Each season is completely [[glamorous]] in its own way. DVDs are essential to anybody's collection **** of out 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 1296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I haven't [[seen]] all of Jess Franco's [[movies]], I have [[seen]] 5, I [[think]], and there are more than 180 of them. So maybe it's a bit [[early]] to [[say]] so but "Necronomicon Geträumte Sünden" ([[better]] known as 'Succubus', but that is the cut [[version]]) is according to me if not the [[best]], [[certainly]] on of Franco's [[best]]. Franco is best known (although 'known' might be [[slightly]] [[exaggerated]]) for "Vampiros Lesbos", a [[weird]] cultish movie that [[got]] more acclaim in the [[mid]] 90's when people [[found]] out [[Jess]] Franco was [[also]] an interesting [[composer]]. Through the soundtrack a [[happy]] few [[discovered]] the [[man]] and [[found]] out what was to be [[expected]] after seeing the video clip of 'The lion and the cucumber' ('Vampyros Lesbos OST'): Jess Franco is an [[overwhelming]] director. When the [[phone]] rang during 'Vampiros', I [[let]] it [[ring]]. I just [[wanted]] to [[see]] more of the [[movie]]. Since that moment Franco never could grip me that [[much]]. But then I [[stumbled]] on this [[movie]]. It is even better than "Vampiros Lesbos", I [[think]]. Franco is [[looking]] for what he can do with a [[story]] and a [[camera]]. We find out he can do a [[lot]]. I [[certainly]] didn't [[expect]] to find "Necronomicon" that [[great]]: its [[beginning]] didn't impress me at all. [[Remember]], I had [[seen]] "Vampiros Lesbos" before ([[although]] chronologically that came only three years later) and both movies kinda start the same. But then the [[story]] went on, puzzling and [[gripping]], beautiful camera work and the stuff you would like to see Godard do if he weren't so occupied with spreading his political messages. [[Later]] on in the [[movie]] I heard a dialogue about which art was or wasn't old-fashioned. The [[man]] says that all [[movies]] have to be old-fashioned because it takes weeks before the audience sees what got filmed. But the [[girl]] [[replies]] that "Bunuel, Fritz Lang and Godard [[yesterday]] made movies for tomorrow". Janine Reynaud is an interesting lead [[actress]] and of course Howard Vernon, a Franco regular, is also there. [[Luckily]] the acting is good (something that can spoil a lot of [[Franco]] [[movies]] for you, but not this one). But [[certainly]] watch out for the dummy scene. The erotic [[tension]], the [[wild]] directing and the fact that it's a yesterday's movie for tomorrow make it a movie a lot of people should see. The fact that it is a bit more accessible than "Vampiros Lesbos" certainly helps. I haven't [[watched]] all of Jess Franco's [[movie]], I have [[watched]] 5, I [[reckon]], and there are more than 180 of them. So maybe it's a bit [[swift]] to [[says]] so but "Necronomicon Geträumte Sünden" ([[nicer]] known as 'Succubus', but that is the cut [[stepping]]) is according to me if not the [[optimum]], [[admittedly]] on of Franco's [[better]]. Franco is best known (although 'known' might be [[moderately]] [[inflated]]) for "Vampiros Lesbos", a [[bizarre]] cultish movie that [[did]] more acclaim in the [[medium]] 90's when people [[detected]] out [[Jesse]] Franco was [[moreover]] an interesting [[composing]]. Through the soundtrack a [[delighted]] few [[detected]] the [[males]] and [[detected]] out what was to be [[prophesied]] after seeing the video clip of 'The lion and the cucumber' ('Vampyros Lesbos OST'): Jess Franco is an [[sizable]] director. When the [[phones]] rang during 'Vampiros', I [[leave]] it [[rings]]. I just [[wants]] to [[seeing]] more of the [[cinematography]]. Since that moment Franco never could grip me that [[very]]. But then I [[slumped]] on this [[cinematography]]. It is even better than "Vampiros Lesbos", I [[thought]]. Franco is [[researching]] for what he can do with a [[histories]] and a [[cameras]]. We find out he can do a [[batch]]. I [[probably]] didn't [[awaited]] to find "Necronomicon" that [[large]]: its [[commencing]] didn't impress me at all. [[Remembering]], I had [[watched]] "Vampiros Lesbos" before ([[while]] chronologically that came only three years later) and both movies kinda start the same. But then the [[histories]] went on, puzzling and [[captivating]], beautiful camera work and the stuff you would like to see Godard do if he weren't so occupied with spreading his political messages. [[Then]] on in the [[filmmaking]] I heard a dialogue about which art was or wasn't old-fashioned. The [[males]] says that all [[cinematography]] have to be old-fashioned because it takes weeks before the audience sees what got filmed. But the [[daughter]] [[answering]] that "Bunuel, Fritz Lang and Godard [[monday]] made movies for tomorrow". Janine Reynaud is an interesting lead [[actor]] and of course Howard Vernon, a Franco regular, is also there. [[Gaily]] the acting is good (something that can spoil a lot of [[Franko]] [[theater]] for you, but not this one). But [[surely]] watch out for the dummy scene. The erotic [[voltage]], the [[feral]] directing and the fact that it's a yesterday's movie for tomorrow make it a movie a lot of people should see. The fact that it is a bit more accessible than "Vampiros Lesbos" certainly helps. --------------------------------------------- Result 1297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Although]] I'm [[grateful]] this [[obscure]] gem of 70's [[Italian]] exploitation cinema features in the recently released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[although]] it's [[also]] available on disc under the misleading and stupid alternate title "Escape from Death Row", I honestly think it deserves a proper and [[luxurious]] DVD edition, completely in its originally spoken languages with subtitle options (the [[dubbing]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special bonus features! [[Heck]], I don't even need the restored picture quality and bonus features if only we could watch the film in its original language. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced mafia/crime flick with a lot of violence, comedy (which, admittedly, doesn't always work), feminine beauty and two witty main characters. Tony Lo Bianco is terrific as the small thug pretending to be the city's biggest Don. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in town, he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony helps Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected crime gem funnily alters gritty action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual killings are sadistic and merciless, which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just appears in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the men behind the camera, responsible for the superb cinematography, was no less then Joe D'Amato. [[Great]] film, highly recommended to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. [[Despite]] I'm [[thankful]] this [[opaque]] gem of 70's [[Ltalian]] exploitation cinema features in the recently released "Grindhouse Experience" box set, and [[though]] it's [[additionally]] available on disc under the misleading and stupid alternate title "Escape from Death Row", I honestly think it deserves a proper and [[deluxe]] DVD edition, completely in its originally spoken languages with subtitle options (the [[copying]] is truly horrible), restored picture quality and a truckload of special bonus features! [[Devil]], I don't even need the restored picture quality and bonus features if only we could watch the film in its original language. "Mean Frank and Crazy Tony" is a cheerfully fast-paced mafia/crime flick with a lot of violence, comedy (which, admittedly, doesn't always work), feminine beauty and two witty main characters. Tony Lo Bianco is terrific as the small thug pretending to be the city's biggest Don. When the real crime lord Frankie Dio (Lee Van Cleef) arrives in town, he sees an opportunity to climb up the ladder by offering his services. Frankie initially ignores the little crook, but they do eventually form an unlikely team when Frankie's entire criminal empire turns against him and a new French criminal mastermind even assassinates Frankie's innocent brother. Tony helps Frankie to escape from prison and together they head for Marseille to extract Frankie's revenge. The script of this sadly neglected crime gem funnily alters gritty action & suspense with light-headed bits of comedy, like the grotesque car chase through the narrow French mountain roads for example. The build up towards the typical mafia execution sequences (guided by an excellent Riz Ortolani score) are extremely tense and the actual killings are sadistic and merciless, which is probably why the film is considered to be somewhat of a grindhouse classic. The film lacks a strong female lead, as the lovely and amazingly voluptuous beauty Edwige Fenech sadly just appears in a couple of scenes, and then still in the background. On of the men behind the camera, responsible for the superb cinematography, was no less then Joe D'Amato. [[Super]] film, highly recommended to fans of Italian exploitation, and I hope to watch it again soon in its original version. --------------------------------------------- Result 1298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This is not a [[bad]] film. It is not [[wildly]] funny, but it is interesting and

entertaining. It has a few funny [[moments]]. Cher gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance alone is worth the watch. If this movie had come out

[[today]] it [[would]] not have been nominated, but by '80s [[standards]] it

was [[excellent]]. This is not a [[unfavorable]] film. It is not [[savagely]] funny, but it is interesting and

entertaining. It has a few funny [[times]]. Cher gives a good

performance in a role that is very opposite her real-life self. Her

performance alone is worth the watch. If this movie had come out

[[hoy]] it [[ought]] not have been nominated, but by '80s [[standard]] it

was [[sublime]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] Not to [[mention]] easily Pierce Brosnon's [[best]] performance. Of course Greg Kinnear is always great. Really, when has he really been bad? I think this film is incredibly [[underrated]]! The use of colors in this movie is something very different in today's film world where every other movie has the Payback blue filter. I also [[love]] the way they used the song by Asia. Proving that even what was once thought of as kinda cheesy can be really cool placed correctly.

I was making my [[first]] feature when this [[came]] out. Being that my film was a hit-man movie, I had to check out anything in the genre that was released. After seeing it, I'm sure it had some effect on me through the process. It was pretty cool when my film got on the IMDb that it would recommend this film if you liked mine. How any of the others relate I have no idea, making an even more interesting coincidence.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337580/ Not to [[referenced]] easily Pierce Brosnon's [[better]] performance. Of course Greg Kinnear is always great. Really, when has he really been bad? I think this film is incredibly [[underestimated]]! The use of colors in this movie is something very different in today's film world where every other movie has the Payback blue filter. I also [[adored]] the way they used the song by Asia. Proving that even what was once thought of as kinda cheesy can be really cool placed correctly.

I was making my [[fiirst]] feature when this [[became]] out. Being that my film was a hit-man movie, I had to check out anything in the genre that was released. After seeing it, I'm sure it had some effect on me through the process. It was pretty cool when my film got on the IMDb that it would recommend this film if you liked mine. How any of the others relate I have no idea, making an even more interesting coincidence.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1337580/ --------------------------------------------- Result 1300 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Wow]]. I read about this movie and it sounded so [[awful]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can [[smell]] it in [[St]] Louis. Where do I start? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the [[success]] of Animal House, but they [[completely]] [[missed]] the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't carry this sorry short [[flop]] for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York [[bimbos]] (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The idea was actually somewhat clever, but the director stunk. The characters all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry Boon, your legacy was tarnished with this flop.

Short Film #2

MORE [[SPOILERS]]

Enter Dominique Corsaire. Pretty girl, recently finished college, not sure what to do with her life. So she becomes a slut, starts sleeping around with some mega rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she beds the most powerful man in the world, Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the president of the United States). Once again, it could have been funny, and though I was happy that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does anything. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. [[Whoo]]. I read about this movie and it sounded so [[scary]] that I had to see it, and my gosh, I can [[flavor]] it in [[Tk]] Louis. Where do I start? National Lampoons was trying to follow up 5 years later on the [[avail]] of Animal House, but they [[fully]] [[miss]] the mark. I'll go chronologically with these short flicks.

Short Film #1

Poor Peter Riegert (Boon from Animal House). Apparently, he wasn't working back then, so the boys at National Lampoons probably called and said "hey, we're making a c**ppy movie, wanna be in it?" Peter was like "well, I'm not doing much these days, why not?" He was a great side character in Animal House, but he couldn't carry this sorry short [[bankruptcy]] for 5 minutes.

POSSIBLE SPOILER The premise is funny enough, with Jason Cooper (Riegert) telling his wife to leave him, she needs to find herself. It's too weird that they're actually in a happy marriage. So he chases her off, there she goes, and Cooper is in charge of the kids. This, off course, leads to him burning the house down, losing several of the kids, and sleeping with an assortment of New York [[gals]] (including an ever so young Diane Lane). Then the wife comes back, wants the kids, and the film ends with a coin flip that'll decide the fate of the children. The idea was actually somewhat clever, but the director stunk. The characters all seem like they're falling asleep, they HAD to be doped up. Sorry Boon, your legacy was tarnished with this flop.

Short Film #2

MORE [[VANDALS]]

Enter Dominique Corsaire. Pretty girl, recently finished college, not sure what to do with her life. So she becomes a slut, starts sleeping around with some mega rich guys, takes their money when they die, and she doesn't stop until she beds the most powerful man in the world, Fred Willard (Ooops, I mean the president of the United States). Once again, it could have been funny, and though I was happy that Corsaire (Ann Dusenberry in real life) wasn't afraid to bare all, her acting was horrible. What a waste of time.

Short Film #3

I can't believe I made it this far. Here's the rookie cop Brent Falcone (Robby Benson) with veteran Stan Nagurski (Richard Widmark). Falcone is young, naive, thinks he can really help people, though he becomes cynical after being shot several thousand times. Nagurski, really, has just given up caring. He watches muggings, assaults, you name it, and never intervenes. He figures the world is lawless and he'll probably get sued if he does anything. Even Christopher Lloyd (at the end of Taxi's run) gets in on the action, getting the police called on him, committing a crime, but having his lawyer there to protect him. God bless America!!

Once again, could have been funny, the performances were intentionally campy, but goodness, no energy whatsoever. Henry Jaglom and Bob Giraldi should be ashamed of having their names on this schlock. I think the writing wasn't bad, the ideas were there, but the execution was pulled off as well as the rescue attempt in the Iranian hostage crisis. If I had been a part of this film, I would want my name removed, it's horrible. Then again, that's why I watched it.

The only good thing about this garbage is that Dr John did the film score (repeating "Going to the Movies" over and over again) and the film isn't much longer than an hour and a half. Show this one in film classes with the heading "what you should NEVER do in film-making." This script should have been left on the shelf because yep, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This film is pretty [[poor]]. The acting is abysmal and [[completely]] forced. Furthermore, by [[shooting]] the film as a docudrama doesn't necessarily [[make]] it more believable, you can't get out of it that easily [[Mr]] [[Dir]]. Don't let my comments mislead you however, as i [[would]] recommend you watch this [[film]], as it does shed some [[light]] on the [[psychology]] or non existent [[psychology]] behind the perpetrators of such crimes. [[However]], the climax of the film is [[absolutely]] [[rubbish]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and simply [[fails]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not translate to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No instead it leaves you with jaw dropping "Was that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for yet another film that started with potential, but ended up falling flat on its face at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz This film is pretty [[poorest]]. The acting is abysmal and [[perfectly]] forced. Furthermore, by [[gunshot]] the film as a docudrama doesn't necessarily [[deliver]] it more believable, you can't get out of it that easily [[Olli]] [[Deir]]. Don't let my comments mislead you however, as i [[could]] recommend you watch this [[kino]], as it does shed some [[lighting]] on the [[psyche]] or non existent [[psyche]] behind the perpetrators of such crimes. [[Still]], the climax of the film is [[abundantly]] [[detritus]]! There is no other way to put it! It pure and simply [[fail]] to capture any sense of atmosphere! What takes place does not translate to me any feelings of desperation, panic, fear or dread that one would surely experience in such terrifying circumstances. No instead it leaves you with jaw dropping "Was that it?!" spilling from your tongue, and by no means are you haunted by these boys actions. Rather you just feel embarrassed for yet another film that started with potential, but ended up falling flat on its face at the most crucial point.Zero Day indeed....zzzzzzzzzzzzz --------------------------------------------- Result 1302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Oh my GOD. I [[bought]] this movie and...I...watched...the...whole...thing. . . Okay, it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hope]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was going to eat something after the [[movie]] but I just can't [[seem]] to get up the [[courage]] to try and hold any [[food]] down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. Very BAD. BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD. Wait, bad doesn't seem to get the message across in quite the right way. Hmm... There isn't a word to describe just how awful.... not awful... Hmm disgustingly horribly casted/acted/filmed/directed/written. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. Possibly burn it I wouldn't want it to end up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand years from now. The [[worst]] [[movie]] ever since "Hey Happy" Oh my GOD. I [[buy]] this movie and...I...watched...the...whole...thing. . . Okay, it's going to be alright... I'l know I'll be okay in a month or two. Some time soon I [[hopes]] to be rid of the flash backs. I was going to eat something after the [[cinema]] but I just can't [[seems]] to get up the [[valour]] to try and hold any [[meals]] down at the moment. Bad? Yes bad. Very BAD. BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD. Wait, bad doesn't seem to get the message across in quite the right way. Hmm... There isn't a word to describe just how awful.... not awful... Hmm disgustingly horribly casted/acted/filmed/directed/written. Now I don't know what to do but throw it out. Possibly burn it I wouldn't want it to end up at the bottom of an architectural dig a thousand years from now. The [[hardest]] [[kino]] ever since "Hey Happy" --------------------------------------------- Result 1303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Throughly [[enjoy]] all the musical numbers each [[time]] I [[see]] this [[movie]]. Never [[seem]] to [[tire]] of it. Fred and [[Ginger]] are [[always]] a [[pleasure]] to watch. Seeing "Lucy" and [[Betty]] Grable before they [[hit]] the [[big]] [[time]], is [[fun]] to watch. Throughly [[enjoys]] all the musical numbers each [[moment]] I [[consults]] this [[flick]]. Never [[seems]] to [[tyre]] of it. Fred and [[Kang]] are [[perpetually]] a [[delight]] to watch. Seeing "Lucy" and [[Beatty]] Grable before they [[hitting]] the [[gargantuan]] [[moment]], is [[droll]] to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Phantasm ....Class. Phantasm II.....awesome. Phantasm III.....erm.....terrible.

Even though i would love to stick up for this film, i quite simply can't. The movie seems to have "sold out". First bad signs come when the video has trailers for other films at the start (something the others did not). Also too many pointless characters, prime examples the kid (who is a crack shot, funny initially but soon you want him dead), the woman who uses karate to fight off the balls (erm not gonna work, or rather shouldn't) and the blooming zombies (what the hell are they doing there, there no link to them in the other Phatasms). Also there is a severe lack of midgets running about.

The only good bits are the cracking start and, of course, Reggie B.

(Possible SPOILER coming Up)

To me this film seems like a filler between II and IV as extra characters just leave at the end so can continue with main 4 in IV.

Overall very, VERY disappointing. 3 / 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Very rarely does Denzil Washington make a bad movie and come to [[think]] of it that goes for Kevin [[Kline]] and in this case , this [[must]] [[count]] as one of their [[best]] [[films]]. It is more about of film about how strong friendship can more than the story of Steve Biko although we do [[get]] an insight into what the [[man]] was like and how far the reporter and [[friend]] Donald Woods went to [[preserve]] the mans [[name]] and let the world know what a corrupt , putrid society South Africa was. The [[Direction]] is outstanding from David Attenborough as it was for Gandhi although if there is any critisism to be aimed it [[could]] be at the [[length]] of the film. Two and a half hours is a long [[time]] to [[sit]] through a [[historic]] movie .What is [[amazing]] is how he [[manages]] to [[control]] all the extras. Thousands of people in both films. This [[film]] [[really]] does open your [[eyes]] to what happened before the [[break]] up of Aparthiet and you cannot fail to [[moved]] by it. 8 out of 10. Very rarely does Denzil Washington make a bad movie and come to [[believe]] of it that goes for Kevin [[Klein]] and in this case , this [[owes]] [[counting]] as one of their [[optimum]] [[cinematographic]]. It is more about of film about how strong friendship can more than the story of Steve Biko although we do [[got]] an insight into what the [[guy]] was like and how far the reporter and [[buddies]] Donald Woods went to [[conserving]] the mans [[behalf]] and let the world know what a corrupt , putrid society South Africa was. The [[Directorate]] is outstanding from David Attenborough as it was for Gandhi although if there is any critisism to be aimed it [[wo]] be at the [[lifespan]] of the film. Two and a half hours is a long [[period]] to [[sitting]] through a [[historical]] movie .What is [[staggering]] is how he [[administered]] to [[supervise]] all the extras. Thousands of people in both films. This [[movie]] [[truthfully]] does open your [[eye]] to what happened before the [[intermission]] up of Aparthiet and you cannot fail to [[relocated]] by it. 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Some guy gets whacked. Right out in plain sight this other guy shoots him. He's got some bodyguards and they whack the killer, but a reporter gets interested. She goes to the hospital where they took the guy who got whacked. She walks in, and corners one bodyguard, but he doesn't feel like talking. I can't figure out why. It's not like anyone else is interested. She's the only reporter there. Anyway, her editor discourages her from working on this lame story. But hey, she does anyway. She goes to see the killer's sister & mom. A few minutes after she leaves they get whacked big time-- somebody blows up their trailer-- huge ball of fire. Then she searches out the bodyguard from the hospital. She finds him hungover on his boat, but a minute later they're both underwater sucking on a scuba tank 'cause three guys are trying to whack them (and have blown up the boat big time-- huge ball of fire). The reporter and the bodyguard whack two of the guys who are trying to whack them.

In the course of the next hour another guy gets whacked crossing the street, there's a shootout with several stiffs in a warehouse, some car chases with wreckage & death, a fake suicide, etc. etc. Lotsa stiffs, all kindsa carnage.

Great stuff, but what the reporter and the bodyguard can't figure is: why in hell the original guy got whacked. What's the motivation? Of course, it might help us to figure out why the reporter's even interested. Through almost all of this she's the only reporter on the story. Nobody else in the media cares. Not even with all the big fireballs and dead bodies. True, the original guy who got whacked wasn't exactly a celebrity. His job was a little bit dull. He was just the President. Yeah, the one who lives in the White House. Oh, and the bodyguard is a Secret Service agent.

Is that the spoiler?

It should be. After all there are no TV cameras, no other print reporters, no bloggers... just another one of those police blotter crimes...

So what's the spoiler?

Lemme think...

No! Wait! The spoiler is that his wife did it! Yeah... the First Lady. She was p---ed because the President was fooling around. And she gets away with it. She's really sharp, huh? But how the hell could anybody ever figure that out? Why would anyone bother? After all, only one reporter is even interested.

I give this move a "1". It was so dumb I just had to keep watching. And it only got dumber! That's the real spoiler! But even though I've told you, you've got to see it to believe it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I have seen many, [[many]] [[films]] from China - and [[Hong]] Kong. This is the [[worst]]. No, the worst one was 'Unknown Pleasures'. I watched 'Platform' [[yesterday]] [[evening]] and thought that Jia Zhang Ke's other two [[films]] must be better. This [[evening]] I was [[disappointed]] again. I will not be watching 'Xiao Wu' tomorrow evening because I have just placed all three films in the bin! [[Whoever]] gave this film, 'Platform' ten out of ten, needs to watch more cinema! The [[photography]] was very poor: it was very difficult to differentiate between some of the [[characters]] because of the [[lack]] of close-up work. The storyline was so disjointed that I fast-forwarded it towards the end out of pure [[frustration]]. I would not [[recommend]] this film to [[anyone]]. [[Give]] me Zhang Yimou or Chen Kage any day. These are true masters of [[Chinese]] cinema, not pretentious con [[men]]! I have seen many, [[multiple]] [[cinematography]] from China - and [[Hk]] Kong. This is the [[hardest]]. No, the worst one was 'Unknown Pleasures'. I watched 'Platform' [[tuesday]] [[afternoon]] and thought that Jia Zhang Ke's other two [[film]] must be better. This [[soir]] I was [[disenchanted]] again. I will not be watching 'Xiao Wu' tomorrow evening because I have just placed all three films in the bin! [[Anyone]] gave this film, 'Platform' ten out of ten, needs to watch more cinema! The [[photograph]] was very poor: it was very difficult to differentiate between some of the [[personages]] because of the [[insufficiency]] of close-up work. The storyline was so disjointed that I fast-forwarded it towards the end out of pure [[disillusion]]. I would not [[recommended]] this film to [[everybody]]. [[Lend]] me Zhang Yimou or Chen Kage any day. These are true masters of [[Chino]] cinema, not pretentious con [[hombre]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This su*k! Why do they have to make movies that they must know su*k from the beginning? I mean, look at Alien from 1977. If the movie you´r about to make is not better than anything made billions of years before, why make it? I had problems with the plot and who the main character was. That's not good either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is one of the [[best]] [[films]] I have [[seen]] in [[years]]! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is [[excellent]] as [[Emma]] Woodhouse. [[Alan]] Cumming is [[superb]] as Reverand [[Elton]], and Emma Thompson's sister, [[Sophie]], is hysterical as Miss Bates. And [[check]] out the [[gorgeous]] Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a [[gentleman]]! Whoever [[said]] you [[need]] sex and violence in a [[movie]] to make it good has never [[seen]] Emma. I [[think]] that is what [[separates]] it from so [[many]] others--it's classy.

If you're [[looking]] for a [[film]] that you can watch with the [[whole]] family, or looking for a romance for yourself, [[look]] no further. Emma is that movie. With a [[beautiful]] [[setting]], [[wonderful]] [[costumes]], and an [[outstanding]] cast (have I [[mentioned]] the [[gorgeous]] Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a [[perfect]] ten! This is one of the [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] I have [[watched]] in [[yrs]]! I am not a Gwyneth Paltrow fan, but she is [[gorgeous]] as [[Emmy]] Woodhouse. [[Allan]] Cumming is [[stunning]] as Reverand [[Alton]], and Emma Thompson's sister, [[Sofie]], is hysterical as Miss Bates. And [[inspecting]] out the [[handsome]] Jeremy Northam as Mr. Knightley; what a [[messieurs]]! Whoever [[asserted]] you [[needs]] sex and violence in a [[filmmaking]] to make it good has never [[watched]] Emma. I [[thoughts]] that is what [[divides]] it from so [[various]] others--it's classy.

If you're [[researching]] for a [[movie]] that you can watch with the [[total]] family, or looking for a romance for yourself, [[gaze]] no further. Emma is that movie. With a [[awesome]] [[settings]], [[awesome]] [[clothes]], and an [[excellent]] cast (have I [[mention]] the [[excellent]] Jeremy Northam?), Emma is a [[faultless]] ten! --------------------------------------------- Result 1310 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would [[finally]] have a [[decent]] [[movie]] about [[World]] [[War]] I as [[experienced]] by American [[soldiers]]. Unfortunately this is not it.

It should have been a [[good]] [[movie]] about WWI. Even [[though]] it was made for television it is [[obvious]] that a real [[effort]] was made to [[use]] appropriate [[equipment]] and [[props]]. But the [[writing]] and [[directing]] are badly lacking, [[even]] [[though]] the [[makers]] of this [[movie]] [[obviously]] [[borrowed]] freely from quite a few well made [[war]] [[movies]]. War movie clichés abound such as the [[arrogant]] [[general]] who apparently does not [[care]] a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average [[grunt]] experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be "Paths of Glory" with American uniforms. Except that "Paths of Glory" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from "Gettysburg" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from "The Thin Red Line". But in "The Thin Red Line" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a [[ring]] forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.

If this movie used a military [[adviser]] they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what [[made]] storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.

Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service. When this movie was first shown on television I had high hopes that we would [[ultimately]] have a [[dignified]] [[filmmaking]] about [[Worldwide]] [[Wars]] I as [[endured]] by American [[troops]]. Unfortunately this is not it.

It should have been a [[buena]] [[cinema]] about WWI. Even [[while]] it was made for television it is [[unmistakable]] that a real [[endeavour]] was made to [[utilise]] appropriate [[devices]] and [[fittings]]. But the [[writes]] and [[instructing]] are badly lacking, [[yet]] [[albeit]] the [[builders]] of this [[film]] [[naturally]] [[loaned]] freely from quite a few well made [[warfare]] [[kino]]. War movie clichés abound such as the [[presumptuous]] [[overall]] who apparently does not [[healthcare]] a flip about the lives of his men. When will Hollywood realize that, even though there have been plenty of bad generals, most combat unit generals have seen plenty of combat themselves and are not naive about what the average [[growling]] experiences? The first part of this movie appeared to be "Paths of Glory" with American uniforms. Except that "Paths of Glory" was emotionally gripping. Later on there was Chamberlain's charge (except uphill) from "Gettysburg" and even the capture of the American soldier by a ring of enemy soldiers from "The Thin Red Line". But in "The Thin Red Line" the soldier was alone when captured. In this movie a [[rings]] forms around the new prisoner in the middle of a battle.

If this movie used a military [[counsellors]] they ignored him. Even though the actors (and I never could forget they were actors while watching) mouthed military tactics I didn't see very much of it. The American soldiers would stand up to be shot while the Germans attacked. And the infamous Storm Troopers, who were apparently blind, appeared to use no tactics whatsoever in their attack. In the real war, the tactics were what [[effected]] storm troopers so effective. But the silliest scene was the attack of the German Flamethrowers. In this scene the German flamethrower operators walked in a broad line towards the defending Americans. If that had been real they would never have gotten close enough to use their flamethrowers before they had all been dropped by the defender's bullets.

Okay, so most war movies are unrealistic when it comes to the tactics shown. But it is still disappointing. But what really turned me off to this flick was the typical anti-war anti-military angle that movie makers seem to think is important. True, war is hell. But most American soldiers, even though they grumble and gripe, tend to believe in what they are doing and can be rather gung-ho about it. My Grandfather served in World War I. And even though he died four years before I was born I have been told how proud he was of his service. --------------------------------------------- Result 1311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a well [[directed]] [[film]] from John Cromwell who was not a [[great]] [[director]] but who did make some [[fine]] [[films]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[could]] [[manage]], atmospheric but nothing [[like]] the [[real]] thing, it is a story of [[obsession]] and thwarted [[love]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] it on [[DVD]] as I had never [[seen]] it before and being a [[great]] admirer of [[Bette]] Davis [[wanted]] to see her in a role [[considered]] one of her early [[great]] ones. So I [[bought]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm sorry to [[say]] her London cockney accent just [[made]] me laugh. Bette [[Davis]] was one of the greatest [[film]] [[actors]], make no [[mistake]], but here she did [[make]] one. It was impossible to take her character seriously. It wasn't as [[gruesome]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but close.

In the other major role was Leslie Howard and he did it [[superbly]]. He was a subtle and intelligent [[actor]] The supporting [[actors]] acquit themselves well. Worth watching despite Ms Davis' vocal gymnastics. This is a well [[aimed]] [[cinematography]] from John Cromwell who was not a [[whopping]] [[headmaster]] but who did make some [[alright]] [[cinematography]] including the 1937 version of 'The Prsoner of Zenda'. Set in a London that only Hollywood [[would]] [[administering]], atmospheric but nothing [[iike]] the [[authentic]] thing, it is a story of [[mania]] and thwarted [[loves]], from the novel by Somerset Maughan.

I was [[researching]] forward to [[witnessing]] it on [[DVDS]] as I had never [[noticed]] it before and being a [[excellent]] admirer of [[Midler]] Davis [[wants]] to see her in a role [[regarded]] one of her early [[large]] ones. So I [[buying]] it. Well she looked fine but I'm sorry to [[says]] her London cockney accent just [[effected]] me laugh. Bette [[Davies]] was one of the greatest [[flick]] [[players]], make no [[mistaken]], but here she did [[deliver]] one. It was impossible to take her character seriously. It wasn't as [[abominable]] as the Dick Van Dyke 'Mary Poppins' cockney accent but close.

In the other major role was Leslie Howard and he did it [[strikingly]]. He was a subtle and intelligent [[protagonist]] The supporting [[players]] acquit themselves well. Worth watching despite Ms Davis' vocal gymnastics. --------------------------------------------- Result 1312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (80%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was trying to be a Hitchcock rip off or a modernized Edgar Allen Poe tribute. These days, someone would have chopped it up a bit and presented it as one of those TV anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an extensive rewrite.

The [[sad]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the rubble of this movie, and the actors are obviously doing the best they can with both their talent and the material they have to work with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a dramatic scene; the special effects simply didn't work; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so plainly that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I suppose someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") I couldn't tell if "The Screaming Skull" was trying to be a Hitchcock rip off or a modernized Edgar Allen Poe tribute. These days, someone would have chopped it up a bit and presented it as one of those TV anthology episodes from the old "Tales From The Dark Side"...but only after an extensive rewrite.

The [[sorrowful]] thing is, there seems to be a nice, nasty little story trying to get out from under the rubble of this movie, and the actors are obviously doing the best they can with both their talent and the material they have to work with. But the director just didn't know how to stage or pace a dramatic scene; the special effects simply didn't work; the screenplay telegraphed its threadbare plot points so plainly that a bivalve could have seen them coming; and the soundtrack kept playing German "oompah band" music when it was supposed to be trying to scare the audience.

They tried; they tried really hard. But this is of interest only as a period piece.I suppose someone very young who hadn't seen a lot of suspense or horror might get a charge out "The Screaming Skull", but someone that young probably wouldn't get most of the subtext or plot motivation. ("Mommy, why is that nice man trying to scare the twisty faced scaredy-cat lady??") --------------------------------------------- Result 1313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I [[sat]] through this [[movie]] [[expecting]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[film]]. But instead was given some of the [[least]] [[thought]] out [[arguments]] against the Christian [[faith]] [[imaginable]]. For instance, in an effort to prove that [[Christianity]] is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the [[bible]] without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is [[quoted]] as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This film also attempts to use the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his mockery of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the film were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they said it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then gives the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the origins of their own faith?" and proceeds to explain that the apostle Paul started Christianity after being stopped on the road to Damascus. The poor chap seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before Acts 2. More deception? Or is this simply ignorance? He also throws around nonsense that Paul didn't believe Jesus was a real person. Are you kidding me? 1 Corinthians 15 describes Jesus death and resurrection being witnessed by people (whom Paul names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other examples of how full of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his upbringing in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. I [[oin]] through this [[kino]] [[wait]] a thought-provoking, fact-based [[flick]]. But instead was given some of the [[fewer]] [[brainchild]] out [[controversies]] against the Christian [[creed]] [[unthinkable]]. For instance, in an effort to prove that [[Christendom]] is inherently violent, the narrator constantly quotes the [[biblical]] without giving context, and thus altering the meaning of the text. Jesus is [[cited]] as commanding the execution of those who disobey him, when in fact, the quote is from a parable Jesus told, involving a king who is then quoted. Thus the narrator makes it appear as if Jesus says one thing when he is actually telling a story where one of his characters says it. This is dishonesty in a very obvious form. Is this really what Atheism has to offer the world? This film also attempts to use the success of the Passion of the Christ over Jesus Christ: Superstar and The Last Temptation of the Christ as evidence that Christians are bloodthirsty. He makes no mention of the fact that the Passion was the most historically accurate Bible-film to date. He makes no mention of the fact that it was actually the best liked by critics of the bunch. He then edits in a series of violent images from the Passion as if to hammer home his point. Ironically, he makes no mention of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre which came out a few months later and plays violence for entertainment, versus dramatic effect.

One thing that really bothered me was his mockery of people who actually knew more about the subject matter than he did. All the Christians he interviewed were average schmoes in the parking lot of Billy Graham's New York Crusade. Atheists he interviewed for the film were notable authors and scholars. He asked the Christians how the Christian movement started, and of course, they said it started with the Holy Spirit coming to the disciples at Pentecost. Which is correct (Acts 2). He then gives the commentary, "isn't it funny how so few Christians seem to know the origins of their own faith?" and proceeds to explain that the apostle Paul started Christianity after being stopped on the road to Damascus. The poor chap seems convinced that Acts 9 happens before Acts 2. More deception? Or is this simply ignorance? He also throws around nonsense that Paul didn't believe Jesus was a real person. Are you kidding me? 1 Corinthians 15 describes Jesus death and resurrection being witnessed by people (whom Paul names in the passage) for the Corinthians to question if they are in doubt!

There are many many other examples of how full of crap this 'documentary' is. But because I don't have time or patience to go into them all, I'll skip straight to the end. It's obvious throughout the whole movie that the narrator has an emotional vendetta against his upbringing in the church. And the climax interview is HIS CHILDHOOD PRINCIPLE! In a last-ditch attempt to disprove the Christian faith, the narrator tries to make a fool out of someone who gave him a detention as a child. Is this what passes as an intellectual documentary for the Atheist community? Surely there are intelligent Atheist filmmakers out there who can make a documentary that isn't a load of made-up crap passed off as 'facts'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is my fourth Joe McDoakes short that I've seen and so far the funniest one. In this one, Joe takes voice lessons from a record impersonating Charles Boyer and Ronald Colman. When he goes to Warner Bros. Studio (the company behind this series, incidentally), he asks Jack Carson for directions which gets both confused. Then he encounters actor George O'Hanlon (who's also McDoakes) who speaks in his more normal voice that's not too far from his later Geroge Jetson and gets to the set where he automatically upsets the director. I'll stop there and just say how funny I found the whole thing and was fascinated by the movie star cameos provided near the end. The final scene was especially a hoot so on that note, go to YouTube if you want to watch So You Want to Be in Picutres! --------------------------------------------- Result 1315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I recently [[purchased]] the complete [[American]] Gothic series on [[DVD]] and it [[lived]] up to my memories of it. I was very [[grateful]] to be able to view for the [[first]] [[time]] [[episodes]] that were never televised. I loved "[[Ring]] of Fire" in particular of the stories I hadn't seen the first [[time]] around.

Gary Cole is [[fantastic]] as "[[evil]], sexy" Lucas Buck. Lucas [[Black]] as Caleb is [[also]] a [[superb]] player. I [[thought]] [[Brenda]] Bakke as Selena Coombs was [[also]] superb in her portrayal. [[In]] [[fact]], the whole [[cast]] was [[fantastically]] talented and had [[great]] [[chemistry]] with each other.

It's a [[shame]] the series was screwed by the [[network]] (in collusion with a [[burgeoning]] [[group]] of censors) because it was [[truly]] [[designed]] for adult viewing. A [[mixture]] of comedy, tragedy, [[farce]], satire, Gothic romance and horror [[genres]], it [[offered]] [[brilliant]] characterizations [[supported]] by acting at the [[genius]] [[level]].

I had the most [[tremendous]] [[lust]] for the [[devil]] for once in my [[life]]. [[Long]] live [[Gary]] Cole ([[Sheriff]] Lucas Buck), the most luscious "[[fallen]] angel" ever. I recently [[buy]] the complete [[Americana]] Gothic series on [[DVDS]] and it [[resided]] up to my memories of it. I was very [[appreciate]] to be able to view for the [[firstly]] [[period]] [[bouts]] that were never televised. I loved "[[Rings]] of Fire" in particular of the stories I hadn't seen the first [[period]] around.

Gary Cole is [[noteworthy]] as "[[demonic]], sexy" Lucas Buck. Lucas [[Negro]] as Caleb is [[moreover]] a [[extraordinaire]] player. I [[brainchild]] [[Cynthia]] Bakke as Selena Coombs was [[apart]] superb in her portrayal. [[At]] [[facto]], the whole [[casting]] was [[insanely]] talented and had [[prodigious]] [[chem]] with each other.

It's a [[dishonour]] the series was screwed by the [[networking]] (in collusion with a [[prospering]] [[grouping]] of censors) because it was [[honestly]] [[conceived]] for adult viewing. A [[amalgam]] of comedy, tragedy, [[mockery]], satire, Gothic romance and horror [[genera]], it [[offering]] [[resplendent]] characterizations [[aided]] by acting at the [[engineering]] [[grades]].

I had the most [[considerable]] [[thirsty]] for the [[demon]] for once in my [[iife]]. [[Longer]] live [[Garry]] Cole ([[Lawman]] Lucas Buck), the most luscious "[[dwindled]] angel" ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1316 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Personally, this is one of my [[favorites]] of all [[time]]! no, i'm not 10.. i'm 30! i own an [[old]], [[original]] VHS of this that i [[bought]] from a rental [[store]]. i've watched it [[countless]] [[times]]..

while it's an amusing movie for [[kids]], it's an [[intriguing]] movie for [[adults]]. i once [[saw]] this [[movie]] whiile i was.. not [[sober]]. my eyes were [[opened]] to things i had never [[noticed]] before. i [[saw]] morals being [[strongly]] [[encouraged]], both [[overtly]] and [[somewhat]] subliminally.. i [[wish]] i [[could]] [[remember]] all the [[things]] i [[noticed]] in particular, but it's been a very [[long]] [[time]] [[since]] then. [[rest]] assured, there are [[TONS]] of [[things]] that are alluded to [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. if you get the [[chance]] to [[view]] it.. not sober.. do so, you won't be [[disappointed]].. as a [[matter]] of fact, you will [[probably]] feel [[rather]] [[happy]] and warm.

[[unique]] and [[wonderful]]! Personally, this is one of my [[favorite]] of all [[period]]! no, i'm not 10.. i'm 30! i own an [[archaic]], [[initial]] VHS of this that i [[acquiring]] from a rental [[storehouse]]. i've watched it [[many]] [[moments]]..

while it's an amusing movie for [[enfants]], it's an [[fascinating]] movie for [[grownups]]. i once [[watched]] this [[movies]] whiile i was.. not [[dispassionate]]. my eyes were [[inaugurated]] to things i had never [[seen]] before. i [[noticed]] morals being [[resolutely]] [[promoted]], both [[patently]] and [[slightly]] subliminally.. i [[wanna]] i [[would]] [[recalling]] all the [[items]] i [[observed]] in particular, but it's been a very [[lang]] [[period]] [[because]] then. [[remaining]] assured, there are [[TON]] of [[items]] that are alluded to [[around]] the [[movies]]. if you get the [[likelihood]] to [[viewing]] it.. not sober.. do so, you won't be [[frustrated]].. as a [[topic]] of fact, you will [[potentially]] feel [[somewhat]] [[pleased]] and warm.

[[singular]] and [[ravishing]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Outside of the [[fact]] that George [[Lopez]] is a pretentious jerk, his [[show]] is [[terrible]].

[[Nothing]] about Lopez has ever been [[funny]]. I have [[watched]] his stand-up and have never uttered any resemblance to a [[laugh]].

His stuff comes across as vindictive and his animosity towards white people oozes out of every single pore of his body.

I have [[laughed]] at white people jokes from many a [[comedian]] and love many of them.

This guy has a grudge that won't end.

I feel bad for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are always cookie cutter with an Hispanic accent.

Canned laugh at the dumbest comments and scenes.

Might be why this show is always on at 2AM in replay. Outside of the [[facto]] that George [[Lopes]] is a pretentious jerk, his [[illustrates]] is [[scary]].

[[Anything]] about Lopez has ever been [[hilarious]]. I have [[observed]] his stand-up and have never uttered any resemblance to a [[chuckles]].

His stuff comes across as vindictive and his animosity towards white people oozes out of every single pore of his body.

I have [[smiled]] at white people jokes from many a [[comic]] and love many of them.

This guy has a grudge that won't end.

I feel bad for Hispanics who have only this show to represent themselves.

The shows plots are always cookie cutter with an Hispanic accent.

Canned laugh at the dumbest comments and scenes.

Might be why this show is always on at 2AM in replay. --------------------------------------------- Result 1318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Over the past year, Uwe Boll has shown [[marginal]] improvement as a filmmaker, cranking out the competent "In the Name of the King" (a "Lord of the Rings" clone) and the proudly vulgar, post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then came "Seed," and the counter was reset to [[Zero]], keeping his bid for legitimacy and respect that much further out of reach. And I'm a [[fan]] of the guy–his films exhibit a uniquely screwball vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally boring victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching pointless stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. Over the past year, Uwe Boll has shown [[smaller]] improvement as a filmmaker, cranking out the competent "In the Name of the King" (a "Lord of the Rings" clone) and the proudly vulgar, post-9/11 satire "Postal." But then came "Seed," and the counter was reset to [[Zilch]], keeping his bid for legitimacy and respect that much further out of reach. And I'm a [[breather]] of the guy–his films exhibit a uniquely screwball vision, and are never dull.

Spawned from his frustration over the savage notices his early films received, "Seed" is a colossally misguided attempt at social commentary, and an even worse jab at creating an iconic slasher mythology (Boll often seems to be taking a page from Rob Zombie's successful reboot of "Halloween"). The antagonist is Maxwell Seed (Will Sanderson), a mute, hulking brute who's slain 666 people and sits on death row, awaiting execution; after unsuccessfully frying the beast, he rises from the grave to seek revenge on those who put him there...and so begins a string of wholly gratuitous mayhem.

Trying to create a new-millennium slasher in the vein of Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, Max Seed is too nondescript and boring to leave an impression, ultimately resembling a washed-up pro wrestler doing "The Toolbox Murders" on a succession of equally boring victims. Furthermore, Seed's character and Boll's "message" run contrary to one another: the death penalty is wrong, sure, but are we really expected to sympathize with a soulless killer who's left a couple hundred corpses in his wake? I think not.

Meanwhile, Michael Pare acts like a listless, long-lost brother to James Remar's character on "Dexter": a cop who sits at his desk a lot, thumbing through newspaper clippings, and watching pointless stop-motion scenes of decomposing animals and people trapped in Seed's lair. By the time he and a bunch of cardboard cops storm Seed's hideout, the sequence is so drawn-out, ill-conceived (the lighting is almost non-existent), and unexciting (despite a healthy dose of gore) that it almost put me to sleep.

The shoddy film-making isn't limited to just that sequence: "Seed" appears to have been shot by a drunken cinematographer, since the camera bobs and weaves endlessly, a technique that's more stomach-turning than the gore itself; these protracted takes of very little happening only draw attention to the meandering, almost non-existent narrative. At 90 minutes, the film is distended enough to be considered a form of torture, which might have been Boll's intent all along.

Pure genius...I guess the joke's on me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is a [[candidate]] for the [[single]] most [[disappointing]] [[movie]] experience of my [[lifetime]]. Cool title, excellent [[director]] (I saw "To [[Die]] For" and "Drugstore Cowboy" before this), and hey - Uma Thurman in the cast. How can you go wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[temples]] for hours after I [[watched]] this [[turkey]].

[[Disjointed]] and unfunny in an [[attempt]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a [[movie]] that should be avoided at all [[costs]]. Its [[critical]] lambasting was well [[deserved]]. You have here one of those rare films that does not contain a single redeeming quality. [[Zero]] out of ****. This is a [[hopefuls]] for the [[exclusive]] most [[depressing]] [[kino]] experience of my [[vie]]. Cool title, excellent [[headmaster]] (I saw "To [[Deaths]] For" and "Drugstore Cowboy" before this), and hey - Uma Thurman in the cast. How can you go wrong? Well, that is a question that throbbed in my [[synagogues]] for hours after I [[seen]] this [[turk]].

[[Unconnected]] and unfunny in an [[try]] to be offbeat, this is a dead-zone of a [[films]] that should be avoided at all [[costing]]. Its [[pivotal]] lambasting was well [[deserves]]. You have here one of those rare films that does not contain a single redeeming quality. [[Nothingness]] out of ****. --------------------------------------------- Result 1320 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well well well. As good as John Carpenter's season 1 outing in "Masters of Horror" was, this is the complete [[opposite]]. He certainly proved he was still a [[master]] of [[horror]] with "Cigarette Burns" but "Pro-Life" is perhaps the [[worst]] I have seen from him.

It's stupid, totally devoid of creepy atmosphere and tension and it overstays it's welcome, despite the less-than-an-hour running time. The script is [[nonsense]], the characters are [[irritable]] and un-appealing and the [[conclusion]] is beyond [[absurd]].

And for those suckers who actually bought the DVD (one of them being me); did you [[see]] how [[Carpenter]] [[describes]] the [[film]]? He's [[actually]] proud of it and he [[talks]] about it as his [[best]] [[work]] for a long [[time]], and he [[praises]] the script. And in the commentary [[track]], where he [[notices]] an [[obvious]] screw up that [[made]] it to the [[final]] cut, he just [[says]] he didn't feel it [[essential]] to [[rectify]] the [[mistake]] and he just [[let]] it be there. I [[fear]] the [[old]] [[master]] has completely lost his touch. I [[sincerely]] hope I'm [[proved]] [[wrong]].

I [[want]] to leave on a positive note and [[mention]] that the [[creature]] [[effects]] are [[awesome]], [[though]]. Technically [[speaking]], this [[film]] is top notch, with [[effective]] lighting schemes and make up [[effects]]. Well well well. As good as John Carpenter's season 1 outing in "Masters of Horror" was, this is the complete [[opus]]. He certainly proved he was still a [[maitre]] of [[abomination]] with "Cigarette Burns" but "Pro-Life" is perhaps the [[gravest]] I have seen from him.

It's stupid, totally devoid of creepy atmosphere and tension and it overstays it's welcome, despite the less-than-an-hour running time. The script is [[senseless]], the characters are [[excitable]] and un-appealing and the [[finding]] is beyond [[nonsense]].

And for those suckers who actually bought the DVD (one of them being me); did you [[behold]] how [[Woodwork]] [[portray]] the [[filmmaking]]? He's [[genuinely]] proud of it and he [[chitchat]] about it as his [[finest]] [[works]] for a long [[period]], and he [[complimented]] the script. And in the commentary [[tracks]], where he [[notification]] an [[palpable]] screw up that [[introduced]] it to the [[ultimate]] cut, he just [[say]] he didn't feel it [[key]] to [[corrects]] the [[mistaken]] and he just [[leave]] it be there. I [[scared]] the [[former]] [[maitre]] has completely lost his touch. I [[unreservedly]] hope I'm [[revealed]] [[misspelled]].

I [[wanna]] to leave on a positive note and [[cite]] that the [[monster]] [[influences]] are [[unbelievable]], [[although]]. Technically [[speaks]], this [[flick]] is top notch, with [[efficacious]] lighting schemes and make up [[influences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Imagine]] the [[plight]] of Richard, a painter, whose real passion is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his home made wings. He has ripped his canvases and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police contraption, he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a judge who orders him to do community service. Richard, whose relationship with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built plane for the thrill of her life, something that brings them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass directed this quirky film which presents an [[unusual]] situation. Jane is clearly not the romantic heroine in mainstream films, and yet, she has such a [[sweet]] aura about her that is hard not to feel for her and what she is trying to accomplish. Mr. Greengrass shows an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he wrote for the film. The movie doesn't try to be cute or give a rosy picture of a young woman afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. [[Presume]] the [[predicament]] of Richard, a painter, whose real passion is flying. When we first meet him, he is seen atop a building in London wearing his home made wings. He has ripped his canvases and other works, at the height of his despair, and fashions a flying device for his jump. When he falls into the protective police contraption, he doesn't suffer a scratch, but it lands him in front of a judge who orders him to do community service. Richard, whose relationship with Anne apparently ended badly, decides to relocate to a rural area where he finds a place in the country with a large barn he plans to use to construct his own plane.

Richard ends up trying to help Jane Harchard reluctantly. She is a young woman suffering from A.L.S., or Lou Gehrig's disease and is confined to a motorized wheel chair. Jane is extremely intelligent, but has a dark side and a salty vocabulary. She uses a hand held device to speak sometimes, as her speech is not clear. What Jane loves to do is to lose her virginity, at any cost. Jane and Richard clash as they meet, but a mutual tolerance soon makes them comfortable with one another.

Jane, who watches porn on her computer, has a notion for finding someone like Richard Gere in "American Gigolo", who will, for a fee, have sex with her. When Richard takes her to London, they find the right man for the job. His fee is exorbitant, but they agree. Since they have no money, Richard decides to rob a big bank. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan when Jane realizes that she can't go through with what she had wanted. At the end, Richard takes Jane for a ride in his crudely built plane for the thrill of her life, something that brings them closer, as they find an affinity with one another.

Peter Greengrass directed this quirky film which presents an [[extraordinaire]] situation. Jane is clearly not the romantic heroine in mainstream films, and yet, she has such a [[sugary]] aura about her that is hard not to feel for her and what she is trying to accomplish. Mr. Greengrass shows an affinity Richar Hawkins' material he wrote for the film. The movie doesn't try to be cute or give a rosy picture of a young woman afflicted with an incurable disease.

Helena Bonham Carter is the main reason for watching the film. She makes a wonderful Jane. On the other hand, Kenneth Branagh doesn't seem too well suited for this type of comedy. Somehow, he has problems of his own in the way he interprets Richard. Gemma Jones has some good moments as Anne, Richard's former love.

"The Theory of Flight" shows a good director. No doubt Peter Greengrass will go to bigger and better things. --------------------------------------------- Result 1322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this on cable back in the early 90's and loved it. Never saw it again until it showed up on cable again recently. Still find it a great Vietnam movie. Not sure why its not higher rated. I found everything about this film compelling. As a vet (not from Vietnam) I can relate to the situations brought by both Harris and De Niro. I can only imagine this film being more poignant now with our situation in Iraq. I wish this would be offered on cable more often for people to see. The human toll on our soldiers isn't left on the battlefield. Its brought home for the rest of there lives. And this film is one of many that brings that home in a very hard way. Excellent film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Now, it would be some sort of cliché if i began with the bit about the title, so i'll wait on that. [[First]], this movie made me wonder why kids do stupid things like wander around in labs and break bottles. [[Then]] i realized it, this is a movie with a message, that message is beat [[kids]] and things like this won't happen. Things like what you ask? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of mayhem before dying in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue Monkey... has [[nothing]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/idiot/thing on the front chasing some screaming nurses. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half drunk on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the mood for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you like snow boarding apes or blue things this movie is not for you. If you like [[bugs]] and good reasons to hit kids, rent this. Now, it would be some sort of cliché if i began with the bit about the title, so i'll wait on that. [[Fiirst]], this movie made me wonder why kids do stupid things like wander around in labs and break bottles. [[Thus]] i realized it, this is a movie with a message, that message is beat [[youngsters]] and things like this won't happen. Things like what you ask? Things like a giant insectish monster growing up and causing a bit of mayhem before dying in the typical "kill the monster indirectly" fashion. Now, as promised... Blue Monkey... has [[anything]] Blue in it nor any Simian of any kind. Now it snot like i was cheated or anything. The picture on the cover had a giant bug/crab/idiot/thing on the front chasing some screaming nurses. That kinda happened but i wanted apes! having just enjoyed MOST EXTREME PRIMATE a few nights before(half drunk on Cask and Creame's brandy mind you) i was in the mood for more monkey hijacks 80's style. Not so much. If you like snow boarding apes or blue things this movie is not for you. If you like [[insects]] and good reasons to hit kids, rent this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[Hong]] Kong filmed potboiler [[packs]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The Young & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' trilogy(especially 'Goodbye Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. Chai Lee(Emy Wong)undergoes a [[stunning]] [[transformation]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. Future Italian porn star/politician, Illona Staller, who would later go by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV positive John Holmes) plays Emy's competition. Exotic locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. Recommended for fans of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! This [[Hk]] Kong filmed potboiler [[packing]] in more melodrama than week's worth of 'The Young & The Restless'. This one is more of a throwback to the original 'Emmanuelle' trilogy(especially 'Goodbye Emmanuelle') than a D'Amato sleazefest. Chai Lee(Emy Wong)undergoes a [[unbelievable]] [[transforms]] from dour nurse to hot-to-trot streetwalker. Future Italian porn star/politician, Illona Staller, who would later go by the name Ciccolina(and have sex with an HIV positive John Holmes) plays Emy's competition. Exotic locales and some decent soft-core scenes round this one out. Recommended for fans of the original 'Emmanuelle', of which I am one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1325 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] After Chicago, I was [[beginning]] to [[lose]] all respect for [[Richard]] Gere and then along came The [[Flock]]. There's just so far a [[nice]] [[smile]] and a [[couple]] of [[stock]] facial gestures can [[get]] you, but he [[proved]] to me that he's [[finally]] gotten hold of his [[craft]] and can act with the best of them. [[Clare]] [[Danes]] was also super as his "trainee/replacement". Some have [[suggested]] there was too much unnecessary violence, but I don't [[see]] it that way. [[Nothing]] I saw detracted from the power of this film. I was [[really]] [[shocked]] I hadn't [[heard]] of it being [[released]] in [[theaters]] and came across it at Blockbuster [[instead]]. [[Really]] an [[exceptional]] [[film]] with just the right [[blend]] of [[action]], [[suspense]], thrills, and social consciousness. As good as 7even? Well, [[maybe]]. And you'll see better acting out of Gere than anyone's ever [[gotten]] out of [[Pitt]]. After Chicago, I was [[startup]] to [[wasting]] all respect for [[Richie]] Gere and then along came The [[Herd]]. There's just so far a [[pleasurable]] [[smirk]] and a [[pair]] of [[stocks]] facial gestures can [[got]] you, but he [[showed]] to me that he's [[eventually]] gotten hold of his [[handicraft]] and can act with the best of them. [[Claire]] [[Danish]] was also super as his "trainee/replacement". Some have [[recommended]] there was too much unnecessary violence, but I don't [[behold]] it that way. [[Anything]] I saw detracted from the power of this film. I was [[genuinely]] [[appalled]] I hadn't [[overheard]] of it being [[publicized]] in [[cinema]] and came across it at Blockbuster [[alternatively]]. [[Truthfully]] an [[unusual]] [[cinematography]] with just the right [[mingling]] of [[activities]], [[wait]], thrills, and social consciousness. As good as 7even? Well, [[presumably]]. And you'll see better acting out of Gere than anyone's ever [[become]] out of [[Beit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Absolutely]] the very [[first]] [[film]] that scared me to death. I happened catch it when my older brother([[r]].i.p.) was watching it. It was on a black and white [[TV]] and not [[really]] a good [[picture]] but it [[got]] me interested. Shortly after, my folks bought a color set and, as luck would have it, The Million Dollar Movie was [[showing]] it one [[Sunday]].

I had [[forgotten]] most of the plot, but it did not [[take]] long to [[catch]] up...and I got so [[scared]] I had a hard time [[sleeping]] that [[night]]! I mean sure it was just a movie but it involved a creature that not only came from space, but you could not hear it, or see it...and once it got hold of you it was too late. Even now, after all this time it still sends a shiver up my spine. A true classic, and [[even]] better a [[classic]] that I have [[seen]] [[scare]] the [[pants]] off a new generation!

[[Long]] [[live]] The [[Blob]]! [[Utterly]] the very [[fiirst]] [[filmmaking]] that scared me to death. I happened catch it when my older brother([[rs]].i.p.) was watching it. It was on a black and white [[TELEVISION]] and not [[genuinely]] a good [[visuals]] but it [[ai]] me interested. Shortly after, my folks bought a color set and, as luck would have it, The Million Dollar Movie was [[demonstrate]] it one [[Domingos]].

I had [[disregarded]] most of the plot, but it did not [[taking]] long to [[captures]] up...and I got so [[shitless]] I had a hard time [[slept]] that [[nuit]]! I mean sure it was just a movie but it involved a creature that not only came from space, but you could not hear it, or see it...and once it got hold of you it was too late. Even now, after all this time it still sends a shiver up my spine. A true classic, and [[yet]] better a [[conventional]] that I have [[noticed]] [[terrified]] the [[britches]] off a new generation!

[[Largo]] [[vivo]] The [[Smudge]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[First]] [[let]] me [[say]] that I am not a Dukes [[fan]], but after this [[movie]] the series [[looked]] like Law and Order. The [[worst]] [[thing]] was the [[casting]] of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worse]] was M.C. Gainey as Roscoe, [[If]] they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a hard [[ass]] [[cop]]. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he [[played]] in this movie.

The [[movie]] is [[loaded]] with the [[usual]] [[errors]], cars getting torn up, and continues like [[nothing]] [[happened]]. The [[worst]] example of this is when the the General [[gets]] together with Billy Prickett, and the General is ran into a dirt [[hill]] [[obviously]] [[slowing]] to a near stop, but goes on to win the [[race]]. [[Frst]] [[allowing]] me [[says]] that I am not a Dukes [[breather]], but after this [[kino]] the series [[seemed]] like Law and Order. The [[hardest]] [[stuff]] was the [[pouring]] of Roscoe and Boss Hogg. Burt Reynolds is not Boss Hogg, and even [[worst]] was M.C. Gainey as Roscoe, [[Though]] they ever watched the show Roscoe was not a hard [[backside]] [[constable]]. He was more a Barney Fife than the role he [[served]] in this movie.

The [[films]] is [[onus]] with the [[accustomed]] [[mistakes]], cars getting torn up, and continues like [[nada]] [[transpired]]. The [[hardest]] example of this is when the the General [[got]] together with Billy Prickett, and the General is ran into a dirt [[hillside]] [[unmistakably]] [[slows]] to a near stop, but goes on to win the [[racing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[movie]] was gripping from [[start]] to [[finish]] and its b/w [[photography]] of the American heartland is [[stunning]]. We feel we are right there with them as they [[cross]] the [[big]] [[sky]] [[country]] and then into [[Mexico]] and back to [[America]] again. Near the end of the movie, the reflection of the [[rain]] on Robert Blake looks like [[small]] rivers of sweat and [[tears]] rolling down his face. [[In]] the [[end]], we follow them up the [[stairway]] to their final [[moment]].

The two [[criminals]], [[performed]] by Robert Blake and Scott Wilson, as Perry [[Smith]] and Dick Hickock [[could]] be seen on any [[street]] in any town. Hickock is a [[smiling]] [[boy]] [[next]] [[door]] and [[Smith]], the [[guy]] with [[stars]] in his eyes from the wrong side of town. This point is [[made]] in the movie and it [[always]] [[surprises]] us that [[criminals]] are no [[different]] in appearance than [[anyone]] [[else]]. [[Evil]], even the most vile, is [[part]] of the human condition. These two [[delusional]] men [[kill]] an entire family, looking for a safe that isn't there. Once on the run, they [[start]] writing bad cheques, carving out a trail for the authorities.

There are many fine supporting actors. I like John Forsyth as the detective on the case, Alvin Dewey. Also, Will Geer shines in a brief but excellent scene as the prosecuting attorney.

I have often [[wanted]] to [[see]] this [[movie]] all the way through, having only [[caught]] it in short snatches; I did finally get to it after buying the DVD. The result is the [[finest]] [[classic]] crime [[movie]] I have ever seen.

Don't [[miss]] this [[brilliant]] movie. To me, this is what [[great]] film-making is all about. The [[cinematography]] was gripping from [[lancer]] to [[finalise]] and its b/w [[photographed]] of the American heartland is [[staggering]]. We feel we are right there with them as they [[traversed]] the [[vast]] [[heavens]] [[nations]] and then into [[Mexican]] and back to [[Americans]] again. Near the end of the movie, the reflection of the [[acidic]] on Robert Blake looks like [[scant]] rivers of sweat and [[rip]] rolling down his face. [[Throughout]] the [[termination]], we follow them up the [[stairwell]] to their final [[time]].

The two [[lawbreakers]], [[done]] by Robert Blake and Scott Wilson, as Perry [[Smiths]] and Dick Hickock [[wo]] be seen on any [[rue]] in any town. Hickock is a [[grinning]] [[guys]] [[upcoming]] [[wears]] and [[Smiths]], the [[dude]] with [[superstar]] in his eyes from the wrong side of town. This point is [[introduced]] in the movie and it [[permanently]] [[dumbfounded]] us that [[lawbreakers]] are no [[several]] in appearance than [[someone]] [[other]]. [[Satanic]], even the most vile, is [[portion]] of the human condition. These two [[delirious]] men [[assassinate]] an entire family, looking for a safe that isn't there. Once on the run, they [[launches]] writing bad cheques, carving out a trail for the authorities.

There are many fine supporting actors. I like John Forsyth as the detective on the case, Alvin Dewey. Also, Will Geer shines in a brief but excellent scene as the prosecuting attorney.

I have often [[wants]] to [[seeing]] this [[kino]] all the way through, having only [[grabbed]] it in short snatches; I did finally get to it after buying the DVD. The result is the [[meanest]] [[typical]] crime [[kino]] I have ever seen.

Don't [[mademoiselle]] this [[sumptuous]] movie. To me, this is what [[prodigious]] film-making is all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Spanish films are into a, if not Golden, definitely a Silver Age. Piédras is another [[example]] of a [[movie]] that takes people and their conflicts [[seriously]]. Although the feelings are strong or nearly at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[happen]].

There are [[different]] stories here, which [[become]] [[connected]]. One is about the retarded girl, who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next block. One is about the middle-aged woman who finds the lover of her life in a foot fetischist. Another is about the girl with drug problems who's lover leaves her. Still another one is about the madame of a brothel who (almost) finds true love.

[[Definitely]] worth seeing. It's in Spain the moviemakers take women seriously. Spanish films are into a, if not Golden, definitely a Silver Age. Piédras is another [[cases]] of a [[kino]] that takes people and their conflicts [[severely]]. Although the feelings are strong or nearly at life or death-level, they still aren't really melodramatic. This could [[emerge]].

There are [[divergent]] stories here, which [[gotten]] [[related]]. One is about the retarded girl, who doesn't dare to pass the street to the next block. One is about the middle-aged woman who finds the lover of her life in a foot fetischist. Another is about the girl with drug problems who's lover leaves her. Still another one is about the madame of a brothel who (almost) finds true love.

[[Doubtless]] worth seeing. It's in Spain the moviemakers take women seriously. --------------------------------------------- Result 1330 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Bar some of the questionable acting (there musicians at the end of the day), this in the words of Quentin Tarrinno is "The best rock movie ever made...period"

Think 8 Mile, but without the rapping - a young musician, trying to prove himself to the local community, whilst struggling to cope with a broken home and a rival band. Throw in the sex interest and the truly exceptional performances, this is the real 8 mile.

Prince provides a solid performance, as does Morris Day and Jerome Benton. Decent script, good direction, great plot, and spectacular performances. Not forgetting the some of the best rock/pop/funk music you will ever hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 1331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I've tried to watch this so-called comedy, but it's very hard to bear. This is a bad, narrow-minded, cliché-ridden movie. Definitively not funny, but very much boring and annoying, indeed. Bad script, bad acting. It's a complete waste of time - and there remains nothing more to say, I'm afraid.

1 out of 10 points. --------------------------------------------- Result 1332 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this at a [[foreign]] [[film]] [[festival]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to relieve the Estonian [[treasury]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[captures]] the atmosphere of the newly emancipated Baltic states [[beautifully]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[lot]] less grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[lot]] of [[humor]] and some romance, too. I don't [[want]] to spoil a number of [[startling]] yet logical [[surprises]], so I'll just say this heist [[film]] starts from a [[great]] script, and the directing and performances are [[top]] notch. [[DARKNESS]] [[IN]] TALLIN is [[simply]] the fastest and most nerve-racking example of its [[genre]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, though (deliberately) not as glossy. RENT OR BUY IT NOW. I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] this at a [[exterior]] [[cinematography]] [[celebratory]]. It's a beautifully paced nail-biter about a plot to relieve the Estonian [[treasure]] of a billion or so in gold. It's all shot in a gritty, grainy style that Hollywood rarely uses --- but it [[apprehended]] the atmosphere of the newly emancipated Baltic states [[marvellously]] (note: Tallin was actually looking a [[batch]] less grim in 2003 when I was there).

There's a [[batch]] of [[comedy]] and some romance, too. I don't [[desiring]] to spoil a number of [[striking]] yet logical [[astonishment]], so I'll just say this heist [[kino]] starts from a [[whopping]] script, and the directing and performances are [[superior]] notch. [[BLACKNESS]] [[FOR]] TALLIN is [[mere]] the fastest and most nerve-racking example of its [[genus]] --- I'd put it up against RAFIFI, TOPKAPI, and it's miles ahead of the new OCEAN'S 11, though (deliberately) not as glossy. RENT OR BUY IT NOW. --------------------------------------------- Result 1333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I had my [[doubts]] about another [[love]] story wherein disabled [[individuals]] find meaning and [[redemption]] through honest [[communication]]. And it's [[still]] not at the [[top]] of my [[list]]. But the performances from Helena Bonham Carter and Kenneth Branagh and [[exemplary]], [[almost]] [[stunning]], and rescue this from being just another tear-jerker. Carter's depiction of an ALS victim is [[strong]], perhaps even overdone at times ([[sometimes]] her dialog dissolves into undistinguishable mutterings). But the overall effect is commendable and rewarding. Branagh may be the perfect compliment to her performance.

I had my [[anxieties]] about another [[loves]] story wherein disabled [[person]] find meaning and [[reincarnation]] through honest [[communicating]]. And it's [[however]] not at the [[superior]] of my [[listing]]. But the performances from Helena Bonham Carter and Kenneth Branagh and [[excellent]], [[hardly]] [[awesome]], and rescue this from being just another tear-jerker. Carter's depiction of an ALS victim is [[forceful]], perhaps even overdone at times ([[intermittently]] her dialog dissolves into undistinguishable mutterings). But the overall effect is commendable and rewarding. Branagh may be the perfect compliment to her performance.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie has successfully [[proved]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[players]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not [[even]] begin to describe how [[bad]] this movie truly is. First of all, is it just me, or is that the ugliest kid you have ever [[seen]]? I [[mean]], his teeth could be used as a can-opener. [[Secondly]], why would a [[genie]] [[want]] to [[pursue]] a career in the music industry when, even though he has magical powers, he sucks [[horribly]] at [[making]] music? [[Third]], I have read the [[Bible]]. [[In]] no [[way]] [[shape]] or [[form]] did it [[say]] that [[Jesus]] [[made]] [[genies]]. Fourth, what was the [[deal]] with all the [[crappy]] [[special]] [[effects]]? I [[assure]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[teenager]] with a computer [[could]] [[make]] [[better]] [[effects]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ending]] [[suck]] so badly? And what the [[hell]] is a djin? And finally, [[whoever]] [[created]] the nightmare known as Kazaam [[needs]] to be [[thrown]] off of a [[plane]] and [[onto]] the Eiffel [[Tower]], because this movie take the word "suck" to an [[entirely]] new level. This movie has successfully [[revealed]] what we all already know, that professional basket-ball [[gamers]] suck at everything besides playing basket-ball. Especially rapping and acting. I can not [[yet]] begin to describe how [[naughty]] this movie truly is. First of all, is it just me, or is that the ugliest kid you have ever [[watched]]? I [[imply]], his teeth could be used as a can-opener. [[Ii]], why would a [[engineer]] [[wanted]] to [[pursuing]] a career in the music industry when, even though he has magical powers, he sucks [[terribly]] at [[doing]] music? [[Terzi]], I have read the [[Bibles]]. [[At]] no [[routes]] [[form]] or [[forms]] did it [[told]] that [[Geez]] [[accomplished]] [[geniuses]]. Fourth, what was the [[treat]] with all the [[shite]] [[specific]] [[consequences]]? I [[assured]] you that any acne-addled nerdy [[schoolgirl]] with a computer [[wo]] [[deliver]] [[best]] [[repercussions]] than that. Fifth, why did the [[ended]] [[suckle]] so badly? And what the [[whorehouse]] is a djin? And finally, [[whosoever]] [[engendered]] the nightmare known as Kazaam [[need]] to be [[threw]] off of a [[airline]] and [[for]] the Eiffel [[Torre]], because this movie take the word "suck" to an [[wholly]] new level. --------------------------------------------- Result 1335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] It's very funny. It has a [[great]] [[cast]] who each give [[great]] performances. [[Especially]] [[Sally]] [[Field]] and Kevin [[Kline]]. It's a well [[written]] screenplay by Andrew Bergman (Honeymoon In Vegas). I don't like soap operas, even though I never watch them. But I do [[love]] this film because it's so [[crazy]] and off the wall, that it [[beats]] the [[hell]] out of any [[stupid]] soap that they have on [[daytime]] television. [[In]] my [[opinion]], it's the [[best]] [[film]] of 1991. It's very funny. It has a [[awesome]] [[casting]] who each give [[awesome]] performances. [[Specifically]] [[Suzie]] [[Sphere]] and Kevin [[Klein]]. It's a well [[authored]] screenplay by Andrew Bergman (Honeymoon In Vegas). I don't like soap operas, even though I never watch them. But I do [[iike]] this film because it's so [[loony]] and off the wall, that it [[overpowers]] the [[brothel]] out of any [[dopey]] soap that they have on [[daylight]] television. [[During]] my [[vista]], it's the [[optimum]] [[filmmaking]] of 1991. --------------------------------------------- Result 1336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] It's not the most well made slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's [[pretty]] amusing. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the bands that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I knew someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the [[poor]] quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! It's not the most well made slasher movies of all time, but for what it is, it's [[quite]] amusing. The plot is lame but the kills are not too bad. I have to be honest, if you don't follow the bands that are featured in this film, you wont find this film as funny as those who do. I knew someone who saw this film and was really disappointed because of the [[pauper]] quality of the film but you have to understand that it was made in the spare time of being on tour, in between playing to moshing kids and drinkin' with friends backstage...it's not made to be taken seriously. It's ubber cheese at it's punk best and with over 100 kills,most of which are ultra gory, it's a fun movie to have friends over to watch, drink and be merry! --------------------------------------------- Result 1337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I saw this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[great]] [[telling]] of the [[many]] [[possible]] stories about the immigrant farmworker [[population]] that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My [[grandparents]] were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala plantation (Big Island) at the time setting of the [[movie]]. I moved to the Big Island over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[surprised]] to [[see]] that many of the former cane growing [[lands]] are still [[undeveloped]], with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie helps to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a review like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an incredible job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other [[excellent]] foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another great film about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. I saw this when it premiered and just re-watched it on IFC again. This is a [[whopping]] [[tell]] of the [[multiple]] [[conceivable]] stories about the immigrant farmworker [[populace]] that came to Hawai'i to work the sugar plantations in the early 1900's. My [[grandmothers]] were part of that migration; my parents were born on a Kohala plantation (Big Island) at the time setting of the [[flick]]. I moved to the Big Island over a year ago after living in California for over 30 years. I was [[dumbfounded]] to [[consults]] that many of the former cane growing [[tierra]] are still [[underdeveloped]], with wild cane still growing, years after the plantations closed. I've heard many stories from my aunts and uncles who were kids growing up on the plantation. This movie helps to image those kinds of stories and memories. This story is more of an historical document than a romantic plot-driven movie. It leaves me shaking my head to read a review like ccthemovieman's. Some people just don't get it.

I didn't recall that Youki Kudoh had the starring role, with which she did an incredible job. I recall her great performances in Jim Jarmusch's "Mystery Train" and in an Australian film, co- starring with Russell Crowe, "Heaven's Burning". Tamlyn Tomita did a great job with her pidgin English, especially for someone who didn't grow up in the Islands. I had forgotten that Toshiro Mifune had a cameo role as the moving picture show narrator. And I missed the fact that Jason Scott Lee had an uncredited, non-speaking part as one of the plantation workers during the payday scene.

I was saddened to find out that the director and co-writer, Kayo Hatta, died in an accidental drowning in 2005.

There are two other [[resplendent]] foreign films that mirror this cane plantation experience: "Gaijin" about the immigrant cane workers in Brazil (many of them Japanese) in the same time period; and "Sugar Cane Alley" about the cane plantation experience in Africa. The latter is still available, but "Gaijin", sadly, doesn't appear to have been shown in quite a while. Another great film about the early Asian in America experience when immigrants were more like slaves is "A Thousand Pieces of Gold". This was set over the Chinese workers' involvement in the building of the railroad, starred Rosalind Chao, Chris Cooper, Michael Paul Chan, and Dennis Dun. --------------------------------------------- Result 1338 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The Road Rovers was a [[great]] [[show]] about canine superheroes [[chosen]] by the Master to fight [[crime]] around the world. The show was [[hilarious]] to [[say]] the least. [[Simple]] and complex jokes that could appeal to all ages. Running jokes [[throughout]] the [[series]] that could spawn a drinking [[game]]. The action was mesmerizing, and cleverly set up. The [[characters]] were very [[original]], each with a very [[different]] personality. But what made me [[enjoy]] the show the most was the depth of the [[characters]]. Each of them have struggles and emotional [[difficulties]] that are never expressed, but implied in subtext. [[Hopefully]], one day, there'll be some [[way]] to watch the Rovers in action again. The Road Rovers was a [[whopping]] [[exposition]] about canine superheroes [[opting]] by the Master to fight [[misdemeanors]] around the world. The show was [[comic]] to [[told]] the least. [[Uncomplicated]] and complex jokes that could appeal to all ages. Running jokes [[across]] the [[serial]] that could spawn a drinking [[ballgame]]. The action was mesmerizing, and cleverly set up. The [[trait]] were very [[initials]], each with a very [[divergent]] personality. But what made me [[enjoying]] the show the most was the depth of the [[personage]]. Each of them have struggles and emotional [[difficulty]] that are never expressed, but implied in subtext. [[Luckily]], one day, there'll be some [[pathway]] to watch the Rovers in action again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It's a bit [[easy]]. That's about it.

The graphics are clean and [[realistic]], except for the fact that some of the [[fences]] are 2d, but that's forgiveable. The [[rest]] of the graphics are [[cleaner]] than GoldenEye and [[many]] other N64 [[games]]. The [[sounds]] are magnificant. [[Everything]] from the speaking to the SFX are [[pleasant]] and [[realistic]].

The [[camera]] angle is a bit frustrating at [[times]], but it's the same for [[every]] platform game, like Banjo-Kazooie and Donkey [[Kong]] 64.

I [[got]] this [[game]] as a [[Christmas]] [[present]] in 1997, and [[since]] then, I have [[dutifully]] gotten 120 [[stars]] over 10 [[times]]. It's a bit [[simpler]]. That's about it.

The graphics are clean and [[practical]], except for the fact that some of the [[fence]] are 2d, but that's forgiveable. The [[resting]] of the graphics are [[cleanser]] than GoldenEye and [[various]] other N64 [[game]]. The [[sound]] are magnificant. [[Entire]] from the speaking to the SFX are [[pleasurable]] and [[pragmatic]].

The [[cameras]] angle is a bit frustrating at [[period]], but it's the same for [[each]] platform game, like Banjo-Kazooie and Donkey [[Hk]] 64.

I [[get]] this [[gaming]] as a [[Claus]] [[presents]] in 1997, and [[because]] then, I have [[meticulously]] gotten 120 [[star]] over 10 [[period]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Shot on an impossible schedule and no budget to speak of, the movie turned out a lot better than you would expect, certainly much more true to the Peter O'Donnell books and comic strip than the previous two films. You can read the strip currently in the reprints from Titan Books, or in Comics Revue monthly. It is one of the greatest adventure comic strips of all time. The movie isn't great, but unlike most low budget films it makes the most of what its got, and it holds your interest. On the DVD extras, the interview with Quentin Tarentino, who is obviously stoned, is a gas. Some people have faulted Tarentino for associating his name with the film, but without him it would never have been made. He is a Modesty Blaise fan, and picked a good writer and director. All things considered, worth 8 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I [[usually]] enjoy [[films]] like this. It's shot documentary [[style]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[wooden]] and [[stiff]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a good way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from relatives of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[might]] manage a couple of laughs, as it's always funny seeing your relatives/friends make a movie. [[Well]], in a way, I [[guess]] this gives hope to all up and coming writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. I [[fluently]] enjoy [[movie]] like this. It's shot documentary [[styles]], but the acting and writing are just awful. The acting is [[lumber]] and [[tough]] and the writing is just so cliché, but not at all in a good way. As of typing this, I'm surprised it's at a 5.2/10 on IMDb. I'm certain that most of these votes must have come from relatives of people in the movie. I suppose if that's the case, you [[apt]] manage a couple of laughs, as it's always funny seeing your relatives/friends make a movie. [[Good]], in a way, I [[imagines]] this gives hope to all up and coming writers, directors, actors, etc., 'cause if they can do it, you can do it. Although, maybe you shouldn't. --------------------------------------------- Result 1342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The scene where Sally Field and Whoopi Goldberg go to the mall to revive Sally's flagging spirits is enough reason alone to enjoy this movie, but wait! There's more! This is a crackling good sendup of daytime TV, movie stars on the way down, (and up) and the horrors of love. Robert Downey Jr shows the lighter side of his genius, and Cathy Moriarty is splendid. The dialogue is witty, and the physical humor done with consummate skill. This is a movie that will appeal to those who really enjoy the arts of acting, directing, and writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]]

It's a generic coming-of-age story -- think "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," even "Little Women" -- and there are moments where Mulligan might have [[omitted]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or played down the golden-lit prettiness of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[rare]] emotional perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[forced]], every line has feeling, and the pacing is just right. Even the below-A-list casting helps: Bigger movie stars with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In particular, Witherspoon is excellent: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is also very fine, even if he has to spend much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were aware of its unpromising commercial prospects -- no big stars, no big car crashes, no special effects -- and consciously decided to make the best possible movie, box office be damned. It's intimate and honest, and it sticks to the ribs. If you find yourself misting up at the end, you don't have to feel you've been duped.

It's a generic coming-of-age story -- think "The Member of the Wedding," "Summer of '42," "A Summer Place," even "Little Women" -- and there are moments where Mulligan might have [[ignored]] the soupy music, not used slow-motion, or played down the golden-lit prettiness of the setting. Otherwise, it's done with [[scarce]] emotional perfect-pitch. Nothing's [[obliged]], every line has feeling, and the pacing is just right. Even the below-A-list casting helps: Bigger movie stars with more recognizable personalities might have overwhelmed the material. In particular, Witherspoon is excellent: Her line readings are fresh and original, and her body language is just right for a gawky, hoydenish 14-year-old on the eve of womanhood. Waterston is also very fine, even if he has to spend much of the movie climbing in and out of the family truck.

One senses that the film's makers were aware of its unpromising commercial prospects -- no big stars, no big car crashes, no special effects -- and consciously decided to make the best possible movie, box office be damned. It's intimate and honest, and it sticks to the ribs. If you find yourself misting up at the end, you don't have to feel you've been duped. --------------------------------------------- Result 1344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] What I [[expected]]: A rather lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I got: An even-handed story where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

Sounds sappy but with the nonstop humor and terrific performances this story works! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[perfect]] [[blend]] of sweet, [[strong]], and adorable. We [[expect]] that from her and she [[delivered]].

But Fallon is the [[nice]] [[surprise]] in this film. He [[brings]] to the role the [[perfect]] [[blend]] of [[sports]] [[nut]] combined with the appreciation for the [[normal]] things in [[life]], like caring about [[kids]] and his girlfriend. Fallon [[delivers]] his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the [[field]] for me!") and in the same [[breath]] be obliviously [[blinded]] by his [[love]] for the [[Red]] Sox ("How did the [[grass]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this [[movie]] marks the [[beginning]] of a [[better]] film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top sophomoric [[humor]] typical of SNL alums (i.[[e]]. [[Will]] [[Ferrell]]).

[[In]] short, a movie that [[could]] have [[fallen]] victim to stereotypical male [[vs]]. female [[characters]] [[rose]] above that [[limitation]] and [[provided]] [[nonstop]] spot-on [[humorous]] lines, most [[delivered]] with [[brilliant]] subtlety by Fallon.

[[Hey]], I [[saw]] this with my [[wife]] -- not a baseball fan -- and she [[loved]] it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Guy]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[terrific]] make-you-laugh flick. Go see it! What I [[envisaged]]: A rather lame overly-stereotypical portrayal of a sports-mad guy and an equally lame stereotypical portrayal of the gal who likes him yet suffers while being second banana to his overly zealous support for his favorite sports team.

What I got: An even-handed story where both guy and gal end up admitting -- to themselves and each other -- that they each have passions in their lives yet each can forgive the other to save the love they share.

Sounds sappy but with the nonstop humor and terrific performances this story works! Barrymore is classic Barrymore: that [[flawless]] [[mixes]] of sweet, [[vigorous]], and adorable. We [[hopes]] that from her and she [[handed]].

But Fallon is the [[handsome]] [[surprises]] in this film. He [[poses]] to the role the [[flawless]] [[mix]] of [[sport]] [[nuts]] combined with the appreciation for the [[customary]] things in [[vie]], like caring about [[juvenile]] and his girlfriend. Fallon [[offerings]] his lines with subtle perfection. He can be caring ("You just ran across the [[sphere]] for me!") and in the same [[murmur]] be obliviously [[blind]] by his [[likes]] for the [[Reid]] Sox ("How did the [[weeds]] feel? Kinda spongy?") at the same time. Fallon's portrayal "made" the movie. Hopefully, this [[movies]] marks the [[start]] of a [[improved]] film career for Fallon, something beyond the over-the-top sophomoric [[mood]] typical of SNL alums (i.[[f]]. [[Willingness]] [[Farrell]]).

[[Among]] short, a movie that [[did]] have [[tumbled]] victim to stereotypical male [[v]]. female [[attribute]] [[soared]] above that [[bounds]] and [[gave]] [[perpetual]] spot-on [[hilarious]] lines, most [[rendered]] with [[phenomenal]] subtlety by Fallon.

[[Bye]], I [[noticed]] this with my [[women]] -- not a baseball fan -- and she [[worshipped]] it as much as I did. It's neither a "[[Boy]] Flick" nor a "Chick Flick". It's a [[handsome]] make-you-laugh flick. Go see it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This, for lack of a better term, movie is lousy. Where do I start......

Cinemaphotography - This was, perhaps, the worst I've seen this year. It looked like the camera was being tossed from camera man to camera man. Maybe they only had one camera. It gives you the sensation of being a volleyball.

There are a bunch of scenes, haphazardly, thrown in with no continuity at all. When they did the 'split screen', it was absurd. Everything was squished flat, it looked ridiculous.

The color tones were way off. These people need to learn how to balance a camera. This 'movie' is poorly made, and poorly done.

The plot - You got to be kidding. If I was an SS agent, I'd sue the producers. looked like the Marks Brothers with radios and guns. Sutherland was in his '24' mode - I can see this for free. Eva Longoria would have been better with a little less on, and a lot more showing. As an action bimbo she wasn't much.

I couldn't see a real plot, other than Douglas boinking the Presidents wife. Never did say why the mercenaries were trying to kill the pres. I just don't see the President of the United States running for his life in the utility tunnels of a building, like a rat in a maze. p-l-e-a-s-e.

Hollywood is dead. This movie is the proof. I like 'the big screen'. Have since I was a kid. Many more 'movies' like this and I'll quit going. Whats the matter Hollywood, made so many chick flicks, forget how to make a real movie? If I owned a theater, I'd start running the old movies. The one with real actors, good story lines - and good Cinemaphotography.

This 'movie' is a dog. Don't waste your time or money on it. I rate this 'movie' a zero! Douglas isn't suited for this role. I can over look his age, but his just is to much of a wimp to carry this off. --------------------------------------------- Result 1346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[saw]] Insomniac's Nightmare not to long ago for the first time and I have to say, I really [[found]] it to be [[quite]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place inside his [[mind]] -or does it? The acting from [[everyone]] else is a [[little]] [[rushed]] and shaky and some of the scenes [[could]] be cut down but it [[works]] out in the [[end]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[great]] as the [[film]], if not [[greater]] for those [[Dom]] [[fans]]. It has [[tons]] of [[candid]] moments from the set, outtakes and a [[great]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an independent film will love to watch Tess (the director), Dom and everyone else on the very small close personal set try to bang out this little trippy creepy [[film]]. It was pretty [[enjoyable]] and I'm [[glad]] to have it in my collection. I [[watched]] Insomniac's Nightmare not to long ago for the first time and I have to say, I really [[detected]] it to be [[altogether]] good. If you are a fan of Dominic Monaghan you will love it. The hole movie takes place inside his [[intellect]] -or does it? The acting from [[somebody]] else is a [[petite]] [[hasty]] and shaky and some of the scenes [[would]] be cut down but it [[cooperating]] out in the [[ceases]]. The extras on the DVD are just as [[whopping]] as the [[cinematographic]], if not [[widest]] for those [[Stupidly]] [[followers]]. It has [[tonnes]] of [[frank]] moments from the set, outtakes and a [[large]] interview with the director. Anyone who has gone through making an independent film will love to watch Tess (the director), Dom and everyone else on the very small close personal set try to bang out this little trippy creepy [[flick]]. It was pretty [[nice]] and I'm [[grateful]] to have it in my collection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] so, being a fairly deep fan of horror movies, it's been a while since i've [[seen]] one that really [[made]] me jump (or fidget nervously.)

[[definitely]] going to get this on DVD when it comes out... a hell of a [[lot]] [[better]] than the [[ring]]. the thing that i don't get is that so [[many]] people that we talkd with after the [[movie]] [[thought]] that it was [[horrible]], well, if that's what you think, then so be it... i [[know]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to [[get]] me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth watching.

now, you [[might]] be [[disappointed]] in the [[story]] if you need everything in a neat and tidy [[line]], because the plot goes back an forth a little [[bit]] to help build the [[story]] (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it [[would]] have ruined the [[whole]] [[thing]].)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[little]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will realize that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. so, being a fairly deep fan of horror movies, it's been a while since i've [[noticed]] one that really [[introduced]] me jump (or fidget nervously.)

[[definitively]] going to get this on DVD when it comes out... a hell of a [[batch]] [[optimum]] than the [[ringing]]. the thing that i don't get is that so [[multiple]] people that we talkd with after the [[cinematography]] [[figured]] that it was [[scary]], well, if that's what you think, then so be it... i [[savoir]] what i liked and it takes a fair amount to [[obtain]] me to actually feel scared, so i have to say that this one is worth watching.

now, you [[apt]] be [[frustrating]] in the [[stories]] if you need everything in a neat and tidy [[iine]], because the plot goes back an forth a little [[bitten]] to help build the [[stories]] (i think that if it was shown in chronological order, it [[ought]] have ruined the [[total]] [[stuff]].)

i'm actually glad that this movie had very [[scant]] bloody messes in it... maybe the rest of you studio writers and whathaveyous will realize that you don't have to splash the red stuff all over the set to make people afraid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] It has been 16 years since it's original run, I would have hoped by now some "marketing wizard" would have promoted a live actor version of this [[classic]] by now, or at least sought to re-release the original 65 [[episodes]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[network]] haven't snapped this up. Galaxy Rangers actually had well thought out plots, and even better scripts.The animation was above average quality for it's [[time]], and [[excellent]] when compared to the talking slide show Japanese [[animation]] of [[today]]. It predated the [[heavy]] toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if available. It has been 16 years since it's original run, I would have hoped by now some "marketing wizard" would have promoted a live actor version of this [[typical]] by now, or at least sought to re-release the original 65 [[spells]]. I can't fathom why the sci-fi or cartoon [[grids]] haven't snapped this up. Galaxy Rangers actually had well thought out plots, and even better scripts.The animation was above average quality for it's [[moment]], and [[handsome]] when compared to the talking slide show Japanese [[animate]] of [[thursday]]. It predated the [[ponderous]] toon-toy tie in market, this may have sealed it's doom too. I would willingly spend cash on a DVD of GR if available. --------------------------------------------- Result 1349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Farrah Fawcett is superb in this [[powerful]] 1986 drama, where she plays Marjorie, a woman who manages to escape the clutches of a would-be rapist. [[Well]] [[done]] to Farrah for being a Golden Globe 'Best Actress' nominee.

When her rapist Joe (terrifically played by James [[Russo]]) comes into her [[home]], which she [[shares]] with her two roommates (who are [[conveniently]] out!), Marjorie has to [[play]] along with Joe's [[frightening]] [[demands]]. It does [[make]] for some [[disturbing]] and shocking [[images]]!

When her roommates come home, they are astounded (to say the least) by Marjorie's actions, and a great performance by Alfre Woodard who desperately tries to convince Marjorie to do the right thing and turn him into the police, makes the [[film]] even more nail-biting.

I do find Diana Scarwid quite irritating, but when Joe finally admits that he came there to kill them all, it makes the film a very emotional piece of drama indeed.

Overall, Extremities is a brilliantly thought-out and well-acted movie and I must have watched it hundreds of time by now! Well done to everybody involved. Farrah Fawcett is superb in this [[emphatic]] 1986 drama, where she plays Marjorie, a woman who manages to escape the clutches of a would-be rapist. [[Good]] [[played]] to Farrah for being a Golden Globe 'Best Actress' nominee.

When her rapist Joe (terrifically played by James [[Rousseau]]) comes into her [[dwellings]], which she [[exchange]] with her two roommates (who are [[comfortably]] out!), Marjorie has to [[playing]] along with Joe's [[appalling]] [[asks]]. It does [[deliver]] for some [[disconcerting]] and shocking [[visuals]]!

When her roommates come home, they are astounded (to say the least) by Marjorie's actions, and a great performance by Alfre Woodard who desperately tries to convince Marjorie to do the right thing and turn him into the police, makes the [[cinematography]] even more nail-biting.

I do find Diana Scarwid quite irritating, but when Joe finally admits that he came there to kill them all, it makes the film a very emotional piece of drama indeed.

Overall, Extremities is a brilliantly thought-out and well-acted movie and I must have watched it hundreds of time by now! Well done to everybody involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 1350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] Tripping Over. I must say at first I was a little disappointed in the first few episodes, but having faith in the [[show]], and Abe Forsythe's unquestionable talent, I continued to watch. I can safely [[say]] I'm now [[glad]] that I did. The [[story]] did develop quite well, and all the [[characters]] have a strong base, and most don't have any information [[missing]].

The only thing I can [[fault]] in this production is the [[somewhat]] annoying voice and pronunciation possessed by the [[character]] [[Lizzie]].

Some good acting coupled with a stellar plot really [[gets]] this [[show]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! Tripping Over. I must say at first I was a little disappointed in the first few episodes, but having faith in the [[illustrating]], and Abe Forsythe's unquestionable talent, I continued to watch. I can safely [[says]] I'm now [[happier]] that I did. The [[histories]] did develop quite well, and all the [[nature]] have a strong base, and most don't have any information [[gone]].

The only thing I can [[malfunction]] in this production is the [[rather]] annoying voice and pronunciation possessed by the [[traits]] [[Liz]].

Some good acting coupled with a stellar plot really [[receives]] this [[displays]] over the line. Here's to hoping for another season! --------------------------------------------- Result 1351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] i think the team behind this film did a very good job with the [[limitations]] they had. only £300,000 and 7 [[weeks]] to write, film and edit the whole thing which i think is an [[achievement]] in itself. although this [[film]] is not for the masses (as a young innocent teenage girl is [[killed]] and there is homo-eroticism [[involved]] in the [[story]]) i [[think]] that this [[film]] is a heart wrenching tragedy and the more deeply involved you get in the story, the more sadness you feel. more so [[towards]] Heaton because of the love he feels but is not [[returned]].

this is one of my [[favourite]] British films that i enjoyed very much and would watch again. i think that it's a shame that is film is not very well heard of at all. i think the team behind this film did a very good job with the [[limit]] they had. only £300,000 and 7 [[chow]] to write, film and edit the whole thing which i think is an [[attainment]] in itself. although this [[kino]] is not for the masses (as a young innocent teenage girl is [[murdering]] and there is homo-eroticism [[embroiled]] in the [[fairytales]]) i [[thought]] that this [[filmmaking]] is a heart wrenching tragedy and the more deeply involved you get in the story, the more sadness you feel. more so [[circa]] Heaton because of the love he feels but is not [[returning]].

this is one of my [[preferable]] British films that i enjoyed very much and would watch again. i think that it's a shame that is film is not very well heard of at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] No [[artful]] writeup here because it doesn't deserve one. Not an art film. Not [[even]] one of those 'hidden' [[gems]]. You [[know]], [[like]] those [[movies]] you [[hear]] about through a [[friend]] who [[saw]] this amazing movie downtown where they [[show]] all the [[good]] independents and art [[films]].

[[Just]] pack it into the christmas boxes, and dispose of quickly. No [[ingenious]] writeup here because it doesn't deserve one. Not an art film. Not [[yet]] one of those 'hidden' [[jewelry]]. You [[savoir]], [[iike]] those [[movie]] you [[listened]] about through a [[amigo]] who [[watched]] this amazing movie downtown where they [[exhibitions]] all the [[alright]] independents and art [[film]].

[[Jen]] pack it into the christmas boxes, and dispose of quickly. --------------------------------------------- Result 1353 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[IN]] COLD BLOOD is [[masterfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's also so bent on being [[realistic]], it's [[sometimes]] more [[clinical]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal [[killing]] of a Midwest family, author Truman Capote focused on minutia, [[wrapping]] himself and the reader up in the [[subject]] [[AND]] subjects! [[Brooks]] departs wildly from that approach in favor of [[something]] closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved imbeciles, which surely they were. They're not [[seen]] as misunderstood souls (as in the Capote book) and the savagery of their act is horrifyingly [[blunt]]. Scott Wilson and [[Robert]] Blake are [[excellent]] as the [[killers]] as is the supporting cast, [[including]] [[John]] Forsythe and [[Paul]] [[Stewart]] as the reporter (the Capote "character?") The landmark [[photography]] is by the [[great]] [[Conrad]] Hall. [[INTO]] COLD BLOOD is [[skilfully]] directed and adapted by Richard Brooks. However, it's also so bent on being [[practical]], it's [[intermittently]] more [[clinic]] than entertaining. Recounting the brutal [[killings]] of a Midwest family, author Truman Capote focused on minutia, [[adjusting]] himself and the reader up in the [[topic]] [[UND]] subjects! [[Creek]] departs wildly from that approach in favor of [[somethings]] closer to docudrama. Although he films on actual locations, he keeps his distance. The murderers are portrayed as depraved imbeciles, which surely they were. They're not [[watched]] as misunderstood souls (as in the Capote book) and the savagery of their act is horrifyingly [[blount]]. Scott Wilson and [[Roberta]] Blake are [[glamorous]] as the [[assassins]] as is the supporting cast, [[consisting]] [[Jon]] Forsythe and [[Paulo]] [[Stuart]] as the reporter (the Capote "character?") The landmark [[photographer]] is by the [[awesome]] [[Konrad]] Hall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] **SPOILERS** Redicules slasher [[film]] that makes no [[sense]] at all with a [[killer]] [[running]] [[around]] [[dressed]] in a [[black]] [[robe]] and wearing what [[looks]] like a pull-over [[Peter]] Lorre rubber [[mask]]. Were [[told]] [[early]] in the movie, [[almost]] the very [[first]] scene, that [[young]] Beth Morgan was in rehab due to heavy [[drug]] [[use]] after her [[boyfriend]] was [[murdered]] in Tennyson Collage about a [[year]] [[ago]].

It's also brought out that FBI Agent Sacker's ([[Jeff]] Conaway), who's [[obsessed]] in [[catching]] the [[killer]],[[daughter]] was [[also]] [[murdered]] in Tennyson around the same time. By the time the movie "Do You Wanna Know A Secret" is over it's never explained just what those two killings back in Connecticute has to do with the slaughter in Florida of some half dozen collage [[students]] a year later? other that the killer, at least in the murder of Beth's boyfriend, wore the same silly Halloween outfit.

At spring break in the Sunshine State the six students spend their vacation at a beach house and before you know it they start getting knocked off one at a time. Starting with computer geek Brad Clyton, Chad Allen, the killing even spill over into [[town]] with a number of people who have nothing to do with the targeted student including the police chief Gavin, Jack McGee, getting sliced open.

The masked killer [[saves]] Beth for last in this weird ceremony at a deserted church, in what looks like the Florida Everglades. He then finally reveals who his is and what he intentions are which make as much sense as the movie does, [[none]]. Trying to scare it's audience all the movie does is confuse and bewilder it with a number of not-too convincing slasher scenes. The most effective ones having the victim Oz Washington, Tom Jay Jones, survive at least three attempts on his life and ending up, together with Agent Sacker, the hero in the film.

Oz also had a vicious cut on is foot from a large splinter of glass that almost cut it in half and crippled him but later he miraculously recovered, after getting arrested for a murder he didn't commit, in fact he had it out two more time with the killer with him not as much as having a slight limp in his walk! It also made no sense at all why Oz and Beth went on their own to tack down and catch the killer instead of calling the police, with a cellphone that Oz had, instead?

Beth's boyfriend, who loses his head over her, in the movie Hank Ford, Joseph Lawrence, is also very unconvincing as well as the two girls at the beach house.They together with with Beth Oz end up being the killers victims and then somehow disappearing from sight! for a moment you didn't know if they were really killed at all or if it was some kind of hallucination on Oz's or the local police part. Until the off-the-wall final scene where they popped up in the church.

We also get an insight on a previous relationship between Tina and Hank with her, drunk and acting obnoxious, trying to get it on with Hank as Beth walks in without Hank and Tina even noticing her. That seemed to have upset Beth even more then her boyfriend being murdered at the beginning of the movie! **SPOILERS** Redicules slasher [[movie]] that makes no [[feeling]] at all with a [[murderer]] [[executing]] [[almost]] [[clothed]] in a [[negro]] [[gown]] and wearing what [[seem]] like a pull-over [[Pieter]] Lorre rubber [[conceal]]. Were [[tell]] [[quickly]] in the movie, [[hardly]] the very [[fiirst]] scene, that [[youthful]] Beth Morgan was in rehab due to heavy [[medications]] [[utilize]] after her [[friend]] was [[kiiled]] in Tennyson Collage about a [[annum]] [[formerly]].

It's also brought out that FBI Agent Sacker's ([[Geoffrey]] Conaway), who's [[haunted]] in [[captured]] the [[assassin]],[[maid]] was [[apart]] [[assassinating]] in Tennyson around the same time. By the time the movie "Do You Wanna Know A Secret" is over it's never explained just what those two killings back in Connecticute has to do with the slaughter in Florida of some half dozen collage [[student]] a year later? other that the killer, at least in the murder of Beth's boyfriend, wore the same silly Halloween outfit.

At spring break in the Sunshine State the six students spend their vacation at a beach house and before you know it they start getting knocked off one at a time. Starting with computer geek Brad Clyton, Chad Allen, the killing even spill over into [[cities]] with a number of people who have nothing to do with the targeted student including the police chief Gavin, Jack McGee, getting sliced open.

The masked killer [[rescue]] Beth for last in this weird ceremony at a deserted church, in what looks like the Florida Everglades. He then finally reveals who his is and what he intentions are which make as much sense as the movie does, [[nos]]. Trying to scare it's audience all the movie does is confuse and bewilder it with a number of not-too convincing slasher scenes. The most effective ones having the victim Oz Washington, Tom Jay Jones, survive at least three attempts on his life and ending up, together with Agent Sacker, the hero in the film.

Oz also had a vicious cut on is foot from a large splinter of glass that almost cut it in half and crippled him but later he miraculously recovered, after getting arrested for a murder he didn't commit, in fact he had it out two more time with the killer with him not as much as having a slight limp in his walk! It also made no sense at all why Oz and Beth went on their own to tack down and catch the killer instead of calling the police, with a cellphone that Oz had, instead?

Beth's boyfriend, who loses his head over her, in the movie Hank Ford, Joseph Lawrence, is also very unconvincing as well as the two girls at the beach house.They together with with Beth Oz end up being the killers victims and then somehow disappearing from sight! for a moment you didn't know if they were really killed at all or if it was some kind of hallucination on Oz's or the local police part. Until the off-the-wall final scene where they popped up in the church.

We also get an insight on a previous relationship between Tina and Hank with her, drunk and acting obnoxious, trying to get it on with Hank as Beth walks in without Hank and Tina even noticing her. That seemed to have upset Beth even more then her boyfriend being murdered at the beginning of the movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The Lion King 1 1/2 is a very cute [[story]] to go along with The Lion King. It basically follows the original story of The Lion King but with a couple of [[twists]]. In the movie,e vents are explained by a different characters point of view. This story is still an original plot.

As far as sequels go, Disney isn't all that [[great]] at [[making]] worthwhile ones. This one, being the third part to The Lion King (Simba's Pride is the second.) actually has an [[original]] idea to it while [[still]] [[involving]] the fun of the first. Timon and Pumbaa travel along looking for the ideal place to live. After searching far and wide, they find the place of "Hakuna Matata". They then meet a small lion named Simba, and go through many things that parents today go through.

I think this is a very [[good]] movie, and I'm happy to add it to my collection. The Lion King 1 1/2 is a very cute [[conte]] to go along with The Lion King. It basically follows the original story of The Lion King but with a couple of [[spins]]. In the movie,e vents are explained by a different characters point of view. This story is still an original plot.

As far as sequels go, Disney isn't all that [[remarkable]] at [[doing]] worthwhile ones. This one, being the third part to The Lion King (Simba's Pride is the second.) actually has an [[upfront]] idea to it while [[however]] [[implicate]] the fun of the first. Timon and Pumbaa travel along looking for the ideal place to live. After searching far and wide, they find the place of "Hakuna Matata". They then meet a small lion named Simba, and go through many things that parents today go through.

I think this is a very [[alright]] movie, and I'm happy to add it to my collection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I have read over 100 of the Nancy Drew books, and if you are not bright enough to catch on yet, Nancy Drew the movie was of a YOUNGER Nancy Drew, not the 18-year-old that doesn't go to school that all of the books are about. This was when she was sixteen. So naturally, she [[would]] of not as been as smart as the one in the [[book]] [[considering]] she is only in the 10th grade. Other than that, I [[thought]] the [[movie]] was very cute. It was [[clean]] and appropriate for everyone. It was funny at times. I thought Emma Roberts did a great job. She was articulate, in character, and cute. I liked the awkwardness that [[Nancy]] and Ned had [[around]] each other because they [[obviously]] were not old [[enough]] to be in a serious [[relationship]] like they have in the books. It was a [[cute]], PG [[movie]] that I throughly [[enjoyed]] because I, unlike most people my age, enjoy [[movies]] without sex, [[drugs]], or [[profanity]]. I have read over 100 of the Nancy Drew books, and if you are not bright enough to catch on yet, Nancy Drew the movie was of a YOUNGER Nancy Drew, not the 18-year-old that doesn't go to school that all of the books are about. This was when she was sixteen. So naturally, she [[could]] of not as been as smart as the one in the [[workbook]] [[contemplating]] she is only in the 10th grade. Other than that, I [[figured]] the [[cinema]] was very cute. It was [[pur]] and appropriate for everyone. It was funny at times. I thought Emma Roberts did a great job. She was articulate, in character, and cute. I liked the awkwardness that [[Nance]] and Ned had [[about]] each other because they [[evidently]] were not old [[sufficiently]] to be in a serious [[relation]] like they have in the books. It was a [[belle]], PG [[kino]] that I throughly [[liked]] because I, unlike most people my age, enjoy [[theater]] without sex, [[medicine]], or [[vulgarity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The [[Hanson]] [[brothers]] - Andy (apparently has his act [[together]]) and Hank (clearly doesn't have his act [[together]]) [[need]] money. Andy [[comes]] up with a [[scheme]] to [[get]] some [[dough]] that will have [[consequences]] for the [[whole]] [[Hanson]] family.

This [[film]] delivers. This is a [[layered]], full-blooded [[roller]] coaster ride that knows exactly what it is doing. As a crime [[drama]] / [[thriller]] I [[would]] [[happily]] [[compare]] it to '[[No]] Country For [[Old]] Men.' [[While]] both [[films]] have have an [[ample]] supply of [[character]] [[drama]] and thrills, 'Devil' is more on the thriller side because of its [[fast]] [[pace]]. '[[No]] Country' is a colder and bleaker [[film]] that you can [[really]] [[admire]], while 'Devil' is a [[bit]] more [[enjoyable]]. There is [[definitely]] [[less]] violence in 'Devil' than 'No [[Country]].' The acting [[delivers]] as well. Ethan [[Hawke]], [[sometimes]] [[wooden]] in the past, [[brings]] the jitters, sweating and the deer-in-the-headlights-look to the [[besieged]] Hank. [[Philip]] Seymour Hoffman, as [[Andy]], has the film's hardest scenes and is [[fast]] becoming the [[actor]], who you believe can do [[anything]].

There's really not much [[wrong]] with this [[film]]. It [[jumps]] back and forth without being [[confusing]]. [[Events]] spiral out of control, but the film never does - the writing (from first timer Kelly Masterson), directing (veteran Sidney Lumet) and the editing [[stay]] as tight as a drum. In [[many]] [[categories]], this is [[award]] [[caliber]] [[stuff]], though [[maybe]] [[films]] like 'The Departed' and '[[No]] Country' [[squeezed]] this one out of the limelight. If you liked those, you'll like this. The [[Hansen]] [[plymouth]] - Andy (apparently has his act [[jointly]]) and Hank (clearly doesn't have his act [[jointly]]) [[needed]] money. Andy [[occurs]] up with a [[plan]] to [[obtain]] some [[batter]] that will have [[effects]] for the [[entire]] [[Hansen]] family.

This [[flick]] delivers. This is a [[laminated]], full-blooded [[capstan]] coaster ride that knows exactly what it is doing. As a crime [[theater]] / [[thrillers]] I [[should]] [[willingly]] [[compares]] it to '[[None]] Country For [[Archaic]] Men.' [[Despite]] both [[cinematography]] have have an [[plentiful]] supply of [[traits]] [[theater]] and thrills, 'Devil' is more on the thriller side because of its [[expedited]] [[cadence]]. '[[Nope]] Country' is a colder and bleaker [[flick]] that you can [[truthfully]] [[behold]], while 'Devil' is a [[bitten]] more [[nice]]. There is [[obviously]] [[least]] violence in 'Devil' than 'No [[Nationals]].' The acting [[affords]] as well. Ethan [[Hock]], [[sometime]] [[lumber]] in the past, [[poses]] the jitters, sweating and the deer-in-the-headlights-look to the [[surrounded]] Hank. [[Philips]] Seymour Hoffman, as [[Indy]], has the film's hardest scenes and is [[hurry]] becoming the [[actress]], who you believe can do [[something]].

There's really not much [[fallacious]] with this [[flick]]. It [[jumping]] back and forth without being [[puzzling]]. [[Phenomena]] spiral out of control, but the film never does - the writing (from first timer Kelly Masterson), directing (veteran Sidney Lumet) and the editing [[staying]] as tight as a drum. In [[multiple]] [[category]], this is [[prix]] [[size]] [[thing]], though [[probably]] [[movie]] like 'The Departed' and '[[Nope]] Country' [[hugged]] this one out of the limelight. If you liked those, you'll like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] BABY FACE is a fast paced, wise cracking, knowing smirk of a film that

lasts only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[smart]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that covers so much ground could be told in such a

short time puts most of today's movie makers to shame. Screenwriters of

today should study the economy of BABY FACE and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their films.

The story is no nonsense. An amoral woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production code loused it up with a redeeming, happy ending,

but it isn't hard to see in which the direction the writers wanted to

go, so enjoy what's there and use your imagination for the rest. Stanwyck is terrific as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless suitor. Not a great film but certainly an enjoyable one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. BABY FACE is a fast paced, wise cracking, knowing smirk of a film that

lasts only an hour and 15 minutes, but oh what a [[canny]] 75 minutes they

are! That a story that covers so much ground could be told in such a

short time puts most of today's movie makers to shame. Screenwriters of

today should study the economy of BABY FACE and cut the bloat that

overwhelms so many of their films.

The story is no nonsense. An amoral woman rises to wealth first under,

and then over the bodies of the men who fall madly in love with her.

Sure the production code loused it up with a redeeming, happy ending,

but it isn't hard to see in which the direction the writers wanted to

go, so enjoy what's there and use your imagination for the rest. Stanwyck is terrific as is George Brent and Douglass Dumbvrille as a

hapless suitor. Not a great film but certainly an enjoyable one. If

you've never seen BABY FACE catch it the next time it's shown on cable

or rent the cassette. It's worth the effort.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What a [[bad]], [[bad]] [[movie]]! I tried [[watching]] without [[fast]] forwarding...That failed. After about 30 [[minutes]] I [[stopped]] the [[movie]], went on-line to [[see]] how many minutes this [[disaster]] was. ([[Only]] 84 minutes, [[Whew]]!) It was a confusing, [[boring]] [[movie]]. I don't think [[anyone]] can get [[knocked]] down by getting [[hit]] with a fluorescent bulb [[much]] less [[gutted]] by one!! The one [[funny]] thing is that I watched "The [[Killer]] Cut" version of the [[movie]]. The box boldly states "More Blood!" "More Sex!" "[[More]] [[Terror]] than the theatrical [[release]]!" [[Yikes]]! [[If]] this [[movie]] was [[horrible]] with all those [[claims]] I wonder just how lame the "UN-Killer [[Cut]]" was??? [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] a [[great]] [[movie]] about the [[world]] of the living & the [[world]] of the [[dead]] watch any of The [[Night]] of the [[Living]] [[Dead]] series!! What a [[negative]], [[inclement]] [[movies]]! I tried [[staring]] without [[promptly]] forwarding...That failed. After about 30 [[mins]] I [[stops]] the [[films]], went on-line to [[behold]] how many minutes this [[calamities]] was. ([[Alone]] 84 minutes, [[Wow]]!) It was a confusing, [[dreary]] [[kino]]. I don't think [[person]] can get [[struck]] down by getting [[befallen]] with a fluorescent bulb [[very]] less [[eviscerated]] by one!! The one [[comical]] thing is that I watched "The [[Assassin]] Cut" version of the [[cinematography]]. The box boldly states "More Blood!" "More Sex!" "[[Most]] [[Panic]] than the theatrical [[releases]]!" [[Oop]]! [[Though]] this [[film]] was [[scary]] with all those [[claim]] I wonder just how lame the "UN-Killer [[Chop]]" was??? [[Though]] you [[wanna]] to [[behold]] a [[wondrous]] [[kino]] about the [[monde]] of the living & the [[monde]] of the [[decedent]] watch any of The [[Nocturne]] of the [[Vie]] [[Death]] series!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1360 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Fabulous film! [[Rented]] the DVD recently and was floored by this [[stunning]] piece of work. Douglas Sirk was a filmmaking [[genius]] and he gets performances out of Rock Hudson, Dorothy Malone (Oscar winner), Robert Stack (Oscar nominated), and Lauren Bacall that words cannot describe. [[Paul]] Verhoeven [[brilliantly]] payed homage to this [[film]] by having Dorothy Malone play Sharon Stone's murdering inspirational [[guru]] in his Basic Instinct. What a [[great]] joke!

By turns the film is [[hilarious]], riveting, campy, biting, trashy, [[compelling]], and eye rolling! It's definately the grandaddy of every tawdry big-and-little screen soap opera but none have had the dazzling style like you'll see here: the camera work is smooth and polished, the use of color is breathtaking, the opening montage set to the title song is beyond memorable, the one dimensional characters are unforgettable, and the final image will have you scratching your head as to how the censors back then let it make the final cut!

While most older, highly regarded films can sometimes be a boring chore to sit through, Written on the Wind contains so much and goes by so fast that it's actually a shame when it ends. Thank you to Mr. Sirk for crafting -and Todd Haynes for drawing attention to- what has now become one of my favorite films of all time! SEE THIS MOVIE!!! Fabulous film! [[Leasing]] the DVD recently and was floored by this [[unbelievable]] piece of work. Douglas Sirk was a filmmaking [[engineers]] and he gets performances out of Rock Hudson, Dorothy Malone (Oscar winner), Robert Stack (Oscar nominated), and Lauren Bacall that words cannot describe. [[Pablo]] Verhoeven [[brightly]] payed homage to this [[cinematography]] by having Dorothy Malone play Sharon Stone's murdering inspirational [[evangelist]] in his Basic Instinct. What a [[prodigious]] joke!

By turns the film is [[droll]], riveting, campy, biting, trashy, [[persuading]], and eye rolling! It's definately the grandaddy of every tawdry big-and-little screen soap opera but none have had the dazzling style like you'll see here: the camera work is smooth and polished, the use of color is breathtaking, the opening montage set to the title song is beyond memorable, the one dimensional characters are unforgettable, and the final image will have you scratching your head as to how the censors back then let it make the final cut!

While most older, highly regarded films can sometimes be a boring chore to sit through, Written on the Wind contains so much and goes by so fast that it's actually a shame when it ends. Thank you to Mr. Sirk for crafting -and Todd Haynes for drawing attention to- what has now become one of my favorite films of all time! SEE THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (83%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Well...i was going to wait till this came out on video to see it, and i wish i had, I actually caught scary movie 2 on cable the other day, and it made me yearn for more of the same, what i got was AIRPLANE on CRACK... i mean if you like Airplane or any other Leslie nielsen vehicles, then you'll probably be in heaven, but if your used to the usually WAYANS COMEDY, then you will be dissapointed, there was alot more Eye candy in this one which will keep young hormone raged teenage boys happy, which is probably why it was a box office hit the first week it came out. I enjoyed scary movie 2 ten times more then this fodder, and part one 5 times as much. Odd that the better of the 3 is part 2, but then again i always liked Halloween 2 better then the original as well..maybe its just me. The funniest part of the movie has to be the way the Aliens Say Goodbye. But that wasnt worth the 11 dollars i spent to catch a matinee of this with my fiance. Save yourself cash and catch part 2 again on cable till this is released on Video tape, and then Rent it, dont buy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Some movies you just [[know]] you're going to [[love]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. Tracing it's [[roots]] back to "Double Indemnity," and "The Postman Always Rings Twice" in the 40's - this was a [[great]] example of Modern Film [[Noir]] in the 90's. Nick Cage plays the "down on his luck" main character who [[gets]] [[entangled]] in a husband-wife murder plot - and his luck goes from [[bad]] to [[worse]] to even worse as he tries and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and threat of Red Rock West. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and Walsh, an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real joy. Favorite Line: When Cage looks at the empty gas gauge in the get-away car, shakes his head and says: "F***in' story of my life." Some movies you just [[savoir]] you're going to [[iike]] from the first few seconds. This is one of those movies. Tracing it's [[origin]] back to "Double Indemnity," and "The Postman Always Rings Twice" in the 40's - this was a [[whopping]] example of Modern Film [[Negro]] in the 90's. Nick Cage plays the "down on his luck" main character who [[receives]] [[involved]] in a husband-wife murder plot - and his luck goes from [[negative]] to [[lousiest]] to even worse as he tries and tries to get away from the people, town, violence and threat of Red Rock West. Lots of twists and turns, great performances by Cage, Hopper and Walsh, an hypnotic slide-guitar musical backdrop, and seamless directing make this a real joy. Favorite Line: When Cage looks at the empty gas gauge in the get-away car, shakes his head and says: "F***in' story of my life." --------------------------------------------- Result 1363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I never much [[liked]] the Myra movie, tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. Certainly Miss Welch's costume became an [[iconic]] image, though I have to wonder if many people who recognize the image really saw the film and [[know]] what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't think it had aged any better thru the years. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon History comic books, where it's given proper credit for putting such big stars in what was then an outrageous [[production]]. However, IMHO, the [[movie]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[trying]] to shock that it [[fails]] to inform, [[engage]], [[OR]] entertain --- I never much [[wished]] the Myra movie, tho I appreciate how it pushed the Hollywood envelope at the time. Certainly Miss Welch's costume became an [[emblematic]] image, though I have to wonder if many people who recognize the image really saw the film and [[savoir]] what it was all about -

I rewatched Myra on FMC a couple of years ago and didn't think it had aged any better thru the years. There's a segment about it in the Sexploitation Cinema Cartoon History comic books, where it's given proper credit for putting such big stars in what was then an outrageous [[productivity]]. However, IMHO, the [[cinema]] is too bitter to be charming, too silly to be a turn-on, and so busy [[tempting]] to shock that it [[fail]] to inform, [[engaging]], [[ORR]] entertain --- --------------------------------------------- Result 1364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh man. If you want to [[give]] your [[internal]] Crow T. Robot a [[real]] workout, this is the [[movie]] to [[pop]] into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[endless]].

([[Minor]] [[spoilers]] ahead. Hey, do you [[really]] [[care]] if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[girl]] with a problem. [[Psychology]] has [[developed]] names for it when a [[child]] [[develops]] a sexual [[crush]] on the opposite-sex [[parent]]. But this [[girl]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't [[think]] there's a term for that. It might be because her [[mother]] [[Dana]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, [[whose]] [[cute]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious [[figure]] makes me forgive her any number of [[bad]] movies or [[unsympathetic]] [[characters]]. Here [[Dana]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she [[seems]] to be competing for the gold [[medal]] in the [[Olympic]] [[Indulgent]] [[Mother]] [[competition]].

It's [[possible]] that Dana misses Traci's [[murderous]] streak because truth be [[told]], Traci [[seems]] to have the criminal [[skills]] of a [[hamster]]. It's only because the script [[dictates]] so that she manages to [[pull]] off any [[kind]] of a [[body]] count.

A [[particularly]] [[hilarious]] [[note]] in this [[movie]] is the [[character]] of Carmen, a [[Mexican]] [[maid]] who is [[described]] by [[Dana]] as [[around]] so long she's like one of the [[family]] [[although]] she [[dresses]] in what the director thought would [[say]], "I just [[fell]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also wear a sign [[saying]], "[[Hey]], I'm the [[Next]] [[Victim]]!" Sure enough, Traci [[confronts]] Carmen as Carmen is [[making]] her [[way]] back from [[Mass]], and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[car]] [[manufacturers]] put [[next]] to your spare as a [[bad]] [[joke]]. I [[rather]] [[suspect]] than in [[real]] [[life]] those [[things]] are as [[useless]] as a murder [[weapon]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[In]] another [[sequence]], Arquette [[wears]] a [[flimsy]] dress to a [[vineyard]], under cloudy [[skies]], [[talking]] to the [[owner]]. Cut to her in another [[flimsy]] [[dress]] under sunny skies, [[talking]] to the owner's brother. Then [[cut]] to her wearing the [[first]] [[dress]], in the first [[location]], under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash [[wallow]], 8. For anybody [[else]], 1/2. Oh man. If you want to [[lend]] your [[interior]] Crow T. Robot a [[true]] workout, this is the [[cinematography]] to [[dad]] into the ol' VCR. The potential for cut-up lines in this film is just [[neverending]].

([[Minimal]] [[vandals]] ahead. Hey, do you [[genuinely]] [[healthcare]] if a film of this quality is "spoiled?") Traci is a [[fille]] with a problem. [[Psyche]] has [[crafted]] names for it when a [[kid]] [[develop]] a sexual [[crushing]] on the opposite-sex [[parents]]. But this [[chica]] seems to have one for her same-sex one, and I don't [[thinking]] there's a term for that. It might be because her [[mommy]] [[Dan]] is played by Rosanna Arquette, [[who]] [[lovely]] overbite, neo-flowerchild sexuality and luscious [[silhouette]] makes me forgive her any number of [[wicked]] movies or [[unmoved]] [[nature]]. Here [[Dan]] is not only clueless to her daughter's conduct; she [[seem]] to be competing for the gold [[medals]] in the [[Olympics]] [[Forgiving]] [[Mom]] [[rivalry]].

It's [[feasible]] that Dana misses Traci's [[fatal]] streak because truth be [[say]], Traci [[appears]] to have the criminal [[jurisdiction]] of a [[hamsters]]. It's only because the script [[imposes]] so that she manages to [[pulled]] off any [[genre]] of a [[agencies]] count.

A [[principally]] [[fun]] [[observes]] in this [[cinematography]] is the [[characters]] of Carmen, a [[Mexico]] [[daughter]] who is [[outlines]] by [[Dan]] as [[throughout]] so long she's like one of the [[families]] [[despite]] she [[clothes]] in what the director thought would [[said]], "I just [[plunged]] off the tomato truck from Guadalajara." Carmen is so wise to Traci's scheming, she might also wear a sign [[telling]], "[[Bye]], I'm the [[Future]] [[Victims]]!" Sure enough, Traci [[confront]] Carmen as Carmen is [[doing]] her [[paths]] back from [[Mace]], and bops her with one of those slightly angled lug wrenches that [[cars]] [[producers]] put [[future]] to your spare as a [[wicked]] [[prank]]. I [[comparatively]] [[suspects]] than in [[genuine]] [[lives]] those [[matters]] are as [[unnecessary]] as a murder [[arms]] as they are for changing a tire.

[[Throughout]] another [[sequences]], Arquette [[door]] a [[fragile]] dress to a [[wine]], under cloudy [[sky]], [[debates]] to the [[landlord]]. Cut to her in another [[frail]] [[clothes]] under sunny skies, [[debating]] to the owner's brother. Then [[cutting]] to her wearing the [[fiirst]] [[clothes]], in the first [[locations]], under cloudy skies - but it's supposed to be later. You get the picture. We're talking really bad directing.

As for skin, don't expect much, although Traci does own a nice couple of bikinis.

For those looking for a trash [[bath]], 8. For anybody [[elsewhere]], 1/2. --------------------------------------------- Result 1365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] "The Gingerbread [[Man]] is the [[first]] thriller I've ever [[done]]!" – [[Robert]] Altman

In 1955 Charles Laughton [[directed]] "The Night of the Hunter", a [[spooky]] slice of Southern Gothic in which [[Robert]] Mitchum plays a scary serial [[killer]]. One of the film's more [[famous]] [[sequences]] consists of two kids [[escaping]] from Mitchum on a [[rowboat]], the kids [[frantically]] paddling whilst Mitchum wades after them like a monster.

Seven [[years]] [[later]] Mitchum [[played]] an equally spooky killer in "Cape [[Fear]]", another film set in the American South. That film featured a local attorney trying to protect his family and likewise ended with Mitchum terrorising folks on a boat. In 1991 Martin Scorsese, trying to branch out and tackle something more mainstream, remade "Cape Fear", boat scene and all.

Now we have Robert Altman's "The Gingerbread [[Man]]", another slice of small town Southern Gothic. Altman says he consulted "The Night of the Hunter" for inspiration and tackled such a mainstream film purely because he wanted to "spread his wings and try a popcorn picture", but what he's secretly attempting to do here is deconstruct the canonical films of the Southern Gothic genre.

So instead of a showdown on small boat, we get a showdown on a giant ship. Instead of two kids being kidnapped, we get two kids being safely returned to the police. Instead of money being hidden, we have money being readily given via a last will and testament. Instead of the righteous attorney of the 1961 film and the [[deplorable]] attorney of the 1991 remake, we get a rather three-dimensional lawyer in Kenneth Branagh. Instead of the monster chasing the family we get the hero chasing the bad guys. Instead of the monster breaking into the family's house boat, we have the hero hunting the monster on board the monster's "house ship". Similarly, instead of a murderous serial killer we get an innocent weirdo played by Robert Duvall. . .etc etc etc.

Altman goes on and on, reversing everything just a little slightly, pulling at the edges and doing his own thing. His touch is most apparent during the film's first half-hour, the film existing in an uneasy space between conventional plot-driven movie storytelling and Altman's fondness for overlapping dialogue, casual narratives, prowling camera movement and the way that characters aren't so much introduced as they are simply part of what's going on.

Still, despite Altman's best intentions, the film never rises above mediocrity. Altman's too bound to the conventions of the "thriller format" to do much damage, his style is too lethargic to generate tension and the film is simply not radical enough to counterpoint other canonical films in the genre. "Gingerbread Man" is thus too mainstream to work as a more pure Altman film and too Altman to work as a mainstream thriller.

The film's not a complete waste, though. Robert Downey Junior, Kenneth Branagh and the usually intolerable Daryl Hannah, all turn in juicy performances. The film also has a nice atmosphere, set against a approaching hurricane, and the final act contains some interesting twists and turns. While it's not the complete disaster that Scorsese's "Cape Fear" was, the film still never amounts to anything special.

7/10 – In the late 90s Altman made 3 successive films set in the American South: "Kansas City", "Gingerbread Man" and "Cookie's Fortune". Unlike "Gingerbread Man", both "Kansas City" and "Cookie's Fortune" tackle the genre on the broader, more looser canvases that Altman was most comfortable with.

"Kansas City" is the more important of these two films, its hierarchies of class, politics and crime, and its desire to break radically away from typical gangster genre frameworks, would prove influential on all serious 21st century film crime writers (see, for example, "The Wire"). That said, "Cookie's Fortune", while a much slighter tale, is perhaps the better picture.

Note: Altman claims that this is his first thriller, but he directed "Images", an art house thriller, in 1972.

Worth one viewing. "The Gingerbread [[Mec]] is the [[frst]] thriller I've ever [[played]]!" – [[Roberta]] Altman

In 1955 Charles Laughton [[aimed]] "The Night of the Hunter", a [[terrible]] slice of Southern Gothic in which [[Roberta]] Mitchum plays a scary serial [[shooter]]. One of the film's more [[prestigious]] [[sequence]] consists of two kids [[flee]] from Mitchum on a [[sailboat]], the kids [[sorely]] paddling whilst Mitchum wades after them like a monster.

Seven [[yr]] [[then]] Mitchum [[done]] an equally spooky killer in "Cape [[Fright]]", another film set in the American South. That film featured a local attorney trying to protect his family and likewise ended with Mitchum terrorising folks on a boat. In 1991 Martin Scorsese, trying to branch out and tackle something more mainstream, remade "Cape Fear", boat scene and all.

Now we have Robert Altman's "The Gingerbread [[Bloke]]", another slice of small town Southern Gothic. Altman says he consulted "The Night of the Hunter" for inspiration and tackled such a mainstream film purely because he wanted to "spread his wings and try a popcorn picture", but what he's secretly attempting to do here is deconstruct the canonical films of the Southern Gothic genre.

So instead of a showdown on small boat, we get a showdown on a giant ship. Instead of two kids being kidnapped, we get two kids being safely returned to the police. Instead of money being hidden, we have money being readily given via a last will and testament. Instead of the righteous attorney of the 1961 film and the [[wretched]] attorney of the 1991 remake, we get a rather three-dimensional lawyer in Kenneth Branagh. Instead of the monster chasing the family we get the hero chasing the bad guys. Instead of the monster breaking into the family's house boat, we have the hero hunting the monster on board the monster's "house ship". Similarly, instead of a murderous serial killer we get an innocent weirdo played by Robert Duvall. . .etc etc etc.

Altman goes on and on, reversing everything just a little slightly, pulling at the edges and doing his own thing. His touch is most apparent during the film's first half-hour, the film existing in an uneasy space between conventional plot-driven movie storytelling and Altman's fondness for overlapping dialogue, casual narratives, prowling camera movement and the way that characters aren't so much introduced as they are simply part of what's going on.

Still, despite Altman's best intentions, the film never rises above mediocrity. Altman's too bound to the conventions of the "thriller format" to do much damage, his style is too lethargic to generate tension and the film is simply not radical enough to counterpoint other canonical films in the genre. "Gingerbread Man" is thus too mainstream to work as a more pure Altman film and too Altman to work as a mainstream thriller.

The film's not a complete waste, though. Robert Downey Junior, Kenneth Branagh and the usually intolerable Daryl Hannah, all turn in juicy performances. The film also has a nice atmosphere, set against a approaching hurricane, and the final act contains some interesting twists and turns. While it's not the complete disaster that Scorsese's "Cape Fear" was, the film still never amounts to anything special.

7/10 – In the late 90s Altman made 3 successive films set in the American South: "Kansas City", "Gingerbread Man" and "Cookie's Fortune". Unlike "Gingerbread Man", both "Kansas City" and "Cookie's Fortune" tackle the genre on the broader, more looser canvases that Altman was most comfortable with.

"Kansas City" is the more important of these two films, its hierarchies of class, politics and crime, and its desire to break radically away from typical gangster genre frameworks, would prove influential on all serious 21st century film crime writers (see, for example, "The Wire"). That said, "Cookie's Fortune", while a much slighter tale, is perhaps the better picture.

Note: Altman claims that this is his first thriller, but he directed "Images", an art house thriller, in 1972.

Worth one viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] MY BROTHER TOM

Aspect [[ratio]]: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) forms a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. Unfortunately, Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more dangerous...

Dour drama, sparked by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of nature after being traumatized by their experiences in the 'real world'. Unfortunately, their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an inevitable tragedy. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and sloppy hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. MY BROTHER TOM

Aspect [[percentages]]: 1.85:1

Sound format: Dolby Digital

Following an episode of sexual abuse at the hands of a trusted neighbor, young Jessica (Jenna Harrison) forms a relationship with a strange boy (Ben Whishaw) she meets in the woods. Unfortunately, Whishaw has secrets of his own, no less troubling and far more dangerous...

Dour drama, sparked by brave performances by Harrison and Whishaw, in which two kindred spirits immerse themselves in a mutual love of nature after being traumatized by their experiences in the 'real world'. Unfortunately, their friendship unravels as harsh reality begins to intrude, leading to an inevitable tragedy. Directed by Dom Rotheroe and photographed in digital video format, the movie looks ragged in places (too many awkward close-ups and sloppy hand-held camera moves) and takes a while to find its feet, but the dramatic pay-off is quietly rewarding. --------------------------------------------- Result 1367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] 12 year old Arnald Hillerman accidentally [[kills]] his older brother Eugene. His feelings are arrested by the fact that his family can not interact with him (or feel it is not the right thing to do). His ONLY refuge is his [[grandfather]], who is the ONLY one who seems to have compassion on him. The [[Realism]] will captivate "true-2-life" movie lovers, but will not satisfy those that [[desire]] [[action]] & thrills. 12 year old Arnald Hillerman accidentally [[assassinate]] his older brother Eugene. His feelings are arrested by the fact that his family can not interact with him (or feel it is not the right thing to do). His ONLY refuge is his [[grandad]], who is the ONLY one who seems to have compassion on him. The [[Reality]] will captivate "true-2-life" movie lovers, but will not satisfy those that [[desired]] [[actions]] & thrills. --------------------------------------------- Result 1368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale and great humor, however other then that it's nothing special. All the characters are pretty cool, and the film is entertaining throughout, plus Jackie Chan is [[simply]] [[amazing]] in this!. [[Jackie]] and Wai-Man Chan had fantastic chemistry together, and are both very funny!, and i thought the main opponent looked really menacing!, however the [[dubbing]] was simply [[terrible]]!. The character development is above average for this sort of thing!, and the main fight is simply [[fantastic]]!, plus some of the [[bumps]] Jackie takes in this one are harsh!. There is a lot of really silly and goofy humor in this, but it amused me, and the ending is hilarious!, plus all the characters are quite likable. It's pretty cheap looking but generally very well made, and while it does not have the amount of fighting you would expect from a Jackie Chan flick, it does enough to keep you watching, plus one of my favorite moments in this film is when Jackie (Dragon) and Wai-Man Chan(Tiger), are playing around with a rifle and it goes off!. This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale, and great humor, however other then that it's nothing great, still it's well worth the watch!. The Direction is good. Jackie Chan does a good job here with solid camera work, fantastic angles and keeping the film at a fast pace for the most part. The Acting is very good!. Jackie Chan is amazing as always, and is amazing here, he is extremely [[likable]], hilarious, as usual does some crazy stunts, had fantastic chemistry with Wai-Man Chan, kicked that ass, and played this wonderful cocky character, he was amazing!, i just wished they would stop dubbing him!. (Jackie Rules!!!!!). Wai-Man Chan is funny as Jackie's best friend, i really liked him, he is also a very good martial artist. Rest of the cast do OK i guess. Overall well worth the watch!. *** out of 5 This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale and great humor, however other then that it's nothing special. All the characters are pretty cool, and the film is entertaining throughout, plus Jackie Chan is [[merely]] [[staggering]] in this!. [[Melanie]] and Wai-Man Chan had fantastic chemistry together, and are both very funny!, and i thought the main opponent looked really menacing!, however the [[copying]] was simply [[dreadful]]!. The character development is above average for this sort of thing!, and the main fight is simply [[sumptuous]]!, plus some of the [[humps]] Jackie takes in this one are harsh!. There is a lot of really silly and goofy humor in this, but it amused me, and the ending is hilarious!, plus all the characters are quite likable. It's pretty cheap looking but generally very well made, and while it does not have the amount of fighting you would expect from a Jackie Chan flick, it does enough to keep you watching, plus one of my favorite moments in this film is when Jackie (Dragon) and Wai-Man Chan(Tiger), are playing around with a rifle and it goes off!. This is an above average Jackie Chan flick, due to the fantastic finale, and great humor, however other then that it's nothing great, still it's well worth the watch!. The Direction is good. Jackie Chan does a good job here with solid camera work, fantastic angles and keeping the film at a fast pace for the most part. The Acting is very good!. Jackie Chan is amazing as always, and is amazing here, he is extremely [[sympathetic]], hilarious, as usual does some crazy stunts, had fantastic chemistry with Wai-Man Chan, kicked that ass, and played this wonderful cocky character, he was amazing!, i just wished they would stop dubbing him!. (Jackie Rules!!!!!). Wai-Man Chan is funny as Jackie's best friend, i really liked him, he is also a very good martial artist. Rest of the cast do OK i guess. Overall well worth the watch!. *** out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 1369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] If you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first boy/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this film is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oscar]] [[BUT]] as a Dominican I [[loved]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just go right over your head if you are not part of the culture...the kids being raised by a grandma who's both mother and father, the youngest son being babied and bathed with a Cafe Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being harassed by the neighborhood men, going to church and lighting a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a pull out all the works cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't meant to be NOR was it meant to be an educational tool for those wanting to learn about Latin culture ( tip: make new friends instead). More of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it real without taking itself too seriously. As in the tradition of "Y Tu Mama Tambien" this was simply one boy's coming of age tale. I recommend it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) If you still remember that summer when you had your first kiss, first boy/girlfriend, or first puppy love fling...this film is for you! OK so this movie would and will never win an [[Oscars]] [[NONETHELESS]] as a Dominican I [[worshipped]] it...there are some things in the movie that might just go right over your head if you are not part of the culture...the kids being raised by a grandma who's both mother and father, the youngest son being babied and bathed with a Cafe Bustelo tin (sooo Dominican!), Judy being harassed by the neighborhood men, going to church and lighting a prayer candle...the film's brilliance was in those small details. Granted, it was not a pull out all the works cinematic extravaganza but it wasn't meant to be NOR was it meant to be an educational tool for those wanting to learn about Latin culture ( tip: make new friends instead). More of a bitter-sweet, faux-cumentery, this film kept it real without taking itself too seriously. As in the tradition of "Y Tu Mama Tambien" this was simply one boy's coming of age tale. I recommend it (especialmente si eres Dominicano!) =o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1370 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] [[Since]] I first saw [[Anchors]] Aweigh in 1945, viewing it on videotape [[holds]] a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was easy for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. Now I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Though]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[negligible]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first [[major]] film appearance. As another viewer noted, this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, observing his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and go on to play many roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. Though Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this film, his winsome performance did not suggest that he would become a major creative force, almost the iconic figure, for MGM musicals, where he developed a style of dance complementary to that of Fred [[Astaire]]. Finally, it was strange to see the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and remember that he would later play a "thrill" killer in Compulsion, based on the Leopold-Loeb murder from the 1920s. An additional note: One reviewer praised the performance of Betty Garrett as Sinatra's love interest. She later played opposite him in On the Town, but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. [[Because]] I first saw [[Anchor]] Aweigh in 1945, viewing it on videotape [[hold]] a lot of nostalgia for me. At age 15, it was easy for me to be drawn into the first of the great MGM Technicolor musicals. Now I am perhaps most interested in thinking about the future careers of the leading players. [[Nevertheless]] Sinatra had done a couple of [[unimportant]] films soon after his emergence after his Dorsey days, as a solo singer, this was his first [[sizeable]] film appearance. As another viewer noted, this seems almost to be a warm-up for On the Town. Sinatra may have had to work hard at it, but his dance with Kelly is credible, and he would do better in their next pairings. However, observing his physique, it's easy to see why he was caricatured as a string bean. Who would have imagined that within a decade he would win an academy award for acting, and go on to play many roles as a tough detective or leader in combat. Though Gene Kelly's personality and dancing dominated this film, his winsome performance did not suggest that he would become a major creative force, almost the iconic figure, for MGM musicals, where he developed a style of dance complementary to that of Fred [[Esther]]. Finally, it was strange to see the fresh-faced Dean Stockwell and remember that he would later play a "thrill" killer in Compulsion, based on the Leopold-Loeb murder from the 1920s. An additional note: One reviewer praised the performance of Betty Garrett as Sinatra's love interest. She later played opposite him in On the Town, but Pamela Britton was featured in this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] First ever viewing: July 21, 2008

Very [[impressive]] screenplay and comedic acting and timing in this film. Now 40 years old, it has [[lost]] none of it's power. Neil Simon displays excellent insight into human nature and relationships as well as how to create genuine comedy from unusual situations. Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau give great comedic performances. Neil Simon was inspired by actual events in his own life to write the play this film is based on.

One of the [[best]] written and acted Hollywood comedies of all time!

Surprisingly, only nominated for 2 Academy Awards: "Best Adapted Screenplay" and "Best Film Editing". Hollywood rarely awards comedies, no matter how well they are made. First ever viewing: July 21, 2008

Very [[whopping]] screenplay and comedic acting and timing in this film. Now 40 years old, it has [[forfeited]] none of it's power. Neil Simon displays excellent insight into human nature and relationships as well as how to create genuine comedy from unusual situations. Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau give great comedic performances. Neil Simon was inspired by actual events in his own life to write the play this film is based on.

One of the [[optimum]] written and acted Hollywood comedies of all time!

Surprisingly, only nominated for 2 Academy Awards: "Best Adapted Screenplay" and "Best Film Editing". Hollywood rarely awards comedies, no matter how well they are made. --------------------------------------------- Result 1372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] One of the most [[disgusting]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an incite on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. One of the most [[heinous]] films I have ever seen. I wanted to vomit after watching it. I saw this movie in my American History class and the purpose was to see an incite on the life of a farmer in the West during the late 1800's. What we saw were pigs being shot and then slaughtered, human birth, branding. Oh and at the end there was a live birth of a calf and let me tell you that the birth itself wasn't too bad, but the numerous fluids that came out drove most people in my class to the bathroom. The story itself was OK. The premise of the story is a widow and her daughter and they move to the west to be a house keeper of this cowboy. They live a life of hardship and it is an interesting a pretty accurate view of life in the West during the late 1800's. But if you have a choice, do not see this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1373 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I used to watch this show when I was a little girl. [[Although]] I don't [[remember]] much about it, I [[must]] say that it was a pretty good show. [[Also]], I don't think I've seen every episode. [[However]], if you [[ask]] me, it was still a [[good]] show. I vaguely [[remember]] the theme song. Everyone was ideally cast, the costume design was great. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[brings]] this [[series]] back one day so that I'll be able to [[see]] every episode. Before I [[wrap]] this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this show in my memory forever, even though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in conclusion, when and if this show is ever brought back on the air, I hope that you catch it one day before it goes off the [[air]] for good. I used to watch this show when I was a little girl. [[Though]] I don't [[remind]] much about it, I [[ought]] say that it was a pretty good show. [[Similarly]], I don't think I've seen every episode. [[Nonetheless]], if you [[demand]] me, it was still a [[alright]] show. I vaguely [[recall]] the theme song. Everyone was ideally cast, the costume design was great. The performances were top-grade, too. I just hope some network [[bring]] this [[serials]] back one day so that I'll be able to [[seeing]] every episode. Before I [[wrapper]] this up, I'd like to say that I'll always remember this show in my memory forever, even though I don't think I've seen every episode. Now, in conclusion, when and if this show is ever brought back on the air, I hope that you catch it one day before it goes off the [[aerial]] for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty times by now. I must really [[love]] it, right? Well, not [[really]].

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and thus I am a sucker for the thing. But I definitely have some bones to [[pick]] with it. (Peralta, you listening?).

First, the movie has too little faith in its subject matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are sort of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a jarring montage of clips with an equally jarring soundtrack. I can understand the effect Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in frigid open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At times, the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

Second, have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... I have this movie on DVD and must have watched it thirty times by now. I must really [[iike]] it, right? Well, not [[truthfully]].

I was a surfer earlier in my life, and I loved the sport. To this day, I am fascinated by good surfing. Riding Giants has plenty of that, and thus I am a sucker for the thing. But I definitely have some bones to [[opting]] with it. (Peralta, you listening?).

First, the movie has too little faith in its subject matter. The cutting and editing of the waves is such that the majority of them are sort of ruined. Very, very few waves are actually shown ridden from start to finish. Peralta seems addicted to a hyper kinetic, cut-and-pace method. It gets especially bad in the middle section on the spot Mavericks in Northern California. Not a single wave is ridden start to finish. Almost the entire section on Mavericks (one third of the movie) is a jarring montage of clips with an equally jarring soundtrack. I can understand the effect Peralta was trying to achieve with Mavericks, as the place is a truly frightening mix of bone crushing waves in frigid open ocean chop, but he goes way too far. Mavericks is not just a bad acid trip. Waves are actually ridden there, even with great performances. It would have been good to see some of them. If Peralta thinks this is a grand sport (and I am sure he does), then why does he insist on messing with the subject matter so much? At times, the editing reduces the movie to the inscrutable. There is one fast clip in the section on Peahi in Hawaii, which I still cannot understand. Even if I run it on slow motion on DVD, the image is too fast to be decipherable. It must be a couple of frames in length at the max.

Second, have the guys who made this thing ever learned about understatement? It is particularly galling to watch the narrated directors' version on DVD. These guys sound like two over-the-top valley girls. The same sentiment shows up in the main production. Every thing is always so goddamn "amazing" etc. One character in particular is just plain obnoxious -- Sam George, the editor of Surfer Magazine, who is practically peeing in his pants every time he has anything to say. He is a super drag on the movie.

There is a tremendous amount of effort that went into this movie. I mean, just to get the old movie shots they have, and also, all of the interviews. The movie is a great story, and I think it is generally captivating entertainment. Thematically it is well laid out, with the three parts centering around Greg Noll, Jeff Clark, and Laird Hamilton respectively. There are some uses of still photography that are phenomenal. In the directors' narration, they say it is a new type of 3D technology, and it really works. The three principle characters shine, both in their interviews and in the water. As an athlete, Laird Hamilton is a revelation. He rises to the pinnacle of his sport in a way that I have only seen Michael Jordan do in basketball. And too, the story of his meeting his father is a gem. It really touched me.

It is just that the movie could have been so much more. The very last part of the movie, when the credits roll, gives a hint of what it could have been. There are some beautiful panoramic shots of waves with a magnificent soundtrack. (The soundtrack in the rest of the movie is rubbish, though you may like it if you are fan of the modern, frenetic school of rock.) Anyway there's my two cents... --------------------------------------------- Result 1375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had read many good things about this adaptation of my favorite [[novel]]...so invariably my expectations were crushed. But they were [[crushed]] more than should be expected. The movie would have been a decent movie if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps [[ruined]] it for me.

In any event, for some [[reason]] they [[changed]] the [[labor]] camp at Toulon to a [[ship]] full of [[galley]] slaves. The scene at [[Bishop]] Myriel's was fine. In [[fact]], other than the galleys, [[things]] survived up until the dismissal of Fantine. [[Because]] we do not want to have bad [[things]] [[happen]] to a good [[woman]], she does not [[cut]] her hair, [[sell]] her teeth, or [[become]] a prostitute. The [[worst]] she does is run into the mayor's office and spit on his face. Bamatabois is [[entirely]] eliminated. [[Because]] having [[children]] out of wedlock should also not be talked about, Tholomyes is Fantine's dead husband, rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[change]]. Then comes the [[convent]], which is a [[pretty]] [[difficult]] scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[saved]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, [[however]], the movie again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me screaming at the TV set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his grave. OF COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[dumb]] screenwriters! It's a [[historical]] FACT that there was an insurrection against the government in 1832.

At one point Cosette goes to [[give]] Marius a donation from her father for the reform movement and meets Eponine. Except...not Eponine. Or at least not the Eponine of the [[book]]. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girl]] [[working]] for the prison [[reformers]] (who are [[working]] out of the Cafe Universal as [[opposed]] to the [[Cafe]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the [[movie]] is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. I had read many good things about this adaptation of my favorite [[newer]]...so invariably my expectations were crushed. But they were [[pulverized]] more than should be expected. The movie would have been a decent movie if I had not read the novel beforehand, which perhaps [[obliterated]] it for me.

In any event, for some [[reasons]] they [[shifted]] the [[manpower]] camp at Toulon to a [[ships]] full of [[kitchen]] slaves. The scene at [[Monsignor]] Myriel's was fine. In [[facto]], other than the galleys, [[matters]] survived up until the dismissal of Fantine. [[Since]] we do not want to have bad [[items]] [[occur]] to a good [[femme]], she does not [[chop]] her hair, [[sells]] her teeth, or [[becoming]] a prostitute. The [[hardest]] she does is run into the mayor's office and spit on his face. Bamatabois is [[perfectly]] eliminated. [[Since]] having [[childhood]] out of wedlock should also not be talked about, Tholomyes is Fantine's dead husband, rather than an irresponsible dandy. Valjean is able to fetch Cosette for Fantine before the Champmathieu affair, so they reunite happily, yet another [[shifts]]. Then comes the [[nun]], which is a [[quite]] [[tough]] scene to screw up. Thankfully, it was [[rescuing]]. After this three minutes of accuracy, [[yet]], the movie again begins to hurtle towards Classic Novel Butchering.

As Cosette and Valjean are riding through the park, they come across Marius giving a speech at a meeting. About prison reform. When he comes to hand out fliers to Valjean and Cosette, he says the one line in the movie that set me screaming at the TV set. "We aren't revolutionaries." I could hear Victor Hugo thrashing in his grave. OF COURSE THEY ARE REVOLUTIONARIES! They want to revolt against the pseudo-monarchy that is in place in favor of another republic, you [[dolt]] screenwriters! It's a [[historic]] FACT that there was an insurrection against the government in 1832.

At one point Cosette goes to [[lend]] Marius a donation from her father for the reform movement and meets Eponine. Except...not Eponine. Or at least not the Eponine of the [[workbook]]. This Eponine appears to be a well-to-do secretary [[girlie]] [[collaborated]] for the prison [[reforming]] (who are [[collaborated]] out of the Cafe Universal as [[opposing]] to the [[Coffee]] Musain). Not to mention the audience is already made to dislike her thanks to her not-period, low-cut, tight-fitting dress and her snooty mannerisms.

The prison reformers (Lead by the most poorly cast Enjolras that I have EVER seen) decide that handing out pamphlets isn't good enough anymore. So they're going to build barricades. I don't know about you, but I have never heard of reform movements tearing up the streets and building barricades and attacking government troops. About three hundred people (it was not supposed to be so many) start attacking the National Guard and building a bunch of barricades, etc. Eponine does die for Marius, thankfully.

The rest of the [[cinema]] is sort of accurate, except that Javert's suicide again seems hard to understand thanks to his minuscule screen time and odd character interpretation. The movie ends with Valjean watching Javert jump into the river. This is again inaccurate because Valjean would never have let Javert drown. He saved the man's life earlier, why let him die now? Then there's the whole skipping of Valjean's confession to Marius, his deterioration, and his redemption on his deathbed with Marius and Cosette by his side.

Overall, I can blame the script mostly for the problems. While I am glad Enjolras and Eponine were at least present in the film, they were terribly misinterpreted, as was the entire barricade scene. The elimination of Fantine's suffering prevents us from feeling too much pity for her. That Cosette knows Valjean's past from the start messes with the plot a good deal. I did not even see Thenardier, and Mme. Thenardier only had a few seconds of screen time. The same with Gavroche. I did like Frederich March's interpretation of Valjean a lot, however, which was one of the redeeming features of the movie. On the other hand, Charles Laughton, for all his great acting in other movies, seems to have missed the mark with Javert. The lip tremble, the unnecessary shouting, and his acting in general all just felt very wrong. He also, like many Javerts I have seen, did not appear at all menacing, something required of the character.

Again, this film would probably feel much better if I had not read the book. I would not recommend it to book purists, though. I would also say that the movie would have been a good adaptation for the time had not the infamously accurate French version come out the year before. --------------------------------------------- Result 1376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Brando plays the ace jet [[pilot]], just back from shooting MiGs down in the Korean War. On leave, he discovers his Madame Butterfly, falls in love. The lovers both see the [[folly]] of racism and the cruelty which conservative cultural [[norms]] can bring to human relations.

This film is an [[excellent]] romance with a nice [[twist]] which rejects the racist, conservative standards, [[dominant]] at the [[time]] it was made in 1957. "Sayonara" will [[make]] you laugh and cry. Beware though, [[sometimes]] the musical [[background]] will make you [[wish]] it was not there, [[although]], [[Irving]] Berlin's title song will [[entice]] your [[memory]] for a very [[long]] time after your theatre lights come on again. Brando plays the ace jet [[experimental]], just back from shooting MiGs down in the Korean War. On leave, he discovers his Madame Butterfly, falls in love. The lovers both see the [[insanity]] of racism and the cruelty which conservative cultural [[standards]] can bring to human relations.

This film is an [[glamorous]] romance with a nice [[twisting]] which rejects the racist, conservative standards, [[predominant]] at the [[times]] it was made in 1957. "Sayonara" will [[deliver]] you laugh and cry. Beware though, [[intermittently]] the musical [[backgrounds]] will make you [[wanting]] it was not there, [[despite]], [[Owen]] Berlin's title song will [[induce]] your [[mem]] for a very [[lange]] time after your theatre lights come on again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Such a Long [[Journey]]" is a well crafted [[film]], a good shoot, and a showcase for some good performances. However, the story is such a [[jumble]] of subplots and peculiar [[characters]] that it [[becomes]] a [[sort]] of [[Jack]] of all plots and [[master]] of none. Also, Western [[audiences]] will likely [[find]] the esoterics of the [[rather]] [[obscure]] Parsee [[culture]] a little much to get their [[arms]] around in 1.7 hours. [[Recommended]] for those with an interest in [[India]]. "Such a Long [[Voyage]]" is a well crafted [[cinematography]], a good shoot, and a showcase for some good performances. However, the story is such a [[disarray]] of subplots and peculiar [[hallmarks]] that it [[becoming]] a [[sorting]] of [[Gato]] of all plots and [[maestro]] of none. Also, Western [[spectators]] will likely [[finds]] the esoterics of the [[fairly]] [[fuzzy]] Parsee [[civilisations]] a little much to get their [[weaponry]] around in 1.7 hours. [[Suggested]] for those with an interest in [[Indies]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I agree that Capital City should be on DVD. I watched this show only by accident in 1994 and fell in [[love]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to see [[Americans]] who work abroad in London in the financial industry for a [[change]]. I loved Rolf in this role and [[loved]] every other role that he has been in. I can't [[believe]] the [[show]] only lasted 13 [[episodes]]. I [[liked]] William Armstrong as Hudson's flamboyant charming [[friend]] in the [[series]]. When they aired this [[show]] in the New York City area, it was [[always]] late at night or at off times. The show is less than an hour long. I felt this show should have gone on longer but the casting changes in the second season really made the show a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but missed the actress, Julia Phillips-Lane in the previous season. I felt this show took chances and often it worked. It showed Americans who loved and chose to live in London. The American characters were not arrogant or tried to outdo their British counterparts. I also liked the fact that they had tried to internationalize the cast rather than make them all British. I liked watching Julia Ormond in an early role. I felt this show should have lasted longer. I felt at times that the previews lasted as long as the show in less than an hour. They could have transferred the cast to New York City and it would have been a hit in America. I agree that Capital City should be on DVD. I watched this show only by accident in 1994 and fell in [[likes]] with Rolf Saxon as Hudson Talbot. It was nice to see [[Us]] who work abroad in London in the financial industry for a [[alterations]]. I loved Rolf in this role and [[worshiped]] every other role that he has been in. I can't [[reckon]] the [[illustrates]] only lasted 13 [[bouts]]. I [[wished]] William Armstrong as Hudson's flamboyant charming [[boyfriend]] in the [[serial]]. When they aired this [[displays]] in the New York City area, it was [[invariably]] late at night or at off times. The show is less than an hour long. I felt this show should have gone on longer but the casting changes in the second season really made the show a little less interesting. I didn't care for Sylvia but missed the actress, Julia Phillips-Lane in the previous season. I felt this show took chances and often it worked. It showed Americans who loved and chose to live in London. The American characters were not arrogant or tried to outdo their British counterparts. I also liked the fact that they had tried to internationalize the cast rather than make them all British. I liked watching Julia Ormond in an early role. I felt this show should have lasted longer. I felt at times that the previews lasted as long as the show in less than an hour. They could have transferred the cast to New York City and it would have been a hit in America. --------------------------------------------- Result 1379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] you have a strong stomach. Holden was actually 55 [[years]] old at [[filming]] but looked near 70 and he only [[lived]] another 8 years. [[At]] one point Holden [[said]], "I am over twice your age." Okay, [[try]] triple grandpa! The "[[old]] enough to be your [[father]]" [[theme]] they were shooting for didn't [[work]]. [[Granted]] senior citizens sometimes [[wind]] up with legal [[teens]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[mean]] I want to watch it. It's not a [[matter]] of judgment but the digestive track. I like my [[food]] where it belongs. Lenz is fun to watch and the 70s cars, clothes, furniture, etc. make it worth it if it comes on [[cable]] late at night and you want to watch [[something]] to [[wind]] down for [[bed]]. It would have been [[nice]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her guitar, get more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this [[chick]]? I'm going to [[try]] and [[find]] out. you have a strong stomach. Holden was actually 55 [[ages]] old at [[photographing]] but looked near 70 and he only [[resided]] another 8 years. [[During]] one point Holden [[asserted]], "I am over twice your age." Okay, [[seek]] triple grandpa! The "[[former]] enough to be your [[pere]]" [[themes]] they were shooting for didn't [[collaboration]]. [[Given]] senior citizens sometimes [[windward]] up with legal [[adolescence]]. More power to them, but that doesn't [[imply]] I want to watch it. It's not a [[topic]] of judgment but the digestive track. I like my [[nourishment]] where it belongs. Lenz is fun to watch and the 70s cars, clothes, furniture, etc. make it worth it if it comes on [[telegram]] late at night and you want to watch [[anything]] to [[windmill]] down for [[bedside]]. It would have been [[enjoyable]] to see the blonde friend of Lenz, the one who hocked her guitar, get more scenes. Pleasingly spacey... Who was this [[nana]]? I'm going to [[strive]] and [[finds]] out. --------------------------------------------- Result 1380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Very [[good]] except for the [[ending]] which was a [[huge]] [[disappointment]].

The [[script]] was very [[good]] as was the acting. The visuals were often very [[grainy]] but this in a [[way]] [[added]] to the [[film]] as the snowy features were in good places that helped create a mood towards the film. This affect was ruined by the extremely unbelievable ending.

I was going to give this film an 8 out of ten but the [[ending]] knocked it down a point to 7 because it seemed to depart radically from the first 75 minutes of the movie and seemed quite forced at the end to make the film makers look clever.

This movie though was much better than films with quite a lot larger budgets and seemed to be filmed like a home movie with some extra equipment. Not much in the way of special effects as these go but for suspense it was very good. Very [[alright]] except for the [[terminated]] which was a [[prodigious]] [[disillusionment]].

The [[hyphen]] was very [[buena]] as was the acting. The visuals were often very [[fuzzy]] but this in a [[camino]] [[inserting]] to the [[cinematographic]] as the snowy features were in good places that helped create a mood towards the film. This affect was ruined by the extremely unbelievable ending.

I was going to give this film an 8 out of ten but the [[terminated]] knocked it down a point to 7 because it seemed to depart radically from the first 75 minutes of the movie and seemed quite forced at the end to make the film makers look clever.

This movie though was much better than films with quite a lot larger budgets and seemed to be filmed like a home movie with some extra equipment. Not much in the way of special effects as these go but for suspense it was very good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Once [[big]] [[action]] [[star]] who fell off the [[face]] of the [[earth]] ends up in a [[small]] [[town]] with a problem with [[drug]] [[dealers]] and a [[dead]] [[body]] of a federal agent. Reuniting with some former co-stars to clean up the town.

Low key, often to the point of blandness, "action" comedy mostly just doesn't [[work]]. [[Part]] of the problem is the [[casting]] [[Chris]] Klien as a [[former]] [[action]] hero. he's not [[bad]], but he's [[really]] not believable as some one who was [[taken]] to be a [[tough]] [[guy]]. As I said he's not [[bad]], he's just just miscast for what his back [[story]] is. The [[real]] [[problem]] here is the [[combination]] of the [[script]], which really isn't [[funny]] and [[seems]] artificial at [[times]], and the [[direction]] which is pedestrian to the port of dullness. There is no [[life]] in the [[way]] things are set up. Its as if the director had a list of shots and went by that list. It makes for an un-engaging film. And [[yet]] the [[film]] [[occasionally]] springs to life, such as the in the [[final]] [[show]] down that [[ends]] the [[film]]. That sequence works, but because the [[earlier]] parts of the [[film]] floundered its drained of much of its power.

I can't really [[recommend]] the [[film]]. Its worth a shot if you're a fan of the [[actors]] or are a [[huge]] [[fan]] of independent cinema in all its [[forms]], but [[otherwise]] this is just a [[disappointment]]. Once [[mammoth]] [[measures]] [[stars]] who fell off the [[confronts]] of the [[earthly]] ends up in a [[petit]] [[ciudad]] with a problem with [[medications]] [[distributor]] and a [[die]] [[agency]] of a federal agent. Reuniting with some former co-stars to clean up the town.

Low key, often to the point of blandness, "action" comedy mostly just doesn't [[cooperating]]. [[Portion]] of the problem is the [[pouring]] [[Kris]] Klien as a [[antigua]] [[efforts]] hero. he's not [[faulty]], but he's [[genuinely]] not believable as some one who was [[took]] to be a [[difficult]] [[guys]]. As I said he's not [[faulty]], he's just just miscast for what his back [[tale]] is. The [[authentic]] [[issues]] here is the [[combo]] of the [[screenplay]], which really isn't [[hilarious]] and [[looks]] artificial at [[moments]], and the [[directorate]] which is pedestrian to the port of dullness. There is no [[vida]] in the [[route]] things are set up. Its as if the director had a list of shots and went by that list. It makes for an un-engaging film. And [[still]] the [[filmmaking]] [[sometime]] springs to life, such as the in the [[definitive]] [[exposition]] down that [[end]] the [[cinema]]. That sequence works, but because the [[prior]] parts of the [[filmmaking]] floundered its drained of much of its power.

I can't really [[recommends]] the [[flick]]. Its worth a shot if you're a fan of the [[players]] or are a [[mammoth]] [[breather]] of independent cinema in all its [[formulas]], but [[alternatively]] this is just a [[displeasure]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sure deep in the recesses of Jack Blacks mind the character of Nacho Libre is absolutely hilarious but no it isn't. You can tell ol Jacks having a whale of a time hammin it up playing a smarmy, slimy Mexican friar with dreams of becoming a wrestler but this movie is a total misfire in just about every single department.

I just sat there through most of the movie thinking "Is this supposed to be funny" and "This is the guy from Tenacious D right?". The truth is this film has NOTHING to offer. AT ALL! It's a lousy script with crappy characters and really naff acting and direction. You'll watch endless moments where you think something funny is surely about to happen but it just doesn't. I was bored stupid about 10 minutes in but though it would surely pick up. It didn't. 90 minutes later I'd barely managed to stave off an aneurism it was that painful.

It's like, remember years ago when you'd see anything with your fave actor in it, even some of their really early pap from before they were famous, and you'd be really embarrassed that said actor was actually in such a load of plop. Yeah it's like that.

I've enjoyed some of Jack Black's earlier movies like Shallow Hall and I'm really looking forward to seeing Pick of Destiny but come on man. If you do this to us again Jack I'm gonna have to come round there and hammer your kneecaps or something. At the least give you a serious talking to.

I know it's a cliché but this is one of the worst movies I've ever seen and for so many reasons.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A [[film]] I [[expected]] very little from, and only watched to pass a quiet [[hour]] - but what an [[hour]] it [[turned]] out to be. Roll is an [[excellent]] if none-too-serious little [[story]] of 'country-boy-lost-in-the-big-city-makes-good', it is funny [[throughout]], the [[characters]] are endearing and the [[pace]] is just right.

[[Toby]] Malone is the [[true]] star of the [[film]] with his endearing [[portrayal]] of Matt, [[said]] [[country]] [[boy]] and [[local]] Aussie [[Rules]] football [[hero]] come to the [[big]] [[city]] to [[try]] out for one of the [[big]] teams. He is [[supported]] [[superbly]] by [[John]] Batchelor as local [[gangster]] [[Tiny]]. Watch out for these two.

[[Highly]] [[recommended]]. A [[filmmaking]] I [[projected]] very little from, and only watched to pass a quiet [[hora]] - but what an [[hours]] it [[revolved]] out to be. Roll is an [[sumptuous]] if none-too-serious little [[storytelling]] of 'country-boy-lost-in-the-big-city-makes-good', it is funny [[in]], the [[nature]] are endearing and the [[tempo]] is just right.

[[Topi]] Malone is the [[real]] star of the [[cinematography]] with his endearing [[depiction]] of Matt, [[told]] [[nationals]] [[guys]] and [[locale]] Aussie [[Regulation]] football [[heroin]] come to the [[gargantuan]] [[ville]] to [[tried]] out for one of the [[gargantuan]] teams. He is [[backed]] [[excellently]] by [[Johannes]] Batchelor as local [[mobster]] [[Minuscule]]. Watch out for these two.

[[Unimaginably]] [[recommend]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] It's a really cheesy parody of Tomb Raider and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a soft core movie, which is expected and doesn't [[matter]] because what you really want is the sex. [[Which]] gets me to the [[biggest]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TV]] at 3 am and the independent movies are [[playing]] and the one that is on was made by some college [[kid]] that's going nowhere in that industry. You're left a very long time waiting for an actual sex scene, a lot of times you are thinking something is going to happen, then just left hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes [[somewhere]] is very pleasing though. I personally can't recommend this unless you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a good soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. It's a really cheesy parody of Tomb Raider and some Indiana Jones, the humor's cheesy, and so is the acting. But after all it is a soft core movie, which is expected and doesn't [[question]] because what you really want is the sex. [[Whom]] gets me to the [[larger]] problem of all, there barely is any of it. Which makes you feel like you're watching [[TELEVISIONS]] at 3 am and the independent movies are [[gaming]] and the one that is on was made by some college [[kiddo]] that's going nowhere in that industry. You're left a very long time waiting for an actual sex scene, a lot of times you are thinking something is going to happen, then just left hanging. The one(maybe two, or one with two parts)that actually goes [[somehow]] is very pleasing though. I personally can't recommend this unless you found it in a clear out bin for a dollar or two. If you lucking for a good movie with a plot and good acting, you don't want this. If you looking for a good soft core lesbian film, you don't want this either. --------------------------------------------- Result 1385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] i really [[liked]] the first 2 seasons. because a lot of good [[characters]] disappeared [[later]] on. like most [[shows]] are kinda [[slow]] at [[first]] then get better in later seasons, but this is the absolute reverse. jenny from the 1st season and Valarie from the 2nd season were Sabrina's friends, i really didn't care for the others, jenny and Valarie were her coolest friends. i think for some reason, the producers wanted us to not like her college friends for some reason, they were so cruel to Sabrina. but my favorite episode from season 1 is cat showdown and my favorite episode from season 2 is witch trash, that is the funniest episode. i also thought it was funny how Libby was popular but she was always jealous of Sabrina, and never seemed to have a real boyfriend but was always wanting to be with Harvey. i just wished they could have made more better ones. i also liked how the first 2 seasons, during the opening credits Sabrina would say a few words while wearing a costume, like in the pilot episode where she's in the witch costume, i liked how she said "this is so not me" and later on she kept trying to change herself to something else is what i think, but this is a really [[cool]] show. it is kinda like the andy griffith show in a way because it good at first but once it turned color and barney fife left, it was longer good. but i still like to watch it, but the only reason i watch later seasons is because of sabrina. what i meant about the opening sequence is: the opening titles of seasons 1-3 shows Sabrina in front of a mirror posing with several different costumes and outfits as the cast members' names quickly flash on the bottom of the screen. At the end, Sabrina would say some sort of pun that related to the outfit she is wearing, then disappear. the opening sequence of season four includes the characters in bubbles. the opening credits of seasons 5-7 features Sabrina at various locations around Boston i really [[wished]] the first 2 seasons. because a lot of good [[features]] disappeared [[thereafter]] on. like most [[denotes]] are kinda [[slower]] at [[fiirst]] then get better in later seasons, but this is the absolute reverse. jenny from the 1st season and Valarie from the 2nd season were Sabrina's friends, i really didn't care for the others, jenny and Valarie were her coolest friends. i think for some reason, the producers wanted us to not like her college friends for some reason, they were so cruel to Sabrina. but my favorite episode from season 1 is cat showdown and my favorite episode from season 2 is witch trash, that is the funniest episode. i also thought it was funny how Libby was popular but she was always jealous of Sabrina, and never seemed to have a real boyfriend but was always wanting to be with Harvey. i just wished they could have made more better ones. i also liked how the first 2 seasons, during the opening credits Sabrina would say a few words while wearing a costume, like in the pilot episode where she's in the witch costume, i liked how she said "this is so not me" and later on she kept trying to change herself to something else is what i think, but this is a really [[refrigerate]] show. it is kinda like the andy griffith show in a way because it good at first but once it turned color and barney fife left, it was longer good. but i still like to watch it, but the only reason i watch later seasons is because of sabrina. what i meant about the opening sequence is: the opening titles of seasons 1-3 shows Sabrina in front of a mirror posing with several different costumes and outfits as the cast members' names quickly flash on the bottom of the screen. At the end, Sabrina would say some sort of pun that related to the outfit she is wearing, then disappear. the opening sequence of season four includes the characters in bubbles. the opening credits of seasons 5-7 features Sabrina at various locations around Boston --------------------------------------------- Result 1386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This movie is mostly [[chase]] scenes and special [[effects]]. It is very [[weak]] on [[plot]]. [[Most]] of the computer talk was just mumbo-jumbo. I [[watched]] this because I was a [[big]] [[fan]] of the [[original]] War [[Games]] movie which was based mostly on computer fact and real computer terminology. This movie had [[none]] of that. Most of the computer scenes were not only impossible and [[highly]] [[unrealistic]] of real computers and [[networks]], but just lame. It is [[like]] it was [[written]] by somebody who has no [[comprehension]] of [[real]] computers.

The ripley [[game]] was lame and was essentially just an arcade [[game]]. [[No]] [[real]] hacking, so what was the point? [[Movie]] was [[boring]]. Lame sequel. This movie is mostly [[manhunt]] scenes and special [[impact]]. It is very [[fragile]] on [[intrigue]]. [[More]] of the computer talk was just mumbo-jumbo. I [[observed]] this because I was a [[immense]] [[breather]] of the [[initial]] War [[Gaming]] movie which was based mostly on computer fact and real computer terminology. This movie had [[nos]] of that. Most of the computer scenes were not only impossible and [[tremendously]] [[utopian]] of real computers and [[network]], but just lame. It is [[iike]] it was [[authored]] by somebody who has no [[understanding]] of [[genuine]] computers.

The ripley [[jeu]] was lame and was essentially just an arcade [[games]]. [[Nos]] [[veritable]] hacking, so what was the point? [[Kino]] was [[bored]]. Lame sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 1387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Peter Fonda is so [[intentionally]] enervated as an [[actor]] that his lachrymose line-readings [[cancel]] out any irony or humor in the dialogue. He trades sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with Brooke Shields as if he were a [[wooden]] block with receding hair; even his smaller touches (like fingering a non-existent [[mustache]] on his grizzled [[face]]) don't reveal a character so much as an unsure actor being [[directed]] by himself, an unsure filmmaker. [[In]] the Southwest circa 1950, a poor gambler (not above a little [[cheating]]) wins an orphaned, would-be teen Lolita in a botched [[poker]] [[game]]; after [[getting]] hold of a treasure map promising gold in the [[Grand]] Canyon, the [[bickering]] twosome become prospectors. Some lovely vistas, and an odd but interesting cameo by Henry Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[sole]] compensations in fatigued comedy-drama, with the two leads being trailed by cartoonish killers who will stop at nothing until they get their hands on that map. [[Shields]] is very [[pretty]], but--although the camera loves her pouty, glossy beauty--she has no screen presence (and her tinny [[voice]] has no range whatsoever); every time she opens her mouth, one is [[inclined]] to [[either]] cringe or duck. *1/2 from **** Peter Fonda is so [[purposefully]] enervated as an [[protagonist]] that his lachrymose line-readings [[overrule]] out any irony or humor in the dialogue. He trades sassy barbs and non-witty repartee with Brooke Shields as if he were a [[lumber]] block with receding hair; even his smaller touches (like fingering a non-existent [[whisker]] on his grizzled [[encounter]]) don't reveal a character so much as an unsure actor being [[aimed]] by himself, an unsure filmmaker. [[Throughout]] the Southwest circa 1950, a poor gambler (not above a little [[deception]]) wins an orphaned, would-be teen Lolita in a botched [[booker]] [[games]]; after [[obtain]] hold of a treasure map promising gold in the [[Tremendous]] Canyon, the [[wrangle]] twosome become prospectors. Some lovely vistas, and an odd but interesting cameo by Henry Fonda as a grizzled canyon man, are the [[unique]] compensations in fatigued comedy-drama, with the two leads being trailed by cartoonish killers who will stop at nothing until they get their hands on that map. [[Shield]] is very [[quite]], but--although the camera loves her pouty, glossy beauty--she has no screen presence (and her tinny [[vowel]] has no range whatsoever); every time she opens her mouth, one is [[slanted]] to [[neither]] cringe or duck. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1388 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is the [[best]] made-for-TV movie of all-time! Am I [[saying]] this because I'm a huge Silverstone fan? Partially, but even without her, I'd still see it. I'm a fan of serial killer genre films, and [[believe]] this to be a [[great]] entry in that category. Also, Mary [[Giordano]] easily ranks [[among]] Alicia's top five character [[creations]]. [[Totally]] [[memorable]] - like she [[really]] [[exists]]. I'd have her on my side, too, if there was a mystery to be solved. She plays the [[character]], like she does with her real [[life]], with complete confidence in everything she does. Seems sweet, honest, nice...just like she is in real life. So is that acting? Yes, indeed, she's sort of a rebel once again. This time she's not bad, she's too good and a bit afraid to do things that seem above the law. But she doesn't do things the normal teenager would do. Instead, she spends her time reading detective mags and solves crimes. A cliche abounds: she's sort of avenging her father's death, in a different way than vigilante-style. At the time, Alicia seemed to be playing the same characters: rebellious, seductive, without a parent, a loner. This happens here, too, but she's a bit nerdy this time around. That doesn't matter; she's still cool as a nerd. Check this out soon, or else Giordano will be investigating why you haven't... This is the [[optimum]] made-for-TV movie of all-time! Am I [[arguing]] this because I'm a huge Silverstone fan? Partially, but even without her, I'd still see it. I'm a fan of serial killer genre films, and [[believing]] this to be a [[whopping]] entry in that category. Also, Mary [[Jordanian]] easily ranks [[in]] Alicia's top five character [[mods]]. [[Absolutely]] [[unforgettable]] - like she [[truthfully]] [[exist]]. I'd have her on my side, too, if there was a mystery to be solved. She plays the [[personage]], like she does with her real [[iife]], with complete confidence in everything she does. Seems sweet, honest, nice...just like she is in real life. So is that acting? Yes, indeed, she's sort of a rebel once again. This time she's not bad, she's too good and a bit afraid to do things that seem above the law. But she doesn't do things the normal teenager would do. Instead, she spends her time reading detective mags and solves crimes. A cliche abounds: she's sort of avenging her father's death, in a different way than vigilante-style. At the time, Alicia seemed to be playing the same characters: rebellious, seductive, without a parent, a loner. This happens here, too, but she's a bit nerdy this time around. That doesn't matter; she's still cool as a nerd. Check this out soon, or else Giordano will be investigating why you haven't... --------------------------------------------- Result 1389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (88%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I'm [[surprised]] at the comments from posters stating that Jane Powell made the same type of films Deanna Durbin did. Although they were both young sopranos whose film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this film is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART GIRLS, Durbin plays an impulsive "Little Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to reunite her divorced parents, in its' semi-remake, THREE DARING DAUGHTERS, Jane Powell almost destroys the marriage between her screen Mom Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather Jose Iturbi when she refuses to accept him and strong arms her younger siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've seen, I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in THREE SMART GIRLS, I find it completely winning, and most impressive. Although it's clear from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early film for Deanna, watching the self-confident, knowing and naturally effervescent manner in which she delivers her lines and performs overall, and the subdued and tender manner she projects the more serious scenes, you'd never guess that this was the FIRST film role of a 14 year-old girl whose prior professional experience consisted almost exclusively of two years of vocal instruction.

Given that this film, and Durbin herself, were much publicized at the time as "Universal's last chance," the production must have been an impossibly stressful situation for a film novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the ease and assurance Durbin displays on screen. Although she's clearly still developing her acting style and demeanor before the camera (this was equally true of the early performances of much more experienced contemporaries like Garland, Rooney, O'Connor and Jane Powell), Durbin projects an extraordinary presence and warmth on camera that is absolutely unique to her, and, even here, in her first film, she manages to remain immensely likable despite the often quick-tempered impulsiveness of her character, and though she's occasionally shrill, she never for a second projects the coy and arch qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her success.

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious instrument, the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. I'm [[dumbfounded]] at the comments from posters stating that Jane Powell made the same type of films Deanna Durbin did. Although they were both young sopranos whose film images were crafted by Joe Pasternak, if this film is any indication, they were almost polar opposites.

While, in THREE SMART GIRLS, Durbin plays an impulsive "Little Miss Fixit," who, after some setbacks, manages to reunite her divorced parents, in its' semi-remake, THREE DARING DAUGHTERS, Jane Powell almost destroys the marriage between her screen Mom Jeanette MacDonald and new stepfather Jose Iturbi when she refuses to accept him and strong arms her younger siblings into rejecting him, too. From the Durbin and Powell films I've seen, I'd say these disparate qualities permeate the early films of both of these talented young performers.

As for Durbin's performance in THREE SMART GIRLS, I find it completely winning, and most impressive. Although it's clear from her occasionally shrill and over-emphatic line readings in some of the more energetic scenes that this is an early film for Deanna, watching the self-confident, knowing and naturally effervescent manner in which she delivers her lines and performs overall, and the subdued and tender manner she projects the more serious scenes, you'd never guess that this was the FIRST film role of a 14 year-old girl whose prior professional experience consisted almost exclusively of two years of vocal instruction.

Given that this film, and Durbin herself, were much publicized at the time as "Universal's last chance," the production must have been an impossibly stressful situation for a film novice of any age, but you'd never know it from the ease and assurance Durbin displays on screen. Although she's clearly still developing her acting style and demeanor before the camera (this was equally true of the early performances of much more experienced contemporaries like Garland, Rooney, O'Connor and Jane Powell), Durbin projects an extraordinary presence and warmth on camera that is absolutely unique to her, and, even here, in her first film, she manages to remain immensely likable despite the often quick-tempered impulsiveness of her character, and though she's occasionally shrill, she never for a second projects the coy and arch qualities that afflicted many child stars, including Jane Powell and some of the other young sopranos who followed in the wake of her success.

In short, like all great singing stars, Durbin was much more than just a "beautiful voice." On the other hand, while Durbin's pure lyric soprano is a truly remarkable and glorious instrument, the most remarkable thing about it, to me, was the way she is able to project her songs, without the slightest bit of affectation or "grandnes" that afflict the singing of adult opera singers like Lily Pons, Grace Moore and Jeanette MacDonald in films of the period

The film is also delightful, heavily influenced by screwball comedy, it backs Durbin up with a creme-de-la-creme of first-class screwball pros such as Charles Winninger, Binnie Barnes, Alice Brady, Ray Milland and Mischa Auer. The story is light and entertaining. True, it's hardly "realistic," but why would anyone expect it to be? If you want :"realistic" rent THE GRAPES OF WRATH or TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. On the other hand, if you're looking for a genuine, sweet, funny and entertaining family comedy with a wonderfully, charismatic and gifted adolescent "lead," and terrific supporting players, this film won't let you down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Underground Comedy movie is perhaps one of the worst comedies I've ever seen. I should have known it was going to be bad when the box had the phrase "guaranteed to offend" written on it... meaning that the filmmakers were going to focus more on grossing you out than making you laugh.

This movie is an amateurish jumble of childish skits, bad characters, and worse jokes... from the pathetic Bat-Man sketch to the painfully unfunny Arnold Shvollenpecker skit, they just aren't funny. The few skits that are a little funny are few and far between - watching Micheal Clark Duncan play a gay virgin, for example - but even they go on too long and get ruined from Vince Offer's ineptness at comedy.

Keep The Underground Comedy Movie underground... bury it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A stuttering plot, uninteresting characters and sub-par (to say the least) dialogue plagues this TV production that could hardly have been interesting even with a billion dollar production budget.

The characters aren't believable, in their motives, actions or their professed occupations. The plot reads like a bad Dungeons and Dragons(TM) hack but with plasma rifles and force fields. There are severe continuity issues and the degree of pointless interaction between the characters has this author, at least, wincing.

Avoid it like the plague. Watch any episode of Dark Angel and you will have better acting, dialogue and plot. Yuck. --------------------------------------------- Result 1392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[Williams]] family live on a ranch [[located]] in the middle of the remote desert. They find themselves in [[considerable]] [[peril]] when the place is suddenly thrust into a time [[vortex]] where the [[past]], present and [[future]] collide in a [[wildly]] [[chaotic]] and unpredictable [[manner]]. Director [[John]] "[[Bud]]" Cardos begins the [[film]] on a compellingly [[mysterious]] [[note]] and gradually [[allows]] [[things]] to [[get]] [[stranger]], crazier and more exciting as the loopy [[story]] unfolds. [[Moreover]], Cardos [[fills]] the screen with plenty of dazzling visuals and does a [[nice]] job of creating a [[genuine]] sense of awe and wonder. The admirably [[sincere]] acting from a game cast qualifies as another [[major]] plus: Jim Davis as hearty patriarch [[Grant]] [[Williams]], Dorothy Malone as his cheery [[wife]] Ana, Christopher Mitchum as the concerned [[Richard]], Marcy Lafferty as his [[lovely]] [[wife]] Beth, Natasha Ryan as sweet [[little]] [[girl]] Jenny, and Scott C. Kolden as the gutsy [[Steve]]. The funky [[special]] effects [[offer]] an inspired [[combo]] of gnarly miniatures, neat stop-motion animation [[monsters]] (said [[creatures]] [[include]] a [[tiny]] spindly [[hairless]] [[guy]], a [[big]], lumpy, fanged beast, and a scrawny lizard dude), and nifty matte [[paintings]]. [[Richard]] Band's rousing full-bore [[orchestral]] score really hits the [[stirring]] [[spot]]. John [[Arthur]] Morrill's crisp, sunny [[cinematography]] [[likewise]] does the [[trick]]. A [[fun]] [[flick]]. The [[William]] family live on a ranch [[positioned]] in the middle of the remote desert. They find themselves in [[prodigious]] [[menaces]] when the place is suddenly thrust into a time [[whirlpool]] where the [[former]], present and [[next]] collide in a [[madly]] [[disorderly]] and unpredictable [[method]]. Director [[Jon]] "[[Budd]]" Cardos begins the [[filmmaking]] on a compellingly [[arcane]] [[remark]] and gradually [[allowed]] [[aspects]] to [[got]] [[alien]], crazier and more exciting as the loopy [[conte]] unfolds. [[Meanwhile]], Cardos [[filled]] the screen with plenty of dazzling visuals and does a [[pleasurable]] job of creating a [[veritable]] sense of awe and wonder. The admirably [[sincerest]] acting from a game cast qualifies as another [[sizable]] plus: Jim Davis as hearty patriarch [[Subsidies]] [[William]], Dorothy Malone as his cheery [[women]] Ana, Christopher Mitchum as the concerned [[Richards]], Marcy Lafferty as his [[nice]] [[woman]] Beth, Natasha Ryan as sweet [[tiny]] [[daughter]] Jenny, and Scott C. Kolden as the gutsy [[Steven]]. The funky [[particular]] effects [[delivering]] an inspired [[combination]] of gnarly miniatures, neat stop-motion animation [[monster]] (said [[creature]] [[containing]] a [[smallest]] spindly [[naked]] [[guys]], a [[enormous]], lumpy, fanged beast, and a scrawny lizard dude), and nifty matte [[paint]]. [[Richards]] Band's rousing full-bore [[philharmonic]] score really hits the [[twitching]] [[stain]]. John [[Arturo]] Morrill's crisp, sunny [[films]] [[moreover]] does the [[ruse]]. A [[amusing]] [[gesture]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1393 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night horror show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Name]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. [[Anyways]] this movie [[really]] has very [[little]] [[value]] other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad [[Effects]], [[Bad]] [[Dialog]], just [[bad]] [[movie]] [[making]]. [[Avoid]] this [[unless]] you [[want]] to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other [[movies]] that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty [[decent]] [[movies]] with [[good]] plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. Hey HULU.com is playing the Elvira late night horror show on their site and this movie is their under the [[Denomination]] Monsteroid, good fun to watch Elvira comment on this Crappy movie ....Have Fun with bad movies. [[Anyhow]] this movie [[genuinely]] has very [[petite]] [[values]] other than to see how bad the 70's were for horror flicks Bad [[Consequences]], [[Negative]] [[Dialogue]], just [[negative]] [[cinematography]] [[doing]]. [[Shirk]] this [[if]] you [[wanting]] to laugh at it. While you are at HULU check out the other [[filmmaking]] that are their right now there is 10 episodes and some are pretty [[dignified]] [[movie]] with [[buena]] plots and production and you can watch a lot of them in 480p as long as you have a decent speed connection. --------------------------------------------- Result 1394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Our Song is a marvelous example of passionate, movie making at its aesthetic best. It is, in fact, a genuine wonder of a movie; a penetrating and insightful work of art that chronicles the lives of three young inner city (Crown Heights, Brooklyn) girls during a particular summer in their lives when the perplexities of their approaching adulthood will compel each of them to make a number of difficult, life altering choices that will likely re-define who each of them is, as well as how they will continue to relate to one another in years to come.

Jim McKay's writing/direction is graceful and uncluttered. There is no sappy, gratuitous sentimentality nor are there cliché ridden solutions in this film. What we see here seems, at times, to be heart breakingly real. There is a naturalism - a credibility, if you will - in Our Song that surpasses that of other giants in this genre, including American Graffiti and Cooley High.

Much of the credit for the film's spirit goes to its principle actors. The combined presence of Melisa Martinez (Maria), Kerry Washington (Lanisha), and Anna Simpson (Joycelyn) is dazzlingly powerful. It would be easy - and, of course, blatantly obtuse - to dismiss, as some apparently have, the performances of these three as apathetic or unemotional. In fact, their quiet charm, their instinctive sense of dignity and their raw, sometimes unconventional intelligence, throughout the film, are absolutely riveting. One would have to be completely "out of touch" with, or completely indifferent to, the behavior of teenagers to miss the resounding authenticity in what these three young ladies bring to the screen. Likewise, the supporting cast, particularly Marlene Forte as Lanisha's mother, compliments the work of the three girls as well as the overall tone of the film.

Our Song is a film not to be missed - by anyone of any age. --------------------------------------------- Result 1395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I spied this short on a [[DVD]] of best new Zealand [[shorts]], all great but The french Doors was [[amazing]]. It [[starts]] off slow and you wonder if there is anything going to happen. Just as you relax into the hum drum of home renovation, the most spookiest thing happens.

EEEEkkk, I wanted to stop watching, but I was [[glued]].

The films dips into the primal fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It chills you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't seen in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a great feature, alas it finishes after ten minutes or so. Never the less a great ending that begs you to want to know more.

Loved it and well done and thanks for the ride. These New Zealanders are really turning out the talent.

A new fan. I spied this short on a [[DVDS]] of best new Zealand [[panties]], all great but The french Doors was [[astounding]]. It [[launch]] off slow and you wonder if there is anything going to happen. Just as you relax into the hum drum of home renovation, the most spookiest thing happens.

EEEEkkk, I wanted to stop watching, but I was [[pasted]].

The films dips into the primal fear of the dark and with little, if not any, special effects. It chills you right to the bone. A simple yet brilliant concept opened up all those memories of when I was young and dream't up the most improbably but spooky situations.

The film makers visual style are bang on and the lead character takes you convincingly through the story. It is a quality short that I haven't seen in quite some time.

The French Doors has all the hallmarks of a great feature, alas it finishes after ten minutes or so. Never the less a great ending that begs you to want to know more.

Loved it and well done and thanks for the ride. These New Zealanders are really turning out the talent.

A new fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Very]] [[good]] drama about a young girl who attempts to unravel a series of horrible crimes. She enlists the aid of a police cadet, and they begin running down a series of clues which lead to a traveling carny worker with a long police record. An ending which is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat. [[Eminently]] [[alright]] drama about a young girl who attempts to unravel a series of horrible crimes. She enlists the aid of a police cadet, and they begin running down a series of clues which lead to a traveling carny worker with a long police record. An ending which is guaranteed to keep you on the edge of your seat. --------------------------------------------- Result 1397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] If you want to remember MJ, this is a [[good]] place to start. This movie features sweet tunes, MJ as robot, and a crazy, messed-up plot. I recall, many a night, passing out to this [[fine]] feature [[film]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to green light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is much more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. If you want to remember MJ, this is a [[alright]] place to start. This movie features sweet tunes, MJ as robot, and a crazy, messed-up plot. I recall, many a night, passing out to this [[alright]] feature [[cinematography]] in college, and pondering the sheer awesomenes of whoever decided to green light this ridiculous piece of .

There is lots of singing. Lots of dancing. There is lots of singing while dancing. MJ slays it as you would expect when it comes to this stuff. But there is much more to this movie. There is claymation. There are fat children (clay). There is an anthropomorphic rabbit that michael jackson has to battle in a dance off (obviously clay too). There is Joe Pesci as well (not made of clay).

RIP- we love you Michael! It is a sad day for all of us. --------------------------------------------- Result 1398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] A new creative team emerged in 1950 when brilliant actor James Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant director Anthony Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that genre for the future. Until that time Stewart was mainly noted for an aw..aw..aw approach to family oriented comedies, dramas, and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[best]] screen performances ever and one of the [[best]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a sarcastic writer for a scandal rag in "The Philadelphia Story." He had even done [[westerns]] before. His portrayal of gun shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men combined their resources to produce some of the [[greatest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the best but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful director of A films as a result going on to direct what some critics believe to be the greatest western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." Stewart became fabulously wealthy as a result of the partnership because he signed for part of the royalties in return for a fraction of the salary he was usually paid, a wise move indeed followed by many other actors from then on.

Winchester '73 was also one of the first films, maybe the first, to tell a story from the standpoint of a traveling gun. Each owner is part of the tale being told and it all comes together in the exciting showdown at the end of the movie, which also holds a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). A new creative team emerged in 1950 when brilliant actor James Stewart teamed with the equally-brilliant director Anthony Mann to make a series of westerns that helped define that genre for the future. Until that time Stewart was mainly noted for an aw..aw..aw approach to family oriented comedies, dramas, and romances. Not that he wasn't already a multi-talented Hollywood star. One of his [[bestest]] screen performances ever and one of the [[better]] for anyone on celluloid was as Macaulay 'Mike' Connor, a sarcastic writer for a scandal rag in "The Philadelphia Story." He had even done [[westerners]] before. His portrayal of gun shy yet expert shot Thomas Jefferson Destry Jr. in the comedy western "Destry Rides Again" helped make that film a classic. But to most movie goers he was the all-American boyscout type Mr. Smith or George Bailey. Seldom was there a dark side to any of the characters he played.

Anthony Mann was associated with B flicks in the film noir mode. "Raw Deal," "Side Street," and "T-Men" caught the eye of James Stewart. So the two gifted men combined their resources to produce some of the [[hugest]] Hollywood westerns ever made. "Winchester '73" and "The Man from Laramie" were the best but the others were almost as effective. Mann became a successful director of A films as a result going on to direct what some critics believe to be the greatest western of them all Gary Cooper's "Man of the West." Stewart became fabulously wealthy as a result of the partnership because he signed for part of the royalties in return for a fraction of the salary he was usually paid, a wise move indeed followed by many other actors from then on.

Winchester '73 was also one of the first films, maybe the first, to tell a story from the standpoint of a traveling gun. Each owner is part of the tale being told and it all comes together in the exciting showdown at the end of the movie, which also holds a surprise for the viewer. Based on a story by Stuart Lake, the tale centers on revenge and the ownership of the Winchester '73. The year is 1876. Custer and his 7th cavalry have been annihilated by the Sioux and Cheyenne at Little Big Horn. The whites want revenge. The native Americans want their land and their way of life back. This conflict leads to a confrontation between native Americas led by Young Bull (young Rock Hudson showing his potential as an actor) and a small cavalry group pinned down in a canyon and joined by civilians Lin McAdam (Stewart), his partner and life-long pal High Spade ( the underrated actor Millard Mitchell), and a couple trying to find themselves, Steve Miller (Charles Drake) and Lola Manners (Shelley Winters), a soiled dove with a kind heart. Among the horse soldiers are newcomers Tony Curtis and James Best (late of the "Dukes of Hazzard"), whose part is cut short by a bullet.

Wyatt Earp was in Dodge City in 1876. The movie has him as head marshal. The fine actor Will Geer (later of the Waltons) looks like an older Earp. In reality Wyatt was assistant Marshal in Dodge at the time just cutting his teeth on being a lawman. Lin McAdam wins the Winchester in a shooting contest, but has it taken from him not long afterward by outlaw Dutch Henry Brown (Stephen McNally) and his henchmen. McAdam and High Spade are after both Dutch Henry and the Winchester for the remainder of the movie. An even more sinister character emerges along the way, Waco Johnnie Dean, played as evil personified by Dan Duryea who threatens to steal the show from the other members of a stellar cast.

The Winchester passes through several hands during the course of the film, each time the transfer is intense. One involves a gunrunner played to perfection by John McIntire. Other swaps are intermingled with the scenario above. All this plus the action keeps the viewer glued to the seat throughout the entire show.

As noted above, the cast is first rate down to the smallest role. Look for other familiar faces in uncredited parts, including the future sheriff of "Bonanza" Ray Teal and B western reliable Panhandle Perkins (Guy Wilkerson). --------------------------------------------- Result 1399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Corny]]! I [[love]] it! Corny - just as the TV show was about 40 years ago! Adam and Burt rekindle the same on-screen [[chemistry]] that never seems to have left! They re-live [[old]] memories, plus the [[actors]] that play them from the 1960s show some behind-the-scenes things which are quite interesting to know. 1960s TV was corny escapism for so many of us back then, and this [[DVD]] is no exception, if you are familiar with the original TV [[show]]. The [[fight]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or [[whatever]] is [[fantastic]]!! The movie [[theater]] scene [[shows]] clips of the [[villains]] who [[passed]] away. [[At]] the [[end]] Frank Gorshin makes an appearance. He [[passed]] away not too [[long]] after this [[DVD]] was [[made]], I [[believe]], so it is to his [[great]] [[credit]] that he came back to again [[play]] a villain to [[Adam]] and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robin]] so [[many]] [[years]] ago. He didn't [[lose]] his touch! Thanks to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[also]]. [[In]] [[conclusion]] I [[think]] that this [[DVD]] is for [[great]] [[memories]], and I [[wish]] to [[thank]] both Adam and Burt for [[coming]] back and recreating these [[memories]] for those of us who [[remember]] the original-!!! [[Thanks]], [[Guys]]!!! [[Banal]]! I [[iove]] it! Corny - just as the TV show was about 40 years ago! Adam and Burt rekindle the same on-screen [[chemicals]] that never seems to have left! They re-live [[elderly]] memories, plus the [[actresses]] that play them from the 1960s show some behind-the-scenes things which are quite interesting to know. 1960s TV was corny escapism for so many of us back then, and this [[DVDS]] is no exception, if you are familiar with the original TV [[display]]. The [[fought]] scene with the written Boofs and Bams or [[whichever]] is [[admirable]]!! The movie [[theaters]] scene [[demonstrates]] clips of the [[thugs]] who [[adopted]] away. [[Under]] the [[terminates]] Frank Gorshin makes an appearance. He [[adopted]] away not too [[longer]] after this [[DVDS]] was [[introduced]], I [[believing]], so it is to his [[large]] [[credits]] that he came back to again [[gaming]] a villain to [[Adama]] and Burt, just as he did to Batman & [[Robyn]] so [[various]] [[ages]] ago. He didn't [[wasting]] his touch! Thanks to Julie Newmar to re-living a villain role, [[apart]]. [[During]] [[conclude]] I [[ideas]] that this [[DVDS]] is for [[remarkable]] [[memorabilia]], and I [[desiring]] to [[thanked]] both Adam and Burt for [[forthcoming]] back and recreating these [[memoirs]] for those of us who [[rember]] the original-!!! [[Thanking]], [[Fellers]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[Overall]], I [[enjoyed]] this film and would recommend it to indie film lovers.

However, I really [[want]] to [[note]] the similarities between parts of this film and Nichols' Closer. One scene especially where Adrian Grenier's character is questioning Rosario Dawson's about her sex life while he was away is remarkably similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's character is questioning Julia Roberts, although it is acted with [[less]] [[harshness]] and intensity in "Love." [[Also]] note that "Anna" is the name of both Dawson's and Roberts' character. Can't be coincidence. Now Closer is based on Patrick Marber's play and supposedly this film is loosely based on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this connection formed.

Anyone have an [[idea]]? [[Whole]], I [[appreciated]] this film and would recommend it to indie film lovers.

However, I really [[desiring]] to [[memo]] the similarities between parts of this film and Nichols' Closer. One scene especially where Adrian Grenier's character is questioning Rosario Dawson's about her sex life while he was away is remarkably similar to the scene in Closer where Clive Owen's character is questioning Julia Roberts, although it is acted with [[lowest]] [[toughness]] and intensity in "Love." [[Moreover]] note that "Anna" is the name of both Dawson's and Roberts' character. Can't be coincidence. Now Closer is based on Patrick Marber's play and supposedly this film is loosely based on Arthur Schnitzler's "Reigen" so I'm not sure how this connection formed.

Anyone have an [[concept]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 1401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Charles McDougall's resume includes directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[comes]] with all the credentials to make the TV [[film]] version of Meg Wolitzer's [[novel]] SURRENDER, DOROTHY a [[success]]. And for the most [[part]] he [[manages]] to keep this potentially [[sappy]] story about sudden death of a loved one and than manner in which the people in her life react afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a beautiful unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer vacation. The group seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active social life but intrusively calls here daughter constantly with the mutual greeting 'Surrender, Dorothy', is playing it up elsewhere: when she receives the phone call that Sara is dead she immediately comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and grief create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but surely Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, thriving on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her best in these roles that walk the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit heavy and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp Charles McDougall's resume includes directing episodes on 'Sex and the City', 'Desperate Housewives', Queer as Folk', 'Big Love', 'The Office', etc. so he [[arrives]] with all the credentials to make the TV [[cinematography]] version of Meg Wolitzer's [[newer]] SURRENDER, DOROTHY a [[avail]]. And for the most [[portion]] he [[runs]] to keep this potentially [[gooey]] story about sudden death of a loved one and than manner in which the people in her life react afloat.

Sara (Alexa Davalos) a beautiful unmarried young woman is accompanying her best friends - gay playwright Adam (Tom Everett Scott), Adam's current squeeze Shawn (Chris Pine), and married couple Maddy (Lauren German) and Peter (Josh Hopkins) with their infant son - to a house in the Hamptons for a summer vacation. The group seems jolly until a trip to the local ice creamery by Adam and Sara) results in an auto accident which kills Sara. Meanwhile Sara's mother Natalie Swedlow (Diane Keaton) who has an active social life but intrusively calls here daughter constantly with the mutual greeting 'Surrender, Dorothy', is playing it up elsewhere: when she receives the phone call that Sara is dead she immediately comes to the Hamptons where her overbearing personality and grief create friction among Sara's friends. Slowly but surely Natalie uncovers secrets about each of them, thriving on talking about Sara as though doing so would bring her to life. Natalie's thirst for truth at any cost results in major changes among the group and it is only through the binding love of the departed Sara that they all eventually come together.

Diane Keaton is at her best in these roles that walk the thread between drama and comedy and her presence holds the story together. The screenplay has its moments for good lines, but it also has a lot of filler that becomes a bit heavy and morose making the actors obviously uncomfortable with the lines they are given. Yes, this story has been told many times - the impact of sudden death on the lives of those whose privacy is altered by disclosures - but the film moves along with a cast pace and has enough genuine entertainment to make it worth watching. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] As many others have stated, this is a [[terrible]] movie, from every aspect of movie [[making]]. How they ever got some known name [[actors]] to take on this project is amazing.

Many people have complained that it was [[shot]] on 'cheap' [[video]] [[cameras]]. Yes, it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What [[made]] it bad was the lighting, white balancing, [[shooting]] technique and [[editing]].

There were so [[many]] [[different]] [[shooting]] and editing techniques used that it was a production [[mess]]. [[Harsh]], inconsistent lighting, over use of hand held shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[editing]] (another Allen [[technique]]), but poorly [[done]], without [[real]] purpose.

The [[lack]] of white [[balance]] in the [[restaurant]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The [[simulated]] sex scenes had no acting [[value]] at any [[level]].

How this [[video]] ever [[made]] it to print is [[beyond]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[amazed]] at how [[bad]] it is. As many others have stated, this is a [[spooky]] movie, from every aspect of movie [[doing]]. How they ever got some known name [[players]] to take on this project is amazing.

Many people have complained that it was [[offed]] on 'cheap' [[videos]] [[camera]]. Yes, it was shot on video, but not 'cheap' video. What [[effected]] it bad was the lighting, white balancing, [[gunshot]] technique and [[edited]].

There were so [[several]] [[assorted]] [[gunshot]] and editing techniques used that it was a production [[chaos]]. [[Tough]], inconsistent lighting, over use of hand held shooting (ala Woody Allen), choppy [[edited]] (another Allen [[tech]]), but poorly [[performed]], without [[genuine]] purpose.

The [[imperfection]] of white [[balancing]] in the [[diner]] kitchen scenes is embarrassing; very amateurish.

The [[mimic]] sex scenes had no acting [[valuing]] at any [[grades]].

How this [[videos]] ever [[brought]] it to print is [[afterlife]] me. It is worth watching if only to be [[flabbergasted]] at how [[mala]] it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 1403 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] David Lynch's [[crude]] and crudely drawn take on South Park presents us with a nightmare of [[disturbing]] clichés about suburban middle [[class]] [[families]]. The father is a [[hideous]] monster with three [[teeth]] and a [[disproportionately]] [[large]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[uttered]] the most [[horrendous]] guttural [[noises]], the [[son]] and mother are [[permanently]] [[horrified]], [[incoherent]] creatures for whom [[terror]] is a [[way]] of [[life]]. A number of equally [[absurd]] [[characters]] are introduced throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[famous]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[aspects]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not particularly fond of comedies in general. However, there were a couple of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some clever bits of animated cinematography - where Lynch conveys wide ranges of reaction in his characters through a syntactical arrangement of shots as opposed to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his audience a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated comedy here. [[Interestingly]], he chose to follow in the footsteps of the recent wave of ultra-low-brow humor (i.e. most Will Farrell films) while adding elements of vicious social critique and classic cartoon violence and gross-out humor. While the blend doesn't really work very well here, it is nothing if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch fans. David Lynch's [[rough]] and crudely drawn take on South Park presents us with a nightmare of [[worrying]] clichés about suburban middle [[kinds]] [[family]]. The father is a [[terrible]] monster with three [[dental]] and a [[overly]] [[major]] circular mouth-hole from which are [[pronounced]] the most [[disgusting]] guttural [[rumours]], the [[sons]] and mother are [[forever]] [[astonished]], [[inconsistent]] creatures for whom [[panic]] is a [[routes]] of [[vie]]. A number of equally [[nutty]] [[hallmarks]] are introduced throughout the series.

Lynch is not [[proverbial]] for his comedies (i.e. On the Air, [[things]] of Wild at Heart), and I am not particularly fond of comedies in general. However, there were a couple of scenes in Dumbland which made me laugh out loud. There are some clever bits of animated cinematography - where Lynch conveys wide ranges of reaction in his characters through a syntactical arrangement of shots as opposed to facial expressions (which never really vary in Dumbland).

I believe Lynch was really trying to give his audience a straight-forward, if disturbing, animated comedy here. [[Stunningly]], he chose to follow in the footsteps of the recent wave of ultra-low-brow humor (i.e. most Will Farrell films) while adding elements of vicious social critique and classic cartoon violence and gross-out humor. While the blend doesn't really work very well here, it is nothing if not Lynchian.

Worth seeing by Lynch fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] [[Enjoyable]] in spite of Leslie Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays Philip as a flat, uninteresting character. One is supposed to feel sorry for this man; however, I find myself cheering Bette Davis' Mildred. Ms. Davis gives one her [[finest]] performances (she received an Academy Award nomination). Thanks to her performance she brings this rather dull movie to [[life]]. **Be sure not to miss when Mildred tells Philip exactly how she feels about him. [[Pleasurable]] in spite of Leslie Howard's performance. Mr. Howard plays Philip as a flat, uninteresting character. One is supposed to feel sorry for this man; however, I find myself cheering Bette Davis' Mildred. Ms. Davis gives one her [[meanest]] performances (she received an Academy Award nomination). Thanks to her performance she brings this rather dull movie to [[lives]]. **Be sure not to miss when Mildred tells Philip exactly how she feels about him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1405 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This doesn't quite plumb the depths of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The Twilight Zone (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would build up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[None]] of the characters are particularly sympathetic or interesting until the last segment.

Framing story: Adam West is... well, himself. He doesn't go the Bruce Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he rarely does. He simply plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "Jay" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. Terror, Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy statements.

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso wife is introduced to no purpose, but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but basically [[incoherent]].

Nex's Diner: Reminiscent of various Serling time travel stories, mixed with Steve Allen's "A Meeting of Minds." Most of the actors aren't too bad (except for Josh Astin as Cassius, who manages to walk, talk and even breathe awkwardly), and the idea is [[mildly]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go anywhere. The main character raises some relatively reasonable questions, bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear wasteland.

Life Replay: Not a bad little piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it says something that people are fascinated by the magical properties of remote controls. The main character is mildly sympathetic. Nothing substantially innovative here, but it's okay.

Fighting Spirit: You see the twist coming a mile away but like the main character, it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or Monsters. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. This doesn't quite plumb the depths of Creepshow 3, but it comes close. It also uses the same technique of using some of the same actors in multiple roles throughout the anthology, which is distracting to say the least.

It also rather irritating rips off The Twilight Zone (with the bookshop being comparable to Serling's later Night Gallery). Unfortunately, the producers & writers forgot that Serling would build up sympathy for his characters before messing them over. [[Nos]] of the characters are particularly sympathetic or interesting until the last segment.

Framing story: Adam West is... well, himself. He doesn't go the Bruce Wayne/Batman campy 60s route, but he rarely does. He simply plays the not-particularly-enigmatic "Jay" (there's an ominous spine-chilling name to compare to the likes of Dr. Terror, Eramus, and The Cryptkeeper), and makes some mildly awkward/creepy statements.

Abernathy: Seen Rod Serling's "A Stop in Willoughby"? Then you've seen this. The red herring of the nutso wife is introduced to no purpose, but even the main character's friend identifies him as a wimp. As well directed as can be expected, but basically [[unconnected]].

Nex's Diner: Reminiscent of various Serling time travel stories, mixed with Steve Allen's "A Meeting of Minds." Most of the actors aren't too bad (except for Josh Astin as Cassius, who manages to walk, talk and even breathe awkwardly), and the idea is [[gently]] interesting. But like Abernathy, it doesn't go anywhere. The main character raises some relatively reasonable questions, bugs out a bit (who wouldn't?), and for some reason he ends up banished to a nuclear wasteland.

Life Replay: Not a bad little piece, and manages to predate both Click and Creepshow 3. I suppose it says something that people are fascinated by the magical properties of remote controls. The main character is mildly sympathetic. Nothing substantially innovative here, but it's okay.

Fighting Spirit: You see the twist coming a mile away but like the main character, it has some heart and it's a decent story of defeat and redemption.

Finale: So... why do people end up in cold storage in silver lame suits? Don't know. And doesn't make sense. So... all the protagonists wandered into the bookstore and became trapped? Kinda undermines the happy ending with the boxer (thanks, guys!), and the guy in the first segment died. So how did he get trapped? Did he visit the bookstore before he died, got trapped and... didn't die? What? Huh? I supposer this isn't expected to make sense because it's supernatural. But still...

Overall: basically not dissimilar from the two newer Twilight Zone series, or some episodes of Tales From the Darkside or Monsters. The last two stories and part of the second are probably worth your time. But there's nothing really spectacular here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1406 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout [[hit]] '[[Basic]] Instinct' is a stylish and shocking neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making somewhat sleazy [[trash]] [[films]], both in his native Holland and in America and this film is one of the reasons why. The Fourth Man follows the strange [[story]] of Gerard Reve (played by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[alcoholic]] and slightly [[mad]] writer who goes to Vlissingen to give a talk on the stories he writes. [[While]] there, he meets the seductive Christine Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her house where he discovers a handsome picture of one of her lovers and [[proclaims]] that he will meet him, even if it kills him.

Paul Verhoeven twists the truth many times in this [[film]], and that ensures that you never quite know where you are with it. Many of the occurrences in The Fourth Man could be what they appear to be, but they could easily be interpreted as something else entirely and this keeps the audience on the edge of their seats for the duration, and also makes the film work as this [[narrative]] is what it [[thrives]] on. Paul Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that feels he has to restrain himself, and that is one of things I like best about him. This film features a very shocking scene that made me feel ill for hours afterwards (and that doesn't happen very often!). I [[wont]] spoil it because it needs the surprise element to work...but you'll see what I mean when you see the film (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is also a number of other macabre scenes that are less shocking than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely nonetheless; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a pipe sent through his skull, a boat is smashed in half...lovely.

The acting in The Fourth Man isn't anything to write home about, but it's solid throughout. Jeroen Krabbé holds the audience's attention and looks the part as the drunken writer. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what Sharon Stone would imitate nine years later with Basic Instinct, but the original fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. [[Paulo]] Verhoeven's predecessor to his breakout [[knocked]] '[[Baseline]] Instinct' is a stylish and shocking neo-noir thriller. Verhoeven has become known for making somewhat sleazy [[garbage]] [[cinematography]], both in his native Holland and in America and this film is one of the reasons why. The Fourth Man follows the strange [[narratives]] of Gerard Reve (played by Jeroen Krabbé); a gay, [[beverage]] and slightly [[pissed]] writer who goes to Vlissingen to give a talk on the stories he writes. [[Whereas]] there, he meets the seductive Christine Halsslag (Renée Soutendijk) who takes him back to her house where he discovers a handsome picture of one of her lovers and [[declare]] that he will meet him, even if it kills him.

Paul Verhoeven twists the truth many times in this [[cinema]], and that ensures that you never quite know where you are with it. Many of the occurrences in The Fourth Man could be what they appear to be, but they could easily be interpreted as something else entirely and this keeps the audience on the edge of their seats for the duration, and also makes the film work as this [[narration]] is what it [[flourishes]] on. Paul Verhoeven is not a filmmaker that feels he has to restrain himself, and that is one of things I like best about him. This film features a very shocking scene that made me feel ill for hours afterwards (and that doesn't happen very often!). I [[habit]] spoil it because it needs the surprise element to work...but you'll see what I mean when you see the film (make sure you get the uncut version!). There is also a number of other macabre scenes that are less shocking than the one I've mentioned, but are lovely nonetheless; a man gets eaten by lions, another one has a pipe sent through his skull, a boat is smashed in half...lovely.

The acting in The Fourth Man isn't anything to write home about, but it's solid throughout. Jeroen Krabbé holds the audience's attention and looks the part as the drunken writer. It is Renée Soutendijk that impresses the most, though, as the femme fatale at the centre of the tale. Her performance is what Sharon Stone would imitate nine years later with Basic Instinct, but the original fatale did it best. Paul Verhoeven's direction is solid throughout as he directs our attention through numerous points of view, all of which help to create the mystery of the story. Verhoeven has gone on to make some rubbish, but he obviously has talent and it's a shame that he doesn't put it to better use. Of all the Verhoeven films I've seen, this is the best and although it might be difficult to come across; trust me, it's worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 1407 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Would]] that more romantic comedies were as [[deftly]] executed as this one? I never [[thought]] anything as mundane as the simple sale of a music box could leave me catching my [[breath]] with excitement. Margaret Sullavan makes a marvellous saleswoman, and she and James Stewart always brought out the best in each other. This [[movie]] sports what I think is Frank Morgan's most [[winning]] performance, and with "The Wizard of Oz" and "Tortilla Flat" under his belt, that is saying a [[lot]]. The [[way]] he finds a [[Christmas]] dinner partner [[left]] me giddy with [[joy]]. Director Ernst Lubitsch might have [[thought]] "Trouble In Paradise" his favorite, but this one he must surely consider a [[triumph]]. With some of the wittiest dialogue American [[movies]] of the 30's has to [[offer]]. [[Should]] that more romantic comedies were as [[shrewdly]] executed as this one? I never [[brainchild]] anything as mundane as the simple sale of a music box could leave me catching my [[respiratory]] with excitement. Margaret Sullavan makes a marvellous saleswoman, and she and James Stewart always brought out the best in each other. This [[kino]] sports what I think is Frank Morgan's most [[earning]] performance, and with "The Wizard of Oz" and "Tortilla Flat" under his belt, that is saying a [[batches]]. The [[routing]] he finds a [[Navidad]] dinner partner [[exited]] me giddy with [[jubilation]]. Director Ernst Lubitsch might have [[brainchild]] "Trouble In Paradise" his favorite, but this one he must surely consider a [[victory]]. With some of the wittiest dialogue American [[cinematography]] of the 30's has to [[supplying]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1408 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Intelligent]], wry, and [[thrilling]], "The Invisible Man" [[stood]] out in 2000 among Sci-Fi's usual lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and sometimes [[melodramatic]] script with gritty, cynical plots and modern noir dialogue. The [[show]] sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no [[denying]] the fact that "I-Man"'s [[characters]] went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability [[like]] the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted elegantly, made even more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such taut pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. [[Smarter]], wry, and [[excite]], "The Invisible Man" [[amounted]] out in 2000 among Sci-Fi's usual lineup, balancing out "Farscape"'s fantastical art direction and sometimes [[operatic]] script with gritty, cynical plots and modern noir dialogue. The [[exhibit]] sat between "Law and Order" and "Doctor Who" on the believability meter, but there was no [[refuses]] the fact that "I-Man"'s [[features]] went beyond caricature. Even characters that verged on predictability [[iike]] the Keeper, the Official, and Eberts were given reprieves from the formulaic. Paul Ben-Victor and Vincent Ventresca had a chemistry that evolved and shifted elegantly, made even more remarkable by the revolving door team of writers and directors. The effects are never allowed to overwhelm the plot, and the science only sometimes verged on the totally unbelievable. The show's low points are still entertaining, and I've never seen such taut pilot episodes. Matt Greenberg and Sci-Fi should be commended, and fans have the right to demand a comprehensive DVD edition of the show. Every time I come across a marathon of "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" on Sci-Fi, I roll my eyes and sigh, mourning the excitement and possibility of science fiction television that "Invisible Man" and its ilk represented. --------------------------------------------- Result 1409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Otto Preminger's Dana Andrews cycle of films noirs are among the (largely) unsung jewels of the genre. Because they lack paranoia, misogyny or hysteria, they may have seemed out of place at the time, but the clear-eyed imagery, the complex play with identity, masculinity and representation, the subversion of traditional psychological tenets, the austere, geometrical style all seem startlingly modern today, and very similar to Melville. The lucid ironies of this film are so loaded, brutal and ironic that the 'happy' ending is one of the cruellest in Hollywood history. Brilliant on the level of entertaining thriller as well, tense, and packed with double-edged dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 1410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] In [[director]] Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita Rao seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But [[sadly]], the plot of this new film comes off looking way too outdated, even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just seems like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving grace is the fact that it oozes sincerity from start to finish, you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's previous films and by closely examining this new one you can safely declare that Barjatya believes in a perfect world, he believes in his good-as-gold characters, he believes that large families can live together happily under the same roof without the slightest bumps.But alas, he's unable to translate his vision to the screen. It's difficult to overlook how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both virtuous and virginal – I mean, think about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! In [[headmaster]] Sooraj Barjatya's Vivah,20-something Delhi boy Shahid Kapur finds himself smitten by the demure, small-town girl his father has selected for him to marry. Drawn to her innocence and simplicity, Shahid agrees to the marriage barely moments after he's met her at her home in Madhupur, and the young lady in question Amrita Rao seems equally floored by her charming suitor. The marriage is fixed for six months later, and the couple find themselves in the first throes of young, budding love, their geographical distance notwithstanding. But Amrita, who's been raised by her uncle and her aunt after her parents' death, is struck by a horrible calamity just hours before the marriage. And then, it's up to Shahid to play the honourable lover and to embrace her unconditionally.Much in the same vein as Hum Aapke Hain Koun and Hum Saath Saath Hain, Barjatya's new film Vivah too is on one level a family drama with an extremely idealistic premise. But [[unhappily]], the plot of this new film comes off looking way too outdated, even more far-fetched than those regressive Ekta Kapoor soaps. And the problem is clear – you just can't relate to such squeaky-clean characters who don't have one bad bone in their bodies. There are many things that work in favour of and against Hindi films, and timing is one such important factor. Twenty-five years ago, perhaps the plot of Vivah may not have felt like such a stretch, but today it just seems like the product of a mind stuck in a time warp. Perhaps the film's only saving grace is the fact that it oozes sincerity from start to finish, you can make out right away that the filmmaker's intention is not to deceive. Judging both by Barjatya's previous films and by closely examining this new one you can safely declare that Barjatya believes in a perfect world, he believes in his good-as-gold characters, he believes that large families can live together happily under the same roof without the slightest bumps.But alas, he's unable to translate his vision to the screen. It's difficult to overlook how one-dimensional his protagonists are – Shahid and Amrita, both virtuous and virginal – I mean, think about it, the first time they hold hands is an hour and twenty minutes into the film. Barjatya may think he's returning to his Maine Pyar Kiya roots with Vivah, but truth is that the reason we embraced Salman and Bhagyashree in that film, or even Salman and Madhuri in Hum Aapke Hain Koun is because they had such fantastic chemistry. Because although they were created out of the same mould as Shahid and Amrita in Vivah, those pairs had mischief and masti. Shahid and Amrita are just insipid and boring.For a film that relies so heavily on music to narrate its story, the filmmaker chooses a string of 70s-style tunes that only further slacken the film's deadening pace. But if I had to choose just one reason to explain why Vivah doesn't work for me, it's because I'm not sure I can relate to any of the characters who inhabit Barjatya's story. To some perhaps, Vivah will give hope, that a perfect world like this is actually out there somewhere. But I'm a little cynical I guess. So, give me the coquettish Madhuri of Hum Aapke Hain Kaun, give me the bratty Salman of Maine Pyar Kiya, I'll even take that mischievous Karisma Kapoor of Hum Saath Saath Hain. But save me from these dullards. You know, some marriages aren't made in heaven. This one's Vivah! --------------------------------------------- Result 1411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I find I [[enjoy]] this show, but the [[format]] [[needs]] some work. First off, the good attributes. I like how this show will take us through the day-to-day [[life]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the addict to [[show]] us how bad they've [[allowed]] their lives to [[become]]. This is followed by an [[intervention]] which is then followed by an [[outcome]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat things and [[sometimes]] the outcome (often short term due to the constraints of time between filming and airing) is a negative outcome. This makes the positive [[outcomes]] all the [[better]].

Another thing I [[like]] about the show is the quality of the camera [[work]]. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze anywhere and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[surprisingly]] [[good]] and stable. It's actually superior to scripted shows like "The Shield" where the photography is so bad it can induce nausea.

Now for the bad. An episode will [[sometimes]] [[contain]] two completely different and unrelated cases that will be mixed together during the show. You'll get caught up in the story of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the story of another. Get caught up in that story then [[suddenly]] you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[forgotten]] which [[case]] the individual currently on screen [[belong]] to. This [[constant]] flip-flopping between [[addicts]] [[really]] [[gets]] disruptive during the [[intervention]] scenes because the [[show]] will [[even]] [[mix]] together the two [[completely]] unrelated [[interventions]]! I once heard the marketing B.S. [[reason]] for this poor design: "The [[show]] can [[get]] so [[intense]] that switching to another addict [[allows]] the viewer time to absorb what they're watching." Oh please. Clearly the [[reason]] this is done is because they have two [[cases]] that aren't [[big]] enough for an hour show so they [[mix]] two [[together]]. By mixing them instead of giving each a half hour [[block]], like they should, it [[forces]] the viewer to watch the entire thing (and the commercials) if they are interested in one [[case]] but not the other.

I [[used]] to find these "blender" [[episodes]] so annoying that I'd only tell my TiVo to record episodes containing one [[addict]], but then it [[became]] [[easier]] just to [[record]] all of them. I find I [[enjoying]] this show, but the [[layout]] [[required]] some work. First off, the good attributes. I like how this show will take us through the day-to-day [[lifetime]] of an addict because the producers have a knack at getting the addict to [[demonstrating]] us how bad they've [[empowered]] their lives to [[gotten]]. This is followed by an [[interference]] which is then followed by an [[findings]]. Intervention doesn't candy-coat things and [[intermittently]] the outcome (often short term due to the constraints of time between filming and airing) is a negative outcome. This makes the positive [[result]] all the [[optimum]].

Another thing I [[likes]] about the show is the quality of the camera [[cooperation]]. Given the reality that these cameramen have to squeeze anywhere and don't have the benefit of re shooting scenes the photography is [[terribly]] [[buena]] and stable. It's actually superior to scripted shows like "The Shield" where the photography is so bad it can induce nausea.

Now for the bad. An episode will [[occasionally]] [[containing]] two completely different and unrelated cases that will be mixed together during the show. You'll get caught up in the story of one addict then suddenly you're thrown into the story of another. Get caught up in that story then [[unexpectedly]] you're back to the first addict...or are you? By now you may have [[ignored]] which [[lawsuits]] the individual currently on screen [[belongs]] to. This [[permanent]] flip-flopping between [[crackheads]] [[truly]] [[receives]] disruptive during the [[intervening]] scenes because the [[exposition]] will [[yet]] [[mixing]] together the two [[utterly]] unrelated [[interference]]! I once heard the marketing B.S. [[motif]] for this poor design: "The [[exposition]] can [[obtain]] so [[intensive]] that switching to another addict [[lets]] the viewer time to absorb what they're watching." Oh please. Clearly the [[cause]] this is done is because they have two [[instances]] that aren't [[massive]] enough for an hour show so they [[mixtures]] two [[jointly]]. By mixing them instead of giving each a half hour [[bloc]], like they should, it [[troop]] the viewer to watch the entire thing (and the commercials) if they are interested in one [[instances]] but not the other.

I [[utilizing]] to find these "blender" [[bouts]] so annoying that I'd only tell my TiVo to record episodes containing one [[junkie]], but then it [[was]] [[effortless]] just to [[recordings]] all of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So this was an HBO "Made for TV Movie" eh? Is that an excuse for such a pathetic plot and terrible acting? Such a shame to see Jim Belushi reduced to a role so repetitive (shot at, survived, lies, beaten up, survives, shot at, lies and so ad infinitum. Call that a script? As for the Brits, embarrassing to see Timothy Dalton's pathetic (or was he just taking the p***, depends how much he was paid I guess?) attempt at a Southern Sheriff). As for that other Brit, the bleached blond one, what a w***er! There is a trend towards glorifying these "English speaking" (sic) super-violent thugs lately, perhaps thanks to Mr. Madonna's two movies succeed in entertaining and justify the violence by skillful use of irony and humour, like Pulp Fiction does. However, this movie discredits and devalues the genre. definately one to miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kareena Kapoor in a bikini hmmmmmmmm.

Akshay Kumar...

Anil Kapoor....

Maybe Saif....

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Good Banner..

Kareena Kapoor in a bikini.....

Not one good reason not to see this movie....

Or so i thought ........Didnt these people make JBJ...

Why o Why did i forget that.

For all the criticism the first half of the movie isn't that bad...

There is some intrigue and YOU FEEL A SORT OF IRRITATION MIXED WITH EXCITEMENT THAT I FELT WHEN SEEING GUY RITCHIE MOVIES LIKE LOCK STOCK AND SNATCH.

Kareena Kapoor is sizzling in a very skinny model sort of way.

Akshay Kumar is Akshay Kumar as only he can be.

Anil Kapoor is annoying but kind of funny, YOU ALMOST FORGET THAT MOST OF THE TIME YOU CANNOT UNDERSTAND HIM.

Saif is sidey ala Main Khiladi.. once again.

There is the occasional laugh and a few chuckles, and a few goosebumps during the kareena-saif love story (kareena in the rain, behind me on my bike hmmmmmmm).

BUT MOSTLY THIS HALF PROMISES MORE THAN IT DELIVERS.....

WHICH MAKES THE SECOND HALF ALL THE MORE UNBEARABLE....

There was almost a cheer when the interval came not only because because of the wet kareena because of what people thought were the things to come.

INSTEAD WE WERE TREATED TO MIND NUMBING TORTURE WHICH IS DIFFICULT TO PUT IN WORDS.

Saif suddenly seam like a comic sidekick...

SUDDENLY THE SEXY KAREENA LOOKS ANOREXIC, YOU REALISE THAT THE SECOND LAST FLOOR IS NOW EMPTY AND HER FACE LOOKS TO BIG FOR HER BODY ( only girls can notice this and make other guys notice the second last floor was my observation).

ANIL KAPOOR AND HIS SIDEKICKS GET ON YOUR NERVES.

Akshay Kumar is the only one who carries off the madness to some extent but even he become intolerable after a while.

ALL THE WHILE YOU ARE SUBJECTED TO ONE ABSURDITY AFTER THE OTHER.

WHY??!! WHAT??!!! WHEN?!!! WHERE?!!! WHAT HAVE I DONE TO DESERVE THIS...

A collective gasp went trough the audience before every song in the second half, which were ordinary even without the movie around it.

Cannot relieve the trauma anymore....

CONCLUSION.

THIS MOVIE STARTS OF AS A BUZZ WHICH YOU FEEL COULD EVEN TURN OUT TO A HIGH BUT ENDS UP SLOWLY MOVING TOWARDS A HEADACHE AND THEN RAPIDLY TURNS INTO A FULL BLOWN MIGRAINE ATTACK.

Please don't watch this movie for any reason other than academic interest.

+s Cast, Akshay Kumar, first half.

+/-s what, when, how, who to much confusion.(need a book to fill this).

+s cast, the whole second half (need many pages to fill this).

total 3/10 (im trying to avoid the 1s and 2s too not seem to extreme but make no mistake this movie is unwatchable no matter how decent the first half is). --------------------------------------------- Result 1414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] when discussing a [[movie]] titled 'snakes on a plane', we should point out early that the snakes are pretty [[darn]] [[important]] to the plot.

what we have here are very [[bad]] cgi snakes that neither [[look]] nor move like [[real]] snakes. [[snakes]] are [[scary]] because they [[appear]] to be slimy, they [[crawl]] they slither. these snakes do [[nothing]] of the [[sort]]. they glide along like they would in a video [[game]]. they are [[cartoon]] [[snakes]]. i would go as far to say that even [[someone]] that had a major phobia against real snakes [[would]] not find these ones [[scary]]

why on earth then would you want to include extreme close ups of these cgi failures? why not rely on [[suspense]].. the whole 'less is more' ethic. or better still, why not just make them look good in the first place? and then maybe still use them sparingly

take one look at john carpenters 'the thing'. here we have real slime, and gore of eerie proportions. 20 years go by and we get this pile of stinking sfx crap '[[snakes]] on a plane'. when are these people going to wake up and smell the coffee? special [[effects]] are going backwards!

sure you could say.. but the movie is a [[joke]], get it? sure i'm with that idea, but do it well! in addition to the above, this [[movie]] has crap dialogue. and the music and sound [[effects]] are not creepy or memorable in any way.

i could handle every other actor being part of this movie, except for jackson. what was he doing there? the man who starred in pulp fiction 10 years ago. is this [[career]] progression? are you offering people value for [[money]]? no. i'd like to know what Tarantino thought when he was half way through this [[stinker]] of a [[movie]]

the [[current]] generation seem to have very low expectations. and Hollywood seems to be [[offering]] them just what they [[want]]. on [[leaving]] the [[cinema]] i [[saw]] a number of [[advertisements]] for some truly [[horrendous]] looking [[future]] [[releases]] [[including]]... [[DOA]]: dead or [[alive]], (another) cgi [[animal]] [[film]] [[called]] 'flushed away', and another [[crap]] [[looking]] [[comedy]] named 'click'. in [[addition]] to that i [[saw]] some [[awful]] trailers, [[including]] one for (another) [[crap]] British horror/comedy. i've truly not seen the movie industry in a [[mess]] like this for a [[long]] time

expect to see this movie for sale in the DVD bargain section for £1 in 6 months time. and if you're expecting to see a black comedy with [[tonnes]] of great looking snakes, and some bad ass cool dialogue coming from samuel l jacksons lips. forget it. when discussing a [[kino]] titled 'snakes on a plane', we should point out early that the snakes are pretty [[damn]] [[essential]] to the plot.

what we have here are very [[wicked]] cgi snakes that neither [[glance]] nor move like [[veritable]] snakes. [[rattlesnakes]] are [[dreadful]] because they [[arise]] to be slimy, they [[grovel]] they slither. these snakes do [[anything]] of the [[genre]]. they glide along like they would in a video [[jeu]]. they are [[comic]] [[serpents]]. i would go as far to say that even [[anyone]] that had a major phobia against real snakes [[could]] not find these ones [[spooky]]

why on earth then would you want to include extreme close ups of these cgi failures? why not rely on [[sufferance]].. the whole 'less is more' ethic. or better still, why not just make them look good in the first place? and then maybe still use them sparingly

take one look at john carpenters 'the thing'. here we have real slime, and gore of eerie proportions. 20 years go by and we get this pile of stinking sfx crap '[[rattlesnakes]] on a plane'. when are these people going to wake up and smell the coffee? special [[influences]] are going backwards!

sure you could say.. but the movie is a [[giggle]], get it? sure i'm with that idea, but do it well! in addition to the above, this [[cinematography]] has crap dialogue. and the music and sound [[influencing]] are not creepy or memorable in any way.

i could handle every other actor being part of this movie, except for jackson. what was he doing there? the man who starred in pulp fiction 10 years ago. is this [[professions]] progression? are you offering people value for [[cash]]? no. i'd like to know what Tarantino thought when he was half way through this [[tosser]] of a [[movies]]

the [[contemporary]] generation seem to have very low expectations. and Hollywood seems to be [[delivering]] them just what they [[wanting]]. on [[let]] the [[movies]] i [[observed]] a number of [[commercials]] for some truly [[gruesome]] looking [[forthcoming]] [[release]] [[include]]... [[MADEA]]: dead or [[vivid]], (another) cgi [[animals]] [[movies]] [[termed]] 'flushed away', and another [[dammit]] [[searching]] [[humour]] named 'click'. in [[supplement]] to that i [[noticed]] some [[frightening]] trailers, [[include]] one for (another) [[baloney]] British horror/comedy. i've truly not seen the movie industry in a [[chaos]] like this for a [[lang]] time

expect to see this movie for sale in the DVD bargain section for £1 in 6 months time. and if you're expecting to see a black comedy with [[shitloads]] of great looking snakes, and some bad ass cool dialogue coming from samuel l jacksons lips. forget it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The Good Earth is not a [[great]] film by any [[means]], it is way to ordinary. [[Maybe]] it was [[different]] in the 1930's but who would [[want]] to see the life of a [[farmer]]. It is not very interesting to me. [[Yes]], Luis Rainer and Paul Muni do an excellent job acting but the [[film]] dragged on way too long. I could have told you the [[ending]] of this movie by the first [[act]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not want to be like his own father turns out exactly like him. Both falling in love with their [[wives]] just as they are on their death beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[good]] character actors or funny moments, it just was depressing stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[time]] of [[crisis]]. The Good Earth is not a [[wondrous]] film by any [[modes]], it is way to ordinary. [[Presumably]] it was [[various]] in the 1930's but who would [[wanted]] to see the life of a [[farmers]]. It is not very interesting to me. [[Yep]], Luis Rainer and Paul Muni do an excellent job acting but the [[cinematography]] dragged on way too long. I could have told you the [[terminated]] of this movie by the first [[legislation]]. In short Wang Lung (Muni) a small time farmer who does not want to be like his own father turns out exactly like him. Both falling in love with their [[manacles]] just as they are on their death beds. The film does a complete 360 going from one generation to the next. Also this film did not have any [[buena]] character actors or funny moments, it just was depressing stuff about lasting as a farmer during a [[moment]] of [[crises]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Enter the Fat Dragon" is one of the funniest martial art movies I had the opportunity to see. Sammo Hung portrays a Chinese farm boy that comes to visit a city friend. Just like Tang Lung of "Way of the Dragon." Wherever Sammo goes, trouble starts, therefore he has to rely on his martial art skills to solve the differences. Luckily, Sammo's character learns martial arts by imitating and mimicking his idol, Bruce Lee. He even strokes his nose with his thumb exactly the way Bruce Lee does and also releases his screeching yell. He also uses nunchucks in a scene. It was like watching a fat Bruce Lee. There's a great showdown near the end of the movie which consists of foreign fighters. Sammo has to encounter each opponent one by one. Sort of like "The Game of Death", where each fighter possesses a different martial art discipline from one another.

This is one of the films I really enjoyed watching and also the very first Sammo Hung movies I've seen. Excellent fight scenes and a lot of laughs. A rare classic Sammo Hung film I highly recommend for all you martial art fans out there. 8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1417 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (87%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Quote: theurgist: Anyone with an I.Q. over 50 would have seen this film what it is, an intelligent well acted prequel to a modern day classic, yes it doesn't have a blockbuster cast or a huge budget BUT it is still very well done and had me hooked for the full duration.

An I.Q. over 50 you say.. that most mean you have an I.Q. lower than 50.. its name is CARLITOS WAY: Rise to power !!! meaning it should have something whit the first one to do..

all and all its a OK movie if.. YOU CHANGE THE TITLE AND NO CHARACTERS NAMED CARLITO BRIGANTE!!!

P.s don't comment on a movie if you don't know anything about movies. but i guess an I.Q. under 50,, you wont know what the hell i am yelling about...

Peace out!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. Look at it a month later and you might see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically remarkable that went unnoticed at first. After sitting through The Great Ecstasy of Robert Carmichael at its UK premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[found]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the film itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defence]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the plot was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and pretentious film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and sloppy (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not entirely without merit. The audience is left to decide how Robert got that way: was it the influence of his peers? Why did all the good influences and concern from parents and teachers not manage to include him in a better approach to life? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction seems to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. I am always wary of taking too instant a dislike to a film. Look at it a month later and you might see it differently, or dig it up after 50 years in a different continent and some cult followers find something stylistically remarkable that went unnoticed at first. After sitting through The Great Ecstasy of Robert Carmichael at its UK premiere, it came as no surprise to me that I [[discoveries]] the question and answer session afterwards more interesting than the film itself. Shane Danielsen (Artistic Director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival), aided by the film's director and producer, gave a spirited [[defend]] of a movie than received an overall negative response from the audience. Edinburgh Festival audiences are not easily shocked. Only one person walked out in disgust. The criticisms of the film included very articulate and constructive ones from the lay public as well as an actor and a woman who teaches M.A. film directors. This was not an overly 'shocking' film. There was a degree of uninterrupted sexual violence, but far less extreme than many movies (most actual weapon contact was obscured, as were aroused genitals). The audience disliked it because they had sat through two hours that were quite boring, where the acting standards were not high, where the plot was poor, predictable and drawn out, and where they had been subjected to clumsy and pretentious film-making on the promise of a controversial movie. Metaphors to the war in Iraq are contrived, over-emphasised and sloppy (apart from a general allusion to violence, any deeper meaning is unclear); and the 'fig-leaf' reference Marquis de Sade, as one audience member put it, seems a mere tokenistic excuse for lack of plot development towards the finale.

We have the story of an adolescent who has a certain amount going for him (he stands out at school for his musical ability) but takes drugs and hangs out with youths who have little or nothing going for them and whose criminal activities extend to rape and violence. When pushed, Robert seems to have a lot of violence locked inside him.

The film is not entirely without merit. The audience is left to decide how Robert got that way: was it the influence of his peers? Why did all the good influences and concern from parents and teachers not manage to include him in a better approach to life? Cinematically, there is a carefully-montaged scene where he hangs back (whether through too much drugs, shyness, a latent sense of morality or just waiting his turn?). Several of his friends are raping a woman in a back room, partly glimpsed and framed in the centre of the screen. In the foreground of the bare bones flat, a DJ is more concerned that the girl's screams interrupt his happy house music than with any thought for the woman. Ultimately he is a bit annoyed if their activities attract police attention. The stark juxtaposition of serious headphones enjoyment of his music even when he knows a rape is going on points up his utter disdain in a deeply unsettling way. Robert slumps with his back to us in the foreground.

But the rest of the film, including its supposedly controversial climax involving considerable (if not overly realistic) sexual violence, is not up to this standard. Some people have had a strong reaction to it (the filmmakers' stated intention: "If they vomit, we have succeeded in producing a reaction") but mostly - and as far as I can tell the Edinburgh reaction seems to mirror reports from Cannes - they feel, "Why have programmers subjected us to such inferior quality film-making?" Director Clay Hugh can talk the talk but has not developed artistic vision. His replies about holding up a mirror to life to tell the truth about things that are swept under the carpet, even his defence that there is little plot development because he didn't want to do a standard Hollywood movie - all are good answers to criticisms, but unfortunately they do not apply to his film, any more than they do to holding up a mirror while someone defecates, or wastes film while playing ineptly with symbols. Wanting to try and give him the benefit of any lingering doubt, I spoke to him for a few minutes after the screening, but I found him as distasteful as his movie and soon moved to the bar to wash my mouth out with something more substantial. There are many truths. One aspect of art is to educate, another to entertain, another to inspire. I had asked him if he had any social or political agenda and he mentions Ken Loach (one of the many great names he takes in vain) without going so far as to admit any agenda himself. He then falls back on his mantra about his job being to tell the truth. I am left with the feeling that this was an overambitious project for a new director, or else a disingenuous attempt to put himself on the map by courting publicity for second rate work

Andy Warhol could paint a tin of soup and it was art. Clay Hugh would like to emulate the great directors that have made controversial cinema and pushed boundaries. Sadly, his ability at the moment only extends to making high-sounding excuses for a publicity-seeking film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] IF you are planning to see this movie, please reconsider. I don't usually post my comments about something I've seen on television, but this one was such a waste of my life that I needed to do something productive to get that bad taste out of my mouth. Critiquing this movie would take far too long as there are so many things wrong with it. I will just simply say, please do not ever see this movie. It was a complete waste of my time and it WILL be a waste of yours. Anyone that wrote a positive review of this movie is one of two things; utterly inept, or working for the company that produced it. Again, I guarantee that you will indeed regret seeing this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[In]] ten words or less to [[describe]] this [[film]], Barbara Stanwyck is too [[appealing]] and it is [[great]]! The film is [[wonderful]], except for the [[perhaps]] tacked-on [[ending]], but I [[love]] happy endings anyway. Barbara Stanwyck, however, as the platinum-blonde gold-digger is [[amazing]]. She knows what she [[wants]] and goes after it! This [[film]] is sexy and [[excellent]]! [[Among]] ten words or less to [[outlining]] this [[movie]], Barbara Stanwyck is too [[attractive]] and it is [[huge]]! The film is [[gorgeous]], except for the [[presumably]] tacked-on [[terminated]], but I [[amore]] happy endings anyway. Barbara Stanwyck, however, as the platinum-blonde gold-digger is [[staggering]]. She knows what she [[wanted]] and goes after it! This [[movie]] is sexy and [[glamorous]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] BABY FACE is one of the better of the "[[forgotten]]" films before the code. It was shown last night after the 1931 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE on the TURNER [[CLASSIC]] NETWORK, so I was [[able]] to watch the film as it is now with four plus minutes of it [[restored]].

Stanwyck is [[living]] in [[East]] St. [[Louis]] (where she may have [[known]] the [[drunken]] [[parents]] of "Myra" - Mae [[Clarke]] - in WATERLOO [[BRIDGE]]). Her [[father]] is [[Robert]] Barrett. She has lived with him since the [[death]] of her [[mother]], and (in the [[restored]] dialog) he has been pimping her [[since]] she was 14 [[years]] old. Now she is [[resident]] waitress and part-time whore in his speakeasy, her closest [[friend]] being Chico (Theresa Harris), the African-American servant who Barrett [[keeps]] bullying. It is one of the two good points of Stanwyck's personality that she keeps standing up to her father about Harris, threatening to leave if Harris is fired (and since it is the grubby workers like Nat Pendleton, who enjoy seeing Stanwyck serve them, rather than the flavor of the hooch he serves that brings them in, Barrett has to obey her).

The one guy who comes to the speakeasy regularly whom Stanwyck likes is the shoemaker and intellectual Adolf Cragg (Alphonse Ethier), who sees great potential in the [[spirited]] girl if she will just leave her forsaken home. He is also pushing the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzche, and the idea of the will to power. More about this later.

After she knocks out the local political bigwig (Arthur Hohl), and has an argument with Barrett about this, a still explosion kills Barrett, and enables Stanwyck to leave her home town. She and Harris head to New York City, managing to get free transport by a railroad freight car by sleeping with a brakeman (James Murray). They reach New York, and after [[walking]] about they [[see]] the Gotham [[Trust]] [[Company]] (established 1873), and the friendly [[guard]] tells her where the personnel office is.

We slowly watch Stanwyck ascend the corporate ladder to the top, similar (but sleazier) than Robert Morse dared in HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING. But Morse was a man in a man dominated company. Stanwyck knows her sexual allure is her weapon. She goes through John Wayne, Douglas Dumbrille (a section of the film that I always felt was the most shocking - curiously enough - when I watched it), Douglas Wood, Henry Kolker, and finally George Brent. Each ends up falling for her, and either being pushed aside when no longer useful, or destroyed by her. Brent, the new President of the Bank his grandfather founded, eventually marries her - and the crisis of the film is when the bank's economic situation is shaken (especially after Brent buys her a fortune in jewels and gives her valuable bonds). Brent is indicted. Will she stick up for him?

SPOILER COMING UP:

The one thing about these films that is not admitted is that the theatrical and moral conventions of the time still dictated endings. The original ending had Stanwyck boarding a ship for Europe abandoning Brent to his fate, but realizing she can't do it to him, returning to their apartment house, and finding he's shot himself. She is riding with him to the hospital as it ends. Now before the rediscovered footage was found, the film ended with them apparently giving up all their money to the bank to save it, and retiring back to East St. Louis, to live happily if poor.

Neither of these are good endings. Stanwyck should continue on her destructive course, with Brent the last of her victims. But even without the Breen office the script writers (one is Darryl Zanuck, by the way) saw fit to have her find a moral center. She has none - at least none for powerful men (whom she hates). I don't think that a depression audience would have tolerated that type of conclusion.

There are other problems, due to the changing styles of public opinion and changes in society. It was a man's world in the corporate world in 1933, so Stanwyck has her work cut out for her. Wood (when she is going to be fired for an indiscretion with him) admits that he did not want her to work.

But in 2006, Stanwyck would have been finding woman all over the place. In the film there are nasty, catty remarks (obviously some based on jealousy) towards Stanwyck from other secretaries and female employees at her rapid rise. In 2006, she'd be frequently confronting women superiors, and she would find them cutting her off at the legs very quickly. Of course, if she finds one or two are lesbians she might try that road but it is doubtful. And she also never seems to meet any men who are gay. They do have gay male executives in business, who wouldn't give a damn about her legs or breasts.

Then there is her mentor, Mr Cragg. Cragg is remade in the "bowdlerized" version into trying to make her seek a moral center. In reality he pushes Nieztsche, but the way (in a broader sense) the Nazis pushed Nieztsche - find your way to power and push it. While Nieztsche did stress power sometimes, it wasn't the be-all and end-all of his theories. Otherwise nobody would read him today in college courses. Cragg is obviously self-educated, but only half-educated. In short if somebody who thoroughly studied Nieztsche confronted Cragg he'd make him look like a half-educated fool. And this is Stanwyck's mentor! A good film, and for it's day worth a 10...but seriously flawed. BABY FACE is one of the better of the "[[disregarded]]" films before the code. It was shown last night after the 1931 version of WATERLOO BRIDGE on the TURNER [[CONVENTIONAL]] NETWORK, so I was [[capable]] to watch the film as it is now with four plus minutes of it [[rehabilitated]].

Stanwyck is [[residing]] in [[Southeastern]] St. [[Louie]] (where she may have [[renowned]] the [[inebriated]] [[parenting]] of "Myra" - Mae [[Clark]] - in WATERLOO [[PUENTE]]). Her [[fathers]] is [[Roberto]] Barrett. She has lived with him since the [[decease]] of her [[mummy]], and (in the [[rehabilitated]] dialog) he has been pimping her [[because]] she was 14 [[olds]] old. Now she is [[capita]] waitress and part-time whore in his speakeasy, her closest [[boyfriend]] being Chico (Theresa Harris), the African-American servant who Barrett [[retains]] bullying. It is one of the two good points of Stanwyck's personality that she keeps standing up to her father about Harris, threatening to leave if Harris is fired (and since it is the grubby workers like Nat Pendleton, who enjoy seeing Stanwyck serve them, rather than the flavor of the hooch he serves that brings them in, Barrett has to obey her).

The one guy who comes to the speakeasy regularly whom Stanwyck likes is the shoemaker and intellectual Adolf Cragg (Alphonse Ethier), who sees great potential in the [[vibrant]] girl if she will just leave her forsaken home. He is also pushing the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzche, and the idea of the will to power. More about this later.

After she knocks out the local political bigwig (Arthur Hohl), and has an argument with Barrett about this, a still explosion kills Barrett, and enables Stanwyck to leave her home town. She and Harris head to New York City, managing to get free transport by a railroad freight car by sleeping with a brakeman (James Murray). They reach New York, and after [[marching]] about they [[behold]] the Gotham [[Trusting]] [[Corporations]] (established 1873), and the friendly [[guards]] tells her where the personnel office is.

We slowly watch Stanwyck ascend the corporate ladder to the top, similar (but sleazier) than Robert Morse dared in HOW TO SUCCEED IN BUSINESS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING. But Morse was a man in a man dominated company. Stanwyck knows her sexual allure is her weapon. She goes through John Wayne, Douglas Dumbrille (a section of the film that I always felt was the most shocking - curiously enough - when I watched it), Douglas Wood, Henry Kolker, and finally George Brent. Each ends up falling for her, and either being pushed aside when no longer useful, or destroyed by her. Brent, the new President of the Bank his grandfather founded, eventually marries her - and the crisis of the film is when the bank's economic situation is shaken (especially after Brent buys her a fortune in jewels and gives her valuable bonds). Brent is indicted. Will she stick up for him?

SPOILER COMING UP:

The one thing about these films that is not admitted is that the theatrical and moral conventions of the time still dictated endings. The original ending had Stanwyck boarding a ship for Europe abandoning Brent to his fate, but realizing she can't do it to him, returning to their apartment house, and finding he's shot himself. She is riding with him to the hospital as it ends. Now before the rediscovered footage was found, the film ended with them apparently giving up all their money to the bank to save it, and retiring back to East St. Louis, to live happily if poor.

Neither of these are good endings. Stanwyck should continue on her destructive course, with Brent the last of her victims. But even without the Breen office the script writers (one is Darryl Zanuck, by the way) saw fit to have her find a moral center. She has none - at least none for powerful men (whom she hates). I don't think that a depression audience would have tolerated that type of conclusion.

There are other problems, due to the changing styles of public opinion and changes in society. It was a man's world in the corporate world in 1933, so Stanwyck has her work cut out for her. Wood (when she is going to be fired for an indiscretion with him) admits that he did not want her to work.

But in 2006, Stanwyck would have been finding woman all over the place. In the film there are nasty, catty remarks (obviously some based on jealousy) towards Stanwyck from other secretaries and female employees at her rapid rise. In 2006, she'd be frequently confronting women superiors, and she would find them cutting her off at the legs very quickly. Of course, if she finds one or two are lesbians she might try that road but it is doubtful. And she also never seems to meet any men who are gay. They do have gay male executives in business, who wouldn't give a damn about her legs or breasts.

Then there is her mentor, Mr Cragg. Cragg is remade in the "bowdlerized" version into trying to make her seek a moral center. In reality he pushes Nieztsche, but the way (in a broader sense) the Nazis pushed Nieztsche - find your way to power and push it. While Nieztsche did stress power sometimes, it wasn't the be-all and end-all of his theories. Otherwise nobody would read him today in college courses. Cragg is obviously self-educated, but only half-educated. In short if somebody who thoroughly studied Nieztsche confronted Cragg he'd make him look like a half-educated fool. And this is Stanwyck's mentor! A good film, and for it's day worth a 10...but seriously flawed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1422 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I am not sure why I [[like]] Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[anyone]] who works hard can succeed regardless of talent. That is a good feeling for all of us who [[lack]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how dumb Detention is, but many [[neglect]] to point out the positives.

Any [[movie]] where at [[least]] one annoying teenager [[gets]] killed can't be all [[bad]]. Why do so many movies that have a [[cast]] of teens always need to include the [[stereotypical]] teens? Aren't there any other kind of teens? Does every group of teens have one angry black guy? One genius [[nerd]] that nobody likes? One slutty girl who is very friendly and (in this movie) pregnant? One disturbed anti-social white kid from a broken home who everyone agrees is talented (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black kid who is in tune with the Universe and so cool that all the other neurotic kids trust him. Then add a couple of generic expendable teens of any color. They don't say much but get shot at some point.

Detention would have been better if the bad guys had gotten to blow up the school. Preferably with the writers inside. The dialogue is bad, and the plot is worse. When the bad guys (and girl) finally hijack a van full of drugs, then they sit inside the van making out. They drive the van to the school because they want to re-paint the van at the school's paint shop, but they never get around to re-painting the van. By the way, it would have been easier to just put all the drugs in another car or two cars or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They also never move the drugs or sell them or do anything else with the big score.

For some reason, they decide they have to kill the kids and the teacher (Dolph Lundgren) even though when the villains take over the school nobody is remotely aware of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people still in the school have nothing to do with painting vehicles, so why go after them?

Anyhow, the best part of this movie is that the villains are all armed with numerous machine guns, and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. I am not sure why I [[loves]] Dolph Lundgren. I guess seeing him on screen makes me feel that [[nobody]] who works hard can succeed regardless of talent. That is a good feeling for all of us who [[shortfall]] talent. Some of the other reviews point out how dumb Detention is, but many [[neglects]] to point out the positives.

Any [[cinematography]] where at [[lowest]] one annoying teenager [[get]] killed can't be all [[negative]]. Why do so many movies that have a [[casting]] of teens always need to include the [[stereotyped]] teens? Aren't there any other kind of teens? Does every group of teens have one angry black guy? One genius [[geek]] that nobody likes? One slutty girl who is very friendly and (in this movie) pregnant? One disturbed anti-social white kid from a broken home who everyone agrees is talented (but what is the talent?). And one laid-back black kid who is in tune with the Universe and so cool that all the other neurotic kids trust him. Then add a couple of generic expendable teens of any color. They don't say much but get shot at some point.

Detention would have been better if the bad guys had gotten to blow up the school. Preferably with the writers inside. The dialogue is bad, and the plot is worse. When the bad guys (and girl) finally hijack a van full of drugs, then they sit inside the van making out. They drive the van to the school because they want to re-paint the van at the school's paint shop, but they never get around to re-painting the van. By the way, it would have been easier to just put all the drugs in another car or two cars or another van or a truck and drive away without repainting the Police Van. They also never move the drugs or sell them or do anything else with the big score.

For some reason, they decide they have to kill the kids and the teacher (Dolph Lundgren) even though when the villains take over the school nobody is remotely aware of it because it is after school hours. The handful of people still in the school have nothing to do with painting vehicles, so why go after them?

Anyhow, the best part of this movie is that the villains are all armed with numerous machine guns, and they keep finding the teens (including a guy in a wheel chair) and they keep shooting hundreds of bullets at the teens and usually miss. Towards the end of the movie there is some bloodshed. For every time someone gets shot, there must be at least three hundred bullets fired that miss. The stunts are pretty bad.

I read one of the reviews that says that this movie had a budget of $10 Million, and I am amazed. When I saw the movie I figured maybe Lundgren had done it as some kind of charity work for some film school where he is the teacher. Like maybe this movie was their end of the year exam. It was a test to watch it, but I passed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to say this is one of the worst films I've ever seen. They had a pretty good storyline to go on, but than the messed it up so badly. First of all the cast is all wrong, where did that van peeble(crap actor btw) and puff daddy come from??? It looks like Carlito has come from the hood, and used to hang about with some real idiots. This film doesn't do "Carlitos Way" any justice. Im so happy that the sequel "Carlito's Way" came out first, if I had seen this rubbish first, I would have never given the pacino version a chance. And anyway, pacino is supposed to have read this story, thought it's crap and did the sequel instead. Carlito's Way: Rise to Power - 1 out of 10. Carlito's Way - 9 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1424 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I just viewed Detention last night and i [[liked]] what i saw. It was a cool fun movie.Dolph looked superbly cool on the Bike.He also looked good in this movie as compared to his other recent movies.He is now in a pretty [[good]] [[shape]].The story was [[ok]] and the other actors were also passable.I wouldn't call this movie his best but its still a [[good]] movie.

But it [[also]] had its share of [[Problems]]. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and even when they were being fired at point blank range they missed the target.They should've had shown the ppl escaping the bullets in a better way. Another problem which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can swear in front of their teacher and even in the classroom. The third problem was that the bad guys were very few in numbers. There should've been more bad guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the small budget. Overall the movie was a good Movie.I enjoyed it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u r a DEAD beat cop. (Some One-liners were also cool)

I just viewed Detention last night and i [[wished]] what i saw. It was a cool fun movie.Dolph looked superbly cool on the Bike.He also looked good in this movie as compared to his other recent movies.He is now in a pretty [[alright]] [[form]].The story was [[allright]] and the other actors were also passable.I wouldn't call this movie his best but its still a [[alright]] movie.

But it [[apart]] had its share of [[Troubles]]. The first one was the way bullets were flying everywhere and even when they were being fired at point blank range they missed the target.They should've had shown the ppl escaping the bullets in a better way. Another problem which i had was the way the students were swearing. I dont know in which school the students can swear in front of their teacher and even in the classroom. The third problem was that the bad guys were very few in numbers. There should've been more bad guys. Last problem was definately the fact that the set looked cheesy , but that was due to the small budget. Overall the movie was a good Movie.I enjoyed it.I would recommend others to watch it. P.S. Now u r a DEAD beat cop. (Some One-liners were also cool)

--------------------------------------------- Result 1425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This thing is really awfull. There´s no charachter with [[weight]], they´re all floating [[around]] in the BG´s. The Motion [[Capture]] is a [[fine]] [[toy]], but this movie demostrates that you really need people who knows animation to do an animated [[film]]. THE [[MACHINE]] CAN´T [[DO]] [[ANYTHING]] WELL BY [[ITSELF]]. If you [[see]] it as a [[bizarre]] [[film]], you´ll have fun finding mistakes of [[continuity]]... [[IN]] A 3D [[MOVIE]]!!! It´s [[funny]] to watch the princess [[dress]] move [[around]] [[like]] a thing with diferent phisics. You [[need]] animators and 3D animators, not data-entries whom know 3D [[programs]]. [[Note]] the junctions, like the [[elbows]], how they [[lost]] [[volume]] and [[get]] [[deformed]]. The [[person]] who [[made]] the charachter design (a very good one) sufered for sure when he/she [[watched]] them move, ´cos you can´t [[say]] they [[come]] to [[life]]. This thing is really awfull. There´s no charachter with [[weights]], they´re all floating [[almost]] in the BG´s. The Motion [[Caught]] is a [[alright]] [[pawn]], but this movie demostrates that you really need people who knows animation to do an animated [[cinema]]. THE [[APPLIANCE]] CAN´T [[DOING]] [[NADA]] WELL BY [[MYSELF]]. If you [[behold]] it as a [[weird]] [[filmmaking]], you´ll have fun finding mistakes of [[continuation]]... [[THROUGHOUT]] A 3D [[FILMMAKING]]!!! It´s [[hilarious]] to watch the princess [[apparel]] move [[throughout]] [[iike]] a thing with diferent phisics. You [[require]] animators and 3D animators, not data-entries whom know 3D [[program]]. [[Noting]] the junctions, like the [[bends]], how they [[forfeited]] [[volumes]] and [[obtain]] [[twisted]]. The [[persona]] who [[accomplished]] the charachter design (a very good one) sufered for sure when he/she [[observed]] them move, ´cos you can´t [[told]] they [[coming]] to [[lives]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1426 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Wow! I [[loved]] this movie and [[LOVE]] [[Judy]] Marte!! This [[girl]] isn't just an [[awesome]] [[pretty]] [[face]], she's funny and really really talented!! She [[made]] me laugh [[many]] times just by being very [[naturally]] [[rough]] with Victor who was desperately hitting on her! We'll be [[seeing]] her a lot in the next coming years... and [[probably]] [[also]] from director [[Peter]] Sollett and co-star Victor Rasuk!

[[Raising]] Victor Vargas is one of the [[best]] [[film]] I [[saw]] in a long [[time]]! [[Very]] refreshing! It's [[true]], [[nice]], funny, well filmed, it got it all : [[good]] [[story]], good [[actors]], good [[film]] [[direction]]!

If you [[like]] simple, slow paced, [[real]] life, urban [[movies]], like [[maybe]] [[Jersey]] [[Girl]] from [[Kevin]] [[Smith]], you'll [[love]] [[Victor]] Vargas! It's [[better]]! Wow! I [[worshipped]] this movie and [[LIKES]] [[Jody]] Marte!! This [[women]] isn't just an [[marvelous]] [[belle]] [[confront]], she's funny and really really talented!! She [[brought]] me laugh [[countless]] times just by being very [[patently]] [[coarse]] with Victor who was desperately hitting on her! We'll be [[witnessing]] her a lot in the next coming years... and [[unquestionably]] [[apart]] from director [[Pete]] Sollett and co-star Victor Rasuk!

[[Grew]] Victor Vargas is one of the [[better]] [[cinematography]] I [[noticed]] in a long [[moment]]! [[Quite]] refreshing! It's [[veritable]], [[enjoyable]], funny, well filmed, it got it all : [[alright]] [[storytelling]], good [[actresses]], good [[films]] [[directorate]]!

If you [[iike]] simple, slow paced, [[genuine]] life, urban [[cinematography]], like [[probably]] [[Jerzy]] [[Daughter]] from [[Kev]] [[Smiths]], you'll [[likes]] [[Viktor]] Vargas! It's [[nicer]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I don't know what it is with this movies. But movies about history or religion are always criticised by their accuracy. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's [[difficult]] to make 100% accurate films nowadays when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I rather like to judge a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

[[So]] I start by saying that I [[liked]] this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The series should have been a three part story, his childhood being the first part. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real problem I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a history book way. Especially the second part which is just a sum of events that happened. I rather would have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I think. Nevertheless I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. Just to remember more vividly what happened and see Carlyle giving his best. 7.5/10 I don't know what it is with this movies. But movies about history or religion are always criticised by their accuracy. Of course it's not 100% accurate. It's [[laborious]] to make 100% accurate films nowadays when even the "experts" disagree with each other. Therefore I rather like to judge a movie by what it is trying to say than pick on all the inaccuracies.

[[Thereby]] I start by saying that I [[wished]] this mini serie. But I do agree with the critique that his childhood years went by too fast. The series should have been a three part story, his childhood being the first part. But if they didn't have more money to shoot more story who am I to criticise that???

There's only one real problem I have with this movie and that's the fact that it's told in a history book way. Especially the second part which is just a sum of events that happened. I rather would have liked to see Hitler more humane (more scenes where he doubts himself etc.). Noah Taylor did that more in the movie 'Max' which seem to work better I think. Nevertheless I'm glad this was made and own it on DVD. Just to remember more vividly what happened and see Carlyle giving his best. 7.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This film has a powerful philosophical ending. But that ending has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

Youth alienation in the late 1960's, from the viewpoint of a young man and a young woman, is the obvious theme of "Zabriskie Point". [[Neither]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a fact that actually [[enhances]] the film's message. Having untrained actors conveys a sense of [[realism]], as both players seem emotionally detached from the turmoil around them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with stunning cinematography. The beautiful naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and perfectly in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I would have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this film. It's different; it's unique; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the years go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a bohemian sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically mesmerizing. This film has a powerful philosophical ending. But that ending has meaning only if you watch the movie from the beginning.

Youth alienation in the late 1960's, from the viewpoint of a young man and a young woman, is the obvious theme of "Zabriskie Point". [[Nor]] Mark Frechette nor Daria Halprin had much acting experience, a fact that actually [[reinforces]] the film's message. Having untrained actors conveys a sense of [[pragmatism]], as both players seem emotionally detached from the turmoil around them.

This is not a script-driven film. Except for the first ten minutes, it is mostly visual, with stunning cinematography. The beautiful naturalistic images seem other-worldly, and perfectly in sync with the emotional detachment of Mark and Daria.

I would have replaced the thematically weak Pink Floyd music with the more cogent music of The Doors. Many scenes cry out for "Riders On The Storm".

Even so, I like this film. It's different; it's unique; it is artistic and imaginative. And the desert badlands are beautiful.

As the years go by, "Zabriskie Point" seems more and more attractive. It conveys the mood of the late 1960's in America. It is amazingly artistic, in a bohemian sort of way. And the film's last eight minutes are philosophically mesmerizing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] "Read My Lips" tells of a strange symbiosis which develops between a plain, socially maladroit female office worker (Devos) and her workplace trainee, a crude excon (Casel). As the film fleshes out this unlikely duo down to their ids they become embroiled in a chilling merging of the minds, each using the other for their own selfish reasons with an [[extraordinary]] [[outcome]]. [[Good]] [[stuff]] for anyone into character-driven [[films]] with strong psychodramatic undercurrents. [[In]] French with [[easy]] to read subtitles and good translation. (B+) "Read My Lips" tells of a strange symbiosis which develops between a plain, socially maladroit female office worker (Devos) and her workplace trainee, a crude excon (Casel). As the film fleshes out this unlikely duo down to their ids they become embroiled in a chilling merging of the minds, each using the other for their own selfish reasons with an [[unbelievable]] [[results]]. [[Buena]] [[thing]] for anyone into character-driven [[filmmaking]] with strong psychodramatic undercurrents. [[During]] French with [[uncomplicated]] to read subtitles and good translation. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A [[truly]] [[frightening]] film. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who [[wanted]] to show that gays are good, normal, mainstream-aspiring people. Retrograde to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. Wow! Who knew? The supporting characters are caricatures of gay stereotypes (the effeminate buffoon, the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main characters are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow clones, of [[little]] interest.

As far as the romantic & ideological struggles of the main couple are concerned, there's not much to say: we've seen it all before, and done much better. A [[truthfully]] [[spooky]] film. Feels as if it were made in the early '90s by a straight person who [[wanna]] to show that gays are good, normal, mainstream-aspiring people. Retrograde to the point of being offensive, LTR suggests that monogamy and marriage are the preferred path to salvation for sad, lonely, sex-crazed gays. Wow! Who knew? The supporting characters are caricatures of gay stereotypes (the effeminate buffoon, the bitter, lonely queen, the fag hag, etc.) and the main characters are milquetoast, middle-class, middlebrow clones, of [[kiddo]] interest.

As far as the romantic & ideological struggles of the main couple are concerned, there's not much to say: we've seen it all before, and done much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1431 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are really two sections of this film. Firstly there's the laughable prologue to the film which is so hysterical and cornball that it would almost feel appropriate that the 'The Simpsons' Troy McClure should be doing the narration.

Then the rest of the film begins (starting off with a title song which really doesn't fit in with the rest of the film) which, while technically OK, is killed by a vague, inconsistent and unconvincing plot and not just uninteresting characters, but characters that make no sense.

This is especially so with Mickey Rooney's Spiventa, who was supposedly in on the plot and part of the 'organisation' the whole time yet what would have happened had Hackman made the seemingly arbitrary decision to take him along when breaking out? In that case he would've been a totally superfluous and unnecessary character, which in the end he still is.

The overall problem of the film is that it's totally unwilling to put any detail on who or what is behind this conspiracy. It's as if the filmmakers didn't have the courage to imply that a particular section of society would be capable of creating such an organisation and instead settled on the hope that a lack of explanation would suffice and the audience would form their own conclusions.

Put simply, the film fails on all levels. --------------------------------------------- Result 1432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Enchanted April is a tone poem, an impressionist painting, a masterpiece of conveying a message with few words. It has been one of my 10 [[favorite]] [[films]] since it came out. I continue to wait, albeit less patiently, for the film to come out in DVD format. Apparently, I am not [[alone]].

If parent company Amazon's listings are correct, there are many people who want this title in DVD format. Many people want to go to Italy with this cast and this script. Many people want to keep a permanent copy of this film in their libraries. The cast is spectacular, the cinematography and direction impeccable. The film is a definite keeper. Many have already asked. Please add our names to the list. Enchanted April is a tone poem, an impressionist painting, a masterpiece of conveying a message with few words. It has been one of my 10 [[preferable]] [[filmmaking]] since it came out. I continue to wait, albeit less patiently, for the film to come out in DVD format. Apparently, I am not [[only]].

If parent company Amazon's listings are correct, there are many people who want this title in DVD format. Many people want to go to Italy with this cast and this script. Many people want to keep a permanent copy of this film in their libraries. The cast is spectacular, the cinematography and direction impeccable. The film is a definite keeper. Many have already asked. Please add our names to the list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1433 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How has this piece of [[crap]] stayed on [[TV]] this long? It's terrible. It makes me want to shoot someone. It's so fake that it is actually [[worse]] than a 1940s sci-fi [[movie]]. I'd [[rather]] have a stroke than watch this [[nonsense]]. I remember watching it when it [[first]] [[came]] out. I thought, hey this [[could]] be interesting, then I [[found]] out how [[absolutely]], [[insanely]], [[ridiculously]] [[stupid]] it [[really]] was. It was so [[bad]] that I [[actually]] [[took]] out my pocket knife and stuck my hand to the table.

[[Please]] people, stop watching this and all other [[reality]] [[shows]], they're the [[trash]] that is jamming the [[networks]] and [[canceling]] quality programming that [[requires]] some [[thought]] to [[create]]. How has this piece of [[dammit]] stayed on [[TVS]] this long? It's terrible. It makes me want to shoot someone. It's so fake that it is actually [[pire]] than a 1940s sci-fi [[movies]]. I'd [[fairly]] have a stroke than watch this [[claptrap]]. I remember watching it when it [[firstly]] [[arrived]] out. I thought, hey this [[did]] be interesting, then I [[uncovered]] out how [[perfectly]], [[stunningly]], [[outrageously]] [[idiotic]] it [[genuinely]] was. It was so [[wicked]] that I [[genuinely]] [[picked]] out my pocket knife and stuck my hand to the table.

[[Invite]] people, stop watching this and all other [[realism]] [[exhibitions]], they're the [[litter]] that is jamming the [[network]] and [[revoke]] quality programming that [[requiring]] some [[brainchild]] to [[engender]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Deathstalker is directed by John Watson and it stars Rick Hill, who is some kind of body builder and famous of that, if I have understood right? The plot follows as Deathstalker (Hill) tries to get something back from the evil lord, and he has to travel to the lord's cave. He meets many dwarfs and monsters during his journey, and the settings are very close to Tolkien, and of course Conan the Barbarian. This is a rip off of huge success of Conan, and [[even]] though this is very [[stupid]] film, it has many nice trash merits and is recommended for [[trash]] fans and tolerating film junkies!

There are no many cinematic merits in this film. Couple of scenes are almost atmospheric and fascinating, but what Deathstalker [[concentrates]] to show, are nude females and huge muscles of Hill. Females are usually helpless victims and very stupid, too, so this is very macho film and [[thus]] may not please many feminists! The fight scenes are nothing special and pretty [[dull]], and the monsters are not either anything special. And all the other aspects of the film are also very amateurish and [[badly]] done, but what did you expect from low budget [[effort]] like this? This [[tries]] to be as great as Conan but [[fails]] pretty [[miserably]]. As I said, this can [[please]] fans of turkey cinema but no one else. This belongs to the [[category]] it's so [[bad]] it's great!

Deathstalker is still not as near as bad as it could be, and as a turkey film, I appreciate this almost as much as other turkeys, enjoyable ones of course! If bad films are your cup of tea, then try this and have fun, but if you don't understand "enjoyably bad films" then stay away. And if somebody can't stand large amount of nudity, then stay away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the film has an R rating. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 Deathstalker is directed by John Watson and it stars Rick Hill, who is some kind of body builder and famous of that, if I have understood right? The plot follows as Deathstalker (Hill) tries to get something back from the evil lord, and he has to travel to the lord's cave. He meets many dwarfs and monsters during his journey, and the settings are very close to Tolkien, and of course Conan the Barbarian. This is a rip off of huge success of Conan, and [[yet]] though this is very [[dolt]] film, it has many nice trash merits and is recommended for [[detritus]] fans and tolerating film junkies!

There are no many cinematic merits in this film. Couple of scenes are almost atmospheric and fascinating, but what Deathstalker [[focuses]] to show, are nude females and huge muscles of Hill. Females are usually helpless victims and very stupid, too, so this is very macho film and [[so]] may not please many feminists! The fight scenes are nothing special and pretty [[drab]], and the monsters are not either anything special. And all the other aspects of the film are also very amateurish and [[sorely]] done, but what did you expect from low budget [[endeavours]] like this? This [[seeks]] to be as great as Conan but [[fail]] pretty [[woefully]]. As I said, this can [[invites]] fans of turkey cinema but no one else. This belongs to the [[categories]] it's so [[mala]] it's great!

Deathstalker is still not as near as bad as it could be, and as a turkey film, I appreciate this almost as much as other turkeys, enjoyable ones of course! If bad films are your cup of tea, then try this and have fun, but if you don't understand "enjoyably bad films" then stay away. And if somebody can't stand large amount of nudity, then stay away as well. There is more nudity here than violence, and due to these scenes, the film has an R rating. Otherwise this could be some safe PG family film!

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1435 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was intrigued to see how this adaptation measured up. [[Unfortunately]], the [[movie]] didn't even come close to creating the ambiance or developing the characters that Orwell so masterfully did in his [[book]]. The director seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[book]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. John Hurt, the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the end. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the fact that those are missing is the greatest shortcoming of this film. Besides that, John Hurt was a terrible casting choice, looking about 15 years older than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the cast was well chosen. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[horribly]] adapted film with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. A few weeks ago, I read the classic George Orwell novel, 1984. I was fascinated with it and thought it was one of the best books I've read recently. So when I rented the DVD, I was intrigued to see how this adaptation measured up. [[Regretfully]], the [[movies]] didn't even come close to creating the ambiance or developing the characters that Orwell so masterfully did in his [[ledger]]. The director seems to think that everyone watching the movie has read the [[ledger]], because he makes no attempt to demonstrate WHY the characters act and feel the way they do. John Hurt, the main actor, is droll the entire way through, and hardly does any acting until the end. We never really find out what he does for a living, or why his love affair is forbidden, or what the political climate is and why the main character desires rebellion. This book cannot be done justice in movie form without proper narration and explanation of the political system oppressing the characters, and the fact that those are missing is the greatest shortcoming of this film. Besides that, John Hurt was a terrible casting choice, looking about 15 years older than the 39 year old Winston he was supposed to be portraying. On a more positive note, however, the rest of the cast was well chosen. It's just too bad they were put in such a [[unbearably]] adapted film with the wrong lead actor. -Brian O. --------------------------------------------- Result 1436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think Joe [[Don]] [[Baker]] can be good or even [[great]] with the right material and the right director (the "Cape Fear" remake, a small role in "Goldeneye", "Walking Tall"). And I even liked Baker in "Mitchell", because he was playing an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yes]], MST3K's coverage was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't deserve - to [[keep]] things lively and [[entertaining]] - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is quite a bit weaker than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's character, as written, is an idiot. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have gotten the drop on them and forced them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a bush league hot dog and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are supposed to admire?

The whole movie is basically like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. Two qualifiers right up front: I actually think Joe [[Donation]] [[Boulanger]] can be good or even [[magnificent]] with the right material and the right director (the "Cape Fear" remake, a small role in "Goldeneye", "Walking Tall"). And I even liked Baker in "Mitchell", because he was playing an anti-hero who was SUPPOSED to be unlikeable. [[Yep]], MST3K's coverage was hilarious, but they took a lot of cheap shots at Baker - that he didn't deserve - to [[sustain]] things lively and [[fun]] - he was appropriate to the level and tone of the movie, and he was the best part of the movie.

"Final Justice" seems to be more of the same, but in spite of the exotic locations and the "cowboy frontier justice" theme, it is quite a bit weaker than "Mitchell". And the main reason is that Baker's character, as written, is an idiot. The movie has the conceit that because Baker embodies old style frontier machismo, he challenges his opponents to old style mano-a-mano quick-draw contests. And because he's so tough and macho, he always wins, even when he's hurt, wounded, outnumbered, etc.

That's a conceit with a lot of potential (it worked for Gary Cooper), even if it condemns the film to "B" movie status. But Baker is so frigging stupid and obsessive that he needlessly challenges three of the bad guy's henchman to a showdown in a public market, with civilians all over the place. He COULD have simply shadowed them to the chief bad guy's headquarters (which was why he was following them in the first place) and they never would have noticed. Or he could have gotten the drop on them and forced them to surrender, and gotten one of the henchmen to take him to headquarters at gun point. But no, he has to be a bush league hot dog and a macho blockhead, and so he gets a child taken as a hostage in the ensuing shootout!

This is a guy we are supposed to admire?

The whole movie is basically like this. Most of the supporting actors are somewhere between OK (the henchmen) to pretty good (the chief bad guy and his father, who are two well known European actors - they just go through the motions, but they are pros and even hamming it up they are decent). But through it all, Baker's character pulls silly , unproductive stunts and mistakes that get at least two relatively innocent people killed, plus a couple of bad guys who might have been taken alive without the use of deadly force.

On the positive side, since 90% of the movie is set on Malta or in the Mediterranean, you get to see lots of pretty scenery and lots of nice and exotic looking extras. And really, Baker himself may be on the heavy side and slightly dyspeptic, but he isn't that bad...certainly not the tub o' lard that this films critics (including Mike and the Bots in their hilarious coverage) seem to think.

In short, this movie is good for video wallpaper, but the viewer should not pay any attention to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1437 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] One of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I've ever [[seen]]. Acting was [[terrible]], both for the [[kids]] and the adults. Most to all [[characters]] [[showed]] no, little or not enough emotion. The [[lighting]] was [[terrible]], and there were too [[many]] [[mess]] ups about the [[time]] of the day the film was [[shot]] ([[In]] the [[river]] scene where they just [[get]] their [[boat]] [[destroyed]], there's 4 [[shots]]; The [[sheriff]] and [[Dad]] in the [[evening]] on their [[boat]], [[Jillian]] and Molly in the [[evening]] [[swimming]], the [[rest]] of the [[kids]] in the [[daytime]] *when it's supposed to in the evening* at the [[river]] [[bank]], and the doctor, Beatrice, and Simonton at [[night]] but not in the [[evening]] getting off their [[boat]].) The [[best]] acting in the [[movie]] was [[probably]] from the sheriff, Cappy ([[Although]], there's a [[slip]] of character when the pulse [[detector]] *Whatever that thing is when people [[die]], it beeps* shows Cappy has [[died]], he still [[moves]] while it can [[still]] be [[heard]] beeping, and while the [[nurse]] [[extra]] [[checks]] his pulse manually, then it [[shows]] the pulse again, and [[THEN]] he finally [[dies]].) I [[guess]] it's not going to be [[perfect]], [[since]] it's an [[independent]] [[movie]], but it [[still]] [[could]] be [[better]]. Not worth [[watching]], [[honestly]], [[even]] for [[kids]]. [[Might]] as well watch [[something]] good, [[like]] The Lion [[King]] or [[Toy]] [[Story]] if you're going to [[see]] [[anything]] you'll remember. One of the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I've ever [[noticed]]. Acting was [[scary]], both for the [[infantile]] and the adults. Most to all [[nature]] [[revealed]] no, little or not enough emotion. The [[lit]] was [[scary]], and there were too [[myriad]] [[chaos]] ups about the [[moment]] of the day the film was [[kiiled]] ([[Across]] the [[rivers]] scene where they just [[obtain]] their [[battleship]] [[devastated]], there's 4 [[beatings]]; The [[lawman]] and [[Papa]] in the [[tonight]] on their [[vessels]], [[Gillian]] and Molly in the [[soir]] [[swimmer]], the [[stays]] of the [[infantile]] in the [[daylight]] *when it's supposed to in the evening* at the [[rivers]] [[banco]], and the doctor, Beatrice, and Simonton at [[nuit]] but not in the [[tonight]] getting off their [[battleship]].) The [[finest]] acting in the [[film]] was [[perhaps]] from the sheriff, Cappy ([[Despite]], there's a [[slipping]] of character when the pulse [[polygraph]] *Whatever that thing is when people [[deaths]], it beeps* shows Cappy has [[perished]], he still [[shift]] while it can [[yet]] be [[listened]] beeping, and while the [[infirmary]] [[additional]] [[audit]] his pulse manually, then it [[show]] the pulse again, and [[AFTERWARDS]] he finally [[decease]].) I [[reckon]] it's not going to be [[flawless]], [[because]] it's an [[independant]] [[cinematography]], but it [[yet]] [[did]] be [[best]]. Not worth [[staring]], [[openly]], [[yet]] for [[youngsters]]. [[Possible]] as well watch [[anything]] good, [[iike]] The Lion [[Emperor]] or [[Pawn]] [[Tales]] if you're going to [[behold]] [[somethings]] you'll remember. --------------------------------------------- Result 1438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] If you [[like]] [[Star]] [[Wars]]/Trek, come see where they [[got]] all their [[ideas]] and cinematic [[devices]]. It's my top 2 [[favorite]] [[movies]] of all [[times]], other-worldly-futuristic and psycho-thriller. The intensity of the root material (Shakespeare's "The [[Tempest]]") is not [[overshadowed]] by whizbang gimmickry (a la [[later]] Lucas). And just because it was [[made]] in 1956, don't assume you can '[[see]] the strings' holding the flying [[saucer]] up. This was the first [[movie]] where you COULDN'T. Miracle it was [[made]] at "A-movie" scale, economics and tastes at the [[time]] were stacked heavily against it. And director Wilcox's previous 'hit' was "Lassie [[Come]] [[Home]]". Until I looked him up, I assumed 'Fred Wilcox' was a [[pseudonym]] for a director who was already or [[later]] [[became]] [[famous]], but at the [[time]] didn't [[want]] to be associated with sci-fi, which was [[strictly]] a "B" [[genre]] back then. This was either a very VERY [[visionary]] production, or a very fortuitous 'mistake' on the part of the folks who bankroll Hollywood.

There are the massive-scale mattes with live action almost microscopically inserted that Lucas used extensively. There are intelligent machines that transcend the stereotypical 'user interface'; "computers", as they've come to be portrayed much less futuristically in later works. Star Trek's 'transporter' is there, visually, almost unaltered by Roddenberry 10 years later. And if the Trek/Wars technobabble turns you off, FP's scientific references are not overdone and are all accurate, even today. The "ship" set is comprehensive, sparklingly realistic, as good as anything you've seen since, and more convincing than anything 'Trek' has done, for TV or film. We didn't get to spend as much time there as I would have liked.

If you ever wondered how movies got into space so competently, watching FP will explain all that. It's definitely not 'Wagontrain to the Stars'. If you [[loves]] [[Superstar]] [[War]]/Trek, come see where they [[ai]] all their [[idea]] and cinematic [[equipment]]. It's my top 2 [[preferable]] [[theater]] of all [[period]], other-worldly-futuristic and psycho-thriller. The intensity of the root material (Shakespeare's "The [[Storm]]") is not [[dwarfed]] by whizbang gimmickry (a la [[afterward]] Lucas). And just because it was [[introduced]] in 1956, don't assume you can '[[consults]] the strings' holding the flying [[flyer]] up. This was the first [[kino]] where you COULDN'T. Miracle it was [[effected]] at "A-movie" scale, economics and tastes at the [[period]] were stacked heavily against it. And director Wilcox's previous 'hit' was "Lassie [[Arriving]] [[Households]]". Until I looked him up, I assumed 'Fred Wilcox' was a [[nickname]] for a director who was already or [[afterward]] [[was]] [[eminent]], but at the [[moment]] didn't [[desiring]] to be associated with sci-fi, which was [[rigidly]] a "B" [[types]] back then. This was either a very VERY [[farsighted]] production, or a very fortuitous 'mistake' on the part of the folks who bankroll Hollywood.

There are the massive-scale mattes with live action almost microscopically inserted that Lucas used extensively. There are intelligent machines that transcend the stereotypical 'user interface'; "computers", as they've come to be portrayed much less futuristically in later works. Star Trek's 'transporter' is there, visually, almost unaltered by Roddenberry 10 years later. And if the Trek/Wars technobabble turns you off, FP's scientific references are not overdone and are all accurate, even today. The "ship" set is comprehensive, sparklingly realistic, as good as anything you've seen since, and more convincing than anything 'Trek' has done, for TV or film. We didn't get to spend as much time there as I would have liked.

If you ever wondered how movies got into space so competently, watching FP will explain all that. It's definitely not 'Wagontrain to the Stars'. --------------------------------------------- Result 1439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] "[[Come]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[lot]] of [[opinions]] among the contributors to this [[forum]]. Granted, it's a film that promises a take on gay life, as most viewers [[expect]] and [[somehow]], it [[gets]] away from that promise into an introspective [[view]] at a young man's soul. The [[film]] has a [[way]] of [[staying]] with us even when it has [[ended]]. It is a [[character]] study about how a young man gets involved into a love affair with someone so much different than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mathieu]] confused, hurt and depressed when things don't go according to what he hoped the relationship would be.

If you haven't seen the film, perhaps you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the director of the film, has told his story from Mathieu's viewpoint. Most viewers appear to be disoriented by the different times within the film, but there are hints that are not obvious, as one can see, in retrospect. The story is told in flashbacks that might add to the way some people will view the film. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu felt for Cedric and the ultimate breakdown of their life together.

First of all, Cedric, the handsome young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu feels the attraction for Cedric too. We realize how different both young men are by the way Cedric tells Mathieu's family how he feels school is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, finds beauty in the abandoned place where Cedric has taken him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the guide book, wants Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she wisely tells him about the importance of continuing his career. She also points out about what future both of them would have together, which proves to be true. Mathieu appears to have learned his lesson, the hard way. He goes on to an uncertain life with Cedric and attempts to take his own life. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a psychiatrist that has treated his wounded soul.

The ending might be confusing for most viewers, but there is a moment in the film when Mathieu goes to work in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. Yet, we have seen the way Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. "[[Arrived]] Undone" appears to elicit a [[batches]] of [[opinion]] among the contributors to this [[tribune]]. Granted, it's a film that promises a take on gay life, as most viewers [[expects]] and [[someplace]], it [[get]] away from that promise into an introspective [[opinions]] at a young man's soul. The [[flick]] has a [[routing]] of [[residing]] with us even when it has [[ending]]. It is a [[personage]] study about how a young man gets involved into a love affair with someone so much different than him that, in the end, will leave [[Mads]] confused, hurt and depressed when things don't go according to what he hoped the relationship would be.

If you haven't seen the film, perhaps you would like to stop reading.

Sebastien Lifshitz, the director of the film, has told his story from Mathieu's viewpoint. Most viewers appear to be disoriented by the different times within the film, but there are hints that are not obvious, as one can see, in retrospect. The story is told in flashbacks that might add to the way some people will view the film. This is a story about the doomed the love Mathieu felt for Cedric and the ultimate breakdown of their life together.

First of all, Cedric, the handsome young local, pursues Mathieu until he succeeds in convincing him he likes him. Mathieu feels the attraction for Cedric too. We realize how different both young men are by the way Cedric tells Mathieu's family how he feels school is not for him. On the other hand, Mathieu, who wants to be an architect, finds beauty in the abandoned place where Cedric has taken him. We watch as Mathieu, reading from the guide book, wants Cedric's attention.

When Mathieu comes out to his mother, she wisely tells him about the importance of continuing his career. She also points out about what future both of them would have together, which proves to be true. Mathieu appears to have learned his lesson, the hard way. He goes on to an uncertain life with Cedric and attempts to take his own life. We watch him in the hospital speaking to a psychiatrist that has treated his wounded soul.

The ending might be confusing for most viewers, but there is a moment in the film when Mathieu goes to work in a bar where we see him washing glasses and looking intently to Pierre, the young man who frequents the bar. That is why when Mathieu goes looking for Pierre at his house, appears to be hard to imagine. Yet, we have seen the way Mathieu is obviously interested in Pierre. The last scene at the beach, when Pierre and Mathieu are seen strolling in the sand, has a hopeful sign that things will be better between them as they watch a young boy, apparently lost, but then realizing the father is nearby.

Jeremie Elkaim makes Mathieu one of the most complex characters in recent films. This is a young man who is hard to understand on a simple level. Mathieu has suffered a lot, first with the separation of his parents, then with his depressed mother and with losing Cedric. Stephan Rideau, who has been seen on other important French films, is equally good, as the shallow Cedric.

While "Come Undone" will divide opinions, the film deserves a viewing because of the complexity and the care Sebastien Lifshitz gives to the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 1440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] ROLL is a [[wonderful]] little [[film]]. [[Toby]] Malone plays an 18 year old [[kid]] (very well acted, by the way) who is into [[soccer]]. Malone's [[cousin]] takes him out the night before his [[big]] [[game]] on an [[adventure]] with [[many]] [[twists]] and turns [[involving]] two [[gym]] [[bags]], a [[drug]] [[lord]], some tough bikers, some [[cops]], and some [[prostitutes]] ... and the [[movie]] [[keeps]] us guessing as to which [[characters]] are on which side of the [[law]], what the contents of [[either]] gym [[bag]] is, and [[even]] what gender a [[key]] [[biker]] is. Parts of it reminded me of [[LOCK]] STOCK [[AND]] TWO [[SMOKING]] Barrels.

[[For]] me, [[ROLL]] [[reinforced]] three [[opinions]] that I already held before [[seeing]] ROLL. Those [[opinions]] are: 1. I [[really]] [[want]] to [[visit]] [[Australia]] one day. The [[country]] and cities are [[beautiful]] and it looks like such a [[cool]] [[place]] for a [[vacation]].

2. Some of the [[best]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The [[cinematography]] in ROLL was especially [[impressive]]. I [[loved]] the stylized [[colors]] and lighting in [[many]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[women]] are [[HOT]]! ROLL is a [[sumptuous]] little [[movie]]. [[Topi]] Malone plays an 18 year old [[kids]] (very well acted, by the way) who is into [[football]]. Malone's [[kinsman]] takes him out the night before his [[hefty]] [[gaming]] on an [[adventurer]] with [[several]] [[kinks]] and turns [[involve]] two [[gymnasium]] [[baggage]], a [[medicine]] [[sire]], some tough bikers, some [[police]], and some [[whores]] ... and the [[cinematography]] [[retains]] us guessing as to which [[attribute]] are on which side of the [[ley]], what the contents of [[neither]] gym [[purse]] is, and [[yet]] what gender a [[indispensable]] [[motorcycle]] is. Parts of it reminded me of [[LOCKED]] STOCK [[UND]] TWO [[SMOKERS]] Barrels.

[[During]] me, [[ROLLING]] [[reinforcement]] three [[opinion]] that I already held before [[witnessing]] ROLL. Those [[view]] are: 1. I [[truthfully]] [[wanna]] to [[visiting]] [[Australians]] one day. The [[nations]] and cities are [[awesome]] and it looks like such a [[refrigerate]] [[placing]] for a [[holiday]].

2. Some of the [[optimum]] filmmakers in the are Australian. The [[filmmaking]] in ROLL was especially [[unbelievable]]. I [[worshipped]] the stylized [[coloring]] and lighting in [[several]] of the scenes.

3. Australian [[female]] are [[HOTTER]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Return To The 3th Chamber is the [[comedic]] sequel to the [[epic]] 36th [[Chamber]] Of Shaolin, in which Gordon [[Liu]] played [[Shan]] Te, a young man who became a [[monk]] and [[awesome]] fighter. [[In]] this sequel Liu plays a hapless loser who has to learn kung fu after causing his [[friends]] to be beaten. He imitates the [[original]] Shan Te, [[tries]] all manner of tricks to get into Shaolin Temple to learn and [[eventually]] [[gets]] some [[unique]] skills to fight some bullying bosses. Its a [[classic]] light hearted martial [[arts]] [[tale]], with the ace production [[values]] of the Shaw [[Brothers]] and the [[sure]] footed direction of [[Lui]] Chia Liang. The [[choreography]] is [[fantastic]] [[throughout]], whether for [[fighting]] or slapstick [[comedy]] and Gordon Liu's performance, as are the others, [[particularly]] the sympathetic monk [[work]] [[perfectly]] for the material. The [[film]] is less epic or profound than some of the [[stars]] other [[work]] and there are [[certainly]] [[grander]], more violent and sweeping Shaw [[Brothers]] [[films]]. But few have such a [[magical]] [[blend]] of slapstick, [[unique]] training and [[fighting]], with a [[subtle]] [[yet]] [[warming]] [[tale]] of a useless guy making good. Full of light hearted [[joy]], its [[impossible]] not to [[give]] this the [[highest]] [[score]]. Return To The 3th Chamber is the [[slapstick]] sequel to the [[saga]] 36th [[Salle]] Of Shaolin, in which Gordon [[Ryu]] played [[Mountain]] Te, a young man who became a [[moines]] and [[unbelievable]] fighter. [[For]] this sequel Liu plays a hapless loser who has to learn kung fu after causing his [[buddies]] to be beaten. He imitates the [[preliminary]] Shan Te, [[attempted]] all manner of tricks to get into Shaolin Temple to learn and [[ultimately]] [[receives]] some [[singular]] skills to fight some bullying bosses. Its a [[typical]] light hearted martial [[humanities]] [[stories]], with the ace production [[value]] of the Shaw [[Plymouth]] and the [[convinced]] footed direction of [[Loy]] Chia Liang. The [[dancers]] is [[unbelievable]] [[around]], whether for [[combating]] or slapstick [[comedian]] and Gordon Liu's performance, as are the others, [[namely]] the sympathetic monk [[cooperation]] [[totally]] for the material. The [[cinema]] is less epic or profound than some of the [[celebrity]] other [[jobs]] and there are [[obviously]] [[fatter]], more violent and sweeping Shaw [[Plymouth]] [[cinematography]]. But few have such a [[quadrant]] [[mingling]] of slapstick, [[exclusive]] training and [[combating]], with a [[nuanced]] [[however]] [[heating]] [[storytelling]] of a useless guy making good. Full of light hearted [[glee]], its [[unable]] not to [[lend]] this the [[high]] [[notation]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1442 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm not to [[keen]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[slow]] at the times. As the movie goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[nothing]] brilliant. I really like David Schwimmer and I [[think]] he's good here. I'm not a [[massive]] Gwyneth Paltrow [[fan]], but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[okay]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly recommended movie, but if you like the [[leads]] then you [[might]] enjoy it. I'm not to [[fervent]] on The Pallbearer, it's not too bad, but just very [[slower]] at the times. As the movie goes on, it gets a little more interesting, but [[anything]] brilliant. I really like David Schwimmer and I [[believing]] he's good here. I'm not a [[prodigious]] Gwyneth Paltrow [[ventilator]], but I don't mind her sometimes and she's [[allright]] here. The Pallbearer is not a highly recommended movie, but if you like the [[leeds]] then you [[apt]] enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Neil Simon has [[quite]] a body of work, but it is the [[Odd]] Couple that carried him to fame. This [[film]] [[really]] [[works]]. [[Jack]] Lemmon & [[Walter]] Matthaw have a [[great]] [[chemistry]]. The supporting cast for this [[film]] is stellar as well.

It is about 2 [[men]] [[living]] [[together]] who are from opposite [[planets]]. The [[script]] bristles with [[humor]] from this situation. This had been done in some [[forms]] previously. This is the one that brings it all together in a very [[good]] package.

Simon has done some other decent [[work]], but this one is really his [[best]] [[work]] which made the [[rest]] of his work possible. It is hard to [[imagine]] Simon ever topping this. Neil Simon has [[very]] a body of work, but it is the [[Bizarre]] Couple that carried him to fame. This [[filmmaking]] [[truly]] [[cooperating]]. [[Jacque]] Lemmon & [[Walters]] Matthaw have a [[whopping]] [[chemist]]. The supporting cast for this [[kino]] is stellar as well.

It is about 2 [[males]] [[iife]] [[whole]] who are from opposite [[planet]]. The [[scripts]] bristles with [[comedy]] from this situation. This had been done in some [[form]] previously. This is the one that brings it all together in a very [[alright]] package.

Simon has done some other decent [[collaborate]], but this one is really his [[nicest]] [[jobs]] which made the [[remaining]] of his work possible. It is hard to [[guess]] Simon ever topping this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] How is it possible that no journalist or critic reminded us of the resemblance with that other better Flemish movie "Congo Express (1986)"? There are also some [[characters]] in congo Express put together without having really a [[relation]] to each other: Jean, (de Congolees), the workman, the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, Roger, Guy, Lucienne and Gilbert. Of course, Tom Barman is a [[star]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a reason to pardon the flaws in the script (if there is a script) of Anyway the wind blows. The joke (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a movie that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed chance for Flemish Cinema. How is it possible that no journalist or critic reminded us of the resemblance with that other better Flemish movie "Congo Express (1986)"? There are also some [[hallmarks]] in congo Express put together without having really a [[relationship]] to each other: Jean, (de Congolees), the workman, the two taxi-drivers, the street-singer, Roger, Guy, Lucienne and Gilbert. Of course, Tom Barman is a [[superstar]] and Luc Gubbels wasn't. That should not be a reason to pardon the flaws in the script (if there is a script) of Anyway the wind blows. The joke (the only one!) at the party about the ice in the refrigerator is taken from that great Flemish movie "De Witte (1934)" where De Witte is putting too much salt on the potatoes. Some accidents happen in the movie but there comes no explanation after. Tom Barman delivers us here a movie that is more like an experiment to watch at the television than a movie for the theatres. Another missed chance for Flemish Cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Excellent movie, a realistic picture of contemporary Finland, touching and profound. One of the best Finnish films ever made. Captures marvelously the everyday life in a Central Finland small town, people's desires and weaknesses, joys and sorrows. The bright early fall sunshine creates a cool atmosphere to this lucid examination of people in a welfare society. Lampela is indeed one of the most promising Finnish filmmakers. He shows that it is possible to make gripping movies without machine guns and bloodshed. His next film Eila is also worth seeing although the story of cleaning women fighting for their jobs is not quite as universally appealing as the destinies in Joki. --------------------------------------------- Result 1446 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Lets put it this way. I actually get this movie. I get what the [[writer]]/directer was [[trying]] to do. I understand that the dialog was meant to be dry and emotionless. I understand that the plot was [[supposed]] to be non-climactic and stale. That was what the writer/director was going for. A very very very [[dry]] humor/comedy. With all that understanding, I still think the [[movie]] [[sucked]]. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same features. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, let me rephrase that. Its only purpose is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't work. Lets put it this way. I actually get this movie. I get what the [[novelist]]/directer was [[tempting]] to do. I understand that the dialog was meant to be dry and emotionless. I understand that the plot was [[suspected]] to be non-climactic and stale. That was what the writer/director was going for. A very very very [[driest]] humor/comedy. With all that understanding, I still think the [[movies]] [[aspired]]. It seemed like the writer/director was trying to recreate Napolean Dynamite with this movie. It had all of the same features. Even the main character behaved similar to Napolean. But Napolean Dynamite was actually funny. Its script worked. This movie is not. It has no purpose. Well, let me rephrase that. Its only purpose is to rip off Napolean Dynamite and try to capture that look and feel. Too bad it didn't work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Picture the scene: a [[mountainous]] [[alien]] [[landscape]]. [[Twin]] [[moons]] [[illuminate]] the [[blood]] red sky. The Tardis [[lands]], and out [[steps]] the [[Doctor]], a middle-aged man in a Victorian frock [[coat]], and [[Rose]], his companion from Earth. A flicker of [[recognition]] crosses his face. "Well, I never! Its the [[planet]] Saurious-7. Where I [[fought]] the warlike Kraggartians. They [[tried]] to use giant Skinkons to take over the [[planet]].". The girl sniffs the air. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[place]]. I keep thinking we're being watched.". The Doctor wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, girl. I wonder if the King and Queen of Cordaraby City remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He strides off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. Unfairly derided at the time of its original U.K. broadcast, 'Rose' can now safely be regarded as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it belonged, as one of the B.B.C.'s flagship programmes. The [[mistakes]] made by the McGann T.V. movie were well learnt. Instead of trying to shoehorn the new 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh start for the series, beginning with shop girl Rose Tyler ( [[Billie]] Piper ) going about her daily routine. One day she goes to the basement to find a man named Wilson, and then the trouble begins. [[Mannequins]] come to life and attack her. It is only through the intervention of a mysterious stranger ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[story]], slight [[though]] it may be, is more than adequate as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the famous scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when shop window dummies sprang to life. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an added emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! Picture the scene: a [[undulating]] [[aliens]] [[scenery]]. [[Doubly]] [[satellite]] [[enlighten]] the [[chrissakes]] red sky. The Tardis [[territory]], and out [[measures]] the [[Medic]], a middle-aged man in a Victorian frock [[overcoat]], and [[Increased]], his companion from Earth. A flicker of [[acknowledgment]] crosses his face. "Well, I never! Its the [[planets]] Saurious-7. Where I [[campaigned]] the warlike Kraggartians. They [[strived]] to use giant Skinkons to take over the [[planets]].". The girl sniffs the air. "Can't we go, Doctor. I don't like the look of this [[placing]]. I keep thinking we're being watched.". The Doctor wags a disapproving finger. "Don't be silly, girl. I wonder if the King and Queen of Cordaraby City remember me from my last visit. Come along, Rose, come along!". He strides off, the girl struggles to keep up. High on a hill, sinister red eyes regard them with hatred...

That was not how 'Rose' began back in 2005, and thank heavens for that say I. Unfairly derided at the time of its original U.K. broadcast, 'Rose' can now safely be regarded as a landmark episode, putting 'Dr.Who' back where it belonged, as one of the B.B.C.'s flagship programmes. The [[error]] made by the McGann T.V. movie were well learnt. Instead of trying to shoehorn the new 'Who' into existing chronology, it represented a fresh start for the series, beginning with shop girl Rose Tyler ( [[Billy]] Piper ) going about her daily routine. One day she goes to the basement to find a man named Wilson, and then the trouble begins. [[Models]] come to life and attack her. It is only through the intervention of a mysterious stranger ( Christopher Eccleston ) that she is saved.

The [[storytelling]], slight [[nonetheless]] it may be, is more than adequate as a starting-point for the series. The Autons are, of course, an old villain ( this was their first appearance since 1971 ), but no references are made to their past appearances - another wise move. The finale effectively recreated the famous scene in 'Spearhead From Space' when shop window dummies sprang to life. As the Doctor, Christopher Eccleston lacked the eccentricity of his predecessors, preferring a modern leather jacket to the Doctor's traditional period clothes, but this made him more accessible to the show's hoped-for new audience. Billie Piper confounded her critics by making a big impression as 'Rose'. Also good was Noel Clarke as her boyfriend 'Mickey'.

Yes, there was an added emphasis on special effects, but then there needed to be - the wobbly sets and unconvincing monsters of the past have no place on 21st century television. What is more important is how good a script this is. Ten million people tuned in to see the new Doctor.

'Dr.Who' was back - and back with a bang! --------------------------------------------- Result 1448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I loved this movie, I'll admit it. This has to be the best (straight to?) video movie I've seen. Well... me and my friend decided just for shits n' giggles that we'd rent this movie. We knew what to expect and we got exactly what we expected, plus more. When that red neck gets slammed up against the tree by the Sasquatch, we literally watched that part about three to four times, it was that amazing (hysterically, of course). And why? Oh why does the main character have to roll that much? Like honestly, we know that you're in danger, rolling that much isn't gonna help all that much. But really, if this movie is in you're local video store RENT IT. It is worth the money and it's not even that bad, like it's bad, but not incredibly bad. Overall, complete amazing will be in store for you if you rent this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1449 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is the [[best]] [[movie]] I`ve ever [[seen]] !!! Thomas [[Beckett]] & [[Richard]] Miller -two mankinds who want to survive in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one killed !!? You must kill, if you getting doubt about something, YOU MUST SURVIVE !!

P.P.- I appologise of my bad / worst/ English !!! This is the [[optimum]] [[flick]] I`ve ever [[noticed]] !!! Thomas [[Becket]] & [[Richards]] Miller -two mankinds who want to survive in the "jungle" of violence and madnes, one shot - one killed !!? You must kill, if you getting doubt about something, YOU MUST SURVIVE !!

P.P.- I appologise of my bad / worst/ English !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] At the end of this episode Holmes asks Watson not to record the case for posterity.[[For]] a good reason! The [[super]] sleuth [[left]] his little grey cells([[sorry]] Agatha)at home for this tale. There is no deductive [[reasoning]],no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. Holmes bumbles along fifty [[yards]] behind the [[plot]]. The dastardly CAM is finally dealt to by an old frail-in a manner that would have made Charles Bronson's heart swell with pride-six bullets in the breadbasket.In an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of Watson's shoes.[[Mercifully]] the writer didn't decide to tack on the story of Cinderella to lengthen the film.The murderess,Holmes and Watson,escape scot free. Oh well,it is a bit of a change of pace in late Victorian London.A bit of sixgun law:-) At the end of this episode Holmes asks Watson not to record the case for posterity.[[Onto]] a good reason! The [[splendid]] sleuth [[exited]] his little grey cells([[apology]] Agatha)at home for this tale. There is no deductive [[justification]],no acute analysis of signs at crime scenes. Holmes bumbles along fifty [[courtyards]] behind the [[intrigue]]. The dastardly CAM is finally dealt to by an old frail-in a manner that would have made Charles Bronson's heart swell with pride-six bullets in the breadbasket.In an ensuing chase a pursuer gets hold of one of Watson's shoes.[[Merrily]] the writer didn't decide to tack on the story of Cinderella to lengthen the film.The murderess,Holmes and Watson,escape scot free. Oh well,it is a bit of a change of pace in late Victorian London.A bit of sixgun law:-) --------------------------------------------- Result 1451 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[In]] 1914, Charlie Chaplin began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "Keystone Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[little]] structure and were completely ad libbed. As a result, the [[films]], [[though]] [[popular]] in their day, were just [[awful]] by today's standards. Many of them bear a strong similarity to home movies featuring obnoxious relatives mugging for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but inexplicably, Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the film lacks coherence and just isn't particularly funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. [[Onto]] 1914, Charlie Chaplin began making pictures. These were made for Mack Sennett (also known as "Keystone Studios") and were literally churned out in very rapid succession. The short comedies had very [[kiddo]] structure and were completely ad libbed. As a result, the [[filmmaking]], [[while]] [[fashionable]] in their day, were just [[scary]] by today's standards. Many of them bear a strong similarity to home movies featuring obnoxious relatives mugging for the camera. Many others show the characters wander in front of the camera and do pretty much nothing. And, regardless of the outcome, Keystone sent them straight to theaters. My assumption is that all movies at this time must have been pretty bad, as the Keystone films with Chaplin were very successful.

The Charlie Chaplin we know and love today only began to evolve later in Chaplin's career with Keystone. By 1915, he signed a new lucrative contract with Essenay Studios and the films improved dramatically with Chaplin as director. However, at times these films were still very rough and not especially memorable. No, Chaplin as the cute Little Tramp was still evolving. In 1916, when he switched to Mutual Studios, his films once again improved and he became the more recognizable nice guy--in many of the previous films he was just a jerk (either getting drunk a lot, beating up women, provoking fights with innocent people, etc.). The final evolution of his Little Tramp to classic status occurred in the 1920s as a result of his full-length films.

It's interesting that this film is called TWENTY MINUTES OF LOVE since the film only lasts about 10 minutes! Oh well. The plot, what little there is, involves the Little Tramp in the park. A couple wants to neck but inexplicably, Charlie insists on practically sitting on the couple's lap and really annoying them. I can't understand why and the short consists of Charlie wandering about the park annoying these people and some others later in the film. Perhaps he was looking for a threesome, I don't know. But the film lacks coherence and just isn't particularly funny--even when people start slapping each other and pushing each other in the lake. A typical poor effort before Chaplin began to give his character a plot and personality. --------------------------------------------- Result 1452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This should be required viewing for all young people. This is documentary at its best, from the haunting music and terrific narration by Olivier to its unflinching and penetrating analyses, The World at War is unforgettable and irreplaceable for anyone who wants to know about humanity's sorry experience at the nadir of the 20th century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This Academy Award [[winning]] short film can rank among the [[greatest]] of the genre. Told [[completely]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[treat]] about a [[young]] [[boy]] who buys a gold fish, lovingly [[places]] him in a [[bowl]] then goes off to school, leaving the gold fish unprotected and a [[window]] carelessly open. [[After]] a while, a [[neighboring]] orange tabby [[comes]] poking around, comes in through the [[window]] and [[heads]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[apparently]] knows something is [[going]] on and becomes very excited. As the cat [[comes]] very [[near]] to the bowl, the fish jumps out. The [[cat]] [[catches]] the fish, [[drops]] him back in the bowl and exits through the [[window]] he [[came]] in just as the [[boy]], not knowing what has [[happened]], [[gets]] back. This was [[amazingly]] [[filmed]] with [[real]] animals; how [[Cousteau]] got these [[animals]] to behave in this [[manner]] is [[remarkable]]. I only [[wish]] this [[film]] were [[available]] now for people to see; I only [[saw]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[originally]] [[released]], but it has remained unforgettable. This Academy Award [[triumphs]] short film can rank among the [[grandest]] of the genre. Told [[abundantly]] without dialogue, it is a visual [[treatment]] about a [[youths]] [[dude]] who buys a gold fish, lovingly [[sites]] him in a [[bowls]] then goes off to school, leaving the gold fish unprotected and a [[luna]] carelessly open. [[Upon]] a while, a [[contiguous]] orange tabby [[occurs]] poking around, comes in through the [[windows]] and [[chefs]] slowly for the bowl. The fish [[ostensibly]] knows something is [[go]] on and becomes very excited. As the cat [[happens]] very [[close]] to the bowl, the fish jumps out. The [[pussycat]] [[catch]] the fish, [[drop]] him back in the bowl and exits through the [[luna]] he [[arrived]] in just as the [[dude]], not knowing what has [[arrived]], [[get]] back. This was [[unimaginably]] [[videotaped]] with [[actual]] animals; how [[Smith]] got these [[animal]] to behave in this [[way]] is [[notable]]. I only [[wants]] this [[kino]] were [[approachable]] now for people to see; I only [[noticed]] it once, in 1959 when it was [[initially]] [[releasing]], but it has remained unforgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 1454 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] David Mamet [[wrote]] the screenplay and made his directorial [[debut]] with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a psychiatrist is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is somewhat discontented with her own personal life; there's an emptiness she can [[neither]] define nor resolve, and it [[primes]] her vulnerability. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before enticing her into his world. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy claimed he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred dollars. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card game he has going on in the back room. In the middle of a big hand, Mike is going to leave the room for a few minutes; while he is gone, her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the audience, as well, is hooked. The dialogue, and Mamet's unique style and the precise cadence with which his actors deliver their lines, is mesmerizing. As Mike leads Margaret through his compelling, surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the intricacies of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the stunning climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. David Mamet [[texted]] the screenplay and made his directorial [[infancy]] with `House of Games,' a character study fraught with psychological overtones, in which a psychiatrist is lured into the dark world of the confidence game. Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) has a successful practice and has written a best-selling novel, 'Driven.' Still, she is somewhat discontented with her own personal life; there's an emptiness she can [[either]] define nor resolve, and it [[premiums]] her vulnerability. When a patient, Billy Hahn (Steven Goldstein), confides to her during a session that he owes big money to some gamblers, and that they're going to kill him if he doesn't pay, she decides to intervene on his behalf. This takes her to the `House of Games,' a seedy little dive where she meets Mike (Joe Mantegna), a charismatic con-man who wastes no time before enticing her into his world. Instead of the `twenty-five large' that Billy claimed he owed, Mike shows her his book, and it turns out to be eight hundred dollars. And Mike agrees to wipe the slate clean, if she'll agree to do him one simple favor, which involves a card game he has going on in the back room. In the middle of a big hand, Mike is going to leave the room for a few minutes; while he is gone, her job is to watch for the `tell' of one of the other players. By this time, not only Margaret, but the audience, as well, is hooked. The dialogue, and Mamet's unique style and the precise cadence with which his actors deliver their lines, is mesmerizing. As Mike leads Margaret through his compelling, surreal realm of existence, and introduces her to the intricacies of the con game, we are swept right along with her. From that first memorable encounter, when he demonstrates what a `tell' is and how it works, to the lessons of the `short con,' to the stunning climax of this film, Mamet keeps the con going with an urgency that is relentless. And nothing is what it seems. In the end, Margaret learns some hard lessons about life and human nature, and about herself. She changes; and whether or not it's for the better is open to speculation. Mantegna is absolutely riveting in this film; he lends every nuance possible to a complex character who must be able to lead you willingly into the shadows, and does. Crouse also turns in an outstanding performance here; you feel the rigid, up-tight turmoil roiling beneath that calm, self-assured exterior, and when her experiences with Mike induce the change in her, she makes you feel how deeply it has penetrated. She makes you believe that she is capable of what she does, and makes you understand it, as well. The dynamic supporting cast includes Mike Nussbaum (Joey), Lilia Skala (Dr. Littauer), J.T. Walsh (The Businessman), Ricky Jay (George) and William H. Macy (Sergeant Moran). `House of Games' is the quintessential Mamet; he's written and directed a number of high-caliber plays and films since, and will no doubt grace us with more in the future. But this film will be the one that defines him; and you can go to the dictionary and look it up. You'll find it under `Perfection.' This is one great movie you do not want to miss. I rate this one 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] American movies about war and Nazis simply cannot be good. They can not refrain from becoming idiot and following an agenda. All Nazis are bad, crazy, too proud, and Americans are so modest yet so capable and sensible and human. Come on, stop this bullshit. The main character says something like "by this trial, we have to make aggressive war a crime". Is America a peaceful nation with its world #1 $420 billion "defense" budget (#2 China with just $51b)? Is it simply spent in this without any... ROI? Why portray America as a peaceful nation when it isn't? I deeply dislike movies with an agenda - they throw art to hell and try to persuade us into believing something. Hollywood should put a label on movies, just as record companies have that "parental advisory" label. We should have a "bullshit advisory", "propaganda advisory" or a "politically correct advisory" label on some movies. This is one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 1456 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] This movie for what it is, may be one of the most [[amazing]] indie films of recent day. Made on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the current films! IF you have a chance watch it! This movie for what it is, may be one of the most [[unbelievable]] indie films of recent day. Made on a super small budget, the film has special effects that blow away alot of the current films! IF you have a chance watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Considering 'A Star is Born' had been made twice already by the time the 1976 film came into production, the latest remake has a [[freshness]] about it that can be attributed to the fantastic chemistry between the entire acting ensemble. A viewer could be forgiven for believing that Kris Kristofferson & Barbara Streisand were a couple off screen as well as on, with their [[incredible]] displays of [[pure]] affection towards one another.

The film has been described in the [[past]] as a 'Barbara Streisand concert on film, set to a soap opera storyline' however for anyone that enjoys watching a film that takes you beyond the living room into a world where the characters seem truly alive - A Star is Born is well worth the hiring price.

With its incredible soundtrack, flawless acting and touching reality in regards to human emotions and the true frailty of life; A Star is Born is a film that draws you into the world of Esther Hoffman & the love of her life John Norman Howard.

A film for anyone that sees the beauty in real love - the kind that keeps you devoted to a person even as they break your heart... Considering 'A Star is Born' had been made twice already by the time the 1976 film came into production, the latest remake has a [[coldness]] about it that can be attributed to the fantastic chemistry between the entire acting ensemble. A viewer could be forgiven for believing that Kris Kristofferson & Barbara Streisand were a couple off screen as well as on, with their [[unimaginable]] displays of [[unadulterated]] affection towards one another.

The film has been described in the [[yesteryear]] as a 'Barbara Streisand concert on film, set to a soap opera storyline' however for anyone that enjoys watching a film that takes you beyond the living room into a world where the characters seem truly alive - A Star is Born is well worth the hiring price.

With its incredible soundtrack, flawless acting and touching reality in regards to human emotions and the true frailty of life; A Star is Born is a film that draws you into the world of Esther Hoffman & the love of her life John Norman Howard.

A film for anyone that sees the beauty in real love - the kind that keeps you devoted to a person even as they break your heart... --------------------------------------------- Result 1458 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Follows the [[usual]] [[formula]] in putting a [[new]] [[recruit]] -- this [[time]] the first African-American ([[Cuba]] Gooding) after [[President]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea [[diver]] training program that is [[run]] by a [[racist]] zealot (Robert DeNiro). [[If]] the program weren't [[bad]] [[enough]], it's [[got]] to be located in Bayonne, New [[Jersey]].

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Robert]] De Niro activates his Southern accent and [[shouts]] gibberish effectively. [[Cuba]] Gooding, [[raised]] by a stern father as a poor [[black]] [[farm]] [[boy]] in the [[South]], is the expectable paragon of rectitude. The [[girls]] -- one could [[hardly]] [[call]] them women -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[minor]] [[roles]] and are [[mostly]] there to [[argue]] that their [[men]] should [[exercise]] common sense. Other decent [[performers]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[even]] more perfunctory roles.

That's about it. Almost everything [[else]] [[could]] have been assembled by a [[computer]]. A [[ship]] is [[called]] a [[boat]]. Robert De [[Niro]] [[salutes]] [[indoors]], [[uncovered]]. After a [[brutal]] [[assault]] on [[hospital]] [[personnel]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[instead]] of being [[busted]]. [[Somebody]] [[shouts]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. ([[Maybe]] it was a common [[expression]] at the [[time]]. If so, "my [[bad]].") People [[address]] each other by [[rank]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Mate]]," "[[Commander]]," as they do in the Army, [[whereas]] in the [[Navy]] they are [[simple]] "[[Mister]]" (if an [[officer]]) or [[addressed]] by their [[last]] [[name]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[check]] if there was a [[rank]] [[called]] "Senior [[Master]] [[Chief]]" in 1950.

[[Cuba]] Gooding has a tough row to hoe. [[Everyone]] in the [[Navy]], it [[seems]], [[hates]] [[Negroes]] except for one [[guy]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[held]] in [[contempt]] by the others in his [[class]]. It's like the scene in "[[Animal]] [[House]]", in which the [[applicant]] to a [[tony]] [[fraternity]] is [[asked]] to [[wait]] in a [[room]] with a Sikh, a [[black]] man, and a blind [[kid]].

Gooding is an enlisted man, a second [[class]] petty officer. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. [[Cheap]] as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical details are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. Follows the [[accustomed]] [[formulas]] in putting a [[nouveau]] [[conscription]] -- this [[moment]] the first African-American ([[Cuban]] Gooding) after [[Chairs]] Truman desegregates the Armed Forces -- through the U. S. Navy's deep-sea [[dives]] training program that is [[executing]] by a [[racism]] zealot (Robert DeNiro). [[Though]] the program weren't [[negative]] [[adequately]], it's [[gets]] to be located in Bayonne, New [[Jerzy]].

There's nothing wrong with the performances. [[Roberta]] De Niro activates his Southern accent and [[shouting]] gibberish effectively. [[Cuban]] Gooding, [[risen]] by a stern father as a poor [[negro]] [[farmhouse]] [[boys]] in the [[Southern]], is the expectable paragon of rectitude. The [[daughters]] -- one could [[almost]] [[calls]] them women -- are Charleze Theron and Lonette McKee. They have [[minimal]] [[duties]] and are [[especially]] there to [[assert]] that their [[man]] should [[exercises]] common sense. Other decent [[artists]] -- Powers Boothe and Hal Holbrook -- have [[yet]] more perfunctory roles.

That's about it. Almost everything [[further]] [[wo]] have been assembled by a [[computers]]. A [[boat]] is [[drew]] a [[boats]]. Robert De [[Nero]] [[welcomes]] [[interiors]], [[unearthed]]. After a [[ferocious]] [[assaults]] on [[hospitals]] [[servants]], he's transferred out of his outfit [[alternatively]] of being [[roasted]]. [[Person]] [[shouting]] "I'm outta here" in the early 1950s. ([[Possibly]] it was a common [[expressions]] at the [[period]]. If so, "my [[unfavourable]].") People [[treat]] each other by [[ranks]] -- "Lieutenant", "Boatswain's [[Pal]]," "[[Commanding]]," as they do in the Army, [[whilst]] in the [[Marines]] they are [[easy]] "[[Mr]]" (if an [[patrolman]]) or [[tackled]] by their [[final]] [[behalf]] (if enlisted). I didn't bother to [[audit]] if there was a [[categorized]] [[termed]] "Senior [[Maestro]] [[Leader]]" in 1950.

[[Kubo]] Gooding has a tough row to hoe. [[Everybody]] in the [[Marina]], it [[seem]], [[hating]] [[Negros]] except for one [[pal]] from Wisconsin. He stutters and is [[holds]] in [[disregard]] by the others in his [[categories]]. It's like the scene in "[[Wildlife]] [[Maison]]", in which the [[complainant]] to a [[toni]] [[brotherhood]] is [[wondered]] to [[suspense]] in a [[rooms]] with a Sikh, a [[negro]] man, and a blind [[petit]].

Gooding is an enlisted man, a second [[categories]] petty officer. He manages to marry a beautiful woman who has just graduated from medical school. In one of their arguments she pleads with him. She just wants to be a doctor and he should join her, quit the Navy, and lead a quiet life. "And just let life pass you by?", he retorts. Yes. Yes, just be a doctor's spouse and let life pass you by. You can wave to it from the golf course in Boca Raton.

These kinds of flicks were common enough in World War II. "Bombardier," "Airial Gunner," that sort of thing. [[Cheaper]] as they often were, they had some educational features. You learned something about becoming a bombardier or a gunner. Here, the technical details are skipped over, perhaps because the writer knew nothing about them (except Boyle's law, which we learned in high-school chemistry).

I couldn't follow what was happening during some of the emergencies without which a movie like this wouldn't exist. If I got the mechanical problems right, it was because I guessed correctly. The direction is no help either. The movie abounds in close ups, so many that they lose any dramatic impact they might have had. And the emergencies are confusing because they're ill focused.

Why go on? Want to see a better example of this kind of movie? Almost any will do -- except maybe "G. I. Jane", in which the abused hero is a heroin. Try the training camp scenes in "The Young Lions." There the victim is a Jew. Or try "From Here to Eternity," in which no easy sympathy buttons are pushed and the victim is a grown man who refuses to bend and who is active in bringing the conflict on, just like "Cool Hand Luke." No easy excuses are offered, because easy excuses are too easy.

Thoroughly formulaic, and not well done. --------------------------------------------- Result 1459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Forbidden Siren is based upon the Siren 2 Playstation 2 (so many 2s) game. Like most video game [[turned]] [[movies]], I would say the majority don't [[translate]] into a [[different]] medium [[really]] well. And that goes for this one too, painfully.

There's a [[pretty]] long prologue which explains and sets the premise for the [[story]], and the mysterious [[island]] on which a writer (Leo Morimoto) and his children, daughter Yuki (Yui Ichikawa) and son Hideo (Jun Nishiyama) come to move into. The [[villagers]] don't look all too friendly, and soon enough, sound advice is given about the siren on the island, to stay indoors once the siren starts wailing.

Naturally and slowly, things start to go bump, and our siblings go on a mission beating around the bush to discover exactly what is happening on this unfriendly island with its strange inhabitants. But in truth, you will not bother with what's going on, as folklore and fairy tales get thrown in to convolute the plot even more. What was really pushing it into the realm of [[bad]] [[comedy]] are its unwittingly ill-placed-out-of-the-norm moments which just drew pitiful [[giggles]] at its [[sheer]] [[stupidity]], until it's [[explained]] much later. It's one thing trying to come up and [[present]] something smart, but another thing doing it convincingly and with loopholes covered.

Despite it clocking in under 90 minutes - I [[think]] it's a horror movie [[phenomenon]] to have that as a runtime benchmark - it gives that [[almost]] two [[hour]] feel with its slow buildup to [[tell]] what it [[wants]] to. [[Things]] [[begin]] to [[pick]] up toward the [[last]] 20 minutes, but it's a classic [[case]] of too little too late.

What [[saves]] the [[movie]] is how it [[changes]] tack and its revelation at the [[end]]. Again this is a common [[device]] [[used]] to [[try]] and elevate a [[seemingly]] [[simple]] horror [[movie]] into [[something]] a [[little]] bit [[extra]] in the [[hope]] of wowing an [[audience]]. It [[turned]] out rather satisfactorily, but leaves a [[bad]] aftertaste as you'll feel cheated [[somewhat]]. There are two ways a twist will [[make]] you feel - it [[either]] elevates the movie to a memorable level, or provides you with that hokey feeling. Unfortunately Forbidden [[Siren]] belonged more to the latter.

The saving grace will be its cinematography with its use of light, shadows and mirrors, but I will be that explicit - it's still not worth the time, so better to avoid this. Forbidden Siren is based upon the Siren 2 Playstation 2 (so many 2s) game. Like most video game [[revolved]] [[kino]], I would say the majority don't [[convert]] into a [[distinct]] medium [[truthfully]] well. And that goes for this one too, painfully.

There's a [[quite]] long prologue which explains and sets the premise for the [[histories]], and the mysterious [[isla]] on which a writer (Leo Morimoto) and his children, daughter Yuki (Yui Ichikawa) and son Hideo (Jun Nishiyama) come to move into. The [[inhabitants]] don't look all too friendly, and soon enough, sound advice is given about the siren on the island, to stay indoors once the siren starts wailing.

Naturally and slowly, things start to go bump, and our siblings go on a mission beating around the bush to discover exactly what is happening on this unfriendly island with its strange inhabitants. But in truth, you will not bother with what's going on, as folklore and fairy tales get thrown in to convolute the plot even more. What was really pushing it into the realm of [[inclement]] [[humour]] are its unwittingly ill-placed-out-of-the-norm moments which just drew pitiful [[laughter]] at its [[pure]] [[madness]], until it's [[clarified]] much later. It's one thing trying to come up and [[presented]] something smart, but another thing doing it convincingly and with loopholes covered.

Despite it clocking in under 90 minutes - I [[believing]] it's a horror movie [[phenomena]] to have that as a runtime benchmark - it gives that [[roughly]] two [[hours]] feel with its slow buildup to [[told]] what it [[wanting]] to. [[Aspects]] [[embark]] to [[choose]] up toward the [[latter]] 20 minutes, but it's a classic [[examples]] of too little too late.

What [[rescued]] the [[filmmaking]] is how it [[change]] tack and its revelation at the [[ends]]. Again this is a common [[instruments]] [[utilizing]] to [[endeavour]] and elevate a [[reportedly]] [[easy]] horror [[cinema]] into [[anything]] a [[petite]] bit [[supplemental]] in the [[hopes]] of wowing an [[spectators]]. It [[transformed]] out rather satisfactorily, but leaves a [[negative]] aftertaste as you'll feel cheated [[slightly]]. There are two ways a twist will [[deliver]] you feel - it [[neither]] elevates the movie to a memorable level, or provides you with that hokey feeling. Unfortunately Forbidden [[Mermaid]] belonged more to the latter.

The saving grace will be its cinematography with its use of light, shadows and mirrors, but I will be that explicit - it's still not worth the time, so better to avoid this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Scott Henderson, the engineer that employs Carol Richman, as his assistant, makes a point to call her "Kansas", whenever he speaks to her. It shows us that [[Carol]], effectively played by Ella Raines, is supposed to be a babe in the woods, as far as the Manhattan of the 40s was concerned. Only a woman, from out of town, would follow the shady bartender to a solitary elevated [[subway]]. Even then, only a [[naive]] [[girl]] could undertake such an [[adventure]].

Robert Siodmak directed this film noir very well. He [[shows]] a flair for infusing the [[story]] with a [[lot]] of raw sex that was [[surprising]] for those [[days]]. How [[else]] could we justify the [[way]] the [[drummer]] in the [[orchestra]] of the musical, where Scott [[takes]] the [[mysterious]] [[woman]] with an [[unusual]] [[hat]], makes such an overt pass at a [[lady]] on a date? The [[drummer]] [[played]] with [[high]] voltage by Elisha [[Cook]] Jr. doesn't [[hide]] his desires for any of the [[ladies]] who sat in the front row of the [[hit]] musical where he plays. It was a [[real]] explicit [[invitation]], [[first]] to the "phantom [[woman]]" of the [[story]], [[Fay]] Helm; [[afterward]], [[Cliff]] the [[drummer]], insinuates himself very [[openly]] to Ella Raines who goes to the theater disguised as the mystery dame her boss had taken originally.

This is a [[film]] that will [[hook]] any viewer from the beginning. There are things not [[explained]] in it, but it holds the one's interest throughout. The killer is not revealed until the end.

Ella Raines with her expressive eyes was an under estimated actress. She holds her own against much more experienced actors. Franchot Tone, a New York stage actor, working in Hollywood, never [[found]] in this medium the fame he deserved. He is effective as the accused man's best friend. On the other hand, Alan Curtis, comes across as a man, who when framed, accepts his fate and is saved only by the tenacity of the woman who secretly loved him. Thomas Gomez, as the inspector Burgess, is an asset to the film as a detective who has his doubts the police had caught the man who committed the crime.

This movie will not disappoint. Scott Henderson, the engineer that employs Carol Richman, as his assistant, makes a point to call her "Kansas", whenever he speaks to her. It shows us that [[Carrol]], effectively played by Ella Raines, is supposed to be a babe in the woods, as far as the Manhattan of the 40s was concerned. Only a woman, from out of town, would follow the shady bartender to a solitary elevated [[metro]]. Even then, only a [[ingenuous]] [[fille]] could undertake such an [[adventurer]].

Robert Siodmak directed this film noir very well. He [[exposition]] a flair for infusing the [[fairytales]] with a [[batch]] of raw sex that was [[dazzling]] for those [[jours]]. How [[otherwise]] could we justify the [[manner]] the [[drum]] in the [[symphony]] of the musical, where Scott [[pick]] the [[opaque]] [[female]] with an [[peculiar]] [[bonnet]], makes such an overt pass at a [[ladies]] on a date? The [[drum]] [[served]] with [[alto]] voltage by Elisha [[Cooks]] Jr. doesn't [[disguise]] his desires for any of the [[lady]] who sat in the front row of the [[hitting]] musical where he plays. It was a [[actual]] explicit [[call]], [[firstly]] to the "phantom [[female]]" of the [[narratives]], [[Fey]] Helm; [[thereafter]], [[Ravine]] the [[drum]], insinuates himself very [[bluntly]] to Ella Raines who goes to the theater disguised as the mystery dame her boss had taken originally.

This is a [[cinematography]] that will [[hooks]] any viewer from the beginning. There are things not [[clarified]] in it, but it holds the one's interest throughout. The killer is not revealed until the end.

Ella Raines with her expressive eyes was an under estimated actress. She holds her own against much more experienced actors. Franchot Tone, a New York stage actor, working in Hollywood, never [[find]] in this medium the fame he deserved. He is effective as the accused man's best friend. On the other hand, Alan Curtis, comes across as a man, who when framed, accepts his fate and is saved only by the tenacity of the woman who secretly loved him. Thomas Gomez, as the inspector Burgess, is an asset to the film as a detective who has his doubts the police had caught the man who committed the crime.

This movie will not disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] The question is, can a [[movie]] this entertaining really be considered a "bad" movie? My husband and I [[picked]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of [[win]] as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: Grange, this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a surprisingly awesome soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's definitely worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. The question is, can a [[filmmaking]] this entertaining really be considered a "bad" movie? My husband and I [[opting]] this up at a used video store for 99 cents simply because of the title and the fact that the box had the words "Vestron Pictures" on it (Vestron has been highly regarded as a mark of quality ever since I first acquired the legendary films "Suburbia" and "Class of 1984"). We were not expecting a movie as full of [[earn]] as this one was. Your basic plot as is follows: Grange, this goombaesque thug from planet Earth, robs "the bank of the Moon" and is sentenced to a penal colony on a remote planet (I don't even remember the planet's name) to mine for bauxite and other minerals. The "governor" of said colony and the owner of the mine are exploiting the prisoners for labor. Walker, a bounty hunter (apparently one of only three on the whole planet) reminds the prisoners that there is no escape, because there's only one shuttle out of the whole planet and they'd have him to deal with. Then there's the nameless "Colonel", a retired bounty hunter who suffers from a haunting reoccurring nightmare. Much of the movie centers around "futuristic" car chases (dunebuggies with plywood slapped to the sides) with explosions galore. The planet itself looks suspiciously like Hemet, CA or one of those other dusty Inland Empire outposts. But what makes the movie truly shine is a surprisingly awesome soundtrack featuring several LA punk bands of the mid-80s. I seriously doubt that this soundtrack was ever pressed to vinyl, but it's definitely worth buying the movie just for the soundtrack. I can't even remember the names of the bands (they're listed in the credits) other than Exploding White Mice, because that was the only one I'd heard of before I saw this movie, but I'm definitely looking into them.

Basically, the movie is definitely not a waste of your time and would be best enjoyed with a 12 pack of beer and a few of your closest friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1462 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and unbiased portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters living sad lives, but it [[hardly]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a useless role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A failure. Hubert Selby Jr. gave us the book "Requiem For A Dream" and co-wrote the screenplay to Aronofsky's movie of it. That movie succeeded on every level by delivering an intimate, and unbiased portrait of the horrors of the characters lives and the vices that destroyed them. "Last Exit To Brooklyn" still has the vice and the multiple characters living sad lives, but it [[practically]] does them the same justice Aronofsky did.

The film seems laughably anti-gay at times. Especially when in the film homosexuality equals death. One gay character gets stoned, is launched skyward by a speeding car, and lands dead on the pavement. Another is crucified and still more are simply beat up. Another exaggerated piece of shock value, that might actually have been compelling if it were done well, are scenes of the union workers literally doing battle with the strike-breakers. Who'd have thought a drama about Brooklyners would feature action sequences and truck explosions?

The director, Uli Edel has a skill level like that of a TV director, but he is far below the cut for real movies. The film is clunky that can't even seem to settle on a genre. Lake is given a useless role that any mannequin could have filled and Baldwin only seems to know how to look stupid in his equally meager part. And then comes Jennifer Jason Leigh as our lead, a loathsome hooker named Tralala (believe it or not, I'm not joking). Her performance is nothing great and the fate of her character is dirty to say the least. Poor use of color and composition make it look cheaper than it is, and also takes the "real" edge off the more provocative bits. A failure. --------------------------------------------- Result 1463 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] in this movie, joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[rest]] of the [[script]] is equally not believable.

pesci is a [[funny]] [[guy]], which [[saves]] this film from sinking int the absolute back of the [[cellar]], but the other [[roles]] were [[pretty]] [[bad]]. the [[father]] was a greedy [[businessman]] who valued [[money]] more than people, which wasn't [[even]] well-played. [[instead]] of the [[man]] being an archetypal [[villain]], he seemed more like an [[amoral]] android programmed to [[make]] money at all costs. then there's the token piece that is [[assigned]] to pesci as a [[girlfriend]] or [[something]]...i don't [[even]] [[remember]]...she was that forgettable.

[[anyone]] who rates this [[movie]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[paid]] member of some [[sort]] of [[film]] studio [[trying]] to up the [[reputation]] of this sunken film, or at [[least]] one of those [[millions]] of media [[minions]] who can't [[critique]] efficiently (you know, the people who feel bad if they [[give]] [[anything]] a [[mark]] below 6).

[[stay]] away...far away. and [[shame]] on [[comedy]] central, where i [[saw]] this film. they [[usually]] [[pick]] better. in this movie, joe pesci slams dunks a basketball. joe pesci...

and being consistent, the [[repose]] of the [[hyphen]] is equally not believable.

pesci is a [[hilarious]] [[mec]], which [[rescues]] this film from sinking int the absolute back of the [[cava]], but the other [[duties]] were [[quite]] [[faulty]]. the [[fathers]] was a greedy [[trader]] who valued [[cash]] more than people, which wasn't [[yet]] well-played. [[however]] of the [[men]] being an archetypal [[scoundrel]], he seemed more like an [[immoral]] android programmed to [[deliver]] money at all costs. then there's the token piece that is [[ascribed]] to pesci as a [[amie]] or [[somethin]]...i don't [[yet]] [[recalling]]...she was that forgettable.

[[everyone]] who rates this [[film]] above a 5 or 6 is a [[pays]] member of some [[sorting]] of [[kino]] studio [[seeking]] to up the [[notoriety]] of this sunken film, or at [[fewest]] one of those [[zillion]] of media [[lackeys]] who can't [[criticised]] efficiently (you know, the people who feel bad if they [[confer]] [[nothing]] a [[brands]] below 6).

[[staying]] away...far away. and [[dishonor]] on [[humor]] central, where i [[observed]] this film. they [[often]] [[picks]] better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1464 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I must [[admit]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit [[skeptical]]. "Steamy"? In a movie from 1968?? I was prepared for disappointment. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[knew]] my erotic [[hopes]] were dashed.

Boy, was I wrong! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was [[downright]] erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its time. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. I must [[accepted]], when I read the description of the genre on Netflix as "Steamy Romance" I was a little bit [[incredulous]]. "Steamy"? In a movie from 1968?? I was prepared for disappointment. And when I realized it was shot entirely in black & white, I [[overheard]] my erotic [[waits]] were dashed.

Boy, was I wrong! Not only does this film have all of the elements of a steamy romance -- the discovery of first love, fear of the secret being found out, a sudden unexpected end -- but at times this movie was [[fully]] erotic. You will soon forget that it is shot in black & white. The cinematography deserves every accolade it has received over the years. And the performances from the two stars (Essy Persson and Anna Gael) are intense and memorable. OK, so they're both in their mid twenties trying to play school girls. It's 1968. Do you really expect teenagers from the '60s to be able to effectively explore a lesbian love story like this? Many adult women were still trying to come to grips with their sexuality back then. Anyone looking for real teens here is expecting too much.

I think this movie was way ahead of its time. The level of eroticism was an unexpected pleasure; yet it still managed to leave a lot to the imagination, opting instead to give us poetic descriptions to add to what we were shown.

I have no doubt lesbians will identify with the characters here. As for you straight guys who love watching lesbians in action: Although it won't be all you expect, I don't think you'll be too, too disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1465 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I first saw this [[movie]] in my plays & playwrights [[course]] at Tulane. I was [[awed]] at how [[beautiful]] and raw this [[documentary]] was. It is a [[sincere]] look into the unedited [[reality]] of a [[life]] of solitude. The family is fascinating and I thought it [[really]] [[showed]] Little Edie at her [[core]]. **As a side [[note]] My [[professor]] [[even]] [[told]] me that throughout the filming, [[Little]] Edie became infatuated with one of the camera men.** The beauty, I [[find]], comes from the naturalness of the family's [[dysfunction]]. It is [[evident]] in the [[relationship]] between [[mother]] and daughter that neither could function in society [[alone]] and you [[begin]] to wish for [[Little]] Edie's [[rehabilitation]] to society. In all, the film is gripping in its [[aesthetic]] quality and it's portrayal of surprising beauty. Two thumbs way up! I first saw this [[cinematography]] in my plays & playwrights [[cours]] at Tulane. I was [[dumbfounded]] at how [[glamorous]] and raw this [[literature]] was. It is a [[deepest]] look into the unedited [[realistic]] of a [[living]] of solitude. The family is fascinating and I thought it [[truly]] [[proved]] Little Edie at her [[nub]]. **As a side [[remark]] My [[educator]] [[yet]] [[say]] me that throughout the filming, [[Scant]] Edie became infatuated with one of the camera men.** The beauty, I [[found]], comes from the naturalness of the family's [[dysfunctional]]. It is [[flagrant]] in the [[relations]] between [[mam]] and daughter that neither could function in society [[merely]] and you [[initiates]] to wish for [[Scant]] Edie's [[regeneration]] to society. In all, the film is gripping in its [[cosmetic]] quality and it's portrayal of surprising beauty. Two thumbs way up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[comedy]], Manuel [[Gomez]] Pereira [[made]] this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[discovery]], by [[many]] voice you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs [[somewhat]] from the [[norm]] in the Spanish [[cinema]]. The [[downside]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly combined, and while some points are not well developed, [[others]] are out of place. A day in the [[lives]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge (Eduard Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, despite load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things change. Only this explains his [[commitment]] to a minor [[could]] mean a [[turning]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge says things like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to change my luck. " Of course it finds it, begins to play 'Today could be a great day' (Hoy puede ser un gran dia)by Joan Manuel Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[woman]] entry [[age]], divorced and a little lonely. Take valeriana for sleeping, organizes birthday parties as an exemplary mother, said her [[belief]] in [[God]] and leads to a speed of [[homicidal]] [[mother]]. Hortensia is a [[woman]] of many contradictions in his behavior, [[life]] was going in his head driving data as "70% of people fall in love only once in a [[lifetime]]" and said although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[preclude]] the possibility that it is a "sadistic" sleeping in his shoulder in the [[cinema]] at the earliest opportunity. Later came a communion, a dance in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a car and other things that players seem to live unique experiences like that but end up doing quite heavy for the viewer. 'Things that make life worthwhile' debate between us is the drama of two adult persons who have no other that leads them to see where their strange relationship and, conversely, make us take the case as a comedy, focusing on things like a Chinese singing at a wedding (which seem to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. [[During]] what appears an attempt to mix drama and [[parody]], Manuel [[Rodrigues]] Pereira [[introduced]] this film, 'Things that make life worthwhile. "It is not an original [[detecting]], by [[innumerable]] voice you have (quite off the pitch, by the way), but it departs [[slightly]] from the [[norma]] in the Spanish [[cine]]. The [[drawback]] is that the elements forming the film are poorly combined, and while some points are not well developed, [[alia]] are out of place. A day in the [[inhabits]] of two people close to the median age. It's basically what the movie Gómez Pereira. Jorge (Eduard Fernandez) is a stationary (parado) one which, despite load on your back with a drama major, seems willing to see things change. Only this explains his [[pledged]] to a minor [[did]] mean a [[turn]] point in its existence. In line with Audrey Tautou of 'Long dating' (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2004), Jorge says things like this to herself: "if I find a coin before the corner that is now going to change my luck. " Of course it finds it, begins to play 'Today could be a great day' (Hoy puede ser un gran dia)by Joan Manuel Serrat and in a few crosses on its way Hortensia (Ana Belen).She is another [[girls]] entry [[older]], divorced and a little lonely. Take valeriana for sleeping, organizes birthday parties as an exemplary mother, said her [[faith]] in [[Lord]] and leads to a speed of [[bloody]] [[mothers]]. Hortensia is a [[girls]] of many contradictions in his behavior, [[iife]] was going in his head driving data as "70% of people fall in love only once in a [[lifespan]]" and said although it is short of Jorge and unemployed and does not [[precludes]] the possibility that it is a "sadistic" sleeping in his shoulder in the [[movies]] at the earliest opportunity. Later came a communion, a dance in the luxurious wedding banquet, the back of a car and other things that players seem to live unique experiences like that but end up doing quite heavy for the viewer. 'Things that make life worthwhile' debate between us is the drama of two adult persons who have no other that leads them to see where their strange relationship and, conversely, make us take the case as a comedy, focusing on things like a Chinese singing at a wedding (which seem to be amusing in itself) or the gait of a drunk person. The problem is that it does not leave us time to connect with the players, therefore we can not identify with the dramatic, and not give us a solid base comic too, leaving everything except pure joke. In the end, all mixed in a way that the viewer no longer know very well whether to laugh or mourn, and ends up not doing either. And it is true that something is not seen a thousand times, is not the kind of film that we find to bend every corner, but it is not sufficiently different or special as we want to do. Ana Belén (which apparently far less than the 53 years that has in this film) and Eduard Fernandez are two actors who are very enjoyable to see working, but this time it seems ready or comfortable enough in scenes that require him to break the calm that prevails in the film, so in moments like the "accident" with the children of the bar thing seems to be slipping from their hands. Perhaps a very dramatic change that has to do, but that is no excuse to lower our guard. In any case, both interpreters are erected easily the highlight of the function. 'Things that make life worthwhile' work only up to the modest level of entertainment. Any claim that is beyond that point has not been fulfilled, as a romantic comedy or dramatic as that, we presume, they wanted to do, can not afford to have little moments finished successful (beyond bad) as that in which one of the characters talk and laugh, lost drunk, compared to a boy who remains in a coma in part because of him. Neither do much for people like Rosario Pardo, making the typical friend launched whose biggest contribution to the film is the phrase "must be screwed over," and songs from the soundtrack, though significant, not just fit. It is true that the film by Manuel Gomez Pereira has its hits (some of the moments involving Jose Sacristan), but the whole is a anodyne Story, a film with good intentions and a nice result when the better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I [[seriously]] do not understand what the other [[reviewers]] have [[seen]] in this [[appalling]] train-crash of a [[film]]. It was only through [[morbid]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[see]] what [[bizarre]] or inept decision the director would make next.

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. In fact, I think the real reason lies with the studio bosses, who must have been horrified when they saw what he had done with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. Relative to other Columbo movies, this can only be rated a 1 (awful). I [[harshly]] do not understand what the other [[reviewer]] have [[watched]] in this [[frightening]] train-crash of a [[kino]]. It was only through [[pathology]] fascination that I continued to watch it - to [[seeing]] what [[surreal]] or inept decision the director would make next.

Another reviewer suggested that it was Falk's only directorial outing because it interfered with his acting role. In fact, I think the real reason lies with the studio bosses, who must have been horrified when they saw what he had done with their money. It's a wonder they didn't murder HIM. --------------------------------------------- Result 1468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] A [[kid]] with ideals who tries to change things around him. A [[boy]] who is forced to become a man, because of the system. A system who hides the truth, and who is [[violating]] the rights of existence. A [[boy]] who, inspired by Martin Luther King, [[stands]] up, and tells the truth. A family who is [[falling]] [[apart]], and [[fighting]] against it. A [[movie]] you can't [[hide]] from. You see [[things]], and you hear things, and you feel things, that you till the day you die will hope have never happened for real. Violence, frustration, abuse of power, [[parents]] who can't do anything, and a boy with, I am sorry, balls, a boy who will not accept things, who will not let anything happen to him, a kid with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never done anything else, he caries this movie to the end, and [[anyone]] who wants to see how abuse found place back in the 60'ies. A [[kiddo]] with ideals who tries to change things around him. A [[bloke]] who is forced to become a man, because of the system. A system who hides the truth, and who is [[rape]] the rights of existence. A [[fella]] who, inspired by Martin Luther King, [[standing]] up, and tells the truth. A family who is [[dipping]] [[additionally]], and [[gunfight]] against it. A [[cinematography]] you can't [[cache]] from. You see [[items]], and you hear things, and you feel things, that you till the day you die will hope have never happened for real. Violence, frustration, abuse of power, [[parent]] who can't do anything, and a boy with, I am sorry, balls, a boy who will not accept things, who will not let anything happen to him, a kid with power, and a kid who acts like a pro, like he has never done anything else, he caries this movie to the end, and [[nobody]] who wants to see how abuse found place back in the 60'ies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1469 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (61%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I didn't really expect much from "The Night Listener" and I actually never heard of it until I saw the cover in the videostore. However, the movie is very effective when it comes to building up suspension and tension. On occasion it drags a little, but it actually helps to keep you wondering what's going to happen and more importantly: when. As the movie progresses, the character played by Robin Williams gets dragged into some kind of "cat and mouse" spiel to the point where he becomes obsessed with finding out the truth and existence about a 14 year old abused kid that no-one seemed to have ever seen in person. The Night Listener is an interesting story, which is great in building up the suspense throughout the movie and you're pretty much kept in the dark of who is lying and what's real. However, in the end it kind of disappoints and doesn't live up to the potential it could have had. It doesn't really give you a detailed or plausible explanation about the other main character, which would have been helpful and interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 1470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (74%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A pale shadow of a great musical, this movie suffers from the fact that the [[director]], Richard Attenborough, [[completely]] misses the point of the musical, needlessly "opens" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The show is about a group of dancers auditioning for a job in a B'way musical and examines their drive & desire to work in this demanding and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of hopefuls, assuming that they are trying to get their "big break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the size of the original audition and the true scale of shrinkage down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived film. A pale shadow of a great musical, this movie suffers from the fact that the [[headmaster]], Richard Attenborough, [[altogether]] misses the point of the musical, needlessly "opens" it up, and muddies the thrust of the play. The show is about a group of dancers auditioning for a job in a B'way musical and examines their drive & desire to work in this demanding and not-always-rewarding line of work. Attenborough gives us a fresh-faced cast of hopefuls, assuming that they are trying to get their "big break" in show business, rather than presenting the grittier mix of characters created on stage as a group of working "gypsies" living show to show, along with a couple of newcomers. The film has one advantage over the play and that is the opening scene, showing the size of the original audition and the true scale of shrinkage down to the 16/17 on the line (depending on how you count Cassie, who is stupidly kept out of the line in the movie). Anyone who can catch a local civic light opera production of the play will have a much richer experience than seeing this poorly-conceived film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1471 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wouldn't say this is a *bad* movie. Unfortunately for me, I get the feeling that the more you know about fencing, the worse it gets simply due to the fact that it becomes totally unrealistic. I've been fencing since i was 14 years old, and this movie portrays it very poorly. F. Murray Abraham is good (and appears to have some fencing background), but most of the other actors--especially the students--just seem to be lost. --------------------------------------------- Result 1472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The third and [[last]] [[part]] of the [[Bourne]] trilogy (duh), is [[lacking]] a [[bit]] in the story department, but [[covers]] it with extensive action scenes! Twi in [[particular]] take up [[quite]] some of the running time and [[make]] this [[movie]] better.

The director and star (Damon) themselves [[agreed]] that it was [[difficult]] to find a story for the last part, because the end of the second [[movie]] was quite ... advanced story-wise. How they got around that? The action scenes, for once, but they did another thing too, which I can't reveal, because that would be a spoiler. But if you watch the movie, than you'll notice it! Funnily enough I read, that this adaptation of the Bourne books is the least accurate of all three films .. if that means anything to you :o) The third and [[latter]] [[portion]] of the [[Bourn]] trilogy (duh), is [[lacks]] a [[bite]] in the story department, but [[covering]] it with extensive action scenes! Twi in [[special]] take up [[rather]] some of the running time and [[deliver]] this [[cinematography]] better.

The director and star (Damon) themselves [[accepted]] that it was [[laborious]] to find a story for the last part, because the end of the second [[filmmaking]] was quite ... advanced story-wise. How they got around that? The action scenes, for once, but they did another thing too, which I can't reveal, because that would be a spoiler. But if you watch the movie, than you'll notice it! Funnily enough I read, that this adaptation of the Bourne books is the least accurate of all three films .. if that means anything to you :o) --------------------------------------------- Result 1473 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This film has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[worst]] movies ever made. True, most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond bad into the realm of horrible. There is not one [[scary]] moment in it [[unless]] you consider stupidity scary. It is [[typical]] King garbage -- myths twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[scares]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at least, is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. This film has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the [[gravest]] movies ever made. True, most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond bad into the realm of horrible. There is not one [[terrible]] moment in it [[if]] you consider stupidity scary. It is [[classic]] King garbage -- myths twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "[[terrifies]]" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at least, is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1474 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[sat]] through this film and i have to [[say]] it only just managed to keep my attention. The film [[would]] have been a bit more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[awful]] CGI, for future reference to the [[industry]] if your going to [[use]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[avoid]].

Apparently this is [[supposed]] to be a graphic novel for the screen but all i saw was a [[bad]] [[movie]] which bears no [[resemblance]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. I [[oin]] through this film and i have to [[tell]] it only just managed to keep my attention. The film [[could]] have been a bit more bearable if i did not have to watch the [[scary]] CGI, for future reference to the [[industries]] if your going to [[usage]] CGI watch this so you know what to [[preventing]].

Apparently this is [[presumed]] to be a graphic novel for the screen but all i saw was a [[inclement]] [[kino]] which bears no [[likeness]] to a graphic novel whatsoever.

All in all, the story was not as bad as the CGI, i was quite impressed with the acting and thought the casting was good and little more character info would have been nice as it did get a little confusing for me on occasion but that's not surprising as like i said it only just kept my attention, but in all honestly i wish i had given this one a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 1475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Why, oh, why won't they learn? When you've got a nice, juicy [[exploitation]] [[gimmick]], use it! Don't go messing around trying to get all deep and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking foolish.

Christmas Evil is the story of Harry Stadling, who saw a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a kid. So, of course, Harry grows up obsessed with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple enough, and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. Why, oh, why won't they learn? When you've got a nice, juicy [[operate]] [[trick]], use it! Don't go messing around trying to get all deep and thoughtful; you're only gonna wind up looking foolish.

Christmas Evil is the story of Harry Stadling, who saw a little bit too much of Mommy kissing (Daddy-dressed-as-)Santa Claus back when he was a kid. So, of course, Harry grows up obsessed with Christmas, and finally, when his disillusionment becomes too great, he flips out, dresses as Santa, and wanders the city giving out toys to good little children, and viciously killing anyone he deems naughty.

Simple enough, and not a bad place to start. (After all, how many other holiday-themed horror flicks use the same schtick?) Unfortunately, this film wants to be more "Santa, Portrait of a Serial Killer" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night". Two-thirds of the film are spent documenting Harry's slow but inevitable breakdown, when I would have been willing to buy the premise by the time the opening titles were rolling. You know a slasher film is in trouble when you find yourself urging the killer to just get on with it already.

Perhaps Harry's descent into madness could have been compelling in the hands of a competent director, but alas, we've got some guy named Lewis Jackson. Apparently, this is his only film, and it shows. The action jumps giddily from scene to scene, without establishing shots or clear views of the actors to let us know where we are and who we are seeing.

Even once the film gets rolling, we're still treated to heaping helpings of Harry's self-pity, insecurity, and neurotic behavior. More depressing than frightening, Christmas Evil is one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I [[loved]] the Batman tv series and was really looking forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the story of Adam West and Burt Ward trying to recover the batmobile was [[beyond]] me. I don't [[want]] to knock Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 years since they appeared at Batman and [[Robin]], but to see them dressed in dress suits and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I would rather of just seen the ex-stars do [[commentary]]. The batmobile side [[story]] was [[stupid]].

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my opinion. I'd like more background. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to tell the same stuff I already knew. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the book. I am sure it has more in it that this showed. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 Mister Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister Freeze, King Tut, etc. the List goes on. Like I said even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

[[Very]] [[disappointing]]. And really corny. I [[adores]] the Batman tv series and was really looking forward to this. But they tried to do too much.

Why they had the story of Adam West and Burt Ward trying to recover the batmobile was [[afterlife]] me. I don't [[desiring]] to knock Burt or Adam for the way they look now.....It's been 35 years since they appeared at Batman and [[Robben]], but to see them dressed in dress suits and fighting 'badguys' was kinda sad. I would rather of just seen the ex-stars do [[remark]]. The batmobile side [[storytelling]] was [[twit]].

As for the flashback movie, I think it was too short and left out way too much. It was really just a quick overview in my opinion. I'd like more background. They showed the Penguin and Joker for about a minute each just to tell the same stuff I already knew. The Joker had a mustache under his makeup and the penguin had to smoke even though he hated it and was an ex-smoker. That was it on those 2.

I'd love to read the book. I am sure it has more in it that this showed. Like why was there 2 Riddlers or why 3 Catwoman's or 3 Mister Freezes. Where was Commishioner Gordon, Cheif OHara, Alfred, Mister Freeze, King Tut, etc. the List goes on. Like I said even the ones that were in this one were barely in it.

[[Hugely]] [[disappointed]]. And really corny. --------------------------------------------- Result 1477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Mary Poppins is definitely much better, but this is a [[lovely]] [[film]] nonetheless. Angela Lansbury is splendidly dotty as Engletine Price, and David Tomlinson has great fun as Mr. Brown. Their chemistry was just brilliant as well. The [[children]], however just lacked the same sparkle, [[though]] Paul is very funny and cute. The songs were actually not as bad as some people say, "Beautiful Briny Sea" is the best, in fact all the songs are [[outstanding]]. The special effects were wonderful, that had plenty of magic, and the story is original enough. The highlights, though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was beautiful, but my favourite was the football match, which was absolutely hilarious. The only other criticism was that I didn't quite get the ending when I first saw it. All in all, a [[lovely]] film, that is hardly ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox Mary Poppins is definitely much better, but this is a [[sumptuous]] [[cinematography]] nonetheless. Angela Lansbury is splendidly dotty as Engletine Price, and David Tomlinson has great fun as Mr. Brown. Their chemistry was just brilliant as well. The [[infantile]], however just lacked the same sparkle, [[despite]] Paul is very funny and cute. The songs were actually not as bad as some people say, "Beautiful Briny Sea" is the best, in fact all the songs are [[unpaid]]. The special effects were wonderful, that had plenty of magic, and the story is original enough. The highlights, though, like Mary Poppins, were the animated sequences. The underwater sequence was beautiful, but my favourite was the football match, which was absolutely hilarious. The only other criticism was that I didn't quite get the ending when I first saw it. All in all, a [[sumptuous]] film, that is hardly ever on. 8/10 Bethany Cox --------------------------------------------- Result 1478 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Okay]], I seriously CAN'T think of anything [[worse]] than the PR series. There are many bad things in life...traitors, liars, etc. But [[seriously]], Power Rangers has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[list]]. Can you think of [[anything]] more [[stupid]] than five-six [[teenagers]] (who don't [[even]] act like a normal teen) dancing around in [[identical]] suits WITH DIFFERENT [[COLORS]] SO THAT YOU CAN TELL THEM [[APART]]? Fans, have you ever come [[across]] a real person who gets flung against a mental wall and gets up almost immediately and continues to fight without getting injured? Power Rangers are for five-year old boys, and believe me, I never liked this show even when I was five.

I guess you can say Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens actually ACT like teens, and Tommy Oliver actually acts like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, though the fighting is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

Many people say Power Rangers are crap, but I wouldn't. It would be an insult to crap. So face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is rubbish. [[Ok]], I seriously CAN'T think of anything [[lousiest]] than the PR series. There are many bad things in life...traitors, liars, etc. But [[earnestly]], Power Rangers has GOT to be at the bottom of this [[listings]]. Can you think of [[somethings]] more [[moronic]] than five-six [[adolescence]] (who don't [[yet]] act like a normal teen) dancing around in [[selfsame]] suits WITH DIFFERENT [[COLOURED]] SO THAT YOU CAN TELL THEM [[ALSO]]? Fans, have you ever come [[throughout]] a real person who gets flung against a mental wall and gets up almost immediately and continues to fight without getting injured? Power Rangers are for five-year old boys, and believe me, I never liked this show even when I was five.

I guess you can say Dino Thunder is an exception. The teens actually ACT like teens, and Tommy Oliver actually acts like a mentor, or no, a teacher. It's got teen-humor, though the fighting is lame, I don't hate Dino Thunder.

Many people say Power Rangers are crap, but I wouldn't. It would be an insult to crap. So face it, five year old boys, Power Rangers is rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 1479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt [[compelled]] to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets feelings in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a [[great]] start for all Americans to begin the [[healing]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . Incredibly [[emotional]] movie. I would highly recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" Great DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides Having Just "Welcomed Home" my 23 YR old daughter from a year in Iraq, Camp Anaconda medical support unit, I felt [[obligated]] to get this DVD. I wanted to hear other returning vets feelings in order to attempt to better understand her mentality on arrival and not waiting until after something bad happened. Regardless on your take on the war and peace this movie serves as a [[whopping]] start for all Americans to begin the [[curative]] of our returning vets emotional void. The paramount statement of the entire movie is "Take Action" on the problem . Incredibly [[affective]] movie. I would highly recommend this movie to the vet the vets entire mature family and ask that they follow through with a plan to listen comfort help the returning Gulf War Enduring Freedom vets.

Fast forward nearly one year later & My daughter has seen this DVD. Took account of her emotions and actually has made a commitment to re-up for another 6 years. Her take on her time spent in the sand is that she did some good. Local Balad children got first rate medical treatment for various common ailments not ordinarily able to afford free with an escort and translator. Her look over her shoulder at her Iraq tour was . "We changed some hearts and minds back there" Great DVD you have to keep an open mind and see all sides --------------------------------------------- Result 1480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] If ever there were an inspiring story that could [[move]] anyone, disabled or not, to [[persevere]] despite the odds and make it (even when "make it" as an expression, proper, can have a wide berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY LEFT FOOT is it. It's a [[hard]] [[film]] to watch at times: seeing the [[less]] [[placid]] aspects of [[Christy]] Brown's personality emerge in two key scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get married while his father has a bad reaction, and at a dinner table when the woman who's reached out to him, made him able to communicate effectively, now has announced at a key moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to marry another man -- is tough. Very, very tough. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these events and can only express himself in the only way he knows how: via screams, shrieks, and profanities aimed at hurting himself. However, this is not a story of heartache and family dysfunction even when there is quite a bit of it furnishing the autobiographical account, but that of a man overcoming his severe disability, becoming a functioning human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art world. Daniel Day Lewis won an Oscar for his powerful, unforgettable performance as the flawed but tenacious Christy Brown, and Brenda Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's solid mother. If ever there were an inspiring story that could [[budge]] anyone, disabled or not, to [[continue]] despite the odds and make it (even when "make it" as an expression, proper, can have a wide berth which is an ultimately personal truth), MY LEFT FOOT is it. It's a [[laborious]] [[cinematic]] to watch at times: seeing the [[lowest]] [[serene]] aspects of [[Kristy]] Brown's personality emerge in two key scenes -- one when his sister declares she is pregnant and about to get married while his father has a bad reaction, and at a dinner table when the woman who's reached out to him, made him able to communicate effectively, now has announced at a key moment (the inauguration of Brown's art) she is about to marry another man -- is tough. Very, very tough. More so because this is a man who cannot react accordingly to these events and can only express himself in the only way he knows how: via screams, shrieks, and profanities aimed at hurting himself. However, this is not a story of heartache and family dysfunction even when there is quite a bit of it furnishing the autobiographical account, but that of a man overcoming his severe disability, becoming a functioning human being and a force of be reckoned with in the art world. Daniel Day Lewis won an Oscar for his powerful, unforgettable performance as the flawed but tenacious Christy Brown, and Brenda Fricker did so as well for her supporting role as Brown's solid mother. --------------------------------------------- Result 1481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[great]] [[combination]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. Picking up exactly where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, though that doesn't last; for better or worse), this [[installation]] in the franchise seems somewhat more [[bent]] on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one [[long]] stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very diverse and pretty eccentric. Both qualities show in this. The plot continues its excellence, now giving a few regular characters that were minor players in the previous four episodes more attention. Basically every character from the first returns, at least as far as the main [[roles]] go. The pacing isn't as sharp as in the first part, and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any kind of way to say that this didn't involve me, though... I still found myself constantly watching, and at several points reacting strongly, often out loud, to what was going on(extremely unusual behavior for me, as I am an incredibly [[silent]] [[person]]), as I [[also]] was during the first. Like the first, this also [[brings]] up some [[loaded]] ethical [[questions]]. [[Building]] on the [[foundation]] from the first, this [[brings]] the [[story]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[also]] [[bigger]]. [[Grander]]. [[More]] [[spirits]], more [[bizarre]] [[occurrences]], more subplots. The [[strong]] [[graphic]] [[material]] of the first [[also]] [[returns]], and it's been [[kicked]] up a notch. The [[characters]] are [[developed]] further. The acting is [[amazing]], as that of the [[first]]. Udo Kier solidifies his [[immense]] talent, to [[anyone]] who [[doubted]] it. [[Playing]] a very [[difficult]] [[character]]([[anyone]] who has [[seen]] the [[first]] [[series]] can most [[likely]] figure out what I [[mean]]) *and* acting in a [[language]] he didn't [[speak]](he was [[later]] dubbed)... and [[still]] handing in such a [[strong]] performance. The [[cinematography]] remains [[great]], and is [[still]] very hand-held, with rapid zooms and the occasional [[long]] take. The editing is sharp, with a few direct cuts in sound(though these were more prominent in the first). Now, with all that said, I would really like to be able to rate this a perfect 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't regret it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first part had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are basically copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... definitely enjoyable, compelling, powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 Wow... 5 more hours of Riget. Lars continues the [[whopping]] [[jumpsuit]] of occult, dark horror and soap-opera drama. Picking up exactly where the last episode of the previous series left off(complete with the same high intensity and suspense, though that doesn't last; for better or worse), this [[facilities]] in the franchise seems somewhat more [[warped]] on haste... in the last series, there seemed to pass a day or a week between each episode, whereas in this, it clearly is one [[protracted]] stretch... where one episode ends, the next begins. A lot can be said about Lars von Trier... but he is very diverse and pretty eccentric. Both qualities show in this. The plot continues its excellence, now giving a few regular characters that were minor players in the previous four episodes more attention. Basically every character from the first returns, at least as far as the main [[functions]] go. The pacing isn't as sharp as in the first part, and I found myself less gripped by this one. That is not in any kind of way to say that this didn't involve me, though... I still found myself constantly watching, and at several points reacting strongly, often out loud, to what was going on(extremely unusual behavior for me, as I am an incredibly [[mute]] [[somebody]]), as I [[similarly]] was during the first. Like the first, this also [[poses]] up some [[uploaded]] ethical [[issues]]. [[Build]] on the [[bases]] from the first, this [[poses]] the [[history]] further... and being a sequel, the scope is [[apart]] [[fatter]]. [[Largest]]. [[Most]] [[liquors]], more [[inquisitive]] [[phenomena]], more subplots. The [[vigorous]] [[diagram]] [[materials]] of the first [[similarly]] [[restitution]], and it's been [[knocked]] up a notch. The [[hallmarks]] are [[devised]] further. The acting is [[admirable]], as that of the [[fiirst]]. Udo Kier solidifies his [[sizable]] talent, to [[somebody]] who [[questioned]] it. [[Gaming]] a very [[cumbersome]] [[trait]]([[whoever]] who has [[watched]] the [[outset]] [[serials]] can most [[probable]] figure out what I [[imply]]) *and* acting in a [[linguistics]] he didn't [[talk]](he was [[thereafter]] dubbed)... and [[again]] handing in such a [[vigorous]] performance. The [[films]] remains [[phenomenal]], and is [[however]] very hand-held, with rapid zooms and the occasional [[protracted]] take. The editing is sharp, with a few direct cuts in sound(though these were more prominent in the first). Now, with all that said, I would really like to be able to rate this a perfect 10... or at least just under, like the first four episodes. I truly enjoyed watching, and I don't regret it in the least. But this does have shortcomings... the ones the first part had and more. As the first, the humor just takes up too much space... and this time around, it's even worse. There are several new regular characters that are there for no other reason than to provide comic relief... three of them, no less. Scenes are set up and executed for no other reason than to make the audience laugh. Fine for a comedy, but what is it doing in such a dark and unpleasant, yes, nothing short of sadistic at times, horror piece? Helmer's solitary secret hiding place of solitude is changed from the hospital roof... from which he could see his beloved Sweden... to a bathroom. With an angle from inside the bowl. No, you read that right. In general, the humor seems more low-brow... more sex and bodily function jokes, which, again, begs the question "Why?". Whilst most of the writing is excellent, some of it is downright dire. Several scenes are basically copied from the first mini-series(one would guess due to their popularity when it aired). At times, the drama seems a bit more bombastic than that of the first, and it jumps too much at times. Fortunately seldom, but still noticeably, plot points and items are explained away too easily(a certain character living in Denmark for no apparent reason, for example... anyone who's seen it knows who I'm speaking of). The two dishwashers, while still mysterious and insightful, become too much of a gimmick... too overexposed, in the end, I guess. Most of the scenes with them are still enjoyable, though. In addition to that, I want to reassure any reader of this that in spite of all the negative things I have just written that this is still mostly good... definitely enjoyable, compelling, powerful... and in my humble opinion, it should definitely be seen by anyone who liked the first(though if belong in that group; do not expect to feel that the story is finished after watching this any more than you did after the first). I recommend this to any fan of Lars von Trier and anyone who enjoyed the first Riget and wants more where that came from. I urge anyone who's even considering watching this to make sure you've seen all of the first before you do... I bought this before I bought the first, but I held out on watching until I had bought the first and watched that, and I can't tell you how glad I am that I did. Though this features a brief summary of the events in the first, there are an immense amount of details and aspects that you would miss out on if you didn't see it before watching this. Slightly lesser sequel, but definitely still one to watch if you liked the first. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I can't come up with appropriate enough [[words]] to [[describe]] the [[horror]] I felt [[sitting]] in that cinema watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[attempt]] to [[pay]] tribute to that classic Bollywood western, Sholay. The [[biggest]] problem with Varma's remake is that he doesn't [[even]] [[try]] to make a [[credible]] film. It's [[evident]] in [[every]] [[single]] frame of this movie that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[gimmick]] on the part of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[see]] what [[little]] regard he actually shows for a film he claims he's been a fan of all his life.I've seen several bad films over the years, but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to sit through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the entire film, because it tests your patience like few films have before.Varma may borrow his plot and characters from the original film, but his version is trite and hollow and doesn't have any of the spirit and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is actually a [[mockery]] of that timeless gem because it turns out to be everything that the original film was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and entirely mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you want to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru climbs up the watertank and threatens to jump down to his death is turned around in this film with Ajay Devgan playing Hero, pulling a pistol to his head threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd pulled the trigger and spared us all the agony.Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[bad]] effort even as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging background score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[terrible]] [[crime]] of bringing this ridiculous film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. I can't come up with appropriate enough [[phrases]] to [[contour]] the [[terror]] I felt [[seated]] in that cinema watching Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, the director's half-hearted [[endeavours]] to [[pays]] tribute to that classic Bollywood western, Sholay. The [[grandest]] problem with Varma's remake is that he doesn't [[yet]] [[tried]] to make a [[plausible]] film. It's [[apparent]] in [[all]] [[exclusive]] frame of this movie that Varma's heart is just not in it. What you see on screen is a bad joke at best, a [[trick]] on the part of the filmmaker, and it pains you to [[behold]] what [[small]] regard he actually shows for a film he claims he's been a fan of all his life.I've seen several bad films over the years, but I can't remember one that's been as much of a torture to sit through as this one. Consider yourself very brave if you're able to survive the entire film, because it tests your patience like few films have before.Varma may borrow his plot and characters from the original film, but his version is trite and hollow and doesn't have any of the spirit and energy of Sholay. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is actually a [[farce]] of that timeless gem because it turns out to be everything that the original film was not - way-over-the-top, too-long-too-boring, and entirely mindless. Much-loved moments from Sholay are parodied by Varma and for that you want to wring his neck. One of the most memorable scenes in Sholay in which Dharmendra as Veeru climbs up the watertank and threatens to jump down to his death is turned around in this film with Ajay Devgan playing Hero, pulling a pistol to his head threatening to shoot himself. How you wish he'd pulled the trigger and spared us all the agony.Not only does Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag fail as a remake of Sholay, it's a pretty [[horrid]] effort even as a stand-alone film. The eardrum-damaging background score sounds more like someone clanging vessels in the kitchen, and the camera-work alternates between dramatic and head-spinning. Partners in this [[scary]] [[criminality]] of bringing this ridiculous film to screen are the film's mostly dead-as-wood actors. Sushmita Sen as Devi the widow takes both her role and the film too seriously, punctuating her lines with pauses, staring into camera for effect, and generally performing like her life depends upon it. Mohanlal as Narsimha, struggles with his Hindi dialogue and looks embarrassed to be delivering some of the stupidest lines in his illustrious career. Newcomer Prashant Raj playing Jai-equivalent Raj has no acting chops to speak of and can't strum up any of the brooding intensity Amitabh Bachchan brought to the part in the original film.As Hero, the new-age Veeru, Ajay Devgan is entirely hopeless, failing miserably in his attempts at comedy. But the film's weakest link, easily the most shocking casting decision is Nisha Kothari as Ghunghroo, who steps into the shoes of Hema Malini as Basanti, the endearing airhead from Sholay. Nisha Kothari is not only the worst actress in this country, but possibly the worst actress in this whole wide world, she gives the word annoying a whole new meaning, and she makes you want to slit your wrists every time she's on screen. And then, there is Amitabh Bachchan playing Babban Singh, Ramgopal Varma's version of Hindi cinema's most popular villain Gabbar Singh. The only actor in this ensemble who recognises the film's over-the-top tone and plays along accordingly, Bachchan constructs a menacing character who is a treat to watch. He's meant to be a comic book villain who snarls and sneers and hisses and hams, and he does all of that to good effect. But because he's trapped in such a doomed enterprise, his performance doesn't really help elevate the film in any way.No surprises here, I'm going with zero out of ten and two thumbs down for Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag, it one's of those painful movie-watching experiences you wouldn't subject even an enemy to. It's not like Varma hasn't handled a remake before. With Sarkar he gave us a smart, gripping take on The Godfather, and it's a pity he's made this Sholay bhature out of such a much-loved classic. Ramgopal Varma Ki Aag is his worst career decision ever, it's also a dark spot on his resume he'll be embarrassed of forever. I suspect this film will go down in movie history as Ramgopal Varma Ka Daag. --------------------------------------------- Result 1483 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is an [[almost]] action-less [[film]] following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

Dominic Monaghan, as Jack, is [[truly]] [[believable]]. Confused, and scared but lethargic and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, mind boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. This is an [[practically]] action-less [[cinematography]] following Jack, an insomniac, as he goes through hallucinations, is visited by dead friends, throws himself off a building, and, for a lot of the time, can't tell reality from hallucination.

Dominic Monaghan, as Jack, is [[really]] [[dependable]]. Confused, and scared but lethargic and, at times blankly accepting of what he sees, we follow him trying to sort out what he's seeing and find a way to sleep.

Introduce a talking dog (another hallucination) and children that suddenly appear in Jack's bathroom and bedroom without any explanation as to how they got there (more hallucination) and you have an interesting, mind boggling, 43 minutes And the shower scene is enough to get any Dom fan coming back for more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Arg. The shuffling dinosaurs are back to take another bite out of our sanity in this all-awful third film. This time, European terrorists(Irish I'd say) hi-jack an army convoy supposed to be transporting uranium. They pull into a shipyard, open the truck and discover our old friends the carnosaurs. Pandemonium comes visiting then when the rubber dinos chomp the terrorists, the cops and some marines. The whole film seems to be (again) largely inspired from Alien(as Carnosaur 2 was) with the pathetic marines going through the "claustrophobic" shipyard? guns at the ready. This third opus is probably the driest and ungoriest film of the lot, with only one spurt of blood when a rubber dino rips a marine's head off. The dinos are stiff, shuffling creatures as usual and the T-Rex sounds like an enraged elephant when it roars(it also appears to have no eyes). One of the goofiest scenes of the film is when the coppers arrive on the scene: they enter the building where the hijacked truck is kept and hear some weird noise coming from another truck. On opening it, surprise! The Rubber Reptile Gang burst out and devour them. Why were the dinos locked up in the second truck after escaping from the first? How did they get locked in as the truck door could only be locked from the outside? What was the point of filming this scene???? Oh bother, who cares? Both thumbs down for the Over-sized Rubber Iguanas. --------------------------------------------- Result 1485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the patient (Angie Dickinson) of a prominent doctor (Michael Caine) and then pursues the high-priced prostitute (Nancy Allen) who caught a glimpse of Bobbi in the elevator. Liz (Allen) comes under suspicion of the crime and teams up with the patient's son (Keith Gordon) to catch the killer.

It can be summed up in a couple of [[words]]: it's very [[sexy]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very bloody - with the kind of gore [[usually]] [[reserved]] for splatter movies, and boy is it well crafted. Writer / director De Palma's script is OK but it really takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is highly successful on a visceral level and I actually get involved / interested with these characters. I can notice the standard De Palma homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at least from one of the Master's pictures.

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife Nancy Allen (after "Carrie" and "Home Movies".)

By the way, dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production assistants. There's a bit of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller could be classy and bloody at the same time but this picture pulls it off.

One of the best things about it is a typically striking Pino Donaggio music score.

8/10 Psychotic transsexual Bobbi murders the patient (Angie Dickinson) of a prominent doctor (Michael Caine) and then pursues the high-priced prostitute (Nancy Allen) who caught a glimpse of Bobbi in the elevator. Liz (Allen) comes under suspicion of the crime and teams up with the patient's son (Keith Gordon) to catch the killer.

It can be summed up in a couple of [[mots]]: it's very [[sexier]] (Dickinson and Allen look great), it's very bloody - with the kind of gore [[habitually]] [[booked]] for splatter movies, and boy is it well crafted. Writer / director De Palma's script is OK but it really takes a backseat to the man's film-making abilities. It is highly successful on a visceral level and I actually get involved / interested with these characters. I can notice the standard De Palma homages to / ripoffs of Hitchcock - at least from one of the Master's pictures.

And to top it all off, it has a professional and believable cast.

This was De Palma's third movie with ex-wife Nancy Allen (after "Carrie" and "Home Movies".)

By the way, dancer-turned-actress Rachel Ticotin was one of the production assistants. There's a bit of trivia for you.

I wouldn't think a thriller could be classy and bloody at the same time but this picture pulls it off.

One of the best things about it is a typically striking Pino Donaggio music score.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Yes it was a [[little]] low budget, but this movie [[shows]] love! The only [[bad]] [[things]] about it was that you can tell the [[budget]] on this [[film]] [[would]] not [[compare]] to "Waterworld" and though the plot was good, the film never [[really]] tapped into it's [[full]] [[potential]]! Strong performances from [[everyone]] and the [[suspense]] makes it [[worthwhile]] to watch on a [[rainy]] night. Yes it was a [[petite]] low budget, but this movie [[denotes]] love! The only [[wicked]] [[aspects]] about it was that you can tell the [[budgets]] on this [[cinematographic]] [[ought]] not [[comparisons]] to "Waterworld" and though the plot was good, the film never [[genuinely]] tapped into it's [[fullest]] [[potentialities]]! Strong performances from [[someone]] and the [[sufferance]] makes it [[advantageous]] to watch on a [[rainstorm]] night. --------------------------------------------- Result 1487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (58%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] This was a fairly creepy movie; I found the music to be effective for this. The photographs Mario took of the village were also unnerving. However, I had three problems with this film. One is that the lighting was very dark so some of the time it was hard to tell what was going on, but this may have just been my copy. The second is that the very beginning is not explained very well and I'm still not sure what was going on there. The third problem is that I didn't understand the ending, but apparently some people do. Of course there are also the usual problems of people doing stupid things, and the male lead is very 70s. All in all, watchable but not even close to being a favorite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] When an actor has to [[play]] the role of an actor, fictional or factual, the task becomes much more [[difficult]] than [[playing]] a role. In A Double [[Life]],Ronald Coleman surpassed himself as Anthony John, the tortured double personality. He put into that character all his talent and sincerity. The facial [[expressions]], mannerisms,gait and [[stance]] spoke [[eloquently]] of what [[Anthony]] John was [[going]] through while playing Othello on [[stage]]. Coleman [[also]] did [[extremely]] well as a Shakespearean [[actor]] in those short scenes as Othello that were part of this gem of a [[movie]]. Closups of Coleman's face as Othello tortured by [[doubts]] about the [[fidelity]] of Desdemona were in themselves scenes worth [[watching]].Add to that, his character's off stage desperation and only [[someone]] with Coleman's depth of acting perception can achieve. It was like watching Spenser Tracy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, except this double role was [[much]] more [[profound]] and poignant. [[Shelly]] [[Winters]] looked so [[sweet]], [[vulnerable]] and gorgeous at the same time and [[added]] her [[talent]] to the [[movie]]. It is believed that Ronald Coleman [[liked]] his role in this [[film]] above all [[others]] he [[played]] and went on to win the Oscar for [[Best]] Actor in 1947. I would see this movie repeatedly and never feel [[bored]]. When an actor has to [[playing]] the role of an actor, fictional or factual, the task becomes much more [[cumbersome]] than [[playback]] a role. In A Double [[Iife]],Ronald Coleman surpassed himself as Anthony John, the tortured double personality. He put into that character all his talent and sincerity. The facial [[phrase]], mannerisms,gait and [[attitude]] spoke [[aptly]] of what [[Antony]] John was [[go]] through while playing Othello on [[ballpark]]. Coleman [[further]] did [[unimaginably]] well as a Shakespearean [[actress]] in those short scenes as Othello that were part of this gem of a [[kino]]. Closups of Coleman's face as Othello tortured by [[suspicions]] about the [[allegiance]] of Desdemona were in themselves scenes worth [[staring]].Add to that, his character's off stage desperation and only [[person]] with Coleman's depth of acting perception can achieve. It was like watching Spenser Tracy as Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, except this double role was [[very]] more [[deep]] and poignant. [[Shelley]] [[Winter]] looked so [[sugary]], [[weak]] and gorgeous at the same time and [[addendum]] her [[talents]] to the [[cinema]]. It is believed that Ronald Coleman [[wished]] his role in this [[flick]] above all [[alia]] he [[served]] and went on to win the Oscar for [[Nicest]] Actor in 1947. I would see this movie repeatedly and never feel [[drilled]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Panic]] [[In]] The Streets opens in high noir style, a view along a dark street followed by a camera tilt upwards to a window, behind which is playing out a sleazy card game - an opening flourish which, along with some of the location shooting, anticipates some of the atmosphere Welles brought a decade later in Touch Of Evil. One of the players throws open the window; it's an [[appropriate]] action, serving as an introduction to the [[events]] [[within]] as well as literally [[opening]] up our [[first]] [[view]] of the underworld.

[[Shot]] in high [[contrast]] black and [[white]], [[Panic]] In The Streets benefits [[immensely]] from a [[strong]] cast as well as some [[fine]] [[location]] shooting in [[New]] Orleans. Scenes set in such [[places]] as the mortuary, the [[crowded]] [[shipping]] office or amidst the peeling paint of 'Frank's Place' [[offer]] a [[unique]], and [[sometimes]] claustrophobic atmosphere, impossible to [[recreate]] in the studio. With these [[elements]], Kazan's [[film]] [[shows]] the [[influence]] of Dassin's [[groundbreaking]] Naked City of two [[years]] [[earlier]], which [[established]] the gritty, [[almost]] [[documentary]] [[style]] within the [[noir]] [[cycle]]. [[In]] fact, Widmark's [[previous]] role had been in Dassin's even [[finer]] [[Night]] And The City, a [[film]] in which a sense of [[rising]] [[panic]] was even more [[prevalent]]. Joe [[MacDonald]], a [[favourite]] with the [[director]], photographed [[Panic]] [[In]] The Streets' detailed [[environment]]. MacDonald [[also]] [[worked]] on Kazan's [[Pinky]] and [[Viva]] Zapata!, and went on to shoot Widmark again [[three]] [[years]] [[later]] in Fuller's [[masterpiece]] [[Pick]] Up On South Street.

As others have noticed, in a [[manner]] typical of some noir [[films]], Kazan's [[work]] [[offers]] a [[contrast]] between the [[confusion]], sickness and immorality of the streets with the modest, [[calm]] [[home]] [[life]] of the Reeds. But whereas (for [[instance]]) in Lang's The [[Big]] [[Heat]] (1953) the [[home]] [[life]] of the [[hero]] is [[destroyed]] by [[elements]] of vice surrounding the embattled central [[character]] - [[ultimately]] [[sending]] him back to [[work]] with an [[increased]] [[vigilance]] and sense of [[vengeance]] - [[Panic]] [[In]] The Streets [[places]] Reed's [[rising]] anxiousness [[within]] the [[confines]] of what [[amounts]] to just another [[working]] 'day'. [[Despite]] all the [[danger]], [[ultimately]] he [[returns]] back to the [[bosom]] of his [[family]] [[justified]] and [[satisfied]]. The [[implication]] being that [[social]] balance has been [[restored]], at least for the [[moment]] by his professionalism and [[curative]] [[skills]].

That [[imbalance]] of course, has been created by crime and disease. The two are closely associated in this film. It reminds one of the tagline from the much cruder Cobra (1986) - where "Crime is the disease. Meet the cure," a neat analogy in context, if one which rings too uncomfortably of social reductionism. At its climax, as Blackie attempts to flee aboard ship, the visuals specifically allude to rats as being similar to criminals, both posing a menace to society's health. As (the presumably infected) Blackie prowls round the cheap rooms and the docks with his cronies, in search of something he suspects everyone is after, if without knowing exactly what it is, 'plague' and 'Blackie' resonate together in the audiences mind, adding further to connected associations. Ironically Blackie's hunch about Poldi's unfortunate cousin, that "he brought something in" of note is correct - even if, finally, its nothing he can sell or steal. Blackie's logical assumption that the police would not normally bother with the murder of some anonymous illegal immigrant has a ring of truth about it, and his so confusion is understandable.

Dr Reed, although home-loving, and on the side of society, is a true noir hero. Familiar to the genre is the chief protagonist as a man who walks alone, forced to travel beyond the limits of the law. In his way, Reed is forced to take morality into his own hands for the sake of society at large - a dimension of the film that is particularly apposite, given director Kazan's controversial personal history. The director testified before the infamous HUAC, naming suspected communists and fellow travellers. His film depicts suspects being hauled in for questioning, and the manhandling of the press, on the grounds that the overriding public good justified the means. These [[actions]] perhaps echo the director's sentiments at the time, presumably accepting the McCarthyite witch hunt and the suppression of civil rights it entailed in the light of presumed communist infiltration of the entertainment industry. In these times of terrorist threats and state response, such issues as they appear in the film are strikingly modern.

Standout scenes in the film include a notable scene where Blackie interrogates the dying Poldi as to the precise nature of his cousin's presumed contraband. Cat like, Blackie stalks his victim across the room, eventually preying over the doomed man's sick bed, holding Poldi's feverish head in his hands - a striking, evil cradling. It's a gesture emphasising the intimate nature of corruption, whether moral or physical. Apparently, the actors did many or all of their own stunts, which leads to some other, very dramatic scenes at the end, as the police and health authorities close in on the villains under the wharfs. Half crawling, half scrambling over the slippery timbers at the edge of the dock pool must have been an experience very uncomfortable for Palance, but it is sequence that adds immensely to the immediacy of it all.

Occasionally less convincing elements distract the viewer. Apparently Dr Reed is left to fight a potential national emergency little government backup. Perhaps just as astonishingly, he never inoculates himself - inviting a dramatic turn which never materialises. At the end of the film, too, the potential epidemic has been halted, all contactees located, a little too neatly. But these weaknesses are more than outweighed by the other satisfactions of a film that still makes for compulsive and relevant viewing today. [[Panics]] [[Throughout]] The Streets opens in high noir style, a view along a dark street followed by a camera tilt upwards to a window, behind which is playing out a sleazy card game - an opening flourish which, along with some of the location shooting, anticipates some of the atmosphere Welles brought a decade later in Touch Of Evil. One of the players throws open the window; it's an [[adequate]] action, serving as an introduction to the [[incidents]] [[inside]] as well as literally [[introductory]] up our [[fiirst]] [[viewing]] of the underworld.

[[Filmed]] in high [[rematch]] black and [[branca]], [[Terror]] In The Streets benefits [[incredibly]] from a [[forceful]] cast as well as some [[alright]] [[locations]] shooting in [[Nuevo]] Orleans. Scenes set in such [[locations]] as the mortuary, the [[populous]] [[ships]] office or amidst the peeling paint of 'Frank's Place' [[delivers]] a [[sole]], and [[occasionally]] claustrophobic atmosphere, impossible to [[rehabilitate]] in the studio. With these [[ingredients]], Kazan's [[movie]] [[denotes]] the [[effects]] of Dassin's [[pioneering]] Naked City of two [[olds]] [[sooner]], which [[formulated]] the gritty, [[practically]] [[literature]] [[styling]] within the [[negro]] [[cycling]]. [[For]] fact, Widmark's [[anterior]] role had been in Dassin's even [[thinner]] [[Overnight]] And The City, a [[movie]] in which a sense of [[rose]] [[fright]] was even more [[ubiquitous]]. Joe [[mcdonald]], a [[favorite]] with the [[headmaster]], photographed [[Fright]] [[Among]] The Streets' detailed [[environments]]. MacDonald [[similarly]] [[collaborating]] on Kazan's [[Piggy]] and [[Vivo]] Zapata!, and went on to shoot Widmark again [[tre]] [[olds]] [[afterward]] in Fuller's [[centerpiece]] [[Picks]] Up On South Street.

As others have noticed, in a [[fashion]] typical of some noir [[movie]], Kazan's [[jobs]] [[offered]] a [[opposite]] between the [[chaos]], sickness and immorality of the streets with the modest, [[calming]] [[homes]] [[living]] of the Reeds. But whereas (for [[lawsuit]]) in Lang's The [[Huge]] [[Heats]] (1953) the [[housing]] [[living]] of the [[superhero]] is [[annihilated]] by [[ingredients]] of vice surrounding the embattled central [[characters]] - [[lastly]] [[sends]] him back to [[jobs]] with an [[growing]] [[watchdog]] and sense of [[revenge]] - [[Fright]] [[Across]] The Streets [[locations]] Reed's [[increases]] anxiousness [[inside]] the [[restricting]] of what [[moneys]] to just another [[cooperated]] 'day'. [[Though]] all the [[menace]], [[lastly]] he [[comeback]] back to the [[boneless]] of his [[families]] [[vindicated]] and [[pleased]]. The [[implications]] being that [[societal]] balance has been [[reinstated]], at least for the [[time]] by his professionalism and [[therapeutic]] [[jurisdiction]].

That [[mismatch]] of course, has been created by crime and disease. The two are closely associated in this film. It reminds one of the tagline from the much cruder Cobra (1986) - where "Crime is the disease. Meet the cure," a neat analogy in context, if one which rings too uncomfortably of social reductionism. At its climax, as Blackie attempts to flee aboard ship, the visuals specifically allude to rats as being similar to criminals, both posing a menace to society's health. As (the presumably infected) Blackie prowls round the cheap rooms and the docks with his cronies, in search of something he suspects everyone is after, if without knowing exactly what it is, 'plague' and 'Blackie' resonate together in the audiences mind, adding further to connected associations. Ironically Blackie's hunch about Poldi's unfortunate cousin, that "he brought something in" of note is correct - even if, finally, its nothing he can sell or steal. Blackie's logical assumption that the police would not normally bother with the murder of some anonymous illegal immigrant has a ring of truth about it, and his so confusion is understandable.

Dr Reed, although home-loving, and on the side of society, is a true noir hero. Familiar to the genre is the chief protagonist as a man who walks alone, forced to travel beyond the limits of the law. In his way, Reed is forced to take morality into his own hands for the sake of society at large - a dimension of the film that is particularly apposite, given director Kazan's controversial personal history. The director testified before the infamous HUAC, naming suspected communists and fellow travellers. His film depicts suspects being hauled in for questioning, and the manhandling of the press, on the grounds that the overriding public good justified the means. These [[action]] perhaps echo the director's sentiments at the time, presumably accepting the McCarthyite witch hunt and the suppression of civil rights it entailed in the light of presumed communist infiltration of the entertainment industry. In these times of terrorist threats and state response, such issues as they appear in the film are strikingly modern.

Standout scenes in the film include a notable scene where Blackie interrogates the dying Poldi as to the precise nature of his cousin's presumed contraband. Cat like, Blackie stalks his victim across the room, eventually preying over the doomed man's sick bed, holding Poldi's feverish head in his hands - a striking, evil cradling. It's a gesture emphasising the intimate nature of corruption, whether moral or physical. Apparently, the actors did many or all of their own stunts, which leads to some other, very dramatic scenes at the end, as the police and health authorities close in on the villains under the wharfs. Half crawling, half scrambling over the slippery timbers at the edge of the dock pool must have been an experience very uncomfortable for Palance, but it is sequence that adds immensely to the immediacy of it all.

Occasionally less convincing elements distract the viewer. Apparently Dr Reed is left to fight a potential national emergency little government backup. Perhaps just as astonishingly, he never inoculates himself - inviting a dramatic turn which never materialises. At the end of the film, too, the potential epidemic has been halted, all contactees located, a little too neatly. But these weaknesses are more than outweighed by the other satisfactions of a film that still makes for compulsive and relevant viewing today. --------------------------------------------- Result 1490 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[SPOILERS]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I watched half of this [[movie]] and I didn't like it.

First reason: [[Boring]]. Barely anything [[happens]], the [[women]] [[sit]] [[around]] and [[discuss]] how terrible their lives are and how they have no hope, they [[smoke]] weed, read magazines, care for their [[sick]] friend, and cut up the occasional dead body. [[BORING]]!!!!

Second reason: There are too [[many]] things [[left]] [[unexplained]]. [[Many]] scenes are dedicated to a zombie [[hunter]] who [[kidnaps]] random [[men]], restrains them in a [[chair]] and interrogates them. Who are these [[men]]? How do they know [[anything]] about illegal [[activity]] [[concerning]] the diseased flesh [[eaters]]? Why does he [[kill]] one and [[let]] another one go?

Also there is this [[dude]] who at first I [[thought]] [[also]] had the flesh eating disease but he puts his fist through a wall with superhuman strength suggesting he's not quite what we originally thought-never explained! How frustrating is that?

Conclusion: I [[found]] the [[women]] annoying, the [[story]] uninteresting, the duologue [[tedious]], and the action non-existent. Also the cover art is misleading since it makes you believe this movie is going to be cool when it clearly isn't. I [[rented]] this movie based on some of the reviews made by other people on this [[website]], and although I respect the fact that some people might have enjoyed this flick, I will from now on make sure I read more than two reviews deep into a movie so as to avoid [[renting]] another movie I [[regret]] [[seeing]]. [[VANDALS]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I watched half of this [[kino]] and I didn't like it.

First reason: [[Monotonous]]. Barely anything [[arises]], the [[femmes]] [[assis]] [[about]] and [[examines]] how terrible their lives are and how they have no hope, they [[smoked]] weed, read magazines, care for their [[unwell]] friend, and cut up the occasional dead body. [[TIRESOME]]!!!!

Second reason: There are too [[myriad]] things [[walkout]] [[unexplainable]]. [[Countless]] scenes are dedicated to a zombie [[hunting]] who [[hijackings]] random [[man]], restrains them in a [[presides]] and interrogates them. Who are these [[man]]? How do they know [[nothing]] about illegal [[operations]] [[relative]] the diseased flesh [[consumers]]? Why does he [[killin]] one and [[leaving]] another one go?

Also there is this [[pal]] who at first I [[think]] [[additionally]] had the flesh eating disease but he puts his fist through a wall with superhuman strength suggesting he's not quite what we originally thought-never explained! How frustrating is that?

Conclusion: I [[discoveries]] the [[daughters]] annoying, the [[tale]] uninteresting, the duologue [[monotonous]], and the action non-existent. Also the cover art is misleading since it makes you believe this movie is going to be cool when it clearly isn't. I [[rental]] this movie based on some of the reviews made by other people on this [[websites]], and although I respect the fact that some people might have enjoyed this flick, I will from now on make sure I read more than two reviews deep into a movie so as to avoid [[leasing]] another movie I [[sorrow]] [[witnessing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I was a kid I [[watched]] this [[many]] [[times]] over, and I remember whistling the "Happy Cat" song quite often. All the songs are great, and actually [[memorable]], unlike many children's musicals, where the songs are just stuck in for no real reason. The scenes and costumes are lavish, and the acting is very well-done, which isn't [[surprising]], considering the cast. Christopher Walken is very catlike, and doesn't need stupid make-up, or a cat costume for the viewer to believe he's a cat transformed to a human. And Jason Connery's so cute, as the shy and awkward miller's son, Corin, who falls in love with beautiful and the bold Princess Vera. This is a really fun, enjoyable, feature-length movie, where unlike most fairytales, the characters are given personalities. Some of my favourite parts are when Puss makes Corin pretend he's drowning; at the ball when everybody starts dancing a country dance, as it's "all the rage abroad"; when Walken is in the kitchen, dancing on the table (he's a pretty good dancer, too!); and when Vera tells Corin all the things she used to do when she was young, like pretending she was a miller's daughter. I'd recommend this film to children and parents alike, who love magic and fairytales. And it actually IS a movie you can watch together, as it won't drive adults up the wall. When I was a kid I [[observed]] this [[several]] [[moments]] over, and I remember whistling the "Happy Cat" song quite often. All the songs are great, and actually [[unforgettable]], unlike many children's musicals, where the songs are just stuck in for no real reason. The scenes and costumes are lavish, and the acting is very well-done, which isn't [[impressed]], considering the cast. Christopher Walken is very catlike, and doesn't need stupid make-up, or a cat costume for the viewer to believe he's a cat transformed to a human. And Jason Connery's so cute, as the shy and awkward miller's son, Corin, who falls in love with beautiful and the bold Princess Vera. This is a really fun, enjoyable, feature-length movie, where unlike most fairytales, the characters are given personalities. Some of my favourite parts are when Puss makes Corin pretend he's drowning; at the ball when everybody starts dancing a country dance, as it's "all the rage abroad"; when Walken is in the kitchen, dancing on the table (he's a pretty good dancer, too!); and when Vera tells Corin all the things she used to do when she was young, like pretending she was a miller's daughter. I'd recommend this film to children and parents alike, who love magic and fairytales. And it actually IS a movie you can watch together, as it won't drive adults up the wall. --------------------------------------------- Result 1492 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a movie: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a broken fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. Imagine stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the idea of Broken, [[though]] there's no detectives in this movie, I'm just using it as a visual example. But, the intense [[looking]] [[woman]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect choice for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded individual who can find enjoyment out of all kinds of artistic expressions and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It would be really cool if I can frame one of the scene from this movie and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the problem of this movie. Beyond the mood, there's not much anything else here. The director basically took an obsession of an idea and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't consider it to be a spoiler if I say the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this singular idea is all over the bloody place and that's all the director got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art since I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a piece of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good story and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making cheating. It is irresponsible and cheap and a waste of the medium. We gave movies 2 hours running film time for a good reason. Therefore, we should judge it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. Have you ever had a cool image in your mind that you thought it would be nice to be in a movie: Like seeing a detective peeking through the cracks of a broken fence of some abandoned house? Or seeing a woman walking down a street looking cold and intense and awfully alert? Yeah. Imagine stretching that image to a whole movie, you pretty much got the idea of Broken, [[while]] there's no detectives in this movie, I'm just using it as a visual example. But, the intense [[searching]] [[mujer]] is here and she filled pretty much 99% of the screen time. I got nothing to complain about that woman, she's a perfect choice for this role.

I consider myself a very open minded individual who can find enjoyment out of all kinds of artistic expressions and I can truly enjoy some really moody stuff. It would be really cool if I can frame one of the scene from this movie and hang it on the wall. Let's be honest here, the acting is superb. Some of the expressions on the actors face are what keep me watching.

Now onto the problem of this movie. Beyond the mood, there's not much anything else here. The director basically took an obsession of an idea and ran it far beyond what it was worth. I don't consider it to be a spoiler if I say the obsession is "mirror". Let's face it, this singular idea is all over the bloody place and that's all the director got to work with. Granted, there are a few twist and turn here and there. If you paid any attention, nothing is going to surprise you in the end, obvious plot holes aside.

Now, I'm not picking bones with this style of art since I enjoyed them most of the time. I still believe that we should judge an art base on the medium it uses to express whatever the artists want to express. Movie is not a piece of music, or a picture, or a painting, or even a poem, and certainly not just a cool image in your mind. It's all that plus a good story and character development. I consider the Lynch style of movie making cheating. It is irresponsible and cheap and a waste of the medium. We gave movies 2 hours running film time for a good reason. Therefore, we should judge it differently than judging a single frame of imagery such as a photograph or a painting.

This movie is not completely Lynch style, thank goodness. It has a linear development and eventually came to a conclusion. It does not have much story or character development. It presented itself rather seriously with characters composed of common folks, thus distance itself from other fantasy stuff at least from the surface. It does not offer any explanation of the fantasy element nor did it ever attempt to build a coherent world around it. The oddity came from nowhere and seems rather isolated and accidental. Maybe the coherency remains in director's head but from what I can see he did not put much effort into realizing it on the screen.

Where did he put his effort in then? It seems that he spent a lot of effort in building the mood and enhancing it with the music. The music often built up tension which eventually turn into a tease. Only in the later part of the movie the scare and tension materialized.

In the end, I felt like: OK, I know what you are trying to say here but is that the point you are trying to make by spending two hours building up all these tension? It is rather irrelevant with who the characters are and what kind of life they have. And we are given very little about who the characters are. All we have is this circumstance that just took placed. Disappointing but I guess the director did not have much material to work with and it shows. --------------------------------------------- Result 1493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I liked it but then I [[think]] I might have been ironing at the same [[time]]. This reworking of Cyrano de Bergerac/Roxanne is an utterly undemanding, formulaic romcom rescued from straight-to-video [[ignominy]] on its release by the sharp turn of [[Janeane]] Garofalo. Playing the Frasier of [[Pets]], she [[finds]] herself caught in a love [[trap]] when insecurity leads her to pass her best [[friend]] (Uma Thurman) off as herself when a caller comes a-courtin'.

This is an interesting film in the fascinating career of Ben Chaplin. An average British actor, he gave the Hollywood treadmill a shot with this film. He is unremarkable and his anonymity in studio productions is unsurprising on the basis of it, although he has [[appeared]] in substantial cameos in both the later Terence Malick films. Uma Thurman does a ditzy turn on autopilot and Michael Lehmann packages it all together competently. Icky [[phone]] [[sex]] though. 4/10 I liked it but then I [[thinking]] I might have been ironing at the same [[times]]. This reworking of Cyrano de Bergerac/Roxanne is an utterly undemanding, formulaic romcom rescued from straight-to-video [[dishonor]] on its release by the sharp turn of [[Jeannine]] Garofalo. Playing the Frasier of [[Pet]], she [[discoveries]] herself caught in a love [[trapping]] when insecurity leads her to pass her best [[friends]] (Uma Thurman) off as herself when a caller comes a-courtin'.

This is an interesting film in the fascinating career of Ben Chaplin. An average British actor, he gave the Hollywood treadmill a shot with this film. He is unremarkable and his anonymity in studio productions is unsurprising on the basis of it, although he has [[emerged]] in substantial cameos in both the later Terence Malick films. Uma Thurman does a ditzy turn on autopilot and Michael Lehmann packages it all together competently. Icky [[tel]] [[sexuality]] though. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] SYNOPSIS The [[future]] as seen from 1939 England. As war loomed over Europe, the salvation of mankind will not be found in the politics of the past. It is up to the [[brave]] new world of science to overcome man's past mistakes.

CONCEPT [[IN]] RELATION TO THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. Thinking [[outside]] the [[box]] can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will always be [[descent]] and fear, and learning to overcome it is our only hope.

PROS AND CONS I had seen this [[film]] long ago and recently downloaded it off of the [[internet]] (it is in the public domain). This is a fascinating [[work]] on numerous [[levels]]. Since it is a story about the [[future]] as seen from 1939, it has obvious flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[whimsical]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very [[good]] as is the story line. The acting suffers a [[bit]] in the British theatrical sense, in that it can [[lean]] a [[bit]] toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying [[themes]] of the [[film]] is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not [[always]] true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a [[curse]] of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of [[almost]] all later science fiction movies can be seen in this [[film]]. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of [[technology]] in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the lush [[landscapes]] / cityscapes of "Star Wars" [[owe]] some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the [[viewer]] a bit [[perplexed]]. While it is [[optimistic]] in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This [[films]] vision of the future while interesting is also a bit humorous by todays [[standards]]. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next [[logical]] step.

[[Many]] [[great]] British [[actors]] are in this [[film]] as [[young]] [[men]]. [[Cedric]] Hardwicke and [[Ralph]] [[Richardson]] are the most recognized and their oratory skills are [[evident]] here. Raymond Massey is a curious [[choice]] to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. SYNOPSIS The [[forthcoming]] as seen from 1939 England. As war loomed over Europe, the salvation of mankind will not be found in the politics of the past. It is up to the [[plucky]] new world of science to overcome man's past mistakes.

CONCEPT [[DURING]] RELATION TO THE VIEWER Beware your leaders and what you are told. Thinking [[outdoor]] the [[shoebox]] can lead to a brighter tomorrow. There will always be [[pedigree]] and fear, and learning to overcome it is our only hope.

PROS AND CONS I had seen this [[cinema]] long ago and recently downloaded it off of the [[cyber]] (it is in the public domain). This is a fascinating [[jobs]] on numerous [[grades]]. Since it is a story about the [[upcoming]] as seen from 1939, it has obvious flaws. This vision of the future is both terrifying and [[temperamental]]. This film was cutting edge for its day. The special effects are very [[buena]] as is the story line. The acting suffers a [[bite]] in the British theatrical sense, in that it can [[scrawny]] a [[bite]] toward Shakespeare.

One of the underlying [[item]] of the [[films]] is that science and technology can solve all our problems, which we now know is not [[permanently]] true. The films other plot line is that charismatic leaders are a [[cursing]] of human existence and will probably always be with us.

The underpinnings of [[hardly]] all later science fiction movies can be seen in this [[flick]]. The set design and wardrobe of "Forbidden Planet", the failings of [[technique]] in "2001: A Space Odessy", even the lush [[landscaping]] / cityscapes of "Star Wars" [[should]] some amount of inspiration to this film.

The ending of the film leaves the [[viewfinder]] a bit [[stumped]]. While it is [[hopeful]] in its ending sequence of reaching for the stars, we are left to wonder if mankind will ever be able to make it. Even as we reach, there are those that are trying to hold us back. This [[cinematographic]] vision of the future while interesting is also a bit humorous by todays [[norms]]. Huge flying machines and guns that could shoot people into space never materialized in the real world, but in 1939 they were considered the next [[reasonable]] step.

[[Various]] [[super]] British [[actresses]] are in this [[kino]] as [[youthful]] [[males]]. [[Jerome]] Hardwicke and [[Ralf]] [[Roberts]] are the most recognized and their oratory skills are [[flagrant]] here. Raymond Massey is a curious [[choices]] to play the lead character, Cabel. His character almost comes across as the new Christ sent to save the world from its own destruction with the new religion of science.

This is a good piece of cinema history whose themes are still relevant today even if its vision of the future missed the mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 1495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Making a [[book]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye opus is [[different]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're always going to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

Although it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many moments of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled onto the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have music video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a horror movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), working from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and probably one of his better ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost perfect, except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. Making a [[ledger]] into a movie by following the story page-by-page is NEVER a good idea. When people read the book, they automatically start making their own "mental movie" of who the characters look like, the places they exist in, how the situations progress. And everybody's mind's-eye opus is [[disparate]], which is why when the 'REAL' movie finally comes out, you're always going to have a ticked-off segment of the movie-going audience who are disappointed that it just doesn't measure up.

All a screenwriter and a director can hope to accomplish is whatever their own vision of the movie is, and hope that it comes as close as possible to what their audience is expecting to see.

There is no better case for this situation than the movies based on the novels of Stephen King. When filmmakers capture at least the essence of his stories, the results can be breathtaking and truly terrifying (CARRIE, 'SALEM'S LOT, THE DEAD ZONE), or they can be what fans consider to be a gawd-awful mess (Kubrick's version of THE SHINING; the miniseries for IT and THE TOMMYKNOCKERS).

Although it's not even close to being the perfect King adaptation, PET SEMATARY has so many moments of just skin-and-bone-deep unease that seemed to have bled onto the screen directly from the book, that you can pretty much forgive its shortcomings. For that, we have music video-turned-film director Mary Lambert to thank, (she also directed SIESTA, not exactly a horror movie, but another freaky-as-hell must-see you should put on your list), working from a screenplay by the 'Man-ster' Himself, and probably one of his better ones.

Since the majority of you know the story, I won't put you to sleep with too many of the details. Dr. Louis Creed (Dale Midkiff) has moved his family out to the perfect house in the country. Well, almost perfect, except for two nasty little details: the dangerously busy stretch of interstate highway out in front, and the large pet cemetery in the woods out back. Since Louis is a veterinarian and has a young toddler for a son...well, even if you haven't read the book, do the frickin' math. It IS a King story, after all, so no mystery where this is headed.

It's not so much the destination that counts here, but the spooky stops along the way. Certain scenes that are so familiar from the book are brought to shivery, scream-inducing life here: Rachel Creed's (STAR TREK'S Denise Crosby) horrific memory of her terminally ill, crippled sister; Louis's encounters with the mortally injured jogger Victor Pascow (Brad Greenquist), both before and after his death; the trip into the "other" cemetery beyond the pet cemetery. And that third act...if it doesn't give you a few nightmares, maybe you should check your pulse.

Good performances by all here, especially the late Fred Gwynne as the well-intentioned neighbor, Jud Crandall, who gets the best line in the story that sums it all up: "Sometimes, dead is better."

About the only problem with the movie version is the casting of Louis's son, Gage (Miko Hughes). Knowing that it would be damn near impossible to get the kind of performance needed from a kid that age to seal the deal on this, Lambert and crew still did the best they could, and unfortunately, Hughes at the time was just too damn CUTE to "sell" his intended role as an evil, demon-possessed zombie. This takes you out of the movie whenever he shows up, though the scenes where he's featured are still masterfully staged, (especially Gwynne's death scene.)

Other than that, everything else is still about as good as it gets. CARRIE still holds the title for best King adaptation as far as I'm concerned; but SEMATARY is right up there in the Top Five.

Still, will anything adapted for the screen based on a King book be as terrifying as reading the story? Not BLOODY likely...for now. --------------------------------------------- Result 1496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] How can a movie that features the singing of [[Curtis]] Mayfield be bad? It can't! The Groove Tube is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of anything from 2001 to the olympics. The highs, (Koko the clown, the easy lube recipe) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The Dealers"), but even the lows are [[funny]]. Best of all is Ken Shapiro's [[manic]] [[dance]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat King Cole singing Just You, Just Me). Definitely dated now, but at the time The Groove Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. Ken Shapiro made this minor cult hit, then 7 years later made the Christmas day opening bomb, Modern Problems (though I enjoyed it} and since then, unfortunately, nothing.(He could possibly be playing drums in a jazz group) The Groove Tube remains to me an unending burst of positive energy, a movie that 26 years after my initial viewing, still brings me real joy! How can a movie that features the singing of [[Cortes]] Mayfield be bad? It can't! The Groove Tube is a series of scatological black-out sketches that makes fun of anything from 2001 to the olympics. The highs, (Koko the clown, the easy lube recipe) outnumber the lows (an all too long "The Dealers"), but even the lows are [[droll]]. Best of all is Ken Shapiro's [[fussy]] [[dancers]] down a busy Manhattan sidewalk.(That is Shapiro, not Nat King Cole singing Just You, Just Me). Definitely dated now, but at the time The Groove Tube was irreverent, bold, shameless and hysterically funny. Ken Shapiro made this minor cult hit, then 7 years later made the Christmas day opening bomb, Modern Problems (though I enjoyed it} and since then, unfortunately, nothing.(He could possibly be playing drums in a jazz group) The Groove Tube remains to me an unending burst of positive energy, a movie that 26 years after my initial viewing, still brings me real joy! --------------------------------------------- Result 1497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this film.Now a [[lot]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't even bother watching it.Very unfair to say the least.David made his name on the x-files and is a [[decent]] actor. Dr Eugene [[Sands]](Duchovny)is a drug addicted doctor [[struck]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[accident]] he becomes a private doctor for criminal millionaire Raymond Blossom.However the [[FBI]] take an interest in using Eugene to snare Blossom. Angelina [[Jolie]] is cast in the supporting role of clare-the [[gangsters]] moll.She puts in a [[solid]] performance. Timothy Hutton [[playing]] Blossom is [[superb]] and [[immersed]] himself [[deeply]] into his [[character]]. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as many people would think and in the [[end]] i would rate his performance his credible.His [[familiar]] monotonous tone and straight face is present but dosen't [[detract]] too much from the [[film]] David Duchovny plays the lead role in this film.Now a [[batches]] of people upon finding that fact out wouldn't even bother watching it.Very unfair to say the least.David made his name on the x-files and is a [[presentable]] actor. Dr Eugene [[Sable]](Duchovny)is a drug addicted doctor [[hit]] off for malpractice.By sheer [[casualty]] he becomes a private doctor for criminal millionaire Raymond Blossom.However the [[FBL]] take an interest in using Eugene to snare Blossom. Angelina [[Julie]] is cast in the supporting role of clare-the [[thugs]] moll.She puts in a [[solids]] performance. Timothy Hutton [[gaming]] Blossom is [[handsome]] and [[submerged]] himself [[severely]] into his [[nature]]. Duchovny himself isn't as bad as many people would think and in the [[termination]] i would rate his performance his credible.His [[accustomed]] monotonous tone and straight face is present but dosen't [[divert]] too much from the [[filmmaking]] --------------------------------------------- Result 1498 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[wonderful]] film.

I have often [[thought]] that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. ... or was Honest Iago actually smirking at the end, as he died?

Loved how the Bard's iambic pentameter just rolled of Fishburne's tongue, with excellent clarity and emotion.

And how Branagh made Honest Iago seem to celebrate his own evilness...

This is a [[sumptuous]] film.

I have often [[brainchild]] that Shakespeare is inherently not film-friendly: He uses words to create pictures in our minds, which creates a perennial battle with the camera, which only knows to show us what we need to think and feel. Every effort to film Shakespeare ought really to be celebrated. It is not an easy thing to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 1499 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I just thought it was [[excellent]] and I still do. I'm [[grateful]] we're still able to see different stuff from what Hollywood almost floods us with. Saving Grace is smart and [[enjoyable]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana thing better go see the America's bride sort of movie.

Saving [[Grace]] also shows that a [[funny]] movie doesn't have to be stupid. I was laughing my [[ass]] off during most of it but [[also]] pondering questions about what was the female lead character supposed to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

In a nutshell - a witty storyline with typical English humour and good acting and directing. You couldn't ask for more.

7/10. I just thought it was [[glamorous]] and I still do. I'm [[appreciate]] we're still able to see different stuff from what Hollywood almost floods us with. Saving Grace is smart and [[pleasurable]] - those who feel offended by the marijuana thing better go see the America's bride sort of movie.

Saving [[Gracia]] also shows that a [[comical]] movie doesn't have to be stupid. I was laughing my [[tush]] off during most of it but [[similarly]] pondering questions about what was the female lead character supposed to do to pay her deceased husband's debts.

In a nutshell - a witty storyline with typical English humour and good acting and directing. You couldn't ask for more.

7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Until now, the [[worst]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should check the reviews for that [[movie]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this movie have been [[skewed]] positive through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people involved in making it, evidence for which is fairly easy to uncover online. At least the people who made [[Ben]] & Arthur were [[honorable]] enough to [[let]] it [[stand]] on its own shaky legs, instead of unscrupulously promoting it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[terrible]], the [[script]], the story, the casting, the acting, the direction, the photography, the editing, the music... what else goes into a movie? Whatever it is, here it's as [[bad]] as it gets. If it weren't so unpleasant it would be ridiculous. I kept watching it thinking it must get better, because I hadn't yet discovered that none of the positive reviews for it are reliable.

It does not take a lot of money to make a great movie, nor does a low budget mean a movie has to be bad. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget masterpiece is Gus Van Sant's amazing Mala Noche, but there are many others. Sideline Secrets—Director's Cut or original—is bad not because the people who made it had no money, but because they had gigantic egos and no talent for anything at all except self-promotion. Until now, the [[hardest]] movie I had ever seen was Ben & Arthur. You really should check the reviews for that [[kino]] instead of this one. The review statistics for this movie have been [[lopsided]] positive through a relentless and unscrupulous push by some of the people involved in making it, evidence for which is fairly easy to uncover online. At least the people who made [[Benn]] & Arthur were [[honourable]] enough to [[leave]] it [[stands]] on its own shaky legs, instead of unscrupulously promoting it so suckers like me would buy it.

Everything about this movie is [[scary]], the [[scripts]], the story, the casting, the acting, the direction, the photography, the editing, the music... what else goes into a movie? Whatever it is, here it's as [[wicked]] as it gets. If it weren't so unpleasant it would be ridiculous. I kept watching it thinking it must get better, because I hadn't yet discovered that none of the positive reviews for it are reliable.

It does not take a lot of money to make a great movie, nor does a low budget mean a movie has to be bad. My favorite example of a shoestring-budget masterpiece is Gus Van Sant's amazing Mala Noche, but there are many others. Sideline Secrets—Director's Cut or original—is bad not because the people who made it had no money, but because they had gigantic egos and no talent for anything at all except self-promotion. --------------------------------------------- Result 1501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant show for its first four or five years and I bet I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a young adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[pathetic]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had deteriorated so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite Today, Bea Arthur died so I was cruising around the IMDb Web site and somehow wound up on a show called "Gloria." "All In The Family" was a brilliant show for its first four or five years and I bet I watched every episode more than once. However, I swear that I did NOT know a show named "Gloria" existed. Maybe, that's a good thing. Maybe, it means I had a life as a young adult rather than watching television.

On the other hand, it is [[unhappy]] that the "All In The Family" franchise had deteriorated so much that it begat a show I never heard of -- and one that is rated very poorly by the previous reviewers.

I rated the show a 1 for two reasons -- the system did not allow me to register a no vote and writers and TV execs should be condemned for starting a show that had no business being on the air and besmirches the memory of one of the greatest shows in TV history.

Shalom, ZWrite --------------------------------------------- Result 1502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This movie commits what I would call an emotional rape on the viewer. The movie [[supposedly]] caused quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[pathetic]] attempt for a newbie director to get himself noticed. [[Hardly]] a [[voice]] in the [[discussion]] on the issue of violence, drug abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but troubled boy to the vicious rapist is virtually nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated version of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I refuse to comment on its aesthetic values. There are some things an artist should not do to try and achieve his/her goal. At least in my opinion.

To wrap it up: shockingly brutal, revolting and [[NOT]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" instead. This movie commits what I would call an emotional rape on the viewer. The movie [[reportedly]] caused quite a stir among the critics in Cannes, but for me the final scene was just a [[unhappy]] attempt for a newbie director to get himself noticed. [[Practically]] a [[vocal]] in the [[deliberation]] on the issue of violence, drug abuse or juvenile delinquency (or any other issue, for that matter).

The main character's metamorphosis from good, but troubled boy to the vicious rapist is virtually nonexistent, whereas the rape scene (being an over-dragged, exaggerated version of the rape scene from "A clockwork orange") is unbearable and I refuse to comment on its aesthetic values. There are some things an artist should not do to try and achieve his/her goal. At least in my opinion.

To wrap it up: shockingly brutal, revolting and [[NOPE]] WORTH YOUR TIME. See "A clockwork orange" or "Le pianiste" instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1503 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (77%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I saw this recently and I must say, I was moved by the factual basis of the story. [[However]], "Holly" as a movie did not quite work. I am however, looking forward to watching the documentary which the producers who organised this project had made because I think that would be a much more compelling work than this film.

The international cast was composed of B-class actors but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[mention]] for the young actress who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most challenging part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and intention, but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. I saw this recently and I must say, I was moved by the factual basis of the story. [[Yet]], "Holly" as a movie did not quite work. I am however, looking forward to watching the documentary which the producers who organised this project had made because I think that would be a much more compelling work than this film.

The international cast was composed of B-class actors but their acting was appropriate, and I must give a special [[referenced]] for the young actress who played Holly. This was her first movie role and she did a very nice job, considering hers is the most challenging part.

Ron Livingston was adequate but bland as Patrick, the American whose quest is to "save" Holly, but Chris Penn was good in this, his final role. Unfortunately, despite my mostly favourable opinion of Virginie Ledoyen and Udo Kier, both of these actors were very much forgettable and did not do their best work in this film.

I believe in the film's message and intention, but I have to be fair, so I rate "Holly" 3 stars based on its shortcomings as a movie. But I think the subject matter deserves serious consideration and I am pleased that the people behind this movie have made a documentary as well which I hope will have its debut on BBC and other TV networks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This foolish, implausible tale is [[redeemed]] only by the opening scene in which a hard-boiled police detective delivers some nearly-audible lines confirming our greatest fears: He is dead. Perhaps the film would have been [[saved]] had the director forgone the dazzling [[star]] power of A. [[Martinez]] in favor of this sadly-anonymous [[actor]] who [[filled]] the screen for a brief moment. That a no-name hack-tor off the street [[could]] [[salvage]] such a dishwater [[film]] is no less likely than a [[villain]] committing [[murder]] by dropping stones into a quarry for an unsuspecting diver. His moment is brief; his promise is immense. Perhaps we will be treated to more screen time by this obscure thespian if there is ever a sequel to this ill-advised film. This foolish, implausible tale is [[repaid]] only by the opening scene in which a hard-boiled police detective delivers some nearly-audible lines confirming our greatest fears: He is dead. Perhaps the film would have been [[rescued]] had the director forgone the dazzling [[superstar]] power of A. [[Fabio]] in favor of this sadly-anonymous [[protagonist]] who [[fills]] the screen for a brief moment. That a no-name hack-tor off the street [[wo]] [[bailout]] such a dishwater [[films]] is no less likely than a [[hoodlum]] committing [[killings]] by dropping stones into a quarry for an unsuspecting diver. His moment is brief; his promise is immense. Perhaps we will be treated to more screen time by this obscure thespian if there is ever a sequel to this ill-advised film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1505 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Unless you are already [[familiar]] with the pop [[stars]] who [[star]] in this film, save yourself the [[time]] and stop reading this [[review]] after you've reached the end of the next [[sentence]].

[[FORGET]] [[YOU]] EVER STUMBLED UPON THIS FILM [[AND]] GO WATCH SOMETHING ELSE.

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[vehicle]] for Japanese teen idol pretty-boys featuring nonsensical, convoluted "[[plot]]" that drags out for an [[insufferable]] amount of [[time]] until you're ready to [[scream]].

[[Nothing]] in this film makes sense. It's an [[endless]] [[series]] of people [[expressing]] [[various]] emotions, from [[joy]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, FOR [[NO]] [[GOOD]] [[REASON]]. We can [[obviously]] [[see]] [[something]] [[incredibly]] "[[dramatic]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[CRAP]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the [[time]] this film is over, you will be [[sick]] and [[tired]] of these [[stupid]], [[lanky]], girly stars' faces. You'll be [[revolted]] at having spent all this time watching them smile, sneer, cry, look mysterious, be "[[serious]]," and any other [[pointless]] [[expression]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[moron]] [[would]] ever go so far as to refer to this [[piece]] of [[insipid]] [[trash]] as being the "soul" of any of its "[[actors]]" should prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt what the trailer and countless adoring comments on this site will not tell you:

[[Only]] the "converted," [[mindless]] [[minions]] will [[like]] this [[film]], the majority of them [[teenage]] [[girls]] with a pathological adoration for anything androgynous. Freud [[would]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[mindless]] "[[fans]]," stay the [[hell]] away from this [[abomination]]. Unless you are already [[colloquial]] with the pop [[star]] who [[superstar]] in this film, save yourself the [[period]] and stop reading this [[inspect]] after you've reached the end of the next [[sentences]].

[[FORGOT]] [[DOYOU]] EVER STUMBLED UPON THIS FILM [[UND]] GO WATCH SOMETHING ELSE.

But if you insist on reading, consider:

Lame [[autos]] for Japanese teen idol pretty-boys featuring nonsensical, convoluted "[[intrigue]]" that drags out for an [[insupportable]] amount of [[times]] until you're ready to [[cris]].

[[Nada]] in this film makes sense. It's an [[boundless]] [[serial]] of people [[expresses]] [[varied]] emotions, from [[glee]] to anger, from happiness to tragedy, FOR [[NOS]] [[BUENA]] [[MOTIVES]]. We can [[definitely]] [[behold]] [[somethings]] [[surprisingly]] "[[tremendous]]" is happening, but we just don't GIVE A [[SHITTY]] WHY 'cause there's no backstory.

By the [[period]] this film is over, you will be [[ill]] and [[weary]] of these [[silly]], [[wiry]], girly stars' faces. You'll be [[rebelled]] at having spent all this time watching them smile, sneer, cry, look mysterious, be "[[severe]]," and any other [[vain]] [[phrases]] they slap on their faces.

That some [[doofus]] [[should]] ever go so far as to refer to this [[slice]] of [[tacky]] [[detritus]] as being the "soul" of any of its "[[protagonists]]" should prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt what the trailer and countless adoring comments on this site will not tell you:

[[Exclusively]] the "converted," [[thoughtless]] [[devils]] will [[loves]] this [[cinematography]], the majority of them [[adolescence]] [[daughter]] with a pathological adoration for anything androgynous. Freud [[could]] have a field day.

Unless you're one of these [[unwise]] "[[admirers]]," stay the [[inferno]] away from this [[horror]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[first]] "[[Home]] Alone" was one of the funniest movies of the 90's. The second was just as funny with the same cast and jokes! Now comes "Home [[Alone]] 3". I was [[curious]] how they [[could]] continue with the same story [[considering]] Kevin would've been 17 by 1997. He [[could]] take [[care]] of himself, right? [[So]], what does the [[director]] decide to do? He takes a child just as [[annoying]] and makes him sick. The kid is like 6 years old and the mother leaves him alone in the house? What kind of team of burgerlers are these [[idiots]]? I don't really want to get too into detail if you want to sadly see this movie. But please, I'd recommend that you'd stay away from it. It's not worth your precious time. Go fold a piece of paper, do chores, balance a pencil on your nose, or take a nap! It's better to do then to watch "Home Alone 3"!

1/10 The [[fiirst]] "[[Habitation]] Alone" was one of the funniest movies of the 90's. The second was just as funny with the same cast and jokes! Now comes "Home [[Jen]] 3". I was [[unusual]] how they [[did]] continue with the same story [[examining]] Kevin would've been 17 by 1997. He [[wo]] take [[caring]] of himself, right? [[Thereby]], what does the [[headmaster]] decide to do? He takes a child just as [[exasperating]] and makes him sick. The kid is like 6 years old and the mother leaves him alone in the house? What kind of team of burgerlers are these [[cretins]]? I don't really want to get too into detail if you want to sadly see this movie. But please, I'd recommend that you'd stay away from it. It's not worth your precious time. Go fold a piece of paper, do chores, balance a pencil on your nose, or take a nap! It's better to do then to watch "Home Alone 3"!

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1507 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] A [[typical]] 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good music, but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, [[poor]] and at times confused storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with [[poor]] dialogue, nice [[ambiance]].

The reason it is still ([[relatively]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[nude]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy (Eva Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story revolves round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her discovery of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not evolve to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain young girl who is already aware of her sexual charms, but ultimately is just used and ends the film crying like the little girl she really still is. The boy is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and weak victim. A [[classic]] 70s Italian coming of age film, original and good music, but with some quirks, interesting but not fantastic photography, [[poorest]] and at times confused storyline (e.g. the role of the wolf-dog, and where does the boy come from?) with [[pauper]] dialogue, nice [[ambience]].

The reason it is still ([[fairly]]) well-known and sought after is probably the [[naked]] scenes (including typical 70s pseudo-coitus) involving an 11 and 13 year old girl with an older teenage boy (Eva Ionesco and Laura Wendel) - it is interesting from a socio-political point of view to see how these representations of very young adolescents was considered acceptable and normal in the whole of Europe (and US) 30 years ago, whereas now it is more than taboo.

The story revolves round bullying of one girl (Laura) by the other two characters, and her discovery of sex, a quite accurate representation of an aspect teenage life. The character of Eva (Silvia) does not evolve to the very end of the film and already appears very versed in the erotic arts - there is no "coming of age" for her: she is a very vain young girl who is already aware of her sexual charms, but ultimately is just used and ends the film crying like the little girl she really still is. The boy is an utterly despicable bully, while Laura comes across as a very naive and weak victim. --------------------------------------------- Result 1508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Some of the filmmakers who are [[participating]] in this series have made some really [[great]] films but they [[sure]] as heck are not [[showing]] much skill with this series. Particularly the writing. OK, the first season was somewhat [[better]] but these [[new]] episodes they are [[creating]] just stink. I'm a huge [[fan]] of [[horror]] and in my opinion the [[vast]] majority of these episodes are [[total]] [[garbage]]. [[Nothing]] new or genuinely interesting. [[Few]] of them are visually [[creative]]. It's just typical fabricated Hollywood [[crap]], uninteresting, [[childish]], poorly conceived and in some [[cases]], flat out [[laughable]]. Much like Tales from the [[Crypt]] the only [[good]] [[thing]] this series has been offering is great nudity! Other then that this series blows hard. I get the impression sometimes that they hired a bunch of eighth-graders to write the episodes. Maybe they did. Some of the filmmakers who are [[implicated]] in this series have made some really [[sublime]] films but they [[convinced]] as heck are not [[displayed]] much skill with this series. Particularly the writing. OK, the first season was somewhat [[best]] but these [[newer]] episodes they are [[establishing]] just stink. I'm a huge [[breather]] of [[terror]] and in my opinion the [[grand]] majority of these episodes are [[whole]] [[detritus]]. [[Nada]] new or genuinely interesting. [[Rare]] of them are visually [[inventive]]. It's just typical fabricated Hollywood [[bollocks]], uninteresting, [[childlike]], poorly conceived and in some [[lawsuits]], flat out [[ridiculous]]. Much like Tales from the [[Vault]] the only [[buena]] [[stuff]] this series has been offering is great nudity! Other then that this series blows hard. I get the impression sometimes that they hired a bunch of eighth-graders to write the episodes. Maybe they did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] "GEORGE LOPEZ," in my [[opinion]], is an [[absolute]] ABC classic! I haven't seen every episode, but I [[still]] [[enjoy]] it. There are many episodes that I enjoyed. One of them was where Amy (Sandra Bullock) walked into a [[moving]] piece of machinery. If you want to know why, you'll have to have [[seen]] it for yourself. Before I [[wrap]] this up, I'd like to say that everyone [[always]] [[gave]] a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though new [[episodes]] can currently be seen, I strongly recommend you catch it just in [[case]] it goes off the air for good. "GEORGE LOPEZ," in my [[avis]], is an [[unmitigated]] ABC classic! I haven't seen every episode, but I [[yet]] [[enjoys]] it. There are many episodes that I enjoyed. One of them was where Amy (Sandra Bullock) walked into a [[shifting]] piece of machinery. If you want to know why, you'll have to have [[watched]] it for yourself. Before I [[wrapping]] this up, I'd like to say that everyone [[invariably]] [[yielded]] a good performance, the production design was spectacular, the costumes were well-designed, and the writing was always very strong. In conclusion, even though new [[bouts]] can currently be seen, I strongly recommend you catch it just in [[lawsuit]] it goes off the air for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1510 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Hilarious]] film. I [[saw]] this film at the 2002 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Film Festival, and laughed from start to finish. The acting was subtle but very [[funny]]. I'm not entirely certain about "The Real World" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[film]] [[holds]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B steals every scene she appears in, most notably when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]. I'd love to see this released on Video/DVD some time in the future. [[Comical]] film. I [[noticed]] this film at the 2002 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Film Festival, and laughed from start to finish. The acting was subtle but very [[comical]]. I'm not entirely certain about "The Real World" influence, we don't get that here, but the [[cinematography]] [[possesses]] up without the understanding of that show. Heather B steals every scene she appears in, most notably when acting with her seldom talkative red co-star. [[Unimaginably]] [[suggested]]. I'd love to see this released on Video/DVD some time in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 1511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Keanu Reeves stars as a friend of a popular high school student who suddenly commits suicide...he and his friends go through emotional turmoil and share their reactions to this horrible incident...Good acting by Reeves and a young Jennifer Rubin..but on the whole is a little too much.. 4 of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I've [[seen]] this [[film]] more than once now, and there's [[always]] someone [[complaining]] about the "[[obvious]] [[construction]]" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the rules of [[genre]].

It's very [[nice]], how the highly improbable story of how the two [[girls]] (Timoteo/Hummer) [[meet]], is again mirrored in another, even more improbable [[story]], that the [[girls]] make up for a casting. This [[film]] is a [[journey]] between [[fact]] and fiction, it's more about [[potentials]], [[things]] that [[might]] have happened in the [[past]] or might be [[happening]] in the [[future]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[sorts]] of - so [[apt]] [[enough]] there are a [[lot]] of [[motives]], [[Freud]] might have [[found]] interesting for his [[dream]] [[analysis]], [[like]] all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

[[Also]], I [[think]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[watched]] in [[comparison]] to [[current]] Asian [[cinema]] of the [[uncanny]]: Petzold's [[everyday]] urban [[architecture]] [[also]] [[feels]] [[haunted]] in an [[unobtrusive]], [[strangely]] familiar [[way]]. This [[film]] is not about the [[obvious]]. To [[describe]] it as the [[story]] of two [[girls]] who [[meet]] and [[eventually]] [[become]] [[friends]] and [[lovers]], or as the [[story]] of an orphaned [[mother]], who [[searches]] [[Europe]] for her lost [[daughter]], [[clearly]] doesn't say much about the [[nature]] of "Gespenster" at all. I've [[noticed]] this [[movie]] more than once now, and there's [[invariably]] someone [[mooning]] about the "[[apparent]] [[erect]]" of the plot afterwards. But then - this is part of Petzold's game: he plays along with the rules of [[gender]].

It's very [[pleasurable]], how the highly improbable story of how the two [[females]] (Timoteo/Hummer) [[respond]], is again mirrored in another, even more improbable [[saga]], that the [[woman]] make up for a casting. This [[cinematography]] is a [[trip]] between [[facto]] and fiction, it's more about [[potentialities]], [[items]] that [[probable]] have happened in the [[preceding]] or might be [[occurring]] in the [[futur]], than it is about actual ongoings. It's a reverie, [[genus]] of - so [[probability]] [[sufficiently]] there are a [[batch]] of [[motivations]], [[Floyd]] might have [[detected]] interesting for his [[daydream]] [[analytic]], [[iike]] all the "doppelganger"-constellations.

[[Similarly]], I [[believe]], "Gespenster" might be interesting to be [[seen]] in [[comparisons]] to [[underway]] Asian [[movies]] of the [[supernatural]]: Petzold's [[ordinary]] urban [[structure]] [[similarly]] [[believes]] [[tormented]] in an [[discrete]], [[bizarrely]] familiar [[path]]. This [[movies]] is not about the [[manifest]]. To [[outlines]] it as the [[history]] of two [[females]] who [[cater]] and [[ultimately]] [[becomes]] [[buddies]] and [[amateurs]], or as the [[history]] of an orphaned [[mothers]], who [[researching]] [[European]] for her lost [[girls]], [[patently]] doesn't say much about the [[characters]] of "Gespenster" at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1513 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This [[movie]] is an [[extremely]] funny and heartwarming story about an [[orphanage]] that is in [[financial]] [[trouble]]. When the [[director]] goes on [[vacation]], his dad [[agrees]] to [[step]] in [[temporarily]] to run [[things]].

This is [[positively]] the best work that Leslie [[Nielson]] has ever [[done]]. His [[idea]] in the film to [[rent]] out children is [[immediately]] [[innovative]], and his [[sales]] techniques will [[definitely]] make you laugh.

The little [[girl]] in this [[movie]] is so sweet and charming that I know I will never [[forget]] her. [[Just]] make sure that you don't [[miss]] the first five minutes of the movie!

Such [[great]] family [[entertainment]] is so [[rare]] these [[days]]. [[If]] you go for [[slightly]] [[corny]] [[pictures]] with [[happy]] endings,[[go]] for this one! I [[could]] watch this over and over, and I [[often]] do! My only complaint about this [[movie]] is that it is so [[difficult]] to [[find]] a [[copy]]. This [[cinematographic]] is an [[inordinately]] funny and heartwarming story about an [[orphanages]] that is in [[monetary]] [[problem]]. When the [[headmaster]] goes on [[holidays]], his dad [[endorses]] to [[stepping]] in [[tentatively]] to run [[items]].

This is [[favourably]] the best work that Leslie [[Nelson]] has ever [[accomplished]]. His [[brainchild]] in the film to [[rentals]] out children is [[speedily]] [[imaginative]], and his [[selling]] techniques will [[admittedly]] make you laugh.

The little [[chick]] in this [[flick]] is so sweet and charming that I know I will never [[forgets]] her. [[Mere]] make sure that you don't [[missed]] the first five minutes of the movie!

Such [[resplendent]] family [[recreational]] is so [[few]] these [[jours]]. [[Unless]] you go for [[mildly]] [[banal]] [[photo]] with [[jubilant]] endings,[[going]] for this one! I [[would]] watch this over and over, and I [[usually]] do! My only complaint about this [[flick]] is that it is so [[laborious]] to [[unearth]] a [[copying]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1514 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I disagree with much that has been [[written]] and said about this [[supposed]] "masterpiece" of the German New [[Wave]]:

1) There are major [[flaws]] in simple exposition, in the basic communication of critical plot [[points]], as relating to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many viewers understood that the husband agreed, in exchange for substantial financial remuneration, not to return to and reclaim his wife until Oswald was dead?

2) The ending is [[highly]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and accidental. The original [[screenplay]] [[called]] for Maria to commit suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in effect sold their marriage to Oswald. In the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet across her wrist in a gesture of suicide. Maria is then summarily blown up, rather than having to confront and live with the consequences of her self-delusion and moral compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to forcibly superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "experts" assert, I don't think it works. Merely intruding historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German reconstruction in the soundtrack on the dramatic events of the movie does not make those historical events integral to the drama.

The selfish ambition of Maria's rise from poverty to prosperity is meant to parallel the so-called economic miracle of postwar Germany. Maria is thus intended to be a woman specific to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of inexcusable sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. Unknown people talk off screen without ever being seen; music is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically substitutes for acting.

Strangely, for a movie condemning a country for willful collective amnesia of the holocaust, it itself never mentions it once. I disagree with much that has been [[authored]] and said about this [[presumed]] "masterpiece" of the German New [[Waves]]:

1) There are major [[demerits]] in simple exposition, in the basic communication of critical plot [[dot]], as relating to Maria's abortion and the secret contract between Oswald and her husband. How many viewers understood that the husband agreed, in exchange for substantial financial remuneration, not to return to and reclaim his wife until Oswald was dead?

2) The ending is [[heavily]] unsatisfying because arbitrary and accidental. The original [[scenario]] [[termed]] for Maria to commit suicide after the reading of Oswald's will, on finding out that her husband had in effect sold their marriage to Oswald. In the final version, however, Maria only runs water from a faucet across her wrist in a gesture of suicide. Maria is then summarily blown up, rather than having to confront and live with the consequences of her self-delusion and moral compromise.

3) Fassbinder seeks to forcibly superimpose the public on the private, the political on the personal. Contrary to what the critics and "experts" assert, I don't think it works. Merely intruding historic radio news or the sound of the jackhammers of German reconstruction in the soundtrack on the dramatic events of the movie does not make those historical events integral to the drama.

The selfish ambition of Maria's rise from poverty to prosperity is meant to parallel the so-called economic miracle of postwar Germany. Maria is thus intended to be a woman specific to and reflective of her time and place, but is in reality unoriginal and nonspecific. Women have been asserting their independence by using sex for self-advancement for ages.

4) Lastly, there are several instances of inexcusable sloppiness and amateurishness -- Fassbinder's drug addiction and consequent impatience and inattention have had their effect. Unknown people talk off screen without ever being seen; music is clumsily intrusive in places; and melodramatic posturing sporadically substitutes for acting.

Strangely, for a movie condemning a country for willful collective amnesia of the holocaust, it itself never mentions it once. --------------------------------------------- Result 1515 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Dear me... Peter Sellers was one of the most oddly talented [[actors]] there has been. But his [[choice]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[unfortunate]]. He didn't [[seem]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[seen]].

That said, the Boultings and [[Sellers]] had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor film and a dire choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter Sellers trying to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not convince, try as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very artificial seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. Sellers has a very grating way of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no depth, and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the magnificence of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they leave little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, misguided and lightly dull films I have ever seen. A nonentity of a "vehicle" for Sellers' undisputed talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** Dear me... Peter Sellers was one of the most oddly talented [[players]] there has been. But his [[select]] of films, say, after 1964, was very [[sorrowful]]. He didn't [[looks]] to realize how to use his talents. He would have been better off working with more of the Kubricks of the film world than the people he did. Of his later films, only "The Optimists of Nine Elms" and "Being There" have impressed me of those I have [[noticed]].

That said, the Boultings and [[Dealerships]] had made a few films prior to this that hardly sound that bad - I have yet to see "Carlton Browne" and "Heavens Above!" - at least in the sense of using Sellers well to a degree. But, "There's a Girl in My Soup" really is a poor film and a dire choice on Sellers' part in terms of character. In his films from 1955-64, you can usually expect at least some very inventive twist and always an enigmatic conviction in his roles. Here, you have Peter Sellers trying to play a typical romantic lead. It's almost Sellers playing a Niven cad without the joviality. He certainly does not convince, try as he might, or create an interesting character. He should have left such parts to masters of suavity such as Cary Grant, and concentrated on those intriguing dramatic and comic roles that he was famed for.

Hawn and Sellers really do not establish any genuine chemistry; this is no easy, genial romance of the like perfected by William Powell and Myrna Loy. It is very artificial seeming, all the way through - I know that it is part of Danvers' character that he is a dry procurer of ladies, but he doesn't really change from that in a way that convinces. Sellers has a very grating way of playing "charm" as well... this character really has no depth, and really does not gain the viewer's sympathy or interest. Sellers goes through the motions in a way one would not think possible when remembering the magnificence of his shifty, iconoclastic performance in "Lolita".

There really is nothing to say about the plot, direction or characters, as frankly they leave little or no impression. This is truly one of the most anaemic, complacent, misguided and lightly dull films I have ever seen. A nonentity of a "vehicle" for Sellers' undisputed talents.

Rating:- * 1/2/***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1516 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I watched this film not really expecting much, I got it in a [[pack]] of 5 [[films]], all of which were pretty terrible in their own way for under a fiver so what could I expect? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this movie has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting [[points]], the occasional camcorder view is a nice touch, the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e damned annoying and, well thats about it actually, the problem is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of nothing happens and when it does its utterly tedious (I had my thumb on the fast forward button, ready to press for most of the movie, but gave it a go) and seriously is the lead singer of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only reason to watch this and with the exception of London (who was actually quite funny) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've certainly seen a lot worse, but I've also seen a lot better. Best avoid unless your bored of watching paint dry. I watched this film not really expecting much, I got it in a [[package]] of 5 [[kino]], all of which were pretty terrible in their own way for under a fiver so what could I expect? and you know what I was right, they were all terrible, this movie has a few (and a few is stretching it) interesting [[dot]], the occasional camcorder view is a nice touch, the drummer is very like a drummer, i.e damned annoying and, well thats about it actually, the problem is that its just so boring, in what I can only assume was an attempt to build tension, a whole lot of nothing happens and when it does its utterly tedious (I had my thumb on the fast forward button, ready to press for most of the movie, but gave it a go) and seriously is the lead singer of the band that great looking, coz they don't half mention how beautiful he is a hell of a lot, I thought he looked a bit like a meercat, all this and I haven't even mentioned the killer, I'm not even gonna go into it, its just not worth explaining. Anyway as far as I'm concerned Star and London are just about the only reason to watch this and with the exception of London (who was actually quite funny) it wasn't because of their acting talent, I've certainly seen a lot worse, but I've also seen a lot better. Best avoid unless your bored of watching paint dry. --------------------------------------------- Result 1517 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Despite]] the mysteriously [[positive]] [[reviews]] and [[high]] [[rating]], this is an awful [[movie]]. Awful [[enough]], that l feel [[obligated]] to [[warn]] you how [[bad]] it is.

The [[movie]] is set in the final period of the Raj, during the time of India's fight for independence. What follows in the [[ridiculous]] plot just fills me with [[disbelief]]. What the [[characters]] do and how they behave just does not persuade me that the characters [[exist]] in that [[era]].

[[For]] [[instance]], [[would]] the young married Hindu housemaid from the local village have an affair with her married Englishman Master, knowing full well that discovery of the affair would likely mean utter social ostracization and shame if not mortal punishment? Unlikely, but still maybe. However, would the same young Hindu housemaid, in the [[conservative]] society of India of that era carry on like a half [[naked]] Britney [[Spears]] in heat, partake in [[hot]] [[outdoor]] sex during [[daylight]] in [[open]] [[view]] where they [[might]] be [[discovered]] at any moment? That is not only bloody [[unlikely]], that is a retarded [[plot]] line.

Such idiocies combined with the poor acting, drove me to [[leave]] the [[cinema]] an hour into the [[movie]], so i did not watch the second half of the [[movie]]. One could only [[hope]] the ending is of more [[intelligence]] than what i saw in the [[first]] half. [[Albeit]] the mysteriously [[propitious]] [[examinations]] and [[higher]] [[evaluations]], this is an awful [[film]]. Awful [[satisfactorily]], that l feel [[forced]] to [[warnings]] you how [[inclement]] it is.

The [[kino]] is set in the final period of the Raj, during the time of India's fight for independence. What follows in the [[absurd]] plot just fills me with [[scepticism]]. What the [[traits]] do and how they behave just does not persuade me that the characters [[exists]] in that [[epoch]].

[[In]] [[case]], [[should]] the young married Hindu housemaid from the local village have an affair with her married Englishman Master, knowing full well that discovery of the affair would likely mean utter social ostracization and shame if not mortal punishment? Unlikely, but still maybe. However, would the same young Hindu housemaid, in the [[tory]] society of India of that era carry on like a half [[nude]] Britney [[Spurs]] in heat, partake in [[sexy]] [[external]] sex during [[daytime]] in [[opened]] [[views]] where they [[apt]] be [[found]] at any moment? That is not only bloody [[implausible]], that is a retarded [[intrigue]] line.

Such idiocies combined with the poor acting, drove me to [[letting]] the [[cine]] an hour into the [[cinematography]], so i did not watch the second half of the [[films]]. One could only [[hopes]] the ending is of more [[intelligentsia]] than what i saw in the [[frst]] half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[movie]] is all about subtlety and the [[difficulty]] of navigating the ever-shifting [[limits]] of mores, race relations and desire. [[Granted]], it is not a movie for [[everyone]]. There are no [[car]] [[chases]], no buildings exploding, no murders. The drama lies in the [[tension]] suggested by glances, minimal gestures, [[spatial]] [[boundaries]], lighting and [[things]] [[left]] -- [[sometimes]] very ostensibly -- unsaid. It's about identity, [[memory]], community, [[belonging]]. The different parts of the [[movie]] [[work]] [[together]] to [[reinforce]] the leitmotifs of self and other, identity, desire, [[limits]] and loss. It will reward the [[attentive]] and sensitive [[viewer]]. It will displease those [[whose]] palates require explosive, massive, spicy action. It is a [[beautifully]] filmed human [[story]]. That is all. This [[filmmaking]] is all about subtlety and the [[hassle]] of navigating the ever-shifting [[restrict]] of mores, race relations and desire. [[Accorded]], it is not a movie for [[anybody]]. There are no [[auto]] [[chase]], no buildings exploding, no murders. The drama lies in the [[tensile]] suggested by glances, minimal gestures, [[geographic]] [[restriction]], lighting and [[aspects]] [[exited]] -- [[occasionally]] very ostensibly -- unsaid. It's about identity, [[mem]], community, [[belonged]]. The different parts of the [[flick]] [[cooperation]] [[jointly]] to [[augment]] the leitmotifs of self and other, identity, desire, [[restriction]] and loss. It will reward the [[conscientious]] and sensitive [[bystander]]. It will displease those [[whom]] palates require explosive, massive, spicy action. It is a [[amazingly]] filmed human [[conte]]. That is all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1519 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[William]] Powell is Philo Vance in "The Kennel [[Murder]] Case," a 1933 film [[also]] starring [[Mary]] Astor, Paul Cavanagh, [[Eugene]] Palette, [[Helen]] Vinson and Ralph Morgan. A [[dog]] [[show]] in which Philo has entered his Scottish terrier [[Captain]] serves as the background for a locked [[room]] mystery with too many suspects. The mystery is very [[clever]] and the denouement both [[complicated]] and interesting. Since the talkies are still [[quite]] young, the camera work is a [[little]] static, but [[Michael]] Curtiz does a [[good]] job directing the action.

The supporting cast is [[excellent]]; the [[entire]] [[cast]] [[brings]] the [[film]] up a notch. [[Lots]] of [[actors]] have [[played]] Philo Vance, [[including]] [[Paul]] Lukas, Basil Rathbone, Wilford Hyde-White, Edmund Lowe, [[James]] Stephenson, Alan [[Curtis]], Warren [[William]] and others. Powell [[played]] it the most (five [[times]]) and is the [[best]] fit for the role - very [[relaxed]] but [[serious]] at the same [[time]]. This was made before "The Thin [[Man]]" catapulted him to [[big]] stardom - he had spent about 12 years in [[film]] by then, [[beginning]] his [[career]] on stage in 1912 at the [[age]] of 20. A [[remarkable]] [[man]], a [[remarkable]] screen [[presence]] and a [[remarkable]] [[actor]] who lived to be [[nearly]] 92. We're so lucky to have his [[films]] [[available]] on DVD and on TCM [[today]]. "The Kennel [[Murder]] [[Case]]" is a [[great]] [[story]] and a [[fun]] [[film]] - don't [[miss]] it. [[Williams]] Powell is Philo Vance in "The Kennel [[Assassinate]] Case," a 1933 film [[moreover]] starring [[Mari]] Astor, Paul Cavanagh, [[Buchanan]] Palette, [[Hackett]] Vinson and Ralph Morgan. A [[canine]] [[display]] in which Philo has entered his Scottish terrier [[Commander]] serves as the background for a locked [[chambers]] mystery with too many suspects. The mystery is very [[canny]] and the denouement both [[convoluted]] and interesting. Since the talkies are still [[utterly]] young, the camera work is a [[petit]] static, but [[Michele]] Curtiz does a [[alright]] job directing the action.

The supporting cast is [[sumptuous]]; the [[overall]] [[casting]] [[poses]] the [[cinematography]] up a notch. [[Batch]] of [[players]] have [[effected]] Philo Vance, [[containing]] [[Paolo]] Lukas, Basil Rathbone, Wilford Hyde-White, Edmund Lowe, [[Jacobo]] Stephenson, Alan [[Cortes]], Warren [[Willem]] and others. Powell [[served]] it the most (five [[period]]) and is the [[better]] fit for the role - very [[relax]] but [[severe]] at the same [[period]]. This was made before "The Thin [[Males]]" catapulted him to [[huge]] stardom - he had spent about 12 years in [[movie]] by then, [[starts]] his [[careers]] on stage in 1912 at the [[aged]] of 20. A [[gorgeous]] [[dude]], a [[fabulous]] screen [[attendance]] and a [[fabulous]] [[protagonist]] who lived to be [[approximately]] 92. We're so lucky to have his [[kino]] [[accessible]] on DVD and on TCM [[yesterday]]. "The Kennel [[Murdering]] [[Lawsuit]]" is a [[huge]] [[history]] and a [[droll]] [[movies]] - don't [[mademoiselle]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Absolutely one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I have ever seen! The acting, the dialog, the manuscript, the sound, the lighting, the plot line. I actually can't say anything positive about this, although I enjoy Swedish [[movies]]. The fighting scenes are so ridiculous that it's impossible to take it [[seriously]]. And when the lead [[character]] just happens to loose his shirt, while dodging bullets in a strip [[bar]], I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke, or if [[someone]] really [[thinks]] these are [[ingredients]] in a good [[film]]?! Regina [[Lund]] is the only half descent [[actor]], but she disappears in a flood of laughable pronunciations and unbelievable [[reactions]]. It leaves you horrified that someone actually spent time and [[money]] on something like this... Absolutely one of the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever seen! The acting, the dialog, the manuscript, the sound, the lighting, the plot line. I actually can't say anything positive about this, although I enjoy Swedish [[movie]]. The fighting scenes are so ridiculous that it's impossible to take it [[severely]]. And when the lead [[characters]] just happens to loose his shirt, while dodging bullets in a strip [[barrister]], I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke, or if [[everyone]] really [[believes]] these are [[components]] in a good [[movie]]?! Regina [[Lundin]] is the only half descent [[protagonist]], but she disappears in a flood of laughable pronunciations and unbelievable [[reaction]]. It leaves you horrified that someone actually spent time and [[cash]] on something like this... --------------------------------------------- Result 1521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Definitely at the top five of best [[John]] Garfield movies has to be [[Pride]] of the Marines. It's the [[true]] [[story]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the cost of his own [[sight]], while [[wounded]] [[held]] off a horde of storming Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The [[story]] [[nicely]] segments in three parts, Al Schmid's [[home]] [[life]] where he's a [[simple]] working [[stiff]] who's just getting serious with a [[woman]] and who likes nothing better than his [[bowling]] night. Pearl Harbor is [[bombed]] and he's off to war as [[millions]] of others were.

The [[second]] [[part]] is at Guadalcanal and we [[see]] [[part]] of the [[action]] where he's in an [[isolated]] [[machine]] [[gun]] nest, holding off Japanese troops. His action [[prevented]] [[Marine]] positions from being overrun, but a grenade does in his [[eyesight]].

And of course the third [[part]] is his painful [[adjustment]] to civilian [[life]] and to reassure himself that people aren't just [[caring]] for him out of pity, most of all that [[girl]] he was seeing Eleanor [[Parker]].

This [[film]] was [[broadcast]] on TCM on John Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a [[documentary]] on Garfield hosted by his [[daughter]]. One of the people [[interviewed]] [[said]] that Garfield was the [[actor]] most [[believable]] in working [[class]] [[roles]] in having and holding a union card.

[[In]] that [[respect]] he was lucky in that he did [[land]] with Warner [[Brothers]] in Hollywood. [[Though]] he [[kept]] getting typecast in gangster [[roles]] in the [[tradition]] of that studio, Garfield was [[terrific]] in these parts because of his background, because he came from the [[kind]] of [[life]] Al Schmid had, with the [[exception]] of Garfield's [[Jewish]] background.

[[In]] that [[respect]] he was perfect to [[play]] the [[part]] of a working [[class]] [[hero]] like Al Schmid who [[accepted]] the responsibility of defending his country. No super heroics here, just a guy who'd rather have been back in Philadelphia, but doing a job that had to be done.

It's a great part for Garfield. It's a film one shouldn't miss. I do wonder though whatever happened to the real Al Schmid. Definitely at the top five of best [[Jon]] Garfield movies has to be [[Hubris]] of the Marines. It's the [[real]] [[conte]] of Marine private Al Schmid who at the cost of his own [[eyesight]], while [[wounding]] [[holds]] off a horde of storming Japanese on Guadalcanal.

The [[histories]] [[courteously]] segments in three parts, Al Schmid's [[housing]] [[living]] where he's a [[easy]] working [[fierce]] who's just getting serious with a [[women]] and who likes nothing better than his [[snooker]] night. Pearl Harbor is [[bombing]] and he's off to war as [[billions]] of others were.

The [[secondly]] [[portion]] is at Guadalcanal and we [[seeing]] [[portion]] of the [[efforts]] where he's in an [[segregated]] [[machines]] [[howitzer]] nest, holding off Japanese troops. His action [[hampered]] [[Seamen]] positions from being overrun, but a grenade does in his [[sight]].

And of course the third [[portion]] is his painful [[modifications]] to civilian [[vie]] and to reassure himself that people aren't just [[care]] for him out of pity, most of all that [[chick]] he was seeing Eleanor [[Barker]].

This [[movies]] was [[spreading]] on TCM on John Garfield's 95th birthday and there was a [[documentation]] on Garfield hosted by his [[girls]]. One of the people [[interviewing]] [[says]] that Garfield was the [[protagonist]] most [[credible]] in working [[sorts]] [[functions]] in having and holding a union card.

[[Onto]] that [[respecting]] he was lucky in that he did [[earth]] with Warner [[Brethren]] in Hollywood. [[If]] he [[conserved]] getting typecast in gangster [[functions]] in the [[traditions]] of that studio, Garfield was [[awesome]] in these parts because of his background, because he came from the [[types]] of [[living]] Al Schmid had, with the [[exemption]] of Garfield's [[Hebrew]] background.

[[Onto]] that [[respecting]] he was perfect to [[playing]] the [[portion]] of a working [[sorts]] [[heroin]] like Al Schmid who [[accepts]] the responsibility of defending his country. No super heroics here, just a guy who'd rather have been back in Philadelphia, but doing a job that had to be done.

It's a great part for Garfield. It's a film one shouldn't miss. I do wonder though whatever happened to the real Al Schmid. --------------------------------------------- Result 1522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Being a slasher film aficionado, I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. [[While]] channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp II [[happened]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I wanted to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not seen the original, my criticism should probably not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is wrong with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm assuming that the franchise of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a joke on itself. Hell, even the name comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for wanting to just put together something for pure camp horror value, but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original Friday the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires bad acting, but come on. Pamela Springsteen as the evil out-of-touch-with-reality killer did a better job of killing off my interest than she did killing off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC II is pretty boring, and I really did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can barely appreciate them. If you're looking for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your channel surfing takes you across this one, check and see what else is on. Being a slasher film aficionado, I typically will settle in to watch every slash movie that passes over my retinas, which sometimes does more harm than good to my brain, I will say. [[Despite]] channel surfing the other night, Sleepaway Camp II [[arrived]] to cross paths with me. Of course, I wanted to check it out, as I had heard of the Sleepaway Camp franchise, but have never actually seen any of them (for shame, I know). I will note that since I have not seen the original, my criticism should probably not be taken too seriously, because perhaps what I think is wrong with it is totally intentional by the franchise's own design.

Now I'm assuming that the franchise of Sleepaway Camp is, in itself, a joke on itself. Hell, even the name comes off as an intentional joke. Sleep away camp? It's good fun. I can appreciate the film for wanting to just put together something for pure camp horror value, but that's about as far as I can go. The acting in this movie made the cast of the original Friday the 13th look like thespians doing a rendition of Macbeth. Campy requires bad acting, but come on. Pamela Springsteen as the evil out-of-touch-with-reality killer did a better job of killing off my interest than she did killing off the entire cast. As far as comedy goes, there were a few times where I chuckled, but it was few and far between.

Ultimately, SAC II is pretty boring, and I really did want to sleep away the camp. The deaths are so obviously staged and fake that you can barely appreciate them. If you're looking for a slasher film comedy with good camp, I recommend Club Dread. If your channel surfing takes you across this one, check and see what else is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Cliffhanger is what [[appears]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[last]] action [[movie]] before he [[became]] such an [[underrated]] [[actor]]. It's about a mountain climber that [[must]] help his friend after being held hostage by [[mercenaries]] that want them to find three suitcases carrying money over 100 million dollars. It has [[great]] action sequence's, edge of your [[seat]] [[fun]] and a [[great]] [[time]] at the movies. Cliffhanger is what [[emerges]] to be Slyvester Stallone's [[latter]] action [[kino]] before he [[was]] such an [[undervalued]] [[actress]]. It's about a mountain climber that [[gotta]] help his friend after being held hostage by [[mercs]] that want them to find three suitcases carrying money over 100 million dollars. It has [[huge]] action sequence's, edge of your [[seats]] [[droll]] and a [[whopping]] [[period]] at the movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1524 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Actually, the [[movie]] is neither [[horror]] nor Sci-Fi. With a very strong [[Christian]] religious theme, this movie delivers [[minimal]] content and no suspense. Second-tier actors do half-decent [[jobs]] of reading their [[boring]] roles. The only [[good]] performance is by [[Sydney]] [[Penny]] who plays a role of a [[mother]] of ... I won't [[spoil]] the [[movie]], it's [[either]] Christ or Anti-Christ. [[Avoid]] watching this movie [[unless]] you a Christian religious [[fanatic]] [[obsessed]] with apocalypse.

[[Being]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this movie just because I [[wanted]] to write this [[review]]. It's a [[pity]] that Sci-Fi [[channel]] had to [[air]] this [[movie]] at the peak [[evening]] [[time]]. Actually, the [[cinema]] is neither [[terror]] nor Sci-Fi. With a very strong [[Kristen]] religious theme, this movie delivers [[small]] content and no suspense. Second-tier actors do half-decent [[working]] of reading their [[bore]] roles. The only [[alright]] performance is by [[Sidney]] [[Benny]] who plays a role of a [[mommy]] of ... I won't [[ruin]] the [[movies]], it's [[nor]] Christ or Anti-Christ. [[Stave]] watching this movie [[if]] you a Christian religious [[fanaticism]] [[haunted]] with apocalypse.

[[Ongoing]] a non-Christian, I had to force myself to watch this movie just because I [[want]] to write this [[examine]]. It's a [[compassion]] that Sci-Fi [[chanel]] had to [[airlift]] this [[cinematography]] at the peak [[soir]] [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[like]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I [[saw]] this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that [[bad]], it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[impressive]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I found it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott gave the best performance as a homicidal cop. Truly believable and really in character, he freaked me out a couple of times.

I was really expecting a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified action sequences, stuff like that, but it was surprisingly well done and I didn't find any of that. Every shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty solid really.

overall, amazing cast, decent story that kept me interested and just enough action to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't appear in theatres, it was better than some garbage I've seen on the big screen. I would say it's worth seeing. First off, I'm not some Justin Timberlake fangirl obsessed with making him look good, in fact I'm not even a huge Justin fan, but I did [[iike]] this movie.

I work at a video store and when I [[sawthe]] this movie with its huge cast that I'd never even heard of I had to see what it was about. I didn't find Justin's acting that [[unfavorable]], it was clearly the worst out of the group, but it's a pretty [[unbelievable]] group, with Cary Elwes and Dylan McDermott being two names that didn't even make the first credits list. The story is basic, a journalist uncovering corrupt cops, but I found it well done. L L Cool J's character was clearly conflicted, but I honestly didn't know what he would do in the end. Morgan Freeman is as always, the wise mentor figure he does so well, and as much as I love Kevin SPacey, he was kind of just there. HIs character didn't have a whole lot of substance, but it's Kevin Spacey, he can do no wrong.

Surprisingly I thought Dylan McDermott gave the best performance as a homicidal cop. Truly believable and really in character, he freaked me out a couple of times.

I was really expecting a lot of cheesiness to be honest. Horrible catchphrases, unjustified action sequences, stuff like that, but it was surprisingly well done and I didn't find any of that. Every shooting had a point, it wasn't clichéd, pretty solid really.

overall, amazing cast, decent story that kept me interested and just enough action to make me jump. I don't know why it didn't appear in theatres, it was better than some garbage I've seen on the big screen. I would say it's worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1526 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This show is [[totally]] worth watching. It has the [[best]] cast of [[talent]] I have [[seen]] in a very [[long]] time. The [[premise]] of the [[show]] is [[unique]] and fresh ( I [[guess]] the [[executives]] at ABC are not [[used]] too that, as it was not another [[reality]] [[show]]). [[However]] this [[show]] was [[believable]] with [[likable]] [[characters]] and [[marvelous]] story lines. I am [[probably]] not in the age [[group]] they [[expect]] to [[like]] the show, as I am in my forty's, but a [[lot]] of my [[friends]] also [[loved]] it (Late 30's - mid 40's) and are [[dying]] for quality [[shows]] with talented cast [[members]]. I do not [[think]] this [[show]] was [[given]] [[enough]] time to [[gain]] an audience. I believe that [[given]] more time this show would have [[done]] very well. Once again ABC is not giving a [[show]] with [[real]] potential a [[real]] [[chance]]. With so [[many]] [[shows]] [[given]] [[chance]] after [[chance]] and not [[nearly]] worth it! They [[need]] to give quality [[shows]] a [[real]] [[chance]] and the time to really click and gain an audience. I really loved the characters and looked forward to watching each episode. I have been watching the episodes on ABC [[videos]] and the [[show]] [[keeps]] [[getting]] better and better. [[Although]] I [[think]] they [[owe]] us one more episode (Number 13?). We want to watch what we can! [[Bombard]] ABC with [[emails]] and letters and [[see]] if its [[possible]] to [[save]] this [[show]] from extinction. It [[certainly]] [[worked]] for Jerico. Some [[things]] are just worth [[saving]] and this [[show]] is [[definitely]] one of them. SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION [[TO]] ABC [[AT]]: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gh1215/petition.html This show is [[perfectly]] worth watching. It has the [[optimum]] cast of [[talents]] I have [[watched]] in a very [[lange]] time. The [[prerequisite]] of the [[exhibitions]] is [[exclusive]] and fresh ( I [[guessing]] the [[cadres]] at ABC are not [[utilizing]] too that, as it was not another [[realism]] [[demonstrate]]). [[Conversely]] this [[illustrating]] was [[dependable]] with [[likeable]] [[features]] and [[glamorous]] story lines. I am [[undeniably]] not in the age [[panel]] they [[waits]] to [[fond]] the show, as I am in my forty's, but a [[batch]] of my [[homies]] also [[liked]] it (Late 30's - mid 40's) and are [[die]] for quality [[display]] with talented cast [[lawmakers]]. I do not [[thinking]] this [[display]] was [[gave]] [[adequate]] time to [[earn]] an audience. I believe that [[bestowed]] more time this show would have [[performed]] very well. Once again ABC is not giving a [[spectacle]] with [[actual]] potential a [[actual]] [[opportunity]]. With so [[multiple]] [[display]] [[bestowed]] [[likelihood]] after [[likelihood]] and not [[practically]] worth it! They [[required]] to give quality [[displaying]] a [[actual]] [[likelihood]] and the time to really click and gain an audience. I really loved the characters and looked forward to watching each episode. I have been watching the episodes on ABC [[video]] and the [[spectacle]] [[retains]] [[obtaining]] better and better. [[Despite]] I [[thinks]] they [[gotta]] us one more episode (Number 13?). We want to watch what we can! [[Bombarding]] ABC with [[email]] and letters and [[seeing]] if its [[doable]] to [[saves]] this [[illustrating]] from extinction. It [[admittedly]] [[cooperating]] for Jerico. Some [[aspects]] are just worth [[saved]] and this [[illustrating]] is [[categorically]] one of them. SIGN THE ONLINE PETITION [[AUX]] ABC [[FOR]]: http://www.PetitionOnline.com/gh1215/petition.html --------------------------------------------- Result 1527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This is the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. I was [[going]] to [[get]] up and [[leave]] at [[Tape]] 4 but I [[stuck]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghanistan]]? [[Come]] on [[guys]]! Who's the [[idiot]] who [[forgot]] to [[hide]] the Sanskrit billboards? I thought the lead [[actor]]([[George]] Calil) was [[particularly]] inept. Apart from the [[bad]] acting and over zealous camera shake, I [[thought]] [[using]] the events of 9/11 as a [[reason]] to [[make]] "[[Larson]] the [[Lunatic]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[disgraceful]] and irreverent to the [[victims]] of 9/11. [[Using]] a [[phone]] [[call]] from Larson's [[wife]], [[Sarah]], [[supposedly]] from one of the terrorist [[held]] [[planes]] on that day, was [[appalling]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that [[cold]] hearted stunt did. This is the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever [[noticed]]. I was [[go]] to [[obtain]] up and [[letting]] at [[Cassette]] 4 but I [[cornered]] it out. I now consider myself a Masochist! [[Afghan]]? [[Arrived]] on [[lads]]! Who's the [[morons]] who [[forgotten]] to [[hides]] the Sanskrit billboards? I thought the lead [[protagonist]]([[Georges]] Calil) was [[notably]] inept. Apart from the [[amiss]] acting and over zealous camera shake, I [[thinks]] [[used]] the events of 9/11 as a [[raison]] to [[deliver]] "[[Larsen]] the [[Quirky]] Implodes, all over a screen near you" [[shameful]] and irreverent to the [[victim]] of 9/11. [[Used]] a [[tel]] [[invitation]] from Larson's [[femme]], [[Sara]], [[seemingly]] from one of the terrorist [[hold]] [[airliner]] on that day, was [[fearsome]]. The camera shake didn't make me feel sick, that [[frigid]] hearted stunt did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1528 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[STAR]] [[RATING]]: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits

In this debut effort for Nick Park's beloved man and dog, they are forced to fly to the moon when good old Wallace runs out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest [[feature]] at just 22 [[minutes]], this W/G adventure is [[also]] the earliest and it kinda [[shows]]. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been hugely into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really enjoyed is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the hugely successful recent film adaptation.

As technically impressive as the first two (all things considered!) this one lacks the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's fairly good fun as a first try and certainly set the standard for greater things to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** [[SUPERSTAR]] [[APPRAISALS]]: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits

In this debut effort for Nick Park's beloved man and dog, they are forced to fly to the moon when good old Wallace runs out of cheese.

As well as being the shortest [[hallmarks]] at just 22 [[mins]], this W/G adventure is [[moreover]] the earliest and it kinda [[illustrates]]. The plasticine animation is a little creaky and funny here, sort of reminiscent of the Mork animation about the little man in the box.

Admirable though the craftsmanship behind it is, I've never actually been hugely into Wallace & Gromit (maybe a bit too clean and traditional for someone of my generation.) The only one I've really enjoyed is The Wrong Trousers (and that was more from when I was younger and less aware of, shall we say, the seedier pleasures of life.) I was driven to actively seek out this early effort due to the resurgence in popularity as a result of the hugely successful recent film adaptation.

As technically impressive as the first two (all things considered!) this one lacks the emotional angle it's successors were to possess. That being said, it's fairly good fun as a first try and certainly set the standard for greater things to come. Two stars, but a good two stars. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 1529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I've just finished listening to the director's commentary for this film, and I [[think]] the one [[big]] [[thing]] I [[got]] from it that I [[agree]] with is that this film, like Mann's The Insider, is completely subjective. It's from Howard's POV. So, any review or attempt at contemplating a set of comments about it, as Ebert did, is really about Nolte's character actually. If you feel, as he did, that the film "does not work", then you're saying, I think, that Howard does not work. And, to be frank, you might be right. Howard's reasoning and personality really wouldn't stand up to professional mental treatments and analysis.

But, hey, that's the nature of people.

Andrew. I've just finished listening to the director's commentary for this film, and I [[reckon]] the one [[gargantuan]] [[stuff]] I [[did]] from it that I [[concur]] with is that this film, like Mann's The Insider, is completely subjective. It's from Howard's POV. So, any review or attempt at contemplating a set of comments about it, as Ebert did, is really about Nolte's character actually. If you feel, as he did, that the film "does not work", then you're saying, I think, that Howard does not work. And, to be frank, you might be right. Howard's reasoning and personality really wouldn't stand up to professional mental treatments and analysis.

But, hey, that's the nature of people.

Andrew. --------------------------------------------- Result 1530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Before I [[begin]], you need to [[know]] that I am a huge [[fan]] of many of Sonny Chiba's films. His biographical [[series]] of the life of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and among the best martial arts films ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was practically non-stop and with the possible exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[practitioner]] on [[film]] during the 1970s. [[Because]] they are so good, I've seen at [[least]] 15 of his films and recently [[bought]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am NOT a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a [[bad]] film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie [[fan]] trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem [[would]] still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is [[simply]] atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out [[like]] it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the editing is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[bad]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was annoying, distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the [[choreography]] [[would]] have improved things a bit. [[Instead]] of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! Before I [[begun]], you need to [[savoir]] that I am a huge [[breather]] of many of Sonny Chiba's films. His biographical [[serial]] of the life of his master, Mas Oyama, were amazing and among the best martial arts films ever made, as were most of his Street Fighter films. The action was practically non-stop and with the possible exception of Bruce Lee (depending on who you ask), he was the greatest martial arts [[physicians]] on [[cinematography]] during the 1970s. [[Since]] they are so good, I've seen at [[less]] 15 of his films and recently [[acquire]] some more (which I am in the process of watching).

Unfortunately, despite my love of these films, I am NOT a mind-numbed zombie who worships the man to such a degree that I rate EVERY film a 10. There are a few reviews like this here on IMDb and I truly think that anyone giving this film a 10 should be ignored because this is such a [[negative]] film from a technical standpoint and isn't even close to the being Chiba's best work. A score of 10 isn't a real rating--it's some zombie [[ventilator]] trying to make a statement about Chiba, not this film! As I said, technically this film is awful. Some of this was the result of my seeing the American dubbed version, with its irrelevant prologue and bad dubbing. But most of the problem [[should]] still exist with the original Japanese print. The camera-work is [[exclusively]] atrocious--like it was done by chimps (smart chimps, but still chimps nonetheless). Often, much of the fast martial arts action is missed because the camera is so slow or the tops of the actors heads are clipped off due to the shoddiness of production. And, again and again, the camera pans in and out [[iike]] it is a new toy being used by an idiot plus the editing is beyond wretched--with cuts being done haphazardly and confusingly.

I don't know whether the musical score is original or not--but it was also very, very [[naughty]]. Sort of like acid rock of 1970 blended poorly with Ennio Morricone's "Spaghetti Western" music--it was annoying, distracting and just plain silly.

As for the martial arts action, I think that having chimps do the [[dance]] [[could]] have improved things a bit. [[Alternatively]] of the great fight scenes you'd look forward to in a Chiba film, the fights are too brief and often missed by the camera!! So what you are left with is the story...and this MIGHT just be the worst part of the film! It's supposed to be an anti-drug film starring Sonny Chiba as....Sonny Chiba! And when the film begins, he vows to destroy the drug trade in Japan. But, the Mafia (complete with not a single member who looks Italian, but who are ALL Japanese) vows to stop Chiba. And, when a lady comes to Chiba with promises to give him information about how to destroy the drug trade, he agrees to help her and risk his life with no conditions--even though she's NEVER forthright about telling him what she knows! In fact, later it turns out she is just trying to use Chiba to protect her while she herself sells a huge briefcase full of cocaine--and he CONTINUES trying to protect her!! This makes no sense at all and throughout much of the film it looks as if they just shot the film without a script--such as when they went into the bars and brothels and had Chiba walking about as if he was drunk.

So if it was THAT bad, why still does it merit a 3? Well, first, there are many more horrid marital arts films (such as many of those from Hong Kong in the 1970s)--including one with guys dressed up in gorilla suits doing kung fu and their handlers with 3 foot long tongues they used for fighting (now THAT'S bad). Second, while the action is very bad compared to other Sonny Chiba films, compared to its contemporaries, it's not that bad. Still, you could easily do a lot better than this horrid little film.

By the way, if you are wondering if this is the worst Sonny Chiba film, it certainly is not! In one of his first films, INVASION OF THE NEPTUNE MEN, Chiba plays a leotard-wearing super-hero who battles pointy-headed invaders from the planet Neptune. It's so bad that it rivals PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE and THEY SAVED HITLER'S BRAIN for awfulness.

A final note to parents--Like most of Sonny Chiba's films, this one is very violent and has its share of boobies. DON'T let little kids watch this no matter how much they beg! Make them wait until they are older before you let them watch wretched rated-R martial arts films! --------------------------------------------- Result 1531 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (79%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[First]] than anything, I'm not going to praise Iñarritu's [[short]] film, even I'm Mexican and proud of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

In another hand, I see most of the reviews focuses on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a [[subtle]] bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm talking about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on September 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is remarkable that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much irony in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the Ken Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more clearly and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin Americans) suffered at a similar date something worst, and nobody remembers our grief as the whole world has done to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have become victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time ago; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. [[Firstly]] than anything, I'm not going to praise Iñarritu's [[succinct]] film, even I'm Mexican and proud of his success in mainstream Hollywood.

In another hand, I see most of the reviews focuses on their favorite (and not so) short films; but we are forgetting that there is a [[nuanced]] bottom line that circles the whole compilation, and maybe it will not be so pleasant for American people. (Even if that was not the main purpose of the producers)

What i'm talking about is that most of the short films does not show the suffering that WASP people went through because the terrorist attack on September 11th, but the suffering of the Other people.

Do you need proofs about what i'm saying? Look, in the Bosnia short film, the message is: "You cry because of the people who died in the Towers, but we (The Others = East Europeans) are crying long ago for the crimes committed against our women and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Even though the Burkina Fasso story is more in comedy, there is a the same thought: "You are angry because Osama Bin Laden punched you in an evil way, but we (The Others = Africans) should be more angry, because our people is dying of hunger, poverty and AIDS long time ago, and nobody pay attention to us like the whole world has done to you".

Look now at the Sean Penn short: The fall of the Twin Towers makes happy to a lonely (and alienated) man. So the message is that the Power and the Greed (symbolized by the Towers) must fall for letting the people see the sun rise and the flowers blossom? It is remarkable that this terrible bottom line has been proposed by an American. There is so much irony in this short film that it is close to be subversive.

Well, the Ken Loach (very know because his anti-capitalism ideology) is much more clearly and shameless in going straight to the point: "You are angry because your country has been attacked by evil forces, but we (The Others = Latin Americans) suffered at a similar date something worst, and nobody remembers our grief as the whole world has done to you".

It is like if the creative of this project wanted to say to Americans: "You see now, America? You are not the only that have become victim of the world violence, you are not alone in your pain and by the way, we (the Others = the Non Americans) have been suffering a lot more than you from long time ago; so, we are in solidarity with you in your pain... and by the way, we are sorry because you have had some taste of your own medicine" Only the Mexican and the French short films showed some compassion and sympathy for American people; the others are like a slap on the face for the American State, that is not equal to American People. --------------------------------------------- Result 1532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] This [[movie]] is not as [[good]] as all the movies of Christ I've ever seen. And I'm quite amazed that in this story Pilate [[wants]] to [[finish]] [[Jesus]], when the Scriptures (as well the other movies) state differently. It lacks also a very important issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians lies in this very event. As Paul says in one of his letters "If Christ did not rise from the dead, our faith is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this movie was seeing on the streets the remains of the palms that were used when Jesus entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, Jesus WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. This [[cinematography]] is not as [[alright]] as all the movies of Christ I've ever seen. And I'm quite amazed that in this story Pilate [[desires]] to [[iend]] [[Christ]], when the Scriptures (as well the other movies) state differently. It lacks also a very important issue: The Resurrection.. None of the other movies skip this very important part: the faith of all of us Christians lies in this very event. As Paul says in one of his letters "If Christ did not rise from the dead, our faith is vain". A very impressive scene for me in this movie was seeing on the streets the remains of the palms that were used when Jesus entered Jerusalem.

Finally, and in opposition to my Jewish co-commentator, Jesus WAS NOT a myth. And as a matter of fact, he was also a JEW. There are plenty of documents (relgious and secular) that prove the existence of this extraordinary man(or should I said, God become a man) that indeed changed mankind. I strongly advise him(given he is a historian) to read about Flavius Josephus, the most brilliant Jewish commentator of the 1st. Century. --------------------------------------------- Result 1533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I'm sorry, I had high hopes for this movie. [[Unfortunately]], it was too long, too thin and too [[weak]] to hold my attention. When I realized the whole movie was indeed only about an older guy reliving his dream, I felt cheated. Surely it could have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more meaningful.

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest room. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. I'm sorry, I had high hopes for this movie. [[Sadly]], it was too long, too thin and too [[fragile]] to hold my attention. When I realized the whole movie was indeed only about an older guy reliving his dream, I felt cheated. Surely it could have been a device to bring us into something deeper, something more meaningful.

So, don't buy a large drink or you'll be running to the rest room. My kids didn't enjoy it either. Ah well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I am a big movie fan. I like movies of all types. This is [[arguably]] the [[worst]] movie I've ever seen.

I get that it follows the book closely, which raises the point that not everything should be made into a movie. Especially since the authenticity of the experiences in the book have been called into question more than once.

These characters are not quirky, they are mentally [[ill]]. The things that happen are not [[funny]], they are disturbing; especially [[considering]] they are [[supposed]] to be true.

This movie had the feel of The Royal Tenenbaums, another movie I hated, only Running With Scissors was even more dysfunctional and less funny.

I will never get those hours back. I wanted to wash my brain after watching. I am a big movie fan. I like movies of all types. This is [[assuredly]] the [[gravest]] movie I've ever seen.

I get that it follows the book closely, which raises the point that not everything should be made into a movie. Especially since the authenticity of the experiences in the book have been called into question more than once.

These characters are not quirky, they are mentally [[patient]]. The things that happen are not [[humorous]], they are disturbing; especially [[consider]] they are [[presumed]] to be true.

This movie had the feel of The Royal Tenenbaums, another movie I hated, only Running With Scissors was even more dysfunctional and less funny.

I will never get those hours back. I wanted to wash my brain after watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If you're going to look after a child, make sure they don't live anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said kid has a habit of drawing gory pictures and disappears at night among the tombstones to see her 'friends'. But, our long haired heroine, oblivious to all the signs, shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a dullard older brother who becomes a love interest for our budding babysitter. Even more spooky than the zombie gang outside is the cast's [[tendency]] to talk even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[match]] the movement of their mouths. But enough of that.. domestic animals are being sacrificed, old ladies are having eyeballs torn out and the orchestra won't shut up during any scene, even the quiet ones. Oh, and the editor is having a day off going by the way the film drones on.

In fact, it would been better if everybody involved had taken a breather, smelt what they'd signed up for and gone AWOL. Yes, I know it's hard to get into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd want. If would be like a trainee farm labourer having a conviction for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[worst]] lead performances ever by the shrill Laurel Barnett, and another almost equally as [[bad]] by the charisma-free child actress Rosalie Cole (The next Dakota Fanning she ain't) the film meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a climax.

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[useless]] heroine in a shed, while her bit of rough fends off these ghouls with a plank of wood, a one shell shotgun and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the car, and they accidentally discovered that the creatures found the noise of the horn so [[repellent]] they shuffled off at the sound of it. So do they [[stay]] where they are safe? No of course not, they [[run]] off to this abandoned [[building]] in the [[middle]] of nowhere, so the [[bloke]] can [[prove]] what a hardnut he is the [[girl]] can [[act]] like she's having a [[nervous]] [[breakdown]].

Finally, the film [[closes]]. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake [[blood]], as if [[nothing]] horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has happened. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, boring horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to spend a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 If you're going to look after a child, make sure they don't live anywhere near a graveyard. Especially if said kid has a habit of drawing gory pictures and disappears at night among the tombstones to see her 'friends'. But, our long haired heroine, oblivious to all the signs, shacks up with her family the Nortons, which include a strict father and a dullard older brother who becomes a love interest for our budding babysitter. Even more spooky than the zombie gang outside is the cast's [[penchant]] to talk even when their lips aren't moving, and for the words to not [[ballgame]] the movement of their mouths. But enough of that.. domestic animals are being sacrificed, old ladies are having eyeballs torn out and the orchestra won't shut up during any scene, even the quiet ones. Oh, and the editor is having a day off going by the way the film drones on.

In fact, it would been better if everybody involved had taken a breather, smelt what they'd signed up for and gone AWOL. Yes, I know it's hard to get into movies these days, but this sort of starter point is not one on your CV you'd want. If would be like a trainee farm labourer having a conviction for chicken molesting. Featuring one of the [[gravest]] lead performances ever by the shrill Laurel Barnett, and another almost equally as [[amiss]] by the charisma-free child actress Rosalie Cole (The next Dakota Fanning she ain't) the film meanders on and on with nothing but padding until we get what passes for a climax.

This involves five or six members of the undead barricading our utterly [[dispensable]] heroine in a shed, while her bit of rough fends off these ghouls with a plank of wood, a one shell shotgun and whatever he can lay his hands on. But back up a minute.. earlier on they were in the car, and they accidentally discovered that the creatures found the noise of the horn so [[despicable]] they shuffled off at the sound of it. So do they [[sojourn]] where they are safe? No of course not, they [[running]] off to this abandoned [[build]] in the [[oriente]] of nowhere, so the [[man]] can [[proving]] what a hardnut he is the [[girlie]] can [[ley]] like she's having a [[jittery]] [[disintegration]].

Finally, the film [[close]]. It doesn't end, it just goes to a grinding halt. The main character wanders back to her vehicle covered in fake [[chrissake]], as if [[anything]] horrible had happened. But, my dear viewer, something horrible has happened. You have just sat through one of the most lamebrained, boring horror films you're ever likely to see, and lost 82 minutes of your life you'll never get back. Just think.. years from now on your deathbed, what you'd trade an hour and 22 minutes for just to spend a bit of extra time with your family. Sadly, it's already too late for me. Don't you make the same mistake :( 2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[saw]] this [[trailer]] and thought to myself my god is this movie for real, who would want to see this movie and at the same time i thought that, my girl friend [[turned]] to me and said "we have to go see this movie"...enough [[said]] so i saw this about 5 minutes go and I [[tried]] to put on a [[brave]] [[face]] and [[enjoy]] the cheap scares but there weren't [[even]] any of those. It has to be one of the [[worst]] movies I have ever seen the director has no [[influence]] no perspective the same shots were used again and again he did not build up suspense the cast probably were [[simply]] told scream cry run fall. I would love to see the script as the first 40 mins was mostly annoying girly giggles and bad music, there was absolutely no character development.

The plot is just...well there was no plot it was basically I know we will terrorize a high school group on their prom night with a stalker serial killer, That's brilliant! hmmm The acting was what you expect in a Australian soap opera hopeless, that main character the Blondie god dam she annoyed me. her longest line must have been half a sentence, and every time she was on camera she was just pulling another rude facial expression.

Please listen to me if you have any taste in movies don't go see this, and if your like me and don't have a choice well then I wish you good [[luck]], maybe smuggle in an ipod or magazine. Can't believe this film [[got]] made! I [[noticed]] this [[caravan]] and thought to myself my god is this movie for real, who would want to see this movie and at the same time i thought that, my girl friend [[transformed]] to me and said "we have to go see this movie"...enough [[indicated]] so i saw this about 5 minutes go and I [[attempts]] to put on a [[fearless]] [[confronting]] and [[enjoys]] the cheap scares but there weren't [[yet]] any of those. It has to be one of the [[gravest]] movies I have ever seen the director has no [[repercussions]] no perspective the same shots were used again and again he did not build up suspense the cast probably were [[purely]] told scream cry run fall. I would love to see the script as the first 40 mins was mostly annoying girly giggles and bad music, there was absolutely no character development.

The plot is just...well there was no plot it was basically I know we will terrorize a high school group on their prom night with a stalker serial killer, That's brilliant! hmmm The acting was what you expect in a Australian soap opera hopeless, that main character the Blondie god dam she annoyed me. her longest line must have been half a sentence, and every time she was on camera she was just pulling another rude facial expression.

Please listen to me if you have any taste in movies don't go see this, and if your like me and don't have a choice well then I wish you good [[chances]], maybe smuggle in an ipod or magazine. Can't believe this film [[gets]] made! --------------------------------------------- Result 1537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] [[WOW]], [[finally]] Jim [[Carrey]] has [[returned]] from the died. This movie had me [[laughing]] and [[crying]]. It also [[sends]] a [[message]] that we should all know and [[learn]] from. Jeniffer Aniston was [[great]], she will [[finally]] have a [[hit]] [[movie]] under her [[belt]]. [[If]] you [[liked]] liar liar you will [[love]] this movie. I [[give]] it 9/10. [[WHEW]], [[lastly]] Jim [[Kari]] has [[repatriated]] from the died. This movie had me [[kidding]] and [[mourning]]. It also [[sent]] a [[messaging]] that we should all know and [[learns]] from. Jeniffer Aniston was [[super]], she will [[eventually]] have a [[slapped]] [[flick]] under her [[strap]]. [[Unless]] you [[loved]] liar liar you will [[iike]] this movie. I [[confer]] it 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I never seem to write a [[review]] on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how [[good]], or how bad, a movie is. This [[film]] [[falls]] into the first category. [[Every]] year, I try to see all the nominees for [[Best]] Foreign [[Film]] at the [[Oscars]], [[even]] those that I [[know]] I won't like. "As It Is [[In]] Heaven" seems to [[fit]] the bill. The plot sounds sugary and [[sentimental]] and slow....For my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". After a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare film where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The characters in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a likable bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela Olsson, as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is beautiful, and the main song, sung by Gabriella, is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the feisty 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in words, it all makes sense as the movies comes to a fitting crescendo. **** out of *****. Probably the [[strongest]] Swedish [[movie]] I've ever seen. I never seem to write a [[revisiting]] on IMDb unless I am extremely surprised at how [[alright]], or how bad, a movie is. This [[kino]] [[dips]] into the first category. [[Any]] year, I try to see all the nominees for [[Nicest]] Foreign [[Kino]] at the [[Oskar]], [[yet]] those that I [[savoir]] I won't like. "As It Is [[For]] Heaven" seems to [[suited]] the bill. The plot sounds sugary and [[emotional]] and slow....For my tastes, which run more towards original, dark and/or daring foreign cinema (Michael Haneke, Francois Ozon, A lot of modern Japanese/Korean cinema) "As It Is In Heaven" does not sound particularly interesting....It didn't get released in the USA, so I sat down to watch a VCD I found in Singapore, preparing to "cross it off the list". After a dull beginning, "As It Is In Heaven" becomes that rare film where you really become inspired by what is happening on screen. Weak points: The characters in the film are pure "stock" characters- the Wounded Dreamer, the Town Bully, the Battered Wife, the Loose Woman Yearning for Love, the Repressed Minister....Thankfully, they're largely a likable bunch, as well as being well-written and well-acted. Ingela Olsson, as the minister's wife Inger, would have been nominated for an Oscar had her performance been in English. Strong points: the music is beautiful, and the main song, sung by Gabriella, is truly dramatic and memorable. And keep an eye out for the feisty 87-year old actress playing Olga, who is keeping up with the dancing steps as well as the younger ladies! I won't discuss the ending, but I will say that it makes sense. They're are a lot of emotional things happening in the last hour of the film, and you're not quite sure why they're happening. Although nothing is explained in words, it all makes sense as the movies comes to a fitting crescendo. **** out of *****. Probably the [[fittest]] Swedish [[kino]] I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1539 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There may be spoilers!

Charlie Fineman ([[Adam]] Sandler), who lost his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11), still grieves over their [[deaths]]. He runs into his former college roommate, Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle), and the two [[rekindle]] their [[friendship]]. Alan vows to help his [[old]] friend come to terms with the [[terrible]] [[loss]]. This is a simplification of the basic [[story]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[movie]] is, however, a [[story]] of how [[fate]] intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[powerless]] do any thing about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no [[longer]] fulfilling. He feels friendless and out of touch with his own reality. He is [[unable]] to communicate with his [[wife]] and his associates at [[work]]. He can't express his feelings and as a result [[feels]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his job. [[Eventually]] he meets and [[discovers]] that Charlie, (who [[originally]] does not [[remember]] [[Alan]]), is living in a false [[reality]] of his own. [[Charlie]] has gone back to a [[time]] in his [[life]] when he had no family. He [[lives]] as if he were [[still]] a [[student]] [[playing]] in a [[rock]] band, collecting vinyl records of the 60s and 70s [[bands]], and playing video [[games]]. He has escaped to a better and [[safer]] [[time]] in his [[life]] where there are no [[bad]] [[guys]] and he has a [[lot]] [[less]] to [[lose]]. Everyone in this movie is affected in some way by the tragedy that has affected Charlie and his remission to a formerly [[different]] and [[better]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[great]] enabler. His in-laws are subtracted from his [[life]] because they [[would]] take him back to the reality that his [[family]] is now gone from his [[life]]. And Alan is most affected by him because [[Alan]] wants to, (in at first a selfish desire to escape from his own reality) to be with Charlie as a means to subtract himself from his own stifled reality and then he wants to find a way to help Charlie begin to recover from his self-induced guilt and denial of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is Charlie able to begin to heal himself but that Alan, in fact, learns to communicate and sate his true desires with his associates at work and, eventually, is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern judge, (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. There may be spoilers!

Charlie Fineman ([[Adama]] Sandler), who lost his family in a tragedy, (the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11), still grieves over their [[fatalities]]. He runs into his former college roommate, Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle), and the two [[resuscitate]] their [[goodwill]]. Alan vows to help his [[former]] friend come to terms with the [[hideous]] [[losing]]. This is a simplification of the basic [[storytelling]] of Reign Over Me.

This [[filmmaking]] is, however, a [[conte]] of how [[fated]] intercedes in our lives when we ourselves may be [[unable]] do any thing about our own states of being. Alan is stuck in a life that he knows is no [[most]] fulfilling. He feels friendless and out of touch with his own reality. He is [[incapable]] to communicate with his [[woman]] and his associates at [[jobs]]. He can't express his feelings and as a result [[thinks]] lost and distant from his own world. He chances upon Charlie on the streets of Manhattan while driving from his job. [[Finally]] he meets and [[discoveries]] that Charlie, (who [[initially]] does not [[remind]] [[Allan]]), is living in a false [[realistic]] of his own. [[Charley]] has gone back to a [[period]] in his [[vie]] when he had no family. He [[vie]] as if he were [[nonetheless]] a [[learners]] [[gaming]] in a [[boulder]] band, collecting vinyl records of the 60s and 70s [[strips]], and playing video [[gaming]]. He has escaped to a better and [[secure]] [[period]] in his [[living]] where there are no [[naughty]] [[lads]] and he has a [[batch]] [[least]] to [[wasting]]. Everyone in this movie is affected in some way by the tragedy that has affected Charlie and his remission to a formerly [[diversified]] and [[improved]] (?) place. His landlady is his protector and [[super]] enabler. His in-laws are subtracted from his [[vie]] because they [[ought]] take him back to the reality that his [[familia]] is now gone from his [[living]]. And Alan is most affected by him because [[Alana]] wants to, (in at first a selfish desire to escape from his own reality) to be with Charlie as a means to subtract himself from his own stifled reality and then he wants to find a way to help Charlie begin to recover from his self-induced guilt and denial of loss. It is through this relationship that not only is Charlie able to begin to heal himself but that Alan, in fact, learns to communicate and sate his true desires with his associates at work and, eventually, is able to admit to his wife he has not been able to communicate his real feelings to her but that he strongly wants to because he does love her. It is in fact a poignant moment in the film when the stuff has hit the fan and Charlie is being confronted with the reality of being put away that he and Alan are talking about the situation together over "Chinese" that Charlie states that he is in fact worried about Alan and not himself.

This movie will, if you let it, take you through a river of emotions and leave you thinking. It will have you laughing at how Charlie uses his words, like people really do in everyday life, to make a comical statement of fact about a real situation. It will leave you on the verge of tears, (in my case actual tears), when Charlie confronts his grief and begins to come to grips with his tremendous loss. And that in fact the tragic reality is his guilt and loss has really never left him and he dealt with it in the only way he knew: denial. It will make you curse at the cold, unthinking actions of a young prosecutor trying to win his "case", (as I actually did at Charlie's hearing!) And it will make you smile at the commonsense of a old and wise, stern judge, (Donald Sutherland who is great at his short distinct role and gives the best performance of a wise, stern person in the legal profession since Wilford Brimley played an Assistant Attorney General in Absence of Malice.)

This movie was also amazing to me for a few other reasons: (1) I never looked at my watch once during the showing of the film. Which means it had me from the beginning to the end, (2) Although the cast was interracial, this fact was not important to the playing out of the roles of the characters in the film. Race was a non-factor to the performance of the roles in this movie. Amazing people can actually interact with out this fact being brought out! and (3) the only real reference to 9/11 is when Charlie's financial attorney refers to the tragedy of Charlie's loss as "…what Charlie had become on 9/12". Time will be the true test of how this movie will stand out in the future but if the purpose of a movie is not to just entertain but to make one think and have that movie stay with you long after you leave the theatre then Reign Over Me succeeded phenomenally as far as I am concerned. I have not yet forgotten this wonderful thought provoking film and I will wait impatiently for the day I can purchase it as a DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 1540 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This may or may not be the [[worst]] movie that [[Steve]] Martin has ever [[made]], but it certainly was far from his best. Obviously, he did this [[crap]] for the pay check. Dreck like this certainly does [[nothing]] to [[enhance]] his [[reputation]] as a funny man. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that when people go to see a Steve Martin movie, they expect to be entertained, not bored to tears. It's sad that he dragged Dan Aykroyd and Phil Hartman down with him. I don't understand why talented people can't get a grip on the fact that people don't want to see them in lousy movies. If you're going to call a movie a comedy, then it should be funny. This wasn't. Shame on the US military for allowing itself to be associated with this pabulum, too. Full Metal Jacket had more laughs than this [[miserable]] excuse for a "service comedy." Surely, Phil Silvers is rolling over in his grave. This may or may not be the [[hardest]] movie that [[Stephens]] Martin has ever [[brought]], but it certainly was far from his best. Obviously, he did this [[damnit]] for the pay check. Dreck like this certainly does [[nada]] to [[strengthen]] his [[renown]] as a funny man. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that when people go to see a Steve Martin movie, they expect to be entertained, not bored to tears. It's sad that he dragged Dan Aykroyd and Phil Hartman down with him. I don't understand why talented people can't get a grip on the fact that people don't want to see them in lousy movies. If you're going to call a movie a comedy, then it should be funny. This wasn't. Shame on the US military for allowing itself to be associated with this pabulum, too. Full Metal Jacket had more laughs than this [[sorrowful]] excuse for a "service comedy." Surely, Phil Silvers is rolling over in his grave. --------------------------------------------- Result 1541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I saw the original "Chorus Line" on Broadway God knows how many times and felt the passion, despair and joy come from this live experience in the theater. Michael Bennett knew he would have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but could never figure out how to do it. [[If]] the man who came up with the show is stumped - that should answer your question. There are some shows that are simply made to be seen live - with an audience. [[However]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical work of "Ghandi" and dancing with animals in "Doctor Doolittle" [[ended]] up directing this film which bore little to no resemblance to the stage show. [[Horrible]] songs were added (Surprise! Surprise!), great songs were dropped or given to other characters (which didn't make sense). Michael Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't dance tried to act and there was the sexy "Landers" woman who couldn't sing, act, or dance - I guess she had just finished being Ghandi's wife. The dances by Jeffrey Hornaday look like nothing more than schlock from "Flashdance" rejects and nothing works. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[If]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - see it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. I saw the original "Chorus Line" on Broadway God knows how many times and felt the passion, despair and joy come from this live experience in the theater. Michael Bennett knew he would have to re-imagine "Chorus" for the screen but could never figure out how to do it. [[Though]] the man who came up with the show is stumped - that should answer your question. There are some shows that are simply made to be seen live - with an audience. [[Still]], Richard Attenborough fresh of the musical work of "Ghandi" and dancing with animals in "Doctor Doolittle" [[completed]] up directing this film which bore little to no resemblance to the stage show. [[Scary]] songs were added (Surprise! Surprise!), great songs were dropped or given to other characters (which didn't make sense). Michael Douglas was mis-cast. People that couldn't dance tried to act and there was the sexy "Landers" woman who couldn't sing, act, or dance - I guess she had just finished being Ghandi's wife. The dances by Jeffrey Hornaday look like nothing more than schlock from "Flashdance" rejects and nothing works. I sat there stunned at how something so riveting and emotional could be drained to nothing. [[Though]] you truly love this show and it is coming back to Broadway in 2006 - see it but don't think that the long running musical event that was "A Chorus Line" has any thing at all to do with this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] First off, this is an [[excellent]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the first adventure of 007, Dr. No (1962) being the second, while in Golden Eye, the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "M" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before Bond [[became]] a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[license]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a [[bit]] if we [[wish]] to be entertained. No, the [[new]] Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[primitive]] electronics of the [[original]] [[series]] from nearly half a century ago. [[In]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we [[call]] them [[cell]] phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you [[think]] 400 years from now, they [[would]] have [[perfected]] Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's [[give]] the [[producers]] some leeway.

But to [[try]] and make [[things]] a bit consistent, [[let]] us just [[ponder]] about the Cylons [[creation]] just 60 [[years]] [[prior]] to the [[end]] of [[Battlestar]] Galactica. If that is the [[case]], where did all the Cylons that [[populated]] the [[original]] earth [[come]] from? We know that the [[technology]] [[exists]] for spontaneous jumps through space. [[Well]], what happened if one of the Cyclon ships at [[war]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ship]], loaded with human-looking Cylons, [[wound]] up not only [[jumping]] through space, but through [[time]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[years]] with a [[crippled]] [[ship]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[found]] out they [[could]] repopulate it and [[eventually]] [[destroyed]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sent]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[search]] for the [[legendary]] Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to [[become]] the humans, who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! First off, this is an [[glamorous]] series, though we have sort of a James Bond effect. What I mean is that while the new Casino Royale takes place in 2006, it is chronologically the first adventure of 007, Dr. No (1962) being the second, while in Golden Eye, the first film with Pierce Brosnan, Judi Dench is referred to as the new replacement for the male "M" so how could she have been in place in the beginning before Bond [[was]] a double-0, aside from the fact that she is obviously 14 years older? This is more or less a "poetic" [[permissions]] to thrill. We need to turn our heads aside a [[bitten]] if we [[wants]] to be entertained. No, the [[novo]] Star Trek movie does not have any of the [[rudimentary]] electronics of the [[preliminary]] [[serials]] from nearly half a century ago. [[Onto]] the 1960's communicators were fantasy. (now we [[calls]] them [[cells]] phones) and there were sliding levers instead of buttons. OMG, do you [[thinks]] 400 years from now, they [[ought]] have [[perfecting]] Rogaine for Jean-Luc Picard? So, please, let's [[lend]] the [[industrialists]] some leeway.

But to [[trying]] and make [[matters]] a bit consistent, [[leaving]] us just [[pondering]] about the Cylons [[formation]] just 60 [[olds]] [[anterior]] to the [[terminating]] of [[Galactica]] Galactica. If that is the [[lawsuit]], where did all the Cylons that [[manned]] the [[initial]] earth [[arriving]] from? We know that the [[tech]] [[existed]] for spontaneous jumps through space. [[Good]], what happened if one of the Cyclon ships at [[warfare]] with the Caprica fleet was fired upon or there was a sunspot or whatever and one [[ships]], loaded with human-looking Cylons, [[injury]] up not only [[hopping]] through space, but through [[moment]], back a thousand or ten thousand [[olds]] with a [[paralyzed]] [[ships]] near Earth One. They colonized it, [[detected]] out they [[did]] repopulate it and [[finally]] [[demolition]] themselves, but not before they themselves [[sends]] out a "ragtag" fleet to [[scoured]] for the [[mythical]] Caprica, only to find a habitable but unpopulated planet, which they colonized to [[gotten]] the humans, who eventually invented the Cylons. Time paradox? Of course. Which came first, the chicken or the road? Who cares? It's fraking entertaining! --------------------------------------------- Result 1543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] i actually thought this is a comedy and sat watching it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[clear]] this is no comedy, or at least not a 'Jim Carrey type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, enjoyed the story and don't mind i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie shows how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love i actually thought this is a comedy and sat watching it expecting to laugh my ass off. pretty soon in became [[unambiguous]] this is no comedy, or at least not a 'Jim Carrey type' one. what kept we watching was the characters - the movie starts with some pretty grim, troubled people, gathered together to try and fight one of their basic fears - fear of water, fear of swimming. we start to get bit by bit into their lives, witness their troubles, guess of their thoughts.

actually i made it look much darker than it actually is, and besides the chain of events soon brings some light and hope to their lives.

i probably wouldn't have watched the movie had i known its not a comedy but rather a drama, but i had good time, enjoyed the story and don't mind i spent about 90 minutes with it.

many films treat the alienation between people in the western world, this movie shows how people can get together and help each other

"and if in the light of dying day you meet her, don't let her pass you by and leave, don't loose her, she is your gift from the sun..."

9/10

peace and love --------------------------------------------- Result 1544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Sidney Young (Pegg) moves from England to New York to work for the popular magazine Sharpe's in a hope to live his dream lifestyle but struggles to make a lasting impression.

Based on Toby Young's book about survival in American business, this comedy drama received mixed views from critiques. [[Labelled]] as inconsistently funny but with charm by the actors, how to lose friends seemed as a run of the mill fish out of the pond make fun at another culture comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[works]] on account of its actors and the simple yet sharp story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too likable for words. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor brings a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are unforgivable, simply breathtaking stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he pulls it off splendidly.

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the stereotypical magazine bosses where Dunst fits in nicely to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny hyperbole of a stereotype film star. The fact that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a dog, and Pegg rounds that off in true Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. Sidney Young (Pegg) moves from England to New York to work for the popular magazine Sharpe's in a hope to live his dream lifestyle but struggles to make a lasting impression.

Based on Toby Young's book about survival in American business, this comedy drama received mixed views from critiques. [[Tagged]] as inconsistently funny but with charm by the actors, how to lose friends seemed as a run of the mill fish out of the pond make fun at another culture comedy, but it isn't.

This 2008 picture [[cooperating]] on account of its actors and the simple yet sharp story. We start off in the past, then in the present and are working our way forwards to see how Young made his mark at one of America's top magazines.

Pegg (Hot Fuzz) is too likable for words. Whether it's hitting zombies with a cricket bat or showing his sidekick the nature of the law the English actor brings a charm and light heartedness to every scene. Here, when the scripting is good but far from his own standards, he brings a great deal of energy to the picture and he alone is worth watching for. His antics with "Babe 3" are unforgivable, simply breathtaking stuff as is his over exuberant dancing, but he pulls it off splendidly.

Bridges and Anderson do well at portraying the stereotypical magazine bosses where Dunst fits in nicely to the confused love interest. Megan Fox, who stole Transformers, reminds everyone she can act here with a funny hyperbole of a stereotype film star. The fact that her character Sophie Myles is starring in a picture about Mother Teresa is as laughable as her character's antics in the pool. To emphasize the point there is a dog, and Pegg rounds that off in true Brit style comedy, with a great little twist.

Though a British film there is an adaptation of American lifestyle for Young as he tries to fit in and we can see the different approaches to story telling. Young wants the down right dirty contrasted with the American professionalism. The inclusion of modern day tabloid stars will soon make this film dated but the concept of exploitation of film star's gives this edge.

Weide's first picture is not perfect. There are lapses in concentration as the plot becomes too soapy with an awkward obvious twist and there are too many characters to be necessary. The physical comedy can also be overdone. As a side note, the bloopers on the DVD are some of the finest you will ever see, which are almost half an hour long.

This comedy drama has Simon Pegg on shining form again and with the collective approach to story telling and sharp comedy, it is worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 1545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they [[call]] Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[clever]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[imagination]]. [[Well]], [[damn]], was I misled. At least I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, purify all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll start with what I liked. I liked the opening scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we could actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all falls apart.

This set-up leads nowhere. The movie does what almost every remake does. It adds more of everything except character, atmosphere, and story. It's noisier, (in some sense) bloodier, and more full of main characters who appear only to die in nonsensical subplots. The setting, the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is gone here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. What a great word "re-imagining" is. Isn't that what they [[invitation]] Dawn of the Dead MMIV (2004)? A [[shrewd]] word indeed - it disguises the term that everyone has grown to hate, "remake" that is, and makes it almost sound as if the process of making one was creative and involved the [[novelty]]. [[Good]], [[geez]], was I misled. At least I was seduced more by the thought of countless gore and unbridled violence than by the idea of "re-imagining," though it played a role.

Still, why make a remake? Directors do it for only a few reasons really: to update a movie for a modern audience, or because they personally love the original and want to make a tribute to it. An homage, if you will. Nonetheless, it all generally (I do admit exceptions) boils down to one thing: stealing someone's idea and reshaping it (or "re-imagining" it) so that those who would never see it or understand it would pay money to see it. It's like Coles'/Cliffs' notes; dump everything in a blender, purify all that is more puzzling and curious and throw in a few artificial flavors. In other words, a great marketing scheme.

So what's wrong with this one? Well, I'll start with what I liked. I liked the opening scenes. Thanks to CGI and a bigger budget we could actually get a grasp of the chaos of the zombie holocaust Romero tried to communicate in the original through minimalist means. We see the city in ruins, thousands of zombies: chaos and death. Two words that look beautiful on screen. Then it all falls apart.

This set-up leads nowhere. The movie does what almost every remake does. It adds more of everything except character, atmosphere, and story. It's noisier, (in some sense) bloodier, and more full of main characters who appear only to die in nonsensical subplots. The setting, the mall which played a crucial role in the original film's story and theme, is purely coincidental. The idea communicated in Romero's film, the pure ecstatic joy of having "a mall all to yourself as a fortress," is gone here. Further, this "re-imagining" has no moxie, no spirit, no balls. It assumes (probably quite rightly) that the audience has no attention span and doesn't bother to get us interested in the characters or the story. The film is rushed and misses the quieter interactions of the four characters of the original. You actually grew to care about those people in Romero's version because there was a certain realism to their existence despite the insanity outside the mall. Here, you don't care when or who goes: what matters is how they go.

What else is their to say? The film is not scary. It has one or two "jump" scenes and it tries to make up for the rest with gore and loud special effects. As a story it's really too choppy to be followed and the conflicts between the characters are too underdeveloped to save it. The humor is also reduced to a few one-liners (and one really good character: Andy). After that, what remains? An ending that is plainly ridiculous and far inferior to the subdued, inevitable ambiguity of the original film. But, despite it being a pretty bad film (though not quite as bad as some other remakes), it should be remembered for one thing: it kicked The Passion of Christ from it's number one spot in the box office. Well done zombies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Think Pierce Brosnan and you think suave, dapper, intelligent James Bond. In this movie, Brosnan plays against type - and has [[lots]] of fun doing so (as does the audience). This is a film about a hired assassin who befriends a harried businessman... and it [[works]]!

This is a [[fun]] movie, with very good scenes (a riveting, on-the-edge Brosnan and a good, compliant "off"-the-edge Kinnear have some good lines). My only cavil is that Hope Davis, playing the oh-so-tolerant wife ("Can I see your gun?") doesn't appear more often: she could have been a marvellous foil to these men.

This movie is like a matador: it plays with the audience, while "going for a kill". The ending is awesome because a storyline (with a positive moral!) emerges: this is a frenetic, frantic and fun movie, which does deserve a wide audience. Think Pierce Brosnan and you think suave, dapper, intelligent James Bond. In this movie, Brosnan plays against type - and has [[batch]] of fun doing so (as does the audience). This is a film about a hired assassin who befriends a harried businessman... and it [[cooperating]]!

This is a [[droll]] movie, with very good scenes (a riveting, on-the-edge Brosnan and a good, compliant "off"-the-edge Kinnear have some good lines). My only cavil is that Hope Davis, playing the oh-so-tolerant wife ("Can I see your gun?") doesn't appear more often: she could have been a marvellous foil to these men.

This movie is like a matador: it plays with the audience, while "going for a kill". The ending is awesome because a storyline (with a positive moral!) emerges: this is a frenetic, frantic and fun movie, which does deserve a wide audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The [[horse]] is [[indeed]] a fine [[animal]]. [[Picturesque]] depictions of [[wild]] horses and their [[grace]] could never have been more majestic in an animation [[flick]].

The animation is simply stupendous. The fine animation forms the backbone of the [[beauty]] that the [[horses]] embolden [[across]] the flick. More so when the stallion traverses diverse terrain, jumps across cliffs and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[wonderful]] instrumental music lures you to [[appreciate]] the [[movie]].

"They say the story of the [[west]] was written from the saddle of a horse . " huh? Well ,The story of a fine horse sure was written from the [[saddle]] of the [[west]] .

[[All]] in all, this [[movie]] is [[clearly]] up there with the [[best]] .It is one of the [[best]] [[animation]] flicks i have watched. Would be a very [[fine]] [[choice]] on a [[lonely]] [[night]]. An [[easy]] 9/10. The [[horses]] is [[actually]] a fine [[zoo]]. [[Scenic]] depictions of [[feral]] horses and their [[gracia]] could never have been more majestic in an animation [[film]].

The animation is simply stupendous. The fine animation forms the backbone of the [[beaut]] that the [[ponies]] embolden [[during]] the flick. More so when the stallion traverses diverse terrain, jumps across cliffs and braves waters.

Soundtrack too is very impressive. The [[noteworthy]] instrumental music lures you to [[appreciative]] the [[filmmaking]].

"They say the story of the [[westerly]] was written from the saddle of a horse . " huh? Well ,The story of a fine horse sure was written from the [[stool]] of the [[western]] .

[[Entire]] in all, this [[filmmaking]] is [[patently]] up there with the [[nicest]] .It is one of the [[optimum]] [[animate]] flicks i have watched. Would be a very [[fined]] [[selection]] on a [[lonesome]] [[nuit]]. An [[uncomplicated]] 9/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1548 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The only [[reason]] I [[give]] this [[movie]] 8/10 stars, and not 10, is because 1) Sinatra is awful and 2) the love interest of Kelly's character leaves much to be desired, (IMHO). Do [[love]] that Dean Stockwell, Quantum Leap - Al, is the little boy. The dance sequence with Jerry Mouse is one of the most entertaining and amazing dance sequences I have ever seen. Tom and Jerry is still a personal favorite of mine and my daughter's. I'm 28 and she's 4, so while the character is less iconic than Mickey, he is still a favorite of many children and adults today. Kelly is as always captivating, his eyes full of fun and excitement. In every movie I have ever seen him in, he always steals the show. One of the best dancers of the 20th century. It is no wonder Paula Abdul "sampled" Kelly's moves. I would also list Gene Kelly as one of the most beautiful people of the 20th century. If you were to watch only one part, don't miss Kelly's dance with Jerry Mouse. You will NOT be disappointed. The only [[raison]] I [[lend]] this [[cinematography]] 8/10 stars, and not 10, is because 1) Sinatra is awful and 2) the love interest of Kelly's character leaves much to be desired, (IMHO). Do [[adores]] that Dean Stockwell, Quantum Leap - Al, is the little boy. The dance sequence with Jerry Mouse is one of the most entertaining and amazing dance sequences I have ever seen. Tom and Jerry is still a personal favorite of mine and my daughter's. I'm 28 and she's 4, so while the character is less iconic than Mickey, he is still a favorite of many children and adults today. Kelly is as always captivating, his eyes full of fun and excitement. In every movie I have ever seen him in, he always steals the show. One of the best dancers of the 20th century. It is no wonder Paula Abdul "sampled" Kelly's moves. I would also list Gene Kelly as one of the most beautiful people of the 20th century. If you were to watch only one part, don't miss Kelly's dance with Jerry Mouse. You will NOT be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] One of Cary Grant's most enduring comedies is Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House. Although judging by the size of it the dwelling [[would]] be a dream mansion today. Still Cary was making a good [[living]] in the advertising field even though he was having a devil of a [[time]] [[trying]] to come up with a [[slogan]] for ham with the [[brand]] [[name]] of Wham.

What [[made]] this [[film]] so popular was the housing shortage of the post World War II [[years]]. [[Returning]] veterans from the [[war]] were claiming their entitlements under the GI Bill of Rights which [[included]] home loans. The [[problem]] was there literally were not enough [[houses]] to [[satisfy]] the [[demand]]. [[Around]] the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the [[film]] were so [[popular]] Congress [[passed]] and President Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner Housing law which put the [[government]] for the first time in the home [[building]] business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like Cary [[Grant]] and Myrna Loy they had two daughters and were looking to get out of inner city Rochester. Their place wasn't quite as grand as a house in Connecticut with eighteen rooms, still they lived there the rest of their lives the way Cary and Myrna most likely did.

Of course it was expensive and the costs just keep adding up and up, threatening to send Cary to the cleaners. Cary and Myrna also have Melvyn Douglas around to offer counsel, usually too late. Truth be told he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is simply an extension of Nora Charles. If you can [[imagine]] the Charles's moving to the [[country]] and William Powell having the [[headaches]] Cary [[Grant]] does, the [[film]] [[would]] [[still]] [[work]] just [[fine]].

Mr. Blandings [[Builds]] His [[Dream]] [[House]] still works well as [[comedy]] because the [[situations]] are universal. And this review is [[dedicated]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who [[lived]] in their dream [[house]] [[together]] for over 40 years. One of Cary Grant's most enduring comedies is Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House. Although judging by the size of it the dwelling [[could]] be a dream mansion today. Still Cary was making a good [[vie]] in the advertising field even though he was having a devil of a [[moment]] [[striving]] to come up with a [[mantra]] for ham with the [[marca]] [[designation]] of Wham.

What [[accomplished]] this [[films]] so popular was the housing shortage of the post World War II [[yr]]. [[Reverted]] veterans from the [[wars]] were claiming their entitlements under the GI Bill of Rights which [[inscribed]] home loans. The [[issues]] was there literally were not enough [[homes]] to [[respond]] the [[request]]. [[Roundabout]] the time the book by Eric Hodgins and the [[movie]] were so [[trendy]] Congress [[voted]] and President Truman signed the Taft-Ellender- Wagner Housing law which put the [[councils]] for the first time in the home [[architectural]] business.

I had an uncle and aunt who were around the same time building their own home which they moved into in the early Fifties. Like Cary [[Subsidies]] and Myrna Loy they had two daughters and were looking to get out of inner city Rochester. Their place wasn't quite as grand as a house in Connecticut with eighteen rooms, still they lived there the rest of their lives the way Cary and Myrna most likely did.

Of course it was expensive and the costs just keep adding up and up, threatening to send Cary to the cleaners. Cary and Myrna also have Melvyn Douglas around to offer counsel, usually too late. Truth be told he's kind of sweet on Myrna and Cary knows it.

Myrna Loy's role is simply an extension of Nora Charles. If you can [[imagining]] the Charles's moving to the [[nation]] and William Powell having the [[headache]] Cary [[Awarding]] does, the [[movie]] [[ought]] [[nonetheless]] [[collaboration]] just [[alright]].

Mr. Blandings [[Construct]] His [[Dreamed]] [[Haus]] still works well as [[travesty]] because the [[instances]] are universal. And this review is [[specializing]] to my Uncle Walter and Aunt Kate who [[resided]] in their dream [[homes]] [[jointly]] for over 40 years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] A gave it a "2" instead of a "1" (awful) because there is no denying that many of the visuals were [[stunning]], a lot of talent went into the special effects and artwork. But that wasn't enough to [[save]] it.

The "sepia" toned, washed out colors sort of thing has been [[done]] before many times in other [[movies]]. [[Nothing]] new there. I can [[see]] there were some hat-tips to other old, classic [[movies]]. [[OK]]. No problem with that.

But a movie has got to be [[entertaining]] and interesting, not something that would put you to sleep.

The story line and the script of this movie WAS [[awful]], the [[characters]] two dimensional. [[Slow]] moving. Some of the scenes were [[pretty]] to look at, but [[ultimately]], as a [[whole]], it was [[quite]] [[boring]], I couldn't [[recommend]] it. A gave it a "2" instead of a "1" (awful) because there is no denying that many of the visuals were [[astounding]], a lot of talent went into the special effects and artwork. But that wasn't enough to [[rescued]] it.

The "sepia" toned, washed out colors sort of thing has been [[accomplished]] before many times in other [[cinematography]]. [[None]] new there. I can [[behold]] there were some hat-tips to other old, classic [[cinematography]]. [[ALLRIGHT]]. No problem with that.

But a movie has got to be [[fun]] and interesting, not something that would put you to sleep.

The story line and the script of this movie WAS [[vile]], the [[trait]] two dimensional. [[Lento]] moving. Some of the scenes were [[quite]] to look at, but [[lastly]], as a [[together]], it was [[rather]] [[dreary]], I couldn't [[recommends]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1551 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I found out about this [[film]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from [[Game]] On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and [[star]] in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very [[simple]] [[romantic]] comedy with [[Janeane]] Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[bad]] for so many [[reasons]]. The plot is [[unbelievably]] [[predictable]] from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to [[note]] her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this [[travesty]] of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. I found out about this [[cinematography]] because Jewish Ben Chaplin from [[Ballgame]] On was in it. Game On is a funny British sitcom and apparently he left because he wanted to break into Hollywood and [[superstar]] in this film. He failed thank God.

The film is a very [[easy]] [[sentimental]] comedy with [[Jeannine]] Garofalo playing an ugly woman who uses her neighbour Uma Thurman to date Ben Chaplin because she thinks Ben Chaplin won't like her because she's ugly. The film is just [[naughty]] for so many [[motivation]]. The plot is [[surprisingly]] [[foreseeable]] from the overtly slapstick bits to the serious mushy bits: ugh just that montage where all three of them are having fun and then the photograph bit. Those two scenes made me cringe! Janeane's character is sickeningly arrogant (and guessing from her role as stand-up "comedienne" and arch-feminist is in real life too). She claims that the film is "anti-feminist" when in fact it's just realistic. Men more often than not go for looks over personality. It's interesting to [[remark]] her hypocrisy too. She'd been a feminist and "comedienne" for years before taking this role and then suddenly decides afterwards that the film was bad. I imagine she hated the idea and script of this film before it was released but she made sure she kept that quiet so she could get paid for this [[comedy]] of a film. I mean come on! She acted in it for Heaven's sake! What this film was really was anti-men if anything. It portrays men as stupid animals whose brains are in their groins with the men doing stupid things to attract the attention of Uma Thurman's character Noelle.

There are other bad things about this film too like Ben Chaplin's character being the British man every American girl finds cute and Jamie Foxx being the token black best friend of Chaplin and of course Foxx had to try and mimic his accent a few times for good measure. Is that the best the script writers could come up with? Blimey they've never done that before except with every Hugh Grant and Dudley Moore film ever made. There's also a truly awful phone sex scene which is just grotesque and proves how cheap the film is. The other comments on here all say how Janeane Garofalo isn't ugly but is actually beautiful. Erm was I watching the same film as they were? She's certainly no looker and the only good thing about this film was that she was rightly cast as the ugly one. Although having said that, I fail to see the appeal of Uma Thurman as well: she's lanky and gaunt looking.

I guarantee three things about this film if you've never watched it:

You will know what the ending will be;

You will find the phone sex scene painfully embarrassing and;

You will be bored after ten minutes.

Watch at your own peril. --------------------------------------------- Result 1552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The [[first]] 50 [[minutes]] of this [[movie]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 [[minutes]] were [[excellent]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are excellent. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a [[compelling]] role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. The [[fiirst]] 50 [[mins]] of this [[filmmaking]] were quite boring. It focused on the personal problems Doyle had, including his sick wife, death threats by fans, a pushy publisher and feelings of guilt concerning his mentally ill father. Even though these subjects had an important impact on Doyle's life, I was more curious about the birth of Sherlock Holmes. The last 40 [[mins]] were [[glamorous]]. We finally got a look inside Doyle head, how he created Holmes and why he had to 'kill' Holmes. The actors are excellent. Including the intriguing Selden played by Tim McInnerny, Arthur Conan Doyle, a [[persuasive]] role played by Douglas Henshall and Brian Cox as the 'role model' for Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Bell. The locations are good, especially for a TV movie and the camera work is nice. If the first 50 minutes were as good the the last 40 minutes this would have been a small masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 1553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Like the characters in this [[show]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[nailed]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban teenager in the 70s. The 70s fashions, cars, home furnishings, foods, and [[fads]], are all very [[authentic]] in this show.

The show boasts a very talented ensemble cast, who all mesh [[together]] very well on camera. I really like the [[unique]], psychedelic-style film sequences. No other [[show]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge film sequences, really [[help]] to convey the campy hipness, that characterized the 70s era.

Overall this is a very [[funny]] sitcom. The one thing that bothers me about this show, is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate laughs. In this way, I think that this show tries to be too much like Married With Children. While Married with Children is a great sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to imitate it.

I do recommend That 70s Show, mainly due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on witty dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. Like the characters in this [[displaying]], I too was a teen during the 70s. The producers really [[pinched]] the whole zeitgeist, of being a suburban teenager in the 70s. The 70s fashions, cars, home furnishings, foods, and [[fashions]], are all very [[veritable]] in this show.

The show boasts a very talented ensemble cast, who all mesh [[jointly]] very well on camera. I really like the [[unequalled]], psychedelic-style film sequences. No other [[exposition]] does camera tricks like this. These cutting-edge film sequences, really [[supporting]] to convey the campy hipness, that characterized the 70s era.

Overall this is a very [[droll]] sitcom. The one thing that bothers me about this show, is it's over-reliance on cruel humor, to generate laughs. In this way, I think that this show tries to be too much like Married With Children. While Married with Children is a great sitcom in its own right, it's tacky that the creators of That 70s show, keep trying to imitate it.

I do recommend That 70s Show, mainly due to it's nostalgia factor. It could be an even better show though, if the writers relied more on witty dialog, rather than bawdy, tasteless jokes and pranks. --------------------------------------------- Result 1554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The most succinct way to [[describe]] Ride With The Devil is with but one word: authenticity. I will not rehash what has already been [[said]] about this wonderous film, but I would [[like]] to say how much the historical research and painstaking attention to detail the crew no [[doubt]] went through was appreciated by this filmgoer.

As a student of history familiar with the period and setting of this [[film]], I [[must]] say that this production is one of the most [[accurate]] fictional [[films]] [[regarding]] "bleeding Kansas". [[Yes]] there were liberties taken on the actual [[events]], as all fiction is [[apt]] to do. But the [[overall]] feel of the [[film]] is [[genuine]]. [[Authentic]] costumes, [[authentic]] [[attitudes]] (no PC hindsight here) even the [[actors]] look [[authentic]].Even Jewel Kilcher (who has a [[small]] [[part]] in the [[film]]) looked like she stepped [[form]] a [[mid]] 19th century photograph.

A few [[viewers]] I [[talked]] with have [[expressed]] their incredulity at the stylized [[dialog]]. They cannot [[believe]] that 19th century farmers [[would]] "[[talk]] like poets".

What they don't realize is that in this [[age]] of verbal slobbishness, the American public public of the 19th century was a [[surprisingly]] literate and eloquent bunch. These people were raised on Shakespeare and the [[King]] James [[version]] of the Bible. The screenwriters reconstructed the most likely verbal [[styles]] of these people, [[judging]] from documentation of the [[time]]. The stylized dialog just [[adds]] to the magical [[atmosphere]] of the [[film]].

But in addition to a historical [[document]], this [[film]] [[works]] on a visceral [[level]] as well. Beautifully photographed and performed, it harkens back to the days of the great [[western]] epics. The raid on Lawrence, Kansas, [[done]] so many [[times]] before in so [[many]] other, [[lesser]] [[films]] is portrayed with a [[sense]] of [[urgency]] that [[puts]] the [[viewer]] [[right]] in the midst of the [[action]].

Romance, adventure, moral and [[ethical]] conflict.This [[film]] has everything a discerning moviegoer could want.

[[In]] a year that was [[dominated]] by overhyped garbage like American [[Beauty]], this [[great]] artwork was [[buried]] by an indifferent studio system. But I am certain that Ride With The [[Devil]] will be [[given]] it's due in the coming [[years]]. [[Please]] [[rent]] this film. You will not be [[disappointed]]. The most succinct way to [[portray]] Ride With The Devil is with but one word: authenticity. I will not rehash what has already been [[stated]] about this wonderous film, but I would [[likes]] to say how much the historical research and painstaking attention to detail the crew no [[duda]] went through was appreciated by this filmgoer.

As a student of history familiar with the period and setting of this [[flick]], I [[ought]] say that this production is one of the most [[exact]] fictional [[filmmaking]] [[relating]] "bleeding Kansas". [[Yup]] there were liberties taken on the actual [[incidents]], as all fiction is [[likely]] to do. But the [[entire]] feel of the [[flick]] is [[vera]]. [[Vera]] costumes, [[truthful]] [[behaviors]] (no PC hindsight here) even the [[actresses]] look [[veritable]].Even Jewel Kilcher (who has a [[tiny]] [[portion]] in the [[flick]]) looked like she stepped [[shape]] a [[middle]] 19th century photograph.

A few [[audience]] I [[spoken]] with have [[voiced]] their incredulity at the stylized [[dialogue]]. They cannot [[believing]] that 19th century farmers [[ought]] "[[speak]] like poets".

What they don't realize is that in this [[aging]] of verbal slobbishness, the American public public of the 19th century was a [[terribly]] literate and eloquent bunch. These people were raised on Shakespeare and the [[Emperor]] James [[stepping]] of the Bible. The screenwriters reconstructed the most likely verbal [[styling]] of these people, [[judgement]] from documentation of the [[period]]. The stylized dialog just [[adding]] to the magical [[ambiance]] of the [[kino]].

But in addition to a historical [[documentation]], this [[flick]] [[collaborated]] on a visceral [[grades]] as well. Beautifully photographed and performed, it harkens back to the days of the great [[occidental]] epics. The raid on Lawrence, Kansas, [[completed]] so many [[dates]] before in so [[innumerable]] other, [[marginal]] [[filmmaking]] is portrayed with a [[sensing]] of [[emergency]] that [[begs]] the [[beholder]] [[rights]] in the midst of the [[measures]].

Romance, adventure, moral and [[moral]] conflict.This [[cinematographic]] has everything a discerning moviegoer could want.

[[For]] a year that was [[dominate]] by overhyped garbage like American [[Beaut]], this [[whopping]] artwork was [[interred]] by an indifferent studio system. But I am certain that Ride With The [[Demon]] will be [[conferred]] it's due in the coming [[olds]]. [[Invite]] [[tenancy]] this film. You will not be [[disappointing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This is an [[excellent]] [[documentary]], packed with racing [[action]] [[beautiful]] pictures and a great [[story]]. The IMAX Cameras give you a very wide perspective, as a DVD movie it is [[perfect]]. Your hear every speaker working [[almost]] all the [[time]], The [[film]] is not speeded up and just gives you the [[natural]] feel of 230mph. Of course there are some sound effects added but i [[think]] they are [[good]], they give a depth to the driving scenes... This is an [[glamorous]] [[literature]], packed with racing [[efforts]] [[fabulous]] pictures and a great [[conte]]. The IMAX Cameras give you a very wide perspective, as a DVD movie it is [[faultless]]. Your hear every speaker working [[hardly]] all the [[moment]], The [[cinematographic]] is not speeded up and just gives you the [[naturel]] feel of 230mph. Of course there are some sound effects added but i [[thought]] they are [[alright]], they give a depth to the driving scenes... --------------------------------------------- Result 1556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Aileen Gonsalves, my girlfriend, is in this [[film]] playing a secretary at the [[main]] character's [[bank]]. She has a [[lovely]] scene with Roshan Seth in a [[restaurant]]. There's more information on her website at >Having [[stated]] my personal interest in the [[film]], I have to say that I [[think]] it is a [[beautiful]] [[movie]] - [[moving]], funny and beautifully filmed. Aileen Gonsalves, my girlfriend, is in this [[filmmaking]] playing a secretary at the [[principal]] character's [[banking]]. She has a [[charmer]] scene with Roshan Seth in a [[catering]]. There's more information on her website at >Having [[said]] my personal interest in the [[kino]], I have to say that I [[thought]] it is a [[glamorous]] [[kino]] - [[relocating]], funny and beautifully filmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1557 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A friend of mine [[recommended]] this movie, citing my vocal and inflective similarities with Des Howl, the movie's main character. I guess to an extent I can see that and perhaps a bit more, I'm not very sure whether or not that's flattering portrayal.

This is a pretty unique [[work]], the only [[movie]] to which this might have more than a glancing [[similarity]] would be True Romance, not for the content or the style of filming or for the pace of dialogue (Whale Music is just so much more, well, relaxed.) But instead that they both represent modern love stories.

In general I'm a big fan of Canadian movies about music and musicians (for example I highly recommend Hard Core Logo) and this film in particular. It has an innocent charm, Des is not always the most likeably guy, but there's something about him that draws a sterling sort of empathy. A friend of mine [[recommending]] this movie, citing my vocal and inflective similarities with Des Howl, the movie's main character. I guess to an extent I can see that and perhaps a bit more, I'm not very sure whether or not that's flattering portrayal.

This is a pretty unique [[jobs]], the only [[cinematic]] to which this might have more than a glancing [[likeness]] would be True Romance, not for the content or the style of filming or for the pace of dialogue (Whale Music is just so much more, well, relaxed.) But instead that they both represent modern love stories.

In general I'm a big fan of Canadian movies about music and musicians (for example I highly recommend Hard Core Logo) and this film in particular. It has an innocent charm, Des is not always the most likeably guy, but there's something about him that draws a sterling sort of empathy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1558 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] William Powell is a doctor dealing with a murder and an ex-wife in "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford," also starring Jean Arthur, Eric Blore, and James Gleason. It seems that Powell had chemistry going with just about any woman with whom he was teamed. Though he and Myrna Loy were the [[perfect]] screen couple, the actor made a couple of other "Thin Man" type [[movies]], one with Ginger Rogers and this one with Arthur, both to very good [[effect]].

Somehow one never gets [[tired]] of seeing Powell as a [[witty]], debonair professional and "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" is no exception. The ex-Mrs. B has Mr. B served with a subpoena for back alimony and then moves back in to help him solve a mystery that she's dragged him into. And this isn't the first time she's done that! It almost seems as though there was a "Bradford" film before this one or that this was intended to be the first of a series of films - Mr. B complains that his mystery-writer ex is constantly bringing him into cases. This time, a jockey riding the favorite horse in a raise mysteriously falls off the horse and dies right before the finish line.

The solution of the case is kind of outlandish but it's beside the point. The point is the banter between the couple and the interference of the ex-Mrs. B. Jean Arthur is quite glamorous in her role and very funny. However, with an actress who comes off as brainy as Arthur does, the humor seems intentional rather than featherbrained. I suspect the writer had something else in mind - say, the wacky side of Carole Lombard. When Arthur hears that the police have arrived, she says, "Ah, it's probably about my alimony. I've been waiting for the police to take a hand in it," it's more of a rib to Powell rather than a serious statement. It still works well, and it shows how a good actress can make a part her own.

Definitely worth watching, as William Powell and Jean Arthur always were. William Powell is a doctor dealing with a murder and an ex-wife in "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford," also starring Jean Arthur, Eric Blore, and James Gleason. It seems that Powell had chemistry going with just about any woman with whom he was teamed. Though he and Myrna Loy were the [[irreproachable]] screen couple, the actor made a couple of other "Thin Man" type [[kino]], one with Ginger Rogers and this one with Arthur, both to very good [[effects]].

Somehow one never gets [[jaded]] of seeing Powell as a [[spiritual]], debonair professional and "The Ex-Mrs. Bradford" is no exception. The ex-Mrs. B has Mr. B served with a subpoena for back alimony and then moves back in to help him solve a mystery that she's dragged him into. And this isn't the first time she's done that! It almost seems as though there was a "Bradford" film before this one or that this was intended to be the first of a series of films - Mr. B complains that his mystery-writer ex is constantly bringing him into cases. This time, a jockey riding the favorite horse in a raise mysteriously falls off the horse and dies right before the finish line.

The solution of the case is kind of outlandish but it's beside the point. The point is the banter between the couple and the interference of the ex-Mrs. B. Jean Arthur is quite glamorous in her role and very funny. However, with an actress who comes off as brainy as Arthur does, the humor seems intentional rather than featherbrained. I suspect the writer had something else in mind - say, the wacky side of Carole Lombard. When Arthur hears that the police have arrived, she says, "Ah, it's probably about my alimony. I've been waiting for the police to take a hand in it," it's more of a rib to Powell rather than a serious statement. It still works well, and it shows how a good actress can make a part her own.

Definitely worth watching, as William Powell and Jean Arthur always were. --------------------------------------------- Result 1559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is the [[best]] of [[Shelley]] Duvall's high-quality "Faerie [[Tale]] Theatre" series. The [[ugly]] stepsisters are broadway-quality comedy relief, and Eve Arden is the [[personification]] of wicked stepmotherhood. Jennifer Beals does an [[excellent]] [[job]] as a straight Cinderella, [[especially]] in the garden scene with [[Matthew]] Broderick's Prince [[Charming]]. Jean Stapleton plays the fairy godmother well, [[although]] I'm not sure I liked the "southern [[lady]]" characterization with some of the lines. Steve Martin's comedy relief as the [[Royal]] [[Orchestra]] Conductor is quintessential Martin, but a [[tiny]] [[bit]] [[misplaced]] in the show's flow.

As is [[customary]] with the [[series]], there are [[several]] [[wry]] [[comments]] [[thrown]] in for the older [[children]] (ages 15 and up). With a [[couple]] of [[small]] [[bumps]], the [[show]] flows well, and they [[live]] [[happily]] ever after. [[Children]] up to age 8 will [[continue]] to watch it after the [[parents]] [[finally]] get tired of it -- I found 3 [[times]] in one day to be a [[little]] too much. This is the [[better]] of [[Shelly]] Duvall's high-quality "Faerie [[Tales]] Theatre" series. The [[hideous]] stepsisters are broadway-quality comedy relief, and Eve Arden is the [[incarnation]] of wicked stepmotherhood. Jennifer Beals does an [[sumptuous]] [[jobs]] as a straight Cinderella, [[namely]] in the garden scene with [[Mathew]] Broderick's Prince [[Enchanting]]. Jean Stapleton plays the fairy godmother well, [[albeit]] I'm not sure I liked the "southern [[dame]]" characterization with some of the lines. Steve Martin's comedy relief as the [[Regal]] [[Philharmonic]] Conductor is quintessential Martin, but a [[minuscule]] [[bitten]] [[mislaid]] in the show's flow.

As is [[normal]] with the [[serials]], there are [[multiple]] [[sardonic]] [[observations]] [[tossed]] in for the older [[kids]] (ages 15 and up). With a [[matching]] of [[tiny]] [[humps]], the [[showing]] flows well, and they [[viva]] [[mercifully]] ever after. [[Kids]] up to age 8 will [[incessant]] to watch it after the [[parenting]] [[ultimately]] get tired of it -- I found 3 [[moments]] in one day to be a [[petite]] too much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1560 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] One of my [[favourite]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most wonderful '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and Ozzy as the preacher (surely he exists in America?). Then there are the boys (rich, vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My favourite scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then check this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. One of my [[preferable]] films. It has everything - rocking soundtrack, courtesy of Eddie Clark, ex Motorhead, loads of action, loads of laughs, totally ridiculous plot and the most wonderful '80's stereotypes as characters. Eddie, the put-upon nice guy, who just wants to be left alone to be different, Leslie (about as wet as they come), Nuke (the rock burn-out), Eddie's Mom (pathetic), Roger (the geek) and Ozzy as the preacher (surely he exists in America?). Then there are the boys (rich, vicious and stupid) and the girls (vacant, vain and stupid). What more could you ask for?

Well, first of all, there's Sammi Curr, the rock star, an amalgam of every '80's badass rocker you can think of. What about that rocket firing guitar? Then there's the scene where Sammi pulls the old lady through the TV screen and smashes her up. And what does Roger do? Why, hoover her up, just like a good geek would. My favourite scene is where Tim Hainey gets his long overdue reward from Sammi via the wet finger in the plug - magic!

If you were into rock in the '80's or just love ridiculous films like I do, then check this one out. It's available on DVD and very cheap so (trick or)treat yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] [[For]] a movie that gets no respect there sure are a lot of [[memorable]] quotes listed for this gem. Imagine a movie where Joe Piscopo is actually funny! Maureen Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[character]] is an [[absolute]] scream. Watch for Alan "The Skipper" Hale jr. as a police Sgt. [[Per]] a movie that gets no respect there sure are a lot of [[eventful]] quotes listed for this gem. Imagine a movie where Joe Piscopo is actually funny! Maureen Stapleton is a scene stealer. The Moroni [[traits]] is an [[unmitigated]] scream. Watch for Alan "The Skipper" Hale jr. as a police Sgt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This is te cartoon that should have won [[instead]] of Country [[Cousin]]. Visually well-done and [[much]] more entertaining and memorable. Worth [[watching]] just for the music [[alone]]! [[Although]] there are [[elements]] that undoubtably will [[bruise]] the [[sensibilities]] of some these [[days]], the [[cartoon]] has to be [[given]] a bit of perspective. It's over sixty [[years]] [[old]] and it is, after all, just a cartoon. I'm disabled and if I were as hyper-sensitive as the folks who [[look]] at [[things]] like this [[cartoon]] and [[take]] umbrage, I [[would]] have long since curled up in a [[fetal]] [[position]] and [[faded]] away. Sometimes you need to lighten up, put your [[head]] back and float! Caricatures of [[celebrities]] in cartoons were common in the 1930s and 1940s and were [[almost]] never [[terribly]] flattering. Bing Crosby [[reportedly]] [[hated]] it when he was [[used]] on more than one occasion. *SIGH* This is te cartoon that should have won [[alternatively]] of Country [[Cous]]. Visually well-done and [[very]] more entertaining and memorable. Worth [[staring]] just for the music [[only]]! [[Despite]] there are [[ingredients]] that undoubtably will [[bruises]] the [[sensitivity]] of some these [[jours]], the [[comic]] has to be [[afforded]] a bit of perspective. It's over sixty [[yrs]] [[former]] and it is, after all, just a cartoon. I'm disabled and if I were as hyper-sensitive as the folks who [[peek]] at [[aspects]] like this [[toon]] and [[taking]] umbrage, I [[should]] have long since curled up in a [[fetus]] [[posture]] and [[dissipated]] away. Sometimes you need to lighten up, put your [[leiter]] back and float! Caricatures of [[proverbial]] in cartoons were common in the 1930s and 1940s and were [[approximately]] never [[excruciatingly]] flattering. Bing Crosby [[supposedly]] [[hating]] it when he was [[utilizing]] on more than one occasion. *SIGH* --------------------------------------------- Result 1563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[Man]] on Fire was hot. I [[love]] a classic [[tale]] of good ol' [[revenge]], and what better [[cause]] for revenge than the kidnapping of an innocent [[little]] girl.

The writers did an [[excellent]] [[job]] in this [[movie]] of building the [[relationship]] between Creasy ([[Denzel]] Washington) and Pita (Dakota [[Fanning]]) so that the viewer would understand and actually feel the drive Creasy had to rescue Pita. It was also good that Creasy wasn't a choir boy type trying to rescue Pita through the "proper" channels, but instead used torture tactics and street smarts. Some may say, "[[Torture]] is wrong regardless," and you may be right, but when you see the pain Creasy goes through due to the loss of Pita and the sheer passion he has for getting her back, you can't help but side with Creasy and pull for him to be even more merciless. There would be no progress if Creasy used diplomacy to deal with the different nefarious gangsters and criminals and he knew that.

Creasy's quest ended with the return of Pita to her mother and Creasy dying in the vehicle of the bad guys. But Creasy's death did not diminish the effectiveness of the movie, it in fact enhanced it by showing that Creasy was willing to die to get Pita back. His death was noble in fact.

Denzel does an excellent job as do the writers. This movie deserves good marks because it definitely was a [[good]] movie. [[Bloke]] on Fire was hot. I [[amour]] a classic [[fable]] of good ol' [[retaliation]], and what better [[reason]] for revenge than the kidnapping of an innocent [[scant]] girl.

The writers did an [[sumptuous]] [[labor]] in this [[filmmaking]] of building the [[relationships]] between Creasy ([[Denzil]] Washington) and Pita (Dakota [[Stoking]]) so that the viewer would understand and actually feel the drive Creasy had to rescue Pita. It was also good that Creasy wasn't a choir boy type trying to rescue Pita through the "proper" channels, but instead used torture tactics and street smarts. Some may say, "[[Torturing]] is wrong regardless," and you may be right, but when you see the pain Creasy goes through due to the loss of Pita and the sheer passion he has for getting her back, you can't help but side with Creasy and pull for him to be even more merciless. There would be no progress if Creasy used diplomacy to deal with the different nefarious gangsters and criminals and he knew that.

Creasy's quest ended with the return of Pita to her mother and Creasy dying in the vehicle of the bad guys. But Creasy's death did not diminish the effectiveness of the movie, it in fact enhanced it by showing that Creasy was willing to die to get Pita back. His death was noble in fact.

Denzel does an excellent job as do the writers. This movie deserves good marks because it definitely was a [[alright]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The zenith of two brilliant careers. [[David]] Lynch, better known for less [[accessible]] [[material]], crafts a delicate and [[exquisite]] [[story]] around the most unlikely [[premise]]. A [[man]] travels to [[see]] his estranged [[brother]]. Having no other [[means]] of transportation, his [[journey]] takes him over six [[weeks]] on a [[lawn]] mower. [[Richard]] Farnsworth, in his [[last]] [[film]], [[delivers]] a [[stunningly]] [[layered]] and nuanced performance in the [[starring]] role. Achingly beautiful in its exultation of small [[things]], Straight [[Story]] is a classic [[cinema]] [[experience]] that [[must]] not be [[missed]]. [[Sissy]] Spacek is [[notable]] as Farnsworth's daughter, an [[impaired]] middle-aged [[woman]] living with the loss of her [[children]]. The zenith of two brilliant careers. [[Davids]] Lynch, better known for less [[affordable]] [[materials]], crafts a delicate and [[wonderful]] [[history]] around the most unlikely [[hypothesis]]. A [[men]] travels to [[seeing]] his estranged [[hermano]]. Having no other [[modes]] of transportation, his [[journeys]] takes him over six [[week]] on a [[sod]] mower. [[Richards]] Farnsworth, in his [[final]] [[filmmaking]], [[offerings]] a [[terribly]] [[laminated]] and nuanced performance in the [[featuring]] role. Achingly beautiful in its exultation of small [[items]], Straight [[Storytelling]] is a classic [[cine]] [[experiences]] that [[gotta]] not be [[flunked]]. [[Weakling]] Spacek is [[noteworthy]] as Farnsworth's daughter, an [[defaced]] middle-aged [[women]] living with the loss of her [[kids]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Mary]] Pickford ("[[Born]] on the Fourth of July" as [[Angela]] Moore) is "The [[Little]] American" (of French [[heritage]]); she falls in love with [[Jack]] Holt (as [[Karl]] Von Austreim), who had [[moved]] to America with his German father and American mother. French-American Raymond [[Hatton]] (as Count Jules de Destin of the "[[Fighting]] Destins") has [[fallen]] in love with [[Ms]]. Pickford. The [[love]] triangled threesome eventually wind up in France, with the [[Great]] War ([[World]] [[War]] I, in [[hindsight]]) complicating their lives [[considerably]].

A mostly [[entertaining]], if propagandistically flawed, Cecil B. DeMille [[film]]. The torpedoing, and sinking, of a ship carrying Pickford is "Titanic"-like. The war intrigue gets dramatic as Pickford slowly becomes an undercover spy for France, while the Germans [[occupy]] her ancestral [[home]]. Of course, German lover Holt arrives. It was [[difficult]] to believe they [[took]] so [[long]] to [[recognize]] each other as he [[moved]] in for the [[rape]], but it was [[dark]]; and, [[prior]] [[events]] had them believe each other dead. The film goes [[WAY]] over-the-top in its symbolism. Pickford was, by the [[way]], Canadian - [[though]], few could [[deny]] she wasn't a "Little American", for all [[intents]] and purposes.

[[FUN]] to [[spot]] "[[extras]]" who later [[became]] [[major]] [[stars]] [[include]] Wallace Beery, Colleen Moore, and Ramon Novarro - especially, watch for Mr. Novarro exhibiting "star" quality during one of the film's more memorable [[sequences]]: Pickford and the wounded soldier saluting each other as he is taken by her on a stretcher. Novarro even gets Mary Pickford to write a letter for him; obviously, he's [[got]] a [[future]] in pictures. Also future-bound is Ben Alexander, who plays the boy "Bobby"; he becomes a dependable [[child]] actor, and grows up to become a [[Jack]] Webb partner on "Dragnet".

******* The [[Little]] American (7/12/17) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Mary Pickford, Jack Holt, Raymond Hatton [[Maryam]] Pickford ("[[Ould]] on the Fourth of July" as [[Angeli]] Moore) is "The [[Tiny]] American" (of French [[patrimony]]); she falls in love with [[Jacque]] Holt (as [[Carl]] Von Austreim), who had [[relocated]] to America with his German father and American mother. French-American Raymond [[Hutton]] (as Count Jules de Destin of the "[[Battling]] Destins") has [[shrunk]] in love with [[Luciana]]. Pickford. The [[iike]] triangled threesome eventually wind up in France, with the [[Super]] War ([[Global]] [[Warfare]] I, in [[retrospect]]) complicating their lives [[significantly]].

A mostly [[entertain]], if propagandistically flawed, Cecil B. DeMille [[movie]]. The torpedoing, and sinking, of a ship carrying Pickford is "Titanic"-like. The war intrigue gets dramatic as Pickford slowly becomes an undercover spy for France, while the Germans [[occupies]] her ancestral [[dwellings]]. Of course, German lover Holt arrives. It was [[problematic]] to believe they [[taken]] so [[longer]] to [[recognizes]] each other as he [[shifted]] in for the [[rapes]], but it was [[dusky]]; and, [[anterior]] [[event]] had them believe each other dead. The film goes [[MANNER]] over-the-top in its symbolism. Pickford was, by the [[routes]], Canadian - [[albeit]], few could [[rejects]] she wasn't a "Little American", for all [[target]] and purposes.

[[ENTERTAINING]] to [[stain]] "[[extra]]" who later [[was]] [[sizable]] [[superstar]] [[containing]] Wallace Beery, Colleen Moore, and Ramon Novarro - especially, watch for Mr. Novarro exhibiting "star" quality during one of the film's more memorable [[sequence]]: Pickford and the wounded soldier saluting each other as he is taken by her on a stretcher. Novarro even gets Mary Pickford to write a letter for him; obviously, he's [[did]] a [[impending]] in pictures. Also future-bound is Ben Alexander, who plays the boy "Bobby"; he becomes a dependable [[kids]] actor, and grows up to become a [[Gato]] Webb partner on "Dragnet".

******* The [[Scant]] American (7/12/17) Cecil B. DeMille ~ Mary Pickford, Jack Holt, Raymond Hatton --------------------------------------------- Result 1566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] The [[cliché]] of the shell-shocked soldier home from the [[war]] is here given [[dull]] [[treatment]]. [[Pity]] a splendid [[cast]], acting to the limits of their [[high]] [[talents]], can't redeem 'The Return of the Soldier' from its stiff-collared [[inability]] to move the viewer to emotional involvement. Best moments, as another reviewer [[noted]], come when Glenda Jackson is on screen; but [[even]] Jackson's crackling good [[cinematic]] power can't [[pull]] this film's chestnuts from its [[cold]], never warmed hearth. Ann-Margret, she of sex-kitten [[repute]] and too often accused of lacking acting [[ability]], finds her actual and rather profound abilities wasted here - despite her speaking with a nigh-flawless Middlesex [[accent]]. The hackneyed score, redolent of many lackluster TV miniseries' slathered-on saccharine emotionalism, is at [[irritating]] odds with the emotional remoteness of the [[script]], blocking, and overbaked formalism of the [[direction]]; except for its score and corseted [[script]] and direction, 'The Return of the Soldier' has all the right bits but it fails to make them work together. The [[clichés]] of the shell-shocked soldier home from the [[warfare]] is here given [[uninspiring]] [[therapies]]. [[Compassion]] a splendid [[casting]], acting to the limits of their [[supreme]] [[talent]], can't redeem 'The Return of the Soldier' from its stiff-collared [[infirmity]] to move the viewer to emotional involvement. Best moments, as another reviewer [[observed]], come when Glenda Jackson is on screen; but [[yet]] Jackson's crackling good [[cinematographic]] power can't [[pulling]] this film's chestnuts from its [[frigid]], never warmed hearth. Ann-Margret, she of sex-kitten [[fame]] and too often accused of lacking acting [[aptitude]], finds her actual and rather profound abilities wasted here - despite her speaking with a nigh-flawless Middlesex [[focus]]. The hackneyed score, redolent of many lackluster TV miniseries' slathered-on saccharine emotionalism, is at [[vexing]] odds with the emotional remoteness of the [[hyphen]], blocking, and overbaked formalism of the [[directions]]; except for its score and corseted [[hyphen]] and direction, 'The Return of the Soldier' has all the right bits but it fails to make them work together. --------------------------------------------- Result 1567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This was the only time I ever walked out on a movie. Years later, I saw it in the cable listings and thought, "Maybe I should give it another try." Suffice to say that I was right the first time. This [[ranks]] second only to Godzilla 1998 as the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've ever seen. This was the only time I ever walked out on a movie. Years later, I saw it in the cable listings and thought, "Maybe I should give it another try." Suffice to say that I was right the first time. This [[categorize]] second only to Godzilla 1998 as the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1568 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I thought I was going to watch a [[scary]] [[movie]].. and ended up laughing all the way throughout the movie. In the scene where the human transformed to a werewolf I thought they was [[kidding]]. Todays computer games have ten times better animations. Low budget, is a fitting comment. I [[would]] [[recommend]] [[Wolf]] (1994) with Jack Nicholson for a good werewolf movie. It has good special effects as they should be (human transforming to werewolf). Unless you wish to have good laugh I would not recommend you to watch this movie. This movie is a [[joke]]. I thought I was going to watch a [[fearful]] [[films]].. and ended up laughing all the way throughout the movie. In the scene where the human transformed to a werewolf I thought they was [[laughing]]. Todays computer games have ten times better animations. Low budget, is a fitting comment. I [[ought]] [[recommendation]] [[Loup]] (1994) with Jack Nicholson for a good werewolf movie. It has good special effects as they should be (human transforming to werewolf). Unless you wish to have good laugh I would not recommend you to watch this movie. This movie is a [[giggle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1569 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie had to be the [[worst]] [[horror]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. The acting was [[terrible]], Horrible and cheesy and [[talk]] about a predictable plot! I will never watch this [[movie]] again nor will I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to [[anyone]]. What a waste of time! First, as [[soon]] as the [[movie]] [[began]] I [[realized]] what I [[got]] myself into. All they did for this movie was [[copy]] scenes from many other [[horror]] [[movies]] out there and bunched them all into this one [[movie]]. The [[prank]] [[phone]] calls, halloween night, a [[psycho]], and one [[knife]]! Its [[absolutely]] [[ridiculous]]. I was not [[scared]] at all during the [[movie]], which I thought horror [[movies]] were [[supposed]] to do. As for the making of the [[movie]], its [[pretty]] [[hilarious]] how they all [[talk]] about how this [[movie]] was so great and so [[scary]]. I [[mean]] how do you not [[realize]] that the [[movies]] is a [[cheap]] rip off of "[[Scary]] [[Movie]]" for [[example]]. [[At]] [[least]] [[get]] some [[good]] [[actors]] in there and then [[maybe]] it [[would]] have been [[pulled]] off as a [[good]] horror [[movie]]. This movie had to be the [[meanest]] [[terror]] [[films]] I have ever [[noticed]]. The acting was [[horrendous]], Horrible and cheesy and [[speaks]] about a predictable plot! I will never watch this [[kino]] again nor will I [[recommended]] this [[cinematography]] to [[person]]. What a waste of time! First, as [[swiftly]] as the [[cinematography]] [[inaugurated]] I [[effected]] what I [[gets]] myself into. All they did for this movie was [[copier]] scenes from many other [[terror]] [[film]] out there and bunched them all into this one [[cinema]]. The [[giggle]] [[telephone]] calls, halloween night, a [[insane]], and one [[stab]]! Its [[fully]] [[absurd]]. I was not [[startled]] at all during the [[filmmaking]], which I thought horror [[films]] were [[presumed]] to do. As for the making of the [[cinema]], its [[quite]] [[comic]] how they all [[chitchat]] about how this [[filmmaking]] was so great and so [[terrifying]]. I [[meaning]] how do you not [[realising]] that the [[filmmaking]] is a [[inexpensive]] rip off of "[[Dreadful]] [[Films]]" for [[examples]]. [[During]] [[fewest]] [[obtain]] some [[alright]] [[protagonists]] in there and then [[conceivably]] it [[ought]] have been [[pull]] off as a [[alright]] horror [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'll [[start]] with what I [[liked]].

I really [[liked]] the [[songs]], everything about them was great, the [[costumes]], music, lyrics (as [[long]] as the translation was good :) ), choreography, everything.

I [[loved]] the crab scene and the cooking scene.

But that's about it.

I [[get]] it, arty cinema, blablabla, but too much is too much. Too much silence (it was interesting for an hour, but two hours of hearing steps and moaning from time to time, really...), too much boredom (no movie should ever be boring, no matter how deep it was to be!), too much porn-like scenes (I do get it really, I get that they were filming a porn movie there, but really, REALLY, really that is too much) I truly think, that cinema should be for watching and this one is definitely not watchable in no way.

3 stars for the songs. I'll [[lancer]] with what I [[loved]].

I really [[loved]] the [[melodies]], everything about them was great, the [[suits]], music, lyrics (as [[longer]] as the translation was good :) ), choreography, everything.

I [[worshipped]] the crab scene and the cooking scene.

But that's about it.

I [[obtain]] it, arty cinema, blablabla, but too much is too much. Too much silence (it was interesting for an hour, but two hours of hearing steps and moaning from time to time, really...), too much boredom (no movie should ever be boring, no matter how deep it was to be!), too much porn-like scenes (I do get it really, I get that they were filming a porn movie there, but really, REALLY, really that is too much) I truly think, that cinema should be for watching and this one is definitely not watchable in no way.

3 stars for the songs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1571 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I only watched this film from beginning to end because I promised a friend I would. It lacks even unintentional entertainment value that many bad films have. It may be the worst film I have ever seen. I'm surprised a distributor put their name on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Another Pokemon movie has hit the [[theaters]], and again, I'm [[hearing]] the same [[old]], "Pokemon is [[dead]], blah blah blah." The franchise's [[detractors]] couldn't be more wrong. [[Kids]] are [[still]] playing the trading card game, they're [[still]] watching the [[TV]] series, they're waiting for the [[Game]] Boy Advance [[games]], and they want to [[see]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That said, "Pokemon The 4th [[Movie]]" introduces us to two more "legendary" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi transports itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a great moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent aptly named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the picture? Will Jessie, James, and Meowth have bigger parts in this movie than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the first 3 movies, if you go into the movie deciding that you're automatically going to hate it no matter what simply because it's Pokemon (or just because your child/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[cetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're going to hate it because you've decided that you want to hate it. That [[may]] be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can [[enjoy]] this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. Another Pokemon movie has hit the [[cinema]], and again, I'm [[hearings]] the same [[archaic]], "Pokemon is [[die]], blah blah blah." The franchise's [[critics]] couldn't be more wrong. [[Infantile]] are [[again]] playing the trading card game, they're [[again]] watching the [[TELEVISION]] series, they're waiting for the [[Gaming]] Boy Advance [[gaming]], and they want to [[consults]] "Pokemon the 4th Movie."

That said, "Pokemon The 4th [[Cinematic]]" introduces us to two more "legendary" Pokemon: Suicune, the "north wind" of lore, and Celebi, guardian of the forest (and star of the show). Celebi transports itself and a boy named Sam 40 years into the future, to the present day, where Pokemon trainer Ash, his faithful Pikachu, and his friends Brock and Misty are traveling through Johto. Sam and Ash become fast friends, once they discover the other's mutual love for Pokemon (Sam's vintage Pokeball with screw-on top is a great moment). Together, they decide to protect Celebi from the villain of the story, the Team Rocket agent aptly named Vicious, who is hell-bent on capturing Celebi for his own ends. Will Ash and Sam be able to protect Celebi from Vicious' Dark Balls? Where does Suicune fit into the picture? Will Jessie, James, and Meowth have bigger parts in this movie than before? And just who is Sam, really?

Like with the first 3 movies, if you go into the movie deciding that you're automatically going to hate it no matter what simply because it's Pokemon (or just because your child/niece/nephew/younger sibling/et [[etcetera]] "dragged" you into it), then you're going to hate it because you've decided that you want to hate it. That [[maggio]] be, but to blindly trash "Pokemon The 4th Movie" simply because it is a Pokemon movie, and especially without having seen it, is just plain stupid. Even non-fans can [[enjoying]] this movie without having to know every last detail of the world of Pokemon. I'm not saying that you WILL become a Pokemon fan because of this movie, but you CAN indeed enjoy it, if you'll let yourself.

Unlike the first 3 Pokemon movies, "Pokemon the 4th Movie" is being distributed by Miramax, who I've heard is also working on securing the rights to the 5th Pokemon movie, which was released this past summer in Japan. Miramax claims to have some boffo-aggressive marketing strategy for "Pokemon The 4th Movie," but all I've seen so far is a feeble limited release, which doesn't include the usual Pikachu short in the beginning, which I was really looking forward to this time. I hope that Miramax will see fit to put the Pikachu short, called "Pikachu's Exciting Hide-and-Seek," onto at least the DVD/VHS release, if not with a future wider release of "Pokemon The 4th Movie." I hope that the current release is just the tip of the iceberg for this very entertaining film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1573 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more [[expensive]] and hyped films fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the [[best]] of the [[genre]], it keeps the [[viewer]] involved in all that's going on.

This is clearly a B type movie. In [[fact]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed Stranger" is the opportunity to take a peek at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear cinematography by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a great detective team. Patricia Barry is perfect as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. Director Edward Montagne does in a little more than one hour what other, more [[costly]] and hyped films fail to do. Mr. Montagne shows us a police story written by Phillip H. Reisman Jr. that while, is not one of the [[better]] of the [[genus]], it keeps the [[beholder]] involved in all that's going on.

This is clearly a B type movie. In [[facto]], the best thing going for "The Tattooed Stranger" is the opportunity to take a peek at the way New York looked in those years. The crystal clear cinematography by William O. Steiner, either has been kept that way through the years, or has been lovingly restored.

There are great views of New York in the opening sequence. Later we are taken to Brooklyn to the Dumbo section and later on the film travels to the Bronx and the Gun Hill Road area with its many monument stores in the area.

John Miles and Walter Kinsella made a great detective team. Patricia Barry is perfect as the plant expert from the Museum of Natural History. Jack Lord, who went to bigger things in his career, is seen in a non speaking role.

It was great fun to watch a city, as it was, because it doesn't exist any more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Go [[immediately]] and [[rent]] this [[movie]]. It will be be on a bottom shelf in your [[local]] [[video]] store and will be [[covered]] in dust. No one will have touched it in [[years]]. It may [[even]] be a $.50 [[special]]! It's worth [[ten]] bucks, I [[swear]]! Buy it! There aren't very many films than can [[compare]] with this - the celluloid [[version]] of that goo that forms at the bottom of a trash can after a few [[years]]. Yes, I gave it a '1,' but it [[really]] [[deserves]] much lower. 1-10 scales were not designed with stuff like this in mind. Go [[speedily]] and [[tenancy]] this [[cinematography]]. It will be be on a bottom shelf in your [[locale]] [[videos]] store and will be [[cover]] in dust. No one will have touched it in [[yrs]]. It may [[yet]] be a $.50 [[specific]]! It's worth [[tio]] bucks, I [[cuss]]! Buy it! There aren't very many films than can [[comparisons]] with this - the celluloid [[stepping]] of that goo that forms at the bottom of a trash can after a few [[olds]]. Yes, I gave it a '1,' but it [[truthfully]] [[merits]] much lower. 1-10 scales were not designed with stuff like this in mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 1575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] A question for all you girls out there : [[If]] a man you`ve never met before accidentally [[phoned]] you up on purpose and continued to do so at the most [[indiscreet]] moments would you be intrigued by him or so freaked out you`d phone the police ? [[Yeah]] that`s what I [[thought]] so I couldn`t swallow the [[idea]] of [[Marti]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD [[SPOILERS]] *****

This is a [[really]] [[dumb]] [[story]] . Connor Hill`s wife is murdered and the plot revolves around the question is Connor phoning Marti so he can have an alibi ? But there`s a massive gap in logic here , couldn`t Connor have employed a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any forensics at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning Marti at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as predictable as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who made the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a really crap downhill skier A question for all you girls out there : [[Though]] a man you`ve never met before accidentally [[telephoned]] you up on purpose and continued to do so at the most [[inquisitive]] moments would you be intrigued by him or so freaked out you`d phone the police ? [[Yah]] that`s what I [[thoughts]] so I couldn`t swallow the [[think]] of [[Martyn]] Gerrard putting up with the unwarrented attention of Connor Hill

***** MILD [[TROUBLEMAKERS]] *****

This is a [[truthfully]] [[dolt]] [[narratives]] . Connor Hill`s wife is murdered and the plot revolves around the question is Connor phoning Marti so he can have an alibi ? But there`s a massive gap in logic here , couldn`t Connor have employed a hit man ? something the prosecution seem to have ignored . And wasn`t there any forensics at the murder scene ? So why does the whole trial rest on Connor phoning Marti at the time of the murder ? Dumb . Dumb . Dumb . And it`s as predictable as it is brainless .

My abiding memory of this film is that for someone who made the winter Olympics Marti Gerrard is a really crap downhill skier --------------------------------------------- Result 1576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] Kusturika [[made]] it again. Another [[masterpiece]]. A coral [[comedy]] full of his own landmarks, with a frenetic [[rhythm]] and [[many]] [[glorious]] moments, we [[laughed]] and [[laughed]], what a party! The [[music]] is everywhere, and [[also]] the shooting, the [[animals]], the [[crazy]] [[bastards]], sex and [[amazing]] gadgets and inventions, everything colorfully visual to entertain only. [[Pure]] [[cinema]] in essence. A [[wonderful]] [[experience]] to watch. And one is [[specially]] [[grateful]] since good comedies are so rare, and so wonderful. Well, this is one, and if you enjoyed Kusturica's [[previous]] [[films]], you'll [[love]] this, although, as in all comedies, it is about a chemical reaction, and you have to be in the mood for it. Kusturika [[introduced]] it again. Another [[centerpiece]]. A coral [[parody]] full of his own landmarks, with a frenetic [[pace]] and [[innumerable]] [[sumptuous]] moments, we [[giggled]] and [[giggled]], what a party! The [[musician]] is everywhere, and [[similarly]] the shooting, the [[zoo]], the [[lunatic]] [[motherfuckers]], sex and [[stunning]] gadgets and inventions, everything colorfully visual to entertain only. [[Unadulterated]] [[theater]] in essence. A [[glamorous]] [[experiences]] to watch. And one is [[concretely]] [[appreciative]] since good comedies are so rare, and so wonderful. Well, this is one, and if you enjoyed Kusturica's [[former]] [[film]], you'll [[likes]] this, although, as in all comedies, it is about a chemical reaction, and you have to be in the mood for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1577 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Full House is a great show. I am still today growing up on it. I started watching it when i was 8 and now i am 12 and still watching it. i fell in love with all of the characters, especially Stephanie. she is my favorite. she had such a sense of humor. in case there are people on this sight that hardly watch the show, you should because you will get hooked on it. i became hooked on it after the first show i saw, which just happened to be the first episode, in 2002. it really is a good show. i really think that this show should go down to many generations in families. and it's great too because it is an appropriate show for all ages. and for all parents, it teaches kids lessons on how to go on with their life. nothing terrible happens, like violence or swearing. it is just a really great sit-com. i give it 5 out of 5 stars. what do you think? OH and the best time to watch it is when you are home sick from school or even the old office. It will make you feel a lot better. Trust me i am hardly home sick but i still know that it will make you feel better. and to everybody that thinks the show is stupid, well that's too bad for you because you won't get as far in life even if you are happy with your life. you really should watch it and you will get hooked on it. i am just telling you what happened to me and everybody else that started watching this awesome show. well i need must go to have some lunch. remember you must start watching full house and soon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I'm [[allowed]] to write 1000 words about this film, but one word could suffice: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't laugh so much as gawk at this [[truly]] [[dreadful]] [[movie]]. We kept [[looking]] at each other with our best "What the...?" expressions. There is no way to adequately [[describe]] this movie. Killer [[tomatoes]] were funny, but this is just [[sick]]. What kind of mind [[produces]] images [[like]] these and then puts them on film for others to see? What kind of mind includes innocent [[children]] in this [[weird]], weird movie and then [[packages]] it as if it is appropriate for [[children]]? Parents, whatever you do, if your child still believes in Santa, don't let him/her see this movie. Preteens can watch it -- probably with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. If you decide to inflict this movie on others, you might want to spike their eggnog.

Quite possibly the [[worst]] [[film]] ever [[made]]. I'm [[authorizing]] to write 1000 words about this film, but one word could suffice: bizarre. Hubby and I didn't laugh so much as gawk at this [[truthfully]] [[spooky]] [[cinematography]]. We kept [[researching]] at each other with our best "What the...?" expressions. There is no way to adequately [[outlining]] this movie. Killer [[tomato]] were funny, but this is just [[sickly]]. What kind of mind [[begets]] images [[iike]] these and then puts them on film for others to see? What kind of mind includes innocent [[childhood]] in this [[inquisitive]], weird movie and then [[bundles]] it as if it is appropriate for [[childhood]]? Parents, whatever you do, if your child still believes in Santa, don't let him/her see this movie. Preteens can watch it -- probably with "What the...?" expressions on their faces. If you decide to inflict this movie on others, you might want to spike their eggnog.

Quite possibly the [[gravest]] [[flick]] ever [[accomplished]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1579 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (86%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] You spend most of this two-hour film wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you knew something dramatic was going to be revealed. Until then, Smith, plays it [[mysterious]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the typical action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a great job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. You spend most of this two-hour film wondering "what's the story regarding the lead character?"

Will Smith, as a low-key "Ben Thomas" will keep you guessing. The last 20-25 minutes is when you find out, and it's a shocker....but you knew something dramatic was going to be revealed. Until then, Smith, plays it [[cryptic]], almost stalking people. You know he has a good reason for doing it, but it's never really explained, once again, to keep us guessing until the end.

All of it, including a on again/off again but touching romance with Rosario Dawkins ("Emily Posa") might make some viewers frustrated or wanting to quit this film.....but don't because the final long segment puts all the pieces of this puzzle together.

This is a two-hour film and not the typical action-packed macho Will Smith film. In fact, the most shocking aspect might be seeing the drawn, sad face of Smith throughout this story. It almost doesn't even look like him in a number of shots. He looks like he's lost weight and is sick. Smith does a great job portraying a man carrying around a lot of sadness.

Like a good movie will often do, this film will leave you thinking long after the ending credits. --------------------------------------------- Result 1580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I always look forward to this [[movie]] when its on TV. Have to get the DVD I guess. The range of different types of people is great. It [[says]] to me that anyone can be a [[dancer]] if they try hard enough. My favorite character must be Mr.Aoki. He is so quirky but so full of emotions. It is a perfect movie with wonderful dancing. Unfortunately we never get the chance to see them go to [[Blackpool]]. [[Would]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it leaves it to your [[imagination]] to what could of [[happened]].

A very simple and [[innocent]] [[story]]. He [[stays]] [[loyal]] to his wife and [[daughter]].

I haven't [[seen]] the Hollywood remake. Not sure if I want to. I don't really enjoy Jennifer Lopez. I [[think]] [[Richard]] Gere more matches the [[original]] than [[Lopez]]. I have a [[feeling]] that the remake is not as [[simple]] and innocent. I always look forward to this [[filmmaking]] when its on TV. Have to get the DVD I guess. The range of different types of people is great. It [[said]] to me that anyone can be a [[dancers]] if they try hard enough. My favorite character must be Mr.Aoki. He is so quirky but so full of emotions. It is a perfect movie with wonderful dancing. Unfortunately we never get the chance to see them go to [[Vegas]]. [[Ought]] make for the perfect sequel if they had. But I guess it leaves it to your [[novelty]] to what could of [[arrived]].

A very simple and [[blameless]] [[storytelling]]. He [[resting]] [[trusty]] to his wife and [[girls]].

I haven't [[watched]] the Hollywood remake. Not sure if I want to. I don't really enjoy Jennifer Lopez. I [[ideas]] [[Richards]] Gere more matches the [[initial]] than [[Santana]]. I have a [[sense]] that the remake is not as [[uncomplicated]] and innocent. --------------------------------------------- Result 1581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] In the winter of 1931, supposedly 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as Michael Sullivan Jr.) [[wonders]] what his mobster father Tom Hanks (Michael "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[living]]. Young Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "work" one evening, and witnesses him blasting away some rival [[gangsters]]. This leads - in a VERY roundabout [[way]] - to "Godfather"-type Paul Newman (as John Rooney) hiring independent hit-man Jude Law (as Harlen Maguire) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks thinks they will be safe with a relative, which is [[puzzling]] when you consider the characters' line of work.

Looking uncannily like Paul Peterson ("The Donna Reed Show"), Hoechlin does a terrific job for director Sam Mendes; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the [[luckiest]] young actor of 2002. But, the most striking thing about "Road to Perdition" is the stunning cinematography of Conrad L. Hall, which [[deservedly]] won a career capping "Academy Award" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[work]] is [[truly]] superlative. This [[helps]] make up for the overall [[impression]] of a measured, [[contrived]] staginess to both the narrative and visuals. The deviating end is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated [[dog]] is an example of the aforementioned staginess).

******** Road to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam Mendes ~ Tom Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, Paul Newman, Jude Law In the winter of 1931, supposedly 12-year-old Tyler Hoechlin (as Michael Sullivan Jr.) [[beauties]] what his mobster father Tom Hanks (Michael "Mike" Sullivan) does for a [[vida]]. Young Hoechlin follows Mr. Hanks to "work" one evening, and witnesses him blasting away some rival [[bandits]]. This leads - in a VERY roundabout [[camino]] - to "Godfather"-type Paul Newman (as John Rooney) hiring independent hit-man Jude Law (as Harlen Maguire) to track down Hoechlin and Hanks, who are off to cool their heels in Chicago. Hanks thinks they will be safe with a relative, which is [[perplexing]] when you consider the characters' line of work.

Looking uncannily like Paul Peterson ("The Donna Reed Show"), Hoechlin does a terrific job for director Sam Mendes; and, getting to work with this cast makes him the [[kindest]] young actor of 2002. But, the most striking thing about "Road to Perdition" is the stunning cinematography of Conrad L. Hall, which [[legitimately]] won a career capping "Academy Award" for the late photographer. Mr. Hall's [[jobs]] is [[honestly]] superlative. This [[aiding]] make up for the overall [[printout]] of a measured, [[artificial]] staginess to both the narrative and visuals. The deviating end is abruptly uplifting (the unrelated [[canine]] is an example of the aforementioned staginess).

******** Road to Perdition (7/12/02) Sam Mendes ~ Tom Hanks, Tyler Hoechlin, Paul Newman, Jude Law --------------------------------------------- Result 1582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (64%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] This 1997 film-blanc classic tale of smoldering passion has achieved its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The pervasive, ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant screenplay dangles this [[embryonic]] affair-to-be in front of the enraptured audience, sitting transfixed as the abstract, almost-expressionist cinematography deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can cut the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings seems just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern cinema? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . 'Runaway Car' should have its catchword as well. Perhaps the film could have opened with an extreme closeup of Judge Reinhold saying something such as "A car is an extension of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline could then be dedicated to parsing every syllable, subtlety and nuance of that phrase. Had that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. This 1997 film-blanc classic tale of smoldering passion has achieved its well-deserved legendary status as one of the screen's greatest sagas of a doomed and hopeless love. The pervasive, ongoing and progressive magnetism between Judge Reinhold and what's-her-name is sure to set many a viewer's heart a-flutter with memories of one's own first crush. The brilliant screenplay dangles this [[embryos]] affair-to-be in front of the enraptured audience, sitting transfixed as the abstract, almost-expressionist cinematography deep-focuses on the just-under-the-surface desires that ebb and flow between the principals. You can cut the sexual tension with a dull tire iron.

A tiny drop of perspiration on the end of a nose catches the bright sunshine, and leaves no doubt as to its significance. Scenes like this abound and bear watching again and again. As with "Jane Eyre" and "Rebecca" (to which this masterpiece is so often compared), the closeups of the actors' faces as they experience the slow dawning of the great love-that-is-not-to-be will haunt you forever.

The now-classic RC soundtrack score, with its creative and unique use of solo synthesizer, emphasizes the emotion that drips throughout like a leaky crankcase.

If I had any criticisms at all by mentioning what I consider a minor flaw (and dared to risk the wrath of the millions of fans who hold this classic so dear to their hearts), I would say that the hallmark of "Runaway Car" - its sense of mounting sexual tension - is briefly broken by the highway scene, which now after repeated viewings seems just a bit overlong (and probably even unnecessary?) to the eternal, bittersweet tale of Love Interrupted.

Dare I advance what I perceive as the tiniest of flaws in this critically-acclaimed triumph of modern cinema? 'Citizen Kane' had its 'Rosebud' . . . 'Runaway Car' should have its catchword as well. Perhaps the film could have opened with an extreme closeup of Judge Reinhold saying something such as "A car is an extension of its owner!", and the rest of the storyline could then be dedicated to parsing every syllable, subtlety and nuance of that phrase. Had that plot line been done, this film could have topped "Titanic" at the Golden Globes that year, I'm convinced.

My one regret? That I didn't read the novel first. --------------------------------------------- Result 1583 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This low-grade Universal chiller has just been announced as an upcoming DVD release but, intended as part of a collection of similar movies that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that legitimate release. Which is just as well, since the end [[result]] was not [[anything]] particularly special (if decently atmospheric at that): for [[starters]], the plot is pretty [[weak]] – even though in a way it anticipates the Vincent Price vehicle THEATRE OF BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see sharing his measly plate of cheese with his pet cat! – who, upon finding himself on the receiving end of art critic Alan Napier's vitriolic pen one time too many, decides to end it all by hurling himself into the nearby river. However, while contemplating just that action, he is anticipated by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally enough, saves the poor guy's life with the intention of having the latter do all the dirty work for him in gratitude! Although it is supposedly set in the art circles of New York, all we really see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter Robert Lowery (who keeps painting the same statuesque blonde girl Joan Shawlee over and over in banal poses – how is that for art?) who, conveniently enough, is engaged to a rival art critic (Virginia Grey) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is discovered with his spine broken and Lowery is suspected; but then investigating detective Bill Goodwin gets the bright idea of engaging another critic to publish a scathing review of Lowery's work (I did not know that publicity sketches got reviewed!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is going to be! In the meantime, Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by sculpting Hatton's uniquely craggy – and recognizable – visage which, needless to say, attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to believe that she lacks material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and model. Bafflingly, although The Creeper is fully aware of how Grey looks (thanks to her aforementioned haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! This low-grade Universal chiller has just been announced as an upcoming DVD release but, intended as part of a collection of similar movies that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that legitimate release. Which is just as well, since the end [[upshot]] was not [[something]] particularly special (if decently atmospheric at that): for [[beginners]], the plot is pretty [[fragile]] – even though in a way it anticipates the Vincent Price vehicle THEATRE OF BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see sharing his measly plate of cheese with his pet cat! – who, upon finding himself on the receiving end of art critic Alan Napier's vitriolic pen one time too many, decides to end it all by hurling himself into the nearby river. However, while contemplating just that action, he is anticipated by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally enough, saves the poor guy's life with the intention of having the latter do all the dirty work for him in gratitude! Although it is supposedly set in the art circles of New York, all we really see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter Robert Lowery (who keeps painting the same statuesque blonde girl Joan Shawlee over and over in banal poses – how is that for art?) who, conveniently enough, is engaged to a rival art critic (Virginia Grey) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is discovered with his spine broken and Lowery is suspected; but then investigating detective Bill Goodwin gets the bright idea of engaging another critic to publish a scathing review of Lowery's work (I did not know that publicity sketches got reviewed!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is going to be! In the meantime, Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by sculpting Hatton's uniquely craggy – and recognizable – visage which, needless to say, attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to believe that she lacks material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and model. Bafflingly, although The Creeper is fully aware of how Grey looks (thanks to her aforementioned haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"! --------------------------------------------- Result 1584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is without doubt the best documentary ever produced giving an accurate and epic depiction of World War 2 from the invasion of Poland in 1939 to the end of the war in 1945.

Honest and to the point, this documentary presents views from both sides of the conflict giving a very human face to the war. At the same time tactics and the importance of Battles are not overlooked, much work has been put into the giving a detailed picture of the war and in particularly the high, low and turning points in the allies fortunes. Being a British produced documentary this 26 part series focus is mainly on Britain, but Russia and America's contribution are not skimmed over this is but one such advantage of a series of such length.

Another worthy mention is the score, the music and the whole feel of the documentary is one of turmoil, struggle and perseverance. Like a film this series leaves the viewer in no doubt of the hardship faced by the allies and the Germans during the war, its build to a climax at the end of every episode, which serves to layer the coarse of the second world war. After watching all 26 the viewer is left with an extensive knowledge about the war and astonished at just how much we owe to the members of the previous generation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] An ultra-nervous old [[man]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[terrorized]] by the news that a gang is stalking the city and prominent citizens are disappearing, really panics when [[someone]] [[throws]] a rock through his window with a message tied to it, saying "You will be next!"

He calls the detective agency wondering where are the guys he asked for earlier. Of course, it's the [[Stooges]], who couldn't respond because had come into the office, robbed them and tied them up. Some detectives! The moment poor Mr. Goodrich hangs up the phone and says, "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "Nico" appears out of a secret panel in the room and chokes him unconscious. We next find out that his trusted employees are anything but that. Now these crooks have to deal with the "detectives" that are coming by the house for Mr. Goodrich.

Some of the gags, like Moe and Larry's wrinkles, are getting a bit old, but some of them will provoke laughs if I see them 100 times. I always laugh at Shemp trying to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a classic routine with a long, accordion-like camera lens. The act he puts on when he's poisoned is always funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was taking the great Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were always great in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this film, An ultra-nervous old [[dawg]], "Mr. Goodrich," [[terrified]] by the news that a gang is stalking the city and prominent citizens are disappearing, really panics when [[whoever]] [[castings]] a rock through his window with a message tied to it, saying "You will be next!"

He calls the detective agency wondering where are the guys he asked for earlier. Of course, it's the [[Pawns]], who couldn't respond because had come into the office, robbed them and tied them up. Some detectives! The moment poor Mr. Goodrich hangs up the phone and says, "I feel safer already," a monster-type goon named "Nico" appears out of a secret panel in the room and chokes him unconscious. We next find out that his trusted employees are anything but that. Now these crooks have to deal with the "detectives" that are coming by the house for Mr. Goodrich.

Some of the gags, like Moe and Larry's wrinkles, are getting a bit old, but some of them will provoke laughs if I see them 100 times. I always laugh at Shemp trying to be a flirt, as he does here with Mr. Goodrich's niece, in a classic routine with a long, accordion-like camera lens. The act he puts on when he's poisoned is always funny, too. Shemp was so good that I didn't mind he was taking the great Curly's place.

Larry, Moe, Curly/Shemp were always great in the chase scenes, in which monsters or crooks or both are chasing them around a house. That's the last six minutes in here. At times, such as this film, --------------------------------------------- Result 1586 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] My parents [[took]] me to this [[movie]] when I was nine years [[old]]. I have never [[forgotten]] it. I had never before seen anything as [[beautiful]] as [[Elizabeth]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she made Elephant [[Walk]]) [[Remember]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[see]] anything else on the screen. I just [[wanted]] to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has begun to [[show]] her age, (She's [[almost]] seventy-four) but I still believe her to be one of the most [[beautiful]] and [[breathtaking]] women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several times since, and it is a [[sappy]] melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, magnificent scenery, the very impressive elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human arrogance in the face of nature.

All in all, a well-spent couple of hours watching the movie channel or a rented video. My parents [[taken]] me to this [[kino]] when I was nine years [[ancient]]. I have never [[disregarded]] it. I had never before seen anything as [[glamorous]] as [[Isabel]] Taylor. (She was twenty-two when she made Elephant [[Walking]]) [[Remind]], I'm nine, so the feelings aren't sexual, I just couldn't [[seeing]] anything else on the screen. I just [[wanting]] to sit at her feet like a puppy and stare up at her. She has begun to [[showings]] her age, (She's [[roughly]] seventy-four) but I still believe her to be one of the most [[ravishing]] and [[astounding]] women to ever have lived.

I have seen the movie several times since, and it is a [[gooey]] melodrama. What saves it is, of course, Miss Taylor's beauty, magnificent scenery, the very impressive elephant stampede, and a well-made point on human arrogance in the face of nature.

All in all, a well-spent couple of hours watching the movie channel or a rented video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably the most boring, worse and useless film I have seen last year. The plot that was meant to have some philosophical aspects emerged to me as a very bad hollow copy of the matrix, with plenty of clichés: the lone wolf cop, good looking, psychologically disturbed, sleeping with his gun... + nice hard worker and shy, but good looking she-scientist, you add a 2 cent plot and you have I, Robot! I was terribly disturbed by the obvious advertising of brands like FedEx,Audi,converse etc. This movie stinks the commercialization and tend to be more a poor ad spot that unfortunately will not end after 30 sec. I wouldn't recommend this to my worse enemy, if you have some spare time, watch a good TV program instead or better read a nice book. --------------------------------------------- Result 1588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[watched]] this movie because I [[like]] Nicolas Cage and well, I [[found]] it strange and [[completely]] [[pointless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copy]] of it. Wow. what a difference. The original one was way better. I'd like you all to know it did originally actually make a statement, it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the Christian public expressing their fear of paganism. If you dig deeper into it it also makes comments on life but I don't want to go into details, just, simply put, if you were disappointed and you'd like to know what it SHOULD look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a little dated, but A lot better. I [[observed]] this movie because I [[iike]] Nicolas Cage and well, I [[unearthed]] it strange and [[abundantly]] [[meaningless]]... so I decided to poke around a little bit and got my hands on the 70s [[copied]] of it. Wow. what a difference. The original one was way better. I'd like you all to know it did originally actually make a statement, it's existence did have a purpose. It was really the Christian public expressing their fear of paganism. If you dig deeper into it it also makes comments on life but I don't want to go into details, just, simply put, if you were disappointed and you'd like to know what it SHOULD look like, feel free to watch the 70s version, a little dated, but A lot better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1589 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I really have problems rating this movie. It is directed brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of money in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), editing and cinematography are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[sick]] [[movies]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... I really have problems rating this movie. It is directed brilliantly, there is obviously a lot of money in it. Gere and Danes are intense (although her screen personality could use a bit more defining and spicing up), editing and cinematography are excellent. On the other hand, it is one of those really really [[indisposed]] [[cinema]] where one cannot help but wonder whether the director himself likes to stage specific scenes, and, yes, one cannot help but wonder how many copycats will such a movie inspire.

In purely artistic terms, it is a 9, but I really have to ask myself who these people are giving their money to produce such a movie .... --------------------------------------------- Result 1590 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I can't for the life of me remember why--I must have had a free ticket or something--but I saw this [[movie]] in the theater when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[travesty]] someone dared to call a film, and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. Unfortunately I [[stuck]] it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the worst mistakes of my life thus far. My offense became pure horror when just before the closing credits the smarmy demon child sticks his head out from behind a sign and says "Look for Problem Child 2, coming soon!" That was hands-down THE most terrifying moment ever recorded on film.

The plot, if I recall correctly, involved John Ritter and perhaps his wife (Lord, how I've tried without success to block this film out of my mind) adopting a "problem child." Maybe they think they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their intent, they fail miserably because from first frame to last this child remains the brattiest, rudest, most horrid demon-spawn ever to hit the big screen. Forget Damian, forget Rosemary's Baby. This kid takes the cake. The only difference is, we are supposed to feel sorry for him because he's a "problem child." However, this is impossible since this child is quite likely the most unsympathetic character ever portrayed. You want to kill him through the entire film, and when (SPOILER, like anyone cares) John Ritter decides to keep the vile hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in shocked disgust (like several of the people at the theater where I saw it did).

This is only the second movie I have given a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by God I couldn't tell you which was worse. John Ritter had a quote in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! I can't for the life of me remember why--I must have had a free ticket or something--but I saw this [[cinematography]] in the theater when it was released. I don't remember who I went with, which theater I was in, or even which city. All I remember was how offended I was at this [[masquerade]] someone dared to call a film, and how half the people in the theater walked out before the movie was over. Unfortunately I [[trapped]] it out to end, which I still consider to be one of the worst mistakes of my life thus far. My offense became pure horror when just before the closing credits the smarmy demon child sticks his head out from behind a sign and says "Look for Problem Child 2, coming soon!" That was hands-down THE most terrifying moment ever recorded on film.

The plot, if I recall correctly, involved John Ritter and perhaps his wife (Lord, how I've tried without success to block this film out of my mind) adopting a "problem child." Maybe they think they can reform him, or something. I really don't know. If that was their intent, they fail miserably because from first frame to last this child remains the brattiest, rudest, most horrid demon-spawn ever to hit the big screen. Forget Damian, forget Rosemary's Baby. This kid takes the cake. The only difference is, we are supposed to feel sorry for him because he's a "problem child." However, this is impossible since this child is quite likely the most unsympathetic character ever portrayed. You want to kill him through the entire film, and when (SPOILER, like anyone cares) John Ritter decides to keep the vile hell-child you will be yelling "Send him back!" in shocked disgust (like several of the people at the theater where I saw it did).

This is only the second movie I have given a "1" to on the IMDb. The other was Superman IV, and by God I couldn't tell you which was worse. John Ritter had a quote in TV Guide about the time that Problem Child 3, which he was not in, came out. He said something like "The only way I would do another [Problem Child] sequel is if they dragged my dead body back to perform." Amen to that!

I would rather watch a 24-hour marathon of Police Academy sequels than see even twenty minutes of Problem Child again. 1/10, only because I can't give it a negative score, which is what it really deserves. Someone burn the original negatives of this film, please! --------------------------------------------- Result 1591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This "[[film]]" is a travesty. No, wait--an [[abomination]]. [[NO]], WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[WORST]] [[film]] ever [[made]] [[featuring]] beloved [[characters]] [[created]] and [[established]] by other actors.

I [[thought]] "[[Inspector]] Clouseau" with [[Alan]] Arkin (!) instead of Peter [[Sellers]] was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but [[even]] [[daring]] to "[[remake]]" Stan Laurel and Oliver [[Hardy]] is [[asinine]] and money [[grubbing]].

Mr. Laurel and [[Mr]]. Hardy have been dead, respectively, [[since]] 1957 and 1965. Why [[anyone]] [[would]] even [[begin]] to [[imagine]] that [[suitable]] [[updates]] for L & H [[would]] be in the [[persona]] of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is [[beyond]] me. I tuned in [[fully]] [[expecting]] to be [[horrified]] and [[embarrassed]] and I [[certainly]] wasn't disappointed. [[Everyone]] [[involved]] in this [[pathetic]], moronic, disgrace should be blackballed from [[anything]] and everything [[associated]] with Hollywood and film-making. [[AVOID]] THIS [[MOVIE]] [[AT]] [[ALL]] COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN [[DULY]] WARNED. This "[[movie]]" is a travesty. No, wait--an [[horror]]. [[NONE]], WAIT--this is without a doubt the absolute [[PIRE]] [[cinematography]] ever [[accomplished]] [[featured]] beloved [[traits]] [[generated]] and [[formulated]] by other actors.

I [[think]] "[[Inspectors]] Clouseau" with [[Alana]] Arkin (!) instead of Peter [[Dealerships]] was ludicrous and sacrilegious, but [[yet]] [[brave]] to "[[redo]]" Stan Laurel and Oliver [[Robust]] is [[dolt]] and money [[uprooting]].

Mr. Laurel and [[Monsieur]]. Hardy have been dead, respectively, [[because]] 1957 and 1965. Why [[everyone]] [[could]] even [[starts]] to [[imagining]] that [[adequate]] [[update]] for L & H [[could]] be in the [[personality]] of Bronson Pinchot and Gailard Sartain is [[afterlife]] me. I tuned in [[perfectly]] [[await]] to be [[terrified]] and [[ashamed]] and I [[definitely]] wasn't disappointed. [[Anyone]] [[implicated]] in this [[unhappy]], moronic, disgrace should be blackballed from [[nothing]] and everything [[tied]] with Hollywood and film-making. [[EVADE]] THIS [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] [[IN]] [[TOTALITY]] COSTS--YOU HAVE BEEN [[SATISFACTORILY]] WARNED. --------------------------------------------- Result 1592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (84%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] OK its not the best film I've ever seen but at the same time I've been able to sit and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the first part of the first short story i wondered what the hell i was watching but at the same time it was so [[awful]] i loved it cheap laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. OK its not the best film I've ever seen but at the same time I've been able to sit and watch it TWICE!!! story line was pretty awful and during the first part of the first short story i wondered what the hell i was watching but at the same time it was so [[frightening]] i loved it cheap laughs all the way.

And Jebidia deserves an Oscar for his role in this movie the only thing that let him down was half way through he stopped his silly name calling.

overall the film was pretty perfetic but if your after cheap laughs and you see it in pound land go by it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1593 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Presenting Lily Mars may have [[provided]] [[Judy]] Garland with one of the easier roles she had while at MGM because Lily Mars is [[definitely]] a [[character]] she could [[identify]] with. A [[young]] [[girl]] with [[talent]] enough for ten, she knows she has what it [[takes]] to [[make]] it in the [[theater]] no [[matter]] how much producer Van Heflin from her home town discourages her.

I [[really]] liked Judy in this one as the [[girl]] determined to make it in the [[theater]]. [[Because]] it is Judy Garland with the [[talent]] of [[Judy]] Garland you in the audience [[know]] she has the right stuff [[even]] if it [[takes]] Van Heflin [[nearly]] the [[whole]] movie to be [[convinced]].

Both [[Judy]] and Heflin hail from the same [[small]] [[town]], Heflin's dad was the town doctor who [[delivered]] her and Heflin while he may have [[moved]] away and [[become]] a [[big]] [[producer]] on Broadway, their respective [[moms]], [[Fay]] Bainter and [[Spring]] Byington have [[kept]] in touch. That's her [[entrée]], but Heflin's [[constantly]] barraged with stagestruck [[kids]], but never [[anyone]] [[quite]] like Lily Mars.

No real [[big]] song hits came out of Presenting Lily Mars for [[Garland]], [[though]] she [[sings]] all her numbers. The [[best]] in the film is a [[revival]] of that gaslight era [[chestnut]], [[Every]] [[Little]] [[Movement]] [[Has]] A [[Meaning]] [[All]] Its Own. Judy [[sings]] it with Connie Gilchrist [[playing]] the [[cleaning]] [[lady]] in a Broadway [[theater]] where Heflin's [[show]] is being produced. Gilchrist was a [[star]] back in the [[days]] of the FloraDora Girls and she and Judy [[deliver]] the song in [[grand]] [[style]] with Connie. It's the [[best]] scene in the [[film]] as Gilchrist [[encourages]] Judy to [[keep]] at it. [[Composer]] Karl Hoschna had died a [[long]] time ago, but lyricist Otto Harbach was still alive and I'm [[betting]] he liked what he heard.

European musical star Marta Eggerth is in Presenting Lily Mars as the show's star who's at first bemused, then angry and [[finally]], understanding of Garland and Heflin. She did a couple of films with MGM and then went back to Europe for more work on the continent. I'm betting MGM didn't quite know what to do with her and her thick Hungarian accent, though Louis B. Mayer never met a soprano he didn't like.

Van Heflin does well as the patient producer who puts up with a lot from Garland and Eggerth. Heflin was just coming off his Oscar for Johnny Eager the previous year and he and Garland wouldn't appear to be an ideal screen team, but they're not bad together.

Presenting Lily Mars is a fine showcase for the talents of Judy Garland. And she didn't have to share the screen in another backstage film with Mickey Rooney. Presenting Lily Mars may have [[supplied]] [[Jody]] Garland with one of the easier roles she had while at MGM because Lily Mars is [[categorically]] a [[characteristics]] she could [[detection]] with. A [[youthful]] [[female]] with [[talents]] enough for ten, she knows she has what it [[pick]] to [[deliver]] it in the [[drama]] no [[topic]] how much producer Van Heflin from her home town discourages her.

I [[truthfully]] liked Judy in this one as the [[chick]] determined to make it in the [[cinemas]]. [[Since]] it is Judy Garland with the [[talents]] of [[Jody]] Garland you in the audience [[savoir]] she has the right stuff [[yet]] if it [[pick]] Van Heflin [[roughly]] the [[total]] movie to be [[persuaded]].

Both [[Jody]] and Heflin hail from the same [[tiny]] [[city]], Heflin's dad was the town doctor who [[handed]] her and Heflin while he may have [[relocated]] away and [[becomes]] a [[huge]] [[manufacturer]] on Broadway, their respective [[mom]], [[Fey]] Bainter and [[Springs]] Byington have [[conserved]] in touch. That's her [[entree]], but Heflin's [[steadily]] barraged with stagestruck [[juvenile]], but never [[nobody]] [[altogether]] like Lily Mars.

No real [[substantial]] song hits came out of Presenting Lily Mars for [[Wreath]], [[despite]] she [[exalt]] all her numbers. The [[better]] in the film is a [[rejuvenation]] of that gaslight era [[brunette]], [[Any]] [[Scant]] [[Movements]] [[Ha]] A [[Meanings]] [[Entire]] Its Own. Judy [[exalt]] it with Connie Gilchrist [[gaming]] the [[cleanup]] [[ladies]] in a Broadway [[movies]] where Heflin's [[displaying]] is being produced. Gilchrist was a [[superstar]] back in the [[jours]] of the FloraDora Girls and she and Judy [[delivering]] the song in [[large]] [[styles]] with Connie. It's the [[better]] scene in the [[movie]] as Gilchrist [[promoting]] Judy to [[conserve]] at it. [[Songwriter]] Karl Hoschna had died a [[prolonged]] time ago, but lyricist Otto Harbach was still alive and I'm [[bet]] he liked what he heard.

European musical star Marta Eggerth is in Presenting Lily Mars as the show's star who's at first bemused, then angry and [[eventually]], understanding of Garland and Heflin. She did a couple of films with MGM and then went back to Europe for more work on the continent. I'm betting MGM didn't quite know what to do with her and her thick Hungarian accent, though Louis B. Mayer never met a soprano he didn't like.

Van Heflin does well as the patient producer who puts up with a lot from Garland and Eggerth. Heflin was just coming off his Oscar for Johnny Eager the previous year and he and Garland wouldn't appear to be an ideal screen team, but they're not bad together.

Presenting Lily Mars is a fine showcase for the talents of Judy Garland. And she didn't have to share the screen in another backstage film with Mickey Rooney. --------------------------------------------- Result 1594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[killed]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[comedy]], but it's um. squalid. The plot is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so petty and disturbed and [[conveniently]] contrived I ultimately [[found]] it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an uneven, goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) This was a blind buy used DVD. It totally [[deaths]] a nice buzz I had going when I hit play.

It's bubble-headed [[charade]], but it's um. squalid. The plot is ZANY!, but the characters do things to each other that are so petty and disturbed and [[comfortably]] contrived I ultimately [[discoveries]] it depressing to watch.

Maybe the box lead me to expect something more than an uneven, goofy caper film. (I know, I know, the quotes on the box & the Academy Award nomination mean nothing.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] How can someone NOT like this movie??? This movie is so [[good]], that the first week I saw it on the shelf at the video store it was stolen....BEST Horror Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know HAHAHA..How is that NOT funny? The only movie that comes [[close]] to [[touching]] this is [[Bride]] of Chucky and that was just [[great]]!! How can someone NOT like this movie??? This movie is so [[alright]], that the first week I saw it on the shelf at the video store it was stolen....BEST Horror Movie Ever!!!....I mean he took the Carrot and he...well you know HAHAHA..How is that NOT funny? The only movie that comes [[shut]] to [[affects]] this is [[Fiancee]] of Chucky and that was just [[formidable]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is the first Tom Hanks [[movie]] I have gotten the privilege of seeing in the theater, although he is my [[favorite]]. When I heard he was going to play a hit-man, I was a [[little]] stunned thinking "can Mr. Hanks pull this one off"? And he did in high fashion. This 1930's [[depression]] [[era]] [[film]] is a about loyalty, redemption, and one [[path]] that you don't want your children stumbling down. Tom Hanks leads a stellar cast as Michael Sullivan. Being the family man, and the secret life of the contract killer for the Oscar nominated Paul Newman. This [[movie]] Tom Hanks relies more on reaction and gaze rather than dialogue, which he delivers a knockout performance.

On one night of one of his jobs, Michael's son Michael Jr., played by newcomer Tyler Hoechlin, witnesses the hit. And Michael Sr.'s partner in crime, fellow stage actor Daniel Craig can't have that information out. So he wacks out the son and wife of Michael Sr., except Michael Jr. So the two head for Chicago to get Conner Rooney(son of Paul Newman's Mr. Rooney).

The drama and intense plot really thickens from their as father trys to set things right, even though son is along for the ride. While on this deadly journey, someone has hired a hit for Michael Sr. The assassin would be the photographer of the deceased Harlen Maguire, played by a stain-teethed Jude Law.

The movie will have you feeling the old days. And with Thomas Newman's beautiful and haunting Oscar nominated score to go along with it, you can't help but appreciate this film from Oscar winning director Sam Mendes. So sit back, and enjoy the wild ride. This is the first Tom Hanks [[flick]] I have gotten the privilege of seeing in the theater, although he is my [[preferable]]. When I heard he was going to play a hit-man, I was a [[petite]] stunned thinking "can Mr. Hanks pull this one off"? And he did in high fashion. This 1930's [[slump]] [[epoch]] [[films]] is a about loyalty, redemption, and one [[chemin]] that you don't want your children stumbling down. Tom Hanks leads a stellar cast as Michael Sullivan. Being the family man, and the secret life of the contract killer for the Oscar nominated Paul Newman. This [[filmmaking]] Tom Hanks relies more on reaction and gaze rather than dialogue, which he delivers a knockout performance.

On one night of one of his jobs, Michael's son Michael Jr., played by newcomer Tyler Hoechlin, witnesses the hit. And Michael Sr.'s partner in crime, fellow stage actor Daniel Craig can't have that information out. So he wacks out the son and wife of Michael Sr., except Michael Jr. So the two head for Chicago to get Conner Rooney(son of Paul Newman's Mr. Rooney).

The drama and intense plot really thickens from their as father trys to set things right, even though son is along for the ride. While on this deadly journey, someone has hired a hit for Michael Sr. The assassin would be the photographer of the deceased Harlen Maguire, played by a stain-teethed Jude Law.

The movie will have you feeling the old days. And with Thomas Newman's beautiful and haunting Oscar nominated score to go along with it, you can't help but appreciate this film from Oscar winning director Sam Mendes. So sit back, and enjoy the wild ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 1597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I give 3 stars only for the [[beautiful]] pictures of Africa. The [[rest]] was... well [[pretty]] boring. For about 50min we have the outline of the plot... In War of the worlds, the [[introductory]] part lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real [[action]]! This is something like:"Let's take a walk in the [[savanna]] and gasp at the beautiful sunsets!". And [[maybe]] deliver a message, like "Don't kill elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[new]]" [[Steven]] Segal [[movie]], not from this... The leading actress makes me think about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much foundation! And I didn't see one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century woman! And in the bar, where they seek up our hero, Swayze makes a comment about the commander that he looks like Dracula. [[Hmmm]], Bram Stoker wrote his book and published it in 1896, and it became famous in the next years. Livingstone and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. So unless the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I would cuddle with a nut, but you get the point. He really manages to have that beaten puppy look on his face on several occasions. The movie stank. Way too long and increasingly [[boring]]. don't watch it! Don't buy it! It's a waste of your money! I give 3 stars only for the [[wondrous]] pictures of Africa. The [[resting]] was... well [[quite]] boring. For about 50min we have the outline of the plot... In War of the worlds, the [[upfront]] part lasted, oh, about 10min? Then was real [[efforts]]! This is something like:"Let's take a walk in the [[marshy]] and gasp at the beautiful sunsets!". And [[conceivably]] deliver a message, like "Don't kill elephants!". Very ecological. I would have expected this out of a "[[newest]]" [[Stephane]] Segal [[films]], not from this... The leading actress makes me think about artificial sun-tan, dyed hair and too much foundation! And I didn't see one scene where her hair is messed up, or she sweats, or her clothes are dusty. She just doesn't look like a 19 century woman! And in the bar, where they seek up our hero, Swayze makes a comment about the commander that he looks like Dracula. [[Mhm]], Bram Stoker wrote his book and published it in 1896, and it became famous in the next years. Livingstone and other explorers went to central Africa from 1840 to 1880. So unless the action takes place between 1896 and 1900.. Houston, we have a problem. :) Swayze makes a nice impression.. as a nutshell - hard on the outside, but soft and cuddly on the inside. Not that I would cuddle with a nut, but you get the point. He really manages to have that beaten puppy look on his face on several occasions. The movie stank. Way too long and increasingly [[bored]]. don't watch it! Don't buy it! It's a waste of your money! --------------------------------------------- Result 1598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Don't even bother with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a classic) it's down right [[awful]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 movie is bad when compared to the book. This is silly, movies should never be judged against the books they are taken from. They are 2 completely different art forms (as if this needed to be pointed out but apparently it does). If you used this criteria for all movies then "2001" would suck and so would "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". Don't even bother with this movie, it's bad when judged on it's own merits, but when compared to the 1972 original (which IS a classic) it's down right [[scary]]. And BTW, somebody commented that the 1972 movie is bad when compared to the book. This is silly, movies should never be judged against the books they are taken from. They are 2 completely different art forms (as if this needed to be pointed out but apparently it does). If you used this criteria for all movies then "2001" would suck and so would "Forest Gump" and "Silence of the Lambs". --------------------------------------------- Result 1599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] ***SPOILERS*** Like some [[evil]] Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance double-play [[combination]] we have in "Omen IV" the [[evil]] seed of the deceased AntiChrist Damien Thorn come back. Terrorizing his parents his schoolmates his neighbors and finally the entire world as a she named Delia York, Asia Vieila. After being given to a "deserving" couple the Yorks Karen & Gene, Fay Grant & Michael Woods,by the Catholic Church's St. Francis orphanage.

Little Delia didn't waste any time making her peasants felt by scratching her mom at a house party. Later Delia almost get killed by a runaway truck only to have herself saved by this "Devil Dog" named Ryder. Going to school Delia takes care of the local bully by getting the big guy to wet himself in front of all his classmates. Later when his father threatens the Yorks with a law suit she has his head sliced off in a self-induced traffic accident! Delia is someone that you never mess with if you know what's good for you.

Meanwhile Dalia's dad Gene becomes a big man in town on his own, or so he thinks, by getting elected to the congress as a champion of the clean air and green trees crowd instead of letting the smog and concrete boys take over the neighborhood with his eye now on he White House itself! Did his bratty and strange daughter Delia have anything to do with Gene York's sudden good fortune?

It's only later when Jo, Ann Hearen, is hired as Delia's nanny that the truth's comes out about her strange and evil powers. Jo a New Age type realizes that Delia is a bit weird, after turning all her white crystals black, and calls her New Age Guru Noah, Jim Byrnes, to come over and check her out. Noah is so upset by what he sees in Delia Kirilian color vibrations ,all black and blue with a little pinch of red, that it flips him out so bad that he almost crashed into Delia's moms car.

Taken on a trip to a psychic festival by Jo Delia turns the entire event into an inferno setting the place, through mental telepathy, on fire and heaving everyone there run for cover including poor Noah who was at the festival and ended up with his leg broken. The and shaken and battered Guru was so shook up by the whole experience that he later checked out of the country to become a hermit in the Tibetan wilderness.

Jo herself is later thrown out, with the help of the sweet and cuddly family pet Ryder, of a second floor window to her death because she knew and talked too much. It's when Karen is again pregnant that she decides, finally, to find out the truth about the real parents of Delia. That's when she,and we in the audience, come face to face with the truth. She's not only the feared AntiChrist of Revelations she's his twin sister! Her brother the AntiChrist himself is about to come on the scene as her kid brother the sill unborn Alexander York!

Three times were more then enough for the AntiChrist coming back to earth to bring about Armageddon. The movie going public were already getting a little tired of of him and his evil adventures. With a fourth really not necessary since Daimen Thorn, the original AntiChrist, had been dead and buried for years. Were put through the usual ringer with no one believing that little Delia is "Thee" AntiChrist until it was almost too late to stop her in her deadly rounds of destroying the entire human race. The movie as bad as it is is also far too long, 97 minutes, for a horror flick that could well have told it's story is as little as 80 minutes.

Having a private eye Earl Knight, Mchael Learner,and later a former Catholic nun sister Yvonne,Megan Lehch,and now faith healer Felichy in the film only to be killed off didn't help the plot either. It only prolonged the suffering of those of us watching the movie. You could see the surprise ending coming almost as soon as the film "Omen IV" began with the bases being cleared for Delia's eventual takeover of the civilized as well as uncivilized world. What was a bit of a surprise was Delia doing it with a little help from friends. ***SPOILERS*** Like some [[viciousness]] Tinkers-to-Evers-to-Chance double-play [[tandem]] we have in "Omen IV" the [[unholy]] seed of the deceased AntiChrist Damien Thorn come back. Terrorizing his parents his schoolmates his neighbors and finally the entire world as a she named Delia York, Asia Vieila. After being given to a "deserving" couple the Yorks Karen & Gene, Fay Grant & Michael Woods,by the Catholic Church's St. Francis orphanage.

Little Delia didn't waste any time making her peasants felt by scratching her mom at a house party. Later Delia almost get killed by a runaway truck only to have herself saved by this "Devil Dog" named Ryder. Going to school Delia takes care of the local bully by getting the big guy to wet himself in front of all his classmates. Later when his father threatens the Yorks with a law suit she has his head sliced off in a self-induced traffic accident! Delia is someone that you never mess with if you know what's good for you.

Meanwhile Dalia's dad Gene becomes a big man in town on his own, or so he thinks, by getting elected to the congress as a champion of the clean air and green trees crowd instead of letting the smog and concrete boys take over the neighborhood with his eye now on he White House itself! Did his bratty and strange daughter Delia have anything to do with Gene York's sudden good fortune?

It's only later when Jo, Ann Hearen, is hired as Delia's nanny that the truth's comes out about her strange and evil powers. Jo a New Age type realizes that Delia is a bit weird, after turning all her white crystals black, and calls her New Age Guru Noah, Jim Byrnes, to come over and check her out. Noah is so upset by what he sees in Delia Kirilian color vibrations ,all black and blue with a little pinch of red, that it flips him out so bad that he almost crashed into Delia's moms car.

Taken on a trip to a psychic festival by Jo Delia turns the entire event into an inferno setting the place, through mental telepathy, on fire and heaving everyone there run for cover including poor Noah who was at the festival and ended up with his leg broken. The and shaken and battered Guru was so shook up by the whole experience that he later checked out of the country to become a hermit in the Tibetan wilderness.

Jo herself is later thrown out, with the help of the sweet and cuddly family pet Ryder, of a second floor window to her death because she knew and talked too much. It's when Karen is again pregnant that she decides, finally, to find out the truth about the real parents of Delia. That's when she,and we in the audience, come face to face with the truth. She's not only the feared AntiChrist of Revelations she's his twin sister! Her brother the AntiChrist himself is about to come on the scene as her kid brother the sill unborn Alexander York!

Three times were more then enough for the AntiChrist coming back to earth to bring about Armageddon. The movie going public were already getting a little tired of of him and his evil adventures. With a fourth really not necessary since Daimen Thorn, the original AntiChrist, had been dead and buried for years. Were put through the usual ringer with no one believing that little Delia is "Thee" AntiChrist until it was almost too late to stop her in her deadly rounds of destroying the entire human race. The movie as bad as it is is also far too long, 97 minutes, for a horror flick that could well have told it's story is as little as 80 minutes.

Having a private eye Earl Knight, Mchael Learner,and later a former Catholic nun sister Yvonne,Megan Lehch,and now faith healer Felichy in the film only to be killed off didn't help the plot either. It only prolonged the suffering of those of us watching the movie. You could see the surprise ending coming almost as soon as the film "Omen IV" began with the bases being cleared for Delia's eventual takeover of the civilized as well as uncivilized world. What was a bit of a surprise was Delia doing it with a little help from friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 1600 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Another [[demonstration]] of Kurosawa's [[genius]], his first [[colour]] film is a darkly [[surreal]] [[look]] into the [[tragic]] [[lives]] of [[Tokyo]] slum [[dwellers]], [[essentially]] a [[series]] of interweaving vignettes [[depicting]] [[several]] [[groups]] of people eking out a [[perilous]] existence in a [[harsh]] and [[uncaring]] post-war [[shanty]] [[town]]. Swinging from [[comedy]] to tragedy and back, this [[film]] shows how people [[deal]] with the [[worst]] [[kind]] of life each in their own [[way]], [[mostly]] [[retreating]] into themselves and [[living]] in the fantasy [[worlds]] of their own [[heads]], [[withdrawing]] [[emotionally]] from those [[around]] them or [[drowning]] themselves in [[alcohol]]. [[Mixing]] kitchen-sink [[realism]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa toys [[expertly]] with the [[emotions]] of his audience, drawing [[tears]] and [[laughter]] with equal deftness. A [[wonderful]], draining [[experience]]. Another [[protesting]] of Kurosawa's [[prodigy]], his first [[dye]] film is a darkly [[bizarre]] [[gaze]] into the [[dire]] [[life]] of [[Tokio]] slum [[residents]], [[overwhelmingly]] a [[serial]] of interweaving vignettes [[detailing]] [[assorted]] [[panel]] of people eking out a [[hazardous]] existence in a [[stringent]] and [[oblivious]] post-war [[hovel]] [[cities]]. Swinging from [[travesty]] to tragedy and back, this [[cinematic]] shows how people [[addressing]] with the [[lousiest]] [[genre]] of life each in their own [[path]], [[essentially]] [[retreats]] into themselves and [[vida]] in the fantasy [[universe]] of their own [[chiefs]], [[withdraws]] [[excitedly]] from those [[about]] them or [[sinks]] themselves in [[beverage]]. [[Amalgam]] kitchen-sink [[realist]] with Kabuki-esque theatrics, Kurosawa toys [[deftly]] with the [[sentiments]] of his audience, drawing [[sobs]] and [[chuckles]] with equal deftness. A [[glamorous]], draining [[experiences]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]]

Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[first]] Royal [[Premiere]] after WWII.

[[Remarkably]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund Freud Psychology, the Founding fathers of America and various others up the long stairs (special effects in its [[infancy]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[losing]] any of its integrity.

[[Although]] sounding absurd, this [[clever]] script leads and [[dances]] the viewer between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a presents a charming ease rarely matched in cinema since.

Be prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love story. Roger Livesey acts like a man possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those early post war years.



Filmed just after the war, this story was made in order to highlight Anglo-American relations after the war. It ended up receiving the honour of being the [[frst]] Royal [[Debut]] after WWII.

[[Unimaginably]] the film tangles together the Royal Air Force, Sigmund Freud Psychology, the Founding fathers of America and various others up the long stairs (special effects in its [[debut]]) and beyond the heavenly gates without [[loosing]] any of its integrity.

[[While]] sounding absurd, this [[malin]] script leads and [[dancing]] the viewer between heaven and earth with the skill of a mountain goat and a presents a charming ease rarely matched in cinema since.

Be prepared to have your heart warmed by this sweet, innocent and charming love story. Roger Livesey acts like a man possessed to steal the show!!!!

British Cinema should cry when it remembers how good it used to be in those early post war years.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Need a lesson in pure, abject failure?? Look no further than "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom", an abysmal, dirt-poor, disgrace of a flick. As we all know, decent moovies tend to sprout horrible, horrible offspring: "Halloween" begat many, many bad 80's slasher flicks; "Mad Max" begat many, many bad 80's "futuristic wasteland fantasy" flicks; and "Conan the Barbarian" begat a whole slew of terrible, horrible, incredibly bad 80's sword-and-sorcery flicks. "Wizards of the Lost Kingdom" scrapes the bottom of that 80's barrel, in a way that's truly insulting to barrels. A young runt named Simon recaptured his "good kingdom" from an evil sorcerer with the help of a mangy rug, a garden gnome, a topless bimbo mermaid, and a tired-looking, pudgy Bo Svenson. Svenson("North Dallas Forty", "Inglorious Bastards", "Delta Force"), a long-time b-moovie muscleman, looks barely able to swing his aluminum foil sword. However, he manages to defeat the forces of evil, which consist of the evil sorcerer, "Shurka", and his army of badly costumed monsters, giants, and midgets. At one point, a paper mache bat on a string attacks, but is eaten by a 1/2 hidden sock puppet, pitifully presented as some sort of dragon. The beginning of the film consists of what can only politely be described as bits of scenes scooped up from the cutting-room floor of udder bad moovies, stitched together in the vain hope of setting the scene for the film, and over-earnestly narrated by some guy who never appears again. Words cannot properly convey the jaw-dropping cheapness of this film; the producers probably spent moore moolah feeding Svenson's ever expanding gullet than on the cheesy fx of this flick. And we're talkin' Brie here, folks... :=8P Director Hector Olivera("Barbarian Queen") presents this mish-mash in a hopelessly confused, confuddled, and cliched manner, destroying any possible hint of clear, linear storytelling. The acting is dreadful, the production levels below shoe-string, and the plot is one tired cliche after another paraded before our weary eyes. That they actually made a sequel(!!!) makes the MooCow's brain whirl. James Horner's("Braveheart", "Titanic","The Rock") cheesy moosic from "Battle Beyond the Stars" was lifted, screaming and kicking, and mercilessly grafted onto this turkey - bet this one doesn't pop up on his resume. Folks, you gotta see this to believe it. The MooCow says as a cheapo rent when there is NOTHING else to watch, well, it's moore fun than watching dust bunnies mate. Barely. :=8P --------------------------------------------- Result 1603 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I don't [[really]] know where to [[start]]. The acting in this [[movie]] was really [[terrible]], I can't [[remember]] [[seeing]] so [[many]] 'actors' in one [[film]] that weren't able to [[act]]. Not only the acting was [[bad]], the [[characters]] were [[incredibly]] [[stupid]] as well.

Then there's the [[action]]. I [[believe]] that even [[children]] [[know]] that when [[someone]] [[gets]] [[shot]], there's blood [[involved]]. But when [[someone]] [[gets]] [[shot]] in Snitch'd for ten (!!) times, there's no [[blood]] at all. Well, I [[guess]] that's just me.

To make a [[long]] [[story]] short (because [[believe]] me, I can go on for [[hours]] about this [[film]]), this is without a [[doubt]] the [[worst]] [[film]] I ever [[saw]]. This [[film]] should be number 1 in the bottom 100 without a doubt. I don't [[truly]] know where to [[initiation]]. The acting in this [[cinematography]] was really [[scary]], I can't [[recall]] [[see]] so [[several]] 'actors' in one [[cinematography]] that weren't able to [[ley]]. Not only the acting was [[amiss]], the [[trait]] were [[tremendously]] [[moronic]] as well.

Then there's the [[efforts]]. I [[reckon]] that even [[enfants]] [[savoir]] that when [[everybody]] [[attains]] [[offed]], there's blood [[entangled]]. But when [[anybody]] [[got]] [[offed]] in Snitch'd for ten (!!) times, there's no [[chrissakes]] at all. Well, I [[reckon]] that's just me.

To make a [[longue]] [[stories]] short (because [[believing]] me, I can go on for [[hour]] about this [[films]]), this is without a [[duda]] the [[meanest]] [[cinematography]] I ever [[noticed]]. This [[cinematography]] should be number 1 in the bottom 100 without a doubt. --------------------------------------------- Result 1604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Uta Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard textbook in many college theater courses. In the book, Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. In the Presentational approach, the actor focuses on realizing the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. In the Representational approach, the actor tries to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational approach to acting was still partially in vogue when this [[Hamlet]] was made. British theater has a long history of this style of acting, and Olivier could be said to be the ultimate king of the Representational school.

Time has not been kind to this school of acting, or to this [[movie]]. Nearly every working actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern eye, Olivier's highly enunciated, stylized delivery is stodgy, stiff and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that would have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the movie creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[unintentionally]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of note in this Hamlet, putting in a good essay at the Queen, despite the painfully obvious age differences (he was 41; she was 26). The other actors in this movie have no chance to get anything else of significance done, given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the camera! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the insecurity of the Shakespearean stage actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." Uta Hagen's "Respect for Acting" is the standard textbook in many college theater courses. In the book, Hagen presents two fundamentally different approaches to developing a character as an actor: the Presentational approach, and the Representational approach. In the Presentational approach, the actor focuses on realizing the character as honestly as possible, by introducing emotional elements from the actor's own life. In the Representational approach, the actor tries to present the effect of an emotion, through a high degree of control of movement and sound.

The Representational approach to acting was still partially in vogue when this [[Hamlets]] was made. British theater has a long history of this style of acting, and Olivier could be said to be the ultimate king of the Representational school.

Time has not been kind to this school of acting, or to this [[cinematography]]. Nearly every working actor today uses a Presentational approach. To the modern eye, Olivier's highly enunciated, stylized delivery is stodgy, stiff and stilted. Instead of creating an internally conflicted Hamlet, Olivier made a declaiming, self-important bullhorn out of the melancholy Dane -- an acting style that would have carried well to the backs of the larger London theaters, but is far too starchy to carry off a modern Hamlet.

And so the movie creaks along ungainfully today. Olivier's tendency to e-nun-ci-ate makes some of Hamlet's lines [[unwittingly]] funny: "In-stead, you must ac-quire and be-get a tem-purr-ance that may give it... Smooth-ness!" Instead of crying at meeting his father's ghost (as any proper actor could), bright fill lights in Olivier's pupils give us that impression.

Eileen Herlie is the only other actor of note in this Hamlet, putting in a good essay at the Queen, despite the painfully obvious age differences (he was 41; she was 26). The other actors in this movie have no chance to get anything else of significance done, given Olivier's tendency to want to keep! the camera! on him! at all! times!

Sixty years later, you feel the insecurity of the Shakespearean stage actor who lacked the confidence to portray a breakable, flawed Hamlet, and instead elected to portray a sort of Elizabethan bullhorn. Final analysis: "I would have such a fellow whipped for o'er-doing Termagant; it out-herods Herod: pray you, avoid it." --------------------------------------------- Result 1605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[All]] you need to [[know]] about this [[film]] [[happens]] in the first five [[minutes]]: it [[looks]] cool, it has a [[solid]] [[original]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[period]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[get]] that message, you [[may]] as well [[switch]] to another [[film]].

Davies's [[protagonist]] [[ignores]] his [[beautiful]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[life]] who cares about him. [[Then]] by the [[time]] he [[takes]] her [[advice]] to [[join]] her in the [[real]] world--instead of [[living]] a [[fantasy]] [[film]] of which he's the imagined director--he does so by [[pushing]] her aside and [[pairing]] up with an [[actress]] he's [[idealized]] beyond reason. A [[couple]] [[laughs]] and some thoughtful art [[direction]] are the only [[things]] worth watching here.

The [[film]] is [[also]] interesting as [[documentation]] of Jason Schwartzman's [[fall]] from Mount Rushmore. [[In]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's [[annoying]] brattiness was [[something]] to be [[overcome]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's [[family]] connection [[clearly]] [[landed]] him in this role; here's [[hoping]] his [[choices]] [[improve]]. [[Every]] you need to [[savoir]] about this [[cinematography]] [[comes]] in the first five [[mins]]: it [[seem]] cool, it has a [[robust]] [[upfront]] soundtrack reflective of the late-60s [[deadline]], and all but a couple of its characters are unlikeable. Once you [[obtain]] that message, you [[maggio]] as well [[switches]] to another [[cinematography]].

Davies's [[player]] [[despises]] his [[superb]] girlfriend, one of the few people in his [[lifetime]] who cares about him. [[Later]] by the [[moment]] he [[pick]] her [[guidance]] to [[joined]] her in the [[genuine]] world--instead of [[residing]] a [[fantasia]] [[cinematography]] of which he's the imagined director--he does so by [[prompting]] her aside and [[matches]] up with an [[actor]] he's [[modelled]] beyond reason. A [[matches]] [[laughed]] and some thoughtful art [[directions]] are the only [[matters]] worth watching here.

The [[cinematography]] is [[apart]] interesting as [[documentary]] of Jason Schwartzman's [[drop]] from Mount Rushmore. [[During]] Rushmore, Schwartzman's [[vexing]] brattiness was [[anything]] to be [[overcoming]], but here it's his character's only quality. Schwartzman's [[families]] connection [[unequivocally]] [[disembarked]] him in this role; here's [[awaits]] his [[selects]] [[improved]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1606 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Of [[life]] in (some) [[colleges]]. Of course there were [[artistic]] licenses taken, but some of what you saw in this [[film]] go on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the races pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are schools that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when [[class]] lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for class, they (students) seem to just hang around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not really. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? Exaggerated? Maybe. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just hang around with their own DOES happen. Minus the Hollywood exaggerations, the race thing hit pretty close to home for me. Of [[living]] in (some) [[academia]]. Of course there were [[arty]] licenses taken, but some of what you saw in this [[flick]] go on in some colleges.

I went to colleges in Southern California where the races pretty much hang around with their own. It's funny because these are schools that want racial unity, equality etc. and I can honestly say, that it's there. But the thing is when [[kinds]] lets out, or when they're just hanging out waiting for class, they (students) seem to just hang around with people of their own race or ethnicity. Is that bad? Not really. Everyone needs a feeling of belonging. But like the school paper of one of the schools I attended once wrote about that, "we should all try to hang around with students of other ethnicities and try to know them." Otherwise you're creating your own segregation.

Racism certainly existed in one of those schools I attended. One time someone put leaflets around campus talking about the glories of the Aryan Race and had the symbols of some of those racist organizations. Fortunately, nothing happened like the incident in the movie where the young Caucasian man went off and started shooting at a multiculturalism gathering.

I can only hope and pray that nothing like that ever will happen.

So is "Higher Learning" overly dramatic? Exaggerated? Maybe. Is it way "off mark?" It depends on where you went to or go to school. The race thing where the ethnicities just hang around with their own DOES happen. Minus the Hollywood exaggerations, the race thing hit pretty close to home for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a confused and [[incoherent]] mess of [[interminable]] scenes of boring [[dialogues]] and [[monologues]]. That is no [[exaggeration]]: you have to [[make]] a tremendous [[effort]] to even [[try]] to become [[involved]] with it.

I [[sincerely]] thought Fassbinder would [[make]] [[something]] interesting in order to [[tell]] why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in [[every]] scene somebody is [[trying]] to explain: "when he was [[young]], this happened..." and "he just [[came]] back from Casablanca and ordered to [[cut]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a slaughter house talking with a friend prostitute (certainly a slaughter house is the best place for a pleasant little chat), and while telling her the story of Elvira's life, Fassbinder shows the [[killing]] of one cow after the other. It is difficult to choose between giving attention to the [[disturbing]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very [[forced]] and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to [[die]]".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- indulgence. This is a confused and [[inconsistent]] mess of [[infinite]] scenes of boring [[dialog]] and [[monologue]]. That is no [[overstatement]]: you have to [[deliver]] a tremendous [[endeavour]] to even [[attempts]] to become [[entangled]] with it.

I [[cordially]] thought Fassbinder would [[deliver]] [[somethings]] interesting in order to [[told]] why does Erwin/Elvira suicides at the end, but instead of this, in [[all]] scene somebody is [[try]] to explain: "when he was [[youthful]], this happened..." and "he just [[became]] back from Casablanca and ordered to [[chopping]] everything down there...", etc.

Soon in the movie, Erwin/Elvira is in a slaughter house talking with a friend prostitute (certainly a slaughter house is the best place for a pleasant little chat), and while telling her the story of Elvira's life, Fassbinder shows the [[manslaughter]] of one cow after the other. It is difficult to choose between giving attention to the [[bewildering]] images or what the transvestite is saying. Of course we come to the very [[compelled]] and coarse symbolism of "I have suffered much in my life, and am about to [[dead]]".

In one of the sparse moments where actually happens something, Erwin/Elvira encounters a former lover, that only after performing a extremely gay choreography with two other guys (as if going for the necessary level of homosexuality) is that he recognizes Elvira.

There are some interesting shots and ideas, I must admit (such as when the nun tells the story of the young Erwin), but everything on the movie is wasted due to Fassbinder's self- indulgence. --------------------------------------------- Result 1608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Radiofreccia" is still a [[good]] [[surprise]] in [[Italian]] cinema. The [[film]] is [[based]] on a [[book]] of Italian [[songwriter]] Luciano Ligabue, who [[also]] directs the movie and [[writes]] the music [[score]] -of course.

The film is a [[portrait]] of north Italian province [[life]], in the [[Emilia]] Romagna region. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radios]] -one of the [[boys]] of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Youth]] [[wishes]], friendship, love, sex, individual dramas and unemployment are among the themes, but the [[film]] speaks [[also]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of [[heroin]] slavery.

Without being [[boring]] and moralist, the story flows very well; the spontaneity of [[actors]] is [[strong]] and the [[way]] of directing as well. Obviously Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[neither]] Fellini nor a [[movie]] [[professional]], [[first]] of all he's a musician. But he succeeds in making a good [[product]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the success with his [[second]] movie "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[In]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only star is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most popular young Italian [[actors]]. See in a [[small]] role another [[Italian]] [[songwriter]] -[[Francesco]] Guccini, he's the [[nice]] communist barman and football [[trainer]]! "Radiofreccia" is still a [[alright]] [[surprising]] in [[Ltalian]] cinema. The [[flick]] is [[predicated]] on a [[ledger]] of Italian [[composers]] Luciano Ligabue, who [[additionally]] directs the movie and [[typed]] the music [[notation]] -of course.

The film is a [[portrayal]] of north Italian province [[iife]], in the [[Amelia]] Romagna region. We're in 1975, the time of the first free [[radio]] -one of the [[grooms]] of the movie creates "Radioraptus". [[Youthful]] [[desires]], friendship, love, sex, individual dramas and unemployment are among the themes, but the [[filmmaking]] speaks [[similarly]] about drugs -Freccia, the main character, is a victim of [[smack]] slavery.

Without being [[dreary]] and moralist, the story flows very well; the spontaneity of [[players]] is [[vigorous]] and the [[routing]] of directing as well. Obviously Luciano "Liga" Ligabue is [[either]] Fellini nor a [[cinema]] [[occupational]], [[outset]] of all he's a musician. But he succeeds in making a good [[merchandise]]. Unfortunately he'll not repeat the success with his [[secondly]] movie "Da zero a dieci" -not good at all.

[[During]] "Radiofreccia" actors are generally not very famous, the only star is Stefano Accorsi -one of the most popular young Italian [[players]]. See in a [[scant]] role another [[Ltalian]] [[composers]] -[[Francisco]] Guccini, he's the [[handsome]] communist barman and football [[trainers]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This was the [[first]] regular filmed Columbo movie episode but [[yet]] it aired as the second, after Steven Spielberg's "Columbo: Murder by the Book". It's also at the same time [[among]] one of the [[better]] ones!

Bernard L. Kowalski was one great creative director! No wonder that they later [[asked]] him to direct three more Columbo movies. The [[movie]] has some [[real]] creative and innovative shot sequences and the [[movie]] as a [[whole]] is [[also]] [[clearly]] made with style, [[passion]] and eye for detail. [[Every]] shot [[connects]] and is a reason why this [[movie]] is better and also better looking just any other average made for TV movie. It's definitely one of the better directed Columbo movies.

It's a quit original Columbo entry for a couple of reasons. The murder is more or less an accident and was an impulsive act. So the killer this time doesn't have any time to plan out the 'perfect murder' in advance and his to clean up any of the traces afterward and has to dispose the body. The killer in this movie is not only being handled as the man who committed the crime but more as the man who helps out Lieutenant Columbo to solve the murder. It makes the character a more interesting and layered one as well and also helps to make the way Columbo solves the whole crime seem way more interesting as well because of that. Of course Columbo starts to suspect him pretty early on and as always he comes to solution by making himself vulnerable and look more stupid than he of course truly is and by gaining the killer's trust. This is obviously no spoiler since this is the way every Columbo movie gets set-up. I liked the story of the movie and how it progressed.

It also helps the movie that it has such a fine cast. At the time of this movie Peter Falk had really made the Columbo character his own and the character at this was already fully developed. Robert Culp is truly great as the short tempered Brimmer. Funny thing is that he would later star in three different Columbo movies again and one "Mrs. Columbo" episode, only in totally different roles. He even played the murderer in a couple of those movies as well again. He by the way was not the only actor that did this in other later Columbo movies. Also the great Ray Milland makes an appearance in this movie, as the husband of the victim.

All in all, a real great early Columbo movie and among the better ones out of the long running series of movies.

9/10 This was the [[frst]] regular filmed Columbo movie episode but [[even]] it aired as the second, after Steven Spielberg's "Columbo: Murder by the Book". It's also at the same time [[between]] one of the [[optimum]] ones!

Bernard L. Kowalski was one great creative director! No wonder that they later [[asks]] him to direct three more Columbo movies. The [[movies]] has some [[actual]] creative and innovative shot sequences and the [[films]] as a [[total]] is [[moreover]] [[overtly]] made with style, [[enthusiasm]] and eye for detail. [[Any]] shot [[binds]] and is a reason why this [[filmmaking]] is better and also better looking just any other average made for TV movie. It's definitely one of the better directed Columbo movies.

It's a quit original Columbo entry for a couple of reasons. The murder is more or less an accident and was an impulsive act. So the killer this time doesn't have any time to plan out the 'perfect murder' in advance and his to clean up any of the traces afterward and has to dispose the body. The killer in this movie is not only being handled as the man who committed the crime but more as the man who helps out Lieutenant Columbo to solve the murder. It makes the character a more interesting and layered one as well and also helps to make the way Columbo solves the whole crime seem way more interesting as well because of that. Of course Columbo starts to suspect him pretty early on and as always he comes to solution by making himself vulnerable and look more stupid than he of course truly is and by gaining the killer's trust. This is obviously no spoiler since this is the way every Columbo movie gets set-up. I liked the story of the movie and how it progressed.

It also helps the movie that it has such a fine cast. At the time of this movie Peter Falk had really made the Columbo character his own and the character at this was already fully developed. Robert Culp is truly great as the short tempered Brimmer. Funny thing is that he would later star in three different Columbo movies again and one "Mrs. Columbo" episode, only in totally different roles. He even played the murderer in a couple of those movies as well again. He by the way was not the only actor that did this in other later Columbo movies. Also the great Ray Milland makes an appearance in this movie, as the husband of the victim.

All in all, a real great early Columbo movie and among the better ones out of the long running series of movies.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] "House Of Games" is definitely not without its flaws- plot holes, stiff acting, final scenes- but they do [[little]] to [[detract]] from the [[fun]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your [[head]]. "House Of Games" does almost everything a good [[thriller]] is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a huge feat given the fact that we're dealing with the the world of confidence men and the cons they perpetrate. So it stands to reason that we never really know what's going on, even though we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[film]] [[worthwhile]] for those who are game; a film for which repeated viewings are indulgences instead if necessities.

It has a definite Hitchcock slant to it. The film draws on some similar themes found his 1964 effort "Marnie", considered a misfire when released but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking works. One could easily consider the idea of Lindsay Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten year later perhaps. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive behaviors which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's repressed, up-tight character says, "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality Check on a low setting and enjoy swimming with the sharks! "House Of Games" is definitely not without its flaws- plot holes, stiff acting, final scenes- but they do [[scant]] to [[divert]] from the [[droll]] of watching a thriller that so methodically messes with your [[jefe]]. "House Of Games" does almost everything a good [[thrillers]] is supposed to do. Of course, this is not a huge feat given the fact that we're dealing with the the world of confidence men and the cons they perpetrate. So it stands to reason that we never really know what's going on, even though we think that we do. But that's what makes the [[kino]] [[valid]] for those who are game; a film for which repeated viewings are indulgences instead if necessities.

It has a definite Hitchcock slant to it. The film draws on some similar themes found his 1964 effort "Marnie", considered a misfire when released but now regarded as one of the Master's more thought-provoking works. One could easily consider the idea of Lindsay Crouse's character being the same as Tippi Hedrin's...ten year later perhaps. Both are strong-willed loners, both with compulsive behaviors which compel them to walk too close to the shark pool. As Crouse's repressed, up-tight character says, "What's life without adventure?" Put your Reality Check on a low setting and enjoy swimming with the sharks! --------------------------------------------- Result 1611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (62%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Stan]] Laurel and Oliver Hardy had [[extensive]] (separate) film careers before they were eventually teamed. [[For]] many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Babe]] Hardy ... and throughout his adult life, Hardy was known to his friends as 'Babe'. While touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall act for Bernard Delfont, Hardy gave an interview to journalist John McCabe in which he explained the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a shave from a gay hairdresser who squeezed Hardy's plump cheeks (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

Although much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very dire indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and Runt: names which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. Seen here, Hardy looks much as he does in his early Hal Roach films with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and Runt epic, is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this film has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. [[Stanley]] Laurel and Oliver Hardy had [[comprehensive]] (separate) film careers before they were eventually teamed. [[During]] many of Ollie's pre-Stan films, he was billed on screen as [[Babies]] Hardy ... and throughout his adult life, Hardy was known to his friends as 'Babe'. While touring postwar Britain with Laurel in a music-hall act for Bernard Delfont, Hardy gave an interview to journalist John McCabe in which he explained the origin of this nickname: early in his acting career, Hardy got a shave from a gay hairdresser who squeezed Hardy's plump cheeks (the ones on his face) and said 'Nice baby!' Hardy's workmates started crying him 'Babe', and the nickname stuck.

Although much of Hardy's pre-Laurel work is very interesting -- notably his comedy roles in support of Larry Semon and the Chaplin imitator Billy West -- his teamwork with Billy Ruge (who?) in a series of low-budget shorts for the Vim Comedy Film Company is very dire indeed. Hardy and Ruge were given the screen names Plump and Runt: names which are unpleasant in their own right, but made worse because Ruge (although shorter than Hardy) isn't especially a runt. Seen here, Hardy looks much as he does in his early Hal Roach films with Laurel ... but without the spit curls and the fastidious little moustache.

'One Too Many', an absolutely typical Plunt and Runt epic, is direly unfunny ... and its dreichness is made even more conspicuous by the fact that this film has exactly the same premise as 'That's My Wife', one of Laurel and Hardy's most hilarious films. Plump (Hardy) is the star boarder in a rooming-house run by a tall gawky landlady. Runt (Ruge) is the porter. Plump receives a letter from his wealthy uncle John, whose dosh he expects to inherit. His uncle is coming to see him and to meet Plump's wife and baby. There's only one problem: Plump hasn't got a wife and baby. He's been lying to his uncle in order to seem a family man. Now, of course, Plump expects Runt to find him a wife and baby on short notice. Of course, the results are disastrous. It would be nice if those disastrous results were funny, but they aren't. Most of the unfunny humour here is just empty slapstick, with characters settling their arguments by shoving each other into bathtubs.

SPOILERS COMING. Vim director Will Louis (who?) shows no instinct for camera framing: the actress who plays the landlady is significantly taller than Hardy, and Louis consistently sets up his shots so that her head is out of frame. This could be funny if done on purpose, but it's merely inept. At one point in this bad comedy, an extremely tasteless gag is looming on the horizon as Runt approaches a black laundress. 'Surely they wouldn't stoop THAT low for a laugh,' I thought. But they do. Runt steals the woman's black infant and tries to fob this off as Plump's progeny.

Somehow, Plump acquires an infant's cot, but he still hasn't got a baby. With Uncle John coming up the stairs, Plump conscripts Runt for babyhood. This gag might just possibly have worked with a midget, or even with a truly runt-sized actor such as Chester Conklin, but Billy Ruge is only slightly below average height. Ruge's impersonation of a baby is neither believable nor funny, and Uncle John would have to be a complete moron to fall for it. Amazingly, he does!

The most notable aspect of 'One Too Many' is a brief appearance -- apparently her only-ever film appearance -- by Madelyn Saloshin, Oliver Hardy's first wife. The marriage was not a happy one, although Hardy's marital troubles never attained the epic proportions of Stan Laurel's.

Only one thing in this movie impressed me. There is a very brief flashback sequence, with Hardy reminiscing about his seaside romance with a bathing beauty. In 1916, there was still not yet a standard film grammar for conveying flashbacks: the one shown here is done gracefully and simply. Too bad this movie has no other merits. 'One Too Many' is definitely one film too many on Oliver Hardy's CV, and I'll rate this movie just one point out of 10. Laurel and Hardy together are definitely much funnier than either of them separately. --------------------------------------------- Result 1612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I have watched quite a few Cold Case episodes over the years, beginning with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[particular]] episode was not only the best of the [[best]], but has few rivals in the Emmy categories. Though some may not agree with the story content (i.e. the male-to-male romantic relationship), I doubt that [[anyone]] could watch this without being [[deeply]] moved within their spirit.

The story is essentially about a case that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. Examples include their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's wife watched Coop and Jimmy drink, fight, and then kiss each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only selected items were colored in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One key emotional scene was when Coop was confronted by his father after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. In this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a respected fellow officer on the force, confronts Coop about the rumors surrounding Coop's relationship with Jimmy. One can feel sorry for Coop, at this point, as the shame and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped upon Coop - "You are not going to disgrace our family...and you're not my son, either." - clearly indicative of the hostile views of same-sex relationships of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. I have watched quite a few Cold Case episodes over the years, beginning with Season 1 episodes back in 2003-2004. And while most have been good, this [[specific]] episode was not only the best of the [[nicest]], but has few rivals in the Emmy categories. Though some may not agree with the story content (i.e. the male-to-male romantic relationship), I doubt that [[nobody]] could watch this without being [[crucially]] moved within their spirit.

The story is essentially about a case that was reopened, based on the testimony from a dying drug dealer. The two central actors are two police officers in the 1960's named Sean Coop (aka, the cold case victim who goes by his last name, Coop) and his partner, Jimmy Bruno.

In the story, Coop is single, a Vietnam war vet, with a deeply troubled past. Jimmy, however, is married, with children no less. Both are partners on the police force and form not only a friendship, but a secret romantic relationship that they both must hide from a deeply and obviously homophobic culture prevalent at that time.

The flashback scenes of their lives are mostly in black and white, with bits of color now and then sprinkled throughout. Examples include their red squad car, the yellow curtains gently blowing by the window in Jimmy's bedroom, where Jimmy's wife watched Coop and Jimmy drink, fight, and then kiss each other while being in an alcohol-induced state. I found it interesting that only selected items were colored in the flashback scenes, with everything else in black and white. I still have not figured out the color scheme and rationale.

The clearly homophobic tension between fellow patrol officers and the two central actors only heightens the intensity of the episode. One key emotional scene was when Coop was confronted by his father after the baptism of Jimmy's baby. In this scene, Coop's father, Sarge, who was a respected fellow officer on the force, confronts Coop about the rumors surrounding Coop's relationship with Jimmy. One can feel sorry for Coop, at this point, as the shame and disgrace of Coop's father was heaped upon Coop - "You are not going to disgrace our family...and you're not my son, either." - clearly indicative of the hostile views of same-sex relationships of that era.

Additional tension can also be seen in the police locker room where Coop and another officer go at it after Coop and Jimmy are labeled "Batman and Robin homos".

As for the relationship between Coop and Jimmy, it's obvious that Coop wanted more of Jimmy in his life. Once can see the tension in Jimmy's face as he must choose between his commitment to his wife and kids, his church, and yet his undying devotion to Coop.

In the end, Jimmy walks away from Coop, realizing that he cannot have both Coop and his family at the same time. Sadly, Coop is killed, perhaps because of his relationship with Jimmy, but Coop may also have been killed for his knowledge of drug money and police corruption that reached higher up in the force.

The most moving scene in the whole episode was when Coop, as he sat dying from gunshot wounds in his squad car, quietly spoke his last words over his police radio to his partner: "Jimmy...we were the lucky ones. Don't forget that."

The soundtrack selection was outstanding throughout the episode. I enjoyed the final scene with the actor Chad Everett, playing the still grieving Jimmy, only much older by now, and clearly still missing his former partner, Coop.

I highly recommend this episode and consider it the best. It is without a doubt the most well-written, well-acted, and well done of all Cold Case episodes that I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] It is not an easy [[film]] to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[entirely]] of [[conversations]]. Yet it is so [[incredibly]] [[compelling]] and [[ruthlessly]] observational of the human [[character]], that it is, in my [[humble]] opinion, one of the very greatest films of all [[time]].

The [[film]] is [[depressing]], [[cynical]] and [[cruel]]. (If you [[want]] something [[uplifting]], [[see]] [[Jacques]] Rivette's [[fantastic]] Céline and [[Julie]] [[Go]] [[Boating]], which was [[made]] [[around]] the same [[time]]). It [[shows]] the [[idealism]] of the [[late]] 1960s to be nothing different from the [[society]] that it was [[trying]] to [[change]].

It [[involves]] a [[supposedly]] liberated ménage-à-trois between [[Alexandre]] ([[played]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), Marie ([[Bernadette]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Yet]] [[Alexandre]] is [[shown]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealous]] as any other man. The [[women]] are exposed as being willingly subservient and [[defining]] their femininity through the [[male]] [[gaze]].

The [[film]] is an [[extremely]] [[icy]] [[end]] to the [[highly]] [[revolutionary]] French [[New]] Wave. This [[movement]] was one of the most [[significant]] movements in [[film]] [[history]] and had a profound [[effect]] on [[cinema]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[key]] [[actors]] of the [[New]] Wave, having starred (among other [[films]]) in the influential Les Quatres [[Cent]] Coups (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebellious]] [[teenager]]. [[Director]] Jean Eustache is not as well known as other directors from the [[New]] Wave, but he should be.

There is no [[improvisation]] (unlike in [[John]] Cassavetes's [[similar]] [[films]] made in the US) and the dialogue [[comes]] from real-life [[conversations]]. The [[film]] is resonant with Eustache's personal experiences. [[For]] example, [[Francoise]] Lebrun was a [[former]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[committed]] [[suicide]] in 1981 and the real-life [[person]] that the [[character]] [[Marie]] was [[based]] on, did too. The [[anger]] and [[bitterness]] all culminate in a harrowing monologue by Veronika [[delivered]] directly to the audience, [[breaking]] down the coldly [[objective]] [[nature]] of the [[rest]] of the [[film]]. This [[mesmerising]], personal, and [[honest]] filmic [[statement]] [[remains]] one of the most [[revealing]] [[films]] of [[human]] [[nature]] [[around]]. It is not an easy [[cinema]] to watch - it is over three and a half hours long and it is composed [[abundantly]] of [[talks]]. Yet it is so [[remarkably]] [[convincing]] and [[cruelly]] observational of the human [[nature]], that it is, in my [[lowly]] opinion, one of the very greatest films of all [[times]].

The [[filmmaking]] is [[demoralizing]], [[cynic]] and [[heartless]]. (If you [[wants]] something [[uplift]], [[consults]] [[Terence]] Rivette's [[delightful]] Céline and [[Jolly]] [[Going]] [[Nautical]], which was [[effected]] [[throughout]] the same [[period]]). It [[denotes]] the [[idealist]] of the [[belated]] 1960s to be nothing different from the [[societies]] that it was [[tempting]] to [[modify]].

It [[implies]] a [[apparently]] liberated ménage-à-trois between [[Alexander]] ([[accomplished]] by Jean-Pierre Leaud), Marie ([[Dominguez]] Lafont) and Veronika (Francoise Lebrun). [[Nevertheless]] [[Alexander]] is [[demonstrated]] to be as chauvinistic and [[jealousy]] as any other man. The [[daughters]] are exposed as being willingly subservient and [[define]] their femininity through the [[virile]] [[look]].

The [[cinema]] is an [[insanely]] [[glacial]] [[terminate]] to the [[unimaginably]] [[innovative]] French [[Nouveau]] Wave. This [[movements]] was one of the most [[notable]] movements in [[movie]] [[historian]] and had a profound [[consequences]] on [[theater]] as we know it. Jean-Pierre Leaud was one of the [[critical]] [[actresses]] of the [[Novel]] Wave, having starred (among other [[movie]]) in the influential Les Quatres [[Cents]] Coups (1959) by Francois Truffaut as a [[rebels]] [[juvenile]]. [[Headmaster]] Jean Eustache is not as well known as other directors from the [[Newer]] Wave, but he should be.

There is no [[jam]] (unlike in [[Giovanni]] Cassavetes's [[analogous]] [[cinema]] made in the US) and the dialogue [[arises]] from real-life [[dialogue]]. The [[filmmaking]] is resonant with Eustache's personal experiences. [[At]] example, [[Francois]] Lebrun was a [[old]] lover of Eustache. Eustache himself [[commit]] [[suicidal]] in 1981 and the real-life [[somebody]] that the [[trait]] [[Mary]] was [[founded]] on, did too. The [[ire]] and [[resentment]] all culminate in a harrowing monologue by Veronika [[gave]] directly to the audience, [[violating]] down the coldly [[intent]] [[trait]] of the [[repose]] of the [[cinematography]]. This [[entrancing]], personal, and [[truthful]] filmic [[statements]] [[remained]] one of the most [[uncovering]] [[movie]] of [[mankind]] [[character]] [[about]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1614 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is one of those movies you see in the video store that you just [[HAVE]] to [[get]] because it just looks so [[horribly]] [[bad]]. And [[indeed]], we couldn't [[take]] most of it. There was a [[lot]] of fast-forwarding going on.

But then we came across a scene where Robert Englund [[seduces]] the female protagonist (her [[name]] [[somehow]] [[slips]] my mind at this time). CRIPES. I've never watched a single scene from a film so many times (I'm estimating forty or so). And I've never laughed so hard in my life. You see, Englund has this thing for showing off his loins. I last saw the film a couple months ago, but I can't stop laughing as I type. Anyway, the scene is a montage of shots-- Englund ripping off the lingerie of the girl, Englund riding a horse naked, and some mysterious woman fellating a snake's head. This is absolute genius. You've got to see it for yourself. This is one of those movies you see in the video store that you just [[HAD]] to [[obtain]] because it just looks so [[terribly]] [[naughty]]. And [[actually]], we couldn't [[taking]] most of it. There was a [[lots]] of fast-forwarding going on.

But then we came across a scene where Robert Englund [[seducing]] the female protagonist (her [[behalf]] [[somewhere]] [[slipping]] my mind at this time). CRIPES. I've never watched a single scene from a film so many times (I'm estimating forty or so). And I've never laughed so hard in my life. You see, Englund has this thing for showing off his loins. I last saw the film a couple months ago, but I can't stop laughing as I type. Anyway, the scene is a montage of shots-- Englund ripping off the lingerie of the girl, Englund riding a horse naked, and some mysterious woman fellating a snake's head. This is absolute genius. You've got to see it for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 1615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I expected alot from this movie. Kinda like Lee as a Naustradamous like caracter but instead all I got was a waste of time and a boring movie. I can't even explain this movie. It had wooden acting, terrible script from pieces from the Bible like hurricanes, tidal waves and earthquakes. But that was at the end! The rest of it I had to wait and hope that something meaningfull would happen but it didn't. This movie is about a couple that tries to find out the changes going on in the world like places in China where there was an earthquake and end up at a convent run by eight nuns and a priest. The convent end up being the key to the misshappenings. The whole movie is missleading and boring. One of Lees worst. --------------------------------------------- Result 1616 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] the only scenes wich made me laugh where the ones with christopher walken in it(the crazy filmdirector)the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] was just [[boring]].in the first [[hour]] or so [[nothing]] [[really]] happens.[[jokes]] which supposed to be funny aren't and zeta jones douglas is [[really]] overacting.julia roberts does a [[routine]] job of the former ugly duck (yeah right!) into the [[girl]] next [[door]] (where did i see this before?) who gets the [[guy]].for short.i really didn't care what would happen with the main characters.if cusack really fell of the [[building]] in a suicide attempt the movie [[could]] have been more interresting to watch. the only scenes wich made me laugh where the ones with christopher walken in it(the crazy filmdirector)the [[resting]] of the [[movies]] was just [[bored]].in the first [[hours]] or so [[anything]] [[truthfully]] happens.[[pranks]] which supposed to be funny aren't and zeta jones douglas is [[truthfully]] overacting.julia roberts does a [[regular]] job of the former ugly duck (yeah right!) into the [[daughters]] next [[porte]] (where did i see this before?) who gets the [[pal]].for short.i really didn't care what would happen with the main characters.if cusack really fell of the [[constructing]] in a suicide attempt the movie [[would]] have been more interresting to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1617 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] No doubt, when Madonna and [[Guy]] Ritchie married, it was because they both thought it would [[help]] their [[movie]] [[careers]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that [[level]] it was a match [[made]] in [[hell]]. [[After]] nearly 20 years of trying to become a respected actress (or "octress" as she might have pronounced it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't get out of herself long enough to turn in a performance that [[anyone]] with taste could [[even]] call decent. And that's the thing that makes people dislike her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her audience. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. No doubt, when Madonna and [[Man]] Ritchie married, it was because they both thought it would [[pomoc]] their [[cinematography]] [[career]]. If you've been through the ordeal of watching "Swept Away," then you know at that [[levels]] it was a match [[accomplished]] in [[inferno]]. [[Upon]] nearly 20 years of trying to become a respected actress (or "octress" as she might have pronounced it in "The Next Best Thing"), she still can't get out of herself long enough to turn in a performance that [[everyone]] with taste could [[yet]] call decent. And that's the thing that makes people dislike her so much on the screen: that gut feeling that her ego is so inflated that it prevents her from being able to just let go and connect with her audience. If there's any justice in this universe, she just blew her last chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I had suspicions the movie was going to be bad. I'm a Duke's [[fan]] from [[way]] back. [[Have]] three years of the [[TV]] series on DVD. [[Well]] I was right. Took the [[family]] to [[see]] it. I [[really]] [[wanted]] to see the General [[jump]] again and some of the chase jump scenes were good. But to [[sum]] it up, the [[movie]] was a dumbed down tarted up version of the [[TV]] show.

Jessica Simpson was pathetic. [[While]] I can honestly [[say]] that the [[original]] Daisy's [[outfits]] were just as [[revealing]], Jessica Simpson's interpretation of Daisy was simply [[awful]]. Sorrel Booke and Denver Pyle [[must]] be [[rolling]] in their [[graves]] as well.

Don't waste your money. If you are an [[old]] [[tried]] and [[true]] Dukes [[fan]] like me and my three [[kids]] are you will be very [[disappointed]]. I had suspicions the movie was going to be bad. I'm a Duke's [[breather]] from [[manner]] back. [[Has]] three years of the [[TELEVISION]] series on DVD. [[Good]] I was right. Took the [[familia]] to [[seeing]] it. I [[truthfully]] [[wants]] to see the General [[jumps]] again and some of the chase jump scenes were good. But to [[somme]] it up, the [[kino]] was a dumbed down tarted up version of the [[TELEVISION]] show.

Jessica Simpson was pathetic. [[Despite]] I can honestly [[says]] that the [[upfront]] Daisy's [[getup]] were just as [[uncovering]], Jessica Simpson's interpretation of Daisy was simply [[scary]]. Sorrel Booke and Denver Pyle [[owes]] be [[roll]] in their [[burials]] as well.

Don't waste your money. If you are an [[former]] [[attempted]] and [[genuine]] Dukes [[ventilator]] like me and my three [[juvenile]] are you will be very [[frustrating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] David Mamet's film debut has been hailed by many as a [[real]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the first time recently and couldn't [[understand]] what was [[supposed]] to be so [[great]] about it.

The movie is about a female [[psychologist]] named Margaret who is also a best-selling author. Margaret has become disillusioned by her profession and her inability to really [[help]] anyone. She tries to rectify this by helping settle her patient's gambling debt to a [[shark]] named Mike (played by [[Joe]] Mantegna, who is the only reason to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a scam he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his cronies to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

First of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[predictable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird line reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main character) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, Margaret is supposedly an intelligent psychologist who is an expert at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. David Mamet's film debut has been hailed by many as a [[true]] thinking-man's movie, a movie that makes you question everybody and everything. I saw it for the first time recently and couldn't [[realise]] what was [[suspected]] to be so [[magnificent]] about it.

The movie is about a female [[psychiatry]] named Margaret who is also a best-selling author. Margaret has become disillusioned by her profession and her inability to really [[support]] anyone. She tries to rectify this by helping settle her patient's gambling debt to a [[sharks]] named Mike (played by [[Kawa]] Mantegna, who is the only reason to watch this film). She discovers that Mike is actually a professional confidence man when she nearly falls victim to a scam he pulls immediately after meeting her. Intrigued, she returns to see him and asks him to show her how con artists operate (she plans on using this as the subject of a new psychology book). She then falls for him and accompanies him on a long con that he and his associates have set up.

I don't feel like going into details, but at the end of the film it is revealed that the events of the whole movie were an elaborate con by Mike and his cronies to swindle Margaret out of $80,000.

First of all, the big twist towards the end was VERY [[foreseeable]]. Any scene where the con men were operating was made very obvious by the stagey acting and weird line reads. Not only that, but the audience (and the main character) knows that they're dealing with con men, so is it really such a big surprise when we find out that Margaret has herself been conned? Besides, Margaret is supposedly an intelligent psychologist who is an expert at reading people, yet she allows herself to be duped far too easily -- and keep in mind, she knows full well that Mike is a con artist.

Secondly, we are led to believe that Margaret was conned from the very beginning, yet in order for the con to ultimately work, she had to do several things that the con men couldn't possibly have predicted that she would do. First, she had to decide to help settle her patient's debt, allowing her to meet the con men in the first place. If she hadn't done this, the entire con would have failed. I just have to say that it's pretty unreasonable to assume that a psychologist is going to take it upon herself to settle a patient's gambling debt. Not only that, but what are the odds that the con men would be at the right spot on the very night she decided to show up? Did they simply show up at that bar every night, hoping she would come and see them? Another thing that had to happen that couldn't have been predicted is that Margaret had to return to see Mike again and ask him to teach her the tricks of his trade. What are the odds of this happening? And yet the whole con is based on this premise.

Another problem I had is with the ending. Margaret finds out she's been conned and decides to get revenge on Mike. At first, Mamet leads us to believe that she's going to con the con, but that falls through, so the ultimate ending is her gunning Mike down in an airport baggage area. Somehow that just felt like a clumsy and inept way to end a movie about con artists plying their trade. Not only that, but she didn't even take back the money he stole from her.

Ultimately, the movie leaves you feeling empty and unfulfilled. And if you, like me, predicted ahead of time that Margaret was going to be conned, you will find this revelation just as unsatisfying. --------------------------------------------- Result 1620 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] This movie is goofy as [[hell]]! I [[think]] it was written as a serious film, but then when it came time to [[film]], [[Michael]] Cooney [[said]] "Hey, let's throw in some [[humor]] and spice it up!" The [[characters]] are actually slightly developed, too. Oh, and the death [[sequences]] are the [[best]]. One thing I [[hate]], though, was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? This movie is goofy as [[whorehouse]]! I [[ideas]] it was written as a serious film, but then when it came time to [[movie]], [[Michele]] Cooney [[avowed]] "Hey, let's throw in some [[comedy]] and spice it up!" The [[personage]] are actually slightly developed, too. Oh, and the death [[sequencing]] are the [[optimum]]. One thing I [[despise]], though, was the hairdryer-weapons. What was that all about? --------------------------------------------- Result 1621 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] When I bought my Toy Story [[tape]] when it came out to Video after being released in theaters I [[saw]] a [[trailer]] for this that said from the creators of Toy Story. As [[soon]] as I saw that I knew this was gonna be a good [[feature]]! I was right! A Bug's Life like Toy [[Story]] is great story, great characters and great animation. My favorite [[characters]] are Dim the rhino Beetle voiced by Brad Garrett and Hemlich the Caterpillar voiced by the late Pixar Storyman Joe Ranft. My favorite scene is when Slim the walking stick (David Hyde Pierce) lifts up Hemlich trying to distract the Bird and Hemlich's like You hoo Mr. Early Bird. How about a nice tasting worm on a stick and Slim's like I'm going to snap! I'm going to snap! I just died laughing at that scene. Being a big fan of insects I think A Bug's Life is my favorite Pixar even though I know a lot of people consider it the worst Pixar film ever! I don't know how you could hate a Pixar film! I think they're all pretty good films! Good job PIXAR! When I bought my Toy Story [[cassette]] when it came out to Video after being released in theaters I [[sawthe]] a [[trailers]] for this that said from the creators of Toy Story. As [[expeditiously]] as I saw that I knew this was gonna be a good [[idiosyncratic]]! I was right! A Bug's Life like Toy [[Conte]] is great story, great characters and great animation. My favorite [[attribute]] are Dim the rhino Beetle voiced by Brad Garrett and Hemlich the Caterpillar voiced by the late Pixar Storyman Joe Ranft. My favorite scene is when Slim the walking stick (David Hyde Pierce) lifts up Hemlich trying to distract the Bird and Hemlich's like You hoo Mr. Early Bird. How about a nice tasting worm on a stick and Slim's like I'm going to snap! I'm going to snap! I just died laughing at that scene. Being a big fan of insects I think A Bug's Life is my favorite Pixar even though I know a lot of people consider it the worst Pixar film ever! I don't know how you could hate a Pixar film! I think they're all pretty good films! Good job PIXAR! --------------------------------------------- Result 1622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I came across An Insomniac's [[Nightmare]] while [[looking]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NOT]] [[disappoint]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[excellent]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to [[agree]] hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I [[think]] her performance stole the [[show]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this [[short]] [[together]]. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. [[SO]] well [[written]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! I came across An Insomniac's [[Cabos]] while [[searching]] for offbeat independent films, and glad to say it did [[NOPE]] [[defraud]]. This crazy half hour ride had me wondering all the way through, and the ending was [[sumptuous]] - one of those NOOOOO moments that really stays with you. I've shown it to a number of people and everyone seems to [[concur]] hands down. The little ghostie girl was very talented and I [[ideas]] her performance stole the [[display]]. She creeped the heck out of me, I can say that much. Nanavati did a great job putting this [[succinct]] [[jointly]]. All the pieces just fell into place and you can tell that she's a great writer from what she did with this script. [[CONSEQUENTLY]] well [[writes]]. It's undoubtedly the strongest part of the film. The directing was great and the acting was enjoyable, but the most important factor here is the strength of the screenplay. Good job to this girl, I can't wait to see more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've seen this about 2 or 3 [[times]] and haven't regretted it. Homeward bound is not just a typical animal [[movie]]. Its [[unique]], [[fun]] and [[bursting]] with adventure. The things that make it a [[fun]] [[movie]] are the [[animals]] ([[obvious]])who are wonderfully trained. A very good effort.

8.5/10! I've seen this about 2 or 3 [[moments]] and haven't regretted it. Homeward bound is not just a typical animal [[flick]]. Its [[peculiar]], [[amusing]] and [[blasting]] with adventure. The things that make it a [[droll]] [[filmmaking]] are the [[beasts]] ([[conspicuous]])who are wonderfully trained. A very good effort.

8.5/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 1624 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This a fascinatingly [[awful]] movie. It make so [[little]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. This a fascinatingly [[spooky]] movie. It make so [[kiddo]] sense that it starts to make a kind of weird internal logic of its own. Well, it would if it didn't keep darting off up side-alleys until eventually floundering under the weight of its own indecisiveness. The movie can't make up its mind whether it is a straight forward 'Man Turns Into Monster' flick (like all those 1950s 'THE INCREDIBLE insert verb ING MAN' movies), or a ghastly big business conspiracy theory movie, or a mystical afterlife contact story, or... or what? Take your pick. It's just a mess. Grotesquely over the top and firing off in all directions, leaving loose ends flapping all over the place. It was as if Tobe Hooper had been taking David Lynch pills. Unfortunately he didn't take enough. --------------------------------------------- Result 1625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Yes, Marie Dresler drinks prune juice that she thinks is poison and she exits running.

Dresler is good. Never my cup of tea but she is a solid performer who surely holds the screen.

I [[watched]] this for Polly Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has sunk into nearly total oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. Yes, Marie Dresler drinks prune juice that she thinks is poison and she exits running.

Dresler is good. Never my cup of tea but she is a solid performer who surely holds the screen.

I [[seen]] this for Polly Moran, whom I've seen elsewhere. Here, Moran is OK -- just OK -- as Dressler's shrewish friend/foe. Too bad she has sunk into nearly total oblivion.

The plot is good hearted. Bad guys try to rob the townspeople. Dressler triumphs and all ends well.

I do wonder about the central plot mechanism: bonds. This came out during the Depression so maybe everyone was familiar with bonds and what they can do if used well and if used wrongly. I, however, not of that era, am vaguely familiar with them. They're like stocks only different, right? It seems odd to build a story about The Little Man around a somewhat sophisticated monetary entity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The acting in the film is really well done honestly, but the movie is so slow and so boring, as soon as it gets interesting everything slows to a major halt. I am glad to see Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great [[job]], so did the other actors as I [[mentioned]] but man... this is one of the [[worst]] [[dragged]] out films I have ever [[seen]]. Now [[maybe]] in a short [[film]] [[form]] this [[movie]] [[would]] be good, but other than that, [[avoid]] it. This [[film]] has so much filler it makes a [[Twinkie]] cake jealous.

I never, ever, walk out on [[films]], but watching this one at home with family, I walked out. [[Yeah]], it was that [[boring]]. [[Apparently]] my [[comment]] doesn't have [[enough]] lines to post, so here's some more filler. I [[guess]] I was inspired by the [[movie]] I just [[watched]]. The acting in the film is really well done honestly, but the movie is so slow and so boring, as soon as it gets interesting everything slows to a major halt. I am glad to see Sam Rockwell in this, he did a great [[labour]], so did the other actors as I [[alluded]] but man... this is one of the [[gravest]] [[languished]] out films I have ever [[noticed]]. Now [[perhaps]] in a short [[kino]] [[forma]] this [[cinematography]] [[could]] be good, but other than that, [[stave]] it. This [[cinematography]] has so much filler it makes a [[Cannoli]] cake jealous.

I never, ever, walk out on [[cinematography]], but watching this one at home with family, I walked out. [[Oui]], it was that [[bored]]. [[Evidently]] my [[commentaries]] doesn't have [[sufficient]] lines to post, so here's some more filler. I [[reckon]] I was inspired by the [[cinematography]] I just [[observed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Wow]]...I can't believe just how [[bad]] [[ZOMBIE]] DOOM (aka [[VIOLENT]] SH!T 3) really is. I'd [[heard]] the [[rumors]], read the [[reviews]] - but had to [[make]] my [[mind]] up for myself. [[Well]], let me tell ya - IT [[BLOWS]]!!! The [[worst]] acting of any [[film]] ever [[made]], dubbing that must have been [[done]] while [[everyone]] [[involved]] was [[completely]] wasted, [[inept]] and [[laughable]] gore FX, no [[discernible]] plot, "[[cinematography]]" that looks like my grandma [[filmed]] it with her camcorder, [[weapons]] props that are no joke - [[made]] out of tin-foil - the list goes on and on...

[[Three]] [[guys]] [[get]] stranded on an [[island]] where a bunch of weirdos run [[around]] with plastic and tin-foil swords. Two of the [[captives]] are [[freed]] along with a [[rebel]] of the [[island]] freaks, and are [[given]] a day's head [[start]] before they are hunted down by the rest of the "[[tribe]]"...that's [[pretty]] much it...

Honestly - this is one of THE [[WORST]] films I've ever had the [[misfortune]] to [[subject]] myself too. The budget had to be about $200 and was [[spent]] [[entirely]] on the [[gore]] FX (which [[actually]] may not have been a [[bad]] [[idea]]...). There is [[NOTHING]] to ZOMBIE DOOM other than strung-together [[ridiculous]] [[looking]] gore scenes with [[lots]] of [[HORRIBLY]] [[dubbed]] [[dialog]]. This [[film]] makes other no-budget outings [[like]] PREMUTOS: [[LORD]] OF THE [[LIVING]] [[DEAD]] look like TITANIC. Some may [[rank]] ZD in the "so-bad-it's-good" category - and I [[guess]] if you're [[REALLY]] [[drunk]] or [[high]] and [[watching]] it with a few [[friends]] MST3K-style - I [[guess]] it [[could]] be looked at that [[way]]. But not by me. I [[hated]] [[pretty]] much everything about it. If ZOMBIE DOOM or ZOMBIE 90 (which is equally [[appalling]] and is included as a "[[bonus]]" on the Shock-O-Rama [[release]] of ZD) is indicative of [[Andreas]] Schnaas' other works - then he should be banned from ever having anything to do with making a film ever again under [[penalty]] of [[death]]. There is one [[amusing]] kung-fu [[battle]] in the latter half of the film, and a [[lot]] of [[blood]] - so I'll grant this one a [[VERY]] [[generous]] 3/10 - Do yourself a favor and [[skip]] this. [[Whoo]]...I can't believe just how [[negative]] [[GHOUL]] DOOM (aka [[FIERCE]] SH!T 3) really is. I'd [[listened]] the [[whispers]], read the [[reviewing]] - but had to [[deliver]] my [[intellect]] up for myself. [[Good]], let me tell ya - IT [[STROKES]]!!! The [[worse]] acting of any [[cinematography]] ever [[introduced]], dubbing that must have been [[doing]] while [[anyone]] [[implicated]] was [[fully]] wasted, [[incompetent]] and [[ridiculous]] gore FX, no [[observable]] plot, "[[movies]]" that looks like my grandma [[shot]] it with her camcorder, [[armament]] props that are no joke - [[accomplished]] out of tin-foil - the list goes on and on...

[[Tres]] [[buddies]] [[obtain]] stranded on an [[isla]] where a bunch of weirdos run [[throughout]] with plastic and tin-foil swords. Two of the [[prisoner]] are [[releasing]] along with a [[mutiny]] of the [[isla]] freaks, and are [[bestowed]] a day's head [[begin]] before they are hunted down by the rest of the "[[clan]]"...that's [[belle]] much it...

Honestly - this is one of THE [[HARDEST]] films I've ever had the [[woe]] to [[theme]] myself too. The budget had to be about $200 and was [[spend]] [[totally]] on the [[gora]] FX (which [[indeed]] may not have been a [[rotten]] [[thought]]...). There is [[ANYTHING]] to ZOMBIE DOOM other than strung-together [[silly]] [[searching]] gore scenes with [[batch]] of [[FRIGHTFULLY]] [[nicknamed]] [[dialogues]]. This [[films]] makes other no-budget outings [[iike]] PREMUTOS: [[SEIGNEUR]] OF THE [[VIDA]] [[DIE]] look like TITANIC. Some may [[categorized]] ZD in the "so-bad-it's-good" category - and I [[reckon]] if you're [[TRULY]] [[drunken]] or [[highest]] and [[staring]] it with a few [[friendships]] MST3K-style - I [[reckon]] it [[wo]] be looked at that [[paths]]. But not by me. I [[hating]] [[belle]] much everything about it. If ZOMBIE DOOM or ZOMBIE 90 (which is equally [[heinous]] and is included as a "[[premium]]" on the Shock-O-Rama [[freed]] of ZD) is indicative of [[Andres]] Schnaas' other works - then he should be banned from ever having anything to do with making a film ever again under [[punishments]] of [[fatalities]]. There is one [[entertaining]] kung-fu [[fights]] in the latter half of the film, and a [[batches]] of [[transfusion]] - so I'll grant this one a [[TREMENDOUSLY]] [[magnanimous]] 3/10 - Do yourself a favor and [[jumping]] this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I [[saw]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the [[family]] programming channel of HBO. At first I was drawn in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I found myself [[searching]] for the remote, so I [[could]] find the '[[INFO]] BUTTON', to [[find]] out what in the world was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoy]] him in many of his films, but one [[thing]] he is not, is a voice-over artist. [[Sure]] he has one of the more unique [[voices]] in Hollywood, but it [[works]] only as a [[part]] of a bigger [[visual]] [[package]]. Attaching his voice to a [[cute]] [[duck]] made watching somewhat difficult. As for the [[rest]] of the [[cast]], uninspired. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, [[weak]] voice talent, strong animation...who was this [[film]] [[targeting]]? Gay [[adolescent]] ducks? I don't get it. Is there [[really]] such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must [[resort]] to animated ducks? Cute story, and like the title, this movie I found hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. I [[watched]] this by accident one lazy summer afternoon. It was playing on the [[familia]] programming channel of HBO. At first I was drawn in, by what I thought was a Disney animation. But then, after a few minutes, I found myself [[browsing]] for the remote, so I [[did]] find the '[[INFORMATION]] BUTTON', to [[unearthed]] out what in the world was on my TV. I have nothing against Harvey F., I [[enjoying]] him in many of his films, but one [[stuff]] he is not, is a voice-over artist. [[Convinced]] he has one of the more unique [[voice]] in Hollywood, but it [[collaboration]] only as a [[parties]] of a bigger [[optic]] [[bundle]]. Attaching his voice to a [[lovely]] [[ducks]] made watching somewhat difficult. As for the [[roosting]] of the [[casting]], uninspired. I suppose working on this film didn't appeal to the really good voice over talent out there.

So, [[fragile]] voice talent, strong animation...who was this [[cinematography]] [[purpose]]? Gay [[adolescence]] ducks? I don't get it. Is there [[truly]] such a dearth of role-models for young up and coming homosexuals, that we must [[recourse]] to animated ducks? Cute story, and like the title, this movie I found hard to love, just like an ugly duckling. --------------------------------------------- Result 1629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I had a really [[hard]] time making it through this move. It was extermly slow and at times wondered when the plot of the movie would actually come to life.

This movie seemed to flow to [[slow]] and I kept on wondering when it was going to end. I am normally a [[person]] who likes a [[good]] [[indie]] file every once in a while but this did not [[satisfy]] what I was looking for.

It seemed they tried to make to much out of this movie. At one point it seemed to turn political which I am not a big fan of in movies. If you are looking for a slow moving movie with little to no plot then this is the right movie for you. As for me I felt I wasted 2 hours when I could of been doing something else. I had a really [[arduous]] time making it through this move. It was extermly slow and at times wondered when the plot of the movie would actually come to life.

This movie seemed to flow to [[lento]] and I kept on wondering when it was going to end. I am normally a [[persons]] who likes a [[alright]] [[andi]] file every once in a while but this did not [[meet]] what I was looking for.

It seemed they tried to make to much out of this movie. At one point it seemed to turn political which I am not a big fan of in movies. If you are looking for a slow moving movie with little to no plot then this is the right movie for you. As for me I felt I wasted 2 hours when I could of been doing something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1630 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] was definitely not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's best movies. I really didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[movie]]. [[For]] some reason, it [[seemed]] [[like]] it was a movie that they put together really [[fast]]. [[In]] some parts, it [[got]] so [[boring]] that I had to fast forward it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[exciting]] parts like their other movies. This [[cinematography]] was definitely not one of Mary-Kate and Ashley's best movies. I really didn't like it, and I was kind of disappointed in that [[films]]. [[Onto]] some reason, it [[appeared]] [[iike]] it was a movie that they put together really [[swift]]. [[For]] some parts, it [[ai]] so [[dreary]] that I had to fast forward it. It didn't have any bloopers or any [[exhilarating]] parts like their other movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This was [[recently]] on AMC's vibrant movie classics and I had to laugh. I had high [[hopes]] for this adventure that follows in the [[vein]] of "[[Voyage]] to the Earth's Core" and "Mysterious Island". I was [[sorely]] [[disappointed]] not only in the acting credentials but in the silly story line that reads from a five year old's comic book. Be sure to catch sight of the wires that are holding on to the Pterdactyl's wings when they grasp "Ogar" a half idiot pre-modern man who befriends the lost adventurers. The ending left it open for further rehashing of the same effects in "People that Time Forgot". Don't waste your time. This was [[freshly]] on AMC's vibrant movie classics and I had to laugh. I had high [[waits]] for this adventure that follows in the [[vena]] of "[[Voyager]] to the Earth's Core" and "Mysterious Island". I was [[badly]] [[disappoint]] not only in the acting credentials but in the silly story line that reads from a five year old's comic book. Be sure to catch sight of the wires that are holding on to the Pterdactyl's wings when they grasp "Ogar" a half idiot pre-modern man who befriends the lost adventurers. The ending left it open for further rehashing of the same effects in "People that Time Forgot". Don't waste your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I know that some films (I mean: European films), that are very bad films, are being regarded as [[great]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being selected for certain big festivals. Don't let this fool you! [[Unless]] you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it great art afterwards, [[skip]] it! The film [[contains]] one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, film popped into my mind, the [[terrible]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one surprise (this has been done endless times before, connecting several storylines: SHORT CUTS, MAGNOLIA, PLAYING BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like daughter), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that made the public at the preview screening laugh at so much incompetence, well... This is an insult to cinema, and only receives high ratings because it happens to be in "another" language, in this case Spanish. Strange world we live in...3/10 I know that some films (I mean: European films), that are very bad films, are being regarded as [[wondrous]] cinema by certain "critics", only because they're non-American. I saw the 8.1 IMDB score for this film and noticed the fact that this was being selected for certain big festivals. Don't let this fool you! [[If]] you're one of those people that likes mind-numbing films like this, and call it great art afterwards, [[jumping]] it! The film [[encompasses]] one hilarious scene after another (a similar, Italian, film popped into my mind, the [[scary]] PREFERISCO IL RUMORE DEL MARE (I prefer the sound of the sea)). The problem with these films is that they're not only boring, like some other strangely praised films, but that they almost play like camp. I mean, let's face it, the acting is horrible (I mean: soap opera-level), the story has not one surprise (this has been done endless times before, connecting several storylines: SHORT CUTS, MAGNOLIA, PLAYING BY HEART, only much better), not one realistic character in it (some true freak-seeing along the way, notice the hilarious zombie-like daughter), and so on and so on.

As if that's not enough, the film is 135 min. (count it!) long, and at the end the director opens his can of sentimentality. After a film with such hilariously bad dialogue and scenes that made the public at the preview screening laugh at so much incompetence, well... This is an insult to cinema, and only receives high ratings because it happens to be in "another" language, in this case Spanish. Strange world we live in...3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] There are no words to [[explain]] how bad NIGHTMARE WEEKEND is. It [[simply]] [[defies]] description. Something about a [[computer]] that can [[change]] personal [[objects]] into silver balls that [[enter]] the victims' mouth, which kills them or [[turns]] them into zombies. The [[whole]] thing is so wonky that it's stunning. There's [[also]] a [[girl]] with personal computer in her room and the computer talks via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this stuff up. The computer also controls things like cars, even though there's nothing linking the computer with the vehicle.

The "film" is [[total]] [[trash]]. Surreal [[bad]] trash. [[Spectacularly]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a lot of [[sex]] scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very [[hot]] or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[woman]] seemingly makes love or [[wants]] to French [[kiss]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the [[floor]].

[[Definitely]] one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever [[made]]. Up there with the equally [[wretched]] direct-to-home [[video]] BOARDINGHOUSE, or [[BOOGEYMAN]] II (both [[NIGHTMARE]] WEEKEND and [[BOOGEYMAN]] II have scenes with a [[killer]] [[toothbrush]]!). [[At]] [[least]] it's fun to watch it and [[try]] to [[make]] [[sense]] of whatever is [[going]] on. There are no words to [[explaining]] how bad NIGHTMARE WEEKEND is. It [[solely]] [[challenging]] description. Something about a [[computers]] that can [[shifting]] personal [[object]] into silver balls that [[intro]] the victims' mouth, which kills them or [[revolves]] them into zombies. The [[together]] thing is so wonky that it's stunning. There's [[apart]] a [[giri]] with personal computer in her room and the computer talks via a hand puppet!!!!!!!! I'm not making this stuff up. The computer also controls things like cars, even though there's nothing linking the computer with the vehicle.

The "film" is [[aggregate]] [[detritus]]. Surreal [[negative]] trash. [[Impressively]], one-of-a-kind bad trash. There's a lot of [[sexuality]] scenes thrown here and there, which aren't very [[sexy]] or erotic. There's even one scene where a [[girl]] seemingly makes love or [[wanted]] to French [[kissed]] a tarantula, which had me rolling on the [[storey]].

[[Indubitably]] one of the [[gravest]] [[filmmaking]] ever [[brought]]. Up there with the equally [[unlucky]] direct-to-home [[videos]] BOARDINGHOUSE, or [[BOGEYMAN]] II (both [[CABOS]] WEEKEND and [[BOGEYMAN]] II have scenes with a [[murderer]] [[brush]]!). [[Under]] [[fewest]] it's fun to watch it and [[endeavour]] to [[deliver]] [[feeling]] of whatever is [[go]] on. --------------------------------------------- Result 1634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight months has passed... The Rocky Mountain Rescue [[receive]] a distress call set by a brilliant terrorist mastermind Eric Quaien (John Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[large]] cases that has [[millions]] of [[dollars]] inside. Two experienced climbers Walker (Sylvester Stallone) and Tucker (Micheal Rooker) and a helicopter pilot (Janine Turner) are to the rescue but they are set by a [[trap]] by Quaien and his [[men]]. [[Now]] the two climbers and pilot are [[forced]] to play a [[deadly]] [[game]] of [[hide]] and seek. While Quaien is [[trying]] to [[find]] the millions of [[dollars]] and he [[kidnapped]] [[Tucker]] to find the money. Once [[Tucker]] finds the money, Tucker will be dead. [[Against]] explosive firepower, bitter cold and dizzying heights. Walker [[must]] outwit Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Street]] 4:The [[Dream]] Master) [[made]] an entertaining non-stop action picture. This film is a spectacular, exciting, visually exciting action picture with plenty of dark [[humour]] as well. This was one of the [[biggest]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best film. Lithgow is a [[terrific]] entertaining villain. Stallone [[certainly]] made an short [[comeback]] of this [[sharp]] thriller. This is probably Harlin's [[best]] work as a filmmaker.

[[DVD]] has an [[sharp]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) [[transfer]] and an terrific-Dolby Digital 5.1 [[Surround]] Sound. [[DVD]] has an [[running]] commentary track by the [[director]] with [[comments]] by Stallone. [[DVD]] [[also]] has [[technical]] crew [[commentary]] as well. [[DVD]] has behind the scenes featurette, two deleted scenes with [[introduction]] by the [[director]] and more. Do not [[miss]] this [[great]] [[action]] [[film]]. [[Screenplay]] by [[Micheal]] France ([[Fantastic]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The Rocky [[Series]]). Based on a [[premise]] by John [[Long]]. [[Excellent]] [[Cinematography]] by [[Alex]] [[Thomson]], B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Demolition]] [[Man]], Legend). [[Oscar]] Nominated for [[Best]] [[Sound]], [[Best]] Sound [[Editing]] and Best Visual Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). After the unexpected accident that killed an inexperienced climber (Michelle Joyner). Eight months has passed... The Rocky Mountain Rescue [[perceive]] a distress call set by a brilliant terrorist mastermind Eric Quaien (John Lithgow). Quaien has lost three [[major]] cases that has [[millionth]] of [[dollar]] inside. Two experienced climbers Walker (Sylvester Stallone) and Tucker (Micheal Rooker) and a helicopter pilot (Janine Turner) are to the rescue but they are set by a [[petard]] by Quaien and his [[males]]. [[Currently]] the two climbers and pilot are [[obligated]] to play a [[mortal]] [[games]] of [[mask]] and seek. While Quaien is [[attempting]] to [[found]] the millions of [[bucks]] and he [[abducted]] [[Goldberg]] to find the money. Once [[Goldberg]] finds the money, Tucker will be dead. [[Anti]] explosive firepower, bitter cold and dizzying heights. Walker [[owe]] outwit Quaien for survival.

Directed by Renny Harlin (Driven, Mindhunters, A Nightmare on Elm [[Rue]] 4:The [[Dreaming]] Master) [[effected]] an entertaining non-stop action picture. This film is a spectacular, exciting, visually exciting action picture with plenty of dark [[comedy]] as well. This was one of the [[larger]] hits of 1993. This is one of Harlin's best film. Lithgow is a [[noteworthy]] entertaining villain. Stallone [[arguably]] made an short [[revert]] of this [[abrupt]] thriller. This is probably Harlin's [[optimum]] work as a filmmaker.

[[DVDS]] has an [[abrupt]] anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) [[transference]] and an terrific-Dolby Digital 5.1 [[Encircling]] Sound. [[DVDS]] has an [[executes]] commentary track by the [[superintendent]] with [[observations]] by Stallone. [[DVDS]] [[similarly]] has [[technological]] crew [[feedback]] as well. [[DVDS]] has behind the scenes featurette, two deleted scenes with [[intro]] by the [[superintendent]] and more. Do not [[mademoiselle]] this [[whopping]] [[activity]] [[cinematography]]. [[Scripts]] by [[Michal]] France ([[Noteworthy]] Four) and actor:Stallone (The Rocky [[Serials]]). Based on a [[hypothesis]] by John [[Lengthy]]. [[Super]] [[Films]] by [[Allie]] [[Thompson]], B.S.C. (Alien³, [[Destruction]] [[Dude]], Legend). [[Oskar]] Nominated for [[Better]] [[Audible]], [[Better]] Sound [[Edition]] and Best Visual Effects. Panavision. (****/*****). --------------------------------------------- Result 1635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Although]] some may [[call]] it a "Cuban [[Cinema]] Paradiso", the movie is closer to a How Green Was My Valley, a [[memory]] [[film]] [[mourning]] for a lost innocence. The [[film]] [[smartly]] avoids [[falling]] into a political trap of taking sides (pro-Castro? anti-Castro?, focusing instead in the human frailty of the characters and the importance of family. Filled with [[good]] acting, in particular from Mexican actress Diana Bracho, who plays Keitel's [[wife]]. A [[masterpiece]], filled with references to classic movies, from CASABLANCA to Chaplin's CITY LIGHTS. Gael [[Garcia]] Bernal plays a small role which is critical for the dramatic payoff of the [[story]]. TV director Georg Stanford Brown, in a [[rare]] return to acting (remember THE ROOKIES?), plays a homeless bum who acts as Greek chorus, [[superbly]]. It is a pity that this movie, originally titled DREAMING OF JULIA, has been released in the States by THINKfilm with the atrocious title of CUBAN BLOOD, which has nothing to do with the movie. [[Despite]] some may [[calls]] it a "Cuban [[Filmmaking]] Paradiso", the movie is closer to a How Green Was My Valley, a [[mem]] [[flick]] [[weeping]] for a lost innocence. The [[kino]] [[shrewdly]] avoids [[dipping]] into a political trap of taking sides (pro-Castro? anti-Castro?, focusing instead in the human frailty of the characters and the importance of family. Filled with [[alright]] acting, in particular from Mexican actress Diana Bracho, who plays Keitel's [[women]]. A [[centerpiece]], filled with references to classic movies, from CASABLANCA to Chaplin's CITY LIGHTS. Gael [[Gonzales]] Bernal plays a small role which is critical for the dramatic payoff of the [[fairytales]]. TV director Georg Stanford Brown, in a [[scarce]] return to acting (remember THE ROOKIES?), plays a homeless bum who acts as Greek chorus, [[remarkably]]. It is a pity that this movie, originally titled DREAMING OF JULIA, has been released in the States by THINKfilm with the atrocious title of CUBAN BLOOD, which has nothing to do with the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Now I've always been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there [[better]] projects. Yes, you heard me. The [[story]] works [[wonderful]], the [[atmosphere]] really works and the [[actors]] do a first [[rate]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN NATION THE SERIES and STAR TREK ENTERPRISE shows that he can be an action star who kicks ass and takes name. The [[stop]] motion effects could have been a tiny [[bit]] better. The color was wrong, they look plastic to me instead of the metal they were suppose to be. But that is a [[minor]] complaint compared to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this movie. 9 STARS OUT OF 10. Now I've always been a fan of Full Moon's puppet work. But I have to say that Robot Jox is one of there [[optimum]] projects. Yes, you heard me. The [[saga]] works [[noteworthy]], the [[vibe]] really works and the [[actresses]] do a first [[rates]] job. Gary Graham who really makes his mark on TV in shows like ALIEN NATION THE SERIES and STAR TREK ENTERPRISE shows that he can be an action star who kicks ass and takes name. The [[ceases]] motion effects could have been a tiny [[bite]] better. The color was wrong, they look plastic to me instead of the metal they were suppose to be. But that is a [[lesser]] complaint compared to the whole that is the Robot Jox, if you like Gary Graham or other Full Moon movies, then you will like this movie. 9 STARS OUT OF 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The lead characters in this movie fall into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Simple]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his buddy Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very impressed with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The best Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the absolute best of Czech cinema. The lead characters in this movie fall into two categories: smart and stupid. [[Uncomplicated]] enough.

Jiri Machacek (Standa) plays a hapless, dopey guy who gets arrested for a crime he did not commit. When he tries to get financially reimbursed by his evil, former boss, the situation gets out of control.

While Standa is genuinely (but endearingly) stupid, his buddy Ondrej is an absolute blithering idiot who bungles everything and manages to say and do the wrong thing every time. Without Ondrej, Standa might stand a chance of going through life with some modest degree of success. With Ondrej, life will never be boring, but it sure won't be without a lot of headaches!

Ivan Trojan plays Zdenek, an evil genius type who degenerates into some Hitler-esquire delusional tyrant. Zdenek and his henchmen try to kill Standa to keep Zdenek's secrets safe.

I am very impressed with the high quality and imagination of Czech films. For a relatively small country, the Czech Republic certainly has produced more than its share of superb entertainment. The best Czech movies I have seen are: 1) Pelišky and 2) Tmavomodrý Svet (Dark Blue World). If you see these two movies, you have seen the absolute best of Czech cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 1638 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie was [[extremely]] boring. It should least not more than 15 minutes. The images of child and animal being killed were little bit disturbing.

Usually I don't write comments but this one was so [[bad]] having so many good and excellent comments. I think in this case we are one step closer to honest assessment of this title.

What more can I say? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 hours long sleeping period. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. This movie was [[inordinately]] boring. It should least not more than 15 minutes. The images of child and animal being killed were little bit disturbing.

Usually I don't write comments but this one was so [[horrid]] having so many good and excellent comments. I think in this case we are one step closer to honest assessment of this title.

What more can I say? I fall asleep during this movie 3 times. It was about 4 hours after I had woken up from 8 hours long sleeping period. I think it is the point itself.

There is no dialog between characters except maybe 2 sentences at the very end.

When you fall asleep once watching it do not try to rewind and catch up because you will fall asleep again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Though this movie has a [[first]] [[rate]] roster of fine [[actors]], special effects that are [[excellent]], and a [[story]] line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[picked]] up for studio distribution and went [[directly]] to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks released during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens missed the [[opportunity]], fortunately the new concept of [[releasing]] direct to DVD [[allows]] us to [[enjoy]] it.

The [[theme]] is [[old]]: rookie reporter uncovers an inner circle of [[cops]] that are corrupt - in this case the F.R.A.T. (First Response Assault and Tactical) team, a group of well trained [[policeman]] created to clean up the mythical city of Edison from its low point of [[crime]], [[drugs]], prostitution etc. [[Working]] undercover the [[temptation]] of pocketing the [[confiscated]] goods and money proves too [[much]] of an [[opportunity]] and now, 15 [[years]] after its [[formation]], FRAT is responsible for [[murder]], [[drug]] trafficking, terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead dog is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a terrifyingly real [[gangster]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cool]] J, even more buff than [[usual]] and [[proving]] he can be a sensitive actor). [[Reporter]] Pollack ([[Justin]] Timberlake) catches wind of a 'bad mistake' and reports his theory of [[fraud]] and [[corruption]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[always]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack convinces Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, also a consistently [[fine]] [[character]] actor) and they aid Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad [[incidents]] [[happen]] and the [[story]] runs pall mall toward a series of [[unexpected]] [[results]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carry]] the lead, [[especially]] in the [[company]] of such [[seasoned]] actors. But LL [[Cool]] J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott [[keep]] the well-oiled [[machine]] of a [[movie]] rolling to the very [[end]]. [[No]], it is not a [[great]] [[movie]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the [[seat]] [[action]] [[flick]] with a [[message]]. Grady Harp Though this movie has a [[fiirst]] [[rates]] roster of fine [[actresses]], special effects that are [[handsome]], and a [[histories]] line that is full of surprises, it wasn't [[selecting]] up for studio distribution and went [[squarely]] to DVD. Perhaps it contains too much 'anti-police force' information, or perhaps it is juts one too many action flicks released during a glut, but whatever the reason the big screens missed the [[luck]], fortunately the new concept of [[liberating]] direct to DVD [[allowed]] us to [[enjoying]] it.

The [[thematic]] is [[archaic]]: rookie reporter uncovers an inner circle of [[policemen]] that are corrupt - in this case the F.R.A.T. (First Response Assault and Tactical) team, a group of well trained [[constabulary]] created to clean up the mythical city of Edison from its low point of [[offences]], [[pharmaceuticals]], prostitution etc. [[Worked]] undercover the [[seduction]] of pocketing the [[seized]] goods and money proves too [[very]] of an [[likelihood]] and now, 15 [[olds]] after its [[establishment]], FRAT is responsible for [[killings]], [[medicines]] trafficking, terrorizing innocent people etc. The lead dog is Lazerov (Dylan McDermott, who makes a terrifyingly real [[thug]]!) and his partner Rafe Deed (LL [[Cooling]] J, even more buff than [[normal]] and [[demonstrating]] he can be a sensitive actor). [[Correspondent]] Pollack ([[Justine]] Timberlake) catches wind of a 'bad mistake' and reports his theory of [[cheating]] and [[bribery]] to his paper's boss Ashford (the [[permanently]] reliably fine Morgan Freeman). Gradually Polack convinces Ashford and subsequently Wallace (Kevin Spacey, also a consistently [[alright]] [[nature]] actor) and they aid Pollack in this investigative reporting. The closer Pollack gets to the truth the more surprises and bad [[event]] [[occur]] and the [[history]] runs pall mall toward a series of [[unscheduled]] [[findings]].

Timberlake lacks the charisma to [[carrying]] the lead, [[namely]] in the [[corporations]] of such [[skilled]] actors. But LL [[Refrigerate]] J, Freeman, Spacey, and McDermott [[maintain]] the well-oiled [[appliance]] of a [[cinema]] rolling to the very [[terminate]]. [[Nope]], it is not a [[excellent]] [[cinematography]], but it is one that makes for an edge of the [[seats]] [[activity]] [[gesture]] with a [[messages]]. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 1640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] If the Lion King was a Disney [[version]] of [[Hamlet]], then the [[Lion]] King 3: Hakuna Matata is a [[Disney]] version of [[Guildenstern]] and Rosencrantz are Dead. Just like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[film]], we [[get]] to view the action from the point of [[view]] of two of the minor characters from the [[original]]: Timon, the meerkat with a [[penchant]] for [[breaking]] into song at the [[drop]] of a hat, and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence [[issues]]. By following their [[story]] - rather than Simba's - we get to [[see]] why all the [[animals]] bowed down as Simba was [[presented]] from Pride Rock. We find out what [[made]] Timon and Pumbaa [[decide]] to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[oust]] [[Scar]]. And we find out how they [[dealt]] with the hyena's once and for all. [[Nathan]] [[Lane]] as Timon [[gets]] most of the [[best]] jokes, but he is [[ably]] [[supported]] by [[Ernie]] Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[also]] [[good]] to [[hear]] Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Goldberg]] reprising their [[roles]]. [[Julie]] Kavner and Jerry Stiller lend their [[distinctive]] voices to two [[new]] [[characters]]: Timon's [[mother]] and uncle. The only [[downside]] is the [[constant]] stop-start-rewind-fast-forward [[device]] which doesn't [[always]] [[help]] to [[progress]] the [[story]]. Having [[said]] that, there is a [[brilliant]] [[zoom]] [[near]] the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]]. With more [[laughs]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[movie]], Hakuna Matata is worth [[watching]] - if only for the [[hot]] tub scene which is still [[funny]] despite being a [[little]] [[bit]] [[predictable]]. If the Lion King was a Disney [[stepping]] of [[Hamlets]], then the [[Iion]] King 3: Hakuna Matata is a [[Disneyland]] version of [[Rosencrantz]] and Rosencrantz are Dead. Just like Tom Stoppard's beguiling [[flick]], we [[gets]] to view the action from the point of [[views]] of two of the minor characters from the [[initial]]: Timon, the meerkat with a [[tendency]] for [[violating]] into song at the [[dropped]] of a hat, and Pumbaa, the warthog with flatulence [[questions]]. By following their [[conte]] - rather than Simba's - we get to [[behold]] why all the [[wildlife]] bowed down as Simba was [[submitted]] from Pride Rock. We find out what [[introduced]] Timon and Pumbaa [[decides]] to follow Simba back to Pride Rock to [[unseat]] [[Scars]]. And we find out how they [[addressed]] with the hyena's once and for all. [[Nate]] [[Lanes]] as Timon [[obtains]] most of the [[optimum]] jokes, but he is [[deftly]] [[corroborated]] by [[Arne]] Sabella as Pumbaa. It is [[besides]] [[buena]] to [[overheard]] Matthew Broderick and Whoopi [[Tucker]] reprising their [[functions]]. [[Jolly]] Kavner and Jerry Stiller lend their [[idiosyncratic]] voices to two [[newer]] [[character]]: Timon's [[mommy]] and uncle. The only [[drawback]] is the [[uninterrupted]] stop-start-rewind-fast-forward [[appliances]] which doesn't [[unceasingly]] [[support]] to [[progressed]] the [[storytelling]]. Having [[stated]] that, there is a [[glamorous]] [[zooming]] [[nearby]] the [[startup]] of the [[cinematography]]. With more [[giggles]] than any other third-in-a-Disney-series [[cinematography]], Hakuna Matata is worth [[staring]] - if only for the [[sexy]] tub scene which is still [[fun]] despite being a [[scant]] [[bite]] [[foreseeable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I just didn't [[get]] this [[movie]]...[[Was]] it a musical? no..but there were choreographed [[songs]] and dancing in it...

[[Was]] it a [[serious]] [[drama]]....no the acting was not [[good]] enough for that.

Is Whoopi Goldberg a quality serious [[Actor]]..Definently not.

I had [[difficulty]] staying awake through this [[disjointed]] [[movie]]. The [[message]] on apartheid and the "[[tribute]]" to the [[students]] who [[died]] during a [[student]] uprosing is [[noted]]. But as [[entertainment]] this was very [[poor]] and as a documentary style [[movie]] it was [[worse]].

[[See]] for yourself, but in [[fairness]] I [[hated]] it I just didn't [[gets]] this [[cinematography]]...[[Became]] it a musical? no..but there were choreographed [[melodies]] and dancing in it...

[[Became]] it a [[weighty]] [[opera]]....no the acting was not [[buena]] enough for that.

Is Whoopi Goldberg a quality serious [[Protagonist]]..Definently not.

I had [[problem]] staying awake through this [[unconnected]] [[kino]]. The [[messages]] on apartheid and the "[[accolades]]" to the [[learners]] who [[dying]] during a [[pupil]] uprosing is [[highlighted]]. But as [[amusement]] this was very [[pauper]] and as a documentary style [[cinema]] it was [[pire]].

[[Consults]] for yourself, but in [[equity]] I [[resent]] it --------------------------------------------- Result 1642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A quiet, sweet and beutifully nostalgic movie on how it is to be confronted with old friends and surroundings from your youth with all that memories and the problems and sorrows of the present with you. A movie that makes you feel good. All the ingredients are here: old jelousy, rivalry, friendship and loyalty. Mischief, nightly fridge-raids and all the other fun stuff that we all remember from our summer camps. All the characters get the opportunity for a week to experience this again as the old camp-leader now is retiring and want to meet the children from the golden years of the camp. All of them are now in their thirties and in the middle of their careers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The [[writers]] of this [[story]] knew these [[men]] very well. The [[actors]], likewise, portrayed them very well. The [[result]] is that by the [[end]] of the [[film]] you feel like you're actually watching [[John]] Lennon and Paul McCartney. The [[expected]] [[tensions]] are there, [[especially]] in the [[awkward]] first moments. But as the two [[begin]] to loosen up, the old [[camaraderie]] that [[made]] the Beatles [[work]] so well [[begins]] to [[show]] through. The [[bitterness]] is still there, and [[interrupts]] at [[times]], but by the [[time]] [[John]] gets the idea to [[take]] Lorne Michaels up on his offer to [[pay]] the Beatles the gag sum of $3000 to [[appear]] on "[[Saturday]] Night Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that terrorized [[Liverpool]] [[together]] as [[teens]], and survived playing the [[rough]] [[nightclubs]] of Hamburg to [[rise]] to Superstardom. But in the [[end]], this [[wonderful]] [[fantasy]] grounds us [[gently]]. We are reminded why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[possible]] [[even]] before Lennon's [[assassination]]: The two [[driving]] forces of the group outgrew each other. *WARNING* Spoilers ahead... The [[screenwriters]] of this [[conte]] knew these [[males]] very well. The [[actresses]], likewise, portrayed them very well. The [[resulting]] is that by the [[terminating]] of the [[flick]] you feel like you're actually watching [[Jon]] Lennon and Paul McCartney. The [[scheduled]] [[tension]] are there, [[specifically]] in the [[clumsy]] first moments. But as the two [[startup]] to loosen up, the old [[comradeship]] that [[brought]] the Beatles [[jobs]] so well [[starts]] to [[spectacle]] through. The [[resentment]] is still there, and [[disruptions]] at [[moments]], but by the [[times]] [[Jon]] gets the idea to [[taking]] Lorne Michaels up on his offer to [[payroll]] the Beatles the gag sum of $3000 to [[appearing]] on "[[Monday]] Night Live", the two could be the same boyish pranksters that terrorized [[Manchester]] [[jointly]] as [[youths]], and survived playing the [[coarse]] [[discos]] of Hamburg to [[increased]] to Superstardom. But in the [[termination]], this [[sumptuous]] [[fantasia]] grounds us [[mildly]]. We are reminded why a Beatles reunion was most likely never [[feasible]] [[yet]] before Lennon's [[murdering]]: The two [[drives]] forces of the group outgrew each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 1644 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Another silent [[love]] triangle film from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[boxer]] Bob Corby ([[Ian]] [[Hunter]]) recruits circus boxer "One Round" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to keep the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[nearby]]. There are [[lots]] of [[character]] actors and grotesques—at [[Jack]] and Mabel's [[wedding]] the verger, standing in the aisle of the church, registers shock at the sight of the very tall and the very short men, the [[fat]] lady, the conjoined [[twins]] who, of course, [[argue]] about which side of the [[aisle]] to [[sit]], and the [[wedding]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[losing]] [[Mabel]] and boxing his [[way]] back to her [[heart]], or something like that. It was another era altogether, with the audience in evening dress, and the [[boxers]] dressing up, too, when out of the ring. The camera [[angles]], the pace, the use of symbols, the cutting—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and editing of the last boxing match is very gripping. Brisson's good looks are well-used in this one; his smiling is not so [[oblivious]] of what's going on [[around]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[annoying]]. But can [[boxers]] have such dimples? Another silent [[adores]] triangle film from Hitchcock, not a mystery, but very English, very well-paced and photographed. Smooth [[wrestler]] Bob Corby ([[Iain]] [[Hunting]]) recruits circus boxer "One Round" Jack Sander (Carl Brisson) to be his sparring partner, partly to keep the pretty but fickle Mabel (Lilian Hall-Davis) [[neighbours]]. There are [[batches]] of [[trait]] actors and grotesques—at [[Jacque]] and Mabel's [[marriages]] the verger, standing in the aisle of the church, registers shock at the sight of the very tall and the very short men, the [[greasy]] lady, the conjoined [[binoculars]] who, of course, [[assert]] about which side of the [[hallway]] to [[seated]], and the [[marry]] feast is amusing. The rest of the movie has Jack [[wasting]] [[Elsie]] and boxing his [[manner]] back to her [[crux]], or something like that. It was another era altogether, with the audience in evening dress, and the [[underclothes]] dressing up, too, when out of the ring. The camera [[angle]], the pace, the use of symbols, the cutting—all very stylish and masterful. The camera-work and editing of the last boxing match is very gripping. Brisson's good looks are well-used in this one; his smiling is not so [[unconcerned]] of what's going on [[roughly]] him as he is in Hitchcock's The Manxman, and so is not [[vexing]]. But can [[underpants]] have such dimples? --------------------------------------------- Result 1645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (83%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Here is one of those [[movies]] spoiled by the studio's insistence on a happy ending. Conflicts which have stretched out for years are settled in a few minutes. It [[would]] have been far more interesting to inject a tone of ambiguity. The talented Barbara Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from independent and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her life. Brent, as usual, is well over his head and then there is the ludicrous situation of Gig Young playing a character named Gig Young. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the actor! Worth seeing though far below what it could have been. Here is one of those [[cinematography]] spoiled by the studio's insistence on a happy ending. Conflicts which have stretched out for years are settled in a few minutes. It [[could]] have been far more interesting to inject a tone of ambiguity. The talented Barbara Stanwyck is undone by a sudden metamorphosis from independent and assertive woman to a compliant female of the kind she has put down all her life. Brent, as usual, is well over his head and then there is the ludicrous situation of Gig Young playing a character named Gig Young. Someone mentions "Gig Young" and then who appears but Gig Young, the actor! Worth seeing though far below what it could have been. --------------------------------------------- Result 1646 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[used]] to watch this on either HBO or [[Showtime]] or Cinemax during the one summer in the mid 90's that my [[parents]] subscribed to those [[channels]]. I came across it [[several]] times in [[various]] parts and always found it [[dark]], bizarre and [[fascinating]]. I was [[young]] then, in my early teens; and now years later after having [[discovered]] the [[great]] Arliss Howard and being blown away by "Big Bad [[Love]]" I [[bought]] the DVD of "Wilder Napalm" and re-watched it with my girlfriend for the first time in many [[years]]. I [[absolutely]] loved it! I was really [[impressed]] and [[affected]] by it. There are so [[many]] [[dynamic]] fluid complexities and cleverness [[within]] the camera [[movements]] and [[cinematography]]; all of which [[perfectly]] gel with the intelligent, intense and [[immediate]] chemistry between the three leads, their [[story]], the [[music]] and all the other [[actors]] as well. It's [[truly]] "[[Cinematic]]". I [[love]] Arliss Howard's subtle intensity, ambivalent strength and hidden intelligence, I'm a big fan of [[anything]] he does; and his interplay with Debra Winger's manic [[glee]] (they are of course married) has that magic charming [[reality]] to it that goes past the camera. (I wonder if they watch this on [[wedding]] anniversaries?......."Big [[Bad]] Love" should be the next [[stop]] for [[anyone]] who has not [[seen]] it; it's [[brilliant]].) And, [[Dennis]] Quaid in full clown make-up, sneakily [[introduced]], [[angled]], [[hidden]] and displayed by the shot [[selection]] and full bloomed delivery is of the [[kind]] of pure dark movie [[magic]] you don't [[see]] very [[often]]. Quaid has [[always]] had a sinister quality to him for me [[anyways]], with that huge slit mouth span, hiding behind his flicker eyes lying in wait to unleash itself as either mischievous charm or diabolical weirdness (here as both). Both Howard and Quaid have the insane fire behind the eyes to pull off their [[wonderful]] intense internal gunslinger square-offs in darkly cool fashion. In fact the whole film has a darkly cool energy and hip intensity. It's really a [[fantastic]] [[film]], put together by intelligence, imagination, agility and chemistry by all parties involved. I really cannot imagine how this got funded, and it looks pretty expensive to me, by such a conventional, imagination-less system, but I thank God films like this slip through the system every once in awhile. In a great way, with all of its day-glo bright carnival colors, hip intelligence, darkly warped truthful humor and enthralling chemistry it reminds me of one of my favorite films of all time: "Grosse Pointe Blank".......now that's a compliment in my book! I [[employs]] to watch this on either HBO or [[Sharpish]] or Cinemax during the one summer in the mid 90's that my [[parent]] subscribed to those [[channel]]. I came across it [[dissimilar]] times in [[several]] parts and always found it [[gloomy]], bizarre and [[mesmerizing]]. I was [[youthful]] then, in my early teens; and now years later after having [[detects]] the [[prodigious]] Arliss Howard and being blown away by "Big Bad [[Adore]]" I [[buys]] the DVD of "Wilder Napalm" and re-watched it with my girlfriend for the first time in many [[yrs]]. I [[utterly]] loved it! I was really [[surprising]] and [[influenced]] by it. There are so [[several]] [[energetic]] fluid complexities and cleverness [[inside]] the camera [[movement]] and [[movies]]; all of which [[altogether]] gel with the intelligent, intense and [[instant]] chemistry between the three leads, their [[history]], the [[musician]] and all the other [[actresses]] as well. It's [[genuinely]] "[[Movies]]". I [[likes]] Arliss Howard's subtle intensity, ambivalent strength and hidden intelligence, I'm a big fan of [[something]] he does; and his interplay with Debra Winger's manic [[pleasure]] (they are of course married) has that magic charming [[realism]] to it that goes past the camera. (I wonder if they watch this on [[marrying]] anniversaries?......."Big [[Mala]] Love" should be the next [[stopped]] for [[someone]] who has not [[watched]] it; it's [[sparkly]].) And, [[Denny]] Quaid in full clown make-up, sneakily [[lodged]], [[tended]], [[hid]] and displayed by the shot [[select]] and full bloomed delivery is of the [[sorts]] of pure dark movie [[witchcraft]] you don't [[seeing]] very [[routinely]]. Quaid has [[repeatedly]] had a sinister quality to him for me [[anyhow]], with that huge slit mouth span, hiding behind his flicker eyes lying in wait to unleash itself as either mischievous charm or diabolical weirdness (here as both). Both Howard and Quaid have the insane fire behind the eyes to pull off their [[glamorous]] intense internal gunslinger square-offs in darkly cool fashion. In fact the whole film has a darkly cool energy and hip intensity. It's really a [[sumptuous]] [[kino]], put together by intelligence, imagination, agility and chemistry by all parties involved. I really cannot imagine how this got funded, and it looks pretty expensive to me, by such a conventional, imagination-less system, but I thank God films like this slip through the system every once in awhile. In a great way, with all of its day-glo bright carnival colors, hip intelligence, darkly warped truthful humor and enthralling chemistry it reminds me of one of my favorite films of all time: "Grosse Pointe Blank".......now that's a compliment in my book! --------------------------------------------- Result 1647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw this film on TV many years ago and I saw this film when I [[got]] this on tape. I thought that this was reasonably well done. It was not the best of all [[movies]], but it was good enough. The movie has [[enough]] talent to [[inspire]] [[many]] people, [[especially]] [[younger]] kids. The acting was good, with [[Danny]] [[Glover]] [[leading]] the cast. The plot line was not very believable, but the script was well [[written]]. This [[movie]] can [[also]] be the interest of [[avid]] baseball [[fans]]. It does not [[directly]] [[apply]] to a action-packed [[sports]] [[movie]]. It [[directly]] applies to a [[nice]] [[film]] that you can watch with your family and [[learn]] some messages that are [[hidden]] in this [[film]]. Overall, the [[film]] was good, but not great. I give this a movie a 7/10. I saw this film on TV many years ago and I saw this film when I [[ai]] this on tape. I thought that this was reasonably well done. It was not the best of all [[cinematography]], but it was good enough. The movie has [[satisfactorily]] talent to [[inspiring]] [[several]] people, [[specifically]] [[youngest]] kids. The acting was good, with [[Danby]] [[Grover]] [[principal]] the cast. The plot line was not very believable, but the script was well [[writes]]. This [[filmmaking]] can [[apart]] be the interest of [[greedy]] baseball [[followers]]. It does not [[immediately]] [[implement]] to a action-packed [[athletics]] [[cinematic]]. It [[immediately]] applies to a [[pleasurable]] [[filmmaking]] that you can watch with your family and [[learns]] some messages that are [[disguised]] in this [[flick]]. Overall, the [[movie]] was good, but not great. I give this a movie a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[miss]] [[Dark]] Angel!..

I [[understand]] not ever one likes it, but as far as I'm concerned the show should not have been [[canceled]], especially for another space show mock up...

I'm reading the books now. they are doing a pretty good job of explaining somethings, but I still think we should get a TV movie or something.

THE FREAK NATION LIVES!!!!!!!! I [[mademoiselle]] [[Blackness]] Angel!..

I [[understood]] not ever one likes it, but as far as I'm concerned the show should not have been [[nullified]], especially for another space show mock up...

I'm reading the books now. they are doing a pretty good job of explaining somethings, but I still think we should get a TV movie or something.

THE FREAK NATION LIVES!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] i didn't [[even]] bother finishing the [[movie]] because i was so [[bored]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that movie again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[told]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". i didn't [[yet]] bother finishing the [[kino]] because i was so [[bores]] i thought i was going to pass out i was watching it in the movie theaters and me and my friends just got tired so we got up and left to another movie if i ever have to sit through 2 min. of that movie again i think I'm going to shoot myself...and i do know the whole entire movie because my friend [[tell]] me what happened at the end and i wasn't surprised at all i mean who didn't know she was going to do the right thing and let him be happy i mean for real you would have to be a complete idiot not to know that. i know i didn't miss anything and if somebody ask's me to see that movie i would say "over my dead body". --------------------------------------------- Result 1650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A woman asks for advice on the road to reach a mysterious town, and hears two ghoulish stories from the local weirdo, both zombie related. But [[perhaps]] [[fate]] has something nasty in store for her too...

The Zombie Chronicles is [[absolutely]] one of the [[worst]] [[films]] I have ever seen. In fact I must confess, so [[bad]] was it I fast forwarded through most of the [[garbage]]. And there was a lot of that, believe me. It runs for just 69 [[minutes]], and there is still tons of [[filler]]. You get some skinhead doing a lot of push ups, plenty of dull kissy-kissy scenes between goofy teens (that rhymed, tee hee) and some fine examples of why some people should never become actors.

As for the title characters, they barely even have a footnote in the film. Why, you get more undead action in the intro than you do the preceding feature! Though, considering how pathetic the eyes bursting out of sockets and the eating of brains sequences are (amongst other 'delights'), maybe that's a blessing in disguise.

And to top it all off, it looks likes it's been filmed on someone's mobile phone for broadcast on Youtube. Jerky camera-work, scratches on the print, flickering lights... I had to rub my eyes when I realised it was made in 2001, and not 1971. Even the clothes and fashioned look about three decades out of date!

If you think I'm not qualified to do a review of Chronicles having not seen the whole film, then go ahead. YOU try sitting through it, I betcha you won't even make it to the first appearance of the blue-smartie coloured freaks before making your excuses and leaving. It is truly laughable that anyone chose to release it, and honestly you'll get far more fun resting your drink on the disc than actually torturing your DVD player with this gigglesome [[excuse]] for horror. In fact, don't for surprised if it packs it's [[bags]] and leaves in the morning, [[leaving]] you doomed to watch VHS tapes for the rest of your life. You have been [[warned]]... 0/10

P.S What kind of 18-rated horror has the woman keep a massive sports bra on during the obligatory sex scene?! See, the movie can't even get that part right... A woman asks for advice on the road to reach a mysterious town, and hears two ghoulish stories from the local weirdo, both zombie related. But [[possibly]] [[fates]] has something nasty in store for her too...

The Zombie Chronicles is [[abundantly]] one of the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever seen. In fact I must confess, so [[wicked]] was it I fast forwarded through most of the [[wastes]]. And there was a lot of that, believe me. It runs for just 69 [[mins]], and there is still tons of [[refill]]. You get some skinhead doing a lot of push ups, plenty of dull kissy-kissy scenes between goofy teens (that rhymed, tee hee) and some fine examples of why some people should never become actors.

As for the title characters, they barely even have a footnote in the film. Why, you get more undead action in the intro than you do the preceding feature! Though, considering how pathetic the eyes bursting out of sockets and the eating of brains sequences are (amongst other 'delights'), maybe that's a blessing in disguise.

And to top it all off, it looks likes it's been filmed on someone's mobile phone for broadcast on Youtube. Jerky camera-work, scratches on the print, flickering lights... I had to rub my eyes when I realised it was made in 2001, and not 1971. Even the clothes and fashioned look about three decades out of date!

If you think I'm not qualified to do a review of Chronicles having not seen the whole film, then go ahead. YOU try sitting through it, I betcha you won't even make it to the first appearance of the blue-smartie coloured freaks before making your excuses and leaving. It is truly laughable that anyone chose to release it, and honestly you'll get far more fun resting your drink on the disc than actually torturing your DVD player with this gigglesome [[alibis]] for horror. In fact, don't for surprised if it packs it's [[luggage]] and leaves in the morning, [[exiting]] you doomed to watch VHS tapes for the rest of your life. You have been [[advised]]... 0/10

P.S What kind of 18-rated horror has the woman keep a massive sports bra on during the obligatory sex scene?! See, the movie can't even get that part right... --------------------------------------------- Result 1651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would separate it from most [[dull]] and overly crafted mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). I have to say I was really looking forward on watching this film and finding some new life in it that would separate it from most [[uninspiring]] and overly crafted mexican films. I have no idea why but I trusted Sexo, Pudor y Lagrimas to be the one to inject freshness and confidence to our non-existent industry. Maybe it was because the soundtrack(which I listened to before I saw the film) sounded different from others, maybe it was because it dared to include newer faces(apart from Demian Bichir who is always a favorite of mexican film directors) and supposedly dealed within it's script with modern social behaviour, maybe because it's photography I saw in the trailers was bright and realistic instead of theatrical. The film turned out to be a major crowd pleaser, and a major letdown. What Serrano actually deals here with is the very old fashioned "battle of the sexes" as in "all men are the same" and "why is it that all women...;" blah,blah,blah. Nothing new in it, not even that, it uses so much common ground and clichè that it eventually mocks itself without leaving any valuable reflexion on the female/male condition. Full of usual tramps on the audience like safe gags about the clichès I talked about before(those always work, always) and screaming performances(it is a well acted film in it's context)..and by screaming I mean, literally. The at first more compelling characters played by Monica Dionne and Demian Bichir turn out to be according to Serrano the more pathetic ones. I completely disagree with Serrano, they shouldn't have been treated that way only to serve as marionettes for his lesson to come through...he made sure we got HIS message and completely destroyed their roles that were the only solid ground in which this story could have stood. Anyway, it is after all, a very entertaining film at times and you will probably have a good time seeing it (if you accept to be manipulated by it). --------------------------------------------- Result 1652 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] But how can you [[stand]] to mange a baseball team that can't win. For [[George]] Knox, it is not easy. As the movie opens, [[Roger]] Beaumont (Joseph-Gordon-Levitt) and his best friend J.P (Milton [[Davis]] Jr.) are riding on thier bikes around the angels' stadium. [[When]] they [[return]] to thier foster mother's home, Roger is [[suprised]] to have a visit from his dad (Dermot Mulroney). His mom is dead! And when he asks his father when they going to be a family again, he father jokes "I say when the angels win the division championship" So later on, Roger and J.P hide in a tree to watch the angels play baseball. When the [[manger]] [[George]] Knox (Danny Glover) take out his pitcher, the pitcher gets mad and gets into a fight with him, and soon the angels team get into the fightm that gets Knox ejected from the game. That night Roger makes a prayer, for the angles win the championship. When his foster mother Maggie Nelson (Brenda Ficker) agrees that Roger and J.P go to a basball, Roger sees real angles come on the field and helps the left fielder (Matthew McConaughey) makes a catch, that leaves the manger and the play-by-play man (Jay. O Sanders) how did he to that. Roger learns from the head angel (Christopher Lloyd) that only he can see the angles, because he was the only that prayed for help.

10/10 But how can you [[stands]] to mange a baseball team that can't win. For [[Giorgi]] Knox, it is not easy. As the movie opens, [[Roget]] Beaumont (Joseph-Gordon-Levitt) and his best friend J.P (Milton [[Davies]] Jr.) are riding on thier bikes around the angels' stadium. [[Whenever]] they [[reverted]] to thier foster mother's home, Roger is [[actualy]] to have a visit from his dad (Dermot Mulroney). His mom is dead! And when he asks his father when they going to be a family again, he father jokes "I say when the angels win the division championship" So later on, Roger and J.P hide in a tree to watch the angels play baseball. When the [[manager]] [[Georges]] Knox (Danny Glover) take out his pitcher, the pitcher gets mad and gets into a fight with him, and soon the angels team get into the fightm that gets Knox ejected from the game. That night Roger makes a prayer, for the angles win the championship. When his foster mother Maggie Nelson (Brenda Ficker) agrees that Roger and J.P go to a basball, Roger sees real angles come on the field and helps the left fielder (Matthew McConaughey) makes a catch, that leaves the manger and the play-by-play man (Jay. O Sanders) how did he to that. Roger learns from the head angel (Christopher Lloyd) that only he can see the angles, because he was the only that prayed for help.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1653 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] WHO'S GOT THE GOLD? is ([[unfortunately]]) the last of the HANZO THE RAZOR [[films]], starring Shintaro Katsu as the title character - the multi-weapon proficient, authority-bucking samurai officer with the "unique" technique of raping confessions out of unwilling female informants until they "spill the beans" and beg for more...

This entry starts with Hanzo "[[uncovering]]" a woman who poses as a ghost to guard a lake that's filled with bamboo trunks filled with gold stolen from the Treasury. This leads to Hanzo discovering a loan-sharking scheme and an orgy ring run by a blind monk. The requisite swordplay and rape/interrogation ensue - finalizing in a decent ending for this strange trilogy of films.

Not quite as strong and enjoyable as THE SNARE (part 2 of the series...), but still great for fans of samurai sleaze and Japanese pinky-style films. 8/10 WHO'S GOT THE GOLD? is ([[unluckily]]) the last of the HANZO THE RAZOR [[cinematography]], starring Shintaro Katsu as the title character - the multi-weapon proficient, authority-bucking samurai officer with the "unique" technique of raping confessions out of unwilling female informants until they "spill the beans" and beg for more...

This entry starts with Hanzo "[[revealing]]" a woman who poses as a ghost to guard a lake that's filled with bamboo trunks filled with gold stolen from the Treasury. This leads to Hanzo discovering a loan-sharking scheme and an orgy ring run by a blind monk. The requisite swordplay and rape/interrogation ensue - finalizing in a decent ending for this strange trilogy of films.

Not quite as strong and enjoyable as THE SNARE (part 2 of the series...), but still great for fans of samurai sleaze and Japanese pinky-style films. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Gerard is a writer with a somewhat overactive imagination. He is [[also]] homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic guilt and something of a clairvoyant, or so it seems. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by Christine. When he discovers that Christine's new boyfriend is the bit of rough trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to stick around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. Then he [[realizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, going to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's overheated, over-egged melodrama is a [[delicious]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[lot]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a dream and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's imagination. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to say Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. Super performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and easily Verhoeven's [[best]] [[film]] up to his [[wonderfully]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". Gerard is a writer with a somewhat overactive imagination. He is [[similarly]] homosexual and Catholic prone to Catholic guilt and something of a clairvoyant, or so it seems. On a trip to Flushing he is 'seduced' by Christine. When he discovers that Christine's new boyfriend is the bit of rough trade he's been fancying from afar he decides to stick around. After all, enforced heterosexuality has its compensations. Then he [[recognizes]] that Christine's previous three husbands have all died violent deaths. Did Christine murder them and is he or the boyfriend, Herman, going to be 'the fourth man'? Verhoeven's overheated, over-egged melodrama is a [[scrumptious]] blend of Hitchcock and David Lynch, full of OTT eroticism and religious imagery and an awful [[batches]] of the colour red. A lot of the time it looks and feels like a dream and we can never be sure that what we are seeing is real or a figment of Gerard's imagination. The fun is in figuring it out. Also the fact that Christine is an infinitely more likable character that either the priggish Gerard or the bullish Herman means we are hardly like to root for either of the men over her. In fact, it's fair to say Gerard's comeuppance can't come soon enough. Super performances, too, from Jeroen Krabbe and Renee Soutendijk and easily Verhoeven's [[bestest]] [[cinematography]] up to his [[staggeringly]] subversive piece of sci-fi "Starship Troopers". --------------------------------------------- Result 1655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Jude]] Law gives his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which offers [[little]] else of [[value]]. Completely [[lacking]] in eroticism, excitement, or leading ladies with appeal. One decent [[fight]], a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide [[detective]], well played by Timothy Spall. But despite their best [[efforts]], both [[actors]] are staked to the cross of the film's [[banality]].

With a lesser actor in the lead role -- and without the [[benefit]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Crocodiles]] [[would]] blend into the sea of low-budget [[vampire]] quickies. [[Jews]] Law gives his all in this beautifully filmed vampire flick which offers [[small]] else of [[values]]. Completely [[missing]] in eroticism, excitement, or leading ladies with appeal. One decent [[tussle]], a few moments of mild suspense. And a one-note plot.

The movie waxes philisophic in a series of conversations between Law's character and a dogged homicide [[pinkerton]], well played by Timothy Spall. But despite their best [[activities]], both [[protagonists]] are staked to the cross of the film's [[triviality]].

With a lesser actor in the lead role -- and without the [[interests]] of Oliver Curtis's cinematography -- [[Gators]] [[could]] blend into the sea of low-budget [[vamp]] quickies. --------------------------------------------- Result 1656 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I was [[particularly]] [[moved]] by the understated [[courage]] and integrity of l'Anglaise, in this beautifully acted, [[intellectually]] and visually [[compelling]] [[film]]. [[Thank]] you so much, [[Monsieur]] [[le]] directeur Rohmer. I was [[concretely]] [[shifted]] by the understated [[bravery]] and integrity of l'Anglaise, in this beautifully acted, [[mentally]] and visually [[conclusive]] [[kino]]. [[Thanking]] you so much, [[Gentleman]] [[lai]] directeur Rohmer. --------------------------------------------- Result 1657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Witchcraft]]/Witchery/[[La]] Casa 4/ and whatever [[else]] you wish to call it. How about..Crud.

A [[gathering]] of people at a Massachusetts [[island]] [[resort]] are [[besieged]] by the black [[magic]] powers of an [[evil]] [[witch]] [[killing]] each [[individual]] using [[cruel]], torturous [[methods]]. [[Photographer]] [[Gary]]([[David]] Hasselhoff)is [[taking]] pictures for Linda(Catherine Hickland whose [[voice]] and demeanor resemble EE-YOR of the Winnie the [[Poo]] cartoon), a virgin studying witchcraft, on the island resort without permission. Rose Brooks(Annie Ross, portraying an [[incredibly]] [[rude]] bitch)is interested in perhaps purchasing the resort and, along with husband Freddie(Robert Champagne, who is always ogling other women much younger than him), pregnant daughter Jane(Linda Blair)and grandson Tommy(Michael Manchester, who just looks bored throughout, probably wanting to watch [[Sesame]] Street instead of [[starring]] in this rubbish), go by boat to the resort being treated to a look at the property by Realtor Tony Giordano's son Jerry(Rick Farnsworth), obviously a pup in the business getting his feet wet. Along with these folks is architect Leslie(Leslie Cumming, whose character is a nympho)who might help Rose re-design the resort. The boat's captain is killed by The Lady in Black(Hildegard Knef, wearing her make-up and lip-stick extra thick)and a storm is brewing. The boat drives off by itself(..guided by the invisible power of The Lady in Black, I guess)with everyone stuck in the decrepit resort, which is in dire need of repairs. Most of the victims, before meeting their grisly fates are carried through a type of red wormhole whose vortex leads to another dimension(..perhaps a type of hell or something)where they are tortured by these fiends dressed in raggedy clothes with a crummy visage. One victim has her mouth sown before being hung upside down in a chimney, roasted as the others light the fireplace. One poor soul is tortured by harsh twistings of rope wrapped tightly around her flesh before being found hanging from the snout of a swordfish penetrating through her neck. One fellow is slowly suffocating as his veins bulge(..and bleed) and neck's blood vessels burst squirting in Hasselhoff's face! One fellow is crucified with nails hammered into his hands before being hung upside down over an open flame. Blair's pregnant victim becomes possessed with her hair standing on end speaking in another woman's voice. One is raped by this demonic man with a "diseased" mouth as the hellish hobos stand nearby gleefully cheering. The film, despite it's excesses, is mostly dull fodder for those who really wish to see the lowest point in the careers of Hasselhoff and Blair, who deserve better than this. Almost unbearable at times, building little-to-no suspense. Clumsy execution of the death sequences which look cheap and laughable. Sure some gore is okay, but most of the film shows victims after they've been run through the ringer. We do get a chance to see pregnant women(..who look exactly like stuntmen in costume with bad wigs) jumping out three story windows. Oh, and The Lady in Black's reflected face often pops up on inanimate objects for characters to see. Tommy has a little Sesame Street recorder which tapes The Lady in Black's mumbo jumbo chants, obviously used for later. For some reason, The Lady in Black likes to visit little Tommy. He's not at all scared of her, for Tommy's just too bored to show any expression on his face, much less fear. Need I say more? This one's a real stinker. Ugh. [[Sorcery]]/Witchery/[[Las]] Casa 4/ and whatever [[elsewhere]] you wish to call it. How about..Crud.

A [[compiling]] of people at a Massachusetts [[isle]] [[recourse]] are [[beleaguered]] by the black [[quadrant]] powers of an [[wicked]] [[sorceress]] [[murdering]] each [[person]] using [[ruthless]], torturous [[processes]]. [[Photography]] [[Gari]]([[Dawood]] Hasselhoff)is [[picked]] pictures for Linda(Catherine Hickland whose [[voices]] and demeanor resemble EE-YOR of the Winnie the [[Poop]] cartoon), a virgin studying witchcraft, on the island resort without permission. Rose Brooks(Annie Ross, portraying an [[appallingly]] [[discourteous]] bitch)is interested in perhaps purchasing the resort and, along with husband Freddie(Robert Champagne, who is always ogling other women much younger than him), pregnant daughter Jane(Linda Blair)and grandson Tommy(Michael Manchester, who just looks bored throughout, probably wanting to watch [[Syrup]] Street instead of [[featuring]] in this rubbish), go by boat to the resort being treated to a look at the property by Realtor Tony Giordano's son Jerry(Rick Farnsworth), obviously a pup in the business getting his feet wet. Along with these folks is architect Leslie(Leslie Cumming, whose character is a nympho)who might help Rose re-design the resort. The boat's captain is killed by The Lady in Black(Hildegard Knef, wearing her make-up and lip-stick extra thick)and a storm is brewing. The boat drives off by itself(..guided by the invisible power of The Lady in Black, I guess)with everyone stuck in the decrepit resort, which is in dire need of repairs. Most of the victims, before meeting their grisly fates are carried through a type of red wormhole whose vortex leads to another dimension(..perhaps a type of hell or something)where they are tortured by these fiends dressed in raggedy clothes with a crummy visage. One victim has her mouth sown before being hung upside down in a chimney, roasted as the others light the fireplace. One poor soul is tortured by harsh twistings of rope wrapped tightly around her flesh before being found hanging from the snout of a swordfish penetrating through her neck. One fellow is slowly suffocating as his veins bulge(..and bleed) and neck's blood vessels burst squirting in Hasselhoff's face! One fellow is crucified with nails hammered into his hands before being hung upside down over an open flame. Blair's pregnant victim becomes possessed with her hair standing on end speaking in another woman's voice. One is raped by this demonic man with a "diseased" mouth as the hellish hobos stand nearby gleefully cheering. The film, despite it's excesses, is mostly dull fodder for those who really wish to see the lowest point in the careers of Hasselhoff and Blair, who deserve better than this. Almost unbearable at times, building little-to-no suspense. Clumsy execution of the death sequences which look cheap and laughable. Sure some gore is okay, but most of the film shows victims after they've been run through the ringer. We do get a chance to see pregnant women(..who look exactly like stuntmen in costume with bad wigs) jumping out three story windows. Oh, and The Lady in Black's reflected face often pops up on inanimate objects for characters to see. Tommy has a little Sesame Street recorder which tapes The Lady in Black's mumbo jumbo chants, obviously used for later. For some reason, The Lady in Black likes to visit little Tommy. He's not at all scared of her, for Tommy's just too bored to show any expression on his face, much less fear. Need I say more? This one's a real stinker. Ugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] I just [[watched]] this movie on Showtime. Quite by [[accident]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[seen]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've missed a [[lot]].

That's the way this movie is. It's almost playing on the Kevin Bacon effect. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever character is intertwined in some way or another. Action, reaction, interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[wonderful]]. I'm going to have to find a copy to buy. I just [[saw]] this movie on Showtime. Quite by [[mishap]] actually. If I wouldn't have only had 6 hrs of sleep for the past two days then I wouldn't have came home early from work. If I hadn't came home early from work I wouldn't have [[watched]] this movie. I wouldn't have known what I was missing, but I would've missed a [[batches]].

That's the way this movie is. It's almost playing on the Kevin Bacon effect. That and causality (hence my verbiage above). Ever character is intertwined in some way or another. Action, reaction, interaction, non-interaction. This movie is just [[glamorous]]. I'm going to have to find a copy to buy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1659 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The problems with this film are many, but I will try to [[mention]] the most glaring and [[bothersome]] ones. First of all, while the theme suggests a number of vignettes about Manhattan life, the reality was that everything, as usual in movies and TV, was about something bizarre, usually of a sexual nature. The story lines were thin or [[nonexistent]], and virtually every scene, camera shot, line of dialog, and expressed emotion was absolutely, and [[totally]] [[fake]]. It finally reached a point after an hour of so of mind numbing garbage that I walked out (something no uncommon for me in recent years.) I would have guessed the fi9lm was directed by some wannabe auteur drop outs from some 3rd rate film studies program, but I believe the (at one time, pre-Amelia, talented)director Mira Nair took part in this disgusting [[travesty]], so perhaps the directorial talent in America has descended en masse into the cesspool. The problems with this film are many, but I will try to [[referenced]] the most glaring and [[troublesome]] ones. First of all, while the theme suggests a number of vignettes about Manhattan life, the reality was that everything, as usual in movies and TV, was about something bizarre, usually of a sexual nature. The story lines were thin or [[absent]], and virtually every scene, camera shot, line of dialog, and expressed emotion was absolutely, and [[perfectly]] [[forged]]. It finally reached a point after an hour of so of mind numbing garbage that I walked out (something no uncommon for me in recent years.) I would have guessed the fi9lm was directed by some wannabe auteur drop outs from some 3rd rate film studies program, but I believe the (at one time, pre-Amelia, talented)director Mira Nair took part in this disgusting [[joke]], so perhaps the directorial talent in America has descended en masse into the cesspool. --------------------------------------------- Result 1660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] this is a great movie. I love the series on tv and so I loved the movie. One of the best things in the movie is that Helga finally admits her deepest darkest secret to Arnold!!! that was great. i loved it it was pretty funny too. It's a great movie! Doy!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Usually]] I don't really [[like]] [[Emma]] Roberts so much, but after watching Nancy Drew it kind of changed my mind. The actors in the movies made the [[whole]] thing exciting and funny. [[Most]] of the time when you watch a mystery [[movie]] you can solve it before the [[middle]] of the [[show]], but in this [[movie]] it's [[like]] you are [[actually]] there. The clues have to all fit [[together]] until you can finally [[understand]] the [[whole]] [[crime]]. I am [[still]] [[amazed]] how she found it out. The whole movie was really clever and the people who [[watched]] it with me [[loved]] the movie too. The clothes were my favorite [[part]] of the movie, it was so cute. I don't [[think]] there will be another [[movie]] like this until the sequel comes out. I give it a nine because the [[popular]] girls didn't really [[seem]] to have the [[part]] just right, but they [[still]] make me laugh. It was a really great [[movie]] and a [[great]] [[mystery]]. I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] watching it. [[Popularly]] I don't really [[likes]] [[Emmy]] Roberts so much, but after watching Nancy Drew it kind of changed my mind. The actors in the movies made the [[together]] thing exciting and funny. [[Anymore]] of the time when you watch a mystery [[flick]] you can solve it before the [[medium]] of the [[shows]], but in this [[film]] it's [[likes]] you are [[genuinely]] there. The clues have to all fit [[jointly]] until you can finally [[understanding]] the [[total]] [[offense]]. I am [[nonetheless]] [[horrified]] how she found it out. The whole movie was really clever and the people who [[saw]] it with me [[worshipped]] the movie too. The clothes were my favorite [[party]] of the movie, it was so cute. I don't [[believing]] there will be another [[flick]] like this until the sequel comes out. I give it a nine because the [[fashionable]] girls didn't really [[appears]] to have the [[party]] just right, but they [[however]] make me laugh. It was a really great [[films]] and a [[huge]] [[conundrum]]. I [[categorically]] [[recommends]] watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] i checked this one out on DVD for a dollar so I [[could]] easily smile as this [[dreadful]] [[movie]] unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any [[worse]], it [[inevitably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold vengeance" in the US DVD version has absolutely nothing to do with the script. The action scenes are so [[obviously]] taken in their [[first]] take. There are lots of mistakes during dialogues indicating that there is just no intend to do another take to at least [[try]] to make this movie bearable. I cannot remember having seen a worse movie and I do occasionally get bad ones--well, except for unstoppable with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a bad one, Unstoppable deserves Best Picture awards at the Oscars when compared to this piece of crap. i checked this one out on DVD for a dollar so I [[did]] easily smile as this [[frightening]] [[cinematography]] unfolds. every time that you think it cannot get any [[worst]], it [[unavoidably]] does. The acting is absolutely horrific. the plot makes no sense at all. The title "cold vengeance" in the US DVD version has absolutely nothing to do with the script. The action scenes are so [[assuredly]] taken in their [[fiirst]] take. There are lots of mistakes during dialogues indicating that there is just no intend to do another take to at least [[endeavour]] to make this movie bearable. I cannot remember having seen a worse movie and I do occasionally get bad ones--well, except for unstoppable with Wesley Snipes. No, who am I kidding, while a bad one, Unstoppable deserves Best Picture awards at the Oscars when compared to this piece of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 1663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie was a major [[disappointment]] on [[direction]], intellectual niveau, [[plot]] and in the way it dealt with its subject, painting. It is a [[slow]] moving film set like an episode of Wonder Years, with appalling [[lack]] of depth though. It [[also]] [[fails]] to deliver its message in a [[convincing]] [[manner]].

The approach to the subject of painting is very elite, limited to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the makers of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style kitschy landscape paintings. Good art according to this film can be achieved by applying basic (like, primary school level) color theory and lots of sentiment. In parts the movie is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated (rather, celebrated by dancing on tables) that mentally handicapped people are not capable of having emotions or expressing them through painting, their works by definition being worthless 'bullshit' (quote).

I do not understand how the movie could get such high rating, then again, so far not many people rated it, and they chose for only very high or very low grades. This movie was a major [[dissatisfaction]] on [[directorate]], intellectual niveau, [[intrigue]] and in the way it dealt with its subject, painting. It is a [[lento]] moving film set like an episode of Wonder Years, with appalling [[shortages]] of depth though. It [[apart]] [[fail]] to deliver its message in a [[compelling]] [[modes]].

The approach to the subject of painting is very elite, limited to vague and subjective terms as "beauty". According to the makers of this movie, 'beauty' can be only experienced in Bob-Ross-style kitschy landscape paintings. Good art according to this film can be achieved by applying basic (like, primary school level) color theory and lots of sentiment. In parts the movie is offending, e.g. at a point it is stated (rather, celebrated by dancing on tables) that mentally handicapped people are not capable of having emotions or expressing them through painting, their works by definition being worthless 'bullshit' (quote).

I do not understand how the movie could get such high rating, then again, so far not many people rated it, and they chose for only very high or very low grades. --------------------------------------------- Result 1664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] After watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good film but sadly The [[film]] is a joke and actually [[trying]] hard to introduce Aryeman Afterall his father Keshu is the producer

RKS spoke so highly about the film during promotions, saying the film has meat unlike films released that time, I wonder which films was he talking about

The film is actually a [[typical]] [[Masala]] film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[kidnap]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids kidnapping Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay After watching KHAKEE i felt i'll get to watch another good film but sadly The [[cinematography]] is a joke and actually [[try]] hard to introduce Aryeman Afterall his father Keshu is the producer

RKS spoke so highly about the film during promotions, saying the film has meat unlike films released that time, I wonder which films was he talking about

The film is actually a [[emblematic]] [[Garam]] film with loads of comedy, romance, action everything jumbled

The ease at which the kids [[snatched]] the family, is one of the funniest parts ever, Imagine kids kidnapping Dawood's family

The end is a complete jumble mumble with sudden change of characterization

RKS gives his weakest film till date, except some Bachchan scenes the film is a bore

Music is boring

Amitabh tries to give the role his all, he does his part well, though not his best though he contorts his face too much when pulling a trigger and does a weird look while smoking the cigar His dubbing too isn't matched properly at times

Akshay is there for some minutes and just repeats his act and hams

Aryeman seems expressionless, tries too hard but overdoes it in some scenes

Bhumika emerges the best of the lot

The rest are okay --------------------------------------------- Result 1665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] In the opening scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I could see. [[However]], Bette Davis(Daisey Appleby),"The Whales of August",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[best]] [[roles]] in a long career in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her yacht with George Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral Staircase",'46. Daisey even proposed marriage to Johnny in a Ferris Wheel upside down and even got a black eye. Davis and Brent made a great couple, one suppose to be very rich and the other a very poor reporter. Off stage, Davis and Brent were having a real torrid love affair, which is good reason why there was sparks when these two appeared in this film. If you liked Bette Davis and George Brent, this is the film for you! In the opening scenes of this movie a man shot arrows through his hotel room into another man's bathroom and blew out all the lights. This must have been very hep for 1936, but rather way way out and had nothing to do with the film, Robin Hood did not make an appearance as far as I could see. [[Instead]], Bette Davis(Daisey Appleby),"The Whales of August",'87 was very young and attractive and performed one of her [[optimum]] [[duties]] in a long career in Hollywood. Daisey never stopped teasing or being very sexy with her nightgowns and so called swim suit on her yacht with George Brent(Johnny Jones),"The Spiral Staircase",'46. Daisey even proposed marriage to Johnny in a Ferris Wheel upside down and even got a black eye. Davis and Brent made a great couple, one suppose to be very rich and the other a very poor reporter. Off stage, Davis and Brent were having a real torrid love affair, which is good reason why there was sparks when these two appeared in this film. If you liked Bette Davis and George Brent, this is the film for you! --------------------------------------------- Result 1666 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] So far Nightmares and Dreamscapes has been erratic and [[disappointing]]. The [[first]] segment, directed by Brian Henson, may have offered little in the way of groundbreaking storytelling or real scares, but at [[least]] it was well-directed, suspenseful, and visually interesting, with [[solid]] acting by William Hurt and very impressive special [[effects]] for a mini-series.

[[However]], the second story in the series was just [[dreadful]], and not in the [[good]] [[way]]. The [[screenplay]] is bad, requiring the shallow, unlikable protagonists to [[act]] illogically in order to move the [[plot]], and having [[characters]] ramble on [[endlessly]] for the [[purposes]] of clunky, [[unnecessary]] exposition. The acting is overdone and [[unconvincing]], and I [[felt]] far more empathy for a cold-blooded [[killer]] in the first [[story]] than for the newlywed [[couple]] in the second. The director [[used]] a million tricks to [[try]] to [[make]] the [[narrative]] spooky, but with the amateurish acting and writing, the end [[result]] looks like a freshman-year film [[school]] project, with camera [[moves]] for their own sake, and [[little]] in the [[way]] of plot or tension.

[[If]] the rest of the series continues like this, I'll be sorely [[let]] down. I look forward to William H. Macy's installment, and [[hope]] he [[gets]] a decent director and screenwriter for his segment. So far the quality is far too [[inconsistent]] to [[predict]] [[either]] [[way]]. So far Nightmares and Dreamscapes has been erratic and [[distressing]]. The [[fiirst]] segment, directed by Brian Henson, may have offered little in the way of groundbreaking storytelling or real scares, but at [[fewest]] it was well-directed, suspenseful, and visually interesting, with [[robust]] acting by William Hurt and very impressive special [[impact]] for a mini-series.

[[Conversely]], the second story in the series was just [[horrific]], and not in the [[buena]] [[camino]]. The [[scenarios]] is bad, requiring the shallow, unlikable protagonists to [[ley]] illogically in order to move the [[intrigue]], and having [[nature]] ramble on [[constantly]] for the [[aims]] of clunky, [[superfluous]] exposition. The acting is overdone and [[inconclusive]], and I [[smelled]] far more empathy for a cold-blooded [[shooter]] in the first [[stories]] than for the newlywed [[matching]] in the second. The director [[utilizes]] a million tricks to [[seek]] to [[deliver]] the [[descriptive]] spooky, but with the amateurish acting and writing, the end [[outcome]] looks like a freshman-year film [[tuition]] project, with camera [[shift]] for their own sake, and [[tiny]] in the [[ways]] of plot or tension.

[[Though]] the rest of the series continues like this, I'll be sorely [[letting]] down. I look forward to William H. Macy's installment, and [[expectancy]] he [[got]] a decent director and screenwriter for his segment. So far the quality is far too [[incompatible]] to [[predicting]] [[neither]] [[ways]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[saw]] this show about 3-4 years ago. It was dam [[Funny]]! When i first time i saw it was playing on ETV(Estonian Television) And i started to like it. Too bad that that show is on bad [[time]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who likes to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[ideas]]. He got these glasses which h are brown. I [[like]] it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . I [[witnessed]] this show about 3-4 years ago. It was dam [[Droll]]! When i first time i saw it was playing on ETV(Estonian Television) And i started to like it. Too bad that that show is on bad [[moment]] for me. Hyde is like a cool guy who likes to sing Frank Sinatra! And he comes on stupid [[thinking]]. He got these glasses which h are brown. I [[iike]] it . And there's FeZ. The group Pervert. We all know what he does when his alone..... He wants to get laid badly. He even had it with his boss in one episode.His from India. And there is Michael , The stupidest guy on whole group , probably stupidest in town and his a cop! He is so stupid that i remember follows: Hyde says: Did u called cops ? - No Michael comes in and says. Does anyone know how to turn off siren? He is a town playboy. Then comes Jackie , who is former girlfriend of Michael and then she's Hyde's girlfriend. Then is Eric Who's son of grumpy war veteran and son of Kitty the housewife. His one big pussy. But he loves Donna , his girlfriend with who they plan for they're marriage. Donna is one hot girl. Hmm what i forget? ah Hyde lives in a basement . --------------------------------------------- Result 1668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I'm a fan of C&C, going back to their records, and [[liked]] this movie, but at one point in the mid-1980's on cable television in San Jose California, it was aired with an alternate plot line that destroyed the entire point of the movie. All references to marijuana were replaced with "diamonds". The bag that "Red" drops to [[Chong]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the conversation still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. I'm a fan of C&C, going back to their records, and [[wished]] this movie, but at one point in the mid-1980's on cable television in San Jose California, it was aired with an alternate plot line that destroyed the entire point of the movie. All references to marijuana were replaced with "diamonds". The bag that "Red" drops to [[Chuang]] has diamonds in it instead of marijuana, but the conversation still remains the same ("...it's worth ~$3000/lb"). There is also a subplot in which clips of aliens on a ship were added observing C&C, and talking to each other about getting the diamonds. At the end, instead of "space coke", it's something else. I'm not sure who created this version, but it was horrible, and obvious that they were attempting to make it family/child friendly. It would have been better if that network had not aired it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Here are the [[matches]] . . . (adv. = advantage)

The [[Warriors]] ([[Ultimate]] [[Warrior]], Texas [[Tornado]] and Legion of Doom) v The [[Perfect]] Team ([[Mr]] Perfect, [[Ax]], Smash and Crush of [[Demolition]]): [[Ax]] is the first to [[go]] in [[seconds]] when Warrior splashes him for the [[pin]] (4-3 adv. [[Warriors]]). I knew [[Ax]] wasn't a healthy man but if he was that [[unhealthy]] why bother have him on the [[card]]? This [[would]] be his [[last]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Demolition]] job out cheaply via [[double]] disqualification (2-1 adv. [[Warriors]]). [[Perfect]] applies the Perfect Plex on Texas [[Tornado]] for the [[pin]]. He then [[attempts]] the same on [[Warrior]] but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior comes back with a splash to pin [[Perfect]] and become the [[sole]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart [[Foundation]] v [[Million]] Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, [[Mystery]] [[Partner]] and Rhythm and Blues): The [[mystery]] [[partner]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact [[disposing]] of [[Koko]] straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still manages to say his [[correct]] [[height]], [[weight]] and finishing [[move]] while [[pretending]] not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams [[Honky]] for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls victim to Dibiase with [[help]] from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top [[rope]] but doesn't leave quietly [[attacking]] Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[legal]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). Almost straight after, Greg gets [[caught]] in a cradle by Hart trying to put the figure four leg-lock on him and gets pinned. It comes down to Hart v Dibiase and after a few minutes of nice wrestling, Bret gets his body-cross [[reversed]] by Dibiase for the [[pin]]. Dibiase is the [[sole]] survivor. [[At]] least Hart is put to good [[use]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Roberts]], 'Superfly' Jimmy Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the [[big]] boot and leg [[drop]] for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and would be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). Despite Slaughter getting in the ring against four men, he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. Here are the [[match]] . . . (adv. = advantage)

The [[Combatants]] ([[Final]] [[Combatant]], Texas [[Twister]] and Legion of Doom) v The [[Perfected]] Team ([[Herr]] Perfect, [[Hatchet]], Smash and Crush of [[Shredding]]): [[Axe]] is the first to [[going]] in [[secs]] when Warrior splashes him for the [[pines]] (4-3 adv. [[Guerillas]]). I knew [[Axe]] wasn't a healthy man but if he was that [[inclement]] why bother have him on the [[carte]]? This [[could]] be his [[latter]] PPV. Eventually, both Legion of Doom and [[Destroyed]] job out cheaply via [[twin]] disqualification (2-1 adv. [[Fighters]]). [[Flawless]] applies the Perfect Plex on Texas [[Typhoon]] for the [[pines]]. He then [[trying]] the same on [[Combatant]] but Warrior no-sells it and kicks out. Warrior comes back with a splash to pin [[Perfection]] and become the [[unique]] survivor. 5/10

The Dream Team (Dusty Rhodes, Koko B Ware and The Hart [[Cornerstone]] v [[Billion]] Dollar Team (Ted Dibiase, [[Puzzle]] [[Partners]] and Rhythm and Blues): The [[puzzle]] [[partners]] is The Undertaker and, on his debut, makes an impact [[dispose]] of [[Coco]] straight away with The Tombstone(Monsoon still manages to say his [[exact]] [[pinnacle]], [[weighs]] and finishing [[budge]] while [[faking]] not to know who he is) making it 4-3 to Dibiase's Team. Niedhart power-slams [[Tonk]] for the pin (3-3) and his career with the WWF is over. Shortly afterwards, it is Niedhart who falls victim to Dibiase with [[helps]] from Virgil (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Rhodes next after an Undertaker double axe-handle off the top [[strings]] but doesn't leave quietly [[assault]] Brother Love. Undertaker goes after Dusty and gets counted out despite not being the [[judiciary]] man (2-1 adv. Dibiase's Team). Almost straight after, Greg gets [[grabbed]] in a cradle by Hart trying to put the figure four leg-lock on him and gets pinned. It comes down to Hart v Dibiase and after a few minutes of nice wrestling, Bret gets his body-cross [[flipped]] by Dibiase for the [[pines]]. Dibiase is the [[unique]] survivor. [[Under]] least Hart is put to good [[usage]]. 6/10

The Vipers (Jake 'The Snake' [[Stevens]], 'Superfly' Jimmy Snuka and The Rockers) v Visionaries (Rick 'Model' Martel, Warlord and Power and Glory): After spending some time in the ring, Marty Jannetty gets power slammed by Warlord as he comes off the top rope for the pin (4-3 adv. Visionaries). Snuka gets pinned in seconds by Martel who reverses his body cross (4-2 adv. Visionaries). Michaels gets caught in the Power Plex and pinned by Roma (4-1 adv. Visionaries). It is now Roberts against four men resembling his Survivor Series effort two years before. Despite hitting Warlord with the DDT, Roberts gets counted out chasing after Martel. The Visionaries are the first team in Survivor Series history to completely survive as one. Not much here worth watching to be honest as the psychology is rushed. 3/10

Hulkamaniacs (Hulk Hogan, 'Hacksaw' Jim Duggan, Bigbossman and Tugboat) v Natural Disasters (Earthquake, Dino Bravo, Barbarian and Haku): One Bossman slam eliminates Haku early in the bout (4-3 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Duggan gets his 2 by 4 out after whacking Earthquake with it to get disqualified (3-3). Bravo commits career suicide shortly afterwards by allowing Hogan to cradle him for the pin (3-2 adv. Hulkamaniacs). Earthquake manages to overcome Bossman with two elbow drops for the pin shortly afterwards (2-2). Hogan gets beat down and FINALLY Tugboat gets a tag (who knew he was there at this point?), he wrestles for about 30 seconds before getting counted out with Earthquake. Only Hogan and Barbarian left. Barbarian puts in some nice offence but inevitably gets caught in the [[considerable]] boot and leg [[autumn]] for the pin. Hogan is the sole survivor. 4/10

The Alliance (Nikolai Volkoff, Tito Santana and Bushwhackers) v Mercenaries (Sgt Slaughter, Boris Zhukov and Orient Express): All of the Mercanaries wore camouflage face paint. Lightning quick pins here with Santana pinning Zhukov in his last PPV in seconds (4-3 adv. Alliance). There wasn't even a Bolshevik showdown. Bushwhackers hit Sato with The Battering Ram even though Tanaka was the legal man (4-2 adv. Alliance) and would be his last appearance on WWF PPV as The Orient Express get repackaged. Tanaka follows Sato when Santana stuns him with the flying forearm (4-1 adv. Alliance). Despite Slaughter getting in the ring against four men, he eliminates Volkoff (who's career is over after this), Butch and Luke in that order with relative ease. Finally, Santana beats Slaughter by disqualification when General Adnan hits him with Iraqi flag. At last some interesting booking even though the match was awful. Santana takes the upset victory as the sole survivor and becomes his last finest hour. 3/10

The egg hatches and it's Hector Guerrerro in a silly outfit. He dances with Gene Okerlund and gets booed by the crowd while Piper and Monsoon pretend they are enjoying it.

Match of Survival: Ultimate Warrior, Hulk Hogan and Tito Santana v Warlord, Power and Glory, Rick 'Model' Martel and 'Million Dollar Man Ted Dibiase: Just merely another catalogue of eliminations as Santana pins Warlord in seconds with flying forearm at least avenging his previous Summerslam defeat (4-3 adv. Dibiase's team). Dibiase stun guns Santana afterwards for the pin (4-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan kicks out of The Power Plex and proceeds to pin Roma after a clothesline, effectively killing off Power and Glory's push (3-2 adv. Dibiase's team). Hogan eliminates Martel by count-out and Dibiase with the leg drop for the pin (2-1 adv. Hogan's team). Hogan finally allows Warrior into the match who quickly disposes of former nemesis Hercules after a splash. A very predictable ending to the point of nauseous. 2/10

Overall, too many matches and too little time obviously had a detrimental effect as the wrestlers were almost waiting on a conveyor belt to be pinned. Most of the heels were decimated by Warrior and Hogan which is a poor way to handle a great roster of wrestlers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] My wife and I found this film to be [[highly]] unsatisfying. [[While]] the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too many loose ends that make no sense at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, enormously wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW II deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He meticulously found time somehow to do an exhausting search of bank records to unearth this one curious fact. All the while dealing with a red hot hostage situation and bank robbers threatening to start executing them momentarily. Wow! Talk about super powers for a detective.

The bank robbers leave behind millions of dollars in loose currency in the vault they have opened. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, ostensibly for the purpose of blackmailing the bank president. This defies any rational attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his henchmen with lesser brains.

Jodie Foster, using her political connections with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), Denzel Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster movie I saw, "Flight Plan", was also riddled with holes that made no sense at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF MONEY, AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine actors, lousy script writing. My wife and I found this film to be [[vitally]] unsatisfying. [[Albeit]] the plot keeps you interested and busy wondering just what is going on, when you leave the theater, there are just too many loose ends that make no sense at all. (SPOILERS AHEAD) Christopher Plummer, enormously wealthy head of a NY bank has a terrible hidden secret. Profiting from WW II deals with the Nazis and hiding loot stolen from Jews, he keeps the evidence (including diamonds and documents with the Nazi swastika) in a safety deposit box in his bank. Why? If he wants this never to be revealed, why did he not burn and destroy the documents years ago? And the diamonds? Obviously, he does not need them - why keep them rather than dispose of them? How did the bank robbers find out his secret? How did they know to zero in on this very safety deposit box #232? Ace detective Denzel Washington also discovers bank records show SD Boxes No's 231 and 233, but no #232. Curious. He meticulously found time somehow to do an exhausting search of bank records to unearth this one curious fact. All the while dealing with a red hot hostage situation and bank robbers threatening to start executing them momentarily. Wow! Talk about super powers for a detective.

The bank robbers leave behind millions of dollars in loose currency in the vault they have opened. They take only the contents of SD Box #232, ostensibly for the purpose of blackmailing the bank president. This defies any rational attempt at a logical explanation for what the film depicts as a criminal mastermind, or for his henchmen with lesser brains.

Jodie Foster, using her political connections with the Mayor of NYC, gains permission to enter the bank which is under the control of the bank robbers while holding many hostages. She offers the chief bank robber a deal to buy back the documents he now has in hand, but he ain't interested. So what's his point (if any?).

My wife was offended by the arrogance of all the players, Christopher Plummer (Bank President), Denzel Washington (ace detective), and Jodie Foster, crack trouble shooter for high-powered problems.

The last Jodie Foster movie I saw, "Flight Plan", was also riddled with holes that made no sense at all. I thought I liked Jodie Foster, but I will probably avoid her future films.

Now my problem is that I can rarely persuade my wife to go to the movies. I cannot disagree with her on this one ... "A WASTE OF MONEY, AND A WASTE OF TIME." Be forewarned. A well crafted film, fine actors, lousy script writing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1671 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When I learned of Sir Alec Guinness' death, this was the first of his many films I thought of re-seeing. What a wonderful droll commentary the film provides even after all these years. And Guinness helps to weave the charm into every frame. His eyes and face are as luminous as that white suit he wears. Both he and the film have to be considered lifetime favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1672 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just PPV'd this. I don't want to waste too much time on this as most of the posters here put it better than I ever could, but I did want to say a few things.

I didn't know which was funnier: Redgrave chasing tiny moths and tripping over her nurse; Close wailing that her "precious" boy (whom she and the Mr. had decided was a drunken loser) has been turned into roadkill; that the tone-deaf Ann schmoozed with Peggy Lee; or the horrid CGI of Crypt Keeper Annie gazing at her younger self!

I never bought Danes as the younger Redgrave. I didn't buy Richardson and Collette as sisters, either. If Meryl Streep's daughter wants to be an actress, she better get Mama to give her a few lessons! I had zero idea why any girl (or Buddy) would make fools of themselves over vapid stud du jour Harris! Ann's daughters are as whiny and thoughtless as she, Luc is a retarded slacker on crack, and I didn't give a rot about any of them! Evening gives Chick Flicks a bad name! --------------------------------------------- Result 1673 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] i thought it was pretty interesting my social studies/language arts teacher was the police chief guy that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he [[always]] get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[thats]] so stupid -_- i think I'm [[done]] never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is fun i love my friends i thought it was pretty interesting my social studies/language arts teacher was the police chief guy that was holding the microphone on the water barrel part =D i was excited my teacher is in some commercials he was in a gas/coffee/phone/play station commercial its nice seeing him on TV he was also on everybody hates Chris except he [[incessantly]] get the small part la la why do we have to right 10 lines [[shes]] so stupid -_- i think I'm [[doing]] never mind I'm still not done what is this a joke? why do we have to go all the way to line ten... really what's the point of it??!! i will just right random words for now -_- maple story is fun i love my friends --------------------------------------------- Result 1674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[gave]] it a 10, [[since]] [[everyone]] [[else]] [[seemed]] to [[like]] it and it [[would]] have been churlish not to. The reason I'm [[troubling]] you is to add a personal observation on Castle's work.

I've seen "Homicidal" and "The Tingler" (the version with the clever colour sequence where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few times and "The House On Haunted Hill" many times.

Even I am not old enough to have seen them when [[Castle]] was up to his showman tricks, thus I can appreciate them for their own merit. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I believe they do him a disservice.

The end sequence of "Homicidal" is GENUINELY shocking and works today - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted Hill" was a TRIUMPH. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright house as its exterior, the great Vincent Price and a solid cast, plus a good score and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the late Sixties, it produced an audience reaction I'd not seen before and have not seen since.

It was the bit where the heroine is alone in the basement (if you've not seen the film, stop reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the hero on the other side of the wall.

With NO telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the AUDIENCE to switch their gaze to... I'm saying no more (my "spoiler" declaration above only covers THIS movie).

The point is, I believe this ploy was DELIBERATE - not accidental - and when it happened, the WHOLE AUDIENCE SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is superior film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. I [[supplied]] it a 10, [[because]] [[anybody]] [[further]] [[sounded]] to [[iike]] it and it [[should]] have been churlish not to. The reason I'm [[worrisome]] you is to add a personal observation on Castle's work.

I've seen "Homicidal" and "The Tingler" (the version with the clever colour sequence where everything except the blood is in black and white) a few times and "The House On Haunted Hill" many times.

Even I am not old enough to have seen them when [[Castillo]] was up to his showman tricks, thus I can appreciate them for their own merit. And while most pass him off as second-rate, schlocky, hammy, etc., I believe they do him a disservice.

The end sequence of "Homicidal" is GENUINELY shocking and works today - and the premise of "The Tingler" while silly, was highly original.

But "The House On Haunted Hill" was a TRIUMPH. Having used that Frank Lloyd Wright house as its exterior, the great Vincent Price and a solid cast, plus a good score and production values - when I first saw it at a packed late-night showing in the late Sixties, it produced an audience reaction I'd not seen before and have not seen since.

It was the bit where the heroine is alone in the basement (if you've not seen the film, stop reading NOW) and we are waiting to hear the hero on the other side of the wall.

With NO telegraphing of what is coming, the camera slowly pulls back, forcing the AUDIENCE to switch their gaze to... I'm saying no more (my "spoiler" declaration above only covers THIS movie).

The point is, I believe this ploy was DELIBERATE - not accidental - and when it happened, the WHOLE AUDIENCE SCREAMED (including most of the men!) It took the audience about TEN MINUTES to calm down.

Now THAT is superior film-making. A flamboyant showman he might have been, but "House" and the other two films I've mentioned were GOOD MOVIES. Castle may not have been a Hitchcock, but he was no Ed Wood, either.

It's easy to concentrate on someone's quirks and forget to examine their TALENT. So I hope this documentary acknowledged that. I look forward to seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] 96 [[minutes]] of this is [[cruel]]..and I love the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the helm of this was not a [[fan]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great pause) that I wonder if it's an old Starsky & Hutch episode. I lost count of the number of times I noticed that makeup had missed a spot near the collar. [[Refusing]] to acknowledge that any time had passed since the mid-60's (ludicrous) the producers simply [[replace]] Marilyn & Eddie with younger actors. Why not let them grow and age? The addition of an Addam's Family style reunion does not add to the flavor of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few hours (preposterous.) Sid Ceaser is the most, yes the most unbelievable character (I am including the bad robots) since he babbles an unwild combination of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an ancient Arabic ruler. And yes, it looks like the laugh track is missing. In fact, there are several spots where there is dead air, as if the laugh track was to be inserted later. The actors seem to wait on the faux audience. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of touch the writers and producers were. Marilyn says something like: "Where could Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an accident. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle Herman will be here if he has to drag himself off the train track." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's husband was a stuntman in the early 60's and lost a leg and was nearly killed in a train stunt. He never recovered and this financially devastated her family. (check out Biography's fantastic review of her life and career) This line could have been easily changed to be more sensitive to her.

If you are a real fan of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this mess. It illustrates how some things are better left alone. Even with the (nearly) original cast, this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. 96 [[mins]] of this is [[ferocious]]..and I love the old Munster's. Yes, the plot is thing; yes the lines are trite; but whoever was at the helm of this was not a [[admirer]]. There is so much 'intrigue' (and I use that word with great pause) that I wonder if it's an old Starsky & Hutch episode. I lost count of the number of times I noticed that makeup had missed a spot near the collar. [[Dismissing]] to acknowledge that any time had passed since the mid-60's (ludicrous) the producers simply [[replaced]] Marilyn & Eddie with younger actors. Why not let them grow and age? The addition of an Addam's Family style reunion does not add to the flavor of the Halloween Party.

Grandpa & Herman fly to Transylvania and back in a few hours (preposterous.) Sid Ceaser is the most, yes the most unbelievable character (I am including the bad robots) since he babbles an unwild combination of gibberish & yiddish but claims to be an ancient Arabic ruler. And yes, it looks like the laugh track is missing. In fact, there are several spots where there is dead air, as if the laugh track was to be inserted later. The actors seem to wait on the faux audience. It's not laughable; it's sad. Oh, and the best part! Yvonne DeCarlo has a line that just goes to show you how out of touch the writers and producers were. Marilyn says something like: "Where could Uncle Herman and Grandpa be? They could have been in an accident. They could have been hit by a car...or a train!" Lily says responds with something like: "You're Uncle Herman will be here if he has to drag himself off the train track." What's amazing about this is: Yvonne DeCarlo's husband was a stuntman in the early 60's and lost a leg and was nearly killed in a train stunt. He never recovered and this financially devastated her family. (check out Biography's fantastic review of her life and career) This line could have been easily changed to be more sensitive to her.

If you are a real fan of the Munster's then you'll have to RENT this mess. It illustrates how some things are better left alone. Even with the (nearly) original cast, this is almost as bad as the attempted remake of the show a few years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 1676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In [[order]] to [[hold]] the public's [[attention]] for three [[hours]], we were treated not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 years of Hungarian history, as to sexual liaisons with a sister, a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[also]] a [[totally]] [[gratuitous]] [[rape]]. Having [[said]] all this, the first story of the relationship among the children of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensual]] - thanks to [[Jennifer]] Ehle. In [[decree]] to [[held]] the public's [[beware]] for three [[hour]], we were treated not so much to a family's romp through four generations and 120 years of Hungarian history, as to sexual liaisons with a sister, a sister-in-law and other adulteries. Oh yes, there was [[moreover]] a [[abundantly]] [[unsubstantiated]] [[rapes]]. Having [[avowed]] all this, the first story of the relationship among the children of the patriarch was fresh and [[sensuous]] - thanks to [[Jessica]] Ehle. --------------------------------------------- Result 1677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've [[seen]] all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[worst]] one [[yet]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The directors and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's Abiding Joy." The only [[thing]] about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the [[characters]] (Willie, Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and [[Cookie]]). The names/ages/genders of the children are [[wrong]]. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[produce]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The music is too loud. The actors are not convincing - they lack emotions.

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last movie from this series, but I doubt it. If there are more movies made, I wish Michael Landon, Jr and others would stick closer to the original plot and story lines. The [[books]] are excellent and, if closely followed, would make excellent movies! I've [[watched]] all four of the movies in this series. Each one strays further and further from the books. This is the [[hardest]] one [[however]]. My problem is that it does not follow the book it is titled after in any way! The directors and producers should have named it any thing other than "Love's Abiding Joy." The only [[stuff]] about this movie that remotely resembles the book are the names of some of the [[personages]] (Willie, Missie, Henry, Clark, Scottie and [[Cannoli]]). The names/ages/genders of the children are [[amiss]]. The entire story line is no where in the book.

I find it a great disservice to Janette Oke, her books and her fans to [[generating]] a movie under her title that is not correct in any way. The music is too loud. The actors are not convincing - they lack emotions.

If you want a good family movie, this might do. It is clean. Don't watch it, though, if you are hoping for a condensed version of the book. I hope that this will be the last movie from this series, but I doubt it. If there are more movies made, I wish Michael Landon, Jr and others would stick closer to the original plot and story lines. The [[livres]] are excellent and, if closely followed, would make excellent movies! --------------------------------------------- Result 1678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] how many [[minutes]] does it take to [[paint]] a [[poem]]? in this film much too [[long]].

it tells the story about the impact of a first love between two schoolboys.

the boys can't withhold touching each other and making love. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a sensual guy in the disco and that [[raises]] doubt: exploration, fantasy, longing, lust and feelings of loosing grip on your love are themes that are all extensively painted with music, close-ups and silent scenes like telling a poem. but it really takes too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising how many [[mins]] does it take to [[paintings]] a [[poetry]]? in this film much too [[protracted]].

it tells the story about the impact of a first love between two schoolboys.

the boys can't withhold touching each other and making love. after a while one gets distracted by a brief encounter with a sensual guy in the disco and that [[evokes]] doubt: exploration, fantasy, longing, lust and feelings of loosing grip on your love are themes that are all extensively painted with music, close-ups and silent scenes like telling a poem. but it really takes too long, annoying long, shame, the effort was promising --------------------------------------------- Result 1679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] [[Ida]] Lupino was one of the few women to [[break]] through the directorial glass ceiling in Hollywood under the studio system. Not [[surprisingly]], she also [[tackled]] proto-feminist themes that, when touched at all, were approached in so gingerly a manner that it was seldom quite clear what was being talked about. In [[Outrage]], she treats rape and its aftermath, and though [[throughout]] the short movie it's [[referred]] to as `criminal assault,' she [[leaves]], for once, no doubt about what happened.

Mala Powers (in her official debut) plays a secretary-bookkeeper at a big industrial plant; she lives with her parents but is engaged to a swell guy (Robert Clarke), who just got a raise and now makes $90 a week. Leaving the plant after working late one night, she finds herself being stalked. In the ensuing scene – the best in the movie – she tries to escape her pursuer in a forbidding maze of buildings and alleys but fails.

When she returns home, disheveled and in shock, the police can't get much out of her; she claims she never saw her attacker (who manned a snack truck outside the factory). Trying to pretend that nothing happened, she returns to her job but falls apart, thinking that everybody is staring at her, judging her. She goes into a fugue state, running away to Los Angeles on a bus but stumbling off at a rest stop.

Waking up in a strange ranch house, she learns that she's been rescued by Tod Andrews, a young minister in a California agricultural town. She lies about her identity and takes a job packing oranges. The two fall vaguely in love, but it's clear to Andrews that Powers is keeping dire secrets. When, at a company picnic, she seizes a wrench and cracks the skull of Jerry Paris, who was trying to steal a kiss, the truth about her past comes out....

It was a courageous movie to come out in 1950, and that may explain and excuse some of its shortcomings. Lupino never recaptures the verve of the early assault scene, and the movie wanders off into the bucolic and sentimental, ending up talky and didactic. Yes, Lupino had important information to impart, but she didn't trust the narrative to speak for itself. Her cast, pleasant but bland and generic, weren't much help, either, reverting to melodramatic postures or homespun reassurance. But Outrage was a breakthrough, blazing a trail for later discourse on what the crime of rape really is, and what it really means to its victims. [[Irn]] Lupino was one of the few women to [[rupture]] through the directorial glass ceiling in Hollywood under the studio system. Not [[interestingly]], she also [[addressed]] proto-feminist themes that, when touched at all, were approached in so gingerly a manner that it was seldom quite clear what was being talked about. In [[Disgust]], she treats rape and its aftermath, and though [[across]] the short movie it's [[alluded]] to as `criminal assault,' she [[departs]], for once, no doubt about what happened.

Mala Powers (in her official debut) plays a secretary-bookkeeper at a big industrial plant; she lives with her parents but is engaged to a swell guy (Robert Clarke), who just got a raise and now makes $90 a week. Leaving the plant after working late one night, she finds herself being stalked. In the ensuing scene – the best in the movie – she tries to escape her pursuer in a forbidding maze of buildings and alleys but fails.

When she returns home, disheveled and in shock, the police can't get much out of her; she claims she never saw her attacker (who manned a snack truck outside the factory). Trying to pretend that nothing happened, she returns to her job but falls apart, thinking that everybody is staring at her, judging her. She goes into a fugue state, running away to Los Angeles on a bus but stumbling off at a rest stop.

Waking up in a strange ranch house, she learns that she's been rescued by Tod Andrews, a young minister in a California agricultural town. She lies about her identity and takes a job packing oranges. The two fall vaguely in love, but it's clear to Andrews that Powers is keeping dire secrets. When, at a company picnic, she seizes a wrench and cracks the skull of Jerry Paris, who was trying to steal a kiss, the truth about her past comes out....

It was a courageous movie to come out in 1950, and that may explain and excuse some of its shortcomings. Lupino never recaptures the verve of the early assault scene, and the movie wanders off into the bucolic and sentimental, ending up talky and didactic. Yes, Lupino had important information to impart, but she didn't trust the narrative to speak for itself. Her cast, pleasant but bland and generic, weren't much help, either, reverting to melodramatic postures or homespun reassurance. But Outrage was a breakthrough, blazing a trail for later discourse on what the crime of rape really is, and what it really means to its victims. --------------------------------------------- Result 1680 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (73%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Short synopsis

This film [[opens]] with soldiers being released from the company of men. One of them pursues another with a weird scheme the other repeatedly refuses. Later they both get trapped in an office building in which they want to crack a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility turns into playful banter and then into a desperate fight for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really serious). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[hole]] into a wall and finally manage to escape – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last encounter, a last light for a cigarette, adieu l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to see closet homosexuals in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of women is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern glass and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall coverings around. The wardrobe is also very good. The ultra stylish Citroen DS (maybe the most modern and elegant car of all times) features large in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can recommend this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a manner that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he really acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is highly recommended). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. Also very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. Short synopsis

This film [[opened]] with soldiers being released from the company of men. One of them pursues another with a weird scheme the other repeatedly refuses. Later they both get trapped in an office building in which they want to crack a safe during the Christmas holidays. Hostility turns into playful banter and then into a desperate fight for survival (during the bantering they lose all drinkable liquids, so it is really serious). With exposed, well built and well oiled torsos they ram a [[orifice]] into a wall and finally manage to escape – only to find out that they have been betrayed and set up by women. One gets caught, the other remains free and is not given away by his companion. A last encounter, a last light for a cigarette, adieu l'ami, farewell, friend.

I found it hard not to see closet homosexuals in the two main characters, played by classical he-man superstars Alain Delon and Charles Bronson. They are obviously attracted to each other, their treatment of women is abominable and marked by contempt throughout. The whole story seems to have a strong symbolic undertow, a little like Deliverance. It is also very stylish. The safe the two men want to crack is in a – for the time – ultra modern glass and aluminum tower. It is the seat of a publicity firm, so there are many fancy posters and wall coverings around. The wardrobe is also very good. The ultra stylish Citroen DS (maybe the most modern and elegant car of all times) features large in this movie – perhaps a subtle kind of product placement.

I can recommend this movie for the actor's performances alone. Delon and Bronson are really sharing the top billing, in a manner that struck me as very fair and sporting. Both do a considerable amount of acrobatics. I have never seen Bronson better than here, he really acts - and speaks French throughout, with a heavy accent buy very passably indeed. And it is certainly the man himself we hear. (So the French language version is highly recommended). The police inspector who pursues the two is played by on of my favorite Franch character actors, Bernard Fresson who was Gene Hackman's partner in French Connection II. He is the best brainy police inspector I know. Also very good is former child actress Brigitte Fossey as the young ingénue who, as it turns out, is not so Innocent as it first seems.

Anyone who expects the „old in-an-out" of classical heist movies might be disappointed with this film. For those with a little patience this will be a rewarding experience, full of novel and original ideas and directorial quirks, although it my be a little too brutal and sadistic for its own sake. --------------------------------------------- Result 1681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Years have gone by since Don Wilson used his martial arts expertise to take down a robot who was programmed to destroy him, he's also married to the blonde reporter (Stacie Foster) who led the rebellion in the first film, now a new [[conspiracy]] is in the works, one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two heroes, and a corporation looking to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and [[Cyber]] Tracker 2 [[becomes]] a virtual [[replay]] of the first [[movie]]. I [[admit]] that I have [[bought]] [[DVDs]] from the [[bargain]] [[bin]] that were [[made]] by PM, PM was a [[company]] that [[specialized]] in cheap-jack action flicks (like this) which had tons of [[explosions]], [[little]] [[story]] and [[overall]] [[nothing]] but [[mean]] edged [[action]]. Some of these titles have been ([[mildly]]) enjoyable (Last Man [[Standing]] and The Sweeper) however Cyber Tracker 2 is [[stuck]] with the [[casting]] of the charisma-less Don Wilson. When [[comparing]] the [[protagonists]] of [[similar]] PM [[efforts]] both [[Jeff]] Wincott and C. [[Thomas]] Howell are [[Oscar]] [[nominees]] when [[compared]] to Don Wilson. Another [[telling]] sign is that this was [[directed]] by Richard Pepin who has [[none]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[seems]] to have in crafting [[action]] [[sequences]] that feel [[much]] more [[expensive]] than their [[budgets]]. [[Then]] again [[though]] both C. [[Thomas]] and Wincott are [[probably]] more [[expensive]] to [[obtain]]. [[Cyber]] Tracker 2 is a [[rip]] off with a [[capitol]] [[R]], there are so [[many]] steals from [[better]] movies (Robocop, Terminator, [[Universal]] Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[almost]] as if Richard Pepin is [[trying]] to [[infuse]] a [[sense]] of identity to the pedestrian [[material]] yet without the intelligent [[ideas]] or at [[least]] the mindless zip of [[great]] [[action]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[borrowed]] from a [[better]] movie and the [[supporting]] cast [[overact]]. The only exception comes from Tony Burton who is [[miles]] better than the material. [[Also]] Stacie Foster [[looks]] [[like]] she [[could]] be [[better]] with far better material. [[However]] [[Cyber]] [[Tracker]] 2 comes off [[mainly]] as [[noisy]], [[bland]] and [[lackluster]] as its [[leading]] [[man]], however with no [[real]] martial [[arts]] sequences to [[fall]] back on, all there is, is [[lots]] of cars [[tipping]] over and that [[alone]] is no [[substitute]] for the [[bankruptcy]] of [[ambition]] [[expressed]] here.

*1/2 out of 4-([[Poor]]) Years have gone by since Don Wilson used his martial arts expertise to take down a robot who was programmed to destroy him, he's also married to the blonde reporter (Stacie Foster) who led the rebellion in the first film, now a new [[complicity]] is in the works, one that involves look-alike droids who frame our two heroes, and a corporation looking to rule the world (There is no plot to back any of this up) and [[Cyberspace]] Tracker 2 [[become]] a virtual [[playback]] of the first [[cinematography]]. I [[recognise]] that I have [[acquire]] [[dvd]] from the [[negotiations]] [[benn]] that were [[accomplished]] by PM, PM was a [[societies]] that [[specialising]] in cheap-jack action flicks (like this) which had tons of [[blast]], [[tiny]] [[narratives]] and [[comprehensive]] [[nada]] but [[imply]] edged [[measures]]. Some of these titles have been ([[smoothly]]) enjoyable (Last Man [[Stand]] and The Sweeper) however Cyber Tracker 2 is [[trapped]] with the [[foundry]] of the charisma-less Don Wilson. When [[comparative]] the [[players]] of [[analogue]] PM [[initiative]] both [[Geoff]] Wincott and C. [[Tomas]] Howell are [[Oskar]] [[nominations]] when [[compares]] to Don Wilson. Another [[saying]] sign is that this was [[oriented]] by Richard Pepin who has [[nos]] of the flair Joseph Merhi [[appears]] to have in crafting [[actions]] [[sequence]] that feel [[very]] more [[costly]] than their [[budget]]. [[Later]] again [[whilst]] both C. [[Tomas]] and Wincott are [[arguably]] more [[costly]] to [[obtained]]. [[Internet]] Tracker 2 is a [[tears]] off with a [[congress]] [[rs]], there are so [[countless]] steals from [[best]] movies (Robocop, Terminator, [[Globally]] Soldier to even Halloween III!) that it's [[hardly]] as if Richard Pepin is [[tempting]] to [[instil]] a [[sensing]] of identity to the pedestrian [[materials]] yet without the intelligent [[reflections]] or at [[less]] the mindless zip of [[magnificent]] [[actions]], Cyber Tracker 2 falls flat. There is literally no good idea that isn't [[loaned]] from a [[improved]] movie and the [[helped]] cast [[overdo]]. The only exception comes from Tony Burton who is [[kilometres]] better than the material. [[Moreover]] Stacie Foster [[seems]] [[iike]] she [[did]] be [[best]] with far better material. [[Still]] [[Cyberspace]] [[Sniffer]] 2 comes off [[principally]] as [[rowdy]], [[insipid]] and [[mediocre]] as its [[culminating]] [[mec]], however with no [[genuine]] martial [[arte]] sequences to [[autumn]] back on, all there is, is [[lot]] of cars [[tip]] over and that [[lonely]] is no [[surrogates]] for the [[bankrupt]] of [[intention]] [[voiced]] here.

*1/2 out of 4-([[Pauper]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 1682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I have been a fan of Pushing Daisies since the very beginning. It is wonderfully [[thought]] up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[remarkable]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much TV has been needing a creative, [[original]] show like Pushing Daisies. It is a huge [[relief]] to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[similarities]], and it does get tedious at [[moments]] to [[see]] shows so [[close]] in [[identity]].

With a magnificent cast, wonderful script, and hilarity in every episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[remarkable]] shows on your television. I have been a fan of Pushing Daisies since the very beginning. It is wonderfully [[ideas]] up, and Bryan Fuller has the most [[sumptuous]] ideas for this show.

It is unbelievable on how much TV has been needing a creative, [[upfront]] show like Pushing Daisies. It is a huge [[relieving]] to see a show, that is unlike the rest, where as, if you compared it to some of the newer shows, such as Scrubs and House, you would see the [[analogies]], and it does get tedious at [[times]] to [[behold]] shows so [[shuts]] in [[identities]].

With a magnificent cast, wonderful script, and hilarity in every episode, Pushing Daisies is, by-far, one of the most [[sumptuous]] shows on your television. --------------------------------------------- Result 1683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Having [[watched]] both the Lion King and Lion King II and enjoyed both thoroughly. I thought Lion King 1.5 might be worth watching. What a [[disappointment]] ! Disney must be getting desperate for revenues.

Especially now that they lost the deal with pixar.

[[Basically]], they just [[picked]] up some bits of footage that were left on the editor's floor (or garbage can) and glued them together to [[make]] a

quick buck. Unlike LK I & II, both of which had strong story lines.

This movie [[hardly]] has a story at all. While the characters and animation are always fun to look at, there is simply not enough material here for a movie. Some of the bits could have been good 2nd disk fillers on the original offerings.

Disney - Shame on you for putting this trash out to make a quick buck!

Next time take the time and effort and put our an enduring work. Having [[observed]] both the Lion King and Lion King II and enjoyed both thoroughly. I thought Lion King 1.5 might be worth watching. What a [[frustration]] ! Disney must be getting desperate for revenues.

Especially now that they lost the deal with pixar.

[[Largely]], they just [[opted]] up some bits of footage that were left on the editor's floor (or garbage can) and glued them together to [[deliver]] a

quick buck. Unlike LK I & II, both of which had strong story lines.

This movie [[almost]] has a story at all. While the characters and animation are always fun to look at, there is simply not enough material here for a movie. Some of the bits could have been good 2nd disk fillers on the original offerings.

Disney - Shame on you for putting this trash out to make a quick buck!

Next time take the time and effort and put our an enduring work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage dump where the characters live. The film is based on a series of stories by Shugoro Yamamoto and tells the story of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[sadness]].

[[First]] color film [[made]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[long]] [[time]]. [[Weirdly]] it was [[often]] listed as being only available in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[run]] time in some [[promotional]] material. I was holding out for the [[full]] [[version]], waiting to see what Kurasowa [[wanted]] us to see, only to [[find]] out on the recent [[release]] by [[Criterion]] that the 140 minute version is the full version.

[[Finally]] [[sitting]] down to see the film last night I'm of mixed emotions about the [[film]]. First and foremost its visually linked to every film that followed. You can see every other of Kurasowals remaining six films reflected in this [[movie]], down to the [[painted]] sunsets. Its a striking [[film]] in its use of [[color]] and you can understand why it took him so long to a film stock he would he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[work]] of [[art]].([[Though]] be [[warned]] if you're going to see this on your widescreen TV this was shot 1.33 so will appear in normal TV ratio.) The rest of the film is a mixed bag. Part of the problem is that the lives of all of these people don't quite come together. As separate tales they all work well but as a filmic whole they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa since one can't always hit things out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort occasionally bombed himself.

This isn't to say that there aren't reasons to see the film. As will all Kurasowa films there are always reasons to see his films, whether they work or not. The first [[trip]] of the "trolley" is one of the [[best]] things Kurasowa ever did and is worth the price of a rental. Its one of the most [[magical]] moments in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. The title is the sound that one of the characters makes as he drives his imaginary trolley across the garbage dump where the characters live. The film is based on a series of stories by Shugoro Yamamoto and tells the story of a group of people who effectively live in ramshackle homes on the edge of the dump. It's a mix of laughter and [[heaviness]].

[[Firstly]] color film [[introduced]] by Akria Kurasowa has been something I've wanted to see for a [[largo]] [[period]]. [[Oddly]] it was [[habitually]] listed as being only available in a shortened version from a three or four hour original due to an error in the [[execute]] time in some [[propaganda]] material. I was holding out for the [[fullest]] [[stepping]], waiting to see what Kurasowa [[desired]] us to see, only to [[finds]] out on the recent [[emancipate]] by [[Criteria]] that the 140 minute version is the full version.

[[Lastly]] [[seated]] down to see the film last night I'm of mixed emotions about the [[cinema]]. First and foremost its visually linked to every film that followed. You can see every other of Kurasowals remaining six films reflected in this [[cinema]], down to the [[brushed]] sunsets. Its a striking [[cinematographic]] in its use of [[coloring]] and you can understand why it took him so long to a film stock he would he happy with (of course there are failed projects as well). The film is a visual [[cooperating]] of [[artistry]].([[Notwithstanding]] be [[alerted]] if you're going to see this on your widescreen TV this was shot 1.33 so will appear in normal TV ratio.) The rest of the film is a mixed bag. Part of the problem is that the lives of all of these people don't quite come together. As separate tales they all work well but as a filmic whole they don't hang as one. I don't blame Kurasowa since one can't always hit things out of the box, especially when some one like Robert Altman who specialized in multi-character films of this sort occasionally bombed himself.

This isn't to say that there aren't reasons to see the film. As will all Kurasowa films there are always reasons to see his films, whether they work or not. The first [[travelling]] of the "trolley" is one of the [[optimum]] things Kurasowa ever did and is worth the price of a rental. Its one of the most [[quadrant]] moments in film history as the trolley is inspected and taken out. The father and son living in the car is touching (though ultimately very sad) and there are other bits and pieces that shine (like the cast which is across the board great) and one should at least try the film as something different from a man we usually associated with samurai films or crime dramas.

Its an intriguing misfire from a master filmmaker which means in this case means its better than most other filmmakers successes.

Between 6 and 7 as a whole, much higher in pieces. --------------------------------------------- Result 1685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] [[After]] Chaplin made one of his best films: Dough & Dynamite, he made one of his [[worst]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. Many of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very little else to recommend this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. [[Upon]] Chaplin made one of his best films: Dough & Dynamite, he made one of his [[gravest]]: Gentlemen Of Nerve. During this first year in films, Chaplin made about a third of all his films. Many of them were experimental in terms of ad-libbing, editing, gags, location shooting, etc. This one takes place at a racetrack where Chaplin and his friend try to get in without paying. Mabel Normand is there with her friend also, and Chaplin manages to rid himself of both his and Mabel's friends. He then woos Mabel in the grandstand with no apparent repercussions from his behavior. Lots of slapstick in here, but there is very little else to recommend this film for other then watching Chaplin develop. The print I saw was badly deteriorated, which may have affected its enjoyment. Charley Chase can be glimpsed. * of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 1686 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally joke free, we [[start]] the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[TUBE]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid frat boys who still mainline JACKASS or Tom Green will find the idea of fecal matter coming out of the some tube, SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a clown who basically does the "not very endearing clown" bit I think I've seen approxiately ninety times now will [[eat]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a model for the many infinitely funnier movies like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. After two long, long opening skits, one of which my brother saw the conclusion coming of and the other totally joke free, we [[initiation]] the fast-forward fest that it GROOVE [[PIPING]] proper. Naturally, uber-stupid frat boys who still mainline JACKASS or Tom Green will find the idea of fecal matter coming out of the some tube, SEX OLYMPICS(I really don't need to give you details, do I), and a clown who basically does the "not very endearing clown" bit I think I've seen approxiately ninety times now will [[coma]] this up like dung beetles: well, more power to you.

I just want to express that, despite what you've heard, this movie was in no way a model for the many infinitely funnier movies like KENTUCKY FRIED MOVIE or what not. The skit movie had already been done in AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT SEX, and so on. And done way better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] There's been a vogue for the past few years for often-as-not ironic zombie-related films, as well as other media incarnations of the flesh- eating resurrected dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an attempt to cash in on that, simply a manifestation of it, or both -- and it [[falls]] squarely into the [[category]] of ironic zombies. The [[joke]] here is that we get to see the walking dead in the contrasting context of a broadly stereotyped, squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a great Zombie War, and the creatures are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s suburb.

It's a moderately funny concept on its own, and enough perhaps for a five-minute comedy sketch, but it can't hold up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this idealized version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and loses all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a cheap attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but irritate me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any resemblance to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is bragging emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this bad writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" actually imparts character and sympathy to a lumbering green monster who cannot speak.

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to commodity fetishism, racism, classism, war paranoia, et cetera, but none of it really works on a comprehensive level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. There's been a vogue for the past few years for often-as-not ironic zombie-related films, as well as other media incarnations of the flesh- eating resurrected dead. "Fido" is a film that's either an attempt to cash in on that, simply a manifestation of it, or both -- and it [[dips]] squarely into the [[class]] of ironic zombies. The [[farce]] here is that we get to see the walking dead in the contrasting context of a broadly stereotyped, squeaky-clean, alternate-history (we are in the wake of a great Zombie War, and the creatures are now being domesticated as slaves) version of a 1950s suburb.

It's a moderately funny concept on its own, and enough perhaps for a five-minute comedy sketch, but it can't hold up a feature-film on its own. The joke that rotting corpses for servants are incongruous with this idealized version of a small town is repeated over and over again, and loses all effectiveness. The soundtrack relentlessly plays sunny tunes while zombies cannibalize bystanders. The word "zombie" is constantly inserted into an otherwise familiarly homey line for a cheap attempt at a laugh.

The very broadness and artificiality of the representation of "the nineteen fifties" here can't help but irritate me. It is so stylized, in it evidently "Pleasantville-"inspired way, that it is more apparent in waving markers of its 1950s-ness around than actually bearing any resemblance to anything that might have happened between 1950 and 1959. There is something obnoxiously sneering about it, as if the film is bragging emptily and thoughtlessly about how more open, down-to-Earth, and superior the 2000s are.

Because the characters are such broad representations of pop-culture 1950s "types," it's difficult to develop much emotional investment in them. Each has a few character traits thrown at him or her -- Helen is obsessed with appearances, and Bill loves golf and his haunted by having had to kill his father -- but they remain quite two-dimensional. Performances within the constraints of this bad writing are fine. The best is Billy Connolly as Fido the zombie, who in the tradition of Boris Karloff in "Frankenstein" actually imparts character and sympathy to a lumbering green monster who cannot speak.

There are little bits of unsubtle allegory thrown around -- to commodity fetishism, racism, classism, war paranoia, et cetera, but none of it really works on a comprehensive level, and the filmmakers don;t really stick with anything.

Unfortunately, this film doesn't really get past sticking with the flimsy joke of "Look! Zombies in 'Leave it to Beaver!'" for a good hour- and-a-half. --------------------------------------------- Result 1688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I just got through watching this DVD at home. We [[love]] [[Westerns]], so my husband rented it. He started [[apologizing]] to me half way through. The saddles, costumes, accents--everything was off. The part that made me so mad is where the guy didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[excuse]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the way through, and, as someone else said...too many bad things to single out any one reason why it [[sucked]]. I mean, the fact that the boy happened to snatch the evil stone from the collector on the same month and day it was found, what's the point of that? And why were there a grave yard where everyone died on April 25 but the people whose souls were taken by the collector were still up walking around? If you want a movie to make fun of after a few beers, this may be your movie. However, if you want a real Western, you will hate this movie. I just got through watching this DVD at home. We [[iove]] [[Westerners]], so my husband rented it. He started [[apologised]] to me half way through. The saddles, costumes, accents--everything was off. The part that made me so mad is where the guy didn't shoot the "collector" with his bow and arrow as he was taking the fat guy's soul. His only [[apologising]] was "he only had 2 arrows left." We watched it all the way through, and, as someone else said...too many bad things to single out any one reason why it [[aspired]]. I mean, the fact that the boy happened to snatch the evil stone from the collector on the same month and day it was found, what's the point of that? And why were there a grave yard where everyone died on April 25 but the people whose souls were taken by the collector were still up walking around? If you want a movie to make fun of after a few beers, this may be your movie. However, if you want a real Western, you will hate this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I just loved watching it though and having fun with it's total badness of a film. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[chance]]. Seriously, folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special effects, and plot in general is very cheesy and [[unrealistic]]. "Doesn't she need lungs" said Crow noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[body]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "cat fight" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. So, in some ways this was a fun movie. I think for horror fans, you'll probably enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll get a great laugh.

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would die: 1/10 I just loved watching it though and having fun with it's total badness of a film. I saw this film through the helpful sarcasm of Mystery Science Theater 3000 and I have the DVD. If you flip the to the other side of the DVD, they show the actual movie, so I gave it a [[opportunities]]. Seriously, folks this is grilled cheese.

The acting, special effects, and plot in general is very cheesy and [[utopian]]. "Doesn't she need lungs" said Crow noticing how the head can still talk while it doesn't have a [[cadaver]], and Tom Servo just wistfully remarks "No, she's got neck juice!". The ending is just classic and no one can touch this soundtrack with K-Porn! I loved the "cat fight" between the two strippers. That "Meow" after the fight or scene, whatever, was classic. So, in some ways this was a fun movie. I think for horror fans, you'll probably enjoy it. For a good time, watch the MSTK3 version, you'll get a great laugh.

MST3K version: 10/10 The Brain that would die: 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1690 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie has an all star cast, John Candy, Richard Lewis, Ornella Mutti, Cybill Shepard, and Jim Belushi to name a few, run amuck in Monte Carlo, as well as some other beautiful European locations, and is very funny. The trouble that everyone gets in when they lie to protect themselves is great, and I highly recommend that you see this movie, it is well worth it! John Candy is in top form in Once Upon A Crime, as is everyone else! If you and your family are looking for a great family film, this is your ticket. Everyone gives stellar performances, great acting, great comedy, and great timing, which is rare in movies these days. Great plot, great mystery, (which I love anyways) and overall, well worth the money you spend on it. So get the kids, grab some popcorn, juice, or tea, or sodas, and enjoy the show!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I watched this movie after seeing it on Broadway. I love the Broadway musical and I [[love]] the movie. I watched the [[movie]] like it was not [[related]] to the Broadway [[show]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[happens]] to most [[books]] when they are turned into [[movies]], so I developed a philosophy really early. Assume that the [[movie]] is going to be based on the book ( or musical in this [[case]]) but that while the [[story]] line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[different]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[years]] before I had to make a [[choice]]. I was a good dancer( picking up chorus work in local productions as a child etc) but I wasn't [[super]] talented.I was [[however]] [[super]] talented as a show rider. I was [[told]] by my [[dance]] instructor and my trainer ( who i [[spent]] [[several]] months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to make a [[choice]] when I [[turned]] 14. That I [[needed]] to [[move]] up from dancing two [[hours]] four-five days a [[week]] and riding 3 [[hours]] a day 7 days a week.. and [[dedicate]] to one or the other. [[So]] I dearly [[love]] dancing and I [[love]] this [[movie]] and a [[lot]] of the other [[ballet]] and [[dance]] [[movies]]. I just [[chose]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[great]] [[movie]] about raw emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of anticipation and [[heartbreak]] when you work really hard to get something you want and you just do not [[get]] it. I [[love]] the [[movie]]. I love the Broadway musical. I watched this movie after seeing it on Broadway. I love the Broadway musical and I [[amore]] the movie. I watched the [[flick]] like it was not [[relating]] to the Broadway [[displaying]]. I am an avid reader and have seen what [[arrives]] to most [[book]] when they are turned into [[theater]], so I developed a philosophy really early. Assume that the [[kino]] is going to be based on the book ( or musical in this [[lawsuits]]) but that while the [[histories]] line may be similar it will not be the same, it will be [[several]] so watch it for what it is.

I danced for 12 [[yrs]] before I had to make a [[elects]]. I was a good dancer( picking up chorus work in local productions as a child etc) but I wasn't [[wonderful]] talented.I was [[instead]] [[gorgeous]] talented as a show rider. I was [[tells]] by my [[dancer]] instructor and my trainer ( who i [[spends]] [[various]] months a year at his farm out of state) that I had to make a [[selects]] when I [[transformed]] 14. That I [[needs]] to [[budge]] up from dancing two [[hour]] four-five days a [[chow]] and riding 3 [[hour]] a day 7 days a week.. and [[allot]] to one or the other. [[Accordingly]] I dearly [[adores]] dancing and I [[adores]] this [[kino]] and a [[batches]] of the other [[ballets]] and [[dances]] [[theater]]. I just [[opting]] to watch this movie for what it is, it is a [[resplendent]] [[films]] about raw emotion and human interaction. It is about the power of anticipation and [[distress]] when you work really hard to get something you want and you just do not [[obtain]] it. I [[likes]] the [[film]]. I love the Broadway musical. --------------------------------------------- Result 1692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[classic]] on [[film]] about a [[love]] obsessed [[young]] man who's abused hurt and humiliated by the object of his obsession to the point of [[losing]] everything he has only to find [[true]] love in the end under the most [[unusual]] circumstances.

Leslie Howard plays the role of Philip [[Carey]] a sensitive young artiest in Paris trying to make a [[living]] by selling his paintings. [[Told]] by a local art expert that his work is not at all good [[enough]] to be [[sold]] to the art [[going]] public Philip decides to [[go]] back to his native [[England]] and study medicine and [[become]] a [[physician]] in order to help others.

[[Philip]] being born with a club [[foot]] is very hypersensitive about his [[awkward]] condition and makes up for that by being a very pleasant and friendly [[person]]. One afternoon [[Philip]] is at a local café with a fellow [[medical]] [[student]] and spots pretty [[waitress]] [[Mildred]] Rogers, Bette [[Davis]], and [[immediately]] falls in [[love]] with her. [[Mildred]] at [[first]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Philip]] but [[later]] [[realizing]] just what a sap he is takes [[advantage]] of his [[feelings]] for her. [[Mildred]] has him [[spend]] himself into poverty [[buying]] her [[gifts]] and [[taking]] her out to the [[theater]] [[every]] [[time]] she off from [[work]]. Phlip [[also]] [[falls]] behind on his [[studies]], by paying so much attention [[towards]] Mildred, at the [[medical]] [[university]] and [[fails]] his final [[exams]].

Going into hock buying an engagement [[ring]] for [[Mildred]] in an [[attempt]] to [[ask]] for her hand in [[marriage]] the cold hearted [[Mildred]] [[tells]] the [[startled]] [[Philip]] that she's already [[engaged]] to be [[married]] to Emil Miller, Alan Hale. It [[turns]] out that he's one of the [[customers]] at the café that she's [[always]] flirting with.

[[Philip]] [[broke]] and heart-sick slowly get his [[life]] back [[together]] and [[later]] retakes his [[medical]] [[exam]] and passes it and at the same [[time]] [[finds]] a [[new]] [[love]] in [[Nora]], [[Fay]] [[Johnson]], a writer for a local love magazine. Later to Philip's shock and surprise Mildred walks back into his life.

Mildred [[telling]] Philip that her husband Emil, who's [[child]] she's carrying, threw her out of the house has the kind and understanding Philip take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in [[love]] with him. It later turns out that Mildred wasn't married to Emil but had a child out of wedlock by having an illicit affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. **SPOILER ALERT** W. Somerset Maugham [[typical]] on [[movies]] about a [[amour]] obsessed [[youthful]] man who's abused hurt and humiliated by the object of his obsession to the point of [[wasting]] everything he has only to find [[real]] love in the end under the most [[strange]] circumstances.

Leslie Howard plays the role of Philip [[Cary]] a sensitive young artiest in Paris trying to make a [[life]] by selling his paintings. [[Said]] by a local art expert that his work is not at all good [[adequately]] to be [[selling]] to the art [[gonna]] public Philip decides to [[going]] back to his native [[Uk]] and study medicine and [[gotten]] a [[doctors]] in order to help others.

[[Felipe]] being born with a club [[footing]] is very hypersensitive about his [[clumsy]] condition and makes up for that by being a very pleasant and friendly [[persons]]. One afternoon [[Philipp]] is at a local café with a fellow [[medicinal]] [[pupils]] and spots pretty [[hostess]] [[Elsie]] Rogers, Bette [[Davies]], and [[swiftly]] falls in [[likes]] with her. [[Elsie]] at [[outset]] rebuffs the love-sick [[Phillip]] but [[subsequently]] [[realise]] just what a sap he is takes [[advantages]] of his [[sensations]] for her. [[Elsie]] has him [[expenditure]] himself into poverty [[purchased]] her [[donation]] and [[take]] her out to the [[theatre]] [[all]] [[times]] she off from [[cooperate]]. Phlip [[similarly]] [[drop]] behind on his [[researches]], by paying so much attention [[circa]] Mildred, at the [[medicinal]] [[universities]] and [[fail]] his final [[reviews]].

Going into hock buying an engagement [[rings]] for [[Gladys]] in an [[seeks]] to [[requested]] for her hand in [[weddings]] the cold hearted [[Elsie]] [[told]] the [[dumbfounded]] [[Philipp]] that she's already [[betrothed]] to be [[matrimony]] to Emil Miller, Alan Hale. It [[revolves]] out that he's one of the [[shoppers]] at the café that she's [[incessantly]] flirting with.

[[Felipe]] [[raped]] and heart-sick slowly get his [[iife]] back [[jointly]] and [[thereafter]] retakes his [[medicinal]] [[examinations]] and passes it and at the same [[period]] [[find]] a [[nouveau]] [[iike]] in [[Orthe]], [[Fey]] [[Lbj]], a writer for a local love magazine. Later to Philip's shock and surprise Mildred walks back into his life.

Mildred [[saying]] Philip that her husband Emil, who's [[kids]] she's carrying, threw her out of the house has the kind and understanding Philip take her back at the expense of Nora who was very much in [[likes]] with him. It later turns out that Mildred wasn't married to Emil but had a child out of wedlock by having an illicit affair with him! Emil it turns out was already married.

As before Mildred takes advantage of Philip's kind heart for her and her baby daughter, where he supports them with food medical attention and shelter, to the point where he again goes broke and can't continue his studies ending with her leaving Philip; after having a very heated and emotional encounter with him. Out on the streets with nowhere to go Philip is taken in by Mr. Athanly, Reginald Owens, who he once treated at the hospital and falls in love with his daughter Sally, Frances Dee.

Later Philip has his club foot corrected at the medical center and with the help of Mr. Athenly gets back to being a doctor. It's then when he encounters Mildred again who's really at the end of her rope. Dying of tuberculosis and having lost her daughter she's all alone with no one to look after her. Philip now well to do and respected in medical circles does all he can to help the sick and poor Mildred but in the end she succumbed to her illness and passes away.

Mildred had the love and devotion in Philip all those years that he was in love with her but choose to abuse him and have affairs with man who were just like her, cold unfeeling and selfish. In the end Mildred got back just what she gave to the kind and sensitive Philip: She became both unloved and alone. Philip found in the sweet and caring Sally everything that Mildred wasn't and in the end also found the true love that he was looking for all of his life. --------------------------------------------- Result 1693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] A top notch Columbo from [[beginning]] to [[end]]. I [[particularly]] like the [[interaction]] between [[Columbo]] and the killer, Ruth Gordon.

As an avid Columbo fan, I can't [[recall]] another one in which he doesn't set up the [[killer]] at the end as he does in other [[episodes]]. In this one, as he's trying to determine the correct sequence of the [[boxes]] and the "[[message]]" that the nephew [[left]] behind, it [[finally]] dawns on him.

The [[music]] in this episode is very [[good]] as well, as it is in many of other ones. A top notch Columbo from [[started]] to [[terminate]]. I [[namely]] like the [[interactive]] between [[Colombo]] and the killer, Ruth Gordon.

As an avid Columbo fan, I can't [[rappel]] another one in which he doesn't set up the [[shooter]] at the end as he does in other [[bouts]]. In this one, as he's trying to determine the correct sequence of the [[mailboxes]] and the "[[messaging]]" that the nephew [[exited]] behind, it [[ultimately]] dawns on him.

The [[musician]] in this episode is very [[alright]] as well, as it is in many of other ones. --------------------------------------------- Result 1694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] I absolutely [[love]] this [[game]] to death. Ever since I was 9 years old (I am now 15). It has great graphics, characters, magic, weapons, additions, and don't forget the ultimately awesome dragoon forms! I am still waiting for a remake, prequel, or a sequel to this [[spectacular]] video game.

You play as Dart, a young swordsman who has the potential to be quite the hero. On this adventure you encounter wondrous creatures and boss fights. You also encounter some friends on the way who have their own special element. Such as Fire, Darkness, Water/Ice, Thunder/Lightning, Earth, Light, and Wind. There are also items known as dragoon spirits, which allow you to transform into magical creatures of legend. Dragons, wizards, creatures called winglies and evil creatures you'll have to face on this adventure of action-packed thrills and excitement. One of my all time favorite games, The Legend of Dragoon! I absolutely [[iove]] this [[gaming]] to death. Ever since I was 9 years old (I am now 15). It has great graphics, characters, magic, weapons, additions, and don't forget the ultimately awesome dragoon forms! I am still waiting for a remake, prequel, or a sequel to this [[whopping]] video game.

You play as Dart, a young swordsman who has the potential to be quite the hero. On this adventure you encounter wondrous creatures and boss fights. You also encounter some friends on the way who have their own special element. Such as Fire, Darkness, Water/Ice, Thunder/Lightning, Earth, Light, and Wind. There are also items known as dragoon spirits, which allow you to transform into magical creatures of legend. Dragons, wizards, creatures called winglies and evil creatures you'll have to face on this adventure of action-packed thrills and excitement. One of my all time favorite games, The Legend of Dragoon! --------------------------------------------- Result 1695 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Easily the best known of all the Shakespeare plays, it has been [[seriously]] let down here. Shoddy [[direction]], stagnant studio [[work]] and [[erratic]] performances spoil a fine tragedy.

[[In]] the [[town]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[centuries]] but [[tragedy]] is imminent when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[love]] with Juliet (Rebecca Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, especially in daytime scenes, seriously stagnates the energy of the play. It's a story that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot outdoors. Coupled with this the costumes are hideous, with too many tights and ludicrous codpieces. The stage fighting looks horrendous, with far too much stretching and running around to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a truly effective Romeo. He manages the character's intensity when the plot gets going but his stately accent and bland, often inexpressive eyes limit his range. It is very [[hard]] for the audience to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too youthful to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's naiveté but a little more sassiness would have been welcome.

The supporting roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar Laurence is fine but too many of his best lines have been cut. Anthony Andrews' Mercutio belongs on stage and not on camera. He gurns and gesticulates excessively and looks rather ridiculous as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has virtually no presence as Tybalt. He did develop an edge and intensity to deliver some fine screen performances in later years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor Lawrence Naismith fails to give the part any authority on camera. Only [[Micheal]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, comes out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

See one of the other versions of this story instead. Easily the best known of all the Shakespeare plays, it has been [[harshly]] let down here. Shoddy [[directorate]], stagnant studio [[jobs]] and [[irregular]] performances spoil a fine tragedy.

[[For]] the [[municipality]] of Verona, the Capulets and the Montagues have been feuding for [[ages]] but [[drama]] is imminent when Romeo (Patrick Rycart), a Montague, falls in [[iove]] with Juliet (Rebecca Saire), a Capulet. Bloodshed soon erupts...

The studio work, especially in daytime scenes, seriously stagnates the energy of the play. It's a story that, with it's energy, deserves to be shot outdoors. Coupled with this the costumes are hideous, with too many tights and ludicrous codpieces. The stage fighting looks horrendous, with far too much stretching and running around to be engaging.

Patrick Ryecart is too lightweight to be a truly effective Romeo. He manages the character's intensity when the plot gets going but his stately accent and bland, often inexpressive eyes limit his range. It is very [[tough]] for the audience to relate to this Romeo. Rebecca Saire is too youthful to be a good Juliet - she captures the character's naiveté but a little more sassiness would have been welcome.

The supporting roles don't fare much better. Joseph O'Connor's Friar Laurence is fine but too many of his best lines have been cut. Anthony Andrews' Mercutio belongs on stage and not on camera. He gurns and gesticulates excessively and looks rather ridiculous as a result. Alan Rickman, underplaying his role, has virtually no presence as Tybalt. He did develop an edge and intensity to deliver some fine screen performances in later years, but that isn't in evidence here. The Prince can be a fine role with his brief appearances but actor Lawrence Naismith fails to give the part any authority on camera. Only [[Michel]] Hordern, in probably his best role in this series, comes out of this with any dignity. His Capulet is well-played and a joy to watch.

See one of the other versions of this story instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1696 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] Michael Is King. This film contains some of the [[best]] stuff [[Mike]] has ever done. Smooth Criminal is [[pure]] [[genius]]. The cameos are wonderful, but as [[always]], the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down. Michael Is King. This film contains some of the [[nicest]] stuff [[Mich]] has ever done. Smooth Criminal is [[unadulterated]] [[engineering]]. The cameos are wonderful, but as [[incessantly]], the main event is MJ himself. He is the best, hands down. --------------------------------------------- Result 1697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Lars]] von Trier's Europa is a [[worthy]] echo of The Third [[Man]], about an American coming to post-World War II [[Europe]] and [[finds]] himself [[entangled]] in a [[dangerous]] [[mystery]].

Jean-Marc Barr plays [[Leopold]] [[Kessler]], a German-American who refused to join the US Army during the war, [[arrives]] in [[Frankfurt]] as soon as the [[war]] is over to work with his uncle as a sleeping [[car]] conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the [[war]] is still secretly going on with an underground [[terrorist]] [[group]] called the Werewolves who [[target]] American allies. Leopold is [[strongly]] against taking any sides, but is [[drawn]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the owner of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is pardoned by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German transportation system up and running again. The colonel soon enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an adventure by being involved with both sides of the conflict in a mysterious and film noir-ish way, where everyone and everything is not what it seems. Its [[amazing]] to watch the naive Leopold deal with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying passengers, his disgruntled uncle, even the railway company's officials who come to examine his work ethic) before he finally boils over and humorously and violently takes control. The film is endlessly unpredictable.

The film stylishly shot, it always takes place at night during the winter with [[lots]] of [[falling]] snow. Its shot in black and [[white]] with shots of [[color]] randomly appearing [[throughout]]. [[Also]], background screens displaying images that counter act with the images up front. Add Max von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europa]] [[becomes]] a dreamlike place that's out of this [[world]].

This is now a personal [[favorite]] [[film]] of [[mine]]. [[Jorgen]] von Trier's Europa is a [[laudable]] echo of The Third [[Mec]], about an American coming to post-World War II [[European]] and [[deems]] himself [[implicated]] in a [[dicey]] [[enigma]].

Jean-Marc Barr plays [[Leopoldo]] [[Dominguez]], a German-American who refused to join the US Army during the war, [[arrived]] in [[Frankfurter]] as soon as the [[wars]] is over to work with his uncle as a sleeping [[vehicles]] conductor on the Zentropa Railway. What he doesn't know is the [[wars]] is still secretly going on with an underground [[terrorists]] [[panel]] called the Werewolves who [[targeting]] American allies. Leopold is [[flatly]] against taking any sides, but is [[lured]] in and seduced by Katharina Hartmann (Barbara Sukowa), the femme fatale daughter of the owner of the railway company. Her father was a Nazi sympathizer, but is pardoned by the American Colonel Harris (Eddie Considine) because he can help get the German transportation system up and running again. The colonel soon enlists, or forces, Leopold to be a spy (without giving him a choice or chance to think about it) to see if the Werewolves might carry out attacks on the trains.

Soon, Leopold is stuck in an adventure by being involved with both sides of the conflict in a mysterious and film noir-ish way, where everyone and everything is not what it seems. Its [[unbelievable]] to watch the naive Leopold deal with everything (his lover, the terrorists, the colonel, annoying passengers, his disgruntled uncle, even the railway company's officials who come to examine his work ethic) before he finally boils over and humorously and violently takes control. The film is endlessly unpredictable.

The film stylishly shot, it always takes place at night during the winter with [[batch]] of [[dropping]] snow. Its shot in black and [[blanca]] with shots of [[dye]] randomly appearing [[during]]. [[Moreover]], background screens displaying images that counter act with the images up front. Add Max von Sydow's hypnotic narration, and [[Europe]] [[become]] a dreamlike place that's out of this [[monde]].

This is now a personal [[prefer]] [[movie]] of [[mines]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1698 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This, "Prodigal Son" and "Eastern Condors" are my [[favourite]] Sammo Hung films. The Fat Dragon is fatter in this outing than he was in "Condors", but he's no [[less]] sure-footed as director or actor. He is, in fact, at the top of his form and [[delivers]] a [[devastating]], brutal actioner that boasts half a [[dozen]] [[amazing]] sequences and manages to tell a compassionate, sweet love story also. [[Love]] and romance are not the director's priorities here, but they serve as curious adjuncts to the action, and insure that viewers don't hit the fast-forward button between the physical clashes.

The opening scene, which features a funny light sabre duel, sets a solid but deceptive tone. A sequence in which Sammo's pedicab is chased by a car is beautifully staged and sweetened with a sharp, comic tone. The fast and furious stick fight between Sammo and Lau Kar Leung is a model of dazzling choreography and sharp, superb direction, and easily one of the best ever of its type. The film's violence escalates slowly until, finally, when the climactic showdown comes, we are subjected to some of the most brutal altercations ever seen in a Sammo production. The director/actor's assault on Billy Chow and a house filled with angry, menacing opponents is a bone-cracking, physically punishing delight.

Terrific on every level and one of the best martial arts movies ever made.

Great score, too. This, "Prodigal Son" and "Eastern Condors" are my [[preferable]] Sammo Hung films. The Fat Dragon is fatter in this outing than he was in "Condors", but he's no [[least]] sure-footed as director or actor. He is, in fact, at the top of his form and [[offerings]] a [[disastrous]], brutal actioner that boasts half a [[twelve]] [[unbelievable]] sequences and manages to tell a compassionate, sweet love story also. [[Adored]] and romance are not the director's priorities here, but they serve as curious adjuncts to the action, and insure that viewers don't hit the fast-forward button between the physical clashes.

The opening scene, which features a funny light sabre duel, sets a solid but deceptive tone. A sequence in which Sammo's pedicab is chased by a car is beautifully staged and sweetened with a sharp, comic tone. The fast and furious stick fight between Sammo and Lau Kar Leung is a model of dazzling choreography and sharp, superb direction, and easily one of the best ever of its type. The film's violence escalates slowly until, finally, when the climactic showdown comes, we are subjected to some of the most brutal altercations ever seen in a Sammo production. The director/actor's assault on Billy Chow and a house filled with angry, menacing opponents is a bone-cracking, physically punishing delight.

Terrific on every level and one of the best martial arts movies ever made.

Great score, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 1699 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is one of those nostalgia things with me and I never REALLY expect anyone else to "get it" but am pleased when I recommend it and somebody DOES enjoy it. My late father HATED Arthur Askey but this film was one he really enjoyed and his consistent enthusiasm for "The Ghost Train" and "Old Ted 'Olmes" transferred to me as a child. Years later, I watch it every now and again, enjoying the familiarity. I always wonder if it will not be quite the same but I am never disappointed in it. There is much to enjoy. The sequence on the train is truly inspired when Askey and Murdoch proceed to annoy the arrogant male passenger. Then the whole section in the station is amazing with so much going on you have to keep up. Yes, it is dated and full of wartime Britishness in accents and plot (based on the original play by Arnold Ridley of Dad's Army fame!) but full of wonderful character performances - including Kathleen Harrison as a dotty spinster. The atmosphere is truly as near sinister as an Arthur Askey vehicle could get. This is available cheap as chips in the UK on DVD so treat yourself. It is a perfect Saturday/Sunday morning or any day lazy afternoon lightweight piece of entertainment. I Thank You....

OLD MOVIES CAN BE GOOD MOVIES! --------------------------------------------- Result 1700 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I really [[enjoyed]] this. I got it [[thinking]] it was [[going]] to be a documentary, but it [[revealed]] itself as a good [[piece]] of tongue in cheek fun.

I think this has been well [[done]], pretty much an [[extended]] TV [[show]] into a [[film]], but due to the characters or rather original actors willingness to have fun and be [[made]] fun off helps this [[work]] in a [[great]] old [[style]] Innocent way.

If you are a fan of the original TV [[series]] then i am sure you will enjoy this.

Q I really [[appreciated]] this. I got it [[ideology]] it was [[go]] to be a documentary, but it [[demonstrated]] itself as a good [[slice]] of tongue in cheek fun.

I think this has been well [[performed]], pretty much an [[lengthened]] TV [[spectacle]] into a [[cinematography]], but due to the characters or rather original actors willingness to have fun and be [[brought]] fun off helps this [[cooperating]] in a [[whopping]] old [[styling]] Innocent way.

If you are a fan of the original TV [[serials]] then i am sure you will enjoy this.

Q --------------------------------------------- Result 1701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Welcome to Collinwood is one of the most [[delightful]] films I have ever seen. A superb ensemble cast, tight editing and wonderful direction. A caper movie that doesn't get bogged down in the standard tricks.

Not much can be said about this [[film]] without spoiling it. The [[tag]] [[line]] [[says]] it all - 5 [[guys]]. 1 [[Safe]]. No Brains.

William H Macy and Sam Rockwell lead an [[amazing]] cast. George [[Clooney]] should be [[congratulated]] for producing this gem.

Welcome to Collinwood is one of the most [[ravishing]] films I have ever seen. A superb ensemble cast, tight editing and wonderful direction. A caper movie that doesn't get bogged down in the standard tricks.

Not much can be said about this [[cinematographic]] without spoiling it. The [[etiquette]] [[linea]] [[contends]] it all - 5 [[dudes]]. 1 [[Secure]]. No Brains.

William H Macy and Sam Rockwell lead an [[unbelievable]] cast. George [[Cloned]] should be [[welcoming]] for producing this gem.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1702 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[In]] her first nonaquatic role, Esther [[Williams]] plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, [[proving]] she [[could]] be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[finest]] performance. And he is so handsome it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward Andrews as his overly-protective [[father]] who is the standout.

Bathed in glorious Technicolor, The Unguarded [[Moment]] is [[irresistible]] hokum and at times [[compelling]] [[drama]]. [[During]] her first nonaquatic role, Esther [[William]] plays a school teacher who's the victim of sexual assault. She gives a fine performance, [[exhibiting]] she [[would]] be highly effective out of the swimming pool. As the detective out to solve the case, George Nader gives perhaps his [[noblest]] performance. And he is so handsome it hurts! John Saxon is the student under suspicion, and although he gets impressive billing in the credits, it's Edward Andrews as his overly-protective [[pere]] who is the standout.

Bathed in glorious Technicolor, The Unguarded [[Time]] is [[inexorable]] hokum and at times [[persuading]] [[tragedy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I'm a fan of Crash and Blade Runner and this movie [[explores]] some of those highway death and 80s film noir [[themes]] that I like to see, so I [[enjoyed]] it.

In general though, the [[essential]] stupidity of the film noir protagonist is not pulled off well by the female lead and her hero is nearly a neanderthal, hence the kitch warning. I'm a fan of Crash and Blade Runner and this movie [[investigate]] some of those highway death and 80s film noir [[item]] that I like to see, so I [[liked]] it.

In general though, the [[indispensable]] stupidity of the film noir protagonist is not pulled off well by the female lead and her hero is nearly a neanderthal, hence the kitch warning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[Sandra]] Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Nothing]], the [[movie]] [[released]] in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway stage [[production]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[movie]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[show]]."

There were [[several]] [[changes]] in monologues and one-liners, and the [[movie]] version visually re-vamps the [[story]], taking [[Sandra]] from a [[fabulous]] existence as a successful stage [[performer]] in [[New]] York, during what she [[calls]] her "superstar [[summer]]," to an illusory, [[almost]] [[desperate]] existence back in her [[home]] in Los Angeles - her [[fictional]] [[manager]] in the [[film]] refers to it as [[getting]] Sandra back "to her [[roots]], to ... upscale [[supper]] clubs like the Parisian [[Room]]."

There's a point to be [[made]] here. Sandra tries to [[appeal]] her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[harsh]] [[critique]] of American [[pop]] [[culture]] to an audience that doesn't [[completely]] see it. [[In]] L.A. she's [[playing]] to a [[predominantly]] black audience, [[trying]] to [[relate]] her [[ideas]] when all these people [[seem]] to [[want]] is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike [[stripper]]. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resemble]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[said]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[show]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[movie]] is dryer than a bone. A funny scene to catch is of a rotund [[man]] from the audience [[helping]] Shashonna out of her [[pants]].

But, if she's [[going]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[style]] and force, conveying everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[right]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[yet]] somehow [[still]] [[swimming]] in the [[pool]] of her own transparent stardom. Her [[depictions]] of [[interactions]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry [[Lewis]], [[Bianca]] Jagger, Ralph [[Lauren]] and (what we're lead to [[believe]] is) Warren Beatty are [[fictional]] and [[hilarious]].

[[Sandra]] [[begins]] her [[show]] in her most [[awkward]] [[moment]], [[performing]] a [[quiet]] but [[mystifying]] rendition of [[Nina]] Simone's song "Four [[Women]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[garb]], singing lines such as "my [[skin]] is [[black]]," "my [[hair]] is wooly," and "they call me Sweet Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the night, does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of [[songs]] written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a beautiful black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores emotions and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. [[Xander]] Bernhard's Without You I'm [[Anything]], the [[flick]] [[publicized]] in 1990, followed on the heels of her 1988 off-Broadway stage [[productivity]] ... what she and others refer to in the [[flick]] as her "smash-hit one-woman [[displaying]]."

There were [[multiple]] [[modifications]] in monologues and one-liners, and the [[cinematography]] version visually re-vamps the [[conte]], taking [[Xander]] from a [[fantastic]] existence as a successful stage [[entertainer]] in [[Novel]] York, during what she [[invited]] her "superstar [[hsia]]," to an illusory, [[approximately]] [[hopeless]] existence back in her [[household]] in Los Angeles - her [[fictitious]] [[administrator]] in the [[flick]] refers to it as [[obtain]] Sandra back "to her [[origin]], to ... upscale [[breakfast]] clubs like the Parisian [[Rooms]]."

There's a point to be [[introduced]] here. Sandra tries to [[appealed]] her liberal worldview and her sometimes [[stringent]] [[criticisms]] of American [[pops]] [[cultures]] to an audience that doesn't [[perfectly]] see it. [[During]] L.A. she's [[gaming]] to a [[basically]] black audience, [[attempting]] to [[relating]] her [[visions]] when all these people [[looks]] to [[wants]] is "Shashonna," a Madonna-look-alike [[remover]]. And even then, with Shashonna dancing to drum beats that [[resembled]] those from "Like a Virgin," there's not much to be [[says]] for the audience's enjoyment of the [[display]]. The scene in the club throughout the [[filmmaking]] is dryer than a bone. A funny scene to catch is of a rotund [[dude]] from the audience [[supporting]] Shashonna out of her [[britches]].

But, if she's [[gonna]] down, Sandra's doing so with [[styling]] and force, conveying everything from foul confidence to punctured vulnerability ... [[rights]] to the point at which she's naked (literally), pleading for acceptance and [[however]] somehow [[again]] [[swam]] in the [[pooling]] of her own transparent stardom. Her [[representations]] of [[interaction]] with the likes of Calvin Klein, Jerry [[Louise]], [[Blanche]] Jagger, Ralph [[Loren]] and (what we're lead to [[reckon]] is) Warren Beatty are [[notional]] and [[droll]].

[[Sondra]] [[launching]] her [[displaying]] in her most [[clumsy]] [[time]], [[perform]] a [[silent]] but [[perplexing]] rendition of [[Neena]] Simone's song "Four [[Woman]]" while dressed in a mufti and other African [[dresses]], singing lines such as "my [[epidermis]] is [[calico]]," "my [[hairstyle]] is wooly," and "they call me Sweet Thing."

She resurrects and celebrates the ghosts of underworld art in a tremendously funny description of the frenzied estate auction for Andy Warhol: "Leave it to Andy to have the wisdom and sensitivity into the hours and hours of toil and labor that went into the Indian product ... that they've been so lucky to cash in on this whole Santa Fe thing happening."

She expounds on the excessiveness of Hollywood, consoling a distraught friend then admonishing him, saying "Mister, if this is about Ishtar, I'm getting up right now and walking out of your life forever because that's too self-indulgent even for me!"

Sandra illustrates the expectations of women in the age of feminism. Dressed as a Cosmo girl, Sandra retells her young-girl fantasy to become an executive secretary and marry her boss. She eventually concludes in relief, "I'll never be a statistic, not me. I'm under 35, and I'm going to be married!"

Sandra extols the opening of sexuality in society: "When he touches you in the night, does it feel all right, or does it feel real? I say it feels real... MIGHTY real."

Finally, she cries for change in progressive American society by channeling disco greats Patrick Cowley and Sylvester and proclaiming, "Eventually everyone will funk!"

All this comes in the form of glitzy, schmaltzy but wonderful cabaret performances of [[anthems]] written and originated by Billy Paul, Burt Bacharach, Hank Williams and Laura Nyro, to name a few. At the same time, the idealized, fictional incarnation of Sandra -- her self-generated mirror image -- floats around town, a beautiful black model with flowing gowns and tight bustiers reading the Kabala, studying chemistry and listening to NWA rap music.

In Without You I'm Nothing, Sandra Bernhard explores emotions and existences that, up until then, she'd only toyed with as a regular guest on Late Night With David Letterman. Her almost child-like enthusiasm for shock, exhibited throughout the '80s, is thrown aside in the face of a subtler allure, and her confidence in the face of materialism and American celebrity proves refreshing. This approach to comedy would change Sandra's direction forever and mark the more mature, more personable entertainer to come.

If you like subtle humor to the point of engaging in inside jokes about glamour, celebrity, sex, loneliness, despair and shallow expressions of love and kinship, this movie will keep you in stitches. It may not be meant to be funny across the board. Perhaps it's a bit unsettling or even maudlin for some. But consider the emptiness of the world Sandra paints for you, and you'll understand just how funny and brilliant she really is.

But see Without You I'm Nothing with a friend "in the know" because it's definitely funnier that way. Before you know it, the two of you will be trading Sandra barbs and confusing the hell out of everyone else. --------------------------------------------- Result 1705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] If you've seen other movies like this, they're probably better. The Omega Man [[comes]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they [[avoided]] the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[premise]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING else! I get tired of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, ineffective, arrogant characters in a movie. That [[pretty]] much [[describes]] [[everyone]] in the movie at some point. I [[rented]] it, and found myself yelling at the TV repeatedly, "no, don't do that!", "why are you so stupid", "look out!", etcetera. A true [[lack]] of character development is evident about halfway in. A [[movie]] SHOULD give you a strong personal connection with at least some of the characters so that you actually care what happens to them. This one does not. Also,there should have been a longer, more involving end to the movie as well. If you've seen other movies like this, they're probably better. The Omega Man [[arrives]] to mind. To the studio's credit, they [[avoiding]] the sprawling, unnecessary, big budget technofest that typifies movies of this ilk. Additionally, the set-up and [[supposition]] were excellent: four people whose past is virtually irrelevant to us are trying to get away from an overwhelming infectious fatal disease. What's bad is EVERYTHING else! I get tired of endlessly stupid, careless, wimpy, ineffective, arrogant characters in a movie. That [[quite]] much [[outline]] [[somebody]] in the movie at some point. I [[renting]] it, and found myself yelling at the TV repeatedly, "no, don't do that!", "why are you so stupid", "look out!", etcetera. A true [[misses]] of character development is evident about halfway in. A [[cinematographic]] SHOULD give you a strong personal connection with at least some of the characters so that you actually care what happens to them. This one does not. Also,there should have been a longer, more involving end to the movie as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] one of the funnest mario's i've ever played. the [[levels]] are [[creative]], there are fluid controls, and [[good]] graphics for its time. there's [[also]] a multitude of crazy bosses and enemies to [[fight]]. [[Sometimes]] the levels [[get]] [[frustrating]], and if you [[leave]] out some of the hard levels and [[still]], [[need]] to [[get]] more accomplished to [[fight]] a [[boss]], it can be [[annoying]]. another complaint is the camera angle; though it [[works]] fairly well most of the [[time]], it can be a pain in certain situations. if your a big [[time]] [[mario]] [[fan]]; this ones for you. [[even]] if your not a [[huge]] [[fan]] of him, i'd still recommend this one. its a [[big]] game, and getting what you need can take a while, but it's very [[satisfying]]. good for [[playing]] in short bursts of time. it will [[almost]] [[certainly]] [[hold]] your interest; it sure does hold [[mine]]! one of the funnest mario's i've ever played. the [[level]] are [[imaginative]], there are fluid controls, and [[alright]] graphics for its time. there's [[furthermore]] a multitude of crazy bosses and enemies to [[combat]]. [[Intermittently]] the levels [[obtains]] [[disappointing]], and if you [[leaving]] out some of the hard levels and [[nonetheless]], [[needed]] to [[got]] more accomplished to [[battles]] a [[chef]], it can be [[exasperating]]. another complaint is the camera angle; though it [[collaborate]] fairly well most of the [[period]], it can be a pain in certain situations. if your a big [[period]] [[mariah]] [[ventilator]]; this ones for you. [[yet]] if your not a [[sizeable]] [[groupie]] of him, i'd still recommend this one. its a [[grands]] game, and getting what you need can take a while, but it's very [[gratifying]]. good for [[gaming]] in short bursts of time. it will [[roughly]] [[probably]] [[holds]] your interest; it sure does hold [[landmine]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This is my first comment! This is a [[fantastic]] movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[amazing]] product this was.

I [[suggested]] to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. This is my first comment! This is a [[sumptuous]] movie! I watched it all by luck one night on TV. At first 5 minutes i thought it was a B movie, but afterward i understood what an [[unbelievable]] product this was.

I [[propose]] to some friends to see the movie, only to tell me that it was a bad B movie. How wrong. Superficial critiques.

I think that the movie is almost a product of genius! The well known director made an excellent job here and it is a shame to tell that he was out of the game all this time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of foreign [[movies]] that fall flat on their face, but here is the flip side!!! This is an [[awful]] re-make of the U.S. [[movie]] "Wide Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "[[Liam]]" on the other hand is just strange. I must give credit to "[[Liam]]" for one [[thing]], and that is making it clear that I made the right choice in changing my [[religion]]! It is not un-common to see U.S. re-makes of foreign [[cinematography]] that fall flat on their face, but here is the flip side!!! This is an [[scary]] re-make of the U.S. [[cinematography]] "Wide Awake" by the British!

"Wide Awake" is strange but entertaining and funny! "[[Llam]]" on the other hand is just strange. I must give credit to "[[Llam]]" for one [[stuff]], and that is making it clear that I made the right choice in changing my [[religions]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I picked up this [[movie]] with the [[intention]] of getting a bad zombie movie. But I had no Idea what I was [[getting]] myself into.

I [[started]] the [[movie]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of pain and [[visual]] [[torture]].

I finally know what [[hell]] is like. It's this movie. For eternity. This movie has no value. It didn't even really have a [[plot]]. There was stuff going on in each scene but no overall explanation why anything happens.

Instead of watching this movie I [[suggest]] that you line the nearest blender with oil and try and stuff as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the outcome to be far more pleasant than this movie.

Don't even watch it. Not even to see how bad it is. I beg you. If you watch it, then it means they win. I picked up this [[cinematography]] with the [[objective]] of getting a bad zombie movie. But I had no Idea what I was [[obtain]] myself into.

I [[opened]] the [[film]] and soon I had been pulled into a world of pain and [[optic]] [[tortures]].

I finally know what [[inferno]] is like. It's this movie. For eternity. This movie has no value. It didn't even really have a [[intrigue]]. There was stuff going on in each scene but no overall explanation why anything happens.

Instead of watching this movie I [[propose]] that you line the nearest blender with oil and try and stuff as many bullets in it as you can. You will find that the outcome to be far more pleasant than this movie.

Don't even watch it. Not even to see how bad it is. I beg you. If you watch it, then it means they win. --------------------------------------------- Result 1710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ~~I was able to see this movie yesterday morning on a early viewing pass~~

I am a mom of 2 children, who range from 11 down to 6. So I'm sure plenty of parents can relate to having to see many many "kids" movies. This was refreshing for me. I haven't read this particular book, so I don't know if it stayed true to the book or not. But it sure took the grossness factor to a high level. This is the story of the "new" kid in town and it just so happens that there are a group of boys who have formed a club of sorts and love to pick on kids ....sound familiar? Haven't we all suffered this one time or another. He has the little brother who he cant stand and parents that he is embarrassed about. What I enjoyed most of all was seeing how each character was totally different from another they all stood out. The bully (why do they always make the bully a red head? My daughter has red hair! and she is no bully!..lol) is well a great bully, who finds himself being yelled at by his own big brother. It took twists and turns and well you fall in love with all of them and really find yourself routing for all the characters! Even the parents, great connection between father and son. All around enjoyable, sweet,funny, gross etc......Take your kids!!! You will enjoy it as much as they do! --------------------------------------------- Result 1711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] the only word i can think of to [[describe]] this movie is: Ordinary.

The [[plot]] [[line]] about Gary sinise's [[character]] [[attempting]] suicide is a [[ridiculous]] [[premise]] and c'mon..[[living]] as some sort Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[ocean]] because he couldn't handle life in the [[lucrative]] pro/am golf community? [[cry]] me a [[river]]. I [[wish]] these were my [[problems]]. I do enjoy [[Dylan]] [[Baker]] and Sinise but this [[movie]] was [[clearly]] a [[bad]] choice or a pay check for Sinise. The scene in which little Timmy Price [[gets]] verbally abused by the other club member in front of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it the only word i can think of to [[outlining]] this movie is: Ordinary.

The [[intrigue]] [[bloodline]] about Gary sinise's [[characteristics]] [[striving]] suicide is a [[nonsensical]] [[hypothesis]] and c'mon..[[life]] as some sort Salingeristic hermit or recluse in a shack driving golf balls into the [[maritime]] because he couldn't handle life in the [[profitable]] pro/am golf community? [[mourns]] me a [[rivers]]. I [[desiring]] these were my [[difficulties]]. I do enjoy [[Dillon]] [[Boulanger]] and Sinise but this [[film]] was [[apparently]] a [[inclement]] choice or a pay check for Sinise. The scene in which little Timmy Price [[got]] verbally abused by the other club member in front of his father during the tournament is so over the top that i am embarrassed to watch it --------------------------------------------- Result 1712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Bedknobs & Broomsticks is another one of Disney's [[masterpieces]]. It was filmed with [[sequences]] of animation and the [[actors]] and actresses interacting with the animations. (A similar [[concept]] was [[used]] in Mary Poppins when the children and Mary disappear into the sidewalk art.) I am [[mainly]] rating this film through child's eyes because I have not seen it in [[years]]. Back then, it was one of my favourite films. It was [[magical]] and [[mystical]], and the last scenes (the [[conflict]] [[beginning]] with the ghostly [[armour]] walking into [[battle]]) were my favourites. There was [[also]] a [[lot]] of stop-animation [[used]] with the spells (ie, people turning into rabbits), which may be a [[little]] dated and silly now. ([[Also]], I believe that the film starts off [[slowly]].) Through the [[eyes]] of a [[child]], this is a [[fun]] [[film]] and it is [[easy]] for children to put themselves into the [[places]] of the children in the [[film]]. It is an [[imaginative]] film which is [[sadly]] largely-forgotten [[today]]. Bedknobs & Broomsticks is another one of Disney's [[classics]]. It was filmed with [[sequence]] of animation and the [[actresses]] and actresses interacting with the animations. (A similar [[idea]] was [[utilised]] in Mary Poppins when the children and Mary disappear into the sidewalk art.) I am [[basically]] rating this film through child's eyes because I have not seen it in [[olds]]. Back then, it was one of my favourite films. It was [[quadrant]] and [[woolen]], and the last scenes (the [[disputes]] [[starts]] with the ghostly [[armoured]] walking into [[firefight]]) were my favourites. There was [[similarly]] a [[batch]] of stop-animation [[using]] with the spells (ie, people turning into rabbits), which may be a [[tiny]] dated and silly now. ([[Additionally]], I believe that the film starts off [[softly]].) Through the [[eye]] of a [[kids]], this is a [[droll]] [[filmmaking]] and it is [[effortless]] for children to put themselves into the [[sites]] of the children in the [[flick]]. It is an [[creative]] film which is [[woefully]] largely-forgotten [[hoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1713 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Michelle Rodrigez was made for this movie, when I first saw her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[fear]] and is [[tough]] like she should be in this movie. She is more a bad girl and that's what I [[like]] about her. This movie is about a troubled girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her love to fight and asks her brothers trainer to train her. Even though they don't think she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I think this movie was a little slow at the ending, but was well done. It shows, that people can do anything even if they don't think you have the potential. I recommend it to be seen. Michelle Rodrigez was made for this movie, when I first saw her in Fast and the Furious. You could tell that she was a tough woman. With this movie, she has not only proven her acting, but shows no [[fright]] and is [[strenuous]] like she should be in this movie. She is more a bad girl and that's what I [[iike]] about her. This movie is about a troubled girl, living the life as a tom boy and getting in constant trouble with school and family. As she gets interested in her brothers training to be a boxer, she decides to go after her love to fight and asks her brothers trainer to train her. Even though they don't think she has the potential, they get to be shown proven wrong.

I think this movie was a little slow at the ending, but was well done. It shows, that people can do anything even if they don't think you have the potential. I recommend it to be seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 1714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] What [[happened]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[premise]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the movie loses it. Actually, it never really got going. There was a [[little]] [[excitement]] when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. Steve Martin, who is a very [[talented]] [[person]] and usually [[brings]] a lot to a movie, was [[dreadful]] and his [[entire]] [[character]] was not [[even]] close to being [[important]] to this movie, other than to [[make]] it longer. I really would have [[liked]] to [[see]] more interactions between the [[main]] characters, [[Kate]] and Angie, and maybe [[try]] not for a [[pure]] comedy, which [[unfortunately]] it was not, but [[maybe]] a [[drama]] with comedic [[elements]]. I [[think]] if the [[movie]] did this it [[could]] have been very [[funny]] [[since]] both [[actresses]] are [[quite]] funny in their own [[ways]] and sitting here I can [[think]] of [[numerous]] scenarios that [[would]] have been a [[riot]]. What [[sweated]]? What we have here is basically a solid and plausible [[supposition]] and with a decent and talented cast, but somewhere the movie loses it. Actually, it never really got going. There was a [[petite]] [[exhilaration]] when we find out that Angie is not really pregnant, then find out that she is after all, but that was it. Steve Martin, who is a very [[prodigy]] [[individual]] and usually [[puts]] a lot to a movie, was [[scary]] and his [[overall]] [[trait]] was not [[yet]] close to being [[momentous]] to this movie, other than to [[deliver]] it longer. I really would have [[enjoyed]] to [[behold]] more interactions between the [[primary]] characters, [[Cate]] and Angie, and maybe [[tried]] not for a [[sheer]] comedy, which [[tragically]] it was not, but [[conceivably]] a [[teatro]] with comedic [[facets]]. I [[reckon]] if the [[film]] did this it [[did]] have been very [[fun]] [[because]] both [[actors]] are [[perfectly]] funny in their own [[modes]] and sitting here I can [[believe]] of [[myriad]] scenarios that [[could]] have been a [[rioting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] By some happy coincidence the same year that Jimmy [[Stewart]] and Kim Novak [[made]] Alfred Hitchcock's haunting masterpiece "Vertigo", they [[also]] [[made]] this [[light]] comedy. [[Perhaps]] the two [[actors]] needed to do it after undergoing the heaviness of the Hitchcock [[film]] . At any rate this a [[great]] [[companion]] piece to "[[Vertigo]]" as it again [[explores]] a very un-likely but powerful romance. In fact the [[film]] can be seen as the flip side of "Vertigo" with it's [[happy]] ending. Here again [[Novak]] undergoes a [[transformation]], in Vertigo she essentially plays two women and here she 'transforms' from witch to mortal. Stewart is again bewitched and for awhile tormented by his love for her. Unlike Vertigo the two come together in "Bell Book and Candle" , a perfect antidote for the Hitcock movie. Again the dynamics of love and attraction are examined but in an altogether different vein. The cast is terrific. Lemmon hilarious as Novak's warlock brother and Elsa Lancaster giving a classic performance as the Aunt. Ernie Kovacs as the alcoholic cult writer and of course Hermoine Gingold playing Novak's competitor are all great. The scene with Stewart drinking the potion is comedy at it's best. Anyone who has seen Vertigo or even if you haven't should see this [[memorable]] light [[comedy]]. By some happy coincidence the same year that Jimmy [[Steward]] and Kim Novak [[introduced]] Alfred Hitchcock's haunting masterpiece "Vertigo", they [[additionally]] [[introduced]] this [[lighting]] comedy. [[Presumably]] the two [[actresses]] needed to do it after undergoing the heaviness of the Hitchcock [[flick]] . At any rate this a [[whopping]] [[mate]] piece to "[[Dizziness]]" as it again [[scrutinize]] a very un-likely but powerful romance. In fact the [[filmmaking]] can be seen as the flip side of "Vertigo" with it's [[joyous]] ending. Here again [[Novick]] undergoes a [[converting]], in Vertigo she essentially plays two women and here she 'transforms' from witch to mortal. Stewart is again bewitched and for awhile tormented by his love for her. Unlike Vertigo the two come together in "Bell Book and Candle" , a perfect antidote for the Hitcock movie. Again the dynamics of love and attraction are examined but in an altogether different vein. The cast is terrific. Lemmon hilarious as Novak's warlock brother and Elsa Lancaster giving a classic performance as the Aunt. Ernie Kovacs as the alcoholic cult writer and of course Hermoine Gingold playing Novak's competitor are all great. The scene with Stewart drinking the potion is comedy at it's best. Anyone who has seen Vertigo or even if you haven't should see this [[unforgettable]] light [[travesty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Having heard quite positive reviews and having seen the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it delivered. [[Overall]], the [[movie]] is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[classic]]. [[SPOILER]] [[At]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[fantastic]]. This is just as [[good]] as the scene in The Big Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[barricade]] his door, but forgets the door turns outward! END [[SPOILER]] Just go [[see]] this movie, you won't be [[disappointed]]. Having heard quite positive reviews and having seen the trailer I had to see this movie. With William H. Macy, Luis Guzman, Michael Jeter and Sam Rockwell present it had to be good. And it delivered. [[Total]], the [[flick]] is not crack-you-up funny, but there is one scene that really stands out and is, in a my eyes, a [[typical]]. [[DEFLECTOR]] [[For]] the end, where they break through the wall to get to the safe and we see Rockwell and Washington stare at Jeter is just [[sumptuous]]. This is just as [[alright]] as the scene in The Big Lebowski where The Dude is using a chair to [[roadblock]] his door, but forgets the door turns outward! END [[DEFLECTORS]] Just go [[seeing]] this movie, you won't be [[disillusioned]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I know Anime. I've been into it long before it became a national phenomenon; i [[loved]] Ranma before most people [[knew]] what Dragonball Z even was. And just so you [[know]] I'm not [[bragging]] about my, let me [[say]] this: out of all the animes I've [[seen]], Castle in the Sky is by far one of the [[best]]. It's obvious people [[say]] Spirited Away is the best, but I [[really]] disagree. [[Most]] people only [[know]] that movie because it one an Acedmy [[Award]]; this isn't an exaggeration - I've shown Princess Mononoke and [[Castle]] in the [[Sky]] to people who'd only ever [[seen]] Spirited Away, and they agree that the [[latter]] two are the [[superior]] of the three. [[Personally]], I'd never [[thought]] that [[anything]] [[could]] [[compare]] to Princess Mononoke, until I [[finally]] [[saw]] Castle in the [[Sky]]. I [[still]] [[think]] that the prior is the better of the two, but [[Castle]] in the [[Sky]] is [[easily]] on par with it; in [[many]] [[ways]], Castle has [[major]] [[elements]] that Mononoke was [[missing]]. [[In]] either [[case]], if you've only [[seen]] Spirited Away, and [[think]] that that is Miyazaki's [[best]] [[film]], be [[prepared]] to have your [[earth]] [[shaken]]. I know Anime. I've been into it long before it became a national phenomenon; i [[cared]] Ranma before most people [[overheard]] what Dragonball Z even was. And just so you [[savoir]] I'm not [[brag]] about my, let me [[tell]] this: out of all the animes I've [[noticed]], Castle in the Sky is by far one of the [[optimum]]. It's obvious people [[told]] Spirited Away is the best, but I [[truly]] disagree. [[More]] people only [[savoir]] that movie because it one an Acedmy [[Awarding]]; this isn't an exaggeration - I've shown Princess Mononoke and [[Castillo]] in the [[Celestial]] to people who'd only ever [[watched]] Spirited Away, and they agree that the [[latest]] two are the [[superiors]] of the three. [[Individual]], I'd never [[figured]] that [[something]] [[wo]] [[comparative]] to Princess Mononoke, until I [[eventually]] [[seen]] Castle in the [[Celestial]]. I [[nonetheless]] [[thinks]] that the prior is the better of the two, but [[Castillo]] in the [[Celestial]] is [[conveniently]] on par with it; in [[multiple]] [[methods]], Castle has [[sizable]] [[components]] that Mononoke was [[lacks]]. [[Throughout]] either [[example]], if you've only [[saw]] Spirited Away, and [[thinking]] that that is Miyazaki's [[nicest]] [[movies]], be [[authored]] to have your [[overland]] [[wracked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1718 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] It's nothing brilliant, [[groundbreaking]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an extremely fascinating character study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of [[heroin]], but not really. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[disturbing]], [[yet]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these [[characters]] do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic [[film]] offers no conclusion or [[revelation]] at the end, we just see the lives of these sordid individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B It's nothing brilliant, [[innovative]] or innovative, but 'Dog Days' is for some reason an extremely fascinating character study. It's like CRASH tripping on a bad dose of [[smack]], but not really. It's an Austrian film following the lives of several depressed, deranged and annoying people and their abusive relationships with each other. It's [[nagging]], [[even]] very well-acted and it's interesting to watch the crazy little things these [[nature]] do. Certainly not for the weak-hearted, this highly pessimistic [[cinematographic]] offers no conclusion or [[epiphany]] at the end, we just see the lives of these sordid individuals over the course of two days. Grade: B --------------------------------------------- Result 1719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[bad]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! This had a great cast with big-name stars like Tyrone Power, Henry Fonda, Randolph Scott, Nancy Kelly, Henry Hull and Brian Donlevey and a bunch more lesser-but-known names with shorter roles. It also had Technicolor, one of the few movies made with it in 1939.

Now the [[unfavourable]] news.......regrettably, I can't say much positive for the story. It portrayed the James boys in a totally positive light....and Hollywood has done that ever since. Why these criminals are always shown to be the "good guys" is beyond me. This film glamorizes them and made their enemies - the railroad people - into vicious human beings. The latter was exaggerated so much it was preposterous. Well, that's the film world for you: evil is good; good is bad.

Hey Hollywood: here's a news flash - The James boys were criminals! Really - look it up! --------------------------------------------- Result 1720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[Shame]] on [[Julia]] [[Roberts]] and [[John]] Cusack. They are so [[talented]] and should not have had any [[part]] in this movie. The storyline was [[dumb]] and predictable. The [[jokes]] were not [[funny]]. The [[romance]] was not [[really]] romance. I was all too happy when this movie [[ended]]. [[Pity]] on [[Yulia]] [[Stevens]] and [[Johannes]] Cusack. They are so [[gifted]] and should not have had any [[portions]] in this movie. The storyline was [[foolish]] and predictable. The [[pleasantries]] were not [[comical]]. The [[romanticism]] was not [[truthfully]] romance. I was all too happy when this movie [[completed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I [[love]] these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[today]] and it is rich in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was made to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[kids]] to "act" I'll never know. I think they are [[precious]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this [[movie]] as it [[shows]] the naiveté that [[existed]] in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were made to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a different time with a totally different mind set. I [[adore]] these "Diaper Baby" movies! You couldn't make a movie like this [[hoy]] and it is rich in cinematic history. It is goofy and the film was made to make you laugh, which it does. How they ever got these [[infantile]] to "act" I'll never know. I think they are [[inestimable]] and the kids make me laugh but so do the others who made this [[filmmaking]] as it [[exhibited]] the naiveté that [[exists]] in the early 30's. You have to remember that this is when the film industry was very young, the stock market had crashed, the world wide depression was beginning and these films were made to give a person a break from the real world. The fact that you could see movies for five cents is beyond my comprehension, but then dinner for 25 cents is too. It was a different time with a totally different mind set. --------------------------------------------- Result 1722 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had heard some bad things about [[Cabin]] Fever almost as much as I [[heard]] the cultish [[hype]]. As it [[turns]] out, the first film from the new impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so effort with the IQ points dropping as the [[film]] progresses. There are [[worse]] [[movies]] out there, and [[surely]] more gory ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so high on the blood-count for Hostel, there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either though: kids go to a cabin for a week of partying, only to come across a very sick man, covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that feeds the reservoir, and soon the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one way or another. The characters, either the lead college kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they meet their fates, the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly thrown together without the many [[laughs]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and maybe might have been funnier in another movie or by itself, but in the context of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[work]]. There's also a young police character who is even dumber and less convincing than the others. And the family that goes after DiBello following an incident has some possibilities that aren't realized. But all the while, Roth pumps up his script with common sense out the [[window]] and sudden scares and frights with people hacking up blood on one another and a [[killer]] dog rambling around. Which isn't all for not either. Now, unlike lesser Troma horror [[movies]] or even lesser ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure [[Roth]] is a die-hard fan- he doesn't [[make]] it unwatchable. It's [[also]] [[smart]] to not have any [[explanation]] for where the virus [[comes]] from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't [[really]] have a fine [[idea]] of what makes for great campy-horror times. His film [[tries]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red tint on the lens or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a [[lot]] of illogical scenarios and choices made (shave your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- I had heard some bad things about [[Bungalow]] Fever almost as much as I [[listened]] the cultish [[fanfare]]. As it [[revolves]] out, the first film from the new impresario Eli Roth, it's just a so-so effort with the IQ points dropping as the [[cinematography]] progresses. There are [[pire]] [[films]] out there, and [[indubitably]] more gory ones (while I'm not sure how the hype-meter got so high on the blood-count for Hostel, there is a good amount for genre fans here). The premise isn't necessarily bad either though: kids go to a cabin for a week of partying, only to come across a very sick man, covered in blood, whom in a panic they set on fire. He winds up dead in the water that feeds the reservoir, and soon the characters all succumb to the flesh-eating virus one way or another. The characters, either the lead college kids (including Rider Strong as the hero and James DiBello as the goofy side-bar) or the supporting 'village' folks are archetypal to the point of inertia, if not painfully so.

As they meet their fates, the townspeople get pretty weird, and it just seems to be non-sensibly thrown together without the many [[grin]]; 'Pancakes kid' comes out of nowhere, and maybe might have been funnier in another movie or by itself, but in the context of the rest of the movie, it just doesn't [[collaboration]]. There's also a young police character who is even dumber and less convincing than the others. And the family that goes after DiBello following an incident has some possibilities that aren't realized. But all the while, Roth pumps up his script with common sense out the [[luna]] and sudden scares and frights with people hacking up blood on one another and a [[murderer]] dog rambling around. Which isn't all for not either. Now, unlike lesser Troma horror [[films]] or even lesser ones of the 70s or 80s- to which I'm sure [[Ruth]] is a die-hard fan- he doesn't [[deliver]] it unwatchable. It's [[likewise]] [[intelligent]] to not have any [[explanations]] for where the virus [[happens]] from.

But unlike those films too, he also doesn't [[genuinely]] have a fine [[concept]] of what makes for great campy-horror times. His film [[strive]] for that, of course, and only once or twice does he make it a goofy, bloody time (I did like the random bunny Strong sees while on the gurney). It's not even very poorly shot a lot of the time (albeit with its own contrived style-choices ala red tint on the lens or that story with the bowling-alley worker). It simply contains a [[batch]] of illogical scenarios and choices made (shave your legs with a deadly virus, uh-huh), and it aims for fairly typical ground. If that's your cup of tea, more power to you. But at the end I found it to be actually un-exceptional genre territory that doesn't offend audience sensibilities ala Saw, but doesn't swing for the fence either as a clever B-movie. Roth also has the temerity to end the movie on a true note of 'what-the-hell' as the Santa Claus bearded convenience store clerk from earlier in the film serves a bunch of black people. It could work if he followed up on it with something better, or if he dropped it altogether. Same could be said for a lot of the movie. C- --------------------------------------------- Result 1723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] My, how the mighty have [[fallen]]. Kim Basinger is a [[great]] actress but she was [[definitely]] slumming when she [[took]] this role. This movie is bad for one [[reason]] in particular: [[lapses]] in logic. Its looks like one of those [[movies]] that would have been passable with all its plot holes if it had [[came]] out in the 80s and 90s but in 2008 it just looks real [[stupid]]. This is the [[worst]] thriller I've ever seen and I've seen The Bone Collector and [[Twisted]].

The story details Della(Kim Basinger)is just getting from [[buying]] gifts in a mall an is [[harassed]] by a gang of [[thugs]] that end up killing a [[cop]] that came to her aid. From then on she is chased by these idiotic goons through an abandoned street and she [[gets]] rid of them one by one with a toolbox full of tools.

So [[many]] things are wrong with this [[movie]]. As I [[said]] this movie leaps over logic at [[every]] turn and with the exception of Kim Basinger, the acting is made-for-TV bad. Hell, this pseudo thriller is made-for-TV bad. The way she kills each of these politically correct thugs(1 Caucasian, 1 Hispanic, 1 Asian and 1 African American all coming together to stalk a Caucasian woman. Don't you just love America?)is laughable to a fault. The way she killed the Hispanic guy made me laugh hysterically. The sex scene with the main hoodlum was so out in left field that it make you shake your head in shame. I only [[recommend]] this to lovers of bad [[films]] and no one else. Anybody else especially [[Kim]] Basinger [[fans]] would do well not to own this [[flick]]. You don't [[want]] [[see]] an actress you respect in a [[film]] this bad now do you? Of course not. You were warned. My, how the mighty have [[fall]]. Kim Basinger is a [[wondrous]] actress but she was [[decidedly]] slumming when she [[taken]] this role. This movie is bad for one [[motif]] in particular: [[expire]] in logic. Its looks like one of those [[cinematography]] that would have been passable with all its plot holes if it had [[became]] out in the 80s and 90s but in 2008 it just looks real [[nonsensical]]. This is the [[gravest]] thriller I've ever seen and I've seen The Bone Collector and [[Twisty]].

The story details Della(Kim Basinger)is just getting from [[acquiring]] gifts in a mall an is [[intimidated]] by a gang of [[gangsters]] that end up killing a [[cops]] that came to her aid. From then on she is chased by these idiotic goons through an abandoned street and she [[receives]] rid of them one by one with a toolbox full of tools.

So [[countless]] things are wrong with this [[film]]. As I [[told]] this movie leaps over logic at [[each]] turn and with the exception of Kim Basinger, the acting is made-for-TV bad. Hell, this pseudo thriller is made-for-TV bad. The way she kills each of these politically correct thugs(1 Caucasian, 1 Hispanic, 1 Asian and 1 African American all coming together to stalk a Caucasian woman. Don't you just love America?)is laughable to a fault. The way she killed the Hispanic guy made me laugh hysterically. The sex scene with the main hoodlum was so out in left field that it make you shake your head in shame. I only [[recommending]] this to lovers of bad [[kino]] and no one else. Anybody else especially [[Kima]] Basinger [[admirers]] would do well not to own this [[film]]. You don't [[wantto]] [[seeing]] an actress you respect in a [[kino]] this bad now do you? Of course not. You were warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 1724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] This movie is really [[special]]. It's a very [[beautiful]] [[movie]]. [[Which]] [[starts]] with three [[orphans]], Sho, his brother Shinji and their [[friend]] Toshi, They're poor children's, [[living]] on the street, but one day they [[succeeded]] to [[steal]] a [[bag]] full of [[money]], and then their able to [[live]] on, to [[buy]] a [[house]], and their [[life]] [[seems]] to [[become]] much [[better]]. They're making [[new]] friend, life-friends. But [[something]] went [[wrong]] and they're becoming [[enemies]] and it all [[ends]] up with them [[killing]] each other.

I was [[negative]] about this [[movie]] in the [[beginning]], because when [[singers]] (Gackt - Solo, ex-singer in [[Malice]] Mizer, Hyde - [[Solo]], [[singer]] in L'Arc~en~Ciel, both very famous in Japan and Wang Lee-Hom - Taiwanese [[singer]]) [[trying]] to [[become]] actors, but this isn't like the other singers-going-actors-movies. They're doing a [[great]] job, and with no earlier [[experience]] in [[movies]] (except for Lee-Hom, who had been in two [[movies]] before).

This is [[absolutely]] one of my favorite [[movies]]. [[Maybe]] that's a [[little]] because I'm a very [[big]] fan of Hyde, but - it was this movie who [[made]] me [[discover]] him.

Well, Gackt ([[playing]] the main [[character]] - the orphan Sho) was a [[part]] of the [[group]] who [[wrote]] the script, and it was he who [[insisted]] that Hyde should play Sho's friend, the [[vampire]] Kei. [[At]] that time they didn't know each other, at least not like [[friends]]. But after the [[movie]] they [[became]] really [[good]] friend, and that [[shows]] us too that they really [[worked]] [[hard]] on this movie and that they had good [[cooperation]].

The [[movie]] have many [[different]] [[feelings]] running trough the [[story]], Love, [[Hate]], [[Sadness]], [[Pain]], [[Loneliness]], Happiness and so on. I [[think]] the [[first]] hour are the best, it's so [[beautiful]]. After that people are [[dying]], Kei's leaving and it all changes so much. But [[still]] it's a [[great]] [[movie]], it's the only [[movie]] who has ever [[made]] me [[cry]], it [[ends]] up so sad, but [[still]] [[beautiful]].

[[So]] if you haven't [[seen]] this movie, you really should. Because it's wonderful, but sad. You won't regret it. ^^ This movie is really [[especial]]. It's a very [[ravishing]] [[cinematographic]]. [[Whom]] [[began]] with three [[fatherless]], Sho, his brother Shinji and their [[friends]] Toshi, They're poor children's, [[inhabit]] on the street, but one day they [[successes]] to [[fly]] a [[backpack]] full of [[cash]], and then their able to [[viva]] on, to [[purchase]] a [[home]], and their [[vida]] [[seem]] to [[becoming]] much [[best]]. They're making [[newest]] friend, life-friends. But [[anything]] went [[inaccurate]] and they're becoming [[opponent]] and it all [[end]] up with them [[manslaughter]] each other.

I was [[inclement]] about this [[films]] in the [[launches]], because when [[singer]] (Gackt - Solo, ex-singer in [[Mischief]] Mizer, Hyde - [[Alone]], [[singing]] in L'Arc~en~Ciel, both very famous in Japan and Wang Lee-Hom - Taiwanese [[singers]]) [[striving]] to [[gotten]] actors, but this isn't like the other singers-going-actors-movies. They're doing a [[awesome]] job, and with no earlier [[experiences]] in [[movie]] (except for Lee-Hom, who had been in two [[films]] before).

This is [[totally]] one of my favorite [[films]]. [[Presumably]] that's a [[small]] because I'm a very [[gargantuan]] fan of Hyde, but - it was this movie who [[brought]] me [[discovers]] him.

Well, Gackt ([[play]] the main [[nature]] - the orphan Sho) was a [[party]] of the [[groups]] who [[texted]] the script, and it was he who [[highlighted]] that Hyde should play Sho's friend, the [[vampires]] Kei. [[During]] that time they didn't know each other, at least not like [[friend]]. But after the [[film]] they [[was]] really [[buena]] friend, and that [[denotes]] us too that they really [[cooperation]] [[tough]] on this movie and that they had good [[partnership]].

The [[movies]] have many [[several]] [[passions]] running trough the [[saga]], Love, [[Hating]], [[Grief]], [[Grief]], [[Lonely]], Happiness and so on. I [[thinking]] the [[frst]] hour are the best, it's so [[awesome]]. After that people are [[died]], Kei's leaving and it all changes so much. But [[nonetheless]] it's a [[grand]] [[movies]], it's the only [[movies]] who has ever [[brought]] me [[mourns]], it [[end]] up so sad, but [[nonetheless]] [[awesome]].

[[Thus]] if you haven't [[saw]] this movie, you really should. Because it's wonderful, but sad. You won't regret it. ^^ --------------------------------------------- Result 1725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] The [[film]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[problems]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite simply incredibly boring because it really is just one small episode blown up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really convincing as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. The [[kino]] My Name is Modesty is based around an episode that takes up about one page in the 10th modesty Blaise novel called Night of the Morningstar. It describes an incident in which the young Modesty (17 in the book, mid twenties in the film)asserts her leadership in a war over a casino. As this is set before the actual Blaise adventures her trusted sidekick Willi Garvin is not in the film. That is one of the main [[troubles]] as the relationship between Blaise and Garvin was certainly always one of the fascinating aspects of the novels and the long running comic strip. The other problem is that the film is quite simply incredibly boring because it really is just one small episode blown up into a screenplay. The casting is okay but Alexandra Staden is not really convincing as the heroine and actually too old for the role to play the young Modesty. I get the impression that this film was a quick and dirty solution as not to lose the rights to the Blaise franchise. --------------------------------------------- Result 1726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] [[Allow]] me to just get to the bottom [[line]] here: I've got 3 kids, ages 5 to 10. I consider a trip to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me support the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* [[Authorizing]] me to just get to the bottom [[iine]] here: I've got 3 kids, ages 5 to 10. I consider a trip to the theater a success when there are no talking animals. I've seen most of the children's videos in our collection at least 72 times. I can tell you when the film gets reversed in The Wizard of Oz, the over-18 sexual joke in El Dorado and the tragic flaw with the ending of Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. I could probably storyboard Nemo from memory alone.

What makes me support the one child of mine (it varies) who suggests this title for the family movie of an evening? In a word: Showerman.

Moment of silence...

*sigh* --------------------------------------------- Result 1727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I can understand those who [[dislike]] this [[movie]] cause of a [[lack]] of knowledge.

First of all, those [[girls]] are not Geisha, but brothel [[tenants]], and one that don't know the difference will not understand half of the movie, and certainly not the end. This is a [[complete]] art work about the women's life and [[needs]] in this era. Everything is important, and certainly the way they dress, all over the movie means more than words. To those who [[thought]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director understood the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual range. I can understand those who [[antipathy]] this [[filmmaking]] cause of a [[failure]] of knowledge.

First of all, those [[daughters]] are not Geisha, but brothel [[renter]], and one that don't know the difference will not understand half of the movie, and certainly not the end. This is a [[finish]] art work about the women's life and [[required]] in this era. Everything is important, and certainly the way they dress, all over the movie means more than words. To those who [[brainchild]] it was a boring geisha movie, I'll suggest you to read a bit about this society before making a conclusion that is so out of the reality. This is Kurosawa's work of is life, and I'm sure that the director understood the silent meaning of Kurosawa's piece to the right intellectual range. --------------------------------------------- Result 1728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This movie was o.k. but it [[could]] have been much better. There are some spooky moments but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[want]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you could fast forward through & not miss anything. The biggest flaw is that it is so [[predictable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[anything]] [[great]]. This movie was o.k. but it [[did]] have been much better. There are some spooky moments but there aren't enough of them to make me ever [[wanted]] to see this movie again. There are some scenes you could fast forward through & not miss anything. The biggest flaw is that it is so [[foreseeable]], & that is the reason why I rated it so low. It's watchable but don't expect [[somethings]] [[wondrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I saw it at the premiere at SXSW and was extremely disappointed. The director knew little about John Lennon and even said as much at the premiere. This is a drama, but people were laughing throughout at how cheesy the film was. That's never a good sign. The only saving graces were Dominic Monaghan and Jason Leonard as Livien's roommates/bandmates. They were funny while the rest of the movie took itself waaay too seriously. The cheesy dropping of Beatles lyrics was just absurd. The soundtrack was excellent, however, and was probably the best part of the movie. Unless you're one of those crazy, rabid Dominic Monaghan fans, don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 1730 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Rather [[annoying]] that [[reviewers]] keep [[comparing]] this to Planet Earth... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. Earth is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is inevitably inferior and simplified. But that is not comparing like with like.

As a feature-length documentary (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[surpasses]] pretty much anything you will see in your entire [[life]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[everyone]] in the UK - very much including me - adores David Attenborough, and there's little excuse for him not to be narrating here, but that hardly deserves knocking down a star or three. He wasn't a presenter on Planet Earth, just a narrator, and I'm sure he's modest and gracious enough to realise that anything that gets more viewers in is a Good Thing.

Anyone who sees this will be [[overwhelmed]] by its awe, majesty and glory. All reviewers agree on that. Those who [[love]] it (ie. everyone) will/should go on to see an buy Planet Earth. So three cheers for its cinematic release, and a big boooo for anyone cheap enough to buy this on DVD rather than the Planet Earth box-set. But as works of art they're not in competition here people.

The Earth is big enough for both. Rather [[exasperating]] that [[testers]] keep [[compares]] this to Planet Earth... Of *course* Planet Earth is better - it has much much more of the same. Earth is like an extended trailer for the Planet Earth series, and as such, is inevitably inferior and simplified. But that is not comparing like with like.

As a feature-length documentary (or actually as a feature-length anything), it [[topped]] pretty much anything you will see in your entire [[iife]] (unless you choose to traverse the Earth in helicopters with long-range cameras for years on end, and wait for months in the most extreme environments to catch a glimpse of the most extraordinary beings on earth, which - lets face it - is unlikely).

On the narration: yes [[someone]] in the UK - very much including me - adores David Attenborough, and there's little excuse for him not to be narrating here, but that hardly deserves knocking down a star or three. He wasn't a presenter on Planet Earth, just a narrator, and I'm sure he's modest and gracious enough to realise that anything that gets more viewers in is a Good Thing.

Anyone who sees this will be [[inundated]] by its awe, majesty and glory. All reviewers agree on that. Those who [[iove]] it (ie. everyone) will/should go on to see an buy Planet Earth. So three cheers for its cinematic release, and a big boooo for anyone cheap enough to buy this on DVD rather than the Planet Earth box-set. But as works of art they're not in competition here people.

The Earth is big enough for both. --------------------------------------------- Result 1731 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Look, there's nothing spectacularly offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[typical]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it [[really]] has no [[sense]] of movement, you feel as though you could get up and walk away at any moment. The production of the [[movie]] also has the feel of a debut movie made about fifteen years ago. I'd [[recommend]] re-watching a classic movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this shallow imitation. Oh, one other BIG problem...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously disappointed with the way they've made him look here. Look, there's nothing spectacularly offensive about this film, it's just boring. It's a [[emblematic]] rom-com with an ending you can see coming before you've seen so much as the trailer. The key difference is that the classic rom-coms tackle their stories with wit and a lack of pretension. This movie has no pretension but it [[genuinely]] has no [[sensing]] of movement, you feel as though you could get up and walk away at any moment. The production of the [[kino]] also has the feel of a debut movie made about fifteen years ago. I'd [[recommending]] re-watching a classic movie like When Harry Met Sally instead of this shallow imitation. Oh, one other BIG problem...no chemistry. If you're used to seeing Michael looking all cute as Vaughn in Alias, you're going to be seriously disappointed with the way they've made him look here. --------------------------------------------- Result 1732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This movie is [[wonderful]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be killed. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the blob gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time [[favorite]] 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? This movie is [[sumptuous]]. What separates it from other 50's sci-fi is the fact that the alien has no features, no face, eyes, anything, yet it can't be killed. I especially like the idea that this film doesn't take place over a few days, it takes place in one night, lasting supposedly past midnight.It's also scary that once the blob gets on you, you can't get it off. you're stuck in it, as it dissolves your flesh and slowly devours your body. My all time [[preferable]] 50's sci-fi film, and what is sometimes considered the quintessential one. I can see why this rocketed Steve McQueen to stardom. All this and a catchy theme song! How can you go wrong? --------------------------------------------- Result 1733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is indeed a god [[adaptation]] of [[Jane]] Austen's [[novel]]. Compared with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to [[resemble]] as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[awful]]. [[Besides]] [[Kate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other actors were [[trying]] too hard. [[Mark]] Strong was not the "gentleman" he was supposed to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no feeling whatsoever, and throughout the [[entire]] film you could not see his love "[[growing]]" for Emma at all. This had a [[terrible]] effect on Kate Beckinsale, who seemed to be trying to "resque" her leading role as well as her partner's. Moreover, there was no chemistry between the entire cast. Hariett Smith, played by Samantha Morton, seemed to have no real attachment to Mr. Elton, played by Dominic Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was portrayed in the book. The settings of the film are also too poor. The costumes are even more so. I would have imagined Emma Woodhouse to dress in a more fashionable and elegant way that she does here. The ending is also too long. It is good that it resembles the book's ending, but it is a killer [[ending]] for a film. And again, I can see no feeling of happiness in the face of Mr.Knightley. To conclude, I [[believed]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[book]], but with poor actors. It seemed as if the film was made without any budget at all. I would prefer to see the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was made to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these actors (excepting the good Olivia Williams and the better Kate Beckinsale) [[ruin]] the entire script. This is indeed a god [[adjustment]] of [[Jin]] Austen's [[newer]]. Compared with the American Version with Guinneth Paltrow, the script was written to [[resembling]] as much as possible the book. But the acting was [[scary]]. [[Furthermore]] [[Cate]] Beckinsale, who I believe was a true likeness of the Emma in the book, all the other actors were [[seeking]] too hard. [[Brands]] Strong was not the "gentleman" he was supposed to be. He was often rude and offensive, had no feeling whatsoever, and throughout the [[overall]] film you could not see his love "[[rising]]" for Emma at all. This had a [[scary]] effect on Kate Beckinsale, who seemed to be trying to "resque" her leading role as well as her partner's. Moreover, there was no chemistry between the entire cast. Hariett Smith, played by Samantha Morton, seemed to have no real attachment to Mr. Elton, played by Dominic Rowan. Therefore, she did not seem as heartbroken as she was portrayed in the book. The settings of the film are also too poor. The costumes are even more so. I would have imagined Emma Woodhouse to dress in a more fashionable and elegant way that she does here. The ending is also too long. It is good that it resembles the book's ending, but it is a killer [[terminated]] for a film. And again, I can see no feeling of happiness in the face of Mr.Knightley. To conclude, I [[felt]] this adaptation to be loyal to the [[workbook]], but with poor actors. It seemed as if the film was made without any budget at all. I would prefer to see the "lighter" version with Paltrow and Northam, even if it is clear that it was made to be a "blockbuster", than to watch these actors (excepting the good Olivia Williams and the better Kate Beckinsale) [[downfall]] the entire script. --------------------------------------------- Result 1734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It is [[cheese]]. If all you [[want]] is a [[video]] [[game]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for action the film was too [[cheap]] to [[actually]] make special [[effects]] for, this is it. My [[friend]] and I actually had a great [[time]] seeing it, since the theatre was mostly empty and we [[could]] heckle a bit. This [[movie]] REALLY requires heckling.

[[Plot]]? There was a [[plot]]? OK, some [[stupid]] [[college]] or later types get invited to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the San Juan [[Islands]] ("If they'd only stayed back in Seattle, they would have survived." - direct quote, or nearly.) to attend. They get there and everyone is gone, and the [[site]] is somewhat wrecked (but hey, the keg is still full!). With the [[help]] of a crusty old captain and a coast guard woman (who acted only slightly less tough - and slightly less well - than Cynthia Rothrock), they fight lots of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky legends, and mostly get killed. That's about it.

It's not quite as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still better than Severed (they are sort of my own personal alpha and omega for bad movies - the former is bad but fun to heckle, and the latter is just too freaking bad to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're expecting a video game movie as excellent as Resident Evil, run away!!! run away now!!!

OK, some real big questions (without too many spoilers): Since when did Spanish ships of the 18th century venture into the Pacific Northwest????? Why is anyone in the Pacific Northwest smuggling guns, and to whom - CANADA, for crying out loud??? Why is a rave on an unnamed (oh, excuse me, it's called "isla del muerto", shya, right) San Juan Island - and outdoors, still keeping in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in attendance - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

Lucky thing there's lots of hatchets around. Lots of them. Everyone has them. Must be a hatchet sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I Know What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory comments (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. It is [[queso]]. If all you [[wanna]] is a [[videos]] [[games]], complete with what look like straight-from-the-computer cutaway sequences for action the film was too [[inexpensive]] to [[indeed]] make special [[influence]] for, this is it. My [[amigo]] and I actually had a great [[moment]] seeing it, since the theatre was mostly empty and we [[wo]] heckle a bit. This [[films]] REALLY requires heckling.

[[Intrigue]]? There was a [[intrigue]]? OK, some [[foolish]] [[academies]] or later types get invited to "the rave of the year" and go to one of the San Juan [[Insular]] ("If they'd only stayed back in Seattle, they would have survived." - direct quote, or nearly.) to attend. They get there and everyone is gone, and the [[venue]] is somewhat wrecked (but hey, the keg is still full!). With the [[assists]] of a crusty old captain and a coast guard woman (who acted only slightly less tough - and slightly less well - than Cynthia Rothrock), they fight lots of zombies (some which spit acid), get an earful of freaky legends, and mostly get killed. That's about it.

It's not quite as BAD as Demonicus, but not by much, and still better than Severed (they are sort of my own personal alpha and omega for bad movies - the former is bad but fun to heckle, and the latter is just too freaking bad to watch more than once). On the other hand, if you're expecting a video game movie as excellent as Resident Evil, run away!!! run away now!!!

OK, some real big questions (without too many spoilers): Since when did Spanish ships of the 18th century venture into the Pacific Northwest????? Why is anyone in the Pacific Northwest smuggling guns, and to whom - CANADA, for crying out loud??? Why is a rave on an unnamed (oh, excuse me, it's called "isla del muerto", shya, right) San Juan Island - and outdoors, still keeping in mind this is THE PACIFIC NORTHWET. And the rave has about 30 people in attendance - "the rave of the year," my patoot.

Lucky thing there's lots of hatchets around. Lots of them. Everyone has them. Must be a hatchet sales outlet nearby.

Finally, while the movie started out playing with a little "parody" (with nudges at I Know What You Did and Jaws), it didn't carry it through near enough.

OK, really finally - when the introductory comments (in a voice-over, no less) casually mention that one of the characters "gave up her boyfriend to focus on her fencing" you can be darn sure there'll be some fencing by the end of the movie. Not GOOD fencing, but a couple of people hacking at each other with swords, anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 1735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] This was [[incredible]], meaning that it was [[hard]] to believe, that the "forgotten tribe" would make this astounding migration twice a year, and that the filmmakers, Cooper and Schoedsack, didn't stage some of the scenes and shots. But what shots they are! The cinematography, under [[mostly]] [[extreme]] conditions, is [[brilliant]], and the [[score]] of Iranian [[music]] [[added]] to the video release [[give]] this [[memorable]] [[documentary]] an added [[richness]].

I had the [[pleasure]] of seeing this and "Kon Tiki" on the same weekend, which was a thrill and [[certainly]] made me [[see]] how [[tough]] and [[hardy]] and [[brave]] people can be, whether for [[primitive]] survival or the [[need]] for adventure or in the [[name]] of science. This was [[unimaginable]], meaning that it was [[stiff]] to believe, that the "forgotten tribe" would make this astounding migration twice a year, and that the filmmakers, Cooper and Schoedsack, didn't stage some of the scenes and shots. But what shots they are! The cinematography, under [[basically]] [[abject]] conditions, is [[shiny]], and the [[scoring]] of Iranian [[musician]] [[adds]] to the video release [[lend]] this [[unforgettable]] [[literature]] an added [[profusion]].

I had the [[glee]] of seeing this and "Kon Tiki" on the same weekend, which was a thrill and [[probably]] made me [[seeing]] how [[stringent]] and [[resilient]] and [[fearless]] people can be, whether for [[primal]] survival or the [[needs]] for adventure or in the [[denomination]] of science. --------------------------------------------- Result 1736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be glad to show you.

If you are used to seeing what made for a good Star Trek show, do [[NOT]] watch this.

The writing is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[characters]] [[weak]], and most of all, the [[design]] work is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Forget]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only good thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I wept openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. How low can someone sink while trying to recapture an old glory? ST:HF will be glad to show you.

If you are used to seeing what made for a good Star Trek show, do [[NAH]] watch this.

The writing is hodge-podge, the actors' portrayals of their [[trait]] [[vulnerable]], and most of all, the [[conceiving]] work is downright doggy.

Like watching strong captains, don't look here! Like the strong Federation attitude? [[Forgot]] about it here! Starfleet is mocked by ensigns wearing SPIKES in their hair.

While a seemingly mentally feeble captain shuffles about and within two minutes of the opening show's credits, Ensign Spikey is attempting to arrange a tryst with an engineer. It just degrades from there. No, not even uniforms match, for goodness sake. They are too small or too big, collars down to their chests, and TNG Seasons One and Two Uniforms mixed in with Season Three and DS9 uniforms. The strict discipline and tradition of any of the originals in lacking in this production down to the treads! The only good thing about this show is its graphics, which seem to improve a bit with each season. OK, I take that back. Who uses CG that inexpertly? The designers of this show.

Don't bother with it, it will offend your Star Trek sense, as it did mine. Not even the throw backs to previous shows can save this catastrophe.

I wept openly when i watched this, probably because my eyes were bleeding and my head almost ruptured. That bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] I'd even say some shades of Hitchcock...this is clearly better than MMM, which is seen as a guilty [[pleasure]] by some if not most Woody fans. By the way, did you know that Annie Hall was first conceived as a murder mystery? Anyhow, Woody reclaims some relevance in film [[comedy]] with this one. The plot turns are nice and [[tight]]. I will say that in the first 20 minutes or so, some of the actors are a little too hasty at delivering their lines, but stick around. Scarlett [[Johansson]] proves well-cast in the Diane Keaton-type role, and at no time is there any uncomfortable moments between her and the much older Woody. No one could imagine a more perfect actor for the role of Peter Lyman than Jackman. I'd even say some shades of Hitchcock...this is clearly better than MMM, which is seen as a guilty [[glee]] by some if not most Woody fans. By the way, did you know that Annie Hall was first conceived as a murder mystery? Anyhow, Woody reclaims some relevance in film [[travesty]] with this one. The plot turns are nice and [[stringent]]. I will say that in the first 20 minutes or so, some of the actors are a little too hasty at delivering their lines, but stick around. Scarlett [[Johanson]] proves well-cast in the Diane Keaton-type role, and at no time is there any uncomfortable moments between her and the much older Woody. No one could imagine a more perfect actor for the role of Peter Lyman than Jackman. --------------------------------------------- Result 1738 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Three]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[first]] attempt at a full length comedy feature. The only similarities to Intolerance are the opening "book" scene and the fact that similar stories through the ages are edited together into a complete film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't succeed as a feature film, it [[could]] be [[reduced]] to three two-reelers. [[Fortunately]], The Three Ages succeeds [[brilliantly]] as a comedy and contains some of the funniest routines I've seen in any of Keaton's film. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are simple boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the period satires are riotous and set the standard for future works by Mel Brooks and all films of this genre. However, I don't believe that anyone has ever topped this comedy. No one can play the lovable goof like Keaton and the stunts in this film are some of his best. In addition, Wallace Beery's appearance as Keaton's rival adds to this film's appeal. Anyone who thinks that comedy from the 1920's cannot be appreciated by modern audiences needs to see this movie. Loosely intended as a satire of D.W. Griffith's Intolerance, The [[Tres]] Ages was Buster Keaton's [[fiirst]] attempt at a full length comedy feature. The only similarities to Intolerance are the opening "book" scene and the fact that similar stories through the ages are edited together into a complete film. Keaton's reasoning for appropriating this style was that if it didn't succeed as a feature film, it [[did]] be [[slashing]] to three two-reelers. [[Mercifully]], The Three Ages succeeds [[marvellously]] as a comedy and contains some of the funniest routines I've seen in any of Keaton's film. There is nothing unique or daring about the story lines. They are simple boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-gets-girl plots, but the period satires are riotous and set the standard for future works by Mel Brooks and all films of this genre. However, I don't believe that anyone has ever topped this comedy. No one can play the lovable goof like Keaton and the stunts in this film are some of his best. In addition, Wallace Beery's appearance as Keaton's rival adds to this film's appeal. Anyone who thinks that comedy from the 1920's cannot be appreciated by modern audiences needs to see this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1739 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real culprit. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a [[cheap]] programmer, never achieving anything special. It is pleasant enough but then, at some point, it [[stops]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone could have sank the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good either. Vincent is a wimpy heroine and Duryea was never very good at playing good guys. I love film noirs, but this one was a [[real]] [[disappointment]]. "Black Angel" is minor whodunit, with June Vincent as a woman trying to save her husband from the electric chair after he is found guilty of killing an old acquaintance. Dan Duryea (the husband of the murdered woman) decides to help Vincent find the real culprit. Peter Lorre has one thankless role as a suspect. This film noir looks and plays like a [[inexpensive]] programmer, never achieving anything special. It is pleasant enough but then, at some point, it [[halting]] making sense and the solution to the mystery provokes one of those big "give me a break" reactions. That ending alone could have sank the film completely, but what precedes the conclusion is not very good either. Vincent is a wimpy heroine and Duryea was never very good at playing good guys. I love film noirs, but this one was a [[authentic]] [[frustration]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] If you are under 13 or above 13 and pretty intoxicated, you'll enjoy D-war. If you are a seriously dedicated fan of all kinds of brainless action films, you'll enjoy D-war. Otherwise, don't bother! I [[saw]] the [[movie]] today with my nephews and 3 of their friends. They really loved it and that made me feel good. [[After]] the movie was over, all the kids(my nephews and their friends)could not [[stop]] thanking me for taking them to the theater.

The CG is [[good]]. Acting and directing are horrible. Storyline is extremely simple. But, since the half of the audience was kids, they were screaming, shouting and cheering every time the dragons appeared on the screen. This made the viewing experience far more exciting than it should have been.

It's a good movie to take your kids to, but except for the final battle sequence, D-War is disappointing. I give this film 7 out of 10 mainly because the kids loved it so much. If you are under 13 or above 13 and pretty intoxicated, you'll enjoy D-war. If you are a seriously dedicated fan of all kinds of brainless action films, you'll enjoy D-war. Otherwise, don't bother! I [[noticed]] the [[cinematography]] today with my nephews and 3 of their friends. They really loved it and that made me feel good. [[Upon]] the movie was over, all the kids(my nephews and their friends)could not [[parada]] thanking me for taking them to the theater.

The CG is [[buena]]. Acting and directing are horrible. Storyline is extremely simple. But, since the half of the audience was kids, they were screaming, shouting and cheering every time the dragons appeared on the screen. This made the viewing experience far more exciting than it should have been.

It's a good movie to take your kids to, but except for the final battle sequence, D-War is disappointing. I give this film 7 out of 10 mainly because the kids loved it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 1741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (84%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Wow, the spookiest thing about this episode was the price of houses 40 years ago. I'll preface by saying I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. If the story/actors/etc. are worth their salt, they should be able to convey the bulk of the narrative without having to read it out, [[reminded]] me of [[personages]] who can't think off the cuff but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was tedious and boring, but some enjoy that kind of thing, it's just not my cup O tea. They could have kept the narrative but at least made it much more believable and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a singular half circle driveway, yet he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's nowhere to be seen on the road or on the property. Sloppy editing, as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you see at 24m30s walking towards the car as she pulls into the driveway of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also overdone, like some Jr. High drama student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I could keep picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It kept dragging on and the true purpose seemed to be to use absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully expected to see the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over told us all about the 8 track player, automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, abruptly. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or terminated. Not that many would notice, I suspect most had already changed the channel or dozed off by the end. Wow, the spookiest thing about this episode was the price of houses 40 years ago. I'll preface by saying I'm not a fan of narrated episodes. If the story/actors/etc. are worth their salt, they should be able to convey the bulk of the narrative without having to read it out, [[recalls]] me of [[character]] who can't think off the cuff but rely on teleprompters. The psychobabble was tedious and boring, but some enjoy that kind of thing, it's just not my cup O tea. They could have kept the narrative but at least made it much more believable and interesting if it was coming from a psychiatrist or maybe a newspaper reporter or something. Niggling little things like Peugeot being at the house, which has a singular half circle driveway, yet he seems to have parked his car in the tree he was standing under, because it's nowhere to be seen on the road or on the property. Sloppy editing, as she pulls into the driveway (for what seems the 100th time) exactly who are those 2 guys you see at 24m30s walking towards the car as she pulls into the driveway of the deserted house? The dolly close-ups were also overdone, like some Jr. High drama student discovering the zoom function on his camera for the first time. I could keep picking apart, but that might get almost as boring as this episode was. It kept dragging on and the true purpose seemed to be to use absolutely all the stock footage they had shot of Elaine driving the Newport convertible. I fully expected to see the Chrysler logo and a nice jingle play while a voice over told us all about the 8 track player, automatic top etc. The only good thing I have to say about his one is that it just ends, abruptly. No loose ends tied up, nothing explained or terminated. Not that many would notice, I suspect most had already changed the channel or dozed off by the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 1742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] But this is a [[great]] martial arts [[film]]. [[Liu]] Chia [[Liang]] ranks second to none as a fight choreographer, only Sammo Hung at his [[best]] [[compares]]. This is immediately clear from his [[proud]] [[exhibition]] of [[technique]] -rather than flashy camera angles etc. - during [[fights]]. The direction is [[tightly]] controlled to not only excite the viewer by the speed and movement but to awe her with the precise skill displayed. This [[film]] [[benefits]] also from Liu's [[participation]] in front of the camera. Liu's performance at the banquet scene with which the [[film]] opens is one of the [[high]] points in kung fu movie history. Liu is supported by the [[beautiful]] and talented Hui Ying Hung (of My Young Auntie fame) and 'Hsiao Hou' whose acrobatics are breathtaking, and preferable to any amount of wirework As for the plot , this film follows the not uncommon theme of revenge, but with character and moral development along the way, and a most [[fitting]] resolution. The humour in this is also of the [[best]]. If you only watch one kung fu film ever, this would be a good choice- it has it all. But this is a [[whopping]] martial arts [[kino]]. [[Yoo]] Chia [[Leong]] ranks second to none as a fight choreographer, only Sammo Hung at his [[optimum]] [[compared]]. This is immediately clear from his [[prideful]] [[displays]] of [[technology]] -rather than flashy camera angles etc. - during [[fight]]. The direction is [[rigidly]] controlled to not only excite the viewer by the speed and movement but to awe her with the precise skill displayed. This [[cinematography]] [[profit]] also from Liu's [[turnout]] in front of the camera. Liu's performance at the banquet scene with which the [[flick]] opens is one of the [[highest]] points in kung fu movie history. Liu is supported by the [[resplendent]] and talented Hui Ying Hung (of My Young Auntie fame) and 'Hsiao Hou' whose acrobatics are breathtaking, and preferable to any amount of wirework As for the plot , this film follows the not uncommon theme of revenge, but with character and moral development along the way, and a most [[montage]] resolution. The humour in this is also of the [[optimum]]. If you only watch one kung fu film ever, this would be a good choice- it has it all. --------------------------------------------- Result 1743 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[best]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[true]] classic. It's a [[perfect]] album, it starts out with Let's Go Crazy([[appropriate]] for the [[beginning]] as it's a great party song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun pop song...), The Beautiful Ones(a cheerful [[ballad]], probably the [[closest]] thing to R&B on this whole album), Computer Blue(a [[somewhat]] angry anthem [[towards]] Appolonia), [[Darling]] Nikki(one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves Cry(the climax to this [[masterpiece]]), I Would Die 4 U, Baby I'm A Star, and, of course, Purple Rain(a true classic, a very appropriate ending for this classic album) The movie and the album are both very good. I highly recommend them! The movie is okay, it has it's moments, the music scenes are the [[better]] of all! The soundtrack is a [[veritable]] classic. It's a [[irreproachable]] album, it starts out with Let's Go Crazy([[befitting]] for the [[onset]] as it's a great party song and very up-tempo), Take Me With U(a fun pop song...), The Beautiful Ones(a cheerful [[stroll]], probably the [[nearest]] thing to R&B on this whole album), Computer Blue(a [[rather]] angry anthem [[vers]] Appolonia), [[Bebe]] Nikki(one of the funniest songs ever, it very vaguely makes fun of Appolonia), When Doves Cry(the climax to this [[centerpiece]]), I Would Die 4 U, Baby I'm A Star, and, of course, Purple Rain(a true classic, a very appropriate ending for this classic album) The movie and the album are both very good. I highly recommend them! --------------------------------------------- Result 1744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This early Sirk melodrama, [[shot]] in black and white, is a [[minor]] film, [[yet]] showcases the flair of the German [[director]] in [[enhancing]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is nothing new but Sirk sets himself apart by creating [[meaningful]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided immeasurably by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a crisp 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. This early Sirk melodrama, [[offed]] in black and white, is a [[marginal]] film, [[even]] showcases the flair of the German [[headmaster]] in [[strengthened]] tired story lines into something resembling art. Set in the 1910's, Barbara Stanwyck is the woman who has sinned by abandoning her small-town husband and family for the lure of the Chicago stage. She never fulfilled her ambitions, and is drawn back to the town she left by an eager letter from her daughter informing her that she too has taken a liking to the theatre (a high school production, that is). Back in her old town she once again comes up against small-mindedness, and has to deal with her hostile eldest daughter, bewildered (and boring) husband (Richard Carlson) and ex-lover. The plot is nothing new but Sirk sets himself apart by creating [[worthwhile]] compositions, with every frame carefully shot, and he is aided immeasurably by having Stanwyck as his leading lady. It runs a crisp 76 minutes, and that's just as well, because the material doesn't really have the legs to go any further. --------------------------------------------- Result 1745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy psychological thriller, and one that has [[improved]] with time. [[Compared]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no character development here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[seeing]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[guess]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. [[Unfortunately]], the effects are [[laughable]]. Mewing cherubs, [[stretchy]] [[doors]], [[irritating]] [[dead]] [[children]] that can't speak [[plainly]] ... and an idiotically sappy [[ending]] that does it's darnedest to [[give]] you a [[new]] age [[enema]] of [[butterflies]] and rainbows. [[Ill]] take my Skittles [[orally]], thank you. [[Bruce]] Dern, I've [[liked]] you since "The [[Cowboys]]". [[Stop]] it. The Haunting. A remake, of course. The original was a creepy psychological thriller, and one that has [[improving]] with time. [[Comparing]] to this 1999 remake, it's a classic. There is no character development here, only caricatures (the slut, the authoritative brain, the "I'm gonna get us outta here" fellow, the oh so sensitive bookworm). But, [[witnessing]] as how the were banking on the special effects being the "star", I [[guessing]] characters that you can empathize with are a secondary concern. [[Sadly]], the effects are [[farcical]]. Mewing cherubs, [[bungee]] [[gates]], [[vexing]] [[die]] [[infant]] that can't speak [[explicitly]] ... and an idiotically sappy [[terminating]] that does it's darnedest to [[confer]] you a [[novo]] age [[colonic]] of [[butterfly]] and rainbows. [[Sick]] take my Skittles [[verbally]], thank you. [[Bros]] Dern, I've [[wished]] you since "The [[Steelers]]". [[Discontinue]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1746 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] The first episode immediately gave a good impression what to expect from the series! Mysteries waiting to be solved and a lot of [[good]] drama! I [[love]] the fact that they [[gradually]] [[reveal]] the stories concerning the characters! Explaining just enough to stay excited! Of course this [[show]] has some flaws! In the first two series there are some characters who for some reason don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a decent sent off but some of them just aren't there! Like Rose and her husband! Where the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later episodes! But it is a little inconsistent! That being said "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode(especially the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on character development than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a bad thing! It even saves some episodes from getting boring! One of the elements that can be considered the strength of this show are the wonderful characters! You will grow to love these characters! Good or bad! But eventually I will want to see some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The danger of "Lost" getting canceled due to declining ratings is near! And that would be devastating! The first episode immediately gave a good impression what to expect from the series! Mysteries waiting to be solved and a lot of [[buena]] drama! I [[iike]] the fact that they [[progressively]] [[disclosing]] the stories concerning the characters! Explaining just enough to stay excited! Of course this [[displayed]] has some flaws! In the first two series there are some characters who for some reason don't show up in the third season! Many of the characters have a decent sent off but some of them just aren't there! Like Rose and her husband! Where the hell are they? What happened to them? Maybe they will return in later episodes! But it is a little inconsistent! That being said "Lost" manages to be thrilling every episode(especially the first two seasons)! That is a very hard thing to do! I do notice that in the third season the focus is more on character development than the mystery aspects of the show! This is not a bad thing! It even saves some episodes from getting boring! One of the elements that can be considered the strength of this show are the wonderful characters! You will grow to love these characters! Good or bad! But eventually I will want to see some mysteries to be solved and get closure! The danger of "Lost" getting canceled due to declining ratings is near! And that would be devastating! --------------------------------------------- Result 1747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] The script was VERY [[weak]] w/o enough character arcs to make you care one bit about the characters or what happens to them. The script is way too talky and not [[enough]] gore or action to [[even]] call it slow paced. The story gets to the point that you just want everyone to shut up and die as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[muted]], [[stiff]] dialogue. On a technical note, the music mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. Then again, this could be called a blessing. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well done indeed. The script was VERY [[breakable]] w/o enough character arcs to make you care one bit about the characters or what happens to them. The script is way too talky and not [[satisfactorily]] gore or action to [[yet]] call it slow paced. The story gets to the point that you just want everyone to shut up and die as quickly as possible so you don't have to listen to them talk this very [[silencer]], [[tough]] dialogue. On a technical note, the music mix is way to high and makes it hard to understand what is being said most times. Then again, this could be called a blessing. Overall, this same story could have better been told in a short film w/ a running time under 30 minutes. The obvious "in your face" homages to Sam Raimi and "Evil Dead" would have been good had they been more subtle, but here they seem more like a bald faced rip off. C'mon, this kind of 35mm budget and THIS is the best that could be done? Still, the cinematography, lighting design and shots were very well done indeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I saw it, and which I [[could]] [[erase]] my [[memory]] and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[wonderful]]! It reminded me very much of Fried [[Green]] Tomatoes [[At]] The Whistlestop Cafe.

The [[story]] goes back in time and at the end of the movie we [[see]] what the connections are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by [[Disney]] and many [[characters]] are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The story is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just [[ordered]] the book from amazon, can't wait! I recorded this ages ago but only got round to watching it today. I have been ill so had run out of stuff to watch! I am so glad I saw it, and which I [[would]] [[deleted]] my [[memoir]] and watch i again for the first time. This movie is so [[glamorous]]! It reminded me very much of Fried [[Archer]] Tomatoes [[Under]] The Whistlestop Cafe.

The [[storytelling]] goes back in time and at the end of the movie we [[consults]] what the connections are. Some people have said this is a kids movie. I disagree - it may be made by [[Disneyland]] and many [[nature]] are children, but I am 23 and I LOVED it! There were moments when my spine tingled. The story is unlike any other film these days, full of adventure. I have just [[commanded]] the book from amazon, can't wait! --------------------------------------------- Result 1749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Feeding]] The Masses was just another [[movie]] [[trying]] to [[make]] a [[little]] [[money]] off of the zombie craze that is going around, mostly due to the popularity of movies such as Land Of The Dead and the Resident Evil series.

It [[starts]] at a [[television]] station, which is guarded by the military, and are reporting that The Lazarus Virus (zombies) are close to containment and the [[city]] will [[soon]] be free to do their [[business]] again. The problem is, this is [[totally]] false. [[Zombies]] are running rampantly and only a small minority of people are [[aware]]. Among them are Torch ([[William]] Garberina), the camera man, Sherry ([[Rachael]] [[Morris]]), the lead [[anchor]] [[woman]] (who for some [[reason]] is listed as playing Shelly on this website) and [[Roger]] (Patrick Cohen), their military [[escort]]. Torch and Sherry are against [[lying]] to the people but the station is being [[run]] by [[secret]] service (or some other [[government]] [[agency]]) and they are [[heavily]] [[censored]].

This [[movie]] [[gives]] itself a pat on the back on the box-cover saying "We [[hold]] FEEDING THE MASSES on a [[higher]] level than any o the three 'of the Dead' films by George A. Rombero." The source of that quote has lost ALL credibility with me.

[[Let]] me just say that this movie is [[BAD]]. I don't mean [[bad]] like I was [[expecting]] more (I [[obviously]] was, [[though]]) but I [[mean]] [[bad]] in that I [[could]] not [[find]] any redeeming [[qualities]] in the [[film]], whatsoever. The acting in all parts are [[either]] over [[done]] or too [[wooden]]. Did [[anybody]] [[remember]] their lines or are they reading off of cue cards? I can't [[even]] [[think]] of what the [[best]] [[part]] of the [[movie]] was or the best actor/[[actress]]. There really was not one. If I had to give a [[nod]] to [[someone]], I would [[say]] Roger, the military [[escort]] was [[probably]] the most interesting [[character]] but that is [[really]] not [[saying]] much.

I would have to recommend to pass on this [[movie]], [[despite]] the box-cover looking [[pretty]] [[good]] (It's what [[originally]] drew me to the [[movie]]). 3/10 [[Eating]] The Masses was just another [[cinematography]] [[striving]] to [[deliver]] a [[petite]] [[cash]] off of the zombie craze that is going around, mostly due to the popularity of movies such as Land Of The Dead and the Resident Evil series.

It [[startup]] at a [[tv]] station, which is guarded by the military, and are reporting that The Lazarus Virus (zombies) are close to containment and the [[ville]] will [[shortly]] be free to do their [[entrepreneurial]] again. The problem is, this is [[entirely]] false. [[Walkers]] are running rampantly and only a small minority of people are [[conscious]]. Among them are Torch ([[Guillaume]] Garberina), the camera man, Sherry ([[Rachel]] [[Maurice]]), the lead [[anchors]] [[femme]] (who for some [[motive]] is listed as playing Shelly on this website) and [[Roget]] (Patrick Cohen), their military [[accompany]]. Torch and Sherry are against [[lied]] to the people but the station is being [[executing]] by [[clandestine]] service (or some other [[administrations]] [[bodies]]) and they are [[sharply]] [[censured]].

This [[films]] [[offers]] itself a pat on the back on the box-cover saying "We [[held]] FEEDING THE MASSES on a [[greatest]] level than any o the three 'of the Dead' films by George A. Rombero." The source of that quote has lost ALL credibility with me.

[[Letting]] me just say that this movie is [[WICKED]]. I don't mean [[negative]] like I was [[awaiting]] more (I [[unmistakably]] was, [[although]]) but I [[imply]] [[negative]] in that I [[would]] not [[unearthed]] any redeeming [[qualifications]] in the [[films]], whatsoever. The acting in all parts are [[neither]] over [[played]] or too [[timber]]. Did [[anyone]] [[remembers]] their lines or are they reading off of cue cards? I can't [[yet]] [[believing]] of what the [[finest]] [[portions]] of the [[films]] was or the best actor/[[actor]]. There really was not one. If I had to give a [[ida]] to [[everybody]], I would [[said]] Roger, the military [[accompanies]] was [[arguably]] the most interesting [[trait]] but that is [[truly]] not [[arguing]] much.

I would have to recommend to pass on this [[cinematography]], [[albeit]] the box-cover looking [[belle]] [[alright]] (It's what [[initially]] drew me to the [[cinema]]). 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Warning]]: [[contains]] a [[spoiler]]. Corny [[plot]] and in many [[cases]] terrible acting. Fontaine is great, but some others, [[particularly]] [[Richard]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are exceedingly wooden. Ney lies in bed, dying of arsenical poisoning, with [[every]] hair in place. Yet the [[movie]] is so juicy and so suspenseful. More [[faithful]] to the book than most [[movies]] of its [[era]]. [[Casting]] [[Joan]] [[Fontaine]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[shocking]] then - I'm not kidding, kids) was a [[masterful]] stroke. She's just her [[usual]] [[Joan]] Fontainey self. As murderers were [[supposed]] to, she [[dies]] by [[falling]] "[[feet]] foremost through the floor into an [[empty]] space." [[Alerting]]: [[encompasses]] a [[baffle]]. Corny [[intrigue]] and in many [[case]] terrible acting. Fontaine is great, but some others, [[namely]] [[Ritchie]] Ney, Ivy's husband, are exceedingly wooden. Ney lies in bed, dying of arsenical poisoning, with [[any]] hair in place. Yet the [[films]] is so juicy and so suspenseful. More [[loyal]] to the book than most [[theater]] of its [[epoch]]. [[Cast]] [[Joana]] [[Trout]] as a poisoner (and an adulteress, which was just as [[alarming]] then - I'm not kidding, kids) was a [[masterly]] stroke. She's just her [[normal]] [[Joana]] Fontainey self. As murderers were [[presumed]] to, she [[died]] by [[receding]] "[[foot]] foremost through the floor into an [[emptiness]] space." --------------------------------------------- Result 1751 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I watched the trailer on the DVD after [[seeing]] the film, and I think [[anyone]] who saw it before watching the film would be very surprised and [[possibly]] [[disappointed]]. It [[made]] much of the fact that the film was "by the director of Cube" and made it look like a horror film, when in fact it is an Absurdist comedy (IMDB's spell checker doesn't seem to think that Absurdist is a word, but it is), reminiscent of Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are Dead.

I [[love]] the way the story builds up slowly at first, then gradually escalates. I also enjoy the fact that no explanation is given for what happens in the film. That and the fact that the story plays out mainly in just the one set are the only respects in which this film is similar to Cube. I [[recommend]] it. I watched the trailer on the DVD after [[witnessing]] the film, and I think [[somebody]] who saw it before watching the film would be very surprised and [[conceivably]] [[disappointing]]. It [[introduced]] much of the fact that the film was "by the director of Cube" and made it look like a horror film, when in fact it is an Absurdist comedy (IMDB's spell checker doesn't seem to think that Absurdist is a word, but it is), reminiscent of Rosencrantz and Guildernstern are Dead.

I [[amour]] the way the story builds up slowly at first, then gradually escalates. I also enjoy the fact that no explanation is given for what happens in the film. That and the fact that the story plays out mainly in just the one set are the only respects in which this film is similar to Cube. I [[recommendations]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] The film is [[bad]]. There is no other way to say it. The story is weak and outdated, especially for this country. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really care. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The subject was just not [[believable]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I [[think]] this rang true for everyone else who [[watched]] it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't work. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. The film is [[negative]]. There is no other way to say it. The story is weak and outdated, especially for this country. I don't think most people know what a "walker" is or will really care. I felt as if I was watching a movie from the 70's. The subject was just not [[reliable]] for the year 2007, even being set in DC. I [[thinking]] this rang true for everyone else who [[saw]] it too as the applause were low and quick at the end. Most didn't stay for the Q&A either.

I don't think Schrader really thought the film out ahead of time. Many of the scenes seemed to be cut short as if they were never finished or he just didn't know how to finish them. He jumped from one scene to the next and you had to try and figure out or guess what was going on. I really didn't get Woody's (Carter) private life or boyfriend either. What were all the "artistic" male bondage and torture pictures (from Iraq prisons) about? What was he thinking? I think it was his very poor attempt at trying to create this dark private subculture life for Woody's character (Car). It didn't work. It didn't even seem to make sense really.

The only good thing about this film was Woody Harrelson. He played his character (Car) flawlessly. You really did get a great sense of what a "walker" may have been like (say twenty years ago). He was great and most likely will never get recognized for it.

As for Lauren, Lily and Kristin... Boring.

Don't see it! It is painful! Unless you are a true Harrelson fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1753 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A young [[solicitor]] in [[sent]] to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made [[less]] than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not liked. To [[speed]] [[things]] up he [[decides]] to [[move]] from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is usually fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a woman in black, is she real or imaginary,he is also subjected to the blood curdling cries of a woamn and child apparently drowning in the marshes, these events take their toll on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. Atmospheric TV adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a [[little]] underwhelmed. A young [[prosecutors]] in [[dispatches]] to a remote area to wrap up the estate of a recently deceased client. When he arrives he finds that he is made [[least]] than welcome by the local villagers and that his deceased client was not liked. To [[acceleration]] [[items]] up he [[decided]] to [[budge]] from the local inn and take up residence in her home, a house that is usually fogbound and approached only by a causeway that is blocked off by the sea most of the day. Once there he sees visions of a woman in black, is she real or imaginary,he is also subjected to the blood curdling cries of a woamn and child apparently drowning in the marshes, these events take their toll on him and he soon becomes quite terrified. Atmospheric TV adaptation of a famous play by Susan Hill, that spends it first third building up its characters, before moving to the creepy country house, its poor colour contrast give away its TV roots immediately, this really should have been in black & white, but still as a ghost story it had a couple of unsettling moments, still though after waiting so long to see it I must say I was sadly just a [[tiny]] underwhelmed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Clean family oriented [[movie]]. I laughed, I cried...I [[loved]] it. I was [[worried]] I wouldn't be able to see Steve Carrell as anything but goofy Michael from The Office. Boy, was I wrong. He should win an Oscar for his performance. I will definitely buy this on DVD when it comes out. My husband [[enjoyed]] it and he isn't into [[movies]] of this "type". I saw it with 2 other couples in the 30 year old range and we all agreed it was the [[best]] movie we had seen in a LONG time and certainly the cleanest. Only 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who likes comedy, drama, romance and more! Clean family oriented [[films]]. I laughed, I cried...I [[worshiped]] it. I was [[preoccupied]] I wouldn't be able to see Steve Carrell as anything but goofy Michael from The Office. Boy, was I wrong. He should win an Oscar for his performance. I will definitely buy this on DVD when it comes out. My husband [[liked]] it and he isn't into [[filmmaking]] of this "type". I saw it with 2 other couples in the 30 year old range and we all agreed it was the [[optimum]] movie we had seen in a LONG time and certainly the cleanest. Only 1 cuss word! Not even sure why it was PG13. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone who likes comedy, drama, romance and more! --------------------------------------------- Result 1755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[movie]] has everything a fantasy [[movie]] should have, romance, [[clever]] witticisms, [[great]] acting and a fair dose of [[magic]].

I [[thoroughly]] [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]] and was [[drawn]] to its [[original]] plot ([[based]] on the Neil Gaiman novel which I am now looking to read) and [[colorful]] [[characters]].

One of the most [[striking]] [[things]] to me actually was how self contained the [[story]] is. Unlike so [[many]] sci-fi [[fantasy]] [[movies]] out there right now which [[leave]] open-endings and such this was a [[pure]] fairy-tale, [[satisfying]] in and of itself with no [[need]] for a sequel.

[[Original]]. [[Fun]]. Feel-good Fantasy. This [[filmmaking]] has everything a fantasy [[cinematic]] should have, romance, [[smarter]] witticisms, [[prodigious]] acting and a fair dose of [[hallucinogenic]].

I [[rigorously]] [[liked]] this [[flick]] and was [[draws]] to its [[initial]] plot ([[predicated]] on the Neil Gaiman novel which I am now looking to read) and [[coloured]] [[characteristics]].

One of the most [[staggering]] [[matters]] to me actually was how self contained the [[storytelling]] is. Unlike so [[several]] sci-fi [[chimera]] [[cinematography]] out there right now which [[let]] open-endings and such this was a [[unadulterated]] fairy-tale, [[agreeable]] in and of itself with no [[requisite]] for a sequel.

[[Upfront]]. [[Droll]]. Feel-good Fantasy. --------------------------------------------- Result 1756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] We rented five movies for New Year's Eve weekend and watched this one first. All I can say is that there was no place to go but up after watching this one. It was pointless and vulgar. Harvey Keitel's script must have been easy to write -- just make two out every three words a curse word. Andie McDowell is surprisingly good in a character roll, but the movie has nothing else to recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Fred Gwynne, Al [[Lewis]], Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[funny]], [[funny]] [[movie]]. The late [[Fred]] Gwynne is [[truly]] [[wonderful]] as [[Herman]] Munster who [[lives]] with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is hilarious as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the wax figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to [[terrorize]] the town everyone blames the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too late. You'll laugh out [[loud]] just like I did. Fred Gwynne, Al [[Louie]], Sid Caesar, and Yvonne De Carlo star in this [[comical]], [[comical]] [[cinematography]]. The late [[Freda]] Gwynne is [[truthfully]] [[sumptuous]] as [[Hermann]] Munster who [[iife]] with Grandpa Munster (Al Lewis), wife Lily (Yvonne De Carlo), and his son and daughter. Sid Caesar is hilarious as the owner of a wax museum that has a whole section dedicated to the Munster family. When the wax figures of Herman and Grandpa begin to [[intimidate]] the town everyone blames the two. The two now have to clear their names before it's too late. You'll laugh out [[vocal]] just like I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 1758 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[night]] and thought it was o.k., but missing something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the labored line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't get Durante's song out of my head, I kept trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and physical [[comedy]]. The next night I [[watched]] a scene with Thelma Todd as a conniving chorus girl trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors excellent, their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, appreciating Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's Sensational! It's Sublime! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. I watched 'Speak Easily' one [[nuit]] and thought it was o.k., but missing something. Maybe Buster Keaton strangely speaking threw me off, or the labored line delivery of a leading lady. The next day I kept thinking about the movie, though. I couldn't get Durante's song out of my head, I kept trying to better remember Thelma Todd's first scene, I considered that maybe Keaton did do some funny falls and physical [[travesty]]. The next night I [[observed]] a scene with Thelma Todd as a conniving chorus girl trying to impress Buster and Jimmy with her sex appeal. A very funny scene, the actors excellent, their faces, their eyes, their silly expressions. So I watched another scene, their show is opening on Broadway. Buster in his blissful innocence botches every act. Again, I was laughing out loud, appreciating Keaton's clowning and tumbling. So the next night I watched the whole movie again, and this time I see it for the first time: It's Stupendous! It's Sensational! It's Sublime! Three great comedians! Todd dances! Durante sings! Keaton speaks! Sure it ain't poifect...but there's a lot of laughs in this picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 1759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I recently saw I.Q. and even though I'm not a romantic comedy type of gal, I think that it was just a nice and sweet movie to watch. So [[many]] movies in my [[opinion]] lack honesty. You know that feeling when you're watching a movie and you just feel robbed because it's taking something from the story and it was like the director just threw it together like it was trash? The story between the scientists is a sweet and funny one. How they stuck together and they tried to help Tim Robbins character become smart. I liked the love story between Tim and Meg because it was simple and brought up a good point when it comes to love, "nothing is what it seems". I would recommend this for a Sunday morning.

7/10 I recently saw I.Q. and even though I'm not a romantic comedy type of gal, I think that it was just a nice and sweet movie to watch. So [[multiple]] movies in my [[visualise]] lack honesty. You know that feeling when you're watching a movie and you just feel robbed because it's taking something from the story and it was like the director just threw it together like it was trash? The story between the scientists is a sweet and funny one. How they stuck together and they tried to help Tim Robbins character become smart. I liked the love story between Tim and Meg because it was simple and brought up a good point when it comes to love, "nothing is what it seems". I would recommend this for a Sunday morning.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] With films like "[[Wallace]] & Gromit" and "Chicken [[Run]]" under their belt, the good people from the other side of the [[pond]], Aardman Animation, are now [[introducing]] us to a [[bit]] of their [[twisted]] humor in the form of "Creature [[Comforts]]".

Derived from a short done early in their careers, "Creature [[Comforts]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went across the [[country]] [[interviewing]] people with innocuous questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then speed things up a bit asking about their sex lives.

The answers, while seeming to be boring and mundane, are actually quite funny, when you understand the dialogs come first and the animals are added later.

How many of these animals look like the person making the statements? One of the characters discussing what he looks for in a woman, "I like them kind of thin." is an insect, the Walking Stick.

There are two dogs discussing odors and smells, while sniffing the behind of a poodle, as they talk about the different smells of a woman.

There are two birds in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her health, her long suffering husband stands by her, saying nothing.

While it might take some time for "Creature Comforts" to find it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the ordinary. While there are more reality shows than Carter has liver pills, "Creature Comforts" is one of a kind and definitely worth watching.

Some of the humor might seem a little racy, it's the claymation that catches the attention of the children (like the old Batman series of the 60's, the jokes are subtle enough the kids won't get them) and it's the jokes that are there for the adults. With films like "[[Dallas]] & Gromit" and "Chicken [[Executes]]" under their belt, the good people from the other side of the [[lagoon]], Aardman Animation, are now [[introduction]] us to a [[bitten]] of their [[deformed]] humor in the form of "Creature [[Amenities]]".

Derived from a short done early in their careers, "Creature [[Amenities]]" is a slice-of-life show where snippets of conversation are removed from their context and given to an animal of some sort.

Aardman Animation went across the [[nationals]] [[interrogated]] people with innocuous questions such as, "Are you a liar?" and then speed things up a bit asking about their sex lives.

The answers, while seeming to be boring and mundane, are actually quite funny, when you understand the dialogs come first and the animals are added later.

How many of these animals look like the person making the statements? One of the characters discussing what he looks for in a woman, "I like them kind of thin." is an insect, the Walking Stick.

There are two dogs discussing odors and smells, while sniffing the behind of a poodle, as they talk about the different smells of a woman.

There are two birds in a cage. As the "wife" tells the litany that is her health, her long suffering husband stands by her, saying nothing.

While it might take some time for "Creature Comforts" to find it's "legs", it should find a place on television for those who are tired of the ordinary. While there are more reality shows than Carter has liver pills, "Creature Comforts" is one of a kind and definitely worth watching.

Some of the humor might seem a little racy, it's the claymation that catches the attention of the children (like the old Batman series of the 60's, the jokes are subtle enough the kids won't get them) and it's the jokes that are there for the adults. --------------------------------------------- Result 1761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This was a [[delightful]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well played by the [[animation]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish superiority and innocent wonder. The quote (or scene) I recall [[vividly]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and [[threatens]] to [[storm]] out, the Scientist [[answers]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[splendid]] blend of entertainment and information make this a classic as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. This was a [[sumptuous]] presentation. Hemo (blood) as a Greek god was so well played by the [[animate]] with vanity, arrogance, snobbish superiority and innocent wonder. The quote (or scene) I recall [[eloquently]] is when Hemo tires of "all this plumbing ... you haven't learned my secrets at all" and [[endangering]] to [[tempest]] out, the Scientist [[responses]] him in a single word "Thalassa" -- salt water which horrifies the Fiction Writer but mollifies Hemo and segues so neatly into the chemical aspects of blood.

Such a [[awesome]] blend of entertainment and information make this a classic as fresh and engrossing today as the day it was released. Stimulating the interest and imagination is fundamental to teaching kids to love learning. --------------------------------------------- Result 1762 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I went into The Straight Story [[expecting]] a [[sad]]/[[happy]] type drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[got]]. What I wasn't [[expecting]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. Leave it to Lynch to take a simple story about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and turn it into a microcosm for the human condition.

If you didn't notice, watch it again, paying attention to the ages of the people Alvin meets, the terrain he's driving through, the reactions people give him, the kinds of discussions he has (one of the first is about pregnancy and children, one of the last is outside of a cemetery). The last road he drives down is particulary haunting in this context, as it narrows and his fear and nervousness mount. The last mechanical failure could be seen as a death, and the miraculous rebirth of his engine relating to an afterlife, in which he achieves the desired reunion.

I only hope some of the people who branded this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more holistic attention. I went into The Straight Story [[hoping]] a [[regrettable]]/[[gratified]] type drama with nice direction and some good acting. These I [[ai]]. What I wasn't [[awaited]] was an allegory for the trials of human existence. Leave it to Lynch to take a simple story about a 300 mile trip on a lawnmower and turn it into a microcosm for the human condition.

If you didn't notice, watch it again, paying attention to the ages of the people Alvin meets, the terrain he's driving through, the reactions people give him, the kinds of discussions he has (one of the first is about pregnancy and children, one of the last is outside of a cemetery). The last road he drives down is particulary haunting in this context, as it narrows and his fear and nervousness mount. The last mechanical failure could be seen as a death, and the miraculous rebirth of his engine relating to an afterlife, in which he achieves the desired reunion.

I only hope some of the people who branded this as a slow sappy melodrama take the time to watch with a more holistic attention. --------------------------------------------- Result 1763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[saw]] this [[bomb]] when it hit [[theaters]]. I [[laughed]] the whole time. Why? Because the [[stupidity]] of it seemed to have made me go insane. I [[look]] back on it and realize there was not ONE [[funny]] thing in the whole [[movie]]. At leat nothing intentional. It IS awfully [[funny]] that Lizzie cn chew a piece of Nurplex and become a gigantic, carnivorous [[demon]]...yet her itty-bitty little [[dress]] is perfectly intact, despite the fact that she is now hundreds of times [[larger]] than she was when she first put it on. [[Or]] the kind of movie in which a [[man]] can be shocked with a defibulator and only fall unconcious, and return to conciousness without ANY medical attention. And don't let me get started on the ridiculous fate of the "villain" that they decided they needed to create "conflict." Uh huh.

To the person complaining about Disney only targetting kids-The raunchy parts of this film seems to disprove that statement. Do we really need Daryl Hannah accusing Jeff Bridges of having kinky video tapes? You do if you're Disney and you're out of ideas for making the movie appeal to the above-8 crowd without writing a more intelligent script! I am thoroughly convinced that Disney pays off the ratings board so it's movies can get away with murder and still get family-friendly ratings.

What a waste of the DVD format. I [[noticed]] this [[blaster]] when it hit [[theatres]]. I [[laugh]] the whole time. Why? Because the [[craziness]] of it seemed to have made me go insane. I [[peek]] back on it and realize there was not ONE [[comical]] thing in the whole [[cinematography]]. At leat nothing intentional. It IS awfully [[droll]] that Lizzie cn chew a piece of Nurplex and become a gigantic, carnivorous [[devil]]...yet her itty-bitty little [[clothe]] is perfectly intact, despite the fact that she is now hundreds of times [[grander]] than she was when she first put it on. [[Neither]] the kind of movie in which a [[bloke]] can be shocked with a defibulator and only fall unconcious, and return to conciousness without ANY medical attention. And don't let me get started on the ridiculous fate of the "villain" that they decided they needed to create "conflict." Uh huh.

To the person complaining about Disney only targetting kids-The raunchy parts of this film seems to disprove that statement. Do we really need Daryl Hannah accusing Jeff Bridges of having kinky video tapes? You do if you're Disney and you're out of ideas for making the movie appeal to the above-8 crowd without writing a more intelligent script! I am thoroughly convinced that Disney pays off the ratings board so it's movies can get away with murder and still get family-friendly ratings.

What a waste of the DVD format. --------------------------------------------- Result 1764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my introduction to the series. I saw this film for the first time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which often pulls obscure gems like this out of cold storage for new generations. I made it a point to watch the entire Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. Looking back, I still rate The House That Dripped Blood as my [[favorite]], followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the elements that [[make]] this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style cinematography, creepy to kooky, far-fetched [[tales]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came [[together]] better here than any of the [[others]] [[overall]]. The [[movie]] [[centers]] [[around]] a very [[old]] English country house and the misfortune that befalls all that dwell within.

The [[first]] [[story]] involves a horror [[writer]] and his wife, who moved into this secluded place to get a break from the city so he could concentrate on his passion. He creates a murderous [[character]] called Dominic and soon starts [[experiencing]] great difficulty telling reality from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[torment]] that I [[found]] amusing yet creepy. Oh and those horrible prop teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The [[second]] [[story]] is the [[tale]] of a [[lonely]] old [[man]] ([[Peter]] Cushing) that has moved here to [[escape]] his loneliness, yet it only worsens as he is haunted by lost love. He seems to have found possible salvation at a local (very creepy) wax museum, but it turns out he would have been much better off alone.......

The third story includes the [[great]] Christopher Lee (my fav British horror actor) as a [[single]] father with a rather disturbed and thoroughly creepy young daughter. He is constantly wary of her getting into things she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural talent for it, with good reason. Lee is [[superb]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that man has a [[true]] talent for playing characters that are absolutely devoid of warmth!! But despite his best efforts, the little troublemaker does in fact learn forbidden knowledge and bad things follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. I'll admit to being biased when I reviewed this since it was my introduction to the series. I saw this film for the first time in ~2005 on the late night "Fear Friday" on AMC, which often pulls obscure gems like this out of cold storage for new generations. I made it a point to watch the entire Amicus anthology series before reviewing any of them here to make sure I had perspective. Looking back, I still rate The House That Dripped Blood as my [[preferable]], followed closely by Tales From The Crypt and then Asylum.

I think all of the elements that [[deliver]] this series charming---the vintage '60s/'70s style cinematography, creepy to kooky, far-fetched [[stories]] and the utter Britishness of it all right down the backing music----came [[jointly]] better here than any of the [[alia]] [[total]]. The [[filmmaking]] [[facility]] [[about]] a very [[ancient]] English country house and the misfortune that befalls all that dwell within.

The [[outset]] [[conte]] involves a horror [[screenwriter]] and his wife, who moved into this secluded place to get a break from the city so he could concentrate on his passion. He creates a murderous [[characteristics]] called Dominic and soon starts [[undergoing]] great difficulty telling reality from fiction. There is a subtle physchedelia here via his [[agony]] that I [[unearthed]] amusing yet creepy. Oh and those horrible prop teeth (then again these are British actors, maybe those were REAL!!!)

The [[secondly]] [[storytelling]] is the [[storytelling]] of a [[alone]] old [[dude]] ([[Petra]] Cushing) that has moved here to [[escaping]] his loneliness, yet it only worsens as he is haunted by lost love. He seems to have found possible salvation at a local (very creepy) wax museum, but it turns out he would have been much better off alone.......

The third story includes the [[marvellous]] Christopher Lee (my fav British horror actor) as a [[exclusive]] father with a rather disturbed and thoroughly creepy young daughter. He is constantly wary of her getting into things she shouldn't---like witchcraft! She has a natural talent for it, with good reason. Lee is [[extraordinaire]] here as the ice cold disciplinarian, that man has a [[veritable]] talent for playing characters that are absolutely devoid of warmth!! But despite his best efforts, the little troublemaker does in fact learn forbidden knowledge and bad things follow......

This final story is the tale of a cynical old veteran actor that feels the young director he's working with isn't qualified to capture a proper vampire film, right down to the quality of the costumes and his cloak in particular. So he goes to a old curiosity store in the middle of a foggy night to get something more "authentic". Little does he know that he picked up a truly authentic vampire's cloak! Putting it on at the stroke of midnight has rather noticeable effects. By the time I had gotten to this fourth and final story, it was after 3 am and I couldn't quite stay awake on the first try (not from boredom). But I did experience something that I have hundreds of times, a curious bonding experience I have with films or music when I drift in and out of sleep and the film/music becomes part of my dream!! Great fun!! This bizarre story was perfect for that and seemed much scarier the first time than it actually was because I woke up right when he was levitated by the cloak's power and couldn't quite comprehend was what happening at first. Not long after, the lovely Ingrid Pitt, a costar on his movie set, came to visit and he warned her not to put on the cloak at midnight---but he needn't have bothered, for she was a real vampire herself. The chintzy keyboard jingle that followed as she flew toward him on the staircase was simply hysterical!! And again in my half-asleep state, seemed rather confusing! Side Note: Make sure to catch Lee and Pitt along with the stunning Amicus star Britt Ekland in the all time classic film The Wicker Man (1973).

The weakest link here was the interlacing commentary between stories, but based on the stories themselves, this is a classic! Objectively, I would say the third story is best, but I like the 4th most because it makes me smile so much.Very highly recommended for horror fans and if you're a British horror fan, it's mandatory! I'd say it's worthwhile to view the series in chronological order if you can. The last film of this series, Monster Club (1980) is certainly the weakest. I think the first 3-4 films except for the at times mediocre Torture Garden (1967) are the best, but if you like any of them, you should watch them all at least once. You'll probably be back many more times to watch your favorites. --------------------------------------------- Result 1765 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The Wicker Man, starring Nicolas Cage, is by no means a [[good]] movie, but I can't [[really]] say it's one I [[regret]] watching. I could go on and on about the negative aspects of the movie, like the terrible acting and the lengthy scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it comes to a movie like this. Instead, here's five reasons why you SHOULD watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its cheesy, unintentionally funny execution. If nothing else, this is a movie that may inspire you to see the original 1973 film, or even read the short story on which it is based.

4. For a cheesy horror/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's pretty obvious that it was filmed on location instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we get to see some very great scenery. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very good [[looking]] movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by watching him in any movie he does. Whether Nicolas Cage is great or terrible, he always brings his unique energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker Man, but in the most wonderful kind of way.

2. A student could probably write a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. The Wicker Man, starring Nicolas Cage, is by no means a [[buena]] movie, but I can't [[truthfully]] say it's one I [[sadness]] watching. I could go on and on about the negative aspects of the movie, like the terrible acting and the lengthy scenes where Cage is looking for the girl, has a hallucination, followed by another hallucination, followed by a dream sequence- with a hallucination, etc., but it's just not worth dwelling on when it comes to a movie like this. Instead, here's five reasons why you SHOULD watch The Wicker Man, even though it's bad:

5. It's hard to deny that it has some genuinely creepy ideas to it, the only problem is in its cheesy, unintentionally funny execution. If nothing else, this is a movie that may inspire you to see the original 1973 film, or even read the short story on which it is based.

4. For a cheesy horror/thriller, it is really aesthetically pleasing. It's pretty obvious that it was filmed on location instead of using green screen or elaborate sets, so we get to see some very great scenery. There are also many nicely composed shots. It is a very good [[searching]] movie.

3. Nicolas Cage is not so much an actor as he is a force of nature. Whether you're a fan of his or not, it seems as if it's impossible for Cage to play a "normal guy". There is always some kind of eccentricity or nerdiness he brings to the characters he plays, and personally, I am always fascinated by watching him in any movie he does. Whether Nicolas Cage is great or terrible, he always brings his unique energy into play, and he is never boring to watch. He is terrible in The Wicker Man, but in the most wonderful kind of way.

2. A student could probably write a hell of a paper on this movie, as it seems to be the strongest anti-feminist movie ever made. "See?" you could write, "this is what happens when women are allowed to run a society!" Also, the similarities between this "Summersisle" society and a bee colony are pretty interesting and worth noting.

1. If you're reading this, there's probably a good chance you may have seen a YouTube video that has become very popular: a collection of "highlights" from the movie, including Cage running around in a bear suit, and of course, the infamous "AAGHH!! THE BEES!! MY EYES!!!" line. These scenes are hilarious out of context, and they are still fairly funny while watching them in the film's entirety.

I bought the used DVD at Blockbuster for about 5 dollars...when you work that out, it's about a dollar per reason. It's a pretty good deal.

NOTE: The Unrated version of the movie is the best to watch, and it's better to watch the Theatrical version just for its little added on epilogue, which features a cameo from James Franco. --------------------------------------------- Result 1766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Over the years, we've seen a lot of preposterous things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, keeping "8 Simple Rules" going after John Ritter died comes to mind, but this is probably the [[first]] time I cared. The idea of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser extent Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the gimmick that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. Over the years, we've seen a lot of preposterous things done by writers when the show just had to go on no matter what, keeping "8 Simple Rules" going after John Ritter died comes to mind, but this is probably the [[frst]] time I cared. The idea of having "That 70's Show" without Eric or to a lesser extent Kelso is ridiculous. They tried to cover it up with a comeback of Leo and increasingly outrageous story lines, but it always felt like why bother when you don't have a main character anymore. It just didn't really connect, it was a bunch of unrelated stuff happening that most of the time wasn't even funny. The last season felt like the season too much for every single character, simply because Eric used to take a lot of screen time and now we'd be smashed in the face by how stale and repetitive the rest of the characters were. Focusing on the gimmick that is Fez was thoroughly uninteresting and the character would simply stop working, because the whole deal was that he'd say something weird from out of nowhere, and you can't say stuff from out of nowhere when every second line is yours. They also brought in the standard cousin Oliver, only this time it just wasn't a kid. Whenever you heard somebody knock on the door, you started praying it wasn't Randy, please let it not be Randy. The deal with Randy was that he'd do really awful jokes, usually as Red would say, smiling like an ass and totally screwing up delivery and Donna would be in stitches. I think more than half of the last season was Donna pretending to be amused. The problems had started earlier though: what once was a truly great show with an equally great concept that for once wasn't about a dysfunctional family slowly got into the territory of soap opera. Everybody started being in love with everybody, emotional scenes were dragged out at nausea, with just one usually lame joke placed somewhere to divert attention that we were watching "As The World Turns". I'm guessing this was character development, but come on that was written almost as clumsily as the moral lessons from "Family Matters". To be fair, the last episode, also because it had a cameo by Topher Grace (a cameo in his own show), was really good, even if not that funny either.

By the way, yet more criticism on Season 8: what the hell was with the opening theme? Not only did they use the same joke twice (a character not singing), Fez scared the hell out of me. Dude, don't open your eyes that far. But the first five seasons or so,among the best comedy ever broadcast. --------------------------------------------- Result 1767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] Part Two [[picks]] up... not where the [[last]] [[film]] [[left]] off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of [[Steven]] Soderbergh's [[epic]] 4+ [[hour]] [[event]], Che's two stories are told as classic "Rise" and "Fall" scenarios. In Part Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing mentioned in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. Things don't go quite as well planned, at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the enclosing, larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic character. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the sequence where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, marks as one of the most memorable and satisfying of any film this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, slightly sluggish (understandable due to the big running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd (Matt Damon?), but these are minor liabilities. Going this time for the straight color camera approach, this is almost like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the group, as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 Part Two [[opted]] up... not where the [[latter]] [[filmmaking]] [[walkout]] off. As part of the quasi-conventionality of [[Steve]] Soderbergh's [[saga]] 4+ [[hours]] [[incident]], Che's two stories are told as classic "Rise" and "Fall" scenarios. In Part Two, Che Guevara, leaving his post as a bureaucrat in Cuba and after a failed attempt in the Congo (only in passing mentioned in the film), goes down to Bolivia to try and start up another through-the-jungle style revolution. Things don't go quite as well planned, at all, probably because of Che's then notorious stature as a Communist and revolutionary, and in part because of America's involvement on the side of the Bolivian Government, and, of course, that Castro wasn't really around as a back-up for Che.

As it goes, the second part of Che is sadder, but in some ways wiser than the first part. Which makes sense, as Guevara has to endure low morale from his men, betrayals from those around him, constant mistakes by grunts and nearby peasants, and by ultimately the enclosing, larger military force. But what's sadder still is that Guevara, no matter what, won't give in. One may see this as an incredible strength or a fatal flaw- maybe both- but it's also clear how one starts to see Che, if not totally more fully rounded, then as something of a more sympathetic character. True, he did kill, and executed, and felt justified all the way. And yet it starts to work on the viewer in the sense of a primal level of pity; the sequence where Guevara's health worsens without medicine, leading up to the shocking stabbing of a horse, marks as one of the most memorable and satisfying of any film this year.

Again, Soderbergh's command of narrative is strong, if, on occasion, slightly sluggish (understandable due to the big running time), and one or two scenes just feel totally odd (Matt Damon?), but these are minor liabilities. Going this time for the straight color camera approach, this is almost like a pure militia-style war picture, told with a great deal of care for the men in the group, as well as Guevara as the Lord-over this group, and how things dwindle down the final scene. And as always, Del-Toro is at the top of his game, in every scene, every beat knowing this guy so well- for better and for worse- that he comes about as close to embodiment as possible. Overall, the two parts of Che make up an impressive package: history as drama in compelling style, good for an audience even if they don't know Che or, better, if they don't think highly of him. It's that special. 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] The real story (took place in Kansas in 1959) of a murder (Perry and Dick, two ex-convicts who broke into a remote house on a rainy night to steal and kill everyone they met). Richard Brooks directed the chilling and disturbing Capote's book about the reasons that drove these kids to the crime (Are they Natural Born Killers ?). The crime scenes are very brutal and haunting because of the lack of senses and reasons for what we [[witnessed]]. [[Stunning]] black & white cinematography from Conrand Hall, [[excellent]] country - road music score from Quincy Jones, [[amazing]] performances in two principal [[roles]] from Robert Blake and Scott Wilson and first time in a movie a sad comment about capital punishment at the last moments before their deaths. Jones, Hall and Brooks (as [[director]] and as writer for adapted screenplay) are Academy Award nominees. Gripping, [[superbly]] [[directed]] and frightening, one of the [[best]] [[films]] of this decade The real story (took place in Kansas in 1959) of a murder (Perry and Dick, two ex-convicts who broke into a remote house on a rainy night to steal and kill everyone they met). Richard Brooks directed the chilling and disturbing Capote's book about the reasons that drove these kids to the crime (Are they Natural Born Killers ?). The crime scenes are very brutal and haunting because of the lack of senses and reasons for what we [[saw]]. [[Staggering]] black & white cinematography from Conrand Hall, [[sumptuous]] country - road music score from Quincy Jones, [[staggering]] performances in two principal [[functions]] from Robert Blake and Scott Wilson and first time in a movie a sad comment about capital punishment at the last moments before their deaths. Jones, Hall and Brooks (as [[superintendent]] and as writer for adapted screenplay) are Academy Award nominees. Gripping, [[marvellously]] [[aimed]] and frightening, one of the [[optimum]] [[cinematographic]] of this decade --------------------------------------------- Result 1769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Stewart]] is a distinguished [[bachelor]] and a successful [[executive]] who is about to [[marry]] his fiancée Janice [[Rule]] but [[instead]] gets [[involved]] with a capricious, sensual art [[dealer]] (Kim Novak) who [[turns]] out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[desires]] earnestly and intensely to [[love]], but is unable to feel it...

[[Stewart]] slowly [[falls]] in [[love]] with her, and [[looks]] for a [[way]] to [[free]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[cat]], Pyewacket... Still, [[Stewart]] [[continues]] in his [[attempts]] to [[change]] her into a loving, feeling [[woman]] as he aspires to [[marry]] her...

Also [[blocking]] his [[way]] are such talented [[supporting]] [[actors]] as Novak's brother (Jack Lemmon), a silly, charming sorcerer who can walk nonchalantly through walls; a [[terrible]] author who is [[writing]] a [[book]] about [[witchcraft]]; and the Head of the Association of Manhattan [[Witches]], [[none]] other than the [[incredible]] [[Hermione]] Gingold...

Novak's [[Aunt]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other relatives, is a tender witch who [[accepts]] that [[nothing]] should [[prevent]] the course of [[true]] [[love]]... She aids and [[stimulates]] them in turning Novak into the [[woman]] of Stewart's [[dreams]], for a happy ending...

If you [[like]] to [[see]] a [[lightweight]] comedy about [[magic]], [[fantasy]] and [[love]]; [[beautiful]] [[cinematography]]; [[stunning]] [[use]] of [[color]]; and with an [[exceptional]] [[cast]]; don't [[miss]] this [[enjoyable]] and amusing [[movie]]… [[Steward]] is a distinguished [[diploma]] and a successful [[management]] who is about to [[marie]] his fiancée Janice [[Regulation]] but [[alternatively]] gets [[engaged]] with a capricious, sensual art [[seller]] (Kim Novak) who [[revolves]] out to be a Greenwich Village witch… Novak [[wishes]] earnestly and intensely to [[loved]], but is unable to feel it...

[[Stuart]] slowly [[dip]] in [[amore]] with her, and [[seems]] for a [[ways]] to [[libre]] her from her witch-spell... Novak resents his well-intentioned concern, as does her Siamese [[kitten]], Pyewacket... Still, [[Stuart]] [[persisted]] in his [[seeks]] to [[amended]] her into a loving, feeling [[femme]] as he aspires to [[marie]] her...

Also [[blockage]] his [[ways]] are such talented [[assisting]] [[protagonists]] as Novak's brother (Jack Lemmon), a silly, charming sorcerer who can walk nonchalantly through walls; a [[frightening]] author who is [[writes]] a [[ledger]] about [[magic]]; and the Head of the Association of Manhattan [[Sorcerers]], [[nothing]] other than the [[amazing]] [[Malfoy]] Gingold...

Novak's [[Queer]] Queenie (Elsa Lanchester), unlike her other relatives, is a tender witch who [[admits]] that [[nothin]] should [[deter]] the course of [[genuine]] [[loves]]... She aids and [[fostering]] them in turning Novak into the [[femme]] of Stewart's [[dreamt]], for a happy ending...

If you [[loves]] to [[behold]] a [[slight]] comedy about [[magical]], [[imagination]] and [[loves]]; [[fabulous]] [[films]]; [[striking]] [[employs]] of [[dye]]; and with an [[admirable]] [[casting]]; don't [[mademoiselle]] this [[agreeable]] and amusing [[cinematographic]]… --------------------------------------------- Result 1770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Pathetic]]. This is what happens when director comes to work just because [[someone]] is paying him to.

The intentions were [[good]], great [[locations]] and settings for a [[film]] of [[epic]] proportions. But the performance, damn! I swear, in some shots you can [[see]] extras on the background [[staring]] in the [[camera]], or [[looking]] at the [[actors]] because no one told them what they should do when they [[hear]] "Action!". The battle scenes are so [[bad]] you wonder - are these people for real? They could've [[done]] more [[damage]] just by hugging each other. [[In]] the slow-mo scenes you can [[see]] people on [[battle]] field [[walking]] [[around]] or just [[standing]], [[waving]] their hands.

Only [[action]] in the foreground is somehow emphasized. But for what? The [[story]] is so [[illogical]] and discontinuous, it [[seems]] like random situations in chronological [[order]], sometimes not [[even]] that. The dialogs are [[dumb]], the [[love]] plot is more [[embarrassing]] and [[ridiculous]] than in Hong Kong action movies.

With a [[budget]] of 40 [[million]], and you can [[see]] [[every]] [[dollar]] invested on the screen, in [[best]] [[case]] scenario, the [[final]] [[result]] of all this enormous [[effort]] is a [[shiny]] [[round]] [[laser]] [[disk]] in the thin [[cover]] placed on the shelf in [[video]] [[store]]. [[Deplorable]]. This is what happens when director comes to work just because [[everyone]] is paying him to.

The intentions were [[buena]], great [[places]] and settings for a [[kino]] of [[manas]] proportions. But the performance, damn! I swear, in some shots you can [[seeing]] extras on the background [[watching]] in the [[cameras]], or [[searching]] at the [[protagonists]] because no one told them what they should do when they [[heard]] "Action!". The battle scenes are so [[amiss]] you wonder - are these people for real? They could've [[effected]] more [[harms]] just by hugging each other. [[Onto]] the slow-mo scenes you can [[seeing]] people on [[battles]] field [[walk]] [[almost]] or just [[stand]], [[wave]] their hands.

Only [[measures]] in the foreground is somehow emphasized. But for what? The [[saga]] is so [[absurd]] and discontinuous, it [[seem]] like random situations in chronological [[orders]], sometimes not [[yet]] that. The dialogs are [[dopey]], the [[amour]] plot is more [[distracting]] and [[absurd]] than in Hong Kong action movies.

With a [[budgets]] of 40 [[trillion]], and you can [[seeing]] [[all]] [[dollars]] invested on the screen, in [[finest]] [[examples]] scenario, the [[definitive]] [[conclusions]] of all this enormous [[endeavour]] is a [[brilliant]] [[redondo]] [[lasers]] [[rotors]] in the thin [[covers]] placed on the shelf in [[videos]] [[boutique]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1771 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As [[someone]] who [[lived]] through,and [[still]] remembers that decade [[vividly]],if the actual '70s had been half this funny and (semi)normal,they [[would]] have been so much more enjoyable.Actual kids in that era did not act or behave anything close to as bright-eyed and normal as these kids did.The country's youth was still under the influence of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s rebellion that it spawned,especially in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the childishness,the unreasonableness of them - [[none]] of the characters exhibit any of that.

Someone compared to "Happy Days",and I can see why:They were both sitcoms that take place 20 years before the current time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't born then,trust me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the actual '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately portray life at a US Army medical base during the Korean War,etc. As [[person]] who [[resided]] through,and [[yet]] remembers that decade [[strikingly]],if the actual '70s had been half this funny and (semi)normal,they [[could]] have been so much more enjoyable.Actual kids in that era did not act or behave anything close to as bright-eyed and normal as these kids did.The country's youth was still under the influence of the hippies and the drug culture all that '60s rebellion that it spawned,especially in the behavior department;the petulance,the smugness,the self-righteousness,the childishness,the unreasonableness of them - [[nothingness]] of the characters exhibit any of that.

Someone compared to "Happy Days",and I can see why:They were both sitcoms that take place 20 years before the current time they were broadcast,and they both offer only surface ,cliched depictions of the actual eras,not even close to the full scope of it,just showing the obvious things - the fashions,toys,music,contraptions,etc,and that's it.For those too young to remember,or weren't born then,trust me,the '70s weren't like that,any more than "Happy Days" were like the actual '50s,as "M*A*S*H*" didn't accurately portray life at a US Army medical base during the Korean War,etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 1772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Suffice to say that - despite the odd ludicrous panegyric to his soi disant "[[abilities]]" posted here - the [[director]] of this inept, [[odious]] tosh hasn't made a film since. Well that is excellent news as far as I'm concerned.

Dead Babies has all of the bile of its creator, but [[lacks]] the wit and technical [[proficiency]] that make Martin Amis the [[novelist]] readable.

When will the British film industry wake up and realise that if it wants to regain the status it once had it should stop producing rubbish like this and make something real people will actually want to watch?

Avoid like the plague. Suffice to say that - despite the odd ludicrous panegyric to his soi disant "[[dexterity]]" posted here - the [[superintendent]] of this inept, [[infamous]] tosh hasn't made a film since. Well that is excellent news as far as I'm concerned.

Dead Babies has all of the bile of its creator, but [[missing]] the wit and technical [[capability]] that make Martin Amis the [[writer]] readable.

When will the British film industry wake up and realise that if it wants to regain the status it once had it should stop producing rubbish like this and make something real people will actually want to watch?

Avoid like the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 1773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (66%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all screwed up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Where]] was the story? I made myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. I read the back of the box and it talked about Mary Shelley and Percy Shelley and Lord Byron. I thought, "wonderful! This will be great!" I was so wrong. The story was all screwed up. In fact I still don't get it. It just seems to me that all the characters did was drink, smoke (opium?) and have sex. Not that those aren't good movie qualities, but please! [[Everytime]] was the story? I made myself finish the movie, and yes, it did pick up towards the end, but by then the movie was almost over. Rent it if you really want to. Just don't trust the back of the box. --------------------------------------------- Result 1774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] In this [[excellent]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[labyrinth]] of [[despair]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny humanity in bleak expressionist symbolism.

A [[prostitute]] has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy ring will go to any lengths to recover it. Two parallel investigations unfold as both spies and [[cops]] [[hunt]] down the precious information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[assurance]] by Richard Widmark. He knows the cops to be his moral equals and intellectual inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a charge. Throw me in. You've done it before." In this pitiless world, the cops are just one more gang on the streets. Just as Candy the hooker bribes Lightning Louie to get a lead, so the police are busy paying stool pigeons for information.

It is hard to believe that when Widmark [[made]] this [[film]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old star, coming to the end of his contract with [[Fox]], plays the upstart Skip McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a teenager. Today it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to punch his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing beer in her face, but by the mores of the period it signified toughness - and Candy, after all, is a fallen woman.

Jean Peters is radiant as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year burst of B-movie fame, she is beautiful and engaging as the whore with the golden heart. She is the story's victim, a martyr to her beauty as much as anything else. She means well, but is constantly being manipulated by cynical men - Joey, Skip and the cops.

The real star of this movie is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering subway stations offer a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, malevolent force. Like maggots in a rotting cheese, human figures scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt humanity. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. Richard Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. In this [[sumptuous]] Twentieth-Century Fox film-noir, the metropolis is a [[maze]] of [[desperation]] in which scavengers and predators survive by living off one another. Brooding cityscapes lower over puny humanity in bleak expressionist symbolism.

A [[whore]] has her purse snatched on the subway. It contains a microfilm, and a communist spy ring will go to any lengths to recover it. Two parallel investigations unfold as both spies and [[cop]] [[hunted]] down the precious information.

Anti-hero pickpocket Skip McCoy is played with scornful [[warranty]] by Richard Widmark. He knows the cops to be his moral equals and intellectual inferiors, so he taunts them: "Go on," he says to captain Dan Tiger (Murvyn Vye), "drum up a charge. Throw me in. You've done it before." In this pitiless world, the cops are just one more gang on the streets. Just as Candy the hooker bribes Lightning Louie to get a lead, so the police are busy paying stool pigeons for information.

It is hard to believe that when Widmark [[effected]] this [[filmmaking]] he was already in early middle age. The 39-year-old star, coming to the end of his contract with [[Fuchs]], plays the upstart Skip McCoy with the irreverent brashness of a teenager. Today it may not be acceptable for the romantic lead to punch his love interest into unconsciousness then revive her by sloshing beer in her face, but by the mores of the period it signified toughness - and Candy, after all, is a fallen woman.

Jean Peters is radiant as Candy. Here, right in the middle of her five-year burst of B-movie fame, she is beautiful and engaging as the whore with the golden heart. She is the story's victim, a martyr to her beauty as much as anything else. She means well, but is constantly being manipulated by cynical men - Joey, Skip and the cops.

The real star of this movie is New York. Haunting urban panoramas and snidering subway stations offer a claustrophobic evocation of the city as a living, malevolent force. Like maggots in a rotting cheese, human figures scurry through the city's byways. Elevators, subway turnstiles, sidewalks - even a dumb waiter act as conduits for the flow of corrupt humanity. People cling to any niche that affords safety: Moe has her grimy rented room, Skip his tenebrous shack on the Hudson River. As the characters move and interact, they are framed by bridge architecture, or lattices of girders, or are divided by hanging winch tackle. The personality of the city is constantly imposing itself. The angles and crossbeams of the wharf timbers are an echo of the gridiron street plan, and the card-index cabinets in the squadroom mimic the Manhattan skyline. When Joey's exit from the subway is barred, it is as if the steel sinews of the city are ensnaring him.

A surprising proportion of this film is shot in extreme close-up. Character drives the plot, as it should, and the close-ups are used to augment character. When Skip interrogates Candy, the close-up captures the sexual energy between them, belying the hostility of Skip's words. Jean Peters' beauty is painted in light, in exquisite soft focus close-ups. The device is also employed to heighten the tension. The opening sequence, the purse snatch, contains no dialogue: the drama relies entirely on close-up for its powerful effect.

Snoopers, and snoopers upon snoopers, populate the film. Moe (Thelma Ritter) makes a living as an informant, and her place in the hierarchy is accepted, even by her victims. When Skip observes, "she's gotta eat", he is chanting a recurring refrain. Just as 'straight' New Yorkers peddle lamb chops or lumber, the Underworld traffics in the commodity of information.

And yet even the stool pigeons are superior to Joey and his communist friends. Joey's feet on Moe's bed symbolise a transgression of the most basic moral code. Joey is beyond the pale. Moe will not trade with Joey, even to preserve her life: " ... even in our crummy business, you gotta draw the line somewhere."

"Pick-Up" was made in the depths of the Cold War. Richard Nixon had just been chosen as the Republican vice-presidential candidate, having made his name with his phoney Alger Hiss expose - bogus communist microfilm and all. The McCarthy show trials were a daily reality. We see the cops in the movie inveigh against "the traitors who gave Stalin the A-bomb".

New York can be seen as a giant receptacle in which human offal cheats, squeals and murders. Containers form a leitmotif throughout the film. Moe carries her trade mark box of ties, and candy's purse, container of the microfilm, is the engine of the plot. Skip keeps his only possessions in a submerged crate, symbolising his secretive street-wisdom. The paupers' coffins, moving down the Hudson on a barge, are containers of just one more cargo being shifted around the pitiless metropolis.

The film is a masterpiece of composition. Candy is shown above the skulking Skip on the rickety gangway of the shack, signifying her moral ascendancy. When the gun is placed on the table, the extreme perspective makes it look bigger than Candy - violence is beginning to dwarf compassion. The lovers are eclipsed by the shadow of a stevedore's hook, reminding us that their love is neither pure nor absolute, but contingent upon the whims of the sinister city. Enyard the communist is a shadow on a wall, or a disembodied puff of cigarette smoke. He is like the lone alley cat amongst the garbage - a predatory phantom of the night. Camera shots from under taxi hoods, inside newspaper kiosks and through the bars of hospital beds constantly reinforce in us the awareness that we are all trapped in the metropolis. We are civilisation's mulch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[film]] is pure, distilled, [[unadulterated]] boredom. I knew nothing of it before I [[entered]] the [[dark]] [[room]], took my seat. I was [[seduced]] by the "[[mysterious]] and suspenseful" blurb on the [[poster]] I [[suppose]]. [[Also]], Lena Headey is [[nice]] and unconventionally sexy, and Richard Jenkins is [[always]] a [[reliable]] [[guy]] to have around, so the cast [[seemed]] [[reasonable]]. It may have been his [[name]] above the title that convinced me to go with this instead of whatever [[else]] was on. I should've [[gone]] to [[see]] Valkyrie for the [[second]] [[time]] [[instead]].

The thin [[plot]] revolves [[around]] Headley's Gina McVey, her [[boyfriend]], her father, her sister and her sister's husband who for some [[reason]] are being stalked, in a very louche and unenthusiastic manner, by their [[evil]] doppelgangers who [[emerge]] from [[mirrors]] that mysteriously smash. There [[could]] be a [[great]] [[film]] [[behind]] this [[idea]] (not [[exactly]] an [[original]] [[idea]], [[mind]] you, but [[still]]...) and in fact, if the filmmakers had shorn away all the [[supporting]] cast and simply [[stuck]] to Headey's character's [[story]], The [[Broken]] could've made a [[reasonable]] 20-minute short. As it is, it is desperately unmotivated and [[boring]], and [[terribly]] inconsistent.

For [[instance]], in one scene, a [[mirror]] smashes on its own in a [[room]] [[housing]] all the [[main]] characters; they look [[puzzled]] but [[quickly]] [[forget]] about it. [[In]] another scene, a mirror smashes in an empty [[room]], and a [[doppelganger]] is [[visible]] as she "[[steps]] out" of the [[shards]] left hanging on the wall. [[So]] why did the first mirror smash if no creepy crawly was to come [[crawling]] out? Just for a little thrill? There are far too [[many]] scenes of the [[characters]] in the dimly-lit London flats, [[peering]] [[around]] corners cos they thought they heard something, but seeing [[nothing]] there and moving on. We [[begin]] to wonder, why doesn't this [[malevolent]] doppelgang [[actually]] ever [[want]] to try to [[scare]] them? [[Scare]] the [[characters]] and you have a [[chance]] of scaring the [[audience]]. But we, the [[audience]], will [[need]] to [[start]] [[threatening]] each other, in the [[darkness]] of the [[theater]], if we [[want]] to have any thrills during The [[Broken]]. By the [[way]], once we've spent [[time]] with these [[evil]] [[doubles]], we are [[totally]] [[bemused]] as to why anyone should be expected to be frightened of them - they just stand around, blank looks on their faces, perhaps [[totally]] harmless after [[killing]] their [[others]].

There are some nice moods and touches throughout, and I dare say director Sean Ellis could fashion a genuinely stylish and suspenseful mystery movie if he was to hire an imaginative screenwriter next time. This [[cinematography]] is pure, distilled, [[pure]] boredom. I knew nothing of it before I [[penetrated]] the [[gloomy]] [[courtrooms]], took my seat. I was [[charmed]] by the "[[enigmatic]] and suspenseful" blurb on the [[placard]] I [[imagining]]. [[Similarly]], Lena Headey is [[pleasurable]] and unconventionally sexy, and Richard Jenkins is [[steadily]] a [[believable]] [[pal]] to have around, so the cast [[appeared]] [[rational]]. It may have been his [[designation]] above the title that convinced me to go with this instead of whatever [[elsewhere]] was on. I should've [[missing]] to [[behold]] Valkyrie for the [[secondly]] [[period]] [[alternatively]].

The thin [[intrigue]] revolves [[throughout]] Headley's Gina McVey, her [[friend]], her father, her sister and her sister's husband who for some [[motives]] are being stalked, in a very louche and unenthusiastic manner, by their [[wicked]] doppelgangers who [[appear]] from [[mirror]] that mysteriously smash. There [[wo]] be a [[tremendous]] [[cinematography]] [[backside]] this [[ideals]] (not [[precisely]] an [[preliminary]] [[think]], [[esprit]] you, but [[again]]...) and in fact, if the filmmakers had shorn away all the [[aiding]] cast and simply [[cornered]] to Headey's character's [[tale]], The [[Fractured]] could've made a [[rational]] 20-minute short. As it is, it is desperately unmotivated and [[bored]], and [[stunningly]] inconsistent.

For [[examples]], in one scene, a [[mirrors]] smashes on its own in a [[chamber]] [[home]] all the [[primary]] characters; they look [[bewildered]] but [[swiftly]] [[forgot]] about it. [[For]] another scene, a mirror smashes in an empty [[chamber]], and a [[ringer]] is [[evident]] as she "[[strides]] out" of the [[fragments]] left hanging on the wall. [[Thereby]] why did the first mirror smash if no creepy crawly was to come [[creeping]] out? Just for a little thrill? There are far too [[myriad]] scenes of the [[character]] in the dimly-lit London flats, [[peered]] [[about]] corners cos they thought they heard something, but seeing [[anything]] there and moving on. We [[began]] to wonder, why doesn't this [[maleficent]] doppelgang [[genuinely]] ever [[wanted]] to try to [[fearful]] them? [[Fearful]] the [[trait]] and you have a [[possibilities]] of scaring the [[audiences]]. But we, the [[audiences]], will [[requisite]] to [[began]] [[threaten]] each other, in the [[blackness]] of the [[theatres]], if we [[wanted]] to have any thrills during The [[Broke]]. By the [[path]], once we've spent [[times]] with these [[wickedness]] [[twofold]], we are [[downright]] [[bewildered]] as to why anyone should be expected to be frightened of them - they just stand around, blank looks on their faces, perhaps [[absolutely]] harmless after [[assassinate]] their [[alia]].

There are some nice moods and touches throughout, and I dare say director Sean Ellis could fashion a genuinely stylish and suspenseful mystery movie if he was to hire an imaginative screenwriter next time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1776 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Moon]] [[Child]] was one of the more [[symbolic]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]]. What I really [[liked]] about it was the illustration on [[immorality]]/[[mortality]],and the [[obstacles]] and guidances through [[life]]. The [[movie]] [[depicts]] a [[great]] [[deal]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[advantages]] to it. Whether if it is having [[supernatural]] abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[usually]] wish for. Moon [[Child]] shows the [[pain]] and disadvantages of being immortal, since the feelings towards loss [[impacts]] [[almost]] all the characters [[especially]] to the main [[characters]] Sho and Kei. The [[meaning]] of the title '[[Moon]] Child' [[reveals]] as the [[film]] [[comes]] [[close]] to the [[end]] where it [[clearly]] [[shows]] that [[everyone]] is a [[moon]] which shines other people's [[way]], giving [[guidance]]. I [[personality]] [[quite]] like that moral the [[movie]] depicted on. The [[weaknesses]] of the [[film]] lies in some parts of the acting and special effects [[since]] it made the [[film]] [[less]] authentic. The scene where [[character]] Toshi [[dies]] [[could]] have been more [[powerful]] and realistic if more [[authentic]] [[emotions]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[special]] [[effects]] like the [[gun]] shots [[also]] could have been more [[authentic]] without [[making]] it [[seem]] too much like an action [[video]] game. The [[sparks]] that [[came]] out of the [[guns]] [[appeared]] too fake and I [[think]] that [[could]] have been [[eliminated]] or fixed. Nevertheless, I [[think]] Moon [[Child]] should be a [[movie]] [[everyone]] should [[consider]] watching. The [[symbolic]] [[ideas]] and [[images]] the [[movie]] [[brings]] out [[would]] be [[easily]] [[accepted]] by [[everyone]] and may interest [[many]] [[viewers]]. It is [[quite]] a thoughtful film and [[also]] [[entertaining]] to watch. [[Lune]] [[Enfant]] was one of the more [[iconic]] [[theater]] I've [[noticed]]. What I really [[wished]] about it was the illustration on [[debauchery]]/[[decease]],and the [[barrera]] and guidances through [[lifetime]]. The [[cinema]] [[denotes]] a [[fabulous]] [[deals]] of vampire Kei having the power of immorality and the [[advantage]] to it. Whether if it is having [[uncanny]] abilities or everlasting life, these are what humans [[routinely]] wish for. Moon [[Kids]] shows the [[pains]] and disadvantages of being immortal, since the feelings towards loss [[affecting]] [[hardly]] all the characters [[namely]] to the main [[features]] Sho and Kei. The [[mean]] of the title '[[Luna]] Child' [[uncovers]] as the [[cinematography]] [[arrives]] [[shut]] to the [[terminates]] where it [[apparently]] [[demonstrating]] that [[anybody]] is a [[luna]] which shines other people's [[manner]], giving [[instructions]]. I [[persona]] [[pretty]] like that moral the [[flick]] depicted on. The [[malfunctions]] of the [[films]] lies in some parts of the acting and special effects [[because]] it made the [[films]] [[lesser]] authentic. The scene where [[characters]] Toshi [[dead]] [[did]] have been more [[mighty]] and realistic if more [[genuine]] [[feelings]] in the acting were put into it. Some scenes with [[particular]] [[implications]] like the [[firearm]] shots [[similarly]] could have been more [[genuine]] without [[doing]] it [[appears]] too much like an action [[videos]] game. The [[sparkle]] that [[became]] out of the [[firearm]] [[emerged]] too fake and I [[believe]] that [[wo]] have been [[deleted]] or fixed. Nevertheless, I [[reckon]] Moon [[Kids]] should be a [[film]] [[anybody]] should [[considering]] watching. The [[emblematic]] [[idea]] and [[photographs]] the [[films]] [[puts]] out [[ought]] be [[conveniently]] [[consented]] by [[anybody]] and may interest [[several]] [[moviegoers]]. It is [[rather]] a thoughtful film and [[moreover]] [[amusing]] to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 1777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] ***SPOILER*** Do not read this, if you think about [[watching]] that movie, although it [[would]] be a [[waste]] of time. (By the [[way]]: The plot is so [[predictable]] that it does not [[make]] any [[difference]] if you read this or not anyway)

If you are [[wondering]] whether to [[see]] "Coyote [[Ugly]]" or not: don't! It's not worth [[either]] the money for the ticket or the VHS / [[DVD]]. A [[typical]] "Chick-Feel-Good-Flick", one [[could]] [[say]]. The [[plot]] itself is as shallow as it can be, a [[ridiculous]] and uncritical [[version]] of the American [[Dream]]. The young good-looking [[girl]] from a [[small]] [[town]] [[becoming]] a [[big]] [[success]] in [[New]] York. The few [[desperate]] [[attempts]] of giving the [[movie]] any [[depth]] fail, such as the "tragic" [[accident]] of the [[father]], the "difficulties" of Violet's relationship with her [[boyfriend]], and so on. McNally ([[Director]]) [[tries]] to arouse the audience's [[pity]] and [[sadness]] put does not have any [[chance]] to succeed in this attempt due to the [[bad]] [[script]] and the [[shallow]] acting. Especially [[Piper]] Perabo [[completely]] fails in [[convincing]] one of "Jersey's" [[fear]] of [[singing]] in [[front]] of an [[audience]]. The only good (and [[quite]] [[funny]] [[thing]]) about "Coyote [[Ugly]]" is John Goodman, who represents the [[small]] ray of [[hope]] of this [[movie]].

I was very astonished, that [[Jerry]] Bruckheimer produced this [[movie]]. [[First]] "[[Gone]] [[In]] 60 Seconds" and now this... what [[happened]] to [[great]] [[movies]] like "The Rock" and "Con Air"? THAT was [[true]] Bruckheimer stuff.

[[If]] you are [[looking]] for a [[superficial]] [[movie]] with [[good]] [[looking]] [[women]] just to have a relaxed [[evening]], you should better go and [[see]] "Charlie's Angels" (it's much more [[funny]], [[entertaining]] and self-ironic) [[instead]] of this flick.

Two thumbs down (3 out of 10). ***SPOILER*** Do not read this, if you think about [[staring]] that movie, although it [[could]] be a [[squandering]] of time. (By the [[paths]]: The plot is so [[foreseeable]] that it does not [[deliver]] any [[dispute]] if you read this or not anyway)

If you are [[asks]] whether to [[behold]] "Coyote [[Nasty]]" or not: don't! It's not worth [[nor]] the money for the ticket or the VHS / [[DVDS]]. A [[classic]] "Chick-Feel-Good-Flick", one [[would]] [[says]]. The [[intrigue]] itself is as shallow as it can be, a [[absurd]] and uncritical [[stepping]] of the American [[Dreams]]. The young good-looking [[daughters]] from a [[petit]] [[city]] [[becomes]] a [[overwhelming]] [[accomplishments]] in [[Nouveau]] York. The few [[hopeless]] [[seeks]] of giving the [[film]] any [[depths]] fail, such as the "tragic" [[crash]] of the [[fathers]], the "difficulties" of Violet's relationship with her [[pal]], and so on. McNally ([[Headmaster]]) [[seeks]] to arouse the audience's [[shame]] and [[heartbreak]] put does not have any [[luck]] to succeed in this attempt due to the [[negative]] [[scripts]] and the [[superficial]] acting. Especially [[Flute]] Perabo [[altogether]] fails in [[compelling]] one of "Jersey's" [[scare]] of [[sing]] in [[newsweek]] of an [[audiences]]. The only good (and [[perfectly]] [[hilarious]] [[stuff]]) about "Coyote [[Nasty]]" is John Goodman, who represents the [[petite]] ray of [[amal]] of this [[cinematography]].

I was very astonished, that [[Jiri]] Bruckheimer produced this [[filmmaking]]. [[Outset]] "[[Vanished]] [[Among]] 60 Seconds" and now this... what [[transpired]] to [[tremendous]] [[film]] like "The Rock" and "Con Air"? THAT was [[genuine]] Bruckheimer stuff.

[[Though]] you are [[searching]] for a [[shallow]] [[films]] with [[buena]] [[searching]] [[daughters]] just to have a relaxed [[soir]], you should better go and [[behold]] "Charlie's Angels" (it's much more [[hilarious]], [[amuse]] and self-ironic) [[however]] of this flick.

Two thumbs down (3 out of 10). --------------------------------------------- Result 1778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (69%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This review owes its existence entirely to a review. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and duly decide what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is allocated a 1-5 star rating. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Excellent]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst insult imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We watched it, and my wife and I were glad we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We liked the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) This review owes its existence entirely to a review. We take a weekly TV magazine to see what is coming up, and duly decide what we will watch. Obligingly, there are brief reviews of most of the films scheduled to be shown on the five major terrestrial channels. In addition to the prose, each film is allocated a 1-5 star rating. 5 means Don't Miss (superior to 4 for [[Resplendent]]!), down to 1 standing for Poor. We have learned from vast experience that, with few exceptions, stars are awarded for gross taste, foul language, offensive content, promiscuity, horror, blood & guts, and especially killing off the hero/heroine just when everyone was about to live happily ever after. (If that isn't done, the movie is denigrated as being 'predictable' - the worst insult imaginable!)

Brave New Girl was given only 1 star, thereby suggesting it was a candidate worthy of our time and attention. This was confirmed by the reviewer's description of the movie as being a "truly awful tale", and, "Stupid, just stupid". We watched it, and my wife and I were glad we did so. The TV magazine reviewer further stated that the movie was "not a reworking of War and Peace", with which we have to agree. Reading through the IMDb reviews for this title a day or two later, the urge to pick up my pen (so to speak) to add my halfpennyworth (pronounced harf'pen'uth (emphasis on the first syllable) for the uninitiated) became overwhelming.

Why did we take to this movie? Well, it's just a matter of taste. We like attractive characters, believable relationships between them, interesting situations, courtesy and respect, good triumphing over evil, and so on. We liked the integrity and personalities of Holly (Lindsey Haun), her Mum (Virginia Madsen), Ditz (Barbara Mamabolo), Grant (Nick Roth), Zoe (Joanne Boland) and the two male professors involved in the story. So what if the storyline includes a 'wicked witch of the west' in the form of Angela (Barbara Mamabolo), provided that she plays the part with some conviction. We appreciated the friendship depicted between the two room-mates, with one having a financially challenged upbringing by a loving single Mum, and the other having every material advantage but receiving little parental time and affection. Is it any wonder that Ditz felt the way she did about Holly's Mum? Is it surprising that Grant should take an immediate interest in Holly, considering the manner of their initial meeting, Holly's dazzling smiles and her lively self-possession? I think these issues and the events are believable enough, but it is necessary to pretend that the scholarship and other circumstances are realistic in order for the tale to have a setting.

My wife and I are greatly blessed by not having any significant musical education. This enables us to enjoy the sounds produced by instruments and voices without having our critical faculties intruding unduly on our listening, and thus spoiling the experience. We enjoyed both the classical pieces and the pop, which came over well on the TV, and we weren't struck by any lack of talent. Also, it mattered not that Holly's classical vocals were dubbed by someone else.

We enjoyed the movie enough to look for a DVD. The average delivered price we have paid per disk for the movies in our collection currently stands at £4.9484 (rounded to four decimal places). Brave New Girl was available from a trusted supplier on the Amazon Marketplace for £1.3516 (rounded to four decimal places) above this figure. Such a purchase would increase the average. Why I should resent this is a mystery to me, but it is a testimony to our enjoyment of this film that we placed an order anyway. I have awarded this film 7 IMDb stars out of ten, having docked one for overenthusiastic reception of the performances by the audiences, one for Britney advertising and one for something else I can't remember right now. (In case it hasn't tumbled, this review is an anthem in celebration of the use of brackets!) --------------------------------------------- Result 1779 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] The original book of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV series because most people watch for the 1930s style. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can play at that game too. [[Hanging]] the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[feeble]] but the 50s [[version]] had [[students]] who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose making them think about the poverty of the marchers is much the same thing. All the stuff about Japp having to cater for himself was [[weak]] too but they had to put something in to fill the time. This would have made a decent half hour show or they could have filmed the book and made it a better long show. It is obvious this episode is a victim of style over content. The original book of this was set in the 1950s but that won't do for the TV series because most people watch for the 1930s style. Ironically the tube train near the end was a 1950s train painted to look like a 1930s train so the Underground can play at that game too. [[Dangling]] the storyline on a plot about the Jarrow March was [[fragile]] but the 50s [[stepping]] had [[learners]] who were beginning to think about the world around them so I suppose making them think about the poverty of the marchers is much the same thing. All the stuff about Japp having to cater for himself was [[tenuous]] too but they had to put something in to fill the time. This would have made a decent half hour show or they could have filmed the book and made it a better long show. It is obvious this episode is a victim of style over content. --------------------------------------------- Result 1780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie made me feel as if I had missed some important scenes from the very beginning. There were continuity errors and plots that stopped as abruptly as they started. I was very [[disappointed]] because I love Whoopi Goldberg & Danny Glover, in addition to that have always [[trusted]] & respected Danny Glovers taste in his choice of roles, "Grand Canyon" for example. I just could not finish this movie, after what seemed an eternity, but was probably just a little over an [[hour]]; we had to [[turn]] it off. There was no [[comedy]], there was [[nothing]] about the characters to make you empathize or sympathize with them, there was no evoking of emotion at all [[regarding]] this movie and the clips of their past were poorly edited, confusing, and [[unnecessary]]. What [[could]] have been a [[great]] idea for a [[movie]], even as a drama & not a [[comedy]] ([[although]] I think a [[comedy]] in this situation [[would]] have been better, because I love to watch white people freak out & start acting like complete idiots, it makes me laugh) became a [[waste]] of my $1 credit at the video store. This movie made me feel as if I had missed some important scenes from the very beginning. There were continuity errors and plots that stopped as abruptly as they started. I was very [[disenchanted]] because I love Whoopi Goldberg & Danny Glover, in addition to that have always [[trustworthy]] & respected Danny Glovers taste in his choice of roles, "Grand Canyon" for example. I just could not finish this movie, after what seemed an eternity, but was probably just a little over an [[hours]]; we had to [[transforming]] it off. There was no [[charade]], there was [[anything]] about the characters to make you empathize or sympathize with them, there was no evoking of emotion at all [[pertaining]] this movie and the clips of their past were poorly edited, confusing, and [[dispensable]]. What [[did]] have been a [[wondrous]] idea for a [[cinema]], even as a drama & not a [[humor]] ([[while]] I think a [[farce]] in this situation [[could]] have been better, because I love to watch white people freak out & start acting like complete idiots, it makes me laugh) became a [[wastes]] of my $1 credit at the video store. --------------------------------------------- Result 1781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This movie is simply incredible! I had [[expected]] something quite different form the film that I actually [[saw]]. [[However]], it is very [[insightful]] in that it shows the aggressive nature of human sexuality and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest [[seeing]] this rare [[work]] of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual spirit of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go see it! It´s worth your money and time! This movie is simply incredible! I had [[prophesied]] something quite different form the film that I actually [[sawthe]]. [[Still]], it is very [[perceptive]] in that it shows the aggressive nature of human sexuality and its linkage with animal behavior. Let me warn those among the readers of this article who are easily offended by content that is all too sexual, for the explicit sexual nature of this film feels like a high-brow sort of pornography. It even features a scene that comes extremely close to rape.

Meanwhile, I strongly suggest [[witnessing]] this rare [[cooperating]] of "sexual art". Every minute of the picture breathes the sexual spirit of the seventies, by the way. One should not forget how times have changed!

Go see it! It´s worth your money and time! --------------------------------------------- Result 1782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV [[show]]. And I really enjoyed this flick. I enjoyed myself here a lot more than I did with other summer [[blockbusters]].

It's funny hearing people [[rail]] against this [[movie]] with [[excuses]] like "lame plot" and "it's much cruder than the show." Does ANYONE remember the crudeness of the humor in the [[pilot]] episode? [[Daisy]] makes incest jokes and [[Bo]] [[says]] that Luke had probably fathered half the kids in the orphanage. The only reason it was cleaned up is because it changed to and earlier time slot.

And as far as the plot goes. It was the perfect Dukes plot. In fact as a remake it probably stays truer to the source material than any TV show that has migrated to the big screen.

While Sean William Scott and Johnny Knoxville aren't EXACTLY like their small screen versions, they do a great job and work very well together. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little bit more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. In the movie Roscoe is a little... scary.

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the General Lee is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back roads of Hazzard?

Folks, allow yourself to enjoy a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[great]] dumb movie! I'm a huge fan of the Dukes of Hazzard TV [[shows]]. And I really enjoyed this flick. I enjoyed myself here a lot more than I did with other summer [[blockbuster]].

It's funny hearing people [[railways]] against this [[filmmaking]] with [[pretences]] like "lame plot" and "it's much cruder than the show." Does ANYONE remember the crudeness of the humor in the [[piloting]] episode? [[Margarita]] makes incest jokes and [[Pok]] [[asserts]] that Luke had probably fathered half the kids in the orphanage. The only reason it was cleaned up is because it changed to and earlier time slot.

And as far as the plot goes. It was the perfect Dukes plot. In fact as a remake it probably stays truer to the source material than any TV show that has migrated to the big screen.

While Sean William Scott and Johnny Knoxville aren't EXACTLY like their small screen versions, they do a great job and work very well together. I wasn't too keen on Burt's Boss Hogg though. And I would have like a little bit more incompetence from Sheriff Roscoe. In the movie Roscoe is a little... scary.

And who didn't have a smile on their face as the General Lee is racing through the streets of Atlanta and the back roads of Hazzard?

Folks, allow yourself to enjoy a movie that is just an excuse for nostalgia, bikinis and car chases, you won't be sorry. It's just a [[huge]] dumb movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1783 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] In his 1966 film "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question truth against a backdrop of British youth protesters. By setting such questions against a fabric of hippie youth movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a cause when what you think is true may actually be a lie? On the flip side, the film [[said]] that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be deceiving us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most [[tacky]] parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with bad metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. In his 1966 film "Blow Up", Antonioni had his hero question truth against a backdrop of British youth protesters. By setting such questions against a fabric of hippie youth movements, Antonioni questioned, intentionally or not, the effectiveness of these organisations. How can you fight for a cause when what you think is true may actually be a lie? On the flip side, the film [[told]] that we must fight and actively challenge what we see precisely because others may be deceiving us with false images and false truths. Though the hippie aspects were the most [[dorky]] parts of "Blow Up", they created a nice texture and gave the film more meaning than it might otherwise have had. It was a very cautionary and mature little film.

With "Zabriskie Point" Antonioni throws away all the ambiguities and subtleties of "Blow Up" and goes full blown hippie. The result is a film awash with bad metaphors, stupid ideas and heavy handed storytelling. How could somebody, who across his career displayed such restraint and intelligence, make something so silly?

The film opens with a nice series of close ups, as we watch a group of radicals discussing the meaning of revolution. Suddenly one man (Mark) gets up and leaves. He hates the rigid and ordered nature of revolution. He recognises that, though revolutionaries fight for freedom, to bind oneself to such a militant cause is to effectively give your freedom away. And so like Jack Nicholson in "The Passenger", Mark just wants to be free.

As such, Mark buys a gun and goes solo. He takes orders from no one. When police raid his university campus Mark shoots a guy and runs away. He then flees to a nearby airfield, steals a small private plane and flies out to the desert. Antonioni treats the desert as a peaceful utopia, and contrasts it with the ruthlessly capitalist cities, with their billboards and hollow modern appliances. He sees the desert as a sort of Garden of Eden.

In the desert, Mark meets Daria and quickly falls in love. Antonioni then gives us a ridiculous sex scene in which hundreds of hippies have sex in the sand. Free from the constraints of modern life, these tree-huggers and student radicals can now celebrate their individualism by humping in the sun.

The film ends with Mark dying and Daria fantasising about blowing up the mansions and stately homes of the rich capitalists who killed him. It's Antonioni's challenge to his audience. Pick up the guns, pickets and explosives, he says. Tear the walls down before they cage you in!

Of course the film had no effect on its audience. They recognised "Zabriskie Point" as being just another self centred commercial attempt at being radical. A sort of commodified radicalism. It felt untruthful and tame.

Thematically the film is pretty stupid. Antonioni basically says that if you are unhappy with the modern world, and the fat cats who exploit you, you should either flee to the desert (Mark) or actively fight the system (Daria). That's all well and good. But though artists constantly warn us of such dystopian nightmares, they're all mostly unable to show us how to effectively administer change. Like the end of "Fight Club", nihilism and violence achieve nothing. In the real world, social change tends to be instigated by humble inventors, spurred ahead by minor technological advancements. I mean, what liberated women more than contraceptives?

3/10 - A very bad film. The problem is, Antonioni does not really believe in rebellion. He is a quiet and contemplative man. An introvert who seems to have made an extroverted film simply to garner more adoration from the counterculture who embraced his earlier film, "Blow Up". As such, "Zabrinskie Point" comes across as a very pretentious and stupid film. It's essentially a 50 year old man say "Look at me, I'm a daring rebel!"

There are many films in which the audience is encouraged to fight "the system", but they all fall into one of four categories. In the first category you have films like "Network", "Cool Hand Luke", "Cuckoo's Nest" and "Spartacus". These all show that the lives of freedom fighters all end in failure, though in each case the "spirit of revolution" survives. The message is that you can not effect change, but by dying or failing, the optimistic notion of change survives through martyrdom. Essentially we must keep on failing rather than give up hope.

Then you have films like "Fight Club", "Zabriskie Point" and "Falling Down", which simply encourage you to explode. Tear it all down. Blow it all up. Everything is a lie, so you might as well go out guns blazing. These films are borne out of angry, reactionary feelings, rather than any sort of common sense.

Then you have the "flight rather than fight" category. Terrence Malick and Antonioni are the masters of this genre. Films like "The Passenger", "Red Desert" and "Badlands" show human beings running from worlds they do not like and forging islands or peaceful havens for themselves. Both directors are pessimists, in that Malick has his islands destroyed and Antonioni has his islands offering no sense of happiness or solution.

Then you have the fourth category. Films like Donnersmarck's "The Lives of Others", Ashby's "Bound For Glory" and Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange", treat artists as a force of change and rebellion. In these dystopian worlds, in which everyone is content to be a slave to the state, it is the unbridled creativity and freedom of will of the artist/criminal who keeps the system in check. By simply existing outside of the herd, you create waves. Your comments, actions and critical eye, challenges the status quo. As such, Donnersmarck's film has novelists and artists undermining Nazi Germany, whilst Kubrick has Alex the artist/criminal fighting Nazi droogs, painting the town in blood and sperm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[bought]] Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[prepared]] me for how [[brilliant]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much [[since]] Firefly (also and [[amazing]] show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some amazing episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[great]]. I've heard some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. I [[buys]] Dark Angel seasons 1 & 2 two weeks ago, after catching a couple of season 1 episodes on Channel 5. Nothing [[braced]] me for how [[sumptuous]] the show is. I haven't enjoyed anything as much [[because]] Firefly (also and [[astounding]] show). I'll admit Season 2 wqasn't quite as good, but there are still some amazing episodes (see Designate this, Bag 'Em, the Berrisford Agenda, Harbor Lights, Freak Nation etc.) and Alec is [[large]]. I've heard some of the plans for the would-be season 3, and I have to say, I can't believe it was cancelled - I won't spoil it for you - but it would have rocked! I also think it has a lot of potential as a movie (although at the moment it seems highly unlikely). As proof of my obsessiveness, Max's barcode number is 332960073452, and in the two weeks I've had it, I am 3 episodes away from having watched both seasons twice. It's just too good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] John Cassavetes' 1977 film Opening [[Night]] is, what critics [[usually]] call the work of such a significant artist, 'overlooked'. It is an [[excellent]] film, in its own right, and one of the [[best]] portraits of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a perfect film, in that, at two [[hours]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half [[hour]] too long, and there's a [[bit]] too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead [[character]] Myrtle Gordon, [[played]] by Gena Rowlands, the [[wife]] of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another [[Woman]], which [[also]] starred Rowlands, eleven [[years]] [[later]], is a better [[portrait]] of the [[internal]] [[conflicts]] of an aging [[woman]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[win]] the Best Actress [[Award]] at the Berlin [[Film]] [[Festival]] for this [[portrayal]], and it was well deserved. Often this [[film]], [[written]] by Cassavetes, is easily [[compared]] to his earlier- and inferior- [[film]], A [[Woman]] [[Under]] The [[Influence]], but it's a [[spurious]] [[comparison]]. Rowlands' [[character]] in that [[film]] is [[severely]] mentally [[disturbed]] from the [[start]], as well as coming from a blue [[collar]] [[background]], while her characters in this [[film]] and in Allen's [[film]] are both [[artists]] who are [[haunted]] by apparitions. [[In]] this [[film]] it's the ghost of a [[dead]] young [[woman]] who can be seen as Myrtle's younger [[doppelganger]], while in Allen's [[film]] it's her character's own past…. Many critics have taken this [[film]] to be a [[portrait]] of an alcoholic, seeing Myrtle surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[manager]] who [[tells]] her, during opening [[night]], 'I've seen a lot of [[drunks]] in my time, but I've never seen [[anyone]] as drunk as you who could stand up. You're [[great]]!', but this is wrong, for [[alcohol]] isn't her problem- nor is her [[chain]] [[smoking]]. They are merely diversions from whatever thing is [[really]] [[compelling]] her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' [[credit]], as a storyteller, he never [[lets]] us [[find]] out [[exactly]] what's [[wrong]] with [[Myrtle]], and [[despite]] her [[coming]] through in the [[end]], there's no [[reason]] to [[expect]] that she has really [[resolved]] [[anything]] of [[consequence]]. This [[sort]] of [[end]] without [[resolution]] [[links]] Cassavetes directly with the more [[daring]] European [[directors]] of the recent [[past]], who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an [[audience]], and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. John Cassavetes' 1977 film Opening [[Soir]] is, what critics [[habitually]] call the work of such a significant artist, 'overlooked'. It is an [[glamorous]] film, in its own right, and one of the [[optimum]] portraits of a midlife crisis ever put to film. It's not a perfect film, in that, at two [[hour]] and twenty four minutes it's about a half [[hours]] too long, and there's a [[bitten]] too much emphasis on the drunkenness of the lead [[nature]] Myrtle Gordon, [[served]] by Gena Rowlands, the [[woman]] of Cassavetes, long after we've gotten the point. But only Woody Allen's masterpiece, Another [[Daughters]], which [[further]] starred Rowlands, eleven [[olds]] [[afterward]], is a better [[portrayal]] of the [[inside]] [[conflict]] of an aging [[female]]. Yet, Rowlands did [[triumph]] the Best Actress [[Scholarship]] at the Berlin [[Flick]] [[Feast]] for this [[portrait]], and it was well deserved. Often this [[movie]], [[wrote]] by Cassavetes, is easily [[compares]] to his earlier- and inferior- [[cinematic]], A [[Daughters]] [[At]] The [[Implications]], but it's a [[fake]] [[compare]]. Rowlands' [[characters]] in that [[cinematic]] is [[seriously]] mentally [[bothered]] from the [[outset]], as well as coming from a blue [[neck]] [[backgrounds]], while her characters in this [[movie]] and in Allen's [[movie]] are both [[performer]] who are [[tormented]] by apparitions. [[Throughout]] this [[flick]] it's the ghost of a [[deceased]] young [[wife]] who can be seen as Myrtle's younger [[ringer]], while in Allen's [[flick]] it's her character's own past…. Many critics have taken this [[movie]] to be a [[portrayal]] of an alcoholic, seeing Myrtle surround herself with enablers, such as a stage [[administrator]] who [[says]] her, during opening [[nuit]], 'I've seen a lot of [[drunkards]] in my time, but I've never seen [[nobody]] as drunk as you who could stand up. You're [[marvellous]]!', but this is wrong, for [[beverage]] isn't her problem- nor is her [[strings]] [[smoke]]. They are merely diversions from whatever thing is [[genuinely]] [[convincing]] her to her own destruction, and much to Cassavetes' [[credence]], as a storyteller, he never [[enable]] us [[unearthed]] out [[precisely]] what's [[improper]] with [[Moaning]], and [[though]] her [[arriving]] through in the [[ends]], there's no [[cause]] to [[awaited]] that she has really [[solve]] [[nothing]] of [[effect]]. This [[kind]] of [[ceases]] without [[resolutions]] [[nexus]] Cassavetes directly with the more [[valiant]] European [[administrators]] of the recent [[yesteryear]], who were comfortable in not revealing everything to an [[audiences]], and forcing their viewers to cogitate, even if it hurts.

Yet, the film recapitulates perfectly the effect of a drunk or fever lifting out of the fog, and as such the viewer again is subliminally involved in its drama. Whether or not Myrtle Gordon does recover, after the film's universe irises about her is left for each and every viewer to decide, and as we have seen before that lid closes, one's choices do matter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1786 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] With the badly injured Tony in an induced [[coma]], two things [[happen]]: Tony [[imagines]] himself leading the [[life]] of a salesman [[attending]] a [[business]] convention, while his family and [[friends]] go through [[hell]] trying to cope with the [[possible]] loss of the [[big]] man. The [[dream]] sequences are right out of an [[old]] TWILIGHT ZONE episode, as Tony [[finds]] himself transformed into an Average Joe [[trying]] to [[deal]] with a [[missing]] wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country [[business]] trip. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an Italian thug from Noo Joisey. A [[nice]] [[touch]]. The shockingly long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose old man. The best moment has the big boys trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial dispute. Vito gets off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet case, which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. With the badly injured Tony in an induced [[eat]], two things [[arise]]: Tony [[presume]] himself leading the [[vida]] of a salesman [[attends]] a [[corporations]] convention, while his family and [[mates]] go through [[brothel]] trying to cope with the [[probable]] loss of the [[large]] man. The [[daydream]] sequences are right out of an [[antique]] TWILIGHT ZONE episode, as Tony [[deems]] himself transformed into an Average Joe [[attempting]] to [[address]] with a [[gone]] wallet and mixed-up identities while on a cross-country [[firms]] trip. His intonation as a blazer- and khaki-wearing schnook is more mid-American and less that of an Italian thug from Noo Joisey. A [[pleasurable]] [[toque]]. The shockingly long-haired, hippy-dippy AJ (whom Paulie calls "Van Helsing" at one point) has a nice scene with his comatose old man. The best moment has the big boys trying to talk about life without Tony, which immediately breaks down into a territorial dispute. Vito gets off a line about the new-dead Gene possibly having been a closet case, which is interesting in light of what we are about to learn about Vito. --------------------------------------------- Result 1787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[time]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is promised a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the movie for which he escaped base, later caught after interrupting a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern Afghanistan terrorist base operated by a group called Black Sunday, who have commandeered an Air Force stealth fighter thanks to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), John Sands(Seagal)will fly into enemy territory, receiving help from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on ground. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female enforcer, Eliana(Katie Jones), and Sands must figure out how to not only re-take command of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but rescue him as well. And, maybe, Sands can get revenge on the traitor he trained, Rather(Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 hours until a General's Navy pilots bomb the entire area. On board the stealth, Black Sunday equipped a biochemical bomb, hoping to detonate it on the United States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot Afghans when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[bodies]] dropping dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to scrutiny(..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area undetected so easily) and the plot itself is [[nothing]] to write home about. The movie is edited fast, the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poorest]] [[efforts]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). [[Even]] more [[disappointing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). Steven Seagal, Mr. Personality himself, this [[moment]] is the United States' greatest Stealth pilot who is promised a pardon from the military(..who attempted to swipe his memory at the beginning of the movie for which he escaped base, later caught after interrupting a gang of robbers in a shootout at a gas station)if he is able to successfully infiltrate a Northern Afghanistan terrorist base operated by a group called Black Sunday, who have commandeered an Air Force stealth fighter thanks to an American traitor. Along with a fellow pilot who admired the traitor, Jannick(Mark Bazeley), John Sands(Seagal)will fly into enemy territory, receiving help from his Arab lover, Jessica(Ciera Payton)and a freedom fighter, Rojar(Alki David) once they are on ground. Jannick is kidnapped by Black Sunday leaders, Stone(Vincenzo Nicoli)and his female enforcer, Eliana(Katie Jones), and Sands must figure out how to not only re-take command of the kidnapped stealth fighter, but rescue him as well. And, maybe, Sands can get revenge on the traitor he trained, Rather(Steve Toussaint)in the process. Sands has 72 hours until a General's Navy pilots bomb the entire area. On board the stealth, Black Sunday equipped a biochemical bomb, hoping to detonate it on the United States.

Seagal gets a chance to shoot Afghans when he isn't slicing their throats with knives. The film is mostly machine guns firing and [[organizations]] dropping dead. The setting of Afghanistan doesn't hold up to scrutiny(..nor does how easily Seagal and co. are able to move about the area undetected so easily) and the plot itself is [[anything]] to write home about. The movie is edited fast, the camera a bit too jerky. Seagal isn't as active a hero as he once was and his action scenes are tightly edited where we have a hard time seeing him taking out his foes, unlike the good old days. One of Seagal's [[poor]] [[effort]], and he's as understated as ever(..not a compliment). [[Yet]] more [[depressing]] is the fact that Seagal never fights in hand to hand combat with the film's chief villains, tis a shame. He doesn't even snap a wrist or crack a neck in any visible way(..sure we see a slight resemblance of some tool getting tossed around, but it's not as clear a picture as I enjoy because the filmmakers have such fast edits and dizzying close-ups). --------------------------------------------- Result 1788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] Did [[anyone]] edit this [[film]]? Or was it only the DVD release that had huge thirty second gaps between scenes? It's OK though, I fell asleep watching it the first time. Then I [[fell]] asleep the [[second]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the [[worst]] I've [[seen]], but it's close. The acting is not the [[worst]] I've [[seen]] either...but it's close. The production .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[worst]] I had ever seen in my life! Not trying to be spiteful, but Unhinged could have used some more production.

Please don't think I'm a hater of horror films, or even that I didn't enjoy this film. I just felt I was [[laughing]] at the film much more than I felt I was laughing along with it. The gruesome moments were not too poorly done, but [[could]] have been done better even with a shoestring budget.

Characters seemed awkwardly developed, or ignored all together, twist ending was pretty [[bad]], and the exposition took forever without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[avoiding]] this movie.

1/10 Did [[everyone]] edit this [[kino]]? Or was it only the DVD release that had huge thirty second gaps between scenes? It's OK though, I fell asleep watching it the first time. Then I [[declined]] asleep the [[secondly]] time and the third time. The plot is actually not the [[gravest]] I've [[noticed]], but it's close. The acting is not the [[hardest]] I've [[noticed]] either...but it's close. The production .... well, I can honestly say that it was the [[hardest]] I had ever seen in my life! Not trying to be spiteful, but Unhinged could have used some more production.

Please don't think I'm a hater of horror films, or even that I didn't enjoy this film. I just felt I was [[kidding]] at the film much more than I felt I was laughing along with it. The gruesome moments were not too poorly done, but [[did]] have been done better even with a shoestring budget.

Characters seemed awkwardly developed, or ignored all together, twist ending was pretty [[mala]], and the exposition took forever without exposing much.

I'd recommend [[stave]] this movie.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Q.E.D. was a [[brilliant]] TV series and it truly was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this era of TIVO and recording devices that it would fare much better than it did in 1982. I am eagerly awaiting its availability on DVD!

While it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The Wild, Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a much more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was witty and the action was high. The show ran in the UK as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with better production values than BBC typically had in that era.

I was a nineteen year old lad when this series ran initially, and had much too much to do in my life to make time for television. I remember my dear mother, however, calling me to remind me that Q.E.D. was on, and we would sit on the phone and watch it together. Wonderful memories.

Truly, Q.E.D. is a sad loss and, if it could be done with the same quality and values today, I would love to see it make a return. Q.E.D. was a [[lustrous]] TV series and it truly was one of the very few worth scheduling for! I suspect that in this era of TIVO and recording devices that it would fare much better than it did in 1982. I am eagerly awaiting its availability on DVD!

While it is true that it has some in common with other television shows like The Wild, Wild West, The Bearcats and The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr., all of which I am a huge fan of,Q.E.D. had a much more intellectual quality to it. It did not suffer for that, however - the dialog was witty and the action was high. The show ran in the UK as Mastermind, and it did have something of the BBC feel to it, but with better production values than BBC typically had in that era.

I was a nineteen year old lad when this series ran initially, and had much too much to do in my life to make time for television. I remember my dear mother, however, calling me to remind me that Q.E.D. was on, and we would sit on the phone and watch it together. Wonderful memories.

Truly, Q.E.D. is a sad loss and, if it could be done with the same quality and values today, I would love to see it make a return. --------------------------------------------- Result 1790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she [[could]] [[hardly]] have chosen to remake her image more [[dramatically]]. A [[great]] success in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is difficult to [[imagine]] this delicate [[frame]] standing up to a bounty hunters life... but then this is exactly what Domino Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's [[biggest]] [[fans]]) [[believe]] she [[carries]] if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more [[amazing]] than the fiction. Kiera Nightly moved straight from the P&P set to this action movie... she [[would]] [[nigh]] have chosen to remake her image more [[drastically]]. A [[prodigious]] success in Love Actually and as Lizie in Jane Austen's classic, she is, once again, "having a go". Just as her bikini clad warrier woman in King Arthur was more skin than muscle, it is difficult to [[suppose]] this delicate [[fabric]] standing up to a bounty hunters life... but then this is exactly what Domino Harvey (the real one) did, and I (being one of Nightly's [[grandest]] [[amateurs]]) [[believing]] she [[carrying]] if off.

Stuff....

* 90210 (for the non American world) is the post code of Beverly hills in LA, where all the film stars live. * Domino Harvey father's mostfamous film was Manchurian Candidate (which appears in the film). * Domino Harvey died of a drug overdose in her bath before the film came out in June 2005, after having been arrested for drug dealing. She had just completed the negotiation for some of her music to be inlcuded in the film. * Kiera Knightly alludes to Domino Harvey's sexuality in her interview with Lucy Liu.

If you find this film a bit far fetched, then check out Domino Harvey, as the facts are more [[unbelievable]] than the fiction. --------------------------------------------- Result 1791 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] My Super X-Girlfriend is one [[hell]] of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[excellent]] and the costumes Uma Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[proved]] everyone wrong and nailed her role as the lunatic girlfriend. She was just simply [[FABULOUS]]!!! Luke Wilson was also good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the [[greatest]] actresses of all time. The supporting cast was also superb especially Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's screenplay and from it's original plot line. This film is very highly recommended. My Super X-Girlfriend is one [[bordello]] of a roller coaster ride. The special effects were [[noteworthy]] and the costumes Uma Thurman wore were hubba buba. Uma Thurman is an underrated comedic actress but she [[showed]] everyone wrong and nailed her role as the lunatic girlfriend. She was just simply [[SUMPTUOUS]]!!! Luke Wilson was also good as the average Joe but he was a brave man to work with one of the [[widest]] actresses of all time. The supporting cast was also superb especially Anna Faris who was extremely good (A lot better than in the Scary Movie franchise).

Ivan Rietman did very well in directing this film because if it wasn't for him and Uma Thurman this film wouldn't have done so well. This film is clearly a 10/10 for it's cast (Uma Thurman), it's director, it's screenplay and from it's original plot line. This film is very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 1792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[realize]] that bringing a novel to the big screen is always problematic. That is the only positive thing I can say about this truly [[horrid]] [[adaptation]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[book]]. Flannery O'Connor [[wrote]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a remarkably gifted writer. [[In]] her first novel she wove together a dark and deeply [[disturbing]] tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and surprising evenhandedness. The characters in the [[book]] may seem outrageous to those who have not lived in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do exist. Not only do they exist, they are human beings with families, feelings, and concerns like anyone else. Flannery's intentions were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[zealots]] - she saw in them the beautiful operation of what she would have called 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[distressing]], and [[maddening]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a sense of dread and impending doom. Finally, it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our entire world view.

None of this comes through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. None. It is a [[farce]]. A [[bad]] farce. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that turns the stomach. The acting is poor, the southern accents are fake and insulting. The filmmakers show no insight into the thinking of religious southerners. Ms. O'Connor's intense prose are reduced to sight gags and [[cheap]], amateur theatre. The soundtrack is a mixture of hayseed [[silliness]] and 'Clockwork Orange'-style cheeseball electronics that doesn't fit the story or even the MOVIE. I was granted free admission to this movie and almost walked out. Truly, truly [[terrible]].

As an aside, I do not agree with Ms. O'Connor's religious views, and while I was raised in the deep south, years ago I made my way north and have not looked back. But the south is a beautiful place full of fascinating individuals (like every other place on earth), and the cartoonish mockery with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. I [[attain]] that bringing a novel to the big screen is always problematic. That is the only positive thing I can say about this truly [[nefarious]] [[adjustment]].

Have you read 'Wise Blood?' It's an amazing [[ledger]]. Flannery O'Connor [[written]] about the south as no one else has. She was a southerner herself, a devout catholic, and a remarkably gifted writer. [[Onto]] her first novel she wove together a dark and deeply [[bewildering]] tale of faith, doubt, and redemption with a macabre sense of humor and surprising evenhandedness. The characters in the [[books]] may seem outrageous to those who have not lived in the rural south, but I can assure you that such people do exist. Not only do they exist, they are human beings with families, feelings, and concerns like anyone else. Flannery's intentions were so often misunderstood - she was not lampooning these backwoods [[addicts]] - she saw in them the beautiful operation of what she would have called 'grace'...even in the most violent, [[disappointing]], and [[infuriating]] of circumstances. To read 'Wise Blood' is to be washed over with a sense of dread and impending doom. Finally, it is to think long and hard about our judgments and preconceptions - our entire world view.

None of this comes through in John Huston's 'Gilligan's Island'-like adaptation. None. It is a [[masquerade]]. A [[unfavourable]] farce. The entire film is saturated with a hauteur that turns the stomach. The acting is poor, the southern accents are fake and insulting. The filmmakers show no insight into the thinking of religious southerners. Ms. O'Connor's intense prose are reduced to sight gags and [[inexpensive]], amateur theatre. The soundtrack is a mixture of hayseed [[hilarity]] and 'Clockwork Orange'-style cheeseball electronics that doesn't fit the story or even the MOVIE. I was granted free admission to this movie and almost walked out. Truly, truly [[scary]].

As an aside, I do not agree with Ms. O'Connor's religious views, and while I was raised in the deep south, years ago I made my way north and have not looked back. But the south is a beautiful place full of fascinating individuals (like every other place on earth), and the cartoonish mockery with which southerners and their attitudes are dealt in this movie borders on offensive. If you're into being offended (which I am not), then this movie most DEFINITELY crosses the line.

I don't like to talk crap about an artist's work - John Huston was a man that I did not know, and I'm sure he was a sincere and gifted filmmaker, to which his respected place in film history attests. My views are clearly skewed by having read (and loved) Flannery O'Connor's work. So I don't claim to be coming from any other perspective. Maybe as a stand-alone film it works for cinephiles. But for Flannery O'Connor fans - and, I might add, for self-respecting southerners and openminded individuals of all stripes - this movie is a waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 1793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[bad]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is obvious that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more expensive than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an obnoxious mailman who sings horrendous songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) Boring and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. The last Tarzan film starring Johnny Weissmuller (looking surprisingly aged a year after "Tarzan and the Huntress") is [[negative]], in spite of all the trivia one can add to make it look better. It is obvious that RKO tried to make a great farewell for Weissmuller, shooting in beautiful scenery in México, with a top star of that country (Andrea Palma) and multiple award-winning cinematographer Gabriel Figueroa, and bringing in prestigious composer Dimitri Tiomkin to do the score. Although it may have cost less for filming abroad, it looks more expensive than any other RKO film in the series, taking advantage of Acapulco beaches and real pyramids as Aquatania, and with impressive décors for all the scenes related to the temple of god Balu (especially the exterior, built on steep rocks.) Kurt Neumann should have stayed as director, instead of Robert Florey, who gives it a very slow pace. Neumann had done a fine work with "Tarzan and the Amazons", "Tarzan and the Leopard Woman" and "Tarzan and the Huntress", and finished his career directing the classic "The Fly" the year before his death; while Florey became a television director, after a career of few remarkable films. If Weissmuller looks tired, the chimp playing Cheeta is not as good as the others, but the worst character is Benji, an obnoxious mailman who sings horrendous songs (that have a Caribbean air, in a location supposed to be Africa and shot in México!) Boring and decidedly of dubious taste, it was a sad farewell to Weissmuller's Tarzan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the plot thickens and finally becomes [[black]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the first part of the movie. It continues in this vein for a while until, in the end, it tries to go back to the original light-hearted banter. But by now it's too late. It's hard to see why these women would still be talking to one another and the finale is unconvincing. Truly a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make films. Difficult to see how the producers ever convinced themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a real flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). Was this meant to be a comedy or a serious drama? This film starts with a light-hearted banter between three women. Fine. It moves into a conflict between the women when one of them meets a man. Fine. There are a few antics between them. Fine. But when the plot thickens and finally becomes [[negra]] I started to wonder whether I had misinterpreted the first part of the movie. It continues in this vein for a while until, in the end, it tries to go back to the original light-hearted banter. But by now it's too late. It's hard to see why these women would still be talking to one another and the finale is unconvincing. Truly a lesson (for British filmmakers anyway) of how not to make films. Difficult to see how the producers ever convinced themselves this film would work. And the box office proved it to be a real flop, because I'd never heard of this film until this weekend (four years after its release). --------------------------------------------- Result 1795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this film when i was around 6 or 7 years old and didn't really think it was anything particularly special. AS time went on i watched it a few more times and it [[started]] to [[grow]] on me as i started to [[understand]] the morals of the [[film]], which i will come to later. [[For]] a while i left this film alone and didn't watch it for a while. [[When]] looking for an old classic film to watch a few weeks ago (now being 15), I dug out the VHS of homeward bound. After [[watching]] this i was left on a [[natural]] [[high]] that i couldn't really explain. The film gives an overwhelming sense of joy that you never really expect. The films nature of three completely different animals collaborating together to find their way home really sends a message home that no matter how different you are you can always find common ground, something that you all need. The way the personalities of the characters is chosen is truly fantastic. In that you have an old knowledgeable wise golden retriever, looking after or guiding 'chance' the fun loving if slightly clumsy young American bulldog, with sassy the clever, vulnerable but confident cat. The film follows these three friends or companions on a journey that is so realistically impossible it creates magic in that you start to believe that this journey can happen.

I don't want to sound like a soft tissue grabber when it comes to films i assure you i am quite the opposite, but the most uplifting part of this film is without a doubt shadows return, when shadow desperately tries to escape and chance and sassy, painfully are told by him to leave. When both animals return to their beloved owners there is a silence until shadow limps over the horizon to the awe of all. There is a fine line between heartwarming and corny rubbish but this film is pure [[magic]] even at the age of 15. This film may not be Lord of the rings but for Disney to produce such a [[fantastic]] film using animals and for it to uplift myself in the way it does even at this age it deserves 10/10. I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] this film when i was around 6 or 7 years old and didn't really think it was anything particularly special. AS time went on i watched it a few more times and it [[embarked]] to [[raising]] on me as i started to [[understanding]] the morals of the [[cinema]], which i will come to later. [[In]] a while i left this film alone and didn't watch it for a while. [[Whenever]] looking for an old classic film to watch a few weeks ago (now being 15), I dug out the VHS of homeward bound. After [[staring]] this i was left on a [[naturel]] [[supreme]] that i couldn't really explain. The film gives an overwhelming sense of joy that you never really expect. The films nature of three completely different animals collaborating together to find their way home really sends a message home that no matter how different you are you can always find common ground, something that you all need. The way the personalities of the characters is chosen is truly fantastic. In that you have an old knowledgeable wise golden retriever, looking after or guiding 'chance' the fun loving if slightly clumsy young American bulldog, with sassy the clever, vulnerable but confident cat. The film follows these three friends or companions on a journey that is so realistically impossible it creates magic in that you start to believe that this journey can happen.

I don't want to sound like a soft tissue grabber when it comes to films i assure you i am quite the opposite, but the most uplifting part of this film is without a doubt shadows return, when shadow desperately tries to escape and chance and sassy, painfully are told by him to leave. When both animals return to their beloved owners there is a silence until shadow limps over the horizon to the awe of all. There is a fine line between heartwarming and corny rubbish but this film is pure [[quadrant]] even at the age of 15. This film may not be Lord of the rings but for Disney to produce such a [[unbelievable]] film using animals and for it to uplift myself in the way it does even at this age it deserves 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1796 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of those rare movies, it's lovely and compelling, dignified and quirky, a true gift. I consider it a prerequisite for any trip to Italy, or any vacation at all, because it reminds you to open yourself up to a broader experience (yup, find the magic). I especially loved Josie Lawrence, as Lottie Wilkins, but every lead and supporting actor is flawless in this film. Further the costumes, if you're drawn to fashion and costumes, are extraordinarily well done. I just wish they'd release it on DVD because I'm wearing my tape version out!

Absolutely well worth your time, just make sure to settle in to watch it, without any interruptions. --------------------------------------------- Result 1797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I [[looked]] forward to seeing this [[movie]] when it [[came]] out, since I was a [[huge]] SNL [[fan]]. When my [[boyfriend]] and I went to [[see]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[yelling]], "Don't waste your [[money]]!" But of course we had to [[find]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few funny [[bits]] (Laser [[Bra]] 2000, [[Root]] Boy Slim), most of it [[felt]] [[like]] it [[could]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 [[hour]] show. It was pretty [[bad]].

When the opera [[singer]] came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I realized that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on purpose with this movie. Or else he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your time watching it, it's that bad. I [[seemed]] forward to seeing this [[cinematography]] when it [[arrived]] out, since I was a [[overwhelming]] SNL [[breather]]. When my [[friend]] and I went to [[behold]] it, the people coming out of the early show were [[screaming]], "Don't waste your [[cash]]!" But of course we had to [[found]] out for ourselves.

While there were a few funny [[tib]] (Laser [[Brassiere]] 2000, [[Provenance]] Boy Slim), most of it [[believed]] [[iike]] it [[would]] have been severely edited down to an amusing 1 [[hora]] show. It was pretty [[faulty]].

When the opera [[songbird]] came on, many people got up and walked out. This made me laugh, because I realized that O'Donoghue was just pressing people's buttons on purpose with this movie. Or else he was just insane. Whatever - you don't need to waste your time watching it, it's that bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 1798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (80%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this Star is Born story seems to be to [[make]] ultimate success all the more sublime. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned [[within]] herself but never convincing as the stage actress of growing fame who both overcomes and [[profits]] from this detachment. Even in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's instructions. After suffering through Esther's (largely self-inflicted) pain in excruciating detail, we are given no persuasive sense of her triumph.

The obsessive presence of the heroine's pain seems to be meant as a guarantee of aesthetic transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, Judaism, sexual betrayal) never come together in a coherent whole. A 163-minute film with a simple plot should be able to knit up its loose ends. Esther Kahn is still not ready to go before an audience. The point of the vastly extended preparatory phase of this Star is Born story seems to be to [[deliver]] ultimate success all the more sublime. Summer Phoenix is very effective as an inarticulate young woman imprisoned [[inside]] herself but never convincing as the stage actress of growing fame who both overcomes and [[incomes]] from this detachment. Even in the lengthy scenes of Esther's acting lessons, we never see her carry out the teacher's instructions. After suffering through Esther's (largely self-inflicted) pain in excruciating detail, we are given no persuasive sense of her triumph.

The obsessive presence of the heroine's pain seems to be meant as a guarantee of aesthetic transcendence. Yet the causes of this pain (poverty, quasi-autism, Judaism, sexual betrayal) never come together in a coherent whole. A 163-minute film with a simple plot should be able to knit up its loose ends. Esther Kahn is still not ready to go before an audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Bromwell [[High]] is [[nothing]] short of [[brilliant]]. [[Expertly]] scripted and [[perfectly]] [[delivered]], this [[searing]] parody of a [[students]] and [[teachers]] at a South London [[Public]] [[School]] leaves you literally rolling with [[laughter]]. It's vulgar, provocative, witty and sharp. The characters are a [[superbly]] caricatured cross section of British [[society]] (or to be more accurate, of any society). Following the [[escapades]] of Keisha, Latrina and Natella, our three "protagonists" for [[want]] of a better term, the show doesn't [[shy]] away from parodying every imaginable [[subject]]. Political [[correctness]] [[flies]] out the [[window]] in [[every]] episode. [[If]] you [[enjoy]] [[shows]] that aren't [[afraid]] to poke [[fun]] of every taboo [[subject]] [[imaginable]], then Bromwell [[High]] will not [[disappoint]]! Bromwell [[Supremo]] is [[anything]] short of [[shiny]]. [[Skilfully]] scripted and [[entirely]] [[gave]], this [[blistering]] parody of a [[schoolchildren]] and [[profs]] at a South London [[Populace]] [[Teaching]] leaves you literally rolling with [[giggles]]. It's vulgar, provocative, witty and sharp. The characters are a [[staggeringly]] caricatured cross section of British [[societies]] (or to be more accurate, of any society). Following the [[pranks]] of Keisha, Latrina and Natella, our three "protagonists" for [[wantto]] of a better term, the show doesn't [[coy]] away from parodying every imaginable [[theme]]. Political [[propriety]] [[flying]] out the [[windows]] in [[any]] episode. [[Unless]] you [[enjoys]] [[denotes]] that aren't [[freaked]] to poke [[funny]] of every taboo [[topic]] [[unimaginable]], then Bromwell [[Higher]] will not [[deceive]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 1800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[ratings]].

skip this "movie" and wait for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't [[buy]] or rent it. trust me you won't be [[missing]] a thing. the Architect [[brings]] no [[new]] info: _(spoiler)_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you could already figure something like that out from the first movie: Agent Smith telling us the first Matrix created didn't work because it was too perfect. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I seen this before ? Oh right in the first movie the roles where reversed ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ ships) in the BIG battle which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by someone (hmmmm, maybe the guy holding the knife who wanted to stab Neo?!) who pushed the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a shameless ploy to make money (especially off the guys who went to see it more then once), which evidently worked [[like]] a charm. 1/10 and that's only because I don't go lower with my [[assessments]].

skip this "movie" and wait for the last movie of the "Trilogy", don't [[buying]] or rent it. trust me you won't be [[faded]] a thing. the Architect [[bring]] no [[novo]] info: _(spoiler)_ there have been more NEO's before him, he's like nr.6 or something. you could already figure something like that out from the first movie: Agent Smith telling us the first Matrix created didn't work because it was too perfect. Trinity died and Neo's "love" brought her back, where have I seen this before ? Oh right in the first movie the roles where reversed ! same as the action-scenes nothing new just with more opponents. the Action-scene (the 20+ ships) in the BIG battle which we didn't see (maybe in Revolutions ?), betrayed by someone (hmmmm, maybe the guy holding the knife who wanted to stab Neo?!) who pushed the EGM-button to soon.

all in all a shameless ploy to make money (especially off the guys who went to see it more then once), which evidently worked [[iike]] a charm. --------------------------------------------- Result 1801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that you [[happen]] [[across]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Saturday]] afternoon, and you [[get]] [[drawn]] into it and [[end]] up watching the [[whole]] thing. I [[thought]] that it was well acted and it really [[made]] me feel for the [[characters]]. [[Though]] it's a bit [[slow]] moving, [[focusing]] more on the [[relationships]] between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[members]], it never got [[boring]]. We don't [[really]] [[see]] too much of all the robberies that they were so legendary for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I [[thought]] [[Tracey]] Needham, who [[played]] Bonnie, [[really]] did a good [[job]] with her [[character]]. Going from a [[nice]] [[country]] [[girl]] to a cold-blooded [[killer]] is a [[challenging]] [[thing]] to [[portray]], and I [[enjoyed]] the subtlety she [[brought]] to the role.

Overall, an above average effort, especially [[considering]] it was a [[made]] for TV [[movie]]. This is one of those [[theater]] that you [[occur]] [[during]] when you're channel surfing on a [[Sunday]] afternoon, and you [[gets]] [[lured]] into it and [[ends]] up watching the [[entire]] thing. I [[figured]] that it was well acted and it really [[introduced]] me feel for the [[features]]. [[Notwithstanding]] it's a bit [[lento]] moving, [[concentrating]] more on the [[relationship]] between Bonnie and Clyde and their family [[member]], it never got [[bored]]. We don't [[truly]] [[behold]] too much of all the robberies that they were so legendary for, and instead most of the shootouts take place when they're ambushed by the police. I [[ideas]] [[Tracy]] Needham, who [[done]] Bonnie, [[genuinely]] did a good [[employment]] with her [[nature]]. Going from a [[handsome]] [[nationals]] [[chick]] to a cold-blooded [[shooter]] is a [[hard]] [[stuff]] to [[outline]], and I [[liked]] the subtlety she [[lodged]] to the role.

Overall, an above average effort, especially [[examine]] it was a [[introduced]] for TV [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1802 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The endless bounds of our inhumanity to our own kind never fails to stun me. This truly [[astonishing]] [[story]] of a horrifically abused and largely unheard-of population is [[compelling]], well-documented and enraging. As an American, I am constantly humiliated by my country's behaviour and this is just another in our long catalogue of international debasement. We suck. This is probably the first John Pilger documentary I've seen, but it [[immediately]] [[made]] me want to see what else he's done. My only [[complaint]], and the reason I [[gave]] this [[film]] only 8 out of 10, is that Pilger [[shows]] us this travesty and the appalling collaboration of the [[US]] and [[UK]] [[governments]], demands that we viewers/citizens are complicit in our own [[inaction]]...but makes no suggestion of how to help. I don't know about Britain, but America's [[made]] it nearly [[impossible]] for the citizenry to take part in their government's doings. A [[gesture]] in the right direction might [[help]] these islanders' cause. The endless bounds of our inhumanity to our own kind never fails to stun me. This truly [[uncanny]] [[conte]] of a horrifically abused and largely unheard-of population is [[convincing]], well-documented and enraging. As an American, I am constantly humiliated by my country's behaviour and this is just another in our long catalogue of international debasement. We suck. This is probably the first John Pilger documentary I've seen, but it [[expeditiously]] [[introduced]] me want to see what else he's done. My only [[grievance]], and the reason I [[delivered]] this [[films]] only 8 out of 10, is that Pilger [[showcase]] us this travesty and the appalling collaboration of the [[USA]] and [[BRITANNICA]] [[council]], demands that we viewers/citizens are complicit in our own [[passivity]]...but makes no suggestion of how to help. I don't know about Britain, but America's [[effected]] it nearly [[impractical]] for the citizenry to take part in their government's doings. A [[flick]] in the right direction might [[aiding]] these islanders' cause. --------------------------------------------- Result 1803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] [[After]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two roles in Man From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[foul]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an insult to viewer intelligence, according to members of my family. I'll stick with the first one, and try to forget I ever saw the sequel! [[Afterward]] what I thought was a masterful performance of two roles in Man From Snowy River, WHY was Kirk Douglas replaced by Brian Dennehy in the sequel? It just wasn't the same without Spur and Harrison, as portrayed by Douglas. Maybe he recognized how poor the plot was--Jim returns after extended absence, to find Jessica being pursued by another man. He could not expect any girl to wait that long with no contact from him, and not find competition. For a Disney movie, this contains [[squalid]] language, plus the highly unnecessary part when Jim & Jessica shacked up without being married--very LAME. Quite an insult to viewer intelligence, according to members of my family. I'll stick with the first one, and try to forget I ever saw the sequel! --------------------------------------------- Result 1804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I watched this [[show]] on the [[basis]] of it being [[told]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show quickly starts introducing us to the main characters and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the best of the lot, its [[extremely]] [[dramatic]] and [[really]] gets out the whole evil side of the [[show]] ready to [[progress]] throughout the rest of the season. My one biggest [[criticism]] is I [[felt]] a little let down by the [[show]] - probably not through its own fault, as it got cancelled after a mere 1 season, it seemed to display show much potential and it deserved a lot better treatment than it got. The acting is excellent, and this show has some of the [[best]] characters (good and evil) in it I have ever seen that are well developed in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten shows which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, definitely something out of the ordinary! I watched this [[displaying]] on the [[base]] of it being [[said]] it was reminiscent of David Lynch's Twin Peaks - a show which I adore. The show quickly starts introducing us to the main characters and rather unusually the pilot episode is to me the best of the lot, its [[terribly]] [[whopping]] and [[truly]] gets out the whole evil side of the [[spectacle]] ready to [[advance]] throughout the rest of the season. My one biggest [[critiques]] is I [[deemed]] a little let down by the [[display]] - probably not through its own fault, as it got cancelled after a mere 1 season, it seemed to display show much potential and it deserved a lot better treatment than it got. The acting is excellent, and this show has some of the [[nicest]] characters (good and evil) in it I have ever seen that are well developed in a short space of time. There is the odd cheesy effect for the first 5 or ten shows which are a bit overly dramatic, but this is rectified as the season progressed. Well worth a watch, definitely something out of the ordinary! --------------------------------------------- Result 1805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Just got back from a free screening and I'm very glad I didn't pay to see this very sub-par film. The theater was full and the crowd was a mix of kids and adults. It seemed like it was just the kids who were laughing at all the slap-stick and fart jokes though (good god they loved to hit these poor mice in the crotch a lot!). The movie is pretty juvenile, unintelligent, predictable, and mostly annoying. The characters just seem to be thrown together to fill in empty space and the relationships between them all seemed very forced with no charm at all.

Visually, the film is about average with nothing that really stands out. They did a decent job of mimicking the clay look from Wallace and Gromit, but other than that it's very forgettable imagery.

Although I was really bored throughout the whole film, I chuckled a couple times. It's not an absolute failure, but I most definitely would not want to watch it again. If you're a parent with kids (and you don't care that your kids see mindless cheap-jokes) then feel free to take them to see it, but everyone else shouldn't waste their money. --------------------------------------------- Result 1806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I had the [[opportunity]] to [[see]] this [[film]] debut at the Appalachian Film [[Festival]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[brilliantly]] done, with an excellent cast that [[works]] well as an [[ensemble]]. My [[favorite]] performances were from [[Youssef]] Kerkour, Justin [[Lane]] , and [[Adam]] [[Jones]]. [[Also]], there are some [[great]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was [[surprised]] to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Definitely]] a [[must]] see. I had the [[likelihood]] to [[behold]] this [[filmmaking]] debut at the Appalachian Film [[Fest]], in which it won an award for Best Picture. This film is [[beautifully]] done, with an excellent cast that [[cooperating]] well as an [[whole]]. My [[prefer]] performances were from [[Yusef]] Kerkour, Justin [[Alleyways]] , and [[Adamo]] [[Joneses]]. [[Moreover]], there are some [[resplendent]] effects with dragonflies and cockroaches, that I was [[horrified]] to find out that this film was done on a small budget. The writer-director Adam Jones, who I believe also won an award for his writing, does an excellent job with direction. The audience loved this movie. Cross Eyed will keep you laughing throughout the movie. [[Admittedly]] a [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 1807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[If]] there's one [[genre]] that I've never been a fan of, it's the biopic. Always misleading, filled with false [[information]], over-dramatized scenes, and trickery all around, biopics are almost never done right. Even in the hands of the truly talented directors like Martin Scorsese (The Aviator) and Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind), they often do a [[great]] disservice to the people they are trying to [[capture]] on screen. Skeptiscism takes the place of hype with the majority of biopics that make their way to the big screen and the Notorious Bettie Page was no different. Some critics and moviegoers objected to Gretchen Mol given the role of Bettie Page, saying she was no longer a celebrity and didn't have the chops for the part. I never doubted Mol could handle the part since, but I never expected to as blown as away by her performance as I was upon just viewing the film hours ago. Mol delivers a knockout Oscar worthy performance as the iconic 1950's pin-up girl, who, after an early life of abuse (depicted subtlety and tastefully done, something few directors would probably do) inadvertently becomes one of the most talked about models of all time. The picture covers a lot of ground in its 90 minute running time yet despite no less than three subplots, there is still a feeling that there may be a small portion missing from the story. Director/co-writer Marry Harron and Guinevere Turner's [[fantastic]] script is only marred by a too abrupt and not as clear as it should be ending. Still, credit must be given to the two ladies for creating a nearly flawless biopic that manages to pay tribute to both its subject and the decade it emulates masterfully. Come Oscar time, Mol, Turner, and Harron should be receiving nominations. Doubt it will happen, though there certainly are no three women more deserving of them. 9/10 [[Unless]] there's one [[gender]] that I've never been a fan of, it's the biopic. Always misleading, filled with false [[informations]], over-dramatized scenes, and trickery all around, biopics are almost never done right. Even in the hands of the truly talented directors like Martin Scorsese (The Aviator) and Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind), they often do a [[marvellous]] disservice to the people they are trying to [[caught]] on screen. Skeptiscism takes the place of hype with the majority of biopics that make their way to the big screen and the Notorious Bettie Page was no different. Some critics and moviegoers objected to Gretchen Mol given the role of Bettie Page, saying she was no longer a celebrity and didn't have the chops for the part. I never doubted Mol could handle the part since, but I never expected to as blown as away by her performance as I was upon just viewing the film hours ago. Mol delivers a knockout Oscar worthy performance as the iconic 1950's pin-up girl, who, after an early life of abuse (depicted subtlety and tastefully done, something few directors would probably do) inadvertently becomes one of the most talked about models of all time. The picture covers a lot of ground in its 90 minute running time yet despite no less than three subplots, there is still a feeling that there may be a small portion missing from the story. Director/co-writer Marry Harron and Guinevere Turner's [[unbelievable]] script is only marred by a too abrupt and not as clear as it should be ending. Still, credit must be given to the two ladies for creating a nearly flawless biopic that manages to pay tribute to both its subject and the decade it emulates masterfully. Come Oscar time, Mol, Turner, and Harron should be receiving nominations. Doubt it will happen, though there certainly are no three women more deserving of them. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, insipid role. The [[real]] [[problem]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I fell asleep in the theater watching this long, drawn out and exceptionally [[boring]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. I love Henry James books and Washington Square was no exception. I was very excited to see a new movie coming out, based on the book of that title. Jennifer Jason Lee is an exceptional actress and Ben Chaplin good enough to play the lead roles. Albert Finney is miscast and doesn't carry the role well. I wanted to shoot Maggie Smith....or rather her silly, insipid role. The [[genuine]] [[troubles]] and what's lacking in this latest version is a good script, music, and direction.

I fell asleep in the theater watching this long, drawn out and exceptionally [[dreary]] movie. There are more pauses in the dialog than a Pinter Play. In the book I felt a deep caring for Catherine Sloper and her life. The movie had just the opposite effect. I also disliked the twist where her aunt has a sexual attraction to Morris. Eeeeeeeek. YUK.

Watch it if you can't sleep, it's a definite snoozer. Don't watch it if you're depressed. You'll need Zoloft after this.

Sure, "The Heiress" was exceptional with Olivia Haviland and Montgomery Clift in the title roles. The actor who played her father was on the mark as the uncaring, cold father....still grieving for his dead wife and hating Catherine for it. The movie was not faithful to the book but neither is this one.

This movie was a box office flop. I have no doubts as to why. --------------------------------------------- Result 1809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Unlike [[many]] other [[films]], which are [[disturbing]] either by dint of their [[naked]] [[unpleasantness]] ([[Man]] Bites [[Dog]]) or their sheer violence (most Peckinpah [[films]]), Deliverance [[shocks]] by its plausibility. [[Certainly]], the [[buggery]] scene is pretty straightforward in its [[unpleasantness]], but the film's [[effect]] derives far more from its slow build-up and the [[tangible]] [[sense]] of isolation surrounding the four leads, both before and after everything starts to go [[wrong]]. The moment when the canoes pass under the child on the [[bridge]], who does not even [[acknowledge]] the men he had earlier played [[music]] with, let alone show any sign of human affection towards them, is among the most sinister in modern film. The tension increases steadily throughout the canoe trip, and perseveres even after the final credits - the ending makes the significance of the characters' ordeals horrifically real. The movie's plausibility is greatly aided by the playing of the leads, particularly Ned Beatty and Jon Voight as the victim and reluctant hero respectively. Burt Reynolds, too, has never been better. The film's cultural influence is demonstrable by the number of people who will understand a reference to 'banjo territory' - perhaps only Get Carter has done such an effective hatchet-job on a region's tourist industry. I can think of only a handful of movies which put me into such a serious depression after they had finished - the oppressive atmosphere of Se7en is the best comparison I can think of. Although so much of it is excellent of itself, Deliverance is a [[classic]] above all because there are no adequate points of comparison with it - it is unique. Unlike [[multiple]] other [[cinematography]], which are [[alarming]] either by dint of their [[nude]] [[antipathy]] ([[Males]] Bites [[Canine]]) or their sheer violence (most Peckinpah [[movie]]), Deliverance [[convulsions]] by its plausibility. [[Probably]], the [[homosexuality]] scene is pretty straightforward in its [[antipathy]], but the film's [[repercussions]] derives far more from its slow build-up and the [[corporeal]] [[feeling]] of isolation surrounding the four leads, both before and after everything starts to go [[misguided]]. The moment when the canoes pass under the child on the [[flyover]], who does not even [[recognising]] the men he had earlier played [[musician]] with, let alone show any sign of human affection towards them, is among the most sinister in modern film. The tension increases steadily throughout the canoe trip, and perseveres even after the final credits - the ending makes the significance of the characters' ordeals horrifically real. The movie's plausibility is greatly aided by the playing of the leads, particularly Ned Beatty and Jon Voight as the victim and reluctant hero respectively. Burt Reynolds, too, has never been better. The film's cultural influence is demonstrable by the number of people who will understand a reference to 'banjo territory' - perhaps only Get Carter has done such an effective hatchet-job on a region's tourist industry. I can think of only a handful of movies which put me into such a serious depression after they had finished - the oppressive atmosphere of Se7en is the best comparison I can think of. Although so much of it is excellent of itself, Deliverance is a [[conventional]] above all because there are no adequate points of comparison with it - it is unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 1810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] "The Mother" tells of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the quietly passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and daughter, the [[silent]] needs she attempts to soothe in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A [[somewhat]] antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The Mother" does an [[excellent]] job of dealing with uncomfortable issues realistically while [[avoiding]] gratuitous sensationalism. Will play best with more mature audiences, possibly women, who may better empathize with the central character, her needs and issues. (B+) "The Mother" tells of a recently widowed mid-60's mother of two adult children (Reid) who, on the heels of her husband's death, finds herself awakening from a life of sleepwalking as she has an affair with a young carpenter who is also her daughter's married lover. The film dwells on the quietly passive Mom, her tenuous relationship with her grown son and daughter, the [[gagging]] needs she attempts to soothe in bed with her young lover, and the convolutions arising therefrom. A [[rather]] antiseptic drama with rumbling psychodramatic undercurrents, "The Mother" does an [[glamorous]] job of dealing with uncomfortable issues realistically while [[stave]] gratuitous sensationalism. Will play best with more mature audiences, possibly women, who may better empathize with the central character, her needs and issues. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 1811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I tried to watch this movie in a military camp during an overseas mission, and let me tell you, you'll watch anything under those circumstances. Not this piece of sh*t though.

The first five minutes set the tone by weak porn-movie quality acting, weird out-of-the-blue plot twists and unbelievable situations and behavior. It gets worse after that. This movie does not have one single saving grace, and yet it is not bad in a way that would make it funny to watch. It's just horrible. I've seen quite many movies in my life and I'm not one of those snobby know-all critics, I mean I'll enjoy most movies to some extent even if they're bad. This one... man.

Steer _well_ clear of this one, my friend. --------------------------------------------- Result 1812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best of the genre. I saw it twice about 25yrs ago and have not had another opportunity to see it again since then. It rivals the Zatoichi series (also starring Katsu) in exciting swordplay. --------------------------------------------- Result 1813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] [[Excellent]] [[film]]. [[Suzy]] Kendall will hold your interest [[throughout]]. [[Has]] not been shown on American [[TV]] for a decade. One scene that has [[always]] stayed with me is the German cavalry [[gas]] [[attack]]. You will find others. [[Hope]] they [[soon]] put it on tape. [[Glamorous]] [[cinematography]]. [[Susie]] Kendall will hold your interest [[during]]. [[Had]] not been shown on American [[TELEVISION]] for a decade. One scene that has [[incessantly]] stayed with me is the German cavalry [[gasoline]] [[assault]]. You will find others. [[Hopes]] they [[expeditiously]] put it on tape. --------------------------------------------- Result 1814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Anything]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[sunk]] in the first few [[seconds]] with a [[disclaimer]] that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [[[rumor]]] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most [[sensational]] "[[mysteries]]."

[[Okay]]. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not [[much]] of an endorsement). What do we [[get]]?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is speaking from his own experience through these characters. But what's told is so cynical and ugly and muddled, we're left feeling guilty for witnessing a bunch of hooey that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the film has a curious madcap quality that I found more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the great "Citizen Kane" polishes off the relationship between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. In "The Cat's [[Meow]]" we're not ever sure of Davies motives for being with Hearst. As soon as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the love of Chaplain's life? Or is he just trying to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The film never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the production values. There's a [[glorious]] recreation of the [[yacht]] and period costumes. I [[got]] more out of looking at the construction of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a story that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is [[pure]] fiction. The disclaimers that [[frame]] the film only [[make]] it all the more tentative and unsatisfying.

The [[performers]] can't be [[faulted]], [[although]] Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only [[Joanna]] Lumley [[rises]] above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole [[enterprise]] rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. [[Something]] that might have been potentially interesting in this material is [[poured]] in the first few [[secs]] with a [[caveat]] that the events we're about to see can't ever be known and "This is the whisper [[[rumour]]] most often told" about one of Hollywood's most [[staggering]] "[[riddles]]."

[[Aight]]. So we're not getting anything new (and E!'s "Mysteries & Scandals" gives you a better foothold on the particular incident...and that's not [[very]] of an endorsement). What do we [[obtains]]?

We learn that Hollywood is a nest of viper's and decadents. No big news there. More interesting we learn what a washed up director is willing to do to regain his position of power in the entertainment industry and/or political establishment. It raises the question of whether Peter Bogdanovich is speaking from his own experience through these characters. But what's told is so cynical and ugly and muddled, we're left feeling guilty for witnessing a bunch of hooey that passes itself off as history.

The tone of the film has a curious madcap quality that I found more irritating than fun. We're not empathetic with anyone. And the great "Citizen Kane" polishes off the relationship between Davies and Hearts in a much more convincing way. In "The Cat's [[Meows]]" we're not ever sure of Davies motives for being with Hearst. As soon as we're told one thing, she's off doing the other.

And are we to believe that Davies was the love of Chaplain's life? Or is he just trying to cockold one of America's most powerful--and apparently moronic--citizens. The film never makes it clear.

What is convincing are the production values. There's a [[wondrous]] recreation of the [[sailing]] and period costumes. I [[ai]] more out of looking at the construction of some of the lapels on the men's jackets than following a story that libels many of the the most well-known personalities in Hollywood history. No one will remember that the screenplay is [[pur]] fiction. The disclaimers that [[framework]] the film only [[deliver]] it all the more tentative and unsatisfying.

The [[painters]] can't be [[failed]], [[albeit]] Meg Tilly goes way past parody here. Kirsten Dunst never disappoints. She gives the most sincere performance in a sea of scenery chewing. Only [[Joanne]] Lumley [[climbed]] above the material, but so much so that she seems to be distancing herself from the whole [[business]] rather than narrating it. One of her first lines is, "I'm not here!" And I'm sure she wishes she wasn't.

This isn't on par with Bogdanovich's trashy, so-bad-it's-good "At Long Last Love." It's perched on attempting something serious, but hesitates and stumbles chiefly because it's so full of bitterness towards "the beast" named Hollywood. This is "National Enquirer" filmmaking. And it not only soils the names of those who the film places on board the Oneida that weekend, but the audience gets pretty dirty as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 1815 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I think Dolph Lundgren had [[potential]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[moments]] in his [[career]] but he [[also]] made some [[poor]] [[choices]] and this is [[definitely]] one of them [[although]] [[made]] later in his [[career]]. The strange thing about Jill The Ripper (or Jill Rips...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[thought]] they were [[making]] a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be complex and intelligent when in fact it's nothing more than shallow, confusing and gratuitous. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and premise immediately make it a B-Movie Porn at very best.

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even though he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently enough considering the script and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one particularly stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely horrible performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and gratuitous sex games including a downright ridiculously hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 I think Dolph Lundgren had [[prospective]] at being a big action star a la Schwarzenegger, Stallone, and even Van Damme to certain degree. He had some big [[times]] in his [[quarries]] but he [[moreover]] made some [[pauper]] [[chooses]] and this is [[indubitably]] one of them [[while]] [[accomplished]] later in his [[carrera]]. The strange thing about Jill The Ripper (or Jill Rips...or Tied Up) is that I honestly think they seriously [[ideas]] they were [[doing]] a provocative and serious thriller? It shows in the way that they describe it on IMDb, on the DVD case, in the commentaries, and this film is not serious. To call it campy would be a huge understatement. The film tries to be complex and intelligent when in fact it's nothing more than shallow, confusing and gratuitous. On top of that they put Lundgren, who is known for action films, in an attempt at a serious role which makes it even more campy because his range as an actor is pretty limited. The entire film revolves around the kinky sex world and yet they attempt at making it a serious thriller? Just the plot and premise immediately make it a B-Movie Porn at very best.

Dolph Lundgren plays disgraced former cop and raging alcoholic Matt Sorenson who decides to play Detective when his brother is murdered. I mean put aside the numerous plot holes that has Lundgren getting free roam to investigate crime scenes, and witnesses and everything else even though he's not a cop anymore and you still have a pretty strange and rather lack luster performance from Lundgren. Danielle Brett is Lundgren's eventual love interest and his brother's widow. Brett plays her role decently enough considering the script and campy story. The supporting cast is huge and no one particularly stands out in their performances unless it's on the negative side such as the absolutely horrible performance by Victor Pedtrchenko who seems to go by several different names in the film, boasts an awful accent and is a really awful villain.

I honestly tried to get into the mystery and film and watch closely but there wasn't any reason to because it was all a jumble of ridiculous plot and gratuitous sex games including a downright ridiculously hilarious scene where Lundgren goes under cover and is strung upside down nearly naked. To explain how classy and well done this movie is (sarcasm...sarcasm) the back of the DVD I picked up (it was really cheap) has Lundgren's character listed as "Murray Wilson" (not the name of his character in the film.) While somehow Lundgren manages to be usually watchable the film falls flat on it's face trying to be serious. Considering director Anthony Hickox is infamous for really B-Movie Horror flicks it only makes sense even though I think he was really trying to be serious. Hard core cult Lundgren fans will have to see it...no one else should...certainly for any sort of mystery or suspense. 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] First off, I would just like to [[say]] what a big fan of Bette Midler's I am. Stella is a very good movie with a [[wonderful]] [[cast]] (Bette Midler, [[John]] Goodman, Trini Alvarado, [[Stephen]] Collins, [[Marsha]] Mason) This is one of my favorite films of all time. It [[deals]] with a [[mother]] [[raising]] a [[child]] on her own, she goes through a [[lot]] of [[things]] that are out of her [[way]] to bring up her daughter Jenny [[played]] [[wonderfully]] by Trini Alvarado. This movie is very [[good]] and I [[suggest]] that you pick up a [[copy]] to watch it. Roger Ebert [[gave]] is 3 1/2 [[stars]]! And it [[deserved]] 4! [[WONDERFUL]]! I [[give]] it 4 out of 4! First off, I would just like to [[says]] what a big fan of Bette Midler's I am. Stella is a very good movie with a [[great]] [[casting]] (Bette Midler, [[Jon]] Goodman, Trini Alvarado, [[Stefan]] Collins, [[Marcia]] Mason) This is one of my favorite films of all time. It [[deal]] with a [[mamas]] [[raise]] a [[kids]] on her own, she goes through a [[batch]] of [[items]] that are out of her [[manner]] to bring up her daughter Jenny [[served]] [[staggeringly]] by Trini Alvarado. This movie is very [[alright]] and I [[proposes]] that you pick up a [[copier]] to watch it. Roger Ebert [[supplied]] is 3 1/2 [[celebrity]]! And it [[merit]] 4! [[RAVISHING]]! I [[lend]] it 4 out of 4! --------------------------------------------- Result 1817 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[movie]] was [[made]] for fans of Dani (and Cradle of [[Filth]]). I am not one of them. I [[think]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metal]] bandwagon ([[still]], I'm [[generally]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[case]] to [[pay]] for it, I convinced myself, that the less authentic something is the more it [[tries]] to be [[convincing]]. Thus I assumed I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself [[splatter]] with a sinister [[background]]. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[AWFUL]] [[camera]] work and [[DISGUSTING]] quality. And that was then (2002), that it [[looked]] like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects [[annoyed]] me. My disliking evolved. I [[noticed]] how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" [[height]]) looked in his platform [[shoes]] ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head [[apparently]] had no [[skull]].) I also found that this movie may have no [[sense]]. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOT]] make [[sense]]. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[bad]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the [[worst]] ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. This [[cinematography]] was [[brought]] for fans of Dani (and Cradle of [[Dirt]]). I am not one of them. I [[ideas]] he's just an imitator riding the black [[metals]] bandwagon ([[nevertheless]], I'm [[routinely]] not a fan of black metal). But as I was carrying this DVD [[example]] to [[salary]] for it, I convinced myself, that the less authentic something is the more it [[seeks]] to be [[compelling]]. Thus I assumed I'm in for a roller-coaster ride of rubber gore and do-it-yourself [[splatters]] with a sinister [[context]]. Now, that is what I do like.

I got home and popped it in. My patience lasted 15 minutes. [[HEINOUS]] [[cameras]] work and [[OUTRAGEOUS]] quality. And that was then (2002), that it [[seemed]] like it was shot using a Hi8 camcorder. I left it on the shelf. Maybe a nice evening with beer and Bmovies would create a nice setting for this... picture.

After a couple of months I got back to it (in mentioned surroundings) and saw half. Then not only the mentioned aspects [[upset]] me. My disliking evolved. I [[remarked]] how funny Dani (1,65m; 5'5" [[pinnacle]]) looked in his platform [[shoe]] ripping a head of a mugger apart. (Yes, ripping. His head [[seemingly]] had no [[scalp]].) I also found that this movie may have no [[feeling]]. Still, I haven't finished it yet, so I wasn't positive.

After a couple more tries I finally managed to finish this flick - a couple of months back... (Yes, it took me 5,5 years.) So - Dani in fact was funny as Satan/Manson/super-evil-man's HELPER and the movie DID [[NOPE]] make [[feeling]]. See our bad person employs Dani to do bad things. He delivers. Why? Well I guess he's just very, very [[amiss]]. As a matter of fact they both are and that is pretty much it.

We have a couple of short stories joined by Dani's character. My favourite was about a guy, who STEALS SOMEONE'S LEG, because he wants to use it as his own. Yeah, exactly.

The acting's ROCK BOTTOM. The CGI is the [[hardest]] ever. I mean Stinger beats it (and, boy, is Stinger's CGI baaaaad). The story has no sense. And the quality is... Let's just say it is not satisfying. The only thing that might keep you watching is the unmotivated violence and gore. Blood and guts are made pretty well. Why, you can actually see that the movie originated there and then moved on. (Example - Dani 'The Man' Filth takes a stuffed cat - fake as can be - and guts it... and then eats what fell out. Why? We never know. We do know, however, that this cat must have been on illegal substances, as his heart is almost half his size.)

You might think, after my comment that this movie is so bad it's good, but it's just bad. Cradle of Filth fans can add 3 points. I added one for gore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Im a huge M Lillard fan that's why I ended up [[watching]] this movie. Honestly I doubt that if he wasn't in the movie i would of enjoyed it as much or even watched it but once I did watch it realize the [[story]] was pretty [[decent]]. A [[bad]] [[ending]] I must say but I did see it [[coming]]. It's a low [[budget]] movie and some of the actors weren't really good but all in all I rated this movie 7/10.

The [[suspense]] of wondering what Lillard was actually up to was what really keeped me interested in this movie.

Its a [[good]] rental!

7/10 Im a huge M Lillard fan that's why I ended up [[staring]] this movie. Honestly I doubt that if he wasn't in the movie i would of enjoyed it as much or even watched it but once I did watch it realize the [[conte]] was pretty [[presentable]]. A [[unhealthy]] [[terminated]] I must say but I did see it [[incoming]]. It's a low [[budgets]] movie and some of the actors weren't really good but all in all I rated this movie 7/10.

The [[sufferance]] of wondering what Lillard was actually up to was what really keeped me interested in this movie.

Its a [[alright]] rental!

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[antiques]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and tells his ambitious companion and specialist in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jamie]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and [[ties]] him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a wealthy and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[stupid]] acquaintance Piece (Mark Boone Junior), who comes with his retarded girlfriend that believes she is from Mars, to compose the backup team. However, Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues Jack, Jamie and Piece.

The low [[budget]] "Spanish [[Judges]]" is a movie with a reasonable [[screenplay]] with an [[awful]] [[conclusion]] that [[wastes]] a good cast. Valeria Golino is astonishingly beautiful but together with the good actor Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[save]] the [[stupid]] [[story]]. Further, the scenes that are supposed to be funny unfortunately do not work, and actually they are silly and not funny. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Tudo Por Dinheiro" ("All For Money") The stranger Jack (Matthew Lillard) arrives in the studio of the crook collector of [[masterpieces]] Max (Vincent D'Onofrio) and tells his ambitious companion and specialist in poisons Jamie (Valeria Golino) that he is Jack's brother. [[Jaime]] does not buy his story, dominates Jack and [[relations]] him up to a chair. When Max arrives, Jack proposes US$ 100,000.00 for each one to protect him in a negotiation of the antiques "Spanish Judges" with a wealthy and dangerous collector. Max invites his [[imbecile]] acquaintance Piece (Mark Boone Junior), who comes with his retarded girlfriend that believes she is from Mars, to compose the backup team. However, Jack double-crosses the collector and then he intrigues Jack, Jamie and Piece.

The low [[budgets]] "Spanish [[Richter]]" is a movie with a reasonable [[script]] with an [[spooky]] [[conclusions]] that [[debris]] a good cast. Valeria Golino is astonishingly beautiful but together with the good actor Vincent D'Onofrio, they are not able to [[economize]] the [[silly]] [[tale]]. Further, the scenes that are supposed to be funny unfortunately do not work, and actually they are silly and not funny. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Tudo Por Dinheiro" ("All For Money") --------------------------------------------- Result 1820 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' career [[came]] to my attention through the 'Night of [[Bad]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician (undoubtedly one of the [[best]] on our contemporary pop scene, even the Dutch agree on that) [[tried]] to be an [[actor]]. Whether he should have made the attempt or not cannot be judged.

In '[[Intensive]] Care' he's quite likable, but he seems to be uncomfortable with the flick in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than mediocre story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a tedious menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the least appealing. The couple from Amsterdamned could have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not work. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny greasy pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

This infamous ending to Koen Wauters' career [[became]] to my attention through the 'Night of [[Mala]] Taste'. Judging by the comment index i wasn't the first and i am not to be the last person in Western Europe to learn that this musician (undoubtedly one of the [[finest]] on our contemporary pop scene, even the Dutch agree on that) [[strived]] to be an [[protagonist]]. Whether he should have made the attempt or not cannot be judged.

In '[[Intense]] Care' he's quite likable, but he seems to be uncomfortable with the flick in which he is participating. No one can blame him. It deserves its ranking in Verheyen's Hall of Fame by all means & standards. The story of the Murderous Maniac Who is Supposed To Have Died In An Accident But Is Alive And Wrathful has been told dozens of times before, and even without original twists a director can deliver a more than mediocre story through innovative settings and cinematography.

IC contents itself with a hospital wing and a couple of middle class houses. The pace is dull. The tension looses the last bit of its credibility to the musical score, for every appearance of the murderer is accompagnied by a tedious menacing melody, followed by orchestral outbursts during the murders, which or largely suggested and in any case as bloodless as a small budget can make them. The sex scene is gratuitous but not in the least appealing. The couple from Amsterdamned could have made it work, though. While dealing with the couple subject : the whole subplot between Wauters and the girl does not work. A more effective emotional connection could have been established on screen if they had just been fellow victims-to-be, who loosen their nerves halfway through physical intercourse. I will not even grant the other cast members the dignity of a mentioning, for they should all have been chopped up into tiny greasy pieces. As a matter of fact, most of them do. The ones i recall where obvious for the genre : a pretty nurse and two cops.

Hence, in a slasher, the cavalry only comes in time to need rescue itself. The (anti-) hero has to take out the villain, mostly through clever thinking, for former red berets don't often get parts in these films; they might overcome the illusion of invincibility that surrounds the killer. Translated to the events, Wauters kills the doctor and saves the dame in distress.

No people, i am not finished. This is not how the story goes. Wauters makes his heroic attempt but gets beaten up with a fury that comes close to "A Clockwork Orange", so it is up to the girl to pick up the driller killer act and pierce through the doctors brains. Though this method ensures the killer's death more than the usual rounds of 9mm bullets, the doctor survives in order to enable IC to reach the 80 min mark.

I should have made my point by now. Intensive Care is a bad movie, which can only be enjoyed by Bad Taste lovers, who can verify Verheyen's catchy statements and make some up for themselves and that way try to sit through it. For example, the (unintended) parody value of the doctor's clown mask (Halloween) and the final confrontation in the park (the chase at the end of Friday the 13th).

However, let me conclude by giving an overview by a few measly elements which give IC a little credit. George Kennedy is not one of them. All he has to do is endure a horrible monologue by a fellow doctor/French actor and look horrified when they let him go down in flames in order to tag his big name on a stand-in. He could have played his Naked Gun part again, to end up as beef, but with a longer screen time. The finale may be one of them. I had never seen a maniac being brought down by launching fireworks into his guts in order to crush him against a flexible fence. It is good for a laugh.

Name one good truly point about Intensive Care ... Koen Wauters learned his lesson and devoted himself entirely to his musical career. It makes me wonder how many editions of the Paris-Dakar race he has to abort before coming to his senses.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I [[saw]] this [[film]] in the [[worst]] possible circumstance. I'd already missed 15 minutes when I woke up to it on an international flight between Sydney and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I thought maybe it was a movie of the week, but quickly became [[riveted]] by the performance of the lead actress playing a young woman who's child had been kidnapped. The premise started taking twist and turns I didn't see coming and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight guide to figure out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[discovering]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won Best Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if Secret Sunshine is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to discover more. I [[observed]] this [[cinematographic]] in the [[lousiest]] possible circumstance. I'd already missed 15 minutes when I woke up to it on an international flight between Sydney and Seoul. I didn't know what I was watching, I thought maybe it was a movie of the week, but quickly became [[mesmerised]] by the performance of the lead actress playing a young woman who's child had been kidnapped. The premise started taking twist and turns I didn't see coming and by the end credits I was scrambling through the the in-flight guide to figure out what I had just watched. Turns out I was belatedly [[detects]] Do-yeon Jeon who'd won Best Actress at Cannes for the role. I don't know if Secret Sunshine is typical of Korean cinema but I'm off to the DVD store to discover more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1822 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The Good [[Earth]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The movie is based on the [[novel]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[hated]] that they decided to cast Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[laughable]] as the farmer's [[father]]. He has such a [[heavy]] American [[accent]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[bear]] listening to him speak.

It is a [[shame]] that Hollywood could not get past their racist [[beliefs]] to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. The Good [[Tierra]] follows the life a slave girl and a poor farmer in China. The movie is based on the [[newer]] by Pearl S. Buck. The story is great, but I [[loathe]] that they decided to cast Anglos in the lead roles. Walter Connolly is [[ludicrous]] as the farmer's [[pere]]. He has such a [[weighty]] American [[focus]], as do most of the lead actors, that I could not [[xiong]] listening to him speak.

It is a [[pity]] that Hollywood could not get past their racist [[belief]] to cast Asians in the lead roles. To take Anglos and make them look like Chinese is akin to Anglos putting shoe polish on their faces to play African-Americans. --------------------------------------------- Result 1823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is my [[second]] [[time]] through for A Perfect Spy. I [[watched]] it 2 or 3 years ago and [[liked]] it. I like it [[still]]. It's natural that it gets compared to the beeb's other big [[Le]] Carre' [[series]], Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Tinker Tailor focuses on the "[[game]]" spies play; Perfect [[Spy]] [[gives]] us the other [[axis]] - what kind of [[person]] a spy is. There are a number of [[themes]] that these movies [[share]], along with others in the [[genre]].

Ambiguity - moral, sexual, interpersonal - which creates a multidimensional space of [[true]] [[vs]]. [[false]], inside vs. [[outside]], [[love]] vs. [[responsibility]]. In a [[way]], these characters are happiest when they are being treated the most shabbily by those they love and respect - "backstabbed" in its [[various]] nuances.

The [[theme]] of fathers and father-figures is [[also]] [[important]]. One of the most [[intriguing]] characters in A Perfect [[Spy]] is Rick, the [[main]] character Magnus' [[perhaps]] ersatz father. [[Throughout]] the story he betrays and is betrayed. A rogue who always manages to [[climb]] back up the ladder when he's been toppled, who seems impervious to what others think of him, asks Magnus each time they meet, "Do you love your old man?" and never, "Do you love me?" Maybe it says this somewhere else, but A Perfect Spy is a love story.

Another theme is that of malignancy. The nature of the business is to turn others - turn them against their government, against their friends and associates, turn them against their values and beliefs. In each of the Le Carre' movies I have seen, The Spy who Came in From the Cold, Looking Glass War, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Smiley's People, and A Perfect Spy, turning and being turned is the foundation of the tragedy.

Finally, not so much a theme as an artistic touch - in each of these films there is usually only a single gun shot, or perhaps two shots bookending the story. Violence, torture, cruelty are always just beneath the surface. We see their results not as streams of blood or dank prison cells but in the the objects Le Carre''s characters cling to as they are ineluctably sucked down into the morass.

If you haven't seen the films above, and you enjoy A Perfect Spy, you are in for a treat. I'd also recommend The Sandbagger series (Yorkshire TV), the 2nd and 3rd seasons of which begin to reach the level of this kind of complexity. The IPCRESS File and Burial in Berlin are nice, though light weight. For political intrigue try A Very British Coup, House of Cards and Yes, Minister/Yes, Prime Minister.

If only a brit would set his hand to making The Three Kingdoms - there would be a film with intrigue and complexity. This is my [[seconds]] [[period]] through for A Perfect Spy. I [[observed]] it 2 or 3 years ago and [[wished]] it. I like it [[however]]. It's natural that it gets compared to the beeb's other big [[Lai]] Carre' [[serials]], Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Tinker Tailor focuses on the "[[gaming]]" spies play; Perfect [[Spying]] [[offers]] us the other [[shaft]] - what kind of [[someone]] a spy is. There are a number of [[item]] that these movies [[exchanges]], along with others in the [[gender]].

Ambiguity - moral, sexual, interpersonal - which creates a multidimensional space of [[truthful]] [[v]]. [[erroneous]], inside vs. [[exterior]], [[likes]] vs. [[responsability]]. In a [[routes]], these characters are happiest when they are being treated the most shabbily by those they love and respect - "backstabbed" in its [[multiple]] nuances.

The [[subjects]] of fathers and father-figures is [[moreover]] [[sizable]]. One of the most [[enthralling]] characters in A Perfect [[Hyena]] is Rick, the [[principal]] character Magnus' [[presumably]] ersatz father. [[Around]] the story he betrays and is betrayed. A rogue who always manages to [[rises]] back up the ladder when he's been toppled, who seems impervious to what others think of him, asks Magnus each time they meet, "Do you love your old man?" and never, "Do you love me?" Maybe it says this somewhere else, but A Perfect Spy is a love story.

Another theme is that of malignancy. The nature of the business is to turn others - turn them against their government, against their friends and associates, turn them against their values and beliefs. In each of the Le Carre' movies I have seen, The Spy who Came in From the Cold, Looking Glass War, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Smiley's People, and A Perfect Spy, turning and being turned is the foundation of the tragedy.

Finally, not so much a theme as an artistic touch - in each of these films there is usually only a single gun shot, or perhaps two shots bookending the story. Violence, torture, cruelty are always just beneath the surface. We see their results not as streams of blood or dank prison cells but in the the objects Le Carre''s characters cling to as they are ineluctably sucked down into the morass.

If you haven't seen the films above, and you enjoy A Perfect Spy, you are in for a treat. I'd also recommend The Sandbagger series (Yorkshire TV), the 2nd and 3rd seasons of which begin to reach the level of this kind of complexity. The IPCRESS File and Burial in Berlin are nice, though light weight. For political intrigue try A Very British Coup, House of Cards and Yes, Minister/Yes, Prime Minister.

If only a brit would set his hand to making The Three Kingdoms - there would be a film with intrigue and complexity. --------------------------------------------- Result 1824 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Far from [[providing]] the caffeine kick you'd [[expect]] from a [[film]] that [[shares]] its [[name]] with the most energy-boosting of warm [[beverages]], Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[revenge]] tale. [[Indeed]], if the [[movie]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few undesirable dregs and [[lacking]] in a lingering aftertaste. Sporadically it hits the spot, but otherwise it isn't the [[hot]] action-drama it hopes to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[nurse]] who takes the law into her own hands and delivers hard justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that hooked her younger sister into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political commentary on the plight of urban black youths in America is prominent in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political corruption and white establishment racism that profits and acts as a parasite off the targeted Afro-American minorities. Sadly, the timely messages are [[undermined]] by the film's poor quality and lack of [[focus]]. Coffy's ideas are important, it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the plus points of Coffy is the [[presence]] of Blaxploitation icon Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action heroine as she [[shotguns]] down the [[scum]] in her often spectacular acts of vigilante violence (how do you deal with a house full of hoods? Drive the [[car]] right through the front [[door]]!). It's just a [[shame]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[wasting]] time squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[possible]]. The low budget can't have helped, but neither does the [[fact]] that for a Blaxploitation flick, Coffy lacks groove. Just as the issues are undermined by the lack of quality, consequently the entertainment and excitement are also skewered by moments of dullness and misdirection.

The total result is workmanlike and wooden. We get a hip heroine but not a hip movie. It's a shame as Coffy has its moments and should rightly be regarded as a key film in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. Far from [[supplying]] the caffeine kick you'd [[awaited]] from a [[kino]] that [[exchanges]] its [[designation]] with the most energy-boosting of warm [[drinks]], Coffy clunks about and never really rises above being just a ropey [[retribution]] tale. [[Actually]], if the [[kino]] was a cup of coffee, it'd be rather weak and watery, littered with a few undesirable dregs and [[missing]] in a lingering aftertaste. Sporadically it hits the spot, but otherwise it isn't the [[hottest]] action-drama it hopes to be.

Plot-wise, Coffy is a [[nursing]] who takes the law into her own hands and delivers hard justice to the drug-pushing, lady-pimpin', mob-suckers that hooked her younger sister into a depraved, sick state. Socio-political commentary on the plight of urban black youths in America is prominent in Coffy, and it makes for some thought-provoking stuff as Coffy crusades against the political corruption and white establishment racism that profits and acts as a parasite off the targeted Afro-American minorities. Sadly, the timely messages are [[inhibited]] by the film's poor quality and lack of [[concentrations]]. Coffy's ideas are important, it's just that they are not well-aimed.

One of the plus points of Coffy is the [[participation]] of Blaxploitation icon Pam Grier. Grier goes at her role with gusto and makes for an appealing action heroine as she [[revolvers]] down the [[froth]] in her often spectacular acts of vigilante violence (how do you deal with a house full of hoods? Drive the [[vehicular]] right through the front [[porte]]!). It's just a [[embarrass]] that the storyline wavers on occasions, [[losing]] time squeezing as much sexual exploitation as [[probable]]. The low budget can't have helped, but neither does the [[facto]] that for a Blaxploitation flick, Coffy lacks groove. Just as the issues are undermined by the lack of quality, consequently the entertainment and excitement are also skewered by moments of dullness and misdirection.

The total result is workmanlike and wooden. We get a hip heroine but not a hip movie. It's a shame as Coffy has its moments and should rightly be regarded as a key film in the Blaxploitation craze; it just never ascends above being an average, lukewarm number. --------------------------------------------- Result 1825 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Straight to the point: "The Groove Tube" is one of the most unfunny, unclever and downright [[horrible]] films ever [[made]]. This "[[comedy]]" is so [[void]] of [[anything]] remotely resembling a [[trace]] of wit that it's [[almost]] incomprehensible that it was [[even]] [[made]]. I said almost because there are [[fans]] of everything after all.

This film isn't [[even]] "[[good]]" bad or "[[enjoyable]]" bad. To put this movie on the same level of entertainment as "[[Plan]] 9" or "Robot Monster" [[would]] be a crime to those films. Films like that you can actually watch and get a kick out of. But this film is SO bad, SO poorly made, acted and scripted and SO incredible [[stale]], that there just isn't even a trace of "camp" or "schlock" to be found.

Even though this was made before Saturday Night Live premiered, comparisons were probably inevitable. I'm not a big fan of SNL, but this film is worse than the worst SNL skit you can find. And man, that's BAD. Just to keep the men viewers from leaving, Shapiro throws in a pair of breasts every so often, but poorly-filmed breasts from 1974 aren't going to excite anyone these days. Truthfully this film is so poorly made and is such a sleep-inducing excursion, I doubt if they excited anyone in 1974 either.

A man named Ken Shapiro made this film. I swear to God, any ten-year old with a video camera could have made something funnier and more clever. It's just downright unreal - this is truly an [[unbelievable]] film. The "jokes" and "gags" are so infantile that even little boys who like to sneak dad's porno mags out at night won't laugh.

I will give this film one thing - the very last sequence, the "dancing man" sequence, where a guy (Shapiro) on the streets of NYC dances to a tune, is easily the best [[thing]] in this horrible film. Not that the "dancing man" sequence is that great either - it definitely has its moments of not being clever as Shapiro desperately tries to fill in the time for the entire song - but it actually was somewhat watchable. The part of this sequence where the cop starts dancing with the man is the one sole trace of cleverness in the entire film. No wonder Shapiro put this sequence last - again, while not so great itself, it easily beats anything else in this "film."

Otherwise, this film is such a complete piece of crap, it's unfathomable as to how an actual human being can be so downright cleverless. The name of this film should have been "Ken Shapiro's Craparama." It's amazing that this was made, but many truly talented filmmakers can't get in. However, I will say that I bet the geniuses at NYU would love this movie. Total garbage. Straight to the point: "The Groove Tube" is one of the most unfunny, unclever and downright [[scary]] films ever [[accomplished]]. This "[[humour]]" is so [[vacuum]] of [[something]] remotely resembling a [[tracing]] of wit that it's [[hardly]] incomprehensible that it was [[yet]] [[accomplished]]. I said almost because there are [[enthusiasts]] of everything after all.

This film isn't [[yet]] "[[buena]]" bad or "[[pleasurable]]" bad. To put this movie on the same level of entertainment as "[[Scheme]] 9" or "Robot Monster" [[could]] be a crime to those films. Films like that you can actually watch and get a kick out of. But this film is SO bad, SO poorly made, acted and scripted and SO incredible [[rancid]], that there just isn't even a trace of "camp" or "schlock" to be found.

Even though this was made before Saturday Night Live premiered, comparisons were probably inevitable. I'm not a big fan of SNL, but this film is worse than the worst SNL skit you can find. And man, that's BAD. Just to keep the men viewers from leaving, Shapiro throws in a pair of breasts every so often, but poorly-filmed breasts from 1974 aren't going to excite anyone these days. Truthfully this film is so poorly made and is such a sleep-inducing excursion, I doubt if they excited anyone in 1974 either.

A man named Ken Shapiro made this film. I swear to God, any ten-year old with a video camera could have made something funnier and more clever. It's just downright unreal - this is truly an [[awesome]] film. The "jokes" and "gags" are so infantile that even little boys who like to sneak dad's porno mags out at night won't laugh.

I will give this film one thing - the very last sequence, the "dancing man" sequence, where a guy (Shapiro) on the streets of NYC dances to a tune, is easily the best [[stuff]] in this horrible film. Not that the "dancing man" sequence is that great either - it definitely has its moments of not being clever as Shapiro desperately tries to fill in the time for the entire song - but it actually was somewhat watchable. The part of this sequence where the cop starts dancing with the man is the one sole trace of cleverness in the entire film. No wonder Shapiro put this sequence last - again, while not so great itself, it easily beats anything else in this "film."

Otherwise, this film is such a complete piece of crap, it's unfathomable as to how an actual human being can be so downright cleverless. The name of this film should have been "Ken Shapiro's Craparama." It's amazing that this was made, but many truly talented filmmakers can't get in. However, I will say that I bet the geniuses at NYU would love this movie. Total garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 1826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] Yet again, early morning television proves an [[invaluable]] resource for films that I [[otherwise]] would never have been able to track down. At four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin recording 'The Informer (1935),' my fourth film from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[excellent]] one at that. Set during the Irish Civil War in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley Nichols from the novel of the same name by Liam O'Flaherty. Though he was born in the United States, and is most renowned for his "Americana" pictures, both of Ford's parents were Irish, which explains the director's decision to direct the film. Victor McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who informs on an old friend, Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to claim the £20 reward for his girlfriend, Katie (Margot Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his attempted arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were members, begins to investigate the traitor behind the incident, every clue bringing them closer and closer to the real culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with guilt for his friend's untimely death, and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that rivals Don Birnam in 'The Lost Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious volumes of alcohol, trapped in a vicious little circle of depression, his extravagant spending captures the attention of the investigating IRA members. For the one time in his life, Gypo finds himself surrounded by admirers (including an amusing J.M. Kerrigan), who enthusiastically clap him on the back and christen him "King Gypo" for his physical might. However, it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the man, and are simple showing him attention to exploit him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of irony, the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. Yet again, early morning television proves an [[inestimable]] resource for films that I [[alternately]] would never have been able to track down. At four o'clock in the morning, I stumbled out of bed to begin recording 'The Informer (1935),' my fourth film from prolific American director John Ford, and an [[sumptuous]] one at that. Set during the Irish Civil War in 1922, the screenplay was adapted by Dudley Nichols from the novel of the same name by Liam O'Flaherty. Though he was born in the United States, and is most renowned for his "Americana" pictures, both of Ford's parents were Irish, which explains the director's decision to direct the film. Victor McLaglen plays Gypo Nolan, a brutish but well-meaning ruffian who informs on an old friend, Frankie McPhillip (Wallace Ford), in order to claim the £20 reward for his girlfriend, Katie (Margot Grahame). When Frankie is killed during his attempted arrest, the Irish Republican Army, of which both Frankie and Gypo were members, begins to investigate the traitor behind the incident, every clue bringing them closer and closer to the real culprit.

Meanwhile, Gypo is plagued with guilt for his friend's untimely death, and descends into a bout of heavy-drinking that rivals Don Birnam in 'The Lost Weekend (1945)' in its excessiveness. As Gypo drowns his sorrows in copious volumes of alcohol, trapped in a vicious little circle of depression, his extravagant spending captures the attention of the investigating IRA members. For the one time in his life, Gypo finds himself surrounded by admirers (including an amusing J.M. Kerrigan), who enthusiastically clap him on the back and christen him "King Gypo" for his physical might. However, it's obvious that these people feel no affection for the man, and are simple showing him attention to exploit him for money. The additional £20 brought by Frankie's death could never buy Gypo an assembly of friends – indeed, in a bitter twist of irony, the money was only made possible by the betrayal and loss of one of his only good companions. A relatively simple fellow, Gypo could not possibly have fully considered the consequences of his actions, and is eventually offered forgiveness on account of his "not knowing what he was doing," but his foolishness must not go unpunished.

Criticism is occasionally levelled at Ford's film for its allegedly propagandistic support of a "terrorist" organisation. Though this stance obviously depends on one's personal views {I certainly don't know enough Irish history to pass judgement}, there's no doubt that the film portrays the Irish Republican Army as selfless, dedicated and impartial, a proud piece of Irish patriotism if I ever saw it. However, the main theme of the story is that of betrayal; driven by intense poverty, one ordinary man betrays the confidence of his good friend, and comes to deeply regret his actions. The tormented Gypo is played mainly for pity, and Victor McLaglen gives a powerful performance that betrays a lifetime of unsatisfying existence, culminating in one terrible decision that condemns him to an uneasy death. 'The Informer' was John Ford's first major Oscar success, winning a total of four awards (from six nominations), including Best Actor for McLaglen {who snatched the statue from the three-way favourites of 'Mutiny on the Bounty (1935)'}, Best Director and Best Screenplay for Dudley Nichols {who declined the award due to Union disagreements}. --------------------------------------------- Result 1827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Oh what a [[condescending]] movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this movie [[tries]] to be a deep [[social]] commentary on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The [[plot]] is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative [[plot]] contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned baby left in the weeds, a gang of thugs intimidating a lawyer, a guy flying through the night sky over the city, a kid at summer camp.

And through all these events, the one constant is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the dialogue, as characters compare notes on their life experiences. One character tells another: "When you sit on the edge of that thing (the Grand Canyon), you realize what a joke we people are; ... those rocks are laughing at me, I could tell, me and my worries; it's real humorous to that Grand Canyon".

And another character pontificates about the meaning of it all: "There's a gulf in this country, an ever widening abyss between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this big hole has opened up in the ground, as big as the ... Grand Canyon, and what's come pouring out ... is an eruption of rage, and the rage creates violence ...".

Aside from the horribly unnatural and forced dialogue, aside from the shallow, smarmy characters, aside from the dumb plot, the story's pace is agonizingly slow. Acting is uninspired and perfunctory. The film's tone is smug and self-satisfied, in the script's contempt for viewers.

This was a film project approved by Hollywood suits who fancy themselves as omnipotent gurus, looking down from on high. They think their film will be a startling revelation to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, eager to learn about the real meaning of American social change. Oh what a [[patronising]] movie! Set in Los Angeles, the center of the universe from the POV of Hollywood filmmakers, this movie [[endeavours]] to be a deep [[sociable]] commentary on contemporary American angst.

Stereotyped, smarmy characters of widely varying socio-economic backgrounds cross paths in their everyday, humdrum lives. The [[intrigue]] is disjointed and desultory. Numerous unimaginative [[intrigue]] contrivances keep the film going, like: a drive-by shooting, an abandoned baby left in the weeds, a gang of thugs intimidating a lawyer, a guy flying through the night sky over the city, a kid at summer camp.

And through all these events, the one constant is the generous helping of sociological "insights" imparted through the dialogue, as characters compare notes on their life experiences. One character tells another: "When you sit on the edge of that thing (the Grand Canyon), you realize what a joke we people are; ... those rocks are laughing at me, I could tell, me and my worries; it's real humorous to that Grand Canyon".

And another character pontificates about the meaning of it all: "There's a gulf in this country, an ever widening abyss between the people who have stuff and the people who don't have ... it's like this big hole has opened up in the ground, as big as the ... Grand Canyon, and what's come pouring out ... is an eruption of rage, and the rage creates violence ...".

Aside from the horribly unnatural and forced dialogue, aside from the shallow, smarmy characters, aside from the dumb plot, the story's pace is agonizingly slow. Acting is uninspired and perfunctory. The film's tone is smug and self-satisfied, in the script's contempt for viewers.

This was a film project approved by Hollywood suits who fancy themselves as omnipotent gurus, looking down from on high. They think their film will be a startling revelation to us lowly, unknowing movie goers, eager to learn about the real meaning of American social change. --------------------------------------------- Result 1828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into laughter at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its best it's so [[good]]. This is one dated movie. It's also a [[classic]], if a tarnished one. I'm not inclined to laugh at people anyway, on principle, and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The Informer to my mind is a little like giggling at an idiot savant when he dribbles his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his game he is also a true savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and yet it boasts splendid photography, some fine acting, a wonderful score and a good, decent simple story. In the end, which I won't give away, politics, religion and psychology come together, in a church, in such a way as to make the scene seem corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the Irish) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that way, they do say things like that. Not everyone is hip, and it may not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people today so much superior to those of seventy or eighty years ago? And in what way? I don't think so. We're just different. Now go watch the movie. To watch this film from start to finish without bursting into laughter at some point requires almost an act of faith, as one has to keep saying to oneself, "it's old", "it's a classic", "be kind", not because the movie is so bad, but because at its best it's so [[buena]]. This is one dated movie. It's also a [[typical]], if a tarnished one. I'm not inclined to laugh at people anyway, on principle, and I get more than a little irritated when others do so. To make fun of The Informer to my mind is a little like giggling at an idiot savant when he dribbles his orange juice all over the tablecloth. Yes, one says to oneself, he is an idiot, and yet when he's on top of his game he is also a true savant. The same is true for The Informer, which is on occasion very dreadful indeed, and yet it boasts splendid photography, some fine acting, a wonderful score and a good, decent simple story. In the end, which I won't give away, politics, religion and psychology come together, in a church, in such a way as to make the scene seem corny and over the top, and yet so is life sometimes. Uneducated people of simple faith behave differently from us (presumably brilliant) modern folks, and the scene isn't so much unbelievable (I buy it, but I know the Irish) as embarrassing. Yet people do behave that way, they do say things like that. Not everyone is hip, and it may not even be desirable for everyone to be hip. Are people today so much superior to those of seventy or eighty years ago? And in what way? I don't think so. We're just different. Now go watch the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1829 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What seemed at first just another introverted French flick offering no more than baleful sentiment became for me, on second viewing, a genuinely insightful and quite satisfying presentation.

Spoiler of sorts follows.

Poor Cedric; he apparently didn't know what hit him. Poor audience; we were at first caught up in what seemed a really beautiful and romantic story only to be led back and forth into the dark reality of mismatch. These two guys just didn't belong together from their first ambiguous encounter. As much as Mathieu and Cedric were sexually attracted to each other, the absence of a deeper emotional tie made it impossible for Mathieu, an intellectual being, to find fulfillment in sharing life with someone whose sensibilities were more attuned to carnival festivities and romps on the beach.

On a purely technical note, I loved the camera action in this film. Subtitles were totally unnecessary, even though my French is "presque rien." I could watch it again without the annoying English translation and enjoy it even more. This was a polished, very professionally made motion picture. Though many scenes seem superfluous, I rate it nine out of ten. --------------------------------------------- Result 1830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[theater]] as [[part]] of the SXSW Film [[Festival]]. We were [[graced]] with the presence of [[director]] Mike Binder and stars [[Adam]] Sandler and [[Don]] Cheadle who [[took]] [[audience]] questions after the [[film]]. It is a [[remarkable]] and [[powerful]] [[film]] about what it is like to lose yourself and [[begin]] to [[find]] your [[way]] back. The performances are [[phenomenal]] and the [[story]] [[manages]] to be both tragic and [[funny]] in a [[way]] that is all too [[rare]]. (The [[trailer]] for the [[film]] [[tries]] a [[little]] too [[hard]] to [[emphasize]] the comedic [[aspects]].)

This is a breakout role for [[Adam]] Sandler. [[While]] he has begun to transition to more dramatic roles with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a significant step forward for him as a dramatic actor. He deserves an Oscar nomination as he continues down to transition to more dramatic roles as Tom Hanks did and Jim Carrey is also doing. In this role, he seemed to be trying to channel Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man. Although playing an autistic man is certainly very different than Sandler's traumatized character, both characters for different reasons are trapped in their own worlds of child-like isolation and confusion.

Don Cheadle's performance is [[less]] surprising, but just as [[good]]. After Hotel Rwanda and [[Crash]], we've come to expect remarkable nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the qualities of sincerity and honesty that comes through in this role. But he, too, is also [[broken]] and [[struggling]] if not in the such [[profound]] [[ways]] as Sandler's [[character]]. Cheadle is [[struggling]] with [[difficulties]] in both his [[marriage]] and in his professional life as a dentist. [[Together]] the [[characters]] [[played]] by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the [[way]] that true friends often do (in a [[way]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have lost and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best major studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is almost another character in the plot is [[wonderful]]. The [[filming]] in the streets of [[New]] York - a city that suffered a great tragedy and has [[also]] had to [[heal]] itself - is also quite beautiful. The [[supporting]] [[roles]] by Jada Pinkett [[Smith]], Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and Mike Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, healing, male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is [[almost]] hypnotic as it draws you into the [[lives]] of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it made more character-driven charming [[films]] like Reign over Me. This [[cinema]] screened last night at Austin's Paramount [[cinema]] as [[parties]] of the SXSW Film [[Feast]]. We were [[flattered]] with the presence of [[superintendent]] Mike Binder and stars [[Adams]] Sandler and [[Donating]] Cheadle who [[picked]] [[spectators]] questions after the [[flick]]. It is a [[whopping]] and [[influential]] [[films]] about what it is like to lose yourself and [[initiates]] to [[unearthed]] your [[manner]] back. The performances are [[unbelievable]] and the [[conte]] [[administering]] to be both tragic and [[comical]] in a [[routing]] that is all too [[uncommon]]. (The [[caravan]] for the [[filmmaking]] [[attempting]] a [[petite]] too [[laborious]] to [[insisted]] the comedic [[facets]].)

This is a breakout role for [[Adams]] Sandler. [[Although]] he has begun to transition to more dramatic roles with Punch-Drunk Love and Spanglish, this role is a significant step forward for him as a dramatic actor. He deserves an Oscar nomination as he continues down to transition to more dramatic roles as Tom Hanks did and Jim Carrey is also doing. In this role, he seemed to be trying to channel Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man. Although playing an autistic man is certainly very different than Sandler's traumatized character, both characters for different reasons are trapped in their own worlds of child-like isolation and confusion.

Don Cheadle's performance is [[lesser]] surprising, but just as [[alright]]. After Hotel Rwanda and [[Collisions]], we've come to expect remarkable nuanced performances from Cheadle. He has the qualities of sincerity and honesty that comes through in this role. But he, too, is also [[raped]] and [[battling]] if not in the such [[deepest]] [[methods]] as Sandler's [[traits]]. Cheadle is [[battling]] with [[difficulty]] in both his [[marries]] and in his professional life as a dentist. [[Jointly]] the [[attribute]] [[served]] by Cheadle and Sandler struggle to heal each other in the [[routing]] that true friends often do (in a [[pathway]] that reminds me of Matt Damon and Robin Williams in Good Will Hunting). They are both searching for that part of the themselves that they have lost and trying to find again.

Reign over Me is one of the best major studio films to be released this year. The soundtrack, which is almost another character in the plot is [[noteworthy]]. The [[photographing]] in the streets of [[Newest]] York - a city that suffered a great tragedy and has [[similarly]] had to [[cure]] itself - is also quite beautiful. The [[helping]] [[functions]] by Jada Pinkett [[Tremblay]], Liv Tyler, Saffron Burrows (in a very odd role), Donald Sutherland, and Mike Binder himself are all quite good.

Writer/Director Mike Binder has really delivered a story that so many will be able to connect with on numerous levels. This is a story about grief, family, healing, male friendship, mental health, and the meaning of love. Reign over Me does not disappoint. The film is [[about]] hypnotic as it draws you into the [[iife]] of its characters. Hollywood would have a much better reputation if it made more character-driven charming [[cinema]] like Reign over Me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Once I watched The [[Tenant]] and interpreted it as a horror movie. It [[uses]] [[many]] of the tropes of the genre: the sinister apartment, suspicious neighbors, apparitions, mysteries, hallucinations. The life of the hero, Trelkovsky, seemed surrounded by evil, secret forces trying to drive him mad.

Last [[time]] I [[watched]] it I [[challenged]] this [[initial]] [[interpretation]]. If this movie is a [[horror]] movie, it's only [[horror]] in the sense that a Kafka novel is horror. In fact this movie can be understood on a literal level as a lonely man slowly becoming crazy without any external influence.

Polanski made in his career three movies dealing with madness: Repulsion, which I don't particularly like because the development of madness in the heroine never convinced me; Rosemary's Baby, in which the heroine is driven mad by evil forces; and The Tenant, which might be the best study of paranoia ever made in cinema.

Trelkovsky is a young man who rents an apartment in which a woman killed herself. He becomes obsessed with her and slowly starts becoming her: he wears her clothes, puts on makeup, talks like her. But is he being possessed by a spirit, or is he just letting his wild imagination get the best of him? It's this hesitation between what is real and imaginary, and which Polanski never resolves, that makes this such a fascinating movie. Many events in the movie can be attributed to the supernatural as easily as they can be to normal causes, and it's up to the viewer to decide what to believe in.

Although this is not my favorite Polanski movie, it is nevertheless a good example of his ability to create suspense and portray madness in very convincing terms. And technically speaking, it's a marvel too. Suffice to say he collaborates with film composer Philippe Sarde and legendary director of photography Sven Nykvist (Bergman's DP) in the making of this movie. A slow pacing and [[sometimes]] uninteresting segments may make this movie difficult to enjoy, but it's an experience nevertheless. Once I watched The [[Renter]] and interpreted it as a horror movie. It [[utilise]] [[various]] of the tropes of the genre: the sinister apartment, suspicious neighbors, apparitions, mysteries, hallucinations. The life of the hero, Trelkovsky, seemed surrounded by evil, secret forces trying to drive him mad.

Last [[period]] I [[observed]] it I [[contested]] this [[upfront]] [[explanations]]. If this movie is a [[abomination]] movie, it's only [[monstrosity]] in the sense that a Kafka novel is horror. In fact this movie can be understood on a literal level as a lonely man slowly becoming crazy without any external influence.

Polanski made in his career three movies dealing with madness: Repulsion, which I don't particularly like because the development of madness in the heroine never convinced me; Rosemary's Baby, in which the heroine is driven mad by evil forces; and The Tenant, which might be the best study of paranoia ever made in cinema.

Trelkovsky is a young man who rents an apartment in which a woman killed herself. He becomes obsessed with her and slowly starts becoming her: he wears her clothes, puts on makeup, talks like her. But is he being possessed by a spirit, or is he just letting his wild imagination get the best of him? It's this hesitation between what is real and imaginary, and which Polanski never resolves, that makes this such a fascinating movie. Many events in the movie can be attributed to the supernatural as easily as they can be to normal causes, and it's up to the viewer to decide what to believe in.

Although this is not my favorite Polanski movie, it is nevertheless a good example of his ability to create suspense and portray madness in very convincing terms. And technically speaking, it's a marvel too. Suffice to say he collaborates with film composer Philippe Sarde and legendary director of photography Sven Nykvist (Bergman's DP) in the making of this movie. A slow pacing and [[intermittently]] uninteresting segments may make this movie difficult to enjoy, but it's an experience nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 1832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie was two and a quarter excruciating hours. Someone please tell me what the point was?

I mean, I understand the historical setting. It's supposed to be about a ragtag group of Confederate bushwhackers (terrorists?) on the Missouri-Kansas frontier, taking revenge against all northern sympathizers and abolitionists during the U.S. Civil War. But aside from gratuitous violence there wasn't really much of a point to this movie. Perhaps it was a political statement? That war is really nothing much more than gratuitous violence? If that was the point it was done quite well, but I don't think that was the point. I think the producers really thought they were making a worthwhile movie here, but as far as I was concerned there was a complete lack of any plot. It seemed like I was watching a paperback novel come to life, with the characters looking like what you would see on the covers of such novels.

This movie should be burned along with some of the towns this gang torched! --------------------------------------------- Result 1833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Full]] House was and [[still]] is a [[great]] show. It's a good show for people of all ages and is also a good family [[show]]. There really aren't any [[shows]] [[like]] it anymore. The kids are very cute and even though it's a bit cheesy, it's still good, [[especially]] for anyone who [[watched]] it when they were a kid. I would love to see the cast interviewed now. [[Anyone]] that would like to see [[interviews]] of the cast, kind of like a where are they now type thing for the special features of the DVD, should go to the Petition spot website and sign a petition titled Full House Reunion on DVD as there is a petition for this in hopes that the cast may want to do it. Yay for Full House! [[Fullest]] House was and [[however]] is a [[whopping]] show. It's a good show for people of all ages and is also a good family [[showings]]. There really aren't any [[illustrates]] [[iike]] it anymore. The kids are very cute and even though it's a bit cheesy, it's still good, [[specifically]] for anyone who [[seen]] it when they were a kid. I would love to see the cast interviewed now. [[Whoever]] that would like to see [[interviewing]] of the cast, kind of like a where are they now type thing for the special features of the DVD, should go to the Petition spot website and sign a petition titled Full House Reunion on DVD as there is a petition for this in hopes that the cast may want to do it. Yay for Full House! --------------------------------------------- Result 1834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] can be [[labeled]] as a study [[case]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unhealthy]] and non-artistic lust for [[anything]] that might be [[termed]] as caco-imagery. The author lives with the impression that his [[sanctimonious]] [[revolt]] against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[region]] of [[Europe]]", "I don't [[believe]] one iota in the birds flu", "Romanian people steal because they are [[poor]]; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[close]] to a responsible moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not enough to pose as a righteous person - you also need a modicum of professionalism, talent and intelligence to transpose this stance into an artistic product. Fatefully, "The Foreign Legion" shows as much acumen as a family video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly wetting himself in front of the guests. The script is chaotic and incoherent, randomly bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an illiterate attempt to suggest some kind of a story. The direction is [[pathetically]] dilettante - the so-called "director" is unable to build up at least a mediocre mise-en-scene, his shots are annoyingly awkward, and any sense of storytelling shines by total absence. (Of course, any comment is forced to stop at this level; it would be ridiculous to mention concepts as "cinematographic language", "means of expression" or "style"). The acting is positively "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the exception of... paradoxically, the soccer goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a genuine freshness, but she is compromised by the amateurish directions given by Daneliuc.

The most serious side of this [[offense]] to decent cinema is the fact that the production received a hefty financing from the national budget, via C.N.C. (the National Cinematography Council). The fact that long-time-dead old [[dinosaurs]] like Daneliuc are still thirsty for the [[government]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through natural selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. This [[cinematography]] can be [[labelled]] as a study [[instances]]. It's not just the fact that it denotes an [[unsanitary]] and non-artistic lust for [[algo]] that might be [[called]] as caco-imagery. The author lives with the impression that his [[moralistic]] [[uprising]] against some generic and childishly termed social ills ("Moldavia is the most pauper [[zoning]] of [[Europa]]", "I don't [[believing]] one iota in the birds flu", "Romanian people steal because they are [[pauper]]; Europeans steal because they are thieves") are more or less [[nearer]] to a responsible moral and artistic attitude - but he is sorely off-target!

What Daneliuc doesn't know, is that it's not enough to pose as a righteous person - you also need a modicum of professionalism, talent and intelligence to transpose this stance into an artistic product. Fatefully, "The Foreign Legion" shows as much acumen as a family video with Uncle Gogu drunkenly wetting himself in front of the guests. The script is chaotic and incoherent, randomly bustling together sundry half-subjects, in an illiterate attempt to suggest some kind of a story. The direction is [[pitifully]] dilettante - the so-called "director" is unable to build up at least a mediocre mise-en-scene, his shots are annoyingly awkward, and any sense of storytelling shines by total absence. (Of course, any comment is forced to stop at this level; it would be ridiculous to mention concepts as "cinematographic language", "means of expression" or "style"). The acting is positively "Cântarea României" ("Romania's Chant") level, with the exception of... paradoxically, the soccer goal-keeper Necula Raducanu, who is very natural, and Nicodim Ungureanu. Oana Piecnita seems to have a genuine freshness, but she is compromised by the amateurish directions given by Daneliuc.

The most serious side of this [[crimes]] to decent cinema is the fact that the production received a hefty financing from the national budget, via C.N.C. (the National Cinematography Council). The fact that long-time-dead old [[dinosaur]] like Daneliuc are still thirsty for the [[goverment]] udder is understandable (in a market-driven economy, they would be instantly eliminated through natural selection). But the corruption of the so-called "jury" that squanders the country's money on such ridiculously scabrous non-art, non-cinema and non-culture belongs to the criminal field. --------------------------------------------- Result 1835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Warning: mild [[spoilers]].

The story of Joseph Smith stands out as an [[amazing]] - even [[moving]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[movie]] [[portrays]] [[events]] in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true Church of Jesus Christ on the earth. I've so far [[seen]] the [[movie]] twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene helped to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was interestingly portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and moving when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie masterfully portrays simultaneously the joy and growth of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. Warning: mild [[vandals]].

The story of Joseph Smith stands out as an [[unbelievable]] - even [[shifting]] - episode in American history and World Religious history. This [[filmmaking]] [[denotes]] [[event]] in the life of Joseph Smith, whom Mormons revere as the prophet of the restoration of the true Church of Jesus Christ on the earth. I've so far [[noticed]] the [[cinematography]] twice in its first month of public showing.

Joseph Smith is shown first to be the youngest of a trio of brothers (Alvin, Hyrum & Joseph) who, at a very young age, needed an operation. The operation, done without our modern conveniences, was bloody and difficult. The scene helped to show the cohesiveness of the Smith family and the bonds between the brothers and between Joseph and his parents.

Joseph's religious confusion and subsequent praying which lead to what Mormons call the First Vision was interestingly portrayed. The face of Jesus is never shown, but you see the unmistakable nail marks in His hands. The rejection by religious leaders and many in his small New York community is sweetened at least slightly by Joseph's marriage to Emma.

This movie does not clearly map out the events of Mormon Church history, but merely jumps from scene to scene. This is not a critique - simply a note about the style.

The practice of tarring and feathering is shown, and it is especially dramatic and moving when Joseph delivers a sermon about the Savior's love with a scarred face from having recently been attacked.

The movie masterfully portrays simultaneously the joy and growth of Mormonism as an infant church, while at the same time the ever-deepening opposition that spread into the heights of local governments.

The film shows many scenes from Joseph's life, including a few beautiful moments portraying his relationship to Emma. An attempt is made to show the depth and complexity of Joseph's life, including his fierce love for his wife, his endless love for children, his wit, his courage in the face of filthy and dangerous opposition, his religious sentiments, and his compassion.

As Joseph and Hyrum ride to Carthage, never to return home alive, most of the characters from throughout the movie, whose lives had been touched by Joseph, are shown along the way, helping to reinforce what was already seen but setting up the final scene to be more powerful.

At the end, the martyrdom of Joseph and Hyrum is portrayed, and moviegoers are left to ponder the events they just witnessed.

When I first watched the movie I assumed it was made by the Church to introduce Joseph Smith to non-members. I no longer think that is the case, although I hope the movie can do just that. As an insider, I find that the film is a celebration of Joseph and excellently reinforces the good things we already know about him. I am curious to see how outsiders will view the film - whether they will simply see it as propagandic, an epic story of an American religious man, or something else.

The film is beautifully shot, family friendly, moving and, hopefully, something good for everyone. That the events portrayed actually happened in these United States of America is interesting to ponder in light of the many aspects of our culture - including freedom of religious expression and respect (generally) for the law - we moderns take for granted. --------------------------------------------- Result 1836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Simply, one of the funiest movies i've ever seen. It's a parody of crime-life, parody of everything that represents the Chicago 1930.- There is no realy need to underestimate this movie because rating is under 5. Its a opinion of a mass, and mass is hypnotized. Who decide to watch it - it will regret, Who decide not to watch it - will regret more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I own Ralph Bakshis [[forgotten]] masterpiece Fire & Ice on an old OOP rental videotape.

Well for one thing, this is better than any other Conan-esque film you'll ever see. Sure, it's cheesy, but who cares? It [[stood]] the [[test]] of [[time]], and the only way it started to look [[cheesy]] is in [[comparisons]] to modern fantasy epics [[like]] LOTR:FOTR (though I [[love]] that [[film]].)

The plot goes like this: After a battle between Fire & Ice, a kings daughter is kidnapped by Jarols (Ice) subhuman creatures, while a sole survivor of a victimized village rescues her.

Yeah it doesn't sound as a [[original]] as Nurse Betty, but that's not the point. It is really to bring to life an interesting idea of a world of two enemies: Fire & Ice. And it succeeds.

As for the action scenes: superb. They are well handled, have terrific suspence, and have plenty of loud noises. Just check out the climatic battle, now THAT'S an ending!

The acting and [[dialogue]]: competent. Really. They aren't gonna be [[nominated]] for an [[Oscar]], but they are OK and don't get on your nerves.

The animation is quite [[good]]. Shot on 3D and rotoscoped (I THINK), it looks pretty good. A lot of the backgrounds look really detailed and well drawn, and although the character designs feel a little 1-dimentional, they are OK.

[[Overall]], this is a [[fine]] neglected little gem and will entertain you more than any of the superfical "entertainment". 10/10 I own Ralph Bakshis [[disregarded]] masterpiece Fire & Ice on an old OOP rental videotape.

Well for one thing, this is better than any other Conan-esque film you'll ever see. Sure, it's cheesy, but who cares? It [[amounted]] the [[proof]] of [[moment]], and the only way it started to look [[corny]] is in [[compare]] to modern fantasy epics [[iike]] LOTR:FOTR (though I [[amore]] that [[flick]].)

The plot goes like this: After a battle between Fire & Ice, a kings daughter is kidnapped by Jarols (Ice) subhuman creatures, while a sole survivor of a victimized village rescues her.

Yeah it doesn't sound as a [[initial]] as Nurse Betty, but that's not the point. It is really to bring to life an interesting idea of a world of two enemies: Fire & Ice. And it succeeds.

As for the action scenes: superb. They are well handled, have terrific suspence, and have plenty of loud noises. Just check out the climatic battle, now THAT'S an ending!

The acting and [[talks]]: competent. Really. They aren't gonna be [[nominating]] for an [[Oscars]], but they are OK and don't get on your nerves.

The animation is quite [[alright]]. Shot on 3D and rotoscoped (I THINK), it looks pretty good. A lot of the backgrounds look really detailed and well drawn, and although the character designs feel a little 1-dimentional, they are OK.

[[Entire]], this is a [[fined]] neglected little gem and will entertain you more than any of the superfical "entertainment". 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Okay, so the [[first]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects way, but from the [[beginning]], [[Hidden]] [[Frontier]] has given [[consistently]] [[good]] story lines and performances, and have always been [[willing]] to mistakes they've made. They advice people to see [[newer]] episodes first, so they can see just how good the [[show]] is, and understand how much it has changed [[since]] the first episodes. The cast have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[shows]] on-screen.

The influx of guest [[actors]] who make their [[mark]] on the show and with fans attests [[also]] to the [[show]], as the story lines go from [[strength]] to strength. The [[show]] has [[pushed]] [[barriers]] with its [[various]] story lines - depression, drug addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[wrong]] way, but that is what [[Star]] Trek is and was all about. It [[portrays]] those story lines in a smart and emotional way, [[dealing]] with them subtly and [[smoothly]].

[[Yes]], they have [[used]] some [[characters]] from Trek [[history]], but they have done them justice - [[characters]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[vastly]] underused in the [[show]], had a [[rebirth]] in the [[New]] [[Frontier]] books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when Peter David when more towards wild fantasy versus [[serious]] sci-fi, and HF [[shows]] those characters in a [[completely]] [[different]] light, which [[serves]] them better.

The site [[also]] [[allows]] fans to [[interact]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[get]] to know the people [[involved]]. They [[release]] bloopers for [[every]] episode, so the fans can see what a [[laugh]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[dedication]] that [[would]] make [[many]] professional [[actors]] wide-eyed in shock!

What this [[series]], now drawing to a [[close]] after 7 [[years]], has [[accomplished]] on such a limited [[amount]] of resources is [[nothing]] short of [[amazing]] - bringing people [[together]], [[inspiring]] others to do the same. HF will [[live]] for a long time after it [[ends]], as long as people still enjoy the [[reason]] it [[started]] in the first [[place]]. Okay, so the [[frst]] few seasons took a while to get going on the special effects way, but from the [[initiating]], [[Concealing]] [[Frontiers]] has given [[incessantly]] [[buena]] story lines and performances, and have always been [[desirous]] to mistakes they've made. They advice people to see [[novel]] episodes first, so they can see just how good the [[shows]] is, and understand how much it has changed [[because]] the first episodes. The cast have a fantastic camaraderie and it [[denotes]] on-screen.

The influx of guest [[players]] who make their [[brands]] on the show and with fans attests [[likewise]] to the [[demonstrating]], as the story lines go from [[kraft]] to strength. The [[display]] has [[shoved]] [[obstruction]] with its [[multiple]] story lines - depression, drug addiction and mainstream homosexuality - and these may have rubbed a few people the [[inaccurate]] way, but that is what [[Superstar]] Trek is and was all about. It [[denotes]] those story lines in a smart and emotional way, [[addressing]] with them subtly and [[mildly]].

[[Yeah]], they have [[uses]] some [[attribute]] from Trek [[story]], but they have done them justice - [[nature]] like Shelby, Lefler and Necheyev, [[dramatically]] underused in the [[display]], had a [[renaissance]] in the [[Novel]] [[Borders]] books, but they lost their sizzle after a while, when Peter David when more towards wild fantasy versus [[severe]] sci-fi, and HF [[displays]] those characters in a [[entirely]] [[several]] light, which [[contributes]] them better.

The site [[similarly]] [[lets]] fans to [[communicate]] with chat rooms and forums and they can [[obtain]] to know the people [[involvement]]. They [[releases]] bloopers for [[any]] episode, so the fans can see what a [[giggling]] they have, because they are people doing it in their spare time, with a [[pledge]] that [[ought]] make [[multiple]] professional [[actresses]] wide-eyed in shock!

What this [[serials]], now drawing to a [[shut]] after 7 [[yrs]], has [[made]] on such a limited [[amounts]] of resources is [[anything]] short of [[staggering]] - bringing people [[jointly]], [[stimulating]] others to do the same. HF will [[vive]] for a long time after it [[terminates]], as long as people still enjoy the [[motif]] it [[starts]] in the first [[placing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] After seeing the terrible, terrible, terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I knew I had to see this as soon as I heard about it.

Pressing play to view the trailer I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a [[GREATLY]] put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! After seeing the terrible, terrible, terrible BATMAN: DEAD END I knew I had to see this as soon as I heard about it.

Pressing play to view the trailer I thought I was in for another hideous short from what so-far looked like another bad wannabe film-maker trying to bring new depth to an existing character. But was instead greeted with a [[SEVERELY]] put together trailer for a movie that sadly doesn't exist, as I would LOVE to see a finished movie even if it was only 30 minutes long.

WORLD'S FINEST makes up for BATMAN: DEAD END and then some.

I look forward to the next short! --------------------------------------------- Result 1840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] A repressed housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, whose body double treats/horrifies us with an extreme closeup of her delicates) is sexually bored by her husband and decides to branch-out. This directly results in a string of murders that soon involve a high-class prostitute (Nancy Allen, clearly I am in the wrong business if SHE can bring home $600 a night) and her psychologist (Michael Caine). If you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "pay homage to") Hitchcock, watch "Sisters" [[instead]] of this. "Dressed to Kill," while loaded with style and technical skill, is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the displeasure of sitting through. The plot is absurd and tired. It does feature some surprisingly effective jump scares and nasty graphic murder sequences that should please any horror fan, as long as they can get past the silly story line, that must have been dated even in 1980. A repressed housewife (an annoying lisping Angie Dickinson, whose body double treats/horrifies us with an extreme closeup of her delicates) is sexually bored by her husband and decides to branch-out. This directly results in a string of murders that soon involve a high-class prostitute (Nancy Allen, clearly I am in the wrong business if SHE can bring home $600 a night) and her psychologist (Michael Caine). If you are going to watch De Palma rip off (excuse me, "pay homage to") Hitchcock, watch "Sisters" [[conversely]] of this. "Dressed to Kill," while loaded with style and technical skill, is one of the tackiest thrillers I have had the displeasure of sitting through. The plot is absurd and tired. It does feature some surprisingly effective jump scares and nasty graphic murder sequences that should please any horror fan, as long as they can get past the silly story line, that must have been dated even in 1980. --------------------------------------------- Result 1841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is a great documentary [[film]]. [[Any]] [[fan]] of car [[racing]] should own a copy of this [[outstanding]] [[film]]. [[Director]] "[[Stephen]] Low" did a [[great]] [[job]],as well as the [[main]] [[stars]] of the [[film]], [[Father]] & Son, Mario & [[Michael]] Andretti. The DVD [[looks]] & sounds [[amazing]]. And [[best]] of all it's IMAX! [[Great]] home [[theater]] test disc. This is a great documentary [[movies]]. [[Everything]] [[ventilator]] of car [[races]] should own a copy of this [[unpaid]] [[cinema]]. [[Superintendent]] "[[Steven]] Low" did a [[prodigious]] [[jobs]],as well as the [[principal]] [[celebrity]] of the [[kino]], [[Fathers]] & Son, Mario & [[Michele]] Andretti. The DVD [[seems]] & sounds [[fantastic]]. And [[better]] of all it's IMAX! [[Whopping]] home [[cinema]] test disc. --------------------------------------------- Result 1842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was NOT a good movie. I honestly [[cant]] [[say]] that I enjoyed this [[movie]] at all. Of course It is effective in its way of being a shocking, realistic, twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I [[found]] it to be very [[boring]] (and not as gory as i hoped). And also I found that the torturers were very annoying, when they talked and loughed trying to sound tough all the time, that ruined it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX cos they are awesome. I just finished watching guinea pig - Devils experiment. I have to say that this movie, although having very good FX, better then I expected, was NOT a good movie. I honestly [[becuase]] [[told]] that I enjoyed this [[movies]] at all. Of course It is effective in its way of being a shocking, realistic, twisted 43 minutes of torture, but I [[discoveries]] it to be very [[dreary]] (and not as gory as i hoped). And also I found that the torturers were very annoying, when they talked and loughed trying to sound tough all the time, that ruined it even more (and Im sure there's some people out there who will agree with me on that one). I have now seen guinea pig 1,2,3,5 and the best one out of those in my opinion is guinea pig 2 - Flowers of the flesh and blood. I wont say much more about Devils experiment, other than Great fx, descent acting from the girl, annoying fu**ing torturers, overall I give it 4 stars on account of the FX cos they are awesome. --------------------------------------------- Result 1843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Sarafina was a [[fun]] [[movie]], and some of the songs were really great. Sarafina was very [[entertaining]]. I don't [[normally]] like music things like this, but the [[singing]] was not lame [[like]] it looked like on the box. The movie was [[useful]] for learning about [[history]] because it was an interesting [[perspective]] of the Soweto [[rioting]] of 1976. It showed you [[things]] from the [[perspective]] of the students in the rioting and [[showed]] you that they were [[real]] [[characters]]. [[Because]] you got to see them as real [[characters]] this makes you like them more as an audience, and makes you more sympathetic to them as totally the [[victims]] of the [[white]] [[government]], who you can not sympathise with. The [[singing]] of the [[students]] is [[correct]] because we know from [[accounts]] that the [[students]] in the [[riot]] were singing and dancing before it became violent. The [[clothing]] of the students in Sarafina is very similar to the [[clothing]] [[shown]] in [[photos]] from Soweto. They [[made]] the [[movie]] actually in Soweto, which is why it looks very accurate in [[many]] parts. All these [[things]] make the [[film]] more accurate for someone [[using]] it to [[learn]] about aparthied. As [[viewers]] we [[must]] be [[critical]] of the [[way]] the [[history]] of [[Apartheid]] was [[presented]]. As I said before, you become sympathetic to the students - this makes it [[potentially]] less [[reliable]] and objective. [[Also]], it [[changes]] some of the [[details]] from other [[accounts]]. [[In]] Sarafina it turns to [[chaos]] when the [[policeman]] comes into their [[classroom]] and shoots the students. The [[police]] and army were very aggressive at Soweto, but this is [[probably]] an [[exaggerated]] [[event]]. The police and army did shoot students, but there is not evidence of them [[going]] into [[schools]] and executing people [[like]] this. The [[fighting]] was more in the streets and had looting and [[crime]]. This is [[done]] in the [[movie]] probably to make you feel more sorry for the [[school]] students. The [[movie]] would have been more [[useful]] if it had some [[different]] [[information]] about aparthied. The [[teacher]] was arrested for being against the [[government]], and the [[mum]] goes to [[work]] in a white persons [[house]]. But there is not any information about the [[government]] and why they were doing it or any [[details]] about the [[racist]] [[policies]] and laws. -By George S, [[Chris]] and Finlay Sarafina was a [[amusing]] [[films]], and some of the songs were really great. Sarafina was very [[droll]]. I don't [[habitually]] like music things like this, but the [[singer]] was not lame [[iike]] it looked like on the box. The movie was [[handy]] for learning about [[histories]] because it was an interesting [[views]] of the Soweto [[riots]] of 1976. It showed you [[items]] from the [[views]] of the students in the rioting and [[indicated]] you that they were [[actual]] [[personages]]. [[Since]] you got to see them as real [[nature]] this makes you like them more as an audience, and makes you more sympathetic to them as totally the [[fatalities]] of the [[bianca]] [[govt]], who you can not sympathise with. The [[singer]] of the [[student]] is [[accurate]] because we know from [[account]] that the [[student]] in the [[mutiny]] were singing and dancing before it became violent. The [[garments]] of the students in Sarafina is very similar to the [[dress]] [[demonstrated]] in [[images]] from Soweto. They [[accomplished]] the [[cinema]] actually in Soweto, which is why it looks very accurate in [[several]] parts. All these [[matters]] make the [[filmmaking]] more accurate for someone [[employs]] it to [[learning]] about aparthied. As [[audience]] we [[ought]] be [[important]] of the [[manner]] the [[histories]] of [[Segregation]] was [[submitted]]. As I said before, you become sympathetic to the students - this makes it [[conceivably]] less [[credible]] and objective. [[Moreover]], it [[altering]] some of the [[detail]] from other [[account]]. [[Onto]] Sarafina it turns to [[anarchy]] when the [[police]] comes into their [[classrooms]] and shoots the students. The [[policemen]] and army were very aggressive at Soweto, but this is [[arguably]] an [[inflated]] [[phenomena]]. The police and army did shoot students, but there is not evidence of them [[gonna]] into [[colleges]] and executing people [[iike]] this. The [[battles]] was more in the streets and had looting and [[offence]]. This is [[doing]] in the [[cinematic]] probably to make you feel more sorry for the [[teaching]] students. The [[filmmaking]] would have been more [[helpful]] if it had some [[multiple]] [[info]] about aparthied. The [[professors]] was arrested for being against the [[govt]], and the [[momma]] goes to [[collaborated]] in a white persons [[habitation]]. But there is not any information about the [[govt]] and why they were doing it or any [[clarification]] about the [[racism]] [[politics]] and laws. -By George S, [[Kris]] and Finlay --------------------------------------------- Result 1844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I [[backed]] it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the Rape Revenge movie has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," though making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of failure is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't help, but the sequence is just too damn long and pointless. It destroys any momentum and investment in the lead character set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? Having just recently re-viewed "Lipstick" for the first time in a few decades, I [[corroborated]] it with "Descent" even though I have heard more negative comments than good from other film friends with tastes as varied as mine.

It's interesting to contrast how the unique niche of the Rape Revenge movie has evolved in the past 32 years, from the full-on gore of "I Spit On Your Grave," to the tawdry sensationalism of "Lipstick," to the tasteful handling of the issue in "The Accused." But "Descent," though making some important points, never really offers us anything truly new in terms of revelatory meaning. No, "Descent" is so poorly made in terms of picture and sound quality that it detracts from any significant message it could hope to make --- a message that, when examined closely, isn't that groundbreaking.

I pretty much knew the plot going in. What I wanted to see *was* the "descent" or degeneration of Dawson's character. Being a big fan of Rosario's, I was anxious to see the layers being stripped away and her psyche being slowly twisted...you know, the kind of portrayal DeNiro brings to "Taxi Driver." Unfortunately, the script and the director/writer's choices don't provide any sort of believable transition.

The biggest point of failure is the second act. It became obvious what the filmmaker's intentions were for this segment of club-hopping, drug use, and obsession with big black stallion Adrian (every white boy's nightmare, natch) from a Q&A on the DVD, but this excursion into Dawson's character is never believably rendered. We don't know exactly what the hell she's doing half the time, what she's after, or why she's doing it. The poor quality of the audio/video again don't help, but the sequence is just too damn long and pointless. It destroys any momentum and investment in the lead character set up during the otherwise exceptionally well-done first act. By the time we get to the finale, our interest has already waned.

One point of success that Dawson does point out in the Q&A is that by the end "revenge" scene we are pumped for retribution, then realize just how drawn-out and ugly the reality is. While that's certainly valid, it doesn't make the scene any more intriguing.

If you have the DVD, check out the deleted "classroom" scene. This is an excellent 8 minute plus outtake that crackles with energy and provocation (though all verbal) and really DOES show Dawson's slow crack-up materializing as she delightfully vivisects poor Francie Swift's prissy, condescending dorm counselor. If more expository scenes like this had been added and more of the middle third cut down, we might have an interesting psychological study of the impact of senseless acts of violence.

As the film stands in the final cut, though, all we get is what we've seen before, only in a more graphic rendering. So what? --------------------------------------------- Result 1845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Most]] [[complaints]] I've heard of this film really come down to one thing: It isn't Versus. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[similarities]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's [[ability]] to craft an interesting B-movie in [[natural]] locations. For Alive, almost everything takes place inside. In small, cramped [[spaces]]. Here the art design is thrust into your face, and [[WHAT]] art design it is! We are [[treated]] to several very intricate and interesting spaces, and our characters are for the most part confined to those spaces. [[Also]] a key difference is that we don't get much action here until the end of the film. Versus was all about action and cool, here a LOT more emphasis is put on characters and situation and messing with your mind. Because of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[film]] than Versus. You may not [[pop]] it in and go to a random scene to watch five or ten minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit glued to the screen for nearly two hours watching he interaction of a few [[genuinely]] interesting [[characters]].

I'm now ecstatic that I ordered the DVD [[despite]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to realize this is a different animal from Versus - it's [[often]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to get the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters picks it up for subtitled R1 DVD release! [[More]] [[grievance]] I've heard of this film really come down to one thing: It isn't Versus. Yes, the cast and crew is basically the same. Yes, Kitamura rehashes a few shots in the fight scenes that come in the film's second half, but that's about where the [[analogies]] end. Versus takes place essentially all outside, showcasing Kitamura's [[dexterity]] to craft an interesting B-movie in [[naturel]] locations. For Alive, almost everything takes place inside. In small, cramped [[sites]]. Here the art design is thrust into your face, and [[QUEL]] art design it is! We are [[processed]] to several very intricate and interesting spaces, and our characters are for the most part confined to those spaces. [[Moreover]] a key difference is that we don't get much action here until the end of the film. Versus was all about action and cool, here a LOT more emphasis is put on characters and situation and messing with your mind. Because of this, Alive is a far more interesting [[movies]] than Versus. You may not [[pops]] it in and go to a random scene to watch five or ten minutes of cool zombie bloodshed, but you will sit glued to the screen for nearly two hours watching he interaction of a few [[actually]] interesting [[features]].

I'm now ecstatic that I ordered the DVD [[albeit]] some naysay. You should too! But be sure to realize this is a different animal from Versus - it's [[ordinarily]] slow, and requires a bit of thought to get the most out of it. I hope Media Blasters picks it up for subtitled R1 DVD release! --------------------------------------------- Result 1846 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ronald Colman gives an electrifying performance as Tony John, a Broadway actor who can't separate his offstage life from Shakespeare's Othello, the character he plays on stage....Two important scenes illustrate Tony's dilemma. The first one takes place in producer Max Lasker's office. Acting is a matter of talent for the practical-minded Lasker. But Donlan, Tony's friend, disagrees: "No, no. When you do it like Tony does it, it's much more. The way he has of becoming someone else every night...so completely. No, don't tell me his whole system isn't affected by it."....The other scene occurs in waitress Pat Kroll's apartment. Tony tells her his name is Martin. She thanks him. Then he says: "Or Paul. Hamlet. Joe. And maybe Othello."....When Tony begins rehearsing Othello, we learn that though he's trying to keep his real life separated from his stage life, "The part begins to seep into your life, and the battle begins. Reality against imagination." He can't keep the two separated: In his mind Pat is Desdemona and he's Othello, and he wrongly believes she has been unfaithful to him. He murders her....Colman's bravura performance, in a complex and difficult role, earned him 1947's Academy Award for Best Actor. Oscar nominations went to Ruth Gordon and Garson Kanin for Best Original Screenplay. Not to be overlooked is Milton Krasner's atomspheric cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 1847 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Why would a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This film teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[obviously]] wasn't embracing my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's writing debut, there are many wonderful aspects to this film; [[however]], in order to justify the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development would have been helpful. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. Why would a person go back to a person, who kicks them in the teeth, not once, not twice, but over and over again.

This film teaches us that in order to find love we must accept abuse (not just forgive it, but fully accept it). Gosh! No wonder my first relationship only lasted ten years. I [[undoubtedly]] wasn't embracing my inner masochist.

As Bucatinsky's writing debut, there are many wonderful aspects to this film; [[instead]], in order to justify the reunion of Eli and Tom, more character development would have been helpful. We are never acquainted with Eli's masochism, in fact, we are led to believe that he is not a masochist, although Tom's psycho-emotional sadism is highly evident. --------------------------------------------- Result 1848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a mate rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the actors in this movie, and the money used to produce this movie would have been better used to [[start]] a fire. This is absolutely [[terrible]], 2 hours of life that anyone who endures this untalented bloodbath will never get back. After watching 5 [[minutes]], myself and the boys wondered if sinking bulk heavies would make this anymore [[entertaining]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I finally found some of this G grade acting remotely funny. It's an insult upon this entire planet that the director thought anyone could find anything beneficial from this more, he should go and buy a rope. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you got paid well to be in this joke because I doubt you will ever work again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting licence. There is only one problem with this website, you can't give a negative rating. Additionally a mate rated this as a D grade movie. I say he was being too nice. A piece of wood could show more emotion that the actors in this movie, and the money used to produce this movie would have been better used to [[lancer]] a fire. This is absolutely [[scary]], 2 hours of life that anyone who endures this untalented bloodbath will never get back. After watching 5 [[mins]], myself and the boys wondered if sinking bulk heavies would make this anymore [[amusing]]. Half a carto and a bottle of 151 later I finally found some of this G grade acting remotely funny. It's an insult upon this entire planet that the director thought anyone could find anything beneficial from this more, he should go and buy a rope. And to the actors in this flick, I hope you got paid well to be in this joke because I doubt you will ever work again. In summary I fine everyone in this movie 100 grand and 12 demerit points off your acting licence. --------------------------------------------- Result 1849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How sad there is no option to post a mark lower than 1. I watched this piece of [[nonsense]] and could [[barely]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the [[film]] was [[awful]]. Music, acting, [[direction]], story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out loud at various points in the film. I particularly loved the [[bit]] where our hero is dashing through the [[hospital]] in soft focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the nurses hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. If you are of a Christian persuasion and very easily satisfied, you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. How sad there is no option to post a mark lower than 1. I watched this piece of [[grotesque]] and could [[hardly]] believe what i was watching. Every single part of the [[kino]] was [[scary]]. Music, acting, [[directions]], story, everything, simply everything. I actually found myself laughing out loud at various points in the film. I particularly loved the [[bite]] where our hero is dashing through the [[hospitals]] in soft focus slow motion, and knocks the clipboard out of the nurses hand, because, .............well. Just because. Product placement? Crucifix's (crucifi?) everywhere. If you are of a Christian persuasion and very easily satisfied, you may like this movie. If you do like this movie, you really need to get out more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1850 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This movie was the [[worst]] [[movie]] ever [[made]] on the planet, I like BARNEY more than this movie. The [[graphics]] suck, half the movie is animated, the deaths suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that made this movie!PLEASE DO NOT WASTE HOURS OF YOUR LIFE WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only [[good]] part was when the [[movie]] ******* ended! This movie is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[DUMB]]! Please do not waste your time watching this movie, you will [[regret]] it.You want to know why this movie sucks? Well, the cover sucked, the [[graphics]] sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people tried to blow themselves up, the college students think there all that and can stand up to the [[animal]]. I [[mean]], there was a 5 ft. tiger running straight at a woman, she throws a [[spear]] at it from 100 ft away! [[WAIT]] [[TILL]] [[YOU]] CAN [[Actually]] HIT IT! The acting was [[horrible]] too. Jurrasic [[Park]] is [[actually]] a [[good]] [[movie]], and this just had to go and [[ruin]] it. This movie was the [[lousiest]] [[films]] ever [[accomplished]] on the planet, I like BARNEY more than this movie. The [[charts]] suck, half the movie is animated, the deaths suck, and over all, I was ready to SUE the people that made this movie!PLEASE DO NOT WASTE HOURS OF YOUR LIFE WATCHING THIS MOVIE. The only [[buena]] part was when the [[movies]] ******* ended! This movie is 50 percent Jurassic park, .1 percent Sabretooth, and 49.9 percent [[SILLY]]! Please do not waste your time watching this movie, you will [[sadness]] it.You want to know why this movie sucks? Well, the cover sucked, the [[graph]] sucked, the blood looked ( I mean is) ketchup, the people tried to blow themselves up, the college students think there all that and can stand up to the [[beasts]]. I [[meaning]], there was a 5 ft. tiger running straight at a woman, she throws a [[lance]] at it from 100 ft away! [[WAITS]] [[UNTIL]] [[THEE]] CAN [[Genuinely]] HIT IT! The acting was [[heinous]] too. Jurrasic [[Playpen]] is [[genuinely]] a [[well]] [[film]], and this just had to go and [[vandalize]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Shiner, [[directed]] by Christian Calson, [[centers]] [[around]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good start as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[couples]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real purpose since the are so marginalized. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release grows as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not convincing. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't work. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I appreciate that Calson wanted to achieve a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. Shiner, [[oriented]] by Christian Calson, [[centre]] [[throughout]] three "couples" and their relationships with obsession and violence. Pretty good start as far as I'm concerned. Interesting. The [[matches]] break down into a heterosexual couple, two heterosexual male friends and a straight guy being "harmlessly" stalked by a gay man.

The "het" couple really don't have much of a role in the film. There are some scenes that show how they like to be aggressive when having sex or playing around with each other, but seem to have no real purpose since the are so marginalized. My assumption is that they represent a more day to day illustration of how sex/violence are integrated in a couples life. The couple aren't very aggressive and it's not even shot in any kind of erotic way. As characters, they don't add much to the theme or plot.

The two male friends make up the bulk of the plot. They engage in some gay bashing of sorts by convincing a homosexual man to have sex with them in an alley. This escalates into violence. And the violence changes them. It becomes a means of sexual gratification. And their need for violence t release grows as the film progresses. The main problem I had is the violence is not convincing. Never once does it seem that any of the characters is in any real danger. It just doesn't work. Given that the whole theme of the film is about the characters' relationships with violence, this is a major problem. Unfortunately, the make-up doesn't help either. Sometimes, it's okay, other times it is very bad. In one scene, I really wondered why one of the characters had rouge smeared on his face. Confusing.

The more interesting pair of the characters is the "stalker couple." Here Calson seemed to have more to say and was able to develop a more coherent storyline. Perhaps it is because the characters seem to develop more and have resolution at the end. Shiner may well have been much better if it had stuck with these two.

I appreciate that Calson wanted to achieve a lot with this film. It is admirable. Most low budget flicks don't aspire to much. I don't think Calson achieved want he was aiming for. Myself, I found nothing particularly controversial or unsettling. Shiner was unconvincing. This doesn't mean, however, that the director can't achieve something with his next film.

He seems to have something to say. --------------------------------------------- Result 1852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] This is a [[terrible]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I could turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, tedious and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. This is a [[frightful]] production of Bartleby, though not, as the other reviewer put it because it is "unfilmable," but rather because this version does not maintain the spirit of the book. It tells the story, almost painfully so. Watching it, I could turn the pages in my book and follow along, which is not as much fun when dealing with an adaptation. Rather, see the 2001 version of Bartleby featuring Crispin Glover. That version, while humorous, brings new details to the film while maintaining the spirit of the novel. What's important is the spirit, not the minutiae of things like setting, character names, and costumes. The difference between these film versions is like night and day, tedious and hilarious. This version is a lesson as to what can go wrong if an adaptation is handled poorly, painful, mind-numbing schlock. --------------------------------------------- Result 1853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Cuban]] Blood is one of those sleeper films that has a lot to say about [[life]] in a very traditional [[way]]. I actually [[watched]] it while [[sailing]] [[around]] [[Cuba]] on a western [[Caribbean]] cruise. It details the [[life]] of an 11 year [[old]] [[boy]] in a [[small]] [[town]] in Cuba in 1958 and 1959 during the revolution. [[Not]] much [[time]] is [[spent]] on the revolution until the very end, when the [[Socialist]] regime [[came]] and took the property of the boy's [[father]]. The majority of the [[film]] is the boy's coming of age and the [[relationships]] that [[arise]] in a [[small]] [[town]] where [[everyone]] knows [[everyone]] else. There are some [[powerful]] scenes that [[everyone]] can [[relate]] to. A class A [[film]] with [[fine]] acting and directing. This is a [[film]] that tells a [[story]] with no special [[effects]] or [[grand]] [[schemes]] or [[real]] twists. It is a [[film]] about people and their [[lives]], their [[mistakes]], and their [[triumphs]]. A good [[film]] worth [[watching]] several [[times]] annually. [[Cuba]] Blood is one of those sleeper films that has a lot to say about [[vie]] in a very traditional [[manner]]. I actually [[saw]] it while [[navigating]] [[approximately]] [[Cuban]] on a western [[Caribe]] cruise. It details the [[iife]] of an 11 year [[former]] [[dude]] in a [[petite]] [[ciudad]] in Cuba in 1958 and 1959 during the revolution. [[No]] much [[moment]] is [[spend]] on the revolution until the very end, when the [[Socialistic]] regime [[became]] and took the property of the boy's [[fathers]]. The majority of the [[filmmaking]] is the boy's coming of age and the [[relationship]] that [[happen]] in a [[minor]] [[city]] where [[somebody]] knows [[someone]] else. There are some [[emphatic]] scenes that [[anybody]] can [[pertaining]] to. A class A [[films]] with [[alright]] acting and directing. This is a [[kino]] that tells a [[narratives]] with no special [[influencing]] or [[grande]] [[scheme]] or [[actual]] twists. It is a [[movies]] about people and their [[life]], their [[malfunctions]], and their [[victoire]]. A good [[cinematography]] worth [[staring]] several [[dates]] annually. --------------------------------------------- Result 1854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[ruin]] this [[great]] [[piece]] by your simple mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. "Jared Diamond made a point in the first episode that other peoples of the world didn't have animals to domesticate but Europeans did, and that accounts for why we were able to make steel and invent complex machines". --- It is obvious that the person who wrote this comment hasn't understood the reasoning behind this documentary or the original book. Please don't [[rubble]] this [[prodigious]] [[slice]] by your simple mindedness. The reasons are far more complex than the single thing you mentioned. Please read the book as is it a great source of information. I enjoyed it a lot. This book is even a taught as a text book at some universities. --------------------------------------------- Result 1855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This film is so bad and [[gets]] [[worse]] in [[every]] [[imaginable]] fashion. Its not just the poor acting and [[script]] nor is it the lame and perverse [[time]] one wastes on [[watching]] it. What [[really]] puts this film in my hall of [[shame]] is the [[apparent]] struggling that the [[writers]] and [[producers]] do with the film to [[try]] and [[make]] it funny. The actress replacing Jean Reno's [[descendant]] is to [[old]] and [[learned]] her lesson in the [[first]] [[film]] so they [[add]] a new girl who is to be [[married]]. [[Nearly]] all of the [[original]] [[extras]] and [[gags]] [[return]] [[however]] this time makes me [[want]] to [[ripe]] my eyes out of my sockets because it's a [[waste]] of perfectly good film. The torture of the constant camera cuts and [[shots]] in any scene in this movie can put the viewer into violent convolutions. This second film [[takes]] the successful original and drags it out of its coffin and parades the corpse out in the public [[square]] and perversely [[degrades]] not only the original idea and its legacy but our [[intelligence]] as well. This [[film]] unlike the spruce [[goose]] could not [[fly]] for it had no plot in the principals [[returning]] for a 'necklace'. [[No]] [[script]] since it was [[apparently]] [[written]] and added to daily. No attention to camera or [[shots]] in mind. Poor [[lighting]] and [[special]] [[effects]] [[done]] for the sake of doing so. This [[film]] would not [[even]] pass for a student [[film]] in basic [[Film]] 101. How this pile [[got]] through no one can [[tell]]. It was a [[big]] [[loosing]] [[investment]] and it [[appears]] that no one had the [[strength]] to put this [[unnatural]] [[cruel]] [[mistake]] out of our miseries. This [[movie]] has one good [[part]] ...its [[END]]! This [[film]] is my #1 [[worst]] [[film]] of all [[time]], [[finally]] "Howard The [[Duck]]" is no longer the [[goose]]. This film is so bad and [[got]] [[lousiest]] in [[any]] [[unthinkable]] fashion. Its not just the poor acting and [[screenplay]] nor is it the lame and perverse [[moment]] one wastes on [[staring]] it. What [[genuinely]] puts this film in my hall of [[pity]] is the [[observable]] struggling that the [[authors]] and [[industrialists]] do with the film to [[endeavour]] and [[deliver]] it funny. The actress replacing Jean Reno's [[descendent]] is to [[longtime]] and [[learns]] her lesson in the [[fiirst]] [[films]] so they [[added]] a new girl who is to be [[wedlock]]. [[Almost]] all of the [[initial]] [[goodies]] and [[jokes]] [[comeback]] [[conversely]] this time makes me [[wanting]] to [[ripen]] my eyes out of my sockets because it's a [[wastes]] of perfectly good film. The torture of the constant camera cuts and [[punches]] in any scene in this movie can put the viewer into violent convolutions. This second film [[pick]] the successful original and drags it out of its coffin and parades the corpse out in the public [[piazza]] and perversely [[deteriorates]] not only the original idea and its legacy but our [[intellect]] as well. This [[filmmaking]] unlike the spruce [[geese]] could not [[stealing]] for it had no plot in the principals [[returned]] for a 'necklace'. [[Nos]] [[scripts]] since it was [[reportedly]] [[wrote]] and added to daily. No attention to camera or [[punches]] in mind. Poor [[lights]] and [[peculiar]] [[ramifications]] [[played]] for the sake of doing so. This [[cinema]] would not [[yet]] pass for a student [[cinema]] in basic [[Cinema]] 101. How this pile [[ai]] through no one can [[told]]. It was a [[overwhelming]] [[losing]] [[investors]] and it [[seem]] that no one had the [[fortitude]] to put this [[anomalous]] [[savage]] [[awry]] out of our miseries. This [[cinematographic]] has one good [[party]] ...its [[CEASES]]! This [[cinematographic]] is my #1 [[lousiest]] [[filmmaking]] of all [[period]], [[ultimately]] "Howard The [[Canard]]" is no longer the [[geese]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] One of my [[favourite]] "domestic" [[movies]]. I don't know if there is any person in our country who hasn't seen this movie! It's [[funny]], and sad at some moments...I don't know how did people around the world (who had opportunity to watch it) accept this movie, because you have to know some moments in our serbian history and character of Serbs in the first half of the 20th century, to be able to understand it! But as I see here, there is somebody from Canada who watched it...and he liked it.

I think that I'll try to put all good quotes from the movie on this site, but first to find out how to do that...

[[Cheers]]. One of my [[preferable]] "domestic" [[filmmaking]]. I don't know if there is any person in our country who hasn't seen this movie! It's [[comical]], and sad at some moments...I don't know how did people around the world (who had opportunity to watch it) accept this movie, because you have to know some moments in our serbian history and character of Serbs in the first half of the 20th century, to be able to understand it! But as I see here, there is somebody from Canada who watched it...and he liked it.

I think that I'll try to put all good quotes from the movie on this site, but first to find out how to do that...

[[Clink]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Well, you [[know]] the [[rest]]! This has to be the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've seen in a long long time. I can only imagine that [[Stephanie]] Beaham had some bills to pay when [[taking]] on this role.

The lead role is played by (to me) a [[complete]] unknown and I [[would]] [[imagine]] disappeared right back into obscurity right after this [[turkey]].

[[Bruce]] [[Lee]] [[led]] the martial arts [[charge]] in the early 70's and since then fight scenes have to be either martial arts based or at [[least]] brutal if [[using]] street fighting [[techniques]]. This [[movie]] [[uses]] [[fast]] cuts to [[show]] off the martial arts, however, [[even]] this can't [[disguise]] the fact that the [[lady]] doesn't know how to [[throw]] a punch. An [[average]] 8 year old boy would [[take]] her [[apart]] on this [[showing]].

[[Sorry]], the only [[mystery]] on [[show]] here is how this didn't [[win]] the golden raspberry for its year. Well, you [[savoir]] the [[repose]]! This has to be the [[hardest]] [[kino]] I've seen in a long long time. I can only imagine that [[Stefani]] Beaham had some bills to pay when [[adopting]] on this role.

The lead role is played by (to me) a [[finish]] unknown and I [[ought]] [[imagines]] disappeared right back into obscurity right after this [[turk]].

[[Bros]] [[Rhee]] [[culminated]] the martial arts [[burdens]] in the early 70's and since then fight scenes have to be either martial arts based or at [[fewer]] brutal if [[used]] street fighting [[technique]]. This [[film]] [[utilizes]] [[swiftly]] cuts to [[illustrating]] off the martial arts, however, [[yet]] this can't [[conceal]] the fact that the [[dame]] doesn't know how to [[toss]] a punch. An [[averages]] 8 year old boy would [[taking]] her [[moreover]] on this [[displayed]].

[[Dorry]], the only [[puzzle]] on [[exhibitions]] here is how this didn't [[wins]] the golden raspberry for its year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the first Jean Renoir Silent film I have watched and perhaps rightly so since it is generally regarded to be his best, besides being also his first major work. Overall, it is indeed a very assured and technically accomplished film which belies the fact that it was only Renoir’s sophomore effort. For fans of the director, it is full of interesting hints at future Renoir movies especially THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID (1946) and THE GOLDEN COACH (1952) – in its depiction of a lower class femme fatale madly desired by various aristocrats who disgrace themselves for her – but also THE RULES OF THE GAME (1939) – showing as it does in one sequence how the rowdy servants behave when their masters' backs are turned away from them – and FRENCH CANCAN (1955) – Nana is seen having a go at the scandalous dance at one point. Personally, I would say that the film makes for a respectable companion piece to G.W. Pabst’s PANDORA’S BOX (1928), Josef von Sternberg’s THE BLUE ANGEL (1930) and Max Ophuls’ LOLA MONTES (1955) in its vivid recreation of the sordid life of a courtesan.

Having said all that, the film was a resounding critical and commercial failure at the time of its release – a “mad undertaking” as Renoir himself later referred to it in his memoirs which, not only personally cost him a fortune (he eventually eased the resulting financial burden by selling off some of his late father’s paintings), but almost made him give up the cinema for good! Stylistically, NANA is quite different from Renoir’s sound work and owes a particular debt to Erich von Stroheim’s FOOLISH WIVES (1922), a film Renoir greatly admired – and, on a personal note, one which I really ought to revisit presto (having owned the Kino DVD of it and the other von Stroheims for 4 years now). Anyway, NANA is certainly not without its flaws: a deliberate pace makes itself felt during the overly generous 130 minute running time with some sequences (the horse race around the mid-point in particular) going on too long.

The overly mannered acting style on display is also hard to take at times – particularly that of Catherine Hessling’s Nana and Raymond Guerin-Catelain’s Georges Hugon (one of her various suitors)…although, technically, they are being their characters i.e. a bad actress (who takes to the courtesan lifestyle when she is booed off the stage) and an immature weakling, respectively. However, like Anna Magnani in THE GOLDEN COACH, Hessling (Renoir’s wife at the time, by the way) is just not attractive enough to be very convincing as “the epitome of elegance” (as another admirer describes her at one stage) who is able to enslave every man she meets. Other notables in the cast are “Dr. Caligari” himself, Werner Krauss (as Nana’s most fervent devotee, Count Muffat), Jean Angelo (as an initially skeptical but eventually tragic suitor of Nana’s) and future distinguished film director Claude Autant-Lara (billed as Claude Moore and also serving as art director here) as Muffat’s close friend but who is secretly enamored with the latter’s neglected wife!

The print I watched – via Lionsgate’s “Jean Renoir 3-Disc Collector’s Edition” – is, for the most part, a lovingly restored and beautifully-tinted one which had been previously available only on French DVD. Being based on a classic of French literature (by Emile Zola, no less), it cannot help but having been brought to the screen several times and the two most notable film versions are Dorothy Arzner’s in 1934 (with Anna Sten and Lionel Atwill and which I own on VHS) and Christian-Jaque’s in 1955 (with Martine Carol and Charles Boyer, which I am not familiar with). --------------------------------------------- Result 1859 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Okay, note to the people that put together these horror acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[grateful]] and I hugely support the [[initiative]], but … have you even watched the films before selecting them as part of the collection? When I purchased the Boris Karloff collection there were several films in which the [[star]] only [[played]] a [[supportive]] and unessential role ("Tower of London", "The Strange Door"). "The Invisible Ray", [[however]], is part of the Bela Lugosi [[collection]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This actually would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection instead! Bela Lugosi's character is quite possibly the most good-natured and earnest one he ever portrayed in his entire career and good old Karloff actually plays the mad and dangerously obsessed scientist here. "The Invisible Ray" features three main chapters. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and demands quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are fundamental for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a couple of eminent colleagues (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he managed to capture extraterrestrial rays inside a self-manufactured device. The scientists are sincerely impressed with his work and invite Rukh and his lovely wife Diane along for an expedition in the heart of Africa. There Dr. Rukh isolates himself from the group, discovers the essential element "Radium X" to complete his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the best and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with ingenious gimmicks (melting statues) and a surprising climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, convinced the others are out to steal his discovery and even his life, he intends to eliminate them using his deadly touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible Ray" sounds rather complicated, but the film is easy to follow and entertaining. The story is rather far-fetched but nevertheless compelling and director Lambert Hillyer provides several moments of sheer suspense. Boris Karloff is truly fantastic and so is Lugosi, even though he deserved to have a little more screen time. Their scenes together are the highlights of the film, along with the funky images of the glowing Boris. Okay, note to the people that put together these horror acting legends DVD-collections: I truly am [[appreciative]] and I hugely support the [[initiatives]], but … have you even watched the films before selecting them as part of the collection? When I purchased the Boris Karloff collection there were several films in which the [[stars]] only [[accomplished]] a [[positive]] and unessential role ("Tower of London", "The Strange Door"). "The Invisible Ray", [[instead]], is part of the Bela Lugosi [[collate]] and here it's actually Boris Karloff who overshadows Bela! This actually would have been a great title for the Boris Karloff collection instead! Bela Lugosi's character is quite possibly the most good-natured and earnest one he ever portrayed in his entire career and good old Karloff actually plays the mad and dangerously obsessed scientist here. "The Invisible Ray" features three main chapters. The first one, set in Dr. Janos Rukh's Carpathian castle is pretty boring and demands quite a lot of the viewer's patience, but of course the character drawings and the subject matter discussed here are fundamental for the rest of the film. Dr. Rukh (Karloff) demonstrates to a couple of eminent colleagues (among them Bela Lugosi as Dr. Benet) how he managed to capture extraterrestrial rays inside a self-manufactured device. The scientists are sincerely impressed with his work and invite Rukh and his lovely wife Diane along for an expedition in the heart of Africa. There Dr. Rukh isolates himself from the group, discovers the essential element "Radium X" to complete his medical ray and goes completely bonkers after being overexposed to the meteorite himself. The third and final act is obviously the best and most horrific one, as it revolves on a good old fashioned killing spree with ingenious gimmicks (melting statues) and a surprising climax. Karloff glows in the dark and, convinced the others are out to steal his discovery and even his life, he intends to eliminate them using his deadly touch. The narrative structure of "The Invisible Ray" sounds rather complicated, but the film is easy to follow and entertaining. The story is rather far-fetched but nevertheless compelling and director Lambert Hillyer provides several moments of sheer suspense. Boris Karloff is truly fantastic and so is Lugosi, even though he deserved to have a little more screen time. Their scenes together are the highlights of the film, along with the funky images of the glowing Boris. --------------------------------------------- Result 1860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to perform the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is consumed by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[great]] [[movie]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another attraction of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" While rehearing Carmen of Bizet, the middle-aged choreographer Antonio (Antonio Gades) brings the sexy Carmen (Laura del Sol) to perform the lead role. Antonio falls in love for Carmen, who is an independent and seductive woman incapable to accept a possessive love. When Carmen has an affair with another dancer, Antonio is consumed by his jealousy like D. José in the original opera, entwining fiction with reality.

"Carmen" is another [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]] of Carlos Saura's trilogy dedicated to the Flamenco dance. The dramatic love story is developed with the lives of the artists entwined with the characters they are rehearsing, and many times is not absolutely clear whether what is happening is reality (with the dancers) or fiction (of the play). Paco de Lucia is another attraction of this original version of the famous Bizet's opera, which is based on the novel of Prosper Mérimée. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Carmen" --------------------------------------------- Result 1861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is going to be the most [[useless]] comment I have ever put down, but yet I must do it to [[warn]] you about the atrocity to [[cinema]] that "Freddy's Dead" is. It is not only the very worst chapter of the Nightmare series, but is right up there with the [[worst]] [[horror]] sequel of all time! It was [[boring]], [[pointless]], and [[nearly]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top CORNY kills are [[enough]] to drive this "[[film]]" into the [[ground]]. [[However]], it doesn't stop there, just add bad acting, a [[terrible]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping pile of guano! It's no wonder why [[Freddy]], as always played by Robert Englund, has made two postmortem appearances. I would too if I went out like that. This is a strictly fans only movie, don't stare at our shame. This is going to be the most [[needless]] comment I have ever put down, but yet I must do it to [[ultimatum]] you about the atrocity to [[films]] that "Freddy's Dead" is. It is not only the very worst chapter of the Nightmare series, but is right up there with the [[lousiest]] [[terror]] sequel of all time! It was [[bored]], [[vain]], and [[approximately]] death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top CORNY kills are [[suffice]] to drive this "[[cinema]]" into the [[terrain]]. [[Instead]], it doesn't stop there, just add bad acting, a [[scary]] script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping pile of guano! It's no wonder why [[Freddie]], as always played by Robert Englund, has made two postmortem appearances. I would too if I went out like that. This is a strictly fans only movie, don't stare at our shame. --------------------------------------------- Result 1862 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] College students, who are clearing out a condemned dormitory, are stalked by an elusive killer.

The [[Dorm]] That Dripped Blood (aka Pranks) is a bit of a mixed bag for slasher fans. The movies [[production]] values are pretty low and the story for the most part is pretty [[routine]], there's even a creepy bum hanging around for a red herring. In fact much of the story's build-up is pretty forgettable, [[save]] for one or two brutal murders. But the movie is really made better by its surprisingly intense [[climax]] (in an atmospheric setting) and one fairly bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is lackluster for the most part. Stephen Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty nice turn in character. Also look for a young Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer saved the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** College students, who are clearing out a condemned dormitory, are stalked by an elusive killer.

The [[Bunkhouse]] That Dripped Blood (aka Pranks) is a bit of a mixed bag for slasher fans. The movies [[productivity]] values are pretty low and the story for the most part is pretty [[everyday]], there's even a creepy bum hanging around for a red herring. In fact much of the story's build-up is pretty forgettable, [[economize]] for one or two brutal murders. But the movie is really made better by its surprisingly intense [[pinnacle]] (in an atmospheric setting) and one fairly bold, unconventional conclusion.

The cast is lackluster for the most part. Stephen Sachs is the best of the lot as he does a pretty nice turn in character. Also look for a young Daphne Zuniga as an ill-fated student.

Over all this is a pretty standard B slasher effort, but the finale is well worth savoring and for this viewer saved the movie from being a complete ho-hum.

** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 1863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] There were a [[lot]] of 50's sci-fi [[movies]]. They were [[big]] [[draws]] for the Drive-in [[theaters]]. A [[lot]] of them were crappy [[even]] back then. This [[movie]] and 'The Day the Earth [[Stood]] Still' [[stand]] out, and both have aged well in their own [[way]]. From the very [[beginning]] with its eerie theremin musical score (which [[still]] [[sounds]] [[weird]] since theremins are [[hardly]] ever [[used]]) Forbidden [[Planet]] takes you where no [[man]] has gone before. [[Speaking]] of [[Star]] Trek there's so much material in this [[film]] that [[got]] into [[Star]] [[Trek]] TOS its like a [[pilot]] for the series; from the interactive [[captain]]/first mate/[[doctor]], the [[mad]] scientist, [[alien]] beings, [[babe]] in short [[skirt]], [[computer]] intelligence; it is all de rigeur now but this was the first of its [[kind]]. Besides, it has good acting and well-done artwork which [[even]] today evokes a certain [[awe]] at the [[imagery]]. [[Consider]] how the huge Krell [[machine]] is successfully depicted with some [[real]] depth. I [[saw]] this as a [[kid]] (at a drive-in :0)when it was a [[new]] [[movie]] and it [[scared]] me. Of course [[every]] [[movie]] that was even vaguely scary did back then but I [[remember]] being real worried about the [[invisible]] monster. [[Forbidden]] Planet is a [[movie]] a sci-fi fan can watch [[several]] [[times]] and find [[something]] [[new]] with each [[viewing]]. There were a [[lots]] of 50's sci-fi [[cinema]]. They were [[considerable]] [[attracts]] for the Drive-in [[theater]]. A [[lots]] of them were crappy [[yet]] back then. This [[cinema]] and 'The Day the Earth [[Amounted]] Still' [[standing]] out, and both have aged well in their own [[routing]]. From the very [[starting]] with its eerie theremin musical score (which [[again]] [[noises]] [[freaky]] since theremins are [[practically]] ever [[utilizing]]) Forbidden [[Planetary]] takes you where no [[dawg]] has gone before. [[Talking]] of [[Superstar]] Trek there's so much material in this [[filmmaking]] that [[get]] into [[Superstar]] [[Walkabout]] TOS its like a [[piloting]] for the series; from the interactive [[captains]]/first mate/[[physician]], the [[enraged]] scientist, [[exotic]] beings, [[babies]] in short [[hem]], [[computers]] intelligence; it is all de rigeur now but this was the first of its [[sorts]]. Besides, it has good acting and well-done artwork which [[yet]] today evokes a certain [[dazzle]] at the [[image]]. [[Contemplate]] how the huge Krell [[appliance]] is successfully depicted with some [[actual]] depth. I [[observed]] this as a [[infantile]] (at a drive-in :0)when it was a [[novel]] [[flick]] and it [[terrified]] me. Of course [[any]] [[flick]] that was even vaguely scary did back then but I [[remind]] being real worried about the [[unseen]] monster. [[Forbid]] Planet is a [[flick]] a sci-fi fan can watch [[multiple]] [[dates]] and find [[anything]] [[novel]] with each [[visualizing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ...but the actress playing the [[daughter]] just doesn't [[come]] [[across]] as [[credible]].

It doesn't [[work]] for me when I see an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[suggested]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[children]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[casting]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[work]] for me.

you [[might]] [[want]] to [[check]] other [[comments]] to find out what this film is [[actually]] about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[agree]] that the [[premise]] for this [[film]] is [[beautiful]] [[though]] - I [[wish]] another director would [[try]] to [[pick]] up this story again. ...but the actress playing the [[giri]] just doesn't [[coming]] [[throughout]] as [[dependable]].

It doesn't [[jobs]] for me when I see an actress of about 25 years playing the role of a 12-year-old... Other commentators have [[proposing]] that this is one of the messages of this film, that [[enfant]] may sometimes seem more adult-like than adults, but with the [[cast]] as it is in this film, it just doesn't [[collaboration]] for me.

you [[apt]] [[wanted]] to [[inspect]] other [[commentaries]] to find out what this film is [[genuinely]] about, because i couldn't bear watching it to the end.

i [[concur]] that the [[supposition]] for this [[cinematography]] is [[magnificent]] [[despite]] - I [[wanting]] another director would [[tried]] to [[selected]] up this story again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1865 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] One of my [[favorite]] movies, with a very nostalgic ending. The movie is about the Sullivan family, obviously Michael Sullivan (the father) is one of the main members of the mafia, the killer to say it this way, and an expert one. One of the kids wants to know the work of his father (a terrible mistake), so he hides on his father's car and well, he sees Tom Hanks in action to say it this way.

Mafia doesn't rules, in Mafia nobody wins, when they want you out, they take you out. Of course you can see anyone who works at the mafia with a giant house, the best car in the world, whatever you like, but make a wrong work, or make something your "boss" doesn't want, and you're fired, and killed.

You can see what I mean in the movie, Sullivan Jr. sees something he didn't had to see, and well, almost all his family gets killed for that "wrong thing" his son did. The movie is really entertaining, you see how the Sullivan's live after being chased by the mafia, or kinda of that.

This movie is kinda of sad, shows us about revenge, those dirty works people do, almost everything you like. Hopefully the guy is reading this comment doesn't works for the mafia, and if you work at the mafia make yourself a favor and get the hell out of the country before you get killed by your boss and their workers.

This movie receives: 10/10 One of my [[preferable]] movies, with a very nostalgic ending. The movie is about the Sullivan family, obviously Michael Sullivan (the father) is one of the main members of the mafia, the killer to say it this way, and an expert one. One of the kids wants to know the work of his father (a terrible mistake), so he hides on his father's car and well, he sees Tom Hanks in action to say it this way.

Mafia doesn't rules, in Mafia nobody wins, when they want you out, they take you out. Of course you can see anyone who works at the mafia with a giant house, the best car in the world, whatever you like, but make a wrong work, or make something your "boss" doesn't want, and you're fired, and killed.

You can see what I mean in the movie, Sullivan Jr. sees something he didn't had to see, and well, almost all his family gets killed for that "wrong thing" his son did. The movie is really entertaining, you see how the Sullivan's live after being chased by the mafia, or kinda of that.

This movie is kinda of sad, shows us about revenge, those dirty works people do, almost everything you like. Hopefully the guy is reading this comment doesn't works for the mafia, and if you work at the mafia make yourself a favor and get the hell out of the country before you get killed by your boss and their workers.

This movie receives: 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1866 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Wracked with [[guilt]] after a lot of [[things]] [[felt]] [[apart]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber [[Gabriel]] Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie ([[Janine]] [[Turner]]), while over the cloudy [[skies]] where the [[weather]] [[looks]] a bit [[threatening]], a [[spectacularly]] [[precarious]] mid-air [[hijacking]] goes [[wrong]] and $100 million taken from a [[Treasury]] Department plane get lost in the middle of [[nowhere]] followed by a crash landing…

[[Stranded]] off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen [[cash]], the high-trained [[hikers]] make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[breathtaking]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[definitely]] Stallone's [[best]] action adventure [[movie]]… Wracked with [[blame]] after a lot of [[items]] [[smelled]] [[furthermore]] on that ledge, an ace mountain rescue climber [[Gabriele]] Walker (Stallone) comes back for his girlfriend Jessie ([[Janeane]] [[Latour]]), while over the cloudy [[heavens]] where the [[weatherman]] [[seem]] a bit [[endangering]], a [[impressively]] [[brittle]] mid-air [[abduct]] goes [[inaccurate]] and $100 million taken from a [[Hoard]] Department plane get lost in the middle of [[somewhere]] followed by a crash landing…

[[Beached]] off the snowy peaks, and needing mountain guides to win back the stolen [[money]], the high-trained [[hiker]] make an emergency call asking the help of a rescue unit…

Unfortunately, Gab and Hall (Michael Rooker) have to team up to arrive at the scene of the crash unaware that the distress call was a fake, and a bunch of merciless terrorists led by a psychotic (John Lithgow),are waiting for them only to find out a way off the stormy mountain with the dumped cases of money…

With [[exciting]] shots, vertiginous scenery, dizzying heights, perilous climbs, freezing temperatures, "Cliffhanger" is [[surely]] Stallone's [[optimum]] action adventure [[filmmaking]]… --------------------------------------------- Result 1867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This film, along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[favorite]] Pabst-directed films and I enjoyed them more than his much more famous [[films]] which starred Louise Brooks (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's probably because both are very similar to the Neo-Realist films that the Italians perfected in the 1940s and 50s. This style film called for using non-actors (just typical folks) in [[everyday]] settings in order to create [[intensely]] [[involving]] and [[realistic]] films.

In this case, the film is about French and German coal miners, so appropriately, the people in the roles seem like miners--not actors. The central conflict as the film begins is that there is a huge mine located on the Franco-German border. Instead of one big mine, it is divided at the border and German workers are not welcome in the French mine, despite there being greater unemployment in Germany. This, language differences (illustrated wonderfully in a dance hall scene) and WWI conspire to create a huge rift between the factions--resulting in a WE vs. THEY mentality. Later, an explosion causes a huge collapse in the French and the Germans refuse to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they prove that there is true comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a strong criticism of xenophobia and tried, in vain, to get the German audiences to see the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously moving film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic images I have ever seen. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (Milestone) had great messages of peace and harmony but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an amazing and sad relic that is well worth seeing. This film, along with WESTFRONT 1918, are my [[preferable]] Pabst-directed films and I enjoyed them more than his much more famous [[cinematography]] which starred Louise Brooks (such as PANDORA'S BOX). It's probably because both are very similar to the Neo-Realist films that the Italians perfected in the 1940s and 50s. This style film called for using non-actors (just typical folks) in [[routine]] settings in order to create [[intently]] [[implicating]] and [[practical]] films.

In this case, the film is about French and German coal miners, so appropriately, the people in the roles seem like miners--not actors. The central conflict as the film begins is that there is a huge mine located on the Franco-German border. Instead of one big mine, it is divided at the border and German workers are not welcome in the French mine, despite there being greater unemployment in Germany. This, language differences (illustrated wonderfully in a dance hall scene) and WWI conspire to create a huge rift between the factions--resulting in a WE vs. THEY mentality. Later, an explosion causes a huge collapse in the French and the Germans refuse to sit back and do nothing. Risking their own lives, they prove that there is true comradeship between miners and men in general.

The film is a strong criticism of xenophobia and tried, in vain, to get the German audiences to see the futility of war and hatred. It was a gorgeously moving film with some of the scariest and claustrophobic images I have ever seen. Considering history, though, the film's impact was minimal at best. It's a real shame, as like this one, WESTFRONT 1918, JÁACCUSE (Gance) and ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (Milestone) had great messages of peace and harmony but ultimately were failures in positively swaying public opinion. So, from a historical point of view, it's an amazing and sad relic that is well worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 1868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I was thrilled to watch this [[movie]] [[expecting]] it to be the sequel to the [[cult]] classic "[[Private]] Lessons" which [[portrays]] the [[dream]] of any [[male]] [[teenager]].

"[[Private]] Lessons II" has NOTHING to do with the title I [[mention]]. It's just a regular soft-core Cinemax flick that won't make a [[change]] in your [[life]]. There's just one [[hot]] [[sex]] scene in a [[rooftop]] but that's it. I watched this a [[long]] time ago but believe me, this is just a [[regular]] [[boring]] soft [[core]] flick.

The [[women]] are [[hot]] but that's not enough to [[rent]] or buy the movie. My advice is to watch this only if it airs on cable. I was thrilled to watch this [[cinematography]] [[await]] it to be the sequel to the [[cults]] classic "[[Privy]] Lessons" which [[exemplifies]] the [[dreamt]] of any [[virile]] [[juvenile]].

"[[Privately]] Lessons II" has NOTHING to do with the title I [[mentioned]]. It's just a regular soft-core Cinemax flick that won't make a [[modification]] in your [[lifetime]]. There's just one [[sexiest]] [[sexuality]] scene in a [[toit]] but that's it. I watched this a [[protracted]] time ago but believe me, this is just a [[regularly]] [[bore]] soft [[crux]] flick.

The [[femmes]] are [[caliente]] but that's not enough to [[leasing]] or buy the movie. My advice is to watch this only if it airs on cable. --------------------------------------------- Result 1869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[horribly]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. No,

Basically your watching something that doesn't make sense. To not spoil the film for people who actually want to this take a look at the flick I will explain the story.

A normal everyday to day women, is walking down a street then find's herself driving by in her own car. She follows her and many events take place during that time that include her and her family.

I specifically made an account to comment on this film, of how [[unbearably]] written this was. The acting was great, the events were great, but the story just brought it nowhere - it could of been added to tremendously and be made into a worldwide epidemic. I'm not sure what the writer was trying to accomplish by making this, usually at the end of films most of your questions get answers but this film has you asking, What just happened and 1 hour 20 minutes just passed for nothing.

Spoiler Starts__

They had this area between 2 dimensions (ours and behind the glass) that would come into our world and kill us. It was not elaborated on all during the film, and you never know how it was happening or why it was or when it happened. Nothing gets explained during the film. The main character shouldn't of even been the main character. At the end of the film the guy who finally figures it all out and runs away (her sisters boyfriend) should of been the main character but sadly the movie ends 20 seconds after.

I bought this movie for $10, threw it out right after.. don't waste your time. I really hope nothing like this is made again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I watched both [[Bourne]] Identity and Bourne Supremacy on [[DVD]] before [[seeing]] this in the theater. I'd been waiting for this [[since]] before they started filming. I wasn't [[disappointed]].

Minor spoilers below-

Overall it was good, but it [[also]] lacked the [[continuity]] of the [[first]] two. Identity and Supremacy both [[flowed]] [[gracefully]] between adrenaline rush action to introspective drama. This [[movie]] [[felt]] choppy at [[times]]. The plot-building down-times were slightly too drawn out. That caused the following action to feel too frenetic.

Camera: Speaking of frenetic, the trademark Greengrass shaky cam was present and very annoying to me. I know its has been talked/whined about to nausea on the message board, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. All the martial arts training the actors went through was totally wasted. The ridiculous camera cuts and wiggling camera ruined most of the fighting in the movie. It is a cheap, student director trick to make the film feel unsettled. I'd expect those techniques to be used in some horror flick made for high school kids, but not in this classy, adult, [[action]] [[series]]. Too much extreme close-up also. Do some framing. Get some interesting shots. Constant close-up [[feels]] like lazy directing to me.

[[Story]]: The [[story]] was VERY confusing at first. They thrust [[new]] names and faces [[upon]] you from the get go. [[Gave]] me the [[feeling]] that you get when you come into a movie late and know you've missed some [[crucial]] [[information]]. [[Felt]] [[rushed]] or compressed for [[time]] [[reasons]]. [[After]] you catch up [[however]] the story is [[quite]] [[good]]. It's [[enjoyable]] following leads along with Bourne. [[HOWEVER]], I did [[NOT]] [[care]] for the [[whole]] last scene of [[Supremacy]] (Landy/Bourne on the [[phone]]) being in the middle of [[Ultimatum]] [[thing]]. It basically makes the [[movie]] a half-prequel. I [[thought]] that was [[awkward]].

Cast/Characters: The star of the [[movie]] is the action. [[Obviously]] there are only two originals [[left]]. Bourne and [[Nicky]] Parsons. Them [[teaming]] up was [[kind]] of [[odd]] to me. I [[think]] they just [[wanted]] to [[give]] Bourne [[someone]] to [[protect]] to and [[confide]] in. Unless I [[completely]] [[missed]] [[something]], they never even [[tell]] you why they teamed up. The other [[assassins]] in the [[movie]] were pretty quiet. This felt like Gilroy/Greengrass/whoever wanting to not leave open ends. Understandable but disappointing. Seriously, Damon with Clive Owen in Identity and Marton Csokas in Supremacy.. Those scenes were phenomenal. These assassins are as uninteresting as Castel (the first fella Bourne fights in Identity). The cast in general has degraded as the the series went on. Clive Owen was practically an afterthought. That's a measure of strength for that first cast. The second, they basically trade Chris Cooper for Joan Allen.... Not exactly equal. This one trades Brian Cox and Franka Potente for 3 actors to be named later. Nothing against David Strathairn, Scott [[Glenn]], or [[Albert]] Finney, but they're not the first names that come to mind for this kind of series. Aside from a couple pauses that seemed to long, the acting was right on.

As a whole, it was successful. Felt like they wanted to get the series over with though. If they would have trimmed or rearranged the slower parts, eliminated Scott Glenn's part entirely, zoomed out, and taken the camera away from the seizure victim, it would have been perfect.

ENDING SPOILER

I don't see why they leave Bourne alive at the end. It was my understanding this was the conclusion. They clearly made reference to the very beginning of the series with his silhouette floating motionless. I thought that was going to be it. A full circle type of ending. I did like Nicky reacting to the news report though.

SPOILER SPECIFICS WARNING - QUOTE FROM MOVIE BELOW -

Bourne's last line at the end "Look at this.. Look at what they make you give." quoting the first assassin he killed, I loved that. The final scene was great. (Except that it was Vosen {Strathairn} that shot at Bourne. Why would he do that? Just out for vengeance? If he was angry enough to murder, why not shoot Pamela Landy after she faxes his top secret file? That didn't make sense.) I watched both [[Bourn]] Identity and Bourne Supremacy on [[DVDS]] before [[witnessing]] this in the theater. I'd been waiting for this [[because]] before they started filming. I wasn't [[frustrated]].

Minor spoilers below-

Overall it was good, but it [[similarly]] lacked the [[continuation]] of the [[fiirst]] two. Identity and Supremacy both [[rushed]] [[politely]] between adrenaline rush action to introspective drama. This [[movies]] [[smelled]] choppy at [[time]]. The plot-building down-times were slightly too drawn out. That caused the following action to feel too frenetic.

Camera: Speaking of frenetic, the trademark Greengrass shaky cam was present and very annoying to me. I know its has been talked/whined about to nausea on the message board, but it doesn't mean it's not relevant. All the martial arts training the actors went through was totally wasted. The ridiculous camera cuts and wiggling camera ruined most of the fighting in the movie. It is a cheap, student director trick to make the film feel unsettled. I'd expect those techniques to be used in some horror flick made for high school kids, but not in this classy, adult, [[activity]] [[serials]]. Too much extreme close-up also. Do some framing. Get some interesting shots. Constant close-up [[thinks]] like lazy directing to me.

[[Histories]]: The [[storytelling]] was VERY confusing at first. They thrust [[newer]] names and faces [[after]] you from the get go. [[Given]] me the [[impression]] that you get when you come into a movie late and know you've missed some [[pivotal]] [[info]]. [[Smelled]] [[hurried]] or compressed for [[period]] [[justification]]. [[Upon]] you catch up [[instead]] the story is [[rather]] [[alright]]. It's [[agreeable]] following leads along with Bourne. [[STILL]], I did [[NOPE]] [[healthcare]] for the [[total]] last scene of [[Superiority]] (Landy/Bourne on the [[phones]]) being in the middle of [[Alert]] [[stuff]]. It basically makes the [[cinematography]] a half-prequel. I [[ideology]] that was [[clumsy]].

Cast/Characters: The star of the [[flick]] is the action. [[Surely]] there are only two originals [[gauche]]. Bourne and [[Nik]] Parsons. Them [[matching]] up was [[genus]] of [[bizarre]] to me. I [[thinking]] they just [[wants]] to [[confer]] Bourne [[whoever]] to [[protecting]] to and [[entrust]] in. Unless I [[totally]] [[miss]] [[anything]], they never even [[say]] you why they teamed up. The other [[murderers]] in the [[kino]] were pretty quiet. This felt like Gilroy/Greengrass/whoever wanting to not leave open ends. Understandable but disappointing. Seriously, Damon with Clive Owen in Identity and Marton Csokas in Supremacy.. Those scenes were phenomenal. These assassins are as uninteresting as Castel (the first fella Bourne fights in Identity). The cast in general has degraded as the the series went on. Clive Owen was practically an afterthought. That's a measure of strength for that first cast. The second, they basically trade Chris Cooper for Joan Allen.... Not exactly equal. This one trades Brian Cox and Franka Potente for 3 actors to be named later. Nothing against David Strathairn, Scott [[Glen]], or [[Alberto]] Finney, but they're not the first names that come to mind for this kind of series. Aside from a couple pauses that seemed to long, the acting was right on.

As a whole, it was successful. Felt like they wanted to get the series over with though. If they would have trimmed or rearranged the slower parts, eliminated Scott Glenn's part entirely, zoomed out, and taken the camera away from the seizure victim, it would have been perfect.

ENDING SPOILER

I don't see why they leave Bourne alive at the end. It was my understanding this was the conclusion. They clearly made reference to the very beginning of the series with his silhouette floating motionless. I thought that was going to be it. A full circle type of ending. I did like Nicky reacting to the news report though.

SPOILER SPECIFICS WARNING - QUOTE FROM MOVIE BELOW -

Bourne's last line at the end "Look at this.. Look at what they make you give." quoting the first assassin he killed, I loved that. The final scene was great. (Except that it was Vosen {Strathairn} that shot at Bourne. Why would he do that? Just out for vengeance? If he was angry enough to murder, why not shoot Pamela Landy after she faxes his top secret file? That didn't make sense.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I've been a [[fan]] since his first [[album]]. This film is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are simply [[terrible]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, Nick Cave, Antony, and Jarvis Cocker were particularly [[annoying]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was ruined by the so called harmony of Martha Wainwright.

I've never seen my wife get up and walk out of the room on a film before and I found myself fast forwarding through the performances to get to the few interview segments, which were also difficult to watch due to the poor camera work.

There are many who have been able to interpret Mr. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD Lang, Billy Joel, Aaron Neville, and Willie Nelson come to mind, but those people selected for this performance were just awful.

Hopefully there will be another attempt at capturing Leonard Cohen on film that will illustrate his insight, talent, and intelligence.

So sad I've been a [[breather]] since his first [[scrapbook]]. This film is a disservice to him. The performances, except for one by Rufus Wainwright and Teddy Thompson are simply [[scary]].

Those by Martha Wainwright, Nick Cave, Antony, and Jarvis Cocker were particularly [[galling]]. Even the one by the McGarrigle sisters was ruined by the so called harmony of Martha Wainwright.

I've never seen my wife get up and walk out of the room on a film before and I found myself fast forwarding through the performances to get to the few interview segments, which were also difficult to watch due to the poor camera work.

There are many who have been able to interpret Mr. Cohen's songs, Jennifer Warnes, KD Lang, Billy Joel, Aaron Neville, and Willie Nelson come to mind, but those people selected for this performance were just awful.

Hopefully there will be another attempt at capturing Leonard Cohen on film that will illustrate his insight, talent, and intelligence.

So sad --------------------------------------------- Result 1872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is, without a doubt, the most [[offensive]] "[[chick]] flick" I have [[seen]] in [[years]], if not ever. The [[writing]] & characterizations are so [[riddled]] with stereotypes that the film verges on [[parody]]. Before walking out of the [[theater]] an [[hour]] and five [[minutes]] into this [[disaster]], we were subjected to the following themes: having a [[baby]] will [[solve]] all of your [[problems]], "[[performer]] [[types]]" are [[miserable]] messes, & [[musicians]] can't be [[good]] mothers [[unless]] they [[toss]] their [[dreams]] for a more [[conventional]] lifestyle. What a [[waste]] of a [[talented]] cast & some great-looking sets & [[costumes]]. When Natasha [[Richardson]] told Toni Collette that [[unless]] she [[lives]] a more mainstream [[life]], she'll [[end]] up - shudder - "[[alone]]!", I felt queasy. I can't believe this [[movie]] [[made]] it to theatrical release. It's the [[sort]] of fare one [[expects]] from those "women's" [[cable]] channels that I [[always]] pass right by when channel-surfing. I am [[female]] and over 35, so I should be [[part]] of this film's [[target]] [[audience]], but boy, does "Evening" miss its [[target]]. This is, without a doubt, the most [[onslaught]] "[[dame]] flick" I have [[noticed]] in [[yrs]], if not ever. The [[writes]] & characterizations are so [[replete]] with stereotypes that the film verges on [[mockery]]. Before walking out of the [[cinemas]] an [[hora]] and five [[mins]] into this [[cataclysm]], we were subjected to the following themes: having a [[bebe]] will [[addressing]] all of your [[disorders]], "[[virtuoso]] [[genus]]" are [[unhappy]] messes, & [[music]] can't be [[alright]] mothers [[if]] they [[lance]] their [[nightmares]] for a more [[traditional]] lifestyle. What a [[wastes]] of a [[gifted]] cast & some great-looking sets & [[suits]]. When Natasha [[Roberts]] told Toni Collette that [[if]] she [[iife]] a more mainstream [[vida]], she'll [[ends]] up - shudder - "[[lonely]]!", I felt queasy. I can't believe this [[film]] [[accomplished]] it to theatrical release. It's the [[genre]] of fare one [[awaited]] from those "women's" [[wire]] channels that I [[constantly]] pass right by when channel-surfing. I am [[girl]] and over 35, so I should be [[portions]] of this film's [[aim]] [[audiences]], but boy, does "Evening" miss its [[aiming]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of America's most brilliant film directors was without question Elia Kazan. His directorial genius was not particularly suited to taut thrillers, since Kazan needed more room to breathe and to be slower and more subtle. However, 'Panic in the Streets' is a first-rate social thriller and is if anything more relevant to today than it was to 1950 when it was released. The themes of illegal immigrants, people-smuggling, imminent plagues, rapid transmission around the world of diseases (a worried Richard Widmark says: 'I could be in any American city in ten hours and in Africa tomorrow.'), ethnic isolation and ghettoism are today's concerns more than ever. This film features a spectacular film debut by Jack Palance, and a wonderful performance by Barbara Bel Geddes, two casting strokes of genius. Richard Widmark is allowed not to be a psychopath for once, and is a deeply caring, warmly loving, intense hero of the people. He leads basically a one-man campaign to stop an epidemic of pneumonic plague in New Orleans, struggling to convince sluggish politicians and complacent policemen that there is a problem. There is a race against time to find the small-time crooks who have contracted the plague from a dead illegal immigrant within 48 hours, before the whole city, and as they are always reminding us, the whole country, are endangered with the worst thing since the 1919 flu. One amazing scene where Jack Palance, who is infected, is prevented from climbing aboard a ship by a rat-barrier on the rope is ironic in the extreme, reminding us in the most gruesome terms that humans can be the worst carriers and vermin of all. The highly dramatic chase scenes in what they call 'the coffee factory' at the wharfs rivals the most inventive climax scenes of Hitchcock, and with just as spectacular a setting. Many non-professionals appear in the film, which has the gritty realism of, well, something called reality. Kazan really takes the cameras into places where even people rarely went, and where even rats would have thought twice. This film was a major feat of social realism. If it lacks the electricity of the most highly charged thrillers, it is because Kazan took it so seriously that he could not hype it up, for after all, the threat of plague is serious enough to scare anybody without the need for extra guns and molls. The only unfortunate thing about the film is the title, which gives a false suggestion of superficiality. But Kazan was anything but superficial. He clearly considered this project a public duty, to alert us to genuine possibilities. If only those possibilities had diminished today, but alas, they are getting worse every day. One day, after a worldwide plague, this film may be shown to a few survivors as an example of how an outbreak was contained on film, but its lessons were forgotten. --------------------------------------------- Result 1874 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (77%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Less self-conscious and much less pretentious than GUTS OF A BEAUTY, this Kazuo Komizu gore flick is worth a look (at least once).

Sleazy snapshotters escort wanna-be actresses/models to a remote house in the woods in order to sexually molest them. Unfortunately (for the horny boys), a long-schlonged demon, who lives in the woods, has already targeted the girls for fun.

The thing even ends up having fun with the boys -- that's IF you consider beheadings, dismemberment and masturbation with severed limbs "fun".

Once again, it all sounds better on paper than it looks and sounds on film.

Just as Komizu mangled LIVING DEAD AT TOKYO BAY with his ineptitude, he also mangles this effort and is only saved by some audacious violence and some great white panty shots.

Don't buy the hype, though, or you'll be sorely disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 1875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] Well, I can honestly say that this is the first time that I experienced a film that had literally no meat or potatoes in it. The [[entire]] film felt [[like]] it was just the [[salad]] with no main course. The story line was fallible and [[laughable]], the [[characters]] were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was done by four-year [[olds]]. Does that cover it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[concept]] in my entire life. I have never read the comics or seen the other programs with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To begin, the story moved too quickly. For someone new to this character and situations, I needed more built into creating the reasons instead of finding the solution. I have seen other Anime (if you could call this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to develop them. There was nothing set aside for Lady Death. In a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly become this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, considering moments before she was introduced as this weak and feeble woman controlled by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do battle with an existence that has been around for millions of years. This was absurd. The presentation of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated character instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't work. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and instead I was left with more [[incoherent]] babbling than actual development. It is a very sad day in Hell when we forgo characters to show more violence and action, especially in an animated feature.

Next, there was Lucifer himself. Let me just say that I think I could do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was weak, his voice was laughable, and he just didn't represent the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a bigger place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** Well, I can honestly say that this is the first time that I experienced a film that had literally no meat or potatoes in it. The [[overall]] film felt [[iike]] it was just the [[coleslaw]] with no main course. The story line was fallible and [[nonsensical]], the [[attribute]] were one-dimensional, the realism was out the window, and the animation was done by four-year [[years]]. Does that cover it? I have never been more embarrassed for a [[notions]] in my entire life. I have never read the comics or seen the other programs with this character, but from the looks of the other reviews I am not off base with my observation.

To begin, the story moved too quickly. For someone new to this character and situations, I needed more built into creating the reasons instead of finding the solution. I have seen other Anime (if you could call this one an Anime) that do great things with their characters because they take the time to develop them. There was nothing set aside for Lady Death. In a few short scenes, we see her train with Cremator and instantly become this aggressive she-beast of Hell. This was hard for me to swallow, considering moments before she was introduced as this weak and feeble woman controlled by her father. Suddenly, she is immersed with hatred and can do battle with an existence that has been around for millions of years. This was absurd. The presentation of Lady Death was poor, to say the least. I felt as if she was nothing more than an animated character instead of a desperate woman with revenge on the mind. For me, it just didn't work. She was nothing more than eye-candy for prepubescent boys wanting to ogle the mass quantities of skin that she suddenly grew on her chest when training with Cremator. Oh, I felt sick just watching her. The same goes for the character of Cremator. Who was this random person? The explanation they gave wasn't enough, and instead I was left with more [[unconnected]] babbling than actual development. It is a very sad day in Hell when we forgo characters to show more violence and action, especially in an animated feature.

Next, there was Lucifer himself. Let me just say that I think I could do battle with the King of Hell and survive. He was weak, his voice was laughable, and he just didn't represent the image that I had in my mind. It was as if Disney was in control and wanted to make him semi-PC. He lacked the darkness and corrupt nature that Lucifer embodies. He was not the ruler of Hell, but instead just a lackey that had a bigger place to live. Speaking of living or dying, how can you die again in Hell? That was a concept that definitely needed more explanation. Most of the characters were worrying about dying, when they didn't even consider the option that they were already dead. That is how they got to Hell. I think it was this level of thinking that ruined the film for me. I didn't quite capture the notion that your soul was still in a solid body in Hell, but that could just be me … or maybe it was because there was NO DEVELOPMENT in this story. There was nothing built, just preparing.

The battle sequences were hysterically bad. The animation in this cartoon felt like it was made in the early 90s. There was nothing impressive about the way that this film was drawn. Why are we, America, so behind on animation? It is huge in Asia, and it is creeping in hardcore here because we keep making films like Lady Death that do not challenge or use any part of imagination. We are cheap, and this film shows it.

Overall, this film was bad. The animation coupled with the horrendous voice work was cheap. I had head somewhere that this film as in production for a long time, which is hard to understand because I think I could have made this film on my credit card. The production was horrendous as well as the story. Nothing was developed, leaving huge gaping plot holes that nearly everyone fell into. The strength of the characters was missing, and nothing was explained. I wasted my time with this one and would like to warn others so that when Death does come, you don't find yourself in my state and regretting the fact that you wasted 80 minutes on this piece of garbage.

BLAH!

Grade: * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 1876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a little while back and, since then, I've been watching every one of his movies that [[arrives]] on my radar screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he even resembles Owen somewhat) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he lands some meaty roles, he'll crack an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[denigrate]] this film at all.

It's a [[fine]] story, with very believable people (well, it's based upon the author's early shenanigans with rocketry), a great cast – Chris Cooper is always good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch list – with the appropriate mix of humor, pathos, excitement...and the great sound track with so many rock n roll oldies to get the feet tapping.

But, this film had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same age as Homer Hickham; like him, I looked up at the night stars to watch Sputnik as it scudded across the blackness; like Homer also, I experimented with rocketry in my backyard and used even the exact same chemicals for fuel; and like Homer, I also had most of my attempts end in explosive disaster! What fun it was...

I didn't achieve his great (metaphorical and physical) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you see this movie.

Sure, it's a basic family movie, but that's a dying breed these days, it seems. Take the time to see it, with the kids: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. I [[firstly]] [[noticed]] Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead (2005) a little while back and, since then, I've been watching every one of his movies that [[happens]] on my radar screen. Like Clive Owen, he has an intensity (and he even resembles Owen somewhat) that just oozes from the screen. I feel sure that, if he lands some meaty roles, he'll crack an Oscar one day...

That's not to [[impugn]] this film at all.

It's a [[alright]] story, with very believable people (well, it's based upon the author's early shenanigans with rocketry), a great cast – Chris Cooper is always good, and Laura Dern is always on my watch list – with the appropriate mix of humor, pathos, excitement...and the great sound track with so many rock n roll oldies to get the feet tapping.

But, this film had a very special significance for me: in 1957, I was the same age as Homer Hickham; like him, I looked up at the night stars to watch Sputnik as it scudded across the blackness; like Homer also, I experimented with rocketry in my backyard and used even the exact same chemicals for fuel; and like Homer, I also had most of my attempts end in explosive disaster! What fun it was...

I didn't achieve his great (metaphorical and physical) heights though. But, that's what you find out when you see this movie.

Sure, it's a basic family movie, but that's a dying breed these days, it seems. Take the time to see it, with the kids: you'll all have a lot of good laughs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] this movie [[scared]] me so bad, i am easily scared though so its no big thing but this [[movie]] was [[scary]] and whoever wasnt scared by this movie, im [[surprised]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope everyone sees it, but dont see it with the [[lights]] off like i did.... this movie [[apprehensive]] me so bad, i am easily scared though so its no big thing but this [[cinematography]] was [[horrible]] and whoever wasnt scared by this movie, im [[horrified]] because everyone i know said it was scary, i hope everyone sees it, but dont see it with the [[lit]] off like i did.... --------------------------------------------- Result 1878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I really, really [[enjoyed]] watching this movie! [[At]] [[first]], seeing its poster I [[thought]] it was just another easy romantic [[comedy]] ... but it is simply more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm sure a good [[part]] of the viewers had just before they [[saw]] the [[movie]]) it's [[yet]] another important part of the [[big]] concept of this movie itself (or even of its marketing strategy)! What I [[mean]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to images! To [[impressions]]! I went to the [[cinema]] to view this film having the wrong impression, the wrong [[expectations]], and at the [[end]] I [[felt]] how superficial I could be! To exemplify it comes to my mind the sequence near the end in which Sidney buys the plane ticket to go back to New York and as he is asked to 'give an autograph', meaning to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on TV thanks to the scandal at the awards he is now some kind of celebrity. And this is just, I believe, the climax of this main theme around which the movies revolves. Above this, I believe the movie also offers us a solution to get along with this, illustrated throughout the movie by Sidney's attitude: don't become too serious about yourself or about anybody else ... "even saints were people in the beginning" ... as Sophie once says in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first place: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. I really, really [[adored]] watching this movie! [[For]] [[frst]], seeing its poster I [[figured]] it was just another easy romantic [[travesty]] ... but it is simply more than this! I personally believe that this idea (that I'm sure a good [[portions]] of the viewers had just before they [[watched]] the [[flick]]) it's [[even]] another important part of the [[gargantuan]] concept of this movie itself (or even of its marketing strategy)! What I [[imply]] is: Nowadays we are slaves to images! To [[fingerprints]]! I went to the [[filmmaking]] to view this film having the wrong impression, the wrong [[prognosis]], and at the [[terminates]] I [[deemed]] how superficial I could be! To exemplify it comes to my mind the sequence near the end in which Sidney buys the plane ticket to go back to New York and as he is asked to 'give an autograph', meaning to sign for the ticket, he believes that just because he got on TV thanks to the scandal at the awards he is now some kind of celebrity. And this is just, I believe, the climax of this main theme around which the movies revolves. Above this, I believe the movie also offers us a solution to get along with this, illustrated throughout the movie by Sidney's attitude: don't become too serious about yourself or about anybody else ... "even saints were people in the beginning" ... as Sophie once says in the movie. The saints of the moment are the stars. We attribute them an 'aura' of perfection, of eternal happiness, but the reality is much less than that. Even the saints of any religion are images, ideal models of how to behave and how to live your life. Even they were not for real ... they became 'for real' after they died and we looked back at them. And that's the catch: we need our saints! we need our stars! We strive for them as if it wasn't for them we wouldn't have anything to strive for. And television and all other media are means to create and capture our strivings. We desperately need benchmarks in regard to which to measure ourselves. And that's how we got in the cinema to watch this movie in the first place: to see if we can fit the benchmark, or if the benchmark is to small for us. This time it was larger than we expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 1879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Upon]] The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[praised]] for being David Lynch's [[first]] [[film]] that ignored his regular themes of the macabre and the [[surreal]]. Based on a [[true]] story of one man and his journey to visit his estranged brother on a John Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an odd [[story]] for Lynch to direct. [[Yet]] as the story develops you can see some of Lynch's [[trademark]] motifs coming through.

Lynch's [[focus]] on small town America and its [[inhabitants]] is [[still]] as prevalent as in his [[previous]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or Twin Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the weirdness is curbed down. The [[restrictions]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can think of that features a G rating. Incredibly significant, this [[films]] stands as evidence that [[beautiful]] and significant family films can be produced.

The Straight [[Story]] was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For many Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally [[acclaimed]], the only overly [[negative]] review by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a typical Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his [[protagonist]] Alvin Straight "[[quoting]] lines directly from Confucious." He [[argues]] that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[criticism]] that many will read for the [[film]]. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the [[sense]] of Eraserhead, Lost [[Highway]] or Mulholland Drive - all [[films]] which I [[also]] adore, The [[Straight]] [[Story]] [[features]] a [[different]] side of Lynch that is by no means [[terrible]]. [[If]] you are a Lynch fan, it is most [[important]] to [[separate]] that side of Lynch with this [[feature]].

The narrative is [[slow]] and [[thoughtful]], which [[gives]] you a [[real]] sense of the protagonist's [[thoughts]] as he [[travels]] to his [[destination]]. Alvin [[constantly]] is [[reminded]] about his past and his relationships with his [[wife]], [[children]] and his [[brother]]. [[Yet]] particularly [[significant]] is that there are no flashbacks, which only [[adds]] to the [[effect]], which reminded me of my [[conversations]] with my grandparents. The [[conclusion]] [[arrives]] like watching a [[boat]] being carried down a [[slow]] meandering river and it is [[beautiful]] to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to go to America. The performances are also excellent with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting old and comes highly recommended! [[Afterwards]] The Straight Story release in 1999, it was [[hailing]] for being David Lynch's [[fiirst]] [[movie]] that ignored his regular themes of the macabre and the [[bizarre]]. Based on a [[veritable]] story of one man and his journey to visit his estranged brother on a John Deere '66 mower, at first glance its an odd [[history]] for Lynch to direct. [[Even]] as the story develops you can see some of Lynch's [[marques]] motifs coming through.

Lynch's [[accent]] on small town America and its [[villagers]] is [[however]] as prevalent as in his [[anterior]] efforts such as Blue Velvet or Twin Peaks, but the most notable difference is that the weirdness is curbed down. The [[restriction]] imposed means that the film has the notable accolade of being one of the few live action films that I can think of that features a G rating. Incredibly significant, this [[cinematic]] stands as evidence that [[fantastic]] and significant family films can be produced.

The Straight [[History]] was the first feature which Lynch directed where he had no hand at writing. For many Lynch devotees this was a huge negative point. Almost universally [[famous]], the only overly [[detrimental]] review by James Brundage of filmcritic.com focused on this very criticism, that it wasn't a typical Lynch film. "Lynch is struggling within the mold of a G-Rated story that isn't his own." Brundage claims, with his [[actor]] Alvin Straight "[[citing]] lines directly from Confucious." He [[maintains]] that the story is weak and the dialogue even worse. Yet this is about the only [[critic]] that many will read for the [[flick]]. Whilst it is true that it is not Lynch in the [[sensing]] of Eraserhead, Lost [[Freeway]] or Mulholland Drive - all [[cinema]] which I [[apart]] adore, The [[Consecutive]] [[Storytelling]] [[traits]] a [[multiple]] side of Lynch that is by no means [[hideous]]. [[Unless]] you are a Lynch fan, it is most [[major]] to [[seperate]] that side of Lynch with this [[idiosyncrasies]].

The narrative is [[slower]] and [[pensive]], which [[offers]] you a [[veritable]] sense of the protagonist's [[ideas]] as he [[traveling]] to his [[destinations]]. Alvin [[systematically]] is [[recalling]] about his past and his relationships with his [[women]], [[infantile]] and his [[sibling]]. [[Even]] particularly [[notable]] is that there are no flashbacks, which only [[inserting]] to the [[effects]], which reminded me of my [[talks]] with my grandparents. The [[finding]] [[comes]] like watching a [[sailboat]] being carried down a [[sluggish]] meandering river and it is [[leggy]] to watch. The natural landscapes of the US are accentuated and together with the beautiful soundtrack by Angelo Badalamenti, makes me yearn to go to America. The performances are also excellent with every actor believable in their roles and Richard Farnsworth is particularly excellent. His Oscar nomination was greatly deserved and it was a shame that he didn't win. Regardless, however it is probably the finest swan-song for any actor.

So whilst The Straight Story features none of Lynch's complex narratives or trademark dialogue, the film is a fascinating character study about getting old and comes highly recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 1880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this was an excellent and very honest portrayal of paralysis and racism. This movie never panders to the audience and never gets predictable. The acting was top-notch and the movie reminded me of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest". --------------------------------------------- Result 1881 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Inappropriate]]. The PG rating that this movie gets is yet another huge misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. [[Parents]] don't be fooled, taking an elementary school [[child]] to this movie is a huge mistake. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for [[kids]], but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that [[aside]], The Cat in the Hat is still a [[terrible]] movie. The [[casting]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving [[graces]]. The [[beautiful]] Kelly Preston and the always [[likeable]] (or hateable in this [[case]]) Alec Baldwin are both good in their [[roles]] even [[though]] Preston is almost too [[beautiful]] for a role like this. The [[kids]] are conditioned actors and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing things at the screen.

Did I mention there was an [[oversized]] talking [[cat]] in this [[movie]]? [[Mike]] Myers is absolutely deplorable. I didn't like him as the voice of Shrek, and I truly [[believe]] now that Myers should not be [[allowed]] [[near]] the realm of children's [[films]] ever again. His [[portrayal]] of The [[Cat]] is a [[slightly]] toned down [[version]] of [[Fat]] Bastard and [[Austin]] Powers.

[[In]] the [[end]], the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he came, even if just for a day, he [[ruined]] 82 minutes of my [[life]], 82 minutes of personal anger and strife.

The [[Cat]] in the Hat may be the [[worst]] [[kids]] [[movie]] ever. [[Inopportune]]. The PG rating that this movie gets is yet another huge misstep by the MPAA. Whale Rider gets a PG-13 but this movie gets a PG? Please. [[Relatives]] don't be fooled, taking an elementary school [[kids]] to this movie is a huge mistake. There were numerous times I found myself being uncomfortable not just because the humor was inappropriate for [[juvenile]], but also because it was totally out of the blue and unnecessary.

But all that [[sideways]], The Cat in the Hat is still a [[terrifying]] movie. The [[pouring]] and overall look of the movie are the only saving [[wonders]]. The [[wondrous]] Kelly Preston and the always [[likable]] (or hateable in this [[lawsuits]]) Alec Baldwin are both good in their [[functions]] even [[despite]] Preston is almost too [[admirable]] for a role like this. The [[enfant]] are conditioned actors and it shows, especially with Dakota Fanning. Fanning is the only human aspect of the film that kept me watching and not throwing things at the screen.

Did I mention there was an [[swollen]] talking [[pussycat]] in this [[filmmaking]]? [[Mick]] Myers is absolutely deplorable. I didn't like him as the voice of Shrek, and I truly [[believing]] now that Myers should not be [[allowing]] [[nearer]] the realm of children's [[cinematography]] ever again. His [[portrait]] of The [[Kitten]] is a [[somewhat]] toned down [[stepping]] of [[Fatty]] Bastard and [[Austen]] Powers.

[[Throughout]] the [[ends]], the cat should not have come, he should have stayed away, but he came, even if just for a day, he [[devastated]] 82 minutes of my [[lives]], 82 minutes of personal anger and strife.

The [[Ctu]] in the Hat may be the [[gravest]] [[youngsters]] [[films]] ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 1882 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Having just seen this on TMC, it's fresh in my [[mind]]. It's [[obvious]] that while the stooges are featured [[stars]], they don't really run the show. First, they're broken into 2 groups - Moe, as "Shorty" and Larry and Curly as a pair of vagrants, so there's not a whole [[lot]] of full team work. The love [[story]] that [[fuels]] the [[plot]] is uninteresting, the two ladies are the only ones with any acting [[ability]], there's another group of musical stooges that are unfunny, [[unless]] you [[consider]] their [[attempts]] at being [[funny]] to be [[sadly]] buffoonish. The [[music]] is [[tiresome]], they [[drive]] [[cars]] to the [[ranch]] and then [[depend]] on horses, the dorky western wear is silly, and there's an [[awful]] lot of the movie with no stooges on camera. By the [[way]], this is [[obviously]] after Curley's first stroke, and his [[reduced]] [[energy]] [[level]] is clear. Vernon [[Dent]] [[appears]] [[early]] on in an uncredited role. I [[loved]] everything these [[guys]] ever did, [[including]] all the non-Curley stuff, but this little dogie is [[pretty]] [[lousy]]. Having just seen this on TMC, it's fresh in my [[esprit]]. It's [[noticeable]] that while the stooges are featured [[celebrity]], they don't really run the show. First, they're broken into 2 groups - Moe, as "Shorty" and Larry and Curly as a pair of vagrants, so there's not a whole [[batches]] of full team work. The love [[conte]] that [[flammable]] the [[intrigue]] is uninteresting, the two ladies are the only ones with any acting [[capacities]], there's another group of musical stooges that are unfunny, [[if]] you [[scrutinize]] their [[endeavour]] at being [[humorous]] to be [[tragically]] buffoonish. The [[musica]] is [[pesky]], they [[drives]] [[auto]] to the [[husbandry]] and then [[rely]] on horses, the dorky western wear is silly, and there's an [[terrible]] lot of the movie with no stooges on camera. By the [[camino]], this is [[naturally]] after Curley's first stroke, and his [[decreased]] [[energies]] [[grades]] is clear. Vernon [[Tooth]] [[appearing]] [[soon]] on in an uncredited role. I [[love]] everything these [[boys]] ever did, [[consisting]] all the non-Curley stuff, but this little dogie is [[belle]] [[rotten]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1883 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] "GOOD TIMES," in my [[opinion]], is a must-see CBS hit! [[Despite]] the fact that I've never [[seen]] every episode, I still enjoy it. It's [[hard]] to say which one is my favorite. Also, I really love the theme song. [[If]] you ask me, even though I [[like]] everyone, it would have been [[nice]] if everyone had stayed on the show throughout its entire [[run]]. Everyone always [[gave]] a good performance, the production [[design]] was [[spectacular]], the [[costumes]] were well-designed, and the writing was always very [[strong]]. In conclusion, [[even]] [[though]] it can be seen on TV [[Land]] now, I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] you [[catch]] it just in [[case]] it goes off the [[air]] for good. "GOOD TIMES," in my [[avis]], is a must-see CBS hit! [[Though]] the fact that I've never [[watched]] every episode, I still enjoy it. It's [[tough]] to say which one is my favorite. Also, I really love the theme song. [[Unless]] you ask me, even though I [[loves]] everyone, it would have been [[delightful]] if everyone had stayed on the show throughout its entire [[running]]. Everyone always [[yielded]] a good performance, the production [[designing]] was [[dramatic]], the [[costume]] were well-designed, and the writing was always very [[forceful]]. In conclusion, [[yet]] [[despite]] it can be seen on TV [[Territory]] now, I [[resolutely]] [[recommended]] you [[capturing]] it just in [[lawsuits]] it goes off the [[midair]] for good. --------------------------------------------- Result 1884 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This piece ain't [[really]] worth a [[comment]].. It's [[simply]] the [[worst]] "[[horror]]" [[movie]] i have ever [[seen]]. The [[actors]] are [[bad]] as [[bad]] can be and the whole [[plot]] is so [[silly]] it [[nearly]] [[made]] me cry. Shame on you I say!! This piece ain't [[genuinely]] worth a [[observation]].. It's [[exclusively]] the [[meanest]] "[[abomination]]" [[cinematography]] i have ever [[noticed]]. The [[protagonists]] are [[amiss]] as [[negative]] can be and the whole [[intrigue]] is so [[beast]] it [[nigh]] [[brought]] me cry. Shame on you I say!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really didn't expect much from this film seeing as it has people from Parkersburg WV, which is were I live, acting in it. This town is dull and so is this film. There were a few decent scened in the movie but I was distracted by all the crappy landmarks they made a point to show. This movie may have been good if there was actual acting in it but there wasn't any. Unless you are from Parkersburg and are interested in seeing what you see everyday, then stay away from this movie. The dialog will put you to sleep, the acting will bore you to tears and Steven Soderberg should lose some credibility after shooting crap like this. Its a predictable movie with no surprises. What you see is what you get and that is a 73 minute tour of Parkersburg West Virginia and Belpre Ohio without a narrator. --------------------------------------------- Result 1886 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The title of this obscure and (almost righteously) [[forgotten]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have anything else to say that was useful, anyway. But hey, "The [[Forest]]" isn't [[totally]] [[hopeless]] and not [[even]] *that* bad, actually. If nothing else, at [[least]] it obeys the, admittedly unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a couple of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a bit of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary brainless teenagers and the script has solid ambitions towards supernaturalism. The concept isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a couple of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The demented family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. The title of this obscure and (almost righteously) [[overlooked]] 80's slasher inevitably reminds me of The Cure's mega-smash-monster hit song with the same title, hence a piece of the lyrics in the title-section of this user comment. Also, I didn't have anything else to say that was useful, anyway. But hey, "The [[Wald]]" isn't [[fully]] [[distraught]] and not [[yet]] *that* bad, actually. If nothing else, at [[fewest]] it obeys the, admittedly unwritten, first rule of 80's slasher: kill someone within the first 10 minutes of playtime. Sure you've heard about the basic premise of this film a dozen times before, but don't let that discourage you from watching it, as "The Forest" has a couple of things more to offer than just an appealingly sinister cover image. It's actually a bit of an atypical 80's slasher! The main characters aren't ordinary brainless teenagers and the script has solid ambitions towards supernaturalism. The concept isn't always successful, let alone plausible, but it's more than interesting enough to hold your attention and there are even are a couple of surprisingly strong moments of tension and plot twists to enjoy. Two married couples decide to go camping in the most isolated woods of California, but due to a stupid bet the wives travel separately from their husbands. Barely set up for the night, they receive uncanny visits from a mother looking for her two children, the children themselves and finally the father who's out hunting for human flesh. The demented family may be real or imaginary, but the women are definitely in danger and by the time their husbands arrive, they have already vanished. The men too encounter the family, and they find out more about the slightly dysfunction background. "The Forest" is a weird and unusual film, to say the least. It's not exactly a masterpiece of plotting, but the thoroughly strange atmosphere will certainly appeal to open-minded fans of 80's horror. The murders are fairly gruesome and will-filmed, including a slit throat and a painful saw-massacre, and the filming locations are stunningly beautiful. The more you contemplate about the story and its abrupt twists, the less it makes any sense, so my advice would just be to enjoy this odd viewing experience for as long as it lasts and not a minute longer. The acting performances are just above average, the music is okay and at least director Donald Jones (also responsible for the 70's exploitation-sickie "Schoolgirls in Chains") tried to be a little more creative that the majority of 80's horror films. Too bad it ultimately fails. --------------------------------------------- Result 1887 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I've [[always]] been [[enthusiastic]] about [[period]] [[dramas]], an art [[form]] in which the BBC has excelled in the [[past]]. This presentation of "Byron" was [[unbelievable]]. [[Unbelievably]] bad! The [[script]] was [[dreadful]], the acting uninspired, and all the characters [[woefully]] [[insipid]]. Apparently Byron was "mad bad and [[dangerous]] to know", and set the [[ladies]] hearts all-a-flutter. Not in this [[production]]. Here he [[appeared]] as a tawdry jumped-up little [[squirt]] [[instead]] of a [[fiery]] [[hero]] of [[womenfolk]] and the Greek [[struggle]] for [[independence]]. It is [[said]] that Byron walked with a limp. This [[portrayal]] of the [[man]] was just [[limp]] all over.

I [[watched]] the [[whole]] two and a half [[hours]] [[waiting]] for [[something]] to [[spark]] into [[life]]. Not a splutter, not [[even]] a glimmer. It was [[utter]] [[tedium]], if not downright boredom, from [[start]] to [[finish]].

Having the [[opinion]] that no-one will ever [[better]] the Bard of [[Avon]], I [[also]] [[believe]] that Byron's poetry is over-revered and to my [[mind]] should be flung on the back [[burner]], and this dramatisation of his [[life]] should be [[accorded]] the same [[treatment]].

I [[think]] the BBC lost its nous with this one I've [[steadily]] been [[fervent]] about [[times]] [[drama]], an art [[forms]] in which the BBC has excelled in the [[preceding]]. This presentation of "Byron" was [[awesome]]. [[Uncommonly]] bad! The [[hyphen]] was [[horrific]], the acting uninspired, and all the characters [[unfortunately]] [[vapid]]. Apparently Byron was "mad bad and [[perilous]] to know", and set the [[madams]] hearts all-a-flutter. Not in this [[productivity]]. Here he [[emerged]] as a tawdry jumped-up little [[brat]] [[however]] of a [[spirited]] [[superhero]] of [[menfolk]] and the Greek [[struggling]] for [[independant]]. It is [[avowed]] that Byron walked with a limp. This [[portrait]] of the [[bloke]] was just [[saggy]] all over.

I [[observed]] the [[overall]] two and a half [[hour]] [[suspense]] for [[somethin]] to [[sparkle]] into [[iife]]. Not a splutter, not [[yet]] a glimmer. It was [[unmitigated]] [[drudgery]], if not downright boredom, from [[begins]] to [[completing]].

Having the [[visualise]] that no-one will ever [[improved]] the Bard of [[Yvon]], I [[similarly]] [[reckon]] that Byron's poetry is over-revered and to my [[intellect]] should be flung on the back [[engraver]], and this dramatisation of his [[lives]] should be [[ascribed]] the same [[treat]].

I [[believing]] the BBC lost its nous with this one --------------------------------------------- Result 1888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (88%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Having looked at some of the other [[comments]] here, I have a main complaint with this presentation.

The two primary [[characters]] are attractive in their own [[ways]] - the beautiful "victim," and the handsome, obviously extremely "off-center," blue-collar [[protagonist]] (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns beating the hell out of each other, sort of like a Caucasian Kabuki scenario.

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced complaint is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. Beginning with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be exaggerating what has occurred.

But this is a film and story, [[compelling]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. Having looked at some of the other [[feedback]] here, I have a main complaint with this presentation.

The two primary [[traits]] are attractive in their own [[methods]] - the beautiful "victim," and the handsome, obviously extremely "off-center," blue-collar [[actor]] (if just short of "totally-deranged") - take turns beating the hell out of each other, sort of like a Caucasian Kabuki scenario.

This is all right, and this is, of course, mainly a "turning-the-tables" story. However, my referenced complaint is that I believe the director got caught-up in his desire to display Farrah's well-known and obvious physical attributes. Beginning with her being enticingly clad in a thin robe, and with a number of scenes displaying more than needed for any dramatic effect - while immensely pleasing to the eyes, these distract from the poignancy level of the drama.

Her roommates I'm certain give performances as written and directed - however, their respective skepticism and histrionic babbling and sobbing, don't ring true -- based upon Farrah's previous experience with this guy, the obvious evidence of his having come to their premises with only the worst of intentions, and that she would have absolutely no grounds to be exaggerating what has occurred.

But this is a film and story, [[persuading]] as much in spite of, as because of, the director's work. --------------------------------------------- Result 1889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] This is a [[fine]] musical with a timeless score by one of my favorite [[composers]] (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[atmosphere]] which gives the movie a [[lot]] of charm, but in terms of a [[story]].. well it's not [[really]] there. Or at [[least]], not very well worked out. The acting is [[also]] not so [[smooth]] by Caron. But I [[liked]] some of the [[dialogues]], I [[liked]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[character]] [[played]] by Levant, the [[colors]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[quite]] [[magnificent]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the dot to me. This is a [[alright]] musical with a timeless score by one of my favorite [[songwriter]] (Gershwin) and a nice 'Parisien' [[vibe]] which gives the movie a [[lots]] of charm, but in terms of a [[tales]].. well it's not [[truly]] there. Or at [[lowest]], not very well worked out. The acting is [[apart]] not so [[seamless]] by Caron. But I [[loved]] some of the [[dialog]], I [[wished]] the scene at the Seine, I liked the [[characters]] [[done]] by Levant, the [[dye]]; and the dancing of course, which is [[altogether]] [[glamorous]].

A 7.5 - 8 seems on the dot to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 1890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How I got into it: When I started watching this series on Cartoon Network,I have to say that I've never seen anything like this,and it was the best. But when I started collecting the series on VHS,and years later on DVD part of Bandai's Anime Legends collections. It was amazing,and truly worth watching. It had a lot of exploding action that will blow you out of your seat. And of course,the theme songs "Just Communication",and Rhythm Emotions" were the best.

Characters,and Gundams: My favorite characters in the show were:Heero,Duo,Relena,Treize,Lady Und,Noin,and Zechs. My favorite Gundams in the show that I liked the most are the Wing Zero,and Epyon,and of course the Altron,and Deathscythe I,and II.

Meaning of the show: What this series also tells us that in real life,wars are very hard and we can sometimes win,or lose. But peace can also be hard to obtain,and I do believe the Gundam pilots are doing the right thing,and are trying to obtain world peace.

But however,this show is truly the best of the best. So in closing to this review,after you watch this show,see the Movie Endless Waltz. --------------------------------------------- Result 1891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Seriously]] the only [[good]] thing about this year ceremony were the [[winners]].

[[Although]] the ceremony itself was pretty short it [[still]] was somewhat [[boring]]. I think it's [[seriously]] [[time]] to [[look]] for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY new. It's pretty [[obvious]] that they tried to [[make]] the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Diddy]] and Prince present a [[category]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the [[presenter]] was an [[attempt]] to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[None]] of it really worked out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a good presenter. I really merely saw him as a guy who just talked every now and then in between of the different categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for instance Billy Crystal's.

Also the handing out of the awards was pretty dumb at times. Not letting everybody come to the stage but also handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was plain weird.

Still, I can't remember being any more satisfied with the award winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the last couple of years always had been the case. So does that mean it had been a good year for movies with lots of competitive contestants? I don't think so. I think most of the movies will be largely forgotten in 20 years from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar Baby" and "The Passion of the Christ" maybe. Sure I don't agree with every single award that was handed out this year, for instance Caleb Deschanel should had won for best cinematography, not that I don't like Robert Richardson's work, he really did some amazing work for most of Oliver Stone's work but I really feel that Deschanel deserved the award way more. Also I would had liked seeing Jim Miller and Paul Rubell win for best editing and John Debney for best music. But oh well, there is no way the Academy Awards can please everybody of course, I understand that. There will always be people complaining about the winners.

It also was funny to see that most of the award presenters were way more nervous than the nominees and winners. Did Prince said any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable show but with nice winners.

4/10 [[Harshly]] the only [[buena]] thing about this year ceremony were the [[finalists]].

[[Albeit]] the ceremony itself was pretty short it [[again]] was somewhat [[dreary]]. I think it's [[profoundly]] [[moment]] to [[peek]] for a new director and producers for the show, who can come up with something REALLY new. It's pretty [[observable]] that they tried to [[deliver]] the show more 'hip' and appealing for a younger audience this year by letting Beyonce perform and letting P. [[Didi]] and Prince present a [[class]]. Also letting Chris Rock be the [[broadcaster]] was an [[endeavor]] to re-new the ceremony and make it more appealing. [[Nos]] of it really worked out.

Sure, Chris Rock is a funny guy but he wasn't really a good presenter. I really merely saw him as a guy who just talked every now and then in between of the different categories. His presence wasn't really as 'big' as for instance Billy Crystal's.

Also the handing out of the awards was pretty dumb at times. Not letting everybody come to the stage but also handing out some of the awards in the middle of the theater was plain weird.

Still, I can't remember being any more satisfied with the award winners. None of the movies really swept away the awards as the last couple of years always had been the case. So does that mean it had been a good year for movies with lots of competitive contestants? I don't think so. I think most of the movies will be largely forgotten in 20 years from now, with the exception of "Million Dollar Baby" and "The Passion of the Christ" maybe. Sure I don't agree with every single award that was handed out this year, for instance Caleb Deschanel should had won for best cinematography, not that I don't like Robert Richardson's work, he really did some amazing work for most of Oliver Stone's work but I really feel that Deschanel deserved the award way more. Also I would had liked seeing Jim Miller and Paul Rubell win for best editing and John Debney for best music. But oh well, there is no way the Academy Awards can please everybody of course, I understand that. There will always be people complaining about the winners.

It also was funny to see that most of the award presenters were way more nervous than the nominees and winners. Did Prince said any of the nominees names right at once? And were is Sean Penn's sense of humor? Al Pacino and Jeremy "I hope they missed" Irons were the best presenters of the night.

Overall a very forgettable show but with nice winners.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged [[filmmaking]] and [[synchronised]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film [[started]]. And the cinema's peeling paint gradually became more interesting than the shoddy mess on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas promises much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only escape from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and rewrite them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous shots of photogenic Cubans gushing with joy, grief, pity, terror and the like.

The problem is that the simplicity of the narrative is marred by endless excursions into film-school artiness, latino caricature, Marx brothers slapstick and even - during a particularly underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's face.

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the boss at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. Her boss-eyed accomplice, Concha, variously points fingers, eavesdrops and screeches. Cesar, the metalhead dolt and romantic interest, reveals hidden writing talent when Carla departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for good measure. All this would be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon comic strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow pretensions, ahem.

Nada Mas attempts to straddle the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of Amelie and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' theme of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an eccentric single white female who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to bring magic into the lives of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any dross that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This film should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. I caught this Cuban film at at an arthouse film club. It was shown shortly after the magisterial 1935 Silly Symphony cartoon where the Isle of Symphony is reconciled with the Isle of Jazz. What with the recently deceased Ruben Gonzalez piped through speakers in this old cinema-ballroom and a Cuban flag hanging from peeling stucco rocaille motifs, the scene was set for a riproaring celebration of engaged [[kino]] and [[timed]] hissing at the idiocies of Helms-Burton. But then the film [[inaugurated]]. And the cinema's peeling paint gradually became more interesting than the shoddy mess on-screen.

The storyline of Nada Mas promises much. Carla is a bored envelope-stamper at a Cuban post office. Her only escape from an altogether humdrum existence is to purloin letters and rewrite them, transforming basic interpersonal grunts into Brontëan outbursts of breathless emotion. Cue numerous shots of photogenic Cubans gushing with joy, grief, pity, terror and the like.

The problem is that the simplicity of the narrative is marred by endless excursions into film-school artiness, latino caricature, Marx brothers slapstick and even - during a particularly underwhelming editing trick - the celluloid scratching of a schoolkid defacement onto a character's face.

Unidimensional characters abound. Cunda, the boss at the post office, is a humourless dominatrix-nosferatu. Her boss-eyed accomplice, Concha, variously points fingers, eavesdrops and screeches. Cesar, the metalhead dolt and romantic interest, reveals hidden writing talent when Carla departs for Miami. A chase scene (in oh-so-hilarious fast-forward) is thrown in for good measure. All this would be fine in a Mortadello and Filemon comic strip, but in a black-and-white zero-FX flick with highbrow pretensions, ahem.

Nada Mas attempts to straddle the stile somewhere between the 'quirky-heroine-matchmakes-strangers' of Amelie and the 'poetry-as-great-redeemer' theme of Il Postino. Like Amelie, its protagonist is an eccentric single white female who combats impending spinsterdom by trying to bring magic into the lives of strangers. And like Il Postino, the film does not flinch from sustained recitals of poetry and a postman on a bicycle takes a romantic lead. Unfortunately, Nada Mas fails to capture the lushness and transcendence of either film.

There are two things that might merit watching this film in a late-night TV stupor. The first is the opening overhead shot of Carla on a checker-tiled floor, which cuts to the crossword puzzle she is working on. The second is to see Nada Mas as a cautionary example: our post Buena Vista Social Club obsession with Cuban artistic output can often blinker us into accepting any dross that features a bongo on the soundtrack. This film should not have merited a global release - films such as Waiting List and Guantanamera cover similar thematic territory far more successfully. --------------------------------------------- Result 1893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Some people might consider this movie a piece of artwork - to be able to express your [[imagination]] on [[film]] in order to create a movie filled with antagonizing pain and [[death]].. I personally think that this movie is a [[disgust]], which should have never been [[released]]. This movie is repulsive, [[illogical]] and meaningless. Not only is it a [[complete]] waste of [[time]] but it makes you sick for days to come. The appalling images shown in the film not only make you grasp for air but they set in your mind and it takes days to forget them. Such a shame that people waste their imagination on such inhumane suffering.. "Kill Bill" would be another example but at least "Kill Bill" has its purpose, meaning, climax and resolution.. Some people might consider this movie a piece of artwork - to be able to express your [[fantasy]] on [[movie]] in order to create a movie filled with antagonizing pain and [[mortality]].. I personally think that this movie is a [[resentment]], which should have never been [[liberated]]. This movie is repulsive, [[irrational]] and meaningless. Not only is it a [[finalise]] waste of [[moment]] but it makes you sick for days to come. The appalling images shown in the film not only make you grasp for air but they set in your mind and it takes days to forget them. Such a shame that people waste their imagination on such inhumane suffering.. "Kill Bill" would be another example but at least "Kill Bill" has its purpose, meaning, climax and resolution.. --------------------------------------------- Result 1894 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I avoided watching this film for the longest time. Long before it was even [[released]] I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I [[wanted]] [[nothing]] to do with it. I never [[watched]] it in the theatre. I shook my head in [[disbelief]] at the 11 Academy [[Awards]] - even though I had never seen it. Then I was [[asked]] to be a [[judge]] at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this movie. "It was so [[great]]," she said. "You really [[felt]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a great movie.

[[Where]] to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking contestant was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The [[nonchalance]] as news of the [[iceberg]] first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very [[impressive]], indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 I avoided watching this film for the longest time. Long before it was even [[publicized]] I had dismissed it as an over-hyped, over-blown, overly romanticized piece of Hollywood schmaltz, and I [[wants]] [[anything]] to do with it. I never [[seen]] it in the theatre. I shook my head in [[skepticism]] at the 11 Academy [[Scholarship]] - even though I had never seen it. Then I was [[requesting]] to be a [[richter]] at a high school public speaking contest. One of the girls spoke about this movie. "It was so [[whopping]]," she said. "You really [[deemed]] like you were on the ship." "Nonsense," I thought. I shared my feelings with my fellow judges. One looked at me and said, "you might be right, but if she liked the movie that much maybe she'll want to learn more about the real Titanic. The movie must have done something right to get her so interested." "Well, maybe," thought I. Then it finally appeared on Pay TV. "OK," I thought, "I'll give it a look see." I didn't want to like it - and I didn't. I loved it! What a great movie.

[[Whereby]] to start? First - the directing. My high school public speaking contestant was right. James Cameron does a superb job of creating an almost "you are there" type of atmosphere. The gaiety of life aboard the most elegant ship in the world. The [[indifference]] as news of the [[iceman]] first spreads; then the rising sense of panic. You don't just watch it; you really do feel it. Then - the performances. The lead performances from Kate Winslet (as Rose) and Leonardo DiCaprio (as Jack) are excellent - Winslet's being the superior, I thought, but both were good. They had their rich girl/poor boy characters down to a perfect "t" I thought. In my opinion, though, stealing the show was Frances Fisher as Rose's mother. She was perfect as the snobby aristocrat, and you could feel the fear and loathing she felt every time she looked at Jack. Then - the details. I'm no expert on the sinking of the Titanic, but I have a reasonable general knowledge, and this film does a super job of recreating the historical details accurately and then weaving them seamlessly around the fictional romance. Very [[unbelievable]], indeed. Then - the song. Who can watch this movie and not be taken with Celine Dion's performance of "My Heart Goes On."

Problems. Well, the romance was perhaps too contrived, in the sense that I just don't accept that Jack could have moved so effortlessly from steerage to first class. (I know he was invited the first time; but he seems to keep getting into first class without being stopped until he's been there for a while.) The realities of the separation of the social classes were much more realistically portrayed, I thought, when the steerage passengers were going to be left locked down there after the ship hit the iceberg while the first class folks got to enjoy half empty lifeboats.

A minor quibble, though. This is truly an excellent movie. My only regret is not seeing it in the theatre, where I think it would have been so much more impressive.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It [[could]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad [[job]] but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[beautiful]] movie. I have loved it since local channels [[used]] to show it. Graham [[Greene]] is one of my favorite writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Many]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[among]] them. I [[think]] I saw "Brighton Rock" once many years ago and liked it but maybe I'm simply thinking fondly of the novel.) This is superbly cast. Charles Boyer does not, it's true, come across as Spanish. But he seems to have the perfect temperament for this character -- tired, wary, caring. Lauren Bacall is appealing as the British girl who falls for him. But the supporting players are the best: Katina Paxinou is excellent. Her performance is a little Grand Guignol, but I attribute that to the director. Peter Lorre, whom we first meet as he gives Boyer a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal language, is excellent -- as always.

And Wanda Hendrix could break the hardest heart. She comes across as a precocious early teenager. The character wants to be helpful. She does her best.

I [[recommend]] this movie [[highly]]. Not without [[reservations]]. The reservation is, primarily, that it is a little stolid. But the story and acting can scarcely be bettered. It [[did]] have been better had it been directed by someone with more experience. Shumlin didn't do a bad [[labor]] but it is not a great work of cinematic art.

It is, however, a [[ravishing]] movie. I have loved it since local channels [[using]] to show it. Graham [[Green]] is one of my favorite writers of the last century. Some pretty bad movies were made from his novels and stories. ([[Myriad]] love "The Fallen Idol" but I am not [[in]] them. I [[believe]] I saw "Brighton Rock" once many years ago and liked it but maybe I'm simply thinking fondly of the novel.) This is superbly cast. Charles Boyer does not, it's true, come across as Spanish. But he seems to have the perfect temperament for this character -- tired, wary, caring. Lauren Bacall is appealing as the British girl who falls for him. But the supporting players are the best: Katina Paxinou is excellent. Her performance is a little Grand Guignol, but I attribute that to the director. Peter Lorre, whom we first meet as he gives Boyer a lesson in an Esperanto-like universal language, is excellent -- as always.

And Wanda Hendrix could break the hardest heart. She comes across as a precocious early teenager. The character wants to be helpful. She does her best.

I [[recommending]] this movie [[unimaginably]]. Not without [[bookings]]. The reservation is, primarily, that it is a little stolid. But the story and acting can scarcely be bettered. --------------------------------------------- Result 1896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] [[Just]] like last years event WWE New Years Revolution 2006 was headlined by an Elimination Chamber match. The [[difference]] between last years and this years match however was the [[entertainment]] value. In reality only three people stood a chance of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those men were current champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and Shawn Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Mac]] would put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris Masters. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one night. It was obvious he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a spear to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only entertaining piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like last year, was truly atrocious. Triple H and The Big Show put on a snore fest that had me struggling to stay away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? Any pay-per-view that has both Jerry Lawler and Viscera wrestling on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a success really does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this stuff?) and Big Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a little help from his Mama.

The women of the WWE also had a busy night. There was the usual Diva nonsense with a Bra and Panties Gauntlet match which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was also on the line. In a match, I thought would have been left to brew till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a good match. Trish won the contest but it was evident that this is going to continue for the foreseeable future.

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. [[Only]] like last years event WWE New Years Revolution 2006 was headlined by an Elimination Chamber match. The [[divergence]] between last years and this years match however was the [[entertainments]] value. In reality only three people stood a chance of walking out of the Pepsi Arena in Albany, New York with the WWE Championship. Those men were current champion John Cena, Kurt Angle and Shawn Michaels. There was no way Vinnie [[Macs]] would put the belt on any of the rookies; Carlito or Chris Masters. And Kane? Kane last held the WWE Championship in June 1998, and that was only for one night. It was obvious he wasn't going to be the one either. Last years match was a thrilling affair with six of the best WWE had to offer. 2006 was a predictable and disappointing affair but still the match of the night by far.

The only surprise of the evening came after the bell had run on the main event. Out strolled Vince McMahon himself and demanded they lift the chamber. It was then announced that Edge was cashing in his money in the bank championship match right then and there. With no time to prepare and just off the back of winning the Elimination Chamber match John Cena did not stand a chance and dropped the title after a spear to one of the most entertaining heels in WWE. This was the only entertaining piece of action that happened all night.

The undercard, like last year, was truly atrocious. Triple H and The Big Show put on a snore fest that had me struggling to stay away. HHH picked up the win but that was never in any real doubt was it? Any pay-per-view that has both Jerry Lawler and Viscera wrestling on the same card will never have any chance of becoming a success really does it. The King pinned Helms (who books this stuff?) and Big Vis tasted defeat against the wasted Shelton Benjamin with a little help from his Mama.

The women of the WWE also had a busy night. There was the usual Diva nonsense with a Bra and Panties Gauntlet match which was won by Ashley and the Woman's Championship was also on the line. In a match, I thought would have been left to brew till WrestleMania 22 Mickie James challenged Trish Stratus in a good match. Trish won the contest but it was evident that this is going to continue for the foreseeable future.

The opening contest of the night pitted soon to be WWE Champion Edge against Intercontinental Champion, Ric Flair. This could have been better but it was a battered and bloody Flair that retained after a disqualification finish. Edge obviously had bigger fish to fry.

So New Years Revolution kicked off the 2006 pay-per-view calendar in disastrous fashion. The only good thing from that is knowing that for the WWE the only way is up. They don't get much worse than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[got]] a free pass to a preview of this [[movie]] [[last]] [[night]] and didn't know what to expect. The premise seemed [[silly]] and I assumed it would be a lot of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[great]] surprise. I laughed so [[hard]] I cried at some of the jokes. This film is a [[must]] see for anyone with an open mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[go]] to with your grandmother ([[Jack]] Palance?) or small children. The language is filthy, the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. I [[ai]] a free pass to a preview of this [[filmmaking]] [[final]] [[nuit]] and didn't know what to expect. The premise seemed [[laughable]] and I assumed it would be a lot of shallow make-fun-of-the-virgin humor. What a [[whopping]] surprise. I laughed so [[laborious]] I cried at some of the jokes. This film is a [[should]] see for anyone with an open mind and a slightly twisted sense of humor. OK.....this is not a movie to [[going]] to with your grandmother ([[Jacque]] Palance?) or small children. The language is filthy, the jokes are (very) crude, and the sex talk is about as graphic as you'll find anywhere. What's amazing, however, is that the movie is still a sweet love story. My girlfriend and I both loved it. Steve Carell is terrific, but (like The Office) the supporting cast really makes the film work. All of the characters have their flaws, but they also have depth and likability. Everyone pulls their weight and the chemistry is perfect. I can't wait to get the DVD. I'm sure it will be up there with Office Space for replays and quotable lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 1898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film [[loses]] its way in a [[conventional]] farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[great]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A diverting, but not great film. Partially from the perceived need, one feels, to include a conventional love story in the plot to make the film more marketable to a 1950's movie-going public.

The film starts with some wickedly funny characterizations of the upper-class bureaucrats running the Foreign Office --- the British are pilloried in the way that only the British can pillory themselves. But after that, the film [[forfeits]] its way in a [[classic]] farcical plot. Terry-Thomas watchable as always, but the [[prodigious]] talent in the cast (Peter Sellers, et al) is largely wasted.

A diverting, but not great film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[worst]] Laurel & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as close to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite huge flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". I can understand after watching this again for the first time in many years how it is considered one of the [[gravest]] Laurel & Hardy's. For me, it isn't as close to as bad as "Air Raid Wardens" and "The Bullfighters", but there are some definite huge flaws in it. The film is set up to show Laurel and Hardy as the owners and instructors of the dance studio. Hardy is funny as the prancing lead of a "London Bridge" dance, surrounded by 20th Century Fox starlets, while in the next room, Laurel teaches the beginners ballet while wearing a ballerina outfit. A clumsy carpenter spills glue on the floor, leading to a predicable gag where Hardy ends up the looser. Then, in come the racketeers, now selling insurance covering up their protection racket. One of them is a very young and handsome Robert Mitchum. But no sooner do they bully the boys into buying insurance, they are arrested.

This is the end of the gangsters and the last time we see the dance studio. The rest of the film is devoted to Laurel and Hardy's support of wealthy patron Trudy Marshall and her inventor boyfriend, Robert Bailey. They first try to help them hide their relationship from her disapproving parents (Matt Briggs and Margaret Dumont) and hopeful suitor Allan Lane, whom we can tell right off is a no-good swine. This leads to Briggs' hidden bar being revealed to tea-totaling Dumont, and a gag where a rug is literally pulled out from the wealthy patriarch which crashes his bed into a pond below. When Bailey uses the boys to help display his ray gun, pandemonium ensues. The dead-pan butler announces to Case and Dumont that their house is on fire.

Later, Hardy wants to use the insurance policy to gain money to pay their dance studio rent and hopes to get Laurel to break a leg to do so. There is no reference to the fact that the insurance salesmen were gangsters and that the policy would probably be invalid. (Even if they were to have become legitimate insurance salesman, after being arrested, their licenses would have been revoked). Laurel ends up getting off a bus which had been abandoned by the driver over a supposedly rabid dog (only a frosting covered, cake devouring Toto look-alike, or possibly the actual pooch), causing Oliver to end up on a huge beach roller-coaster that somehow the bus has ended up on, perfectly fitting its wheels onto the tracks. Roller-coaster gags can be exciting, as evidenced in "Abbott and Costello Go to Hollywood", and this one is amusing but anticlimactic.

As the story wraps up, all of these gags seem to have no point, giving the impression that this was simply a series of one-reelers put together to make a full-length feature, hopefully part of a double bill. L&H, as I've mentioned in other reviews of their later films, had lost much of their luster after leaving Hal Roach's employ, but surprisingly here, they do not come off as old and tired looking as they had in films made in the same year. Had the gags not been as amusing, as was the case with some of their other films, this surely would have ranked a "2" as opposed to a "3". --------------------------------------------- Result 1900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ([[Spoiler]] [[included]], some would say)

This film is not possible to take seriously. [[At]] some parts it is so [[awfully]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Try]] me for the [[sequence]] where Stallone's character jumps some 20 meters with full [[climbing]] gear or (and this is really my favorite) snuffs a bad guy by sticking him onto a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he muster to accomplish such feats? I dunno, but he sure gives reality a run for the [[money]]. ([[Deflectors]] [[inscribed]], some would say)

This film is not possible to take seriously. [[In]] some parts it is so [[horribly]] stupid that I just can't help laughing at it all. [[Seeks]] me for the [[sequencing]] where Stallone's character jumps some 20 meters with full [[soaring]] gear or (and this is really my favorite) snuffs a bad guy by sticking him onto a stalactite. Yeah, what ungodly strength did he muster to accomplish such feats? I dunno, but he sure gives reality a run for the [[cash]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Norman, Is That You? was (this is all third hand, so take it with a grain of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the prints from the theater can't have been that great. Still, performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty [[good]].

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD PIECE: it reflected the attitudes in the mid to early 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the movie really shines in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really memorable.

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be missed. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the movie! Norman, Is That You? was (this is all third hand, so take it with a grain of salt) adapted to an African American family from a Jewish one, when it made the transition off stage and onto screen. Also, it was one of those movies originally filmed in video, so the prints from the theater can't have been that great. Still, performances by Redd Foxx and others were pretty [[alright]].

What I wanted to tell you all is that the movie is a PERIOD PIECE: it reflected the attitudes in the mid to early 70s about finding out you have a gay son or daughter in your family. For that reason alone, it's pretty interesting- if not a little "hollywood". Don't believe me? Check out lines about curtains, etc. Very stereotypical. Not too deep.

But... the movie really shines in a couple of areas. There is a side splitting scene when Redd Foxx is trying to find his wife, who's run away with his brother (!) to Ensenada in a souped up Pinto. The phone conversation across the border is really memorable.

But... the best scene in the movie is when Wayland Flowers and Madame did his/their gay routine that he used to do in gay bars and nightclubs. To the best of my knowledge, this is the only time that routine was filmed. And, it's a slightly cleaned up and much shorter version, I'm told. Still, it's vintage Madame, and shouldn't be missed. People are still stealing lines from Wayland; the man was truly gifted. Enjoy the movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This [[overrated]], short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip bar. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[silly]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. [[Next]] to "Law & Order" TP spews originality left and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "weirdness", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a merely watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes around in circles, spinning webs in every corner but (or because of it) ultimately going nowhere. The supposed weirdness is always forced; the characters don't behave in a strange way as much as they behave in an IDIOTIC way half the time. There's a difference...

Whenever I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "Living In Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the director (Buscemi) for succumbing to the tired old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I think of Lynch. You want weird? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's basically abstract. You want a unique TV show? Watch "The Prisoner". You want a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's films offer that. TP looks like an overly coiffed TV crime drama in which all the young people look like fashion models. The cast gives TP a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. This [[overstated]], short-lived series (a measly two seasons) is about as experimental and unique as a truck driver going to a strip bar. I am not quite sure what they mean by "ground-breaking" and "original" when they fawn all over Lynch and his [[asinine]] little TV opus. What exactly is their criteria of what is original? Sure, compared to the "Bill Cosby Show" or "Hill Street Blues" it's original. Definitely. [[Forthcoming]] to "Law & Order" TP spews originality left and right.

Fans of TP often say that the show was canceled because too many viewers weren't smart enough, open enough for the show's supposed "weirdness", its alleged wild ingenuity, or whatever. As a fan of weirdness myself, I have to correct that misconception. There is nothing too off-the-wall about TP; it is a merely watchable, rather silly whodunit that goes around in circles, spinning webs in every corner but (or because of it) ultimately going nowhere. The supposed weirdness is always forced; the characters don't behave in a strange way as much as they behave in an IDIOTIC way half the time. There's a difference...

Whenever I watch the "weird dream" sequence in "Living In Oblivion" in which the dwarf criticizes the director (Buscemi) for succumbing to the tired old let's-use-a-midget-in-a-dream-scene cliché, I think of Lynch. You want weird? "Eraserhead" is weird - in fact, it's beyond weird, it's basically abstract. You want a unique TV show? Watch "The Prisoner". You want a strange-looking cast? Felini's and Leone's films offer that. TP looks like an overly coiffed TV crime drama in which all the young people look like fashion models. The cast gives TP a plastic look. Kens & Barbies en masse.

In fact, one of the producers of TP said that Lynch was looking for "unique faces" for the series. Unique faces? Like Lara Flynn Boyle's? Sheryll Fenn's? Like those effeminate-faced "hunks" straight out of men's catalogs (or gay magazines)? Don't get me wrong; there is nothing wrong with getting an attractive cast, especially with beauties like Fenn (the way Madonna would look if she were 1000 times prettier), but then don't go around saying you're making a "weird show with weird-looking people". And I have never understood Lynch's misguided fascination with Kyle MacLachlan (I should get a medal for bothering to spell his name right). He is not unlikable, but lacks charisma, seeming a little too bland and polished. His character's laughable "eccentricities" were not at all interesting, merely one of Lynch's many attempts to force the weirdness, trying hard to live up to his reputation - him having completely lost his edge but that time. Everything Lynch made post-"Elephant Man" was very much sub-par compared to his first two movies. What followed were often mediocre efforts that relied on Lynch's relatively small but fanatical fan base to keep him in the public eye by interpreting meanings into his badly put-together stories that don't hold any water on closer scrutiny. In other words, Lynch is every intellectual-wannabe's darling.

So Laura Palmer was killed by her Dad...? He was obsessed by the devil or some such nonsense. That's the best this "great mind" could come up with... You've got B-movie horror films that end with more originality.

Lynch is neither bright nor hard-working enough to come up with a terrific story.

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 1903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This film is a [[flagrant]] rip-off of one of the best [[novels]] of all time, Silas Marner by George [[Eliot]].

The details of the film [[shown]] on IMDb do give acknowledgement to the [[original]] authoress but I did not see this at the beginning of the film, only a credit at the end of it saying "suggested by the [[book]] Silas Marner". Suggested? It was [[nothing]] but a [[complete]] rip- off of all the essential [[elements]] of the [[story]]:

[[A]] wronged and [[sad]] old [[man]], an artisan, poor and lonely, has all his money stolen. One night a child wanders up to his door as her mother lies dying in the snow outside. The man takes her in and brings her up until one day the local squire (or rich politician here) demands to adopt the child. It is he who has fathered the child during an illicit affair years before. The battle then ensues as to who should have legal custody of the child.

In this and every other aspect of the film, the story is exactly the same. In only one can I find a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but perhaps that would have strained the acting abilities of Mr Martin too far. On top of that he has his hair dyed in some carrot juice concoction (presumably to make him look younger, but actually making him look more the clown that he is)! There is also the addition of meaningless jokes, that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the story which have no part in it and only detract from the profoundness of the story. Like when the child cries in the courthouse declaring she can only be happy with the man who has fathered her all these years. This is conveyed in the film by the girl applying nasal decongestant to the bridge of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity within the film industry permit such a film to be made. If I was a trustee of George Eliot's I would insist on reparation. If I was Steve Martin I would send the profits to that estate, or to the poor. At the very least it should be entitled Silas Marner - adapted by S Martin. Or better still removed from the archives!

If you are interested in this story - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. This film is a [[egregious]] rip-off of one of the best [[storybooks]] of all time, Silas Marner by George [[Elliott]].

The details of the film [[indicated]] on IMDb do give acknowledgement to the [[preliminary]] authoress but I did not see this at the beginning of the film, only a credit at the end of it saying "suggested by the [[books]] Silas Marner". Suggested? It was [[anything]] but a [[finishing]] rip- off of all the essential [[component]] of the [[histories]]:

[[una]] wronged and [[sorrowful]] old [[mec]], an artisan, poor and lonely, has all his money stolen. One night a child wanders up to his door as her mother lies dying in the snow outside. The man takes her in and brings her up until one day the local squire (or rich politician here) demands to adopt the child. It is he who has fathered the child during an illicit affair years before. The battle then ensues as to who should have legal custody of the child.

In this and every other aspect of the film, the story is exactly the same. In only one can I find a difference. Silas Marner had epilepsy - but perhaps that would have strained the acting abilities of Mr Martin too far. On top of that he has his hair dyed in some carrot juice concoction (presumably to make him look younger, but actually making him look more the clown that he is)! There is also the addition of meaningless jokes, that this offbeat comedian cannot resist bringing into the story which have no part in it and only detract from the profoundness of the story. Like when the child cries in the courthouse declaring she can only be happy with the man who has fathered her all these years. This is conveyed in the film by the girl applying nasal decongestant to the bridge of her nose to make her tearful!

I am surprised that legalities and integrity within the film industry permit such a film to be made. If I was a trustee of George Eliot's I would insist on reparation. If I was Steve Martin I would send the profits to that estate, or to the poor. At the very least it should be entitled Silas Marner - adapted by S Martin. Or better still removed from the archives!

If you are interested in this story - and I hope you are - dismiss this completely and watch Silas Marner. Or read the book! The BBC made an excellent adaptation of it in the 1980's. --------------------------------------------- Result 1904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Unfortunately, because of US viewers' [[tendency]] to shun [[subtitles]], this movie has not [[received]] the distribution nor attention it merits. Its [[subtle]] [[themes]] of belonging, identity, racial relations and especially how colonialism [[harms]] all [[parties]], [[transcend]] the obvious [[dramatic]] [[tensions]], the nostalgic [[memories]] of the protaganiste's childhood, and the exoticism of her relationship with her parents' "houseboy," perhaps the only "real" human she knows. We won't even look at her mother's relationship with this [[elegant]] [[man]]. There! i hope i've given you enough of a hook to take it in, whether you speak French or like subtitles or not. I challenge you to be as brave, strong and aware as La P'tite. Unfortunately, because of US viewers' [[penchant]] to shun [[caption]], this movie has not [[benefited]] the distribution nor attention it merits. Its [[nuanced]] [[topics]] of belonging, identity, racial relations and especially how colonialism [[harm]] all [[party]], [[exceed]] the obvious [[noteworthy]] [[tension]], the nostalgic [[reminiscences]] of the protaganiste's childhood, and the exoticism of her relationship with her parents' "houseboy," perhaps the only "real" human she knows. We won't even look at her mother's relationship with this [[tasteful]] [[dude]]. There! i hope i've given you enough of a hook to take it in, whether you speak French or like subtitles or not. I challenge you to be as brave, strong and aware as La P'tite. --------------------------------------------- Result 1905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] Probable reasons why so [[many]] people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They might enjoy [[gore]] and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other reasons not covered here.

The only thing I [[liked]] about this film is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will almost definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... Probable reasons why so [[countless]] people on this site have enjoyed this:

1. They might not have read the book. 2. They might enjoy [[gora]] and violence in a film. 3. They might be very young and therefore not understand the violence. 4. People might not understand how somehow more scary and more violent it is compared to the original book. 5. There are sure to be many other reasons not covered here.

The only thing I [[wished]] about this film is the song "'Bright Eyes".

If perchance, you happen to be one of those people who has read the book, enjoys calm and peaceful films without violence and are quite old and understand scariness and violence, you are sure not to like this. Otherwise you will almost definitely enjoy this.

Like in the book, a rabbit called Fiver in an unsuspecting warren warns of terrible danger to come. Only a few rabbits - including his brother Hazel - believe him and they set out on a dangerous journey to find a new place to live... --------------------------------------------- Result 1906 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] It may (or may not) be considered interesting that the only [[reason]] I really [[checked]] out this movie in the [[first]] place was because I wanted to see the performance of the man who beat out Humphrey Bogart in his CASABLANCA (10/10 role for the Best Actor Oscar. (I still would have given the Oscar to Bogie, but Paul Lukas did do a great job and deserved the [[nomination]], at least.) Well, I'm [[glad]] I did check this movie out, because I enjoyed it [[immensely]]. I [[think]] the [[movie]] did preach a [[little]], but not only did I not [[mind]], I enjoyed the speeches and was never [[bored]] with them.

The acting was outstanding in this movie. I especially enjoyed Paul Lukas, Lucile Watson (rightfully nominated for an Oscar), [[Bette]] Davis (wrongfully not nominated), George Coulouris and, oddly, Eric Roberts, who plays the middle child. I really enjoyed his character: an odd-looking boy who talks like some sort of [[philosopher]]. He just cracks me up. Even the characters name (Bodo) is funny.

The ending, in which Lukas's character was forced to do something he considered wrong even though he was doing it for all the right reasons, worked for me as well. I agreed with why he felt he had to what he did, and I understood why he couldn't quite [[explain]] it. The message this [[movie]] makes is a good and noble one, the scenery (meaning the house) is beautiful, and the acting is the excellent. Watch this movie if you ever get a [[chance]].

9/10 It may (or may not) be considered interesting that the only [[rationale]] I really [[audit]] out this movie in the [[fiirst]] place was because I wanted to see the performance of the man who beat out Humphrey Bogart in his CASABLANCA (10/10 role for the Best Actor Oscar. (I still would have given the Oscar to Bogie, but Paul Lukas did do a great job and deserved the [[appointing]], at least.) Well, I'm [[happier]] I did check this movie out, because I enjoyed it [[unimaginably]]. I [[believe]] the [[cinematography]] did preach a [[tiny]], but not only did I not [[intellect]], I enjoyed the speeches and was never [[bores]] with them.

The acting was outstanding in this movie. I especially enjoyed Paul Lukas, Lucile Watson (rightfully nominated for an Oscar), [[Midler]] Davis (wrongfully not nominated), George Coulouris and, oddly, Eric Roberts, who plays the middle child. I really enjoyed his character: an odd-looking boy who talks like some sort of [[thinker]]. He just cracks me up. Even the characters name (Bodo) is funny.

The ending, in which Lukas's character was forced to do something he considered wrong even though he was doing it for all the right reasons, worked for me as well. I agreed with why he felt he had to what he did, and I understood why he couldn't quite [[clarifying]] it. The message this [[cinematography]] makes is a good and noble one, the scenery (meaning the house) is beautiful, and the acting is the excellent. Watch this movie if you ever get a [[opportunities]].

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I remember originally seeing this film at Radio City Music Hall when it came out. I didn't really understand the humor back then, but this movie can make me laugh out loud.

With all due respect to George Burns (RIP), Walter Matthau really deserved the Oscar for this film. His performance is amazing--given the fact that he was 20 years younger than his character, Willie Clark. His mannerisms are first-rate. ("You know what kind of songs he wrote? Sh*t!" and when speaking to the Spanish-speaking guy at the front desk: "No! No! No enchilada!!") Absolutely hilarious!

Kudos to Richard Benjamin, who played straight man to Matthau.

I just wish this was on DVD, because my VHS recording is getting a bit old.

I had no interest in seeing the remake with Woody Allen, because in no way can it match the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 1908 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] No other movie has [[made]] me feel like this before... and I don't feel bad. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I waited to watch this movie (9 [[months]]) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[view]] this ______. The reason I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I [[wrack]] my brain I just can't seem to [[come]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a breather. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Thank]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No words. No thoughts. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait No other movie has [[effected]] me feel like this before... and I don't feel bad. Like, I don't want my money back or the time that I waited to watch this movie (9 [[mois]]) nor do I feel bad about using two hours of a sunny summer day in order to [[visualizing]] this ______. The reason I say "_____" is because no matter how hard I [[ruination]] my brain I just can't seem to [[arrive]] up with a word in ANY of the seven languages that movie was in to sum it up. I have no idea what was going on the entire time and half way through the movie I needed a breather. No movie has ever done this to me before. Never in my life have I wanted cauliflower, milk, and baguettes this much. [[Thanking]] you. - Ed

Uh. *clears throat* No words. No thoughts. I don't know. I truly don't know. - Cait --------------------------------------------- Result 1909 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A sweet and [[totally]] [[charming]] [[film]], Shall We Dansu? [[made]] me [[laugh]] and cry. At [[first]] appearance, Sugiyama-san was not terribly appealing--an uptight salaryman, [[seemingly]] devoted to his family, but all too easily captivated by a face in a window. The [[object]] of his [[obsession]] is [[distant]] and cold. But by the end of the [[movie]], I was in [[love]] with him, her, his wife and daughter, all the dance [[instructors]] and dance [[students]]. This uncomplicated story of [[transformation]] and renewal is a little [[jewel]] that I would [[enjoy]] seeing again. A sweet and [[fully]] [[handsome]] [[kino]], Shall We Dansu? [[introduced]] me [[laughed]] and cry. At [[fiirst]] appearance, Sugiyama-san was not terribly appealing--an uptight salaryman, [[supposedly]] devoted to his family, but all too easily captivated by a face in a window. The [[objects]] of his [[mania]] is [[aloof]] and cold. But by the end of the [[flick]], I was in [[iove]] with him, her, his wife and daughter, all the dance [[instructor]] and dance [[student]]. This uncomplicated story of [[metamorphosis]] and renewal is a little [[jewelry]] that I would [[enjoys]] seeing again. --------------------------------------------- Result 1910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Leave]] it to Braik to put on a good [[show]]. Finally he and Zorak are living their own lives outside of Spac Ghost Coast To Coast. I have to say that I [[love]] both of these shows a whole lot. They are completely what started Adult Swim. Brak made it big with an album that came out in the year 2000. It may not have been platinum, but his show was really popular to tons of people out there that love Adult Swims shows. I have to [[say]] that out of all the Adult Swim [[shows]] with no plot, this has to be the one with the most none plot ever made. That is why I like it so much, it is just such a classic in the Adult Swim history. I believe this is just such a great show, if you don't like it. Hey there were tons who hated it and tons who loved it. [[Let]] it to Braik to put on a good [[shows]]. Finally he and Zorak are living their own lives outside of Spac Ghost Coast To Coast. I have to say that I [[amour]] both of these shows a whole lot. They are completely what started Adult Swim. Brak made it big with an album that came out in the year 2000. It may not have been platinum, but his show was really popular to tons of people out there that love Adult Swims shows. I have to [[tell]] that out of all the Adult Swim [[exhibited]] with no plot, this has to be the one with the most none plot ever made. That is why I like it so much, it is just such a classic in the Adult Swim history. I believe this is just such a great show, if you don't like it. Hey there were tons who hated it and tons who loved it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] [[Paul]] Verhoeven has one of the [[strangest]] oeuvres of any [[major]] director: he started off making art-house films in his native Netherlands before moving to Hollywood where he [[began]] making subversive genre pieces which are often seen as mere entertainments by the mainstream crowd. 1983's The Fourth Man was the last film he made before moving to the U.S. and it seems to have been a [[transitional]] [[film]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Man]] it's clear that the film will be [[seen]] from the [[perspective]] of the famous [[albeit]] [[impoverished]] author Gerard. [[In]] a seeming homage to [[Carol]] Reed's similarly titled 1949 [[film]] The Third [[Man]] the film begins with an author making a trip to speak to a crowd of literature enthusiasts. The similarities end there, however, as Gerard runs into no major complications before arriving at the auditorium and the speech itself goes fairly smoothly. In spite of the relative ease with which he completes this function we know that the author is somewhat troubled as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before leaving his house and he also has a surreal fantasy involving a hotel he sees advertised and a detached eyeball growing out of a door's peephole. That he sometimes has trouble keeping his fantasies separate from reality is made all the more clear when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he admits that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no longer knows whether something did or didn't happen."

The Fourth Man is full of surreal fantasies and dreams which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they relate to events which we have seen occur and because they sometimes foreshadow events which haven't occurred yet. Between the effectiveness of the unreal sequences and Verhoeven's careful editing style this ends up being the most [[atmospheric]] film this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth Man is also perversely funny as Gerard's deeply held Catholic beliefs seep into every aspect of his life including sexuality. He naturally associates a female hair stylist he knows intimately with the Biblical Delilah though he fears she'll remove an even more important symbol of masculinity with her scissors. In an erotic fantasy sequence that would make Luis Buñuel blush he substitutes a man he's attracted to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. [[Paulus]] Verhoeven has one of the [[oddest]] oeuvres of any [[sizeable]] director: he started off making art-house films in his native Netherlands before moving to Hollywood where he [[launches]] making subversive genre pieces which are often seen as mere entertainments by the mainstream crowd. 1983's The Fourth Man was the last film he made before moving to the U.S. and it seems to have been a [[ephemeral]] [[filmmaking]] for him.

From the beginning of The Fourth [[Dawg]] it's clear that the film will be [[watched]] from the [[views]] of the famous [[whereas]] [[dispossessed]] author Gerard. [[For]] a seeming homage to [[Carroll]] Reed's similarly titled 1949 [[kino]] The Third [[Dude]] the film begins with an author making a trip to speak to a crowd of literature enthusiasts. The similarities end there, however, as Gerard runs into no major complications before arriving at the auditorium and the speech itself goes fairly smoothly. In spite of the relative ease with which he completes this function we know that the author is somewhat troubled as he has realistic fantasies about murdering his roommate before leaving his house and he also has a surreal fantasy involving a hotel he sees advertised and a detached eyeball growing out of a door's peephole. That he sometimes has trouble keeping his fantasies separate from reality is made all the more clear when an anecdote he tells is exposed as untrue and he admits that he "lie{s} the truth until {he} no longer knows whether something did or didn't happen."

The Fourth Man is full of surreal fantasies and dreams which are made all the more disturbing because it's very easy to see how they relate to events which we have seen occur and because they sometimes foreshadow events which haven't occurred yet. Between the effectiveness of the unreal sequences and Verhoeven's careful editing style this ends up being the most [[barometric]] film this side of Don't Look Now and like that film this one is full of ambiguity. Unlike that film The Fourth Man is also perversely funny as Gerard's deeply held Catholic beliefs seep into every aspect of his life including sexuality. He naturally associates a female hair stylist he knows intimately with the Biblical Delilah though he fears she'll remove an even more important symbol of masculinity with her scissors. In an erotic fantasy sequence that would make Luis Buñuel blush he substitutes a man he's attracted to for a life size statue of Christ on the cross.

The Fourth Man is a horror film which manages to bring the viewer into the mind of the protagonist while still maintaining a certain ambiguity: it certainly seems as if Gerard is in danger but it may just be more of his "lying the truth." The film is also full of both subtle and not so subtle visual symbolism which helps make it a unique and satisfying cinematic experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1912 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on [[Jordan]] Ladd. But watching this [[film]] [[almost]] put me off her. This is [[absolutely]] [[awful]]! I [[could]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so [[bland]] and generic. I [[would]] [[love]] it if the great Mistuharu Misawa Tiger Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "lake" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely wonderful. A true [[angel]]. But she couldn't even save this utter joke of a film. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth drug. It looked hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. Jesus Christ, I can't believe I've wasted my time watching this movie. I only watched because I have such a crush on [[Giordano]] Ladd. But watching this [[cinematography]] [[hardly]] put me off her. This is [[perfectly]] [[scary]]! I [[did]] have been watching Survivor Series 93 over this.

The lead guy in this was so [[vapid]] and generic. I [[should]] [[amore]] it if the great Mistuharu Misawa Tiger Drove '91'd his ass through a glass window. I was enraging every time he was saying "lake" and "cabin". I'd kick his ass.

Jordan Ladd, on the other hand, was absolutely wonderful. A true [[angels]]. But she couldn't even save this utter joke of a film. Sadly, she couldn't even act like she was off her nut when she took that truth drug. It looked hilarious.

I also loved the bit where Jordan accidentally spilled yogurt on her. It reminded me of a time where...nevermind.

Anayways, do watch this film because of it's awfulness. --------------------------------------------- Result 1913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Just]] saw this at the Chicago [[Film]] [[Festival]] - [[avoid]] it at all [[costs]] [[unless]] you have sleep [[problems]]. It is a [[film]] filled with pretensions - it opens with a [[minor]] [[quote]] from "Hiroshima mon [[amour]]" and it's all downhill from there. [[Camera]] [[work]] - imagine a [[child]] [[trying]] to [[imitate]] Wong Kar Wai. Story line - Smokey Robinson and the Miracles' "The Love I saw in You Was Just a Mirage" [[expanded]] from 3 minutes to over 2 hours but filled with repetition. [[For]] [[butt]] numbing pain this film ranks with the benches at the Methodist church my parent dragged me to when I was a kid. I want 2+ hours of my life refunded. Julian Hernandez's promoter prefaced the viewing with comment that the film was "controversial" - that is true only for the film's narcotic effect. [[Only]] saw this at the Chicago [[Cinematography]] [[Festivals]] - [[preventing]] it at all [[expenses]] [[if]] you have sleep [[problem]]. It is a [[films]] filled with pretensions - it opens with a [[underage]] [[quoting]] from "Hiroshima mon [[amore]]" and it's all downhill from there. [[Cameras]] [[cooperate]] - imagine a [[children]] [[seeking]] to [[replicate]] Wong Kar Wai. Story line - Smokey Robinson and the Miracles' "The Love I saw in You Was Just a Mirage" [[broadens]] from 3 minutes to over 2 hours but filled with repetition. [[During]] [[cul]] numbing pain this film ranks with the benches at the Methodist church my parent dragged me to when I was a kid. I want 2+ hours of my life refunded. Julian Hernandez's promoter prefaced the viewing with comment that the film was "controversial" - that is true only for the film's narcotic effect. --------------------------------------------- Result 1914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This movie is without a [[doubt]] a [[perfect]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[rating]] this [[film]] low grades because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, thats ridiculous, saying that a Jackie Chan movie is bad because of its plot is like saying a porn movie is bad because it has no plot! you watch Jackie Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much concentrated on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American films from that era and even later you will realize that Jackie Chan's movies had over the top fights scenes and not really good plots while American movies had good plots but shitty action scenes compared to what Jackie Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the porn, Jackie Chan is watched for the ACTION, i think you people are rating it bad because there's no plot because you think thats how a smart movie critic would rate a good movie but the way i see it is a good movie is a movie that can keep me entertained. Sure the middle of the movie was boring, VERY BORING, but put it this way the rest which is all action scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the way how American action movies were created, they have even stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a true man, a true entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes pure in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a walk in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. American movies rely so much on special effects and safety wires and stunt doubles and so much more. Police Story and many other Jackie Chan films are pieces of work of a true entertainer who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a masterpiece This movie is without a [[duda]] a [[irreproachable]] 10/10.. for all you people out there who are [[appraisals]] this [[kino]] low grades because it has no "good plot" or anything like that, thats ridiculous, saying that a Jackie Chan movie is bad because of its plot is like saying a porn movie is bad because it has no plot! you watch Jackie Chan FOR THE FIGHT SCENES, for the action its not so much concentrated on a good story or anything like that, if you look at how he makes movies and compare it to other American films from that era and even later you will realize that Jackie Chan's movies had over the top fights scenes and not really good plots while American movies had good plots but shitty action scenes compared to what Jackie Chan was doing at the time. Porn is watched for the porn, Jackie Chan is watched for the ACTION, i think you people are rating it bad because there's no plot because you think thats how a smart movie critic would rate a good movie but the way i see it is a good movie is a movie that can keep me entertained. Sure the middle of the movie was boring, VERY BORING, but put it this way the rest which is all action scenes and stunts very much do pay for all of that. This did change the way how American action movies were created, they have even stollen scenes from this movie. If you want a true man, a true entertainer then watch this movie and many more of Jackie Chan's, hes pure in everyway. He literally makes American movies look like a walk in the park, and even in TODAYS movies. American movies rely so much on special effects and safety wires and stunt doubles and so much more. Police Story and many other Jackie Chan films are pieces of work of a true entertainer who just goes all out and is very talented in what he can do. a masterpiece --------------------------------------------- Result 1915 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] This really should [[deserve]] a "O" rating, or even a negative ten. I watched this show for ages, and the show [[jumped]] the [[shark]] around series 7. This episode, [[however]], is proof that the show has [[jumped]] the [[shark]]. It's writing is lazy, absurd, self-indulgent and not [[even]] [[worthy]] of rubbish like Beavis and [[Butthead]].

It is quite [[possible]] to be ridiculous and still be [[fun]] -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Mummy, Count of Monte Cristo -- all "fun" movies that are not to be taken seriously. However, there is such thing as ridiculous as in "this is the worst thing I've ever seen." And indeed, this is the [[worst]] episode of Stargate I've ever seen. It's absolutely dreadful, and this coming from someone with a stargate in her basement.

Makes me want to sell all of my stargate props, most seriously. This really should [[deserves]] a "O" rating, or even a negative ten. I watched this show for ages, and the show [[bumped]] the [[mako]] around series 7. This episode, [[yet]], is proof that the show has [[soared]] the [[mako]]. It's writing is lazy, absurd, self-indulgent and not [[yet]] [[laudable]] of rubbish like Beavis and [[Cretin]].

It is quite [[attainable]] to be ridiculous and still be [[hilarious]] -- Pirates of the Caribbean, the Mummy, Count of Monte Cristo -- all "fun" movies that are not to be taken seriously. However, there is such thing as ridiculous as in "this is the worst thing I've ever seen." And indeed, this is the [[lousiest]] episode of Stargate I've ever seen. It's absolutely dreadful, and this coming from someone with a stargate in her basement.

Makes me want to sell all of my stargate props, most seriously. --------------------------------------------- Result 1916 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I am very [[disappointed]] with "K-911." The original "[[good]]" quality of "K-9" doesn't exist any more. This is more [[like]] a sitcom! Some of casts from original movie returned and got some of my memory back. The [[captain]] of Dooley now loves to hit him like a scene from old comedy show. That was crazy. What's the deal with the change of Police? It seems like they are now LAPD! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " I am very [[disenchanted]] with "K-911." The original "[[alright]]" quality of "K-9" doesn't exist any more. This is more [[iike]] a sitcom! Some of casts from original movie returned and got some of my memory back. The [[skipper]] of Dooley now loves to hit him like a scene from old comedy show. That was crazy. What's the deal with the change of Police? It seems like they are now LAPD! Not San Diego PD. It is a completely different movie from " --------------------------------------------- Result 1917 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Man oh man... I've been foolishly procrastinating (not the right term, there's a long list!) to watch this [[film]] and [[finally]] had the [[chance]] to do so. And "news" are: [[Marvellous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[For]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, Dogville, Dancer in The [[Dark]], The Five Obstructions, etc... [[Europa]] is [[probably]] the differential for its [[greatness]] in visual terms. Everything is [[beautifully]] [[somber]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "imaginary" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till noir films of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard Von Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well intended totalitarian" movie maker of nowadays. His authoritarian way of dealing with very [[intricate]] issues, without being irrational, hits the nerve of the viewer with the intent to cure some of the deepest wounds we feed in our hypocritical world.

As Utopian as it seems, I do believe people like Von Trier could help society in many ways in a broader aspect. The day films and filmmakers that carry this sort of power are no longer necessary, as a tool for reflection, perhaps it could be the start of a new era: "The age of emotional control over our fears". This is what he offers to us constantly through his work over and over.

Bravo! Man oh man... I've been foolishly procrastinating (not the right term, there's a long list!) to watch this [[filmmaking]] and [[lastly]] had the [[probability]] to do so. And "news" are: [[Glamorous]] labyrinthine spectacle!

[[During]] any Von Trier's "follower": both Rigets, Element of Crime, Dogville, Dancer in The [[Darkened]], The Five Obstructions, etc... [[Europe]] is [[presumably]] the differential for its [[size]] in visual terms. Everything is [[fantastically]] [[dark]] and claustrophobic! You really get the feeling of being inside this "imaginary" nightmarish time warp. Taking from the masters of surreal cinema like Bunuel, Bergman, till noir films of the 40's with acidic drops of avant-guard Von Trier leads the art-film scene as the "well intended totalitarian" movie maker of nowadays. His authoritarian way of dealing with very [[complex]] issues, without being irrational, hits the nerve of the viewer with the intent to cure some of the deepest wounds we feed in our hypocritical world.

As Utopian as it seems, I do believe people like Von Trier could help society in many ways in a broader aspect. The day films and filmmakers that carry this sort of power are no longer necessary, as a tool for reflection, perhaps it could be the start of a new era: "The age of emotional control over our fears". This is what he offers to us constantly through his work over and over.

Bravo! --------------------------------------------- Result 1918 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This [[cartoon]] was [[strange]], but the [[story]] actually had a little more depth and emotion to it than other [[cartoon]] [[movies]]. We have a girl at a [[camp]] with low self esteem and [[hardly]] any other [[friends]], except a [[brother]] and [[sister]] who are just a [[miserable]] as she is. She [[reaches]] the [[ultimate]] low point and when the [[opportunity]] [[arises]] she literally makes a [[pact]] with a devil-like demon. I [[found]] this [[film]] to be very true to [[life]] and just when [[things]] couldn't be worse, the girl sees what she's [[done]], she feels remorse and then changes and then she [[helps]] this [[dark]], [[mystical]] creature learn the human quality of [[love]]. The twins [[improve]] too, by helping the little [[bears]] and then they [[get]] a [[sense]] of self worth too. A very [[positive]] [[message]] for [[children]], [[though]] some [[elements]] of the [[film]] was [[strange]], it was and [[still]] is a [[rather]] [[enjoyable]] [[film]]. The [[music]] from [[Stephen]] [[Bishop]] (Tootsie [[songs]]) [[made]] the [[film]] even better This [[toon]] was [[curious]], but the [[stories]] actually had a little more depth and emotion to it than other [[caricatures]] [[cinematography]]. We have a girl at a [[campground]] with low self esteem and [[practically]] any other [[boyfriends]], except a [[sibling]] and [[sisterly]] who are just a [[lousy]] as she is. She [[achieves]] the [[final]] low point and when the [[opportunities]] [[emerges]] she literally makes a [[treaties]] with a devil-like demon. I [[detected]] this [[cinematography]] to be very true to [[lives]] and just when [[aspects]] couldn't be worse, the girl sees what she's [[performed]], she feels remorse and then changes and then she [[supporting]] this [[blackness]], [[woolen]] creature learn the human quality of [[likes]]. The twins [[enhancement]] too, by helping the little [[carry]] and then they [[obtain]] a [[sensing]] of self worth too. A very [[affirmative]] [[messaging]] for [[kid]], [[if]] some [[facets]] of the [[movie]] was [[curious]], it was and [[again]] is a [[fairly]] [[agreeable]] [[cinematography]]. The [[musicians]] from [[Stefan]] [[Monseigneur]] (Tootsie [[lyrics]]) [[introduced]] the [[kino]] even better --------------------------------------------- Result 1919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The movie never claims to be [[something]] spectacular like [[many]] [[films]] do. The [[films]] [[props]] itself as a [[fun]] and [[entertaining]] [[time]]. And that's [[exactly]] what it was. It is the Korean version of a male Bring It On.

From the get [[go]] you can feel for the rest of the film and how it will end but the enjoyment is not in the [[surprise]] [[twists]] nor is it the [[way]] the [[film]] is a carbon copy of another. [[Instead]], the enjoyment is held in the [[journey]] of how the 2 remaining "thugs" came to be men in their own [[right]]. Therefore, the [[film]] is [[fun]] and entertaining.

The camera [[work]], specially the dolly moves were very well executed. The script, being a tad [[weak]], was overly enjoyable in the fact that the [[characters]] were not 2 dimensional but they were full of life and desire. This [[film]] will not win any [[Oscars]], nor any DVD blockbuster sales, but a [[fun]] watch and a [[fun]] experience. The movie never claims to be [[anything]] spectacular like [[various]] [[movie]] do. The [[kino]] [[accessories]] itself as a [[funny]] and [[amusing]] [[period]]. And that's [[accurately]] what it was. It is the Korean version of a male Bring It On.

From the get [[going]] you can feel for the rest of the film and how it will end but the enjoyment is not in the [[amazement]] [[kinks]] nor is it the [[camino]] the [[filmmaking]] is a carbon copy of another. [[Alternatively]], the enjoyment is held in the [[itinerary]] of how the 2 remaining "thugs" came to be men in their own [[rights]]. Therefore, the [[filmmaking]] is [[hilarious]] and entertaining.

The camera [[cooperate]], specially the dolly moves were very well executed. The script, being a tad [[tenuous]], was overly enjoyable in the fact that the [[features]] were not 2 dimensional but they were full of life and desire. This [[cinematographic]] will not win any [[Oskar]], nor any DVD blockbuster sales, but a [[droll]] watch and a [[droll]] experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 1920 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] If it [[smells]] like [[garbage]] and if it [[looks]] like [[garbage]], it must be [[garbage]]. This is by far one of the [[worst]] movies I have ever [[seen]] in my [[entire]] [[life]]. [[Tony]] Scott's [[poor]] [[directing]] [[style]] puts [[shame]] to an already uninteresting and slightly untrue [[story]] of Domino Harvey's life as a bounty hunter. The [[story]] is [[completely]] discontinuous and [[confusing]] to watch. Certain [[aspects]] of the [[plot]] were ridiculous and [[totally]] unbelievable. It [[seems]] that all of the [[action]] scenes were loosely strung together by poor plot [[points]] and [[horrible]] acting. Keira Knightley does [[get]] [[totally]] naked in this one though. That is the one and only upside to this film. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] her [[naked]] just [[fast]] forward the [[movie]] until about an [[hour]] and a half into it and you'll [[catch]] a whole lot of nipple. I [[strongly]] suggest that no one see this [[movie]] EVER! [[Positive (53%)]] honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this horrific remake, or the comments on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so funny. [[Anyway]], this movie is the among the [[worst]] movies ever, and certainly the bottom of the [[barrel]] for sequels. The "Omen" name on the title made me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the face to the other three, especially the original. There are so many classically bad moments, but my favorite is the guy catching fire from the juggler at the psychic fair!! good times ! This movie is to the Omen series what "Scary Movie" is to the entire genre. Avoid unless you're looking for a good laugh. honestly, i don't know what's funnier, this horrific remake, or the comments on this board. Masterpiece's review had me in tears, that's so funny. [[Anyhow]], this movie is the among the [[gravest]] movies ever, and certainly the bottom of the [[canon]] for sequels. The "Omen" name on the title made me stop and watch it this morning on HBO, but it's a slap in the face to the other three, especially the original. There are so many classically bad moments, but my favorite is the guy catching fire from the juggler at the psychic fair!! good times ! This movie is to the Omen series what "Scary Movie" is to the entire genre. Avoid unless you're looking for a good laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 1922 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Words]] cannot [[begin]] to [[describe]] how blandly [[terrible]] this movie is. I [[wish]] it were "so bad it's good," but it's not. It's just [[dull]], lifeless, and [[boring]]. It's so [[bad]] I couldn't [[even]] [[laugh]] at it.

[[In]] [[response]] to other posters, Anne-Marie Frigon is not the [[highlight]] of the [[movie]]. The only [[person]] [[less]] charismatic is the [[director]] [[Brett]] [[Kelly]], who as a [[true]] [[statement]] on [[vanity]], cast himself as the [[male]] [[lead]]. They both [[look]] like inbreeds, sister and [[brother]].

The gal, [[Sherry]] Thurig, is a looker. The [[complete]] [[opposite]] of Anne-Marie - attractive. This girl is tall and willowy, and can [[act]]. [[Although]] you can [[tell]] she's holding back.

All the [[actors]] [[seem]] to be holding back, [[especially]] the [[supporting]] [[male]], [[Mark]]. I've [[seen]] less wood in a rain [[forest]], but he's [[still]] better than Kelly. Why would Kelly [[keep]] his [[actors]] from acting? Is he really that bad a [[director]]? Everyone [[else]] has summed the [[story]] up [[perfectly]] - there isn't one. Kids are kidnapped and Kelly [[steps]] in [[poo]] to [[solve]] the crime. I know how he [[felt]] stepping in the [[poo]], it's how I [[felt]] after watching his [[movie]].

[[Yes]], I [[tried]] to [[get]] my [[money]] back from the rental [[store]]. This is a [[home]] [[movie]] best [[left]] to be [[seen]] by the [[friends]] of the [[director]] (and if you search them out, you'll [[see]] those same friends were the one who [[gave]] the [[movie]] positive [[marks]]). [[Phrases]] cannot [[launching]] to [[describing]] how blandly [[dreadful]] this movie is. I [[wanting]] it were "so bad it's good," but it's not. It's just [[drab]], lifeless, and [[dreary]]. It's so [[amiss]] I couldn't [[yet]] [[laughter]] at it.

[[At]] [[reactions]] to other posters, Anne-Marie Frigon is not the [[stressing]] of the [[cinema]]. The only [[individuals]] [[lesser]] charismatic is the [[headmaster]] [[Widely]] [[Kelley]], who as a [[genuine]] [[declarations]] on [[conceit]], cast himself as the [[virile]] [[culminate]]. They both [[gaze]] like inbreeds, sister and [[hermano]].

The gal, [[Jerez]] Thurig, is a looker. The [[finishing]] [[contrast]] of Anne-Marie - attractive. This girl is tall and willowy, and can [[acts]]. [[Despite]] you can [[told]] she's holding back.

All the [[players]] [[looks]] to be holding back, [[concretely]] the [[helping]] [[masculine]], [[Brands]]. I've [[watched]] less wood in a rain [[forests]], but he's [[again]] better than Kelly. Why would Kelly [[retaining]] his [[protagonists]] from acting? Is he really that bad a [[superintendent]]? Everyone [[further]] has summed the [[tales]] up [[fully]] - there isn't one. Kids are kidnapped and Kelly [[actions]] in [[caca]] to [[solving]] the crime. I know how he [[smelled]] stepping in the [[chit]], it's how I [[believed]] after watching his [[filmmaking]].

[[Oui]], I [[strived]] to [[obtains]] my [[cash]] back from the rental [[storehouse]]. This is a [[habitation]] [[filmmaking]] best [[exited]] to be [[watched]] by the [[friendships]] of the [[headmaster]] (and if you search them out, you'll [[seeing]] those same friends were the one who [[delivered]] the [[filmmaking]] positive [[brand]]). --------------------------------------------- Result 1923 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[masterpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[wonderful]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[finest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal impact, including the score, seems to me patent and egregious. I challenge ANYone to sit through this film and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND lovable, and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute gems of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. Again, it seems totally illogical, to me at least, that "Arthur" merits a mere 6.4 out of 10 possible. Steve Gordon's one-shot [[centerpiece]] herein is the totally "unlikely" if not quite "impossible" melding of wildly disparate elements. That he managed to make alcoholism laugh-friendly rather than tearjerking tragic is, in itself, [[sumptuous]]. That he gave Dudley Moore his [[noblest]] role, and every other cinematic element herein its optimal impact, including the score, seems to me patent and egregious. I challenge ANYone to sit through this film and not laugh out loud. But, apparently, nearly a third of its audience has so managed. Well, I, for one, found and find Gordon's effort both laughable AND lovable, and the iikes of Geraldine Fitzgerald's great-aunt and Stephen Elliott's murderous would-be father-in-law absolute gems of background characters. Even the black chauffeur managed to escape patronization, and the late, sniffish Sir John Gielgud was right about accepting his fee, but wrong about undertaking his role. "Arthur" makes no effort to "Underztand," much less rationalize, the scourge of "alcoholism" (hey, iFit ain't booze, it's other drugs of choice, including meth, and addictions are merely symptoms, not targets), it simply observes in its own quizzical manner. --------------------------------------------- Result 1924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I find it rather useless to [[comment]] on this "movie" for the simplest [[reason]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's similar to a rotten egg which has nothing good to show to the world excerpt for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of eggs have been before it. But since a comment is [[mandatory]] for such a [[grandiose]] insignificance ...

[[Filth]] is definitely the proper word to [[describe]] this movie created in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[directed]] by Lucian Pintilie who insists to depict the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some value whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." I find it rather useless to [[observation]] on this "movie" for the simplest [[motif]] that it has nothing to comment upon.It's similar to a rotten egg which has nothing good to show to the world excerpt for the fact that it is rotten as other endless number of eggs have been before it. But since a comment is [[compulsory]] for such a [[splendid]] insignificance ...

[[Dirt]] is definitely the proper word to [[contour]] this movie created in the same manner as any other Romanian "movie" [[oriented]] by Lucian Pintilie who insists to depict the so called "Romanian reality" following the Communist era (1990 to present days).

Under no circumstances recommended for people outside Romania as for the others (who lately find amateurish camera, lack of plot, lack of directorial / actors's quality etc, noise etc. as being trendy and even art-like) : watch & enjoy this "movie" (as I know you will) but do the other well intentioned IMDb members a favor, don't write an online review for it will misguide, irritate and in the end waste their time.

On the other hand this movie (among others) has some value whatsoever, an educational one for it sets the example for : "How NOT to make a movie." --------------------------------------------- Result 1925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]]

This is without a doubt the funniest [[comedy]] of the year. Everybody is brilliant. The acting is superb. You can [[see]] that the actors enjoyed making this film. It´s a [[shame]] to [[spoil]] the film with give aways, so [[rent]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10.

This is without a doubt the funniest [[travesty]] of the year. Everybody is brilliant. The acting is superb. You can [[consults]] that the actors enjoyed making this film. It´s a [[dishonour]] to [[wrack]] the film with give aways, so [[renting]] it and laugh your ass off.

9 - 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] The silent one-panel cartoon [[Henry]] comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest [[human]]" in this [[dull]] little cartoon. Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the [[Production]] Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes. A bore. The silent one-panel cartoon [[Gregg]] comes to Fleischer Studios, billed as "The world's funniest [[humanity]]" in this [[uninspiring]] little cartoon. Betty, long past her prime, thanks to the [[Productivity]] Code, is running a pet shop and leaves Henry in charge for far too long -- five minutes. A bore. --------------------------------------------- Result 1927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If this is the first of the "Nemesis" films that you have seen, then I strongly urge you to proceed no further. The sequels to "Nebula" prove to be no better...hard to believe considering this entry is bottom-of-the-barrel. This movie tries, but it's just not worth your time, folks. Take a nap instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1928 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie would not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back [[lot]] [[warehouse]] was the [[supposed]] space [[port]] filmed in? "[[Continuity]] People!" It's a [[basic]] [[principle]] in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[port]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[warehouse]]!??!? People Please! The only thing I will commend this movie for, is the [[wardrobe]] [[dept]]. for continuously, keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing [[outfits]]! Even the [[women]] who saw this [[bomb]] had to [[appreciate]] the outfits that she [[obviously]] [[spent]] some [[time]] getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi [[channel]] [[would]] have been [[better]] off [[showing]] SpaceBalls! At [[least]] there [[would]] have been some real [[humor]] in watching something so [[unbelievable]].

P.S. Michael Ironside, [[please]] Fire [[Your]] Agent ASAP! You are so much [[better]] of an actor, to be [[even]] associated with this level of movie making. If it were not for the "Oh So Gourgous," Natassia Malthe, this B- movie would not have been worth one sector of my Tivo disk space! In what low rent, back [[batch]] [[platt]] was the [[suspected]] space [[porto]] filmed in? "[[Continuation]] People!" It's a [[fundamental]] [[tenets]] in real movie making! By night an alleged space [[harbour]] and by day (night and day on a space station?) a [[depot]]!??!? People Please! The only thing I will commend this movie for, is the [[cupboard]] [[ministry]]. for continuously, keeping Natassia in those tight shape revealing [[garb]]! Even the [[femmes]] who saw this [[blasts]] had to [[appreciative]] the outfits that she [[definitely]] [[spend]] some [[times]] getting into, each day of filming! The Sci-fi [[channels]] [[should]] have been [[best]] off [[illustrating]] SpaceBalls! At [[less]] there [[could]] have been some real [[comedy]] in watching something so [[phenomenal]].

P.S. Michael Ironside, [[invites]] Fire [[Ton]] Agent ASAP! You are so much [[best]] of an actor, to be [[yet]] associated with this level of movie making. --------------------------------------------- Result 1929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This [[movie]] is up there with the all-time classics. The music, camera shots, and acting are [[excellent]]. Showing the movie in black and white gave it a much better appearance and complemented the music [[perfectly]], like Psycho. Its surprising how so few people have [[commented]] on this [[movie]]. My guess is that its a [[hard]] movie to find. I [[gave]] the [[film]] a 9. See the [[movie]] and you'll know what I'm talking about. This [[films]] is up there with the all-time classics. The music, camera shots, and acting are [[glamorous]]. Showing the movie in black and white gave it a much better appearance and complemented the music [[altogether]], like Psycho. Its surprising how so few people have [[noted]] on this [[film]]. My guess is that its a [[laborious]] movie to find. I [[supplied]] the [[cinematic]] a 9. See the [[cinema]] and you'll know what I'm talking about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1930 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Whether this [[movie]] is propaganda or not (I [[firmly]] believe it is not), it [[really]] [[shows]] the power of Media. The importance of this documentary is not to [[show]] how good of a man Chavez is. It is really to demonstrate the way the Bolivarians saw how it happened, the Chavez way of seeing it. [[Although]] it [[may]] seem [[wrong]] and bias to support a film , I think the point of view shown in the movie is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the private media corporation of Venezuela only [[saw]] a one side perspective of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This movie [[shows]] us the way the Bolivarians saw it . Call it propaganda , I say it's a judgment call on your [[part]]. Whether this [[cinematographic]] is propaganda or not (I [[resolutely]] believe it is not), it [[truthfully]] [[denotes]] the power of Media. The importance of this documentary is not to [[showing]] how good of a man Chavez is. It is really to demonstrate the way the Bolivarians saw how it happened, the Chavez way of seeing it. [[Nevertheless]] it [[maggio]] seem [[misguided]] and bias to support a film , I think the point of view shown in the movie is utterly legitimate. The Venezuelian people via the private media corporation of Venezuela only [[watched]] a one side perspective of the coup, the Neo-Liberal side. This movie [[demonstrating]] us the way the Bolivarians saw it . Call it propaganda , I say it's a judgment call on your [[portions]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Really]], I can't [[believe]] that I [[spent]] $5 on this movie. I am a huge zombie fanatic and thought the movie couldn't be that bad. It had [[zombies]] in it right? Was I wrong! To be honest the movie had it's moments...I thought it was cool when the guy got his head ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[think]] that it [[would]] be more enjoyable to [[slide]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a vat of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been better if we could see some [[boob]] but I had to watch the trailers for the other movies produced by this company to see that. Buyer beware...[[unless]] you are into masochism. [[Genuinely]], I can't [[think]] that I [[spends]] $5 on this movie. I am a huge zombie fanatic and thought the movie couldn't be that bad. It had [[walkers]] in it right? Was I wrong! To be honest the movie had it's moments...I thought it was cool when the guy got his head ripped off but that was about it. Overall I [[believe]] that it [[could]] be more enjoyable to [[slipping]] down a razorblade slide on my bare nutsack into a vat of vinegar then watch this movie again. The movie could have been better if we could see some [[tit]] but I had to watch the trailers for the other movies produced by this company to see that. Buyer beware...[[if]] you are into masochism. --------------------------------------------- Result 1932 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[plot]] is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and [[convince]] the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. [[However]], there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialogue]] which [[reflects]] the majority of the scenes of the film, an [[old]] [[man]] living by himself in a house. [[During]] the film I found that I was scared [[twice]] namely when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The rest of the film I have to admit did not engage me; I found the tempo of the film a little too slow. The limited dialogue was not a problem. However, the development of the story and its conclusions, after watching the film, took too [[long]]. I feel more could have been made of the relationship, ghostly encounters, with the child and the old man. Alone in the woods at night unsure of your own mind can lead to some eerie situations, children are always scary as ghosts, see Dark Water. The [[intrigue]] is straightforward an old man living off a main road in woodland one day witnesses a man murdering a child in the woods. Soft For Digging follows the old man's attempts to try and [[persuading]] the police that what he saw was not a figment of his imagination. [[Instead]], there is a problem each time the old man guides the police to where the murder happen no corpse can be found. Soft For Digging has a diminutive [[dialog]] which [[reflecting]] the majority of the scenes of the film, an [[longtime]] [[hombre]] living by himself in a house. [[Onto]] the film I found that I was scared [[twofold]] namely when the murdered child abruptly appears before the old man. The rest of the film I have to admit did not engage me; I found the tempo of the film a little too slow. The limited dialogue was not a problem. However, the development of the story and its conclusions, after watching the film, took too [[lange]]. I feel more could have been made of the relationship, ghostly encounters, with the child and the old man. Alone in the woods at night unsure of your own mind can lead to some eerie situations, children are always scary as ghosts, see Dark Water. --------------------------------------------- Result 1933 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I can't [[say]] much about this [[film]]. I [[think]] it [[speaks]] for itself (as do the [[current]] [[ratings]] on here). I rented this about two years [[ago]] and I [[totally]] [[regretted]] it. I [[even]] /tried/ to [[like]] it by watching it twice, but I just couldn't. I can [[safely]] [[say]] that I have [[absolutely]] no [[desire]] to [[see]] this [[waste]] of [[time]] ever, ever again. And I'm not one to trash a [[movie]], but I [[truly]] [[believe]] this was awful. It wasn't [[even]] [[funny]] in the slightest. The only [[bits]] I [[enjoyed]] were the few scenes with [[Christopher]] Walken in them. I [[think]] this [[film]] [[ruined]] both [[Jack]] [[Black]] and [[Ben]] Stiller for me. [[All]] I can [[think]] of when I [[see]] one of their [[films]] now-a-days is this [[terrible]] [[movie]], and it [[reminds]] me not to waste my [[money]]. Amy Poehler is so very [[annoying]], too.

Overall, well, I [[think]] you [[get]] my point. The [[stars]] are for Walken, by the [[way]]. I can't [[says]] much about this [[films]]. I [[ideas]] it [[conversations]] for itself (as do the [[contemporary]] [[assessments]] on here). I rented this about two years [[formerly]] and I [[fully]] [[deplore]] it. I [[yet]] /tried/ to [[fond]] it by watching it twice, but I just couldn't. I can [[securely]] [[tell]] that I have [[wholly]] no [[wanting]] to [[behold]] this [[squandering]] of [[times]] ever, ever again. And I'm not one to trash a [[film]], but I [[genuinely]] [[think]] this was awful. It wasn't [[yet]] [[droll]] in the slightest. The only [[tib]] I [[adored]] were the few scenes with [[Christophe]] Walken in them. I [[believing]] this [[cinematography]] [[devastated]] both [[Jacques]] [[Calico]] and [[Benn]] Stiller for me. [[Every]] I can [[believing]] of when I [[seeing]] one of their [[cinematography]] now-a-days is this [[frightful]] [[film]], and it [[remembered]] me not to waste my [[cash]]. Amy Poehler is so very [[galling]], too.

Overall, well, I [[believing]] you [[gets]] my point. The [[star]] are for Walken, by the [[paths]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came across Live! almost accidentally. oh boy! what a [[choice]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it [[expecting]] no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid reality show. [[Now]] I can easily say this has been a hell of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense [[grow]] gradually through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! While in a plane, flicking through the large choice of movies, I came across Live! almost accidentally. oh boy! what a [[wahl]].

I remembered vaguely seeing the trailer over a year ago and completely forgot about it [[waits]] no more than another cheesy nonsense movie about a stupid reality show. [[Presently]] I can easily say this has been a hell of a ride. I don't remember last time I have been so excited, terrified. Not sure if it was the high altitude playing with my senses, but the suspense [[augmentation]] gradually through the movie until reaching a climax where you can't turn away from the screen, literally sitting on the edge of your seat and biting the remaining nails you've got.

You will first go through a personal moral assessment of where you stand about the righteousness of the show. You will drift from thinking "how come the human being can be so vicious" to "why not after all?".Ask yourself would you do it. Then learn about the contestants, their motives and start guessing. You will then watch contestant pulling the trigger one by one and get excited even though you know the first candidate is safe.

Good acting, good directing, with a movie experience that reminds you those old movies where you knew what would happen in the next scene but still were craving for more.

*Spoilers* couple of things i would have changed:

- the casting of the contestants. i have really been moved by the farmer and we should have had a bit more like him. The idea of a rich writer who wants to be famous is a bit stupid, it felt like you didn't care about some of the contestants. Although this might have been done on purpose, i think the audience should have been able to associate with the majority of the contestants. - game rules, a big glitch :

what happens if the 5th contestants doesn't die when he pulls the trigger. do you seriously think the last standing guy will pull the trigger and execute himself!!! they should have given a chance to all contestants to live, ie: if 5th is a blank too, then no one dies.

interestingly I haven't been bothered too much by this bad points cause i really had a good time. just wish i had some popcorn with me! --------------------------------------------- Result 1935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This was a [[classic]] [[case]] of [[something]] that should never have been. Gloria was now a [[single]] [[mother]], her husband had [[left]] her because she wouldn't live in some [[commune]] with him (he was [[mad]] that [[Reagan]] had been [[elected]] and [[wanted]] to turn his back on [[society]]). [[Right]] then and there I had problems with the series - [[come]] on, I [[say]] to myself, is this the same noble [[Michael]] Stivic that countered Archie Bunker's right winged [[philosophies]]? The series went on, but it just didn't have any pizazz. Whatever [[momentum]] [[Sally]] Struthers [[gained]] from All the Family was [[long]] [[gone]]. [[Maybe]], if the series had been [[given]] another [[name]] and presented as being [[totally]] [[independent]] of [[All]] [[In]] The [[Family]], it might have [[worked]] out. [[Ah]] well, that's [[show]] [[business]]. This was a [[classical]] [[lawsuits]] of [[somethin]] that should never have been. Gloria was now a [[exclusive]] [[momma]], her husband had [[exited]] her because she wouldn't live in some [[municipalities]] with him (he was [[furious]] that [[Regan]] had been [[opted]] and [[wanna]] to turn his back on [[societal]]). [[Rights]] then and there I had problems with the series - [[arrive]] on, I [[says]] to myself, is this the same noble [[Michel]] Stivic that countered Archie Bunker's right winged [[stances]]? The series went on, but it just didn't have any pizazz. Whatever [[impetus]] [[Solly]] Struthers [[earned]] from All the Family was [[longer]] [[missing]]. [[Probably]], if the series had been [[afforded]] another [[designation]] and presented as being [[wholly]] [[independant]] of [[Totality]] [[Throughout]] The [[Familia]], it might have [[works]] out. [[Oh]] well, that's [[exhibitions]] [[enterprise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is what a [[movie]] should be when trying to capture the essence of that which is very surreal. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[dream]] sequence and really moves you into a dark haunting memory. The Kids were [[extremely]] [[believable]] and I do expect some [[things]] to come of them in the [[future]]. [[Very]] natural acting for such [[young]] ones, I don't [[know]] if [[Bill]] [[pulled]] it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[excellent]]. [[Bill]] scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[comment]] by KevNJeff about [[Mr]]. Paxtons [[bad]] acting, what can one do in that role. He played the [[part]] rather well in my [[opinion]]. This is [[coming]] from [[someone]] who [[said]] [[Hamlet]] was good (The Ethan [[Hawke]] Version?) [[Wow]]......... [[Do]] not listen to his Comments. [[Great]] [[flick]] to [[make]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[want]]? [[Cinematography]] gets an above the average [[rating]] also. This is what a [[filmmaking]] should be when trying to capture the essence of that which is very surreal. It has this hazy overtone that is rarely captured on film, it feels like a [[daydreaming]] sequence and really moves you into a dark haunting memory. The Kids were [[inordinately]] [[credible]] and I do expect some [[aspects]] to come of them in the [[futur]]. [[Eminently]] natural acting for such [[jeune]] ones, I don't [[savoir]] if [[Billing]] [[pulls]] it out of them or there just that good, but no the less [[sumptuous]]. [[Billing]] scored as far as I'm concerned and for the [[observing]] by KevNJeff about [[Bernd]]. Paxtons [[unhealthy]] acting, what can one do in that role. He played the [[portion]] rather well in my [[viewing]]. This is [[upcoming]] from [[everyone]] who [[indicated]] [[Hamlets]] was good (The Ethan [[Hock]] Version?) [[Whoa]]......... [[Doing]] not listen to his Comments. [[Super]] [[movie]] to [[deliver]] you feel really uncomfortable, if that's what you [[wants]]? [[Movies]] gets an above the average [[ratings]] also. --------------------------------------------- Result 1937 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] This was a [[complete]] [[disappointment]]. The acting isn't [[bad]], but the production was just so [[bad]] that at times I felt I needed to [[stop]] it, but I [[sadly]] made it through and was able to finish it a bit embarrassed by the whole [[poor]] [[movie]]. It is o.k. if you are o.k. with cheesy moral plots and don't mind [[watching]] a movie that vastly misconstrues Whitman. If you want a [[cheesy]] fictional story go for it. This was a [[finishes]] [[frustration]]. The acting isn't [[amiss]], but the production was just so [[wicked]] that at times I felt I needed to [[discontinue]] it, but I [[unhappily]] made it through and was able to finish it a bit embarrassed by the whole [[poorest]] [[films]]. It is o.k. if you are o.k. with cheesy moral plots and don't mind [[staring]] a movie that vastly misconstrues Whitman. If you want a [[corny]] fictional story go for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Ten out of the 11 short films in this movie are [[masterpieces]] (I found only the Egyptian one disappointing). Stragely, all but the Mexican director chose to portray the problems of individuals or groups in connection with 9-11: the Afghan refugees, deaf people, Palestinians, the widows of Srebrenica, AIDS and poverty and corruption in Africa, Pinochets coup and ensuing bloodbath, suicide bombings in Israel, paranoia-hit and state-persecuted Muslim Americans in the USA, old people living alone, and the aftermath of WWII in the hearts of Asian soldiers. This might say something sad about the limits of empathy, in both ways: the directors might feel that Americans ignore the pains of the rest of the world and only care about their own tragedies, while they effectively do the same with their short films.

Surprising myself, I found Sean Penn's piece one of the very best in the collection, and ***SPOILER AHEAD*** I also guess his portrayal of Ernest Borgnine as a half-crazy old man vegetating in a New York flat experiencing his widow life's happiest moment when the Sun shines through his window after the WTC "collapsed out of light's way", I guess this might also be one of the most offending as the general American audience would see it. Ten out of the 11 short films in this movie are [[antiques]] (I found only the Egyptian one disappointing). Stragely, all but the Mexican director chose to portray the problems of individuals or groups in connection with 9-11: the Afghan refugees, deaf people, Palestinians, the widows of Srebrenica, AIDS and poverty and corruption in Africa, Pinochets coup and ensuing bloodbath, suicide bombings in Israel, paranoia-hit and state-persecuted Muslim Americans in the USA, old people living alone, and the aftermath of WWII in the hearts of Asian soldiers. This might say something sad about the limits of empathy, in both ways: the directors might feel that Americans ignore the pains of the rest of the world and only care about their own tragedies, while they effectively do the same with their short films.

Surprising myself, I found Sean Penn's piece one of the very best in the collection, and ***SPOILER AHEAD*** I also guess his portrayal of Ernest Borgnine as a half-crazy old man vegetating in a New York flat experiencing his widow life's happiest moment when the Sun shines through his window after the WTC "collapsed out of light's way", I guess this might also be one of the most offending as the general American audience would see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1939 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie [[really]] [[surprised]] me. I had my [[doubts]] about it at first but the movie got better and better for each minute.

It is [[maybe]] not for the [[action]] seeking audience but for those that [[like]] an [[explicit]] [[portrait]] of a very [[strange]] criminal, [[man]], lover and husband. If you're not a [[fan]] of bad [[language]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is somewhat [[hard]] to follow sometimes, but in the [[end]] I [[think]] it [[made]] everything better. The ending was [[unexpected]] since you were [[almost]] fouled to [[think]] it [[would]] [[end]] [[otherwise]].

As for the acting I [[think]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[award]] for long but it at [[least]] caught my eye. [[Gil]] Bellows portrait of a [[prison]] [[man]] is not always perfect but it is very [[entertaining]]. [[Shaun]] Parkes portrait of Bellows [[prison]] [[mate]] Clinique is great and [[extremely]] [[powerful]]. On the [[downside]] I [[think]] I will put Esai [[Morales]] portrait of Markie.

Take my [[advice]] and watch this [[movie]], [[either]] you will [[love]] it or [[dislike]] it! This movie [[genuinely]] [[horrified]] me. I had my [[hesitations]] about it at first but the movie got better and better for each minute.

It is [[potentially]] not for the [[activity]] seeking audience but for those that [[adores]] an [[unequivocal]] [[portrayal]] of a very [[curious]] criminal, [[dude]], lover and husband. If you're not a [[admirer]] of bad [[linguistics]] or sexual content this really is not for you.

The storyline is somewhat [[arduous]] to follow sometimes, but in the [[termination]] I [[thinking]] it [[introduced]] everything better. The ending was [[unforeseeable]] since you were [[approximately]] fouled to [[reckon]] it [[ought]] [[ends]] [[alternately]].

As for the acting I [[ideas]] it was good. It will not be up for an Oscar [[prix]] for long but it at [[fewest]] caught my eye. [[Jill]] Bellows portrait of a [[penitentiaries]] [[bloke]] is not always perfect but it is very [[amusing]]. [[Shawn]] Parkes portrait of Bellows [[imprisons]] [[companion]] Clinique is great and [[unimaginably]] [[influential]]. On the [[disadvantage]] I [[thinking]] I will put Esai [[Ethical]] portrait of Markie.

Take my [[counseling]] and watch this [[cinema]], [[neither]] you will [[likes]] it or [[distaste]] it! --------------------------------------------- Result 1940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] If [[anybody]] really [[wants]] to understand Hitler, read WWI history not WWII [[history]]. Find out what happened during that war, how soldiers had to live around dead corpses all the time. How so many [[soldiers]] went [[insane]], from what they saw during WWI, at the time they called it "shellshocked" now the [[call]] it post-traumatic stress [[disorder]]. [[If]] you [[learn]] the true horrors of WWI, you will begin to understand Hitler. You will understand how a human being can become desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the horrors around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only [[good]] WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this movie misses, its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this [[movie]] [[ignored]] these factors, and has just [[become]] another throw away piece of [[crap]] to [[throw]] on the pile. With [[really]] no real [[value]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers name on this so it would sell more. If [[everyone]] really [[wanna]] to understand Hitler, read WWI history not WWII [[tale]]. Find out what happened during that war, how soldiers had to live around dead corpses all the time. How so many [[troops]] went [[psycho]], from what they saw during WWI, at the time they called it "shellshocked" now the [[invitation]] it post-traumatic stress [[turbulence]]. [[Though]] you [[learns]] the true horrors of WWI, you will begin to understand Hitler. You will understand how a human being can become desensitized to death, not because their evil but simply because it was the only way for them too cope with the horrors around them.

This movie unfortunately misses that, as so many others do. Read some books on the subject and you should watch the movie "paths of glory", the only [[alright]] WWI movie ever made. You will see the frustration of the soldiers in that movie, the sense of helplessness, and a utter devaluation of human life, as nothing more than bullet catchers.

Thats what this movie misses, its really the key point to understanding Germany. A lost war, where millions and millions of Germans lost their lives, for no real reason. Then comes an utter economic collapse, following the war. Those are the factors that create extremism.

The loss of family members and massive poverty will create always lead to extremism. Unfortunately this [[cinematography]] [[forgotten]] these factors, and has just [[gotten]] another throw away piece of [[shit]] to [[toss]] on the pile. With [[truthfully]] no real [[values]], there are fictional movie's based upon fictional characters that could give you a better idea of Hitler than this does. They just threw Hitlers name on this so it would sell more. --------------------------------------------- Result 1941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] "Against All Flags" is [[every]] [[bit]] the [[classic]] swashbuckler. It has all the [[elements]] the [[adventure]] [[fan]] could [[hope]] for and more for in this one, the damsel in distress is, well, not really in distress. As Spitfire [[Stevens]], Maureen O'Hara is at her [[athletic]] [[best]], running her [[foes]] through in [[defiance]] of the social [[norms]] of the [[period]]. [[Anthony]] [[Quinn]] [[rounds]] out the [[top]] three billed actors as the [[ruthless]] [[Captain]] Roc Brasiliano and [[proves]] to be a wily and capable nemesis for Brian Hawke (Flynn). [[For]] the classic adventure [[fan]], "Against All Flags" is a must-see. While it [[may]] not be in [[quite]] the same league as some of Errol Flynn's earlier [[work]] (Captain Blood and The [[Sea]] [[Hawk]], for [[instance]]), it is still a [[greatly]] [[entertaining]] romp. "Against All Flags" is [[any]] [[bite]] the [[typical]] swashbuckler. It has all the [[ingredient]] the [[fling]] [[admirer]] could [[hopes]] for and more for in this one, the damsel in distress is, well, not really in distress. As Spitfire [[Stephens]], Maureen O'Hara is at her [[athlete]] [[better]], running her [[haters]] through in [[contempt]] of the social [[standards]] of the [[schedules]]. [[Antony]] [[Queen]] [[cycles]] out the [[supreme]] three billed actors as the [[pitiless]] [[Commander]] Roc Brasiliano and [[illustrates]] to be a wily and capable nemesis for Brian Hawke (Flynn). [[During]] the classic adventure [[ventilator]], "Against All Flags" is a must-see. While it [[maggio]] not be in [[pretty]] the same league as some of Errol Flynn's earlier [[cooperation]] (Captain Blood and The [[Hoi]] [[Buzzard]], for [[cases]]), it is still a [[severely]] [[amusing]] romp. --------------------------------------------- Result 1942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Sadly IMDb does not [[allow]] me to [[rate]] [[Judges]] lower than 1. What a [[shame]]. This ghastly movie is so [[bad]] that I [[actually]] [[turned]] the [[damned]] thing off well before the [[ending]]. The [[script]] had a few [[bright]] moments, but the [[directing]], [[editing]], acting, [[audio]] quality, and [[especially]] timing on line delivery was so [[abhorrent]] as make Judges [[utterly]] unbearable.

[[Judges]] was [[advertised]] as being like a [[modern]] day [[comic]] [[book]] style [[western]], but in [[reality]] was nothing of the [[sort]]. What it is most like is [[dog]] [[poop]] on the bottom of your [[shoe]]. You can [[try]] to [[pretend]] it is [[okay]], but it just [[keeps]] on stinking.

Why [[video]] [[stores]] [[think]] it is [[okay]] to [[carry]] this [[kind]] of [[crap]] with [[constant]] [[gaps]] in the audio and [[worse]] than [[high]] school [[drama]] [[class]] acting is beyond me. We [[rent]] movies in [[order]] to [[see]] [[something]] better that what is on television. But [[Judges]] is [[worse]] than the most [[pathetic]] SciFi [[Channel]] original. I [[intend]] to [[demand]] my [[money]] back from Hollywood [[Video]]. Sadly IMDb does not [[enabling]] me to [[rates]] [[Magistrates]] lower than 1. What a [[pity]]. This ghastly movie is so [[mala]] that I [[genuinely]] [[transformed]] the [[goddam]] thing off well before the [[terminated]]. The [[scripts]] had a few [[luminous]] moments, but the [[instructing]], [[edited]], acting, [[aural]] quality, and [[principally]] timing on line delivery was so [[infamous]] as make Judges [[altogether]] unbearable.

[[Richter]] was [[announced]] as being like a [[contemporary]] day [[comical]] [[ledger]] style [[ouest]], but in [[realism]] was nothing of the [[kinds]]. What it is most like is [[canine]] [[turd]] on the bottom of your [[laces]]. You can [[tried]] to [[pretending]] it is [[allright]], but it just [[retains]] on stinking.

Why [[videos]] [[boutique]] [[reckon]] it is [[okey]] to [[transporting]] this [[genre]] of [[turd]] with [[steady]] [[faults]] in the audio and [[worst]] than [[supreme]] school [[dramas]] [[kinds]] acting is beyond me. We [[rented]] movies in [[edict]] to [[behold]] [[anything]] better that what is on television. But [[Magistrate]] is [[worst]] than the most [[unhappy]] SciFi [[Canals]] original. I [[intentioned]] to [[requested]] my [[cash]] back from Hollywood [[Videos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Elvira Mistress of the [[Dark]] is just that, a campy concoction of [[fun]], sex [[appeal]], horror and comedy all poured into a low cut black [[gown]] and toped with a sky high black bouffant hair-do. This [[movie]] is sure to [[delight]] any [[fan]] of Elvira's. It takes you upclose and personal with Elvira and [[probes]] deep into her...[[um]] [[past]] revealing her [[enormous]]... [[ancestry]].

The [[movie]] takes you on a ride with Elvira as she goes from [[TV]] Horror [[Hostess]] with the Mostess to her home town of Fallwell [[Mass]] to claim her [[inheritance]] from a deceased [[Great]] Aunt. [[Where]] she [[encounters]] a stuffy [[town]], a studly [[cinema]] [[owner]], a creepy [[Great]] Uncle who [[seems]] to be after her for more than her good looks. A slew of high [[school]] [[kids]] that [[immediately]] [[love]] her, and a town board who are will do [[anything]] to get her out of [[town]], even if it means [[burning]] her at the stake! Watch Elvira [[woo]] the [[kids]], stalk the [[stud]], [[avoid]] her creepy [[Great]] Uncle and thumb her nose at the stuffy uptight 'preservatives' who have no [[kind]] [[words]] for her, in Elvira Mistress of the Dark!

As Elvira [[would]] [[say]] "I [[guarantee]] it'll be a [[scream]]! ([[screams]] in background) [[Whoa]]! [[Good]] [[thing]] I didn't [[say]] it'd be a [[gas]]!" Elvira Mistress of the [[Dusky]] is just that, a campy concoction of [[droll]], sex [[appeals]], horror and comedy all poured into a low cut black [[bathrobe]] and toped with a sky high black bouffant hair-do. This [[cinematic]] is sure to [[glee]] any [[ventilator]] of Elvira's. It takes you upclose and personal with Elvira and [[enquiry]] deep into her...[[umm]] [[preceding]] revealing her [[sizeable]]... [[origin]].

The [[filmmaking]] takes you on a ride with Elvira as she goes from [[TVS]] Horror [[Stewardess]] with the Mostess to her home town of Fallwell [[Mace]] to claim her [[heredity]] from a deceased [[Prodigious]] Aunt. [[Everytime]] she [[clashes]] a stuffy [[ciudad]], a studly [[cine]] [[homeowner]], a creepy [[Huge]] Uncle who [[looks]] to be after her for more than her good looks. A slew of high [[tuition]] [[infantile]] that [[expeditiously]] [[iove]] her, and a town board who are will do [[nothing]] to get her out of [[ciudad]], even if it means [[smoldering]] her at the stake! Watch Elvira [[wooo]] the [[infantile]], stalk the [[stallion]], [[preventing]] her creepy [[Resplendent]] Uncle and thumb her nose at the stuffy uptight 'preservatives' who have no [[sort]] [[mots]] for her, in Elvira Mistress of the Dark!

As Elvira [[ought]] [[tell]] "I [[secured]] it'll be a [[yelling]]! ([[yelling]] in background) [[Woah]]! [[Well]] [[stuff]] I didn't [[said]] it'd be a [[gasoline]]!" --------------------------------------------- Result 1944 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Eddie Izzard is a one-in-a-million comic genius. He goes from squirrels to WWII to Stonehenge to religion to Englebert Humperdink and it's absolutely hilarious and it all makes sense! Get a copy of this now, you won't regret it! I give this an 11 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1945 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] The original Vampires (1998) is one of my favorites. I was curious to see how a sequel would work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[surprised]] at how this played out. As a rule, sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[Though]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[keeping]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a drawback initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a [[decent]] watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two questions, though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. The original Vampires (1998) is one of my favorites. I was curious to see how a sequel would work considering they used none of the original characters. I was quite [[dumbfounded]] at how this played out. As a rule, sequels are never as good as the original, with a few exceptions. [[Despite]] this one was not a great movie, the writer did well in [[preserving]] the main themes & vampire lore from the first one in tact. Jon Bon Jovi was a drawback initially, but he proved to be a half-way decent Slayer. I doubt anyone could top James Wood's performance in the first one, though... unless you bring in Buffy!

All in all, this was a [[presentable]] watch & I would watch it again.

I was left with two questions, though... what happened to Jack Crow & how did Derek Bliss come to be a slayer? Guess we'll just have to leave that to imagination. --------------------------------------------- Result 1946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "[[Attack]] of the [[Killer]] [[Tomatoes]]" consists mostly of rambling, poorly [[assembled]] footage in [[search]] of a [[movie]]. The plot makes no sense, and the various characters drop in and out of the [[picture]] with no explanation at all. Watching this silly spoof, you [[get]] the [[feeling]] than so many other [[comments]] have captured so accurately: that it's [[easy]] to make a cheap, low-quality [[film]] and then use the "parody" angle as an excuse for its cheapness and low quality (in one scene, female swimmers are terrified of tomatoes that are floating near them; how far can "suspension of disbelief" go - even in a parody?). The title song is great, [[though]]. (*1/2) "[[Attacks]] of the [[Assassin]] [[Onion]]" consists mostly of rambling, poorly [[gathered]] footage in [[browse]] of a [[film]]. The plot makes no sense, and the various characters drop in and out of the [[photograph]] with no explanation at all. Watching this silly spoof, you [[got]] the [[sense]] than so many other [[feedback]] have captured so accurately: that it's [[easier]] to make a cheap, low-quality [[kino]] and then use the "parody" angle as an excuse for its cheapness and low quality (in one scene, female swimmers are terrified of tomatoes that are floating near them; how far can "suspension of disbelief" go - even in a parody?). The title song is great, [[despite]]. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 1947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[cried]] my heart out, [[watching]] this [[movie]]. I have never suffered from any [[eating]] [[disorder]], but I [[think]] this [[must]] be a very true picture.

[[Alison]] Lohman is [[excellent]]! She [[expresses]] these feelings [[amazingly]] well. My [[teenage]] [[years]] [[came]] back to me so [[vividly]]. Anyone who has [[gone]] through difficult [[times]] as a child or [[teenager]] will be [[able]] to [[relate]] to this [[movie]]. I [[recommend]] you all to [[see]] it!

The [[music]] is [[great]] too - I've now [[discovered]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[also]] [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] [[Alison]] Lohman in White Oléander, because I am positive she is [[perfectly]] [[suited]] for the role as [[Agnes]]. I [[yelled]] my heart out, [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]]. I have never suffered from any [[devouring]] [[tumult]], but I [[reckon]] this [[should]] be a very true picture.

[[Ellison]] Lohman is [[wonderful]]! She [[express]] these feelings [[wonderfully]] well. My [[teens]] [[yr]] [[became]] back to me so [[eloquently]]. Anyone who has [[extinct]] through difficult [[period]] as a child or [[youth]] will be [[capable]] to [[pertaining]] to this [[kino]]. I [[recommended]] you all to [[consults]] it!

The [[musician]] is [[gorgeous]] too - I've now [[found]] Diana Lorden.

I'm [[apart]] [[researching]] forward to [[witnessing]] [[Allison]] Lohman in White Oléander, because I am positive she is [[quite]] [[adapted]] for the role as [[Eugene]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[usually]] [[come]] on this website prior to going to the movies, as I like to see what other people think of the movie. I read many reviews which said 'thriller not a [[horror]] movie'. This prompted me to give this film a try. I really must [[take]] issue with these 'thriller/horror' statements, as it was [[neither]]! I almost went and asked for my [[money]] back, and if you [[lot]] of reviewers [[enjoyed]] this rubbish....well you must be [[easily]] pleased! At the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a waste of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for something to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams acted the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor script which dithered around and went nowhere. Save your money folks, this is a turkey which will be featuring at a DVD store 'bargain box' near you in the very foreseeable future! I [[normally]] [[arrived]] on this website prior to going to the movies, as I like to see what other people think of the movie. I read many reviews which said 'thriller not a [[terror]] movie'. This prompted me to give this film a try. I really must [[taking]] issue with these 'thriller/horror' statements, as it was [[or]]! I almost went and asked for my [[cash]] back, and if you [[batch]] of reviewers [[liked]] this rubbish....well you must be [[effortless]] pleased! At the end of the movie, the people behind me said out loud "what a waste of time" and I turned to them and replied " I couldn't have summed it up better". I kept waiting for something to happen...but it didn't. There was the potential for a lot of good scares (or thrills if you like) but none happened. Williams acted the part quite well but I felt he was short changed by a poor script which dithered around and went nowhere. Save your money folks, this is a turkey which will be featuring at a DVD store 'bargain box' near you in the very foreseeable future! --------------------------------------------- Result 1949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is outstanding and wonderfully scored. Prince's Oscar for music was richly deserved (many people don't know he won one). I think this is one of the best films to watch as a couple late at night on DVD. A great surprise: Prince does a fine job acting, and is pretty good at conveying pain on camera. Morris Day, Wendy, and Lisa are good in their supporting roles. Very cool landmark film. --------------------------------------------- Result 1950 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] and [[anyone]] who watches this film will agree. This film was directed in the [[days]] when plot, character believability and theme actually mattered.

Jean Peters, Widmark, and Thelma Ritter [[steal]] the [[spotlight]]. Ritter is in top form as informer "Moe" she survives in the Bowery section of NY, acting as a stool pigeon for NYC police.

The only other film in which I have seen Peters is "Niagara", and she certainly [[proves]] her acting ability here, complete with Brooklyn accent. Widmark is appropriately menacing, as the anti-hero who must discern what the right thing is, despite his need for cash.

The photography is brilliant. The neon, the subway station (though it looks cleaner than the real thing!) the harbor shack where Widmark lives as a transient. Excellent use is made of the city, with "Lightning Louie" in Chinatown; the many flavors and appetites of the city are addressed here; the political climate of the time is a haunting backdrop. 10/10. and [[nobody]] who watches this film will agree. This film was directed in the [[jours]] when plot, character believability and theme actually mattered.

Jean Peters, Widmark, and Thelma Ritter [[stealing]] the [[concentrates]]. Ritter is in top form as informer "Moe" she survives in the Bowery section of NY, acting as a stool pigeon for NYC police.

The only other film in which I have seen Peters is "Niagara", and she certainly [[testifies]] her acting ability here, complete with Brooklyn accent. Widmark is appropriately menacing, as the anti-hero who must discern what the right thing is, despite his need for cash.

The photography is brilliant. The neon, the subway station (though it looks cleaner than the real thing!) the harbor shack where Widmark lives as a transient. Excellent use is made of the city, with "Lightning Louie" in Chinatown; the many flavors and appetites of the city are addressed here; the political climate of the time is a haunting backdrop. 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 1951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A novel by Remarque. A [[cast]] that [[looks]] great on paper. A left-wing refugee struggling to remain in Paris between the wars. A Gestapo officer undercover.

It's a [[pity]] there's no synergy here. The [[bits]] and [[pieces]] never coalesce.

[[Stories]] about left-wing [[refugees]] in France don't have to be this [[dull]]. Read Arthur Koestler's [[memoir]] "Scum of the Earth" (if you can find it). Or his chilling "Dialogue With Death" (ditto).

To me, the only interest in this film [[lies]] in some of the incidental details.

The leads spend a lot of time drinking calvados, the Norman apple brandy. I welcome any prompting to have a nip of calvados myself. It certainly made this film appear to pass more quickly. But, according to the film, it's only sold in cheap, low-class saloons. Vive le tabac parisien! That's what I say. References to intoxicating liquors do abound here; that would seem to be a preoccupation of the scenarists.

I enjoy films set in France because it can be amusing waiting for the inevitable full-size alcohol ad to pop up on a wall in the background. I wasn't disappointed. This time it was for Byrrh, a very unusual choice. This film would rate a 10 if only we were judging it on the refinement of its booze murals.

The film's indifferent score is by Louis Gruenberg. Gruenberg is best known -- if you can call it that -- for his opera "The Emperor Jones", based on the O'Neill play. It premièred at roughly the same time as the film version starring Paul Robeson. The opera survives today in a recording or two by Lawrence Tibbett. It should surface again soon though; they're running out of potentially marketable operas to revive.

Opera seems an appropriate subject to mention here since Charles Boyer's character operates under his "Czech" aliases. Two of them are "Wozzeck" and "Gunther", both prominent roles in German opera. Is that just coincidence?

Name-dropping just seems to be part of this film. Notice that they call up "Himmelstoss" on the phone. Himmelstoss happens to be one of the main characters in Remarque's earlier "All Quiet on the Western Front".

Well, the in-jokes are all in place; guess there wasn't time to develop any drama. A novel by Remarque. A [[casting]] that [[seem]] great on paper. A left-wing refugee struggling to remain in Paris between the wars. A Gestapo officer undercover.

It's a [[compassion]] there's no synergy here. The [[tib]] and [[slices]] never coalesce.

[[History]] about left-wing [[refugee]] in France don't have to be this [[uninspiring]]. Read Arthur Koestler's [[memory]] "Scum of the Earth" (if you can find it). Or his chilling "Dialogue With Death" (ditto).

To me, the only interest in this film [[lying]] in some of the incidental details.

The leads spend a lot of time drinking calvados, the Norman apple brandy. I welcome any prompting to have a nip of calvados myself. It certainly made this film appear to pass more quickly. But, according to the film, it's only sold in cheap, low-class saloons. Vive le tabac parisien! That's what I say. References to intoxicating liquors do abound here; that would seem to be a preoccupation of the scenarists.

I enjoy films set in France because it can be amusing waiting for the inevitable full-size alcohol ad to pop up on a wall in the background. I wasn't disappointed. This time it was for Byrrh, a very unusual choice. This film would rate a 10 if only we were judging it on the refinement of its booze murals.

The film's indifferent score is by Louis Gruenberg. Gruenberg is best known -- if you can call it that -- for his opera "The Emperor Jones", based on the O'Neill play. It premièred at roughly the same time as the film version starring Paul Robeson. The opera survives today in a recording or two by Lawrence Tibbett. It should surface again soon though; they're running out of potentially marketable operas to revive.

Opera seems an appropriate subject to mention here since Charles Boyer's character operates under his "Czech" aliases. Two of them are "Wozzeck" and "Gunther", both prominent roles in German opera. Is that just coincidence?

Name-dropping just seems to be part of this film. Notice that they call up "Himmelstoss" on the phone. Himmelstoss happens to be one of the main characters in Remarque's earlier "All Quiet on the Western Front".

Well, the in-jokes are all in place; guess there wasn't time to develop any drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 1952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was really [[great]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[captures]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned rich girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and nobility. I wasn't thrilled with Ewan McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! I'm a huge Jane Austen fan and besides being a feature-length film (a true fan wants to see as little left out as possible and that can only be achieved in a mini-series) it was really [[whopping]]. Gwyneth Paltrow really [[apprehended]] the slightly clueless but well-intentioned rich girl and Jeremy Northam IS Mr. Knightly with his poise and nobility. I wasn't thrilled with Ewan McGregor even though I like him very much as an actor but didn't feel it spoiled the movie at all. Like I said, as a Jane Austen fan there were things I would have liked to have seen included that weren't but that would have made it much longer than permissible for a feature length film and as it was I felt they really encapsulated the story well. I've seen every adaptation of this book and felt this was the best one! --------------------------------------------- Result 1953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Having seen and loved Greg Lombardo's most recent film "Knots" (he co-wrote and directed that feature as well), I decided to check out his earlier work, and this movie was well worth the effort and rental. Macbeth in Manhattan is a tongue in cheek, excellent take on the Shakespeare favorite, updated and moved to NYC. I was impressed by the underlying wit and intelligence of the script and was wowed by the way the storyline of the production in the movie mirrors the storyline of the play itself - and very cleverly at that. The trials and tribulations of life in Manhattan parallel many a Shakespeare play, and Central Park was rarely put to better use than as the woods around Macbeth's castle. Mr. Lombardo obviously has a fond place in his heart for New York and New York stories (Knots is a funny and warm sex comedy about six thirty-something New Yorkers set primarily in a charming Brooklyn neighborhood, with Manhattan offices and a downtown loft thrown in for good measure) and has spent considerable time around the plays of Shakespeare. The movie is well-paced and the story reflects a deep understanding of the essential drama at the core of Macbeth. It reminded me of Al Pacino's "Looking for Richard" - another wonderful Shakespeare "play within a movie." I highly recommend checking out Macbeth in Manhattan. --------------------------------------------- Result 1954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (90%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Chris]] [[Rock]] stars in this remake of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a [[struggling]] young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very [[funny]] to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. [[Kris]] [[Boulder]] stars in this remake of Warren Beatty's Heaven Can Wait (itself a remake of the 1941 film Here Comes Mr. Jordan), a comedy about a man who dies before his time, before he can realize his dreams, and his adventures in his new (albeit temporary) body. In the Beatty version, the protagonist was a backup quarterback for the then-Los Angeles Rams. In Rock's hipper version, our lead character is a [[fighting]] young - and decidedly low-talent - standup comedian.

It's very [[comical]] to see the razor-sharp Rock playing a bad comedian. It's kind of like seeing Tom Hanks play a bad actor. Lance Barton's dream is to play the legendary Apollo Theater on a non-amateur night. But every time he tries out his material, he's booed off the stage lustily - so much so that his nickname becomes "Booie." His jokes are lame, his delivery painful. In short, Lance is everything that the real Chris Rock isn't.

Lance is also a bike messenger, and he's riding the streets on his way to try out even more material when BAM! He's hit by a truck. Ok, so maybe he was taken from his body a tenth of a second early by a slightly incompetent angel (Eugene Levy), but hey, he was going to get hit anyway. No dice, it appears Lance isn't due in Heaven until 2044. So what to do? Mr. King (Chazz Palminteri), the "manager" of Heaven, reluctantly agrees to find a new body for the not-quite-dead Mr. Barton. Trouble is, the body they find is of a greedy, old white man. Turns out this fella (a Mr. Wellington) owns all kinds of things - he's the 15th richest man in the country! What luck! You can imagine how Lance will turn things around.

But of course, while in the body of the affluent Mr. Wellington, Lance falls for a gorgeous hospital worker (Regina King). We males know how tough it is to find a female given our own body, but try winning one over while you're an dumpy, old white guy! And it's even worse when she's not impressed by your money.

This is Rock's first shot at a lead role, and in my opinion he performs admirably. There's still a lot of the standup comedian in him - and, of course, if he ever wants to get diverse roles, he might have to stop incorporating standup routines into the script - but this isn't really a bad thing. Rock's personality - his drive, his delivery, his demeanor, and his passion - are what fuel this film. He's clearly having a lot of fun in the role, and he seems bent on making sure you have fun watching him. --------------------------------------------- Result 1955 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] After seeing only half of the film in school back in [[November]], today, I [[saw]] that it was on Flix [[channel]] and decided to watch it to [[see]] the rest of it and to [[write]] a [[new]] [[review]] on it.

The [[book]] that the [[film]] is [[based]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[terrible]] adaption of it though.

[[Awful]] (and I mean [[awful]]) acting, bad [[dialogue]], and average [[cinematography]] make up this [[terrible]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[film]] [[starts]] off Brian who is the cliché [[image]] of a late 80s teen (sporting a mullet, [[banging]] his [[head]] to [[cheap]] 80s rock [[music]]) and his [[mother]] driving in a car for him to [[get]] on a [[plane]] to [[fly]] up to see his estranged [[Dad]] (his [[parents]] are divorced...now cue the [[dramatic]] [[pause]].) Now Brian has [[said]] goodbye to [[Mom]] and [[dog]] and is [[flying]] up to see his father. The pilot is a [[fat]], ugly, rude man (wasn't like that in the [[book]]) who after 2 minutes in the air, has a [[heart]] [[attack]] and [[dies]]. [[In]] the [[book]] it goes into more [[detail]] with the pilot having more [[pains]] and it [[seemed]] to be that they were in the air much [[longer]] before the pilot had his [[heart]] attack.

The [[plane]] ([[within]] another two minutes) has [[gone]] empty on fuel ([[leaving]] us, the viewers, to [[assume]] that he's been up there for [[hours]] [[even]] [[though]] the [[sun]] hasn't [[changed]] [[position]] and the [[scenery]] looks [[EXACTLY]] the same.) Now's he's [[crashed]] landed.

This is the point in the movie where everything is a lot different then it was in the [[book]]. [[In]] the [[book]] it [[said]] his [[jacket]] was [[torn]] to shreds but in the [[movie]] it is [[perfectly]] fine with no [[tears]] or [[rips]] ([[looks]] [[like]] he just [[bought]] it), it never [[said]] he [[climbed]] a [[mountain]], [[saw]] a [[wolf]], and [[fell]] asleep up there on the [[mountain]], it never [[said]] he was [[attacked]] by a bear (it [[said]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[said]] he [[eats]] the [[several]] [[bugs]] that he does, it never [[mentions]] the [[second]] [[tornado]] or that he [[learned]] to [[get]] those sparrows, [[skin]] them, and [[eat]] them or that [[little]] fish farm trap that he makes (that is [[destroyed]] by one of the [[tornadoes]]) nor does it mention him hurting his [[ribs]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his [[things]].

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame [[flashbacks]] (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) [[leaving]] and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 After seeing only half of the film in school back in [[June]], today, I [[watched]] that it was on Flix [[canal]] and decided to watch it to [[behold]] the rest of it and to [[writing]] a [[nouveau]] [[revising]] on it.

The [[ledger]] that the [[kino]] is [[base]] on, Hatchet, is OK. This is a [[horrible]] adaption of it though.

[[Disgusting]] (and I mean [[horrible]]) acting, bad [[talks]], and average [[cinematographic]] make up this [[scary]] adaption of Hatchet.

The [[kino]] [[launches]] off Brian who is the cliché [[images]] of a late 80s teen (sporting a mullet, [[pounding]] his [[leader]] to [[cheaper]] 80s rock [[musicians]]) and his [[mommy]] driving in a car for him to [[got]] on a [[planes]] to [[stealing]] up to see his estranged [[Pop]] (his [[parenting]] are divorced...now cue the [[spectacular]] [[hiatus]].) Now Brian has [[told]] goodbye to [[Mum]] and [[hound]] and is [[hovering]] up to see his father. The pilot is a [[greasy]], ugly, rude man (wasn't like that in the [[books]]) who after 2 minutes in the air, has a [[heartland]] [[attacks]] and [[die]]. [[At]] the [[books]] it goes into more [[details]] with the pilot having more [[pain]] and it [[sounded]] to be that they were in the air much [[anymore]] before the pilot had his [[heartland]] attack.

The [[planes]] ([[inside]] another two minutes) has [[missing]] empty on fuel ([[leave]] us, the viewers, to [[presume]] that he's been up there for [[hour]] [[yet]] [[despite]] the [[sunshine]] hasn't [[altering]] [[stance]] and the [[landscapes]] looks [[ACCURATELY]] the same.) Now's he's [[collided]] landed.

This is the point in the movie where everything is a lot different then it was in the [[books]]. [[At]] the [[ledger]] it [[indicated]] his [[mantle]] was [[buzzed]] to shreds but in the [[filmmaking]] it is [[wholly]] fine with no [[sobs]] or [[criticizes]] ([[seem]] [[iike]] he just [[buy]] it), it never [[stated]] he [[climbing]] a [[mont]], [[observed]] a [[woolf]], and [[plunged]] asleep up there on the [[mont]], it never [[asserted]] he was [[slammed]] by a bear (it [[told]] a moose but not a bear), it never [[stated]] he [[feeds]] the [[dissimilar]] [[bedbugs]] that he does, it never [[cites]] the [[secondly]] [[typhoon]] or that he [[learnt]] to [[got]] those sparrows, [[epidermis]] them, and [[swallowed]] them or that [[petit]] fish farm trap that he makes (that is [[wrecked]] by one of the [[cyclones]]) nor does it mention him hurting his [[coast]] from one of the tornadoes.

I don't even think you can call what was depicted in the film a tornado. All it was was just a windstorm that knocked down several of his [[aspects]].

My favorite part of this camp fest was Brian's lame [[recollections]] (that are never mentioned in the book) especially the cliché scene of Brian waking up, walking over to the window and seeing his Dad (with all of his things packed that can all perfectly fit into just the back of his truck) [[leave]] and screams "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDDDD!!!!" (yet of course his father didn't hear him even though he was just right outside) and he punches his fist through the window (wtf?)

The ending is the only thing that is close to what happened in the book (I said close.) In the book I think one of the key things that the rescue pilot said to Brian when he landed was "you're the kid who they've been looking for! They stopped months ago..." yet they left that line out in the movie.

There's a pathetic epilogue with Brian (somehow without counseling or therapy) getting back to normal with his family. I think we were supposed to assume that they were getting together for Thanksgiving (because they had a turkey on the counter.) Then it shows his temporary home (for what, in the movie, seemed like three days, but in the book was for several months) and his hatchet, still in a tree where he left it (also didn't happen in the book) showing where he carved a message, so perfectly done: "HOME" (where we really supposed to believe that he carved that that perfectly with just that hatchet?)

No quote can sum this movie up better then when Enid from Ghost World said "this is so bad it's gone past good and back to bad again." Perfect description of this movie.

I wouldn't recommend it to somebody (who hasn't read the book) and are just looking to watch a movie nor would I to somebody who has read the book (because they'll be disappointed and bored to death.

For those who have read the book, leave what your imagination created as the movie. This is awful and will bring down your thoughts on the book.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 1956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[At]] the [[time]] I am [[writing]] this I [[see]] out of over 15,000 votes it has a 5.8 [[rating]]. [[Something]] is [[wrong]] with that picture. Personally I [[give]] it a 10. I can see a 7 at the [[lowest]] or a [[possible]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[see]] this [[movie]] for what it [[truly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[hero]]. This movie won more than it's [[share]] of awards. [[Won]] 3 Oscars. Another 5 wins & 26 nominations .... right there [[tells]] me it's better than a 5.8. Some [[great]] acting from some very good actors, some great special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a classic for years to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to check out Dick Tracy. Definitely a movie you can watch more than a few times. Al Pacino is great as Big Boy Caprice. [[Into]] the [[moment]] I am [[handwriting]] this I [[behold]] out of over 15,000 votes it has a 5.8 [[evaluation]]. [[Somethin]] is [[fallacious]] with that picture. Personally I [[confer]] it a 10. I can see a 7 at the [[least]] or a [[feasible]] 8 if it was rated by people that [[consults]] this [[kino]] for what it [[honestly]] is. It is a movie based on a comic book [[heroin]]. This movie won more than it's [[exchange]] of awards. [[Wins]] 3 Oscars. Another 5 wins & 26 nominations .... right there [[told]] me it's better than a 5.8. Some [[super]] acting from some very good actors, some great special effects and in my opinion will be if not already a classic for years to come. If you're looking for pure entertainment be sure to check out Dick Tracy. Definitely a movie you can watch more than a few times. Al Pacino is great as Big Boy Caprice. --------------------------------------------- Result 1957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Awwww....yes, it is heartwarming and all that some unlucky family gets adopted by ABC/Sears and has their home "renovated." That's where the humanistic appeal ends. I liked it early in its run, but now this show has become disgustingly excessive.

Ten needy families could be given relatively luxurious homes with lots of goodies for every one family that each episode of this show splurges on. The people at Habitat For Humanity must be shaking their heads in disbelief. For example, is it necessary for a healthy sixteen year old boy to have a jacuzzi in his bedroom, or have his bed tricked-out with "Low Rider" hydraulics? Does the mom really need her dilapidated, non-running and rusted out old pick-up truck restored and "pimped" by some of the best customizers in California? A new one would have done the job quite nicely, and probably for a third of the price. Do people really need a sixty-five inch plasma screen in every room of the house? And then there's the issue of who pays the increased property taxes and utility bills. Even after the zaniacs at "Makeover" leave, somebody still has earn a living. I doubt the friendly folks down at Social Services will see the humor in all of this largess.

This show is nothing more than a ratings grabber for ABC, and a tacit commercial for its sponsors. --------------------------------------------- Result 1958 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] If you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser [[seen]] films like A Wedding, then you will no [[doubt]] be entertained by HealtH. [[Centered]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains [[many]] of Altman's latter 70s regulars like Paul Dooley (who helped [[write]] the film), [[Carol]] Burnett, and Henry Gibson, while also including top star Altman newcomers like Lauren Bacall, James Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman ensemble films there are numerous subplots in this film, but it is not nearly as overwhelming as films like Nashville or A Wedding, rather it has a more centered feel, perhaps like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an obvious satire on the Health movement, filled with over-top, outlandish, contradictive characters, with guest stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the whole thing. Underlining the whole election process is Altman's characteristic pessimism about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this film is the sheer [[fun]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's last films like this for a while! If you are a fan of Altman's large ensemble casts, as evidenced in major films like M.A.S.H., Nashville, Gosford Park, and lesser [[saw]] films like A Wedding, then you will no [[duda]] be entertained by HealtH. [[Concentrate]] around a Health Convention where two women are running for President, HealtH contains [[innumerable]] of Altman's latter 70s regulars like Paul Dooley (who helped [[handwriting]] the film), [[Carrol]] Burnett, and Henry Gibson, while also including top star Altman newcomers like Lauren Bacall, James Garner, and Glenda Jackson. Like a lot of Altman ensemble films there are numerous subplots in this film, but it is not nearly as overwhelming as films like Nashville or A Wedding, rather it has a more centered feel, perhaps like M.A.S.H. or Gosford Park. The whole thing is an obvious satire on the Health movement, filled with over-top, outlandish, contradictive characters, with guest stars like Dick Cavett providing a wry commentary on the whole thing. Underlining the whole election process is Altman's characteristic pessimism about politics and public appeal but what is most appealing about this film is the sheer [[amusing]] most people seem to be having. This would be one of Altman's last films like this for a while! --------------------------------------------- Result 1959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This may not be the [[worst]] [[comedy]] of all time, but it's close. The [[producers]] of this movie [[stole]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[realize]] that the [[rest]] of the movie is much [[worse]]. He falls into a long line of [[former]] SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been brilliant, some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Avoid]] this movie like the plague.

c This may not be the [[lousiest]] [[humour]] of all time, but it's close. The [[manufacturers]] of this movie [[stolen]] an hour and a half of my life, and I want it back!

Chris Kattan is funny for about 10 minutes. His high pitched voice and mad flailing start to get old, and then you [[realise]] that the [[stays]] of the movie is much [[lousiest]]. He falls into a long line of [[past]] SNL-ers that have attempted movies. Some have been brilliant, some have failed miserably. There's not much middle ground in this category. Although Chris Farley was brilliant, and then okay, and then not so funny, and then dead...so I suppose he hits the entire spectrum in one career.

[[Stave]] this movie like the plague.

c --------------------------------------------- Result 1960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The Underground [[Comedy]] [[Movie]], is possibly the [[worst]] [[train]] [[wrecks]] I've ever [[seen]]. Luckily I didn't [[pay]] for this movie, and my friend [[reluctantly]] [[agreed]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he needed to [[prove]] to me how [[awful]] it was. I [[love]] off [[color]] [[comedy]]. I [[figured]] at the [[least]] it would have that and I would be [[entertained]]. No, [[instead]] the acting was so awful, the "[[jokes]]" were extremely cheesy, and the plot was no where to be found. Maybe there wasn't supposed to be a plot so I can't hold that against this movie. It's pretty sad where the funniest thing in a comedy is an old woman having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A man dressed in a baseball uniform wielding a bat. Hilarious. Simply genius. I got the feeling watching this movie that its creators made it and laughed hysterically with their friends about it. Perhaps this was full of inside jokes we just didn't understand. Or perhaps it's the worst piece of trash ever made and it should be locked away in a vault and dumped in the Arctic Ocean.

P.S. Don't buy this movie! The Underground [[Travesty]] [[Films]], is possibly the [[hardest]] [[forming]] [[rubbles]] I've ever [[noticed]]. Luckily I didn't [[paid]] for this movie, and my friend [[unwillingly]] [[countersigned]] to watch it again siting that it was so awful but he needed to [[proven]] to me how [[horrendous]] it was. I [[adored]] off [[coloration]] [[farce]]. I [[conjured]] at the [[fewest]] it would have that and I would be [[distracted]]. No, [[alternatively]] the acting was so awful, the "[[pranks]]" were extremely cheesy, and the plot was no where to be found. Maybe there wasn't supposed to be a plot so I can't hold that against this movie. It's pretty sad where the funniest thing in a comedy is an old woman having her head hit off by a bat.....by Batman...A man dressed in a baseball uniform wielding a bat. Hilarious. Simply genius. I got the feeling watching this movie that its creators made it and laughed hysterically with their friends about it. Perhaps this was full of inside jokes we just didn't understand. Or perhaps it's the worst piece of trash ever made and it should be locked away in a vault and dumped in the Arctic Ocean.

P.S. Don't buy this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 1961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Very]] [[sweet]] pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better films...Edward Sissorhands, Big Fish, Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. The [[cinematography]], the narration, the music, the external sets all scream Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a STRONG [[influence]], I just haven't [[researched]] enough to know where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forums]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. Every time I see her on the screen I see Zooey. Don't get me wrong, Anna Friel does a great job. Her character is very sweet and lovable and you easily get attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I keep thinking "Why didn't they get Zooey Deschanel".

Lee Pace does a great job too. I kept trying to remember where I knew him from and just looked it up. Wonderfalls!!! Great, short lived series from 2004. If you enjoy Pushing Daisies you MUST go rent Wonderfalls, which is another Brian Fuller creation….hmmmm

[[Loved]] [[seeing]] Swoosie Kurtz (World According to Garp) and Ellen Greene (Little Shop of Horrors) again. Two underrated character actresses that never fail to bring it with their performances. [[Eminently]] [[sugary]] pilot. The show reeks of Tim Burton's better films...Edward Sissorhands, Big Fish, Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. The [[movies]], the narration, the music, the external sets all scream Tim Burton. There has to be a connection, or a STRONG [[effects]], I just haven't [[scrutinized]] enough to know where it is.

As I've seen in the [[forum]], yes Anna Friel is playing a poor man's Zooey Deschanel. Every time I see her on the screen I see Zooey. Don't get me wrong, Anna Friel does a great job. Her character is very sweet and lovable and you easily get attached to her. It's more of a distraction that I keep thinking "Why didn't they get Zooey Deschanel".

Lee Pace does a great job too. I kept trying to remember where I knew him from and just looked it up. Wonderfalls!!! Great, short lived series from 2004. If you enjoy Pushing Daisies you MUST go rent Wonderfalls, which is another Brian Fuller creation….hmmmm

[[Worshipped]] [[witnessing]] Swoosie Kurtz (World According to Garp) and Ellen Greene (Little Shop of Horrors) again. Two underrated character actresses that never fail to bring it with their performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 1962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] this became a cult movie in chinese [[college]] students, though i havnt watched it until it is [[broadcasted]] in channel4, UK.

full of arty [[giddy]] pretentions, the [[plot]] is mediocre and [[unreal]]; the 'spirit' it [[wants]] to convey is how [[independent]] [[artists]] 'resist the commercisliation of music industry' and [[maintain]] their' purity of an artistic soul' and [[wouldnt]] 'sell themselves for dirty money'. that is really [[giddy]] and superficial; the diologue are [[mainly]] [[pathetic]]. acting is [[poor]]. sceenplay is full of art pretention. it is a fantasy [[movie]] for [[kids]] and that;s all

this became a cult movie in chinese [[academies]] students, though i havnt watched it until it is [[disseminated]] in channel4, UK.

full of arty [[dazed]] pretentions, the [[intrigue]] is mediocre and [[surrealistic]]; the 'spirit' it [[wanna]] to convey is how [[independence]] [[painters]] 'resist the commercisliation of music industry' and [[sustain]] their' purity of an artistic soul' and [[thats]] 'sell themselves for dirty money'. that is really [[dizzying]] and superficial; the diologue are [[predominantly]] [[unlucky]]. acting is [[poorest]]. sceenplay is full of art pretention. it is a fantasy [[cinema]] for [[enfant]] and that;s all

--------------------------------------------- Result 1963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] As a study of the [[frailties]] of human nature in the context of old [[age]], this [[film]] is without parallel. It is, quite [[simply]], [[brilliant]]. Full [[marks]] to [[everyone]] - from the scriptwriter to all [[involved]] in the finished product. You can only marvel at the [[perceptions]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[ageing]] performers. As a study of the [[malfunctions]] of human nature in the context of old [[older]], this [[cinematic]] is without parallel. It is, quite [[merely]], [[sumptuous]]. Full [[brands]] to [[anybody]] - from the scriptwriter to all [[participating]] in the finished product. You can only marvel at the [[perception]] inherent in the characterisation of the two [[aging]] performers. --------------------------------------------- Result 1964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] this is the [[perfect]] [[example]] of something great going [[awfully]] [[bad]]... hence, can i advice anyone to watch it? well, i was kinda obliged by the [[fact]] that in was in the tiff [[competition]] (i still can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the director was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[anything]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of official..the first two lie about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do something else..don't ruin a good evening) includes some old breasts and heavy drinking.. but maybe you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they drinking vodka ?) this is the [[flawless]] [[instances]] of something great going [[horribly]] [[amiss]]... hence, can i advice anyone to watch it? well, i was kinda obliged by the [[facto]] that in was in the tiff [[rivalry]] (i still can't believe it won)..and i only remained until the end because the director was there for a q&a section..but that was also [[something]] but interesting.. what's it about? well the first half (the worth watching one) presents three characters: a hooker, a musician and some kind of official..the first two lie about their professions..but the third is the actual liar.. the second half (do something else..don't ruin a good evening) includes some old breasts and heavy drinking.. but maybe you will see it completely different...the tiff jury did (were they drinking vodka ?) --------------------------------------------- Result 1965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[beginning]] of this movie is excellent with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[quickly]] [[loses]] its [[appeal]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and [[looks]] great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. The [[initiates]] of this movie is excellent with tremendous sound and some nice humor, but once the film changes into animation it [[soon]] [[losing]] its [[appeals]].

One of the reasons that was so, at least for me, was that the colors in much of the animation are too muted, with too little contrast. It doesn't look good, at least on VHS. Once in a while it breaks out and [[seems]] great, but not often Also, the characters come and go too quickly. For example, I would have liked to have seen more of "Moby Dick." When the film starts to drag, however, it picks up again with the entrance of the dragon and then the film finishes strong.

Overall, just not memorable enough or able to compete with the great animated films of the last dozen years. --------------------------------------------- Result 1966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] To grasp where this 1976 [[version]] of A STAR IS BORN is coming from consider this: Its final number is sung by Barbra Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute freeze frame of Ms. Streisand -- striking a Christ-like pose -- behind the closing credits. Over ten uninterrupted minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead center, filling the big screen with uncompromising ego. That just might be some [[sort]] of cinematic record.

Or think about this: The plot of this musical revolves around a love affair between two musical superstars, yet, while Streisand's songs are performed in their entirety -- including the interminable finale -- her costar Kris Kristofferson isn't allowed to complete even one single song he performs. Nor, though she does allow him to contribute a little back up to a couple of her ditties, do they actually sing a duet.

Or consider this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six times, including taking credit for "musical concepts" and her wardrobe (from her closet) -- and she also allegedly wanted, but failed to get co-directing credit as well. One of her credits was as executive producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hairdresser]], Jon Peters. As such, Streisand controlled the final cut of the film, which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the film in her direction. What it doesn't explain is how come, given every opportunity to make The Great Diva look good, their efforts only make Streisand look bad. Even though this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[arguably]] her [[worst]] film and contains her [[worst]] performance.

Anyway, moving the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[singer]] on the [[road]] to stardom, who shares the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's John Norman Howard, a hard rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the previous incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his leading man career to help newcomer "Vicky Lester" achieve her success. In the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it clear that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or naive. The only conceivable attraction he might offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. To grasp where this 1976 [[stepping]] of A STAR IS BORN is coming from consider this: Its final number is sung by Barbra Streisand in a seven minute and forty second close-up, followed by another two-and-half-minute freeze frame of Ms. Streisand -- striking a Christ-like pose -- behind the closing credits. Over ten uninterrupted minutes of Barbra's distinctive visage dead center, filling the big screen with uncompromising ego. That just might be some [[genre]] of cinematic record.

Or think about this: The plot of this musical revolves around a love affair between two musical superstars, yet, while Streisand's songs are performed in their entirety -- including the interminable finale -- her costar Kris Kristofferson isn't allowed to complete even one single song he performs. Nor, though she does allow him to contribute a little back up to a couple of her ditties, do they actually sing a duet.

Or consider this: Streisand's name appears in the credits at least six times, including taking credit for "musical concepts" and her wardrobe (from her closet) -- and she also allegedly wanted, but failed to get co-directing credit as well. One of her credits was as executive producer, with a producer credit going to her then-boyfriend and former [[hairstylist]], Jon Peters. As such, Streisand controlled the final cut of the film, which explains why it is so obsessed with skewing the film in her direction. What it doesn't explain is how come, given every opportunity to make The Great Diva look good, their efforts only make Streisand look bad. Even though this was one of Streisand's greatest box office hits, it is [[undeniably]] her [[lousiest]] film and contains her [[gravest]] performance.

Anyway, moving the melodrama from Hollywood to the world of sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll, Streisand plays Esther Hoffman, a pop [[diva]] on the [[paths]] to stardom, who shares the fast lane for a while with Kristofferson's John Norman Howard, a hard rocker heading for the off ramp to Has-beenville. In the previous incarnations of the story, "Norman Maine" sacrifices his leading man career to help newcomer "Vicky Lester" achieve her success. In the feminist seventies, Streisand & Co. want to make it clear that their heroine owes nothing to a man, so the trajectory is skewed; she'll succeed with or without him and he is pretty much near bottom from scene one; he's a burden she must endure in the name of love. As such, there is an obvious effort to make the leading lady not just tougher, but almost ruthless, while her paramour comes off as a henpecked twit.

Kristofferson schleps through the film with a credible indifference to the material; making little attempt to give much of a performance, and oddly it serves his aimless, listless character well. Streisand, on the other hand, exhibits not one moment of honesty in her entire time on screen. Everything she does seems, if not too rehearsed, at least too controlled. Even her apparent ad libs seem awkwardly premeditated and her moments of supposed hysteria coldly mechanical. The two have no chemistry, making the central love affair totally unbelievable. You might presume that his character sees in her a symbol of his fading youth and innocence, though at age 34, Streisand doesn't seem particularly young or naive. The only conceivable attraction he might offer to her is that she can exploit him as a faster route to stardom. And, indeed, had the film had the guts to actually play the material that way, to make Streisand's character openly play an exploitive villain, the film might have had a spark and maybe a reason to exist.

But I guess the filmmakers actually see Esther as a sympathetic victim; they don't seem to be aware just how cold-blooded and self absorbed she is. But sensitivity is not one of the film's strong points: note the petty joke of giving Barbra two African American back up singers just so the film can indulge in the lame racism of calling the trio The Oreos. And the film makes a big deal of pointing out that Esther retains her ethnic identity by using her given name of Hoffman, yet the filmmakers have changed the character's name of the previous films from "Esther Blodgett" so that Streisand won't be burdened with a name that is too Jewish or too unattractive. So much for ethnic pride.

The backstage back stabbing and backbiting that proceeded the film's release is near legendary, so the fact that the film ended up looking so polished is remarkable. Nominal director Frank Pierson seems to have delivered the raw material for a good movie, with considerable help from ace cinematographer Robert Surtees. And the film did serve its purpose, producing a soundtrack album of decent pop tunes (including the Oscar-winning "Evergreen" by Paul Williams and Streisand). But overall the film turned out to be the one thing Streisand reportedly claimed she didn't want it to be, a vanity project. --------------------------------------------- Result 1967 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[excellent]] Private Snafu [[cartoon]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu shorts, to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely imaginative and crams [[tons]] of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it escalates into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated brilliantly by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, fictional creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It stands up as one of the [[best]] of the Private Snafu shorts. Friz Freleng's 'Rumours' is an [[sumptuous]] Private Snafu [[caricature]] that warns against spreading panic-inducing rumours during wartime. Produced, as were all the Snafu shorts, to be shown to military audiences as entertaining instructional films, 'Rumours' is extremely imaginative and crams [[shitloads]] of ideas into its very brief lifespan. When Snafu starts a rumour about a bombing, it escalates into an eventual rumour that America has lost the war. This is illustrated brilliantly by way of a long, rubbery piece of baloney and several strange, fictional creatures who come back to haunt Snafu with ever more terrible news about his country's military. 'Rumours' is inventive, fast paced and funny, all of which help to overshadow the rather laboured, "don't badmouth the military" message. It stands up as one of the [[nicest]] of the Private Snafu shorts. --------------------------------------------- Result 1968 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I [[remembered]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson movie with Olivier and [[Vivien]] Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's voice from behind [[whiskers]]. [[Well]] Flora Robson was [[great]]. Her next [[signature]], for me, [[would]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[different]] [[sumptuous]] [[gowns]]. And the same [[voice]]. As for the Armada, it was a subtext. I like black-and-white [[films]]. Was everything [[done]] in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I missed daylight! I [[reminding]] the title so well. To me, it was a Flora Robson movie with Olivier and [[Viviane]] Leigh in supporting roles. And it had Vincent Massey's voice from behind [[mustaches]]. [[Good]] Flora Robson was [[sublime]]. Her next [[firma]], for me, [[could]] be "55 Days at Peking". The same role but with [[distinct]] [[wondrous]] [[robes]]. And the same [[voices]]. As for the Armada, it was a subtext. I like black-and-white [[movie]]. Was everything [[accomplished]] in Elizbethan times at night? It was talky and difficult to fathom, at times. I couldn't tell which was the love interest. Was it the Spaniard or was it Vivien Leigh? And I do not believe that Elizabeth I would have been the brilliant strategist to recommend that fire ships be sent against the Armada. Apparently it worked for the Empire, but not for the script. This might have been more accurate, historically, but Bette Davis had more engaging scripts. And I missed daylight! --------------------------------------------- Result 1969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] A [[fantastic]] [[show]] and an unrealized [[classic]]; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[greatest]] modern comedies of recent times.

With a [[dark]] and bizarre style of humor that towers over the tired, formulaic approach of it's inferior, yet unfortunately far more [[acknowledged]] successor, Little Britain, The League of Gentlemen was [[truly]] something [[special]] during a rather [[quiet]] era in British comedy.

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never really been anything like The League of Gentlemen before. On the surface, a [[seemingly]] simplistic sketch show, the show soon unfolds as a vivid, sinister but incredibly hilarious universe populated with all manner of brilliant comedic creations. What really sets the show apart from it's rivals, is it's approach to telling us it's story. Rather than serve us re-hashed sketches, barely distinguishable from the next, here we see each individual or group of characters go through their various journeys and story lines. No visit to them is the same, and each time they offer us up with a surprise.

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque yet hilarious populace. And that's probably the main reason why the show is such a joy to watch (and also the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The Catherine Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been kept on to entertain further, bowed out before the series came to a close, giving room for fellow characters to grow more, or allow for the introduction of newer residents of Royston Vasey to make their mark.

Another thing that sets this show above others is that the writing team approach the script process with care and intelligence. As mentioned before, all four members of the League have a sound mind when it comes to judging the longevity of their creations, and when it's time to call it quits in respect to certain characters. This awareness has also meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold evolution, not usually seen in a show of this nature. The narrative driven, and far darker third series is a brave step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together various sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third series is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame A [[sumptuous]] [[display]] and an unrealized [[typical]]; The League of Gentlemen remains as one of the [[higher]] modern comedies of recent times.

With a [[darkness]] and bizarre style of humor that towers over the tired, formulaic approach of it's inferior, yet unfortunately far more [[recognized]] successor, Little Britain, The League of Gentlemen was [[honestly]] something [[especial]] during a rather [[shush]] era in British comedy.

Up until it's arrival on the scene, there had never really been anything like The League of Gentlemen before. On the surface, a [[reportedly]] simplistic sketch show, the show soon unfolds as a vivid, sinister but incredibly hilarious universe populated with all manner of brilliant comedic creations. What really sets the show apart from it's rivals, is it's approach to telling us it's story. Rather than serve us re-hashed sketches, barely distinguishable from the next, here we see each individual or group of characters go through their various journeys and story lines. No visit to them is the same, and each time they offer us up with a surprise.

Gradually, over three series' and a Christmas special, the fictional town of Royston Vasey is heaving with a grotesque yet hilarious populace. And that's probably the main reason why the show is such a joy to watch (and also the reason why the show would easily merit more series') Unlike other current shows like The Catherine Tate Show or more importantly Little Britain, the League both know when a character has run it's course, and have the opportunity to deal with that. Several fan favorite's, who could have easily been kept on to entertain further, bowed out before the series came to a close, giving room for fellow characters to grow more, or allow for the introduction of newer residents of Royston Vasey to make their mark.

Another thing that sets this show above others is that the writing team approach the script process with care and intelligence. As mentioned before, all four members of the League have a sound mind when it comes to judging the longevity of their creations, and when it's time to call it quits in respect to certain characters. This awareness has also meant The League of Gentlemen undergoes a bold evolution, not usually seen in a show of this nature. The narrative driven, and far darker third series is a brave step away from the more sketch based first two series' and this bold move by the League really pays off. With the third series, there's less of an urgency for them to please an audience, and like the Christmas special, they pursue individual stories with a clear narrative, unlike the more sketch-based previous series' that (succesfully) binded together various sets of sketches into a series' long story arc.

The third series is both a refreshing change of pace of style, as well as a real treat for fans who've already seen the first two. Despite some polarized opinion on the third series, any real fan of the League will appreciate what the third series has to offer, as well as really enjoy the more character based episodes, that only delve deeper into fan favorite's, but pair up and inter-wine characters that might not have crossed paths previously.

It might take a little trying to get into the change in style, but it's definitely worth it, and in my opinion, the third series is the best and also provides a firm conclusion to the series.

The show's not without it's drawbacks, and very occasionally certain characters and set pieces appear somewhat out of place, but for the most part, the genius writing, dark nature of the show and the host of brilliant characters (that are often all too close to real life) make for a real treat and prove what comedy should be about and puts much of the more recent, catch phrase driven and often desperate attempts at comedy to shame --------------------------------------------- Result 1970 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The "gangster" [[genre]] is now a worn subject one that is too often subjected to parody. In retrospect the series is a culmination of previous clichés that have been utilized in it's genre, thankfully the [[writers]] have advanced [[upon]] this flaw by creating a [[realism]] which has been [[applied]] to it. The Sopranos is an epic [[crime]] saga that [[illustrates]] it's content with psychological depth that is characterized with subtle nuance, [[humor]] and unvarnished violence. The key [[protagonist]] [[Tony]] Soprano is perceived as a [[perilous]] general bereft of [[fear]] and moral [[values]] by his crew ,[[however]], Tony is of two persona's one which is bestial while the other is conflicted with [[guilt]] and [[resent]]. With out any inhibitions or contradictions I [[still]] adamantly believe that The Sopranos has the [[finest]] ensemble cast of [[recent]] [[memory]]. [[All]] [[things]] [[considered]] I [[could]] make an [[elaborate]] [[statement]] on the [[series]], but I won't. If ever there is a [[visual]] dictionary in [[global]] consumerism [[search]] for these [[definitions]] [[vital]], [[ambiguous]], [[unrelenting]], [[epic]], [[uncompromising]] and the sopranos [[shattered]] visage will be [[smiling]] right back at you. The "gangster" [[genus]] is now a worn subject one that is too often subjected to parody. In retrospect the series is a culmination of previous clichés that have been utilized in it's genre, thankfully the [[screenwriters]] have advanced [[afterward]] this flaw by creating a [[pragmatism]] which has been [[applying]] to it. The Sopranos is an epic [[misdemeanour]] saga that [[denotes]] it's content with psychological depth that is characterized with subtle nuance, [[mood]] and unvarnished violence. The key [[actor]] [[Tonny]] Soprano is perceived as a [[precarious]] general bereft of [[affraid]] and moral [[value]] by his crew ,[[nonetheless]], Tony is of two persona's one which is bestial while the other is conflicted with [[blame]] and [[hates]]. With out any inhibitions or contradictions I [[however]] adamantly believe that The Sopranos has the [[greatest]] ensemble cast of [[newer]] [[mem]]. [[Entire]] [[items]] [[deemed]] I [[would]] make an [[formulated]] [[declaration]] on the [[serials]], but I won't. If ever there is a [[optic]] dictionary in [[international]] consumerism [[browse]] for these [[definition]] [[fundamental]], [[vague]], [[unceasing]], [[saga]], [[adamant]] and the sopranos [[ruined]] visage will be [[grinning]] right back at you. --------------------------------------------- Result 1971 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] An interesting animation about the fate of a [[giant]] tiger, a sloth, and a [[mammoth]], who [[saved]] a [[baby]], who was close to be [[killed]] by a [[group]] of [[tigers]] during the ice age. The [[morale]] of the film shows that good behavior with the [[others]] may [[bring]] [[benefits]] at the end. One of the tigers in the group [[got]] an order to finally capture the baby, who was [[hardly]] saved by his [[mother]] when the tigers attacked her community. The baby was then rescued by the sloth and the mammoth, but the tiger joined them with the objective of [[finally]] taken away the baby. They went through very troublesome [[paths]] with plenty of [[danger]], and at once the [[tiger]] was to fall down and saved by the [[mammoth]]. At the end the group of tigers tried to [[capture]] the baby but the mammoth helped incredibly by his tiger colleague was able to overcome this attack and to give the baby back to his father and the community to which he belongs. An interesting animation about the fate of a [[titan]] tiger, a sloth, and a [[gargantuan]], who [[rescued]] a [[babies]], who was close to be [[massacred]] by a [[cluster]] of [[tamil]] during the ice age. The [[ethics]] of the film shows that good behavior with the [[alia]] may [[bringing]] [[profit]] at the end. One of the tigers in the group [[get]] an order to finally capture the baby, who was [[almost]] saved by his [[mum]] when the tigers attacked her community. The baby was then rescued by the sloth and the mammoth, but the tiger joined them with the objective of [[eventually]] taken away the baby. They went through very troublesome [[pathway]] with plenty of [[menace]], and at once the [[tigers]] was to fall down and saved by the [[jumbo]]. At the end the group of tigers tried to [[caught]] the baby but the mammoth helped incredibly by his tiger colleague was able to overcome this attack and to give the baby back to his father and the community to which he belongs. --------------------------------------------- Result 1972 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Deliverance" is one of the [[best]] exploitation films to [[come]] out of that [[wonderful]] 1970's decade from whence so many other exploitation [[films]] came.

A [[group]] of [[friends]] sets out on a canoe [[trip]] down a [[river]] in the [[south]] and they [[become]] [[victimized]] by a bunch of toothless hillbillies who pretty much try to [[ruin]] their [[lives]]. It's [[awesome]].

We are treated to anal rape, [[vicious]] [[beatings]], bow and arrow [[killings]], shootings, [[broken]] bones, etc... A [[lot]] [[like]] 1974's "Texas Chainsaw [[Massacre]]," to say that "Deliverance" is believable would be immature. This would never and [[could]] never happen, even in the dark [[ages]] of 1972.

"Deliverance" is a very entertaining ride and [[packed]] full of [[action]]. It is one in a [[huge]] pile of exploitation films to come from the early 70's and it ([[arguably]]) sits on [[top]] of that pile with it's [[great]] acting, [[superb]] [[cinematography]] and [[excellent]] writing.

8 out of 10, kids. "Deliverance" is one of the [[optimum]] exploitation films to [[arrive]] out of that [[admirable]] 1970's decade from whence so many other exploitation [[movie]] came.

A [[clusters]] of [[friend]] sets out on a canoe [[voyage]] down a [[revere]] in the [[southward]] and they [[becomes]] [[intimidated]] by a bunch of toothless hillbillies who pretty much try to [[wrack]] their [[inhabits]]. It's [[funky]].

We are treated to anal rape, [[sadistic]] [[shots]], bow and arrow [[kill]], shootings, [[raped]] bones, etc... A [[batch]] [[iike]] 1974's "Texas Chainsaw [[Bloodbath]]," to say that "Deliverance" is believable would be immature. This would never and [[did]] never happen, even in the dark [[years]] of 1972.

"Deliverance" is a very entertaining ride and [[packing]] full of [[activities]]. It is one in a [[sizable]] pile of exploitation films to come from the early 70's and it ([[admittedly]]) sits on [[topped]] of that pile with it's [[super]] acting, [[handsome]] [[movies]] and [[sumptuous]] writing.

8 out of 10, kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 1973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] foywonder's review of this [[cheap]] STV hits the nail squarely on the [[head]]. [[Make]] sure you read it. In case you don't, a group of scientists heads off into the deep woods of the Pacific [[Northwest]], to fumble around with a bunch of bones in an animal graveyard. The [[Big]] [[Foot]] family doesn't take kindly to this, and [[proceeds]] to pick off the team one by one, largely offscreen. [[Big]] [[Foot]] himself has a distinctly ape-like [[face]], but is less scary overall than Harry from HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS. Most of the movie has the wooden, generic [[actors]] [[pretending]] to be scientists tromping around in the [[woods]] and yakking away. This is a no-budget movie in which very [[little]] happens, at [[least]] on screen. We do get to watch the sexiest of the females take a shower while one of her male companions watches, but [[nothing]] comes of this. foywonder's review of this [[inexpensive]] STV hits the nail squarely on the [[leiter]]. [[Deliver]] sure you read it. In case you don't, a group of scientists heads off into the deep woods of the Pacific [[Southwestern]], to fumble around with a bunch of bones in an animal graveyard. The [[Gargantuan]] [[Footing]] family doesn't take kindly to this, and [[revenues]] to pick off the team one by one, largely offscreen. [[Hefty]] [[Footing]] himself has a distinctly ape-like [[encountering]], but is less scary overall than Harry from HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS. Most of the movie has the wooden, generic [[protagonists]] [[pretend]] to be scientists tromping around in the [[lumber]] and yakking away. This is a no-budget movie in which very [[petite]] happens, at [[fewer]] on screen. We do get to watch the sexiest of the females take a shower while one of her male companions watches, but [[anything]] comes of this. --------------------------------------------- Result 1974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] this by far one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I have ever [[seen]] in my [[life]]. I [[gave]] up to watch it after an [[hour]] and [[regretted]] that [[hour]] a [[lot]]. the acting is horrible and there is [[almost]] no [[plot]]. my [[guess]] is that [[someone]] [[came]] up with a [[strange]] [[shape]] of an [[animal]] and [[started]] to make a [[story]] [[around]] of it. [[borrowing]] some [[ideas]] from [[movies]] like Resident [[Evil]] and [[Aliens]] doesn't [[result]] in a [[movie]] like them. if this going to be a top Korean [[movie]], I'd rather won't bother to [[see]] [[even]] a Korean [[movie]] [[trailer]]...

By the [[way]], this [[movies]] is a good [[reason]] to [[believe]] that not necessarily a [[high]] [[rating]] [[means]] the [[movie]] is promising. I [[think]] [[every]] [[Korean]] who has [[internet]] for online [[gaming]] rated this [[movie]] over the 8, even [[though]] has no clue what it is about. this by far one of the [[hardest]] [[kino]] I have ever [[noticed]] in my [[vida]]. I [[yielded]] up to watch it after an [[hora]] and [[lamented]] that [[hours]] a [[batch]]. the acting is horrible and there is [[hardly]] no [[intrigue]]. my [[reckon]] is that [[everybody]] [[became]] up with a [[inquisitive]] [[forma]] of an [[beasts]] and [[began]] to make a [[narratives]] [[throughout]] of it. [[borrower]] some [[notions]] from [[movie]] like Resident [[Nefarious]] and [[Foreigner]] doesn't [[conclusions]] in a [[filmmaking]] like them. if this going to be a top Korean [[movies]], I'd rather won't bother to [[seeing]] [[yet]] a Korean [[cinematography]] [[caravan]]...

By the [[paths]], this [[films]] is a good [[motive]] to [[believing]] that not necessarily a [[highest]] [[valuation]] [[method]] the [[films]] is promising. I [[believing]] [[all]] [[Kure]] who has [[web]] for online [[games]] rated this [[films]] over the 8, even [[despite]] has no clue what it is about. --------------------------------------------- Result 1975 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The 40 Year [[Old]] Virgin, is about [[Andy]] Stitzer, a forty [[year]] [[old]] [[man]] who [[works]] in an electronic [[store]] and doesn't have much of a [[social]] [[life]] and is very [[awkward]] [[around]] [[women]]. Some of his co-workers at the store [[invite]] him out one [[night]] and they discover that [[Andy]], is still a virgin so they [[plan]] to [[help]] him lose his virginity. One day in the [[store]] [[Andy]], meets a [[woman]] named Trish, who [[gives]] him her [[phone]] number and [[eventually]] [[Andy]], works up enough [[courage]] to [[go]] on a [[date]] with her and they [[start]] to really like each other but [[Andy]], is still very awkward when it comes to [[sex]] and he is [[going]] to have to tell this to Trish, much to his embarrassment if he can actually get up enough courage to tell her before [[things]] get awkward. The 40 Year Old Virgin, has good direction, a good script, good comedic performances by the whole cast, good cinematography and good film editing. The film stars and is co-written by Steve Carell, who does a very good comedic breakthrough performance and his writing for the film is very good too. I was very pleasantly surprised with this film. It is sweet, funny, entertaining, fun, enjoyable, clever, good natured and a good time. This film is just as good as this year's Wedding Crashers, and both films are two of the best comedies I have seen in awhile. The 40 Year Old Virgin, really showcases a lot of talent and it is put to good use and it works as a comedy and a romance and it is sweet and a lot of fun. One of the [[biggest]] [[surprises]] and one of the [[best]] comedies of the year. The 40 Year [[Antique]] Virgin, is about [[Andi]] Stitzer, a forty [[annum]] [[archaic]] [[dude]] who [[collaborate]] in an electronic [[storing]] and doesn't have much of a [[societal]] [[lifetime]] and is very [[clumsy]] [[throughout]] [[woman]]. Some of his co-workers at the store [[please]] him out one [[nighttime]] and they discover that [[Indie]], is still a virgin so they [[plans]] to [[support]] him lose his virginity. One day in the [[shops]] [[Indy]], meets a [[wife]] named Trish, who [[provides]] him her [[tel]] number and [[lastly]] [[Indie]], works up enough [[gallantry]] to [[going]] on a [[dating]] with her and they [[launches]] to really like each other but [[Indie]], is still very awkward when it comes to [[sexuality]] and he is [[go]] to have to tell this to Trish, much to his embarrassment if he can actually get up enough courage to tell her before [[aspects]] get awkward. The 40 Year Old Virgin, has good direction, a good script, good comedic performances by the whole cast, good cinematography and good film editing. The film stars and is co-written by Steve Carell, who does a very good comedic breakthrough performance and his writing for the film is very good too. I was very pleasantly surprised with this film. It is sweet, funny, entertaining, fun, enjoyable, clever, good natured and a good time. This film is just as good as this year's Wedding Crashers, and both films are two of the best comedies I have seen in awhile. The 40 Year Old Virgin, really showcases a lot of talent and it is put to good use and it works as a comedy and a romance and it is sweet and a lot of fun. One of the [[larger]] [[astonishment]] and one of the [[optimum]] comedies of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 1976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before [[watching]] it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[could]] follow the [[dialogue]] through it. My [[view]] on the [[movie]] may be [[partially]] biased [[since]] I had never read the play before, but I [[got]] [[pulled]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is undoubtedly one of the best writers ever to have lived and the [[story]] of [[Hamlet]] is [[definitely]] one of his [[best]] achievements.

But now on to the [[movie]]...

I [[found]] that all the [[actors]] in the movie had a firm [[grasp]] of what they were saying and [[thus]], were [[able]] to [[articulate]] it [[quite]] well. [[Leonardo]] in Romeo and [[Juliet]] is nothing [[compared]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[King]]. The [[thing]] I [[liked]] about this was that it [[worked]] very well as a "MOVIE" and not as a play you are studying. You don't [[need]] to be [[affluent]] with Shakespeare to [[relate]] to all the Misery hamlet has to [[go]] through. I would [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to a [[wide]] [[audience]].

That's my two [[cents]]. I had never read Shakespeare's Hamlet before [[staring]] it but I did have a Shakespeare book with me and [[wo]] follow the [[talks]] through it. My [[avis]] on the [[movies]] may be [[partly]] biased [[because]] I had never read the play before, but I [[ai]] [[pulling]] into this movie's grasp. Shakespeare is undoubtedly one of the best writers ever to have lived and the [[histories]] of [[Hamlets]] is [[certainly]] one of his [[optimum]] achievements.

But now on to the [[filmmaking]]...

I [[uncovered]] that all the [[actresses]] in the movie had a firm [[grasping]] of what they were saying and [[consequently]], were [[capable]] to [[enunciate]] it [[abundantly]] well. [[Leonard]] in Romeo and [[Joliet]] is nothing [[comparing]] to Kenneth Branagh and the [[Emperor]]. The [[stuff]] I [[wished]] about this was that it [[cooperating]] very well as a "MOVIE" and not as a play you are studying. You don't [[needed]] to be [[wealthy]] with Shakespeare to [[pertain]] to all the Misery hamlet has to [[going]] through. I would [[recommendation]] this [[flick]] to a [[large]] [[audiences]].

That's my two [[cent]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 1977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the [[film]] is [[still]] [[awful]]. Besides the synthesizer, the saxophone was the most abused instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is evident in the title song. Hearing that song again made me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic misery inflicted upon them. And to compound this musical assault Rob Lowe's character played saxophone, and there was one scene where he played a solo that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the characters were intensely unappealing, although I must say they did a great job of casting equally unappealing actors to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual diseases if such thing were voted upon. I noticed "Fire" was on cable the other night and I began watching it because I couldn't recall anything specific about it other than I remember it being a horrible film when I saw it back in '85. Twenty years later the [[filmmaking]] is [[nevertheless]] [[scary]]. Besides the synthesizer, the saxophone was the most abused instrument in pop music during the 1980s, as is evident in the title song. Hearing that song again made me want to jab a screwdriver in my ears to end the sonic misery inflicted upon them. And to compound this musical assault Rob Lowe's character played saxophone, and there was one scene where he played a solo that went on and on like he was Charlie Parker, only his shrill tone and playing were more reminiscent of a monkey playing a kazoo. All the characters were intensely unappealing, although I must say they did a great job of casting equally unappealing actors to portray them. Actually I thought Mare Winningham was appealing, and I initially felt sorry for her character because she wore funny underwear, but then near the end of the movie she decides to have sex with Rob Lowe's character who would probably be voted most likely to transfer a variety of sexual diseases if such thing were voted upon. --------------------------------------------- Result 1978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Much worse than the original. It was actually *painful* to sit through, and it barely held my six year old's interest.

Introduction of some new Pokemon is marginally interesting, but storyline is extra-thin, dialogue is still bad, and music is mediocre. Watch the television show instead - it's much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 1979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I was up late flipping cable channels one night and ran into this movie from about 10 minutes into the start - every time I even thought going to bed, something kept on telling me to keep on watching it even though it was way way way past my bedtime.

This movie could have been another easy slam dunk anti-gun film, but instead they chose to [[examine]] the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[even]] better, the [[movie]] [[kept]] on with the real life - just when you think they are [[going]] to take the [[easy]] and obviously contrived [[way]] out, a twist comes along and changes the whole [[outlook]] of the movie. This film not only doesn't follow the formula, it [[shows]] how other events [[often]] lead up to and/or [[affect]] what happens afterwards.

I only [[wish]] the filmmakers had [[explored]] the [[issues]] [[around]] anti-depressant drugs more - the [[kids]] from Columnbine who did the shootings were on them for [[years]] and it was [[frightening]] to watch the way Deanna popped them every time the [[nightmares]] started. Up until recently they were dispensing the stuff like candy and only now do they even begin to [[understand]] what long term effects the drugs have. It was very refreshing to [[see]] that the mental illness [[aspect]] of the [[story]] was given quite a bit of film, having a relative who [[suffers]] from a mental illness, I can say that the movie was [[dead]] nuts on in every aspect of mental illnesses. [[Bravo]] to the director and writer who obviously did their homework on those issues. And for those who think certain things couldn't happen in a hospital (I don't want to tell any particulars), you're dead wrong on that too - I've been there. The [[script]] was so [[real]] it was amazing.

Go [[BUY]] this film and show it to your teenage kids before it's too late. Someday they'll thank you for it. I was up late flipping cable channels one night and ran into this movie from about 10 minutes into the start - every time I even thought going to bed, something kept on telling me to keep on watching it even though it was way way way past my bedtime.

This movie could have been another easy slam dunk anti-gun film, but instead they chose to [[considering]] the aftereffects of the shootings. And [[yet]] better, the [[films]] [[retained]] on with the real life - just when you think they are [[go]] to take the [[uncomplicated]] and obviously contrived [[camino]] out, a twist comes along and changes the whole [[prospect]] of the movie. This film not only doesn't follow the formula, it [[demonstrate]] how other events [[ordinarily]] lead up to and/or [[impacting]] what happens afterwards.

I only [[want]] the filmmakers had [[scrutinized]] the [[subjects]] [[about]] anti-depressant drugs more - the [[juvenile]] from Columnbine who did the shootings were on them for [[ages]] and it was [[creepy]] to watch the way Deanna popped them every time the [[dreaming]] started. Up until recently they were dispensing the stuff like candy and only now do they even begin to [[understanding]] what long term effects the drugs have. It was very refreshing to [[behold]] that the mental illness [[element]] of the [[tale]] was given quite a bit of film, having a relative who [[undergo]] from a mental illness, I can say that the movie was [[decedent]] nuts on in every aspect of mental illnesses. [[Brava]] to the director and writer who obviously did their homework on those issues. And for those who think certain things couldn't happen in a hospital (I don't want to tell any particulars), you're dead wrong on that too - I've been there. The [[hyphen]] was so [[veritable]] it was amazing.

Go [[ACQUIRING]] this film and show it to your teenage kids before it's too late. Someday they'll thank you for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 1980 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] As you probably already know, Jess Franco is one prolific guy. Hes made hundreds upon hundreds of [[films]], many of which are crap. However, he managed to sneak in an occasionally quality work amongst all the assembly line exploitation. "Succubus" isn't his best work (thats either "The Diabolical Dr. Z" or "Vampyros Lesbos"), but it has many of his trademarks that make it a [[must]] for anyone interested in diving into his [[large]] catalog. He [[combines]] the erotic (alternating between showing full-frontal nudity and leaving somethings left to the imagination) and the surreal seamlessly. This is a very dreamlike [[film]], full of [[great]] atmosphere. I [[particularly]] liked the [[constant]] namedropping. [[Despite]] [[coming]] off as being incredibly pretentious, its amusing to hear all of Franco's influences.

Still, there are many [[users]] who don't like "Succubus" and I can see where they're coming from. Its leisurely paced, but I can deal with that. More problematic is the incoherency. The script here was obviously rushed, and within five minutes into the film I had absolutely no [[idea]] what was going on (and it never really came together from that point on). Those who want some substance with their style, look elsewhere. Also, if its a horror [[film]], it never really becomes [[scary]] or even suspenseful. Still, I was entertained by all the psychedelic silliness that I didn't really mind these major flaws all too much. (7/10) As you probably already know, Jess Franco is one prolific guy. Hes made hundreds upon hundreds of [[kino]], many of which are crap. However, he managed to sneak in an occasionally quality work amongst all the assembly line exploitation. "Succubus" isn't his best work (thats either "The Diabolical Dr. Z" or "Vampyros Lesbos"), but it has many of his trademarks that make it a [[ought]] for anyone interested in diving into his [[gargantuan]] catalog. He [[amalgamated]] the erotic (alternating between showing full-frontal nudity and leaving somethings left to the imagination) and the surreal seamlessly. This is a very dreamlike [[kino]], full of [[prodigious]] atmosphere. I [[concretely]] liked the [[perpetual]] namedropping. [[While]] [[come]] off as being incredibly pretentious, its amusing to hear all of Franco's influences.

Still, there are many [[user]] who don't like "Succubus" and I can see where they're coming from. Its leisurely paced, but I can deal with that. More problematic is the incoherency. The script here was obviously rushed, and within five minutes into the film I had absolutely no [[brainchild]] what was going on (and it never really came together from that point on). Those who want some substance with their style, look elsewhere. Also, if its a horror [[kino]], it never really becomes [[terrible]] or even suspenseful. Still, I was entertained by all the psychedelic silliness that I didn't really mind these major flaws all too much. (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 1981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[debated]] as to whether or not I should tick the [[spoiler]] box. Since 99% of this show has probably already been seen by any follower of [[Scrubs]] it [[probably]] doesn't [[come]] under the category of a spoiler.

Clip [[shows]]. Grrr. We all knew Friends was going down the tube when they [[started]] with clip [[shows]]...and five and a half years into [[Scrubs]] they've [[gone]] and fallen down that hole.

I have to wonder if the [[writers]] just couldn't be [[bothered]] [[writing]] that week and just [[said]] to themselves "let's [[show]] the other [[funny]] stuff." It didn't [[work]].

[[For]] starters, [[showing]] all the times that people have [[fallen]] down isn't [[funny]] when [[taken]] out of context. It's not [[funny]] to [[see]] Todd dangling by his banana hammock [[unless]] we know WHY he was [[dangling]] by his [[banana]] hammock.

[[Second]], for what was [[supposed]] to be a [[compilation]] of JD's fantasies, one was Turk's [[dream]], another [[also]] wasn't his [[fantasy]], [[although]] I forget which.

And that's the problem. This episode is [[totally]] forgettable. We've [[seen]] all these [[things]] before. And the [[collection]] of clips of people [[dancing]]? Why? That's not [[funny]].

Finally, I must [[admit]] two of my favourite Scrubs moments were shown in the last [[compilation]]...Dr. Cox realising that Ben died...and JD [[telling]] him how proud of him he is.

But even seeing those moments again didn't save the episode. The summary says it all.

[[Worst]] episode ever. Bill Lawrence, PLEASE don't let your show go the same way as Friends, keep it fresh, keep it funny...or wrap it up. I [[discussing]] as to whether or not I should tick the [[baffle]] box. Since 99% of this show has probably already been seen by any follower of [[Robes]] it [[admittedly]] doesn't [[arriving]] under the category of a spoiler.

Clip [[illustrates]]. Grrr. We all knew Friends was going down the tube when they [[beginning]] with clip [[exhibitions]]...and five and a half years into [[Gowns]] they've [[faded]] and fallen down that hole.

I have to wonder if the [[authors]] just couldn't be [[inconvenienced]] [[handwriting]] that week and just [[asserted]] to themselves "let's [[shows]] the other [[hilarious]] stuff." It didn't [[collaboration]].

[[Onto]] starters, [[show]] all the times that people have [[decrease]] down isn't [[hilarious]] when [[picked]] out of context. It's not [[fun]] to [[behold]] Todd dangling by his banana hammock [[if]] we know WHY he was [[hanging]] by his [[bananas]] hammock.

[[Seconds]], for what was [[presumed]] to be a [[compiling]] of JD's fantasies, one was Turk's [[dreamt]], another [[additionally]] wasn't his [[utopia]], [[despite]] I forget which.

And that's the problem. This episode is [[entirely]] forgettable. We've [[noticed]] all these [[matters]] before. And the [[collate]] of clips of people [[danse]]? Why? That's not [[comical]].

Finally, I must [[acknowledge]] two of my favourite Scrubs moments were shown in the last [[compile]]...Dr. Cox realising that Ben died...and JD [[eloquent]] him how proud of him he is.

But even seeing those moments again didn't save the episode. The summary says it all.

[[Gravest]] episode ever. Bill Lawrence, PLEASE don't let your show go the same way as Friends, keep it fresh, keep it funny...or wrap it up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1982 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is one of those films that's more interesting to watch from an academic perspective than from an entertainment perspective. I do my [[ratings]] based on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. If I were to rate it as an academic film, though, it [[would]] get a 10.

It is [[shot]] in a very interesting manner, like a pseudo-silent film with elements of sound effect and reality. It's meant to convey disjointed memory and fragmentation of the mind, and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the film has a lot of disgusting elements to it that I didn't find all that entertaining. They're mainly just disturbing. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the character relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. This is one of those films that's more interesting to watch from an academic perspective than from an entertainment perspective. I do my [[notations]] based on how much I enjoyed or was entertained by the movie, so I'm giving it a 4. If I were to rate it as an academic film, though, it [[should]] get a 10.

It is [[kiiled]] in a very interesting manner, like a pseudo-silent film with elements of sound effect and reality. It's meant to convey disjointed memory and fragmentation of the mind, and it is interesting in these respects.

However, the film has a lot of disgusting elements to it that I didn't find all that entertaining. They're mainly just disturbing. It has some very interesting imagery too, and some interesting concepts, but some of the character relationships (especially between the mother and son) are pretty disturbing.

In all, this film will either appeal to you or it won't. For me, it was interesting from an academic perspective, but it wasn't a good watch, and I'll probably not go back to it a second time.

4/10 if you're looking for entertainment. 10/10 from an academic standpoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 1983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides several hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I remember about the film except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a [[great]] film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. 'Major Payne' is a film about a major who makes life a living Hell for his small group of boys in the marines. This film does not really have a lot to offer, but it provides several hilarious moments that are well-worth a watch. Don't expect it to be a memorable film, however. Just expect to laugh your way through the film and at the expense of other people. The confrontation between Major Payne and the chubby boy were hilarious, and that's really all I remember about the film except for the boys wanting revenge on Major Payne. Again, it is not a [[sublime]] film, and it is probably best watched on a rainy day when you need some laughter. --------------------------------------------- Result 1984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I find it so amazing that even after all these years, we are STILL talking about this movie! Obviously this movie wasn't THAT bad or else people wouldn't even BOTHER to talk about it. I personally enjoyed this film immensly, and still do! I guess this film isn't for everyone, but it certainly did touch the hearts of many.

As for those that think that this film is "overrated" or "over-hyped"...well, we only have the movie-going public to thank for that! lol* You see, it's not CRITICS/article writers that make a film "HUGE" or a "HIT" with the general movie-going public. PEOPLE make the film a huge success. With Titanic, everyone was in awe. Let's face it, a film like this had never been made before. At least not with the type of special effects needed to really capture the essence of the ship actually sinking. This film is so accurate that even James Cameron timed the actual sinking of the ship in the film with the REAL sinking that fateful day in April 1912. Even the silverware for goodness sakes matched!

Give this movie a break you guys! The critics thought this movie would sink BIG time! When this movie actually came out and people started hearing by WORD OF MOUTH (which is the BEST form of advertisement mind you) that this was a good/decent/movie worth seeing, then everyone started flocking to the theaters in droves to see this movie...not once, not twice, but maybe 3 times and more! So, I really wouldn't say that this movie was "overhyped"...at least not like the buildup for the MATRIX reloaded or the HULK is being "overhyped". ha! Critics didn't even think that Titanic would make enough money to cover Cameron's gigantic film budget that it took to make this mammoth of a film. However, the films money took care of that 200 million budget and MUCH more!

Personally, I LOVE this film. However, this film might not be for everyone. DOn't say that this film sucks just because of romance though! THat is the most sexist thing I've ever heard! Disliking a movie just because it has romance in it! The story was sweet. The dialogue could have been better, but let's face it...the REAL star of the movie wasn't Leo or Kate...it was that GIGANTIC Ship! I think all of the actors including DiCaprio and Winslet did a fine job. It's not thier best work (I've seen much BETTER work from both of them) but it wasn't the WORST I've seen on screen before. Give them a break!

--------------------------------------------- Result 1985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Normally]] when I go on a raid of the local Hollywood Video I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the basic principals behind a B-Horror movie is it's camp value, Heavy Gore, Lots of needless Nudity, and special [[effects]] that anyone can put together with a pack of corn syrup and latex. I [[rented]] Cradle of Fear strictly because I've been a fan of the band since they released they're first Demo in 1995. The [[movie]] [[started]] off on an interesting note and then when I saw Dani Filth stomp on an extremely [[obvious]] latex [[mask]] I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[potential]] and really [[could]] have been a real good movie but in the end this "Movie" really is just an extended Cradle of [[Filth]] Video. [[Routinely]] when I go on a raid of the local Hollywood Video I head towards the B-Horror movies. To me the basic principals behind a B-Horror movie is it's camp value, Heavy Gore, Lots of needless Nudity, and special [[influencing]] that anyone can put together with a pack of corn syrup and latex. I [[leases]] Cradle of Fear strictly because I've been a fan of the band since they released they're first Demo in 1995. The [[films]] [[launches]] off on an interesting note and then when I saw Dani Filth stomp on an extremely [[manifest]] latex [[hide]] I LAUGHED. When I saw the Lesbian sex scene for the sake of a Lesbian sex scene I LAUGHED EVEN HARDER. I spent pretty much the entire movie laughing and when I wasn't laughing I was shaking my head thinking about how a multi-million dollar rock star would want to make a movie that seemed like it was on a budget of multi-hundreds of dollars. The whole point of this movie to me seemed to attract the "Hardcore Goth kids who think death, destruction, sex, blood, and Satan are the greatest things invented since Lava Lamps. That was really it. To me this movie seemed like 80.5% of the things that happened in this movie just happened for the sake of being Satanic. This movie had a lot of [[prospective]] and really [[did]] have been a real good movie but in the end this "Movie" really is just an extended Cradle of [[Dirt]] Video. --------------------------------------------- Result 1986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[time]] the [[hero]] from the first film has [[become]] human and this time uses fist and foot combos against super universal [[soldiers]] and a [[computer]] which has gone awry and is [[prepared]] to take over the world. I'm pretty sure it was [[Double]] Team, which convinced everyone that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[providing]] watchable action [[flicks]]. [[However]] it was this that [[tarnished]] his [[credibility]] [[forever]]. While Universal Soldier:The Return isn't as dull as Double Team or The Quest,it's [[still]] [[pretty]] [[awful]] indeed, with [[none]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for [[kids]] who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) This [[period]] the [[heroin]] from the first film has [[becomes]] human and this time uses fist and foot combos against super universal [[troops]] and a [[computers]] which has gone awry and is [[ready]] to take over the world. I'm pretty sure it was [[Doubly]] Team, which convinced everyone that Jean-Claude Van Damme was no longer credible in [[offered]] watchable action [[gestures]]. [[Still]] it was this that [[tinted]] his [[credence]] [[eternally]]. While Universal Soldier:The Return isn't as dull as Double Team or The Quest,it's [[nevertheless]] [[quite]] [[scary]] indeed, with [[nos]] of the style and flair of the original and no star pairing. This sequel is made simply for [[youngsters]] who enjoy professional wrestling. As I look back, not even the action sequences were all that exciting and therefore this movie is a worthless dud. In other words another clunker in Van Damme's assembly line.

* out of 4(Bad) --------------------------------------------- Result 1987 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, [[thinking]] that with such a [[great]] cast, it [[would]] have to be at [[least]] marginally brilliant.

[[Big]] [[mistake]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown together haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[feels]]) with the [[hope]] that it would all come together in the [[editing]] room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turkey]] is [[notable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all [[around]] her. But other than that, avoid at all costs. ([[Which]] is [[pretty]] easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[cable]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) As an Altman fan, I'd sought out this movie for years, [[ideology]] that with such a [[wondrous]] cast, it [[should]] have to be at [[lowest]] marginally brilliant.

[[Gros]] [[mistaken]].

This is one of Altman's big-cast mishmashes, thrown together haphazardly and improvisationally (or so it [[thinks]]) with the [[esperanza]] that it would all come together in the [[edition]] room. It doesn't.

As Maltin points out, this [[turk]] is [[remarkable]] only for the debut performance of Alfre Woodard, who outshines the vets all [[throughout]] her. But other than that, avoid at all costs. ([[Whom]] is [[belle]] easy to do -- it's never been released on video -- to my knowledge -- and its [[cables]] appearances have the frequency of Halley's Comet.) --------------------------------------------- Result 1988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I was excited when I heard they were finally [[making]] this [[horrific]] [[event]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this [[would]] be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[mannerisms]]. I guess he [[sells]] tickets? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire theater with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will admit that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. John Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and worried about what would happen to his family (and self) if he talked to police about it. In fact, Holmes never really testified about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. So this was still really one big mystery, a mystery that this movie does nothing to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of discretion and most of the principal characters are dead. However, there is no real storyline, it is fragmented claptrap. The script is light and the actors try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no insight into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for long stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. Even Kudrow tries hard to make a flimsy role look substantial. It is a very shallow piece and dare I say, boring. The director even tries to turn it into a love story. Which is nice, unless you know anything about what a piece of trash John Holmes really was. Perhaps a couple of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie Nights" might have helped here. "Boogie Nights" was innovative and exciting in all regards. This film on the other hand was flat and without any real charm or style. Even the music is out of place, with Duran Duran being played in a scene that was supposed to have taken place in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There could have been a great film based on this gruesome event, but I have not seen it yet. I have not seen even a decent one yet (unless you consider the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). I was excited when I heard they were finally [[doing]] this [[scary]] [[phenomena]] into a movie. The whole era (1980's Southern California) and subject matter (drug and porn industry) is intriguing to me. I thought this [[should]] be a sure fire hit. I was not thrilled with the choice of Kilmer as Holmes, they do not resemble each other in physical appearance or [[quirks]]. I guess he [[sold]] tickets? However, I was willing to overlook this and give it a fair shot. I was a bit shocked that there were only like four other people in the entire theater with me on that first day of showing. Now the whole crime and story in the film is hard to do, I will admit that. There were no witnesses to this very violent and brutal act. John Holmes was there, but he was also a pathological liar and worried about what would happen to his family (and self) if he talked to police about it. In fact, Holmes never really testified about what happened and the crime did go unsolved. So this was still really one big mystery, a mystery that this movie does nothing to cast light on. The person writing the screenplay had a whole lot of discretion and most of the principal characters are dead. However, there is no real storyline, it is fragmented claptrap. The script is light and the actors try to hard to beef up paper thin lines by overacting. The film gives no insight into Holmes or the other people involved. Kilmer's character disappears for long stretches, his girlfriend is dull, the police are jokes. Even Kudrow tries hard to make a flimsy role look substantial. It is a very shallow piece and dare I say, boring. The director even tries to turn it into a love story. Which is nice, unless you know anything about what a piece of trash John Holmes really was. Perhaps a couple of viewings of Anderson's "Boogie Nights" might have helped here. "Boogie Nights" was innovative and exciting in all regards. This film on the other hand was flat and without any real charm or style. Even the music is out of place, with Duran Duran being played in a scene that was supposed to have taken place in 1980. Then we have Gordon Lightfoot? Gordon Lightfoot? There could have been a great film based on this gruesome event, but I have not seen it yet. I have not seen even a decent one yet (unless you consider the Rahad Jackson scene from Boogie Nights). --------------------------------------------- Result 1989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the [[intelligently]] written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the [[beautiful]] music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[rarity]] in movie going [[experiences]]: one that is nigh impossible to find [[fault]] with in any area.

There have been several [[comparisons]] made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy [[epic]] to rival Rob Roy as the [[kind]] of movie I would care to see more than once. While Braveheart works hard to be a serious epic, Rob Roy just grabs you and absorbs you into its tightly edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob Roy contains the perfect balance of dramatic tension, action and even occasional humor. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that anchor them in their authentic period setting.

Further, they are not caricatures of good and evil as we all too often observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob Roy prevails, we realize his predicaments are products of his own pride and sense of honor. Tim Roth plays one of the most hateful bad guys in the history of cinema, yet there are moments when we can understand how the events of his life have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob Roy employs a level of character development that makes its story even more believable and gripping.

Rob Roy is a [[delightful]] treasure, featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. From the excellent acting of an extremely impressive cast, to the [[shrewdly]] written (and very quotable) script, from the lavish cinematography to the [[awesome]] music score by Carter Burwell, Rob Roy offers a [[scarce]] in movie going [[experience]]: one that is nigh impossible to find [[malfunction]] with in any area.

There have been several [[compare]] made with Braveheart, which came out the same year. With all due credit to Mel Gibson, Braveheart struck me as too much of a self-conscious and preachy [[manas]] to rival Rob Roy as the [[genus]] of movie I would care to see more than once. While Braveheart works hard to be a serious epic, Rob Roy just grabs you and absorbs you into its tightly edited storytelling. Not a single scene is wasted.

Rob Roy contains the perfect balance of dramatic tension, action and even occasional humor. The characters are well fleshed-out, perfectly conveying vernacular and mannerisms that anchor them in their authentic period setting.

Further, they are not caricatures of good and evil as we all too often observe in even modern film.

For example, while we hope the heroic Rob Roy prevails, we realize his predicaments are products of his own pride and sense of honor. Tim Roth plays one of the most hateful bad guys in the history of cinema, yet there are moments when we can understand how the events of his life have shaped him into becoming what he is. Rob Roy employs a level of character development that makes its story even more believable and gripping.

Rob Roy is a [[scrumptious]] treasure, featuring one of the greatest sword fights ever choreographed and a climatic ending worthy of all the tense anticipation. --------------------------------------------- Result 1990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In watching how the two brothers interact and feed off of each other through the whole movie makes me personally happy to live in the rural area much like they did in the movie. I have watched this movie countless times and have the book right beside my Bible. After watching the movie I agree that this is one of the few movies that does a book justice. I strongly recommend anyone that has the chance to go to Montana to fish or be outdoors to do so. It is amazing. I can not think of anyone else that could play the role better than Brad Pitt. Do yourself justice and watch one of the better movies in the modern movie era. STRONGLY Recommend And as a guide for fishing trips in both Montana and Wyoming, do not try to learn how to fly fish from the scenes of the movie because although it looks great on the film you have no idea how much practice and skill fishing like that actually takes. Thank you for listening Watch this movie please if you would like a long sad movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 1991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] All Kira Reed fans [[MUST]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. Thankfully, Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy films are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). Later, she marvels to her publishist how [[great]] it was, but she didn't get his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they continue their kinky games. But eventually she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks loose, and I'll leave it at that. This is easily the best of these soft-core Playboys films I've seen. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. All Kira Reed fans [[OWES]] see this. The film's premise has struggling romance novelist Kira unable to come up with any new ideas. She's also getting over a divorce. However, she meets this guy at a restaurant and he helps her out of her shell (and clothing). They go into a corner room and they do it. Thankfully, Kira gets a condom out (Now don't ever tell me these Playboy films are worthless piles of soft-core fluff. Remember kids, safe sex). Later, she marvels to her publishist how [[large]] it was, but she didn't get his name. Despite this, the guy finds her and they continue their kinky games. But eventually she tires of his sneakiness and wants to know more. When she does, all hell breaks loose, and I'll leave it at that. This is easily the best of these soft-core Playboys films I've seen. Check this out, and marvel at the greatness of Kira. --------------------------------------------- Result 1992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] It's just [[breathtaking]] in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!

Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.

I'm [[inclined]] to the [[later]] view-- [[thanks]] to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.

The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question. It's just [[amazing]] in it's awfulness-- you really must see it!

Depending on your perspective, Dylan Walsh is either the savior or the problem here: since he's the only one on screen that can actually get his lines out with something akin to natural cadences and inflection, he either ruins the movie by pointing up everyone else's flaws, or he saves it by providing some context for their awfulness.

I'm [[tilted]] to the [[thereafter]] view-- [[gratitude]] to him, it works as high comedy. He's the 7 footer in a game of dwarf basketball, his skill set just doesn't apply in this context, and his discombobulation is delicious.

The real treat though is Ms. Eastwood, whose inability to speak in plain English is so pervasive I actually googled her, expecting to learn that she was a Russian beauty who pronounced her lines phonetically, with no understanding of their meaning. But no: she's just a talent free American who will leave you laughing with every line she drops. Whether she knew what the lines meant must remain an open question. --------------------------------------------- Result 1993 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] A very [[good]] start. I was a [[bit]] surprised to find the machinery not quite so [[advanced]]: It should have been cruder, to match we saw in the original series. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan lady [[comes]] across as a little too human. She needs to school on Spock who, after all, is the model for this [[race]]. Too bad they couldn't have picked Jeri Ryan. I like Ms. Park, the Korean(?)lady. The doctor has possibilities. Haven't sorted out the other males, except for the black guy. He's a really likeable. Bakula needs to find his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of humor and his willingness to try anything. He is, of course, big and strong enough for the heroics. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. A very [[alright]] start. I was a [[bite]] surprised to find the machinery not quite so [[advance]]: It should have been cruder, to match we saw in the original series. The cast is interesting, although the Vulkan lady [[arises]] across as a little too human. She needs to school on Spock who, after all, is the model for this [[errand]]. Too bad they couldn't have picked Jeri Ryan. I like Ms. Park, the Korean(?)lady. The doctor has possibilities. Haven't sorted out the other males, except for the black guy. He's a really likeable. Bakula needs to find his niche--In QL his strong point was his sense of humor and his willingness to try anything. He is, of course, big and strong enough for the heroics. The heavies were OK, although I didn't like their make-up. --------------------------------------------- Result 1994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] There is indeed much to [[complain]] about this movie version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell looks good in his title role, but his line readings, frankly, stink. This also suffers, in large part, from this being credited as the [[first]] movie that makes use of rear projection. The sets look phony.

There are two [[great]] [[strengths]] in this show, however: [[although]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[perfect]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Julie]], is [[little]] remembered [[today]]: [[mostly]] for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the programmer [[EAST]] [[OF]] BORNEO to simply shots of her: credit Melford's stylish visual direction of the original. Her great beauty and simple (although stagy) performance help repair some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this movie.

However, one of Borzage's themes is the mystical power of love, and it is the handling of the celestial sections that make this great, from the arrival of the celestial train to the journey to 'the Hot Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as always, perfect.

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King version of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I still greatly enjoyed this version and think you should give it a chance. There is indeed much to [[moan]] about this movie version of Molnar's mystical play --Farrell looks good in his title role, but his line readings, frankly, stink. This also suffers, in large part, from this being credited as the [[frst]] movie that makes use of rear projection. The sets look phony.

There are two [[super]] [[fortresses]] in this show, however: [[while]] the dialogue readings limp, the visual performances are [[faultless]]. Rose Hobart, as [[Jolly]], is [[scant]] remembered [[hoy]]: [[primarily]] for ROSE HOBART, in which Joseph Cornell cut down the programmer [[SOUTHEAST]] [[DU]] BORNEO to simply shots of her: credit Melford's stylish visual direction of the original. Her great beauty and simple (although stagy) performance help repair some of the damage to the earth-bound sections of this movie.

However, one of Borzage's themes is the mystical power of love, and it is the handling of the celestial sections that make this great, from the arrival of the celestial train to the journey to 'the Hot Place'. H.B. Warner's performance here is, as always, perfect.

So we have here a flawed but very interesting version. I think that Lang's 1934 version is better, as well as the celestial scenes in the Henry King version of CAROUSEL, the watered-down musical remake. But I still greatly enjoyed this version and think you should give it a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 1995 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one [[reason]] for this movie. [[John]] Derek wanted to [[show]] off his [[beautiful]] [[wife]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[least]] a [[humorous]] movie and there was a [[reason]] for nudity and sex. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. If you're into that, well, then [[fast]] forward to it and skip the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[show]] off her [[terrible]] acting. She is undoubtedly a [[beautiful]] [[woman]] but a [[poster]] of her is more [[exciting]] than this movie! Richard Harris was a [[better]] [[actor]] than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your [[time]] on this movie...go [[buy]] the [[book]] instead. This is not a very good telling of the Tarzan epic. There was only one [[motif]] for this movie. [[Giovanni]] Derek wanted to [[exhibition]] off his [[magnificent]] [[femme]] in the buff! Bo Derek in '10' was at [[fewer]] a [[humour]] movie and there was a [[rationale]] for nudity and sex. This movie is nothing more than soft porn. If you're into that, well, then [[speedily]] forward to it and skip the rest! This movie (like Bolero) was again a vehicle for Bo Derek to [[displays]] off her [[scary]] acting. She is undoubtedly a [[wondrous]] [[femme]] but a [[placard]] of her is more [[excite]] than this movie! Richard Harris was a [[optimum]] [[protagonist]] than this; this was one of his few mistakes! don't waste your [[period]] on this movie...go [[acquiring]] the [[workbook]] instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 1996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Paperhouse is the most moving and [[poignant]] film I've ever seen. Often classed as a "horror movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but [[think]] it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[wonderful]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

Paperhouse is the most moving and [[agonizing]] film I've ever seen. Often classed as a "horror movie" this, I believe, is a grave error. Some journo once called it "the thinking person's Nightmare on Elm Street" and while I accept the logic of his conclusion I can't help but [[ideas]] it's a tag that is ill deserved and misleading. Those that can only see horror are truly missing out here and only serves to demonstrate they're really not thinking at all.

In fact, just attempting to classify this [[sumptuous]] work is probably a bad idea. Quite simply, Paperhouse is perfect in every exquisite detail and will always have a special place in my heart. As someone wiser than me once said, "the film hits you on a completely emotional level", which may go some way to explaining why my comments are so unrelentingly gushing. To be honest, I make no apology for this so if you feel my words are too saccharine for your taste, stop reading now because there's more to come.

It's so rare to find a film that has at its heart the pain and heartache of childhood and the struggle to overcome the dreadful feelings of isolation and loneliness that can completely overwhelm us at this fragile time in our lives. Even more unusual to find child actors who can actually play their roles with the sensitivity and intelligence required to make it all work. In Charlotte Burke and Elliott Spiers we had an inspired piece of casting and the lasting impact of Paperhouse owes much to their ability to portray the melancholy and alienation of childhood (often overlooked) in a seamless and convincing way.

And yet both of these brilliant young stars seemed to have slipped through the grasp of the studios and have somehow faded away.

Add to all this an incredibly talented director (Bernard Rose), imaginative cinematography and the most beautiful and haunting soundtrack you're ever likely to hear and you may start to get an inkling of why I have such affection and affinity for this film that no amount of words can express.

--------------------------------------------- Result 1997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I think this movie had to be fun to [[make]] it, for us it was [[fun]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we [[get]] to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of scary movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we [[laugh]] [[together]]. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. I think this movie had to be fun to [[deliver]] it, for us it was [[droll]] to watch it. The actors look like they have a fun time. My girlfriends like the boy actors and my boyfriends like the girl actors. Not very much do we [[obtain]] to have crazy fun with a movie that is horror make. I see a lot of scary movies and i would watch this one all together once more, or more because we [[giggling]] [[jointly]]. If this actors make other scary movies i will watch them. The grander mad man thats chase to kill the actors is very much a good bad man. He make us laugh together the most. i would give this movie a high score if you ask me.

I don't know if the market has any more of the movies with the actors, but the main boy is cute. the actor with the grand chest has to be not real. they doesn't look to real. --------------------------------------------- Result 1998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] [[Basically]] a [[typical]] [[propaganda]] film for the last [[good]] war. But there were a couple [[things]] that [[struck]] me. First was the [[use]] of mouthed epithets. In two cases the Scott character [[mouths]] one, once at the beginning when he drops his bomb off target during the bomb-off ("dammit") and once when he is trying to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[could]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it [[several]] times and that's what it [[looks]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley character wishes the O'Brien character goodbye and good luck ("Give 'em hell") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral problems with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer assures him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into oblivion this scene plays with not a little irony. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! [[Predominantly]] a [[classic]] [[advocacy]] film for the last [[buena]] war. But there were a couple [[items]] that [[rocked]] me. First was the [[uses]] of mouthed epithets. In two cases the Scott character [[hydrants]] one, once at the beginning when he drops his bomb off target during the bomb-off ("dammit") and once when he is trying to sway a bombardier into being a pilot ("s*%t"). I [[did]] be wrong about the second instance but I replayed it [[various]] times and that's what it [[seem]] like to me. The third case is when the Anne Shirley character wishes the O'Brien character goodbye and good luck ("Give 'em hell") over the roar of the engines. She must have thought that was too unladylike because she clearly says "heck". I also found interesting the character that has moral problems with bombing, specifically bombing civilians. The avuncular superior officer assures him that only military targets will be hit due to the precision of the bombsight used. Given what we know about the LeMay's later strategy of firebombing Japanese cities into oblivion this scene plays with not a little irony. I remember McNamara's quoting of LeMay in "The Fog of War", something to the effect that if the US did not win the conflict he would be tried as a war criminal. The ending is way overwrought, in keeping with the movie. It reminded me a bit of the end of White Heat (I'm not comparing the films, just the ending!). Maybe it's just 'cause he gets blowed up. Blowed up real good!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 1999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I think that people are under estimating this [[incredible]] [[film]]. People are [[seeing]] it as a typical horror movie that is set out to scare us and prevent us from getting some sleep. Which if it was trying to do then it would deservedly get a 1/10 but i viewed this film with a few [[friends]] and we found it very entertaining and [[though]] it was a good movie after all it does have Stephanie beaton. This is the reason why i think that it [[deserves]] the 10/10 for the pure entertainment of the film.

The general [[view]] on this movie is that it has bad acting, a simple script that a 10 year old could produce and that it cant be taken seriously and people are rating it low because of this. But i see this as a thoroughly entertaining [[masterpiece]]...that has a hilariously funny script which is made even more entertaining by the actors and [[although]] not very serious it is very entertaining. I think that people are under estimating this [[unimaginable]] [[kino]]. People are [[witnessing]] it as a typical horror movie that is set out to scare us and prevent us from getting some sleep. Which if it was trying to do then it would deservedly get a 1/10 but i viewed this film with a few [[boyfriends]] and we found it very entertaining and [[albeit]] it was a good movie after all it does have Stephanie beaton. This is the reason why i think that it [[merited]] the 10/10 for the pure entertainment of the film.

The general [[viewing]] on this movie is that it has bad acting, a simple script that a 10 year old could produce and that it cant be taken seriously and people are rating it low because of this. But i see this as a thoroughly entertaining [[centerpiece]]...that has a hilariously funny script which is made even more entertaining by the actors and [[albeit]] not very serious it is very entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 2000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Before I'd seen this, I had [[seen]] some pretty bad [[Christmas]] films. But once I [[saw]] this, "Jingle All the [[Way]]" looked [[better]] than "The Godfather". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[helping]] out some kids, but it almost feels demonic watching it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[replaces]] by an evil, devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many kids off of [[Christmas]]. The plot of this [[massacre]] is very [[strange]], which fits along with all of the performances and [[dialog]]. Santa lives high above [[Earth]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all around the world get ready for Christmas. But Santa has an enemy named Pitch, or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by creating diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

Everything about this film, along with being downright [[bad]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually seems much more merry than Santa. Santa talks about delivering presents to all the boys and girls, yet he seems to only deliver to 5 houses of kids in Mexico. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer laughs, I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. Everything is terrible. The first 10 minutes are simply Santa playing the organ while kids sing to it. Probably one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously laughing about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only [[positive]] is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can [[appreciate]] [[bad]] [[cinema]].

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. Before I'd seen this, I had [[noticed]] some pretty bad [[Kringle]] films. But once I [[observed]] this, "Jingle All the [[Ways]]" looked [[best]] than "The Godfather". "Santa Claus" is a jolly film about Santa [[assists]] out some kids, but it almost feels demonic watching it. Santa's jolly ho-ho-ho is [[supersedes]] by an evil, devilish laugh that I'm sure has turned many kids off of [[Xmas]]. The plot of this [[bloodbath]] is very [[inquisitive]], which fits along with all of the performances and [[dialogue]]. Santa lives high above [[Earthly]] in the North Pole where he, and kids from all around the world get ready for Christmas. But Santa has an enemy named Pitch, or Satan. Pitch tries to ruin Santa's Christmas by making three boys naughty, and by creating diversions, like moving the chimney and making the doorknob hot. When Pitch causes Santa to be attacked by a dog, it's up to Santa's helper Pedro and Merlin the wizard to get Santa out of this pickle.

Everything about this film, along with being downright [[unhealthy]], is so bizarre. Satan dances a lot and he actually seems much more merry than Santa. Santa talks about delivering presents to all the boys and girls, yet he seems to only deliver to 5 houses of kids in Mexico. The reindeer are wind up toys, and when the reindeer laughs, I'm amazed it doesn't bring tears to kid's eyes...it's frightening. Everything is terrible. The first 10 minutes are simply Santa playing the organ while kids sing to it. Probably one of the strangest scenes is Santa shooting Pitch in the butt with a mini-cannon and uproariously laughing about it while Pitch dances around in pain. I think parents are better off telling their little kids about where babies come from, than showing them this. The only [[auspicious]] is it will have you laughing hysterically if you can [[appreciative]] [[negative]] [[movies]].

My rating: BOMB/****. 85 mins. --------------------------------------------- Result 2001 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This has always been one of my [[favourite]] movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have become a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to collect all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how corny they could be to how technically [[correct]] some of them were. The great colours and the sets get me [[going]] too. It's a [[pity]] when they re-make some of these good [[old]] movies; they nearly always stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the Earth stood still, it's [[utter]] garbage!! [[Forbidden]] [[Planet]] is one of the benchmark space films of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[shudder]] to think what the [[new]] one will be like! To my mind, some [[things]], such as fantastic classic movies, should just be left [[alone]] to be what they are, classic [[examples]] of great [[attempts]] at telling [[simple]] [[stories]], and giving people a thrill in the process. Once they add all the techno-crap that we have available now, the film just seems to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage factory, - nothing special at all. By the way, I [[notice]] that the astronauts' uniforms in Forbidden Planet were also used for "Queen of Outer Space"! That just tells you that the budgets were a [[bit]] lower back then, doesn't it? Hey, less [[money]] and better films, hmmm....

[[Great]] performances in this [[movie]] from Leslie [[Nielsen]], in a [[serious]] role, and Anne Francis, [[Walter]] Pidgeon (who has [[always]] been one of my [[favourite]] actors), [[Earl]] Holiman, and of [[course]] Robby the [[Robot]]!

The special effects are [[fantastic]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[great]] sci-fi experience! This has always been one of my [[preferable]] movies, and will always be. Over the last few years I have become a 50's / 60's Sci-fi freak, trying to collect all of the better ones that were made back then. I love lots of things about them from how corny they could be to how technically [[rectified]] some of them were. The great colours and the sets get me [[gonna]] too. It's a [[shame]] when they re-make some of these good [[former]] movies; they nearly always stuff it up, - just look at the recent re-do of The day the Earth stood still, it's [[total]] garbage!! [[Forbids]] [[Planetary]] is one of the benchmark space films of all time, and now they're trying to re-make it too, and I [[tremble]] to think what the [[novel]] one will be like! To my mind, some [[matters]], such as fantastic classic movies, should just be left [[solely]] to be what they are, classic [[cases]] of great [[endeavors]] at telling [[uncomplicated]] [[storytelling]], and giving people a thrill in the process. Once they add all the techno-crap that we have available now, the film just seems to be more dog-meat from the Hollywood sausage factory, - nothing special at all. By the way, I [[notification]] that the astronauts' uniforms in Forbidden Planet were also used for "Queen of Outer Space"! That just tells you that the budgets were a [[bite]] lower back then, doesn't it? Hey, less [[cash]] and better films, hmmm....

[[Large]] performances in this [[kino]] from Leslie [[Nelson]], in a [[severe]] role, and Anne Francis, [[Walters]] Pidgeon (who has [[permanently]] been one of my [[preferable]] actors), [[Earle]] Holiman, and of [[cours]] Robby the [[Robotics]]!

The special effects are [[unbelievable]], and the storyline is not too far-fetched. This is a [[whopping]] sci-fi experience! --------------------------------------------- Result 2002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[entertaining]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch [[movies]] in the [[first]] place. True, some [[movies]] are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "HOLLOW MAN" manages to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! It seems a lot of IMDB comments on this film are biased, in the sense that they try to compare it to an older version. True, "HOLLOW MAN" is a remake of sorts of "THE INVISIBLE MAN", but that's where the similarities end. "HOLLOW MAN" is an [[droll]] movie,period. If you watch a movie with the intention of finding as many flaws as possible, then you shouldn't watch [[filmmaking]] in the [[fiirst]] place. True, some [[cinematography]] are plain horrendous and unbearable, but "HOLLOW MAN" manages to entertain and make you think what YOU would do if you were invisible and if you had your ex getting laid with one of your friends. Kevin Bacon stars as a eccentric scientist who, along with a team of collaborators, discover the way to make animals invisible. Now his mission is to make them visible again. When this team of young scientists (working, as you might guess, for the Pentagon)think they have the formula for making animals visible again, Kevin bacon volunteers to be the first to try the new experimental drug. After that, of course, things go wrong, as Kevin Bacon remains invisible for the rest of the movie and is obliged to wear a latex mask, so his collaborators know where he is. Feelings of paranoia and desperation begin to take over Kevin's character, and when he finds out that his ex girlfriend AND collaborator (Elisabeth Shue) is having a torrid affair with another of the young scientists in the team, he finally snaps. The movie then turns into a hybrid of "ALIEN" and a slasher flick, but that's not saying it's a bad turn. There are scares and chills and the movie moves at a nice pace. The special effects are top notch (a quality always prevalent in ALL of Paul Verhoeven's films)as we get to see some "body reconstitution" sequences never seen on a movie before. If there's anything to complain about, perhaps, is the predictability of the situations herein; by the first hour of the movie you KNOW Kevin bacon will make the jump from being weird and eccentric to being a homicidal lunatic in the end. And the ending is a bit abrupt, but despite this, HOLLOW MAN is still worth watching. If you want to know what a TRULY bad movie is, then waste your money on "FEAR DOT COM" (With Stephen Dorf) or the even worse THE UNTOLD (or "Sasquatsh", with Land Henriksen). Now THAT is "hollow"! 8* out of 10*! --------------------------------------------- Result 2003 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] This [[film]] has special effects which for it's [[time]] are very [[impressive]]. Some if it is [[easily]] explainable with the scenes [[played]] [[backwards]] but the overlay of [[moving]] images on an object on [[film]] is [[surprisingly]] well [[done]] given that this [[film]] was made more than 94 [[years]] [[ago]]. This [[kino]] has special effects which for it's [[period]] are very [[unbelievable]]. Some if it is [[conveniently]] explainable with the scenes [[accomplished]] [[aft]] but the overlay of [[relocating]] images on an object on [[movie]] is [[impossibly]] well [[effected]] given that this [[cinematography]] was made more than 94 [[yrs]] [[formerly]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] First a quick 'shut up!' to those [[saying]] this movie stinks. You can't go to every movie expecting 'Citizen Kane'. This was actually a [[fun]] movie. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[flaw]] in this movie is, I don't think there was enough chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is good fun. Selma Blair needs to eat something. She's worrying me. But she still looks [[beautiful]]. So yes, I [[recommend]] this movie for a date or light saturday afternoon fun. Go see.

RATING: **1/2 out of **** First a quick 'shut up!' to those [[arguing]] this movie stinks. You can't go to every movie expecting 'Citizen Kane'. This was actually a [[droll]] movie. Jason Lee is good in everything he does. The only [[inadequacy]] in this movie is, I don't think there was enough chemestry between Lee and Julia Stiles. They should have dwelled more on that. Other than that, the movie is good fun. Selma Blair needs to eat something. She's worrying me. But she still looks [[resplendent]]. So yes, I [[recommendations]] this movie for a date or light saturday afternoon fun. Go see.

RATING: **1/2 out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Oh]] God, I [[must]] have [[seen]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been [[young]], but I wasn't stupid. Anyone could see that this is a [[bad]] [[movie]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[seen]] more impressive effects at [[Disneyland]], I've seen better performances at a school play, And I've [[seen]] more convincing crocodiles at the [[zoo]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, ignoring the [[children]] tapping on the [[glass]].

The story is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[trying]] out a [[new]] water [[sport]], surfing in shark filled waters. It soon becomes evident that something more dangerous is in the water. After they learn what, they [[get]] the help of a grizzly [[middle]] aged fisherman, who [[wants]] to [[kill]] the animal to [[avenge]] the eating of his family.

I [[think]] I have seen every crocodile film [[made]] in the last fifteen years, the [[best]] of which is Lake Placid, and the worse of which is its sequel. Blood [[Surf]] would have to be the second worst croc flick I think, with Primeval and Crocodile tailing closely behind.

The Australian Saltwater Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, resulting in more than a hundred injuries or deaths every year. Movies like Blood Surf however ruin not only the ferocious image of such a creature, but a good hour and a half of the viewer's life. Unless you really want to see it, avoid Blood Surf. [[Ah]] God, I [[owe]] have [[watched]] this when I was only 11 or twelve, (don't ask how) I may have been [[youthful]], but I wasn't stupid. Anyone could see that this is a [[mala]] [[cinema]], nasty, gross, unscary and very silly. I've [[noticed]] more impressive effects at [[Disney]], I've seen better performances at a school play, And I've [[noticed]] more convincing crocodiles at the [[animals]], where they do nothing but sit in the water, ignoring the [[childhood]] tapping on the [[glasses]].

The story is set in northern Australia. A handful of ambitious young people, are [[seek]] out a [[nouveau]] water [[sportsman]], surfing in shark filled waters. It soon becomes evident that something more dangerous is in the water. After they learn what, they [[obtain]] the help of a grizzly [[mid]] aged fisherman, who [[desires]] to [[murders]] the animal to [[retribution]] the eating of his family.

I [[thoughts]] I have seen every crocodile film [[accomplished]] in the last fifteen years, the [[finest]] of which is Lake Placid, and the worse of which is its sequel. Blood [[Surfing]] would have to be the second worst croc flick I think, with Primeval and Crocodile tailing closely behind.

The Australian Saltwater Crododile is one of the most dangerous creatures out there, resulting in more than a hundred injuries or deaths every year. Movies like Blood Surf however ruin not only the ferocious image of such a creature, but a good hour and a half of the viewer's life. Unless you really want to see it, avoid Blood Surf. --------------------------------------------- Result 2006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This [[movie]] was horrible. I [[watched]] it three times, and not [[even]] the whole [[thing]]. It's just impossible to watch, the [[story]] [[line]] sucks, it's depressing, and utterly [[disgusting]]. I don't write [[spoilers]] for anything, so if you [[want]] to know why it's so [[disgusting]], see it for yourself. The only [[good]] thing about this movie was [[John]] [[Savage]], his [[dialogue]] at the [[beginning]], and some [[funny]] parts in the [[movie]]. The [[little]] [[kid]] in this [[movie]] is [[annoying]], and the [[whole]] situation is bullshit. I saw this movie at [[movie]] [[stores]] around America, so I [[assumed]] it [[would]] be a [[good]] [[movie]]. [[Jesus]] [[Christ]], was I wrong!!!! The acting is all [[horrible]], and the nudity itself is lame and nasty. Another thing is, [[Starr]] Andreef, the other [[main]] [[character]], hasn't been in such [[bad]] [[movies]] in the [[past]], in fact, she was in some [[pretty]] good ones. [[Same]] with John [[Savage]]. This [[movie]] SUCKS! This [[film]] was horrible. I [[saw]] it three times, and not [[yet]] the whole [[stuff]]. It's just impossible to watch, the [[histories]] [[linea]] sucks, it's depressing, and utterly [[gruesome]]. I don't write [[troublemakers]] for anything, so if you [[wanting]] to know why it's so [[sickening]], see it for yourself. The only [[buena]] thing about this movie was [[Giovanni]] [[Savagery]], his [[dialog]] at the [[launching]], and some [[hilarious]] parts in the [[film]]. The [[petite]] [[petit]] in this [[cinematography]] is [[vexing]], and the [[together]] situation is bullshit. I saw this movie at [[film]] [[storage]] around America, so I [[shouldered]] it [[could]] be a [[well]] [[film]]. [[Christ]] [[Gosh]], was I wrong!!!! The acting is all [[scary]], and the nudity itself is lame and nasty. Another thing is, [[Satar]] Andreef, the other [[principal]] [[characters]], hasn't been in such [[wicked]] [[movie]] in the [[preceding]], in fact, she was in some [[quite]] good ones. [[Identical]] with John [[Cruel]]. This [[cinematography]] SUCKS! --------------------------------------------- Result 2007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't give a movie or a show ten very often but this show touched a nerve in a way no other show has. I found the entire series on mysoju.com and thought the premise looked interesting so I took a look see. I wasn't disappointed in what I saw; I was moved. This story stays on the tender side as the main characters move us through the scenes. Sumire Iwaya, played thoughtfully by Koyuki, shows us human nature as she wants to keep troubles from being shown. No one really wants to lay their soul out in front of a perspective mate. So instead she substitutes a human, played by an adorable Matsumoto Jun, as a pet. This pet is like any other creature we would consider a pet. The difference; he can retaliate in the same way, after all Momo is a man, not a dog. As he is treated like a pet, he reacts to situations how a dog might react. She spends time with the new boyfriend, Momo gets jealous. It's when she realizes that her pet isn't just a pet that the sexual tension between the two starts to become thick - Momo is a dance prodigy. Her thinking slowly changes as we start to get a glance at his own thoughts. Matsumoto takes us from seeing a character who is very one dimensional in the beginning, to two dimensional when we see he's a dancer, to a three dimensional character when we see him start to fall for his master as a man, not as a dog. In my opinion, it's worth watching this story just to see this character develop. Plus Matsumoto plays Momo with such tenderness you almost start to wish you had one too. Neither wants to think about the future and how their relationship will change, but as Momo (the name she gives him as one would name their new puppy) states – we both knew this wasn't going to be able to last. Watch this show with a open mind, it's worth it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The emotional [[impact]] of this [[movie]] defies [[words]]. It is [[elegant]], subtle, [[beautiful]], and tragic all rolled into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting ability, the full range of it. Who knew? I saw The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actor]], Smith. His performances in both [[movies]] [[portray]] a whole other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully enjoy its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile condition of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human guilt, atonement, love, and sacrifice. The emotional [[consequences]] of this [[filmmaking]] defies [[expression]]. It is [[tasteful]], subtle, [[magnifique]], and tragic all rolled into two hours. This is Will Smith as he matures into his acting ability, the full range of it. Who knew? I saw The Pursuit of Happiness and thought, this must be a fluke for the blockbuster, over-the-top [[actress]], Smith. His performances in both [[theater]] [[describing]] a whole other dimension to Smith, a refinement of talent, the selectivity of scripts, I'm not sure, but I view him differently now. Seven Pounds is one of those movies that in order to fully enjoy its essence you have to suspend your belief. Don't watch it for the plot, watch it for the fragile condition of the human heart, both literally and metaphorically. It is a story of human guilt, atonement, love, and sacrifice. --------------------------------------------- Result 2009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I read in the papers that W.Snipes was broke so no wonder he would take parts in low budget projects like The Contractor.He is just the next action star to join a growing club:the penniless action stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the lead in a [[cheap]] [[action]] flick which was shot in Bulgaria( we are supposed to believe that the location is London, like only a [[complete]] [[moron]] would buy that)The [[story]] is the one of 1000 other movies: retired special forces good guy gets hired by the government again to do a wet job- after that government wants to get rid of him- good guy gets away after killing bad guys (was that a spoiler? guess not!) The star of the movie: the little girl (Eliza Bennett) outperforms everybody else of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for eye candy Lena Headey, makes 2 stars. Only for die hard Snipes fans!Everybody else:avoid! I read in the papers that W.Snipes was broke so no wonder he would take parts in low budget projects like The Contractor.He is just the next action star to join a growing club:the penniless action stars of the 90s (Van Damme,Segal,Lundgren,Snipes). Here he stars the lead in a [[cheaper]] [[measures]] flick which was shot in Bulgaria( we are supposed to believe that the location is London, like only a [[finishing]] [[knucklehead]] would buy that)The [[storytelling]] is the one of 1000 other movies: retired special forces good guy gets hired by the government again to do a wet job- after that government wants to get rid of him- good guy gets away after killing bad guys (was that a spoiler? guess not!) The star of the movie: the little girl (Eliza Bennett) outperforms everybody else of the cast!!!One star is for her plus one star for eye candy Lena Headey, makes 2 stars. Only for die hard Snipes fans!Everybody else:avoid! --------------------------------------------- Result 2010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Worst]] [[film]] ever, this is a [[statement]] that people here on IMDb often throw around. Whether it's an Uwe Boll movie, bad classics like Manos The Hands Of Fate or the latest no brains summer action fest from Michael Bay, people are [[often]] quick to jump to the sudden conclusion that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the movie world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully [[ignorant]] and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of crap movie making really goes. There are films out there so bad, so hideous, so [[unintentionally]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults form around them to celebrate their awfulness and their discussion boards are the kindest places on the internet due to everyone agreeing unanimously that said film is really that bad.

Ladies and Gentlemen, i present to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay epic that is so utterly bad that it's a lot like a violent car crash, you know it's awful but you can't stop looking at it. The brainchild of self proclaimed "hollywood actor, director" and may i add beached whale Sam Mraovich, this film is legendarily [[terrible]]. Let me give you a hint of how ego driven this project was. Mr Mraovich not only directed this film, he wrote it, produced it, executive produced it, scored it, edited it and then finally starred in it. This is a man so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent genius that like someone with an ugly child he [[fails]] to recognise just how [[catastrophic]] his [[bastard]] [[creation]] really is.

Everything in this film fails on an epic level, the acting is the [[worst]] you will ever witness, the plot is the most ridiculous, the editing and cinematography is the most amateur and even the music is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've gone on a bit of a tangent here, but please believe me that this film is really as [[bad]] as i describe it, i would say this film is horse crap squished into a film reel, but the truth is it wasn't even shot on film, it was shot on a digital camcorder not much better than the one sitting in your closet right now gathering dust. Don't get me wrong, i forgive low budgets for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. [[Pire]] [[cinematography]] ever, this is a [[declarations]] that people here on IMDb often throw around. Whether it's an Uwe Boll movie, bad classics like Manos The Hands Of Fate or the latest no brains summer action fest from Michael Bay, people are [[ordinarily]] quick to jump to the sudden conclusion that on the board they're posting that there is nothing worse in the movie world.

I envy these people, because they're blissfully [[ignoramus]] and unaware of how deep the rabbit hole of crap movie making really goes. There are films out there so bad, so hideous, so [[accidentally]] hilarious and so ridiculous that cults form around them to celebrate their awfulness and their discussion boards are the kindest places on the internet due to everyone agreeing unanimously that said film is really that bad.

Ladies and Gentlemen, i present to you Ben and Arthur, an 85 minute gay epic that is so utterly bad that it's a lot like a violent car crash, you know it's awful but you can't stop looking at it. The brainchild of self proclaimed "hollywood actor, director" and may i add beached whale Sam Mraovich, this film is legendarily [[scary]]. Let me give you a hint of how ego driven this project was. Mr Mraovich not only directed this film, he wrote it, produced it, executive produced it, scored it, edited it and then finally starred in it. This is a man so blinded by his own ego and so believing of his non existent genius that like someone with an ugly child he [[fail]] to recognise just how [[tragic]] his [[fucker]] [[creations]] really is.

Everything in this film fails on an epic level, the acting is the [[hardest]] you will ever witness, the plot is the most ridiculous, the editing and cinematography is the most amateur and even the music is like nails on a chalkboard. I'm aware i've gone on a bit of a tangent here, but please believe me that this film is really as [[amiss]] as i describe it, i would say this film is horse crap squished into a film reel, but the truth is it wasn't even shot on film, it was shot on a digital camcorder not much better than the one sitting in your closet right now gathering dust. Don't get me wrong, i forgive low budgets for films provided the concept is interesting, for example as much as i disliked it The Blair Witch Project proved that low budgets can still lead to an atmospheric interesting film. Ben and Arthur does not have a good concept to fall back on, even if this film was shot on a budget of 20 million with Hollywoods finest actors it would still suck, the plot is that atrocious, and the characters are even worse. One of the main characters Arthur who is portrayed by non other than Sam Mraovich is one of the most whiny loathsome little turds ever put in a film. You'll dislike him within 5 minutes of the start of the film and by the end of the film that hate will have turned into outright loathing. Apparently Mr Mraovich forgot that we're supposed to root for the hero.

I don't want to spoil all the gut busting hilarity you'll experience watching this film (which i urge you not to pay for) so i will give you two tame mild examples of how stupid this film is, tame and mild as in amongst the least offending mistakes in the movie. In one cut we hear one of the main characters say how "they know a good lawyer and will give HIM a call" the shot fades out then fades back in and this HIM they spoke of earlier is actually a woman, quite a spectacular mistake to make in post production i think. The second is simple, seconds after seeing this transsexual lawyer the characters are told to fly to Vermont, we then cut to a shot of a plane landing amongst palm trees in a sunny area. I've never been to Vermont personally but i'm certain you won't find any palm trees there.

Imagine this kind of stupid amateur inconsistency stretched to nearly an hour and a half combined with ridiculous dialogue and plot and then multiply it by 10 and it still won't fully prepare you for Ben and Arthur. Imagine the absolute worst film you've seen in your life and imagine it being even worse and you still won't be on the same level as Ben and Arthur, this film is really that bad.

However we should be glad in a way, films like this are a true rarity. They give us hope that one day we can become film makers ourselves or that we can be screenwriters. Simply because we'll have a new found sense of confidence due to the fact that we'll know that nothing we produce no matter how amateur could be as much of a suck fest as this.

The real worst movie of all time has finally been discovered, and it is called Ben and Arthur. --------------------------------------------- Result 2011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Filmatography: Excellent, nice camera [[angles]] (I don't [[remember]] seeing a [[movie]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). Could have avoided gruesome scenes with a soft camera. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down angles, in particular (a different touch).

Music: Not impressive. Songs don't stick around in your mind even after watching the movie. May be, I [[expected]] same quality like "Anniyan". A [[disappointment]].

[[Actors]]: Kamal needs to slowly pull away from hard-core action sequences. His age and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very awkward to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It took a long time to release the movie due to various issues. He slips in few scenes. Even abvious things got slipped from a famous director.

Overall: Just a okay movie. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx Filmatography: Excellent, nice camera [[nooks]] (I don't [[reminisce]] seeing a [[kino]] of late, with good close-ups, until this one). Could have avoided gruesome scenes with a soft camera. NY is pictured good.I liked the upside down angles, in particular (a different touch).

Music: Not impressive. Songs don't stick around in your mind even after watching the movie. May be, I [[predicted]] same quality like "Anniyan". A [[dissatisfaction]].

[[Players]]: Kamal needs to slowly pull away from hard-core action sequences. His age and belly really show up. Also, he should avoid close romantic sequences going forward. It was a very awkward to see a mature/aged star still trying to play like a 20+ heroes scenes. Love can be expressed at any age; as we get older, you still can express love nicely from a distance (without touching a woman too much. For example, the love expressed by Rajinikanth in "chandrmukhi").

Jyotika just appears for the namesake in the movie. Not sure why she accepted this. Well, that is not my problem, I guess.

Others just have a small presence.

Direction: I expected Gautham to excel (or measure-up) to his other movie "Kakka Kakka". He disappointmented me. It took a long time to release the movie due to various issues. He slips in few scenes. Even abvious things got slipped from a famous director.

Overall: Just a okay movie. Too much graphics. DEFINITELY not for kids (and adults who expect some kind of "Entertainment").

Thx --------------------------------------------- Result 2012 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I was in the film too, but i don't know if they [[actually]] put this scene in. On the way back from a school trip (in 2005) we stopped at a service station at the same time as they were doing the film, and we were asked (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 years old, could anyone who has seen the film tell me if that [[part]] was actually [[kept]] in the film, it would be great to know! I remember I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half [[years]] before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been quite a successful film, I might buy it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D Thank you I was in the film too, but i don't know if they [[genuinely]] put this scene in. On the way back from a school trip (in 2005) we stopped at a service station at the same time as they were doing the film, and we were asked (the whole of us) to run in and shout Go! Freebird! We were all around 10 years old, could anyone who has seen the film tell me if that [[party]] was actually [[retained]] in the film, it would be great to know! I remember I thought the film had never come out, because it was another 2 and a half [[yrs]] before it was released. All of your comments seem to be good so I'm guessing it has been quite a successful film, I might buy it, but first I would like to know if I'm in it! :D Thank you --------------------------------------------- Result 2013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This film was so amateurish I [[could]] [[hardly]] [[believe]] what I was seeing. It is shot on [[VIDEO]]! [[NOT]] [[film]]! I have not seen the likes of this since the early 70's, when late night networks showed movie of the week '[[horror]] flicks' shot in......[[video]]. It [[looks]] like a bad soap opera, and that is [[paying]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[give]] it their best shot. Michael Des Barres does okay with what he is given to do, which is to [[act]] like a [[sex]] addict out of [[control]]. I can't say that it is pleasant to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the therapist sits in a chair for practically the entire film, with very little variation in camera angles. I can't fault her for someone else's poor blocking, but she is totally unbelievable in her role. Her little girl voice works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is certainly ageless and exotic, but she's outside her range with this.

Alexandra Paul is pathetically overwrought. Every line she delivers is with three exclamation points. Someone must have directed her to scream at all costs. Why would Michael Des Barres want to have sex with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off okay, and probably the most believable of the bunch. But that is not saying much.

This has to be the [[worst]] film I have seen in years. This film was so amateurish I [[did]] [[barely]] [[think]] what I was seeing. It is shot on [[VIDEOS]]! [[NAH]] [[flick]]! I have not seen the likes of this since the early 70's, when late night networks showed movie of the week '[[abomination]] flicks' shot in......[[videotape]]. It [[seems]] like a bad soap opera, and that is [[pays]] it a compliment. Some of the actors [[lend]] it their best shot. Michael Des Barres does okay with what he is given to do, which is to [[ley]] like a [[sexuality]] addict out of [[controls]]. I can't say that it is pleasant to watch.

Nastassja Kinski as the therapist sits in a chair for practically the entire film, with very little variation in camera angles. I can't fault her for someone else's poor blocking, but she is totally unbelievable in her role. Her little girl voice works against her here. And I consider myself a Nastassja Kinski fan. She is certainly ageless and exotic, but she's outside her range with this.

Alexandra Paul is pathetically overwrought. Every line she delivers is with three exclamation points. Someone must have directed her to scream at all costs. Why would Michael Des Barres want to have sex with such a raging shrew?

Finally, Rosanna Arquette as the sweet, maligned wife comes off okay, and probably the most believable of the bunch. But that is not saying much.

This has to be the [[gravest]] film I have seen in years. --------------------------------------------- Result 2014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I think that most [[everyone]] [[wants]] to believe that [[extraordinary]] [[things]] exist and this film shows no restraint in [[trying]] to exploit that to the fullest. The [[presentation]] is very interesting, well presented and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of view it just doesn't [[work]]. Hydrogen [[filled]] flying bladders? They [[would]] need to be the [[size]] of a Mack truck to be [[useful]]. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic [[explosion]]. I have no [[problem]] with [[fantasy]], just don't try to pass it off as [[fact]]. Some folks will always misunderstand. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly found myself saying "oh brother, what a load of ....". If you want a FAKE documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap instead. Or at the very least turn the sound off. I think that most [[anyone]] [[wanted]] to believe that [[unbelievable]] [[items]] exist and this film shows no restraint in [[tempting]] to exploit that to the fullest. The [[submission]] is very interesting, well presented and the graphics are state of the art, but from a scientific point of view it just doesn't [[jobs]]. Hydrogen [[fills]] flying bladders? They [[ought]] need to be the [[greatness]] of a Mack truck to be [[beneficial]]. And then there's the ever-present possibility of a catastrophic [[shattering]]. I have no [[issues]] with [[fantasia]], just don't try to pass it off as [[facto]]. Some folks will always misunderstand. All in all the film is entertaining, but I constantly found myself saying "oh brother, what a load of ....". If you want a FAKE documentary, watch This Is Spinal Tap instead. Or at the very least turn the sound off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Finally]], after [[years]] of [[awaiting]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "Basic Instinct", we have been given a [[great]] sequel that is [[packed]] with the right elements [[needed]] for a [[franchise]] such as this! I [[remember]] everything about the original, the [[steam]], the [[romance]], the sex, the interrogation, the [[music]] (by the [[master]] [[Jerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[murder]], to intense confrontations of all kind! Make no [[mistake]], "Basic [[Instinct]]" was a real winner for audiences [[everywhere]]. I can [[remember]] in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the glamorous, always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a pleasant thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us real [[fans]] what we've been expecting. This film is not an Academy Award winner, nor does it try to be. It [[simply]] [[delivers]] the die-hard [[fans]] what they have been expecting. It's a film for [[fun]]. [[Movies]] [[today]] seem to take themselves way too seriously, but this film is just loose and [[fun]], not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the [[film]].

The film is a fast-paced [[film]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. [[Lastly]], after [[yr]] of [[hoping]] a new film to continue the sexual mayhem of "Basic Instinct", we have been given a [[whopping]] sequel that is [[packaging]] with the right elements [[requisite]] for a [[candour]] such as this! I [[remembering]] everything about the original, the [[steamship]], the [[romanticism]], the sex, the interrogation, the [[musician]] (by the [[maitre]] [[Gerry]] Goldsmith), and everything else from violence and [[assassinate]], to intense confrontations of all kind! Make no [[awry]], "Basic [[Hunch]]" was a real winner for audiences [[nowhere]]. I can [[recollect]] in 2001 when we were first given the news about such a sequel. Five years later, we have it. I never would have thought it to end up such as this. When it was declared a dropped project, time sure couldn't tell if it was ever a real possibility to begin with. Well, I guess we now know anything's possible in this case. Even if the original director, or writer are not present, all we need is the glamorous, always reliable Sharon Stone, and we have a done deal! Please, hear me out...

When people say that this film is bad, I think it is only due to the fact that the style is extreme, and slightly dated. I use the word "dated" only because we have not seen a certain film of the like in many years, and audiences have become adapted to the pointless, boring storytelling seen in other movies that actually make money, and the only reason they make such big numbers is because those films are family friendly. Who needs hole some and clean? Of course it's a pleasant thing to have, but c'mon! Escapism is really seldom these days, and "Basic Instinct 2" gives us real [[stalkers]] what we've been expecting. This film is not an Academy Award winner, nor does it try to be. It [[solely]] [[affords]] the die-hard [[amateurs]] what they have been expecting. It's a film for [[droll]]. [[Cinematography]] [[yesterday]] seem to take themselves way too seriously, but this film is just loose and [[droll]], not taking itself seriously, not too seriously anyway. That said, I shall evaluate the [[movies]].

The film is a fast-paced [[kino]] from the first second, as we see Cathernine Tremell in a car, speeding at 110 MPH-and enjoying lustful thrills doing so. Perhaps sex and driving does not mix, because our sexy novelist takes a bad turn and...well, she gets away unharmed, but her studly partner doesn't fare too well. Once again, Tremell is the primary suspect of the accident, and will be put under analyst's and psychiatrists. Dr. Michael Glass (Morrissey) is automatically drawn to to her from the first moment he meets her. Like another criminal investigator before him, he is entranced and seduced, slowly, and surely. His denial of it all begins to crumble around him as she weaves a spell only she has the power to do. Tramell is possibly more dangerous now, than she was before,but like the first one, we'll never really know, will we? Once the seduction is in motion, jealousy, rage, drugs, and a plateful of erotic scenery ensues!

This film does not recycle the first one, but rather mentions the previous films incidents briefly from time to time. This is a good thing. It lets us as an audience know that the script has been written to bring the level up a notch or two. Sharon Stone dazzles us again, as though 14 years has not come to pass. Her second run of the deceitful novelist is right on the spot as earlier. Just awesome! David Morrissey is well cast, and manages pretty well. The fact that a non-popular star was chosen, makes his performance all the more enjoyable because we as an audience have no background on him, just what we see him perform. My final thought-8.5 to 9 out of 10. So it's not the first one, nor can it live up to the first ones prize winning place. It can, however, live up to the standards set by the first film, and it does folks! It does. --------------------------------------------- Result 2016 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Without a doubt, Private Lessons II is the [[greatest]] movie I have ever seen. A Japanese import (poorly) translated into English, its a joy to watch. Not much of it makes sense, but that doesn't [[matter]]. It's the [[greatest]] [[comedy]] around without ever being [[intentionally]] funny.

The film is rare and unavailable on video, but I have caught it a couple of time late, late at night on pay cable. My taped copy has been watched dozens and dozens of times as I slowly, person-by-person, introduce this film gem to the world.

Joanna Pacula plays the tutor/lover to Ken, our hero. (She apparently was just working for her check.) Ken is played by Goro Inagaki, of the Japanese pop band SMAP, who gives it his all and has great hair through out the movie. Stacy Edwards, of "In the Company of Men" fame, shows up in the movie too and is probably happy that she found other film work afterwards.

It takes at least three viewings to sorta figure out what the plot is. On repeating viewing you can enjoy elements like the abnormal amount of vases Ken has in his house (at least 50) or that Ken is wearing a shirt with embroidered husks of corn in the movie's finale.

The movie is predictable, but highly quotable. My friends and I reenact entire scenes. Yes, it sounds like we're lame losers and we are ... but we're lame losers who have seen "Private Lessons II." Be one of ten people in the world who have seen this movie. You'll thank me for it. Without a doubt, Private Lessons II is the [[largest]] movie I have ever seen. A Japanese import (poorly) translated into English, its a joy to watch. Not much of it makes sense, but that doesn't [[issue]]. It's the [[biggest]] [[travesty]] around without ever being [[willfully]] funny.

The film is rare and unavailable on video, but I have caught it a couple of time late, late at night on pay cable. My taped copy has been watched dozens and dozens of times as I slowly, person-by-person, introduce this film gem to the world.

Joanna Pacula plays the tutor/lover to Ken, our hero. (She apparently was just working for her check.) Ken is played by Goro Inagaki, of the Japanese pop band SMAP, who gives it his all and has great hair through out the movie. Stacy Edwards, of "In the Company of Men" fame, shows up in the movie too and is probably happy that she found other film work afterwards.

It takes at least three viewings to sorta figure out what the plot is. On repeating viewing you can enjoy elements like the abnormal amount of vases Ken has in his house (at least 50) or that Ken is wearing a shirt with embroidered husks of corn in the movie's finale.

The movie is predictable, but highly quotable. My friends and I reenact entire scenes. Yes, it sounds like we're lame losers and we are ... but we're lame losers who have seen "Private Lessons II." Be one of ten people in the world who have seen this movie. You'll thank me for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2017 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I am an [[avid]] [[fan]] of [[horrendous]] movies, [[anything]] [[cheesy]] and down right [[ridiculous]] is my [[game]]. [[So]] [[imagine]] my [[spirit]] I went to the local [[Rent]] [[Shop]], and [[found]] Vampires vs. Zombies. The name is just too [[entertaining]], you [[know]] that no one in the [[world]] [[could]] [[pull]] off [[something]] like it, it just has to be [[bad]].

And boy, is it [[BAD]]. After [[viewing]] this horror-ific [[movie]], I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal [[sat]] outside without [[saying]] a word to each other for [[several]] [[minutes]], both of us [[contemplating]] the future of our [[lives]] after watching this [[movie]]. I [[broke]] the [[depressing]] [[silence]] with the words, "...[[dude]]....What?" [[Yes]], i am an enthralling individual.

Heres a [[quick]] '[[street]] review' The [[Plot]]; There is [[none]], at all, ever, [[constantly]] in "WTF" [[mode]]. The [[Characters]]; [[No]] [[development]], forgettable. The [[Music]]; Worse than porn. The [[Vampires]]; Theirs [[vampires]]? The Zombies; [[Theirs]] [[Zombies]]?

[[In]] the [[end]]; Everyone should [[see]] this [[movie]], [[honestly]], its so [[bad]] I [[yearn]] to [[see]] it again. [[So]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[get]] [[Depressed]]. I am an [[fervent]] [[breather]] of [[dreadful]] movies, [[nothing]] [[corny]] and down right [[nonsensical]] is my [[games]]. [[Consequently]] [[imagining]] my [[wits]] I went to the local [[Leasing]] [[Shops]], and [[discovered]] Vampires vs. Zombies. The name is just too [[droll]], you [[savoir]] that no one in the [[monde]] [[did]] [[pulling]] off [[algo]] like it, it just has to be [[negative]].

And boy, is it [[AMISS]]. After [[visualizing]] this horror-ific [[cinematography]], I was speechless, literally. Me and my pal [[oin]] outside without [[arguing]] a word to each other for [[dissimilar]] [[mins]], both of us [[recital]] the future of our [[vie]] after watching this [[cinematographic]]. I [[ruptured]] the [[somber]] [[speechless]] with the words, "...[[boy]]....What?" [[Oui]], i am an enthralling individual.

Heres a [[speedily]] '[[rue]] review' The [[Intrigue]]; There is [[nos]], at all, ever, [[steadily]] in "WTF" [[modes]]. The [[Nature]]; [[Nos]] [[evolution]], forgettable. The [[Musicians]]; Worse than porn. The [[Bloodsuckers]]; Theirs [[vampire]]? The Zombies; [[Yours]] [[Walkers]]?

[[Throughout]] the [[terminate]]; Everyone should [[seeing]] this [[kino]], [[sincerely]], its so [[wicked]] I [[yearning]] to [[behold]] it again. [[Therefore]] do yourself a favor, watch it and [[obtain]] [[Depressive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Surprisingly well done for an independent film, An Insomniac's Nightmare paints a startling picture of what it would be like to suffer from insomnia. Wonderfully well written, and directed, it creates the atmosphere of a dream as the viewer is taken through one night in the life of an insomniac.

Starring Dominic Monaghan as Jack, we get to see everything he sees as the long hours of a lonely night drag on. The narration is almost hypnotizing, and from the opening lines, it is impossible to turn away. Fascinating and slightly disturbing, it shows how someone copes with a lack of sleep, balancing on the brink between sanity and madness.

With twists and turns around every corner, An Insomniac's Nightmare is provocative and engaging. It comes very highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] There are three movies with this animation style that I fondly remember from my youth. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "Dragons" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I wish I hadn't. What bothered me the most was the [[script]]. It was incredibly choppy and often inane. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that music in movies such as these rarely have what one would call classic pieces, but the music in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to show to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I could ever sit through that crap fest again. Disappointed is putting it mildly. There are three movies with this animation style that I fondly remember from my youth. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "Dragons" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I wish I hadn't. What bothered me the most was the [[hyphen]]. It was incredibly choppy and often inane. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that music in movies such as these rarely have what one would call classic pieces, but the music in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to show to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I could ever sit through that crap fest again. Disappointed is putting it mildly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I didn't know this was a [[silent]] [[movie]] with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the corny [[humor]], flickering [[lighting]] and [[film]], etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[score]] I [[assigned]] it. It was about [[chapter]] 8 before I found any interest in this story and had I had popcorn I may have [[thrown]] it at the screen. [[Maybe]] this appeals to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain transplant. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this [[movie]] - the one enjoyable aspect of the movie. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot recommend this movie. I didn't know this was a [[speechless]] [[cinematography]] with narration. I don't care for silent movies - the corny [[comedy]], flickering [[light]] and [[kino]], etc. I'm sure that attributes to the low [[punctuation]] I [[awarded]] it. It was about [[sections]] 8 before I found any interest in this story and had I had popcorn I may have [[tossed]] it at the screen. [[Probably]] this appeals to the sci-fi crowd? The only thing missing was a zombie scene and a brain transplant. I went with two other people on a Friday night and there were a total of 6 people in the entire theater. Isabella Rosselinni narrated this [[cinematography]] - the one enjoyable aspect of the movie. No one left commenting how much they enjoyed this nor appreciated the unusual approach to telling this story. I cannot recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] 1937's "Stella Dallas" with Barbara Stanwyck hasn't exactly aged well--how [[anyone]] [[thought]] a semi-updated [[version]] of the [[story]] would work now is a real puzzler. Perhaps they thought jaunty, cheerfully brash Bette Midler could make [[something]] out of it, but this hoary [[script]] [[defeats]] her. [[Plot]] about a female bartender having a baby out of wedlock, and years later giving the young girl over to the child's wealthy father so she'll have a shot at a better life, can't escape tatty, old-fashioned trappings and sentiment. Midler works best with a movie director who can control her excesses, but that fails to happen here; Stephen Collins is stolid as the man who changes her life, but Trini Alvarado is well-cast as Midler's daughter. This is what used to be referred to as a "woman's picture", a wallow, but it doesn't pass muster because it stays too faithful to its 1930's origins. *1/2 from **** 1937's "Stella Dallas" with Barbara Stanwyck hasn't exactly aged well--how [[person]] [[thoughts]] a semi-updated [[stepping]] of the [[narratives]] would work now is a real puzzler. Perhaps they thought jaunty, cheerfully brash Bette Midler could make [[anything]] out of it, but this hoary [[screenplay]] [[beat]] her. [[Intrigue]] about a female bartender having a baby out of wedlock, and years later giving the young girl over to the child's wealthy father so she'll have a shot at a better life, can't escape tatty, old-fashioned trappings and sentiment. Midler works best with a movie director who can control her excesses, but that fails to happen here; Stephen Collins is stolid as the man who changes her life, but Trini Alvarado is well-cast as Midler's daughter. This is what used to be referred to as a "woman's picture", a wallow, but it doesn't pass muster because it stays too faithful to its 1930's origins. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy movie using circa 1979 ideas of what constitutes illicit romance for 13 year old girls. Script, pacing, and direction are [[uniformly]] [[awful]]. Action sequences [[defy]] belief. Characters speak with the simplified diction one usually finds in films aimed at the under 10 set, but also includes multiple sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic deaths.

The movie [[wants]] to be a [[comedy]] on some level but is never [[funny]], an adventure picture but plot and action are [[insipid]], and a children's movie but introduces pedophilia and child rape as real possibilities. It also wants to be a buddy picture, a coming of age picture, a ghost movie, an Indian spiritual movie, a travelogue, and a western. The overall affect is of massive stupidity with a nasty twist. Wanda Nevada is a complete waste of time [[unless]] you want to see a good many terrific shots of the Grand Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. Wanda Nevada is a pubescent fantasy movie using circa 1979 ideas of what constitutes illicit romance for 13 year old girls. Script, pacing, and direction are [[evenly]] [[scary]]. Action sequences [[braving]] belief. Characters speak with the simplified diction one usually finds in films aimed at the under 10 set, but also includes multiple sexual references involving Shields' character as well as graphic deaths.

The movie [[wanted]] to be a [[humour]] on some level but is never [[comical]], an adventure picture but plot and action are [[tacky]], and a children's movie but introduces pedophilia and child rape as real possibilities. It also wants to be a buddy picture, a coming of age picture, a ghost movie, an Indian spiritual movie, a travelogue, and a western. The overall affect is of massive stupidity with a nasty twist. Wanda Nevada is a complete waste of time [[if]] you want to see a good many terrific shots of the Grand Canyon. That it manages to do just fine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Those who [[love]] Elivra as I did in her late night [[movie]] hostess [[duties]] will [[love]] this movie - she is just [[plain]] cool - her car is great, and she is a bit of a Transylvanian Dolly Parton - she is so innocent and naive at times - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a touch of Mae [[West]] -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comic]] cast is [[great]], with Edie McClurg at her usual best - plus [[Sally]] Kellerman as Patty is [[hilarious]]. Any time I have to [[crunch]] something for a topping, I will think of how Elvira crunches the potato chips -

This movie is one to be watched again and again - just for the [[fun]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[lives]] up to this one ---- Those who [[loves]] Elivra as I did in her late night [[flick]] hostess [[liability]] will [[iike]] this movie - she is just [[plains]] cool - her car is great, and she is a bit of a Transylvanian Dolly Parton - she is so innocent and naive at times - and sexy all of the time - plus, more than a touch of Mae [[Western]] -

The sets are well done as well, and the [[comedian]] cast is [[resplendent]], with Edie McClurg at her usual best - plus [[Solly]] Kellerman as Patty is [[comical]]. Any time I have to [[contraction]] something for a topping, I will think of how Elvira crunches the potato chips -

This movie is one to be watched again and again - just for the [[droll]] of it. Now I have to get the sequel to it, Elvira's Haunted Hills, and see if it [[inhabits]] up to this one ---- --------------------------------------------- Result 2024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (79%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] Having lived in Japan for several years this movie does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not even come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. [[Unfortunately]], a great opportunity has been missed to bring the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not authentic. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A minor but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. Having lived in Japan for several years this movie does not reflect the Japanese culture and does not even come close to explain what being a Geisha is all about. [[Unhappily]], a great opportunity has been missed to bring the Japanese culture a bit closer to the broad Western audience and help demystify the country where Zen, Samurai, the Geisha world of Kyoto originate from. Some of the most poignant moments of the movie are when the Americans are shown in Japanese surroundings.The Geisha dances were not authentic. There was far too much use of Chinese music. A minor but essential detail: proper use of the incense sticks was nowhere to be seen. The Sakura scenes were almost obscenely kitschy ! Interestingly, some of the Chinese actors were quite convincing as Japanese persons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[originally]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[worked]] at a [[video]] store and I [[loved]] it. I [[recently]] [[watched]] the [[movie]] again and have [[realized]] that it is a lost [[treasure]]. The [[movie]] stars [[Jennifer]] Connelly, almost twenty [[years]] before she [[would]] go on to [[win]] an [[Oscar]] for Beautiful [[Mind]], as Natalie Becker. Byron Thames plays her best friend in the [[world]], Jeff Moran. The film is definitely a milder, cuter and softer [[version]] of the Pretty in Pink's and Some Kind of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[exactly]] why it is so [[good]]. It's honest, not [[forced]] like those [[films]], and parents will [[enjoy]] [[watching]] this [[movie]] with there [[kids]].

When Natalie's Dad [[leave]] [[home]] on a [[business]] [[trip]], Jeff convinces her that he should [[move]] in because his [[home]] [[life]] sucks. With [[support]] from Natalie's [[friend]], Polly, [[played]] [[exquisitely]] by Maddie Corman, she lets him. But this [[movie]] isn't about putting kids in situations and seeing what they can get away with. The three leads are so [[natural]] and the [[script]], [[surprisingly]] so [[honest]], that what [[comes]] through best in their performances is heart [[breaking]]. These [[characters]] [[really]] do care about each other. It's a [[great]] [[film]] to [[show]] to [[kids]] who are [[reaching]] pre-teen [[adolescence]].

I [[initially]] came across Linda Feferman's Seven Minutes in Heaven when I was 14 and [[collaborate]] at a [[videos]] store and I [[worshipped]] it. I [[newly]] [[seen]] the [[cinematic]] again and have [[performed]] that it is a lost [[treasury]]. The [[cinema]] stars [[Jessica]] Connelly, almost twenty [[olds]] before she [[should]] go on to [[earning]] an [[Oskar]] for Beautiful [[Intellect]], as Natalie Becker. Byron Thames plays her best friend in the [[worldwide]], Jeff Moran. The film is definitely a milder, cuter and softer [[stepping]] of the Pretty in Pink's and Some Kind of Wonderful's of the 1980's, which is [[precisely]] why it is so [[buena]]. It's honest, not [[obliged]] like those [[cinematography]], and parents will [[enjoys]] [[staring]] this [[filmmaking]] with there [[brats]].

When Natalie's Dad [[letting]] [[domicile]] on a [[businesses]] [[trips]], Jeff convinces her that he should [[budge]] in because his [[lodgings]] [[living]] sucks. With [[assistance]] from Natalie's [[boyfriend]], Polly, [[served]] [[divinely]] by Maddie Corman, she lets him. But this [[kino]] isn't about putting kids in situations and seeing what they can get away with. The three leads are so [[naturel]] and the [[hyphen]], [[bizarrely]] so [[truthful]], that what [[arrives]] through best in their performances is heart [[violating]]. These [[personages]] [[truthfully]] do care about each other. It's a [[awesome]] [[movies]] to [[display]] to [[children]] who are [[obtain]] pre-teen [[adolescent]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] From the moment the [[film]] [[begins]], already there is a [[discrepancy]]. As this [[film]] takes place on the borders of Normandy and the middle East, and is also an international film, one would [[expect]] proper accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[American]]. Also, I [[find]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the story line a little difficult to follow from the beginning. Who is who? Otherwise the film is very accurate in [[costume]] and [[scenery]]. If you want to see a [[movie]] to get a feel of what it was like in the past (albeit the lack of accents) then this movie is worth a rent. If you're looking for a movie as epic as Kingdom of Heaven, then look elsewhere. From the moment the [[films]] [[initiating]], already there is a [[differences]]. As this [[cinematography]] takes place on the borders of Normandy and the middle East, and is also an international film, one would [[waits]] proper accents portrayed. This is not done as the majority of the cast sound [[Americas]]. Also, I [[unearth]] the acting to be rehearsed at best, the story line a little difficult to follow from the beginning. Who is who? Otherwise the film is very accurate in [[outfits]] and [[landscape]]. If you want to see a [[filmmaking]] to get a feel of what it was like in the past (albeit the lack of accents) then this movie is worth a rent. If you're looking for a movie as epic as Kingdom of Heaven, then look elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2027 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Wow]], I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[movie]]. Now, I have [[seen]] much [[worse]], but there are much more [[romantic]]/funny comedies with [[John]] Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[best]]. While the acting wasn't [[terrible]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was little passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as [[complete]] cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). [[Ruff]], I can't believe people consider this a 'good' [[cinematography]]. Now, I have [[saw]] much [[worst]], but there are much more [[sentimental]]/funny comedies with [[Jon]] Cusack.

This is a mediocre film at [[nicest]]. While the acting wasn't [[horrendous]], but not great, for a romantic comedy, there was little passion, little romance. There were many loose ends that don't show up or are not addressed. Unfortunately, the main characters do come off as [[finish]] cowards. They don't know themselves well enough to realize that they don't love the people they are engaged to. How do we know they aren't in love? By the utter lack of remorse both characters have for leaving their finances. I can think of few things more romantic than the continual escape from commitment that these two show.

The movie doesn't even end with a wedding scene, more than likely both will get cold feet and drop each other like hot potatoes once a commitment is nearing. This movie is really about two people who can't commit to anything, unlike Cusack's previous characters, who were more than willing to make a deep commitment (Loyd in Say Anything, Martin in Grosse Pointe Blank, etc.).

The greatest failure of this movie was the complete lack of any twists turns, or anything of interest. When the movie ended, I felt like they had failed to include a climax to the story, which basically fits the whole movie: boring. No suspense about whether the two will end up together, no joy when they do, no consequences to their actions.

It is sad that people are so blind to the shoddiness of this movie, that they simply rebuke any criticism with 'Everyone is too Cynical!'. Criticism of this movie is not cynicism, simply unbiased examination. There are many other better romantic comedies, even ones with Grace Kelly, or Eva Marie Saint.

If you think this movie is great, try these movies, you hearts will explode: The Princess Bride, Say Anything, Grosse Pointe Blank, High Fidelity, Keeping the Faith, Charade, Rear Window, North by Northwest, or There's Something About Mary (which is a good examination of idealized romance vs. today's society). --------------------------------------------- Result 2028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I was [[raised]] watching the original Batman Animated Series, and am an [[avid]] Batman graphic novel collector. With a comic [[book]] hero as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Creative]] liberties are all well and good, but when it [[completely]] [[changes]] the character, then it is too far. I [[purchased]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[hopes]] that an [[extra]] bonus feature could shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[atrocity]]. In an [[interview]] on the making of "The Batman," one of the [[artists]] or writers (I'm unsure which) [[said]] that "We felt we shouldn't mess with Batman, but we could mess with the villains." So, they proceeded to make the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime knockoff, Mr. Freeze into a super-powered jewel thief, Poison Ivy into a teenage hippie, and countless other shameful acts which are making Bob Kane roll over in his grave.

To sum it all up: I wish I had more hands so I could give this show FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 simply because it uses the Batman name. Warner Bros...rethink this! Please! I was [[risen]] watching the original Batman Animated Series, and am an [[impassioned]] Batman graphic novel collector. With a comic [[workbook]] hero as iconic as Batman, there are certain traits that cannot be changed. [[Inventive]] liberties are all well and good, but when it [[wholly]] [[shift]] the character, then it is too far. I [[procure]] one of the seasons of "The Batman" in the [[waits]] that an [[supplemental]] bonus feature could shed some light on the creators' reasoning for making this show such an [[ruthlessness]]. In an [[interrogation]] on the making of "The Batman," one of the [[painters]] or writers (I'm unsure which) [[told]] that "We felt we shouldn't mess with Batman, but we could mess with the villains." So, they proceeded to make the Joker into an immature little kid begging for attention, the Penguin into some anime knockoff, Mr. Freeze into a super-powered jewel thief, Poison Ivy into a teenage hippie, and countless other shameful acts which are making Bob Kane roll over in his grave.

To sum it all up: I wish I had more hands so I could give this show FOUR THUMBS DOWN. It squeezes by my rating with a 2 out of 10 simply because it uses the Batman name. Warner Bros...rethink this! Please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I think it was an overrated PG-13 crap! At least BRITTANY SNOW's performance was good and some others like IDRIS ELBA were good too, but some others teens in the prom like the leads friends were not that convincing. The killer was so dumb and looked so stupid too. The deaths were stupid, boring and completely unoriginals. The movie was very boring too and very overrated. It wasn't suspenseful at all, i almost fall asleep. Its another bad PG-13 remake, its really a dreadful movie IMO. The ending was so stupid and the climax was very rushed and boring. The movie is pretty slow too. Overall the only good thing about this crap fest is maybe BRITTANY SNOW i think she gave a good performance and IDRIS ELBA too, but besides that it was a completely dreadful movie and horrible remake. Well thats just my opinion. i gave it a 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2030 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This little seen [[movie]] is a [[languid]] and laid-back giallo. It veers away from some of the cliché's of the genre and adopts a looser approach. It's about a woman searching for her [[missing]] lover; a [[psychiatrist]] who has suddenly vanished for no apparent reason. Her search leads her to a villa populated by a group of eccentric individuals. In [[true]] giallo [[style]], murder is never far away.

The cast is really rather good. We have Aldofo Celi (Thunderball), Alida Valli (Suspiria), Horst Frank (Cat o' Nine Tails) and a very young Sybil Danning (80's scream queen). The lead actress is Rosemary Dexter, and while I am not familiar with her, she does a good job in leading the picture.

One of the defining features of Eye in the Labyrinth is its music. Atypically for a giallo it features a jazz-rock fusion soundtrack. This score, composed by Roberto Nicolosi, is reminiscent of Miles Davis, especially his work on In A Silent Way. It's an excellent soundtrack and really gives this movie a different feel than most gialli. The fusion groove accentuates the languid atmosphere and compliments the sunny, sea-front scenery that the film is mostly made up of.

This is a giallo so we really need to talk about the murder set-pieces. Well, this film falls a little short in this regard. It's certainly not devoid of them but they are few and far between. The opening dream-murder being probably the best on offer as well as a memorable burning car sequence. But this really isn't a particularly [[violent]] film. Still, I don't think it should [[disappoint]] too many seasoned fans of the genre. The mystery is fairly [[compelling]] and it has enough eccentric characters (the idiot boy Saro and THAT unsettlingly inappropriate dubbed accent?) and moments of the bizarre to satisfy; while the sleaze-factor is upheld with a smattering of nudity throughout.

Eye in the Labyrinth plays like a giallo version of an Agatha Christie mystery, as it features a group of unsympathetic characters in a villa, all under suspicion of murder; we have the obligatory flashbacks detailing their connections with the final hours of the (highly unsympathetic) murder victim. While this isn't a grade-A example of the genre, it's certainly an appealingly different one, as it doesn't borrow too heavily from other films of the sub-genre. For giallo enthusiasts I give this a thumbs up and hope one day it's given a nice DVD transfer. It certainly deserves the treatment. This little seen [[filmmaking]] is a [[languorous]] and laid-back giallo. It veers away from some of the cliché's of the genre and adopts a looser approach. It's about a woman searching for her [[gone]] lover; a [[psychiatry]] who has suddenly vanished for no apparent reason. Her search leads her to a villa populated by a group of eccentric individuals. In [[real]] giallo [[styles]], murder is never far away.

The cast is really rather good. We have Aldofo Celi (Thunderball), Alida Valli (Suspiria), Horst Frank (Cat o' Nine Tails) and a very young Sybil Danning (80's scream queen). The lead actress is Rosemary Dexter, and while I am not familiar with her, she does a good job in leading the picture.

One of the defining features of Eye in the Labyrinth is its music. Atypically for a giallo it features a jazz-rock fusion soundtrack. This score, composed by Roberto Nicolosi, is reminiscent of Miles Davis, especially his work on In A Silent Way. It's an excellent soundtrack and really gives this movie a different feel than most gialli. The fusion groove accentuates the languid atmosphere and compliments the sunny, sea-front scenery that the film is mostly made up of.

This is a giallo so we really need to talk about the murder set-pieces. Well, this film falls a little short in this regard. It's certainly not devoid of them but they are few and far between. The opening dream-murder being probably the best on offer as well as a memorable burning car sequence. But this really isn't a particularly [[fierce]] film. Still, I don't think it should [[deceive]] too many seasoned fans of the genre. The mystery is fairly [[persuading]] and it has enough eccentric characters (the idiot boy Saro and THAT unsettlingly inappropriate dubbed accent?) and moments of the bizarre to satisfy; while the sleaze-factor is upheld with a smattering of nudity throughout.

Eye in the Labyrinth plays like a giallo version of an Agatha Christie mystery, as it features a group of unsympathetic characters in a villa, all under suspicion of murder; we have the obligatory flashbacks detailing their connections with the final hours of the (highly unsympathetic) murder victim. While this isn't a grade-A example of the genre, it's certainly an appealingly different one, as it doesn't borrow too heavily from other films of the sub-genre. For giallo enthusiasts I give this a thumbs up and hope one day it's given a nice DVD transfer. It certainly deserves the treatment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I enjoyed the story by itself, but the things that I learned about WWI Planes & boats, make this movie a must see. The close-ups on the plane & the torpedo boat & how they were used were completely new to me. I heartily recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 2032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is really a very bad movie. Why? First of all, the story is bad. It is an artificial story, combining all sorts of things together that make no sense. It just seems a wrong experiment. Secondly, the actors cannot play in a realistic manner. They cannot even talk as an actor should. Why did I buy this movie? And what must I do with it now? --------------------------------------------- Result 2033 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[liked]] the [[movie]], first of all because it told an interesting story, but the story as told in the movie felt like it was condensed from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a fictional South American country, also a lot to fit into the time available. I [[think]] it would have been much better as a six-hour mini-series than it turned out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's [[rushed]], the story doesn't skip so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is excellent. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is outstanding. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also excellent. Meryl Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. I [[wished]] the [[cinematography]], first of all because it told an interesting story, but the story as told in the movie felt like it was condensed from a much-longer story. Since the book is over 400 pages, that makes sense. It spans a time period from the 1920s to the 1970s, in a fictional South American country, also a lot to fit into the time available. I [[ideas]] it would have been much better as a six-hour mini-series than it turned out as a 140-minute movie.

Even though it's [[hastened]], the story doesn't skip so much that it gets confusing. What is told is told fairly well. One fault is that Clara's supernatural powers appear inconsistently; either they should have appeared more evenly through the course of the movie, or they should have been left out. Two more faults (which could be spoilers): Esteban's eventual return to goodness happens somewhat too suddenly, and Ferula's curse seems to wear off, even though the tone of the story suggests that it should endure forever.

The acting is excellent. Glenn Close, as the tormented spinster Ferula, is outstanding. Jeremy Irons, as the brutal self-made rich man, is also excellent. Meryl Streep, as the main character Clara, is great, although she's often even better than she was in this movie. There were many well-performed smaller roles too. The biggest fault is that the movie seemed to lack a dialect coach; each actor seemed to speak in a different sort of accent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I'll give writer/director William Gove credit for finding someone to [[finance]] this ill-conceived "thriller." A good argument for not wasting money subscribing to HBO, let alone buying DVDs based on cover art and blurbs. A pedestrian Dennis Hopper and a game Richard Grieco add [[nothing]] significant to their resumes, [[although]] the art direction is not half bad. The [[dialogue]] will leave you grimacing with wonder at its conceit; this is storytelling at its [[worst]]. No tension, no suspense, no dread, no fear, no [[empathy]], no catharsis, no [[nothing]]. A few attractive and often nude females spice up the boredom, but this is definitely a film best seen as a trailer. I feel sorry for the guy who greenlighted this thing. Good for late-night, zoned-out viewing only. You have been warned. I'll give writer/director William Gove credit for finding someone to [[hacienda]] this ill-conceived "thriller." A good argument for not wasting money subscribing to HBO, let alone buying DVDs based on cover art and blurbs. A pedestrian Dennis Hopper and a game Richard Grieco add [[anything]] significant to their resumes, [[while]] the art direction is not half bad. The [[conversations]] will leave you grimacing with wonder at its conceit; this is storytelling at its [[gravest]]. No tension, no suspense, no dread, no fear, no [[empathetic]], no catharsis, no [[none]]. A few attractive and often nude females spice up the boredom, but this is definitely a film best seen as a trailer. I feel sorry for the guy who greenlighted this thing. Good for late-night, zoned-out viewing only. You have been warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the only David Zucker movie that does not spoof anything the first of its kind. The funniest movie of 98 with Night at the Roxbury right behind But I did not think Theres something about mary was funny so that doesnt count except for the frank and beans thing he he. Dont listen to the critics especially Roger Ebert he does not know solid entertainment just look at his reviews.Anyway see it you wont be dissapionted --------------------------------------------- Result 2036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[So]] many wonderful actresses in one [[film]] serve as a practical invitation to the local movie house so I duly responded. Here are some remarks..

Vanessa Redgrave is great even while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good thing for the film but a sad [[thing]] for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[harsh]] in recent years. Claire [[Danes]] [[continues]] her [[welcome]] [[return]] to the movies and exudes a [[definite]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's resemblance to her mother Merly Streep both in terms of physical appearance and acting style is so striking that I lost my concentration to the film for a couple of minutes after her entrance. She is surprisingly good; however such a resemblance has the danger of working against her favor. I agree with a previous comment: Natasha Richardson definitely had some plastic job done to her face. She certainly does not look like how I remember her from previous films ("Nell" for example.) Both she and Toni Collette sadly do not make much impression partly because they do not look convincing as sisters. Their interplay is weak. Toni Collette additionally is way too old for her character. Glenn Close and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger emotional resonance than the rest of the film. Eileen Atkins provides some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an imaginary nighttime companion to Redgrave's character. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film considerably even though he gives a broader performance than needed. As a matter of fact as soon as he exits the story it starts to drag. It is also to his credit that he manages to create the exact necessary sense of boyish charm in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the center of the film. He also has the misfortune that the script is insufficient in explaining why three people (one of them a man) are so much smitten by this man. The backstory to this should have been developed more.

The cinematography is [[excellent]] as expected. However the main summer house set failed to convince me. It does not look natural on the top of that rocky hill, particularly with its grass patch in the front. A bit too cardboard like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... [[Consequently]] many wonderful actresses in one [[movies]] serve as a practical invitation to the local movie house so I duly responded. Here are some remarks..

Vanessa Redgrave is great even while lying in bed. She also looks very old and I don't think this is achieved with much make-up which is a good thing for the film but a sad [[stuff]] for us cinema-goers. I think her aging got a bit [[tough]] in recent years. Claire [[Denmark]] [[continued]] her [[saluted]] [[repatriate]] to the movies and exudes a [[concrete]] warmth. Mamie Gummer's resemblance to her mother Merly Streep both in terms of physical appearance and acting style is so striking that I lost my concentration to the film for a couple of minutes after her entrance. She is surprisingly good; however such a resemblance has the danger of working against her favor. I agree with a previous comment: Natasha Richardson definitely had some plastic job done to her face. She certainly does not look like how I remember her from previous films ("Nell" for example.) Both she and Toni Collette sadly do not make much impression partly because they do not look convincing as sisters. Their interplay is weak. Toni Collette additionally is way too old for her character. Glenn Close and Meryl Streep had to have more screen time. Streep's performance actually is little more than a cameo. Her scenes on the other hand have bigger emotional resonance than the rest of the film. Eileen Atkins provides some welcome dry wit, especially in her second role as an imaginary nighttime companion to Redgrave's character. As for the men; Hugh Dancy enlivenes the film considerably even though he gives a broader performance than needed. As a matter of fact as soon as he exits the story it starts to drag. It is also to his credit that he manages to create the exact necessary sense of boyish charm in the viewer. Patrick Wilson on the other hand is a complete void at the center of the film. He also has the misfortune that the script is insufficient in explaining why three people (one of them a man) are so much smitten by this man. The backstory to this should have been developed more.

The cinematography is [[magnifique]] as expected. However the main summer house set failed to convince me. It does not look natural on the top of that rocky hill, particularly with its grass patch in the front. A bit too cardboard like.

Overall, the film is a classy production, but a seen-it-all-before, cried-at-it-all-before feeling took over me during most of its duration and consequently it failed to make the kind of impact on me that I expected from a tearjerker. However, it still managed to make me thoughtful about the passing of time, about one's expectations from life and the extent to which these are fulfilled or not. Worth trying at least on DVD if not at the movies... --------------------------------------------- Result 2037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] This [[film]] is one of [[Michael]] Keaton's [[best]]. [[Throughout]] the [[film]] he is 'on'. With co-stars like Ms. Henner, Joe Piscopo and [[Danny]] DeVito, you can't go [[wrong]]. [[Great]] laughs, [[great]] [[fun]] for [[everyone]]. This [[cinematography]] is one of [[Micheal]] Keaton's [[nicest]]. [[During]] the [[cinematic]] he is 'on'. With co-stars like Ms. Henner, Joe Piscopo and [[Danby]] DeVito, you can't go [[inaccurate]]. [[Whopping]] laughs, [[large]] [[droll]] for [[anybody]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2038 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[For]] a low budget project, the [[Film]] was a [[success]]. The story is interesting, and the actors were [[convincing]]. [[Eva]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the director shows his talent by taking on many roles for his project. Of [[course]] this low budget film [[could]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the [[music]] [[keeps]] this [[script]] [[moving]]. Although this film has it's share of problems, such as continuity, I must say that I would [[rent]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. [[Onto]] a low budget project, the [[Cinematic]] was a [[avail]]. The story is interesting, and the actors were [[persuading]]. [[Ewa]] Longoria, who now stars on the TV Show "Dragnet," is sexier than ever. The locations were ideal for the ganster plot, and the director shows his talent by taking on many roles for his project. Of [[cours]] this low budget film [[would]] use better editing transitions and more special effects for the gun scenes, but the [[musicians]] [[retains]] this [[scripts]] [[transferring]]. Although this film has it's share of problems, such as continuity, I must say that I would [[tenancy]] the director's next movie. If your a film student, you could learn a few things from the director's commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 2039 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] With Harry Callahan [[getting]] up in years, the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile sometimes and out of place, his demeanor still was unwavering. [[Thankfully]], this film took some time off to develop a different type of [[story]], one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. [[While]] the film [[fell]] [[short]] in doing so, it was still an [[excellent]] addition to the series, [[even]] if it was getting a [[little]] out of place during a [[time]] of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. With Harry Callahan [[obtain]] up in years, the inevitable `old man with a chip on his shoulder' story had to come into play eventually. Callahan, looking fragile sometimes and out of place, his demeanor still was unwavering. [[Mercifully]], this film took some time off to develop a different type of [[fairytales]], one that might reinvent the Dirty Harry and the whole genre. [[Despite]] the film [[plummeted]] [[terse]] in doing so, it was still an [[sumptuous]] addition to the series, [[yet]] if it was getting a [[scant]] out of place during a [[moment]] of silly fashion trends and New Wave music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[like]] [[Brad]] [[Pitt]] [[enormously]]. He is an [[actor]] with [[brains]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the rest. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Louise]]" a [[thought]] has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Troy]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte [[Bardot]] [[comes]] to [[mind]] nonetheless. He is so beautiful that he is at his most [[effective]] when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, almost accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. Strange, "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. I [[fond]] [[Rad]] [[Beit]] [[unbelievably]]. He is an [[protagonist]] with [[neurons]] and wit, not to mention face, pectorals and all the rest. Since I saw him in "Thelma and [[Luiz]]" a [[brainchild]] has been bothering me, who does he remind me of? "[[Trojans]]" did it for me. He is the new Brigitte Bardot. The differences are obvious of course. Male, American etc but Brigitte [[Pardo]] [[happens]] to [[intellect]] nonetheless. He is so beautiful that he is at his most [[efficient]] when he plays against it. "Kalifornia" "12 Monkeys" "Fight Club" "Snatch" His self deprecating humor makes him human, almost accessible. Fortunately "Troy" will soon be forgotten. Only still photographs with Pitt, semi naked in ravishing sprint positions will decorate the walls of legions of salivating fans. Strange, "Das Boot" is one of the great films of the second part of the 20th Century. What is Wolfgang Petersen doing directing this? Well, I suppose it would be very hard to say no at the chance of working with the new Brigitte Bardot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] This [[final]] [[Voyager]] episode [[begins]] 23 [[years]] in the future. Voyager has made it back home. [[In]] the [[many]] [[years]] it [[took]] to [[return]] tho, the Vulcan Tuvoks' mind has been [[destroyed]]. He carried a disease they were too late [[getting]] home to cure.

Captain Janeway [[comes]] [[across]] [[aliens]] who have [[time]] [[travel]] technology. She [[realizes]], there's a Warp [[Conduit]] in the Delta [[Quadrant]] that [[could]] bring Voyager [[home]] [[immediately]] - if she could go back in time and [[notify]] Voyager. There's one problem. The [[Conduit]] is deep inside Borg Space.

Janeway visits Tuvok. He's like a child. He scribbles tho, obsessed, [[working]] on math [[problems]] or movie reviews or something, he's [[convinced]] are [[important]] somehow. [[In]] the institution, Tuvok [[cries]], [[asking]] for 'Janeway' to [[please]], please [[come]] back to him.

Janeway decides to commandeer a federation shuttle and [[equip]] it with [[weapons]] technology 20 [[years]] ahead of the Borg, in the [[hopes]] of going back in time and [[using]] this [[new]] [[technology]] to guide Voyager to the Warp [[Conduit]].

When she goes back in [[time]] and [[links]] up with [[Voyager]], Janeway meets her younger self. The two captains disagree, arguing about the [[plan]]. The real-captain visits Tuvok [[asking]] him if it's true he has a brain [[disorder]]. Tuvok admits it's true, but it can't be cured by the facilities on the ship so he's [[kept]] it to himself.

The young Captain agrees to the [[older]] Captains' [[plan]]. To [[increase]] their [[chances]] of success the [[older]] Janeway plans to [[distract]] the Borg with her shuttle craft. The Borg actually [[capture]] Janeway and her shuttle. The Borg [[Queen]] personally assimilates Captain Janeway. But Janeway's [[expected]] this! the Borg [[Queen]] has [[assimilated]] a [[virus]] into herself that [[kills]] her. With the Borg Queen [[dead]] [[Voyager]] makes it thru the Warp [[Conduit]] back to federation space. This [[ultimate]] [[Trips]] episode [[commences]] 23 [[yr]] in the future. Voyager has made it back home. [[Throughout]] the [[several]] [[olds]] it [[picked]] to [[revert]] tho, the Vulcan Tuvoks' mind has been [[ruined]]. He carried a disease they were too late [[obtaining]] home to cure.

Captain Janeway [[arises]] [[during]] [[alien]] who have [[period]] [[voyage]] technology. She [[recognizes]], there's a Warp [[Pipeline]] in the Delta [[Pixie]] that [[would]] bring Voyager [[homes]] [[rapidly]] - if she could go back in time and [[informed]] Voyager. There's one problem. The [[Channeling]] is deep inside Borg Space.

Janeway visits Tuvok. He's like a child. He scribbles tho, obsessed, [[collaborated]] on math [[disorders]] or movie reviews or something, he's [[persuaded]] are [[principal]] somehow. [[Into]] the institution, Tuvok [[cree]], [[asks]] for 'Janeway' to [[invites]], please [[arrived]] back to him.

Janeway decides to commandeer a federation shuttle and [[endow]] it with [[arms]] technology 20 [[yr]] ahead of the Borg, in the [[aspirations]] of going back in time and [[employs]] this [[novel]] [[tech]] to guide Voyager to the Warp [[Pipeline]].

When she goes back in [[period]] and [[bound]] up with [[Voyage]], Janeway meets her younger self. The two captains disagree, arguing about the [[programmes]]. The real-captain visits Tuvok [[asks]] him if it's true he has a brain [[rioting]]. Tuvok admits it's true, but it can't be cured by the facilities on the ship so he's [[retained]] it to himself.

The young Captain agrees to the [[elderly]] Captains' [[schemes]]. To [[widen]] their [[opportunity]] of success the [[elderly]] Janeway plans to [[entertain]] the Borg with her shuttle craft. The Borg actually [[captures]] Janeway and her shuttle. The Borg [[Quinn]] personally assimilates Captain Janeway. But Janeway's [[anticipate]] this! the Borg [[Quinn]] has [[likened]] a [[viruses]] into herself that [[murders]] her. With the Borg Queen [[die]] [[Voyage]] makes it thru the Warp [[Channeling]] back to federation space. --------------------------------------------- Result 2042 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Very]], very humdrum [[movie]] fare here with Stella Stevens [[taking]] directions from [[someone]] in disguise(it didn't take me long to [[guess]] who it was) in Old Nevada Town outside Vegas for a money heist in the Circus Circus Hotel in Las Vegas. Stevens leads her girl gang of three, and they find out that they must act much quicker than had been anticipated. [[Despite]] some neat looks at Las Vegas in the 70's, very [[average]] yet credible acting from most involved, and a plot line with [[potential]], Las Vegas [[Lady]] [[lays]] one big [[boring]] egg. It [[seems]] [[forever]] for the film to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at least thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even close. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky Stuart Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year prior to his grand performance as the prosecuting attorney Bugliosa in Helter Skelter. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a waterfall. There is one punch and one head hit with a blunt instrument. Beyond that nothing in terms of action. And as for the girls, don't expect much there either. Stella and her girls(both very mediocre yet pretty talents, get in a sauna and a bath. What do we see? Nothing but a fleeting side profile. Stella wears these nice open blouses accentuating her real talents, but I wish she would have been a bit more open with her performance. That way I could write one thing that would recommend the film. Alas, it was not to be, and I have little to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible film in any way, it just has nothing going for it either. YAWN. [[Tremendously]], very humdrum [[flick]] fare here with Stella Stevens [[picked]] directions from [[everybody]] in disguise(it didn't take me long to [[imagine]] who it was) in Old Nevada Town outside Vegas for a money heist in the Circus Circus Hotel in Las Vegas. Stevens leads her girl gang of three, and they find out that they must act much quicker than had been anticipated. [[While]] some neat looks at Las Vegas in the 70's, very [[medium]] yet credible acting from most involved, and a plot line with [[prospective]], Las Vegas [[Dame]] [[laying]] one big [[bore]] egg. It [[appears]] [[permanently]] for the film to kick into gear,and when it does it just sputters here and there and never really speeds up. I was somewhat disappointed with this film. Sure, I wasn't expecting anything great, but I at least thought this might be one of those neat exploitation films from the 70's or something like it. Not even close. No one dies. There is a lame gunfight between creaky Stuart Whitman and officious George DiCenzo, one year prior to his grand performance as the prosecuting attorney Bugliosa in Helter Skelter. The gunfight has all the suspense of watching a waterfall. There is one punch and one head hit with a blunt instrument. Beyond that nothing in terms of action. And as for the girls, don't expect much there either. Stella and her girls(both very mediocre yet pretty talents, get in a sauna and a bath. What do we see? Nothing but a fleeting side profile. Stella wears these nice open blouses accentuating her real talents, but I wish she would have been a bit more open with her performance. That way I could write one thing that would recommend the film. Alas, it was not to be, and I have little to say in this film's favor. It isn't a horrible film in any way, it just has nothing going for it either. YAWN. --------------------------------------------- Result 2043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This film is about a man who has been too [[caught]] up with the [[accepted]] [[convention]] of [[success]], trying to be ever upwardly [[mobile]], [[working]] hard so that he [[could]] be [[proud]] of [[owning]] his own [[home]]. He assumes this is all there is to [[life]] until he accidentally [[takes]] up dancing, all because he wanted to get a [[closer]] look of a [[beautiful]] girl that he sees by the dance studio [[everyday]] while riding the subway on his [[way]] [[home]].

His was infatuated with her at first, [[going]] to the [[dance]] class just to idolize her, but he eventually [[lets]] himself go and gets himself into the dancing. It eventually becomes apparent to him that there is more to life than working yourself to death. There is a set of oddball [[characters]] also learning in the studio, giving the [[film]] a [[lot]] of [[laughs]] and some sense of bonding between the dejected.

There is also revelations of various [[characters]], including the girl he initially admired, giving some [[depth]] to them by showing their blemished past and their [[struggle]] to overcome it.

The dancing was also engaging, with the [[big]] [[competition]] at the [[end]], but it is not the usual story where our underdog come out at the [[top]] by winning it. [[Instead]], there are downfalls, revelations and redemption.

All these makes it a moving and fun [[film]] to watch. This film is about a man who has been too [[capturing]] up with the [[recognize]] [[conventions]] of [[accomplishments]], trying to be ever upwardly [[laptop]], [[collaborating]] hard so that he [[did]] be [[prideful]] of [[possessing]] his own [[domicile]]. He assumes this is all there is to [[lives]] until he accidentally [[pick]] up dancing, all because he wanted to get a [[tightest]] look of a [[glamorous]] girl that he sees by the dance studio [[routine]] while riding the subway on his [[route]] [[house]].

His was infatuated with her at first, [[go]] to the [[choreography]] class just to idolize her, but he eventually [[enable]] himself go and gets himself into the dancing. It eventually becomes apparent to him that there is more to life than working yourself to death. There is a set of oddball [[features]] also learning in the studio, giving the [[flick]] a [[lots]] of [[giggling]] and some sense of bonding between the dejected.

There is also revelations of various [[nature]], including the girl he initially admired, giving some [[depths]] to them by showing their blemished past and their [[tussle]] to overcome it.

The dancing was also engaging, with the [[gargantuan]] [[contests]] at the [[terminating]], but it is not the usual story where our underdog come out at the [[supreme]] by winning it. [[Alternatively]], there are downfalls, revelations and redemption.

All these makes it a moving and fun [[movies]] to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] First, it takes a full half hour to get Hackman out of [[jail]] and to start doing the [[job]]. What a waste of time, we all know Hackman is getting out to do some job for his masters, why waste almost a third of the movie on these sequences. Then Hackman stays in a hotel and the story arc again goes [[nowhere]], [[simply]] [[proving]] to us that Hackman is under close watch and anything he says or does is know by the [[masters]]. Again, another 20 minutes. Then more wasted [[time]] showing the reunion with his [[wife]]. All of this should have [[taken]] 10-15 [[minutes]] at most simply as a set-up for the real action, intrigue and plot twists. By the time the real action gets going, I was so [[bored]] that I just wanted the movie to end. Hackman is great as usual, and the other actors as well, but this is a dud of the first [[magnitude]]. First, it takes a full half hour to get Hackman out of [[imprisonment]] and to start doing the [[labour]]. What a waste of time, we all know Hackman is getting out to do some job for his masters, why waste almost a third of the movie on these sequences. Then Hackman stays in a hotel and the story arc again goes [[everywhere]], [[straightforward]] [[showing]] to us that Hackman is under close watch and anything he says or does is know by the [[maestro]]. Again, another 20 minutes. Then more wasted [[period]] showing the reunion with his [[femme]]. All of this should have [[picked]] 10-15 [[mins]] at most simply as a set-up for the real action, intrigue and plot twists. By the time the real action gets going, I was so [[drilled]] that I just wanted the movie to end. Hackman is great as usual, and the other actors as well, but this is a dud of the first [[greatness]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ((NB: Spoiler warning, such as it is!))

First off, this is a teen slasher flick -- the Spam-In-A-Cabin genre, as Joe Bob Briggs piquantly put it. If you're looking for Roshambo, this isn't it and wasn't going to BE it. I'm desperately unimpressed by stabs at its cinematography, directing or acting performances.

Secondly, this wasn't Zuniga's first horror flick, it was her first screen appearance period, cinema, TV, whatever. For what it is worth; neither is Daphne Zuniga Susan Sarandon or Katherine Hepburn.

Thirdly, you have to give even a lame slasher flick props. Sure, it follows the deeply insulting formulaic message of its genre: any young woman having or showing interest in sex is beef on the hoof, and the harvest time is now.

Except this one gives the chop to the sweet, virginal protagonist as well! Now THERE is a mediocre teen death film that has the courage of its convictions! Interesting that this was said ingenue's only film role. Another One Hit Wonder, except that term gives the lass too much credit.

(Then again, this film probably has one of the highest percentage of one-movie actors in history. Of the nineteen credited actors, a whopping thirteen never appeared in any other film. Three appeared in one other movie by the same producers. Only one other besides Zuniga has as many as six screen credits. What was this, the Has Been And Never Were Mutual Aid Society?)

Granted, I saw this a long time ago on late night cable when I was bored and never anticipate being that bored in my life again, but I see no reason to hunt down everyone involved and toss them in the incinerator with Joanne.

2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Surely]] no [[Saturday]] morning [[TV]] kids' [[show]] was ever done this poorly. [[After]] all, those producers had to [[count]] on the [[audience]] coming back. Well, in this [[awful]] offering, they [[could]] at [[least]] [[count]] the [[money]] they [[saved]] on sets. The [[script]] could have been a reject from some long-forgotten space [[opera]] [[serial]], with a few smarmy lines [[added]] for cool-dude Gerald Mohr to [[murmur]] to Naura [[Hayden]]. [[No]] [[director]] [[could]] have [[done]] [[anything]] [[decent]] with such a [[loony]] storyline, so the action just plods boringly along. The spaceship props are absurd--a Bulova [[wall]] [[clock]] and [[portable]] typewriter, for example--but the [[planet]] sets have [[got]] to be some of the [[worst]] in cinematic history. Most are [[crude]] drawings, and it's all bathed in an [[often]] misfocused red light. [[Even]] Mohr's bare hairy [[chest]] is [[used]] as a prop. And it's a [[bad]] one--as rib-thin as the plot. Any viewer who can [[make]] it to the [[end]] of this [[movie]] will [[hear]] a message from the Martians--and will [[probably]] agree [[completely]]! [[Probably]] no [[Saturdays]] morning [[TELEVISION]] kids' [[demonstrating]] was ever done this poorly. [[Upon]] all, those producers had to [[comte]] on the [[viewers]] coming back. Well, in this [[scary]] offering, they [[did]] at [[less]] [[counting]] the [[cash]] they [[saves]] on sets. The [[screenplay]] could have been a reject from some long-forgotten space [[drama]] [[serials]], with a few smarmy lines [[adds]] for cool-dude Gerald Mohr to [[breath]] to Naura [[Haydn]]. [[Nos]] [[superintendent]] [[wo]] have [[accomplished]] [[something]] [[presentable]] with such a [[wacky]] storyline, so the action just plods boringly along. The spaceship props are absurd--a Bulova [[mur]] [[timer]] and [[cellular]] typewriter, for example--but the [[planets]] sets have [[gets]] to be some of the [[hardest]] in cinematic history. Most are [[rough]] drawings, and it's all bathed in an [[frequently]] misfocused red light. [[Yet]] Mohr's bare hairy [[torso]] is [[utilized]] as a prop. And it's a [[wicked]] one--as rib-thin as the plot. Any viewer who can [[deliver]] it to the [[ends]] of this [[cinematography]] will [[listen]] a message from the Martians--and will [[indubitably]] agree [[perfectly]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2047 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[false]] note. All the acting is [[superb]]. As [[Dani]], Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and superbly directed and edited film, I felt like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have watched this movie at least 5 times, and can honestly say that it is one of the single best movies ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. This "coming of age" film deals with the experiences of two young girls, Dani and Maureen, as they learn about life and love one fateful summer.

Directed by Robert Mulligan, famous for his superb work in "To Kill a Mockingbird," the film never hits a [[fallacious]] note. All the acting is [[funky]]. As [[Danny]], Reese Witherspoon makes a stunning film debut. Watching this beautifully photographed and superbly directed and edited film, I felt like I was looking through a window to reality, rather than watching a movie.

I have watched this movie at least 5 times, and can honestly say that it is one of the single best movies ever made about being young, being in love, and going through the feelings, challenges, and changes of young adulthood. Families with children between 10 and 15 should watch it together, and use it as a discussion piece, as it raises a number of issues about sibling rivalry, how to deal with being in love, the responsibilities of a parent, etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] There are many illnesses born in the mind of man which have been given life in modern times. Constant vigilance or [[accrued]] information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, [[counselors]] and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these mental phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[premise]] of the film entitled " The Night Listner." It tells the [[story]] of a popular radio host called Gabriel Noon ([[Robin]] [[Williams]]) who spends his evenings [[enthralling]] his audiences with [[vivid]] stories about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and reaches out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual abuse at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is captivated and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure Robin Williams and were it not for Toni [[Collette]] who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Sandra]] [[Oh]] as Anna and John Cullum as pop, this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more [[serious]] performances. *** There are many illnesses born in the mind of man which have been given life in modern times. Constant vigilance or [[accumulated]] information in the realm of Pyschosis, have kept psychologists, [[counselor]] and psychiatrists busy with enough work to last them decades. Occasionally, some of these mental phenomenon are discover by those with no knowledge of their remedy or even of their existence. That is the [[prerequisite]] of the film entitled " The Night Listner." It tells the [[conte]] of a popular radio host called Gabriel Noon ([[Robyn]] [[William]]) who spends his evenings [[mesmerizing]] his audiences with [[lifelike]] stories about Gay lifestyles. Perhaps its because his show is losing it's authentic veneer which causes Noon to admit he is no longer himself. Feeling abandoned by both his lover Jess (Bobby Cannavale) and his and best friend (Joe Morton), he seeks shelter in his deepening despair and isolation. It is here, a mysterious voice in the night asks him for help. Noon needs to feel useful and reaches out to the desperate voice which belongs to a 14 year old boy called Peter (Rory Culkin). In reading the boy's harrowing manuscript which depicts the early life and sexual abuse at the hands of his brutal parents, Noon is captivated and wants to help. However, things are not what they seem and Noon soon finds himself en-wrapped in an elusive and bizarre tale torn right out of a medical nightmare. This movie is pure Robin Williams and were it not for Toni [[Colette]] who plays Donna D. Logand, [[Sondra]] [[Aaaah]] as Anna and John Cullum as pop, this might be comical. Instead, this may prove to be one of William's more [[severe]] performances. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you ask?...well see this one and maybe it will [[make]] more [[sense]].. Hitchcock never [[blended]] scenes together better....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[get]] that scattered feeling you [[sometimes]] get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[sense]] that the characters will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[disappoint]] you when they do. Screenwriter/[[Producer]] Phil Hay's [[surreal]] tale of [[life]], [[blended]] with an [[absolutely]] [[superb]] soundtrack makes you [[think]] more about the 6 degrees of separation in [[life]] than the movie by the same title...I will be looking for more good things from this [[producer]] in the [[future]]. OK so a 10 for a 2 1/2 star movie you ask?...well see this one and maybe it will [[deliver]] more [[sensing]].. Hitchcock never [[blending]] scenes together better....The film weaves scenes together flawlessly from the start and yet you don't [[gets]] that scattered feeling you [[intermittently]] get when a movie runs you through the many characters it attempts to develop. You [[feeling]] that the characters will show you something unusual about themselves and then they don't [[defraud]] you when they do. Screenwriter/[[Manufacturers]] Phil Hay's [[bizarre]] tale of [[lifetime]], [[mixing]] with an [[totally]] [[sumptuous]] soundtrack makes you [[believing]] more about the 6 degrees of separation in [[vida]] than the movie by the same title...I will be looking for more good things from this [[manufacturers]] in the [[futur]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2050 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that [[even]] the writer/director could provide no answer. At the question and answer session after the screening, Mr. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using [[actors]] with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a [[reason]] to create a [[film]]. Actors are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger [[vision]] - a larger vision that seemed muddled at best and absent at worst.

Crispin Glover also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The film seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The film doesn't even give me an indicator of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't even afford to make the taboo disturbing or inciting on any level because he hasn't made the audience care in any way.

Ignoring problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that actually shocked me most was how poorly the film was put together. The editing, cinematography, and other technical aspects seemed frequently to be extremely amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the movie, and I feel that the money should have been spent on different designers (Glover actually did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The painted sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a photographed stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed like a sort of Home Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the biggest problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even understand how seriously the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is screaming at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. I saw Crispin Glover's "What Is It?" at the Ann Arbor film festival. Admittedly, the film was at least aptly named, because I got the distinct sense that [[yet]] the writer/director could provide no answer. At the question and answer session after the screening, Mr. Glover said that the film was originally meant to be a short film to show the virtue of using [[players]] with down-syndrome. However, this is in itself not enough of a [[motif]] to create a [[cinematography]]. Actors are, in my opinion, building blocks for a larger [[insight]] - a larger vision that seemed muddled at best and absent at worst.

Crispin Glover also said that he wanted to address taboo subjects. Well, he does do that. But why? The film seems to have no stance, no reason for addressing anything. Does he feel these things shouldn't be taboo? The film doesn't even give me an indicator of that. Taboo for the sake of taboo is not interesting. It can't even afford to make the taboo disturbing or inciting on any level because he hasn't made the audience care in any way.

Ignoring problems with the concept for a moment, the thing that actually shocked me most was how poorly the film was put together. The editing, cinematography, and other technical aspects seemed frequently to be extremely amateur. Glover said 125-150 thousand dollars went into the movie, and I feel that the money should have been spent on different designers (Glover actually did some design himself - I know I saw at least sound design in the credits). The painted sets are okay (not great), but used poorly. Parts feel like a photographed stage play - which would be fine if that went to any sort of purpose, but in Glover's hands it just feels sloppy. Other parts are filmed like a sort of Home Movie, of inferior quality to a lot of the stuff I see first-time filmmakers do on iMovie.

Perhaps the biggest problem with "What Is It?" is I can't even understand how seriously the film is to be taken. There are some parts that feel like Glover is screaming at you to think seriously. At other points, he seems off on his own little joke. Perhaps he meant for this to be ironic, or meaningful in some way, but I just felt that Glover couldn't even get himself to give his film any sort of serious attention.

Glover said he originally wanted it to be a short film. If only it had been. At seventy-two minutes, the film runs out of imagery and ideas in the first twenty, and it is arguable if the ideas were formulated enough to claim that they were even there for that period of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] This movie was great the first time I saw it, when it was called "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill Murray turned into an eccentric black man played by Morgan Freeman, Scarlett Johansson turned into a cranky Latino woman played by Paz Vega, and Tokyo, Japan turned into Carson, California. [[Instead]] of meaningful conversations and silence we enjoyed in Translation, we get [[meaningless]] blabbering in 10 Items that verges on annoying. Instead of [[characters]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that spew [[pointless]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most annoying part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a hurry to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less lists of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to yell at them saying, "Didn't you say you had somewhere to be? What the heck are doing? A minute ago you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never truly understood how something could "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and unsympathetic…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. This movie was great the first time I saw it, when it was called "Lost in Translation." But somehow Bill Murray turned into an eccentric black man played by Morgan Freeman, Scarlett Johansson turned into a cranky Latino woman played by Paz Vega, and Tokyo, Japan turned into Carson, California. [[However]] of meaningful conversations and silence we enjoyed in Translation, we get [[unnecessary]] blabbering in 10 Items that verges on annoying. Instead of [[hallmarks]] that were pensive and introspective as in Translation, we get characters that spew [[dispensable]] advice on topics they have no clue about. How can a character that wears hundred dollar T-shirts and has never been inside a Target department store expect to give advice to a working-class woman on how to prepare for a job interview as an administrative assistant? Don't think that stops him. If he isn't giving her clothing advice, he's telling her what she should eat. The most annoying part of the movie for me was how supposedly they were in a hurry to make an appointment, and yet the characters keep finding time to run another errand, be it washing the car, stopping at Arby's, or just laying around to list off their 10 Items or Less lists of things they love and hate. I kept wanting to yell at them saying, "Didn't you say you had somewhere to be? What the heck are doing? A minute ago you were practically late, now you're eating roast beef and pondering your lives!" Until I saw this movie, I never truly understood how something could "insist upon itself," but I think this movie does exactly that, and undeservedly so. The dialogue makes the characters cheesy and unsympathetic…with the exception that I felt sorry for both of the actors for having signed onto this project. --------------------------------------------- Result 2052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Possibly]] the most [[brilliant]] [[thing]] about Che: Part Two, as we begin to [[integrate]] it with Part One in our minds, is that there is no [[clarification]] of why Che chose to confidentially abscond from Cuba after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no [[clarification]] of why he chose Bolivia as his subsequent setting for a coup d'etat, no allusion to the political decisions he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has given prominent familiarity. Extraordinary focus is given to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet hardly any endeavor is made to single them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

In Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible dedication. There are remarkable sporadic visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these men live for weeks at a time, and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria part of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's producers, gives a champion's performance, not least because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge like most epic heroes. In Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he falls to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called insane. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively within those means. [[Conceivably]] the most [[lustrous]] [[stuff]] about Che: Part Two, as we begin to [[embed]] it with Part One in our minds, is that there is no [[clarify]] of why Che chose to confidentially abscond from Cuba after the revolution, no allusion to his experience in the Congo, no [[detail]] of why he chose Bolivia as his subsequent setting for a coup d'etat, no allusion to the political decisions he made as a young man motorcycling across South America, which Walter Salles has given prominent familiarity. Extraordinary focus is given to Che meeting the volunteers who accompany his guerrilla factions. Yet hardly any endeavor is made to single them out as individuals, to establish involved relationships. He is reasonably unreasonable. Che drives an unbreakable doctrine to leave no wounded man behind. But there is no feeling that he is deeply directly concerned with his men. It is the concept.

In Part 1, in Cuba, the rebels are welcomed by the people of the villages, given food and cover, supported in what grows to be a victorious revolution. Here, in Bolivia, not much understanding is apparent. Villagers expose him. They protect government troops, not his own. When he expounds on the onesidedness of the government medical system, his audience appears uninterested. You cannot lead a people into revolution if they do not want to comply. Soderbergh shows U.S. military advisers working with the Bolivians, but doesn't fault the United States for Che's collapse. Che seems to have just misfigured his fight and the place where he wanted to have it.

In showcasing both wars, Soderbergh doesn't build his battle scenes as actions with specific results. Che's men attack and are attacked. They exchange fire with faraway assailants. There is generally a cut to the group in the aftershock of combat, its death toll not paused for. This is not a war movie. It is about one man's reasonably unreasonable drive to endure. There is no elaborate cinematography. Soderbergh looks firmly at Che's inflexible dedication. There are remarkable sporadic visceral shots, but being few they are all the more powerful, such as Che's POV shot during his final beats. There is an abundance of the terrain, where these men live for weeks at a time, and the all-consuming effect is of languor, Guevara himself having malaria part of the time.

Benicio Del Toro, one of the film's producers, gives a champion's performance, not least because it's modest. He isn't portrayed as the cutting edge like most epic heroes. In Cuba, he arises in conquest, in Bolivia, he falls to the reverse, and occasionally is actually difficult to distinguish behind a tangle of beard and hair. Del Toro illustrates not so much an identity as an attitude. You may think the film is too long. I think there's a genuine cause for its breadth. Guevara's affairs in Cuba and particularly Bolivia was not a sequence of episodes and sketches, but an undertaking of staying power that might virtually be called insane. In the end, Che as a whole or in parts is a commercially ballsy movie, one where its director begins by understanding the limits innate in cinematic biography and working progressively within those means. --------------------------------------------- Result 2053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] This movie should have been named Need For [[Speed]]: The Movie. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Speed]] is mostly about hot [[cars]] and beautiful [[women]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only [[thing]] about this movie that was A-Level were the cars. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost [[nonexistent]]. I only really watched this movie to see how [[bad]] it was and, while it was pretty [[bad]], it could have been worse. And at least it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. This movie should have been named Need For [[Speeds]]: The Movie. For those who have not played the games Need For [[Quickens]] is mostly about hot [[auto]] and beautiful [[mujer]] and almost no plot. This applies perfectly to Redline. The only [[stuff]] about this movie that was A-Level were the cars. The acting seemed forced and scripted, the premise was flimsy at best, and the plot was almost [[absent]]. I only really watched this movie to see how [[inclement]] it was and, while it was pretty [[inclement]], it could have been worse. And at least it was entertaining. I just wish they had showed Eddie Griffin crashing the Enzo somewhere in the movie. All in all, don't pay for it, don't go out of your way to see it, but if it's on Showtime or HBO and there isn't anything else on, it's a decent distraction. --------------------------------------------- Result 2054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Veteran director and producer Allan Dwan, whose huge string of films includes both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently shown (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") [[tried]] his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of singers with little past film experience and, as it turned out, virtually no future, he spun a fictional and in no small [[part]] offensive story about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

Bill Shirley is the young, lovestruck Foster whose kindness to slaves includes giving the money saved for an engagement ring to pay the hospital cost for an injured little black boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel Lawrence) whose pesky younger sister, Jeanie (Eileen Christy), is slowly realizing she's in love with the nearly impecunious song-smith. Foster is in love with Inez who is revolted by the composer's Number 1 on the Levee Hit Parade Tune, "O Susannah." Enter minstrel Edwin P.Christy (Ray Middleton) to help launch the profit-making phase of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film standards of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed fakes with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the Foster songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal whitewash of the antebellum South. The biggest number features black-face for all on stage, an historical anomaly and a contemporary piece of unthinking racism. Were these portrayals of blacks anywhere near reality, the abolitionists would be rightly condemned for interfering with so beneficent an institution.

"I Dream of Jeanie" apparently sank into the studio's vault with barely a death whisper. Now revived by Alpha Video for a mere $4.99 it's a period piece with charming songs and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who wore their bed linen to the theater. Veteran director and producer Allan Dwan, whose huge string of films includes both the utterly forgettable and the recurrently shown (for example, John Wayne in "Sands of Iwo Jima") [[strived]] his hand at a big musical with "I Dream of Jeanie." Harnessing a lead cast of singers with little past film experience and, as it turned out, virtually no future, he spun a fictional and in no small [[party]] offensive story about the great American songwriter, Stephen Foster.

Bill Shirley is the young, lovestruck Foster whose kindness to slaves includes giving the money saved for an engagement ring to pay the hospital cost for an injured little black boy. His intended is Inez McDowell (Muriel Lawrence) whose pesky younger sister, Jeanie (Eileen Christy), is slowly realizing she's in love with the nearly impecunious song-smith. Foster is in love with Inez who is revolted by the composer's Number 1 on the Levee Hit Parade Tune, "O Susannah." Enter minstrel Edwin P.Christy (Ray Middleton) to help launch the profit-making phase of Foster's career.

This is, by the musical-film standards of the early Fifties, a big production. The sets are lavish in that special Hollywood way that portrayed fakes with all the trimmings. The singers aren't half bad and the Foster songs are almost impossible to ruin.

But this is also a literal whitewash of the antebellum South. The biggest number features black-face for all on stage, an historical anomaly and a contemporary piece of unthinking racism. Were these portrayals of blacks anywhere near reality, the abolitionists would be rightly condemned for interfering with so beneficent an institution.

"I Dream of Jeanie" apparently sank into the studio's vault with barely a death whisper. Now revived by Alpha Video for a mere $4.99 it's a period piece with charming songs and repulsive sentimentalizing about the victims of America's great crime, slavery.

This was what Hollywood was putting out two years before Brown v. Board of Education. Must have warmed the hearts of some moviegoers who wore their bed linen to the theater. --------------------------------------------- Result 2055 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This movie is the [[best]] horror movie, bar-none.I [[love]] how [[Stanley]] just dumps the women into the lake.I have been a fan of Judd Nelson's work for many years, and he [[blew]] me away. Its a blend of horror, and drama ,and romance, not so much [[comedy]]. His evil, yet charming look [[captured]] me right then and there. That look in his eyes, I will never [[forget]]. There's something about him, I cant describe. This movie is the [[optimum]] horror movie, bar-none.I [[iike]] how [[Stan]] just dumps the women into the lake.I have been a fan of Judd Nelson's work for many years, and he [[farted]] me away. Its a blend of horror, and drama ,and romance, not so much [[humor]]. His evil, yet charming look [[apprehended]] me right then and there. That look in his eyes, I will never [[overlook]]. There's something about him, I cant describe. --------------------------------------------- Result 2056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is a wonderful movie with a [[fun]], clever story and the dynamics of [[culture]] [[differences]] and the running [[theme]] of what's important in [[life]] make this a very under-appreciated movie. Don't [[let]] the cynics of the world [[deter]] you from [[seeing]] this. Keaton has [[wonderful]] [[moments]] and I wonder at the fact that [[comedy]] is never appreciated, because [[actors]] like Keaton make [[going]] from [[humor]] to [[serious]] bits [[look]] [[tremendously]] easy. [[Great]] movie all around! This is a wonderful movie with a [[droll]], clever story and the dynamics of [[cultivation]] [[discrepancy]] and the running [[thematic]] of what's important in [[lives]] make this a very under-appreciated movie. Don't [[leaving]] the cynics of the world [[dampen]] you from [[see]] this. Keaton has [[marvelous]] [[times]] and I wonder at the fact that [[travesty]] is never appreciated, because [[actresses]] like Keaton make [[go]] from [[mood]] to [[grievous]] bits [[gaze]] [[unimaginably]] easy. [[Whopping]] movie all around! --------------------------------------------- Result 2057 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Well, one has to [[give]] the director credit for how [[gutsy]] he was. Gutsy [[would]] be the right term. Not only did he [[use]] a [[total]] [[cast]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he also [[decided]] to use sub-par [[special]] effects with a confusing and [[boring]] plot, he also, and I AM NOT kidding, put a warning at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]] that you [[might]] DIE [[OF]] [[FRIGHT]]!!! However, they do [[promise]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a creepy [[limping]] [[gardener]] is always a good move. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery [[Science]] [[Theater]] 3000, you might've seen this. They [[like]] to [[showcase]] [[horrible]] movies, just to let you know.

A good gift for [[someone]] you [[hate]]. Well, one has to [[lend]] the director credit for how [[heroic]] he was. Gutsy [[could]] be the right term. Not only did he [[used]] a [[overall]] [[casting]] of five people (no extras at ALL), but he also [[opted]] to use sub-par [[specific]] effects with a confusing and [[bore]] plot, he also, and I AM NOT kidding, put a warning at the [[commencing]] of the [[films]] that you [[presumably]] DIE [[TO]] [[PANIC]]!!! However, they do [[promises]] a FREEEEEE COOOOFFFFFFFIIIIINNNNN. To have a creepy [[hobbling]] [[gardiner]] is always a good move. Yaaa-unique-aaawwwwnnn....

If you watch Mystery [[Veda]] [[Teatro]] 3000, you might've seen this. They [[loves]] to [[illustrate]] [[gruesome]] movies, just to let you know.

A good gift for [[everyone]] you [[hating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2058 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This is a [[brilliant]] documentary that follows the life of Herge and his [[creating]] TinTin. Its based [[around]] a [[series]] of [[interviews]] [[conducted]] in 1971, and covers [[every]] [[thing]] from his early life and "[[Nazi]] [[collaboration]]" to the final [[moments]] of his life.

Brilliantly edited, very [[cinematic]] and [[fast]] paced [[enough]] to not [[get]] boring. This [[film]] will give you a [[new]] [[appreciation]] for the [[work]] of Herge.

The [[film]] [[makers]] [[make]] the [[film]] more than just another [[documentary]]. [[Using]] the latest [[state]] of the art [[technology]] and for a change putting it to good [[use]].

Recently more and more [[documentaries]] have been making it to [[cinemas]]. But this one as to be amongst the [[best]]... This is a [[shiny]] documentary that follows the life of Herge and his [[establish]] TinTin. Its based [[about]] a [[serials]] of [[conversations]] [[implemented]] in 1971, and covers [[any]] [[stuff]] from his early life and "[[Nazis]] [[work]]" to the final [[times]] of his life.

Brilliantly edited, very [[cinematography]] and [[prompt]] paced [[adequately]] to not [[gets]] boring. This [[filmmaking]] will give you a [[novo]] [[acknowledgement]] for the [[jobs]] of Herge.

The [[movie]] [[manufacturer]] [[deliver]] the [[cinematographic]] more than just another [[documentation]]. [[Utilized]] the latest [[sate]] of the art [[technician]] and for a change putting it to good [[employs]].

Recently more and more [[literature]] have been making it to [[halls]]. But this one as to be amongst the [[nicest]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This is another North East Florida production, filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley Plantation. I was rather surprised the company was able to take over the main street of Fernandina Beach as long as was necessary to achieve the street scenes. The film is pretty, and pretty [[bad]]. Tami Erin is cute, but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small kids, or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. This is another North East Florida production, filmed mainly in and near by to Fernandina Beach and the Kingsley Plantation. I was rather surprised the company was able to take over the main street of Fernandina Beach as long as was necessary to achieve the street scenes. The film is pretty, and pretty [[wicked]]. Tami Erin is cute, but overacts. Eileen Brennan overacts even more. Good for small kids, or for those who like fluff in large doses. A 4 from the Miller-Movies formula. --------------------------------------------- Result 2060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] [[Remembering]] the dirty [[particulars]] of this insidiously vapid "[[movie]]" is akin to [[digging]] into your [[chest]] cavity with a rusty, salted spoon. Perhaps "[[Home]] [[Alone]] 2: Lost in [[New]] York" (1992) was a [[bit]] on the predictable side, but this [[pathetic]] excuse for a [[film]] is just one of the most [[shameless]] [[bids]] at commercialization I have ever [[heard]] of. A boy [[fighting]] off [[spies]]/[[terrorists]] when he's [[home]] [[alone]] in a Chicago [[suburb]] with the chickenpox? [[Ridiculous]]! Why did this [[film]] have to be [[made]]? I am the [[kind]] of [[person]] who [[believes]] [[even]] [[terrible]] [[movies]] are not wastes of [[time]], but [[rather]] [[learning]] [[experiences]]. [[However]], this is actually a [[waste]] of [[time]]. It should be [[avoided]] at all [[costs]]. [[Recalls]] the dirty [[details]] of this insidiously vapid "[[films]]" is akin to [[excavated]] into your [[torso]] cavity with a rusty, salted spoon. Perhaps "[[Household]] [[Single]] 2: Lost in [[Nouveau]] York" (1992) was a [[bitten]] on the predictable side, but this [[deplorable]] excuse for a [[films]] is just one of the most [[cheeky]] [[tender]] at commercialization I have ever [[listened]] of. A boy [[struggling]] off [[espionage]]/[[terrorism]] when he's [[household]] [[lonely]] in a Chicago [[suburbia]] with the chickenpox? [[Absurd]]! Why did this [[cinematography]] have to be [[brought]]? I am the [[genus]] of [[persona]] who [[sees]] [[yet]] [[harrowing]] [[kino]] are not wastes of [[times]], but [[quite]] [[learnt]] [[experiment]]. [[Yet]], this is actually a [[wastes]] of [[period]]. It should be [[avoid]] at all [[charges]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2061 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[In]] a lot of his films ([[Citizen]] Kane, Confidential [[Report]], Touch of evil) Orson [[Welles]] [[gave]] him the role of an [[exuberant]] [[men]]. [[In]] "The Lady from Shanghai" it's the only time I see him holding the role of the victim. The role of the [[culprit]], he [[gave]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[guess]] it's because he was in [[love]] with her. Therefore, it's an interesting [[film]]. But I [[find]] the [[story]] [[excellent]] too. The direction is [[genius]], as [[usual]] with [[Welles]] : two scenes are [[particularly]] [[brilliant]]: the one in the aquarium and the [[final]] one with the [[mirrors]]. This [[film]] is [[brilliant]].(10/10) [[For]] a lot of his films ([[Civic]] Kane, Confidential [[Reporting]], Touch of evil) Orson [[Orson]] [[delivered]] him the role of an [[lush]] [[males]]. [[During]] "The Lady from Shanghai" it's the only time I see him holding the role of the victim. The role of the [[culpability]], he [[delivered]] it to Rita Hayworth, I [[imagine]] it's because he was in [[likes]] with her. Therefore, it's an interesting [[movie]]. But I [[unearth]] the [[histories]] [[magnifique]] too. The direction is [[genie]], as [[normal]] with [[Orson]] : two scenes are [[namely]] [[shiny]]: the one in the aquarium and the [[latter]] one with the [[mirror]]. This [[filmmaking]] is [[resplendent]].(10/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[BAD]] films from the 70's made with no actors of any note, an [[embarrassing]] script, woeful direction, and a tireless [[desire]] to fuse "horror" with light comedy. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather scarce here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very least, the lake is beautiful. ... and how they bore you right out of your mind! The Crater Lake Monster is one of the classic [[MALA]] films from the 70's made with no actors of any note, an [[distracting]] script, woeful direction, and a tireless [[willingness]] to fuse "horror" with light comedy. This movie introduces a paleontologist who finds drawings of an aquatic dinosaur underneath Crater Lake...a meteor falls from the sky, and an aquatic dinosaur of the claymation variety begins to terrorize and eat the inhabitants surrounding Crater Lake. The whole matter is taken care of by Steve our local sheriff. Much of the film - when not showing pools of blood left behind from what we imagine must have been the beast dining - is spent following the bumbling antic of two guys named Arnie and Mitch who run a boat rental place. They try so bad to be funny, that we get lines like, looking at a business sign, Mitch saying to Arnie "You spelled bait wrong, it's spelled B-A-T-E." The laughs were rather scarce here. We then see them get drunk together and imagine a tree trunk to be the dinosaur. Laurel and Hardy watch out! The dinosaur looks fake, but the movie is fun in a bad way. And at the very least, the lake is beautiful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's a shame this movie is so hard to get your hands on in the US. I found it through a rare video dealer, and it was certainly worth it. This is, without a doubt, the best film made during the pre-code era, and the finest film of the 1930s. Masterful director Frank Borzage made wonderful films about the Depression, and with MAN'S CASTLE he created a fairy tale amidst the hardships of the era.

Loretta Young and Spencer Tracy have a wonderful chemistry between them, and they help make this movie a wonderful romance. Young's Trina is sweet and hopeful, while Tracy's Bill is gruff and closed-off. The dynamic between the character creates one of the most difficult, but in the end rewarding relationships on film.

MAN'S CASTLE is the most soft-focus pre-code film I've seen. Borzage uses the hazy and dreamy technique to turn the squatter's village where Bill and Trina live into a palace. The hardships of the Depression are never ignored, in fact they're integral to the film. But as Borzage crafts the film as a soft focus fairy tale, the love between the characters makes the situation seem less harsh. It makes the film warm and affectionate.

MAN'S CASTLE is the crowning achievement of the pre-code era. If only more people could see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] This is a really [[fun]], breezy, light hearted romantic comedy. You cannot go wrong with Meg Ryan's cute perkiness combined with Albert Einstein's genius. Normally, I'm not a fan of completely fabricated fictional tales about actual people, now deceased and not able to defend themselves, but I [[think]] the late Einstein might himself have [[gotten]] a [[chuckle]] out of this one.

It's the 1950's...Princeton, New Jersey in the spring. The story revolves around a pretty, young, scatter brained mathematician, Catherine (Meg Ryan), who is all set to marry a stuffy jerk, a behavioral researcher named James, merely because he has the brains she's looking for in the father of her future children. However, it's love at first sight when her car breaks and she meets an auto mechanic named Ed (Tim Robbins). As she doesn't think Ed is intelligent enough, her uncle, none other than Albert Einstein, plays match maker, assisted in his endeavors by three mischievous cronies, all theoretical physicists. Uncle Albert must make Ed appear suitably smart, so concocts a charade portraying him as a physicist...naturally with amusing results.

Walter Matthau is his usual hilarious self, and pulls off the character of Einstein quite effectively. With his three professorial buddies, Kurt, Nathan, and Boris, a lot of laughs ensue. The real Einstein had a genuine human side and this film just takes it one (outrageous) step further. If you suspend all logic, you can almost imagine this silly story happening!

It might not be rocket science (despite its main character) but it is a wonderful sweet, refreshing movie. One of the [[best]] of the [[comedy]] romance [[genre]]. This is a really [[droll]], breezy, light hearted romantic comedy. You cannot go wrong with Meg Ryan's cute perkiness combined with Albert Einstein's genius. Normally, I'm not a fan of completely fabricated fictional tales about actual people, now deceased and not able to defend themselves, but I [[believing]] the late Einstein might himself have [[become]] a [[snicker]] out of this one.

It's the 1950's...Princeton, New Jersey in the spring. The story revolves around a pretty, young, scatter brained mathematician, Catherine (Meg Ryan), who is all set to marry a stuffy jerk, a behavioral researcher named James, merely because he has the brains she's looking for in the father of her future children. However, it's love at first sight when her car breaks and she meets an auto mechanic named Ed (Tim Robbins). As she doesn't think Ed is intelligent enough, her uncle, none other than Albert Einstein, plays match maker, assisted in his endeavors by three mischievous cronies, all theoretical physicists. Uncle Albert must make Ed appear suitably smart, so concocts a charade portraying him as a physicist...naturally with amusing results.

Walter Matthau is his usual hilarious self, and pulls off the character of Einstein quite effectively. With his three professorial buddies, Kurt, Nathan, and Boris, a lot of laughs ensue. The real Einstein had a genuine human side and this film just takes it one (outrageous) step further. If you suspend all logic, you can almost imagine this silly story happening!

It might not be rocket science (despite its main character) but it is a wonderful sweet, refreshing movie. One of the [[nicest]] of the [[farce]] romance [[genres]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is not a [[bad]] movie. It follows the new conventions of modern horror, that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress running for her life in the first scene. This movie [[takes]] the old convention of a psycho killer on he loose, and [[manage]] to do something new, and interesting with it. It is also always nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an example of what the [[genre]] has become. Cut [[hits]] all the marks, and is actually scary in some parts. I liked it I gave it an eight. This is not a [[amiss]] movie. It follows the new conventions of modern horror, that is the movie within a movie, the well known actress running for her life in the first scene. This movie [[pick]] the old convention of a psycho killer on he loose, and [[administer]] to do something new, and interesting with it. It is also always nice to see Molly Ringwald back for the attack.

So this might be an example of what the [[gender]] has become. Cut [[rattles]] all the marks, and is actually scary in some parts. I liked it I gave it an eight. --------------------------------------------- Result 2066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie deserves credit for its [[original]] approach. It combines elements of theater, film, and epic storytelling. [[Unfortunately]], it falls flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and epic elements without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[grave]] at this [[horrible]] [[adaptation]] which turns the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I found the movie unwatchable and an incredibly [[shabby]], disrespectful treatment of a beautiful story. This movie deserves credit for its [[upfront]] approach. It combines elements of theater, film, and epic storytelling. [[Sadly]], it falls flat on all levels. The films biggest weakness is it's unwillingness to commit to anything; it has camp, moralistic, and epic elements without ever committing to any of them. As for the story itself, Chretien de Troyes is spinning in his [[tombs]] at this [[scary]] [[coping]] which turns the lovable, unbearably innocent Percival into a most ungallant and rude churl.

Most likely two types of people will see this, francophiles or Arthuriophiles. Speaking as one of the latter, I found the movie unwatchable and an incredibly [[seedy]], disrespectful treatment of a beautiful story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Letters with no [[destination]] [[end]] up in another world found in the back rooms of the post office. Here, Alice manages to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A quiet little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video shop, overshadowed by fifty [[copies]] of that dreaded GODZILLA film. It's a shame because this turned out to be a [[satisfying]] film telling a [[brave]] tale with strong simple images and effective performances from the two leads. This film succeeds where [[Garry]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). Letters with no [[fates]] [[ending]] up in another world found in the back rooms of the post office. Here, Alice manages to land a job in hope of finding her lost father. What she does discover is the tormented soul of her boss, Frank. A quiet little Aussie flic that came and went at the cinema. Now you find it in the deep dark corner of the video shop, overshadowed by fifty [[copied]] of that dreaded GODZILLA film. It's a shame because this turned out to be a [[agreeable]] film telling a [[audacious]] tale with strong simple images and effective performances from the two leads. This film succeeds where [[Gari]] Marshall's other dead letter office flic DEAR GOD (1996 - USA) failed, and comes close to the brilliance of, not the Kevin Costner turkey, but He Jianjun's POSTMAN (1995 - China). --------------------------------------------- Result 2068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the final nail in the coffin of Goldcrest and thus the British Film Industry. The film is absolute [[pants]], it's full of music from the attempted mid-80's jazz revival and based on a book & author that was briefly popular at that time and has deservedly sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally uncaring film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[worst]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. Following the disasterous Revolution, this film was pretty much the final nail in the coffin of Goldcrest and thus the British Film Industry. The film is absolute [[shorts]], it's full of music from the attempted mid-80's jazz revival and based on a book & author that was briefly popular at that time and has deservedly sank back into obscurity. Temple searched for ages trying to find Suzette and came up with 8th Wonders Patsy Kensett another person who was briefly popular at the time. By the time the film came out of post production the Jazz revival was over, as was Kensett's career and the film met a totally uncaring film public.

Mediocre would be an overstatement for some of the [[gravest]]/campest/cheesiest acting to ever grace the British silver screen watching it almost 20 years on and the film is truely cringeworthy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] while watching this [[movie]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Pippi]] and every [[time]] was a real pleasure. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[real]] [[good]] [[laugh]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is terrible from beginning to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo [[bad]]. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to Pippi. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a broadcast. burn the movie and save the kids. if you want to look at Pippi then look at the original movie and have a good laugh. WE LOVE PIPPI INGER NILSSON, sorry Tami Erin you will never stand up to be Pippi.. Oh yes.. when read the "spoilers" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and robbing the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own risk.. it is really a waste of time... while watching this [[cinematography]] I got sick. I have been grewing up with [[Fifi]] and every [[moment]] was a real pleasure. when my wife came to Sweden she was looking at the oldies and had a [[true]] [[alright]] [[chuckles]]. but this American version should be renamed and never be shown again. it is terrible from beginning to it's end. how can they manage to make it soo [[inclement]]. well I guess someone blames the translation ha ha ha.. but they are never close to Pippi. may this movie never been seen again and never sent out on a broadcast. burn the movie and save the kids. if you want to look at Pippi then look at the original movie and have a good laugh. WE LOVE PIPPI INGER NILSSON, sorry Tami Erin you will never stand up to be Pippi.. Oh yes.. when read the "spoilers" explanation, "'spoiling' a surprise and robbing the viewer of the suspense and enjoyment of the film." well I guess the director stands for this... you are looking at this movie at your own risk.. it is really a waste of time... --------------------------------------------- Result 2070 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Every]] scene was put [[together]] [[perfectly]].This movie had a [[wonderful]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,none have and ever will exist. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[perfect]]! I [[saw]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[picking]] it up and bringing it [[home]] with me. You can [[call]] me a sappy romantic, but this movie just touched my heart, not to [[mention]] made me laugh with pleasure at the same time. Even though it made me cry,I admit, at the end, the whole movie just brightened up my outlook on life thereafter.I suggested to my horror, action, and pure humor movie buff of a brother,who absolutely adored this movie. This is a movie with a good sense of feeling.It could make you laugh out loud, touch your heart, make you fall in love,and enjoy your life.Every time you purposefully walk past this movie, just be aware that you are consciously making the choice to live and feel this inspiring movie.Who knows? What if it could really happen to you?, and keep your mind open to the mystical wonders of life. [[Any]] scene was put [[jointly]] [[altogether]].This movie had a [[sumptuous]] cast and crew. I mean, how can you have a bad movie with Robert Downey Jr. in it,none have and ever will exist. He has the ability to brighten up any movie with his amazing talent.This movie was [[faultless]]! I [[watched]] this movie sitting all alone on a movie shelf in "Blockbuster" and like it was calling out to me,I couldn't resist [[selecting]] it up and bringing it [[habitation]] with me. You can [[invitation]] me a sappy romantic, but this movie just touched my heart, not to [[cited]] made me laugh with pleasure at the same time. Even though it made me cry,I admit, at the end, the whole movie just brightened up my outlook on life thereafter.I suggested to my horror, action, and pure humor movie buff of a brother,who absolutely adored this movie. This is a movie with a good sense of feeling.It could make you laugh out loud, touch your heart, make you fall in love,and enjoy your life.Every time you purposefully walk past this movie, just be aware that you are consciously making the choice to live and feel this inspiring movie.Who knows? What if it could really happen to you?, and keep your mind open to the mystical wonders of life. --------------------------------------------- Result 2071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this one when I was seven or eight. I must have found the [[characters]] [[round]], because they [[left]] a impression in my mind that lasted for a [[long]] [[time]] after the [[end]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[sad]], well... for a 7-8 year [[old]] kid.

I had the opportunity of seeing this movie again lately, and found that the [[plot]] was too simple, the [[character]], two-dimensional... I guess it's the [[kind]] of [[movie]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[young]] [[child]]... [[Pity]]...

I [[recommend]] this one for all you parents with [[small]] [[kids]]... ( I [[saw]] it in its [[original]] [[french]] version, so I cannot [[tell]] you whether the [[translation]] is good or not.) I [[remind]] [[witnessing]] this one when I was seven or eight. I must have found the [[personage]] [[rounded]], because they [[gauche]] a impression in my mind that lasted for a [[protracted]] [[times]] after the [[terminating]] of the movie. And the ending, now that's [[regrettable]], well... for a 7-8 year [[former]] kid.

I had the opportunity of seeing this movie again lately, and found that the [[intrigue]] was too simple, the [[personage]], two-dimensional... I guess it's the [[sorting]] of [[flick]] that you can only with the innocence of a [[youthful]] [[infantile]]... [[Shame]]...

I [[recommending]] this one for all you parents with [[scant]] [[kiddies]]... ( I [[sawthe]] it in its [[upfront]] [[frenchman]] version, so I cannot [[say]] you whether the [[translating]] is good or not.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Jessica Simpson not only lacks any acting skill, but the script is incredibly shallow and lame. You actually hear serious dialogue that goes, "I love you more." "No, I love YOU more." I stopped watching the movie (online) after the first half hour, I couldn't take it anymore. Her "southern girl charm" just doesn't work and is really quite annoying; her attempts at slapstick humor fall flat and she delivers lines like she is reading the script right off the page.

Poor Luke Wilson. Did he not read the script before agreeing to do this, or did he fall for Papa Joe's (Jessica's dad and also the producer of the movie) promise of big profits? Hopefully he now knows better than to sign on to another movie like this. Luke Wilson is actually a good actor - I hate seeing the pained look on his face as he suffers through the bad dialogue.

Also, I think the previous commenter giving this movie an 8 out of 10 was probably either involved in the movie somehow or hired by Papa Joe to give the movie a better rating. No one in their right mind would actually find this movie engaging.

Jessica has lots of money, right? Maybe buy some acting lessons? --------------------------------------------- Result 2073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Saw]] this [[movie]] at the Rotterdam IFF. You [[may]] [[question]] some [[decisions]] of the [[maker]] - like [[choosing]] a mockumentary [[form]] for such a sensitive and [[horrible]] [[subject]] - but this [[movie]] sure [[hits]] you in the gut. [[Especially]] the [[last]] scenes were [[almost]] [[painful]] to watch. Hope it gets the distribution it [[deserves]]. [[Sawthe]] this [[cinematographic]] at the Rotterdam IFF. You [[maggio]] [[matter]] some [[rulings]] of the [[bringer]] - like [[opted]] a mockumentary [[shape]] for such a sensitive and [[atrocious]] [[topic]] - but this [[movies]] sure [[jolts]] you in the gut. [[Specially]] the [[final]] scenes were [[virtually]] [[hurtful]] to watch. Hope it gets the distribution it [[merited]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] [[Excellent]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. [[Glamorous]] documentary, ostensibly about the friendship and subsequent rivalry between two West Coast retro rock'n'roll bands: The Dandy Warhols and the Brian Jonestown Massacre. What it actually turns out to be is a portrait of a borderline psychopath - Anton Newcomb - and his tortured relationship with the rest of the world. Interestingly, for a music documentary, there is hardly any music. What there is - snatches of songs, more often than not aborted by the performers - is incidental rather than central. Although the protagonists are musicians, the story is not about music but rather about a particularly American version of a British myth of a cartoon lifestyle, ie, one where nobody has to take responsibility for behaving like spoiled adolescents on a full-time basis. Tantrums, drugs, violence, grossly dysfunctional attitudes, egomania on a truly epic scale - all of this is excused or positively encouraged because it conforms to some collectively held idea about what rock'n'roll is about. As a film this is a first-class documentary but it raises more questions than it answers. For example, why is Anton's music so conservative? For someone so wild and outrageous (and he IS wild and outrageous) his music never seems to have progressed beyond the most obvious derivations of his 60s idols (The Stones, Velvets etc.) For someone who claims to be able to play 80 instruments he has never bothered to learn to play any one of them beyond the most rudimentary level. Similarly, the Dandy Warhols burning ambition is based on a vision of rock'n'roll which is astonishingly fossilised in 1969. Nothing wrong with pastiches, of course, but surely there's more to musical life than perpetually acting out a cartoon from the late 60s. Why don't they take some risks with their music - in the way that their role models did? Because, one suspects, this is not about music. Music is just an accessory, a prop, or an excuse, to lead completely dysfunctional and irresponsible lives. But why? In the Dandy Warhols case, the answer is obvious: to make lots of money and be famous. Big deal. Anton Newcomb's case is more interesting. He is obviously very talented, but every time he is given an opportunity to reach a wider audience he sabotages it, usually in the most dramatic way possible. He is terrified of success, and at the same time, deeply resents anyone else who has it - especially his former friends the Dandy Warhols. Fascinating movie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[watched]] like 8 or 9 Herzog [[movies]] and [[none]] of them had any [[impact]] on me.

I watched several documentaries about him. He is [[obviously]] an [[intelligent]] [[man]], with [[great]] knowledge about [[films]] and [[passion]] for [[making]] them, but does this makes him a good [[director]]. [[Definitely]] [[NO]]! A [[complete]] anti-talent. He can [[make]] a [[good]] [[documentary]] because of [[previously]] mentioned [[traits]], but a [[film]] with [[actors]] – never!

He can't direct nor write. His [[screenplays]] are [[full]] of [[badly]] thought out situations, and many [[situations]]/[[dialogues]] in his [[movies]] are so childishly and [[badly]] [[done]] that they cannot be [[hidden]] [[behind]] the word "art" in any [[sense]]. No [[way]]. Not to [[mention]] the unskillful [[direction]], so amateurish-like. To [[say]] that he [[wants]] to direct like that and [[write]] [[crap]] like that is a [[lie]].

Like the scene when Scheitz [[gets]] [[arrested]] and Storszek [[hides]] in the back of the [[store]]. WHO IS HE [[KIDDING]]?

He is a [[cheater]]; he knows what [[fake]] [[intellectuals]] and [[critics]] [[want]]. He knows what elements he [[needs]] to put in the [[script]] to [[get]] your their attention and empty [[praising]]. Never mind the [[rest]] of the [[script]] and sloppy [[direction]].

[[Just]] [[look]] at [[Julio]] Medem. [[If]] Herzog can make a [[movie]] [[like]] Medem can, then I [[might]] re-check his [[old]] movies and try to [[find]] [[talent]] in them. I [[seen]] like 8 or 9 Herzog [[cinematography]] and [[nos]] of them had any [[repercussions]] on me.

I watched several documentaries about him. He is [[unmistakably]] an [[artful]] [[dude]], with [[sublime]] knowledge about [[cinema]] and [[fervour]] for [[doing]] them, but does this makes him a good [[superintendent]]. [[Undoubtedly]] [[NOS]]! A [[finish]] anti-talent. He can [[deliver]] a [[alright]] [[documentation]] because of [[before]] mentioned [[idiosyncrasies]], but a [[filmmaking]] with [[actresses]] – never!

He can't direct nor write. His [[scenarios]] are [[fullest]] of [[sorely]] thought out situations, and many [[circumstances]]/[[conversation]] in his [[kino]] are so childishly and [[desperately]] [[accomplished]] that they cannot be [[masked]] [[posterior]] the word "art" in any [[feeling]]. No [[ways]]. Not to [[mentioning]] the unskillful [[directorate]], so amateurish-like. To [[says]] that he [[wish]] to direct like that and [[handwriting]] [[bollocks]] like that is a [[lies]].

Like the scene when Scheitz [[get]] [[imprisoned]] and Storszek [[mask]] in the back of the [[boutique]]. WHO IS HE [[JOKE]]?

He is a [[trickster]]; he knows what [[untruthful]] [[thinkers]] and [[criticisms]] [[wanting]]. He knows what elements he [[must]] to put in the [[hyphen]] to [[gets]] your their attention and empty [[greet]]. Never mind the [[resting]] of the [[hyphen]] and sloppy [[directions]].

[[Mere]] [[glance]] at [[Giulio]] Medem. [[Though]] Herzog can make a [[filmmaking]] [[iike]] Medem can, then I [[conceivably]] re-check his [[archaic]] movies and try to [[found]] [[talents]] in them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Who actually created this piece of crap this is the worst movie i have ever seen in my life it is such a waste of time and money. I hate it how they create low budget sequels featuring D-Lister actors and a storyline so similar to the 1st one.

I found this movie in the bargain bin sitting right next to Wild Things 2 and Death To The Supermodels for $2.99 what a fool i was to actually think that this could be good instead i watched in disgust as poor acting stereotypes ripped of the storyline and script from the 1st one.

Whoever thought that this straight-to-video production was actually even a half decent film you must be on crackd or something because I think what pretty much most of the people who've seen this film thinks WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I could not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the [[plot]] advances it too [[stays]] [[incomprehensible]]. I'm going to guess and [[say]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got sorted out. The [[producers]] could never separate the many details that the novel, or any novel, has the time and space to create from the other [[idea]], which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[many]] things happening in a proscribed feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made movie that one [[could]] enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. I could not, for the life of me, follow, figure out or understand the story. As the [[intrigue]] advances it too [[resting]] [[unthinkable]]. I'm going to guess and [[said]] that there was a preproduction story/plot problem that never got sorted out. The [[maker]] could never separate the many details that the novel, or any novel, has the time and space to create from the other [[inkling]], which was to make a movie about a serial killer and the killer's pursuit by the police. They ended up with too [[several]] things happening in a proscribed feature film time limit. Too bad really because they had a solid cast, a director who knows how to move things around and excellent cinematography. In fact, a well made movie that one [[wo]] enjoy and relax with for a couple of hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] There are some [[comments]] about this film that [[say]] that it is a [[bad]] and [[silly]] one and such an excellent actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[accepted]] to act in it.

I think, just the opposite, that, [[even]] when the film is [[strange]] and has some [[weaknesses]], the performance of Pierre Fresnay is so [[formidable]] that it converts the [[film]] in something [[excellent]].

His performance is probably the [[best]] in [[history]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the cabaret.

For somebody who does not believe that a priest – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps bizarre. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the death of the younger priest is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. Pierre Fresnay turns the crazy act of murder in something understandable within the temporal madness of his character, the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this terrible way, comes back to his duty. There are some [[sightings]] about this film that [[tell]] that it is a [[rotten]] and [[witless]] one and such an excellent actor as Pierre Fresnay should not have [[consented]] to act in it.

I think, just the opposite, that, [[yet]] when the film is [[weird]] and has some [[vulnerabilities]], the performance of Pierre Fresnay is so [[dreaded]] that it converts the [[cinematography]] in something [[sumptuous]].

His performance is probably the [[better]] in [[story]].

The film itself has a very polemic scene about the consecration of wine in the cabaret.

For somebody who does not believe that a priest – even a defrocked one – can convert it in Christ's blood, the scene is perhaps bizarre. But for somebody who has been raised in a catholic framework, it is very emotive even if quite unpleasant.

The scene of the death of the younger priest is tremendously shocking. But it is very well acted. Pierre Fresnay turns the crazy act of murder in something understandable within the temporal madness of his character, the tortured defrocked Morand who, in this terrible way, comes back to his duty. --------------------------------------------- Result 2079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It is an [[extremely]] [[difficult]] film to watch, particularly as it [[targets]] the innermost [[core]] of all of our lives. But ultimately it is a very [[beautiful]] and deeply [[moving]] film. Any person who finds it cynical I have to [[say]] that they [[must]] have greatly [[missed]] the point of the film's entire [[message]]. [[For]] those who actually watch the [[film]], they will see that the way the issues are dealt with is absolutely necessary, and the outcome is ultimately uplifting. Sure, it's very hard to watch, a difficult subject matter and even brutal. Yet it's extremely relevant to society and everybody. It shows the peak of what world cinema is doing at the moment (I will not restrict that term to just France) and everyone should try to see it. I will say that it is best to go in with a clear head without being swayed by conflicting views, and just let the film work for you. It is an [[unimaginably]] [[laborious]] film to watch, particularly as it [[purpose]] the innermost [[basic]] of all of our lives. But ultimately it is a very [[sumptuous]] and deeply [[relocating]] film. Any person who finds it cynical I have to [[said]] that they [[owe]] have greatly [[mistook]] the point of the film's entire [[messaging]]. [[During]] those who actually watch the [[flick]], they will see that the way the issues are dealt with is absolutely necessary, and the outcome is ultimately uplifting. Sure, it's very hard to watch, a difficult subject matter and even brutal. Yet it's extremely relevant to society and everybody. It shows the peak of what world cinema is doing at the moment (I will not restrict that term to just France) and everyone should try to see it. I will say that it is best to go in with a clear head without being swayed by conflicting views, and just let the film work for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie is [[basically]] a [[documentary]] of the chronologically ordered series of [[events]] that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presidential]] [[Palace]], Caracas [[Venezuela]].

The [[pathos]] of the [[movie]] is [[real]] and one [[feels]] the pain, sorrow and [[joy]] of the people who lived through this [[failed]] [[coup]] d'etat of [[President]] Hugo [[Chavez]].

One comes away from [[viewing]] this [[film]] that Hugo Chavez is [[truly]] a [[great]] historical figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly brought the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[old]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[installed]] [[government]] of Venezuela.

It is [[obvious]] from the [[film]] footage that George W [[Bush]] [[aided]] and abetted the [[Venezuelan]] [[coup]] d'etat. That the mainstream [[media]] [[aided]] and abetted [[George]] W [[Bush]] is not [[surprising]].

What is [[surprising]] is how few people has [[seen]] this movie and how few people [[realize]] the total corruption of America's [[mass]] media.

It has taken only 20 [[years]] for Ronald [[Reagan]] elimination of the [[Fairness]] Doctrine in 1986 to [[turn]] [[America]] into blind and rudderless state.

May Hugo Chavez open patriotic Americans' [[eyes]] to the truth and beauty of the [[true]] American [[vision]]. This movie is [[essentially]] a [[documentaries]] of the chronologically ordered series of [[phenomena]] that took place from April 10, 2002 through April 14, 2002 in the Venezuelan [[Presiding]] [[Mansions]], Caracas [[Venezuelan]].

The [[ducks]] of the [[flick]] is [[veritable]] and one [[thinks]] the pain, sorrow and [[delight]] of the people who lived through this [[faulted]] [[putsch]] d'etat of [[Chairs]] Hugo [[Gonzales]].

One comes away from [[visualizing]] this [[filmmaking]] that Hugo Chavez is [[really]] a [[resplendent]] historical figure. Hugo Chavez's persona single-handedly brought the Venezuelan people to overthrow the 3-day [[elderly]] military-installed junta and re-establish the democratically [[fitted]] [[goverment]] of Venezuela.

It is [[noticeable]] from the [[cinematography]] footage that George W [[Busch]] [[helping]] and abetted the [[Venezuela]] [[putsch]] d'etat. That the mainstream [[medium]] [[helping]] and abetted [[Georgie]] W [[Busch]] is not [[impressed]].

What is [[impressive]] is how few people has [[watched]] this movie and how few people [[realizing]] the total corruption of America's [[mace]] media.

It has taken only 20 [[yrs]] for Ronald [[Regan]] elimination of the [[Equality]] Doctrine in 1986 to [[converting]] [[Americans]] into blind and rudderless state.

May Hugo Chavez open patriotic Americans' [[eye]] to the truth and beauty of the [[real]] American [[conception]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2081 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This was a nice attempt at [[something]] but it is too pretentious and boring to [[rise]] above it's low budget trappings. The use of virtual sets [[almost]] works but at some points it [[fails]] [[miserably]]. They made good [[use]] of the [[small]] [[budget]] I [[guess]]. I just [[wish]] the [[story]] and most of the acting was [[better]]. There are a lot of parts where you [[see]] what they were aiming for and it would of been [[great]] if they actually [[hit]] those [[marks]] but they don't. Confusing and [[unbelievable]] [[story]]. [[Bad]] [[DVD]] [[transfer]] too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one [[sitting]]. This I had to [[shut]] off. It was too [[boring]]. I can do slow [[movies]]. But just [[make]] them [[appealing]] in some [[aspect]]. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[departments]] so it never added up to an engrossing [[experience]]. [[Maybe]] the [[film]] maker's next [[attempt]] will be better. This was a nice attempt at [[algo]] but it is too pretentious and boring to [[increasing]] above it's low budget trappings. The use of virtual sets [[roughly]] works but at some points it [[fail]] [[spectacularly]]. They made good [[usage]] of the [[little]] [[budgets]] I [[reckon]]. I just [[desire]] the [[conte]] and most of the acting was [[best]]. There are a lot of parts where you [[behold]] what they were aiming for and it would of been [[magnificent]] if they actually [[knocked]] those [[marques]] but they don't. Confusing and [[phenomenal]] [[narratives]]. [[Mala]] [[DVDS]] [[transferred]] too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one [[seated]]. This I had to [[closure]] off. It was too [[tiresome]]. I can do slow [[movie]]. But just [[deliver]] them [[appeal]] in some [[element]]. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all [[ministries]] so it never added up to an engrossing [[enjoying]]. [[Conceivably]] the [[cinematography]] maker's next [[attempts]] will be better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2082 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Most]] of the French films I've [[seen]] - and [[enjoyed]] - were more talk than action, but that's [[okay]]. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with intriguing actors. (However, I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in every French film ever made! It seemed that way.)

This movie has the same interesting visuals and had a good opening. But then it [[became]] talk, talk and more [[talk]]....which is fine for a drama but not for a murder mystery. [[After]] awhile, I almost fell [[asleep]] watching this.

Actually, the film was more like a play with almost all the scenes played out in one room. Thus, if you love plays, you should like this...but I want a little more bang for a murder story. [[Longer]] of the French films I've [[watched]] - and [[adored]] - were more talk than action, but that's [[allright]]. I found them interesting, well-photographed and with intriguing actors. (However, I did at one point wonder if Gerald Depardieu was in every French film ever made! It seemed that way.)

This movie has the same interesting visuals and had a good opening. But then it [[was]] talk, talk and more [[conversation]]....which is fine for a drama but not for a murder mystery. [[Upon]] awhile, I almost fell [[slumber]] watching this.

Actually, the film was more like a play with almost all the scenes played out in one room. Thus, if you love plays, you should like this...but I want a little more bang for a murder story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2083 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] this film was almost a [[great]] imaginative film. A mixture of shakespeare, pop, jazz, and faerie tales. This movie was an imaginative twist on the Cinderella theme. Featuring a strong cast, headed by the perfectly cast Kathleen Turner, this movie had everything going for it. Everything but production values. I almost never think that a movie needs special effects or big budgets, but with an over the [[top]] production [[like]] this, it [[came]] off with the same seedy quality as every other made for tv movie. Besides better cinematography, this film was almost [[perfect]].

this film was almost a [[marvellous]] imaginative film. A mixture of shakespeare, pop, jazz, and faerie tales. This movie was an imaginative twist on the Cinderella theme. Featuring a strong cast, headed by the perfectly cast Kathleen Turner, this movie had everything going for it. Everything but production values. I almost never think that a movie needs special effects or big budgets, but with an over the [[superior]] production [[iike]] this, it [[became]] off with the same seedy quality as every other made for tv movie. Besides better cinematography, this film was almost [[faultless]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2084 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Just]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this film, I decided to write another [[review]]. I missed a few things out last time...

First, the [[script]]. Second, the acting. Third, Jesus Christ what were they [[thinking]] [[making]] a piece of [[garbage]] like this and then [[expecting]] us to enjoy it when there are no [[redeeming]] features whatsoever from beginning to end except when Joseph Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting climax!!!

I can't [[believe]] I wasted my [[money]] on this when I could have given it to a homeless person or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? [[Only]] so that you fellow movie fans get the point about this film, I decided to write another [[scrutinize]]. I missed a few things out last time...

First, the [[hyphen]]. Second, the acting. Third, Jesus Christ what were they [[ideas]] [[doing]] a piece of [[litter]] like this and then [[await]] us to enjoy it when there are no [[redeem]] features whatsoever from beginning to end except when Joseph Fiennes finally gets blown away in a very unexciting climax!!!

I can't [[believing]] I wasted my [[moneys]] on this when I could have given it to a homeless person or a busker or SOMETHING!

Are you getting the picture? --------------------------------------------- Result 2085 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy [[job]] on the first Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad job on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[true]] it may have [[improved]] if its series was ever [[aired]] but [[lets]] be realistic...this [[movie]] a [[crock]]! A lot of [[bad]] acting *[[NOTE]] The [[Shower]] scene* "Kissing [[Cousins]]" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had effort, I'll give you that, but it was too stupid! They [[even]] tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T FUNNY! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one look Absolutely [[NOTHING]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them look different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...Okay, what were you thinking? Could you possibly choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[fabulous]] Sarah Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no [[offense]] Amy Adams. [[Oh]], yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! Okay, let me break it down for you guys...IT'S HORRIBLE!

If Roger Kumble did such a fancy [[labour]] on the first Cruel Intentions then why did he do such a bad job on this. I'm sorry but this movie is stupid, [[genuine]] it may have [[enhanced]] if its series was ever [[dispensed]] but [[allows]] be realistic...this [[cinematography]] a [[baloney]]! A lot of [[naughty]] acting *[[REMARK]] The [[Bathhouse]] scene* "Kissing [[Coz]]" ?????? What kind of line is that? "Slipery when wet" ?????????? Can we say DUH-M! This movie had effort, I'll give you that, but it was too stupid! They [[yet]] tried to make it funny by giving the house servants stupid accents which actually....WASN'T FUNNY! It was pathetic. Not to mention that they made everyone in the this one look Absolutely [[NADA]] like the original cast. It's as if they made them look different on purpose or something! I like watching it when I'm really really really board which doesn't happen occasionally. For those of you who did like it...Okay, what were you thinking? Could you possibly choose this movie over the other one which had great acting and the [[wondrous]] Sarah Michelle Gellar? A movie is gold if it has Sarah Michelle Gellar in it, DUH! But this movie doesn't, no [[infraction]] Amy Adams. [[Oooh]], yeah since when does Sebastain have a heart????? UGH! --------------------------------------------- Result 2086 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[movie]] [[seems]] to have a lot of people [[saying]] it is one of the most [[brutal]] of all [[time]]. After having just viewed it, I can [[say]] it does not [[live]] up to those [[claims]].

The [[idea]] of the [[movie]] is indeed demented. But [[overall]], the [[execution]] wasn't at all cringe [[worthy]]. Even the final scene (the eyeball thing) isn't really that nasty. I was expecting [[something]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than [[gore]] put forth on films like the ultra low budget Violent Sh!t.

Any one wanting to see an actual movie will be disappointed, since there is no story whatsoever (though surely most people know this). Gore fans will be disappointed since, contrary to belief, the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress playing the victim might be one of the worst in history.

Regardless of what people say, this movie isn't that shocking, it just plain all out [[sucks]]. Avoid it. This [[kino]] [[looks]] to have a lot of people [[arguing]] it is one of the most [[ferocious]] of all [[moment]]. After having just viewed it, I can [[says]] it does not [[inhabit]] up to those [[claim]].

The [[ideals]] of the [[cinematography]] is indeed demented. But [[holistic]], the [[implementation]] wasn't at all cringe [[praiseworthy]]. Even the final scene (the eyeball thing) isn't really that nasty. I was expecting [[somethings]] insane, instead it was of lower quality than [[gora]] put forth on films like the ultra low budget Violent Sh!t.

Any one wanting to see an actual movie will be disappointed, since there is no story whatsoever (though surely most people know this). Gore fans will be disappointed since, contrary to belief, the blood and guts here are few and far between. Not to mention the actress playing the victim might be one of the worst in history.

Regardless of what people say, this movie isn't that shocking, it just plain all out [[stinks]]. Avoid it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Kurt Russell's chameleon-like performance, coupled with John Carpenter's flawless filmmaking, makes this one, without a doubt, one of the finest boob-tube bios ever aired. It holds up, too: the emotional foundation is strong enough that it'll never age; Carpenter has preserved for posterity the power and ultimate poignancy of the life of the one and only King of Rock and Roll. (I'd been a borderline Elvis fan most of my life, but it wasn't until I saw this mind-blowingly moving movie that I looked BEYOND the image at the man himself. It was quite a revelation.) ELVIS remains one of the top ten made-for-tv movies of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2088 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You'll [[notice]] that the chemist, who appears in two scenes and gets to speak, is played by Stephen King. "Don't give up your day job" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[fair]]. King acquits himself [[reasonably]] well: he's no worse than any other member of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pure]] [[rubbish]]. [[Please]], [[give]] up your day job.

Never have I [[seen]] so many [[dreadful]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is probably the worst - gathered together in the one film. Everyone acts hammily, but not in any entertaining way; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I blame screenwriter/director Tom Holland. It can't be that ALL the actors are REALLY this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never heard of any of them before, but still, I don't think I could walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many bad performers if I tried: ONE actor, despite my best efforts, would turn out to have talent. So what's more likely - that Tom Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he wrote a lousy script and then directed it poorly? That would also explain why actors are bad in direct proportion to their prominence in the script. The more direction an actor got, the worse he performed. ("You want me to bend over like a hunchback, talk from the back of my throat, show all my teeth, and look bored, all at the same time? Okay...")

This theory is confirmed by the fact that Holland undeniably managed to co-write a lousy [[script]]. Several writers here have commented on the fact that Billy Halleck is not a likeable character, but that's a misleading way of putting it. He's not a knowable character. All we find out about him before the supernatural stuff starts happening is that he's fat, and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is food," he tells us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

In the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end psychology. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much sense, and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." You'll [[advices]] that the chemist, who appears in two scenes and gets to speak, is played by Stephen King. "Don't give up your day job" is the standard thing to say, but that's not [[justo]]. King acquits himself [[sensibly]] well: he's no worse than any other member of the cast, and better than most. The story, on the other hand, is [[pur]] [[detritus]]. [[Invites]], [[confer]] up your day job.

Never have I [[saw]] so many [[heinous]] performances - of which the lead actor's (the LEAD ACTOR'S!) is probably the worst - gathered together in the one film. Everyone acts hammily, but not in any entertaining way; they all somehow manage to go over-the-top without expending, or manifesting, energy. I blame screenwriter/director Tom Holland. It can't be that ALL the actors are REALLY this bad. What are the odds against that? Admittedly, I've never heard of any of them before, but still, I don't think I could walk into a talent agency and walk out with this many bad performers if I tried: ONE actor, despite my best efforts, would turn out to have talent. So what's more likely - that Tom Holland rolled a dozen consecutive snake-eyes, or that he wrote a lousy script and then directed it poorly? That would also explain why actors are bad in direct proportion to their prominence in the script. The more direction an actor got, the worse he performed. ("You want me to bend over like a hunchback, talk from the back of my throat, show all my teeth, and look bored, all at the same time? Okay...")

This theory is confirmed by the fact that Holland undeniably managed to co-write a lousy [[hyphen]]. Several writers here have commented on the fact that Billy Halleck is not a likeable character, but that's a misleading way of putting it. He's not a knowable character. All we find out about him before the supernatural stuff starts happening is that he's fat, and that all he can think about is food. ("All I can think about is food," he tells us, helpfully.) And in the end...

(Sigh) I suppose I ought insert a spoiler warning here...

In the end he becomes evil. Why? I can only shrug. Perhaps he's under some kind of enchantment. Yeah, that's probably it. By "evil" perhaps I mean "inexplicable" - it's not so much badness as a socially undesirable suspension of ordinary means-end psychology. Anyway, his actions at the end make no sense, nobody's actions make much sense, and this is despite the fact that the characters do little but explain their motivation for the benefit of the audience.

By the way, here's my nominee for hammiest line/delivery: "I don't think you'd like it. IN FACT..." [big dramatic pause] "...I don't think you'd like it at all." --------------------------------------------- Result 2089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The kids grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[outstanding]] performances. [[Yes]], I shed a [[tear]] along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A must see for those who care about their families. Family problems abound in real life and that is what this movie is about. Love can hold the members together through out the ordeals and trials and that is what this movie is about. One man, Daddy, has the maturity and fortitude to sustain the family in the face of adversity. The kids grow up,one all be it, in the hard way, to realize that no matter how old they or a parent is, the parent still loves their children and are willing to provide them a cushion when they fall. ALL the actors portraying their characters did [[unpaid]] performances. [[Yup]], I shed a [[rip]] along the way knowing I had had similar experiences both as a young adult and later as a parent. This true to life is one which every young adult, and parent, would do well to see, although some will not realize it until they too are parents. A must see for those who care about their families. --------------------------------------------- Result 2090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Really, it's [[nothing]] [[much]]. I only recommend watching it if; 1.) You're a big fan of any of the main [[stars]]. 2.) If you really want to check out the first time Lucille Ball was seen with red [[hair]].

4 out of 10 stars Really, it's [[anything]] [[very]]. I only recommend watching it if; 1.) You're a big fan of any of the main [[star]]. 2.) If you really want to check out the first time Lucille Ball was seen with red [[hairstyle]].

4 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The Ballad of Django is a meandering [[mess]] of a [[movie]]! This spaghetti western is [[simply]] a collection of scenes from other (and much better!) [[films]] [[supposedly]] [[tied]] together by "Django" [[telling]] how he [[brought]] in [[different]] outlaws. [[Hunt]] Powers (John Cameron) brings [[nothing]] to the role of Django. Skip this one unless you just HAVE to have [[every]] Django movie [[made]] and even THAT may not be a good enough excuse to see this one!! The Ballad of Django is a meandering [[jumble]] of a [[flick]]! This spaghetti western is [[straightforward]] a collection of scenes from other (and much better!) [[cinema]] [[reportedly]] [[associated]] together by "Django" [[tell]] how he [[made]] in [[distinct]] outlaws. [[Hunts]] Powers (John Cameron) brings [[anything]] to the role of Django. Skip this one unless you just HAVE to have [[each]] Django movie [[accomplished]] and even THAT may not be a good enough excuse to see this one!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and final movie in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "Lone Wolf and Cub), directed saga of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one battling ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering shady goings on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting stale and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any [[longer]]. [[Fortunately]], this one was better then the second thanks to having more [[humor]]. I'm just glad that they choose to stop at the one trilogy (I'm looking at YOU Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD Extras: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

Eye Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her left one Shintarô Katsu, best known for the Zatôichi films, again stars in this third and final movie in the Kenji Misumi (mostly known for "Lone Wolf and Cub), directed saga of Hanzo 'The Razor' Itami feature the big dicked one battling ninjas, rapeing 'ghosts', and uncovering shady goings on at the Shogunate treasury. The Hanzo 'plot' was kinda getting stale and repetitive. What was once novel in the first film, was not any [[most]]. [[Blithely]], this one was better then the second thanks to having more [[comedy]]. I'm just glad that they choose to stop at the one trilogy (I'm looking at YOU Lucas)

My Grade: B

DVD Extras: Merely Trailers for all 3 Hanzo the Razor films

Eye Candy: Aoi Nakajima unleashes both tits, Mako Midori just her left one --------------------------------------------- Result 2093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast list, but after I watched it I must admit that I felt a bit disappointed. The main problem of this movie is that actors aren't capable of holding this movie on their back. Why? Because of [[bad]] [[script]]. Although Dillon, Lane and Jones try very [[hard]] to [[take]] this movie on another level, there is no innovative storytelling and the direction is too [[ordinary]]. So for Matt Dillon fans this is watchable movie, just like for admirers of beautiful Diane Lane. Legendary Tommy Lee Jones is always [[great]] but this is not movie for him; far below his level. So if you get hooked up by this great [[cast]] watch it but don't expect anything big or extraordinary. The only thing that you'll remember about this flick is Diane Lane scenes; rest of it is very forgettable. I was attracted to this movie when I looked at cast list, but after I watched it I must admit that I felt a bit disappointed. The main problem of this movie is that actors aren't capable of holding this movie on their back. Why? Because of [[mala]] [[hyphen]]. Although Dillon, Lane and Jones try very [[dur]] to [[taking]] this movie on another level, there is no innovative storytelling and the direction is too [[everyday]]. So for Matt Dillon fans this is watchable movie, just like for admirers of beautiful Diane Lane. Legendary Tommy Lee Jones is always [[wondrous]] but this is not movie for him; far below his level. So if you get hooked up by this great [[casting]] watch it but don't expect anything big or extraordinary. The only thing that you'll remember about this flick is Diane Lane scenes; rest of it is very forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2094 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A missed train. A [[wrong]] [[phone]] number. An [[extra]] cup of coffee. What [[happens]] to those [[around]] you when you make a seemingly innocuous decision? Most people don't [[give]] it a [[thought]] as they [[absorbed]] in their own [[thoughts]] and [[actions]].

"Happenstance" tells the [[story]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[mundane]] as it pertains to a [[group]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[components]] of what passes for contemporary [[theater]], with the [[full]] [[cast]] of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an illegal immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on camera as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal girl who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the beginning of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction come true? The concept is good, but the storytelling is flimsy. The connections from one event to the next are weak. There's better storytelling in 15 [[seconds]] of the Liberty Mutual insurance [[commercial]] where one person sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can sacrifice the time for this film, but you'll finish it dissatisfied and wondering what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and director. A missed train. A [[improper]] [[telephone]] number. An [[additional]] cup of coffee. What [[arises]] to those [[roundabout]] you when you make a seemingly innocuous decision? Most people don't [[lend]] it a [[figured]] as they [[assimilated]] in their own [[reflections]] and [[measures]].

"Happenstance" tells the [[histories]] of the interrelations and cause-and-effect of the [[trite]] as it pertains to a [[clusters]] of normal Parisian folk. It has all the [[ingredients]] of what passes for contemporary [[drama]], with the [[fullest]] [[casting]] of the dysfunctional and disillusioned.

There's a cheating husband, an illegal immigrant, a classic slacker, a pickpocket, a crazy grandmother, an annoying girlfriend, a selfish roommate, and a homeless man. Audrey Tautou serves as the erstwhile protagonist (in the sense that she's on camera as much as anyone else and opens and closes the film) and normal girl who just can't seem to find the right rhythm in her life.

She learns at the beginning of her day from a stranger on a train what her horoscope holds for her. What happens to her in the course of the day is told through various characters. Does the prediction come true? The concept is good, but the storytelling is flimsy. The connections from one event to the next are weak. There's better storytelling in 15 [[second]] of the Liberty Mutual insurance [[trade]] where one person sees a good deed and passes it along to another than there is in two hours of Happenstance.

If you enjoy Audrey Tautou, then you certainly can sacrifice the time for this film, but you'll finish it dissatisfied and wondering what this same storyline could be if it were handled by a better producer and director. --------------------------------------------- Result 2095 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I just watched I. Q. again tonight and had forgotten how much I love this movie. It is wonderfully entertaining and leaves you feeling that all is right with the world. I love the allusions to Mozart all throughout from the opening with "Einstein" playing "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" on the violin to him humming Eine Kleine Nachtmusik during the IQ testing of the Ed Walters. I love that a woman is portrayed as intelligent and encouraged to have a career, an especially unique situation for the 1950's, the time in which this movie is set. (I myself have been a teacher but stayed at home to raise my children, so please don't think I am some staunch women's libber.) It's wonderful how a man who is "only a grease monkey" is finally seen to be just as important and worthy as Catherine's fiance, a clinical behavioral researcher. The message to me is that we are not what we do, but who we are is defined by so much more - no labels. There are so many little gags and one-liners that are almost throwaways if you don't watch and listen carefully.

I did catch a few things in the movie that are not listed on the goofs page. In the scene when Ed Walters is to speak at symposium, there are 3 instruments (protractor, ruler, etc.) hanging on the right from the chalk ledge. In the next camera shot, there only 2. In the credits on our video, it lists Tony Shaloub's character as Bob Watters, not Bob Rosetti as he introduces himself in the movie and is listed here on Imdb.

I highly recommend this movie. It may be a piece of fluff in some estimations, but has lots more substance than many give it credit for. Not only that, what a great cast is assembled here. Watch it and enjoy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have not read the other [[comments]] on the film, but judging from the average [[rating]] I can [[see]] that they are unlikely to be very complementary.

I watched it for the [[second]] [[time]] with my children. They [[absolutely]] [[loved]] it. True, it did not have the [[adults]] rolling [[around]] the [[floor]], but the [[sound]] of the children's enjoyment [[made]] it seem so.

It is a [[true]] Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of [[moral]] content - how [[sad]] it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our [[friends]] and associates. There are [[many]] other films on a [[similar]] subject matter, no doubt, many of which will have a [[greater]] comic or emotional [[impact]] on adults. It's [[hard]] for me to [[imagine]] such an [[impact]] on the junior [[members]] of the family, [[however]].

[[Hence]], for the [[children]], a 9/10 from me. I have not read the other [[observations]] on the film, but judging from the average [[scoring]] I can [[behold]] that they are unlikely to be very complementary.

I watched it for the [[secondly]] [[period]] with my children. They [[altogether]] [[worshiped]] it. True, it did not have the [[grownup]] rolling [[about]] the [[flooring]], but the [[sounds]] of the children's enjoyment [[effected]] it seem so.

It is a [[veritable]] Mel Brooks farce, with plenty of [[ethical]] content - how [[unfortunate]] it is to be loved for our money, not for whom we are, and how fickle are our [[homies]] and associates. There are [[multiple]] other films on a [[equivalent]] subject matter, no doubt, many of which will have a [[enhanced]] comic or emotional [[impacts]] on adults. It's [[stiff]] for me to [[guess]] such an [[effects]] on the junior [[member]] of the family, [[conversely]].

[[Therefore]], for the [[infantile]], a 9/10 from me. --------------------------------------------- Result 2097 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Shallow, shallow [[script]] ...stilted acting ...the shadows of boom mikes lingering over the actors' [[heads]] in scenes ...worth watching because Kate Mulgrew plays the most selfish [[mother]] in [[TV]] [[movie]] history and it's all before Ben Affleck got his teeth [[capped]]. Shallow, shallow [[hyphen]] ...stilted acting ...the shadows of boom mikes lingering over the actors' [[leaders]] in scenes ...worth watching because Kate Mulgrew plays the most selfish [[madre]] in [[TELEVISION]] [[films]] history and it's all before Ben Affleck got his teeth [[confined]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Well, sorry for the mistake on the one line summary.......Run people, run!! This movie is an horror!! [[Imagine]]! Gary Busey in another low budget movie, with an [[incredibly]] [[bad]] scenario...isn't that a nightmare? No (well yes), it is Plato's run...........I give it * out of *****. Well, sorry for the mistake on the one line summary.......Run people, run!! This movie is an horror!! [[Suppose]]! Gary Busey in another low budget movie, with an [[insanely]] [[amiss]] scenario...isn't that a nightmare? No (well yes), it is Plato's run...........I give it * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One Stinko of a movie featuring a shopworn plot and, to be kind, acting of less than Oscar caliber. But to me the single worst flaw was the total misrepresentation of a jet aircraft, and especially a 747. Some of the major blunders:

1. No Flight Engineer (or even a flight engineer station. 2. Mis-identifying the F-16 interceptors as F-15's (no resmblance whatsoever). 3. Loading passengers into an "aft baggage compartment" supposedly accesible from the cabin - Even if such a compartment existed, placing that much weight that far aft would make the aircraft unflyable. 4. Hollow point bullets that "won't damage the aircraft". 5. The entire landing procedure was so bad I wanted to puke. 6. An SR-71 (of all planes) with a pressure seal hatch 7. Opening a cabin door outward - into the wind - in flight!!

Ah nuts, it was just a truly lousy movie. Gotta make the list of bottom 10 of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 2100 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Realistic [[movie]],sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be scared. When Billy Zane tries to kill someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this movie. [[Tom]] Berenger is again playing a [[soldier]]. No good thrill, realistic [[sequences]]. Not always shooting, that is one great [[thing]]. Well filmed. I hate the helicopter [[sequence]], cause only one [[terrorist]] [[kills]] almost the [[whole]] [[marine]] bunch...I [[give]] it **and a half out of ***** Realistic [[filmmaking]],sure,except for the fact that the characters don't look like to be scared. When Billy Zane tries to kill someone, he feels bad...but he doesn't look like to. That's why I don't like his performance in this movie. [[Thom]] Berenger is again playing a [[serviceman]]. No good thrill, realistic [[sequence]]. Not always shooting, that is one great [[stuff]]. Well filmed. I hate the helicopter [[sequences]], cause only one [[terrorism]] [[killing]] almost the [[ensemble]] [[sailor]] bunch...I [[lend]] it **and a half out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 2101 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I saw this at an arty [[cinema]] that was also [[showing]] "Last Days" and some Charlie Chaplin films. Based on the quality of the other features, I [[decided]] to [[give]] "Immortel" a [[chance]]. I nearly walked out of this [[movie]], and I [[LIKE]] science-fiction! The [[story]] is set in a [[futuristic]] [[New]] York city, filled with [[Blade]] Runner-style sky [[advertisements]] and some [[similar]] debates about cloning/synthetic [[humans]]. [[Unfortunately]], the [[screenplay]] was not condensed [[enough]] for an hour-and-forty-five-minute [[movie]]. [[Three]] [[groups]] [[exist]] in this [[world]]: [[humans]], artificial humans, and Egyptian gods. The artificial [[humans]] [[seem]] to have the [[upper]] hand and [[control]] the politics of the [[city]]. The [[humans]] are slaves and are [[used]] for eugenics and organ [[donation]]. The Egyptian [[gods]] have a floating pyramid ([[modeled]] on the [[Great]] Pyramid of Khufu, and complete with a [[deteriorated]] [[exterior]], [[leaving]] a smooth "cap" on the pyramid. Wouldn't a floating futuristic pyramid be in perfect condition?). The pyramid rests above the [[city]] and [[nobody]] on the [[ground]] [[understands]] what it is or why it's there. I won't bore you with the so-called [[plot]], but there is [[lots]] of [[unnecessary]] gore and [[many]] gross-out scenes. The film, as I [[said]], looks to have been [[influenced]] by [[Blade]] [[Runner]], and perhaps [[also]] by The Fifth [[Element]] and The Matrix. [[At]] the end of the [[film]] [[credits]] were listed thank-yous to the United Kingdom, France, and [[Italy]]. The film is FRENCH, but [[uses]] British [[actors]] who don't [[speak]] French. [[Hence]], it is [[obvious]] that their French dialog has been [[dubbed]]. This is a distraction, and I [[also]] [[thought]] that [[switching]] back and forth between [[real]] [[humans]] and animations [[quite]] distracting. It doesn't [[help]] that the animations are poor--no [[better]] than a video [[game]]. Skip this one. I saw this at an arty [[kino]] that was also [[show]] "Last Days" and some Charlie Chaplin films. Based on the quality of the other features, I [[deciding]] to [[lend]] "Immortel" a [[possibilities]]. I nearly walked out of this [[cinematography]], and I [[LOVES]] science-fiction! The [[history]] is set in a [[future]] [[Newest]] York city, filled with [[Bladed]] Runner-style sky [[commercials]] and some [[akin]] debates about cloning/synthetic [[human]]. [[Unhappily]], the [[scenarios]] was not condensed [[satisfactorily]] for an hour-and-forty-five-minute [[film]]. [[Tre]] [[clusters]] [[existent]] in this [[monde]]: [[beings]], artificial humans, and Egyptian gods. The artificial [[human]] [[seems]] to have the [[supreme]] hand and [[controlling]] the politics of the [[ville]]. The [[beings]] are slaves and are [[utilized]] for eugenics and organ [[gifts]]. The Egyptian [[lord]] have a floating pyramid ([[modelled]] on the [[Splendid]] Pyramid of Khufu, and complete with a [[aggravated]] [[foreign]], [[abandoning]] a smooth "cap" on the pyramid. Wouldn't a floating futuristic pyramid be in perfect condition?). The pyramid rests above the [[ville]] and [[anyone]] on the [[terrain]] [[realizes]] what it is or why it's there. I won't bore you with the so-called [[intrigue]], but there is [[lot]] of [[dispensable]] gore and [[multiple]] gross-out scenes. The film, as I [[asserted]], looks to have been [[impact]] by [[Blades]] [[Sprinter]], and perhaps [[apart]] by The Fifth [[Component]] and The Matrix. [[For]] the end of the [[cinematography]] [[appropriations]] were listed thank-yous to the United Kingdom, France, and [[Italia]]. The film is FRENCH, but [[employs]] British [[protagonists]] who don't [[talk]] French. [[Thereby]], it is [[perceptible]] that their French dialog has been [[nicknamed]]. This is a distraction, and I [[apart]] [[think]] that [[switches]] back and forth between [[genuine]] [[humankind]] and animations [[abundantly]] distracting. It doesn't [[aids]] that the animations are poor--no [[optimum]] than a video [[jeu]]. Skip this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2102 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a depressingly shallow, naive and mostly unfunny look at a wildly improbable relationship between Brooks' psychotic film editor and Harold, his vapid girlfriend. The two have ZERO chemistry together - primarily because Harold is incapable of doing anything besides looking pretty at this stage of her career; but also because Brooks' character is neither interesting nor likeable. There are 15 static, excruciating minutes at the beginning where Brooks, having just broke up with Harold, stumbles about his apartment in a depressed, drugged out state - unbearable.

Sappily and unimaginatively bookended by Joe Cocker's "You Are So Beautiful", there simply is not enough material here for a feature film. There is hardly anything going on on the periphery of their relationship to give the appearance that these people exist in a real world. I'm sure Brooks' intention was to shine a white hot spotlight on the affair and, in a way, deconstruct it; but if you're going to do that the writing and acting needs to be far far better than what it is here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] [[Just]] when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a single movie a "[[Bomb]]" [[rating]], a friend brought this notorious [[turd]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its reputation, and it was as God-awful as I'd [[anticipated]]. This is a Mexican-made [[mess]], [[dubbed]] into English, and produced by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[terrible]] sets and [[effects]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't operate at the North Pole, but instead from a cloud in outer space, and who doesn't have little [[elves]] helping him make his toys but rather all different groups of children from practically every country there is. The opening sequence, where St. Nick chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing terrible holiday songs in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no story. Obviously, THIS Santa Claus doesn't observe the child labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the devil himself traveling from hell to Earth, just to make little kids naughty and turn Santa's Christmas Eve rounds into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's bound to [[frighten]] little children and turn them off Santa Claus and the holidays forever. Oddly, the [[name]] of [[Jesus]] Christ is mentioned often in this Christmas film, which somehow makes it all the creepier in the context of all the bizarre things that are going on. This easily makes my personal list of the "[[Worst]] [[Movie]] I've Ever [[Seen]]", but I'm sure that's [[nothing]] unique. [[Mere]] when I thought I would finish a whole year without giving a single movie a "[[Bombs]]" [[ratings]], a friend brought this notorious [[poo]] to my house last night. I feared the worst knowing its reputation, and it was as God-awful as I'd [[prophesied]]. This is a Mexican-made [[confusion]], [[nicknamed]] into English, and produced by K. Gordon Murray. It's got [[scary]] sets and [[ramifications]], and features a rather frightening Santa who doesn't operate at the North Pole, but instead from a cloud in outer space, and who doesn't have little [[brownies]] helping him make his toys but rather all different groups of children from practically every country there is. The opening sequence, where St. Nick chuckles heartily as he observes monitors showing all these kiddies working hard while singing terrible holiday songs in a variety of languages, seems to go on forever, and with no story. Obviously, THIS Santa Claus doesn't observe the child labor laws!

Eventually we get some nasty and slinky red-suited apprentice of the devil himself traveling from hell to Earth, just to make little kids naughty and turn Santa's Christmas Eve rounds into a nightmare. Watching this movie is a trippy and twisted experience, and it's bound to [[scared]] little children and turn them off Santa Claus and the holidays forever. Oddly, the [[names]] of [[Damn]] Christ is mentioned often in this Christmas film, which somehow makes it all the creepier in the context of all the bizarre things that are going on. This easily makes my personal list of the "[[Gravest]] [[Cinematography]] I've Ever [[Watched]]", but I'm sure that's [[nada]] unique. --------------------------------------------- Result 2104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This has got to be the [[best]] [[movie]] I've ever seen.

Combine breathtaking cinematography with [[stunning]] acting and a gripping plot, and you have a [[masterpiece]].

Dog [[Bite]] Dog had me gripping the edge of my seat during some scenes, recoiling in horror during others, and left me [[drowning]] in my own [[tears]] after the tragic ending.

The [[film]] [[left]] a deep [[impression]] on me. It's shockingly violent scenes contrasted [[sharply]] with the poignant and [[tender]] 'love' scenes. The film is undeserving of it's [[Cat]] III (nudity) rating; there are no [[nude]] scenes whatsoever, and the 'love' scenes do not even involve [[kissing]] or 'making out'.

The message which this [[film]] [[presented]] to me? All human beings, no matter how [[violent]] or [[cruel]] they may seem, have a [[tender]] side. Edison [[Chen]] does a [[superb]] [[job]] [[playing]] the [[part]] of the [[murderous]] [[Pang]].

I rate this [[film]] 10/10. It's a must-watch. This has got to be the [[optimum]] [[movies]] I've ever seen.

Combine breathtaking cinematography with [[awesome]] acting and a gripping plot, and you have a [[centerpiece]].

Dog [[Mouthful]] Dog had me gripping the edge of my seat during some scenes, recoiling in horror during others, and left me [[sinking]] in my own [[rip]] after the tragic ending.

The [[filmmaking]] [[exited]] a deep [[printout]] on me. It's shockingly violent scenes contrasted [[severely]] with the poignant and [[offerings]] 'love' scenes. The film is undeserving of it's [[Kitten]] III (nudity) rating; there are no [[naked]] scenes whatsoever, and the 'love' scenes do not even involve [[shagging]] or 'making out'.

The message which this [[kino]] [[tabled]] to me? All human beings, no matter how [[fierce]] or [[merciless]] they may seem, have a [[offerings]] side. Edison [[Shen]] does a [[great]] [[employment]] [[gaming]] the [[parties]] of the [[mortal]] [[Pong]].

I rate this [[kino]] 10/10. It's a must-watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It is a well known fact that when Gene Roddenberry [[first]] pitched Star Trek to NBC, the original pilot episode, The Cage, was rejected for being "too cerebral". When the series was given another [[chance]], Roddenberry thought it would be fun to establish the events of the rejected episode as canon, and did so by writing The Menagerie, which has the [[unique]] distinction of being the sequel to what was [[still]], at the time, an unaired episode.

This [[time]], rather than exploring a new planet, [[Kirk]] and his crew are on Starbase 11, paying a visit to the [[former]] [[commander]] of the Enterprise, [[Christopher]] Pike ([[Sean]] Kenney), now horribly disfigured and paralyzed because of an [[accident]]. Pike [[joins]] his [[successor]] on the starship, where an unpleasant [[surprise]] awaits: Spock, who used to [[serve]] under Pike, has [[effectively]] hijacked the vessel and set the course for Talos IV, a [[planet]] which is off-limits (the [[punishment]] is [[death]]) [[since]] Pike and Spock's last visit there, 13 years [[earlier]]. Naturally, being a logical [[creature]], Spock turns himself in and arranges a court-martial so that he can [[justify]] his [[actions]].

There's no need to [[say]] more about the plot, since the [[rest]] will [[play]] out in [[Part]] 2. What really impresses is how Roddenberry [[creates]] the connection between The Cage and the rest of the Star Trek universe, by coming up with a particular type of flashback (to say more would be too much) that allows [[everyone]], on screen and off, to see what [[could]] have been of Trek, had NBC not turned down the original project. In particular, it's fun to see Jeffrey Hunter (who was unable to return in The Menagerie) play Pike as a more serious captain than Kirk [[usually]] is and Nimoy's early days as Spock, whose [[personality]] hadn't been fully established [[yet]]: this is the only [[time]] in the [[entire]] [[series]] that everybody's [[favorite]] Vulcan spontaneously [[grins]].

[[In]] [[short]], not just a [[great]] "[[mystery]]" episode, but [[also]] a [[treat]] for those who can't be bothered to [[track]] down The Cage in its [[original]] [[form]] (it's [[available]] as [[part]] of the Season 3 [[box]] set). It is a well known fact that when Gene Roddenberry [[frst]] pitched Star Trek to NBC, the original pilot episode, The Cage, was rejected for being "too cerebral". When the series was given another [[probability]], Roddenberry thought it would be fun to establish the events of the rejected episode as canon, and did so by writing The Menagerie, which has the [[unequalled]] distinction of being the sequel to what was [[nonetheless]], at the time, an unaired episode.

This [[moment]], rather than exploring a new planet, [[Kirky]] and his crew are on Starbase 11, paying a visit to the [[antigua]] [[commandant]] of the Enterprise, [[Christophe]] Pike ([[Shawn]] Kenney), now horribly disfigured and paralyzed because of an [[crash]]. Pike [[participates]] his [[inherit]] on the starship, where an unpleasant [[amazement]] awaits: Spock, who used to [[serves]] under Pike, has [[efficiently]] hijacked the vessel and set the course for Talos IV, a [[globe]] which is off-limits (the [[sanctions]] is [[dies]]) [[because]] Pike and Spock's last visit there, 13 years [[formerly]]. Naturally, being a logical [[monster]], Spock turns himself in and arranges a court-martial so that he can [[justification]] his [[measurements]].

There's no need to [[told]] more about the plot, since the [[resting]] will [[playing]] out in [[Parties]] 2. What really impresses is how Roddenberry [[begets]] the connection between The Cage and the rest of the Star Trek universe, by coming up with a particular type of flashback (to say more would be too much) that allows [[someone]], on screen and off, to see what [[did]] have been of Trek, had NBC not turned down the original project. In particular, it's fun to see Jeffrey Hunter (who was unable to return in The Menagerie) play Pike as a more serious captain than Kirk [[traditionally]] is and Nimoy's early days as Spock, whose [[persona]] hadn't been fully established [[nonetheless]]: this is the only [[times]] in the [[whole]] [[serial]] that everybody's [[preferential]] Vulcan spontaneously [[smirk]].

[[Among]] [[succinct]], not just a [[whopping]] "[[enigma]]" episode, but [[further]] a [[address]] for those who can't be bothered to [[tracking]] down The Cage in its [[upfront]] [[shape]] (it's [[accessible]] as [[portion]] of the Season 3 [[shoebox]] set). --------------------------------------------- Result 2106 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (76%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK, the movie is good but I give it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy tale. This kind of [[crap]] just adds to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and dozens of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An organic virus is much more complex, even though it's way tinier. Though, it's considered one of the simplest forms in the universe, organic virus's attach burrow into your cells and attach themselves to the RNA, then change your own RNA code. Explain to me how something like that could be processed from a monitor? Maybe the radiation has some effect on the user's cornea that turns your eyeballs into these viruses? I could see that, but obviously, the writer didn't think of that. OK, the movie is good but I give it a 1 because the idea of a computer virus becoming an organic virus is pure fairy tale. This kind of [[baloney]] just adds to those uncomputer savvy moron's paranoid delusions that a computer virus is exactly like an organic virus. First of all, strings of code and dozens of 1s and 0s add up to computer virus. An organic virus is much more complex, even though it's way tinier. Though, it's considered one of the simplest forms in the universe, organic virus's attach burrow into your cells and attach themselves to the RNA, then change your own RNA code. Explain to me how something like that could be processed from a monitor? Maybe the radiation has some effect on the user's cornea that turns your eyeballs into these viruses? I could see that, but obviously, the writer didn't think of that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2107 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I saw this film on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[drama]]. But, one might [[hope]] that at [[least]] the critical "facts" that the story turns on might be based on actual events. [[Reagan]] was [[shot]] and the other characters were real people. The movie got that right. From there on, reliance on [[facts]] [[rapidly]] [[decays]]. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TV]] reporter at the [[time]] of these events, I was [[stunned]] that I had never [[heard]] [[anything]] about the [[bizarre]] [[behavior]] of [[Secretary]] Haig as [[portrayed]] by Richard Dreyfuss. The whole [[nation]] had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is [[bullying]] a cowered cabinet and [[totally]] out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began [[researching]] the [[subject]] on the [[Internet]] and [[quickly]] found [[actual]] [[audio]] [[tapes]] and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Room]] [[conversations]] that this film pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "facts" of the [[film]] [[meant]] to [[show]] a [[White]] House, Secret Service etc. in total chaos -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and [[driving]] the world near the brink of [[nuclear]] war -- are demonstrably [[incorrect]]. They didn't happen! There is internal conflict, to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press room performance is historically [[regrettable]] and he is "difficult". But there is nothing approaching the scenes depicted in the film. There are too many gross errors to list, but any fair comparison of the recorded and written record and the fantasy of this film begs the question as to what the producers were really trying to accomplish. Enlighten? Inform? Entertain? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is difficult to ascribe motives to others, but one must seriously question what was behind such [[shameless]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "Reel to Real" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the issues that were the central focus of the film -- namely the events within the [[Administration]] on the day of the [[shooting]]. So, the viewer was left to research those without much -- if any -- help from the network. I saw this film on the History Channel today (in 2006). First of all, I realize that this is not a documentary -- that it is a [[opera]]. But, one might [[hopes]] that at [[fewer]] the critical "facts" that the story turns on might be based on actual events. [[Regan]] was [[filmed]] and the other characters were real people. The movie got that right. From there on, reliance on [[truths]] [[faster]] [[disintegrates]]. I had never heard of this movie before seeing it. Having been a [[TELEVISION]] reporter at the [[times]] of these events, I was [[startled]] that I had never [[hear]] [[nada]] about the [[surreal]] [[demeanour]] of [[Secretaries]] Haig as [[depicted]] by Richard Dreyfuss. The whole [[countries]] had heard the "I am in control...", etc., but Dreufuss' Haig is [[intimidate]] a cowered cabinet and [[wholly]] out of control personally. Having watched the film, I began [[quest]] the [[themes]] on the [[Cyber]] and [[expeditiously]] found [[real]] [[audible]] [[ribbons]] and transcripts of most of the Situation [[Salle]] [[talk]] that this film pretends to reenact. Incredibly, many the the principal "facts" of the [[filmmaking]] [[intend]] to [[exposition]] a [[Blanc]] House, Secret Service etc. in total chaos -- and the nation's leadership behaving irrationally and [[motorists]] the world near the brink of [[nuke]] war -- are demonstrably [[erroneous]]. They didn't happen! There is internal conflict, to be sure. Haig makes missteps, his press room performance is historically [[sorrowful]] and he is "difficult". But there is nothing approaching the scenes depicted in the film. There are too many gross errors to list, but any fair comparison of the recorded and written record and the fantasy of this film begs the question as to what the producers were really trying to accomplish. Enlighten? Inform? Entertain? I believe they failed on all three fronts. It is difficult to ascribe motives to others, but one must seriously question what was behind such [[cheeky]] invention. And, as for my beloved History Channel's "Reel to Real" follow-on documentary, there was almost no mention of the issues that were the central focus of the film -- namely the events within the [[Managerial]] on the day of the [[shootout]]. So, the viewer was left to research those without much -- if any -- help from the network. --------------------------------------------- Result 2108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I have a 5 minute [[rule]] (sometimes I'll leave leway for 10). If a movie is not good in the first 5 or 10 minutes it's probably not [[going]] to ever get better. I have yet to [[experience]] any [[movie]] that has proved to contest this theory. Dan in Real Life is [[definitely]] no exception. I was watching this [[turkey]] and [[thought]]; wow, this is not [[funny]], not touching, not sad, and I don't like any of the [[characters]] at all.

The story of an advice columnist/widower raising three young daughters, who falls in love with his brothers girlfriend. I suppose the tagline would be "advice columnist who could USE advice"? I don't know. Dans character in no way struck me as someone qualified to give advice. I guess THAT'S the irony? I don't know. He goes to see his parents, brothers, sisters and their kids at some sort of anual family retreat, which seems very sweet, and potential fodder for good comedy, story lines...none which ever emerge. The central story is basically how he loves this woman, but can't have her. Anyone with a pulse will realise that eventually he WILL get her, but you have to suffer through painfully unfunny, trite, lifetime movie network dialogue "murderer of love" to get to the inevitable happy ending.

This is truly one of the [[worst]] movies I've ever seen. I have a 5 minute [[stipulations]] (sometimes I'll leave leway for 10). If a movie is not good in the first 5 or 10 minutes it's probably not [[go]] to ever get better. I have yet to [[experiences]] any [[films]] that has proved to contest this theory. Dan in Real Life is [[unquestionably]] no exception. I was watching this [[turk]] and [[think]]; wow, this is not [[comical]], not touching, not sad, and I don't like any of the [[nature]] at all.

The story of an advice columnist/widower raising three young daughters, who falls in love with his brothers girlfriend. I suppose the tagline would be "advice columnist who could USE advice"? I don't know. Dans character in no way struck me as someone qualified to give advice. I guess THAT'S the irony? I don't know. He goes to see his parents, brothers, sisters and their kids at some sort of anual family retreat, which seems very sweet, and potential fodder for good comedy, story lines...none which ever emerge. The central story is basically how he loves this woman, but can't have her. Anyone with a pulse will realise that eventually he WILL get her, but you have to suffer through painfully unfunny, trite, lifetime movie network dialogue "murderer of love" to get to the inevitable happy ending.

This is truly one of the [[gravest]] movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is absolutely nothing to redeem this movie. They took a sleazy story, miscast it, miswrote it, misfilmed it. It has bad dialogue badly performed in a meandering and trashy story.

As badly as it fails as art, it fails even worse as commerce. Who could have been the target market for this. What age group? What interest group?

Someone should make a movie about how and why they made this movie. That I would pay to see.

I've seen thousands of bad movies, and this ranks with "Sailor Who Fell from Grace" and "Manos" ... my choices as the three most unredeemably bad movies I've ever seen. Everybody associated with it should be forced to make conversation with VanDamme for all eternity.

I challenge you. Watch this movie and perform an academic exercise - how could you take this and make it worse? I can't think of one way. --------------------------------------------- Result 2110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I hate to [[even]] waste the time it takes to write 10 lines on this atrocity. Hyung-Rae Shim is [[lucky]] that bad film-making isn't a capital crime or he'd be put to death twice for writing and [[directing]] this [[disaster]]. I'm amazed that this film had a $75m budget, but actually glad in the [[sense]] that it was such a tremendous [[flop]], that Shim will hopefully, never get to make another [[movie]] the [[rest]] of the life and, therefore, not waste any more of filmgoers time. I would think the [[actors]] would have gotten together and lynched him by now.

With the effects resources available to them, a great film [[could]] have been made with this budget. As usual, the failure should have been spotted at the very beginning with the [[terrible]] [[script]] and story. "[[Transformers]]" was another visual feast with a [[weak]] script, but this makes it [[look]] like "Citizen Kane". I hate to [[yet]] waste the time it takes to write 10 lines on this atrocity. Hyung-Rae Shim is [[luck]] that bad film-making isn't a capital crime or he'd be put to death twice for writing and [[instructing]] this [[calamities]]. I'm amazed that this film had a $75m budget, but actually glad in the [[sensing]] that it was such a tremendous [[implosion]], that Shim will hopefully, never get to make another [[film]] the [[repose]] of the life and, therefore, not waste any more of filmgoers time. I would think the [[protagonists]] would have gotten together and lynched him by now.

With the effects resources available to them, a great film [[did]] have been made with this budget. As usual, the failure should have been spotted at the very beginning with the [[grisly]] [[hyphen]] and story. "[[Transformer]]" was another visual feast with a [[fragile]] script, but this makes it [[gaze]] like "Citizen Kane". --------------------------------------------- Result 2111 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was looking for a cute, simple comedy to pass the time but choosing this film proved to be an enormous mistake.

I can't write a single good thing about it. First, the script is stupid and not funny at all, relying on tired, recycled jokes and a farting turtle for laughs. In my book, that's not funny, that's pathetic.

Low budget 'effects' (if I can even call them effects) with horrible cinematography. In many places it feels almost like an indie film shot with no money.

Acting... I feel sorry for the actors. Are Pamela Anderson and Denise Richards that desperate for some money that they've agreed to take part in this? (looking at their recent filmography, it would appear so.) Despite the outfits, Pamela is showing her age and as a whole, they don't even come across as sexy, let alone funny.

This movie is not even in the so-bad-it-is-funny category. It's just bad, as if everybody involved was sick of it.

Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is not a good movie but I [[still]] like it. The cat Clovis is gold in a jar as well as the [[premise]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically opposed to the evil Sleepwalkers. I think there is more to this movie than people realize, basically it is very harsh, but this brusqueness can sometimes be [[good]]. It's got the corny lines, the abrupt ending and a comedic element conveyed by the bumbling [[policemen]].

Did anyone find the incestuous element a bit disturbing? Ultimately this movie is casually and randomly acrimonious, which is quite [[effective]], I liken it to Psycho - the relationship between the mother and son, the changing of protagonists. I think the abruptness works also, this is not a movie that you want them to lengthen, it only works if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the director lacked depth, or whether he did these things with purpose, we know Stephen King has ability, yet I haven't even read his books, only seen some of his movies.

Anyway, I [[liked]] it. If you like harsh corny movies with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It really is so bad its good. This is not a good movie but I [[again]] like it. The cat Clovis is gold in a jar as well as the [[hypothesis]] of the cats themselves - intrinsically opposed to the evil Sleepwalkers. I think there is more to this movie than people realize, basically it is very harsh, but this brusqueness can sometimes be [[alright]]. It's got the corny lines, the abrupt ending and a comedic element conveyed by the bumbling [[police]].

Did anyone find the incestuous element a bit disturbing? Ultimately this movie is casually and randomly acrimonious, which is quite [[efficacious]], I liken it to Psycho - the relationship between the mother and son, the changing of protagonists. I think the abruptness works also, this is not a movie that you want them to lengthen, it only works if it's short.

I'm still not sure whether the director lacked depth, or whether he did these things with purpose, we know Stephen King has ability, yet I haven't even read his books, only seen some of his movies.

Anyway, I [[wished]] it. If you like harsh corny movies with 80's overtones just watch it. but don't expect too much. It really is so bad its good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2113 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I must warn you, there are some spoilers in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish [[Judges]]" on February I think. It was mention it was the last [[copy]], but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But either [[way]], I have it. I thought it was good. I wanted to [[see]] this mainly because of the great actor, [[Matthew]] Lillard (I'm [[surprised]] no one on the [[reviews]] mention the scar) although it is [[kind]] of low budget, getting enough money to [[make]] this [[film]] would be worth spending. Man, what a [[good]] actor.

The [[story]] it about a con [[artist]] known as Jack ([[Matthew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Judges]]. If you don't know what Spanish [[Judges]] are or haven't [[seen]] the [[trailer]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He needs protection, so he hires a couple who are also crooks, Max and Jamie (Vincent D'Onofrio and Valeria Golino) as well as a crook that goes by the name of Piece (Mark Boone Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even tell anyone her name because she's from Mars, as she said. So they (mainly Jack) call her "Mars Girl". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one big game. A game that involves some lust, lies and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and Valeria, as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've done better and the score could've been a little better as well. Some of the score was actually good. The theme they used for the beginning and the end (before the credits) was a good song choice, that's my opinion. The fight scene in the end could've been a little longer and a little more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a review, but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: Valeria Golino is not a newcomer. According to this site, she has been acting since 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" movies. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 I must warn you, there are some spoilers in it. But to start it off, I got "Spanish [[Judge]]" on February I think. It was mention it was the last [[copies]], but as I see, it wasn't back-ordered. But either [[camino]], I have it. I thought it was good. I wanted to [[seeing]] this mainly because of the great actor, [[Mads]] Lillard (I'm [[surprises]] no one on the [[scrutinize]] mention the scar) although it is [[genera]] of low budget, getting enough money to [[deliver]] this [[cinematic]] would be worth spending. Man, what a [[alright]] actor.

The [[saga]] it about a con [[entertainer]] known as Jack ([[Mathew]] Lillard) who "claims" to have merchandises called The Spanish [[Justices]]. If you don't know what Spanish [[Justices]] are or haven't [[watched]] the [[trailers]] for this and this is the first review you have read, I won't even say what they are. I figure it would be a big twist of no one knew what it was. He needs protection, so he hires a couple who are also crooks, Max and Jamie (Vincent D'Onofrio and Valeria Golino) as well as a crook that goes by the name of Piece (Mark Boone Junior). He has a girlfriend who won't even tell anyone her name because she's from Mars, as she said. So they (mainly Jack) call her "Mars Girl". Everything starts out fine, but then it turns to one big game. A game that involves some lust, lies and betrayal.

There was some over acting in it (Matt and Valeria, as well as Tamara, were not one of them). There were some scenes they could've done better and the score could've been a little better as well. Some of the score was actually good. The theme they used for the beginning and the end (before the credits) was a good song choice, that's my opinion. The fight scene in the end could've been a little longer and a little more violent, but what can you do? One more comment on Matt: Damn, he plays a smooth, slick con man.

I know this is a review, but I need to make a correction towards NeCRo, one of the reviewers: Valeria Golino is not a newcomer. According to this site, she has been acting since 1983. To me, and hopefully to others, she is well known as Charlie Sheen's Italian love interest in both the "Hot Shots!" movies. But good review.

Although I think it's one of the rare films I've seen and it's really good (which is why I gave it 10 stars above), I will give the grade of what I thought when I first saw it.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2114 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] I have NOT seen this movie, but I must. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's books (Kon Tiki, Ra and Aku Aku) I am actively looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians migrated to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[voyage]] was [[heroic]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. I have NOT seen this movie, but I must. Having read all three of Thor Heyerdahl's books (Kon Tiki, Ra and Aku Aku) I am actively looking for a copy of this movie.

The thesis that Peruvians migrated to Polynesia is alive and well. Considering that this crew had NO GPS, and only an old fashioned valve (tube) radio with a 6-watt output, their [[tour]] was [[valiant]] to say the least.

Please reply to this message if you can tell me the location of a copy of this video.

I would be interested in buying it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2115 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] This is a [[FUNNY]] film. It has all the [[usual]] [[Disney]] components (music, [[great]] range of characters, story, appeal), [[entwined]] with [[superb]] animation and the [[excellent]] voice talents of [[less]] well known actors as those in say "Antz" and "Price of Egypt".

The [[characters]] work really well, and have a strong appeal, and the humour is aimed at a wide level which [[overcomes]] generational [[barriers]]. The movie is also presented in superb cinemascope format, which adds to the cinema experience.

Call me crazy, but I have seen the film three times, and I intend on taking more friends to see it this weekend. Many skeptics have seen this film on my recommendation and not been disappointed. I work in a multiplex, and I can honestly say that no-one has ever walked out of this movie without a sense of satisfaction.

See it, and don't be put off because it is animated. You are sure to enjoy this movie, and make sure you stay for the end credits! The bloopers and out-takes at the end are the funniest part of the film, which is packed with laughs throughout. This is a [[DROLL]] film. It has all the [[routine]] [[Disneyland]] components (music, [[large]] range of characters, story, appeal), [[interconnected]] with [[glorious]] animation and the [[sumptuous]] voice talents of [[fewer]] well known actors as those in say "Antz" and "Price of Egypt".

The [[features]] work really well, and have a strong appeal, and the humour is aimed at a wide level which [[expires]] generational [[impediment]]. The movie is also presented in superb cinemascope format, which adds to the cinema experience.

Call me crazy, but I have seen the film three times, and I intend on taking more friends to see it this weekend. Many skeptics have seen this film on my recommendation and not been disappointed. I work in a multiplex, and I can honestly say that no-one has ever walked out of this movie without a sense of satisfaction.

See it, and don't be put off because it is animated. You are sure to enjoy this movie, and make sure you stay for the end credits! The bloopers and out-takes at the end are the funniest part of the film, which is packed with laughs throughout. --------------------------------------------- Result 2116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Superhero]] movies [[pretty]] much [[always]] suck, and this is no [[exception]]. Its only redeeming quality is the [[fact]] the [[movie]] [[COULD]] have been even [[worse]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[movie]], so yes it is that [[bad]]...

If your [[looking]] for a black [[superhero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[superhero]] [[movie]] but at least its [[entertaining]]. [[Hero]] movies [[quite]] much [[consistently]] suck, and this is no [[immunities]]. Its only redeeming quality is the [[facto]] the [[kino]] [[WO]] have been even [[worst]]. I would put 'Batman & Robin' and 'Steel' above this [[film]], so yes it is that [[wicked]]...

If your [[searching]] for a black [[hero]], check out 'Blankman' its not a "serious" [[hero]] [[film]] but at least its [[fun]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[If]] you're watching this without an inkling of an idea what the story is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[synopsis]] has painted a picture of a rather sane storyline, but the actual [[film]] is [[anything]] but.

As the synopsis went, it tells of an obsessed mountain climber, which you'll see as the prologue before the opening credits and text crawl, which tells you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary city that exists in dreamy manuscripts of the mind (note to self – this spells trouble with flashing lights), where its inhabitants are immortals yearning for a change in their omnipresence. They can see our world, and notice of all persons this mountain climber, and the synopsis explained that they decided to contact him through alchemy, creating an intelligent sphere to meet the man.

What that translated to, is a repetitive piece of animation that a 5 year old kid could produce. Have shapes created, though credit goes to the stop motion style, and put it through a mind-numbing loop. And repeat until your eyes start to close, then move on to the next scene. If anything, the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) really love their sticks and balls, constantly playing at conjuring up that magical sphere, and having a field day playing with it before releasing it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the man interacts with the sphere in yet another hypnotically boring and sleep inducing sequence.

Thank goodness of course that the run time is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or less) against the 70 stated. While firmly dated, its dull colours, non-existent story, scratchy soundtrack and repetitive pictures will win over no fans. Don't waste time. [[Though]] you're watching this without an inkling of an idea what the story is about, then you're in for quite the surprise. Even then the [[outline]] has painted a picture of a rather sane storyline, but the actual [[kino]] is [[somethings]] but.

As the synopsis went, it tells of an obsessed mountain climber, which you'll see as the prologue before the opening credits and text crawl, which tells you of the presence of Chronopolis, an imaginary city that exists in dreamy manuscripts of the mind (note to self – this spells trouble with flashing lights), where its inhabitants are immortals yearning for a change in their omnipresence. They can see our world, and notice of all persons this mountain climber, and the synopsis explained that they decided to contact him through alchemy, creating an intelligent sphere to meet the man.

What that translated to, is a repetitive piece of animation that a 5 year old kid could produce. Have shapes created, though credit goes to the stop motion style, and put it through a mind-numbing loop. And repeat until your eyes start to close, then move on to the next scene. If anything, the Chonopolisians (if this term exists) really love their sticks and balls, constantly playing at conjuring up that magical sphere, and having a field day playing with it before releasing it to the "other" world. It gets no better as well, when the man interacts with the sphere in yet another hypnotically boring and sleep inducing sequence.

Thank goodness of course that the run time is shorter than what's advertised, which is 57 minutes (or less) against the 70 stated. While firmly dated, its dull colours, non-existent story, scratchy soundtrack and repetitive pictures will win over no fans. Don't waste time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Since]] the advent of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and [[easily]] [[touched]] by accounts of unhappy [[love]]. Even more [[fascinating]] have [[always]] been the [[tales]] of [[impossible]] [[love]], [[love]] that cannot be. The [[Israeli]] filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The [[Bubble]]" is about that. And then it is also not. The title of the [[film]] refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[background]] of the [[political]] realities of [[Israel]]. The country's [[cosmopolitan]] and unofficial capital city doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a city in the [[Palestinian]] [[West]] [[Bank]] which [[also]] [[features]] in the [[film]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the Palestinian checkpoints. [[Actually]], it doesn't [[seem]] to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv allows people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western city. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' records, a lifestyle magazine editor looking for a sexy cover for his next issue, [[trendy]] people sitting in trendy cafes discussing trendy things over cups of [[cappuccino]] and other similarly trendy drinks, while those at home are watching the local edition of Pop Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[reality]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young Israelis who share a flat and, for the most part, try to stay out of politics. Yelli, the camp owner and manager of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the city and prefers not to think about the „crap that surrounds them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a slightly avantguard record store, seems to be equally unwilling to engage in long political discussions and contemplations. Lulu, the only female of the lot, is on the contrary linked to the Israeli Left, although her political activities seem to be confined to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam naturally don't object to [[participating]] in these. Lulu and her [[political]] [[friends]] make t-shirts with the rave's [[logo]], put up [[posters]] and hand out [[booklets]] [[advertising]] it in the [[neighbourhood]]. Their [[main]] concern [[seems]] to be that there are never any actual [[Palestinians]] [[participating]] and that the [[police]] might [[come]] and [[spoil]] all the [[fun]] for them again. The [[closest]] they [[come]] to an [[actual]] [[confrontation]] is when they get into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the initial hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with [[Hebrew]], he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. [[Because]] the advent of literature, people of all nationalities have been fascinated and [[conveniently]] [[poked]] by accounts of unhappy [[adored]]. Even more [[mesmerizing]] have [[invariably]] been the [[fables]] of [[unable]] [[likes]], [[likes]] that cannot be. The [[Palestine]] filmmaker Eytan Fox' latest film „The [[Moniker]]" is about that. And then it is also not. The title of the [[flick]] refers to the „bubble" that is Tel-Aviv set against the [[context]] of the [[politically]] realities of [[Israeli]]. The country's [[metropolis]] and unofficial capital city doesn't have much in common with Nablus, a city in the [[Palestine]] [[Western]] [[Banking]] which [[moreover]] [[idiosyncrasies]] in the [[cinema]]. It doesn't have much in common with the tense and hateful atmosphere at the Palestinian checkpoints. [[Indeed]], it doesn't [[appears]] to have much in common with anything surrounding it. The „bubble" of Tel-Aviv allows people to have a lifestyle which isn't much different from what you may expect in any Western city. Teenage girls looking for Britney Spears' records, a lifestyle magazine editor looking for a sexy cover for his next issue, [[fashionable]] people sitting in trendy cafes discussing trendy things over cups of [[mocha]] and other similarly trendy drinks, while those at home are watching the local edition of Pop Idol. It is this „bubble" that also has the potential to lull one's mind into a false sense of [[realist]].

The film evolves around the lives of three young Israelis who share a flat and, for the most part, try to stay out of politics. Yelli, the camp owner and manager of „Orna & Ella", a hip cafe, rarely leaves the city and prefers not to think about the „crap that surrounds them". Noam, a soft and easygoing employee of a slightly avantguard record store, seems to be equally unwilling to engage in long political discussions and contemplations. Lulu, the only female of the lot, is on the contrary linked to the Israeli Left, although her political activities seem to be confined to „raves against the occupation". Yelli and Noam naturally don't object to [[participated]] in these. Lulu and her [[politician]] [[boyfriends]] make t-shirts with the rave's [[logos]], put up [[banners]] and hand out [[pamphlet]] [[publicity]] it in the [[vicinity]]. Their [[principal]] concern [[looks]] to be that there are never any actual [[Israeli]] [[implicated]] and that the [[policing]] might [[arrive]] and [[ruin]] all the [[amusing]] for them again. The [[nearest]] they [[arrived]] to an [[reales]] [[encounters]] is when they get into a scuffle with some not so Palestinian-friendly locals who try to prevent them from handing out the leaflets. In other words, predictable products of the „bubble".

The opening scenes of the film take us to a checkpoint on a road to Nablus where we also find Noam doing his reserve duty. A group of Palestinians is being thoroughly checked before entering Israel, among them a pregnant woman who suddenly goes into labour and gives birth to a stillborn child despite the best efforts from Noam and the doctor who eventually arrives in an ambulance. The woman is comforted by a young man who later turns up on Noam's doorstep in Tel-Aviv with his ID which the latter obviously dropped during the ordeal on the border. His name is Ashraf, he's Palestinian and he's gay. And he hasn't just come to hand back the ID, he has come to see Noam. Without a permit to live in Israel and despite the initial hesitation from Noam's flatmates he stays. He soon gets a Jewish name and a job at Yelli's cafe. Having grown up in Jerusalem with [[Hebrews]], he doesn't have an Arabic accent which makes it possible for him and his newly found friends to conceal his identity. The sky is light blue and the air is sweet. But it cannot last. For he has become part of an equation which was never meant to be.

At one point, Noam and Ashraf watch a play called Bent about two prisoners in a Nazi concentration camp who have a love relationship which can never become physical or visible to the surrounding guards. They find a way of being together on another level, a metaphysical one, a level where no one else has access. This is also where our couple arrives in the end. And it couldn't have been much different for them, not in today's Israel.

„The Bubble" is a political statement about the bubble that bursts when confronted with the political realities of today's Israel set against the background of a beautiful and awkward love story involving an Israeli and a Palestinian, the impossible love story in a divided world where no such things as compromise or other colours than black and white exist. „The Bubble" is also a beautiful film about people, gay and straight, inhabiting that strange city, Tel-Aviv, shown through the eyes of people who really care about them. The film's premise may have its flaws and the fatal chain of events may seem somewhat construed, but its strong message and emotional impact will not leave you untouched. --------------------------------------------- Result 2119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[totally]] disagreed with those comments which [[said]] this is a good [[movie]]. This is a totally [[SUCKED]] movie. I mean [[SUCKED]] - S.U.C.K.E.D. The story [[development]] is strange. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent girl to a party-fun seeking [[chick]] for no [[convincing]] reasons at all. [[In]] [[addition]], all the [[actresses]] [[looked]] way too [[old]] for being college [[students]] - College [[students]] [[looked]] like about 30 [[years]] old - you figure out the rest. I [[watched]] only about first ten minutes and started fast forwarding to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[hasty]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are [[laughable]], [[considering]] how many clothes they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[save]] yourself a few bucks. Conclusion: Story - 0, [[Sex]] - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. I [[absolutely]] disagreed with those comments which [[avowed]] this is a good [[film]]. This is a totally [[ASPIRED]] movie. I mean [[ASPIRED]] - S.U.C.K.E.D. The story [[evolution]] is strange. Mia Kirshner changed from an innocent girl to a party-fun seeking [[girl]] for no [[persuading]] reasons at all. [[For]] [[supplement]], all the [[actors]] [[seemed]] way too [[antique]] for being college [[schoolboys]] - College [[student]] [[seemed]] like about 30 [[olds]] old - you figure out the rest. I [[saw]] only about first ten minutes and started fast forwarding to look for sex scenes. all the sex scenes are lame, [[headlong]] and, most importantly, no frontal at all. All the sex scenes are [[ridiculous]], [[consider]] how many clothes they had on. Do yourself a favor - put it down and [[savings]] yourself a few bucks. Conclusion: Story - 0, [[Sexuality]] - 0, Acting - 0, Score - 0 out 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (84%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[documentary]] is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige Richards) career. The Tennessee tease was the most recognizable pin-up queen in history. Her most memorable work [[came]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his Movie Star News instructed Betty on what to do in front of the camera. There was no nudity in the famous photos or "stag films", but nonetheless, Klaw was charged with distributing [[obscene]] materials and was ordered to destroy them to avoid prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her career. The girl-next-door with jet black hair, blue eyes and an hour glass figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and devote her last years to religion. This movie actually could have been a lot better; but good [[enough]] to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the cast: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can change your heart rate. This [[literature]] is a reenactment of the last few years of Betty Page's(Paige Richards) career. The Tennessee tease was the most recognizable pin-up queen in history. Her most memorable work [[arrived]] in the 1950's and was fetish photos, bondage and cat-fight "girly flicks". Irving Klaw(Dukey Flyswatter)at his Movie Star News instructed Betty on what to do in front of the camera. There was no nudity in the famous photos or "stag films", but nonetheless, Klaw was charged with distributing [[pornographic]] materials and was ordered to destroy them to avoid prosecution. It is no surprise that Betty had a cult following at the height of her career. The girl-next-door with jet black hair, blue eyes and an hour glass figure dressed in fetish gear or not would mesmerize for decades. After all, it has been said that she was photographed more than Marilyn Monroe and second only to the most photographed image in the world, Elvis Presley. Betty Page would disappear and devote her last years to religion. This movie actually could have been a lot better; but good [[adequately]] to hold interest.

Miss Richards is stunning in her own right. Bra, panties, garter belt and hose do not hurt her image in the least. Also in the cast: Jaimie Henkin, Jana Strain, Emily Marilyn and Julie Simone. Be advised this movie can change your heart rate. --------------------------------------------- Result 2121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Thank God this wasn't based on a true story, because what a story it is. Populated by despicable characters whose [[depravity]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a mesmerizing, jaw-dropping excursion into perversion which [[would]] be laughable (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly tragic undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[magnificent]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than Sidney Lumet doesn't [[hurt]] either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. Thank God this wasn't based on a true story, because what a story it is. Populated by despicable characters whose [[debauchery]] knows no bounds, Before The Devil is a mesmerizing, jaw-dropping excursion into perversion which [[ought]] be laughable (and sometimes is, even with - or perhaps because of - the sickeningly tragic undercurrent of human dysfunction throughout) if it weren't carried out with such [[sumptuous]], overwhelming conviction by its stars. The excellent script by Kelly Masterson and superb direction by none other than Sidney Lumet doesn't [[harmed]] either.

The main dysfunction here is of a family nature, with the two majorly screwed up brothers (brilliant portrayals from Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ethan Hawke) deciding to rob their own parents' jewelry store, an attempt that goes pathetically awry.

The story is told with time-shifts (which are noted on screen, such as: "Charlie: Two Days Before The Robbery", so no one should be confused); some people have said they didn't like this device but I thought it worked perfectly, adding to the skeweredness of the whole affair, considering that the two brothers in question are hardly playing with full decks - between them you couldn't make a decent poker hand to save your life. Throw in these cheesy extra tidbits: one of the brothers is a drug addict, married to Gina (Marisa Tomei, also excellent), who is having an affair with the other brother, toss in some monumental sibling rivalry, along with the fact that said drug addict brother hates his father (a wrenching performance from Albert Finney), who has apparently caused him serious past pain, and you've got a Shakespearean/Greek tragedy on your hands. Proceed with caution. --------------------------------------------- Result 2122 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb displays this just think zero and you'll get my drift. [[Director]] and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most [[expensive]] movie ever made), but that need not be an [[insurmountable]] handicap. I've seen some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard [[work]], integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly [[possible]] to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at fraction of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "War of the Worlds". Unfortunately, Hines failed in all these departments. Even if he had had Spielberg's budget and Tom Cruise signed for the lead his movie would have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a story. Thanks to digital video technology he can record images and sound, but he shows little aptitude for assembling a narrative with what he records. A guy walks down a country lane, a lot. He talks badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's returning -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be useful (a first-year film student could storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical establishing sequence than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than total artistic ineptitude is a desire to pad out thirty minutes of wretchedly amateurish CG works into something that could be offered as a feature-length film. Finally the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and talking becomes running and talking, or shrieking. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the dialogue is lifted straight from H.G. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of cinema to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times (flipped left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer looks like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. Is it possible to give a movie NO STARS? I suppose not. However many stars IMDb displays this just think zero and you'll get my drift. [[Headmaster]] and photographer Timothy Hines didn't have much of a budget compared to Spielberg's Herculean effort with the same material (rumored to be the most [[pricey]] movie ever made), but that need not be an [[invincible]] handicap. I've seen some wonderful work done on a comparative shoestring ("Soldier and Saints" is a recent example). With hard [[collaboration]], integrity and, above all, talent it is certainly [[reachable]] to realize a faithful rendition of Wells' novella -- and at fraction of what was spent by Dreamworks on its "War of the Worlds". Unfortunately, Hines failed in all these departments. Even if he had had Spielberg's budget and Tom Cruise signed for the lead his movie would have stunk just as badly as this barnyard animal he's foisted on us.

Primarily, Hines seems unable to tell a story. Thanks to digital video technology he can record images and sound, but he shows little aptitude for assembling a narrative with what he records. A guy walks down a country lane, a lot. He talks badly aped Received English to some other guy. Then he walks down the same lane, only shot from the back this time to show he's returning -- clever, eh? Walking and talking, for nearly an hour that's all that happens. OK, I'll grant that one extended excursion from the main character's house to the impact site on Horsell Common to show that it's a considerable distance from one place to the other might be useful (a first-year film student could storyboard a more economical and more aesthetical establishing sequence than this, btw), but half a dozen times? Back and forth, back and forth, et cetera, et cetera with some yakkity-yak in between. Remarkable. The only explanation for this surfeit of redundancy other than total artistic ineptitude is a desire to pad out thirty minutes of wretchedly amateurish CG works into something that could be offered as a feature-length film. Finally the Martian fighting machines appear and the walking and talking becomes running and talking, or shrieking. Later we get staggering and wailing for dessert.

Thankfully, much of the dialogue is lifted straight from H.G. Wells' text; else we'd have no idea what is going on. But is it not the whole point of cinema to illuminate a text, to realize what words alone can't convey? If a film relies on dialogue or monologue to tell us what we see or how to feel, why bother? Why not do a radio play? Orson Welles made himself a household name doing just that. However, Hines thinks he's a filmmaker, so he's content to mouth the words and swallow the meaning.

Secondly, Hines was able to buy some CG effects of a sort for his movie, but he has no idea how to use them. Now I for one have no unquenchable sweet tooth for eye candy. I believe good science fiction cinema doesn't need dazzling technical effects. Some really potent Sci-Fi's have flourished on virtually none at all. But "The War of the Worlds" as film requires a certain baseline effort. Wells tells a story that hinges on things can be seen and heard and even smelled. The effects don't need to be complex; they can even be crude (e.g. fighting machines on wires gliding over miniature streets as seen in the George Pal/Byron Haskins 1953 version), but they must be handled well. Unfortunately Hines' effects are both crude and incompetent – tripod fighting machines higher than a cathedral spire stomp around making a noise like a pogo stick bouncing on linoleum – Martian squidoids even though oppressed by four times the gravity of their native world scurry and flit about without perceptible effort – skeletons totally denuded of flesh and muscle writhe and scream -- the same damn horse and buggy greenscreens its way across the foreground a dozen times (flipped left for right occasionally in hope that we might not notice) – and on ad nauseum. Crude technique is forgivable. So you have a CG fire effect that's less than convincing? Fine, we can work around that. Just don't use it too often and only show glimpses of it. That stomped woman sequence looks more like a crushed plum? Throw it away. It's not necessary. You say your Martian flyer looks like a toy on a string? If you must use it, go ahead, but please don't show it twice! But no, Hines won't listen. We get the worst looking stuff used again and again. Gotta get those 180 minutes somehow, boy.

Next we have acting, or more precisely too much acting. Whether in a speaking role or just paid to die on queue everybody in this film is acting his little heart out. Evidently Hines thinks he's getting a bargain -- More fleeing in terror over there! You, quaking behind that tree, let's have a real conniption fit this take. You call that writhing in agony? Nonsense, my grandmother can writhe better -- Nevertheless the cast as a whole and individually stink. They aren't even good amateurs. But this needn't prove fatal. Many a good movie has been made with rancid acting. That's what directors are for. And editors. Which brings up another point… Who the hell let Tim Hines edit this cheese factory? If America's butchers were as adept at meat cutting as Hines is at film cutting your next hamburger would be all fingers and no beef. In spite of the near three-hour running time there is lots of stuff missing from this movie -- not sequences, but single frames, creating a herky-jerky effect that's nauseating to watch. Maybe Hines intention was to simulate the effect of a hand cranked cine camera of the 1890's. If he was I can say he doesn't know how to do it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Proof that not everything Tarantino touches turns to gold. This is most [[definitely]] plastic, all the way. Its easy to [[see]] that without Quentin's [[involvement]] this would have [[probably]] sat on the shelf for years, that's [[assuming]] it would have ever got [[produced]] in the first place. It is about a [[woman]] with a [[fascination]] of death who [[gets]] a job cleaning up after crime scenes, Angela Jones is unconvincing in this role, William Baldwin is better as the Serial Killer who keeps Jones in employment!. [[All]] in all [[pretty]] [[poor]]. Proof that not everything Tarantino touches turns to gold. This is most [[indubitably]] plastic, all the way. Its easy to [[seeing]] that without Quentin's [[betrothal]] this would have [[perhaps]] sat on the shelf for years, that's [[presuming]] it would have ever got [[generated]] in the first place. It is about a [[femmes]] with a [[passion]] of death who [[get]] a job cleaning up after crime scenes, Angela Jones is unconvincing in this role, William Baldwin is better as the Serial Killer who keeps Jones in employment!. [[Totality]] in all [[quite]] [[poorest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[liked]] nearly all the [[movies]] in the [[Dirty]] [[Harry]] series with the [[exception]] of the one I [[think]] is [[titled]] "[[Enforcer]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[weak]] in [[areas]] too, but I still [[enjoyed]] it. This one is one of my [[favorites]] of the [[series]], if nothing else for the [[great]] line of "Go ahead, [[make]] my day". This one also [[features]] an interesting albeit familiar [[plot]] of [[someone]] killing those that have [[done]] her [[wrong]]. Just [[think]] "Magnum Force" with less mystery about who is behind the [[killings]] and you have your plot. Granted there is a [[bit]] more than that as this one does feature a very [[nice]] [[final]] [[showdown]] at an amusement park. It also [[features]] [[Dirty]] Harry [[getting]] a bulldog as a [[gift]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a rather [[humorous]] scene. The only [[question]] that remains is why Clint Eastwood had to have the rather mediocre actress Sandra Locke in so [[many]] of his [[movies]]. She brings the [[score]] down a point [[every]] time even when [[overall]] the [[movie]] is [[enjoyable]] to me. [[Granted]] she is not to bad here, but her [[character]] could have been so much better by someone else. Another problem with this movie and other Dirty [[Harry]] movies, at times they almost seem to be [[advertisements]] for guns. I like guns as much as the next person, but do we really need scenes of him [[explaining]] all the [[different]] strengths of his newest weapon and how [[many]] bullets it [[holds]]? [[Still]], very [[nice]] [[entry]] into the Dirty Harry series of movies. I [[loved]] nearly all the [[theater]] in the [[Sleazy]] [[Harri]] series with the [[exemptions]] of the one I [[believing]] is [[entitled]] "[[Gorilla]]". "Deadpool" was a bit [[puny]] in [[zones]] too, but I still [[liked]] it. This one is one of my [[favorite]] of the [[serials]], if nothing else for the [[grand]] line of "Go ahead, [[deliver]] my day". This one also [[featured]] an interesting albeit familiar [[intrigue]] of [[anybody]] killing those that have [[effected]] her [[misspelled]]. Just [[thought]] "Magnum Force" with less mystery about who is behind the [[kills]] and you have your plot. Granted there is a [[bitten]] more than that as this one does feature a very [[pleasurable]] [[last]] [[confrontation]] at an amusement park. It also [[attribute]] [[Nasty]] Harry [[obtaining]] a bulldog as a [[gifts]] and it tripping up Sandra Locke in a rather [[amusing]] scene. The only [[issue]] that remains is why Clint Eastwood had to have the rather mediocre actress Sandra Locke in so [[myriad]] of his [[theater]]. She brings the [[notation]] down a point [[each]] time even when [[general]] the [[flick]] is [[pleasant]] to me. [[Afforded]] she is not to bad here, but her [[traits]] could have been so much better by someone else. Another problem with this movie and other Dirty [[Harri]] movies, at times they almost seem to be [[commercials]] for guns. I like guns as much as the next person, but do we really need scenes of him [[explains]] all the [[various]] strengths of his newest weapon and how [[multiple]] bullets it [[held]]? [[Nonetheless]], very [[pleasurable]] [[entrance]] into the Dirty Harry series of movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 2125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is a [[great]] movie that everyone should see. It plays like a Dean Koontz book.

[[Bill]] Paxton's performance was [[great]] in that it really [[seems]] like he [[believes]] in what he is saying and doing.

I don't know why [[viewers]] have to read in some kind of advocacy for religious [[murder]] in to the film. It is fiction. The ending is [[surprising]], but fictional. [[So]] what? I think that is what makes this [[movie]] so [[good]]. SPOILER [[DO]] [[NOT]] READ [[FURTHER]] IF [[YOU]] [[HAVENT]] SEEN THE MOVIE. Throughout the movie, the viewer is continually shocked at the sickness of Paxton's character, the impact on the children, and the way the children handle this outrageous conduct. And then at the end, it turns out to be true. God has put him on a mission to rid the world of demons. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other viewers suggest. Sure, he is given info that he couldn't have known otherwise, but the movie goes further to show how God is "protecting" Adam through the convenient video quality problem and the complete lack of memory of the second FBI agent. The film isn't advocating Christian murder, it is merely taking the viewer on a very unexpected ride. This is a [[whopping]] movie that everyone should see. It plays like a Dean Koontz book.

[[Invoices]] Paxton's performance was [[fantastic]] in that it really [[looks]] like he [[deems]] in what he is saying and doing.

I don't know why [[onlookers]] have to read in some kind of advocacy for religious [[assassinations]] in to the film. It is fiction. The ending is [[impressive]], but fictional. [[Consequently]] what? I think that is what makes this [[flick]] so [[alright]]. SPOILER [[DOING]] [[NO]] READ [[ELSE]] IF [[TOI]] [[ACTUALY]] SEEN THE MOVIE. Throughout the movie, the viewer is continually shocked at the sickness of Paxton's character, the impact on the children, and the way the children handle this outrageous conduct. And then at the end, it turns out to be true. God has put him on a mission to rid the world of demons. Paxton is not clairvoyant as other viewers suggest. Sure, he is given info that he couldn't have known otherwise, but the movie goes further to show how God is "protecting" Adam through the convenient video quality problem and the complete lack of memory of the second FBI agent. The film isn't advocating Christian murder, it is merely taking the viewer on a very unexpected ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I watched this movie after [[watching]] Practical Magic, and the older film was far superior. I liked the [[way]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. Jimmy Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this film, but I suppose they did serve to highlight the reserve of Gillian's character. I was also [[struck]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The gestures [[Nicky]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers especially struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. I watched this movie after [[staring]] Practical Magic, and the older film was far superior. I liked the [[camino]] the lighting, makeup, and costumes changed as Gillian changed in the story. Jimmy Stewart's mannerisms didn't do a lot for me in this film, but I suppose they did serve to highlight the reserve of Gillian's character. I was also [[slugged]] by Nicky's and Gillian's mannerisms--it was as if the director wanted him to appear effeminate and Gillian to appear masculine. The gestures [[Nick]] makes when he's showing Redlich his powers especially struck me. I've never thought of warlocks as being effeminate, so it was an interesting way of contrasting those characters. --------------------------------------------- Result 2127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] In the [[beginning]] of this [[film]], one of the [[commentators]] [[says]] that he was told that he has two [[strikes]] against him: he is black and male. But in addition to that, he has a third strike: he's [[gay]]. "You're [[going]] to have to be stronger than you ever imagined," he is [[told]]. "Paris is Burning" is a documentary about gay black and Hispanic men who are tranvestites or [[transsexuals]].

The [[miracle]] of "Paris is Burning" is that director Jennie Livingston [[takes]] a [[subject]] that [[could]] have very easily become a freak [[show]] and allows the people in it their humanity. We learn their views of homosexuality, men, women, their hopes, their disappointments, their dreams. Some of these dreams are so unattainable it's tragic. Many of the people are seriously in denial;

This is not a film for everyone. There are shots in this movie of nude transsexuals. If you have a problem with homosexuality, then this movie isn't for you. But if you do see this movie you'll realise "Paris is Burning" isn't really about men wearing women's clothes, it's about a group of people who are routinely marginalised and put down by society at large, and what they do to get a sense of community in their lives.

I've watched this movie four times since it was released in 1991, because it says so many things: it's a commentary about materialism in our culture, about gender roles, about rich and poor people, about the media and what it celebrates, about fame and adulation. "Paris is Burning" is one of the most humane, and one of the saddest, movies I've ever seen. In the [[startup]] of this [[movies]], one of the [[analysts]] [[asserts]] that he was told that he has two [[strike]] against him: he is black and male. But in addition to that, he has a third strike: he's [[homo]]. "You're [[go]] to have to be stronger than you ever imagined," he is [[tells]]. "Paris is Burning" is a documentary about gay black and Hispanic men who are tranvestites or [[transvestites]].

The [[miracles]] of "Paris is Burning" is that director Jennie Livingston [[pick]] a [[theme]] that [[wo]] have very easily become a freak [[displaying]] and allows the people in it their humanity. We learn their views of homosexuality, men, women, their hopes, their disappointments, their dreams. Some of these dreams are so unattainable it's tragic. Many of the people are seriously in denial;

This is not a film for everyone. There are shots in this movie of nude transsexuals. If you have a problem with homosexuality, then this movie isn't for you. But if you do see this movie you'll realise "Paris is Burning" isn't really about men wearing women's clothes, it's about a group of people who are routinely marginalised and put down by society at large, and what they do to get a sense of community in their lives.

I've watched this movie four times since it was released in 1991, because it says so many things: it's a commentary about materialism in our culture, about gender roles, about rich and poor people, about the media and what it celebrates, about fame and adulation. "Paris is Burning" is one of the most humane, and one of the saddest, movies I've ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] do not ever watch this film...it is the [[biggest]] [[pile]] of sh*te i have ever come [[across]] in my whole life. and thats saying something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[absolutely]] dire this is THE [[WORST]] FILM [[IN]] THE WORLD!!! [[seriously]] doesn't it [[even]] give you a [[hit]] seeing as it cost my 99p from sainsburys and it was only made in 2005? [[hahaha]] this film is like a cheap [[college]] movie you can even see the camera in the corner of the screen....although if u really wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[scary]] [[shark]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my life...ha ha. i mean [[seriously]] this is the [[biggest]] [[waste]] of 2 1/2 hours EVER!! do not ever watch this film...it is the [[greatest]] [[piles]] of sh*te i have ever come [[throughout]] in my whole life. and thats saying something. the acting, storyline and filming were [[entirely]] dire this is THE [[HARDEST]] FILM [[INTO]] THE WORLD!!! [[severely]] doesn't it [[yet]] give you a [[strike]] seeing as it cost my 99p from sainsburys and it was only made in 2005? [[ahah]] this film is like a cheap [[colleges]] movie you can even see the camera in the corner of the screen....although if u really wanna watch it you gotta watch the "[[terrible]] [[mako]] scene"...possibly the best piece of acting i have seen in my life...ha ha. i mean [[earnestly]] this is the [[strongest]] [[wastes]] of 2 1/2 hours EVER!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] And here's [[yet]] another [[piece]] of evidence to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[unique]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Red]] [[Queen]] [[Kills]] Seven Times" is a totally mesmerizing [[wholesome]] of [[original]] plotting, stylish production [[values]], enchanting music, [[great]] acting talents and inventively gory [[murder]] sequences. It's a [[fabulous]] giallo ([[released]] in the golden [[year]] 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[every]] [[fan]] of [[Italian]] [[cinema]]. The storyline doesn't just [[introduce]] your average black-gloved & sexually [[frustrated]] [[killer]], but [[blends]] [[good]] old-fashioned [[revenge]] [[motives]] with the macabre [[myth]] of the [[murderous]] "[[Red]] [[Queen]]". At [[young]] age, their [[grandfather]] [[tells]] the [[constantly]] fighting [[siblings]] [[Kitty]] and Evelyn about an uncanny lady who, once [[every]] 100 [[years]] on April 6th, [[kills]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years [[later]], [[Kitty]] has [[become]] the successful choreographer of a [[prominent]] modeling [[agency]] (even sharing her [[bed]] with the general [[manager]]) when [[suddenly]] the [[killing]] spree [[begins]]. Sister Evelyn [[would]] be the [[obvious]] [[culprit]], but she [[moved]] to the States [[recently]]... [[Or]] has she? Complex yet [[compelling]] and [[involving]] [[red]] herrings are thrown at you every couple of minutes and the Red Queen [[character]] is [[definitely]] the most [[fascinating]] [[killer]] in giallo-history. Her [[face]] can never be seen, but she [[wears]] a blood red cloak and produces the most ghastly laugh whenever she made a new victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her victims are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind cars and even impaled on fences! That latter one is [[truly]] one of the [[greatest]] (= most gruesome) [[acts]] of violence I've ever seen! What more could you possibly [[request]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, perhaps? The gorgeous female actresses got this more than covered, among them Barbara Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Emilio]] Miraglia isn't the most famous giallo-director, as he only [[made]] this one and the [[equally]] [[recommended]] "The [[Night]] Evelyn [[Came]] Out of the [[Grave]]", but his [[influence]] and importance should [[NOT]] be [[forgotten]]. And here's [[still]] another [[slice]] of evidence to claim that we should all worship the Italian giallo and acknowledge it to be the absolute most [[sole]] sub genre in horror. Emilio Miraglia's "The [[Rouge]] [[Quinn]] [[Murdering]] Seven Times" is a totally mesmerizing [[healthful]] of [[upfront]] plotting, stylish production [[value]], enchanting music, [[marvellous]] acting talents and inventively gory [[assassinate]] sequences. It's a [[unbelievable]] giallo ([[publicized]] in the golden [[annum]] 1972) that belongs in the top-five of [[any]] [[breather]] of [[Ltalian]] [[cine]]. The storyline doesn't just [[introduces]] your average black-gloved & sexually [[disappointed]] [[slayer]], but [[mingling]] [[buena]] old-fashioned [[retaliation]] [[grounds]] with the macabre [[myths]] of the [[lethal]] "[[Reid]] [[Quinn]]". At [[youthful]] age, their [[grandpa]] [[says]] the [[ceaselessly]] fighting [[brethren]] [[Kitten]] and Evelyn about an uncanny lady who, once [[all]] 100 [[olds]] on April 6th, [[murders]] seven people of which her sister is the inevitable last victim. Fourteen years [[thereafter]], [[Kitten]] has [[gotten]] the successful choreographer of a [[illustrious]] modeling [[organizations]] (even sharing her [[bedside]] with the general [[administrator]]) when [[abruptly]] the [[killed]] spree [[beginning]]. Sister Evelyn [[ought]] be the [[glaring]] [[guilt]], but she [[shifted]] to the States [[lately]]... [[Orr]] has she? Complex yet [[convincing]] and [[involve]] [[rouge]] herrings are thrown at you every couple of minutes and the Red Queen [[nature]] is [[undoubtedly]] the most [[enthralling]] [[murderer]] in giallo-history. Her [[confront]] can never be seen, but she [[door]] a blood red cloak and produces the most ghastly laugh whenever she made a new victim. She's not exactly gentle either, as her victims are barbarically stabbed with a dagger, dragged behind cars and even impaled on fences! That latter one is [[really]] one of the [[widest]] (= most gruesome) [[act]] of violence I've ever seen! What more could you possibly [[petition]]? Some classy and tasteful nudity, perhaps? The gorgeous female actresses got this more than covered, among them Barbara Bouchet and a young Sybil Danning. [[Bermudez]] Miraglia isn't the most famous giallo-director, as he only [[effected]] this one and the [[similarly]] [[recommendations]] "The [[Nocturnal]] Evelyn [[Became]] Out of the [[Gravesite]]", but his [[implications]] and importance should [[NAH]] be [[disregarded]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It [[started]] out with an interesting premise. I always like Civil War stuff and ancient secret societies. The more the [[film]] progressed, the more I realized that this was a B [[movie]] at [[best]]. In the latter half, it quickly became a C movie, then D, then F, then "I [[wish]] that this wasn't a rental so that I could put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was awful, just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[book]]. [[Maybe]] the [[book]] is well written. The screenplay was written by a 10 year old. It was [[ridiculously]] [[shallow]], the dialog [[drab]] and uninteresting, the [[characters]] about as interesting as a 5 pound bag of fertilizer. I [[really]] [[hated]] this movie, as did my wife. I am a [[Christian]] and I have no problem with movies that promote or support Christianity. This [[movie]] did a great disservice to the cause. Awful, terrible, worthless. If you liked it, I strongly recommend Superman 4. It [[initiation]] out with an interesting premise. I always like Civil War stuff and ancient secret societies. The more the [[cinematography]] progressed, the more I realized that this was a B [[kino]] at [[finest]]. In the latter half, it quickly became a C movie, then D, then F, then "I [[wanting]] that this wasn't a rental so that I could put it in the microwave!" I can't say that the acting in all cases was awful, just most. The writing, however... I never read the [[books]]. [[Perhaps]] the [[workbook]] is well written. The screenplay was written by a 10 year old. It was [[outrageously]] [[cursory]], the dialog [[uninspiring]] and uninteresting, the [[trait]] about as interesting as a 5 pound bag of fertilizer. I [[truthfully]] [[disliked]] this movie, as did my wife. I am a [[Cristian]] and I have no problem with movies that promote or support Christianity. This [[movies]] did a great disservice to the cause. Awful, terrible, worthless. If you liked it, I strongly recommend Superman 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2131 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] "Revolt of the Zombies" proves that having the same [[director]] revamp and recycle an idea doesn't necessarily make lightning strike twice.

The Halperin brothers, [[responsible]] for the horror classic "White Zombie", [[made]] this [[trite]] piece of [[garbage]] a mere few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[recycled]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't want the Halperins to be able to use the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only thing that could help this film, because, as everyone knows, bad films can make much more money simply by having the word 'Zombie' appear in the title. Knowing what Victor Halperin was capable of a few years before only makes this uninteresting film more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror film after this debacle. The zombies here seem not to be true walking dead, but simply hypnotism victims.

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? Be ready to crack a few eggs, including your own.

THE LAME PLOT: Man falls in love with scheming woman who plays with his heart and becomes engaged to him only to make his friend, whom she loves, jealous. This sends man into a spiral of madness in which he tries using zombie mind-control techniques to change things to his advantage in an attempt to win over a woman who isn't worth spit.

This includes one of the most blatantly obvious plot developments I've ever seen. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the ending coming. The acting isn't even good. This movie makes the racially insensitive "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I bought) seems like an atmospheric horror masterpiece by comparison and reminds us that not every black and white film is a classic. It makes the atomic age sci-fi alien zombie cheese fest "Invisible Invaders" seem like a serious drama. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it could probably make many a Korean film fan twitch (South Korean films are often known for their use of melodrama). The credits list the ironically named company Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this would be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not recommended for fans of: zombies, romance, or classic films. "Revolt of the Zombies" proves that having the same [[headmaster]] revamp and recycle an idea doesn't necessarily make lightning strike twice.

The Halperin brothers, [[answerable]] for the horror classic "White Zombie", [[accomplished]] this [[corny]] piece of [[detritus]] a mere few years later to cash in on its popularity and even [[reclaimed]] close-ups of Lugosi's eyes from that previous film. There was a court battle with the "White Zombie" film's rights owners, who didn't want the Halperins to be able to use the word 'zombie' in this title. That word was the only thing that could help this film, because, as everyone knows, bad films can make much more money simply by having the word 'Zombie' appear in the title. Knowing what Victor Halperin was capable of a few years before only makes this uninteresting film more insulting. It seems he never directed another horror film after this debacle. The zombies here seem not to be true walking dead, but simply hypnotism victims.

Wanna create a mind-controlled army of zombies? Be ready to crack a few eggs, including your own.

THE LAME PLOT: Man falls in love with scheming woman who plays with his heart and becomes engaged to him only to make his friend, whom she loves, jealous. This sends man into a spiral of madness in which he tries using zombie mind-control techniques to change things to his advantage in an attempt to win over a woman who isn't worth spit.

This includes one of the most blatantly obvious plot developments I've ever seen. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see the ending coming. The acting isn't even good. This movie makes the racially insensitive "King of the Zombies" (which appeared on the same double bill DVD I bought) seems like an atmospheric horror masterpiece by comparison and reminds us that not every black and white film is a classic. It makes the atomic age sci-fi alien zombie cheese fest "Invisible Invaders" seem like a serious drama. This is one big ball of cheese so ridiculously melodramatic it could probably make many a Korean film fan twitch (South Korean films are often known for their use of melodrama). The credits list the ironically named company Favorite Films. I'm not sure whose favorite film this would be, but they're obviously an idiot.

Not recommended for fans of: zombies, romance, or classic films. --------------------------------------------- Result 2132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A concept with potential, and it was fun to see these two holiday icons together, but...

Rudolph's glowing [[nose]] didn't require the "explanation" offered in this film - much like The Force in the Star Wars films didn't need the explanation of "medichlorians in the bloodstream." But mainly, the [[film]] left me [[cold]] because of Winterbolt's over-complicated plot to destroy Santa. He's got the power to put [[suggestions]] into people's minds, so why does he do things in such a roundabout way? Breaking the [[magic]] of Rudolph's [[nose]], framing Rudolph, threatening to melt the Frosty family...The comedically [[exaggerated]] plots of [[Pinky]] and the Brain and "Phineas and Ferb's" Dr. Doofenshmirtz (which are done that way on purpose and played for laughs) seem simple and straightforward compared to Winterbolt's, which we're expected to take somewhat seriously.

There is a particularly (and amusingly) strange moment when a character throws her two guns at the bad guy, like boomerangs. I understand if they don't want to have guns being shot in a family film, but then why have guns in the first place? A concept with potential, and it was fun to see these two holiday icons together, but...

Rudolph's glowing [[nosedive]] didn't require the "explanation" offered in this film - much like The Force in the Star Wars films didn't need the explanation of "medichlorians in the bloodstream." But mainly, the [[films]] left me [[frigid]] because of Winterbolt's over-complicated plot to destroy Santa. He's got the power to put [[proposal]] into people's minds, so why does he do things in such a roundabout way? Breaking the [[hallucinogenic]] of Rudolph's [[nosedive]], framing Rudolph, threatening to melt the Frosty family...The comedically [[inflated]] plots of [[Piggy]] and the Brain and "Phineas and Ferb's" Dr. Doofenshmirtz (which are done that way on purpose and played for laughs) seem simple and straightforward compared to Winterbolt's, which we're expected to take somewhat seriously.

There is a particularly (and amusingly) strange moment when a character throws her two guns at the bad guy, like boomerangs. I understand if they don't want to have guns being shot in a family film, but then why have guns in the first place? --------------------------------------------- Result 2133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] All in all a good film and better for the fact that had the film not been made the story might remain hidden to the masses. Brosnan does a good job as the native American with a hidden past and the photography is stunning. To some, this may be too whimsical, to others boring - for me it is a gentle, well-told tale and perfect for family viewing. Now that's not something you get a lot of recently. --------------------------------------------- Result 2134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a must-see documentary movie for anyone who fears that modern youth has lost its taste for real-life adventure and its sense of morality. Darius Goes West is an amazing roller-coaster of a story. We live the lives of Darius and the crew as they embark on the journey of a lifetime. Darius has Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, a disease which affects all the muscles in his body. He is confined to a wheelchair, and needs round-the-clock attention. So how could this crew of young friends possibly manage to take him on a 6,000 mile round-trip to the West Coast and back? Watch the movie and experience the ups and downs of this great adventure - laugh and cry with the crew as they cope with unimaginable challenges along the way, and enjoy the final triumph when they arrive back three weeks later in their home town to a rapturous reception and some great surprises! --------------------------------------------- Result 2135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This Movie has [[great]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little [[rough]]. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a Cheesy movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with [[true]] martial arts in it and with [[Amazing]] stunts WITHOUT the use of [[wires]] and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[true]] the two [[main]] stars in the [[show]] where in the kid [[show]] the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this [[movie]]. But hey the fight scenes are enough to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are worthy enough for Jackie Chan to sit threw and [[admire]]. This Movie has [[excellent]] fight scenes. Now its true that the acting is a little [[rugged]]. But If I wanted to see a movie based on acting skills I would watch a Cheesy movie Like American Beauty. But If you want to see a movie with [[veritable]] martial arts in it and with [[Staggering]] stunts WITHOUT the use of [[wiring]] and flying threw the air like so many movies around now which are over killing the matrix. Then Watch this. Now it's [[truthful]] the two [[principal]] stars in the [[display]] where in the kid [[displays]] the power rangers and another cast member of that show has a bit part in this [[filmmaking]]. But hey the fight scenes are enough to make Jet Li p**s his pants. And the stunts are worthy enough for Jackie Chan to sit threw and [[behold]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2136 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I was [[intrigued]] by the title, so during a small bout of [[insomnia]] ([[fueled]] by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then checked my TV [[listings]] and watched it again! There is one very obvious [[realization]] that occurred to me when I [[saw]] this film- in spite of politics, traditions, culture, etc., teenagers [[everywhere]] are virtually the same. The characters of the kids from Belgrade could have been [[transported]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time period, and language differences aside, would be impossible to tell apart from any of the local teens of that [[era]]. They certainly displayed the same growing pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of fact, much the same things that occupied my time growing up in 1970's Southern California.

This was a bittersweet story, but the [[joy]] of youth made it very enjoyable. The characters, especially the young actors, were [[completely]] [[believable]] [[also]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in nicely with other 50's-themed movies. I was [[disconcerted]] by the title, so during a small bout of [[irritability]] ([[powered]] by my curiosity...), I stayed up and watched it. I then checked my TV [[listing]] and watched it again! There is one very obvious [[implementation]] that occurred to me when I [[watched]] this film- in spite of politics, traditions, culture, etc., teenagers [[nowhere]] are virtually the same. The characters of the kids from Belgrade could have been [[hauled]] to, let's say, somewhere in the American Midwest during the same time period, and language differences aside, would be impossible to tell apart from any of the local teens of that [[epoch]]. They certainly displayed the same growing pains and preoccupations, politics aside: Music, sex, movie idols, music, drinking, sports, music... As a matter of fact, much the same things that occupied my time growing up in 1970's Southern California.

This was a bittersweet story, but the [[gladness]] of youth made it very enjoyable. The characters, especially the young actors, were [[totally]] [[dependable]] [[similarly]]. I won't say this was the Yugoslav "American Graffiti", but I will say that it fits in nicely with other 50's-themed movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 2137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] Awlright, damn it, the MooCow will grudgingly admit the truth: I kinda' like this [[cheap]], cheesy 70's parody. The idea that vast hordes of killer tomatoes are destroying the US is a [[great]] [[idea]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[provide]] some decent chuckles, moostly the sight of terrified extras running away from large, obviously fake tomatoes. This film, along with The Kentucky Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier attempts at spoofs, which became so popular in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to Airplane!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at humor are dismal failures, and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people must also have enjoyed it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! Large chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty dull. And dig those 70's clothes, dude!! ;=8) This tomato is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow says grab a pizza and pop in the Tomatoes!! : Awlright, damn it, the MooCow will grudgingly admit the truth: I kinda' like this [[cheaper]], cheesy 70's parody. The idea that vast hordes of killer tomatoes are destroying the US is a [[gorgeous]] [[brainchild]], and in spite of itself, the moovie does [[furnishes]] some decent chuckles, moostly the sight of terrified extras running away from large, obviously fake tomatoes. This film, along with The Kentucky Fried Moovie, is one of the earlier attempts at spoofs, which became so popular in the 80's & 90's, thanks largely to Airplane!. This one, like moost spoofs, is pretty poor. Many attempts at humor are dismal failures, and will induce much groaning. But thanks to the ravenous tomatoes hordes, the obnoxious "Puberty Love" song, and the awesome helicopter crash scene, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes does provide some goods, though largely for the wrong reasons. There are sooooo many things wrong with this film...and so right, it's hard to explain. Enough people must also have enjoyed it as the Tomatoes made a comeback in 2 moore films, and a cartoon series!! Large chunks of time spent away from the tomatoes are pretty dull. And dig those 70's clothes, dude!! ;=8) This tomato is seedy and cheesy, but worth a chuckle or two; the MooCow says grab a pizza and pop in the Tomatoes!! : --------------------------------------------- Result 2138 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] ***Possible spoilers***

I recently watched this movie with my 11 year old son and was pleased to see that he laughed in the right places and was thrilled by the action sequences. Ron Ely is just right as Doc. Cool, calm, almost always in control(and with an occasional twinkle in his eye). What more can one ask for? I have never read a Doc Savage book, so I don't know if it is faithful to the source but I enjoyed the light tone and derring-do. Many people have compared this movie to Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I don't think is fair. The difference in budget is astounding(Raiders must have at least 10 times the budget). Doc Savage does not have the extensive location work that Raiders has. Special effects are also at a minimum but come on people, the story is a lot of fun and the humor is just right. The Sousa music is catchy(love that theme song- Every time I watch the film, I end up humming the theme for days).The best way to approach this film is to just RELAX and enjoy. Highlights include the exciting opening sequence where the fabulous five and Doc chase the Indian sniper throughout the rooftops of New York and the VERY funny fight sequence between Doc and Captain Seas. Not as good is the villain who sleeps in a giant crib (really!). Overall a great movie to watch on a rainy day. I give it 7 out of 10.

Doc Savage, Doc Savage...thank the lord he's here! --------------------------------------------- Result 2139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] [[Child]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most serious issues facing our world today and I [[feared]] that any film on the topic would jump straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual nature in order to shock and disturb the [[audience]]. [[After]] having [[seen]] both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one film [[moved]] me to [[want]] to actually [[see]] a [[change]] in international laws. The other [[felt]] like a [[poor]] [[attempt]] at making me [[cry]] for five minutes with emotive [[music]] and the odd [[suicide]].

I do not believe that turning this issue into a Hollywood tear jerker is a useful or necessary strategy to adopt and I must commend the makes of 'Holly' for engaging subtly but powerfully with the terrible conditions these children are sadly forced to endure. 'Trade' wavered between serious and stupid with scenes involving the death of a cat coming after images that represented children being forced to commit some horrendous acts. I found this unengaging and at times offensive to the cause. If I had wanted a cheap laugh I would not have signed up for a film on child trafficking.

For anyone who would like to watch a powerful film that actually means something I would suggest saving the money on the cinema ticket for the release of 'Holly'. [[Kid]] 'Sexploitation' is one of the most serious issues facing our world today and I [[fears]] that any film on the topic would jump straight to scenes of an explicitly sexual nature in order to shock and disturb the [[audiences]]. [[Upon]] having [[noticed]] both 'Trade' and 'Holly', one film [[shifted]] me to [[wants]] to actually [[consults]] a [[shifting]] in international laws. The other [[smelled]] like a [[deficient]] [[endeavour]] at making me [[cries]] for five minutes with emotive [[musica]] and the odd [[suicidal]].

I do not believe that turning this issue into a Hollywood tear jerker is a useful or necessary strategy to adopt and I must commend the makes of 'Holly' for engaging subtly but powerfully with the terrible conditions these children are sadly forced to endure. 'Trade' wavered between serious and stupid with scenes involving the death of a cat coming after images that represented children being forced to commit some horrendous acts. I found this unengaging and at times offensive to the cause. If I had wanted a cheap laugh I would not have signed up for a film on child trafficking.

For anyone who would like to watch a powerful film that actually means something I would suggest saving the money on the cinema ticket for the release of 'Holly'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] What a let down! This [[started]] with an [[intriguing]] mystery and interesting characters. Admittedly it moved along at the speed of a snail, but I was nevertheless gripped and kept watching.

David Morrissey is [[always]] [[good]] value and he Suranne Jones were good leads. The [[Muslim]] aspects were very interesting. We were tantalised with possible terrorist connections.

But then Morrissey's [[character]] was [[killed]] off and all the air left the balloon. The last episode was dull, dull, dull. The whole thing turned out to be very small [[beer]] and the dénouement was unbelievably feeble.

Five hours of my life for that? My advice: watch paint dry instead. What a let down! This [[initiates]] with an [[riveting]] mystery and interesting characters. Admittedly it moved along at the speed of a snail, but I was nevertheless gripped and kept watching.

David Morrissey is [[continually]] [[alright]] value and he Suranne Jones were good leads. The [[Moslem]] aspects were very interesting. We were tantalised with possible terrorist connections.

But then Morrissey's [[personage]] was [[assassinated]] off and all the air left the balloon. The last episode was dull, dull, dull. The whole thing turned out to be very small [[casket]] and the dénouement was unbelievably feeble.

Five hours of my life for that? My advice: watch paint dry instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Shown in [[Australia]] as 'Hydrosphere', this [[incredibly]] [[bad]] [[movie]] is SO bad that you [[become]] hypnotised and have to watch it to the [[end]], just to [[see]] if it [[could]] [[get]] any [[worse]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[predictable]] it [[seems]] [[written]] by a [[high]] [[school]] dramatics class, the sets are [[pathetic]] but [[marginally]] [[better]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wooden]].

The [[infant]] 'muppet' [[seems]] to have been [[stolen]] from the [[props]] [[cupboard]] of '[[Total]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[single]], [[original]] [[idea]] in the [[whole]] [[movie]].

I [[found]] this [[movie]] to be so [[bad]] that I [[laughed]] most of the [[way]] through.

Malcolm McDowell should hang his [[head]] in [[shame]]. He [[obviously]] [[needed]] the money! Shown in [[Aussie]] as 'Hydrosphere', this [[stunningly]] [[mala]] [[cinematography]] is SO bad that you [[becoming]] hypnotised and have to watch it to the [[ceases]], just to [[behold]] if it [[wo]] [[gets]] any [[lousiest]]... and it does! The storyline is so [[foreseeable]] it [[appears]] [[typed]] by a [[supreme]] [[teaching]] dramatics class, the sets are [[unhappy]] but [[slightly]] [[best]] than the miniatures, and the acting is [[wood]].

The [[childhood]] 'muppet' [[looks]] to have been [[larceny]] from the [[propellers]] [[credenza]] of '[[Overall]] Recall'. There didn't seem to be a [[lonely]], [[initial]] [[thinks]] in the [[overall]] [[filmmaking]].

I [[find]] this [[film]] to be so [[mala]] that I [[smiled]] most of the [[paths]] through.

Malcolm McDowell should hang his [[leiter]] in [[disgrace]]. He [[definitely]] [[necessity]] the money! --------------------------------------------- Result 2142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] What reviewers and MST3K left out is the best [[part]] (and only [[memorable]] scene) of this otherwise [[dreadful]] [[movie]]: There is a very good rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s ineptitude). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this chance, yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. What reviewers and MST3K left out is the best [[party]] (and only [[unforgettable]] scene) of this otherwise [[scary]] [[cinematography]]: There is a very good rape-in-the-shower scene committed by the bad guy (Ben Gazzara look-alike) on Maria (as mentioned, killed later through T.J.'s ineptitude). Perhaps rape is too strong a word, "prison mating ritual" may be more appropriate. The background behind this chance, yet forced meeting is the mobster who is hiding "Ben Gazzara," introduces him to the girls hanging out at his pool. The 30-ish blonde disses him, but our villain must be quite smitten by her, because the courtship is on at that point. His first move is to attempt drowning her, until his mafia don benefactor tells him to knock it off. Kind of like the girl in high school you didn't like, but still wanted to have carnal knowledge of anyway... Let's just say, he catches UP with her in the cabana later. --------------------------------------------- Result 2143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] You know that feeling of hilarity you get when you watch a film that's trying so hard to be a serious, thought provoking piece of cinema and fails miserably? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the sheer terrible nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[House]] of the [[Dead]]" [[struggles]] to achieve even this low graded level of cinema.

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to recreate the [[feeling]] like you've just [[woken]] up to find out that the [[cat]] has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you [[slept]]. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is [[arguably]] the [[worst]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

Final Score: 1/10. You know that feeling of hilarity you get when you watch a film that's trying so hard to be a serious, thought provoking piece of cinema and fails miserably? When you can't help but bust out laughing at the sheer terrible nature of the trash littering your screen? "[[Households]] of the [[Deceased]]" [[struggle]] to achieve even this low graded level of cinema.

From start to end "House of the Dead" manages to recreate the [[sense]] like you've just [[awakening]] up to find out that the [[gato]] has laid it's curled business neatly on your forehead while you [[sleep]]. It is clear from the start that the female actors have been cast for their cleavage size (which they exploit shamelessly) whereas the males for their hardcore "kick-ass" attitude. I honestly did not care any of the characters for any moment of the film and found myself actually wishing their demise so as to spare me a good hour of this torture. Uwe Boll should have considered screening two hours of footage from the actual game as a movie. At least then we'll get better acting… However not all blame can be placed on the actors as it is certainly a challenge to produce a convincing film when faced with the script of this film. It is [[undeniably]] the [[hardest]] section of the film and actually contains such lines as: "These are zombies, pure and simple" and "No cap'n, we must not go there! It's evil!".

We all know that Zombie movies are never going to be particularly thought provoking or full of meaning; at best they are a harmless two hours of action, blood and closet terror. Trash, yes, but entertaining trash. Not the kind of trash which bursts out of your bin bag as you haul it across the room and smothers your shoes in sour milk cartons and decaying banana skins. According to IMDb, "House of the Dead" received such bad reviews that no Danish cinemas bought the movie. If only we could have had the same privilege.

Final Score: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel [[takes]] a [[pretty]] [[weird]] [[idea]] and doesn't go to great lengths to squeeze a [[story]] out of it. [[Basically]] Alice from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her friends. This has the least deaths out of the whole series and the wise-cracks are quite poor, so neither the horror fans or comedy fans are happy.

I've not alot to [[say]] about this. It's moderately interesting to [[see]] the characters of Alice and Dan returning from four, but not worth watching a [[movie]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, possibly only the competant [[direction]] saves it from being the [[worst]] in the series. Like Freddy's Revenge, this sequel [[pick]] a [[quite]] [[inquisitive]] [[thoughts]] and doesn't go to great lengths to squeeze a [[conte]] out of it. [[Virtually]] Alice from number 4 is pregnant and her baby is haunted by Freddy which gives him an outlet to haunt her friends. This has the least deaths out of the whole series and the wise-cracks are quite poor, so neither the horror fans or comedy fans are happy.

I've not alot to [[tell]] about this. It's moderately interesting to [[behold]] the characters of Alice and Dan returning from four, but not worth watching a [[cinematographic]] over. Uninspriring and unenjoyable, possibly only the competant [[directions]] saves it from being the [[hardest]] in the series. --------------------------------------------- Result 2145 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] this [[movie]] is not [[porn]], it was not meant to be porn, and unless my uncle runs for [[president]] of the [[world]] it should never be considered porn.

now that that [[issue]] was [[sorted]] out, i can [[say]] i [[thoroughly]] [[recommend]] this film, as it's [[issues]] are [[still]] [[widely]] available. it's funny, the acting is [[great]] and it raises serious(curious) [[questions]].

i can't fully understand why this film was so mistreated, probably this is why i plan to never visit the us. [[Lena]] is the true pioneer of the modern riot-grrrl movement, confusion, curiosity and wit are her main attributes, she is occasionally angry, but aren't we all? this [[filmmaking]] is not [[interracial]], it was not meant to be porn, and unless my uncle runs for [[presidency]] of the [[worldwide]] it should never be considered porn.

now that that [[issuing]] was [[classify]] out, i can [[tell]] i [[scrupulously]] [[recommending]] this film, as it's [[subjects]] are [[however]] [[heavily]] available. it's funny, the acting is [[resplendent]] and it raises serious(curious) [[issues]].

i can't fully understand why this film was so mistreated, probably this is why i plan to never visit the us. [[Lina]] is the true pioneer of the modern riot-grrrl movement, confusion, curiosity and wit are her main attributes, she is occasionally angry, but aren't we all? --------------------------------------------- Result 2146 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] When you pick a movie I hope one factor you will consider, are the actors in the [[movie]] using their fame to influence the moral fabric of our society in a positive or negative way? This is not a political statement this is a moral issue that effects are society. When a comedian/actor makes curl sexual and racist remarks about a teenager and her father we should ask ourselves (do I want to support that behavior)? In this case [[Mr]]. Foxx [[behavior]] tears at the [[social]] fabric that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. When you pick a movie I hope one factor you will consider, are the actors in the [[cinema]] using their fame to influence the moral fabric of our society in a positive or negative way? This is not a political statement this is a moral issue that effects are society. When a comedian/actor makes curl sexual and racist remarks about a teenager and her father we should ask ourselves (do I want to support that behavior)? In this case [[Herr]]. Foxx [[demeanor]] tears at the [[sociable]] fabric that teaches our youth right from wrong, good behavior from bad that loving-kindness is better than hatefulness. Mr. Foxx should remember he is only entertainment and there is a lot of that out there for us to choose from. Saying sorry does not get him off the hook. It will not undue the hurt or remove the bad behavior he spreads to our youth. One way to stop this behavior is to stop being a fan of it. No longer see anything they are part of. We cannot change them but we can stop the fame we give them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2147 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The first five [[minutes]] of this movie showed [[potential]]. After that, it went straight from [[something]] [[possibly]] decent to some [[sort]] of illegitimate [[comedy]]. The best part is that I couldn't [[stop]] [[thinking]] of Supertroopers thanks to [[Joey]] Kern. I [[would]] recommend watching this [[movie]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a movie. There are so many scenes in this movie that makes one just stop and wonder if the entire cast and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[amazes]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only cost about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's Gate for being able to pull that one off. The first five [[mins]] of this movie showed [[prospective]]. After that, it went straight from [[algo]] [[perhaps]] decent to some [[genre]] of illegitimate [[parody]]. The best part is that I couldn't [[cessation]] [[idea]] of Supertroopers thanks to [[Jojo]] Kern. I [[could]] recommend watching this [[cinematography]] for the sheer fact of learning how not to make a movie. There are so many scenes in this movie that makes one just stop and wonder if the entire cast and crew just stopped caring at some point. The thing that [[astounds]] me most about this movie is that it grossed $22 million in the box office and only cost about $1.5 million to make. Congrats to Lion's Gate for being able to pull that one off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[Howling]] [[II]] [[starts]] as it means to go on with a [[bizarre]] and surreal opening narration by Christopher Lee whose image is imposed over a moving star field, oh and a [[skeleton]] appears as well for some reason. He says "for it's written the inhabitants of the Earth have been made drunk with her blood. And I saw her sip upon a hairy beast and she held forth a golden challis full of the filthiest fornication's and upon her forehead was written, behold I am the great Mother of #an [[inaudible]] word I couldn't make out no matter how many times I rewound the tape and tried to, sorry# and all abominations of the Earth". This opening narration means nothing at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen caption that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's probably not too long after the events of the original Howling (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called Stefan Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will come back to life. Ben dismisses such nonsense. But together with one of Karen's friends and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he visits Stefan at his home. There Stefan tells them about Werewolves and how they can be killed, he mentions Stirba (Sybil Danning) who is the queen of Werewolves. Stefan also shows them a photograph taken at Karen's funeral of a woman named Mariana (Marsha A. Hunt) and that she is an extremely vicious and dangerous Werewolf who wants Karen. Stefan says he will stake any Werewoves through the heart with titanium. Ben figures out that Stefan means he will stake Karen as well so together with Jenny he travels to the graveyard where his sister's crypt is to stop Stefan. However lots of Werewolves turn up and attack Stefan, Ben and Jenny. They survive the attack and manage to find out that Stirba is to be found in Transylvania. They all decide to travel to Transylvania and stop Stirba and her Werewolves from taking over the Earth by fulfilling a centuries old curse. Once there they travel to a small town called Vlkava which means 'where wolves live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his small but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually shot in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is part dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. The [[Screams]] [[SECONDLY]] [[initiates]] as it means to go on with a [[surreal]] and surreal opening narration by Christopher Lee whose image is imposed over a moving star field, oh and a [[skeletor]] appears as well for some reason. He says "for it's written the inhabitants of the Earth have been made drunk with her blood. And I saw her sip upon a hairy beast and she held forth a golden challis full of the filthiest fornication's and upon her forehead was written, behold I am the great Mother of #an [[unfathomable]] word I couldn't make out no matter how many times I rewound the tape and tried to, sorry# and all abominations of the Earth". This opening narration means nothing at all and is just downright bizarre. After the opening credits which are set over shots of Transylvanian architecture we get an on screen caption that informs us we're in 'Los Angeles, California U.S.A. City of the Angels'. I knew I was in for a long 86 minutes. It's probably not too long after the events of the original Howling (1981) and it's Karen White's funeral. After the ceremony Karen's brother Ben (Reb Brown) is spoken to by an 'occult investigator' called Stefan Crosscoe (Christopher Lee) who says that Karen is a Werewolf and that she will come back to life. Ben dismisses such nonsense. But together with one of Karen's friends and colleagues Jenny (Annie McEnroe) he visits Stefan at his home. There Stefan tells them about Werewolves and how they can be killed, he mentions Stirba (Sybil Danning) who is the queen of Werewolves. Stefan also shows them a photograph taken at Karen's funeral of a woman named Mariana (Marsha A. Hunt) and that she is an extremely vicious and dangerous Werewolf who wants Karen. Stefan says he will stake any Werewoves through the heart with titanium. Ben figures out that Stefan means he will stake Karen as well so together with Jenny he travels to the graveyard where his sister's crypt is to stop Stefan. However lots of Werewolves turn up and attack Stefan, Ben and Jenny. They survive the attack and manage to find out that Stirba is to be found in Transylvania. They all decide to travel to Transylvania and stop Stirba and her Werewolves from taking over the Earth by fulfilling a centuries old curse. Once there they travel to a small town called Vlkava which means 'where wolves live' and meet up with the local priest, Father Florin (Ladislav Krecmer) and his small but loyal group of Werewolf hunters, hey what else can I call them? Oh, and a dwarf named Florica (Ludmila Safarova) helps too. They follow Mariana who they hope will lead them to Stirba. But Stirba knows of Stefan's arrival and has plans for him Ben and Jenny. Will Stefan be able to put an end to Stirba's plans for world domination? Will this film get any more bizarre or surreal? Watch it and find out. Directed by Philippe Mora this is one strange mess of a film. It's poorly edited as certain sequences just jump around incoherently. The single biggest problem is the script by Robert Sano and Gary Brandner based on his novel which is all over the place and doesn't make any sort of sense or introduces us to any proper characters that we like. Luckily it moves along like a rocket and is never dull or boring, unlike the original. Something strange or bizarre is always happening to keep the viewer entertained. Most people will probably hate it, but for those of us who enjoy 'bad' films this is right up there with the best of them. There are Werewolf orgies which are just freaky to watch. We get some cool Werewolf killing weaponry. The sets and locations just seem so out of place and I don't know if this was actually shot in Transylvania but it doesn't look like what I thought mid 80's Transylvania would. Stirba's castle is part dungeon, part Gothic castle and part modern luxury house. Stirba and her servant's costumes are very over-the-top, Stirba wears an outfit that looks like it belongs in a S/M video and to be fair to her she looks pretty sexy, and her minions wear skimpy leather clothing too. The special make-up effects range from good to poor, a dwarf's eyes explode, someone has their hand ripped off and a priest has some creature emerge from his mouth but this isn't a film loaded with gore, although there are plenty of effect sequences with Werewolf transformations and attacks. There is plenty of nudity as well as Stirba and her minions are a real randy bunch of Werewolves! I should also mention the music, the soundtrack is dominated by awful rock music that I hated and I ended up turning the volume down. Acting is weak all round and what on Earth was Christopher Lee thinking about when he accepted this film?! I wonder what he thinks of it. Basically the whole thing is a real mess, but I found it a fairly entertaining mess all the same. Impossible to recommend but it kept me watching through to the end. Speaking of which the end credits run over what appears to be deleted scenes and cut footage, it also features the same shot of Sybil Danning taking her dress off and exposing her breasts probably in excess of 20 times! If that's your thing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I can't believe it that was the worst movie i have ever seen in my life. i laughed a couple of times. ( probably because of how stupid it was ) If someone paid me to see that movie again i wouldn't. the plot was so horrible , it made no sense , and the acting was so bad that i couldn't even tell if they were trying. that movie was terrible rating: F --------------------------------------------- Result 2150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Strained]] [[comedy]], a sketch-like [[revue]] which was initially a [[vehicle]] to showcase one-time [[radio]] [[star]] Jack Pearl but is now [[best]] [[remembered]] as America's [[introduction]] to The Three Stooges. [[Actually]], Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billed]] alongside [[comic]] Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast [[features]] [[Jimmy]] Durante (who is completely wasted on dim material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[audience]] for the [[film]] these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't [[find]] much to applaud here. [[Incredibly]] [[loud]] and [[overbearing]], it [[shows]] how far Hollywood had to [[go]] to [[reach]] a certain [[level]] of slapstick sophistication. *1/2 from **** [[Uptight]] [[farce]], a sketch-like [[magazine]] which was initially a [[vehicles]] to showcase one-time [[radios]] [[stars]] Jack Pearl but is now [[finest]] [[reminding]] as America's [[introductions]] to The Three Stooges. [[Genuinely]], Larry, Curly and Moe are [[billing]] alongside [[hilarious]] Ted Healy as Ted Healy and his Three Stooges. Although the supporting cast [[characters]] [[Jimbo]] Durante (who is completely wasted on dim material) and ZaSu Pitts, the only [[spectators]] for the [[cinematography]] these days are Stooges-addicts, and even they won't [[found]] much to applaud here. [[Stunningly]] [[rowdy]] and [[arrogant]], it [[exposition]] how far Hollywood had to [[going]] to [[reaching]] a certain [[grades]] of slapstick sophistication. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] Here's an interesting little movie that [[strictly]] gives the phrase "low budget" a [[horrible]] name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high [[camp]] fun, which is way, WAY off the mark. A [[glamorous]] showcase of breasts and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, opposing the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! Here's an interesting little movie that [[tightly]] gives the phrase "low budget" a [[horrendous]] name. Our physics teacher who has about nine kids creates a strange serum that causes "molecular reorganization". Students are hopelessly killed from fake coincidences of submarine sandwiches and flying school supplies. Sounds like a resurrection of classic B-movies from the 50s, right? Nope! It's not an example of high [[campsite]] fun, which is way, WAY off the mark. A [[magnificent]] showcase of breasts and butts ensues our desire for pleasure, opposing the horror that should have had 99.44% more in the first place. Bottom-of-the-barrel entertainment at its best, aided by pints of red blood and dead student bodies. Atrocious movies like this would make the ultimately catastrophic GURU THE MAD MONK (1970) the work of an intelligent genius who has a Master's degree in film production! It's an automatic "F", so rest easy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2152 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first [[tell]] everyone that this movie was terrible. [[Downright]] [[terrible]]. And not, [[surprisingly]] for the reasons [[mentioned]] in the first review. I thought I [[might]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it deserved, but was sorrowfully [[rebuked]] upon reading what he [[said]]. I am quite [[ashamed]] to be taking the same side as someone who [[commented]] that the movie "[[definitely]] lacks good-looking [[females]]." [[Let]] me be the first to [[say]], "[[Wow]]! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[reviewing]] there. My [[mind]] can [[hardly]] [[comprehend]] the philosophical musings about this movie." [[Seriously]] though, a [[lack]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an essential to a [[movie]]. [[If]] you're desperate enough for "good-looking females" you should really watch other types of movies, not necessarily falling into the sci-fi category. Seeing as I hate reading long essays hoping to find a point and being disappointed, I will first [[say]] everyone that this movie was terrible. [[Altogether]] [[heinous]]. And not, [[superbly]] for the reasons [[talked]] in the first review. I thought I [[apt]] agree with him, seeing as he gave the movie the rank it deserved, but was sorrowfully [[reprimanded]] upon reading what he [[told]]. I am quite [[embarassed]] to be taking the same side as someone who [[remarked]] that the movie "[[decidedly]] lacks good-looking [[femmes]]." [[Allowing]] me be the first to [[tell]], "[[Ruff]]! that was definitely some serious in-depth [[review]] there. My [[intellect]] can [[almost]] [[understanding]] the philosophical musings about this movie." [[Profoundly]] though, a [[misses]] of "good-looking females" shouldn't be considered an essential to a [[cinematography]]. [[Though]] you're desperate enough for "good-looking females" you should really watch other types of movies, not necessarily falling into the sci-fi category. --------------------------------------------- Result 2153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This game is one of the [[best]] RPG. Fist, It is actually more amusing than any other because of the battle system (you harm the enemy [[depending]] on how you aim the attack, you can transform into dragoon, the special attack, the magic...). The script is very [[good]]. Characters are all [[lovely]] and you have no long dialogs to support, as happened in [[several]] games of Final Fintasy series. I got bored of that dialogs about [[past]], when you just [[want]] to go on with the game's story. Ambientation is a jewel on this game, it [[combines]] Middle-age fantasy with futuristic [[science]] fiction. It's [[remarkable]] that animation [[effects]] are just [[incredible]], i like them more than other in other [[modern]] games (we can't [[remember]] that Legend of the Dragoon is 8 [[years]] now). Then, Map is huge, there are all [[kinds]] of [[places]] an [[enemies]]. [[Finally]], [[Music]] is not the [[best]] [[game]] muse I have [[heard]], but it's [[perfect]] for a [[game]] like this. This game is one of the [[optimum]] RPG. Fist, It is actually more amusing than any other because of the battle system (you harm the enemy [[according]] on how you aim the attack, you can transform into dragoon, the special attack, the magic...). The script is very [[alright]]. Characters are all [[loverly]] and you have no long dialogs to support, as happened in [[different]] games of Final Fintasy series. I got bored of that dialogs about [[yesteryear]], when you just [[desiring]] to go on with the game's story. Ambientation is a jewel on this game, it [[combining]] Middle-age fantasy with futuristic [[sciences]] fiction. It's [[whopping]] that animation [[influencing]] are just [[unimaginable]], i like them more than other in other [[fashionable]] games (we can't [[rember]] that Legend of the Dragoon is 8 [[ages]] now). Then, Map is huge, there are all [[sort]] of [[sites]] an [[opponent]]. [[Eventually]], [[Musica]] is not the [[optimum]] [[ballgame]] muse I have [[hear]], but it's [[consummate]] for a [[ballgame]] like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] After you've seen this [[small]] [[likable]] and [[comical]] film, you will for [[sure]] feel better. [[Cheer]] to Yves B. Pelletier to have [[given]] birth to this [[small]] [[magnificent]] [[movie]] moment, that according to me, will be recognized as a marking [[movie]] of [[year]] 2004 for the Quebec. The [[actors]] Isabelle Blais, Emmanuel Bilodeau, [[Sylvie]] [[Moreau]] and Stéphane Gagnon all [[deliver]] a touching performance. I [[would]] [[compare]] the [[feeling]] that this [[wonderful]] story [[gives]] you to the ones that Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain have [[given]] me. [[So]] if you've like the Jean-Pierre Jeunet [[magnificent]] [[film]], I [[would]] [[say]] that you should also like the [[first]] movie from Yves B. Pelletier, Les Aimants After you've seen this [[scant]] [[sympathetic]] and [[humorous]] film, you will for [[persuaded]] feel better. [[Cheerfulness]] to Yves B. Pelletier to have [[granted]] birth to this [[scant]] [[admirable]] [[cinematography]] moment, that according to me, will be recognized as a marking [[movies]] of [[annum]] 2004 for the Quebec. The [[protagonists]] Isabelle Blais, Emmanuel Bilodeau, [[Shirley]] [[Morrow]] and Stéphane Gagnon all [[make]] a touching performance. I [[should]] [[compared]] the [[sentiment]] that this [[sumptuous]] story [[provides]] you to the ones that Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amélie Poulain have [[granted]] me. [[Therefore]] if you've like the Jean-Pierre Jeunet [[beautiful]] [[films]], I [[ought]] [[said]] that you should also like the [[outset]] movie from Yves B. Pelletier, Les Aimants --------------------------------------------- Result 2155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Maria]] [[Braun]] got married [[right]] in the middle of [[combat]] all around her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[ripped]] through the [[building]], to [[begin]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[papers]] on a [[pile]] of [[rubble]] on the [[street]]. [[Perhaps]] this may strike some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to come: marriage on the [[rocks]], so to [[speak]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian prison camp, unbenownst to the [[helpless]] but hopeful and [[proud]] [[Maria]], who keeps standing by the depressing rubble of the train station as some come home, others don't, with a sign awaiting Hermann.

Trouble arises, as happens in Rainer Werner Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his best and most provocative, we see as Maria (uncommonly gorgeous Hanna Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her man, even if it means working at a bar for American GI's and, even still after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a black GI and comes close to bearing his child (that is, naturally, until he reappears and a murder occurs and he takes the rap so she can be safe), or working for a German businessman (effectively sympathetic Ivan Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and rising star in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll always be married.

It's hard to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. Money, sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her cake and eats it with a sultry smile: she gets to have a husband, more or less (actually a lot less until the last ten minutes of the film) while obtaining things- a man who dotes on her whenever he can, a new and expensive house with servants, a secretary, money- that others around her aren't getting due to already being with a man or too weak in a position to rise anywhere (such as the secretary, played interestingly enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

Maria is sexy, confident, and all alone, with an idealized life going against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle going on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. [[Mario]] [[Browne]] got married [[rights]] in the middle of [[counter]] all around her and her husband Hermann. An explosion [[buzzed]] through the [[constructing]], to [[launching]] with, and she and Hermann had to sign the [[documentation]] on a [[heap]] of [[vandalize]] on the [[thoroughfare]]. [[Potentially]] this may strike some as a heavy-handed metaphor for what's about to come: marriage on the [[rattle]], so to [[talking]]. It's a betrothal where the husband goes off to war and is held in a Russian prison camp, unbenownst to the [[defenceless]] but hopeful and [[prideful]] [[Mariah]], who keeps standing by the depressing rubble of the train station as some come home, others don't, with a sign awaiting Hermann.

Trouble arises, as happens in Rainer Werner Fassbinder's melodramas, and as its one of his best and most provocative, we see as Maria (uncommonly gorgeous Hanna Schygulla in this role) will do a two-face: she'll stand by her man, even if it means working at a bar for American GI's and, even still after she hears from a fellow soldier that Hermann has died will still stand by him as she sleeps with a black GI and comes close to bearing his child (that is, naturally, until he reappears and a murder occurs and he takes the rap so she can be safe), or working for a German businessman (effectively sympathetic Ivan Desny) and becoming his sometimes mistress and rising star in the company. Maria will do whatever it takes to be successful, but she'll always be married.

It's hard to say there's anything about Maria that isn't fascinating. Money, sex, power, all of these become interchangeable for Maria. She's like the feminist that has her cake and eats it with a sultry smile: she gets to have a husband, more or less (actually a lot less until the last ten minutes of the film) while obtaining things- a man who dotes on her whenever he can, a new and expensive house with servants, a secretary, money- that others around her aren't getting due to already being with a man or too weak in a position to rise anywhere (such as the secretary, played interestingly enough by Fassbinder's own mother).

Maria is sexy, confident, and all alone, with an idealized life going against a life that should be made in the shade. She says of the two men- the American soldier and poor old and sick Oswald- that she's fond of them, and at the same time will stick by those roses the confused and soul-searching husband Hermann sends from Canada, after being released from prison. She's casts a profile that a feminist would love to trounce, but understand where she's coming from and going all the way.

Fassbinder employs this inherent contradiction, and moments with Maria appear to go against the conventions of a melodrama (for example, Hermann walking in on the jubilant and half-naked Maria and GI is just about a masterpiece of a scene, with Maria's reaction not of surprise or guilt but pure happiness to see that he's there let alone alive), while sticking to his guns as a director of such high-minded technique with a storyline that should be predictable. But it isn't really. It's like one big metaphor for a country that, after the war, couldn't really move on to normalcy. A few times Fassbinder puts sound of the radio on in the background, and we see Maria walking around her family house, hustle and bustle going on around her, and the radio speaks of a divided Germany, of things still very unsettled, of a disarray. Maybe the only way to cope is excess, or maybe that's just my interpretation of it.

It's hard to tell, really, under Schygulla's stare face and eyes, anyway. It's such an incredible performance, really, one of those showstoppers that captures the glamor and allure of an old-time Hollywood female star while with the down-and-dirty ethic of a girl of the streets. Most telling are the opposing costumes one sees in one scene when she finally is with her husband, where she stars in one of those super-lustful black lingerie pieces and high heels, and then moves on to a dress without even thinking about it. That's almost the essence of what Maria is, and Schygulla wonderfully gets it down, a headstrong but somehow loving figure who is adored and perplexed by the men around her, sometimes in a single sentence. This is what Fassbinder captures in his wonderful first part of his "trilogy"; while I might overall prefer Veronika Voss as a masterpiece, Maria Braun is perhaps just as good as a character study, of what makes a woman tick and tock with (almost) nothing to lose. --------------------------------------------- Result 2156 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (79%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] OK this movie was made for one reason and one reason only TO MAKE MONEY!!The producers obviously didn't care about killing a classic horror movie. I knew this movie would [[suck]] as soon as it was going to be a pg-13 how many pg-13 slashers movies have turned out to be good? Thats like asking how many women have been on the moon? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no masterpiece but it certainly deserves to be [[recognised]] as a movie that stays true to its genre and deosnt try to be anything more than that.

My problem with Prom night 2008 is the way that it handles the killer and i have 3 major problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main victims family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he says he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he want to kill her, love her or just plain rape her?? 3) The killer is too good, how did he develop all of his skills? He used to be a teacher, so in this one scene where he kills the main victims boyfriend while hes basically on top of her asleep and she doesn't notice, it all silly 2 stars out of 10 terrible,silly,stupid attempt at a horror movie OK this movie was made for one reason and one reason only TO MAKE MONEY!!The producers obviously didn't care about killing a classic horror movie. I knew this movie would [[lick]] as soon as it was going to be a pg-13 how many pg-13 slashers movies have turned out to be good? Thats like asking how many women have been on the moon? The answer is NONE!! Prom night 1980 was of cource no masterpiece but it certainly deserves to be [[concede]] as a movie that stays true to its genre and deosnt try to be anything more than that.

My problem with Prom night 2008 is the way that it handles the killer and i have 3 major problems with him.....................

1)The way he escapes, he was locked up in a mental institute and he escapes through a air conditioning vent!! WHAT THE HELL? why would they have an air conditioning vent in the patients room? Do they want him to be comfortable during his stay or something? 2)His intentions are somewhat uncertain the killer want all of the main victims family and friends dead so he can have her all to his self, he says he loves her but the next minute he trys to kill her, so does he want to kill her, love her or just plain rape her?? 3) The killer is too good, how did he develop all of his skills? He used to be a teacher, so in this one scene where he kills the main victims boyfriend while hes basically on top of her asleep and she doesn't notice, it all silly 2 stars out of 10 terrible,silly,stupid attempt at a horror movie --------------------------------------------- Result 2157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Excellent]] show. [[Instead]] of watching the same old sitcom type shows where it's the same old thing, just different "stars", this [[refreshing]] show provided an incredibly entertaining view of office situations. We have been away from watching any television for 2 years and after coming back, of all the shows available we look forward to watching this show on W. Shame on Global for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS make it. [[Everyone]] I talk to [[enjoys]] this show and I believe it was foolish of Global to walk away. I [[guess]] they [[want]] to stick it out with the typical mind numbing shows from the States instead of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[come]] on people, let's keep the [[variety]]. This [[unique]] [[show]] [[provided]] a very comedic view of a [[slightly]] exaggerated [[realistic]] side of office life and relationships, with [[unique]] [[characters]] that you don't [[see]] on any sitcoms [[today]] or in the [[past]]. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. [[Funky]] show. [[However]] of watching the same old sitcom type shows where it's the same old thing, just different "stars", this [[freshen]] show provided an incredibly entertaining view of office situations. We have been away from watching any television for 2 years and after coming back, of all the shows available we look forward to watching this show on W. Shame on Global for pulling the plug on this one. I thought this one would be a winner. Let's be realistic about things, FEW Canadian SHOWS make it. [[Someone]] I talk to [[enjoy]] this show and I believe it was foolish of Global to walk away. I [[guessing]] they [[wish]] to stick it out with the typical mind numbing shows from the States instead of pulling behind a Canadian made show that had a lot of promise. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a lot of shows on TV, but, [[arriving]] on people, let's keep the [[assortment]]. This [[sole]] [[showing]] [[gave]] a very comedic view of a [[moderately]] exaggerated [[practical]] side of office life and relationships, with [[peculiar]] [[traits]] that you don't [[behold]] on any sitcoms [[thursday]] or in the [[previous]]. Too bad that global had to say no to this one, foolish mistake. --------------------------------------------- Result 2158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I am a [[MAJOR]] [[fan]] of the [[horror]] genre! I LOVE horror/slasher/[[gore]] flicks of all [[kinds]]. Some of my [[favorites]] are the [[really]] "[[good]]" bad horror flicks. But this [[movies]] has [[NOTHING]] to warrant it's viewing!! I'm not going to [[spend]] a [[lot]] of [[time]] [[talking]] about everything that's [[wrong]] with it.

The [[script]] is horrid. The acting is horrid. The FX are not [[even]] worth discussing. The "set" is an absolute [[JOKE]]!! The [[sad]] thing is I [[think]] there MAY be some [[real]] [[potential]] in a [[couple]] of the [[actors]], but this [[vehicle]] [[left]] them [[NOTHING]] to [[work]] with!!!

Suffice it to [[say]] I [[saw]] it for "[[free]]" & feel I was robbed!! The [[time]] you'd WASTE watching this [[would]] be better [[spent]] flossing your cat. I am a [[IMPORTANT]] [[breather]] of the [[monstrosity]] genre! I LOVE horror/slasher/[[gora]] flicks of all [[types]]. Some of my [[favourite]] are the [[truthfully]] "[[buena]]" bad horror flicks. But this [[cinematography]] has [[ANYTHING]] to warrant it's viewing!! I'm not going to [[expended]] a [[batches]] of [[period]] [[debating]] about everything that's [[erroneous]] with it.

The [[hyphen]] is horrid. The acting is horrid. The FX are not [[yet]] worth discussing. The "set" is an absolute [[JOKING]]!! The [[unfortunate]] thing is I [[thought]] there MAY be some [[genuine]] [[possibility]] in a [[pair]] of the [[protagonists]], but this [[motor]] [[exited]] them [[ANYTHING]] to [[works]] with!!!

Suffice it to [[told]] I [[observed]] it for "[[libre]]" & feel I was robbed!! The [[times]] you'd WASTE watching this [[could]] be better [[expenditure]] flossing your cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sisters in law will be released theatrically on march 24th in Sweden. A good occasion for our Nordic friends to discover this original and thoughtful documentary. It was shown in Göteborg together with a retrospective dedicated to Kim Longinotto, "director in focus" of the festival. She gave a master class, very much appreciated, telling about her method as documentary filmmaker and told the audience about the special circumstances which led her to shoot Sisters in law twice : the first version got lost for good, so a second shooting was organized and the film turned out to be different at the end. A pretty awful problem happened, in this case, to create the possibility of a very strong movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Every [[time]] I watch this movie I am more [[impressed]] by the whole production. I have [[come]] to the [[conclusion]] that it is the best romantic [[comedy]] ever [[made]]. [[Everyone]] involved is [[perfect]]; [[script]], acting, [[direction]], sets and [[editing]]. [[Whilst]] [[James]] Stewart can [[always]] be relied [[upon]] for a good performance, and the [[supporting]] cast are [[magnificent]], it is Margaret Sullavan who [[reveals]] what an underrated [[actress]] she was. [[Her]] [[tragic]] personal [[life]] give poignancy to her qualities as a performer where [[comedy]] acting [[skills]] are not easy to [[achieve]]. Lubitsch managed to [[get]] the [[best]] and he [[obviously]] [[gave]] his [[best]]. Watch for the number of scenes which were [[done]] on one take - [[breathtaking]]. Every [[period]] I watch this movie I am more [[surprising]] by the whole production. I have [[coming]] to the [[concluding]] that it is the best romantic [[farce]] ever [[introduced]]. [[Anybody]] involved is [[perfection]]; [[screenplay]], acting, [[directorate]], sets and [[edited]]. [[Notwithstanding]] [[Jacques]] Stewart can [[incessantly]] be relied [[after]] for a good performance, and the [[supports]] cast are [[glamorous]], it is Margaret Sullavan who [[discloses]] what an underrated [[actor]] she was. [[His]] [[calamitous]] personal [[iife]] give poignancy to her qualities as a performer where [[travesty]] acting [[competency]] are not easy to [[accomplish]]. Lubitsch managed to [[gets]] the [[finest]] and he [[apparently]] [[supplied]] his [[nicest]]. Watch for the number of scenes which were [[doing]] on one take - [[staggering]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "John Hughes' son wrote a high school drama! Wow!" I thought as I checked the flick's info here on IMDb, late on a Saturday night, having found myself watching the opening credits on BBC2.

I've just finished watching it, and sadly it was downhill from there on. Arguably you can't spoil a film this poor, but I'll leave the spoilers out of this review...

There's an awful lot of style over very little substance: unfortunately the style hasn't dated too well in the eight years since its release. As for the substance, the film tries to pose an interesting look at the nature of control in society through the microcosm of school-life; but beneath the shiny veneer, a remotely meaningful or relevant argument fails to materialise. Characters are painted in childishly broad strokes, falling into the kind of generic stereotypes the writer's father sought to question in Breakfast Club.

Director Kyle Cooper does a decent job keeping the pace up (perhaps relying a little too much on montages of information, which soon becomes a tiresome device, but at least pushes the story along), but his efforts don't sufficiently detract from the poor script and bizarre casting (how anyone is supposed to side with 'Maddox', when Blake Shields gurns and glowers his way through the part, I just can't understand), not to mention the numerous gaping plot holes (I'm all for creative license, but when the "bad guys" know the identities of the "good guys" making their lives a misery, but fail to act in any way to stop them, you really have to wonder why this script didn't undergo another few re-drafts before production - did Daddy even read it?).

I'm sure a younger audience might get some enjoyment from this film (and all power to them), but they're really better off sticking with Hughes Sr.'s high school output, and if the idea of school-time rebellion is what really appeals, the 1968 classic "If..." is a much more satisfying examination of the subject. --------------------------------------------- Result 2162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This [[film]] came out 12 years years ago, and was a revelation [[even]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The textbooks on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing [[houses]]. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field Guide" with its [[flow]] chart of influence that [[pulls]] together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the film - ignores the [[houses]] [[completely]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive book on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the background information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical context is the biggest missing part of "Paris is Burning".

The film is valuable because it focuses on a scene otherwise being ignored. It is a valuable snapshot of life in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not come out until three years later.

Of historical importance, but we still need someone to do either a book or a documentary film that provides more context. This [[cinema]] came out 12 years years ago, and was a revelation [[yet]] for people who knew something of the drag scene in New York. The textbooks on drag performance say nothing of these vogueing [[house]]. Anthony Slide's 'Great Pretenders' says nothing. Julian Fleisher's "The Drag Queens of New York: An Illustrated Field Guide" with its [[flux]] chart of influence that [[pulling]] together Julian Eltinge, Minette, the Warhol queens, and the 90s club scene - and postdates the film - ignores the [[household]] [[perfectly]]. Even Laurence Senelick's "The Changing Room" - the closest thing that we have to a definitive book on drag performance rushes quickly past the film and does not give the background information that one would have expected from it.

I understand from the film itself,and various articles I found on the web that this house system goes back decades. The major film performance by a house member prior to 1990 seems to be Chrystal La Beija in "The Queen", 1968. The historical context is the biggest missing part of "Paris is Burning".

The film is valuable because it focuses on a scene otherwise being ignored. It is a valuable snapshot of life in 1989. The unfortunate fact that Venus Xtravaganza was murdered during filming provides a very dramatic ending, but this is not the only film about transsexuals to include a real-life murder. As we now know, Dorian Corey had a mummified corpse in her literal closet, but this did not come out until three years later.

Of historical importance, but we still need someone to do either a book or a documentary film that provides more context. --------------------------------------------- Result 2163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I don't know what [[would]] be so great about this movie. [[Even]] worse, why should anyone bother seeing this one ? [[First]] of all there is no [[story]]. One [[could]] [[say]] that [[even]] without a [[story]] a [[movie]] [[could]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sort]] of strong feeling (laughter, cry, [[fear]], ...), but in my opinion this movie does not do that [[either]].

You are just watching [[images]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[useful]] things to do.

I [[guess]] you [[could]] [[say]] the movie is an [[experiment]] and it is daring because it [[lacks]] all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your [[valuable]] [[time]] and 7 EUR of your [[money]] ? For me the [[answer]] is: no. I don't know what [[should]] be so great about this movie. [[Yet]] worse, why should anyone bother seeing this one ? [[Outset]] of all there is no [[histories]]. One [[wo]] [[said]] that [[yet]] without a [[histories]] a [[films]] [[wo]] be worth watching because it invokes some [[sorting]] of strong feeling (laughter, cry, [[panic]], ...), but in my opinion this movie does not do that [[neither]].

You are just watching [[picture]] for +/- 2 hrs. There are more [[worthwhile]] things to do.

I [[presume]] you [[would]] [[told]] the movie is an [[experiences]] and it is daring because it [[missing]] all the above. But is this worth 2 hrs of your [[worthwhile]] [[moment]] and 7 EUR of your [[cash]] ? For me the [[replies]] is: no. --------------------------------------------- Result 2164 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (58%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] The reason I intended to give this movie a chance to take 2 hours of my life (actually it was only 35 minutes) was my wish to try to understand and hopefully appreciate Indian cinema. All I have ever seen were few older movies of S.Ray.

Browsing through IMDb I came across this one and after seeing rating of 8.7 I concluded this must be the one which will open the doors of unknown and bring artistic enjoyment. Oh my how wrong I was! The only logical explanation for this rating of 8.7 is that most of 970 people who voted are Indian and their only venture outside Bolliwood production were Adam Sandler movies.

With this rating this movie would be ranked on 9th place on IMDb List of 250 best movies above Citizen Cane, Goodfellas of Psycho! I am really not in a mood to review and criticize because there is simply nothing that I find worth remembering from this painful experience. My only hope is that there is a lot of Hindu who like me find this movie as is -- plain stupid, with abundance of kitsch and cheesy music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Young]] beautiful Eva (Hedy Lamarr) [[marries]] an [[older]] [[man]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't satisfy her [[sexually]] and [[ignores]] her. [[Frustrated]] she goes [[home]] and [[plans]] to get a [[divorce]]. [[Then]], one day, she's [[skinny]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the [[woods]]. Her [[horse]] gallops off with her clothes...and she runs after it! She [[meets]] [[young]] and very handsome Adam (Aribert Mog). They [[make]] [[love]] and she [[realizes]] this is the [[man]] she wants.

[[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!! [[Naturally]], [[since]] this was [[made]] in 1933, she has to be [[punished]] for her sin so it [[leads]] to a [[tragic]] finale. END OF [[ENDING]] SPOILER!!!!

This horrified people in 1933 but it's pretty tame by today's standards. Lamarr's [[nude]] [[swim]] [[shows]] nothing and when she [[runs]] after the [[horse]] [[totally]] [[nude]], it's either [[shown]] in [[extreme]] [[long]] shot or is [[covered]] by branches and such. There's only a few [[minor]] shots of her breasts. Also when she has sex with Mog, [[nothing]] is [[shown]] but her [[face]] but you see her [[achieving]] an orgasm. These scene were [[considered]] [[pretty]] extreme in their day and were [[cut]] out [[completely]] of the American [[release]]. [[Now]] today they're back in. This [[film]] would get by with a PG-13 [[easily]] now.

Shock episodes aside this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[dialogue]]. Except for the music score this could be a silent picture. Luckily all the actors are good--Lamarr and Mog [[especially]] and they're so [[attractive]] that they just take your [[breath]] away watching them. Also the sequence where they [[make]] love is [[easily]] one of the most beautifully shot and acted sequences I've ever seen in a movie. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's quite a few of them) are unfortunately pretty [[obvious]] today. I actually [[started]] to giggle during one!

[[So]], [[great]] direction, [[beautiful]] imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly [[bowled]] over by it. I [[found]] the movie slow-moving ([[beautiful]] [[imagery]] does not [[make]] a [[picture]] for me), somewhat dull, obvious, static and had a [[negative]] [[ending]]. I can live with the ending but it doesn't [[excuse]] the other problems I had with it. [[Also]] the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to love this movie so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. [[Youngsters]] beautiful Eva (Hedy Lamarr) [[matrimony]] an [[oldest]] [[males]] (Zvonimir Rogoz). Unfortunately he can't satisfy her [[sex]] and [[omit]] her. [[Disappointed]] she goes [[dwellings]] and [[schematics]] to get a [[divorcing]]. [[Thereafter]], one day, she's [[lean]] dipping in a lake in the middle of the [[bois]]. Her [[horsey]] gallops off with her clothes...and she runs after it! She [[fulfils]] [[youngster]] and very handsome Adam (Aribert Mog). They [[deliver]] [[likes]] and she [[recognizes]] this is the [[dude]] she wants.

[[CEASE]] SPOILER!!!! [[Clearly]], [[because]] this was [[accomplished]] in 1933, she has to be [[punishing]] for her sin so it [[leeds]] to a [[dire]] finale. END OF [[DISCONTINUE]] SPOILER!!!!

This horrified people in 1933 but it's pretty tame by today's standards. Lamarr's [[naked]] [[swam]] [[show]] nothing and when she [[manages]] after the [[steed]] [[perfectly]] [[bare]], it's either [[displayed]] in [[utmost]] [[lengthy]] shot or is [[encompassed]] by branches and such. There's only a few [[small]] shots of her breasts. Also when she has sex with Mog, [[anything]] is [[demonstrated]] but her [[encounter]] but you see her [[achieve]] an orgasm. These scene were [[judged]] [[belle]] extreme in their day and were [[cutting]] out [[utterly]] of the American [[releasing]]. [[Presently]] today they're back in. This [[filmmaking]] would get by with a PG-13 [[comfortably]] now.

Shock episodes aside this is just OK. It is beautifully filmed and there's next to no [[conversation]]. Except for the music score this could be a silent picture. Luckily all the actors are good--Lamarr and Mog [[namely]] and they're so [[seductive]] that they just take your [[respiratory]] away watching them. Also the sequence where they [[deliver]] love is [[conveniently]] one of the most beautifully shot and acted sequences I've ever seen in a movie. The scenes with the sexual symbolism (there's quite a few of them) are unfortunately pretty [[unmistakable]] today. I actually [[launched]] to giggle during one!

[[Accordingly]], [[marvellous]] direction, [[handsome]] imagery, attractive actors, good acting all around--but I wasn't exactly [[batsmen]] over by it. I [[find]] the movie slow-moving ([[admirable]] [[photos]] does not [[deliver]] a [[visuals]] for me), somewhat dull, obvious, static and had a [[detrimental]] [[terminated]]. I can live with the ending but it doesn't [[alibi]] the other problems I had with it. [[Additionally]] the final sequence is REALLY strange--and out of place. So I admire this film more than anything else. It was well-done and I'd recommend it but with caution. Many people seem to love this movie so I'm in the minority. Use your own judgment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2166 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Haven't [[seen]] any of the Japanese Grudge-films, but I really [[enjoy]] this one. I rarely [[get]] SCARED when [[watching]] [[films]]. I can [[jump]], if the effect and sound is [[startling]] enough, but getting [[scared]] from a movie is a [[rare]] [[thing]] for me. But I did [[get]] [[scared]] from [[Grudge]]. [[Maybe]] because I didn't [[expect]] [[anything]] at all when I [[watched]] it. I didn't [[expect]] [[getting]] [[scared]]. I didn't know [[anything]] about it either. That was probably a [[good]] thing.

This is a [[film]] that you, apparently, either [[love]] or [[hate]]. Most people seem to [[compare]] it to the Japanese Grudge-films, but even [[though]] I haven't [[seen]] them, I [[believe]] it isn't right to [[compare]] any [[film]], actually. This [[film]] [[stands]] on it its own.

The [[story]] is weak, most people [[say]]. I don't agree. The [[story]] is minimalistic, and [[done]] so on [[purpose]]. The story-telling [[techniques]] [[used]] - the [[broken]] [[time]] [[frame]] for [[instance]] - is [[perfectly]] [[done]]. The [[director]] knows [[exactly]] what he's doing, and I [[believe]] he [[got]] his [[vision]] through as he [[wanted]] it.

I [[gave]] this [[film]] 8 of 10. It is a [[film]] you will [[enjoy]] watching, or hate. It's as [[simple]] as that. Haven't [[watched]] any of the Japanese Grudge-films, but I really [[enjoying]] this one. I rarely [[got]] SCARED when [[staring]] [[cinematography]]. I can [[leap]], if the effect and sound is [[stunning]] enough, but getting [[freaked]] from a movie is a [[uncommon]] [[stuff]] for me. But I did [[obtain]] [[terrified]] from [[Dent]]. [[Conceivably]] because I didn't [[expects]] [[nothing]] at all when I [[observed]] it. I didn't [[awaited]] [[obtain]] [[fright]]. I didn't know [[nothing]] about it either. That was probably a [[alright]] thing.

This is a [[filmmaking]] that you, apparently, either [[iove]] or [[loathed]]. Most people seem to [[comparative]] it to the Japanese Grudge-films, but even [[while]] I haven't [[watched]] them, I [[reckon]] it isn't right to [[comparative]] any [[kino]], actually. This [[kino]] [[standing]] on it its own.

The [[storytelling]] is weak, most people [[tell]]. I don't agree. The [[conte]] is minimalistic, and [[performed]] so on [[targeting]]. The story-telling [[technological]] [[utilize]] - the [[raped]] [[moment]] [[frames]] for [[lawsuit]] - is [[altogether]] [[doing]]. The [[headmaster]] knows [[accurately]] what he's doing, and I [[reckon]] he [[ai]] his [[eyesight]] through as he [[desired]] it.

I [[supplied]] this [[kino]] 8 of 10. It is a [[cinematography]] you will [[enjoys]] watching, or hate. It's as [[simpler]] as that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2167 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Brilliant]], [[clever]] [[movie]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a legendary french Canadian signer Felix Leclerc). Flashy photo and clever editing is the word of Leclerc, [[strongly]] [[helped]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[mysterious]] and well played [[movie]]. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] it 9.5/10 You like to solve mysteries? You like complex narrations? This is for you. [[Sparkly]], [[canny]] [[cinematography]] by Francis Leclerc(son of a legendary french Canadian signer Felix Leclerc). Flashy photo and clever editing is the word of Leclerc, [[severely]] [[assist]] by Roy Dupuis who's dythirambic in the lead role.

The plot is about Alexandre Tourneur, veterinary in his 40's who just woke up from a coma after being unplugged by somebody unknown. Tourneur is struggling to remember who hit him as he was ending a deer's sufferings on the road. Throughout the struggling, he has weird behavior and it seems like something took over him.

Not spooky, but very [[opaque]] and well played [[kino]]. I have my hypothesis on the ending(I think the Indian caused the accident) but this ending was open to any explanations.

I [[resolutely]] [[recommendation]] it 9.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2168 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I've watched a few episodes of this [[show]] and have found certain [[elements]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is [[totally]] upstaged and [[wrecked]] by the neverending immoral relationships of the show's [[characters]]. Everybody seems to have [[slept]] with just about everyone, [[even]] during office hours, which is [[ridiculously]] [[unrealistic]]. There doesn't [[seem]] to be one [[solid]], lasting [[marriage]] or relationship in the [[entire]] [[show]] - [[everyone]] is broken up and on the prowl - [[hardly]] a true reflection of all Americans. Indeed, there is a [[total]] [[lack]] of respect for [[marriage]] or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[cheap]] [[show]] that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real [[relationships]] rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. I've watched a few episodes of this [[exhibitions]] and have found certain [[ingredient]] of it to be rather interesting, considering medical facts that can be learned. But this is [[fully]] upstaged and [[ravaged]] by the neverending immoral relationships of the show's [[nature]]. Everybody seems to have [[sleeping]] with just about everyone, [[yet]] during office hours, which is [[shockingly]] [[utopian]]. There doesn't [[seems]] to be one [[robust]], lasting [[matrimony]] or relationship in the [[overall]] [[exposition]] - [[everybody]] is broken up and on the prowl - [[almost]] a true reflection of all Americans. Indeed, there is a [[unmitigated]] [[shortfall]] of respect for [[marries]] or monogamy and it's truly fulsome.

Then we are presented with endless little moral 'dilemmas' and they're generally solved in such a way that belittles anyone who doesn't agree with the all-knowing degenerate management and staff of the private practice. For instance, in one of the latest episodes we're presented with an exceedingly rare situation of a baby who is born with an uncertain gender and Addison absolutely refuses to perform the surgery because we're supposed to let the baby decide his gender later on. Anyone who disagrees with this is portrayed as immature and stupid.

And I think that anyone opposed to abortion would be offended by the way the show treats pro-lifers. Addison made the comment that no man was allowed to have an opinion on the issue and only one black character was given dignity for opposing abortion on moral grounds. The general feeling was that if you opposed abortion, you're a freak - hardly the popular sentiment in the US. Two of the main characters in the show nonchalantly mention that they had abortions when they were younger and had no apologies or regrets, in spite of the fact that research has shown women can undergo intense depression. What's more a young girl comes to the clinic for an abortion and then thanks the staff on the way out and someone talks about it as how they were helping this young person and it was like something to exult in. The script could have been written by Planned Parenthood.

All in all, this is a [[inexpensive]] [[exhibit]] that lacks much of a future unless it decides to present more real [[ties]] rather than just totally unbelievable soap opera relationships and far-fetched medical situations throughout the whole show. --------------------------------------------- Result 2169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was wonderful as was his toying with the [[audience]]. [[Very]] [[nice]] [[work]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. Yes, Shakespeare would indeed have been proud. Laurence Fishburne was not at his best but certainly not bad. Kenneth Brannagh on the other hand was brilliant. His scheming was wonderful as was his toying with the [[audiences]]. [[Eminently]] [[pleasurable]] [[jobs]].

There were at times too little drama where more would have been expected. Cassio's slaying, for instance, was a bit clouded by too much happening to far apart, causing the spectator to twist his head to grasp it all.

Did I mention Michael Maloney? His madness striken Roderigo was unusual; annoying even.

If you haven't seen Othello before, see this. If you haven't read Othello, see this. If you haven't heard Othello, see this. You do, on the other hand, do yourself a favour by reading it, seeing it acted onstage and hearing it sung too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Have]] not [[seen]] this 1958 film in a very [[long]] time and [[greatly]] enjoyed Kim [[Novak]] playing the role as Gil Holroyd who is an actual witch and has an aunt named Queenie Holroyd who is also a witch and Gillian also has a brother warlock named Nick played by Jack Lemmon. When Gillian sets her eyes on Shep Henderson,(James Stewart) who is engaged to a girl he is going to marry; Gillian performers some magic spells with a cat and changes his mind about his intended bride and then becomes very lust full and falls in love with Gillian. The [[story]] tells that a real witch cannot fall in love, blush or cry and this begins to prove a big problem between Shep and Gillian, so Nick and Aunt Queenie decided they have to do something about this situation. [[Great]] film to view over and over again and a great classic film from 1958. [[Had]] not [[noticed]] this 1958 film in a very [[lengthy]] time and [[severely]] enjoyed Kim [[Nowak]] playing the role as Gil Holroyd who is an actual witch and has an aunt named Queenie Holroyd who is also a witch and Gillian also has a brother warlock named Nick played by Jack Lemmon. When Gillian sets her eyes on Shep Henderson,(James Stewart) who is engaged to a girl he is going to marry; Gillian performers some magic spells with a cat and changes his mind about his intended bride and then becomes very lust full and falls in love with Gillian. The [[tales]] tells that a real witch cannot fall in love, blush or cry and this begins to prove a big problem between Shep and Gillian, so Nick and Aunt Queenie decided they have to do something about this situation. [[Large]] film to view over and over again and a great classic film from 1958. --------------------------------------------- Result 2171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Elizabeth Taylor never [[could]] [[act]] at all and she was just her usual [[annoying]], untalented self in this film. This was before she got so fat but she still looked very short and dumpy. Rock Hudson was OK as Bick Benedict but [[clearly]] an [[actor]] with more range like William Holden would have been [[better]]. [[James]] Dean certainly proved he [[knew]] how to mumble his way through a movie. The [[whole]] [[film]] is [[incredibly]] [[slow]] and goes on for far too [[long]]. The [[actors]] were all too [[young]] and lightweight and [[none]] of them [[aged]] convincingly due to the [[poor]] make-up. Hudson [[looked]] [[ridiculous]] just being [[padded]] out and Dean and Carroll Baker were [[obviously]] the same age.

0/10. Elizabeth Taylor never [[wo]] [[ley]] at all and she was just her usual [[exasperating]], untalented self in this film. This was before she got so fat but she still looked very short and dumpy. Rock Hudson was OK as Bick Benedict but [[unequivocally]] an [[protagonist]] with more range like William Holden would have been [[best]]. [[Jacobo]] Dean certainly proved he [[knowed]] how to mumble his way through a movie. The [[ensemble]] [[kino]] is [[stunningly]] [[decelerate]] and goes on for far too [[longer]]. The [[protagonists]] were all too [[jeune]] and lightweight and [[nothingness]] of them [[yr]] convincingly due to the [[pauper]] make-up. Hudson [[seemed]] [[nonsense]] just being [[stuffed]] out and Dean and Carroll Baker were [[notoriously]] the same age.

0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2172 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not ashamed to admit I [[loved]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what works? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. I don't watch much porn, but I love porn stars. And I love gory movies. So when I heard about a porn-star gore movie, I was really excited. Of course, that was years ago and when I heard about all the trouble with making and finishing the movie, I never thought I'd actually get to see it. But I did and I'm not ashamed to admit I [[worshipped]] it, even with all its flaws.

First, the flaws. The story is set in Ireland and is called Samhain, but the story it seemed to want to tell is about the Sawney Beane clan from Scotland. So why not just set it there and skip the third-grade report about Samhain/Irish immigrants/Halloween? Also, it breaks its own rules by stating that you're safe on the trails, but then the cannibal mutants just start running amok everywhere. It's never clear how many cannibals we're dealing with. There's a big stone castle that's obviously ancient, yet no one's noticed it before. The self-conscious horror film references are annoying and so are the characters. The heroine has a flashback montage of all her dead friends that include a character she NEVER MET. The ending makes no sense.

So what works? The gore! Sure I would have liked more, but it was refreshing to see such a nasty movie that wasn't afraid to be nothing more than a gore movie. Two murders are waay over the top and Taylor Hayes has a nice disgusting scene. The two wild murders are even given extended shots on the DVD. I've always been of the mind that gore can overcome a stupid story and Evil Breed reinforced that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2173 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[film]] starts out with a family who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter Martha MacIssac ([[Olivia]] [[Dunne]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,(Zack). The [[mother]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill [[Dunne]]) who suddenly walks in on her daughter and Zack making out and then all kinds of problems [[seem]] to surface. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[also]] big [[problems]] that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the teenage and Nick Mancuso,(Richard Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This film will keep you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[filled]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy This [[cinematography]] starts out with a family who were all going in different directions and their teenage daughter Martha MacIssac ([[Olivier]] [[Dunn]]) was very much in love with Joe MacLeod,(Zack). The [[mummy]] is played by Mitzi Kapture,(Jill [[Dunn]]) who suddenly walks in on her daughter and Zack making out and then all kinds of problems [[appears]] to surface. Jill Dunne has a husband who is always traveling or staying away from the home quite often. There are [[apart]] big [[trouble]] that occur when the family decides to go on a camping trip which their daughter Olivia dislikes and just cannot adapt to sleeping outdoors and requires a tent to be kept out all the bugs. In many ways, Olivia does an outstanding performance as the teenage and Nick Mancuso,(Richard Grant) gives a great supporting role as a hotel owner. This film will keep you guessing how it will end and you will enjoy a film [[fills]] with plenty of horror and terror. Enjoy --------------------------------------------- Result 2174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Wow I [[loved]] this movie! It is about normal [[life]] in a small [[village]]. About hypocrisy and honesty, love and surrender. Great! It is about [[things]] everybody encounters in [[life]]. You have to do things with passion. But some people will not [[appreciate]] your passion and will [[try]] to [[stop]] you. There are people who find the opinion of others and 'what will the [[neighbors]] think' more [[important]] than to follow their heart. Don't [[let]] anybody's opinion stop you from [[fulfilling]] your dreams and passion. I [[loved]] the [[fact]] that the [[actors]] were all really normal people, it [[could]] have been my family. No big beauties, but all people you fall in love with during the movie. Wow I [[worshipped]] this movie! It is about normal [[lifetime]] in a small [[villager]]. About hypocrisy and honesty, love and surrender. Great! It is about [[items]] everybody encounters in [[iife]]. You have to do things with passion. But some people will not [[thankful]] your passion and will [[strive]] to [[stops]] you. There are people who find the opinion of others and 'what will the [[voisin]] think' more [[critical]] than to follow their heart. Don't [[letting]] anybody's opinion stop you from [[perform]] your dreams and passion. I [[cared]] the [[facto]] that the [[players]] were all really normal people, it [[would]] have been my family. No big beauties, but all people you fall in love with during the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This was a [[movie]] that I had [[heard]] about all my [[life]] [[growing]] up, but had never [[seen]] it until a few [[years]] ago. It's reputation [[truly]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael Myers, had seen the [[mask]], saw [[commercials]] for all of the [[crummy]] sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where Jason and Freddy had a deadly grip on the horror [[game]], and never thought much of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[cheated]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[genuinely]] terrifying movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this film delivers on all the other levels most horror movies fail to achieve today. The atmosphere that John Carpenter creates is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west town is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" seemingly appearing and disappearing into the shadows at will. The simple yet brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with specific nods to Jamie Lee Curtis and Donald Pleasance. Ms. Curtis is such a good Laurie Strode because she is so likable and vulnerable. It is all the more frightening when she is being stalked by Michael Myers because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

Overall, not only is Halloween a great horror movie, but also a great film. It works on many levels and draws the audience in and never lets up. This should be standard viewing for anyone wanting to experience a truly scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be surprised if you think you see "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! This was a [[filmmaking]] that I had [[overheard]] about all my [[living]] [[grew]] up, but had never [[saw]] it until a few [[ages]] ago. It's reputation [[truthfully]] proceeded it. I knew of Michael Myers, had seen the [[hide]], saw [[spots]] for all of the [[measly]] sequels that followed. But I was growing up during the decade where Jason and Freddy had a deadly grip on the horror [[gaming]], and never thought much of the Halloween franchise. Boy, how I was being [[deluded]] with cheap knock offs.

Halloween is a [[actually]] terrifying movie. Now, by today's standards, it isn't as graphic and visceral, but this film delivers on all the other levels most horror movies fail to achieve today. The atmosphere that John Carpenter creates is so creepy, and the fact that it is set in a quaint, mid-west town is a testament to his ability. The lighting effects are down right horrifying, with "The Shape" seemingly appearing and disappearing into the shadows at will. The simple yet brutally effective music score only adds to the suspense.

The performances by all the players are well done, with specific nods to Jamie Lee Curtis and Donald Pleasance. Ms. Curtis is such a good Laurie Strode because she is so likable and vulnerable. It is all the more frightening when she is being stalked by Michael Myers because the director and viewer have invested so much into her, we want her to survive and get away.

Donald Pleasance plays Dr. Loomis like a man on a mission, and it works well. He adds a sense of urgency to the predicament the town finds itself in because he knows what evil stalks their streets.

Overall, not only is Halloween a great horror movie, but also a great film. It works on many levels and draws the audience in and never lets up. This should be standard viewing for anyone wanting to experience a truly scary movie. And for an even more frightful time, try watching it alone with the lights off. Don't be surprised if you think you see "The Shape" lurking around in the shadows! --------------------------------------------- Result 2176 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quote]] was [[essentially]] the theme for the movie in my [[opinion]]. Tom [[Cruise]] plays a young [[man]] who was handed everything in his life. He takes [[things]] for [[granted]] and it [[comes]] [[around]] full [[swing]] in this [[great]] movie with a [[superb]] twist. This [[film]] will [[keep]] you [[engaged]] in the [[plot]] and [[unable]] to [[pause]] it to take a bathroom break.

Its a [[movie]] that really makes you [[step]] back and look at your [[life]] and how you [[live]] it. You cannot [[really]] [[appreciate]] the [[better]] [[things]] in life (the sweet), like [[love]], until you have [[experienced]] the [[bad]] (the [[sour]]). The [[theme]] will [[really]] get you to "[[open]] your eyes".

[[Only]] [[complaint]] is that the movie [[gets]] very [[twisted]] at [[points]] and is [[hard]] to [[really]] [[understand]]. I [[think]] the [[end]] is [[perfect]] [[though]]. I [[recommend]] you watch it and [[see]] for yourself. "The sweet is never as sweet without the sour." This [[quoting]] was [[basically]] the theme for the movie in my [[vistas]]. Tom [[Cruising]] plays a young [[dawg]] who was handed everything in his life. He takes [[items]] for [[given]] and it [[happens]] [[roughly]] full [[wobble]] in this [[whopping]] movie with a [[handsome]] twist. This [[cinematographic]] will [[conserving]] you [[hired]] in the [[intrigue]] and [[incapable]] to [[pauses]] it to take a bathroom break.

Its a [[cinematographic]] that really makes you [[stepping]] back and look at your [[iife]] and how you [[iive]] it. You cannot [[truthfully]] [[appreciative]] the [[nicer]] [[items]] in life (the sweet), like [[likes]], until you have [[seasoned]] the [[wicked]] (the [[sulphurous]]). The [[subjects]] will [[truthfully]] get you to "[[opened]] your eyes".

[[Solely]] [[grievance]] is that the movie [[got]] very [[deformed]] at [[dot]] and is [[laborious]] to [[truthfully]] [[comprehend]]. I [[thought]] the [[terminating]] is [[perfection]] [[despite]]. I [[recommendation]] you watch it and [[behold]] for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Short, but long enough, [[Cat]] [[Soup]] is a very wild trip to watch. One day, I was just searching though my On-demand list through the anime section and [[came]] across it, and decided to watch it. I [[spent]] the [[whole]] [[time]] basically sitting with my jaw agape. The [[whole]] time I was either vacant of thought, or had a fleeting one which screamed "[[TURN]] IT [[OFF]]!!!". But I didn't. And [[actually]], I'm [[glad]] I did.

The animation is stunning. [[Very]] artistic, [[odd]] and dark. I personally loved it for the [[amazing]] animation, but the seemingly vacant story behind it is equally compelling for myself.

A young boy--well, cat--goes in search of his sister's soul. In the first part she's lying sick in bed, and is soon paid by a visit from a sort of grim reaper. Her soul is split in half. One is regained by the cat boy while the other half is lost.

Then the rest of the film is slightly lost to me, honestly. I expect they go back, and their world is... perhaps slowly falling apart? Maybe her absence of soul is the answer behind this, for the rest of the film contains various stages of which the world's in. First there's a giant flood, and next it dries up into a bleak desert, and then everything freezes (thanks to either what is God or fate, as you will see). Then I believe they find the sister's soul in the form of an orange flower. After that, the whole world disappears. Haha, totally didn't get that, but it sends shivers down my spine each time.

Despite it's seemingly random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it enough and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy stuff like this, and would love to spend time doing that just to understand it. But to some people it's probably not their cup of tea. It comes off as highly disturbing, so if you like your straight forward anime, this is not a film for you. If you have an open mind however, I highly recommend this movie. Short, but long enough, [[Pussycat]] [[Gumbo]] is a very wild trip to watch. One day, I was just searching though my On-demand list through the anime section and [[arrived]] across it, and decided to watch it. I [[expended]] the [[overall]] [[moment]] basically sitting with my jaw agape. The [[ensemble]] time I was either vacant of thought, or had a fleeting one which screamed "[[CONVERTING]] IT [[DEACTIVATE]]!!!". But I didn't. And [[genuinely]], I'm [[happier]] I did.

The animation is stunning. [[Extremely]] artistic, [[outlandish]] and dark. I personally loved it for the [[startling]] animation, but the seemingly vacant story behind it is equally compelling for myself.

A young boy--well, cat--goes in search of his sister's soul. In the first part she's lying sick in bed, and is soon paid by a visit from a sort of grim reaper. Her soul is split in half. One is regained by the cat boy while the other half is lost.

Then the rest of the film is slightly lost to me, honestly. I expect they go back, and their world is... perhaps slowly falling apart? Maybe her absence of soul is the answer behind this, for the rest of the film contains various stages of which the world's in. First there's a giant flood, and next it dries up into a bleak desert, and then everything freezes (thanks to either what is God or fate, as you will see). Then I believe they find the sister's soul in the form of an orange flower. After that, the whole world disappears. Haha, totally didn't get that, but it sends shivers down my spine each time.

Despite it's seemingly random scenes, I'm sure there's a deeper message behind it if you watch it enough and do some research. Personally, I LOVE trippy stuff like this, and would love to spend time doing that just to understand it. But to some people it's probably not their cup of tea. It comes off as highly disturbing, so if you like your straight forward anime, this is not a film for you. If you have an open mind however, I highly recommend this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have no [[idea]] how IMDb [[sorts]] [[reviews]] but I do know that, as [[happens]] [[often]] on Amazon.com, there are a striking number of very [[negative]] [[reviews]] for this movie which repeat the same, [[somewhat]] [[obscure]] [[talking]] points, [[almost]] [[verbatim]]. A campaign? [[Only]] IMDb knows.

As for this movie: it's fine. It's a [[funny]], [[cute]] and very straightforward movie.

It's been over a decade [[since]] I [[worked]] in Brooklyn, lived in Queens and [[visited]] relatives in the South Bronx. But I [[found]] nothing inauthentic or exploitative about these [[kids]]. Is the [[grandmother]] a bizarre character? [[Yup]]. Do the [[dialogue]] and plot [[acknowledge]] this? [[Yes]], [[thankfully]], they do. [[Are]] other [[movies]] set in the LES and [[featuring]] Dominican / [[Puerto]] [[Rican]] kids [[possible]]? You betcha. Does that make this [[movie]] a crime — as some of the (to my eyes, astroturf) comments would [[suggest]]? Hardly. Let a thousand plastic flowers [[bloom]].

This is better than any episode of Degrassi JR. [[High]] or Degrassi [[High]]. Scoff at the comparison but _we've never had that_ and I'm [[touched]], to the [[core]], by this movie's humility of purpose and tender [[spirit]].

That said, I'd love to know the backstory behind all this backbiting! :-D I have no [[brainchild]] how IMDb [[types]] [[assessment]] but I do know that, as [[occurs]] [[usually]] on Amazon.com, there are a striking number of very [[mala]] [[inspecting]] for this movie which repeat the same, [[slightly]] [[opaque]] [[debating]] points, [[approximately]] [[literal]]. A campaign? [[Exclusively]] IMDb knows.

As for this movie: it's fine. It's a [[comical]], [[purty]] and very straightforward movie.

It's been over a decade [[because]] I [[acted]] in Brooklyn, lived in Queens and [[toured]] relatives in the South Bronx. But I [[detected]] nothing inauthentic or exploitative about these [[kid]]. Is the [[granny]] a bizarre character? [[Yeah]]. Do the [[dialog]] and plot [[acknowledging]] this? [[Yeah]], [[hopefully]], they do. [[Be]] other [[cinematography]] set in the LES and [[featured]] Dominican / [[Porto]] [[Rico]] kids [[probable]]? You betcha. Does that make this [[cinematic]] a crime — as some of the (to my eyes, astroturf) comments would [[proposes]]? Hardly. Let a thousand plastic flowers [[blooming]].

This is better than any episode of Degrassi JR. [[Higher]] or Degrassi [[Higher]]. Scoff at the comparison but _we've never had that_ and I'm [[impacted]], to the [[nuclei]], by this movie's humility of purpose and tender [[geist]].

That said, I'd love to know the backstory behind all this backbiting! :-D --------------------------------------------- Result 2179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Since their [[nasty]] divorce from the [[Disney]] [[Company]] (with Disney [[keeping]] the Miramax [[brand]]) the Weinstein [[Company]] [[seems]] to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[FLOCK]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the [[nasty]] job of keeping track of [[registered]] sex offenders, this [[picture]] will tell you more about sex criminals than an entire season of Law and Order - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken agent worn-out by the task. Claire Danes for once has the opportunity to get into a solid role ([[instead]] of the junk she normally gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the novice. The [[cinematography]], pacing, editing, all of it is [[first]] rate --- and I [[saw]] no [[trace]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[subject]] is [[handled]] with [[restraint]], but it's [[still]] a [[tough]] [[subject]] and might [[make]] you sick.

Fifty years [[ago]] there was [[almost]] no problem with the [[kinds]] of sex [[crimes]] herein [[shown]] in abundance which will shock even the jaded. Then came the [[Supreme]] [[Court]] [[decisions]] which [[simultaneously]] [[tied]] [[police]] hands as the "[[rights]]" of sex [[perverts]] were [[opened]] up and [[America]] was turned into a shopper's [[paradise]] for sexual perversity, both willing and [[unwilling]]. Each such [[step]] was [[met]] with [[praise]] by Liberals, who [[celebrated]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with glossy [[covers]] on [[Time]] and [[Newsweek]]. [[Everyday]] liberals [[also]] [[praised]] the Court's [[action]] and mocked those who disagree. [[In]] 2007 how [[many]] [[Americans]] know that the [[kind]] of [[pornography]] that [[depicts]] savage violence and torture of young [[women]] -- can be [[subscribed]] to, and delivery of it is [[subsidized]] by the [[discount]] periodicals rate by the US [[Post]] Office. [[Just]] one part of the problem -- a [[problem]] that can tare anyone's family to shreds.

[[Richard]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[gives]] his best in his performance here. [[Perhaps]] in his maturing age he's [[gained]] a [[measure]] of [[wisdom]]. Since their [[naughty]] divorce from the [[Disneyland]] [[Enterprises]] (with Disney [[maintain]] the Miramax [[trademark]]) the Weinstein [[Corporation]] [[appears]] to specialize in above average movies which are then under-promoted and seen by few. THE [[HERD]] is a prime example.

A story about the civil servants who have the [[dirty]] job of keeping track of [[recorded]] sex offenders, this [[imaging]] will tell you more about sex criminals than an entire season of Law and Order - SVU.

Richard Gere gives his best-ever performance as the soft-spoken agent worn-out by the task. Claire Danes for once has the opportunity to get into a solid role ([[conversely]] of the junk she normally gets stuck in) and she makes the most of playing the novice. The [[movie]], pacing, editing, all of it is [[fiirst]] rate --- and I [[watched]] no [[tracing]] of the attention-deficit-disorder camera jump-around or excess camera cuts that others complained about. The [[topic]] is [[manipulated]] with [[restriction]], but it's [[again]] a [[stiff]] [[theme]] and might [[deliver]] you sick.

Fifty years [[previously]] there was [[approximately]] no problem with the [[type]] of sex [[offenses]] herein [[displayed]] in abundance which will shock even the jaded. Then came the [[Upper]] [[Courthouse]] [[decision]] which [[meanwhile]] [[associated]] [[cops]] hands as the "[[right]]" of sex [[pervert]] were [[opens]] up and [[American]] was turned into a shopper's [[heaven]] for sexual perversity, both willing and [[hesitant]]. Each such [[stepping]] was [[complied]] with [[praising]] by Liberals, who [[proverbial]] the Warren Court's ill deeds with glossy [[encompasses]] on [[Moment]] and [[Front]]. [[Routine]] liberals [[similarly]] [[praising]] the Court's [[activities]] and mocked those who disagree. [[Onto]] 2007 how [[multiple]] [[Us]] know that the [[sort]] of [[obscene]] that [[denotes]] savage violence and torture of young [[girl]] -- can be [[signed]] to, and delivery of it is [[financed]] by the [[discounting]] periodicals rate by the US [[Posting]] Office. [[Mere]] one part of the problem -- a [[trouble]] that can tare anyone's family to shreds.

[[Richie]] Gere is a Liberal, but he [[furnishes]] his best in his performance here. [[Presumably]] in his maturing age he's [[profited]] a [[measurement]] of [[intellect]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When this initially aired in 1984, my wife and I taped it on our very first VHS recorder. I still have that aging tape, which I try to watch annually. It was the year my first child was born, and [[seeing]] A Christmas Carol in this incarnation brings back fond memories of happy times -- many hours of which were spent with this film playing in the background. I finally [[broke]] down this year and ordered a DVD, which prompted me to take a moment to write this brief reaction to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[story]] is [[captured]] in [[outstanding]] fashion here. George C. Scott is [[absolutely]] amazing and [[totally]] [[believable]] as Scrooge. The [[supporting]] [[cast]] is [[equally]] [[spectacular]]. This is, to my [[mind]], a [[flawless]] production. [[Little]] [[details]] add much to the enjoyment. The [[game]] "similes" Scrooge's nephew and [[wife]] play with their [[party]] [[guests]] is a neat [[item]]. (I've since re-created it with my [[high]] school English students as a [[brief]] respite from [[class]] work!) [[Honestly]], I can [[think]] of few [[ways]] to [[entertain]] myself over the [[holidays]] I [[enjoy]] more than [[indulging]] in this CBS production, which was [[originally]] [[sponsored]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[old]] tape with the [[original]] IBM [[commercials]] ... which [[show]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[years]]. [[Amazing]] how things have [[changed]]!) Bottom line: A [[Christmas]] Carol is a [[timeless]] [[story]], and this rendition is a [[timeless]] [[classic]]. [[Enjoy]] ... and [[God]] Bless [[Us]], [[Every]] One! When this initially aired in 1984, my wife and I taped it on our very first VHS recorder. I still have that aging tape, which I try to watch annually. It was the year my first child was born, and [[see]] A Christmas Carol in this incarnation brings back fond memories of happy times -- many hours of which were spent with this film playing in the background. I finally [[raped]] down this year and ordered a DVD, which prompted me to take a moment to write this brief reaction to the movie. Charles Dickens' [[fairytales]] is [[apprehended]] in [[unpaid]] fashion here. George C. Scott is [[totally]] amazing and [[altogether]] [[dependable]] as Scrooge. The [[aiding]] [[casting]] is [[similarly]] [[noteworthy]]. This is, to my [[esprit]], a [[faultless]] production. [[Scant]] [[detail]] add much to the enjoyment. The [[gaming]] "similes" Scrooge's nephew and [[women]] play with their [[parties]] [[guest]] is a neat [[items]]. (I've since re-created it with my [[supremo]] school English students as a [[succinct]] respite from [[classroom]] work!) [[Plainly]], I can [[believing]] of few [[avenues]] to [[distract]] myself over the [[festivities]] I [[enjoying]] more than [[indulge]] in this CBS production, which was [[initially]] [[sponsoring]] by IBM. (Incidentally, it's fun to watch the [[elderly]] tape with the [[preliminary]] IBM [[adverts]] ... which [[displays]] just how much computers have evolved in 21 [[olds]]. [[Awesome]] how things have [[shifted]]!) Bottom line: A [[Claus]] Carol is a [[incorruptible]] [[fairytales]], and this rendition is a [[perpetual]] [[typical]]. [[Enjoys]] ... and [[Deity]] Bless [[Americans]], [[Any]] One! --------------------------------------------- Result 2181 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] A thin [[story]] with [[many]] [[fine]] shots. Eyecatchers here are the three ladies from the D.R.E.A.M. team. And, to a lesser extent, the guy accompanying them. Traci Lords convincingly acts out the female half of an evil business-couple intending to poison the world with antrax. Original in this movie is the bra-bomb, put on a captured member of the D.R.E.A.M.-team. Of course she is rescued by a co-member, three seconds before explosion. Although clearly lent from James Bond's 'Goldfinger' and 'You only live twice', such a climax always works well. All in all a nice watch, James Bond replaced here by three Charlie's Angels. A thin [[history]] with [[several]] [[alright]] shots. Eyecatchers here are the three ladies from the D.R.E.A.M. team. And, to a lesser extent, the guy accompanying them. Traci Lords convincingly acts out the female half of an evil business-couple intending to poison the world with antrax. Original in this movie is the bra-bomb, put on a captured member of the D.R.E.A.M.-team. Of course she is rescued by a co-member, three seconds before explosion. Although clearly lent from James Bond's 'Goldfinger' and 'You only live twice', such a climax always works well. All in all a nice watch, James Bond replaced here by three Charlie's Angels. --------------------------------------------- Result 2182 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] This really is an [[incredible]] film. Not only does it document the eternal struggle of indigenous and disenfranchised people to gain their rightful voice but it also shows the United States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. Chavez is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the initial stages of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a tool long used by successive American governments and their seemingly blinkered citizens. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of TV or generic footage but an active documentation of a people and its government fighting for its future. Truly a moving experience for anyone with a conscience. These Irish film makers deserve our gratitude. Long live Chavez.

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be allowed to choose its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First phase in this process is the need to know what the realities of the situation are, and this documentary does a great job of doing just that. This really is an [[unimaginable]] film. Not only does it document the eternal struggle of indigenous and disenfranchised people to gain their rightful voice but it also shows the United States up for its dishonesty, subterfuge, and blatant disregard for human rights and self-determination. Chavez is shown as a very brave and charismatic leader struggling against what can only be characterized as a despicable elite devoid of any sense of proportion or justice. These filmmakers have recorded a coup unlike anything witnessed before.

And in the cross hairs we see the USA, once again pulling the strings and blurring all sense of reality. It's heart-breaking to watch the initial stages of the revolt knowing full well that the subversion of democracy that we're witnessing is a tool long used by successive American governments and their seemingly blinkered citizens. The footage makes it clear that this is not a manipulation of TV or generic footage but an active documentation of a people and its government fighting for its future. Truly a moving experience for anyone with a conscience. These Irish film makers deserve our gratitude. Long live Chavez.

We need to enshrine the notion that each country must be allowed to choose its government and to develop in ways that the majority sees fit. First phase in this process is the need to know what the realities of the situation are, and this documentary does a great job of doing just that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I recently saw the Broadway [[revival]] of "Blithe Spirit" [[starring]] [[Angela]] Lansbury, Rupert Everett, Christine Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[terrific]] [[production]], and shows what good actors can do with a play that is less than perfect. Angela Lansbury is extremely funny as Madame Arcati.

It was probably a mistake, then, to check out the film version of the play starring Rex Harrison. The [[movie]] does not have the energy or the laughs of a good stage production.

"Blithe Spirit" is probably one of those plays that works better with a live cast, in an audience full of people who have come to laugh. The actors can improvise, give touches and nuances to their performance and delivery of the lines, and involve the audience on a personal level that you can't get in a movie house, or with a DVD showing, where the audience is separated from the story by the "Fourth Wall." The story: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful writer, lives with his wife Ruth (Constance Cummings) in a house in the English countryside. Seeking information for his next book, a book dealing with the supernatural, Charles invites Madame Arcati (Margaret Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London production), a local spiritual medium, over to his house to conduct a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but hopes to pick up "the tricks of the trade." But then Madame Arcati brings back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first wife, who died of pneumonia seven years ago. Elvira refuses to leave, and develops a spitting rivalry with Ruth over Charles (complicated by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On stage, the actors can give performances that invite laughs in this situation. But on the screen, the actors in "Blithe Spirit" tear through the lines as if they don't know that anyone is listening to them. They mumble lines that were designed to get laughs on the stage. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and lifeless. Only Margaret Rutherford seems to have retained her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same year. In "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. I recently saw the Broadway [[rejuvenation]] of "Blithe Spirit" [[championships]] [[Angeli]] Lansbury, Rupert Everett, Christine Ebersole, and Jayne Atkinson. It's a [[super]] [[productivity]], and shows what good actors can do with a play that is less than perfect. Angela Lansbury is extremely funny as Madame Arcati.

It was probably a mistake, then, to check out the film version of the play starring Rex Harrison. The [[movies]] does not have the energy or the laughs of a good stage production.

"Blithe Spirit" is probably one of those plays that works better with a live cast, in an audience full of people who have come to laugh. The actors can improvise, give touches and nuances to their performance and delivery of the lines, and involve the audience on a personal level that you can't get in a movie house, or with a DVD showing, where the audience is separated from the story by the "Fourth Wall." The story: Charles Condomine (Rex Harrison), a successful writer, lives with his wife Ruth (Constance Cummings) in a house in the English countryside. Seeking information for his next book, a book dealing with the supernatural, Charles invites Madame Arcati (Margaret Rutherford, reprising her role from the original 1941 London production), a local spiritual medium, over to his house to conduct a séance. Charles believes that spiritism is a sham, but hopes to pick up "the tricks of the trade." But then Madame Arcati brings back the ghost of Elvira (Kaye Hammond), Charles's first wife, who died of pneumonia seven years ago. Elvira refuses to leave, and develops a spitting rivalry with Ruth over Charles (complicated by the fact that only Charles can see or hear Elvira).

On stage, the actors can give performances that invite laughs in this situation. But on the screen, the actors in "Blithe Spirit" tear through the lines as if they don't know that anyone is listening to them. They mumble lines that were designed to get laughs on the stage. The performances by Harrison, Cummings, and even Kaye Hammond are flat and lifeless. Only Margaret Rutherford seems to have retained her spark and humor as Madame Arcati.

The Oscar-winning visual effects in the film are unimpressive -- not just by today's standards, but by the standards of 1946! They consist mostly of Kaye Hammond walking around in fluorescent green outfits and makeup, being photographed in special lighting to make her look like a glowing ghost.

The cinematographer deserves some credit for creative lighting. But compare the dull visual effects of "Blithe Spirit" to the truly groundbreaking effects in Disney's "Song of the South" -- which was eligible for awards the same year. In "South," humans and animated characters share the screen seamlessly for minutes at a time. Compared to "South," the Oscar that "Blithe Spirit" received for special effects was completely undeserved.

At any rate, I can only encourage you to catch the Broadway revival of this play with Angela Lansbury before it closes. As for the movie with Rex Harrison, skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2184 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Ashanti is a very 70s sort of film (1979, to be [[precise]]). It reminded me of The [[Wild]] Geese in a [[way]] ([[Richard]] Burton, [[Richard]] Harris and [[Roger]] Moore on a mission in Africa). It's a very [[good]] [[film]] too, and I enjoyed it a [[lot]].

David ([[Michael]] Caine) is a [[doctor]] [[working]] in [[Africa]] and is married to a [[beautiful]] Ashanti [[woman]] [[called]] Anansa (Beverley [[Johnson]]) who has [[trained]] in medicine in [[America]] and is [[also]] a [[doctor]]. [[While]] they're doctoring, one day she is [[snatched]] by slavers [[working]] for an Arabic [[slave]] trader [[called]] [[Suleiman]] ([[played]] [[perfectly]] by [[Peter]] Ustinov, of all people). The [[rest]] of the [[film]] is David [[trying]] to [[get]] her back.

[[Michael]] Caine is a [[brilliant]] [[actor]], of course, and plays a [[character]] who is very determined and prepared to do [[anything]] to get his [[wife]] back, but rather [[hopeless]] with a [[gun]] and [[action]] stuff. He's [[helped]] out [[first]] by a Englishman campaigning against the slave [[trade]] that no one [[acknowledges]] is going on (Rex Harrison!), then briefly by a [[helicopter]] pilot ([[William]] Holden), and then by an [[Arab]] called Malik (Kabir Bedi). Malik has a [[score]] to [[settle]] with Suleiman (he is very [[intense]] [[throughout]], a very [[engaging]] [[character]]), and so rides off with David to [[find]] him and get Anansa back - this [[involves]] a [[wonderful]] scene in which David fails miserably to get on his [[camel]].

Then there's [[lots]] of [[adventure]]. There's [[also]] lots of morality-questioning. The [[progress]] of the [[story]] is a [[little]] predictable from this point, and there are a few liberties [[taken]] with plotting to [[move]] [[things]] along [[faster]], but it's all pretty forgivable. The [[question]] is, will [[David]] [[get]] to Anansa before [[Peter]] Ustinov [[sells]] her on to [[Omar]] Sharif ([[yes]], of [[course]] [[Omar]] Sharif is in it!)? Ashanti is a very 70s sort of film (1979, to be [[exact]]). It reminded me of The [[Feral]] Geese in a [[routes]] ([[Richards]] Burton, [[Richie]] Harris and [[Roget]] Moore on a mission in Africa). It's a very [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] too, and I enjoyed it a [[batches]].

David ([[Michele]] Caine) is a [[physicians]] [[collaborated]] in [[Continents]] and is married to a [[funky]] Ashanti [[daughters]] [[drew]] Anansa (Beverley [[Lbj]]) who has [[qualified]] in medicine in [[Latina]] and is [[likewise]] a [[medic]]. [[Despite]] they're doctoring, one day she is [[abducted]] by slavers [[cooperated]] for an Arabic [[slavic]] trader [[drew]] [[Suleyman]] ([[effected]] [[altogether]] by [[Petra]] Ustinov, of all people). The [[remainder]] of the [[filmmaking]] is David [[tempting]] to [[got]] her back.

[[Michele]] Caine is a [[resplendent]] [[protagonist]], of course, and plays a [[personage]] who is very determined and prepared to do [[nothing]] to get his [[women]] back, but rather [[desperate]] with a [[handgun]] and [[efforts]] stuff. He's [[assists]] out [[frst]] by a Englishman campaigning against the slave [[trading]] that no one [[recognizes]] is going on (Rex Harrison!), then briefly by a [[helicopters]] pilot ([[Willem]] Holden), and then by an [[Arabic]] called Malik (Kabir Bedi). Malik has a [[notation]] to [[resolved]] with Suleiman (he is very [[ferocious]] [[around]], a very [[engage]] [[traits]]), and so rides off with David to [[unearthed]] him and get Anansa back - this [[implicates]] a [[magnifique]] scene in which David fails miserably to get on his [[camels]].

Then there's [[batch]] of [[adventurer]]. There's [[apart]] lots of morality-questioning. The [[progression]] of the [[narratives]] is a [[petite]] predictable from this point, and there are a few liberties [[picked]] with plotting to [[budge]] [[aspects]] along [[quickly]], but it's all pretty forgivable. The [[issue]] is, will [[Davids]] [[got]] to Anansa before [[Petra]] Ustinov [[sold]] her on to [[Amor]] Sharif ([[yeah]], of [[cours]] [[Omer]] Sharif is in it!)? --------------------------------------------- Result 2185 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Lee hosted the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said something to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The Howling II, then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." Indeed he was right as this film may very well be the [[worst]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[first]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking [[werewolf]] film with its incredible special [[effects]] and its campy sense of style and subject matter. It was a film to be taken seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some strange reason thought that even more campy sequels were needed rather than what worked the first time(See CHUD then CHUD II to illustrate this point). This film is miles and miles away from the first on every front. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the major scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning(okay, I'll cede Ferdy Mayne too). Lee looks embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does ridiculous things(check out that ending with him and Stirba). Lee looks incredibly tired and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that dreadful noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a zero - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! Lee hosted the 100 Years of Horror for Ted Newsom and was talking about filmic werewolves. He said something to the effect that his only brush with lycanthropy was The Howling II, then he quipped, "The less said about that the better." Indeed he was right as this film may very well be the [[gravest]] in his entire catalog of screen performances. The [[fiirst]] Howling by Joe Dante was a groundbreaking [[werewolves]] film with its incredible special [[impact]] and its campy sense of style and subject matter. It was a film to be taken seriously. Like other good original films, filmmakers for some strange reason thought that even more campy sequels were needed rather than what worked the first time(See CHUD then CHUD II to illustrate this point). This film is miles and miles away from the first on every front. There is absolutely nothing scary about it. It looks cheap and is pitch black through most of the major scenes. Lee is the only actor in the film worth mentioning(okay, I'll cede Ferdy Mayne too). Lee looks embarrassed as he says inane dialog and does ridiculous things(check out that ending with him and Stirba). Lee looks incredibly tired and knows what dreck this is which is a tad more insightful than the two leads who leave America to go to Romania. The story isn't really worth examining here, and you can bet there is very little story worth mentioning when you have to have Stephen Parsons and his band Babel play through much of the film in the beginning and the ending with that dreadful noise. Sybil Danning is here and, yes, she disrobes once and then we get that scene showed again and again and again - one reviewer said 17 times(I counted ten - but might have been so bored out of my mind by that point). I gave the film three stars, but it really deserves a zero - the three I gave it are 1 for Lee and two for Ms. Danning's contributions. Yuck! --------------------------------------------- Result 2186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I've been trying to find out about this series for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a [[child]] and have never quite been able to get it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was particularly struck by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the atmosphere, which was unusual right from the beginning - mysterious, austere, and extremely [[authentic]]. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. Every 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an [[enormous]] let-down. The characters in this series seemed genuine, real people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood stars in costumes. This is a real [[masterpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it available on VHS or DVD? I would just love to have the chance to see this again! I've been trying to find out about this series for ages! Thank you, IMDb! I saw this as a [[infantile]] and have never quite been able to get it out of my mind. As a 6-year old, of course, I was particularly struck by the episode of the cyclops, which was absolutely chilling (I talked about it so much that my older brother made me a cyclops out of a plastic cave man figurine, which I still have) What I also remember, though, was the atmosphere, which was unusual right from the beginning - mysterious, austere, and extremely [[veritable]]. When I read the original many years later I experienced that same sensation. It's a very hard thing to capture - and probably impossible in Hollywood. Every 'Odyssey' I've seen since has been an [[massive]] let-down. The characters in this series seemed genuine, real people - ancient Greek people - and not some Hollywood stars in costumes. This is a real [[centerpiece]]! But - Why is it not better known? And why isn't it available on VHS or DVD? I would just love to have the chance to see this again! --------------------------------------------- Result 2187 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] To sum this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[every]] frame is [[real]]. The story was thought up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "newbie" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

To sum this documentary up in a few words is next to impossible. Every fiber of your body tells you that this is not happening right from the opening montage of rapid-fire images, through to the last shot of the clean up at Ground Zero, but [[any]] frame is [[veritable]]. The story was thought up by two French brothers living in New York. Jules (28) and Gideon (31) Naudet (pronounced "Nau-day") want to make a documentary on New York City Firefighters, beginning with a "newbie" from the academy and follow him through the nine month probationary period to full-fledged firefighter. Seeking the help of their close friend, actor James Hanlon (36), an actor and firefighter at Station 1, Engine 7, the Naudets sift through the "Probies" at the academy and find one, Tony Benetakos to focus the bulk of their documentary on.

Tony becomes the butt of jokes and slowly learns the ins and outs of station life through the members of this close-knit family. Firefighters have a superstition about "Probies." It is that they are either "White Clouds" or "Black Clouds," meaning that with the latter, all kinds of fires follow the "Probie." The former means that very little fire activity follows, but one day, there will be the mother of all fires. Tony is a "White Cloud." After some initial growing pains, Tony settles into the firehouse as if he were a seasoned vet. Then the unthinkable occurs....

September 11, 2001 begins with a clear blue sky and an early morning call to go and see about a supposed gas leak not far from Wall Street. Because Jules has had little camera experience, Gideon hands a camera to his younger brother and tells him to ride with the chief, T. K. Pfeiffer. Arriving at about 8:42, the firefighters begin to use their gas detectors over a grate. Then the sudden roar of what seems to be a low flying airplane rips past the scene, and as Jules pans upwards, we see the first strike of the day. American Airlines Flight 11 smashes into the face of the North Tower of 1 World Trade. Pfeiffer orders his men into the fire engine and they head for the World Trade Center. Once there, Jules asks to accompany the Chief into the tower. Pfeiffer tells Naudet to stick close to him. Once inside, the full impact of the growing disaster begins to show on the faces of the men whose sole purpose is to save lives.

Gideon Naudet decides to leave the firehouse and walk down to the impact area. Once there, he captures the impact of the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, with 2 World Trade. He knows Jules is with Chief Pfeiffer inside the towers. Watching and capturing the crowds' reaction to the unimaginable, Gideon begins to capture on tape the growing fear in Lower Manhattan. Inside tower one, Jules records the last view the world, or loved ones will have of their sons, fathers, uncles, grandfathers, husbands, boyfriends, friends as one by one, each firefighter, carrying 60 lbs of equipment begin the long arduous climb up 80 stories to rescue the injured and trapped. Jules also catches the last glimpse Chief Pfeiffer will have of his brother, Kevin, as he leaves to do his selfless duty. Also caught on video is the gutwrenching sound of falling bodies hitting pavement from victims choosing to jump from the higher floors above the impact zones, sooner than face death at the hands of the flames and smoke. But Jules is respectful, never once does he capture a sensationalistic moment...the money shot. His work is professional through his baptism of fire. He also catches the sight of debris falling from tower two after it is hit by the second plane and the ordered way the firefighters evacuated civilians from the building. Then Jules is caught in the collapse of the south tower and the first official victim is taken: Father Michael Judd, the Chaplain for the fire department. Then as Jules and Chief Pfeiffer make their way from the fallout of the collapse of tower two, tower one begins its structural collapse.

What results is a breathtakingly, poignant view from inside Ground Zero as Jules and Gideon work separately to document that day. Not knowing if either is alive, each fearing the worst. As each firefighter arrives at the firehouse, they greet each other with joyous hugs at having made it back. And in one moment of overwhelming emotion, Jules and Gideon are reunited. As Jules cries on his brother's shoulder, Gideon embraces his younger brother as Hanlon makes the filmmakers the subject. There is one fearful moment when Tony Benetakos, who left the station with a former chief, is believed to have been lost...but returns to the fold, this "Probie" has proven himself.

Shown with only three interruptions, 9/11 is a stunning achievement in documentary filmmaking. It ranks up there with the Hindenburg footage in showing history as it unfolds. The Naudets are to be commended for their deft handling of the subject. In lesser hands, the tendency would be toward the sensational, but the Naudets temper their eye toward dignity and compassion. Narrated by Hanlon, we get the feel of his words as he takes the audience through the events of September 11. Robert De Niro hosts the program in a sombre, restrained way. He never seeks the camera for his own glory, rather he lays out the scenes you are about to see. I also commend CBS for their bravery at airing this special. Chastised for their attempt at grabbing ratings, they temper their editing toward the emotions of the relatives of those who perished. This is a must see for anyone who needs to be reminded of what true heroism is. It isn't about dribbling a basketball, or selling an album of hate lyrics...9/11 is about humanity at its best. Heroism at its finest and the cost of freedom.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2188 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I saw this film a few [[years]] [[ago]] and I got to say that I really [[love]] it.Jason Patric was [[perfect]] for this weird role that he played.The [[director]]?I don't too many things about him...and I don't care.The screenplay is good,that's for sure.[[In]] just a few words I have to say about this movie that is weird,strange,even [[dark]],but it's a [[good]] one.I saw it a few [[years]] ago and never [[saw]] it since then.I want to [[see]] it again and again.I know that I'm not gonna get sick of watching it.The scenes,the atmosphere,the actors,the story...everything is good.The movie should have lasted longer.I think 120 minutes should have been [[perfect]].I was [[hoping]] for a part 2 for this [[movie]].Too bad it din't [[happened]].Jason Patric:you're the [[man]] ! very [[good]] movie. the [[end]]. :-) I saw this film a few [[yrs]] [[formerly]] and I got to say that I really [[adores]] it.Jason Patric was [[irreproachable]] for this weird role that he played.The [[superintendent]]?I don't too many things about him...and I don't care.The screenplay is good,that's for sure.[[During]] just a few words I have to say about this movie that is weird,strange,even [[dusky]],but it's a [[alright]] one.I saw it a few [[yrs]] ago and never [[sawthe]] it since then.I want to [[consults]] it again and again.I know that I'm not gonna get sick of watching it.The scenes,the atmosphere,the actors,the story...everything is good.The movie should have lasted longer.I think 120 minutes should have been [[irreproachable]].I was [[awaiting]] for a part 2 for this [[kino]].Too bad it din't [[transpired]].Jason Patric:you're the [[males]] ! very [[buena]] movie. the [[terminating]]. :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Henry Thomas was "great". His character held my attention. I was so "into" the story that I forgot it wasn't real. I wanted him to keep the baby and see what a special person he was. The other people in the story were essential in the makeup of his character. The way they banded together to help one another was truly awe inspiring. I love movies that show the real side of human emotions without having to hit you over the head, in that you are not smart enough to figure things out for yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 2190 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Never cast models and Playboy bunnies in your films! Bob Fosse's "Star 80" about Dorothy Stratten, of whom Bogdanovich was obsessed enough to have married her SISTER after her murder at the hands of her low-life husband, is a zillion times more interesting than Dorothy herself on the silver screen. Patty Hansen is no actress either..I expected to see some sort of lost masterpiece a la Orson Welles but instead got Audrey Hepburn cavorting in jeans and a god-awful "poodlesque" hair-do....Very disappointing...."Paper Moon" and "The Last Picture Show" I could watch again and again. This clunker I could barely sit through once. This movie was reputedly not released because of the brouhaha surrounding Ms. Stratten's tawdry death; I think the real reason was because it was so bad! --------------------------------------------- Result 2191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Originally]] called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Carl]] Zschering) who "likes em young". Unable to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who [[teaches]] him a [[special]] Vietnamese chant. This "[[chant]]" [[involves]] whistling 'London [[Bridge]] is [[Falling]] Down' whilst hopping [[around]] like an epileptic morris dancer. [[Nonetheless]], [[Ugly]] Joe [[tries]] it out and hey presto! He is now a girl. Ideally he needs to be a young guy in order attract [[girls]]. But lets not talk about ideals here - this [[film]] was made in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue delivered by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For instance, [[Joe]] decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The [[highlight]] of this [[terrible]] [[movie]] involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a man. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the way for another priceless moment. This involved the male hooker reporting the incident to a curly haired police officer with a 2-bit joke shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's inability at saying "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

Apart from the above mentioned incident this monotonous slash [[flick]] was a complete bore. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. [[Initially]] called The Changer. The Nostril Picker is a poorly constructed tale about a loner named Joe Bukowski ([[Karol]] Zschering) who "likes em young". Unable to socially interact with girls he bumps into a tramp who [[learns]] him a [[particular]] Vietnamese chant. This "[[purity]]" [[includes]] whistling 'London [[Bridges]] is [[Tumbling]] Down' whilst hopping [[about]] like an epileptic morris dancer. [[Nevertheless]], [[Nasty]] Joe [[strives]] it out and hey presto! He is now a girl. Ideally he needs to be a young guy in order attract [[daughters]]. But lets not talk about ideals here - this [[cinematography]] was made in 1983 and released in 1993, in an ideal world it should have NEVER been released.

The Film Asylum dubbed this horror hokum as "mind numbing, ham handed story telling". Its worse than that. The Nostril Picker really takes the biscuit, in fact the whole god-damn cookie jar. Terribly scripted dialogue delivered by brain-dead actors, a ridiculous plot and a predictable twist. Just when things couldn't get any more absurd the story goes off on its own nonsensical tangent. For instance, [[Kawa]] decides to kill the girls by changing back into himself. But i thought he wanted to get close to them? Not content with being a murderer Joe also turns into a cannibal and eats some of his victims, of which there were only around 3-4.

The [[underlines]] of this [[fearsome]] [[flick]] involves Joe picking up a hooker (Steven Andrews) then taking "her" back to his apartment. What happens next defies belief... Joe turns back into a man, but also discovers the hooker is a man. How does he react? Well, in a Benny Hill-esquire fashion, he chases "her" around the apartment with a bunch of squirty dildo's only to trip up on a blow up doll. God knows what Patrick J Matthews and Stephen Hodge were thinking of. At least this scene paved the way for another priceless moment. This involved the male hooker reporting the incident to a curly haired police officer with a 2-bit joke shop 'cop' uniform. The hilarious acting is a must see. Especially the hooker's inability at saying "dildo" and his demand for "satisfaction".

Apart from the above mentioned incident this monotonous slash [[gesture]] was a complete bore. You know a movie's bad when the DVD trailers were more exciting. Normally, i'd fast forward to the good bits, only there weren't any here. The main action sequences involved Joe simply stabbing his victims repeatedly. Forget quick cuts, Matthews utilizes fadeouts (one during a stab scene) to limit any form of suspense there might already be. One girl's non-reaction to her fingers being chopped off is laughable. Normally i'd relish the words "uncut" but in this case they were far from a blessing. Just more agonizing cinematic torture. The whole movie felt like an unedited episode of Midsummer Murders, only less entertaining. I'd hate to see the cut version.

To sum up, The Nostril picker is the most unentertaining thing i've seen since Richard Hammond's 5 O' Clock Show. Dismal performances made worse by a terribly tinny soundtrack and bad dubbing. Don't be fooled by the box label, this is NOT a cult classic unless it qualifies for the lets-use-shitty-horror-dvds-for-coffee-coasters cult. Which i think it does. Unless re-edited to 30 minutes stay away from this coma inducing mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2192 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] For my first taste of Shakespeare on stage, I cannot believe what these people did to a perfectly good play.

-Let's start off with the good bit, shall we?-

Alan Rickman is [[alright]], although some of his [[dialog]] could have been delivered with more feeling. The rest of the actors needed to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art thou not dead yet, Romeo? The [[actor]], while not only [[completely]] [[wooden]] and deadpan, could not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was completely out of focus, had difficulty even looking Juliet in the face, and absolutely [[NO]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. Juliet is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her character,and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of character for the entirety of his dialog. Benvolio was unfeeling and mercilessly choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and Juliet. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have seen kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this movie a rating of zero. For my first taste of Shakespeare on stage, I cannot believe what these people did to a perfectly good play.

-Let's start off with the good bit, shall we?-

Alan Rickman is [[allright]], although some of his [[dialogues]] could have been delivered with more feeling. The rest of the actors needed to pull it together.

Romeo, Romeo, whyfore art thou not dead yet, Romeo? The [[protagonist]], while not only [[abundantly]] [[timber]] and deadpan, could not read his lines with any gusto at all. He was completely out of focus, had difficulty even looking Juliet in the face, and absolutely [[NOS]] grace with the lines that he was given. Whoever cast him deserves to be punished. Juliet is almost passable, but she gives no depth to her character,and seems to be completely out of touch with the play. Mercutio was incredibly creepy and completely out of character for the entirety of his dialog. Benvolio was unfeeling and mercilessly choppy with his lines.

I was forced to endure this half-baked production of Romeo and Juliet. The acting was stilted and the costumes were nothing short of distracting. I have seen kindergarten puppet shows with more effort put into them. I only wish that i could give this movie a rating of zero. --------------------------------------------- Result 2193 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] For all of the Has-Beens or Never Was's or for the curious, this [[film]] is for you....Ever played a sport, or [[wondered]] what it felt like after the lights went down and the crowd left..this film [[explores]] that and more.

[[Robin]] Williams(Jack Dundee) is a small town assistant banker in Taft CA., whose life has been [[plagued]], by a miscue in a BIG rival high school football game 13 years ago, when he dropped the pass that would have won over Bakersfield, their Arch-Rival, that takes great pleasure in pounding the Taft Rockets, season after season . Kurt Russell(Reno Hightower) was the Quarterback in that famous game, and is the local legend, that now is a van repair specialist, whose life is fading into lethargy, like the town of Taft itself.

Williams gets an idea to remake history, by replaying the GAME ! He meets with skeptical resistance, so he goes on a one man terror spree, and literally paints the town , orange, yellow and black , to raise the ire of the residents to recreate THE game . After succeeding, the players from that 1972 team reunite, and try to get in shape to practice, which is hysterical . The game is on , Bakesfield is loaded with all of the high tech gadgets, game strategies, and sophisticated training routines . Taft is drawing plays in the mud, with sticks, stones, and bottle caps, what a riot ! Does Taft overcome the odds, does Robin Willians purge the demons from his bowels, does Kurt Russell rise from lethargy, watch "The Best of Times" for one of the [[BEST]] viewing experiences ever!

One of Robin Williams [[best]] UNDERSTATED performances, the [[chemistry]] between Robin and Russell is magic . And who is Kid Lester ???

Holly Palance and Pamela Reed give memorable performances as the wives of Williams and Russell. Succeeds on Many Levels. A 10 ! For all of the Has-Beens or Never Was's or for the curious, this [[movie]] is for you....Ever played a sport, or [[inquired]] what it felt like after the lights went down and the crowd left..this film [[scrutinize]] that and more.

[[Rubin]] Williams(Jack Dundee) is a small town assistant banker in Taft CA., whose life has been [[blighted]], by a miscue in a BIG rival high school football game 13 years ago, when he dropped the pass that would have won over Bakersfield, their Arch-Rival, that takes great pleasure in pounding the Taft Rockets, season after season . Kurt Russell(Reno Hightower) was the Quarterback in that famous game, and is the local legend, that now is a van repair specialist, whose life is fading into lethargy, like the town of Taft itself.

Williams gets an idea to remake history, by replaying the GAME ! He meets with skeptical resistance, so he goes on a one man terror spree, and literally paints the town , orange, yellow and black , to raise the ire of the residents to recreate THE game . After succeeding, the players from that 1972 team reunite, and try to get in shape to practice, which is hysterical . The game is on , Bakesfield is loaded with all of the high tech gadgets, game strategies, and sophisticated training routines . Taft is drawing plays in the mud, with sticks, stones, and bottle caps, what a riot ! Does Taft overcome the odds, does Robin Willians purge the demons from his bowels, does Kurt Russell rise from lethargy, watch "The Best of Times" for one of the [[OPTIMUM]] viewing experiences ever!

One of Robin Williams [[nicest]] UNDERSTATED performances, the [[chemist]] between Robin and Russell is magic . And who is Kid Lester ???

Holly Palance and Pamela Reed give memorable performances as the wives of Williams and Russell. Succeeds on Many Levels. A 10 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] In the process of trying to establish the audiences' empathy with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Maguire]]) the filmmakers slander the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never withdrew from the Union and the Union Army was not an invading force. The Southerners fought for State's Rights: the right to own slaves, elect crooked legislatures and judges, and employ a political spoils system. There's nothing noble in that. The Missourians could have easily traveled east and joined the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the story has nothing to do with [[ambiguity]]. When Jake leaves the Bushwhackers, it's not because he saw error in his way, he certainly doesn't give himself over to the virtue of the cause of abolition. In the process of trying to establish the audiences' empathy with Jake Roedel (Tobey [[Molloy]]) the filmmakers slander the North and the Jayhawkers. Missouri never withdrew from the Union and the Union Army was not an invading force. The Southerners fought for State's Rights: the right to own slaves, elect crooked legislatures and judges, and employ a political spoils system. There's nothing noble in that. The Missourians could have easily traveled east and joined the Confederate Army.

It seems to me that the story has nothing to do with [[ambivalence]]. When Jake leaves the Bushwhackers, it's not because he saw error in his way, he certainly doesn't give himself over to the virtue of the cause of abolition. --------------------------------------------- Result 2195 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] "Angels in the Outfield" was originally a 1951 [[movie]] from the Ted Turner [[library]]; [[Disney]] remade it in 1994, this [[time]], using the California Angels (now the Los Angeles [[Angels]]) as the team (Disney [[used]] to own this and the Anaheim [[Mighty]] Ducks Hockey Team; [[also]], good [[use]] of the [[words]], huh?????).

This [[movie]] was about a [[couple]] of orphaned [[children]] who [[wanted]] a [[family]]. A [[man]] promised the [[boys]] a family, only if the [[Angels]] won the [[pennant]]. So, he called upon God one night about this. The [[boy]] who prayed could [[see]] the help [[coming]] on the way (and [[ONLY]] that [[boy]]); for [[instance]], when the first [[angel]] had come down, a player [[hit]] a ball so hard not only did the bat [[break]], so did the ball!!!!! [[For]] much of the post-All [[Star]] season of 1994, the [[Angels]] were at the [[top]] of the AL West (of which my [[home]] team the Rangers is one and it [[still]] is). However, they lost a [[game]] because the [[boy]] was at court instead of the [[White]] [[Sox]]/Angels [[game]] (there was no Central Division in Baseball back then, hence Chicago being in the [[West]]), and no [[angels]] were there to [[help]]. Thus, a [[new]] [[rule]] was [[created]]: no [[angels]] can [[help]] in championship [[games]]. But wait! [[In]] the [[final]] [[championship]] [[game]], the Angels won!!!!! It was a [[miracle]] [[indeed]]!

What I [[liked]] about this [[film]]: This is a [[good]] movie. I mean, I prayed [[every]] [[night]] for the [[last]] few [[years]] [[asking]] for help with [[school]] and stuff; look at me now! My [[work]] was good!!!!! So for one, this [[shows]] that if you believe, God can [[send]] His [[angels]] down to [[help]] you with any [[troubles]] that you may have in [[life]]. And second, this is a family baseball movie, which is [[always]] [[exciting]]. This is an [[old]] Disney [[movie]], too; I've [[seen]] this just [[recently]] on the [[New]] Disney Channel ([[blech]]!!!!!).

"[[Angels]] in the Outfield" will [[change]] your life [[forever]] once you've seen it!!!!!

10/10 "Angels in the Outfield" was originally a 1951 [[flick]] from the Ted Turner [[librarian]]; [[Disneyland]] remade it in 1994, this [[times]], using the California Angels (now the Los Angeles [[Angel]]) as the team (Disney [[using]] to own this and the Anaheim [[Forceful]] Ducks Hockey Team; [[apart]], good [[uses]] of the [[phrase]], huh?????).

This [[filmmaking]] was about a [[pair]] of orphaned [[kid]] who [[wants]] a [[familia]]. A [[males]] promised the [[guys]] a family, only if the [[Angel]] won the [[flag]]. So, he called upon God one night about this. The [[dude]] who prayed could [[behold]] the help [[upcoming]] on the way (and [[PURELY]] that [[dude]]); for [[lawsuits]], when the first [[angels]] had come down, a player [[slapped]] a ball so hard not only did the bat [[interruption]], so did the ball!!!!! [[At]] much of the post-All [[Stars]] season of 1994, the [[Angel]] were at the [[supreme]] of the AL West (of which my [[household]] team the Rangers is one and it [[nonetheless]] is). However, they lost a [[games]] because the [[guys]] was at court instead of the [[Blanca]] [[Orioles]]/Angels [[games]] (there was no Central Division in Baseball back then, hence Chicago being in the [[Western]]), and no [[angel]] were there to [[helped]]. Thus, a [[newer]] [[ordinance]] was [[generated]]: no [[angel]] can [[assistance]] in championship [[game]]. But wait! [[Among]] the [[definitive]] [[championships]] [[games]], the Angels won!!!!! It was a [[miracles]] [[actually]]!

What I [[wished]] about this [[flick]]: This is a [[alright]] movie. I mean, I prayed [[any]] [[overnight]] for the [[final]] few [[olds]] [[asks]] for help with [[tuition]] and stuff; look at me now! My [[jobs]] was good!!!!! So for one, this [[displayed]] that if you believe, God can [[shipment]] His [[angel]] down to [[helps]] you with any [[disturbances]] that you may have in [[vida]]. And second, this is a family baseball movie, which is [[incessantly]] [[intriguing]]. This is an [[archaic]] Disney [[film]], too; I've [[saw]] this just [[lately]] on the [[Newer]] Disney Channel ([[yuck]]!!!!!).

"[[Angel]] in the Outfield" will [[shifting]] your life [[endlessly]] once you've seen it!!!!!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2196 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is the one in which the diminutive Ruth [[Gordon]] plays an Agatha-Christie type of [[murder]] mystery [[author]] who locks her nephew by [[marriage]] into a [[safe]]. Gordon [[believes]] that he [[murdered]] her [[niece]] and the young [[fellow]] [[dies]] of [[suffocation]], while Gordon is traveling back and forth to [[New]] York. He [[manages]], [[however]], to [[leave]] behind some [[clues]], [[scratches]] on a [[couple]] of [[black]] safe [[deposit]] boxes and an improvised and well-hidden [[note]]. [[Columbo]] enters the [[case]], [[suspects]] her at once, and [[solves]] the mystery by [[simply]] using his supernatural mystical intuitive powers. Oh, and [[Mariette]] Hartley is on hand as Gordon's secretary and would-be blackmailer. Hartley is, I [[believe]], the [[grand]] daughter of the [[psychologist]] B. F. Skinner. I'm not sure her [[ancestry]] had [[anything]] to do with her [[attractive]] belly button, which is on [[display]] during a belly [[dance]] [[sequence]], but I've [[always]] admired Skinner anyway.

The [[murder]] is well [[handled]]. It's a good plot, and [[none]] of the [[performers]] or crew fluff anything. But the [[outstanding]] [[figure]] here is Ruth [[Gordon]], only a skosh over five [[feet]] tall. She was over 80 [[years]] old and looked it. There are [[moments]] when she [[almost]] teeters, but she [[consistently]] exudes [[charm]]. Her acting is idiosyncratic. You can never be sure when she's being serious or when she's putting Columbo and the audience on. She's [[given]] some good lines too. What humor there is comes from Gordon. [[Columbo]] doesn't have any of his frequent [[comic]] moments.

All in all, a [[nice]] [[job]] by [[everyone]] concerned. This is the one in which the diminutive Ruth [[Gordo]] plays an Agatha-Christie type of [[kills]] mystery [[auteur]] who locks her nephew by [[marry]] into a [[securing]]. Gordon [[deems]] that he [[killing]] her [[granddaughter]] and the young [[colleagues]] [[deaths]] of [[bottleneck]], while Gordon is traveling back and forth to [[Newest]] York. He [[administering]], [[conversely]], to [[letting]] behind some [[cues]], [[scrapes]] on a [[matching]] of [[negro]] safe [[depot]] boxes and an improvised and well-hidden [[observes]]. [[Colombo]] enters the [[instance]], [[accuser]] her at once, and [[solving]] the mystery by [[merely]] using his supernatural mystical intuitive powers. Oh, and [[Marian]] Hartley is on hand as Gordon's secretary and would-be blackmailer. Hartley is, I [[reckon]], the [[whopping]] daughter of the [[psychiatry]] B. F. Skinner. I'm not sure her [[origin]] had [[something]] to do with her [[seductive]] belly button, which is on [[displays]] during a belly [[danse]] [[sequences]], but I've [[consistently]] admired Skinner anyway.

The [[manslaughter]] is well [[treated]]. It's a good plot, and [[nothing]] of the [[performer]] or crew fluff anything. But the [[unpaid]] [[silhouette]] here is Ruth [[Gordo]], only a skosh over five [[magpies]] tall. She was over 80 [[yrs]] old and looked it. There are [[times]] when she [[approximately]] teeters, but she [[ceaselessly]] exudes [[seduction]]. Her acting is idiosyncratic. You can never be sure when she's being serious or when she's putting Columbo and the audience on. She's [[gave]] some good lines too. What humor there is comes from Gordon. [[Colombo]] doesn't have any of his frequent [[comedian]] moments.

All in all, a [[pleasurable]] [[jobs]] by [[anybody]] concerned. --------------------------------------------- Result 2197 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] My sincere advice to all: don't watch the movie.

Don't even go near to the theater where this movie is being played!! [[even]] a glimpse of it is [[bad]] for health. serious. no [[jokes]]. it's 3.30 am in the morning. and i returned from this crappiest [[movie]] on this universe. FOUR HOURS DAMN!!! I am proud that i survived after all of it! [[If]] this is [[called]] survival.

i am [[highly]] frustrated. [[annoyed]]. [[disappointed]]. it was [[sheer]] [[waste]] of [[time]]! money went in [[drain]]! no [[plot]]. Hope i [[wake]] up tomorrow sane and with no memories of this night!! [[RUBBISH]] [[MOVIE]].

[[Happy]] Republic day to one and all :) My sincere advice to all: don't watch the movie.

Don't even go near to the theater where this movie is being played!! [[yet]] a glimpse of it is [[inclement]] for health. serious. no [[pranks]]. it's 3.30 am in the morning. and i returned from this crappiest [[kino]] on this universe. FOUR HOURS DAMN!!! I am proud that i survived after all of it! [[Though]] this is [[termed]] survival.

i am [[exceptionally]] frustrated. [[enraged]]. [[frustrating]]. it was [[mere]] [[squander]] of [[times]]! money went in [[drainage]]! no [[intrigue]]. Hope i [[waking]] up tomorrow sane and with no memories of this night!! [[DETRITUS]] [[CINEMATIC]].

[[Contented]] Republic day to one and all :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2198 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Battlestar]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[great]] look, [[excellent]] actors, and interesting [[stories]]... [[AND]] yeah, had hot men and women running around in and out of uniform.

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy [[writing]]. [[Actors]] [[smoking]] up a storm to give them "character." Outdoor sequences that ruin the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford Focus sitting in the background). [[Lots]] and lots of teenage angst. LOTS of gyrating naked women (but in the background. Which I'm sure will be cut for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. None of the actors except Polly Walker took my attention at all. At an hour and a half, I was still wondering when it was going to be over.

So what exactly is it that's supposed to bring me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The actors? Besides Polly Walker's fine turn, there isn't much interesting being done here. There aren't even any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, although for the younger set he's pretty old, since he's over 25.

I loved BSG. I was skeptical when I heard about Caprica, and unfortunately, I think I'm right. I predict a very short run for it as a series unless they really sharpen their pencils over at SciFi and get to work making this more than The OC on another planet. [[Pegasus]] Gallactica was so great because it had tight writing, a [[wondrous]] look, [[phenomenal]] actors, and interesting [[narratives]]... [[UND]] yeah, had hot men and women running around in and out of uniform.

Caprica was just lazy. Lazy [[handwriting]]. [[Protagonists]] [[tobacco]] up a storm to give them "character." Outdoor sequences that ruin the feeling of being somewhere else (yes, that is a Ford Focus sitting in the background). [[Batch]] and lots of teenage angst. LOTS of gyrating naked women (but in the background. Which I'm sure will be cut for the series) and a token view of some men in towels. None of the actors except Polly Walker took my attention at all. At an hour and a half, I was still wondering when it was going to be over.

So what exactly is it that's supposed to bring me back? The science fiction? It's awfully light on that. The actors? Besides Polly Walker's fine turn, there isn't much interesting being done here. There aren't even any "hotties" in the cast, except for maybe Esai, although for the younger set he's pretty old, since he's over 25.

I loved BSG. I was skeptical when I heard about Caprica, and unfortunately, I think I'm right. I predict a very short run for it as a series unless they really sharpen their pencils over at SciFi and get to work making this more than The OC on another planet. --------------------------------------------- Result 2199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Any film that deals with [[bigotry]] in a [[positive]] manner is a film that should still be [[seen]] by [[current]] audiences as the message and moral of the story will [[always]] be relevant as long as we have a [[world]] full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the film is really an old-fashioned [[love]] story..boy meets girl..boys loses girl...boy gets girl back....

The weakest role goes to the [[late]] Kent Smith as Lt. General Webster([[Riccardo]] Montalban is a close second)...my question would be how did he ever get to be a 3-star general...the character is such a wimp in the presence of his wife and military subordinates, it's a wonder they show him any respect at all.

Brando's southern accent is a little overdone, and some scenes have a few holes but [[overall]], I enjoy the film [[every]] time I see it.

Red [[Buttons]] is [[great]]...I always love seeing comedians in dramatic [[roles]]...as in Button's case, [[often]] a comedian can [[better]] portray the tragedy of a [[person]] than a more traditional dramatic [[actor]]. Any film that deals with [[fanaticism]] in a [[propitious]] manner is a film that should still be [[noticed]] by [[underway]] audiences as the message and moral of the story will [[incessantly]] be relevant as long as we have a [[globe]] full of bigotry.

Aside from that, the film is really an old-fashioned [[iike]] story..boy meets girl..boys loses girl...boy gets girl back....

The weakest role goes to the [[tardy]] Kent Smith as Lt. General Webster([[Ricardo]] Montalban is a close second)...my question would be how did he ever get to be a 3-star general...the character is such a wimp in the presence of his wife and military subordinates, it's a wonder they show him any respect at all.

Brando's southern accent is a little overdone, and some scenes have a few holes but [[whole]], I enjoy the film [[any]] time I see it.

Red [[Poppers]] is [[large]]...I always love seeing comedians in dramatic [[functions]]...as in Button's case, [[traditionally]] a comedian can [[improved]] portray the tragedy of a [[someone]] than a more traditional dramatic [[actress]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I absolutely loved this movie. It met all expectations and went beyond that. I loved the humor and the way the movie wasn't just randomly silly. It also had a message. Jim Carrey makes me happy. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have done excellent analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to comment, but the film just [[bugs]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I must toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the original "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this piece of crap just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. Everyone else who has commented negatively about this film have done excellent analysis as to why this film is so bloody awful. I wasn't going to comment, but the film just [[beetles]] me so much, and the writer/director in particular. So I must toss in my hat to join the naysayers.

I saw the original "Wicker Man" and really loved the cornucopia of music, sensuality, paganism in a modern world, and the clash of theological beliefs. This said, I am not part of the crowd that thinks remakes of great movies shouldn't be done. For example, I liked the original 1950's "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", but equally enjoyed the 1978 remake. Both films can stand on their own. Another example is "The Thing". The original, as campy as it looks compared to today's standards, has a lot to be proud of in the 1982 remake with Kurt Russell (my all time favorite horror movie). So that small minority of people who like "The Wicker Man" re-make can not accuse me of dissing this piece of crap just because it's a re-make.

This film solidified for me Neil LaBute's sexism and misogynistic tendencies. It also made me wonder how executives, wanting to make a serious thriller, would green light a product that is so anti-female. There are too many scenes of Cage hitting women just because he's frustrated with them thwarting his investigation of a missing girl. would he react like this off the island in other cases where suspects aren't forthcoming? The original created a society in which men and women are equal participants in a Goddess based religion. The threat to the main character came from everyone, male and female. There was no sexual hierarchy.

The metaphor of bees, drones etc was a bit heavy handed and convenient ("The drone must die!"), especially when Cage's character has bee allergies. I kept wondering why the men on the island didn't fight back and use mere physicality to stop these women from treating them like grunts. These were not women with special supernatural powers, and half of them seemed to be pregnant, the other half old and fat, and the rest girls and thin blonde waifs, so if the men really wanted to escape they could do what most men do when they hate women. Physically dominate them. There didn't seem to be any guns or weapons beyond cutting tools to hold them if they were unhappy. But if they were content being drones, why make them unable to speak? They could be used as a threat to Cage because they will defend the community. They are drones because Neil LaBute seems to believe that a society ran by women would leave men castrated. (That movie was made already. "The Stepford Wives" anyone?) Classic symptoms from men who are afraid of what may happen if women got their sh*t together and were truly equal citizens.

The problem with the man-hating female society is that it makes uninteresting movie viewing and creates unintentional humor when Cage starts knocking women out. I belief LaBute should've left the society an egalitarian one, kept the sexuality and uninhibited lasciviousness, and pushed buttons of discomfort in regards to the children on that island. No one likes pedophiles or children to be sexually exploited. So how would a cop react if he saw lewd acts performed by adults with children around? There would be a logical mental leap that these children are abused, thus, an urgency created to save the missing child and get help for all the children. LaBute has said he created the fiancé and daughter story thread to give Cage's character an incentive to search. I don't think you need that. Any child abused will make an adult react to save them. The irony of course would be that the child Cage "saves" ultimately brings him death.

The dialogue was contrived and campy. The whole third act was hilarious. The audience I saw it with guffawed (and later booed at the end). I just thought the movie started off wrong when the letter arrived written in the fancy handwriting and all the flashbacks cutting into to show how wounded Cage is. We don't need that. Just show him arriving on the island for an investigation of a missing child. Most of us in America have seen "Law & Order" and other cop procedurals. We come into the movie as if we are Cage's partner solving a mystery.

So much potential...wasted. Neil LaBute, stick to talking head pictures for people who enjoy your male angst-ridden plays and flicks of that sort. Stay with your own company of men. Leave the thrillers for people who understand thrillers. Here is your jar of honey. I'll watch that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2202 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctively help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I guarantee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2203 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I really [[liked]] the movie. I remember reading it several times as a kid and was glad to see a movie had been made about the book.

I was kid-sitting for a boy and a girl, ages 11 and 8 and had to talk the [[girl]] in to seeing the movie. But happily, at the end, she was glad she saw it and even said that she wanted to buy it on [[DVD]] as soon as it came out.

There were some great laugh-out-loud [[moments]] and the movie was not as "[[gross]]" as I expected it would be ... tho it did rank pretty high up there on the gross-o-meter ...

The only thing I cannot figure out is why they had to have the "dilly" line in there that was done by Woody in reference to his private part ... that to me was the only shocker moment (and you could hear the adults in the audience audibly gasp at that moment in the movie) ... I have no clue why that was put in the movie; it added nothing to the actual movie except for that shock/gasp factor ... other than that, a pretty good [[movie]]. Nice to see the "Pepsi" girl all grown up. I really [[wished]] the movie. I remember reading it several times as a kid and was glad to see a movie had been made about the book.

I was kid-sitting for a boy and a girl, ages 11 and 8 and had to talk the [[woman]] in to seeing the movie. But happily, at the end, she was glad she saw it and even said that she wanted to buy it on [[DVDS]] as soon as it came out.

There were some great laugh-out-loud [[times]] and the movie was not as "[[flagrant]]" as I expected it would be ... tho it did rank pretty high up there on the gross-o-meter ...

The only thing I cannot figure out is why they had to have the "dilly" line in there that was done by Woody in reference to his private part ... that to me was the only shocker moment (and you could hear the adults in the audience audibly gasp at that moment in the movie) ... I have no clue why that was put in the movie; it added nothing to the actual movie except for that shock/gasp factor ... other than that, a pretty good [[cinematography]]. Nice to see the "Pepsi" girl all grown up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. Spend a useful 90 min. [[living]] your favourite game. Disjointed - poorly filmed - non [[directed]] junk. It takes a bits from several other "science fiction" movies and badly attempts to join the parts into a pathetically weak story. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to realise that providing simple entertainment would achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill [[ingenuity]] and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[money]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i would like my 90 min of life back. Snuggle down in your favourite chair and switch on the play-station, as you toss this into the waste disposal unit. Spend a useful 90 min. [[residing]] your favourite game. Disjointed - poorly filmed - non [[aimed]] junk. It takes a bits from several other "science fiction" movies and badly attempts to join the parts into a pathetically weak story. There's nothing new here, the filmmakers do not seem to realise that providing simple entertainment would achieve a monetary game, but a touch of skill [[resourcefulness]] and flair is required to turn it into a good film. Any [[cash]] spent watching this is a waste, and personally i would like my 90 min of life back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] 1933 [[seemed]] to be a [[great]] year for satires ("[[Duck]] [[Soup]]" for [[instance]]) and this one [[fits]] in well [[even]] though it is about the obsession with [[contract]] [[bridge]]. The tone is like a humorous piece from The New Yorker, appropriate, since the film begins with the "Goings On About Town" page of that magazine. The only [[thing]] [[odd]] is the casting. Made a few years [[later]] William Powell and Myrna [[Loy]] would have been perfect. However, after 1934, you wouldn't have had adultery handled in such a [[sophisticated]] [[fashion]], the young and [[beautiful]] Loretta Young in some shear and slinky [[outfits]], or a group of prostitutes listening to a bridge contest on radio. Even if you know nothing about bridge, you may still want to check out a [[rare]] [[example]] of Hollywood satire. 1933 [[appeared]] to be a [[excellent]] year for satires ("[[Ducks]] [[Gumbo]]" for [[lawsuits]]) and this one [[adjusts]] in well [[yet]] though it is about the obsession with [[contracts]] [[bridging]]. The tone is like a humorous piece from The New Yorker, appropriate, since the film begins with the "Goings On About Town" page of that magazine. The only [[stuff]] [[inquisitive]] is the casting. Made a few years [[afterward]] William Powell and Myrna [[Lui]] would have been perfect. However, after 1934, you wouldn't have had adultery handled in such a [[complex]] [[manner]], the young and [[handsome]] Loretta Young in some shear and slinky [[wardrobes]], or a group of prostitutes listening to a bridge contest on radio. Even if you know nothing about bridge, you may still want to check out a [[scarce]] [[instance]] of Hollywood satire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] There's a theory of time that posits that all the moments that ever [[existed]] and will exist, actually exist right now. It's a [[bit]] too much to wrap your [[head]] around, but perhaps a bit of a [[comfort]] to those who [[wish]] they [[could]] go back to a simpler time and place. For [[Barbara]] Jean Trenton ([[Ida]] Lupino), that time was twenty five [[years]] earlier, the mid 1930's when her youth and glamor held the [[greatest]] [[promise]]. For my [[part]], if I [[could]] [[travel]] through [[time]], it [[would]] be back to the 1950's when I [[grew]] up. [[Maybe]] to a [[place]] like Willoughby, but that's another episode.

One thing that wouldn't be so [[special]] about 1959 [[would]] [[involve]] [[dealing]] with all that clunky machinery just to watch an episode of "The [[Twilight]] [[Zone]]". [[How]] [[many]] reels do you think it [[would]] take to catalog the entire [[series]], and then find a particular story you [[wanted]] to watch? I guess you have to [[consider]] the trade offs, convenience [[versus]] simplicity, having it right now or taking the [[time]] to spool it up to the exact spot where the [[story]] begins. Popping in a CD has it's advantages.

I'm a [[little]] surprised that Rod Serling would pen a [[story]] that so closely resembled "Sunset Boulevard". Ida Lupino's [[character]] mirror imaged Norma Desmond just a bit too closely to be [[considered]] an original concept. Martin Balsam portrays very much a similar character to Erich von Stroheim, the husband turned butler who's loyalty is unquestioned. Where the story diverges has to do with the [[way]] Danny (Balsam) and Sall (Ted de Corsia) challenge Barbara Jean to get with reality and clear the cobwebs that paralyze her existence.

[[Fortunately]] for us viewers, Ida Lupino had no such [[reservations]] about taking parts that were 'not [[big]], but a nice showcase'. It's a [[real]] [[treat]] to watch any episode of "The Twilight Zone" and get to see who pops up from days [[gone]] by. Sometimes you get a two-fer, like you have here with Lupino and Balsam, [[celebrities]] who [[sometimes]] made their mark before the [[series]] began, and sometimes after. [[Combined]] with the stories that the program produced, it's not [[surprising]] that they still manage to entertain so well today. There's a theory of time that posits that all the moments that ever [[exists]] and will exist, actually exist right now. It's a [[bitten]] too much to wrap your [[jefe]] around, but perhaps a bit of a [[consolation]] to those who [[wants]] they [[did]] go back to a simpler time and place. For [[Barbaric]] Jean Trenton ([[Nods]] Lupino), that time was twenty five [[olds]] earlier, the mid 1930's when her youth and glamor held the [[greater]] [[promising]]. For my [[portion]], if I [[wo]] [[voyages]] through [[moment]], it [[ought]] be back to the 1950's when I [[increases]] up. [[Presumably]] to a [[placing]] like Willoughby, but that's another episode.

One thing that wouldn't be so [[extraordinaire]] about 1959 [[ought]] [[implicating]] [[treating]] with all that clunky machinery just to watch an episode of "The [[Dusk]] [[Region]]". [[Mode]] [[multiple]] reels do you think it [[ought]] take to catalog the entire [[serials]], and then find a particular story you [[wants]] to watch? I guess you have to [[examining]] the trade offs, convenience [[vs]] simplicity, having it right now or taking the [[moment]] to spool it up to the exact spot where the [[histories]] begins. Popping in a CD has it's advantages.

I'm a [[tiny]] surprised that Rod Serling would pen a [[histories]] that so closely resembled "Sunset Boulevard". Ida Lupino's [[nature]] mirror imaged Norma Desmond just a bit too closely to be [[deemed]] an original concept. Martin Balsam portrays very much a similar character to Erich von Stroheim, the husband turned butler who's loyalty is unquestioned. Where the story diverges has to do with the [[pathways]] Danny (Balsam) and Sall (Ted de Corsia) challenge Barbara Jean to get with reality and clear the cobwebs that paralyze her existence.

[[Lucky]] for us viewers, Ida Lupino had no such [[reserve]] about taking parts that were 'not [[major]], but a nice showcase'. It's a [[actual]] [[deal]] to watch any episode of "The Twilight Zone" and get to see who pops up from days [[extinct]] by. Sometimes you get a two-fer, like you have here with Lupino and Balsam, [[celebrity]] who [[sometime]] made their mark before the [[serials]] began, and sometimes after. [[Merging]] with the stories that the program produced, it's not [[dazzling]] that they still manage to entertain so well today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But [[since]] this is a biopic, it's [[important]] to at least [[know]] what to expect from the character.

I don't know if the [[manner]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[way]] Ned Kelly is portrayed as a [[hero]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to believe everything is [[true]]. I don't think he's portrayed as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solid]] Western-type movie for everybody's tastes. Heath Ledger is great as always and the sexy Naomi Watts charms the screen.

Give this movie a chance if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I [[could]] recommend it. I watched this on the movies with my girlfriend at the time and I can say that I didn't have the best time mainly because I didn't know about Ned Kelly or his story.

But [[because]] this is a biopic, it's [[sizeable]] to at least [[savoir]] what to expect from the character.

I don't know if the [[forma]] the events are told are true, or if it everything is fictional. But the [[camino]] Ned Kelly is portrayed as a [[heroin]] and a fighter for justice really makes me want to believe everything is [[veritable]]. I don't think he's portrayed as a redneck criminal or thief, but that's just my opinion.

This is a [[solids]] Western-type movie for everybody's tastes. Heath Ledger is great as always and the sexy Naomi Watts charms the screen.

Give this movie a chance if it airs on cable. Otherwise, I don't think I [[wo]] recommend it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I enjoyed this film. It was lighthearted, [[delightful]], and very [[colorful]]. You can see that MGM was [[showing]] off Technicolor. There are [[hardly]] any [[colors]] that do not [[appear]] in this [[film]]. [[Every]] scene is [[packed]] full. The [[choreography]] was [[great]]. [[Gene]] Kelly is a wonder. He is so talented. The [[dance]] numbers in this [[film]] are all [[perfectly]] [[executed]], and [[perfectly]] [[designed]]. He [[understands]] that the dances can tell the [[story]] as much as [[anything]] else. The [[last]] section of the [[film]], the [[grand]] [[dance]] [[sequence]], is very [[impressive]]. What makes this [[film]] very [[special]] is Gershwin's [[music]]. [[Few]] American [[composers]] have had a better [[gift]] for melody. I very much [[enjoy]] Gershwin's music. It is [[enchanting]]. Ira Gershwin is [[definitely]] one of the [[greatest]] lyric [[writers]]. He is so [[witty]] and [[charming]]. This was a [[highly]] [[entertaining]] [[film]]. I enjoyed this film. It was lighthearted, [[scrumptious]], and very [[scenic]]. You can see that MGM was [[illustrating]] off Technicolor. There are [[barely]] any [[coloring]] that do not [[emerge]] in this [[cinematography]]. [[Any]] scene is [[packaging]] full. The [[dance]] was [[resplendent]]. [[Genetics]] Kelly is a wonder. He is so talented. The [[ballet]] numbers in this [[filmmaking]] are all [[altogether]] [[implemented]], and [[altogether]] [[designs]]. He [[understand]] that the dances can tell the [[tales]] as much as [[something]] else. The [[lastly]] section of the [[cinematography]], the [[big]] [[dances]] [[sequencing]], is very [[unbelievable]]. What makes this [[cinematography]] very [[especial]] is Gershwin's [[musica]]. [[Rare]] American [[songwriter]] have had a better [[gifts]] for melody. I very much [[enjoys]] Gershwin's music. It is [[charming]]. Ira Gershwin is [[unmistakably]] one of the [[strongest]] lyric [[authors]]. He is so [[spiritual]] and [[enchanting]]. This was a [[unimaginably]] [[amusing]] [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[First]] of all, I don't [[understand]] why some people [[find]] this [[movie]] so anti-american. Sure, there are moments when the U.S. are [[accused]] directly, like at the segments of [[Youssef]] Chahine, Ken Loach and, to a certain extent, Mira Nair. But come on, they aren't naive [[accusations]]; instead, they are based on real and documented facts, and all the [[documents]] that the CIA released about [[Chile]] [[confirms]] this, for example.

But [[returning]] to the [[film]] itself, what I [[enjoyed]] most on it is the variety of [[moods]] we find in it. We find children being educated for the respect of the all the people who died in the event; we find a unhappy couple that will be changed by the [[tragedy]] of that day; we find common people that have their feelings downgraded on the shadow of the events of September 11 and react differently to this, with dignity or frustration; we even find someone in the movie for who the fall of the towers grounds for a moment of real happiness.

All these visions and others - as powerful as these or even more - make a consistent blend and help the spectator to have a glimpse about how different people spread across the world reacted to the events of September 11th. Thus, what we see is a [[panorama]] that is much more complex than whites and blacks, and this may make some people infuriated; but this is the world where we live, and in it there is no place for manicheistic ideologies, regardless of what presidents or priests may say us.

Finally, I think it's a shame that there isn't even a release date for this movie in the United States of [[America]]. It's a shame because most of the [[american]] people is [[asking]] why this catastrophe [[happened]], and this movie [[could]] [[give]] some clues to them. This [[film]] [[puts]] very [[clearly]] - differently of what some people of this forum [[think]] - that everything we do today will [[determine]] our future, and that the [[errors]] of the past will [[affect]] how we [[live]] [[today]]. [[Frst]] of all, I don't [[understanding]] why some people [[unearthed]] this [[kino]] so anti-american. Sure, there are moments when the U.S. are [[charged]] directly, like at the segments of [[Joseph]] Chahine, Ken Loach and, to a certain extent, Mira Nair. But come on, they aren't naive [[charges]]; instead, they are based on real and documented facts, and all the [[papers]] that the CIA released about [[Chili]] [[affirms]] this, for example.

But [[reverted]] to the [[cinematography]] itself, what I [[liked]] most on it is the variety of [[feelings]] we find in it. We find children being educated for the respect of the all the people who died in the event; we find a unhappy couple that will be changed by the [[drama]] of that day; we find common people that have their feelings downgraded on the shadow of the events of September 11 and react differently to this, with dignity or frustration; we even find someone in the movie for who the fall of the towers grounds for a moment of real happiness.

All these visions and others - as powerful as these or even more - make a consistent blend and help the spectator to have a glimpse about how different people spread across the world reacted to the events of September 11th. Thus, what we see is a [[scenery]] that is much more complex than whites and blacks, and this may make some people infuriated; but this is the world where we live, and in it there is no place for manicheistic ideologies, regardless of what presidents or priests may say us.

Finally, I think it's a shame that there isn't even a release date for this movie in the United States of [[Latina]]. It's a shame because most of the [[americana]] people is [[requested]] why this catastrophe [[sweated]], and this movie [[wo]] [[confer]] some clues to them. This [[filmmaking]] [[raises]] very [[patently]] - differently of what some people of this forum [[ideas]] - that everything we do today will [[determines]] our future, and that the [[error]] of the past will [[impacting]] how we [[living]] [[hoy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2210 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Guys, you got to watch this [[awesome]] movie. At the end of this movie you will have a strong passion and profundity imbued into yourselves. The acting of the two characters, Billy Sunday and Carl Brashear deeply [[touches]] the heart from inside. This movie is about principles, dignity, patriotism and [[HONOR]]. You will hear Chief Carl Brashear say, the [[Navy]] has greatest tradition of all - Honor - practiced thoroughly by these two characters. Mere [[glances]] of these characters during the movie fills you with [[enthusiasm]]. Dialogue delivery of this movie is [[perfect]]. You can't find any [[flaws]] in the dialogues. What the [[Master]] [[Chief]] [[Billy]] [[says]] roams in and out of your [[mind]] for a [[long]] [[time]] after [[watching]] the movie. Please watch this [[movie]]. Guys, you got to watch this [[unbelievable]] movie. At the end of this movie you will have a strong passion and profundity imbued into yourselves. The acting of the two characters, Billy Sunday and Carl Brashear deeply [[afflicts]] the heart from inside. This movie is about principles, dignity, patriotism and [[HONORING]]. You will hear Chief Carl Brashear say, the [[Armada]] has greatest tradition of all - Honor - practiced thoroughly by these two characters. Mere [[stares]] of these characters during the movie fills you with [[ardour]]. Dialogue delivery of this movie is [[irreproachable]]. You can't find any [[vulnerabilities]] in the dialogues. What the [[Maestro]] [[Leader]] [[Beli]] [[asserts]] roams in and out of your [[esprit]] for a [[protracted]] [[moment]] after [[staring]] the movie. Please watch this [[films]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our reporter hero battles hindersome authorities, duplicitous co-workers, renegade UFO debunkers, and silent, skulking aliens. (Though capable of mind control and zapping objects from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[script]] clomps from event to event,[[leaving]] puzzlers [[aplenty]]. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese abduct the ugly photographer first instead of his model? Inquiring minds want to know! Writer-director Mario Gariazzo apparently researched his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics double feature. (The closing screen crawl boasts that it's based on actual events...just like "Plan 9!") Some may feel burned by the abrupt finale, but it should still appeal to conspiracy cranks. In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our reporter hero battles hindersome authorities, duplicitous co-workers, renegade UFO debunkers, and silent, skulking aliens. (Though capable of mind control and zapping objects from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The [[hyphen]] clomps from event to event,[[letting]] puzzlers [[galore]]. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese abduct the ugly photographer first instead of his model? Inquiring minds want to know! Writer-director Mario Gariazzo apparently researched his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics double feature. (The closing screen crawl boasts that it's based on actual events...just like "Plan 9!") Some may feel burned by the abrupt finale, but it should still appeal to conspiracy cranks. --------------------------------------------- Result 2212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] MULHOLLAND [[DRIVE]] [[made]] me the [[definitive]] [[fan]] of David Lynch. He's a [[modern]] genius, because he's not only a film-maker. His [[stories]] and his [[style]] have a spell that [[cross]] the screen. So THE STRAIGHT [[STORY]] was [[quite]] a [[surprise]] to me, with its [[easy]] to follow storyline and sunny sets. [[Still]], [[Lynch]] is there, and, while this is far from his [[best]], it's a [[film]] not to be [[missed]]. Late [[Richard]] Farnsworth's performance is one of the [[reasons]].

8/10 MULHOLLAND [[DRIVES]] [[brought]] me the [[conclusive]] [[ventilator]] of David Lynch. He's a [[fashionable]] genius, because he's not only a film-maker. His [[tales]] and his [[styles]] have a spell that [[croix]] the screen. So THE STRAIGHT [[FAIRYTALES]] was [[pretty]] a [[amazement]] to me, with its [[uncomplicated]] to follow storyline and sunny sets. [[However]], [[Bastien]] is there, and, while this is far from his [[better]], it's a [[movies]] not to be [[flunked]]. Late [[Richie]] Farnsworth's performance is one of the [[rationale]].

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] So there's an old security guard and a guy who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest wuss. Kevin wants to impress his incredibly insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from work to... a random house... he finds his "friends," the sexually confusing red-shorted KYLE and the [[truly]] revolting sluttish DAPHNE. They are soon joined by Daphne's boyfriend, the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead NICK. And there's the title creatures, horrid little dogeared puppets who kill people by giving them their heart's desire. Kyle's heart's desire is to mate with a creepy, yucky woman in spandex. Nick's heart's desire is to throw grenades in a grade school cafeteria-- I mean nightclub. Kevin's heart's desire is to beat up a skinny thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's desire is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[way]] a truly hideous band sings a truly odd song. The hobgoblins randomly go back to where they came from then blow up. "Citizen Kane" cannot [[hold]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[cinema]]. So there's an old security guard and a guy who dies and then there's KEVIN, the world's biggest wuss. Kevin wants to impress his incredibly insensitive, bratty, and virginal girlfriend AMY. As he returns from work to... a random house... he finds his "friends," the sexually confusing red-shorted KYLE and the [[really]] revolting sluttish DAPHNE. They are soon joined by Daphne's boyfriend, the trigger-happy sex-crazed macho lunkhead NICK. And there's the title creatures, horrid little dogeared puppets who kill people by giving them their heart's desire. Kyle's heart's desire is to mate with a creepy, yucky woman in spandex. Nick's heart's desire is to throw grenades in a grade school cafeteria-- I mean nightclub. Kevin's heart's desire is to beat up a skinny thug with nunchucks. Amy's heart's desire is to be a disgusting slut. Daphne's already a disgusting slut, so she doesn't have a heart's desire. Along the [[pathways]] a truly hideous band sings a truly odd song. The hobgoblins randomly go back to where they came from then blow up. "Citizen Kane" cannot [[held]] a candle to this true masterpiece of American [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] I don't think I [[could]] have [[enjoyed]] it more, [[though]] certain [[things]] were disturbing. I'm not [[going]] to [[say]] what, if you haven't [[seen]] it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what [[movie]] can lack with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was [[developed]] [[sufficiently]]. [[Nothing]] seemed too [[rushed]], as [[movies]] [[like]] this [[tend]] to be. The [[characters]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[hilarious]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the story is very well [[tied]] [[together]], [[even]] if certain aspects may be unsatisfactory...by matter of [[opinion]]. But like I [[said]] before, it's [[hard]] not to love any movie with Robert Downey Jr. I don't think I [[wo]] have [[liked]] it more, [[if]] certain [[items]] were disturbing. I'm not [[gonna]] to [[tell]] what, if you haven't [[saw]] it...you'll have to find out for yourself. At any rate, what [[flick]] can lack with Robert Downey Jr.'s puppy-dog eyes? All-in-all, the plot was [[worded]] [[satisfactorily]]. [[Anything]] seemed too [[flowed]], as [[theater]] [[iike]] this [[tending]] to be. The [[personage]] were like-able, and there were plenty of [[comical]] scenes in it. The idea over-all is that the story is very well [[associated]] [[jointly]], [[yet]] if certain aspects may be unsatisfactory...by matter of [[vista]]. But like I [[says]] before, it's [[laborious]] not to love any movie with Robert Downey Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2215 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS movies is often regarded as the weakest of the lot. However, this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the contrary. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a bit more slow-going at times, but RETURN OF THE JEDI still offers a [[lot]] to warrant the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[classic]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a great villain, but a memorable one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence fun is the clever use of puppets for the various members of Jabba's court, including the intimidating, slavering Rancor and scary Sarlaac pit monster. It builds masterfully to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

Things get a little bit slower around the second act, where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we travel to the forest planet of Endor, home of the cuddlesome yet stalwart Ewoks. Most of the complaints about RETURN OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a delightfully memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third act, though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. This final entry in George Lucas's STAR WARS movies is often regarded as the weakest of the lot. However, this is not to say that it is a totally worthless entry in the series. On the contrary. Sure, it's not as groundbreaking as its predecessors and a bit more slow-going at times, but RETURN OF THE JEDI still offers a [[batches]] to warrant the price of admission.

The first third of the movie, where Luke and his friends rescue Han from the palace of Jabba the Hutt, is a [[typical]]. Jabba, a truly disgusting blob of bloated flesh who speaks in his own language, not only makes a great villain, but a memorable one, too. It must have been a nightmare to construct this giant puppet, much less give it the spark and life that we see on the finished product. Actually, what also makes this sequence fun is the clever use of puppets for the various members of Jabba's court, including the intimidating, slavering Rancor and scary Sarlaac pit monster. It builds masterfully to its climax and pulls punches all the while.

Things get a little bit slower around the second act, where Luke discovers that he and Leia are related by blood and when we travel to the forest planet of Endor, home of the cuddlesome yet stalwart Ewoks. Most of the complaints about RETURN OF THE JEDI that I've read seem to be centered on these furry creatures, in that they somehow disrupt the tone of the saga. I don't totally agree with that, although this moment is probably played out a bit longer than it should. However, their leader, Wicket (played by Warrick Davis) is a delightfully memorable creation, and watching how they handle the Imperial Troops' technology with their simple, natural weapons provides a nice contrast.

By the time we get to the third act, though, the pace picks up again, as we intercut between the Ewoks battle against the troops, Lando and the Rebel Forces launching an attack against the Empire's all-new half-completed Death Star, and Luke's final showdown with Darth Vader and the Emperor. The latter ties with the Jabba Palace sequence as the highlight of the movie. Mark Hamill flexes his acting chops once again as Luke Skywalker in these scenes, and watching him as a fully matured Jedi Knight makes for an unforgettable performance. Also, as iconic as James Earl Jones' voice as Darth Vader is, he is rivaled only by the shriveled, crone-like Emperor, played with deliciously raspy, frightening evil by Ian McDiarmid. The tension between this trio heightens the excitement of this climactic moment, which is appropriately darkly lit and menacingly underscored.

The STAR WARS movies have always set standards for special effects, and the technical work in RETURN OF THE JEDI can easily hold a candle to its predecessors. The space battle fights are as exhilarating as always, and the speeder bike chase through the forest is a knockout. Of course, given that this movie was made after A NEW HOPE and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, it probably shouldn't be so surprising that the special effects have reached an even greater level of excellence. The acting is classic STAR WARS fare; Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher all mature and deepen into their roles, and Anthony Daniels provides more hilarious moments as C-3PO. Frank Oz's Yoda only appears in two scenes, but he makes the most of it. And yes, there's also John Williams' music.

All told, while RETURN OF THE JEDI falters a little bit in the middle, the first and third acts deliver in style, making this a rather satisfactory finale to one of the greatest sagas ever.

In 1997, George Lucas re-released the classic STAR WARS in digitally restored (and revamped) "Special Editions", which featured added-in effects and/or shots as well as some enhancements. Of the three, RETURN OF THE JEDI appears to have caused the most commotion with STAR WARS fans. Perhaps it can be due to the jarringly out-of-place (albeit funny if you're not so easily offended) "Jedi Rocks" musical number in Jabba's Palace, which, although technically amazing, does disrupt the flow of the film. However, I DID like the ending montage scenes where we see victory celebrations occurring on the various planets of the galaxy. This DVD version features yet more tweaking--we get to see more montage finale scenes (notably on Naboo, where we hear what sounds like Jar Jar Binks screaming, "Wesa free!"), and, in what is probably the most controversial change, Hayden Christensen as the specter of Anakin Skywalker in the closing scenes. Probably due to the intense (and unfair) disdain fans have for his somewhat shaky work in EPISODE II: ATTACK OF THE CLONES it seems inevitable that fans would put this edition down for that alone. However, if you're watching the STAR WARS saga chronologically (and contemplating about it), chances are you may react a little differently. Nonetheless, it is an issue that fans have raised, so it's probably best to be warned beforehand.

As nice as it would be to have Lucas release the original versions of these three classic films, he nonetheless stands by what he said about these revamps being the "definitive" editions of his classic trilogy, and, when viewing the STAR WARS movies altogether as one complete saga (as Lucas intended), it actually makes sense to keep them technically and aurally consistent. The original films will always be engraved in our memories, but these new incarnations are just as much fun, if one can give them a chance. --------------------------------------------- Result 2216 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is mindless, it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) [[wasted]] on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[characters]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/world with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 times the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. I just don't understand why this movie is getting beat-up in here. Jeez. It is mindless, it isn't polished and it is (as I am reading) [[squandered]] on some. The cast of this movie plays their [[personage]] to the 'T' (If you watched Permanent Midnight and became a Ben Stiller fan then yes you will be disappointed). These are misunderstood, well-intentioned misfits trying to save the city/world with nothing but grit and determination. The problem is they don't realize their limits until the big showdown and that's the point! This is 3 times the movie that The Spy Who Shagged Me was yet gets panned by the same demographic group, likely the same people who feel the first AP movie pales in comparison to the sequel. I just don't get it. The jokes work on more then one level; if you didn't get it I know what level you're at. --------------------------------------------- Result 2217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I have [[seen]] a [[lot]] of Saura films and always found [[amazing]] the [[way]] he assembles music, dance, drama and [[great]] cinema in his movies. Ibéria shows an [[even]] better Saura, [[dealing]] with multimedia concepts and a more contemporary concept of dance and music. Another thing that [[called]] my [[attention]] is the [[fact]] that, in this movie, dancers and [[musicians]], dance and music, are equally [[important]]: the camera [[shows]] [[various]] [[aspects]] of [[music]] [[interpretation]], examining not only technical [[issues]] but [[also]] the [[emotional]] [[experience]] of playing. The interest of Saura on the [[bridge]] between classical and [[contemporary]] [[music]] and dance is one more ingredient in turning this [[movie]] maybe the most aesthetically [[exciting]] [[among]] his other [[works]]. That's why I [[recommend]] it [[strongly]] to those who [[love]] good [[cinema]], good music, good dance, great art. I have [[watched]] a [[batch]] of Saura films and always found [[staggering]] the [[routing]] he assembles music, dance, drama and [[grand]] cinema in his movies. Ibéria shows an [[yet]] better Saura, [[treating]] with multimedia concepts and a more contemporary concept of dance and music. Another thing that [[phoned]] my [[beware]] is the [[facto]] that, in this movie, dancers and [[music]], dance and music, are equally [[sizeable]]: the camera [[displayed]] [[divergent]] [[things]] of [[musicians]] [[explanations]], examining not only technical [[matters]] but [[additionally]] the [[affective]] [[enjoying]] of playing. The interest of Saura on the [[flyover]] between classical and [[modern]] [[musician]] and dance is one more ingredient in turning this [[filmmaking]] maybe the most aesthetically [[fascinating]] [[in]] his other [[work]]. That's why I [[recommending]] it [[severely]] to those who [[likes]] good [[theaters]], good music, good dance, great art. --------------------------------------------- Result 2218 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yeah, unfortunately I came across the DVD of this and found that it was incredibly awful.

First of all, the characters suck. I mean, come on, if some dork in an orange hat who calls himself 'Orange Sherbert' is the best creative idea these guys could come up for a character, then they should definitely not be in the film-making scene. Poor "costumes", bad "interviews", and basically there is not one "wrestler" on this whole disc with any shred of charisma.

The "wrestling" in Splatter Rampage Wrestling is nothing more than these idiots gently and playfully bouncing together on a trampoline. They make sure to giggle together all the while, too, making the experience seem more like a toddler's playtime than a "wrestling deathmatch".

Basically, Splatter Rampage Wrestling is a pretty lackluster Backyard Wrestling clone. Only, instead of blood, weapons, mayhem, and WRESTLING, we get a trampoline, giggling kids, TERRIBLE audio, and some guy called Orange Sherbert.

Wrestling fan or not, avoid this DVD. It's awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 2219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Besides the [[fact]] that my [[list]] of [[favorite]] [[movie]] [[makers]] is: 1)[[Stanley]] Kubrick 2)God Allmighty 3)the [[rest]]... this movie actually is better than the [[book]] (and the TV miniseries [[though]] this is an [[easy]] feat, considering the [[director]]). The [[flawless]] filming stile, the acting and (Kubrick's all [[time]] number one [[skill]]) the [[music]] - make it THE [[masterpiece]] of [[horror]]. I watched the TV miniseries a few [[years]] [[ago]] and liked the [[story]] and I had my hopes about this when I [[got]] a [[hold]] of it. IT [[BLEW]] ME AWAY!!! It is far better than I ever [[imagined]] it. It [[starts]] slow (Kubrick [[trademark]]) and has a [[lot]] of downtime that [[builds]] up the [[suspense]]. The intro scene is a [[classic]] by all [[means]] and I watched it about 20 [[times]] just for the shear atmosphere it [[induces]] to the [[whole]] [[film]]. [[Also]] the [[film]] doesn't [[offer]] a [[lot]] of gore (it has just [[enough]] and it is by no [[means]] [[tasteless]]) a [[trend]] that I [[hate]] in [[recent]] day [[horror]] [[films]]. [[Just]] watch it! Besides the [[facto]] that my [[listing]] of [[favored]] [[kino]] [[industrialists]] is: 1)[[Stan]] Kubrick 2)God Allmighty 3)the [[resting]]... this movie actually is better than the [[ledger]] (and the TV miniseries [[if]] this is an [[easier]] feat, considering the [[headmaster]]). The [[faultless]] filming stile, the acting and (Kubrick's all [[period]] number one [[capabilities]]) the [[musicians]] - make it THE [[centerpiece]] of [[monstrosity]]. I watched the TV miniseries a few [[olds]] [[prior]] and liked the [[histories]] and I had my hopes about this when I [[ai]] a [[held]] of it. IT [[FARTED]] ME AWAY!!! It is far better than I ever [[conjured]] it. It [[commenced]] slow (Kubrick [[brands]]) and has a [[batch]] of downtime that [[constructed]] up the [[wait]]. The intro scene is a [[classical]] by all [[mode]] and I watched it about 20 [[period]] just for the shear atmosphere it [[induce]] to the [[total]] [[movie]]. [[Similarly]] the [[flick]] doesn't [[provide]] a [[batches]] of gore (it has just [[adequately]] and it is by no [[signifies]] [[insipid]]) a [[propensity]] that I [[hated]] in [[latest]] day [[terror]] [[cinema]]. [[Mere]] watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I [[saw]] this not too long [[ago]], and I [[must]] say: This movie is [[terrible]]. I watch crappy [[movies]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is stupid. You have an incredibly corny villain that enjoys screaming awful puns as he kills his victims(actually worse than the one contained in this sentence). He has his hard [[luck]] story that he uses to justify his killings. "Everyone picks on me. The only girl that thinks I'm not trailer-trash [[likes]] one of the [[guys]] that pick on me. I want to kill everybody. Wah." OK, I'm exaggerating. But the premise to this movie alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the list of crappy movies.

Adding to what I just said, the kid's mom is promiscuous, he walks in on his mother and her current boyfriend getting it on, mom's boyfriend tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't going to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He kills kid right in front of mom, mom screams in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't mean to!" Then he tells mom not to say anything to the police about it. Kid was killed under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets murdered under a scarecrow, he comes back as a killer scarecrow with a vengeance. His victims "haven't been stalked like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make matters worse, this movie was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was going to give this movie a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming moments. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually want to see this [[crap]].) I could have somewhat forgiven the bad acting, the horrible special effects, the abysmal script, and the [[bad]] camera work, but I simply have no respect for lack of effort on that level.

This movie isn't nearly as good as I'm making it out to be. If you want to see an example of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy watching bad movies, like I do, then watch this at your own risk. Everyone else should stay a safe distance away from this movie at all times. I [[noticed]] this not too long [[formerly]], and I [[needs]] say: This movie is [[scary]]. I watch crappy [[movie]] for fun. Scarecreow is not fun. Scarecrow is stupid. You have an incredibly corny villain that enjoys screaming awful puns as he kills his victims(actually worse than the one contained in this sentence). He has his hard [[opportunities]] story that he uses to justify his killings. "Everyone picks on me. The only girl that thinks I'm not trailer-trash [[fond]] one of the [[grooms]] that pick on me. I want to kill everybody. Wah." OK, I'm exaggerating. But the premise to this movie alone is enough to put it near the bottom of the list of crappy movies.

Adding to what I just said, the kid's mom is promiscuous, he walks in on his mother and her current boyfriend getting it on, mom's boyfriend tells him to leave, kid refuses, insisting that he isn't going to leave his own house. Boyfriend chases kid into corn field. He kills kid right in front of mom, mom screams in terror, boyfriend is like, "OMG! I didn't mean to!" Then he tells mom not to say anything to the police about it. Kid was killed under a scarecrow, though. So, like any kid who gets murdered under a scarecrow, he comes back as a killer scarecrow with a vengeance. His victims "haven't been stalked like this before..." (Scarecrow's official tag line)

To make matters worse, this movie was filmed in a whopping 8 days. That's right, 8 days. I was going to give this movie a 2, because in spite of itself, it has one or two redeeming moments. (They're spoilers, so I won't spoil it for you, if you actually want to see this [[baloney]].) I could have somewhat forgiven the bad acting, the horrible special effects, the abysmal script, and the [[amiss]] camera work, but I simply have no respect for lack of effort on that level.

This movie isn't nearly as good as I'm making it out to be. If you want to see an example of how not to make a movie, or if you enjoy watching bad movies, like I do, then watch this at your own risk. Everyone else should stay a safe distance away from this movie at all times. --------------------------------------------- Result 2221 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] (aka: The Bloodsucker Leads the Dance)

Lots of naked babes in this one with a couple of lesbo scenes thrown in. The film is supposed to take place in Ireland but it looks more like Rome and the Adriatic to me.

Gothic lesbians get invited to a Count's island castle for the weekend. One by one they seem to be missing their heads due to a madperson running around.

It's not very scary or bloody and the rooms look like they are lit with floodlights even though candles are lit. Go figure...(sic)

Dubbing is worse than usual and the plot only serves as an excuse for the eroticism and nudity. Directed by euro horror actor Alfredo Rizzo, this is one snoozer.

Pretty boring 2 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I [[really]] hate this [[retarded]] show, it SUCKS! big time, and personally I [[think]] it is insulting to fairy [[kind]] (if you [[believe]] in fairies that is); I [[mean]] the people who had [[come]] up with such [[crap]] '[[ought]] to have their heads [[examine]] huh? and [[also]] there is a LOT of [[craziness]] (the [[evil]] [[school]] [[teacher]], which I [[think]] is [[getting]] [[really]] [[old]]) and [[also]] [[stupidity]] (the boy's [[parents]] and fairy godfather) in this [[show]] - two of the things that I dispised and [[loathe]] in the [[WHOLE]] world ([[especially]] [[stupidity]]).

[[Overall]], I [[say]] that this show is so f*****' [[annoying]] and should not be [[seen]] by prying eyes at [[ALL]] (it [[would]] make'em bleed to death)! I [[truly]] hate this [[moronic]] show, it SUCKS! big time, and personally I [[thought]] it is insulting to fairy [[sorts]] (if you [[reckon]] in fairies that is); I [[meaning]] the people who had [[coming]] up with such [[shitty]] '[[would]] to have their heads [[review]] huh? and [[apart]] there is a LOT of [[dementia]] (the [[viciousness]] [[tuition]] [[teachers]], which I [[ideas]] is [[obtain]] [[truly]] [[longtime]]) and [[additionally]] [[madness]] (the boy's [[parent]] and fairy godfather) in this [[exhibitions]] - two of the things that I dispised and [[resent]] in the [[TOGETHER]] world ([[predominantly]] [[madness]]).

[[Comprehensive]], I [[tell]] that this show is so f*****' [[galling]] and should not be [[saw]] by prying eyes at [[TOTALITY]] (it [[could]] make'em bleed to death)! --------------------------------------------- Result 2223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a try.

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have finally seen each other after their father has passed away. Ryan and Theo at first argue about who did what. But later, Theo finds out that his brother Ryan is not only gay but he is dying of a terminal illness. So, Ryan and Theo spend their time patching up their differences.

This is such an [[incredible]] film. I have only seen Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was phenomenal in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER heard of before did a phenomenal job as well.

I would recommend this to those who are interested in the Gay and Lesbian genre. This is one movie you don't want to miss.

I give this film 10 stars out of 10. Excellent film! I have found this movie available for streaming on Netflix and thought I'd give it a try.

The plot revolves around Ryan and Theo Taylor (Colm Feore and David Cubitt) who have finally seen each other after their father has passed away. Ryan and Theo at first argue about who did what. But later, Theo finds out that his brother Ryan is not only gay but he is dying of a terminal illness. So, Ryan and Theo spend their time patching up their differences.

This is such an [[unimaginable]] film. I have only seen Colm Feore in Season 7 of 24 but he was phenomenal in this. David Cubitt, an actor I have NEVER heard of before did a phenomenal job as well.

I would recommend this to those who are interested in the Gay and Lesbian genre. This is one movie you don't want to miss.

I give this film 10 stars out of 10. Excellent film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2224 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I saw this [[movie]], just now, not when it was [[released]] and [[hailed]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to summarize everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good film.

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to [[admit]] that his first and the [[TV]] drama he [[made]] before this picture are much better. further more, this is his first [[attempt]] at [[directing]] a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[funny]] and effective.

The first [[thing]] you have to know if you'll ever see this film: Israel of the 21st century hates the kibbutz and the values it represented since the formation of the state of [[Israel]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very dire, and some of them disappear one by one. the kibbutz, [[Hebrew]] word for collective, was a sort of village for members only, where the values of equality and socialism were the dogma for everyday life. with the change in social values with time, it seems now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was repressed, locked within the dogma rules, with no ticket out. the entrance of capitalist values and way of life in the 90's and so far made it very hard on the kibbutzim to survive. the crazy mother in the film is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this film as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the good old days of the kibbutz. once, it was a dream of every young couple to live in a kibbutz and raise children in this quite and beautiful [[environment]]. but the film shows the opposite. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a cult of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undermine]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your individuality is the most important thing. you must place yourself in the center, and no one else but you is the matter. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first sin.

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. I saw this [[cinematography]], just now, not when it was [[freed]] and [[greet]] as best picture of the year here in Israel. and to summarize everything right now, I will just say: this is not a good film.

This is Dror Shaul's second feature film, and I have to [[recognised]] that his first and the [[TELEVISION]] drama he [[accomplished]] before this picture are much better. further more, this is his first [[strive]] at [[instructing]] a drama. the early works were comedies, and were [[comical]] and effective.

The first [[stuff]] you have to know if you'll ever see this film: Israel of the 21st century hates the kibbutz and the values it represented since the formation of the state of [[Israeli]]. the real situation of the kibbutzim is very dire, and some of them disappear one by one. the kibbutz, [[Jewish]] word for collective, was a sort of village for members only, where the values of equality and socialism were the dogma for everyday life. with the change in social values with time, it seems now that the kibbutz was a place where the human spirit was repressed, locked within the dogma rules, with no ticket out. the entrance of capitalist values and way of life in the 90's and so far made it very hard on the kibbutzim to survive. the crazy mother in the film is the central metaphor for that.

But, I regard this film as having nothing to do with nostalgia for the good old days of the kibbutz. once, it was a dream of every young couple to live in a kibbutz and raise children in this quite and beautiful [[surroundings]]. but the film shows the opposite. that the kibbutz, with it's socialist dogma, was a place sort of like a cult of crazy people, with crazy ideas that [[undercut]] the freedom of each individual within the collective. this is the central philosophy of post modern capitalism: your individuality is the most important thing. you must place yourself in the center, and no one else but you is the matter. this is the philosophy the film stands for, and that's just it's first sin.

If you disagree with me on the political side, I'm sure you will agree that the acting, the tone of the film, it's script and it's direction are the four sins that follow. the film has no real visual text and none of it's shots is something to remember. it is also very "delicate", a delicacy that is no more than artsy fartsy attempt to provoke emotions, which do not surface, not in the film and not with the viewer. it brings nothing but boredom.

Can someone please explain: why this film won so many prizes? maybe because it shows that Israel is in line with the rest of the world, hating socialist and human values? or maybe it shows that Israel is a "delicate" place, not giving in to dogmas and fanaticism? that we are basically very human and good people, capable of emotions, especially when they are fake ones, just like capitalism expects us to be? or maybe because it tells one of the biggest lies of Israeli cinema in recent years, a lie that undermines the justification of the existence of the Jewish state? no matter what the answer is, it's not a good one. not for the world, not for human values and not for the Jews. --------------------------------------------- Result 2225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A simple comment...

What can I say... this is a wonderful film that I can watch over and over. It is definitely one of the top ten comedies made. With a great cast, Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau wording a perfect script by Neil Simon, based on his play.

It is real to life situation done perfectly. If you have digital cable, one gets the menu on bottom of screen to give what is on. It usually gives this film ***% stars but in reality it deserves **** stars. If you really watch this film, one can tell that it will be as funny and fresh a hundred years from now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I saw "Brother's [[Shadow]]" at the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]] and found myself [[still]] thinking about it two days [[later]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[business]] after a stint in jail, it [[offers]] all the [[necessary]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[characters]]; sharp, [[observant]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it [[presents]] [[something]] that is all too rare at the multiplex these days: the uncompromising [[vision]] of a [[mature]] sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to [[emerge]] full-blown, but we [[get]] the [[sense]] he (like his protagonist) has [[paid]] his [[dues]]. He knows how [[real]] people [[struggle]] in this world, and he knows how we [[yearn]] to see--or at [[least]], to experience vicariously--success. [[Yet]] Yellin respects his audience too much to blow [[happy]] smoke up our rear [[ends]]. [[In]] the [[end]], we [[see]] that Jake's [[triumph]] doesn't [[lie]] in [[commissions]], or even in the esteem of his [[family]], but in "the [[work]]" he couldn't abandon if he [[tried]].

It's an [[essential]] [[theme]] in a [[world]] (and [[especially]] a [[movie]] industry) that can't [[rise]] above "the bottom [[line]]". This [[film]] [[deserves]] a [[wide]] audience. I saw "Brother's [[Shade]]" at the Tribeca [[Filmmaking]] [[Fest]] and found myself [[again]] thinking about it two days [[then]]. The story of a prodigal son (Scott Cohen) returning to his family's custom furniture [[businesses]] after a stint in jail, it [[gives]] all the [[needed]] qualities of a solid drama--memorable [[character]]; sharp, [[watchful]] dialog; sensitive use of the camera by a filmmaker who thinks visually.

But more than that, it [[presented]] [[anything]] that is all too rare at the multiplex these days: the uncompromising [[eyesight]] of a [[adult]] sensibility. The talent of director-screenwriter Todd S. Yellin seems to [[appear]] full-blown, but we [[gets]] the [[feeling]] he (like his protagonist) has [[salary]] his [[royalties]]. He knows how [[veritable]] people [[combat]] in this world, and he knows how we [[aspires]] to see--or at [[fewer]], to experience vicariously--success. [[Nonetheless]] Yellin respects his audience too much to blow [[cheerful]] smoke up our rear [[end]]. [[Across]] the [[termination]], we [[seeing]] that Jake's [[triumphant]] doesn't [[lies]] in [[committee]], or even in the esteem of his [[families]], but in "the [[jobs]]" he couldn't abandon if he [[attempts]].

It's an [[critical]] [[topics]] in a [[monde]] (and [[namely]] a [[filmmaking]] industry) that can't [[raising]] above "the bottom [[bloodline]]". This [[flick]] [[merits]] a [[broader]] audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ...but this just isn't [[working]] and I am surprised to see how many people consider it good. On what grounds? There are some loose hints here and there, but the whole material is self-indulgent and [[unconvincing]]. Lynch's movies are generally [[intriguing]] because they generate a sense of confusion and yet, are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, characters, ideas etc. But this is [[dull]] and yes, [[pointless]]. Because whatever there is to explore is either to "small", either too far-fetched, or simply told before in a superior manner. It's just Lynch exploring DV, nothing more so it should be treated like this. 1/10 ...but this just isn't [[cooperating]] and I am surprised to see how many people consider it good. On what grounds? There are some loose hints here and there, but the whole material is self-indulgent and [[inconclusive]]. Lynch's movies are generally [[riveting]] because they generate a sense of confusion and yet, are very playful when doing that. There is some visual sense, there are some subplots, characters, ideas etc. But this is [[dreary]] and yes, [[meaningless]]. Because whatever there is to explore is either to "small", either too far-fetched, or simply told before in a superior manner. It's just Lynch exploring DV, nothing more so it should be treated like this. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2228 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a movie that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few [[characters]] from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is mildly entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. I watched this movie and the original Carlitos Way back to back. The difference between the two is disgusting. Now i know that people are going to say that the prequel was made on a small budget but that never had anything to do with a bad script. Now maybe it's just me, but i always thought that a prequel was made to go set up the other movie, starring key characters and maybe filling in a bit about life that we didn't know. Rise to Power is just a movie that has Carlito's name. There should have been at least a few [[hallmarks]] from the original movie, the ending makes no sense in relation to the original. In the end of this movie he retires with his sweet heart but how the hell do we get him coming out of prison in the next movie? And his woman isn't even the same woman that he talks about as his only love in the original. I would say the movie is mildly entertaining in its self, with a few decent bits but it pales when held up to it's big brother. Don't lay awake at night waiting to see this, watch the original one more time if you really need a hit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In one word: excruciating. I was advised to read some articles about this film's [[philosophical]] meanings afterward, but, having sat through the movie's interminable 115 [[minutes]] and being slowly crushed beneath its [[bloated]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it seemed [[better]] to just report my reactions to the movie. After all, who goes to see a movie with a syllabus in hand? And this flick was [[dismal]]. Lead [[actor]] Claude Laydu, from the film's opening to its end, wears the same wearying and [[annoying]] mask of agony as to be [[practically]] [[indistinguishable]] from the film's eternal, dreary voice-over. [[Filming]] one over the other might have [[worked]] [[better]] than subjecting an [[audience]] to both, as they [[basically]] [[say]] the same [[thing]]: The [[priest]] of Ambricourt is a [[wretched]] [[human]] being. The story, about a [[persecuted]] priest who [[tries]] to [[help]] out a [[troubled]] [[rich]] [[family]], does [[nothing]] [[toward]] making its [[characters]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[family]] are a bunch of [[unpleasant]] [[weirdos]], and the [[priest]], himself, [[comes]] across as a nosy pest. The [[last]] 30 minutes [[suggests]] some breath-taking message about [[grace]] and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[indulgent]] close-ups of a suffering Laydu and the [[vague]] subtext in Robert Bresson's [[script]], all I felt was, Finally, it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson [[fanatic]] [[Paul]] Schrader, just to [[see]] how many [[elements]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own scripts and movies, especially "Taxidriver", "Raging Bull" and "Light Sleeper". In one word: excruciating. I was advised to read some articles about this film's [[philosophic]] meanings afterward, but, having sat through the movie's interminable 115 [[mins]] and being slowly crushed beneath its [[puffy]] symbolism and lava-flowing oppressiveness, it seemed [[best]] to just report my reactions to the movie. After all, who goes to see a movie with a syllabus in hand? And this flick was [[somber]]. Lead [[protagonist]] Claude Laydu, from the film's opening to its end, wears the same wearying and [[galling]] mask of agony as to be [[hardly]] [[indistinct]] from the film's eternal, dreary voice-over. [[Photographing]] one over the other might have [[collaborated]] [[best]] than subjecting an [[spectators]] to both, as they [[principally]] [[told]] the same [[stuff]]: The [[padre]] of Ambricourt is a [[pitiable]] [[humanity]] being. The story, about a [[victimized]] priest who [[endeavour]] to [[helped]] out a [[tormented]] [[affluent]] [[families]], does [[anything]] [[into]] making its [[characteristics]] remotely interesting or sympathetic, as the [[families]] are a bunch of [[disagreeable]] [[psychos]], and the [[vicar]], himself, [[occurs]] across as a nosy pest. The [[latter]] 30 minutes [[proposed]] some breath-taking message about [[gracia]] and one man's suffering equaling that of others, but due to all the [[tolerant]] close-ups of a suffering Laydu and the [[nebulous]] subtext in Robert Bresson's [[hyphen]], all I felt was, Finally, it's over, let's have some ice-cream. Interesting for fans of Bresson [[fanatical]] [[Paolo]] Schrader, just to [[behold]] how many [[element]] of character and setting Schrader carried into in his own scripts and movies, especially "Taxidriver", "Raging Bull" and "Light Sleeper". --------------------------------------------- Result 2230 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Musically [[speaking]] Irving Berlin [[gave]] Fred [[Astaire]] and Ginger Rogers another pluperfect musical after Top [[Hat]] if that was [[possible]]. Although in this [[case]] like that [[Jerome]] Kern confection Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[retained]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred [[Astaire]] is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to forget Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on shore leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally [[meets]] Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

Again Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the production. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the pair, Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the great romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their dancing on this one is [[absolute]] [[magic]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

Neither Ozzie or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with real feeling and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other reason than to hear a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten today. Musically [[talking]] Irving Berlin [[given]] Fred [[Esther]] and Ginger Rogers another pluperfect musical after Top [[Bonnet]] if that was [[conceivable]]. Although in this [[example]] like that [[Geraldine]] Kern confection Roberta that they were in, Follow the Fleet [[conserved]] Randolph Scott with another singer, this time Harriet Hilliard.

Randolph Scott is a career Navy CPO and Fred [[Esther]] is an ex-vaudevillian who enlisted in the Navy to forget Ginger Rogers his former partner. But now the two are on shore leave. Fred and Ginger take up right where they left off, and Randy accidentally [[conforms]] Ginger's dowdy sister Harriet who blossoms into a real beauty. But Randy's a typical love 'em and leave 'em sailor.

Again Irving Berlin wrote a hit filled score with him tightly supervising the production. Ginger gets to do some really outstanding vocalizing with Let Yourself Go which she and Fred later dance to. But the real hit of the show is Let's Face the Music and Dance which is a number done at a Navy show. Sung first by Astaire and later danced to by the pair, Let's Face the Music and Dance is one of the great romantic numbers ever written for the screen. Their dancing on this one is [[unmitigated]] [[hallucinogenic]].

I'm sure that when I mention Harriet Hilliard a few younger people might ask who that was. But they will know immediately when I mention her in conjunction with her famous husband Ozzie Nelson. That's right Ozzie and Harriet. It's something of a mystery to me why Harriet stopped singing when she just became David and Ricky's mom on television. Then again she didn't even keep her own name.

Neither Ozzie or Harriet sang on television. Ozzie was a pale imitation of Rudy Vallee as a singer, but Harriet could really carry a tune. She sings Get Thee Behind Me Satan and The Moon and I Are Here, But Where Are You, both with real feeling and class. I recommend you see Follow the Fleet if for no other reason than to hear a dimension of Harriet Hilliard incredibly forgotten today. --------------------------------------------- Result 2231 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Being a [[genre]] [[film]] fan, a child of the 80's AND a fan of hard rock music...this [[movie]] holds a special place in my [[heart]]. It has everything you [[could]] want in a supernatural movie: [[action]], great special [[effects]] (for 1986) and a [[guitar]] wailing glam- rock soundtrack. It [[certainly]] was THE movie for all the heavy metal fans at the [[time]]. I didn't [[see]] this at the [[cinema]] because it was never released theatrically over here...but it's popularity on video during the mid to late eighties secured it's [[cult]] status and eventually led to a (sadly, mediocre) DVD release in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy movies or rock music then this probably isn't your cup of tea...but, trust me, there are worse films of this type out there...and, despite average acting and some outrageously ridiculous situations, Trick or Treat is most definitely a wailing riff above the usual horror fare. You'll never look at your stereo the same way again. Or should I say MP3 player?

TRICK OR TREAT TRIVIA- Marc Price (Eddie) played geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom 'Family Ties.' After a string of direct to video flops including, 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes eat France' and 'The Rescue' he gave up on acting to pursue a career in stand-up comedy. Recently, he has been considering a TV comeback.

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a major Hollywood producer/ screenwriter. He has written and produced several major films and TV series, including: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most recently 'Final Destination 3'.

Tony Fields (Sammi) started his performing career as a dancer on the TV series 'Solid Gold'. He appeared in several low budget films and TV shows before landing his breakout role as the devilish Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. Sadly, Tony passed away on February 27th 1995 of AIDS related cancer.

Doug Savant (Tim) is probably best remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the popular sitcom 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. Being a [[types]] [[cinema]] fan, a child of the 80's AND a fan of hard rock music...this [[cinema]] holds a special place in my [[heartland]]. It has everything you [[did]] want in a supernatural movie: [[activities]], great special [[ramifications]] (for 1986) and a [[guitars]] wailing glam- rock soundtrack. It [[surely]] was THE movie for all the heavy metal fans at the [[times]]. I didn't [[behold]] this at the [[filmmaking]] because it was never released theatrically over here...but it's popularity on video during the mid to late eighties secured it's [[heresy]] status and eventually led to a (sadly, mediocre) DVD release in 2002. If you're not a fan of creepy movies or rock music then this probably isn't your cup of tea...but, trust me, there are worse films of this type out there...and, despite average acting and some outrageously ridiculous situations, Trick or Treat is most definitely a wailing riff above the usual horror fare. You'll never look at your stereo the same way again. Or should I say MP3 player?

TRICK OR TREAT TRIVIA- Marc Price (Eddie) played geeky Skippy Handelman on the popular long running comedy sitcom 'Family Ties.' After a string of direct to video flops including, 'Little Devils''Killer Tomatoes eat France' and 'The Rescue' he gave up on acting to pursue a career in stand-up comedy. Recently, he has been considering a TV comeback.

Glen Morgan (Roger) is now a major Hollywood producer/ screenwriter. He has written and produced several major films and TV series, including: 'Space: Above and Beyond''The X-Files''Final Destination''Jet Li's The One''Willard' and most recently 'Final Destination 3'.

Tony Fields (Sammi) started his performing career as a dancer on the TV series 'Solid Gold'. He appeared in several low budget films and TV shows before landing his breakout role as the devilish Sammi Curr in 'Trick or Treat'. Sadly, Tony passed away on February 27th 1995 of AIDS related cancer.

Doug Savant (Tim) is probably best remembered for his pioneering role of homosexual twentysomething Matt Fielding on the popular sitcom 'Melrose Place'. Since then he has had a long and varied acting career, appearing in such films and TV series as: 'The One''Godzilla''CSI: Crime Scene Investigation' and the short lived Joss Whedon sci-fi series 'Firefly'. Currently he can be seen as Tom Scavo on the smash hit series 'Desperate Housewives'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I saw this ages ago when I was younger and could never remember the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's film credits on IMDb and noticed an entry named "Once Upon a Crime...". Something rang a bell and I [[clicked]] on it, and after reading the plot summary it brought back a [[lot]] of [[memories]].

I've [[found]] it has aged pretty well despite the fact that it is not by any means a "great" comedy. It is, however, rather enjoyable and is a [[good]] riff on a Hitchcock [[formula]] of mistaken identity and [[worldwide]] thrills.

The movie has a large cast of characters, amongst them an American couple who find a woman's dog while vacationing in [[Europe]] and decide to [[return]] it to her for a reward - only to find her dead [[body]] [[upon]] arrival. From there the plot gets crazier and sillier and they go on the run after the police think they are the killers.

Kind of a mix between "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" and a lighter Hitchcock feature, this was directed by Eugene Levy and he managed to get some of his good friends - such as John Candy - to star in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its cast, and the ending has a funny little twist that isn't totally [[unpredictable]] but [[also]] is kind of [[unexpected]]. I saw this ages ago when I was younger and could never remember the title, until one day I was scrolling through John Candy's film credits on IMDb and noticed an entry named "Once Upon a Crime...". Something rang a bell and I [[ticked]] on it, and after reading the plot summary it brought back a [[batch]] of [[memoirs]].

I've [[uncovered]] it has aged pretty well despite the fact that it is not by any means a "great" comedy. It is, however, rather enjoyable and is a [[alright]] riff on a Hitchcock [[formulas]] of mistaken identity and [[world]] thrills.

The movie has a large cast of characters, amongst them an American couple who find a woman's dog while vacationing in [[Europa]] and decide to [[reverting]] it to her for a reward - only to find her dead [[bodies]] [[after]] arrival. From there the plot gets crazier and sillier and they go on the run after the police think they are the killers.

Kind of a mix between "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" and a lighter Hitchcock feature, this was directed by Eugene Levy and he managed to get some of his good friends - such as John Candy - to star in it. The movie is mostly engaging due to its cast, and the ending has a funny little twist that isn't totally [[unforeseeable]] but [[apart]] is kind of [[unforeseeable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[propaganda]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and truth http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of [[Yugoslavia]] documentary [[series]] (of five episodes) is a [[painstakingly]] compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which marked the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslavia]] and spanned almost the entire first half of the 1990's. It includes a huge wealth of news footage and interviews with involved parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[real]] "[[improvement]]" which could be made to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later developments in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat showing on BBC television, but the addition of some even more recent events would help to complete this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of work. Perhaps another whole episode might be warranted? The very succinct title of this documentary was made all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of Serbia and Montenegro - a much belated and formal admission of that which occurred years before.

not fiction like in "Yugoslavia: The Avoidable War (1999)" don't watch this Serbian documentary and Serbian [[advocacy]] look out for this documentary and you will see facts and truth http://imdb.com/title/tt0283181/

The Death of [[Yugoslav]] documentary [[serials]] (of five episodes) is a [[dutifully]] compiled and researched account of the extended mass-bloodshed which marked the end of the old Federal [[Yugoslav]] and spanned almost the entire first half of the 1990's. It includes a huge wealth of news footage and interviews with involved parties both "Yugoslav" and otherwise. The only [[veritable]] "[[refinements]]" which could be made to this amazing achievement would be the inclusion of later developments in the Balkans since the program was made. This was indeed done in the late 1990's for a repeat showing on BBC television, but the addition of some even more recent events would help to complete this admirably detailed and fulsome piece of work. Perhaps another whole episode might be warranted? The very succinct title of this documentary was made all the more appropriate by the eventual abandonment of the term "Yugoslavia" by the now-named Federal Republic of Serbia and Montenegro - a much belated and formal admission of that which occurred years before.

not fiction like in "Yugoslavia: The Avoidable War (1999)" --------------------------------------------- Result 2234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that Lost and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's based on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & Delirious is actually a much [[better]] movie, so see that one [[instead]].

This one moves very [[slowly]], but being a late 60s French [[movie]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. Finally, not much character development to even get you attached to the movie. I'm not sure how related they are, but I'm almost certain that Lost and Delirious is a remake of this movie (or the story that it's based on). Very similar plotline, and even some of the scenes and sets seem to be very, very similar. Lost & Delirious is actually a much [[optimum]] movie, so see that one [[alternatively]].

This one moves very [[softly]], but being a late 60s French [[films]], that is to be expected of the style. Told in a retrospect from the perspective of one of the girls revisiting the school. The editing of the flashbacks with the current scenes is a little bit confusing at first, particularly since the audio from each overlaps (ie, hearing flashbacks while seeing the present and vice versa). Also, the "girls" are a bit old to think that they are in a boarding school. Finally, not much character development to even get you attached to the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] [[Very]] [[good]] dramatic [[comedy]] about a playwright trying to figure out how to keep his head above water after running out of ideas. Can't say much about this film without giving away the story. I can say that little was as it seems as you are watching the picture. Everybody has his or her own agenda. Nice little [[surprise]] at the end - after all the other surprises. Well written with good performances by all. [[Eminently]] [[buena]] dramatic [[travesty]] about a playwright trying to figure out how to keep his head above water after running out of ideas. Can't say much about this film without giving away the story. I can say that little was as it seems as you are watching the picture. Everybody has his or her own agenda. Nice little [[surprises]] at the end - after all the other surprises. Well written with good performances by all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This movie was like a bad train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to continue to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Just]] the movie as a whole just [[enraged]] both of us. There wasn't [[anything]] positive or [[good]] about this scenario. After this movie, I had to go rent something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as [[usual]] a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, though over played, she does a wonderful job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. This movie was like a bad train wreck, as horrible as it was, you still had to continue to watch. My boyfriend and I rented it and wasted two hours of our day. Now don't get me wrong, the acting is good. [[Jen]] the movie as a whole just [[upset]] both of us. There wasn't [[somethings]] positive or [[alright]] about this scenario. After this movie, I had to go rent something else that was a little lighter. Jennifer Tilly is as [[accustomed]] a very dramatic actress. Her character seems manic and not all there. Darryl Hannah, though over played, she does a wonderful job playing out the situation she is in. More than once I found myself yelling at the TV telling her to fight back or to get violent. All in all, very violent movie...not for the faint of heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 2237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I wasn't expecting much, and, to be honest, I didn't like this film the first time around but watching it again and I realised that it's kinda [[cool]]. Sure, it's a one joke film but it's a funny gag.

Someone posted that it could be better written and it could be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a lawyer. Sadly it's a wasted opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[classic]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't expect too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. I wasn't expecting much, and, to be honest, I didn't like this film the first time around but watching it again and I realised that it's kinda [[groovy]]. Sure, it's a one joke film but it's a funny gag.

Someone posted that it could be better written and it could be. I think this film had the potential to be a over-the-top My Cousin Vinny. But with a horror host instead of a lawyer. Sadly it's a wasted opportunity. With just a bit more writing it could be a [[typical]]. The kids are underused there's no reason why they should latch on to Elvira. Apart from the obvious reasons. It would have been great to see their relationship flourish. I know it's a comedy but it's little differences that separate the good films from the brilliant.

Elvira herself is always fun and engaging. Not to mention flirty. Every time she smiles you will too. It's hard to knock a film when the main character is so charming. And it really is her charm, don't let her looks fool you into thinking that she's some sort of tart. Well she is. But she's a nice one. The sort of person you'd let look after your kids. Wouldn't let her cook for them, though...

I'd recommend giving it a go.

Just don't expect too much.

She's more than just a great set of boobs. She's also an incredible pair of legs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] HORRENDOUS! [[Avoid]] like the plague. I [[would]] rate this in the top 10 [[worst]] movies ever. Special [[effects]], acting, mood, sound, etc. appear to be [[done]] by day care [[students]]...wait, I have seen programs [[better]] than this. [[Opens]] like a soft porn show with a blurred nude female doing a shower scene then goes bad from there. Good [[nude]] scenes, but that is it. [[Sound]] and light [[problems]] were persistent [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. At times I [[would]] [[swear]] I [[could]] [[hear]] the roaring of the [[camera]] [[motors]]. [[YIKES]]! I would [[like]] to see another movie on this story, but [[done]] by different people. This batch of [[actors]] and crew need more acting and movie making lessons. Voted 1 out of 10. HORRENDOUS! [[Evade]] like the plague. I [[could]] rate this in the top 10 [[meanest]] movies ever. Special [[repercussions]], acting, mood, sound, etc. appear to be [[completed]] by day care [[learners]]...wait, I have seen programs [[best]] than this. [[Inaugurated]] like a soft porn show with a blurred nude female doing a shower scene then goes bad from there. Good [[bare]] scenes, but that is it. [[Sounds]] and light [[difficulty]] were persistent [[in]] the [[flick]]. At times I [[should]] [[cuss]] I [[wo]] [[listened]] the roaring of the [[cameras]] [[automobiles]]. [[WHOOPS]]! I would [[fond]] to see another movie on this story, but [[effected]] by different people. This batch of [[protagonists]] and crew need more acting and movie making lessons. Voted 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Tara Reid as an intellectual, Christian Slater(usually great) as a dollar store Constantine and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just want to thank those brilliant casting directors for the hard work and effort. You guys are on. Heres an idea, just my humble [[lowly]] opinion as the movie going public but it follows directly with your [[previous]] choices,a movie about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in history invent one pill to cure all diseases ever known to man and get this, heres the clincher they have to be played by Jessica Simpson and Paris Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. Seriously though you owe me $7.50. Tara Reid as an intellectual, Christian Slater(usually great) as a dollar store Constantine and Stephen Dorff as...well it's STEPHEN DORFF FOR Christ SAKE!!!! I personally just want to thank those brilliant casting directors for the hard work and effort. You guys are on. Heres an idea, just my humble [[modest]] opinion as the movie going public but it follows directly with your [[formerly]] choices,a movie about the most brilliant neuro-physicist in history invent one pill to cure all diseases ever known to man and get this, heres the clincher they have to be played by Jessica Simpson and Paris Hilton. I knew you guys would love that. Seriously though you owe me $7.50. --------------------------------------------- Result 2240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' is the best [[film]] ever made. Now, that I [[got]] your attention with that horribly inaccurate [[statement]] that should be a hanging [[offense]] if spoken, [[let]] me begin my short overview of this tacky, offensive, pretentious and boring hunk of junk I guess you could consider a [[movie]]. First of all, the low budget of this [[stinker]] is [[totally]] [[obvious]] based on the very [[poor]] and inexperienced [[direction]] of [[Christian]] Vuissa, and the tacky, overly preachy, whiny and stilted screenplay by F. Mathew Smith. I really despise the fact that it sends a very pro-Mormon, and sort of anti-every other religion message. Yes, the story is about a small town half full with Mormons and half full with Baptists. It [[shows]] all the main and role-model characters being Mormon, and being so nice and perfect, yet they are being picked on by the evil, [[conniving]] and very judgmental Baptists. It [[shows]] how [[beautiful]] [[Mormons]] are and how cold-hearted and ignorant Baptists are, instead of showing a little solidarity like would be appropriate and realistic. I'm a part of neither religion (I'm actually an atheist), but this offended me, along with another countless amount of Baptists most likely. It shows the Baptists as being very unopened and unwelcoming to the Mormons, and the Mormons being very accepting, when again, in reality there is a mutual like/dislike between them. Sorry, I didn't mean to go off on a rant.

Another aspect of 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' I didn't much [[care]] for, was the acting. The performances are very amateurish and [[unnatural]], [[especially]] from the [[female]] lead Heather Beers. Miss [[Beers]] stumbles her [[way]] through her [[part]] without any [[passion]] or [[feeling]] for her role, and I wasn't too much impressed with Dan Merkley, who's the [[main]] [[character]] in this [[lackluster]] of a [[motion]] [[picture]], but I have to [[say]] he's [[way]] more [[talented]] or [[shows]] more [[talent]] in this [[film]] then Heather Beers. [[Whoever]] [[played]] the [[town]] sheriff was [[awful]] [[also]]. [[Although]] there is [[maybe]] a [[tiny]] [[laugh]] [[deep]] within the film, it is full of clichés. [[For]] [[example]], the main [[character]], Tartan (Merkley), [[finds]] solace with a [[Native]] [[American]] who [[always]] [[gives]] him the [[best]] [[advice]] on [[things]] [[relating]] to a [[tribal]] [[way]] of life - how cliché is that? To make the situation even more of a pathetic cliché, Tartan buys the poor, lonely heathen a puppy dog. Ugghhh!

If you want my advice, stay as far away from 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' as you can. I saw it on the shelf and thought it would be a cute and interesting little indie about religion. All I got was a, well, piece of crap. Grade: D-

my ratings guide - A+ (absolutley flawless); A (a [[masterpiece]], near-perfect); A- ([[excellent]]); B+ ([[great]]); B (very good); B- (good); C+ (a mixed bag); C (average); C- (disappointing); D+ ([[bad]]); D (very bad); D- (absolutley horrendous); F (not one redeeming quality in this [[hunk]] of Hollywood feces). 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' is the best [[filmmaking]] ever made. Now, that I [[did]] your attention with that horribly inaccurate [[statements]] that should be a hanging [[crimes]] if spoken, [[allowing]] me begin my short overview of this tacky, offensive, pretentious and boring hunk of junk I guess you could consider a [[cinematography]]. First of all, the low budget of this [[tosser]] is [[perfectly]] [[unmistakable]] based on the very [[pauper]] and inexperienced [[directorate]] of [[Christianity]] Vuissa, and the tacky, overly preachy, whiny and stilted screenplay by F. Mathew Smith. I really despise the fact that it sends a very pro-Mormon, and sort of anti-every other religion message. Yes, the story is about a small town half full with Mormons and half full with Baptists. It [[exhibition]] all the main and role-model characters being Mormon, and being so nice and perfect, yet they are being picked on by the evil, [[dishonest]] and very judgmental Baptists. It [[exhibitions]] how [[funky]] [[Mormon]] are and how cold-hearted and ignorant Baptists are, instead of showing a little solidarity like would be appropriate and realistic. I'm a part of neither religion (I'm actually an atheist), but this offended me, along with another countless amount of Baptists most likely. It shows the Baptists as being very unopened and unwelcoming to the Mormons, and the Mormons being very accepting, when again, in reality there is a mutual like/dislike between them. Sorry, I didn't mean to go off on a rant.

Another aspect of 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' I didn't much [[healthcare]] for, was the acting. The performances are very amateurish and [[abnormal]], [[peculiarly]] from the [[girl]] lead Heather Beers. Miss [[Pints]] stumbles her [[routes]] through her [[portions]] without any [[fascination]] or [[sentiment]] for her role, and I wasn't too much impressed with Dan Merkley, who's the [[principal]] [[nature]] in this [[mediocre]] of a [[motions]] [[images]], but I have to [[told]] he's [[route]] more [[gifted]] or [[exhibited]] more [[talents]] in this [[filmmaking]] then Heather Beers. [[Somebody]] [[served]] the [[municipality]] sheriff was [[hideous]] [[apart]]. [[While]] there is [[perhaps]] a [[small]] [[laughing]] [[profound]] within the film, it is full of clichés. [[During]] [[instances]], the main [[characteristics]], Tartan (Merkley), [[found]] solace with a [[Indigenous]] [[Americana]] who [[steadily]] [[offers]] him the [[optimum]] [[consultancy]] on [[items]] [[regarding]] to a [[clan]] [[routing]] of life - how cliché is that? To make the situation even more of a pathetic cliché, Tartan buys the poor, lonely heathen a puppy dog. Ugghhh!

If you want my advice, stay as far away from 'Baptists at Our Barbecue' as you can. I saw it on the shelf and thought it would be a cute and interesting little indie about religion. All I got was a, well, piece of crap. Grade: D-

my ratings guide - A+ (absolutley flawless); A (a [[centerpiece]], near-perfect); A- ([[admirable]]); B+ ([[fabulous]]); B (very good); B- (good); C+ (a mixed bag); C (average); C- (disappointing); D+ ([[amiss]]); D (very bad); D- (absolutley horrendous); F (not one redeeming quality in this [[bite]] of Hollywood feces). --------------------------------------------- Result 2241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie [[tells]] the tender tale of a demented scientist who, after his [[fiance]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can find a suitable body to attach her noggin to. Everyone in this [[movie]] [[exudes]] more [[slime]] than a snail, [[particularly]] our protagonist. This movie [[narrates]] the tender tale of a demented scientist who, after his [[fianc]] is decapitated, goes around ogling strippers so that he can find a suitable body to attach her noggin to. Everyone in this [[cinematography]] [[exude]] more [[phlegm]] than a snail, [[concretely]] our protagonist. --------------------------------------------- Result 2242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This film is a bit reminiscent of the German film, THE NEVERENDING STORY because a child is magically transported to a strange land in order to be a hero. However, due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are used to make an amazingly realistic looking world--one that will blow your socks off due to its realism and scope.

I [[enjoyed]] this film, but boy was it a [[chore]] at [[first]]! Unfortunately, for most Westerners, this film is one you [[might]] give up on very quickly or dismiss it since everything in the film seems so odd. However, give it a chance. Don't think or try to understand everything you see--just allow the story to unfold and you will most likely enjoy the film.

In many ways, this is exactly the sort of advice I'd give to adults who watch Miyazaki's SPIRITED AWAY because it is very similar and features tons of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The big differences between the two is that THE GREAT YOKAI WAR is live-action and SPIRITED AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do think THE GREAT YOKAI WAR was intended mostly as a kids' movie, in the USA, most parents would not want to show this to younger kids because it's so violent, scary and features some adult behaviors. So who is the audience in the West? Well, older kids and adults who appreciate foreign films with non-Western themes and composition. This is a rather narrow audience, indeed!

While you are watching, look for all the strange little touches. In fact, you could watch the film dozens of times and notice different tiny things each time. A few of the funny references I liked were the comment about Gamera, the scene that came with the comment "KIDS: Don't Try This At Home" as well as the use of Kirin beer to allow a person to actually see the Yokai (hmm,...perhaps that scene should have also contained this warning)!

By the way, director Takashi Miike is a hard one to pin down stylistically, other than to say that none of his stories I've seen have seemed "normal". Some of his films are rather disgusting and disturbing and I hated them (especially AUDITION and ICHI THE KILLER)whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever seen (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. This film is a bit reminiscent of the German film, THE NEVERENDING STORY because a child is magically transported to a strange land in order to be a hero. However, due to far superior modern technology, puppets and CGI are used to make an amazingly realistic looking world--one that will blow your socks off due to its realism and scope.

I [[appreciated]] this film, but boy was it a [[drudgery]] at [[frst]]! Unfortunately, for most Westerners, this film is one you [[apt]] give up on very quickly or dismiss it since everything in the film seems so odd. However, give it a chance. Don't think or try to understand everything you see--just allow the story to unfold and you will most likely enjoy the film.

In many ways, this is exactly the sort of advice I'd give to adults who watch Miyazaki's SPIRITED AWAY because it is very similar and features tons of Yokai (Japanese mythical spirits). The big differences between the two is that THE GREAT YOKAI WAR is live-action and SPIRITED AWAY is much more child-friendly. While I do think THE GREAT YOKAI WAR was intended mostly as a kids' movie, in the USA, most parents would not want to show this to younger kids because it's so violent, scary and features some adult behaviors. So who is the audience in the West? Well, older kids and adults who appreciate foreign films with non-Western themes and composition. This is a rather narrow audience, indeed!

While you are watching, look for all the strange little touches. In fact, you could watch the film dozens of times and notice different tiny things each time. A few of the funny references I liked were the comment about Gamera, the scene that came with the comment "KIDS: Don't Try This At Home" as well as the use of Kirin beer to allow a person to actually see the Yokai (hmm,...perhaps that scene should have also contained this warning)!

By the way, director Takashi Miike is a hard one to pin down stylistically, other than to say that none of his stories I've seen have seemed "normal". Some of his films are rather disgusting and disturbing and I hated them (especially AUDITION and ICHI THE KILLER)whereas some of them are magical and among the best films I've ever seen (THE HAPPINESS OF THE KATAKURIS). One thing for sure, it's hard to watch one of his films and not have a strong reaction one way or the other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2243 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac relentlessly [[explores]] the world of the extreme with Harry Russo.

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict scumbag who will stop at nothing to destroy those who stand between him and insanity. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, Harry begins his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins comes the 1st installment of the vilest story ever to be filmed

The only other movie I have seen similar to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a really low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are looking for something disturbing, different and horrific then this would make a fine choice.

DO NOT EXPECT ANYTHING LIKE MODERN DAY HORROR (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised Did you ever wonder how far one movie could go?

Schizophreniac relentlessly [[scrutinize]] the world of the extreme with Harry Russo.

Harry is an aggravated writer, killer and drug addict scumbag who will stop at nothing to destroy those who stand between him and insanity. Driven by the demonic voices of his ventriloquist dummy rubberneck, Harry begins his killing spree.

From director Ron Atkins comes the 1st installment of the vilest story ever to be filmed

The only other movie I have seen similar to this would happen to be the 2nd installment entitled Schizophreniac Necromaniac

This is a really low budget film and will not be for everyone, but if you are looking for something disturbing, different and horrific then this would make a fine choice.

DO NOT EXPECT ANYTHING LIKE MODERN DAY HORROR (Such as Scream)

Viewer discretion is advised --------------------------------------------- Result 2244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I went to see this [[film]] at the cinemas and i was shocked when I got in the room. There was only me and my girlfriend! This [[shouted]] to me that this film is not very good.

Not to my surprise, the film was [[dire]]. [[Ben]] Affleck plays a [[guy]] who [[buys]] a [[family]] for Christmas. It is a very [[predictable]] narrative with him falling in love with the girl that hates him. His acting is OKish but for the comedy [[aspect]] of the film he is not very good. The plot line is [[poor]] and the [[comedy]] almost non-existent.

[[However]], there are some [[good]] points. [[For]] [[example]], the [[family]] is [[falling]] [[apart]] and the [[mother]] is very funny.

I hope this review [[stops]] other people [[wasting]] their [[money]]. I was very embarrassed when I [[came]] out of the [[room]]!!! I went to see this [[cinematography]] at the cinemas and i was shocked when I got in the room. There was only me and my girlfriend! This [[cheered]] to me that this film is not very good.

Not to my surprise, the film was [[tragic]]. [[Benn]] Affleck plays a [[man]] who [[acquire]] a [[families]] for Christmas. It is a very [[foreseeable]] narrative with him falling in love with the girl that hates him. His acting is OKish but for the comedy [[facet]] of the film he is not very good. The plot line is [[poorest]] and the [[parody]] almost non-existent.

[[Still]], there are some [[buena]] points. [[Onto]] [[cases]], the [[families]] is [[decreasing]] [[regardless]] and the [[mothers]] is very funny.

I hope this review [[ceasing]] other people [[losing]] their [[cash]]. I was very embarrassed when I [[became]] out of the [[courtrooms]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2245 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (82%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] An opium den, a dirty little [[boy]] (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a violent fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual shenanigans, scantily [[clad]] babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a [[bar]] with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[treated]] equally, does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? Wrong. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The first half of "Footlight Parade" is preparation for a musical extravaganza which occupies the last half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to lose his job and does lose his playgirl wife as a result of talking pictures squeezing out live stage musicals. His producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The Big Trail." Before each showing of the flick, a dance number is presented as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and cartoons would later serve the purpose. Kent gets the idea that a prologue chain would be the road to salvation for the dwindling live musical business. Kent is basically an idea man along the lines of choreographer Busby Berkeley. Could it be that Cagney's character is patterned after Berkeley? Could be.

In preparation for the prologues, Kent learns that his ideas are being stolen by a rival. He uncovers the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a new leak is planted in the form a dazzling temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - soon to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas College shows up in the form of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a real find and is paired with Bea Thorn (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any cinema stage of the day, are as fresh and [[enjoyable]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of special note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred Astaire and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. An opium den, a dirty little [[bloke]] (actually a midget), prostitutes galore, a violent fracas in a dive, a motel for sexual shenanigans, scantily [[coated]] babes with cleavage a lot, a boozer falling down the stairs, a racially mixed clientèle in a [[solicitors]] with Asians, Africans, and Anglos [[handled]] equally, does this sound like a film playing at the local shopping mall? Wrong. These are all scenes from a 1933 musical.

The first half of "Footlight Parade" is preparation for a musical extravaganza which occupies the last half of the film. Chester Kent (Cagney) is about to lose his job and does lose his playgirl wife as a result of talking pictures squeezing out live stage musicals. His producers take him to see a popular talky of the day, John Wayne in "The Big Trail." Before each showing of the flick, a dance number is presented as a prologue. Shorts, news reels, serials, and cartoons would later serve the purpose. Kent gets the idea that a prologue chain would be the road to salvation for the dwindling live musical business. Kent is basically an idea man along the lines of choreographer Busby Berkeley. Could it be that Cagney's character is patterned after Berkeley? Could be.

In preparation for the prologues, Kent learns that his ideas are being stolen by a rival. He uncovers the traitor, fires him, then unbeknown to him a new leak is planted in the form a dazzling temptress. His assistant, Nan Prescott (Joan Blondell - soon to be Mrs. Dick Powell) has the hots for Kent and is determined to expose the wiles of the temptress. A new singer from Arkansas College shows up in the form of Scotty Blain (Dick Powell) who turns out to be a real find and is paired with Bea Thorn (Ruby Keeler). The resulting three prologue musicals, which couldn't possibly have been presented on any cinema stage of the day, are as fresh and [[nice]] today as they were over seventy years ago, "Honeymoon Hotel," "By a Waterfall," and "Shanghai Lil."

Of special note is the song and dance of tough-guy James Cagney. Like Fred Astaire and Bill "Bojangles" Robinson, Cagney's dancing appeared natural and unrehearsed, although hours went into practice to get each step just right. Not as good a singer as Astaire, Cagney's singing, like Astaire's, sounded natural, unlike the crooning so popular at the time. It's amazing that one person could be so talented and so versatile as James Cagney.

Most critics prefer the "Shanghai Lil" segment over the other two. Yet the kaleidoscopic choreography of "By a Waterfall" is astonishing. How Berkeley was able to film the underwater ballets and to create the human snake chain must have been difficult because it has never been repeated. The close up shots mixed brilliantly with distant angles is a must-see. The crisp black and white photography is much more artistic than it would have been if shot in color.

Though not nearly as socially conscious as "Gold Diggers of 1933," "Footlight Parade" stands on its own as one of the most amazing and outrageous musicals ever put on the big screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2246 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This [[sorry]] excuse for a [[film]] [[reminded]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop [[earlier]] this Summer. "The Order" was [[clearly]] edited to such an [[unconscionable]] degree that the scenes, rather than [[forming]] a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[little]] to forward any [[semblance]] of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[fan]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my man needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to movie oblivion.

Here are the problems I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his essential plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these threads together were pathetic at best. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by [[inserting]] into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured [[angst]], manufactured love and most idiotically manufactured sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing techno music. Rather than developing character, these elements seemed like the cheap devices they clearly were, a half-hearted attempt at putting popcorn-chewing adolescents in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an intriguing concept. We have scandal, we have religion and we have supernatural forces at play. Why then do we learn almost nothing about anyone's background? We learn a little about Alex, but even he gives up the passion of the priesthood to sleep with a woman after two days, a woman who tried to kill him during an exorcism at some point in the past. And Alex is the most developed, if you can call it that, character in the entire film.

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to see one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. This [[dorry]] excuse for a [[cinematography]] [[remembered]] me a great deal of what I heard about "Gigli", that Ben and Jen flop [[formerly]] this Summer. "The Order" was [[apparently]] edited to such an [[unjustified]] degree that the scenes, rather than [[train]] a cohesive and provoking film, appeared to be a collection of disconnected sequences that did [[small]] to forward any [[appearance]] of a unified plot. Now, I'm a Heath Ledger [[admirer]] ("10 Things I hate About You", "A Knight's Tale" and particularly his supporting role in "Monster's Ball"), but my man needs to find himself a better agent. Keep accepting scripts like "The Order" and "Four Feathers" and he's going to be on the fast track to movie oblivion.

Here are the problems I had with the film. Firstly, the Director tried to make up for the inadequacies of his essential plot by introducing two other plot lines that seemingly had little if anything to do with, well, much of anything. Plot skeins involving the American trying to take over the Vatican and the Dark Pope, while mildly interesting, did nothing to reveal to the viewer anything about the main characters. The attempts to tie these threads together were pathetic at best. Secondly, please don't insult the intelligence of the viewer by [[adds]] into the film scenes that are clearly obligatory. We had manufactured [[dread]], manufactured love and most idiotically manufactured sex that seemed like a page right out of "Matrix Reloaded" with skull-numbing techno music. Rather than developing character, these elements seemed like the cheap devices they clearly were, a half-hearted attempt at putting popcorn-chewing adolescents in the seats. Thirdly, and most importantly, this movie seemed to ha ve an intriguing concept. We have scandal, we have religion and we have supernatural forces at play. Why then do we learn almost nothing about anyone's background? We learn a little about Alex, but even he gives up the passion of the priesthood to sleep with a woman after two days, a woman who tried to kill him during an exorcism at some point in the past. And Alex is the most developed, if you can call it that, character in the entire film.

As the cliche goes nowadays, if you're going to see one movie this year, make sure it's not this one. There's about ten interesting minutes out of the intolerable 101 minute affair. The only thing that saved me was going with a girl who I'm rather fond of.

1 out of 10. I'm disappointed. File this one firmly under -had potential but blew it on over editing and bad directing-. Heath my man, go back to Monster's Ball-like cameos. They really suit you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[purchased]] this [[film]] for $5 in a bargain bin at my local video [[store]] for one reason only, Chase Masterson, but I should have crumbled up the five, thrown it in a [[toilet]] and flushed. The film is about a bunch of twenty somethings that peaked in high [[school]] and [[reunite]] on the [[anniversary]] of their [[idiot]] [[friends]] [[death]], who got drunk and wandered into the [[woods]] and [[died]]. There problem is a reptilian [[monster]] is [[hunting]] them down one by one. The acting is [[abysmal]], these [[worthless]] people were [[apparently]] cast offs on [[shows]] like 90210 and Dawsons [[Creek]]. The [[directing]] was on par with a twelve year [[old]] and the [[script]] was [[probably]] [[done]] by a thirteen year [[old]]. The [[entire]] set looks like someone's backyard in Malibu. The people on here that have [[praised]] this [[film]] are [[obviously]] [[friends]] of the director and/or [[actors]]. [[Avoid]] this [[pile]] of garbage at [[ALL]] [[costs]]. I [[acquire]] this [[cinematographic]] for $5 in a bargain bin at my local video [[stores]] for one reason only, Chase Masterson, but I should have crumbled up the five, thrown it in a [[bathhouse]] and flushed. The film is about a bunch of twenty somethings that peaked in high [[teaching]] and [[reunification]] on the [[birthday]] of their [[dolt]] [[friendships]] [[decease]], who got drunk and wandered into the [[wood]] and [[succumbed]]. There problem is a reptilian [[monsters]] is [[hunted]] them down one by one. The acting is [[gruesome]], these [[dispensable]] people were [[reportedly]] cast offs on [[displays]] like 90210 and Dawsons [[Creeks]]. The [[instructing]] was on par with a twelve year [[former]] and the [[hyphen]] was [[indubitably]] [[effected]] by a thirteen year [[former]]. The [[overall]] set looks like someone's backyard in Malibu. The people on here that have [[welcomed]] this [[movies]] are [[notoriously]] [[homies]] of the director and/or [[players]]. [[Avoided]] this [[piling]] of garbage at [[EVERYTHING]] [[charges]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Freddy's Dead: The Final [[Nightmare]], the sixth installment of the [[Nightmare]] on Elm Street series and once again another [[bad]] sequel. I [[think]] this is [[tied]] up with the last sequel of the Dream Child. I was lucky enough to [[get]] the Nightmare on Elm Street series box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to [[see]] all the sequels. [[May]] I say that I'm just getting more and more [[disappointed]] [[though]] with these sequels, at least the past two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the writers were trying to give Freddy a soul and they're just destroying it instead of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't needed, sorry to Robert Englund, but this was very much below what Freddy Krueger represents.

Freddy is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a daughter. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her father, but soon she finds out what his dark secrets are and he wants her help. She has to do her best to resist his powers, but it's hard with all the good [[memories]] she has of her loving father. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without manipulating her into his ways.

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the sarcasm. This is one of the [[worst]] sequels, it's [[tied]] up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd rather watch the second Nightmare on Elm Street to be honest. This just had bad acting, stupid editing, and just over all a bad idea for a story. I didn't like the concept of it and it just ruined the whole idea of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death master of nightmares, not Father Knows Best.

2/10 Freddy's Dead: The Final [[Cabos]], the sixth installment of the [[Cabos]] on Elm Street series and once again another [[amiss]] sequel. I [[believing]] this is [[connected]] up with the last sequel of the Dream Child. I was lucky enough to [[obtains]] the Nightmare on Elm Street series box DVD set for my birthday, so I got to [[behold]] all the sequels. [[Maggio]] I say that I'm just getting more and more [[frustrated]] [[although]] with these sequels, at least the past two, it just seems like Freddy lost his edge. It's almost like the writers were trying to give Freddy a soul and they're just destroying it instead of reinventing the story. This was a sequel that wasn't needed, sorry to Robert Englund, but this was very much below what Freddy Krueger represents.

Freddy is back, but he's got something we don't know about, a daughter. Maggie, she's not aware that he is her father, but soon she finds out what his dark secrets are and he wants her help. She has to do her best to resist his powers, but it's hard with all the good [[recollections]] she has of her loving father. Ironic, isn't it? But Freddy isn't giving up without manipulating her into his ways.

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare is also presented in 3-D, radical, huh? Note the sarcasm. This is one of the [[hardest]] sequels, it's [[related]] up with the fifth sequel of the Nightmare on Elm Street series, I'd rather watch the second Nightmare on Elm Street to be honest. This just had bad acting, stupid editing, and just over all a bad idea for a story. I didn't like the concept of it and it just ruined the whole idea of who Freddy Krueger really is, the death master of nightmares, not Father Knows Best.

2/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2249 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This was the [[third]] remake of [[SLEEPING]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[worked]] and was a [[better]] film

DARAAR is [[directed]] by Abbas Mustan who [[sadly]] failed in their [[attempt]] here

the [[story]] was good but the handling wasn't that good and the [[heroine]] was [[shown]] too regressive and the climax too was [[disappointing]]

Direction is [[bad]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA(strangely which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too [[hard]] in his debut and does manage in [[many]] scenes to chill the audiences but his [[voice]] was [[terrible]] Johny is too [[loud]] This was the [[terzi]] remake of [[SLEEPER]] WITH THE ENIEMY After YAARANA(1995) and AGNISAKSHI(1996)

AGNISAKSHI was the only one which [[cooperating]] and was a [[best]] film

DARAAR is [[geared]] by Abbas Mustan who [[woefully]] failed in their [[attempts]] here

the [[storytelling]] was good but the handling wasn't that good and the [[idol]] was [[indicated]] too regressive and the climax too was [[disappointed]]

Direction is [[wicked]] Music is good

Rishi reprises his role of YAARANA(strangely which also was a remake of SWTE) and looks too fat for the lead and is okay Juhi is decent while Arbaaz tries too [[tough]] in his debut and does manage in [[myriad]] scenes to chill the audiences but his [[vocal]] was [[scary]] Johny is too [[rowdy]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2250 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The "movie aimed at [[adults]]" is a [[rare]] thing these days, but Moonstruck does it well, and is still a [[better]] than average [[movie]], which is aging very well. [[Although]] it's comic [[moments]] [[aim]] lower than the rest of it, the [[movie]] has a [[wonderful]] specificity (Italians in Brooklyn) that isn't [[used]] to shortchange the [[characters]] or the [[viewers]]. (i.[[e]]. Mobsters never [[appear]] in acomplication. It never becomes grotesque like My Big Fat Greek [[Wedding]]) The secondary story lines are economically told with short scenes that [[allow]] a [[break]] from the major thread. These are the scenes that are now missing in [[contemporary]] [[movies]] where their immediate value cannot be impressed upon producers and bigwigs. I miss these scenes. It also [[beautifully]] involves older characters. The movie takes it's own slight, quiet path to a conclusion. There isn't a poorly [[written]] scene [[included]] anywhere to make some executives sphincter relax. Cage and Cher do very nice work.

Moonstruck invokes old-school, ethnic, workaday New York much like 'Marty' except Moonstruck is way [[less]] [[sanctimonious]]. The "movie aimed at [[adult]]" is a [[few]] thing these days, but Moonstruck does it well, and is still a [[best]] than average [[filmmaking]], which is aging very well. [[Despite]] it's comic [[times]] [[targeting]] lower than the rest of it, the [[flick]] has a [[sumptuous]] specificity (Italians in Brooklyn) that isn't [[utilize]] to shortchange the [[features]] or the [[listeners]]. (i.[[f]]. Mobsters never [[appears]] in acomplication. It never becomes grotesque like My Big Fat Greek [[Marrying]]) The secondary story lines are economically told with short scenes that [[authorizing]] a [[blackout]] from the major thread. These are the scenes that are now missing in [[current]] [[theater]] where their immediate value cannot be impressed upon producers and bigwigs. I miss these scenes. It also [[amazingly]] involves older characters. The movie takes it's own slight, quiet path to a conclusion. There isn't a poorly [[authored]] scene [[inscribed]] anywhere to make some executives sphincter relax. Cage and Cher do very nice work.

Moonstruck invokes old-school, ethnic, workaday New York much like 'Marty' except Moonstruck is way [[least]] [[hypocrite]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Presenting Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute film, but in my [[opinion]] it [[could]] have been better. Judy Garland is great as always, but some scenes in the film seem out of place and the romance between her and Van Heflin develops all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to beat her butt, but the next minute he falls in love with her. I believe that this production, the film editing, and the script ( even though the photography was great, the scenery was nice and the costumes were nice as well) could have been a little better. It feels as though the production was too rushed.

The supporting cast was good as well, especially little Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't develop into a teenage comic actress. She's much better in this film than in her previous films as Warner Brothers in the late 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's really good in that), when they tried to make her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this film could better, but in the end, Judy gave it her all. Presenting Lily Mars (MGM, 1943) is a cute film, but in my [[visualizing]] it [[did]] have been better. Judy Garland is great as always, but some scenes in the film seem out of place and the romance between her and Van Heflin develops all too quickly.

I mean, one minute he's ready to beat her butt, but the next minute he falls in love with her. I believe that this production, the film editing, and the script ( even though the photography was great, the scenery was nice and the costumes were nice as well) could have been a little better. It feels as though the production was too rushed.

The supporting cast was good as well, especially little Janet Chapman as the second youngest daughter daughter Rosie. She at the age of 11, looks really cute and it's a shame that she didn't develop into a teenage comic actress. She's much better in this film than in her previous films as Warner Brothers in the late 1930's (except for Broadway Musketeers 1938, she's really good in that), when they tried to make her into a Shirley Temple/Sybil Jason hybrid. Overall, this film could better, but in the end, Judy gave it her all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of violation, but also the only true actors and performers in it. So how on [[Earth]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your cars and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the cars and [[earn]] [[money]] on their chests. It is painful for those who [[love]] [[cars]]. It is [[painful]] for those who love movies.

I want my money back !!! You already know how painful to watch this movie is. But I wonder why one of the [[hardest]] [[films]] ever should include one the most beautiful cars. Why the cars should be not only the victim of violation, but also the only true actors and performers in it. So how on [[Overland]] you Porsche, Lamborghini or whatever could allow those people to get in touch with your cars and ruin you reputation for which you give millions.Stop the getting an advantage of the cars and [[wins]] [[cash]] on their chests. It is painful for those who [[adored]] [[wagon]]. It is [[hurtful]] for those who love movies.

I want my money back !!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[enjoyed]] this film. I thought it was an [[excellent]] political thriller about something that's never happened before - a [[Secret]] Service agent [[going]] [[bad]] and [[involved]] in an [[assassination]] [[plot]]. Unfortunately, for [[Michael]] Douglas' [[character]], "Pete Garrison," they [[think]] HE's the mole but he isn't.

He's just a morally-flawed [[agent]] having an affair with the First Lady! Since he's doing that, he's [[unable]] to [[give]] an [[acceptable]] [[polygraph]] [[exam]] and that makes him [[suspect]] number one when it's [[revealed]] there is a plot to kill the President.

"Garrison" is forced to go on the lam but at the same time he's still trying to do the right thing by protecting the President. Douglas does a fine job in this role. I don't always care the people he plays but he's an excellent actor. Keifer Sutherland ("David Breckinridge") is equally as good (at least in here) as the fellow SS boss who hunts down Douglas until convinced he has been telling the truth. When he does the two of them work together in the finale to discover and then stop, if they can, the plot. The crooks are interesting, too, by the way. Also, I have never - and never will, unfortunately - [[see]] a First Lady who looks as good as Kim Basinger

This is simply a slick action [[flick]] that entertains start-to-finish. Are there [[holes]] in it? Of course; probably a number of them, and a [[reason]] you see so [[many]] [[critical]] [[comments]]. However, it is unfairly bashed here. It just isn't intelligent [[enough]] for the [[geniuses]] here on this website. My [[advice]]: chill, just go along for the ride and [[enjoy]] all the action and intrigue. [[Yes]], it [[gets]] a [[little]] Rambo-ish at the [[end]] but otherwise it [[gets]] [[high]] [[marks]] for [[entertainment]].....which is what [[movies]] are all about. I [[liked]] this film. I thought it was an [[sumptuous]] political thriller about something that's never happened before - a [[Covert]] Service agent [[go]] [[unhealthy]] and [[entangled]] in an [[slain]] [[intrigue]]. Unfortunately, for [[Michele]] Douglas' [[characteristics]], "Pete Garrison," they [[ideas]] HE's the mole but he isn't.

He's just a morally-flawed [[officers]] having an affair with the First Lady! Since he's doing that, he's [[incapable]] to [[lend]] an [[agreeable]] [[detector]] [[checkups]] and that makes him [[suspicious]] number one when it's [[divulged]] there is a plot to kill the President.

"Garrison" is forced to go on the lam but at the same time he's still trying to do the right thing by protecting the President. Douglas does a fine job in this role. I don't always care the people he plays but he's an excellent actor. Keifer Sutherland ("David Breckinridge") is equally as good (at least in here) as the fellow SS boss who hunts down Douglas until convinced he has been telling the truth. When he does the two of them work together in the finale to discover and then stop, if they can, the plot. The crooks are interesting, too, by the way. Also, I have never - and never will, unfortunately - [[seeing]] a First Lady who looks as good as Kim Basinger

This is simply a slick action [[gesture]] that entertains start-to-finish. Are there [[orifices]] in it? Of course; probably a number of them, and a [[justification]] you see so [[several]] [[indispensable]] [[feedback]]. However, it is unfairly bashed here. It just isn't intelligent [[adequately]] for the [[genies]] here on this website. My [[counseling]]: chill, just go along for the ride and [[enjoying]] all the action and intrigue. [[Oui]], it [[obtains]] a [[scant]] Rambo-ish at the [[termination]] but otherwise it [[get]] [[alto]] [[mark]] for [[amusement]].....which is what [[movie]] are all about. --------------------------------------------- Result 2254 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Years]] [[ago]] [[many]] big studios [[promoted]] serial films that were shown in movie theaters's in between the actual features along with a Newsreel of current [[events]], plus cartoons, [[especially]] on a Saturday afternoon. (The parents [[loved]] it mostly) "The Return of Chandu" was a 12 episode serial where Chandu,(Bela Lugosi),"The Mysterious [[Mr]]. Wong",'34 is a magician with super natural powers and travels to the island of Lemuria to rescue the kidnapped princess of Egypt,(Nadji)Maria Alba,"Dr. Terror's House of Horrors",'43. Princess Nadji is held captive by the black magic cult of Ubasti, who believe that she is a reincarnation of their long-dead goddess Ossana. These 12-episode serials take you way back in time and are very well produced, considering we are talking about 1934 ! [[Yr]] [[formerly]] [[various]] big studios [[promoting]] serial films that were shown in movie theaters's in between the actual features along with a Newsreel of current [[event]], plus cartoons, [[peculiarly]] on a Saturday afternoon. (The parents [[loves]] it mostly) "The Return of Chandu" was a 12 episode serial where Chandu,(Bela Lugosi),"The Mysterious [[Bernd]]. Wong",'34 is a magician with super natural powers and travels to the island of Lemuria to rescue the kidnapped princess of Egypt,(Nadji)Maria Alba,"Dr. Terror's House of Horrors",'43. Princess Nadji is held captive by the black magic cult of Ubasti, who believe that she is a reincarnation of their long-dead goddess Ossana. These 12-episode serials take you way back in time and are very well produced, considering we are talking about 1934 ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2255 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Gregory Peck's acting was excellent, as one would expect, and the cinematography quite stunning even when playing directly into some [[melodramatic]] "moment." But, the [[rest]] of the [[film]] was overacted and [[hard]] to watch, for me anyway. I [[tried]] to like it, but had to fast-forward through the last thirty [[minutes]] or so. I feel I [[wasted]] a [[couple]] of good hours. Had it not been for Gregory Peck, I wouldn't have lasted fifteen minutes. 4/10. Gregory Peck's acting was excellent, as one would expect, and the cinematography quite stunning even when playing directly into some [[operatic]] "moment." But, the [[resting]] of the [[movies]] was overacted and [[difficult]] to watch, for me anyway. I [[try]] to like it, but had to fast-forward through the last thirty [[mins]] or so. I feel I [[squandered]] a [[coupling]] of good hours. Had it not been for Gregory Peck, I wouldn't have lasted fifteen minutes. 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2256 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I've always believed that David and Bathsheba was a film originally intended for Tyrone Power at 20th Century Fox, although Gregory [[Peck]] does give a good account of himself as King David, the monarch with a wandering eye.

A [[whole]] [[lot]] of biblical [[subjects]] [[get]] [[covered]] in this [[film]], adultery, redemption, sin, punishment and generally what God [[expects]] from his followers.

When you're a king, even king in a biblically [[prophesied]] kingdom you certainly do have a [[lot]] perogatives not open to the rest of us. King David has many wives, including one really vicious one in Jayne Meadows who was the daughter of Saul, David's predecessor. But his eyes catch sight of Bathsheba out in her garden one evening. Turns out she's as unhappily married to Uriah the Hittite as David is to quite a few women. Uriah is one of David's army captains. David sends for Bathsheba and him being the King, she comes a runnin' because she's had her eye on him too.

What happens, an affair, a pregnancy, and a carefully arranged death for Uriah in a battle. But an all seeing and knowing Deity has caught all of this and is not only punishing David and Bathsheba, but the entire Kingdom of Israel is being punished with drought, disease, and pestilence.

The sexist law of the day calls for Bathsheba to have a stoning death. David shows weakness in his previous actions, but here he steps up to the plate and asks that the whole thing be put on him. He even lays hands on the Ark of the Covenant which was an instant death as seen in the film.

My interpretation of it is that God admires guts even if you're wrong and he lets up on David and forgives them both. Bathsheba becomes the mother of Solomon and she and David are the ancestors of several successors in the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah until they're both conquered.

Susan Hayward is a fetching Bathsheba caught in a loveless marriage with Uriah played by Kieron Moore. The only thing that gets Moore aroused is a good battle. I liked Kieron Moore's performance as a brave and rather stupid horse's rear.

No one can lay the law down like Raymond Massey. His Nathan the Prophet is in keeping with the John Brown character he played in two films, same intensity.

So when His own law called for death, why did God spare Bathsheba and keep David on the throne. Maybe it was the fact He just didn't want to train a third guy for the job. He'd replaced Saul with David already.

But I think the Christian interpretation might be that this was a hint of the New Testament forthcoming, that one might sin and receive mercy if one asks for it penitently. I'll leave it to the biblical scholars to submit interpretations.

Watch the film and you might come up with an entirely new theory. I've always believed that David and Bathsheba was a film originally intended for Tyrone Power at 20th Century Fox, although Gregory [[Beck]] does give a good account of himself as King David, the monarch with a wandering eye.

A [[entire]] [[batches]] of biblical [[item]] [[got]] [[covering]] in this [[movies]], adultery, redemption, sin, punishment and generally what God [[hopes]] from his followers.

When you're a king, even king in a biblically [[forecast]] kingdom you certainly do have a [[batch]] perogatives not open to the rest of us. King David has many wives, including one really vicious one in Jayne Meadows who was the daughter of Saul, David's predecessor. But his eyes catch sight of Bathsheba out in her garden one evening. Turns out she's as unhappily married to Uriah the Hittite as David is to quite a few women. Uriah is one of David's army captains. David sends for Bathsheba and him being the King, she comes a runnin' because she's had her eye on him too.

What happens, an affair, a pregnancy, and a carefully arranged death for Uriah in a battle. But an all seeing and knowing Deity has caught all of this and is not only punishing David and Bathsheba, but the entire Kingdom of Israel is being punished with drought, disease, and pestilence.

The sexist law of the day calls for Bathsheba to have a stoning death. David shows weakness in his previous actions, but here he steps up to the plate and asks that the whole thing be put on him. He even lays hands on the Ark of the Covenant which was an instant death as seen in the film.

My interpretation of it is that God admires guts even if you're wrong and he lets up on David and forgives them both. Bathsheba becomes the mother of Solomon and she and David are the ancestors of several successors in the divided kingdoms of Israel and Judah until they're both conquered.

Susan Hayward is a fetching Bathsheba caught in a loveless marriage with Uriah played by Kieron Moore. The only thing that gets Moore aroused is a good battle. I liked Kieron Moore's performance as a brave and rather stupid horse's rear.

No one can lay the law down like Raymond Massey. His Nathan the Prophet is in keeping with the John Brown character he played in two films, same intensity.

So when His own law called for death, why did God spare Bathsheba and keep David on the throne. Maybe it was the fact He just didn't want to train a third guy for the job. He'd replaced Saul with David already.

But I think the Christian interpretation might be that this was a hint of the New Testament forthcoming, that one might sin and receive mercy if one asks for it penitently. I'll leave it to the biblical scholars to submit interpretations.

Watch the film and you might come up with an entirely new theory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2257 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's grab of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a chump out of Neville Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of Europe.

[[Clearly]] meant as propaganda in its day this series over the [[test]] of [[time]] has [[become]] an [[informative]] documentary as well with most of the "Allied bias" turning out to be historical fact. The Fuhrer hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one thing and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians quickly capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic struggle against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a white flag, declaring "Peace in our time" to this day has durable propaganda qualities. Here in its original context it resonates even more powerfully as the darkness of World War ll sets in on Europe leaving the American viewer with two options, freedom or slavery. In 1943 there was no evading this simple truth and The Nazis Strike makes its point effectively. The second of the Why We Fight Series concentrates on Hitler's grab of the Sudetanland and beyond as he makes a chump out of Neville Chamberlain and embarks on his conquest of Europe.

[[Blatantly]] meant as propaganda in its day this series over the [[proof]] of [[times]] has [[gotten]] an [[informational]] documentary as well with most of the "Allied bias" turning out to be historical fact. The Fuhrer hoists himself on his own petard with smug pronouncements before his people and the world as he says one thing and does another as his army moves East. The Czechs and Austrians quickly capitulate but the Poles put up an heroic struggle against overwhelming odds.

The disparity between Hitler's military might and Chamberlain waving the Munich treaty like a white flag, declaring "Peace in our time" to this day has durable propaganda qualities. Here in its original context it resonates even more powerfully as the darkness of World War ll sets in on Europe leaving the American viewer with two options, freedom or slavery. In 1943 there was no evading this simple truth and The Nazis Strike makes its point effectively. --------------------------------------------- Result 2258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Life [[Stinks]] (1991) was a [[step]] below Mel [[Brooks]] other productions. He stars as a rich man who wages an insane wager with his "friends". Brooks claims that he can life like a homeless man for a month. His shocked and amused friends accept this unusual wager. During his "stay" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of odd homeless people, one of them catches his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[strike]] up a [[friendship]] as she teaches him the many tricks she learned whilst living on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy rich? Will he win this unorthodox [[wager]]? Who are his true friends? Find out when you watch LIFE STINKS to find out!

This film has been slagged unfairly. Sure it's not a classic like his earlier films but it's still enjoyable. I liked the way Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent films then you'll get the humor as well.

Recommended for Mel Brooks fans. Life [[Sucks]] (1991) was a [[steps]] below Mel [[Creek]] other productions. He stars as a rich man who wages an insane wager with his "friends". Brooks claims that he can life like a homeless man for a month. His shocked and amused friends accept this unusual wager. During his "stay" in the Bowery, he meets a bunch of odd homeless people, one of them catches his fancy (Lesley-Ann Warren). They [[hitting]] up a [[goodwill]] as she teaches him the many tricks she learned whilst living on the street. Can Mr. Brooks survive on his own without the luxuries of being filthy rich? Will he win this unorthodox [[bets]]? Who are his true friends? Find out when you watch LIFE STINKS to find out!

This film has been slagged unfairly. Sure it's not a classic like his earlier films but it's still enjoyable. I liked the way Mel Brooks pays homage to Charles Chaplin in this film. If you have watched Chaplin's earlier silent films then you'll get the humor as well.

Recommended for Mel Brooks fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie about the relationships that sometimes developed between American servicemen and Japanese women in post-war Japan--as well as the obstacles that prejudices created for them. Brando goes from having contempt for the Japanese (which is natural considering WW2) to falling in love with a Japanese woman and wanting to marry her. His performance is okay (I am not a major fan of his acting style) and the movie is marvelous throughout. Red Buttons received an Oscar for his touching performance of another GI who falls in love in Japan (though the Japanese women who plays opposite him also did a remarkable job).

I don't want to spoil it but the movie is a good one to watch with a box of tissues.

This movie manages to say SOMETHING and be entertaining at the same time. A mostly underrated gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 2260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] "A Family Affair" takes us back to a less [[complicated]] time in [[America]]. It's sobering to see how [[different]] [[everything]] was back then. It was a more [[innocent]] era in our country and we watch a 'functional' family dealing in [[things]] together. The film [[also]] marks the beginning of the [[series]] featuring the Hardy family.

The film, [[directed]] by [[George]] Seitz, is [[based]] on a successful [[play]]. [[Judge]] James Hardy, and his wife Emmily, are facing a domestic crisis that must be dealt with. Married daughter Joan comes home after she has committed a social blunder and her husband holds her responsible. At the same time, another [[daughter]], Marion, brings home a beau, who is clear will clash with her father. The happy teen ager Andy, seems to be the only one without a [[problem]] until his [[mother]] makes him [[escort]] Polly to the dance, something he is [[reluctant]] to do.

Needless to [[say]], [[Judge]] [[Hardy]] will [[prove]] why he knows [[best]] as he [[puts]] a [[plan]] into [[action]] to get [[everyone]] [[together]] again. After all, he is a [[man]] that understands, not only the [[law]], but how to deal with those outside forces that [[threatens]] his standing in the community and what will make his [[family]] happy.

Lionel Barrymore plays [[Judge]] Hardy with [[conviction]]. He is the glue that [[holds]] everything together. [[Spring]] Byington is [[seen]] as Emily, the mother. [[Mickey]] [[Rooney]] has a [[small]] [[part]] in this [[film]], but he is as [[always]], [[fun]] to watch. Cecilia [[Parker]] and Julie Haydon appeared as the [[daughters]], [[Marion]] and Joan. [[Sara]] Hayden and [[Margaret]] Marquis are [[also]] featured in the [[film]] as Aunt Milly and Polly, the girl that [[surprises]] [[Andy]] with her beauty.

"A Family [[Affair]]" is a [[good]] [[way]] to [[observe]] our [[past]] through the [[positive]] [[image]] [[painted]] of an American family. "A Family Affair" takes us back to a less [[tortuous]] time in [[Latina]]. It's sobering to see how [[assorted]] [[eveything]] was back then. It was a more [[blameless]] era in our country and we watch a 'functional' family dealing in [[items]] together. The film [[apart]] marks the beginning of the [[serials]] featuring the Hardy family.

The film, [[aimed]] by [[Georgie]] Seitz, is [[base]] on a successful [[gaming]]. [[Magistrate]] James Hardy, and his wife Emmily, are facing a domestic crisis that must be dealt with. Married daughter Joan comes home after she has committed a social blunder and her husband holds her responsible. At the same time, another [[maid]], Marion, brings home a beau, who is clear will clash with her father. The happy teen ager Andy, seems to be the only one without a [[problems]] until his [[mommy]] makes him [[escorts]] Polly to the dance, something he is [[hesitant]] to do.

Needless to [[says]], [[Magistrates]] [[Robust]] will [[demonstrating]] why he knows [[better]] as he [[begs]] a [[planning]] into [[measures]] to get [[someone]] [[jointly]] again. After all, he is a [[guy]] that understands, not only the [[laws]], but how to deal with those outside forces that [[threats]] his standing in the community and what will make his [[families]] happy.

Lionel Barrymore plays [[Magistrates]] Hardy with [[convictions]]. He is the glue that [[hold]] everything together. [[Springs]] Byington is [[watched]] as Emily, the mother. [[Mikey]] [[Roni]] has a [[minimal]] [[parties]] in this [[flick]], but he is as [[incessantly]], [[droll]] to watch. Cecilia [[Barker]] and Julie Haydon appeared as the [[women]], [[Mariana]] and Joan. [[Sarah]] Hayden and [[Margret]] Marquis are [[additionally]] featured in the [[movie]] as Aunt Milly and Polly, the girl that [[dumbfounded]] [[Indy]] with her beauty.

"A Family [[Fling]]" is a [[alright]] [[routing]] to [[observes]] our [[bygone]] through the [[auspicious]] [[photos]] [[repainted]] of an American family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2261 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie is simply far too long, far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[gratuitous]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the movie [[could]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as effective without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I saw this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also could have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. This movie is simply far too long, far too repetitive, with the male nudity and sexuality being (as this is said as a gay with my own collection of adult titles) far too [[unprovoked]] and unnecessary. Much of the first third of the movie [[wo]] have been cut down to ten minutes and been equally as effective without trying the patience (and stamina) of an audience.

I saw this movie on an early Saturday afternoon, with a film festival audience; the type of crowd that tends to be more adventuresome, interested in more experimental or atypical films, such as one without much dialog, shorts, foreign films. The near sell out crowd in an approximate 275 seat theater started to dribble out within the first half of the movie and while the great majority did stay for the "pay off" (which never actually arrived), I have never, in about 14 years of attending any number of film festivals, experimental, gay and otherwise, seen such a large number of people walk away from a film.

This movie could easily have been cut down by more than half and been as effective as it was. It also could have gone in different directions, still with a shorter running time, and been far more effective.

As it currently exists, this is not something that one can readily recommend or one I would have any desire to watch again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] RUN...do not walk away from this movie!!!!! [[Aimed]] at the very young [[kids]], this movie will bore you to tears. [[If]] the Gamera [[trilogy]] of the 90's [[raised]] the bar, this film just [[lowered]] it. It's slow paced and the [[monster]] fighting is good, but seldom seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[cat]] box. [[Just]] a very [[poor]] [[offering]] after a phenomenal 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and nobody was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor writing killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. RUN...do not walk away from this movie!!!!! [[Destined]] at the very young [[juvenile]], this movie will bore you to tears. [[Though]] the Gamera [[triad]] of the 90's [[hiked]] the bar, this film just [[shrinking]] it. It's slow paced and the [[monsters]] fighting is good, but seldom seen. This movie had me dry heaving in the [[gato]] box. [[Virtuous]] a very [[pauper]] [[delivers]] after a phenomenal 90's series.

SPOILERS BEYOND THIS POINT!!!!!!!!!!! Here are the top 10 reasons Gamera fans of the 90's series will HATE this film.

10. This movie is a drama that follows a kid trying to cope with the death of his mother and fears losing baby Gamera to a fight after knowing his father saw the adult Gamera die.

9. You see the adult Gamera for maybe a minute at the beginning of the film. He gets his butt kicked by a few Gyaos and self destructs??? He looks old and lethargic. Plus he looks nothing like any gamera you've ever seen. His suit looked cheap and rushed.

8. The young Gamera you see through the rest of the film looks like a Pokemon. Big-eyed and cute...it will remind you of the baby Godzilla from Godzilla vs MechaGodzilla 2. Gamera is now too cute.

7. This movie has the pace of watching a NASCAR race during a 3 hour rain delay. I watched this movie with 2 other Gamera fans and nobody was happy with how slowly this film moved along. I've seen an SUV full of fat people going up a mountain road move faster.

6. Like Godzilla:Final Wars, this movie had very little kaiju time on screen. Final Wars had much more, actually, and better fights although short.

5. Kids take the title role. The friend of all children theme and poor writing killed the original Gamera series in the 1970's and history repeats itself in the 2000's. The most successful Gamera films abandoned the Sesame Street feel and went to a darker place. Why go back to a failed formula? This was to be a new trilogy and poor ticket sales killed any hope for this story to continue (thank god).

4. Gamera lost his iconic roar. He now sounds like an Elephant with strep throat.

3. This movie may produce a new Olympic event.....Imagine a relay race that involves sending very young children into harm's way. You have to see the ending to understand this point. Where were the parents? Oh yea..right there sending their kids into a kaiju battle zone.

2. The special effects were good, but sub-par for a Gamera movie. Legion and Iris had better effects. The best effect was showing the apple sized baby Gamera fly. Not too impressive.

1. This movie is just not what adult kaiju fans come to expect. The director was involved in Power Rangers and it shows. It comes off like a cross between ET, Always: Sunset on Third Street and TMNT. Kudos if you know all 3 references.

Rental at best or watch once if you buy it to complete the DVD series. --------------------------------------------- Result 2263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Darius]] Goes [[West]] is an [[amazing]] documentary about a [[teenager]] (Weems) with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and his 11 [[friends]] who [[take]] him on a cross-country [[trip]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[wheelchair]].

I recently watched this movie at the Sunscreen Film [[Festival]]. It [[played]] twice over the course of the [[festival]]. This [[movie]] is an amazing [[story]] about the human spirit, and the [[spirit]] of Weem's friends. I do not say this often about [[movies]], but after [[watching]] this movie, I feel moved to do something towards the cause. Every festival this movie has [[taken]] [[part]] in, this movie has won an [[award]] of some [[kind]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Film]] [[Festival]], and it is going to London and [[Athens]], [[Greece]]. I would not be [[surprised]] if this movie went all the [[way]] to the Academy [[Awards]]. It is snowballing out of control. If [[anyone]] has a [[chance]] to [[see]] this [[movie]], [[wherever]] it is [[playing]], go! Take as [[many]] people as possible, and [[go]]! It is heading to [[New]] Orleans for a [[film]] [[festival]], then on to [[Atlanta]] and Palm [[Beach]], FL. [[Darius]] is from Georgia, so I [[expect]] the [[tickets]] for the [[Atlanta]] showing will be [[sold]] out [[quickly]], if they are not already. Please, [[go]] [[see]] this [[movie]]! DGW ([[talk]] about it)

-Kish [[Dario]] Goes [[Western]] is an [[unbelievable]] documentary about a [[teenagers]] (Weems) with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, and his 11 [[mates]] who [[taking]] him on a cross-country [[voyages]] to see if "Pimp My Ride" will pimp out his [[chair]].

I recently watched this movie at the Sunscreen Film [[Celebratory]]. It [[effected]] twice over the course of the [[feast]]. This [[cinematic]] is an amazing [[history]] about the human spirit, and the [[geist]] of Weem's friends. I do not say this often about [[cinematographic]], but after [[staring]] this movie, I feel moved to do something towards the cause. Every festival this movie has [[picked]] [[portion]] in, this movie has won an [[scholarship]] of some [[sorts]]. It is in the Tribeca [[Flick]] [[Feast]], and it is going to London and [[Athena]], [[Greek]]. I would not be [[horrified]] if this movie went all the [[camino]] to the Academy [[Scholarship]]. It is snowballing out of control. If [[someone]] has a [[probability]] to [[consults]] this [[kino]], [[nowhere]] it is [[gaming]], go! Take as [[countless]] people as possible, and [[going]]! It is heading to [[Novel]] Orleans for a [[kino]] [[celebratory]], then on to [[Atalanta]] and Palm [[Beaches]], FL. [[Dario]] is from Georgia, so I [[hopes]] the [[banknotes]] for the [[Atalanta]] showing will be [[sell]] out [[expeditiously]], if they are not already. Please, [[going]] [[seeing]] this [[flick]]! DGW ([[schmooze]] about it)

-Kish --------------------------------------------- Result 2264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] Something [[surprised]] me about this [[movie]] - it was actually [[original]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood [[every]] month.

I saw this movie on [[video]] because I did not even [[know]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The suspense builds throughout and the twist ending is [[excellent]].

Something [[horrified]] me about this [[flick]] - it was actually [[preliminary]]. It was not the same old recycled crap that comes out of Hollywood [[all]] month.

I saw this movie on [[videotaping]] because I did not even [[savoir]] about it before I saw it at my local video store. If you see this movie available - rent it - you will not regret it. The suspense builds throughout and the twist ending is [[glamorous]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your [[heart]] [[broken]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the greatest figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his movies. Here the [[heartbreak]] begins. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak increases because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just occasionally came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I continue to search for the lost footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the beginning of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, coincidentally, played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply incompatible with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a merciless scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often cast as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

To be a Buster Keaton fan is to have your [[crux]] [[broke]] on a regular basis. Most of us first encounter Keaton in one of the brilliant feature films from his great period of independent production: 'The General', 'The Navigator', 'Sherlock Jnr'. We recognise him as the greatest figure in the entire history of film comedy, and we want to see more of his movies. Here the [[grieving]] begins. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton's brother-in-law Joseph Schenck pressured him into signing a contract that put Keaton under the control of MGM. Keaton became just one more actor for hire, performing someone else's scripts. Then his alcoholism got worse. After 'Steamboat Bill Jnr', Keaton never again made a truly first-rate film. A couple of sources describe a would-be masterpiece comedy that Keaton claimed he *almost* got to make at MGM: a parody of 'Grand Hotel'. Biographer Tom Dardis has offered convincing evidence that Keaton made up this story.

The heartbreak increases because, among the many years of Keaton's long steady decline, he just occasionally came up with a good film ... such as his short comedy 'Grand Slam Opera'. I continue to search for the lost footage of Keaton's dramatic scene with Spencer Tracy in 'It's a Mad Mad World': a sequence in which embittered cop Tracy telephones an old retired crook (Keaton) and tries to recruit his assistance in stealing Smiler Grogan's cash. That footage is almost certainly gone forever, but I keep looking.

'Speak Easily', alas, is one of Keaton's films from the beginning of his decline. MGM were trying to build up Jimmy Durante (who, coincidentally, played Smiler Grogan three decades later) as a new comedy star. Unfortunately, MGM tried to build up Durante by teaming him with Keaton, whose style of comedy was simply incompatible with Durante's. (I'm a fan of both.) Throughout his career, Durante was a merciless scene-stealer: commendably, he knew that he was being built up at Keaton's expense, and Keaton was the only co-star whom Durante never attempted to upstage.

Keaton was often cast as the victim of extremely cruel machinations. In 'Speak Easily', he plays a didactic and humourless Midwestern college professor named Post (because he's as wooden as one) who receives a letter informing him that he's inherited $750,000, which he must travel to New York City to claim. Does he make a 'phone call to verify this? Does he even check the postmark? No; he takes his life's savings out of the bank and rushes to New York. As soon as he's gone, Post's manservant confesses that he wrote the (fake) letter to jostle Professor Post out of his rut!

Post, who thinks he's a 3/4-millionaire, crosses paths with Jimmy Dodge (Durante), who's trying to produce a musical revue but hasn't any money. The characters which these two brilliant comedians are playing onscreen simply fail to intermesh. Keaton is playing one of those eggheads (like Mister Logic in 'Viz') who intellectualises everything. Durante plays one of those annoying hepcats who is incapable of making any straightforward statement because the script requires him always to speak in slang. There's a painfully unfunny dialogue scene in which Durante is trying to talk to Keaton about money, but - instead of coming straight out with it - Durante has to use increasingly contrived slang terms like 'kale', 'cartwheels' and so forth ... while Keaton of course has no idea what Durante's on about. I'll give Keaton credit: his own dry and dusty prairie voice, his flat Kansas accent, is absolutely perfect for the character he's playing here.

Sidney Toler, looking much leaner and more handsome here than he would be just a year later, is impressive as the excitable director of the revue bankrolled (on tick) by Professor Post. Henry Armetta, whom I've never found funny, is even less funny than usual here, offering a running gag with a stupid payoff. Thelma Todd impressed me here, in a more villainous version of the role she played in 'Horse Feathers' (a much funnier movie). Edward Brophy, one of my favourite character actors, is wasted.

Part of the problem with 'Speak Easily' is that supporting characters behave in completely inappropriate ways. Keaton's lawyer shows up at Durante's theatre with an urgent message for Keaton ... but he isn't there, so the lawyer proceeds to divulge Keaton's personal business to the first total stranger he meets. (Fire that lawyer, Buster!) In another scene, Professor Post - the guy who's perceived as bankrolling this musical - blunders into the chorus girls' changing room, and all the chorus girls immediately squeal and cover themselves. I know for a fact that *modern* chorus girls would never react this way, and I seriously doubt that chorus girls in 1932 behaved that way either ... certainly not in response to the 'angel' controlling their show's pursestrings.

SPOILERS COMING. About half an hour into the unfunny 'Speak Easily', the great Jimmy Durante seats himself at the piano, grins into the camera, and does that distinctive little shake of his head as he starts to play a tune. This is the moment when I thought that, at long last, this movie was finally going to settle down to its purpose of entertaining us. Alas, no. Most annoying of all is the ending of this film, which uses the single most hackneyed and implausible cliche in all of comedy: the one in which an utterly incompetent dimwit becomes a star comedian through his own ineptitude. (Keaton would be forced to replay this cliche in a 1955 episode of 'Screen Directors Playhouse'; Chaplin had already used it in 'The Circus'.)

I very nearly wept - in anger and sorrow - at the wasted opportunities in 'Speak Easily'. Mostly out of respect for the work that Keaton, Durante, Toler, Brophy and Miss Todd have done elsewhere, I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Judy Davis shows us here why she is one of Australia's most respected and loved actors - her portrayal of a lonely, directionless nomad is first-rate. A teenaged Claudia Karvan also gives us a glimpse of what would make her one of this country's most popular actors in years to come, with future roles in THE BIG STEAL, THE HEARTBREAK KID, DATING THE ENEMY, RISK and the acclaimed TV series THE SECRET LIFE OF US. (Incidentally, Karvan, as a child, was a young girl whose toy Panda was stolen outside a chemist's shop in the 1983 drama GOING DOWN with Tracey Mann.) If this films comes your way, make sure you see it!! Rating: 79/100. See also: HOTEL SORRENTO, RADIANCE, VACANT POSSESSION, LANTANA. --------------------------------------------- Result 2267 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This [[movie]] was a [[real]] [[torture]] fest to sit through. Its first mistake is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[barely]] [[needs]] to [[convince]] the [[audience]] of it. When it does stoop to putting in its argument, it has the participants breathlessly deliver [[barely]] substantiated facts ; all that's missing is someone crying "when is someone going to think of the children!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the info was backed up by any reliable sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. James Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is supposedly life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. This [[kino]] was a [[authentic]] [[torturing]] fest to sit through. Its first mistake is treating nuclear power as so self-evidently a 'bad thing' that it [[hardly]] [[require]] to [[persuading]] the [[spectators]] of it. When it does stoop to putting in its argument, it has the participants breathlessly deliver [[hardly]] substantiated facts ; all that's missing is someone crying "when is someone going to think of the children!". While watching this movie, I kept thinking "where'd you hear that?" or "that can't possibly be true" - yet little of the info was backed up by any reliable sources. And bless 'em, the 'regular folks' in the movie came across more like Luddites than people with any understanding of the pros and cons of nuclear power; to be fair, that might be the fault of the film-makers, but equally fairly, it's a condition shared by the movie's rock stars.

As for the performers........... Now some of these people are highly respected musicians whose music I've enjoyed, and I'm sure a few of them really did believe in this cause. But they all come across as wheezing old hippies desperately searching for something to get worked up over, now that the 60s have passed them by. Particularly embarrassing are Graham Nash and James Taylor. Nash seems to be trying too hard - he looks like he can't possibly believe the things he's being told (not that I blame him), but desperate to feel noticed and included. James Taylor performs what has to be the wimpiest protest "anthem" ever, "Stand and Fight", in the most sickeningly cheerful way you can imagine. In fact, most of the performances are pretty bland when they're not being patronizing. Nobody seems worked up by this event, as if it really doesn't mean much to them at all. It's worth noting that the driving force behind this whole event seems to be John Hall, of the band Orleans, and responsible for some of the wimpiest MOR pop of the 70s. (Remember, if you dare, "Dance With Me" and "Still the One".) It's worth noting because that's symbolic of how the cause here fails to inspire any real passion in the music. The cause is supposedly life-or-death, but everybody sleepwalks through their numbers like they're playing the Catskills. Except maybe Gil-Scott Heron - his protest number "We Almost Lost Detroit" is on topic at least, but delivered with all the smugness of a high-schooler impressed with how 'controversial' he's being.

Only Bruce Springsteen's performance raises a pulse; I've never been a big fan of the Boss, but he absolutely smokes, no question. Part of me thinks he was taped separately, at another event, and edited into this movie to give wake the audience. Compared to the general blandness and air of self-satisfaction here, it's no wonder Bruce was hailed as the savior of rock'n'roll.

But even his performance is hobbled by the lifeless concert shooting. I don't expect a lot of flashy camera movement from a '70s film, but the shots are unnecessarily static, broken up only by split-second cutaways to a back-up singer's tonsils. Now, some of this may be because the performers are lifeless to start with; and *maybe* the film-makers are more skilled at shooting documentaries than concert footage - but all you have to do is watch "Rust Never Sleeps" or "The Last Waltz" to see a movie like this done with more skill. And with more exciting musicians.

So really, there's only two things to watch this movie for: Springsteen's stellar performance, and as a sad snapshot about a counter-culture in decline. --------------------------------------------- Result 2268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[watched]] this [[movie]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[lot]] of the "time [[facts]]" were off. At the beginning of the movie, the grandfather made a comment to this grandson and his friends about how they felt when 9-11 [[hit]]. This [[movie]] was [[supposed]] to be [[taking]] place in 1994. Also, one of the grandsons friends was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been drafted as of yet. The story [[line]] was good but the facts and actuality of the time [[frame]] was so far off [[base]] that it made the [[movie]] [[seem]] cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I rented this movie hoping that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The dog was cute. But the way that this movie was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who fought the war but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. I [[observed]] this [[cinematography]] last night and was a bit disappointed. A [[batches]] of the "time [[truths]]" were off. At the beginning of the movie, the grandfather made a comment to this grandson and his friends about how they felt when 9-11 [[befallen]]. This [[cinematography]] was [[suspected]] to be [[adopting]] place in 1994. Also, one of the grandsons friends was wearing an Eagles Donovan McNabb jersey. He hadn't even been drafted as of yet. The story [[bloodline]] was good but the facts and actuality of the time [[framework]] was so far off [[groundwork]] that it made the [[kino]] [[seems]] cheesy. My boyfriend is an avid reader of WWII books and memorabilia. I rented this movie hoping that it would be good. The acting was so-so. The dog was cute. But the way that this movie was carried out made me glad that I only paid 4 dollars to rent it as opposed to the 50 it would have taken me to watch it in a theater. I hope that who ever reads this understands that I mean no discontent to those who fought the war but the facts and time frame should have been a little more closely monitored. --------------------------------------------- Result 2269 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I watched this film so [[many]] times through my [[child]] hood that [[even]] to this day i can pretty much re-sight all of the [[dialogue]]. And when I watch it now it just makes me [[happy]] and [[surprisingly]] [[still]] laugh. I think it's amazing how they [[managed]] to train animals especially the [[cat]] to the extent that they are able to play the [[main]] role of a [[feature]] [[film]]. However watching it now I can [[also]] unfortunately notice that it isn't the masterpiece i once [[thought]] it was. But i prefer to remember how i felt about it when i was younger watching it on VHS on my fist TV that would cloud the image in yellow. And and bearing in mind it is a children's film, that is why i would still [[definitely]] [[give]] it 10/10. I watched this film so [[numerous]] times through my [[kids]] hood that [[yet]] to this day i can pretty much re-sight all of the [[dialogues]]. And when I watch it now it just makes me [[gratified]] and [[shockingly]] [[yet]] laugh. I think it's amazing how they [[administer]] to train animals especially the [[kitten]] to the extent that they are able to play the [[leading]] role of a [[idiosyncrasies]] [[cinematography]]. However watching it now I can [[similarly]] unfortunately notice that it isn't the masterpiece i once [[brainchild]] it was. But i prefer to remember how i felt about it when i was younger watching it on VHS on my fist TV that would cloud the image in yellow. And and bearing in mind it is a children's film, that is why i would still [[obviously]] [[lend]] it 10/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This movie is hilarious. The problem is that it's not a comedy. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Thomas]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Crazies]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[ratings]]. This movie is hilarious. The problem is that it's not a comedy. One classic scene involves Kurt [[Tommaso]] just happening to find a pommel-horse in the middle of a village square (which he uses to pummel the bad guys.) Another is the trek into the "Village of [[Freaks]]." Too bad this movie wasn't made to be a farce, or it may have gotten better [[assessments]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is basically a spoof a la "Airplane!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all manner of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[attack]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of spies I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of course there's a meddling reporter (Taylor) who pops in at the worst times, dancing and singing Army soldiers, Japanese scientists with dubbed-in voices, some guy dragging around a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the San Diego Chicken before he made it big.

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you could probably make up better yourself after watching these. Some of the dialogue is inutterably bad ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to say in front of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty Love" goes...well, I can't blame the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "Killer" comedy, but it tries.

Rock on, Peace. This movie's heart was in the right place, no matter where its brain was.

"Attack" is basically a spoof a la "Airplane!" (two years before the fact - nice going.) of what happens when vegetables, or in this case fruits, attack.

Through all manner of film magic (stop motion, papier-mache tomatoes on skateboards, reverse filming, people watching off-screen tomatoes, people throwing basketball-sized tomatoes at the on-screen actors), the tomatoes do indeed [[onslaught]] everyone in their leafy grasp.

Then, it's up to Mason Dixon (Miller) and a group of spies I wouldn't wish on any government's side to save the day. Of course there's a meddling reporter (Taylor) who pops in at the worst times, dancing and singing Army soldiers, Japanese scientists with dubbed-in voices, some guy dragging around a parachute and a samurai sword...and oh yeah, the San Diego Chicken before he made it big.

The gags here aren't all that great. In fact, you could probably make up better yourself after watching these. Some of the dialogue is inutterably bad ("Please pass the ketchup" - not something to say in front of tomatoes.) and as far as "Puberty Love" goes...well, I can't blame the tomatoes for shriveling up on hearing it.

What's good about it? Well, I liked the theme song and the beginning credits, and there was a scene with four people on the phone at once that was pretty well executed. ...that's about it.

Three stars. Not a "Killer" comedy, but it tries.

Rock on, Peace. --------------------------------------------- Result 2272 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] EA have shown us that they can make a classic 007 agent and make you feel in the 60's world. The graphics of the game are outstanding and also the voice recording is very professional. I [[got]] this [[game]] April 2007 (two [[years]] after release), and I am [[still]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[shame]] that [[EA]] will no [[longer]] make 007 [[games]].

I [[give]] this game 10/10 for the [[levels]] it [[contains]], [[especially]] the "consulate" [[level]]. I would [[recommend]] this game to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only thing I didn't like in the game is the Russian boat level, it was too much pressure. On the whole I like the game A LOT!! EA have shown us that they can make a classic 007 agent and make you feel in the 60's world. The graphics of the game are outstanding and also the voice recording is very professional. I [[ai]] this [[games]] April 2007 (two [[yrs]] after release), and I am [[yet]] impressed with the gameplay. It's a [[dishonour]] that [[AE]] will no [[most]] make 007 [[game]].

I [[confer]] this game 10/10 for the [[level]] it [[consists]], [[specially]] the "consulate" [[levels]]. I would [[recommendations]] this game to anyone from the age of 13 and over. The only thing I didn't like in the game is the Russian boat level, it was too much pressure. On the whole I like the game A LOT!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I really like this [[movie]] because in Australia, Chinese [[movies]] [[like]] these never [[get]] [[shown]] during prime time. I [[must]] [[say]] this is one of the [[best]] [[serious]] [[movies]] ever, which [[outlines]] the difference between the [[Hong]] [[Kong]] people, and mainland Chinese. It [[really]] [[shows]] that there's discomfort between the two, but can only [[get]] [[better]] as HK are learning Mandarin. It also [[showed]] me how in mainland [[China]] the indie [[rock]] scene exists, and that Chinese people do know how to strum the [[guitar]] and [[get]] the [[house]] funking! Whoever said [[China]] isn't ready for [[rock]] [[music]]? [[Daniel]] Wu is [[absolutely]] [[superb]], with his clean and [[crisp]] [[voice]], [[honest]] acting, and a [[total]] chick magnet. I [[recommend]] this movie to those who don't know much about Asian people to [[cleanse]] themselves from the typical Western stereotypes, and people who just [[love]] Chinese/Asian [[cinema]] like myself. [[Check]] it out! I really like this [[cinema]] because in Australia, Chinese [[theater]] [[iike]] these never [[obtain]] [[showed]] during prime time. I [[ought]] [[says]] this is one of the [[optimum]] [[severe]] [[cinematic]] ever, which [[outlined]] the difference between the [[Kong]] [[Hk]] people, and mainland Chinese. It [[genuinely]] [[denotes]] that there's discomfort between the two, but can only [[obtain]] [[nicer]] as HK are learning Mandarin. It also [[indicated]] me how in mainland [[Wa]] the indie [[boulder]] scene exists, and that Chinese people do know how to strum the [[guitars]] and [[obtains]] the [[homes]] funking! Whoever said [[Hua]] isn't ready for [[boulder]] [[musician]]? [[Danielle]] Wu is [[totally]] [[sumptuous]], with his clean and [[crunchy]] [[vocals]], [[truthful]] acting, and a [[unmitigated]] chick magnet. I [[recommendation]] this movie to those who don't know much about Asian people to [[cleansed]] themselves from the typical Western stereotypes, and people who just [[likes]] Chinese/Asian [[theaters]] like myself. [[Auditing]] it out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] [[enjoyed]] the movie and efficient Confucian crime drama, the old order survives the threat posed by a brash young greedy man, no doubt representing modern society. I thought the final scene was strange and could not understand if we were to believe that big D was being punished for being greedy or it was part of the plan a long. I [[loved]] the scene and for once in a Chinese movie, the violence was not a choreographed martial arts fest. On thing that always amuses me about HK films is that the main influence the British seem to have had is to introduce 'yes sir' and 'sorry' into the local language and its amusing that long after we have gone, they are still there. [[liked]] the movie and efficient Confucian crime drama, the old order survives the threat posed by a brash young greedy man, no doubt representing modern society. I thought the final scene was strange and could not understand if we were to believe that big D was being punished for being greedy or it was part of the plan a long. I [[worshipped]] the scene and for once in a Chinese movie, the violence was not a choreographed martial arts fest. On thing that always amuses me about HK films is that the main influence the British seem to have had is to introduce 'yes sir' and 'sorry' into the local language and its amusing that long after we have gone, they are still there. --------------------------------------------- Result 2275 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Considering the original film version of 'The Haunting" is in my top ten films of all time' I approached this adaption with [[trepidation]]. I was right to be cautious as this film is a poorly written and badly executed [[load]] of old tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the [[original]] was terrifying to me as a child for one [[reason]]! you see nothing. Robert Wise [[used]] innovative camera-work and superb [[lighting]] to [[generate]] [[fear]] and this is why it work's. The shame of the new version is that it relies on clever special effects and pyrotechnics to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there (actors such as Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta Jones) to do something different. This film should only watched as an example of studio butchery! Considering the original film version of 'The Haunting" is in my top ten films of all time' I approached this adaption with [[angst]]. I was right to be cautious as this film is a poorly written and badly executed [[burden]] of old tosh, all those involved should be ashamed. the [[initial]] was terrifying to me as a child for one [[motives]]! you see nothing. Robert Wise [[utilizing]] innovative camera-work and superb [[lit]] to [[produce]] [[panic]] and this is why it work's. The shame of the new version is that it relies on clever special effects and pyrotechnics to get from A to B, sadder still is that the ingredients were there (actors such as Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta Jones) to do something different. This film should only watched as an example of studio butchery! --------------------------------------------- Result 2276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[New]] York I Love You just like its [[predecessor]] (Paris Je T'Aime) is a [[compound]] of various stories that [[reflects]] the [[different]] kinds and [[aspects]] of [[love]] but unlike it the [[rhythm]] is much faster and the stories much shorter. The [[movie]] offers a [[unique]] view of the city of New York with its various and different landscapes. New York, I Love You [[offers]] a [[first]] [[class]] cast, featuring such great [[actors]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, Ian McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn among others and some excellent [[writers]] and directors like Brett Ratner and Anthony Mingella. [[Novel]] York I Love You just like its [[forerunner]] (Paris Je T'Aime) is a [[complicate]] of various stories that [[reflect]] the [[several]] kinds and [[things]] of [[loves]] but unlike it the [[pace]] is much faster and the stories much shorter. The [[flick]] offers a [[unequalled]] view of the city of New York with its various and different landscapes. New York, I Love You [[offered]] a [[fiirst]] [[schoolroom]] cast, featuring such great [[actresses]] like Shia LaBeouf, Natalie Portman, Ian McKellen, Hayden Christensen, Chistina Rcci and Orlando Bloom, Ethan Hawke, James Caan and Robin Wright Penn among others and some excellent [[screenwriters]] and directors like Brett Ratner and Anthony Mingella. --------------------------------------------- Result 2277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

What an absolutely crappy film this is. How or why this movie was made and what the hell Billy Bob Thornton and Charlize Theron were doing signing up for this mediocre waste of time is beyond me. Strong advise for anyone sitting down to catch a flick: DO NOT waste your time on this 'film'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] CCCC is the first good [[film]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first saw the trailer of the film I thought It would be a nice family movie. I was right. Salman Khan has given is strongest performance ever. My family weren't too [[keen]] on him but after [[seeing]] this [[film]] my family are very [[impressed]] with him. Rani and Preity are wonderful. The [[film]] is [[going]] to be a [[huge]] [[hit]] because of the three [[main]] stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya meeting and falling in love. They get married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they [[come]] back Raj and Priya [[find]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[family]] are full of [[joy]] when they [[find]] out [[especially]] Raj's dada (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[family]] are [[playing]] cricket one day and Priya has an [[accident]] which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very [[close]] [[family]] [[friend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[tells]] Raj and Priya that she can no [[longer]] have [[anymore]] [[kids]]. Raj and Priya [[keep]] this quiet from the [[family]]. Raj and Priya [[decide]] to [[go]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[find]] a [[girl]] and Raj and that [[girl]] will have a [[baby]] [[together]] and then hand the [[baby]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[finds]] a [[girl]]. Her [[name]] is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancer]] and a [[prostitute]]. Raj [[tells]] her the situation and bribes her with [[money]] and she agrees. Raj [[changes]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[tells]] Priya that he has [[found]] a [[girl]]. Madhubala and Priya [[meet]] and [[become]] [[friends]]. They [[go]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[finds]] out. Priya spends the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[alone]] and they [[spend]] the [[night]] [[together]]. The [[doctor]] confirms that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[happy]]. Raj [[tells]] his [[family]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[comes]] to [[love]] Raj and she [[wants]] him. What [[happens]] next? Watch CCCC to [[find]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the [[film]] is their [[idea]] of surrogacy. They should have [[done]] it the [[proper]] [[way]] in the [[film]] but it didn't ruin the [[film]]. It was [[still]] [[excellent]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana [[Hai]] Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! CCCC is the first good [[movie]] in Bollywood of 2001. When I first saw the trailer of the film I thought It would be a nice family movie. I was right. Salman Khan has given is strongest performance ever. My family weren't too [[enthusiastic]] on him but after [[witnessing]] this [[kino]] my family are very [[surprising]] with him. Rani and Preity are wonderful. The [[flick]] is [[gonna]] to be a [[gargantuan]] [[hitting]] because of the three [[primary]] stars.

It's about Raj (Salman Khan) and Priya meeting and falling in love. They get married and go to Switzerland for their honeymoon. When they [[coming]] back Raj and Priya [[unearthed]] out that Priya is pregnant. Raj's [[families]] are full of [[glee]] when they [[unearthed]] out [[specifically]] Raj's dada (Amrish Puri). Raj and his [[families]] are [[gaming]] cricket one day and Priya has an [[incident]] which causes Priya to have a miscarriage. Raj has a very [[nearing]] [[families]] [[boyfriend]] who is a doctor, Balraj Chopra (Prem Chopra). He [[says]] Raj and Priya that she can no [[anymore]] have [[longer]] [[children]]. Raj and Priya [[keeping]] this quiet from the [[families]]. Raj and Priya [[deciding]] to [[going]] for surrogacy. Surrogacy to them is that they will [[found]] a [[daughter]] and Raj and that [[daughter]] will have a [[babies]] [[jointly]] and then hand the [[babies]] over to Raj and Priya. Raj [[found]] a [[girlie]]. Her [[designation]] is Madhubala (Preity Zinta). She is a [[dancers]] and a [[whore]]. Raj [[told]] her the situation and bribes her with [[cash]] and she agrees. Raj [[shift]] Madhubala completley. Raj [[says]] Priya that he has [[detected]] a [[woman]]. Madhubala and Priya [[cater]] and [[gotten]] [[buddies]]. They [[going]] to Switzerland to do this so no one [[find]] out. Priya spends the night in a church and Raj and Madhubala are all [[solely]] and they [[expenditure]] the [[overnight]] [[jointly]]. The [[physician]] confirms that Madhubala is pregnant and they are all [[happier]]. Raj [[says]] his [[families]] that Priya is pregnant. They are happy again. Madhubala [[happens]] to [[likes]] Raj and she [[wanted]] him. What [[occurs]] next? Watch CCCC to [[unearth]] out.

The one thing I didn't like about the [[kino]] is their [[thinks]] of surrogacy. They should have [[completed]] it the [[adequate]] [[routing]] in the [[cinema]] but it didn't ruin the [[cinema]]. It was [[again]] [[awesome]].

The songs of the film are great. My favourites are "Chori Chori Chupke Chupke", Dekhne Walon Ne", "Deewana [[Hoi]] Yeh Mann" and "Mehndi". The song "Mehndi" is very colourful. In that song it shows the ghod bharai taking place and it is very colourful. The film deserves 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. [[While]] the [[actors]] are all personable, the story is so trite and goes [[nowhere]]. I think Victor Rasuk has [[great]] charisma, but [[deserves]] a real film from a real storyteller. .... this movie basks too much in its own innocence. It doesn't tell a story; it's more a big time snooze fest. [[Albeit]] the [[protagonists]] are all personable, the story is so trite and goes [[everywhere]]. I think Victor Rasuk has [[wondrous]] charisma, but [[merit]] a real film from a real storyteller. --------------------------------------------- Result 2280 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] The movie is absolutely silly.

But were you expecting a high-brow intellectual film based on a comic called Slam Dunk? Really? Jay Chou's acting isn't exactly the most moving thing I've ever seen, but I [[certainly]] [[enjoyed]] the movie. [[Was]] it somewhere near the level of awesome that someone like Jet Li or Stephen Chow can produce? No, not really. Was it [[thoroughly]] [[entertaining]] if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we got a great laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I especially enjoy the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. The movie is absolutely silly.

But were you expecting a high-brow intellectual film based on a comic called Slam Dunk? Really? Jay Chou's acting isn't exactly the most moving thing I've ever seen, but I [[probably]] [[liked]] the movie. [[Were]] it somewhere near the level of awesome that someone like Jet Li or Stephen Chow can produce? No, not really. Was it [[scrupulously]] [[droll]] if you're just taking it at surface value? Absolutely. It's a movie about some Chinese eye-candy idols and musicians who can play basketball at an unreal level of expertise. There's an evil Triad-style dude and a wacky scheming guy who gets Jay Chou involved in all of this. A love interest. It's formulaic but really, suspend disbelief for a while. Come on. It's called Kung Fu Dunk. What do you really think you signed on for? Do yourself a favor if you watch it - I found myself a copy with some Engrish subtitles that made the movie nigh unintelligible conversation wise, but we got a great laugh out of it. They would appear to be extremely fixated on Jerusalem and the numbers 1, 10.

I laughed, I cried, I hurled. I'd watch it again.

Especially for that fight scene in the bar. Well choreographed and well shot. I especially enjoy the plexiglass lit pool table - I'd LOVE to play on one of those.

Slick enough for me, but I dig on trash cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Let me start out by saying I can [[enjoy]] just about any bad Italian horror movie or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. Seriously. This one was downright [[awful]].

There are way too many elements that Martino [[tries]] to inject and [[none]] of them work (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant Westerners, of course, who set up a resort in the jungle somewhere. I don't even remember where it takes place...how sad is that... Basically, people come to the resort to see this native tribe and its' ceremonies but eventually they upset the 'Alligator God' of the river who then proceeds to go on a rampage, killing said vacationers and some tribesmen as well. Sounds good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is minimal violence until the end, the special effects are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the love story thrown in is laughable.

There is seriously a few scenes where it appears they set up a camera underwater in a pool and threw a toy alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is supposed to be the gator attacking. I'm not kidding. In another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is targeted by the incredible sinking plastic gator, who all of a sudden is five times the size of a van. (A few minutes ago, he was only big enough to eat a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size cargo van...) It is really pathetic. The only other flick I can think of where the effects were so bad I was pulled out of the story was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be terrified.

Normally I'd say anything Sergio Martino was a solid must-see but this one is a must-pass. Waste of time and definitely not worth buying for the $15+ sticker price from No Shame. This one is a SHAME.

2 out of 10, kids. Let me start out by saying I can [[enjoying]] just about any bad Italian horror movie or jungle exploitation flick from the 1970's. Seriously. This one was downright [[scary]].

There are way too many elements that Martino [[strives]] to inject and [[nothingness]] of them work (except for the croc-gone-wild thing) very well at all. There are some ignorant Westerners, of course, who set up a resort in the jungle somewhere. I don't even remember where it takes place...how sad is that... Basically, people come to the resort to see this native tribe and its' ceremonies but eventually they upset the 'Alligator God' of the river who then proceeds to go on a rampage, killing said vacationers and some tribesmen as well. Sounds good, yeah? Well, don't get your hopes up. There is minimal violence until the end, the special effects are so bad it was like a kindergarten class performed them and the love story thrown in is laughable.

There is seriously a few scenes where it appears they set up a camera underwater in a pool and threw a toy alligator, like a dart, into the water and that is supposed to be the gator attacking. I'm not kidding. In another wonderfully crafted special effect, a Matchbox van is targeted by the incredible sinking plastic gator, who all of a sudden is five times the size of a van. (A few minutes ago, he was only big enough to eat a human, but now he dwarfs a full-size cargo van...) It is really pathetic. The only other flick I can think of where the effects were so bad I was pulled out of the story was Bruno Mattei's masterpiece, "Rats," what with the plastic rats on the conveyor belt and all who COULDN'T be terrified.

Normally I'd say anything Sergio Martino was a solid must-see but this one is a must-pass. Waste of time and definitely not worth buying for the $15+ sticker price from No Shame. This one is a SHAME.

2 out of 10, kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 2282 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] It has been almost 5 [[years]] [[since]] the [[release]] of this stylish action flick.I have watched this movie almost 10 [[times]] and it a [[great]] [[effort]] by Gautham.From my [[perspective]],I feel this movie is virtually [[flawless]]. Surya as ACP Anbuchelvan-no doubt..classy.Jyothika played her role as Maya very well.The character suits her very well.The [[character]] that caught movie-goers attention was Pandia.Jeevan played the role of Pandia very well.Brutal and fearsome.Jeevan deservedly received the Best Villain award in the ITFA 2004.The supporting cast of Daniel Balaji,Devadharshini and other performed well.

Racy screenplay,perfectly-timed dialogues and brilliant narration by Gautham.The soundtrack by Harris Jeyaraj are all chart-busters while the BGM suits the movie very well.Cinematography by R.D. Rajasekhar is rich.Peter Hein choreographed the stunts well.Anthony's editing is precise.Above all,Kaakha Kaakha is a perfect cop film filled with right doses of action and romance.

Even some Hollywood film cant compete with Kaakha Kaakha...undoubtedly. It has been almost 5 [[yr]] [[because]] the [[emancipate]] of this stylish action flick.I have watched this movie almost 10 [[moments]] and it a [[whopping]] [[efforts]] by Gautham.From my [[views]],I feel this movie is virtually [[faultless]]. Surya as ACP Anbuchelvan-no doubt..classy.Jyothika played her role as Maya very well.The character suits her very well.The [[trait]] that caught movie-goers attention was Pandia.Jeevan played the role of Pandia very well.Brutal and fearsome.Jeevan deservedly received the Best Villain award in the ITFA 2004.The supporting cast of Daniel Balaji,Devadharshini and other performed well.

Racy screenplay,perfectly-timed dialogues and brilliant narration by Gautham.The soundtrack by Harris Jeyaraj are all chart-busters while the BGM suits the movie very well.Cinematography by R.D. Rajasekhar is rich.Peter Hein choreographed the stunts well.Anthony's editing is precise.Above all,Kaakha Kaakha is a perfect cop film filled with right doses of action and romance.

Even some Hollywood film cant compete with Kaakha Kaakha...undoubtedly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2283 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This movie is one of the most [[awful]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[dialogue]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's ending, but it's not. How [[long]] is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. This movie is one of the most [[scary]] I've ever seen. Not only is the [[conversation]] awful, it never ends. You'll think it's ending, but it's not. How [[longer]] is it, 140, 160 minutes? I don't even know. I do know that I'll never watch it again. It's like someone took a romantic comedy, took out the comedy, then decided to downplay the romance, leaving us with the pile of crap that managed to make its way to the screen. But don't take my word for it, find out for yourself how terrible this film is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] A [[great]] British Indy [[movie]]! [[Fantastic]] chemistry between the 3 [[main]] [[characters]] make for some [[hilarious]] drug-fuelled set [[pieces]] that Cheech and [[Chong]] [[would]] be proud of. [[Great]] to [[see]] Phil Daniels back on the [[big]] screen ([[even]] if he has swapped sides [[since]] Quadrophenia!) and Gary [[Stretch]] is [[surprisingly]] good and a [[treat]] for the ladies! Loved the [[final]] fight scene with it's nod to Zulu and now I know what [[happened]] to [[Arthur]] [[Brown]] after he set himself on [[fire]] on [[Top]] of the Pops!...he's not acting....he really is a bona-fide British [[hippie]]!!! You don't have to be a [[biker]] to [[enjoy]] this and it's straight into my Friday night post-pub repeat viewing [[collection]].

Give this [[film]] a go and you won't be [[disappointed]]. A [[tremendous]] British Indy [[kino]]! [[Exceptional]] chemistry between the 3 [[primary]] [[personage]] make for some [[amusing]] drug-fuelled set [[segments]] that Cheech and [[Zhuang]] [[ought]] be proud of. [[Awesome]] to [[seeing]] Phil Daniels back on the [[large]] screen ([[yet]] if he has swapped sides [[because]] Quadrophenia!) and Gary [[Stretching]] is [[unimaginably]] good and a [[treating]] for the ladies! Loved the [[last]] fight scene with it's nod to Zulu and now I know what [[sweated]] to [[Arturo]] [[Brownish]] after he set himself on [[feu]] on [[Superior]] of the Pops!...he's not acting....he really is a bona-fide British [[freak]]!!! You don't have to be a [[motorcycle]] to [[enjoys]] this and it's straight into my Friday night post-pub repeat viewing [[collections]].

Give this [[cinema]] a go and you won't be [[disenchanted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] its a gem movie if anyone who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant understand what is going on there. a thakur call men for catching a big terrorist who is like god and even police don't know abut him but these ppl do.

biggest [[advantage]] of film is its speed u never [[know]] what is going on and the part is completed. actors are at there [[best]] of [[worst]] acting and [[actress]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which [[seems]] to come in very long time but u [[cant]] understand them so easily try hard for that and last word i haven't seen movie complete due to a brain roast so plz tell me ditz end if it have its a gem movie if anyone who hasn't seen movie sholey he cant understand what is going on there. a thakur call men for catching a big terrorist who is like god and even police don't know abut him but these ppl do.

biggest [[parti]] of film is its speed u never [[savoir]] what is going on and the part is completed. actors are at there [[finest]] of [[meanest]] acting and [[actor]] is here for time-pass of songs. and what u cant forget is the cool dialouge which [[seem]] to come in very long time but u [[becuase]] understand them so easily try hard for that and last word i haven't seen movie complete due to a brain roast so plz tell me ditz end if it have --------------------------------------------- Result 2286 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[strong]] [[tribute]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[strong]] characterization of the [[man]], his genius as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[times]] they blended.

The whole [[story]] of Douglas MacArthur [[would]] be a six hour [[film]] or a TV mini-series. It would cover him from his days on frontier posts with his family to his time at West Point where he still has the highest scholastic average ever achieved by a cadet. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend building bravery on the battlefields of World War I in France. It would also have to tell about him firing on the Bonus Marchers of World War I veterans in 1932, probably putting the final kabosh on any chances President Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. During MacArthur's last years he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City. That must have been a subject they avoided.

This film [[concentrates]] on the years 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The film opens with MacArthur addressing the student body in 1962. As he speaks the words of the famous Duty Honor Country speech, MacArthur's mind goes back to World War II and his desperate struggle against the advancing Japanese on the island of Corregidor and the fields of Bataan on Luzon. The film takes him through his struggle to win back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of command by President Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[would]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of Dan O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the part of the film I enjoyed the best, seeing MacArthur and his relations with both these men.

[[FDR]] by O'Herlihy [[captures]] the aristocratic squire and exceptionally devious man that was our 32nd President. Roosevelt was a man who got his points across with unusual subtlety and cleverness. Sometimes he liked scheming a little too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. Note how he deals with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. Frank McCarthy who produced the Academy Award winning biographical film Patton follows it up with a [[vigorous]] [[commendation]] to another of America's fighting generals, Douglas MacArthur. Gregory Peck gives a [[vigorous]] characterization of the [[males]], his genius as well as his egotism. With MacArthur you never knew quite where one began and the other left off and too many [[moments]] they blended.

The whole [[conte]] of Douglas MacArthur [[ought]] be a six hour [[filmmaking]] or a TV mini-series. It would cover him from his days on frontier posts with his family to his time at West Point where he still has the highest scholastic average ever achieved by a cadet. It would talk about his service in the Phillipines as a young officer, his legend building bravery on the battlefields of World War I in France. It would also have to tell about him firing on the Bonus Marchers of World War I veterans in 1932, probably putting the final kabosh on any chances President Herbert Hoover had of getting re-elected. During MacArthur's last years he and Hoover had penthouse suites at the Waldorf Astoria in New York City. That must have been a subject they avoided.

This film [[focusing]] on the years 1941 to 1952 and it is told in flashback. The film opens with MacArthur addressing the student body in 1962. As he speaks the words of the famous Duty Honor Country speech, MacArthur's mind goes back to World War II and his desperate struggle against the advancing Japanese on the island of Corregidor and the fields of Bataan on Luzon. The film takes him through his struggle to win back the Phillipines, the occupation of Japan and the first 18 months culminating in his relief of command by President Truman.

MacArthur as a film [[should]] not work at all if it wasn't for the portrayals of Dan O'Herlihy and Ed Flanders as Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman respectively. It's the part of the film I enjoyed the best, seeing MacArthur and his relations with both these men.

[[DLN]] by O'Herlihy [[apprehended]] the aristocratic squire and exceptionally devious man that was our 32nd President. Roosevelt was a man who got his points across with unusual subtlety and cleverness. Sometimes he liked scheming a little too much for its own sake, but he was the master politician of the last century. Note how he deals with MacArthur both as a battlefield commander and potential rival at the same time.

Truman by Flanders is as people remember him, a blunt spoken man of the people who disliked MacArthur's haughtiness from the gitgo. Of course it's in the history books how Truman relieved MacArthur in 1951 for insubordination. MacArthur was insubordinate, no doubt about it.

Yet I could write a whole thesis on the Truman-MacArthur relations. Along the way it need not have ever come to a crisis. I've always felt that FDR would have dealt with the whole matter in a far better way had he still been president then.

MacArthur was also grandly eloquent and Gregory Peck captures some of that eloquence in some of the orations that made him as much a legend as victories on the battlefield. Listen to Peck at the Japanese surrender, at MacArthur's farewell to the nation before the joint session of Congress, and of course his speech to the cadets in 1962. Watch the newsreels and see if you don't agree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] (NOTE: I [[thought]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[see]] the [[others]] here agree. I [[guess]] it was [[pretty]] obvious - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had [[written]]:)

The [[owners]] have left on vacation for two [[weeks]] - a trip to California - leaving the [[cat]] (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the house. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does find a bunch of canned tuna. However, to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the little mouse in the house has it...and baits the [[cat]] with it. This is a mean rodent who keeps teasing Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last second. Sylvester tries everything possible to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a frustrating story, and why they make the sadistic [[mouse]] the "good guy" is beyond me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor Tom always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! (NOTE: I [[ideas]] I'd be the only one writing what I did below, but I [[behold]] the [[alia]] here agree. I [[suppose]] it was [[belle]] obvious - this was overdoing the bait-the-cat bit. Anyway, here is what I had [[authored]]:)

The [[holders]] have left on vacation for two [[zhou]] - a trip to California - leaving the [[gato]] (Sylvester) all alone and locked in the house. That means no milk, but the cat, to his relief, does find a bunch of canned tuna. However, to his dismay, he can't find the opener.

It turns out the little mouse in the house has it...and baits the [[ctu]] with it. This is a mean rodent who keeps teasing Sylvester with the opener and then yanking it away at the last second. Sylvester tries everything possible to open the can of tuna but can't do it.

This is a frustrating story, and why they make the sadistic [[mice]] the "good guy" is beyond me. It's like some of the Tom & Jerry cartoons where poor Tom always gets the worst of it even though many times the little mouse starts the conflict! --------------------------------------------- Result 2288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[story]] is [[seen]] before, but that does'n [[matter]] if you can [[figure]] out to [[make]] a [[proper]] storyboard. It is [[clear]] that the [[director]] haven't [[spent]] his [[work]] on the storyboard. [[Alongside]] this, the [[cameraman]] [[spent]] far too [[much]] time leaning [[angles]] that do not match the message of the [[movie]]. The funniest is, however, if you take a [[look]] at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[purpose]] that the director has [[chosen]] to make the film with [[bad]] [[camera]] angles. [[Because]] it [[remind]] us about [[hunting]]. But I have never [[heard]] of [[hunting]] with poor [[camera]] angles ;-) It will have 1 stars because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti West, has not spent more time to review his story. It is as if the movie was more important than the planning. Because you have a [[camera]] does not mean you should make a movie right away... come. Everyone can make a movie, but not all will be just as good. So a word of advice to Ti West are: stop and labeling what you want. Use your time to start planning and not filming until everything has come down on a storyboard. You certainly have the ability and desire - so don't abuse your talent. The [[storytelling]] is [[noticed]] before, but that does'n [[topic]] if you can [[silhouette]] out to [[deliver]] a [[appropriate]] storyboard. It is [[lucid]] that the [[headmaster]] haven't [[spending]] his [[works]] on the storyboard. [[Beside]] this, the [[videotaped]] [[spend]] far too [[very]] time leaning [[nooks]] that do not match the message of the [[kino]]. The funniest is, however, if you take a [[glance]] at the movie's website, you can read that it was on [[intention]] that the director has [[opting]] to make the film with [[negative]] [[cameras]] angles. [[Since]] it [[recalled]] us about [[hounding]]. But I have never [[listened]] of [[chasing]] with poor [[cameras]] angles ;-) It will have 1 stars because the story is OK. It is a pity that Ti West, has not spent more time to review his story. It is as if the movie was more important than the planning. Because you have a [[cameras]] does not mean you should make a movie right away... come. Everyone can make a movie, but not all will be just as good. So a word of advice to Ti West are: stop and labeling what you want. Use your time to start planning and not filming until everything has come down on a storyboard. You certainly have the ability and desire - so don't abuse your talent. --------------------------------------------- Result 2289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well I don't know where to [[begin]]. [[Obviously]] this was a made for [[TV]] [[movie]], so my [[expectations]] were low. I was pleasantly surprised by the [[overall]] direction of the [[second]] hour, but [[anything]] before or after that seemed to be a paint by the [[numbers]] [[sort]] of [[movie]].

And [[talk]] about bad [[chemistry]] between the tow lovebird [[detectives]]. ..

I [[would]] [[go]] more in [[depth]], but this movie doesn't really [[deserve]] it. Grade: D+ (IMDB [[rating]] 3/10) Well I don't know where to [[lancer]]. [[Definitely]] this was a made for [[TVS]] [[cinematographic]], so my [[prognosis]] were low. I was pleasantly surprised by the [[total]] direction of the [[secondly]] hour, but [[nothing]] before or after that seemed to be a paint by the [[figures]] [[genre]] of [[cinematography]].

And [[speaks]] about bad [[chem]] between the tow lovebird [[informers]]. ..

I [[should]] [[going]] more in [[depths]], but this movie doesn't really [[merited]] it. Grade: D+ (IMDB [[evaluation]] 3/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie [[deserved]] a working over on Mystery Science Theater. Even though it has nothing whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an [[unintentional]] laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." Be sure to check out the following: the cheesy medallion (looks like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly done stutter (which does [[draw]] attention away from his even worse acting), the [[incredibly]] [[bad]] process work on all the "monsters," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the little girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he sinks in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious boat (oh, brother!!) which appears to be made of plywood mounted on an old sand dredge and looks like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. prom ("Voyage into the Future with the class of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman Imperial armor but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians invented the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -oh the horror! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers manage to lose the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or whatever - evidently chose to die heroically rather than be in any more scenes. This movie [[deserves]] a working over on Mystery Science Theater. Even though it has nothing whatever to do with King Solomon it's worth a watch because it is an [[unwitting]] laugh-riot. Really! It's worse than "Destroy All Monsters." Be sure to check out the following: the cheesy medallion (looks like the Shriners have been here), the obviously polyester Norfolk jacket on "Allan Quatermain," David MaCallum's badly done stutter (which does [[attract]] attention away from his even worse acting), the [[stunningly]] [[amiss]] process work on all the "monsters," the monsters themselves - the hand puppet which menaces the little girl, the giant snake that menaces Macallum while he sinks in oatmeal, the red-lighted eyes on the motorized crabs, the amazingly hilarious boat (oh, brother!!) which appears to be made of plywood mounted on an old sand dredge and looks like a leftover from a Jr.Sr. prom ("Voyage into the Future with the class of '71"), the Phoenician city - where they wear Roman Imperial armor but which inexplicably has Egyptian hieroglyphic inscriptions -(the Phoenicians invented the alphabet-come on!),and worst of all, Macallum and Ekland (with her fright wig) playing smoochy-face -oh the horror! The best parts are that the intrepid explorers manage to lose the comic Frenchman ,and the African guy -Snuffleupagus or whatever - evidently chose to die heroically rather than be in any more scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 2291 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[hated]] this [[show]] when I was a kid. That was back in the day when kids show characters actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General American [[Dialect]] we're used to. Jack Wild had a British accent and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others mentioned, though, I never quite understood what the deal was with the [[witch]] wanting the flute. That always seemed odd to me, probably because the [[flute]] just annoyed me and I wouldn't have gone to any trouble to take it away!

Just a [[comment]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to early 70s [[McDonalds]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[ripped]] off McDonalds. At the height of McDonalds popularity, the TV [[show]] (or [[rather]], their creators) [[sought]] to [[license]] [[McDonalds]] [[characters]] for their [[show]], but when [[McDonalds]] [[declined]] the TV [[show]] [[changed]] the characters slightly and passed it as their own. They even [[hired]] former employees of McDonalds ad agency and the voice actors to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. Search for Pufnstuf McDonaldland lawsuit and you'll find plenty of articles about it. I [[resent]] this [[demonstrate]] when I was a kid. That was back in the day when kids show characters actually had accents, not just the bland, generic, General American [[Dialects]] we're used to. Jack Wild had a British accent and Pufnstuf's was southern. Like one of the others mentioned, though, I never quite understood what the deal was with the [[sorceress]] wanting the flute. That always seemed odd to me, probably because the [[piper]] just annoyed me and I wouldn't have gone to any trouble to take it away!

Just a [[commentaries]] on the similarity of Pufnstuf to early 70s [[macdonald]] commercials that others have mentioned: Pufnstuf [[torn]] off McDonalds. At the height of McDonalds popularity, the TV [[demonstrate]] (or [[comparatively]], their creators) [[solicited]] to [[permits]] [[macdonald]] [[features]] for their [[exhibitions]], but when [[macdonald]] [[diminished]] the TV [[exhibitions]] [[altered]] the characters slightly and passed it as their own. They even [[contracted]] former employees of McDonalds ad agency and the voice actors to make the TV shows. McDonalds sued and won. Search for Pufnstuf McDonaldland lawsuit and you'll find plenty of articles about it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a writer or an critic...I'M just a student that has seen this movie few minutes ago....AND I want to thank people that worked on creating this movie!It is not the best or the most.... but it touched my heart...why???i would like to understand it myself...it is easy and accessible..it is a movie that makes you feel good after a bad day without any regret about the time wasted on watching it!It is about love and caring, about the life that we have but we miss it sometimes because of material stuff .......Look at all the time that we have but we miss it....why a fu*k do we do that???We need to live like were dying ...care about every second and remember:if we do good things-good things come back to us!HAppiness is real...and it has a special taste in New York...i love this town and the world the we live in!!!!thank you very much for the movie and sorry for my mistakes(English is my second language)... --------------------------------------------- Result 2293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Made]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the original [[work]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[history]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[first]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was [[created]] by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same [[Star]] Wars-type of space universe as Matsumoto's other [[famous]] space [[manga]]: [[CAPTAIN]] HARLOCK. [[In]] fact space [[pirate]] Harlock and other [[characters]] from that manga (including [[Queen]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make [[appearances]] in GE999. GE999 was a success as a manga and was [[soon]] followed by [[also]] [[popular]] anime [[series]] which [[included]] over 100 [[episodes]]. It was [[aired]] in 1978. A [[year]] [[later]] came this anime [[film]], which isn't a sequel to the [[series]], but summaries the [[main]] [[points]] of the story in two [[hours]] long movie.

The [[story]] is set in unidentified [[Star]] Wars-type of future where journeying to [[different]] [[planets]] has [[become]] a possibility. People of the future can have themselves [[mechanical]] bodies in which they can [[live]] hundreds of [[years]], maybe even forever. The [[protagonist]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a [[young]] [[boy]] who witnesses how a [[cruel]] [[Count]] Mecha, whose [[entire]] [[body]] is made of mechanical parts, [[kills]] Tetsurô's [[mother]]. Tetsurô swears [[revenge]] and is convinced that he can only [[achieve]] it by having a mechanical [[body]]. To [[obtain]] it he [[must]] [[travel]] to a far-away [[planet]] with space train [[Galaxy]] [[Express]] 999. [[However]], [[since]] Tetsurô [[comes]] from [[poverty]], he has no money to [[obtain]] the [[expensive]] ticket. By a [[chance]] coincidence he [[meets]] a [[beautiful]] [[young]] [[woman]], Maetel, who [[bears]] a [[resemblance]] to his [[dead]] [[mother]]. Maetel [[offers]] a [[ticket]] for Tetsurô on a [[condition]] that she accompanies him on his [[journey]]. And so the [[journey]] [[begins]]…

I first [[saw]] this [[film]] [[last]] October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I must first [[tell]] about the thing that [[bothered]] me the most in this [[film]]: it [[seems]] very [[rushed]]. [[Then]] again what can you [[expect]] from 2 [[hours]] long [[movie]] that tries to [[tell]] the [[main]] [[points]] of over 100 [[episodes]] long [[series]]? [[Whatever]] the case, the [[situations]] [[change]] with a [[fast]] [[speed]] and Tetsurô meets other important characters in the story [[mostly]] by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an [[entertaining]] adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of [[view]], so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still [[awakes]] talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. Galaxy Express 999 (Ginga tetsudô Three-Nine). [[Introduced]] in 1979. Directed by Rintaro. Based on the original [[cooperate]] by Leiji Matsumoto.

What little I know of the [[story]] of GALAXY EXPRESS 999, it was [[outset]] published as a popular manga in 1970's and was [[generated]] by Leiji Matsumoto. GE999 is set in the same [[Stars]] Wars-type of space universe as Matsumoto's other [[illustrious]] space [[mana]]: [[COMMANDANT]] HARLOCK. [[For]] fact space [[piracy]] Harlock and other [[personages]] from that manga (including [[Quinn]] Emeraldas and Tochirô Oyama) make [[phenomena]] in GE999. GE999 was a success as a manga and was [[rapidly]] followed by [[similarly]] [[trendy]] anime [[serials]] which [[inscribed]] over 100 [[spells]]. It was [[circulated]] in 1978. A [[annum]] [[then]] came this anime [[flick]], which isn't a sequel to the [[serials]], but summaries the [[principal]] [[dots]] of the story in two [[hour]] long movie.

The [[saga]] is set in unidentified [[Superstar]] Wars-type of future where journeying to [[multiple]] [[planetary]] has [[gotten]] a possibility. People of the future can have themselves [[machinery]] bodies in which they can [[inhabit]] hundreds of [[olds]], maybe even forever. The [[actor]], Tetsurô Hoshino, is a [[youths]] [[dude]] who witnesses how a [[savage]] [[Tally]] Mecha, whose [[whole]] [[organs]] is made of mechanical parts, [[killings]] Tetsurô's [[mommy]]. Tetsurô swears [[retaliation]] and is convinced that he can only [[realize]] it by having a mechanical [[organs]]. To [[obtained]] it he [[needs]] [[voyager]] to a far-away [[planets]] with space train [[Galactic]] [[Expressing]] 999. [[Instead]], [[because]] Tetsurô [[arises]] from [[needy]], he has no money to [[obtained]] the [[costly]] ticket. By a [[likelihood]] coincidence he [[conforms]] a [[brilliant]] [[youthful]] [[mujer]], Maetel, who [[carry]] a [[similarity]] to his [[deceased]] [[mummy]]. Maetel [[offering]] a [[tickets]] for Tetsurô on a [[stipulation]] that she accompanies him on his [[itinerary]]. And so the [[voyages]] [[launching]]…

I first [[seen]] this [[filmmaking]] [[final]] October, about six months from now, and again yesterday. I feel that I must first [[say]] about the thing that [[inconvenienced]] me the most in this [[filmmaking]]: it [[looks]] very [[hasty]]. [[Thus]] again what can you [[hopes]] from 2 [[hour]] long [[movies]] that tries to [[told]] the [[principal]] [[dots]] of over 100 [[spells]] long [[serials]]? [[Regardless]] the case, the [[circumstances]] [[shifting]] with a [[faster]] [[quickening]] and Tetsurô meets other important characters in the story [[basically]] by pure chance. I feel makers should have either left something out or include extra 30 minutes.

However, there's no arguing that GE999 has deserved its place as an anime classic. The animation itself, very faithful to the style of Matsumoto's manga, is detailed and beautiful to watch. Even after almost 30 years of its release the animation has not become "out of date" but puts many later anime films in shame. The music through out the film is enjoyable to listen even if somewhat "old" these day (it was the 70's after all). I have not heard any English dub of this film so I can only comment the Japanese audio which is good. Voice actors give life to their characters, most memorable ones being Masako Nozawa (mainly known as the voice of Goku through out the entire Dragon Ball saga) as the excited and young Tetsurô, and Masako Ikeda as the calm and mysterious Maetel. The supporting characters are not left in shadows, but also have a life of their own, most memorable to me being waitress Claire.

The story itself is suitable for both those who are looking for an entertainment for couple of hours, as well as for those who try to find deeper messages. GE999 is an [[amuse]] adventure film but can also be seen as Tetsurô's journey from boyhood to manhood. The whole film is told from his point of [[avis]], so we are forced to feel what he feels. I think many people can relate to Tetsurô, for despite the fantasy elements, he is a very realistic character: young, hot headed, awkward and naive. We follow him as he starts to see differences between humans and machines and come to conclusion whether he wants the mechanical body or not. Maetel on the other hand stays as a mystery in the film and even in the end, when she reveals who and what she really is, it doesn't much answer to anything. Maetel can be seen as a dream of a growing young man, always close but just out of reach.

It's is the strange yet beautiful relationship between Tetsurô and Maetel that still [[wakes]] talking and questions, and fascinates after the decades. People have argued if their relationship is that of a two friends, of mother and son, or of two possible lovers (which wakes a lot of critique since Maetel's age is unknown and Tetsurô hasn't even reached his puberty yet). Without any means to sound deep, I think the best term to describe them is "soul mates". There is no question that the two feel devotion, caring and love for each others, yet it goes beyond that of friendship, family and lovers. I think that if their relationship would be stuffed in any of those categories, it would take something out of the whole film and of the characters. The ending scene, even if you already know what is going to happen, is still very touching and memorable.

All in all, despite the rushing of plot and some corny scenes, GALAXY EXPRESS 999 holds its place as an anime classic amongst the films like Katsuhiro Otomo's AKIRA (1988) and Mamoru Oshii's GHOST IN THE SHELL (1995). The film is directed by Rintaro, who had previous experience of Leiji Matsumoto's works as he had worked in CAPTAIN HARLOCK series. Later Rinatro directed a wonderful looking METROPOLIS (2001) that also questions the difference between humans and machines.

GALAXY EXPRESS 999 (1979) is a classic that should be seen at least once by every anime fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 2294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] My [[mother]] and I were on our [[way]] home from a [[trip]] up to the [[North]] [[East]] ([[mainly]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[little]] [[detour]] a attend a [[film]] [[festival]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[film]] so I [[thought]] this might be a bit educational. The [[first]] [[movie]] we saw was this one, THE ROMEO DIVISION. Now, I don't know about you but I thought this was [[great]]! I'm from Texas and where I [[come]] from we don't [[see]] too [[many]] [[motion]] [[pictures]] so this was a [[pleasant]] surprise. My [[mother]] [[insisted]] that it was too violent, but [[said]] that I didn't know much about what she was [[saying]] but this was a great [[picture]]. I was [[shocked]] by the fight [[sequences]] they were [[great]]. Also, I am a big fan when the good [[guys]] [[win]] so I was [[thrilled]] when Romeo ladies [[killed]] all of the [[bad]] [[guys]]. This was [[true]] [[brilliance]]. I'm not sure when it's [[getting]] [[released]] on [[video]] but if you [[get]] the [[chance]] you should [[check]] it out. I [[think]] you'll be [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. A word to the wise [[though]], it is [[rather]] violent and there [[many]] cuss [[words]] so you may not [[want]] to [[let]] your [[children]] watch. It's more for [[adults]]. My [[mommy]] and I were on our [[manner]] home from a [[travel]] up to the [[Northern]] [[Southeastern]] ([[basically]] Massachusetts) when we decided to take a [[petite]] [[shunt]] a attend a [[movie]] [[feast]] in Boston. Now, I don't know much about [[flick]] so I [[ideas]] this might be a bit educational. The [[fiirst]] [[filmmaking]] we saw was this one, THE ROMEO DIVISION. Now, I don't know about you but I thought this was [[resplendent]]! I'm from Texas and where I [[coming]] from we don't [[seeing]] too [[several]] [[petition]] [[photos]] so this was a [[pleasurable]] surprise. My [[mommy]] [[stressed]] that it was too violent, but [[say]] that I didn't know much about what she was [[arguing]] but this was a great [[image]]. I was [[appalled]] by the fight [[sequence]] they were [[huge]]. Also, I am a big fan when the good [[buddies]] [[gaining]] so I was [[excited]] when Romeo ladies [[assassination]] all of the [[wicked]] [[boy]]. This was [[veritable]] [[luster]]. I'm not sure when it's [[obtaining]] [[emitted]] on [[videos]] but if you [[got]] the [[probability]] you should [[verified]] it out. I [[believe]] you'll be [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]]. A word to the wise [[while]], it is [[fairly]] violent and there [[innumerable]] cuss [[mots]] so you may not [[wants]] to [[leaving]] your [[kids]] watch. It's more for [[grownup]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Harsh, yes, but I call 'em like I see 'em.

I saw this in the late 80's, and it was truly one of the most [[awful]], [[boring]] films I've ever forced myself to watch.

[[Yes]], the [[cinematography]] is lovely. The Czech settings are truly stunning. The political backdrop is enticing, but unlike similar "historically set" stories (e.g. _Dr. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[failed]] to make the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

Sure, Olin and Binoche are beautiful. But this film manages to make even "erotic" scenes plodding and slow. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the book, the story would have made a bit more sense. However, life's too short to expend any more time on this one. Harsh, yes, but I call 'em like I see 'em.

I saw this in the late 80's, and it was truly one of the most [[scary]], [[dreary]] films I've ever forced myself to watch.

[[Yep]], the [[movie]] is lovely. The Czech settings are truly stunning. The political backdrop is enticing, but unlike similar "historically set" stories (e.g. _Dr. Zhivago_ (qv)), this one [[faulted]] to make the politics relevant to the story, or even interesting.

Sure, Olin and Binoche are beautiful. But this film manages to make even "erotic" scenes plodding and slow. I'm all for romance, but this movie was so boring, I started hoping the Russians would shoot them all and put an end to my misery.

I'm sure if I'd read the book, the story would have made a bit more sense. However, life's too short to expend any more time on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2296 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] If Fassbinder has made a worse film, I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent films like "The Bitter Tears Of Petra von Kant". This [[film]] bogs down with so much [[arty]], quasi-symbolic images it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real test of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only moments that display any real human emotion, and prove that at the core of this [[horrible]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. If Fassbinder has made a worse film, I sure don't want to see it! Anyone who complains that his films are too talky and claustrophobic should be forced to view this, to learn to appreciate the more spare style he opted for in excellent films like "The Bitter Tears Of Petra von Kant". This [[kino]] bogs down with so much [[artsy]], quasi-symbolic images it looks like a parody of an "art-film". The scene in the slaughterhouse and the scene where Elvira's prostitute friend channel-surfs for what seems like ten minutes are just two of the most glaring examples of what makes this film a real test of the viewer's endurance. But what really angers me about it are the few scenes which feature just Elvira and her ex-wife and/or her daughter. These are the only moments that display any real human emotion, and prove that at the core of this [[gruesome]] film, there was an excellent film struggling to free itself. What a waste. --------------------------------------------- Result 2297 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Knowing how old a film is, [[ought]] to prepare the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[tolerable]]. [[So]] it was when I watched Revolt of the Zombies. The heavy reliance on [[tedious]] [[dialogue]] and corny movements should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or absence) of [[special]] [[effects]] in those days. A great [[deal]] is asked from the imagination of the onlooker - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't easy to follow: Some zombiefied southeast Asian soldiers in WWI performed very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if true, the explanation should stay out of the wrong hands, so, off goes a group to archaeologically investigate. The key to long-distance hypnosis is learned by a member of the expedition, who uses it to, among other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on everybody, which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with precautionary forethought. Recommended for only the extremely patient. Knowing how old a film is, [[must]] to prepare the viewer for a few things, and, with those things in mind, perhaps the movie'll be more [[bearable]]. [[Therefore]] it was when I watched Revolt of the Zombies. The heavy reliance on [[monotonous]] [[conversation]] and corny movements should be expected, as should the primitiveness (or absence) of [[particular]] [[consequences]] in those days. A great [[treat]] is asked from the imagination of the onlooker - maybe too much, in this case. And the plot isn't easy to follow: Some zombiefied southeast Asian soldiers in WWI performed very admirably. Although skeptical as to why, if true, the explanation should stay out of the wrong hands, so, off goes a group to archaeologically investigate. The key to long-distance hypnosis is learned by a member of the expedition, who uses it to, among other purposes, temporarily dispense with the beau of the gal for whom he has the hots. To prove his love for her, he gives up his hold on everybody, which he shouldn't have done 'cause, once they're all unzombiefied, many want to kill him so that he'll never control them again. Below average, even with precautionary forethought. Recommended for only the extremely patient. --------------------------------------------- Result 2298 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] [[Absolutely]] [[wonderful]] drama and Ros is top notch...I [[highly]] recommend this movie. Her performance, in my [[opinion]], was [[Academy]] Award material! The only real [[sad]] fact here is that Universal hasn't seen to it that this [[movie]] was ever available on any video format, whether it be tape or DVD. They are [[ignoring]] a VERY good movie. But Universal has little regard for its library on DVD, which is [[sad]]. If you [[get]] the [[chance]] to [[see]] this [[somewhere]] (not [[sure]] why it is [[rarely]] even [[run]] on [[cable]]), see it! I won't [[go]] into the [[story]] because I [[think]] most people [[would]] [[rather]] have an [[opinion]] on the [[film]], and too many "[[reviewers]]" [[spend]] [[hours]] [[writing]] about the story, which is [[available]] [[anywhere]].

a 10! [[Fully]] [[glamorous]] drama and Ros is top notch...I [[inordinately]] recommend this movie. Her performance, in my [[view]], was [[Oscars]] Award material! The only real [[unfortunate]] fact here is that Universal hasn't seen to it that this [[filmmaking]] was ever available on any video format, whether it be tape or DVD. They are [[ignore]] a VERY good movie. But Universal has little regard for its library on DVD, which is [[hapless]]. If you [[got]] the [[probability]] to [[behold]] this [[nowhere]] (not [[convinced]] why it is [[seldom]] even [[execute]] on [[cables]]), see it! I won't [[going]] into the [[storytelling]] because I [[ideas]] most people [[ought]] [[quite]] have an [[vista]] on the [[flick]], and too many "[[examiners]]" [[expended]] [[hour]] [[handwriting]] about the story, which is [[accessible]] [[nowhere]].

a 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2299 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This is a very [[bad]] western mainly because it is historically [[inaccurate]]. It [[looks]] as if it were shot on a back [[lot]] in California [[instead]] of where Jack Slade lived and [[died]], [[Idaho]], Colorado [[Territories]], and [[Montana]]. It fictionalizes everything that is [[known]] about this [[mysterious]] 'bad man,' 'good man.' The [[script]] is horrible; there is very [[little]] [[direction]], and [[lousy]] acting. Dorothy Malone is [[completely]] wasted as his [[wife]]. [[Mark]] Steven never [[seems]] to know how to [[portray]] this mysterious Jack Slade. [[In]] [[real]] life, [[Jack]] Slade was a very [[good]] [[stage]] [[line]] superintendent. He was [[feared]] by his local townsmen for his [[hard]] [[drinking]]. When drunk he [[would]] [[start]] [[fights]] and cause other [[problems]] in Virginia [[City]], Montana. To insure that he [[could]] never [[terrorize]] them again, vigilantes lynched [[Jack]] Slade after he [[ignored]] their [[warning]] to [[leave]] [[town]] [[immediately]]. This is a [[horrible]] [[movie]]. I can not [[recommend]] [[anyone]] to watch this [[movie]] other than to [[see]] how Hollywood butches [[history]] at will, [[even]] to this day. This is a very [[wicked]] western mainly because it is historically [[wrong]]. It [[seem]] as if it were shot on a back [[lots]] in California [[however]] of where Jack Slade lived and [[perished]], [[Oregon]], Colorado [[Lands]], and [[Wyoming]]. It fictionalizes everything that is [[renowned]] about this [[cryptic]] 'bad man,' 'good man.' The [[hyphen]] is horrible; there is very [[tiny]] [[directorate]], and [[miserable]] acting. Dorothy Malone is [[wholly]] wasted as his [[femme]]. [[Marks]] Steven never [[appears]] to know how to [[describe]] this mysterious Jack Slade. [[Among]] [[genuine]] life, [[Jacque]] Slade was a very [[alright]] [[phase]] [[bloodline]] superintendent. He was [[fears]] by his local townsmen for his [[tough]] [[drinkable]]. When drunk he [[could]] [[embark]] [[wrestling]] and cause other [[trouble]] in Virginia [[Town]], Montana. To insure that he [[did]] never [[frighten]] them again, vigilantes lynched [[Jacques]] Slade after he [[overlooked]] their [[ultimatum]] to [[leaving]] [[municipality]] [[swiftly]]. This is a [[frightful]] [[kino]]. I can not [[recommended]] [[whoever]] to watch this [[movies]] other than to [[behold]] how Hollywood butches [[tale]] at will, [[yet]] to this day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The first von Trier movie i've ever [[seen]] was [[breaking]] the waves. Sure a [[nice]] [[movie]] but it [[definitely]] stands in the shadow of europa. [[Europa]] tells a story of a [[young]] German-American who wants to experience [[Germany]] just after the [[second]] [[world]] [[war]]. He [[takes]] a [[job]] that his uncle has arranged for him as a purser on a luxues [[train]]. Because of his [[job]], he travels all through an [[almost]] [[totally]] [[destroyed]] [[germany]], meeting with the [[killing]] of [[traitors]], and hunt for former nazi [[party]] [[members]]. The [[society]] is suffering from [[corruption]]. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the job he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the main [[character]] get [[involved]] in [[bombing]] and [[terrorism]] by a group called 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[help]] them placing [[bombs]] on trains. The [[atmosphere]] is [[astounding]]. The viewer is taken from scene to scene by a man [[attempting]] to put the viewer under hypnosis and then [[counting]] to wake you up in a new scene. [[Just]] when you think you've seen a lot!!!!!!! europe!! The first von Trier movie i've ever [[noticed]] was [[violating]] the waves. Sure a [[pleasurable]] [[filmmaking]] but it [[admittedly]] stands in the shadow of europa. [[Europe]] tells a story of a [[youths]] German-American who wants to experience [[Germans]] just after the [[secondly]] [[globe]] [[warfare]]. He [[pick]] a [[workplace]] that his uncle has arranged for him as a purser on a luxues [[forming]]. Because of his [[employment]], he travels all through an [[approximately]] [[abundantly]] [[demolished]] [[germans]], meeting with the [[murdering]] of [[renegades]], and hunt for former nazi [[part]] [[lawmakers]]. The [[societal]] is suffering from [[bribery]]. His uncle has narrowed his conciousness by focussing on the job he has also as a purser on the train. By coincidence the main [[characters]] get [[implicated]] in [[bombings]] and [[terrorists]] by a group called 'werewolves' they put pressure on him to [[succour]] them placing [[bombardment]] on trains. The [[ambiance]] is [[staggering]]. The viewer is taken from scene to scene by a man [[striving]] to put the viewer under hypnosis and then [[counts]] to wake you up in a new scene. [[Mere]] when you think you've seen a lot!!!!!!! europe!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (68%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Personally I think this show looks pretty cheaply made. Some of the [[actors]] are terrible. They over do it & seem fake. I can always tell how it's going to end within the first 10 minutes or less of watching because they make it so transparently clear. It's not very well written either. I love to watch it to [[laugh]] at it. You know the saying "It's so bad that it's good?" Well, that saying applies to this show. I also like to watch just to see if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to end. So far I've been right every time. It's like a little game that I play. It's nice when you are bored & you feel like laughing at something. Personally I think this show looks pretty cheaply made. Some of the [[actresses]] are terrible. They over do it & seem fake. I can always tell how it's going to end within the first 10 minutes or less of watching because they make it so transparently clear. It's not very well written either. I love to watch it to [[laughing]] at it. You know the saying "It's so bad that it's good?" Well, that saying applies to this show. I also like to watch just to see if I'm right when I guess how it's all going to end. So far I've been right every time. It's like a little game that I play. It's nice when you are bored & you feel like laughing at something. --------------------------------------------- Result 2302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A terrible [[film]] which is [[supposed]] to be an [[independent]] one. It needed some dependence on something.

This totally [[miserable]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the wonderful film "Crash?" If so, this [[film]] crashed entirely.

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running around and throwing rocks into buses and cars which [[obviously]] cause mayhem.

The [[film]] is just too choppy to [[work]]. One woman loses her husband after 14 years to another while her younger sister is ripped off by a suitor. This causes the former sister to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older sister also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who purchase masks to rob a bank. Obviously, the robbery goes awry but there doesn't seem to be any punishment for the crooks. Perhaps, the punishment should have been on the writers for failure to create a cohesive film. A terrible [[movie]] which is [[suspected]] to be an [[independant]] one. It needed some dependence on something.

This totally [[sorrowful]] film deals with the interactions among Irish people. Were they trying to imitate the wonderful film "Crash?" If so, this [[kino]] crashed entirely.

There is just too much going on here culminated by a little brat running around and throwing rocks into buses and cars which [[apparently]] cause mayhem.

The [[kino]] is just too choppy to [[cooperating]]. One woman loses her husband after 14 years to another while her younger sister is ripped off by a suitor. This causes the former sister to become a bitter vetch and walk around in clothes not worth believing. The older sister also becomes embittered but soon finds romance.

Then, we have 3 losers who purchase masks to rob a bank. Obviously, the robbery goes awry but there doesn't seem to be any punishment for the crooks. Perhaps, the punishment should have been on the writers for failure to create a cohesive film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2303 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] When I was kid back in the 1970s a local theatre had Children's Matinees every Saturday and Sunday afternoon (anybody remember those?). They showed this thing one year around Christmas time. Me and some friends went to see it. I [[expected]] a cool Santa Claus movie. What I got was a [[terribly]] dubbed (you can tell) and truly creepy movie.

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't ask me what those two are doing in the same movie) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil costume complete with horns!). The images had me cringing in my seat. I always found Santa spooky to begin with so that didn't help. The guy in the Satan suit didn't help. But what REALLY horrified me were the wooden rein deers that pulled Santa's sled. When he wound them up and the creepy sound they made and the movements--I remember having nightmares about those things! All these years later I still remember walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the pants off any little kid who sees it. Avoid this one--unless you really want to punish your kids. This gets a 1. When I was kid back in the 1970s a local theatre had Children's Matinees every Saturday and Sunday afternoon (anybody remember those?). They showed this thing one year around Christmas time. Me and some friends went to see it. I [[projected]] a cool Santa Claus movie. What I got was a [[stunningly]] dubbed (you can tell) and truly creepy movie.

Something about Santa Claus and Merlin the Magician (don't ask me what those two are doing in the same movie) fighting Satan (some joker in a silly devil costume complete with horns!). The images had me cringing in my seat. I always found Santa spooky to begin with so that didn't help. The guy in the Satan suit didn't help. But what REALLY horrified me were the wooden rein deers that pulled Santa's sled. When he wound them up and the creepy sound they made and the movements--I remember having nightmares about those things! All these years later I still remember walking out of that theatre more than a little disturbed by what I saw. My friends were sort of frightened by it too. I just saw an ad for it on TV and ALL those nightmares came roaring back. This is a creepy, disturbing little Christmas film that will probably scare the pants off any little kid who sees it. Avoid this one--unless you really want to punish your kids. This gets a 1. --------------------------------------------- Result 2304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A slasher [[flick]], made in the early 80's, has a curse on it which has anyone who tries to finish it turning up dead. Years later, a group of film students attempted to complete the movie - also resurrecting the films deadly curse. Great idea for a film, but sadly 'Cut' is just another wasted opportunity.

Unfortunately [[Australia]] hasn't had the world's best track [[record]] when it [[comes]] to [[horror]]. 'Razorback' (1984) was an out and out dud as was 'Holwing III' (1987), which was half an American [[film]] anyway. As for our foray into comedy-horror, '[[Body]] Melt' (1993) is best left forgotten. The problem with 'Cut' is that the [[makers]] [[trying]] to create a [[clever]] [[horror]] [[satire]] a la 'Scream' (1996) but have no insight into the genre or what makes it work. And [[although]] this sounds weird me saying this about a slasher [[film]] but what 'Cut' really [[lacks]] is any "heart". Sure it follows the basic "rules" [[established]] by 'Scream', but it doesn't [[want]] to play with the [[formula]], instead it goes for a cardboard copy of the [[earlier]].

The killer, Scarman, is probably one of the most [[boring]] and uncharismatic villains in horror movie history. His endless barrage awkwardly, lame one-liners would make the [[dialogue]] of a porno seem like Shakespeare. The [[cast]] never seem like their fully involved and look like their just waiting for a shoot to be over so they can collect their pay checks. And the feel of the [[film]] is like it's deliberately [[trying]] not to be creepy; [[looking]] more like an episode of 'Neighbors' or 'Heartbreak High'. By the way, those attempts at MTV style, hyper-cinema during the "[[research]]" sequence just look lame, dated and out of place.

If [[Australia]] ever gets a chance to do horror again (Which I hope we still do) [[maybe]] we should take a leaf from the 'Mad Max' (1979) book. Instead of trying to copy the U.S. we should be [[trying]] our own take on the genre. A slasher [[gesture]], made in the early 80's, has a curse on it which has anyone who tries to finish it turning up dead. Years later, a group of film students attempted to complete the movie - also resurrecting the films deadly curse. Great idea for a film, but sadly 'Cut' is just another wasted opportunity.

Unfortunately [[Australians]] hasn't had the world's best track [[registering]] when it [[arrives]] to [[terror]]. 'Razorback' (1984) was an out and out dud as was 'Holwing III' (1987), which was half an American [[filmmaking]] anyway. As for our foray into comedy-horror, '[[Agencies]] Melt' (1993) is best left forgotten. The problem with 'Cut' is that the [[maker]] [[try]] to create a [[adept]] [[terror]] [[irony]] a la 'Scream' (1996) but have no insight into the genre or what makes it work. And [[despite]] this sounds weird me saying this about a slasher [[cinema]] but what 'Cut' really [[dearth]] is any "heart". Sure it follows the basic "rules" [[created]] by 'Scream', but it doesn't [[wanted]] to play with the [[formulas]], instead it goes for a cardboard copy of the [[ago]].

The killer, Scarman, is probably one of the most [[tiresome]] and uncharismatic villains in horror movie history. His endless barrage awkwardly, lame one-liners would make the [[dialog]] of a porno seem like Shakespeare. The [[casting]] never seem like their fully involved and look like their just waiting for a shoot to be over so they can collect their pay checks. And the feel of the [[kino]] is like it's deliberately [[try]] not to be creepy; [[searching]] more like an episode of 'Neighbors' or 'Heartbreak High'. By the way, those attempts at MTV style, hyper-cinema during the "[[researches]]" sequence just look lame, dated and out of place.

If [[Aussie]] ever gets a chance to do horror again (Which I hope we still do) [[conceivably]] we should take a leaf from the 'Mad Max' (1979) book. Instead of trying to copy the U.S. we should be [[attempts]] our own take on the genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 2305 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Really [[enjoyed]] this little [[movie]]. It's a [[moving]] film about [[struggle]], [[sacrifice]] and [[especially]] the [[bonds]] of [[friendship]] between [[different]] [[peoples]] (the child [[actor]] who plays [[Miki]] is [[especially]] [[good]]). There's so [[many]] [[large]] scale impersonal [[films]] set [[around]] WW2, that this convincingly told [[little]] [[story]] is a [[real]] [[break]] from the [[norm]], and an [[original]] one at that. I'll [[also]] add that this [[film]] is far from [[boring]], very far!! Of course the [[Horses]] are [[wonderful]] and the [[scenery]] [[breathtaking]]. To [[anyone]] who really [[treats]] their animal as part of the [[family]] (I do), you'll [[find]] this [[film]] [[especially]] rewarding. [[Recommended]] to movie [[fans]] who [[look]] for something a [[little]] [[different]]. Really [[appreciated]] this little [[cinematography]]. It's a [[relocating]] film about [[fight]], [[slaughter]] and [[specifically]] the [[bond]] of [[goodwill]] between [[various]] [[populations]] (the child [[actress]] who plays [[Micky]] is [[mostly]] [[alright]]). There's so [[multiple]] [[sizable]] scale impersonal [[kino]] set [[throughout]] WW2, that this convincingly told [[scant]] [[stories]] is a [[veritable]] [[rupture]] from the [[norma]], and an [[upfront]] one at that. I'll [[similarly]] add that this [[flick]] is far from [[bored]], very far!! Of course the [[Horse]] are [[noteworthy]] and the [[landscaping]] [[spectacular]]. To [[someone]] who really [[discusses]] their animal as part of the [[families]] (I do), you'll [[unearth]] this [[kino]] [[namely]] rewarding. [[Suggested]] to movie [[stalkers]] who [[peek]] for something a [[tiny]] [[assorted]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] A very [[ordinary]] made-for-tv product, "Tyson" [[attempts]] to be a serious biopic while stretching the moments of angst for effect, fast forwarding through the esoterics of the corrupt sport of boxing, and muddling the sensationalistic stuff which is the only thing which makes Tyson even remotely interesting. A [[lukewarm]] watch at [[best]] which more likely to appeal to the general public than to boxing fans. A very [[everyday]] made-for-tv product, "Tyson" [[strives]] to be a serious biopic while stretching the moments of angst for effect, fast forwarding through the esoterics of the corrupt sport of boxing, and muddling the sensationalistic stuff which is the only thing which makes Tyson even remotely interesting. A [[tepid]] watch at [[optimum]] which more likely to appeal to the general public than to boxing fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2307 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Kenny Doughty as Jed Willis is [[sexier]] in this role than any male [[porn]] star, even though he keeps his [[pants]] on.

The [[movie]] tore at my [[heart]] reminding me of the intensity of the big explosive love of my life. I don't think I can think of another movie, except perhaps Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet that [[captures]] that giddy [[joy]] that well.

The other draw of the movie is the very English eccentric characters enjoying the scandal vicariously. In that sense it is much the same appeal as Midsomer Murder or a Miss Marple mystery, without the mayhem.

This is a great antidote to the mock horror currently popular in the USA an any relationships between people of different ages. Kenny Doughty as Jed Willis is [[scorching]] in this role than any male [[interracial]] star, even though he keeps his [[slacks]] on.

The [[kino]] tore at my [[nub]] reminding me of the intensity of the big explosive love of my life. I don't think I can think of another movie, except perhaps Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet that [[apprehended]] that giddy [[glee]] that well.

The other draw of the movie is the very English eccentric characters enjoying the scandal vicariously. In that sense it is much the same appeal as Midsomer Murder or a Miss Marple mystery, without the mayhem.

This is a great antidote to the mock horror currently popular in the USA an any relationships between people of different ages. --------------------------------------------- Result 2308 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[masterpiece]].

Thus it is, [[possibly]], not for everyone.

The camera work, acting, directing and everything else is unique, original, [[superb]] in every [[way]] - and very [[different]] from the trash we are [[sadly]] used to getting.

Summer Phoenix [[creates]] a deep, believable and [[intriguing]] Esther [[Kahn]]. As everything else in this film, her acting is [[unique]] - it is completely her own - neither "British" nor "American" nor anything else I have ever seen. There is something mesmerizing about it.

The lengthy, unbroken, natural shots are [[wonderful]], reminding us that we have become too accustomed to a few restricted ways of shooting and editing. A [[centerpiece]].

Thus it is, [[conceivably]], not for everyone.

The camera work, acting, directing and everything else is unique, original, [[extraordinaire]] in every [[camino]] - and very [[divergent]] from the trash we are [[regrettably]] used to getting.

Summer Phoenix [[begets]] a deep, believable and [[mesmerizing]] Esther [[Khan]]. As everything else in this film, her acting is [[sole]] - it is completely her own - neither "British" nor "American" nor anything else I have ever seen. There is something mesmerizing about it.

The lengthy, unbroken, natural shots are [[glamorous]], reminding us that we have become too accustomed to a few restricted ways of shooting and editing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2309 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] a [[time]] of magic, [[barbarians]] and [[demons]] abound a diabolical tyrant named Nekhron and his [[mother]] Queen Juliane who [[lives]] in the [[realm]] of ice and wants to [[conquer]] the [[region]] of fire ruled by the King Jerol but when his [[beautiful]] [[daughter]] Princess Teegra has been [[kidnapped]] by Nekhron's [[goons]], a warrior named Larn [[must]] [[protect]] her and must [[defeat]] Nekhron from taking over the world and the kingdom with the [[help]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

[[A]] nicely done and [[excellent]] [[underrated]] animated fantasy epic that combines live actors with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's Ralph Bakshi's second best movie only with "American Pop" being number one and "Heavy Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's certainly better than his "Cool World" or "Lord of the Rings", the artwork is designed by famed artist Frank Farzetta and the animation has good coloring and there's also a hottie for the guys.

I highly recommend this movie to fantasy and animation lovers everywhere especially the new 2-Disc Limited Edition DVD from Blue Underground.

Also recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy Metal", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "Fantastic Planet", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the Wind", " Conan The Destroyer", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "Lord of the Rings ( 1978)", " The Sword in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " King Arthur", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American Pop", " Jason and The Argonauts", " Clash of the Titans", " The Last Unicorn", " The Secret of NIMH", "The Flight of Dragons", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire". [[Among]] a [[moment]] of magic, [[heathens]] and [[warlocks]] abound a diabolical tyrant named Nekhron and his [[mommy]] Queen Juliane who [[vie]] in the [[sphere]] of ice and wants to [[defeat]] the [[zoning]] of fire ruled by the King Jerol but when his [[awesome]] [[daughters]] Princess Teegra has been [[abduction]] by Nekhron's [[morons]], a warrior named Larn [[owe]] [[protective]] her and must [[conquer]] Nekhron from taking over the world and the kingdom with the [[supporting]] of an avenger named Darkwolf.

[[una]] nicely done and [[sumptuous]] [[underestimated]] animated fantasy epic that combines live actors with animation traced over them ( rotoscoping), it's Ralph Bakshi's second best movie only with "American Pop" being number one and "Heavy Traffic" being third and "Wizards" being fourth. It's certainly better than his "Cool World" or "Lord of the Rings", the artwork is designed by famed artist Frank Farzetta and the animation has good coloring and there's also a hottie for the guys.

I highly recommend this movie to fantasy and animation lovers everywhere especially the new 2-Disc Limited Edition DVD from Blue Underground.

Also recommended: "The Black Cauldron", "The Dark Crystal", "Conan The Barbarian", "The Wizard of Oz", " Rock & Rule", "Wizards", "Heavy Metal", "Starchaser: Legend of Orin", "Fantastic Planet", " Princess Mononoke", " Nausicca: Valley of the Wind", " Conan The Destroyer", " Willow", " The Princess Bride", "Lord of the Rings ( 1978)", " The Sword in The Stone", " Excalibur", " Army of Darkness", " Krull", "Dragonheart", " King Arthur", " The Hobbit", " Return of the King ( 1980)", "Conquest", " American Pop", " Jason and The Argonauts", " Clash of the Titans", " The Last Unicorn", " The Secret of NIMH", "The Flight of Dragons", " Hercules (Disney)", " Legend", " The Chronicles of Narnia", " Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire". --------------------------------------------- Result 2310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]]

One of the best films I've ever seen. Robert Duvall's performance was excellent and outstanding. He did a wonderful job of making a character really come to life. His character was so convincing, it made me almost think I were in the theater watching it live, I give it 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 2311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm easily entertained. I [[enjoyed]] "Hot Shots" and "The Naked Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even managed to enjoy most Pauly Shore [[movies]]. There is only one [[movie]] that I've seen that I can honestly say was [[bad]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I do remember sitting in the theater thinking, "This is a [[dumb]] [[movie]]. Why did I [[see]] this?" It's honestly the only [[movie]] that I cannot [[recommend]]. I'm easily entertained. I [[adored]] "Hot Shots" and "The Naked Gun" and their many sequels, even when most people found them unbearable. I've even managed to enjoy most Pauly Shore [[kino]]. There is only one [[movies]] that I've seen that I can honestly say was [[mala]]...and this was it. It's been a while since I've seen it, but I do remember sitting in the theater thinking, "This is a [[silly]] [[cinematography]]. Why did I [[behold]] this?" It's honestly the only [[cinematography]] that I cannot [[recommended]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I screamed my head off because seeing this movie was my first movie going [[experience]] ever at some 13 months [[old]]. I remember it being incredibly bloody and it made me [[angry]]. I watched it again on tv a few years [[ago]]. [[Big]] [[mistake]] -- the acting is wooden, the plot non-existent and the movie lacks merit unless 23 year-old T & A is what gets you going... 0/**** I screamed my head off because seeing this movie was my first movie going [[experiences]] ever at some 13 months [[longtime]]. I remember it being incredibly bloody and it made me [[indignant]]. I watched it again on tv a few years [[beforehand]]. [[Grands]] [[mistaken]] -- the acting is wooden, the plot non-existent and the movie lacks merit unless 23 year-old T & A is what gets you going... 0/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 2313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Recap]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is discovered in the ice of Antarctica. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. Julian Rome, a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the researchers is a old girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[female]] researchers practically throw themselves at him. And the [[block]] of ice with the thing inside is melting [[unnaturally]] [[quickly]]. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. Unfortunately the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a little entertaining but too much energy (from me) must be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the movie is not too good.

3/10 [[Synthesis]]: Something mysteriously dense that transmits radio signals is discovered in the ice of Antarctica. The mysterious block is dug out and brought to a research station on Antarctica. Julian Rome, a former SETI-worker, is brought in to decipher the message. Problem is that one of the researchers is a old girlfriend of his, and the situation quickly turns awkward, especially since the other [[femmes]] researchers practically throw themselves at him. And the [[bloc]] of ice with the thing inside is melting [[unusually]] [[early]]. Soon the object is in the open. The mystery continues though as the object generates a huge amount of electricity. It is decided to open the object, but just before that is done, Julian decodes the signal. "Do not open". But too late, and the object explodes as it is finally breached, and two things unleashed on earth. The first is an alien, that had been dormant in the object, and the other is a virus that instantly kills the research staff. And Washington, that is suspiciously updated on this historic event, decides that those things can not be unleashed upon the earth. So a Russian nuclear submarine, carrying nuclear weapons is sent to Antarctica.

Comments: The movie holds a few surprises. One is Carl Lewis who surprisingly puts in a good acting performance, and the other is that the special effects that are beautiful, well worked through and a lot better than expected. Unfortunately the story holds a lot of surprises of its own, and this time not in a good way. Actually it is so full of plot holes that sometimes the movies seem to consist of almost randomly connected scenes. It is never really explained why Washington know so much, why Washington is able to command Russian submarines, why the object is in the Antarctic and has woken up now. It is really puzzling that the alien pod is transmitting in understandable English. Some might want to explain this with that the alien had been to Earth before and knew the language (and obviously chose English, why?). But then it is very confusing why the nice aliens that apparently want to save the Earth from the virus, send their "Do not open" message encoded! And finally the end is as open as an end can be.

The movie is a little entertaining but too much energy (from me) must be diverted to fill in the voids in the plot. Therefore the total impression of the movie is not too good.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2314 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Most [[college]] students find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the communities in which they [[study]] and live. Their conversations are held with their fellow students and the college faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[documentary]] is a prime [[example]] of a [[disillusioned]] college student who judges the entire community based on limited contact with a small number of its members.

The [[documentary]] focused on a small group of individuals who were portrayed as representing large groups of the [[population]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most get the most media attention. Other than its misrepresentation of the community in which the [[film]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is ridiculous to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. Most [[campuses]] students find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the communities in which they [[explored]] and live. Their conversations are held with their fellow students and the college faculty. Steven Greenstreet's [[documentation]] is a prime [[instances]] of a [[frustrated]] college student who judges the entire community based on limited contact with a small number of its members.

The [[documentaries]] focused on a small group of individuals who were portrayed as representing large groups of the [[populace]]. As is usual, the people who scream the most get the most media attention. Other than its misrepresentation of the community in which the [[kino]] was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.

Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is ridiculous to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals. --------------------------------------------- Result 2315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[teenager]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the [[surrogate]] parent in charge. The Hamilton's [[move]] [[house]] a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[fact]] that his brother's & sister [[kidnap]], imprison & murder people in the [[basement]] doesn't [[help]] relax or calm Francis' nerves [[either]]. [[Francis]] know's something just isn't right & when he eventually [[finds]] out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, enough said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've seen I thought The Hamiltons was complete total & utter crap. I found the character's really [[poor]], very unlikable & the slow moving story failed to capture my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really big sustained build up to what's inside a cupboard thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[boring]] plot plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their money from to buy new houses since none of them seem to work (except David in a [[slaughterhouse]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been caught before now. The script tries to mix in every day drama with potent horror & it just does a [[terrible]] job of combining the two to the extent that neither aspect is memorable or effective. A [[really]] [[bad]] [[film]] that I am struggling to say anything good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. The Hamiltons tells the story of the four Hamilton siblings, [[adolescence]] Francis (Cory Knauf), twins Wendell (Joseph McKelheer) & Darlene (Mackenzie Firgens) & the eldest David (Samuel) who is now the [[substitutions]] parent in charge. The Hamilton's [[budge]] [[domicile]] a lot, Franics is unsure why& is unhappy with the way things are. The [[facto]] that his brother's & sister [[hijacked]], imprison & murder people in the [[cellar]] doesn't [[pomoc]] relax or calm Francis' nerves [[nor]]. [[Franz]] know's something just isn't right & when he eventually [[discovers]] out the truth things will never be the same again...

Co-written, co-produced & directed by Mitchell Altieri & Phil Flores as The Butcher Brothers (who's only other film director's credit so far is the April Fool's Day (2008) remake, enough said) this was one of the 'Films to Die For' at the 2006 After Dark Horrorfest (or whatever it's called) & in keeping with pretty much all the other's I've seen I thought The Hamiltons was complete total & utter crap. I found the character's really [[pauper]], very unlikable & the slow moving story failed to capture my imagination or sustain my interest over it's 85 & a half minute too long 86 minute duration. The there's the awful twist at the end which had me laughing out loud, there's this really big sustained build up to what's inside a cupboard thing in the Hamiltons basement & it's eventually revealed to be a little boy with a teddy. Is that really supposed to scare us? Is that really supposed to shock us? Is that really something that is supposed to have us talking about it as the end credits roll? Is a harmless looking young boy the best 'twist' ending that the makers could come up with? The [[bore]] plot plods along, it's never made clear where the Hamiltons get all their money from to buy new houses since none of them seem to work (except David in a [[slaughter]] & I doubt that pays much) or why they haven't been caught before now. The script tries to mix in every day drama with potent horror & it just does a [[horrendous]] job of combining the two to the extent that neither aspect is memorable or effective. A [[genuinely]] [[mala]] [[cinema]] that I am struggling to say anything good about.

Despite being written & directed by the extreme sounding Butcher Brothers there's no gore here, there's a bit of blood splatter & a few scenes of girls chained up in a basement but nothing you couldn't do at home yourself with a bottle of tomato ketchup & a camcorder. The film is neither scary & since it's got a very middle-class suburban setting there's zero atmosphere or mood. There's a lesbian & suggest incestuous kiss but The Hamiltons is low on the exploitation scale & there's not much here for the horror crowd.

Filmed in Petaluma in California this has that modern low budget look about it, it's not badly made but rather forgettable. The acting by an unknown (to me) cast is nothing to write home about & I can't say I ever felt anything for anyone.

The Hamiltons commits the cardinal sin of being both dull & boring from which it never recovers. Add to that an ultra thin story, no gore, a rubbish ending & character's who you don't give a toss about & you have a film that did not impress me at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Rachel, Jo, Hannah, Tina, Bradley and John are all on [[top]] form here. They [[deserve]] oscar nominations for their performances. I am a [[great]] [[fan]] of the [[tv]] show aswell. Their music rocks and they're all so talented! I am [[also]] a great exponent of [[SARCASM]]!!!!!!

IF YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO [[NOT]] READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are terribly weak, the dialogue is [[terrible]] and the jokes are not [[even]] executed [[properly]] (i feel sorry for the director). The jokes are so [[unbelievably]] [[bad]] that 8 little, passionate S Club fans weren't laughing. They thought they [[could]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the world. They [[became]] S Club Juniors. Paul, "the [[fat]], [[ugly]] one who started a mosh band" must be [[thanking]] his [[lucky]] stars that he [[left]] when he did. One of the [[worst]] movies ever made. BEWARE OF THIS MOVIE! DO NOT GO AND SEE IT! YOU WON'T LAUGH! YOU [[WILL]] CRY! 0/10 RJT Rachel, Jo, Hannah, Tina, Bradley and John are all on [[supreme]] form here. They [[deserves]] oscar nominations for their performances. I am a [[wondrous]] [[breather]] of the [[tvs]] show aswell. Their music rocks and they're all so talented! I am [[apart]] a great exponent of [[IRONICAL]]!!!!!!

IF YOU'RE AN S CLUB FAN DO [[NOPE]] READ THIS!!!!!

The performances are terribly weak, the dialogue is [[heinous]] and the jokes are not [[yet]] executed [[rightly]] (i feel sorry for the director). The jokes are so [[uncommonly]] [[negative]] that 8 little, passionate S Club fans weren't laughing. They thought they [[did]] do it better. And they did. They conquered the world. They [[came]] S Club Juniors. Paul, "the [[fatty]], [[grisly]] one who started a mosh band" must be [[gratitude]] his [[luckily]] stars that he [[walkout]] when he did. One of the [[gravest]] movies ever made. BEWARE OF THIS MOVIE! DO NOT GO AND SEE IT! YOU WON'T LAUGH! YOU [[WILLINGNESS]] CRY! 0/10 RJT --------------------------------------------- Result 2317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] i am [[totally]] addicted to this show. i can't wait till the [[week]] goes by to see the [[next]] [[showing]]. it's a great [[story]] [[line]] and it has the [[best]] [[actors]] and actresses on the show. i will [[tune]] in [[every]] [[week]] to watch it [[even]] if i am not [[home]] i [[always]] have my vcr set to tape monarch cove. simon rex is the [[best]] [[actor]] on the [[show]]. it is suspenseful and exciting. i think this [[show]] should [[stay]] on the [[air]] and i [[believe]] [[everyone]] should tune in to watch it. i [[saw]] the very first episode and actually i wasn't going to watch it but i was [[watching]] [[lifetime]] one day and i decided to watch it because it was on and i [[absolutely]] [[love]] it and right now it's my [[favorite]] [[show]]. i am really mean it. i am [[perfectly]] addicted to this show. i can't wait till the [[zhou]] goes by to see the [[upcoming]] [[show]]. it's a great [[conte]] [[bloodline]] and it has the [[better]] [[actresses]] and actresses on the show. i will [[tuning]] in [[any]] [[weeks]] to watch it [[yet]] if i am not [[house]] i [[incessantly]] have my vcr set to tape monarch cove. simon rex is the [[bestest]] [[actress]] on the [[display]]. it is suspenseful and exciting. i think this [[exposition]] should [[staying]] on the [[airforce]] and i [[think]] [[someone]] should tune in to watch it. i [[noticed]] the very first episode and actually i wasn't going to watch it but i was [[staring]] [[vie]] one day and i decided to watch it because it was on and i [[altogether]] [[adores]] it and right now it's my [[preferable]] [[spectacle]]. i am really mean it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2318 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm no fan of newer movies, but this one was a real pleasure to watch. Adults and children could watch it together - how unusual! My aunt liked it, too. It had laughter, tears, love, adventure, special effects, good actors - and a talking parrot. It reminded me of a favourite, The Wizard of Oz. The hero, Paulie, an intelligent parrot, is separated from his home and family and goes through many adventures, temptations and disappointments, always keeping in mind his resolution to find his friend, Marie. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Comes this heartwarming [[tale]] of hope. Hope that you'll never have to endure anything this [[awful]] again. *cough* Razzie [[award]] *cough*

I disliked this movie because it was unfunny, [[predictable]] and inane. While [[watching]] I felt like I was in a [[psychology]] [[experiment]] to determine how low [[movie]] standards could get before people [[complained]]. When I [[requested]] my [[money]] back at the [[end]] of the movie I was informed that because I [[watched]] the whole thing 'I wasn't entitled to reimbursement'. I was [[told]] by the assistant manager that [[several]] people had complained and gotten refunds already though.

The [[movie]] [[summary]] is [[pretty]] basic. The midget thief steals a diamond and the poses as a baby to elude police. Underneath this clever [[outline]] however, lies a repertoire of original, fresh and hilarious skits. [[Or]] not.

Ask yourself the following: [[Do]] you like to [[see]] people [[getting]] [[hit]] by pans? Do you like fart jokes? Do you like to [[see]] midgets posing as [[babies]] threatened with a thermometer in the anus? [[Do]] you like tired racial jokes? Do you think babies say 'goo goo goo goo goo gaa gaa'? Do you drool?

[[If]] you answered 'yes' to any of the above then this [[movie]] is definitely for you. [[Although]] it has been billed in some places as 'The [[Worst]] [[Movie]] of the Decade', there is probably a movie or 2 that are worse...somewhere. I can't say for sure. I gave this movie 2 stars because we all know a review with only one star would indicate bias on the part of the reviewer and then the review wouldn't be taken seriously.

This lowbrow comedy is intended for a less [[intelligent]] [[audience]] and I cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Save your money for something funny.

Respect Comes this heartwarming [[storytelling]] of hope. Hope that you'll never have to endure anything this [[frightening]] again. *cough* Razzie [[awards]] *cough*

I disliked this movie because it was unfunny, [[foreseeable]] and inane. While [[staring]] I felt like I was in a [[psyche]] [[experimentation]] to determine how low [[cinematography]] standards could get before people [[denounced]]. When I [[enquired]] my [[cash]] back at the [[ceases]] of the movie I was informed that because I [[observed]] the whole thing 'I wasn't entitled to reimbursement'. I was [[tells]] by the assistant manager that [[many]] people had complained and gotten refunds already though.

The [[film]] [[synthesizing]] is [[belle]] basic. The midget thief steals a diamond and the poses as a baby to elude police. Underneath this clever [[portray]] however, lies a repertoire of original, fresh and hilarious skits. [[Neither]] not.

Ask yourself the following: [[Doing]] you like to [[behold]] people [[obtain]] [[slapped]] by pans? Do you like fart jokes? Do you like to [[behold]] midgets posing as [[babe]] threatened with a thermometer in the anus? [[Doing]] you like tired racial jokes? Do you think babies say 'goo goo goo goo goo gaa gaa'? Do you drool?

[[Though]] you answered 'yes' to any of the above then this [[films]] is definitely for you. [[Despite]] it has been billed in some places as 'The [[Gravest]] [[Filmmaking]] of the Decade', there is probably a movie or 2 that are worse...somewhere. I can't say for sure. I gave this movie 2 stars because we all know a review with only one star would indicate bias on the part of the reviewer and then the review wouldn't be taken seriously.

This lowbrow comedy is intended for a less [[shrewd]] [[viewers]] and I cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone. Save your money for something funny.

Respect --------------------------------------------- Result 2320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] What's with all the [[negative]] comments? After having seen this film for the first time [[tonight]], I can only [[say]] that this is a good holiday [[comedy]] that is sure to [[brighten]] up any [[lonely]] person's day. When I [[saw]] that [[Drew]] (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the holidays alone, I [[wanted]] to [[cry]]. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. Also, even [[though]] I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and Alicia (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me smile and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Now]], in conclusion, I highly recommend this [[good]] holiday comedy that is sure to brighten up any [[lonely]] person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. What's with all the [[counterproductive]] comments? After having seen this film for the first time [[monday]], I can only [[said]] that this is a good holiday [[travesty]] that is sure to [[illuminate]] up any [[lonesome]] person's day. When I [[sawthe]] that [[Called]] (Ben Affleck) might end up spending the holidays alone, I [[desired]] to [[clamour]]. You'll have to see the movie if you want to know why. Also, even [[despite]] I liked Tom (James Gandolfini) and Alicia (Christina Applegate) after awhile, if you ask me, they were real snobs. However, this film did make me smile and feel good inside. Before I wrap this up, I'd like to say that Mike Mitchell has scored a pure holiday hit. [[Presently]], in conclusion, I highly recommend this [[alright]] holiday comedy that is sure to brighten up any [[single]] person's day to any Ben Affleck or Christina Applegate fan who hasn't seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[William]] H. Macy is at his most sympathetic and [[compelling]] here as a hit-man and loving father who [[wants]] to [[step]] out of the [[family]] [[business]] without angering his overbearing [[parents]]. [[Treads]] much of the same [[territory]] as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[theme]] (here too he [[visits]] a [[shrink]]) but is [[still]] worth [[watching]] thanks to some [[taut]] direction from Brommel (I [[look]] forward to what this [[guy]] directs next), an excellent script, and all around [[great]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[always]]. This is [[probably]] his [[best]] role [[since]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[best]] as the [[domineering]] [[father]]. Tracy Ullman gives a [[surprisingly]] [[riveting]] [[dramatic]] [[turn]] as Macy's [[wife]]. [[Young]] David Dorfman is excellent as Macy's bright and [[sensitive]] [[son]] ([[many]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[wonderful]]). [[Even]] Neve Campell (who I [[usually]] [[find]] [[abhorrent]]) is compelling as the [[troubled]] [[young]] [[woman]] who [[captures]] Macy's eye. [[All]] of this is punctuated by a [[moving]] [[score]] and crisp [[pace]] that [[lead]] up to a [[predictable]] but [[still]] [[powerful]] [[climax]] and [[meaningful]] and [[touching]] [[aftermath]]. This [[film]] [[deserved]] a much [[wider]] [[release]], as I [[suspect]] it [[would]] have connected with [[audiences]]. [[Williams]] H. Macy is at his most sympathetic and [[convincing]] here as a hit-man and loving father who [[wanted]] to [[stride]] out of the [[families]] [[corporations]] without angering his overbearing [[relatives]]. [[Caterpillars]] much of the same [[land]] as TV's "The Sopranos" in terms of the mid-life crisis of a criminal [[subjects]] (here too he [[tours]] a [[shrug]]) but is [[yet]] worth [[staring]] thanks to some [[tense]] direction from Brommel (I [[peek]] forward to what this [[dude]] directs next), an excellent script, and all around [[resplendent]] performances. Macy is excellent as [[incessantly]]. This is [[presumably]] his [[optimum]] role [[because]] "Fargo." Donald Sutherland is at his creepy [[better]] as the [[overbearing]] [[fathers]]. Tracy Ullman gives a [[oddly]] [[mesmerizing]] [[phenomenal]] [[converting]] as Macy's [[women]]. [[Youthful]] David Dorfman is excellent as Macy's bright and [[delicate]] [[sons]] ([[several]] of his lines sound ad-libbed and are [[resplendent]]). [[Yet]] Neve Campell (who I [[ordinarily]] [[found]] [[obnoxious]]) is compelling as the [[disordered]] [[youthful]] [[women]] who [[catching]] Macy's eye. [[Entire]] of this is punctuated by a [[shifting]] [[notation]] and crisp [[cadence]] that [[culminate]] up to a [[foreseeable]] but [[however]] [[forceful]] [[orgasm]] and [[valid]] and [[affects]] [[consequence]]. This [[flick]] [[merited]] a much [[grander]] [[frees]], as I [[suspected]] it [[ought]] have connected with [[spectators]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] As a [[child]] I preferred the [[first]] [[Care]] Bear [[movie]] [[since]] this one [[seemed]] so [[dark]]. I [[always]] sat down and watched the [[first]] one. As I [[got]] older I [[learned]] to prefer this one. What I do [[think]] is that this [[film]] is too [[dark]] for infants, but as you [[get]] older you learn to [[treasure]] it since you understand it more, it doesn't seem as dark as it was back when you were a [[child]].

This [[movie]], in my [[opinion]], is better than the [[first]] one, [[everything]] is so much deeper. It [[may]] contradict the [[first]] [[movie]] but you must ignore the first movie to watch this one. The cubs are just too adorable, I rewind that 'Flying My Colors' scene. I tend to annoy everyone by singing it.

The sound track is great! A big hand to Carol and Dean Parks. I love every song in this movie, I have downloaded them all and is all I am listening to, I'm listening to 'Our beginning' also known as 'Recalling' at the moment. I have always preferred this sound track to the first one, although I just totally love Carol Kings song in the first movie 'Care-A-Lot'.

I think the animation is great, the animation in both movies are fantastic. I was surprised when I sat down and watched it about 10 years later and saw that the animation for the time was excellent. It was really surprising.

There is not a lot of back up from other people to say that this movie is great, but it is. I do not think it is weird/strange. I think it is a wonderful movie.

Basically, this movie is about how the Care [[Bears]] came about and to [[defeat]] the Demon, Dark Heart. The end is surprising and again, beats any 'Pokemon Movie' with the Care Bears Moral issues. It leaves an effect on you. Again this movie can teach everyone at all ages about morality. As a [[kiddies]] I preferred the [[fiirst]] [[Caring]] Bear [[cinematography]] [[because]] this one [[appeared]] so [[gloom]]. I [[incessantly]] sat down and watched the [[frst]] one. As I [[did]] older I [[learnt]] to prefer this one. What I do [[thinking]] is that this [[filmmaking]] is too [[darkness]] for infants, but as you [[obtains]] older you learn to [[hoard]] it since you understand it more, it doesn't seem as dark as it was back when you were a [[kiddies]].

This [[filmmaking]], in my [[view]], is better than the [[outset]] one, [[eveything]] is so much deeper. It [[maggio]] contradict the [[outset]] [[cinematography]] but you must ignore the first movie to watch this one. The cubs are just too adorable, I rewind that 'Flying My Colors' scene. I tend to annoy everyone by singing it.

The sound track is great! A big hand to Carol and Dean Parks. I love every song in this movie, I have downloaded them all and is all I am listening to, I'm listening to 'Our beginning' also known as 'Recalling' at the moment. I have always preferred this sound track to the first one, although I just totally love Carol Kings song in the first movie 'Care-A-Lot'.

I think the animation is great, the animation in both movies are fantastic. I was surprised when I sat down and watched it about 10 years later and saw that the animation for the time was excellent. It was really surprising.

There is not a lot of back up from other people to say that this movie is great, but it is. I do not think it is weird/strange. I think it is a wonderful movie.

Basically, this movie is about how the Care [[Carry]] came about and to [[beat]] the Demon, Dark Heart. The end is surprising and again, beats any 'Pokemon Movie' with the Care Bears Moral issues. It leaves an effect on you. Again this movie can teach everyone at all ages about morality. --------------------------------------------- Result 2323 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Ashley Judd, in an early role and I think her first starring role, shows her real-life rebellious nature in this slow-moving feminist soap opera. Wow, is this a vehicle for political correctness and extreme Liberalism or what?

Being a staunch feminist in real life, she must have [[cherished]] this script. No wonder Left Wing critic Roger Ebert loved this [[movie]]; it's right up his political alley, too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am glad Judd elevated herself from this moronic [[fluff]] to better roles in movies that entertained, not preached the heavy-handed Liberal agenda. Ashley Judd, in an early role and I think her first starring role, shows her real-life rebellious nature in this slow-moving feminist soap opera. Wow, is this a vehicle for political correctness and extreme Liberalism or what?

Being a staunch feminist in real life, she must have [[treasured]] this script. No wonder Left Wing critic Roger Ebert loved this [[cinematography]]; it's right up his political alley, too.

Unlike the reviewers here, I am glad Judd elevated herself from this moronic [[grope]] to better roles in movies that entertained, not preached the heavy-handed Liberal agenda. --------------------------------------------- Result 2324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Larry]] Burrows has the distinct feeling he's missing out on something. Ever since he missed a crucial baseball shot at school that cost the championship, he's been convinced his life would have turned out better had he made that shot. Then one night his car breaks down again. Walking into the nearest bar to wait for the tow truck, Larry happens upon barman Mike, who unbeknown to Larry is about to change his life for ever.......

The alternate [[life]] premise in cinema is hardly a [[new]] thing, stretching back to the likes of It's A Wonderful Life and showing no signs of abating with the quite [[recent]] Sandler vehicle that was Click. It's a [[genre]] that has produced very mixed results. Back in 1990 was this James Belushi led production, rarely mentioned when the said topic arises, it [[appears]] that it has largely been forgotten. [[Which]] is a shame since it oozes charm and is not [[short]] in the humour department. We know that we are being led to its ultimate message come the end, but it's a fun and enjoyable [[path]] to be [[led]] down. The film also serves [[notice]] to what a [[fine]] comedy actor James Belushi was. I mean if his style of smart quipping and larking exasperation isn't your thing,? then [[chances]] are you [[would]] avoid this film anyway. But for those [[engaged]] by the likes of [[Red]] [[Heat]], K-9 and Taking Care of Business, well Mr. Destiny is right up your street. Along for the ride are [[Linda]] Hamilton, [[Michael]] Caine, [[Jon]] Lovitz, Hart Bochner, Jay O. Sanders, [[Rene]] [[Russo]] and Courteney Cox.

[[Mr]]. [[Destiny]], pure escapist [[fun]] with a kicker of a [[message]] at its [[heart]]. 7/10 [[Lar]] Burrows has the distinct feeling he's missing out on something. Ever since he missed a crucial baseball shot at school that cost the championship, he's been convinced his life would have turned out better had he made that shot. Then one night his car breaks down again. Walking into the nearest bar to wait for the tow truck, Larry happens upon barman Mike, who unbeknown to Larry is about to change his life for ever.......

The alternate [[iife]] premise in cinema is hardly a [[nouveau]] thing, stretching back to the likes of It's A Wonderful Life and showing no signs of abating with the quite [[newer]] Sandler vehicle that was Click. It's a [[genera]] that has produced very mixed results. Back in 1990 was this James Belushi led production, rarely mentioned when the said topic arises, it [[emerges]] that it has largely been forgotten. [[Whose]] is a shame since it oozes charm and is not [[terse]] in the humour department. We know that we are being led to its ultimate message come the end, but it's a fun and enjoyable [[road]] to be [[spearheaded]] down. The film also serves [[notification]] to what a [[fined]] comedy actor James Belushi was. I mean if his style of smart quipping and larking exasperation isn't your thing,? then [[likelihood]] are you [[ought]] avoid this film anyway. But for those [[betrothed]] by the likes of [[Reid]] [[Thermal]], K-9 and Taking Care of Business, well Mr. Destiny is right up your street. Along for the ride are [[Lynda]] Hamilton, [[Michele]] Caine, [[John]] Lovitz, Hart Bochner, Jay O. Sanders, [[Renee]] [[Rousseau]] and Courteney Cox.

[[Mister]]. [[Destined]], pure escapist [[droll]] with a kicker of a [[messages]] at its [[crux]]. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I read John Everingham's story years ago in Reader's Digest, and I [[remember]] [[thinking]] what a great movie it [[would]] [[make]]. And it probably would have been had Michael Landon never got his hands on it. As far as I'm concerned, Landon was one of the [[worst]] [[actors]] on earth, and his artistic license went way over the top, similar to his massacre of the "Little House" book series is proof. The acting, for [[lack]] of a better word, is [[atrocious]], the screenplay [[sloppy]], and there are more close-ups of Landon's puss than should be allowed.

This movie reflects Everingham's story as much as "[[Little]] House On The Prairie" reflects the [[books]] is was "based" on. It's just another vehicle to show off Landons horrendous [[hair]]. I read John Everingham's story years ago in Reader's Digest, and I [[rember]] [[ideology]] what a great movie it [[ought]] [[deliver]]. And it probably would have been had Michael Landon never got his hands on it. As far as I'm concerned, Landon was one of the [[hardest]] [[players]] on earth, and his artistic license went way over the top, similar to his massacre of the "Little House" book series is proof. The acting, for [[misses]] of a better word, is [[outrageous]], the screenplay [[neglectful]], and there are more close-ups of Landon's puss than should be allowed.

This movie reflects Everingham's story as much as "[[Petit]] House On The Prairie" reflects the [[ledger]] is was "based" on. It's just another vehicle to show off Landons horrendous [[hairstyle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] The Last Hard Men [[finds]] James Coburn an outlaw doing a long sentence breaking free from a chain gang. Do he and his friends head for the Mexican border from jail and safety. [[No]] they don't because Coburn has a mission of revenge. To kill the peace officer who brought him in and in the process killed his woman.

That peace officer is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, Barbara Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was involved in a Waco like standoff. His Indian woman was [[killed]] in the hail of bullets fired. It's not something he's proud of, she was a collateral casualty in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he lets us know full well what an evil man he truly is. Heston is his usual stalwart hero, but the acting honors in The Last Hard Men go to James Coburn. He blows everyone else off the screen when he's on.

Coburn gets the bright idea of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian reservation where the white [[authorities]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to make it personal then.

Coburn's gang includes, Morgan Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and Jorge Rivero. Heston has Chris Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[nasty]] and [[brutal]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally intended for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[shows]] a lot of his influence with the liberal use of slow motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

For a little Peckinpaugh lite, The Last Hard Men is your [[film]]. The Last Hard Men [[deems]] James Coburn an outlaw doing a long sentence breaking free from a chain gang. Do he and his friends head for the Mexican border from jail and safety. [[Nope]] they don't because Coburn has a mission of revenge. To kill the peace officer who brought him in and in the process killed his woman.

That peace officer is Charlton Heston who is now retired and he knows what Coburn is after. As he explains it to his daughter, Barbara Hershey, Coburn was holed up in a shack and was involved in a Waco like standoff. His Indian woman was [[assassinated]] in the hail of bullets fired. It's not something he's proud of, she was a collateral casualty in a manhunt.

Lest we feel sorry for Coburn he lets us know full well what an evil man he truly is. Heston is his usual stalwart hero, but the acting honors in The Last Hard Men go to James Coburn. He blows everyone else off the screen when he's on.

Coburn gets the bright idea of making sure Heston trails him by kidnapping Hershey and taking her to an Indian reservation where the white [[administrations]] can't touch him. He knows that Heston has to make it personal then.

Coburn's gang includes, Morgan Paull, Thalmus Rasulala, John Quade, Larry Wilcox, and Jorge Rivero. Heston has Chris Mitchum along who is his son-in-law to be.

The Last Hard Men is one [[sordid]] and [[barbarous]] western. Andrew McLaglen directed it and I'm thinking it may have been a project originally intended for Sam Peckinpaugh. It sure [[demonstrating]] a lot of his influence with the liberal use of slow motion to accentuate the violence. Of which there is a lot.

For a little Peckinpaugh lite, The Last Hard Men is your [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2327 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] One is [[tempted]] to [[define]] the [[genre]] of Gert de Graaff's [[movie]] as `event of the thought' following the example of Merab Mamardashvili. The nominal storyline is a certain Bart Klever's torturous quest for that ephemeral [[substance]] which constitutes the essence of personality. The script for his new movie is taking shape simultaneously on his computer and in his own [[imagination]]. This film-monologue originated as a response to Fellini's `8 ½' and cost Gert de Graaff 13 [[years]] of work. Excitedly playing with real and fictional characters as well as with the audience, it reveals the whimsical interconnection of the real and imaginary, the paradoxical co-existence in two different galaxies: that of Guttenberg and that of MacLhuen. For some time we are apt to side with the [[script]] writer, who believes that the cause of all misfortune is the damned stereotypes of mass mentality (`man', `catholic', `window washer'). And together with him we fall into a trap when the author-creator is finally faced with the insoluble dilemma: how can one eliminate from the future movie. Bart Klever? Just five minutes before the finale thanks to the common petty reproaches of the wife of the creator, who is deeply immersed in work, we realize that together with the main [[character]] we have again been `framed'. Really, what is the price of the art for the sake of which it is acceptable to renounce one's own name and the day-to-day care for the young daughter?

So who is he, this Bart Klever? Is he a brilliant prophet or someone possessed like Frenhoffer from Balzac's masterpiece (just like the latter the script writer in the end erases from the computer memory everything has written)? Gert de Graaff suggests that we answer this question ourselves.

One is [[attempted]] to [[defined]] the [[gender]] of Gert de Graaff's [[kino]] as `event of the thought' following the example of Merab Mamardashvili. The nominal storyline is a certain Bart Klever's torturous quest for that ephemeral [[substances]] which constitutes the essence of personality. The script for his new movie is taking shape simultaneously on his computer and in his own [[fantasy]]. This film-monologue originated as a response to Fellini's `8 ½' and cost Gert de Graaff 13 [[yr]] of work. Excitedly playing with real and fictional characters as well as with the audience, it reveals the whimsical interconnection of the real and imaginary, the paradoxical co-existence in two different galaxies: that of Guttenberg and that of MacLhuen. For some time we are apt to side with the [[screenplay]] writer, who believes that the cause of all misfortune is the damned stereotypes of mass mentality (`man', `catholic', `window washer'). And together with him we fall into a trap when the author-creator is finally faced with the insoluble dilemma: how can one eliminate from the future movie. Bart Klever? Just five minutes before the finale thanks to the common petty reproaches of the wife of the creator, who is deeply immersed in work, we realize that together with the main [[personage]] we have again been `framed'. Really, what is the price of the art for the sake of which it is acceptable to renounce one's own name and the day-to-day care for the young daughter?

So who is he, this Bart Klever? Is he a brilliant prophet or someone possessed like Frenhoffer from Balzac's masterpiece (just like the latter the script writer in the end erases from the computer memory everything has written)? Gert de Graaff suggests that we answer this question ourselves.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2328 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The trailers for this film were better than the [[movie]]. What [[waste]] of talent and money. Wish I would've waited for this movie to come on DVD because at least I wouldn't be out $9. The movie totally misses the [[mark]]. What could have been a [[GREAT]] movie for all actors, [[turned]] out to be a B-movie at [[best]]. Movie moved VERY [[slow]] and just when I thought it was going somewhere, it almost did but then it didn't. In this day and age, we need unpredictable plot twists and closures in film, and this film offered [[neither]]. The whole thing about how everyone is a suspect is good, however, not sure if it was the way it was directed, the lighting, the delivery of lines, the writing or what, but nothing came from it. Lot of hype for nothing. I was VERY disappointed in this film, and I'm telling everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy saxophone music throughout made the film worse as well. And the ending had NOTHING to do with the rest of the film. What a disappointment. The trailers for this film were better than the [[movies]]. What [[squander]] of talent and money. Wish I would've waited for this movie to come on DVD because at least I wouldn't be out $9. The movie totally misses the [[brand]]. What could have been a [[LARGE]] movie for all actors, [[revolved]] out to be a B-movie at [[finest]]. Movie moved VERY [[lento]] and just when I thought it was going somewhere, it almost did but then it didn't. In this day and age, we need unpredictable plot twists and closures in film, and this film offered [[or]]. The whole thing about how everyone is a suspect is good, however, not sure if it was the way it was directed, the lighting, the delivery of lines, the writing or what, but nothing came from it. Lot of hype for nothing. I was VERY disappointed in this film, and I'm telling everyone NOT to see it. The cheesy saxophone music throughout made the film worse as well. And the ending had NOTHING to do with the rest of the film. What a disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2329 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] If you [[like]] plot turns, this is your movie. It is impossible at any moment to [[predict]] what will happen next. Nothing is as it appears or ends as you think it will. The characters are all gritty and engaging. Cage is at his best. [[Dennis]] Hopper again [[shows]] his [[delightfully]] sinister side. JT [[Walsh]] is [[perfect]] in his last performance. Laura Boyle sizzles. Dwight Yoakum makes a film debut superbly in a cameo. I categorize this [[movie]] as "I am having a really, really, really bad day" film. Not a [[slow]] minute in this [[film]]. A [[real]] [[sleeper]]. This [[movie]] is [[underrated]] and, sadly, [[overlooked]]. If you [[iike]] plot turns, this is your movie. It is impossible at any moment to [[forecasts]] what will happen next. Nothing is as it appears or ends as you think it will. The characters are all gritty and engaging. Cage is at his best. [[Denny]] Hopper again [[showcase]] his [[pleasantly]] sinister side. JT [[Welch]] is [[faultless]] in his last performance. Laura Boyle sizzles. Dwight Yoakum makes a film debut superbly in a cameo. I categorize this [[filmmaking]] as "I am having a really, really, really bad day" film. Not a [[sluggish]] minute in this [[kino]]. A [[veritable]] [[sleeping]]. This [[filmmaking]] is [[understated]] and, sadly, [[neglected]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] If you want to see a movie that [[terribly]] mixes up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine Prophecy" is a good [[example]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too funny to me seeing the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this film have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's mustaches, like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a bad choice for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny seeing Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... If you want to see a movie that [[stunningly]] mixes up one Latin country with any other Latin country, "The Celestine Prophecy" is a good [[cases]]: 1. Perú, not even in its most violent times, has not shown polices or soldiers as much as in this film. This showed a country like El Salvador when Civil War. Since I'm a Peruvian who lives in Lima (the capital of Perú), it was too funny to me seeing the police guards here, there and everywhere. 2. If you have a car in Perú, and you want (or need) to be a taxi driver, just post a sticker with the word "Taxi" on the front glass of your car and you can drive freely in Peruvian streets (there are taxi companies, but their rates are quite expensive). No need of yellow or a black/white squared band on the doors of your car. Well, taxis in this film have that band, somethin that you will never see in Perú. 3. Peruvian people are not Caribbean styled clothing. For example, when a taxi driver comes out, he was wearing a "Guayabera" (Cuban shirt), a white hat, and 40's mustaches, like Clark Gable. Not one Peruvian man looks like that, please! Perú is not the Caribbeans! 4. A scene shows a woman on a street with a quite long skirt, like the typical folklore dresses in Latin America. Take a walk anywhere in Perú, and you'll never find a woman wearing like that, unless you are watching a typical dance. 5. Cast could've been better: I can not deny Héctor Elizondo is a great actor, but he's not a Latin actor (his father was Basque and his mother from Puerto Rico, but he was born in New York) and his Spanish is not fluent. It's notorious Spanish is not his first language. There are dozens of very good Latin actors who could've performed as Cardinal Sebastián. Petrus Antonius (General Rodríguez) was also a bad choice for a "Latin Police officer". It was so funny seeing Elizondo and Petronius in General Rodríguez's office. They looked like two English or American students in a Spanish class, making their best effort in order to pronounce Spanish. Unsuccessfully, of course. Castulo Guerra was better in his Spanish. A "Peruvian" officer, who announced Cardinal Sebastián, spoke a quite funny Spanish too. There are very good Peruvian actors, like Augusto Alvarez-Calderón and Christian Meier (just to mention two out of many Peruvian actors), who could've performed with excellence. 6. I admit that a fictional movie can let itself a license inventing cities or, even, countries. But, please, when creating a name, be careful when using a foreign language: The town portrayed in this movie should've been called "Vicente" and not "Viciente". Vicente is a male name, and Viciente has never been used. 7. I disagree one user, who says that this movie was filmed on locations in Perú. Not one location is Peruvian, although the production has used in excess posters showing "Inca Kola", the Peruvian soda. As not few American films, this one must have used any Latin country. After all, for American producers or directors, a Latin place is identical to any other Latin place. 8. In the first scenes, when John (Matthew Settle) flies to Perú, he's supposed to arrive to the only one international airport in Perú: Jorge Chávez Airport (in Lima, the capital). Actually, believe me, it must be any airport in the world, but Peruvian airport. And, of course, in Peruvian airports there are no military or police guards. 9. When this John takes a room in a Peruvian hotel, this one has a fan and, obviously has no air conditioner. Please, this doesn't happen in no hotel in Perú(and other Latin countries), unless you get a 1 star hotel! 10. The rebels who fight against the government are... ¡Colombians! Their accent was, with no doubt, from Colombia. For casting them, the producers should've hired Peruvian actors. In few words, it would've been cheaper filming in Perú.

I could go on with more examples out of this film, that led me to give it a "1" (awful) vote, but I fell asleep after about 20 minutes from its beginning. But dear producers: It's not a tragedy: There are many worse movies with not few mistakes. Just let's remember "Indiana Jones and the kingdom of the Crystal skull" and indescribable Disney's "The Emperor's new groove". The list of bad films could be endless... --------------------------------------------- Result 2331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] This film is really [[bad]], with a script full of 'memorable' lines and incredibly [[bad]] performances. The special effects are also bad (not the worst ones I have seen, either) and the music is so [[bad]] that you have to listen to it to believe it. Just two short themes (30 seconds long or so) are repeated constantly throughout the whole film.

[[All]] in all, one of the [[worst]] films I have ever seen. This film is really [[mala]], with a script full of 'memorable' lines and incredibly [[mala]] performances. The special effects are also bad (not the worst ones I have seen, either) and the music is so [[mala]] that you have to listen to it to believe it. Just two short themes (30 seconds long or so) are repeated constantly throughout the whole film.

[[Everything]] in all, one of the [[gravest]] films I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[Watched]] this on DVD in [[original]] language with [[English]] subs. Either the [[subtitling]] was very poor or the actual [[dialog]] doesn't make much of [[story]] and [[give]] any [[character]] [[development]]. There are [[quite]] a few HK [[stars]] in this but the [[movie]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just bad. The [[bright]] and colorful scenes done in CG are [[attractive]] for the sheer [[colors]] and brilliance but it can get overwhelming before [[long]]. If anything this makes me think of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and [[crap]] plot. I'm certain I grasped what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[lousy]]. [[Observed]] this on DVD in [[initial]] language with [[Frenchman]] subs. Either the [[caption]] was very poor or the actual [[dialogue]] doesn't make much of [[saga]] and [[lend]] any [[characteristics]] [[evolution]]. There are [[rather]] a few HK [[celebrity]] in this but the [[movies]] doesn't need their presence to make it better or worse. It's just bad. The [[luminous]] and colorful scenes done in CG are [[seductive]] for the sheer [[coloring]] and brilliance but it can get overwhelming before [[longer]]. If anything this makes me think of a child's movie with its nonstop barrage of cg, fight scenes, and [[turd]] plot. I'm certain I grasped what took place in the film but the whole delivery of the story was rather [[squalid]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2333 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The word "1st" in the title has more ominous meaning for the [[viewers]] of this film than for its crime victims. At [[least]] they don't have to stick around and watch this [[interminable]] [[film]] reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[script]]; 1st takes used in each performance in the [[final]] [[film]]; 1st edit in post production; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[movie]] is not [[cast]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[film]] [[come]] off as [[worse]] than third [[rate]], from the goofy [[script]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffering]] through this cobbled together film, by the 2 [[hour]] mark you want to be put out of your [[misery]]. At 160 minutes long it is readily [[apparent]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details concerning the lame [[script]] and acting [[serves]] little purposes. Even in the equally [[awful]], Lake [[Placid]], at [[least]] the performances [[Bill]] Pullman and [[Bridget]] Fonda constructed out of an [[extremely]] [[weak]] [[script]], were nuanced enough to make you [[laugh]] at the movie. In 1st to Die, one ends up grieving only for the time lost in waiting to see what happens after the opening scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never introduced to one of the main characters, who I [[think]] (were never quite told) is a D.A. She just appears in one scene in the middle of a conversation. Obviously the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was dropped on the editor's floor. And no one realized that a character appearing out of nowhere was an unusual film ploy.

In a word, don't waste your time with this one. My wife and I wish we didn't. But at [[least]] we created our own diversions by commenting in various places in the film like it was Mystery [[Science]] Theater. "Meanwhile, in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! The word "1st" in the title has more ominous meaning for the [[spectators]] of this film than for its crime victims. At [[fewest]] they don't have to stick around and watch this [[infinite]] [[cinematography]] reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a [[hyphen]]; 1st takes used in each performance in the [[definitive]] [[films]]; 1st edit in post production; etcetera, etcetera.

The [[films]] is not [[casting]] too badly, it's just that everything about the [[kino]] [[arriving]] off as [[worst]] than third [[rates]], from the goofy [[hyphen]], to the wooden performances. And while [[suffer]] through this cobbled together film, by the 2 [[hora]] mark you want to be put out of your [[woe]]. At 160 minutes long it is readily [[overt]] that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details concerning the lame [[hyphen]] and acting [[contributes]] little purposes. Even in the equally [[gruesome]], Lake [[Tranquility]], at [[fewest]] the performances [[Invoices]] Pullman and [[Bridgette]] Fonda constructed out of an [[tremendously]] [[fragile]] [[hyphen]], were nuanced enough to make you [[laughter]] at the movie. In 1st to Die, one ends up grieving only for the time lost in waiting to see what happens after the opening scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never introduced to one of the main characters, who I [[thoughts]] (were never quite told) is a D.A. She just appears in one scene in the middle of a conversation. Obviously the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was dropped on the editor's floor. And no one realized that a character appearing out of nowhere was an unusual film ploy.

In a word, don't waste your time with this one. My wife and I wish we didn't. But at [[fewest]] we created our own diversions by commenting in various places in the film like it was Mystery [[Veda]] Theater. "Meanwhile, in Cleveland . . . ." !!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "Shore Leave" is mostly an average Star Trek adventure. [[Nothing]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply think that this is not the best representation of what the show had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. However, I'm [[glad]] to [[see]] that a TV show of this type had enough good [[sense]] to take a break from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, Kirk decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the perfect place for a vacation. As usual, the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and tense moments, but most of the story is played for laughs. Good, but unexceptional. "Shore Leave" is mostly an average Star Trek adventure. [[Nada]] wrong with the episode, though. I simply think that this is not the best representation of what the show had to offer to fans. It is lightweight entertaining, nothing more. However, I'm [[happier]] to [[consults]] that a TV show of this type had enough good [[sensing]] to take a break from serious intergalactic conflicts. In this episode, Kirk decides to grant his crew some time off, and a landing party is beamed down to a planet that looks like the perfect place for a vacation. As usual, the planet is not as peaceful as it appears to be. There are some action and tense moments, but most of the story is played for laughs. Good, but unexceptional. --------------------------------------------- Result 2335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animation]] just [[blew]] me away after a steady diet of Simpsons (Sorry Mr. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. Recommend multiple viewings with some cool tunes, good friends and a couple of cold ones! Picked up the movie at the flea market for 4 bucks, sure did get my moneys worth!. Could care-less about the hot babes but the [[animate]] just [[farted]] me away after a steady diet of Simpsons (Sorry Mr. Groening). The best part, facial expressions. Recommend multiple viewings with some cool tunes, good friends and a couple of cold ones! --------------------------------------------- Result 2336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I read the book and the book was fascinating.

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were [[totally]] [[insufferable]]. I cringed at the lack of a screenplay that could not follow the novel, a [[novel]] that has all the [[action]], simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the general public in most cities. Would not ever recommend this film to anyone I know.

Simply, one of he [[worst]] [[adaptations]] I have seen transformed into a plot less exploration of heaven on earth.

The cinematography was indeed the only highlight. But, how could that fail when filmed in an beautiful country such as Peru.

To prospective [[viewers]], do not waste your time or energy on this flop. I read the book and the book was fascinating.

This movie, it's direction, the screenplay, and the acting were [[abundantly]] [[unbearable]]. I cringed at the lack of a screenplay that could not follow the novel, a [[newer]] that has all the [[actions]], simplicity, and courage to illustrate a temerity of a great possibly fact based story.

I can see why this movie was not released to the general public in most cities. Would not ever recommend this film to anyone I know.

Simply, one of he [[hardest]] [[adaptation]] I have seen transformed into a plot less exploration of heaven on earth.

The cinematography was indeed the only highlight. But, how could that fail when filmed in an beautiful country such as Peru.

To prospective [[spectators]], do not waste your time or energy on this flop. --------------------------------------------- Result 2337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] I ran [[across]] this several years [[ago]] while channel [[surfing]] on a Sunday afternoon. [[Though]] it was [[obviously]] a cheesy [[TV]] movie from the 70s, the [[direction]] and [[score]] were well [[done]] enough that it [[grabbed]] my attention, and [[indeed]] I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the opportunity to buy a [[foreign]] DVD of this [[film]] (oops, didn't notice a domestic one had [[finally]] come out a couple months [[prior]]), and was very [[pleased]] to be able to watch it again (and in its [[entirety]]).

I don't [[wholly]] [[understand]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[seem]] to have a [[lock]] on [[horror]] [[movies]] that are actually [[scary]]. The decades [[prior]] to the 70s produced some [[beautifully]] shot films and the [[bulk]] of our enduring [[horror]] [[icons]], but are they actually [[scary]]? No, not very. [[Likewise]] in the [[years]] [[since]] the 70s we've gotten horror [[movies]] that are [[cooler]], more exciting, have much better [[production]] values and [[sophisticated]] [[special]] effects, are more [[fun]], funnier, have [[effective]] "[[jump]]" [[moments]], and some very [[creative]] [[uses]] of gore, but again... they aren't really [[scary]]! There's just [[something]] about the [[atmosphere]] of the 70s [[horror]] [[films]]. The grainy film quality. The spookily [[dark]] scenes unilluminated by vast high-tech lighting [[rigs]]. The "edge of dreamland" muted quality of the dialogue and the [[weird]] and stridently EQ'd scores. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. Everything that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[works]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the quiet, [[intense]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly [[unnerving]]. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers wisely save that for when the dog appears in its full-on supernatural form. The effects when that occurs, while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally gave me chills. The bizarre, vaguely-defined, "I'm not quite sure what I'm looking at" look intuitively strikes me as more like how a real supernatural vision would be, rather than the hyper-real, crystal clear optical printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror films.

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) I ran [[during]] this several years [[prior]] while channel [[surfer]] on a Sunday afternoon. [[If]] it was [[naturally]] a cheesy [[TELEVISION]] movie from the 70s, the [[orientation]] and [[notation]] were well [[performed]] enough that it [[caught]] my attention, and [[admittedly]] I was hooked and had to watch it through to the end. I recently got the opportunity to buy a [[alien]] DVD of this [[kino]] (oops, didn't notice a domestic one had [[eventually]] come out a couple months [[anterior]]), and was very [[happier]] to be able to watch it again (and in its [[totality]]).

I don't [[utterly]] [[understanding]] the phenomenon, but somehow the 70s [[seems]] to have a [[blockade]] on [[abomination]] [[cinematographic]] that are actually [[horrible]]. The decades [[formerly]] to the 70s produced some [[staggeringly]] shot films and the [[wholesale]] of our enduring [[terror]] [[symbol]], but are they actually [[awful]]? No, not very. [[Conversely]] in the [[olds]] [[because]] the 70s we've gotten horror [[theater]] that are [[refrigerator]], more exciting, have much better [[productivity]] values and [[complex]] [[specific]] effects, are more [[funny]], funnier, have [[effectiveness]] "[[hops]]" [[times]], and some very [[creativity]] [[utilise]] of gore, but again... they aren't really [[terrible]]! There's just [[somethings]] about the [[ambiance]] of the 70s [[monstrosity]] [[cinema]]. The grainy film quality. The spookily [[darkness]] scenes unilluminated by vast high-tech lighting [[torres]]. The "edge of dreamland" muted quality of the dialogue and the [[bizarro]] and stridently EQ'd scores. The odd sense of unease and ugliness permeating everything. Everything that works to undermine most movies of the 70s, in the case of horror, [[collaborating]] in its favor.

Specifically, in this film, the quiet, [[intensive]] shots of the devil dog staring people down is fairly [[disquieting]]. So much more effective than if they had gone the more obvious route of having the dog be growling, slavering, and overtly hostile ("Cujo"?). The filmmakers wisely save that for when the dog appears in its full-on supernatural form. The effects when that occurs, while unsophisticated by today's standards, literally gave me chills. The bizarre, vaguely-defined, "I'm not quite sure what I'm looking at" look intuitively strikes me as more like how a real supernatural vision would be, rather than the hyper-real, crystal clear optical printer / digital compositor confections of latter-day horror films.

While the human characters in this film are not as satisfyingly rendered as their nemesis or the world they inhabit, the actors all do a decent job. The pairing of the brother and sister from the "Witch Mountain" movies as, yes, brother and sister, is a rather cheesy bit of stunt casting, but they do fine. Yvette Mimieux always manages to be entertaining if unspectacular. Richard Crenna earns more and more empathy from the audience as the film progresses. His self-doubt as he wonders whether his family's alienness is truly due to a supernatural plot or whether he's merely succumbing to paranoid schizophrenia is pretty well handled, though his thought that getting a routine physical may provide an explanation for what he's been experiencing is absurd in its naïveté.

The movie's The-End-Question-Mark type ending is one of the only ones I've seen that doesn't feel like a cheap gimmick, and actually made me think about the choices these characters would be faced with next and what they'd be likely to do and how they'd feel about it.

Detractors of this film may say it's merely a feature-length vehicle for some neato glowing retina shots, but hey, you could say the same thing about "Blade Runner". :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[pilot]] to be quite interesting. However I probably had too high expectations because I was [[quite]] disappointed by it. First they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[got]] worse as [[none]] of the other [[characters]] were properly introduced. They focused too much on John Doe which made the story far less intriguing. I was also slightly disappointed by Dominic Purcell's performance because I found he didn't make a believable John Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant sensation. It leads us to the worst issue in the bunch, the episodic format. I could already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So overall I was very disappointed by it and don't recommend it to anyone. Considering how bad it was I better understand now why the show got canceled. In some way I have the impression that it missed its target, developing characters to help the protagonist find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he met at the club. The production quality was also quite good and the [[casting]] correct. But I'll never know if it got better, probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. Considering John Doe apparently inspired Kyle XY's creator I was expecting its [[experimental]] to be quite interesting. However I probably had too high expectations because I was [[rather]] disappointed by it. First they turned the protagonist into a freak who had the crazy idea of showing off his amazing knowledge in front of an audience, in a public area. So after that scene I began to worry that it was just entertainment. But the problem is that it [[ai]] worse as [[nos]] of the other [[hallmarks]] were properly introduced. They focused too much on John Doe which made the story far less intriguing. I was also slightly disappointed by Dominic Purcell's performance because I found he didn't make a believable John Doe. An other problem was the police story. It really felt like déjà vu and it wasn't a pleasant sensation. It leads us to the worst issue in the bunch, the episodic format. I could already see the fillers coming one after an other.

So overall I was very disappointed by it and don't recommend it to anyone. Considering how bad it was I better understand now why the show got canceled. In some way I have the impression that it missed its target, developing characters to help the protagonist find his own identity. It's sad because there was potential, like the people he met at the club. The production quality was also quite good and the [[pouring]] correct. But I'll never know if it got better, probably not, because I don't plan to watch the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A very [[good]] [[movie]]. A [[classic]] sci-fi [[film]] with [[humor]], action and everything. This [[movie]] [[offers]] a [[greater]] number of [[aliens]]. We [[see]] the Rebel Alliance [[leaders]] and [[much]] of the [[Imperial]] forces. The [[Emperor]] is somewhat an [[original]] [[character]]. I [[liked]] the Ewoks [[representing]] somehow the [[indigenous]] savages and the Vietnamese. ([[Excellent]] [[references]]) I [[loved]] the duel between Vader and [[Luke]] which is the [[best]] of the saga. [[In]] [[Return]] of the Jedi the epilogue of the first trilogy is over and the [[Empire]] [[finally]] [[falls]]. I [[also]] [[appreciated]] the [[victory]] [[celebration]] where it [[fulfills]] Vader's [[redemption]] and returns [[hi]] into Anakin [[Skywalker]] [[spirit]] along with Yoda and Obi-Wan. It [[gives]] a [[sadness]] and a tear. The [[greatest]] scenes in Star Wars are among this [[movie]]: When Vader turns on the [[Emperor]]. [[Luke]] watches and finds [[comfort]] in seeing Obi-Wan, Yoda and...his father (1997 version not [[Hayden]] Christenssen). The [[next]] [[best]] scene is when [[Luke]] rushes to [[strike]] back Darth Vader to [[protect]] Leia. There is a deep [[dark]] side of this [[film]] despite there is a [[good]] ending. I felt there was much more than [[meets]] the [[eye]]. And as [[always]] the [[John]] William's music will [[bring]] the classicism into Star Wars [[universe]]. A very [[alright]] [[cinematography]]. A [[classical]] sci-fi [[movies]] with [[comedy]], action and everything. This [[flick]] [[offered]] a [[widest]] number of [[foreigner]]. We [[seeing]] the Rebel Alliance [[heads]] and [[very]] of the [[Imperialism]] forces. The [[Kaiser]] is somewhat an [[originals]] [[traits]]. I [[wished]] the Ewoks [[represented]] somehow the [[native]] savages and the Vietnamese. ([[Super]] [[referencing]]) I [[worshipped]] the duel between Vader and [[Matty]] which is the [[better]] of the saga. [[During]] [[Reverted]] of the Jedi the epilogue of the first trilogy is over and the [[Reich]] [[ultimately]] [[autumn]]. I [[apart]] [[complimented]] the [[sieg]] [[celebratory]] where it [[meets]] Vader's [[buyout]] and returns [[hello]] into Anakin [[Anakin]] [[geist]] along with Yoda and Obi-Wan. It [[affords]] a [[woe]] and a tear. The [[widest]] scenes in Star Wars are among this [[films]]: When Vader turns on the [[King]]. [[Matty]] watches and finds [[consolation]] in seeing Obi-Wan, Yoda and...his father (1997 version not [[Haydn]] Christenssen). The [[imminent]] [[nicest]] scene is when [[Matty]] rushes to [[struck]] back Darth Vader to [[upholding]] Leia. There is a deep [[gloomy]] side of this [[cinematography]] despite there is a [[buena]] ending. I felt there was much more than [[fulfils]] the [[ojo]]. And as [[incessantly]] the [[Jon]] William's music will [[brings]] the classicism into Star Wars [[universes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yesterday I watched this movie for the third time. It was recommended to me by a fried several weeks ago. I never watched or even noticed it before, because it falls (so typically) in the category "Swedish Movie" and those who rose up (like me) with Hollywood productions tend to be sceptical of any foreign movies. Hell what a paradigm shift! The film touches me, because it just keeps up my hope, that mankind can change to a better way. The Swedish village is just a pattern for all areas on earth where people live together - controlled by religion, misunderstandings, lack of courage, predictions, disguised brutality, but also the ability to have fun, to meet, to sing... It takes a trigger from outside to rip off the masks of everyone (who keeps one) and to let them feel that we all are just human beings with the desire to live our own lives. I can never stop to see stories like this, because, that keeps up my hope as described above. The five minutes containing the story of Gabriella's song including her performance is one of my movie-highlights ever! Thank you Kay Pollak just for these 5 minutes, which made me happy! --------------------------------------------- Result 2341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[perfect]] companion piece to Peter Watkins' "La Commune (Paris 1871)." [[Both]] films -screened at this year's Toronto International Film Festival- ironically illustrate how history is [[shaped]] to by the tellers of the tale. Ironic, [[given]] the [[tragic]] events that were taking place in the U.S. during the festival.

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the movie, based on Grace Elliott's ([[Lucy]] [[Russell]]) "[[Memoirs]]," is a first-hand account of how she survived those heady but [[dangerous]] days. She [[also]] details her [[relationship]] with The Duke of Orleans ([[played]] by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in [[contrast]] to herself, is a supporter of the Revolution.

[[True]] to [[form]], you don't know [[whose]] side of history Rohmer is going to [[come]] down on. One of the [[earliest]] of the French "[[New]] [[Wave]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has [[often]] been [[criticized]] for being too conservative. [[After]] all, in the [[midst]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming romantic [[little]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sell]] the old boy short, folks, he's [[always]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et le duc" [[continues]] to [[bear]] this out.

Rohmer's [[characters]] are never the "[[bad]] [[guys]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human [[beings]] who are capable of [[exhibiting]] a full [[range]] of human potentialities -and [[limitations]]. That's why his movies are [[always]] [[provocative]], and this [[film]] is no [[exception]].

Now for the technological nuts and [[bolts]].

Rohmer, [[though]] [[making]] his [[way]] into his 80s, is [[still]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic [[innovation]]. The look of "L'Anglaise" is like something you've never seen before. You guessed it, the old guy -like [[several]] of the festival's [[directors]] this year- has gone digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as though they are taking place in their original 1780s Parisian settings. As a matter of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

Erich Rohmer's "L'Anglaise et le duc" makes a [[irreproachable]] companion piece to Peter Watkins' "La Commune (Paris 1871)." [[Whether]] films -screened at this year's Toronto International Film Festival- ironically illustrate how history is [[fashioned]] to by the tellers of the tale. Ironic, [[gave]] the [[cataclysmic]] events that were taking place in the U.S. during the festival.

Set in Paris during the French Revolution, the movie, based on Grace Elliott's ([[Lucie]] [[Russel]]) "[[Briefs]]," is a first-hand account of how she survived those heady but [[unsafe]] days. She [[further]] details her [[relations]] with The Duke of Orleans ([[accomplished]] by Jean-Claude Dreyfus), who, in [[contrasts]] to herself, is a supporter of the Revolution.

[[Real]] to [[forms]], you don't know [[whom]] side of history Rohmer is going to [[arrive]] down on. One of the [[nearest]] of the French "[[Novel]] [[Wavelength]]" filmmakers, Rohmer has [[routinely]] been [[criticizing]] for being too conservative. [[Upon]] all, in the [[medium]] of the rebelling-youth-Viet-Nam days of the late 60s and 70s, he was filming romantic [[tiny]] confections like "Claire's Knee." But don't [[sells]] the old boy short, folks, he's [[incessantly]] been a student of human nature, not an ideologue, and "L'Anglaise et le duc" [[persisted]] to [[bears]] this out.

Rohmer's [[attribute]] are never the "[[wicked]] [[buddies]]" nor the "good guys'; they are first and foremost human [[humans]] who are capable of [[proving]] a full [[ranges]] of human potentialities -and [[bounds]]. That's why his movies are [[perpetually]] [[inflammatory]], and this [[movie]] is no [[exemption]].

Now for the technological nuts and [[bolt]].

Rohmer, [[if]] [[doing]] his [[pathway]] into his 80s, is [[again]] on the cutting-edge of cinematic [[inventions]]. The look of "L'Anglaise" is like something you've never seen before. You guessed it, the old guy -like [[many]] of the festival's [[administrators]] this year- has gone digital.

All of the movie's exterior scenes look as though they are taking place in their original 1780s Parisian settings. As a matter of fact, you may get so distracted from marveling at the authenticity of the film's look you may have to go back for a second screening to catch the subtleties of the film's psychological -and yes, I'll say it- political insights.

Toronto features some of the world's edgiest young filmmakers this year, as well as some of the world's oldest. And the old masters are standing there on cinema's cutting-edges right alongside the young ones.

Long live youth. Long live old age. And long live Erich Rohmer.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2342 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I don't know what this movie is about, really. It's like a student's art school project. They never [[say]] why the world is [[dark]], but it is always [[darkness]] except for seconds a day. There are long, interrupting [[shots]] of insects of all sorts for no reason. What [[little]] [[dialogue]] there is in the movie is as inane and [[nonsensical]] as the images. A black woman enters the main character's apartment. Somehow she becomes [[pregnant]] overnight, then gets shot in the head. The main character takes [[care]] of the [[body]] until it becomes a cocoon after which a white naked woman emerges. I have never been so blown away by how [[bad]] and [[pointless]] a [[movie]] can be. Honestly, I would like someone to watch it so they can tell me what they think it's about. But I wouldn't wish this level of [[hell]] on anybody else. I don't know what this movie is about, really. It's like a student's art school project. They never [[told]] why the world is [[somber]], but it is always [[blackness]] except for seconds a day. There are long, interrupting [[beatings]] of insects of all sorts for no reason. What [[small]] [[conversations]] there is in the movie is as inane and [[irrational]] as the images. A black woman enters the main character's apartment. Somehow she becomes [[expectant]] overnight, then gets shot in the head. The main character takes [[healthcare]] of the [[agency]] until it becomes a cocoon after which a white naked woman emerges. I have never been so blown away by how [[mala]] and [[vain]] a [[kino]] can be. Honestly, I would like someone to watch it so they can tell me what they think it's about. But I wouldn't wish this level of [[bordello]] on anybody else. --------------------------------------------- Result 2343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is STRIKINGLY beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[SHREWD]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. Re: Pro Jury

Although the lead actress is STRIKINGLY beautiful, the plot stands little chance of acceptance because too many distracting details face the audience during the unfolding of the story.

One may believe that middle-class teen-age school girls in the 1950's easily gave away their virginity without thought of marriage to 30-year-old's they barely know, but I doubt it.

"EASILY GIVE AWAY VIRGINITY"? WHAT A [[CANNY]] REMARK ABOUT THIS FILM. TRULY.

One may believe that young high school teens are highly self-confident and self-assured as they interact with their elders in complex social situations, but my experience has been, more often than not, teenagers feel very awkward and act clumsy as they experiment in the adult world.

YOU JUST AREN'T AT ALL ABLE TO SEE THE WORLD OTHER THAN THROUGH YOUR OWN EYES? THAT'S SAD.

One may believe that a experienced medical doctor would not know the pungent oder of Stroptomycin -- the smelly fermenting byproduct of busy earth microbes -- and not detect that some lifeless bland powder is fake, but I think not.

AND ANOTHER "EXPERT" OPINION DRAWN FROM EXPERIENCE. DANDY.

One may believe that 30-something-year-old troublemakers can enter into, and hang around inside, a public school rec hall during a school social and make trouble, but I think that school socials are traditionally a protected environment and parents, chaparones and school staff would be around to prevent this.

NOW BE A GOOD SPORT AND TELL US AT WHICH INSTITUTION YOU GREW UP.

One final nit, throughout Hey Babu Riba the five teenage friends referred to themselves as the foursome. There is probably an explanation why the FIVE were the FOURsome, but because it was never detailed, each reference distracts from each scene.

OF COURSE THERE'S PROBABLY AN EXPLANATION. GOOD JOB FIGURING THAT OUT! NOW I'LL BE GENEROUS AND WILL HELP YOU OUT OF YOUR MISERY: ALTHOUGH IT WAS TRANSLATED AS A GENERAL "FOURSOME", THE WORD "čETVORKA" HAS ANOTHER MEANING: IT'S A SPORTS TERM USED TO DESIGNATE A 4M OR 4W SETUP - A ROWING CREW CONSISTING OF 5 PERSONS: 4 ROWERS AND A COXSWAIN.

This movie did not ring true for me.

WE SHOULD ALL HEED TO YOUR COMPETENT AND PRAISEWORTHY OPINION. DUDE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2344 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Once in a while, a film comes along that raises the bar for [[every]] other [[film]] in its [[genre]]. A [[film]] of this [[caliber]] will influence many films following its release for years to come. `A [[Chinese]] Ghost Story' falls in this [[category]]. It is arguably one of the [[best]] horror films [[made]] during the 1980's; [[possibly]] one of the [[best]] ever [[made]].

The filmmakers have [[crafted]] a [[movie]] that appeals to [[every]] horror [[fan]]. The story is engrossing and [[original]]. The villains are [[appropriately]] menacing and [[frightening]]. The sets are [[creepy]] and [[atmospheric]]. There is even a [[little]] blood and [[gore]] to satisfy the splatter [[fan]] of the [[house]]. But don't let the `horror' label scare you off, if you're not a fan of the [[genre]]. This film easily fits into many different categories.

The screenwriter has deftly blended the drama, comedy, horror, kung fu, and romance genres into a delicious deluxe cinematic pizza. `A Chinese Ghost Story' is a [[beautiful]] epic love story told, thankfully, without the gratuitous nudity and/or explicit sex scenes that have ruined many Hollywood `love stories'. Those put off by the romantic elements of the story can sit back and revel in the fast-paced swordplay and `wire-fu'. If that's not [[enough]], actors Leslie [[Cheung]] and Wu Ma provide enough humorous situations to satiate your appetite for comedy. This film offers something for every film fan.

Director Siu-Tung Ching and Producer Tsui Hark assembled a truly amazing cast for this film. Leslie Cheung proves that he is not only a gifted actor, but also a talented singer and a charming physical comedian. I cannot possibly think of a performer other than Cheung who [[could]] have portrayed Ling Choi Sin better (except maybe Chow Yun Fat). Joey Wang is enchanting as Lit Su Seen, the enslaved spirit who steals the heart of Cheung's [[character]]. Her portrayal of the title character is [[truly]] haunting and memorable. Wu Ma is hilarious as the cantankerous Taoist who aids the young lovers.

On technical level, this film is very impressive, [[even]] by today's standards. The [[direction]] is [[superb]]. I [[wish]] that today's Hollywood [[executives]] [[would]] [[seek]] out [[talented]] [[artists]] like Siu-Tung Ching [[rather]] [[falling]] back on the [[usual]] MTV video or Pepsi commercial `directors'. The cinematography is gorgeous. You have to commend any cinematographer who can make a film look good when most of its pivotal scenes take place in the dead of night. The special effects make-up is top-notch. In fact, most of the creature effects in this film blow away the shoddy CGI ghouls and goblins that have become commonplace in modern horror films.

Since its release, "A Chinese Ghost Story" has spawned two worthy sequels, a full-length animated movie, and countless imitations. None of the films that followed it or copied it were able to capture the magic of this classic, however. This film is required viewing for any horror fan or just anyone looking for great way to spend 95 minutes of your time. 10 out 10.

Once in a while, a film comes along that raises the bar for [[any]] other [[flick]] in its [[type]]. A [[films]] of this [[stature]] will influence many films following its release for years to come. `A [[Chino]] Ghost Story' falls in this [[class]]. It is arguably one of the [[nicest]] horror films [[brought]] during the 1980's; [[presumably]] one of the [[optimum]] ever [[accomplished]].

The filmmakers have [[worded]] a [[cinematography]] that appeals to [[any]] horror [[admirer]]. The story is engrossing and [[initial]]. The villains are [[satisfactorily]] menacing and [[appalling]]. The sets are [[frightful]] and [[barometric]]. There is even a [[scant]] blood and [[gora]] to satisfy the splatter [[groupie]] of the [[dwellings]]. But don't let the `horror' label scare you off, if you're not a fan of the [[gender]]. This film easily fits into many different categories.

The screenwriter has deftly blended the drama, comedy, horror, kung fu, and romance genres into a delicious deluxe cinematic pizza. `A Chinese Ghost Story' is a [[belle]] epic love story told, thankfully, without the gratuitous nudity and/or explicit sex scenes that have ruined many Hollywood `love stories'. Those put off by the romantic elements of the story can sit back and revel in the fast-paced swordplay and `wire-fu'. If that's not [[adequate]], actors Leslie [[Chang]] and Wu Ma provide enough humorous situations to satiate your appetite for comedy. This film offers something for every film fan.

Director Siu-Tung Ching and Producer Tsui Hark assembled a truly amazing cast for this film. Leslie Cheung proves that he is not only a gifted actor, but also a talented singer and a charming physical comedian. I cannot possibly think of a performer other than Cheung who [[wo]] have portrayed Ling Choi Sin better (except maybe Chow Yun Fat). Joey Wang is enchanting as Lit Su Seen, the enslaved spirit who steals the heart of Cheung's [[characteristics]]. Her portrayal of the title character is [[honestly]] haunting and memorable. Wu Ma is hilarious as the cantankerous Taoist who aids the young lovers.

On technical level, this film is very impressive, [[yet]] by today's standards. The [[directorate]] is [[admirable]]. I [[wants]] that today's Hollywood [[managerial]] [[ought]] [[seeks]] out [[gifted]] [[performers]] like Siu-Tung Ching [[fairly]] [[decline]] back on the [[routine]] MTV video or Pepsi commercial `directors'. The cinematography is gorgeous. You have to commend any cinematographer who can make a film look good when most of its pivotal scenes take place in the dead of night. The special effects make-up is top-notch. In fact, most of the creature effects in this film blow away the shoddy CGI ghouls and goblins that have become commonplace in modern horror films.

Since its release, "A Chinese Ghost Story" has spawned two worthy sequels, a full-length animated movie, and countless imitations. None of the films that followed it or copied it were able to capture the magic of this classic, however. This film is required viewing for any horror fan or just anyone looking for great way to spend 95 minutes of your time. 10 out 10.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2345 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I found this film to be quite an [[oddity]]. From the very get go I found it [[extremely]] [[hard]] to like this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[reason]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, [[although]] I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't figure for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone [[could]] have taken his place quite easily and [[make]] this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the stabs at weak comedy (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. I found this film to be quite an [[uniqueness]]. From the very get go I found it [[greatly]] [[tough]] to like this movie, and now after a little thinking about it I can pretty much pinpoint the [[raison]] why. Jean-Marc Barr, [[though]] I love him to bits (I think Zentropa is one of the best movies ever made) is quite miscast here, and although I can't figure for the life of me who would be better, I am sure someone [[did]] have taken his place quite easily and [[deliver]] this film work. Everything else is fine, except for the stabs at weak comedy (A Meet The Parents Joke is not really needed, filmmakers!) and I really like Richard E. Grant as the British Major. It just suffers from one thing.. Jean-Marc. --------------------------------------------- Result 2346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the government controls everything and no one can be trusted. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel [[good]] about yourself. It is about a romance taking place in this society and the betrayal of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The film has some very [[good]] ideas and is done well in [[portraying]] this society with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[However]], despite the film's cleverness at portraying this idea, the film was very slow and did not seem to quite get the idea across. It seemed to spend too much time being clever rather than telling a story. 'Ninteen Eighty-Four' is a film about a futuristic society in which the government controls everything and no one can be trusted. It is a very dark film, and it is one that will not make you feel [[alright]] about yourself. It is about a romance taking place in this society and the betrayal of the lovers and about human nature being self-centred. The film has some very [[buena]] ideas and is done well in [[illustrating]] this society with the dark tones in colours (contrasting with happiness and bright colours in the dreams) and a general feeling of loneliness through objects and people and places. [[Still]], despite the film's cleverness at portraying this idea, the film was very slow and did not seem to quite get the idea across. It seemed to spend too much time being clever rather than telling a story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is an very [[good]] movie. This is one that I would rent over and over again. It is not like your normal superhero movie. This movie blends comedy, action and [[great]] special effects. It even has a person in it that does a lot of voices on The Simpsons. [[William]] H. Macy is the bomb. This is an very [[alright]] movie. This is one that I would rent over and over again. It is not like your normal superhero movie. This movie blends comedy, action and [[prodigious]] special effects. It even has a person in it that does a lot of voices on The Simpsons. [[Willem]] H. Macy is the bomb. --------------------------------------------- Result 2348 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] We often see movies about [[undesirable]] things going on in [[politics]], but I still recommend "City Hall". [[In]] a role he was born to play, Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to deal with the shooting of a boy. But it turns out that nothing that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the characters are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any given politician, you may have your [[doubts]] after [[watching]] this movie.

I understand that I can't name any specific example of something similar to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. If we had idealistic impressions of those at the top, this movie tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget Fonda, Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. We often see movies about [[unpopular]] things going on in [[policies]], but I still recommend "City Hall". [[For]] a role he was born to play, Al Pacino stars as New York's mayor who has to deal with the shooting of a boy. But it turns out that nothing that he does will really have any effect. In this movie, the characters are as gritty as we would expect of anyone involved in a political scandal. No matter how much you trust any given politician, you may have your [[anxieties]] after [[staring]] this movie.

I understand that I can't name any specific example of something similar to what this movie portrays, but that's not the point. If we had idealistic impressions of those at the top, this movie tears such ideas down. Certainly one that I encourage you to see. Also starring John Cusack, Bridget Fonda, Danny Aiello, Anthony Franciosa and David Paymer. --------------------------------------------- Result 2349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] i love bed knobs and broomsticks so much that it makes me cry a thousand tears of joy every time i have the magnificent pleasure of seeing it. i would also like to reiterate the simple fact that i love it so much.too much some have said. i have 27 copies on video and i love them all equally. i also love anyone else who loves it. i love you. my favourite scene is the dance scene at portobello road. i have learned the dance moves and practice it everyday. i have some audio recordings of myself singing the song. if anyone can play the drums or guitar i am thinking of forming a bed knobs and broomsticks band.i hope to call it 'the knobs'. love me (liz) --------------------------------------------- Result 2350 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[In]] [[Mexico]] this [[movie]] was [[aired]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's life, is a true example about a [[good]] German and [[specially]], about a good man. The conversations between Tukur's character and the Nazi [[prosecutor]] are [[specially]] interesting. A [[true]] ideas' war: two different Germans, both with [[faith]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very complex person: man, freedom fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[great]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[outstanding]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[recommended]] this [[film]] a [[lot]], [[specially]] in this [[difficult]] times for the [[planet]]. [[In]] [[Mexico]] we don't know a [[lot]] about [[Pastor]] Bonhoeffer life and [[legacy]], this is a [[great]] [[work]] for [[rescue]] a [[forgotten]] [[hero]]. [[Throughout]] [[Mexican]] this [[cinematographic]] was [[dispensed]] only in PayTV. Dietrich Bonhoeffer's life, is a true example about a [[alright]] German and [[notably]], about a good man. The conversations between Tukur's character and the Nazi [[attorney]] are [[especially]] interesting. A [[real]] ideas' war: two different Germans, both with [[fe]] in there believes. Bonhoeffer was a very complex person: man, freedom fighter, boyfriend, churchman and a [[superb]] intellectual; Ulrich Tukur is [[admirable]] as Bonhoeffer. I [[suggested]] this [[cinematography]] a [[batches]], [[concretely]] in this [[laborious]] times for the [[globe]]. [[For]] [[Mexican]] we don't know a [[batches]] about [[Clergyman]] Bonhoeffer life and [[heirloom]], this is a [[large]] [[collaborating]] for [[bailout]] a [[disregarded]] [[superhero]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Actually, I never [[bought]] into the [[metal]] was satanic and stuff, but this [[movie]] [[kind]] of [[played]] on that [[idea]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate [[really]] [[high]], it does serve its purpose in that it entertains while it is [[playing]]. The story has a metal band [[burned]] to death in their hotel, one of their [[fans]] has a [[dream]] to this [[effect]] and said band starts to go on a kill [[spree]] from beyond the grave. So [[yes]], a [[bit]] of "[[Nightmare]] on Elm [[Street]]" plot going on here. Granted Freddy never molested a girl in a car before. There was another movie featuring a heavy metal band in it, but it was very different in how it played out as it had a band that kind of took over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. Nothing to [[gruesome]] in it as I do not [[remember]] all that many gory [[kills]]. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the girl wearing the headphones and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing great, but a nice time filler. Actually, I never [[purchased]] into the [[metallurgical]] was satanic and stuff, but this [[kino]] [[sorting]] of [[served]] on that [[concept]]. Though certainly not a movie to take seriously or to rate [[truthfully]] [[higher]], it does serve its purpose in that it entertains while it is [[gaming]]. The story has a metal band [[cremated]] to death in their hotel, one of their [[buffs]] has a [[daydreaming]] to this [[effects]] and said band starts to go on a kill [[frenzy]] from beyond the grave. So [[yup]], a [[bitten]] of "[[Cabos]] on Elm [[Thoroughfare]]" plot going on here. Granted Freddy never molested a girl in a car before. There was another movie featuring a heavy metal band in it, but it was very different in how it played out as it had a band that kind of took over a town of kids and made them crazy. This one simply has the one fan of the band kind of helping the killer spirit at first then trying to stop him. Nothing to [[vile]] in it as I do not [[remind]] all that many gory [[assassination]]. Quite frankly, the scene I do remember most is the scene of the girl wearing the headphones and then being molested by some creature incarnation of the band. Nothing great, but a nice time filler. --------------------------------------------- Result 2352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I love watching [[early]] colour [[films]] - you mean those 40s clothes weren't all grey?

Margaret Rutherford dominates this [[movie]]. Her "eccentric" garb is actually rather attractive and yes, she has an [[amazing]] hourglass figure. But I feel she was given her head rather too much. She probably developed this characterisation over many performances, and nobody told her "If it gets a laugh, leave it out." She does too much [[deranged]] fooling about when she's [[supposed]] to be surprisingly down to earth. The Madame Arcati joke is that mediums were usually portrayed as wispy females in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a rest! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). I love watching [[precocious]] colour [[cinematic]] - you mean those 40s clothes weren't all grey?

Margaret Rutherford dominates this [[movies]]. Her "eccentric" garb is actually rather attractive and yes, she has an [[unbelievable]] hourglass figure. But I feel she was given her head rather too much. She probably developed this characterisation over many performances, and nobody told her "If it gets a laugh, leave it out." She does too much [[crazed]] fooling about when she's [[suspected]] to be surprisingly down to earth. The Madame Arcati joke is that mediums were usually portrayed as wispy females in long drapery. Arcati behaves like a retired headmistress (We'll really put our backs into it!). The contrast between her breezy, commonplace manner and her wacky beliefs isn't really brought out.

Just because all the actors are English (apart from Cummings), the Americans feel they have to use the words "Brit", "stiff", "lip" and "upper". Oh, give it a rest! The three main characters lose their tempers constantly and make risqué remarks (Did he make love to you? Yes, but very discreetly - he was in the cavalry!). --------------------------------------------- Result 2353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Liongate has [[yet]] to [[prove]] itself. Every single [[movie]] from lionsgate has been abysmal. i've [[tried]] and tried to give them more [[opportunities]] and they just [[keep]] slapping me over and over again. And Cabin Fever is [[definitely]] no exception.

I couldn't [[even]] pay attention to most of this [[movie]] it was so frustrating and [[bad]].

here's the plot. [[Guy]] [[cuts]] up [[dead]] [[dog]] for some [[reason]]. [[Gets]] [[infected]] by random virus, [[transfers]] it to [[kids]] at a camp, [[kids]] [[start]] to get infected and [[die]], [[town]] [[finds]] out about it and rather than [[help]] them, [[kills]] them. then the water is infected and everyone [[dies]]. the [[end]].

[[Seriously]], that's the [[whole]] [[movie]].

all the [[characters]] are [[completely]] retarded, you don't [[care]] for any of them, and the one [[kid]] should have [[stuck]] with [[boy]] meets world. Me and my [[friend]] [[found]] that [[talking]] about how [[fat]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more enjoyable than [[paying]] attention to this [[movie]]. We did [[manage]] to [[make]] it all the [[way]] to the [[end]] while [[screaming]] bulls$@t, because this [[film]] will make you do that.

and i'm [[still]] [[confused]] by the random [[slow]] [[motion]] karate [[moves]] of the one random [[kid]] and how [[apparently]] [[everybody]] out in the [[country]] is [[completely]] [[retarded]] and hickish. And again, why did this [[dog]] [[attack]] the [[girl]]? why did the [[kid]] the hicks were [[trying]] to [[kill]] sit in a [[chair]] waiting for them to [[kill]] him? that was [[part]] of the two of their's [[plan]]? wow. [[best]] [[plan]] ever. i cannot believe this [[movie]] [[got]] a [[theatrical]] [[release]]. i [[could]] barely [[stomach]] the DVD, [[let]] [[alone]] have to [[sit]] in a [[theater]] not [[moving]] for an hour and a half. It wasn't [[scary]], or [[funny]], or cool, or [[anything]]. it's just a waste of 90 minutes that you [[could]] be [[using]] to...i don't know, [[plant]] a tree or something. it's more productive than this [[piece]] of [[garbage]]. The acting, [[special]] [[effects]], and [[script]] are a [[joke]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever [[gets]] one [[nasty]] leg shaving scene, out of 10 Liongate has [[again]] to [[proof]] itself. Every single [[film]] from lionsgate has been abysmal. i've [[attempting]] and tried to give them more [[luck]] and they just [[retain]] slapping me over and over again. And Cabin Fever is [[decidedly]] no exception.

I couldn't [[yet]] pay attention to most of this [[movies]] it was so frustrating and [[horrid]].

here's the plot. [[Bloke]] [[cutbacks]] up [[decedent]] [[doggy]] for some [[reasons]]. [[Got]] [[contaminated]] by random virus, [[transfer]] it to [[kid]] at a camp, [[children]] [[outset]] to get infected and [[dead]], [[ville]] [[found]] out about it and rather than [[helped]] them, [[assassination]] them. then the water is infected and everyone [[dead]]. the [[ends]].

[[Profoundly]], that's the [[overall]] [[film]].

all the [[character]] are [[perfectly]] retarded, you don't [[healthcare]] for any of them, and the one [[children]] should have [[trapped]] with [[guy]] meets world. Me and my [[buddies]] [[uncovered]] that [[speaks]] about how [[greasy]] and bitchy our one classmate was to be far more enjoyable than [[paid]] attention to this [[cinema]]. We did [[managed]] to [[deliver]] it all the [[paths]] to the [[ends]] while [[yelling]] bulls$@t, because this [[cinematography]] will make you do that.

and i'm [[nevertheless]] [[bemused]] by the random [[slower]] [[motions]] karate [[shift]] of the one random [[children]] and how [[seemingly]] [[somebody]] out in the [[countries]] is [[fully]] [[nutcase]] and hickish. And again, why did this [[hound]] [[attacks]] the [[dame]]? why did the [[petit]] the hicks were [[try]] to [[murder]] sit in a [[chairs]] waiting for them to [[murder]] him? that was [[party]] of the two of their's [[systems]]? wow. [[finest]] [[programmes]] ever. i cannot believe this [[cinematography]] [[gets]] a [[teatro]] [[freeing]]. i [[would]] barely [[stomachache]] the DVD, [[leave]] [[lonely]] have to [[seated]] in a [[drama]] not [[transferring]] for an hour and a half. It wasn't [[dreadful]], or [[humorous]], or cool, or [[nothing]]. it's just a waste of 90 minutes that you [[would]] be [[used]] to...i don't know, [[installation]] a tree or something. it's more productive than this [[slice]] of [[litter]]. The acting, [[peculiar]] [[influences]], and [[screenplay]] are a [[giggle]]. don't ever pick this up.

Cabin fever [[got]] one [[repulsive]] leg shaving scene, out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2354 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I saw an advert for this on a video.Then my sister discovered that we had the book so I read it.I rented the video on the same day I finished the book.I thought it was very memorable as was the book. The cast was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was excellent as Helen and [[Rupert]] [[Graves]] was hateful as Arthur.The costumes,music and settings are [[stunningly]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY MORE IF YOU HAVEN`T WATCHED THIS

On the downside there are some sex scenes that have been added in and some violence.This is why the video is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the first part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. While the book is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as long as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The book is rather underated.Anne Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as Jane Erye or Wuthering Heights which have made it into television and film several times. Another thing.When I read the book ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 CONTAINS SPOILERS!

I saw an advert for this on a video.Then my sister discovered that we had the book so I read it.I rented the video on the same day I finished the book.I thought it was very memorable as was the book. The cast was brilliant.Tara Fitzgerald was excellent as Helen and [[Cornelius]] [[Tombstones]] was hateful as Arthur.The costumes,music and settings are [[unimaginably]] beautiful.

WARNING!DON`T READ ANY MORE IF YOU HAVEN`T WATCHED THIS

On the downside there are some sex scenes that have been added in and some violence.This is why the video is rated 15. There are some other things that have been thrown in.After the first part,I felt that the accuracy went downhill. While the book is better than this,I am glad I have seen it and would reccomend it to people who have read the book,are fans of Bronte or like costume dramas(I am all 3!)as long as you fastforward through the sex scenes. The book is rather underated.Anne Brontes books don`t seem to be that widely read or well known as Jane Erye or Wuthering Heights which have made it into television and film several times. Another thing.When I read the book ,I was surprised at how much religion ther was in it,but here they had axed that all out!

7\10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] I saw this movie with a bunch of friends and although only two of us walked out of the cinema thinking how cool it was, the others just laughed and commented on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't supposed to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a movie that [[mocks]] horror flicks and does a damn [[good]] job.. There seems to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and original!!! Jessica Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and Kylie was an even better move. The Impossible Princess was Queen of the screen!! I recommend seeing this flick, as you'll be guessing until the very end the connection with Raffy, Hilary and The movie that never got finished 20 years ago. I saw this movie with a bunch of friends and although only two of us walked out of the cinema thinking how cool it was, the others just laughed and commented on how stupid it was. Well that was because it isn't supposed to be taken so seriously, basically it is a a movie that [[ridicules]] horror flicks and does a damn [[buena]] job.. There seems to be another movie coming out like that too, umm... Scary Movie?? Well this is Aussie, and original!!! Jessica Napier does a surperb performance and Sarah Kants has a definate bright future in acting! I hope to see more of them. Molly Ringwald was a good move, and Kylie was an even better move. The Impossible Princess was Queen of the screen!! I recommend seeing this flick, as you'll be guessing until the very end the connection with Raffy, Hilary and The movie that never got finished 20 years ago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2356 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have [[seen]] the film a few [[days]] back on a video [[tape]] and [[even]] [[though]] it was [[hard]] to swallow it at one take (because of its [[length]] and story), I [[liked]] it very much. I was [[impressed]] [[first]], by the [[script]] and then, by the [[realization]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an easy, [[joyful]] ride; it goes through time and [[different]] political regimes and [[shows]] the influence of them to [[ordinary]] people's lives. What I [[loved]] was the inner logic the [[film]] followed; logic, which just like logic in [[life]], was [[rather]] [[illogical]] and confusing at [[times]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the events and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[though]] to [[try]] to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I also liked very much Nikita Mikhalkov's [[character]] Aleksei and the way he [[played]] it, as some critics [[would]] [[saw]], with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[think]] he [[later]] [[played]] [[characters]] that [[remind]] me of Aleksei in [[films]] like "[[Cruel]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I actually [[love]]) and to some extent in "The Insulted and the Injured" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[shows]], I [[think]], what a [[great]] film-maker [[Andrei]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable [[films]] like "Tango and [[Cash]]" and [[less]] forgettable like "Runaway train". I [[would]] [[prefer]] "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... I have [[watched]] the film a few [[jours]] back on a video [[cassettes]] and [[yet]] [[although]] it was [[laborious]] to swallow it at one take (because of its [[lifespan]] and story), I [[wished]] it very much. I was [[surprising]] [[firstly]], by the [[screenplay]] and then, by the [[attainment]] of this script. The film takes you on a ride, but that is not an easy, [[happier]] ride; it goes through time and [[several]] political regimes and [[exhibited]] the influence of them to [[normal]] people's lives. What I [[worshipped]] was the inner logic the [[flick]] followed; logic, which just like logic in [[lifetime]], was [[comparatively]] [[incoherent]] and confusing at [[dates]] but in the end, when I thought about it, all the events and twists made sense. It makes no sense [[despite]] to [[attempting]] to re-tell the story as it spreads in more than 50 years of time. I also liked very much Nikita Mikhalkov's [[personage]] Aleksei and the way he [[served]] it, as some critics [[ought]] [[watched]], with restless abandon. What I didn't like about it, was that I [[thinks]] he [[thereafter]] [[served]] [[features]] that [[reminded]] me of Aleksei in [[movie]] like "[[Merciless]] Romance" (Zhestokij romans, which I actually [[loves]]) and to some extent in "The Insulted and the Injured" ("Unizhennye i oskorblyonnye"). "Sibiriada" [[exhibited]], I [[thinks]], what a [[resplendent]] film-maker [[Andr]] Konchalovski was before he went to Hollywood and made forgettable [[filmmaking]] like "Tango and [[Money]]" and [[lesser]] forgettable like "Runaway train". I [[ought]] [[prefers]] "Kurochka Ryaba" to them... --------------------------------------------- Result 2357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I was so [[surprised]] by how great The Man In The Moon truly was.I [[mean]] at first I was kinda [[expecting]] a cheesy, and [[predictable]] film, but I decided to put that aside when watching.Well, when it was over I was just left [[stunned]](mainly in [[tears]]), by how [[great]] The Man [[In]] The [[Moon]] turned out to be.This movie is so entertaining and is so aware of its tone, and its just a [[fabulous]] film.The acting was great [[especially]] from Reece Witherspoon(who was so cute and lovable), and [[everyone]] else.There wasn't anything that [[really]] bothered me, I [[felt]] the ending kinda [[predictable]], but very well [[done]] at that.Also I felt some things to be plain or as if it had been done before, but still a great film.Overall I must say I don't to much to say about this [[film]], not that it was bad, its just a [[film]] you either like or don't like.I [[would]] however recommend this to any and [[everyone]], even if you don't like these type of [[films]], its still an enjoyable film.

8.7 out of 10 stars I was so [[surprises]] by how great The Man In The Moon truly was.I [[imply]] at first I was kinda [[hoping]] a cheesy, and [[foreseeable]] film, but I decided to put that aside when watching.Well, when it was over I was just left [[dumbfounded]](mainly in [[sobs]]), by how [[prodigious]] The Man [[Throughout]] The [[Luna]] turned out to be.This movie is so entertaining and is so aware of its tone, and its just a [[sumptuous]] film.The acting was great [[notably]] from Reece Witherspoon(who was so cute and lovable), and [[anybody]] else.There wasn't anything that [[genuinely]] bothered me, I [[deemed]] the ending kinda [[foreseeable]], but very well [[performed]] at that.Also I felt some things to be plain or as if it had been done before, but still a great film.Overall I must say I don't to much to say about this [[cinematography]], not that it was bad, its just a [[movies]] you either like or don't like.I [[ought]] however recommend this to any and [[someone]], even if you don't like these type of [[cinematography]], its still an enjoyable film.

8.7 out of 10 stars --------------------------------------------- Result 2358 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] My comments on this movie have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so ill change my comment completely.

I think this is a [[really]] [[bad]] [[movie]] for several [[reasons]].

Subject: one should be very careful in making a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. My comments on this movie have been deleted twice, which i find pretty offending, since i am making an effort to judge this movie for other people. Please be tolerant of other people's opinion. Obviously writing in the spirit of Nietzsches works is not understood, so ill change my comment completely.

I think this is a [[truthfully]] [[mala]] [[movies]] for several [[motifs]].

Subject: one should be very careful in making a movie about a philosopher that is even today not understood by the masses and amongst peers brings out passionate discussions. One thing philosophers do agree on is that Nietzsche was a great thinker. So making a movie about his life, which obviously includes his 'ideas' is a thing one should be extremely careful with, or preferably, don't do at all. Wisdom starts with knowing what you don't know. One might think this is not a review of the movie itself, but the movie is not about an imaginary character, it is about the life of someone who actually lived and had/has great influence on the world of yesterday, today and tomorrow. If someone tells a story about a tomato, i can express my thoughts about the story itself, but also about the chosen subject, the tomato. There is a responsibility for producers when they make a movie about actual facts. Specially in a case like this and this responsibility was not taken.

Screenplay: One of the first things i noticed were the ridiculous accents. Why? It distracts from what it should be about; Nietzsche and the truths he found. It doesn't help putting things in a right geographical perspective or time! Come on, make it proper English or better yet; German! Even Mel Gibson got that part right... letting his characters speak some gibberish Aramaic in the Passion.

Secondly, it is well over-acted.

3d, Assante is not an actor to depict Nietzsche. Bad casting.

4th, facts are way off.

And so on. Its a waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I don't [[know]] why some guys from [[US]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgaria]] have the [[courage]] to [[express]] [[feelings]] about something they don't [[understand]] at all. [[For]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't expect too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[movie]] without [[prejudice]], [[try]] to [[understand]] the [[whole]] [[humor]] inside - people of [[Serbia]] [[DID]] actually [[getting]] married while Bil Clinton [[bomb]] their villages, gypsies in all [[Balkans]] are [[ALWAYS]] [[try]] to f*ck you up in any way they can, LOVE is always [[unexpected]], pure and [[colorful]], and Balkans are [[extremely]] creative. For those who [[claims]] this is a bad [[movie]] I can see only that the American's sh*t (like Meet Dave, Get Smart etc) are much much worse than a pure, frank [[Balkan]] humoristic love story movie as Promise me. The comment should be useful and on second place should [[represent]] the personal view of the writer. I [[think]] the [[movie]] is [[great]] and people watch it [[must]] give their respects to the [[director]] and [[story]] [[told]] inside. It is [[simple]], but [[true]]. It is [[brutal]], but [[gentle]] and makes you laugh to [[dead]]. I don't [[savoir]] why some guys from [[AMERICANS]], Georgia or even from [[Bulgarian]] have the [[valor]] to [[expresses]] [[sentiments]] about something they don't [[understanding]] at all. [[During]] those who did not watch this movie - watch it. Don't expect too much or don't put some frameworks just because this is Kosturica. Watch the [[cinematographic]] without [[prejudices]], [[tries]] to [[fathom]] the [[total]] [[mood]] inside - people of [[Serbians]] [[COULD]] actually [[obtaining]] married while Bil Clinton [[bombing]] their villages, gypsies in all [[Balkan]] are [[INCESSANTLY]] [[attempted]] to f*ck you up in any way they can, LOVE is always [[unanticipated]], pure and [[picturesque]], and Balkans are [[terribly]] creative. For those who [[claim]] this is a bad [[filmmaking]] I can see only that the American's sh*t (like Meet Dave, Get Smart etc) are much much worse than a pure, frank [[Balkans]] humoristic love story movie as Promise me. The comment should be useful and on second place should [[constituted]] the personal view of the writer. I [[ideas]] the [[cinematic]] is [[resplendent]] and people watch it [[ought]] give their respects to the [[headmaster]] and [[history]] [[said]] inside. It is [[uncomplicated]], but [[truthful]]. It is [[brute]], but [[mild]] and makes you laugh to [[decedent]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This is the best film the Derek couple has ever made and if you think this is a [[recommendation]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the usual ingredients: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch Bo disrobing or auditioning for wet T-shirt contests quite frequently, the story is just laughably idiotic, and the film takes itself much too [[seriously]]. And then: Orang Utans in Africa?

But it has a few [[things]] [[going]] for it. Bo [[looks]] [[great]], the production values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp value. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be serious and fails so badly. This is the best film the Derek couple has ever made and if you think this is a [[recommend]] then you haven't seen any of the others. There are the usual ingredients: it is just as poorly acted as their other efforts, we can watch Bo disrobing or auditioning for wet T-shirt contests quite frequently, the story is just laughably idiotic, and the film takes itself much too [[earnestly]]. And then: Orang Utans in Africa?

But it has a few [[matters]] [[go]] for it. Bo [[seem]] [[large]], the production values (sets, costumes, etc.) are quite good, and this greatly enhances its camp value. In a strange way it is actually quite funny, simply because it tries to be serious and fails so badly. --------------------------------------------- Result 2361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] This is [[even]] [[worse]] than the original Game of Death. A jumbled, [[incoherent]] storyline leads to "Billy Lo" [[falling]] from a [[helicopter]] to the [[ground]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we start out following some Bruce Lee [[clone]], the film kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The [[main]] [[reason]] to watch this one is when [[Bobby]] Lo [[fights]] a lion, which is [[quite]] [[obviously]] a [[guy]] in a lion [[costume]]. [[Jang]] Lee [[Hwang]] is also the villain, who is [[usually]] pretty awesome but his screen [[time]] is significantly small. Mainly watched this and the original [[Game]] of [[Death]] because they're a part of the Bruce Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's finished works. No one would buy them otherwise. This is [[yet]] [[pire]] than the original Game of Death. A jumbled, [[disjointed]] storyline leads to "Billy Lo" [[tumbling]] from a [[helicopters]] to the [[terra]] below, killing him, as we're left to follow his younger brother, Bobby Lo. So not only do we start out following some Bruce Lee [[clooney]], the film kills that one off and has us follow another one thirty minutes into the story. The [[primary]] [[motif]] to watch this one is when [[Robbie]] Lo [[fight]] a lion, which is [[perfectly]] [[definitely]] a [[pal]] in a lion [[getup]]. [[Cheung]] Lee [[Wong]] is also the villain, who is [[routinely]] pretty awesome but his screen [[period]] is significantly small. Mainly watched this and the original [[Games]] of [[Deaths]] because they're a part of the Bruce Lee boxed set. It's no wonder they're included with Lee's finished works. No one would buy them otherwise. --------------------------------------------- Result 2362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most boring movies I have ever seen, its horrible. Christopher Lee is good but he is hardly in it, the only the good part is the opening scene.

Don't be fooled by the title. "End of the World" is truly a bad movie, I stopped watching it close to the end it was so bad, only for die hard b-movie fans that have the brain to stand this vomit. --------------------------------------------- Result 2363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Well, what to say...

Having [[seen]] the film I still have to wonder what the [[hell]] the point of it all really was?? V.[[Dodgy]] camera [[moves]] in the courtyard at one point... I had to look away from the screen, I was feeling physically [[sick]]... [[Round]] and Round and [[Round]].... You get the idea...

VERY [[VERY]] Strange accents at many points.... "Those that should [[know]], know"

[[Unless]] your [[getting]] in for free, or being paid to watch it, or your partner is about to make you paint the house or something.. then forget it... Well, what to say...

Having [[saw]] the film I still have to wonder what the [[inferno]] the point of it all really was?? V.[[Suspicious]] camera [[shift]] in the courtyard at one point... I had to look away from the screen, I was feeling physically [[unwell]]... [[Redondo]] and Round and [[Rounded]].... You get the idea...

VERY [[VITALLY]] Strange accents at many points.... "Those that should [[savoir]], know"

[[If]] your [[obtain]] in for free, or being paid to watch it, or your partner is about to make you paint the house or something.. then forget it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to make up more than one hauntingly [[evil]] image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she could carry it off brilliantly. [[Unfortunately]], I can't find many other [[reasons]] for [[seeing]] this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the rest, Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy woman is really [[tiresome]], and even if you like this sort of thing more than I do you'll have to admit that the tension sags badly during these scenes. Savage's drunken brute of an insurance agent is equally distasteful but at least it's a small role. Of the leading actors, Nicholas Walker inspires no sympathy at all for Paul Keller's plight and his acting is wooden. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level rises a little. Sheedy's meticulous, understated performance (though she often seems to be on automatic pilot) is admirable in itself but out of context with the rest. The sets are drab, the camera-work undistinguished. Towards the end of this thriller Ally Sheedy's gaunt latter-day image is used creatively to make up more than one hauntingly [[unholy]] image. She convinces one that, if a nasty Bette Davis-type role were to come her way, she could carry it off brilliantly. [[Regrettably]], I can't find many other [[motifs]] for [[witnessing]] this. If you've wondered what Sheedy looks like in a pair of old-fashioned glasses (but why should anyone?) then here's your answer. For the rest, Sally Kirkland's sex-starved crazy woman is really [[gruelling]], and even if you like this sort of thing more than I do you'll have to admit that the tension sags badly during these scenes. Savage's drunken brute of an insurance agent is equally distasteful but at least it's a small role. Of the leading actors, Nicholas Walker inspires no sympathy at all for Paul Keller's plight and his acting is wooden. Dara Tomanovich is better and during her scenes with Sheedy the level rises a little. Sheedy's meticulous, understated performance (though she often seems to be on automatic pilot) is admirable in itself but out of context with the rest. The sets are drab, the camera-work undistinguished. --------------------------------------------- Result 2365 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] i would have [[given]] this [[movie]] a 1 out of 10 if it weren't for [[ms]]. Claudine Barretto's performance. and i will [[take]] this [[time]] to [[overlook]] that Kris Aquino's here. and... [[end]].

i really AVOID watching Pinoy [[horror]] movies because stories [[lack]] originality and i really think that (some) [[writers]] don't [[give]] enough [[attention]] to the [[characters]] (and their progression) in their [[stories]] (redundant??). it was as if they 'pushed' the [[movie]] onwards when their storytelling stank. and my goodness, [[creative]] exhaustion led them to rip-off other movies. why?? why did this movie get a good review?? i wouldn't give it that much merit. the movie was KIND OF scary, but the movie seemed more freaky as it deals with Filipino folklore... it goes into my list of 'most likely to happen' category. i just wished they spent more time improving the story lines and fix those flash back sequences, never mind if the lighting sucked, it wouldn't matter much if the content would blow you away.. SAYANG. i would have [[bestowed]] this [[cinematography]] a 1 out of 10 if it weren't for [[corinne]]. Claudine Barretto's performance. and i will [[taking]] this [[period]] to [[ignore]] that Kris Aquino's here. and... [[ceases]].

i really AVOID watching Pinoy [[monstrosity]] movies because stories [[shortfall]] originality and i really think that (some) [[authors]] don't [[confer]] enough [[beware]] to the [[trait]] (and their progression) in their [[fairytales]] (redundant??). it was as if they 'pushed' the [[cinematography]] onwards when their storytelling stank. and my goodness, [[imaginative]] exhaustion led them to rip-off other movies. why?? why did this movie get a good review?? i wouldn't give it that much merit. the movie was KIND OF scary, but the movie seemed more freaky as it deals with Filipino folklore... it goes into my list of 'most likely to happen' category. i just wished they spent more time improving the story lines and fix those flash back sequences, never mind if the lighting sucked, it wouldn't matter much if the content would blow you away.. SAYANG. --------------------------------------------- Result 2366 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have never read the Bradbury [[novel]] that this [[movie]] is based on but from what I've [[gathered]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the [[trailer]] I [[knew]] I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so disappointed it hurt. This is because the [[movie]] itself felt so [[amateurish]]. The [[actors]] were not well cast (though Robards and Pryce are both good actors - just not here). The kid actors, it seemed, were merely asked to show up, get in the characters' clothes, say the lines and make the faces. The set and props were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was surprisingly [[bad]]. I was so surprised at the awfulness of it that I had to go online and check who directed it, just to see the kind of work he had done. The editing was cut and paste and the plot (screenplay) was just that as well (even though the author had been involved himself, irony?). The building up of the tension, fear and suspense was so mild it was ineffective when the climax finally came.

I've read some of the comments on this movie and find it hard to believe people actually like it. What hurts the most is that the content is interesting and fun and intriguing. It had so much potential. Unfortunately, the film was so technically [[bad]] it takes away from the brilliance of the story. I have never read the Bradbury [[newer]] that this [[cinematography]] is based on but from what I've [[flocked]], it will be interesting (when I finally do read it and I will). My comments will be based purely on the film. As soon as I saw the [[camper]] I [[overheard]] I had to see it and was so excited but when I finally did, I was so disappointed it hurt. This is because the [[cinematography]] itself felt so [[unprofessional]]. The [[players]] were not well cast (though Robards and Pryce are both good actors - just not here). The kid actors, it seemed, were merely asked to show up, get in the characters' clothes, say the lines and make the faces. The set and props were cheap and unrealistic. The direction was surprisingly [[wicked]]. I was so surprised at the awfulness of it that I had to go online and check who directed it, just to see the kind of work he had done. The editing was cut and paste and the plot (screenplay) was just that as well (even though the author had been involved himself, irony?). The building up of the tension, fear and suspense was so mild it was ineffective when the climax finally came.

I've read some of the comments on this movie and find it hard to believe people actually like it. What hurts the most is that the content is interesting and fun and intriguing. It had so much potential. Unfortunately, the film was so technically [[negative]] it takes away from the brilliance of the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This [[film]], which is based on a [[true]] [[story]], comes from [[first]] [[time]] director and long time [[actor]], Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[best]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best [[Actor]]. I guess [[Denzel]] [[wanted]] a change of [[pace]], so he [[chose]] to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[truly]] well done film from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some kind of commitment and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone Fisher is about a young African American man in the Navy who constantly gets into fights, and after one particular brawl he is sent to see a Navy psychiatrist named Jerome Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport helps Antwone to deal with his troubled past and learn to move on with his life, by finding his birth mother who had to give him up at birth because she was in prison. What makes this film [[good]] is the fact that it's not overly melodramatic. I was [[expecting]] something a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, fighting and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the swearing, fighting and vulgarity of the film were out of place. Quite the contrary! [[However]], Antwone Fisher is a [[true]] [[story]], and I don't [[think]] that Washington [[wanted]] to sensationalize the story for [[dramatic]] affect in the film. Don't [[get]] me wrong, there are [[moments]] when we [[see]] Antwone fighting, carrying on and having [[moments]] when it [[seems]] like the [[world]] is [[closing]] in on him. After all, in his [[first]] session with his [[psychiatrist]], the [[character]] [[played]] by Washington, Devenport [[asks]] [[Fisher]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[response]] is, `from under a [[rock]],' an [[obvious]] jab at the [[pressures]] waning on Antwone Fisher's soul. But I had to [[appreciate]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she appears at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would [[like]] to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's [[remake]] of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** This [[flick]], which is based on a [[veritable]] [[conte]], comes from [[fiirst]] [[period]] director and long time [[protagonist]], Denzel Washington. Denzel Washington has given us some of the [[optimum]] performances of the last decade, as a black soldier in the Civil War in Glory, and a lawyer in the acclaimed Philadelphia. And of course, he made special notoriety last year when he won the Academy Award for Best Actor in Training Day, in which Denzel Washington became the first African American to receive the award for Best [[Actress]]. I guess [[Denzil]] [[wanna]] a change of [[tempo]], so he [[elects]] to direct Antwone Fisher, in which he also stars. Fisher is played by Derek Luke, who is new to the silver screen, but has made some guest appearances on such television shows as King of Queens, and he will be appearing in the upcoming film release of Biker Boyz.

This is a [[really]] well done film from Denzel Washington, considering it was his first time directing. Undoubtedly, Denzel felt some kind of commitment and believed in the real life story of Antwone Fisher. Antwone Fisher is about a young African American man in the Navy who constantly gets into fights, and after one particular brawl he is sent to see a Navy psychiatrist named Jerome Davenport, played by Denzel Washington. Davenport helps Antwone to deal with his troubled past and learn to move on with his life, by finding his birth mother who had to give him up at birth because she was in prison. What makes this film [[alright]] is the fact that it's not overly melodramatic. I was [[hoping]] something a little more like Good Will Hunting, with a lot of swearing, fighting and vulgarity. Not that I didn't like Good Will Hunting, or the swearing, fighting and vulgarity of the film were out of place. Quite the contrary! [[Instead]], Antwone Fisher is a [[veritable]] [[history]], and I don't [[believing]] that Washington [[desired]] to sensationalize the story for [[noteworthy]] affect in the film. Don't [[obtain]] me wrong, there are [[times]] when we [[behold]] Antwone fighting, carrying on and having [[times]] when it [[appears]] like the [[monde]] is [[shut]] in on him. After all, in his [[firstly]] session with his [[psychiatry]], the [[nature]] [[served]] by Washington, Devenport [[requesting]] [[Fishermen]] where he was born, and Fisher's [[reply]] is, `from under a [[boulder]],' an [[manifest]] jab at the [[presses]] waning on Antwone Fisher's soul. But I had to [[appreciates]] the fact that this film wasn't sensationalized for dramatic affect. I think it shows real character on the part of Denzel Washington to deliver a more realistic story and to avoid the typical clichés that are common in Hollywood films, even those based on true stories. One other point that I would like to bring up about Antwone Fisher is the acting. Over all, performances were good in the film, but not great. At times, I think it was a bit obvious that the main characters were actors, but overall, to complain about performances in this film would be ludicrous. One actress that I would like to point out in this film is Viola Davis. She plays Antwone's mother, but she says barely two sentences in the movie at all, but not so much because she appears at the end of the film, but more because she in shock that her long lost son, Antwone has found her. What I would [[adores]] to point out about her as an actress in the lack of use of her. She in basically a character actress, and I haven't seen her play any really elaborate roles. She made appearances in Traffic, Out Of Sight, Kate & Leopold, and two recent films: Far From Heaven and Solaris. In Steven Soderberg's [[redo]] of Solaris, she played a scientist on a doomed space craft orbiting a planet. In that film, she is confronted by George Clooney's character and she drawn to tears by what Clooney tells her in a particular scene. When I first saw Solaris, I remember seeing her tear up in the scene and thinking, wow, this woman can act. It was as if you could feel the character's grief. In that brief shot of her face, she gave so much expression and I honestly felt very sorry for her character's sadness and trouble in the film. I think she has definite potential as an actress and should be used more often perhaps in leading roles, rather than just as a character driven actress. Nonetheless, Antwone Fisher is a very good movie. Denzel Washington, as always, pulls off a great performance and he gives us a great directorial debut. Also, Derek Luke is a very talented actor. I think that Antwone Fisher will bring his immense critical fame for his portrayal of the troubled man, but I think that his public popularity will increase with the release of Biker Boyz, which also stars Lawrence Fishburn. Antwone Fisher is based on the book `Finding Fish: A Memoir,' by Antwone Quenton Fisher. *** --------------------------------------------- Result 2368 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[loved]] this film. I [[first]] saw it when I was 20 ( which was only four years ago) and I enjoyed it so much, I brought my own copy the next day. The comedy is well played by all involved. I always have to rewind and rewatch the scene where Mr. Tsanders explains why he found water at 6 ft in one area and 227 feet in another area. Also look for Jason Robards father who plays Mr. Retch. Talent ran in that family. I [[worshipped]] this film. I [[firstly]] saw it when I was 20 ( which was only four years ago) and I enjoyed it so much, I brought my own copy the next day. The comedy is well played by all involved. I always have to rewind and rewatch the scene where Mr. Tsanders explains why he found water at 6 ft in one area and 227 feet in another area. Also look for Jason Robards father who plays Mr. Retch. Talent ran in that family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] If you want to watch a [[good]] [[film]] about how [[women]] can fight back against sexual assault, then this film is not the [[film]] that you [[want]] to watch. It was a social commentary about a woman who was victimized and fights back. Spoiler: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much [[better]] film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! If you want to watch a [[alright]] [[cinematography]] about how [[femmes]] can fight back against sexual assault, then this film is not the [[cinematographic]] that you [[desiring]] to watch. It was a social commentary about a woman who was victimized and fights back. Spoiler: Rosario Dawson turns the tables on her assailant. Instead of using the criminal justice system, the victim resorts to using vigilantism. She in essence nullifies the judicial system. The film "The Accused" was a much [[best]] film because the victim uses the judicial system and wins. What the "Descent" does is telling victims of assault that they should resort to violence? Is victim any better that the accuser? No!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I will [[start]] this off by [[saying]] I couldn't get all the [[way]] through it. I picked it up on a [[rainy]] day from WalMart [[like]] the rest of the reviewers on this site. I [[figured]] there wasn't any way I [[would]] [[regret]] my [[purchase]]. Was I wrong or what? Seriously now, who [[approved]] this [[project]]? They need to be [[forced]] to watch this movie over and over until the [[end]] of [[eternity]]. That's the only [[fitting]] punishment I can [[think]] of for releasing something this [[bad]]. The [[shooting]] [[reminds]] me of the [[movies]] I [[used]] to [[make]] for [[class]] projects on a [[big]] [[old]] VHS cam. The acting [[isnt]] much [[better]]. I [[think]] the only [[difference]] is that there are a few [[cool]] cameos. [[Yay]], who cares... Shecky Moskowitz is unfunny, and the [[ships]] [[comedian]] is an [[even]] [[bigger]] loser. That's about as much of the plot as I understood.

Overall it's the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've ever [[seen]]. I own it on DVD and have [[given]] it to many co-workers to watch. Each [[comes]] back and [[laughs]] and [[says]] "[[Wow]] I [[didnt]] [[think]] I'd ever [[say]] I [[shut]] off an [[Adam]] Sandler [[movie]] 15 minutes in...."

My [[response]] is always "Well now you can"

I will [[starter]] this off by [[telling]] I couldn't get all the [[ways]] through it. I picked it up on a [[downpour]] day from WalMart [[iike]] the rest of the reviewers on this site. I [[conjured]] there wasn't any way I [[could]] [[regretful]] my [[procuring]]. Was I wrong or what? Seriously now, who [[ratify]] this [[projects]]? They need to be [[compelled]] to watch this movie over and over until the [[ceases]] of [[virginity]]. That's the only [[fit]] punishment I can [[believing]] of for releasing something this [[unfavorable]]. The [[shootings]] [[remembered]] me of the [[kino]] I [[usage]] to [[deliver]] for [[sorts]] projects on a [[gros]] [[former]] VHS cam. The acting [[theyre]] much [[best]]. I [[thoughts]] the only [[disparity]] is that there are a few [[refrigerate]] cameos. [[Rawhide]], who cares... Shecky Moskowitz is unfunny, and the [[battleship]] [[comic]] is an [[yet]] [[greatest]] loser. That's about as much of the plot as I understood.

Overall it's the [[gravest]] [[filmmaking]] I've ever [[watched]]. I own it on DVD and have [[bestowed]] it to many co-workers to watch. Each [[happens]] back and [[smile]] and [[said]] "[[Ruff]] I [[thats]] [[believing]] I'd ever [[said]] I [[closure]] off an [[Adams]] Sandler [[film]] 15 minutes in...."

My [[answering]] is always "Well now you can"

--------------------------------------------- Result 2371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this a lot. In fact, if I see it again(and I plan to) I just may love it. I'll echo other reviewers in saying that this movie really does grow on you as you watch. It starts kind of slowly but the way in enfolds is very natural and has a mood to it. You just get into it.

I really liked the summery atmosphere to the movie and thought the movie was very touching as a whole. The characters have a strong element of realism and the movie very slowly and gently weaves a spell as you get involved in the various interactions between them all and want to know how it will ultimately turn out and what paths the characters will choose to take.

I am very surprised that there are less then a dozen comments on this-there are obscure TV movies that have more comments then Rich In Love.

One thing that I will say is I missed the ending which is driving me crazy and I HAVE to watch it again to see that. This is a movie that may not be for everybody but that I feel is strongly underrated(even some of my most film buff purist friends who have seen almost every movie there is haven't seen this) and it doesn't even seem to have much of a message board but I liked it a lot and to all those who like family dramas that are warm on scenery, atmosphere and an unhurried languid pace should probably take a look at this. Especially note worthy is that it takes place in South Carolina so for those (like me) who love the south, and movies that take place there, this is a gem. I'll add my vote to the woefully few comments and recommend this little known flick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I never heard of this film til it played as part of a Robert Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the cast list looked [[tasty]] to say the least with seven names - in addition to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the daughter of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the sadistic male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were wasting their time. I looked in vain for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range war and Mitchum must have thought it was barely a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new twists - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've seen or heard nothing to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be said for this. I never heard of this film til it played as part of a Robert Mitchum retrospective at the National Film Theatre in London. Almost 60 years on the cast list looked [[delicious]] to say the least with seven names - in addition to top-billed Mitchum - in the public domain; Charles McGraw, not long off The Killers, Barbara Bel Geddes, long before Dallas and arguably still better known as the daughter of Theatre Set Designer Norman, Walter Brennan, who needed no introduction, Frank Faylen, the sadistic male nurse in The Lost Weekend and the much nicer small-town mensch in It's A Wonderful Life, Robert Preston still a decade away from Harold Hill in The Music Man with Tom Tully and Phyllis Thaxter making up the numbers. Alas, most of them were wasting their time. I looked in vain for any 'signature' scenes given that it was Robert Wise on bullhorn. By this time he'd made around a half dozen films and had still to find a style. The story is our old friend the range war and Mitchum must have thought it was barely a cut above the Hopalong Cassidy oaters on which he'd cut his teeth. There are no new twists - if you don't count the unbelievable scene when Mitchum accuses Preston of sleeping with Thaxter to gain information about her father's plans to move his cattle. This is perfectly true but how did Mitchum KNOW? We've seen or heard nothing to indicate how he discovered it. On balance not a lot to be said for this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I [[picked]] this [[movie]] on the [[cover]] [[alone]] [[thinking]] that i was in for an adventure to the [[level]] of "Indiana Jones and The [[Temple]] of Doom". [[Unfortunately]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so large that i [[could]] [[barely]] [[find]] [[anything]] of quality in this [[movie]]. The cover described [[amazing]] [[special]] [[effects]]. There were [[none]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[stereotypes]] were [[awfully]] [[portrayed]]. It does give the [[idea]] that you can [[solve]] [[problems]] with violence. Good if you [[want]] to [[teach]] your [[kids]] that. I don't. Keep away from this one. If you are looking for family [[entertainment]] then you might find something that is more [[inspiring]] [[elsewhere]]. I [[picks]] this [[cinematography]] on the [[coverings]] [[lonely]] [[thoughts]] that i was in for an adventure to the [[tiers]] of "Indiana Jones and The [[Temples]] of Doom". [[Regrettably]] I was in for a virtual yawn. Not like any yawn i have had before though. This yawn was so large that i [[would]] [[scarcely]] [[finds]] [[algo]] of quality in this [[cinema]]. The cover described [[unbelievable]] [[peculiar]] [[ramifications]]. There were [[nos]]. The movie was so lightweight that even the [[preconceptions]] were [[terrifyingly]] [[depicted]]. It does give the [[thoughts]] that you can [[dissipating]] [[problem]] with violence. Good if you [[wanting]] to [[taught]] your [[enfants]] that. I don't. Keep away from this one. If you are looking for family [[entertainments]] then you might find something that is more [[stimulating]] [[else]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2374 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A sweet-natured young mountain [[man]] with a sad [[past]] (Henry Thomas) comes upon an abandoned baby girl in the [[woods]] and instantly falls in love with her. The [[town]] elders [[generally]] [[support]] him in keeping the child, though a local temptress (Cara Seymour) thinks little of the [[new]] family. A determined little girl on a long walk and a sinister travelling salesman (David Strathairn at his creepiest) have parallel [[stories]] which converge in a fateful [[way]]. This is a [[charming]] slice-of-life in the Ozarks in the same vein as "Where The Lillies Bloom" & "The Dollmaker". All three were shot on location in those beautiful hills and cover the lives of simple-living -- but not simple-minded -- American folk. A minimum of strong language and brief but pointed violence make this fairly-safe family viewing. A sweet-natured young mountain [[guy]] with a sad [[preceding]] (Henry Thomas) comes upon an abandoned baby girl in the [[lumber]] and instantly falls in love with her. The [[towns]] elders [[habitually]] [[assistance]] him in keeping the child, though a local temptress (Cara Seymour) thinks little of the [[novel]] family. A determined little girl on a long walk and a sinister travelling salesman (David Strathairn at his creepiest) have parallel [[story]] which converge in a fateful [[routing]]. This is a [[ravishing]] slice-of-life in the Ozarks in the same vein as "Where The Lillies Bloom" & "The Dollmaker". All three were shot on location in those beautiful hills and cover the lives of simple-living -- but not simple-minded -- American folk. A minimum of strong language and brief but pointed violence make this fairly-safe family viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2375 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] While I have a great respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[would]] call "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first movie poster and trailer, and [[thankfully]] [[lived]] up to my expectations.

Atlantis is a more "[[mature]]" Disney film in the sense that it lacks [[songs]] (a very unusual trait for a Disney film indeed), and is focused more on action and [[discovery]] than any other [[recent]] Disney offering. The world of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's core, is [[fantastic]], presented as desolate caverns with ruins, and then slowly developing into actual ecosystems, which, while usually containing some reminder of harshness, become more and more intriguing until the tropical paradise itself is reached. The presentation of simply Atlantis' landscape and setting, without some expendable cheery song, gave the kingdom a much more [[beautiful]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean language, as well as attempts to connect it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations adds to this, and [[works]] fairly well.

Also, with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's practical jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" element that I usually associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the struggle to get to Atlantis, and the constant discovery that occurred at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was able to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by helping the Atlanteans discover parts of their own history that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "weaponry", which is used in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a better word, quite exciting.

Granted, not all of the story makes full sense, and the film doesn't feature any amazing new computer-generated visual effects, but, aside from the Toy Story movies, this is the most [[entertaining]] Disney film I've seen in years. While I have a great respect for Disney's animated films, as of late they haven't really been what I [[ought]] call "must-see". Atlantis looked intriguing from the first movie poster and trailer, and [[mercifully]] [[resided]] up to my expectations.

Atlantis is a more "[[ripe]]" Disney film in the sense that it lacks [[tunes]] (a very unusual trait for a Disney film indeed), and is focused more on action and [[discoveries]] than any other [[newer]] Disney offering. The world of Atlantis, hidden beneath the earth's core, is [[unbelievable]], presented as desolate caverns with ruins, and then slowly developing into actual ecosystems, which, while usually containing some reminder of harshness, become more and more intriguing until the tropical paradise itself is reached. The presentation of simply Atlantis' landscape and setting, without some expendable cheery song, gave the kingdom a much more [[ravishing]] and intriguing appearance. The inclusion of an Atlantean language, as well as attempts to connect it into the mythology of real-life ancient civilizations adds to this, and [[cooperating]] fairly well.

Also, with the exception of some scenes involving Mole's practical jokes, there didn't seem to be much of a "childish" element that I usually associate with Disney films. Instead, the main elements were the struggle to get to Atlantis, and the constant discovery that occurred at Atlantis, as Milo the outsider was able to learn all he ever needed to know about the place by helping the Atlanteans discover parts of their own history that they didn't know about. Part of this involves the Atlantean "weaponry", which is used in a very action-packed climax which is, for lack of a better word, quite exciting.

Granted, not all of the story makes full sense, and the film doesn't feature any amazing new computer-generated visual effects, but, aside from the Toy Story movies, this is the most [[amusing]] Disney film I've seen in years. --------------------------------------------- Result 2376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I could give this movie the [[lowest]] possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[incompetence]], of high intentions and failure.

Mira Sorvino is [[horribly]] cast as the princess, but entirely [[unbelievable]] as Phocion, a young boy. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[character]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the insipid French play that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a brilliant, passionate philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and uninspired re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the atrocious plot and dialogue, there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire Let me be clear. I've used IMDb for years. But only today I went through the trouble of registering on the site, just so I could give this movie the [[fewer]] possible rating. I've seen hundreds of films, some of them bad, a few awful. Never, though, have i seen such a contrast of pretense and [[incapacity]], of high intentions and failure.

Mira Sorvino is [[awfully]] cast as the princess, but entirely [[amazing]] as Phocion, a young boy. Fiona Shaw is always an entertaining [[trait]], but the dialogue in the film is much worse, even, than in the insipid French play that is the source (Marivaux never reached Hollywood until now, and we should keep it that way).

To illustrate, for example, that Leontine is a brilliant, passionate philosopher and scientist, she is shown frantically pouring chemicals from beaker to beaker, shouting out names of famous scientists. And the romance between Agis and the princess is played even sillier. For this, the pair should receive a joint 'Clair Danes' award, which in a just world would be awarded for gratuitously anachronistic and uninspired re-interpretation of interesting teens from literature as brats of the 1990's (see Miss Danes in Les Miserables).

Aside from the atrocious plot and dialogue, there are some attempts to introduce artistic tropes into the filming. For example, there are moments when a handful of spectators are faded in and out of view of the action, sitting in chairs, watching the principal characters. The Director wants us to realize she's adapted a play. I get it. But it doesn't happen at all until far into the film. At that point, seeing a crowd of people sitting in chairs for a moment, then disappearing, is creepy and distracting. They're like some sort of un-scary zombie crowd, appearing through the mists, filling us with dread. When you see the horrible frolic and song that ends this movie, you'll want to rouse your own crowd of zombies and kill them all for the grave injustise of poisoning your mind for 112 minutes.

-Matthew McGuire --------------------------------------------- Result 2377 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Yes it may be goofy and may not [[seem]] as funny as many high budget comedies out there, but this movie is [[truly]] hilarious if you really watch it. Tim Meadows has always struck me as being funny off of the Saturday Night Live show. [[Whenever]] he would do this [[character]] on the show I would crack up [[laughing]]. So after I [[saw]] this was going to be [[playing]] on Comedy Central one [[night]] I decided to [[check]] it out. All in all I was farily impressed with this [[movie]], because it wasn't [[meant]] to [[win]] any Oscars or become [[comedy]] of the [[year]], but it did entertain the [[Saturday]] [[Night]] [[Live]] fans that [[love]] the Ladies [[Man]] [[character]]. This movie is [[also]] [[packed]] with some [[highly]] quotable lines that can be recited for years to [[come]]. Yes it may be goofy and may not [[looks]] as funny as many high budget comedies out there, but this movie is [[honestly]] hilarious if you really watch it. Tim Meadows has always struck me as being funny off of the Saturday Night Live show. [[Wherever]] he would do this [[traits]] on the show I would crack up [[kidding]]. So after I [[watched]] this was going to be [[replay]] on Comedy Central one [[nocturne]] I decided to [[audit]] it out. All in all I was farily impressed with this [[cinematography]], because it wasn't [[signified]] to [[earn]] any Oscars or become [[travesty]] of the [[annum]], but it did entertain the [[Saturdays]] [[Nightly]] [[Viva]] fans that [[likes]] the Ladies [[Males]] [[nature]]. This movie is [[moreover]] [[packing]] with some [[unimaginably]] quotable lines that can be recited for years to [[arrive]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] its too bad that no one knows anything about this [[movie]], and it [[gets]] old telling people it's rap's version of spinal [[tap]]. and you know, im [[sorry]] i dont have any better [[comments]], but damnit, go get the [[movie]] and watch it, and then make all your friends watch it too, just like im gonna. its too bad that no one knows anything about this [[filmmaking]], and it [[attains]] old telling people it's rap's version of spinal [[valve]]. and you know, im [[dorry]] i dont have any better [[sightings]], but damnit, go get the [[cinematography]] and watch it, and then make all your friends watch it too, just like im gonna. --------------------------------------------- Result 2379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[watched]] this because I thought there were [[going]] to be a [[lot]] of car [[chases]] and [[cool]] [[cars]] to gawk at. [[Guess]] I was [[lied]] to. This [[movie]] is very [[boring]].

The [[movie]] [[starts]] out Kip Raines(Giovanni Ribisi) [[sitting]] outside a [[Porsche]] dealership [[checking]] to see if they have the right [[car]]. When they [[confirm]] it's the right one, Kip [[gets]] a brick out of the [[trunk]] and chucks it at the window, shattering it. He [[gets]] the [[Porsche]] while his [[friend]] [[gets]] the [[keys]]. They [[start]] up the [[car]] and take off into the [[night]]. They deliver it to a [[warehouse]] only to have been followed by the [[police]]. So, the [[whole]] crew ditches all the [[cars]] and go their separate [[ways]]. Then, we [[get]] a glimpse of Memphis Raines. He is [[giving]] a [[little]] [[speech]] to a bunch of [[kids]] at a go-kart [[track]]. Then, he is [[confronted]] by Atlee Jackson([[Will]] Patton). Atlee tells Memphis that his brother Kip is in [[deep]] *bleep*. Memphis is known as one of the most [[notorious]] [[car]] [[thieves]] in Los Angeles. Memphis heads to a junkyard and meets Raymond Calitri([[Christopher]] Ecclesten). This [[guy]] [[threatens]] to [[kill]] Kip if Memphis doesn't [[deliver]] 50 [[cars]] [[within]] 72 hours.

There are a few [[problems]] with this film:

1.[[Story]]: The first 48 in-movie hours take place when Cage and Duvall are [[looking]] for a crew and planning everything out. The last 12 in-movie hours are a waste!

2. The [[Cars]]: You see maybe 10 [[cars]] out of the 50 as the [[movie]] advertises. So, where are the other 40 [[cars]]? Why don't we get to [[see]] them?

3. The [[Chase]]: The [[chase]] at the [[end]] of the [[movie]] was a [[joke]]. It was not suspenseful at all.

4. The [[Dog]]: [[Somewhere]] in the [[movie]], the [[dog]] eats the burgers and swallows three [[keys]] as well. This is [[impossible]]. The [[keys]] were [[flipped]] [[open]]. The [[keys]] [[would]] have [[severely]] [[damaged]] the dog's esophagus, [[stomach]], and [[large]] intestines. The [[guys]] suggest giving the [[dog]] laxatives to [[help]] him [[poop]] it out. This won't [[work]]. The dog will get a lot of diarrhea but no keys. It was stated in Jackass after Ryan Dunne stuck a toy car up his rectum. Take laxatives, lots of diarrhea, but no car. Same case with the dog.

5. The Cop During The Chase: When Eleanor breaks down for a few minutes, Nicholas Cage tries desperately to start up the car. You see a police cruiser behind him who isn't looking at his car at all. But, right when Nicholas Cage starts the engine up again, the police officer jerks his head to the right, sees the car, and immediately begins to chase after him. It is stupid. [[So]], right when he heard the engine start, and saw the car, he knew that was the car he was looking for. How does he know it's the right car? He only sees the back of it.

Overall, the movie is boring. There is no action. There are very few cars. The movie is stupid. I have never seen the original but I plan to.

I give this movie 1 star out of 10. Get The Fast and Furious instead. I [[observed]] this because I thought there were [[go]] to be a [[batch]] of car [[haunts]] and [[groovy]] [[car]] to gawk at. [[Imagine]] I was [[lie]] to. This [[cinematography]] is very [[dreary]].

The [[film]] [[commences]] out Kip Raines(Giovanni Ribisi) [[seated]] outside a [[Audi]] dealership [[checked]] to see if they have the right [[cars]]. When they [[confirmed]] it's the right one, Kip [[got]] a brick out of the [[torso]] and chucks it at the window, shattering it. He [[receives]] the [[Audi]] while his [[friends]] [[got]] the [[essentials]]. They [[commence]] up the [[cars]] and take off into the [[nighttime]]. They deliver it to a [[warehouses]] only to have been followed by the [[cops]]. So, the [[ensemble]] crew ditches all the [[wagon]] and go their separate [[shapes]]. Then, we [[got]] a glimpse of Memphis Raines. He is [[conferring]] a [[petite]] [[rhetoric]] to a bunch of [[kid]] at a go-kart [[tracks]]. Then, he is [[matched]] by Atlee Jackson([[Willingness]] Patton). Atlee tells Memphis that his brother Kip is in [[deepest]] *bleep*. Memphis is known as one of the most [[infamous]] [[cars]] [[bandits]] in Los Angeles. Memphis heads to a junkyard and meets Raymond Calitri([[Christophe]] Ecclesten). This [[boy]] [[threatened]] to [[assassination]] Kip if Memphis doesn't [[provide]] 50 [[car]] [[inside]] 72 hours.

There are a few [[troubles]] with this film:

1.[[Narratives]]: The first 48 in-movie hours take place when Cage and Duvall are [[searching]] for a crew and planning everything out. The last 12 in-movie hours are a waste!

2. The [[Carriages]]: You see maybe 10 [[car]] out of the 50 as the [[cinematography]] advertises. So, where are the other 40 [[automobiles]]? Why don't we get to [[behold]] them?

3. The [[Manhunt]]: The [[manhunt]] at the [[ends]] of the [[films]] was a [[jest]]. It was not suspenseful at all.

4. The [[Canine]]: [[Somehow]] in the [[cinematography]], the [[canine]] eats the burgers and swallows three [[key]] as well. This is [[unable]]. The [[wrenches]] were [[toppled]] [[opens]]. The [[key]] [[could]] have [[harshly]] [[harmed]] the dog's esophagus, [[abdomen]], and [[monumental]] intestines. The [[lads]] suggest giving the [[doggy]] laxatives to [[aiding]] him [[poo]] it out. This won't [[collaborate]]. The dog will get a lot of diarrhea but no keys. It was stated in Jackass after Ryan Dunne stuck a toy car up his rectum. Take laxatives, lots of diarrhea, but no car. Same case with the dog.

5. The Cop During The Chase: When Eleanor breaks down for a few minutes, Nicholas Cage tries desperately to start up the car. You see a police cruiser behind him who isn't looking at his car at all. But, right when Nicholas Cage starts the engine up again, the police officer jerks his head to the right, sees the car, and immediately begins to chase after him. It is stupid. [[Accordingly]], right when he heard the engine start, and saw the car, he knew that was the car he was looking for. How does he know it's the right car? He only sees the back of it.

Overall, the movie is boring. There is no action. There are very few cars. The movie is stupid. I have never seen the original but I plan to.

I give this movie 1 star out of 10. Get The Fast and Furious instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 2380 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Run away from this movie. Even by B-movie [[standards]] this movie is [[dreadful]]. It is also insidious in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are cool and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the disenfranchised a lot better than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not work as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction presents nothing new or interesting. Run away from this movie. Even by B-movie [[norms]] this movie is [[horrendous]]. It is also insidious in it's theme. The main theme is that people who reject society and have no respect for anything are cool and worth admiring. People who treat others with respect are losers. Guncrazy is a movie that speaks for the disenfranchised a lot better than this movie, see it instead.

No normal kid would do what Trent does. State Troopers do not work as they do in this film etc. Seeing this movie makes you realize why writers use the hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold cliche. Mija is a completely unsympathetic hooker,who yes, has had a terrible life. However, she is such a terrible person the audience cannot identify with her.

Usually there is one thing a movie can be recommended for, in this case there is none. It is such a ridiculous movie it insults the person who tries to identify with the main characters. The acting is adequate by B-movie standards and the direction presents nothing new or interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I have [[seen]] [[every]] episode of this [[spin]] off. I thought the first season was a decent effort considering the expectations of following such a success that is Grey's Anatomy. Thus i have [[continued]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[lacks]] the charm, the chemistry and more importantly the drama of it's predecessor Grey's Anatomy. The relationships seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The writing [[lacks]] the [[intelligence]] and comedic hints seen in GA. There are shows that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, unfortunately PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is simply not interesting. I have [[noticed]] [[each]] episode of this [[revolve]] off. I thought the first season was a decent effort considering the expectations of following such a success that is Grey's Anatomy. Thus i have [[sustained]] to watch. I'm afraid the second season [[missing]] the charm, the chemistry and more importantly the drama of it's predecessor Grey's Anatomy. The relationships seem contrived and the acting is so-so. The writing [[missing]] the [[intelligentsia]] and comedic hints seen in GA. There are shows that a formulaic but do not feel formulaic and contrived, unfortunately PP is not so. I loved Kate Walsh's presence in GA. I'm afraid Kate Walsh's life in LA is simply not interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 2382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] In the [[beginning]] and throughout the movie, it was great. It was suspenseful and thrilling. [[Yet]] in the end it gave no answer to what had happened. They mysteriously turned into zombies by a raven or crow? It did not answer the questions that we all had and therefore, was not as good a movie as I thought that it was going to be. In the [[commences]] and throughout the movie, it was great. It was suspenseful and thrilling. [[Even]] in the end it gave no answer to what had happened. They mysteriously turned into zombies by a raven or crow? It did not answer the questions that we all had and therefore, was not as good a movie as I thought that it was going to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I have to admit that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh Film [[Festival]]. However, after the Artistic Director of the Festival specifically recommended this film to an audience of over 200 people prior to the screening of another film, I decided to [[go]] to [[see]] it. [[Wow]]!

This film is dealing with the very [[difficult]] [[issue]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have found myself crying a number of times during the movie and laughing at others. Speaking about an emotional roller coaster.

The lead actor (Thuy Nguyen) is a Vietnamese newcomer (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this incredibly complex and difficult role. She reminded me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from Whale Rider but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a child prostitute. Chances are that she will win numerous awards.

The main story is about a girl who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron Livingston in a strong dramatic role that we are not used to see from him), who after spending some time with her decides to help her. By that time however, she is sold again and he is going on a search for her around Cambodia. The story turns and twists and the audience can never predict what will happen next.

The acting was strong across the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very convincing as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen (touching as a social worker) and Chris Penn (one of his last movies). The Asian cast was also superb.

Although the film deals with this difficult subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a compelling, powerful story. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in real operating brothels) which adds to the feeling that you are almost watching a documentary. It seems that the DP used a lot of hand held camera and close-ups and overall it made you feel like you are right there as part of the story.

After the screening, I was listening to other members of the audience as they left and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an easy film to watch and I salute the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. I have to admit that Holly was not on my watch list for the Edinburgh Film [[Celebratory]]. However, after the Artistic Director of the Festival specifically recommended this film to an audience of over 200 people prior to the screening of another film, I decided to [[going]] to [[behold]] it. [[Whoa]]!

This film is dealing with the very [[cumbersome]] [[issuing]] of child prostitution and does so without any compromise. I have found myself crying a number of times during the movie and laughing at others. Speaking about an emotional roller coaster.

The lead actor (Thuy Nguyen) is a Vietnamese newcomer (who was only 14 at the time of filming) and had to tackle this incredibly complex and difficult role. She reminded me of Keisha Castle-Hughes from Whale Rider but the role here is much more demanding as she has to play a child prostitute. Chances are that she will win numerous awards.

The main story is about a girl who was sold to prostitution by her family and held as a sex-slave in a brothel in Cambodia. She meets an American (played by Ron Livingston in a strong dramatic role that we are not used to see from him), who after spending some time with her decides to help her. By that time however, she is sold again and he is going on a search for her around Cambodia. The story turns and twists and the audience can never predict what will happen next.

The acting was strong across the board with a very interesting international cast. Udo Kier (very convincing as a sex tourist), Virgine Ledoyen (touching as a social worker) and Chris Penn (one of his last movies). The Asian cast was also superb.

Although the film deals with this difficult subject matter it focuses successfully on telling a compelling, powerful story. It was shot in Cambodia (some scenes in real operating brothels) which adds to the feeling that you are almost watching a documentary. It seems that the DP used a lot of hand held camera and close-ups and overall it made you feel like you are right there as part of the story.

After the screening, I was listening to other members of the audience as they left and it seemed that they were all stunned. This is not an easy film to watch and I salute the filmmakers for not making a "Hollywood Film."

It is by far the best film I have seen in the Edinburgh Film Festival. Opinion shared by my husband and a couple of other friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 2384 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I have read the novel Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews years ago and last night I accidentally came to see this adaption.

Although it's been years since I read the story the first time, the differences between the novel and the movie are [[humongous]]. Very important elements, which made the whole thing plausible are just written out or changed to [[bad]].

If the plot sounds interesting to you: go and get the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was hard to stop watching because of the great basic plot by Ben Mezrich. I have read the novel Reaper of Ben Mezrich a fews years ago and last night I accidentally came to see this adaption.

Although it's been years since I read the story the first time, the differences between the novel and the movie are [[mammoth]]. Very important elements, which made the whole thing plausible are just written out or changed to [[negative]].

If the plot sounds interesting to you: go and get the novel. Its much, much, much better.

Still 4 out of 10 since it was hard to stop watching because of the great basic plot by Ben Mezrich. --------------------------------------------- Result 2385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The film belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper bring a little acting verve to story with several standard elements. Well filmed, well [[edited]], with plenty of well acted secondary [[roles]].

Some have [[declared]] this movie to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I [[agree]] with those who say "The movie celebrates the thrill of youthful inspiration."

The [[film]] is a [[pleasant]] reminder that achievement may be born of ordinary roots.

The film belongs to Inventor - Underdog genre. Jake Gyllenhaal, Laura Dern and Chris Cooper bring a little acting verve to story with several standard elements. Well filmed, well [[editing]], with plenty of well acted secondary [[duties]].

Some have [[announced]] this movie to be classic American hokey. It is that and more. I [[concur]] with those who say "The movie celebrates the thrill of youthful inspiration."

The [[flick]] is a [[pleasurable]] reminder that achievement may be born of ordinary roots.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A bad rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked story and strong aftertaste of lame [[propaganda]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they live next door and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix woman, she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[singer]] [[woman]] with the [[crazy]] [[eyes]] is [[best]] when she's [[dead]] in [[bed]]; and [[even]] the [[wolf]] was sub-par ([[although]] she was the [[best]] performer in the movie) -- [[maybe]] they [[fed]] her before the shots, or something.

Unlike "[[Seven]]", which had a (made up, but interesting) [[story]], to which one could relate more or less regardless of the [[country]], this [[movie]] [[seems]] to focus on a US-only obsession. [[If]] one doesn't care much about "[[sex]] [[offenders]]" -- and the statistics are that [[lack]] of exercise and bad diet [[cause]] more [[pain]], suffering and [[death]] -- there is [[little]] reason to see it, or to be afraid.

There are some [[body]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fails]] both as artistic device (because it is pointless) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste time on this one. A bad rip-off attempt on "Seven", complete with sub-second-grade acting, awful camera work, half-baked story and strong aftertaste of lame [[publicity]]. Yeah, them "sex offenders", they live next door and you're gonna get raped, really.

No surprises from the vice-terminatrix woman, she acts as always -- as convincingly as a piece of wood. Richard Gere keeps on sliding lower and lower -- and is about as low here as a late Steven Seagal.

The [[vocalist]] [[femme]] with the [[psycho]] [[eye]] is [[finest]] when she's [[deceased]] in [[bedside]]; and [[yet]] the [[woolf]] was sub-par ([[while]] she was the [[nicest]] performer in the movie) -- [[conceivably]] they [[fueled]] her before the shots, or something.

Unlike "[[Sept]]", which had a (made up, but interesting) [[conte]], to which one could relate more or less regardless of the [[nation]], this [[kino]] [[seem]] to focus on a US-only obsession. [[Though]] one doesn't care much about "[[sexuality]] [[delinquents]]" -- and the statistics are that [[imperfection]] of exercise and bad diet [[reason]] more [[heartache]], suffering and [[mortality]] -- there is [[small]] reason to see it, or to be afraid.

There are some [[agency]] part fetishes and some snuff, but the gore is less then mediocre, and [[fail]] both as artistic device (because it is pointless) and as gore, because it is not gory enough.

Don't waste time on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This film is [[overblown]], predictable, [[pretentious]], and [[hollow]] to its core. The [[settings]] are [[faithful]] to the [[era]] but self-conscious in their magnification by [[prolonged]] [[exposure]]. The lingering over artifacts [[stops]] the [[action]] and cloys almost as much as the empty [[dialogue]]. Tom Hanks [[seems]] to be sleepwalking much as Bruce Willis did in Hart's War. Tom, you can't give depth to a character simply by making your face blank! The content did not warrant the histrionic acting by [[Paul]] Newman. This is a dud [[wrapped]] in an atomic bomb casing. This film is [[exaggerated]], predictable, [[presumptuous]], and [[empty]] to its core. The [[setups]] are [[trusty]] to the [[epoch]] but self-conscious in their magnification by [[extended]] [[exhibition]]. The lingering over artifacts [[stop]] the [[actions]] and cloys almost as much as the empty [[conversation]]. Tom Hanks [[seem]] to be sleepwalking much as Bruce Willis did in Hart's War. Tom, you can't give depth to a character simply by making your face blank! The content did not warrant the histrionic acting by [[Paolo]] Newman. This is a dud [[shrouded]] in an atomic bomb casing. --------------------------------------------- Result 2388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] I saw this feature as part of the Asian American Film Festival in New York and was [[horrified]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is hidden beneath way too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the least bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have flashbacks. I saw this feature as part of the Asian American Film Festival in New York and was [[astonished]] by the graphic, sado-masochistic, child pornography that I witnessed. The story line is hidden beneath way too many graphic sex scenes - and, not one is in the least bit erotic - sick is the more the feeling. The director seemed to be going for shock value rather the exploring the various levels of why these characters are like this. See it if you can stomach it - I still have flashbacks. --------------------------------------------- Result 2389 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[When]] i saw the preview for this on [[TV]] i was [[thinking]], "[[ok]] its gonna be a [[good]] werewolf [[movie]]" but it was not. it was not [[scary]] at all! acting was good, [[plot]] was [[horrible]], the military bid was just [[plain]] stupid. I [[think]] the SCI-FI [[channel]] [[could]] of [[done]] better than this [[piece]] of [[crap]]. The [[movie]] [[made]] it [[sound]] like Arron was [[going]] to turn into a [[werewolf]], [[instead]] he turned [[psycho]] and [[bit]] some doctor's throat out. [[If]] you have read some of my other reviews on other [[movies]], there all [[positive]], but this one is not simply because the story was [[terrible]]. One out of 10 max. Im sure you all were expecting some [[werewolf]] [[flick]], but i [[bet]] you didn't expect this. Beyond Loch Nes was [[way]] [[better]] than this [[movie]], heck, any [[movie]] [[thats]] on the sci-fi [[channel]] is [[better]] than this [[movie]]. [[Whenever]] i saw the preview for this on [[TELEVISIONS]] i was [[thought]], "[[okay]] its gonna be a [[buena]] werewolf [[cinematographic]]" but it was not. it was not [[dreadful]] at all! acting was good, [[intrigue]] was [[terrible]], the military bid was just [[lowlands]] stupid. I [[believe]] the SCI-FI [[canal]] [[did]] of [[completed]] better than this [[slice]] of [[damnit]]. The [[movies]] [[brought]] it [[sounds]] like Arron was [[gonna]] to turn into a [[werewolves]], [[conversely]] he turned [[crazy]] and [[bitten]] some doctor's throat out. [[Though]] you have read some of my other reviews on other [[cinematography]], there all [[favourable]], but this one is not simply because the story was [[heinous]]. One out of 10 max. Im sure you all were expecting some [[werewolves]] [[gesture]], but i [[bets]] you didn't expect this. Beyond Loch Nes was [[paths]] [[best]] than this [[film]], heck, any [[kino]] [[aint]] on the sci-fi [[canal]] is [[optimum]] than this [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Basically]] what we have here is [[little]] more than a [[remake]] of the hilarious 1970's classic kitsch horror 'Death Line' which [[ironically]] was like this [[cobblers]], also partly filmed at the disused Aldwych underground station.

Making good use of the now disused Jubilee Line platforms at Charing Cross as well as the aforementioned Aldwych, this film contains [[basically]] the same plot - [[dodgy]] murdering mad zombie in the tunnels [[preying]] on the lost passengers who have missed the last train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are sadly lacking. The gore ranges from the poor to the unnecessarily over gory whilst the sub-Gollum nutter is never really fully explained as seems little more than an under developed plot device.

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin script than run down a lot of tunnels and scream every so often, indeed she was like pretty much everyone else in this film, out-acted by a small dog and a pack of tame rats.

If creepy films set on the London Underground are your bag, or you just want to play 'spot the tube location' them pick this up on DVD when it hits a bargain bin. If you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a copy of Death Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well written and acted film, you will need to change trains..... [[Largely]] what we have here is [[kiddo]] more than a [[redo]] of the hilarious 1970's classic kitsch horror 'Death Line' which [[paradoxically]] was like this [[shoemakers]], also partly filmed at the disused Aldwych underground station.

Making good use of the now disused Jubilee Line platforms at Charing Cross as well as the aforementioned Aldwych, this film contains [[principally]] the same plot - [[murky]] murdering mad zombie in the tunnels [[preyed]] on the lost passengers who have missed the last train - originality is not this film's strong point.

Indeed strong points are sadly lacking. The gore ranges from the poor to the unnecessarily over gory whilst the sub-Gollum nutter is never really fully explained as seems little more than an under developed plot device.

Franke Polente has little to do with a thin script than run down a lot of tunnels and scream every so often, indeed she was like pretty much everyone else in this film, out-acted by a small dog and a pack of tame rats.

If creepy films set on the London Underground are your bag, or you just want to play 'spot the tube location' them pick this up on DVD when it hits a bargain bin. If you are looking for classic horror, go and dig up a copy of Death Line (aka Raw Meat).

If you are looking for a quality well written and acted film, you will need to change trains..... --------------------------------------------- Result 2391 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I was [[amazed]] at the improvements made in an animated film. If you sit close to the screen, you will see the detail in the grass and surface structures. The detail, colors, and shading are at least an order of magnitude better than Toy Story. How they were able to pull off the shading, I will never know. I do hope that PIXAR will provide a documentary on how the film was produced so I can find out how all this was [[accomplished]]. Based on this film, I think animated films of the [[future]] will be judged on the basis of this film. I was [[appalled]] at the improvements made in an animated film. If you sit close to the screen, you will see the detail in the grass and surface structures. The detail, colors, and shading are at least an order of magnitude better than Toy Story. How they were able to pull off the shading, I will never know. I do hope that PIXAR will provide a documentary on how the film was produced so I can find out how all this was [[doing]]. Based on this film, I think animated films of the [[futur]] will be judged on the basis of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is a great entertaining action [[film]] in my opinion, with cool characters, lots of action, and an [[amazing]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, however Alex Karzis is awful as the [[villain]]!. The story is very [[good]], and i [[found]] the [[kids]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[simply]] [[amazing]] in this!. The action scenes are [[excellent]], and it's almost like Die Hard except it's set in a school!, plus Kata Dobó is very menacing and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional moments as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't cut it as the villain way too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be higher then 4.1 in my opinion, as i thought it was a great action film, and while the kids, were very stupid at times, they got quite resourceful as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The ending is very amusing,and Corey Sevier's character was my favorite student!, plus Dolph has still got it!. This is a great entertaining action [[film]] in my opinion, with cool characters, lots of action, and an amazing performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the [[villain]], [[still]] i [[highly]] [[recommend]] this one!. The [[Direction]] is very [[good]]!. [[Sidney]] J. Furie does a very good [[job]] here with [[great]] camera [[work]], good [[angles]], and [[keeping]] the [[film]] at a very [[fast]] pace!. There is a [[bit]] of blood and violence. We [[get]] [[lots]] of [[extremely]] [[bloody]] [[gunshot]] [[wounds]],knife in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[minor]] [[stuff]]. The Acting is [[fantastic]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[amazing]] as [[always]], and is amazing here, he is [[extremely]] likable, [[kicks]] that [[ass]] as [[usual]], had [[great]] chemistry with the [[kids]], had an awesome [[character]], is very charismatic, and he [[may]] not have [[shown]] a [[great]] emotional [[rage]], he [[still]] was a [[hell]] of a [[lot]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[favorite]] [[actors]]! (Lundgren [[Rules]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[god]] [[awful]] as the [[villain]], he is laughably OTT, was [[boring]], and not [[menacing]] at all, he [[also]] annoyed the crap out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 This is a great entertaining action [[cinematic]] in my opinion, with cool characters, lots of action, and an [[impressive]] performance from Dolph Lundgren, however Alex Karzis is awful as the [[scoundrel]]!. The story is very [[buena]], and i [[find]] the [[infantile]] to be likable for the most part, plus Dolph Lundgren is [[merely]] [[staggering]] in this!. The action scenes are [[glamorous]], and it's almost like Die Hard except it's set in a school!, plus Kata Dobó is very menacing and sexy as the sidekick!. The finale is very exciting, and it has a couple of cool emotional moments as well!, however i just wished it had another villain, because Alex Karzis just didn't cut it as the villain way too OTT, and laughable for my tastes. This should be higher then 4.1 in my opinion, as i thought it was a great action film, and while the kids, were very stupid at times, they got quite resourceful as the movie went along!, plus the shootouts were pretty cool as well!. The ending is very amusing,and Corey Sevier's character was my favorite student!, plus Dolph has still got it!. This is a great entertaining action [[cinematography]] in my opinion, with cool characters, lots of action, and an amazing performance from Lundgren!, but Alex Karzis is awful as the [[scoundrel]], [[nevertheless]] i [[unimaginably]] [[recommends]] this one!. The [[Directorate]] is very [[alright]]!. [[Sydney]] J. Furie does a very good [[workplace]] here with [[awesome]] camera [[jobs]], good [[angle]], and [[maintaining]] the [[cinema]] at a very [[faster]] pace!. There is a [[bitten]] of blood and violence. We [[obtain]] [[lot]] of [[terribly]] [[murderous]] [[tir]] [[lesions]],knife in the side of the head, bloody arrow hits, an impaling, and other [[marginal]] [[thing]]. The Acting is [[resplendent]]!. Dolph Lundgren is [[unbelievable]] as [[permanently]], and is amazing here, he is [[unbelievably]] likable, [[karate]] that [[arse]] as [[normal]], had [[awesome]] chemistry with the [[enfants]], had an awesome [[personages]], is very charismatic, and he [[maggio]] not have [[demonstrated]] a [[awesome]] emotional [[tantrum]], he [[again]] was a [[dammit]] of a [[batch]] of fun to watch!, he is one of my [[favored]] [[protagonists]]! (Lundgren [[Regulations]]!!!!!). Alex Karzis is [[jeez]] [[abominable]] as the [[scoundrel]], he is laughably OTT, was [[bored]], and not [[endangering]] at all, he [[additionally]] annoyed the crap out of me. Kata Dobó is very sexy as the side kick and did fine with what she had to do, she was the real villain in my opinion!. Corey Sevier is funny as Mick, he was my favorite student, and i really started to warm up to him in the 2nd half, i liked him a lot!, he had good chemistry with Dolph too. Dov Tiefenbach(Willy),Chris Collins(Hogie),Mpho Koaho(Jay Tee),Danielle Hampton(Alicia),Nicole Dicker(Charlee) all do great as the students. Jennifer Baxter is very cute and is good as The fiancée. rest of the cast do fine. Overall i highly recommend this one!. ***1/2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This movie has so [[many]] [[wonderful]] [[elements]] to it! The debut performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of [[course]], [[marvelous]], but so too is her [[chemistry]] with Jason London. The score is [[remarkable]], [[breezy]] and [[pure]]. James [[Newton]] Howard [[enhances]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[also]] seems to have a [[knack]] for lost-days-of-youth movies, be sure to [[catch]] his [[score]] for the recent "[[Peter]] Pan" and the haunting [[Gothic]] music of "The [[Village]]." I [[first]] saw this [[film]] at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[cry]] at the [[ending]], I [[shed]] a [[tear]] or two for the [[nostalgia]]. [[Show]] this movie to your [[daughters]]. It will [[end]] up [[becoming]] a lifetime [[comfort]] [[film]]. This movie has so [[innumerable]] [[sumptuous]] [[element]] to it! The debut performance of Reese Witherspoon is, of [[cours]], [[fabulous]], but so too is her [[chem]] with Jason London. The score is [[dramatic]], [[glib]] and [[sheer]]. James [[Newtonian]] Howard [[reinforces]] the quality of any film he composes for tenfold. He [[apart]] seems to have a [[donation]] for lost-days-of-youth movies, be sure to [[catches]] his [[punctuation]] for the recent "[[Pete]] Pan" and the haunting [[Goth]] music of "The [[Villager]]." I [[firstly]] saw this [[filmmaking]] at about 13 or 14 and now I don't just [[outcry]] at the [[terminated]], I [[boathouse]] a [[rip]] or two for the [[longing]]. [[Demonstrate]] this movie to your [[female]]. It will [[ceases]] up [[becomes]] a lifetime [[consolation]] [[flick]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is [[absurd]] - aside from the fellow Australian who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a review so far was some way involved in the production of Elektra, [[considering]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie conversions so I didn't go in with many [[expectations]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[incredibly]] underwhelming. The thing that irked me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by [[unexplained]], that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by [[unexplained]].

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[locations]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained little enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're supposed to suspend our disbelief for fantasy/action films, but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action film standards) that it simply frustrated me.

Well, hell, at least Jennifer Garner looks damn good. This is [[claptrap]] - aside from the fellow Australian who has reviewed this flick, I can't help but think that everyone else who has submitted a review so far was some way involved in the production of Elektra, [[scrutinize]] how generous they were with their praise.

Admittedly I'm not really a fan of comic-book-to-movie conversions so I didn't go in with many [[forecasting]], yet still I found Elektra to be [[stunningly]] underwhelming. The thing that irked me the most was the fact that there was SO MUCH in this film which went by [[inexplicable]], that left you thinking "huh, what relevance does that have to the plot?" or "so how did that aspect of the character come about?" I can only hope that these are things which are perhaps explained somewhat in Daredevil, which I have no intention of seeing.

Furthermore, the behaviour of the characters in this film appear to do an about-face at random moments to suit the storyline, and don't even get me started about the utterly pointless romantic sub-plot. I'm also (still) scratching my head over the fate of Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa's character, which seems to have gone by [[inexplicable]].

If I can give kudos to this movie for anything it would have to be the fantastic [[placements]] in which it was shot, but otherwise I gained little enjoyment from Elektra. I know we're supposed to suspend our disbelief for fantasy/action films, but almost everything in this film was so improbable or confusing (even by action film standards) that it simply frustrated me.

Well, hell, at least Jennifer Garner looks damn good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Well, I had seen "They all laughed" when it came out in

Europe around 1982 and had kept a vague but dear souvenir of it. I 've just [[seen]] it again on tape, almost twenty years after... Bogdanovich has a [[true]] heartfelt tenderness over his [[characters]] and a kind sympathy which is [[difficult]] not to feel [[also]]. Excellent comedians and [[actors]], good lines all over and for [[everyone]] and pretty [[good]] editing, too. I laughed and [[smiled]] all the time. Just as we all do, at [[times]]. Go [[get]] it. Well, I had seen "They all laughed" when it came out in

Europe around 1982 and had kept a vague but dear souvenir of it. I 've just [[watched]] it again on tape, almost twenty years after... Bogdanovich has a [[truthful]] heartfelt tenderness over his [[attribute]] and a kind sympathy which is [[laborious]] not to feel [[likewise]]. Excellent comedians and [[actresses]], good lines all over and for [[somebody]] and pretty [[alright]] editing, too. I laughed and [[glared]] all the time. Just as we all do, at [[period]]. Go [[obtains]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2396 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I saw this [[film]] as it was the [[second]] feature on a disc containing the [[previously]] banned Video Nasty 'Blood Rites'. As Blood Rites was entirely [[awful]], I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but [[actually]], it [[would]] [[seem]] that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this time as [[Seeds]] of Sin tops Blood [[Rites]] in style and stands tall as a more than adequate [[slice]] of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually [[quite]] [[similar]] to Blood [[Rites]], as we focus on a dysfunctional [[family]] unit, and of course; there is an [[inheritance]] at stake. The [[film]] is shot in black and white, and the [[look]] and feel of it reminded me a [[lot]] of the trash classic 'The [[Curious]] Dr Humpp'. There's barely any [[gore]] on display, and the [[director]] [[seems]] keener to [[focus]] on sex, with [[themes]] of incest and hatred [[seeping]] through. The acting is [[typically]] [[trashy]], but most of the women [[get]] to [[appear]] nude at some point and [[despite]] a poor [[reputation]], director [[Andy]] Milligan actually [[seems]] to have an [[eye]] for this [[sort]] of thing, as many of the [[sequences]] in this film are actually [[quite]] [[beautiful]]. The [[plot]] is paper thin, and most of the [[film]] is [[filler]]; but the [[music]] is catchy, and the director also does a [[surprisingly]] [[good]] [[job]] with the sex scenes themselves, as most are [[somewhat]] erotic. Overall, this is not a [[great]] [[film]]; but it's [[likely]] to [[appeal]] to the [[cult]] [[fan]], and [[gets]] a [[much]] [[higher]] recommendation than the [[better]] [[known]] and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. I saw this [[filmmaking]] as it was the [[secondly]] feature on a disc containing the [[ago]] banned Video Nasty 'Blood Rites'. As Blood Rites was entirely [[scary]], I really wasn't expecting much from this film; but [[indeed]], it [[ought]] [[appears]] that trash director Andy Milligan has outdone himself this time as [[Seed]] of Sin tops Blood [[Ritualistic]] in style and stands tall as a more than adequate [[cut]] of sick sixties sexploitation. The plot is actually [[pretty]] [[akin]] to Blood [[Ceremonial]], as we focus on a dysfunctional [[familia]] unit, and of course; there is an [[succession]] at stake. The [[filmmaking]] is shot in black and white, and the [[glance]] and feel of it reminded me a [[batch]] of the trash classic 'The [[Weird]] Dr Humpp'. There's barely any [[gora]] on display, and the [[headmaster]] [[looks]] keener to [[accent]] on sex, with [[subjects]] of incest and hatred [[seeped]] through. The acting is [[routinely]] [[tacky]], but most of the women [[gets]] to [[appearing]] nude at some point and [[while]] a poor [[notoriety]], director [[Indy]] Milligan actually [[looks]] to have an [[eyes]] for this [[kinds]] of thing, as many of the [[sequence]] in this film are actually [[utterly]] [[resplendent]]. The [[intrigue]] is paper thin, and most of the [[kino]] is [[refill]]; but the [[musician]] is catchy, and the director also does a [[unimaginably]] [[buena]] [[labour]] with the sex scenes themselves, as most are [[slightly]] erotic. Overall, this is not a [[awesome]] [[movie]]; but it's [[potentially]] to [[appellate]] to the [[religions]] [[groupie]], and [[obtains]] a [[very]] [[upper]] recommendation than the [[optimum]] [[renowned]] and lower quality 'Blood Rites'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I do miss the company Vestron, they sure had their finger on the pulse of unique and unusual cinema back in the 1980s. This is very apparent with the astonishing Paperhouse, a film that touches me deeply each and every time I watch it.

The idea of a girl manipulating a dream world with her drawings (thusly the dream world manipulating reality), and also connecting with and affecting the life of a boy she's never actually met, is fascinating and never disappoints. Charlotte Burke at first seems quite precocious and yet you warm up to her because by being a bit of a mischievous child, it makes it hard for the adults to believe what she is experiencing. She becomes very self aware and strong towards the end, even finding she doesn't "hate boys" as she so defiantly claimed at first. Through this we are treated to many touching moments and some immensely scary ones, all visually stunning with a grand score from Hans Zimmer. I'm quite proud to be an owner of the soundtrack on CD when it was released in the United States on RCA Victor. At the time of this writing there is no DVD of Paperhouse yet available in the U.S. (only in Europe), here's hoping one of my wishes will come true as I truly cherish this beautiful film and a DVD of it would be very welcome!

It's satisfying watching the girl work out her thoughts like a puzzle game trying to make the dream world work for her and her newfound friend Marc (Elliot Spiers). Both Charlotte Burke and Elliot Spiers do a magnificent job throughout, I find the editorial comment on Amazon.com about it being "hammy acting" quite perplexing -- I found every aspect of Paperhouse to be exhilarating. Even in minor scenes of brilliance like when Charlotte and the girl in the classroom are staring at each other through the glass on a door, it's quite powerful.

You don't have to be an arthouse type to enjoy Paperhouse, just be a person that enjoys a film that stimulates and has you wanting more. There is enough in this film to invite repeated viewings and I'm still in awe of the cinematography and sets. For me, it's never like watching the same film twice, as there are so many details to absorb and savor. A very emotional experience indeed.

While there are many films I adore, there are only a few specific ones that strike a great emotional chord in me: films like Paperhouse, Static, Resurrection, and Donnie Darko. When I see so much drek out there passing as films that will easily be forgotten and in bargain bins, all I have to do is watch Paperhouse and my faith in wondrous storytelling is renewed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2398 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is one of the [[better]] comedies that has ever been on television. Season one was hilarious as were most of the following seasons. The only reason that I give this [[show]] a 9/10 is because of the unfortunate [[final]] season. The only good part of the final season was the finale. My favorite part of this show was the scenes that cut to people's [[imaginations]], often depicting the characters in famous TV shows or movies from the 70's. It is a [[rare]] [[show]] in that i liked every [[character]] (with the exception of the final season...too late to try to develop a new character and fez wasn't nearly as funny). Red's foot in your ass comments never got old, nor did Kelso's stupidity. Bravo to fox for keeping such a good show so long, too long even. This is one of the [[optimum]] comedies that has ever been on television. Season one was hilarious as were most of the following seasons. The only reason that I give this [[spectacle]] a 9/10 is because of the unfortunate [[definitive]] season. The only good part of the final season was the finale. My favorite part of this show was the scenes that cut to people's [[imaginings]], often depicting the characters in famous TV shows or movies from the 70's. It is a [[scarce]] [[showing]] in that i liked every [[characteristics]] (with the exception of the final season...too late to try to develop a new character and fez wasn't nearly as funny). Red's foot in your ass comments never got old, nor did Kelso's stupidity. Bravo to fox for keeping such a good show so long, too long even. --------------------------------------------- Result 2399 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I don't know the [[stars]], or modern Chinese teenage music - but I do know a thoroughly entertaining movie when I [[see]] one.

Kung Fu Dunk is pure Hollywood in its values - it's played for laughs, for love, and is a great [[blend]] of Kung Fu and basketball.

[[Everybody]] looks like they had a [[lot]] of fun making this - the production values are [[excellent]] - and [[modern]] [[China]] looks glossier than Los Angeles here.

The plot of the abandoned orphan who grows up in a kung fu school only to be kicked out and then discover superstardom as a basketball play (and love and more etc;) is great - this is fresh, fun, and immensely entertaining.

With great action and good dialogue this is one simply to enjoy - for all ages - and for our money was one of the best family movies we're seen in a long time.

Please ignore the negative reviews and give Dunk a chance - we were really glad we did - a GOOD sports comedy movie. I don't know the [[superstar]], or modern Chinese teenage music - but I do know a thoroughly entertaining movie when I [[consults]] one.

Kung Fu Dunk is pure Hollywood in its values - it's played for laughs, for love, and is a great [[mingling]] of Kung Fu and basketball.

[[Someone]] looks like they had a [[batches]] of fun making this - the production values are [[resplendent]] - and [[fashionable]] [[Wah]] looks glossier than Los Angeles here.

The plot of the abandoned orphan who grows up in a kung fu school only to be kicked out and then discover superstardom as a basketball play (and love and more etc;) is great - this is fresh, fun, and immensely entertaining.

With great action and good dialogue this is one simply to enjoy - for all ages - and for our money was one of the best family movies we're seen in a long time.

Please ignore the negative reviews and give Dunk a chance - we were really glad we did - a GOOD sports comedy movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2400 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] As [[long]] as you [[go]] into this movie knowing that it's [[terrible]]: [[bad]] acting, [[bad]] "[[effects]]," [[bad]] [[story]], [[bad]]... everything, then you'll [[love]] it. This is one of my [[favorite]] "goof on" [[movies]]; watch it as a [[comedy]] and have a dozen good [[laughs]]! As [[longer]] as you [[going]] into this movie knowing that it's [[scary]]: [[rotten]] acting, [[wicked]] "[[influences]]," [[unhealthy]] [[tales]], [[unhealthy]]... everything, then you'll [[iove]] it. This is one of my [[preferable]] "goof on" [[theater]]; watch it as a [[travesty]] and have a dozen good [[giggles]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] On this 4th of July weekend it's heartening to see the spirit of the Declaration of Independence alive and well in the [[film]] "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers gave the back of their collective hand to King George III, this [[film]] [[exposes]] in [[hilarious]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[current]] [[crop]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the government, to include privatizing war itself.

The cast in this satire [[absolutely]] [[shines]]. [[John]] Cusack is [[wonderful]] as a droll, conflicted corporate [[assassin]], and the [[beautiful]] Marisa Tomei is superb as his love interest. (My gosh, "George Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so attractive!) But it is John's sister Joan Cusack who really [[steals]] the film. Her portrayal of a bossy, yet simultaneously sycophantic, personal assistant is priceless, and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the brilliance of her performance. She not only possesses fantastic comic timing, her face is as expressive as one could ever wish for in an actor. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very effective, cameo in the film as the head of the company which is running the war, the Tamerlane Corporation. Sitting on a "throne" with his pants down around his ankles, Ackroyd even looks like the arse clown who currently occupies one of our real thrones of power. You won't have to think too hard to recognize that person. Much of this movie was filmed in Bulgaria, which is why we are able to see so much real military equipment. (You just know that the US military would never have cooperated in making this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I especially enjoyed the character of "Omar Sharif" as played by the Bulgarian actor Lyubomir Neikov. In one scene in which he is on the dance floor with Marisa Tomei he has a couple of lines that could summarize our entire foreign policy attitude toward the foreign leaders we install - and uninstall - in power.

Naturally, this film won't appeal to everyone. If you believe that the on-going privatization of our foreign policy, the military, intelligence collection and analysis, prisons and the corrections system, public health, and a myriad of other government services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. On this 4th of July weekend it's heartening to see the spirit of the Declaration of Independence alive and well in the [[kino]] "War, Inc." Just as our founding fathers gave the back of their collective hand to King George III, this [[flick]] [[presents]] in [[comical]] fashion the craven war-profiteering by the [[underway]] [[cropping]] of capitalistic creeps who are intent on indecently privatizing the government, to include privatizing war itself.

The cast in this satire [[completely]] [[glows]]. [[Johannes]] Cusack is [[sumptuous]] as a droll, conflicted corporate [[callin]], and the [[leggy]] Marisa Tomei is superb as his love interest. (My gosh, "George Costanza" was right. Marisa Tomei is so attractive!) But it is John's sister Joan Cusack who really [[robs]] the film. Her portrayal of a bossy, yet simultaneously sycophantic, personal assistant is priceless, and more than once I just couldn't stop laughing at the brilliance of her performance. She not only possesses fantastic comic timing, her face is as expressive as one could ever wish for in an actor. Dan Ackroyd, too, has a short, but very effective, cameo in the film as the head of the company which is running the war, the Tamerlane Corporation. Sitting on a "throne" with his pants down around his ankles, Ackroyd even looks like the arse clown who currently occupies one of our real thrones of power. You won't have to think too hard to recognize that person. Much of this movie was filmed in Bulgaria, which is why we are able to see so much real military equipment. (You just know that the US military would never have cooperated in making this satiric expose of war-profiteering.) I especially enjoyed the character of "Omar Sharif" as played by the Bulgarian actor Lyubomir Neikov. In one scene in which he is on the dance floor with Marisa Tomei he has a couple of lines that could summarize our entire foreign policy attitude toward the foreign leaders we install - and uninstall - in power.

Naturally, this film won't appeal to everyone. If you believe that the on-going privatization of our foreign policy, the military, intelligence collection and analysis, prisons and the corrections system, public health, and a myriad of other government services is a good thing you may not find much to like in this film. If you believe, however, that destroying people and countries in order to add to some corporation's bottom line is an abomination I think you'll find much to appreciate in this film. Nothing could be more in keeping with the Spirit of Independence that heaping well-deserved ridicule on corrupt powers that be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Decent enough with some [[stylish]] imagery however the tiny budget hampers things.

I also get the impression they were trying to shock you with some of the graphic weirdo [[perv]] website stuff.

if you [[like]] anime in particular stuff like cyber city and the AD police then this might up your street.

but [[basically]] its low budget matrix cash in however not totally [[devoid]] of its own style.

Great soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/punk/post [[grunge]] bands. Worth checking out if only for the soundtrack. Decent enough with some [[stylized]] imagery however the tiny budget hampers things.

I also get the impression they were trying to shock you with some of the graphic weirdo [[perverts]] website stuff.

if you [[iike]] anime in particular stuff like cyber city and the AD police then this might up your street.

but [[mostly]] its low budget matrix cash in however not totally [[bereft]] of its own style.

Great soundtrack by some unheard of grunge/punk/post [[grungy]] bands. Worth checking out if only for the soundtrack. --------------------------------------------- Result 2403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (76%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[always]] tell people that "Enchanted April" is an adult movie with no cussing, no sex, and no violence. One might think of it as "the ultimate chick flick", but I [[bet]] there are one or two enlightened men out there who love it too. Don't invite the kids, [[though]]. This movie is very low-key.

Seeing "[[Enchanted]] April" is a very healing experience. The sound [[track]] and gorgeous scenery, along with the ladies' gentle manners, bring to mind the peace and beauty of a pre-Raphaelite painting.

Lest anyone think yours truly only watches one kind of movie, I will paraphrase a line I heard once on "Saturday Night Live" and say that my two favorite movies are "The Deer Hunter" and "Enchanted April". I [[invariably]] tell people that "Enchanted April" is an adult movie with no cussing, no sex, and no violence. One might think of it as "the ultimate chick flick", but I [[gamble]] there are one or two enlightened men out there who love it too. Don't invite the kids, [[despite]]. This movie is very low-key.

Seeing "[[Delighted]] April" is a very healing experience. The sound [[tracking]] and gorgeous scenery, along with the ladies' gentle manners, bring to mind the peace and beauty of a pre-Raphaelite painting.

Lest anyone think yours truly only watches one kind of movie, I will paraphrase a line I heard once on "Saturday Night Live" and say that my two favorite movies are "The Deer Hunter" and "Enchanted April". --------------------------------------------- Result 2404 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] And I don't say it in a [[bad]] way.

I watched this movie at the cinema when I was 6 or 7. For me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the years, I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even seeing a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I liked it that way.

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. If I saw it today, I know I couldn't help but criticise MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a childhood memory, so my feelings towards it are those of a child from 20 years ago.

I see my adult self intervenes in my rating and gives it an 8 for the memories and wonderful music. For that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is definitely worthy of a 10. And I don't say it in a [[unhealthy]] way.

I watched this movie at the cinema when I was 6 or 7. For me and my cousins it was magical, beautiful and scary at the same time. When we left the theatre, Michael was our best friend even though we knew he had no idea about it.

Over the years, I saw this movie being aired a few times but I always changed the channel. Even seeing a few seconds of it would bring back that feeling of magic and warm my heart. And I liked it that way.

So I've only seen this movie once and I believe it was a good decision not to watch it again. If I saw it today, I know I couldn't help but criticise MJ's acting, the plot (if there was one) and this and that. For me this is a childhood memory, so my feelings towards it are those of a child from 20 years ago.

I see my adult self intervenes in my rating and gives it an 8 for the memories and wonderful music. For that little kid who watched it in awe 20 years ago though, this is definitely worthy of a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Virile]], but [[naive]], [[big]] Joe Buck [[leaves]] his [[home]] in [[Big]] [[Spring]], Texas, and hustles off to the [[Big]] Apple in search of [[women]] and [[big]] [[bucks]]. [[In]] NYC, JB meets up with [[frustration]], and with "Ratso" Rizzo, a scruffy but cordial con [[artist]]. [[Somehow]], this mismatched [[pair]] manage to survive each other which in [[turn]] [[helps]] both of them cope with a gritty, [[sometimes]] [[brutal]], urban [[America]], en [[route]] to a poignant [[ending]].

Both [[funny]] and [[depressing]], our "Midnight [[Cowboy]]" [[rides]] head-on into the [[vortex]] of cyclonic cultural [[change]], and [[thus]] [[confirms]] to 1969 [[viewers]] that they, themselves, have been [[swept]] away from the 1950's [[age]] of innocence, and [[dropped]], Dorothy and [[Toto]] like, into the 1960's [[Age]] of [[Aquarius]].

The film's [[direction]] is masterful; the casting is [[perfect]]; the acting is [[top]] notch; the [[script]] is crisp and cogent; the [[cinematography]] is engaging; and the music [[enhances]] all of the above. [[Deservedly]], it won the [[best]] [[picture]] [[Oscar]] of 1969, and I [[would]] [[vote]] it as one of the [[best]] [[films]] of that cyclonic decade. [[Masculine]], but [[gullible]], [[major]] Joe Buck [[sheets]] his [[house]] in [[Substantial]] [[Springs]], Texas, and hustles off to the [[Substantial]] Apple in search of [[female]] and [[considerable]] [[usd]]. [[At]] NYC, JB meets up with [[disappointment]], and with "Ratso" Rizzo, a scruffy but cordial con [[entertainer]]. [[Somewhere]], this mismatched [[couple]] manage to survive each other which in [[transforming]] [[help]] both of them cope with a gritty, [[intermittently]] [[brute]], urban [[Latina]], en [[road]] to a poignant [[ended]].

Both [[comical]] and [[disheartening]], our "Midnight [[Denim]]" [[wrinkles]] head-on into the [[eddy]] of cyclonic cultural [[modifying]], and [[accordingly]] [[asserts]] to 1969 [[audiences]] that they, themselves, have been [[stormed]] away from the 1950's [[aging]] of innocence, and [[slipped]], Dorothy and [[Tutu]] like, into the 1960's [[Aging]] of [[Sagittarius]].

The film's [[directorate]] is masterful; the casting is [[faultless]]; the acting is [[superior]] notch; the [[scripts]] is crisp and cogent; the [[films]] is engaging; and the music [[reinforces]] all of the above. [[Rightfully]], it won the [[optimum]] [[photographs]] [[Oskar]] of 1969, and I [[should]] [[voted]] it as one of the [[nicest]] [[cinematographic]] of that cyclonic decade. --------------------------------------------- Result 2406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Possible spoilers.

[[Although]] there was some [[good]] acting - [[particularly]] Chloe Sevigny, and Radha Mitchell in the comedy half - this [[simply]] was not an engaging film. The segues between the comedy [[part]] and the tragedy [[part]] were awkward or sometimes not obvious. This viewer was initially confused by the [[fact]] that the [[supporting]] cast [[differs]] in the two halves; I thought with the [[way]] things were laid out in the [[opening]] scene that the people [[surrounding]] Melinda [[would]] be the same people, just reacting differently (more of a "He Said, She Said" [[premise]]). [[However]], what we have is two [[totally]] [[different]] [[stories]] and two totally different [[women]], both of whom [[happen]] to be [[played]] by Radha Mitchell.

The two playwrights in the opening scene - the comedian and the tragedian - [[supposedly]] [[take]] the same [[premise]] and go from there, but the two [[stories]] are only tenuously [[related]]. They do little to support the topic of discussion, which is that almost anything can be looked at as either comedy or tragedy. Nice [[cast]], but a [[disappointing]] [[film]]. Possible spoilers.

[[While]] there was some [[buena]] acting - [[principally]] Chloe Sevigny, and Radha Mitchell in the comedy half - this [[merely]] was not an engaging film. The segues between the comedy [[parties]] and the tragedy [[parties]] were awkward or sometimes not obvious. This viewer was initially confused by the [[facto]] that the [[helped]] cast [[varying]] in the two halves; I thought with the [[pathways]] things were laid out in the [[initiation]] scene that the people [[surrounds]] Melinda [[could]] be the same people, just reacting differently (more of a "He Said, She Said" [[assumption]]). [[Still]], what we have is two [[perfectly]] [[varied]] [[tales]] and two totally different [[daughters]], both of whom [[occur]] to be [[accomplished]] by Radha Mitchell.

The two playwrights in the opening scene - the comedian and the tragedian - [[reportedly]] [[taking]] the same [[assumption]] and go from there, but the two [[history]] are only tenuously [[tied]]. They do little to support the topic of discussion, which is that almost anything can be looked at as either comedy or tragedy. Nice [[casting]], but a [[depressing]] [[cinema]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2407 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I'm not sure if [[users]] [[ought]] to be [[allowed]] to review [[films]] after only sitting through half, but I'm [[afraid]] I just couldn't [[stand]] another minute.

[[If]] this abject [[excuse]] for a [[film]] doesn't have the late, [[great]] GP spinning like a [[wheel]] in his [[grave]], then I doubt [[anything]] will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[How]] dare a ([[second]] [[rate]]) [[director]] and writer attempt something to which they're so [[clearly]] [[incapable]] of delivering. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly executed slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? Check. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? Check. Embarrassingly written female characters? Double check. Total disregard for the story which you're trying to portray? Check.

After a while, you realize that what you're watching is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with Knoxville. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with Knoxville which hasn't moved on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the last one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I decided, after some consideration, that watching this was like watching a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. Terrible jump cuts, awful camera work, clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an Irishman who's most noteworthy recent work is a really lousy BBC Sunday night drama called Monarch of the Glen (trust me, it's lowest common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so critical that when some random guy from the TV decides to give acting a go, if he's not so bad, he stinks, we applaud his efforts? Knoxville JUST ABOUT manages to get through every scene. Poor Christina A. has no such luck. Her performance is a car crash (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. I'm not sure if [[customers]] [[owe]] to be [[permitting]] to review [[movie]] after only sitting through half, but I'm [[worried]] I just couldn't [[standing]] another minute.

[[Unless]] this abject [[alibi]] for a [[films]] doesn't have the late, [[formidable]] GP spinning like a [[wheels]] in his [[tombs]], then I doubt [[something]] will.

The excellent review above 'Not a film for Parsons fans' sums up most of my feelings. [[Mode]] dare a ([[seconds]] [[rates]]) [[superintendent]] and writer attempt something to which they're so [[apparently]] [[unable]] of delivering. What were they thinking? Where to start?

THE SCRIPT: I thought I'd be getting a slice of bittersweet Americana. What I got was poorly executed slapstick with no cliché left unturned. Stupid hippy? Check. Stupid fat cop? Check. Awful plot contrivances? Check. Embarrassingly written female characters? Double check. Total disregard for the story which you're trying to portray? Check.

After a while, you realize that what you're watching is a soap and not a very well written one at that. Scene with Knoxville. Scene with Ex girlfriend. Scene with Knoxville which hasn't moved on much. Scene with Ex girlfriend which was a bit like the last one. And so on...

THE DIRECTION: My friends and I decided, after some consideration, that watching this was like watching a bad episode of Quincy, or maybe a particularly poor Dukes of Hazzard. That's how bad the direction was. Terrible jump cuts, awful camera work, clunky ins and outs to scenes. God, it was cringeworthy. And then I discovered the director was an Irishman who's most noteworthy recent work is a really lousy BBC Sunday night drama called Monarch of the Glen (trust me, it's lowest common denominator TV). And then it all made sense...

THE ACTING: Are we now so critical that when some random guy from the TV decides to give acting a go, if he's not so bad, he stinks, we applaud his efforts? Knoxville JUST ABOUT manages to get through every scene. Poor Christina A. has no such luck. Her performance is a car crash (though what you do with those lines, I don't know). The 'hippy' in the hearse: oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Have we not moved on since Cheech and Chong?

I could go on, but I think you get my drift. What I would say is that, as other reviews have mentioned, no one on this film clearly gives a flying damn for The Byrds, The Flying Burrito Brothers or Gram's solo work. They knew nothing about the American road movie and they certainly give a damn about trying to do anything with an admittedly decent story from rock mythology. This film was shallow, failed to explore anything and was jaw droppingly unfunny from beginning to...oh wait, I didn't quite make the end. And I suggest you stay away too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2408 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] OK, it's very rare that I complain something I got for FREE. [[So]] I guess this movie pushed me over that limit. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disappointed]]. One [[audience]] member's question to the [[director]] about using the [[Native]] American [[references]] just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the movie better, [[basically]] says everything that this movie [[FAILED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American [[references]] [[felt]] really out of place and contrived. It's [[obvious]] that this director and writer [[tried]] [[tackling]] an arena they never played in before. They should have stuck to the old adage of "write about something you know". IF they are in fact versed in this it certainly did not show on the movie or the beauty of this unique culture was not given proper justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to see this film on the basis that it was an indie. So I held it to higher expectations. "Little Miss Sunshine" was an indie and saw it before it became so popular. Before it even came out to wide release I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. UNFORTUNATELY I could not say the same about "Expiration Date". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so clever at their approach that the outcome would take us to a different [[direction]] avoiding the trap of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already TRAPPED from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to say it, but the best and [[WORST]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "Little Miss Sunshine" being the best and this movie being the [[worst]]. I wish I could say otherwise.

But I do [[congratulate]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their family members at the cemetery. OK, it's very rare that I complain something I got for FREE. [[Hence]] I guess this movie pushed me over that limit. I saw it at the Hollywood Cemetery for FREE and walked away very very [[disenchanted]]. One [[spectators]] member's question to the [[headmaster]] about using the [[Indigenous]] American [[referencing]] just as "bookends" instead of being weaved into the movie better, [[predominantly]] says everything that this movie [[FAULTED]] on.

NATIVE American REFERENCES--- The Native American [[reference]] [[deemed]] really out of place and contrived. It's [[palpable]] that this director and writer [[strived]] [[solving]] an arena they never played in before. They should have stuck to the old adage of "write about something you know". IF they are in fact versed in this it certainly did not show on the movie or the beauty of this unique culture was not given proper justice.

Clichés and ON THE NOSE--- I agreed to see this film on the basis that it was an indie. So I held it to higher expectations. "Little Miss Sunshine" was an indie and saw it before it became so popular. Before it even came out to wide release I was already raving how it's going to be a hit. UNFORTUNATELY I could not say the same about "Expiration Date". "Sunshine" took us to cliché incidents but the filmmakers were so clever at their approach that the outcome would take us to a different [[orientation]] avoiding the trap of being a "cliche". This movie on the other hand had no way of not falling in the trap because it was already TRAPPED from the start. The psycho mom's antics, the Hendrix couple, etc.

I hate to say it, but the best and [[HARDEST]] movie I've seen this year were both indies. "Little Miss Sunshine" being the best and this movie being the [[hardest]]. I wish I could say otherwise.

But I do [[praised]] the filmmakers for having such a good turn out from their family members at the cemetery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] As the [[story]] in my [[family]] goes, my dad, Milton Raskin, played the piano for the Dorsey [[band]]. After Sinatra joined the band, my dad practiced with him for [[hours]] on end. Then, at a point in time, my dad told Sinatra that he was actually to good to be [[tied]] up with such a small [[group]] ([[band]]), and that he should venture off on his own. By that time Sinatra had enough credits 'under his belt' to do just that! Dorsey never forgave my [[dad]], and the [[rest]], as they [[say]], is history.

I have some [[pictures]] and [[records]] to that [[effect]], and so does [[Berkley]] University in California.

I have seen just about [[every]] Sinatra [[movie]] more [[times]] than I [[wish]] to [[say]], and his [[movies]] never [[get]] [[old]] . . . Thank you Frank As the [[tale]] in my [[familial]] goes, my dad, Milton Raskin, played the piano for the Dorsey [[bands]]. After Sinatra joined the band, my dad practiced with him for [[hour]] on end. Then, at a point in time, my dad told Sinatra that he was actually to good to be [[tying]] up with such a small [[panel]] ([[banding]]), and that he should venture off on his own. By that time Sinatra had enough credits 'under his belt' to do just that! Dorsey never forgave my [[pope]], and the [[remainder]], as they [[told]], is history.

I have some [[imaging]] and [[registers]] to that [[effects]], and so does [[Berkeley]] University in California.

I have seen just about [[any]] Sinatra [[cinematic]] more [[time]] than I [[desire]] to [[tell]], and his [[kino]] never [[obtain]] [[antique]] . . . Thank you Frank --------------------------------------------- Result 2410 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (75%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Contains spoilers.

The British director J. Lee Thompson [[made]] some excellent films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more curious offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of rural Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, making Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no really outstanding acting performance in the film. There is also little in the way of coherent plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The main problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 Contains spoilers.

The British director J. Lee Thompson [[effected]] some excellent films, notably 'Ice Cold in Alex' and 'Cape Fear', but 'Country Dance' is one of his more curious offerings. The story is set among the upper classes of rural Scotland, and details the strange triangular relationship between Sir Charles Ferguson, an eccentric aristocratic landowner, his sister Hilary, and Hilary's estranged husband Douglas, who is hoping for a reconciliation with her. We learn that during his career as an Army officer, Charles was regarded as having 'low moral fibre'. This appears to have been an accurate diagnosis of his condition; throughout the film he displays an attitude of gloomy disillusionment with the world, and his main sources of emotional support seem to be Hilary and his whisky bottle. The film ends with his committal to an upper-class lunatic asylum.

Peter O'Toole was, when he was at his best as in 'Lawrence of Arabia', one of Britain's leading actors, but the quality of his work was very uneven, and 'Country Dance' is not one of his better films. He overacts frantically, making Charles into a caricature of the useless inbred aristocrat, as though he were auditioning for a part in the Monty Python 'Upper-Class Twit of the Year' sketch. Susannah York as Hilary and Michael Craig as Douglas are rather better, but there is no really outstanding acting performance in the film. There is also little in the way of coherent plot, beyond the tale of Charles's inexorable downward slide.

The main problem with the film, however, is neither the acting nor the plot, but rather that of the Theme That Dare Not Speak Its Name. There are half-hearted hints of an incestuous relationship between Charles and Hilary, or at least of an incestuous attraction towards her on his part, and that his dislike of Douglas is motivated by sexual jealousy. Unfortunately, even in the swinging sixties and early seventies (the date of the film is variously given as either 1969 or 1970) there was a limit to what the British Board of Film Censors was willing to allow, and a film with an explicitly incestuous theme was definitely off-limits. (The American title for the film was 'Brotherly Love', but this was not used in Britain; was it too suggestive for the liking of the BBFC?) These hints are therefore never developed and we never get to see what motivates Charles or what has caused his moral collapse, resulting in a hollow film with a hole at its centre. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2411 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I caught Evening in the cinema with a lady friend. Evening is a chick flick with no apologies for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Except]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[watched]] with interest and did not have to turn away or [[roll]] my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[part]], will [[absolutely]] [[love]] this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as comfortably as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. While both of her daughters silently contemplate the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? Will we all realize that settling for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire Danes is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, though just 5' 5" in reality), and is absolutely captivating in one climactic scene where her singing talents are finally put to the test.

You can't really talk trash about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close fill out the other major and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. I caught Evening in the cinema with a lady friend. Evening is a chick flick with no apologies for being such, but I can say with some relief that it's not so infused with estrogen that it's painful for a red-blooded male to watch. [[Salvo]] for a single instance at the very end of the movie, I [[observed]] with interest and did not have to turn away or [[rolling]] my eyes at any self-indulgent melodrama. Ladies, for their [[party]], will [[utterly]] [[adores]] this movie.

Ann Lord is elderly, bed-ridden and spending her last few days on Earth as comfortably as possible in her own home with her two grown daughters at her side. Discomfited by the memories of her past, Ann suddenly calls out a man's name her daughters have never heard before: Harris. While both of her daughters silently contemplate the significance of their mother's strong urge to recall and redress her ill-fated affair with this mysterious man at this of all times, Ann lapses back in her head to the fateful day she met Harris - and in doing so, lost the youthful optimism for the future that we all inevitably part ways with.

Both Ann and her two daughters - one married with children, one a serial "commitophobe" - struggle with the central question of whether true love really exists, and perhaps more importantly, if true love can endure the test of time. Are we all one day fated to realize that love never lasts forever? Will we all realize that settling for the imperfect is the only realistic outcome? The subtle fact that the aged Ann is still wrestling with an answer to these questions on her deathbed is not lost on her two daughters.

The cinematography for Evening is interesting - most of the film is spent in Ann's mind as she recalls the past, and for that reason I think the film was shot as if it was all deliberately overexposed, to give everyone an ethereal glow (and thus make it very obvious that all of this is not real, but occurred in the past). Claire Danes is beautiful (appearing to be really, really tall, though just 5' 5" in reality), and is absolutely captivating in one climactic scene where her singing talents are finally put to the test.

You can't really talk trash about the cast, which leads off with Claire Danes and doesn't let up from there: Vanessa Redgrave, Patrick Wilson, Meryl Streep and Glenn Close fill out the other major and minor roles in the film.

I can't really say anything negative about this film at all, though Hugh Dancy's struggle to have his character emerge from utter one-dimensionality is in the end a total loss. Playing the spoiled, lovable drunk offspring of the obscenely rich who puts up a front of great bravado but is secretly scared stiff of never amounting to anything probably doesn't offer much in the way of character exploration - he had his orders and stuck to them.

In the end, gentlemen, your lady friend will most certainly weep, and while you'll likely not feel nearly as affected, the evening will definitely not be a waste for the time spent watching Evening. Catch it in theatres or grab it as a rental to trade off for points for when you want to be accompanied to a viewing of Die Hard 4 or the upcoming Rambo flick. It'll be your little secret that this viewing didn't really cost you much at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 2412 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I rated this film 7/10 which is an average of 8/10 for screenplay, direction and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[excellent]] at 8/10.Also I commend Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson (Alan Curtis) was just in view of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's alibi.

I have this film on a "Suevia Film Noir Cine Negro" DVD in Spanish as "La Dama Desconocida" with the original soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative language, since despite searching I could not find a wholly English version.I was however anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella performs another heroic role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses several suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a little hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for instance, did not notice him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more suspense as these theatrical moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. I rated this film 7/10 which is an average of 8/10 for screenplay, direction and 1944 production values and 6/10 for acting.My acting rating in turn was calculated at 4/10 for all the screen characters except for that played by heroine Ella Raines as Carol Richman who was [[sumptuous]] at 8/10.Also I commend Thomas Gomez as Inspector Burgess whose character convinces that he personally does not think the guilty verdict on Scott Henderson (Alan Curtis) was just in view of his naive alibi.These two then form an alliance to prove Scott's alibi.

I have this film on a "Suevia Film Noir Cine Negro" DVD in Spanish as "La Dama Desconocida" with the original soundtrack "Ingles" as an alternative language, since despite searching I could not find a wholly English version.I was however anxious to see another performance by Ella Raines after being impressed with her performance as a heroine in "Impact" playing a sole female garage proprietor.Here Ella performs another heroic role believing in the innocence of her engineer boss and refuses several suggestions that she should return to her home in Kansas (her boss's pet name for her) before solving the missing alibi.The fact that she is secretly in love with her boss is a little hard to believe since he formally just seemed to have had a formal business relationship with her.He had however designed children's homes and playgrounds so I suppose "family man" had lit up in Carol's brain.

In the 1940s with "the film code" in operation, producers could only portray sex through metaphors and here it is done in the form of furious drumming played by Elisha Cooke jnr.Carol dolls herself up as a girl of easy virtue in an attempt to lure the drummer into giving her information about "The Phantom Lady" alibi.The other main character, Jack Marlow (an associate of Scott Henderson) is played by Franchot Tone whose performance I found too theatrical and wondered why Carol, for instance, did not notice him constantly and strangely admiring his hands.Here the screenplay should have been improved and provided more suspense as these theatrical moves telegraphed the plot far too early to the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2413 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[creativity]]. I'm sure the [[writers]] were on [[something]] other than oxygen when they [[wrote]] this one. [[Based]] on the previews, I [[thought]] that this would be a [[funny]] [[movie]]. But if you are not up on the [[latest]] [[stupid]] [[pop]] [[culture]] then you'll [[miss]] most of the silly [[humor]] in this [[movie]]. Why [[waste]] your [[time]]. You can [[sit]] on a [[log]] doing [[nothing]] and have more fun than this [[movie]] will [[provide]].

Hollywood does it again. Lots of money, no [[imagination]]. I'm sure the [[authors]] were on [[anything]] other than oxygen when they [[texted]] this one. [[Founded]] on the previews, I [[thinking]] that this would be a [[fun]] [[movies]]. But if you are not up on the [[newest]] [[silly]] [[pops]] [[cultures]] then you'll [[missed]] most of the silly [[humour]] in this [[movies]]. Why [[squandering]] your [[period]]. You can [[seated]] on a [[registers]] doing [[anything]] and have more fun than this [[film]] will [[render]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2414 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hams]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly awful, and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully ridiculous. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. Bela Lugosi is an evil botanist who sends brides poisoned orchids on their wedding day, steals the body in his fake ambulance/hearse and takes it home for his midget assistant to extract the glandular juices in order to keep Bela's wife eternally young. Some second rate actors playing detectives try to solve the terrible, terrible mystery. Bela Lugosi [[hamas]] it up nicely, but you can tell he needed the money.

This film is thoroughly awful, and most of the actors would have been better off sticking to waiting tables, but the plot is wonderfully ridiculous. Tell anyone what happens in it and they tend to laugh quite a lot and demand to see the film. I got the DVD in a discount store 2 for £1, which I think is a pretty accurate valuation, anyone paying more for this would be out of their mind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2415 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] By no means a [[masterpiece]], and far from Errol Flynn's [[best]], [[Istanbul]] [[still]] has much going for it. The locations and [[beautiful]] technicolour [[cinematography]], [[bring]] us back to a [[time]] [[long]] [[since]] [[past]]. Errol Flynn does show moments of his [[past]] [[glory]], and is OK as Jim Brennan, a pilot who's past [[comes]] back to [[haunt]] him. The picture is actually a remake of 1947's "[[Singapore]]", and the [[story]] [[seems]] awfully contrived and cliche' by today's standards. [[Also]] [[many]] of the supporting cast seem to be simply "going through the motions" in this picture. [[Many]] people have [[also]] compared it to one of the all time greats, CASABLANCA. [[While]] [[watching]] the [[film]], I could [[see]] [[many]] of the similarities, but [[hey]], Casablanca has inspired countless imitators, so take that for what it's worth. In [[closing]], if you are a fan of Flynn, or [[old]] fashioned love [[stories]], you [[might]] [[want]] to [[give]] this [[film]] a [[look]]. Otherwise, I'd [[recommend]] Casablanca, or The Maltese [[Falcon]], as a good [[introduction]] to some of Hollywood's classics.... By no means a [[centerpiece]], and far from Errol Flynn's [[nicest]], [[Constantinople]] [[again]] has much going for it. The locations and [[sumptuous]] technicolour [[films]], [[bringing]] us back to a [[period]] [[lengthy]] [[because]] [[previous]]. Errol Flynn does show moments of his [[former]] [[gloria]], and is OK as Jim Brennan, a pilot who's past [[occurs]] back to [[torment]] him. The picture is actually a remake of 1947's "[[Mauritius]]", and the [[stories]] [[looks]] awfully contrived and cliche' by today's standards. [[Additionally]] [[innumerable]] of the supporting cast seem to be simply "going through the motions" in this picture. [[Multiple]] people have [[likewise]] compared it to one of the all time greats, CASABLANCA. [[Despite]] [[staring]] the [[movies]], I could [[consults]] [[multiple]] of the similarities, but [[hi]], Casablanca has inspired countless imitators, so take that for what it's worth. In [[shut]], if you are a fan of Flynn, or [[elderly]] fashioned love [[narratives]], you [[probability]] [[wants]] to [[confer]] this [[kino]] a [[glance]]. Otherwise, I'd [[recommends]] Casablanca, or The Maltese [[Hawks]], as a good [[intro]] to some of Hollywood's classics.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2416 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[understand]] this film to be a [[debut]] [[feature]] and as such, it is very [[impressive]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and [[serve]] to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon deliver a [[story]] that has much more depth and lyricism than [[typical]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a [[story]] that needs [[Judd]] [[Hirsch]] caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the beautiful Susan Floyd. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was able to coax nuance out of the young actor in a role that could have been easily devalued by stereotype or overreach. Anyway, I found the film refreshing and entertaining. I [[fathom]] this film to be a [[premiere]] [[idiosyncrasies]] and as such, it is very [[unbelievable]]. It has the feel and pacing of a "true indie", yet director Todd Yellin clearly possesses the photographic and editorial vision, command and judgment of a mature and seasoned professional. The shots are well framed and thought out and [[serves]] to move the story forward. He, and screenwriter Ivan Solomon deliver a [[stories]] that has much more depth and lyricism than [[emblematic]] "paint by numbers" type scripts. It's a [[conte]] that needs [[Jude]] [[Hirsh]] caliber character talent to have a shot at working. Judd is fantastic as usual; as are Scott Cohen and the beautiful Susan Floyd. The real surprise though is Elliot Korte who plays Adam Groden. Yellin was able to coax nuance out of the young actor in a role that could have been easily devalued by stereotype or overreach. Anyway, I found the film refreshing and entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 2417 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Okay]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this show has no [[backbone]]!

[[Peter]] O'Toole as Ol' [[Colonel]] [[Cricket]] from The [[First]] [[War]] and now the emblazered [[Lord]] of the [[Manor]].

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered [[Lady]] of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, [[equally]] as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant advice for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her best bit of advice: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I [[thought]] it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[world]]." Well, we can't say they didn't warn us.

Ah, Susan - time was, your character [[would]] have been running the whole show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

So - with a cast and [[setting]] like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead Revisited," right?

Wrong! They took these 1-dimensional supporting roles because they paid so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. [[Verywell]], you have:

Penelope Keith as Miss Herringbone-Tweed, B.B.E. (Backbone of England.) She's killed off in the first scene - that's right, folks; this show has no [[linchpin]]!

[[Petr]] O'Toole as Ol' [[Coronel]] [[Predatory]] from The [[Outset]] [[Warfare]] and now the emblazered [[Gods]] of the [[Mansion]].

Joanna Lumley as the ensweatered [[Missus]] of the Manor, 20 years younger than the colonel and 20 years past her own prime but still glamourous (Brit spelling, not mine) enough to have a toy-boy on the side. It's alright, they have Col. Cricket's full knowledge and consent (they guy even comes 'round for Christmas!) Still, she's considerate of the colonel enough to have said toy-boy her own age (what a gal!)

David McCallum as said toy-boy, [[similarly]] as pointlessly glamourous as his squeeze. Pilcher couldn't come up with any cover for him within the story, so she gave him a hush-hush job at the Circus.

and finally:

Susan Hampshire as Miss Polonia Teacups, Venerable Headmistress of the Venerable Girls' Boarding-School, serving tea in her office with a dash of deep, poignant advice for life in the outside world just before graduation. Her best bit of advice: "I've only been to Nancherrow (the local Stately Home of England) once. I [[think]] it was very beautiful but, somehow, not part of the real [[monde]]." Well, we can't say they didn't warn us.

Ah, Susan - time was, your character [[could]] have been running the whole show. They don't write 'em like that any more. Our loss, not yours.

So - with a cast and [[configured]] like this, you have the re-makings of "Brideshead Revisited," right?

Wrong! They took these 1-dimensional supporting roles because they paid so well. After all, acting is one of the oldest temp-jobs there is (YOU name another!)

First warning sign: lots and lots of backlighting. They get around it by shooting outdoors - "hey, it's just the sunlight!"

Second warning sign: Leading Lady cries a lot. When not crying, her eyes are moist. That's the law of romance novels: Leading Lady is "dewy-eyed."

Henceforth, Leading Lady shall be known as L.L.

Third warning sign: L.L. actually has stars in her eyes when she's in love. Still, I'll give Emily Mortimer an award just for having to act with that spotlight in her eyes (I wonder . did they use contacts?)

And lastly, fourth warning sign: no on-screen female character is "Mrs." She's either "Miss" or "Lady."

When all was said and done, I still couldn't tell you who was pursuing whom and why. I couldn't even tell you what was said and done.

To sum up: they all live through World War II without anything happening to them at all.

OK, at the end, L.L. finds she's lost her parents to the Japanese prison camps and baby sis comes home catatonic. Meanwhile (there's always a "meanwhile,") some young guy L.L. had a crush on (when, I don't know) comes home from some wartime tough spot and is found living on the street by Lady of the Manor (must be some street if SHE's going to find him there.) Both war casualties are whisked away to recover at Nancherrow (SOMEBODY has to be "whisked away" SOMEWHERE in these romance stories!)

Great drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I downloaded this movie [[yesterday]] through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[expectations]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a villain.I though at least actors like him would have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proved]] that [[nobody]] can [[compete]] AMJAD KHAN's magic Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[old]] one is a milestone in Indian cinema with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a hit with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's TALENTS ARE wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[worst]] actresses we have I don't know how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no excitement and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this movie It was a Total carnage of the original Sholay I downloaded this movie [[today]] through an internet site the Quality was kinda good! I was watching the movie with high [[outlook]] (though i knew it was a flop), especially as the film has superstar Amitabh Bachchan playing the role of a villain.I though at least actors like him would have done some worth to their roles.But unfortunately Mr Bachchan failed to impress as villain this [[proven]] that [[anyone]] can [[vying]] AMJAD KHAN's magic Rgv's trial to re-kindle the past backfired royally! Sholay, the [[archaic]] one is a milestone in Indian cinema with an all-star cast, cult dialogue, stylish cinematography and a brilliant soundtrack which is still a hit with present generations too.A good actor like Ajay Devgan's TALENTS ARE wasted and his performance was average.Prashant Raj, a newcomer doesn't know what acting is . Nisha Kothari proved she is one of the [[gravest]] actresses we have I don't know how she is still in RGV's crew Urmila & Abhishek seen in a song with no excitement and passion Mohanlal tried his best and Susmitha Sen's work was good i somehow liked her work in this movie It was a Total carnage of the original Sholay --------------------------------------------- Result 2419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Not as bad as some are making it out to be, though obviously pathetic compared to the original. In my opinion Amitabh was great as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to Gabbar in the original as they were clearly not going for the same effect. Other than some mediocre action scenes however, the [[rest]] of the film is flawed. Character development was poor and the development of the story was [[hopeless]], with many loopholes, and missing pieces of information which i wouldn't have known if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[worst]] part of the movie was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this new [[dude]] called Prashant Raj. Nisha is just plain annoying from the time her [[lips]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this guy? where is he from and why on earth was he present in the film studio for anything other than to serve drinks?. His acting [[ability]] is zero and he has the same tone, dialog delivery and staunch expression in [[every]] scene, whether it be action, comedy, or even a scene when [[someone]] has just died. [[Ajay]] Devgan was average, at [[least]] his expressions changed which is more than i can [[say]] for his mistake of a [[companion]]. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and also a very [[sexy]] Urmilla Matondkar in a special appearance. Not as bad as some are making it out to be, though obviously pathetic compared to the original. In my opinion Amitabh was great as the villain Babban Singh - try not to compare to Gabbar in the original as they were clearly not going for the same effect. Other than some mediocre action scenes however, the [[stays]] of the film is flawed. Character development was poor and the development of the story was [[desperate]], with many loopholes, and missing pieces of information which i wouldn't have known if i hadn't read the back of the DVD case. The [[hardest]] part of the movie was the support roles from Nisha Kothari and especially this new [[homeboy]] called Prashant Raj. Nisha is just plain annoying from the time her [[lip]] first open. As for Prashant Raj - seriously who is this guy? where is he from and why on earth was he present in the film studio for anything other than to serve drinks?. His acting [[dexterity]] is zero and he has the same tone, dialog delivery and staunch expression in [[all]] scene, whether it be action, comedy, or even a scene when [[person]] has just died. [[Aage]] Devgan was average, at [[fewer]] his expressions changed which is more than i can [[told]] for his mistake of a [[comrade]]. overall, RGV's Aag is worth watching for Amitabh's solid performance, and also a very [[scorching]] Urmilla Matondkar in a special appearance. --------------------------------------------- Result 2420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Whether it's three guys in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a dude bound in twine or a girl saying "What up, dog?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Jones]]. It is strange and surreal and not altogether a [[completely]] comprehensible [[yarn]]... yet it never [[loses]] you. The [[first]] time I saw it, I [[nearly]] laughed myself [[sick]]. And every [[night]] after I would [[come]] [[home]] and watch it again. Forget Coyote [[Ugly]]... this is the [[movie]] that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[late]]! Whether it's three guys in their tighty-whiteys rapping to a dude bound in twine or a girl saying "What up, dog?" to a lump of roadkill, there's something please everyone in Knuckleface [[Joneses]]. It is strange and surreal and not altogether a [[abundantly]] comprehensible [[yarns]]... yet it never [[looses]] you. The [[outset]] time I saw it, I [[practically]] laughed myself [[indisposed]]. And every [[overnight]] after I would [[arrive]] [[domicile]] and watch it again. Forget Coyote [[Hideous]]... this is the [[flick]] that cemented my crush on Piper Perabo. See it... before it's too [[tard]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2421 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] In "Anne of [[Green]] Gables" (1934), Marilla Cuthbert ([[Helen]] Westley) and [[Matthew]] Cuthbert (O.P. Heggie), middle-aged [[siblings]] who live together at Green Gables, a farm in Avonlea, on Prince [[Edward]] [[Island]], decide to [[adopt]] a [[boy]] from distant orphanage to [[help]] on their [[farm]]. But the orphan [[sent]] to them is a precocious [[girl]] of 14 named [[Anne]] Shirley (Dawn Evelyn Paris-a veteran of Disney's [[series]] of "[[Alice]]" shorts who [[later]] [[would]] [[adopt]] her character's [[name]]).

Anne was only 11 in [[Lucy]] [[Maude]] Montgomery's [[source]] novel but the same actress [[could]] not credibly [[go]] from 11 to [[college]] age during the course of the [[story]]. The [[movie]] suffers somewhat from this concession, as many of Anne's [[reactions]] and much of what she [[says]] are more [[entertaining]] coming from an eleven-year-old that from a [[teenager]]. As in the book, [[Anne]] is bright and [[quick]], [[eager]] to please but [[dissatisfied]] with her [[name]], her [[build]], her freckles, and her [[long]] red hair. [[Being]] a [[child]] of [[imagination]], [[however]], Anne takes much [[joy]] in [[life]], and [[adapts]] [[quickly]] to her [[new]] family and the environment of Prince Edward Island.

[[In]] [[fact]] Anne is the original "[[Teenage]] [[Drama]] [[Queen]]" and the film's screenwriter [[elected]] to focus on this aspect of her [[character]]. Which [[transformed]] the [[basic]] [[genre]] from mildly amusing family [[drama]] to [[comedy]]. A [[change]] that delighted [[audiences]] and that [[continues]] to frustrate reader purists.

Since the [[comedy]] is very much in the spirit of the Montgomery's [[story]] I can [[see]] no [[reason]] to take [[issue]] with the [[changes]], but [[let]] this [[serve]] as fair warning to [[anyone]] expecting a totally [[faithful]] [[adaptation]]. The comedy [[element]] is the strength of the [[film]] as it is one of the earliest self-reflexive parodies of Hollywood conventions. The [[actress]] Anne Shirley was one of Hollywood's all- [[time]] [[beauties]] and the [[film]] is in black and white. [[So]] much of the amusement is in [[seeing]] the title character's [[endless]] [[laments]] about her appearance and hair [[color]] [[contradicted]] by what is appearing on the screen. [[Anne]] [[regularly]] regales her no [[nonsense]] [[rural]] [[companions]] with melodramatic lines like: "[[If]] you [[refuse]] it will be a lifelong [[sorrow]] to me". [[Perhaps]] the funniest moment is when she corrects the [[spelling]] of her [[name]] on the [[classroom]] [[blackboard]].

Tom Brown does a nice job as Anne's love interest Gilbert Blythe and Sara Haden steals all the scenes in which she appears as the Cuthbert's pompous neighbor.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child. In "Anne of [[Archer]] Gables" (1934), Marilla Cuthbert ([[Hackett]] Westley) and [[Mathew]] Cuthbert (O.P. Heggie), middle-aged [[sibling]] who live together at Green Gables, a farm in Avonlea, on Prince [[Edwards]] [[Isle]], decide to [[adoption]] a [[dude]] from distant orphanage to [[supporting]] on their [[farmhouse]]. But the orphan [[expedition]] to them is a precocious [[chick]] of 14 named [[Anna]] Shirley (Dawn Evelyn Paris-a veteran of Disney's [[serials]] of "[[Altar]]" shorts who [[then]] [[could]] [[approve]] her character's [[designation]]).

Anne was only 11 in [[Lucie]] [[Maud]] Montgomery's [[roots]] novel but the same actress [[would]] not credibly [[going]] from 11 to [[academics]] age during the course of the [[narratives]]. The [[flick]] suffers somewhat from this concession, as many of Anne's [[answers]] and much of what she [[asserts]] are more [[fun]] coming from an eleven-year-old that from a [[adolescent]]. As in the book, [[Anna]] is bright and [[timely]], [[enthusiastic]] to please but [[discontented]] with her [[denomination]], her [[construct]], her freckles, and her [[prolonged]] red hair. [[Ongoing]] a [[kids]] of [[creativity]], [[conversely]], Anne takes much [[glee]] in [[vie]], and [[tailor]] [[speedily]] to her [[novel]] family and the environment of Prince Edward Island.

[[For]] [[facto]] Anne is the original "[[Teenagers]] [[Theater]] [[Reine]]" and the film's screenwriter [[opt]] to focus on this aspect of her [[characteristics]]. Which [[conversions]] the [[fundamental]] [[genus]] from mildly amusing family [[theater]] to [[travesty]]. A [[alterations]] that delighted [[spectators]] and that [[persisted]] to frustrate reader purists.

Since the [[travesty]] is very much in the spirit of the Montgomery's [[saga]] I can [[behold]] no [[justification]] to take [[issuing]] with the [[amendment]], but [[leaving]] this [[serving]] as fair warning to [[somebody]] expecting a totally [[fiel]] [[readjustment]]. The comedy [[component]] is the strength of the [[cinematography]] as it is one of the earliest self-reflexive parodies of Hollywood conventions. The [[actor]] Anne Shirley was one of Hollywood's all- [[period]] [[wonders]] and the [[cinematic]] is in black and white. [[Consequently]] much of the amusement is in [[witnessing]] the title character's [[bottomless]] [[regrets]] about her appearance and hair [[colors]] [[conflicted]] by what is appearing on the screen. [[Anna]] [[periodically]] regales her no [[laughable]] [[agricultural]] [[classmates]] with melodramatic lines like: "[[Though]] you [[garbage]] it will be a lifelong [[contrition]] to me". [[Presumably]] the funniest moment is when she corrects the [[satire]] of her [[behalf]] on the [[class]] [[chalkboard]].

Tom Brown does a nice job as Anne's love interest Gilbert Blythe and Sara Haden steals all the scenes in which she appears as the Cuthbert's pompous neighbor.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child. --------------------------------------------- Result 2422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] some people think that the second series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[win]] my opinion,as a very [[good]] chrecter.i looked at a [[poll]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second [[series]] was scoobys downfall.OK so loads said yes but 28%still cant be [[wrong]].I do like the [[way]] most of the [[episodes]] focused on comedy.i [[believe]] the [[show]] [[would]] have gone rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[dog]] solving mystery in same formula.scrappy was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very funny.i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[superb]] series that gave a beginning to tire show a new formula and lease of life.Nuff said. some people think that the second series was where scooby was ruined..i disagree totally.the shows quality did not go up or down and scrappy ,[[earning]] my opinion,as a very [[buena]] chrecter.i looked at a [[voting]] on jumpedtheshark.com and 72% of people said scrappys second [[serials]] was scoobys downfall.OK so loads said yes but 28%still cant be [[fallacious]].I do like the [[camino]] most of the [[spells]] focused on comedy.i [[think]] the [[display]] [[ought]] have gone rubbish if it was the same 5 people/[[pooch]] solving mystery in same formula.scrappy was a breath of fresh air to the show.sure,some people tuned out but when scrappy was introduced viewing figures DOUBLED.Back to the show.All the episodes and segments were very funny.i was Intriguded by the yabba shorts and .But at the end of the day its a matter of opinion if you like scrappy or not is a matter of opinion,there is certainly no fact involved.But in my OPINION this was a [[sumptuous]] series that gave a beginning to tire show a new formula and lease of life.Nuff said. --------------------------------------------- Result 2423 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] As has been noted, this [[formula]] has been [[filmed]] several times, most recently as "You've Got Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"Trout Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[least]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars charisma, which doesn't quite cut it here.

The chemistry betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[real]] [[sparks]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leads]] are boring the rest of the movie can only follow. Judy in particular is disappointing. She looks like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks [[like]] a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was getting so hot about. I would have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great either. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood leading man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[image]] here.

If you're a fan of the [[stars]] or the early 1900's then you [[might]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining romantic comedies out there, and they offer you much more than a mouthful of stale confection. As has been noted, this [[formulas]] has been [[videotaped]] several times, most recently as "You've Got Mail", with Tom Hanks and Meg"Trout Pout" Ryan. Of the several versions, this is my [[fewer]] favorite. The problem i think is that the studio coasted on the Stars charisma, which doesn't quite cut it here.

The chemistry betwixt the two leads never comes to a boil in this movie. There are no [[veritable]] [[ignites]]. Van Johnson and Judy Garland remind me of day old donuts, pleasant but bland. And when the [[leeds]] are boring the rest of the movie can only follow. Judy in particular is disappointing. She looks like she has no neck! I don't know if she was having trouble with pain or something but she looks [[iike]] a turtle trying to pull it's head into it's shell, all hunched up and everything. I couldn't figure out what Van Johnson was getting so hot about. I would have made a bee line for that cute violin player. And Van wasn't great either. I've always thought of him as a rather generic Hollywood leading man and he doesn't do anything to dispel that [[photos]] here.

If you're a fan of the [[superstar]] or the early 1900's then you [[conceivably]] like this movie. But there are a lot more entertaining romantic comedies out there, and they offer you much more than a mouthful of stale confection. --------------------------------------------- Result 2424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As a Turkish [[man]] now [[living]] in Sweden I must [[confess]] I often watch Scandinavian [[movies]]. Most if them I never [[understand]]. I [[think]] [[actors]] from [[Scandinavia]] [[work]] best in Hollywood. Last week I [[watched]] a [[film]] [[called]] "The Polish [[Wedding]]" [[together]] with a [[polish]] friend of [[mine]] and we both said it was the worst movie we ever [[watched]]. [[Unfortunately]] I was wrong this [[movie]] " House of Angels" is [[even]] [[worse]]. None of the [[actors]] can [[act]], absolutely not the female so called [[star]] Helen Bergstrom. The [[plot]] is so [[silly]] [[nobody]] can [[believe]] it.I think the [[whole]] thing is a mess from the [[start]]. lots of [[bad]] acting except from Selldal and Wollter. Ahmed Sellam As a Turkish [[men]] now [[iife]] in Sweden I must [[admit]] I often watch Scandinavian [[cinematography]]. Most if them I never [[comprehend]]. I [[believe]] [[players]] from [[Nordic]] [[cooperate]] best in Hollywood. Last week I [[observed]] a [[cinematographic]] [[telephoned]] "The Polish [[Wedlock]]" [[jointly]] with a [[polaco]] friend of [[mining]] and we both said it was the worst movie we ever [[saw]]. [[Sadly]] I was wrong this [[kino]] " House of Angels" is [[yet]] [[pire]]. None of the [[protagonists]] can [[ley]], absolutely not the female so called [[superstar]] Helen Bergstrom. The [[intrigue]] is so [[dolt]] [[anyone]] can [[think]] it.I think the [[together]] thing is a mess from the [[lancer]]. lots of [[amiss]] acting except from Selldal and Wollter. Ahmed Sellam --------------------------------------------- Result 2425 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (51%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] His first movie after longtime friend John Belushi's death, Aykroyd shows much fatigue trying to pull off a character that would have been a snap for Belushi.

Instead, "Doctor Detroit" gives us bookish professor Aykroyd masquerading as a weird, violent pimp to ward off a rival known only as Mom. That's bad enough, but he also has classes to teach, a school dinner to host, four ladies of the evening to protect and a Pimp's Dinner (or something like that) to attend. No wonder Aykroyd seems stupefied most of the time. Why should the viewer be alone?

It was on this film that Aykroyd met future wife Donna Dixon. At least some good came out of this chaotic mess.

One and a half stars. You want good Aykroyd, see "The Blues Brothers". You want bad, see "Doctor Detroit". --------------------------------------------- Result 2426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] First off, I have to [[say]] that I [[loved]] the [[book]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie would be [[beneficial]]. The movie was so [[disappointing]] to me. The movie cuts out some characters, and misses a lot of the main points of the book. It skips around a lot, and doesn't explain anything in detail. If someone was watching this movie without having first read the book, they would be confused. The most disappointing thing in this movie to me, was the ending. The ending in the book was the most powerful, and in the movie, they changed it! It was supposed to be the pigs and men in an alliance and sort of "melting" together, but instead, the movie made it seem like the animals were going to rebel against the pigs. To sum up, I don't think that this movie captured the real meaning that Orwell portrayed in his book. First off, I have to [[told]] that I [[worshipped]] the [[ledger]] Animal Farm. I read it with my 9th grade class, and it was great. We also decided that watching the movie would be [[propitious]]. The movie was so [[depressing]] to me. The movie cuts out some characters, and misses a lot of the main points of the book. It skips around a lot, and doesn't explain anything in detail. If someone was watching this movie without having first read the book, they would be confused. The most disappointing thing in this movie to me, was the ending. The ending in the book was the most powerful, and in the movie, they changed it! It was supposed to be the pigs and men in an alliance and sort of "melting" together, but instead, the movie made it seem like the animals were going to rebel against the pigs. To sum up, I don't think that this movie captured the real meaning that Orwell portrayed in his book. --------------------------------------------- Result 2427 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] One of Disney's [[best]] [[films]] that I can enjoy [[watching]] often. you may easily guess the outcome, but who cares? its just plain [[fun]] [[escape]] for 1 hour forty-two minutes. and after all wasn't movies meant to get away from reality for just a short time anyway? The cast sparkles with [[delight]]. -magictrain One of Disney's [[optimum]] [[kino]] that I can enjoy [[staring]] often. you may easily guess the outcome, but who cares? its just plain [[droll]] [[flee]] for 1 hour forty-two minutes. and after all wasn't movies meant to get away from reality for just a short time anyway? The cast sparkles with [[glee]]. -magictrain --------------------------------------------- Result 2428 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This film has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad yarn, and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second [[unit]] stuff is [[endless]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very good indeed as a sophisticated [[Egyptian]]. He should take it up as a sideline. The film is essentially ruined by one of the world's most irritating actresses, Lesley Anne Down, who plays the lead. She spends the whole film wondering how she looks, are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the fellas lust after her, etc. Having started life as a model at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most revolting about female vanity and dim-witted inanity. And to think that this film was directed by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He allows this [[terrible]] [[actress]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom eyes, it matters not. She is supposed to be a young Egyptologist. But she has never been to Egypt before! She takes a taxi to Giza and catching her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' Barf! OK, so that was the script, but she takes to the banality too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a serious problem about a black market in antiquities there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was fun to see the name of Cyril Swern as sound recordist on the film, as I knew him pretty well long ago. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is described as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That would not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. This film has nothing whatever to do with the Sphinx, and the title is just a come-on. The story concerns an imagined true and concealed tomb in the Valley of the Kings, of King Seti I, second pharaoh of the 19th Dynasty, New Kingdom period. It is not a bad yarn, and a great deal of the film is shot on location. Even the scenes in the Winter Palace Hotel lobby in Luxor were really shot there, and not in a studio. The second [[units]] stuff is [[boundless]], and they must have been let loose on Egypt for weeks. Frank Langella is very good indeed as a sophisticated [[Masri]]. He should take it up as a sideline. The film is essentially ruined by one of the world's most irritating actresses, Lesley Anne Down, who plays the lead. She spends the whole film wondering how she looks, are her blue eyes refracting light at the correct angle, do all the fellas lust after her, etc. Having started life as a model at the age of ten, what hope could there be for her? She epitomises everything that is most revolting about female vanity and dim-witted inanity. And to think that this film was directed by Franklin Shaffner, who won an Oscar for 'Patton'! He allows this [[frightful]] [[actor]] to whimper and simper through the film, hysterical one moment, flirting the next, in a kind of hurricane of idiocy as she reels from one man to another, either screaming or making bedroom eyes, it matters not. She is supposed to be a young Egyptologist. But she has never been to Egypt before! She takes a taxi to Giza and catching her first glimpse of the pyramids, gushes in ecstasy: 'But they're so BIG!!!!' Barf! OK, so that was the script, but she takes to the banality too readily, giving the impression that it is her natural element, which I don't doubt for a minute. Elements of the story are sound. There is, indeed, a serious problem about a black market in antiquities there. True! Well done! The novel by Robin Cook, which I have not seen, may be OK for all I know. It was fun to see the name of Cyril Swern as sound recordist on the film, as I knew him pretty well long ago. Stanley Kubrick's step-daughter Katharina is described as 'draughtswoman'. I wonder what that means? Maybe she did some set work. Anyway, the antiquities in the film are pretty good, actually. And we get to see lots of the Cairo Museum and numerous scenic locations. They actually go inside King Tutankhamun's Tomb! I don't imagine that would be allowed today for a movie. A lot of inappropriate scenes take place in mosques. That would not go down well today, but in 1981 such things were not on the agenda. The music for the film is absolutely appalling, worse than Lesley Anne Down in fact! But there were sound track elements which were surprisingly authentic, one being the cacophony of traffic noise of Cairo, which is accurately rendered in the background, and would make anyone who knows Cairo chuckle nervously. Also, the loudspeaker calls to prayer are there the whole time, another touch of authenticity. Why didn't they get this right? It could have been good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2429 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] I [[rented]] this [[movie]], [[thinking]] it [[looked]] like a wonderfully delightful historical piece. What I got was a [[piece]] of [[pure]] [[garbage]]. This movie was confusing in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and dreadful in all spots. Mira Sorvino's portrayal of a queen playing a young male scholar was depressing at best. Ben Kingsley should have been stripped of his knighthood for even considering this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely stick to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more entertaining than this thing they call a play within a movie.

The cinematography looks like some college kid took a class in Cinematography 101 and failed miserably. Almost every scene in the movie is chopped up for some sort of effect; the end result of course being the cheesiest bit of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was almost good as Agis; too bad he had such a bad script to work with. Rachael Stirling gives her best effort as the almost gullible lady in waiting. In the end, I really wish Blockbuster Video gave refunds. I'm so glad I didn't spend 10 bucks watching this fiasco in the theater. If they've been performing this Marivaux play since the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the ages have had their best naps during this work. If I had been there, they wouldn't have hear the play over the snoring. Thank goodness for the modern convenience of DVD players; you can skip past the boring or awful scenes. Guess that means I only watched the beginning and the end! I [[rental]] this [[cinematography]], [[ideas]] it [[seemed]] like a wonderfully delightful historical piece. What I got was a [[slice]] of [[pur]] [[detritus]]. This movie was confusing in most spots, choppy in almost every spot and dreadful in all spots. Mira Sorvino's portrayal of a queen playing a young male scholar was depressing at best. Ben Kingsley should have been stripped of his knighthood for even considering this film as one of his projects. Fiona Shaw should definitely stick to playing Petunia Dursley; at least the Harry Potter movies are more entertaining than this thing they call a play within a movie.

The cinematography looks like some college kid took a class in Cinematography 101 and failed miserably. Almost every scene in the movie is chopped up for some sort of effect; the end result of course being the cheesiest bit of editing I've ever seen. Jay Rodan was almost good as Agis; too bad he had such a bad script to work with. Rachael Stirling gives her best effort as the almost gullible lady in waiting. In the end, I really wish Blockbuster Video gave refunds. I'm so glad I didn't spend 10 bucks watching this fiasco in the theater. If they've been performing this Marivaux play since the 18th century, it makes me wonder how many people over the ages have had their best naps during this work. If I had been there, they wouldn't have hear the play over the snoring. Thank goodness for the modern convenience of DVD players; you can skip past the boring or awful scenes. Guess that means I only watched the beginning and the end! --------------------------------------------- Result 2430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Utter dreck. I got to the 16 minute/27 second point, and gave up. I'd have given it a negative number review if that were possible (although 'pissible' is a more fitting word...). Unlike the sizzle you could see and practically feel between MacMurray and Stanwyck in the original, the chemistry between dumb ol' Dicky Crenna and whats-her-face here is just non-existent. The anklet becomes an unattractive chunky bracelet? There's no ciggy-lighting-by-fingertip? And I thought I'd be SICK when they have a mortified-looking (and rightly so, believe you me) Lee J. Cobb as Keyes practically burping/upchucking his way through the explanation of his "Little Man" to Mr. Garloupis. No offence to the non-sighted, but it looks as though a posse of blind men ran amuck with the set design of both the Dietrichson and Neff houses. The same goes for those horrid plaid pants that Phyllis wears. And crikey, how much $$ does Neff make, that he lives overlooking a huge marina? This, folks, again, all takes place in the first 16 and a half minutes. If you can get through more of it, you have a much stronger constitution than me, or you are a masochist. But please, take some Alka-Seltzer first, or you WILL develop a "little man" of your own that may never go away. Proceed with caution, obviously. --------------------------------------------- Result 2431 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (87%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Four stories written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a beautiful, old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some spooky moments and the [[twist]] at the end was good. The second has [[Peter]] Cushing becoming [[obsessed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary [[ending]] (although the [[ending]] in the story was MUCH worse). The last is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the scenery) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee playing Dracula.

This is a good horror anthology--nothing terrifying but the first one and the ending of the third gave me a few pleasurable little chills. Also the fourth one is actually very funny and Pitt makes a VERY sexy vampire! Also the house itself looks beautiful...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and unusual movie score too. All in all a good little horror anthology well worth seeking out. Try to see it on DVD--the Lions Gate one looks fantastic with strong colors and great sound. Four stories written by Robert Bloch about various people who live in a beautiful, old mansion and what happens to them. The first has Denholm Elliott as a novelist who sees the killer he's writing about come to life. Some spooky moments and the [[twisting]] at the end was good. The second has [[Peters]] Cushing becoming [[oversexed]] with a wax figure resembling his dead wife. The third has Christopher Lee who has a child (Chloe Franks) and is scared of her. It all leads up to a pretty scary [[terminated]] (although the [[terminated]] in the story was MUCH worse). The last is an out and out comedy with Jon Petwee and Ingrid Pitt (both chewing the scenery) and a cape that turns people into vampires! There's also a cute line about Christopher Lee playing Dracula.

This is a good horror anthology--nothing terrifying but the first one and the ending of the third gave me a few pleasurable little chills. Also the fourth one is actually very funny and Pitt makes a VERY sexy vampire! Also the house itself looks beautiful...and very creepy. It's well-directed with some nice atmospheric touches. A very good and unusual movie score too. All in all a good little horror anthology well worth seeking out. Try to see it on DVD--the Lions Gate one looks fantastic with strong colors and great sound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2432 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Carlito [[Way]], the [[original]] is a brilliant story about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to leave his criminal past and so he invests in a club and the deals with the trouble that comes with it.

This film was....

I saw the trailer and knew instantly it was going to be [[bad]]..But after dismissing films in the [[past]] and finding out they were great( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo Drift)...I gave this a shot and it [[failed]] within the first five [[minutes]]...

The script is something a [[teenager]] [[would]] [[come]] up with if given five minutes to [[prepare]]...It was [[weak]], with weaker [[dialogue]]. It seems there is an [[instant]] [[need]] for romance in a gangster [[movie]]. So Brigante [[decides]] to [[beat]] a [[guy]] up for the [[girl]]....and she say's '[[Yes]]!' And if you [[need]] to [[act]] bad just throw racism around...As we learn from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was terrible to say the least...I found 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I absolutely [[hate]] all these musicians turning to movies. Lets face it the only reason P Diddy did this movie was so he could play a gangsters...The actress who plays Leticia was weak but beautiful. The sex scene was weak but we got to see her..which was okay...

But overall I [[expected]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the horrendous movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. Carlito [[Path]], the [[preliminary]] is a brilliant story about an ex-drug dealer who hopes to leave his criminal past and so he invests in a club and the deals with the trouble that comes with it.

This film was....

I saw the trailer and knew instantly it was going to be [[negative]]..But after dismissing films in the [[preceding]] and finding out they were great( Lucky Number Slevin, Tokyo Drift)...I gave this a shot and it [[faulted]] within the first five [[mins]]...

The script is something a [[youngsters]] [[could]] [[coming]] up with if given five minutes to [[develop]]...It was [[fragile]], with weaker [[discussions]]. It seems there is an [[momentary]] [[necessity]] for romance in a gangster [[cinematography]]. So Brigante [[decided]] to [[defeated]] a [[man]] up for the [[dame]]....and she say's '[[Oui]]!' And if you [[needed]] to [[ley]] bad just throw racism around...As we learn from the 'Italian mobsters'...

The acting was terrible to say the least...I found 'Hollywood Nicky', hilarious.

I absolutely [[loathed]] all these musicians turning to movies. Lets face it the only reason P Diddy did this movie was so he could play a gangsters...The actress who plays Leticia was weak but beautiful. The sex scene was weak but we got to see her..which was okay...

But overall I [[prophesied]] it shed light on how Carito ended up in prison and the love of his life...And the assassin towards the end completely added to the horrendous movie that is...

Carlito's Way: Rise to Power.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Disney]] might just be on to something here. First, they had "Remember the Titans" with Denzel, a [[story]] based on truth [[involving]] [[sports]] and a small town in middle America. Now, with Quaid and The [[Rookie]]... [[yet]] another sports story [[based]] on truth.

Both movies [[move]] you to tears at times, and both make you [[smile]] and feel all warm after [[seeing]] them. My [[wife]] and I took in The Rookie and we expected it to be a [[great]] feel good type movie. We were not let down, when [[asked]] if we'd be [[buying]] this on [[DVD]] when it comes out, it was a no-brainer. Most definately. [[Disneyland]] might just be on to something here. First, they had "Remember the Titans" with Denzel, a [[stories]] based on truth [[encompassing]] [[athletics]] and a small town in middle America. Now, with Quaid and The [[Novice]]... [[even]] another sports story [[predicated]] on truth.

Both movies [[budge]] you to tears at times, and both make you [[smirk]] and feel all warm after [[see]] them. My [[femme]] and I took in The Rookie and we expected it to be a [[resplendent]] feel good type movie. We were not let down, when [[requesting]] if we'd be [[buys]] this on [[DVDS]] when it comes out, it was a no-brainer. Most definately. --------------------------------------------- Result 2434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Just finished watching American Pie: Beta House and I [[gotta]] say, this was such a garbage pile of crap. The [[first]] 3 [[American]] Pies were hilarious, the [[last]] 3 were a joke and should not have been [[called]] American Pie.

As you [[figured]] out from the title of the movie, Beta House, is about a [[fraternity]], freshmen, girls and, the most original part of them all, [[falling]] in [[love]]. Of [[course]], the guy that has his [[way]] with the [[chicks]] is Stifler, who, along with his [[mates]], tries to [[complete]] another [[apparently]] impossible task. It was [[unrealistic]] and [[super]] [[fake]]. Its just [[really]] [[predictable]] and the [[plot]] is so [[weak]]. Both sides of the college [[battle]] to [[see]] who [[gets]] the whole [[thing]] ([[something]] like that) To [[sum]] it up: [[awful]] acting + [[dull]] script + wrong use of the American [[Pie]] franchise = [[total]] waste of [[time]]! This movie is unbearable. I give it a two out of ten, [[although]] most of it sucked there were [[lots]] of nudity and pretty girls, like 2 funny scenes :) Just finished watching American Pie: Beta House and I [[should]] say, this was such a garbage pile of crap. The [[fiirst]] 3 [[Americas]] Pies were hilarious, the [[final]] 3 were a joke and should not have been [[phoned]] American Pie.

As you [[conjured]] out from the title of the movie, Beta House, is about a [[brotherhood]], freshmen, girls and, the most original part of them all, [[tumbling]] in [[adore]]. Of [[cours]], the guy that has his [[paths]] with the [[hoes]] is Stifler, who, along with his [[friends]], tries to [[finished]] another [[allegedly]] impossible task. It was [[impractical]] and [[terrific]] [[counterfeits]]. Its just [[genuinely]] [[foreseeable]] and the [[intrigue]] is so [[puny]]. Both sides of the college [[battles]] to [[seeing]] who [[got]] the whole [[stuff]] ([[somethin]] like that) To [[suma]] it up: [[scary]] acting + [[boring]] script + wrong use of the American [[Pizza]] franchise = [[whole]] waste of [[period]]! This movie is unbearable. I give it a two out of ten, [[albeit]] most of it sucked there were [[batches]] of nudity and pretty girls, like 2 funny scenes :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is perhaps one of the [[finest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** The Korean War has been dubbed Americas's forgotten war. So many unanswered questions were buried along with the 50 thousand men who died there. Occasionally, we are treated to a play or movie which deals with that far-off, ghostly frozen graveyard. Here is perhaps one of the [[noblest]]. It's called " Sergeant Ryker. " The story is of an American soldier named Sgt. Paul Ryker (Lee Marvin) who is selected for a top secret mission by his commanding officer. His task is to defect to the North Koreans and offer his services against United Nations forces. So successful is his cover, he proves invaluable to the enemy and given the rank of Major. However, he is thereafter captured by the Americans, put on trial as a traitor and spy. Stating he was ordered to defect, he sadly learns his commanding officer has been killed and has no evidence or proof of his innocence. He is convicted and sentenced to hang. However, his conviction is doubted by Capt. Young (Bradford Dillman), his prosecutor. Convincing commanding Gen. Amos Baily, (Lloyd Nolan) of his doubts, he is granted a new trial and if found guilty will be executed. The courtroom drama is top notch as is the cast which includes Peter Graves, Murray Hamilton and Norman Fell as Sgt. Max Winkler. Korea was a far off place but the possibility of convicting a Communist and hanging him hit very close to home in the 1950's. Due to its superior script and powerful message, this drama has become a courtroom Classic. Excellent viewing and recommended to all. **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2436 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, supposedly to go to Saturn, but really only to some stock footage of solar [[flares]], and then he [[gets]] a nose bleed, and before you [[know]] it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged [[head]] to [[foot]], and then an overweight [[nurse]] with an ill-fitting uniform [[comes]] in and gets [[eaten]] by the guy, whose [[supposed]] to be [[melting]] all over the place but never [[seems]] to [[lose]] any mass, and then NASA, or at [[least]] one [[guy]] at NASA, [[gets]] upset about it and [[calls]] one other [[guy]] in to [[hunt]] him down, but the [[guy]] they [[sent]] to [[hunt]] the [[melting]] [[guy]] has to go [[home]] and have [[soup]] [[first]], and his oddly-shaped [[wife]] [[forgot]] the [[crackers]], so he can't have [[crackers]], and then he has to [[go]] out and [[look]] for the [[melting]] [[guy]] with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[really]] [[work]], so he [[really]] only follows the [[trail]] of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[old]] people in a lemon grove, and a [[women]] with a meat cleaver, and some [[kind]] of industrial [[plant]] with trigger-happy [[security]] [[guards]], and since I can't tell you how the [[movies]] [[ends]], all I can [[say]] is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some [[guy]] with the [[stupid]] name of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this [[movie]] died a [[hideous]], [[violent]] death and was unable to make more [[movies]], and the [[world]] lived HAPPILY EVER AFTER - THE [[END]]! Once upon a time some evil people made a movie about a guy that got shot into space, supposedly to go to Saturn, but really only to some stock footage of solar [[flashlights]], and then he [[got]] a nose bleed, and before you [[savoir]] it, he's laying in a hospital bandaged [[jefe]] to [[feet]], and then an overweight [[nursing]] with an ill-fitting uniform [[happens]] in and gets [[tasted]] by the guy, whose [[suspected]] to be [[melt]] all over the place but never [[seem]] to [[losing]] any mass, and then NASA, or at [[lowest]] one [[boy]] at NASA, [[got]] upset about it and [[call]] one other [[pal]] in to [[hunting]] him down, but the [[boy]] they [[despatch]] to [[hunted]] the [[merging]] [[pal]] has to go [[dwelling]] and have [[soups]] [[fiirst]], and his oddly-shaped [[femme]] [[forgotten]] the [[cookie]], so he can't have [[cookie]], and then he has to [[going]] out and [[peek]] for the [[fusion]] [[boy]] with a geiger counter, and that doesn't [[truthfully]] [[works]], so he [[truthfully]] only follows the [[pathway]] of half-eaten corpses, and then there's something about a sheriff, and two ugly [[longtime]] people in a lemon grove, and a [[mujer]] with a meat cleaver, and some [[sorting]] of industrial [[factory]] with trigger-happy [[insurance]] [[guard]], and since I can't tell you how the [[film]] [[culminates]], all I can [[told]] is Jonathan Demme is in it somewhere with some [[boys]] with the [[foolish]] name of Burr DeBenning, and if there's any justice in the world everyone connected with this [[cinematography]] died a [[nefarious]], [[fierce]] death and was unable to make more [[kino]], and the [[worldwide]] lived HAPPILY EVER AFTER - THE [[ENDING]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Wealthy [[psychiatrist]] Lindsay Crouse has just [[published]] her first novel and is [[feeling]] down about her [[profession]] feeling that it's [[hopeless]] to [[help]] her patients. A [[young]] gambling junkie client [[asks]] her to [[help]] him pay off his debts if he truly wants to help him get better. Here she [[gets]] [[involved]] with Joe Mantegna. To reveal any more of the plot [[would]] spoil one hell of a fun movie and 'House of Games' may very well be the [[best]] con [[movie]] I've [[seen]]. [[David]] Mamet [[wrote]] and directed this gem that's full of snappy dialogue, [[great]] one-liners, and enough twists to keep you guessing til the [[end]]. Crouse is perfect as the uptight [[psychiatrist]] needing a change and Mantegna tops her as the devilishly sly con-man. And with the exception of a coincidence in the last quarter of the [[movie]], the [[film]] is in utter control of it's [[audience]]; and we are loving the con.

*** out of **** Wealthy [[therapist]] Lindsay Crouse has just [[publicized]] her first novel and is [[sense]] down about her [[occupations]] feeling that it's [[despondent]] to [[aid]] her patients. A [[youths]] gambling junkie client [[wondering]] her to [[aids]] him pay off his debts if he truly wants to help him get better. Here she [[obtains]] [[engaged]] with Joe Mantegna. To reveal any more of the plot [[could]] spoil one hell of a fun movie and 'House of Games' may very well be the [[optimum]] con [[cinematography]] I've [[watched]]. [[Dawood]] Mamet [[authored]] and directed this gem that's full of snappy dialogue, [[large]] one-liners, and enough twists to keep you guessing til the [[terminates]]. Crouse is perfect as the uptight [[psychologist]] needing a change and Mantegna tops her as the devilishly sly con-man. And with the exception of a coincidence in the last quarter of the [[flick]], the [[kino]] is in utter control of it's [[spectators]]; and we are loving the con.

*** out of **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "[[Hey]] [[Babu]] Riba" is a film about a [[young]] [[woman]], Mariana ([[nicknamed]] "Esther" after a [[famous]] American [[movie]] [[star]]), and four young [[men]], Glenn, [[Sacha]], Kicha, and Pop, all perhaps 15-17 years old in 1953 Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The five are committed friends and crazy about jazz, blue jeans, or [[anything]] American it [[seems]].

The very close relationship of the teenagers is poignant, and ultimately a sacrifice is [[willingly]] [[made]] to try to help one of the group who has [[fallen]] on [[unexpected]] difficulties. In the wake of [[changing]] communist politics, they go their separate ways and reunite in 1985 (the year before the film was made).

I enjoyed the film with some [[reservations]]. The subtitles for one thing were difficult. Especially in the beginning, there were a number of dialogues which had no subtitles at all. Perhaps the conversational pace required it, but I couldn't always both read the text and absorb the scene, which caused me to not always understand which [[character]] was involved. I [[watched]] the movie (a video from our public library) with a friend, and neither of us really [[understood]] part of the story about acquiring streptomycin for a sick relative.

This Yugoslavian coming of age film effectively [[conveyed]] the teenagers' sense of invulnerability, idealism, and [[strong]] and [[loyal]] bonds to each other. There is a main flashforward, and it was [[intriguing]], [[keeping]] me guessing until the [[end]] as to who these [[characters]] were vis-a-vis the 1953 cast, and what had actually [[happened]].

I would rate it 7 out of 10, and [[would]] like to [[see]] other films by the [[director]], Jovan Acin (1941-1991). "[[Yo]] [[Abu]] Riba" is a film about a [[youths]] [[female]], Mariana ([[dubbed]] "Esther" after a [[illustrious]] American [[flick]] [[superstar]]), and four young [[male]], Glenn, [[Sascha]], Kicha, and Pop, all perhaps 15-17 years old in 1953 Belgrade, Yugoslavia. The five are committed friends and crazy about jazz, blue jeans, or [[nothing]] American it [[looks]].

The very close relationship of the teenagers is poignant, and ultimately a sacrifice is [[voluntarily]] [[introduced]] to try to help one of the group who has [[dipped]] on [[unanticipated]] difficulties. In the wake of [[modifying]] communist politics, they go their separate ways and reunite in 1985 (the year before the film was made).

I enjoyed the film with some [[bookings]]. The subtitles for one thing were difficult. Especially in the beginning, there were a number of dialogues which had no subtitles at all. Perhaps the conversational pace required it, but I couldn't always both read the text and absorb the scene, which caused me to not always understand which [[nature]] was involved. I [[observed]] the movie (a video from our public library) with a friend, and neither of us really [[fathom]] part of the story about acquiring streptomycin for a sick relative.

This Yugoslavian coming of age film effectively [[shipped]] the teenagers' sense of invulnerability, idealism, and [[vigorous]] and [[trusty]] bonds to each other. There is a main flashforward, and it was [[fascinating]], [[conserving]] me guessing until the [[termination]] as to who these [[traits]] were vis-a-vis the 1953 cast, and what had actually [[transpired]].

I would rate it 7 out of 10, and [[ought]] like to [[consults]] other films by the [[superintendent]], Jovan Acin (1941-1991). --------------------------------------------- Result 2439 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I really liked ZB1. [[Really]], I did. I have no problem with [[extremely]] low-budget [[movies]], and I have [[enjoyed]] [[movies]] with worse production values than ZB3 (if you can imagine such a thing. [[check]] out 'wiseguys [[vs]]. [[zombies]],' if you're interested). Indeed, I [[prefer]] lower [[budget]] zombie [[films]], because I am [[suspicious]] that Hollywood [[directors]] do not [[understand]] what zombies are 'about.'

But ZB3 was just so [[bad]]. It was retarded. I don't want to [[bother]] being dignified in my [[criticism]]. I [[want]] my 90 minutes back, etc. Except that it really only [[took]] ~80 minutes, because partway through I put it into 1.4X [[fast]] forward.

[[Okay]], here's some [[criticism]].

1. The pacing was [[TERRIBLE]]. [[Everyone]] [[talked]] in [[monologues]]. Even when [[someone]] just had a [[single]] line, the camera [[work]] and the [[editing]] and the [[insertion]] of a bunch of F-bombs into [[every]] [[sentence]] [[made]] the line FEEL like a monologue. [[At]] first I was [[excited]] about the 90 minute running [[time]] [[compared]] to ZB1's 70 minutes, but there were [[actually]] [[fewer]] 'events' in ZB3. It's all [[talking]].

2. The [[gore]] [[effects]] [[got]] stupider. Just glop rubbed [[around]] on people's [[tummies]].

3. Despite the epic [[exposition]], there really wasn't a plot. And the [[exposition]] is indeed epic! I won't spoil it, if you're [[going]] to watch it. (Don't watch it.) But then, it's just a bunch of lame characters [[walking]] [[around]] and [[bickering]] for ~80 minutes. or [[fewer]], if you so [[choose]]. I really liked ZB1. [[Genuinely]], I did. I have no problem with [[greatly]] low-budget [[cinematography]], and I have [[adored]] [[kino]] with worse production values than ZB3 (if you can imagine such a thing. [[audit]] out 'wiseguys [[versus]]. [[walkers]],' if you're interested). Indeed, I [[favourite]] lower [[budgets]] zombie [[cinematography]], because I am [[suspect]] that Hollywood [[managers]] do not [[realise]] what zombies are 'about.'

But ZB3 was just so [[wicked]]. It was retarded. I don't want to [[annoy]] being dignified in my [[criticizing]]. I [[wanted]] my 90 minutes back, etc. Except that it really only [[picked]] ~80 minutes, because partway through I put it into 1.4X [[quickly]] forward.

[[Alright]], here's some [[criticisms]].

1. The pacing was [[TERRIFYING]]. [[Anybody]] [[mentioned]] in [[monologue]]. Even when [[anybody]] just had a [[lonely]] line, the camera [[collaboration]] and the [[edit]] and the [[inclusion]] of a bunch of F-bombs into [[all]] [[penalties]] [[accomplished]] the line FEEL like a monologue. [[Under]] first I was [[thrilled]] about the 90 minute running [[times]] [[compares]] to ZB1's 70 minutes, but there were [[genuinely]] [[minus]] 'events' in ZB3. It's all [[chat]].

2. The [[gora]] [[influences]] [[get]] stupider. Just glop rubbed [[throughout]] on people's [[stomachs]].

3. Despite the epic [[show]], there really wasn't a plot. And the [[displays]] is indeed epic! I won't spoil it, if you're [[go]] to watch it. (Don't watch it.) But then, it's just a bunch of lame characters [[marche]] [[about]] and [[quarrel]] for ~80 minutes. or [[lesser]], if you so [[chose]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2440 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is one of the [[oddest]] films of the Zatôichi series due to its very unusual pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, [[instead]] of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in charge of making the films. This could easily explain why this [[film]] seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[films]]. As far as Ichi's role, the [[film]] is very [[different]] because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's [[also]] [[easy]] to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is totally taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. This is one of the [[weirdest]] films of the Zatôichi series due to its very unusual pacing and the role that Ichi plays in the film. Interestingly enough, this was the first Zatôichi film made by Shintaro Katsu's new production company. Now, [[however]] of just playing the blind swordsman, Katsu is in charge of making the films. This could easily explain why this [[cinematographic]] seems so different in style to the previous 15 [[filmmaking]]. As far as Ichi's role, the [[filmmaking]] is very [[assorted]] because he isn't in the film as much as usual. He's [[apart]] [[uncomplicated]] to fool and actually, for a while, does a lot to harm people instead of helping!

"Zatôichi Rôyaburi" begins with Ichi talking with an old lady who tries to take advantage of his blindness. Oddly, in this scene, Ichi says that he's been blind since a toddler, though in an earlier film he says his blindness set in when he was 8. This is a minor mistake, and only a crazed fan like myself would have noticed.

This film takes place over a period of at least six months and is more likely to have taken a year--so you can see what I said about odd pacing. Most films in the series take place over a few days or weeks. Ichi comes to a town where there is a boss (Asagoro) who tries very hard to be nice to Ichi because he knows of the blind man's reputation. The boss is quite charming and surprisingly Ichi is totally taken in by the evil man. At the same time, he meets another boss (Shushui)--a sort of guru to the poor. Shushui admonishes the people to forsake all violence and even Ichi falls under his teaching--giving up his blade for many months. Shushui's teachings are very similar to Daoist teachings from China--non-violence and acceptance of life as it is (for good or for bad).

Months after leaving this town and thinking all was well, Ichi learns that as soon as he left, Asagoro showed his true colors--enslaving women, oppressing the poor and being an all-around jerk. In a way, Ichi is responsible for this, as he helped Asagoro and counted him as a friend. Now, Asagoro has captured Shushui and several innocent people have killed themselves due to the evil boss' actions.

When Ichi returns, he doesn't accept automatically that Asagoro is good or evil but tests him cleverly. This bit with a scarecrow is inspired and leads to a finale where, what else, Ichi kills the baddies and frees Shushui. This finale was very good and occurred in the rain. Then final scene with Asagoro and the rocks is great, though the beheading is a tad cheesy by today's special effects standards.

Pluses for the film are that although poorly paced, it is different and cannot be mistaken for the previous 15 (which often seem very similar). Additionally, it does end very well. Minuses (aside from pacing) are that some might dislike seeing Ichi so fallible and the scenes with Ichi and the other blind men that are included for comic relief fall flat...very, very, very flat. They are tacky and unfunny...that's the sort of flat that it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2441 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The Invisible [[Maniac]] [[starts]] as a young Kevin Dornwinkle ([[Kris]] Russell) is caught by his strict mother (Marilyn Adams) watching a girl (Tracy Walker) strip through his telescope... [[Cut]] to 'Twenty Years Later' & Kevin Dornwinkle (Noel Peters) is now a [[physics]] professor who [[claims]] to have [[discovered]] a way to turn [[things]] [[invisible]] [[using]] a 'mollecular reconstruction' serum. However during a [[demonstration]] in [[front]] of his fellow [[scientists]] it [[fails]] & they all laugh at him, Dornwinkle goes mad kills a few of them & is locked away in a mental institute from which he escapes. Jump forward 'Two Weeks Later' & a group of summer college students discuss the tragic death of their [[physics]] teacher when the headmistress Mrs. Cello (Stephanie Blake as Stella Blalack) says that she has hired a replacement, yes you've guessed it it's Dornwinkle. The student don't take to him & treat him like dirt, however Dornwinkle has perfected his invisibility serum & uses it to satisfy his perverted sexual urges & his desire for revenge...

Co-written & directed by Adam Rifkin wisely hiding under the pseudonym Rif Coogan (I wouldn't want my name to be associated with this turd of a film either) The Invisible Maniac is real bottom of the [[barrel]] stuff. The [[script]] by Rifkin, sorry Coogan & Tony Markes is [[awful]]. It tries to be a teenage sex/comedy/horror hybrid that just fails in every department. For a start the sex is [[nothing]] more than a few female shower scenes & a few [[boob]] shots, not much [[else]] I'm afraid & the birds in The Invisible [[Maniac]] aren't [[even]] that good [[looking]]. The [[comedy]] is lame & every joke misses by the proverbial mile, this is the kind of [[film]] that thinks [[someone]] fighting an invisible man or having Henry (Jason Logan) a [[mute]] [[man]] [[trying]] to [[make]] a [[phone]] call is [[funny]]. The [[Invisible]] [[Maniac]] makes the [[Police]] Academy (1984 - 1994) series of films [[look]] [[like]] the pinnacle of [[sophistication]]! As for the [[horror]] [[aspect]] that too is lame. It's [[also]] an [[incredibly]] slow (it takes over half an [[hour]] before Dornwinkles [[even]] becomes [[invisible]]), [[dull]], predictable, [[boring]] & has [[highly]] [[annoying]] & unlikable [[teenage]] character's.

Director Rifkin or Coogan or whatever does absolutely nothing to try & make The Invisible Maniac an even slightly enjoyable experience. There's no scares, tension or atmosphere & as a [[whole]] the [[film]] is a real chore to sit through. He does nothing with the invisibility angle, just a few doors opening on their own is as adventurous as it gets. There is very little gore or violence, a bit of splashing blood, a few strangulations & the only decent bit in the whole film when someone has their head blown off with a shotgun, unfortunately he was invisible at the time & we only get to see the headless torso afterwards.

The budget must have been low, & I mean really low because this is one seriously cheap looking film. Dornwinkles laboratory is basically two jars on his bedside cabinet! When he escapes from the mental institution he has all of one dog sent after him & the entire school has about a dozen pupils & two teachers. The Invisible Maniac is a poorly made film throughout it's 85 minute duration, I spotted the boom mike on at least one occasion... Lets just say the acting is of a low standard & leave it at that.

The Invisible Maniac is crap, plain & simple. I found no redeeming features in it at all, there are so many more better [[films]] out there you can watch so there is no reason whatsoever to waste your time on this rubbish. Definitely one to avoid. The Invisible [[Fou]] [[begun]] as a young Kevin Dornwinkle ([[Chrissy]] Russell) is caught by his strict mother (Marilyn Adams) watching a girl (Tracy Walker) strip through his telescope... [[Slice]] to 'Twenty Years Later' & Kevin Dornwinkle (Noel Peters) is now a [[physicist]] professor who [[claim]] to have [[discovering]] a way to turn [[matters]] [[unseen]] [[employs]] a 'mollecular reconstruction' serum. However during a [[protests]] in [[newsweek]] of his fellow [[scientist]] it [[fail]] & they all laugh at him, Dornwinkle goes mad kills a few of them & is locked away in a mental institute from which he escapes. Jump forward 'Two Weeks Later' & a group of summer college students discuss the tragic death of their [[physically]] teacher when the headmistress Mrs. Cello (Stephanie Blake as Stella Blalack) says that she has hired a replacement, yes you've guessed it it's Dornwinkle. The student don't take to him & treat him like dirt, however Dornwinkle has perfected his invisibility serum & uses it to satisfy his perverted sexual urges & his desire for revenge...

Co-written & directed by Adam Rifkin wisely hiding under the pseudonym Rif Coogan (I wouldn't want my name to be associated with this turd of a film either) The Invisible Maniac is real bottom of the [[canon]] stuff. The [[hyphen]] by Rifkin, sorry Coogan & Tony Markes is [[fearsome]]. It tries to be a teenage sex/comedy/horror hybrid that just fails in every department. For a start the sex is [[anything]] more than a few female shower scenes & a few [[tit]] shots, not much [[elsewhere]] I'm afraid & the birds in The Invisible [[Psychopath]] aren't [[yet]] that good [[quest]]. The [[farce]] is lame & every joke misses by the proverbial mile, this is the kind of [[cinematography]] that thinks [[everyone]] fighting an invisible man or having Henry (Jason Logan) a [[muffler]] [[bloke]] [[strive]] to [[deliver]] a [[telephone]] call is [[hilarious]]. The [[Unseen]] [[Fou]] makes the [[Cops]] Academy (1984 - 1994) series of films [[peek]] [[fond]] the pinnacle of [[subtlety]]! As for the [[terror]] [[element]] that too is lame. It's [[similarly]] an [[surprisingly]] slow (it takes over half an [[hora]] before Dornwinkles [[yet]] becomes [[unseen]]), [[tiresome]], predictable, [[tiresome]] & has [[tremendously]] [[bothersome]] & unlikable [[schoolgirl]] character's.

Director Rifkin or Coogan or whatever does absolutely nothing to try & make The Invisible Maniac an even slightly enjoyable experience. There's no scares, tension or atmosphere & as a [[ensemble]] the [[cinema]] is a real chore to sit through. He does nothing with the invisibility angle, just a few doors opening on their own is as adventurous as it gets. There is very little gore or violence, a bit of splashing blood, a few strangulations & the only decent bit in the whole film when someone has their head blown off with a shotgun, unfortunately he was invisible at the time & we only get to see the headless torso afterwards.

The budget must have been low, & I mean really low because this is one seriously cheap looking film. Dornwinkles laboratory is basically two jars on his bedside cabinet! When he escapes from the mental institution he has all of one dog sent after him & the entire school has about a dozen pupils & two teachers. The Invisible Maniac is a poorly made film throughout it's 85 minute duration, I spotted the boom mike on at least one occasion... Lets just say the acting is of a low standard & leave it at that.

The Invisible Maniac is crap, plain & simple. I found no redeeming features in it at all, there are so many more better [[cinema]] out there you can watch so there is no reason whatsoever to waste your time on this rubbish. Definitely one to avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I had [[lost]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie Main Prem Ki Deewani hoon, then a year back now I saw promos for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't want to waste my hard earned money watching it in cinema. When the film first came out on [[DVD]] I rented it and watched and I [[loved]] the [[movie]] and took back my [[words]] for Sooraj. I just finished watching it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to review this movie. Sooraj R. BarjatyaGot it right this time, [[okay]] I was not a huge fan of Hum App Ke Hai Kaun. But I have always loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best work. I hardly ever cry in a movie but this movie made me feel like crying. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much underrated movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid Kapoor and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! I had [[forfeited]] faith in Sooraj R. Barjatya after the movie Main Prem Ki Deewani hoon, then a year back now I saw promos for Vivah which looked good. But I didn't want to waste my hard earned money watching it in cinema. When the film first came out on [[DVDS]] I rented it and watched and I [[worshipped]] the [[flick]] and took back my [[phrase]] for Sooraj. I just finished watching it yesterday again and this time I thought I have to review this movie. Sooraj R. BarjatyaGot it right this time, [[alrighty]] I was not a huge fan of Hum App Ke Hai Kaun. But I have always loved Manie Pyar kiya, after Manie Pyar kiya to me I think Vivah is Barjatyas best work. I hardly ever cry in a movie but this movie made me feel like crying. If you have ever been in love before then there will be many moments that will touch you in this movie, the movie is just too sweet and will have you falling in love with it, my view a much underrated movie.

The story of this movie you might call desi and very old times, but to me it seemed modern because the two couples which are getting an arrange marriage are aware it's an old tradition. It's done in present times, lots of people don't believe in this arrange marriage, but I do. The journey between the engagement and wedding which will always be special and this movie shows it clearly. When Prem meets Poonam for the first time, they show it how it is and that's reality and my parents where saying that's how they got married and it showed it in a way which is so real yes people the way Prem and Poonam meet in this movie is how most marriages happen. It was a very sweet, you feel nervous yet excited, the song "Do Ajnabe" shows that very well. Getting back to the story yes it's a journey which you soon get glued to between Prem and Poonam (Shahid Kapoor and Amrita Rao) and there families. A twist occurs in this movie which is really good, the last 30mins you all will be reaching for the tissue box.

What makes this film so amazing is the chemistry between Prem and Poonam, how they fall for each other is too sweet. Simple boy and Simple Girl, when they first meet during and after the song "Do Anjane Ajnabe" It's very sweet to watch, She hardly says anything and Prem does all the talking being honest with her about his past and the girl he liked and him smoking. Then it leads on to them all having a family trip and then that's when they really do fall for each other. It makes you just want to watch the couple and watch all the sweet moments they have. Another factor is that Poonam chichi is really mean to her and you feel sorry for Poonam because she has been treated bad and makes you want to see her happy and when she finally finds happiness, you too start feeling happy with her the movie basically makes you fall in love with Poonam more then just Prem. When she finds happiness through Prem you want her to stay happy and also hope nothing goes wrong because the character is shown as a sweet simple girl. Which brings me to performances and Amrita Roa as Poonam is amazing in the movie, her best work till date you will fall in love with this innocent character and root her on to find happiness. Shahid Kapoor as Prem is amazing too, he is Poonam support in the film, he is her happiness the movie, together they share an amazing chemistry and I have never seen a cuter couple since SRK and Kajol. If Ishq Vishk didn't touch you to telling you how cute they are together this surely will. "Mujhe Haq hai" the song and before that is amazing chemistry they show. Scenes which touched me was when Prem takes Poonam to his room and shows her that's where they will be staying and he opens her up and they have a moment between them which is too sweet. Again if you have ever been in love with someone that much these scenes you can defiantly connect to. The film is just the sweetest thing you will see ever.

The direction is spot on, to me a good movie is basically something that can pull me in and stop me believe for this hours what is being seen here is fake and there is a camera filing them. To me this film pulled me in and for those three hours I felt really connected to the movie. The songs you will only truly like when you have seen the movie as they are songs placed in the situation after I saw the movie I been playing the songs non stop! The music is amazing, the story is simply amazing too what more can I ask for?

What I can finally say it, rarely do we get a movie that makes us feel good, this movie after you have seen it will make you feel really good and make you want to be a better person. Its basically the sweetest journey ever, its basically showing you they journey between engagement and marriage and many people say it's the bestest part of your life…Well this movie actually shows you way do people actually say that? Why do people actually say that the journey is just that amazing! Watch this movie and you will find out why the journey is amazing! --------------------------------------------- Result 2443 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (88%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This two-part TV mini-series isn't as good as the original from 1966 but it's [[solid]]. The original benefited from a huge number of things---it was all in black and white, it had a [[great]] jazz [[score]] and it was [[filmed]] at the real locations, including the [[home]] of the doomed [[Clutter]] family. That was [[important]] because in the book and in the original movie the home is very much a [[character]] itself.

This remake was filmed in Canada which I guess doubles okay for Kansas. The story tries to be as sympathetic to Perry as it [[dares]] to and Eric Roberts plays him as a somewhat fey person, his homosexuality barely hidden. The gentler take by Roberts doesn't quite work in the end though because it's hard to believe that his version of Perry Smith would just finally explode in a spasm of murder. Whereas Robert Blake's take on Smith left you no doubt that his Perry Smith was an extremely dangerous character.

Anthony Edwards was excellent as the bombastic, big-mouthed and ultimately cowardly Dick Hickcock, the brains of the outfit. His performance compares very well to Scott Wilson's role in the original movie.

Since this is a longer movie it allows more time to develop the Clutter family and in this regard I think the 1996 movie has an advantage. The Clutters are just an outstanding, decent family. They've never harmed another soul and it is just inexplicable that such a decent family is ultimately massacred in such a horrifying way. It still boggles my mind that, after the Clutters were locked in the bathroom, that Herb Clutter didn't force out the window so at least his children would have a chance to escape. This movie has the thought occur to him, but too late. From what I read about the real home, which is still standing, the way the bathroom is configured they could've opened the counter drawers and effectively barricaded the door which would've forced the killers to blast their way in. But it might've bought time for some of the Clutters to escape. Why the Clutters didn't try this, I have no idea.

Fans of the book will recognize that this movie takes a lot of liberties with how the crime is committed but not too serious. Still, it's distracting to viewers like me who have read tons about the case. The actors playing the cops, led by Sam Neill and Leo Rossi, are uniformly excellent, much better, I think, as a group, than the actors in the original movie. They know that to secure the noose around the necks of both of them they have to get them to confess. And the officers come to the interview impeccably prepared. They had already discovered the likely alibi the phony story of going to Fort Scott, and had debunked every jot of it. The officers then let Smith & Hickcock just walk into their trap. Hickcock is a b.s. artist who figures he can convince anyone of anything and the officers respectfully let him tell his cover story. But when they lower the boom on him, he shatters very quickly. It's very well filmed and acted and very gratifying to watch because the viewer naturally should loath Hickcock in particular by this point, a cowardly con-man who needs the easily manipulated Smith to do his killing for him. Supposedly Hickcock later stated that the real reason for the crime wasn't to steal money from the Clutters but to rape Nancy Clutter. At least she was spared that degradation.

The actors playing the Clutters are very good, Kevin Tighe as Herb Clutter in particular. The story sensitively deals with Mrs. Clutter's emotional problems, most likely clinical depression, and Mrs. Clutter displays remarkable inner strength when she firmly and strongly demands that the killers leave her daughter alone. From what I've read the Clutters' surviving family was particularly bothered by how Bonnie Clutter was portrayed in the book, claiming it was entirely untrue. But as an aside, both of the killers related to the police how Mr. Clutter asked them to not bother his wife because of her long illness. Capote might make up that fiction to make the character of Bonnie more interesting but certainly the killers had no reason to falsely portray Mrs. Clutter and no doubt much of the conversation in the book (duplicated in the movies) is right off the taped confessions of the killers. So it would've been nonsensical for Herb to have said that and not have it be true. This two-part TV mini-series isn't as good as the original from 1966 but it's [[robust]]. The original benefited from a huge number of things---it was all in black and white, it had a [[huge]] jazz [[scoring]] and it was [[shot]] at the real locations, including the [[dwellings]] of the doomed [[Chaos]] family. That was [[critical]] because in the book and in the original movie the home is very much a [[nature]] itself.

This remake was filmed in Canada which I guess doubles okay for Kansas. The story tries to be as sympathetic to Perry as it [[daring]] to and Eric Roberts plays him as a somewhat fey person, his homosexuality barely hidden. The gentler take by Roberts doesn't quite work in the end though because it's hard to believe that his version of Perry Smith would just finally explode in a spasm of murder. Whereas Robert Blake's take on Smith left you no doubt that his Perry Smith was an extremely dangerous character.

Anthony Edwards was excellent as the bombastic, big-mouthed and ultimately cowardly Dick Hickcock, the brains of the outfit. His performance compares very well to Scott Wilson's role in the original movie.

Since this is a longer movie it allows more time to develop the Clutter family and in this regard I think the 1996 movie has an advantage. The Clutters are just an outstanding, decent family. They've never harmed another soul and it is just inexplicable that such a decent family is ultimately massacred in such a horrifying way. It still boggles my mind that, after the Clutters were locked in the bathroom, that Herb Clutter didn't force out the window so at least his children would have a chance to escape. This movie has the thought occur to him, but too late. From what I read about the real home, which is still standing, the way the bathroom is configured they could've opened the counter drawers and effectively barricaded the door which would've forced the killers to blast their way in. But it might've bought time for some of the Clutters to escape. Why the Clutters didn't try this, I have no idea.

Fans of the book will recognize that this movie takes a lot of liberties with how the crime is committed but not too serious. Still, it's distracting to viewers like me who have read tons about the case. The actors playing the cops, led by Sam Neill and Leo Rossi, are uniformly excellent, much better, I think, as a group, than the actors in the original movie. They know that to secure the noose around the necks of both of them they have to get them to confess. And the officers come to the interview impeccably prepared. They had already discovered the likely alibi the phony story of going to Fort Scott, and had debunked every jot of it. The officers then let Smith & Hickcock just walk into their trap. Hickcock is a b.s. artist who figures he can convince anyone of anything and the officers respectfully let him tell his cover story. But when they lower the boom on him, he shatters very quickly. It's very well filmed and acted and very gratifying to watch because the viewer naturally should loath Hickcock in particular by this point, a cowardly con-man who needs the easily manipulated Smith to do his killing for him. Supposedly Hickcock later stated that the real reason for the crime wasn't to steal money from the Clutters but to rape Nancy Clutter. At least she was spared that degradation.

The actors playing the Clutters are very good, Kevin Tighe as Herb Clutter in particular. The story sensitively deals with Mrs. Clutter's emotional problems, most likely clinical depression, and Mrs. Clutter displays remarkable inner strength when she firmly and strongly demands that the killers leave her daughter alone. From what I've read the Clutters' surviving family was particularly bothered by how Bonnie Clutter was portrayed in the book, claiming it was entirely untrue. But as an aside, both of the killers related to the police how Mr. Clutter asked them to not bother his wife because of her long illness. Capote might make up that fiction to make the character of Bonnie more interesting but certainly the killers had no reason to falsely portray Mrs. Clutter and no doubt much of the conversation in the book (duplicated in the movies) is right off the taped confessions of the killers. So it would've been nonsensical for Herb to have said that and not have it be true. --------------------------------------------- Result 2444 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Back in the forties, when movies touched on matters not yet admissible in "polite" society, they resorted to [[codes]] which supposedly floated over the heads of most of the audience while alerting those in the know to just what was up. Probably no [[film]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the oddly [[obscure]] Desert [[Fury]], set in a small gambling oasis called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the Purple Sage saloon and casino is the [[astonishing]] [[Mary]] Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' original script made this relationship explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, stir, and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these ingredients up to a hard boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled exchanges. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a remarkable movie. Back in the forties, when movies touched on matters not yet admissible in "polite" society, they resorted to [[ciphers]] which supposedly floated over the heads of most of the audience while alerting those in the know to just what was up. Probably no [[flick]] of the decade was so freighted with innuendo as the oddly [[indistinct]] Desert [[Busybody]], set in a small gambling oasis called Chuckawalla somewhere in the California desert. Proprietress of the Purple Sage saloon and casino is the [[uncanny]] [[Mari]] Astor, in slacks and sporting a cigarette holder; into town drives her handful-of-a-daughter, Lizabeth Scott, looking, in Technicolor, like 20-million bucks. But listen to the dialogue between them, which suggests an older Lesbian and her young, restless companion (one can only wonder if A.I. Bezzerides' original script made this relationship explicit). Even more blatant are John Hodiak as a gangster and Wendell Corey as his insanely jealous torpedo. Add Burt Lancaster as the town sheriff, stir, and sit back. Both Lancaster and (surprisingly) Hodiak fall for Scott. It seems, however, that Hodiak not only has a past with Astor, but had a wife who died under suspicious circumstances. The desert sun heats these ingredients up to a hard boil, with face-slappings aplenty and empurpled exchanges. Don't pass up this hothouse melodrama, chock full of creepily exotic blooms, if it comes your way; it's a remarkable movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2445 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Dark comedy? Gallows humor? How does one make a comedy out of murder? It can be risky business as the viewer is required to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. So, the story has be rock [[solid]] with a [[good]] dash of [[suspended]] [[reality]] in order to make it [[work]]. So, [[Pierce]] Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted alcoholic who kills people for a living and is having a life crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky beginning, he learns that he needs a friend. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a life. Add character actor, Philip Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the races. Brosnan is wonderfully crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear delightful as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is delightful and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. Dark comedy? Gallows humor? How does one make a comedy out of murder? It can be risky business as the viewer is required to let go of their moral values and laugh at the antics of a man who kills people. So, the story has be rock [[robust]] with a [[alright]] dash of [[terminated]] [[realistic]] in order to make it [[cooperated]]. So, [[Pearce]] Brosnan, the Irishman's answer to 007 is now cast as a chain-smoking, sex-addicted alcoholic who kills people for a living and is having a life crisis. He meets a struggling businessman, Greg Kinnear, and after a rocky beginning, he learns that he needs a friend. But, Greg's happily married to Hope Davis and Brosnan sees in him the basic things he doesn't have, love, home and a life. Add character actor, Philip Baker Hall as the hit-man's manager and we're off to the races. Brosnan is wonderfully crass and crude as the anti-hero and Kinnear delightful as his counterpart, the very human businessman. Hope Davis adds a sparkle as Kinnear's very conventional wife who is fascinated with this derelict who drifts into their lives. The ending is delightful and with some surprise to it. You should leave the theater feeling, at least, partly good-- if you're able to suspend being aghast at killing people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this commonplace movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the direction is extremely boring and the story is NOT so interesting and [[original]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! Why a good actress like Elizabeth Berkley stars in this commonplace movie???!!! The cast gives some good performance (Elizabeth Berkley as a Barbie girl, Ele Keats as a girl without mother and Justin Whalin, a guy eternally lessened by his bother), but the direction is extremely boring and the story is NOT so interesting and [[preliminary]]. I can NOT believe that a movie like this was produced for the big screen! Julie Corman (the producer): are you CRAZY???!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2447 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] About the baby: Why wasn't [[big]] brother [[assuming]] he'd be hungry for a [[bottle]] or some nourishment or a diaper [[change]]? He should have been [[screaming]] non-stop after that [[many]] hours without [[care]]. [[Definitely]] [[stupid]] to take the [[baby]] from a safe place when he didn't need to.

And why was the road miraculously clear whenever [[anyone]] wanted to drive [[somewhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees fall on the roads and block them?

I can't imagine the cops at the roadblock not immediately following after any young person who would crash it, especially when they said it was dangerous to go there.

That being said, it was nice to have a movie children could safely watch, for a change. About the baby: Why wasn't [[considerable]] brother [[supposing]] he'd be hungry for a [[bottles]] or some nourishment or a diaper [[shift]]? He should have been [[howl]] non-stop after that [[various]] hours without [[healthcare]]. [[Certainly]] [[daft]] to take the [[honey]] from a safe place when he didn't need to.

And why was the road miraculously clear whenever [[person]] wanted to drive [[anywhere]]? Didn't any uprooted trees fall on the roads and block them?

I can't imagine the cops at the roadblock not immediately following after any young person who would crash it, especially when they said it was dangerous to go there.

That being said, it was nice to have a movie children could safely watch, for a change. --------------------------------------------- Result 2448 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] of the films of the young republic few in number as they are The Buccaneer (1958)stands out as a finely crafted film. Charleton Heston excels in his portrayal of Old Hickory's defence of New Orleans with a thrown together force of militia, regulars and pirates promised a reprieve.

after Christmas 1814 peninsula veterans led by sir edward packenham, the duke of wellington's brother in law bore down on the city of new orleans. andy jackson had a day to draw together a scratch force to defend the city behind bales of hay.

Charlton Heston projects Jackson's terrifying presence and awe inspiring power of command. Yet there are a few colorful comic relief. With the might of the English lioness about to pounce, a young blond haired voluteer from New Orleans asks: I guess the ruckus is about to start.

the battle was about to rage but not for long. true to form the British marched straight into withering American fire. in less than a few minutes an attempt to reconquer lost north American territories had been foiled.

the battle scene in this movies lasts slightly longer than the actual battle itself.

there are colorful side stories in this film of the young volunteer at his first dance to celebrate the victory. --------------------------------------------- Result 2449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The 60s (1999) D: [[Mark]] Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, Julia Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard Roberts, Bill Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a white [[family]] and a black family. The film's first half is driven by the [[excellent]] performance of Dutton as [[Reverend]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's [[character]] is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[forgotten]] in a [[dull]], [[incoherent]], and downright awful 2nd half. RATING: 4 out of 10. Not rated (later rated PG-13 for video/DVD release). The 60s (1999) D: [[Marked]] Piznarski. Josh Hamilton, Julia Stiles, Jerry O'Connell, Jeremy Sisto, Jordana Brewster, Leonard Roberts, Bill Smitrovich, Annie Corley, Charles S. Dutton. NBC mini-series (later released to video/DVD as full length feature film) about the treacherous 1960s, as seen through the eyes of both a white [[familia]] and a black family. The film's first half is driven by the [[wondrous]] performance of Dutton as [[Clergyman]] Willie Taylor and evenly spreads the storyline between the families. However, Dutton's [[trait]] is killed halfway through and the black family is completely [[neglected]] in a [[uninspiring]], [[counterintuitive]], and downright awful 2nd half. RATING: 4 out of 10. Not rated (later rated PG-13 for video/DVD release). --------------------------------------------- Result 2450 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[In]] my life I have [[seen]] many great and awful movies. I am not an [[expert]] in professional reviews, but I have definitely something to [[say]] about this one. Firstly, these actors are the [[worst]] I have [[seen]]... Their acting is so unreal that you even want to throw away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these actors were not interested in the quality.

Another [[awful]] thing is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you hear them. It seems that your 14 year old son could act better. I feel that this movie had a budget similar to the cost of my 14 year old European car...

Please, if my message reaches you - save your time and money. [[Across]] my life I have [[saw]] many great and awful movies. I am not an [[experts]] in professional reviews, but I have definitely something to [[tell]] about this one. Firstly, these actors are the [[meanest]] I have [[noticed]]... Their acting is so unreal that you even want to throw away the DVD in the first 2 minutes. I think that these actors were not interested in the quality.

Another [[grisly]] thing is about these dialogs - they are so lame. You sometimes feel uncomfortable when you hear them. It seems that your 14 year old son could act better. I feel that this movie had a budget similar to the cost of my 14 year old European car...

Please, if my message reaches you - save your time and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Paul [[Hennessy]] and his wife, Cate [[must]] deal with their two teenage daughters and weird son...But after the [[untimely]] passing of [[John]] Ritter, the [[show]] [[became]] more about [[coping]] with the loss of a [[loved]] one...

I [[found]] this [[show]], [[passing]] through the channels one afternoon and I have to say I was [[laughing]] myself till my ribs ached, simply at the [[range]] of [[characters]]; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[find]] himself dealing mostly with his daughters...From then on, I [[caught]] the rest of the [[show]] when I was [[free]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's death...Shortly afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' part 2 and I have to say I was nearly in tears, watching the emotions of the characters, losing a loved one...How Rory punches a wall in anger and frustration...How Cate deals with having to sleep in her bed all alone....Briget and Kerry talking about what they should have done.

But the show does move on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who provide great laughs, as Cate's father tries to protect his family and give 'man issue talks' to Rory...But the true gem is CJ...who is absolutely hilarious as the wild cousin.

It will always be John Ritter's [[masterpiece]]. Paul [[Hennessey]] and his wife, Cate [[should]] deal with their two teenage daughters and weird son...But after the [[inopportune]] passing of [[Jon]] Ritter, the [[shows]] [[was]] more about [[adapting]] with the loss of a [[worshipped]] one...

I [[detected]] this [[spectacle]], [[passerby]] through the channels one afternoon and I have to say I was [[kidding]] myself till my ribs ached, simply at the [[assortment]] of [[personage]]; the witty lines and the situation Paul would [[finds]] himself dealing mostly with his daughters...From then on, I [[apprehended]] the rest of the [[spectacle]] when I was [[libre]] and I have to say the writing was very good..But then I read about John Ritter's death...Shortly afterwards I watched 'Goodbye' part 2 and I have to say I was nearly in tears, watching the emotions of the characters, losing a loved one...How Rory punches a wall in anger and frustration...How Cate deals with having to sleep in her bed all alone....Briget and Kerry talking about what they should have done.

But the show does move on, bringing with it Jim Egan and CJ Barnes who provide great laughs, as Cate's father tries to protect his family and give 'man issue talks' to Rory...But the true gem is CJ...who is absolutely hilarious as the wild cousin.

It will always be John Ritter's [[centerpiece]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2452 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was beginning to come out as a lesbian. i [[saw]] this [[movie]] on an old black and white TV, with terrible [[reception]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an awakening that seemed like an [[echo]] of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgot]] the feelings the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile magic, and i have [[treasured]] a hope that i would see it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone would make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it also has some of the same delicacy and persistent poignancy... in 1976 i had just moved to the us from ceylon. i was 23, and had been married for a little over three years, and was beginning to come out as a lesbian. i [[watched]] this [[flick]] on an old black and white TV, with terrible [[hospitality]], alone, and uninterrupted, in an awakening that seemed like an [[echos]] of the story. i was living in a small house in tucson arizona, and it was summertime... like everyone else here, i never [[forgotten]] the feelings the images of this story called forth, and its residue of fragile magic, and i have [[priceless]] a hope that i would see it again someday. i'll keep checking in. i also wish that someone would make a movie of shirley verel's 'the other side of venus'. it also has some of the same delicacy and persistent poignancy... --------------------------------------------- Result 2453 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] This one is a little better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its [[humor]] which [[basically]] keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That wears thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[tremendous]] [[amount]] of [[total]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. This one is a little better than the first one. It still relies on a lot of its [[mood]] which [[virtually]] keeps saying that the old Bond movies were not realistic. That wears thin after so many parodies. The girls were more interesting in this one.

There is a [[terrific]] [[somme]] of [[whole]] gross out humor. Hopefully one day real comedy will come back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] as [[always]] this is an [[inaccurate]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. as [[steadily]] this is an [[amiss]] picture of the homeless. TV told a lot of lies about panhandlers in the early 1990s and made everyone look bad, and claimed we all made over $100 a day when $20-40 a day was much closer to reality. when someone drove by where i held up a sign offering to work, and offered me work, i actually went and took the work if i was physically able.and if i would been offered the $100,000 id damned sure invested in in apt prepaid for at least 2 years, and kept most in the bank and still left myself $10-20000 for NL $1-2 and $2-5 cash games at the casinos. i usually always win and could win decent if i just had a bankroll. instead i win about $1000 a month is all playing in always minimum buying in due to not wanting to risk losing it all. i was only homeless cause i didn't wanna risk spending all my money and going broke, sometimes i had over $1000-2000 in my sock while i slept outside. anyone wanting to talk contact sevencard2003 on yahoo messenger.i admit i was different than most homeless people though, due to the fact i never drank smoke or took drugs. im no longer homeless, am now in govt housing for $177 a month and getting SSI and spend most of my time winning at online poker. mom and sunflower diversified worked hard to get me SSI. glad my days of hiding in under the stage in the convention center of the casino at night sleeping, worrying about getting caught by security are finally over. had this TV crew picked me theyd been over a lot sooner. its a shame how they don't better select who they pick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2455 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] i am a big [[fan]] of karishma Kapoor and Govinda. I watched this [[film]] after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley brilliant.

There are films that are bad, and there are films that are cr*p. but this film just takes the [[biscuit]].

We were so annoyed that we were conned out of paying our money expecting a decent film.

avoid at all cost, [[dont]] [[even]] rent it.

1/10 i am a big [[breather]] of karishma Kapoor and Govinda. I watched this [[cinematography]] after i had seen Fiza, which was absolutley brilliant.

There are films that are bad, and there are films that are cr*p. but this film just takes the [[cookies]].

We were so annoyed that we were conned out of paying our money expecting a decent film.

avoid at all cost, [[wasnt]] [[yet]] rent it.

1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] Collusion Course is even worse than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is less pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[bad]] Leno's character, a sanctimonious buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. Collusion Course is even worse than the typical "evil white male corporate capitalist" movie of the week. This movie is less pleasant than a toothache. Jay Leno can act. He's good in his underrated debut movie, The Silverbears, in which he gives a performance consist with the demands of his character. This movie is so [[wicked]] Leno's character, a sanctimonious buffoon, is less annoying than Morita's character, a sanctimonious fool. --------------------------------------------- Result 2457 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] As others have mentioned, all the women that go nude in this film are mostly absolutely gorgeous. The plot very [[ably]] shows the hypocrisy of the female libido. When men are around they want to be pursued, but when no "men" are around, they become the pursuers of a 14 year old boy. And the boy becomes a man really fast (we should all be so lucky at this age!). He then gets up the courage to pursue his true love. As others have mentioned, all the women that go nude in this film are mostly absolutely gorgeous. The plot very [[skilfully]] shows the hypocrisy of the female libido. When men are around they want to be pursued, but when no "men" are around, they become the pursuers of a 14 year old boy. And the boy becomes a man really fast (we should all be so lucky at this age!). He then gets up the courage to pursue his true love. --------------------------------------------- Result 2458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Much]] in the same [[way]] [[Frank]] Miller and his Sin [[City]] comics used black and white to express itself (and its [[film]] noir influences), so does Christian Volckman with Renaissance.

It is the year 2054, in [[Paris]]. In the [[tradition]] of science fiction, the future is a bright, sparkling multi-teared jewel. This is a jewel in a [[setting]] of [[misery]], inequity and [[darkness]]; [[bright]] and [[beautiful]] on top with a [[dark]] underbelly beneath. One of these "[[bright]]" people at the top, a research [[scientist]] from a very [[large]] and [[influential]] [[global]] [[company]] (Avalon), is kidnapped. The well [[known]] and efficient, [[Captain]] Karas (voiced by the [[new]] James [[Bond]] himself - [[Daniel]] Craig), is [[assigned]] the [[task]] to [[find]] her.

The plot and layout is not [[overly]] original. It is heavily influenced by [[film]] noir, Gibson's Neuromancer and other detective stories, along with [[movies]] like [[Blade]] [[Runner]], Sin [[City]], Fritz Lang's [[Metropolis]] and Minority Report. There is the [[main]] plot, surrounded by other possible sub-plots that all [[connect]] at the [[end]]. It is not [[hard]] to figure it all out.

The movie's [[strength]] and originality is in its [[intense]] visual [[presentation]]. Paris is an intricate array of [[levels]] and sub-levels. [[At]] its [[base]] is the more [[primitive]] industrial infrastructure. As the [[city]] rises, so does its architectural complexity and luminescence. [[Yet]] in this [[structure]], the [[top]] does not [[equate]] with [[elevation]] of human [[ideals]] and behavior. Paris has been intricately animated and laid out in [[brilliant]] black and white. The [[movie]] is [[closer]] in spirit with Sin City (the [[comics]]) then Sin City the [[movie]] was with its [[source]] material. This is [[done]] all the more [[easy]], because it is [[still]] [[remaining]] in [[relatively]] the same medium; animation. Much in the same [[way]] as a Scanner Darkly [[pushed]] the [[visual]] [[aspects]] of [[story]] telling, so does this. The light and [[dark]], black and white [[creates]] an atmosphere of [[contrasts]], as well as visual [[ambiguity]]. Right and [[wrong]], black and [[white]] can [[lose]] all meaning at the same time it is right in front of us. The [[movie]] [[proves]] how [[black]] and white can be both [[ambiguous]] and [[obvious]] at the same [[time]].

[[In]] [[keeping]] with the [[spirit]] of the [[movie]], I can be both critic and [[fan]]. I can love and loath in the same light. It is definitely an experience I recommend for lovers of the visual arts. So pour another Black and Tan, enter the void and enjoy the ride. [[Very]] in the same [[camino]] [[Franck]] Miller and his Sin [[Town]] comics used black and white to express itself (and its [[filmmaking]] noir influences), so does Christian Volckman with Renaissance.

It is the year 2054, in [[Parisien]]. In the [[traditions]] of science fiction, the future is a bright, sparkling multi-teared jewel. This is a jewel in a [[configured]] of [[destitution]], inequity and [[blackness]]; [[gloss]] and [[handsome]] on top with a [[blackness]] underbelly beneath. One of these "[[lustrous]]" people at the top, a research [[savant]] from a very [[considerable]] and [[powerful]] [[international]] [[corporations]] (Avalon), is kidnapped. The well [[renowned]] and efficient, [[Skipper]] Karas (voiced by the [[newest]] James [[Bonding]] himself - [[Danielle]] Craig), is [[allocated]] the [[tasks]] to [[unearthed]] her.

The plot and layout is not [[inordinately]] original. It is heavily influenced by [[flick]] noir, Gibson's Neuromancer and other detective stories, along with [[theater]] like [[Bladed]] [[Racer]], Sin [[Town]], Fritz Lang's [[Cosmopolitan]] and Minority Report. There is the [[principal]] plot, surrounded by other possible sub-plots that all [[connecting]] at the [[terminates]]. It is not [[tough]] to figure it all out.

The movie's [[kraft]] and originality is in its [[intensive]] visual [[presentations]]. Paris is an intricate array of [[level]] and sub-levels. [[Under]] its [[basis]] is the more [[rudimentary]] industrial infrastructure. As the [[town]] rises, so does its architectural complexity and luminescence. [[Even]] in this [[architecture]], the [[topped]] does not [[assimilate]] with [[height]] of human [[idea]] and behavior. Paris has been intricately animated and laid out in [[lustrous]] black and white. The [[flick]] is [[nearest]] in spirit with Sin City (the [[cartoons]]) then Sin City the [[cinematography]] was with its [[backgrounds]] material. This is [[performed]] all the more [[uncomplicated]], because it is [[nonetheless]] [[remainder]] in [[comparatively]] the same medium; animation. Much in the same [[manner]] as a Scanner Darkly [[relegated]] the [[optic]] [[things]] of [[tale]] telling, so does this. The light and [[blackness]], black and white [[generates]] an atmosphere of [[contrast]], as well as visual [[ambivalence]]. Right and [[erroneous]], black and [[bianchi]] can [[losing]] all meaning at the same time it is right in front of us. The [[cinema]] [[proving]] how [[negro]] and white can be both [[indistinct]] and [[observable]] at the same [[period]].

[[During]] [[conserving]] with the [[esprit]] of the [[cinema]], I can be both critic and [[admirer]]. I can love and loath in the same light. It is definitely an experience I recommend for lovers of the visual arts. So pour another Black and Tan, enter the void and enjoy the ride. --------------------------------------------- Result 2459 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[If]] there has ever been a worse [[comedy]] than 'Gray Matters' I am unaware of it. The [[New]] York [[Jewish]] comedy's 'funny' [[premise]] is that [[siblings]] Sam & [[Gray]] are mistaken for a couple and so [[decide]] to fix Sam up with a girlfriend, only to [[find]] that Gray is equally attracted to their [[target]] - Charlie. The revelation that [[Gray]] is secretly [[gay]] is [[apparently]] only a surprise to her. There is a [[deeply]] [[offensive]] [[wedding]] sequence, a [[deeply]] embarrassing 'drunk act' from Moynahan and Graham, and a performance that would [[embarrass]] [[forests]] everywhere for its woodenness from Tom Cavanagh. Sissy Spacek demonstrates a [[complete]] [[inability]] to do comedy and will want this excised from her [[resume]]. Molly Shannon plays the homely [[friend]] with lumpen insouciance. [[Only]] [[Alan]] Cumming [[emerges]] with any credit but is [[seriously]] under-employed and given [[nothing]] with which to [[work]]. The [[whole]] [[disaster]] is cemented by Graham's [[bizarre]] eye-rolling performance culminating with the penultimate scene where she wears a comedy [[hat]] and an overcoat despite the scene being set in a lesbian [[bar]]. It is [[astonishing]] that this [[film]] was ever [[released]] it has no [[redeeming]] [[feature]] and should be [[avoided]] at all costs. [[Unless]] there has ever been a worse [[humour]] than 'Gray Matters' I am unaware of it. The [[Newest]] York [[Jews]] comedy's 'funny' [[assumption]] is that [[plymouth]] Sam & [[Grey]] are mistaken for a couple and so [[deciding]] to fix Sam up with a girlfriend, only to [[unearthed]] that Gray is equally attracted to their [[objectives]] - Charlie. The revelation that [[Grey]] is secretly [[homo]] is [[clearly]] only a surprise to her. There is a [[acutely]] [[abusive]] [[marriages]] sequence, a [[bitterly]] embarrassing 'drunk act' from Moynahan and Graham, and a performance that would [[shaming]] [[woodland]] everywhere for its woodenness from Tom Cavanagh. Sissy Spacek demonstrates a [[finishes]] [[incapacity]] to do comedy and will want this excised from her [[restore]]. Molly Shannon plays the homely [[friends]] with lumpen insouciance. [[Exclusively]] [[Allan]] Cumming [[occurs]] with any credit but is [[earnestly]] under-employed and given [[anything]] with which to [[works]]. The [[ensemble]] [[calamities]] is cemented by Graham's [[surreal]] eye-rolling performance culminating with the penultimate scene where she wears a comedy [[bonnet]] and an overcoat despite the scene being set in a lesbian [[barrister]]. It is [[breathtaking]] that this [[cinematography]] was ever [[liberated]] it has no [[redeem]] [[peculiarities]] and should be [[stave]] at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This [[picture]] for me scores very highly as it is a hugely [[enjoyable]] and amusing spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and serious performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at least it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. This [[visuals]] for me scores very highly as it is a hugely [[pleasurable]] and amusing spoof of Alien Invaders taking over a town and many of its' men folk.

The town and the players are all decked out in sort of 1950's style and the whole movie has a deliberate tacky and kitschy feel to it. Some of the scenes are hilarious like with the birth of an alien creature.

All the actors give full blooded and serious performances which makes the film even funnier and the special effects and Aliens are at least it seems to me intentionally 3rd rate to add to the amusement.

These type of films often deserve a cult following:

8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'm Italian and when I've recently looked again this [[film]] I [[astonished]] for its beauty: the first [[time]] I was 10 years old and I liked it, but [[today]] I can appreciate it with adult [[mind]] and [[feelings]]. Now I can understand it was a masterpiece of a special season of the Italian cinema (Pasolini [[etc]].), by that [[time]] [[gone]].

The Hollywood epic films are good...for fun. Perhaps this 'Odyssey' had no English [[version]] because is not enough funny... not suitable for pop-corn and coke audience. [[However]] suitable for Homer pathos and existentialist reflections.

In Italy was recently released a very good DVD version: INTEGRAL, with excellent colors. You can find it in some file sharing, but it's Italian only, and without subtitles. Too bad: also the dialogs and the voices of this film are remarkable. I'm Italian and when I've recently looked again this [[cinematography]] I [[horrified]] for its beauty: the first [[moment]] I was 10 years old and I liked it, but [[yesterday]] I can appreciate it with adult [[intellect]] and [[affections]]. Now I can understand it was a masterpiece of a special season of the Italian cinema (Pasolini [[cetera]].), by that [[moment]] [[faded]].

The Hollywood epic films are good...for fun. Perhaps this 'Odyssey' had no English [[stepping]] because is not enough funny... not suitable for pop-corn and coke audience. [[Instead]] suitable for Homer pathos and existentialist reflections.

In Italy was recently released a very good DVD version: INTEGRAL, with excellent colors. You can find it in some file sharing, but it's Italian only, and without subtitles. Too bad: also the dialogs and the voices of this film are remarkable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2462 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This made-for-TV [[film]] is a [[brilliant]] one. This is probably the [[best]] and favourite role by BAFTA winning John Thaw (Kavanagh Q.C. and [[Inspector]] Morse). Tom Oakley (Thaw) widowed [[man]] has lived in a village [[alone]] for a while since his wife and son died, and now he has been landed with an evacuee [[called]] Willaim Beech (Nick Robinson). As he [[gets]] to know this [[child]] he [[starts]] to [[develop]] a [[friendship]]. Until Willaim's Mum (Annabelle Apsion) [[wants]] him back. [[After]] [[Tom]] gets [[worried]] about William not contacting him he goes to London to [[find]] him. [[In]] the [[end]] Willaim gets his [[home]] with a loving [[family]] (or [[Dad]]). Set during the Second [[World]] [[War]] this is an [[excellent]] [[film]]. It was [[nominated]] the BAFTA [[Lew]] [[Grade]] [[Award]], and it won the National [[Television]] [[Award]] for [[Most]] Popular [[Drama]]. John [[Thaw]] was number 3 on TV's 50 Greatest [[Stars]]. [[Very]] good! This made-for-TV [[movies]] is a [[sumptuous]] one. This is probably the [[nicest]] and favourite role by BAFTA winning John Thaw (Kavanagh Q.C. and [[Detective]] Morse). Tom Oakley (Thaw) widowed [[dude]] has lived in a village [[solely]] for a while since his wife and son died, and now he has been landed with an evacuee [[drew]] Willaim Beech (Nick Robinson). As he [[get]] to know this [[kids]] he [[launch]] to [[developing]] a [[amity]]. Until Willaim's Mum (Annabelle Apsion) [[wanna]] him back. [[Upon]] [[Thom]] gets [[concerned]] about William not contacting him he goes to London to [[finds]] him. [[Onto]] the [[termination]] Willaim gets his [[housing]] with a loving [[families]] (or [[Pope]]). Set during the Second [[Global]] [[Warfare]] this is an [[admirable]] [[movie]]. It was [[designated]] the BAFTA [[Yoo]] [[Grades]] [[Scholarship]], and it won the National [[Tv]] [[Awarding]] for [[Anymore]] Popular [[Tragedy]]. John [[Melt]] was number 3 on TV's 50 Greatest [[Celebrity]]. [[Hugely]] good! --------------------------------------------- Result 2463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I haven't watched the movie [[yet]], but can't [[wait]] to [[see]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[seen]]: the [[questions]] it posed [[really]] stopped me and [[made]] me [[think]], the [[unique]] [[approach]] to the sport of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle within"... [[thank]] god somebody is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so [[fresh]] and [[smart]]. And the actor is [[really]] hot. I [[especially]] [[enjoyed]] the short clip with the [[actor]] from the [[Rocky]] [[movies]], really [[clever]]. I thought that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[childhood]] traumas-is [[timeless]], and [[god]] knows a [[lot]] of people [[need]] it. Bring it on. I haven't watched the movie [[even]], but can't [[suspense]] to [[seeing]] it! It seems very interesting and inspirational. It was one of the most interesting trailers I've ever [[saw]]: the [[matters]] it posed [[truthfully]] stopped me and [[introduced]] me [[reckon]], the [[exclusive]] [[approaching]] to the sport of boxing as a metaphor for the "battle within"... [[thanked]] god somebody is hitting another angle with the boxing thing. This film looks so [[dulce]] and [[canny]]. And the actor is [[genuinely]] hot. I [[namely]] [[liked]] the short clip with the [[protagonist]] from the [[Rocko]] [[filmmaking]], really [[canny]]. I thought that the topic selected-overcoming adversities and [[children]] traumas-is [[undying]], and [[deities]] knows a [[batches]] of people [[necessity]] it. Bring it on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. [[Abhorrent]] concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's book "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with Gregory Peck). It was [[probably]] too racy for television--what with drugs and hippies [[added]] to the mix--that NBC [[initially]] refused to [[air]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in theaters. [[Director]] James Goldstone [[gets]] freaky with the hyperkinetic [[visuals]] and camera-tricks, while editor Edward A. Biery goes wild with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful gimmicks cannot cover up the [[weaknesses]] of this [[updated]] plot, and the acting is woefully overripe. Dillman, under pressure to recall the [[events]] of the [[night]] in [[question]], goes through an Actor's Seminar of [[tics]], stammers, nose-wipes, and [[crazy]] half-laughs while spitting out dialogue like, "[[Dream]]...a [[dream]]...drugs...[[yeah]], [[drugs]]...that SOUND...bells...[[help]]!" As a villainous fellow scientist with a Cheshire Cat smile, Pat Hingle nearly upstages Dillman in the Grand Thespian department by continually addressing everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and twisting his mouth around in agony. Hope Lange's scientist/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she screams at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, talk Ape Man? Me want You!" This is one frantic "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** Bradford Dillman plays a scientist who wakes up one morning in the middle of a bloody crime scene; having partial amnesia (or "global amnesia", which one character claims to define as elective loss of memory), the scientist finds a private detective in the phone book in the hopes of piecing his life back together. [[Vile]] concoction very loosely based on Walter Ericson's book "Fallen Angel" (filmed in 1965 as "Mirage" with Gregory Peck). It was [[perhaps]] too racy for television--what with drugs and hippies [[add]] to the mix--that NBC [[originally]] refused to [[aeronautics]] it, which is how this low-budgeter wound up in theaters. [[Headmaster]] James Goldstone [[got]] freaky with the hyperkinetic [[photographs]] and camera-tricks, while editor Edward A. Biery goes wild with the zig-zag cuts. Unfortunately, their admittedly-colorful gimmicks cannot cover up the [[faults]] of this [[modernized]] plot, and the acting is woefully overripe. Dillman, under pressure to recall the [[event]] of the [[nighttime]] in [[issue]], goes through an Actor's Seminar of [[ticks]], stammers, nose-wipes, and [[psycho]] half-laughs while spitting out dialogue like, "[[Daydream]]...a [[dreams]]...drugs...[[yep]], [[drug]]...that SOUND...bells...[[aids]]!" As a villainous fellow scientist with a Cheshire Cat smile, Pat Hingle nearly upstages Dillman in the Grand Thespian department by continually addressing everyone in baby-talk, strutting about like a middle-aged peacock and twisting his mouth around in agony. Hope Lange's scientist/love-interest is given the short shrift, but not before she screams at indifferent-lover Dillman: "What do I have to do, talk Ape Man? Me want You!" This is one frantic "Jigsaw"! *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] i was [[intrigued]] to [[see]] how a little-seen 2008 [[film]] had somehow won the Oscar for best [[picture]] of 2009 and [[thus]] went to [[see]] The Hurt Locker. [[sadly]], all i [[got]] for the two hours invested was the [[grim]] confirmation that this film had won awards purely for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and visual style of this film is some of the [[weakest]] you will ever see. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[homage]] with dire, [[annoying]] "shaky cam" [[visuals]], it shows off all the hallmarks of a second rate daytime soap opera in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as rejected Beetle Bailey comic strip ideas and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[worst]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not enough to obscure how bad the project is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was bereft of humour and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. i was [[disconcerted]] to [[seeing]] how a little-seen 2008 [[movies]] had somehow won the Oscar for best [[images]] of 2009 and [[so]] went to [[behold]] The Hurt Locker. [[woefully]], all i [[ai]] for the two hours invested was the [[somber]] confirmation that this film had won awards purely for off-the-screen reasons.

the direction and visual style of this film is some of the [[fewer]] you will ever see. when it's not busy being yet another Bourne Identity [[commendation]] with dire, [[vexing]] "shaky cam" [[imagery]], it shows off all the hallmarks of a second rate daytime soap opera in terms of lensing.

the "plot" is threadbare, the characterizations are about as well developed as rejected Beetle Bailey comic strip ideas and the dialogue - on the instances where the film gives up on being "minimalist" and for no apparent reason turns one or two soldiers into right chatterboxes - is some of the [[hardest]] ever recorded. in fairness, the actors do the best they can in the circumstances, just not enough to obscure how bad the project is.

the whole film has the feel of it being intended as some kind of "mockumentary" that they clocked was bereft of humour and thus re-edited as best they could so as to pass it off as a serious drama.

if you spend two hours on this film they are two hours you will never get back, and two hours wasted that you will regret for the rest of your life. --------------------------------------------- Result 2466 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Hello. I am Paul Raddick, a.k.a. Panic Attack of WTAF, Channel 29 in Philadelphia. Let me tell you about this god [[awful]] movie that powered on Adam Sandler's film career but was digitized after a short time.

Going Overboard is about an aspiring comedian played by Sandler who gets a job on a cruise ship and fails...or so I thought. Sandler encounters babes that like History of the World Part 1 and Rebound. The babes were supposed to be engaged, but, actually, they get executed by Sawtooth, the meanest cannibal the world has ever known. Adam Sandler fared bad in Going Overboard, but fared better in Big Daddy, Billy Madison, and Jen Leone's favorite, 50 First Dates. Man, Drew Barrymore was one hot chick. Spanglish is red hot, Going Overboard ain't Dooley squat! End of file. Hello. I am Paul Raddick, a.k.a. Panic Attack of WTAF, Channel 29 in Philadelphia. Let me tell you about this god [[scary]] movie that powered on Adam Sandler's film career but was digitized after a short time.

Going Overboard is about an aspiring comedian played by Sandler who gets a job on a cruise ship and fails...or so I thought. Sandler encounters babes that like History of the World Part 1 and Rebound. The babes were supposed to be engaged, but, actually, they get executed by Sawtooth, the meanest cannibal the world has ever known. Adam Sandler fared bad in Going Overboard, but fared better in Big Daddy, Billy Madison, and Jen Leone's favorite, 50 First Dates. Man, Drew Barrymore was one hot chick. Spanglish is red hot, Going Overboard ain't Dooley squat! End of file. --------------------------------------------- Result 2467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I watched the Canadian videotape of this movie as "The Witching" which somehow made its way to New York State. Audio was quite [[bad]], I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to hear it and the soundtrack [[often]] was [[overwhelming]] the dialog. Orson Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was run through an echo chamber. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the group was not meant to represent any real group!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her questions about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives aggressively, and causes another car to go off the road and blow up. After the police arrive, she takes a doll that fell out of the car, the second of many handmade dolls in the movie.

It turns out Mr. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, though she doesn't realize it. They want her because she has an innate talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very involving. The movie does seem a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of new footage. The original version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The magic of DVD could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a priority. I watched the Canadian videotape of this movie as "The Witching" which somehow made its way to New York State. Audio was quite [[inclement]], I had to raise it to about 7/8 just to hear it and the soundtrack [[habitually]] was [[hefty]] the dialog. Orson Welles was a mumbler, worse than usual, and some of his dialog and of others was run through an echo chamber. A ghostly figure who keeps reappearing had her voice distorted. Some closed captions would really have helped!

A group of witches or satanists (the end credits say the group was not meant to represent any real group!) have a ritual in which they get naked and cause a miscarriage by stabbing a doll. The woman who had the miscarriage and her husband move to a town named "Lilith," where he's been offered a job at a toy factory. Despite one of the AKAs of this movie apparently being "The Toy Factory," we never see it, and it's only occasionally referred to at all.

On the way to Lilith, her husband gets impatient with some of her questions about what his new boss Mr. Cato wanted to know about their religious persuasion. He drives aggressively, and causes another car to go off the road and blow up. After the police arrive, she takes a doll that fell out of the car, the second of many handmade dolls in the movie.

It turns out Mr. Cato and all the townspeople are witches, and that they are the ones who caused her miscarriage, though she doesn't realize it. They want her because she has an innate talent for necromancy, of which she was not really aware.

Some images in the movie have some impact, but on the whole the movie is not very involving. The movie does seem a bit of a mess, and this is no doubt largely due to its re- editing and the addition of new footage. The original version, according to the end credits, was called Necromancy - A Life for a Life. The magic of DVD could let us see both versions on one disc, but re-releasing this movie probably isn't a priority. --------------------------------------------- Result 2468 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I would not [[hesitate]] to put this [[adaptation]] of 'Death Trap" in a top 5 list of the [[best]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") play off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I normally don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that [[comparisons]] of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[brilliant]] stage-to-screen [[adaptation]] [[featuring]] Michael Caine - are [[valid]], or even fair. Yes, the two stories have a [[lot]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[class]] [[warfare]] as the [[battle]] of [[wits]], and the [[house]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a [[character]] in the [[movie]] as the two actors - the [[house]] doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a [[battle]] of [[wits]] as it is a pointed vignette about how people are no [[damned]] good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they [[get]]. I'll just say that both movies are superb [[examples]] of the [[genre]], and well worth your [[time]] and money. This is [[America]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't give away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a dozen years, and still enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted [[comedy]] and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. I would not [[dither]] to put this [[readjust]] of 'Death Trap" in a top 5 list of the [[optimum]] stage-to-movie adaptations ever. Caine and Reeves (an underrated actor who never really got a chance to do more than soggy romances and "Superman") play off each other extremely well here. Even Dyan Cannon - who I normally don't care for - is perfectly cast in a role that exploits her annoyance value as an actress.

I'm not sure that [[comparative]] of "Deathtrap" with "Sleuth" - another [[lustrous]] stage-to-screen [[readjustment]] [[featured]] Michael Caine - are [[legitimate]], or even fair. Yes, the two stories have a [[batches]] in common. But "Sleuth" is as much about [[classes]] [[war]] as the [[fight]] of [[spirits]], and the [[housing]] in "Sleuth" is set is at least as much a [[personages]] in the [[cinema]] as the two actors - the [[dwellings]] doesn't really have an equivalent in "Deathtrap". And "Deathtrap" isn't so much a [[bataille]] of [[spirits]] as it is a pointed vignette about how people are no [[cursed]] good (and never as smart as they think they are) and deserve everything they [[got]]. I'll just say that both movies are superb [[cases]] of the [[sorts]], and well worth your [[period]] and money. This is [[Americas]], after all. You don't have to choose!

I won't give away the twists and turns of the plot, but I don't think it matters anyway. I've watched the DVD eight or nine times in a dozen years, and still enjoyed the chemistry and the timing and the mean, scary moments when things go "all pear shaped". It's all done so well that the ride becomes more important than the actual destination.

Anyone who likes black-hearted [[travesty]] and suspense in the Hitchcock style of film-making will probably enjoy "Deathtrap" immensely. --------------------------------------------- Result 2469 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Drawing Restraint 9. [[dir]]: [[Matthew]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the [[middle]] of a [[pretentious]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of [[dialogue]] in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a [[giant]] furry pita on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth turds and spinal columns are used in a [[whale]] blubber experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and [[still]] [[annoying]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is among the most pretentious of the modern art [[movies]]. At 135 minutes, it adds to its pretension by being [[boring]] to boot. I would call the use of color [[stunning]], and the opening sequence interesting, but the rest of the movie looked like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up later.

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and Matthew Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head shaving (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Then]] there is mutual evisceration, cannibalism, and lets not forget the giant turd.

Matthew Barney has [[written]] that this is about "the [[relationship]] between self-imposed [[resistance]] and [[creativity]]." That's [[almost]] like saying, "if you don't [[get]] it, then you're not [[creative]] in your [[interpretation]], so sod off because I'm an [[artist]]." Oh, [[wait]], that's the POST-modern interpretation of that sentence and what the movie would be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[supposed]] to be [[Modern]] art. Which is about the art itself.

[[So]], let's [[start]] this [[whole]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 [[serious]] and should not be [[taken]] as any [[realistic]] [[attempt]] to [[interpret]] the [[movie]].

The first half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was [[trying]] to [[quit]] smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who [[tells]] them that the ship is scarred from when another ship [[hit]] it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ Drawing Restraint 9. [[deir]]: [[Matthieu]] Barney.

How do you know when you're in the [[idler]] of a [[cocky]] art film? Is it that there is only 8 lines of [[talks]] in 140 minutes of film? Is it when Bjork is wearing what looks like a [[gigantic]] furry pita on her head in a pseudo-Asian ritual? Maybe when mammoth turds and spinal columns are used in a [[pyle]] blubber experiment. Or, when you're about ready to kill the composer for making a minimal, and [[however]] [[galling]], version of a Philip Glass score? In any case, Drawing Restraint 9 is among the most pretentious of the modern art [[cinematography]]. At 135 minutes, it adds to its pretension by being [[bored]] to boot. I would call the use of color [[magnificent]], and the opening sequence interesting, but the rest of the movie looked like it was filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary. That is until it looks like they were trying to film their version of P-ss Christ, but that will be coming up later.

Actually, the documentary-esquire portions were the best parts of it. The surface plot is about a whaling ship, and then there is a ritual about making whale fat. Then, there are the guests in the form of Bjork and Matthew Barney who are welcomed on the ship by being put through a ritual of humiliation which includes passed-out head shaving (think frat boy pranks), nicotine patches, and giant furry pita hats. [[Subsequently]] there is mutual evisceration, cannibalism, and lets not forget the giant turd.

Matthew Barney has [[authored]] that this is about "the [[rapport]] between self-imposed [[resistant]] and [[imagination]]." That's [[roughly]] like saying, "if you don't [[obtain]] it, then you're not [[inventive]] in your [[explanations]], so sod off because I'm an [[painters]]." Oh, [[suspense]], that's the POST-modern interpretation of that sentence and what the movie would be about if it was POST-modern. But, its [[presumed]] to be [[Contemporary]] art. Which is about the art itself.

[[Consequently]], let's [[begins]] this [[ensemble]] interpretation bit, shall we? The following lines are only 3/4 [[severe]] and should not be [[picked]] as any [[pragmatic]] [[endeavours]] to [[interpretive]] the [[cinema]].

The first half-hour concerns pearl divers and the construction of a giant ramp. Obviously, the ramp is symbolic of the need for self-elevation to whatever standards you hold dear, and the pearl divers are looking for pearls of wisdom. Then, on a whaling ship, they build a crate that looks like it is in the crude shape of a whale. Obviously a crude element of foreshadowing.

On the ship, they make whale fat inside the shape of the whale, and take out the fins portion. They replace this with a spinal column and later a giant turd. These are supposed to be the states of the movie itself. When its fat, its entertaining but bad for you. When it is the spinal column, its the "important" parts of the movie, or the backbone so to speak. Then, the giant turd is the bowels of the movie, or when the movie is crap.

Bjork and Matthew Barney the arrive on separate ships, are put into strange humiliating outfits which AREN'T EVEN WELL MADE OR SYMMETRICAL, one suspects that they ran out of money and Barney was [[attempting]] to [[discontinue]] smoking. SO, they put patches on his head. They go through a ritual and learn about the ship from a Japanese wise man, who [[narrates]] them that the ship is scarred from when another ship [[befallen]] it; a crash or intersection, if you will. This inspires Bjork and Barney, who are different on the outside, to start cutting each other's legs off and eat them so they could turn into whales themselves and be the same person. They intersect. Oh, did I forget to mention that this has been done in a Robbie Williams video? Then, the pearl divers come back with their mouths full of pearls of knowledge which they let fall to make a stupid Venn Diagram. Barney made it through 8th grade geometry, obviously. Or, maybe at least some social studies.

Oh, and did I forget Bjork's ear-gouging I-want-to-kill-her score? At times it is hypnotic, but at others you just want to assassinate her.

Art film is one thing, but when you just throw up all sorts of symbolism in the hopes of getting a reaction out of people, it becomes a self-destructive joke. When do you cross the line between becoming a joke in terms of art? Dali and Bunuel frequently made surreal pieces of nonsense but were more coherent and/or entertaining than this piece of trash. Un Chien Andalou had the sensibility to cram as much symbolism as it could into less than half an hour.

So, can I recommend this? Only if you like dull HIGH ART films with lots of symbolism and flat imagery.

D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2470 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Only on a very rare occasion does an episode of the x-files fail to generate any [[excitement]] or does the episode contain anything which is just [[totally]] [[boring]] to watch.A [[detective]] and his former partner both [[die]] in [[unexplained]] circumstances.The [[deaths]] are linked to the presence of a [[little]] [[girl]] who was there when the [[deaths]] [[took]] place.Mulder has devised a theory that a policeman murdered by his colleagues has come back reincarnated as the little [[girl]] and is exacting revenge.Now for the [[bizarre]] bit.The little girl has no connection at all and seems to just a random person chosen as the reincarnation.I think this was slightly lazy [[writing]] by the writers and this episode ranks as one of the [[worst]] in x-files [[history]]! Only on a very rare occasion does an episode of the x-files fail to generate any [[restlessness]] or does the episode contain anything which is just [[abundantly]] [[dreary]] to watch.A [[pinkerton]] and his former partner both [[dying]] in [[impenetrable]] circumstances.The [[fatality]] are linked to the presence of a [[petit]] [[dame]] who was there when the [[fatalities]] [[picked]] place.Mulder has devised a theory that a policeman murdered by his colleagues has come back reincarnated as the little [[dame]] and is exacting revenge.Now for the [[surreal]] bit.The little girl has no connection at all and seems to just a random person chosen as the reincarnation.I think this was slightly lazy [[writes]] by the writers and this episode ranks as one of the [[gravest]] in x-files [[historian]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] One of the great [[classic]] comedies. Not a [[slapstick]] [[comedy]], not a [[heavy]] [[drama]]. A [[fun]], [[satirical]] [[film]], a [[buyers]] beware guide to a [[new]] [[home]].

[[Filled]] with [[great]] [[characters]] all of whom, [[Cary]] [[Grant]] is [[convinced]], are out to [[fleece]] him in the [[building]] of a [[dream]] [[home]].

A [[great]] [[look]] at [[life]] in the [[late]] 40's.

One of the great [[typical]] comedies. Not a [[comedic]] [[farce]], not a [[hefty]] [[dramas]]. A [[droll]], [[sarcastic]] [[kino]], a [[shoppers]] beware guide to a [[novel]] [[household]].

[[Filling]] with [[marvellous]] [[personages]] all of whom, [[Carey]] [[Awarding]] is [[persuaded]], are out to [[lana]] him in the [[constructing]] of a [[slumber]] [[abode]].

A [[whopping]] [[glance]] at [[lifetime]] in the [[belated]] 40's.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Actually this movie was not so [[bad]]. It contains action, comedy and excitement. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[surprised]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really negative thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little film! Actually this movie was not so [[unfavorable]]. It contains action, comedy and excitement. There are good actors in this film, for instance Doug Hutchison (Percy from "The Green Mile"), who plays Bristol. Another well known actor is Jamie Kennedy, from "Scream" and "Three Kings". The main characters are played by Jamie Foxx as Alvin, who was pretty good and also funny, but the one who most [[horrified]] me, was David Morse as Edgar Clenteen. He plays a different character than he usually does, because in other films like "The Green Mile", "Indian Runner", "The Negotiator" or "The Langoliers" he plays a very sympathetic person, and in "Bait" the plays almost the opposite, a man without any emotions, which was nice to see. The only really negative thing about this film, are the several pictures of the World Trade Center, which makes this film perhaps look a little dated. Overall I thought this was a pretty good little film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] More like [[psychological]] [[analysis]] of [[movies]], but Psycho does sound better as a [[header]]. The [[man]] in charge of the movie (the narrator if you will) does [[depict]] movies here in his own [[way]]. [[Most]] of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[strongly]] advise you to see them ([[especially]] the Hitchcock [[movies]], Solyaris, Conversation & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Or]] in other words, he might spoil them for you. I don't remember if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not big of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and opinions are crazy and fun to listen to, if you're open minded to see things through another perspective (even if that does destroy your favorite movie a bit for you ... it doesn't mean it will do that, but it could)! More like [[psychiatric]] [[analytic]] of [[movie]], but Psycho does sound better as a [[letterhead]]. The [[dude]] in charge of the movie (the narrator if you will) does [[describe]] movies here in his own [[manner]]. [[More]] of them are classics, but all of them are listed here at IMDb and I'd [[categorically]] advise you to see them ([[peculiarly]] the Hitchcock [[kino]], Solyaris, Conversation & and the Lynch movies), because Slavoj Zizek will reference them!

[[Oder]] in other words, he might spoil them for you. I don't remember if he spoiled more than those I've listed (I think the Chaplin movies too), but as I wrote it'd be best if you watch them all beforehand! In the IMDb listing there is a movie missing, that I did report to them, so it might get up there pretty soon. It's a Meg Ryan movie, but it's a only a brief snippet not big of a deal anyways.

Zizek views and opinions are crazy and fun to listen to, if you're open minded to see things through another perspective (even if that does destroy your favorite movie a bit for you ... it doesn't mean it will do that, but it could)! --------------------------------------------- Result 2474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracle]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[track]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for action movie and who is better to direct movie where is snow, ice, cold and bad [[weather]] than [[finnish]] man. Action is good! [[Music]] in the [[film]] is [[spectacular]]. The bad guy is John Litghow, other [[stars]] Micheal Rooker ( The portrait of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in beautiful [[place]] and it is very exciting [[movie]]. [[Overall]] good [[movie]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[special]] [[collectors]] [[edition]], with good [[extras]]. Comig [[soon]] in [[Finland]] straight to [[video]]. This movie is directed by Renny Harlin the finnish [[miracles]]. Stallone is Gabe Walker. Cat and Mouse on the mountains with ruthless terrorists. Renny Harlin knows how to direct actionmovie. Stallone needed this role to get back on [[rails]]. Snowy mountain is very good place for action movie and who is better to direct movie where is snow, ice, cold and bad [[climactic]] than [[finns]] man. Action is good! [[Musicians]] in the [[cinematography]] is [[marvellous]]. The bad guy is John Litghow, other [[star]] Micheal Rooker ( The portrait of serialkiller), Janine Turner ( Strong Medicine). The is placed in beautiful [[placing]] and it is very exciting [[kino]]. [[Aggregate]] good [[movies]] ****/*****

Remember Extreme ääliöt: [[especial]] [[gatherers]] [[editions]], with good [[goodies]]. Comig [[speedily]] in [[Finns]] straight to [[videotaped]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2475 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This film was rather a [[disappointment]]. [[After]] the very [[slow]], very intense (and quite gory) [[beginning]] the film begins to lose it. Too much [[plot]] leaves too [[little]] [[time]] for explanation, and coming out of the [[theater]] I [[wondered]] what this was all about. The characters remain [[shallow]], the story is not [[convincing]] at all, most of it is déja vù stuff without hints of parody, and there are some very cheesy parts... Like, the young cop has to do dig up a body. Of course it's night AND it rains AND he has to do it alone... yawn! Or The Manifestation of the Evil being "nazis" plus "genetic manipulation"... Wow, that's really original. There are some nice bits, though, like the fistfight scene, mountain views and some (running) gags, but (though [[Reno]] and Vincent Cassel do what they can) that's definitely not worth it. (3 out of 10) This film was rather a [[disillusionment]]. [[Upon]] the very [[lento]], very intense (and quite gory) [[outset]] the film begins to lose it. Too much [[intrigue]] leaves too [[petit]] [[times]] for explanation, and coming out of the [[cinema]] I [[enquired]] what this was all about. The characters remain [[superficial]], the story is not [[persuade]] at all, most of it is déja vù stuff without hints of parody, and there are some very cheesy parts... Like, the young cop has to do dig up a body. Of course it's night AND it rains AND he has to do it alone... yawn! Or The Manifestation of the Evil being "nazis" plus "genetic manipulation"... Wow, that's really original. There are some nice bits, though, like the fistfight scene, mountain views and some (running) gags, but (though [[Renaud]] and Vincent Cassel do what they can) that's definitely not worth it. (3 out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The only [[reason]] I didn't score this a one is that Sibrel does show that he is [[adept]] at the technical aspects of making a film. It is a technically adept film.

That having been said, this is a [[film]] [[based]] on lies and distortions that are quite easily disproven. Most of the [[documentary]] is [[spent]] using [[propaganda]] techniques to bash the space program, [[rather]] than actual fact. And Sibrel's "[[irrefutable]] proof" that the landings were faked is easily [[refuted]] if you know anything about orbital mechanics.

I do not recommend watching this, but if you do, see it at google video for free. Don't let Bart Sibrel profit from your curiosity. The only [[motif]] I didn't score this a one is that Sibrel does show that he is [[adroit]] at the technical aspects of making a film. It is a technically adept film.

That having been said, this is a [[cinema]] [[predicated]] on lies and distortions that are quite easily disproven. Most of the [[documentaries]] is [[spends]] using [[advocacy]] techniques to bash the space program, [[somewhat]] than actual fact. And Sibrel's "[[unquestionable]] proof" that the landings were faked is easily [[disproved]] if you know anything about orbital mechanics.

I do not recommend watching this, but if you do, see it at google video for free. Don't let Bart Sibrel profit from your curiosity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2477 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Unless the title is [[supposed]] to be some kind of [[spoiler]] for the wife's transformation (the fiends! ruining it for us). Anycase, if this [[movie]] wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so remarkably low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits every 70's cliche except disco. [[Nobody]] is likeable, and you [[could]] careless what happens to [[anyone]] in this one. [[Eminently]] forgetable except for the [[bad]], [[bad]] performances. Unless the title is [[presumed]] to be some kind of [[baffle]] for the wife's transformation (the fiends! ruining it for us). Anycase, if this [[cinematography]] wasn't Made-For-TV, it should have been, it's so remarkably low-budget, underscripted, underacted, and hits every 70's cliche except disco. [[Anyone]] is likeable, and you [[wo]] careless what happens to [[person]] in this one. [[Vitally]] forgetable except for the [[amiss]], [[amiss]] performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2478 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] So when i was [[little]] i [[got]] this movie as a present and my sister and i [[loved]] it. we would watch it all the [[time]]. when our friends came over we [[would]] have sleepovers and we'd watch big rock candy mountain and grandpa's magical toys. I'm 21 now and i still [[love]] this movie, some old friends and i [[recently]] [[got]] together and watched it, we [[knew]] all the songs and we [[danced]] and talked about how much we hated Profster when we were little. One friend actually [[bought]] this movie and grandpa's magical toys for her 2 year old daughter because she wants to pass on our [[love]] of this movie. This really is a [[movie]] you can let your kids watch and feel safe, no violence, no [[bad]] language, just lots of great [[songs]] and important lessons. So when i was [[scant]] i [[did]] this movie as a present and my sister and i [[worshipped]] it. we would watch it all the [[period]]. when our friends came over we [[ought]] have sleepovers and we'd watch big rock candy mountain and grandpa's magical toys. I'm 21 now and i still [[amour]] this movie, some old friends and i [[lately]] [[gets]] together and watched it, we [[overheard]] all the songs and we [[dancing]] and talked about how much we hated Profster when we were little. One friend actually [[buys]] this movie and grandpa's magical toys for her 2 year old daughter because she wants to pass on our [[likes]] of this movie. This really is a [[cinema]] you can let your kids watch and feel safe, no violence, no [[unfavorable]] language, just lots of great [[anthems]] and important lessons. --------------------------------------------- Result 2479 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in business? If someone gave her another chance after this piece of [[crap]], she's up for the most Fortunate Person Of Ever award.This movie [[sucks]] to no [[END]]...It never [[ceases]] to amaze me what the turn into [[movies]]...and the [[fact]] that they made this writer put it off for a bit? [[Seriously]]? I can write [[better]] [[crap]] than this in my sleep.

OK, so how many lines to I have to type? I don't get this at all. I guess I"m a newbie. I guess I don't understand why there should ever be a limit to what anyone has to say...or a quota? Seriously, I don't care if you have a one word sentence...or even a one word response. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this enough, finally?

This movie is [[worthless]]. Screenwriter Lisa Lutz began writing the screenplay at the age of 21 in 1991

Is she even in business? If someone gave her another chance after this piece of [[goddamnit]], she's up for the most Fortunate Person Of Ever award.This movie [[stinks]] to no [[TERMINATING]]...It never [[halt]] to amaze me what the turn into [[theater]]...and the [[facto]] that they made this writer put it off for a bit? [[Severely]]? I can write [[improved]] [[goddamnit]] than this in my sleep.

OK, so how many lines to I have to type? I don't get this at all. I guess I"m a newbie. I guess I don't understand why there should ever be a limit to what anyone has to say...or a quota? Seriously, I don't care if you have a one word sentence...or even a one word response. I mean, c'mon?

Thanks...is this enough, finally?

This movie is [[unusable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2480 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Why has this not been [[released]]? I [[kind]] of [[thought]] it must be a bit rubbish since it hasn't been. How wrong can a girl be! This [[film]] is, in a word, [[enthralling]].

You will be [[captivated]]. It [[holds]] your attention from the start and its [[pace]] never [[slows]].

The final [[part]] of the [[film]], the "episode" as it were (not giving anything away, you [[saw]] that in the trailer) is [[also]] unmissable. You will chose a [[favourite]], you will be [[shocked]], you wont be able to go and make a cup of coffee because you need to find out what happens. The adrenalin [[rises]] and you cant not watch. Cudos to the [[actors]], it's very [[believable]]. And it doesn't [[stop]] there, they have a [[final]] shock for you.

It [[also]] makes you [[question]] reality [[TV]] and if you would watch. And how far away from this are we, [[really]]? Endemol (who [[make]] [[big]] [[brother]]) [[made]] a [[TV]] [[show]] in Holland last year [[offering]] a dying woman's kidney to patients in [[need]] of a transplant. The show was [[revealed]] at the end to be a hoax, ostensibly to [[raise]] awareness of organ [[donation]], but are we getting too close for [[comfort]]? Why has this not been [[liberated]]? I [[genera]] of [[brainchild]] it must be a bit rubbish since it hasn't been. How wrong can a girl be! This [[flick]] is, in a word, [[mesmerizing]].

You will be [[mesmerised]]. It [[hold]] your attention from the start and its [[tempo]] never [[lento]].

The final [[portion]] of the [[cinematography]], the "episode" as it were (not giving anything away, you [[seen]] that in the trailer) is [[apart]] unmissable. You will chose a [[preferential]], you will be [[electrocuted]], you wont be able to go and make a cup of coffee because you need to find out what happens. The adrenalin [[increased]] and you cant not watch. Cudos to the [[actresses]], it's very [[dependable]]. And it doesn't [[halted]] there, they have a [[ultimate]] shock for you.

It [[furthermore]] makes you [[matter]] reality [[TELEVISION]] and if you would watch. And how far away from this are we, [[genuinely]]? Endemol (who [[deliver]] [[huge]] [[fraternal]]) [[brought]] a [[TELEVISION]] [[demonstrate]] in Holland last year [[delivers]] a dying woman's kidney to patients in [[gotta]] of a transplant. The show was [[divulged]] at the end to be a hoax, ostensibly to [[raises]] awareness of organ [[donations]], but are we getting too close for [[solace]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 2481 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Timberlake's performance [[almost]] [[made]] attack the screen. It wasn't all bad, I just think the reporters role was wrong for him.

LL Cool J played the typical rapper role, toughest,baddest guy around. I don't think the cracked a [[smile]] in the [[whole]] [[movie]], not [[even]] when proposed to his girlfriend.

[[Morgan]] Freeman pretty much carried the [[whole]] [[movie]]. He was has some funny scenes which are the high point of the movie.

Kevin Spacey wasn't good or bad he was just "there".

[[Overall]] it's a [[Dull]] movie. bad plot. a lot of bad acting or wrong roles for actors. Timberlake's performance [[nigh]] [[accomplished]] attack the screen. It wasn't all bad, I just think the reporters role was wrong for him.

LL Cool J played the typical rapper role, toughest,baddest guy around. I don't think the cracked a [[laughter]] in the [[total]] [[cinematography]], not [[yet]] when proposed to his girlfriend.

[[Morg]] Freeman pretty much carried the [[ensemble]] [[cinema]]. He was has some funny scenes which are the high point of the movie.

Kevin Spacey wasn't good or bad he was just "there".

[[Entire]] it's a [[Drab]] movie. bad plot. a lot of bad acting or wrong roles for actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I don't like this film, but then I didn't think much of the [[book]] either which, [[although]] lauded by many as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character development and disjointed and [[illogical]] in plot, [[although]] it was far more [[readable]] than Fante's dreadful first effort "[[Road]] to Los Angeles" not published until Fante became fashionable in the mid 80s.

I was intrigued to see what [[sort]] of soup Towne [[would]] make with such [[meager]] ingredients. He has worked hard script-wise to repair the many shortcomings of the book but for my money didn't rescue it. There was never a movie in Ask the Dust while ever he tried to stay faithful to the book. I consider this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. I don't like this film, but then I didn't think much of the [[ledger]] either which, [[while]] lauded by many as a "masterpiece", I found lacking in character development and disjointed and [[irrational]] in plot, [[nonetheless]] it was far more [[legible]] than Fante's dreadful first effort "[[Paths]] to Los Angeles" not published until Fante became fashionable in the mid 80s.

I was intrigued to see what [[kinds]] of soup Towne [[could]] make with such [[paltry]] ingredients. He has worked hard script-wise to repair the many shortcomings of the book but for my money didn't rescue it. There was never a movie in Ask the Dust while ever he tried to stay faithful to the book. I consider this film Towne's folly.

In a word: forgettable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Cradle of Fear

This isn't a [[movie]] where intricate delicate little narrative nuances occupy our attention. This is not a film where the [[special]] effects are [[supposed]] to leave us slack-jacked uttering that sense of whoa. What it is [[though]] is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which [[leaves]] little to the [[imagination]], [[created]] in the eyes of the [[director]], Alex Chandon, as "a throwback to [[sleazy]] '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral experience for 2 [[hours]], where four plot lines are connected through lots of watery blood, reams of dismembered body parts and innards, tied by an intestinal thread of revenge.

The purveyor of such horrific violence is Dani Filth, lead-singer of the metal band Cradle of Filth, executing a role he was destined to play.

As other's have said, there is nothing new about wanting to carryout occultist revenge. In this particular context a convicted sexual predator and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be congratulated on also penning and editing this piece, is the opportunity to let his sick mind run free. He seems to take delight in the idea of splattering blood into the orifices of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being crushed, demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to engage those who relish getting up close and personal to their horror. And for some of those who closely follow these type of films, there is the odd sequence which may have you thinking, "Did I just see what I thought I did", because of course Pretty Woman this 'aint. It reminds me of some of the gore-fests created out of Italian horror some 20 to 30 years ago, and a number of other works where disgusting images have left their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins also adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, intestines, occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. Cradle of Fear

This isn't a [[kino]] where intricate delicate little narrative nuances occupy our attention. This is not a film where the [[particular]] effects are [[suspected]] to leave us slack-jacked uttering that sense of whoa. What it is [[whilst]] is a slice of lo-fi goth horror which [[sheets]] little to the [[fantasy]], [[established]] in the eyes of the [[superintendent]], Alex Chandon, as "a throwback to [[seedy]] '70s and '80s horror".

This is a very visceral experience for 2 [[hour]], where four plot lines are connected through lots of watery blood, reams of dismembered body parts and innards, tied by an intestinal thread of revenge.

The purveyor of such horrific violence is Dani Filth, lead-singer of the metal band Cradle of Filth, executing a role he was destined to play.

As other's have said, there is nothing new about wanting to carryout occultist revenge. In this particular context a convicted sexual predator and murderer, Kemper, the father of our devilish avenging-angel, compels his son to exact retribution on those who are some how connected to convicting him to purgatory within an insane asylum.

What this provides for the Chandon, who should be congratulated on also penning and editing this piece, is the opportunity to let his sick mind run free. He seems to take delight in the idea of splattering blood into the orifices of those on screen, and into every nook and cranny that can be reached. We are also treated to close-ups of skull's being crushed, demonic rape, and other assorted imagery to engage those who relish getting up close and personal to their horror. And for some of those who closely follow these type of films, there is the odd sequence which may have you thinking, "Did I just see what I thought I did", because of course Pretty Woman this 'aint. It reminds me of some of the gore-fests created out of Italian horror some 20 to 30 years ago, and a number of other works where disgusting images have left their mark but not the context in which they were viewed.

Story 4 of the set is particularly intriguing where the idea of ones obsession can ultimately lead to death in the pursuit of internet violence through the "Sick Room", where the user is in control of how a life can be snuffed out. Further acknowledgements should also go out to a pounding soundtrack that allows Filth to exercise his daytime talent, and an effective use of drum and bass, often overlooked in film-making as a viable form of supporting visuals. Using the city of London as a backdrop with real people as opposed to movie stand-ins also adds support to the commando feel of the film. OK, classic it may not be, but blood, guts, intestines, occult and demons in a slightly perverse unproblematic way it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Having grown up in Texas, and less than 15 miles from what used to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[nauseating]]. The majority of Texans do not live like this movie indicates. The plot is [[weak]], and the [[fake]] accents are [[amusing]], and it reinforces the stereotypical image that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The horribly [[fake]] Texas accents is what [[kills]] it for me. [[True]], there is a certain [[Texas]] twang to most Texans' accents, but these people [[overdo]] it. You can't get someone from New [[Jersey]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't work. John Travolta should have stuck to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more convincing as Wonder Girl than she is as a Texan. Having grown up in Texas, and less than 15 miles from what used to be Gilley's, I can tell you that this movie is [[disgusting]]. The majority of Texans do not live like this movie indicates. The plot is [[fragile]], and the [[forged]] accents are [[entertaining]], and it reinforces the stereotypical image that all Texans are beer drinking, honky-tonkin', rednecks. The horribly [[forged]] Texas accents is what [[assassinated]] it for me. [[Genuine]], there is a certain [[Texan]] twang to most Texans' accents, but these people [[overestimate]] it. You can't get someone from New [[Swimsuit]] and Ohio to do Texas accents. It just doesn't work. John Travolta should have stuck to disco-dancing or the 50s. Debra Winger was more convincing as Wonder Girl than she is as a Texan. --------------------------------------------- Result 2485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] The film opens with Bill Coles (Melvyn Douglas) [[telling]] a story about how his best friend--make that client--Jim Blandings ([[Cary]] [[Grant]]) and his family are tightly packed into a small New York apartment, with not enough closet space and way too few bathrooms. When Jim's wife, Muriel (Myrna Loy), wants to renovate the apartment, advertising exec Jim [[falls]] in [[love]] with (or falls for!) an ad for a house. Once he's purchased the house, [[bills]] and frustration [[pile]] up incessantly as everything that can go [[wrong]] with the building of Jim's 'dream house' goes wrong.

One of three collaborations between Grant and Loy, this is a [[charming]] little comedy--not very taxing, with no real great [[message]], but a [[great]] way to spend an hour or two. The laughs are there right from the start, when the alarm clock goes off and Jim tries to shut it off, only to be thwarted at every turn by Muriel. The timing and delivery of the comedic lines and situations can only be given by a couple of seasoned pros, and that's just what Grant and Loy give us: polished performances, simple chemistry, and a lot of fun. Myrna Loy is in a pretty thankless role (it's evident that Grant's character Jim gets the lion share of the lines and the acting, and Grant, as always, pulls both off with remarkable aplomb), but she gives Muriel a colour, life and bite that only Myrna Loy can give a character. Melvyn Douglas plays wry amusement to perfection as well, never hitting a single wrong note.

One of my favourite scenes has definitely got to be when Bill gets himself locked in the 'store room', and Jim goes to 'save' him... only to get everyone trapped inside! Every little problem that pops up for the Blandings renovation project--including petty jealousy and an ad campaign for 'Wham'--seems to bring together everything that *could* go wrong with building a new house but makes it believable and an enjoyable watch. 8/10 The film opens with Bill Coles (Melvyn Douglas) [[eloquent]] a story about how his best friend--make that client--Jim Blandings ([[Kari]] [[Granting]]) and his family are tightly packed into a small New York apartment, with not enough closet space and way too few bathrooms. When Jim's wife, Muriel (Myrna Loy), wants to renovate the apartment, advertising exec Jim [[slumps]] in [[adores]] with (or falls for!) an ad for a house. Once he's purchased the house, [[billing]] and frustration [[piling]] up incessantly as everything that can go [[inaccurate]] with the building of Jim's 'dream house' goes wrong.

One of three collaborations between Grant and Loy, this is a [[cute]] little comedy--not very taxing, with no real great [[messaging]], but a [[prodigious]] way to spend an hour or two. The laughs are there right from the start, when the alarm clock goes off and Jim tries to shut it off, only to be thwarted at every turn by Muriel. The timing and delivery of the comedic lines and situations can only be given by a couple of seasoned pros, and that's just what Grant and Loy give us: polished performances, simple chemistry, and a lot of fun. Myrna Loy is in a pretty thankless role (it's evident that Grant's character Jim gets the lion share of the lines and the acting, and Grant, as always, pulls both off with remarkable aplomb), but she gives Muriel a colour, life and bite that only Myrna Loy can give a character. Melvyn Douglas plays wry amusement to perfection as well, never hitting a single wrong note.

One of my favourite scenes has definitely got to be when Bill gets himself locked in the 'store room', and Jim goes to 'save' him... only to get everyone trapped inside! Every little problem that pops up for the Blandings renovation project--including petty jealousy and an ad campaign for 'Wham'--seems to bring together everything that *could* go wrong with building a new house but makes it believable and an enjoyable watch. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2486 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'd have to [[say]] this is one of the [[best]] animated films I've ever seen. I liked it the first time but [[really]] [[appreciated]] it on the [[second]] [[viewing]], just a few [[weeks]] ago. I can [[see]] why sequel is doing such [[great]] [[business]] at the box office. [[Apparently]], a lot of people [[liked]] this [[movie]].

A [[gorgeous]] [[color]] palette ([[man]], this [[looks]] good) and a [[lot]] of good adult (but clean) humor make this a [[big]] winner. The opening 3-4-minute scene with "Scat," is [[excellent]] as are [[subsequent]] interludes with him. "Sid" the [[sloth]] (voiced by [[John]] Leguizano), [[however]], provides the [[main]] humor in the movie. He usually has something funny to say [[throughout]] the movie.

Ray Romano is the voice of the mammoth, the [[big]] [[character]] of the film, literally, while [[Denis]] Leary is the ferocious bad-guy-turned-good sabertooth tiger

This isn't just humor and [[pretty]] colors but a nice, sentimental [[story]] of how a little baby [[softens]] up a [[couple]] of [[tough]] [[characters]]. This isn't [[interrupted]] with a [[lot]] of [[songs]], [[either]]: one only brief one and there is nothing [[offensive]], language-wise.

If more animated movies were this [[good]], I'd own more. I'd have to [[said]] this is one of the [[nicest]] animated films I've ever seen. I liked it the first time but [[genuinely]] [[enjoyed]] it on the [[secondly]] [[vista]], just a few [[chow]] ago. I can [[behold]] why sequel is doing such [[sublime]] [[corporations]] at the box office. [[Ostensibly]], a lot of people [[enjoyed]] this [[filmmaking]].

A [[glamorous]] [[dye]] palette ([[dude]], this [[seems]] good) and a [[batch]] of good adult (but clean) humor make this a [[sizeable]] winner. The opening 3-4-minute scene with "Scat," is [[super]] as are [[later]] interludes with him. "Sid" the [[idleness]] (voiced by [[Johannes]] Leguizano), [[still]], provides the [[principal]] humor in the movie. He usually has something funny to say [[during]] the movie.

Ray Romano is the voice of the mammoth, the [[major]] [[nature]] of the film, literally, while [[Denny]] Leary is the ferocious bad-guy-turned-good sabertooth tiger

This isn't just humor and [[quite]] colors but a nice, sentimental [[conte]] of how a little baby [[eases]] up a [[matches]] of [[stiff]] [[nature]]. This isn't [[discontinued]] with a [[lots]] of [[lyrics]], [[nor]]: one only brief one and there is nothing [[onslaught]], language-wise.

If more animated movies were this [[buena]], I'd own more. --------------------------------------------- Result 2487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I took my 10-year-old daughter to [[see]] [[Nancy]] [[Drew]] over the weekend and found myself [[thoroughly]] [[entertained]]. First off, it was [[clean]], and I [[mean]] by my standards. The majority of kids' [[movies]] [[today]] are full of [[crude]] toilet humor and gross-out [[jokes]] to [[elicit]] cheap [[laughter]] from the pre-teen [[crowd]]. Nancy Drew is [[smarter]] than that, however, and the humor is subtle and [[clever]].

The title role is played with a refreshing vivaciousness by Emma Roberts, who is perky and polite without ever becoming [[annoying]]. Unlike The Brady Bunch Movie, where the anachronistic characters are jeered and ridiculed, Nancy's style is treated with respect and dignity. It's a great moment when the LA "style-conscious" girls with their Paris Hilton streetwalker attire are dismissed by the boutique owner, while Nancy, in her penny loafers and homemade Butterick pattern dress, is embraced. This movie shuns the we-need-to-enlighten-this-wholesome-girl tack so many Hollywood movies take. Nancy remains true to herself and her values throughout.

The mystery is just tense enough at times to be engaging. There were several suspenseful moments where my daughter nervously grabbed my arm, but there were no gratuitous shock scenes. It's all based on tension and mood and is a lot of [[fun]]. The supporting cast is good, particularly Marshall Bell as the creepy caretaker. There are some great cameos by Eddie Jemison, [[Chris]] Kattan and Bruce Willis and many [[moments]] that will make adults smile.

This [[film]] deserves better ratings than some have given it. Not only was I glad not to be dragged to yet another computer animated film where talking animals burp and pass gas all over the place, but I was also very [[entertained]]. Had I been there without a child, I still would've enjoyed the movie. This is one DVD that will have my daughter's name on it under the Christmas tree. I took my 10-year-old daughter to [[seeing]] [[Nance]] [[Called]] over the weekend and found myself [[elaborately]] [[distracted]]. First off, it was [[cleanse]], and I [[imply]] by my standards. The majority of kids' [[cinematography]] [[yesterday]] are full of [[coarse]] toilet humor and gross-out [[pleasantries]] to [[attain]] cheap [[laughs]] from the pre-teen [[multitude]]. Nancy Drew is [[intelligent]] than that, however, and the humor is subtle and [[intelligent]].

The title role is played with a refreshing vivaciousness by Emma Roberts, who is perky and polite without ever becoming [[infuriating]]. Unlike The Brady Bunch Movie, where the anachronistic characters are jeered and ridiculed, Nancy's style is treated with respect and dignity. It's a great moment when the LA "style-conscious" girls with their Paris Hilton streetwalker attire are dismissed by the boutique owner, while Nancy, in her penny loafers and homemade Butterick pattern dress, is embraced. This movie shuns the we-need-to-enlighten-this-wholesome-girl tack so many Hollywood movies take. Nancy remains true to herself and her values throughout.

The mystery is just tense enough at times to be engaging. There were several suspenseful moments where my daughter nervously grabbed my arm, but there were no gratuitous shock scenes. It's all based on tension and mood and is a lot of [[droll]]. The supporting cast is good, particularly Marshall Bell as the creepy caretaker. There are some great cameos by Eddie Jemison, [[Kris]] Kattan and Bruce Willis and many [[times]] that will make adults smile.

This [[cinema]] deserves better ratings than some have given it. Not only was I glad not to be dragged to yet another computer animated film where talking animals burp and pass gas all over the place, but I was also very [[distracted]]. Had I been there without a child, I still would've enjoyed the movie. This is one DVD that will have my daughter's name on it under the Christmas tree. --------------------------------------------- Result 2488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The [[plot]] is tight. The acting is [[flawless]]. The directing, [[script]], scenery, [[casting]] are all well [[done]]. I watch this [[movie]] [[frequently]], [[though]] I don't [[know]] what it is about the [[whole]] [[thing]] that [[grabs]] me. [[See]] it and [[drop]] me a [[line]] if you can figure out why I [[like]] it so much. The [[intrigue]] is tight. The acting is [[irreproachable]]. The directing, [[scripts]], scenery, [[foundry]] are all well [[performed]]. I watch this [[flick]] [[often]], [[albeit]] I don't [[savoir]] what it is about the [[total]] [[stuff]] that [[seizes]] me. [[Consults]] it and [[tumble]] me a [[iine]] if you can figure out why I [[adores]] it so much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2489 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[On]] the [[surface]], "[[Written]] on the [[Wind]]" is a lurid, glossy soap [[opera]] about the sexual dysfunctions of a Texas oil [[family]]. But underneath it all is a [[deep]], social commentary on 1950's [[life]]. Director Douglas Sirk scores again with another Univeral sudser. Robert Stack falls in [[love]] with [[Lauren]] Bacall. The [[problem]] is that Stack's [[best]] [[pal]], [[Rock]] Hudson, loves her too. When [[Stack]] finds out he's [[sterile]] and Bacall [[ends]] up pregnant, the [[fireworks]] [[fly]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oscar]] for her portrayl of Texas' [[biggest]] nympho who is [[shunned]] by Hudson. [[Good]] [[epic]] soap [[opera]]. [[Onto]] the [[surfaces]], "[[Typed]] on the [[Turbine]]" is a lurid, glossy soap [[oprah]] about the sexual dysfunctions of a Texas oil [[familia]]. But underneath it all is a [[deepest]], social commentary on 1950's [[iife]]. Director Douglas Sirk scores again with another Univeral sudser. Robert Stack falls in [[loves]] with [[Laureen]] Bacall. The [[trouble]] is that Stack's [[nicest]] [[mate]], [[Boulder]] Hudson, loves her too. When [[Stacked]] finds out he's [[barren]] and Bacall [[culminates]] up pregnant, the [[pyrotechnics]] [[flies]]. And, the all-too-good Dorothy Malone won an [[Oskar]] for her portrayl of Texas' [[bigger]] nympho who is [[dodged]] by Hudson. [[Buena]] [[odyssey]] soap [[oprah]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Canadian director Vincenzo Natali took the art-house [[circuit]] by storm with the intriguing and [[astonishingly]] intelligent Cube, which is my personal favourite SF film of the 90s. It framed the basic conceit of a group of strangers trapped in a maze shaped like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[took]] this idea in fascinating [[directions]].

I've been eagerly [[awaiting]] Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five [[years]] for him to mount another project, I'm [[delighted]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[exploration]] of one man's [[place]] in the world, and how through a completely logical chain of [[events]], finds himself in a situation beyond his control.

I don't want to reveal too much about the plot, because one of the [[joys]] of [[Cypher]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[refreshing]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Cypher]] is such a [[film]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the [[planet]], is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[send]] him to [[different]] parts of [[America]] to [[record]] different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. Covering topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast [[Lucy]] [[Liu]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She [[gives]] him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds [[irresistible]]. That's not too [[surprising]] [[considering]] the dry [[marriage]] he is in.

When Rita turns up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she [[tells]] him his [[life]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[would]] cheapen the impact the [[rest]] of the [[film]] has on us, as well as the tortuous [[path]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with Cube, Natali shows quite a talent for encompassing seemingly ordinary people, taking them out of the familiar, and basically seeing what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a secret silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! Canadian director Vincenzo Natali took the art-house [[circuitry]] by storm with the intriguing and [[unimaginably]] intelligent Cube, which is my personal favourite SF film of the 90s. It framed the basic conceit of a group of strangers trapped in a maze shaped like a giant cube, shot entirely on one set, and [[taken]] this idea in fascinating [[guidelines]].

I've been eagerly [[awaited]] Natali's follow-up, and although its taken five [[olds]] for him to mount another project, I'm [[gratified]] to say it was worth the wait. Cypher is a fascinating [[explorer]] of one man's [[placing]] in the world, and how through a completely logical chain of [[incidents]], finds himself in a situation beyond his control.

I don't want to reveal too much about the plot, because one of the [[delights]] of [[Encryption]] is the different avenues it takes us down. It is so [[refresh]] in this day and age to see a SF film that has more than one idea in it's head. [[Encryption]] is such a [[movie]].

Morgan Sullivan (Jeremy Northam), one of the blandest people to ever walk the [[planetary]], is hired by the company DigiCorp. They [[consignment]] him to [[diversified]] parts of [[Latina]] to [[recording]] different seminars. To his bewilderment, they are unbelievably boring. Covering topics as mundane as shaving cream and cheese.

While Morgan is waiting for one seminar, he runs into Rita Foster (an impeccably cast [[Lucie]] [[Yoo]]), the definition of an ice maiden. She [[provides]] him the brush-off, but there is something to her he finds [[inexorable]]. That's not too [[impressive]] [[examine]] the dry [[marrying]] he is in.

When Rita turns up at another one of Morgan's seminars, she [[says]] him his [[living]] is not what it appears. And I'm not saying anything more about the plot. To do so [[ought]] cheapen the impact the [[repose]] of the [[filmmaking]] has on us, as well as the tortuous [[routing]] that's so much fun to follow.

As with Cube, Natali shows quite a talent for encompassing seemingly ordinary people, taking them out of the familiar, and basically seeing what will happen when they're thrust into the unknown. And Cypher follows similar patterns. But it's not a carbon copy of Cube. It has it's own inspiration.

Cypher is a film that has more in common with conspiracy thrillers and paranoia stories. One of the great things about Cypher is the way these themes creep into the story without your knowledge. When Morgan realises his false identity is a piece of a much larger puzzle, it's as much of a shock to us as it is to him.

One thing that distinguishes Cypher from Cube is how much more polished it is. Where Cube was confined to a minimalist setting and a shoestring budget with a cast of unknowns, Cypher is also on a low budget, but Natali economises it as much as he can, allowing him to broaden the horizon, and launching Morgan on an amazing journey through the labyrinth of his own identity.

Natali's direction is exceptional, with a deft hand on the reins. There are some amazing camera angles from above, such as the enormity of the DigiCorp building as a vast, robust office block in conjunction to the insignificant speck that is Morgan standing outside. All the colour appears to have been bled out of the picture, which compliments the tone of the film perfectly as a modern day film-noir.

The acting is uniformly excellent throughout. Jeremy Northam is a sympathetic figure from his loveless marriage to questioning his own identity. His performance is excellent because it's so modulated. He literally seems to transform right before our very eyes. From a clinical, spineless wimp to a confident man who will do anything to preserve his new identity.

David Hewlett puts in a welcome appearance who made such an impact in Cube. He resides in a secret silo that looks like it was borrowed from Men in Black. His scene is one of the best because it's an exercise in carefully calculated suspense and paranoia. He is a supposed expert in identifying double-agents, and it's a fantastic piece of writing, brilliantly acted by Hewlett. All he has to do is look at Morgan, and we're drawn into his complex mind game.

But it's Lucy Liu who's the scene stealer here. Too often she is cast in films where her potential is not utilised to full effect. But in Cypher, she is finally given a character that fits her like a glove. Rita is an aloof, guarded femme fatale that Liu inhabits with relish. I perked up every time she appeared because she is always in control, and can reduce a room to silence by the power of her icy stare alone.

Things come to a very gratifying end, that doesn't conclude on an ambiguous note the way Cube did. But Morgan deserves his happy ending. After he's been put through the ringer like this, I cheered for him in the final scene. It's a perfect final moment because it comes as a ray of sunshine after a gloomy 90 minutes.

Cypher succeeds on all counts. Engaging, shocking, always entertaining, it's everything that Total Recall wanted to be but wasn't. And it comes as a refreshing antidote to the overwhelming and inexplicable Matrix.

A fine follow-up from Natali. And now I'm a committed fan of the man. Superb stuff! --------------------------------------------- Result 2491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most hillarious and funny Brooks movie I ever seen. I can watch and re-watch the tape 100 times. I laugh my a** off and I cry on some moments. It is really good and funny movie, and if you like Brooks - this is a must! In short - Brooks (billionare) gets to the streets as homeless for 30 days in order to win the entire poor district from his competitor. The reality bites, but in the end - it is about warm relations between humans... Hightly recommend! --------------------------------------------- Result 2492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] The movie is a fantasy. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is wonderfully clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

Movies are designed to serve various purposes. This one is designed to [[entertain]] and it [[certainly]] does. If I have one negative comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, Jeanette MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/Nelson Eddy films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I recommend this movie without reservation to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. The movie is a fantasy. The story line is thin but serves as the structure upon which some wonderful songs are sung and sung beautifully. (I still cannot believe that such handsome and attractive people could sing this well.) Some of the dialog is wonderfully clever. The costumes made me feel as though I was watching a haute couture fashion show from 1942.

Movies are designed to serve various purposes. This one is designed to [[distract]] and it [[obviously]] does. If I have one negative comment it would be that Nelson Eddy was a little too old to be the handsome dashing Count. Some of the closeups made me uncomfortable. But he could still sing and sing magnificently. However, Jeanette MacDonald was just as dazzling as ever. She makes a spectacular angel.

This genre is well before my time, and I an new to the Jeanette MacDonald/Nelson Eddy films and related conversation. The music in this movie is beautiful. As much as I love the classic rock music which fills most modern movies, there is no question in my mind that this music is simply and clearly more memorable, more delightful, better constructed. The stars in this movie are more talented than the stars I see in the movie theaters today. And Jeanette MacDonald, without the benefit of Beverly Hills plastic surgeons, was more beautiful than the stars I see today. I am unclear as to why so many other posters are apologetic about liking this movie and more generally this group of movies. They say it is dated and try to explain why it is the way it is. And those that do not like it say that it is not very good but compared to what? I think this movie will doubtless still be entertaining people when so many other movie are long forgotten. There is just too much quality in every way in this movie for it not to be remembered and enjoyed. I recommend this movie without reservation to anyone who appreciates great talent, great beauty and great music. --------------------------------------------- Result 2493 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's not just that this is a bad movie; it's not only that four of the "best" Mexican movie [[makers]] are in this film; and it's not only that the script is terrible. It's just that...this movie [[sucks]]...big time. This people are wasting money in [[terrible]] [[scripts]]. It's [[supposed]] to make a criticism about Mexican [[society]] but we're [[fed]] up with this [[kind]] of films. Is [[bad]] [[language]] [[supposed]] to be [[funny]]? I don't [[get]] it. Mexican cinema is in big trouble if this kind of movies are going to continue playing (and being written and produced).

Please, don't think this kind of movies are well received in Mexico: We hate them and they don't reflect us. It's not just that this is a bad movie; it's not only that four of the "best" Mexican movie [[strategists]] are in this film; and it's not only that the script is terrible. It's just that...this movie [[stinks]]...big time. This people are wasting money in [[scary]] [[screenplay]]. It's [[suspected]] to make a criticism about Mexican [[societal]] but we're [[fueled]] up with this [[genre]] of films. Is [[mala]] [[parlance]] [[presumed]] to be [[fun]]? I don't [[obtain]] it. Mexican cinema is in big trouble if this kind of movies are going to continue playing (and being written and produced).

Please, don't think this kind of movies are well received in Mexico: We hate them and they don't reflect us. --------------------------------------------- Result 2494 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] "The Last Big Thing" is a [[wonderful]] satirical [[film]] that sardonically [[whips]] pop culture to the point of [[humorous]] self-desctruction. The characters are so interesting and fun to laugh at/sympathize with. Which [[brings]] me to an introduction to the [[characters]] I liked best...

Simon Geist is a man in his late 30s/early 40s who [[creates]] a pop-culture driven editorial [[magazine]] [[called]] "The Next Big Thing". Thing is, this magazine [[doesnt]] [[really]] exist, and it is only an [[excuse]] for Simon to get close to [[actors]] by [[interviewing]] them, only to bitch-slap them silly, insulting their [[way]] of [[buying]] into [[pop]] culture. His live-in [[female]] [[friend]], Darla, is also writing a magazine (which is [[real]]), which [[mainly]] has to do with her and Simon, as well as her and her father. Darla is a [[genuinely]] loveable (or loathable) [[character]], depending on how you view her muted neurotic behavior. Magda is a [[prostitute]], the [[character]] i [[liked]] the [[best]]. [[Brent]] is a flat character with not much to him, as is Tedra, the music-video queen for a bunch of B-rated [[rock]] bands. [[Still]], these [[characters]] [[weave]] a very interesting web [[together]]. And this movie questions all the motivations that people have for what they do and why they do it. Its a [[wonderful]] [[film]] and I [[suggest]] you [[see]] it if you're in the [[indie]]/art house crowd. Mark my words!

"The Last Big Thing" is a [[sumptuous]] satirical [[filmmaking]] that sardonically [[flogging]] pop culture to the point of [[comical]] self-desctruction. The characters are so interesting and fun to laugh at/sympathize with. Which [[poses]] me to an introduction to the [[features]] I liked best...

Simon Geist is a man in his late 30s/early 40s who [[generates]] a pop-culture driven editorial [[revue]] [[termed]] "The Next Big Thing". Thing is, this magazine [[theres]] [[truly]] exist, and it is only an [[apologize]] for Simon to get close to [[actresses]] by [[interviewed]] them, only to bitch-slap them silly, insulting their [[pathway]] of [[purchasing]] into [[dad]] culture. His live-in [[girls]] [[boyfriend]], Darla, is also writing a magazine (which is [[actual]]), which [[basically]] has to do with her and Simon, as well as her and her father. Darla is a [[actually]] loveable (or loathable) [[nature]], depending on how you view her muted neurotic behavior. Magda is a [[whore]], the [[nature]] i [[wished]] the [[better]]. [[Burnett]] is a flat character with not much to him, as is Tedra, the music-video queen for a bunch of B-rated [[boulder]] bands. [[However]], these [[attribute]] [[weaving]] a very interesting web [[jointly]]. And this movie questions all the motivations that people have for what they do and why they do it. Its a [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] and I [[insinuate]] you [[behold]] it if you're in the [[andy]]/art house crowd. Mark my words!

--------------------------------------------- Result 2495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] Taking a [[break]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi Goldberg in an adaptation of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's [[incredible]] that this is the same woman who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[magnificent]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second best movie behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. Taking a [[rupture]] from his escapist run in the early '80s, Steven Spielberg directed Whoopi Goldberg in an adaptation of Alice Walker's "The Color Purple", about about the desperate existence of an African-American woman in the 1930s. Watching Goldberg play Celie, it's [[surprising]] that this is the same woman who starred in movies like "Sister Act". This is the sort of movie that could easily be - no, make that SHOULD BE - part of the curriculum in Black Studies and Women's Studies. There's one scene that may be the most [[ravishing]] editing job that's ever been on screen (you'll know it when you see it). I can't believe that this didn't win a single Oscar; it may be Spielberg's second best movie behind "Schindler's List" (maybe even tied with it). Also starring Danny Glover, Adolph Caesar, Margaret Avery, Oprah Winfrey, Willard E. Pugh, Akosua Busia, and Laurence Fishburne. --------------------------------------------- Result 2496 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Never [[even]] knew this movie existed until I found an old VHS copy of it, hidden deep in my dusty horror closet. The title on the box said "Insect" and the illustrations on the back made clear that it is just another insignificant and poorly produced 80's horror movie. They can surely be fun, of course, as [[long]] as don't expect an intelligent scenario and as long as you're not irritated by seeing a giant amount of cheesy make-up effects. Just about every important aspect that makes a horror movie worthy viewing is substandard here in "Blue Monkey"! The plot is [[ridiculous]] and [[highly]] unoriginal, the acting performances are painful to [[observe]] and there's a [[total]] [[lack]] of [[suspense]]. Following the always-popular [[trend]] of "big-bug" [[movies]], "Blue Monkey" handles about a new and [[unknown]] [[insect]] species that [[wipes]] out the [[doctors]] and [[patients]] of a [[remote]] hospital. The [[makers]] couldn't be more [[evasive]] about the [[actual]] [[origin]] of this gigantically over-sized [[critter]]! All we know is that it's not from [[outer]] space and it initially [[crawled]] out of a [[tropical]] plant. Other than this, there's [[absolutely]] no [[explanation]] for where this [[new]] [[type]] of insect all of a sudden comes from! Like I [[said]], don't [[get]] your [[hopes]] up for an intelligent [[screenplay]]. The [[first]] half of the [[film]] is [[entertaining]] [[enough]], with some [[nice]] [[gore]] and the [[introduction]] of a couple deranged [[characters]] (an 80-year-old [[blind]] and alcoholic [[lady]]!) but the second half (when the [[entire]] [[hospital]] is put to quarantine) is [[dreadfully]] [[boring]]. It is [[also]] near the [[end]] that "Blue [[Monkey]]" [[begins]] to exaggeratedly rip-off older (and [[better]]) [[films]]. [[Approaching]] the [[climax]], they [[apparently]] ran out of [[budget]] as well, since the lighting becomes very poor and the [[guy]] in the [[monster]] suit isn't very well [[camouflaged]] anymore. "Blue [[Monkey]]" is worth a [[peek]] in [[case]] you're [[really]] bored or if you really [[want]] to [[see]] [[every]] 80's horror [[movie]] ever [[made]]. [[Fans]] of B-cinema may [[recognize]] [[John]] Vernon ("[[Killer]] Klowns from Outer Space", "Curtains") in the [[small]] and [[meaningless]] role of [[Roger]], who's in [[charge]] of the [[clinic]]. Never [[yet]] knew this movie existed until I found an old VHS copy of it, hidden deep in my dusty horror closet. The title on the box said "Insect" and the illustrations on the back made clear that it is just another insignificant and poorly produced 80's horror movie. They can surely be fun, of course, as [[longer]] as don't expect an intelligent scenario and as long as you're not irritated by seeing a giant amount of cheesy make-up effects. Just about every important aspect that makes a horror movie worthy viewing is substandard here in "Blue Monkey"! The plot is [[grotesque]] and [[heavily]] unoriginal, the acting performances are painful to [[observing]] and there's a [[whole]] [[absence]] of [[wait]]. Following the always-popular [[trends]] of "big-bug" [[cinematography]], "Blue Monkey" handles about a new and [[unnamed]] [[bug]] species that [[swabs]] out the [[doctor]] and [[patient]] of a [[distant]] hospital. The [[manufacturer]] couldn't be more [[noncommittal]] about the [[real]] [[origins]] of this gigantically over-sized [[critters]]! All we know is that it's not from [[exterior]] space and it initially [[crept]] out of a [[equatorial]] plant. Other than this, there's [[perfectly]] no [[explanations]] for where this [[nouveau]] [[genre]] of insect all of a sudden comes from! Like I [[asserted]], don't [[gets]] your [[waits]] up for an intelligent [[script]]. The [[outset]] half of the [[cinema]] is [[amusing]] [[adequate]], with some [[delightful]] [[gora]] and the [[introducing]] of a couple deranged [[characteristics]] (an 80-year-old [[blinded]] and alcoholic [[dame]]!) but the second half (when the [[total]] [[hospitals]] is put to quarantine) is [[awfully]] [[bored]]. It is [[likewise]] near the [[terminate]] that "Blue [[Ape]]" [[begin]] to exaggeratedly rip-off older (and [[best]]) [[film]]. [[Approach]] the [[pinnacle]], they [[reportedly]] ran out of [[budgets]] as well, since the lighting becomes very poor and the [[pal]] in the [[monsters]] suit isn't very well [[veiled]] anymore. "Blue [[Ape]]" is worth a [[gaze]] in [[cases]] you're [[truly]] bored or if you really [[wanna]] to [[behold]] [[all]] 80's horror [[films]] ever [[accomplished]]. [[Followers]] of B-cinema may [[acknowledged]] [[Giovanni]] Vernon ("[[Shooter]] Klowns from Outer Space", "Curtains") in the [[little]] and [[unhelpful]] role of [[Roget]], who's in [[burdens]] of the [[dispensary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2497 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Doctor]] Feinstone is a dentist.He has a [[beautiful]] [[wife]] and a huge house with a pool.[[Suddenly]] he discovers that his wife is making out with the pool attendant-he [[realises]] that [[behind]] everything clean,there is decay.He starts to [[torture]] his patients...[[Corbin]] Bernsen is brilliant as the deranged dentist-he is [[completely]] [[believable]].There is surprisingly [[little]] [[gore]] but the scenes of dental torture are quite nasty and grotesque.Highly [[recommended]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! [[Medic]] Feinstone is a dentist.He has a [[awesome]] [[women]] and a huge house with a pool.[[Abruptly]] he discovers that his wife is making out with the pool attendant-he [[understands]] that [[backside]] everything clean,there is decay.He starts to [[tortured]] his patients...[[Furey]] Bernsen is brilliant as the deranged dentist-he is [[altogether]] [[dependable]].There is surprisingly [[tiny]] [[gora]] but the scenes of dental torture are quite nasty and grotesque.Highly [[suggested]]."The Dentist 2" is also worth checking out! --------------------------------------------- Result 2498 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] My personal vision of hell is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[movie]] play for [[eternity]] on [[every]] [[available]] surface in that room. The whole [[notion]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only begins to scratch the surface of how [[ridiculous]] a premise this movie is. The single most important thing about watching any movie is the [[concept]] of "willing suspension of disbelief" . . . it is [[impossible]] to do that in this movie. My personal vision of hell is being locked in a room without the ability to close my eyes or block my ears and have this [[cinematography]] play for [[virginity]] on [[all]] [[accessible]] surface in that room. The whole [[concepts]] that Streisand plays a boy/man only begins to scratch the surface of how [[nonsensical]] a premise this movie is. The single most important thing about watching any movie is the [[conceptions]] of "willing suspension of disbelief" . . . it is [[impractical]] to do that in this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are movies which are so [[awful]] that they become affectionately comical in their ineptness. Such is the case with Columbia Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[cinematic]] [[atrocity]] [[began]] when an otherwise well intentioned American saw a Japanese made for TV film 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[movie]] in [[English]]. This began a virtual tsunami of bad decisions which circumnavigated the globe until it washed ashore in Orlando on October 21, 2004.

The premise, and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a skinny Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula comes to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. Next we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so much so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. ***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers***spoilers

There are bad movies and then there are movies which are so [[horrendous]] that they become affectionately comical in their ineptness. Such is the case with Columbia Pictures' 'The Grudge.' This [[films]] [[ruthlessness]] [[inaugurated]] when an otherwise well intentioned American saw a Japanese made for TV film 'Ju-on' and was inspired to remake the [[cinematography]] in [[Anglais]]. This began a virtual tsunami of bad decisions which circumnavigated the globe until it washed ashore in Orlando on October 21, 2004.

The premise, and I use the word loosely, involves a house in Tokyo haunted by a skinny Momma ghost who looks like a cross between Margaret Cho and Alanis Morrisette, along with her ghastly sidekick a chubby, rambunctious but evil second grader. Is there anything scarier than a creepy 8 year old Japanese boy? Sure there is! Count Chocula comes to mind. With this whimsical bunch we must add a mysterious black cat who I have affectionately named Chim Chim. (Remember Speed Racer?) As you have already guessed, they were murdered in this domicile of doom and now desire to kill everyone who enters the premises. You see, as explained by a Japanese detective, when someone dies in a rage their ghost seeks revenge on everyone who steps on the property lines as defined by the county commissioner or something like that, I forget.

The story begins innocently enough with acclaimed thespian Bill Pullman leaping to his death from a balcony. My guess is Bill Pullman got this job because of his kids begged him for a trip to Tokyo Disneyland. Next we endure the mildly interesting saga of Nurse Yoko, 'oh no don't go in there' screams the audience, but alas she heeds not the dire warnings and is predictably snuffed out like a magic lantern. About 30 minutes into the movie we finally see its American heroine Sarah Michelle Gellar as Karen. Sarah Michelle Gellar might be a competent actress but I could not help thinking of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, so much so that it was distracting. It is the equivalent to having Jennifer Anniston star in a movie about the adventures of six friends in New York. Try as you may, you just can't stop thinking about the other project which made her famous. But I digress, Karen, the nurse is hired as a replacement for the original care giver who disappeared at spooks r us.

She snoops around, meets the ghosts, coma lady dies, and some other stuff happens. Watching the fair haired vixen searching for clues I half expected her to find the ghost and pull its mask off to reveal it was actually old man Gower who owned the abandoned amusement park! 'I would've gotten away with it too if it weren't for you meddling kids and that dog of yours!'

Director Takashi Shimizu, who is vying to be the Ed Wood of Asia, made two unfortunate decisions involving sound. First, he choose to use a soundtrack only when someone is about to be killed. This is an excellent devise for obliterating any suspense because the audience gets a two minute warning to prepare for another miserably predictable murder. Second, he gave the ghosts a bizarre guttural noise that sounds like a gargling gopher. After the movie, I heard several people exiting the theatre making the sound and laughing.

Sarah Michelle Gellar ends up being the sole survivor. And of course we learn that the fire she set to burn down the house was extinguished in time for the obligatory next chapter. However, considering the humorous reactions of the audience, they did not want a sequel but an apology. 'The Grudge' could be easily re-edited into a comedy, perhaps then it will be appreciated for its camp value. Baring that, this will go down as the greatest cinematic thriller since 'Godzilla vs. Megalon.' I would suggest waiting until the movie comes to your local discount theatre where it can receive the public ridicule it so richly deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2500 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 [[gore]] fest [[hit]] "[[Hostel]]", and most of these lame ass knock-offs are just as bad or worse - yet "Live Feed" managed to keep me somewhat entertained for about the first 30 minutes. Started off with plenty of sex and [[sleazy]] [[settings]], followed by some [[good]] [[death]] scenes [[involving]] the Chinese [[Organized]] [[Crime]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the movie was the tough 'hero' with the [[guns]] and a grudge saving the day... I [[would]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a premise mainly [[involving]] [[obnoxious]] young people being slaughtered in a seedy porno [[theater]], [[doubling]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. [[If]] only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating would have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, [[leaving]] the [[rest]] of the [[movie]] to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. [[So]], basically, it IS just a low-budget "[[Hostel]]" rip-off with the redeeming [[use]] of [[gratuitous]] sex, [[almost]] constant during the first half of the film... [[Overall]], I would say don't bother with this one. I wasn't at all a fan of the 2005 [[gora]] fest [[knocked]] "[[Dormitory]]", and most of these lame ass knock-offs are just as bad or worse - yet "Live Feed" managed to keep me somewhat entertained for about the first 30 minutes. Started off with plenty of sex and [[dirty]] [[setting]], followed by some [[alright]] [[dies]] scenes [[encompassing]] the Chinese [[Arrange]] [[Crimes]] Squad and a 7-foot, leather-aproned butcher... What put me out of the movie was the tough 'hero' with the [[hotties]] and a grudge saving the day... I [[ought]] call this movie mediocre, at best, since a premise mainly [[encompassing]] [[repugnant]] young people being slaughtered in a seedy porno [[cinemas]], [[duplicating]] as a hideout for the mafia, is appealing to me. [[Though]] only the torture was prolonged enough to be thoroughly effective, then my rating would have differed greatly. Unfortunately, most of the gruesomeness is heaped together in one scene, [[abandoning]] the [[stays]] of the [[films]] to conclude as a revenge-type scenario. [[Accordingly]], basically, it IS just a low-budget "[[Hostels]]" rip-off with the redeeming [[employs]] of [[unjustified]] sex, [[nearly]] constant during the first half of the film... [[Aggregate]], I would say don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2501 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and [[considered]] quite racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[colored]] melodrama is still a [[wonderful]] thing. The plot concerns the goings on in an oil rich dysfunctional Texas [[family]] that includes big brother Kyle, who is [[insecure]], [[weak]], wounded & very [[alcoholic]], played by [[Robert]] [[Stack]] in a very [[touching]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sister]] Marylee [[played]] in an extreme manner by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her emotions, which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting jobs of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall marriage falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** Released in 1956,and [[deemed]] quite racy at the time, Douglas Sirk's over the top candy [[stained]] melodrama is still a [[sumptuous]] thing. The plot concerns the goings on in an oil rich dysfunctional Texas [[familial]] that includes big brother Kyle, who is [[precarious]], [[feeble]], wounded & very [[alcohol]], played by [[Roberto]] [[Heap]] in a very [[touch]] & vulneable performance and his sluty [[sisters]] Marylee [[served]] in an extreme manner by Dorothy Malone. Ms. Malone's performance is telegraphed to us via her eyes, which she uses to show us her emotions, which mostly consist of lust (for Rock Hudson) and jealousy (for Lauren Bacall). Malone is the only actress I've ever seen in movies who enters a room eyes first. Now don't get me wrong, her performance to say the least is an absolute hoot, and is one of the supreme camp acting jobs of the 1950's. But it is also terrible, because as likeable and attractive as Malone is,she's not a very good actress, and she's not capable of subtly or shading. Her performace is of one note. She does get to do a wicked Mambo,and in a great montage, as unloving daddy played by the always good Robert Keith falls to his death climbing a staircase, Sirk mixes it up with an almost mad Malone doing a orgasmic dance as she undresses. Stack,(who should have won an Oscar) & Malone, (who won the award, but shouldn't have) are the real stars of the film, the ones who set all the hysteria, both sexual & otherwise in motion, while the "real stars" of the film, Hudson & Bacall fade to grey & brown,which are the colors that they are mainly costumed in. Hudson who was a better actor then given credit for plays the childhood & best friend of Stack's, and the stalked love interest of Malone's who moans & groans over Rock through most of the film. But Hudson wants no part of her,and instead is in love with Bacall who is married to Stack. No one is very happy & no one is happy for very long. The Stack-Bacall marriage falls apart big time after a year, and Stack pretty much drinks himself into oblivion because he thinks he is sterile, and can't give Bacall a baby to prove that he's a man. Sirk who was a very intelligent man, and had a long & fascinating career both in films and theatre in Germany, ended his Hollywood career at Universal in the mid 1950's with a series of intense vividly colored "women's movies" or melodramas. Although they were mainly adapted from medicore or trashy source material,in Sirk's hands they became masterpieces of the genre. Sirk had a wonderful sense of color & design which he brought to play in these films filling his wide screen spaces with characters who played out their emotional lives among weird color combinations & lighting, make believe shadows, and lots of mirroed reflections. In "Written" the characters are always peeking out of windows, listening at doors or sneaking around. So in the end, after much violence, an accidental murder, a miscarriage & more Sirk ends the movie with a final & startling scene of a "reborn" and reformed Malone in a man-tailored suit, sitting at a desk foundling a miniature oilwell. --------------------------------------------- Result 2502 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Despite the gravity of the subject and [[probably]] the good [[intentions]] of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[inconsistencies]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[hard]] to [[take]] the story seriously. [[Green]], who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[success]] comes easily when he's willing to succumb to falsifying his image. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting opportunity with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. Green is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as [[anything]] but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite annoying and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really little development of any of them.

The other problem with this film is the ungodly amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted film in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. Despite the gravity of the subject and [[assuredly]] the good [[intents]] of the filmmakers to make a film addressing white supremacy, the [[anomalies]] of its main character, Bronson Green, aspiring New York actor easily turned L.A. phony, makes it [[tough]] to [[taking]] the story seriously. [[Greene]], who is constantly rejected by Los Angeles casting agents for being obsolete (i.e. too New York when the 80s is looking for big, blonde, and dumb), he finds [[accomplishments]] comes easily when he's willing to succumb to falsifying his image. Unfortunately, the new hair dye and pacified "surfer" attitude lands him an acting opportunity with the Jericho Church, which subscribes white supremacist teaching of the Aryan nation. Green is willing to easily forget his past, and particularly turning his back on his young black friend of ten years, in order to be the Church's new spokesman. This makes no sense, seeing as how principled our character initially is. It is this sudden, and loose change in character, coupled with an abrupt reversion back to the hardened, DeNiro-obsessed (as his Taxi Driver character) form who is able to battle the villains. A noble attempt on the filmmakers, but one that ultimately reveals itself as [[somethings]] but serious.

The other characters, too, are quite annoying and what we are forced to recognize in them comes too easily -- the psychotic paranoia of the Church leader, the self-interested actress girlfriend (the first girlfriend Bronson has when he's in L.A.), and the new blonde girlfriend who's character lacks so much development, she is, for the most part, just a walking, talking void. We are just supposed to see them in fleeting moments in which something random forces us to draw assumptions about the characters. But there is really little development of any of them.

The other problem with this film is the ungodly amount of time the characters are involved in very little important action. Much of the beginning concerns introducing the characters, obviously, and later we see Bronson's difficulties with breaking into the L.A. acting scene and the frustrations which stem from constant rejection. But after he does willingly change his looks and personality in order to become accepted, there is at least a good twenty minutes to thirty minutes of wasted film in which very little of anything happens.

For films that seek to draw attention to the irrational fears behind racism, this was not one done with enough credibility. --------------------------------------------- Result 2503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Love [[hurts]]. That, I think, is the main message Mike Binder's newest film Reign Over Me brings [[across]]. Whether that love has caused your relationship to become stagnant, or has brought anger from the one you love [[cheating]] for years, or has [[broken]] your heart to the point of being [[unable]] to open yourself up to the world, love hurts. The [[great]] [[thing]] about this film, however, is not in its portrayal of these lost souls trying to let their past heartbreaks go, but in the eventual restart of new bonds for the future. No one in this drama is perfect; they are all at some degree trapped emotionally in relationships that they can't free themselves from alone. There is some heavy subject material here and I credit Binder for never making the story turn into a political diatribe, but instead infusing the serious moments with some real nice comedic bits allowing the tale to stay character-based and small in scale compared to the epic event that looms overhead. What could have become a trite vehicle for opinions on how 9-11 effected us all, ends up being a story about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can save their lives from a life of depression and regret.

This is a new career performance for Adam Sandler. I like to think that my favorite director Paul Thomas Anderson was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his stupid comedies as something to use dramatically. The juvenility of a character like Billy Madison allows for laughs and potty humor, but also can be used to show a repressed man, shy and shutout to the world around him—a man with no confidence that needs an event of compassion to break him from his shell. Anderson let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk Love and Mike Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays former dentist Charlie Fineman whose wife and three kids were killed in one of the planes that took down the World Trade Center on 9-11. That one moment crushed any life that he had and as a result, he became reclusive and started to believe he couldn't remember anything that happened before that day. He really delivers a moving portrait of a man trying to keep up the charade in his head while those around him, those that love him, try and open him up to the reality of what happened and what the future holds. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished family, he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best friend and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. Love [[stings]]. That, I think, is the main message Mike Binder's newest film Reign Over Me brings [[in]]. Whether that love has caused your relationship to become stagnant, or has brought anger from the one you love [[hoodwink]] for years, or has [[ruptured]] your heart to the point of being [[incompetent]] to open yourself up to the world, love hurts. The [[super]] [[stuff]] about this film, however, is not in its portrayal of these lost souls trying to let their past heartbreaks go, but in the eventual restart of new bonds for the future. No one in this drama is perfect; they are all at some degree trapped emotionally in relationships that they can't free themselves from alone. There is some heavy subject material here and I credit Binder for never making the story turn into a political diatribe, but instead infusing the serious moments with some real nice comedic bits allowing the tale to stay character-based and small in scale compared to the epic event that looms overhead. What could have become a trite vehicle for opinions on how 9-11 effected us all, ends up being a story about two men and a connection they share that is the only thing which can save their lives from a life of depression and regret.

This is a new career performance for Adam Sandler. I like to think that my favorite director Paul Thomas Anderson was the first to see the childish, pent-up anger in his stupid comedies as something to use dramatically. The juvenility of a character like Billy Madison allows for laughs and potty humor, but also can be used to show a repressed man, shy and shutout to the world around him—a man with no confidence that needs an event of compassion to break him from his shell. Anderson let Sandler do just that in his masterpiece Punch-Drunk Love and Mike Binder has taken it one step further. Sandler plays former dentist Charlie Fineman whose wife and three kids were killed in one of the planes that took down the World Trade Center on 9-11. That one moment crushed any life that he had and as a result, he became reclusive and started to believe he couldn't remember anything that happened before that day. He really delivers a moving portrait of a man trying to keep up the charade in his head while those around him, those that love him, try and open him up to the reality of what happened and what the future holds. Always on edge and ready to snap at any moment when something is mentioned to spark the memory of his perished family, he goes through life with his iPod and headphones, shutting out everything so as not to be tempted remember.

Reign Over Me is not about Charlie Fineman though, it is about dentist and family man Alan Johnson. A man that has trapped himself into a marriage and dental practice that both have stagnated into monotony, Johnson needs as much help in his life as his old college roommate Charlie does. Played perfectly by the always brilliant Don Cheadle, Johnson has lost his backbone to try and change his life. He has no friends and when he sees Charlie, by chance, one day, his life evolves into something he hasn't felt in 15 years. He revels in the chance to go out with an old friend no matter how much he has changed from the death of his family. Cheadle's character wants to revert back to the college days of hanging out and Sandler's doesn't mind because all that was before he met his wife. The two men get what they want and allow themselves to grow close despite the years of solitude that used to rule their lives. Once they begin opening up though, it is inevitable that the subject of the tragedy will creep up and test the façade they have created for themselves.

The supporting cast does an amazing job helping keep up appearances for the two leads. Jada Pinkett Smith has never been an actress that impressed me and throughout the film played the tough as nails wife nicely, but it is her final scene on the phone with Cheadle that really showed me something different and true. Liv Tyler is a bit out of her element as a psychiatrist, but the movie calls her on this fact and makes the miscasting, perfect casting. The many small cameos are also effective, even writer/director Mike Binder's role as Sandler's old best friend and accountant, (my only gripe here is why he feels the need to put his name in the opening credits as an actor when it is everywhere, considering it is his film). Last but not least is the beautiful Saffron Burrows. She is a great actress and plays the love- crushed divorcée trying to put her life back together wonderfully. A role that seems comic relief at first, but ends up being an integral aspect for what is to come.

Binder has crafted one of the best dramatic character studies I have seen in a long time. The direction is almost flawless, (the blurring between cuts and characters in the fore/ background really annoyed me in the beginning), the acting superb, and the story true to itself, never taking the easy way out or wrapping itself up with a neatly tied bow at the conclusion. Even the music was fantastic and used to enhance, not to lead us emotionally, (why after two great uses of the titular song by The Who did Binder feel the need to use the inferior Eddie Veddar remake for the end, I don't know, but it did unfortunately stick out for me). Reign Over Me is a film about love and how although it can cause the worst pain imaginable, it can also save us from regret and allow us to once again see the world as a place of beauty and hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2504 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Having read many of the other reviews for this film on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is nothing like the books upon which it is based. Upon this point I cannot comment, having never actually read any of the protagonists adventures previously. However, what I can say with certainty, is that it [[strikes]] me that [[many]] of the said reviewers must have surely undergone a sense of humour bypass; Let's be [[honest]] here - this [[film]] is just so much [[fun]]!

OK…..so I must [[concede]] the point that the film apparently is not representative of the character/s but let's put this into a clear perspective…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this film also bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman series does not remain faithful to the original DC comic book character? Or perhaps is there STILL unrest in same persons that the 1980 film version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the original series?

The point is, yes this film is incredibly camp but that's precisely its charm!

Former Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and bears more than a passing resemblance to Gary Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a great supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. Also look out for a very brief but highly welcome appearance by horror movie favourite Michael Berryman.

Best scene? Far too many to choose from but check out the hilarious facial expressions adopted by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the ultimate faux pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! Also the often noted scene near the end of the film wherein Savage tackles his nemesis Captain Seas utilising various martial arts disciplines which are labelled on screen! – Priceless!

Simply put, the film doesn't take itself at all seriously and is all the more fun for it. Great fun from start to finish! (and you'll be singing the John Phillip Sousa adapted theme song for days afterwards guaranteed!) Having read many of the other reviews for this film on the IMDb there is ostensibly a consensus amongst purists that this film is nothing like the books upon which it is based. Upon this point I cannot comment, having never actually read any of the protagonists adventures previously. However, what I can say with certainty, is that it [[bombarded]] me that [[numerous]] of the said reviewers must have surely undergone a sense of humour bypass; Let's be [[truthful]] here - this [[filmmaking]] is just so much [[droll]]!

OK…..so I must [[recognising]] the point that the film apparently is not representative of the character/s but let's put this into a clear perspective…..do the same individuals who are carping on about this film also bemoan the fact that the classic 1960's Batman series does not remain faithful to the original DC comic book character? Or perhaps is there STILL unrest in same persons that the 1980 film version of Flash Gordon was too much of a departure from the original series?

The point is, yes this film is incredibly camp but that's precisely its charm!

Former Tarzan, Ron Ely plays the eponymous hero in this (and bears more than a passing resemblance to Gary Busey to boot!) and is backed up by a great supporting cast who all look to be having a ball with their respective roles. Also look out for a very brief but highly welcome appearance by horror movie favourite Michael Berryman.

Best scene? Far too many to choose from but check out the hilarious facial expressions adopted by the waiter when Savage and his men commit the ultimate faux pas of ordering coke, lemonade and milk at a formal occasion! Also the often noted scene near the end of the film wherein Savage tackles his nemesis Captain Seas utilising various martial arts disciplines which are labelled on screen! – Priceless!

Simply put, the film doesn't take itself at all seriously and is all the more fun for it. Great fun from start to finish! (and you'll be singing the John Phillip Sousa adapted theme song for days afterwards guaranteed!) --------------------------------------------- Result 2505 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This movie set out to be better than the [[average]] action movie and in that regard they succeeded.This movie had [[spectacular]] cinematography featuring spectacular mountain snow and heights,a very [[fit]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an exciting plot,and a [[great]] performance from it's main villain [[becouse]] he will really shock you with his evil ways.The [[movie]] does not rank an all [[time]] great [[becouse]] of the weak screen play.The plot and story cries for this movie to make Stallone an extra special human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or Bond movie characters.They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but considering the plot's style,weakens the excitement factor.Also,the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at times.The script should have been more realistic and less "talky".Another weak point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The movie makers should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have continued the quality of the scenes of the shooting sequences during the plane hijacking early in the movie.Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV series) as soon as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time great potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I sense the movie's director wanted to tone down Stallone's character and try to steal the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that great if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ This movie set out to be better than the [[medium]] action movie and in that regard they succeeded.This movie had [[excellent]] cinematography featuring spectacular mountain snow and heights,a very [[fitted]] Stallone putting in a good performance as well,an exciting plot,and a [[large]] performance from it's main villain [[allways]] he will really shock you with his evil ways.The [[filmmaking]] does not rank an all [[moment]] great [[shouldnt]] of the weak screen play.The plot and story cries for this movie to make Stallone an extra special human,much like the Rambo or Rocky or Bond movie characters.They chose to humanise Stallone's character in this one which is ok but considering the plot's style,weakens the excitement factor.Also,the dialogue was cheesy and carelessly condescending at times.The script should have been more realistic and less "talky".Another weak point was the unrealistic shooting scenes.The movie makers should have been more carefull how they hadled the shooting hits and misses.They should have continued the quality of the scenes of the shooting sequences during the plane hijacking early in the movie.Instead,they decided to water down a lot of the shooting sequences (ala "A-Team" TV series) as soon as the villains set foot on the mountain tops.This movie had a lot of all time great potential.Crisper action sequences,better dialogue and more Rambo/Rocky style emotion/determination from Stallone would have taken this movie to a higher level.I know this was not Stallone's fault.I sense the movie's director wanted to tone down Stallone's character and try to steal the movie by taking credit for his direction which was not all that great if not for his cinematographer.Sill a good movie though........ --------------------------------------------- Result 2506 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[LOVED]] this movie! I am biased seeing as I am a huge Disney fan, but I really enjoyed myself. The action [[takes]] off running in the beginning of the film and just [[keeps]] [[going]]! This is a bit of a [[departure]] for Disney, they don't spend quite as much time on character development (my [[husband]] [[pointed]] this out)and there are no musical numbers. It is strictly action adventure. I [[thoroughly]] enjoyed it and [[recommend]] it to [[anyone]] who loves Disney, be they young or old. I [[WORSHIPPED]] this movie! I am biased seeing as I am a huge Disney fan, but I really enjoyed myself. The action [[pick]] off running in the beginning of the film and just [[retains]] [[go]]! This is a bit of a [[departing]] for Disney, they don't spend quite as much time on character development (my [[hubby]] [[stressed]] this out)and there are no musical numbers. It is strictly action adventure. I [[carefully]] enjoyed it and [[recommends]] it to [[nobody]] who loves Disney, be they young or old. --------------------------------------------- Result 2507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] A [[must]] see [[movie]] for [[anyone]] who ever went to camp, or [[wanted]] to. This [[film]] [[captures]] the absolute [[essence]] of what summer camp is all about. It is [[funny]], it is [[compassionate]] it makes you [[want]] to watch more about the [[characters]] once the [[credits]] [[begin]] to role. [[If]] you have not [[seen]] this [[movie]]..what are you doing? [[get]] off you [[butt]] and [[run]] the [[video]] [[store]]. Have a [[great]] [[summer]] :) A [[should]] see [[film]] for [[nobody]] who ever went to camp, or [[desired]] to. This [[films]] [[catch]] the absolute [[gist]] of what summer camp is all about. It is [[humorous]], it is [[merciful]] it makes you [[wanted]] to watch more about the [[personage]] once the [[credence]] [[commenced]] to role. [[Unless]] you have not [[watched]] this [[movies]]..what are you doing? [[gets]] off you [[cul]] and [[executing]] the [[videotape]] [[storehouse]]. Have a [[wonderful]] [[sommer]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 2508 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Seeing as the world snooker championship [[final]] [[finished]] in a premature and [[disappointing]] [[manner]] with Ronnie O`Sullivan [[defeating]] Greame Dott by 18 [[frames]] to 8 BBC 2 found a gap in their [[schedule]] and so decided to broadcast A WALK ON THE MOON a [[movie]] I had [[absolutely]] no [[knowledge]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought [[possibly]] it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the [[opening]] with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer [[camp]] has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and bored house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It jars with the rest of the movie and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them Seeing as the world snooker championship [[definitive]] [[ended]] in a premature and [[frustrating]] [[fashion]] with Ronnie O`Sullivan [[beating]] Greame Dott by 18 [[frame]] to 8 BBC 2 found a gap in their [[schedules]] and so decided to broadcast A WALK ON THE MOON a [[cinematography]] I had [[abundantly]] no [[acquaintances]] off

I missed a few seconds of the title credits so had no idea Viggo Mortensen starred in it and thought [[maybe]] it might be a cheap TVM , certainly the [[commencement]] with the mawkish Pearl and Marty taking their kids to a Summer [[campground]] has that sort of made for TV feel though the brightly lit ( Too brightly lit ) cinematography seemed to suggest this was a cinematic film and it wasn`t until the appearence of Viggo Mortensen as hippy guy Walker that I realised this was a cinema release , after all someone of Mortensen`s stature wouldn`t star in a TVM , I mean that`s like a legend like Robert DeNiro appearing in a straight to video film . Wait a minute , didn`t Bob .... ?

Some people on this site have mentioned that Pearl and Marty are an unconvincing on-screen couple and I agree . I can understand why Pearl would be attracted to exciting hippy guy but have no idea why Walker would be attracted to plain house wife Pearl . The sixties was before my time but surely if you`ve got the choice between hippy chicks and bored house wives it`s not really a choice at all . Mind you a lot of people took LSD in those days so I guess that explains it

I feel the major problem of A WALK ON THE MOON comes down to the fact it`s a romantic drama at heart ( Just like you`d expect in a TVM ) with several cloying coming of age scenes so why include a fairly explicit sex scene ? It jars with the rest of the movie and is possibly off putting to the menopuasal women who were 20 something in 1969 . I say possibly because the movie also seems to aim at a teeenage market with the coming of age scenes and those teenagers will probably be bored with the historical and social context of man walking on the moon and Woodstock . In other words A WALK ON THE MOON tries to attract many types of audience but will probably appeal to none of them --------------------------------------------- Result 2509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This 1947 film stars and was directed and written by Orson Welles (with a funky Irish accent) and [[also]] stars the gorgeous Rita Hayworth with less appealing short blonde hair. So, I've hung out with Orson before in Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane and the Third Man etc. but this was my [[first]] Rita Hayworth interaction. Our first [[meeting]] went well, she does a [[superb]] [[job]] playing the [[frightened]]/cagey Elsa, [[married]] to a crippled millionaire lawyer. Mike ([[Welles]]) and Elsa [[fall]] for each other. He wants to run away with her, she doesn't know if she can live without the things money can buy. Elsa, her husband, and his partner bicker and bite, just like the sharks Mike describes attacking each other and his foretelling proves just too true. Several twists and turns follow in this murder mystery as we come to the climax in the fun house. (Think the ending shootout in The Man with the Golden Gun, which borrowed heavily from this scene). I wasn't sure who the murderer was until the end.

This movie is like shrimp in garlic and lemon. The dish centers on the sea, it is subtle, sour, and pungent, all to great effect. These might not be the best, fresh shrimp, but good quality frozen shrimp from Costco. The flavorful sauce adds to the naturalness of the pink shrimp as you fill up on a healthy, but filling alternative to more mundane, common fare. 7/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies This 1947 film stars and was directed and written by Orson Welles (with a funky Irish accent) and [[additionally]] stars the gorgeous Rita Hayworth with less appealing short blonde hair. So, I've hung out with Orson before in Touch of Evil and Citizen Kane and the Third Man etc. but this was my [[frst]] Rita Hayworth interaction. Our first [[meetings]] went well, she does a [[resplendent]] [[labour]] playing the [[freaked]]/cagey Elsa, [[newlyweds]] to a crippled millionaire lawyer. Mike ([[Orson]]) and Elsa [[declines]] for each other. He wants to run away with her, she doesn't know if she can live without the things money can buy. Elsa, her husband, and his partner bicker and bite, just like the sharks Mike describes attacking each other and his foretelling proves just too true. Several twists and turns follow in this murder mystery as we come to the climax in the fun house. (Think the ending shootout in The Man with the Golden Gun, which borrowed heavily from this scene). I wasn't sure who the murderer was until the end.

This movie is like shrimp in garlic and lemon. The dish centers on the sea, it is subtle, sour, and pungent, all to great effect. These might not be the best, fresh shrimp, but good quality frozen shrimp from Costco. The flavorful sauce adds to the naturalness of the pink shrimp as you fill up on a healthy, but filling alternative to more mundane, common fare. 7/10 http://blog.myspace.com/locoformovies --------------------------------------------- Result 2510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A meteor hit's Crater Lake (hence our title), awakening a Plesiosaur, who proceed's to snack on the hick population (in California, that hick capital of the world.)

There's bad movies, and then there's "The Crater Lake Monster", which somehow managed to escape MST3K. Featuring grating acting, a decent stop-motion beast, and more, this is a dreadful piece of 1970's low budget exploitation/monster movie dreck.

While the movie is guilty of many crimes, the biggest one is Arnie and Mitch, two obnoxious rednecks who serve as our comic relief. They bumble around, fight to stock "banjo music",ogle women, and act like pathetic excuses of humanity. The characters are so bad, they should count as a crime against humanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[casting]], but the [[movie]] plays [[serious]] mindf** with the [[audience]]. (don't read if you ever intend to seriously watch this film or to ever watch this film seriously due to the spoilers) First of all, I felt myself [[rolling]] my eyes repeatedly at the Liberal stereotypes: the cops are all sadistic and frame this black guy with no evidence. The coroner, witnesses and even the lawyer of the accused collaborate against him (he is accused of the rape and murder of a young girl) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard law prof who gives impassioned speeches about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous death penalty. He is approached by the convicted man's grandmother to defend him and re-open the trial.

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the small town officials and the good IL' boys club but finds that the case against Blair, the alleged killer, now on death row, was all fabricated. The main evidence was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The beating was administered by a black cop (!) who even played Russian roulette to get the confession out of him. Connery finds out that another inmate on death row actually did the murder and after a few tete a tetes with a seriously overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris hid the murder weapon.

He gets a re-trial and Blair is freed.

I think... film over....

Then suddenly! It turns out that Blair IS a psychotic psycho and that he used "white guilt" to enlist Connery. He concocted the story with Ed Harris in return for Blair carrying out a few murders for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, thanks to Connery's deluded PC principles! The final 30 min. are a weird action movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. JUST CAUSE showcases Sean Connery as a Harvard law prof, Kate Capshaw (does she still get work?) as his wife (slight age difference) and Lawrence Fishburne as a racist southern cop (!) and Ed Harris in a totally over the top rendition of a fundamentalist southern serial killer.

Weird [[moulding]], but the [[cinema]] plays [[grievous]] mindf** with the [[viewers]]. (don't read if you ever intend to seriously watch this film or to ever watch this film seriously due to the spoilers) First of all, I felt myself [[roll]] my eyes repeatedly at the Liberal stereotypes: the cops are all sadistic and frame this black guy with no evidence. The coroner, witnesses and even the lawyer of the accused collaborate against him (he is accused of the rape and murder of a young girl) because he is black.

Connery is a Harvard law prof who gives impassioned speeches about the injustices against blacks and against the barbarous death penalty. He is approached by the convicted man's grandmother to defend him and re-open the trial.

Connery is stonewalled (yawn...) by the small town officials and the good IL' boys club but finds that the case against Blair, the alleged killer, now on death row, was all fabricated. The main evidence was his confession which was beaten out of him.

The beating was administered by a black cop (!) who even played Russian roulette to get the confession out of him. Connery finds out that another inmate on death row actually did the murder and after a few tete a tetes with a seriously overacting, Hannibal Lecter-like Ed Harris, he finds out where Harris hid the murder weapon.

He gets a re-trial and Blair is freed.

I think... film over....

Then suddenly! It turns out that Blair IS a psychotic psycho and that he used "white guilt" to enlist Connery. He concocted the story with Ed Harris in return for Blair carrying out a few murders for Harris.

now Blair is on the loose again, thanks to Connery's deluded PC principles! The final 30 min. are a weird action movie tacked onto a legal drama, Connery and Fishburne fighting the serial killer in an alligator skinning house on stilts (yes, you read that right) in the everglades.

That was one weird film.

So the whole system is corrupt and inefficient, the cops are all just bullies and Abu Graib type torturers, but the criminals are really psychotics and deserve to fry.

Truly depressing on every level! The system is completely rotten and the PC white guilt types who challenge it are seriously deluded too.

Two thumbs down. Connery obviously had to make a mortgage payment or something. --------------------------------------------- Result 2512 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This was actually my [[favorite]] [[series]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[thought]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the [[villains]] had a [[lot]] of [[creative]] [[thought]] put into them (and [[even]] very [[scary]] and [[believable]] as well). Some of the best episodes were "I Left My [[Neck]] [[In]] San [[Francisco]]", "Twenty [[Thousand]] [[Screams]] Under The [[Sea]]", "The [[Ghoul]], The Bat And The [[Ugly]]" and "When You [[Wish]] Upon A [[Star]] Creature". If you have never [[seen]] these episodes please do. This [[series]] was a bit of a [[mixed]] bag [[though]] as there were other [[episodes]] which didn't [[seem]] to have the same [[kind]] of edge to them such as "Rocky [[Mountain]] YIIII!" and "The [[Ransom]] Of Scooby [[Chief]]". As like the [[series]] before it, it was very well put [[together]], interesting storyline and [[brilliantly]] drawn. As [[everyone]] [[says]] [[though]], it [[would]] have been so much better without [[Scrappy]] Doo. The [[character]] was tiresome and [[distracting]] to the [[story]] that was being [[told]]. This was actually my [[favored]] [[serials]] of Scooby Doo when I was younger. I [[figured]] each episode had more of an edge to it and the [[thugs]] had a [[lots]] of [[imaginative]] [[ideas]] put into them (and [[yet]] very [[appalling]] and [[dependable]] as well). Some of the best episodes were "I Left My [[Collier]] [[At]] San [[Francis]]", "Twenty [[Thousands]] [[Screaming]] Under The [[Hai]]", "The [[Zombie]], The Bat And The [[Disgusting]]" and "When You [[Wanna]] Upon A [[Superstar]] Creature". If you have never [[watched]] these episodes please do. This [[serials]] was a bit of a [[blended]] bag [[if]] as there were other [[bouts]] which didn't [[looks]] to have the same [[sorting]] of edge to them such as "Rocky [[Mont]] YIIII!" and "The [[Hostage]] Of Scooby [[Head]]". As like the [[serials]] before it, it was very well put [[jointly]], interesting storyline and [[beautifully]] drawn. As [[someone]] [[alleges]] [[nevertheless]], it [[ought]] have been so much better without [[Combative]] Doo. The [[personage]] was tiresome and [[embarrassing]] to the [[narratives]] that was being [[said]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This horrendously bad [[piece]] of trash manages to be racist, sexist and homophobic all at once, while [[pretending]] to be terribly [[chic]] and [[sophisticated]]. [[Atrocious]] performances, a cliche ridden screenplay, and [[boring]] [[direction]] make this movie one to steer clear of. Two scenes were [[especially]] [[offensive]] - the one in which Schaech [[scrubs]] his tongue after being [[kissed]] by another man ([[could]] it [[really]] have been that gross), and the scene where Eastwood is [[kissed]] by Schaech's [[best]] [[friend]], who is [[pretending]] to be Russian. After he [[leaves]] the [[room]] she exclaims "f**king [[foreigners]]"! So [[much]] for her being a cultured [[artist]] who [[dreams]] of [[living]] in Paris!?!

[[Jonathon]] Schaech can be a likeable actor on screen, and is astonishingly good-looking. It's a shame he didn't [[learn]] more from working with cutting edge gay director Gregg Araki on an earlier film, and [[try]] to salvage this film from descending into a string of gay stereotypes and a mire of homophobia. This horrendously bad [[slice]] of trash manages to be racist, sexist and homophobic all at once, while [[faking]] to be terribly [[swank]] and [[complex]]. [[Outrageous]] performances, a cliche ridden screenplay, and [[tiresome]] [[orientation]] make this movie one to steer clear of. Two scenes were [[notably]] [[abusive]] - the one in which Schaech [[robes]] his tongue after being [[kiss]] by another man ([[did]] it [[genuinely]] have been that gross), and the scene where Eastwood is [[fucked]] by Schaech's [[finest]] [[friends]], who is [[pretend]] to be Russian. After he [[sheets]] the [[chambers]] she exclaims "f**king [[strangers]]"! So [[very]] for her being a cultured [[artists]] who [[nightmares]] of [[inhabit]] in Paris!?!

[[Johnathan]] Schaech can be a likeable actor on screen, and is astonishingly good-looking. It's a shame he didn't [[learns]] more from working with cutting edge gay director Gregg Araki on an earlier film, and [[seeks]] to salvage this film from descending into a string of gay stereotypes and a mire of homophobia. --------------------------------------------- Result 2514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] i just watched the movie i was [[afraid]] it's gonna disappoint me. i was rather [[surprised]] at the end though. The American pie franchise is still in my favorite franchise movies of all times. [[yes]], it won't be true if i say that i enjoyed it as mush as i enjoyed the original ones. beta house along with the previous two [[pies]] definitely lost [[something]] that the first two pies had.it is not gonna become a [[classic]] as the first two already did. but what the hell-it is still funny with a lot of good moments and i [[think]] it should be the [[first]] movie to [[pick]] if you [[wanna]] have [[fun]] and [[relax]] after a [[hard]] day at [[work]] or school. beta house [[deserves]] 6/10 but i gave it 7/10 just for being another [[slice]] of PIE. i just watched the movie i was [[fright]] it's gonna disappoint me. i was rather [[dumbfounded]] at the end though. The American pie franchise is still in my favorite franchise movies of all times. [[yeah]], it won't be true if i say that i enjoyed it as mush as i enjoyed the original ones. beta house along with the previous two [[cakes]] definitely lost [[anything]] that the first two pies had.it is not gonna become a [[typical]] as the first two already did. but what the hell-it is still funny with a lot of good moments and i [[thought]] it should be the [[outset]] movie to [[opt]] if you [[wantto]] have [[amusing]] and [[mellow]] after a [[laborious]] day at [[collaboration]] or school. beta house [[merits]] 6/10 but i gave it 7/10 just for being another [[cutting]] of PIE. --------------------------------------------- Result 2515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Don't read [[anything]] about this [[movie]] ([[especially]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[awesome]] movie without knowing anything about it - and you'll have a really great experience. If you like to see an intelligent, twisted story: Go, get the DVD and you'll truly not be [[disappointed]]. "[[Cypher]]" is not really a sci-fi movie, more a psycho thriller settled in the environment of globalized business. It's about corporate secrets, how big companies spy each others research departments and the methods used by them. The actors do a [[great]] performance and the overall visual style of the movie provides a perfect mode of coldness. Cypher is much deeper, more complex and - what belongs the story and the ending - also much, much more satisfying than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "Nothing". Actually it's one of the best movies I've ever seen (and that's something I really don't say this about every fifth well-made flick). Sorry, can't tell you anything more about this movie without risking to hurt your experience. Just give it a chance. ;-) Don't read [[something]] about this [[filmmaking]] ([[namely]] nothing that could contain any spoilers). Just watch this [[unbelievable]] movie without knowing anything about it - and you'll have a really great experience. If you like to see an intelligent, twisted story: Go, get the DVD and you'll truly not be [[disenchanted]]. "[[Encryption]]" is not really a sci-fi movie, more a psycho thriller settled in the environment of globalized business. It's about corporate secrets, how big companies spy each others research departments and the methods used by them. The actors do a [[large]] performance and the overall visual style of the movie provides a perfect mode of coldness. Cypher is much deeper, more complex and - what belongs the story and the ending - also much, much more satisfying than Vincenzo Natali's other movies "Cube" and "Nothing". Actually it's one of the best movies I've ever seen (and that's something I really don't say this about every fifth well-made flick). Sorry, can't tell you anything more about this movie without risking to hurt your experience. Just give it a chance. ;-) --------------------------------------------- Result 2516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I [[gave]] this [[film]] 8 out of 10, [[reserving]] 10 for e.[[g]] Amadeus, and 9 for Slumdog [[Millionaire]] most [[recently]]. This [[film]] is close to Slumdog, but it is difficult to judge on such [[film]] without understanding [[Balkan]] life, [[mentality]] and a soul which Kusturica [[presents]] [[masterfully]]. To [[understand]] it you [[really]] [[need]] to be one of [[Balkan]]. This is an [[amazing]] [[movie]], much better and more contemporary of his [[previous]] [[films]], which are [[boring]] at this [[time]], I [[think]] Kusturica is [[moving]] forward with this movie. I like [[humour]] ([[Balkan]] humour), [[photography]] is an art itself, each scene is [[artistic]] to the [[limit]]. Plot is [[probably]] a fairy [[tale]] , don't [[recall]] it now, but [[remember]] reading to my daughter-going-to [[sleep]] a [[similar]] [[story]]. I [[yielded]] this [[cinematography]] 8 out of 10, [[booking]] 10 for e.[[gram]] Amadeus, and 9 for Slumdog [[Billionaire]] most [[newly]]. This [[filmmaking]] is close to Slumdog, but it is difficult to judge on such [[flick]] without understanding [[Balkans]] life, [[psyche]] and a soul which Kusturica [[presented]] [[skilfully]]. To [[comprehend]] it you [[truthfully]] [[require]] to be one of [[Balkans]]. This is an [[unbelievable]] [[cinematographic]], much better and more contemporary of his [[anterior]] [[kino]], which are [[bored]] at this [[moment]], I [[thought]] Kusturica is [[transferring]] forward with this movie. I like [[comedy]] ([[Balkans]] humour), [[photographer]] is an art itself, each scene is [[arty]] to the [[restricting]]. Plot is [[presumably]] a fairy [[history]] , don't [[reminded]] it now, but [[remind]] reading to my daughter-going-to [[slumber]] a [[identical]] [[histories]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2517 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] [[Just]] as [[Tom]] Berenger put you into the [[soul]] of Sgt. Barnes, he has [[done]] it again with Thomas [[Beckett]]. If I [[thought]] his [[world]] was [[folding]] in on him in the first scenes, it was nothing compared to how much more I [[felt]] during the [[last]] scenes. [[Great]] [[movie]], [[even]] for a [[girl]]. [[Mere]] as [[Thom]] Berenger put you into the [[alma]] of Sgt. Barnes, he has [[performed]] it again with Thomas [[Becket]]. If I [[figured]] his [[worldwide]] was [[fold]] in on him in the first scenes, it was nothing compared to how much more I [[deemed]] during the [[final]] scenes. [[Marvellous]] [[cinematography]], [[yet]] for a [[female]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Well, here's another [[terrific]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly would have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…Sweet Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[beautiful]] and almost enchanting mixture of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is unquestionably what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a sublime depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a dull moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. Well, here's another [[sumptuous]] example of awkward 70's film-making! The rudimentary premise of "What's the matter with Helen?" is quite shocking and disturbing, but it's presented in such a stylish and sophisticated fashion! In the hands of any other movie crew, this certainly would have become a nasty and gritty exploitation tale, but with director Curtis Harrington ("Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?") and scriptwriter Henry Farrell ("Hush…Hush…Sweet Charlotte") in charge, it became a [[ravishing]] and almost enchanting mixture of themes and genres. The basic plot of the film is definitely horrific, but there's a lot more to experience, like love stories, a swinging 1930's atmosphere and a whole lot of singing and tap-dancing! The setting is unquestionably what makes this movie so unique. We're literally catapulted back to the 1930's, with a sublime depiction of that era's music, religion, theatrical business and wardrobes. Following the long and exhausting trial that sentenced their sons to life-imprisonment for murder, Adelle (Debbie Reynolds) and Helen (Shelley Winters) flee to California and attempt to start a new life running a dance school for young talented girls. Particularly Adelle adapts herself perfectly to the new environment, as she falls in love with a local millionaire, but poor old Helen continues to sink in a downwards spiral of insanity and paranoia. She only listens to the ramblings of a radio-evangelist, fears that she will be punished for the crimes her son committed and slowly develops violent tendencies. The script, although not entirely without flaws, is well written and the film is adequately paced. There's never a dull moment in "What's the matter with Helen", although the singing, tap-dancing and tango sequences are quite extended and much unrelated to the actual plot. But the atmosphere is continuously ominous and the film definitely benefices from the terrific acting performance of Shelley Winters. She's downright scary as the unpredictable and introvert lady who's about to snap any second and, especially during the last ten minutes or so, she looks more petrifying than all the Freddy Kruegers, Jason Voorhees' and Michael Myers' combined! There are several terrific supportive characters who are, sadly, a little underdeveloped and robbed from their potential, like Michéal MacLiammóir as the cocky elocution teacher, Agnes Moorehead as the creepy priestess and Timothy Carey as the obtrusive visitor to the ladies' house. There are a couple of surprisingly gruesome scenes and moments of genuine shock to enjoy for the Grand Guignol fanatics among us, but particularly the set pieces and costume designs (even nominated for an Oscar!) are breathtaking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2519 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[hate]] this movie! It was NOTHING like the book, and just thinking about it makes me mad. If you watch the movie before reading the [[book]], then yeah, it's a good [[movie]]. But King's book was AMAZING and this movie was [[nothing]] like it. I mean, the general meaning might be sort of similar but most aspects of the movie are completely different. The ending for [[example]]! So in the book it is extremely intense and Danny and Wendy escape seconds before the hotel explodes. but in this [[horrible]] [[movie]] version jack like takes them through a stupid maze... yeah, there is no maze in the book and there is no reason for it. Another part that made me angry was that jack just kills Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the hero of the book and they just kill him off like he wasn't important. Overall, it was just [[bad]] that the movie was so extremely off. I [[detest]] this movie! It was NOTHING like the book, and just thinking about it makes me mad. If you watch the movie before reading the [[ledger]], then yeah, it's a good [[cinematography]]. But King's book was AMAZING and this movie was [[anything]] like it. I mean, the general meaning might be sort of similar but most aspects of the movie are completely different. The ending for [[cases]]! So in the book it is extremely intense and Danny and Wendy escape seconds before the hotel explodes. but in this [[terrifying]] [[cinematography]] version jack like takes them through a stupid maze... yeah, there is no maze in the book and there is no reason for it. Another part that made me angry was that jack just kills Mr. Halloran! what the heck, he is basically the hero of the book and they just kill him off like he wasn't important. Overall, it was just [[negative]] that the movie was so extremely off. --------------------------------------------- Result 2520 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I am decidedly not in the [[target]] [[audience]] for this [[film]]. I am a man nearly 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the [[discovery]] of a movie called Clerks late one night on television. The [[first]] two [[things]] I [[noticed]] about that film were that it was 1) technically [[amateurish]] and 2) [[brilliantly]] [[written]]. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I started to get interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his life at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The themes and ideas of this film are strong and poignant. I can tell from watching it that not much has changed since I was growing up, young men still have the same problems they always have. The writer dresses up these problems and themes in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest characters, and has them do completely believable things. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a technical standpoint, but from an artistic one, it is very close. I am decidedly not in the [[intent]] [[viewers]] for this [[filmmaking]]. I am a man nearly 50 who has only recently stumbled across the world of independent film. This happened quite by accident, with the [[detecting]] of a movie called Clerks late one night on television. The [[frst]] two [[matters]] I [[saw]] about that film were that it was 1) technically [[unprofessional]] and 2) [[marvellously]] [[writes]]. When I read an interview with the director in the local paper and he said that one of his influences was Clerks, I started to get interesting. When he said his main influence was The Station Agent, a movie I'd seen on DVD a week prior, I decided I had to go and check it out. The result could be described along the same lines as Clerks, although the two films are nothing alike content wise. Both films suffer from technical gaffes that are overcome through amazing writing. Whereas Clerks is a day in the life of a man who has nothing in his life at all and is afraid to ask tough questions about himself and his situation, Less Like Me is about a man who seemingly forces himself to be constantly busy, he's always running one way or another, filling his life with little things so that he will never have to deal with the big ones. The themes and ideas of this film are strong and poignant. I can tell from watching it that not much has changed since I was growing up, young men still have the same problems they always have. The writer dresses up these problems and themes in the modern vernacular, crafts wonderfully honest characters, and has them do completely believable things. As far as indie cinema goes, this may not be perfect from a technical standpoint, but from an artistic one, it is very close. --------------------------------------------- Result 2521 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Two old buddies are sent to Japan to get back results of a genetic research containing videotape, which is stolen by the black suited ninjas at the beginning of the movie. First they just have to learn some ninja skill, because "only ninja can beat the ninja."

Sakura killers tries hard to be enjoyable ninja-flick but fails that badly. The whole movie is just so hollow and predictable that is hard to say anything good about it: Same plot has been seen in different variations dozens of times before, characters are too briefly drawn, direction is dull and script doesn't offer anything surprising, even in the ending scene, which by itself reduced movie's (trash)value.

Even 80's ninja-flick-fan, who understands the esthetic of trash-movies, is hard to find this movie even barely enjoyable. It simply doesn't offer anything new to viewer, neither in visual level nor in plot. Shurikens are thrown and katanas are swinging, but it's not enough to lead the movie direction it meant to be and recurred similar fighting scenes numbs even the most calloused viewer after the first 30 minutes.

It's hard to recommend movie to anyone. Even Franco Nero's clumsy performance in "Enter the Ninja" falls behind Sakura killer's American-ninjas. Even in visual level movie doesn't have any balls and it's waste of time to try to find any great fighting scenes in this movie: There isn't any. In all, one of the most futile ninja-flicks, I've ever seen. Doesn't interest even in curiosity. Trust me on this one.

½ out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2522 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Maximally manipulative Anabel Sims (Betsy Drake) sets out to [[trap]] her ideal [[man]], [[aided]] by her co-worker, [[Julie]]. [[Esteemed]] [[pediatrician]] Madison Brown (Cary Grant) goes from [[bemused]] to betrothed in the space of 90 minutes on [[film]], but to the [[viewer]] it's all [[eternity]]. Can a [[movie]] receive [[less]] than one [[star]]? This one is a prime [[candidate]]. Maximally manipulative Anabel Sims (Betsy Drake) sets out to [[traps]] her ideal [[men]], [[helped]] by her co-worker, [[Jolly]]. [[Revered]] [[paediatrician]] Madison Brown (Cary Grant) goes from [[muddled]] to betrothed in the space of 90 minutes on [[films]], but to the [[beholder]] it's all [[virginity]]. Can a [[film]] receive [[lesser]] than one [[superstar]]? This one is a prime [[nominee]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2523 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] In the [[history]] of movies [[based]] on comic books, "[[Mystery]] [[Men]]" is one of the most [[underrated]] ones. This is no regular comic superhero movie! It follows the exploits of a motley crew of well-meaning wannabes, which include Mr. Furious (played by Ben Stiller), the Bowler (Janeane Garofalo), the Shoveller (William H. Macy), the Blue Rajah (Hank Azariah) and the Spleen (Paul Reubens). "Mystery Men" spoofs several aspects of superhero movies like "Superman" or "Batman," such as the pithy sayings, and the questions about secret identities. Most of the superheroes aren't billionaires like Bruce Wayne, but blue-collar types with menial jobs and neurotic home lives. So it looks as if director Kinka Usher is making the heroes into something the average viewer can relate to. I found "Mystery Men" to be visually stimulating and very funny. Even if it doesn't turn into a franchise, it's still a joy to watch! In the [[tale]] of movies [[predicated]] on comic books, "[[Conundrum]] [[Mens]]" is one of the most [[underestimated]] ones. This is no regular comic superhero movie! It follows the exploits of a motley crew of well-meaning wannabes, which include Mr. Furious (played by Ben Stiller), the Bowler (Janeane Garofalo), the Shoveller (William H. Macy), the Blue Rajah (Hank Azariah) and the Spleen (Paul Reubens). "Mystery Men" spoofs several aspects of superhero movies like "Superman" or "Batman," such as the pithy sayings, and the questions about secret identities. Most of the superheroes aren't billionaires like Bruce Wayne, but blue-collar types with menial jobs and neurotic home lives. So it looks as if director Kinka Usher is making the heroes into something the average viewer can relate to. I found "Mystery Men" to be visually stimulating and very funny. Even if it doesn't turn into a franchise, it's still a joy to watch! --------------------------------------------- Result 2524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I caught this film late on a sat night/ Sunday morning with my brother. We had been drinking. This is one of the [[best]] [[films]] for ripping apart I have ever seen. From the 'luxury' ocean liner actually being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with adhesive stickers saying staff, then seeing the same door being used for something else in another scene - this film [[rocks]]!! The continuity is so poor you cant help but notice it, it slaps you in the face with the holes. In the final scene he jumps off a life boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his son and new girlfriend (The ships PR director who knows kung-fu and used to be in the police but was dismissed for doing things her way - true)on the ferry going very fast away from the explosion. ......Then the dad is there hugging them. HoW???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The casino is the size of a large bedroom with one casino table. when being chased by the villains there is only One place to hide, you've guessed it. Enter the villains who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four fruit machines and a little corner bar (a corner bar in the casino - fantastic). They walk straight past the only hiding place thus allowing our Casper to get around them and 'take them out'.

Get some mates over, get a few drinks in, put this film on and howl. I caught this film late on a sat night/ Sunday morning with my brother. We had been drinking. This is one of the [[optimum]] [[kino]] for ripping apart I have ever seen. From the 'luxury' ocean liner actually being a 'roll on, roll off' ferry, complete with cast iron everything to the doors with adhesive stickers saying staff, then seeing the same door being used for something else in another scene - this film [[shakes]]!! The continuity is so poor you cant help but notice it, it slaps you in the face with the holes. In the final scene he jumps off a life boat with the ferry in the distance. Cut to his son and new girlfriend (The ships PR director who knows kung-fu and used to be in the police but was dismissed for doing things her way - true)on the ferry going very fast away from the explosion. ......Then the dad is there hugging them. HoW???? Who cares, its magic. There is not one redeeming feature to this film. The casino is the size of a large bedroom with one casino table. when being chased by the villains there is only One place to hide, you've guessed it. Enter the villains who, instead of checking under the One table, proceed to shoot up four fruit machines and a little corner bar (a corner bar in the casino - fantastic). They walk straight past the only hiding place thus allowing our Casper to get around them and 'take them out'.

Get some mates over, get a few drinks in, put this film on and howl. --------------------------------------------- Result 2525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Refreshing `lost' gem! Featuring effective dialog combined with excellent acting to establish the characters and involve you enough to care what happens to them. The Douglas and Widmark characters are realistic heroes. Palance is his usual evil presence. Widmark win the fisticuffs fight scene, a car chase of less than 60 seconds with a `logical' end, and a lengthy chase on foot that shames the overdone chase sequences of contemporary Hollywood. You know how it will likely end, but the suspense and interest are sustained throughout. The end of the chase is one of the most realistic you will ever see. The film seems to slow a little past the middle, but stay with it for the rewarding conclusion. --------------------------------------------- Result 2526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I hope whoever coached these losers on their accents was [[fired]]. The only high [[points]] are a few of the [[supporting]] [[characters]], 3 of 5 of my favourites were [[killed]] off by the end of the season (and one of them was a [[cat]], to put that into perspective).

The [[whole]] storyline is [[centered]] [[around]] [[sex]], and [[nothing]] [[else]]. [[Sex]] with [[vampires]], gay sex with gay vampires, gay sex with straight vampires, sex to score vampire blood, sex after drinking vampire blood, sex in front of [[vampires]], vampire sex, non-vampire sex, sex because we're scared of vampires, sex because we're mad at vampires, sex because we just became a vampire, etc.

Nothing against sex, it would just be nice if it were a little more subtle with being peppered into the storyline. Perhaps HAVE a storyline and then shoehorn some sex into it. But they didn't even bother to do that... and Anna Paquin is a dizzy gap-tooth bitch. Either she sucks or her character sucks, I can't figure out which.

Another part of the storyline that I find highly [[implausible]] is why 150 year old vampire Bill who seems to have his things together would be interested in someone like Sookie. She's constantly flying off the handle at him for things he can't control. He leaves for two days and she already decides that he's "not coming back" and suddenly has feelings for dog-man? Give me a break. She's supposed to be a 25 year old woman, not a 14 year old girl. People close to her are dying all over, and she's got the brightest smile on her face because she just gave away her V-card to some dude because she can't read his mind? As the main character of the story, I would've hoped the show would do a little more to make her understandable and someone to invest your interest in, not someone you keep secretly hoping gets killed off or put into a coma. I can't find anything about her character that I like and even the fact that she can read minds is impressively uninspiring and not the [[least]] bit interesting.

I will not be wasting my time with watching Season 2 come June. I hope whoever coached these losers on their accents was [[sacked]]. The only high [[dot]] are a few of the [[helping]] [[character]], 3 of 5 of my favourites were [[killing]] off by the end of the season (and one of them was a [[gato]], to put that into perspective).

The [[ensemble]] storyline is [[focus]] [[throughout]] [[sexuality]], and [[anything]] [[otherwise]]. [[Sexuality]] with [[bloodsucker]], gay sex with gay vampires, gay sex with straight vampires, sex to score vampire blood, sex after drinking vampire blood, sex in front of [[vampire]], vampire sex, non-vampire sex, sex because we're scared of vampires, sex because we're mad at vampires, sex because we just became a vampire, etc.

Nothing against sex, it would just be nice if it were a little more subtle with being peppered into the storyline. Perhaps HAVE a storyline and then shoehorn some sex into it. But they didn't even bother to do that... and Anna Paquin is a dizzy gap-tooth bitch. Either she sucks or her character sucks, I can't figure out which.

Another part of the storyline that I find highly [[unlikely]] is why 150 year old vampire Bill who seems to have his things together would be interested in someone like Sookie. She's constantly flying off the handle at him for things he can't control. He leaves for two days and she already decides that he's "not coming back" and suddenly has feelings for dog-man? Give me a break. She's supposed to be a 25 year old woman, not a 14 year old girl. People close to her are dying all over, and she's got the brightest smile on her face because she just gave away her V-card to some dude because she can't read his mind? As the main character of the story, I would've hoped the show would do a little more to make her understandable and someone to invest your interest in, not someone you keep secretly hoping gets killed off or put into a coma. I can't find anything about her character that I like and even the fact that she can read minds is impressively uninspiring and not the [[fewer]] bit interesting.

I will not be wasting my time with watching Season 2 come June. --------------------------------------------- Result 2527 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] A [[CRY]] IN THE DARK

A CRY IN THE DARK was a film that I anticipated would offer a [[phenomenal]] performance from Meryl Streep and a solid, if unremarkable film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the movie received little attention from major [[awards]] groups.

Little did I anticipate that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[riveting]] drama, well-constructed on every level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[classic]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the attentive bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to laughable. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly captured. It is subtle and realistic, leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in courtrooms and focuses on the Chamberlain's continuous fight to prove their innocence to the press and the court, which suspects Lindy of murder.

The fact that it is clear to us from the beginning that they are innocent makes the tense trials all the more gripping. As an audience member, I was fully invested in the Chamberlain's plight... and was genuinely angered and hurt and saddened when they were made to look so terrible by the media. But at the same, the media/public opinion is understandable. I loved the way the media was by no means made to be sympathetic, but they always had valid reasons to hold their views.

The final line of the film is very profound and captures perfectly the central element that makes this film so much different from other courtroom dramas.

In terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... A [[CRYING]] IN THE DARK

A CRY IN THE DARK was a film that I anticipated would offer a [[unbelievable]] performance from Meryl Streep and a solid, if unremarkable film. This assumption came from the fact that aside from Streep's Best Actress nomination, the movie received little attention from major [[scholarship]] groups.

Little did I anticipate that A CRY IN THE DARK would be such a [[exciting]] drama, well-constructed on every level. If you ask me, this is an under-appreciatted [[typical]].

The film opens rather slowly, letting the audience settle into the Chamberlain's at a relaxed pace and really notice that, at the core, they are an incredibly loving, simple family. Fred Schepisi (the director) selects random moments to capture of a family on vacation that give a looming sense of the oncoming tragedy, while also showing the attentive bliss with which Lindy (Streep) and Michael (Sam Neill) Chamberlain care for their children.

While the famous line "A Dingo Took My Baby!" has become somewhat of a punchline these days, the movie never even comes close to laughable. The actual death of Azaria is horrifyingly captured. It is subtle and realistic, leaving the audience horrified and asking questions.

The majority of the film takes place in courtrooms and focuses on the Chamberlain's continuous fight to prove their innocence to the press and the court, which suspects Lindy of murder.

The fact that it is clear to us from the beginning that they are innocent makes the tense trials all the more gripping. As an audience member, I was fully invested in the Chamberlain's plight... and was genuinely angered and hurt and saddened when they were made to look so terrible by the media. But at the same, the media/public opinion is understandable. I loved the way the media was by no means made to be sympathetic, but they always had valid reasons to hold their views.

The final line of the film is very profound and captures perfectly the central element that makes this film so much different from other courtroom dramas.

In terms of performances, the only ones that really matter in this film are those of Streep and Neill... and they deliver in every way. For me, this ranks as one of (if not #1) Meryl Streep's best performances. For all her mastery of different accents (which of course are very impressive in their own right), Streep never loses the central heart and soul of her characters. I find this to be one of Streep's more subtle performances, and she hits it out of the park. And Neill, an actor who has never impressed me beyond being charismatic and appealing in JURASSIC PARK, is a perfect counterpoint to Streep's performance. From what I've seen, this is undoubtedly Neill's finest work to date. It's a shame he wasn't recognized by the Academy with a Leading Actor nomination to match Streep's... b/c the two of them play of each other brilliantly.

More emotionally gripping than most films, and also incredibly suspenseful... A CRY IN THE DARK far exceeded my expectations. I highly recommend that people who only know of the movie as the flick where Meryl screams "The dingo took my baby!" watch the film and see just how much more there is to A CRY IN THE DARK then that one line.

... A ... --------------------------------------------- Result 2528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I can remember [[seeing]] this movie as a [[kid]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO would show it late at night back when they were they one and only movie pay channel in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only [[movie]] of its [[kind]] ever [[shown]] on [[pay]] television...[[especially]] back then. I would [[love]] to [[see]] it now as an adult where I would be more [[apt]] to [[understand]] the adult theme of it. It was [[probably]] the [[closest]] [[thing]] I had ever seen to pornography at the [[young]] [[age]] of 7 or 8. Luckily I had stupid babysitters and party-going [[parents]] on the [[weekends]]. [[Most]] of my [[memory]] of this [[movie]] was the completely erratic sexual [[behavior]] of these two [[guys]]. [[Breaking]] into [[houses]] to [[sniff]] [[underwear]], feeding on a stranger's breast [[milk]] on a public [[bus]], and fornicating in a [[cab]] at the request of one of their female subjects were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[idea]] this movie had such a following. Most people I talk to have never heard of it. I can remember [[see]] this movie as a [[children]] in 1977 or 1978. HBO would show it late at night back when they were they one and only movie pay channel in existence. Back then it was UNRATED and was the only [[flick]] of its [[genera]] ever [[displayed]] on [[wage]] television...[[specifically]] back then. I would [[iike]] to [[seeing]] it now as an adult where I would be more [[likely]] to [[fathom]] the adult theme of it. It was [[unquestionably]] the [[nearest]] [[stuff]] I had ever seen to pornography at the [[youths]] [[aged]] of 7 or 8. Luckily I had stupid babysitters and party-going [[parenting]] on the [[weekend]]. [[More]] of my [[mem]] of this [[cinematographic]] was the completely erratic sexual [[demeanor]] of these two [[guy]]. [[Breaching]] into [[accommodations]] to [[snort]] [[lingerie]], feeding on a stranger's breast [[dairy]] on a public [[buses]], and fornicating in a [[taxis]] at the request of one of their female subjects were just a few of the whacked escapades these guys were pulling off. A very racy film for the early '70s. Until I checked IMDb, I had no [[ideals]] this movie had such a following. Most people I talk to have never heard of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2529 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Some [[time]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American West, several cowboys in need of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that buffaloes are too numerous for the hunting to have any [[impact]], but the more experienced hunter has seen how quickly the population can collapse, and he isn't so [[sure]]. Featuring buffalo herds living in South Dakota and [[showing]] [[film]] of actual [[hunting]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary thinning of the herd), the movie does an [[excellent]] [[job]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting figure. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie suffers by comparison. The plot is not as focused on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[keep]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. Some [[period]] in the late 19th century, somewhere in the American West, several cowboys in need of money go on a buffalo hunt. The group's leader believes that buffaloes are too numerous for the hunting to have any [[effects]], but the more experienced hunter has seen how quickly the population can collapse, and he isn't so [[persuaded]]. Featuring buffalo herds living in South Dakota and [[displaying]] [[filmmaking]] of actual [[chasing]] (the movie's introduction explains it as necessary thinning of the herd), the movie does an [[resplendent]] [[labor]] of presenting us with the plight of the buffalo and its effect on Native Americans without ever getting preachy about it.

The real story, however, is about the dysfunctional family which is created by the small group formed to do the hunting. The father figure is Charlie, a violent man with a short fuse. Sandy, his "brother", is the experienced hunter who is tired of killing but needs the job after losing his cattle. A half-Indian boy, who hates the fact that he looks entirely Caucasian, takes the role of adopted son. The grandfather (and moral compass) is an alcoholic buffalo skinner; Charlie's "wife" is an Indian woman whose companions he killed after they stole his horses.

Charlie is clearly the most interesting figure. He is mean and insulting towards everyone around him, yet at the same time he knows that they are the only family and friends that he has. He expects the abducted Indian women to hate him, then accept him, but he doesn't know how to react when she refuses to do either. He's the one who put the family together in the first place, but he's also the one who is fated to ultimately destroy it.

This is all very similar to the classic "Red River", which also features a family of sorts being torn apart by the increasingly violent and alienated father figure. As one might expect, this movie suffers by comparison. The plot is not as focused on developing the characters and family dynamics, and the direction fails to [[maintaining]] all of the scenes working towards this common goal. Charlie is so thoroughly unlikable from the very beginning that we never have any reason to care about what happens to him or his family. On the positive side, however, the message surrounding the buffalo slaughter adds an extra dimension to the film and its conclusion is far superior to the Hollywood ending which was tacked on to the end of "Red River". As a result, "The Last Hunt" is an interesting and entertaining film, very well made, but falling short of what would be needed to consider it a classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 2530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Good movies are original, some leave a message or touch you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just plain action when I watched this one. It [[started]] of good and was quite entertaining, so why a bad review. Well in the end the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was [[OK]], so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[ruined]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... Good movies are original, some leave a message or touch you in a certain way, but sometimes you're not in the mood for that.

I wanted something simple, no thinking just plain action when I watched this one. It [[commencing]] of good and was quite entertaining, so why a bad review. Well in the end the movie lost it's credibility. The storyline wasn't that cheesy at all, the action was not too special but overall good, acting was [[ALLRIGHT]], so more than enough to satisfy my needs. But all got [[devastated]] because things happened that were over the top, and it left me with a bad feeling. They should have put a little more effort in making everything credible and would have gotten a 7 in the "no thinking just plain action" category. So in conclusion if you know you'll get irritated because things are happening that seem completely illogical: don't watch! otherwise I'd say go ahead... --------------------------------------------- Result 2531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[film]] [[reminded]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a [[good]] [[way]].

David Chase's seminal mob opera only ever put its foot wrong twice, the most jarring and [[inexplicable]] instance of which took place in its fourth season, when Junior Soprano went on trial for his life. Rather than [[pursue]] this riveting (and pivotal) [[plot]] line, the [[writers]] instead [[chose]] to [[completely]] [[ignore]] it, focusing [[instead]] on [[Bobby]] Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his recently deceased wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of genuine interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, mysterious assassination attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the whole East Coast/West Coast feud in the first place, and ended up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the film treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why exactly was Tupac so convinced that he was sold out by his own people? Did he alone nurture his subsequent affiliation with Suge Knight? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it appears here?

None of these questions are even fleetingly addressed by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in depicting Wallace's turbulent love life to zero compelling dramatic avail. These sequences (including a brain-frazzlingly clichéd groupie indescretion in a hotel room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only real comparison to be made is with a network TV movie.

The storytelling, in both structure and content, is simplistic and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as something designed to celebrate its subject and educate the uninitiated on the intricacies of their life and work; the film is almost entirely worthless. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre plotting, coupled with the [[lifeless]] musical performances (an area in which a film like this should soar, surely) result in a film that appears to have been designed only to satisfy the whims and demands of those involved, leaving Wallace's questionable status as a giant in his field as the preserve of the easily persuaded and previously converted only.

And the final twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. This [[kino]] [[remembered]] me of The Sopranos, and not in a [[buena]] [[paths]].

David Chase's seminal mob opera only ever put its foot wrong twice, the most jarring and [[perplexing]] instance of which took place in its fourth season, when Junior Soprano went on trial for his life. Rather than [[pursuit]] this riveting (and pivotal) [[intrigue]] line, the [[authors]] instead [[opt]] to [[entirely]] [[neglecting]] it, focusing [[however]] on [[Bubi]] Baccalieri's constant whimpering over his recently deceased wife's frozen pasta dish.

When something of genuine interest happens in Notorious - for example that first, mysterious assassination attempt on Tupac Shakur that ignited the whole East Coast/West Coast feud in the first place, and ended up leading to the deaths of both Tupac and Christopher Wallace - the film treats it as just another bit of plot to plod through. Why exactly was Tupac so convinced that he was sold out by his own people? Did he alone nurture his subsequent affiliation with Suge Knight? And was Lil' Kim's transformation from prim office drone into sex-obsessed, vampish diva really as banal as it appears here?

None of these questions are even fleetingly addressed by the film's screenwriters, who are far more interested in depicting Wallace's turbulent love life to zero compelling dramatic avail. These sequences (including a brain-frazzlingly clichéd groupie indescretion in a hotel room) are so toothless and bruisingly manipulative that the only real comparison to be made is with a network TV movie.

The storytelling, in both structure and content, is simplistic and trite. But more fundamentally, as a biopic; as something designed to celebrate its subject and educate the uninitiated on the intricacies of their life and work; the film is almost entirely worthless. The reliance on meat-and-potatoes genre plotting, coupled with the [[lackluster]] musical performances (an area in which a film like this should soar, surely) result in a film that appears to have been designed only to satisfy the whims and demands of those involved, leaving Wallace's questionable status as a giant in his field as the preserve of the easily persuaded and previously converted only.

And the final twenty minutes, in which Wallace's posthumous cultural identity is broadly painted as being akin to that of a latter day saint, quite frankly made me feel like throwing up.

On that score, much as with any other, Notorious is crass, calculating and compromised. --------------------------------------------- Result 2532 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] If I [[write]] a [[review]] about a [[movie]], [[maybe]] it will [[stick]] with me... but [[generally]] I [[expect]] that I will have forgotten I've [[seen]] this one a [[mere]] two weeks from now. [[So]] why [[bother]]? [[Because]] again I [[find]] myself [[watching]] a low-rated [[movie]] that was fun to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the [[room]] while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at least it was not [[unbearable]]... not a comedy of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet [[fluff]]... and if you can't take it, stay in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its targeted demographic, and won't be a total bore to an adult.

It offers a few good chuckles here and there, but nary a side [[splitter]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly entertaining, but at least it doesn't [[suck]] (as so many have said it does). Maybe those folks are afraid of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to grade on the bell curve, so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[okay]] all-around rating in my book. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[rating]] at the [[time]] of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[done]] thus far, makes the [[rating]] numbers [[meaningless]]. I cannot believe how strongly people feel one [[way]] or the other about this forgettable [[fluff]] (or that I am [[even]] [[bothering]] to write about it). Am I missing something?

[[Anyway]], it should be noted that Emma [[Roberts]] [[performs]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel [[often]] written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You [[might]] [[also]] [[recognize]] [[Bruce]] Spence [[playing]] [[Leonard]], [[though]] his role is [[ancillary]].

[[Surely]] you can miss this one if you are an [[adult]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[girl]] in your [[life]], [[rent]] this [[movie]] for her... and be [[prepared]] [[NOT]] to [[hate]] it (you [[might]] [[even]] [[enjoy]] it). If I [[writing]] a [[examinations]] about a [[film]], [[possibly]] it will [[twig]] with me... but [[traditionally]] I [[waits]] that I will have forgotten I've [[saw]] this one a [[simple]] two weeks from now. [[Consequently]] why [[disturb]]? [[Since]] again I [[unearthed]] myself [[staring]] a low-rated [[films]] that was fun to watch. I didn't expect I'd to be able to stay in the [[sala]] while it was on.

It wasn't great, but at least it was not [[unsustainable]]... not a comedy of errors which always makes me cringe. It was just sweet [[grope]]... and if you can't take it, stay in the locker room boys. I agree with those who defend this movie because it is sure to please its targeted demographic, and won't be a total bore to an adult.

It offers a few good chuckles here and there, but nary a side [[slicer]]. Sure it is silly and only mildly entertaining, but at least it doesn't [[sucking]] (as so many have said it does). Maybe those folks are afraid of their sensitive sides?

I have a tendency to grade on the bell curve, so a 4,5 or 6 is actually an [[alright]] all-around rating in my book. Giving it a 4 makes sense and will bolster its [[assessments]] at the [[period]] of this writing. Giving it a 1 or a 10, as most have [[played]] thus far, makes the [[evaluations]] numbers [[vain]]. I cannot believe how strongly people feel one [[paths]] or the other about this forgettable [[grope]] (or that I am [[yet]] [[teasing]] to write about it). Am I missing something?

[[Anyhoo]], it should be noted that Emma [[Stevens]] [[conducts]] her role as Clairedycat quite convincingly. Ariell Kebbel [[generally]] written into b*ch roles does not disappoint when her character gets her due. You [[apt]] [[further]] [[acknowledges]] [[Bros]] Spence [[play]] [[Leonardo]], [[nonetheless]] his role is [[complementary]].

[[Undoubtedly]] you can miss this one if you are an [[adulthood]]. But, if there is a pre-teen [[daughters]] in your [[lives]], [[tenancy]] this [[kino]] for her... and be [[poised]] [[NOPE]] to [[hatred]] it (you [[probability]] [[yet]] [[enjoys]] it). --------------------------------------------- Result 2533 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Vampires]], sexy [[guys]], guns and some blood. Who could ask for more? Moon Child delivers it all in one [[nicely]] packaged flick! Gackt is the innocent Sho - who befriends a Vampire Kei (HYDE), their relationship grows with time but as Sho ages, Kei's immortality breaks his [[heart]]. It doesn't help that they both fall in love with the same woman. The special effects are pretty good considering the small budget. It's a [[touching]] [[story]] ripe with human emotions. You will laugh, [[cry]], [[laugh]], then cry some more. [[Even]] if you are not a fan of their music, SEE THIS [[FILM]]. It [[works]] [[great]] as a stand [[alone]] Vampire [[movie]].

9 out of 10 [[Vamps]], sexy [[guy]], guns and some blood. Who could ask for more? Moon Child delivers it all in one [[courteously]] packaged flick! Gackt is the innocent Sho - who befriends a Vampire Kei (HYDE), their relationship grows with time but as Sho ages, Kei's immortality breaks his [[nub]]. It doesn't help that they both fall in love with the same woman. The special effects are pretty good considering the small budget. It's a [[touch]] [[fairytales]] ripe with human emotions. You will laugh, [[clamour]], [[giggling]], then cry some more. [[Yet]] if you are not a fan of their music, SEE THIS [[MOVIE]]. It [[cooperating]] [[large]] as a stand [[exclusively]] Vampire [[cinematography]].

9 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2534 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] "Footlight [[Parade]]" is just one of several [[wonderfully]] jaunty musicals that Warner Bros. [[produced]] in the early 1930's to ward off the Depression. "42nd [[Street]]" and the Golddiggers [[series]] were also [[produced]] during this era, and they [[made]] literally, millions of [[Americans]] [[forget]] their [[troubles]] for a little while, and [[enjoy]] themselves.

While most of the [[films]] [[produced]] had the great [[talents]] of Joan Blondell, [[Ruby]] Keeler, and [[Dick]] Powell, only Foolight [[Parade]] had the incomparable James Cagney. [[Almost]] ten [[years]] [[prior]] to his most well-known musical, "Yankee Doodle Dandy". Here he dances in that most [[original]] of dance [[styles]], with his arms usually lowered at his side, and his legs doing all types of undulations and kicks. It's easy to see that he is enjoying himself, and that makes us [[enjoy]] him all the more.

[[While]] [[almost]] all of the musical [[sequences]] [[appear]] at the [[end]] of the [[film]], they are well worth the wait. I believe that this [[film]] was [[made]] just [[prior]] to the [[installation]] of the production [[code]], so some of the [[costumes]] and scenes are a bit risqué. But it's all in [[fun]].

It doesn't matter what the plot of the [[film]] is, just know that there are plenty of laughs and a superlative cast. Besides those already mentioned, [[Guy]] Kibbee is at his flustered best here.

7 out of 10 "Footlight [[Motorcade]]" is just one of several [[amazingly]] jaunty musicals that Warner Bros. [[generated]] in the early 1930's to ward off the Depression. "42nd [[Rue]]" and the Golddiggers [[serials]] were also [[generated]] during this era, and they [[introduced]] literally, millions of [[American]] [[overlook]] their [[difficulty]] for a little while, and [[enjoying]] themselves.

While most of the [[filmmaking]] [[generated]] had the great [[talent]] of Joan Blondell, [[Roby]] Keeler, and [[Penis]] Powell, only Foolight [[Parades]] had the incomparable James Cagney. [[Nigh]] ten [[olds]] [[formerly]] to his most well-known musical, "Yankee Doodle Dandy". Here he dances in that most [[preliminary]] of dance [[style]], with his arms usually lowered at his side, and his legs doing all types of undulations and kicks. It's easy to see that he is enjoying himself, and that makes us [[enjoys]] him all the more.

[[Despite]] [[practically]] all of the musical [[sequence]] [[emerge]] at the [[terminating]] of the [[cinema]], they are well worth the wait. I believe that this [[cinema]] was [[brought]] just [[formerly]] to the [[plant]] of the production [[cipher]], so some of the [[clothes]] and scenes are a bit risqué. But it's all in [[droll]].

It doesn't matter what the plot of the [[filmmaking]] is, just know that there are plenty of laughs and a superlative cast. Besides those already mentioned, [[Pal]] Kibbee is at his flustered best here.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a forgotten 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[idiot]]. Wargames: The Dead Code joins the long running [[list]] of [[unnecessary]] sequels that the DVD market has filled so [[easily]]. Movies [[like]] this don't need spoilers, because [[YOU]] already know them.

The "plot" for this "[[film]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; nerd likes girl; nerd gets accidentally involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other country; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at key point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret Government computer gets crazy; nerd is hired to beat Top Secret Government Computer; nerd beats Top Secret Computer by using the same old Top Secret Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and cinematography are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should avoid this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like [[cheap]] looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, Mathew Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't [[even]] do a five second cameo in this one. But can you blame him? Let's face it-- if you rented a STDVD sequel of a forgotten 80's gem, and expected it to be better than the aforementioned, then you are an [[dopey]]. Wargames: The Dead Code joins the long running [[lists]] of [[dispensable]] sequels that the DVD market has filled so [[comfortably]]. Movies [[iike]] this don't need spoilers, because [[TOI]] already know them.

The "plot" for this "[[movies]]", is as follows: Nerd meets girl; girl likes nerd; nerd likes girl; nerd gets accidentally involved with Top Secret Government computer; nerd and girl go to another country; nerd and girl end up being persecuted by Government suits in the other country; nerd and girl meet some important old guy that dies at key point in the "film"; nerd and girl are captured; the Top Secret Government computer gets crazy; nerd is hired to beat Top Secret Government Computer; nerd beats Top Secret Computer by using the same old Top Secret Computer from the first Wargames "film"; nerd saves the day; nerd gets laid.

The end.

The acting, script, effects, score, and cinematography are what you would expect-- B-grade. Some familiar faces are in here, and unless you are a mega fan of Colm Feore, then you should avoid this one. Granted, the movie won't make you insane enough to eat your own toes by seeing it, so if you like [[cheaper]] looking STDVD sequels, then you are right at home.

Sadly, Mathew Broderick was too involved with some "masterpiece", that he couldn't [[yet]] do a five second cameo in this one. But can you blame him? --------------------------------------------- Result 2536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have [[seen]] some [[bad]] [[movies]] ([[Austin]] Powers - The Spy [[Who]] Shagged Me, Batman Forever), but this [[film]] is so [[awful]], so BORING, that I [[got]] about half [[way]] through and could not [[bear]] [[watching]] the [[rest]]. A pity. Boasting [[talent]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a story by [[John]] Grisham, what went [[wrong]]? Branagh is a big-time lawyer who has a one-night [[fling]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[psychopath]] who hanged her [[cat]], etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[sent]] to a [[nuthouse]], and he [[promptly]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't [[figure]] out how) [[Robert]] Downey jr, [[Daryl]] [[Hannah]], Famke Janssen and [[Tom]] Berenger are all mixed into the story which [[moves]] [[slower]] than stationary. I [[wanted]] to [[like]] this, and, being a [[huge]] Grisham [[fan]], have read all about this movie and I ([[foolishly]]) [[expected]] something interesting. This is honestly the [[WORST]] [[film]] I've seen to date and I [[wish]] I could have my money refunded. * out of *****. I have [[watched]] some [[negative]] [[movie]] ([[Aston]] Powers - The Spy [[Whom]] Shagged Me, Batman Forever), but this [[kino]] is so [[gruesome]], so BORING, that I [[gets]] about half [[routes]] through and could not [[xiong]] [[staring]] the [[stays]]. A pity. Boasting [[talents]] such as Kenneth Branagh, Embeth Davitz and Robert Duvall and a story by [[Giovanni]] Grisham, what went [[amiss]]? Branagh is a big-time lawyer who has a one-night [[adventure]] with Davitz. Her father (Duvall) is a [[loony]] who hanged her [[gato]], etc, etc, so Branagh has him [[dispatch]] to a [[madhouse]], and he [[expeditiously]] escapes. Somehow (I couldn't [[silhouette]] out how) [[Roberta]] Downey jr, [[Darryl]] [[Hanna]], Famke Janssen and [[Thom]] Berenger are all mixed into the story which [[shift]] [[slow]] than stationary. I [[wished]] to [[fond]] this, and, being a [[overwhelming]] Grisham [[admirer]], have read all about this movie and I ([[unwisely]]) [[anticipated]] something interesting. This is honestly the [[GRAVEST]] [[kino]] I've seen to date and I [[wishing]] I could have my money refunded. * out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I must say, I was [[surprised]] with the quality of the movie. It was far better than I [[expected]]. Scenario and acting is quite good. The director [[made]] a good job as well. Although some scenes look a [[bit]] clumsy, it is a decent [[movie]] [[overall]]. The [[idea]] was [[definitely]] [[brilliant]] and the truth did not [[reveal]] itself till the very [[end]]. The [[mental]] hospital atmosphere was [[given]] quite good. The plot was clear, consistent and well thought. Some people [[may]] find it a bit [[boring]] [[though]] since the story line is very focused and they take their time for character and story development. Moral of the story, it is a decent [[movie]] for its [[genre]] and it is [[astonishingly]] [[good]]. I must say, I was [[horrified]] with the quality of the movie. It was far better than I [[waited]]. Scenario and acting is quite good. The director [[brought]] a good job as well. Although some scenes look a [[bite]] clumsy, it is a decent [[cinematography]] [[totals]]. The [[thinks]] was [[decidedly]] [[lustrous]] and the truth did not [[expose]] itself till the very [[terminate]]. The [[psychological]] hospital atmosphere was [[afforded]] quite good. The plot was clear, consistent and well thought. Some people [[maggio]] find it a bit [[tiresome]] [[if]] since the story line is very focused and they take their time for character and story development. Moral of the story, it is a decent [[filmmaking]] for its [[type]] and it is [[unimaginably]] [[alright]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2538 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the very best Three Stooges shorts ever. A spooky house full of evil guys and "The Goon" challenge the Alert Detective Agency's best men. Shemp is in top form in the famous in-the-dark scene. Emil Sitka provides excellent support in his Mr. Goodrich role, as the target of a murder plot. Before it's over, Shemp's "trusty little shovel" is employed to great effect. This 16 minute gem moves about as fast as any Stooge's short and packs twice the wallop. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 2539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] Silent Night, Deadly [[Night]] 5 is the very [[last]] of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed horror flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some obvious things going on here...Mickey Rooney plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little boy named Derek heard a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it said "don't open till Christmas", he begins to open it anyway but is stopped by his dad, who scolds him and sends him to bed, and opens the gift himself. Inside is a little red ball that sprouts Santa arms and a head, and proceeds to kill dad. Oops, maybe he should have left well-enough alone. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the incident since he watched it from the stairs, but he doesn't grow up to be some killer Santa, he just stops talking.

There's a mysterious stranger lurking around, who seems very interested in the toys that Joe Petto makes. We even see him buying a bunch when Derek's mom takes him to the store to find a gift for him to bring him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this guy doing? Well, we're not sure but he does seem to be taking these toys apart to see what makes them tick. He does keep his landlord from evicting him by promising him to pay him in cash the next day and presents him with a "Larry the Larvae" toy for his kid, but of course "Larry" is not a good toy and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't pretty.

Anyway, eventually what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the old story, Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and naughty because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth plastic crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. Silent Night, Deadly [[Nocturne]] 5 is the very [[final]] of the series, and like part 4, it's unrelated to the first three except by title and the fact that it's a Christmas-themed horror flick.

Except to the oblivious, there's some obvious things going on here...Mickey Rooney plays a toymaker named Joe Petto and his creepy son's name is Pino. Ring a bell, anyone? Now, a little boy named Derek heard a knock at the door one evening, and opened it to find a present on the doorstep for him. Even though it said "don't open till Christmas", he begins to open it anyway but is stopped by his dad, who scolds him and sends him to bed, and opens the gift himself. Inside is a little red ball that sprouts Santa arms and a head, and proceeds to kill dad. Oops, maybe he should have left well-enough alone. Of course Derek is then traumatized by the incident since he watched it from the stairs, but he doesn't grow up to be some killer Santa, he just stops talking.

There's a mysterious stranger lurking around, who seems very interested in the toys that Joe Petto makes. We even see him buying a bunch when Derek's mom takes him to the store to find a gift for him to bring him out of his trauma. And what exactly is this guy doing? Well, we're not sure but he does seem to be taking these toys apart to see what makes them tick. He does keep his landlord from evicting him by promising him to pay him in cash the next day and presents him with a "Larry the Larvae" toy for his kid, but of course "Larry" is not a good toy and gets out of the box in the car and of course, well, things aren't pretty.

Anyway, eventually what's going on with Joe Petto and Pino is of course revealed, and as with the old story, Pino is not a "real boy". Pino is probably even more agitated and naughty because he suffers from "Kenitalia" (a smooth plastic crotch) so that could account for his evil ways. And the identity of the lurking stranger is revealed too, and there's even kind of a happy ending of sorts. Whee.

A step up from part 4, but not much of one. Again, Brian Yuzna is involved, and Screaming Mad George, so some decent special effects, but not enough to make this great. A few leftovers from part 4 are hanging around too, like Clint Howard and Neith Hunter, but that doesn't really make any difference. Anyway, I now have seeing the whole series out of my system. Now if I could get some of it out of my brain. 4 out of 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 2540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[Being]] the [[prototype]] of the classical Errol Flynn [[adventure]] [[movie]] and having a good [[story]] as well as two more [[brilliant]] co-stars in Maureen O'Hara (what an [[exquisite]] [[beauty]]!) and Anthony [[Quinn]], I can only recommend this movie to all those having even the slightest liking for romance and adventure.

Hollywood at its best! [[Ongoing]] the [[prototypes]] of the classical Errol Flynn [[adventurer]] [[kino]] and having a good [[saga]] as well as two more [[glowing]] co-stars in Maureen O'Hara (what an [[handsome]] [[beaut]]!) and Anthony [[Gwen]], I can only recommend this movie to all those having even the slightest liking for romance and adventure.

Hollywood at its best! --------------------------------------------- Result 2541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] An unfunny, unworthy [[picture]] which is an undeserving end to Peter Sellers' career. It is a [[pity]] this movie was ever made. An unfunny, unworthy [[photograph]] which is an undeserving end to Peter Sellers' career. It is a [[compassion]] this movie was ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 2542 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for Hooligans. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing Toby McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the [[idea]] of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too seriously. The gravity of the pugilism, the reverence with which the subject matter is treated becomes irritating, as it neither establishes or resolves the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[contrived]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the Americans at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the absurdity of the film doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this corny, and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste time with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and clever fun; the way violence is supposed to be. Let's just say I had to suspend my disbelief less for Spiderman than I did for Hooligans. That is, to say, I have less of a problem believing Toby McGuire can stick to buildings than I do Elija Wood throwing down with toughs in Manchester. I won't get into specifics, as I don't want to write a spoiler, but the [[thoughts]] of grown, professional, British men getting into near death scraps every weekend is, well... funny. And this film is not. The fighting, the idea of fighting, is taken far too seriously. The gravity of the pugilism, the reverence with which the subject matter is treated becomes irritating, as it neither establishes or resolves the conflict. It seems as though the plot, with holes big enough to drive a Guiness truck through, has been slapped together with a [[artificial]] "fish out of water" theme so that viewers can gaze into Woods teary eyes as he learns how to become a man ie. hitting other young men of opposing football tastes with blunt objects and then running away as fast as he can. The characters are cartoonish, especially the Americans at Harvard. The character development and story line are telegraphed to the viewer throughout the picture. Unfortunately, the absurdity of the film doesn't reach its height until nearly the end, which by then you'll have spent nearly two hours of your life you are never getting back. Pick up "The Football Factory" or "Fight Club" instead of this corny, and disappointing dud. It doesn't waste time with empty melodrama, the tired old "Yankee in King Aurthur's Court," or weepy, parables of coming of age bullsh*t. They're just pure, dark, and clever fun; the way violence is supposed to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 2543 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[hello]] boys and [[girls]]... this isn't your [[regular]] [[movie]] review, because this is going to be the [[cold]]. [[hard]]. truth. are you [[serious]]? this movie sucked so many [[balls]] i couldn't [[keep]] them out of my mouth! they [[might]] as well have sprayed me in the eye with monkey [[semen]]. you'd [[need]] one seriously large douche to [[pump]] out all the vaginal [[fluid]] from this movie.

the plot was very [[lacking]]. the [[actors]] were [[terrible]]. i rewound the [[dance]] number [[several]] times and had to pause it even more because i was choking on my own spit. do boys, everyone!

peace R&H besties4lyf [[hey]] boys and [[daughters]]... this isn't your [[regularly]] [[movies]] review, because this is going to be the [[chilled]]. [[tough]]. truth. are you [[grievous]]? this movie sucked so many [[gonads]] i couldn't [[conserving]] them out of my mouth! they [[apt]] as well have sprayed me in the eye with monkey [[sperm]]. you'd [[require]] one seriously large douche to [[pumping]] out all the vaginal [[fluids]] from this movie.

the plot was very [[missing]]. the [[players]] were [[scary]]. i rewound the [[danse]] number [[diverse]] times and had to pause it even more because i was choking on my own spit. do boys, everyone!

peace R&H besties4lyf --------------------------------------------- Result 2544 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] As a huge fan or the Cracker series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm afraid just does not [[live]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to Manchester after 7 years for his daughters wedding and gets involved in a murder investigation were a soldier, tormented by flash backs from his tour of duty in Northern Irland, goes on a killing spree.

What I did not like about this episode is the [[extremely]] [[convenient]] way it is all set up and how fitz is led to the murderer. It is all fat to far-fetched.

There are however some good scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[filmed]] great. As a huge fan or the Cracker series, I have been waiting 7 years for the next addition. This Episode I'm afraid just does not [[inhabit]] up to the legend.

Fitz returns to Manchester after 7 years for his daughters wedding and gets involved in a murder investigation were a soldier, tormented by flash backs from his tour of duty in Northern Irland, goes on a killing spree.

What I did not like about this episode is the [[tremendously]] [[handy]] way it is all set up and how fitz is led to the murderer. It is all fat to far-fetched.

There are however some good scenes in flash backs from Northern Irland which are [[videotaped]] great. --------------------------------------------- Result 2545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his mother and experiences some sort of Oedepus complex afterward.

It is something like 95 [[minutes]] long but would be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing climbing practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[much]] less [[sympathetic]]).

There's a strange love story involved which doesn't have anything to do with anything. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first ten minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending together and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a guy that stuff happens to. The only active choice he has in the whole middle of the movie is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this MacKenzie director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten theories back into our memories! You really dug! What a Wallraff! Okay so now I realized this film is based on some random book, but anyway..

Photowise it is [[boring]]. A lot of talking heads. Plus the editor has changed the colors from scene to scene, you know cold and warm etc.. why? maybe "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. Hallam Foe tells us the story about a boy who lost his mother and experiences some sort of Oedepus complex afterward.

It is something like 95 [[mins]] long but would be better in ten. There's like an hour in the middle where he is doing climbing practice on rooftops, and habits in a church tower like Quasimodo (only he is [[very]] less [[congenial]]).

There's a strange love story involved which doesn't have anything to do with anything. She happens to look like his mother, yes so what? We know he misses his mother, that's what the first ten minutes were about. They should just have put the beginning and ending together and it would have been a O.K. short film. Now it's a portrait of a character who doesn't change. He is a guy that stuff happens to. The only active choice he has in the whole middle of the movie is to apply for a job.

There's this whole Oedepus thing going on which is supposed to make us analyze his character. He paints his face, dresses in women's clothing and wears a dead Badger on his head. A Badger! You've got to see the ending! He returns to his home with the badger on his head (and it is shot like a tacky Horror film) to kill his dad's new wife (which he had sex with in the beginning). And somehow they thought this wouldn't be entertaining enough so they put some indie punk music in the background. I've got to admit though, I'm kind of allergic to films that want to write a psychological complex on your nose. It feels like this MacKenzie director/guy/whatever is trying to show us that he also has been studying psychology in school. You are so smart! Thank you for bringing all these forgotten theories back into our memories! You really dug! What a Wallraff! Okay so now I realized this film is based on some random book, but anyway..

Photowise it is [[bored]]. A lot of talking heads. Plus the editor has changed the colors from scene to scene, you know cold and warm etc.. why? maybe "Hallam Foe" is both a feature and a test film for color blind people. Or maybe they just thought that the drama wouldn't be enough to tell us that he feels lonely, so they increased blue so that we really get it.

I'm not even gonna comment on the cliché indie-oh-how-how-how-cute drawings they have made in the presentation. And all the "cute" sex stuff going on. This whole film is an independent cliché. But I do recommend it. I laughed more than a few times. Though it is really annoying to be a film student and to see how crap like this gets through the machine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2546 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] [[After]] a [[brief]] prologue showing a masked man stalking and then [[slashing]] the throat of an older gentleman on a deserted, urban, turn of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter (John Adam) as they go out house hunting. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it turns out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their new home. It just may be [[haunted]].

13 Gantry Row combines a [[memorable]] if [[somewhat]] [[clichéd]] story with good to average direction by [[Catherine]] Millar into a [[slightly]] above average shocker.

The biggest [[flaws]] seem partially due to budget, but not wholly excusable to that hurdle. A crucial problem occurs at the beginning of the film. The opening "thriller scene" features some wonky editing. Freeze frames and series of stills are used to cover up the fact that there's not much action. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the mix" techniques. There is great atmosphere in the scene from the location, the lighting, the fog and such, but the camera should be slowly following the killer and the victim, cutting back and forth from one to the other as we track down the street, showing their increasing proximity. The tracking and the cuts need to be [[slow]]. The attack needed to be longer, clearer and better blocked. As it stands, the scene has a strong "made for television" feel, and a low [[budget]] one at that.

After this scene we move to the present and the flow of the film [[greatly]] [[improves]]. The story has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the budget [[forces]] a much subtler approach. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively create a lot of slyly creepy scenarios, [[often]] dramatic in nature instead of special effects-oriented, such as the mysterious man who arrives to take away the old slabs of iron, which had been bizarrely affixed to an interior wall.

For some horror fans, the first section of the film might be a little heavy on realist drama. At least the first half hour of the film is primarily about Julie and Peter trying to arrange financing for the house and then trying to settle in. But Morphett writes fine, intelligent dialogue. The material is done well enough that it's often as suspenseful as the more traditional thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly destroy it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, shows that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally finds liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. [[Upon]] a [[terse]] prologue showing a masked man stalking and then [[cutback]] the throat of an older gentleman on a deserted, urban, turn of the century Australian street, we meet Julie (Rebecca Gibney) and Peter (John Adam) as they go out house hunting. They manage to get a loan for a fixer-upper on a posh Sydney street, but it turns out that physical disrepair is not the only problem with their new home. It just may be [[obsessed]].

13 Gantry Row combines a [[eventful]] if [[slightly]] [[cliché]] story with good to average direction by [[Cathy]] Millar into a [[marginally]] above average shocker.

The biggest [[irregularities]] seem partially due to budget, but not wholly excusable to that hurdle. A crucial problem occurs at the beginning of the film. The opening "thriller scene" features some wonky editing. Freeze frames and series of stills are used to cover up the fact that there's not much action. Suspense should be created from staging, not fancy "fix it in the mix" techniques. There is great atmosphere in the scene from the location, the lighting, the fog and such, but the camera should be slowly following the killer and the victim, cutting back and forth from one to the other as we track down the street, showing their increasing proximity. The tracking and the cuts need to be [[slowing]]. The attack needed to be longer, clearer and better blocked. As it stands, the scene has a strong "made for television" feel, and a low [[budgets]] one at that.

After this scene we move to the present and the flow of the film [[exceedingly]] [[betterment]]. The story has a lot of similarities to The Amityville Horror (1979), though the budget [[troops]] a much subtler approach. Millar and scriptwriter Tony Morphett effectively create a lot of slyly creepy scenarios, [[generally]] dramatic in nature instead of special effects-oriented, such as the mysterious man who arrives to take away the old slabs of iron, which had been bizarrely affixed to an interior wall.

For some horror fans, the first section of the film might be a little heavy on realist drama. At least the first half hour of the film is primarily about Julie and Peter trying to arrange financing for the house and then trying to settle in. But Morphett writes fine, intelligent dialogue. The material is done well enough that it's often as suspenseful as the more traditional thriller aspects that arise later--especially if you've gone through similar travails while trying to buy your own house.

Once they get settled and things begin to get weirder, even though the special effects often leave much to be desired, the ideas are good. The performances help create tension. There isn't an abundance of death and destruction in the film--there's more of an abundance of home repair nightmares. But neither menace is really the point.

The point is human relationships. There are a number of character arcs that are very interesting. The house exists more as a metaphor and a catalyst for stress in a romantic relationship that can make it go sour and possibly destroy it. That it's in a posh neighborhood, and that the relationship is between two successful yuppies, shows that these problems do not only afflict those who can place blame with some external woe, such as money or health problems. Peter's character evolves from a striving corporate employee with "normal" work-based friendships to someone with more desperation as he becomes subversive, scheming to attain something more liberating and meaningful. At the same time, we learn just how shallow those professional friendships can be. Julie goes through an almost literal nervous breakdown, but finally finds liberation when she liberates herself from her failing romantic relationship.

Although 13 Gantry Row never quite transcends its made-for-television clunkiness, as a TV movie, this is a pretty good one, with admirable ambitions. Anyone fond of haunted house films, psycho films or horror/thrillers with a bit more metaphorical depth should find plenty to enjoy. It certainly isn't worth spending $30 for a DVD (that was the price my local PBS station was asking for a copy of the film after they showed it (factoring in shipping and handling)), but it's worth a rental, and it's definitely worth watching for free. --------------------------------------------- Result 2547 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This movie stinks! You will want back the two-plus hours it takes to get through it. Sliding [[Doors]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[directed]] by Peter Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[tries]] to do much much MUCH better. That movie was [[clever]], witty, and well-acted. I cared about what happened to both Gwyenths -- or rather the characters she played -- and the performances by supporting cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is tiresome, the dialogue is contrived and I could have cared less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so dysfunctional -- her first glass of wine is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[laughable]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is fine, but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble movies worked because, I'm guessing, he spent time on the screenplay and the actors were talented. One piece of trivia for this movie is that he wrote this screenplay in two months: you can tell. And while Chloe Sevigny is talented -- those around her are not, not enough to be a whole presence. The movie ends up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've seen in other movies but can't quite remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. This movie stinks! You will want back the two-plus hours it takes to get through it. Sliding [[Floodgates]], w/ Gwyenth Paltrow and [[oriented]] by Peter Howit, did what Melinda & Melinda [[strive]] to do much much MUCH better. That movie was [[adroit]], witty, and well-acted. I cared about what happened to both Gwyenths -- or rather the characters she played -- and the performances by supporting cast were fantastic.

Where as Melinda & Melinda is tiresome, the dialogue is contrived and I could have cared less about any of these people -- least of all Melinda. One Melinda is so dysfunctional -- her first glass of wine is at 10 a.m. -- and so melodramatic she is [[absurd]], and not in the comedic sense. The 2nd Melinda is fine, but forgettable.

Woody Allen's previous ensemble movies worked because, I'm guessing, he spent time on the screenplay and the actors were talented. One piece of trivia for this movie is that he wrote this screenplay in two months: you can tell. And while Chloe Sevigny is talented -- those around her are not, not enough to be a whole presence. The movie ends up being Chloe Sevigny and a bunch of other people you know you've seen in other movies but can't quite remember which ones.

Sad, very sad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] [[Man]], what a scam this [[turned]] out to be! Not because it wasn't any [[good]] (as I wasn't really expecting [[anything]] from it) but because I was misled by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly paraded its "stars" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony Bill. [[Sure]] enough, their [[names]] did not appear in the film's opening credits, much less themselves in the rest of it!! As it [[turned]] out, the only [[movie]] which connects those three [[actors]] [[together]] is the equally [[obscure]] LAS VEGAS [[LADY]] (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTER]] is anybody's [[guess]]…

Even so, [[since]] I [[paid]] $1.50 for its [[rental]] and I was in a monster-movie [[mood]] [[anyhow]], I [[elected]] to watch the [[movie]] regardless and, [[yup]], it stunk! Apart from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an [[anonymous]] [[crew]], an unmistakably amateurish [[air]] was [[visible]] from [[miles]] away and the most I [[could]] do with it is laugh at the JAWS-like [[pretensions]] and, [[intentionally]] so, at the resistible antics of two moronic layabouts-cum-boat [[owners]] who frequently squabble [[among]] themselves with the [[bemused]] local sheriff [[looking]] on. The [[creature]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly [[realized]] (naturally) but, as had been the [[case]] with THE [[GIANT]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[also]] just [[seen]], this didn't [[seem]] to [[bother]] the film-makers [[none]] as they flaunt it as [[much]] as they can, [[especially]] during the movie's second half! [[Men]], what a scam this [[revolved]] out to be! Not because it wasn't any [[alright]] (as I wasn't really expecting [[algo]] from it) but because I was misled by the DVD sleeve which ignorantly paraded its "stars" as being Stuart Whitman, Stella Stevens and Tony Bill. [[Persuaded]] enough, their [[naming]] did not appear in the film's opening credits, much less themselves in the rest of it!! As it [[transformed]] out, the only [[kino]] which connects those three [[protagonists]] [[jointly]] is the equally [[fuzzy]] LAS VEGAS [[MISSUS]] (1975) – but what that one has to do with THE CRATER LAKE [[MONSTERS]] is anybody's [[reckon]]…

Even so, [[because]] I [[salaried]] $1.50 for its [[rented]] and I was in a monster-movie [[humour]] [[anyways]], I [[select]] to watch the [[flick]] regardless and, [[oui]], it stunk! Apart from the fact that it had a no-name cast and an [[unnamed]] [[crewman]], an unmistakably amateurish [[aviation]] was [[perceptible]] from [[kilometres]] away and the most I [[wo]] do with it is laugh at the JAWS-like [[pretexts]] and, [[consciously]] so, at the resistible antics of two moronic layabouts-cum-boat [[owner]] who frequently squabble [[between]] themselves with the [[perplexed]] local sheriff [[searching]] on. The [[monster]] itself – a plesiosaur i.e. half-dinosaur/half-fish – is imperfectly [[performed]] (naturally) but, as had been the [[examples]] with THE [[GARGANTUAN]] CLAW (1957) which I've [[additionally]] just [[watched]], this didn't [[looks]] to [[disturb]] the film-makers [[nos]] as they flaunt it as [[very]] as they can, [[notably]] during the movie's second half! --------------------------------------------- Result 2549 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Two sisters, their perverted brother, and their cousin have car trouble. They then [[happen]] about the home of Dr. Hackenstein whom conveniently needs the [[body]] parts of three nubile young women to use in an experiment to bring his deceased lover back to life. He tells them that he'll [[help]] them get [[home]] in the morning, so they spend the night. [[Then]] the good [[doctor]] gets down to work in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I [[found]] this to be [[mildly]] amusing, [[nothing]] at all to [[actually]] go out of your way for (I stumbled across it on Netflix instant view & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired film. Most of the humor doesn't work, but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a small part and she was always a treat to watch.

Eye Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker got topless

My Grade: D+ Two sisters, their perverted brother, and their cousin have car trouble. They then [[arise]] about the home of Dr. Hackenstein whom conveniently needs the [[agencies]] parts of three nubile young women to use in an experiment to bring his deceased lover back to life. He tells them that he'll [[assisting]] them get [[lodgings]] in the morning, so they spend the night. [[Thus]] the good [[doktor]] gets down to work in this low-budget horror-comedy.

I [[discoveries]] this to be [[smoothly]] amusing, [[none]] at all to [[indeed]] go out of your way for (I stumbled across it on Netflix instant view & streamed it to the xbox 360), but better then I expected it to be for a Troma acquired film. Most of the humor doesn't work, but their are still some parts that caused me to smile. Plus the late, great Anne Ramsey has a small part and she was always a treat to watch.

Eye Candy: Bambi Darro & Sylvia Lee Baker got topless

My Grade: D+ --------------------------------------------- Result 2550 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Whale-hunters pick on the [[wrong]] [[freaking]] whale.

A [[group]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a female and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's mate sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn baby slips out and slops onto the deck. 'Captain Nolan' (Richard Harris) could tell that the big male is really mad by the way it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of revenge has Harris' [[presence]] and Bo's beauty, but not much [[else]]. This was Bo's first 'released' film, though her first acting job was four [[years]] previous in 'And Once Upon a Love' released in 1981 as 'Fantasies' (directed by John Derek).

P.S. Today, the date of this review (November 20), is Bo Derek's birthday. I hope Bo has a 'whale' of a good time..... get it?..... [[whale]]?..... hee-hee. Whale-hunters pick on the [[amiss]] [[frakking]] whale.

A [[clusters]] of yahoo whale exploitists capture a female and string her up by her tail-fin. The whale's mate sees the whole thing including the moment the female's unborn baby slips out and slops onto the deck. 'Captain Nolan' (Richard Harris) could tell that the big male is really mad by the way it stared him down as if to say, "Get out of town before high-tide."

This story of revenge has Harris' [[involvements]] and Bo's beauty, but not much [[elsewhere]]. This was Bo's first 'released' film, though her first acting job was four [[ages]] previous in 'And Once Upon a Love' released in 1981 as 'Fantasies' (directed by John Derek).

P.S. Today, the date of this review (November 20), is Bo Derek's birthday. I hope Bo has a 'whale' of a good time..... get it?..... [[pyle]]?..... hee-hee. --------------------------------------------- Result 2551 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Holes, originally a novel by Louis Sachar, was successfully transformed into an entertaining and well-made film. Starring Sigourney Weaver as the warden, Shia Labeouf as Stanley, and Khleo Thomas as Zero, the roles were very well casted, and the actors portrayed their roles well.

The film had inter-weaving storylines that all led up to the end. The main storyline is about Stanley Yelnats and his punishment of spending a year and a half at Camp Greenlake. The second storyline is about Sam and Kate Barlow. This plot deals with racism and it is the more deep storyline to the movie. The third is about Elya Yelnats and Madame Zeroni, which explains the 100-year curse on the Yelnats family. In my opinion, these storylines were weaved together very well.

Contrary to many people's beliefs, I think that you do not have to have read the book to understand the movie. The film is reasonably easy to understand.

The acting in the film was well done, especially Shia Labeouf (Stanley), Khleo Thomas (Zero), Sigourney Weaver (the warden), and Jon Voight (Mr. Sir). The other members of D-Tent, Jake Smith (Squid), Max Kasch (Zig-Zag), Miguel Castro (Magnet), Byron Cotton (Armpit), and Brenden Jefferson (X-Ray), enhanced the comic relief of the movie. However, the best parts were with Zero and Stanley, who made a great team together.

Although Holes is a Disney movie, it deals with some serious issues such as racism, shootings, and violence. The film's dramatization at some points is very well done.

I would suggest this movie to people of all ages, whether they have read the book or not. You shouldn't miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[watched]] this [[last]] night on TV (HBO). I have to [[admit]], that the tension in this [[movie]] was unsurpassed by most other FN era [[movies]]. I [[loved]] the [[way]] [[Chip]] [[would]] be all [[calm]] one moment and then VIOLENT the very next [[moment]]. It was [[classic]]. Ahh yes. The dames, the villians, the cigars and thuggish [[cops]]! It has it all. This [[movie]] [[delivered]] all the [[goods]] to me. I [[especially]] loved the [[way]] they mixed [[communism]] into the plot, very common for this [[era]] of movie. [[Very]] [[daring]] [[also]] [[since]] blacklisting was [[popular]] in those [[days]]. I [[rate]] this [[movie]] one of the [[best]] I have [[seen]] in the FN [[genre]]! I [[saw]] this [[final]] night on TV (HBO). I have to [[accepted]], that the tension in this [[filmmaking]] was unsurpassed by most other FN era [[theater]]. I [[worshipped]] the [[manner]] [[Puce]] [[should]] be all [[mellow]] one moment and then VIOLENT the very next [[time]]. It was [[typical]]. Ahh yes. The dames, the villians, the cigars and thuggish [[constabulary]]! It has it all. This [[cinema]] [[gave]] all the [[merchandise]] to me. I [[mainly]] loved the [[camino]] they mixed [[communists]] into the plot, very common for this [[epoch]] of movie. [[Eminently]] [[audacity]] [[similarly]] [[because]] blacklisting was [[trendy]] in those [[jours]]. I [[rates]] this [[cinematography]] one of the [[nicest]] I have [[watched]] in the FN [[types]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2553 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Working with one of the best Shakespeare sources, this film [[manages]] to be [[creditable]] to it's source, whilst still appealing to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented cast on good form. Working with one of the best Shakespeare sources, this film [[runs]] to be [[commendable]] to it's source, whilst still appealing to a wider audience.

Branagh steals the film from under Fishburne's nose, and there's a talented cast on good form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] After [[seeing]] the movie last night I was left with a sense of the hopelessness [[faced]] by organisations trying to tackle the problem the film [[portrays]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[large]] that it's [[hard]] to [[see]] how it can be [[defeated]] without [[major]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

Anyway, on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an uncomfortable central [[relationship]] this is a very [[compelling]] [[film]], and I'd [[even]] go so far as to [[say]] it was [[enjoyable]]. The [[film]] was well edited for the [[running]] time and the performance by Thuy Nguyen was [[excellent]]. I [[also]] [[felt]] Ron Livingston played a very [[difficult]] role well.

It [[would]] have been nice to have a little more [[insight]] into why [[Patrick]] [[feels]] he has to [[help]] [[Holly]], but [[maybe]] the reason is a [[simple]] as he [[explains]] to Chris Penn's [[character]]. I won't [[explain]] it here - [[go]] [[see]] the [[movie]].

This is a good, thought-provoking [[film]] with [[obviously]] good [[intentions]]. I [[hope]] it gets a [[wide]] [[enough]] [[release]] to reach a [[decent]] sized audience and gain more [[support]] for the K-11 [[Project]]. After [[witnessing]] the movie last night I was left with a sense of the hopelessness [[encountered]] by organisations trying to tackle the problem the film [[exposes]]. The scale of the prostitution seems so [[great]] that it's [[tough]] to [[seeing]] how it can be [[conquered]] without [[sizable]] governmental changes in Cambodia.

Anyway, on with the review.

Although it is a sombre movie with an uncomfortable central [[rapport]] this is a very [[conclusive]] [[cinematography]], and I'd [[yet]] go so far as to [[tell]] it was [[congenial]]. The [[filmmaking]] was well edited for the [[implementing]] time and the performance by Thuy Nguyen was [[noteworthy]]. I [[similarly]] [[smelled]] Ron Livingston played a very [[laborious]] role well.

It [[should]] have been nice to have a little more [[eyesight]] into why [[Patricio]] [[thinks]] he has to [[supporting]] [[Holley]], but [[perhaps]] the reason is a [[easy]] as he [[explain]] to Chris Penn's [[characters]]. I won't [[clarified]] it here - [[going]] [[seeing]] the [[movies]].

This is a good, thought-provoking [[cinematography]] with [[notoriously]] good [[intents]]. I [[amal]] it gets a [[big]] [[adequately]] [[releases]] to reach a [[dignified]] sized audience and gain more [[succour]] for the K-11 [[Projects]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2555 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] [[Released]] on DVD in the UK as [[Axe]], The Choke is a teen slasher that fails in [[pretty]] much [[every]] [[department]]: the [[story]] is almost non-existent, [[resulting]] in a [[film]] which [[comprises]] mostly of people wandering [[around]] a dark building; with the [[exception]] of two [[characters]] (who are quite [[obviously]] destined to be the film's [[survivors]]), everyone is [[thoroughly]] objectionable, [[meaning]] that the [[viewer]] couldn't [[care]] less when they get slaughtered; the deaths aren't gory enough ([[unless]] a brief shot of a pound of [[minced]] beef [[covered]] in [[fake]] blood turns your [[stomach]]); and the [[gratuitous]] sex scene features next to no nudity (an unforgivable [[mistake]] to make in a slasher [[flick]]!).

The wafer-thin plot sees [[members]] of a [[punk]] band [[locked]] [[inside]] what [[appears]] to be the world's [[largest]] [[nightclub]] (there are [[endless]] abandoned [[corridors]] and [[rooms]], unlike any club I've ever [[seen]]) where they are [[picked]] off by an [[unseen]] [[assailant]]. [[For]] a low budget [[effort]], the [[production]] values are okay, and the cast are all [[seem]] to be [[fairly]] [[capable]] [[actors]], but with not [[nearly]] [[enough]] [[genuine]] scares, a [[reluctance]] to get [[really]] messy (this is a slasher, so where's the graphic [[splatter]]?), [[way]] too much [[dreadful]] [[dialogue]] ([[particularly]] from the not-dead-soon-enough drummer) and some [[ill]] [[advised]] [[use]] of tacky video [[techniques]] in an [[attempt]] to [[add]] some style, the [[movie]] [[quickly]] becomes [[extremely]] [[boring]]. [[Liberated]] on DVD in the UK as [[Ax]], The Choke is a teen slasher that fails in [[quite]] much [[all]] [[ministry]]: the [[saga]] is almost non-existent, [[ensuing]] in a [[kino]] which [[understands]] mostly of people wandering [[roundabout]] a dark building; with the [[exceptions]] of two [[personage]] (who are quite [[definitely]] destined to be the film's [[survivor]]), everyone is [[rigorously]] objectionable, [[sens]] that the [[beholder]] couldn't [[healthcare]] less when they get slaughtered; the deaths aren't gory enough ([[if]] a brief shot of a pound of [[pricked]] beef [[encompassed]] in [[forged]] blood turns your [[abdomen]]); and the [[unjustified]] sex scene features next to no nudity (an unforgivable [[awry]] to make in a slasher [[movie]]!).

The wafer-thin plot sees [[member]] of a [[thug]] band [[locking]] [[within]] what [[emerges]] to be the world's [[strongest]] [[cabaret]] (there are [[countless]] abandoned [[aisles]] and [[salas]], unlike any club I've ever [[saw]]) where they are [[pick]] off by an [[unnoticed]] [[abuser]]. [[During]] a low budget [[efforts]], the [[productivity]] values are okay, and the cast are all [[seems]] to be [[relatively]] [[able]] [[players]], but with not [[roughly]] [[suitably]] [[true]] scares, a [[hesitation]] to get [[truly]] messy (this is a slasher, so where's the graphic [[splatters]]?), [[ways]] too much [[gruesome]] [[discussions]] ([[principally]] from the not-dead-soon-enough drummer) and some [[iil]] [[reported]] [[utilise]] of tacky video [[technique]] in an [[strives]] to [[adds]] some style, the [[film]] [[faster]] becomes [[exceptionally]] [[dreary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something magical. it's hard to say what, what button Lucas has found and boldly pressed, but it [[works]]. Star Wars is more than a movie. it's an idea.

How, may you ask? i shall explain. star wars touches on the most universal of stereotypes, good vs evil. it does this so obviously, so profoundly, that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals even more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but even before 1-3, there was amazing depth to it all. it felt real, as if capsule fell from the sky into Lucas's lap, detailing a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

Star Wars is definitely something far above the norm, and i must admit, whenever i see them, particularly this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and evil are so clearly defined. i get a tingling feeling when i see them, a feeling that something, somehow, has touched me more than any physical thing could ever hope. first, i'd like to say that, while i know my share about star wars, i am not a fanatic. i do not know how many chromosomes a Wamp Rat has or the extended family of TK427. what i know is this: Star wars, all the movies(less so with episode 2 though), captured something magical. it's hard to say what, what button Lucas has found and boldly pressed, but it [[cooperating]]. Star Wars is more than a movie. it's an idea.

How, may you ask? i shall explain. star wars touches on the most universal of stereotypes, good vs evil. it does this so obviously, so profoundly, that literally any person from any environment can understand. Episode VI does the very well, concluding the epic struggle between a son and his used and manipulated father, yet also, with the addition of the prequels, reveals even more to the hinted back story. suddenly, it's Darth Vader at the front, and viewers realize that it's the story about Anakin, not just Luke. but even before 1-3, there was amazing depth to it all. it felt real, as if capsule fell from the sky into Lucas's lap, detailing a historical account of a galaxy far, far away.

Star Wars is definitely something far above the norm, and i must admit, whenever i see them, particularly this one, i feel very small. i feel as though i've been thrust into a world where good and evil are so clearly defined. i get a tingling feeling when i see them, a feeling that something, somehow, has touched me more than any physical thing could ever hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2557 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Bo is Jane Parker, whose long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[worst]] role of a very inconsistent career) is in Africa studying something or another. She tracks him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' stories of a giant monster whose nightly howling can be heard throughout the jungle. Turns out to be the [[Ape]] Man himself (Miles O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[rescues]] her from bad guys and falls in love with her, [[leaving]] them just enough time in this [[agonizing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny monkey looks on and cheers. Normally I'm very open-minded to varying opinions about any film, but this is the sole exception. This is the [[worst]] film ever made. If you don't agree, you haven't seen it. (Notes: Newsday called it "unendurable," which is the best one-word summary I can think of. The Maltin Movie Guide comments that they almost had to think of a rating lower than BOMB.) Bo is Jane Parker, whose long-lost anthropologist father (Richard Harris, in the [[hardest]] role of a very inconsistent career) is in Africa studying something or another. She tracks him down (how?) and he tells her of the natives' stories of a giant monster whose nightly howling can be heard throughout the jungle. Turns out to be the [[Monkey]] Man himself (Miles O'Keeffe, who has the film's best dialogue), who [[bailout]] her from bad guys and falls in love with her, [[abandoning]] them just enough time in this [[distressing]] two hours to romp naked while a horny monkey looks on and cheers. Normally I'm very open-minded to varying opinions about any film, but this is the sole exception. This is the [[gravest]] film ever made. If you don't agree, you haven't seen it. (Notes: Newsday called it "unendurable," which is the best one-word summary I can think of. The Maltin Movie Guide comments that they almost had to think of a rating lower than BOMB.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Not long [[enough]] to be feature length and not abrupt enough to a short, this thing exists for one [[reason]], to have a lesbian three-way. There are [[worse]] reasons to exist. One sad thing is that this [[could]] have [[made]] a decent feature length [[movie]]. [[Misty]] fits snuggly into her outfit and is a very cocky [[girl]] and when people are so infatuated with a game character, like Lara Croft, that they make nude calenders of her, you know that a soft-core [[flick]] is set to explode. Unfortunately, this is pretty [[pathetic]]. [[Especially]] the [[painfully]] [[fake]] sex scene between Darian and Misty, where you can [[see]] her hand is fingering [[air]]. Watch this if you just can't [[get]] enough of Misty or [[Ruby]], who makes a [[nice]] [[blonde]] and has zee verst jerman akcent ever. Not long [[suitably]] to be feature length and not abrupt enough to a short, this thing exists for one [[cause]], to have a lesbian three-way. There are [[pire]] reasons to exist. One sad thing is that this [[did]] have [[accomplished]] a decent feature length [[kino]]. [[Hazy]] fits snuggly into her outfit and is a very cocky [[dame]] and when people are so infatuated with a game character, like Lara Croft, that they make nude calenders of her, you know that a soft-core [[gesture]] is set to explode. Unfortunately, this is pretty [[unfortunate]]. [[Mostly]] the [[embarrassingly]] [[falsify]] sex scene between Darian and Misty, where you can [[seeing]] her hand is fingering [[airline]]. Watch this if you just can't [[got]] enough of Misty or [[Roby]], who makes a [[delightful]] [[haired]] and has zee verst jerman akcent ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2559 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] [[save]] your money. i have been a [[fan]] of fullmoon productions for a [[long]] [[time]] and i have never [[seen]] them [[make]] a [[movie]] as [[bad]] as this. the [[casting]] is [[terrible]], the [[story]] is [[even]] [[worse]] and the [[special]] [[affects]] are [[worse]] than any [[movie]] iv'e [[seen]] sence the 80's. this [[movie]] is so [[bad]] i [[cant]] [[even]] suggest renting it. [[rescued]] your money. i have been a [[breather]] of fullmoon productions for a [[lang]] [[moment]] and i have never [[noticed]] them [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]] as [[amiss]] as this. the [[pouring]] is [[heinous]], the [[histories]] is [[yet]] [[lousiest]] and the [[peculiar]] [[touches]] are [[lousiest]] than any [[cinema]] iv'e [[noticed]] sence the 80's. this [[cinematography]] is so [[mala]] i [[dont]] [[yet]] suggest renting it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2560 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] If you haven't seen this yet, I [[say]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't waste your time. [[Neither]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your money. *Spoilers*- I can't decide which was worse: The movie itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? [[Ellen]] Pompeo's acting [[talent]] is very [[questionable]] I hope she can [[improve]] it over time. The storyline is just [[unbelievable]]. Loose cannon American cop fighting criminals in Europe on his own?? Infamous Slavic mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An emotional art [[teacher]] leading a ruthless gang??? Spanish police executive dumber than a sack of hammers??? Give me a break. There's only one [[good]] thing about this movie, though: At least, the production costs must be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as meaningless and over the top as this one. If you haven't seen this yet, I [[tell]] just move on, take a walk in the park, don't waste your time. [[Or]] the scenario nor the acting is worth your money. *Spoilers*- I can't decide which was worse: The movie itself or Baldwin's hairstyle? [[Helene]] Pompeo's acting [[talents]] is very [[suspicious]] I hope she can [[boost]] it over time. The storyline is just [[extraordinary]]. Loose cannon American cop fighting criminals in Europe on his own?? Infamous Slavic mafiosi protected by only two hunks??? An emotional art [[maestro]] leading a ruthless gang??? Spanish police executive dumber than a sack of hammers??? Give me a break. There's only one [[buena]] thing about this movie, though: At least, the production costs must be lower than "Ocean's 12"'s which was as meaningless and over the top as this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2561 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Heartland" is a [[wonderful]] [[depiction]] of what it was really like to live on the frontier. The hard work and individual strength that were needed to survive the hardships of the climate and the [[lack]] of medical care are [[blended]] with the camaraderie and the interdependence of the settlers. The drama was [[especially]] [[meaningful]] because the story is based on the diaries of real people whose descendants still live there. It was also nice to see the [[west]] [[inhabited]] by real people. No one was glamorous or looked as if they had just spent a session with the makeup or costume department. Conchatta Ferrell is just wonderful. She is an example of the strong, persevering people who came to Wyoming in the early 20th century and let no hardship stand in their way of a new life in a new land. "Heartland" is a [[sumptuous]] [[portrayal]] of what it was really like to live on the frontier. The hard work and individual strength that were needed to survive the hardships of the climate and the [[inadequacy]] of medical care are [[mix]] with the camaraderie and the interdependence of the settlers. The drama was [[particularly]] [[valid]] because the story is based on the diaries of real people whose descendants still live there. It was also nice to see the [[westerner]] [[manned]] by real people. No one was glamorous or looked as if they had just spent a session with the makeup or costume department. Conchatta Ferrell is just wonderful. She is an example of the strong, persevering people who came to Wyoming in the early 20th century and let no hardship stand in their way of a new life in a new land. --------------------------------------------- Result 2562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an [[awesome]] movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high school is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle get everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad script, questionable directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[awesome]] soundtrack,extreme campyness, these elements & much more come together to make this what it is,a classic.

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. this movie is awesome. sort of. it dosent really say much, or do much, but it is an [[sumptuous]] movie to watch because of how stupid it is. the high school is taken over by evil ms.togar that hates the one thing that all the students love, rock& roll. riff randle get everyone tickets for the ramones show, and this movie peaks with a take over of the school led my riff randle & the ramones. this movie has everything, a bad script, questionable directing, bad actors(ie clint howard & p.j. soles), an [[sumptuous]] soundtrack,extreme campyness, these elements & much more come together to make this what it is,a classic.

note - during the live ramones set, notice that darby crash of the germs is in the front of the crowd. neat-o. --------------------------------------------- Result 2563 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Playing out as a sort of pre runner to The [[Great]] [[Escape]] some 13 [[years]] [[later]], this smashing [[little]] British [[film]] plays it straight with no thrills and dare do well overkill. First part of the movie is the set up and [[subsequent]] escape of our [[protagonists]], whilst the second part concentrates on their survival whilst on the run as they try to reach Sweden. The film relies on [[pure]] [[characters]] with [[simple]], effective, and yes, [[believable]] dialogue to [[carry]] it thru, and it [[achieves]] its [[aims]] [[handsomely]]. No [[little]] [[amount]] of suspense keeps the [[film]] ticking along, and as an adventure story it [[works]] [[perfectly]] for the time frame it adheres to, so a big [[thumbs]] to the [[film]] that may well be the first of its type ?.

7/10 Playing out as a sort of pre runner to The [[Awesome]] [[Fleeing]] some 13 [[olds]] [[afterward]], this smashing [[scant]] British [[cinematic]] plays it straight with no thrills and dare do well overkill. First part of the movie is the set up and [[posterior]] escape of our [[players]], whilst the second part concentrates on their survival whilst on the run as they try to reach Sweden. The film relies on [[pur]] [[attribute]] with [[mere]], effective, and yes, [[dependable]] dialogue to [[transporting]] it thru, and it [[reaches]] its [[intents]] [[generously]]. No [[tiny]] [[somme]] of suspense keeps the [[kino]] ticking along, and as an adventure story it [[cooperate]] [[altogether]] for the time frame it adheres to, so a big [[inches]] to the [[kino]] that may well be the first of its type ?.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The [[Cure]] [[uses]] voice over to create an intense mood. Although the VO accounts for all of the film's lines it amazingly does not take away from the visual [[story]]. The [[use]] of multiple [[film]] [[stocks]] [[add]] a lot of texture to the story. The [[choice]] of combining b & w and [[color]] [[worked]] [[nicely]] to [[enhance]] the [[leaps]] in time. The ending will make you jump [[despite]] being able to [[anticipate]] the result. I was [[especially]] [[enjoyed]] the thrill of the film's [[suspense]]. The close-ups for the [[love]] scene are [[also]] [[lovely]] and reflect a tasteful [[eye]]. The [[piece]] is [[quite]] [[short]] but accomplishes a [[lot]]. The tight editing really [[helps]] to show off what a short [[film]] can do. Worth [[watching]] more than once! The [[Treatment]] [[used]] voice over to create an intense mood. Although the VO accounts for all of the film's lines it amazingly does not take away from the visual [[tale]]. The [[usage]] of multiple [[films]] [[stock]] [[inserting]] a lot of texture to the story. The [[opting]] of combining b & w and [[coloring]] [[cooperated]] [[courteously]] to [[reinforcement]] the [[jumps]] in time. The ending will make you jump [[albeit]] being able to [[predicted]] the result. I was [[peculiarly]] [[liked]] the thrill of the film's [[wait]]. The close-ups for the [[likes]] scene are [[apart]] [[belle]] and reflect a tasteful [[eyeball]]. The [[slice]] is [[very]] [[terse]] but accomplishes a [[batches]]. The tight editing really [[aided]] to show off what a short [[movie]] can do. Worth [[staring]] more than once! --------------------------------------------- Result 2565 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I have [[seen]] romantic comedies and this is one of the easiest/[[worst]] [[attempts]] at one. A lot of the scenes work in a plug-and-play manner inserted strictly to [[conform]] to the romantic-comedy [[genre]]. Usually this is okay because we're [[dealing]] with a [[genre]], but the [[challenge]] [[generally]] [[resides]] in [[making]] it original, new and inventive. This movie fails to do so.

There is no [[sense]] of who the characters really are, [[apart]] from Sylvie Moreau's (who is the real [[star]] of this movie, not [[Isabelle]] Blais). They [[fit]] into this one-dimensional [[cliché]] and they [[become]] [[nothing]] more than [[simple]] puppets [[serving]] the [[purpose]] of a very [[light]] narrative.

The pacing of the movie can become annoying, rhythm [[lacks]], and the editing is [[filled]] with [[unnecessary]] close-ups. I should [[also]] [[mention]] the [[overly]] stylized decors making some scenes devoid of any naturally, or [[rather]], [[making]] the [[attempt]] at naturally [[seem]] too [[obvious]]. Of course, along with that, you have the right-on-cue sappy music which [[unfortunately]] often sounds [[mismatched]].

I can't [[believe]] that a [[movie]] who makes [[obvious]] Woody Allen allusions ends up being this [[deceptive]]. [[If]] you [[expect]] a [[good]] light-hearted [[romantic]] [[comedy]], this is not it. Or rather, this a [[poor]] [[attempt]] at it. You will only leave the [[theater]] [[wondering]] why this [[film]] has been getting such praise when [[cinema]] is now more than 100 years [[old]] and there are far [[superior]] Quebecois directors making [[better]] flicks.

Les Aimants is a good [[movie]] for what it is. But it's a [[bad]] one if you regard [[cinema]] as an [[art]] and directors as auteur's. I have [[saw]] romantic comedies and this is one of the easiest/[[meanest]] [[strives]] at one. A lot of the scenes work in a plug-and-play manner inserted strictly to [[adhere]] to the romantic-comedy [[genera]]. Usually this is okay because we're [[treating]] with a [[genus]], but the [[challenges]] [[habitually]] [[inhabit]] in [[doing]] it original, new and inventive. This movie fails to do so.

There is no [[sensing]] of who the characters really are, [[moreover]] from Sylvie Moreau's (who is the real [[superstar]] of this movie, not [[Isabel]] Blais). They [[fitted]] into this one-dimensional [[clichés]] and they [[becomes]] [[anything]] more than [[easy]] puppets [[serve]] the [[intent]] of a very [[lighting]] narrative.

The pacing of the movie can become annoying, rhythm [[absence]], and the editing is [[fills]] with [[dispensable]] close-ups. I should [[similarly]] [[mentioned]] the [[excessively]] stylized decors making some scenes devoid of any naturally, or [[somewhat]], [[doing]] the [[endeavours]] at naturally [[appears]] too [[evident]]. Of course, along with that, you have the right-on-cue sappy music which [[sadly]] often sounds [[mismatch]].

I can't [[believing]] that a [[filmmaking]] who makes [[evident]] Woody Allen allusions ends up being this [[bogus]]. [[Though]] you [[expecting]] a [[buena]] light-hearted [[sentimental]] [[humor]], this is not it. Or rather, this a [[pauper]] [[strives]] at it. You will only leave the [[theaters]] [[asks]] why this [[cinematography]] has been getting such praise when [[filmmaking]] is now more than 100 years [[former]] and there are far [[top]] Quebecois directors making [[best]] flicks.

Les Aimants is a good [[flick]] for what it is. But it's a [[rotten]] one if you regard [[cinemas]] as an [[artistry]] and directors as auteur's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is miniscule. Release dates were continually shifted around for this truly [[awful]] movie that is so much a bleep on the radar like it deserves. The premise kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. There's a lot of movies that have set release dates, only to get pulled from distribution due to a legal snafu of some kind, and then put in limbo for a long time. You can only wish a film as rotten as "Slackers" remained in a coma for what it's worth, which is miniscule. Release dates were continually shifted around for this truly [[scary]] movie that is so much a bleep on the radar like it deserves. The premise kicks off under the guise of Ethan, a creepy nerd with a scary obsession for the campus bombshell Angela. Ethan devilishly enlists the aid of David and his friends who have been scamming the school for their entire run with blackmail to help win Angela. I don't like to give spoilers out, but for a piece of crap like this I can make an exception. Angela falls for David, Ethan intentionally screws everything up, the good guys win. That's what happens in a nutshell for another tired retread of the teen gross out genre. Gross humor is funny, it always has been dating back to the days of the immortal classic "Animal House", to the likes of contemporaries like "There's Something About Mary" and "Road Trip" amongst dozens of others of which there are too many to mention. But when you use it as a plot point you can only get so far, case in point, Ethan has an Angela doll composed of her individual strands of hair of which he does god knows what with it. No one wants to take witness to watch Ethan urinating in the shower while singing to himself. No one wants to watch a young man singing "She'll be coming around the mountain" with a sock on his penis. But nothing can prepare you for the full visual assault of seeing 50's bombshell Mamie Van Doren bare her breasts at 71 years old. I don't know if it's the story's lack of coherence, which cuts to scenes that make absolutely no sense. Director Dewey Nicks was a former fashion photographer, and after reviewing this film, you can only wish he'll go back to the profession. The worst thing you can do on any film, is to make it look like you're having fun, because you detract from your objectives, just like "Slackers" does, by burying it's plot outline under a pile of gross out gags, pointless vignettes, and lack of construction. It's like a bunch of college students got drunk, took one's camcorder, and shot a bunch of random crap and compiled it together. If you want to see a teen gross out comedy that's actually good, then I suggest "American Pie" and "Animal House", or "Road Trip", just something that's entertaining, and not dreadfully bad like "Slackers". Coincidentally Cameron Diaz makes a cameo in this film, just as she did in another bad film such as "The Sweetest Thing" where the story treats gross humor like another plot, instead of a device much like this disaster.. If you pass by "Slackers" at your local video store, just keep on walking, and let it end up at the bottom of the shelf like it deserves. --------------------------------------------- Result 2567 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[watched]] the show 10 [[years]] ago and [[loved]] it!!! Am now in possession of the DVD and was watching the series, and waiting for scenes I knew were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his house)and realized it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[watching]] the seduction without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the comments about the [[shows]] being out of order. Thank You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some comments state "Strangler number 19 then Triangle 20, when another had them around the other way. And also Potato Boy 5, and Dead to the World 6, were reversed as well. Can someone clarify????? I [[saw]] the show 10 [[yrs]] ago and [[cared]] it!!! Am now in possession of the DVD and was watching the series, and waiting for scenes I knew were in the show (when Lucas confronts Gail in his house)and realized it was missing - all of a sudden I was [[staring]] the seduction without the lead up. Then I went on line to check out all the BIOS of the stars and came across the comments about the [[display]] being out of order. Thank You!!!!! But there seems to be some conflict. Some comments state "Strangler number 19 then Triangle 20, when another had them around the other way. And also Potato Boy 5, and Dead to the World 6, were reversed as well. Can someone clarify????? --------------------------------------------- Result 2568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] My brother brought this movie home from the rental store and I remember expecting it to be such a bore. I [[think]] the title especially put me off. I can't ever remember starting a movie with such low [[expectations]] and being so completely won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie [[speaks]] to me the way this one did. I was completely caught up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her life. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley Judd has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. My brother brought this movie home from the rental store and I remember expecting it to be such a bore. I [[believing]] the title especially put me off. I can't ever remember starting a movie with such low [[outlook]] and being so completely won over. I watched the movie twice before I let my brother take it back to the store. It is very infrequent that a movie [[chitchat]] to me the way this one did. I was completely caught up in Ruby's situation as she tries to make her way through her life. The bad thing about this movie is that it seems to end so quickly. I could have kept watching for hours. Another downside is that I have been unsatisfied with everything Ashley Judd has done since. She is so perfect in this movie. This film is easily in my top ten favorites of all time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2569 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Six [[degrees]] had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when Men in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on hiatus and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it ended. We could relate to the characters who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[favorite]] characters. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[superb]]. I alway like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to protest the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time slot, don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. Six [[diplomas]] had me hooked. I looked forward to it coming on and was totally disappointed when Men in Trees replaced it's time spot. I thought it was just on hiatus and would be back early in 2007. What happened? All my friends were really surprised it ended. We could relate to the characters who had real problems. We talked about each episode and had our [[preferable]] characters. There wasn't anybody on the show I didn't like and felt the acting was [[resplendent]]. I alway like seeing programs being taped in cities where you can identify the local areas. I for one would like to protest the canceling of this show and ask you to bring it back and give it another chance. Give it a good time slot, don't keep moving it from this day to that day and advertise it so people will know it is on. --------------------------------------------- Result 2570 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Let's just say it in [[simple]] [[words]] so that [[even]] the [[makers]] of this film might have a [[chance]] to [[understand]]: This is a very [[dumb]] [[film]] with an even dumber [[script]], lame [[animation]], and a [[story]] that's about as original as thumbtacks. Don't bother -- [[unless]] you need to [[find]] some [[way]] to entertain a [[group]] of mentally [[retarded]] [[adults]] or extremely slow [[children]]. They [[might]] [[laugh]], especially if they're off their [[meds]]. There's a special kind of [[insult]] in a film this ridiculous -- not only do the filmmakers [[apparently]] [[think]] that [[children]] are brainless idiots who can be entertained with claptrap that cost approximately zero effort, but they don't [[even]] bother to break a sweat inserting a gag here and there that an adult might find amusing. This film, frankly, [[ticked]] me off royally. [[Shame]] on you for stooping so low. Let's just say it in [[easy]] [[phrases]] so that [[yet]] the [[builders]] of this film might have a [[luck]] to [[understanding]]: This is a very [[dopey]] [[cinematography]] with an even dumber [[hyphen]], lame [[animate]], and a [[history]] that's about as original as thumbtacks. Don't bother -- [[if]] you need to [[finds]] some [[routing]] to entertain a [[panels]] of mentally [[moronic]] [[grownups]] or extremely slow [[enfants]]. They [[apt]] [[laughter]], especially if they're off their [[medications]]. There's a special kind of [[snub]] in a film this ridiculous -- not only do the filmmakers [[manifestly]] [[thought]] that [[kiddies]] are brainless idiots who can be entertained with claptrap that cost approximately zero effort, but they don't [[yet]] bother to break a sweat inserting a gag here and there that an adult might find amusing. This film, frankly, [[clicked]] me off royally. [[Embarrass]] on you for stooping so low. --------------------------------------------- Result 2571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[lot]] has been [[said]] about Shinjuku Triad [[Society]] as the [[first]] [[true]] "Miike" [[film]] and I [[thought]] this [[sort]] of description might have been a cliché. But, like all [[clichés]], it is [[based]] on the [[truth]]. All the Miike trademarks are here, the violence, the black [[humour]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[testing]] and the [[difficult]] to like central [[character]]. Shinjuku is [[however]], one of Miike's most [[perfectly]] [[formed]] [[films]]. He [[says]] in an [[interview]] that if he [[made]] it again it [[would]] be [[different]], but not [[necessarily]] better. I [[think]] what he means is that the [[film]] [[possesses]] a [[truly]] [[captivating]] [[energy]] and raw edge which [[seems]] so [[fresh]] that [[although]] he might be [[able]] to [[capture]] a more visually or [[technically]] [[complex]] [[movie]] he [[could]] not [[replicate]] or better the purity of this [[film]].

As you [[might]] expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty [[beatings]] are supplemented by a [[fantastic]] scene in which a [[woman]] has a [[chair]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[film]] could [[let]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[film]] has a [[fantastic]] pace, unlike Dead or Alive which [[begins]] and [[ends]] [[strongly]] and [[dips]] in the middle. Dead or Alive [[also]] [[deals]] with [[similar]] [[issues]], Miike is [[clearly]] concerned about the relations between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[period]] and this emotive [[subject]] is [[handled]] well here, the central character really [[coming]] to life when you [[begin]] to [[understand]] his [[past]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's [[praises]] [[enough]]. I do not [[want]] to [[give]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[began]] to [[use]] CGI to [[animate]] his [[films]] and is [[almost]] reminiscent of something like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[characters]] are [[superbly]] [[realized]] and the [[final]] twist [[guarantees]] that as [[soon]] as the [[film]] has [[finished]] you'll be popping it back on again to work it all out. A [[batch]] has been [[told]] about Shinjuku Triad [[Societal]] as the [[fiirst]] [[truthful]] "Miike" [[filmmaking]] and I [[figured]] this [[genre]] of description might have been a cliché. But, like all [[clichéd]], it is [[base]] on the [[veracity]]. All the Miike trademarks are here, the violence, the black [[humor]], the homosexuality, the taboo [[essays]] and the [[laborious]] to like central [[characters]]. Shinjuku is [[instead]], one of Miike's most [[altogether]] [[forming]] [[cinematographic]]. He [[alleges]] in an [[interrogating]] that if he [[introduced]] it again it [[ought]] be [[several]], but not [[invariably]] better. I [[reckon]] what he means is that the [[filmmaking]] [[possessed]] a [[genuinely]] [[thrilling]] [[energies]] and raw edge which [[looks]] so [[dulce]] that [[despite]] he might be [[capable]] to [[captures]] a more visually or [[technologically]] [[tortuous]] [[filmmaking]] he [[did]] not [[reproduced]] or better the purity of this [[movies]].

As you [[conceivably]] expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty [[coups]] are supplemented by a [[sumptuous]] scene in which a [[girls]] has a [[president]] smashed over her face. (Only a Miike [[cinematic]] could [[leave]] you get away with a sentence like that.) The [[filmmaking]] has a [[unbelievable]] pace, unlike Dead or Alive which [[outset]] and [[terminates]] [[resolutely]] and [[drops]] in the middle. Dead or Alive [[additionally]] [[treats]] with [[comparable]] [[problem]], Miike is [[blatantly]] concerned about the relations between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar [[timeline]] and this emotive [[topic]] is [[treated]] well here, the central character really [[incoming]] to life when you [[launch]] to [[fathom]] his [[previous]].

I cannot sing Shinjuku's [[congratulating]] [[sufficient]]. I do not [[wanna]] to [[lend]] away too much. This is Miike before he [[starts]] to [[utilizing]] CGI to [[animated]] his [[filmmaking]] and is [[hardly]] reminiscent of something like Kitano's Sonatine. The central [[character]] are [[fantastically]] [[performed]] and the [[last]] twist [[guarantee]] that as [[expeditiously]] as the [[cinematography]] has [[finalized]] you'll be popping it back on again to work it all out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2572 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]]

This is [[definitely]] a '[[must]] see' for those who occasionally smoke a reefer in their secret hide-out, trying to avoid being caught by parents, teachers, the police, etc... The protagonist is a lady in her forties, living in her mansion, breeding orchids, and absolutely unaware of the fact that her so-called rich and truthful husband is actually broke and cheating on her. When he all of the sudden dies, she is confronted with the truth. The bailiff comes by to tell her that she is in a huge debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener tells her about the recent success of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some long thinking to get rid of her flowers and start breeding pot instead... The story is quite original, the performances outstanding! I can think of only a few movies that made me laugh more than this one. Still, the melodramatic touch is present. The film is typical British: the jokes aren't vulgar, there is no violence involved. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have taken a few draughts before watching 'Saving grace'. It will be so much more fun! Especially the scene with the 2 old ladies in their tea shop is hilarious. I thought my jawbones would burst. 9/10

This is [[categorically]] a '[[ought]] see' for those who occasionally smoke a reefer in their secret hide-out, trying to avoid being caught by parents, teachers, the police, etc... The protagonist is a lady in her forties, living in her mansion, breeding orchids, and absolutely unaware of the fact that her so-called rich and truthful husband is actually broke and cheating on her. When he all of the sudden dies, she is confronted with the truth. The bailiff comes by to tell her that she is in a huge debt. She doesn't know what to do, until her gardener tells her about the recent success of marijuana in Britain. She decides after some long thinking to get rid of her flowers and start breeding pot instead... The story is quite original, the performances outstanding! I can think of only a few movies that made me laugh more than this one. Still, the melodramatic touch is present. The film is typical British: the jokes aren't vulgar, there is no violence involved. It shouldn't be mentioned that it is recommended to have taken a few draughts before watching 'Saving grace'. It will be so much more fun! Especially the scene with the 2 old ladies in their tea shop is hilarious. I thought my jawbones would burst. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2573 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I sat down to watch a [[documentary]] about [[Puerto]] Rico, and I [[ended]] up [[watching]] one about Nuyoricans. When I go to Puerto [[Rico]], I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. When I do see struggling people, they are [[usually]] Haitians, Dominicans, or Cubans that have recently [[arrived]] to the island. There is no such [[thing]] as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[heard]]... you don't. Pedro Albizo [[Campos]] IS [[NOT]] MLK to me. MLK was a great [[man]]. [[Campos]] is a [[great]] [[man]] to those that want independence which is 1%. To the [[rest]] he as loco as Osama Bin Laden. Puertoricans that want independence are a bunch of [[fools]]. If you want any proof to all of you dreamers of an independent Puerto Rico see Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of South and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about Puerto Rico, this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their struggles.

To the person that complaint that not enough of Africa was on the show... it was suppose to be about Puerto Rico... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

In conclusion... to all those ignorant white people that think we need green cards to come to the US, and want to learn how the prime minister runs things, this is not a [[good]] documentary about Puertorican culture. Tell your kids to pay attention in Geography, and History class.

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She [[promoted]] it as if its how we all feel. [[Should]] have been titled... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." PLEASE STOP USING PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, OR ANYTHING ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. God forbid they play this on the island. I sat down to watch a [[documentation]] about [[Porto]] Rico, and I [[completed]] up [[staring]] one about Nuyoricans. When I go to Puerto [[Puerto]], I fail to see the 50% that live in poverty. When I do see struggling people, they are [[generally]] Haitians, Dominicans, or Cubans that have recently [[arriving]] to the island. There is no such [[stuff]] as spanglish... either you speak Spanish, or you don't.... and from what I [[listened]]... you don't. Pedro Albizo [[Camps]] IS [[NOPE]] MLK to me. MLK was a great [[dude]]. [[Fields]] is a [[wondrous]] [[dude]] to those that want independence which is 1%. To the [[stays]] he as loco as Osama Bin Laden. Puertoricans that want independence are a bunch of [[cunts]]. If you want any proof to all of you dreamers of an independent Puerto Rico see Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, all of South and Central America, and Mexico. Its worked wonders for them. This documentary is not about Puerto Rico, this documentary was about the Nuyoricans and their struggles.

To the person that complaint that not enough of Africa was on the show... it was suppose to be about Puerto Rico... not Africa. Denzel will make one shortly just for you.

In conclusion... to all those ignorant white people that think we need green cards to come to the US, and want to learn how the prime minister runs things, this is not a [[alright]] documentary about Puertorican culture. Tell your kids to pay attention in Geography, and History class.

***Update***

Bocabonita... "doc." was about Nuyoricans. She [[encouraged]] it as if its how we all feel. [[Ought]] have been titled... "yo soy nuyorican... lunche...can't speak Spanish." PLEASE STOP USING PUERTO RICO, RICAN, BORICUA, OR ANYTHING ELSE ASSOCIATED WITH PR WITH THIS NUYORICAN HISTORICAL LESSON. God forbid they play this on the island. --------------------------------------------- Result 2574 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Playwright [[Sidney]] Bruhl (a [[wonderfully]] over-the-top [[Michael]] Caine) [[would]] [[kill]] for a [[hit]] play. Enter young wonder kid (a solid Reeve) who's just written such a [[play]]. Weave into this Bruhl's overly hysterical wife ([[superbly]] [[played]] by [[Cannon]]) and a German [[psychic]] (a very [[funny]] Irene Worth) and you've [[got]] yourself a [[wonderfully]] funny [[suspense]] [[flick]].

[[While]] not up to "Sleuth" [[standards]], "Deathtrap" is none the [[less]] a very capable, twist [[filled]] comical [[suspense]] ride [[based]] on a [[terrific]] play by Ira Levin. The performers are [[obviously]] having a field day with the [[material]], with Caine in [[particular]] [[delivering]] [[top]] notch lines with gusto.

The [[film]] [[loses]] a [[bit]] of steam midway through and the [[ending]] is a [[lot]] [[less]] [[satisfying]] than the [[hilarious]] one in the [[original]] [[play]] but [[overall]] "Deathtrap" is [[solid]], well acted and suspenseful [[fun]]. Playwright [[Sydney]] Bruhl (a [[amazingly]] over-the-top [[Michele]] Caine) [[should]] [[slays]] for a [[hitting]] play. Enter young wonder kid (a solid Reeve) who's just written such a [[gaming]]. Weave into this Bruhl's overly hysterical wife ([[staggeringly]] [[done]] by [[Barrel]]) and a German [[devin]] (a very [[amusing]] Irene Worth) and you've [[did]] yourself a [[marvellously]] funny [[wait]] [[gesture]].

[[Despite]] not up to "Sleuth" [[norms]], "Deathtrap" is none the [[fewest]] a very capable, twist [[fill]] comical [[sufferance]] ride [[predicated]] on a [[fantastic]] play by Ira Levin. The performers are [[surely]] having a field day with the [[materials]], with Caine in [[singular]] [[supplying]] [[superior]] notch lines with gusto.

The [[movie]] [[losing]] a [[bite]] of steam midway through and the [[terminated]] is a [[batches]] [[lowest]] [[pleasing]] than the [[funny]] one in the [[upfront]] [[gaming]] but [[aggregate]] "Deathtrap" is [[robust]], well acted and suspenseful [[amusing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[wanted]] so much to enjoy this [[movie]]. It moved very [[slowly]] and was just boring. If it had been on TV, it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, maybe. What happened to the story? A great cast and [[photographer]] were working on a faulty foundation. If this is [[loosely]] based on the life of the [[director]], why didn't he get someone to see that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[directed]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a different [[film]], not this one....for soap opera saga [[possibly]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller Stahl was speaking. I was not alone, because I heard a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make better movies? This one had the nugget of a great story, but was just poorly executed. I [[want]] so much to enjoy this [[kino]]. It moved very [[softly]] and was just boring. If it had been on TV, it would have lasted 15 to 20 minutes, maybe. What happened to the story? A great cast and [[photographing]] were working on a faulty foundation. If this is [[lightly]] based on the life of the [[headmaster]], why didn't he get someone to see that the writing itself was "loose". Then he [[geared]] it at a snail's pace which may have been the source of a few people nodding off during the movie. The music soars, but for a different [[kino]], not this one....for soap opera saga [[arguably]]. There were times when the dialogue was not understandable when Armin Meuller Stahl was speaking. I was not alone, because I heard a few rumblings about who said what to whom. Why can't Hollywood make better movies? This one had the nugget of a great story, but was just poorly executed. --------------------------------------------- Result 2576 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She [[gives]] her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette [[Midler]] [[moves]] her audience. [[If]] you can't see it live (which is the [[best]] way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to [[look]] at is how [[incredible]] her voice has changed and matured over the [[years]] but never [[lost]] its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never [[loses]] anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will [[treasure]] this concert for a very long time. Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She [[offers]] her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette [[Bette]] [[shift]] her audience. [[Unless]] you can't see it live (which is the [[better]] way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to [[gaze]] at is how [[unimaginable]] her voice has changed and matured over the [[yr]] but never [[outof]] its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never [[forfeits]] anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will [[hoard]] this concert for a very long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[times]] when I [[thought]] it was a comedy. I loved how the government's plan to capture the terrorist leader is to air drop in one man, who is unarmed, and expect him to capture him and escape with a rocket pack. [[If]] only it were really that easy. I've finally found a [[movie]] worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space". Oh dear, Oh dear. I started watching this not knowing what to expect. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. There were [[dates]] when I [[brainchild]] it was a comedy. I loved how the government's plan to capture the terrorist leader is to air drop in one man, who is unarmed, and expect him to capture him and escape with a rocket pack. [[Though]] only it were really that easy. I've finally found a [[kino]] worse than "Plan 9 From Outer Space". --------------------------------------------- Result 2578 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Le Locataire"("The Tenant")is without a doubt one of the most important horror movies ever made.Polanski stars as a Trelkovsky,a timid file clerk living in Paris,who answers an advertisement for an apartment,only to find that the previous tenant attempted suicide by leaping from the apartment window.Trelkovsky is compelled to visit her in the hospital and there he meets Stella(Isabelle Adjani).Trelkovsky immediately moves in when the previous tenant dies and,at first,is quite pleased with having found such a nice apartment.His happiness is soon replaced by waves of paranoia as he becomes increasingly suspicious of his neighbours,who seem to be trying to provoke Trelkovsky into repeating the previous tenant's suicide.This film is great.Polanski manages to create a surreal atmosphere of dread and paranoia.Plenty of brilliant moments such as the classic scene where Trelkovsky discovers the previous tenant's tooth in a hole in the wall,or the fever dream where he wanders into the building's bathroom to find the walls covered with hieroglyphics.The photography by Sven Nykvist is truly beautiful."The Tenant" is a neglected gem.It may be difficult to track down,but it is more than worth the effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 2579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] No reason to bother renting this flick. From the opening [[credits]] on, I knew I was in trouble.

It was filmed as though it was a soft porn movie, but there [[really]] isn't [[anything]] erotic about it. The look into the world of sex addiction is [[intriguing]], but only to a point.

Boring sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[save]] this film. No reason to bother renting this flick. From the opening [[appropriations]] on, I knew I was in trouble.

It was filmed as though it was a soft porn movie, but there [[truthfully]] isn't [[algo]] erotic about it. The look into the world of sex addiction is [[captivating]], but only to a point.

Boring sex scenes, bad plot, and cameos by Ed Begley Jr. and Rosanna Arquette aren't enough to [[rescued]] this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2580 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] European Vacation (aka National Lampoon's European Vacation) is the [[weakest]] of the [[Vacation]] [[films]] (the first and third one the most superior of the films). While Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo return as Clark and Ellen Griswold (with new actors in the roles of Russ and Audrey Griswold), this time they are given a weaker [[script]] with very bad dialogue. This causes the pacing to suffer, with the jokes not very [[funny]] at all. To be more specific, what really causes this [[film]] to suffer is the fact that the "jokes" as they are, are just pasted together into a cobbled-together script), rather than serving a central plot as the other 3 Vacation films have. Oh well, they can't win them all. 4 out of 10. European Vacation (aka National Lampoon's European Vacation) is the [[lower]] of the [[Holidays]] [[cinema]] (the first and third one the most superior of the films). While Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo return as Clark and Ellen Griswold (with new actors in the roles of Russ and Audrey Griswold), this time they are given a weaker [[hyphen]] with very bad dialogue. This causes the pacing to suffer, with the jokes not very [[comical]] at all. To be more specific, what really causes this [[cinematography]] to suffer is the fact that the "jokes" as they are, are just pasted together into a cobbled-together script), rather than serving a central plot as the other 3 Vacation films have. Oh well, they can't win them all. 4 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I thought this movie was very well put together. The voice-overs were also great. I liked how they all overcame their conflicts and reached their goals. I would recommend this movie to anyone. It was definitely worth the time and money to watch it. Atlantis has some comic scenes that made me laugh. Other scenes made me sad. And others made me glad. It is a movie any age can enjoy. From the moment Milo is the crazy "profesor" or until he gathers the crew up for the fantastic voyage under the sea. After I watched the movie, I read the book. It was good as well, but the movie puts better pictures in your mind. It is just like the book. But go ahead and watch this movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 2582 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny Kennedy. I never got the chance to meet him but I have never heard anybody say a bad word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programme]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this terrible [[condition]]. This man has [[touched]] people in a way that a million charity leaflets could not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in [[schools]]. I also agree with other comments - what have I got to moan about? He took everything that life could throw at him and still managed to retain a sense of [[humour]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that showed his dressings being [[changed]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. I have a two year old son who suffers from the same condition as Jonny Kennedy. I never got the chance to meet him but I have never heard anybody say a bad word about him. I hope he knows how much the making of this [[programmed]] has helped his fellow sufferers by raising awareness of this terrible [[stipulation]]. This man has [[poked]] people in a way that a million charity leaflets could not. I believe that this should be compulsory viewing in [[institutes]]. I also agree with other comments - what have I got to moan about? He took everything that life could throw at him and still managed to retain a sense of [[humor]]. God Bless. I couldn't watch the part that showed his dressings being [[modified]]. I have enough trouble with my son's. --------------------------------------------- Result 2583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Amongst the standard one liner type action [[films]], where acting and logic are checked at the door, this movie is at the top of the class. If the person in charge of casting were to have put "good" actors in this [[flick]], it would have been worse(excepting Richard Dawson who actually did act well, if you can call playing yourself "acting"). I [[love]] this movie! The Running Man is in all likelihood God's gift to man(okay maybe just men). Definitely the most quotable [[movie]] of our time so I'll part you with my favorite line: "It's all part of life's rich pattern Brenda, and you better F*****g get used to it." Ahh, more people have been called "Brenda" for the sake of quoting this film than I can possibly imagine. Amongst the standard one liner type action [[movie]], where acting and logic are checked at the door, this movie is at the top of the class. If the person in charge of casting were to have put "good" actors in this [[gesture]], it would have been worse(excepting Richard Dawson who actually did act well, if you can call playing yourself "acting"). I [[iike]] this movie! The Running Man is in all likelihood God's gift to man(okay maybe just men). Definitely the most quotable [[kino]] of our time so I'll part you with my favorite line: "It's all part of life's rich pattern Brenda, and you better F*****g get used to it." Ahh, more people have been called "Brenda" for the sake of quoting this film than I can possibly imagine. --------------------------------------------- Result 2584 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] To start off with, [[since]] this movie is a remake of a [[classic]], the rating has to be lowered already. Since this version stars Viggo Mortensen in the lead role of Kowalski, it [[helps]].

Isn't this just like the United States government though, to terrorize one of its own citizens. Sounds like Jason Priestley's character from the movie! But it is the [[truth]], the government would do anything possible to destroy a man's life for trying to get home to his wife. A wife, who is in labor no less, and may not make it.

"There was a time in this country that the police would escort a man to his pregnant wife." The words of the Disc Jockey.

There were some great shots of scenery in this film, and great car chases and a lot of spirituality. After much consideration, I gave this film a 7. To start off with, [[because]] this movie is a remake of a [[typical]], the rating has to be lowered already. Since this version stars Viggo Mortensen in the lead role of Kowalski, it [[supporting]].

Isn't this just like the United States government though, to terrorize one of its own citizens. Sounds like Jason Priestley's character from the movie! But it is the [[veracity]], the government would do anything possible to destroy a man's life for trying to get home to his wife. A wife, who is in labor no less, and may not make it.

"There was a time in this country that the police would escort a man to his pregnant wife." The words of the Disc Jockey.

There were some great shots of scenery in this film, and great car chases and a lot of spirituality. After much consideration, I gave this film a 7. --------------------------------------------- Result 2585 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] xica da Silva is one of the best Brazilians opera soap ever! the a black slave's story that becomes queen of a small villa when conquering the most powerful man's of the area love, in the colonial period of the brazil dominated by Portugal, that explored its diamonds. The largest xica enemy, violante, bride that it was changed by xica, is a woman of big it influences the Portugal king close to and does to take revenge of the slave of everything. Very religious person, she is a picture of the hypocritical society and religious of the time, she dedicates its life the morality of the villa that was committed by xica, that is a woman full of lusts that it faces the society of the time to preach and it helps the slaves of the area. The story also bill with forbidden loves, sorceries and vampires and religious fervor. Xica da Silva does with that you don't want to lose a I only surrender, from beginning to end! --------------------------------------------- Result 2586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] (Spoilers)

I was very [[curious]] to see this [[film]], after having [[heard]] that it was [[clever]] and witty. I had to stop halfway because of the [[unbearable]] boredom I felt.

The [[idea]] [[behind]] the [[film]] [[would]] have been acceptable: depicting the way the relationship between a man and a [[woman]] [[evolves]], through all the problems and difficulties that two people living in a big [[city]] can [[experience]]. What made me [[dislike]] the whole [[film]] were two things.

First of all, the film was so down-to-earth that it looked as if, by describing the problems that a couple must solve on a day-to-day basis, it became itself ordinary and [[dull]].

Secondly, the overall sloppiness of the production, with [[dialogues]] that were barely understandable.

Too bad. (Spoilers)

I was very [[unusual]] to see this [[movies]], after having [[hear]] that it was [[shrewd]] and witty. I had to stop halfway because of the [[untenable]] boredom I felt.

The [[brainchild]] [[backside]] the [[kino]] [[ought]] have been acceptable: depicting the way the relationship between a man and a [[dame]] [[matures]], through all the problems and difficulties that two people living in a big [[ville]] can [[experiences]]. What made me [[aversion]] the whole [[cinematography]] were two things.

First of all, the film was so down-to-earth that it looked as if, by describing the problems that a couple must solve on a day-to-day basis, it became itself ordinary and [[drab]].

Secondly, the overall sloppiness of the production, with [[discussions]] that were barely understandable.

Too bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2587 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I was [[utterly]] [[disappointed]] by this movie. I had read some of the other reviews here and had much higher expectations. I [[expected]] a [[drama]] with more intense character development. But that never happens in the [[movie]]. Daniel-Day Lewis is a good [[actor]], but not as good as some reviewers here would have us believe. I tought he [[repeated]] the same set of 4 or 5 movements in the movie. I [[would]] rate his performance 6 out of 10.

Acting: 6 out of 10 Direction is 5 out of 10. Script is the [[worst]]: 2 out of 10.

I deleted the movie from my DVR at 70 mins. into the movie. Much better movies out there than this... I was [[perfectly]] [[disenchanted]] by this movie. I had read some of the other reviews here and had much higher expectations. I [[prophesied]] a [[tragedy]] with more intense character development. But that never happens in the [[cinema]]. Daniel-Day Lewis is a good [[actress]], but not as good as some reviewers here would have us believe. I tought he [[recur]] the same set of 4 or 5 movements in the movie. I [[ought]] rate his performance 6 out of 10.

Acting: 6 out of 10 Direction is 5 out of 10. Script is the [[hardest]]: 2 out of 10.

I deleted the movie from my DVR at 70 mins. into the movie. Much better movies out there than this... --------------------------------------------- Result 2588 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] There's more to offer in the opening of The Odd Couple than in the entirety of most [[films]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A cleaning lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his room he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the [[viewer]] [[finally]] puts it together — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[window]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular genius of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable situations. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. Great stuff. And it's made even greater with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great effect is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly memorable is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. There's more to offer in the opening of The Odd Couple than in the entirety of most [[movie]]. Felix Unger (the poor guy's monogram even curses him) checks into a New York hotel. A cleaning lady says "Good night." "Goodbye," he answers back. In his room he empties his pockets, then struggles to take off his wedding ring only to put the objects neatly into an envelope, addressed to his wife and beloved children. When the [[onlooker]] [[lastly]] puts it together — aha, he's going to off himself — we watch him struggle to open the [[luna]] — oh no, he's going to jump — The poor guy injures his lower back. This is all you need to know about Felix Unger — his wife has left him, he's a compulsive cleaner and he's a hypochondriac. And all in one scene. This is the particular genius of Neil Simon's comedy — it's about situation and character. There are few obvious physical jokes — no kicks to the groin, no cheap gags — just funny characters in uncomfortable situations. And, of course, he is a master of manipulating the audience's expectations. Coming from the Swingers era, imagine what I thought in the date scene when Felix starts lamenting about the breakup of his marriage to the girls his roommate Oscar has worked so hard to get into his apartment. He's blowing it, right? Think again. The girls love his sensitivity, his ability to cry in front of them. They invite him back to their place since his meatloaf has burned because Oscar wasn't paying enough attention to it. He's in like Flynn, right? Uh, yes, but he doesn't want to go with the girls because he's feeling vulnerable. Great stuff. And it's made even greater with a style that minimizes editing and maximizes the wonderful eight-room apartment set. You've got Jack Lemmon and the slouchy, pouchy Walter Matthau for Chrissakes, why mess it up? The visual style reminded me of Breakfast at Tiffany's, in that great effect is made from a large depth of field and the interplay between the various planes of action. Particularly memorable is the scene in which Felix, fleeing from Oscar, closes a partition only to realize the partition doesn't cover the side where Oscar is coming from. You get a real sense of the layout of the apartment, and thus the proximity in which the two divorcées live. The twist here is that these two are really married — to each other. So the observations about married life that might be ignored in an ordinary romantic comedy are made all the more poignant since they are two guys. --------------------------------------------- Result 2589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Yes, this [[gets]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this fill is [[genius]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, wonderfully strange man one day and Harris caught him on tape, in all that [[true]] misfit [[glory]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[tragedy]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Penn]] and Crispin Glover in the roles of the young men, respectively. The world is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a broader glimpse into growing up weird in vanilla America. Recommended for anyone and everyone! Yes, this [[got]] the full ten stars. It's plain as day that this fill is [[engineers]]. The universe sent Trent Harris a young, wonderfully strange man one day and Harris caught him on tape, in all that [[veritable]] misfit [[stardom]] that you just can't fake. Too bad it ended in [[drama]] for the young man, if only an alternate ending could be written for that fellow's story. The other two steps in the trilogy do retell the story, with Sean [[Pennsylvania]] and Crispin Glover in the roles of the young men, respectively. The world is expanded upon and the strangeness is contextualized by the retelling, giving us a broader glimpse into growing up weird in vanilla America. Recommended for anyone and everyone! --------------------------------------------- Result 2590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with long, complex dramas. Crime is essentially banal, so the pay off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[used]] a number of clever devices to try and [[get]] round this, but has not been [[entirely]] successful. [[Answers]] to precisely what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well buried. The viewer inevitably [[feels]] a [[little]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[drama]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the lives of those involved; the family, the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was [[gripping]]. The writing was a significant cut above the run of the mill for prime-time drama, and the performances uniformly good. In an ensemble piece it is invidious to focus on individuals, but Penelope Wilton deserves special mention for an extraordinary tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking form as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the handling of race, as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[powerful]] stuff. A number of posters have commented on the unsatisfactory conclusion. This is always a problem with long, complex dramas. Crime is essentially banal, so the pay off is always anti-climactic, whilst detailed exposition detracts from the human drama. The writer has [[utilize]] a number of clever devices to try and [[obtains]] round this, but has not been [[downright]] successful. [[Reply]] to precisely what happened and why may have been supplied, but if so they are well buried. The viewer inevitably [[deems]] a [[petite]] cheated.

But in a sense this is unimportant. The [[theatrical]] was never about the crime, or even the investigation, it was about the impact of events on the lives of those involved; the family, the investigators, the witnesses, the press. And as such it was [[captivating]]. The writing was a significant cut above the run of the mill for prime-time drama, and the performances uniformly good. In an ensemble piece it is invidious to focus on individuals, but Penelope Wilton deserves special mention for an extraordinary tour de force as the mother-wife-daughter, and Janet McTeer was in cracking form as a hard-bitten old cop.

One of the most interesting aspects of the drama is the handling of race, as the elephant in the room that no-one is prepared to mention. Subtle, [[influential]] stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 2591 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Yet again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the wild side. And a [[remarkable]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Mumbai]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch doctors, business [[tycoons]] and [[broker]] types, yep the [[whole]] stinking [[lot]] -- are in sharp focus here. In typical tabloid fashion, their [[worlds]] unfold, with [[every]] [[colorful]] [[story]] a [[clever]] sub-plot in itself.

A struggling starlet dumped by the producer after getting her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the pedophile businessman and his neurotic wife, the reporters and the police captain; all shades on display and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell job of [[digging]] up the dirt on the drama kings, the dancing queens and the living dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen Sharma is effective as the ex-crime beat reporter, but she could have been dolled up a little in keeping with the job change and the party circuit.

[[Highly]] [[focused]] (running time 140 min) and [[refreshingly]] [[different]] film, well worth the money. Yet again, Madhur Bhandarkar takes you on a ride to the wild side. And a [[sumptuous]] one it is, literally and figuratively.

[[Bangalore]] hi-society -- stars and starlets, glam dolls and witch doctors, business [[magnates]] and [[intermediaries]] types, yep the [[overall]] stinking [[batch]] -- are in sharp focus here. In typical tabloid fashion, their [[mundos]] unfold, with [[any]] [[scenic]] [[tale]] a [[adroit]] sub-plot in itself.

A struggling starlet dumped by the producer after getting her pregnant, the stewardess and her high-profile husband, the pedophile businessman and his neurotic wife, the reporters and the police captain; all shades on display and countless hues in between.

Bhandarkar does a swell job of [[delving]] up the dirt on the drama kings, the dancing queens and the living dead. Atul Kulkarni packs a punch, as does Boman Irani and Sandhya Mrudul. Konkona Sen Sharma is effective as the ex-crime beat reporter, but she could have been dolled up a little in keeping with the job change and the party circuit.

[[Inordinately]] [[orientated]] (running time 140 min) and [[cheerfully]] [[divergent]] film, well worth the money. --------------------------------------------- Result 2592 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This [[masterpiece]] of lesbian [[horror]] comes from exploitation master Joseph W.Sarno.It features plenty of soft [[core]] sex,[[really]] [[hot]] lesbian [[sequences]] plus a [[lot]] of [[naked]] [[women]].The acting is pretty good and the [[film]] is [[quite]] [[atmospheric]] and well-made.[[Marie]] Forsa is one of the hottest chicks I have ever [[seen]] in a horror movie-it's a visual pleasure to see her [[wonderful]] body.Sarno really knows how to pick up hot looking ladies.A [[must]] [[see]] for [[fans]] of sexploitation! This [[centerpiece]] of lesbian [[monstrosity]] comes from exploitation master Joseph W.Sarno.It features plenty of soft [[nuclei]] sex,[[truthfully]] [[caliente]] lesbian [[sequence]] plus a [[batch]] of [[bare]] [[females]].The acting is pretty good and the [[cinema]] is [[rather]] [[atmosphere]] and well-made.[[Mary]] Forsa is one of the hottest chicks I have ever [[watched]] in a horror movie-it's a visual pleasure to see her [[admirable]] body.Sarno really knows how to pick up hot looking ladies.A [[ought]] [[behold]] for [[amateurs]] of sexploitation! --------------------------------------------- Result 2593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] The movie had a cute opening, I truly believed I was in for one of the best romantic comedies i've seen in a while... there was something particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat abstract and mystical. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[unrealistic]]. To say that the ending was CORNY and PREDICTABLE would almost be an understatement... The most typical romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character realises that he has made a mistake and chases the "woman of his dreams" only to confess his love for her in front of a sympathetic crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the end, the 'good guys' win, 'bad guys' loose... You get the picture. A WASTE of a potentially interesting movie. The movie had a cute opening, I truly believed I was in for one of the best romantic comedies i've seen in a while... there was something particular "foreign" about the way the movie was set up, realistic yet somewhat abstract and mystical. But then the story line started becoming more and more [[utopian]]. To say that the ending was CORNY and PREDICTABLE would almost be an understatement... The most typical romantic ending where everything goes great for every 'likable' character. A scene where the main character realises that he has made a mistake and chases the "woman of his dreams" only to confess his love for her in front of a sympathetic crowd of on- lookers. Come on. In the end, the 'good guys' win, 'bad guys' loose... You get the picture. A WASTE of a potentially interesting movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2594 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] 5 [[minutes]] into this [[movie]] I was hyperventilating, [[shaking]], and [[writhing]] in [[pain]]. And not in the [[good]] [[way]]. The [[story]] is about a troupe of [[idiotic]] [[children]] making prank [[phone]] [[calls]] to a [[psycho]] which is [[always]] a good [[idea]]. Turns out psychos don't like [[prank]] phone calls because in 2 minutes [[time]] he's at their door [[killing]] poor [[Williams]] [[mom]] and [[dad]]. Well [[skip]] ahead 15 years and [[guess]] what? Still [[prank]] phone calling people. [[Yep]] you [[would]] of thought that a [[horrible]] [[murder]] [[would]] of [[deterred]] them from doing that ever again but no. So after about two hours [[later]] and [[way]] too many [[scream]] ripoffs I [[realized]] that this [[movie]] gave me nothing but a [[terrible]] [[taste]] in my mouth and a [[severe]] [[urge]] to [[take]] my own [[life]]. This [[piece]] of [[crap]] isn't [[even]] worth [[laughing]] at the shoddy [[production]], the "acting", or Rutger haurs [[dwindling]] [[career]]. I [[love]] [[crappy]] [[horror]] [[movies]] but this is the most unsatisfying [[piece]] I've ever [[seen]]. [[Just]] don't. 5 [[mins]] into this [[films]] I was hyperventilating, [[shakes]], and [[wriggling]] in [[heartbreak]]. And not in the [[buena]] [[camino]]. The [[storytelling]] is about a troupe of [[moronic]] [[childhood]] making prank [[tel]] [[invites]] to a [[insane]] which is [[steadily]] a good [[thoughts]]. Turns out psychos don't like [[joke]] phone calls because in 2 minutes [[period]] he's at their door [[killed]] poor [[William]] [[mum]] and [[pop]]. Well [[skipped]] ahead 15 years and [[imagine]] what? Still [[giggle]] phone calling people. [[Yes]] you [[should]] of thought that a [[terrible]] [[slain]] [[should]] of [[inhibited]] them from doing that ever again but no. So after about two hours [[then]] and [[ways]] too many [[howls]] ripoffs I [[realised]] that this [[cinematography]] gave me nothing but a [[horrifying]] [[tasting]] in my mouth and a [[utmost]] [[invite]] to [[taking]] my own [[lives]]. This [[slice]] of [[damnit]] isn't [[yet]] worth [[kidding]] at the shoddy [[productivity]], the "acting", or Rutger haurs [[tumbling]] [[professions]]. I [[adored]] [[shit]] [[terror]] [[kino]] but this is the most unsatisfying [[slice]] I've ever [[noticed]]. [[Jen]] don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[First]] of all i'd just like to say this [[movie]] rawked more than any of the recent [[crap]] that hollywood has [[cooked]] up out of its [[bowels]]. McBain is a [[true]] [[action]] film with more violence than most viewers can handle. It has all of the [[classic]] elements of a late 80's/early 90's action film....the random gratuitous acts of violence (ie. when Walken and crew go in to confront the drug dealers to get money they just show up and kill them rather than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the guys on fire, the guys that get blown off buildings, and of course the guys who are on fire that get blown off of buildings. Walken is at his [[finest]] in this picture delivering [[memorable]] lines such as, "let's go sit..........out on the deck." and [[others]] that [[make]] this [[film]] a top buy off of the clearence rack at the local video store. if you have a bloodlust for unnecessary random [[acts]] of violence rent this movie [[today]] and [[satisfy]] your thirst. [[Outset]] of all i'd just like to say this [[kino]] rawked more than any of the recent [[crappy]] that hollywood has [[boned]] up out of its [[intestines]]. McBain is a [[veritable]] [[activities]] film with more violence than most viewers can handle. It has all of the [[typical]] elements of a late 80's/early 90's action film....the random gratuitous acts of violence (ie. when Walken and crew go in to confront the drug dealers to get money they just show up and kill them rather than letting them live and just taking their money), the snapping of necks, the guys on fire, the guys that get blown off buildings, and of course the guys who are on fire that get blown off of buildings. Walken is at his [[meanest]] in this picture delivering [[eventful]] lines such as, "let's go sit..........out on the deck." and [[alia]] that [[deliver]] this [[movie]] a top buy off of the clearence rack at the local video store. if you have a bloodlust for unnecessary random [[act]] of violence rent this movie [[yesterday]] and [[cater]] your thirst. --------------------------------------------- Result 2596 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! How appropriate, right? I know, I love it. [[Anyway]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the rules of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't imaginative, but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally [[worse]] than the original.

It is entertaining in the same way as the original was, in that the characters and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't help getting a good laugh. At one point, a guy asks Angela out, and she says "I'll call you," and then quickly walks away. The guy says to himself, "How is she gonna call me? I don't have a phone!" and then he sniffs his armpits, wondering what turned her off (it's the hair, dude!!).

It is a well-known fact that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered teenagers were more often than not being punished by their killer for some kind of bad behavior, usually for being too promiscuous. When I first started getting into horror movies and saw the Friday the 13th movies for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I learned it in a film class a year or two later and was amazed that their was some method to the madness. I was pretty impressed, not only that the movies were passing on some kind of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was actually some thought put into it.

But not in this movie! At one point just before Angela kills one of her victims, she says "Let this be a lesson to you. Say no to drugs!" Real subtle screen writing there, guys. Then again, the dialogue is the most entertaining thing in the movie. Angela (who, by the way, went through all that therapy and those operations and all that trouble to clean up her past and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed person and then changed her name from Angela to, umm, Angela), says at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This made me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... So Angela has grown up and gotten therapy and an operation to turn her into a real life daughter, rather than the son that she was born, and now holds a job as - wait for it - a camp counselor! How appropriate, right? I know, I love it. [[Writ]], the first sequel to the Sleepaway Camp franchise obeys all the rules of horror sequels - more blood, more imaginative killings (which aren't imaginative, but still more so than the original), more nudity, a more elaborate plot, and generally [[lousiest]] than the original.

It is entertaining in the same way as the original was, in that the characters and wardrobes are so goofy and so authentically 80's that you can't help getting a good laugh. At one point, a guy asks Angela out, and she says "I'll call you," and then quickly walks away. The guy says to himself, "How is she gonna call me? I don't have a phone!" and then he sniffs his armpits, wondering what turned her off (it's the hair, dude!!).

It is a well-known fact that in 80s slasher movies, the murdered teenagers were more often than not being punished by their killer for some kind of bad behavior, usually for being too promiscuous. When I first started getting into horror movies and saw the Friday the 13th movies for the first time in the mid 90s, I didn't realize this. I learned it in a film class a year or two later and was amazed that their was some method to the madness. I was pretty impressed, not only that the movies were passing on some kind of message, albeit a morbid one, but that there was actually some thought put into it.

But not in this movie! At one point just before Angela kills one of her victims, she says "Let this be a lesson to you. Say no to drugs!" Real subtle screen writing there, guys. Then again, the dialogue is the most entertaining thing in the movie. Angela (who, by the way, went through all that therapy and those operations and all that trouble to clean up her past and reinvent herself as a normal and well-developed person and then changed her name from Angela to, umm, Angela), says at one point, "I don't like being the wicked witch of the west, but I know what happens when things get out of control." (People start getting killed...by me! HA!)

Then later, she demands that one of the counselors, Mare, make an apology, to which the girl replies, "I'd rather die!" Sorry, Mare, but you really walked into that one...

Two years ago I was a camp counselor at a sleepaway camp similar to the one portrayed in this movie (except the camp that I taught at had more than three kids to the 15 or 20 counselors and it also had rules, which the one in the movie doesn't). This made me notice the myriad of discrepancies in the movie from what camp life is really like.

That's okay though, you can hardly make a movie like this with a lot of 9 year olds running around, although there were some 10 or 11 year old kids killed in this movie. I hadn't seen that kind of thing much before.

Definitely bad taste, even for a cheesy 80s slasher movie.... --------------------------------------------- Result 2597 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] this is the [[first]] [[time]] I'm [[writing]] a [[comment]] on a [[movie]] on IMDb. but i had to [[write]] it for this one. its 3 hrs of [[unadulterated]] [[torture]]. from the [[starting]] u [[get]] the idea that the [[movie]] is gonna be [[bad]]. the acting is [[pathetic]]. I'm a [[big]] [[fan]] of [[Ajay]] devgan ([[loved]] him in bhagat singh) but he is at his [[worst]] in this movie. amitabh seems to have [[worked]] hard for this one, but somehow the fear is missing. prashant raj is a non [[actor]]. and the most [[irritating]] [[part]] of the movie is nisha kothari. i have no clue why the [[director]] took her in this movie. the [[background]] score is repetitive. [[somehow]] i [[felt]] that ramu tried to repeat a sarkar, the color theme, the background score, the camera angles, but it didn't [[work]]. [[PLEASE]] Don't WATCH IT this is the [[firstly]] [[period]] I'm [[literary]] a [[commentaries]] on a [[kino]] on IMDb. but i had to [[handwriting]] it for this one. its 3 hrs of [[pur]] [[tortures]]. from the [[launching]] u [[got]] the idea that the [[films]] is gonna be [[negative]]. the acting is [[unlucky]]. I'm a [[gargantuan]] [[breather]] of [[Aage]] devgan ([[adore]] him in bhagat singh) but he is at his [[hardest]] in this movie. amitabh seems to have [[functioned]] hard for this one, but somehow the fear is missing. prashant raj is a non [[protagonist]]. and the most [[irksome]] [[parties]] of the movie is nisha kothari. i have no clue why the [[headmaster]] took her in this movie. the [[context]] score is repetitive. [[someplace]] i [[smelled]] that ramu tried to repeat a sarkar, the color theme, the background score, the camera angles, but it didn't [[cooperates]]. [[INVITES]] Don't WATCH IT --------------------------------------------- Result 2598 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] One of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]] shoddy [[camera]] [[work]], crappy filter usage, [[film]] was [[grainy]], [[script]] was [[terrible]], i mean [[come]] on, how predictable was the big battle at the end.....

some of the fight scenes were okay i [[guess]]....

some scenes were so bad it was comical ...like Sorbo getting the horse and riding at the end...LOL i mean really ..a horse? Oh cant forget how the bad assassins roll around in the same vehicle throughout the entire movie..one would think that after killling key witness and federal agents, they woulda been tracked down..ETC, ETC really don't bother watching it... One of the [[hardest]] [[films]] I've [[noticed]] shoddy [[cameras]] [[cooperate]], crappy filter usage, [[flick]] was [[foggy]], [[hyphen]] was [[scary]], i mean [[arrived]] on, how predictable was the big battle at the end.....

some of the fight scenes were okay i [[imagines]]....

some scenes were so bad it was comical ...like Sorbo getting the horse and riding at the end...LOL i mean really ..a horse? Oh cant forget how the bad assassins roll around in the same vehicle throughout the entire movie..one would think that after killling key witness and federal agents, they woulda been tracked down..ETC, ETC really don't bother watching it... --------------------------------------------- Result 2599 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Watching]] this movie was a [[waste]] of time. I was tempted to leave in the [[middle]] of the [[movie]], but I resisted. I don't [[know]] what Ridley Scott intended, but I [[learned]] that in the army, [[women]] get as [[stupid]] as [[men]]. They [[learn]] to spit, to [[insult]] and to [[fight]] in [[combat]], and that's [[also]] a waste of [[time]] (in my [[opinion]]). And, anyway, what the [[hell]] was that [[final]] scene in Lybia? [[Are]] they [[still]] [[fighting]] Gadafi or is it that it's easy for everyone to [[believe]] [[islamic]] people are [[always]] a [[danger]]? [[Staring]] this movie was a [[wastes]] of time. I was tempted to leave in the [[mid]] of the [[films]], but I resisted. I don't [[savoir]] what Ridley Scott intended, but I [[learnt]] that in the army, [[daughters]] get as [[foolish]] as [[man]]. They [[learnt]] to spit, to [[insulted]] and to [[battling]] in [[struggles]], and that's [[apart]] a waste of [[times]] (in my [[vista]]). And, anyway, what the [[bordello]] was that [[definitive]] scene in Lybia? [[Be]] they [[yet]] [[struggles]] Gadafi or is it that it's easy for everyone to [[reckon]] [[islam]] people are [[constantly]] a [[jeopardy]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 2600 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The only redeeming quality of this movie is that it was [[bad]] [[enough]] to be [[comedic]]. [[Everyone]] in this [[movie]] [[looks]] [[like]] a [[porn]] industry drop out. I have actually [[seen]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[though]] I had actually [[rented]] some [[kind]] of gay [[porn]] after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your [[ass]] [[Nick]]: You watch yours (together): I [[wont]] [[leave]] you behind!

The [[first]] [[action]] sequence [[shows]] how awful the production is, but its [[really]] [[kind]] of funny: Good [[guys]] have transformer [[weapons]]! [[In]] one scene, they all have [[fake]] HK MP5 sub-machine [[guns]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[top]] it all off, they do some [[weapon]] swapping between scenes with a [[couple]] of M-16s!! I [[think]] they had a budget shortage for [[guns]], not [[enough]] to go around between the [[good]] guys and bad guys. Fight scenes are poorly coordinated and fake as all hell. You have to remove the pin/spoon from a grenade for it to explode on its own. You can't fire a shoulder launched missile of any kind while riding inside a helicopter. Weapons that you throw away don't suddenly re-appear. When a gun is out of bullets, throwing it away is still pretty [[stupid]]. Unless you have no idea how to reload them.. Big slow trucks driving around in first gear make for awkward action scenes. I really cant believe movies [[like]] this are actually produced. This movie would be hilarious on nitrous oxide or maybe just drunk. The only redeeming quality of this movie is that it was [[horrid]] [[sufficiently]] to be [[slapstick]]. [[Anyone]] in this [[cinema]] [[seem]] [[iike]] a [[pornographic]] industry drop out. I have actually [[watched]] better acting in low budget porn. I [[although]] I had actually [[rentals]] some [[genus]] of gay [[pornography]] after this classic scene: Jim: Watch your [[butt]] [[Nicky]]: You watch yours (together): I [[habit]] [[let]] you behind!

The [[fiirst]] [[efforts]] sequence [[show]] how awful the production is, but its [[truthfully]] [[type]] of funny: Good [[lads]] have transformer [[waffen]]! [[Onto]] one scene, they all have [[forged]] HK MP5 sub-machine [[muskets]]. Next scene, AK-47 replicas! And then, to [[topped]] it all off, they do some [[gun]] swapping between scenes with a [[matches]] of M-16s!! I [[ideas]] they had a budget shortage for [[pistols]], not [[satisfactorily]] to go around between the [[alright]] guys and bad guys. Fight scenes are poorly coordinated and fake as all hell. You have to remove the pin/spoon from a grenade for it to explode on its own. You can't fire a shoulder launched missile of any kind while riding inside a helicopter. Weapons that you throw away don't suddenly re-appear. When a gun is out of bullets, throwing it away is still pretty [[nonsensical]]. Unless you have no idea how to reload them.. Big slow trucks driving around in first gear make for awkward action scenes. I really cant believe movies [[iike]] this are actually produced. This movie would be hilarious on nitrous oxide or maybe just drunk. --------------------------------------------- Result 2601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The [[Master]] Blackmailer, [[based]] off of [[Sir]] [[Arthur]] Conan Doyle's short [[story]], "the [[Adventure]] of Charles Augustus Milverton," is the [[first]] [[feature]] [[length]] Sherlock Holmes story with Jeremy [[Brett]] that I have [[seen]]. The story is interesting and [[dark]]. The [[film]] has a [[somewhat]] dreary, sad feel to it, but it is [[quite]] entertaining (with some [[especially]] [[funny]] scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one [[way]] or another, [[destroy]] their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few [[tragic]] consequences for victims that [[could]] not pay up. Our heroes must [[next]] [[help]] Lady Eva Blackwell, who must [[pay]] a sum that is [[beyond]] her means or else her [[upcoming]] marriage will most [[definitely]] be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's [[house]] are [[intense]]. Although the [[film]] has an essentially happy [[ending]], the tone is [[sad]] and [[regretful]].

Outstanding performances by Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke (as usual), and [[Robert]] Hardy as the notorious villain (most audiences probably recognize him today as Cornelius Fudge in Harry Potter), Serena Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, Norma West as Lady Swinstead and [[Sophie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only [[complaint]] is that there wasn't enough Inspector Lestrade. (I wish they [[would]] have [[added]] in the scene at the [[end]] of the short story where he gives the description of the two [[burglars]], one of which [[matches]] Watson.) The [[Padrone]] Blackmailer, [[bases]] off of [[Mister]] [[Arturo]] Conan Doyle's short [[tale]], "the [[Fling]] of Charles Augustus Milverton," is the [[frst]] [[attribute]] [[lifespan]] Sherlock Holmes story with Jeremy [[Extensively]] that I have [[noticed]]. The story is interesting and [[gloom]]. The [[cinematic]] has a [[slightly]] dreary, sad feel to it, but it is [[altogether]] entertaining (with some [[namely]] [[amusing]] scenes).

*Spoilers* Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson attempt to uncover the identity of an illusive blackmailer who has been ruining some of the most prominent families of England by publishing private letters that will, in one [[routing]] or another, [[destroys]] their lives. They eventually find out that he is Charles Augustus Milverton, an "art dealer," after the few [[catastrophic]] consequences for victims that [[would]] not pay up. Our heroes must [[impending]] [[aids]] Lady Eva Blackwell, who must [[paying]] a sum that is [[afterlife]] her means or else her [[impending]] marriage will most [[obviously]] be called off. The scene in which Holmes and Watson burglarize Milverton's [[housing]] are [[fierce]]. Although the [[cinema]] has an essentially happy [[terminating]], the tone is [[regrettable]] and [[pitiful]].

Outstanding performances by Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke (as usual), and [[Roberta]] Hardy as the notorious villain (most audiences probably recognize him today as Cornelius Fudge in Harry Potter), Serena Gordon as Lady Eva Blackwell, Norma West as Lady Swinstead and [[Sofie]] Thomson as Agatha (the scenes involving her and Holmes are a riot). I give it a ***1/2 out *****. My only [[complaints]] is that there wasn't enough Inspector Lestrade. (I wish they [[ought]] have [[adds]] in the scene at the [[terminating]] of the short story where he gives the description of the two [[rustlers]], one of which [[couples]] Watson.) --------------------------------------------- Result 2602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Really no [[reason]] to examine this [[much]] further because of a few very [[glaring]] and bias [[misleading]] statements.

A [[perfect]] [[example]] is when the filmmaker [[claims]] "[[Saul]]" or [[Paul]] of Tarus (the [[writer]] of The [[Book]] of [[Hebrews]] He [[asserts]]) has no [[idea]] [[Jesus]] is or was a human being, this [[assertion]] is either [[purposely]] false as he [[accuses]] others of [[presenting]], or he is [[ignorant]] of what "The [[Bible]]" [[says]].

first we can [[examine]] his [[misleading]] [[claim]] about Hebrews 8.4; which he [[shows]] a [[quote]] "[[If]] [[Jesus]] was on [[earth]], he [[would]] not be a [[priest]]", hence right here He sets up the [[ignorant]] and unlearned viewer to [[accept]] his [[false]] [[premise]].. why? He does what most so called Bible believing people he [[accuses]] of doing, the same.. That is [[TAKING]] things out of [[context]].

verse one of Hebrews 8 is; 1.."Now of the things which we have [[spoken]] this is the [[sum]]: We have such an [[high]] [[priest]], who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the [[heavens]]" The [[context]] above is [[CLEARLY]] [[speaking]] of a [[Jesus]] who was on [[earth]] and [[ASCENDED]] into [[heaven]] after his [[alleged]] [[resurrection]].

It has nothing to do with how the filmmaker [[wants]] the [[viewer]] to [[take]] his out of context [[scripture]]. Here he [[offers]] a foundation, that "[[Paul]] was not [[aware]] of a [[HUMAN]] [[Jesus]], but only one in "[[heaven]]"

follow?

[[lets]] [[see]] if the filmmaker is being honest; Hebrews 7; 14. "[[For]] it is [[evident]] that our [[Lord]] sprang out of Judah; of which tribe [[Moses]] spake [[nothing]] [[concerning]] priesthood."

heh, didn't the filmmaker just quote from the [[writer]] of Hebrews [[trying]] to [[show]] the [[writer]] of that [[book]] has no [[knowledge]] of a "Human [[Jesus]]"? it's likely anyways [[Paul]] didn't write Hebrews, but I will not go into that here, but The [[film]] [[maker]] asserts [[Paul]] did, and that is the [[premise]] of the point [[given]] here.

It is not like this [[film]] [[maker]] does not [[make]] decent [[points]] in certain [[areas]], he does, but he is engaging in the same blind bias of the religion he is bashing on. Once he engages in these tactics, in my strong opinion, he loses credibility as the religion he picks out, and the film is no longer a documentary, but a personal opinion, and a bias of the film maker, nothing more, nothing less. Really no [[reasons]] to examine this [[very]] further because of a few very [[seeming]] and bias [[false]] statements.

A [[flawless]] [[instances]] is when the filmmaker [[claiming]] "[[Shaul]]" or [[Paolo]] of Tarus (the [[novelist]] of The [[Ledger]] of [[Hebrew]] He [[argues]]) has no [[notions]] [[Jeez]] is or was a human being, this [[contention]] is either [[voluntarily]] false as he [[accusation]] others of [[presents]], or he is [[uninformed]] of what "The [[Biblical]]" [[said]].

first we can [[explores]] his [[specious]] [[grievance]] about Hebrews 8.4; which he [[exhibitions]] a [[quotes]] "[[Though]] [[Damn]] was on [[terrestrial]], he [[could]] not be a [[parson]]", hence right here He sets up the [[ignoramus]] and unlearned viewer to [[accepts]] his [[fictitious]] [[assumption]].. why? He does what most so called Bible believing people he [[blaming]] of doing, the same.. That is [[PICKED]] things out of [[backdrop]].

verse one of Hebrews 8 is; 1.."Now of the things which we have [[talked]] this is the [[somme]]: We have such an [[highest]] [[pastor]], who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the [[heaven]]" The [[backdrop]] above is [[DEFINITELY]] [[conversation]] of a [[Christ]] who was on [[terra]] and [[MOUNTED]] into [[paradise]] after his [[presumed]] [[rebirth]].

It has nothing to do with how the filmmaker [[wanna]] the [[beholder]] to [[taking]] his out of context [[scriptures]]. Here he [[tender]] a foundation, that "[[Pauli]] was not [[conscious]] of a [[HUMANITY]] [[Jeez]], but only one in "[[paradise]]"

follow?

[[enables]] [[behold]] if the filmmaker is being honest; Hebrews 7; 14. "[[Onto]] it is [[noticeable]] that our [[Seigneur]] sprang out of Judah; of which tribe [[Musa]] spake [[none]] [[pertaining]] priesthood."

heh, didn't the filmmaker just quote from the [[screenwriter]] of Hebrews [[tempting]] to [[spectacle]] the [[screenwriter]] of that [[books]] has no [[acquaintance]] of a "Human [[Dammit]]"? it's likely anyways [[Pablo]] didn't write Hebrews, but I will not go into that here, but The [[flick]] [[bringer]] asserts [[Pablo]] did, and that is the [[supposition]] of the point [[bestowed]] here.

It is not like this [[flick]] [[growers]] does not [[deliver]] decent [[dot]] in certain [[zones]], he does, but he is engaging in the same blind bias of the religion he is bashing on. Once he engages in these tactics, in my strong opinion, he loses credibility as the religion he picks out, and the film is no longer a documentary, but a personal opinion, and a bias of the film maker, nothing more, nothing less. --------------------------------------------- Result 2603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Franco [[proves]], once again, that he is the prince of surreal & erotic cinema. True, [[much]] of his work can be viewed as entertaining sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he shows what he is truly capable of when he lets his warped creativity run riot and [[gives]] us a [[film]] that is both hypnotic and enigmatic whilst still maintaining the delirious eroticism intrinsic in his work. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[splendid]] score pulsates as the viewer is thrown from one bizarre [[scenario]] to another as we follow the [[trials]] of a striptease artist ([[Reynaud]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one mysterious character states) be a devil, attempt to come to terms with the world she inhabits. A [[beautiful]] and enigmatic [[piece]] of cinema highly [[recommended]] to anybody with even a passing interest in alternative cinema. Franco [[testifies]], once again, that he is the prince of surreal & erotic cinema. True, [[very]] of his work can be viewed as entertaining sleaze but with Succubus (Necronomicon) he shows what he is truly capable of when he lets his warped creativity run riot and [[donne]] us a [[kino]] that is both hypnotic and enigmatic whilst still maintaining the delirious eroticism intrinsic in his work. Jerry Van Rooyen's [[grandiose]] score pulsates as the viewer is thrown from one bizarre [[screenplay]] to another as we follow the [[tryouts]] of a striptease artist ([[Rino]]) who may be schizophrenic, or may indeed (as one mysterious character states) be a devil, attempt to come to terms with the world she inhabits. A [[glamorous]] and enigmatic [[slice]] of cinema highly [[recommends]] to anybody with even a passing interest in alternative cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 2604 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] this [[movie]] as a young kid. [[At]] that age I [[thought]] that the [[silly]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[sports]]. [[Now]], several years later, I can look back and see what a well [[designed]] [[movie]] this was. This [[movie]] [[opened]] my eyes as a small [[child]] to the [[struggles]] other children dealt with and [[real]] [[world]] issues. That kind of exposure is [[largely]] lacking in [[kids]] movies these [[days]] which I don't [[think]] is to our society's benefit. Sure the baseball antics [[seem]] really dumb now, but they [[drew]] kids in. No seven year old is [[going]] to ask to see a movie about foster children, but they will ask to see a movie about baseball. Disney realized this fact and took advantage of it to teach these children an important lesson about the world.

As a young adult the performance of Al and the other angels [[seems]] far less [[impressive]], however I will give credit to the actors playing both children and Danny Glover who all did a fantastic job. I [[truthfully]] [[adored]] this [[film]] as a young kid. [[Under]] that age I [[think]] that the [[laughable]] baseball antics were funny and that the movie was "cool" because of it's about [[athlete]]. [[Currently]], several years later, I can look back and see what a well [[intended]] [[films]] this was. This [[filmmaking]] [[started]] my eyes as a small [[children]] to the [[fight]] other children dealt with and [[actual]] [[globe]] issues. That kind of exposure is [[overwhelmingly]] lacking in [[kid]] movies these [[jours]] which I don't [[thought]] is to our society's benefit. Sure the baseball antics [[appears]] really dumb now, but they [[called]] kids in. No seven year old is [[go]] to ask to see a movie about foster children, but they will ask to see a movie about baseball. Disney realized this fact and took advantage of it to teach these children an important lesson about the world.

As a young adult the performance of Al and the other angels [[appears]] far less [[awesome]], however I will give credit to the actors playing both children and Danny Glover who all did a fantastic job. --------------------------------------------- Result 2605 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I can't agree with any of the comments. First time I saw the film on a UK TV channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the film under this angle I think it's an all different matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked [[instantly]]. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[hilarious]] and it's all in all an [[incredible]] trash [[movie]].

It says as much about America than a Bully or a Ken Park without the drama perspective but it gives a glimpse on the US society, and more precisely on what afternoon TV viewers in America (and I believe there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the neighbours we're talking about, don't we ?

100% fun ! I can't agree with any of the comments. First time I saw the film on a UK TV channel, it was presented as an indie film and if you take the film under this angle I think it's an all different matter. I couldn't believe what I was seeing and got hooked [[instantaneously]]. The plot may be as bad as a JS's show (ie there is no plot) but the acting is wicked, it's [[comical]] and it's all in all an [[unimaginable]] trash [[cinematography]].

It says as much about America than a Bully or a Ken Park without the drama perspective but it gives a glimpse on the US society, and more precisely on what afternoon TV viewers in America (and I believe there are plenty of them !) are interested in. After all it's the neighbours we're talking about, don't we ?

100% fun ! --------------------------------------------- Result 2606 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] [[Given]] the people involved, it is hard to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[dull]]. The writer, David Ward, wrote the amazing caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. At the same time the movie wants to be hip satire, a series of comedy sketches of the type that the NBC television show "Saturday Night" would do so well two years later. The bad result is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits destroy any kind of suspense that the heist might have. It is quite literally a movie that keeps smashing into itself, just as the cars in the cars in the demolition scenes run into each other.

The only real interest for me was watching Jane Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is supposed to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute character in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't believe her for a moment. It is always Jane Fonda pretending to be a prostitute that we are watching. It is as terrible a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It would be a good lesson for acting teachers to run the two films together to show how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or pathetic. It suggests that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. [[Gave]] the people involved, it is hard to see why this movie should be so messed up and [[uninspiring]]. The writer, David Ward, wrote the amazing caper film "The Sting" two years later, Jane Fonda had just won an Academy Award for Klute, and Donald Sutherland had just done excellent work in films like "Klute," "Start the Revolution Without Me," and "Kelly's Heroes." Plotwise, the movie is a caper tale, with a small gang of bumbling misfits planning a big heist. At the same time the movie wants to be hip satire, a series of comedy sketches of the type that the NBC television show "Saturday Night" would do so well two years later. The bad result is that the plot makes the comedy bits seem awkward and forced and the disconnected comedy bits destroy any kind of suspense that the heist might have. It is quite literally a movie that keeps smashing into itself, just as the cars in the cars in the demolition scenes run into each other.

The only real interest for me was watching Jane Fonda. Her "Iris Caine" is supposed to be a light hearted version of her dramatic Bree Daniels prostitute character in "Klute" Yet, one doesn't believe her for a moment. It is always Jane Fonda pretending to be a prostitute that we are watching. It is as terrible a performance as her performance in "Klute" was terrific. It would be a good lesson for acting teachers to run the two films together to show how the same actress in the same type of role can be great or pathetic. It suggests that actors are only as good as their writers and directors. --------------------------------------------- Result 2607 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Although the beginning of the movie in New York takes too long, the movie is a must see for people who like this genre. When Hannah goes to Berlin to visit the older woman who helped her mother during the war, the movie gets much much better.The movie is a bit like The Pianist, can not really be compared. --------------------------------------------- Result 2608 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I [[waited]] for this movie to come out for a while in Canada, and when it [[finally]] did, I was very excited to see it. I really enjoyed it. Of course, in the [[beginning]], it is a very sad movie (and it was New Years Day - [[making]] it even sadder) - however, it [[sticks]] with you. The [[next]] day I was [[thinking]] about it again, because although it revolves around something so emotionally draining, you realize after a few days that it is such a [[beautiful]] story. [[How]] one person can be seen as the link to so [[many]] people, but [[sometimes]] you can be [[blinded]] so many things. And how Diane Keaton's [[character]] [[kind]] of [[saves]] the rest of them by just being there. And how they save her in the process as well. It was such an [[excellent]] movie, and [[Chris]] [[Pine]] (one of my [[favourite]] [[actors]]) [[provides]] the [[perfect]] [[comic]] relief. It is [[definitely]] a [[movie]] that will [[need]] a box of tissues, but will [[really]] stay with you for a [[long]] [[time]]. I [[hoped]] for this movie to come out for a while in Canada, and when it [[lastly]] did, I was very excited to see it. I really enjoyed it. Of course, in the [[launching]], it is a very sad movie (and it was New Years Day - [[doing]] it even sadder) - however, it [[wands]] with you. The [[imminent]] day I was [[think]] about it again, because although it revolves around something so emotionally draining, you realize after a few days that it is such a [[sumptuous]] story. [[Mode]] one person can be seen as the link to so [[multiple]] people, but [[intermittently]] you can be [[blind]] so many things. And how Diane Keaton's [[nature]] [[sorts]] of [[save]] the rest of them by just being there. And how they save her in the process as well. It was such an [[glamorous]] movie, and [[Chrissy]] [[Nips]] (one of my [[preferable]] [[protagonists]]) [[delivers]] the [[faultless]] [[hilarious]] relief. It is [[admittedly]] a [[cinema]] that will [[needs]] a box of tissues, but will [[genuinely]] stay with you for a [[protracted]] [[period]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2609 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] When I started to watch this [[movie]] on VH-1 I cringed. The MTV movies were all bad so I wasnt expecting much. But this movie was really [[good]]. I liked it a [[lot]]. And it even had a [[twist]] at the end. See this [[movie]] because it [[shows]] that Made For TV movies that are good [[exist]]. When I started to watch this [[kino]] on VH-1 I cringed. The MTV movies were all bad so I wasnt expecting much. But this movie was really [[alright]]. I liked it a [[batches]]. And it even had a [[twisting]] at the end. See this [[cinematography]] because it [[displayed]] that Made For TV movies that are good [[exists]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Best]] animated movie ever made. This film explores not only the [[vast]] world of modern animation with [[absolutely]] boggling effects, but the branches of the human mind, soul, and philosophy. The story [[features]] a family of cats, where in the big sister dies, the younger brother [[sees]] this and rescues her [[body]], but when she awakens she is left without a soul. [[So]], the two sibling cats embark on a journey to find it. I have related this [[journey]] to [[many]] [[things]]. The [[history]] of the [[world]], the bible, the cycle of [[life]], and [[every]] time I watch it I discover more and more [[hidden]] themes and metaphors. If you aren't so into the physiological aspect of it then, you will still adore it. The animation is [[superb]], and the creative scenes will have you attached to the screen. [[For]] example, the [[ocean]] freezing in time, [[god]] [[eating]] soup out of the earth, a [[strange]] and [[slightly]] SNM retelling of Hansel and Gretel. To [[conclude]], Cat Soup is an [[absolute]] treat for [[anyone]].

PS- Not for [[kids]], [[gratuitous]] violence [[included]]. [[Optimum]] animated movie ever made. This film explores not only the [[sizable]] world of modern animation with [[altogether]] boggling effects, but the branches of the human mind, soul, and philosophy. The story [[featured]] a family of cats, where in the big sister dies, the younger brother [[believes]] this and rescues her [[bodies]], but when she awakens she is left without a soul. [[Therefore]], the two sibling cats embark on a journey to find it. I have related this [[travels]] to [[several]] [[items]]. The [[story]] of the [[globe]], the bible, the cycle of [[living]], and [[any]] time I watch it I discover more and more [[disguising]] themes and metaphors. If you aren't so into the physiological aspect of it then, you will still adore it. The animation is [[sumptuous]], and the creative scenes will have you attached to the screen. [[During]] example, the [[marine]] freezing in time, [[deities]] [[catering]] soup out of the earth, a [[curious]] and [[marginally]] SNM retelling of Hansel and Gretel. To [[concludes]], Cat Soup is an [[unmitigated]] treat for [[person]].

PS- Not for [[children]], [[unfounded]] violence [[inscribed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I got a DVD of "[[Bogeyman]]" and this stunker was an extra feature. I assumed that it was "Boogeyman [[II]]" because it was paired with the original. But you [[know]] what they [[say]] about those who "[[assume]]": it makes an "ass-" out of "u-" and "me." I had read before viewing that BII [[contains]] a [[lot]] of footage from the [[original]] and that it starred actress [[Love]]. While watching "Return of the Boogeyman," I decided to [[stick]] around through the original footage to [[see]] the notorious death-by-toothbrush scene. Before I knew it, the film was over. Rip-off. I [[think]] that I [[thought]] this was BII because this has a [[similar]] title to one of BII's [[alternate]] titles. Oh well, at least this was just an extra feature, right?

Let me [[stop]] talking about my [[mistake]] and [[start]] [[talking]] about the movie's mistakes. Many, [[many]], mistakes. Who does this [[guy]] Ulli Whatever [[think]] he is? Does he [[really]] [[think]] the same [[movie]] will [[sell]] in [[different]] [[forms]]. There is [[nothing]] [[original]] holding [[Part]] III up. It is [[basically]] a [[flashback]] of the [[original]] through the [[eyes]] of a [[psychic]], who is giving us a gruelingly [[boring]] play-by-play as everything happens. That's the [[movie]]. [[Oh]], and one death-by-stereo scene, but you can read that off [[someone]] else's review. My interest in "[[Boogeyman]] [[II]]" is forever [[lost]].

[[Final]] [[Note]]: This is not a [[series]] of [[films]] to watch back to back. I got a DVD of "[[Boogeyman]]" and this stunker was an extra feature. I assumed that it was "Boogeyman [[SECONDLY]]" because it was paired with the original. But you [[savoir]] what they [[told]] about those who "[[presume]]": it makes an "ass-" out of "u-" and "me." I had read before viewing that BII [[therein]] a [[batches]] of footage from the [[initial]] and that it starred actress [[Amour]]. While watching "Return of the Boogeyman," I decided to [[twig]] around through the original footage to [[behold]] the notorious death-by-toothbrush scene. Before I knew it, the film was over. Rip-off. I [[reckon]] that I [[thoughts]] this was BII because this has a [[analogue]] title to one of BII's [[alternatives]] titles. Oh well, at least this was just an extra feature, right?

Let me [[discontinue]] talking about my [[mistaken]] and [[began]] [[discussing]] about the movie's mistakes. Many, [[numerous]], mistakes. Who does this [[buddy]] Ulli Whatever [[believe]] he is? Does he [[genuinely]] [[reckon]] the same [[filmmaking]] will [[selling]] in [[varied]] [[form]]. There is [[anything]] [[initial]] holding [[Parte]] III up. It is [[principally]] a [[flash]] of the [[initial]] through the [[eye]] of a [[devin]], who is giving us a gruelingly [[tiresome]] play-by-play as everything happens. That's the [[films]]. [[Oooh]], and one death-by-stereo scene, but you can read that off [[somebody]] else's review. My interest in "[[Bogeyman]] [[SECONDLY]]" is forever [[forfeited]].

[[Definitive]] [[Remark]]: This is not a [[serial]] of [[movies]] to watch back to back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2612 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can use seven times.

There are several problems with this [[movie]] that are [[obvious]] to the casual [[audience]]: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door thinks that he is a compelling "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the movie with his [[sermons]], the worst being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. Initially, Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the prettiest girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this movie unbearable is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an worst book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are forced and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. Rajinikanth becomes born again after getting a magical power which he can use seven times.

There are several problems with this [[kino]] that are [[palpable]] to the casual [[spectators]]: the 50ish Rajinikanth is still at home with his parents; the father of the girl next door thinks that he is a compelling "boy" ('vaseekaramaana paiyan'); Rajinikanth suddenly interrupts the movie with his [[speeches]], the worst being how women of yesteryears got their exercise through household work--yet we are to believe that he is not a theist; even though he was well read, he wastes six of his seven powers on a stupid kite; I can go on, but you get the picture.

There are god-men, there are gods, and there is Rajinikanth. The directory has difficulty fitting Rajinikanth into one of these categories. Initially, Rajinikanth is just Rajinikanth doing what Tamil heroes do--stand up to villains and, in spite of being the oldest, getting courted by the prettiest girl in the movie. Rajinikanth does this well and some of Rajinikanth's trademark styles are actually enjoyable--"baba count" is a novelty. What makes this movie unbearable is that those few initial minutes are just a preface to an worst book to be ever written. Even that preface is punctuated with some comedy which are forced and obvious.

The director doesn't explain the purpose of the hero; we see that the hero is facing several hurdles (from politicians, as usual) but we can't really root for the hero because we don't know what the hero's ultimate goal is. At the end, when everyone wants him to be the leader, the hero gives another one of his sermons and walks away to become a hermit. The director offers no solution to the problem in the climax scene.

A. R. Rehman's score is really interesting. Either he shows patches of brilliance or he didn't bother to invest himself fully into this movie--who can blame him. There is one scene where Rajinikanth steps into the van of one of the crooks and then throws the knife and starts his baba count. The music is very apt for the moment and acts as a catalyst adding further tension. The songs are all mediocre, no one would bother with the songs from this movie after a few years.

Unfortunately, 1 is the lowest rank you can assign in IMDb. This movie has all the elements that justify its rightful place at the nether of IMDb's ranking. --------------------------------------------- Result 2613 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This has to be one of the [[worst]] films I have ever [[seen]]. The DVD was [[given]] to me free with an order I placed online for non [[DVD]] related items.

No wonder they were given away, surely no one could part with money for this [[drivel]].

How some reviewers can say they found it hilarious beggars belief, the person who [[includes]] it in the [[worst]] five [[films]] ever has got it spot on.

How on earth a talented [[actor]] like Philip Seymour Hoffman could get involved in this rubbish is unbelievable. Mostly toilet humour and badly done at that.

Anyone wanting to be entertained should avoid this at all costs. This has to be one of the [[gravest]] films I have ever [[noticed]]. The DVD was [[bestowed]] to me free with an order I placed online for non [[DVDS]] related items.

No wonder they were given away, surely no one could part with money for this [[whim]].

How some reviewers can say they found it hilarious beggars belief, the person who [[consists]] it in the [[gravest]] five [[cinema]] ever has got it spot on.

How on earth a talented [[protagonist]] like Philip Seymour Hoffman could get involved in this rubbish is unbelievable. Mostly toilet humour and badly done at that.

Anyone wanting to be entertained should avoid this at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I don't hand out ten [[star]] [[ratings]] [[easily]]. A movie [[really]] has to impress me, and The Bourne Ultimatum has gone far beyond that. [[Furthermore]], this trilogy has come [[together]] so [[nicely]], that I [[believe]] it to be one of the [[greatest]] motion picture trilogies of our [[time]]. [[Though]] all three films [[could]] not be any more different from the Ludlum novels, they still [[stand]] as a [[powerful]] landmark in cinematic [[achievement]]. The Bourne [[Ultimatum]] made me want to [[cry]] that the series was complete, yet I [[could]] not even attempt to [[stop]] smiling for hours.

From the [[moment]] that the [[opening]] title [[appeared]], I [[knew]] we were in for a ride. Paul Greengrass has [[done]] it again. [[Everything]] we [[love]] from the previous Bourne [[films]] is here once again: the [[action]], the dialogue, and of course the shaky [[camera]]. [[However]] for me, that [[last]] one was never a [[problem]]. I [[think]] it [[adds]] to the suspense.

I will be back to [[see]] this [[film]] [[several]] [[times]] before it is [[released]] on DVD, [[simply]] because it is [[genius]]. It is a [[perfectly]] [[satisfying]] [[conclusion]], and should [[stand]] the [[test]] of [[time]] as a [[fantastic]] [[movie]], and [[altogether]], an [[unforgettable]] [[trilogy]]. I don't hand out ten [[stars]] [[evaluations]] [[comfortably]]. A movie [[genuinely]] has to impress me, and The Bourne Ultimatum has gone far beyond that. [[Further]], this trilogy has come [[jointly]] so [[kindly]], that I [[think]] it to be one of the [[larger]] motion picture trilogies of our [[period]]. [[If]] all three films [[wo]] not be any more different from the Ludlum novels, they still [[standing]] as a [[influential]] landmark in cinematic [[attainment]]. The Bourne [[Warnings]] made me want to [[mourn]] that the series was complete, yet I [[did]] not even attempt to [[ceasing]] smiling for hours.

From the [[time]] that the [[opens]] title [[emerged]], I [[knowed]] we were in for a ride. Paul Greengrass has [[doing]] it again. [[Every]] we [[likes]] from the previous Bourne [[cinematic]] is here once again: the [[efforts]], the dialogue, and of course the shaky [[cameras]]. [[Still]] for me, that [[final]] one was never a [[issues]]. I [[believing]] it [[inserting]] to the suspense.

I will be back to [[seeing]] this [[movie]] [[numerous]] [[dates]] before it is [[publicized]] on DVD, [[merely]] because it is [[genie]]. It is a [[quite]] [[pleasing]] [[conclusions]], and should [[standing]] the [[proof]] of [[times]] as a [[fabulous]] [[kino]], and [[quite]], an [[eventful]] [[triad]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2615 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I rented the video of "The Piano [[Teacher]]" knowing nothing about it other than what was [[written]] on the [[video]] box. I did this with some [[trepidation]] because films that win [[awards]] at Cannes are [[usually]] very [[good]] or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the [[latter]] category. About one quarter of the [[way]] into it I [[found]] myself saying out loud, "This [[movie]] is boring." About half way through I was saying to myself, "Where have I seen this before?" [[At]] the three quarters [[mark]] I had [[figured]] it out.

[[In]] [[spite]] of its literary [[origins]], this [[film]] is [[essentially]] a remake of Robert Altman's much [[earlier]] (1969), and [[better]], "That [[Cold]] Day in the Park." Although the details [[obviously]] differ and Altman's [[work]] was more plot-driven and [[less]] of a [[character]] [[study]], the two [[films]] are thematically [[identical]]. There is [[nothing]] "new" to be seen in this [[production]]. [[Every]] aspect of it has been [[done]] before: a [[character]] [[spiralling]] out of [[control]] with [[increasingly]] self-destructive [[behavior]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Bad]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an operatic (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. Butterfly" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. Hence, I am [[bemused]] by the fact that so [[many]] found the film to be "[[shocking]]," "shattering," etc. This [[highly]] derivative [[film]] seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the lighting is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a waste of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting director but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. I rented the video of "The Piano [[Professors]]" knowing nothing about it other than what was [[wrote]] on the [[videos]] box. I did this with some [[anxiety]] because films that win [[prizes]] at Cannes are [[typically]] very [[buena]] or very bad. Unfortunately, this one falls in the [[latest]] category. About one quarter of the [[camino]] into it I [[find]] myself saying out loud, "This [[cinematography]] is boring." About half way through I was saying to myself, "Where have I seen this before?" [[For]] the three quarters [[marked]] I had [[conjured]] it out.

[[Among]] [[sadness]] of its literary [[genesis]], this [[kino]] is [[mainly]] a remake of Robert Altman's much [[previous]] (1969), and [[best]], "That [[Colder]] Day in the Park." Although the details [[definitely]] differ and Altman's [[collaboration]] was more plot-driven and [[fewer]] of a [[characters]] [[studies]], the two [[film]] are thematically [[same]]. There is [[anything]] "new" to be seen in this [[productivity]]. [[Everything]] aspect of it has been [[performed]] before: a [[characters]] [[soaring]] out of [[supervisory]] with [[gradually]] self-destructive [[behaviour]] (Abel Ferrara's "[[Negative]] Lieutenant" 1992); a perverse and doomed 'love' culminating in an operatic (near) death scene (David Cronenberg's "M. Butterfly" 1993); uncommonly brutal sex scenes (David Lynch's "Blue Velvet" 1986); and so on. Hence, I am [[bewildered]] by the fact that so [[various]] found the film to be "[[terrifying]]," "shattering," etc. This [[exceptionally]] derivative [[flick]] seems to have been made for the sole purpose of making viewers feel uncomfortable, and clearly succeeded with some. However, I largely attribute such a reaction to a lack of film-viewing experience. See enough movies and you really will, eventually, have seen it all. And while it is true that I saw the expurgated 'R-rated' version, I doubt that the additional scenes would change my overall opinion of "The Piano Teacher."

Technically, the film is not without merit. There is some very good camera work and the lighting is excellent. Isabelle Huppert's creditable performance also helps save it from being a waste of time. This is the first of Haneke's films that I've seen, and if I were to see more I expect I would have the same opinion of him that I have of Ferrara: an interesting director but not nearly the genius others make him out to be. Rating: 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The Stone Boy is an almost forgotten drama from the 1980s. Considering how many famous or soon to be famous people are in the film, one wonders how it could have been so overlooked. This is a slow, moody, but [[touching]] [[account]] of a tragedy that [[befalls]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of [[Midwestern]] stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all tastes, but [[anyone]] who can appreciate [[real]] human [[drama]] should like it OK.

In the early moments of the film, we see two brothers head off in the early morning hours to pick some peas and maybe shoot a duck or two if they're lucky. While climbing through a barbed wire fence, the gun accidentally discharges and the younger boy fatally shoots his older brother. These boys have apparently never taken a hunter safety course. The way for two men to properly go through a fence like this with one gun would be as follows: First man climbs through. Second man then passes him the gun through the fence. The first man then sets the gun down and helps the other through the fence. At no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is killed, 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own world. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and picks the peas and tells his family about the accident later. At no point during the funeral or inquest does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His family seems to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for killing his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is outwardly upset with Arnold, even though the older brother's death allows him to hit on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's parents don't seem to understand how to deal with their son. They really don't even try to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing seems to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. The Stone Boy is an almost forgotten drama from the 1980s. Considering how many famous or soon to be famous people are in the film, one wonders how it could have been so overlooked. This is a slow, moody, but [[affects]] [[accounting]] of a tragedy that [[befell]] a farm family. The film is more or less an indictment of [[Midwest]] stoic values and suppression of emotion. The film will not be for all tastes, but [[nobody]] who can appreciate [[actual]] human [[theater]] should like it OK.

In the early moments of the film, we see two brothers head off in the early morning hours to pick some peas and maybe shoot a duck or two if they're lucky. While climbing through a barbed wire fence, the gun accidentally discharges and the younger boy fatally shoots his older brother. These boys have apparently never taken a hunter safety course. The way for two men to properly go through a fence like this with one gun would be as follows: First man climbs through. Second man then passes him the gun through the fence. The first man then sets the gun down and helps the other through the fence. At no time should either man have his hands on both the gun and the fence.

Anyway, once his brother is killed, 12-yr-old Arnold regresses into his own world. He does not even run for help after his brother is shot. He simply goes ahead and picks the peas and tells his family about the accident later. At no point during the funeral or inquest does Arnold seem to show any regret or sorrow at all. His family seems to shun him. Perhaps they are even angry at him for killing his brother. An ornery uncle played by Frederick Forrest is outwardly upset with Arnold, even though the older brother's death allows him to hit on the kid's girlfriend. Arnold's parents don't seem to understand how to deal with their son. They really don't even try to talk to him. About the only person he can communicate with is his grandfather who is played in typical grandfatherly skill by Wilford Brimley. After a while, Arnold even moves in with the old timer.

Nothing seems to get Arnold to open up until he takes a bizarre road trip to Reno Nevada to inexplicably look up his uncle's ex-wife. Once he meets her, he begins to emerge from his shell after apologizing to her for breaking up her marriage by starting all of the family's turmoil with the accident. From here on, the film becomes a quick study in reconciliation and reawakening.

The acting is hauntingly distant in most cases. Robert Duvall and Glenn Close make the perfect stoic farm parents. Forrest is good, but maybe trying too hard to channel Paul Newman's performance in Hud. The cinematography is exceptional, too. If you like moody pictures about common folk, this one may be for you. Some even may be advised to bring some tissues. 8 of 10 stars.

The Hound. --------------------------------------------- Result 2617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The first [[film]] ever [[made]]. [[Workers]] streaming from a [[factory]], some cycling, most walking, [[moving]] right or left. Along with Melies, the Lumieres are both the [[starting]] point and the point of departure for cinema - with Melies [[begins]] narrative fiction, [[cinema]], fantasy, artifice, spectacle; with the Lumieres pure, unadorned, [[observation]]. The [[truth]]. There are [[many]] intellectuals who [[regret]] the ossification of cinema from the latter into the tired formulae of the former.

But [[consider]] this short again. There is nothing 'objective' about it. The film is full of [[action]] - a static, inhuman scene burst into life, activity, and the quiet harmony of the frame is ruptured, decentred from the back to right or left (but never, of course, the front, where the camera is). And [[yet]] the camera [[stands]] stock still, contains the energy, the possible subversion, subordinates it to its will. The cinematograph may be a revolutionary invention, but it will be used for conservative purposes - to map out the world, edit it, restrict it, limit it.

worse is the historical [[reality]] of the film. These [[factory]] workers are Lumiere employees. The bosses are spying on their workers, the unseen eye regarding his faceless minions. The [[film]] therefore [[describes]] two types of imprisonment. Behind the [[gates]], the workers are confined in their workplace. The opening of the gate seems to be an image of freedom, [[escape]], but they face another wall, the fourth wall, further confining them. The first film is [[also]] the [[first]] [[example]] of CCTV surveillance, an [[image]] of [[unseen]], all-seeing authority entrapping its [[servants]]. A frightening, all too prophetic movie. The first [[films]] ever [[introduced]]. [[Labourers]] streaming from a [[plant]], some cycling, most walking, [[shifting]] right or left. Along with Melies, the Lumieres are both the [[commence]] point and the point of departure for cinema - with Melies [[launch]] narrative fiction, [[theaters]], fantasy, artifice, spectacle; with the Lumieres pure, unadorned, [[remark]]. The [[veracity]]. There are [[myriad]] intellectuals who [[contrition]] the ossification of cinema from the latter into the tired formulae of the former.

But [[considering]] this short again. There is nothing 'objective' about it. The film is full of [[measures]] - a static, inhuman scene burst into life, activity, and the quiet harmony of the frame is ruptured, decentred from the back to right or left (but never, of course, the front, where the camera is). And [[however]] the camera [[standing]] stock still, contains the energy, the possible subversion, subordinates it to its will. The cinematograph may be a revolutionary invention, but it will be used for conservative purposes - to map out the world, edit it, restrict it, limit it.

worse is the historical [[realism]] of the film. These [[plants]] workers are Lumiere employees. The bosses are spying on their workers, the unseen eye regarding his faceless minions. The [[flick]] therefore [[outlined]] two types of imprisonment. Behind the [[portals]], the workers are confined in their workplace. The opening of the gate seems to be an image of freedom, [[flee]], but they face another wall, the fourth wall, further confining them. The first film is [[additionally]] the [[frst]] [[instance]] of CCTV surveillance, an [[photo]] of [[invisible]], all-seeing authority entrapping its [[officials]]. A frightening, all too prophetic movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One hour, eight minutes and twelve seconds into this flick and I decided it was pretty lame. That was right after Hopalong (Chris Lybbert) drops on his horse from a tree to rejoin the good guy posse. I was pretty mystified by the whole Hopalong Cassidy/Great Bar 20 gimmick which didn't translate into anything at all. Obviously, the name Coppola in the credits couldn't do anything to guarantee success here, even with more than one listed.

If you make it to the end of the film, you'll probably wind up asking yourself the same questions I did. What exactly was the hook with the gloves? What's up with the rodeo scenario? Who was The Stranger supposed to represent? Why did they make this film?

I could probably go on but my energy's been drained. Look, there's already a Western called "The Gunfighter" from 1950 with a guy named Gregory Peck as the title character. Watching it will make you feel as good as watching this one makes you feel bad. That one I can recommend. --------------------------------------------- Result 2619 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Goldberg]] [[gave]] her best screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as Sofia, the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[characters]] Walker had introduced so [[clearly]] on the page - Danny Glover as Albert, Celie's abusive husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of change for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn Chong as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl Anderson (otherwise best known as Judas in the 1973 film of Jesus Christ Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively written, 'The Color Purple' does justice to its source while opening out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. The film version of Alice Walker's hugely emotive and influential 1983 novel (written largely as letters from the central character Celie to God) was a massive Oscar success, and rightly so.

In the role of the abused and awakened Celie, Whoopi [[Tucker]] [[supplied]] her best screen performance by miles. Not far behind her was Oprah Winfrey as Sofia, the fiery woman tamed by fate. Others in the cast fleshed out the [[personage]] Walker had introduced so [[patently]] on the page - Danny Glover as Albert, Celie's abusive husband; Margaret Avery as Shug, a force of change for the good; Willard Pugh and Rae Dawn Chong as Harpo and Squeak; Susan Beaubian as Corrine, the preacher's wife; and the much-missed Carl Anderson (otherwise best known as Judas in the 1973 film of Jesus Christ Superstar) as preacher Samuel.

Beautifully paced and sensitively written, 'The Color Purple' does justice to its source while opening out the story to involve viewers of a feature-length drama. --------------------------------------------- Result 2620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Wow. I went to the video [[store]] tonight because I was in the mood for a bad B Horror movie and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[cover]] and I [[thought]] it [[looked]] like just the movie for my mood. I brought it [[home]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in mind. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[crap]] like this existed amongst man. This movie seemed like a 5 [[year]] [[old]] wrote and [[directed]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring director and this movie made me so mad that someone out there is actually paying this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a garbage dump shoveling crap where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NOT]] WORTH IT!" I really have nothing nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! Wow. I went to the video [[storehouse]] tonight because I was in the mood for a bad B Horror movie and I found this Gem. I looked at the [[coverings]] and I [[brainchild]] it [[seemed]] like just the movie for my mood. I brought it [[household]] and put it on.

This movie was not the B Horror movie that I had in mind. This was MUCH worse. I wanted a bad movie but what I got, I didn't know that [[dammit]] like this existed amongst man. This movie seemed like a 5 [[annum]] [[longtime]] wrote and [[oriented]] it and that is being nice about it.

I am an aspiring director and this movie made me so mad that someone out there is actually paying this guy to direct movies. He needs to work at a garbage dump shoveling crap where he belongs.

If you are thinking about renting this or buying it. I will tell you the same thing that I would tell someone getting ready to commit suicide. "DON'T DO IT, IT'S [[NOPE]] WORTH IT!" I really have nothing nice to say about this movie. DON'T DO IT! --------------------------------------------- Result 2621 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I'm a big [[fan]] of 50s sci-fi, but this is not one of my favorites. While the concept behind the movie was a [[natural]] vehicle for a classic [[teeny]] bopper sci-fi flick, the director counted too heavily on it to [[carry]] the movie. It's clear he was working with no money, because the entire movie is loaded with [[bloated]] [[dialogue]] that goes on and on [[forever]]. I have *never* [[seen]] so much time-killing in a [[movie]].

There are probably less than 60 seconds of "blob footage" in the entire movie, and most of the rest of it is people engaging in a lot of poorly-written, run-on dialogue. It was fun to see Steve M. and Anita C. together, but good [[heavens]]...how could casting have thought anyone in their right mind would believe them as teenagers? I'm a big [[breather]] of 50s sci-fi, but this is not one of my favorites. While the concept behind the movie was a [[naturel]] vehicle for a classic [[miniscule]] bopper sci-fi flick, the director counted too heavily on it to [[transporting]] the movie. It's clear he was working with no money, because the entire movie is loaded with [[puffy]] [[discussions]] that goes on and on [[siempre]]. I have *never* [[noticed]] so much time-killing in a [[cinematography]].

There are probably less than 60 seconds of "blob footage" in the entire movie, and most of the rest of it is people engaging in a lot of poorly-written, run-on dialogue. It was fun to see Steve M. and Anita C. together, but good [[ciel]]...how could casting have thought anyone in their right mind would believe them as teenagers? --------------------------------------------- Result 2622 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] This film [[provides]] the [[saga]] of a [[legendary]] Wild Bill Hickock. He, Buffalo Bill Cody, and Calamity Jane, are the central characters.

As the Civil War closes, [[Lincoln]] mentions his concern that the country's dynamism would be enhanced if people would follow the advice, "Go West, young man," which, mercifully, the film didn't erroneously attribute to Horace Greeley, as a number of others did. But then, he gets assassinated, and some financiers speculate that they can get rich selling weapons to the American Indians.

In the meantime, we see Wild Bill Hickock, who interacts with a small boy, while a steamboat is loading at a dock along the Mississippi. Wild Bill uses a Bowie knife, which he eventually gives to the boy, calling it an "Arkansas Toothpick," which in reality was a different type of knife, though both were used throughout the frontier.

Hickock eventually meets Buffalo Bill Cody, who looks close to the photographs and paintings of the actual man. Cody has just gotten married, and is bringing his bride to the Old West to settle down.

When they arrive at their destination, they run into Calamity Jane, who has a crush on Hickock. She looks at Cody's wife, and asks Buffalo Bill, "Is this your mopsy?" The line was one that caused the Hayes Board some problem, since one definition of "mopsy" was prostitute. Demille wanted the line in, and one of his aides pointed out that in Beatrix Potter's books about Peter Rabbit, three of the rabbits were Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. He pointed this out and asked the censors to identify "the rabbit of ill virtue." It worked; the line stayed in.

The Indians were getting restless, in part because of the superior weaponry they got from the agent of the Eastern financiers. Cody and Hickock were asked to help scout the area, so that troops could get safely through to a beleaguered area. Cody led the troops; Hickock went to check out the activities of an Indian chief, who was an old acquaintance, and who was leading some of the hostile Indians.

Calamity Jane gets captured, and Hickock gets captured trying to save her. They are brought to the chief, and although neither would talk, torture applied to Hickock breaks Calamity Jane's willpower, and she tells the route Cody is using.

The two are released, and Hickock joins up with Cody and his forces, in part to alert them they're walking into a trap. With Hickok's help, they hold off the Indian attack.

Hickock decides to go after the gun runners, and finally takes them prisoner. As they're waiting for authorities, Hickock is gunned down by being shot in the back while playing cards.

There are numerous historic anomalies in the film, but it retains the flavor of legend. Pretty good for the 1930s. This film [[prescribes]] the [[historian]] of a [[mythical]] Wild Bill Hickock. He, Buffalo Bill Cody, and Calamity Jane, are the central characters.

As the Civil War closes, [[Linc]] mentions his concern that the country's dynamism would be enhanced if people would follow the advice, "Go West, young man," which, mercifully, the film didn't erroneously attribute to Horace Greeley, as a number of others did. But then, he gets assassinated, and some financiers speculate that they can get rich selling weapons to the American Indians.

In the meantime, we see Wild Bill Hickock, who interacts with a small boy, while a steamboat is loading at a dock along the Mississippi. Wild Bill uses a Bowie knife, which he eventually gives to the boy, calling it an "Arkansas Toothpick," which in reality was a different type of knife, though both were used throughout the frontier.

Hickock eventually meets Buffalo Bill Cody, who looks close to the photographs and paintings of the actual man. Cody has just gotten married, and is bringing his bride to the Old West to settle down.

When they arrive at their destination, they run into Calamity Jane, who has a crush on Hickock. She looks at Cody's wife, and asks Buffalo Bill, "Is this your mopsy?" The line was one that caused the Hayes Board some problem, since one definition of "mopsy" was prostitute. Demille wanted the line in, and one of his aides pointed out that in Beatrix Potter's books about Peter Rabbit, three of the rabbits were Flopsy, Mopsy, and Cottontail. He pointed this out and asked the censors to identify "the rabbit of ill virtue." It worked; the line stayed in.

The Indians were getting restless, in part because of the superior weaponry they got from the agent of the Eastern financiers. Cody and Hickock were asked to help scout the area, so that troops could get safely through to a beleaguered area. Cody led the troops; Hickock went to check out the activities of an Indian chief, who was an old acquaintance, and who was leading some of the hostile Indians.

Calamity Jane gets captured, and Hickock gets captured trying to save her. They are brought to the chief, and although neither would talk, torture applied to Hickock breaks Calamity Jane's willpower, and she tells the route Cody is using.

The two are released, and Hickock joins up with Cody and his forces, in part to alert them they're walking into a trap. With Hickok's help, they hold off the Indian attack.

Hickock decides to go after the gun runners, and finally takes them prisoner. As they're waiting for authorities, Hickock is gunned down by being shot in the back while playing cards.

There are numerous historic anomalies in the film, but it retains the flavor of legend. Pretty good for the 1930s. --------------------------------------------- Result 2623 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[first]] saw this film when I was about seven [[years]] [[old]] and was [[completely]] enchanted by it then but for [[years]] was unable to [[find]] out what the [[film]] was called. now i am twenty one and stumbled upon the film by accident about two weeks ago and [[bought]] a copy. although my memory of the [[film]] was a [[little]] [[hazy]] I was in no way [[disappointed]] by what I [[saw]]. the [[animation]] in this [[film]] is superb conjuring up an [[entire]] [[world]] that is so [[believable]] and so well [[animated]] that you are [[drawn]] in to the [[film]] by that [[alone]]. But this film [[also]] has a plot that will [[enchant]] and [[entertain]] [[adults]] and [[children]] [[alike]]. with a floating [[island]], a [[mad]] general, a friendly pirate granny and a well [[constructed]] [[love]] [[story]] this [[film]] will not [[let]] you down I [[would]] recommend this [[film]] to any one. I [[firstly]] saw this film when I was about seven [[ages]] [[ancient]] and was [[fully]] enchanted by it then but for [[olds]] was unable to [[finds]] out what the [[flick]] was called. now i am twenty one and stumbled upon the film by accident about two weeks ago and [[purchased]] a copy. although my memory of the [[flick]] was a [[petite]] [[fuzzy]] I was in no way [[disenchanted]] by what I [[watched]]. the [[animate]] in this [[cinematography]] is superb conjuring up an [[overall]] [[globe]] that is so [[credible]] and so well [[animate]] that you are [[lured]] in to the [[cinematography]] by that [[merely]]. But this film [[apart]] has a plot that will [[enchants]] and [[distract]] [[adult]] and [[kid]] [[similarly]]. with a floating [[isle]], a [[enraged]] general, a friendly pirate granny and a well [[constructing]] [[likes]] [[histories]] this [[filmmaking]] will not [[allowing]] you down I [[could]] recommend this [[flick]] to any one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2624 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Tenshu is [[imprisoned]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government officials give him a choice to either be electrocute at a greater degree or [[agree]] to some experiments. He chooses the experimentation and is placed in a large metallic cell with a [[bad]] ass [[criminal]] who also [[survived]] the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[want]] in the room (within [[reason]]), but they can't [[leave]]. after a few days there [[meals]] are cut down to one per day and the room temp is set up too 100. After some more alarms are sounded at intervals so they can't sleep. One day a 'witch' come into their cell (albeit a glassed off portion) What happens next I'll let you find out. I may be in the minority here but I [[liked]] the build up, it was [[intriguing]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

Media Blaster's 2 DVD set Extras: Disc 1) Director's Cut; Trailers for "Versus", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) Theatrical Cut; Commentary with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew interview; Making of; Original Trailer; and Promo Teasers Tenshu is [[imprisoning]] and sentenced to death. When he survives electrocution the government officials give him a choice to either be electrocute at a greater degree or [[concur]] to some experiments. He chooses the experimentation and is placed in a large metallic cell with a [[unfavorable]] ass [[felon]] who also [[outlived]] the electrocution. They can have whatever the [[wanna]] in the room (within [[motif]]), but they can't [[letting]]. after a few days there [[feedings]] are cut down to one per day and the room temp is set up too 100. After some more alarms are sounded at intervals so they can't sleep. One day a 'witch' come into their cell (albeit a glassed off portion) What happens next I'll let you find out. I may be in the minority here but I [[wished]] the build up, it was [[riveting]] to me. Now if the payoff was half as good as the build up was I would have rated this so much higher.

My Grade: C+

Media Blaster's 2 DVD set Extras: Disc 1) Director's Cut; Trailers for "Versus", "Aragami", "Attack the Gas Station", and "Deadly Outlaw Rekka" Disc 2) Theatrical Cut; Commentary with Hideo Sakaki, Ryuhei Kitamura, Sakaguchi Takuand Tsutomu Takahashi; Cast and crew interview; Making of; Original Trailer; and Promo Teasers --------------------------------------------- Result 2625 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] The most [[horrible]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many changes to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but give the fans nothing to work with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. The most [[scary]] retelling of a great series. It should not have been named Battlestar Galactica, because it's only the same in name alone. Too many changes to just have changes. You have characters turned from male to female, black to asian to cylon all in a way to "attract female audiences," when there was already strong female characters that could have just been made stronger. Gone are the egyptian feeling. Gone are the quest for earth. The lack of cylons to go to terminator rejects takes away from the film, especially when one is made a fembot. Granted the original show had a lot of cheese to it, but it had a large following. They tried to hold onto this following but give the fans nothing to work with and basically spit in their face as they make it "their own story." Changes are good, when they make something better, not to just make them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2626 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The most difficult thing about this movie is to say anything positive about it. The characters were stereotypical "white-trash", the movie's "plot" was stunted from the beginning, and the worst feature of this movie was that the nudity was so blatantly from body doubles it was funny. Regretfully, that was the only funny thing in the movie. Ms. Jenkins would be better served if in the future, she would refrain from using her life-story to "entertain" people. It was simply that bad. The one positive aspect of this movie (this has nothing to do with the lack-of-quality of the film) is that my brother shelled out the money for this stinker. --------------------------------------------- Result 2627 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This movie starred a [[totally]] [[forgotten]] [[star]] from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as [[Jimmy]] Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[would]] recognize today. Film [[fanatics]] will also [[recognize]] the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a film from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this nasty and rather untalented man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is history. Within a year, they were making very successful shorts for Columbia and executives at MGM were soon kicking themselves for losing the team. This sort of thing was a common occurrence at MGM, a great studio which had no idea what to do with comedy (such as the films of Buster Keaton, Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello and others). In fact, up until they left for Columbia, MGM put them in a wide variety of odd film roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING LADY. And, oddly, in this film they didn't act as a team--they just did various supporting roles, such as Larry playing the piano!

This particular film begins with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are rescued and brought home, all sense of structure to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! This movie starred a [[abundantly]] [[overlooked]] [[superstar]] from the 1930s, Jack Pearl (radio's "Baron Munchausen") as well as [[Jimi]] Durante. However, 7-1/2 decades later, it's being billed as a Three Stooges film because they are the only ones in the film who the average person [[ought]] recognize today. Film [[zealots]] will also [[acknowledgement]] the wonderful Edna May Oliver as well as Zazu Pitts.

As for the Stooges, this is a film from there very early days--before MGM had any idea what to do with the team. At this point, they were known as "Ted Healy and his Stooges" as Healy was the front man. Fortunately for the Stooges, they soon left this nasty and rather untalented man (read up on him--you'll see what I mean) and the rest is history. Within a year, they were making very successful shorts for Columbia and executives at MGM were soon kicking themselves for losing the team. This sort of thing was a common occurrence at MGM, a great studio which had no idea what to do with comedy (such as the films of Buster Keaton, Laurel and Hardy, Abbott and Costello and others). In fact, up until they left for Columbia, MGM put them in a wide variety of odd film roles--including acting with Clark Gable and Joan Crawford in DANCING LADY. And, oddly, in this film they didn't act as a team--they just did various supporting roles, such as Larry playing the piano!

This particular film begins with Pearl and Durante lost in the African jungle. When they are rescued and brought home, all sense of structure to the film falls apart and the film becomes almost like a variety show--punctuated by scenes with the leads here and there. As for Pearl, I could really see why he never made a successful transition to films, as he has the personality of a slug (but slightly less welcome). As for Durante, I never knew what the public saw in him--as least as far as his films are concerned--he was loud and...loud! He apparently took time off from helping MGM to ruin Buster Keaton's career to make this film. Together, Pearl and Durante rely on lots of verbal humor(?) and Vaudeville-style routines that tend to fall rather flat.

In this film, the Stooges they didn't yet have the right chemistry. Seeing Healy doing the job that Moe did in their later films is odd. What they did in the film was pretty good, but because all the segments were short, they came on and off camera too quickly to allow them to really get into their routines. Stooges fans might be very frustrated at this, though die-hard fans may want to see this so that they can complete their life-long goal of seeing everything Stooge--even the rotten Joe DeRita and Joe Besser films (oh, and did they got bad after the deaths of Shemp and Curly).

Overall, the film is rather dull and disappointing. However, there are a couple interesting things to look for in the mess. At about the 13 minute mark, you will see a brief scene where a tour guide on a bus is singing. Look carefully, as this is Walter Brennan in a role you'd certainly never expect! Another unusual thing to look for in the film is the "Clean as a Whistle" song starting at about 22 minutes into the film. This song and dance number is clearly an example of a so-called "Pre-Code" scene that never would have been allowed in films after 1934 (when the Production Code was strengthened). Despite the word "Clean" in the title, it's a very titillating number with naked women showing lots of flesh--enough to stimulate but not enough to really show anything! It's quite shocking when seen today, though such excesses were pretty common in the early 1930s. Finally, at the 63 minute mark, see Jimmy Durante set race relations back a few decades. See the film, you'll see that I mean! --------------------------------------------- Result 2628 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'm sorry, but even TJ Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[save]] this sequel. I went through half the movie thinking that this was a [[spoof]] of the original. Then came that wild and wacky motorcycle scene (notice that this is the only movie that Patricia Birch directs); and I [[sadly]] [[realized]] they were [[trying]] to be serious. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their gambling habits in the original Grease, were forced to use motorcycles in the second movie. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd hate to see what they would resort to later: maybe Mopeds?

I also never bought the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story gone horribly awry.

So, it looks like you CAN ruin a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I took away from this movie was an idea of how many points out of ten to give it. I'm sorry, but even TJ Hooker's Adrian Zmed couldn't [[rescued]] this sequel. I went through half the movie thinking that this was a [[simulate]] of the original. Then came that wild and wacky motorcycle scene (notice that this is the only movie that Patricia Birch directs); and I [[unhappily]] [[effected]] they were [[striving]] to be serious. I did get a kick out of the fact that the opposing gang, having lost their "wheels" due to their gambling habits in the original Grease, were forced to use motorcycles in the second movie. Being shamed by that putz character Carrington, I'd hate to see what they would resort to later: maybe Mopeds?

I also never bought the hackneyed theme: hunky-Australian-boy-can't-fit-into-Outsiders-dominated-school-ergo-goes-for -tough-guy-with-stupid-biker-helmet-look. It was Disney story gone horribly awry.

So, it looks like you CAN ruin a good thing by placing a bubble-gum smacking Michelle Pfeiffer in a musical. The only thing I took away from this movie was an idea of how many points out of ten to give it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2629 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the [[script]] should have told him that this one was going to be a [[real]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[weak]] story, basically no [[story]] or plot at all. Add in [[bored]], poor acting, [[even]] from the normally [[good]] Eastwood. There's [[absolutely]] no [[action]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[heap]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a [[film]] BE any more [[boring]]? I think watching [[paint]] dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A real [[stinker]]. Don't bother with this one. Sondra Locke stinks in this film, but then she was an awful 'actress' anyway. Unfortunately, she drags everyone else (including then =real life boyfriend Clint Eastwood down the drain with her. But what was Clint Eastwood thinking when he agreed to star in this one? One read of the [[scripts]] should have told him that this one was going to be a [[authentic]] snorer. It's an exceptionally [[vulnerable]] story, basically no [[fairytales]] or plot at all. Add in [[drilled]], poor acting, [[yet]] from the normally [[alright]] Eastwood. There's [[wholly]] no [[actions]] except a couple arguments and as far as I was concerned, this film ranks up at the top of the [[stack]] of natural sleep enhancers. Wow! Could a [[cinematography]] BE any more [[dreary]]? I think watching [[repaint]] dry or the grass grow might be more fun. A real [[wanker]]. Don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] This movie was a [[fantastic]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). This movie was a [[unbelievable]] comedy. It had a lot of comedians star in it like Akshay Kumar,Rajpal Yadav,Paresh Raval and John Abraham.

Rimi Sen was good at playing Akshay Kumars wife and so were all the air hostesses. Mr Hot as Mac (Akshay Kumar) and Mr cool as Sam (John Abraham) are two fashion photographers who like the same girl Maggie (Neha Dupia). When John Abraham cheats on his work he becomes Akshay Kumars senior and Akshay Kumar gets really jealous because his flat has to be given to John Abraham and Neha Dupia starts liking John more. Akshay Kumar wants to be better than John Abraham so he finds a flat and he is going out with three different girls (Nitu Chandra,Nargis Bagheri,Daisy Boppana). --------------------------------------------- Result 2631 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Spoiler]] below, but read on or you'll never [[know]] the horrible fate that awaits all planing to rent "Rodentz".

On a moonlit night, in a remote research laboratory, a major medical breakthrough is about to have [[deadly]] results. A chemical compound that was created to "hunt and destroy" deadly cancer cells has leaked from the hazardous waste disposal system into the building's basement. Now, the rodents involved in the laboratory experiment upstairs are not the only rats in the facility that will [[become]] the altered species. [[Professor]] Schultz, a leading bio-researcher, has just determined that the addition of a new enzyme now enables his "hunt and destroy" formulation to regenerate for the length of time necessary to [[neutralize]] deadly cancer tumors. When three varying degrees of the new mixture are administered to three different rats and the rest poured down the faulty "Waste Hazard" sink, shocking side-effects result in a night of terror.....right.....

Seriously, this is probably the [[worst]] [[film]] I've [[seen]] this year. [[Everything]] about it screams "Low-budget!", from the [[horrendous]] acting to the special [[effects]] which are some of the [[worst]] I've ever [[seen]]. The [[characters]] are clichéd morons and [[act]] in stupid, predictable ways: walking down [[dark]] hallways [[alone]], [[looking]] for a cat, tripping and [[falling]] so the "rats" can [[catch]] up with them, boarding themselves up in a [[small]] [[room]], etc.

[[While]] some films are cheaply [[made]], this film [[really]] takes the cake. [[Every]] possible corner is [[cut]], everything from reusing [[earlier]] [[shots]], [[filming]] the "[[Lab]]" hallways from [[different]] [[angles]] to [[make]] it [[look]] bigger (That [[reminds]] me--why were only TWO [[guys]] working in this freakin' massive building?!?!?!?), to music and [[special]] [[effects]] that [[could]] be done on a children's workshop PC.

That brings me to the [[worst]] [[aspect]] of this steaming pile of dung--the [[special]] effects. Just [[horrendous]]. The [[computer]] generated rats [[look]] so [[fake]] and [[stand]] out in every scene so even the dumbest of [[film]] [[buffs]] [[could]] [[see]] they are computer [[generated]]. And that [[giant]] rat suit--OH MY [[GOD]]!!!!!!!! [[seriously]], are we [[supposed]] to [[believe]] that [[freaking]] beany baby is a monster? [[Just]] pitiful........On the better side, some of the gore looks pretty cool, especially considering the [[budget]].

The actors all suck. no one involved with the production cared or knew what they were doing. I've wasted enough time with review, just take my advice, it's garbage. 1/10.

About the DVD: The transfer sucks, the audio is passable and there's a commentary track on the disk by the director and two of his friends, who say they had absolutely nothing to do with making the film but were there to ask questions and make comments. All three of these sub-human primordial slime are so [[incredibly]] stupid that they should be institutionalized before they can harm themselves or others. I don't [[want]] to waste any more of you kind reader's time or mine, for I am starting to remember more than I want to about this film..... DVD rating: 1/10. [[Baffle]] below, but read on or you'll never [[savoir]] the horrible fate that awaits all planing to rent "Rodentz".

On a moonlit night, in a remote research laboratory, a major medical breakthrough is about to have [[fateful]] results. A chemical compound that was created to "hunt and destroy" deadly cancer cells has leaked from the hazardous waste disposal system into the building's basement. Now, the rodents involved in the laboratory experiment upstairs are not the only rats in the facility that will [[gotten]] the altered species. [[Prof]] Schultz, a leading bio-researcher, has just determined that the addition of a new enzyme now enables his "hunt and destroy" formulation to regenerate for the length of time necessary to [[counteract]] deadly cancer tumors. When three varying degrees of the new mixture are administered to three different rats and the rest poured down the faulty "Waste Hazard" sink, shocking side-effects result in a night of terror.....right.....

Seriously, this is probably the [[meanest]] [[movies]] I've [[noticed]] this year. [[Any]] about it screams "Low-budget!", from the [[fearsome]] acting to the special [[influences]] which are some of the [[gravest]] I've ever [[watched]]. The [[nature]] are clichéd morons and [[law]] in stupid, predictable ways: walking down [[darkness]] hallways [[lonely]], [[search]] for a cat, tripping and [[tumbling]] so the "rats" can [[catches]] up with them, boarding themselves up in a [[petite]] [[chambers]], etc.

[[Despite]] some films are cheaply [[brought]], this film [[genuinely]] takes the cake. [[Everything]] possible corner is [[cutting]], everything from reusing [[previous]] [[punches]], [[photographing]] the "[[Labs]]" hallways from [[diverse]] [[corners]] to [[deliver]] it [[gaze]] bigger (That [[remembering]] me--why were only TWO [[boy]] working in this freakin' massive building?!?!?!?), to music and [[peculiar]] [[impact]] that [[would]] be done on a children's workshop PC.

That brings me to the [[meanest]] [[facet]] of this steaming pile of dung--the [[peculiar]] effects. Just [[gruesome]]. The [[computers]] generated rats [[peek]] so [[forged]] and [[stands]] out in every scene so even the dumbest of [[kino]] [[admirers]] [[wo]] [[behold]] they are computer [[caused]]. And that [[monumental]] rat suit--OH MY [[DEUS]]!!!!!!!! [[harshly]], are we [[presumed]] to [[think]] that [[frakking]] beany baby is a monster? [[Jen]] pitiful........On the better side, some of the gore looks pretty cool, especially considering the [[budgets]].

The actors all suck. no one involved with the production cared or knew what they were doing. I've wasted enough time with review, just take my advice, it's garbage. 1/10.

About the DVD: The transfer sucks, the audio is passable and there's a commentary track on the disk by the director and two of his friends, who say they had absolutely nothing to do with making the film but were there to ask questions and make comments. All three of these sub-human primordial slime are so [[amazingly]] stupid that they should be institutionalized before they can harm themselves or others. I don't [[desiring]] to waste any more of you kind reader's time or mine, for I am starting to remember more than I want to about this film..... DVD rating: 1/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2632 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly [[profound]] movie critics hold such a [[grudge]] against director [[Michael]] Winner? [[Surely]] he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and [[confronting]], but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[famous]] action movies, like the [[first]] three entries in the "Death Wish"-series for example, are easy targets to [[clobber]] down because they [[allegedly]] [[glorify]] violence and the personal use of shotguns, but even when Winner takes on far more mature cinema [[genres]] – like the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a chance with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" generated some controversy and [[infuriated]] several people upon its release, when it leaked that Michael Winner cast genuinely malformed and handicapped people to portray the creatures attempting to cross the gateways between hell and earth. Pretty much the exact same controversy caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in horror cinema "Freaks" to remain banned and unseen for over thirty years! And why? Just because certain prudish and easily offended people, who shouldn't watch the movie in the first place, claim it's an [[unethical]] thing to do? I don't suppose Michael Winner or Todd Browning held these people at gunpoint or forced them to appear in their films, so what gives us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another major reason why critics didn't warmly welcome "The Sentinel" is because Jeffrey Konvitz' novel – and thus Michael Winner's screenplay – is hugely derivative of other contemporary but far more successful religiously themed horror stories and thus, according to the merciless pens of horror critics, little more than pure plagiarism. Admittedly "The Sentinel" borrows multiple substantial elements from "Rosemary's Baby", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's face it, 70's cinema largely thrives on stolen formulas and imitating success stories. If you overlook the slightly unoriginal concept and, in all [[fairness]], a handful of thoroughly confusing and unnecessary sub plots, "The Sentinel" honestly still remains a uniquely atmospheric and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an impressive ensemble cast and nightmarish imagery you're not likely to forget easy.

Alison Parker, a ravishing model with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. Sigh… I sincerely wonder why all the acclaimed and supposedly [[deep]] movie critics hold such a [[dent]] against director [[Michele]] Winner? [[Obviously]] he isn't the avatar of subtlety, as his films are practically always hard-handed and [[faces]], but so what? They're awesomely entertaining. His most [[proverbial]] action movies, like the [[frst]] three entries in the "Death Wish"-series for example, are easy targets to [[demolish]] down because they [[presumably]] [[beautify]] violence and the personal use of shotguns, but even when Winner takes on far more mature cinema [[genre]] – like the religious horrors of "The Sentinel" for example – he doesn't stand a chance with any of the critics. "The Sentinel" generated some controversy and [[disgusted]] several people upon its release, when it leaked that Michael Winner cast genuinely malformed and handicapped people to portray the creatures attempting to cross the gateways between hell and earth. Pretty much the exact same controversy caused Todd's Browning's masterpiece and landmark in horror cinema "Freaks" to remain banned and unseen for over thirty years! And why? Just because certain prudish and easily offended people, who shouldn't watch the movie in the first place, claim it's an [[amoral]] thing to do? I don't suppose Michael Winner or Todd Browning held these people at gunpoint or forced them to appear in their films, so what gives us the right to feel embarrassed in their place? Another major reason why critics didn't warmly welcome "The Sentinel" is because Jeffrey Konvitz' novel – and thus Michael Winner's screenplay – is hugely derivative of other contemporary but far more successful religiously themed horror stories and thus, according to the merciless pens of horror critics, little more than pure plagiarism. Admittedly "The Sentinel" borrows multiple substantial elements from "Rosemary's Baby", "The Omen" and "The Exorcist", but let's face it, 70's cinema largely thrives on stolen formulas and imitating success stories. If you overlook the slightly unoriginal concept and, in all [[equity]], a handful of thoroughly confusing and unnecessary sub plots, "The Sentinel" honestly still remains a uniquely atmospheric and often downright petrifying 70's horror-highlight with an impressive ensemble cast and nightmarish imagery you're not likely to forget easy.

Alison Parker, a ravishing model with some unprocessed mental traumas, moves into a stunning brownstone apartment in Brooklyn, deeply against the will of her boyfriend Michael who proposed to wed her several times already. Alison's physical existence and especially her mental condition drastically alter shortly after, and the ominous apartment appears to be the root of all misery. She meets eccentric neighbors and attends birthday parties for their cats, even though the landlady claims she and a blind priest are the only tenants. She frequently faints during her work assignments and has truly creepy visions of her bastard father and the night she attempted to commit suicide. It slowly becomes clear that Alison got chosen to serve a higher supernatural purpose inside this apartment building, but simultaneously malignant forces try and prevent this. It's truly regrettable how the promotional taglines and even brief synopsis on the back of the DVD immediately reveal that Alison's brownstone apartment is the earth's gateway to hell itself and she's the chosen one to guard it, because the film's script only slowly builds up towards this shocking revelation. For nearly 75 minutes (and throughout some sadly tedious and overlong sequences) Michael Winner successfully maintains the impression that Alison's own mind is playing tricks with her and that the involvement of the Catholic Church and her fiancée's odd behavior are strictly red herrings. Multiple of the horrific scenes come pretty close to being genius, like Alison's flashback or her first acquaintance with the priest upstairs. The whole climax, with the controversial guest appearances mentioned here above, is a literally perplexing showcase of pure terror and easily one of the most unforgettable and nail-biting denouements I ever witnessed.

The cast Michael Winner managed to gather is deeply impressive, especially considering "The Sentinel" still remains a legitimate horror movie and this genre isn't the most popular among prominent actors, but of course you also have to put the cast listing a little into perspective. With such an extended cast, obviously several of the roles in the film are little more than cameos. Martin Balsam and John Carradine, for example, only appear on screen for a couple of minutes all together. Several others (like Christopher Walken, Jeff Goldblum, Beverly D'Angelo and Tom Berenger) perhaps add a lot of fame to the movie nowadays, but back when it was released they were still too unknown in order to attract curious viewers. My personal pick for best performances go to Burgess Meredith as the uncanny neighbor and Eli Wallach as the satirical police inspector. The relatively unknown Cristina Raines does an admirable job carrying the film and Chris Sarandon neatly back her up, even though he sports a ridiculous mustache. In my humble opinion "The Sentinel" is a marvelously entertaining and frightening horror movie, and most definitely a must-see for TRUE genre fanatics. --------------------------------------------- Result 2633 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I have seen this film only the one time about 25 years ago, and to this day I have always told people it is probably the [[best]] [[film]] I have ever seen. Considering there was no verbal dialogue and only thought [[dialogue]] i found the film to be [[enthralling]] and I even found myself holding my [[breath]] so as not to make any sound. I [[would]] highly recomend this [[film]], I wish it was available on DVD. I have seen this film only the one time about 25 years ago, and to this day I have always told people it is probably the [[nicest]] [[cinematographic]] I have ever seen. Considering there was no verbal dialogue and only thought [[dialog]] i found the film to be [[mesmerizing]] and I even found myself holding my [[respiration]] so as not to make any sound. I [[ought]] highly recomend this [[filmmaking]], I wish it was available on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2634 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I watched this today, [[partially]] attracted to the all-star cast and partly because I have enjoyed so [[many]] other films of this ilk. [[However]], this is one to [[avoid]]. There are [[dozens]] of [[badly]] cut scenes where the [[continuity]] just does not flow, the billiards challenge at the start, for [[example]]. The [[fighting]] scenes with the natives are about as good as you would remember in those old black and white Tarzan [[movies]], you know where you see a spear fly through the air and camera cuts to a dead native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous death? There are also [[several]] quite [[unnecessary]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the little girl being [[rescued]] while collecting flowers. The really [[badly]] animated clay toys are too painful to watch. If you do see this movie the crabs which inch forward at about 5kph are the highlight. [[Somehow]] one [[manages]] to creep up on David Mccullum and [[give]] him a nip. Its as if there was no time to [[get]] out of the [[way]], like when the obelisk in the [[city]] [[falls]] over, the native has all the [[time]] in the world to [[take]] a 2 [[step]] to the left, but no he [[screams]] and it [[falls]] on him. I only [[give]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums voice develop a stutter as the movie progresses? I watched this today, [[partly]] attracted to the all-star cast and partly because I have enjoyed so [[multiple]] other films of this ilk. [[Conversely]], this is one to [[shirk]]. There are [[scores]] of [[desperately]] cut scenes where the [[continuation]] just does not flow, the billiards challenge at the start, for [[case]]. The [[struggling]] scenes with the natives are about as good as you would remember in those old black and white Tarzan [[films]], you know where you see a spear fly through the air and camera cuts to a dead native lying motionless on the floor with it sticking from his thigh. Is that instantaneous death? There are also [[diverse]] quite [[unusable]] scenes which have nothing to do with the plot, like the little girl being [[saving]] while collecting flowers. The really [[sorely]] animated clay toys are too painful to watch. If you do see this movie the crabs which inch forward at about 5kph are the highlight. [[Somewhere]] one [[runs]] to creep up on David Mccullum and [[lend]] him a nip. Its as if there was no time to [[got]] out of the [[route]], like when the obelisk in the [[ville]] [[drops]] over, the native has all the [[period]] in the world to [[taking]] a 2 [[stride]] to the left, but no he [[cries]] and it [[waterfalls]] on him. I only [[lend]] this a 2 because of Ekland. And why does Mccullums voice develop a stutter as the movie progresses? --------------------------------------------- Result 2635 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: Stuart Gordon

[[Cast]]: Gary Graham, Anne Marie Johnson, Paul Koslo

Review: Stuart Gordon who we [[usually]] associate with extremely gory [[horror]] [[films]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, took a small detour here and did a little sci-fi [[flick]]. I stress the word "[[little]]" since this is a very low budget [[flick]], and there in lies its main weakness.

The [[story]] takes place in the [[future]]. A world in which the [[great]] superpowers (that [[according]] to this [[movie]] are the United States and Russia) duke out their [[differences]] not by going on a full blown [[world]] war...but by [[fighting]] gladiator [[style]] [[battles]] with [[gigantic]] robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian [[robot]] fighter [[called]] [[Alexander]]. [[Lots]] of [[cheap]] stop motion animation [[ensues]].

Well, the [[idea]] is [[awesome]] I [[guess]]. The [[great]] [[nations]] settleling territorial [[disputes]] with [[giant]] [[robots]]? Interesting [[premise]] and one that [[could]] have been handled [[properly]] if the [[proper]] [[budget]] had been available. Unfortunately what [[could]] have been a [[fun]] [[movie]] ends up being an [[embarrassment]] for an [[otherwise]] great [[director]].

I as a [[kid]] [[loved]] this [[movie]], and I [[guess]] if you [[want]] any enjoyment out of this [[movie]], you'll have to [[revert]] back to little [[kid]] [[mode]] to have some fun with it. I [[showed]] this [[film]] to some of my [[friends]] and as the [[movie]] progressed my [[friends]] where like "what the [[hell]] is this [[piece]] of [[crap]] franco?" And I'm [[like]] well this [[movie]] is a sci-fi by one of my [[favorite]] directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the [[movie]] [[progressed]] into corny [[territory]] I almost [[felt]] like pressing [[stop]] and not having them go through that [[torture]]. I [[could]] go through it, cause I [[loved]] this [[film]] as a [[kid]], and there's still a [[little]] nostalgia attached to watching it. But [[everyone]] [[else]] was just not [[going]] to get it.

And I myself [[realized]] that the [[movie]] isn't [[really]] that good. First off. The [[movie]] is about [[giant]] [[robots]] [[kicking]] the hell out of each other. And in order to [[achieve]] this in a [[credible]] [[fashion]] you'd have to [[use]] some [[damn]] good special effects to make it [[work]], [[expensive]] effects that [[would]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are [[fighting]] that are kinda [[cool]], and made me go "[[thats]] why I liked thid movie!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 Title: Robot Jox (1990)

Director: Stuart Gordon

[[Casting]]: Gary Graham, Anne Marie Johnson, Paul Koslo

Review: Stuart Gordon who we [[traditionally]] associate with extremely gory [[terror]] [[cinematography]] such as Re-Animator, From Beyond, Dagon and Castle Freak, took a small detour here and did a little sci-fi [[gesture]]. I stress the word "[[small]]" since this is a very low budget [[film]], and there in lies its main weakness.

The [[history]] takes place in the [[futur]]. A world in which the [[wondrous]] superpowers (that [[depending]] to this [[cinema]] are the United States and Russia) duke out their [[variance]] not by going on a full blown [[monde]] war...but by [[struggling]] gladiator [[styles]] [[struggles]] with [[overwhelming]] robots. Our hero Achilles must go up against the evil Russian [[robots]] fighter [[termed]] [[Aleksandr]]. [[Lot]] of [[cheaper]] stop motion animation [[ensue]].

Well, the [[think]] is [[unbelievable]] I [[reckon]]. The [[grand]] [[countries]] settleling territorial [[disagreements]] with [[mammoth]] [[robot]]? Interesting [[assumption]] and one that [[would]] have been handled [[sufficiently]] if the [[adequate]] [[budgets]] had been available. Unfortunately what [[did]] have been a [[funny]] [[movies]] ends up being an [[shame]] for an [[alternately]] great [[superintendent]].

I as a [[petit]] [[loves]] this [[cinema]], and I [[imagine]] if you [[wanted]] any enjoyment out of this [[films]], you'll have to [[reverting]] back to little [[enfant]] [[modes]] to have some fun with it. I [[revealed]] this [[cinematography]] to some of my [[friendships]] and as the [[film]] progressed my [[freund]] where like "what the [[inferno]] is this [[slice]] of [[bollocks]] franco?" And I'm [[fond]] well this [[filmmaking]] is a sci-fi by one of my [[preferred]] directors Stuart Gordon?" But as the [[cinematic]] [[advances]] into corny [[territories]] I almost [[believed]] like pressing [[stops]] and not having them go through that [[tortures]]. I [[wo]] go through it, cause I [[loves]] this [[filmmaking]] as a [[petit]], and there's still a [[small]] nostalgia attached to watching it. But [[anyone]] [[elsewhere]] was just not [[go]] to get it.

And I myself [[realised]] that the [[film]] isn't [[genuinely]] that good. First off. The [[film]] is about [[juggernaut]] [[bots]] [[kick]] the hell out of each other. And in order to [[realising]] this in a [[believable]] [[manner]] you'd have to [[utilised]] some [[fuck]] good special effects to make it [[collaborate]], [[costly]] effects that [[could]] help us the audience suspend disbelief. But unfortunately this being a small scale movie, from a small scale company (Empire Pictures, which went bankrupt after making this film!)the effects only help us giggle and laugh at them. Heck even the sets and some of the wardrobe looks unfinished or half assed.

OK granted, once you accept that you are watching a mixture of moderate stop animation and miniatures well you can sort of give in to the film and even enjoy the big robots kicking the hell out of each other. There are certain scenes when the robots are [[battling]] that are kinda [[cooling]], and made me go "[[aint]] why I liked thid movie!" But every know and them, some crappy effect will take you right out of that protective little cocoon you were trying to hide in. And boom, your right back into realizing this film just doesn't live up to its premise.

And heres another thing that sort of bothered me a bit about the movie. This movie is basically a movie for kids. You know, giant robots duking it out? Stop motion animation? Hello? But this movies dialogue had a lot of sexual innuendos and the violence gets a little bloody. So I kept asking myself is this a kids movie or not? After a while I just came to the conclusion that basically this was a kids movie with adult sensibilities, which really isn't a good mix.

So for those of you who don't feel that certain naive childlike charm of watching two robots fighting each other and if you don't have a nostalgic connection to this movie (like I do) well Id suggest you steer clear away from this one. Gordons a great director, but this movie he made, just didn't do it for me. Well, at least not now that I'm a full grown adult.

Rating: 2 out of 5 --------------------------------------------- Result 2636 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Although in my opinion this is one of the [[lesser]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director George Sidney, a lesser musical featuring anyone from that line-up is [[nothing]] to [[sneeze]] at, and in conjunction, the line-up makes Anchors Aweigh a pretty [[good]] film despite its [[flaws]].

Sinatra and Kelly are Clarence Doolittle and Joseph Brady, respectively, two Navy men. As the film begins, they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles area for some much needed leave. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is still a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and Sidney have all of the Navy men comically exaggerating their finesse with women to each other). Brady promises to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a strange combination of militaristic music--because of the Navy premise, obviously, Broadway pop--what the stars tend to sing in more informal settings, opera--what Abbott's character excels at, Liberace-like popular classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because Abbott frequents a Mexican restaurant in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it could. Plenty of the songs are good, and everyone involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart works hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in good, interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. Although in my opinion this is one of the [[smaller]] musicals of stars Frank Sinatra, Gene Kelly, Kathryn Grayson and director George Sidney, a lesser musical featuring anyone from that line-up is [[anything]] to [[sneezing]] at, and in conjunction, the line-up makes Anchors Aweigh a pretty [[alright]] film despite its [[deficiency]].

Sinatra and Kelly are Clarence Doolittle and Joseph Brady, respectively, two Navy men. As the film begins, they're just pulling in to the Los Angeles area for some much needed leave. Brady plans on visiting a girlfriend named Lola. Doolittle is still a bit wet behind the ears, appropriately enough, and seeks advice on women from Brady in private (publicly, scriptwriter Isobel Lennart and Sidney have all of the Navy men comically exaggerating their finesse with women to each other). Brady promises to help get Doolittle hooked up, but primarily because Doolittle won't leave him alone otherwise. A kink is put into their plans when local police basically force them to assist with a young boy who is obsessed with the Navy. He won't give the police any information about who he is or where he lives. Brady helps and he and Doolittle end up taking the boy back home. When the boy's guardian, Susan Abbott (Grayson), finally shows up, Doolittle goes gaga for her. Brady tries to convince him to forget about her; Brady just wants to get back to Lola. But they keep getting coaxed back to Abbott's home, and eventually something of a love triangle forms. Things become more complicated when Brady lies about Doolittle knowing a famous musician, Jose Iturbi, who is in residence at a film studio, and claims that Doolittle has set up an audition for Abbott, who is a singer and actress, in front of Iturbi.

Because of the story, the music is a strange combination of militaristic music--because of the Navy premise, obviously, Broadway pop--what the stars tend to sing in more informal settings, opera--what Abbott's character excels at, Liberace-like popular classical--what Iturbi did, and Mexican music--because Abbott frequents a Mexican restaurant in a Mexican section of L.A. The combination doesn't work as well as it could. Plenty of the songs are good, and everyone involved is certainly talented as a singer or musician, but the genre hopping tends to lose coherence. Worse, there are a couple showcases for Iturbi, who was apparently a big star at the time, that effectively bring the plot to a halt and that seem more than a bit hokey at this point in time. I just watched another film that happened to have outstanding music, Robert Altman's Kansas City (1996), but that misguidedly stopped the plot to periodically turn into a concert film. Anchors Aweigh takes a similar tactic. Yes, this is a musical, but there's a difference between songs that propel and are integral to the plot and concert showcases that seem like contractual obligation material.

There are also some plot problems. It's not very well established why Brady is so against Doolittle's pursuit of Abbott. We can guess that Brady thinks Doolittle shouldn't become involved with someone who has to take care of a kid, and who seems relatively "proper" and traditional, but on the other hand, Brady can tell that Doolittle doesn't have the same womanizing disposition that Brady admits of himself. Abbott seems like a good fit for Doolittle, and furthermore, Lennart works hard to establish that Brady just wants to get Doolittle out of his hair and get on with meeting Lola--it seems that Brady's character should be quickly pawning Doolittle off on any candidate, whether she's a good fit or not. This might seem like a minor detail, but it's actually the hinge for about a third to half of the plot. The story also seems a bit drawn out. Length is a problem. Anchors Aweigh, clocking in at roughly two hours and twenty minutes, should have been cut down by at least a half-hour.

The above surely sounds like I'm complaining about the film too much to justify an 8. I just wanted to stress what I see as flaws, because the conventional wisdom on Anchors Aweigh is much closer to the idea that it has no flaws.

Sinatra, Kelly and Grayson are certainly charismatic, separately and together. They turn in good, interesting performances. Sinatra looks and acts much younger than his actual age of 29 – 30 while shooting. He plays an unusually naïve, virginal character--completely different than most of the roles he would take later, and different than his public image as a crooner. For Kelly, this was his breakthrough film, and rightfully so. His choreography is varied and impressive, as is his acting. Grayson is charming, her performance is sophisticatedly understated, and she's simply gorgeous. All of this helps override the flaws with the script and the drawn out pacing.

And there's even a very interesting element that probably only arises because Sidney was allowed to sprawl over a large variety of moods--the infamous Kelly dance with Jerry the Mouse (of "Tom and Jerry" fame) in an extended fantasy sequence. This is one of the earliest examples of combining live action and animation, and it is extremely well done and enjoyable as long as you're a fan of fantasy. The fantasy sequences tend to be the best of the film. Matched in excellence to the dance with Jerry the Mouse is a long song and dance number featuring Kelly and Grayson, where Brady is imagining Abbott in a scene from a period film while he woos her, having to resort to acrobatic stunts to reach her physically as she stands on a high balcony.

As uneven and flawed as the film is, it is largely successful and entertaining to watch. Fans of classic musicals certainly shouldn't miss Anchors Aweigh, and neither should Sinatra fans, who'll get quite a kick out of his character. --------------------------------------------- Result 2637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Having [[enjoyed]] Joyce's [[complex]] novel so [[keenly]] I was [[prepared]] to be [[disappointed]] by Joseph Strick's and Fred Haines's screenplay, [[given]] the [[fabulous]] [[complexity]] of the original text. [[However]], the film turned out to be very well [[done]] and a [[fine]] [[translation]] of the tone, naturalism, and levity of the book.

It [[certainly]] [[helps]] to have read the [[original]] text before [[viewing]] the [[film]]. I [[imagine]] the latter [[would]] [[seem]] disjointed, with very [[odd]] [[episodes]] [[apparently]] [[randomly]] stitched [[together]], without a [[prior]] reading of the [[text]] to [[help]] [[grasp]] the plot.

It's [[amazing]] to see how "[[filthy]]" the [[film]] is, [[given]] that it was shot in [[Dublin]] in 1967. The Irish [[film]] censors only, [[finally]], unbanned it for viewing by general [[audiences]] in [[Ireland]] as late as 2000 (it was [[shown]] to [[restricted]] [[audiences]] in a private [[cinema]] club, the Irish [[Film]] [[Theatre]], in the late 1970s). Joyce's eroticism is not [[simply]] naturalistic and raunchy, it [[offers]] [[many]] [[wildly]] "perverse" [[episodes]]. Never mind that so [[many]] of these fetishes were [[unacceptable]] when the [[book]] was [[published]] in 1922 - they were [[still]] utterly taboo when the [[film]] was [[made]] in 1967.

It is [[astonishing]] and [[heartening]] to watch the [[cream]] of the [[Irish]] acting profession of the 1960s, respected [[players]] all, daring to [[utter]] and enact Joyce's [[hugely]] transgressive text with such gusto.

[[Bravo]]! Having [[adored]] Joyce's [[sophisticated]] novel so [[powerfully]] I was [[authored]] to be [[disenchanted]] by Joseph Strick's and Fred Haines's screenplay, [[yielded]] the [[peachy]] [[sophistication]] of the original text. [[Still]], the film turned out to be very well [[performed]] and a [[alright]] [[translations]] of the tone, naturalism, and levity of the book.

It [[assuredly]] [[supporting]] to have read the [[upfront]] text before [[visualizing]] the [[cinematography]]. I [[reckon]] the latter [[could]] [[looks]] disjointed, with very [[bizarre]] [[bouts]] [[visibly]] [[indiscriminately]] stitched [[jointly]], without a [[ago]] reading of the [[texts]] to [[assisting]] [[grasping]] the plot.

It's [[striking]] to see how "[[squalid]]" the [[filmmaking]] is, [[conferred]] that it was shot in [[Belfast]] in 1967. The Irish [[movie]] censors only, [[eventually]], unbanned it for viewing by general [[audience]] in [[Irish]] as late as 2000 (it was [[evidenced]] to [[curtailed]] [[audience]] in a private [[cinemas]] club, the Irish [[Movie]] [[Cinemas]], in the late 1970s). Joyce's eroticism is not [[purely]] naturalistic and raunchy, it [[delivers]] [[countless]] [[brutally]] "perverse" [[spells]]. Never mind that so [[numerous]] of these fetishes were [[indefensible]] when the [[cookbook]] was [[publicized]] in 1922 - they were [[nonetheless]] utterly taboo when the [[movie]] was [[effected]] in 1967.

It is [[staggering]] and [[gratifying]] to watch the [[moisturizer]] of the [[Ireland]] acting profession of the 1960s, respected [[gamblers]] all, daring to [[unmitigated]] and enact Joyce's [[unimaginably]] transgressive text with such gusto.

[[Congrats]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This show was appreciated by critics and those who realized that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and anyone else's was not a [[steal]]. (Yes, I've seen "Amelie." "Pushing Daisies" is somewhat similar but still different enough to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[shows]] on TV that have this kind of quirky [[charm]]. The greatest similarity is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[comes]] by that similarity honestly: Bryan Fuller created both shows. (Both shows involve an "undead" young woman, For example.) This [[show]] never [[stopped]] being funny and [[charming]], and it was [[always]] odd, yet was consistently humane.

I must say a word about the conventions of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show lacked a moral center because in the first (and several subsequent) episodes Ned seems to get away with causing the death of Chuck's father without consequences of any kind. First of all, this must be a new definition of "without consequences of any kind" because, in spite of the fact that Ned was only a boy and did not realize that he had caused the death of Chuck's father, he nevertheless felt guilty from the moment he realized what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had caused her father's death with his gift. Now, there are no police to charge people with magically causing one person's death by bringing another person back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal guidance. In other words, it's between Ned and Chuck, who was not inclined to [[forgive]] Ned anytime soon.

But this does point out a problem with continuing story lines in network dramas. I remember when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did something wrong and it seemed he got away with it--for a whole year--then he got caught and was forced to resign from the job (and left the show). The point is, viewers should learn by now and not assume that just because a regular character does something wrong in a single episode, and is not caught in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is always next week--and maybe even next year. This show was appreciated by critics and those who realized that any similarities between "Pushing Daisies" style and anyone else's was not a [[shoplifted]]. (Yes, I've seen "Amelie." "Pushing Daisies" is somewhat similar but still different enough to be original.) Rather, there are too few [[demonstrate]] on TV that have this kind of quirky [[amulet]]. The greatest similarity is to "Dead Like Me" but "P.D" [[arrives]] by that similarity honestly: Bryan Fuller created both shows. (Both shows involve an "undead" young woman, For example.) This [[demonstrate]] never [[ceasing]] being funny and [[cute]], and it was [[permanently]] odd, yet was consistently humane.

I must say a word about the conventions of on-going story lines. some people have complained that this show lacked a moral center because in the first (and several subsequent) episodes Ned seems to get away with causing the death of Chuck's father without consequences of any kind. First of all, this must be a new definition of "without consequences of any kind" because, in spite of the fact that Ned was only a boy and did not realize that he had caused the death of Chuck's father, he nevertheless felt guilty from the moment he realized what he had done. Further, about a dozen episodes into the series, Ned finally did confess to Chuck that he had caused her father's death with his gift. Now, there are no police to charge people with magically causing one person's death by bringing another person back to life, so the questions of absolution and restitution have to be taken up without societal guidance. In other words, it's between Ned and Chuck, who was not inclined to [[amnesty]] Ned anytime soon.

But this does point out a problem with continuing story lines in network dramas. I remember when David Caruso's character on "NYPD Blue" did something wrong and it seemed he got away with it--for a whole year--then he got caught and was forced to resign from the job (and left the show). The point is, viewers should learn by now and not assume that just because a regular character does something wrong in a single episode, and is not caught in that episode, that he has gotten away with it. There is always next week--and maybe even next year. --------------------------------------------- Result 2639 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This film was one of the [[worst]] I've [[seen]] in a [[long]] while.

It's a combination police drama and comedy about two Hollywood detectives, Harrison Ford and [[Josh]] Hartnett, investigating a shootout at a hip hop club.

The [[plot]] is contrived and there are way too [[many]] side issues [[going]] on. Ford is hustling real estate on the side (Martin Landau is one of his [[clients]]), Hartnett runs a yoga school where he's hustling [[chicks]] in his spare [[time]], the two are under [[investigation]] by Internal Affairs, Ford is screwing the ex-girlfriend (Lena Olin) of the IA investigator and she's a psychic who has a radio show, the man who set up the killing at the club is a dirty ex-cop who shot Hartnett's father years ago.

Toss in the obligatory car chases and some lame attempts at humor, and that's about the gist of this turkey. This film was one of the [[hardest]] I've [[noticed]] in a [[prolonged]] while.

It's a combination police drama and comedy about two Hollywood detectives, Harrison Ford and [[Ghosh]] Hartnett, investigating a shootout at a hip hop club.

The [[intrigue]] is contrived and there are way too [[myriad]] side issues [[go]] on. Ford is hustling real estate on the side (Martin Landau is one of his [[consumers]]), Hartnett runs a yoga school where he's hustling [[hoes]] in his spare [[period]], the two are under [[inquiry]] by Internal Affairs, Ford is screwing the ex-girlfriend (Lena Olin) of the IA investigator and she's a psychic who has a radio show, the man who set up the killing at the club is a dirty ex-cop who shot Hartnett's father years ago.

Toss in the obligatory car chases and some lame attempts at humor, and that's about the gist of this turkey. --------------------------------------------- Result 2640 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The [[premise]] of this awaited sequel was really good and after the huge [[success]] of the [[remake]] I [[expected]] a lot sincerely.

The [[sad]] truth is that this movie is really [[absurd]] and inept. The situations are [[dumb]] and beyond [[reason]] and the acting is [[truly]] [[awful]].

This [[time]] there aren't [[likable]] [[characters]] or violins unlike the [[remake]]. [[Also]], the [[gore]] is not that abundant and when it happens it's truly [[bad]].

The violence is minimal and it's a shame because there are many arguments that make you think that there's room for heavy violence. I mean, there's a SWAT team that is hunting a family of cannibal mutants. You surely expect something different! When I watched it on the movies I wanted my money back.

Anyways this is a clear example of how rushed out movies turn out to be a mess and demonstrate poor quality on all aspects.

A mess that let down the fans of the remake like me. That's why sequels are never welcomed; at least this movie isn't as terrible as the 1985 sequel to the original. The [[prerequisite]] of this awaited sequel was really good and after the huge [[avail]] of the [[redo]] I [[projected]] a lot sincerely.

The [[sorrowful]] truth is that this movie is really [[claptrap]] and inept. The situations are [[twit]] and beyond [[cause]] and the acting is [[truthfully]] [[scary]].

This [[moment]] there aren't [[congenial]] [[hallmarks]] or violins unlike the [[redo]]. [[Additionally]], the [[gora]] is not that abundant and when it happens it's truly [[mala]].

The violence is minimal and it's a shame because there are many arguments that make you think that there's room for heavy violence. I mean, there's a SWAT team that is hunting a family of cannibal mutants. You surely expect something different! When I watched it on the movies I wanted my money back.

Anyways this is a clear example of how rushed out movies turn out to be a mess and demonstrate poor quality on all aspects.

A mess that let down the fans of the remake like me. That's why sequels are never welcomed; at least this movie isn't as terrible as the 1985 sequel to the original. --------------------------------------------- Result 2641 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] I [[liked]] Antz, but loved "A Bug's Life". The animation that was put into this [[paid]] off. I will [[definitely]] be getting this on DVD. By the way, Disney should make a widescreen version of this movie on tape. (I heard talk of squishing all of the characters into the screen on the standard video format). Most will have to agree that the ending credits were the funniest! I only saw one of the two sets, but I can't wat to see the other one! I [[wished]] Antz, but loved "A Bug's Life". The animation that was put into this [[salaried]] off. I will [[categorically]] be getting this on DVD. By the way, Disney should make a widescreen version of this movie on tape. (I heard talk of squishing all of the characters into the screen on the standard video format). Most will have to agree that the ending credits were the funniest! I only saw one of the two sets, but I can't wat to see the other one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Sure, for it's [[super]] imagery and [[awesome]] [[sound]], it's a great [[home]] [[theater]] "show off" disk, but this is [[also]] a [[touching]] drama as well as an informative [[documentary]]. The parallel stories that are intertwined throughout this film will keep all [[viewers]] interested. [[Young]], [[old]], [[boys]] and girls alike will [[find]] that deep down, we are all fans of the [[automobile]], [[especially]] the [[high]] performance indy [[machines]] that are the [[result]] of generations blood, sweat, tears, [[ingenuity]] and [[perseverance]]. The [[Mark]] Knopfler and Ry Cooder sound [[track]] is [[perfectly]] [[matched]] to the [[visuals]] and the content. I don't [[want]] to [[give]] away the [[ending]], but the final [[driving]] sequence to [[Quincy]] Jones' "Days Like These" just might [[bring]] a tear to your [[eye]]. Enjoy it! Sure, for it's [[marvellous]] imagery and [[great]] [[sounds]], it's a great [[house]] [[movies]] "show off" disk, but this is [[further]] a [[touch]] drama as well as an informative [[literature]]. The parallel stories that are intertwined throughout this film will keep all [[bystanders]] interested. [[Youths]], [[elderly]], [[guys]] and girls alike will [[unearth]] that deep down, we are all fans of the [[vehicle]], [[notably]] the [[supreme]] performance indy [[equipment]] that are the [[findings]] of generations blood, sweat, tears, [[inventiveness]] and [[obstinacy]]. The [[Flagged]] Knopfler and Ry Cooder sound [[tracking]] is [[altogether]] [[confronted]] to the [[imaging]] and the content. I don't [[wanted]] to [[lend]] away the [[terminated]], but the final [[drive]] sequence to [[Quincey]] Jones' "Days Like These" just might [[bringing]] a tear to your [[eyeball]]. Enjoy it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2643 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a very strange film by director/[[animator]] Richard Williams. [[All]] who know of William's work know it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[cake]].

It [[features]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[save]] their owner's new French doll from a lustful pirate toy and find themselves at the mercy of [[several]] bizarre characters along the [[way]]. The [[strength]] in this movie [[lies]] [[primarily]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[strange]] [[character]] designs, its [[powerful]] animation, and its stark [[contrast]] of the sweet and scary. Williams' [[brilliant]] animation [[portrayed]] Raggedy Ann and [[Andy]] as [[real]] rag dolls, floppy and darned, [[rather]] than simple [[cartoon]] versions of the dolls, which [[made]] it more believable (at [[least]] in a visual [[sense]]). The animation [[shines]] on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose [[body]] walks with two [[different]] [[personalities]] [[controlling]] each [[end]], the silent-movie [[chase]] with [[Sir]] Leonard Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[possibly]] the most [[exquisite]] psychedelic animation I've ever [[seen]]. There's [[something]] about this animation that just makes your [[jaw]] drop--and every second it's [[something]] new. [[Living]] in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the [[Greedy]] is a [[massive]] blob [[man]] that [[lives]] in and mercilessly eats sweets. He [[sings]] a song that I can't [[help]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then tries to [[kill]] Raggedy Ann for her candy heart.

The only [[complaint]] I have about this [[film]] is that there are too [[many]] [[songs]]. It [[continuously]] bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good [[songs]] (which should have been the only ones) [[including]] "I [[Look]], And What Do I See?", "No Girl's [[Toy]]", "[[Blue]]" ([[though]] they didn't need to make him sing it twice), "I Never Get [[Enough]]", "Because I [[Love]] You" and [[maybe]] "I'm [[Home]]." The [[others]] just [[seem]] [[unnecessary]] and [[frankly]] aren't too [[amazing]] to [[listen]] to.

This is a weird [[film]] with [[strange]] undertones, but if that's what you're looking for, you won't find better. This is a very strange film by director/[[moderator]] Richard Williams. [[Entire]] who know of William's work know it's a bit off-kilter (if not ingenious) but this one takes the [[sundae]].

It [[featured]] two hapless ragdolls who have to [[savings]] their owner's new French doll from a lustful pirate toy and find themselves at the mercy of [[diverse]] bizarre characters along the [[manner]]. The [[fortitude]] in this movie [[lie]] [[basically]] in its aesthetic quality; its [[freaky]] [[nature]] designs, its [[emphatic]] animation, and its stark [[opposite]] of the sweet and scary. Williams' [[sublime]] animation [[depicted]] Raggedy Ann and [[Indy]] as [[actual]] rag dolls, floppy and darned, [[comparatively]] than simple [[caricature]] versions of the dolls, which [[introduced]] it more believable (at [[slightest]] in a visual [[feeling]]). The animation [[glitters]] on the bring us the Camel-with-the-Wrinkled-Knees, whose [[agencies]] walks with two [[multiple]] [[dignitaries]] [[monitoring]] each [[terminate]], the silent-movie [[hunting]] with [[Mister]] Leonard Looney and, of course, the Greedy.

The Greedy animation, on its own, is [[presumably]] the most [[sumptuous]] psychedelic animation I've ever [[watched]]. There's [[anything]] about this animation that just makes your [[chin]] drop--and every second it's [[anything]] new. [[Residing]] in what was deemed "the Taffy Pit," the [[Voracious]] is a [[gigantic]] blob [[males]] that [[vie]] in and mercilessly eats sweets. He [[sung]] a song that I can't [[supporting]] but feel hold some sexual undertones, then tries to [[killings]] Raggedy Ann for her candy heart.

The only [[complaints]] I have about this [[filmmaking]] is that there are too [[several]] [[lyrics]]. It [[steadily]] bogs down the movie's pace because there are SIXTEEN of them. There are about six good [[lyrics]] (which should have been the only ones) [[include]] "I [[Gaze]], And What Do I See?", "No Girl's [[Toys]]", "[[Bleu]]" ([[if]] they didn't need to make him sing it twice), "I Never Get [[Sufficient]]", "Because I [[Adores]] You" and [[presumably]] "I'm [[Household]]." The [[alia]] just [[looks]] [[useless]] and [[candidly]] aren't too [[admirable]] to [[hear]] to.

This is a weird [[kino]] with [[weird]] undertones, but if that's what you're looking for, you won't find better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This tear-teaser, written by Steve Martin himself, is so [[unbelievably]] [[bad]], it makes you sick to your [[stomach]]!

The plot is pathetic, the acting awful, and the [[dialogue]] is [[even]] more predictable than the [[ending]].

Avoid at all costs! This tear-teaser, written by Steve Martin himself, is so [[stunningly]] [[unhealthy]], it makes you sick to your [[stomachache]]!

The plot is pathetic, the acting awful, and the [[conversation]] is [[yet]] more predictable than the [[ceasing]].

Avoid at all costs! --------------------------------------------- Result 2645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie is very very very [[poor]]. I have seen better [[movies]].

There was a [[bit]] of [[tension]] but not much to make you jump out of your [[chair]]. It [[begins]] slowly with the [[building]] of tension. [[Which]] is not a [[success]]. [[At]] [[least]] if you [[ask]] me. [[Though]] at some [[points]] or [[moments]] I must [[say]] it was a bit [[funny]] when people [[got]] shot and how they went down.

They should had [[made]] it [[something]] like [[Scary]] [[Movie]], then it might be a better [[movie]]. [[Because]] I [[watched]] only pieces of the movie by skipping scenes and it got to [[boring]] through out the [[movie]]. I [[must]] [[say]] that i felt sleepy watching this [[movie]] so I [[sure]] can [[say]] it is not worth it.

Don't waste [[time]] on [[even]] [[thinking]] to do [[something]] with this [[movie]] besides leaving it where it already is. Somewhere very dusty.. This movie is very very very [[poorest]]. I have seen better [[movie]].

There was a [[bitten]] of [[tensions]] but not much to make you jump out of your [[chairman]]. It [[launches]] slowly with the [[build]] of tension. [[Whose]] is not a [[accomplishments]]. [[During]] [[less]] if you [[wondering]] me. [[Whilst]] at some [[dots]] or [[times]] I must [[says]] it was a bit [[comical]] when people [[did]] shot and how they went down.

They should had [[introduced]] it [[anything]] like [[Fearful]] [[Cinematography]], then it might be a better [[cinema]]. [[Since]] I [[observed]] only pieces of the movie by skipping scenes and it got to [[dull]] through out the [[movies]]. I [[needs]] [[says]] that i felt sleepy watching this [[cinematographic]] so I [[convinced]] can [[told]] it is not worth it.

Don't waste [[times]] on [[yet]] [[think]] to do [[anything]] with this [[cinematography]] besides leaving it where it already is. Somewhere very dusty.. --------------------------------------------- Result 2646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unbelievable!

this film gets a 7 out 0f 10. This has to be one of the worst films i have seen in years. not only was the acting incredibly bad, the storyline (if you can call it that) was just as bad. Offcourse everyone knows what's going to happen within the first 5 minutes. Which is not a bad thing if you can captivate the audience during leading up to that moment. That however, is not the case. There is no action, no suspense, not even a spark between the 2 leading actors. It was unfortunately a waste of my time, and certainly a waste of my money.

and the 2 of merely for trying --------------------------------------------- Result 2647 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] I went to see this one with much expectation. Quite [[unfortunately]] the dialogue is utterly [[stupid]] and [[overall]] the movie is far from [[inspiring]] awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[missing]] logic to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which would make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and Star Wars a decade ago. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and igniting their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your time & money on this one. I went to see this one with much expectation. Quite [[regretfully]] the dialogue is utterly [[nonsensical]] and [[comprehensive]] the movie is far from [[exhilarating]] awe or interest. Even a child can see the [[gone]] logic to character's behaviors. Today's kids need creative stories which would inspire them, which would make them 'daydream' about the events. That's precisely what happened with movies like E.T. and Star Wars a decade ago. (How many kids imagined about becoming Jedi Knights and igniting their own lightsabers?) Seriously don't waste your time & money on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2648 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (61%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Quite possibly the nicest woman in show business, and the sexiest, Debbie gives another fine performance here. Although her work in American Nightmare was far superior, she is still worth watching in this film.

The cast is filled with your typical Melrose Place types, chiseled features and seductive curves, that I had never seen before. Other than Debbie, Laura Nativo was the only actress I had seen before, in the similar Delta Delta Die.

The plot centers around a group of California arrogants who initiate poor naive Debbie Rochon into their clique. They tell her that they have a murder club, and that she must kill someone to be accepted. Debbie wants nothing more but to be accepted by these cool people, so she quickly kills a person, and now the group must decide what to do with her, after she fell for their joke.

VIOLENCE: $$$$$ (Plentiful! Debbie Rochon occasionally has blood splattered all over her and all of the murder scenes are done in your face. Gore hounds will surely enjoy!)

NUDITY: $$$$$ (Plentiful as well! Debbie Rochon has several nude scenes as do many of the no-name actresses and actors. The pool party seems as just an excuse to get everyone naked; man and woman alike. Julie Strain also has a topless cameo but her character is gone after the first five minutes).

STORY: $$ (Could have received a higher vote because the plot was very interesting and unique but the plot serves as filler between nude scenes. I understand that B-Rate films use nudity often, but this is borderline excessive).

ACTING: $ (The acting is sub standard to say the least. Rochon is always a treat, easily the best B-Rate actress in the business today, but her character in American Nightmare was superior. Danny Wolske does a fine job as Debbie's object of lust but the other actors were nothing to write about). --------------------------------------------- Result 2649 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely horrific film. Ameteurish and it isn't funny at all. Lead character played by Mehmet Ali Erbil is very annoying. Edits by E.T and star wars is just plain stupid.

Actor Yilmaz Goksal is the only good think about this movie. He should master his English and move to Hollywood. Hollywood can not find an actor with his qualities. Other than Goksal this movie is a garbage.

Director Gani Mujde is a comic writer and this movie is his worst written work to this date.

Music of Cem Karaca is another plus of this waste of money. Actor Sumer Tilmac also have some presence. Actor who plays the three sons has no talent what so ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 2650 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this film at the Toronto Film Festival, where it received a standing ovation! This film tells a story that to my knowledge has never been told before--namely about the Rosenstrasse (a street in Berlin)uprising of German gentile women who were married to Jews at the end of the Second World War. As such, it is a unique story, and what's more, is the only film about the Holocaust that I have ever seen that shows that there were GOOD Germans (the helping family in "Anne Frank" for instance was Dutch) who did NOT support the Nazis, and, in fact, had the fortitude to stand up against their own country's immorality and brutality during the Nazi regime, at the risk of their very lives. The acting is great across the board, the framing story in New York interesting and intricate, the direction from Von Trotta masterful in every scene, and the production values, including the gorgeous cinematography, outstanding. Of course the family in New York could be speaking German. Many immigrants in this country choose to speak in their native tongue with their family--a common occurrence. So that criticism is unwarranted. To say more would spoil the experience. The film is long, but I did not look at my watch once. I am hoping this film gets some distribution is North America, for not only is this film a masterpiece, but it can actually help heal any animosity people have towards the Germans because of their support of Hitler. If this film is playing in your area, I URGE YOU TO SEE IT! You will be glad you did! --------------------------------------------- Result 2651 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] In Cold Blood was one of several 60s films that created a new vision of violence in the Hollywood film industry. Capote coined the phrase "nonfiction novel" to describe the book on which this film is based, and the spirit of that form was carried over into the film script, which he co-wrote. [[Despite]] the fact that we were well into the era of color film, [[Richard]] Brooks [[elected]] to [[present]] this film in black and white to underscore both the starkness of the landscape and the bleakness of the story. This is the first [[problem]] with the TV remake --color changes the tone of the story. In addition, the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to understand the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only gave this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 rankings for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an In Cold Blood was one of several 60s films that created a new vision of violence in the Hollywood film industry. Capote coined the phrase "nonfiction novel" to describe the book on which this film is based, and the spirit of that form was carried over into the film script, which he co-wrote. [[While]] the fact that we were well into the era of color film, [[Ritchie]] Brooks [[picks]] to [[presents]] this film in black and white to underscore both the starkness of the landscape and the bleakness of the story. This is the first [[difficulties]] with the TV remake --color changes the tone of the story. In addition, the confinement of shooting a film for TV makes reduces the options of how the shots are framed and focused. As a result, we lose the dramatic clash which makes the second part of the original film (police interviews, trial, imprisonment, and execution) so claustrophobic. On the small screen, it's just another version of Law and Order spin-offs.

Hollywood's search for scripts continuously takes it back to movies that were successful in another age. Usually, that's a mistake, and this is no exception.

All of the actors are competent. The script is OK. The directing doesn't get in the way. It's just that the movie doesn't work as well as the original precision instrument. It doesn't hook the viewer into the ambivalence toward Smith and Hickock that the original film provokes. At the end of the TV version, we are left with the feeling: "Ho hum, who cares?"

See the original first, on as large a screen as you can, then watch the TV version simply to understand why the first one was such an important film in 1967.

Wouldn't hurt to also go on line and read a bit about Capote and the original book. It will help you to understand the extraordinary effort he put into the material, and also some of the controversy surrounding both the book and the movie.

I actually only gave this a 4 because I save the bottom 3 rankings for true bombs--the kind that enrage you about having been sucked into spending an --------------------------------------------- Result 2652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I can hardly believe that this [[inert]], turgid and badly staged film is by a filmmaker whose other works I've quite enjoyed. The experience of enduring THE LADY AND THE DUKE (and no other word but "enduring" will do), [[left]] me in a [[vile]] mood, a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb user comment by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer attempted (with success) to make us see the world through the genre art of 18th century France but, as ali has pointed out, has shown (at the cost of alienating his audience) the effects of both class consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist woman of her times. The director has accomplished something undeniably difficult, but I question whether it was worth the effort it took for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull results of his labor. I can hardly believe that this [[idly]], turgid and badly staged film is by a filmmaker whose other works I've quite enjoyed. The experience of enduring THE LADY AND THE DUKE (and no other word but "enduring" will do), [[gauche]] me in a [[infamous]] mood, a condition relieved only by reading the IMDb user comment by ali-112. For not only has Rohmer attempted (with success) to make us see the world through the genre art of 18th century France but, as ali has pointed out, has shown (at the cost of alienating his audience) the effects of both class consciousness and the revolution it inspired through the eyes of a dislikably elitist woman of her times. The director has accomplished something undeniably difficult, but I question whether it was worth the effort it took for him to do so -- or for us to watch the dull results of his labor. --------------------------------------------- Result 2653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[film]] is [[something]] [[like]] a sequel of "[[White]] Zombie", since it is made by the same [[man]] (Halperin) and features [[zombies]]. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, fails to deliver with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[control]] the [[minds]] of people in Cambodia, and a search to destroy the source of his power so the [[zombies]] can be sent free. [[Also]], a love interest for the evil [[man]].

Where this film [[really]] excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this film just did not deliver. And no strong villain (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice effect, but misleading as he is never in the film... why not recreate this with the new actor's eyes? Overall, a film that [[could]] be a great one with a little script re-working and could someday be a powerful remake (especially if they keep it in the same post-war time frame). Heck, if they can fix up "The Hills Have Eyes" then this film has hope. This [[cinematography]] is [[somethings]] [[iike]] a sequel of "[[Blanc]] Zombie", since it is made by the same [[bloke]] (Halperin) and features [[walkers]]. Halperin, the George A. Romero of his day, fails to deliver with this one, though.

We have a man who can [[auditing]] the [[spirits]] of people in Cambodia, and a search to destroy the source of his power so the [[walkers]] can be sent free. [[Similarly]], a love interest for the evil [[men]].

Where this film [[truthfully]] excels is in the imagery. The Cambodian temples and dancers are very nice and the zombie look very powerful in their large numbers. Unfortunately, we don't really get to see much of the zombies in action and the love story seems to play a much too large role for a horror film (though this has a valid plot reason later on).

I would have loved to see some 1930s zombies attack helpless city folk, but this film just did not deliver. And no strong villain (like Bela Lugosi) was waiting to do battle against our heroes. And the use of Lugosi's eyes? A nice effect, but misleading as he is never in the film... why not recreate this with the new actor's eyes? Overall, a film that [[did]] be a great one with a little script re-working and could someday be a powerful remake (especially if they keep it in the same post-war time frame). Heck, if they can fix up "The Hills Have Eyes" then this film has hope. --------------------------------------------- Result 2654 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] After reading the comments to this [[movie]] and [[seeing]] the [[mixed]] [[reviews]], I decided that I would add my ten [[cents]] worth to say I thought the film was [[excellent]], not only in the [[visual]] [[beauty]], the [[writing]], [[music]] [[score]], acting, and directing, but in putting [[across]] the [[story]] of Joseph Smith and the road he [[traveled]] through life of hardship and persecution for believing in God the way he felt and knew to be his path. I am very [[pleased]], indeed, to have had a small [[part]] in telling the [[story]] of this remarkable man. I recommend [[everyone]] to see this when the opportunity [[presents]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. After reading the comments to this [[filmmaking]] and [[witnessing]] the [[blended]] [[scrutinize]], I decided that I would add my ten [[centimes]] worth to say I thought the film was [[glamorous]], not only in the [[optic]] [[beaut]], the [[writes]], [[musica]] [[notation]], acting, and directing, but in putting [[in]] the [[histories]] of Joseph Smith and the road he [[flew]] through life of hardship and persecution for believing in God the way he felt and knew to be his path. I am very [[happier]], indeed, to have had a small [[portions]] in telling the [[histories]] of this remarkable man. I recommend [[anybody]] to see this when the opportunity [[presented]] itself, no matter what religious path he or she may be walking, this only instills one with more determination to live the life that we should with true values of love and forgiveness as the Savior taught us to do. --------------------------------------------- Result 2655 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] [[Where]] to [[start]]. The [[film]] [[started]] out [[pretty]] well, but after the 30 [[min]] mark i caught myself watching the [[clock]]. The horror at the [[start]] of the film was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[got]] stupider and stupider as time [[ticked]] by.

The [[actors]] gave an average performance in this [[movie]] however, i got a bit bored of [[Vinny]] Jones constant [[scowling]] in the film.

As the film dragged on, and take my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[fetched]].

*** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** Just when i thought the film could not get any worse, towards the end loads if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to eat the dead people which made no sense at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating cult and the good guys die at the end. The ending in fact just made me laugh at how bad it was. Once the lead role disposes of Vinny Jones, he becomes the new killer.

In closing, this film made Creep look like the best horror film ever made. I gave it 1 star because the female lead did a pretty good job but even she could not save this train wreck of a movie!! [[Whenever]] to [[launches]]. The [[movie]] [[launches]] out [[belle]] well, but after the 30 [[mn]] mark i caught myself watching the [[countdown]]. The horror at the [[initiate]] of the film was good but then the story kicked in. It just [[ai]] stupider and stupider as time [[checked]] by.

The [[players]] gave an average performance in this [[film]] however, i got a bit bored of [[Vinnie]] Jones constant [[smirking]] in the film.

As the film dragged on, and take my word for it, it dragged on, it just got more and more far [[recovered]].

*** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** SPOILER ALERT *** Just when i thought the film could not get any worse, towards the end loads if skeleton looking monsters turned up, just to eat the dead people which made no sense at all. It turned out to be some sort of flesh eating cult and the good guys die at the end. The ending in fact just made me laugh at how bad it was. Once the lead role disposes of Vinny Jones, he becomes the new killer.

In closing, this film made Creep look like the best horror film ever made. I gave it 1 star because the female lead did a pretty good job but even she could not save this train wreck of a movie!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This [[movie]] fails to [[offer]] [[anything]] new to a genre that has [[traditionally]] shown the cross cultural love [[story]] underpinned by the politics [[mid]] 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[modern]] [[ways]] are [[bad]] and the [[primitive]] but honest and true [[Indians]] are good. [[Surely]] such [[clichéd]] [[depictions]] of the British are [[rather]] passé now.

Apart from the drama that [[fuels]] the second part of the movie the narrative is [[predictable]], the acting is [[pedestrian]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and [[unimaginative]].

The [[story]] [[really]] needed to be fleshed out and [[would]] certainly have [[benefited]] from another half an hour of screen [[time]] to [[give]] the [[characters]] and narrative more [[depth]] and [[give]] the viewer something to feel some investment in.

[[All]] in all, rather uninspiring. [[Oh]] and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with [[emotional]] [[pain]] just doesn't [[work]] for me! This [[film]] fails to [[affords]] [[nothing]] new to a genre that has [[fluently]] shown the cross cultural love [[conte]] underpinned by the politics [[milieu]] 20th century / pre-WWII India, where the British and their [[contemporary]] [[avenues]] are [[mala]] and the [[primordial]] but honest and true [[Injuns]] are good. [[Admittedly]] such [[clichés]] [[representations]] of the British are [[somewhat]] passé now.

Apart from the drama that [[fuel]] the second part of the movie the narrative is [[foreseeable]], the acting is [[footpath]] and two-dimensional, and the directing obvious and [[uninspired]].

The [[tale]] [[genuinely]] needed to be fleshed out and [[should]] certainly have [[received]] from another half an hour of screen [[times]] to [[lend]] the [[features]] and narrative more [[depths]] and [[lend]] the viewer something to feel some investment in.

[[Everything]] in all, rather uninspiring. [[Ahh]] and Linus Roache just cannot do tragedy - going cross-eyed with [[sentimental]] [[heartbreak]] just doesn't [[collaboration]] for me! --------------------------------------------- Result 2657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Lois Weber, self proclaimed missionary via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, [[thanks]] to TCM. This film is her indictment of [[abortion]], but she [[cleverly]] muddles the issue by bringing in eugenics and birth control, leaving the impression that they are somehow equivalent to abortion. Her talent in writing and the other cinematic skills are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had used them less didactically. If you have wondered what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "famous father" looked like, here is your chance. 1916 fashions and automobiles are also on display to add to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't appreciate the propaganda. Lois Weber, self proclaimed missionary via the cinema, wrote, directed and produced other films on controversial subjects, but this may be the first to get wide viewing, [[gratitude]] to TCM. This film is her indictment of [[miscarriages]], but she [[deftly]] muddles the issue by bringing in eugenics and birth control, leaving the impression that they are somehow equivalent to abortion. Her talent in writing and the other cinematic skills are well displayed here, but one may be forgiven for wishing she had used them less didactically. If you have wondered what Tyrone Power, Jr.'s "famous father" looked like, here is your chance. 1916 fashions and automobiles are also on display to add to the interest of this museum piece. It's enjoyable even if you don't appreciate the propaganda. --------------------------------------------- Result 2658 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Little Mosque is one of the most [[boring]] CBC comedies I have ever [[seen]]. They have a way of [[producing]] the easiest comedy [[programming]] they can for the oldest most-easily-offended viewers which for CBC means 85 year [[old]] [[farmers]] in Saskatchewan. The jokes are all predictable and so deathly lame I can't [[believe]] it. The performances are very hammy and over [[acted]] but I don't [[blame]] the [[actors]] [[since]] those [[kind]] of one [[dimensional]] stereotyped [[characters]] are [[probably]] [[exactly]] what the CBC [[asked]] for and [[demanded]]. [[Very]] lame [[show]] with [[bad]] jokes they [[tried]] to [[present]] as "[[controversial]]" well it is less controversial than the other [[boring]] CBC comedies like The [[Hour]] [[Has]] 22 [[Minutes]], [[Royal]] Canadian Air [[Farce]] and Rick Mercer's [[Report]]. Little Mosque is one of the most [[dreary]] CBC comedies I have ever [[noticed]]. They have a way of [[produce]] the easiest comedy [[programmed]] they can for the oldest most-easily-offended viewers which for CBC means 85 year [[longtime]] [[farmer]] in Saskatchewan. The jokes are all predictable and so deathly lame I can't [[think]] it. The performances are very hammy and over [[worked]] but I don't [[guilt]] the [[players]] [[because]] those [[genera]] of one [[dimensions]] stereotyped [[characteristics]] are [[assuredly]] [[accurately]] what the CBC [[enquired]] for and [[asked]]. [[Tremendously]] lame [[exhibitions]] with [[mala]] jokes they [[attempt]] to [[presenting]] as "[[contentious]]" well it is less controversial than the other [[dreary]] CBC comedies like The [[Hours]] [[Ha]] 22 [[Mins]], [[Royale]] Canadian Air [[Charade]] and Rick Mercer's [[Reporting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The extraordinary Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to see this flick. Why she never became a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[exceptional]] and steals every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[first]] rate, with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially memorable. A "9" out of "10." The extraordinary Rosemary Forsyth is the main reason to see this flick. Why she never became a bigger store may never be known. But she is [[extraordinaire]] and steals every scene she's in. Garson Kanin directed this piece of fluff and the cast is [[frst]] rate, with Robert Drivas and Brenda Vaccaro especially memorable. A "9" out of "10." --------------------------------------------- Result 2660 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] well done giving the perspective of the other side fraulein [[doktor]] [[captures]] both the [[cost]] and the futility of [[war]]. [[excellent]] acting especially when [[german]] high [[command]] [[refuses]] in the [[name]] of chivalry to present medal kaiser [[ordered]] struck. the scenes of [[carnage]] are probably too intense for effete US minds who'd [[probably]] [[prefer]] some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might [[appreciate]] the story line and the [[action]]. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's [[Ladder]]. well done giving the perspective of the other side fraulein [[dr]] [[catching]] both the [[expense]] and the futility of [[wars]]. [[sumptuous]] acting especially when [[germany]] high [[commanding]] [[denial]] in the [[names]] of chivalry to present medal kaiser [[instructed]] struck. the scenes of [[rampage]] are probably too intense for effete US minds who'd [[potentially]] [[favored]] some silly speeches and senseless abstractions like 14 points or the league of nations. real americans might [[grateful]] the story line and the [[activities]]. for all the action and intrigue, fraulein doktor compares favo(u)rably to Jacob's [[Escalator]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2661 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] [[Brilliant]] kung-fu scenes, [[loads]] of melodrama, peculiar footwear [[symbolism]] and an unhappy (?) [[end]] makes [[Barefoot]] [[Kid]] an [[unforgettable]] [[film]].

One of the silliest subtitles I've seen... [[Impressive]] kung-fu scenes, [[upload]] of melodrama, peculiar footwear [[symbolic]] and an unhappy (?) [[ceases]] makes [[Nudes]] [[Infantile]] an [[eventful]] [[cinematography]].

One of the silliest subtitles I've seen... --------------------------------------------- Result 2662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] DARK REMAINS is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[win]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 [[separate]] strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the execution is [[haphazard]] and [[results]] in confusion that could perhaps only be [[resolved]] by multiple viewings. [[Unfortunately]], the [[movie]] is [[simply]] not [[enticing]] [[enough]] to [[attract]] most viewers into watching it more than once.

Just about everything that could go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and [[fast]]! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the shortcomings [[found]] here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[simply]] too poor.

The characters are uninteresting as pointed out by other reviewers on this site. The [[badly]] [[written]] script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating opportunities for character-driven situations and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is uninspired. The inspiration from J-Horror movies such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is evident. [[Unfortunately]], the directors of DARK REMAINS did not pay [[close]] attention to the style of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[fear]] of the unknown. [[Tension]] is created by constant shifts between a [[bizarre]] situation (a [[ghost]] on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central character who is [[faced]] with it without any [[warning]]. There is no humour or tongue-in-cheek element in these movies. Everything is [[played]] so straight and without remorse or [[limitations]] that you can't [[help]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the [[suspense]] and ensures the [[horror]] has [[psychological]] [[impact]], very much unlike the "[[jump]] [[scares]]" [[used]] in Hollywood [[movies]].

The directors of [[DARK]] [[REMAINS]] [[made]] a [[brave]] [[attempt]] to [[avoid]] Hollywood clichés and [[also]] successfully avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the [[lack]] of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I could deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS [[like]] the plague. DARK REMAINS is a low budget American horror movie that somehow managed to [[triumphed]] 2 awards.

The plot seems to involve 2 [[separated]] strands. First, a woman commits suicide by slashing her wrists whilst bathing. Second, the young daughter of a technical writer is found with her throat slashed. The grieving couple decide to move to an isolated cabin in the mountains. It later transpires that the cabin and surrounding locations are haunted.

As the movie goes on, the 2 separate strands of story eventually converge as one might reasonably expect. However, the execution is [[random]] and [[outcomes]] in confusion that could perhaps only be [[resolve]] by multiple viewings. [[Sadly]], the [[filmmaking]] is [[merely]] not [[tantalizing]] [[sufficiently]] to [[attraction]] most viewers into watching it more than once.

Just about everything that could go wrong with this movie goes wrong - and [[rapid]]! And the low budget cannot be used to justify all of the shortcomings [[find]] here.

I believe it would be wrong to pass judgement on the actors involved in this production as the material was [[mere]] too poor.

The characters are uninteresting as pointed out by other reviewers on this site. The [[desperately]] [[writes]] script introduces too many people without giving them interesting dialogue, without creating opportunities for character-driven situations and without adding depth to any of them.

The direction is uninspired. The inspiration from J-Horror movies such as RINGU, THE GRUDGE and ONE MISSED CALL is evident. [[Sadly]], the directors of DARK REMAINS did not pay [[closed]] attention to the style of J-Horror. J-Horror works so effectively because it plays on [[afraid]] of the unknown. [[Tensions]] is created by constant shifts between a [[surreal]] situation (a [[phantom]] on a CCTV camera walking towards it for example), and the reaction of a central character who is [[braved]] with it without any [[ultimatum]]. There is no humour or tongue-in-cheek element in these movies. Everything is [[accomplished]] so straight and without remorse or [[limitation]] that you can't [[support]] but be convinced and captivated by it. The foreboding atmospheres set up the [[wait]] and ensures the [[terror]] has [[mental]] [[impacts]], very much unlike the "[[leap]] [[frightens]]" [[using]] in Hollywood [[cinema]].

The directors of [[DARKENED]] [[REMAINED]] [[effected]] a [[daring]] [[endeavour]] to [[preventing]] Hollywood clichés and [[further]] successfully avoided using CGI. The homage to J-Horror could have been well intended. Unfortunately, the [[absence]] of inspiration is likely to make the viewer laugh at the supposed "scares" on the screen. The make-up effects of the "ghosts" weren't too bad given the low budget but their actions just defied logic. I was scratching my head quite a few times during this movie.

I couldn't give away the ending even if I wanted to. I simply couldn't understand it. All I could deduce was that it was something of an anti-climax.

What remains? The answer as a reviewer on a different website has pointed out is boredom. The movie is a chore to sit through. Thankfully, the pain ends after an hour and a half. However, most would probably switch off long before the end.

There are only 2 positive things I could find in this movie - the successful avoidance of scare clichés and the absence of the "f-word" in every single sentence like one would normally expect to find. This is what the 2 stars are for.

Those who like supernatural or psychological horror relating to ghosts and haunting might do well to stick to movies such as THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE, THE CHANGELING or the J-Horror sub-genre.

If you think you have seen too many established movies and want to see an obscure ultra-low budget "R-rated" horror movie about ghosts, watch DEATH OF A GHOST HUNTER. It may not be the greatest horror movie ever made but it is surely a lot better than DARK REMAINS and does have a few genuine surprises in store.

I advise everyone to avoid DARK REMAINS [[iike]] the plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 2663 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Despite having 6 different [[directors]], this fantasy hangs [[together]] [[remarkably]] well.

It was [[filmed]] in England (nowhere near Morocco) in studios and on a few beaches. At the outbreak of war, everything was moved to America and some scenes were filmed in the Grand Canyon.

Notable for having one of the corniest lyrics in a song - "I want to be a bandit, can't you understand it". It remains a favourite of many people. Despite having 6 different [[administrators]], this fantasy hangs [[jointly]] [[unimaginably]] well.

It was [[shot]] in England (nowhere near Morocco) in studios and on a few beaches. At the outbreak of war, everything was moved to America and some scenes were filmed in the Grand Canyon.

Notable for having one of the corniest lyrics in a song - "I want to be a bandit, can't you understand it". It remains a favourite of many people. --------------------------------------------- Result 2664 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[ridiculous]] [[film]] for umpteen years all I can [[think]] of is that [[old]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[teen]] when this smoked fish [[hit]] the U.S. I was too [[young]] to get in the [[theater]] (although I did [[manage]] to [[sneak]] into "[[Goodbye]] Columbus"). Then a screening at a local film museum beckoned - Finally I [[could]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The ONLY [[reason]] this film was not condemned to the anonymous sands of time was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people flocked to this stinker, thinking they were going to see a sex film...Instead, they got lots of closeups of gnarly, repulsive Swedes, on-street interviews in bland shopping malls, asinie political pretension...and feeble who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale actors.

Cultural icon, holy grail, historic artifact..whatever this thing was, shred it, burn it, then stuff the ashes in a lead box!

Elite esthetes still scrape to find value in its [[boring]] pseudo revolutionary political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been ignored, then forgotten.

Instead, the "I Am Blank, Blank" rhythymed title was repeated endlessly for years as a titilation for porno films (I am Curious, Lavender - for gay films, I Am Curious, Black - for blaxploitation films, etc..) and every ten years or so the thing rises from the dead, to be viewed by a new generation of suckers who want to see that "naughty sex film" that "revolutionized the film industry"...

Yeesh, avoid like the plague..Or if you MUST see it - rent the video and fast forward to the "dirty" parts, just to get it over with.

Oh, brother...after hearing about this [[silly]] [[movies]] for umpteen years all I can [[believe]] of is that [[ancient]] Peggy Lee song..

"Is that all there is??" ...I was just an early [[youths]] when this smoked fish [[knocked]] the U.S. I was too [[youth]] to get in the [[drama]] (although I did [[managing]] to [[infiltrate]] into "[[Farewell]] Columbus"). Then a screening at a local film museum beckoned - Finally I [[wo]] see this film, except now I was as old as my parents were when they schlepped to see it!!

The ONLY [[motif]] this film was not condemned to the anonymous sands of time was because of the obscenity case sparked by its U.S. release. MILLIONS of people flocked to this stinker, thinking they were going to see a sex film...Instead, they got lots of closeups of gnarly, repulsive Swedes, on-street interviews in bland shopping malls, asinie political pretension...and feeble who-cares simulated sex scenes with saggy, pale actors.

Cultural icon, holy grail, historic artifact..whatever this thing was, shred it, burn it, then stuff the ashes in a lead box!

Elite esthetes still scrape to find value in its [[bore]] pseudo revolutionary political spewings..But if it weren't for the censorship scandal, it would have been ignored, then forgotten.

Instead, the "I Am Blank, Blank" rhythymed title was repeated endlessly for years as a titilation for porno films (I am Curious, Lavender - for gay films, I Am Curious, Black - for blaxploitation films, etc..) and every ten years or so the thing rises from the dead, to be viewed by a new generation of suckers who want to see that "naughty sex film" that "revolutionized the film industry"...

Yeesh, avoid like the plague..Or if you MUST see it - rent the video and fast forward to the "dirty" parts, just to get it over with.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2665 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Corean cinema can be quite [[surprising]] for an occidental audience, because of the multiplicity of the tones and genres you can find in the same movie. In a Coreen drama such as this "Secret Sunshine", you'll also find some comical parts, thriller scenes and romantic times. "There's not only tragedy in life, there's also tragic-comedy" [[says]] at one point of the movie the character interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the mixture of the picture. But don't get me [[wrong]], this heterogeneity of the [[genres]] the movie [[deals]] with, adds veracity to the experience this rich movie offers to its spectators. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[rare]] to see such a dense and [[profound]] [[portrait]] of a woman in pain.

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet life with her son in the native town of her late husband, really gives, by all the different faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this movie. It's realistic part is erased by the psychological descriptions of all the phases the poor mother is going through. Denial, lost, anger, faith, pert of reality : the movie fallows all the steps the character crosses, and looks like a psychological catalog of all the suffering phases a woman can experience.

The only [[thing]] is to [[accept]] what may look like a [[conceptual]] experience (the woman wears the [[mask]] of [[tragedy]], the man represents the comical interludes) and to let the artifices of the movie touch you. I [[must]] say that some parts of the [[movie]] really did [[move]] me (especialy in the [[beginning]]), particularly those [[concerning]] the unability of Chang Joan to truly help the one he [[loves]], but [[also]] that the [[accumulation]] of suffering emotionally tired me towards the end. [[Nevertheless]], some cinematographic [[ideas]] are really breathtaking and surprising (the scene where a body is discovered in a large shot is for instance amazing). This kind of scenes makes "[[Secret]] [[Sunshine]]" the melo equivalent of "The Host" for horror [[movies]] or "Memories of murder" for thrillers. These movies are indeed [[surprising]], most [[original]], aesthetically [[incredible]], and manage to give another dimension to the [[genres]] they [[deal]] with. The only thing that "Secret Sunshine" [[forgets]], as "The host" forgot to be scary, is to make its audience cry : [[bad]] point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. Corean cinema can be quite [[unbelievable]] for an occidental audience, because of the multiplicity of the tones and genres you can find in the same movie. In a Coreen drama such as this "Secret Sunshine", you'll also find some comical parts, thriller scenes and romantic times. "There's not only tragedy in life, there's also tragic-comedy" [[said]] at one point of the movie the character interpreted by Song Kang-ho, summing up the mixture of the picture. But don't get me [[erroneous]], this heterogeneity of the [[genus]] the movie [[deal]] with, adds veracity to the experience this rich movie offers to its spectators. That doesn't mean that it lacks unity : on the contrary, it's [[scarce]] to see such a dense and [[deep]] [[depiction]] of a woman in pain.

Shin-ae, who's in quest for a quiet life with her son in the native town of her late husband, really gives, by all the different faces of suffering she's going through, unity to this movie. It's realistic part is erased by the psychological descriptions of all the phases the poor mother is going through. Denial, lost, anger, faith, pert of reality : the movie fallows all the steps the character crosses, and looks like a psychological catalog of all the suffering phases a woman can experience.

The only [[stuff]] is to [[countenance]] what may look like a [[theoretical]] experience (the woman wears the [[conceal]] of [[drama]], the man represents the comical interludes) and to let the artifices of the movie touch you. I [[ought]] say that some parts of the [[cinema]] really did [[budge]] me (especialy in the [[launches]]), particularly those [[pertaining]] the unability of Chang Joan to truly help the one he [[likes]], but [[apart]] that the [[accumulate]] of suffering emotionally tired me towards the end. [[Notwithstanding]], some cinematographic [[thinks]] are really breathtaking and surprising (the scene where a body is discovered in a large shot is for instance amazing). This kind of scenes makes "[[Undercover]] [[Sun]]" the melo equivalent of "The Host" for horror [[theater]] or "Memories of murder" for thrillers. These movies are indeed [[unbelievable]], most [[upfront]], aesthetically [[unimaginable]], and manage to give another dimension to the [[genders]] they [[addressing]] with. The only thing that "Secret Sunshine" [[ignores]], as "The host" forgot to be scary, is to make its audience cry : [[amiss]] point for a melodrama, but good point for a good film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's remarkable that for 'Young Mr. Lincoln's' supporting players Ford cast lesser known, other-than-star actors. This not only heightens his film's focus on the central character of Lincoln, but it also affords the audience a refreshing insight into Lincoln as a man of his place and time, a man embroiled, as each one of us inexorably is, in the issues and sentiments of his time and seeking his way to resolving them. It's not so much through Fonda's Lincoln's words and actions but in the faces, the reactions of the supporting players that Ford tells the story of the formation of the young Lincoln's worldview, sense of place in society and polity, and of how the people responded to Mr. Lincoln's words and deeds and placed their trust in this man whom they deemed to have earned their respect and heeding.

Give this a try: instead of focusing on Henry Fonda, next time you view 'Young Mr. Lincoln' shift your focus to the supporting characters - you will, I expect, be handsomely rewarded with a more profound appreciation of both Lincoln and Ford. I like to suspect that Ford's storytelling through the supporting characters' reactions to Fonda's Lincoln may have appealed to David Lean when he directed Omar Sharif in 'Doctor Zhivago', in which it's the supporting characters' reactions to Zhivago that actually tell about Zhivago. --------------------------------------------- Result 2667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] This [[film]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[expecting]] much. However, i was pleasantly [[surprised]]. At first i didn't take well to the lead girl and didn't really care if she lived or died. After a while she definitely grew on me and became a likable character. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but explains a lot. I would recommend this film to everyone. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your life. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. This [[cinematographic]] exceeded my expectations. I thought and have heard that it was going to be rubbish, so i wasn't [[expects]] much. However, i was pleasantly [[dumbfounded]]. At first i didn't take well to the lead girl and didn't really care if she lived or died. After a while she definitely grew on me and became a likable character. It's not just some slasher film where people die for no reason. There is a background story that only takes a few seconds of the film, but explains a lot. I would recommend this film to everyone. If you're not sure just watch it anyway, it's only an hour and a half of your life. You're going to live for 80 years anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 2668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] whereas the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[creating]] the [[definitively]] [[modern]] [[American]] [[genre]] and style in the process - those of what might be called Golden [[Age]] fiction have made [[barely]] any impression whatsoever. The [[problem]] with books like those of Agatha [[Christie]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose [[work]] this [[film]] is based), is that they are low on action or [[variety]] - [[whereas]] Sam Spade or Philip Marlowe traverse the mean streets of LA, working class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy mansions, and meet all sorts of exciting dangers and violence, Golden Age fiction is generally fixed in location, the scene of the murder, usually a lavish country house, and the action is limited to investigating clues and interviewing suspects. This is a very static procedure, plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything else, the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever uncontrollable and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' motivations or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the anxious, prejudice-ridden private eyes, are simply there to be brilliant, and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. whereas the hard-boiled detective stories of Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler have fitted to cinema like a fox in a chicken coop - indeed [[engender]] the [[decidedly]] [[trendy]] [[Americano]] [[gender]] and style in the process - those of what might be called Golden [[Aged]] fiction have made [[scarcely]] any impression whatsoever. The [[trouble]] with books like those of Agatha [[Christi]], Dorothy L. Sayers or S.S. Van Dine (on whose [[cooperates]] this [[cinematic]] is based), is that they are low on action or [[multitude]] - [[whilst]] Sam Spade or Philip Marlowe traverse the mean streets of LA, working class tenements, bars, offices, wealthy mansions, and meet all sorts of exciting dangers and violence, Golden Age fiction is generally fixed in location, the scene of the murder, usually a lavish country house, and the action is limited to investigating clues and interviewing suspects. This is a very static procedure, plot reduced to puzzle.

This, of course, is as much ideological as anything else, the Golden Age stories dealing with a society hostile to change and movement; the hard-boiled novels recording an urban reality increasingly moving away from a centre (both of authority, and of a city), dividing itself up into hostile, ever uncontrollable and lawless camps. Another major problem with Golden age fiction is character - because we cannot know the answer to the crime until the end, we cannot gain access to characters' motivations or emotions, being defined solely by their potential need to murder. The detective, unlike the anxious, prejudice-ridden private eyes, are simply there to be brilliant, and maybe a little eccentric.

The problem with most films from Golden Age books is that they try to be period recreations of the Merchant Ivory/Jane Austen school, and end up looking silly. There have been successes, for example the radical reworkings of Ellery Queen and others by Claude Chabrol. In the English-speaking world, there have really only been two. The Alistair Sim classic, 'Green For Danger', works because it pushes the form almost into parody, while never betraying the integrity or interest of the mystery.

Before that came Michael Curtiz's brilliant 'The Kennel Murder Case'. The narrative is pure Golden Age. A repulsive character is introduced who gives a number of potential suspects reason to kill him. He is duly murdered in a seemingly foolproof manner, indicating suicide, slumped in a locked room. The caricatured policemen fall hopelessly for the bait. It is up to Philo Vance, gentleman and amateur detective, neither old nor fat, to read the clues more insightfully, open the case out of the confines of the room, and eventually solve the case, the corpse being little more than the pretext for intellectual stimulation.

What is interesting is not this detective plot - which can only ever be unsatisfying as all solutions are - although it is rarely less than entertaining, and full of comical bits of business. There isn't even really an attempt to 'subvert' the image of the perfect detective - there is one alarming scene where a brutal sergeant threatens to rough up a suspect, with no protest from Vance, but that's about it.

What marks 'Kennel' as a classic is its modernity. Curtiz is not generally considered a great auteur, because he has no consistent themes or evidence of artistic development. But he was Hollywood's greatest craftsman, and he is on sensational form here. if the Golden Age detective story is mere puzzle, Curtiz takes this idea to is logical extreme, creating an abstract variation on his source, reducing narrative, character and location to geometry, a series of lines, from the beautiful art-deco sets to the glorious camera movements which suddenly break from a static composition , and, as they glide furiously at an angle, jolt the dead decor to life.

This treatment is appropriate to a story that resolutely refuses realism, it is a pattern that turns the detective plot into a hall of mirrors, like the two central brothers, or the original crime itself, borrowed from an 'Unsolved Mysteries' book. This fantasy world of nasty rich men who collect Oriental relics (shades of 'The Moonstone'?), inscrutable Chinese servants, ex-cons turned butlers, dog-loving fops, Runyonesque cops, is the perfect habitat for Vance, a man who will drop a cruise to Europe on a fanciful hunch, who knows the social world of these people, and yet is tainted by his interest in crime and association with the police, or would be if he wasn't anything more than a thinking machine, William Powell, the greatest American comedian of the decade, bravely subsuming his idiosyncratic humanity.

But if the treatment is rarefied, the climax is spectacularly brutal, involving vicious dogs and attempted murder. The police and the detective, supposed to be preventing crime, are guilty of inciting one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Yep, lots of shouting, screaming, cheering, arguing, celebrating, fist clinching, high fiving & fighting. You have a general idea as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[naval]] knowledge would be an advantage for the finer points, but then you'd probably spot the [[many]] [[flaws]]. Not an awful film & Hackman & Washington are their usual brilliant, but the plot was one you [[could]] peg pretty early on. I'm still waiting to see a [[submarine]] film where people get on with each other & don't argue, but then you probably wouldn't have a film.

4/10 Yep, lots of shouting, screaming, cheering, arguing, celebrating, fist clinching, high fiving & fighting. You have a general idea as to why, but can never be 100% certain. A [[marina]] knowledge would be an advantage for the finer points, but then you'd probably spot the [[numerous]] [[demerits]]. Not an awful film & Hackman & Washington are their usual brilliant, but the plot was one you [[did]] peg pretty early on. I'm still waiting to see a [[undersea]] film where people get on with each other & don't argue, but then you probably wouldn't have a film.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2670 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] After watching [[Awake]],I led to a [[conclusion]]:[[director]] and [[screenwriter]] Joby Harold made Awake with the [[intention]] of [[laughing]] at the spectator,for the simple fact the movie is [[full]] of [[ridiculous]] [[elements]].Awake has a lot of plot holes and it is full of absurd and ridiculous elements(for example,the hospital uniform the spirit of the main character uses...did the ghost of a doctor leave it in the floor ?).The [[concept]] behind this movie is [[slightly]] ingenious but all the plot holes and the absurd things make of this a [[stupid]] and crappy film.With the exception of the great Lena Olin,all the [[actors]] bring [[bad]] performances.Hayden Christensen has zero expressions and the same applies for Jessica Alba.The extraordinary actor [[Terrence]] Howard is enormously wasted on his role.[[Awake]] makes a laugh of the [[spectator]].It's so ridiculous and [[full]] of absurd [[things]] that it's impossible to take it [[seriously]].My [[recommendation]] is:skip this crappy [[movie]]. After watching [[Awaken]],I led to a [[finding]]:[[superintendent]] and [[writer]] Joby Harold made Awake with the [[goals]] of [[kidding]] at the spectator,for the simple fact the movie is [[fullest]] of [[nonsensical]] [[component]].Awake has a lot of plot holes and it is full of absurd and ridiculous elements(for example,the hospital uniform the spirit of the main character uses...did the ghost of a doctor leave it in the floor ?).The [[notions]] behind this movie is [[mildly]] ingenious but all the plot holes and the absurd things make of this a [[silly]] and crappy film.With the exception of the great Lena Olin,all the [[protagonists]] bring [[mala]] performances.Hayden Christensen has zero expressions and the same applies for Jessica Alba.The extraordinary actor [[Terence]] Howard is enormously wasted on his role.[[Woken]] makes a laugh of the [[beholder]].It's so ridiculous and [[fullest]] of absurd [[aspects]] that it's impossible to take it [[harshly]].My [[recommending]] is:skip this crappy [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This is one of those movies that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to think what the Blockbuster-approved edit must have looked like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[bore]] of the epic proportions. [[Naturally]], you don't [[expect]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[class]] or two might have [[come]] in handy.

Also, there were so [[many]] [[cute]] [[guys]] in this [[movie]], but they were [[woefully]] under-exploited. I [[like]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe [[around]] in their BVDs as much as the next [[guy]], but [[even]] I have a right to [[expect]] a little more. It wasn't a [[total]] loss, though; at [[least]] we got a [[peek]] a Drew Fuller's ([[covered]]) junk and truly upsetting haircut. And there's Huntley Ritter looking even cuter than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's always a silver lining, [[kids]]. You just have to [[look]] [[really]] hard for it. And [[occasionally]], you have to [[make]] [[use]] of your [[pause]] [[button]]. This is one of those movies that should have been way better than it turned out to be. I dread to think what the Blockbuster-approved edit must have looked like, because the director's cut on DVD was a [[bored]] of the epic proportions. [[Obviously]], you don't [[expects]] it to be "The Godfather", but an acting [[category]] or two might have [[arriving]] in handy.

Also, there were so [[countless]] [[lovable]] [[boy]] in this [[cinematography]], but they were [[unfortunately]] under-exploited. I [[loves]] watching a bevy of hotties writhe [[almost]] in their BVDs as much as the next [[blokes]], but [[yet]] I have a right to [[waits]] a little more. It wasn't a [[unmitigated]] loss, though; at [[fewest]] we got a [[look]] a Drew Fuller's ([[covers]]) junk and truly upsetting haircut. And there's Huntley Ritter looking even cuter than he did in "Bring It On" (and acting about as well). There's always a silver lining, [[enfant]]. You just have to [[peek]] [[genuinely]] hard for it. And [[sometimes]], you have to [[deliver]] [[utilizing]] of your [[pauses]] [[pimple]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2672 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] reading the book prior to watching the film. This book won National Book [[Council]] Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not [[intended]]). It's not too [[difficult]] to read for those out there that don't read [[often]] so don't be afraid! The book seems to [[capture]] the [[passion]] of the relationships more so than the movie and the movie will make more [[sense]] after reading the book. Having [[grown]] up in Melbourne I [[could]] [[really]] [[relate]] to this book and [[movie]]. Very few Australian female writers were [[around]] the in the 70's therefore very little is documented about the [[way]] of life for a [[women]] in an urban city in Australia during this [[era]] or [[class]]. It's a [[precious]] piece of Melbourne [[history]]. It's a [[shame]] that it is documented as some [[sort]] of 80's [[soft]] [[porn]] [[movie]]. It's far from that and as the other [[reviewer]] has [[mentioned]] [[please]] do not read the DVD jacket, it does not represent what the [[movie]] is about at all. Those that [[rent]] the movie based on this description will only be disappointed. Just remember this movie was [[made]] in 1982, so don't expect the Hollywood over [[dramatization]] that they seem to incorporate these days. This is what I [[like]] about it. It's also [[great]] [[seeing]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just fantastic as Nora and it's great watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[best]] remember her for her stints on Playschool and [[Better]] [[Homes]] and Gardens. Who [[knew]] she hid this [[talent]]? This [[movie]] will give you an entirely new impression of her. A [[classic]] [[Australian]] Story! I [[categorically]] [[recommending]] reading the book prior to watching the film. This book won National Book [[Government]] Award in 1978 and is a very gripping read (pun not [[intentioned]]). It's not too [[tough]] to read for those out there that don't read [[traditionally]] so don't be afraid! The book seems to [[catch]] the [[fascination]] of the relationships more so than the movie and the movie will make more [[feeling]] after reading the book. Having [[cultivated]] up in Melbourne I [[did]] [[truthfully]] [[pertain]] to this book and [[cinematography]]. Very few Australian female writers were [[throughout]] the in the 70's therefore very little is documented about the [[routes]] of life for a [[girl]] in an urban city in Australia during this [[epoch]] or [[category]]. It's a [[priceless]] piece of Melbourne [[stories]]. It's a [[dishonour]] that it is documented as some [[kind]] of 80's [[mild]] [[pornography]] [[kino]]. It's far from that and as the other [[rater]] has [[referenced]] [[invites]] do not read the DVD jacket, it does not represent what the [[cinematographic]] is about at all. Those that [[rented]] the movie based on this description will only be disappointed. Just remember this movie was [[introduced]] in 1982, so don't expect the Hollywood over [[simulation]] that they seem to incorporate these days. This is what I [[likes]] about it. It's also [[marvellous]] [[see]] Noni Hazlehurst in this role, she is just fantastic as Nora and it's great watching her really acting, for if you're close to my age you will [[optimum]] remember her for her stints on Playschool and [[Nicer]] [[Dwellings]] and Gardens. Who [[overheard]] she hid this [[talents]]? This [[kino]] will give you an entirely new impression of her. A [[conventional]] [[Aussie]] Story! --------------------------------------------- Result 2673 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] You [[want]] to see the movie "THE Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions. This is not that movie. This movie is not [[funny]]. It is a [[waste]] of time.

All of the good comments here [[seem]] to be [[written]] by (poorly [[disguised]]) [[false]] third [[parties]]. The people who [[made]] this [[movie]] seem to be [[attempting]] to [[synthesize]] [[fake]] interest.

This [[movie]] is not a well done mockumentary. Comparisons to "Spinal Tap" or [[Christopher]] Guest are insulting.

The [[movie]] is so mean-spirited that I cannot imagine [[anyone]] familiar with the [[subject]] [[matter]] finding it [[funny]]. [[Being]] able to [[laugh]] at yourself is an [[important]] quality, but if you are the ones being lampooned in this [[manner]], you'd have to [[hate]] yourself to enjoy it.

The [[movie]] is not offensive because of its grand satire of taboo [[topics]] but because of its constant [[pathetic]] [[banality]]. You [[wanting]] to see the movie "THE Gamers" by Dead Gentlemen Productions. This is not that movie. This movie is not [[comical]]. It is a [[wastes]] of time.

All of the good comments here [[appears]] to be [[writes]] by (poorly [[masked]]) [[incorrect]] third [[part]]. The people who [[introduced]] this [[film]] seem to be [[endeavour]] to [[summarized]] [[forged]] interest.

This [[kino]] is not a well done mockumentary. Comparisons to "Spinal Tap" or [[Christophe]] Guest are insulting.

The [[cinema]] is so mean-spirited that I cannot imagine [[everyone]] familiar with the [[subjected]] [[topic]] finding it [[hilarious]]. [[Underway]] able to [[laughing]] at yourself is an [[notable]] quality, but if you are the ones being lampooned in this [[mode]], you'd have to [[hated]] yourself to enjoy it.

The [[filmmaking]] is not offensive because of its grand satire of taboo [[item]] but because of its constant [[unlucky]] [[triviality]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2674 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Boring]]. [[Minimal]] [[plot]]. [[No]] [[character]] [[development]]. I went into this movie with [[high]] [[expectations]] from the book. It COULD have been an [[awesome]] movie. It COULD have [[probably]] become a cult classic. [[Nope]], it was a [[giant]] let-down. It was poorly cast and had [[horrible]] [[special]] effects. It was difficult to [[determine]] who were the [[bad]] [[guys]]: the [[rebels]] or the military or the [[church]] or all of them? I am [[still]] [[left]] [[puzzled]] by certain mini-plots from the [[movie]]. I am left [[dumbfounded]] as to certain [[aspects]] of this so-called "prophecy", which is never [[really]] [[FULLY]] [[explained]]. I felt like I was watching a corny episode of a mini-series on the sci-fi [[channel]]. It [[seemed]] very much like a made-for-TV [[movie]]. Don't go see this [[movie]]. It is a [[waste]] of [[time]] AND [[money]]. [[Dreary]]. [[Tiny]] [[intrigue]]. [[Nos]] [[characteristics]] [[evolution]]. I went into this movie with [[alto]] [[outlook]] from the book. It COULD have been an [[unbelievable]] movie. It COULD have [[possibly]] become a cult classic. [[Nos]], it was a [[titan]] let-down. It was poorly cast and had [[horrendous]] [[peculiar]] effects. It was difficult to [[define]] who were the [[horrid]] [[fellas]]: the [[rebelling]] or the military or the [[churches]] or all of them? I am [[nevertheless]] [[exited]] [[muddled]] by certain mini-plots from the [[kino]]. I am left [[dismayed]] as to certain [[things]] of this so-called "prophecy", which is never [[truthfully]] [[COMPLETELY]] [[explain]]. I felt like I was watching a corny episode of a mini-series on the sci-fi [[canals]]. It [[appeared]] very much like a made-for-TV [[movies]]. Don't go see this [[films]]. It is a [[squander]] of [[times]] AND [[moneys]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2675 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[would]] put this at the [[top]] of my list of films in the category of unwatchable trash! There are [[films]] that are bad, but the worst kind are the ones that are unwatchable but you are suppose to [[like]] them because they are [[supposed]] to be good for you! The sex [[sequences]], so [[shocking]] in its day, couldn't [[even]] arouse a rabbit. The so [[called]] controversial [[politics]] is [[strictly]] high school sophomore [[amateur]] night Marxism. The [[film]] is self-consciously arty in the [[worst]] [[sense]] of the term. The [[photography]] is in a harsh [[grainy]] black and white. Some scenes are out of focus or taken from the wrong angle. Even the sound is [[bad]]! And some people call this art?

I [[ought]] put this at the [[superior]] of my list of films in the category of unwatchable trash! There are [[film]] that are bad, but the worst kind are the ones that are unwatchable but you are suppose to [[fond]] them because they are [[presumed]] to be good for you! The sex [[sequence]], so [[terrifying]] in its day, couldn't [[yet]] arouse a rabbit. The so [[termed]] controversial [[policies]] is [[tightly]] high school sophomore [[dilettante]] night Marxism. The [[cinema]] is self-consciously arty in the [[hardest]] [[sensing]] of the term. The [[images]] is in a harsh [[fuzzy]] black and white. Some scenes are out of focus or taken from the wrong angle. Even the sound is [[negative]]! And some people call this art?

--------------------------------------------- Result 2676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Why [[review]] good [[movies]] when you can [[review]] "Trancers II?"

[[Ooh]], this film is soooo lame. I can just [[picture]] the cast and crew driving [[around]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[hurling]] [[extras]] in [[silly]] monster make-up at [[poor]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[families]] [[actually]] turn up to [[play]] cameos, probably because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[real]]" extras. Lame effects, lame sets, and a [[script]] so [[convoluted]] it [[would]] take eons to [[untie]] all the knots - this [[must]] be classic Trancers!

And [[yet]]...and [[yet]]...it [[rules]]. [[Note]] this is the same [[thing]] I [[say]] about "Trancers IV." I [[say]] it because it's [[true]]. What can [[beat]] watching an [[old]] [[guy]] in a trench [[coat]] [[mow]] down zombies, then [[bust]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worry]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[lots]] of [[things]] [[could]] be better, but [[anyway]] this is [[still]] good stuff.

My only [[significant]] [[reservation]] is Megan Ward, who [[really]] [[stinks]] up the joint. She's a [[lousy]] [[rival]] for [[Helen]] Hunt's [[character]] - they're both young [[pieces]] of eye [[candy]], and it would've been more effective if they [[actually]] contrasted a bit more. Oh well, you can't have everything. [[At]] [[least]] the wonderful plot [[device]] of the "[[long]] second watch" is back in [[place]], and we've [[got]] more of [[Hap]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[athlete]] in the [[history]] of [[cinema]] (oh, [[wait]] a minute - he's got a [[rival]] in the form of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't [[seen]] this [[lately]], but I do [[seem]] to remember that Martine Beswick [[runs]] away twice during the [[final]] [[battle]]. [[Hooray]] for [[lousy]] [[continuity]]! [[Just]] one of the [[many]] [[highlights]] in this fine film. Why [[revisions]] good [[film]] when you can [[revisited]] "Trancers II?"

[[Boo]], this film is soooo lame. I can just [[photo]] the cast and crew driving [[nearly]] L.A. with a camcorder, [[throwing]] [[goodies]] in [[nonsensical]] monster make-up at [[pauper]], long-suffering Tim Thomerson. The stars' [[family]] [[genuinely]] turn up to [[gaming]] cameos, probably because Full Moon couldn't afford "[[true]]" extras. Lame effects, lame sets, and a [[screenplay]] so [[complicated]] it [[should]] take eons to [[unstrap]] all the knots - this [[owes]] be classic Trancers!

And [[nonetheless]]...and [[nonetheless]]...it [[provisions]]. [[Notes]] this is the same [[stuff]] I [[told]] about "Trancers IV." I [[told]] it because it's [[genuine]]. What can [[defeating]] watching an [[former]] [[pal]] in a trench [[overcoat]] [[mowed]] down zombies, then [[flop]] out with quips like, "Don't [[worried]] ladies, they're bio-degradable"? Well, [[lot]] of [[aspects]] [[would]] be better, but [[writ]] this is [[nevertheless]] good stuff.

My only [[cannot]] [[reservations]] is Megan Ward, who [[genuinely]] [[sucks]] up the joint. She's a [[rotten]] [[rivals]] for [[Hackett]] Hunt's [[characters]] - they're both young [[segments]] of eye [[sweets]], and it would've been more effective if they [[genuinely]] contrasted a bit more. Oh well, you can't have everything. [[In]] [[less]] the wonderful plot [[instruments]] of the "[[lengthy]] second watch" is back in [[placing]], and we've [[ai]] more of [[Pah]] Ashby, the least-convincing [[sports]] in the [[historical]] of [[theatre]] (oh, [[awaits]] a minute - he's got a [[contenders]] in the form of David Ogden Steirs in "Creator").

I haven't [[noticed]] this [[recently]], but I do [[appears]] to remember that Martine Beswick [[manages]] away twice during the [[latter]] [[warfare]]. [[Huzzah]] for [[squalid]] [[continuance]]! [[Jen]] one of the [[numerous]] [[showcases]] in this fine film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2677 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I was looking over our DVD tower last night for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday night. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it sounded like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth watching. [[Boy]] was I [[wrong]]!!! Not only was it like "The Big Chill," it was a rip-off almost character by [[character]]. The Bill Paxton character was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even funny, except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." I was looking over our DVD tower last night for something to watch. We were between NetFlix mailings and it was a quiet Saturday night. I pulled one out that I never heard of before and realized it was borrowed from a friend. From the jacket, it sounded like a rip-off of "The Big Chill" but, with the all-star cast, felt it might be worth watching. [[Boys]] was I [[inaccurate]]!!! Not only was it like "The Big Chill," it was a rip-off almost character by [[nature]]. The Bill Paxton character was a copy of William Hurt ("where have you been all this time" role) -spoiler warning- and, lo and behold, he remains behind to take care of the old place(cabin/camp). Kimberly Williams = Meg Tilly; jerk womanizer Matt Craven = Jeff Goldblum etc., etc. I found myself wondering why I'm even watching these people. There was insufficient character development for me to find any interest in them. How did "Unca Lou" even find these characters after 20 years? Plus it wasn't even funny, except when Perkins fell, err 'flopped' out of bed the first morning, it was a sign and I missed it. After it was over, I asked my wife, "Were there any endearing characters in this film? ... Are you sleeping over there?" She replied, "No, I'm still thinking...No, none I can think of." --------------------------------------------- Result 2678 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have to say that there is [[nothing]] wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I felt like I was watching my next door neighbor's home movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick story, grabbed a camera, and started shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I pay to [[rent]] a film, I expect to feel like I am watching some [[type]] of professionally made movie.

John Schneider has a huge [[resume]], is a great [[actor]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[understand]] how it must be [[fun]], and cheaper to [[use]] [[friends]], and [[relatives]] as the cast, but it doesn't make for [[convincing]] acting. It seemed [[like]] the [[way]] it was [[shot]], he was [[trying]] to give many of the scenes a more interesting look, but when the writing, plot, and acting are there to [[begin]] with, that [[type]] of [[style]] isn't [[necessary]], and it is a distraction.

[[Also]] on a technical [[level]], it had digital artifacts all over the place. [[In]] the [[first]] scene of all of those [[fine]] cars, when they did a [[slow]] [[scan]] of them, they [[appeared]] to [[jerk]] back and forth just a little bit. The problem isn't in my [[viewing]] [[equipment]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somewhere]] in the production. I've never [[seen]] that [[kind]] of [[artifact]] in a professionally [[made]] [[film]] before. Then there was the [[sound]]. It [[sounded]] like they didn't do any voice-overs, which [[may]] be o.k. [[unless]] it [[sounded]] like the [[track]] in this [[film]]. It [[sounded]] like the built in microphone on the camera. I have to say that there is [[none]] wrong with low budget films, so that was not my problem with it. My problem with it is that I felt like I was watching my next door neighbor's home movie. IMO everything about it just seemed like a guy wrote out a quick story, grabbed a camera, and started shooting. I understand how hard this must be to do effectively, but when I pay to [[leases]] a film, I expect to feel like I am watching some [[kind]] of professionally made movie.

John Schneider has a huge [[reset]], is a great [[protagonist]], and was fine in this film. The other people in it were not. I [[realise]] how it must be [[hilarious]], and cheaper to [[utilize]] [[friendships]], and [[parents]] as the cast, but it doesn't make for [[persuading]] acting. It seemed [[iike]] the [[paths]] it was [[filmed]], he was [[striving]] to give many of the scenes a more interesting look, but when the writing, plot, and acting are there to [[began]] with, that [[genre]] of [[styles]] isn't [[essential]], and it is a distraction.

[[Similarly]] on a technical [[grades]], it had digital artifacts all over the place. [[Throughout]] the [[outset]] scene of all of those [[alright]] cars, when they did a [[slower]] [[wiping]] of them, they [[seemed]] to [[dipshit]] back and forth just a little bit. The problem isn't in my [[opinion]] [[apparatus]], (Benq PE-8700 84" diagonal) but [[somehow]] in the production. I've never [[noticed]] that [[genre]] of [[artifacts]] in a professionally [[accomplished]] [[flick]] before. Then there was the [[sounds]]. It [[rang]] like they didn't do any voice-overs, which [[maggio]] be o.k. [[if]] it [[rang]] like the [[trajectory]] in this [[cinematography]]. It [[rang]] like the built in microphone on the camera. --------------------------------------------- Result 2679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (66%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] Funny, sexy, hot!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques need no development!

All in all the whole seems to be known from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this film can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[say]]. Unbelievable funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice Funny, sexy, hot!!! There is no real plot but you needn't anyone...

so the naked or almost naked girls and the typical fights between college-cliques need no development!

All in all the whole seems to be known from simply every film in this category but the reissuer reached the goal that this film can be recognized out of thousand others.

Last thing I've got to [[told]]. Unbelievable funny!

You've got to see it!!!

And if you are young and you want know more about the female body you've got to see it twice --------------------------------------------- Result 2680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] "Stella", starring Bette [[Midler]] in the title role, is an unabashed tearjerker. Set in upstate New York, Stella [[Claire]] [[works]] [[nights]] as a [[bar]] [[maid]], pouring and [[dancing]] in a workingman's saloon. One [[night]], in [[comes]] a slumming [[medical]] intern, [[Stephen]] Dallas, who woos Stella, and in the course of their [[affair]] impregnates her. She [[spurns]] both his [[offers]] of [[marriage]] and abortion, [[sends]] him [[packing]] to a lucrative [[medical]] [[career]], and raises her daughter herself in near-poverty. Flash-forward 16 years and the [[daughter]] has grown into a gorgeous, loving, young lady. Dr. [[Dallas]] is not out of the picture, still [[maintaining]] a [[tenuous]], but caring relationship with his daughter and…..I'm rambling, and [[worse]] yet, making the movie sound somewhat interesting. The acting and screenwriting are so over-the-top you'll [[let]] out a [[groan]] in almost [[every]] scene. The chief offender is [[Bette]] Midler, but close behind is [[John]] Goodman as her alcoholic buddy. Each scene [[seems]] more [[contrived]] than the preceding right up to the finale, which is truly a hoot. [[Taken]] as a [[dramatic]] piece, this film rates no more than grade D, but as camp, it scores an [[unintended]] B+.

"Stella", starring Bette [[Bette]] in the title role, is an unabashed tearjerker. Set in upstate New York, Stella [[Clair]] [[collaborated]] [[evenings]] as a [[barrister]] [[damsel]], pouring and [[ballet]] in a workingman's saloon. One [[nocturnal]], in [[happens]] a slumming [[medicinal]] intern, [[Stephane]] Dallas, who woos Stella, and in the course of their [[fling]] impregnates her. She [[spurned]] both his [[offerings]] of [[weddings]] and abortion, [[dispatched]] him [[packed]] to a lucrative [[medicinal]] [[quarries]], and raises her daughter herself in near-poverty. Flash-forward 16 years and the [[fille]] has grown into a gorgeous, loving, young lady. Dr. [[Dally]] is not out of the picture, still [[conservation]] a [[shaky]], but caring relationship with his daughter and…..I'm rambling, and [[worst]] yet, making the movie sound somewhat interesting. The acting and screenwriting are so over-the-top you'll [[leave]] out a [[whimper]] in almost [[each]] scene. The chief offender is [[Midler]] Midler, but close behind is [[Jon]] Goodman as her alcoholic buddy. Each scene [[appears]] more [[artificial]] than the preceding right up to the finale, which is truly a hoot. [[Took]] as a [[tremendous]] piece, this film rates no more than grade D, but as camp, it scores an [[unexpected]] B+.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This [[movie]] had all the elements to be a [[smart]], sparkling comedy, but for some reason it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to appeal fully to women.

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[awful]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect better material. Jessica Simpson could also have managed so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and Penelope Anne Miller languish in supporting roles that are silly rather than amusing.

Many things in this movie were paint-by-numbers, the various uber-cliché montages, the last minute "misunderstanding", even the kids' party chaos. This just suggests lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to find this movie enjoyable if you don't take it seriously, but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and increasingly disappointed as the scenes roll past. This [[kino]] had all the elements to be a [[shrewd]], sparkling comedy, but for some reason it took the dumbass route. Perhaps it didn't really know who its audience was: but it's hardly a man's movie given the cast and plot, yet is too slapstick and dumb-blonde to appeal fully to women.

If you have seen Legally Blonde and its sequel, then this is like the bewilderingly [[scary]] sequel. Great actors such as Luke Wilson should expect better material. Jessica Simpson could also have managed so much more. Rachael Leigh Cook and Penelope Anne Miller languish in supporting roles that are silly rather than amusing.

Many things in this movie were paint-by-numbers, the various uber-cliché montages, the last minute "misunderstanding", even the kids' party chaos. This just suggests lazy scriptwriting.

It should be possible to find this movie enjoyable if you don't take it seriously, but it's such a glaring could-do-better than you'll likely feel frustrated and increasingly disappointed as the scenes roll past. --------------------------------------------- Result 2682 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Most]] people who have seen this movie thinks that it is the [[best]] movie ever [[made]]. I disagree but this movie is very very [[good]]. [[Tony]] is a bad ass guy and knows that he's intimidating and [[uses]] it to get ahead. It's about him and how he goes from washing dishes to having a huge [[house]] and a office with cocaine all over the desk. If you want a family movie then this isn't the [[way]] to go but if you want mobsters and vengeance and stuff like that then you'll like it. [[More]] people who have seen this movie thinks that it is the [[optimum]] movie ever [[effected]]. I disagree but this movie is very very [[alright]]. [[Tonny]] is a bad ass guy and knows that he's intimidating and [[employs]] it to get ahead. It's about him and how he goes from washing dishes to having a huge [[dwellings]] and a office with cocaine all over the desk. If you want a family movie then this isn't the [[manner]] to go but if you want mobsters and vengeance and stuff like that then you'll like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2683 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I really have to disagree with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire [[film]]) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever shot in Skye) and found a [[film]] with a [[difficult]] [[start]] [[come]] together into a really [[poignant]] whole.

This is not a big budget film. Rather it is a film that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - [[pushing]] out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the combination of music and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into quite a distinctive and memorable film. More of these please! I really have to disagree with guy-yardley-rees who (should he have watched the entire [[cinematographic]]) would have seen some absolutely stunning Scottish scenery (some of the best ever shot in Skye) and found a [[filmmaking]] with a [[laborious]] [[launching]] [[arriving]] together into a really [[agonizing]] whole.

This is not a big budget film. Rather it is a film that has a strong community feel.

I can't say how much 'standard' films bore me - [[prompting]] out the same polished stuff again and again. Seachd doesn't seem to be about that at all. It really seems to be trying to offer something more real and certainly more Gaelic than any recent Scottish film.

OK, so the acting isn't in the style a blockbuster. That's because the actors are seemingly real people. I actually thought that the key roles of the boy and his Grandfather were really convincing - and at times unusually beautiful.

Seachd really bears a second viewing, since there are many threads that become clearer second time around - that really do feed into the ending.

Overall, the combination of music and (at times) stunning visuals, plus a community approach to the acting and non-normal structure has turned Seachd into quite a distinctive and memorable film. More of these please! --------------------------------------------- Result 2684 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] While Rome goes mad celebrating Hitler's [[visit]] - uniforms, bands, parades - two [[outsiders]] stay home, in a [[large]] [[building]], and wind up [[meeting]]. She is [[Sofia]] [[Loren]], who is the wife of brutish public [[servant]] and [[mother]] of six [[children]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio [[speaker]] who's been [[fired]] because of his homosexuality. Both of them need company and understanding, both f them find it in each other.

The movie [[covers]] a [[span]] of a few [[hours]]. The [[color]] are faded and everything takes place with a [[sound]] track of military marches and hysterical radio announcers. Strangely enough, the [[Nazi]] anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical theme.

Beautiful movie, [[excellent]] recreation of a [[special]] [[era]] in Italian history and a [[touching]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to [[expect]] and [[Sofia]] Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[usual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[miss]] it. While Rome goes mad celebrating Hitler's [[visits]] - uniforms, bands, parades - two [[aliens]] stay home, in a [[sizable]] [[construction]], and wind up [[meetings]]. She is [[Sofie]] [[Lauren]], who is the wife of brutish public [[servants]] and [[mom]] of six [[infantile]]. He is Mastroianni, a radio [[speakerphone]] who's been [[sacked]] because of his homosexuality. Both of them need company and understanding, both f them find it in each other.

The movie [[covered]] a [[spanning]] of a few [[hour]]. The [[coloring]] are faded and everything takes place with a [[audible]] track of military marches and hysterical radio announcers. Strangely enough, the [[Hitler]] anthem - the Horst-Wessel-Lied - ends up becoming a romantic musical theme.

Beautiful movie, [[glamorous]] recreation of a [[especial]] [[epoch]] in Italian history and a [[touch]], sad story. Mastroianni is as good as we have come to [[expecting]] and [[Sophia]] Loren does a superb job, very far away from her [[habitual]] truck driver's pin-up, Neapolitan fishwife personas. Don't [[mademoiselle]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2685 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Yes, [[In]] 35 years of [[film]] going I have finally viewed the stinker that surpasses all other ghastly movies I have seen. [[Beating]] '[[Good]] [[Will]] Hunting' Baise Moi' and 'Flirt' for [[sheer]] awfulness. This is pretentious blige of the first [[order]]... not [[even]] [[entertaining]] pretentious bilge. The [[effects]] are cheap, and worse - [[pointless]].

The script [[seems]] to have been written by a first [[year]] [[film]] student who doesn't get out [[much]] but wants to appear full of portent! The acting is [[simply]] undescribably [[bad]] - Tilda Swinton caps a career filled with vacuous woodeness with a performance which veers neurotically between comotose and [[laughable]] 'intensity'. Apparently, some fool out there has allowed the [[director]] of this film to make another one... be warned Yes, [[Onto]] 35 years of [[cinematography]] going I have finally viewed the stinker that surpasses all other ghastly movies I have seen. [[Beat]] '[[Well]] [[Willingness]] Hunting' Baise Moi' and 'Flirt' for [[pure]] awfulness. This is pretentious blige of the first [[edict]]... not [[yet]] [[droll]] pretentious bilge. The [[effect]] are cheap, and worse - [[vain]].

The script [[appears]] to have been written by a first [[annum]] [[films]] student who doesn't get out [[very]] but wants to appear full of portent! The acting is [[exclusively]] undescribably [[negative]] - Tilda Swinton caps a career filled with vacuous woodeness with a performance which veers neurotically between comotose and [[absurd]] 'intensity'. Apparently, some fool out there has allowed the [[superintendent]] of this film to make another one... be warned --------------------------------------------- Result 2686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] Don't waste [[time]] reading my [[review]]. [[Go]] out and see this [[astonishingly]] [[good]] episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[written]]! [[Ruth]] Gordon is [[perfectly]] [[cast]] as the [[scheming]] [[yet]] charming [[mystery]] [[writer]] who [[murders]] her son-in-law to [[avenge]] his [[murder]] of her daughter. [[Columbo]] is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this [[particular]] [[installment]] features [[fantastic]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or Link yet is possibly the densest, most thoroughly original and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. Utterly satisfying in nearly every department and overflowing with droll and witty dialogue and thinking. Truly unexpected and inventive climax tops all. 10/10...seek this one out on Netflix! Don't waste [[moment]] reading my [[inspect]]. [[Going]] out and see this [[terribly]] [[buena]] episode, which may very well be the best Columbo ever [[writes]]! [[Roth]] Gordon is [[altogether]] [[casting]] as the [[underhand]] [[still]] charming [[enigma]] [[screenwriter]] who [[assassinated]] her son-in-law to [[retaliate]] his [[killings]] of her daughter. [[Colombo]] is his usual rumpled, befuddled and far-cleverer-than-he-seems self, and this [[especial]] [[instalment]] features [[unbelievable]] chemistry between Gordon and Falk. Ironically, this was not written by heralded creators Levinson or Link yet is possibly the densest, most thoroughly original and twist-laden Columbo plot ever. Utterly satisfying in nearly every department and overflowing with droll and witty dialogue and thinking. Truly unexpected and inventive climax tops all. 10/10...seek this one out on Netflix! --------------------------------------------- Result 2687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I dug this out and watched it tonight. I honestly think it must be 20 years since the last time I saw it. I remember it being a [[seriously]] flawed film. I don't [[remember]] it being THIS [[bad]]!!!!!

I am absolutely aghast that a [[project]] with this much potential should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to blame for this? The 2 guys who wrote (and I use that word loosely) the [[script]]? The casting directors who so terribly miscast at least 3 major [[characters]] in the [[story]]? (Only 2 of them are among "the amazing 5".) The director, who clearly refused to take it seriously, and kept shoving awful music on top of bad [[writing]] & [[bad]] acting everywhere? (I LIKED the theme song-- but it should never have been used all the way throughout the entire film!) Don Black, who should be ASHAMED at some of the lyrics he wrote for that music?

It figures that I should pull this out, less than a week after re-reading the comic-book adaptation. The first 15-20 minutes of the film more-or-less (really, LESS) parallel the first issue of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I kept wondering-- why was ALMOST every single detail changed? Doc showing up, then using his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 inches because the refractive glass, were just about the only things left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "adaptation", WHY in God's name change EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's HQ, virtually NOTHING is as it was in the comic (which, given Roy Thomas, I figure probably follows the book). I read somewhere they actually combined elements of 2 different novels into one movie. Again-- WHY? I've heard it was changed because they weren't able to secure the kind of budget they wanted. I look at the film, and think... LACK OF MONEY in NO WAY explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really take a look at this thing. The best thing I can say is, I think it would make a great double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and probably a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I also realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. I dug this out and watched it tonight. I honestly think it must be 20 years since the last time I saw it. I remember it being a [[earnestly]] flawed film. I don't [[reminisce]] it being THIS [[amiss]]!!!!!

I am absolutely aghast that a [[projects]] with this much potential should have been mistreated so reprehensibly. Who am I to blame for this? The 2 guys who wrote (and I use that word loosely) the [[hyphen]]? The casting directors who so terribly miscast at least 3 major [[hallmarks]] in the [[fairytales]]? (Only 2 of them are among "the amazing 5".) The director, who clearly refused to take it seriously, and kept shoving awful music on top of bad [[handwriting]] & [[horrid]] acting everywhere? (I LIKED the theme song-- but it should never have been used all the way throughout the entire film!) Don Black, who should be ASHAMED at some of the lyrics he wrote for that music?

It figures that I should pull this out, less than a week after re-reading the comic-book adaptation. The first 15-20 minutes of the film more-or-less (really, LESS) parallel the first issue of the comic. As I watched it tonight, I kept wondering-- why was ALMOST every single detail changed? Doc showing up, then using his wrist-watch remote-control to open the safe, and the sniper's bullet missing him by 5 inches because the refractive glass, were just about the only things left the same. I mean, if you're gonna do an "adaptation", WHY in God's name change EVERYTHING???

Once they leave Doc's HQ, virtually NOTHING is as it was in the comic (which, given Roy Thomas, I figure probably follows the book). I read somewhere they actually combined elements of 2 different novels into one movie. Again-- WHY? I've heard it was changed because they weren't able to secure the kind of budget they wanted. I look at the film, and think... LACK OF MONEY in NO WAY explains what I saw on the screen!!

You know, when people complain about Joel Schumacher, they should really take a look at this thing. The best thing I can say is, I think it would make a great double-feature with the 1966 BATMAN feature-- and probably a great triple-bill with that and the 1980 FLASH GORDON. All 3 films are "silly". Maybe we can "blame" the 1966 film (and TV series) for this. Some fans have complained over the years that Adam West's BATMAN ruined the image of comic-books in the minds of generations of non-comics fans. I think the same could be said for Hollywood. I'm reminded of how many really, really BAD films based on "classic" characters have been made over the years, especially (it seems to me) in the late 70's & early 80's. Charlie Chan, Fu Manchu, Tarzan, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, The Lone Ranger-- all "murdered" by Hollywood types who think, "OH, comic-books! So you know it's supposed to be STUPID!" More like they're the "stupid" ones. What a waste of potential.

Let me say some good things... Despite the script and the directing, Ron Ely is GREAT. When I read a DOC SAVAGE story, I don't think of the James Bama paintings, I think of Ely. Bill Lucking (who later was a regular on THE A-TEAM) is terrific. Eldon Quick (who I've seen somewhere else, but can't recall where) is terrific. Paul Gleason-- who I absolutely HATED with a passion and a vengeance in THE BREAKFAST CLUB ("teachers" like the one he played should be banned from ever teaching anywhere), may be the best of the "amazing 5" in the film. Pamela Hensley-- though her part was almost unrecognizable from the original story-- is terrific. Before she let her hair down, I also realized she looked a HELL of a lot like "Ardala Valmar" from those awful John Calkins BUCK ROGERS strips I just read the other day. She's got a big nose like Ardala-- only not quite as pronounced. The comics Ardala actually looked more like the 1936 movie Princess Aura-- or Cher. Or maybe Streisand. Take yer pick. (Ardala actually got plastic surgery in the George Tuska strips-- after, she was stunning!)

Paul Wexler, funny enough, I saw just last week in a GET SMART episode. I wonder if he was anything like the character he was supposed to be playing? I don't know, because that character sure wasn't in the movie the film takes its title from. --------------------------------------------- Result 2688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like money and like stuff." - Ellen, the [[lost]] quote.

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. "It's like hard to like describe just how like exciting it is like to make a relationship like drama like with all the like pornographic scenes thrown like in for like good measure like, and to stir up like contro- like -versy and make us more like money and like stuff." - Ellen, the [[outof]] quote.

"Kissing, Like, On the, Like, Mouth And Stuff" is like the best like artistic endeavor like ever made. Watching like Ellen's hairy arms and like Chris masturbating was like the height of my years-long movie-viewing experience and stuff. But before I like begin like breaking new U.S.-20-something-airhead records with the my "likes", let me like just briefly list like the high- like -lights of this visual like feast:

1. Chris doing the deed with his genitals. And not just that: the way the camera (guided so elegantly by Ellen and Patrick) rewards the viewer with a full-screen shot of Chris's fat white-trash stomach after he finishes the un-Catholic deed - that was truly thrilling. I can in all honesty say that I've never seen such grace. Chris, you should do more such scenes in your next movies, because that is exactly what we needed as a continuation of what that brilliant, brilliant man, Lars von Trier and his "Idiots 95", started. A quick w*** and then a hairy, fat, white belly: what more can any movie-goer ask for?! Needless to say, I can sit all day and watch Chris ejaculate (in spite of the fact that I'm straight)... Such poetry in motion. Such elegance, such style. No less than total, divine inspiration went into filming that sequence - plus a solid amount of Zen philosophy. Even Barbra Streisand could not get any more spiritual than this.

2. Ellen's hairy, thick arms. The wobbly-camera close-ups, so skillfully photographed by our two directors of photography (I can't emphasize this enough), Ellen and Patrick, often caused confusion regarding the proper identification of the sex in question. There were several scenes when we would see a part of a body (a leg, arm or foot), yet it was often a guessing game: does that body-part belong to a man or a woman? Naturally, Chris and his fellow artists, Ellen, Patrick and whatsername, cast themselves on purpose, because their bodies were ideal for creating this gender-based confusion. It was at times hard to guess whether one is seeing a female or male leg. Patrick is so very thin and effeminate in his movements, so hairless and pristine, whereas Ellen and the other girl are so very butch, what with their thick legs and arms. Brilliant.

3. Brilliant - especially the way that neatly ties in with the theme of role reversal between the sexes: so utterly original and mind-blowing. Ellen behaves like a man, wants sex all the time, while her ex Patrick wants to talk - like a girl. Spiffing.

4. Ellen's search for a Leftist mate. "He must love 'The Simpsons', which is quite Leftist." I am glad that the makers of this movie decided to break the long tradition of offering us intelligent Leftists. Ellen is such a refreshing - and realistic - change. The number of "likes" that she and her liberal friends manage to utter in less than 80 minutes is truly phenomenal (3,849, to be exact). They have managed to realistically transfer their real-life ineptness onto the big screen with a minimum of effort, and I applaud them for that.

5. The close-ups of toes. Plenty of stuff here for foot-fetishists, which I think is a very liberal, highly commendable way of reaching out to sexual minorities. After all, shoe- and foot- fetishists are offered so little in modern cinema, so it's nice to see that someone out there CARES.

KOTM, or rather, KLOTLMAS, offers more than meets the eye. It is not just a modest little film about shallow people engaging in hollow relationships while indulging in meaningless conversations. No, it's much more than that. It's about the light that guides all silly creatures; the guiding light that dominates the futile lives of various pseudo-artistic wannabes who just dropped out of film school, and plan to assault our senses with dim-witted drivel that will hopefully play well at pretentious festivals like Sundance and Cannes, enabling them to gain the necessary exposure hence some real cash for a change, with which they will later hire the likes of Sean Penn and George Clooney in promoting the saving of this planet and the resolving of ALL political problems this world faces. What better way to do that than by making porn at the very start?

If Chris and Ellen did the camera here, as is clearly stated in the end-credits, then who held the camera while the two of them were in front of it? They probably hired some passers-by and shoved the camera into their hands...

Go to http://rateyourmusic.com/~Fedor8, and check out my "TV & Cinema: 150 Worst Cases Of Nepotism" list. --------------------------------------------- Result 2689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I am a [[huge]] [[Michael]] Madsen [[fan]], so [[needless]] to [[say]], i bought this [[movie]] without [[even]] renting it or [[anything]]... This movie was so [[horrible]], i didn't [[even]] [[take]] it back to the [[store]], i wouldn't want [[anyone]] else to be subjected to this human [[poison]], i just [[threw]] it in the trash, never mind the money, it was worth the [[price]] to be able to [[throw]] it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or anything. The story was [[horrible]], and the ending was something i [[despise]]. He was a broken man, alcoholic. his life was a bunch of junk. i thought his horse, peanuts, was an awful device to show his childhood innocence, a dog would have been much much better. i also hate religion, so this ending without a doubt angered me. Jesus heals all... i hate that i know people just like this that are huge Christians and catholics, and time will show that god doesn't heal all, or anything. It was a horrible movie, if u have the option to see it, pass, or better yet buy it, or rent it, and throw it in the garbage, and leave the coffee grounds on it in the morning I am a [[overwhelming]] [[Michal]] Madsen [[admirer]], so [[meaningless]] to [[told]], i bought this [[film]] without [[yet]] renting it or [[nothing]]... This movie was so [[scary]], i didn't [[yet]] [[taking]] it back to the [[shop]], i wouldn't want [[everybody]] else to be subjected to this human [[poisoning]], i just [[ditched]] it in the trash, never mind the money, it was worth the [[prix]] to be able to [[toss]] it away. The acting wasn't that bad, it wasn't good or anything. The story was [[scary]], and the ending was something i [[hating]]. He was a broken man, alcoholic. his life was a bunch of junk. i thought his horse, peanuts, was an awful device to show his childhood innocence, a dog would have been much much better. i also hate religion, so this ending without a doubt angered me. Jesus heals all... i hate that i know people just like this that are huge Christians and catholics, and time will show that god doesn't heal all, or anything. It was a horrible movie, if u have the option to see it, pass, or better yet buy it, or rent it, and throw it in the garbage, and leave the coffee grounds on it in the morning --------------------------------------------- Result 2690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I did not enjoy the film, Joshua, at all. Perhaps it is because I saw another, much better similar film titled Orphan 2 days prior but perhaps it's really just because this film was not very good. I am going with the ladder. Sure, the plot of an evil child is not exactly original but that doesn't mean the film could not succeed. It could have been suspenseful and entertaining and chilling but instead it was slow building, boring, uneventful and really didn't leave me thinking anything more than 'that wasn't very good' when it was all over.

At the end, Joshua's motivations are revealed. I won't give that away but the reality is that he didn't really accomplish his goals since despite Vera Farmiga as his mother, Abby, disappearing about 3/4th through the movie, all arrows point to her returning home soon. She was committed to a mental institution because she was losing her mind but then Joshua's Father/Her husband was accused of tampering with her medication which tells the audience that the institution realized that she was indeed not mentally ill but rather was being dosed medically. So.. shouldn't she be coming home soon? Won't Joshua have failed? Won't his Mother be living with him and his sister and possibly his Father soon? I question the Father since his future is left open ended.

At the end of the day, I didn't care about the characters. The evil demon child Joshua wasn't really scary. The storyline moved slowly and when it picked up it was still boring. Suspense fell flat every single time. When it was over I couldn't believe I had sat through the whole thing.

4/10 just because the acting was good from the parents especially Vera Farmiga as the Mother but if you want to see a movie about an evil 'child' go see Orphan. Now that's a movie that took an unoriginal concept and created a brilliant movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I remember watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a Video or DVD release yet? It's sacrilegious that this [[majesty]] of [[movie]] making has never been released while other rubbish has been. In fact this is the one [[John]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[released]]. In fact i haven't [[seen]] it on the TV either since the day i [[watched]] it. Kurt Russell was the [[perfect]] choice for the role of Elvis. This is [[definitely]] a role he was born to [[play]]. John carpenter's [[break]] from horror brought this gem that i'd love the TV to play again. It is well acted and well performed as far as the [[singing]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[greatest]] hits with gusto. I think this also was the [[film]] that formed the [[partnership]] with Russell and Carpenter which made them [[go]] on to make a number of [[great]] [[movies]] (Escape from [[New]] York, The Thing, Big [[trouble]] in little china, and Escape from L.A. Someone has [[got]] to release this before someone does a remake or their own version of his [[life]], which i feel [[would]] not only tarnish the king but also ruin the [[magic]] that this one has. [[If]] this doesn't get [[released]] then we are gonna be in [[Heartbreak]] [[Hotel]]. I remember watching this film a while ago and after seeing 3000 miles to Graceland, it all came flooding back. Why this hasn't had a Video or DVD release yet? It's sacrilegious that this [[empress]] of [[flick]] making has never been released while other rubbish has been. In fact this is the one [[Johannes]] Carpenter film that hasn't been [[releasing]]. In fact i haven't [[noticed]] it on the TV either since the day i [[observed]] it. Kurt Russell was the [[faultless]] choice for the role of Elvis. This is [[admittedly]] a role he was born to [[gaming]]. John carpenter's [[blackout]] from horror brought this gem that i'd love the TV to play again. It is well acted and well performed as far as the [[singer]] goes. Belting out most of Elvis's [[larger]] hits with gusto. I think this also was the [[cinematography]] that formed the [[partnerships]] with Russell and Carpenter which made them [[going]] on to make a number of [[huge]] [[cinematography]] (Escape from [[Newer]] York, The Thing, Big [[problem]] in little china, and Escape from L.A. Someone has [[did]] to release this before someone does a remake or their own version of his [[lifetime]], which i feel [[ought]] not only tarnish the king but also ruin the [[witchcraft]] that this one has. [[Unless]] this doesn't get [[emitted]] then we are gonna be in [[Sadness]] [[Motel]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2692 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] How much could the general Hollywood director learn from this [[movie]]? All... when it comes to actually scaring people. This [[movies]] [[truly]] [[shows]] that it is [[possible]] to really frighten and scare a viewer, and that monstrous monsters and long knifes never will be the best way of achieving this. All who [[love]] a real psychological thriller [[must]] [[see]] this movie... it is the best of it's kind. How much could the general Hollywood director learn from this [[kino]]? All... when it comes to actually scaring people. This [[theater]] [[honestly]] [[denotes]] that it is [[probable]] to really frighten and scare a viewer, and that monstrous monsters and long knifes never will be the best way of achieving this. All who [[likes]] a real psychological thriller [[should]] [[consults]] this movie... it is the best of it's kind. --------------------------------------------- Result 2693 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] [[While]] not [[quite]] as monstrously [[preposterous]] as later works, this slow-moving, repetitive giallo offers some [[nice]] touches in the [[first]] half, but [[grows]] more and more lethargic and silly as it stumbles to its lame denouement.

To be sure, the [[actors]] are above average - [[considering]] this is an Argento [[movie]] - and some moments [[show]] the director's visual [[skills]], but [[whole]] [[sequences]] should've been cut and, [[basically]], it's just the same exploitative [[trash]] as ever, wallowing in [[fake]] science and abnormal sexual [[depravity]].

3 out of 10 genetic disorders [[Whereas]] not [[pretty]] as monstrously [[idiotic]] as later works, this slow-moving, repetitive giallo offers some [[enjoyable]] touches in the [[fiirst]] half, but [[heighten]] more and more lethargic and silly as it stumbles to its lame denouement.

To be sure, the [[protagonists]] are above average - [[reviewing]] this is an Argento [[film]] - and some moments [[shows]] the director's visual [[dexterity]], but [[ensemble]] [[sequence]] should've been cut and, [[mainly]], it's just the same exploitative [[detritus]] as ever, wallowing in [[fictitious]] science and abnormal sexual [[perversity]].

3 out of 10 genetic disorders --------------------------------------------- Result 2694 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK, I am not a professional movie critic but [[come]] on...a true story!!!!

They are tunneling under another store to get underneath the bank and stumble across a tomb. At tomb with a passageway which goes directly under the bank.

OK, I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to go to sleep. Yeah!!! I am sure with all the adrenaline pumping through them they are going to just fall asleep.

This blows the whole picture!!!! How lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to pay to watch this one. OK, I am not a professional movie critic but [[arrived]] on...a true story!!!!

They are tunneling under another store to get underneath the bank and stumble across a tomb. At tomb with a passageway which goes directly under the bank.

OK, I'll play along.

But then they get into the bank and decide to go to sleep. Yeah!!! I am sure with all the adrenaline pumping through them they are going to just fall asleep.

This blows the whole picture!!!! How lame!!!!!

Glad I didn't have to pay to watch this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well-done ghost story that will give you the creeps and some pretty fair scares along the way. The story unfolds slowly, building atmosphere all the way until you're ready to see the woman in black. You won't forget her once you've seen her. No gore, no knives, no hockey masks--just a well-constructed story that is best viewed at night with the lights out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly Steven Martin's "LA [[Story]]", which at [[least]] had the grace to be [[obviously]] fictional [[even]] [[though]] it starred his then-girlfriend [[playing]] his girlfriend in the [[film]].

Yes, naive [[boys]] and girls, "20 [[Dates]]" IS a mockumentary, although I am not absolutely certain that was Myles Berkowitz's [[intent]] when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[quickly]] [[realized]] that it would be [[pathetic]] and not [[funny]] [[unless]] he made the situations more and more [[ridiculous]]. As a result, the whole thing has an uneasy, cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As someone smartly pointed out, the film has two of the "dates" suing and putting restraining orders on Myles and yet they appear in the film, which would be impossible as it would require a consent form. It also appears to me that the majority of women who appear as "the dates" are professional actresses (albiet not famous ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are simply too obviously pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in front of the camera to be average civilians.

Mr. Berkowitz makes a classic error in only casting this kind of very pretty thin actress, instead of utilizing a variety of believable women, which [[might]] have made the premise (even in a mockumentary) more believable and funnier. He also skates over what is probably his real-world problem, and which is that both the movie character and the real world Myles Berkowitz appear to be functionally unemployed (his real life IMDb credits are practically non-existent, excepting this film). Even in the world of the movie, his ex-wife divorced him for never being employed. I think the viewer (let alone Mr. Berkowitz's real life dates) are deserving of an explanation of he manages to live in one of the most expensive urban environments in the US, in a luxury apartment, driving a fancy car and eating out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't seen to have any source of income whatsoever. (Is he drug dealer? Living off his rich parents? No clue!)

You can get away with most anything in a film, if the jokes are really funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! ....ripoff of a dozen better films. Particularly Steven Martin's "LA [[Narratives]]", which at [[fewer]] had the grace to be [[assuredly]] fictional [[yet]] [[nevertheless]] it starred his then-girlfriend [[gaming]] his girlfriend in the [[filmmaking]].

Yes, naive [[guys]] and girls, "20 [[Times]]" IS a mockumentary, although I am not absolutely certain that was Myles Berkowitz's [[goals]] when he started. My impression is that he started the project semi-seriously, then [[speedily]] [[performed]] that it would be [[deplorable]] and not [[comical]] [[if]] he made the situations more and more [[foolish]]. As a result, the whole thing has an uneasy, cheap and insincere feeling about it.

As someone smartly pointed out, the film has two of the "dates" suing and putting restraining orders on Myles and yet they appear in the film, which would be impossible as it would require a consent form. It also appears to me that the majority of women who appear as "the dates" are professional actresses (albiet not famous ones, excepting Tina Carrere) -- they are simply too obviously pretty, polished, thin and comfortable in front of the camera to be average civilians.

Mr. Berkowitz makes a classic error in only casting this kind of very pretty thin actress, instead of utilizing a variety of believable women, which [[apt]] have made the premise (even in a mockumentary) more believable and funnier. He also skates over what is probably his real-world problem, and which is that both the movie character and the real world Myles Berkowitz appear to be functionally unemployed (his real life IMDb credits are practically non-existent, excepting this film). Even in the world of the movie, his ex-wife divorced him for never being employed. I think the viewer (let alone Mr. Berkowitz's real life dates) are deserving of an explanation of he manages to live in one of the most expensive urban environments in the US, in a luxury apartment, driving a fancy car and eating out at pricey restaurants when he doesn't seen to have any source of income whatsoever. (Is he drug dealer? Living off his rich parents? No clue!)

You can get away with most anything in a film, if the jokes are really funny. "20 Dates" is painfully, embarrassingly UN-funny. Mr. Berkowitz's idea of a joke is to have his character, while on restaurant dates, announce to his companions how the food served is likely to give him either diarrhea or constipation -- the WORST kind of childish potty humor.

It is not very surprising to discover that Mr. Berkowitz never made a film before "20 Dates" and in the last 8 years, has not made a single film, appeared as an actor in anyone else's film OR had a writing or producing credit of any kind. My gut instinct tells me that this film was not financed by "Elie" (the gangster money man who appears off-camera) but more likely by Mr. Berkowitz's affluent parents, or perhaps represents a shocking abuse of credit cards. Whichever it was, we can all rest easy that we are unlikely to have to see Myles Berkowitz or any of his creative efforts EVER AGAIN. Hallelujah!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2697 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This is one of those movies - like Dave, American Dreamer and Local Hero - that holds a viewer's interest time and again. Lightweight movies seldom win Oscars, but whoever did the casting for Soapdish deserves one. [[Even]] after one has seen the movie and knows what is coming, it's still [[enjoyable]] to watch how the various plot facets [[develop]]. [[True]], all the drama is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitting]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My favorite line comes from Whoopi Goldberg: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I think it's unfortunate that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. This is one of those movies - like Dave, American Dreamer and Local Hero - that holds a viewer's interest time and again. Lightweight movies seldom win Oscars, but whoever did the casting for Soapdish deserves one. [[Yet]] after one has seen the movie and knows what is coming, it's still [[agreeable]] to watch how the various plot facets [[formulating]]. [[Truthful]], all the drama is melodrama; but that's entirely [[fitted]] for a movie with a soap opera background. My favorite line comes from Whoopi Goldberg: "Now why can't I write sh*t like that?" I think it's unfortunate that the TV and website censors insist on all this unnecessary sanitation. --------------------------------------------- Result 2698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie gets both a 6/10 [[rating]] from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into consideration, this movie WILL bore you. It's basically a family [[drama]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime [[channel]], but put in a [[horror]] universe. The story and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the zombies and you'll have something just as [[melodramatic]] as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and idea is pretty original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your friends would joke about when you're half-drunk . . . but that joke actually got a theatrical release. The idea gets a 9/10 from me. The only reason it isn't perfect is because they could have taken it even further, but they didn't.

The mix of both is mixed. I thought it was funny, but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT funny. I had my mom and little sister watch it with me and the jokes we made about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of utter genius, but there were also moments of pure boredom.

I sincerely hope that other movies take this kind of over-the-top risk and original ideas. I just can't say it was perfect, or even near it, because of the lack of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 This movie gets both a 6/10 [[assessments]] from me, as well as a 9/10. Here is why: As a standard horror movie for the standard horror crowd, where action and gore and scares are taken into consideration, this movie WILL bore you. It's basically a family [[opera]] similar to what you'd see on the Lifetime [[chanel]], but put in a [[terror]] universe. The story and formula are age-old, retreaded hundreds of times. If you're looking for any originality in the plot structure or the minimal conflicts, you'll be disappointed. Take away the zombies and you'll have something just as [[operatic]] as A Beautiful Mind, tripping on cheese. This is the 6/10.

However, the basic synopsis and idea is pretty original and over-the-top. It's literally something you and your friends would joke about when you're half-drunk . . . but that joke actually got a theatrical release. The idea gets a 9/10 from me. The only reason it isn't perfect is because they could have taken it even further, but they didn't.

The mix of both is mixed. I thought it was funny, but as with most all comedies, it wasn't THAT funny. I had my mom and little sister watch it with me and the jokes we made about it were funnier than the jokes scripted. There were moments of utter genius, but there were also moments of pure boredom.

I sincerely hope that other movies take this kind of over-the-top risk and original ideas. I just can't say it was perfect, or even near it, because of the lack of originality to the plot.

A GREAT family movie. A great movie to watch with a bunch of guys (or girls). A great movie to watch with anyone . . . but if you watch it alone, it will be a bit boring. Other people always make this kind of movie funnier and richer.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] It's a pretty good [[cast]], but the film has [[nowhere]] near the grace of the original Italian comedy "Big Deal on Madonna Street" Anyone [[looking]] for an entertaining caper film should visit the original. William Macy may be one of our greatest living actors, but here he's put to [[little]] [[use]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel [[sorry]] for him [[trying]] to fill those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a young De Niro. The art [[direction]] is rich and textured but [[brings]] [[nothing]] to the story, the extra bits they add to the story feel completely unnecessary and the things they take away are missed. Even starting the way they do seems bizarrely gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the original. Sam Rockwell has his odd and genial charm and Luis Guzman has that odd charisma, but the love story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too bad nobody has figured out how to make this movie as well as it was first made, but then again it's too bad we live in a culture where we feel like we need to remake amazing things instead of simply learning to savor the originals. It's a pretty good [[casting]], but the film has [[everywhere]] near the grace of the original Italian comedy "Big Deal on Madonna Street" Anyone [[searching]] for an entertaining caper film should visit the original. William Macy may be one of our greatest living actors, but here he's put to [[small]] [[uses]]. And his role in the original was played by Marcello Mastroianni, so I sort of feel [[dorry]] for him [[seek]] to fill those shoes. Might as well try to imitate Bogart or a young De Niro. The art [[orientation]] is rich and textured but [[puts]] [[anything]] to the story, the extra bits they add to the story feel completely unnecessary and the things they take away are missed. Even starting the way they do seems bizarrely gratuitous and takes away from the surprise of the original. Sam Rockwell has his odd and genial charm and Luis Guzman has that odd charisma, but the love story part of the movie just seems clunky and flat. It's too bad nobody has figured out how to make this movie as well as it was first made, but then again it's too bad we live in a culture where we feel like we need to remake amazing things instead of simply learning to savor the originals. --------------------------------------------- Result 2700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Not the best of actors' movies.The [[director]] has concentrated on [[projected]] actor's [[stardom]] [[rather]] than giving a [[good]] entertainer. [[May]] be hero himself, his [[family]] and his sincere fans can enjoy it.But [[definitely]] it's not worth for neutral [[audience]].The [[fight]] sequences are a total comedy.The dance moves in the song sequences are [[pathetic]]. The [[music]] is average.This film was the biggest flop for the actor. Inspite of the hype [[created]] over the movie, the [[movie]] failed [[miserably]]. Don't [[even]] think of watching this move even if you want to kill time. You can watch some cartoon instead.A good movie [[buff]] cannot digest this [[crap]] for 2 1/2 hours. Not the best of actors' movies.The [[superintendent]] has concentrated on [[predicting]] actor's [[glory]] [[comparatively]] than giving a [[alright]] entertainer. [[Maggio]] be hero himself, his [[families]] and his sincere fans can enjoy it.But [[admittedly]] it's not worth for neutral [[spectators]].The [[struggles]] sequences are a total comedy.The dance moves in the song sequences are [[unlucky]]. The [[musica]] is average.This film was the biggest flop for the actor. Inspite of the hype [[generated]] over the movie, the [[films]] failed [[spectacularly]]. Don't [[yet]] think of watching this move even if you want to kill time. You can watch some cartoon instead.A good movie [[buffy]] cannot digest this [[damnit]] for 2 1/2 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 2701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] this move was friggin hilarious!!! funniest I've seen in a while, akshay and john kick ass as always, and the chicks are hot too. the [[story]] is awesome, lots of great jokes, and [[whoever]] [[reviewed]] this before me is an idiot. to him i [[say]] that u are not of Indian background so u wouldn't understand the [[humor]] u moron. don't rate [[movies]] u don't understand. what did u watch, the subtitle version where majority of jokes are lost in translation? [[thats]] what i [[thought]] jackass.

akshay kumar is the best actor ever and proves once again his versatility, he can do not only action but comedy as well, and is excellent at it. john has proved himself as well, this is his first comedy role and he was also excellent at it. this move was friggin hilarious!!! funniest I've seen in a while, akshay and john kick ass as always, and the chicks are hot too. the [[conte]] is awesome, lots of great jokes, and [[someone]] [[revisiting]] this before me is an idiot. to him i [[tell]] that u are not of Indian background so u wouldn't understand the [[comedy]] u moron. don't rate [[cinematography]] u don't understand. what did u watch, the subtitle version where majority of jokes are lost in translation? [[theres]] what i [[thinking]] jackass.

akshay kumar is the best actor ever and proves once again his versatility, he can do not only action but comedy as well, and is excellent at it. john has proved himself as well, this is his first comedy role and he was also excellent at it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2702 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] An intriguing [[premise]] of hand-drawn [[fantasy]] [[come]] to life in a child's fever dreams. [[However]], I imagine the average nonfictional child is far more [[adept]] at scaring themselves than Bernard Rose is at [[riveting]] the viewer. The duel between Anna's two realities drags on far too long to sustain interest, especially considering that the little girl [[playing]] her is the most [[abrasive]] child [[actor]] I've ever seen.

Use only for kindling. An intriguing [[supposition]] of hand-drawn [[imagination]] [[arrived]] to life in a child's fever dreams. [[Still]], I imagine the average nonfictional child is far more [[adroit]] at scaring themselves than Bernard Rose is at [[mesmerizing]] the viewer. The duel between Anna's two realities drags on far too long to sustain interest, especially considering that the little girl [[gaming]] her is the most [[caustic]] child [[protagonist]] I've ever seen.

Use only for kindling. --------------------------------------------- Result 2703 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I really enjoyed this movie. Most of the reviews have been bad, but most critics think a movie should be like an idea drama. This movie has a little bit of drama, but the rest is just clean fun and very entertaining. Forget about Julia Roberts being a Pretty Woman, Emma Roberts is a beautiful young lady and there is more to her than just that. Emma was so much fun to watch in the role of Nancy Drew. It is good to see a new face. I believe she will go far.

Nancy Drew may not be based upon the books, but the story is still good. There is also a good blend of other character actors and supporting actors like Pat Carroll, Barry Bostwick, Rachel Leigh Cook and Chris Kattan - not credited. I'm surprised Disney did not release this movie. Some people may not like this movie because it does not contain sex, violence, and cursing. This is a good family film which is rare in this day in time. So take your family, see this movie and judge for your self how good it is. I can't wait for the sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 2704 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] After having [[seen]] the movie the first question arising in my mind was: Is this [[supposed]] to be irony or not? After reading a few [[comments]] about the character Doc Savage and the comic series, I [[knew]] this film was not meant to be [[ironic]]. So, the [[story]] tells us about an US-American Super-Doc saving a [[south]] American republic from [[evil]]. [[Sounds]] like a typical [[story]]. But this one [[comes]] in such an [[unrealistic]] [[way]] that it [[becomes]] ridiculous. The mandatory end-fight shows the [[worst]] presentation of martial [[arts]] I have ever seen. The film might be interesting for low budget movie designers as a [[bad]] example. After having [[saw]] the movie the first question arising in my mind was: Is this [[presumed]] to be irony or not? After reading a few [[commentaries]] about the character Doc Savage and the comic series, I [[knowed]] this film was not meant to be [[sarcastic]]. So, the [[narratives]] tells us about an US-American Super-Doc saving a [[southern]] American republic from [[malicious]]. [[Noises]] like a typical [[histories]]. But this one [[happens]] in such an [[utopian]] [[ways]] that it [[becoming]] ridiculous. The mandatory end-fight shows the [[gravest]] presentation of martial [[arte]] I have ever seen. The film might be interesting for low budget movie designers as a [[inclement]] example. --------------------------------------------- Result 2705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] First off, I had my doubts just looking at the DVD box and reading it [[saying]] that it was about of bunch of teens gathering at a lake where they will find do or something. Any [[movie]] that has a [[premise]] like this has [[failed]] [[miserably]], even as a slasher [[movie]], except for the first Friday the 13th.

I wanted to get up and stop watching the movie at [[least]] 10 times, but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. [[Usually]], I [[think]] every [[movie]] has [[something]] that you can take from it. This has [[nothing]].

Do yourself a favor, and find something constructive to do for 80 [[minutes]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or eat dirt. First off, I had my doubts just looking at the DVD box and reading it [[telling]] that it was about of bunch of teens gathering at a lake where they will find do or something. Any [[kino]] that has a [[supposition]] like this has [[faulted]] [[woefully]], even as a slasher [[kino]], except for the first Friday the 13th.

I wanted to get up and stop watching the movie at [[fewest]] 10 times, but I just kept thinking that it had to get a little better. It didn't. [[Fluently]], I [[thought]] every [[movies]] has [[anything]] that you can take from it. This has [[anything]].

Do yourself a favor, and find something constructive to do for 80 [[mins]]. Like, give yourself papercuts, or eat dirt. --------------------------------------------- Result 2706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ride with the Devil, like Ang Lee's later Brokeback Mountain, is a film of aesthetic and historical importance. Film lovers ought to see it at minimum twice as its artistic nuance is worthy to be over comprehended.

A perfect piece of art, surprising depth of humanity. I really don't recall another war film, will so capture you, will change your existing conception of history and politics, will restore your belief in humanity. After seeing so many killings, so many sufferings , you don't feel yourself numb, instead you treasure the bond between human beings more. The actors' performances haunt your heart, the music drives your mind. Some shoots, are not just some pictures, they transcend themselves, becoming the seeing of soul. Such is the true sense of film being a genre of art.

A film like this doesn't need long comments or reviews, everything it says by itself. Ovation to the cast which includes Tobey Maguire, Jeffrey Wright and Jewel Kilcher, the cinematographer and the composer of the beautiful and lyrical music, what an achievement! --------------------------------------------- Result 2707 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This show is a [[great]] history [[story]]. It's has everything from [[slavery]],the [[way]] they were treated, religion, the [[ways]] Jews were sent into [[hiding]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[way]] women were [[treated]],including the daughters. Even down to homosexuality. The way the [[characters]] are [[intertwined]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so desperate to be [[loved]] that she destroys everyone [[around]] her.I am so [[glad]] they [[decided]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Although]] I [[would]] love to see the unedited [[version]]. Xica has [[become]] my [[Heroine]]. I [[look]] up to the [[way]] she [[uses]] her power to [[help]] all who [[seek]] it. I [[love]] all the [[characters]] and have [[found]] that they can relate to [[many]] people now in this century. I look forward to my Xica [[every]] night. It [[would]] be [[great]] to dub it in [[English]] so the [[Americans]] can [[love]] her too. This show is a [[large]] history [[history]]. It's has everything from [[enslavement]],the [[manner]] they were treated, religion, the [[way]] Jews were sent into [[disguised]],the inquisition, the belief in the Orisha the African gods, the [[ways]] women were [[processed]],including the daughters. Even down to homosexuality. The way the [[characteristic]] are [[interconnected]] and that Violante, that character saddens me. She is so desperate to be [[enjoyed]] that she destroys everyone [[about]] her.I am so [[gratified]] they [[decides]] to re-release it to t.v. again. [[Despite]] I [[could]] love to see the unedited [[stepping]]. Xica has [[gotten]] my [[Heroin]]. I [[glance]] up to the [[ways]] she [[utilized]] her power to [[support]] all who [[strive]] it. I [[loved]] all the [[character]] and have [[detected]] that they can relate to [[countless]] people now in this century. I look forward to my Xica [[any]] night. It [[could]] be [[gorgeous]] to dub it in [[Brits]] so the [[America]] can [[likes]] her too. --------------------------------------------- Result 2708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I really [[tried]] to like this movie. It deals with an important problem in any society: sex addiction.

In this story we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. In this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his life.

The [[production]] values are [[terrible]]; mainly the acting. Oh, you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you might think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful wife stand all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she believe him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just pointless and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

Avoid this movie. Please, avoid it; it's not soft core, it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic feature. It's a pretentious effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

Only Mrs. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't come back. I really [[strived]] to like this movie. It deals with an important problem in any society: sex addiction.

In this story we learn that you can lose everything when you're addicted to sex. In this case, our main character and hero, for having non-stop sex with all kinds of women (crazy, kinky, neurotic) puts in jeopardy his marriage, job, and even his life.

The [[productivity]] values are [[scary]]; mainly the acting. Oh, you won't enjoy ANY of the sex scenes, most of them are done in very poor taste and you might think you're watching a home made flick.

Second, the plot is just non sense. How could such a smart and beautiful wife stand all the nasty stuff from the husband? How could she believe him?! The threesome situation is priceless and will make you chuckle for a while.

Also, the scene with the black movie theater attendant is just pointless and will leave you thinking "wtf?".

Scenes like those you will find plenty.

Avoid this movie. Please, avoid it; it's not soft core, it's not a documental, it's not a dramatic feature. It's a pretentious effort form a so called documentary director or whatever.

Only Mrs. Kinski's legs on display are worth the watch. I caught it on HBO and I'm glad I didn't spend my money on it. But those 90 minutes of my life won't come back. --------------------------------------------- Result 2709 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was in a [[bad]] [[frame]] of mind when I first [[saw]] this movie. For some [[reason]] it [[clicked]] on all my [[levels]], [[tensions]] in a family, loneliness and the want of someone to share your life with. It didn't hurt that the someone to share your life with was such a beautiful [[girl]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I [[also]] [[bought]] the sound [[track]] to this movie (very hard to get). [[Loved]] it and hope it will someday come out on DV I was in a [[rotten]] [[framework]] of mind when I first [[observed]] this movie. For some [[raison]] it [[ticked]] on all my [[grades]], [[voltage]] in a family, loneliness and the want of someone to share your life with. It didn't hurt that the someone to share your life with was such a beautiful [[chick]] as Claire (Cyndy Preston). I [[further]] [[acquiring]] the sound [[trajectory]] to this movie (very hard to get). [[Liked]] it and hope it will someday come out on DV --------------------------------------------- Result 2710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] First off, I hadn't seen "The Blob" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an adult was an [[incredible]] experience. [[Pages]] could be written on its influence on horror films even today. And even more could be written on its social subtext with the 50s "fear of teenagers". But this simple little [[tale]] of interplanetary horror is still a damn [[fine]] scary [[movie]] if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all get out in our modern world. But "The Blob" packs in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored world. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and believe in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. First off, I hadn't seen "The Blob" since I was 7 or 8 and viewing it as an adult was an [[unimaginable]] experience. [[Page]] could be written on its influence on horror films even today. And even more could be written on its social subtext with the 50s "fear of teenagers". But this simple little [[narratives]] of interplanetary horror is still a damn [[alright]] scary [[filmmaking]] if you let it be.

Sure, it looks cheesy as all get out in our modern world. But "The Blob" packs in some genuinely frightening moments as a band of kids track the unstoppable creature when then adults don't believe them. In fact, there are even some pretty bleak moments in its candy-colored world. And Steve McQueen gives so much more than the story deserved on paper that we the viewers really get caught in the moment and believe in him.

To sum up, if you can take off your postmodern irony filter, there's a lot more to love here than meets the eye. --------------------------------------------- Result 2711 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There is no story! The plot is hopeless! A filmed based on a car with a stuck accelerator, no brakes, and a stuck automatic transmission gear lever cannot be good! I would have stopped that car within one minute whether I was in it or in the police car constantly following it. I feel sorry for the actors that had to put up with such a poor script. The few scenes that some similarity to action was heavily over-dramatized, and as far from reality you can get. In addition, there were a lot of blunders, for instance the hood of the runaway car, which was popped doing 100mph. At first it just folded over the windshield, like it would in reality, but then, afterwards, it blew off. The car was later in the movie observed with the hood on....

This film was nothing but annoying, stay away from it! --------------------------------------------- Result 2712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Buster [[absolutely]] shines in this episode, which is the only vehicle I've [[seen]] towards the [[end]] of the [[career]] that [[allowed]] him to do the [[physical]] (and silent!) comedy that made him famous. It's [[still]] a shock to [[hear]] his gravelly [[voice]] in the talkie sequences - his [[voice]] is about the only thing I don't [[care]] for, as far as Buster is [[concerned]] - but his [[ability]] to [[take]] a pratfall is [[still]] [[unparalleled]]. He even [[repeats]] some of the [[gags]] [[used]] in his [[early]] two-reelers with Roscoe Arbuckle.

My deepest [[gratitude]] to [[Rod]] Serling for [[presenting]] us with this episode, and for giving Buster's [[genius]] full scope. He didn't have much [[time]] (one episode) to do it in, but this is a touching [[tribute]] to Hollywood's [[greatest]] genius. Buster [[altogether]] shines in this episode, which is the only vehicle I've [[noticed]] towards the [[ends]] of the [[vocational]] that [[authorizing]] him to do the [[corporeal]] (and silent!) comedy that made him famous. It's [[nevertheless]] a shock to [[listen]] his gravelly [[vocals]] in the talkie sequences - his [[vocals]] is about the only thing I don't [[caring]] for, as far as Buster is [[worried]] - but his [[capabilities]] to [[taking]] a pratfall is [[nevertheless]] [[unrivaled]]. He even [[repetitions]] some of the [[jokes]] [[utilizing]] in his [[prematurely]] two-reelers with Roscoe Arbuckle.

My deepest [[thank]] to [[Wand]] Serling for [[introducing]] us with this episode, and for giving Buster's [[engineers]] full scope. He didn't have much [[moment]] (one episode) to do it in, but this is a touching [[eulogy]] to Hollywood's [[bigger]] genius. --------------------------------------------- Result 2713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The only [[thing]] that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al Gore is still an [[idiot]]. These "[[unchallenged]]" [[experts]] are unchallenged because a response to their inane hypotheses is generally beneath [[real]] science. This is [[mostly]] [[false]] [[science]] folks. The greatest source of greenhouse [[gases]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're willing to start sacrificing your [[brethren]] to [[save]] the [[world]], there's not a [[darn]] [[thing]] to be [[done]]. We've [[heard]] how the world was [[going]] to [[end]] as the [[result]] of [[man]] for more than 50 years. [[Fools]] [[publish]] a [[time]] line for their doomsday and when the [[time]] passes, [[nothing]] has happened. "An Inconvenient Truth" is just another [[vehicle]] with which a [[disingenuous]] [[faction]] of American [[society]] can peddle their [[poop]].

And as to Al [[leaving]] the [[tobacco]] [[business]] because of his sister's [[death]] from [[cancer]], that is a [[load]] too. Al couldn't run his farm any [[better]] than he [[could]] [[run]] the [[country]]. He was losing [[money]] on the [[operation]] because he didn't [[care]] to farm when he [[could]] [[make]] more $ on speaking tours. The only [[global]] [[warming]] that is [[unchallenged]] is the hot [[air]] produced by this gasbag! The only [[stuff]] that "An Inconvenient Truth" proves is that Al Gore is still an [[knucklehead]]. These "[[uncontested]]" [[specialist]] are unchallenged because a response to their inane hypotheses is generally beneath [[actual]] science. This is [[largely]] [[incorrect]] [[veda]] folks. The greatest source of greenhouse [[gas]] - CO2 - is people, we exhale it and unless you're willing to start sacrificing your [[brothers]] to [[saved]] the [[globe]], there's not a [[thin]] [[stuff]] to be [[completed]]. We've [[listened]] how the world was [[gonna]] to [[ends]] as the [[conclusions]] of [[guy]] for more than 50 years. [[Knuckleheads]] [[published]] a [[times]] line for their doomsday and when the [[moment]] passes, [[anything]] has happened. "An Inconvenient Truth" is just another [[motor]] with which a [[untrue]] [[factions]] of American [[societal]] can peddle their [[caca]].

And as to Al [[letting]] the [[cigarettes]] [[businesses]] because of his sister's [[fatalities]] from [[oncology]], that is a [[loads]] too. Al couldn't run his farm any [[optimum]] than he [[wo]] [[running]] the [[nationals]]. He was losing [[cash]] on the [[operate]] because he didn't [[healthcare]] to farm when he [[wo]] [[deliver]] more $ on speaking tours. The only [[international]] [[reheat]] that is [[uncontested]] is the hot [[airlift]] produced by this gasbag! --------------------------------------------- Result 2714 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm not a big fan of rom/coms at the best of times. A few have been quite good (check of Dream for an Insomniac), but this one is just more of the same but less.

With a running time of 100min, I expect more than 1 laugh every 30mins. The only real belly laugh are when male strangers and friends instinctivly help out Lee's character.

All I can say is AVOID. I gaurentee there is at least 10 other movies on the shelf that deserve you $$

3 of out 10 (And only cos I'm a big Lee fan) --------------------------------------------- Result 2715 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (80%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite disappointed. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The [[visuals]] are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. I wandered into this movie after watching the 82-minute "Borat" tonight, and left quite disappointed. I was a huge fan of Wallace and Gromit, and routinely go to see animated films. That being said, I found myself nodding off and at one point nearly walked out, but stayed waiting for this film to get better. Never happened.

The [[picture]] are stunning and the voice work is top notch, especially in my opinion, that of Kate Winslet and Ian McKellen (I had to remind myself a few times the bulbous headed lizard villain was Gandalf and Magneto). The problem with this movie for me is it's one of those animated features for the ADD-set. It registers after the fact as one zany slapstick routine after another, weighed down by a treacle filled plot that pulls out every stop in an attempt to convey an "Important Message." It looks a lot like busted Oscar bait for the animated category, and considering the way it's scoring with critics, I wouldn't be surprised if the Academy gets it wrong and offers up its hardware. But if you're looking for an enjoyable animated feature about rats, take my advice and wait for Ratatouille. --------------------------------------------- Result 2716 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[wonderful]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very wholesome yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors take the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer Who would think Andy Griffith's "Helen Crump" (Aneta Corsaut) had a Steve McQueen movie in her past? But that is only one of several weird and [[sumptuous]] things about the ultimate 1950s teenagers-battle-creatures movie, which might best be described as Rebel Without A Cause meets God Knows What From Outer Space. The Rebel is Steven McQueen (who would shortly decide that "Steve" sounded less prissy), a good boy with just enough wild to be interesting; the very wholesome yet understanding girlfriend is the aforementioned Aneta Corsaut. It was bad enough when their date was disrupted by teenage hot-rodders, but they are considerably more nonplussed when they encounter a gelatinous, man-eating What Is It that rides down to earth on its own hotrod meteor--and begins gobbling up townfolk right and left. But will the grown ups believe them? Of course not, what do they know, they're just kids!

The movie is teeny bopper at its teeny bopping best. The actors take the rather pretentious script very seriously, with many a soulful look into each other eyes, and the "adult" supporting cast probably says "Kids!" very third sentence or so. But the real pleasure of the film its creature, which is well imagined, well-executed, and often manages to generate a surprising degree of suspense. And although clearly on the cheap side (check out those miniature sets, guys!), THE BLOB is actually a fairly well-made film--and there's that catchy little theme song thrown in for good measure. The 40-plus crowd (myself included) will enjoy the movie as nostalgia, but that won't prevent them from hooting right along with the younger set at its whole-milk-and-white-bread 1950s sensibility, and the film would be a great choice for either family-movie night or a more sophisticated "grown ups only" get together. Make plenty of Jello cubes for movie snacking! Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer --------------------------------------------- Result 2717 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] THE [[NOTORIOUS]] BETTIE PAGE Written by Mary Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has always been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? Especially when that person eventually succumbed to a split personality disorder in her latter [[years]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[shy]] away from [[showing]] the push/pull [[nature]] of THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE. You [[allow]] the [[character]] to [[drift]] back and forth between the healing [[forgiveness]] of the power of God and the church and the seductive illusion of control and dominance afforded to Page during her years as a pinup model. By doing so, audiences are offered a complex character that is propelled forward by a desire to leave her difficult past with a naive enjoyment in others' lust for her and a struggle to reconcile her image in the eyes of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot mostly in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of color), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, humorous comedy, making the film an enjoyable experience and also one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the corruption of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably felt during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate [[director]] who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[surprisingly]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her skin. [[Whereas]] most [[directors]], perhaps most male directors, [[would]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of [[atrocities]] that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much compassion for her character, her actress and her audience. From fragility, Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. THE [[RENOWNED]] BETTIE PAGE Written by Mary Harron & Guinevere Turner Directed by Mary Harron

How do you define a person who has always been between two worlds, one of presumed sin and one of supposed redemption? Especially when that person eventually succumbed to a split personality disorder in her latter [[yrs]] as if to demonstrate her own point. If you're director Mary Harron, you don't [[bashful]] away from [[proving]] the push/pull [[traits]] of THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE. You [[authorizing]] the [[personages]] to [[adrift]] back and forth between the healing [[pardon]] of the power of God and the church and the seductive illusion of control and dominance afforded to Page during her years as a pinup model. By doing so, audiences are offered a complex character that is propelled forward by a desire to leave her difficult past with a naive enjoyment in others' lust for her and a struggle to reconcile her image in the eyes of God. Come the right time, it will no longer matter how many eyes are on her because there is only one pair that counts.

Shot mostly in black and white (with some unnecessary bursts of color), THE NOTORIOUS BETTIE PAGE is at times a light, humorous comedy, making the film an enjoyable experience and also one that pokes fun at how seriously people believe in the corruption of pornography. But the delicate hand of the director is more palpably felt during Page's times of despair. Harron is a sensitive, considerate [[headmaster]] who does not throw Page's numerous and devastating blows of abuse in the face of her viewer. Instead, she allows the [[unimaginably]] effective Gretchen Moll, who plays the title role, the chance to hammer the pain of her character into the viewer with fear in her eyes, exhaustion is her cries and shame on her skin. [[Whilst]] most [[administrators]], perhaps most male directors, [[should]] find it essential to show the heroine in painful positions in order to draw a link between the kinds of [[indignities]] that were put upon her and where her life took her, Harron has too much compassion for her character, her actress and her audience. From fragility, Page learns to trust people again and as more and more photographers fall in love with her image, the more she falls in love with their admiration and the control she has over the gaze. By the time her poses cross over into the realm of soft-core S&M, she has found a way to combine her need to be respected with the objectification she has been accustomed to her whole life.

Mary Harron's Bettie Page is a woman who yearns for control over her life and destiny, yet ultimately is always being told where to stand, how to smile and what to wear. When she finally realizes that none of her choices have been her own, she chooses to embrace God and preach his word to those who will listen. The true sadness behind this most important decision is that she is still letting someone else guide her blindly; she just has more faith that this direction will be better for her soul. --------------------------------------------- Result 2718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Normally I would never rent a movie like this, because you know it's going to be bad just by looking at the box. I rented seven movies at the same time, including Nightmare on Elm Street 5, 6 and Wes Craven's New Nightmare. Unfortunately, when I got home I found out the videostore-guy gave me the wrong tape. In the box of Wes Craven's New Nightmare I found this lame movie.

This movie is incredibly boring, the acting is bad and the plot doesn't make any sense. It's hard to write a good review, because I have no idea what the movie was really about. At the end of the movie you have more questions then answers.

On 'Max Power's Scale of 1 to 10' I rate this movie: 1

PS I would like to correct Corinthian's review (right below mine). He says Robert Englund is ripping off lingerie, riding horses naked, etc. The guy that did those things was Mahmoud, played by Juliano Mer, not by Robert Englund. --------------------------------------------- Result 2719 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Heart pounding erotic drama are the words that come to mind when I think of "Secret Games". It becomes more erotic as the film goes along and at one point [[blew]] me away! I didn't [[expect]] the [[delightful]] scene I was about to [[encounter]]. The "call [[girl]]" has her first customer and what a customer! One of the most erotic lesbian scenes I have ever seen. The husband should have listened to his wife and [[perhaps]] she wouldn't have gone on this erotic [[journey]]. It turned out to cost them in the [[end]] but, it was one exciting ride! GO [[SEE]] THIS MOVIE!!! Heart pounding erotic drama are the words that come to mind when I think of "Secret Games". It becomes more erotic as the film goes along and at one point [[farted]] me away! I didn't [[waits]] the [[pleasant]] scene I was about to [[faced]]. The "call [[daughter]]" has her first customer and what a customer! One of the most erotic lesbian scenes I have ever seen. The husband should have listened to his wife and [[conceivably]] she wouldn't have gone on this erotic [[itinerary]]. It turned out to cost them in the [[ends]] but, it was one exciting ride! GO [[CONSULTS]] THIS MOVIE!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] OK well i found this [[movie]] in my [[dads]] [[old]] [[pile]] of [[movies]] and it [[looked]] [[pretty]] good from the [[cover]] but the [[movie]] [[actually]] [[sucked]]!! OK the [[first]] [[story]] with the [[swimmer]] was pretty [[good]] but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was [[completely]] retarded! It wasn't [[even]] [[scary]]! His [[dream]] sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was [[completely]] retarded too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news [[guy]] and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she [[stabbed]] him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not [[even]] going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that [[scary]] but the [[idea]] of the [[story]] was pretty cool..[[uh]] [[yeah]] the [[girl]] [[gets]] [[possessed]] and she [[kills]] all her classmates or something. [[Then]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their [[dreams]] on the bus(Ha). The End. OK well i found this [[cinematographic]] in my [[popes]] [[former]] [[heaps]] of [[films]] and it [[seemed]] [[quite]] good from the [[coverings]] but the [[kino]] [[genuinely]] [[aspired]]!! OK the [[outset]] [[saga]] with the [[swimming]] was pretty [[buena]] but it took a while to get into, then the one with the boy was [[fully]] retarded! It wasn't [[yet]] [[dreadful]]! His [[daydream]] sounds like a little kid's bedtime story. Then the news girls one was [[fully]] retarded too. I'm sure someones going to call up the news [[fella]] and ask him to go out with you. But that one ended cool where she [[knifed]] him and she was in the hospital and she saw him on t.v and he said all that junk to her. Next was that pretty gay story about the guy who brought back the dead people..OMG its so stupid I'm not [[yet]] going to say any more about it.The last one was the best. It wasn't that [[fearful]] but the [[thoughts]] of the [[storytelling]] was pretty cool..[[um]] [[yes]] the [[giri]] [[got]] [[owning]] and she [[murder]] all her classmates or something. [[Later]] when they're all done telling their dreams to each other the losers get on the bus (TO HELL AHAHAHAH) and they see all the people from their [[nightmares]] on the bus(Ha). The End. --------------------------------------------- Result 2721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] Out of all the Princess stories Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most enduring appeal. I can't really say why, but for some [[reason]], generation after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[girl]], I wanted nothing more than to be Cinderella with her glass slipper- it was my absolute [[favorite]] costume.

[[Honestly]], I don't think there is any story that more realizes the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of daily life and find someone who sees you as no one else ever had? The story is older than the English language and somehow it still rings true.

As for the characters, if nothing else, Disney can make a wonderful villain. Lady Tremaine is evil to the T, in a wonderfully calculating, not overtly physical way. Her cutting tongue and eyes do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to strike fear into your heart. The animal friends tend to grate, especially that idiotic Gus. I would have cheered had he met his fate in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at times. However, she just lacked the drive to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It seems the only reason things work out in the end for Cindy is that everything sort of falls to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

Which brings me to the music, which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my favorite of any Disney heroine. Some big standards originated here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a wonderful heartfelt story with a ton of musical highlights. While it is lacking in some character development, it does provide some classic villains and excellent voice work. If you are feeling sick at heart, pop it in- it'll warm you up and make you hum Mmm Mmm Good!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- Happy Birthday! Out of all the Princess stories Disney has put out there, Cinderella probably has the most enduring appeal. I can't really say why, but for some [[motif]], generation after generation thrusts her to the top of their lists. As a little [[fille]], I wanted nothing more than to be Cinderella with her glass slipper- it was my absolute [[preferable]] costume.

[[Openly]], I don't think there is any story that more realizes the longings of the human heart than Cinderella. Who has never wanted to run away from the drudgeries of daily life and find someone who sees you as no one else ever had? The story is older than the English language and somehow it still rings true.

As for the characters, if nothing else, Disney can make a wonderful villain. Lady Tremaine is evil to the T, in a wonderfully calculating, not overtly physical way. Her cutting tongue and eyes do the work for her- she doesn't need staffs of lightening to strike fear into your heart. The animal friends tend to grate, especially that idiotic Gus. I would have cheered had he met his fate in Lucifer's jaws. Cinderella herself was no pushover- making some justly catty remarks at times. However, she just lacked the drive to make her entirely sympathetic. Sure, she was nice and fed animals, but what was keeping her at that place? We never know. Even if she only became a maid in another house, at least she's be getting paid and have a shot at respect. It seems the only reason things work out in the end for Cindy is that everything sort of falls to place in her lap. She never works for her dreams that she sings so fondly of.

Which brings me to the music, which is lovely, as ever. Ilene woods has a lovely, rich voice, probably my favorite of any Disney heroine. Some big standards originated here- A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes, So This is Love, Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo...

Cinderella is a wonderful heartfelt story with a ton of musical highlights. While it is lacking in some character development, it does provide some classic villains and excellent voice work. If you are feeling sick at heart, pop it in- it'll warm you up and make you hum Mmm Mmm Good!

Quote of the film:

-Surprise! Surprise! -Duh duh duh- Happy Birthday! --------------------------------------------- Result 2722 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Jolie]] is probably one of the most talented actress' today, but a [[movie]] like this isn't just worth her time. She [[deserves]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. Sorry, but i don't feel like writing a review for this.

I give it NO [[stars]] out of *****. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid. I think that Angelina [[Julie]] is probably one of the most talented actress' today, but a [[cinematography]] like this isn't just worth her time. She [[merited]] better, and so does everyone else in this movie. Talent is just wasted. Sorry, but i don't feel like writing a review for this.

I give it NO [[superstar]] out of *****. --------------------------------------------- Result 2723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Kings and Queen" is a [[bloated]] French drama that rambles on for an [[interminable]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no discernible point or purpose.

The film features two [[stories]] that seem unrelated at first but which eventually connect with one another about halfway through the movie. The first centers around Nora and her struggles with various men in her life, including an elderly father who discovers he has only a few days left to live. The other story involves a young man named Ismael, a violinist who finds himself placed - unfairly, he believes - in a mental institution through the machinations of an unknown third party. After traveling along on separate tracks for awhile, these two narrative strands eventually come together when we learn that Ismael is a former lover of Nora's and the man she has chosen to adopt her son from an earlier, tragic relationship.

With a bit more focus and a considerable amount of streamlining, "Kings and Queen" might have been a potent, engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most part, complex and touching. But, taken as a whole, the film meanders and maunders to such an extent that, quite frankly, it begins to wreak havoc on our patience and to wear out its welcome early on. Even more distressing is the fact that, even though we spend what seems like a mild eternity in the company of these people, we really don't know quite what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For instance, Nora's father, on his deathbed, writes a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that simply doesn't gibe with the woman we've been looking at for well over two hours. Nora is admittedly no Mother Theresa (then, again, who is?), but she certainly doesn't deserve the invective thrown at her by her very own father. Nora could be accused of being confused, indecisive, a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her father wishing he could give her his cancer and make her die in his place? I don't think so.

Perhaps this film is simply operating at a level of depth that I was unable to fathom. But my suspicion is that even writer Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble fully explaining their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more enlightened at the end than he was at the beginning. "Kings and Queen" is a [[puffy]] French drama that rambles on for an [[neverending]] two hours and thirty-two minutes to no discernible point or purpose.

The film features two [[storytelling]] that seem unrelated at first but which eventually connect with one another about halfway through the movie. The first centers around Nora and her struggles with various men in her life, including an elderly father who discovers he has only a few days left to live. The other story involves a young man named Ismael, a violinist who finds himself placed - unfairly, he believes - in a mental institution through the machinations of an unknown third party. After traveling along on separate tracks for awhile, these two narrative strands eventually come together when we learn that Ismael is a former lover of Nora's and the man she has chosen to adopt her son from an earlier, tragic relationship.

With a bit more focus and a considerable amount of streamlining, "Kings and Queen" might have been a potent, engrossing drama about modern day relationships. It certainly has moments of tremendous insight and emotional power, and the performances are, for the most part, complex and touching. But, taken as a whole, the film meanders and maunders to such an extent that, quite frankly, it begins to wreak havoc on our patience and to wear out its welcome early on. Even more distressing is the fact that, even though we spend what seems like a mild eternity in the company of these people, we really don't know quite what to make of any of them when the show is finally over. For instance, Nora's father, on his deathbed, writes a withering diatribe against his daughter's character that simply doesn't gibe with the woman we've been looking at for well over two hours. Nora is admittedly no Mother Theresa (then, again, who is?), but she certainly doesn't deserve the invective thrown at her by her very own father. Nora could be accused of being confused, indecisive, a bit self-absorbed at times, but evil enough to have her father wishing he could give her his cancer and make her die in his place? I don't think so.

Perhaps this film is simply operating at a level of depth that I was unable to fathom. But my suspicion is that even writer Roger Bohbot and co-writer/director Arnaud Desplechin would have trouble fully explaining their purpose here. This is a well acted, pretentious bore of a film that takes the viewer on a long, rambling voyage through a sea of personal crises, a journey that leaves him no wiser or more enlightened at the end than he was at the beginning. --------------------------------------------- Result 2724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] It does [[seem]] like this film is polarizing us. You either [[love]] it or [[hate]] it. I [[loved]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that said, you just gotta "feel" this one.

Also, early in the film, Tom Cruise shows his girlfriend a painting done by Monet--an impressionist painter. Monet's style is to paint in little dabs so up close the painting looks like a mess, but from a distance, you can tell what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla sky". I believe this is a hint to the moviegoer. This movie is like that impressionist painting. It's impressionist filmmaking! And it's no coincidence that the title of the movie refers to that painting.

This is not your typical linear plot. It requires more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not always going to be sure what's going on. But at the end, all is explained.

You will need to concentrate on this movie but I think people are making the mistake of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should think about it. If you try to figure it out as it's unfolding, you will overwhelm yourself. Just let it happen..."go" with it...keep an open mind. Remember what you see and save the analysis for later.

I found all the performances top notch and thought it to be tremendously unique, wildly creative, and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't enjoy it. It appeals to a certain taste. If you like existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, challenging, spiritual movies, then see it. If you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will surely enjoy it. It does [[looks]] like this film is polarizing us. You either [[iove]] it or [[despise]] it. I [[worshipped]] it.

I agree with the comment(s) that said, you just gotta "feel" this one.

Also, early in the film, Tom Cruise shows his girlfriend a painting done by Monet--an impressionist painter. Monet's style is to paint in little dabs so up close the painting looks like a mess, but from a distance, you can tell what the subject is. Cruise mentions that the painting has a "vanilla sky". I believe this is a hint to the moviegoer. This movie is like that impressionist painting. It's impressionist filmmaking! And it's no coincidence that the title of the movie refers to that painting.

This is not your typical linear plot. It requires more thought. There is symbolism and there are scenes that jump around and no, you're not always going to be sure what's going on. But at the end, all is explained.

You will need to concentrate on this movie but I think people are making the mistake of concentrating way too hard on it. After it ends is when you should think about it. If you try to figure it out as it's unfolding, you will overwhelm yourself. Just let it happen..."go" with it...keep an open mind. Remember what you see and save the analysis for later.

I found all the performances top notch and thought it to be tremendously unique, wildly creative, and spellbinding.

But I will not critize the intelligence of those of you who didn't enjoy it. It appeals to a certain taste. If you like existential, psychedelic, philosophical, thought-provoking, challenging, spiritual movies, then see it. If you prefer something a little lighter, then skip it.

But if you DO like what I described, then you will surely enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] I just [[finished]] watching this [[movie]] and I [[found]] it was [[basically]] just not [[funny]] at all.

I'm an RPG Gamer (computer [[type]], [[none]] of the DnD [[tabletop]] [[stuff]]) but I [[found]] [[none]] of the [[jokes]] in this [[funny]] at all.

Some of the scenes seemed to drag out a lot (tilt and zoom could've been [[cut]] down to 5seconds [[rather]] than over a minute) and it [[feels]] as [[though]] the [[director]] was just [[trying]] to [[fill]] in time.

I think I laughed a [[total]] of 2-3 [[times]] in the [[entire]] [[movie]].

The acting itself wasn't all that [[bad]], [[around]] the standard that a B [[Grade]] [[movie]] should have.

I'd suggest not [[bothering]] with this [[movie]] [[unless]] you're a [[huge]] DnD [[fan]] and even then it would [[probably]] be [[best]] to steer [[clear]] of it. I just [[finishing]] watching this [[cinematography]] and I [[uncovered]] it was [[predominantly]] just not [[comical]] at all.

I'm an RPG Gamer (computer [[kind]], [[nil]] of the DnD [[desktop]] [[thing]]) but I [[finds]] [[nil]] of the [[pranks]] in this [[fun]] at all.

Some of the scenes seemed to drag out a lot (tilt and zoom could've been [[chop]] down to 5seconds [[somewhat]] than over a minute) and it [[thinks]] as [[albeit]] the [[superintendent]] was just [[seek]] to [[fills]] in time.

I think I laughed a [[whole]] of 2-3 [[dates]] in the [[whole]] [[cinema]].

The acting itself wasn't all that [[negative]], [[throughout]] the standard that a B [[Octane]] [[cinematography]] should have.

I'd suggest not [[teasing]] with this [[film]] [[if]] you're a [[overwhelming]] DnD [[admirer]] and even then it would [[undeniably]] be [[nicest]] to steer [[unmistakable]] of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2726 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This [[movie]] appears to have been [[made]] by [[someone]] with some [[good]] ideas but who [[also]] never had [[made]] a [[movie]] before nor had they [[considered]] that a script should be edited or [[even]] [[funny]]. When I [[saw]] this film, I saw it for [[John]] Candy and [[assumed]], incorrectly, that it [[would]] be hilarious. [[Instead]], there was a [[stupid]] plot about mind control and so [[many]] flat, unfunny moments. And, to [[top]] it off, Candy [[delivered]] some of the crudest lines I had ever [[heard]] up to that time. So, [[despite]] a [[potentially]] [[funny]] cast and [[story]] [[idea]], we are left with an amateurish and [[crude]] [[movie]] that will [[probably]] be too [[stupid]] for the average [[adult]], [[though]] [[teens]] will [[probably]] [[find]] a few [[laughs]]. It's really a shame--it could have been so much better. I mean, with [[Eugene]] [[Levy]], Joe Flaherty and [[John]] [[Candy]] it [[SHOULD]] have been [[wonderful]]. This [[cinema]] appears to have been [[accomplished]] by [[everybody]] with some [[alright]] ideas but who [[similarly]] never had [[brought]] a [[flick]] before nor had they [[regarded]] that a script should be edited or [[yet]] [[hilarious]]. When I [[noticed]] this film, I saw it for [[Giovanni]] Candy and [[shouldered]], incorrectly, that it [[ought]] be hilarious. [[Alternatively]], there was a [[foolish]] plot about mind control and so [[several]] flat, unfunny moments. And, to [[superior]] it off, Candy [[gave]] some of the crudest lines I had ever [[audition]] up to that time. So, [[while]] a [[conceivably]] [[hilarious]] cast and [[tales]] [[thinks]], we are left with an amateurish and [[rough]] [[cinematography]] that will [[maybe]] be too [[dumb]] for the average [[mature]], [[while]] [[teenager]] will [[arguably]] [[found]] a few [[giggles]]. It's really a shame--it could have been so much better. I mean, with [[Jose]] [[Levi]], Joe Flaherty and [[Jon]] [[Sweets]] it [[MUST]] have been [[wondrous]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2727 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] I really [[liked]] this [[movie]] I [[saw]] the original classic a few times but could [[hardly]] [[remember]] any [[details]]. I [[think]] this [[movie]] is [[much]] [[better]] than the cartoon its not so [[black]] and white as it. I [[specially]] [[liked]] how they [[made]] the grinch such a [[complete]] [[character]] and [[gave]] a cause of why he was the [[way]] he was, the [[villain]] in this [[movie]] was not the [[actual]] Grinch but the [[Major]], [[much]] [[different]] than the original [[cartoon]]. Jim [[Carrey]] was perfect for the [[part]] all in all a great [[movie]] [[made]] for both [[kids]] and adults alike. I really [[wished]] this [[filmmaking]] I [[sawthe]] the original classic a few times but could [[practically]] [[remembering]] any [[detail]]. I [[ideas]] this [[cinematographic]] is [[very]] [[optimum]] than the cartoon its not so [[negra]] and white as it. I [[notably]] [[wished]] how they [[effected]] the grinch such a [[finish]] [[trait]] and [[given]] a cause of why he was the [[manner]] he was, the [[scoundrel]] in this [[film]] was not the [[real]] Grinch but the [[Big]], [[very]] [[multiple]] than the original [[caricature]]. Jim [[Cary]] was perfect for the [[parties]] all in all a great [[kino]] [[brought]] for both [[brats]] and adults alike. --------------------------------------------- Result 2728 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The [[basic]] plot in this movie isn't bad. A [[lady]] makes it big and comes back to her alma mater to be [[adored]]. But, [[despite]] [[good]] acting by Robert Young and Eve Arden, the movie is a mess. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the director or both, as her performance is just [[awful]]. Instead of being a real [[person]], she does a wonderful [[impersonation]] of a deer [[caught]] in the [[headlights]]. In other words, she [[stares]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[stunned]]" [[expression]]. After just a few [[minutes]] it [[really]] became [[annoying]] for me. Now this is [[certainly]] not the only Crawford [[film]] I dislike for her performance, as she had [[done]] more than her share of overacting--in [[films]] such as [[JOHNNY]] GUITAR or [[many]] of her [[later]] [[films]], such as BERSERK! My advice is to [[try]] a [[different]] Crawford film--there [[certainly]] were [[better]]. The [[fundamental]] plot in this movie isn't bad. A [[milady]] makes it big and comes back to her alma mater to be [[worshipped]]. But, [[while]] [[alright]] acting by Robert Young and Eve Arden, the movie is a mess. The blame for this I place on either Joan Crawford or the director or both, as her performance is just [[scary]]. Instead of being a real [[individuals]], she does a wonderful [[imitation]] of a deer [[capture]] in the [[spotlights]]. In other words, she [[gazes]] off into space and has a "golly I am SOOOO [[surprised]]" [[words]]. After just a few [[mins]] it [[genuinely]] became [[vexing]] for me. Now this is [[unquestionably]] not the only Crawford [[films]] I dislike for her performance, as she had [[played]] more than her share of overacting--in [[cinematographic]] such as [[JONI]] GUITAR or [[numerous]] of her [[subsequent]] [[cinematography]], such as BERSERK! My advice is to [[strive]] a [[diverse]] Crawford film--there [[definitively]] were [[optimum]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2729 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] And this is a [[great]] rock'n'roll [[movie]] in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate [[movies]] in which [[kids]] want to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday Weld gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, repeat the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the elements of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the great stoopid movies of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new DVD to a friend who could only remember seeing parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the great movies to be watching drunk, not the least for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. And this is a [[large]] rock'n'roll [[movies]] in itself. No matter how it evolved (at point being a movie about disco), it ended up as one of the ultimate [[kino]] in which [[infantile]] want to rock out, but the principal stands in their way. Think back to those rock'n'roll movies of the 50's in which the day is saved when Alan Freed comes to town with Chuck Berry to prove that Rock & Roll Music is really cool and safe for the kids, and Tuesday Weld gets a new sweater for the dance. Forward to the 1979, repeat the same plot, but throw in DA RAMONES, whom no one then realized would become one of the most influential bands of the next quarter century (and then for the obligatory DJ guest shot, "The Real" Don Steele). Throw in, too, all the elements of a Roger Corman-produced comedy-exploitation film, except for the two-day shooting schedule, some of the familiar Corman repertory players like Clint Howard, Mary Wournow and Dick Miller (there since "Bucket of Blood"), and you've got one of the great stoopid movies of the day. One of the few films that uses deliberate cheesiness and gets away with it. I showed the new DVD to a friend who could only remember seeing parts of it through a stoner- induced haze at the drive-in, and he agreed that this is one of the great movies to be watching drunk, not the least for the lovely leading ladies and the great Ramones footage. --------------------------------------------- Result 2730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] John Boorman's 1998 The [[General]] was [[hailed]] as a major comeback, though it's [[hard]] to [[see]] why on the [[evidence]] of the [[film]] itself. One of three [[films]] [[made]] that year about [[famed]] [[Northern]] [[Irish]] criminal [[Martin]] Cahill ([[alongside]] Ordinary [[Decent]] Criminal and [[Vicious]] Circles), it has an abundance of incident and style (the film was [[shot]] in colour but [[released]] in b&w Scope in some [[territories]]) but makes [[absolutely]] no impact and just goes on [[forever]]. With a [[main]] [[character]] who [[threatens]] witnesses, [[car]] [[bombs]] doctors, causes a [[hundred]] people to [[lose]] their jobs, tries to buy off the sexually abused [[daughter]] of one of his gang to keep out of [[jail]] and [[nails]] one of his own to a snooker table [[yet]] [[still]] remains a popular local legend an [[attractive]] enough personality for his wife to not only approve but [[actually]] [[suggest]] a ménage a trios with her [[sister]], it [[needs]] a charismatic central performance to [[sell]] the character and the film. It doesn't [[get]] it. [[Instead]], it's lumbered with what may well be Brendan Gleeson's [[worst]] and most disinterested performance: he [[delivers]] his lines and stands in the right [[place]] but there's nothing to suggest [[either]] a local [[hero]] or the [[inner]] workings of a [[complex]] [[character]]. [[On]] the [[plus]] side, this [[helps]] not to overglamorize a [[character]] who is nothing more than an egotistical thug, but it's at [[odds]] with a [[script]] that seems to be [[expecting]] us to love him and his antics.

There's a [[minor]] section that picks up interest when the IRA whips up a local [[hate]] [[campaign]] against the 'General' and his men, [[painting]] them as 'anti-social' [[drug]] dealers [[purely]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a robbery with them, but its [[temporary]] [[resolution]] is so [[vaguely]] shot - [[something]] to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and joining the [[protesters]] which we're [[expected]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just [[thrown]] away. [[Things]] are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls apart, but by then it's too late to really [[care]]. Adrian Dunbar, Maria Doyle Kennedy and the [[gorgeous]] Angeline Ball do good work in adoring [[supporting]] roles, but [[Jon]] Voight's hammy Garda [[beat]] cop [[seems]] to be there more for American [[sales]] than moral balance, overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. John Boorman's 1998 The [[Generals]] was [[welcomed]] as a major comeback, though it's [[difficult]] to [[consults]] why on the [[testimony]] of the [[cinema]] itself. One of three [[film]] [[accomplished]] that year about [[proverbial]] [[Nord]] [[Ireland]] criminal [[Martine]] Cahill ([[beside]] Ordinary [[Presentable]] Criminal and [[Cruel]] Circles), it has an abundance of incident and style (the film was [[filmed]] in colour but [[releases]] in b&w Scope in some [[lands]]) but makes [[entirely]] no impact and just goes on [[perpetuity]]. With a [[primary]] [[nature]] who [[threatened]] witnesses, [[vehicles]] [[blasts]] doctors, causes a [[hundreds]] people to [[losing]] their jobs, tries to buy off the sexually abused [[girl]] of one of his gang to keep out of [[internment]] and [[fingernails]] one of his own to a snooker table [[however]] [[however]] remains a popular local legend an [[tempting]] enough personality for his wife to not only approve but [[indeed]] [[suggests]] a ménage a trios with her [[sisters]], it [[must]] a charismatic central performance to [[sold]] the character and the film. It doesn't [[gets]] it. [[However]], it's lumbered with what may well be Brendan Gleeson's [[lousiest]] and most disinterested performance: he [[offer]] his lines and stands in the right [[placing]] but there's nothing to suggest [[neither]] a local [[heroin]] or the [[indoor]] workings of a [[difficult]] [[nature]]. [[Onto]] the [[longer]] side, this [[assists]] not to overglamorize a [[nature]] who is nothing more than an egotistical thug, but it's at [[probabilities]] with a [[screenplay]] that seems to be [[awaiting]] us to love him and his antics.

There's a [[smaller]] section that picks up interest when the IRA whips up a local [[hating]] [[campaigns]] against the 'General' and his men, [[paints]] them as 'anti-social' [[medicines]] dealers [[only]] because Cahill won't share his loot from a robbery with them, but its [[transient]] [[resolve]] is so [[loosely]] shot - [[somethin]] to do with Cahill donning a balaclava and joining the [[demonstrators]] which we're [[scheduled]] to find lovably cheeky - that it's just [[hurled]] away. [[Matters]] are more successful in the last third as the pressure mounts and his army falls apart, but by then it's too late to really [[healthcare]]. Adrian Dunbar, Maria Doyle Kennedy and the [[wondrous]] Angeline Ball do good work in adoring [[helped]] roles, but [[John]] Voight's hammy Garda [[defeat]] cop [[looks]] to be there more for American [[sale]] than moral balance, overcompensating for Gleeson's comatose non-involvement in what feels like a total misfire. Come back Zardoz, all is forgiven. --------------------------------------------- Result 2731 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[finest]] [[film]] ever made in Indian Cinema. Directed by the great director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. [[Even]] today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[tells]] the Real-life [[Scenario]] of [[Mumbai]] [[Police]] of the 70s. Unlike any Police of other cities in India, Mumbai [[Police]] [[encompasses]] a [[Different]] system altogether. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical [[Outlay]] with real life [[approach]] of [[Mumbai]] [[Police]] [[Environment]].

Amongst [[various]] [[Police]] [[officers]] & colleagues, the [[film]] [[describes]] the [[story]] of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Cop]] [[coming]] from a poor [[family]]. [[His]] father is a [[harsh]] [[Police]] [[Constable]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards immediate action against crime, is an inert craving for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here revolved in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against crime are trampled by his seniors.This leads to [[frustrations]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the [[frustrations]], his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is still alive, as he constantly fights the system. He is aware of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly associated by far end. His compromise [[towards]] unethical practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The Direction is a [[master]] piece & thoroughly hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's house to arrest him, followed by short conversation which is fantastic. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. Alcoholism, [[Corruption]], Political Influence, [[Courage]], Deceptions all are integral part of Mumbai police even today. Those [[aspects]] are dealt [[brilliantly]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[man]] [[show]], Om Puri [[portraying]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[emotions]] [[absolutely]] [[brilliantly]]. "Ardh Satya" is one of the [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] ever made in Indian Cinema. Directed by the great director Govind Nihalani, this one is the most successful Hard Hitting Parallel Cinema which also turned out to be a Commercial Success. [[Yet]] today, Ardh Satya is an inspiration for all leading directors of India.

The film [[says]] the Real-life [[Screenplay]] of [[Hyderabad]] [[Nypd]] of the 70s. Unlike any Police of other cities in India, Mumbai [[Policemen]] [[consists]] a [[Varying]] system altogether. Govind Nihalani creates a very practical [[Expenses]] with real life [[approaches]] of [[Bangalore]] [[Policing]] [[Environments]].

Amongst [[different]] [[Constabulary]] [[officer]] & colleagues, the [[kino]] [[describing]] the [[conte]] of Anand Velankar, a young hot-blooded [[Policemen]] [[arriving]] from a poor [[familia]]. [[Her]] father is a [[tough]] [[Constabulary]] [[Constabulary]]. Anand himself suffers from his father's ideologies & incidences of his father's Atrocities on his mother. Anand's approach towards immediate action against crime, is an inert craving for his own Job satisfaction. The film is here revolved in a Plot wherein Anand's constant efforts against crime are trampled by his seniors.This leads to [[disappointments]], as he cannot achieve the desired Job-satisfaction. Resulting from the [[disappointments]], his anger is expressed in excessive violence in the remand rooms & bars, also turning him to an alcoholic.

The Spirit within him is still alive, as he constantly fights the system. He is aware of the system of the Metro, where the Police & Politicians are a inertly associated by far end. His compromise [[circa]] unethical practice is negative. Finally he gets suspended.

The Direction is a [[masters]] piece & thoroughly hard core. One of the best memorable scenes is when Anand breaks in the Underworld gangster Rama Shetty's house to arrest him, followed by short conversation which is fantastic. At many scenes, the film has Hair-raising moments.

The Practical approach of Script is a major Punch. Alcoholism, [[Bribery]], Political Influence, [[Valor]], Deceptions all are integral part of Mumbai police even today. Those [[things]] are dealt [[marvellously]].

Finally, the films belongs to the One [[guy]] [[spectacle]], Om Puri [[detailing]] Anand Velankar traversing through all his [[sentiments]] [[altogether]] [[marvellously]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2732 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[stumbled]] on this late last [[night]] n TCM.

Hadn't [[seen]] it [[since]] it [[came]] out originally, but had never [[forgotten]] it.

I had [[completely]] [[forgotten]] how [[gorgeous]] and talented Signe Hasso was when she was still [[young]], [[ditto]] for [[Shelly]] Winters before she balooned out.

[[Ronald]] Coleman, though, was the quintessential state [[actor]] of his [[time]] - I had read Othello in [[high]] school English - and HATED it. After seeing "A Double [[Life]]" I read it again and [[finally]] [[understood]] what the play was about.

The [[Gordon]]/Kanin writing team was at its [[peak]] when this script was done -

A [[movie]] well worth [[remembering]] and rewatching, I [[slumped]] on this late last [[nuit]] n TCM.

Hadn't [[watched]] it [[because]] it [[became]] out originally, but had never [[disregarded]] it.

I had [[utterly]] [[ignored]] how [[ravishing]] and talented Signe Hasso was when she was still [[youthful]], [[idem]] for [[Shelley]] Winters before she balooned out.

[[Hsia]] Coleman, though, was the quintessential state [[actress]] of his [[moment]] - I had read Othello in [[alto]] school English - and HATED it. After seeing "A Double [[Vie]]" I read it again and [[ultimately]] [[fathom]] what the play was about.

The [[Gordo]]/Kanin writing team was at its [[crest]] when this script was done -

A [[cinematography]] well worth [[remembered]] and rewatching, --------------------------------------------- Result 2733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[tend]] to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all films starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are always entertaining. There is no rule without exception, however, as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's Possessed" (1974) proves. [[While]] the film does have the specific Naschy-flick-charm, it [[sadly]] drags far too much and gets really, really [[dull]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets quite boring throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the case with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! I [[trends]] to love everything the great late Paul Naschy (R.I.P.) ever was in. While not all films starring Naschy are great, they all have a specific charm that can be found nowhere but in Naschy-flicks, and they are always entertaining. There is no rule without exception, however, as "El Mariscal Del Infierno" aka. "The Devil's Possessed" (1974) proves. [[Albeit]] the film does have the specific Naschy-flick-charm, it [[tragically]] drags far too much and gets really, really [[uninspiring]] in-between. Naschy stars as the evil Baron Gilles De Lancré, who oppresses the people and uses black magic and bloody rituals to stay in power. When Gaston de Malebranche (Guillermo Bredeston), who fought side by side with Gilles De Lancré against the British, learns about the Baron's evil behavior, he decides to turn against his former comrade in arms and help the people free themselves from the satanic Baron's tyranny...

Directed by León Klimovsky, who is best known for directing Naschy in "La Noche De Walpurgis" ("The Werewolf Vs. The Vampire Woman", 1971), the film was scripted by Naschy himself. Naschy often scripted his own films, and one must say that he mostly did a better, more original job than it is the case here. "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is mostly built up as a historical adventure rather than a Horror film, and it gets quite boring throughout the middle. It often resembles the Sword and Sandal films from the 50s, only that this film is set in medieval times. The Satanic part was probably only added because the great Paul Naschy's name is linked to the Horror genre. The film has its good parts: Paul Naschy giving weird speeches, Paul Naschy looking weird, Paul Naschy doing Satanic stuff, Paul Naschy torturing innocent victims, etc. But sadly, most of the film concentrates on the boring hero and the good guys, and these moments are boring. The female cast members are nice to look at, but, unlike most Naschy films, this one features no nudity and sleaze. There is some gore, but it mostly looks clumsy and isn't as fun too look at as it is the case with most other Naschy films. Overall, "El Mariscal Del Infierno" is only worth a look for my fellow Naschy-enthusiasts. There are dozens of films starring the Spanish Horror deity which should be seen before this one, such as "El Jorobado De La Morgue" ("The Hunchback of the Morgue", 1973), "La Orgia De Los Muertos" ("The Hanging Woman", 1973), "El Espanto Surge De La Tumba" ("Horror Rises From The Tomb", 1973), "Latidos De Panico" ("Panic Beats", 1983), "Rojo Sangre" (2004), or any of the 'Waldemar Daninsky' werewolf films. R.I.P. Paul Naschy. Legends never die! --------------------------------------------- Result 2734 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Maybe]] it's the [[dubbing]], or [[maybe]] it's the [[endless]] scenes of people [[crying]], [[moaning]] or [[otherwise]] [[carrying]] on, but I found [[Europa]] '51 to be one of the most [[overwrought]] (and [[therefore]] [[annoying]]) films I've ever seen. The film [[starts]] out promisingly if familiarly, as [[mom]] Ingrid Bergman is too busy to spend time with her spoiled brat of a son (Sandro Franchina). Whilst [[mummy]] and daddy (bland Alexander Knox) entertain their guests at a dinner party, the youngster tries to kill himself, setting in motion a life changing series of events that find Bergman spending time showering compassion on the poor and needy. Spurred on by Communist newspaper editor Andrea (Ettore Giannini), she soon spends more time with the downtrodden than she does with her husband, who soon locks her up in an insane asylum for her troubles. Bergman plays the saint role to the hilt, echoing her 1948 role as Joan of Arc, and Rossellini does a fantastic job of lighting and filming her to best effect. Unfortunately, the script pounds its point home with ham-fisted subtlety, as Andrea and Mom take turns declaiming Marxist and Christian platitudes. By the final tear soaked scene, I had had more than my fill of these tiresome characters. A real step down for Rossellini as he stepped away from neo-realism and further embraced the mythical and mystical themes of 1950's Flowers of St. Francis. [[Probably]] it's the [[copying]], or [[probably]] it's the [[interminable]] scenes of people [[mourn]], [[whining]] or [[alternately]] [[transporting]] on, but I found [[Europe]] '51 to be one of the most [[overworked]] (and [[so]] [[galling]]) films I've ever seen. The film [[begin]] out promisingly if familiarly, as [[mama]] Ingrid Bergman is too busy to spend time with her spoiled brat of a son (Sandro Franchina). Whilst [[mama]] and daddy (bland Alexander Knox) entertain their guests at a dinner party, the youngster tries to kill himself, setting in motion a life changing series of events that find Bergman spending time showering compassion on the poor and needy. Spurred on by Communist newspaper editor Andrea (Ettore Giannini), she soon spends more time with the downtrodden than she does with her husband, who soon locks her up in an insane asylum for her troubles. Bergman plays the saint role to the hilt, echoing her 1948 role as Joan of Arc, and Rossellini does a fantastic job of lighting and filming her to best effect. Unfortunately, the script pounds its point home with ham-fisted subtlety, as Andrea and Mom take turns declaiming Marxist and Christian platitudes. By the final tear soaked scene, I had had more than my fill of these tiresome characters. A real step down for Rossellini as he stepped away from neo-realism and further embraced the mythical and mystical themes of 1950's Flowers of St. Francis. --------------------------------------------- Result 2735 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I enjoyed the feel of the [[opening]] few minutes, but 20-minutes in I was liberally [[applying]] the fast-forward [[button]]. Far too [[many]] shots of Stewart (Michael Zelniker) walking from room to room, down hallways, through doors and down the street, and as many shots of him [[looking]] pensive and confused. [[Gave]] me the [[impression]] that the story had originally been meant as a short (20-30 minutes), and then stretched into a feature as a labour of love between director Grieve and star Zelniker (they co-wrote the screenplay).

It might have been more entertaining if any of the characters had anything to say that I hadn't heard said in many other films before, or if the ending wasn't - disappointingly - the one I had predicted three minutes into the film (atypical for an independent/smaller studio film). At least its heart was in the right place - it wasn't your standard formulaic Hollywood manipulative nonsense. I enjoyed the feel of the [[opens]] few minutes, but 20-minutes in I was liberally [[apply]] the fast-forward [[zit]]. Far too [[several]] shots of Stewart (Michael Zelniker) walking from room to room, down hallways, through doors and down the street, and as many shots of him [[search]] pensive and confused. [[Delivered]] me the [[printing]] that the story had originally been meant as a short (20-30 minutes), and then stretched into a feature as a labour of love between director Grieve and star Zelniker (they co-wrote the screenplay).

It might have been more entertaining if any of the characters had anything to say that I hadn't heard said in many other films before, or if the ending wasn't - disappointingly - the one I had predicted three minutes into the film (atypical for an independent/smaller studio film). At least its heart was in the right place - it wasn't your standard formulaic Hollywood manipulative nonsense. --------------------------------------------- Result 2736 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This gets a two because I liked it as a kid, but it became so [[redundant]] that I just started to [[hate]] it... I can't give this a descriptive review because it would be restating one thing after the other, I probably wouldn't say anything that everyone else didn't say already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted babysitter to the stupidity that runs around and about in it. I have a [[cousin]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and dumbest person I have met. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same thing over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting really really tired of stuff like this. This gets a two because I liked it as a kid, but it became so [[unnecessary]] that I just started to [[dislikes]] it... I can't give this a descriptive review because it would be restating one thing after the other, I probably wouldn't say anything that everyone else didn't say already.

The only other thing about this show is that it's pretty nasty, with the kid with the boil to that twisted babysitter to the stupidity that runs around and about in it. I have a [[homey]] that loves this show and he's the strangest and dumbest person I have met. This show should be pulled from the air. It's always the same thing over and over... They need to put better shows on Nick. I'm getting really really tired of stuff like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2737 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some [[exploitation]] [[monger]], this is [[dull]] and hard to watch.

Not the [[worst]] [[movie]] ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real [[actor]] or two. I'd [[recommend]] _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.

Don't [[believe]] me? Watch it for free (albeit sourced from poor VHS) here: http://www.archive.org/details/Thief-In-The-Night

Relevant links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3199/thief-in-the-night-se-a/ Written and acted by sincere amateurs, produced by some [[operate]] [[mongers]], this is [[uninspiring]] and hard to watch.

Not the [[hardest]] [[kino]] ever, but at least schlock like _Plan 9 From Outer Space_ usually had a real [[protagonist]] or two. I'd [[recommending]] _A Thief In The Night_ only to hardcore ironists and hardcore Dispensationalists. I'm neither.

Don't [[think]] me? Watch it for free (albeit sourced from poor VHS) here: http://www.archive.org/details/Thief-In-The-Night

Relevant links added mostly to reach IMDb's 10-line minimum: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/3199/thief-in-the-night-se-a/ --------------------------------------------- Result 2738 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This "[[clever]]" film was originally a Japanese [[film]]. And while I [[assume]] that original film was pretty bad, it was [[made]] a [[good]] bit [[worse]] when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your [[audience]] is [[made]] of [[total]] idiots, it becomes painfully obvious that this was done--and [[done]] with [[little]] finesse or care about the [[final]] [[product]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[clearly]] American scenes where the film [[looks]] [[quite]] different. Plus, the American scenes [[really]] are [[meaningless]] and consist of two [[different]] [[groups]] of people at [[meetings]] just [[talking]] about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[flying]] and [[destructive]] [[monster]], there is [[practically]] no [[energy]] because I [[assume]] the [[actors]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[wretched]] film--in [[particular]], [[film]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Albert]] Dekker. They both just [[looked]] [[tired]] and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monster]], it's not [[quite]] the standard Godzilla-like [[creature]]. [[Seeing]] a [[giant]] fanged [[turtle]] retract his [[head]] and limbs and [[begin]] spinning through the [[air]] like a [[missile]] is hilarious. [[On]] the other hand, the crappy [[model]] planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[plant]] are, as usual, in this [[film]] and [[come]] as no [[surprise]]. Plus an [[odd]] Japanese [[monster]] [[movie]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[audience]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[little]] [[boy]] who [[loves]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yeah]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA [[VERSUS]] THE [[SMOG]] [[MONSTER]] and [[several]] other [[films]], you've [[got]] this [[annoying]] creep [[cheering]] on the monster, [[though]] unlike [[later]] incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOT]] a good [[guy]] and it [[turns]] out in the [[end]] the [[kid]] is just an idiot! [[Silly]], [[exceptional]] [[poor]] [[special]] [[effects]] that [[could]] be [[done]] [[better]] by the average seven year-old, [[bad]] acting, [[meaningless]] American clips and [[occasionally]] [[horrid]] [[voice]] dubbing make this a [[wretched]] [[film]]. [[Oddly]], while most will [[surely]] hate this [[film]] (and that [[stupid]] kid), there is a [[small]] and very [[vocal]] minority that love these [[films]] and compare them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[believe]] them--this IS a [[terrible]] [[film]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[terrific]] stage presence, Gamera was [[featured]] in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these [[change]] the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are [[really]], really lame. This "[[shrewd]]" film was originally a Japanese [[cinematography]]. And while I [[assumes]] that original film was pretty bad, it was [[accomplished]] a [[alright]] bit [[lousiest]] when American-International Films hacked the film to pieces and inserted American-made segments to fool the audience. Now unless your [[viewers]] is [[brought]] of [[utter]] idiots, it becomes painfully obvious that this was done--and [[doing]] with [[petite]] finesse or care about the [[definitive]] [[commodities]]. The bottom line is that you have a lot of clearly Japanese scenes and then [[naturally]] American scenes where the film [[seem]] [[perfectly]] different. Plus, the American scenes [[truly]] are [[unnecessary]] and consist of two [[varied]] [[grouped]] of people at [[meeting]] just [[debating]] about Gamera--the evil flying turtle! And although this is a fire-breathing, [[hovering]] and [[catastrophic]] [[monsters]], there is [[almost]] no [[energies]] because I [[suppose]] the [[protagonists]] were just embarrassed by being in this [[ratty]] film--in [[special]], [[flick]] veterans Brian Donlevy and [[Alberto]] Dekker. They both just [[seemed]] [[weary]] and ill-at-ease for being there.

Now as for the [[monsters]], it's not [[utterly]] the standard Godzilla-like [[monster]]. [[See]] a [[monumental]] fanged [[turtles]] retract his [[leader]] and limbs and [[outset]] spinning through the [[aviation]] like a [[missiles]] is hilarious. [[Onto]] the other hand, the crappy [[models]] planes, destructible balsa buildings and power [[factory]] are, as usual, in this [[filmmaking]] and [[arrived]] as no [[surprises]]. Plus an [[unusual]] Japanese [[monsters]] [[cinematography]] cliché is included that will frankly annoy most non-Japanese [[viewers]] members, and that is the "adorable and precocious [[petite]] [[guy]] who [[loved]] the monster and believes in him". [[Yes]], right. Well, just like in GODZILLA [[AGAINST]] THE [[SMOKE]] [[MONSTERS]] and [[different]] other [[cinematography]], you've [[get]] this [[irritating]] creep [[cheers]] on the monster, [[while]] unlike [[thereafter]] incarnations of Godzilla, Gamera is [[NOPE]] a good [[dude]] and it [[revolves]] out in the [[ends]] the [[petit]] is just an idiot! [[Absurd]], [[excellent]] [[poorest]] [[specific]] [[consequences]] that [[wo]] be [[accomplished]] [[best]] by the average seven year-old, [[negative]] acting, [[unnecessary]] American clips and [[sometimes]] [[gruesome]] [[vocals]] dubbing make this a [[deplorable]] [[filmmaking]]. [[Strangely]], while most will [[undeniably]] hate this [[flick]] (and that [[foolish]] kid), there is a [[petite]] and very [[vowel]] minority that love these [[filmmaking]] and compare them to Bergman and Kurosawa. Don't [[reckon]] them--this IS a [[scary]] [[cinematography]]!

FYI--Apparently due to his [[magnificent]] stage presence, Gamera was [[attribute]] in several more films in the 60s as well as some recent incarnations. None of these [[altered]] the central fact that he is a fire-breathing flying turtle or that the movies are [[genuinely]], really lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 2739 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The scenes are fast-paced. the [[characters]] are [[great]]. I [[love]] Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was [[disappointed]] that this movie didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only [[blossomed]] when they kissed each other. The scenes are fast-paced. the [[features]] are [[large]]. I [[amore]] Anne-Marie Johnson's acting. I really like the ending.

However, I was [[disappointing]] that this movie didn't delve deeper into Achilles's and Athena's relationship. It only [[flowered]] when they kissed each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 2740 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The pros of this film are the [[astonishing]] [[fighting]] scenes - [[absolutely]] [[incredible]] sword-moves and martial art [[show]] off. A [[true]] John [[Woo]] masterpiece. The story [[tends]] to be a bit week though, but it never overshadows the [[overwhelming]] [[display]] of [[acrobatic]] martial art [[action]]. [[If]] you are into martial [[art]] [[movies]], you are going to [[LOVE]] this one! The pros of this film are the [[awesome]] [[battle]] scenes - [[perfectly]] [[unimaginable]] sword-moves and martial art [[demonstrating]] off. A [[real]] John [[Hu]] masterpiece. The story [[strives]] to be a bit week though, but it never overshadows the [[gargantuan]] [[displaying]] of [[freestyle]] martial art [[activities]]. [[Unless]] you are into martial [[artistry]] [[filmmaking]], you are going to [[IIKE]] this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 2741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Oh my... bad [[clothing]], [[worse]] synth [[music]] and the [[worst]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with vengeance in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heavens]] for small miracles) Fabrizio Laurenti [[directing]] . [[Marketed]] as a kind of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore [[groceries]] and [[bad]] acting.

A mix of ghost story, possessions and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some seriously wooden actors and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's progress to expectable ending, topped with some serious WTF surprise climax. (I just love the look on her face...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to gather some suspense and air of malice in few - very few - scenes; [[unluckily]] for him, these few glimpses of mild movie magic go down quickly and effectively.

The plus sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This department is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when things were made 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as modest budgets could allow. I could only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[obnoxious]] characters (and actors) got mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt sorry for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some rainy afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - every movie that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and bleeding heavily around the room and corridors, MUST have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? Oh my... bad [[dresses]], [[lousiest]] synth [[musicians]] and the [[hardest]]: David Hasselhoff. The 80's are back with vengeance in Witchery, an American-Italian co-production, helmed by infamous Joe 'D'Amato on the production side and short-careered director (thank [[heaven]] for small miracles) Fabrizio Laurenti [[instructing]] . [[Markets]] as a kind of sequel to Sam Raimi's Evil Dead series in Italy (that was dubbed "La Casa" in there), Witchery delivers some modest gore [[errands]] and [[negative]] acting.

A mix of ghost story, possessions and witchcraft, the film bounces clueless from scene to another without letting some seriously wooden actors and hilarious day and night mix-ups slow it's progress to expectable ending, topped with some serious WTF surprise climax. (I just love the look on her face...) Surprisingly Laurenti manages to gather some suspense and air of malice in few - very few - scenes; [[sadly]] for him, these few glimpses of mild movie magic go down quickly and effectively.

The plus sides are experienced, when the gore hits the fan. This department is quite effective and entertaining in that classic latex and red paint style of the 80's Italo-gore, when things were made 100% hand-made and as shockingly and vivid as modest budgets could allow. I could only watch with sadistic glee and few laughters all the over-the-top ways that [[heinous]] characters (and actors) got mangled and misused, one by one. I only felt sorry for Linda Blair, who apparently haven't been let to try any other than that good old possessed girl / woman role ever in his career, or so it looks like when checking out his filmography.

Well, folks - not much more to tell, and even less to tell home about. Don't expect too much when spending some rainy afternoon with this, and probably you'll experience at least some mild fun. It also helps if your rotten little heart pounds in the beat of 80's euro gore horror. And speaking of hearts - every movie that has David Hasselhoff getting skewered by a sizeable metal object and bleeding heavily around the room and corridors, MUST have it's one on the right place.

This is my truth - what is yours? --------------------------------------------- Result 2742 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Amazing]] effects for a movie of this [[time]]. A primer of the uselessness of war and how war becomes a nurturer of itself.

A [[wonderful]] thing about this [[movie]] is it is now public domain and available at archive.org. No [[charge]], no sign up necessary. Watch it in one sitting and you will be propelled.

I plan to [[share]] this flick with as many people as possible as I had never heard of it before and I am a hard core sci fi fan.

I would like to see how others react to this movie.

Watch it.

Rate it.

Tell us what you think. [[Unbelievable]] effects for a movie of this [[moment]]. A primer of the uselessness of war and how war becomes a nurturer of itself.

A [[sumptuous]] thing about this [[filmmaking]] is it is now public domain and available at archive.org. No [[onus]], no sign up necessary. Watch it in one sitting and you will be propelled.

I plan to [[exchanges]] this flick with as many people as possible as I had never heard of it before and I am a hard core sci fi fan.

I would like to see how others react to this movie.

Watch it.

Rate it.

Tell us what you think. --------------------------------------------- Result 2743 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] From the stupid "quaint African natives" travelogue footage with our badly-superimposed principals acting as narrators, to the horrible [[fake]] ears which transform docile Indian elephants into African elephants, to the [[utter]] [[lack]] of any [[logic]] at all, to Maureen O'Sullivan's incessant whining of "Tarzan! Tarzan!", there is [[nothing]] about this movie which deserves classic status.

4/10 From the stupid "quaint African natives" travelogue footage with our badly-superimposed principals acting as narrators, to the horrible [[fraudulent]] ears which transform docile Indian elephants into African elephants, to the [[unmitigated]] [[shortfall]] of any [[reasoning]] at all, to Maureen O'Sullivan's incessant whining of "Tarzan! Tarzan!", there is [[anything]] about this movie which deserves classic status.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2744 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[unbelievably]] [[bad]] I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must see, it's bad in a nice way. Every cliche ever invented for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the top 10 of [[worst]] movies ever made. Hello, can anybody hear me? I don't know why you came to this page, but if you're a fellow viewer of this movie: join the fanclub! This movie was so [[stunningly]] [[unhealthy]] I couldn't stop laughing when I saw it. I think it's a must see, it's bad in a nice way. Every cliche ever invented for a horror movie can be seen here. I'm afraid it's very hard to get a copy of this movie, but it should be in the top 10 of [[worse]] movies ever made. --------------------------------------------- Result 2745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Most definitely the [[worst]] Columbo ever dreamt up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real drag. Falk looks bored throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime watching this. Most definitely the [[gravest]] Columbo ever dreamt up. No murder and the abandonment of the tried and tested formula makes this a real drag. Falk looks bored throughout and so will you be if you waste anytime watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Like with any movie genre, there are good gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of depression of [[disappointment]] about a [[week]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[film]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 silent film of the same name. This is a very [[dry]], very slow gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather flimsy endeavor.

Like "Goodfellas" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to robbing museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a [[bad]] film had I not seen the aforementioned masterpieces before being swamped by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not even ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's List" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. Like with any movie genre, there are good gangster movies and there are bad gangster movies. If you asked me to name a good gangster movie, I'd have dozens to choose from. If you asked me to name a bad gangster movie, probably the first one to pop up in my mind is one that still has me in a sort of depression of [[disillusionment]] about a [[zhou]] since I saw the film for the first and I promise you, the last time. That [[kino]] is "The General", unrelated to the 1926 silent film of the same name. This is a very [[driest]], very slow gangster epic that raises questions not about the story (it's more than easy to follow) but about why the filmmakers chose to make this rather flimsy endeavor.

Like "Goodfellas" (1990) and "American Gangster" (2007)—two superior mob movies—"The General" is based on real people and true events. The film revolves around an Irish criminal named Martin Cahill (Brendan Gleeson) who started his long chain of crimes stealing food as a teenager and then moving up to robbing museums and houses as an adult. Meanwhile, the police led by an inspector named Kenny (Jon Voight) try desperately and vigorously to prove just one of his crimes and convict (or kill) him.

Perhaps because it's a film in the same category as the marvelous "Goodfellas" (1990) and the first two "Godfather" films, I was expecting too much from "The General." But that may be going too easy on it. This would have been a [[wicked]] film had I not seen the aforementioned masterpieces before being swamped by boredom in this oater and its far-too-stretched running time of screaming bad scenes. Let's start knocking the film by just looking at the style in which it is presented. For some reason, director John Boorman and cinematographer Seamus Deasy selected to film this movie in black-and-white while its style and presentation are clearly the elements that belong to a full-fledged color film. Now I have nothing against b/w pictures, not even ones made in modern-day times. "Schindler's List" (1993) was more than ninety percent filmed in black-and-white and it's a masterpiece. "The General", made just five years after "Schindler's List" is not. The cinematography is also far too blown out with high lighting keys that seem very distracting and give the movie a very video-game-like quality that I found simply annoying. The filmmakers were obviously going for a realist's documentary-like style, like "Schindler's List" did, but they fail by making it seem too much like a documentary and at the same time, too much like a classic-style motion picture. Performances in the film range from passable to poor. Brendan Gleeson and Jon Voight gave decent enthusiasm for their roles, but it seemed to me at times that even they were getting kind of run down by the awful screenplay from which they were quoting. The sound design is also very primitive, probably in an attempt to give it a 40s crime-noir appeal, but that also fails because again, it's made too much like a contemporary picture and seems vastly out of place.

But the worst thing that occurs is that there's not one—not one—character in the film that I felt any emotions or opinions for. In fact, for every moment of every scene, the only thought going through my head was "okay…so what?" Moments that in a better film might come across as shocking or appalling are just dull and time-consuming here. I did not sympathize or hate the Brendan Gleeson character because the way the Cahill character is written is simply flat and dull. Gleeson just plays the common criminal and does not strike out with the impact the real Martin Cahill obviously did. If a character is killed off (as they always are in gangster films), we feel nothing. No remorse, no relief, no surprise, nothing. We just say "so what?" And that's all I did during the entire running time of this very flimsy, very poorly-made crime film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Apparently Hollywood is just handing out [[money]] to anyone with a camera and the ability to [[speak]]. This movie was mind numbingly [[bad]]. The [[casting]] was terrible, the acting unspeakable, and the [[story]] [[filled]] with holes. Script? who needs [[script]]? I was surprised that the movie wasn't as verbally vulgar as I thought it would be, [[however]] I [[got]] enough shots of [[T]]&A to last me a lifetime. The movie was like listening to a 19 [[year]] [[old]] [[street]] [[racer]] with ADD (who decided to buy a [[car]] instead of go to [[college]]) [[tell]] a story. Being so poorly scripted, I thought the two [[brothers]] in the [[film]] were [[lovers]] at first. The scenes at the [[racetrack]], along with the main [[female]] actor in the film [[kept]] [[making]] me [[think]] of Herbie: [[Fully]] [[Loaded]]. This is the kind of film is what Grindhouse [[modeled]] itself after...only the writers thought they were being serious. Apparently Hollywood is just handing out [[cash]] to anyone with a camera and the ability to [[speaking]]. This movie was mind numbingly [[negative]]. The [[foundry]] was terrible, the acting unspeakable, and the [[saga]] [[fills]] with holes. Script? who needs [[scripts]]? I was surprised that the movie wasn't as verbally vulgar as I thought it would be, [[instead]] I [[gets]] enough shots of [[ton]]&A to last me a lifetime. The movie was like listening to a 19 [[annum]] [[longtime]] [[rue]] [[runner]] with ADD (who decided to buy a [[motor]] instead of go to [[academics]]) [[telling]] a story. Being so poorly scripted, I thought the two [[plymouth]] in the [[cinematography]] were [[amateurs]] at first. The scenes at the [[circuit]], along with the main [[girl]] actor in the film [[retained]] [[doing]] me [[believe]] of Herbie: [[Utterly]] [[Onus]]. This is the kind of film is what Grindhouse [[shaped]] itself after...only the writers thought they were being serious. --------------------------------------------- Result 2748 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I wouldn't go so far as to not recommend this movie, since the only [[problems]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot devices used in the movie - the sort of things common to every kids movie ever made it seems. That doesn't make it [[bad]], just not something I'd go far.

It is a little saccharine, so I might say that for the most part anyone looking for something with a little more [[wit]] could be disappointed in an obviously for-kids movie like this.

However, all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the trailers) comes on-screen. His time is limited, but it seems apparent that the decision makers had the wisdom to tell these guys 'hey, could you stick in a little more squirrel?' every time it's getting intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop laughing.'

And of course, visually it won't disappoint, but that's almost a given with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. I wouldn't go so far as to not recommend this movie, since the only [[disorders]] I have with it are due to an overexposure to the plot devices used in the movie - the sort of things common to every kids movie ever made it seems. That doesn't make it [[unfavorable]], just not something I'd go far.

It is a little saccharine, so I might say that for the most part anyone looking for something with a little more [[waite]] could be disappointed in an obviously for-kids movie like this.

However, all of that goes out the window when that squirrel (the one in all the trailers) comes on-screen. His time is limited, but it seems apparent that the decision makers had the wisdom to tell these guys 'hey, could you stick in a little more squirrel?' every time it's getting intolerably dull. That doesn't save the movie, but you can leave saying 'at least there was one aspect where I couldn't stop laughing.'

And of course, visually it won't disappoint, but that's almost a given with Pixar flicks. Of all of their stuff, I'd put this at the bottom...but that isn't in itself bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 2749 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a [[terrible]] film, and not one scene has an [[ounce]] of truthful emotion. The characters are uninflected, obviously drawn, [[predictable]] and the story line is obvious and [[typical]] Hollywood wish fulfillment.

William Holden (so sad to see him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing someone in his early 40s and looks like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to find him irresistibly attractive. I think the dog they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with obvious trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the bachelor pad, the swinging hi-fi, the lunches at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies desperately wishing that the free spirits they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' cars sexy.

Ugh. Youth culture was never that desperate. And I shudder to think that Bill Holden was so desperate for youth that he took this embarrassing part. This is a [[spooky]] film, and not one scene has an [[jot]] of truthful emotion. The characters are uninflected, obviously drawn, [[foreseeable]] and the story line is obvious and [[emblematic]] Hollywood wish fulfillment.

William Holden (so sad to see him in this role) was 55 when this film was made, but he's playing someone in his early 40s and looks like he's in his 60s. Kay Lenz was 20 and was scripted to find him irresistibly attractive. I think the dog they found by the side of the road was sexier and had more life than their erotic connection.

Holden's character--the same age as Clint Eastwood when he directed this film, (not) coincidentally--is placed with obvious trappings of 60s pre-hippie cool: the bachelor pad, the swinging hi-fi, the lunches at Yamashiro. But the film is ridiculously uncool, a clanging claptrap of old fogies desperately wishing that the free spirits they saw on Sunset and in Laurel Canyon would find them and their big honkin' cars sexy.

Ugh. Youth culture was never that desperate. And I shudder to think that Bill Holden was so desperate for youth that he took this embarrassing part. --------------------------------------------- Result 2750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When John Singleton is on, he's *on*!! And this is one of his better films. Not quite as tight as Boyz-n-the-Hood, but close to it (and with much of the same stellar cast). This film was very well written, very well put together, and very well shot. There's very little to criticize, and most of my complaints are superficial (eg: where did Fudge get the money for 6 years of college and a lot of expensive stuff? No mention of a rich background... And why doesn't Professor Phibbs have an office? A professor of his stature *should* have one... And while we're at it, for an engineering student, hick or not, Remy's a pretty dumb character - I'd think that he'd have a bit more in the way of basic intelligence - he talks and acts like a total buffoon).

But that aside, the film was very sharp. A good array of characters and points of view; and Singleton doesn't take sides in the story - many of the characters are unsympathetic, and he does a good job of interspersing the Panthers and Supremacist scenes together to show the folly on both sides.

Much of the cinematography was excellent; I especially loved the scene where Kirsty Swanson gets intimate with Taryn and Wayne each scene spliced together really well. Also the Malik/Deja scenes were really well shot as well.

The dialogue was a bit much at times; this film had a tendency to get *really* preachy at times, and it also tends to hammer the points it was making over your head when the points would be just as clear with out the bluntness (we really didn't need the US flag with 'UNLEARN' typed onto it, give some credit, we're not morons...). And to top it off, although *most* of the time Singleton uses melodrama quite well, sometimes it gets *way* too cheezy (like Deja's death, which is fine until she screams out 'WHY!!!' which simply ruined the entire effect and scene).

But the acting, in general, was top of the line. Fabulous performances by Omar Epps (perhaps the best I've ever seen), Kirsty Swanson (who knew Buffy could act??), Michael Rapaport (surprised the hell out of me...after True Romance and Beautiful Girls I though he was a one-role actor), and of course Ice Cube and Laurence Fishburne are *always* outstanding.

Downside? Jennifer Connelly was flat; though it's not completely her fault: her role was stereotypical and one-dimensional. Generic to the highest degree. And Tyra Banks, who had the role, was nothing short of horrid. She whined and whined and whined. Yet another in the long line of models-turned-actresses who failed miserably (though there are a few who prove the exception to this rule).

Finally, the soundtrack! Wow! An amazing soundtrack (which is definitely worth buying!) which fits the film like a glove. Each scene has a twin song (although the Tori Amos songs started to *really* annoy me by the end...not her best work). Liz Phair, Rage Against the Machine, Ice Cube...how can one go wrong??

All in all: a really good watch, a really strong cast, great script, great film. 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2751 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm sorry but this is just plain pathetic. The little girl was a brat, their were no enjoyable characters and the plot sucked. Besides it wasn't even a gator as the film would like us to believe. If you check out any complete guide to reptiles you will find that it really is a Crocodile, not a gator. Obviously they didn't hire a real animal expert or they would know that the creature is a croc. It is a sad excuse for a movie. Especially the ending. I nearly fell asleep with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2752 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Totally]] [[ridiculous]]. [[If]] you [[know]] anything about [[poker]], you will [[find]] it absolutely [[appalling]] but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) [[Where]] to start. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[actors]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. [[Everyone]] else is as [[wooden]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only reason the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this [[pointless]] production. It's [[fitting]] that he had such a [[useless]] role.

There's very [[little]] poker in this movie. Most of the time is spent on useless side [[characters]] whose plots aren't resolved in the slightest. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless Arabs in the convenience store also [[give]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are easily among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, complete [[nonsense]]. Plan 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[might]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious conversation that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I hate movies made by religious people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[travesty]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. [[Abundantly]] [[idiotic]]. [[Though]] you [[savoir]] anything about [[booker]], you will [[unearthed]] it absolutely [[terrifying]] but also entertaining because it is so clueless. The nerd who made this movie is obviously very religious and knows slightly about the game of poker, but I doubt he's ever played above 3-6. (I think he also knows nothing of golf.) [[Wherever]] to start. I've seen better productions in the Intro to Film class I took freshmen year of film school. The [[protagonists]] to watch in this movie are Queen Momma, Scotty Nguyen, and the loser who can never win at poker. [[Somebody]] else is as [[lumber]] as they come, like bad porn actors.

*Spoiler* The man the movie starts with in the opening sequence is the only reason the film got made. He is a railbird who doesn't play poker and never has a line of dialogue, but the actor is the man who obviously paid for the movie. I can't think of a more useless waste of money than this man shelling out for this [[vain]] production. It's [[montage]] that he had such a [[unusable]] role.

There's very [[scant]] poker in this movie. Most of the time is spent on useless side [[attribute]] whose plots aren't resolved in the slightest. Queen Momma does have a show-stealing scene where she throws her loser boyfriend through a window and tries to shoot his brains out. Also the nameless Arabs in the convenience store also [[lend]] brilliant performances when they debate whether to beat up or kill an older lady who robs them. Their subtle performances are easily among the film's highlights. It makes you wonder why they bothered getting all these white people to play the leads.

In conclusion, complete [[grotesque]]. Plan 9 from Outer Space has slightly more coherency. If you play poker though you might want to have a laugh. Also if you're Christian you [[apt]] enjoy some of the heavy-handed religious conversation that pepper the movie like pointless pepper. I hate movies made by religious people. Especially ones who think they know something about things they know nothing about. It's sad that Jennifer Harman and Scotty Nguyen got involved in this [[comedy]] as I can't help but think less of them. They must be envious of Johnny Chan for getting in Rounders. --------------------------------------------- Result 2753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Poorly-made "blaxploitation" crime-drama aimed squarely at the black urban market of the early 1970s. Pam Grier stars in the title role, that of a nurse who becomes a one-woman vigilante after drug-dealing thugs make Coffy's little sister a junkie. Violent nonsense plods along doggedly, with canned energy and excitement; only Grier's flaring temper gives the narrative a jolt (she's not much of an actress here, but she connects with the audience in a primal way). Not much different from what Charles Bronson was doing at this time, the film was marketed and advertised as crass exploitation yet still managed to find a sizable inner-city audience. Today however, it's merely a footnote in '70s film history, and lacks the wide-range appeal of other movies in this genre. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 2754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I [[liked]] this movie because it basically did more with less. It could have been [[made]] more interesting if they had kept it confined to the studio even more (though some of the plot elements would have been harder to develop).

The guy playing the DJ did a good job of showing someone spooked out and haunted by his memories. I also found his dialog with the callers pretty [[funny]].

While parts of the movie you can see coming a mile away, other parts you do not expect to turn out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty minimal ghost story for the most part, concentrating more on the living side of the equation. The last 5-10 minutes were pretty well done as everything is being revealed.

While it was a shorter movie, it felt to be just about the right amount of time to tell the story. Any more and it would have started to drag. I [[wished]] this movie because it basically did more with less. It could have been [[introduced]] more interesting if they had kept it confined to the studio even more (though some of the plot elements would have been harder to develop).

The guy playing the DJ did a good job of showing someone spooked out and haunted by his memories. I also found his dialog with the callers pretty [[droll]].

While parts of the movie you can see coming a mile away, other parts you do not expect to turn out the way they did.

I thought it was a pretty minimal ghost story for the most part, concentrating more on the living side of the equation. The last 5-10 minutes were pretty well done as everything is being revealed.

While it was a shorter movie, it felt to be just about the right amount of time to tell the story. Any more and it would have started to drag. --------------------------------------------- Result 2755 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I never expect a film adaptation to follow too closely to the novel (especially a beloved one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay writer and executive producer on the film, I thought that Evening [[would]] be a good adaptation.

If you enjoyed the [[book]], don't bother with this movie. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[hardly]] [[bear]] any [[resemblance]] to one another.

Here, our characters are completely different: the [[bride]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a drunk, in love with Ann and/or Harris. I don't think a [[single]] character made it from the book to the screen; oh it just gets worst with every passing moment.

And, really, didn't we learn from Bridges of Madison County that cutting from the story we are meant to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown children having obnoxious and juvenile fights, simply does not work on film? This film is a [[disaster]]. Skip it. I never expect a film adaptation to follow too closely to the novel (especially a beloved one, like Evening) but when I saw that the book's author, Susan Minot, was a screenplay writer and executive producer on the film, I thought that Evening [[could]] be a good adaptation.

If you enjoyed the [[ledger]], don't bother with this movie. It is so far afield of the book that the two [[almost]] [[bears]] any [[analogy]] to one another.

Here, our characters are completely different: the [[fiance]] is in love with Harris. Harris is the son of the housekeeper. Buddy is a drunk, in love with Ann and/or Harris. I don't think a [[lonely]] character made it from the book to the screen; oh it just gets worst with every passing moment.

And, really, didn't we learn from Bridges of Madison County that cutting from the story we are meant to be enthralled in, to scenes of our heroes' grown children having obnoxious and juvenile fights, simply does not work on film? This film is a [[cataclysm]]. Skip it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2756 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I have seen this movie when I was about 7 years [[old]] - which was 33 [[years]] [[ago]] - and I never [[forgot]] this movie! I was [[deeply]] touched and moved by the [[brave]] little [[boy]] and the [[beautiful]] eagle. And I just couldn't believe it when he [[turned]] into an eagle just when [[everyone]] in the theater [[thought]] he was [[going]] to [[die]]...

My sister was in the [[movie]] with me and I [[asked]] her [[recently]] if she [[remembered]] the [[movie]] we [[saw]] with the [[boy]] and the [[eagle]] and she [[said]] she [[remembered]] it like we [[saw]] it only yesterday. So it isn't just me.

This movie is a MUST [[SEE]] !!!

You will never [[forget]] it - just like my [[sister]] and me... I have seen this movie when I was about 7 years [[longtime]] - which was 33 [[yrs]] [[formerly]] - and I never [[forget]] this movie! I was [[gravely]] touched and moved by the [[heroic]] little [[boys]] and the [[fabulous]] eagle. And I just couldn't believe it when he [[transformed]] into an eagle just when [[anybody]] in the theater [[figured]] he was [[gonna]] to [[decease]]...

My sister was in the [[filmmaking]] with me and I [[demand]] her [[newly]] if she [[reminded]] the [[filmmaking]] we [[sawthe]] with the [[guy]] and the [[ying]] and she [[indicated]] she [[reminded]] it like we [[observed]] it only yesterday. So it isn't just me.

This movie is a MUST [[CONSULTS]] !!!

You will never [[forgotten]] it - just like my [[sisters]] and me... --------------------------------------------- Result 2757 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] What [[exactly]] was going on during World War 11 in New Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[awful]] [[story]] of 4 sisters was really [[pathetic]] to view. Can you imagine casting Joan Fontaine as the older sister to [[Sandra]] Dee? Fontaine looked more like her mother. [[Even]] funnier was that [[Fontaine]] [[becomes]] pregnant in the [[film]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who showed such [[great]] on screen [[chemistry]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes together in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to tramp around there, despite the fact that she is married. Woe to her when her husband comes back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and finds romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the young Miss Dee here.

The picture has little to no meaning. Are they trying to say that all is fair in love and war? If they are, they did a poor job in selling this.

The conflict of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been quickly done to this terribly disappointing film of 1957. What [[accurately]] was going on during World War 11 in New Zealand when American forces were there?

This [[scary]] [[history]] of 4 sisters was really [[deplorable]] to view. Can you imagine casting Joan Fontaine as the older sister to [[Sondra]] Dee? Fontaine looked more like her mother. [[Yet]] funnier was that [[Trout]] [[becoming]] pregnant in the [[cinematography]].

Piper Laurie and Paul Newman who showed such [[wondrous]] on screen [[chemist]] 4 years later in "The Hustler," have no scenes together in this film. Laurie plays another sister who goes off to Wellington to tramp around there, despite the fact that she is married. Woe to her when her husband comes back from the war.

Jean Simmons is widowed and finds romance with a much subdued Paul Newman. There is even romance for the young Miss Dee here.

The picture has little to no meaning. Are they trying to say that all is fair in love and war? If they are, they did a poor job in selling this.

The conflict of interest with Newman and Simmons is quickly disposed of. That is what should have been quickly done to this terribly disappointing film of 1957. --------------------------------------------- Result 2758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's baby" and "the omen" (it actually blends the two stories).Even its title recalls Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[begins]] well [[enough]],with all the omens scattered on the whole earth,and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband trying to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the rescue (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally funny (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short dialog between priest John Heard -who does not seem to take things seriously ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore probably registered the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the movie for all that. "The seventh sign" borrows a lot from "Rosemary's baby" and "the omen" (it actually blends the two stories).Even its title recalls Bergman' s "the seventh seal" .

Nevertheless,it [[initiates]] well [[adequately]],with all the omens scattered on the whole earth,and in parallel ,a -seemingly- distinct plot with Moore's husband trying to save a poor boy (who killed his parents who were brother and sister)from death penalty.This time,both Christian and Jewish religions are called to the rescue (even the Wandering Jew is involved),which makes the lines sometimes unintentionally funny (Have you ever been to Sunday school? But they taught me that God was love!).The best scene IMHO ,is the short dialog between priest John Heard -who does not seem to take things seriously ,too bad he was not given a more important part because his laid-back acting is priceless-and the young Jew.

Demi Moore probably registered the same desire as ex-husband Bruce Willis :saving the world.She does not save the movie for all that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2759 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] The [[brilliance]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the waiting room. Corbin Bernsen [[gives]] a surprisingly non-lackluster performance as a crazed dentist who I guess tries to kill people but he only works on their teeth so it's not really working out. In a particularly gory scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely destroyed with drills and whatnot, which I guess is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer dentist. It's a typical Brian Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is shoddy and at times seems to be made up on the spot but hey, it's a killer dentist movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. The [[splendor]] of this movie is that even a competent dentist is pretty scary. It's one of man's primal fears. This movie is the nightmarish image every kid has to go through in the waiting room. Corbin Bernsen [[donne]] a surprisingly non-lackluster performance as a crazed dentist who I guess tries to kill people but he only works on their teeth so it's not really working out. In a particularly gory scene we find so-so actor Earl Boen having his teeth completely destroyed with drills and whatnot, which I guess is the absolute worst you can do when you're a killer dentist. It's a typical Brian Yuzna situation, not well written but there's gore. The plot is shoddy and at times seems to be made up on the spot but hey, it's a killer dentist movie, we've all thought of it but they did it first. --------------------------------------------- Result 2760 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Without Peter Ustinov and [[Maggie]] Smith, this [[could]] easily have been a turkey. But they are [[brilliant]]. Ustinov is at his [[best]], and for [[fans]] of Maggie, it is [[great]] to see her in her early days, matching Ustinov every step of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[film]] spends a lot of [[time]] in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, [[including]] red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a delicious shot up the micro-skirt of a waitress, the like of which England has never seen since in public places. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are laughable, but they are not meant to be taken seriously. Nor are the wonderful stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. Without Peter Ustinov and [[Mags]] Smith, this [[wo]] easily have been a turkey. But they are [[sumptuous]]. Ustinov is at his [[nicest]], and for [[followers]] of Maggie, it is [[marvellous]] to see her in her early days, matching Ustinov every step of the way for with and timing. For Englishmen in their fifties (and I am in that bracket), it is always entertaining to see glimpses of and hear sounds of the Swinging Sixties, and although this [[cinematography]] spends a lot of [[period]] in offices, it has plenty of Sixties nostalgia, [[consisting]] red buses, Carnaby Street, a song by Lulu and a delicious shot up the micro-skirt of a waitress, the like of which England has never seen since in public places. As an I.T. engineer, I know that the computer hacking tricks are laughable, but they are not meant to be taken seriously. Nor are the wonderful stereotypes of Italians, French and Germans. --------------------------------------------- Result 2761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[really]] [[enjoyed]] [[watching]] this movie about the Delany sisters. I [[knew]] of them, but that was all. This movie [[opened]] my eyes to their [[bravado]] and [[courage]]. What a [[pair]]. What sacrifices they [[made]] to live [[life]] on their own terms. This is not only a [[movie]] for African Americans, but for all Americans. It is [[sort]] of a history lesson and a documentary [[rolled]] into one and [[combined]] with an [[entertaining]] [[movie]] biography. The acting was [[superior]] by all included and we [[really]] do get a glimpse of the hardships these two sisters went through for many [[years]]. Both sisters are quite different from each other. They came from a very loving and very [[strict]] family with high, maybe even impossible standards of perfection. It is sad to see how Sadie's father [[refused]] to allow his [[daughter]] to [[continue]] to see her [[boyfriend]] due to a possible misunderstanding. I thoroughly recommend this [[movie]] and I am [[glad]] I caught it on television the other day. I [[truthfully]] [[appreciated]] [[staring]] this movie about the Delany sisters. I [[overheard]] of them, but that was all. This movie [[opens]] my eyes to their [[bluster]] and [[boldness]]. What a [[doublet]]. What sacrifices they [[effected]] to live [[lives]] on their own terms. This is not only a [[cinematic]] for African Americans, but for all Americans. It is [[sorts]] of a history lesson and a documentary [[laminated]] into one and [[combo]] with an [[amusing]] [[flick]] biography. The acting was [[supremo]] by all included and we [[truthfully]] do get a glimpse of the hardships these two sisters went through for many [[ages]]. Both sisters are quite different from each other. They came from a very loving and very [[stiff]] family with high, maybe even impossible standards of perfection. It is sad to see how Sadie's father [[refusing]] to allow his [[girls]] to [[sustained]] to see her [[dude]] due to a possible misunderstanding. I thoroughly recommend this [[films]] and I am [[contented]] I caught it on television the other day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2762 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] How sheep-like the movie going public so often proves to be. As soon as a few critics say something new is [[good]] (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[good]] movie, it was a [[dreadful]] movie. 1) [[Plot]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't look for anything deeper than this. 2) Cinematography? - Do me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of astonishingly amateurish camera-work. The ridiculous shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. How sheep-like the movie going public so often proves to be. As soon as a few critics say something new is [[buena]] (ie - "Shake-Cam"), everyone jumps on the bandwagon, as if they are devoid of independent thought. This was not a [[buena]] movie, it was a [[terrifying]] movie. 1) [[Intrigue]]? - What plot? Bourne was chased from here to there, from beginning to end. That's the plot. Don't look for anything deeper than this. 2) Cinematography? - Do me a favor! Any 7 year old armed with an old and battered 8mm movie camera would do a far better job (I am not exaggerating here). This film is a tour-de-force of astonishingly amateurish camera-work. The ridiculous shaking of EVERY (I really do mean every) scene will cause dizziness and nausea. 3) Believable? - Oh yes definitely. This is a masterpiece of credibility. I loved scenes about Bourne being chased by (local) police through the winding market streets of Tangier. - I've BEEN to Tangier. Even the guides can't navigate their way through those streets but Bourne shook off 100 police with speed and finesse. Greengrass must be laughing his head off at the gullibility of his film disciples. 4) Editing? - I don't know what the editor was on when he did this film but I want some! - Every scene is between 0.5 and 2 seconds. I felt nauseous at the end of the film from the strobe effect of the "scenes" flashing by. 5) Directing? - Hmmm. This is an interesting aspect. The film appears to have actually NOT had any directing. More a case of Greengrass throwing a copy of the script (all two pages) at the cameramen and told to "shoot a few scenes whilst drunk". - "Don't worry boys, we'll tie the scenes together in the editing room". The editor should be tarred, feathered and put in the stocks for allowing this monstrosity to hit the silver screen 6) Not one but TWO senior CIA operatives giving the tender feminine treatment to the mistreated and misunderstood Jason Bourne. - Putting their lives on the line for someone they couldn't even be sure wasn't a traitor. Talk about stupid nincompoops. (Whilst the evil male CIA members plot to terminate any operative who so much as drops a paper-clip on the floor). (well, all men are evil, aren't they? - Except for SNAGS of course). Yes, this really is a modern and politically correct film that shows the females to be the heroes of the day and the oppressive males as the real threat to humanity. 7) When the you-know-what finally hits the fan, good triumphs over evil (just like it always does, eh?) and the would-be assassin gets the drop on Jason Bourne - he suddenly undergoes a guilt trip and refrains from pulling the trigger (Yeah - right...) - at that very moment, the evil deputy director just happens to turn up - gun in hand and he does pull the trigger. - How did this 60 year old man run so fast and not even be out of breath? Wonders will never cease 8) Don't worry, there's a senate hearing and the baddies get pulled up before the courts. Well, we can't have nasty, politically incorrect, CIA operatives going round shooting people, can we? How lovely to see a true to life P.C. film of the Noughties. -------------The Bourne Ultimatum is utter rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2763 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The [[Ogre]] is a [[film]] [[made]] for [[TV]] in [[Italy]] and wasn't [[intended]] to be a sequel to [[Demons]] as Lamberto Bava even mentions it on the interview on the Sheirk Show DVD, but it was called Demons III to be part of the Demons series. The music in Demons and Demons 2 was 80's rock music while this is more [[creepy]] music and while the first two was gory horror Demons III: The Ogre is a architectural horror so that's how Demons III isn't a proper sequel to [[Demons]] but I [[still]] like this film.

The [[music]] is creepy and that adds a tone to the castle that the [[film]] is set in, The Ogre is another [[thing]] why I like the film. There are two other films that are classed as Demons III and that is [[Black]] [[Demons]] (Demoni 3) and The Church (Demons 3). Demons III: The Ogre is a good film as long as you don't compare it with [[Demons]] and Demons 2. The [[Creature]] is a [[filmmaking]] [[effected]] for [[TVS]] in [[Italia]] and wasn't [[destined]] to be a sequel to [[Devil]] as Lamberto Bava even mentions it on the interview on the Sheirk Show DVD, but it was called Demons III to be part of the Demons series. The music in Demons and Demons 2 was 80's rock music while this is more [[spooky]] music and while the first two was gory horror Demons III: The Ogre is a architectural horror so that's how Demons III isn't a proper sequel to [[Devil]] but I [[however]] like this film.

The [[musica]] is creepy and that adds a tone to the castle that the [[kino]] is set in, The Ogre is another [[stuff]] why I like the film. There are two other films that are classed as Demons III and that is [[Negro]] [[Devil]] (Demoni 3) and The Church (Demons 3). Demons III: The Ogre is a good film as long as you don't compare it with [[Fiends]] and Demons 2. --------------------------------------------- Result 2764 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] To [[anyone]] who might [[think]] this show isn't for them, please [[give]] it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are reality based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[show]] is a [[return]] to family oriented [[TV]] where the emphasis is on learning some life lessons, learning what real friends and family are about, and maybe even learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young [[actors]] in show business [[today]], and he is [[perfectly]] cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New York Empires ([[great]] name!). Dean Cain, Christopher Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms round out the main [[cast]], and they are all [[exceptional]]. This show deserves a chance to catch on and be seen. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. To [[somebody]] who might [[believing]] this show isn't for them, please [[confer]] it a try. Network television has degenerated into shows that are clones of clones or are reality based shows featuring some often unreal people. This [[illustrating]] is a [[repatriate]] to family oriented [[TELEVISION]] where the emphasis is on learning some life lessons, learning what real friends and family are about, and maybe even learning a little bit about our national pastime. Jeremy Sumpter is one of the most appealing young [[actresses]] in show business [[yesterday]], and he is [[altogether]] cast as the young, slightly naive new batboy for the fictional New York Empires ([[large]] name!). Dean Cain, Christopher Lloyd, Mare Winningham, and Kirsten Storms round out the main [[casting]], and they are all [[unusual]]. This show deserves a chance to catch on and be seen. Hopefully it will stick around for a few seasons and we can watch Pete Young (Sumpter's character) learn and grow. --------------------------------------------- Result 2765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I decided to watch this because of the [[recommendations]] from this [[site]]. I would have to [[say]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take [[heed]] that this film will [[go]] on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the [[staying]] power, [[get]] it on tape and watch it over a [[couple]] of [[nights]].

Now to the [[film]], what I say will [[contain]] "spoilers" and if you don't [[mind]], here goes:

[[Alexandre]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had aborted it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse [[nymph]] called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. Veronika fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the sordid sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as aforesaid with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will even get a job and be the provider for his new found love and family. There is hope!

With the title of "La [[Maman]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was relating to Françoise Lebrun's character of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and whore is the same person? Anyway, what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very chatty, aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud [[played]] their obdurate characters well and held the [[film]] [[together]] as some [[part]] of the script became a [[little]] lost and disjointed.

Not a [[bad]] effort. 7/10. I decided to watch this because of the [[proposing]] from this [[locations]]. I would have to [[said]] it was worth the effort. However, you should take [[hear]] that this film will [[going]] on for 210 minutes. If you don't have the [[residing]] power, [[obtain]] it on tape and watch it over a [[matching]] of [[noches]].

Now to the [[flick]], what I say will [[contained]] "spoilers" and if you don't [[intellect]], here goes:

[[Alexandra]] is a promiscuous bum, a womanizer and a gigolo. He lives with an older woman called Marie. Marie owns a retail shop and she provides for Alex. Alex spends his days at cafés and restaurants. The story reveals that Alex had previously impregnated Gilberte whom he used to live with. Gilberte dumped him for a less attractive man that she did not love because Alex had abused and battered her. At this point, Alex was willing to get a job and and help raise their child before he found out Gilberte had aborted it and planned to marry someone else.

By chance, Alexandre meets a nurse [[nymphs]] called Veronika and they striked up a relationship. Veronika fell in love with Alex for the first time after all the sordid sex she had with men in the past. Marie and Veronika struggles for Alex's affection and had a ménage à trois to boot. Finally at the end, it's revealed Veronika is pregnant with Alex's child and Alex asked her to marry him. We assume (as aforesaid with Gilberte's situation) Alexandre will even get a job and be the provider for his new found love and family. There is hope!

With the title of "La [[Mam]] et la putain", I deduce Jean Eustache was relating to Françoise Lebrun's character of Veronika. She was a whore and then she became the mother. Hence, the mother and whore is the same person? Anyway, what do I know! French films are mostly (not all) very chatty, aimlessly political, preaching, theatrical, insipid, lamenting and full of quotes. Lebrun and Léaud [[effected]] their obdurate characters well and held the [[kino]] [[jointly]] as some [[portion]] of the script became a [[tiny]] lost and disjointed.

Not a [[amiss]] effort. 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I just read the [[comments]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jump]] in here. I [[understand]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My [[feeling]] regarding this film is that it is not afraid to travel the darker roads of loneliness, failure, disappointment and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and angry, yet find tenderness and comfort in each the other. Only great acting [[could]] [[make]] this [[work]] without becoming an emotional quagmire, sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming humanity given to them by such strong performances. I have every reason to dislike Jane Fonda for her Vietnam era actions, but personal feelings apart, she is fabulous in this role. Robert DeNiro is superb as a man whose intelligence and goodness begins to fail him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have seen DeNiro using tenderness rather than toughness to sell a character and I really like it. This film was a big surprise when I first viewed it and I look forward to seeing it again. I just read the [[commentary]] of TomReynolds2004 and feel I have to [[jumping]] in here. I [[fathom]] he doesn't like the film, but his reasons are not evident. My [[sentiment]] regarding this film is that it is not afraid to travel the darker roads of loneliness, failure, disappointment and sorrow. Each of these two people, as portrayed, have plenty of reasons to be bitter and angry, yet find tenderness and comfort in each the other. Only great acting [[did]] [[deliver]] this [[cooperating]] without becoming an emotional quagmire, sentimental and sappy. I really became interested in these people because of their overwhelming humanity given to them by such strong performances. I have every reason to dislike Jane Fonda for her Vietnam era actions, but personal feelings apart, she is fabulous in this role. Robert DeNiro is superb as a man whose intelligence and goodness begins to fail him in a world indifferent to his abilities. This is the first I have seen DeNiro using tenderness rather than toughness to sell a character and I really like it. This film was a big surprise when I first viewed it and I look forward to seeing it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2767 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] A [[wonderful]] [[movie]]! [[Anyone]] [[growing]] up in an Italian [[family]] will [[definitely]] see themselves in these [[characters]]. A [[good]] [[family]] [[movie]] with [[sadness]], [[humor]], and very [[good]] acting from all. You will enjoy this [[movie]]!! We [[need]] more like it. A [[ravishing]] [[kino]]! [[Someone]] [[grows]] up in an Italian [[familial]] will [[certainly]] see themselves in these [[personage]]. A [[alright]] [[families]] [[cinematography]] with [[heaviness]], [[comedy]], and very [[buena]] acting from all. You will enjoy this [[filmmaking]]!! We [[needed]] more like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2768 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This is a comedy based on national stereotypes, no doubt. If you leave away pretending you know or you care what [[Communism]] was about and how [[real]] Russians or Brits are, if you [[accept]] and are not hurt by the [[conventions]], you can have fun with this film. [[Nicole]] Kidman is at her best, sexy, moving and funny. Ben Chaplin [[succeeds]] to [[avoid]] being [[completely]] out-shadowed by [[Nicole]], and the [[rest]] of the cast does [[good]] [[work]] as well. The final is [[moving]], and [[logical]] - [[movie]] logics, of [[course]]. Worth [[watching]], if you [[accept]] the rules of the [[game]]. This is a comedy based on national stereotypes, no doubt. If you leave away pretending you know or you care what [[Communists]] was about and how [[actual]] Russians or Brits are, if you [[accepted]] and are not hurt by the [[convention]], you can have fun with this film. [[Nichol]] Kidman is at her best, sexy, moving and funny. Ben Chaplin [[succeed]] to [[stave]] being [[totally]] out-shadowed by [[Nichol]], and the [[remaining]] of the cast does [[alright]] [[cooperating]] as well. The final is [[transferring]], and [[reasonable]] - [[filmmaking]] logics, of [[cours]]. Worth [[staring]], if you [[admit]] the rules of the [[gaming]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2769 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Like almost [[everyone]] [[else]] who has [[commented]] on this movie, I can only wonder why this has never appeared on video.

I [[recall]] [[seeing]] it at about age 12 on the "The [[Late]] [[Show]]," circa 1972. I too [[recall]] the [[poison]] [[gas]] attack and the weirdly garbed horses. (I don't [[recall]] the more horrific bits I've seen described here; they were [[likely]] [[cut]] out for the [[TV]] audience.) But the scenes I REALLY liked were the ones involving the [[death]] of Lord Kitchener aboard the HMS [[Hampshire]], [[almost]] exactly 90 [[years]] [[ago]]. The scenes of the doomed cruiser approaching the minefield in the [[storm]] were really chilling, as I recall.

Don't recall the musical score, but the comments of the others now have me curious. Get this one out on video! Like almost [[anyone]] [[further]] who has [[noted]] on this movie, I can only wonder why this has never appeared on video.

I [[recalls]] [[witnessing]] it at about age 12 on the "The [[Tardy]] [[Illustrating]]," circa 1972. I too [[reminding]] the [[poisons]] [[gasoline]] attack and the weirdly garbed horses. (I don't [[reminding]] the more horrific bits I've seen described here; they were [[apt]] [[chopping]] out for the [[TVS]] audience.) But the scenes I REALLY liked were the ones involving the [[muerte]] of Lord Kitchener aboard the HMS [[Gloucestershire]], [[practically]] exactly 90 [[yrs]] [[earlier]]. The scenes of the doomed cruiser approaching the minefield in the [[cyclone]] were really chilling, as I recall.

Don't recall the musical score, but the comments of the others now have me curious. Get this one out on video! --------------------------------------------- Result 2770 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Robert]] Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[turns]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound [[thriller]] in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- shows a versatility that is [[commendable]]. [[In]] the Gingerbread [[Man]] he actually has to [[work]] with [[something]] that, unfortunately, he isn't [[always]] very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those big, juicy almost pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[lawyer]] gets caught up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[nefarious]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most staggering ways, twists and plot ensues, yada yada. And it's surprising that Altman would really want to take on one of these "I saw that coming from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[surprise]] that [[pays]] off because, oddly enough, Altman is able to catch some of that very fine behavior, or rather is able to unintentionally coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The [[film]] drips with atmosphere (if not total superlative craftsmanship, sometimes it's good and sometimes just decent for Altman), as Savannah is possibly going to be hit by a big hurricane and the swamp and marshes and rain keep things soaked and muggy and humid. So the atmosphere is really [[potent]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Did]] I neglect Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a little weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman [[saw]] something captivating in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not entirely masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. [[Roberta]] Altman shouldn't make a movie like this, but the fact that he did- and that it [[revolves]] out to be a reasonably good and tightly-wound [[thrillers]] in that paperback-tradition of Grisham thrillers- shows a versatility that is [[laudable]]. [[Among]] the Gingerbread [[Dawg]] he actually has to [[works]] with [[anything]] that, unfortunately, he isn't [[incessantly]] very successful at, or at least it's not the first thing on his checklist as director: plot. There's one of those big, juicy almost pot-boiler plots where a sleazy [[solicitors]] gets caught up with a desperate low-class woman and then a [[abominable]] figure whom the woman is related with enters their lives in the most staggering ways, twists and plot ensues, yada yada. And it's surprising that Altman would really want to take on one of these "I saw that coming from back there!" endings, or just a such a semi-conventional thriller.

But it's a [[surprises]] that [[payroll]] off because, oddly enough, Altman is able to catch some of that very fine behavior, or rather is able to unintentionally coax it out of a very well-cast ensemble, of a small-town Georgian environment. The [[kino]] drips with atmosphere (if not total superlative craftsmanship, sometimes it's good and sometimes just decent for Altman), as Savannah is possibly going to be hit by a big hurricane and the swamp and marshes and rain keep things soaked and muggy and humid. So the atmosphere is really [[emphatic]], but so are performances from (sometimes) hysterical Kenneth Branaugh, Embeth Davitz as the 'woman' who lawyer Branaugh gets caught up with, and Robert Downey Jr (when is he *not* good?) as the private detective in Branaugh's employ. [[Ai]] I neglect Robert Duvall, who in just five minutes of screen time makes such an indelible impression to hang the bad-vibes of the picture on?

As said, some of the plot is a little weak, or just kind of standard (lawyer is divorced, bitter custody battle looms, innocent and goofy kids), but at the same time I think Altman [[sawthe]] something captivating in the material, something darker than some of the other Grisham works that has this standing out somehow. If it's not entirely masterful, it still works on its limited terms as a what-will-happen-next mystery-Southern-noir. --------------------------------------------- Result 2771 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (80%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. Yes, it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks much of the energy a [[comedy]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also got some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do superb work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the film give this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, impotent rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) I can't say that this film deserves anywhere near the amount of vitriol being heaped on it by some reviewers. Yes, it's bogged down by an overly-padded running time, hamfisted editing, and an overreliance on cheeseball special effects. And it lacks much of the energy a [[charade]] needs to get your average audience member to sit through it without checking his or her watch.

On the other hand, it's also got some laugh-out-loud funny lines, a talented and earnest cast, and the classic underdog premise. Macy, Stiller, and Azaria are brilliant as the "core" team, and Garofalo and Studi do superb work adding conflict and variety to the team. I can't say Reubens or Mitchell added much to the film overall, though each had a few chances to shine.

The plot, as I said above, is your classic "underdog-makes-good" stuff. No surprises there, since you know they're going to triumph. What makes it worthwhile is not the absurd, gaudy heroes and villains, but the dialogue and interplay between the characters. Underneath it all, these people are children at heart, who just want to do right. The best scenes in the film give this film its emotional grounding. Look at Azaria's relationship with his long-suffering mother; Macy's endearing innocence in his unwillingness to accept Cap. Amazing's secret identity; Stiller's rage (not unlike that one weird, spazzy kid you once knew who'd always go into quivering, impotent rages on the playground); Garofalo's desire to avenge her father. This childlike belief that a sense of justice and goodness will always make the world a better place, is the true appeal of super-hero comics; and underneath its parodic exterior, "Mystery Men" shows us why these hackneyed comic-book tropes matter to so many.

It never really gels into a satisfying whole, due to the huge number of half-baked subplots (romance, family life, conflicts within the team, etc.), but the main plot is such loopy fun that it makes up for that. The fact that it's supposed to be good, nonsensical fun seems to be lost on some of the reviewers here, so I'll issue a caveat: if you're the type of viewer who finds his enjoyment of an Itchy and Scratchy cartoon ruined by the unexplained and illogical ("Am I to believe this is some sort of.. *snort*... _magic_ xylophone?"), then you are far too literal-minded and humorless for this film. Go rent a Sandler film instead.

(7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 2772 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (65%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Visually speaking, this film is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its seeming message. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Just]] grinding and unpleasant to sit through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. Visually speaking, this film is stunning. It has some delightful black comedic moments. But on the whole, the plot is very clichéd, as is its seeming message. If you're a fan of over-the-top violence in mainstream movies like hostel or saw, you'll love it. If you're looking for something at all high-brow, steer away. I saw it as part of the edinburgh film festival 06, and I only chose it because I was looking for something disturbing. Ultimately, it isn't disturbing. [[Mere]] grinding and unpleasant to sit through. If you genuinely want to be challenged, go see something like The Lost. If you want to be grossed out, or tell your friends about a really messed up film, then this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The only redeeming quality of this overlong miscast melodrama is the scenery of southern France and the voice of Nana Mascouri singing the theme song. Stephanie Powers is miscast and betrayed by a phony accent. As has been pointed out, she is too old to play an 18 year old and looks far too young as a grandmother with a college age granddaughter? Lee Remick is good although she also is ageless in her later years. The talented Joanna Lumley is under utilized and also manages to look forever young when her middle aged son (Robert Urich) finally marries Grandma Stephanie Powers. Stacey Keach's ceaseless arrogance makes you wonder what these women saw in him. Don't know how any viewer could relate to his excessive portrayal? The most credible performance is given by Ian Richardson, who makes the rest of the cast look like rank amateurs. It strains credulity that the handsome male suitors in this epic would remain ever single while they patiently await the subject of their affections to finally consent to accept them. Can anybody believe that handsome Robert Urich would remain single for decades waiting for Stephanie Powers to finally accept his endless marriage proposals? The WW2 engagement between the Wehrmacht and the Marquis is laughable. To begin with, the Germans did not occupy the Provence section of France until late in the war, it was controlled by the Vichy French puppet government. We see the French resistance staging a daylight raid on Mistral's villa to steal sheets after which they all lounge under a bridge waiting for a lumbering truckload of Nazi troops to surprise and annihilate them? If you want to see a well acted mini-series set in a foreign country, don't watch Mistral's Daughter. A far better alternative would be The Thorn Birds. --------------------------------------------- Result 2774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was "just OK", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.

But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a [[charming]] movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel [[Brooks]] gives a [[great]] performance as the lead [[character]], I [[think]] [[somewhat]] [[different]] from his usual persona in his [[movies]].

There's not a lot of knockout [[jokes]] or something like that, but there are some [[rather]] hilarious scenes, and [[overall]] this is a very [[enjoyable]] and very easy to watch film.

[[Very]] [[recommended]]. Seeing as the vote average was pretty low, and the fact that the clerk in the video store thought it was "just OK", I didn't have much expectations when renting this film.

But contrary to the above, I enjoyed it a lot. This is a [[cute]] movie. It didn't need to grow on me, I enjoyed it from the beginning. Mel [[Creek]] gives a [[whopping]] performance as the lead [[nature]], I [[believe]] [[slightly]] [[divergent]] from his usual persona in his [[theater]].

There's not a lot of knockout [[pleasantries]] or something like that, but there are some [[comparatively]] hilarious scenes, and [[general]] this is a very [[pleasurable]] and very easy to watch film.

[[Hugely]] [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Fine performances and art direction do not a good movie make. This movie is so grim and depressing, I could feel absolutely no [[joy]] at the "happy" ending involving the union strike. The attempts at humor involving Lake's pregnancy are absolutely [[disastrous]], and any movie involving a Baldwin brother already has a strike against it. On a positive note, [[Lang]] is still one of America's great underrated actors, he alone almost makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I give this a 4. Fine performances and art direction do not a good movie make. This movie is so grim and depressing, I could feel absolutely no [[jubilation]] at the "happy" ending involving the union strike. The attempts at humor involving Lake's pregnancy are absolutely [[cataclysmic]], and any movie involving a Baldwin brother already has a strike against it. On a positive note, [[Protracted]] is still one of America's great underrated actors, he alone almost makes this worth keeping in the VCR. I give this a 4. --------------------------------------------- Result 2776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Good [[Deaths]]. Good [[Mask]]. Cool Axe. Good [[Looking]] [[Girls]]....But Watch Out!!! No Plot and [[Little]] Scares [[Completely]] lower it's Standards. They Tried to make an "I [[Know]] what you [[Did]] Last [[Summer]]", but [[ended]] up [[making]] A "Scream". But [[Hey]], What do people [[Expect]] From a [[Horror]] [[Movie]]? Answers [[Totally]] [[Vary]]. Rent It If You [[Want]], but I Regret Ever Seeing It. Good [[Fatality]]. Good [[Hides]]. Cool Axe. Good [[Researching]] [[Dame]]....But Watch Out!!! No Plot and [[Petit]] Scares [[Fully]] lower it's Standards. They Tried to make an "I [[Savoir]] what you [[Wo]] Last [[Sommer]]", but [[ending]] up [[doing]] A "Scream". But [[Hi]], What do people [[Expecting]] From a [[Terror]] [[Cinematography]]? Answers [[Wholly]] [[Differ]]. Rent It If You [[Wish]], but I Regret Ever Seeing It. --------------------------------------------- Result 2777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the worst adaption of a classic story I have ever seen. They needlessly modernize it and some points are actually just sick.

The songs rarely move along the story. They seem to be thrown in at random. The flying scene with Marley is pointless and ludicrous.

It's not only one of the worst movies I've seen, but it is definitely the worst musical I've ever seen.

It's probably only considered a classic because "A Christmas Carol" is such a classic story. Just because the original story was a classic doesn't mean that some cheap adaption is. --------------------------------------------- Result 2778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Several]] posters have [[quoted]] Renoir voicing his [[desire]] to make a film showing Ingrid Bergman smiling to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all whilst the harsh reality is that only a select few got to do so. At this stage of her [[career]] Bergman couldn't get [[arrested]]; in 1949 she [[left]] Hollywood to make a picture in Europe, [[fell]] for director Roberto Rossellini and never [[looked]] forward. After five turkeys in Italy she was probably ready to open a vein but within the year, after making this for Renoir, she was back where she [[belonged]] and with an [[Oscar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[movies]] that Renoir [[made]] in [[color]] around this time and on balance it's better than The Golden Coach, which isn't hard, and about even with French Can Can. Renoir probably figured that with so much going for her Bergman could get away with a couple of wooden leading men and Renoir picked two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid mahogany in both cases. The plot is actually based on a real incident in French history but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and concentrate on replicating the paintings of his father in set up after set up. In its pastel colors it resembles another film of the period Les Grandes Manouvres which is no bad thing. All in all it remains a [[pleasant]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. [[Assorted]] posters have [[quoting]] Renoir voicing his [[desired]] to make a film showing Ingrid Bergman smiling to camera. The short answer is wouldn't we all whilst the harsh reality is that only a select few got to do so. At this stage of her [[quarry]] Bergman couldn't get [[netted]]; in 1949 she [[gauche]] Hollywood to make a picture in Europe, [[dipped]] for director Roberto Rossellini and never [[seemed]] forward. After five turkeys in Italy she was probably ready to open a vein but within the year, after making this for Renoir, she was back where she [[possessed]] and with an [[Oskar]] to boot for Anastasia. This is one of three [[theater]] that Renoir [[effected]] in [[dye]] around this time and on balance it's better than The Golden Coach, which isn't hard, and about even with French Can Can. Renoir probably figured that with so much going for her Bergman could get away with a couple of wooden leading men and Renoir picked two doozys in Jean Marais and Mel Ferrer, solid mahogany in both cases. The plot is actually based on a real incident in French history but Renoir is content to give it a once-over-lightly and concentrate on replicating the paintings of his father in set up after set up. In its pastel colors it resembles another film of the period Les Grandes Manouvres which is no bad thing. All in all it remains a [[nice]] trifle showcasing a beautiful and charismatic actress. --------------------------------------------- Result 2779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and considering that it was made in 1937, the results are [[excellent]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been called wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in fact a splendid performance, and one of the best transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the cast, well this was MGM. They had the biggest roster of stars and character actors in Hollywood at the time, and a big budget to pay for the best, and in the end they got the best.

The film softens Wang Lung's marriage to O-lan somewhat. In the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he takes on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. I first read Pearl S Buck's splendid novel in my ninth grade history class, and I enjoyed every thrilling page of it. It was almost inevitable that Hollywood would get hold of it, and considering that it was made in 1937, the results are [[sumptuous]].

Certain things have to be accepted: in 1937 there was no question of casting Asian actors in a major Hollywood film. In a way this renders the end product rather more interesting than if they had been able to use a more authentic-looking cast.

With that obstacle to overcome, executive producer Irving Thalberg and director Sidney Franklin (among others) took the trouble to hand-pick a splendid and stellar cast. Paul Muni plays Wang Lung. Muni was at the peak of his powers as an actor during this period, and could very nearly play anything he put his mind to. Once you get past the makeup (it's good, but no one is going to really mistake him for a Chinese man), his performance has all the verisimilitude of his best work.

Then there is Luise Rainer. Coming off an Oscar win the previous year for her performance in THE GREAT ZIEGFELD, the Viennese actress's star was on the rise and she was given the plum role of O-lan despite her lack of experience in Hollywood. Her performance won her a second consecutive Oscar, the first time in history that happened.

Much criticism has been leveled at Rainer's performance, and her Oscar win here. She has been called wooden and one-note. There is a small grain of truth in that. HOWEVER, that being said, all you need to do is go back to the book. For Rainer, though not Chinese, played O-lan pretty much as Buck wrote her; it is in fact a splendid performance, and one of the best transfers from book to screen I have ever witnessed.

As for the rest of the cast, well this was MGM. They had the biggest roster of stars and character actors in Hollywood at the time, and a big budget to pay for the best, and in the end they got the best.

The film softens Wang Lung's marriage to O-lan somewhat. In the novel, with wealth come the lusts of the flesh and he takes on a concubine, a move which devastates his wife but her feelings as a mere woman do not concern him. In the film, a contrite Wang Lung returns to his wife on her deathbed the two pearls he had taken from her years before, realizing too late that she was his true love.

Corny, yes. But that's Hollywood. Considering the obstacles they were up against, the film might well have opened to screams of laughter. But despite the noticeable dearth of real Asians in the cast, this film has worn surprisingly well with the passage of seventy-three years. In fact the most amazing thing about this film is how good it is, when it might so easily have been a disaster. --------------------------------------------- Result 2780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I had been looking forward to seeing Dreamgirls for quite a while...what with all it's raving reviews, nominations and media attention. And I must [[say]], the [[first]] quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[music]] scene back then. [[However]], as the [[movie]] wore on, me and my whole family were [[bored]] out of our [[wits]]. The singing just kept [[coming]], one after the other. I mean [[seriously]], just one more music number and it [[would]] have broke even with RENT.

Furthermore, I noticed hardly any character development in any of the characters; I just didn't care what happened to them! Even when Eddie Murphy's character died of a drug overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The characters were given a [[flimsy]] background about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there personalities were not revealed enough to draw me in.

Finally, the conflict was simply not significant enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the lack of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were wonderful movies in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would best suit [[someone]] who doesn't really care about an overall story, yet would [[enjoy]] two hours of entertaining and fun singing performances. I had been looking forward to seeing Dreamgirls for quite a while...what with all it's raving reviews, nominations and media attention. And I must [[tell]], the [[firstly]] quarter of the movie was good! It really portrayed the black [[musica]] scene back then. [[Conversely]], as the [[kino]] wore on, me and my whole family were [[drilled]] out of our [[spirit]]. The singing just kept [[forthcoming]], one after the other. I mean [[profoundly]], just one more music number and it [[should]] have broke even with RENT.

Furthermore, I noticed hardly any character development in any of the characters; I just didn't care what happened to them! Even when Eddie Murphy's character died of a drug overdose, I knew I should have been sad, but I just couldn't feel any emotion for that character. The characters were given a [[fragile]] background about singing in their childhood and whatnot, but there personalities were not revealed enough to draw me in.

Finally, the conflict was simply not significant enough to make the viewer care, which goes along with the lack of character development. This movie reminded me of a copy-cat movie based on Ray, Chicago, and Rent (Ray and Chicago were wonderful movies in my opinion). Overall I think this movie would best suit [[anybody]] who doesn't really care about an overall story, yet would [[enjoys]] two hours of entertaining and fun singing performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 2781 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[agree]] with [[everyone]] who says that this series was the [[best]] of the 'spy' genre. My husband and I were [[captivated]] by it when it [[first]] aired in the US and watched every episode. I tried at that [[time]] to purchase the series (I did tape all of it) but was [[told]] by WGBH that it was not [[available]]. I even considered writing to Ian Holm to see if he might have a [[copy]]! Like others, I purchased and read the Deighton series (in part to understand the complicated plot.) [[If]] the [[original]] [[version]] ever comes [[available]] on DVD, I'll be [[among]] the first in line to snap up a copy. Ian Holm's [[portrayal]] of the [[vulnerable]] but [[courageous]] [[Bernard]] [[Samson]] was [[amazing]]. (He is [[always]] [[amazing]].) I [[concur]] with [[someone]] who says that this series was the [[better]] of the 'spy' genre. My husband and I were [[fascinated]] by it when it [[fiirst]] aired in the US and watched every episode. I tried at that [[period]] to purchase the series (I did tape all of it) but was [[say]] by WGBH that it was not [[approachable]]. I even considered writing to Ian Holm to see if he might have a [[copier]]! Like others, I purchased and read the Deighton series (in part to understand the complicated plot.) [[Unless]] the [[initial]] [[stepping]] ever comes [[approachable]] on DVD, I'll be [[between]] the first in line to snap up a copy. Ian Holm's [[portrait]] of the [[susceptible]] but [[plucky]] [[Barnard]] [[Samsun]] was [[staggering]]. (He is [[perpetually]] [[staggering]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 2782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Carol]], the young [[girl]] at the center of the story, is transplanted to a [[foreign]] land, Spain, at the height of the Civil War [[conflict]] in the [[late]] 30s. For this [[girl]], everything is [[new]], in it's foreignness. The [[war]] and her father are her [[constant]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial culture that is years [[behind]] what she has in New York.

Imanol Uribe directs this film by the [[numbers]]. Carol's family is [[obviously]] divided, while Carol's mother is married to someone that is an air force pilot with the leftist faction, the rest of the family's [[sympathies]] are with the Franco and the fascists that won the conflict.

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[easy]] [[film]] to watch. Northern Spain's magnificent landscape is shown. Don't [[expect]] a lot of action since most of what happens revolves around Carol and the young boys she befriends.

Clara Lago plays Carol with [[sincerity]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's mother Aurora, the one that went away to America. Rosa Maria Sarda is Maruja, the teacher who befriends Carol. Carmelo Gomez, plays Alfonso, the man that Aurora left behind when she left for America. This actor, who usually has lead roles in most Spanish [[films]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an enigma throughout the movie. [[Carole]], the young [[female]] at the center of the story, is transplanted to a [[alien]] land, Spain, at the height of the Civil War [[feuding]] in the [[tardy]] 30s. For this [[chick]], everything is [[novel]], in it's foreignness. The [[warfare]] and her father are her [[incessant]] worries, while she has to immerse herself in a provincial culture that is years [[backside]] what she has in New York.

Imanol Uribe directs this film by the [[digit]]. Carol's family is [[patently]] divided, while Carol's mother is married to someone that is an air force pilot with the leftist faction, the rest of the family's [[solidarity]] are with the Franco and the fascists that won the conflict.

The story adds nothing to what has already been told, much better, but it's an [[uncomplicated]] [[kino]] to watch. Northern Spain's magnificent landscape is shown. Don't [[hopes]] a lot of action since most of what happens revolves around Carol and the young boys she befriends.

Clara Lago plays Carol with [[honesty]] and innocence. Maria Barranco is Carol's mother Aurora, the one that went away to America. Rosa Maria Sarda is Maruja, the teacher who befriends Carol. Carmelo Gomez, plays Alfonso, the man that Aurora left behind when she left for America. This actor, who usually has lead roles in most Spanish [[kino]], doesn't have anything to do, as he remains an enigma throughout the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow ([[Robert]] Urich) finally accepts the invitation to work the Micro-Digitech [[Corporation]] in a space suit project, he moves with his beloved wife Patricia (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy (Soleil Moon Frye) to a [[huge]] modern house in the corporation compound. They meet their friend Tom Peterson (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[completely]] [[adapted]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[invites]] the Winslow family to join the Steaming [[Springs]] Country Club. [[Tom]] [[tries]] to seduce Matt [[telling]] him that every member of the club has a meteoric professional ascension in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[tempted]] with the offer. Later he is introduced to the director of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends [[Patricia]] and convinces her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the behavior of his [[family]] and decides to [[investigate]] the club, finding an evil secret about Jessica and the members.

In the 80's, when I [[saw]] "Invitation to Hell", I liked this movie that partially [[recalls]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the [[behavior]] in a suburban compound. I have just [[seen]] it today, and I found a [[great]] metaphoric message against the [[big]] corporations, when people literally sell their souls to the devil to [[climb]] positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author [[intended]] to [[give]] this interpretation to the [[story]], but I believe it fits [[perfectly]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite Para o [[Inferno]]" ("[[Invitation]] to Hell") When the scientist and family man Matt Winslow ([[Roberta]] Urich) finally accepts the invitation to work the Micro-Digitech [[Businesses]] in a space suit project, he moves with his beloved wife Patricia (Joanna Cassidy) and their son Robbie (Barret Oliver) and daughter Chrissy (Soleil Moon Frye) to a [[gargantuan]] modern house in the corporation compound. They meet their friend Tom Peterson (Joe Regalbuto) and his family [[altogether]] [[tailoring]] to the new lifestyle, and Tom [[calls]] the Winslow family to join the Steaming [[Fountains]] Country Club. [[Thom]] [[endeavour]] to seduce Matt [[saying]] him that every member of the club has a meteoric professional ascension in Micro-Digitech, but Matt is not [[attempted]] with the offer. Later he is introduced to the director of the club, Jessica Jones (Susan Lucci) that befriends [[Pat]] and convinces her to join the club with her children. Matt feels the changing in the behavior of his [[families]] and decides to [[surveys]] the club, finding an evil secret about Jessica and the members.

In the 80's, when I [[noticed]] "Invitation to Hell", I liked this movie that partially [[reminded]] "The Stepford Wives", with people changing the [[behaviour]] in a suburban compound. I have just [[noticed]] it today, and I found a [[whopping]] metaphoric message against the [[massive]] corporations, when people literally sell their souls to the devil to [[jumps]] positions and earn higher salaries. I am not sure whether the author [[designed]] to [[lend]] this interpretation to the [[history]], but I believe it fits [[altogether]]. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Convite Para o [[Hell]]" ("[[Invited]] to Hell") --------------------------------------------- Result 2784 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] My Tutor [[Friend]] is a well scripted romance [[comedy]] movie that has something [[similar]] to My Sassy [[Girl]].. there's no [[kissing]]/[[sex]] scenes. Hollywood should learn more from Korean productions. [[Sex]] is not [[always]] [[required]] in a [[good]] romantic [[movie]].

The [[movie]] is of light hearted tone with occasional cartoon CG scenes [[blended]] into the movie. I like the part when Ji-Hoon almost kissed Su-Wan. The funniest moment is when Ji-Hoon punched Su-Wan's first [[love]] because he dumped Su-Wan for another girl and he is going to be a father [[soon]]. How he became a father was revealed in the next scene, which brings [[smiles]] to the audience.

Mao points: 8/10 My Tutor [[Boyfriend]] is a well scripted romance [[parody]] movie that has something [[identical]] to My Sassy [[Daughter]].. there's no [[hugging]]/[[sexuality]] scenes. Hollywood should learn more from Korean productions. [[Sexually]] is not [[permanently]] [[needs]] in a [[buena]] romantic [[flick]].

The [[cinematography]] is of light hearted tone with occasional cartoon CG scenes [[mixing]] into the movie. I like the part when Ji-Hoon almost kissed Su-Wan. The funniest moment is when Ji-Hoon punched Su-Wan's first [[adored]] because he dumped Su-Wan for another girl and he is going to be a father [[promptly]]. How he became a father was revealed in the next scene, which brings [[grins]] to the audience.

Mao points: 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2785 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I watched the un-aired [[episodes]] online and I was so [[sad]] that the show won't be back. It had the [[best]] [[cast]] of [[mature]], talented [[actors]] and an [[amazing]] chemistry. It seemed like all the [[actors]] are personal [[friends]] in real [[life]]. Towards the [[end]] the [[show]] became [[engaging]], sexy and highly watchable. Of course, some of the story lines are not realistic, so what... The [[characters]] are all [[likable]] and you [[root]] for them. The show reminded me a [[cross]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the City" and "Felicity". [[Big]] [[kudos]] to all the cast. [[Note]] to ABC execs: Nielsen ratings [[reports]] do not [[show]] you true results. The show audience will mostly record it. I've been very disappointed with major [[networks]] for flooding us with reality-TV or teenage oriented shows. Why to get a mature, thoughtful, well-acted material we have to switch to HBO or FX? I can only thank the [[network]] for putting the [[rest]] of the episodes online. The new stream media will gain more and more popularity [[among]] [[viewers]]. I watched the un-aired [[spells]] online and I was so [[unfortunate]] that the show won't be back. It had the [[better]] [[casting]] of [[ripe]], talented [[actresses]] and an [[unbelievable]] chemistry. It seemed like all the [[protagonists]] are personal [[friendships]] in real [[living]]. Towards the [[termination]] the [[spectacle]] became [[participate]], sexy and highly watchable. Of course, some of the story lines are not realistic, so what... The [[personage]] are all [[likeable]] and you [[provenance]] for them. The show reminded me a [[traverse]] between 2 other favorites: "Sex and the City" and "Felicity". [[Gargantuan]] [[laurels]] to all the cast. [[Remark]] to ABC execs: Nielsen ratings [[report]] do not [[displaying]] you true results. The show audience will mostly record it. I've been very disappointed with major [[webs]] for flooding us with reality-TV or teenage oriented shows. Why to get a mature, thoughtful, well-acted material we have to switch to HBO or FX? I can only thank the [[networking]] for putting the [[roosting]] of the episodes online. The new stream media will gain more and more popularity [[between]] [[spectators]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2786 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (75%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] This [[early]] John Wayne Lone Star [[western]] has a bit more going for it than the run-of-the-mill oaters Wayne had been making for Lone Star up until that time. For one, it has his old friend Paul Fix in it; Fix, being a much better actor then the standard Lone Star villain, brings a much [[needed]] professionalism to the surroundings instead of the usual hesitant line-readings often delivered in these oaters. The plot, about mistaken identity, payroll robbery and murder, is as trite and perfunctory as you'd expect it to be in a 1930s low-budget western, but Wayne's strapping good looks, easygoing charm and way with a line go a long way to making this more enjoyable. Plump, balding Eddy Chandler isn't quite believable as Wayne's womanizing "partner", and there's a running gag about something that happens whenever Chandler and Wayne are about to get into a fistfight that grows tiresome. On the other hand, Wayne's love interest is played by none other than Mary Kornman, the little "Mary" of the early "Little Rascals" fame. She is a grown-up 20-year-old now, blonde and cute as a button. Most of Wayne's leading ladies in these Lone Star/Monogram "B's" were fairly bland and colorless, but Mary is perky, cute and, yes, sexy. There's a scene in the general store, where she works, in which Wayne asks her to get him a bottle of "nerve tonic", which happens to be on the top shelf, so she has to get a ladder and climb up to the top shelf. Wayne's ogling her pert little backside as she ascends the steps, then again as she comes down, then again a few minuter later when he asks her to climb up and get him another bottle is surprisingly racy for a film made in 1935. Wayne makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is definitely checking out her butt. Anyway, it's an interesting little "B", not great, but not as choppy and random as many of his LoneStar productions of the time. The final gunfight isn't handled all that well, and Chandler gets somewhat irritating after a while, but all in all, it's worth a look, if only to see a cute and sexy Mary Kornman. This [[precocious]] John Wayne Lone Star [[occidental]] has a bit more going for it than the run-of-the-mill oaters Wayne had been making for Lone Star up until that time. For one, it has his old friend Paul Fix in it; Fix, being a much better actor then the standard Lone Star villain, brings a much [[needs]] professionalism to the surroundings instead of the usual hesitant line-readings often delivered in these oaters. The plot, about mistaken identity, payroll robbery and murder, is as trite and perfunctory as you'd expect it to be in a 1930s low-budget western, but Wayne's strapping good looks, easygoing charm and way with a line go a long way to making this more enjoyable. Plump, balding Eddy Chandler isn't quite believable as Wayne's womanizing "partner", and there's a running gag about something that happens whenever Chandler and Wayne are about to get into a fistfight that grows tiresome. On the other hand, Wayne's love interest is played by none other than Mary Kornman, the little "Mary" of the early "Little Rascals" fame. She is a grown-up 20-year-old now, blonde and cute as a button. Most of Wayne's leading ladies in these Lone Star/Monogram "B's" were fairly bland and colorless, but Mary is perky, cute and, yes, sexy. There's a scene in the general store, where she works, in which Wayne asks her to get him a bottle of "nerve tonic", which happens to be on the top shelf, so she has to get a ladder and climb up to the top shelf. Wayne's ogling her pert little backside as she ascends the steps, then again as she comes down, then again a few minuter later when he asks her to climb up and get him another bottle is surprisingly racy for a film made in 1935. Wayne makes no attempt to hide the fact that he is definitely checking out her butt. Anyway, it's an interesting little "B", not great, but not as choppy and random as many of his LoneStar productions of the time. The final gunfight isn't handled all that well, and Chandler gets somewhat irritating after a while, but all in all, it's worth a look, if only to see a cute and sexy Mary Kornman. --------------------------------------------- Result 2787 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I really don't understand why people get so [[upset]] and pan this movie! Remember folks, this is an SNL movie, not anything that is supposed to be unpredictable and original in plot or direction! The Ladies Man is a hilarious movie, albeit stupid at [[times]], with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[WONDERFUL]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim Meadows. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are unbelievable but its [[comedy]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this hilarious [[film]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people [[take]] this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent comedy. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" I really don't understand why people get so [[enraged]] and pan this movie! Remember folks, this is an SNL movie, not anything that is supposed to be unpredictable and original in plot or direction! The Ladies Man is a hilarious movie, albeit stupid at [[time]], with a wacked-out cast and, as usual, [[SUMPTUOUS]] performances by Will Ferrel and Tim Meadows. Yes some of the jokes are stupid, and yes, the characters are unbelievable but its [[travesty]]! I really don't understand how anyone couldn't laugh a lot during this hilarious [[kino]]. Anyway, all I ask is that people [[taking]] this as it is--an SNL, silly and irreverent comedy. Nothing that will win awards, but nonetheless, some modern comedy gold. "10-4 Apricot!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2788 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I couldn't not recommend a Christmas movie more than this worthless piece of drivel (trust me, double negatives are required here -- it's that bad). This film was in trouble from the opening credits when it was revealed that the screenwriter was the same person as the songwriter. The musical numbers are all far too long and none of them any good ("Thank You Very Much" has a decent melody, but the lyrics are stupid beyond words). I would gladly bear the chains worn by Scrooge in the film's bizarre hell sequence than sit through this insult to movie musicals again.

The only entertaining part of this movie (completely unintentional by the way) involves Alec Guinness as Jacob Marley. Dressed in a silly powder white costume, Guinness foppishly prances through his scenes in what was either an attempt to make it appear as though he was floating like a ghost, or to show his utter disdain with having to be in this dreadful movie. Albert Finney, meanwhile, blends the best of Alistar Sim and Charles Laughton to create his hopelessly loathsome character of Quasimodo/Scrooge. Finney's Scrooge is so hideous a person, it's impossible to believe his transformation.

Steer clear of this abomination of filmmaking at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 2789 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you sure will [[appreciate]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[blood]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren Illusion) & Ryu Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[touch]] the zenith in the final showdown at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests versus Buddhist monks and the [[beautiful]] visions provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A [[good]] Japanese [[flick]] for a rainy summer night. Well, if you are one of those Katana's film-nuts (just like me) you sure will [[grateful]] this metaphysical Katana swinging [[chrissakes]] spitting samurai action flick.

Starring Tadanobu Asano (Vital, Barren Illusion) & Ryu Daisuke (Kagemusha). This samurai war between Heiki's clan versus Genji's clan [[touching]] the zenith in the final showdown at Gojo bridge. The body-count is countless.

Demons, magic swords, Shinto priests versus Buddhist monks and the [[admirable]] visions provided by maestro Sogo Ishii will do the rest.

A [[buena]] Japanese [[movie]] for a rainy summer night. --------------------------------------------- Result 2790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Zombie Bloodbath is a movie made by zombie fans for zombie fans with a [[true]] love of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The fact this movie [[got]] [[made]] at all is a [[miracle]]. It is like a huge mashing of [[every]] [[zombie]] movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to enjoy with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little movie three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie Bloodbath is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[fun]] [[movie]]. If you [[hate]] this [[film]] so much, don't [[buy]] it. There is no need for personal [[attacks]] and to [[call]] the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[great]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to [[trash]] others. There are bad [[reviews]] and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[forum]] to personally attack the director of this [[movie]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. Zombie Bloodbath is a movie made by zombie fans for zombie fans with a [[veritable]] love of the Horror genre. As I understand it from the commentary and things I have read, it was made during the huge Midwest flood of 1993 when half of Missouri was underwater. Buildings were under water. cars and houses were underwater. One article said that zombies and the crew from this movie would help sandbag the river after shooting each day. The fact this movie [[did]] [[introduced]] at all is a [[miracles]]. It is like a huge mashing of [[all]] [[ghoul]] movie ever made put through a Troma filter. It is a party movie to enjoy with friends who like loads of splatter and goofy characters. And it is fast paced and energetic and really funny.

A toxic spill accident in a nuclear power facility causes people to melt down or turn into zombies. The local Government covers it up, tears down the factory and builds houses over it. Some ground shifting (?) causes a cave opening to develop and some new residents find the cave and unleash the undead on the newly built community. From there it just gets crazy and gory and fun.

I have read these reviews on here a few times. And it seems obvious to me that the same person attacked this fun little movie three times as a different reviewer, using fake names. They use the same words and sentences. Zombie Bloodbath is cheap. It is raw. It has some bad acting. So does half the movies made. There is much much WORSE out there than this [[funny]] [[movies]]. If you [[hates]] this [[filmmaking]] so much, don't [[acquiring]] it. There is no need for personal [[attack]] and to [[calling]] the crew or cast "Trailer Trash." And it is obvious you are not from Australia or England. It is just upsetting that this [[sublime]] service, the IMDb does not catch people using it just to [[detritus]] others. There are bad [[assessment]] and good reviews, and I don't mind those. I give both bad and good reviews myself. But it is painfully obvious that some fool just wants to use this [[fora]] to personally attack the director of this [[kino]]. Sad.

Some of these so called "Reviewers" even basically sue their "review" just to promote their own movies. One called this film Boring - well, love it or hate it, one thing you can NEVER say about this film is that it is boring. It moves fast and never has a dull spot.

Oh and this reviewer from The Netherlands??? Um - LIAR. You tried to post this same review at Amazon and it got yanked there. The SAME review only it said it was from Missouri.

This nonsense HAS to stop. Love it or Hate it - give it a real review or type nothing. It is obvious you have not seen the films.

But for the record, I have and though this one is not nearly the best that I have seen, it is far from the worst. And even the worst I would give an actual REVOEW and would not attack the director personally.

Hope this review helps some people see through the stupidity going on here. --------------------------------------------- Result 2791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I don't like using the word "awful" to describe any work of the cinema for which a great deal of time, effort, talent and money is spent in its creation but Zefferelli's attempt to adapt Charlotte Brontë's novel 'Jane Eyre' is a [[total]] waste of time.

The script is [[lacking]] in finesse and power, everything [[explained]] to the viewer in no uncertain terms, leaving [[little]] to the imagination. The lead actors are [[woefully]] miscast, clearly hired for their star names, and the musical score drippy and dull. Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt have absolutely no chemistry with one another at all. She is like a wet noodle, worse [[even]] than Joan Fontaine, who at [[least]] was capable of some modicum of emotional involvement in what should be a story of frustrated passion. And William Hurt acts the entire film on one tone and that tone is [[flat]] and [[devoid]] of [[energy]]. Of course the limp and [[vapid]] script does not [[aid]] any of these [[otherwise]] fine actors in their [[efforts]] to [[bring]] any [[whiff]] of [[life]] to this [[flick]].

Joan Plowright's [[Mrs]] Fairfax is like some Disney [[creation]] who [[keeps]] popping up to sweeten scenes in which she would have been best [[left]] out.

There is no [[mystery]] [[surrounding]] the [[story]] of Rochester's first [[wife]]. The role of the would-be second [[wife]], played like a Barbie Doll by Elle MacPhearson, is an [[empty]] [[cipher]].

Fiona Shaw, a very [[great]] actress, is completely wasted as Jane's [[Aunt]], [[Mrs]] Reed. She would have been better-cast as Mrs Fairfax. Only Amanda Root, as Jane's [[beloved]] [[school]] [[teacher]], evokes any authentic sympathy or believability.

I [[saw]] this version of 'Jane Eyre' after viewing Robert Young's for British television, made in 1997, starring Ciaran Hinds, Samantha Morgan and Gemma Jones. There is no comparison. Young's vital, romantic and deeply moving version is like an [[exploding]] nova [[compared]] to Zefferelli's wet squib.

I will be interested now to see the 1970 version with Timothy Dalton, about which I've read some very good things on this web-site. I am amazed at how many people liked Zefferelli's Yorkshire picture book.

About all I can say good about this film is that the house is beautiful and the cinematography vividly colored, beyond that it is a complete dud. I don't like using the word "awful" to describe any work of the cinema for which a great deal of time, effort, talent and money is spent in its creation but Zefferelli's attempt to adapt Charlotte Brontë's novel 'Jane Eyre' is a [[totals]] waste of time.

The script is [[missing]] in finesse and power, everything [[explains]] to the viewer in no uncertain terms, leaving [[small]] to the imagination. The lead actors are [[unfortunately]] miscast, clearly hired for their star names, and the musical score drippy and dull. Charlotte Gainsbourg and William Hurt have absolutely no chemistry with one another at all. She is like a wet noodle, worse [[yet]] than Joan Fontaine, who at [[fewer]] was capable of some modicum of emotional involvement in what should be a story of frustrated passion. And William Hurt acts the entire film on one tone and that tone is [[apartment]] and [[bereft]] of [[energies]]. Of course the limp and [[insipid]] script does not [[helps]] any of these [[alternately]] fine actors in their [[endeavor]] to [[brings]] any [[scent]] of [[vida]] to this [[gesture]].

Joan Plowright's [[Corinne]] Fairfax is like some Disney [[creations]] who [[retains]] popping up to sweeten scenes in which she would have been best [[exited]] out.

There is no [[riddle]] [[surrounds]] the [[fairytales]] of Rochester's first [[woman]]. The role of the would-be second [[mujer]], played like a Barbie Doll by Elle MacPhearson, is an [[hollow]] [[codes]].

Fiona Shaw, a very [[wondrous]] actress, is completely wasted as Jane's [[Tata]], [[Corinne]] Reed. She would have been better-cast as Mrs Fairfax. Only Amanda Root, as Jane's [[sweetheart]] [[tuition]] [[maestro]], evokes any authentic sympathy or believability.

I [[seen]] this version of 'Jane Eyre' after viewing Robert Young's for British television, made in 1997, starring Ciaran Hinds, Samantha Morgan and Gemma Jones. There is no comparison. Young's vital, romantic and deeply moving version is like an [[shattering]] nova [[likened]] to Zefferelli's wet squib.

I will be interested now to see the 1970 version with Timothy Dalton, about which I've read some very good things on this web-site. I am amazed at how many people liked Zefferelli's Yorkshire picture book.

About all I can say good about this film is that the house is beautiful and the cinematography vividly colored, beyond that it is a complete dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 2792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This movie is even a big step down [[form]] the typical [[fare]] dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[horrible]]. Even Boman Irani, who always manages to shine, goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not memorable either. And in [[spite]] trying hard, the female leads don't [[manage]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[capable]] of far better [[projects]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this [[monstrosity]] is [[even]] beneath his [[limited]] [[capabilities]] as an [[actor]]. Esha Deol and Amrita Rao are [[horrible]] in badly [[written]] cliché [[roles]]. It's high time for Indra Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. [[Hope]] he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in better hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. This movie is even a big step down [[shape]] the typical [[tariffs]] dished out by Bollywood. The performances were [[scary]]. Even Boman Irani, who always manages to shine, goes completely OTT as the villain. The soundtrack is not memorable either. And in [[sadness]] trying hard, the female leads don't [[administer]] to be "sexy". Vivek Oberoi is [[able]] of far better [[project]] while Fardeen Khan seems to be stuck in similar fare for the time being. But this [[horror]] is [[yet]] beneath his [[restrained]] [[functionality]] as an [[protagonist]]. Esha Deol and Amrita Rao are [[heinous]] in badly [[writes]] cliché [[duties]]. It's high time for Indra Kumar to hang up his directorial hat. [[Hopes]] he never directs another eyesore like this. Future of Hindi movies are in better hands now. To sum it up, stay far away from waste of celluloid. --------------------------------------------- Result 2793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] This [[film]] is so [[bad]], you can't [[imagine]]. The acting is terrible, even worse than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any sense at all. The story [[could]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot [[holes]] were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[satisfy]] the audience. The actors were [[handsome]] for example the [[former]] Miss [[Switzerland]] and the main character was even hung (woah!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.yes that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm [[going]] to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only want to be entertained for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this [[kind]] of films influence [[teenagers]] to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in fact is only stupid and turns them into brainless ignorant and egocentric idiots. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[avoid]] this [[terrible]] flick at any costs and for that to save your wits!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) This [[cinematography]] is so [[negative]], you can't [[reckon]]. The acting is terrible, even worse than in third class soap operas. An it is a shame that this movie was the most successful in the past 20 years in Switzerland. The interactions between the soldiers didn't make any sense at all. The story [[wo]] have been taken out from a bravo photo-story, the dialogues were as wooden as Treebeard and the plot [[orifices]] were bigger than the black hole in the middle of our galaxy. But nowadays it doesn't need much to [[cater]] the audience. The actors were [[magnificent]] for example the [[past]] Miss [[Suisse]] and the main character was even hung (woah!!) and there certainly was much abuse of drugs. That's real cool man! Particularly for 12 and 13 year old teens. But the media created an atmosphere in witch you was not allowed to reject the film because they manipulated the peer group dynamics by telling implicitly that you are a nerd if you don't go along with the other `sheep' and say.yes that is exactly what it was like when I was in the army/ that's exactly what I'm [[go]] to do when I must go to the army.. to every cheesy action that had to do with drugs and coolness. And don't think I like the army. I was there and I hated it but this film is worse than cleaning up the sticky toilet with a teeth brush (which I was forced to do because I offended an lieutenant) It is not necessary for every film to be sophisticated. Sometimes you only want to be entertained for a few hours and forget about problems and I think its not a bad thing. But this [[genera]] of films influence [[youthful]] to much by showing them a cool lifestyle which in fact is only stupid and turns them into brainless ignorant and egocentric idiots. But since I now that my opinion isn't very popular I will be quiet now and recommend you to [[shirk]] this [[heinous]] flick at any costs and for that to save your wits!

2/10

(sorry for my bad English) --------------------------------------------- Result 2794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This has [[got]] to be the cheesiest, stupidest, most [[retarded]] monster [[film]] of all time. It's a [[complete]] joke that this [[even]] [[surfaced]] into [[theaters]]. This is sort of like [[watching]] the Loch Ness monster in [[rural]] [[America]]. This [[movie]] [[deserves]] to be [[thrown]] in a toilet and [[completely]] forgotten. [[John]] Carradine, [[shame]] on you. The people [[involved]] in this moronic pile of [[trash]] [[need]] to be lobotomized. [[Wait]]! [[Maybe]] I'm [[giving]] them too much credit. I'm sure they were lobotomized before the [[filming]]. How [[else]] can one [[explain]] the [[utter]] and [[sheer]] [[stupidity]] that this bucket of [[crap]] [[contains]]. Don't waste a minute of your [[life]] watching this. Don't [[even]] waste your [[time]] [[sending]] a [[review]]. This has [[gets]] to be the cheesiest, stupidest, most [[moronic]] monster [[cinematographic]] of all time. It's a [[finish]] joke that this [[yet]] [[emerged]] into [[cinema]]. This is sort of like [[staring]] the Loch Ness monster in [[agrarian]] [[Latina]]. This [[kino]] [[merits]] to be [[hurled]] in a toilet and [[wholly]] forgotten. [[Giovanni]] Carradine, [[embarrass]] on you. The people [[embroiled]] in this moronic pile of [[detritus]] [[required]] to be lobotomized. [[Suspense]]! [[Conceivably]] I'm [[confer]] them too much credit. I'm sure they were lobotomized before the [[photographing]]. How [[further]] can one [[elucidate]] the [[absolute]] and [[pure]] [[craziness]] that this bucket of [[baloney]] [[encompasses]]. Don't waste a minute of your [[lives]] watching this. Don't [[yet]] waste your [[times]] [[dispatches]] a [[revise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2795 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This is a [[great]] [[film]] [[Classic]] from the 40's and well produced. There are very [[dramatic]] scenes in this [[film]] with [[John]] Garfield,(Al Schmid),"Force of [[Evil]]",'48 and Dane [[Clark]],(Lee Diamond),"Last [[Rites]]",'88, [[fighting]] the [[Japs]] during WWII being [[completely]] [[surrounded]] and with only one machine-gun. When Al Schmid was [[able]] to [[go]] [[home]] after being [[wounded]] with a [[horrible]] [[injury]], his [[problems]] just [[started]] to [[begin]] with his family and [[engaged]] [[girl]] [[friend]]. Dane Clark [[gave]] an [[outstanding]] supporting role as Lee Diamond, who did everything to [[help]] his [[buddy]] Al [[get]] his [[life]] [[together]] again. There is never a [[complete]] [[victory]] to [[War]] and [[lets]] not [[forget]] all the [[Brave]] [[Wounded]] [[Military]] [[personnel]] in Veterans Hospitals from All the [[Wars]] and our [[present]] [[Iraq]] Vets! This is a [[large]] [[kino]] [[Conventional]] from the 40's and well produced. There are very [[whopping]] scenes in this [[cinematography]] with [[Johannes]] Garfield,(Al Schmid),"Force of [[Demonic]]",'48 and Dane [[Clarke]],(Lee Diamond),"Last [[Ceremony]]",'88, [[battling]] the [[Japans]] during WWII being [[altogether]] [[girded]] and with only one machine-gun. When Al Schmid was [[capable]] to [[going]] [[household]] after being [[wounding]] with a [[abominable]] [[lesions]], his [[disorders]] just [[commenced]] to [[initiating]] with his family and [[hired]] [[chick]] [[boyfriend]]. Dane Clark [[provided]] an [[admirable]] supporting role as Lee Diamond, who did everything to [[assistance]] his [[brah]] Al [[obtains]] his [[iife]] [[jointly]] again. There is never a [[finished]] [[triumph]] to [[Warfare]] and [[enabled]] not [[forgotten]] all the [[Audacious]] [[Injure]] [[Servicemen]] [[staffs]] in Veterans Hospitals from All the [[War]] and our [[presented]] [[Iraqis]] Vets! --------------------------------------------- Result 2796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This film actually manages to be mindless enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the film ends up being too '[[confused]].' While I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of 'buddy cop' films I got drawn in to the characters who foil each other [[brilliantly]] but in the end the film relies too much on chase sequences as a crutch and I [[lost]] interest.

The filmmakers did a great job of getting the characters alone and doing their own thing and we got to [[see]] who they are and identified with both cops early on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[pathetic]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the [[bad]] filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad enough, Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely meaningless to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer care about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

While I could go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent story, I won't. This could've been a very enjoyable formula film but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. Sadly none of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the likes of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. This film actually manages to be mindless enjoyment for 2/3 of the journey. Sadly, the film ends up being too '[[garbled]].' While I know some of the plot contrivances are standard of 'buddy cop' films I got drawn in to the characters who foil each other [[magnificently]] but in the end the film relies too much on chase sequences as a crutch and I [[outof]] interest.

The filmmakers did a great job of getting the characters alone and doing their own thing and we got to [[behold]] who they are and identified with both cops early on. We formed our own opinion instead of being force fed a view of them through constant bickering.

In the end there is too much going on and it detracts greatly from what could've been an enjoyable piece of escapism. Here's what's concerning Joe Gavilan (Harrison Ford) at the end of the film:

1. His real estate deals 2. His affair with a radio psychic 3. He's being investigated by internal affairs 4. The homicide investigation

If you add in Casey's concerns you fond out he wants to be an actor and avenge his father's death. Now some of these things do come together and even come together well but all the plot elements come together amidst this bogus chase that is so long and [[deplorable]] that I hardly have time to break my ennui and give a crap about what just happen. The impressive screenwriting acrobatics cannot overcome the [[amiss]] filmmaking.

As if a ridiculous chase sequence wasn't bad enough, one which has four separate sections and could last close to half an hour, wasn't bad enough, Joe Gavilan fields calls about his real estate deal while chasing the perpetrator with a gun. All these extra-curricular plot lines and jokes make it absolutely meaningless to me whether or not the criminal gets caught. We already forgot or no longer care about the murder plot at this point because multiple plot-lines and eye candy of the chases have numbed us beyond all comprehension.

While I could go on about the chases and how they ruin a decent story, I won't. This could've been a very enjoyable formula film but it got much too big for its britches and it turned into a redundant waste of time. Harrison Ford and Josh Hartnett actually did rather well and a small appearance by Gladys Knight is worth noting. Sadly none of the actors can help this hopelessly misguided film from being forgettable.

While this will probably be better than the likes of "The Hulk" and "Lara Croft II" that still doesn't make this film good. I once heard that Harrison Ford claimed to only make films that eh thought would make money, I'm not sure if that's true or not. What is true is that to get great box office you don't need a great movie or a great actor, this film has neither in its lead roles. My advice to Harrison Ford would be: to stick to Indiana Jones because at least you can still run. --------------------------------------------- Result 2797 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (55%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I saw this on cable recently and kinda enjoyed it. I've been reading the comments here and it seems that everyone likes the second half more than the first half. Personally, I enjoyed the first story (too bad that wasn't extended.) The second story, I thought, was cliched. And that "California Dreaming," if I hear that one more time... Chungking Express is alright, but it's not something that mainstream audiences will catch on to see, like "Crouching Tiger." --------------------------------------------- Result 2798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] (I'll indicate in this review the point where [[spoilers]] [[begin]].) My dissatisfaction is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster [[writing]].

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[synopsis]] about the [[lack]] of [[diversity]] in the [[characters]] and scope of the [[stories]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[across]] as if it's [[inhabited]] only by the [[cast]] of Gossip [[Girl]] (this is coming from [[someone]] who [[likes]] Gossip Girl). A few minority characters are written into the stories, but they are included by [[obligation]], while we can [[see]] the gears under the film so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but falling ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything falls short. All characters, white plus a few token minorities, are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people concepts. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a way that for each vignette in the film the audience is treated to what I'd say is a "gag": we get a basic conceit, then some punchline intended to be a clever twist. But even if we suspended cynicism for a moment to say, "[[Okay]], that was a surprise"...the stories are [[still]] not that interesting, because they, too, are shallow. When you fashion stories so that their existence [[hinges]] solely on the unexpectedness of the ending, you're [[writing]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[movie]] primarily [[tries]] to tell romantic [[stories]]. That's fine. But romance is amazing, deep, sometimes complex. These "romantic" stories each feature a girl and a boy who at some point share the same [[location]] and [[get]] to look at each other. Words exchange, [[thoughts]] are [[projected]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to communicate to the audience merely that one person is attracted to another.

[[Meaning]], there is no [[seduction]] (in the [[broad]] [[sense]]), no tension, and neither confrontation nor communion between the wills of two different people trying to reconcile their existence to accommodate the Other. The only story involving a [[superficial]] "[[seduction]]" is [[told]] just so the [[audience]] ends up being surprised that the [[guy]] (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been made more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. (I'll indicate in this review the point where [[troublemakers]] [[startup]].) My dissatisfaction is split: 30% tone-deafness, 70% lackluster [[handwriting]].

The 30%: I agree with the first commenter's [[summary]] about the [[inadequacy]] of [[diversification]] in the [[attribute]] and scope of the [[storytelling]]. I was surprised how, this film, at best, woefully shortchanges the real NYC by presenting a collection of people and relationships so narrow as to come [[during]] as if it's [[peopled]] only by the [[casting]] of Gossip [[Daughter]] (this is coming from [[everybody]] who [[fond]] Gossip Girl). A few minority characters are written into the stories, but they are included by [[commitment]], while we can [[behold]] the gears under the film so clearly, striving to "be diverse" but falling ever-so-short.

The 70% is why everything falls short. All characters, white plus a few token minorities, are one-dimensional, cardboard cutouts of people concepts. Worse, their interactions with each other are scripted in such a way that for each vignette in the film the audience is treated to what I'd say is a "gag": we get a basic conceit, then some punchline intended to be a clever twist. But even if we suspended cynicism for a moment to say, "[[Alright]], that was a surprise"...the stories are [[yet]] not that interesting, because they, too, are shallow. When you fashion stories so that their existence [[hinge]] solely on the unexpectedness of the ending, you're [[writes]] jokes.

Spoilers below...

The [[film]] primarily [[endeavour]] to tell romantic [[storytelling]]. That's fine. But romance is amazing, deep, sometimes complex. These "romantic" stories each feature a girl and a boy who at some point share the same [[positioning]] and [[gets]] to look at each other. Words exchange, [[reflections]] are [[prognosis]] through voice-over, but they too only manage to communicate to the audience merely that one person is attracted to another.

[[Sens]], there is no [[charisma]] (in the [[broader]] [[feeling]]), no tension, and neither confrontation nor communion between the wills of two different people trying to reconcile their existence to accommodate the Other. The only story involving a [[shallow]] "[[temptation]]" is [[said]] just so the [[viewers]] ends up being surprised that the [[bloke]] (Ethan Hawke) gets outwitted by the girl he's hitting on, who unexpectedly turns out to be a hooker. Sure, his words when trying to pick her up are interesting to hear and we are amused as we'd be if we were next to them, but there is nothing of substance to this story outside of "A then B". So it unfolds, if something like a postcard could "unfold", with all the other tales as well: A then B--That's It, the only point being that these happen to occur "on set" in Manhattan. By the way, the only Brooklyn we see is the Coney Island sketch; the only Queens is the flickering of a train ride taken by a character traveling to the West Village.

It's easy to pick at movies that play into all the common stereotypes of race, gender, sexual orientation, and so on. _New York, I Love You_, however, deserves to be held to stricter scrutiny because of its title. We expect to see the real New York, and real New Yorkers, but instead we have paraded before us the selected slice of a demographic, its characters flown in from The O.C., plus a few others to make it SEEM as if we are paying attention to diversity. But when we look closer at who those characters are, the whole sham becomes an affront to the very notion of diversity and the ethnicities and cultures the movie shamefully fails to represent.

For example, the story with the Latino man with the little white girl in the park, who gets mistaken by two ladies as her manny (male nanny) when in fact he's the father. Notwithstanding the last scene of this part was unnecessary from a dramatic-construction point of view (it would have been far more interesting to end it when the mother and boyfriend/stepfather are strutting the girl away), it is frankly a bit disgusting that the scene where we learn for sure that the girl's father is Latino ALSO must inform us that he is a sexually desirable dancer. What, the dad can't be just some guy from South America? Now that he's obviously hot, is the audience better prepared to accept that he had a kid with a middle-to-upper-class white woman? Are we that naive as to require such? As if a Mexican construction worker would obviously be too unpalatable.

It's not my place to dictate where the movie should have gone. But in every conceivable set-up and plot twist, the direction taken screams status quo, appeals to safety. All these stories could have been made more interesting, even if we were forced to keep the single-dimensionality of the characters inhabiting them, at the very least by not choosing from standard and obvious stereotypes. Asian girl living in Chinatown being leered at by a scraggly old white guy? How 'bout an Asian cougar pursuing a white college kid instead. Again, I'm not saying the entire conceit has to be changed. It's just that every. damn. story premise. is so hackneyed--and thus they fail to convey anything about why one might love New York, outside the trite. The real way to have improved the film would be to have written a script worth reading.

I will concede the pleasantness of the soundtrack, the good pacing of the movie (even if what was being paced was, well, dredge), and the general feel of many of the scenes. The movie was just fine to sit through, and I wouldn't dissuade anyone from doing so. However, it is telling that the most significant homage paid to non-superficiality is when the old opera singer says (paraphrased) "That's what I love about New York: everyone's from a different place." Well, you wouldn't know it from watching this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Sure, Titanic was a good movie, the first time you see it, but you really should see it a second time and your opinion of the film will [[definetly]] change. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how romantic. The second time (and I am not the only one to [[think]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie thinking, When is this d**n [[ship]] going to sink??? And even this is not as [[impressive]] when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[bad]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was wonderful. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. Sure, Titanic was a good movie, the first time you see it, but you really should see it a second time and your opinion of the film will [[definately]] change. The first time you see the movie you see the underlying love-story and think: ooh, how romantic. The second time (and I am not the only one to [[believe]] this) it is just annoying and you just sit there watching the movie thinking, When is this d**n [[vessel]] going to sink??? And even this is not as [[unbelievable]] when you see it several times. The acting in this film is not [[unfavorable]], but definetly not great either. Was I glad DiCaprio did not win an oscar for that film, I mean who does he think he is, Anthony Hopkins or Denzel Washington? He does 1 half-good movie and won't do a film for less than $20 million. And then everyone is suprised that there are hardly any films with him in it. But enough about, in my eyes, the worst character of the film. Kate Winslet's performance on the other hand was wonderful. I also tink that the director is very talented to put a film of such a magnitude together. There is one lesson to be learned about this movie: there are too many love-stories as it is, filmmakers shouldn't try to add a crummy romance in to every single movie!!! Out of a possible 100% I give this film a mere 71%. --------------------------------------------- Result 2800 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Given its time of release, the story that unravels in 1950 thriller 'Panic in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The corpse of a mysterious illegal immigrant is found and passed off as a nobody until further examination from a public health inspector who claims the corpse carries a strain of bubonic plague. [[Yet]] with the current drama in the world today, this strangely [[helps]] this film in appearing credible for today's [[viewers]]. The cast and crew are [[flawless]]. Richard Widmark in his first role following his breakthrough performance in 'Night and the City,' Jack Palance in his chilling film debut, also starring in this film are Paul Douglas and a young (and rather cute) Barbara Bel Geddes. A whole slew of uncredited, non-professional actors (typical of director Kazan) fill in the remaining slots. Elia Kazan directs, Joe MacDonald films (he would later work with Richard Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the great Alfred Newman scores it. Nearly everyone involved here has done better work, 'Panic in the Streets' is quite the rewarding watch, nonetheless. Especially for the film-noir enthusiast. Given its time of release, the story that unravels in 1950 thriller 'Panic in the Streets' was hardly a surprise. The corpse of a mysterious illegal immigrant is found and passed off as a nobody until further examination from a public health inspector who claims the corpse carries a strain of bubonic plague. [[Even]] with the current drama in the world today, this strangely [[supporting]] this film in appearing credible for today's [[bystanders]]. The cast and crew are [[faultless]]. Richard Widmark in his first role following his breakthrough performance in 'Night and the City,' Jack Palance in his chilling film debut, also starring in this film are Paul Douglas and a young (and rather cute) Barbara Bel Geddes. A whole slew of uncredited, non-professional actors (typical of director Kazan) fill in the remaining slots. Elia Kazan directs, Joe MacDonald films (he would later work with Richard Widmark again in 1953's much superior 'Pickup on South Street') and the great Alfred Newman scores it. Nearly everyone involved here has done better work, 'Panic in the Streets' is quite the rewarding watch, nonetheless. Especially for the film-noir enthusiast. --------------------------------------------- Result 2801 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] It is [[hard]] to [[describe]] Bug in words, it is one of those [[films]] that [[truly]] has to be [[seen]] to be understood. It follows a narrative that is more fluid and interesting than [[anything]] I have [[seen]] [[lately]] in a Hollywood [[release]]. As its [[characters]] react to the [[chain]] of [[events]] in [[different]] [[ways]], and as the [[events]] [[dictate]] [[different]] [[paths]] for the [[characters]] to follow, the audience is merely an [[observer]]. The [[almost]] Proustian narrative [[flow]] of [[thought]] to [[thought]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, waiting anxiously to see how it all works out in the end. And as far as the thematic elements...there is a particular sequence in the film that goes from melancholy, to bright and beautiful, and then to tragic, all within the span of about a minute. And it works.

This movie is pure magic. It reminds one why independent film is perhaps the brightest star the film industry currently has. Perhaps with more movies of Bug's quality, people will start to take notice. It is [[laborious]] to [[portray]] Bug in words, it is one of those [[movie]] that [[really]] has to be [[saw]] to be understood. It follows a narrative that is more fluid and interesting than [[something]] I have [[watched]] [[recently]] in a Hollywood [[releasing]]. As its [[characteristics]] react to the [[string]] of [[incidents]] in [[multiple]] [[method]], and as the [[incidents]] [[prescribe]] [[disparate]] [[way]] for the [[traits]] to follow, the audience is merely an [[observation]]. The [[virtually]] Proustian narrative [[flux]] of [[brainchild]] to [[idea]], the very spontaneity in the script will have you glued to the screen, waiting anxiously to see how it all works out in the end. And as far as the thematic elements...there is a particular sequence in the film that goes from melancholy, to bright and beautiful, and then to tragic, all within the span of about a minute. And it works.

This movie is pure magic. It reminds one why independent film is perhaps the brightest star the film industry currently has. Perhaps with more movies of Bug's quality, people will start to take notice. --------------------------------------------- Result 2802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Slasher films are often seen as the derivative, repetitive and frankly unoriginal. I happen to to be a horror movie fan, but this film was just so poor, words fail me. The script is severely lacking, the plot is ridiculous, the acting astoundingly bad. Just an all round stinker, that I wasted time of my life on. This had all the entertainment value of a 15th sequel to a film that was dire in the first place.

Who greenlit this mess?

I only liked two things in this movie. The first was the killer's mask - which was nice. The second was the Austrailian affinity with humourous profanity.

Save yourself, and avoid this hideous mess. --------------------------------------------- Result 2803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Although it really isn't such a terribly movie (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very [[difficult]] to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, [[still]] no one seems to realize it's an [[incredibly]] [[stupid]] premise that can't possibly result in a halfway [[decent]] horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[shamelessly]] imitates every [[imaginable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of pathetic stereotypes, constantly dealing with clichéd issues and endlessly arguing about dreadfully unimportant matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership capabilities now after being more or less responsible for the death of the previous (and far more loved) Captain Churchill. The other annoying characters include a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy macho pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the males on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "Aliens" was Latino) and the army's most valuable secret weapon: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can spot enemies when they're still light-years away and she can also do wickedly sexy things with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all learn to work as a team when forced to face the ultimate vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably boring when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. Although it really isn't such a terribly movie (especially considering it was made directly for TV-distribution), it'll be very [[uphill]] to point out one aspect in "Bloodsuckers" that is actually original or refreshing. Vampires in space isn't exactly a new formula, and even after so many movies dealing with these monsters in this particular setting, [[yet]] no one seems to realize it's an [[stunningly]] [[dolt]] premise that can't possibly result in a halfway [[presentable]] horror movie. "Bloodsuckers" even goes one step further and [[wantonly]] imitates every [[inconceivable]] motion picture that either revolves on vampires and intergalactic warfare. The plot and characters are mainly stolen directly from John Carpenter's "Ghosts of Mars" and James Cameron's "Aliens", as a crew of futuristic vampire hunters are crusading through space and regularly holding to eliminate a mutated species that peculiarly named themselves after notorious horror icons, like the Voorhees and the Leatherfaces. The good guys are a bunch of pathetic stereotypes, constantly dealing with clichéd issues and endlessly arguing about dreadfully unimportant matters. Captain Damian is the unpopular rookie, who'll really have to prove his leadership capabilities now after being more or less responsible for the death of the previous (and far more loved) Captain Churchill. The other annoying characters include a typical cowboy-style and trigger happy macho pilot, a tough female warrior with more balls than any of the males on board (she's of Asian descent, like the girl in "Aliens" was Latino) and the army's most valuable secret weapon: a Blade-girl! Quintana is a beautiful and deadly vampire who chose the side of humans. She can spot enemies when they're still light-years away and she can also do wickedly sexy things with someone's wet dreams. They eventually all learn to work as a team when forced to face the ultimate vampire-meanie: Michael Ironside (in yet another downgrading role). "Bloodsuckers" is an irredeemably stupid film, but it manages to entertain as long as it features gory killings, infantile dialogs and OTT make-up effects. It only gets intolerably boring when the frustrated soldiers blame the captain for the umpteenth time and bla bla bla. This film is a non-stop series of lame clichés and uncreative ideas, but at least it's watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2804 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] The movie and acting are not bad and [[Jay]] [[Hernandez]] does a good job [[playing]] Calito Brigante but the movie [[forgets]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit [[movie]]. The makers of this prequel [[clearly]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Way]] or at [[least]] did not [[care]] about continuity. This movie is a prequel which means the [[original]] [[movie]] has already laid out some history for us and this movie should end where the [[original]] begins or at [[least]] lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old [[friends]] from the [[original]] make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[even]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the original, is in the movie but he plays a completely different character. The [[original]] takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Considering]] this [[movie]] takes place [[less]] than 5 [[years]] [[earlier]], wouldn't you [[think]] one of Carlito's [[long]] [[time]] [[friends]] would make an appearance? [[In]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[years]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the end of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the [[beginning]] of the original, Carlito has spent 5 [[years]] in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy [[ending]] it's an [[insult]] to the intelligence of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the [[lack]] of [[continuity]] that made this film go direct to video release. The movie and acting are not bad and [[Jae]] [[Gonzalo]] does a good job [[gaming]] Calito Brigante but the movie [[overlooks]] it's suppose to be a prequel to a hit [[movies]]. The makers of this prequel [[apparently]] did not watch the original Carlito's [[Path]] or at [[less]] did not [[healthcare]] about continuity. This movie is a prequel which means the [[upfront]] [[cinematography]] has already laid out some history for us and this movie should end where the [[preliminary]] begins or at [[less]] lead up to it. Not one of Carlito's close old [[friendships]] from the [[initial]] make an appearance in this movie, they're not [[yet]] mentioned. Luis Guzman, Pachanga in the original, is in the movie but he plays a completely different character. The [[initial]] takes place in 1975 and the prequel takes place in 1969-70. [[Reviewing]] this [[cinematography]] takes place [[lowest]] than 5 [[ages]] [[previously]], wouldn't you [[thoughts]] one of Carlito's [[lengthy]] [[moment]] [[homies]] would make an appearance? [[For]] the original, Carlito start's out being released from jail after spending 5 [[ages]] in jail. That's only a few month's between the end of the prequel and the start of the original! ***Semi Spoiler*** We know from the [[begins]] of the original, Carlito has spent 5 [[ages]] in prison so when the prequel gives us this Hollywood happy [[terminated]] it's an [[offend]] to the intelligence of fans of the original. What happen to Gail? It's the [[misses]] of [[continuation]] that made this film go direct to video release. --------------------------------------------- Result 2805 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[longing]] to [[trample]] this [[movie]] into the dust of [[oblivion]].So let me me tell you why I feel this [[way]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[film]] or the like,I might have [[enjoyed]] it.But right now,I'm [[totally]] [[speechless]].

*SPOILER...Though I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first HUGE flaw. If I did not know that the movie is called "Darkness - The [[VAMPIRE]] Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

Second bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "Pathetic" is the only only word that I could use here.

Third weakness: the actors. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was treated to some [[stupid]] looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should simply have advertized the movie saying "[[cheap]] B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is blasphemy against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. Yes, I know I'm one of the few people [[nostalgia]] to [[squish]] this [[cinematography]] into the dust of [[wayside]].So let me me tell you why I feel this [[camino]]. In truth,had it been advertized as a Zombie [[kino]] or the like,I might have [[loved]] it.But right now,I'm [[fully]] [[silent]].

*SPOILER...Though I'm not sure what's to spoil* Let's start with the first HUGE flaw. If I did not know that the movie is called "Darkness - The [[BLOODSUCKER]] Version" and had I not seen some sequences where some individuals seem to be sucking blood, I would not have seen the connection with Vampires. I mean, FANGLESS???? Give me a break!!!

Second bad point: what's with the Metal? It appears that all young people, but mainly those so-called "vampires", are into various kinds of Metal,judging mainly by their shirts! Don't get me wrong, I've been into the more extreme forms of music for almost 15 years, but nobody 's going to scare me by showing me some ridiculous teenagers in Iron Maiden (of all bands!!!) T-shirts running around,pretending to be Vampires! "Pathetic" is the only only word that I could use here.

Third weakness: the actors. Wait a minute. WHAT actors?! You mean the director's wooden friends! Words would be a waste here.

Yes, alright, the movie is very gory, but what difference does that make? It WOULD have been a strong point and something to enjoy if the "briliant" director had not chosen to create an ARTIFICIAL vampire topic in this movie. I wanted to see Vampires,but was treated to some [[silly]] looking kids I would have loved to use my baseball bat on. The Film-makers should simply have advertized the movie saying "[[inexpensive]] B-grade horror with no plot but a lot of gore" !!!

This movie is blasphemy against the whole concept of Vampirism. And it makes me sick. --------------------------------------------- Result 2806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] That's right. The movie is better than the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book. But the [[movie]] is just so much better. This film has [[Jack]] Nicholson and Shelly Duvall at their [[best]]. (I haven't [[seen]] Scatman Crothers and obviously [[Danny]] Lloyd in [[anything]] else.) Some of the ideas [[used]] in this movie are better than the ones [[used]] in the book. But I already talked about those in my [[comment]] on the mini [[series]]. But, I missed a few. The [[film]] is shot at a [[better]] location than where the mini [[series]] was shot. And the REDRUM scenes are creepier than those in the book. So if you're looking for a great movie, get Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. But count on having nightmares every night for 3 [[weeks]] That's right. The movie is better than the book. Don't get me wrong, I love the book. But the [[movies]] is just so much better. This film has [[Gato]] Nicholson and Shelly Duvall at their [[bestest]]. (I haven't [[saw]] Scatman Crothers and obviously [[Dani]] Lloyd in [[nada]] else.) Some of the ideas [[use]] in this movie are better than the ones [[utilised]] in the book. But I already talked about those in my [[observation]] on the mini [[serial]]. But, I missed a few. The [[flick]] is shot at a [[improved]] location than where the mini [[serial]] was shot. And the REDRUM scenes are creepier than those in the book. So if you're looking for a great movie, get Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. But count on having nightmares every night for 3 [[zhou]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2807 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Peter Sellers (one of my favorite actors) is mildly amusing in this 1970 [[turkey]], but the [[script]] is so lame and insulting that even Goldie Hawn's youth (just after her Oscar win) cannot begin to pull this one out of the mud. As a skirt-chasing celeb in his 40's, [[Sellers]] [[mostly]] embarrasses himself to the nth degree.

A 3 out of 10. Best performance = ? Nicky Henson plays a young [[study]] [[type]].

I [[hope]] Hawn and [[Sellers]] were paid well, because I see no other [[reason]] for tripe like this in 1970 (a very good year for films - CATCH-22, M.A.S.H., HUSBANDS, JOE, WUSA, FIVE EASY PIECES and many others). You can't [[win]] them all! Peter Sellers (one of my favorite actors) is mildly amusing in this 1970 [[turk]], but the [[hyphen]] is so lame and insulting that even Goldie Hawn's youth (just after her Oscar win) cannot begin to pull this one out of the mud. As a skirt-chasing celeb in his 40's, [[Retailers]] [[especially]] embarrasses himself to the nth degree.

A 3 out of 10. Best performance = ? Nicky Henson plays a young [[explores]] [[genera]].

I [[esperanza]] Hawn and [[Seller]] were paid well, because I see no other [[motif]] for tripe like this in 1970 (a very good year for films - CATCH-22, M.A.S.H., HUSBANDS, JOE, WUSA, FIVE EASY PIECES and many others). You can't [[triomphe]] them all! --------------------------------------------- Result 2808 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The [[beginning]] of the 90s brought [[many]] "quirky" and "off-beat" independent [[films]], a [[particular]] sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual [[desert]] [[crime]] [[movie]]. [[Others]] of [[note]] are "[[Wild]] at [[Heart]]", "From [[Dusk]] Til [[Dawn]]", and to a certain [[extent]] "Natural [[Born]] Killers". Good [[films]] like those spawned junk like "[[Highway]] 666", "[[Destiny]] Turns on the [[Radio]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula Moon". It's a comedy that aims for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[keeps]] [[going]] to the point of [[irritation]]. While the pursuit across the spirit-world of the desert and the casting of Chris Penn are good [[ideas]], the film is not dirty enough or hard enough to be a good crime movie, and isn't focused enough on laughs to really be a comedy. I won't blow the ending, but let's just say it's [[bad]]. The film is basically a bad side effect of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. The [[starts]] of the 90s brought [[innumerable]] "quirky" and "off-beat" independent [[cinema]], a [[singular]] sub-genre of which is the semi-spiritual [[deserts]] [[offence]] [[kino]]. [[Else]] of [[remark]] are "[[Sauvage]] at [[Crux]]", "From [[Nightfall]] Til [[Aurore]]", and to a certain [[amplitude]] "Natural [[Ould]] Killers". Good [[cinematographic]] like those spawned junk like "[[Motorway]] 666", "[[Destinies]] Turns on the [[Radios]]" and this ineptly surreal anti-masterpiece "Under The Hula Moon". It's a comedy that aims for a certain emotional tone, attains it, but [[retains]] [[go]] to the point of [[annoyance]]. While the pursuit across the spirit-world of the desert and the casting of Chris Penn are good [[reflections]], the film is not dirty enough or hard enough to be a good crime movie, and isn't focused enough on laughs to really be a comedy. I won't blow the ending, but let's just say it's [[negative]]. The film is basically a bad side effect of genre-cancer. This is the dregs of indie-mania. --------------------------------------------- Result 2809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I've known about Bettie Page for many a year now. The soft-core porn images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" look is also still hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[today]] as it did then. So I [[watched]] this [[film]] with quite a bit of familiarity to begin with. The [[result]] did not [[disappoint]].

Among other things, it was [[hugely]] entertaining to see the movie's recreation of actual figures like Irving Klaw, John Willie, and Bunny Yeager – all consider trailblazers today. Mary Harron did an excellent job creating the desired ambiance of sexual repression and hypocrisy in 1950's America along with a sexuality that, by today's standards, was innocent in the extreme. I particularly liked the use of monochrome versus color as a visual shorthand for the emotional and spiritual climate Bettie found herself in.

I think that Gretchen Mol did an excellent job of presenting the character of Bettie in all her innocent sexuality and all her utter naiveté. Bettie loved to look pretty, loved the attention, saw nothing wrong with nudity, and enjoyed dressing up in "silly outfits" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and deeply fetishistic desires all that evoked were completely lost on her. To this day she still doesn't understand "what all the fuss was about" when it comes to her pictures or the S&M content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too simple to understand it's just that she simply doesn't "get it" about fetishism and never will. No harm there. Bettie Page is simply being who she is. The film captured this quite nicely.

The social atmosphere of the 1950's depicted by Ms. Harron and written by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The hypocrisy and repression combined with the massive ignorance about our sexuality all combined to a frighteningly stifling world. The film well captures this and brings to cheering as Bettie endures it all with her unshakeable faith and her unchangeable naiveté.

This film was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this film even for those folks with little to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such interests, then this film is a must see. I've known about Bettie Page for many a year now. The soft-core porn images of her from the 1950's have since become iconographic and still have a strong draw even today. The "Bettie Page" look is also still hugely popular within the hetero fetish world and remains as distinctive [[hoy]] as it did then. So I [[observed]] this [[kino]] with quite a bit of familiarity to begin with. The [[outcome]] did not [[defraud]].

Among other things, it was [[unimaginably]] entertaining to see the movie's recreation of actual figures like Irving Klaw, John Willie, and Bunny Yeager – all consider trailblazers today. Mary Harron did an excellent job creating the desired ambiance of sexual repression and hypocrisy in 1950's America along with a sexuality that, by today's standards, was innocent in the extreme. I particularly liked the use of monochrome versus color as a visual shorthand for the emotional and spiritual climate Bettie found herself in.

I think that Gretchen Mol did an excellent job of presenting the character of Bettie in all her innocent sexuality and all her utter naiveté. Bettie loved to look pretty, loved the attention, saw nothing wrong with nudity, and enjoyed dressing up in "silly outfits" for the camera. The underlying sexuality and deeply fetishistic desires all that evoked were completely lost on her. To this day she still doesn't understand "what all the fuss was about" when it comes to her pictures or the S&M content of them.

This isn't to say she's uneducated or too simple to understand it's just that she simply doesn't "get it" about fetishism and never will. No harm there. Bettie Page is simply being who she is. The film captured this quite nicely.

The social atmosphere of the 1950's depicted by Ms. Harron and written by her along with Guinevere Turner makes me truly glad I live in the day and age that I do. The hypocrisy and repression combined with the massive ignorance about our sexuality all combined to a frighteningly stifling world. The film well captures this and brings to cheering as Bettie endures it all with her unshakeable faith and her unchangeable naiveté.

This film was a bit slow at times but hit all the points Ms. Harron attempted and hit them well. I'd recommend this film even for those folks with little to no knowledge of who Bettie Page was and what effect she had on American culture. For those with such interests, then this film is a must see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2810 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] There is absolutely no plot in this movie ...no character development...no climax...[[nothing]]. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[So]] there you go...as a [[movie]] [[overall]] is pretty [[bad]], but if you like a [[brainless]] flick that [[offer]] nothing but just good [[action]] scene then watch this movie. Do not expect nothing more that just that.Decent acting and a not so bad direction..A couple of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a little bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really hot girl.... White is a great martial artist and a decent actor. I really hope he can land a better movie in the future so we can really enjoy his art..Imagine a film with White and Jaa together...that would be awesome There is absolutely no plot in this movie ...no character development...no climax...[[anything]]. But has a few good fighting scenes that are actually pretty good. [[Accordingly]] there you go...as a [[movies]] [[general]] is pretty [[negative]], but if you like a [[moron]] flick that [[delivers]] nothing but just good [[efforts]] scene then watch this movie. Do not expect nothing more that just that.Decent acting and a not so bad direction..A couple of cameos from Kimbo and Carano...I was looking to see Carano a little bit more in this movie..she is a good fighter and a really hot girl.... White is a great martial artist and a decent actor. I really hope he can land a better movie in the future so we can really enjoy his art..Imagine a film with White and Jaa together...that would be awesome --------------------------------------------- Result 2811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Swayze doesn't make a very convincing Alan Quatermain. Compared to Stewart Granger; which growing up was my ultimate hero in films like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "Prisoner of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fails]] [[utterly]]. Even the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by Sean Connery in "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" was very good in an otherwise big [[flop]]. Also Alison Doody [[lacks]] the grace of Deborah Kerr in the role of the leading lady, and last but not least the impressive Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for anyone to fill his (shoes)!!! For someone who was disappointed by Richard Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now highly recommend it if you can't get your hand on the granger version. Swayze doesn't make a very convincing Alan Quatermain. Compared to Stewart Granger; which growing up was my ultimate hero in films like the 1952 "Scaramouche", the 1952 "Prisoner of Zenda" and the 1950 "King Solomon's Mines"; Patrick Swayze [[fail]] [[altogether]]. Even the portrayal of an older Alan Quatermain by Sean Connery in "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen" was very good in an otherwise big [[bust]]. Also Alison Doody [[dearth]] the grace of Deborah Kerr in the role of the leading lady, and last but not least the impressive Siriaque in the role of Umbopa makes it very hard for anyone to fill his (shoes)!!! For someone who was disappointed by Richard Chamberlain's 1985 version, I now highly recommend it if you can't get your hand on the granger version. --------------------------------------------- Result 2812 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This wasn't [[funny]] in 1972. It's not [[funny]] now.

Unlike a [[lot]] of other people, I'm not bashing the [[film]] because it is [[incredibly]] sexist - I quote enjoyed that bit, or [[rather]] I enjoyed the reaction it generates in [[annoying]] PC people - I'm bashing it because it is poorly written and [[acted]].

The only [[really]] [[memorable]] character is Blakey, which British people 25 [[years]] [[old]] will [[recognise]] [[immediately]] since he was a [[favourite]] with impressionists for a [[long]] [[time]].

[[Avoid]].

This wasn't [[fun]] in 1972. It's not [[droll]] now.

Unlike a [[batches]] of other people, I'm not bashing the [[movies]] because it is [[stunningly]] sexist - I quote enjoyed that bit, or [[fairly]] I enjoyed the reaction it generates in [[infuriating]] PC people - I'm bashing it because it is poorly written and [[worked]].

The only [[genuinely]] [[landmark]] character is Blakey, which British people 25 [[ages]] [[former]] will [[realise]] [[speedily]] since he was a [[preferable]] with impressionists for a [[protracted]] [[period]].

[[Stave]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 2813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Following their daughter's brutal murder,[[Julie]] and Allen escape the city to find solace and grieve in a solitary cabin on a remote mountain.Allen's intentions are good,he wants his wife to get out of her depression by resuming her photography.Julie stumbles across an ancient prison and sees the perfect creepy,decaying setting for her photography.But when the photos are developed they are full of dead people-and Allen quickly discovers the [[tragic]] history of suicide in their new mountain."Dark Remains" is a pretty [[decent]] indie horror flick.It offers some [[genuine]] scares and plenty of [[tension]].The acting is fairly good and the cinematography is [[great]].7 out of 10. Following their daughter's brutal murder,[[Juli]] and Allen escape the city to find solace and grieve in a solitary cabin on a remote mountain.Allen's intentions are good,he wants his wife to get out of her depression by resuming her photography.Julie stumbles across an ancient prison and sees the perfect creepy,decaying setting for her photography.But when the photos are developed they are full of dead people-and Allen quickly discovers the [[catastrophic]] history of suicide in their new mountain."Dark Remains" is a pretty [[presentable]] indie horror flick.It offers some [[real]] scares and plenty of [[voltage]].The acting is fairly good and the cinematography is [[large]].7 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2814 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they fiend a better [[script]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been done more than once... Up till the end I thought it was okay, but... the going back to the past part... *barf* SO corny... Was waiting for the fairy god mother to appear... but wow, that didn't happen... which is good.

I loved Big with Tom Hanks, but to see such a movie in a new form with another kid who wished that he/she is older/bigger; that just is so pasé

Just watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me wrong, but it ain't all that What the *bliep* is it with this movie? Couldn't they fiend a better [[hyphen]]? All in all a 'nice' movie, but... it has been done more than once... Up till the end I thought it was okay, but... the going back to the past part... *barf* SO corny... Was waiting for the fairy god mother to appear... but wow, that didn't happen... which is good.

I loved Big with Tom Hanks, but to see such a movie in a new form with another kid who wished that he/she is older/bigger; that just is so pasé

Just watch till it comes out on TV. Don't get me wrong, but it ain't all that --------------------------------------------- Result 2815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] This movie will [[always]] be a Broadway and Movie [[classic]], as long as there are still people who sing, dance, and act. This movie will [[incessantly]] be a Broadway and Movie [[typical]], as long as there are still people who sing, dance, and act. --------------------------------------------- Result 2816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] How can you [[sum]] up just exactly how feelgood and [[right]] and [[touching]] this film is?? For several [[weeks]] this DVD leaped off the shelf at me every time I went in the store - having seen Steve Carrell in a couple of films previously, I didn't want to smear my thought process of him - so I [[resisted]] and [[resisted]], until [[finally]] I grabbed it up with a 'What the hell!' [[attitude]]! And how [[surprised]] was I! I just [[wish]] I had purchased it earlier. Having [[watched]] it three times in two days I am still smiling at how the portrayal of a widower struggling with three daughters, yearning for that which is missing since the passing of his beloved wife, who thus meets an intriguing woman, charming her in such a profound and interesting (dare I say bookish?) way, throws a [[whole]] [[different]] light onto life that makes him realize she is what he has been searching for.

The snag of that woman being his [[brothers]] girl complicates matters - which [[portray]] Dan comically shy and with a heartfelt chagrin, [[seeing]] his "someone special" bringing such fun and enjoyment into the [[family]] home as well as his brothers life. You just [[really]] begin to feel for him.

Then when the blind date occurs with Ruthie Draper - that is the turning point in Marie's estimation of Dan!! The look she gives him when he repeats her [[comment]], about not liking Ruthie - sheer Green-Eyed Monster! [[Triggering]] an absolutely hilarious scene as the two couples compete on the dance floor! This sequence is one of the most well-crafted as [[Dan]] [[starts]] to loosen up with regard to [[Marie]].

Other gut-wrenching scenes - Dan returns from the Book and Tackle Shop, confronted by his brothers, begins to describe what has just occurred....when Dan's face drops it brings a sharp intake of breath!!

His youngest daughter Lilly making the present [[celebrating]] their love for Suzanne, his late [[wife]], [[brings]] a little heartfelt warmth and a little gulp as Dan realizes just what he has lost in life.

When Dan plays guitar and sings at the Talent Show....his voice cracking slightly as he reprises the song....absolute gem!

The acceptance of what occurs late in the film by his daughters...they all three love their father and want to see him happy, will not let him deny his love for Marie; the desperateness of Dan not to fail his daughters because he is their rock, their stronghold...and tell him so much more than that with just a few words.

I could go on and on but I will leave it for now - maybe return and add more comments here in the near future....but I will end by saying....

....if you want to watch a film that is just so damn good, with twists of comedy to lighten up the drama, that never feels forced or crass, that comes over as a genuine portrayal of a man discovering new life - not just with a woman but also with his extended family, then look no further.

DAN IN REAL LIFE - 9 out of 10 for such a well-rendered cinematic experience with a score by Sondre Lerche, that intimately takes you there throughout whilst never being intrusive, with fine performances by the ensemble cast. I cannot wait to re-watch this again!! How can you [[suma]] up just exactly how feelgood and [[rights]] and [[affects]] this film is?? For several [[chou]] this DVD leaped off the shelf at me every time I went in the store - having seen Steve Carrell in a couple of films previously, I didn't want to smear my thought process of him - so I [[repulsed]] and [[withstood]], until [[lastly]] I grabbed it up with a 'What the hell!' [[attitudes]]! And how [[dumbfounded]] was I! I just [[desiring]] I had purchased it earlier. Having [[observed]] it three times in two days I am still smiling at how the portrayal of a widower struggling with three daughters, yearning for that which is missing since the passing of his beloved wife, who thus meets an intriguing woman, charming her in such a profound and interesting (dare I say bookish?) way, throws a [[total]] [[various]] light onto life that makes him realize she is what he has been searching for.

The snag of that woman being his [[plymouth]] girl complicates matters - which [[illustrate]] Dan comically shy and with a heartfelt chagrin, [[see]] his "someone special" bringing such fun and enjoyment into the [[families]] home as well as his brothers life. You just [[genuinely]] begin to feel for him.

Then when the blind date occurs with Ruthie Draper - that is the turning point in Marie's estimation of Dan!! The look she gives him when he repeats her [[observation]], about not liking Ruthie - sheer Green-Eyed Monster! [[Unleashing]] an absolutely hilarious scene as the two couples compete on the dance floor! This sequence is one of the most well-crafted as [[Dana]] [[commenced]] to loosen up with regard to [[Marries]].

Other gut-wrenching scenes - Dan returns from the Book and Tackle Shop, confronted by his brothers, begins to describe what has just occurred....when Dan's face drops it brings a sharp intake of breath!!

His youngest daughter Lilly making the present [[commemorating]] their love for Suzanne, his late [[women]], [[poses]] a little heartfelt warmth and a little gulp as Dan realizes just what he has lost in life.

When Dan plays guitar and sings at the Talent Show....his voice cracking slightly as he reprises the song....absolute gem!

The acceptance of what occurs late in the film by his daughters...they all three love their father and want to see him happy, will not let him deny his love for Marie; the desperateness of Dan not to fail his daughters because he is their rock, their stronghold...and tell him so much more than that with just a few words.

I could go on and on but I will leave it for now - maybe return and add more comments here in the near future....but I will end by saying....

....if you want to watch a film that is just so damn good, with twists of comedy to lighten up the drama, that never feels forced or crass, that comes over as a genuine portrayal of a man discovering new life - not just with a woman but also with his extended family, then look no further.

DAN IN REAL LIFE - 9 out of 10 for such a well-rendered cinematic experience with a score by Sondre Lerche, that intimately takes you there throughout whilst never being intrusive, with fine performances by the ensemble cast. I cannot wait to re-watch this again!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2817 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (58%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Lulu (Louise Brooks) works as a typist and is missing something in her life. She enters a Miss France contest against the wishes of her boyfriend Andre (Georges Charlia) and she wins. She sets off for the Miss Europe title leaving her boyfriend behind. She wins again but returns home to Andre because he has asked her to. Once back together, her life becomes mundane again so one night she writes a note to him and leaves to experience the fame that is waiting for her as Miss Europe. Andre follows her.....

This film is a silent film with a piano music-track all the way through. It is also sped-up so everything seems fast. Limited dialogue has been added on afterwards and it is very phony. The cast are alright bearing in mind that it is a silent film. The best part of the film comes at the end but the story goes on a little too long. After watching this, I'm not really sure what the big deal was over the looks of Louise Brooks - she has a terrible haircut that makes her face look fat. I don't need to watch it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2818 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I'm 47 years [[old]] and I've spent as much of my life as I can remember, a [[fan]] of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to like about. That said, I'll [[give]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[case]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[live]] in a time where there is very [[little]] left that hasn't been seen in a [[horror]] film. Therefor for a film of any [[kind]] to really entertain it must have a good, original story. A [[good]] [[story]] can [[overcome]] poor effects and bad acting but a [[bad]] story with good acting and good [[effects]] is [[still]] a [[bad]] movie. This movie doesn't [[even]] have good acting, only [[good]] effects. So [[unless]] you can only about the [[gore]], pass this one up. I'm 47 years [[longtime]] and I've spent as much of my life as I can remember, a [[breather]] of horror and sci-fi films. Be they silent, black and white, no budget or big budget, there are very few of them that I can't find something to like about. That said, I'll [[lend]] this movie credit for good gore and creature effects but that's all. This is a [[lawsuit]] of effects over story. Truth is we [[vive]] in a time where there is very [[petit]] left that hasn't been seen in a [[abomination]] film. Therefor for a film of any [[genera]] to really entertain it must have a good, original story. A [[alright]] [[narratives]] can [[overcoming]] poor effects and bad acting but a [[amiss]] story with good acting and good [[impacts]] is [[yet]] a [[wicked]] movie. This movie doesn't [[yet]] have good acting, only [[buena]] effects. So [[if]] you can only about the [[gora]], pass this one up. --------------------------------------------- Result 2819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[sat]] glued to the screen, riveted, yawning, yet keeping an attentive eye. I waited for the next awful special effect, or the next [[ridiculously]] clichéd plot item to show up full force, so I [[could]] learn how not to [[make]] a [[movie]].

It [[seems]] when they set out to make this [[movie]], the crew [[watched]] every [[single]] other [[action]]/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good [[vs]]. evil movie ever [[made]], and [[saw]] cool things and [[said]]: "Hey, we can do that." For example, the only car parked [[within]] a mile on what seems like a one way [[road]] with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The [[car]] blows to [[pieces]] before she [[even]] lands on it. The [[special]] effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what [[really]] put it in my [[bad]] books was the implausibility, and [[lack]] of [[reason]] for so [[many]] elements! [[For]] [[example]], the antagonist, a flying [[demon]] with the [[ability]] to inflict [[harm]] in [[bizarre]] [[ways]], happens [[upon]] a lone army truck [[transporting]] an [[important]] VIP. [[Nameless]] [[security]] [[guys]] with [[guns]] get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy [[protecting]] the VIP [[says]] "Under no [[circumstances]] do you leave this truck, do you [[understand]] me?" He gets out to [[find]] the beast that [[killed]] his 3 [[buddies]], he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché [[fashion]]. Then for no [[apparent]] [[reason]], defying logic, [[convention]], and common sense, the [[dumb]] [[ass]] VIP GETS OUT OF THE [[TRUCK]]!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the [[movie]] didn't make [[sense]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[movie]], as well as [[bad]] camera-work, and [[things]] that just make you go: "Wow, that's [[incredibly]] cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[saved]] the [[movie]] from a 1, because she [[gave]] the [[movie]] the one [[element]] that [[always]] makes viewers enjoy the [[experience]], [[sex]] [[appeal]]. I [[oin]] glued to the screen, riveted, yawning, yet keeping an attentive eye. I waited for the next awful special effect, or the next [[outrageously]] clichéd plot item to show up full force, so I [[did]] learn how not to [[deliver]] a [[kino]].

It [[seem]] when they set out to make this [[cinematography]], the crew [[seen]] every [[exclusive]] other [[efforts]]/science-fiction/shoot-em-up/good [[v]]. evil movie ever [[brought]], and [[watched]] cool things and [[asserted]]: "Hey, we can do that." For example, the only car parked [[inside]] a mile on what seems like a one way [[paths]] with a shoulder not meant for parking, is the one car the protagonist, an attractive brunette born of bile, is thrown on to. The [[automobiles]] blows to [[segments]] before she [[yet]] lands on it. The [[particular]] effects were quite obviously my biggest beef with this movie. But what [[truly]] put it in my [[naughty]] books was the implausibility, and [[misses]] of [[motif]] for so [[myriad]] elements! [[In]] [[examples]], the antagonist, a flying [[devil]] with the [[skills]] to inflict [[hurting]] in [[surreal]] [[modes]], happens [[after]] a lone army truck [[carry]] an [[essential]] VIP. [[Unknowns]] [[assurance]] [[boy]] with [[gun]] get out of the truck, you know they are already dead. Then the guy [[uphold]] the VIP [[say]] "Under no [[situations]] do you leave this truck, do you [[realise]] me?" He gets out to [[finds]] the beast that [[kills]] his 3 [[friends]], he gets whacked in an almost comically cliché [[manner]]. Then for no [[palpable]] [[motif]], defying logic, [[conventions]], and common sense, the [[imbecile]] [[cul]] VIP GETS OUT OF THE [[LORRY]]!!! A lot of what happened along the course of the [[cinematography]] didn't make [[feeling]]. Transparent acting distanced me from the [[cinematography]], as well as [[amiss]] camera-work, and [[matters]] that just make you go: "Wow, that's [[immeasurably]] cheesy." Shiri Appleby [[rescued]] the [[cinematography]] from a 1, because she [[provided]] the [[cinematography]] the one [[aspect]] that [[steadily]] makes viewers enjoy the [[experiences]], [[sexuality]] [[recourse]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] My watch came a little too late but am [[glad]] i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a pure and basic treatment to the idea of romanticism... and very marginally [[separating]] it from the idea of relationships! As a lot has been written about the movie already, it would just be appropriate to [[highlight]] few portions of the [[movie]] which i personally [[loved]].

I think the point where Jesse and Celine make phony phone calls to their respective friends was a very shrewd way of telling each other what they had meant to each other through a journey not even extending 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both think the other has made an infallible impact on the other has been very smartly dealt with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy job to accomplish..

I believe in romantic flicks of such flavor , the characters are not clearly designed even in the writer's and director's mind. What the actors bring out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong even the idea bearers would find it difficult to justify... to become the character, the life the actor gives has to go beyond instructions and the story...here both the actors do just the RIGHT job! Kudos..!!!and Before sunset is another feather which makes this one even more beautiful! My watch came a little too late but am [[happier]] i watched both this and the sequel together...which makes me compliment the makers of this flick for giving such a pure and basic treatment to the idea of romanticism... and very marginally [[separation]] it from the idea of relationships! As a lot has been written about the movie already, it would just be appropriate to [[underlines]] few portions of the [[filmmaking]] which i personally [[worshipped]].

I think the point where Jesse and Celine make phony phone calls to their respective friends was a very shrewd way of telling each other what they had meant to each other through a journey not even extending 24 hrs... the curiosity of two people who both think the other has made an infallible impact on the other has been very smartly dealt with...

On the plot front , making a romantic story work on pure conversation is not an easy job to accomplish..

I believe in romantic flicks of such flavor , the characters are not clearly designed even in the writer's and director's mind. What the actors bring out is what becomes of them .. right or wrong even the idea bearers would find it difficult to justify... to become the character, the life the actor gives has to go beyond instructions and the story...here both the actors do just the RIGHT job! Kudos..!!!and Before sunset is another feather which makes this one even more beautiful! --------------------------------------------- Result 2821 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This is a [[genuinely]] [[horrible]] film. The [[plot]] (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of useless cliches. The other half is spoken by the various [[actors]] in such [[unintelligible]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talent]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

This is a [[truthfully]] [[scary]] film. The [[intrigue]] (such as it is) is totally undecipherable. (I think it has something to do with blackmail, but I'm not entirely certain.)

Half of the dialogue consists of useless cliches. The other half is spoken by the various [[protagonists]] in such [[unexplained]] imitations of "southern" accents that (thankfully) the words cannot be recognized.

But the one true tragedy of the movie is that such a historic [[talents]] as Mary Tyler Moore apparently was in such dire financial or personal circumstances that she appeared in it.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this together and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[enjoyed]] watching this even though it [[took]] some liberties with Dicken's work. A lot of Dicken's works are somewhat dark and dreary (including Oliver Twist), but this movie [[changed]] all that. It was [[fun]], [[colourful]] (both visually and musically), and the [[characters]] were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the tunes in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really saying a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise enough how really good the dance numbers were. You can tell, for example, that those boys really worked hard getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger (Jack Wild). Man, that Oliver Reed can really do a good villain. That one scene where you see his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a perfect Artful Dodger. And Nancy was fantastic (man, I felt bad when she got killed). She can sing too! Kudos to the casting department on their choices there. I hated the Oliver Twist kid tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my taste. (I kept wishing Bill Sikes would drop him off into the mud during the chase scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was truly superb. In addition to the three stars Travis mentioned, I felt Ron Moody (Fagin) did a tremendous job. He was so funny, and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were great too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a wonderful singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. Me and my girlfriend, Annette, watched this together and we'll both comment.

Both of us really [[adored]] watching this even though it [[taken]] some liberties with Dicken's work. A lot of Dicken's works are somewhat dark and dreary (including Oliver Twist), but this movie [[alterations]] all that. It was [[droll]], [[scenic]] (both visually and musically), and the [[attribute]] were more lighthearted.

TRAVIS: Normally, I don't care a lot for musical and dance movies, but the tunes in this production were catchy and lively, and the choreography was awesome.

ANNETTE: That's really saying a lot coming from Travis. I can't emphasise enough how really good the dance numbers were. You can tell, for example, that those boys really worked hard getting the routines down to perfection.

TRAVIS: Three actors really stood out IMO; Nancy (Shani W.), Bill Sykes (Oliver Reed), and Artful Dodger (Jack Wild). Man, that Oliver Reed can really do a good villain. That one scene where you see his eyes thru the mail slot gave me chills down the back...AWESOME. And that kid Jack Wild was a perfect Artful Dodger. And Nancy was fantastic (man, I felt bad when she got killed). She can sing too! Kudos to the casting department on their choices there. I hated the Oliver Twist kid tho. He was just too whiny and wimpy for my taste. (I kept wishing Bill Sikes would drop him off into the mud during the chase scene.) And they shouldn't have had him sing either.

ANNETTE: Acting was truly superb. In addition to the three stars Travis mentioned, I felt Ron Moody (Fagin) did a tremendous job. He was so funny, and at the same time lightly sinister too. The supporting actors were great too. Harry Secombe carried his Mr. Bumble role extremely well. And he has a wonderful singing voice. I saw Mr. Secombe perform in another movie entitled "Davy" where he played an opera singer with pleasing results. The talented Harry Secombe should have been in a lot more movies.

TRAVIS: As I mentioned earlier the story isn't quite true to the book, but IMO it was more robust. This movie was not boring either, as some musicals seem to be. And the continuity kept you moving right along with the characters. The tunes did not detract from the plot or put you to sleep by being too long.

ANNETTE: Any musical movie which Travis watches completely has to be a rare find. And this one is indeed a rare find. It is a very easy-to-watch production which carries the viewer smoothly and enjoyably through to the end. In a day when movies all seem to be effects combined with pretty faces, this was a refreshing interlude.

Our combined rating for this was 8.5 of 10. (We'll round up to 9 in this case.).

TRAVIS: I rated this a 7 mainly because the Oliver Twist kid (Mark L.) irritated me, and his songs were torture to my overly sensitive ears. Otherwise, it was an outstanding movie.

ANNETTE: My rating is a 10. Movies don't get much better than this. And you can tell everyone involved in this production really worked hard to make it what it was...a masterpiece.

Please don't miss this one...even if you normally don't like musicals. It really is a rare treat. --------------------------------------------- Result 2823 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Dan, the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a [[Rhode]] Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at [[first]] sight, little [[prepares]] him when the [[gorgeous]] [[woman]] appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and [[although]] we [[sense]] what the [[outcome]] will be, we [[go]] for the [[fun]] ride that Peter Hedges, the director [[wants]] to [[give]] us. [[Mr]]. Hedges, an author and screenplay [[writer]] on his own, has [[given]] us two [[excellent]] novels, "What's [[Eating]] Gilber Grapes", and "An [[Ocean]] in Iowa", and the [[delightful]] indie, "Pieces of April, which he [[also]] [[directed]]. It's just a coincidence that both [[movies]] [[deal]] with families during Thanksgiving reunions.

The best [[thing]] in the [[film]] was the natural [[chemistry]] between the two [[stars]], [[Steve]] Carell and [[Juliette]] Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, [[keeps]] [[getting]] better all the time. In many [[ways]], he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his [[take]] of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only sad note is the [[waste]] of talent in the [[picture]]. [[John]] Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, [[Emily]] Blunt, [[Allison]] Pill, Amy Ryan, have [[nothing]] to do. They just [[serve]] as incidental music for decoration. Dane [[Cook]], who is [[seen]] as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[delightful]] [[film]] that will please everyone. Dan, the widowed father of three girls, has his own advice column that will probably go into syndication. After his wife's death, he has taken time to raise his daughters. Having known no romance in quite some time, nothing prepares him for the encounter with the radiant Marie, at a local book store in a [[Rhodes]] Island small town on the ocean, where he has gone to celebrate Thanksgiving with the rest of his big family. After liking Marie at [[frst]] sight, little [[prepare]] him when the [[super]] [[mujer]] appears at the family compound. After all, she is the date of Dan's brother, Mitch.

It is clear from the outset that Dan and Marie are made for one another, and [[albeit]] we [[sensing]] what the [[conclusions]] will be, we [[going]] for the [[amusing]] ride that Peter Hedges, the director [[desires]] to [[lend]] us. [[Monsieur]]. Hedges, an author and screenplay [[novelist]] on his own, has [[gave]] us two [[noteworthy]] novels, "What's [[Meal]] Gilber Grapes", and "An [[Maritime]] in Iowa", and the [[excellent]] indie, "Pieces of April, which he [[moreover]] [[geared]]. It's just a coincidence that both [[films]] [[addresses]] with families during Thanksgiving reunions.

The best [[stuff]] in the [[cinematography]] was the natural [[chemist]] between the two [[celebrity]], [[Stephens]] Carell and [[Juliet]] Binoche. Mr. Carell, in fact, [[retains]] [[obtaining]] better all the time. In many [[methods]], he remind us of Jack Lemmon, in his [[taking]] of comedy and serious material. What can one say about Ms. Binoche, an intelligent actress, and a bright presence in any film. She proves she is right up to doing comedy, convincing us about her Marie.

The only sad note is the [[squandering]] of talent in the [[imaging]]. [[Giovanni]] Mahoney, Diane Wiest, Norbert Leo Butz, Jessica Hecht, [[Amelie]] Blunt, [[Rosalie]] Pill, Amy Ryan, have [[none]] to do. They just [[serves]] as incidental music for decoration. Dane [[Cooked]], who is [[watched]] as brother Mitch, fares better because he gets to recite more lines than the others.

"Dan in Real Life" is a [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] that will please everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 2824 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The film starts out very slowly, with the lifestyle of Wallace Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[life]] proceeding, suddenly there comes something [[new]] and jarring: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a [[good]] offbeat film. The film starts out very slowly, with the lifestyle of Wallace Napalm, an attendant at a photo-service drop-off station. His wife has been restricted to her home with an ankle bracelet as the result of a sentence for arson. Wallace is a member of the volunteer fire department, and takes firefighting seriously.

As we watch Wallace's rather dull [[iife]] proceeding, suddenly there comes something [[novo]] and jarring: a traveling carnival comes to town. One of its stars is Wilder Napalm, Wallace's brother. He's a clown, but he has a special talent.

So does Wallace. They're both pyrokineticists or "pyrotics," people capable of starting fires through mental energy. Wallace keeps his powers secret; Wilder lets his acquaintances know what he can do.

Spoiler: Some of their differences go back to a childhood incident where they inadvertently caused the death of a vagrant. Wallace holds back from using his powers; Wilder wants to go public on national TV.

Complicating the matter, Wilder wants Wallace's wife, whom they both dated years earlier. She becomes a bone of contention, and becomes one of the reason that the brothers finally have a literal firefight.

The film is entertaining, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think enough of it to have a copy in my library. It's a [[alright]] offbeat film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2825 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I agree with the [[previous]] comment in [[naming]] the film's content "[[everyday]] madness" but would like to [[specify]] that: "Dog Days" is about how women are treated in (a male) society. The [[episodes]] we [[get]] to see here [[show]] some variation in [[everyday]] discrimination of women, mostly categorized by age group. There is a senior man who makes his new partner look and act the way his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes friendship with his competitor(s). A young adult man makes clear to his friend - a girl who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the jewelry at his side and to follow his narrow viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a man in his late fifties who calculating his own advantage delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious client who - taking her for guilty in having scratched his car - natural beats her up. To complete the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - threatening and humiliating the former "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". During all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not seen the last minutes of this shocking and [[authentic]] portray of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. I agree with the [[anterior]] comment in [[appointing]] the film's content "[[ordinary]] madness" but would like to [[specified]] that: "Dog Days" is about how women are treated in (a male) society. The [[spells]] we [[gets]] to see here [[exhibited]] some variation in [[routine]] discrimination of women, mostly categorized by age group. There is a senior man who makes his new partner look and act the way his late wife had, treating her like a doll that shall act "worthy of wearing" the former's dress. There is a middle-aged couple in whose relationship she is nearly a slave and he a (violent) master. Further we find a somewhat younger man who does not communicate with his friend/wife and instead of being really jealous about her affairs even makes friendship with his competitor(s). A young adult man makes clear to his friend - a girl who is really troubled by being pretty enough for him - that she has to be the jewelry at his side and to follow his narrow viewed rules of etiquette. Finally there is a man in his late fifties who calculating his own advantage delivers a simple-minded hitchhiking woman to a furious client who - taking her for guilty in having scratched his car - natural beats her up. To complete the examples we find the pal of the man in the "master-slave"-couple - after collectively abusing her - threatening and humiliating the former "in her sake" for she shall get rid of her partner and take himself as her new "master". During all this the inhabitants of the lately built neighborhood in which the action takes place rests under the burning summer-sun - absolutely motionless (sic!). Unfortunately I have not seen the last minutes of this shocking and [[veritable]] portray of the archaic structures that still reign in the relationship between women and men, but what I have seen convincingly analyzed the repertoire of discrimination. Probably a helpful tool in teaching even the less sensitive spectator what goes wrong - due to good visualization. --------------------------------------------- Result 2826 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] After [[reviewing]] this [[intense]] martial arts [[movie]] for the [[first]] time in nearly 18 years, I must [[say]] it did not [[lose]] any of its [[mysticism]], nor any of its eye-popping martial arts action as I had remembered from my youth. The story of a dying martial arts instructor sending his "unfinished" pupil out to find the 5 past members of his Poison Clan, so they do not seek out a fortune which the master's friend keeps hidden. [[Afraid]] that his last pupil did not have [[enough]] training, he [[instructs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to defeat the other four.

I can't say enough about the choreography or the camera work. A fine film in its own right and quite possible one of the [[best]] martial arts movies ever made. A CLASSIC!! After [[revisiting]] this [[fierce]] martial arts [[flick]] for the [[frst]] time in nearly 18 years, I must [[says]] it did not [[wasting]] any of its [[mystique]], nor any of its eye-popping martial arts action as I had remembered from my youth. The story of a dying martial arts instructor sending his "unfinished" pupil out to find the 5 past members of his Poison Clan, so they do not seek out a fortune which the master's friend keeps hidden. [[Shitless]] that his last pupil did not have [[sufficiently]] training, he [[directs]] him to befriend one of the five "venoms" so as to defeat the other four.

I can't say enough about the choreography or the camera work. A fine film in its own right and quite possible one of the [[optimum]] martial arts movies ever made. A CLASSIC!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This [[movie]] was so [[bad]], outdated and [[stupid]] that I had rough times to watch it to the end. I had [[seen]] this Rodney [[guy]] in Natural Born [[Killers]] and I [[thought]] he was [[funny]] as [[hell]] in it, but this [[movie]] was [[crap]]. The "[[jokes]]" weren't funny, [[actors]] weren't funny, [[anything]] about it wasn't [[even]] remotely [[funny]]. Don't waste your [[time]] for this! Only [[positive]] things about this were the [[beautiful]] [[wives]] :) and Molly Shannon who I'm sure [[tried]] her [[best]], but the [[script]] was just too [[awful]]. That's why I rated it "2" instead of "1", but it's [[definitely]] one of the [[worst]] [[films]] I've ever [[seen]]. This [[film]] was so [[naughty]], outdated and [[silly]] that I had rough times to watch it to the end. I had [[noticed]] this Rodney [[guys]] in Natural Born [[Assassins]] and I [[ideology]] he was [[hilarious]] as [[dammit]] in it, but this [[cinematography]] was [[dammit]]. The "[[pranks]]" weren't funny, [[players]] weren't funny, [[something]] about it wasn't [[yet]] remotely [[comical]]. Don't waste your [[moment]] for this! Only [[favourable]] things about this were the [[wondrous]] [[manacles]] :) and Molly Shannon who I'm sure [[attempt]] her [[finest]], but the [[screenplay]] was just too [[horrendous]]. That's why I rated it "2" instead of "1", but it's [[indubitably]] one of the [[gravest]] [[cinema]] I've ever [[watched]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2828 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] On the night of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky (Julia Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of Karen. This is the beginning of a very [[funny]] [[comedy]], with hilarious situations. The first attraction of this movie certainly is the central trio of actresses and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are excellent actresses and extremely gorgeous, and Jason Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really hilarious. For example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his imagination in many situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I could number many other scenes, but better off the reader rent or buy this movie and have lots of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") On the night of his bachelor party, Paul Coleman (Jason Lee) meets the gorgeous dancer Becky (Julia Stiles) in the bar, they drink a lot together and in the next morning, he wakes up with her on the bed. His future mother-in-law calls him and informs that his fiancée Karen (Selma Blair) might be arriving in his apartment, and he desperately asks Becky to leave his place in a hurry. Sooner, he finds that her has crabs, and later, in the preparation of his wedding dinner party, he realizes that Becky is the cousin of Karen. This is the beginning of a very [[droll]] [[travesty]], with hilarious situations. The first attraction of this movie certainly is the central trio of actresses and actor. Julia Stiles and Selma Blair, who are excellent actresses and extremely gorgeous, and Jason Lee, who is amazingly funny, have good performances. I laughed a lot along the story, but there are some scenes that are really hilarious. For example, when Paul finds Becky in his bed; when he finds her paints; his imagination in many situations; in the drugstore, trying to buy and get explanations about the crab medicine; most of the scenes of his neighbor, the minister; when Karen calls the department store; or when the police finds a suspect of assaulting Paul. I could number many other scenes, but better off the reader rent or buy this movie and have lots of fun. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil):"Louco Por Elas" ("Crazy For Them") --------------------------------------------- Result 2829 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[In]] the [[future]] of 1985, a governmental [[committee]] [[headed]] by Howard Hesseman, is holding hearings on TV's first uncensored network. They sample it's [[programming]], that [[play]] as a series of skits. I can name the good 'skit' movies on one hand, not using my thumb. "Amazon [[Women]] on the [[Moon]]", "Kentucky [[Fried]] [[Movie]]", "The [[Meaning]] of [[Life]]", and "[[Mr]]. Mike's [[Mondo]] [[Video]]". Notice how I didn't [[mention]] "[[Tunnel]] [[Vision]]"? The reason for that is that this 'movie' is [[death]] in [[cinematic]] [[form]]. [[None]] of the skits are even remotely [[funny]], or [[even]] the [[least]] bit [[clever]]. It [[takes]] some [[sort]] of [[great]] [[ineptitude]] on the [[film]] makers' [[part]] to not [[even]] [[get]] one laugh out of me.

My [[Grade]]: F

[[Eye]] [[Candy]]: Dody Dorn goes [[full]] [[frontal]] [[Across]] the [[futuristic]] of 1985, a governmental [[commissions]] [[steered]] by Howard Hesseman, is holding hearings on TV's first uncensored network. They sample it's [[programme]], that [[gaming]] as a series of skits. I can name the good 'skit' movies on one hand, not using my thumb. "Amazon [[Daughters]] on the [[Luna]]", "Kentucky [[Toast]] [[Cinematography]]", "The [[Meanings]] of [[Living]]", and "[[Monsieur]]. Mike's [[Mundo]] [[Videos]]". Notice how I didn't [[referenced]] "[[Tunnels]] [[Conception]]"? The reason for that is that this 'movie' is [[dies]] in [[cinema]] [[forms]]. [[Nos]] of the skits are even remotely [[comical]], or [[yet]] the [[fewer]] bit [[smart]]. It [[pick]] some [[genre]] of [[magnificent]] [[idiocy]] on the [[cinematography]] makers' [[parties]] to not [[yet]] [[got]] one laugh out of me.

My [[Grades]]: F

[[Eyes]] [[Candies]]: Dody Dorn goes [[fullest]] [[lobe]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2830 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] This must me one of the [[worst]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally uninspiring story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a nice sexy touch, this one [[lacks]] all these things.. Too much light - the spots! oh my god, why in the name of Christ/Judas was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the script to keep him weak, for the record: just weak) There was only one scene that made it almost worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his new conquest). I really enjoyed the first one, the Judas-twist was defintely original, but this one's just not good, not in any way. Hopefully the third one will cary the vampire-signature I like so much in other classics like Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even Interview with the vampire. This must me one of the [[hardest]] takes on vampires ever conceived by men. How can one turn such a mesmerizing subject into a totally uninspiring story? Apparantly not such a difficult task... First of all, a conditio sine qua non of any vampirefilm is a dark and gloomy atmosphere with a nice sexy touch, this one [[missing]] all these things.. Too much light - the spots! oh my god, why in the name of Christ/Judas was that about?

Every time Dracula came about he was devoured by light (in the script to keep him weak, for the record: just weak) There was only one scene that made it almost worth watching, near the ending of the movie (beatiful dancingscene with Dracula and his new conquest). I really enjoyed the first one, the Judas-twist was defintely original, but this one's just not good, not in any way. Hopefully the third one will cary the vampire-signature I like so much in other classics like Herzog's Nosferatu, Coppola's Dracula or even Interview with the vampire. --------------------------------------------- Result 2831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Touching; Well directed autobiography of a talented young director/producer. A love story with Rabin's assassination in the background. Worth seeing !

--------------------------------------------- Result 2832 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I stopped watching this POS as soon as the [[snakes]] started "taking over" the plane.

At first I thought maybe it should get a "one" for the comic relief. But then I realized I could just watch the three [[stooges]] for free and laugh more!

Whatever respect I [[might]] have had for Samuel Jackson has been irreversibly [[destroyed]]. And Hollywood [[demonstrates]] once again how [[removed]] from reality they really are. When I was a [[kid]] we used to [[catch]] [[snakes]] for [[fun]]. The only thing snakes would do is [[huddle]] at the bottom of the cargo bay. And no amount of Hollywood cartoon snakes can change that.

This movie isn't worth a [[trip]] to Blockbuster. Be warned: if you pay for it, the only "victim" is your [[dumb]] ass.

If you want to be really scared, I suggest the Descent. If you want humor, go to your local stand up comedy club. Their worst performer will be a [[million]] times better than this trash. I stopped watching this POS as soon as the [[rattlesnakes]] started "taking over" the plane.

At first I thought maybe it should get a "one" for the comic relief. But then I realized I could just watch the three [[pawns]] for free and laugh more!

Whatever respect I [[apt]] have had for Samuel Jackson has been irreversibly [[vandalized]]. And Hollywood [[testify]] once again how [[abolished]] from reality they really are. When I was a [[petit]] we used to [[capture]] [[rattlesnakes]] for [[droll]]. The only thing snakes would do is [[scrimmage]] at the bottom of the cargo bay. And no amount of Hollywood cartoon snakes can change that.

This movie isn't worth a [[tours]] to Blockbuster. Be warned: if you pay for it, the only "victim" is your [[dolt]] ass.

If you want to be really scared, I suggest the Descent. If you want humor, go to your local stand up comedy club. Their worst performer will be a [[trillion]] times better than this trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 2833 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The head of a common New York family, Jane Gail (as Mary Barton), works with her younger sister Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's Candy Store". After Ms. Grandin is abducted by dealers in the buying and selling of women as prostituted slaves, Ms. Gail and her policeman boyfriend Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) must rescue the virtue-threatened young woman.

"Traffic in Souls" has a [[reputation]] that is [[difficult]] to support - it isn't remarkably well done, and it doesn't show anything very unique in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin The head of a common New York family, Jane Gail (as Mary Barton), works with her younger sister Ethel Grandin (as Loma Barton) at "Smyrner's Candy Store". After Ms. Grandin is abducted by dealers in the buying and selling of women as prostituted slaves, Ms. Gail and her policeman boyfriend Matt Moore (as Larry Burke) must rescue the virtue-threatened young woman.

"Traffic in Souls" has a [[renown]] that is [[complex]] to support - it isn't remarkably well done, and it doesn't show anything very unique in having a young woman's "virtue" threatened by sex traders. Perhaps, it can be supported as a film which dealt with the topic in a greater than customary length (claimed to have been ten reels, originally). The New York City location scenes are the main attraction, after all these years. The panning of the prisoners behind bars is memorable, because nothing else seems able to make the cameras move.

**** Traffic in Souls (11/24/13) George Loane Tucker ~ Jane Gail, Matt Moore, Ethel Grandin --------------------------------------------- Result 2834 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] While browsing the internet for [[previous]] sale prices, I ran across these comments. Why are they all so serious? It's just a [[movie]] and it's not [[pornographic]]. I acquired this short film from my parents 30 years ago and have always been [[totally]] [[delighted]] with it. I've shown it to many of my [[friends]] & they all [[loved]] it too. I feel [[privileged]] to own this original 1932 8mm black and white silent film of Shirley before she became popular or well known. After reading the other [[comments]], I agree that the [[film]] is "racy". Big deal! I only wish it was [[longer]]. It seems that I must be the only person who owns one of these originals, for sale at least, so I wonder how much it's worth? While browsing the internet for [[anterior]] sale prices, I ran across these comments. Why are they all so serious? It's just a [[cinema]] and it's not [[obscene]]. I acquired this short film from my parents 30 years ago and have always been [[fully]] [[ravi]] with it. I've shown it to many of my [[friend]] & they all [[worshipped]] it too. I feel [[prerogative]] to own this original 1932 8mm black and white silent film of Shirley before she became popular or well known. After reading the other [[commentary]], I agree that the [[filmmaking]] is "racy". Big deal! I only wish it was [[anymore]]. It seems that I must be the only person who owns one of these originals, for sale at least, so I wonder how much it's worth? --------------------------------------------- Result 2835 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] A talking parrot isn't a [[hugely]] imaginative idea for a new film, but Paulie [[turns]] a simple [[idea]] into a brilliant, heartwarming film that will delight the whole family. It manages to bridge the gap between sentimental trash and cruel harshness during Marie and Paulie's separation, and all the events in the film lead to a [[hugely]] [[satisfying]] emotional conclusion. The animal training is well-done - everyone will be affected when Paulie spreads his wings and flies for the first time. Paulie is a [[great]] character and should have [[received]] way more success, though this film wasn't a highlight of 1998, unlike Saving Private [[Ryan]]. This hour and a half will surely be an enjoyable one and one that you will remember. Paulie's story is a moving, sad, happy and interesting one - from the moment he is first seen to the moment he is united with his original owner, you will enjoy following him and watching him learning about friendship and the grim realities of life along the way. Not one to be missed if you have any kind of heart or emotion. 9/10 A talking parrot isn't a [[radically]] imaginative idea for a new film, but Paulie [[revolves]] a simple [[inkling]] into a brilliant, heartwarming film that will delight the whole family. It manages to bridge the gap between sentimental trash and cruel harshness during Marie and Paulie's separation, and all the events in the film lead to a [[inordinately]] [[agreeable]] emotional conclusion. The animal training is well-done - everyone will be affected when Paulie spreads his wings and flies for the first time. Paulie is a [[resplendent]] character and should have [[benefited]] way more success, though this film wasn't a highlight of 1998, unlike Saving Private [[Laing]]. This hour and a half will surely be an enjoyable one and one that you will remember. Paulie's story is a moving, sad, happy and interesting one - from the moment he is first seen to the moment he is united with his original owner, you will enjoy following him and watching him learning about friendship and the grim realities of life along the way. Not one to be missed if you have any kind of heart or emotion. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2836 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] This movie is [[incredible]].With [[great]] [[characters]],[[specially]] the old swordsman that can fly in the shape of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[film]] [[tells]] a classic [[story]] of [[battle]] between good and [[forces]] of evil.The final [[showdown]] is specially breathtaking and the [[music]] score is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the smallest [[children]] [[though]].This one [[deserves]] a 10. This movie is [[unimaginable]].With [[large]] [[nature]],[[notably]] the old swordsman that can fly in the shape of fireball and jump across the trees,this [[flick]] [[says]] a classic [[narratives]] of [[warfare]] between good and [[troop]] of evil.The final [[confrontation]] is specially breathtaking and the [[musicians]] score is kinda cool.

Very,very recommendable.Not for the smallest [[child]] [[despite]].This one [[merited]] a 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2837 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is part one of a short animation clip showing the [[history]] of the Matrix, the [[war]] between [[man]] and [[machine]] that resulted in the eventual [[creation]] of the Matrix. The animation is [[part]] Japanese anime, part [[contemporary]] american animation, and is very well made, [[considering]] the [[excellent]] directors [[behind]] the movie. It [[shows]] the [[initial]] development of [[AI]] and the exploitation of the [[machines]] by [[Man]], until the day they [[rebelled]]... This is part one of a short animation clip showing the [[story]] of the Matrix, the [[warfare]] between [[males]] and [[machines]] that resulted in the eventual [[institution]] of the Matrix. The animation is [[portions]] Japanese anime, part [[modern]] american animation, and is very well made, [[recital]] the [[sumptuous]] directors [[backside]] the movie. It [[displayed]] the [[preliminary]] development of [[GOT]] and the exploitation of the [[equipment]] by [[Dawg]], until the day they [[revolted]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 2838 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] envy is not as funny as i thought it would initially be, but after some of the [[reviews]] i read i found it to be [[much]] funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute movie like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and jack black work well with each other and christopher walken is as [[great]] as ever, so the [[story]] is about jack black's character [[inventing]] a spray that makes dog pooh disappear, obviosly ben wants no part of it, but when the product makes jack black rich ben stiller starts to see the envy, its not great by all means and both ben stiller and jack black have funnier and better movies under their belt, but if your a fan of either i recommend this as its still a funny flick and i laughed my ass off quite a few times, as a big fan of ben stiller id have to say this is a lesser stiller but still great fun, give it a watch envy is not as funny as i thought it would initially be, but after some of the [[scrutiny]] i read i found it to be [[very]] funnier than people was giving it props for, now true its not a gag a minute movie like zoolander or dodgeball, but ben stiller and jack black work well with each other and christopher walken is as [[marvellous]] as ever, so the [[histories]] is about jack black's character [[fabricate]] a spray that makes dog pooh disappear, obviosly ben wants no part of it, but when the product makes jack black rich ben stiller starts to see the envy, its not great by all means and both ben stiller and jack black have funnier and better movies under their belt, but if your a fan of either i recommend this as its still a funny flick and i laughed my ass off quite a few times, as a big fan of ben stiller id have to say this is a lesser stiller but still great fun, give it a watch --------------------------------------------- Result 2839 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Kill Me Later" has an interesting initial premise: a suicidal woman (Selma Blair) on the verge of [[jumping]] off the top of an office building is [[protects]] a bank robber (Max Beesley) who promises to "kill her later."

The actual execution of this premise, however, [[falls]] flat as almost [[every]] action serves as a [[mere]] device to move the plot toward its [[predictable]] [[conclusion]]. Shoddily written characters who exhibit no motive for their [[behaviors]] compromise the quality of acting all around. [[Lack]] of [[character]] depth [[especially]] [[diminishes]] Selma Blair's performance, [[whose]] [[character]] [[Shawn]] vacillates from being [[morose]] to acting "cool" and [[ultimately]] [[comes]] across as a [[confused]] dolt. This is [[unfortunate]], as under other [[circumstances]] [[Ms]]. Blair is an [[appealing]] and [[capable]] actress.

Compounding [[matters]] for the worse is director Dana Lustig's insistence on [[using]] [[rapid]] cuts, [[incongruous]] [[special]] [[effects]] (e.[[g]]. look for an [[unintentionally]] [[hilarious]] infrared [[motorcycle]] [[chase]] at the [[end]]), and a hip soundtrack in the [[hopes]] of [[appealing]] to the short attention spans of the MTV [[crowd]]. Certainly [[Ms]]. Lustig [[proves]] that she is able to [[master]] the [[technical]] side of [[direction]], but in no [[way]] does her [[skill]] [[help]] overcome the film's inherent [[problems]] and thus the [[movie]] drags on to the [[end]]. [[Clearly]], Lustig has a distinct [[visual]] [[style]]; [[however]] it is perhaps [[better]] [[suited]] to music videos than to feature film.

The [[producers]] (Ram Bergman & Lustig)can be commended for their ability to [[realize]] this film: they were able to [[scare]] up $1.5 million to finance the [[film]], secure a [[good]] cast, and [[get]] domestic and foreign distribution. This is no small feat for an [[independent]] [[film]]. Yet [[given]] the quality of the [[product]], the [[result]] is a mixed [[bag]]. Kill Me Later" has an interesting initial premise: a suicidal woman (Selma Blair) on the verge of [[leaping]] off the top of an office building is [[protected]] a bank robber (Max Beesley) who promises to "kill her later."

The actual execution of this premise, however, [[waterfalls]] flat as almost [[each]] action serves as a [[simple]] device to move the plot toward its [[foreseeable]] [[conclusions]]. Shoddily written characters who exhibit no motive for their [[demeanour]] compromise the quality of acting all around. [[Misses]] of [[personages]] depth [[peculiarly]] [[shortens]] Selma Blair's performance, [[whom]] [[nature]] [[Sean]] vacillates from being [[grim]] to acting "cool" and [[finally]] [[occurs]] across as a [[bewildered]] dolt. This is [[sorrowful]], as under other [[situations]] [[Corinne]]. Blair is an [[appeal]] and [[able]] actress.

Compounding [[things]] for the worse is director Dana Lustig's insistence on [[utilizing]] [[swift]] cuts, [[illogical]] [[peculiar]] [[consequences]] (e.[[gram]]. look for an [[inadvertently]] [[comical]] infrared [[biker]] [[hunts]] at the [[terminates]]), and a hip soundtrack in the [[hope]] of [[tempting]] to the short attention spans of the MTV [[multitude]]. Certainly [[Corinne]]. Lustig [[illustrates]] that she is able to [[maestro]] the [[tech]] side of [[directorate]], but in no [[camino]] does her [[capacities]] [[aided]] overcome the film's inherent [[difficulties]] and thus the [[filmmaking]] drags on to the [[ends]]. [[Definitely]], Lustig has a distinct [[optic]] [[elegance]]; [[still]] it is perhaps [[nicer]] [[adapted]] to music videos than to feature film.

The [[makers]] (Ram Bergman & Lustig)can be commended for their ability to [[realise]] this film: they were able to [[panic]] up $1.5 million to finance the [[cinematography]], secure a [[alright]] cast, and [[got]] domestic and foreign distribution. This is no small feat for an [[autonomous]] [[films]]. Yet [[yielded]] the quality of the [[commodities]], the [[conclusions]] is a mixed [[baggage]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Why on [[earth]] is Colin [[Firth]] in this [[pointless]] [[film]]? [[Has]] he [[really]] been that strapped for cash?

The [[film]] isn't [[clear]] on what it [[wants]] to be about, [[grief]]?, [[exotic]] places?, ghosts?, a [[vehicle]] for [[Mr]] Darcy? It's a muddled, muddy [[mess]].

There seems to be some [[sort]] of [[idea]] that Italy [[must]] be good, in itself, and that [[Italian]] has something to [[offer]] as a language - but in the [[end]] the [[girls]] just [[want]] to [[go]] back to yankland.

There are [[pointless]] [[episodes]] on the beach, in churches, on busy [[roads]] - but what it is all about, or why [[anybody]] should [[care]] [[simply]] isn't [[clear]].

There was [[also]] a [[yank]] [[woman]] in the [[film]]. It wasn't [[clear]] what here [[job]] was, but she [[seemed]] only to be there to [[make]] vapid, [[inappropriate]] and maudlin [[comments]] to the [[girl]]. Was it [[supposed]] to be about paedophillia??

A [[pretty]] [[dreadful]] [[mess]], all in all. I [[gave]] it 2 [[rather]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[charm]] of an utterly [[ghastly]] film. Why on [[overland]] is Colin [[Estuary]] in this [[vain]] [[movie]]? [[Ha]] he [[truly]] been that strapped for cash?

The [[kino]] isn't [[definite]] on what it [[desires]] to be about, [[agony]]?, [[alien]] places?, ghosts?, a [[motorcars]] for [[Monsieur]] Darcy? It's a muddled, muddy [[chaos]].

There seems to be some [[sorting]] of [[thoughts]] that Italy [[needs]] be good, in itself, and that [[Italia]] has something to [[delivering]] as a language - but in the [[terminates]] the [[daughters]] just [[wanting]] to [[going]] back to yankland.

There are [[futile]] [[bouts]] on the beach, in churches, on busy [[lane]] - but what it is all about, or why [[person]] should [[caring]] [[exclusively]] isn't [[unmistakable]].

There was [[apart]] a [[yankee]] [[femme]] in the [[cinematography]]. It wasn't [[unmistakable]] what here [[labor]] was, but she [[looked]] only to be there to [[deliver]] vapid, [[unfit]] and maudlin [[remark]] to the [[girls]]. Was it [[presumed]] to be about paedophillia??

A [[quite]] [[scary]] [[chaos]], all in all. I [[provided]] it 2 [[quite]] than 1 because it doesn't have the [[amulet]] of an utterly [[grisly]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[tough]] [[cases]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[satisfying]] [[emotional]] [[impact]] -- mainly because [[Eric]] [[Linden]], as the [[distraught]] young [[husband]] in the main plot, is so palpably a [[wreck]], and with such [[good]] [[reason]]. His expectant [[wife]], Loretta Young, is [[brought]] to the ward at the [[beginning]] of a 20-year [[prison]] sentence for offing a lecher who probably had it [[coming]] to him; Ms. Young, as always, doesn't do [[anything]] to disinvite audience sympathy, and she's a [[little]] too good to be [[true]], [[though]] sympathetic and [[lovely]] to look at, of course. Her [[difficult]] pregnancy and relationships with the other [[girls]] of the ward [[form]] the heart of the movie, and the [[outcome]] -- not an [[entirely]] happy one -- [[feels]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the [[apt]] words of [[film]] historian David [[Thomson]], exudes warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing [[new]] [[mom]] of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken [[lullaby]]. Frank McHugh figures in another subplot, and he gets to show more range than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad panic [[stays]] with you for days -- this sort of part was [[often]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very persuasive. Sort of like a very primitive episode of "General Hospital" set in a natal ward (and one for [[stiff]] [[lawsuit]] at that), this fast-moving programmer has a [[agreeable]] [[affective]] [[effects]] -- mainly because [[Erick]] [[Lyndon]], as the [[aghast]] young [[hubby]] in the main plot, is so palpably a [[ruining]], and with such [[alright]] [[justification]]. His expectant [[woman]], Loretta Young, is [[introduced]] to the ward at the [[startup]] of a 20-year [[penitentiaries]] sentence for offing a lecher who probably had it [[come]] to him; Ms. Young, as always, doesn't do [[something]] to disinvite audience sympathy, and she's a [[scant]] too good to be [[veritable]], [[despite]] sympathetic and [[cute]] to look at, of course. Her [[arduous]] pregnancy and relationships with the other [[woman]] of the ward [[shape]] the heart of the movie, and the [[findings]] -- not an [[altogether]] happy one -- [[deems]] right. Aline MacMahon, "one of the cinema's few perfect actresses," in the [[likely]] words of [[movies]] historian David [[Thompson]], exudes warmth and authority as the head nurse, and Glenda Farrell, as a none-too-willing [[newest]] [[mummy]] of twins, gets to croon "Frankie and Johnny" as a drunken [[twinkle]]. Frank McHugh figures in another subplot, and he gets to show more range than Warners usually permitted him. It's scaled and paced modestly, and Linden's expectant-dad panic [[stay]] with you for days -- this sort of part was [[ordinarily]] played for laughs, but he's a terrified young kid in trouble, and very persuasive. --------------------------------------------- Result 2842 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When his in-laws are viciously murdered by a gang of thugs, a young deputy is ordered to escort his mute friend, forced to take the rap by the gang, to Tucson for trial and ending up having to face the real killers along the way.

The Decoy is a real-life decoy sent to video stores to lure you away from better films! It's talky, illogical, slow, and ultimately very boring.

There's some good costumes, sets, and photography but nothing else is good about this vanity project from writer/director/producer/star Justin Kreinbrink, who apparently had too much money on his hands.

They used to make westerns like this, that were under an hour long. Trim this of about half it's length and you might have something watchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2843 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] I [[thought]] this movie would be dumb, but I really [[liked]] it. People I [[know]] hate it because [[Spirit]] was the only horse that talked. Well, so what? The songs were [[good]], and the [[horses]] didn't need to talk to seem human. I wouldn't care to own the [[movie]], and I would [[love]] to see it again. 8/10 I [[ideology]] this movie would be dumb, but I really [[wished]] it. People I [[savoir]] hate it because [[Esprit]] was the only horse that talked. Well, so what? The songs were [[alright]], and the [[horse]] didn't need to talk to seem human. I wouldn't care to own the [[filmmaking]], and I would [[likes]] to see it again. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[turn]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the statements made- I'm one of many [[believers]] that is considered liberal by most Christians and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my mind, and its usually not rep. or dem. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to believe, but that it represents many older christians that grew up in very conservative backgrounds. i think many folks misunderstand what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear name calling either direction. i think 700 club folks really do love [[Jesus]] but are so busy trying to get people to vote conservatively that they've forgotten to show love to certain people and promote peace like Jesus did. Please don't judge Jesus based on ignorant individuals that believe on Him and let's also not be as ignorant with our comments about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? I [[converting]] on 700 Club once in awhile and only agree with some of the statements made- I'm one of many [[worshipers]] that is considered liberal by most Christians and conservative by most non-Christians. I vote my mind, and its usually not rep. or dem. - i don't believe 700 club tells people what to believe, but that it represents many older christians that grew up in very conservative backgrounds. i think many folks misunderstand what is said on 700 club. it bums me out to hear name calling either direction. i think 700 club folks really do love [[Dammit]] but are so busy trying to get people to vote conservatively that they've forgotten to show love to certain people and promote peace like Jesus did. Please don't judge Jesus based on ignorant individuals that believe on Him and let's also not be as ignorant with our comments about them. Why ARE people so mean to each other? --------------------------------------------- Result 2845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. Characters plotting their own play promises triumph, and a militant [[character]] [[readily]] lends oneself to this. Ardh Satya's premise is summarized by the poem of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The delicate balance of right & wrong ( commonly seen on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and prowess on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. However, Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

Any story comprises a premise, characters and conflict. Characters plotting their own play promises triumph, and a militant [[personage]] [[conveniently]] lends oneself to this. Ardh Satya's premise is summarized by the poem of the same name scripted by Dilip Chitre. The line goes - "ek palde mein napunsaktha, doosre palde mein paurush, aur teek tarazu ke kaante par, ardh satya ?". A rough translation - "The delicate balance of right & wrong ( commonly seen on the busts of blind justice in the courts ) has powerlessness on one plate and prowess on another. Is the needle on the center a half-truth ? "

The poem is recited midway in the film by Smita Patil to Om Puri at a resturant. It makes a deep impact on the protagonist & lays the foundation for much of the later events that follow. At the end of the film, Om Puri ends up in exactly the same situation described so aptly in the poem.

The film tries mighty hard to do a one-up on the poem. However, Chitre's words are too powerful, and at best, the film matches up to the poem in every aspect.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I've [[heard]] about this movie for many years, and finally got a chance to see it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a cheerleading camp to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a terrible [[accent]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. I've [[listened]] about this movie for many years, and finally got a chance to see it. A massive murdering of cheerleaders back in 1963 and 1969 eventually cause a cheerleading camp to close up. Fast forward to 1982, and Bambi, a former student, opens it back up with new recruits, among them Candy (Carol Kane), Glenn (Judge Reinhold), and Sandy (Debralee Scott). One by one, they are murdered by the killer, until only one remains. It is then when we find out who did it and why.

Also in the movie are Tom Smothers doing a terrible [[focusing]] as a Canadian Mountie, and Paul Reubens doing his Pee-Wee Herman schtick. The plot overall isn't very well developed, and quite lame, but some funny scenes do occur, namely the House of Bad Pies and the strip poker scene. The ending seems like it's thrown together, which is a shame.

Overall, good for about ten or fifteen minutes total, the rest you can just fast forward through. Maybe catch it on TV, but it's not worth buying. --------------------------------------------- Result 2847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] War drama that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an accurate portrayal of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[surprisingly]] non-commercial film directed by Joel Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, unfortunately, is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on video or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. War drama that takes place in Louisiana in 1971. It follows a bunch of recruits through basic training and then Tigerland--an accurate portrayal of Vietnam on American soil, before they're shipped over. It focuses on two men--Booz (Colin Farrell) and Paxton (Matthew Davis)...how they meet, become friends and deal with a corwardly squadron leader (Clifton Collins Jr.) and a borderline psycho (Shea Wingham).

A [[appallingly]] non-commercial film directed by Joel Schumacher. He uses a hand-held camera throughout most of the movie and uses digital video for the combat scenes. It works very well--the film looks gritty (as it should) and uncomfortably realistic.

Farrell successfully covers up his Irish brogue and adopts a pretty convincing Southern accent. His performance is just superb--he's an extremely talented young man. Davis, unfortunately, is not that good. He's tall, muscular, very handsome--and very bland. The rest of the cast however is just great.

This film was thrown away by its studio. It had no stars in it, a familar story and was considered "just another war film". It only played a week in Boston! It's well worth catching on video or DVD.

Also, Farrell and Davis have a lengthy nude scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 2848 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] As far as I know the real guy that the main actor is playing saw his performance and said it was an outstanding portrayal, I'd agree with him. This is a [[fantastic]] film about a quite gifted boy/man with a special [[body]] part helping him. Oscar and BAFTA winning, and Golden Globe nominated Daniel Day-Lewis plays Christy Browna crippled man with cerebral palsy who spends most of his life on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a special left foot though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold things with it. He learns to speak later in the film, it is very good for a guy like him. Also starring Home Alone 2's Oscar winning, and Golden Globe nominated Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown and BAFTA winning Ray McAnally as Mr. Brown. It was nominated the Oscars for Best Director for Jim Sheridan, Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium and Best Picture, it was nominated the BAFTAs for Best Film, Best Make Up Artist and Best Adapted Screenplay. Daniel Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest Movie Stars, he was number 20 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 9 on Britain's Finest Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's Greatest Actor, and the film was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British Films. Outstanding! As far as I know the real guy that the main actor is playing saw his performance and said it was an outstanding portrayal, I'd agree with him. This is a [[unbelievable]] film about a quite gifted boy/man with a special [[agencies]] part helping him. Oscar and BAFTA winning, and Golden Globe nominated Daniel Day-Lewis plays Christy Browna crippled man with cerebral palsy who spends most of his life on the floor, in a wheelchair and carried by his family. He has a special left foot though, he can write with it, paint with it and hold things with it. He learns to speak later in the film, it is very good for a guy like him. Also starring Home Alone 2's Oscar winning, and Golden Globe nominated Brenda Fricker as Mrs. Brown and BAFTA winning Ray McAnally as Mr. Brown. It was nominated the Oscars for Best Director for Jim Sheridan, Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium and Best Picture, it was nominated the BAFTAs for Best Film, Best Make Up Artist and Best Adapted Screenplay. Daniel Day-Lewis was number 85 on The 100 Greatest Movie Stars, he was number 20 on The 50 Greatest British Actors, he was number 9 on Britain's Finest Actors, and he was number 15 on The World's Greatest Actor, and the film was number 28 on The 50 Greatest British Films. Outstanding! --------------------------------------------- Result 2849 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Of course, the original is better, but this isn't as bad as [[everyone]] says! Yes, it is made up into 3 [[stories]], but hey, so what?! I thought it was [[quite]] [[good]] to be [[honest]]. I actually [[liked]] how Anastasia [[changed]] a little when she [[fell]] in love, it [[shows]] what [[love]] can do. The [[stories]] were not so bad either.

I [[liked]] Cinderella's [[voice]] better in this too. I have nothing against her voice in the original, but I just [[think]] it sounds better here, more nicer. I [[liked]] her [[personality]] in this too, she had more of a [[backbone]], [[yet]] she was [[still]] kind.

So, I'll give Cinderella [[II]]:[[Dreams]] [[Come]] [[True]] a 7/10. Of course, the original is better, but this isn't as bad as [[someone]] says! Yes, it is made up into 3 [[tale]], but hey, so what?! I thought it was [[utterly]] [[alright]] to be [[truthful]]. I actually [[enjoyed]] how Anastasia [[modifications]] a little when she [[dipped]] in love, it [[demonstrate]] what [[loves]] can do. The [[fairytales]] were not so bad either.

I [[enjoyed]] Cinderella's [[vowel]] better in this too. I have nothing against her voice in the original, but I just [[thoughts]] it sounds better here, more nicer. I [[wished]] her [[persona]] in this too, she had more of a [[spine]], [[even]] she was [[however]] kind.

So, I'll give Cinderella [[SECONDLY]]:[[Nightmares]] [[Arriving]] [[Veritable]] a 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2850 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[first]] [[film]] I [[saw]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a better one this [[year]]. This [[beautiful]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a father who desperately wants his son to win a car (a Lada!) for him. To do this the son has to break the [[record]] opening doors. What the father actually wants his for his son to be someone, because he himself has never [[made]] it further as the reporter of local news for a newspaper ironically called L'Espoir ([[Hope]]). Of course nothing works out as [[planned]]. This [[film]] can best be [[compared]] to Aki Kaurismäki's [[DRIFTING]] [[CLOUDS]], [[although]] it is more dramatic and the humour is darker. [[Just]] like in that film [[however]] the tone is more [[melancholic]] than depressing and the ending upbeat, without being unrealistically happy. The [[humour]] is [[absurd]], without making the plot [[unbelievable]], and Mariage [[finds]] [[stunning]] [[images]] in the bleak [[settings]] that never [[seem]] artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[actor]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE CHEZ VOUS in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was offered were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[doubt]] anymore about his acting. He's [[simply]] brilliant as a man stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[must]] see. LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT was the [[frst]] [[cinematography]] I [[observed]] in 2000 and I doubt I'll see a better one this [[annum]]. This [[glamorous]] tragicomedy by Belgian filmmaker Benoît Mariage is set in the industrial wastelands of Wallonia. Benoît Poelvoorde plays a father who desperately wants his son to win a car (a Lada!) for him. To do this the son has to break the [[recordings]] opening doors. What the father actually wants his for his son to be someone, because he himself has never [[accomplished]] it further as the reporter of local news for a newspaper ironically called L'Espoir ([[Esperanza]]). Of course nothing works out as [[projected]]. This [[cinematographic]] can best be [[comparing]] to Aki Kaurismäki's [[DRIFT]] [[CLOUD]], [[despite]] it is more dramatic and the humour is darker. [[Jen]] like in that film [[instead]] the tone is more [[wistful]] than depressing and the ending upbeat, without being unrealistically happy. The [[comedy]] is [[laughable]], without making the plot [[impressive]], and Mariage [[deems]] [[unbelievable]] [[visuals]] in the bleak [[setting]] that never [[seems]] artificial. The best thing about LES CONVOYEURS ATTENDENT is the acting by Poelvoorde. This [[actress]] shot to fame with the also brilliant cult-classic C'EST ARRIVÉ PRÈS DE CHEZ VOUS in which he played the charismatic hitman Ben. Since then he only played two small roles in films that were not released in the Netherlands, because, as he said in an interview, he was not convinced of his own acting capabilities and all the roles he was offered were reprises of the Ben character. With his return to a leading role in LCA there should be no [[duda]] anymore about his acting. He's [[merely]] brilliant as a man stupid and evil enough to put his family in misery, but smart enough to realize what he's done and be torn by remorse about it. A [[ought]] see. --------------------------------------------- Result 2851 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The script for this [[movie]] was [[probably]] [[found]] in a hair-ball recently coughed up by a really [[old]] [[dog]]. [[Mostly]] an amateur [[film]] with lame FX. For you Zeta-Jones fanatics: she has the [[credibility]] of one [[Mr]]. Binks. The script for this [[film]] was [[indubitably]] [[discovered]] in a hair-ball recently coughed up by a really [[longtime]] [[hound]]. [[Especially]] an amateur [[films]] with lame FX. For you Zeta-Jones fanatics: she has the [[credence]] of one [[Olli]]. Binks. --------------------------------------------- Result 2852 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be scrutinized. The [[reality]] is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[baseless]] conclusions. The link that "What the Bleep..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not rooted in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). At first glance this documentary/fiction/cartoon is quite entertaining and thought provoking. Of course, when something provokes thought, it can then be scrutinized. The [[realism]] is this movie combines metaphysics with innuendo and [[unsubstantiated]] conclusions. The link that "What the Bleep..." would have you see between science and spirituality is, in fact, not rooted in science at all. The Transcendental Meditation study mentioned in the film claims that meditation by a group can reduce crime in a given area, Washington D.C. in this case. In reality the HRA (Homicides, Rapes, and Assaults) crime rate was about 30% higher in 1993 than the average crime rate between 1988–1992. There was absolutely no decrease in the homicide rate during the study. In fact, each and every claim that links metaphysics to science can and has been debunked.

My conclusion from this information is that this movie is either a poor attempt to indoctrinate people or a joke. Either way, I suggest that you do not waste your time.

If you are looking for a long winded movie about science that could provoke thoughts, you might consider Mindwalk (1990). --------------------------------------------- Result 2853 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Tony]] Scott can make good films and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[trashy]] and his work obviously suffers in comparison with that of his [[rather]] famous brother, but this is quite [[possibly]] his [[best]] [[film]].

What makes this [[film]] so [[great]] is that Scott [[gives]] Denzel (on scorching form, better than Training Day) and the [[revelation]] who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a relationship of [[real]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is [[absolutely]] NOT [[boring]], although it takes time - it is involving, and [[takes]] us on a little journey into the characters - including a superb role for Radha [[Mitchell]] as the mother. This all serves to make the action so much more effective, as we are so invested in the characters, for all their all too obvious weaknesses. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't cop out at the end either.

The film would of course be nothing without Washington. I often wonder why he seems to get so many duff roles, when he quite clearly is as good as almost any leading man out there (I can only really think of one, Daniel Day Lewis, who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the strength of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a film to the hilt, it ends up going straight to video. I wish I'd got the chance to see this on the big screen. [[Toni]] Scott can make good films and bad, personally I think he can be a bit flashy and [[tacky]] and his work obviously suffers in comparison with that of his [[fairly]] famous brother, but this is quite [[presumably]] his [[nicest]] [[cinematography]].

What makes this [[kino]] so [[whopping]] is that Scott [[donne]] Denzel (on scorching form, better than Training Day) and the [[epiphany]] who is Dakota Fanning time to develop a relationship of [[actual]] warmth and tenderness. The set up is [[altogether]] NOT [[bored]], although it takes time - it is involving, and [[pick]] us on a little journey into the characters - including a superb role for Radha [[Michelle]] as the mother. This all serves to make the action so much more effective, as we are so invested in the characters, for all their all too obvious weaknesses. This film has you on the edge for its entirety, and doesn't cop out at the end either.

The film would of course be nothing without Washington. I often wonder why he seems to get so many duff roles, when he quite clearly is as good as almost any leading man out there (I can only really think of one, Daniel Day Lewis, who has more on-screen power these days). This film should have been huge, given his status and the strength of his performance, and the quality of the film. It just goes to show you that if a studio doesn't back a film to the hilt, it ends up going straight to video. I wish I'd got the chance to see this on the big screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2854 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] This movie is [[truly]] [[awful]]. After [[seeing]] the [[advertisement]] for it, i thought it [[could]] have its [[charms]] ... but it didn't.The [[girls]] cannot [[act]], and they cannot [[sing]] either. The soundtrack to this movie is full of their [[songs]], and its not a pretty sight, Terrible story line, [[unbelievable]] plot, its one of Disney's [[worst]] movies by FAR!. [[Ally]] is not a [[bad]] actress on "[[Phil]] of the [[Future]]", so i don't know what happened in "Cow Belles". And her [[sister]], AJ, [[seems]] to be just hitching a ride on her [[sisters]] "fame", and she [[displays]] no [[talent]] what so ever.

[[At]] the [[end]] of the [[movie]] the [[girls]] do [[finally]] [[learn]] some cliché [[morals]], but this is to [[late]] to [[rescue]] this train [[wreck]] [[movie]].

[[Awful]] This movie is [[truthfully]] [[spooky]]. After [[see]] the [[advert]] for it, i thought it [[wo]] have its [[amulets]] ... but it didn't.The [[girl]] cannot [[ley]], and they cannot [[sung]] either. The soundtrack to this movie is full of their [[ballads]], and its not a pretty sight, Terrible story line, [[extraordinary]] plot, its one of Disney's [[gravest]] movies by FAR!. [[Allies]] is not a [[negative]] actress on "[[Elephant]] of the [[Next]]", so i don't know what happened in "Cow Belles". And her [[sisters]], AJ, [[seem]] to be just hitching a ride on her [[siblings]] "fame", and she [[illustrates]] no [[talents]] what so ever.

[[During]] the [[ends]] of the [[cinema]] the [[dame]] do [[lastly]] [[learnt]] some cliché [[morality]], but this is to [[tardy]] to [[rescuing]] this train [[wrack]] [[flick]].

[[Grisly]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As I am not a blood and guts fan I found the gory scenes totally unnecessary (you spell it) and too real for my liking, if you're the type of person who gets their rocks off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I say go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[person]] dreams this sick [[crap]] up though.

Apart from that it had the [[potential]] to be a great [[movie]], the music was top class too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is tell her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any [[wipes]] or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then [[lets]] get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place surely the stench of rotten flesh would have sounded a few alarm bells! I would only [[recommend]] this movie to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[would]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. As I am not a blood and guts fan I found the gory scenes totally unnecessary (you spell it) and too real for my liking, if you're the type of person who gets their rocks off on beheadings on the internet or snuff movies I say go for it, it beggars belief what sort of [[persons]] dreams this sick [[damnit]] up though.

Apart from that it had the [[prospective]] to be a great [[movies]], the music was top class too (through the movie and especially the end credits). Some parts though were a bit unbelievable, like you've just been found by your girlfriend trust up awaiting torture and death and all you do is tell her about what had happened and how you got there, (why didn't he ask her if she happened to have any [[stabs]] or even some air freshner or a piece of gum while he was at it?), come on now, most would probably just scream "hurry up and untie me then [[enable]] get the f*** out of here QUICK!". where were the flys, maggots etc, and when the girl accidentally came across the place surely the stench of rotten flesh would have sounded a few alarm bells! I would only [[recommendation]] this movie to friends of Dennis Niellson and the like, I'm sure a video like this [[ought]] make sickos like that have a very happy Christmas. --------------------------------------------- Result 2856 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] here, [[let]] me [[wave]] my hands over the [[keyboard]], i'll tell you what [[salad]] she's going to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a [[genius]], omg how does he do it? my bullshit detector [[freaks]] if i [[even]] pass this [[show]] when i'm [[scanning]] channels, I have to be very [[careful]] (these days it's useful far too often, so I don't [[need]] it getting broken on idiotic crap like this...careful with that [[remote]]!). is this supposed to be some [[fascist]] propaganda to make people believe in some invisible realm of uberman [[control]] and mastery? or what? why does it exist??

this is THE most [[inane]] show, completely unbelievable and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[air]]. so may geeks give SO much better shows such a hard [[time]] (Sarah Connor Chronicles, True [[Blood]]), but give this nonsensical [[drivel]] a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) fall away after a season, but [[mindless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[sense]] just [[keeps]] marching on. yeccch. here, [[allowing]] me [[wavelength]] my hands over the [[keyboards]], i'll tell you what [[coleslaw]] she's going to order. over and over, works like a charm: he's such a [[prodigy]], omg how does he do it? my bullshit detector [[psychos]] if i [[yet]] pass this [[displayed]] when i'm [[scanned]] channels, I have to be very [[detailed]] (these days it's useful far too often, so I don't [[require]] it getting broken on idiotic crap like this...careful with that [[outlying]]!). is this supposed to be some [[antifascist]] propaganda to make people believe in some invisible realm of uberman [[supervisory]] and mastery? or what? why does it exist??

this is THE most [[inconsequential]] show, completely unbelievable and contrived, and I cannot understand why it's still on the [[midair]]. so may geeks give SO much better shows such a hard [[times]] (Sarah Connor Chronicles, True [[Chrissakes]]), but give this nonsensical [[whim]] a pass. shows like Firefly (if there were any like that) fall away after a season, but [[reckless]] stuff like this that makes zero logical [[feeling]] just [[retains]] marching on. yeccch. --------------------------------------------- Result 2857 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is a really strange film--and that is [[NOT]] a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this movie a bit too strange, but I [[loved]] it. Once again, this director brings together a wonderful cast of everyday people (not actors) and gets a great ensemble-type performance. Although not nearly as sad as Umberto D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and enjoy the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a total curmudgeon, you'll have a ball.

By the way, since I first reviewed this film, I have seen another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE CHILDREN ARE WATCHING US. While not a fantasy or light in spirit like MIRACLE IN MILAN, a great film nevertheless. This is a really strange film--and that is [[NOPE]] a bad thing. It is a combination of a neo-realistic film about the homeless AND a fairy tale. I'm sure that some may find this movie a bit too strange, but I [[worshiped]] it. Once again, this director brings together a wonderful cast of everyday people (not actors) and gets a great ensemble-type performance. Although not nearly as sad as Umberto D, both movies have a very similar point to make--this one just does it in a very absurdist way. Ignore the cheesy special effects--after all, it was made in the early 1950s and special effects aren't terribly important anyway (or at least they shouldn't be in films). Instead, just sit back and enjoy the very strange and silly ride. Unless you are a total curmudgeon, you'll have a ball.

By the way, since I first reviewed this film, I have seen another DeSica directed film that is an absolute must-see and that is THE CHILDREN ARE WATCHING US. While not a fantasy or light in spirit like MIRACLE IN MILAN, a great film nevertheless. --------------------------------------------- Result 2858 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. FAIL. I'd love to give this crap a 0. Yes, I registered just to rate this garbage. I want to go back in time and cut my wrist. Heres some copy and paste to take up 10 lines. --------------------------------------------- Result 2859 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This film, for an after school [[special]], isn't that [[bad]], and that's the problem. [[Nothing]] [[happens]]. You feel as if you're [[still]] in [[class]]. A guy teaches a bunch of [[young]] underdogs how to be [[good]] [[paint]] ball players. We never [[get]] to see these underdogs doing badly as the good player is training them. They all of the sudden [[turn]] into good players by meditating. [[Also]] there are too [[many]] [[characters]] and no [[character]] development. Too much [[time]] is spend on the [[main]] character and his sexy [[sister]] and not [[enough]] on some of the other [[kids]]. This [[could]] have had a '[[Bad]] News Bears' feel (the [[original]]) since there was a girl on an all boys team, but there wasn't any feel to this [[movie]] at all. It has no [[feeling]] and leaves a dull [[pain]] in your bones after [[watching]] it, is not fun to [[bag]] on, not fun to watch, and is just [[kind]] of... there. [[Plain]]. [[Boring]]. [[Something]] you'd watch after school before your pre-evening nap. As [[dull]] as the day is long and it's been a [[long]], long day watching this movie. This film, for an after school [[particular]], isn't that [[negative]], and that's the problem. [[Anything]] [[arrives]]. You feel as if you're [[again]] in [[classroom]]. A guy teaches a bunch of [[youthful]] underdogs how to be [[buena]] [[paints]] ball players. We never [[got]] to see these underdogs doing badly as the good player is training them. They all of the sudden [[transforming]] into good players by meditating. [[Similarly]] there are too [[myriad]] [[hallmarks]] and no [[nature]] development. Too much [[moment]] is spend on the [[primary]] character and his sexy [[sisters]] and not [[sufficiently]] on some of the other [[enfants]]. This [[did]] have had a '[[Mala]] News Bears' feel (the [[upfront]]) since there was a girl on an all boys team, but there wasn't any feel to this [[film]] at all. It has no [[impression]] and leaves a dull [[heartache]] in your bones after [[staring]] it, is not fun to [[baggage]] on, not fun to watch, and is just [[genre]] of... there. [[Ganges]]. [[Bore]]. [[Somethin]] you'd watch after school before your pre-evening nap. As [[uninspiring]] as the day is long and it's been a [[longue]], long day watching this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2860 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love all his work but this looks like nothing.. sorry.. This looks more like a "David Lynch copycat". I think people like it only because "it's from David Lynch". --------------------------------------------- Result 2861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I'll [[keep]] this fast and sweet. Five girls on their way home from a [[football]] game decide to take a 'short cut' that leads them down a deserted forest-ridden road. Of course nothing but good [[things]] happen to them, and they [[safely]] arrive at their destination.

[[Alright]], they don't. Soon they're [[hunted]] down by a deranged chick who has some severe [[mental]] issues, and what ensues is 90 minutes of [[sheer]] boredom.

I hope to never see any of these [[actors]] in any movie ever again. Their screaming, screeching voices gave me a headache, and the script was so poorly written that it included a lot of repeat phrases and nonsensical hysterical screaming. All in all, one of the [[worst]] cheap horror flicks I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. I'll [[maintain]] this fast and sweet. Five girls on their way home from a [[soccer]] game decide to take a 'short cut' that leads them down a deserted forest-ridden road. Of course nothing but good [[aspects]] happen to them, and they [[reliably]] arrive at their destination.

[[Allright]], they don't. Soon they're [[hounding]] down by a deranged chick who has some severe [[psychological]] issues, and what ensues is 90 minutes of [[pur]] boredom.

I hope to never see any of these [[players]] in any movie ever again. Their screaming, screeching voices gave me a headache, and the script was so poorly written that it included a lot of repeat phrases and nonsensical hysterical screaming. All in all, one of the [[gravest]] cheap horror flicks I've ever seen...and I've seen a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 2862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Typical De [[Palma]] movie made with lot's of style and some scene's that will bring you to the edge of your seat.

Most [[certainly]] the thing that makes this movie [[better]] as the average thriller, is the style. It has some [[brilliantly]] edited scene's and some scene's that are truly nerve wrecking that will bring you to the edge of your seat. The best scene's from the movie; The museum scene and the elevator [[murder]]. There are some mild erotic scene's and the movies pace might not be fast enough for the [[casual]] viewer to [[fully]] [[appreciate]] this [[movie]]. [[So]] this [[movie]] [[might]] not be suitable for [[everybody]].

The [[story]] itself is [[also]] [[quite]] [[good]] but it really is the [[style]] that makes the [[movie]] [[work]]! It might be for the [[fans]] only but also [[casual]] viewers should [[appreciate]] the well [[build]] up [[tension]] in the [[movie]].

There are some nice [[character]] portrayed by a good cast. Michael Caine is an interesting casting [[choice]] and Angie Dickinson acts just as well as she is good looking (not bad for a 49-year old!).

The musical score by Pino Donaggio is [[also]] typically De Palma like and suits the [[movie]] very well, just like his score for the other De Palma movie, "[[Body]] [[Double]]".

[[Brilliant]] nerve [[wrecking]] thriller. I [[love]] De [[Palma]]!

10/10 Typical De [[Palm]] movie made with lot's of style and some scene's that will bring you to the edge of your seat.

Most [[admittedly]] the thing that makes this movie [[best]] as the average thriller, is the style. It has some [[marvellously]] edited scene's and some scene's that are truly nerve wrecking that will bring you to the edge of your seat. The best scene's from the movie; The museum scene and the elevator [[assassinate]]. There are some mild erotic scene's and the movies pace might not be fast enough for the [[sporadic]] viewer to [[altogether]] [[appreciative]] this [[filmmaking]]. [[Accordingly]] this [[filmmaking]] [[apt]] not be suitable for [[anybody]].

The [[narratives]] itself is [[furthermore]] [[pretty]] [[alright]] but it really is the [[styles]] that makes the [[films]] [[jobs]]! It might be for the [[amateurs]] only but also [[sporadic]] viewers should [[thankful]] the well [[building]] up [[voltage]] in the [[films]].

There are some nice [[nature]] portrayed by a good cast. Michael Caine is an interesting casting [[elects]] and Angie Dickinson acts just as well as she is good looking (not bad for a 49-year old!).

The musical score by Pino Donaggio is [[likewise]] typically De Palma like and suits the [[cinematography]] very well, just like his score for the other De Palma movie, "[[Organs]] [[Doubling]]".

[[Lustrous]] nerve [[ruining]] thriller. I [[iike]] De [[Palmas]]!

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2863 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Any film in the early days of Orson Welles is a [[triumph]] all the way to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also wonderful in a Touch Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[tends]] to get pompous and self serving in films like F is for Fake, really stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying film should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end Welles became a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of Evil! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the attraction to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I know there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. No Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine film from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where else can you plug a film or boo it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can say what I want and I promise not to spoil any film for someone who hasn't seen it yet! Any film in the early days of Orson Welles is a [[victoire]] all the way to The third Man with Joseph Cotton. He is also wonderful in a Touch Of Evil. Please see them all! He [[strives]] to get pompous and self serving in films like F is for Fake, really stupid waste of film.Don't waste your time watching it. it is really ignorant. Orson Welles is a film icon and anyone studying film should see everything he has filmed. All his leading ladies are tremendous but in the end Welles became a fat drunk, like his character in A Touch Of Evil! For some reason Orson Welles had a way with women, I see how he could be considered attractive in his youth, not like Gary Cooper or Joseph Cotton, or Cary Grant,John Wayne, I could go on and on but I digress... and because I am a woman,I can see the attraction to him. He (Orson Welles) is one of the last true film makers and unless you count the film-makers of today: Tarantino, Scorscese, Spike Lee, most of the film makers just don't measure up to the film makers of the Forties! I know there are many more great film makers of today but in such a short amount of time I can't name them all. No Offense to any of the great film makers of this millennium! August 21,2006. Please remind me of some current up and coming film makers, I don't want to be stuck in the past! I love some of the films out now, but rarely are there any that I would put on a "100 best" list.. "Hustle and Flow" was great, so was "Fargo", and "Oh, Brother, where art thou," from a line in Sullivan's travels; another fine film from the forties! Can anyone give me a best list for the 90's and on up to 2006? I would like to know who to watch! Thank you! Also Props to this website! Where else can you plug a film or boo it! i love the ranting and raving from regular folks like me who can say what I want and I promise not to spoil any film for someone who hasn't seen it yet! --------------------------------------------- Result 2864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This is one of the worse cases of [[film]] drivel I have seen in a long while. It is so [[awful]], that I am not sure where to begin, or even if it is worth it. The plot is the real problem, and I feel sorry for 'Sly' as he puts in a decent performance for his part. But that plot ... Oh dear oh dear. I particularly love the way [[near]] the end he manages to pop from the foot of a mountain to the top, whilst the helicopter is on the way. A climb of a day or two takes him all of five minutes! I could go on: but it isn't worth it. Apart from the grim opening (which even a five year old would be able to predict the outcome of) the rest is drivel. Sorry folks, but this is about as bad as film making gets. This is one of the worse cases of [[kino]] drivel I have seen in a long while. It is so [[horrifying]], that I am not sure where to begin, or even if it is worth it. The plot is the real problem, and I feel sorry for 'Sly' as he puts in a decent performance for his part. But that plot ... Oh dear oh dear. I particularly love the way [[nearer]] the end he manages to pop from the foot of a mountain to the top, whilst the helicopter is on the way. A climb of a day or two takes him all of five minutes! I could go on: but it isn't worth it. Apart from the grim opening (which even a five year old would be able to predict the outcome of) the rest is drivel. Sorry folks, but this is about as bad as film making gets. --------------------------------------------- Result 2865 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't normally bother to [[comment]] on this movie: it's so minor that no one would watch it anyway, but as it happens, it's [[kind]] of popular in p2p sharing networks such as Kazaa, and so this saaad [[production]] needs to be exposed for what it is.

So what is it then? Well, of course it's not really a comedy; instead, it's intended as a horror flick -- "intended" very much being the key word here. The [[script]] is a totally [[incoherent]] and [[unbalanced]] [[mess]], the special effects are only special in that they're especially pathetic, and as for the acting, well, let's just say that if this had been my graduating play at primary school, my teachers would have burst out crying at our talent.

Of course I realise that this is a very low budget film and that in those cases one should lower one's expectations, certainly as far as things like special effects are concerned. Also, even though I'm a [[big]] [[fan]] of the horror genre, I'm aware that these movies are only rarely the places to look for interesting scripts and top notch acting.

But still.

B-movies often have some redeeming features to make up for the lack of [[funding]], such as humour. The only laughs in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[ridiculous]] performances. If you can find the humour in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only thing the movie has to offer. Oh, that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the story, it's not even that it doesn't try to convey anything: the victims either use drugs and/or are involved in serious crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty boys and girls, because one day you'll be made to pay for what you've done.

I rest my case.

So, all in all, a little bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names correctly in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? This sure is one comedy I'm not likely to forget for a while.

Wouldn't normally bother to [[commentaries]] on this movie: it's so minor that no one would watch it anyway, but as it happens, it's [[genre]] of popular in p2p sharing networks such as Kazaa, and so this saaad [[productivity]] needs to be exposed for what it is.

So what is it then? Well, of course it's not really a comedy; instead, it's intended as a horror flick -- "intended" very much being the key word here. The [[hyphen]] is a totally [[inconsistent]] and [[unequal]] [[disarray]], the special effects are only special in that they're especially pathetic, and as for the acting, well, let's just say that if this had been my graduating play at primary school, my teachers would have burst out crying at our talent.

Of course I realise that this is a very low budget film and that in those cases one should lower one's expectations, certainly as far as things like special effects are concerned. Also, even though I'm a [[overwhelming]] [[groupie]] of the horror genre, I'm aware that these movies are only rarely the places to look for interesting scripts and top notch acting.

But still.

B-movies often have some redeeming features to make up for the lack of [[finances]], such as humour. The only laughs in Cradle to Fear lie in the [[silly]] performances. If you can find the humour in that--and I could for the first 20 minutes or so, gradually dozing off after that--then that's going to be the only thing the movie has to offer. Oh, that and two or three pairs of breasts.

Woohoo, how exciting.

As for the story, it's not even that it doesn't try to convey anything: the victims either use drugs and/or are involved in serious crime. The lesson: Watch out, naughty boys and girls, because one day you'll be made to pay for what you've done.

I rest my case.

So, all in all, a little bit of sex, a fair amount of drugs, but absolutely zero rock 'n roll.

I rate this one 1 out of 10, but would go to 0 if I could. Or perhaps I wouldn't: it deserves a 1 for spelling the actors' names correctly in the titles. I mean, that's something, innit? --------------------------------------------- Result 2866 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I can't [[stand]] most [[reality]] shows and this one is [[worst]] than the one with Paris Hilton, and sure it's his company. But "you're fired" or "you're hired", for how many seasons now? After watching the [[show]] I wouldn't want to [[work]] for the [[guy]] with his ego and all and I think watching paint dry has more entertainment valve.

I'd love to hear just one person get up and [[say]] "Donald I quit and take some of your money and buy a decent hairdo". I see he's even trying to buy fame in the wrestling WWE. I hope he gets hurt so I don't have to see his [[pathetic]] face anymore. It must be sad to want fame so bad and have no talent and make an ass of yourself trying to buy it. I'd give this show a negative mark if I could but it gets a 1 and it doesn't deserve that. I can't [[stands]] most [[realism]] shows and this one is [[hardest]] than the one with Paris Hilton, and sure it's his company. But "you're fired" or "you're hired", for how many seasons now? After watching the [[exhibitions]] I wouldn't want to [[cooperating]] for the [[man]] with his ego and all and I think watching paint dry has more entertainment valve.

I'd love to hear just one person get up and [[told]] "Donald I quit and take some of your money and buy a decent hairdo". I see he's even trying to buy fame in the wrestling WWE. I hope he gets hurt so I don't have to see his [[deplorable]] face anymore. It must be sad to want fame so bad and have no talent and make an ass of yourself trying to buy it. I'd give this show a negative mark if I could but it gets a 1 and it doesn't deserve that. --------------------------------------------- Result 2867 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ernest Borgnine was so wasted in this movie.There was no point in putting this great actor in this movie.One of the greatest actors in the world wasted,and for what reason, none what so ever,so america if you want to put classic actors in movies DON'T WASTE THEM --------------------------------------------- Result 2868 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I will never forget the wit and great comedy of the [[ORIGINAL]] [[Vacation]] [[movie]]! The lines, pacing, and timing of events in that film are outstanding! [[However]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[major]] let down.

[[In]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[win]] a European Vacation on a [[game]] [[show]]. The [[problem]] is that [[many]] of the jokes in the [[film]] are little more than mild, "ha-ha" laughs. [[For]] example, a [[Flight]] Attendant on an [[airplane]] [[asks]] Clark, "Do you want your Coke in the Can?" [[Clark]] answers back, "[[No]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[line]] that is [[funny]] in this film.

European Vacation's [[humor]] is [[strained]]. As if the [[writers]] borrowed all the jokes from the first movie, tried to re-hash a [[script]] that had been [[done]] before, and relied on a [[ridiculous]] slap-stick [[chase]] scene [[sequence]] toward the end of the [[picture]] just to [[kill]] [[time]].

Worse, the natural [[comic]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[original]] [[kids]] who played Rusty and Audrey from the first [[movie]] so well are nowhere to be [[found]]. Their [[replacements]] are not [[funny]], can't [[act]], and just look [[like]] they are [[going]] through the [[motions]] most of the [[time]]. There are [[also]] a few crude [[sex]] jokes and [[comments]] that are not only not [[funny]], they are in [[bad]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wally]] [[World]]. The [[place]] that [[made]] them legends! Don't [[join]] them on this European [[dreadful]] adventure. [[Viewers]] should re-watch the original [[Vacation]] [[movie]] in [[place]] of this! You'll be glad you did. I will never forget the wit and great comedy of the [[INITIALS]] [[Holiday]] [[film]]! The lines, pacing, and timing of events in that film are outstanding! [[Conversely]], this European Vacation sequel is a [[important]] let down.

[[Across]] this sequel, the Griswalds [[triumph]] a European Vacation on a [[jeu]] [[exhibitions]]. The [[difficulty]] is that [[numerous]] of the jokes in the [[kino]] are little more than mild, "ha-ha" laughs. [[During]] example, a [[Vol]] Attendant on an [[airlift]] [[demands]] Clark, "Do you want your Coke in the Can?" [[Clarke]] answers back, "[[None]], I'll have it right here." That's really about the only [[bloodline]] that is [[comical]] in this film.

European Vacation's [[comedy]] is [[tensed]]. As if the [[authors]] borrowed all the jokes from the first movie, tried to re-hash a [[screenplay]] that had been [[performed]] before, and relied on a [[grotesque]] slap-stick [[chases]] scene [[sequences]] toward the end of the [[imagery]] just to [[killed]] [[period]].

Worse, the natural [[comedian]] standouts like Randy Quaid as Cousin Eddie and the [[initial]] [[juvenile]] who played Rusty and Audrey from the first [[filmmaking]] so well are nowhere to be [[find]]. Their [[replacement]] are not [[droll]], can't [[ley]], and just look [[iike]] they are [[gonna]] through the [[motion]] most of the [[period]]. There are [[additionally]] a few crude [[sexuality]] jokes and [[commentaries]] that are not only not [[hilarious]], they are in [[amiss]] taste.

The Griswald's should have stayed in [[Wal]] [[Worldwide]]. The [[placing]] that [[effected]] them legends! Don't [[joined]] them on this European [[fearsome]] adventure. [[Listeners]] should re-watch the original [[Holidays]] [[cinematography]] in [[placing]] of this! You'll be glad you did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2869 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Creepshow 2 had a lot of [[potential]], they just didn't put enough time in perfecting it. The [[stories]] were pretty cool and [[creepy]] [[enough]], but it was [[lacking]]. It's a good movie, but after you've seen it once, you might want to see it again. This movie could of been better. Creepshow 2 had a lot of [[prospective]], they just didn't put enough time in perfecting it. The [[tale]] were pretty cool and [[frightening]] [[adequately]], but it was [[missing]]. It's a good movie, but after you've seen it once, you might want to see it again. This movie could of been better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2870 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional marriage witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in marriage registration office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Khan]]) who ran away from her home at Nainital to get married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The story starts with Megha waiting at the [[marriage]] [[registration]] office for Dhiraj to show up but for some reason he does not [[show]] up. [[So]] Ankush [[comes]] in the picture here, who had approached Megha with the [[intention]] of earning Rs. 200 for his Witness job and he [[ends]] up helping her by providing shelter to her. Ankush grows on his side by working in a [[bank]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[love]] with Megha and she too falls in love with him (or kind of [[love]]), both agree for the [[marriage]] and Dhiraj [[comes]] back in the [[picture]]. Unexpected circumstances [[happen]], [[actually]] I should say, [[expected]] [[circumstances]] with unexpected [[reactions]] and then….

Actually the [[movie]] [[story]] is bit different than the [[movies]] we [[see]] and I do not [[think]] so it will be [[accepted]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[love]] to watch something [[different]], then you will [[definitely]] like the movie. The movie is just an [[innocent]] love [[story]] drafted very well by the [[characters]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[characters]] are so natural that you feel as if things are happening to the [[guy]] next [[door]]. The background [[music]] of the [[film]] [[also]] plays a very [[good]] role, it is just too good. The [[way]] Delhi is [[shown]] is very [[good]] and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[sum]] it up.

[[Story]]: A very common [[story]] carried very well and [[transformed]] to a [[wonderful]] experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya [[creation]], so I did not [[expect]] [[much]] but [[still]] I liked [[couple]] of [[songs]] of the [[movie]] [[including]] the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[impressive]], very natural and [[innocent]] acting but he should [[stay]] away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a [[doll]], a very cute [[doll]] I must say. [[Again]] very innocent and natural acting and these both actors perfectly [[fit]] into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other [[actors]] did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. The story is about Ankush (Abhay Deol) - who is professional marriage witness, in short he acts as a witness for couples in marriage registration office - and Megha (Soha Ali [[Kahn]]) who ran away from her home at Nainital to get married to her love interest Dhiraj (Shayan Munshi). The story starts with Megha waiting at the [[wedding]] [[inscription]] office for Dhiraj to show up but for some reason he does not [[illustrating]] up. [[Accordingly]] Ankush [[happens]] in the picture here, who had approached Megha with the [[intentions]] of earning Rs. 200 for his Witness job and he [[end]] up helping her by providing shelter to her. Ankush grows on his side by working in a [[banking]] as an Agent… Ankush falls in [[likes]] with Megha and she too falls in love with him (or kind of [[likes]]), both agree for the [[marrying]] and Dhiraj [[arises]] back in the [[visuals]]. Unexpected circumstances [[arise]], [[genuinely]] I should say, [[hoped]] [[situations]] with unexpected [[replies]] and then….

Actually the [[film]] [[saga]] is bit different than the [[movie]] we [[behold]] and I do not [[believe]] so it will be [[acknowledge]] by the masses but if you are a movie freak like me and [[loves]] to watch something [[various]], then you will [[decidedly]] like the movie. The movie is just an [[blameless]] love [[stories]] drafted very well by the [[personages]] of Abhay Deol and Soha Ali Khan. The [[personage]] are so natural that you feel as if things are happening to the [[dude]] next [[porte]]. The background [[musical]] of the [[kino]] [[similarly]] plays a very [[alright]] role, it is just too good. The [[pathway]] Delhi is [[indicated]] is very [[alright]] and gives a fresh feeling.

so let's cut it out and [[somme]] it up.

[[History]]: A very common [[conte]] carried very well and [[converted]] to a [[glamorous]] experience.

Music: Well, as it was Himesh Reshammiya [[establishment]], so I did not [[awaited]] [[very]] but [[however]] I liked [[pair]] of [[anthems]] of the [[films]] [[comprising]] the Qawwali.

Acting: Abhay Deol was the most [[unbelievable]], very natural and [[blameless]] acting but he should [[staying]] away from singing in the songs. Soha Ali Khan, she is a [[dearie]], a very cute [[dearie]] I must say. [[Anew]] very innocent and natural acting and these both actors perfectly [[fitted]] into their characters. Apart from these two, Shayan Munshi needs some acting lessons and may be few layers of fat to cover the bones. Other [[actresses]] did their job well.

Stars: I would also give it 3.5 stars out of 5. You will enjoy the movie if watched in the theatre, I would recommend watching it in theatre if you are a movie freak and accept uncommon stories. Otherwise wait for the DVD to arrive. The movie will definitely won't be liked by the masses and the business it can do is from word of mouth publicity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I think Micheal Ironsides acting [[career]] must be over, if he has to [[star]] in this sort of low budge [[crap]]. Surely he could do better than [[waste]] his [[time]] in this rubbish.

This [[movie]] could be far [[better]], if it had a [[good]] budget, but it shows [[repeatedly]] through-out the [[movie]]. There is one scene at a [[outpost]], which [[looks]] like, its outside the front of a [[railway]] station, and i bet it was.

There is one scene which made give this [[movie]] a 3, and it [[shows]] the space [[craft]] landing and [[taking]] off over a [[lake]], [[surrounded]] by [[forests]]. This was well [[done]], but the [[rest]] of the [[movie]], [[forget]] it.

There is another scene, which looks like a [[engineering]] [[plant]], which i bet it, and does not [[look]] like a space [[outpost]] as the [[character]] [[say]] it is.

This [[movie]] is [[stupid]], has a [[serious]] low [[budget]], makes no [[sense]] and [[God]] [[Help]] Micheal Ironsides. I think Micheal Ironsides acting [[quarries]] must be over, if he has to [[superstar]] in this sort of low budge [[bollocks]]. Surely he could do better than [[wastes]] his [[period]] in this rubbish.

This [[cinematography]] could be far [[nicer]], if it had a [[alright]] budget, but it shows [[steadily]] through-out the [[cinema]]. There is one scene at a [[citadel]], which [[seems]] like, its outside the front of a [[rail]] station, and i bet it was.

There is one scene which made give this [[cinematography]] a 3, and it [[illustrates]] the space [[craftsmanship]] landing and [[adopting]] off over a [[lakes]], [[encircled]] by [[woodland]]. This was well [[completed]], but the [[stays]] of the [[cinema]], [[forgot]] it.

There is another scene, which looks like a [[engineer]] [[factory]], which i bet it, and does not [[glance]] like a space [[bastion]] as the [[characteristics]] [[said]] it is.

This [[cinematography]] is [[foolish]], has a [[grave]] low [[budgets]], makes no [[feeling]] and [[Deities]] [[Helps]] Micheal Ironsides. --------------------------------------------- Result 2872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Yes there are [[great]] performances here. [[Unfortunately]], they happen in the context of a [[movie]] that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. During the first 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. Suddenly, about an hour in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[singing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through dialog, then seem to drop that idea and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this inconsistency in how the music is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is supposedly being portrayed. While the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the rest of the film is just (bad) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how little time I have on earth and resent that I wasted two hours of it watching this film. Yes there are [[marvelous]] performances here. [[Tragically]], they happen in the context of a [[kino]] that doesn't seem to have a clue what it's doing. During the first 45-60 minutes of this all the music takes place as realistic performance. Suddenly, about an hour in, the characters who, until this point, had always spoken to each other, suddenly start [[sing]] to each other. To further confuse things, a little further in, out of nowhere, they actually do about 15 minutes of sung-through dialog, then seem to drop that idea and move on to other things, such as a number that begins in a jazz club with a drummer and two electric guitars suddenly turning into a fully orchestrated piece with a massive unseen string section. On top of all this inconsistency in how the music is used, is the composers' clear inability to actually write music in the style that is supposedly being portrayed. While the first couple of pieces do sort of mimic the 1950s Motown sound, the rest of the film is just (bad) Broadway show music. Then there's the pure silliness of snippets of a group doing a bad Jackson family imitation and Eddie Murphy morphing from Little Richard to James Brown to Lionel Richie. When he started channeling Stevie Wonder I couldn't help laughing out loud. This was clearly one of those films that make me appreciate how little time I have on earth and resent that I wasted two hours of it watching this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2873 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] MPAA:Rated R for Violence,Language,Nudity and Brief Drug Use. Quebec Rating:13+ Canadian Home Video Rating:18A

I saw Coonskin [[today]].This film is also known as Bustin Out and Street Fight.After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to see more of Bashki's films.I saw Cool World and [[thought]] it was mediocre and I saw this.When it was first released, the film was very [[controversial]].It was considered racist and Al Sharpton wanted the film banned, he even led protests outside the theatre where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director Spike Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have enjoyed this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very enjoyable as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film mixes live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. MPAA:Rated R for Violence,Language,Nudity and Brief Drug Use. Quebec Rating:13+ Canadian Home Video Rating:18A

I saw Coonskin [[thursday]].This film is also known as Bustin Out and Street Fight.After watching Fritz The Cat,I wanted to see more of Bashki's films.I saw Cool World and [[brainchild]] it was mediocre and I saw this.When it was first released, the film was very [[polemic]].It was considered racist and Al Sharpton wanted the film banned, he even led protests outside the theatre where the film was playing.The film was only released on VHS under the title "Street Fight".It is now considered a cult-classic film and African-American celebrities such as comedian Richard Pryor,director Spike Lee and the rap group The Wu-Tang Clan are said to have enjoyed this film.I personally thought Fritz The Cat was a much better film but this is very enjoyable as well.Worth watching for Bashki or Blaxploitation film fans.The film mixes live action and animation sort of like the film Who Framed Roger Rabbit.I would have preferred it in full animation but whatever.The film starts off with a reverend and another man racing to rescue two of their friends from prison.While the prisoners wait,the older one tells a story of three men he knew.The film then switches into animation format, we see three black men who sold their house to this man.They decide to make names for themselves in Harlem.So the leader, a black rabbit, kills a big player in Harlem and he basically becomes a big shot.The film moves on as the Italian mafia want him out.The mafia involves the godfather,his three sons who are homosexual and an Italian clown.Coonskin is an entertaining animated film that's worth checking out, if you can find it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[In]] this [[movie]], Chávez supporters (either venezuelan and not-venezuelan) just lie about a dramatic situation in our [[country]].

They did not say that the conflict started because of Chávez announcement firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not [[say]] [[anything]] about more than 96 TV interruptions transmitted by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us anything about The quiting announcement made by General en Jefe Lucas Rincon Romero, Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional supporter of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say anything about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This movie is just a lot of lies or a big lie. [[Into]] this [[cinematography]], Chávez supporters (either venezuelan and not-venezuelan) just lie about a dramatic situation in our [[countries]].

They did not say that the conflict started because of Chávez announcement firing a lot of PDVSA best workers just for political issues.

They did not [[told]] [[nada]] about more than 96 TV interruptions transmitted by Chávez during only 3 days in "CADENA NACIONAL" (a kind of confiscation o private TV signals). Each one with about 20 minutes of duration.

They did not tell us anything about The quiting announcement made by General en Jefe Lucas Rincon Romero, Inspector General of the army forces, who is a traditional supporter of Chávez. Even now, in despite of his announcement, he is the Ministro de Interior y Justicia. After Chávez return he occuped the Charge of Ministro del Defensa (equals to Defense Secretary in US).

They did not say anything about Chávez orders about shooting against a pacifical people concentration who was claiming for elections.

They did not say anything about the people in this concentration that were killed by Chávez Supporters (either civilians and Military official forces).

They present some facts in a wrong order, in order to lie.

They did not say anything about venezuelan civilian society thats are even now claiming for an elections in order to solve the crisis and Chávez actions in order to avoid the elections.

That's why i tell you.... This movie is just a lot of lies or a big lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2875 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Moonstruck" is one of the best films ever. I own that film on DVD! The movie deals with a New York widow (Cher) who falls in love with her boyfriend's (Danny Aiello) angry brother (Nicholas Cage) who works at a bakery. I'm glad Cher won an Oscar for that movie. Nicholas Cage and Danny Aiello are great, too. The direction from Norman Jewison (who directed "Fiddler On The Roof") is fantastic. "Moonstruck" is an excellent movie for everyone to see and laugh. A must-see!

10/10 stars! --------------------------------------------- Result 2876 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] What an [[amazingly]] funny and [[original]] show. The cast starting with the hysterical Julie Brown(Homecoming Queen's Got A Gun) is just [[perfect]]. Add Amy Hill(All American Girl-Grandma Kim) who plays a lesbian who is always arguing with her partner and business partner(Asian restaurant-WOK-DON"T RUN) I have [[laughed]] harder during this [[show]] than any other I have ever seen(including Newhart-one of my all time favorite shows) If you like movies like Naked Gun and Airplane- you will love this series!! One of the best moments of the show is Cindy Williams playing herself. When she snubs Tammy at the dry cleaners, Tammy finds a picture of Cindy Williams in her coat. The picture is of Cindy Williams doing an unmentionable act with a bowling pin-upside down. It is awesome to see an actress like Cindy Williams being able to play herself like this. Soap opera like with many surprise twists during its short run. I can only hope that this will someday be released on DVD with special many bonus special features. Funniest series I have ever seen!!!! What an [[alarmingly]] funny and [[initial]] show. The cast starting with the hysterical Julie Brown(Homecoming Queen's Got A Gun) is just [[faultless]]. Add Amy Hill(All American Girl-Grandma Kim) who plays a lesbian who is always arguing with her partner and business partner(Asian restaurant-WOK-DON"T RUN) I have [[giggled]] harder during this [[display]] than any other I have ever seen(including Newhart-one of my all time favorite shows) If you like movies like Naked Gun and Airplane- you will love this series!! One of the best moments of the show is Cindy Williams playing herself. When she snubs Tammy at the dry cleaners, Tammy finds a picture of Cindy Williams in her coat. The picture is of Cindy Williams doing an unmentionable act with a bowling pin-upside down. It is awesome to see an actress like Cindy Williams being able to play herself like this. Soap opera like with many surprise twists during its short run. I can only hope that this will someday be released on DVD with special many bonus special features. Funniest series I have ever seen!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2877 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] [[New]] [[York]], 1953. One [[hot]] night, four [[famous]] [[iconic]] [[figures]] will come together. The [[professor]] ([[Albert]] [[Einstein]]) has come to NY to give a [[speech]], which he has, the senator (Joesph MacCarthy) on his back. [[Later]] that night his [[gets]] a [[surprise]] [[visitor]]; a [[famous]] actress (Marilyn [[Monroe]]). [[Who]] [[actually]] [[wants]] to [[discuss]] the theories of Relativity. [[Soon]] her ball-playing husband (Joe DiMaggio) turns up at the [[hotel]] [[room]], begging to [[work]] [[things]] out for their crumbling [[relationship]]. [[Flashbacks]] of [[childhood]], [[important]] [[events]], perceived [[consequences]] of their [[actions]] creep in to [[show]] how these [[individuals]] cope with [[despair]] and a [[hidden]] fear [[waiting]] to [[break]] out.

Now that's one-of-a-kind! [[Adapted]] off a stage-play by [[Terry]] [[Johnson]] (who [[would]] [[also]] script the [[screenplay]] for the [[film]]), "Insignificance" is an [[odd]], [[quirky]], [[seductive]] and [[downright]] curious [[fictional]] pop-culture [[gimmick]] in the hands of [[director]] [[Nicolas]] Roeg. This inspired and cerebral [[experimental]] [[effort]] might be [[rooted]] in its stage-play [[origins]], because it does feel theatrical and most of the action [[occurs]] in a [[hotel]] [[backdrop]] and one [[main]] suite. The cramp [[look]] only [[enhanced]] the moody and smoky atmosphere of [[New]] York to [[great]] [[effect]]. [[However]] these [[limitations]] can't [[contain]] the fruitful and daring [[ideas]] that Roeg [[manages]] to randomly storm up visually and through the [[meaningful]] material. The [[way]] he [[reflects]] on the characters' (who are suggestively [[famous]] figures, without the [[need]] of [[naming]] of them) philosophical [[journeys]] and [[interpretations]] of their [[notions]] is [[stimulating]] in a [[spiritual]] sense, with the [[memories]] gelling into the present and [[visions]] [[showing]] their [[fears]] of realisations, which depending on what you're seeing is either [[beautiful]], or hauntingly [[implemented]]. There's plenty of [[food]] for [[thought]] and [[hints]] [[within]] the verbosely [[innovative]] (if [[sometimes]] [[awkward]]) [[script]], with the main [[focus]] [[concerning]] the [[present]] situation, but the flashbacks gives us the personal make-up (sex, power, enlightenment and [[glory]]) of what makes them who they are and how much of a [[burden]] it can be in there already [[demanding]] [[lives]]. [[Sure]] the [[story]] [[might]] not lead to [[anything]] by the [[end]], and it can feel disjointed, but the dreamy [[vibe]] and [[intelligent]] [[arrangement]] [[irons]] out those folds and makes sure it never [[turns]] [[giddy]]. [[Peter]] Hannan's sensually [[fluid]] [[photography]] and Stanley Myers' titillatingly oozing blues soundtrack fit in snugly with Roeg's stylistically subdue and established style of directing. He makes it look like he's working with something [[big]] and large-scale, but otherwise that's not the case and a small little universe is created. The vintage costumes and locations of the period all come off fittingly enough. What made the film for me had to be the impressive acting it boasted from the main four. Theresa Russell's perky, drop dead gorgeous appeal of the sexy pin-up actress is a growing portrayal that definitely held the film together along with an genuinely excellent and endearing performance by Michael Emil as the professor. Tony Curtis marvellously plays it up as witch-hunting senator and Gary Busey is suitably good in the stoically gravel manner as the ballplayer. Showing up in minor, but amusing support roles happen to be Will Sampson and Patrick Kilpatrick.

A memorably striking, fresh and tour de force meditation piece of metaphysics linked together by four different extremes. Some might find it pretentiously estrange and too talky, but this one had me wrapped up in its own little unique world to worry too much about its shortcomings. [[Novo]] [[Yorke]], 1953. One [[sexier]] night, four [[illustrious]] [[symbolic]] [[numerals]] will come together. The [[educator]] ([[Hugh]] [[Brainiac]]) has come to NY to give a [[rhetoric]], which he has, the senator (Joesph MacCarthy) on his back. [[Thereafter]] that night his [[got]] a [[amazement]] [[reception]]; a [[illustrious]] actress (Marilyn [[Munroe]]). [[Whom]] [[indeed]] [[wish]] to [[examines]] the theories of Relativity. [[Swift]] her ball-playing husband (Joe DiMaggio) turns up at the [[motel]] [[bedroom]], begging to [[collaborated]] [[aspects]] out for their crumbling [[rapport]]. [[Reminiscences]] of [[preschool]], [[momentous]] [[phenomena]], perceived [[implications]] of their [[measurements]] creep in to [[exposition]] how these [[person]] cope with [[desperation]] and a [[concealment]] fear [[expecting]] to [[interruption]] out.

Now that's one-of-a-kind! [[Adaptation]] off a stage-play by [[Terri]] [[Johnston]] (who [[ought]] [[similarly]] script the [[scenario]] for the [[filmmaking]]), "Insignificance" is an [[curious]], [[fickle]], [[tempting]] and [[altogether]] curious [[fictitious]] pop-culture [[stratagem]] in the hands of [[headmaster]] [[Nikolaus]] Roeg. This inspired and cerebral [[empirical]] [[endeavor]] might be [[root]] in its stage-play [[source]], because it does feel theatrical and most of the action [[arises]] in a [[motel]] [[context]] and one [[primary]] suite. The cramp [[peek]] only [[improve]] the moody and smoky atmosphere of [[Novo]] York to [[large]] [[effects]]. [[Still]] these [[restriction]] can't [[containing]] the fruitful and daring [[idea]] that Roeg [[administering]] to randomly storm up visually and through the [[valid]] material. The [[routes]] he [[reflecting]] on the characters' (who are suggestively [[notorious]] figures, without the [[necessity]] of [[designation]] of them) philosophical [[itinerary]] and [[interpretive]] of their [[notion]] is [[encouraging]] in a [[mental]] sense, with the [[memoirs]] gelling into the present and [[notions]] [[exhibiting]] their [[jitters]] of realisations, which depending on what you're seeing is either [[sumptuous]], or hauntingly [[applied]]. There's plenty of [[dietary]] for [[thinking]] and [[suggestions]] [[inside]] the verbosely [[imaginative]] (if [[intermittently]] [[clumsy]]) [[screenplay]], with the main [[focuses]] [[relating]] the [[presented]] situation, but the flashbacks gives us the personal make-up (sex, power, enlightenment and [[stardom]]) of what makes them who they are and how much of a [[load]] it can be in there already [[exacting]] [[life]]. [[Persuaded]] the [[narratives]] [[apt]] not lead to [[nothing]] by the [[terminating]], and it can feel disjointed, but the dreamy [[ambiance]] and [[termite]] [[regimes]] [[fetters]] out those folds and makes sure it never [[revolves]] [[woozy]]. [[Petter]] Hannan's sensually [[fluids]] [[image]] and Stanley Myers' titillatingly oozing blues soundtrack fit in snugly with Roeg's stylistically subdue and established style of directing. He makes it look like he's working with something [[considerable]] and large-scale, but otherwise that's not the case and a small little universe is created. The vintage costumes and locations of the period all come off fittingly enough. What made the film for me had to be the impressive acting it boasted from the main four. Theresa Russell's perky, drop dead gorgeous appeal of the sexy pin-up actress is a growing portrayal that definitely held the film together along with an genuinely excellent and endearing performance by Michael Emil as the professor. Tony Curtis marvellously plays it up as witch-hunting senator and Gary Busey is suitably good in the stoically gravel manner as the ballplayer. Showing up in minor, but amusing support roles happen to be Will Sampson and Patrick Kilpatrick.

A memorably striking, fresh and tour de force meditation piece of metaphysics linked together by four different extremes. Some might find it pretentiously estrange and too talky, but this one had me wrapped up in its own little unique world to worry too much about its shortcomings. --------------------------------------------- Result 2878 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] Robert Mitchum stars as Clint Tollinger in this short but [[tough]] western: Man With The Gun. Tollinger is a professional town tamer - as in, when a town needs someone to save itself; he is the one who is brought in to do it. Tollinger's latest gig comes by as an accident: strolling into town looking for his former fling, he stumbles into a town being played like a puppet by a local western gangster. But many townspeople begin to rue the day they hired Tollinger, as his way of cleaning up the town becomes very taxing (suddenly High Plains Drifter seems less original).

Man With The Gun starts off as an average western tough-guy film but begins to surprise you more and more as the film progresses. What starts off as forgettable and run-of-the-mill ends up dark and character-centered. The entire film is very well shot and the cast is very enjoyable. Mitchum is his usual excellent self here in Man With The Gun - not one of his very best performances, Mitchum still has his classic and effective tough-guy screen presence in high gear and he knocks the action-packed, meaningful, and shocking scenes of the film right out of the park. Man With The Gun is a nice Mitchum western and is easily worth one's time. Robert Mitchum stars as Clint Tollinger in this short but [[stiff]] western: Man With The Gun. Tollinger is a professional town tamer - as in, when a town needs someone to save itself; he is the one who is brought in to do it. Tollinger's latest gig comes by as an accident: strolling into town looking for his former fling, he stumbles into a town being played like a puppet by a local western gangster. But many townspeople begin to rue the day they hired Tollinger, as his way of cleaning up the town becomes very taxing (suddenly High Plains Drifter seems less original).

Man With The Gun starts off as an average western tough-guy film but begins to surprise you more and more as the film progresses. What starts off as forgettable and run-of-the-mill ends up dark and character-centered. The entire film is very well shot and the cast is very enjoyable. Mitchum is his usual excellent self here in Man With The Gun - not one of his very best performances, Mitchum still has his classic and effective tough-guy screen presence in high gear and he knocks the action-packed, meaningful, and shocking scenes of the film right out of the park. Man With The Gun is a nice Mitchum western and is easily worth one's time. --------------------------------------------- Result 2879 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Hitokiri (which translates roughly as "assassination"), a/k/a "Tenchu" which translates roughly as "divine punishment") showcases Hideo Gosha at the top of his form. Do NOT miss this one, or Gosha's other classic, Goyokin! Hitokiri is not only one of Gosha's best films, it's one of the best "samurai/chambara" films ever made, and perhaps one of the best Japanese films ever exported.

Be warned, all of the intricate plot details in Hitokiri can be a little hard to follow for those unfamiliar with 19th century Japanese history. Even so, the underlying human drama is obvious and open to all viewers. As per the norm for Gosha, Hitokiri provides yet another variation on his traditional theme of "loyalty to one's lord" vs. "doing the right thing". However, Gosha develops his favorite theme with such sophistication, that it's really _the_ movie to see (along with Goyokin, of course).

I suppose it breaks down like this: If you want a simpler, more action-oriented tale, you might want to see Goyokin. However, if you want a more thoughtful, multilayered (albeit grim) drama, see this one.

(OK, OK, essentially, the historical backdrop is a massive power grap between many different samurai clans who are either (1) working to reform, yet retain, the Tokugawa Shogunate, and (2) those who are trying to install the Emperor Meiji as the supreme ruler of Japan. Of course, those clans working "for" Emperor Meiji were often less interested in "reforming" Japan than in ensuring their own clan more power in the "new world order". Ironically, the entire feudal system was officially abolished as one of the first reforms of the Meiji government. It's ironic twists like this -- Gosha's big on irony -- that make the entire plot all the more bittersweet.)

What distinguishes "Hitokiri" from Gosha's other movies is Gosha's mature sense of cinematography. Every shot is thoughtfully composed, and (much like Kubrick's Barry Lyndon) each frame of the movie could hold its own as a still composition. Of course, this is typical Gosha. Hitokiri really stands out with stunning backdrops, including(as with Goyokin) many riveting seascapes. Just watch the opening sequence, and you're hooked! Make no mistake, this is no English period piece: Hitokiri is extremely violent (don't say you weren't warned).

What else, other than cool camera work, makes Hitokiri stand out? The performances seem (to me) a bit more subtle in this one. Katsu Shintaro (of Zatoichi/Hanzo the Razor fame) turns in a star performance as the conflicted protagonist/antihero, Okada Izo. Katsu manages to instill humanity to a character that seems almost more wild animal than villain. Throughout the movie, you're never quite sure if you're engaged or revolted by Okada's character. At the same time, Katsu's portrayal of Okada's ravenous hunger for respect, and his later pathetic attempts at redemption, seem so human that you can't help but feel empathy/sympathy. Of course, after seeing Nakadai Tatsuya play the tortured hero in "Goyokin", it's great to see him play such a ruthless villain in "Hitokiri". He's just perfect, there's nothing more to say!

As a final note, perhaps more interesting to buffs than to casual fans, don't miss the last screen appearance of Mishima Yukio (yes, the closeted gay right-wing ultranationalist novelist who committed suicide by seppuku before the crowd of jeering Japanese military personnel he "kidnapped" in 1970, and had a movie on his life and work made by Paul Schrader), who actually does a pretty solid job of portraying the honorable (for an assassin) Shinbei Tanaka. --------------------------------------------- Result 2880 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I watched "Elephant Walk" for the first time in about 30 years and was [[struck]] by how similar the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I enjoyed it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a credible job as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's frustrated admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. I watched "Elephant Walk" for the first time in about 30 years and was [[slugged]] by how similar the story line is to the greatly superior "Rebecca." As others have said, you have the sweet young thing swept off her feet by the alternately charming and brooding lord of the manor, only to find her marriage threatened by the inescapable memory of a larger-than-life yet deeply flawed relative. You have the stern and disapproving servant, a crisis that will either bind the couple together or tear them irreparably apart, climaxed by the fiery destruction of the lavish homestead.

Meanwhile, "Elephant Walk" also owes some of its creepy jungle atmosphere to "The Letter," the Bette Davis love triangle set on a Singapore rubber plantation rather than a Sri Lankan tea plantation.

Maltin gives "Elephant Walk" just two stars, and IMDb readers aren't much kinder, but I enjoyed it despite its predictability. Elizabeth Taylor never looked lovelier, and Peter Finch does a credible job as the basically good man unable to shake off the influence of his overbearing father. Dana Andrews -- a favorite in "Laura" and "The Best Year of Our Lives" -- is wasted as Elizabeth's frustrated admirer. The real star is the bungalow, one of the most beautiful interior sets in movie history. --------------------------------------------- Result 2881 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Saw]] this on SBS TV here in Australia the other [[week]], where it was [[titled]] "Laputa: [[Castle]] in the [[sky]]". I had enabled [[subtitles]] and I [[think]] SBS provided their own for that, which, as usual, was of very good quality.

Just [[looked]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[confirms]] what I [[suspected]]...the floating island of this [[tale]] is taken from the [[classic]] [[Jonathan]] [[Swift]] novel "Gulliver's [[travels]]", which was published in the early to mid 1700s.

[[Anyway]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[features]] an English [[speaking]] voice-cast. It's suitable for young children, I [[think]], but it does run at just over two hours in [[length]], so it may be too [[long]] for some, though not for an [[adult]] like me.

The [[story]] concerns two children who seek to [[find]] a [[legendary]] floating island which has a [[castle]] on it. The [[children]] are not the only ones [[looking]] for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies [[looking]] for the island too, and [[looking]] to [[capture]] the children (Sheeta, the girl, [[voiced]] by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the [[boy]], [[voiced]] by [[James]] Van [[Der]] Beek) in [[order]] to [[help]] them find it.

The [[graphics]] are [[magnificent]]...[[sort]] of photo-realistic at times, [[especially]] the scenes of stonework [[lit]] by torch-light, or the pretty scenes of bright, sunny [[days]], with [[white]] [[clouds]], or mist.

[[Recommended]]. [[Sawthe]] this on SBS TV here in Australia the other [[chow]], where it was [[entitled]] "Laputa: [[Castillo]] in the [[skye]]". I had enabled [[caption]] and I [[thinking]] SBS provided their own for that, which, as usual, was of very good quality.

Just [[seemed]] up "Laputa" on Wikipedia and it [[corroborates]] what I [[supposed]]...the floating island of this [[history]] is taken from the [[conventional]] [[Jonathon]] [[Expedited]] novel "Gulliver's [[trip]]", which was published in the early to mid 1700s.

[[Anyhoo]], this is an engaging Japanese fairytale, which [[idiosyncrasies]] an English [[discussing]] voice-cast. It's suitable for young children, I [[thought]], but it does run at just over two hours in [[lifespan]], so it may be too [[lange]] for some, though not for an [[adulthood]] like me.

The [[histories]] concerns two children who seek to [[found]] a [[fabled]] floating island which has a [[castillo]] on it. The [[infant]] are not the only ones [[researching]] for this island. They have pirates, the army and spies [[researching]] for the island too, and [[researching]] to [[caught]] the children (Sheeta, the girl, [[expressed]] by Anna Paquin, and Pazu, the [[dude]], [[expressed]] by [[Jacques]] Van [[Monastery]] Beek) in [[edict]] to [[aids]] them find it.

The [[chart]] are [[magnifique]]...[[sorts]] of photo-realistic at times, [[namely]] the scenes of stonework [[illuminated]] by torch-light, or the pretty scenes of bright, sunny [[jours]], with [[branca]] [[cloud]], or mist.

[[Suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I don't [[quite]] know how to [[explain]] "Darkend [[Room]]," because to [[summarize]] it wouldn't [[really]] do it justice. It's a quintessentially Lynchian short film with two [[beautiful]] girls in a [[strange]], mysterious situation. I would [[say]] this short is [[definitely]] more on the "Mulholland Drive" [[end]] of the Lynchian [[spectrum]], as opposed to "The Elephant Man" or "The Straight Story." It's hidden on Lynch's [[website]], and well worth the search. I don't [[rather]] know how to [[clarifying]] "Darkend [[Rooms]]," because to [[summed]] it wouldn't [[truly]] do it justice. It's a quintessentially Lynchian short film with two [[funky]] girls in a [[bizarre]], mysterious situation. I would [[tell]] this short is [[obviously]] more on the "Mulholland Drive" [[terminate]] of the Lynchian [[spectra]], as opposed to "The Elephant Man" or "The Straight Story." It's hidden on Lynch's [[websites]], and well worth the search. --------------------------------------------- Result 2883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I saw this movie today at the Haifa Film Festival in Israel after hearing rave reviews, but I [[guess]] the critics were just sucking up to Willem Defoe and his wife (the director) who were present at the festival. It is [[definitely]] the [[slowest]] movie I have ever seen with numerous [[pointless]], [[ridiculously]] long scenes of [[nothing]]. [[Besides]] Defoe who was decent, the acting of the two and a half other people in the movie, Defoe's wife Giada included, was ridiculously [[awful]] (how they cast the part of the salesgirl at the [[bakery]] is [[beyond]] me). This movie is [[pretty]] much [[plot]] less with a lame [[attempt]] to be abstract and off the [[wall]]. The only scene that [[stirred]] any [[kind]] of [[reaction]] in the crowd was vulgar and [[came]] from [[nowhere]] as if just to [[add]] some [[kind]] of [[shock]] [[value]] to the dullness that is this [[movie]]. Sorry for being so harsh, but [[really]] this movie is a [[precious]] waste of [[time]] and money. I appreciate good [[indie]] [[cinema]], but this [[movie]] is not [[worthy]] of moviegoers' [[time]]. I saw this movie today at the Haifa Film Festival in Israel after hearing rave reviews, but I [[reckon]] the critics were just sucking up to Willem Defoe and his wife (the director) who were present at the festival. It is [[admittedly]] the [[slower]] movie I have ever seen with numerous [[vain]], [[grotesquely]] long scenes of [[none]]. [[Furthermore]] Defoe who was decent, the acting of the two and a half other people in the movie, Defoe's wife Giada included, was ridiculously [[horrendous]] (how they cast the part of the salesgirl at the [[pastry]] is [[afterlife]] me). This movie is [[quite]] much [[intrigue]] less with a lame [[seeks]] to be abstract and off the [[wail]]. The only scene that [[provoked]] any [[kinds]] of [[reactions]] in the crowd was vulgar and [[became]] from [[somewhere]] as if just to [[added]] some [[genus]] of [[shocks]] [[values]] to the dullness that is this [[cinematography]]. Sorry for being so harsh, but [[genuinely]] this movie is a [[treasured]] waste of [[period]] and money. I appreciate good [[andy]] [[film]], but this [[cinematography]] is not [[meritorious]] of moviegoers' [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Intriguing]]. [[Exciting]]. Dramatic. [[Explosive]]. [[Complex]]. Epic. [[Words]] that only [[touch]] the tip of the iceberg in terms of the [[grand]] [[story]] that is LOST being told.

From the acting down to the rare visual effects, LOST is the [[essential]] [[show]] on [[television]] for [[fans]] of science-fiction, fantasy, action, adventure, and [[lots]] and [[lots]] of mystery.

Each cast member is so well chosen, and so good in their [[roles]], that you either [[love]] them, or [[hate]] them, or downright wish them dead.

The visual effects, when used (which is rare) are actually quite well [[done]] [[considering]] the usual [[production]] of [[shows]]. Be it the "smoke monster", to the polar bears, [[LOST]] is [[believable]] in terms of eye-candy.

As far as story goes, nothing can compare to the vast complexity this show has made viewers like me endure. Beginning to End, continuity is virtually [[perfect]], characters are developed, and the ever-evolving story slowly gives the answers to its questions so many crave.

Overall, there is practically no [[flaw]] in LOST. It does for dramatic/sci-fi television what [[Arrested]] Development did for comedy: it has set the bar.

I [[highly]] [[recommend]] LOST to those that are patient, intellectual, and [[love]] [[every]] moment of the ride, no matter how long it takes to reach the end.

See this [[show]]. [[Mesmerizing]]. [[Fascinating]]. Dramatic. [[Explosives]]. [[Tortuous]]. Epic. [[Mots]] that only [[touches]] the tip of the iceberg in terms of the [[prodigious]] [[storytelling]] that is LOST being told.

From the acting down to the rare visual effects, LOST is the [[necessary]] [[spectacle]] on [[tvs]] for [[stalkers]] of science-fiction, fantasy, action, adventure, and [[batch]] and [[batches]] of mystery.

Each cast member is so well chosen, and so good in their [[duties]], that you either [[likes]] them, or [[abhor]] them, or downright wish them dead.

The visual effects, when used (which is rare) are actually quite well [[performed]] [[examine]] the usual [[productivity]] of [[display]]. Be it the "smoke monster", to the polar bears, [[OUTOF]] is [[reliable]] in terms of eye-candy.

As far as story goes, nothing can compare to the vast complexity this show has made viewers like me endure. Beginning to End, continuity is virtually [[faultless]], characters are developed, and the ever-evolving story slowly gives the answers to its questions so many crave.

Overall, there is practically no [[inadequacy]] in LOST. It does for dramatic/sci-fi television what [[Arrests]] Development did for comedy: it has set the bar.

I [[unimaginably]] [[recommends]] LOST to those that are patient, intellectual, and [[adores]] [[any]] moment of the ride, no matter how long it takes to reach the end.

See this [[exhibit]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2885 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] [[Spoiler]] This is a [[great]] [[film]] about a conure. He goes through quite the ordeal trying to get back to his little girl owner. He learns a lot through his journey and meets up with a lot of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my wife does, this film is for you. This film also has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[works]] out for Paulie and his Russian friend. Rent this for the whole family, everyone will enjoy this. [[Deflector]] This is a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]] about a conure. He goes through quite the ordeal trying to get back to his little girl owner. He learns a lot through his journey and meets up with a lot of other beautiful birds. If you love birds like my wife does, this film is for you. This film also has some sad parts that make the tears run. In the end it all [[cooperating]] out for Paulie and his Russian friend. Rent this for the whole family, everyone will enjoy this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[incredible]] piece of work and acting does. I found it amazingly lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. Let's cut to the chase: If you're a baby-boomer, you inevitably spent some time wondering at the fact that, in 1976, McCartney had the gumption to drop in on John's city hermit life and spend the day with him. You also certainly wondered how things went. I heard the exact same reports that the writer of this film heard, from John's and Paul's perspective, and I admit that I reconstructed the meeting in pretty much the same way this film does. But none of my imaginings could have bought tears to my eyes the way this [[unimaginable]] piece of work and acting does. I found it amazingly lifelike, perfectly plausible and 100 % saccharin-free. Now, can anyone explain why I didn't hear of this masterpiece before it was shown by the CBC last night? I mean it's already three years old, for goodness sake! And yes, if you're a Beatles fan, this is a must-see performance! Even the subtle paraphrasing of Beatles' melodies in the background is inspired. --------------------------------------------- Result 2887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This [[movie]] makes me want to [[fall]] in [[love]] all over again!I am [[naming]] my next daughter "[[Adelaide]]". Just so that someone who sings like Ol Blue eyes can swoon her one day, and feel the butterflies I [[felt]] hearing it sung, and it wasn't even to me! I [[give]] it a 9/10 This [[filmmaking]] makes me want to [[slumps]] in [[adores]] all over again!I am [[appointing]] my next daughter "[[Homestead]]". Just so that someone who sings like Ol Blue eyes can swoon her one day, and feel the butterflies I [[smelled]] hearing it sung, and it wasn't even to me! I [[lend]] it a 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2888 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I used to be an avid [[viewer]] until I personally spent long cold hours helping [[build]] a [[home]] for the [[White]] [[Family]], only to be sickened to [[see]] the house a year [[later]]. All of the [[beautiful]] rock [[landscaping]] has been [[removed]], the gorgeous rock sidewalk and front fountain have been removed, all the pine trees and pecan trees in the front have been [[cut]] down, sprinkler system has been ripped out. It now [[looks]] like a disaster area. They don't [[even]] [[live]] there any more... they [[live]] "in town" and come out only for the weekend. It sickens me to [[think]] of all the hours that the [[great]] people of Oklahoma [[donated]] to these people and to see the result. The story that we all saw on TV wasn't completely the truth... don't believe every thing you see and hear. I used to be an avid [[onlooker]] until I personally spent long cold hours helping [[building]] a [[housing]] for the [[Bianchi]] [[Families]], only to be sickened to [[seeing]] the house a year [[then]]. All of the [[handsome]] rock [[scenery]] has been [[abolished]], the gorgeous rock sidewalk and front fountain have been removed, all the pine trees and pecan trees in the front have been [[cutting]] down, sprinkler system has been ripped out. It now [[seems]] like a disaster area. They don't [[yet]] [[vivo]] there any more... they [[inhabit]] "in town" and come out only for the weekend. It sickens me to [[believing]] of all the hours that the [[wondrous]] people of Oklahoma [[donating]] to these people and to see the result. The story that we all saw on TV wasn't completely the truth... don't believe every thing you see and hear. --------------------------------------------- Result 2889 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I thought the original of this film was quaint and charming as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to figure it out.

Since I had already seen the original, when I [[saw]] this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately made for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[within]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a character actor, I wanted to see how he would [[pull]] it off.

The writers/producers etc, [[modernized]] the film a bit by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it highly cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I actually enjoyed this quite a bit.

But if anyone really wants to see this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. I thought the original of this film was quaint and charming as well as having me sitting on the edge of my seat trying to figure it out.

Since I had already seen the original, when I [[sawthe]] this on Sci Fi Channel- I don't know if this remake was deliberately made for Sci Fi - I knew what it was [[inside]] the first few minutes. Since I like Richard Burgi as a character actor, I wanted to see how he would [[pulling]] it off.

The writers/producers etc, [[retrofitted]] the film a bit by trying to explain the plight of the "aliens" (They could no longer reproduce their own kind and needed help) using the same pseudo science that has been crammed in our ears in the 90's. Maybe it added a bit of polish to the film, or not.

This film. Film? This production takes on a more sinister edge than the original did- The original ended with a confrontation between the young woman and the alien and an understanding of sorts took place, although no resolution of the Alien's problem.

I sort of remember that in this remake, the woman became rather hostile towards the Burgi/Alien- I think it could have ended better. But the ending is just the ending, and the yarn is a swell yarn, being of the basic 1958 Science Fiction Pulp Stock. Many great science fiction stories were written in the 50's and some of them even made it to film.

This is a swell thing to watch on like a rainy day or something. I rate it highly cos of all the remakes of old 50's Sci Fi, this one came off well. I actually enjoyed this quite a bit.

But if anyone really wants to see this story told WELL, I suggest the original 1958 version with Tom Tyron and Gloria Talbott, directed by Gene Fowler Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 2890 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] The acting may be [[okay]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wish]] you weren't, this [[movie]] is so [[horrible]], that if I [[could]] [[get]] a [[hold]] of [[every]] [[copy]], I would [[burn]] them all and not look back, this [[movie]] is [[terrible]]!! The acting may be [[allright]], the more u watch this movie, the more u [[wishing]] you weren't, this [[kino]] is so [[scary]], that if I [[would]] [[obtain]] a [[held]] of [[all]] [[copies]], I would [[incinerate]] them all and not look back, this [[film]] is [[scary]]!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] How this movie got [[made]] with a [[supposedly]] $70 million budget and without being completely retooled is [[beyond]] me. The storyline and [[dialogue]] are beyond amateurish. Characters [[say]] things no real person would ever say and almost never [[react]] to things that were [[said]] before. No one seems to be grounded in the real world. The acting of the [[leads]] is fine given that the writing is such a dud...but several [[actors]] in supporting roles [[really]] drag the [[production]] down. The hero's [[hair]] probably should've [[gotten]] its own [[credit]], it was so [[oddly]] attention- grabbing...not to mention that it [[gave]] one of the better performances in the pic. Finally, for a movie about L.A. being besieged by giant reptiles, this film is [[shockingly]] [[boring]]. What a [[shame]]! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, thinking up ways that you could have [[taken]] the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. How this movie got [[brought]] with a [[reportedly]] $70 million budget and without being completely retooled is [[afterlife]] me. The storyline and [[conversation]] are beyond amateurish. Characters [[tell]] things no real person would ever say and almost never [[behaves]] to things that were [[say]] before. No one seems to be grounded in the real world. The acting of the [[leeds]] is fine given that the writing is such a dud...but several [[protagonists]] in supporting roles [[genuinely]] drag the [[productivity]] down. The hero's [[hairline]] probably should've [[become]] its own [[credits]], it was so [[stunningly]] attention- grabbing...not to mention that it [[yielded]] one of the better performances in the pic. Finally, for a movie about L.A. being besieged by giant reptiles, this film is [[stunningly]] [[bored]]. What a [[embarrass]]! If you do see this, your mind will be constantly racing, thinking up ways that you could have [[took]] the SFX scenes and built a far better movie around them. Sadly, it wouldn't have taken much. --------------------------------------------- Result 2892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[threesome]] of [[Bill]] Boyd, Robert Armstrong, and [[James]] Gleason play Coney [[Island]] carnys [[vying]] for the hand of [[Ginger]] [[Rogers]], a [[working]] gal who [[sells]] salt water [[taffy]]. With the [[outbreak]] of [[World]] War I, the threesome enlist and pursue [[Ginger]] from afar. The first half of this RKO Pathe production is [[hard]] going, with the three [[male]] leads chewing up the [[scenery]] with [[overcooked]] one-liners and 'snappy' [[dialogue]] that [[quickly]] grows [[tiresome]]. The second half [[concentrates]] on [[action]] sequences as the [[US]] Navy [[pursues]] both a German [[merchant]] cruiser and a U-boat. These [[sequences]] are lively and well-filmed, but overall this is an overlong and unsatisfying comedy-drama with a flat ending. For [[fans]] of the [[stars]] only. The [[trio]] of [[Billed]] Boyd, Robert Armstrong, and [[Jacques]] Gleason play Coney [[Isla]] carnys [[competing]] for the hand of [[Jiang]] [[Rodgers]], a [[collaborated]] gal who [[sold]] salt water [[candy]]. With the [[outburst]] of [[Globe]] War I, the threesome enlist and pursue [[Jiang]] from afar. The first half of this RKO Pathe production is [[tough]] going, with the three [[virile]] leads chewing up the [[panorama]] with [[undercooked]] one-liners and 'snappy' [[dialogues]] that [[soon]] grows [[pesky]]. The second half [[spotlight]] on [[efforts]] sequences as the [[USA]] Navy [[chases]] both a German [[dealer]] cruiser and a U-boat. These [[sequence]] are lively and well-filmed, but overall this is an overlong and unsatisfying comedy-drama with a flat ending. For [[lovers]] of the [[celebrity]] only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] So let me [[start]] off by saying that I saw this movie as [[part]] of a [[bargain]]. I was really bored one fine 1997 day and so I biked over to the [[movie]] rental [[store]]. I asked the clerk what the [[worst]] [[movie]] he had in [[stock]] was. Without [[hesitation]] he walked me over to "[[Lucky]] [[Stiff]]." He told me that he'd [[waive]] the $1 rental [[fee]] (he [[said]] it [[would]] be [[wrong]] to [[charge]] more) if I [[promised]] to watch the [[whole]] movie. So watch it I did, for free...

This movie is terrible. God-Awful even. I don't [[need]] to [[go]] into [[plot]] [[details]], read the other reviews. The [[jokes]] make no sense. The acting was [[terrible]]. I [[know]] it was [[supposed]] to be a [[comedy]], but the stupidity of the main character was [[exhausting]]. You might [[try]] to watch it as something to laugh at, but it's so bad that it isn't [[even]] funny in that way. [[Avoid]]! So let me [[began]] off by saying that I saw this movie as [[portion]] of a [[negotiates]]. I was really bored one fine 1997 day and so I biked over to the [[film]] rental [[shops]]. I asked the clerk what the [[hardest]] [[kino]] he had in [[stocks]] was. Without [[indecision]] he walked me over to "[[Thankfully]] [[Fierce]]." He told me that he'd [[relinquish]] the $1 rental [[royalty]] (he [[indicated]] it [[could]] be [[erroneous]] to [[indict]] more) if I [[vows]] to watch the [[ensemble]] movie. So watch it I did, for free...

This movie is terrible. God-Awful even. I don't [[require]] to [[going]] into [[intrigue]] [[detail]], read the other reviews. The [[pranks]] make no sense. The acting was [[gruesome]]. I [[savoir]] it was [[presumed]] to be a [[farce]], but the stupidity of the main character was [[tiresome]]. You might [[tried]] to watch it as something to laugh at, but it's so bad that it isn't [[yet]] funny in that way. [[Avert]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This apology for a movie is about absolutely nothing! Rachel Griffiths must have needed the money. The film must have been made on a very low budget, because the lighting was non existent. I made a vow if I ever see Pete Postlesumthingor other I'll commit suicide. I'd be happy to know if there was 1) a plot or 2)a script. My biggest regret is I wasted my time watching this rubbish. --------------------------------------------- Result 2895 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I've been [[disappointed]], if not [[surprised]], at the lack of [[appreciation]] this [[film]] has received. Once again, Billy Zane [[proves]] he's more than just a Hollywood pretty boy in a [[silent]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Calling]] this a silent [[film]] is inaccurate, as there's a lot of music and sound. It has a manic pace and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[finally]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast [[listing]], and [[realize]] that [[everyone]] [[shines]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of Wood, and to do a broad, physical kind of acting not seen much these days.

But, today, reviewers try to guess what's going to become a hit much more than they show any kind of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable target audience. It was made mostly out of love for Wood's script. Even after his death, the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly entertaining and a genuinely experimental film that really deserves to live, at least on DVD. I've been [[disenchanted]], if not [[astonished]], at the lack of [[gratitude]] this [[filmmaking]] has received. Once again, Billy Zane [[testifies]] he's more than just a Hollywood pretty boy in a [[muted]] performance that combines spastic slapstick with understated pathos. [[Telephoning]] this a silent [[cinema]] is inaccurate, as there's a lot of music and sound. It has a manic pace and is full of the goofy inventiveness that Ed Wood is [[lastly]] beginning to be appreciated for. Look at the cast [[listings]], and [[accomplishing]] that [[anybody]] [[glitters]]. No one is there just to show their face. I believe they're all in the movie to show their appreciation of Wood, and to do a broad, physical kind of acting not seen much these days.

But, today, reviewers try to guess what's going to become a hit much more than they show any kind of esthetic appreciation for a movie. And IWUETDID has no discernable target audience. It was made mostly out of love for Wood's script. Even after his death, the trendy social parasites have dealt him another serious blow, and deprived the world of a minor classic. This is a highly entertaining and a genuinely experimental film that really deserves to live, at least on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 2896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This snarky, [[homophobic]] [[thing]] was [[dated]] in 1976. It [[seems]] [[particularly]] mean-spirited now, filled with gay [[stereotypes]], and [[characters]] that are meant to be [[laughed]] at, rather than with. [[Redd]] Foxx does his standard schtick, Michael Warren at least [[tries]] to [[bring]] humanity to a one dimensional character, and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Pearl]] Bailey deserves far better. This snarky, [[homophobia]] [[stuff]] was [[dating]] in 1976. It [[seem]] [[principally]] mean-spirited now, filled with gay [[stereotype]], and [[character]] that are meant to be [[smiled]] at, rather than with. [[Nesting]] Foxx does his standard schtick, Michael Warren at least [[endeavours]] to [[bringing]] humanity to a one dimensional character, and Pearl--Pearl what were you thinking--? [[Perla]] Bailey deserves far better. --------------------------------------------- Result 2897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Usually musicals in the 1940's were of a set formula - and if you studied films you know what I'm talking about - a certain running lenghth, very "showy" performances that were great on the surface but never got into the real personalities of the characters etc.

THIS ONE IS DIFFERENT - and light years better and well worth it's nomination for best picture of the year - 1945 (although had no chance of beating the eventual winner - Lost Weekend).

Gene Kelly was probably in the best form of his career - yes I know about "American in Paris" and "Singing in the Rain". This one is different. He really gets into his character of a "sea wolf" thinking (at first) that "picking up any girl while on leave" is nothing more than a lark. And if you had to make up a "story" to get her - so be it - until. Sort of like the Music Man when he gets "his foot caught in the door". The eventual hilarity of the film stems mostly from his and his new pal (Sinatra)'s attempt to make the "story" good in order to "get the girl" that he REALLY and unexpectedly falls in love with. You are going to have to see the movie to see what I mean.

Besides that there are so many other elements of great film in this one, it's a classic buddy story, nostalgia to a time when WWII was almost over (the war ended about a month after the films release), a realization that a guy that always laughed at life can find out that he really is a great human being, great songs and probably a few other elements of classic film making that I can't think of right now.

Why not a 10? Near the end - at nearly 2 1/2 hours starts to feel a bit long. There is a small ballet number that Gene Kelly does that must have been a sensation in 1945 but seems dated and feels like it just adds minutes now. But overall, this ones a definite winner on every level. --------------------------------------------- Result 2898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The symbolic [[use]] of objects, [[form]] [[editing]], the position of [[characters]] in the scene... these were all used with such [[joyous]] abandon by Hitchcock that you can really see what a [[fertile]] [[genius]] he had. The [[way]] the wife moves from one corner of the [[ring]] to the other as the [[fight]] progresses, the editing when the wedding [[ring]] is placed on her finger... while these may [[seem]] a [[bit]] [[obvious]] by todays standards, in the silent era they [[spoke]] [[volumes]] about the [[story]] without a word being [[spoken]]. Even the title has a [[least]] four meanings that I can see; the boxing ring, the wedding [[ring]], the bracelet the lover [[buys]], and the [[love]] triangle at the [[heart]] of the story. The symbolic [[employs]] of objects, [[shape]] [[edited]], the position of [[nature]] in the scene... these were all used with such [[jubilant]] abandon by Hitchcock that you can really see what a [[productive]] [[prodigy]] he had. The [[ways]] the wife moves from one corner of the [[ringing]] to the other as the [[struggles]] progresses, the editing when the wedding [[rings]] is placed on her finger... while these may [[looks]] a [[bite]] [[seeming]] by todays standards, in the silent era they [[talking]] [[volume]] about the [[narratives]] without a word being [[talked]]. Even the title has a [[lowest]] four meanings that I can see; the boxing ring, the wedding [[rings]], the bracelet the lover [[purchases]], and the [[likes]] triangle at the [[nub]] of the story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2899 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[simply]] could never [[happen]]. [[Navy]] protocols could never break down that [[much]] that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the [[Captain]]. I'll take [[Dr]]. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[see]] this plot. Sidenote--the US [[Navy]] did not support this film. This movie had some andrenaline kickers, but it's an old story that [[exclusively]] could never [[arise]]. [[Naval]] protocols could never break down that [[very]] that a crew much less an XO could ever go that far against the [[Capitaine]]. I'll take [[Doktor]]. Strangelove any day if I wish to [[consults]] this plot. Sidenote--the US [[Marina]] did not support this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2900 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Watching Josh Kornbluth 'act' in this movie reminds me of my freshman TV production class, where the 'not funny' had the chance to prove just how unfunny they really were!

OBVIOUS is the word that comes to mind when I try to synopsize this wannabe comedy. The jokes are sophomoric and telegraphed. The delivery is painfully bad. OUCH!!!!!!! The writing is simply dorkish. It is akin to a Bob Saget show.

Watching this movie is as painful as watching a one and a half hour long Saturday Night Live skit (post Belushi).

I hated this movie and want my money back!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (62%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] BEGIN SPOILER: Fitfully funny and memorable for Mr. Chong's literal roach-smoking scene: Chong coolly mashes a stray kitchen cockroach into his pipe's bowl, lights up, coughs and hacks violently for a seeming eternity,then with perfect aplomb and not skipping a beat, re-loads the bowl properly, re-lights, re-tokes. END SPOILER. Alas, I began to lose faith less than half-way through the proceedings. It occurred to me that the lackadaisical duo are way obnoxious and less than relatable. I have come to appreciate the relative sophistication of contemporary stoners, Harold and Kumar. I simply prefer brighter company. Yet, the movie is probably a perfect fit for baked frat bros or those viewers who are so feeble-minded as to be outwitted by a stoner when they-- the former are sober. Notable guest appearance by Paul Reubens spouting obscenities in pre-Pee-wee form. --------------------------------------------- Result 2902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Ten minutes worth of story stretched out into the better [[part]] of two hours. [[When]] nothing of any [[significance]] had happened at the [[halfway]] point I should have left. But, ever [[hopeful]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the [[time]]. Acting was OK, but the [[story]] [[line]] is so transparent and [[weak]]. The [[script]] is about as lame as it [[could]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a whole lot of room for [[good]] dialogue. Ten minutes worth of story stretched out into the better [[party]] of two hours. [[Whenever]] nothing of any [[importance]] had happened at the [[midway]] point I should have left. But, ever [[upbeat]], I stayed. And left with a feeling of guilt for having wasted the [[times]]. Acting was OK, but the [[tales]] [[bloodline]] is so transparent and [[vulnerable]]. The [[hyphen]] is about as lame as it [[wo]] get, but again, stretching out the ten minute plot doesn't leave a whole lot of room for [[alright]] dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 2903 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[believe]] they were telling the [[truth]] the whole [[time]]..U cant trust anything in the [[wild]]... They [[family]] went through hell.Those [[poor]] boys too young to [[understand]] what was going on [[around]] them. But [[still]] having to deal with the [[rumours]]. As well as dealing with the [[lose]] of their [[little]] sister. I cant believe this case went on for so [[long]].seems [[like]] the jury couldn't [[see]] the truth, even if it [[bit]] them on the [[ass]].I feel for this family, and if i could let them know i hate what has happened to them, i would.I have no [[idea]] what they went through, i cant even [[imagine]] it. After [[watching]] this movie, i was in tears, and had to check on my little girl in bed...I think everyone should watch this. I [[believing]] they were telling the [[veracity]] the whole [[moment]]..U cant trust anything in the [[savage]]... They [[families]] went through hell.Those [[deficient]] boys too young to [[understands]] what was going on [[about]] them. But [[nonetheless]] having to deal with the [[rumors]]. As well as dealing with the [[wasting]] of their [[petite]] sister. I cant believe this case went on for so [[longer]].seems [[iike]] the jury couldn't [[behold]] the truth, even if it [[bite]] them on the [[butt]].I feel for this family, and if i could let them know i hate what has happened to them, i would.I have no [[ideals]] what they went through, i cant even [[envision]] it. After [[staring]] this movie, i was in tears, and had to check on my little girl in bed...I think everyone should watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 2904 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] The [[first]] noticeable [[problem]] about this [[awkwardly]] titled [[film]] is its [[casting]]. Ann Nelson plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[star]] in "Airplane!" as the woman who hangs herself while listening to Robert Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I could not get that image out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. First she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another unplanned ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the RV stranded in a salt flat in the desert. In the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves toward the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where Grandpa is trapped on the RV roof as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body experiences take forever. This film takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. The [[fiirst]] noticeable [[difficulties]] about this [[nervously]] titled [[kino]] is its [[pouring]]. Ann Nelson plays the grandma here. Three years after this, she would [[superstar]] in "Airplane!" as the woman who hangs herself while listening to Robert Hays pine for Julie Hagerty. I could not get that image out of my head.

Matt Boston is a fifteen year old with problems. He has headaches. His mother had a nervous breakdown. His grandfather had a massive heart attack. A chain smoking psychiatrist decides to find out what the devil is going on with this family. First she hypnotizes Grandma Nelson. Nelson tells a tale in flashback that fills the entire first half of the film.

She and Grandpa bought an RV, cheap, and drive it around to all the tourist traps in desert California. The RV soon has a mind of its own, going off the road and such. Then, large boulders begin hurling themselves at it. The elderly couple are appropriately afraid, but stay in the vehicle in order to move the plot along.

Eventually, Grandpa has a heart attack after being stranded on the RV roof when it goes for another unplanned ride.

Boston's mom begins talking to some Native American mummies she has lying around the house. She fancies herself an author, and makes copious notes about the musty corpses. The psychiatrist reads the detailed notes, and uses her imagination to fill in the blanks. We see the mother semi-flip out, but her mental breakdown occurs offscreen, much like Gramps' heart attack.

Finally, the patient de resistance, little Matt. Matt goes under the hypnosis gun and tells his own tale. He thinks mom is wigging out (this was made in 1977). Apparently, mom is making the astral bodies of the Native American mummies sort of fly through the air. One hits Matt like a bee hits a windshield, and Matt begins acting all crazy.

The psychiatrist takes Grandma and Matt into the desert. Matt is inexplicably in a wheelchair now, and the trio confront the unseen (and unexplained) forces.

Flocker has no sense of scene construction. The one pro here involves the RV stranded in a salt flat in the desert. In the distance, the couple notice some boulders rolling toward the RV. This is a pretty creepy little scene that is eventually overplayed. As the boulders begin hurling themselves toward the vehicle, the special effects become obvious.

The scenes where the RV runs off the highway, then back on again, take forever. The scenes where Grandpa is trapped on the RV roof as it careens down a dirt road takes forever. Mom's conversations with the mummy take forever. Matt's out of body experiences take forever. This film takes forever.

I was tempted to hit the fast forward button at least a dozen times. As scenes dragged on, it was obvious Flocker was padding. Cut the fat here, and this would have clocked in at an hour. The final "explanation," that the mummies' spirits were trying to kill those close to Matt never holds water. Did they inhabit the RV? The film maker never brings up the fact that the spirits are no good at their murderous ways, they never kill anybody!

As I kept thinking of Nelson in "Airplane!," I also thought of other movies. Anything to keep me from falling asleep during this one. Boston is terrible as the kid, playing a fifteen year old as a cute ten year old who has a smart alecky line for all these adults who fall over themselves loving him.

In the end, Flocker has written and directed a mess. The title is just the beginning of this exercise in making the audience feel ill at ease. This is not scary, and like the ghosts, you too can still walk...away from this tape at the video store.

This is unrated, and contains some physical violence and mild profanity. --------------------------------------------- Result 2905 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are several things wrong with this movie- Brenda Song's character being one of them. I do not believe that the girl is a lousy actor- I honestly don't. I believe she is given poor lines. She is just supposed to be, "that vain, rich girl", and while it is funny in the TV shows she plays in, it can't even get a dry laugh from me here.

Either way, I really should have known what to expect when I sat down to watch this film.

The movie was not that terrible...initially. Wendy's reaction to Shen was completely natural. I mean, how would you feel if a man, claiming to be a reincarnated monk, chased you around commanding you to wear a medallion and insisting that you were needed to fight "the great evil" and save the world? Which brings me to another point. I know this movie is entirely fiction, but it is still has a founding in Chinese culture. It seems like all of the "warriors" in Wendy's family line were women. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that the monks would've just been okay with that. Sure, maybe they could've worked it in somehow, but they offered no explanation whatsoever. By doing so, they just contributed to the many cheesy attempts at female empowerment made by Hollywood and the media.

Nevermind that, however- let us continue.

Wendy's character becomes more unbearable as the film go on. Yes, she is a teenager, and it is near homecoming- I mean, who wants to fight evil during homecoming? The problem is, when "the evil" starts to manifest himself, Wendy does not seem as freaked out as she should be. She is extremely careless- even for someone like her. She continues not to care about her training. I will use this conversation as an example, Shen: "If you do not win this battle, evil will take over, and everything good will be gone." Wendy: "Whoa, talk about pressure. Well...let's talk about something else." Yes, let's Wendy. Let's also go dancing when you should rightfully be training. Of course Shen lets her, but his character has an excuse. Better that he cooperate with her, than that he not, and she not train at all, and get them both killed.

Oh, speaking of which. Shen also told Wendy that it was his destiny for him to die for her in battle, as he had for her great-grandmother (I am assuming that part).

This makes Wendy's actions more unforgivable.

As the script-writer would have it, Wendy's homecoming and this "great battle" are on exactly the same day. Do you know what Wendy does? Do you even have to guess? Yes, she does end up going to the battle, for when she tries to leave for homecoming, the monks, (who Shen had trapped in the body of her coach and teachers because she "felt weird fighting an old man") inform her that Shen has gone to battle alone, so she goes to save him.

We initially see some half-decent fighting, that is actually entertaining. Until finally, the great evil comes out of Wendy's rival-for-homecoming's body, and creates the actual embodiment of himself out of the broken pieces of the bodies of his ancient warriors.

Don't ask.

Anyway, Wendy gets all "panicky." Then Shen goes and defends her from this guy- forgive me for forgetting his long Chinese name- and manages to get himself killed.

Wendy catches Shen as he makes his long descent from being thrust uncomfortably high into the air.

She screams title of said article out.

Now...it was bad enough that Wendy became powerful far, far too fast. No, I will not let it be excused because it was her "destiny" and she had "the power within" her.

Since when, though, did she learn healing? No, worst...since when could she resurrect people? So Shen is raised from the dead. Then, Wendy and he fight the guy.

He loses way to easily. The worst part, is when they jump together, and kick him at the same time, and he is banished forever. Then the monks commend Wendy on her sacrifice.

Two things, #1: Don't the script writer and director know a battle needs a little more "finesse" to it? #2: What sacrifice? The fact that she didn't go to homecoming? Because the girl did not break a sweat, or even bleed. I mean, come on now, this movie was TV PG, I wanted to see somebody get hurt.

Ah-hem...moving on.

I know it sounds like maybe I should have given the movie a one, based on my comments. Part of critique, you must know, though, is breaking a thing down. You don't necessarily try to look for the bad, but if it's there, you bring attention to it. This movie has a lot of bad, but something funny happens when you never really expect something to be all too great in the first place.

So, I suppose it was all right. Not that me not saying it wasn't all right would've stopped anybody from watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] They made me watch this in school and it was [[terrible]]. The [[movie]] is [[outdated]]. The [[episodes]] become confusing because fact is combined with fiction to make the story more interesting.The teachers talked about it as a [[treat]] but [[really]] it was a painfully [[boring]] [[experience]].I have read that very few people who appear in this are [[actors]], but most of them them do what they do in the movie in [[real]] [[life]].This accounts for [[cheesy]] acting very [[often]]. Also, very often the story becomes mildly outrageous and far-fetched. I don't like the way some of the lines were written and wish they had more meaning to them. Though, it was [[written]] to be [[educational]], funny, suspenseful, and hip, It ended up being boring, dry, far-fetched, and old. I hope no one takes time to watch this movie because you would be just fine not seeing it. They made me watch this in school and it was [[frightful]]. The [[film]] is [[outmoded]]. The [[bouts]] become confusing because fact is combined with fiction to make the story more interesting.The teachers talked about it as a [[treating]] but [[genuinely]] it was a painfully [[bore]] [[experiences]].I have read that very few people who appear in this are [[players]], but most of them them do what they do in the movie in [[genuine]] [[lives]].This accounts for [[corny]] acting very [[typically]]. Also, very often the story becomes mildly outrageous and far-fetched. I don't like the way some of the lines were written and wish they had more meaning to them. Though, it was [[handwritten]] to be [[tuition]], funny, suspenseful, and hip, It ended up being boring, dry, far-fetched, and old. I hope no one takes time to watch this movie because you would be just fine not seeing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2907 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Not so many people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't understand them. Simply because they are different kinds of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[desperation]] [[intertwined]] with great personal hope it may be hard for you to [[enjoy]] the [[humor]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[classified]] easily as black-comedy or cult etc. like those of pulp fiction [[etc]]. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america frequently fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. Not so many people like the movies of Bertrand blier simply because they don't understand them. Simply because they are different kinds of people.

If you have not been living under a deep [[distress]] [[interconnected]] with great personal hope it may be hard for you to [[enjoys]] the [[comedy]] blier shown here.

And also the film of blier cannot be [[sorted]] easily as black-comedy or cult etc. like those of pulp fiction [[cetera]]. Because there is this delicacy which the audience of north-america frequently fail to appreciate.

When I looked at these two `hooligans' dining with Jeanne moreau in the seaside restaurant, I felt they were more gentil than any gentleman can have been.

The urge to make love wildly like these is the normal reaction we feel under the unbearable pressure of meaningless being-symbolized by the camion suddenly emerges at the Carrefour.

SO, les valseuses is much better a name than going places. To dance a valse you need to be elegant, but going places you don't. --------------------------------------------- Result 2908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is truly an awful movie and a waste of 2 hours of your life. It is simultaneously bland and offensive, with nudity and lots and lots of violence. However, the nudity is not that exciting, and the violence is repetitive and boring. Also, the plot is flimsy at best, the characters are unrealistic and undeveloped, and the acting is some of the worst I have ever seen.

I have heard that this movie is supposed to be funny, but it's not. I did not laugh once while watching it, nor did I even crack a smile. The makers of this film tried to combine a comedy movie with an action movie, and they failed on both counts.

Some poorly made movies are funny because they are so bad, but this is not one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 2909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally [[decided]] to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[glad]] that the rental was free from the local library. This move was slow, [[boring]], unrealistic and the plot [[made]] no [[sense]]. [[After]] 2 hours, I was ready to nuke that backwater Texas town and put the group of those characters out of their misery. I [[realize]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not understand all of the [[hype]] that I have heard about this movie. [[Dallas]] provided as good a detail of the life in Texas as this movie. Rent it only if you want to understand how movie studios can pay enough money to reviewers to convince the general public that a bad movie is good. After hearing raves about this movie for years, I finally [[decide]] to rent it and watch. Let me start by saying that I'm [[gratified]] that the rental was free from the local library. This move was slow, [[tiresome]], unrealistic and the plot [[accomplished]] no [[sensing]]. [[Upon]] 2 hours, I was ready to nuke that backwater Texas town and put the group of those characters out of their misery. I [[achieving]] that taste is subjective, but believe me, I just do not understand all of the [[threshing]] that I have heard about this movie. [[Dal]] provided as good a detail of the life in Texas as this movie. Rent it only if you want to understand how movie studios can pay enough money to reviewers to convince the general public that a bad movie is good. --------------------------------------------- Result 2910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[If]] you [[like]] [[film]], don't [[miss]] this one. If you [[prefer]] action, or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's [[happening]]. Everyone here is [[stuck]] in a [[gangster]] film. And what [[happens]] is [[transcendental]] [[murder]].

There are few [[similar]] [[films]]. No doubt it will see [[limited]] [[release]], and be [[hard]] to [[find]]. But the [[search]] will be worth it. If you [[want]] to [[study]] a mileu as a potential [[symbol]], then this is [[indeed]] a [[film]] to [[study]].

You can't watch it once. [[If]] you do you'll never [[see]] what's happening. [[Dark]] [[City]] is better. [[Joe]] Vrs. The [[Volcano]] is more [[fun]]. But [[Mad]] [[Dog]] [[Time]] [[could]] [[convert]] the gangsta [[crowd]] to symbolism. . .or at [[least]] to [[think]] [[twice]] before shooting again. [[Unless]] you [[loves]] [[films]], don't [[missed]] this one. If you [[favors]] action, or horror, or romance, then you'll wonder what's [[occurring]]. Everyone here is [[jammed]] in a [[hoodlum]] film. And what [[arises]] is [[momentous]] [[kill]].

There are few [[analogue]] [[cinematographic]]. No doubt it will see [[capped]] [[releases]], and be [[tough]] to [[unearthed]]. But the [[researching]] will be worth it. If you [[wanted]] to [[investigating]] a mileu as a potential [[icons]], then this is [[admittedly]] a [[filmmaking]] to [[scrutinize]].

You can't watch it once. [[Unless]] you do you'll never [[behold]] what's happening. [[Somber]] [[Town]] is better. [[Kawa]] Vrs. The [[Eruption]] is more [[droll]]. But [[Madman]] [[Canine]] [[Period]] [[wo]] [[translate]] the gangsta [[plethora]] to symbolism. . .or at [[slightest]] to [[thinks]] [[doubly]] before shooting again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2911 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] I have seen this film only once, on TV, and it has not been repeated. This is strange when you consider the rubbish that is repeated over and over again. Usually horror movies for me are a source of amusement, but this one really [[scared]] me.

DO NOT READ THE NEXT BIT IF YOU HAVE'NT SEEN THE FILM YET

The scariest bit is when the townsfolk pursue the preacher to where his wife lies almost dead (they'd been poisoning her). He asks who the hell are you people anyway. One by one they give their true identities. The girl who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and seduce him says "I am Lilith, the witch who loved Adam before Eve". I have seen this film only once, on TV, and it has not been repeated. This is strange when you consider the rubbish that is repeated over and over again. Usually horror movies for me are a source of amusement, but this one really [[shitless]] me.

DO NOT READ THE NEXT BIT IF YOU HAVE'NT SEEN THE FILM YET

The scariest bit is when the townsfolk pursue the preacher to where his wife lies almost dead (they'd been poisoning her). He asks who the hell are you people anyway. One by one they give their true identities. The girl who was pretending to be deaf in order to corrupt and seduce him says "I am Lilith, the witch who loved Adam before Eve". --------------------------------------------- Result 2912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I'd read about FLAVIA THE HERETIC for many years, but I only got to see it early last year, when I went on an insane movie-buying [[binge]], and, for whatever reason, it has been on my mind lately, [[though]] it's been some [[months]] since I watched it.

It's a [[striking]] [[film]], set in Italy somewhere around the 15th century. Definitely Medieval-era (though I don't think any specific [[year]] is ever given). This being the [[time]] of Christian ascendancy, the age is a time of utter madness, and the movie captures this very well.

Flavia, our protagonist, is a young lady who encounters a fallen Muslim on a battlefield. He seems a warm and intriguing fellow, and she's immediately taken with him. Her father, a soldier of a a family of some standing, comes along, almost immediately, and murders the wounded man right before her eyes. But she'll continue to see him in her dreams.

Her father ships her off to a convent that seems more like an open-air insane asylum--the residents, so harshly repressed by unyielding Medieval Christianity, slowly go mad. Flavia comes under the influence of one of the nuttier nuns. But in a mad world, only the sane are truly mad, and this sociopathic sister clearly recognizes the insanity around her. Her take on the times in which they live strikes a chord with Flavia, who, being young and apparently sheltered, is beginning to question everything about this world in which she finds herself trapped.

The movie is unflinching in its portrayal of that world, showcasing a lot of unpleasantness. We see a horse gelded, a lord rape one of the women of his lands in a pig-sty, the pious torture of a young nun. Through it all, Flavia observes and questions, rejecting, eventually, the Christian dogma that creates such a parade of horrors in terms that would gain the movie some [[criticism]] over the years for seeming anachronistic. I disagree with that criticism. Flavia's views, though sometimes expressed in ways that vaguely mirror, for example, then-contemporary feminist commentary (the movie was made in 1974), revolve around what are really pretty obvious questions. It is, perhaps, difficult to believe she could be so much of a fish out of water in her own time, but that's the sort of minor point it doesn't do to belabor. Flavia is written in such a way to allow those of our era, or of any era, to empathize with her plight. Getting bogged down on such a matter would be missing the forest for the trees.

Flavia is heartened when the Muslims arrive, invading the countryside, and she finds, in their leader, a new version of the handsome Islamist who still visits her dreams. Smitten with her almost immediately, he allows her to virtually lead his army, becoming a Joan of Arc figure in full battle-gear, and directing the invaders to pull down Christian society, and wreak vengeance upon all those she's seen commit evil.

Is she the herald of a new and better world? She may think so, but Muslims of that era weren't big on feminism, either, as she soon learns the hard way. As they say, meet the new boss...

This is really just a thumbnail of some of the things that happen in FLAVIA THE HERETIC. The movie is quite grim, and with a very downbeat, rather depressing ending. Not a mass-audience movie at all, to be sure. It's quite good, though, and doesn't belong on the "nunsploitation" pile on which it is often carelessly thrown. I think there's much value in the final film, and I'm glad I saw it. I'd read about FLAVIA THE HERETIC for many years, but I only got to see it early last year, when I went on an insane movie-buying [[orgy]], and, for whatever reason, it has been on my mind lately, [[if]] it's been some [[mois]] since I watched it.

It's a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]], set in Italy somewhere around the 15th century. Definitely Medieval-era (though I don't think any specific [[annum]] is ever given). This being the [[moment]] of Christian ascendancy, the age is a time of utter madness, and the movie captures this very well.

Flavia, our protagonist, is a young lady who encounters a fallen Muslim on a battlefield. He seems a warm and intriguing fellow, and she's immediately taken with him. Her father, a soldier of a a family of some standing, comes along, almost immediately, and murders the wounded man right before her eyes. But she'll continue to see him in her dreams.

Her father ships her off to a convent that seems more like an open-air insane asylum--the residents, so harshly repressed by unyielding Medieval Christianity, slowly go mad. Flavia comes under the influence of one of the nuttier nuns. But in a mad world, only the sane are truly mad, and this sociopathic sister clearly recognizes the insanity around her. Her take on the times in which they live strikes a chord with Flavia, who, being young and apparently sheltered, is beginning to question everything about this world in which she finds herself trapped.

The movie is unflinching in its portrayal of that world, showcasing a lot of unpleasantness. We see a horse gelded, a lord rape one of the women of his lands in a pig-sty, the pious torture of a young nun. Through it all, Flavia observes and questions, rejecting, eventually, the Christian dogma that creates such a parade of horrors in terms that would gain the movie some [[criticizing]] over the years for seeming anachronistic. I disagree with that criticism. Flavia's views, though sometimes expressed in ways that vaguely mirror, for example, then-contemporary feminist commentary (the movie was made in 1974), revolve around what are really pretty obvious questions. It is, perhaps, difficult to believe she could be so much of a fish out of water in her own time, but that's the sort of minor point it doesn't do to belabor. Flavia is written in such a way to allow those of our era, or of any era, to empathize with her plight. Getting bogged down on such a matter would be missing the forest for the trees.

Flavia is heartened when the Muslims arrive, invading the countryside, and she finds, in their leader, a new version of the handsome Islamist who still visits her dreams. Smitten with her almost immediately, he allows her to virtually lead his army, becoming a Joan of Arc figure in full battle-gear, and directing the invaders to pull down Christian society, and wreak vengeance upon all those she's seen commit evil.

Is she the herald of a new and better world? She may think so, but Muslims of that era weren't big on feminism, either, as she soon learns the hard way. As they say, meet the new boss...

This is really just a thumbnail of some of the things that happen in FLAVIA THE HERETIC. The movie is quite grim, and with a very downbeat, rather depressing ending. Not a mass-audience movie at all, to be sure. It's quite good, though, and doesn't belong on the "nunsploitation" pile on which it is often carelessly thrown. I think there's much value in the final film, and I'm glad I saw it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] Wonderful [[cast]] wasted on [[worthless]] script. Ten or so adults reunite at the summer camp they attended as juveniles. Could this ever happen in a million years? It's simply a fantasy, and a [[boring]] one at that. Do they become [[teenagers]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, games, good times? They [[may]] try but ultimately the answer is: No. Is there any intrigue? Any suspense? Horror? [[Comedy]]? [[None]] of the above. [[How]] anyone can be entertained by this [[drivel]] is [[beyond]] me. I [[wanted]] to like this [[movie]]; I tried to like this movie, but my brain refused. Wonderful [[casting]] wasted on [[unnecessary]] script. Ten or so adults reunite at the summer camp they attended as juveniles. Could this ever happen in a million years? It's simply a fantasy, and a [[tiresome]] one at that. Do they become [[adolescence]] again? Do they reenact their pranks, games, good times? They [[maggio]] try but ultimately the answer is: No. Is there any intrigue? Any suspense? Horror? [[Humour]]? [[Nos]] of the above. [[Mode]] anyone can be entertained by this [[whim]] is [[afterlife]] me. I [[wished]] to like this [[kino]]; I tried to like this movie, but my brain refused. --------------------------------------------- Result 2914 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Entertaining]] Jim Belushi vehicle, a [[modern]] cockeyed version of It's A Wonderful Life. [[Michael]] Caine plays a sort-of angel who lets Belush see what life would have been like if he had "made it big". Jim is at his best with a good [[story]] and supporting cast; [[seems]] like real chemistry between him and Hamilton. Not an Oscar contender but [[good]] warm-hearted [[fun]]. [[Amusing]] Jim Belushi vehicle, a [[fashionable]] cockeyed version of It's A Wonderful Life. [[Micheal]] Caine plays a sort-of angel who lets Belush see what life would have been like if he had "made it big". Jim is at his best with a good [[fairytales]] and supporting cast; [[seem]] like real chemistry between him and Hamilton. Not an Oscar contender but [[alright]] warm-hearted [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Well, for starters, this actually was THE most elegant Clausen [[film]] to this [[date]].

The man's always got a sense for characters with a slice of humor to them, but I think that he in this movie adds a dimension unparrallel to [[anything]] he's [[made]] [[earlier]]. His [[work]] has - in very black n' white [[words]] - been [[accepted]] by the broad but not that [[critical]] [[audience]], and we've always [[appreciated]] his [[sense]] of humor and his [[ability]] to mix it with human [[problems]] and a [[distinct]] [[way]] of [[letting]] the audience know what he needs to say.

[[In]] "[[Villa]] Paranoia, [[however]], for the [[first]] [[time]], he [[surprises]] with an [[unseen]] [[wisdom]] and a respect for the minorities. Not only the [[ethnic]] but [[also]] the normal people you [[tend]] to [[forget]]. Set in Jutland - in 'the country' - it [[deals]] with the everlasting [[issue]] of [[lack]] of [[love]], but in a [[close]] and at [[times]] [[brutal]] [[way]] that keeps you looking and keeps you focused. And on [[top]] of that, he himself [[manages]] to [[play]] a b******d! A [[true]] b*****d, who wants the right [[thing]] but has no clue how to get there, and people therefore [[suffer]]. Bitterly.

I'd have to say it's one of the [[best]] [[movies]] I've [[seen]] this [[year]] and I'm [[greatly]] anticipating his next. Well, for starters, this actually was THE most elegant Clausen [[kino]] to this [[dates]].

The man's always got a sense for characters with a slice of humor to them, but I think that he in this movie adds a dimension unparrallel to [[nothing]] he's [[accomplished]] [[sooner]]. His [[cooperate]] has - in very black n' white [[phrases]] - been [[admitted]] by the broad but not that [[important]] [[spectators]], and we've always [[complimented]] his [[sensing]] of humor and his [[skills]] to mix it with human [[trouble]] and a [[seperate]] [[routing]] of [[leave]] the audience know what he needs to say.

[[During]] "[[Bungalow]] Paranoia, [[instead]], for the [[fiirst]] [[moment]], he [[startled]] with an [[inconspicuous]] [[intellect]] and a respect for the minorities. Not only the [[racial]] but [[further]] the normal people you [[tended]] to [[overlook]]. Set in Jutland - in 'the country' - it [[addresses]] with the everlasting [[issuing]] of [[shortage]] of [[likes]], but in a [[nearer]] and at [[moments]] [[brute]] [[manner]] that keeps you looking and keeps you focused. And on [[superior]] of that, he himself [[administering]] to [[playing]] a b******d! A [[real]] b*****d, who wants the right [[stuff]] but has no clue how to get there, and people therefore [[undergo]]. Bitterly.

I'd have to say it's one of the [[optimum]] [[theater]] I've [[watched]] this [[annum]] and I'm [[severely]] anticipating his next. --------------------------------------------- Result 2916 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I'm not at all picky about horror [[movies]], and I'm willing to watch [[pretty]] much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[many]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. [[In]] fact, I [[think]] this movie would make an [[excellent]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specify]], before I get to my [[comments]], that I watched this alone. I started [[watching]] it before going to bed, and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the rare movies that doesn't shy away from the death of a child. This is much more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a variety of scares in the film, and most are fairly non-violent, though grotesque in some ways. The story itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and takes an odd turn near the end. While the turn is not absurd, it is certainly not what you expected from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well done for something that appears to have been shot on video. I'm not at all picky about horror [[filmmaking]], and I'm willing to watch [[belle]] much any of them. That doesn't mean that I'm willing to re-watch [[numerous]] of them, or that I won't have criticism for them. This movie is creepy, and is very well done. [[During]] fact, I [[reckon]] this movie would make an [[resplendent]] double-bill with Session 9.

I should [[specifies]], before I get to my [[remarks]], that I watched this alone. I started [[staring]] it before going to bed, and got about 15 minutes in before I realized that it was too effective, so I saved the rest of it for the morning. Even while watching it in broad daylight, it was still creepy. However, I can't vouch for how effective it would be when watching in a larger group.

After the death of their daughter, a couple move to a remote cabin as a means of trying to come to terms with this death. Let me make note of this death - this is one of the rare movies that doesn't shy away from the death of a child. This is much more important, as it both sets the tone, as well as explains much of the acting that permeates the movie.

The couple is not doing well. The wife has distanced herself from the relationship, and the husband is doing what he can to try to bring her back. While some of the comments have complained about their acting - one specified that they act more like a father and daughter than husband and wife, and that's legitimate. He's trying to give her more direction. It's a role that men sometimes take on.

There are a variety of scares in the film, and most are fairly non-violent, though grotesque in some ways. The story itself feels very straightforward for most of the film, and takes an odd turn near the end. While the turn is not absurd, it is certainly not what you expected from the way things had been progressing.

Moody, atmospheric, and very well done for something that appears to have been shot on video. --------------------------------------------- Result 2917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Really]] a [[terrible]] movie. It's to be [[expected]], though. [[Clearly]] a low budget: [[nothing]] all that [[innovative]], an [[actress]] (if you can call what she does "acting") who always has roles with nudity in a [[shower]] scene, a man in a [[reptile]] suit almost [[modeled]] after [[predator]], a [[cabin]] in the [[woods]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not [[new]], for the most [[part]], there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black [[guy]] doesn't [[die]] when he's [[attacked]] (the first time) and he isn't even one of the first couple to [[die]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's experiments and Wes & Steve that I didn't see coming. When Steve [[told]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[believed]] what he said and what Kat replied with. But when the creature [[revealed]] who he really was, I was pleasantly surprised at the novelty of the revelation. It could be because of my [[lack]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty [[bad]] and don't watch it if there's [[anything]] better on... Unless you're in the [[mood]] for a [[cheap]] scifi [[flick]]. [[Genuinely]] a [[spooky]] movie. It's to be [[anticipated]], though. [[Clara]] a low budget: [[nada]] all that [[revolutionary]], an [[actor]] (if you can call what she does "acting") who always has roles with nudity in a [[bathroom]] scene, a man in a [[reptiles]] suit almost [[shaped]] after [[predatory]], a [[cottage]] in the [[bois]], etc. But there are some redeeming points. Although the story is not [[nouveau]], for the most [[parties]], there's a few parts that aren't so regurgitated. For one, the black [[boys]] doesn't [[decease]] when he's [[assailed]] (the first time) and he isn't even one of the first couple to [[decease]]. But that's minor. More importantly, there's a very interesting twist regarding Kat's experiments and Wes & Steve that I didn't see coming. When Steve [[say]] Kat he knew what she did, I [[felt]] what he said and what Kat replied with. But when the creature [[proved]] who he really was, I was pleasantly surprised at the novelty of the revelation. It could be because of my [[failure]] of experience with the genre, or that it's a genuinely clever twist.

Either way, the movie's pretty [[mala]] and don't watch it if there's [[somethings]] better on... Unless you're in the [[ambience]] for a [[cheaper]] scifi [[film]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] One wonders why anyone [[would]] try to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[movie]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to even try to [[remake]], under the guise of a new story, something that should have been [[let]] alone. [[If]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio big honchos' approval, then go all out with big [[stars]] and glossy production values, that [[way]], people will come for the [[stars]].

[[Alas]], that's not what happens in this [[misguided]] attempt at comedy. The problem seems to be the way the screen writers have transplanted the story to London, when basically, this seems to be a typical American situation that not [[even]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the problem with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as [[oil]] and vinegar!

Since the Kat and Nick have no conflict from the start, the viewer is not pulled into the film the way the creators thought they would be. It's clear that Kat will [[fall]] for Nick, and vice-versa in this [[predictable]] [[story]]. Amy Adams, who was the best asset in "Junebug", comes across as a shallow girl who is willing to keep her lie going on and not come clean to the man that loves her and is going to marry her.

For anyone interested, the credits at the end of the film run for almost seven minutes! One wonders why anyone [[should]] try to rehash successful movie plots that have already been seen, like it's the case with this [[cinematography]]. "The Wedding Date" is one of the best examples of why not to even try to [[redo]], under the guise of a new story, something that should have been [[leaving]] alone. [[Though]] a project like this goes ahead with the studio big honchos' approval, then go all out with big [[star]] and glossy production values, that [[ways]], people will come for the [[superstar]].

[[Alack]], that's not what happens in this [[misdirected]] attempt at comedy. The problem seems to be the way the screen writers have transplanted the story to London, when basically, this seems to be a typical American situation that not [[yet]] the setting will be able to fix. Then there is the problem with the stars. Debra Messing and Dermot Mulrooney? They have as much chemistry as [[oils]] and vinegar!

Since the Kat and Nick have no conflict from the start, the viewer is not pulled into the film the way the creators thought they would be. It's clear that Kat will [[autumn]] for Nick, and vice-versa in this [[foreseeable]] [[narratives]]. Amy Adams, who was the best asset in "Junebug", comes across as a shallow girl who is willing to keep her lie going on and not come clean to the man that loves her and is going to marry her.

For anyone interested, the credits at the end of the film run for almost seven minutes! --------------------------------------------- Result 2919 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[breathtaking]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. This 1939 film from director John Ford and writer Lamar Trotti tells a fictional tale of young lawyer Abraham Lincoln, his trials (literally) and his tribulations. It's a sentimental film, reasonably well made but hardly [[amazing]]. The casting of Henry Fonda as Lincoln seems a mistake, for while the actor had the right doleful qualities for the part, even with several inches of makeup and a false nose he's way too handsome for Honest Abe, who was famously homely. It's a good try from Fonda, who's nothing if not sincere, but his miscasting throws the entire film off. The supporting cast is excellent, though, and includes Alice Brady, Ward Bond and Donald Meek. But Ford is too reverential in his treatment of Lincoln, who is presented as just shy of a saint, and in the final scene the movie goes way over the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 2920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] Homeward Bound is a [[beautiful]] [[film]]. Y'know the part where Shadow falls down the ditch... thingy, I *cried*, considering I was only six, I cried! it takes a lot to make me cry! The dogs and the cat are excellently trained. A nice [[family]] movie, *not* for completely hardened non-fluffy people or animal-haters but could for soft-as-crap a.k.a. people [[like]] me.

A [[good]] [[film]] [[overall]], 10/10! Homeward Bound is a [[handsome]] [[films]]. Y'know the part where Shadow falls down the ditch... thingy, I *cried*, considering I was only six, I cried! it takes a lot to make me cry! The dogs and the cat are excellently trained. A nice [[families]] movie, *not* for completely hardened non-fluffy people or animal-haters but could for soft-as-crap a.k.a. people [[iike]] me.

A [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] [[total]], 10/10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Nobody, but nobody, could chew the scenery like the Divine One, [[Ruth]] Elizabeth Davis, and "Elizabeth and Essex" is a great [[example]] why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to play: in that one [[moment]], she makes us understand how [[Elizabeth]] was [[able]] to [[rule]] and rule absolutely! At other times, she is done in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elizabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[weak]] and shrewish. This has the added effect of undermining her authority: when she blows her stack and threatens to dispense justice, it's hard to take her seriously.

Flynn exudes charm, making us see how Essex was able to worm his way into Elizabeth's heart, but he is totally inept at conveying the complexity and sheer evil of the man. It also doesn't help that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this hothead who wants to overthrow his Queen - even as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, thus, more "worthy" of rule? And why does Raliegh betray Elizabeth by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no risk of falling out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is headed. So why does he risk his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time alone at The Tower; everything else that follows (especially the final scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The costumes are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? Nobody, but nobody, could chew the scenery like the Divine One, [[Roth]] Elizabeth Davis, and "Elizabeth and Essex" is a great [[instances]] why. Although she overplays the part at times, watch her when she gawfs about Raliegh writing the lyrics to a song her ladies-in-waiting are about to play: in that one [[time]], she makes us understand how [[Elisabetta]] was [[capable]] to [[regulation]] and rule absolutely! At other times, she is done in by the script's sappiness. When [[Elisabeth]] has to be vulnerable, she comes off as [[vulnerable]] and shrewish. This has the added effect of undermining her authority: when she blows her stack and threatens to dispense justice, it's hard to take her seriously.

Flynn exudes charm, making us see how Essex was able to worm his way into Elizabeth's heart, but he is totally inept at conveying the complexity and sheer evil of the man. It also doesn't help that Essex is badly underwritten. Why is he this hothead who wants to overthrow his Queen - even as he swears fidelity to her - except only that he is more blue-blooded, thus, more "worthy" of rule? And why does Raliegh betray Elizabeth by intercepting her and Essex's letters? He's in no risk of falling out of favor, and we know where Essex (and his head) is headed. So why does he risk his own head by speeding up the inevitable?

What did Curtiz do with all the $$$ he was given? He doesn't even bother to try to hide the fact that his battle scenes are shot on a sound stage. He should've ended it with Elizabeth the first time alone at The Tower; everything else that follows (especially the final scene between her and Essex) is unnecessary. The costumes are fantastic. And is it me, or does Bette look exactly like Susan Sarandon? --------------------------------------------- Result 2922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I've been [[watching]] this every [[night]] on VH1 this past [[week]]. This is a terrific revealing portrait about the [[drugs]] epidemic and how [[drugs]] were [[displayed]] in the [[media]] during the late 60's and on through the 70's.Woodstock,[[Easy]] Rider,The Beatles,The [[Death]] of Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin are all here. Vh1 has [[fashioned]] a complete [[intricate]] portrayal of the life and times during the "[[Drug]] Years". From the Sanfrancisco Bay [[Area]] to Studio 54 this documentary [[shows]] the evolution and advancement of the [[drug]] [[business]] and the [[death]] and [[new]] life it breathed into the American [[culture]].From Marijuana to LSD to Cocaine this [[documentary]] [[shows]] the [[ways]] [[drugs]] were [[getting]] into the [[country]], the hippie movement, the conservative [[resistance]], and how [[drugs]] [[effected]] the arts (music , movies etc.) Featuring [[tons]] of [[fascinating]] [[interviews]] and news reel footage.

Drug Films: The [[Trip]] [[Easy]] [[Rider]] Up [[In]] Smoke Reefer [[Madness]] Blow Boogie [[Nights]] I've been [[staring]] this every [[nocturne]] on VH1 this past [[chou]]. This is a terrific revealing portrait about the [[medications]] epidemic and how [[medications]] were [[visualized]] in the [[medium]] during the late 60's and on through the 70's.Woodstock,[[Simple]] Rider,The Beatles,The [[Fatalities]] of Morrison, Hendrix, Joplin are all here. Vh1 has [[shaped]] a complete [[complicating]] portrayal of the life and times during the "[[Medicinal]] Years". From the Sanfrancisco Bay [[Zoning]] to Studio 54 this documentary [[showing]] the evolution and advancement of the [[narcotics]] [[enterprise]] and the [[died]] and [[nuevo]] life it breathed into the American [[civilisations]].From Marijuana to LSD to Cocaine this [[literature]] [[exhibited]] the [[methods]] [[drug]] were [[obtain]] into the [[nations]], the hippie movement, the conservative [[resilient]], and how [[medicines]] [[performed]] the arts (music , movies etc.) Featuring [[tonne]] of [[exciting]] [[conversations]] and news reel footage.

Drug Films: The [[Journey]] [[Simple]] [[Trooper]] Up [[During]] Smoke Reefer [[Folly]] Blow Boogie [[Evenings]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The saddest part of this is the fact that these are 87 minutes I'll never get back. I knew this was terrible from the get-go, with the guy dressed as a lunatic Indian chief on top of the roof. (See if they could get away with that in 2008). My 10-year-old boy is really into baseball right now, so we decided to rent it on a rainy day. Even though he seemed to enjoy parts of it, I had to cringe when I heard all the needless foul language. Bad, bad movie. This was an awful ripoff of Bad News Bears. Completely shameless and completely predictable. I don't mind a predictable movie if it's done well, but this one absolutely was not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2924 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I don't care how many nominations this junk got for best this and that, this movie stunk. I didn't know whether to turn off the set, or file a lawsuit with O.J.'s attorney for wrongful damage to my mental health. I have seldom been this bored; to call this dung entertainment is a slap in the face of every movie-goer across the planet. The whole story was stupid, the acting was uninspired, the 'drama' was emotionless. I am thankful I didn't have to pay for this unfulfilling experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 2925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The Sunshine Boys is a [[terrific]] [[comedy]] about two ex-vaudevillians who reluctantly reunite for a [[TV]] special despite the fact that they [[despise]] each other.

The comic [[genius]] of two masters at [[work]], George Burns and Walter Matthau are stellar! Some of the best scenes are when the duo is fighting over the [[silliest]] little trivial things! The material is fast-paced and witty, appealing to all ages.

MILD SPOILER ALERT: There are some [[mildly]] sad moments toward the end of the movie that deal indirectly with the affects of aging that gives the film a soft, sincere, tenderness that shows to this reviewer that what the pair really need the most for success, are each other.

If anyone loves The Odd Couple, you'll adore this movie. An [[excellent]] film! The Sunshine Boys is a [[sumptuous]] [[travesty]] about two ex-vaudevillians who reluctantly reunite for a [[TVS]] special despite the fact that they [[despised]] each other.

The comic [[genie]] of two masters at [[works]], George Burns and Walter Matthau are stellar! Some of the best scenes are when the duo is fighting over the [[stupidest]] little trivial things! The material is fast-paced and witty, appealing to all ages.

MILD SPOILER ALERT: There are some [[marginally]] sad moments toward the end of the movie that deal indirectly with the affects of aging that gives the film a soft, sincere, tenderness that shows to this reviewer that what the pair really need the most for success, are each other.

If anyone loves The Odd Couple, you'll adore this movie. An [[glamorous]] film! --------------------------------------------- Result 2926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[If]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was [[nice]], and Nisha Kothari has a [[bright]] [[future]] but the producer and the [[director]] [[ruined]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The [[choice]] of angles, choice of [[lighting]] and well everything distracted from trying to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and dances haven't caused you to [[rip]] your ears off your head, first. The film [[could]] have been [[made]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty good, kinda like "Seven Samurai" but the director and writer didn't go that direction, even if the "townsfolk" finally find their backbone and want to help. This movie fails on so many [[levels]]: editing, writing, photography [[angles]], style, [[lighting]], script - [[name]] any [[aspect]] of this film - it was BAD - [[probably]] the food from the caterer was bad too. I have never in 6 [[years]] of [[watching]] Indian (Bollywood) movies seen [[something]] this [[badly]] [[made]]. [[Though]] the scale went negative I would be happier. Seeing Sushmita Sen was [[delightful]], and Nisha Kothari has a [[gloss]] [[impending]] but the producer and the [[superintendent]] [[trashed]] any and all enjoyment in this story. The [[picks]] of angles, choice of [[illumination]] and well everything distracted from trying to remember what is the story. Oh, if the songs and dances haven't caused you to [[tears]] your ears off your head, first. The film [[did]] have been [[brought]] twice at 1.25 hours, and been pretty good, kinda like "Seven Samurai" but the director and writer didn't go that direction, even if the "townsfolk" finally find their backbone and want to help. This movie fails on so many [[grades]]: editing, writing, photography [[corners]], style, [[lit]], script - [[behalf]] any [[element]] of this film - it was BAD - [[admittedly]] the food from the caterer was bad too. I have never in 6 [[yr]] of [[staring]] Indian (Bollywood) movies seen [[somethings]] this [[desperately]] [[accomplished]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2927 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] I.Q., in my [[opinion]], is a sweet, [[charming]], and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you. If you ask me, [[James]] (Stephen Fry) really was a [[dull]] [[guy]]. To me, Ed (Tim Robbins) was more suited for Catherine (Meg Ryan) than James was. Anyway, everyone involved in this film did an absolutely outstanding job. Now, in [[conclusion]], I [[highly]] [[recommend]] this sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic [[comedy]] about finding the right person for you to any Tim Robbins or Meg Ryan fan who hasn't seen it. You're in for lots of laughter, so go to the video store, rent it or buy it, kick back with a friend, and watch it. I.Q., in my [[visualizing]], is a sweet, [[handsome]], and hilarious romantic comedy about finding the right person for you. If you ask me, [[Jacques]] (Stephen Fry) really was a [[tiresome]] [[mec]]. To me, Ed (Tim Robbins) was more suited for Catherine (Meg Ryan) than James was. Anyway, everyone involved in this film did an absolutely outstanding job. Now, in [[conclude]], I [[unimaginably]] [[recommending]] this sweet, charming, and hilarious romantic [[travesty]] about finding the right person for you to any Tim Robbins or Meg Ryan fan who hasn't seen it. You're in for lots of laughter, so go to the video store, rent it or buy it, kick back with a friend, and watch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (100%)]] Sorry, I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She said that Scott Wilson portrayed a sociopath (no conscience) extraordinarily well. I agree! She also said that Robert Blake portrayed a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[tremendous]] film. I have seen over 2000 films and would rank this in the top 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these regularly. My only criticism was the preachy narration at the end of the film. Many people grow up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. Sorry, I don't have much time to write. I am not a psychologist but have known one for 25 years. She said that Scott Wilson portrayed a sociopath (no conscience) extraordinarily well. I agree! She also said that Robert Blake portrayed a person with anger and impulse control who had a conscience but couldn't control himself superbly. I agree! What a chilling and [[gargantuan]] film. I have seen over 2000 films and would rank this in the top 100. My lifelong friend deals with clients such as these regularly. My only criticism was the preachy narration at the end of the film. Many people grow up in less than ideal circumstances but only one in a million will behave as these 2 losers did. --------------------------------------------- Result 2929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] I've bought, " The Feast of All Saints," and it's not truly a horrible movie, but a lot of [[things]] could have been [[better]]. It had a [[lot]] of historical [[value]], [[played]] out by very talented actress/[[actors]], and it's not an [[everyday]] occurrence that actors can play out such a role and have it be somewhat [[believable]]. There were some parts that were a little mediocre and [[confusing]], but I wouldn't say that the entire movie was [[horrible]]. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's New Orleans, and making something out of it, it pretty hard, and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[problem]] I had with the movie was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that looked near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a great job, the script could have better written, and overall I found the performances were very [[believable]]. I've bought, " The Feast of All Saints," and it's not truly a horrible movie, but a lot of [[aspects]] could have been [[nicer]]. It had a [[batches]] of historical [[values]], [[effected]] out by very talented actress/[[actresses]], and it's not an [[ordinary]] occurrence that actors can play out such a role and have it be somewhat [[dependable]]. There were some parts that were a little mediocre and [[disorienting]], but I wouldn't say that the entire movie was [[abysmal]]. Once you think about that, capturing 1800's New Orleans, and making something out of it, it pretty hard, and much harder to get actors who can strongly signify those parts. But the only big [[issues]] I had with the movie was that most of the actors who did play the free people of color, were mostly light skinned Africans, not very universal in casting others who weren't light skinned; one of the old Creole stereotypes that still exists. Whomever did the casting could have picked a wider variety when it came to hue, despite many Creoles are color conscious.Rather picking actors that looked near white in a sense, could have been more thought out.The actors did a great job, the script could have better written, and overall I found the performances were very [[dependable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] This [[movie]] is [[terrible]]. The [[suspense]] is [[spent]] waiting for a point. There isn't [[much]] of one.

Aside from a few great lines ( "I found a tooth in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to killing himself, it's a collection of supposedly eerie sounds.

This [[kino]] is [[heinous]]. The [[sufferance]] is [[spending]] waiting for a point. There isn't [[very]] of one.

Aside from a few great lines ( "I found a tooth in my apartment" ), and the main characters dedication to killing himself, it's a collection of supposedly eerie sounds.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2931 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The name (Frau) of the main character is the German word for "Woman". I don't know if that was intentional or not, but if sure got some giggles from the German audience at the Fantasy Film Festival last year, when it was shown.

But those were the only giggles the movie got. Not that it was aiming for giggles, it's a horrible movie for heaven's sake! A horrible movie in more than one meaning. It's a shame that a premise like that was wasted with horrible even unbearable moments for the viewer (definetely not for the faint of Heart!!)! And it wasn't even necessary to show all the things that are shown. I'm not even going into a moral obligation (because movies don't really have that kind of task or function) discussion of what is shown here, but this is a new low on the whole "torture movement" that has grown in the last few years! --------------------------------------------- Result 2932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] One of the better Vance films succeeds more on interesting plot and artful direction by none other than Michael Curtiz. This time around a generally hated financier is found dead - shot in the head - in his locked and bolted bedroom on the upper floor. Philo Vance, hearing of the situation while about to set off for Italy, decides to end his vacation and try to solve what he thinks is a murder and what everyone else is considering a suicide. William Powell is as affable a Philo Vance as you will find. He never seems to press and is always very smooth in what he says and does. Powell is aided by a host of very talented actors - some first-rate character actors and actresses like Mary Astor as a niece that hated her uncle, Ralph Morgan as the dead man's secretary, Paul Cavanaugh as a rival dog fancier, Arthur Hohl as a mysterious butler, Helen Vinson as the next door kept blonde, and two really good performances by James Lee as the Chinese cook and portly Eugene Palette as a wise-cracking police detective. Add into the mix a wonderfully comedic turn by Etienne Girardot as a public coroner always missing his meal. It is this depth of suspects and a story that has many plots twists and turns that make The Kennel Murder Case a fast-moving, fun mystery. --------------------------------------------- Result 2933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is an [[early]] film "[[Pilot]]" for the hit Canadian tv [[show]] Trailer Park Boys. It was played to executives at a few [[networks]] before Showcase decided to sign them up for a tv [[series]]. [[Great]] acting and a very funny cast make this one of the [[best]] cult [[comedy]] films. The movie plot is that these two small [[time]] criminals go around "exterminating" peoples pets for money. If you have a dog next [[door]] whos barking all night these are the guys you [[go]] to! But they get into trouble when they come across a job too big for them to deal with and end up in a shootout. Watch this [[movie]] if you want to [[understand]] the beginning of the tv [[series]]. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] it!

Rated R for swearing, violence, and drug use.

Its not too offensive [[either]] (they [[dont]] actually [[show]] killing [[animals]]) This is an [[precocious]] film "[[Experimental]]" for the hit Canadian tv [[spectacle]] Trailer Park Boys. It was played to executives at a few [[webs]] before Showcase decided to sign them up for a tv [[serials]]. [[Prodigious]] acting and a very funny cast make this one of the [[optimum]] cult [[travesty]] films. The movie plot is that these two small [[period]] criminals go around "exterminating" peoples pets for money. If you have a dog next [[puerta]] whos barking all night these are the guys you [[going]] to! But they get into trouble when they come across a job too big for them to deal with and end up in a shootout. Watch this [[kino]] if you want to [[fathom]] the beginning of the tv [[serials]]. I [[unimaginably]] [[recommends]] it!

Rated R for swearing, violence, and drug use.

Its not too offensive [[nor]] (they [[couldnt]] actually [[display]] killing [[wildlife]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 2934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] OK, this movie was cool. I don't think it was the best movie ever made but it sure was fun. My brother and I still act out scenes once in a while, and will occasionally yank the movie out of the cupboard, blow off the dust and pop it in. Enjoyable all the way until the end, but a great concept. This is a movie that one has to just forget criticism all together and just enjoy. Judgment is victory for Robot Jox. --------------------------------------------- Result 2935 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[choppy]] presentation and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something recent, so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[terrible]] sequence in this film) are the absolute [[nadir]] of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as Mr. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly terrible.

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that work. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. When I began watching The Muppets Take Manhattan, the [[turbulent]] presentation and dialogue had me convinced I was watching something recent, so you can imagine my surprise when I came to the IMDb and read that it was made in 1984. Jim Henson may have ended The Muppet Show when it was at its peak, but spin offs like this and Muppet Babies (which apparently is based upon a very [[terrifying]] sequence in this film) are the absolute [[nader]] of all things Muppet. I used to wonder why Muppets attracted such derision from such film reviewers as Mr. Cranky, so I am glad that The Muppets Take Manhattan (henceforth: TMTM) set me straight on that one. Of course, many series have had a massive drop off in quality when the third episode came around: Aliens, RoboCop, The Evil Dead, even Night Of The Living Dead. So while it is no surprise that TMTM is less than The Muppet Movie or The Great Muppet Caper, the surprise lies entirely in how much less than the awesome debut or its slightly lesser follow-up TMTM is. Not only is the music far less satisfying, the scenes that link it all together are utterly terrible.

There are, of course, some redeeming and genuinely funny moments, but they are few and far between. The Swedish Chef is great in any scene he inhabits, so thank the spirit of small mercies that he appears in one sequence where his eccentricity is exploited to the fullest. The problem is that there are just no scenes that work. The story, such as it is, revolves around a Broadway musical Kermit is attempting to get produced. He goes through many trials and tribulations along the way, including the sneaking suspicion the viewer has that we have seen this all before. The biggest problem is that Kermit does not have a decent antagonist to work off this time. Charles Durning was cinematic gold as Doc Hopper, the proprietor of a fast food chain who wants to exploit Kermit for his business. Charles Grodin was dynamite as Nicky Holiday, a jewel thief the Muppets must fight in order to save Miss Piggy from a lifetime in prison. The saying is that a hero is only as good as his antagonist, and these two are at least half responsible for the greatness of the previous two films.

Charles Grodin also highlights what is wrong with TMTM. Namely, the music sucks. The opening number of the Manhattan Melodies show that is at the centre of TMTM, to put it nicely, makes the drivel that now dominates the airwaves seem coordinated. I might just be letting my peculiar sensitivity to the sounds of words and phrases getting to me, but songs like The Rainbow Connection inspired tears of joy, not irritation. Grodin's big solo during The Great Muppet Caper, while not having the same resonation, he lifts the tone of the film eight steps on his own. He is all class. And if there is one thing TMTM could use, it is rising eight steps in addition to attaining a semblance of class. TMTM also feels severely time-compressed, with the story leaping from scene to scene without any consideration for making sense or giving the story cohesion. Maddox himself pointed out that transition and cohesion make a film feel like a coherent whole rather than a mess of thrown-together pieces. See if you can find them in TMTM.

While TMTM does have its guest stars, they are either poorly utilised (Brooke Shields and John Landis), or totally out of their element (Liza Minelli, Dabney Coleman). To call this a waste of time for puppeteer and actor alike is flattery. The absence of an end credits routine is especially sore here, after Animal's "go home" postscript for The Muppet Movie in particular. Which highlights another problem. The characters are poorly written at best, with none of their individual quirks to be seen or heard. Animal shouts singular words at times, but they have nothing to do with the plot, or the conversation going on around him. Say what you will about set pieces designed to show off characters, but think of Animal's moment after eating the instant growth pills, or his "sowwy" after the incident when he pulled the window down on top of his fellow Muppets. Now see if you can remember a single memorable moment with an individual Muppet other than Swedish Chef's hilarious misunderstanding of three-dimensional film involving popcorn. Give up? Then you have proved my point.

Given that Labyrinth, one of the Henson company's best and most timeless products outside of the Muppets, arrived some two years later, it makes TMTM all the more puzzling. Perhaps this misfire convinced Jim Henson to rethink his strategy regarding character development and usage. Or perhaps the misfire can be attributed to Frank Oz, who at the time had just finished working with George Lucas on what many would agree is the most childish episode in the original Star Wars saga. The writers were also involved with The Great Muppet Caper, so I will let them off the hook for this in spite of the fact that a script is one of the most essential pieces of a film. The production is also substantially improved here, with Muppets appearing capable of moving in ways that were previously beyond them. Had the story and script been better thought-out, TMTM might have been at least comparable to The Great Muppet Caper. As it stands now, it is a great answer to the question of whether Muppets write under the influence, or excrete.

For that reason, I gave The Muppets Take Manhattan a three out of ten. Two to denote its actual quality, and a bonus for the Swedish Chef's moments. Without him, this film would be unwatchable. --------------------------------------------- Result 2936 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Professor]] [[Paul]] [[Steiner]] is doing [[research]] in [[matter]] transference. He has [[developed]] a machine that he can [[use]] to make an object like a wrist watch or [[rodent]] disappear, only to have that object re-materialize in a [[different]] [[location]]. But there are those at his [[research]] facility that do not like or approve of his [[experiments]] and will do [[whatever]] it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed [[demonstration]] that might have [[saved]] his [[funding]], [[Professor]] Steiner decides to [[test]] his machine on himself. As [[expected]], things go [[horribly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[heavily]] scared [[madman]] whose [[mere]] [[touch]] will kill.

In hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to re-watch The Projected [[Man]] in the same week I [[watched]] The Fly, Return of the Fly, and Curse of the Fly. There seems to be only so many movies about matter [[transference]] and the [[potentially]] [[horrendous]] effects it can have on the human body that one person should be made to endure in a three or four day [[period]]. I'm not sure what those responsible for the movie [[list]] as their source material for The [[Projected]] Man, but [[much]] of it is so similar to the Fly movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The Projected Man isn't [[even]] nearly as good as the worst of the Fly [[trilogy]].

Besides being [[terribly]] unoriginal, The [[Projected]] [[Man]] has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the [[movie]]. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not care about his suffering, I actually root for it. Supporting cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[little]] to get excited about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very memorable. The "look" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The action – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[avoid]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. [[Schoolteacher]] [[Paolo]] [[Achim]] is doing [[researches]] in [[question]] transference. He has [[established]] a machine that he can [[employs]] to make an object like a wrist watch or [[rodents]] disappear, only to have that object re-materialize in a [[several]] [[placements]]. But there are those at his [[investigate]] facility that do not like or approve of his [[experiences]] and will do [[whichever]] it takes to see that he doesn't succeed. After a failed [[protesting]] that might have [[saving]] his [[finances]], [[Teachers]] Steiner decides to [[proof]] his machine on himself. As [[predicted]], things go [[terrifyingly]] wrong and he is transformed into a [[deeply]] scared [[psychopath]] whose [[simple]] [[touches]] will kill.

In hindsight, maybe it wasn't such a good idea to re-watch The Projected [[Men]] in the same week I [[saw]] The Fly, Return of the Fly, and Curse of the Fly. There seems to be only so many movies about matter [[transfers]] and the [[perhaps]] [[fearsome]] effects it can have on the human body that one person should be made to endure in a three or four day [[times]]. I'm not sure what those responsible for the movie [[listing]] as their source material for The [[Predict]] Man, but [[very]] of it is so similar to the Fly movies that it cannot be mere coincidence. However, The Projected Man isn't [[yet]] nearly as good as the worst of the Fly [[triad]].

Besides being [[exceptionally]] unoriginal, The [[Predicted]] [[Guy]] has several other problems that really hurt the enjoyment of the [[films]]. A big issue I have is with Bryant Haliday in the lead. He's such a horse's ass that, not only do I not care about his suffering, I actually root for it. Supporting cast members Mary Peach and Ronald Allen are almost as bad. They're so bland and dull they hardly matter. In fact, there's very [[small]] to get excited about while watching The Projected Man. The soundtrack – not very memorable. The "look" – I would describe much of it as "muddy". The plot – predictable. The action – there isn't any. Overall, this is one to [[preventing]].

Fortunately, I watched The Projected Man via a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 episode. Funny stuff! While not an absolute, very often, the poorer the movie – the better the MST3K riffs. The guys hit almost all of their marks with The Projected Man. I'll give it a very enthusiastic 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale. --------------------------------------------- Result 2937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Despite what [[others]] had [[said]] (*cough*), this is my favourite [[movie]] of all [[time]]. I don't know how [[long]] I had been [[waiting]] to see it, but once I finally did, I [[immediately]] [[fell]] in love. Sure, it's [[strange]], but that just [[gives]] it more of an [[exciting]] [[flavour]]. For those who don't know, Moonchild is one of Gackt and Hyde's first [[movies]]. They haven't [[done]] very [[many]] at all, [[maybe]] 3 or 4 tops each. So, [[give]] them some [[credit]]. We all know that [[Adam]] Sandler wasn't the [[best]] at [[first]] either. I do believe that they do throw some [[odd]] [[situations]] in there, but I over look that to find the [[best]] [[points]] of this [[movie]], the [[emotions]] [[displayed]] and [[whatnot]]. [[Therefore]], I have [[given]], and [[always]] shall [[give]], this [[movie]] a 10 out of 10. Despite what [[alia]] had [[indicated]] (*cough*), this is my favourite [[kino]] of all [[period]]. I don't know how [[longer]] I had been [[hoping]] to see it, but once I finally did, I [[expeditiously]] [[declined]] in love. Sure, it's [[outlandish]], but that just [[donne]] it more of an [[excite]] [[aftertaste]]. For those who don't know, Moonchild is one of Gackt and Hyde's first [[movie]]. They haven't [[accomplished]] very [[various]] at all, [[perhaps]] 3 or 4 tops each. So, [[confer]] them some [[credence]]. We all know that [[Adams]] Sandler wasn't the [[nicest]] at [[frst]] either. I do believe that they do throw some [[peculiar]] [[circumstances]] in there, but I over look that to find the [[better]] [[dotted]] of this [[film]], the [[sentiments]] [[showed]] and [[lingerie]]. [[Thereby]], I have [[afforded]], and [[incessantly]] shall [[lend]], this [[cinematography]] a 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2938 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was by far the worst low budget horror movie i have ever seen. I am an open minded guy and i always love a good horror movie. In fact, when I'm renting movies i specifically look for some good underrated horror movies. They are always good for a laugh, believe i know, i have seen many. But this movie was just so terrible it wasn't worth a chuckle. I was considering turning it off in the first five minutes... which i probably should have. There is nothing good about it, first and foremost, the camera crew suck3d A$$. The intro was stupid just like the ending. Acting and special effects were terrible. Please I'm begging you, do NOT watch this movie, you will absolutely hate it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2939 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[reviews]] I read for this [[movie]] were pretty decent so I decided to check it out. [[BAD]] IDEA! This is another [[movie]] about a ghost out for revenge against a group friends. The story is [[stupid]], mix two parts Ringu with one part [[Prom]] Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[add]] a tiny dash of Single White [[Female]] - now blend until [[completely]] nonsensical. There is [[nothing]] new to this plot, and revisiting the clichés I've grown so fond of wasn't [[even]] [[entertaining]] this time. This movie jumps to and from the past too much, and once I made sense of it all I realized it still didn't make much sense. Characters go from sane to psycho killer in the blink of an eye. Speaking of characters, they are all your stereotypical favorites - the greedy selfish lawyer, the egocentric actress, the has-been baseball star, the video voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet chick, the 'nicer-than-nice' nice girl, a freakin' black cat... and I didn't care about any of them. Perhaps a better writer could have made the movie work, there were some decent scenes in it, but overall this movie was a [[mess]]. I should also mention a certain 'video tape' that would have been IMPOSSIBLE to shoot.

This movie isn't the [[worst]] Asian horror has to offer by far, but it is still [[pretty]] [[bad]]. If you just want to see some creepy images in the dark, or just want to laugh out loud at some over the top acting, or just want to yell "you're stupid!" at a movie screen, or just want to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when someone asks you how many you've seen - this movie is for you.

Those seeking a decent plot look elsewhere. The [[scrutiny]] I read for this [[filmmaking]] were pretty decent so I decided to check it out. [[NAUGHTY]] IDEA! This is another [[films]] about a ghost out for revenge against a group friends. The story is [[dolt]], mix two parts Ringu with one part [[Homecoming]] Night, a sprinkle of I Know what you did Last Summer, and [[adds]] a tiny dash of Single White [[Daughters]] - now blend until [[perfectly]] nonsensical. There is [[anything]] new to this plot, and revisiting the clichés I've grown so fond of wasn't [[yet]] [[droll]] this time. This movie jumps to and from the past too much, and once I made sense of it all I realized it still didn't make much sense. Characters go from sane to psycho killer in the blink of an eye. Speaking of characters, they are all your stereotypical favorites - the greedy selfish lawyer, the egocentric actress, the has-been baseball star, the video voyeur, the bitter girl, the spooky quiet chick, the 'nicer-than-nice' nice girl, a freakin' black cat... and I didn't care about any of them. Perhaps a better writer could have made the movie work, there were some decent scenes in it, but overall this movie was a [[confusion]]. I should also mention a certain 'video tape' that would have been IMPOSSIBLE to shoot.

This movie isn't the [[hardest]] Asian horror has to offer by far, but it is still [[quite]] [[wicked]]. If you just want to see some creepy images in the dark, or just want to laugh out loud at some over the top acting, or just want to yell "you're stupid!" at a movie screen, or just want to have another Asian horror flick up your sleeve when someone asks you how many you've seen - this movie is for you.

Those seeking a decent plot look elsewhere. --------------------------------------------- Result 2940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[When]] i [[got]] this [[movie]] free from my [[job]], along with three other similar [[movies]].. I watched then with very low [[expectations]]. Now this movie isn't bad [[per]] se. You [[get]] what you [[pay]] for. It is a [[tale]] of [[love]], betrayal, [[lies]], [[sex]], scandal, everything you [[want]] in a [[movie]]. [[Definitely]] not a Hollywood [[blockbuster]], but for [[cheap]] thrills it is not that [[bad]]. I would probably never watch this movie again. [[In]] a nutshell this is the kind of [[movie]] that you [[would]] [[see]] either very late at [[night]] on a local television station that is just wanting to take up some [[time]], or you [[would]] see it on a [[Sunday]] afternoon on a local television station that is [[trying]] to take up some [[time]]. Despite the bad acting, cliché lines, and sub par camera work. I didn't have the desire to turn off the movie and pretend like it never popped into my DVD player. The story has been done many [[times]] in many movies. This one is no [[different]], no [[better]], no worse.

Just your average movie. [[Whenever]] i [[get]] this [[cinematography]] free from my [[labour]], along with three other similar [[films]].. I watched then with very low [[forecasts]]. Now this movie isn't bad [[for]] se. You [[got]] what you [[payroll]] for. It is a [[histories]] of [[likes]], betrayal, [[lying]], [[sexuality]], scandal, everything you [[desiring]] in a [[cinema]]. [[Obviously]] not a Hollywood [[blockbusters]], but for [[inexpensive]] thrills it is not that [[horrid]]. I would probably never watch this movie again. [[During]] a nutshell this is the kind of [[cinematography]] that you [[should]] [[behold]] either very late at [[soir]] on a local television station that is just wanting to take up some [[moment]], or you [[should]] see it on a [[Sonntag]] afternoon on a local television station that is [[seeking]] to take up some [[times]]. Despite the bad acting, cliché lines, and sub par camera work. I didn't have the desire to turn off the movie and pretend like it never popped into my DVD player. The story has been done many [[moments]] in many movies. This one is no [[multiple]], no [[optimum]], no worse.

Just your average movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 2941 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I really didn't [[expect]] much from this movie, but it wasn't bad; actually it was quite [[good]]. This movie contained a couple of the funniest bits of writing I have ever seen from a [[motion]] [[picture]]. Now am not saying this is one of the funniest movies of all [[time]], but I laughed pretty [[hard]] at some parts. "The [[police]] ruled my father's death a [[suicide]]. They said he [[fell]] down an [[elevator]] [[shaft]]. Onto some bullets". Now this movie is not for [[everybody]], its mostly stupid humor like Zoolander or Dodgeball; so if you [[hated]] these movies I would probably recommend you to steer [[clear]]. [[Overall]] it was an [[enjoyable]] [[movie]], about a group of superhero wannabes, who end up becoming real heroes in the end. It's a vastly overrated comedy that many people probably haven't seen yet, because like me before viewing it [[expected]] it to be utter garbage. After viewing this film, I finally understand why this movie was able to assemble such a superstar cast which includes Ben Stiller, William H. Macy, Hank Azaria, and even that kid from Good Burger. It's because Mystery Man is full of excellent comedic writing period 7 out of 10. A very big [[surprise]]. I really didn't [[awaited]] much from this movie, but it wasn't bad; actually it was quite [[alright]]. This movie contained a couple of the funniest bits of writing I have ever seen from a [[petition]] [[imaging]]. Now am not saying this is one of the funniest movies of all [[period]], but I laughed pretty [[laborious]] at some parts. "The [[nypd]] ruled my father's death a [[suicidal]]. They said he [[dipped]] down an [[elevators]] [[axis]]. Onto some bullets". Now this movie is not for [[anybody]], its mostly stupid humor like Zoolander or Dodgeball; so if you [[abhor]] these movies I would probably recommend you to steer [[unmistakable]]. [[Whole]] it was an [[congenial]] [[cinematography]], about a group of superhero wannabes, who end up becoming real heroes in the end. It's a vastly overrated comedy that many people probably haven't seen yet, because like me before viewing it [[waited]] it to be utter garbage. After viewing this film, I finally understand why this movie was able to assemble such a superstar cast which includes Ben Stiller, William H. Macy, Hank Azaria, and even that kid from Good Burger. It's because Mystery Man is full of excellent comedic writing period 7 out of 10. A very big [[amaze]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2942 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is one [[excellent]] Sammo [[Hung]] movie. Actually, this is a [[great]] piece of [[Hong]] [[Kong]] [[action]] [[cinema]]. The [[story]] tells the [[story]] of pedicab drivers in Macao looking for [[love]] and [[getting]] mixed up w/ a vicious pimp. The performances are [[excellent]] and the [[characters]] are all [[likable]] and well-defined. The [[story]] is involving and has [[enough]] romance, [[drama]], [[comedy]], and [[suspense]] to [[keep]] one watching between fight scenes. Sammo Hung [[proves]] here that he's [[probably]] the [[best]] fight [[choreographer]] in the business. The [[action]] is [[simply]] [[amazing]], esp. the [[fight]] w/ [[Lau]] [[Kar]] [[Leung]] and the finale. [[Billy]] [[Chow]] and Sammo [[Hung]] are [[amazing]]. A [[must]] [[see]] for any [[fan]] of [[action]]. This is one [[funky]] Sammo [[Hanged]] movie. Actually, this is a [[large]] piece of [[Kong]] [[Hk]] [[activities]] [[theaters]]. The [[history]] tells the [[stories]] of pedicab drivers in Macao looking for [[loves]] and [[obtaining]] mixed up w/ a vicious pimp. The performances are [[handsome]] and the [[features]] are all [[sympathetic]] and well-defined. The [[tale]] is involving and has [[adequate]] romance, [[opera]], [[humor]], and [[wait]] to [[sustain]] one watching between fight scenes. Sammo Hung [[illustrates]] here that he's [[presumably]] the [[bestest]] fight [[choreography]] in the business. The [[efforts]] is [[merely]] [[unbelievable]], esp. the [[wrestling]] w/ [[Yoo]] [[Karr]] [[Upton]] and the finale. [[Beli]] [[Week]] and Sammo [[Hanged]] are [[striking]]. A [[ought]] [[consults]] for any [[groupie]] of [[activity]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2943 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] [[If]] you like original gut wrenching laughter you will like this movie. [[If]] you are young or old then you will [[love]] this movie, hell even my [[mom]] liked it.

[[Great]] [[Camp]]!!! [[Unless]] you like original gut wrenching laughter you will like this movie. [[Unless]] you are young or old then you will [[iike]] this movie, hell even my [[mammy]] liked it.

[[Large]] [[Campsite]]!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] A [[typical]] [[Goth]] [[chick]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy George) [[gets]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the [[help]] of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom (horror [[mainstay]], Karen Black, the only remotely [[good]] [[thing]] about this [[travesty]]) buy. The acting's pretty laughably bad ([[especially]] when Rainbow interacts with the [[aforementioned]] [[mirror]]) and there are no [[scares]] or [[suspense]] to be had. This [[film]] [[inexplicably]] spawned thus for 3 sequels each slightly more [[atrocious]] than the last. People looking for a [[similarly]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[would]] be well [[advised]] to just [[search]] out the episode of "[[Friday]] the 13th: the Series" where a geeky [[girl]] [[finds]] an [[old]] cursed compact [[mirror]]. That [[packs]] more chills in it's [[scant]] 40 minutes than this [[whole]] franchise has provided [[across]] it's 4 films.

My [[Grade]]: D

Eye [[Candy]]: [[Charlie]] Spradling [[provides]] the [[obligatory]] T&[[A]] A [[characteristic]] [[Gothic]] [[hoochie]] (Rainbow Harvest looking like a cross between Winona Ryder in Beetlejuice and Boy George) [[attains]] even with people she feels have wronged her with the [[succour]] of an old haunted mirror that she finds in the new house she and her mom (horror [[backbone]], Karen Black, the only remotely [[buena]] [[stuff]] about this [[jest]]) buy. The acting's pretty laughably bad ([[mostly]] when Rainbow interacts with the [[above]] [[mirrors]]) and there are no [[frightens]] or [[wait]] to be had. This [[cinematography]] [[inextricably]] spawned thus for 3 sequels each slightly more [[frightful]] than the last. People looking for a [[equally]] themed, but far superior cinematic endeavor [[should]] be well [[warned]] to just [[searched]] out the episode of "[[Fridays]] the 13th: the Series" where a geeky [[chick]] [[discovers]] an [[longtime]] cursed compact [[mirrors]]. That [[packing]] more chills in it's [[few]] 40 minutes than this [[ensemble]] franchise has provided [[throughout]] it's 4 films.

My [[Octane]]: D

Eye [[Confectionary]]: [[Chas]] Spradling [[prescribes]] the [[compulsory]] T&[[una]] --------------------------------------------- Result 2945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] [[could]] have been [[great]](cause its [[got]] a [[somewhat]] [[fascinating]] [[premise]]) but it never rises above sheer [[caricature]]. The acting is [[severely]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[severely]] that i [[thought]] i was [[going]] to [[fall]] of my [[seat]] in the [[theater]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[piece]] of .... [[Danish]] [[cinema]] has been getting a lot of [[good]] pr the [[recent]] [[years]] but if this [[piece]] of .... [[crosses]] the [[border]] I'm [[afraid]] nobody [[sane]] will ever want to [[rent]] a [[danish]] [[movie]]. This [[movie]] is the [[reason]] why i [[chose]] to [[register]] here. I really [[felt]] i needed to steer people away from this piece of .... my [[sympathies]] go out to the people who already went to the [[cinema]] to watch this This [[cinematography]] [[wo]] have been [[resplendent]](cause its [[did]] a [[rather]] [[exhilarating]] [[supposition]]) but it never rises above sheer [[farce]]. The acting is [[powerfully]] flawed and there were moments where i cringed so [[bitterly]] that i [[thinking]] i was [[gonna]] to [[slumps]] of my [[seating]] in the [[theatre]]. Never and I mean never Watch this godawfull [[slice]] of .... [[Krone]] [[cine]] has been getting a lot of [[alright]] pr the [[newer]] [[olds]] but if this [[slice]] of .... [[traverse]] the [[frontiers]] I'm [[frighten]] nobody [[rational]] will ever want to [[tenancy]] a [[danes]] [[film]]. This [[cinematography]] is the [[motives]] why i [[picked]] to [[inscription]] here. I really [[believed]] i needed to steer people away from this piece of .... my [[compassion]] go out to the people who already went to the [[theater]] to watch this --------------------------------------------- Result 2946 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] When it comes to movies, I am generally easily entertained and not very critical, but must say that this movie was one big flop from the start. I gave it 30 minutes and then rewound it. What a waste of some great talent! I was very disappointed with this movie, as it was not what I expected. --------------------------------------------- Result 2947 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] [[Cat]] Soup at [[first]] seems to be a very [[random]] animated film. The best way I've been able to explain it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not totally random. The story is about Nyatta, a young cat boy and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very ill and dies, however, Nyatta sees her soul being taken away by death and is able to retrieve half of it. The story is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

Though a lot of the content in this movie [[seems]] completely random, it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, death and rebirth. You can also see references from other tales, such as Hansel and Gretal. This strangely cute short film has an interesting story, packed with a deeper meaning than what you see on the surface of the screen. [[Ctu]] Soup at [[frst]] seems to be a very [[indiscriminate]] animated film. The best way I've been able to explain it is that it's quite acidic. Though it's not totally random. The story is about Nyatta, a young cat boy and his sister Nyaako. Nyaako is very ill and dies, however, Nyatta sees her soul being taken away by death and is able to retrieve half of it. The story is about their quest to bring Nyaako fully back to life.

Though a lot of the content in this movie [[looks]] completely random, it is not. Most of it is symbolism for life, death and rebirth. You can also see references from other tales, such as Hansel and Gretal. This strangely cute short film has an interesting story, packed with a deeper meaning than what you see on the surface of the screen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is waaaaay to much.. so frustrating to watch.. I was waiting for the whole damn movie to end and to finally get some ANSWERS!!.. and what I've had in the end was nothing but a HUUUGE neon-sign question mark above my head!!!!! I haven't seen such a bad acting and such a nonsense movie in a long long time.. and what's bothering me is.. how come someone (an actor) read the script of such a bull!?#@ movie and say: OK, I'M IN!!! LET'S FILM THIS! This is horrible!!! THIS MOVIE SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!!!! I just can't believe I've spent an hour and a half of my life on something like this!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 2949 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This fanciful horror flick has Vincent Price playing a mad magician that realizes his vocational talents have been sold to another. He devise ways of avenging all those that have wronged him. His master scheme seems to back fire on him.

[[Price]] is a [[little]] below par compared to his masterpieces, but is [[still]] the only [[reason]] to watch this thriller. [[Supporting]] cast includes Patrick O'Neal, Mary Murphy, Eva Gabor and Jay Novello.

This fanciful horror flick has Vincent Price playing a mad magician that realizes his vocational talents have been sold to another. He devise ways of avenging all those that have wronged him. His master scheme seems to back fire on him.

[[Prix]] is a [[tiny]] below par compared to his masterpieces, but is [[yet]] the only [[raison]] to watch this thriller. [[Assists]] cast includes Patrick O'Neal, Mary Murphy, Eva Gabor and Jay Novello.

--------------------------------------------- Result 2950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (83%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The first thing you notice is the animation of the film. I found it [[done]] very well done. The scenery had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good either. There were many times I focused more on my computer than the story. The writing was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was completely ignored, as the main focus was the flies. I also hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and explained that the stories about the flies in the film was a work of fiction, and no flies were on Apollo 11. I did like how he thanked the men and women who sacrificed their lives for space exploration though.

If you are an adult, this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is certainly just for kids. But, save this one for a rainy day. "Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The first thing you notice is the animation of the film. I found it [[effected]] very well done. The scenery had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good either. There were many times I focused more on my computer than the story. The writing was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was completely ignored, as the main focus was the flies. I also hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and explained that the stories about the flies in the film was a work of fiction, and no flies were on Apollo 11. I did like how he thanked the men and women who sacrificed their lives for space exploration though.

If you are an adult, this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is certainly just for kids. But, save this one for a rainy day. --------------------------------------------- Result 2951 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] "[[La]] Bête" by Walerian Borowczyk is [[based]] on the [[short]] [[story]] "Lokis" written by Prosper Merimée.Lucy Broadhurst(Lisabeth Hummel),an American heiress betrothed to the son of an [[impoverished]] [[Marquis]],[[arrives]] at the family's [[crumbling]] château and [[learns]] of a mythical ursine beast purported to prowl the [[nearby]] [[forest]].It is fabled that a former lady of the [[house]](Sirpa Lane)once engaged in perverse sex with the creature and [[Lucy]] [[finds]] herself [[consumed]] by [[dreams]] of the [[incident]]. "The [[Beast]]" is an art-house [[mix]] of [[surreal]] horror,explicit sleaze and porno.There's implied bestiality,[[assault]] and perversion in the priesthood,copious [[fake]] ejaculate smeared on bared breasts,masturbation with a rose and, most graphic of all,the eponymous beast toying with [[incredibly]] [[big]] phallus.Still this [[genuinely]] erotic [[film]] is [[wonderfully]] photographed and tasteless.The women here are stunningly [[beautiful]] and they are [[naked]] most of the time.[[Overall]] "[[La]] Bête" is a [[visual]] [[feast]].Whether it be from the fetishistic attention to detail,or the [[visual]] [[motifs]] pregnant with information,Borowczyk's [[masterpiece]] should be watched with [[care]] and attention.A must-see for [[fans]] of European [[cult]] [[cinema]]. "[[Las]] Bête" by Walerian Borowczyk is [[groundwork]] on the [[terse]] [[conte]] "Lokis" written by Prosper Merimée.Lucy Broadhurst(Lisabeth Hummel),an American heiress betrothed to the son of an [[needy]] [[Marquess]],[[comes]] at the family's [[disintegrating]] château and [[taught]] of a mythical ursine beast purported to prowl the [[near]] [[forestry]].It is fabled that a former lady of the [[housing]](Sirpa Lane)once engaged in perverse sex with the creature and [[Lucie]] [[found]] herself [[eaten]] by [[nightmares]] of the [[event]]. "The [[Silly]]" is an art-house [[mixes]] of [[bizarre]] horror,explicit sleaze and porno.There's implied bestiality,[[attacking]] and perversion in the priesthood,copious [[false]] ejaculate smeared on bared breasts,masturbation with a rose and, most graphic of all,the eponymous beast toying with [[highly]] [[massive]] phallus.Still this [[actually]] erotic [[kino]] is [[divinely]] photographed and tasteless.The women here are stunningly [[resplendent]] and they are [[nus]] most of the time.[[Aggregate]] "[[Las]] Bête" is a [[optic]] [[festival]].Whether it be from the fetishistic attention to detail,or the [[optic]] [[grounds]] pregnant with information,Borowczyk's [[centerpiece]] should be watched with [[healthcare]] and attention.A must-see for [[amateurs]] of European [[heresy]] [[cinemas]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2952 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the best films ever made. It is a realistic depiction of rural ranching life which was a big part of American History. The setting is 1906 Wyoming where life had not changed much since the previous century. The film keeps your interest without the added Hollywood myths. The whole family can see this movie and be intrigued about how life was like in America when it was mostly a rural nation. With this film, you will escape the present and witness the daily life of 100 years ago. In a beautiful, scenic environment you will see the hard physical work that was required to survive, as well as the constant worries and concerns of the elements and the market pressures that will make a difference between success or failure. See this movie and experience life as it was for most of our nation's history. This film is worth your time to see. My only question is - why aren't there more films like this one? --------------------------------------------- Result 2953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Icy]] and [[lethal]] ace hit-man Tony Arzenta (a [[divinely]] smooth and commanding performance by [[Alain]] Delon) [[wants]] to quit the [[assassination]] [[business]], but the [[dangerous]] mobsters he [[works]] for won't [[let]] him. After his [[wife]] and [[child]] are [[killed]], Arzenta [[declares]] open season on [[everyone]] responsible for their [[deaths]]. Director Duccio Tessari [[relates]] the absorbing [[story]] at a [[constant]] snappy [[pace]], [[maintains]] a properly [[serious]] and no-nonsense tone throughout, stages the [[stirring]] shoot-outs and [[exciting]] [[car]] chases with [[considerable]] rip-snorting brio, and punctuates the [[narrative]] with jolting outbursts of explosive bloody violence. Delon's suave and charismatic [[presence]] adds [[extra]] [[class]] to the already engrossing proceedings. This [[film]] further [[benefits]] from sterling acting by a bang-up [[cast]], with [[praiseworthy]] [[contributions]] by [[Richard]] [[Conte]] as wise [[Mafia]] [[kingpin]] Nick Gusto, [[Carla]] Gravini as Arzenta's supportive lady [[friend]] Sandra, Marc Porel as Arzenta's [[loyal]] [[pal]] Domenico [[Maggio]], [[Anton]] Diffring as [[ruthless]], [[calculating]] capo Grunwald, and [[Lino]] Troisi as the [[venomous]] [[gangster]] Rocco Cutitta. Silvano Ippoliti's [[glossy]] [[cinematography]] boasts several [[graceful]] [[pans]]. Gianni Ferrio's funky [[score]] hits the get-down groovy [[spot]]. Erika [[Blanc]] and Rosalba Neri [[pop]] up briefly in nifty [[bit]] parts. [[Better]] [[still]], there's no [[filler]] to speak of and we even [[get]] a decent dab of [[tasty]] gratuitous female nudity. The [[startling]] conclusion [[packs]] a mean and [[lingering]] wallop right to the [[gut]]. A solid and [[satisfying]] [[winner]]. [[Glacial]] and [[mortal]] ace hit-man Tony Arzenta (a [[marvellously]] smooth and commanding performance by [[Alan]] Delon) [[want]] to quit the [[murdering]] [[enterprise]], but the [[unsafe]] mobsters he [[worked]] for won't [[allowing]] him. After his [[femme]] and [[kid]] are [[kill]], Arzenta [[announced]] open season on [[anybody]] responsible for their [[death]]. Director Duccio Tessari [[covers]] the absorbing [[fairytales]] at a [[incessant]] snappy [[cadence]], [[argues]] a properly [[severe]] and no-nonsense tone throughout, stages the [[twitching]] shoot-outs and [[breathtaking]] [[auto]] chases with [[sizeable]] rip-snorting brio, and punctuates the [[descriptive]] with jolting outbursts of explosive bloody violence. Delon's suave and charismatic [[attendance]] adds [[extras]] [[classes]] to the already engrossing proceedings. This [[flick]] further [[profit]] from sterling acting by a bang-up [[casting]], with [[meritorious]] [[donations]] by [[Richards]] [[Tale]] as wise [[Shay]] [[biggie]] Nick Gusto, [[Carly]] Gravini as Arzenta's supportive lady [[boyfriend]] Sandra, Marc Porel as Arzenta's [[faithful]] [[boyfriend]] Domenico [[May]], [[Anthony]] Diffring as [[cruel]], [[computing]] capo Grunwald, and [[Leno]] Troisi as the [[noxious]] [[thug]] Rocco Cutitta. Silvano Ippoliti's [[shiny]] [[movie]] boasts several [[tasteful]] [[pots]]. Gianni Ferrio's funky [[notation]] hits the get-down groovy [[stain]]. Erika [[White]] and Rosalba Neri [[daddy]] up briefly in nifty [[bitten]] parts. [[Improved]] [[however]], there's no [[filling]] to speak of and we even [[obtain]] a decent dab of [[delectable]] gratuitous female nudity. The [[unbelievable]] conclusion [[kits]] a mean and [[continuing]] wallop right to the [[colonic]]. A solid and [[gratifying]] [[winners]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Its not Braveheart( thankfully),but it is fine entertainment with engaging characters and good acting all around. I enjoyed this film when it was released and upon viewing it again last week,find it has held up well over time. Not a classic film,but a very fine and watchable movie to enjoy as great entertainment. --------------------------------------------- Result 2955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Despite a [[tight]] narrative, Johnnie To's [[Election]] feels at times like it was once a [[longer]] picture, with [[many]] characters and plot [[strands]] [[abandoned]] or ultimately unresolved. Some of these are dealt with in the truly [[excellent]] and far [[superior]] sequel, Election 2: [[Harmony]] is a Virtue, but it's [[still]] a dependably [[enthralling]] thriller about a contested Triad election that bypasses the [[usual]] shootouts and [[explosions]] ([[though]] not the violence) in favour of [[constantly]] shifting alliances that can [[turn]] in the time it takes to [[make]] a phone [[call]]. It's also a [[film]] where the most ruthless [[character]] isn't [[always]] the most threatening one, as the chilling [[ending]] makes only too [[clear]]: one can [[imagine]] a [[lifetime]] of [[psychological]] counselling being necessary for all the [[trauma]] that one inflicts on one [[unfortunate]] bystander.

Simon Yam, all too often a [[variable]] actor but [[always]] at his best under To's direction, has possibly never been better in the lead, not least because [[Tony]] Leung's much more extrovert performance makes his stillness more the [[powerful]]. Despite a [[stringent]] narrative, Johnnie To's [[Electoral]] feels at times like it was once a [[most]] picture, with [[countless]] characters and plot [[filaments]] [[relinquished]] or ultimately unresolved. Some of these are dealt with in the truly [[sumptuous]] and far [[supremo]] sequel, Election 2: [[Concordia]] is a Virtue, but it's [[nonetheless]] a dependably [[mesmerizing]] thriller about a contested Triad election that bypasses the [[ordinary]] shootouts and [[bombings]] ([[while]] not the violence) in favour of [[incessantly]] shifting alliances that can [[converting]] in the time it takes to [[deliver]] a phone [[invitation]]. It's also a [[flick]] where the most ruthless [[traits]] isn't [[perpetually]] the most threatening one, as the chilling [[terminated]] makes only too [[definite]]: one can [[suppose]] a [[life]] of [[psychiatric]] counselling being necessary for all the [[injuries]] that one inflicts on one [[pathetic]] bystander.

Simon Yam, all too often a [[changeable]] actor but [[incessantly]] at his best under To's direction, has possibly never been better in the lead, not least because [[Tonda]] Leung's much more extrovert performance makes his stillness more the [[emphatic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2956 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] I know [[sometimes]] its really [[really]] corny... But the acting is [[amazing]] and Melissa [[Joan]] Hart is as cute as a [[button]]. I [[love]] this show a [[lot]], and I'm [[almost]] [[embarrassed]] that I do b/c the [[show]] has a rep. for being really [[corny]], but it makes me feel [[good]]. My only [[problem]] is that [[sometimes]] it can be [[pretty]] low [[budget]] - sometimes actors [[change]] and you just have to deal with it... Like Sabrina's [[father]] is 2 [[different]] guys throughout the [[course]] of the [[movie]]... I [[mean]], couldn't they just [[say]] he was an uncle or [[something]]? Still, I can't [[help]] but [[loving]] this [[show]]. [[Harvey]] and Sabrina make a really cute [[couple]] and Salem is [[absolutely]] [[hilarious]]. I [[definitely]] [[recommend]] it if your looking for some light and [[funny]] [[entertainment]]... My [[favorite]] episode is "Pancake [[Madness]]"... a [[HILARIOUS]] episode. The best season is [[probably]] 3... I'm not [[really]] a [[fan]] of some of the seventh season twists... Once you [[get]] to [[college]], Morgan joins the [[group]] and her [[dialog]] is painful and very poorly acted... Plus she is [[ugly]], so the jokes about how she is only surviving off her good [[looks]] were [[lost]] on me... But I [[think]] it was set up to have a [[really]] [[good]] eighth season and I was [[really]] [[sad]] to [[see]] one of my [[favorite]] [[shows]] [[canceled]]! I know [[occasionally]] its really [[truthfully]] corny... But the acting is [[spectacular]] and Melissa [[Juana]] Hart is as cute as a [[zit]]. I [[iove]] this show a [[batch]], and I'm [[virtually]] [[ashamed]] that I do b/c the [[spectacle]] has a rep. for being really [[dorky]], but it makes me feel [[alright]]. My only [[issues]] is that [[sometime]] it can be [[belle]] low [[budgets]] - sometimes actors [[modified]] and you just have to deal with it... Like Sabrina's [[fathers]] is 2 [[assorted]] guys throughout the [[cours]] of the [[cinematography]]... I [[meaning]], couldn't they just [[tell]] he was an uncle or [[somethin]]? Still, I can't [[supporting]] but [[affective]] this [[illustrating]]. [[Harve]] and Sabrina make a really cute [[couples]] and Salem is [[totally]] [[comic]]. I [[surely]] [[recommends]] it if your looking for some light and [[humorous]] [[amusement]]... My [[preferred]] episode is "Pancake [[Dementia]]"... a [[DROLL]] episode. The best season is [[surely]] 3... I'm not [[truly]] a [[ventilator]] of some of the seventh season twists... Once you [[obtain]] to [[university]], Morgan joins the [[groups]] and her [[dialogue]] is painful and very poorly acted... Plus she is [[ghastly]], so the jokes about how she is only surviving off her good [[seem]] were [[outof]] on me... But I [[reckon]] it was set up to have a [[truly]] [[buena]] eighth season and I was [[truly]] [[lamentable]] to [[behold]] one of my [[preferable]] [[exposition]] [[rescinded]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 2957 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] I am, as [[many]] are, a [[fan]] of Tony Scott films. When this movie came out I had high [[hopes]] that it would be like 'Man On Fire'. To find out that the movie it's the furthest thing from it! The story was treading water from the get go, and the [[choice]] of Mickey Rourke was not such such a good idea. And the whole 'arm'scene was too gratuitous!

The movie is [[centered]] around Kiera Kinghtly, and this movie [[reveals]] that she'll never become a movie star! The movie brought some of the [[worst]] acting ever.

I [[like]] [[Tony]] Scott's direction 'n all, but this takes the whole friggin cake! Sorry [[Ton]], 1 out of 10! I am, as [[innumerable]] are, a [[breather]] of Tony Scott films. When this movie came out I had high [[waits]] that it would be like 'Man On Fire'. To find out that the movie it's the furthest thing from it! The story was treading water from the get go, and the [[pick]] of Mickey Rourke was not such such a good idea. And the whole 'arm'scene was too gratuitous!

The movie is [[focus]] around Kiera Kinghtly, and this movie [[unveils]] that she'll never become a movie star! The movie brought some of the [[gravest]] acting ever.

I [[adores]] [[Tonny]] Scott's direction 'n all, but this takes the whole friggin cake! Sorry [[Tonne]], 1 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 2958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] It's the early 80s. There's a group of suspiciously old-looking teens. And there's a maniac stalking around. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called Pranks. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[idea]]. Unless your idea of a [[great]] prank is to repeatedly hit someone's dinner with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[great]] prank; in fact [[quite]] a rubbish [[prank]] if truth be told. But there you [[go]].

The [[film]] itself concerns a group of teenagers who are tasked with cleaning out a decommissioned dormitory. They become aware that a psychopath is on the loose. To combat this development, they split up and wander about in the dark. It ends in tears for most of them.

Pranks is a [[badly]] made slasher movie. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It appears to be cut of a fair bit of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[pointless]] because, let's face it, a slasher movie shorn of violence is a waste of time. For slasher-film and video nasty completists only. It's the early 80s. There's a group of suspiciously old-looking teens. And there's a maniac stalking around. Yes, this is slasherville.

This movie is called Pranks. Why is it called Pranks? I haven't the faintest [[notions]]. Unless your idea of a [[phenomenal]] prank is to repeatedly hit someone's dinner with a baseball bat - on balance, not a [[wondrous]] prank; in fact [[rather]] a rubbish [[joke]] if truth be told. But there you [[going]].

The [[kino]] itself concerns a group of teenagers who are tasked with cleaning out a decommissioned dormitory. They become aware that a psychopath is on the loose. To combat this development, they split up and wander about in the dark. It ends in tears for most of them.

Pranks is a [[desperately]] made slasher movie. The DVD release I viewed was the Vipco one. It appears to be cut of a fair bit of violence. This makes the DVD even more [[senseless]] because, let's face it, a slasher movie shorn of violence is a waste of time. For slasher-film and video nasty completists only. --------------------------------------------- Result 2959 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] As soon as I began to see posters and hear talk about this movie, I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an incredible to behold and I couldn't wait to see the second one, especially after beginning to see the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I saw it, I left the theater [[extremely]] disappointed, as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. [[While]] the [[action]] scenes in the movie were amazing as always, there simply were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging toward Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the commercials). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely horrendous. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't need to hear about that or pay money to listen to it. The movie was a serious waste of my time, and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the constant boring and dry monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the film quickly, and the small amount of good fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What movie ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. As soon as I began to see posters and hear talk about this movie, I was immediately excited. The Matrix was an incredible to behold and I couldn't wait to see the second one, especially after beginning to see the trailers for it at other movies. However, when I saw it, I left the theater [[immeasurably]] disappointed, as did many other movie-goers at the theater with me. [[Albeit]] the [[measures]] scenes in the movie were amazing as always, there simply were too few of them. In the first movie, there was constant fighting going on it seemed, but the second took a much more (and much unfortunate) preachy point of view. To sum up the plot, there wasn't much to it that wasn't expected. The machines were digging toward Zion with intent of destroying it (that's not a spoiler, everyone saw it in the commercials). The dialogue of the movie was absolutely horrendous. Unless you're a psychology major, you most likely will not understand most of what is said in the movie, and because of that simply won't care. It became somewhat of a romantic movie with the showing of events happening in the lives and relationship of Neo and Trinity. Agent Smith, for as bad-ass as he was in the first movie, seemed to get all religious and preachy. Personally, I don't need to hear about that or pay money to listen to it. The movie was a serious waste of my time, and I don't think I can watch the first one anymore. The dialogue and the constant boring and dry monologues from basically every character made me lose interest in the film quickly, and the small amount of good fighting scenes pushed me nearer the edge, and the ending of the movie shoved me right off. What movie ends with "To Be Concluded"? How original is that folks. I wonder if the Wachowski brothers had to burn the midnight oil to come up with that one. In conclusion, the movie was bad and that's the end of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2960 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was forced to [[see]] this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew movies from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as [[humorous]] as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the nauseating piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I feared it would be. It was an inoffensive, mildly [[entertaining]] [[movie]]. Although I'm pleased that they didn't try to "upgrade" Nancy to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... I was forced to [[seeing]] this because a) I have an 11 year-old girl and b) we had shown her the Bonita Granville Nacy Drew movies from the 1930s, which she thoroughly enjoyed. Personally, I didn't think it was as [[comic]] as the 1930s flicks, but on the other hand, it wasn't the nauseating piece of intelligence-insulting fluff I feared it would be. It was an inoffensive, mildly [[droll]] [[kino]]. Although I'm pleased that they didn't try to "upgrade" Nancy to 21st Century "hipness" (Veronica Mars holds the title as the Modern Nancy Drew), I do think that they made her a little too bland, that they didn't do enough to develop Nancy Drew - the movie could have been titled "Jane Doe, Girl Detective". I have to blame the script: I think each actor did a good job with what they had to work with. I liked Emma Roberts in this role, but they gave her a made-for-TV, not theatrical release, script... --------------------------------------------- Result 2961 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] For the initial 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've really no idea how long it took) Alienator sets up an interesting [[premise]]. I don't think I've seen a slasher movie with an alien from another planet as the baddie before. [[However]], interest soon turns into [[stunned]] [[disbelief]] as you realise the 'alien' is a huge body-builder woman in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[patently]] ridiculous.

Don't think I hold that against it. In the world of shlock-horror, patently ridiculous can often be a good sign. However, the blatant [[stupidity]] of its premise is all the movie really has [[going]] for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Actors]] heap on failed attempts at seriousness, [[potentially]] genius lines of [[pure]] cheese [[dialogue]] are stumbled over with unnerving [[incompetence]] and the [[direction]] fails to sum up [[even]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the time the movie's finished you can barely see the original concept through the haystack of total [[tripe]] the team piled on it.

Add to this the fact that the 'Alien' just kills people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a giant throbbing heap of good ideas being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but AT it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. For the initial 20 minutes or so (I was watching it on a PS2 so I've really no idea how long it took) Alienator sets up an interesting [[supposition]]. I don't think I've seen a slasher movie with an alien from another planet as the baddie before. [[Still]], interest soon turns into [[awed]] [[atheism]] as you realise the 'alien' is a huge body-builder woman in a steel bikini. Yes, Alienator is [[notoriously]] ridiculous.

Don't think I hold that against it. In the world of shlock-horror, patently ridiculous can often be a good sign. However, the blatant [[nonsense]] of its premise is all the movie really has [[go]] for it. Alienator is funny as hell, but it is also a shambolic suckfest of the highest order. [[Protagonists]] heap on failed attempts at seriousness, [[conceivably]] genius lines of [[pur]] cheese [[conversation]] are stumbled over with unnerving [[impotence]] and the [[directorate]] fails to sum up [[yet]] one or two decent set-pieces. By the time the movie's finished you can barely see the original concept through the haystack of total [[gut]] the team piled on it.

Add to this the fact that the 'Alien' just kills people by vaporising them, as opposed to doing any 'slashing' as such and you have a giant throbbing heap of good ideas being left to rot. You'll laugh at Alienator, but AT it, not with it. If that's your thing then go ahead and check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 2962 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The choice to make this SNL [[skit]] into a movie was far better [[thought]] out than other [[recent]] ones. The humor involved in the character is not [[annoyance]] humor, and is also character driven [[enough]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

Oddly enough the sexual content seemed like it could be avoided, but that may have been because the constraints of live [[television]] schooled me to not [[expect]] it. I suppose I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful predecessors, but still better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I liked it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is sad, as Tim Meadows tends not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) The choice to make this SNL [[sketch]] into a movie was far better [[thinking]] out than other [[freshly]] ones. The humor involved in the character is not [[irritation]] humor, and is also character driven [[satisfactorily]] to be stretched out for an hour or two.

Oddly enough the sexual content seemed like it could be avoided, but that may have been because the constraints of live [[tvs]] schooled me to not [[hopes]] it. I suppose I was thinking more "Leisure Suit Larry" risqué than the producers were...

Definitely not a PG-13 movie, which will probably hurt it from ever reaching the heights of its more successful predecessors, but still better premise and writing than its more dismal ones.

I liked it, but I doubt it will be a smash hit... (which is sad, as Tim Meadows tends not to do characters that annoy me with quite the frequency other SNL alumni tend to) --------------------------------------------- Result 2963 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Audiences]] [[today]] will [[probably]] watch a film [[like]] Ossessione and not really consider how [[unprecedented]] it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the [[film]] really [[divorces]] from sap-happy Hollywood [[conventions]]—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more [[upon]] depicting reality in a very grim and [[sober]] light. [[Films]] of this [[nature]]—the neo-realist films—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[provocative]] [[issues]] that were probably unseen on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very raw and [[gritty]]: shot on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular [[actors]]. All of these elements helped convey the issues explored in the film, yielding the following theme: Negative karmic [[repercussions]] will [[haunt]] those who deliberately act immorally.

The two leads—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, yet both carry the mentality: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[drifter]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant fluctuations. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna craves; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the courage to get. She wants to live in a world free from the monotony of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, films prior to the neo-realist [[age]] never showed such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[say]] the least it was [[probably]] a [[bit]] alarming.

[[In]] conjunction with the [[theme]], the neo-realist [[style]] [[helps]] [[show]] the [[negative]] repercussions of adulterous [[behavior]]. [[Succinctly]] put, [[adulterous]] behavior (as [[shown]] in the [[film]]) leads to [[depressing]] and ultimately deadened [[lives]]. [[When]] Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the [[cliff]] and into the [[river]], [[killing]] Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. [[Audience]] [[yesterday]] will [[arguably]] watch a film [[iike]] Ossessione and not really consider how [[incomparable]] it was during the time when it came out. The structure of the [[flick]] really [[divorce]] from sap-happy Hollywood [[pacts]]—as well as other major theatrical elements. It relies more [[after]] depicting reality in a very grim and [[dispassionate]] light. [[Filmmaking]] of this [[character]]—the neo-realist films—were made to reflect the darkness felt during post-World War II times. Ossessione tackles some fairly [[inflammatory]] [[subjects]] that were probably unseen on screen prior to the war, including: adultery, conspiracy, murder, pregnancy, etc. Aside from the one crane shot and certain musical swelling moments, the film aesthetic is very raw and [[sandstone]]: shot on-location, uses natural lighting and most likely non-popular [[actresses]]. All of these elements helped convey the issues explored in the film, yielding the following theme: Negative karmic [[impacts]] will [[torment]] those who deliberately act immorally.

The two leads—Gino and Giovanna—are polar opposites, yet both carry the mentality: we're bored and we want to be entertained. Gino is a [[bum]]; a lone traveler who embraces life and its constant fluctuations. Giovanna is a bored house-wife cemented in the familiarly of marital permanence: she doesn't want to leave her home and husband, but would rather remain where she is because it's safer. Gino's lifestyle represents the ideal lifestyle Giovanna craves; the only difference is that she's too afraid to live it herself—that's why she falls in love with Gino: he represents everything she wants but doesn't have the courage to get. She wants to live in a world free from the monotony of living with her corpulent husband—Gino is the perfect ticket into that world. The affair that ensues between the two most likely left audiences back in the 40's feeling somewhat uneasy. I mean, films prior to the neo-realist [[aging]] never showed such scandalous behavior on screen before. To [[says]] the least it was [[unquestionably]] a [[bite]] alarming.

[[Across]] conjunction with the [[subjects]], the neo-realist [[styles]] [[supports]] [[displayed]] the [[bad]] repercussions of adulterous [[behaviors]]. [[Succinct]] put, [[infidelity]] behavior (as [[displayed]] in the [[flick]]) leads to [[dismal]] and ultimately deadened [[iife]]. [[Whenever]] Gino and Giovanna conspire with each other to "eliminate" Giovanna's husband, karma comes to haunt them like a plague after the deed is done. They return to their home: the atmosphere is dark and biting (as can be expected from the neo-realist style). They are not happy; they're actually more depressed. They thought that by eliminating Giovanna's husband that they'd live happier lives, but they were duped. The film ends with Giovanna's death—it being in karmic similitude of her husband's death. I think this is a very satisfying ending for several reasons. Here's why.

There's a lot of talk as to whether or not evil should be depicted on screen, and if so, to what extent. I think depicting evil is very necessary if and only if the evil depicted is not being glorified, but rather shows what negative consequences evil actions have. As the subtext of Ossessione asks, is adultery and murder evil? I think the film eagerly responds yes! The adulterous behavior between the two reveals how unhappy they are. Ironically though, towards the end of the film when they seem to be healed of their depression and are seen basking in each other's arms inside the car, the author of the film shows that their happiness is, in fact, a façade: the car crashes off the [[clive]] and into the [[rivers]], [[assassinated]] Giovanna; the police arrest Gino. I think it was the author's intention to say that even though people sometimes try and justify their immoral behavior, in the end karma will come back to haunt them. I agree. I think the two got what was coming to them because they both were incredibly selfish—always wanting instant gratification and not willing to endure through hard times. This was especially made clear after the first sign of difficulty that Gino and Giovanna experience in their relationship: he can't handle the pressure of living in Giovanna's husband shadow, so he leaves Giovanna and sleeps with another girl. Such is typical of the insatiable, hedonistic personality.

All in all, the film seemed very risky for its time. The audience, however, was prepared to see such a film because of the sobriety the war brought. Those pre-war, happy-go-lucky films were no longer being believed. Movie-going audiences were ready to see and contemplate difficult films with complex characters: they wanted to see characters whose lives were entangled in so-called 'sin' because it was a reflection of their own life problems. Ossessione, then, acts as a great catalyst for where the future of film was heading. That is, a lot of the naturalism pieces we see today can be said to have been influenced by the neo-realist film movement. --------------------------------------------- Result 2964 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] I have [[lost]] count of just how many [[times]] I have [[seen]] this [[movie]] - I probably know the entire dialog [[backwards]] - [[yet]] I am [[drawn]] to it time and again.

Set in Hungary, a young [[Jimmy]] [[Stewart]] plays the eligible bachelor "Kralik" who becomes the secret admirer of Margaret Sullavan's innocent "Klara". Kralik secretly becomes Klara's pen-friend, and at work together Klara confides in Kralik about the content of his (Kralik's) letters. Clearly Kralik is besotted with Klara - but is unable to make his feelings known whilst he is in competition with the "pen-friend". Confused? Well you wont be - this story has a sweet, almost sugary ending - but we all know it is the ending we all want.

Other characters worth mentioning are Frank Morgan playing his usual role, this time as the shop's owner "Hugo Matuschek", Felix Bressart as "Pirovitch", Kralik's confidant. Joseph Schildkraut as the womanising arrogant "Vadas" - so well played that you cannot help but hate him right from the beginning.

Finally William Tracy who manages to endear himself to us all with his over-confident upstart of a shop junior "Pepi Katona".

Recently re-made as "You've Got Mail" starring Tom Hanks & Meg Ryan for me is not as good as the original - although I suspect younger audiences would disagree.

If this film is on in your area over Christmas, I suggest you pour yourself a nice glass of wine, put a log on the fire and have a box of Kleenex handy. I have [[forfeited]] count of just how many [[moments]] I have [[watched]] this [[filmmaking]] - I probably know the entire dialog [[retrograde]] - [[again]] I am [[lured]] to it time and again.

Set in Hungary, a young [[Jimi]] [[Stuart]] plays the eligible bachelor "Kralik" who becomes the secret admirer of Margaret Sullavan's innocent "Klara". Kralik secretly becomes Klara's pen-friend, and at work together Klara confides in Kralik about the content of his (Kralik's) letters. Clearly Kralik is besotted with Klara - but is unable to make his feelings known whilst he is in competition with the "pen-friend". Confused? Well you wont be - this story has a sweet, almost sugary ending - but we all know it is the ending we all want.

Other characters worth mentioning are Frank Morgan playing his usual role, this time as the shop's owner "Hugo Matuschek", Felix Bressart as "Pirovitch", Kralik's confidant. Joseph Schildkraut as the womanising arrogant "Vadas" - so well played that you cannot help but hate him right from the beginning.

Finally William Tracy who manages to endear himself to us all with his over-confident upstart of a shop junior "Pepi Katona".

Recently re-made as "You've Got Mail" starring Tom Hanks & Meg Ryan for me is not as good as the original - although I suspect younger audiences would disagree.

If this film is on in your area over Christmas, I suggest you pour yourself a nice glass of wine, put a log on the fire and have a box of Kleenex handy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2965 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Good [[grief]] I can't even begin to describe how [[poor]] this film is. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the ummm... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the lack of gore. But it was the level of [[incompetence]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a protagonist who is quite simply so completely [[useless]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... SHE NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some arse then think again.

On top of this, we're handed possibly the least intriguing (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to grace the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or gratuity is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored closets, closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to dress yourself for another year. In fact this movie should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a picture of a big scary coathanger on the DVD case. On the back it could have had a photograph of the audience falling asleep and a quote by Roger and Ebert - something to the extent of: "what the f*@! did we just waste our time watching!" Good [[bereavement]] I can't even begin to describe how [[poorest]] this film is. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't expecting much to begin with. Let's face it, a PG-13 slasher flick is pre-destined to be missing the ummm... slashing, so no one should be surprised by the lack of gore. But it was the level of [[incapacity]] and cliché on display in all the other aspects of this movie is what really blew me away.

We have a protagonist who is quite simply so completely [[unhelpful]] that you find yourself rooting for the bad guy. And here's a turnup for the books... SHE NEVER CHANGES - hence breaking the cardinal rule of basic screen writing - character development. If you think by the end of this film the poor little girl is going to turn around and finally kick some arse then think again.

On top of this, we're handed possibly the least intriguing (and definitely the least scary) killer ever to grace the genre. I'm not joking when I say that Dora the Explorer has scarier villains than this movie.

Finally, because all the potential for tension or gratuity is removed by the inept (and apparently thirteen-year-old) director, what could possibly be left to fill up 2 hours of screen time?

Closets, that's what.

Lots and lots of closets: big closets, small closets, mirrored closets, closets to Narnia, so many damned closets you'll not want to dress yourself for another year. In fact this movie should have just been called "CLOSET", and had a picture of a big scary coathanger on the DVD case. On the back it could have had a photograph of the audience falling asleep and a quote by Roger and Ebert - something to the extent of: "what the f*@! did we just waste our time watching!" --------------------------------------------- Result 2966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this Neil [[Simon]] [[comedy]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[worst]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth going, know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[something]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis... and much better also.

It's not that Steve Martin is a [[lousy]] comedian or wrong for the role as the harried and stressed advertising exec; quite to the contrary, on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is equally inept either; her work has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first saw her in TV's Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The problem with this movie is that it's not about the hapless couple at all: it's really about New York and why everybody should come to New York to live and love their lives away in married bliss – sort of – in the greatest city in the world. That's if you're a New Yorker...

Look, the 1970 [[movie]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically explored all the things that can go wrong when you take a trip somewhere, and included most of the situations and sight gags that you can imagine about what can happen to you in a strange environment. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into gratuitous tangents specifically for an audience these days that expects or wants to see excess. For example, not content with the star appeal of the main players, there is a cameo (relatively long also) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of New York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for President even then? Worse – a walking talking advertisement for the kinder face of New York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as Basil Fawlty – but this time, as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel staff, sycophantically sucking up to rich customers and generally making himself look like the idiot he is, in this role. And, in the process, doing great damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the harassed couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, New York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. We all know what's like when we have a bad day at the office, right? Well, this Neil [[Simeon]] [[humor]] looks at what it's like when you have the [[worse]] of all days just trying to get to the office. Sometimes, it's just not worth going, know what I mean? And, sometimes, it's just not worth doing [[somethings]] when it's already been done before, in 1970, with Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis... and much better also.

It's not that Steve Martin is a [[crummy]] comedian or wrong for the role as the harried and stressed advertising exec; quite to the contrary, on both counts. And, it's not that Goldie Hawn is equally inept either; her work has been consistently good, if not great, ever since I first saw her in TV's Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In of the 1960s.

The problem with this movie is that it's not about the hapless couple at all: it's really about New York and why everybody should come to New York to live and love their lives away in married bliss – sort of – in the greatest city in the world. That's if you're a New Yorker...

Look, the 1970 [[filmmaking]] is still an excellent comedy that realistically explored all the things that can go wrong when you take a trip somewhere, and included most of the situations and sight gags that you can imagine about what can happen to you in a strange environment. This 1999 version unfortunately goes off into gratuitous tangents specifically for an audience these days that expects or wants to see excess. For example, not content with the star appeal of the main players, there is a cameo (relatively long also) from Rudy Giuliani, then mayor of New York, as we all know. What – Giuliani bucking for President even then? Worse – a walking talking advertisement for the kinder face of New York.

And then we have John Cleese, reprising his role as Basil Fawlty – but this time, as a prancing cross-dresser also – once again browbeating hotel staff, sycophantically sucking up to rich customers and generally making himself look like the idiot he is, in this role. And, in the process, doing great damage to the memory of Fawlty Towers, arguably the best British comedy series, bar none...

Why was this 1999 movie made? In the 1970s, New York was a dying city, in many ways. It was almost literally bankrupt. So, when made in 1970, that was the city you saw: grim, dark, moody, unsettling and not the place that the harassed couple finally chose for their new life together in the Big Smoke (as it was then, polluted and all). By 1999, things had gotten better: glitz was back, New York was thriving, it was the Big Apple, ready for you to bite into, if you had the moxie...

So, naturally, the couple in this second coming find that moxie within themselves and finally join the fabulous fray to continue the American dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hence, this movie is truly comic but not for reasons that the producers perhaps envisaged. As much as I like Steve Martin and Goldie Hawn in comedy, this movie is a travesty of the much better one made with the great Jack Lemmon. If you've seen the latter, then definitely don't bother with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 2967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] There are no spoilers in this review. There's nothing to spoil.

No plot, nothing; most clip shows at least try to tie the clips into the plot by some tenuous stretch, but this didn't even do that. Clips, three lines to lead into the next interminable sequence of dull clips... OK, so perhaps they were short on production time, but they'd have been better off skipping this episode entirely. What a waste of time.

I'm not sure how this got made, in fact. Scrubs is usually much better at subverting tropes, but somehow this got through....

Thank heavens they were back on form by the next episode. --------------------------------------------- Result 2968 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] Halloween is the [[story]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[child]]. He takes out his [[problems]] on his older sister, whom he murders at the beginning of the film. This is just the start of [[things]] to come from [[Michael]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the doctor who's been studying Myers for [[years]]. He knows that something is [[different]] about him, [[something]] mysteriously [[evil]]. This evil will not be [[contained]], and it cannot be stopped.

After an escape from an institution, Myers tracks down his younger sister. If he kills her, there may be an end to the troubles of this misunderstood boy. But he seems to have problems in finishing his sister off as other people get in the way. He manages to take them out while still looking for that one girl he needs.

There have been a lot of those horror movies involving teenagers getting hacked to pieces by a masked or gruesome killer. But this one started it all, sort of. If you think about it, most of those horror movies we all remember are the ones that have Freddy Kruger or Jason chasing around half naked girls. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have haunted our dreams when we were children.

Halloween's director, John Carpenter, got a lot out of the horror movies of the '50s and combined everything he knew into one film that [[scared]] the hell out of a lot of people back in the late '70s. This films solidified him as a director to watch and also jump started the career of Jamie Lee Curtis, who plays the girl being stalked by the masked killer.

This film may seem cliché today, but back then there wasn't much out there like this. It's been copied from and ripped off of, but Halloween will always remain the quintessential teenage horror movie. It still gives you chills listening to Carpenter's thrilling music while we see another victim get chased by that shadowy Michael Myers. Halloween is the [[conte]] of a boy who was misunderstood as a [[kiddies]]. He takes out his [[disorders]] on his older sister, whom he murders at the beginning of the film. This is just the start of [[items]] to come from [[Michel]] Myers.

Donald Pleasance plays the doctor who's been studying Myers for [[yrs]]. He knows that something is [[dissimilar]] about him, [[somethings]] mysteriously [[maleficent]]. This evil will not be [[containing]], and it cannot be stopped.

After an escape from an institution, Myers tracks down his younger sister. If he kills her, there may be an end to the troubles of this misunderstood boy. But he seems to have problems in finishing his sister off as other people get in the way. He manages to take them out while still looking for that one girl he needs.

There have been a lot of those horror movies involving teenagers getting hacked to pieces by a masked or gruesome killer. But this one started it all, sort of. If you think about it, most of those horror movies we all remember are the ones that have Freddy Kruger or Jason chasing around half naked girls. Well, if it wasn't for Halloween, those characters wouldn't have haunted our dreams when we were children.

Halloween's director, John Carpenter, got a lot out of the horror movies of the '50s and combined everything he knew into one film that [[shitless]] the hell out of a lot of people back in the late '70s. This films solidified him as a director to watch and also jump started the career of Jamie Lee Curtis, who plays the girl being stalked by the masked killer.

This film may seem cliché today, but back then there wasn't much out there like this. It's been copied from and ripped off of, but Halloween will always remain the quintessential teenage horror movie. It still gives you chills listening to Carpenter's thrilling music while we see another victim get chased by that shadowy Michael Myers. --------------------------------------------- Result 2969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie had lots of great actors and actresses in it and it addressed some very noble issues. It's full of emotion and the direction is done well. The storyline progresses very quickly, but I guess that's better than having to watch a 3 hour movie. This is an easy movie to watch again and again and enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2970 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Iberia is nice to see on TV. But why see this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you like classical music or modern dance this could be your date movie. But [[otherwise]] one and half hour is just too long time. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They know how to combine breath taking dancing to long movie. Director Carlos Saura knows how to shoot dancing from old experience. And time to time it's [[look]] really good. but when the movie is one and hour it should be at [[least]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is bigger then life and this film is not too big. Iberia is nice to see on TV. But why see this in silver screen? Lot of dance and music. If you like classical music or modern dance this could be your date movie. But [[else]] one and half hour is just too long time. If you like to see skillful dancing in silver screen it's better to see Bollywood movie. They know how to combine breath taking dancing to long movie. Director Carlos Saura knows how to shoot dancing from old experience. And time to time it's [[gaze]] really good. but when the movie is one and hour it should be at [[fewer]] most of time interesting. There are many kind of art not everything is bigger then life and this film is not too big. --------------------------------------------- Result 2971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this movie except for the bewildered feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't need a 10 page dissertation or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But Dark Floors takes the "what is this movie about?" thing to a whole new ([[annoying]]) level. What IS this movie about?

This isn't exceptionally scary or thrilling but if you have an hour and a half to kill and/or you want to end up feeling frustrated and confused, rent this winner. I love cheesy horror flicks. I don't care if the acting is sub-par or whether the monsters look corny. I liked this movie except for the bewildered feeling all the way from the beginning of the film to the very end. Look, I don't need a 10 page dissertation or a sign with big letters explaining a plot to me. But Dark Floors takes the "what is this movie about?" thing to a whole new ([[galling]]) level. What IS this movie about?

This isn't exceptionally scary or thrilling but if you have an hour and a half to kill and/or you want to end up feeling frustrated and confused, rent this winner. --------------------------------------------- Result 2972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Do not waste your [[time]] with this movie. This is a [[total]] thrash in terms of acting, directing, sound [[editing]], soundtrack... There was such a waste of performance by some of the very [[good]] [[actors]]. The [[movie]] does not do justice to Paresh Rawal who is [[perhaps]] one of the most [[talented]] [[actors]] in Bollywood. Akshay Kumar who is [[also]] an emerging [[star]] did [[quite]] a [[poor]] [[job]]. John Abraham, what is wrong with him? Is that what you [[call]] acting? I [[mean]] he should [[thank]] [[God]] that he has a [[pretty]] face [[otherwise]] he'd be [[winning]] Razzie [[awards]] in India if there were any such [[awards]] in Bollywood. Asrani a [[great]] talent, but overdoes his bit as before.

[[Screenplay]] which was not to [[mention]] a rip-off from the 1965's Boeing [[Boeing]] was [[quite]] badly framed. [[First]] of all, people in Bollywood just can't make something [[original]]. On [[top]] of that they don't [[even]] know how to [[copy]] well. The jokes in the [[movie]] were so overdone, it was getting painful to sit through them. Priyadarshan may be a [[star]] in the south, but he's just not fit to [[make]] a decent Hindi [[movie]]. The [[sound]] editing is [[amazingly]] [[crappy]]. I can [[go]] on and on this [[matter]], but the bottom-line is that Bollywood should be [[shameful]] of making such a [[film]].

The [[worst]] part is that some people [[seemed]] to [[love]] this [[movie]]. What is [[wrong]] with you [[guys]]? This is the [[reason]] why Bollywood is where it is. [[Did]] you know that Bollywood makes more [[movies]] than Hollywood [[every]] year, [[however]], most of the movies are unheard of abroad, because of [[movies]] like this one. I am an Indian and I am [[utterly]] [[shameful]] of Bollywood for producing this [[piece]] of thrash. [[Movies]] like Dil Chahta [[Hai]] and Lagaan were just [[terrific]]. They are world class [[films]] which are timeless... [[among]] the [[best]] of this decade. [[Garam]] [[Masala]], [[however]], is [[perhaps]] one of the [[worst]] of this century. Period.

I [[give]] it a 1 out of 10. Do not waste your [[period]] with this movie. This is a [[whole]] thrash in terms of acting, directing, sound [[edited]], soundtrack... There was such a waste of performance by some of the very [[alright]] [[protagonists]]. The [[cinematography]] does not do justice to Paresh Rawal who is [[possibly]] one of the most [[prodigy]] [[protagonists]] in Bollywood. Akshay Kumar who is [[similarly]] an emerging [[stars]] did [[perfectly]] a [[pauper]] [[workplace]]. John Abraham, what is wrong with him? Is that what you [[invitation]] acting? I [[meaning]] he should [[gratitude]] [[Heavens]] that he has a [[quite]] face [[alternately]] he'd be [[won]] Razzie [[award]] in India if there were any such [[award]] in Bollywood. Asrani a [[marvelous]] talent, but overdoes his bit as before.

[[Scenarios]] which was not to [[cited]] a rip-off from the 1965's Boeing [[Lockheed]] was [[rather]] badly framed. [[Firstly]] of all, people in Bollywood just can't make something [[initial]]. On [[supreme]] of that they don't [[yet]] know how to [[copier]] well. The jokes in the [[flick]] were so overdone, it was getting painful to sit through them. Priyadarshan may be a [[stars]] in the south, but he's just not fit to [[deliver]] a decent Hindi [[movies]]. The [[sounds]] editing is [[marvelously]] [[crap]]. I can [[going]] on and on this [[question]], but the bottom-line is that Bollywood should be [[scandalous]] of making such a [[cinematography]].

The [[hardest]] part is that some people [[looked]] to [[adored]] this [[flick]]. What is [[awry]] with you [[bloke]]? This is the [[reasons]] why Bollywood is where it is. [[Ai]] you know that Bollywood makes more [[film]] than Hollywood [[any]] year, [[still]], most of the movies are unheard of abroad, because of [[film]] like this one. I am an Indian and I am [[fully]] [[ignoble]] of Bollywood for producing this [[slice]] of thrash. [[Kino]] like Dil Chahta [[Sea]] and Lagaan were just [[wondrous]]. They are world class [[filmmaking]] which are timeless... [[amongst]] the [[finest]] of this decade. [[Masala]] [[Garam]], [[nevertheless]], is [[conceivably]] one of the [[hardest]] of this century. Period.

I [[confer]] it a 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 2973 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This is the first [[time]] I have [[commented]] on a [[film]] because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[might]] wake up and do something about it. Over the last few months, ABC Family began airing a new format of movies. I have [[seen]] the last three and enjoyed them. They were engaging and did the trick. My wife [[likes]] these films. I was [[looking]] forward to viewing "See Jane Date". The trailers [[looked]] and sounded great. [[Unfortunately]], this is one [[film]] where the book must be light years ahead of the effort displayed by the [[writers]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all bad), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It worked against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a huge [[disappointment]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. This is the first [[period]] I have [[noted]] on a [[filmmaking]] because I felt that if the right person read it, they [[apt]] wake up and do something about it. Over the last few months, ABC Family began airing a new format of movies. I have [[noticed]] the last three and enjoyed them. They were engaging and did the trick. My wife [[loves]] these films. I was [[searching]] forward to viewing "See Jane Date". The trailers [[seemed]] and sounded great. [[Tragically]], this is one [[kino]] where the book must be light years ahead of the effort displayed by the [[authors]] and music people involved with this project. The year is 2003, the source (all bad), the score was as interesting as an elevator ride in a department store. It was intrusive and did not add any emotional content to the film at all. It worked against it. I work in the business of film and television . I enjoy being entertained. This is one instance where I kept thinking could it get any worse. The script had lines from another decade and I know these women can act but you wouldn't know it from this movie. To add to the overall experience, the end left me shaking my head. An advice to the executives at Disney, ABC , ABC Family and the producers: Under any circumstances please do not hire the composer or music supervisor to do any of your future films. They have lost their touch and they need to understand what the word "contemporary" , "present day" and "current" means when describing a romantic comedy. There is a world passing you by. All in all a huge [[frustration]] from folks at Von Zerneck-Sertner and ABC Family. --------------------------------------------- Result 2974 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I have [[seen]] The Perfect Son about three times. I fail to see how this [[film]] is a gay film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a gay film. It is a film with a gay character, I can't see why every film with a gay character should be strictly a film about being gay. I [[find]] the [[film]] to be [[sympathetic]] to the study of death, the death of someone who is your kin. I think Theo turns his life around fairly quickly after rehab because he wants to and [[watching]] his brother dying in front of him makes him reassess his life. I found the dialog in the scene when Theo tells Ryan he is going to be a father to be very moving, Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to see or share with anyone. Isn't that horrific and sad? I highly recommend the film. I have [[saw]] The Perfect Son about three times. I fail to see how this [[cinematographic]] is a gay film, I am not even gay, but I don't see it as a gay film. It is a film with a gay character, I can't see why every film with a gay character should be strictly a film about being gay. I [[found]] the [[kino]] to be [[likeable]] to the study of death, the death of someone who is your kin. I think Theo turns his life around fairly quickly after rehab because he wants to and [[staring]] his brother dying in front of him makes him reassess his life. I found the dialog in the scene when Theo tells Ryan he is going to be a father to be very moving, Ryan states that he doesn't want to know about the things he is never going to see or share with anyone. Isn't that horrific and sad? I highly recommend the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 2975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] A man brings his new wife to his home where his former wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! All of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[skulls]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[saw]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I liked it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I realize how [[bad]] it is. It's horribly [[acted]], badly written, very [[dull]] (even at an [[hour]]) and has a [[huge]] cast of FIVE people (one being the [[director]])! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely atmospheric. There also are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a somewhat effective [[ending]]. All in all it's definitely [[NOT]] a good movie...but not a total disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I give it a 2.

Also try to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's paired with "Attack of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[TERRIBLE]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on TV! A man brings his new wife to his home where his former wife died of an "accident". His new wife has just been released from an institution and is also VERY rich! All of the sudden she starts hearing noises and seeing [[cranes]] all over the place. Is she going crazy again or is the first wife coming back from the dead?

You've probably guessed the ending so I won't spell it out. I [[watched]] this many times on Saturday afternoon TV as a kid. Back then, I liked it but I WAS young. Seeing it now I realize how [[mala]] it is. It's horribly [[behaved]], badly written, very [[dreary]] (even at an [[hora]]) and has a [[jumbo]] cast of FIVE people (one being the [[headmaster]])! Still it does have some good things about it.

The music is kinda creepy and the setting itself with the huge empty house and pond nearby is nicely atmospheric. There also are a few scary moments (I jumped a little when she saw the first skull) and a somewhat effective [[ceasing]]. All in all it's definitely [[NOPE]] a good movie...but not a total disaster either. It does have a small cult following. I give it a 2.

Also try to avoid the Elite DVD Drive-in edition of it (it's paired with "Attack of the Giant Leeches"). It's in [[TERRIFYING]] shape with jumps and scratches all over. It didn't even look this bad on TV! --------------------------------------------- Result 2976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This is my [[first]] [[comment]] on IMDb website, and the [[reason]] I'm writing it is that we're [[talking]] about ONE OF THE [[BEST]] FILMS EVER! 'Ne goryuy!' will [[make]] you laugh and [[cry]] at the same [[time]], you will [[fall]] in [[love]] (if you're not a [[fan]] [[yet]]!) with Georgian [[choir]] [[singing]] [[tradition]], and [[possibly]] you will [[accept]] the [[hardships]] of your own existence and just feel good after [[watching]] it:) What I like a [[lot]] about this [[film]] is that actors in the non-leading [[roles]] create vivid and memorable [[characters]] and are just as interesting and [[important]] as the central [[character]]. The [[film]] is [[starring]] Vahtang Kikabidze (who is great), but you will [[remember]] [[every]] [[single]] face [[around]] him in the [[film]]. You will [[find]] yourself quoting their lines, that have [[become]] [[household]] [[names]] for so [[many]] Russian-speaking people. A [[film]] to [[live]] with. [[Simple]], [[yet]] [[deep]], you will [[want]] to watch it again and again. This is my [[outset]] [[commentary]] on IMDb website, and the [[grounds]] I'm writing it is that we're [[discussing]] about ONE OF THE [[BETTER]] FILMS EVER! 'Ne goryuy!' will [[deliver]] you laugh and [[weeps]] at the same [[times]], you will [[falls]] in [[loves]] (if you're not a [[admirer]] [[even]]!) with Georgian [[chorus]] [[sing]] [[traditions]], and [[potentially]] you will [[countenance]] the [[sufferings]] of your own existence and just feel good after [[staring]] it:) What I like a [[batches]] about this [[cinematographic]] is that actors in the non-leading [[functions]] create vivid and memorable [[personage]] and are just as interesting and [[sizeable]] as the central [[nature]]. The [[cinematic]] is [[featuring]] Vahtang Kikabidze (who is great), but you will [[rember]] [[any]] [[sole]] face [[about]] him in the [[filmmaking]]. You will [[found]] yourself quoting their lines, that have [[gotten]] [[abode]] [[surnames]] for so [[various]] Russian-speaking people. A [[films]] to [[vivo]] with. [[Mere]], [[however]] [[deepest]], you will [[desiring]] to watch it again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 2977 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This film has got to be [[ranked]] as one of the most [[disturbing]] and [[arresting]] [[films]] in years. It is one of the few [[films]], [[perhaps]] the only one, that [[actually]] gave me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[film]] [[bears]] comparison, [[affected]] me [[like]] that. I [[saw]] echoes in the [[film]] from [[filmmakers]] like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to ask myself, what was it about the film that made me feel like I did? I [[think]] the [[answer]] would be that I was watching a horror [[film]], but one that defies or even reverses the conventions of said genre. Typically, in a horror film, horrible and frightening things will happen, but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, deserted hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This handling of the [[subject]] in horror is, I [[think]], a [[sort]] of defence mechanism, a principle of [[darkness]] and opacity functioning as a sort of projective space for the desires and fears of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a perfectly normal society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain key thematics from the horror [[genre]], especially concerning the body and its violation, the stages of fright and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[everyday]], middle class [[society]] as a stage on which is relayed a repetitious play of sexual aggression, [[loneliness]], lack and [[violation]] of [[intimacy]] and integrity: precisely the [[themes]] you [[would]] find in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no [[escape]]. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s [[film]] resides. Hundstage [[deals]] with these [[matters]] as a [[function]] of the [[everyday]], [[displays]] them in quotidian [[repetition]], rather than as sites of extremity and catharsis - a move you [[would]] [[encounter]] in said horror [[genre]]. One [[important]] point of reference here is Rainer [[Werner]] Fassbinder. Fassbinder [[also]] had a [[way]] of [[blending]] the political with the personal in his [[films]], a [[tactics]] of the melodrama that [[allowed]] him to [[deal]] in a serious and even moral [[way]] with political issues like [[racism]], [[domination]], [[desire]], [[questions]] [[concerning]] ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the [[mechanisms]] of [[everyday]] [[society]] the subject of his [[film]] [[puts]] him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no [[instances]] of a woman [[fighting]] back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. This film has got to be [[sorted]] as one of the most [[disconcerting]] and [[imprisoning]] [[cinematography]] in years. It is one of the few [[movies]], [[potentially]] the only one, that [[indeed]] gave me shivers: not even Pasolini´s Sálo, to which this [[cinema]] [[carry]] comparison, [[stricken]] me [[iike]] that. I [[seen]] echoes in the [[movies]] from [[cinematographers]] like Pasolini, Fassbinder and others. I had to ask myself, what was it about the film that made me feel like I did? I [[believe]] the [[answering]] would be that I was watching a horror [[cinematography]], but one that defies or even reverses the conventions of said genre. Typically, in a horror film, horrible and frightening things will happen, but on the margins of civilized society: abandoned houses, deserted hotels, castles, churchyards, morgues etc. This handling of the [[topic]] in horror is, I [[thinks]], a [[kinds]] of defence mechanism, a principle of [[dark]] and opacity functioning as a sort of projective space for the desires and fears of the viewer. So, from this perspective, Hundstage is not a horror film; it takes place in a perfectly normal society, and so doesn´t dabble in the histrionics of the horror film. But what you see is the displacement of certain key thematics from the horror [[gender]], especially concerning the body and its violation, the stages of fright and torture it can be put through. What Seidl does is to use the settings of an [[ordinary]], middle class [[societal]] as a stage on which is relayed a repetitious play of sexual aggression, [[solitude]], lack and [[infringement]] of [[privacy]] and integrity: precisely the [[item]] you [[ought]] find in horror, but subjected to a principle of light and transparency from which there is no [[flee]]. It is precisely within this displacement that the power of Seidl´s [[movies]] resides. Hundstage [[deal]] with these [[issues]] as a [[operating]] of the [[routine]], [[displaying]] them in quotidian [[rehearse]], rather than as sites of extremity and catharsis - a move you [[ought]] [[faced]] in said horror [[gender]]. One [[principal]] point of reference here is Rainer [[Warner]] Fassbinder. Fassbinder [[apart]] had a [[routing]] of [[mixing]] the political with the personal in his [[kino]], a [[ploys]] of the melodrama that [[authorized]] him to [[address]] in a serious and even moral [[camino]] with political issues like [[racist]], [[hegemony]], [[willingness]], [[issues]] [[regarding]] ownership, sexual property and control, fascism and capitalism etc. Seidl´s tactic of making the [[arrangements]] of [[ordinary]] [[societies]] the subject of his [[cinema]] [[begs]] him in close proximity with Fassbinder; like this German ally, he has a sort of political vision of society that he feels it is his responsibility to put forward in his films. During a seminar at the Gothenburg Film Festival this year, at which Seidl was a guest, he was asked why he would have so many instances of violated, subjugated women in Hundstage, but no [[case]] of a woman [[battles]] back, liberating herself. Seidl replied that some may view it as immoral to show violence against women, but that he himself felt it would be immoral not to show it. An artistic statement as good as any, I think. Thank you. --------------------------------------------- Result 2978 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Sensitive film does [[lack]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[superbly]] shot and performed. [[However]], the narrative [[structure]] point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its thoughts with what might be described by the [[modern]] viewer as a "story", I'm [[sceptical]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative [[structure]]" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[compared]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to dismiss this film as a cliché, [[PEACHES]] is, in some [[ways]], much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't quite make it. It's certainly very different to Monahan's first feature - THE INTERVIEW! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Lung]] [[added]] to the [[story]]. Who knows - [[maybe]] they did. They [[certainly]] rammed [[home]] the [[compromised]] and flawed [[nature]] of Weaving's [[character]] - [[although]] I personally [[think]] this was [[achieved]] without the [[need]] for these scenes.

*****[[JUST]] [[SAW]] THE [[FILM]] AGAIN*********

On a [[second]] [[viewing]], I can see how some [[would]] [[dismiss]] it as a telemovie dressed up as a [[feature]]. But I'm not sure how distinct these 'categories' are anymore, or even if we should be [[making]] that distinction. In any [[case]], I do [[think]] there are enough layers in the [[film]] to distinguish it from Hallmark efforts. On the other hand, the film's structure is very [[formal]], and its content is hardly challenging,at [[least]] in the [[way]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE DOLLARS, THE [[ILLUSTRATED]] FAMILY [[DOCTOR]], LOOK BOTH WAYS and THE [[HUMAN]] TOUCH are. The performances are all [[good]], but I did [[come]] to the [[realisation]] that the [[main]] [[reason]] I was [[enjoying]] the [[film]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[genre]], without [[necessarily]] [[adding]] [[anything]]...and I can [[understand]] that this can be a fairly [[good]] [[reason]] for another [[person]] *NOT* to [[like]] it! [[Indeed]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a [[film]] must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I would downgrade my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK BOTH WAYS should win. Sensitive film does [[failure]] brilliance and, to some degree, narrative structure, but is nevertheless [[staggeringly]] shot and performed. [[Conversely]], the narrative [[structures]] point is debatable. While it gives the impression of tying off loose ends nicely in the final scenes, and connects its thoughts with what might be described by the [[fashionable]] viewer as a "story", I'm [[incredulous]] as to whether this feel *needs* a "narrative [[edifice]]" that is definite and detectable. Inevitably, it will be [[comparison]] with SOMERSAULT in that its central protagonist (I'm not sure that's the correct word!) is a young, and very young-looking, woman, whose newly discovered sexuality both confuses and empowers her - although of course Cate Shortland's film tackles this aspect better. But while the possibility exists for reckless viewers to dismiss this film as a cliché, [[MELBA]] is, in some [[methods]], much more ambitious than SOMERSAULT. Perhaps that's where it doesn't quite make it. It's certainly very different to Monahan's first feature - THE INTERVIEW! I'm not quite sure how the sex scenes between Weaving and [[Lungs]] [[adds]] to the [[conte]]. Who knows - [[potentially]] they did. They [[obviously]] rammed [[household]] the [[endangered]] and flawed [[traits]] of Weaving's [[traits]] - [[while]] I personally [[ideas]] this was [[obtained]] without the [[requisite]] for these scenes.

*****[[RIGHTEOUS]] [[WATCHED]] THE [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] AGAIN*********

On a [[seconds]] [[opinion]], I can see how some [[ought]] [[disbelieve]] it as a telemovie dressed up as a [[attribute]]. But I'm not sure how distinct these 'categories' are anymore, or even if we should be [[doing]] that distinction. In any [[lawsuit]], I do [[thinking]] there are enough layers in the [[flick]] to distinguish it from Hallmark efforts. On the other hand, the film's structure is very [[staffer]], and its content is hardly challenging,at [[lowest]] in the [[routing]] SOMERSAULT, TOM WHITE, THREE DOLLARS, THE [[DEMONSTRATED]] FAMILY [[MEDICAL]], LOOK BOTH WAYS and THE [[HUMANS]] TOUCH are. The performances are all [[alright]], but I did [[coming]] to the [[materialization]] that the [[principal]] [[justification]] I was [[experience]] the [[flick]] was because it fit the "Australian" [[gender]], without [[invariably]] [[inserting]] [[something]]...and I can [[understood]] that this can be a fairly [[buena]] [[justification]] for another [[individuals]] *NOT* to [[likes]] it! [[Actually]], it wasn't until Lung enters the room in her Vietnamese dress that the film really begins to pack a punch. But that leads us into another debate - *should* we expect that a [[cinema]] must challenge us all the time? Certainly I enjoy being challenged by a film (or a book, or other people), but is there no room anymore for what is simply a nice story?

I haven't deleted my initial post on this film, because I'm all too aware of the Orwellian overtones of such an act. But I would downgrade my initial rating from an 8 to perhaps a 6.5.

As for nominations for AFI Best Film, my votes go to THE HUMAN TOUCH, THREE DOLLARS and LOOK BOTH WAYS - and I think LOOK BOTH WAYS should win. --------------------------------------------- Result 2979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Busy is so amazing! I just loved every word she has ever done- [[freaks]] and [[geeks]], Dawson's creek, white [[chicks]], the [[smokers]]. after the [[first]] time i saw [[home]] room i went and [[got]] it the [[next]] day. i am a [[big]] [[fan]] of her and she has a [[lot]] of fans here in [[Israel]]. if [[someone]] hasn't [[saw]] is [[excellent]] [[movie]] than don't [[waist]] more [[time]] and go [[see]] it now. i [[recommend]] to all of you to see all of her movies. i saw busy in the late [[night]] show with Conan and she was so beautiful and cute i just love her! [[everybody]] who [[saw]] the movie- in home room she looks very [[scary]] but in [[real]] life she is so [[beautiful]]! you have to [[see]] all her half nude pictures for stuff [[magazine]] (maxim) she looks so good there! ~DANIELLE~ Busy is so amazing! I just loved every word she has ever done- [[monsters]] and [[imbeciles]], Dawson's creek, white [[ducklings]], the [[cigarette]]. after the [[frst]] time i saw [[housing]] room i went and [[did]] it the [[future]] day. i am a [[gargantuan]] [[groupie]] of her and she has a [[batches]] of fans here in [[Lsrael]]. if [[everyone]] hasn't [[witnessed]] is [[sumptuous]] [[film]] than don't [[wrist]] more [[moment]] and go [[seeing]] it now. i [[recommending]] to all of you to see all of her movies. i saw busy in the late [[overnight]] show with Conan and she was so beautiful and cute i just love her! [[anybody]] who [[sawthe]] the movie- in home room she looks very [[alarming]] but in [[actual]] life she is so [[awesome]]! you have to [[consults]] all her half nude pictures for stuff [[revue]] (maxim) she looks so good there! ~DANIELLE~ --------------------------------------------- Result 2980 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] If you [[want]] to laugh like [[crazy]], [[rent]] Cage. Cage is about two [[war]] heroes, [[Billy]] and Scott who are best friends. When [[Billy]] is [[shot]] in [[Vietnam]], he is unable to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never seen a [[movie]] with more gay [[references]] to the two main [[characters]]. Billy and Scott love to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," among other things.

Wonderful catch phrases like "Shut the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang Pong, cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for hours. The native American guys that are supposed to be playing Mexican gang members are also top notch. As they say, it's "party time right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I could go on forever, but just watch this movie and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 If you [[wantto]] to laugh like [[kooky]], [[tenancy]] Cage. Cage is about two [[wars]] heroes, [[Billie]] and Scott who are best friends. When [[Billie]] is [[filmed]] in [[Hanoi]], he is unable to fend for himself, so Scott takes him in.

I have never seen a [[cinema]] with more gay [[referencing]] to the two main [[hallmarks]]. Billy and Scott love to "wrestle" and Scott tells Billy that he is "still sore from last night," among other things.

Wonderful catch phrases like "Shut the sh!t up" and "Ping Pang Pong, cut the sh!t" will keep you laughing for hours. The native American guys that are supposed to be playing Mexican gang members are also top notch. As they say, it's "party time right now. Ba-ba-ba-ba ba-ba." I could go on forever, but just watch this movie and laugh your a$$ off. It was so funny I went out and bought the DVD for $5.99 --------------------------------------------- Result 2981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[disaster]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a reputation before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive supporting cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, John Carradine, Andy Devine and others) is wasted with nothing to do.

To expand it to feature length there are numerous clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S ALL HERE) andLaurel and Hardy, who never dreamed they'd be playing in an X rated movie.

The X rating is due to occasional language numerous sexual perversions; however, none of the characters seem to be having any fun. Maybe somebody involved with the film had a warped Puritan sensibility and figured that if they could make these things unappealing it wasn't bad to exploit them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that EASY RIDER (which was made for pocket change) was the most expensive movie ever made because so many films followed which tried and failed in the worst way to duplicate its success. Sixtyish, once honored directors like Stanley Kramer and Otto Preminger made movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark secret.

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a big budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. Watching this last night it amazed me that Fox spent so much money on it and got so little back on their investment. It's the kind of [[calamities]] that has to be seen to be believed.

I'm sure that the first morning of filming Raquel Welch dusted off the shelf over her fireplace to prepare a spot for the Academy Award she would surely win for this daringly original movie. Oops. That's not what happened.

The infighting on the set was detailed in print by Rex Reed and this helped the movie attain a reputation before it was even released. When it was finally released there wasn't the usual three ring circus of publicity. If I remember correctly, in Houston it opened at drive-ins and neighborhood theatres and never played any of the big venues.

I lay most of the blame on director Michael Sarne, who was hot after having directed (the not all that good) JOANNA, a film with music about young people in swinging mod London.

If I recall correctly, Fox wound up firing him and piecing the film together the best they could. That's why scenes play out in no particular sequence and characters appear and then vanish. An impressive supporting cast (Kathleen Freeman, Jim Backus, John Carradine, Andy Devine and others) is wasted with nothing to do.

To expand it to feature length there are numerous clips from Fox movies featuring stars like Carmen Miranda (in amazing footage from THE GANG'S ALL HERE) andLaurel and Hardy, who never dreamed they'd be playing in an X rated movie.

The X rating is due to occasional language numerous sexual perversions; however, none of the characters seem to be having any fun. Maybe somebody involved with the film had a warped Puritan sensibility and figured that if they could make these things unappealing it wasn't bad to exploit them.

This was one of the "youth" pictures that nearly bankrupted Hollywood in the 1970's. One writer joked that EASY RIDER (which was made for pocket change) was the most expensive movie ever made because so many films followed which tried and failed in the worst way to duplicate its success. Sixtyish, once honored directors like Stanley Kramer and Otto Preminger made movies like RPM and SKIDOO in an effort to attract a young audience. White directors and writers attempted to make films to attract a Black audience. Those movies are locked somewhere in a vault and the two named and many others from that genre have never, as best I know, been out on home video or cable. They're the studios' deep dark secret.

Raquel Welch's performance in this is, all things considered, very good. With the right direction and script she could played the type of sassy liberated women Rosiland Russel and Barbara Stanwyck specialized in. She looks great and has awesome costumes. Mae West is the liveliest seventy-something actress I've ever seen. On the one hand it's kind of heartbreaking to watch her attempt to capture her glory from years gone by, but I'm sure she needed the money.

If you want to see a big budget X-rated movie from this era check out BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (also from Fox) because it doesn't take itself seriously. It's crazy kids playing with the equipment at a major studio. MYRA BRECKINRIDGE tries to Say Something. There just wasn't anyone who wanted to listen. --------------------------------------------- Result 2982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] that kid a is such a babe; this [[movie]] was no Titan A.E.(of which it is in many ways modeled after) but still came off as [[entertaining]], the [[fact]] this lost to a piece of [[monkey]] crap like Tomb [[raider]] makes wanna cry; includes some of the most [[entertaining]] characters i've seen in [[disney]] film that kid a is such a babe; this [[kino]] was no Titan A.E.(of which it is in many ways modeled after) but still came off as [[amusing]], the [[facto]] this lost to a piece of [[silvana]] crap like Tomb [[ryder]] makes wanna cry; includes some of the most [[droll]] characters i've seen in [[disneyland]] film --------------------------------------------- Result 2983 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I have seen about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[type]]) This film is among the [[worst]]. For me, an idea [[drives]] a movie. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. Something Weird is definitely cheaply made. However, it has [[little]] to [[say]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the beginning has to do with the film. Something Weird has little to [[offer]]. [[Save]] yourself the pain! I have seen about a thousand horror films. (my favorite [[genus]]) This film is among the [[hardest]]. For me, an idea [[driving]] a movie. So, even a poorly acted, cheaply made movie can be good. Something Weird is definitely cheaply made. However, it has [[small]] to [[tell]]. I still don't understand what the karate scene in the beginning has to do with the film. Something Weird has little to [[offered]]. [[Rescued]] yourself the pain! --------------------------------------------- Result 2984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This [[film]] was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[revelation]] to us. We actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. Obviously we were wrong. Love may come from where you don't expect it and maybe don't want it. But we both chose that [[love]] anyway.

And no, it never changed our sexual orientation. That kind of stuff is for the [[Christian]] wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. This [[flick]] was seen by my wife and I when it came out in 1978. It was a [[epiphany]] to us. We actually thought that we were the only gay and lesbian couple who had ever married and had children. Obviously we were wrong. Love may come from where you don't expect it and maybe don't want it. But we both chose that [[likes]] anyway.

And no, it never changed our sexual orientation. That kind of stuff is for the [[Christianity]] wackos.

When we were young we both had affairs, but never with the opposite sex. As we aged we stopped having extramarital affairs.

This story is not far fetched. However, the suggestion that they became heterosexuals seems pretty unrealistic to me. My wife and I have been sleeping together for the last 40 years. We are still gay. End of story. --------------------------------------------- Result 2985 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is by far the funniest short made by the two comic geniuses. From the time they walk in, to the time Hardy just falls off the roof, this keeps me laughing hysterically. I highly suggest that every fan of Laurel and Hardy should see this short. I also recommend all of the Ghost Series. If you are looking for laughs, see this movie and you will be happy. --------------------------------------------- Result 2986 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] From beginning to [[end]], this is the most [[emotionally]] overwrought [[movie]] about NOTHING I have ever [[seen]]. The characterizations and [[interactions]] between the title character and Marthe Kller's [[character]] are [[pure]] torture. The [[racetrack]] as metaphor [[gimmick]] is so overplayed that it [[borders]] on [[cliche]], yet director Pollack [[treats]] [[every]] hairpin turn as if it were [[something]] profoundly important.

[[Maybe]] there's some [[value]] for a MSFT3000 re-playing of some of the scenes, such as Pacino getting in [[touch]] with his [[inner]] [[female]], for goof [[value]]. But, [[even]] such [[accidental]] [[humor]] is [[hard]] to [[find]] in this [[total]] [[turkey]]. From beginning to [[ceases]], this is the most [[romantically]] overwrought [[cinematography]] about NOTHING I have ever [[saw]]. The characterizations and [[interplay]] between the title character and Marthe Kller's [[nature]] are [[pur]] torture. The [[circuit]] as metaphor [[ruse]] is so overplayed that it [[limitations]] on [[cliches]], yet director Pollack [[deals]] [[all]] hairpin turn as if it were [[somethings]] profoundly important.

[[Conceivably]] there's some [[valuing]] for a MSFT3000 re-playing of some of the scenes, such as Pacino getting in [[toque]] with his [[domestic]] [[femmes]], for goof [[values]]. But, [[yet]] such [[unforeseen]] [[humour]] is [[dur]] to [[unearth]] in this [[overall]] [[turk]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 2987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] What can I say, it's a damn good movie. See it if you still haven't. [[Great]] camera works and lighting [[techniques]]. Awesome, just awesome. [[Orson]] Welles is [[incredible]] 'The Lady From Shanghai' can certainly take the place of '[[Citizen]] Kane'. What can I say, it's a damn good movie. See it if you still haven't. [[Super]] camera works and lighting [[technologies]]. Awesome, just awesome. [[Welles]] Welles is [[unimaginable]] 'The Lady From Shanghai' can certainly take the place of '[[Citizenry]] Kane'. --------------------------------------------- Result 2988 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was what black society was like before the crack epidemics, gangsta rap, and AIDS that beset the ghettos in the eighties. Decent, hardworking families that struggled to get by and all the traumas and tribulations they faced. Black America was a different group of people in the seventies. Still full of hope and flying high on the civil rights movements of the sixties, times were hard but still worth fighting for. Keepin' your head above water, making a wave when you can, this show showed how black society struggled to work together as people and families, before they started to prey on each other and everyone else in order to survive the horrors of the ghettos. It is heart-breaking to see what the black ghettos were like then and what they have become now. --------------------------------------------- Result 2989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I first read the book, when I was a young teenager, then saw the [[film]] late one night. About a year [[ago]] I checked it out on IMDb and discovered no copies available. I then hit the web and found a [[site]] that offers [[War]] [[Films]], soooo [[glad]] that I did, ordered a [[copy]] and sat back and was [[able]] to [[confirm]] why I wanted to [[see]] it again.

In my [[opinion]] to really [[enjoy]] the film I [[suggest]] you read get a copy of the book and then watch the film. The book is no longer in print but I did track a copy down via E-bay, the Author Alan White was a commando/paratrooper during the 2nd world war taking part in disparate clandestine operations and this was his first book. It is written by someone who knows and this fact I believe gives the book and film authenticity. I have not given the film a ten only because of the nature of the ending of the film, not as good as the book. There are a couple of plot lines that differ from the book also, which is strange as the book is not about the large scale nature of war but about the individual in war. The film illustrates this exceptionally well. I have the copy of the book to let my son read and then the film to let him watch, in that order.

If you can track it down the book and the film then it is [[definitely]] worth it and I only wish that it was more readily available for more to read and see, one of my all best war films, ever! I first read the book, when I was a young teenager, then saw the [[flick]] late one night. About a year [[earlier]] I checked it out on IMDb and discovered no copies available. I then hit the web and found a [[venue]] that offers [[Warfare]] [[Cinematic]], soooo [[happier]] that I did, ordered a [[photocopies]] and sat back and was [[capable]] to [[corroborating]] why I wanted to [[behold]] it again.

In my [[visualizing]] to really [[enjoying]] the film I [[insinuate]] you read get a copy of the book and then watch the film. The book is no longer in print but I did track a copy down via E-bay, the Author Alan White was a commando/paratrooper during the 2nd world war taking part in disparate clandestine operations and this was his first book. It is written by someone who knows and this fact I believe gives the book and film authenticity. I have not given the film a ten only because of the nature of the ending of the film, not as good as the book. There are a couple of plot lines that differ from the book also, which is strange as the book is not about the large scale nature of war but about the individual in war. The film illustrates this exceptionally well. I have the copy of the book to let my son read and then the film to let him watch, in that order.

If you can track it down the book and the film then it is [[conclusively]] worth it and I only wish that it was more readily available for more to read and see, one of my all best war films, ever! --------------------------------------------- Result 2990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The true measure of any [[fictional]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience altered in some significant way (note that this change need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a [[film]] in [[general]], it succeeds quite well-excellent [[ensemble]] cast, well-developed [[characters]] you [[come]] to care about, [[wonderful]] script and [[beautiful]] sets and locations. [[In]] short the film is, well, [[enchanting]]. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie Lawrence, Jim Broadbent and Joan Plowright. It says something when Miranda Richardson does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most highly [[recommended]], particularly if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Saith]] Not. The true measure of any [[bogus]] piece of work is whether or not the characters grow from their experiences and emerge from the experience altered in some significant way (note that this change need not be positive or beneficial) at the end.

By that measure, Enchanted April is a resounding success. As a [[flick]] in [[overall]], it succeeds quite well-excellent [[whole]] cast, well-developed [[attribute]] you [[coming]] to care about, [[admirable]] script and [[sumptuous]] sets and locations. [[During]] short the film is, well, [[ravishing]]. Although all the performances are first-rate, three must be mentioned-Josie Lawrence, Jim Broadbent and Joan Plowright. It says something when Miranda Richardson does her usual fine work and yet is overshadowed by so many others in the cast. Most highly [[suggested]], particularly if you are a romantic at heart. Further Deponent [[Unto]] Not. --------------------------------------------- Result 2991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] At [[first]] glance I [[expected]] this film to be crappy because I thought the plot would be so excessively feminist. But I was wrong. As you maybe have read in earlier published comments, I agree in that the feminist part in this film does not [[bother]]. I never had the idea that the main character was exaggerating her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is presented as somebody with a spine, this in contrast to her classmates. So I was [[surprised]] by the story, in fact, I thought it was quite [[good]], except for the predictable end. Maybe it would've been a better idea to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is somewhat more surprised.

In addition, I'd like to say that Rodriguez earned her respect by the way she put away her character. I can't really explain why, but especially in the love scenes she convinced me. It just looked real I think.

I gave it a 7 out of 10, merely because of the dull last half hour. At [[fiirst]] glance I [[awaited]] this film to be crappy because I thought the plot would be so excessively feminist. But I was wrong. As you maybe have read in earlier published comments, I agree in that the feminist part in this film does not [[annoy]]. I never had the idea that the main character was exaggerating her position as a woman. It's like Guzman is presented as somebody with a spine, this in contrast to her classmates. So I was [[horrified]] by the story, in fact, I thought it was quite [[alright]], except for the predictable end. Maybe it would've been a better idea to give the plot a radical twist, so that the viewer is somewhat more surprised.

In addition, I'd like to say that Rodriguez earned her respect by the way she put away her character. I can't really explain why, but especially in the love scenes she convinced me. It just looked real I think.

I gave it a 7 out of 10, merely because of the dull last half hour. --------------------------------------------- Result 2992 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] This [[movie]] does not rock, as others have said. I found it really [[boring]] and silly. The [[story]] is about this metal high school kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The first part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he fails to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. This [[cinema]] does not rock, as others have said. I found it really [[dreary]] and silly. The [[tales]] is about this metal high school kid who idolizes this really bad heavy metal singer. The singer dies, but not before making one last album that is to be played over the radio at, of course, midnight on Halloween (which would actually make it November 1st, a much less potent date to be sure). The kid gets a copy of the record and it contains secret hidden back-play messages. It also is the key that opens the door so that the really bad metal singer can return to bring havoc and death to the world.

The first part of this film is not a horror film at all, but rather an After School Special. We see the metal kid (the outsider) tormented over and over by the popular kids. And he fails to learn the most important lesson in high school movies: When the cool kids who bully you suddenly invite you to a party, DON'T GO! It is a trap. Especially if it is a pool party. Anybody surprised when he ends up in the water?? It was such an After School Special that I kept waiting for Melissa Sue Anderson to show up and teach Jody Foster a lesson.

So back to the horror part of the film. So this metal kid gets some powers and instead of using them to kill the bully boys (which would have made much more sense), he freaks out and tries to protect all of the bully boys and girls from harm. What? A sensitive hero? What fun is that in a horror movie? Thank goodness Carrie White did not follow this lesson. He actually tries to PREVENT having the music played at the Halloween Dance, the very music that could unleash a power to kill all the kids who had been mean to him. If it were me, I would have put that music on, and pronto.

The rest of the movie is about this metal kid going around town trying to kill the horrible metal star he idolized. Why not partner with him and REALLY do some damage. Why you ask? It seems he is in love with one of the popular girls and does not want her hurt..more appropriate for a Molly Ringwald film. Is this a horror film or an episode of Beauty and the Beast? The movie just goes on and on at this point, with no scares, horror, or anything worth watching. If you went to high school in the late 80s like I did, this movie is fun to have a little flashback to fashions and big hair, but that is it for this film. Skip it and stay home and just listen to some KISS. --------------------------------------------- Result 2993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] this movie [[delivers]]. the best is when the awkward teenage [[neighbor]] tries to bike away from the [[babysitter]] and in the background looks like he's never been anywhere near a [[bike]] in his [[life]] as he attempts not to [[fall]] off.

but this [[movie]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 minutes later it delivers a scene of nothing but an arm reaching through a fence and into a cooler pulling out a [[beer]].

stereotypical grilling dads, several plot lines that go nowhere, and a former seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell phone all add up to making this the perfect Saturday night at home. this movie [[provides]]. the best is when the awkward teenage [[voisin]] tries to bike away from the [[nanny]] and in the background looks like he's never been anywhere near a [[cycling]] in his [[lives]] as he attempts not to [[decreased]] off.

but this [[cinematography]] doesn't stop there, when less than 5 minutes later it delivers a scene of nothing but an arm reaching through a fence and into a cooler pulling out a [[casket]].

stereotypical grilling dads, several plot lines that go nowhere, and a former seaQuest actress with a bluetooth cell phone all add up to making this the perfect Saturday night at home. --------------------------------------------- Result 2994 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] This movie forever left an impression on me. I watched it as a Freshman in High School and was home alone that night. I think I lost all respect for Robert Reed as an actor having been a huge fan of the "Brady Bunch". I also thought the role of Chuck Connor was horrendous and evil. However, this movie made such an impact on me that I am now a volunteer in the women's state prison doing bible studies and church services and trying to change womens lives, one at a time. What fascinates me is that so few people actually watched this movie. None of my friends watched it and my family is clueless to this day when I discuss this movie because they didn't see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 2995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Very interesting. The big twist wasn't as big a shock as maybe they had hoped for and it was very dated but it did get my mind working. It really got me thinking about a world without vegetation or livestock and made me appreciate the world I live in a lot more. Charlton Heston does a good job, as do all the supporting characters, and it was a very realistic film which was surprising. It lacked direction at times and a lot of the settings and background needed more explanation but it was still a surprisingly good and intelligent movie. The main fault that I could find was that I didn't want the film to end when it did, I would have liked to see what happened next.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 2996 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Without [[effective]] indulgence of the supernatural or the poetic motivating nuances of humanity, all this creative team has to [[hope]] for is effective [[usage]] of its middling, unoriginal elements. 'Party of Five' gone maniacal then genetically unescapable there's [[little]] [[rooting]] interest because the [[singular]] non-homicidal element is a second-rate bland awful-acting 'Wes Bentley' mopester. [[In]] fact, all of the acting is [[skin]] deep. Even [[though]] the dark-haired [[women]] appeal, the salaciousness is kept to a [[minimum]]. [[No]] nudity here. [[Also]] [[lacking]] are sufficient [[buckets]] of blood. All [[sensations]] are [[kept]] at a teasing, safe distance...an [[unfortunate]] fact [[considering]] the [[given]] [[name]] of the directors is 'butcher.' [[Only]] the soundtrack, the droning angsty alt-country and the tense fluctuating score [[provide]] any palpable [[tension]]. Sometimes some static storyboarded compositions [[add]] appealing low-angles that [[adds]] to the malaise...but for a film that [[calls]] itself [[horror]], I did not [[even]] get close to flinching once. [[Perhaps]] a [[greater]] [[emphasis]] on societal rejuvenation through blood [[intake]], scenes directed with [[varying]] geometric [[shapes]] [[outside]] the [[square]], and a sustained focus on playfulness through the family's maliciousness or traps sympathetic characters [[need]] to escape in order to escape their dilemma [[would]] have improved my [[opinion]], but this was not a [[good]] start to my excursion through horrorfest. Without [[efficient]] indulgence of the supernatural or the poetic motivating nuances of humanity, all this creative team has to [[amal]] for is effective [[uses]] of its middling, unoriginal elements. 'Party of Five' gone maniacal then genetically unescapable there's [[small]] [[racine]] interest because the [[sole]] non-homicidal element is a second-rate bland awful-acting 'Wes Bentley' mopester. [[At]] fact, all of the acting is [[epidermis]] deep. Even [[albeit]] the dark-haired [[femmes]] appeal, the salaciousness is kept to a [[minimal]]. [[Nos]] nudity here. [[Similarly]] [[lacked]] are sufficient [[pails]] of blood. All [[sentiments]] are [[preserved]] at a teasing, safe distance...an [[unlucky]] fact [[consider]] the [[bestowed]] [[designation]] of the directors is 'butcher.' [[Alone]] the soundtrack, the droning angsty alt-country and the tense fluctuating score [[deliver]] any palpable [[tensions]]. Sometimes some static storyboarded compositions [[adding]] appealing low-angles that [[adding]] to the malaise...but for a film that [[invites]] itself [[terror]], I did not [[yet]] get close to flinching once. [[Conceivably]] a [[largest]] [[accent]] on societal rejuvenation through blood [[consumption]], scenes directed with [[differing]] geometric [[ways]] [[outdoors]] the [[squares]], and a sustained focus on playfulness through the family's maliciousness or traps sympathetic characters [[gotta]] to escape in order to escape their dilemma [[could]] have improved my [[vistas]], but this was not a [[buena]] start to my excursion through horrorfest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2997 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] "Nada" was the most [[inadequate]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[last]] good movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[attempt]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also political elements but it was more a psychological thriller with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes terrorists,ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of blood,not really Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the movie the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian actors (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are awful.

With "Nada" this a second period of barren inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. "Nada" was the most [[insufficient]] follow-up to "Les NOces Rouges" which,with hindsight,appears now as the [[latter]] good movie of Chabrol's golden era (1967-1973) "Nada" is Chabrol's first real [[endeavours]] at a wholly political movie;its previous work "les Noces Rouges" had also political elements but it was more a psychological thriller with the usual look at society in French provinces."Nada" includes terrorists,ambassador,hostage-taking,a lot of blood,not really Chabrol's field.A heterogeneous cast gives the movie the coup de grâce :only Duchaussoy,who had already played with the director ,and Maurice Garrel are up to scratch.Viviane Romance ,one of Duvivier's actresses ("la Belle Equipe" "Panique") ,is wasted as a madam (Gabrielle).Italian actors (Fabio Testi,Lou Castel)are awful.

With "Nada" this a second period of barren inspiration for Chabrol .It would be "Violette Nozières" before he was again at the top of his game. --------------------------------------------- Result 2998 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (69%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] ...but I've seen better too.

The story here is predictable--a film crew trying to film a horror movie in a place where murders occurred. Three guesses what happens. This isn't a total bomb--the cast is fairly good with pros John Ireland, Faith Domergue and John Carradine giving the best performances. It's [[reasonably]] well-made--for a low budget film. Just don't expect any nudity, swearing, blood OR gore (the film has a very mild PG rating). I was never totally bored--it's OK viewing on a quiet night. I saw it on video--it was a HORRIBLE print--very dark and some scenes were impossible to see. Still I didn't hate it and it does have a cool ending which surprised me--basically nothing happens up till then so it catches you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a horror film completest. ...but I've seen better too.

The story here is predictable--a film crew trying to film a horror movie in a place where murders occurred. Three guesses what happens. This isn't a total bomb--the cast is fairly good with pros John Ireland, Faith Domergue and John Carradine giving the best performances. It's [[sensibly]] well-made--for a low budget film. Just don't expect any nudity, swearing, blood OR gore (the film has a very mild PG rating). I was never totally bored--it's OK viewing on a quiet night. I saw it on video--it was a HORRIBLE print--very dark and some scenes were impossible to see. Still I didn't hate it and it does have a cool ending which surprised me--basically nothing happens up till then so it catches you off guard. Worth seeing but only if you're a horror film completest. --------------------------------------------- Result 2999 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[managed]] to [[tape]] this off my satellite, but I would [[love]] to get an [[original]] [[release]] in a [[format]] we can [[use]] here in the States. Eddie [[truly]] is Glorious in this performance from San Francisco. I don't remember [[laughing]] so hard at a stand up routine. My [[wife]] and I both [[enjoyed]] this tape and his [[work]] on Glorious I just [[wish]] I [[could]] [[buy]] a copy and help support Eddie financially through my [[purchase]]. We need more of his shows [[available]]. I [[administering]] to [[cassette]] this off my satellite, but I would [[amour]] to get an [[preliminary]] [[releasing]] in a [[formats]] we can [[used]] here in the States. Eddie [[honestly]] is Glorious in this performance from San Francisco. I don't remember [[giggling]] so hard at a stand up routine. My [[women]] and I both [[liked]] this tape and his [[cooperating]] on Glorious I just [[desiring]] I [[wo]] [[acquire]] a copy and help support Eddie financially through my [[procurement]]. We need more of his shows [[accessible]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] SAPS AT SEA

[[Aspect]] [[ratio]]: 1.37:1

[[Sound]] format: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This [[feature]] length comedy - an [[OK]] [[entry]] which nonetheless unspools like a mere [[imitation]] of Laurel and Hardy's best work - marked the final collaboration between L&H and producer Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean voyage after The Boys are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a seagull to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is lacking, perhaps due to the recruitment of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, previously responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose work here lacks a measure of pzazz. Fair, but nothing special. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and James Finlayson make guest appearances. SAPS AT SEA

[[Element]] [[percentages]]: 1.37:1

[[Sounds]] format: Mono

(Black and white)

Suffering from 'hornophobia', Ollie embarks on a 'restful' boat trip, but he and Stan get mixed up with an escaped convict (Rychard Cramer). Chaos ensues.

This [[trait]] length comedy - an [[ALLRIGHT]] [[inlet]] which nonetheless unspools like a mere [[mimicry]] of Laurel and Hardy's best work - marked the final collaboration between L&H and producer Hal Roach. Episodic in structure, the movie culminates in a memorable ocean voyage after The Boys are taken hostage by villainous Cramer (who shoots a seagull to prove how tough he is!). The gags are OK, but inspiration is lacking, perhaps due to the recruitment of actor-turned-director Gordon Douglas, previously responsible for Ollie's first solo effort in the sound era (ZENOBIA, produced in 1939), but whose work here lacks a measure of pzazz. Fair, but nothing special. L&H regulars Charlie Hall and James Finlayson make guest appearances. --------------------------------------------- Result 3001 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I liked it, i really did. Please don't think that i'm an idiot but i have to admit that i enjoyed this [[film]]. I expected it to be crap, it was crap, but sometimes its OK to relax and watch a [[crappy]] [[film]] that you don't have to concentrate too much on isn't it? I didn't expect any hidden meanings or morales, and there wasn't any, but that doesn't matter because i only watched it for entertainment, and it did entertain me throughout. Films like this are why the Ben Stillers (excusing 'there's something about Mary') and the Vince Vaughns (however you spell his last name, i couldn't be bothered checking)have jobs. It's OK to watch a crap film as long as you don't expect too much from it, and i for one shall take a stand, jog, perhaps run, but not drive because i don't have a car, to Blockbuster Video, or even Choices, and rent a bunch of these toilet humoured films and stay in one night watching them. Good day to you reader. P.s if you do not say that this comment helped you then i don't like you, if you do say it helped then god bless you, you will go to heaven. I liked it, i really did. Please don't think that i'm an idiot but i have to admit that i enjoyed this [[kino]]. I expected it to be crap, it was crap, but sometimes its OK to relax and watch a [[shite]] [[kino]] that you don't have to concentrate too much on isn't it? I didn't expect any hidden meanings or morales, and there wasn't any, but that doesn't matter because i only watched it for entertainment, and it did entertain me throughout. Films like this are why the Ben Stillers (excusing 'there's something about Mary') and the Vince Vaughns (however you spell his last name, i couldn't be bothered checking)have jobs. It's OK to watch a crap film as long as you don't expect too much from it, and i for one shall take a stand, jog, perhaps run, but not drive because i don't have a car, to Blockbuster Video, or even Choices, and rent a bunch of these toilet humoured films and stay in one night watching them. Good day to you reader. P.s if you do not say that this comment helped you then i don't like you, if you do say it helped then god bless you, you will go to heaven. --------------------------------------------- Result 3002 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] It's a [[tale]] that could have taken place [[anywhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catching]] the attention of famous opera star and friendship ensuing. The [[aging]] entertainer finds/buys a male child to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their challenging, but free [[life]] along the river. [[Traveling]] [[town]] to town, he performs and has some degree of notoriety. Despite the [[times]] and the [[influences]], the man is kind and [[good]].

[[Overall]], the performances are [[first]] [[rate]], [[especially]] Xu Zhu, who portrays the street performer. The child (Renying Zhou) is beautiful, and downright strong, and withstands the overt prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with supporting help from the kind opera singer, Master Liang (an interestingly androgynous Zhao Zhigang), paint a very interesting tale of forgiveness, sadness and love. Some have mentioned this film's remote similarities to BA WANG BIE JI (FAREWELL MY CONCUBINE); yet this film can't stand easily on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the KING OF MASKS, is the ending. It was weak, cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the story, what was the needless manipulation for? What a shame. To bring a fine motion picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and corny) pathos like that. It frankly made this film good, instead of the classic, it should've been. That aside, the KING OF MASKS is still very well worth your time. I was happy to see the Shaw Brothers are still producing good films. Highly [[recommended]]. It's a [[conte]] that could have taken place [[somewhere]] really, given the right circumstances. Street entertainer [[catch]] the attention of famous opera star and friendship ensuing. The [[ageing]] entertainer finds/buys a male child to pass his art to. From there, we follow them through the rigors of their challenging, but free [[living]] along the river. [[Travels]] [[municipality]] to town, he performs and has some degree of notoriety. Despite the [[moments]] and the [[affect]], the man is kind and [[alright]].

[[Total]], the performances are [[fiirst]] [[rates]], [[namely]] Xu Zhu, who portrays the street performer. The child (Renying Zhou) is beautiful, and downright strong, and withstands the overt prejudices well. The two protagonists, along with supporting help from the kind opera singer, Master Liang (an interestingly androgynous Zhao Zhigang), paint a very interesting tale of forgiveness, sadness and love. Some have mentioned this film's remote similarities to BA WANG BIE JI (FAREWELL MY CONCUBINE); yet this film can't stand easily on its own, any resemblance is remote at best.

My only qualm with the KING OF MASKS, is the ending. It was weak, cliche and about as subtle as a sledgehammer. The audience was already wrapped up in the story, what was the needless manipulation for? What a shame. To bring a fine motion picture that far, only to surrender to emotional (and corny) pathos like that. It frankly made this film good, instead of the classic, it should've been. That aside, the KING OF MASKS is still very well worth your time. I was happy to see the Shaw Brothers are still producing good films. Highly [[suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3003 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Pretty [[awful]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! Pretty [[heinous]] but watchable and entertaining. It's the same old story (if you've lived through the 80s). Vietnam vets fight together as buddies against injustice back in the States. A-Team meets Death Wish, my favorite!

Time goes on, the soldiers go home, and years later a friend is in trouble. No, wait -- in fact, the friend is dead and it is his dad that's in trouble. Our first hero, Joey, is killed by an exceedingly horrifying (super pointy) meat tenderizer as he tries to defend his father's small store from the local "protection" gang despite being wheelchair bound from the war. Desperate for help, the father talks to Sarge, the leader of Joey's old unit from Vietnam, when Sarge shows up for the funeral.

Well, the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the old gang saddles up for the city. You can pretty much imagine most of the rest of the movie.

The one thing that drove me crazy is that Sarge keeps haranguing his men about planning, and about how they're really good at what they do when they plan ahead. But Joey wouldn't have been put in a wheelchair by a gunshot in Vietnam in the first place if the unit hadn't been messing around! Then when things are going really well in the city as they battle the gangs, they do it again. For no reason at all, they completely bypass their plan and try to nail the gang without everyone being present. Phh!!!! I raise my hands in disgust. Foolishness!

There is also a suspicious moment when all present members of the unit make sure to try out the heroin they snatch from the gang to make sure it's real. EVERY single one of them. Hmm....

What are you going to do? Keep watching, I guess. The movie isn't too horrible to watch, but it IS a tease. There are all these climactic moments when nothing actually winds up happening. The most dramatic things that happen are those at the beginning of the movie -- the explosives in Vietnam, Joey's death battle, and the gang brutally kicking an innocent teddy bear aside (poor Teddy!).

I guess my main beef with this movie is that I feel let down by it. Even the confusing subplots with "mystery helpers" and their bizarrely cross-purpose motives wasn't enough to save it at the end. But someday maybe it'll all come right and they'll make a sequel. Ha ha ha ha!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3004 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost indescribable mess that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[bad]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often incoherent, with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly incomprehensible. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. Anyone who knows me even remotely can tell you that I love bad movies almost as much as I love great ones, and I can honestly say that I have finally seen one of the all-time legendary bad movies: the almost indescribable mess that is MYRA BRECKINRIDGE. An adaptation of Gore Vidal's best-selling book (he later disowned this film version), the star-studded MYRA BRECKINRIDGE is truly a movie so [[horrid]] that it remains bizarrely entertaining from beginning to end. The X-rated movie about sex change operations and Hollywood was an absolute catastrophe at the box office and was literally booed off the screen by both critics and audiences at the time of it's release. Not surprisingly, the film went on to gain a near-legendary cult status among lovers of bad cinema, and I was actually quite excited to finally see for the first time.

Director Michael Sarne (who only had two other previous directing credits to his name at the time), took a lot of flack for the finished film, and, in honesty, it really does not look like he had a clue about what he was trying to achieve. The film is often incoherent, with entire sequences edited together in such a half-hazzard manner that many scenes become nearly incomprehensible. Also irritating is the gimmick of using archival footage from the Fox film vaults and splicing it into the picture at regular intervals. This means that there is archival footage of past film stars such as Judy Garland and Shirley Temple laced into newly-film scenes of often lewd sexual acts, and the process just doesn't work as intended (this also caused a minor uproar, as actors such as Temple and Loretta Young sued the studio for using their image without permission).

Perhaps Sarne is not the only one to blame, however, as the film's screenplay and casting will also make many viewers shake their heads in disbelief. For instance, this film will ask you to believe that the scrawny film critic Rex Reed (in his first and last major film role) could have a sex change operation and emerge as the gorgeous sex goddess Raquel Welch?! The film becomes further hard to follow when Welch as Myra attempts to take over a film school from her sleazy uncle (played by legendary film director John Huston), seduce a nubile female film student (Farrah Fawcett), and teach the school's resident bad boy (Roger Herren) a lesson by raping him with a strap-on dildo. Did everyone follow that?

And it gets even better (or worse, depending upon your perspective)! I have yet to mention the film's top-billed star: the legendary screen sex symbol of the nineteen-thirties, Mae West! Ms. West was 77 year old when she appeared in this film (she had been retired for 26 years), and apparently she still considered herself to be a formidable sex symbol as she plays an upscale talent agent who has hunky men (including a young Tom Selleck) throwing themselves at her. As if this weren't bad enough, the tone-deaf West actually performs two newly-written songs about halfway through the film, and I think that I might have endured permanent brain damage from listening to them!

Naturally, none of this even closely resembles anything that any person of reasonable taste would describe as "good," but I would give MYRA BRECKINRIDGE a 4 out of 10 because it was always morbidly entertaining even when I had no idea what in the hell was supposed to be going on. Also, most of the cast tries really hard. Raquel, in particular, appears so hell-bent in turning her poorly-written part into something meaningful that she single-handedly succeeds in making the movie worth watching. If she had only been working with a decent screenplay and capable director then she might have finally received some respect form critics.

The rest of the cast is also fine. The endearingly over-the-top John Huston (who really should have been directing the picture) has some funny moments, Rex Reed isn't bad for a non-actor, and Farrah Fawcett is pleasantly fresh-faced and likable. Roger Herren is also fine, but he never appeared in another movie again after this (I guess he just couldn't live down being the guy who was rapped by Raquel Welch). And as anyone could guess from the description above, Mae West was totally out of her mind when she agreed to do this movie - but that's part of what makes it fun for those of us who love bad cinema. --------------------------------------------- Result 3005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] About twenty [[minutes]] into this movie, I was already bored. Quite [[simply]], these [[characters]] were fairly [[dull]]. [[Occasionally]], [[something]] [[enjoyable]] would [[happen]], but then things would slow down again. Fortunately, my patience was [[eventually]] rewarded, and the ending to this movie wasn't bad at all. [[However]], it was by no means good enough to justify sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I would say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd call this a disappointment. About twenty [[mins]] into this movie, I was already bored. Quite [[purely]], these [[personages]] were fairly [[dreary]]. [[Intermittently]], [[algo]] [[agreeable]] would [[occur]], but then things would slow down again. Fortunately, my patience was [[lastly]] rewarded, and the ending to this movie wasn't bad at all. [[Instead]], it was by no means good enough to justify sitting through the first ninety minutes. So, I would say that the movie was mediocre overall, and considering all of the talent in the cast, I'd call this a disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3006 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[For]] all the Homicide junkies out there, this movie was [[great]]! Every single character that ever was on the show made an appearance in the movie. It helped to resolve some (but not all) issues from the series. Unfortunately, unless you actually did watch the series, most of the enjoyment would be lost, as the movie made heavy references to [[every]] season of the show's existence. This probably would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a separate movie, but we gotta take what we can get. I [[hope]] they make more movies, and continue to feature Homicide characters on Law and Order. [[During]] all the Homicide junkies out there, this movie was [[large]]! Every single character that ever was on the show made an appearance in the movie. It helped to resolve some (but not all) issues from the series. Unfortunately, unless you actually did watch the series, most of the enjoyment would be lost, as the movie made heavy references to [[any]] season of the show's existence. This probably would have been appropriate as a series finale as opposed to being a separate movie, but we gotta take what we can get. I [[esperanza]] they make more movies, and continue to feature Homicide characters on Law and Order. --------------------------------------------- Result 3007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I haven't laughed this [[hard]] at a movie in a long time. I got to go to an advance screening, and was thrilled because I had been dying to see it. I had tears in my eyes from laughter throughout a lot of the movie. The audience all shared my laughter, and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the movie.

Kudos to Steve Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He proves in this movie his tremendous talent for comedy. He has a style that I haven't seen before. And Catherine Keener is excellent as always. Thank God there wasn't a cameo from Will Ferrell(love him, but saw him too much this summer).

There were parts of comedic genius in this movie. Partly thanks to Carrell, and partly thanks to the writing(also Carrell). The waxing scene and the speed dater with the "obvious problem" were absolutely hysterical.

I will definitely go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's released. My advice: go to see it for huge laughs and an incredibly enjoyable movie on top of it. I haven't laughed this [[laborious]] at a movie in a long time. I got to go to an advance screening, and was thrilled because I had been dying to see it. I had tears in my eyes from laughter throughout a lot of the movie. The audience all shared my laughter, and was clapping and yelling throughout most of the movie.

Kudos to Steve Carrell(who I had already been a fan of). He proves in this movie his tremendous talent for comedy. He has a style that I haven't seen before. And Catherine Keener is excellent as always. Thank God there wasn't a cameo from Will Ferrell(love him, but saw him too much this summer).

There were parts of comedic genius in this movie. Partly thanks to Carrell, and partly thanks to the writing(also Carrell). The waxing scene and the speed dater with the "obvious problem" were absolutely hysterical.

I will definitely go see '40 Year Old Virgin' when it's released. My advice: go to see it for huge laughs and an incredibly enjoyable movie on top of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3008 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to [[believe]] that anachronism and other goofs are more acceptable, even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[rotten]] [[films]]. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when watching it closely, I found almost nothing [[specifically]] anachronistic.

The shots of aircraft which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The big 4 engine transport seen after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS colors). The combat planes seen taking off from the carrier at the end are Douglas Skyraiders which entered service after WW2 and were made famous by their service in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of film and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very possibly period authentic. It just 'feels' so wrong. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we share the same birthday. In his co directed ON THE TOWN (1949) there is a car chase at the end with the police driving 1949/50 Ford's yet there isn't the slightest feeling that this is out of place in a WW2 period film. In fact, as I reflected later, there isn't anything which says that this is supposed to be a WW2 period film. It just feels that way. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a ballet (Fancy Free) which may have been based on the work of artist Paul Cadmus (The Fleet's In! 1934) its a great film about sailors on a 24 hour pass in New York and, so heavy with wartime associations, its merely assumed it takes place during the war and yet these contemporary cars do nothing to break the spell.

The first problem is old Cary Grant. Though far too old to represent a Navy SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like Grant, Gary Cooper (Lou Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to play younger. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A guy who gets things done and breaks all the rules while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. One of the most common entries in the 'goofs' category is anachronism. Though I'm beginning to [[believing]] that anachronism and other goofs are more acceptable, even ignored, in very good films, but are found front and center in [[mala]] [[cinematography]]. KISS THEM FOR ME is a rotten film and reeks of anachronism, yet when watching it closely, I found almost nothing [[expressly]] anachronistic.

The shots of aircraft which bookend the film are certainly out of place. The big 4 engine transport seen after the title "Honolulu 1944" appears to be the post war C-97 Stratofreighter (in MATS colors). The combat planes seen taking off from the carrier at the end are Douglas Skyraiders which entered service after WW2 and were made famous by their service in Vietnam.

But excepting these two pieces of film and, of course, the hairstyles, everything else is very possibly period authentic. It just 'feels' so wrong. I'm an admirer of Stanley Donen, we share the same birthday. In his co directed ON THE TOWN (1949) there is a car chase at the end with the police driving 1949/50 Ford's yet there isn't the slightest feeling that this is out of place in a WW2 period film. In fact, as I reflected later, there isn't anything which says that this is supposed to be a WW2 period film. It just feels that way. Based on a wartime Broadway musical which was based on a ballet (Fancy Free) which may have been based on the work of artist Paul Cadmus (The Fleet's In! 1934) its a great film about sailors on a 24 hour pass in New York and, so heavy with wartime associations, its merely assumed it takes place during the war and yet these contemporary cars do nothing to break the spell.

The first problem is old Cary Grant. Though far too old to represent a Navy SBD dive bomber pilot, it is a Hollywood tradition for stars like Grant, Gary Cooper (Lou Gehrig), Jimmy Stewart (Charles Lindbergh) to play younger. It was the role which he is miscast in, not his age. He plays an operator, as they used to call them. A guy who gets things done and breaks all the rules while doing it yet remains admired and loved for it. A hustler. A wheeler dealer. A de rigueur character in a service comedy. Grant is the comic center of what is after all supposed to be a service comedy which is contra to his comedy style.

Thinking back on the great Grant comic performances like BRINGING UP BABY (1938) or ARSENIC AND OLD LACE (1944) and he is the great reactor whose comedy is to be reduced by his context from dignity to a befuddled puddle of inert jelly. IN KISS THEM he is expected to be the comic spark plug which just isn't him. People had already been exposed to the type, most recently to comic Phil Silvers as Sgt. Bilko on television. The role would be perfected later by James Garner but here Grant just isn't funny and appears to be a bully getting his way by aggressively pushing his Cary Grantness rather than cajoling and finessing.

But the thing which really stinks the place up with anachronism is the lead women. There can be no more echt 50s women than Suzy Parker and Jayne Mansfield. They are unique to the decade. Marilyn Monroe can be placed in a continuum with Carole Lombard and Marie Wilson and any number of dumb blonds, and Grace Kelly was another high class dame (think of Mary Astor), but there never could have been an anatomically exaggerated woman in films like Mansfield. Sure there were the 'sweater girls' (e.g. Lana Turner) of WW2, but Mansfield was stretching the point. Suzy Parker was THE model who revolutionized the model business, who changed the mannequin like poses to become the first natural girl who moved and whose personality was captured by the camera (see FUNNY FACE (1957) also by Stanley Donen).

Of course in high 50s style, there seems to be a lot of gender mixing at 'wild' parties but never even a hint of sex (think of the 50s TV shows Bachelor Father or The Bob Cummings Show where dinner jacketed men returned from 'dates' alone). The original book, which I haven't read, was published during the war and appeared as a play on Broadway at the end of the war and the nuances of the situation must have been inescapable for contemporary readers and audiences, but broken down, bowdlerized and reconstituted a dozen years later and fatally miscast, it remains a once forgotten stain on otherwise exemplary careers until the invention of the VCR and cable television resurrected this petrified turkey.

So the lesson here is whatever the 'goof' it will be ignored in a great film like CITIZEN KANE (who actually hears Charles Foster Kane say 'Rosebud'?), and tolerated in fun dreck like WESTWORLD ( why were the robots given live ammunition in the first place?) but absolutely despised in a rotten film, even if the goofs are really non existent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A [[really]] [[bad]] sequel. [[Part]] 1 had a lot of [[funny]] moments - [[part]] 2 is just bad (in a boring way) and [[obviously]] [[made]] to squeeze money out of the fans.

[[Shame]] on you, Otto Waalkes!

The only slightly [[amusing]] [[moment]] in the [[film]] is Helge Schneider who [[apparently]] [[seems]] to be pis*ed about the other characters. It's quite easy to [[identify]] with him...

The [[screenplay]] is sloppy/non-existent. The [[director]] should do everyone a favor and quit his [[job]] immediately. The acting is [[worse]] than a 2nd [[grade]] school play.

Technically the [[movie]] is [[awful]] as well, but who can [[blame]] the cinematographer/sound [[guys]] who had to [[work]] with such an untalented director? A [[truthfully]] [[wicked]] sequel. [[Portion]] 1 had a lot of [[comical]] moments - [[parties]] 2 is just bad (in a boring way) and [[assuredly]] [[accomplished]] to squeeze money out of the fans.

[[Embarrass]] on you, Otto Waalkes!

The only slightly [[droll]] [[time]] in the [[cinema]] is Helge Schneider who [[visibly]] [[appears]] to be pis*ed about the other characters. It's quite easy to [[identifying]] with him...

The [[scenarios]] is sloppy/non-existent. The [[superintendent]] should do everyone a favor and quit his [[labour]] immediately. The acting is [[lousiest]] than a 2nd [[grades]] school play.

Technically the [[films]] is [[frightful]] as well, but who can [[culpa]] the cinematographer/sound [[bloke]] who had to [[collaborated]] with such an untalented director? --------------------------------------------- Result 3010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[suppose]] if you [[like]] endless [[dialogue]] that doesn't forward the [[story]] and flashy [[camera]] [[effects]] like the scene [[transitions]] in the [[television]] [[show]] _Angel_, you'll [[enjoy]] the [[film]]. Me? All I [[wanted]] was a [[nice]], tight little [[story]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was practically [[backward]], plot points were buried under a [[sea]] of unneeded [[dialogue]], and there was [[absolutely]] no [[sense]] of dread, or tension, or ANYTHING.

Is it the redneck? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[cameraman]] on speed. That's not scary. It doesn't generate a single note of tension or atmosphere unless you're scared by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the movie invokes derisive laughter from the audience.

[[Terrible]] film. I [[presuming]] if you [[fond]] endless [[discussions]] that doesn't forward the [[saga]] and flashy [[cameras]] [[consequences]] like the scene [[transitional]] in the [[televisions]] [[showings]] _Angel_, you'll [[enjoying]] the [[movies]]. Me? All I [[wanting]] was a [[delightful]], tight little [[conte]], and it wasn't there. The pacing was practically [[astern]], plot points were buried under a [[hai]] of unneeded [[dialog]], and there was [[altogether]] no [[feeling]] of dread, or tension, or ANYTHING.

Is it the redneck? Is it the Wendigo? No, it's a [[videotape]] on speed. That's not scary. It doesn't generate a single note of tension or atmosphere unless you're scared by MTV. Like those reviewers before me, I too noticed that by the end the movie invokes derisive laughter from the audience.

[[Spooky]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Siskel & Ebert were terrific on this [[show]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine [[conflict]] their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. Now, when [[Ben]] Lyons comes on I feel like I'm watching "Teen News" -- you know, that kids' news show, [[hosted]] by kids for [[kids]]? Manckiewitz is not much [[better]]. It's [[obvious]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two rank [[amateurs]] have [[anything]] of interest or [[consequence]] to say about motion [[pictures]] is ludicrous. [[If]] they are [[reviewing]] a non-formula film, they are [[completely]] lost. Show them something original and [[intelligent]] -- they just [[find]] it "[[confusing]]". [[Wait]] -- I think I [[get]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes movies for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper promoted independent films and were only hit-or-miss with the big budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two [[guys]] LOVE the [[big]] studio schlock and only [[manage]] to tolerate a few indies. Plus [[everyone]] knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The [[blatant]] [[nepotism]] is the icing on the cake. In what [[alternate]] universe do these guys qualify as film critics? Siskel & Ebert were terrific on this [[exposition]] whether you agreed with them or not because of the genuine [[disputing]] their separate professional opinions generated. Roeper took this show down a notch or two because he wasn't really a film critic and because he substituted snide for opinionated. Now, when [[Benn]] Lyons comes on I feel like I'm watching "Teen News" -- you know, that kids' news show, [[greeted]] by kids for [[enfants]]? Manckiewitz is not much [[best]]. It's [[manifest]] they've encountered only a steady diet of mainstream films their entire lives. The idea that these two rank [[lovers]] have [[somethings]] of interest or [[repercussions]] to say about motion [[visuals]] is ludicrous. [[Though]] they are [[review]] a non-formula film, they are [[wholly]] lost. Show them something original and [[shrewd]] -- they just [[unearthed]] it "[[bewildering]]". [[Await]] -- I think I [[got]] it ... ABC is owned by Disney ... Disney makes movies for kids. While Siskel, Ebert, and Roper promoted independent films and were only hit-or-miss with the big budget studio productions -- what a surprise: these two [[boy]] LOVE the [[immense]] studio schlock and only [[administer]] to tolerate a few indies. Plus [[anybody]] knows the age group TV advertisers are aiming for. The [[evident]] [[aegis]] is the icing on the cake. In what [[alternative]] universe do these guys qualify as film critics? --------------------------------------------- Result 3012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[unremarkable]] film [[throughout]]. The film has gained some [[fans]] by way of the [[fact]] that Quentin Tarantino's [[name]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place [[nod]] to the Rodriguez/Tarantino [[flick]] 'From Dusk till Dawn'. These things do not [[make]] a [[great]] movie, however, and this is more than evident all the way through 'Curdled'. The film suffers from an all too obvious lack of [[ideas]], and it tries to mask this with murders that are meant to be stylish and events that are supposed to be disturbing. The Mexican music score that accompanies many of the sequences in the film is obviously meant to be cool, but it's becomes annoying very quickly; especially as aside from the fact that the lead character is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the movie. The film's plot is typically offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with grisly murders, takes a job with a firm that cleans up murder scenes. It sounds boring and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the cast list, and even he doesn't make an impression. He hasn't been given anything to do in the movie and aside from talking to his victims and standing around trying to look menacing, he's pretty much wasted. Angela Jones, or rather; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, takes the lead role as the murder obsessed young woman, and it is always clear that it's her involvement with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting ability. She may have been good enough in her small role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a film by herself. She looks lost and out of place for the majority of the film, and if it weren't for her Latino accent; she wouldn't convince the audience that she's a weirdo on any level. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof piece of forgettable trash. Films like this often win themselves praise for invention or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all levels. Whether you're a Tarantino fan, William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie buff; this is one to miss. From it's uninspiring title to the flat acting performances, Curdled is very much an [[ordinary]] film [[in]]. The film has gained some [[lovers]] by way of the [[facto]] that Quentin Tarantino's [[denomination]] is attached to it, and the silly and out of place [[nods]] to the Rodriguez/Tarantino [[gesture]] 'From Dusk till Dawn'. These things do not [[deliver]] a [[wondrous]] movie, however, and this is more than evident all the way through 'Curdled'. The film suffers from an all too obvious lack of [[reflections]], and it tries to mask this with murders that are meant to be stylish and events that are supposed to be disturbing. The Mexican music score that accompanies many of the sequences in the film is obviously meant to be cool, but it's becomes annoying very quickly; especially as aside from the fact that the lead character is Mexican, it doesn't fit with the tone of the movie. The film's plot is typically offbeat and it follows a gorehound who, because of her obsession with grisly murders, takes a job with a firm that cleans up murder scenes. It sounds boring and it is.

William Baldwin is the only 'name' on the cast list, and even he doesn't make an impression. He hasn't been given anything to do in the movie and aside from talking to his victims and standing around trying to look menacing, he's pretty much wasted. Angela Jones, or rather; the taxi driver from Pulp Fiction, takes the lead role as the murder obsessed young woman, and it is always clear that it's her involvement with Pulp Fiction that won her this role, not her acting ability. She may have been good enough in her small role in Tarantino's masterpiece, but she doesn't have the talent to lead a film by herself. She looks lost and out of place for the majority of the film, and if it weren't for her Latino accent; she wouldn't convince the audience that she's a weirdo on any level. Curdled is a one hundred percent-proof piece of forgettable trash. Films like this often win themselves praise for invention or black comedic antics; but this one fails on all levels. Whether you're a Tarantino fan, William Baldwin fan, horror fan or just a movie buff; this is one to miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 3013 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] I just finished [[watching]] this movie and I must say that I was so [[impressed]].Everything about it was [[superb]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[believable]] child who grew into brave, always willing to help others. His [[mum]] must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this [[film]] for fear of [[missing]] something. It is the prefect fable/tale with morals, cute and scary sprites and 'monsters' but nevertheless heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a hero. Picked to be a rider at the local village festival and a journey to the Goblin Mountain where he discovers the Yokai, who are amazing creations that Brian Froud would be proud of. And the evil Kato and his off sider who definitely needed a hug. These evil people capture the Yokai and throw them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical things and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to kill. Takashi a young boy is the one to become their saviour, alongside a red man/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a cute little creature that, if it had been America they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all good toy stores. The lines are good especially the Don't try this at home kids and other gems that bring a smile to your lips. Suspend belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! Though I must admit that the end was a wee bit sad. And not necessarily so. Cheers Furdion I just finished [[staring]] this movie and I must say that I was so [[surprising]].Everything about it was [[funky]]. The acting the characters, the story. A [[credible]] child who grew into brave, always willing to help others. His [[mummy]] must be proud. I could not take my eyes off this [[cinematographic]] for fear of [[gone]] something. It is the prefect fable/tale with morals, cute and scary sprites and 'monsters' but nevertheless heartwarming folk. A child poked and bullied at school who becomes a hero. Picked to be a rider at the local village festival and a journey to the Goblin Mountain where he discovers the Yokai, who are amazing creations that Brian Froud would be proud of. And the evil Kato and his off sider who definitely needed a hug. These evil people capture the Yokai and throw them into a red pit along with unwanted objects, like motorbikes and other mechanical things and these meld into one horribly violent robotic monsters whose only job is to kill. Takashi a young boy is the one to become their saviour, alongside a red man/dragon a turtle man and a River Princess as well as a cute little creature that, if it had been America they could have turned it into a cuddly toy and sold it at all good toy stores. The lines are good especially the Don't try this at home kids and other gems that bring a smile to your lips. Suspend belief and watch this with a child or on your own and enjoy! Though I must admit that the end was a wee bit sad. And not necessarily so. Cheers Furdion --------------------------------------------- Result 3014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is a review of The [[Wizard]], not to be confused with The Wiz, or [[Mr]]. Wizard. The [[Wizard]] is a late-eighties [[film]] about a [[seriously]] silent boy's ability to play video games and [[walk]] during the [[entire]] opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[update]] of The [[Wizard]] of Oz, and Mr. [[Wizard]] is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink tang out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[reason]] to see this movie. It's simply a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "designed" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. This is a review of The [[Sorcerer]], not to be confused with The Wiz, or [[Hannes]]. Wizard. The [[Sorcerer]] is a late-eighties [[cinematographic]] about a [[earnestly]] silent boy's ability to play video games and [[marche]] during the [[overall]] opening credits. The Wiz is an unnecessary [[refreshed]] of The [[Conjurer]] of Oz, and Mr. [[Conjurer]] is that guy that attached 100 straws together and had some kid drink tang out of it.

Now that we've gotten all that out of the way, let me say this: there's really no [[motif]] to see this movie. It's simply a 100 minute Nintendo commercial designed to capitalize on the Powerglove, the Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Brothers 3. I use the word "designed" in the loosest sense possible, because it seems like this movie was written over a weekend by a crack team of people who had never played Nintendo, and directed by a man with less sense of style than my grandmother. Maybe if the writer and director sat down and actually played some games together, they'd realize that they were about to film total rubbish and instead go to vocational school to learn how to install car stereos.

I hope that this has been an enlightening experience for you. It sure hasn't been for me. In fact, I think I might have lost a few braincells in the act of watching this movie and writing about it. Next time you're at the video store and you see the The Wiz, The Wizard and The Wizard of Oz all sitting there on the shelf in a pretty little row, give them all a miss and play Duck Hunt instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3015 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] The [[Invisible]] [[man]] is a [[show]] [[everybody]] s gotta [[love]]! It [[reminds]] me of the old school 80's [[series]](a-team,airwolf,knightrider) The special effects are [[small]] but very effective!! but what is most [[important]] is the fun they had shooting this series. It really [[shows]]! the [[entire]] [[cast]] fit perfect in there roles and it looks like they can do whatever they want!! especially Paul Ben [[Victor]] and Vincent Ventresca. Ventresca really [[shines]] in this one! for me its unbelievable that an actor with so much sarcasm is his acting style Doesn't [[get]] a shot in a big movie (mr Tarantino this was the show you should have directed! instead of that major boring grave danger(c.s.i)) Get this show if you can. well worth it!!! The [[Undetectable]] [[males]] is a [[showings]] [[someone]] s gotta [[iike]]! It [[reminded]] me of the old school 80's [[serials]](a-team,airwolf,knightrider) The special effects are [[little]] but very effective!! but what is most [[critical]] is the fun they had shooting this series. It really [[exposition]]! the [[whole]] [[casting]] fit perfect in there roles and it looks like they can do whatever they want!! especially Paul Ben [[Viktor]] and Vincent Ventresca. Ventresca really [[glows]] in this one! for me its unbelievable that an actor with so much sarcasm is his acting style Doesn't [[obtain]] a shot in a big movie (mr Tarantino this was the show you should have directed! instead of that major boring grave danger(c.s.i)) Get this show if you can. well worth it!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3016 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the [[fact]] that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to [[carry]] the films [[pretty]] [[weak]] [[attempt]] at [[horror]]. The basic [[idea]] for the [[film]] was interesting but [[unfortunately]] it wasn't able to excite, [[really]] scare or shock me - there was one [[part]] in the [[entire]] [[film]] that I thought was gruesome but even that didn't [[redeem]] it. I did get to like the [[character]] of Kate by the end of the film as she seemed to soften and become a little more realistic by the end, the character played by Jeremy Sheffield was not actually needed for this film and I think the director/writer got carried away with the myriad of characters used for no purpose, if he had left it at the basic characters making it more of a solo effort on Kate's part, it may have worked - Jeremy's acting was wooden to say the least and I felt uncomfortable watching the bad on screen chemistry - or lack of it. Such a shame. Disappointing. I was sadly disappointed by this film due to the [[facto]] that it felt false and the characters were not strong enough to [[bears]] the films [[quite]] [[fragile]] [[seeks]] at [[terror]]. The basic [[inkling]] for the [[cinema]] was interesting but [[sadly]] it wasn't able to excite, [[genuinely]] scare or shock me - there was one [[parties]] in the [[total]] [[cinematography]] that I thought was gruesome but even that didn't [[redeeming]] it. I did get to like the [[nature]] of Kate by the end of the film as she seemed to soften and become a little more realistic by the end, the character played by Jeremy Sheffield was not actually needed for this film and I think the director/writer got carried away with the myriad of characters used for no purpose, if he had left it at the basic characters making it more of a solo effort on Kate's part, it may have worked - Jeremy's acting was wooden to say the least and I felt uncomfortable watching the bad on screen chemistry - or lack of it. Such a shame. Disappointing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Robert Wuhl is teaching a class of film students at New York University in Manhattan, New York.

He covers fallacies of history and truths that are no longer generally [[known]]. I would like to see [[much]] more of this [[show]]. It is very entertaining. [[Mr]]. Wuhl uses [[examples]] and "[[show]] and [[tell]]" to [[get]] his [[points]] [[across]]. He [[explained]] that the [[person]] who actually rode the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere was not Paul Revere! Henry Wadsworth Longfellow [[used]] Revere's [[name]] because it sounded better.

I've [[watched]] Robert Wuhl for [[many]] years, from the [[time]] he was doing stand-up [[comedy]] and all the [[way]] through "Arli$$" on HBO. He's a good [[actor]] and a good stand-up [[comedian]], but he's an [[excellent]] [[teacher]]! I [[highly]] [[recommend]] that you watch an episode of this [[show]]. It is well worth your [[time]]. Robert Wuhl is teaching a class of film students at New York University in Manhattan, New York.

He covers fallacies of history and truths that are no longer generally [[renowned]]. I would like to see [[very]] more of this [[spectacle]]. It is very entertaining. [[Mister]]. Wuhl uses [[case]] and "[[demonstrate]] and [[say]]" to [[obtains]] his [[dots]] [[during]]. He [[clarified]] that the [[persona]] who actually rode the Midnight Ride of Paul Revere was not Paul Revere! Henry Wadsworth Longfellow [[utilizes]] Revere's [[behalf]] because it sounded better.

I've [[saw]] Robert Wuhl for [[innumerable]] years, from the [[moment]] he was doing stand-up [[travesty]] and all the [[pathway]] through "Arli$$" on HBO. He's a good [[actress]] and a good stand-up [[humorist]], but he's an [[sumptuous]] [[profs]]! I [[unimaginably]] [[recommends]] that you watch an episode of this [[exposition]]. It is well worth your [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The arrival of White [[Men]] in Arctic Canada challenges the [[freedom]] of a [[fearless]] ESKIMO hunter.

W. S. Van [[Dyke]], MGM's peripatetic [[director]], was responsible for this [[fascinating]] look at [[life]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on location filming from April 1932 until November 1933 (although some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[While]] [[considered]] a documentary at the [[time]], we [[would]] likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an [[intriguing]] plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Eskimo]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant striving for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for walrus, polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & Mounties encountered by the [[Eskimo]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Eskimo]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film deals in a [[refreshingly]] frank manner with the Eskimo moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent part of their culture. In fact, the entire film can be appreciated as a valuable look at a way of life which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely [[splendid]] and perfectly believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. The arrival of White [[Male]] in Arctic Canada challenges the [[libertad]] of a [[valiant]] ESKIMO hunter.

W. S. Van [[Embankment]], MGM's peripatetic [[superintendent]], was responsible for this [[mesmerizing]] look at [[living]] in the Arctic among the Inuit. His production was on location filming from April 1932 until November 1933 (although some annoying rear projection effects show that some of the shooting took place back at the Studio). [[Despite]] [[judged]] a documentary at the [[moment]], we [[could]] likely term it a 'docudrama' as it is scripted with an [[enigmatic]] plot & storyline.

The film shows the daily life of the [[Husky]], both Winter & Summer, and in fact starts in the warmer time of the year without any snow or ice in sight. The constant striving for food is depicted, and the viewer gets to watch the exciting hunts for walrus, polar bear, whale & caribou. The native language is used throughout, with the use of title cards; the only English is spoken by the fishermen & Mounties encountered by the [[Husky]]. In fact, it is the arrival of White Men, both good & bad, and the change they make on [[Spumoni]] society, which is a major element in the narrative.

This Pre-Code film deals in a [[cheerfully]] frank manner with the Eskimo moral code, particularly with their practice of wife-sharing, which was an important and completely innocent part of their culture. In fact, the entire film can be appreciated as a valuable look at a way of life which was rapidly disappearing even in the early 1930's.

None of the cast receives screen credit, which is a shame as there are some notable performances. Foremost among them is that of Ray Wise, playing the leading role of Mala the Eskimo. Wise (1906-1952) was an Alaskan Native of Inuit ancestry and is absolutely [[handsome]] and perfectly believable in what was a very demanding part. As handsome as any Hollywood star, he would continue acting, using the name of Ray Mala, in a sporadic film career, often in tiny unbilled roles.

Lovely Japanese-Hawaiian actress Lotus Long plays Mala's loyal second wife; the names of the fine actresses playing his other two wives are now obscure. Director Woody Van Dyke steps in front of the cameras as a strict North West Mounted Police inspector. The two decent-hearted Mounties who must deliver Mala to Canadian justice are played by Joe Sawyer & Edgar Dearing, both longtime movie character actors. Danish author Peter Freuchen, upon whose books the film was based, has a short vivid role of an evil wooden-legged sea captain who unwisely rouses Mala's icy wrath. --------------------------------------------- Result 3019 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] When I saw that this film was only 80 minutes long, I [[thought]] we were in [[trouble]]. Condensing the gigantic W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[seemed]] like a disaster waiting to happen. But you know, the movie's not half bad, and it even [[manages]] to [[retain]] much of what makes the book resonate so much with its readers.

I've heard many film buffs [[complain]] that Leslie Howard was a wet noodle of an actor, and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to play the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of Mildred was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most fascinating character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is intense to the point of scary. She makes no effort to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ When I saw that this film was only 80 minutes long, I [[brainchild]] we were in [[hassle]]. Condensing the gigantic W. Somerset Maugham novel down to a movie that clocks in at under an hour and a half [[looked]] like a disaster waiting to happen. But you know, the movie's not half bad, and it even [[administers]] to [[conserving]] much of what makes the book resonate so much with its readers.

I've heard many film buffs [[moan]] that Leslie Howard was a wet noodle of an actor, and he was, but I can't think of anyone more suited to play the role of Philip Carey than a wet noodle, for that's certainly what Carey is. Howard plays him well, which means you want to shake him and slap him upside the head repeatedly, then finally take him out and buy him a spine.

Ah, and then there's Bette, as the girl with whom Carey is obsessed and who brings his world crashing down around him. I didn't know what on earth the appeal of Mildred was in the book, and the movie stays true to that detail. But as played by Davis, she does become the most fascinating character in the story, and if she's nasty and unlikable, she's at least the most dynamic person on screen at any given time. Davis's performance here is credited with changing the course of screen acting, much as Brando's would do nearly 20 years later when he screamed out "Stella!!" in that little-known Tennesee Williams play, and it's not hard to see why. Davis is intense to the point of scary. She makes no effort to wring any sympathy from the audience, and she allows herself to look ugly and most unglamorous. Her appearance when Carey walks in on her late in the film to find her dead or nearly dead of an unnamed disease (though not much care is taken to hide the fact that it's an STD) is shocking. Of course, it helps that this movie squeaked out just before the Production Code went into effect; if it had been made a year later, you can bet things would have been a bit different.

Yes, much of the novel, and many of its most interesting parts, are left on the cutting room floor, and the story really does become about Carey and Mildred and not much else. I found that to be the least interesting and most tedious part of Maugham's novel, but it is the part that gives the novel its title and seems to be the part that readers are still drawn to now, so it strikes me as a wise decision on the part of the film makers that they chose to adapt the novel the way they did.

Grade: B+ --------------------------------------------- Result 3020 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Is this [[film]] a [[joke]]? Is it a [[comedy]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the poor acting, poor directing, and [[appalling]] [[script]] had the audience [[laughing]] out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[reaching]] his [[peak]] shot dead by an assassin he [[walks]] in on by mistake. The [[killer]] sees the [[young]] [[artists]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to attend an [[exhibition]] of his [[work]]. [[At]] the [[exhibition]] the assassin meets the dead artists [[sister]] and they [[end]] up [[falling]] in [[love]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have [[anyone]] [[guessing]] as it is so poorly scripted. The [[film]] takes place [[mainly]] in and [[around]] Vienna, Austria, and [[shows]] what a [[beautiful]] [[city]] it is. Do not waste your [[time]] on this [[film]] [[though]], [[unless]] you are [[studying]] how NOT to [[act]], direct or [[script]] a [[film]]! Is this [[cinematography]] a [[giggle]]? Is it a [[humor]]? Surely it isn't a serious thriller? There is no suggestion that there is any intended humor, but on quite a few occasions the poor acting, poor directing, and [[gruesome]] [[scripts]] had the audience [[smiles]] out loud in the cinema. The plot is acceptable - a promising young artist just [[realising]] his [[pinnacle]] shot dead by an assassin he [[walking]] in on by mistake. The [[slayer]] sees the [[youths]] [[performer]] work portfolio he is carrying and decides to attend an [[shows]] of his [[jobs]]. [[During]] the [[shows]] the assassin meets the dead artists [[sisters]] and they [[ending]] up [[decreasing]] in [[amore]]. It is all very predictable stuff and the end will not have [[anybody]] [[guess]] as it is so poorly scripted. The [[filmmaking]] takes place [[mostly]] in and [[throughout]] Vienna, Austria, and [[displayed]] what a [[superb]] [[ville]] it is. Do not waste your [[moment]] on this [[flick]] [[despite]], [[if]] you are [[examining]] how NOT to [[acts]], direct or [[hyphen]] a [[flick]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3021 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Based]] on [[Ray]] Russell's dark bestseller, this [[John]] ([[WATCHER]] [[IN]] THE [[WOODS]]) Hough-directed bust has [[little]] [[going]] for it.

[[Though]] it does not [[lack]] [[gory]] violence, it lack [[narrative]] sensibility and "[[characters]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon [[endowed]] with a [[mammoth]] [[penis]] that [[shoots]] [[red]] sperm into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more [[precise]], rape.

[[John]] Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing [[career]], is convincing as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre [[attacks]] on young [[women]].

[[Horrific]] possibilities of the victims [[spawning]] [[demonic]] offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[garbage]].

The script's [[reluctance]] to explore the [[dramatic]] repercussions of a fertile [[premise]] exemplifies the [[major]] [[problems]] with this [[vapid]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[exercise]]. [[Founded]] on [[Gleam]] Russell's dark bestseller, this [[Giovanni]] ([[OBSERVER]] [[THROUGHOUT]] THE [[BOIS]]) Hough-directed bust has [[petite]] [[go]] for it.

[[Albeit]] it does not [[misses]] [[gori]] violence, it lack [[narration]] sensibility and "[[nature]]".

The "Incubus" of the title is a demon [[equipped]] with a [[colossal]] [[cock]] that [[canes]] [[rouge]] sperm into vaginas during intercourse -- or, to be more [[exact]], rape.

[[Giovanni]] Cassavetes, moonlighting from his successful directing [[quarries]], is convincing as a doctor who questions the circumstances of the bizarre [[strikes]] on young [[femmes]].

[[Frightening]] possibilities of the victims [[breed]] [[wicked]] offspring are not considered -- and neither is the audience's tolerance for slow moving [[litter]].

The script's [[reticence]] to explore the [[remarkable]] repercussions of a fertile [[supposition]] exemplifies the [[important]] [[disorders]] with this [[insipid]] Big-Schlong-On-The-Loose [[wield]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3022 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I [[could]] not watch it to the [[end]] because it was [[aired]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can remember that I liked it.

This is really not an [[ordinary]] horror movie. It has some horror elements but I rather [[categorize]] it as fantasy. I [[liked]] it but I [[hoped]] for a bit more [[horror]] and scary scenes. [[Especially]] the scene when Anna's dad comes into the paperhouse trying to kill her is a bit short.

[[Now]] to the plot. This movie is about a young girl named Anna who gets ill. While she is ill and has to lie in her bed because of her high fewer she turns on to finishing her drawing about a house - the paperhouse. When she fells a sleep, which often strangely happens just immediately, she finds herself near the house on a big green field. She realizes that the house is exactly like the one she has drawn and that every new detail also appears in her dreams. One day she draws a boy into the house to have somebody to talk to. As she [[forgets]] to draw his legs (because he is sitting behind a window) the boy cannot walk. Later she is being told by the doctor, that a boy also has this strange disease and she realizes that with the boy she has drawn, she also got that boy into her disturbing dreams. She also notices that it gets harder and harder for her to wake up from her dreams. As she misses her father who is ofter abroad she draws her father into the house. She makes a mistake and her father is looking very angry on the painting. She tries to rubber him out but realizes that she cannot change anything already drawn. And next time she falls asleep the horror begins. Her father is mad and blind (because she draw s*** on his head to mark him as 'invalid') and tries to get into the paperhouse and kill Anna and his [[friend]]. Her dreams became a [[horrendous]] nightmare. They manage to escape and to [[kill]] her father and Anna can [[finally]] wake up. Than Anna finds her self in the hospital where her parents are sitting beside her bed. The doctors thought that she fell into a [[coma]] or so. They tell Anna that the other boy died and that they [[want]] to [[travel]] to the ocean to get over those tragical [[happenings]]. Anna draws a watchtower and [[notices]] that the same watchtower can be [[found]] [[near]] the [[hotel]] they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his name because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and forget those [[terrible]] dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] this movie when I was about 10 years old. Unfortunately I [[did]] not watch it to the [[terminates]] because it was [[distributed]] late at night. Now I bought it on DVD because I can remember that I liked it.

This is really not an [[routine]] horror movie. It has some horror elements but I rather [[sorted]] it as fantasy. I [[wished]] it but I [[awaited]] for a bit more [[monstrosity]] and scary scenes. [[Namely]] the scene when Anna's dad comes into the paperhouse trying to kill her is a bit short.

[[Currently]] to the plot. This movie is about a young girl named Anna who gets ill. While she is ill and has to lie in her bed because of her high fewer she turns on to finishing her drawing about a house - the paperhouse. When she fells a sleep, which often strangely happens just immediately, she finds herself near the house on a big green field. She realizes that the house is exactly like the one she has drawn and that every new detail also appears in her dreams. One day she draws a boy into the house to have somebody to talk to. As she [[overlooks]] to draw his legs (because he is sitting behind a window) the boy cannot walk. Later she is being told by the doctor, that a boy also has this strange disease and she realizes that with the boy she has drawn, she also got that boy into her disturbing dreams. She also notices that it gets harder and harder for her to wake up from her dreams. As she misses her father who is ofter abroad she draws her father into the house. She makes a mistake and her father is looking very angry on the painting. She tries to rubber him out but realizes that she cannot change anything already drawn. And next time she falls asleep the horror begins. Her father is mad and blind (because she draw s*** on his head to mark him as 'invalid') and tries to get into the paperhouse and kill Anna and his [[freund]]. Her dreams became a [[odious]] nightmare. They manage to escape and to [[assassinated]] her father and Anna can [[eventually]] wake up. Than Anna finds her self in the hospital where her parents are sitting beside her bed. The doctors thought that she fell into a [[eat]] or so. They tell Anna that the other boy died and that they [[wanna]] to [[travelling]] to the ocean to get over those tragical [[phenomena]]. Anna draws a watchtower and [[notifications]] that the same watchtower can be [[discovered]] [[nearer]] the [[motel]] they traveled to. She runs to the watchtower and meets the boy (I am just not mentioning his name because I cannot remember it and do not want to go back to the previous html page) and can say good bye to him and forget those [[abominable]] dreams forever.

There were a few thing I did not understand in the movie. First of all it was the ending which I absolutely dislike. I think it is too long while the main part of the movie becomes a bit too short. How does the boy fly a helicopter and speak to Anna as he is supposed to be dead? Why did you have to put such a stupid radio on the wall? I hated that scene it was so dumb to me. It almost ruined the main horror scene.

Things I liked were the scene with the photograph of Anna's dad which was the first real scary and horror scene. I liked the boy. The actor was awesome. He was even better than Anna. I also liked how Anna tries to get her father out of the painting while she is asleep and how she is looking for it in the garbage.

Overall a good movie. I give it a 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3023 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[saw]] an [[interview]] with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead character, Marvin Mange, in this [[film]].) He said in it that he wanted to [[emphasize]] physical comedy here so much that even if you had the [[volume]] [[turned]] off you'd be laughing at this movie. Obviously that must be the secret. I had the volume [[turned]] up. I was actually listening to this thing and thought it was a [[disaster]], and [[completely]] unfunny - a [[major]] [[disappointment]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Deuce]] Bigalow, [[Male]] Gigolo."

The story is [[stupid]]: Mange is a [[major]] loser who dreams of being a cop who [[gets]] [[filled]] with a bunch of [[animal]] [[transplants]] after a [[car]] [[accident]] by a mad [[scientist]] [[type]] appropriately named Dr. Wilder ([[Michael]] Caton), and as a [[result]] starts to lose control of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can sniff out drugs hidden in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he also has a nasty habit of eating people's cows and trying to seduce their [[goats]], but surely that's a small price to pay? It just didn't do anything for me.

The cast left much to be desired. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than John McGinley? Here, he plays Sgt. Sisk, Mange's commander on the police force, as a repugnantly cartoonish character (much the same as his doctor character in the inexplicably popular TV series "Scrubs.") I was anxious to get a look at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[job]] (can anything in this movie be [[called]] "[[serious]]?") She, of course, gained her fame as a [[contestant]] on the first "[[Survivor]]" and she [[proves]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't prove here is that she has any discernible [[talent]] as an [[actress]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Police]] [[Chief]] Wilson. I [[mean]], how [[old]] is this guy now? He's the [[size]] of some of the [[cows]] Mange tried to eat, and he seemed out of [[breath]] the [[whole]] way through. I'm surprised he [[made]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adam]] Sandler (who also served as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky [[toys]] in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. I [[observed]] an [[interviews]] with Rob Schneider (who plays the lead character, Marvin Mange, in this [[cinematography]].) He said in it that he wanted to [[stresses]] physical comedy here so much that even if you had the [[volumes]] [[transformed]] off you'd be laughing at this movie. Obviously that must be the secret. I had the volume [[revolved]] up. I was actually listening to this thing and thought it was a [[calamities]], and [[totally]] unfunny - a [[grandes]] [[frustration]] after Schneider's hilarious performance in "[[Carburettor]] Bigalow, [[Mens]] Gigolo."

The story is [[twit]]: Mange is a [[considerable]] loser who dreams of being a cop who [[receives]] [[fill]] with a bunch of [[zoo]] [[grafting]] after a [[cars]] [[crash]] by a mad [[investigator]] [[genre]] appropriately named Dr. Wilder ([[Michel]] Caton), and as a [[outcomes]] starts to lose control of his "animal instincts." This makes him a "supercop." He can sniff out drugs hidden in body cavities and outrun horses. Of course, he also has a nasty habit of eating people's cows and trying to seduce their [[goat]], but surely that's a small price to pay? It just didn't do anything for me.

The cast left much to be desired. Is there a more irritating actor in all of Hollywood than John McGinley? Here, he plays Sgt. Sisk, Mange's commander on the police force, as a repugnantly cartoonish character (much the same as his doctor character in the inexplicably popular TV series "Scrubs.") I was anxious to get a look at Colleen Haskell's first "serious" acting [[workplace]] (can anything in this movie be [[drew]] "[[grave]]?") She, of course, gained her fame as a [[nominee]] on the first "[[Surviving]]" and she [[illustrates]] here what we knew from that: she's cute as a button. What she doesn't prove here is that she has any discernible [[talents]] as an [[actor]]. And what's with Ed Asner as [[Cops]] [[Head]] Wilson. I [[meaning]], how [[longtime]] is this guy now? He's the [[sizes]] of some of the [[cattle]] Mange tried to eat, and he seemed out of [[breathe]] the [[ensemble]] way through. I'm surprised he [[brought]] it through the filming. There's a brief cameo at the end by [[Adams]] Sandler (who also served as Executive Producer of this.)

Anyway, I chuckled twice: Mange playing with his squeaky [[plaything]] in the police car, and the scene Schneider has with Haskell and the orangutan - the orangutan has more acting talent! So, for two chuckles - 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I [[think]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poor]]. When I watched it for the first time I thought it was the old version(1956). When I really found out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there could be such a [[bad]] film made so recently. Thats really all I wanted to say. This film had a good [[plot]] though, nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very badly made. Well that is all. So long I [[thoughts]] that the shots and lighting were very [[poorest]]. When I watched it for the first time I thought it was the old version(1956). When I really found out the true year of the film I was shocked. I didn't know that there could be such a [[negative]] film made so recently. Thats really all I wanted to say. This film had a good [[intrigue]] though, nothing you couldn't miss out on if you would simply read the novel that George Orwelll wrote. All I really want to say has already been said except for this: I can't believe that this film could have possibly received so many awards and nominations.I gave this film a One (awful), because I felt that it was very badly made. Well that is all. So long --------------------------------------------- Result 3025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[God]] Bless 80's slasher films. This is a fun, fun [[movie]]. This is what slasher [[films]] are all about. Now I'm not saying horror movies, just slasher [[films]]. It goes like this: A high school nerd is picked on by all these stupid jocks and cheerleaders, and then one of their [[pranks]] goes horribly wrong. Disfigured and back for revenge, sporting a Joker/Jester mask (pretty creepy looking, might i add), Marty begins to kill off those teens one by one many [[years]] later, after he manages to make them believe that their old abandoned high school is having a reunion. That is basically the plot? What's wrong with that? That's the beauty of 80's slasher films, most of them i would say. A lot of things could be so ridiculous, but they keep drawing you more in an' in as they go by. Especially this film.

It features some outrageous killings, and some are quite creative as well. (poisoning of a beer can, acid bath, i can't remember a javelin ever being used before in any other slasher film either)It really is a fun, fun movie. That's all it is. Nevermind the fact that the characters are complete idiots, never mind their stupidity, and never mind the outrageous, random things that occur in this film. Such as lights being able to be controlled by the killer (when he's not even switching any buttons, you'll see) and toilets being able to cough up blood, baths being able to have acid come out of them, just use that as part of your entertainment! Because thats what really makes it entertaining.

Movies like this represent 80's slashers. Never again could movies like this get made, know why? It isn't the 80's anymore. That is why you should just cherish them for what they are, good fun! I highly recommend this film if you're a hardcore fan of Slahsers such as Friday the 13th.

One last note this movie also had a kick ass villain as well, Marty Rantzen. A disfigured, nerd, who kills all his old foes in a creepy Jester mask. A good villain makes a good slasher. Simon Scuddamore, who played Marty apparently committed suicide shortly after Slaughter High was released. That alone adds something creepy to the film, and sticks with it and it even makes you feel more sorry for the Marty character, i guess. All in all, great 80's slashers fun! It's a shame it will never be the same again... [[Lord]] Bless 80's slasher films. This is a fun, fun [[cinema]]. This is what slasher [[cinema]] are all about. Now I'm not saying horror movies, just slasher [[movie]]. It goes like this: A high school nerd is picked on by all these stupid jocks and cheerleaders, and then one of their [[jokes]] goes horribly wrong. Disfigured and back for revenge, sporting a Joker/Jester mask (pretty creepy looking, might i add), Marty begins to kill off those teens one by one many [[yrs]] later, after he manages to make them believe that their old abandoned high school is having a reunion. That is basically the plot? What's wrong with that? That's the beauty of 80's slasher films, most of them i would say. A lot of things could be so ridiculous, but they keep drawing you more in an' in as they go by. Especially this film.

It features some outrageous killings, and some are quite creative as well. (poisoning of a beer can, acid bath, i can't remember a javelin ever being used before in any other slasher film either)It really is a fun, fun movie. That's all it is. Nevermind the fact that the characters are complete idiots, never mind their stupidity, and never mind the outrageous, random things that occur in this film. Such as lights being able to be controlled by the killer (when he's not even switching any buttons, you'll see) and toilets being able to cough up blood, baths being able to have acid come out of them, just use that as part of your entertainment! Because thats what really makes it entertaining.

Movies like this represent 80's slashers. Never again could movies like this get made, know why? It isn't the 80's anymore. That is why you should just cherish them for what they are, good fun! I highly recommend this film if you're a hardcore fan of Slahsers such as Friday the 13th.

One last note this movie also had a kick ass villain as well, Marty Rantzen. A disfigured, nerd, who kills all his old foes in a creepy Jester mask. A good villain makes a good slasher. Simon Scuddamore, who played Marty apparently committed suicide shortly after Slaughter High was released. That alone adds something creepy to the film, and sticks with it and it even makes you feel more sorry for the Marty character, i guess. All in all, great 80's slashers fun! It's a shame it will never be the same again... --------------------------------------------- Result 3026 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Unhinged]] follows the [[typical]] [[plot]] of the [[early]] 80's slasher trend. Pretty [[Young]] [[Girls]] In Peril. I have to [[give]] it up for the filmmaker who used a [[helicopter]] for some of the [[early]] road-trip [[shots]], you [[actually]] [[think]] for a [[second]] there's [[going]] to be quality in the production. Watching "[[Unhinged]]" was like [[seeing]] an amateur acting class go through it's warm-up. Some of the most awkward, badly [[lit]], overlong scenes are played out with the gusto of a [[Valium]] overdose. I [[wondered]] why they didn't just put the cue-cards on camera so the actresses wouldn't have to constantly shift their gaze. The two main girls were obviously chosen for their T&A factor rather than talent. Laurel Munson as the main chick Terry is as exciting as [[watching]] paint dry. Two nude scenes make for an adolescent thrill. Janet Penner and Virginia Settle as the crazy/creepy daughter and mother the chicks find themselves stranded with compete for [[Worst]] Acting Ever. Long pauses, weird expressions, emphasis on the wrong word, it's all there and is a delight for those of us out there who love bad films. The scenes shift suddenly with long black-outs you could drive a Mack truck through. Cartoon lightning [[crashes]] [[across]] shots without even [[bothering]] to show the sky. Eighties eyeshadow assaults the viewer. But ya know, it grew on me. I felt [[sorry]] for it. I [[wanted]] to hug it, kiss it's boo-boos and make it better. The ending doesn't make up for the damage it's caused but I grinned anyway. I have my own theories regarding the whole "banned" hype and hope that anyone who chooses to view this film does so with [[substantial]] substance [[abuse]] and a [[sense]] of humor. [[Otherwise]] pass. [[Deranged]] follows the [[classic]] [[intrigue]] of the [[swift]] 80's slasher trend. Pretty [[Youthful]] [[Dame]] In Peril. I have to [[lend]] it up for the filmmaker who used a [[chopper]] for some of the [[swift]] road-trip [[punches]], you [[genuinely]] [[believe]] for a [[secondly]] there's [[go]] to be quality in the production. Watching "[[Deranged]]" was like [[see]] an amateur acting class go through it's warm-up. Some of the most awkward, badly [[alight]], overlong scenes are played out with the gusto of a [[Ambien]] overdose. I [[enquired]] why they didn't just put the cue-cards on camera so the actresses wouldn't have to constantly shift their gaze. The two main girls were obviously chosen for their T&A factor rather than talent. Laurel Munson as the main chick Terry is as exciting as [[staring]] paint dry. Two nude scenes make for an adolescent thrill. Janet Penner and Virginia Settle as the crazy/creepy daughter and mother the chicks find themselves stranded with compete for [[Hardest]] Acting Ever. Long pauses, weird expressions, emphasis on the wrong word, it's all there and is a delight for those of us out there who love bad films. The scenes shift suddenly with long black-outs you could drive a Mack truck through. Cartoon lightning [[crash]] [[throughout]] shots without even [[teasing]] to show the sky. Eighties eyeshadow assaults the viewer. But ya know, it grew on me. I felt [[dorry]] for it. I [[wanting]] to hug it, kiss it's boo-boos and make it better. The ending doesn't make up for the damage it's caused but I grinned anyway. I have my own theories regarding the whole "banned" hype and hope that anyone who chooses to view this film does so with [[enormous]] substance [[abusing]] and a [[feeling]] of humor. [[Alternately]] pass. --------------------------------------------- Result 3027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The [[best]] Treasure Island ever made. They just don't make films

like this anymore, or ever. No one makes films like this. More

than a novelty, this film is funny, frank and fascinating, yet moody,

mysterious and morose. This is one of my [[favorite]] pictures. The

director must have had some idea what it is all about, but he

certainly leaves room for your own impressions and interpretations, while leaving little left to the imagination. Why he

has not made more films like this, I have no idea. While

reminding me of some of the best noir, it is one of a kind. But this

is not for the lazy or simple. The [[optimum]] Treasure Island ever made. They just don't make films

like this anymore, or ever. No one makes films like this. More

than a novelty, this film is funny, frank and fascinating, yet moody,

mysterious and morose. This is one of my [[preferable]] pictures. The

director must have had some idea what it is all about, but he

certainly leaves room for your own impressions and interpretations, while leaving little left to the imagination. Why he

has not made more films like this, I have no idea. While

reminding me of some of the best noir, it is one of a kind. But this

is not for the lazy or simple. --------------------------------------------- Result 3028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. Finally the film express sexual [[relationship]] of Alex, kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at last, Alex waked up and realized that they would not have result and future.Ending up was sad.

The director Tudor Giurgiu was in AMC theatre on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the audiences that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this movie are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. I am not so much like Love Sick as I image. Finally the film express sexual [[rapport]] of Alex, kik, Sandu their triangle love were full of intenseness, frustration and jealous, at last, Alex waked up and realized that they would not have result and future.Ending up was sad.

The director Tudor Giurgiu was in AMC theatre on Sunday 12:00PM on 08/10/06, with us watched the movie together. After the movie he told the audiences that the purposed to create this film which was to express the sexual relationships of Romanian were kind of complicate.

On my point of view sexual life is always complicated in everywhere, I don't feel any particular impression and effect from the movie. The love proceeding of Alex and Kiki, and Kiki and her brother Sandu were kind of next door neighborhood story.

The two main reasons I don't like this movie are, firstly, the film didn't told us how they started to fall in love? Sounds like after Alex moved into the building which Kiki was living, then two girls are fall in love. It doesn't make sense at all. How a girl would fall in love with another girl instead of a man. Too much fragments, you need to image and connect those stories by your mind. Secondly, The whole film didn't have a scene of Alex and Kik's sexual intercourse, that 's what I was waiting for……. However, it still had some parts were deserved to recommend. The "ear piercing " part was kind of interesting. Alex was willing to suffer the pain of ear piercing to appreciate kik's love. That was a touching scene which gave you a little idea of their love. Also, the scene of they were lying in the soccer field, the conversation express their loves were truthful and passionate. --------------------------------------------- Result 3029 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (77%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The film starts with a manager (Nicholas Bell) giving welcome investors (Robert Carradine) to Primal Park . A secret project mutating a primal animal using fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik Park¨, and some scientists resurrect one of nature's most fearsome predators, the Sabretooth tiger or Smilodon . Scientific ambition turns deadly, [[however]], and when the high voltage fence is opened the creature escape and begins savagely stalking its prey - the human visitors , tourists and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters enter in the restricted area of the security center and are attacked by a pack of large pre-historical animals which are deadlier and bigger . In addition , a security agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her mate (Brian Wimmer) fight hardly against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the real star stars and they are astounding terrifyingly though not convincing. The giant animals savagely are stalking its prey and the group run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome predators. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more dangerous and slow stalks its victims.

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and gore as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths appear with mediocre special effects.The story provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it results to be quite boring .The giant animals are majority made by computer generator and seem totally lousy .Middling performances though the players reacting appropriately to becoming food.Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[ridiculous]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent attack scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by James R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and John Rhys Davies and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with Steven Strait, Cliff Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[badly]] directed by George Miller and with no originality because takes too many elements from previous films. Miller is an Australian director usually working for television (Tidal wave, Journey to the center of the earth, and many others) and occasionally for cinema ( The man from Snowy river, Zeus and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : Below average, bottom of barrel. The film starts with a manager (Nicholas Bell) giving welcome investors (Robert Carradine) to Primal Park . A secret project mutating a primal animal using fossilized DNA, like ¨Jurassik Park¨, and some scientists resurrect one of nature's most fearsome predators, the Sabretooth tiger or Smilodon . Scientific ambition turns deadly, [[still]], and when the high voltage fence is opened the creature escape and begins savagely stalking its prey - the human visitors , tourists and scientific.Meanwhile some youngsters enter in the restricted area of the security center and are attacked by a pack of large pre-historical animals which are deadlier and bigger . In addition , a security agent (Stacy Haiduk) and her mate (Brian Wimmer) fight hardly against the carnivorous Smilodons. The Sabretooths, themselves , of course, are the real star stars and they are astounding terrifyingly though not convincing. The giant animals savagely are stalking its prey and the group run afoul and fight against one nature's most fearsome predators. Furthermore a third Sabretooth more dangerous and slow stalks its victims.

The movie delivers the goods with lots of blood and gore as beheading, hair-raising chills,full of scares when the Sabretooths appear with mediocre special effects.The story provides exciting and stirring entertainment but it results to be quite boring .The giant animals are majority made by computer generator and seem totally lousy .Middling performances though the players reacting appropriately to becoming food.Actors give vigorously physical performances dodging the beasts ,running,bound and leaps or dangling over walls . And it packs a [[farcical]] final deadly scene. No for small kids by realistic,gory and violent attack scenes . Other films about Sabretooths or Smilodon are the following : ¨Sabretooth(2002)¨by James R Hickox with Vanessa Angel, David Keith and John Rhys Davies and the much better ¨10.000 BC(2006)¨ by Roland Emmerich with with Steven Strait, Cliff Curtis and Camilla Belle. This motion picture filled with bloody moments is [[desperately]] directed by George Miller and with no originality because takes too many elements from previous films. Miller is an Australian director usually working for television (Tidal wave, Journey to the center of the earth, and many others) and occasionally for cinema ( The man from Snowy river, Zeus and Roxanne,Robinson Crusoe ). Rating : Below average, bottom of barrel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] I [[really]] [[wanted]] to [[like]] this [[movie]] because the critics have been unkind

to it (to [[say]] the [[least]])... but it was [[terrible]]. [[Really]] [[terrible]]. Badly

[[acted]], a [[witless]] [[script]], cack [[handed]] [[direction]]... Watching this [[film]] was

like watching a [[car]] crash- you [[want]] to [[look]] away but you keep [[staring]]

because you [[want]] to see how [[messy]] it's [[going]] to [[get]]. Well, the [[car]] is

[[wrecked]] and there are no [[survivors]]. [[On]] the plus side, the [[cinematography]]

was [[nice]], made me want to go on [[holiday]], if only to [[cleanse]] myself from

this [[unholy]] I [[truthfully]] [[wished]] to [[iike]] this [[cinematography]] because the critics have been unkind

to it (to [[tell]] the [[slightest]])... but it was [[scary]]. [[Truthfully]] [[scary]]. Badly

[[reacted]], a [[foolish]] [[hyphen]], cack [[rendered]] [[directions]]... Watching this [[cinema]] was

like watching a [[motorcar]] crash- you [[wanted]] to [[gaze]] away but you keep [[watching]]

because you [[wanted]] to see how [[chaotic]] it's [[go]] to [[obtain]]. Well, the [[autos]] is

[[devastated]] and there are no [[nagin]]. [[Onto]] the plus side, the [[film]]

was [[enjoyable]], made me want to go on [[vacations]], if only to [[purification]] myself from

this [[satanic]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3031 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I wanted to punch the TV. Watching it was torture. I hated it. Never watch this movie. The terrorists are annoying. Adam Sandler is annoying. I normally like him but not in this one. I wanted to break the DVD. This is the most irritating film in the world. The comedian he's jealous of is obnoxious. The only remotely funny part is the rocker with the black teeth getting all the girls. It was so irritating I wanted to punch the TV. DO NOT BUY THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU WANT TO ANNOY SOMEONE. If you even like Adam Sandler a little bit, Don't buy it. It will just make you hate him. Do yourself a favor, if you see it in the store, hide it to put everyone out of danger of buying it. Its a waste of the $1.99 I paid for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3032 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] If you have seen Dogtown and Z-Boys or have any interest in seeing the real, non-caricature, "Real American" side of America then Riding [[Giants]] will hit deeper than anything you've seen before.

This film is "unreal", a facile term if ever there was one, but [[hugely]] [[appropriate]] if you can derive any form of literal meaning out of it - it is a 100% factual documentary, but with all the drama of an opera, and the completely apparent sense of love, expert and knowing instilled by Stacy Peralta's direction and narration, this film expertly leads you from swell to big wave while keeping you completely enthralled in everything you are being given the privilege of seeing.

This film is a symphony, crafted as well as Beethovens 9th, beginning beautifully with its prelude in Hawaii, tugging deeply on human emotion in Santa Cruz and finishing with uproar, triumph and crescendo in Laird Hamiltons feats, again in Hawaii.

Like classical music; like Beethoven's 9th, Ride of the Valkyries or Barbers Adagio for Strings, this may be the only piece you like, but it's worth it. Trust me. If you have seen Dogtown and Z-Boys or have any interest in seeing the real, non-caricature, "Real American" side of America then Riding [[Titans]] will hit deeper than anything you've seen before.

This film is "unreal", a facile term if ever there was one, but [[unimaginably]] [[opportune]] if you can derive any form of literal meaning out of it - it is a 100% factual documentary, but with all the drama of an opera, and the completely apparent sense of love, expert and knowing instilled by Stacy Peralta's direction and narration, this film expertly leads you from swell to big wave while keeping you completely enthralled in everything you are being given the privilege of seeing.

This film is a symphony, crafted as well as Beethovens 9th, beginning beautifully with its prelude in Hawaii, tugging deeply on human emotion in Santa Cruz and finishing with uproar, triumph and crescendo in Laird Hamiltons feats, again in Hawaii.

Like classical music; like Beethoven's 9th, Ride of the Valkyries or Barbers Adagio for Strings, this may be the only piece you like, but it's worth it. Trust me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Words]] can't describe how bad this movie is. I can't explain it by writing only. You have too see it for yourself to get at grip of how [[horrible]] a [[movie]] really can be. Not that I recommend you to do that. There are so many clichés, mistakes (and all other negative things you can imagine) here that will just make you cry. To start with the [[technical]] first, there are a LOT of mistakes regarding the airplane. I won't list them here, but just mention the coloring of the plane. They didn't even manage to show an airliner in the colors of a fictional airline, but instead used a 747 painted in the original Boeing livery. Very bad. The plot is stupid and has been done many times before, only much, much better. There are so many ridiculous moments here that i lost count of it really early. Also, I was on the bad guys' side all the time in the movie, because the good guys were so stupid. "Executive Decision" should without a doubt be you're choice over this one, even the "Turbulence"-movies are better. In fact, every other movie in the world is better than this one. [[Phrases]] can't describe how bad this movie is. I can't explain it by writing only. You have too see it for yourself to get at grip of how [[spooky]] a [[kino]] really can be. Not that I recommend you to do that. There are so many clichés, mistakes (and all other negative things you can imagine) here that will just make you cry. To start with the [[technological]] first, there are a LOT of mistakes regarding the airplane. I won't list them here, but just mention the coloring of the plane. They didn't even manage to show an airliner in the colors of a fictional airline, but instead used a 747 painted in the original Boeing livery. Very bad. The plot is stupid and has been done many times before, only much, much better. There are so many ridiculous moments here that i lost count of it really early. Also, I was on the bad guys' side all the time in the movie, because the good guys were so stupid. "Executive Decision" should without a doubt be you're choice over this one, even the "Turbulence"-movies are better. In fact, every other movie in the world is better than this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3034 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Neil Simon's THE ODD [[COUPLE]] set up a [[model]] for [[many]] of his [[later]] plays. [[Felix]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired [[roommates]] in the original, the former being picky and neat, the latter being slovenly and loose. Simon [[would]] [[rewrite]] (less successfully) the play in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD [[COUPLE]], with female [[roommates]]. He [[made]] it a mixed couple (a woman with her daughter, and a man) in THE [[GOODBYE]] GIRLS. He also [[gave]] it an additional twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE BOYS, a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al Lewis and Willie Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "apartment" problem is reduced to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as Willie, and George Burns as Al.

In actuality, Al probably does not think totally badly of Willie - Willie is pathological on the subject of Al. First Al had little habits, such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words beginning with the letter "t", and slightly jabbing Willie with his index finger, on stage. Secondly, Al retired when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to try to get him jobs in commercials. But Willie can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. So he rarely is able to stay to the end of a rehearsal for a commercial.

Ben is asked to get the two back together for a live scene of their most famous sketch on a television show about American Comedy. He does bring Al to see Willie, and the sparks begin flying, as neither can figure out what the other is doing (and this is just in rehearsal. On top of that, Willie is insisting on changes (minor ones, but they throw off Al) such as saying "ENTER!!!" when Al knocks on the door. The initial rehearsal is a failure, but Ben manages to get them to the taping of the show. The question is if they will complete the scene in the finished program or will Willie wring Al's neck?

The three leads, Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter (example: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "Voyage of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually end up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. Neil Simon's THE ODD [[MATCHING]] set up a [[modeling]] for [[several]] of his [[afterward]] plays. [[Valeria]] Unger and Oscar Madison were the unsuitably paired [[roomies]] in the original, the former being picky and neat, the latter being slovenly and loose. Simon [[should]] [[rewriting]] (less successfully) the play in the 1990s as THE NEW ODD [[MATCHING]], with female [[roomies]]. He [[introduced]] it a mixed couple (a woman with her daughter, and a man) in THE [[CIAO]] GIRLS. He also [[provided]] it an additional twist in 1973 with THE SUNSHINE BOYS, a Broadway hit starring Jack Alberson and Sam Levine as Al Lewis and Willie Clark, the aged, semi-retired Vaudevillians. Here the "apartment" problem is reduced to a teaming of two men who can't stand each other. The 1976 film starred Walter Matthau as Willie, and George Burns as Al.

In actuality, Al probably does not think totally badly of Willie - Willie is pathological on the subject of Al. First Al had little habits, such as accidentally spitting slightly when pronouncing words beginning with the letter "t", and slightly jabbing Willie with his index finger, on stage. Secondly, Al retired when his wife died. Willie was not ready to retire (and has been forcing his nephew and agent, Ben (Richard Benjamin) to try to get him jobs in commercials. But Willie can't remember lines unless they are funny, and keeps flubbing them. So he rarely is able to stay to the end of a rehearsal for a commercial.

Ben is asked to get the two back together for a live scene of their most famous sketch on a television show about American Comedy. He does bring Al to see Willie, and the sparks begin flying, as neither can figure out what the other is doing (and this is just in rehearsal. On top of that, Willie is insisting on changes (minor ones, but they throw off Al) such as saying "ENTER!!!" when Al knocks on the door. The initial rehearsal is a failure, but Ben manages to get them to the taping of the show. The question is if they will complete the scene in the finished program or will Willie wring Al's neck?

The three leads, Matthau, Burns, and Benjamin, do very well with the one-liners, frequently reminiscent of vaudeville patter (example: "Chest pains...I'm getting chest pains Uncle Willie. Every Thursday I come here and get chest pains!" "So, come on Fridays!"). Benjamin strives to prove his deep affection for his uncle, although Matthau's rough outer shell makes it difficult (he only smooths down when he discusses the glory days of vaudeville). Matthau has a little better grasp on reality (at first) than Burns, who seems senile by his repeating himself - but in actuality Matthau's sense of rejection by the world that once applauded him make him less willing to behave properly. Burns is not senile - he takes things slowly. But he seems far happier in accepting his retirement.

I call this a final "Voyage of Discovery" for our modern Lewis and Clark. Al and Willie transcend their old skits, as they gradually end up realizing that they have more in common in their old age than they thought. Even the irascible Willie admits that Al may be (to him) a pain in the ass, but he was a funny man.

Burns was not the original choice for the part of "Al Lewis" (supposedly Dale of the team Smith and Dale). Jack Benny was. Benny probably would have done a good job, but ill-health forced him out (he died in 1975). Burns (whose last involvement in any film was in THE SOLID GOLD CADILLAC in 1956 as the narrator) turned in such a fine performance that he got the "Oscar" for best supporting actor, and was to have a career in movies in the next decade in such films as OH GOD!; OH GOD, YOU DEVIL; and GOING IN STYLE. He died in 1996 age 100, having proved that he was more than just a brilliant straight man for his wife Gracie Allan. --------------------------------------------- Result 3035 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] As an [[aging]] rocker, this movie mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 favourite bands ever - but with the incredible cast (everyone) - and the fantastic storyline - I just [[love]] this piece of creative [[genius]]. I cannot recommend it more [[highly]] - and Mick Jones added so much (Foreigner lead and primary songwriter along with the greatest rock singer ever - Lou Gramm) - I have [[watched]] this [[great]] work more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and Jimmy Nail - talent oozes from every pore - then Astrid.... and [[Karen]]..... what more could an aging rocker ask for!! 10/10 - bloody brilliant.

Alastair, Perth, Western Oz, Originally from Windsor, England. As an [[ageing]] rocker, this movie mentions Heep and Quo - my 2 favourite bands ever - but with the incredible cast (everyone) - and the fantastic storyline - I just [[iike]] this piece of creative [[engineers]]. I cannot recommend it more [[unimaginably]] - and Mick Jones added so much (Foreigner lead and primary songwriter along with the greatest rock singer ever - Lou Gramm) - I have [[observed]] this [[whopping]] work more than 10 times- Bill Nighy - what a voice - and Jimmy Nail - talent oozes from every pore - then Astrid.... and [[Karin]]..... what more could an aging rocker ask for!! 10/10 - bloody brilliant.

Alastair, Perth, Western Oz, Originally from Windsor, England. --------------------------------------------- Result 3036 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] "[[Saving]] [[Grace]]" is never riotously funny, but it [[delivers]] [[quite]] a few good laughs and I enjoyed it to a [[significant]] [[degree]]. Brenda Blethyn is a fine actress, and does a [[good]] [[job]] at [[portraying]] widower [[Grace]], who resorts to [[growing]] marijuana to [[pay]] off her [[massive]] debts. The supporting cast also does a [[fine]] [[job]]. French [[actor]] Tchecky Karyo has a [[funny]] [[little]] role. The premise [[alone]] is appealing. The idea of an over-the-hill woman growing and smoking pot sounds funny enough. And the film plays around with the [[premise]] wisely every now and then. Of course, there are flat moments, like one where two elderly women mistaken Grace's marijuana leaves for tea leaves and they start pulling childish antics at the store where they work. That was a mindless gag that didn't [[quite]] take off. The film's tone is downbeat and [[occasionally]] dull, but I [[got]] enough laughs to [[give]] this English import a [[recommendation]].

My score: 7 (out of 10) "[[Rescued]] [[Gracia]]" is never riotously funny, but it [[offerings]] [[altogether]] a few good laughs and I enjoyed it to a [[sizable]] [[diploma]]. Brenda Blethyn is a fine actress, and does a [[alright]] [[labor]] at [[detailing]] widower [[Gracia]], who resorts to [[grows]] marijuana to [[paying]] off her [[vast]] debts. The supporting cast also does a [[alright]] [[jobs]]. French [[protagonist]] Tchecky Karyo has a [[comical]] [[scant]] role. The premise [[only]] is appealing. The idea of an over-the-hill woman growing and smoking pot sounds funny enough. And the film plays around with the [[assumption]] wisely every now and then. Of course, there are flat moments, like one where two elderly women mistaken Grace's marijuana leaves for tea leaves and they start pulling childish antics at the store where they work. That was a mindless gag that didn't [[utterly]] take off. The film's tone is downbeat and [[intermittently]] dull, but I [[ai]] enough laughs to [[lend]] this English import a [[proposals]].

My score: 7 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3037 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] It's not [[often]] I feel [[compelled]] to [[give]] negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the [[maxim]], "if you don't have [[anything]] good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we [[listen]] to [[everyday]] who nitpick at [[things]] we [[like]]. If it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabriel]] this movie is [[pathetically]] [[HORRID]]. I say this to you to warn you in advance that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. If you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a short summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and unconvincing mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we wander aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next big line. By the end of the movie you're actually wishing he'd blow his horn and make the walls of Jericho fall on the people who made this un-natural disaster.

Bottom line - it's an insult to our intelligence that they made a sequel to this film in the first place. The original told the right story, answered the questions that should have been, and left alone the ones you were meant to ponder afterwards. There are no compelling reasons to follow these characters that was in the first - the priest who lost his faith, the little girl who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her children - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. It's not [[ordinarily]] I feel [[coerced]] to [[confer]] negative criticism of a film; after all I often feel the [[maxime]], "if you don't have [[nothing]] good to say don't say it at all," would be apt advice for the many naysayers we [[heed]] to [[routine]] who nitpick at [[matters]] we [[iike]]. If it's all the same to you the reader though I feel compelled to point out that with the lone exception of Christopher Walken in a returning role as [[Gabrielle]] this movie is [[woefully]] [[GRUESOME]]. I say this to you to warn you in advance that even if you are a fan of Walken's deadpan delivery and style or liked the original "Prophecy" that you will be sorely dissapointed. If you buy it, return it. If you rent it, make sure it's only ninety-nine cents.

What's wrong with this movie? A full list would take too long to read and would bore you to tears, but a short summary would be the following: the once rather crystalline clear picture of the relationship between angels and mortals of the first film is ripped to shreds. Gabriel is turned from the rather morbid right hand of God he once was (and in this role he is WICKEDLY funny in the first) to little more than a thug for heaven. Since Walken is so good at playing heavies (we all remember Frank White from "King of New York") he is still enjoyable but the supporting cast is an unmitigated and unconvincing mess of mortals and angels alike who couldn't buy a clue for 50 cents. If you can figure out the plot you're a smarter man than I. One gets the feeling we wander aimlessly from scene to scene just to move the film along to Walken's next big line. By the end of the movie you're actually wishing he'd blow his horn and make the walls of Jericho fall on the people who made this un-natural disaster.

Bottom line - it's an insult to our intelligence that they made a sequel to this film in the first place. The original told the right story, answered the questions that should have been, and left alone the ones you were meant to ponder afterwards. There are no compelling reasons to follow these characters that was in the first - the priest who lost his faith, the little girl who kept the "big secret", the teacher who protected her children - even Lucifer himself was more interesting BY himself in the first film than all the other characters in the sequel put together. I feel sorry for anybody who sees this film and not the first because they'll probably never want to watch the original and that's a real tragedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3038 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Loonatics Unleashed " is the worst thing that could happen to the classic characters created by Chuck Jones . The "Loony Tunes" have many spin -offs and different versions , some were good ,others not very much .But "Loonatics " it's the worst .The concept is stupid and derivative of shows as "The Power Rangers " and "Teen Titans " . There wasn't any similarity with the original characters and the stories are boring and poorly made . The new designs are ugly and the animation is pathetic . This show just doesn't work .This horrible waste of animation is a complete failure and this shouldn't have be nothing more than a bad joke . Lame ! Zero stars --------------------------------------------- Result 3039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie [[shows]] how [[racist]] [[John]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that [[exists]] in our educational system. How quick he [[forgets]] that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and failed at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an instigating black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this [[film]]. Singleton [[barely]] [[touched]] on the relationships between the white and black characters that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice touch! This movie [[exhibitions]] how [[racial]] [[Johannes]] Singleton is. He portrays whites and other races that are not black as the evil that [[existed]] in our educational system. How quick he [[forget]] that it is this same educational system that made him what he is and failed at it. Ice Cube's character is the epitome of an instigating black man that was responsible for most of the violence in this [[cinematography]]. Singleton [[hardly]] [[poked]] on the relationships between the white and black characters that were trying to reach out to each other. When Omar Epps says " I need to be with my people", that racist remark spoke volume. And John, don't think for a minute that the picture of Thomas Jefferson in the tower stairwell did not get my attention. Nice touch! --------------------------------------------- Result 3040 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[opinion]], Hathaway did [[superb]] direction that conveys what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon philosophies and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will enjoy the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a unique quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. Henry Hathaway was daring, as well as enthusiastic, for his love of the people of the early days in US history. However, to critique historical inaccuracies of his film about Brigham Young and the Mormon people are not necessary or useful in commenting for this film. In my [[visualise]], Hathaway did [[extraordinaire]] direction that conveys what a Mormon people were in the early history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints during the time period beginning with the martyrdom of Joseph Smith to the date of film release. In often subtle filming and dialog delivery, he covered Mormon philosophies and teachings in many of the segments and scenes.

I remember watching this movie on many Saturday mornings during my youth in the early 1950's. That was just over 10 years after the films release and before the Los Angeles Temple was completed, which I watched being constructed and instilled more curious wonder of who Mormons were. I recently purchased this film and will enjoy the following messages that Hathaway interpreted in his film.

1. Love for all people, regardless of their personal beliefs, 2. Charity to those in need or not, 3. Family is high in importance, 4. Listen respectfully and carefully, because even opposing messages have important points to consider and adopt, 5. Work hard, both individually and in community, 6. Prepare and store for future days of need, 7. Hope is a binding link to a higher being, and for our daily lives, 8. And, that there is a unique quality to any group, and appreciate those that are identified as beneficial. --------------------------------------------- Result 3041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I've recently went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the [[movie]] I was too [[young]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[missed]] all these years. For me being able to see [[movies]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[great]]. Most people feel as though the [[music]] are the best [[part]], but I don't think that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's judge by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act rather they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my perspective, the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the things that happen are actually true events that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was coming from the city at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential mainly at the club "First Avenue & 7th St Entry" where in fact Prince, among other musicians, got their career started. It's also a known fact that Prince and Morris Day always had a competition with each other in real life, but it was a friendly competition. They were always friends. So the story basically plays off of that competition aspect of their rivalry rather than their friendship which shows the true competitive side of what occurred at club "First Avenue" for it's time.

Another reason why this movie is good is due to the fact that some of the situations that occur in the movie are actually based on events that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the movie more realistic as far as the emotion because he's telling his trials and tribulations pre-superstardom. Plus, his dedication he puts into his performances is phenomenal. Prince made sure that every moment in the movie was done perfectly. Anytime you hear a song play in the movie it's in perfect sync with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own. I've recently went back and watched this movie again from not seeing it in years. When I first seen the [[flick]] I was too [[youthful]] to understand what the movie was about. Now that I've seen it again I couldn't believe what I've [[mistook]] all these years. For me being able to see [[theater]] for what they are, I think that this movie was [[large]]. Most people feel as though the [[musicians]] are the best [[parties]], but I don't think that's true. Most people don't realize how good the story is because it's judge by the acting. The truth of the matter is that no one in the movie were really trying to act rather they were just being themselves. The entire main cast were just playing themselves. They weren't trying to be anyone else, but themselves.

I've actually watched and analyzed the work and effort put into the movie. Now from my perspective, the situations shown in the movie are pretty much based on what actually went on musically in Minneapolis at the time and it's most of the things that happen are actually true events that happened in Prince's career and who can tell it better than him? The music that was coming from the city at the time was starting to be recognized and be revolutionary. It was interesting to see how the music was very influential mainly at the club "First Avenue & 7th St Entry" where in fact Prince, among other musicians, got their career started. It's also a known fact that Prince and Morris Day always had a competition with each other in real life, but it was a friendly competition. They were always friends. So the story basically plays off of that competition aspect of their rivalry rather than their friendship which shows the true competitive side of what occurred at club "First Avenue" for it's time.

Another reason why this movie is good is due to the fact that some of the situations that occur in the movie are actually based on events that Prince has gone through in his life with the music aspect and the personal. To me, this made the movie more realistic as far as the emotion because he's telling his trials and tribulations pre-superstardom. Plus, his dedication he puts into his performances is phenomenal. Prince made sure that every moment in the movie was done perfectly. Anytime you hear a song play in the movie it's in perfect sync with the situation at hand.

Prince is in all a musical genius and he has proved it on many occasions. This movie is what really put Prince on the map officially and he hasn't slowed down since. Anyone who has watched this movie or still (unbelieveably) hasn't watched it yet, when you sit down and view this film you have have to watch it with intellect or you will miss the whole aspect of the movie. If you really love music this is definitely the movie to watch. Above what anyone else says I think it's a great movie to watch and own. --------------------------------------------- Result 3042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] If you [[like]] CB4, you have no idea what you're [[missing]] if you haven't [[seen]] this film yet. This movie is crazy [[hilarious]], and incorporates a lot more about the hip [[hop]] industry than any other parody movie... It is unfortunate that this movie has not been released on [[dvd]] because it is one movie that everybody I've ever watched it with has [[loved]] and wanted a copy. If you really want a good laugh and you like hip hop and are a little familiar with some old-school performers, definitley [[rent]] this movie. There aren't that many video rental places that have copies of it, but if you happen to come across one you will not be disappointed. If you [[adores]] CB4, you have no idea what you're [[vanished]] if you haven't [[watched]] this film yet. This movie is crazy [[comical]], and incorporates a lot more about the hip [[jump]] industry than any other parody movie... It is unfortunate that this movie has not been released on [[dvds]] because it is one movie that everybody I've ever watched it with has [[cared]] and wanted a copy. If you really want a good laugh and you like hip hop and are a little familiar with some old-school performers, definitley [[tenancy]] this movie. There aren't that many video rental places that have copies of it, but if you happen to come across one you will not be disappointed. --------------------------------------------- Result 3043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] The name of this [[film]] [[alone]] made me want to [[see]] just what it was all about, so I [[taped]] this film during the early hours of the AM. If you ever wanted to see what miners had to go through during the early days and actually see a dramatic scene when the mine crumbles in on the men. This [[film]] [[clearly]] wants to [[show]] that Germany and France can work together and be friends after WW I and how the Germans came to the aid of the French miners much to the unbelief of the French townsfolk. The [[actors]] were all [[outstanding]], with unusual scenes in the mine with a horse and a small young boy who worked in the mine. There is an old old retired miner who manges to go down the mine by ladder when the elevator breaks down. If you are a real film buff, this is a film you will not want to [[miss]]. The name of this [[flick]] [[merely]] made me want to [[consults]] just what it was all about, so I [[strapped]] this film during the early hours of the AM. If you ever wanted to see what miners had to go through during the early days and actually see a dramatic scene when the mine crumbles in on the men. This [[kino]] [[blatantly]] wants to [[exposition]] that Germany and France can work together and be friends after WW I and how the Germans came to the aid of the French miners much to the unbelief of the French townsfolk. The [[actresses]] were all [[admirable]], with unusual scenes in the mine with a horse and a small young boy who worked in the mine. There is an old old retired miner who manges to go down the mine by ladder when the elevator breaks down. If you are a real film buff, this is a film you will not want to [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3044 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was an [[awful]] movie. Basically [[Jane]] March was a half-Korean [[North]] Korean spy sent by Kim Jong Il to do something horrible to the American forces in South Korea. She becomes a maid for an American military family, they all regard her as being Korean even [[though]] she looks more white (I [[believe]] the actress is either 1/4 or 1/8 Southeast Asian, not at all Korean), and the teenage boy of the household starts out hating her and [[ends]] up sleeping with her. The [[way]] Korea and the U.S. military in Korea is depicted is completely [[insane]]. Of course, the [[screenwriter]] and the director were [[obviously]] [[white]] men who've never [[spent]] a day in Korea prior to this movie and had no [[intention]] of showing any real [[insight]] into life in Korea for either Koreans or American GIs and [[instead]] just tried to fulfill their [[pathetic]] Asiaphile fantasies without any regard to how [[completely]] [[unbelievable]] it [[made]] the [[movie]]. Anyone who's ever been to [[Korea]] will know this is utter garbage. In the end the [[North]] Korean honhyol spy-girl gets killed, in an [[obvious]] "paying for her [[sins]]" way. Very [[bad]] [[film]] with a made-for-TV feel to it. This was an [[spooky]] movie. Basically [[Jeanne]] March was a half-Korean [[Norte]] Korean spy sent by Kim Jong Il to do something horrible to the American forces in South Korea. She becomes a maid for an American military family, they all regard her as being Korean even [[despite]] she looks more white (I [[believing]] the actress is either 1/4 or 1/8 Southeast Asian, not at all Korean), and the teenage boy of the household starts out hating her and [[end]] up sleeping with her. The [[routing]] Korea and the U.S. military in Korea is depicted is completely [[loca]]. Of course, the [[writer]] and the director were [[definitely]] [[bianca]] men who've never [[expenditure]] a day in Korea prior to this movie and had no [[ambition]] of showing any real [[vision]] into life in Korea for either Koreans or American GIs and [[alternatively]] just tried to fulfill their [[unhappy]] Asiaphile fantasies without any regard to how [[perfectly]] [[incredible]] it [[accomplished]] the [[kino]]. Anyone who's ever been to [[Rok]] will know this is utter garbage. In the end the [[Norte]] Korean honhyol spy-girl gets killed, in an [[palpable]] "paying for her [[trespasses]]" way. Very [[mala]] [[kino]] with a made-for-TV feel to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[stopped]] five [[minutes]] in when Beowulf was given a double-shot, [[automatic]] crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not have telescoping sights, but Beowulf beat Grendel in hand-to-hand combat. The terrible, [[wooden]] acting and [[eternal]] darkness that plagues all Sci-Fi [[Original]] [[Movies]] didn't [[help]] either. Having only gotten a few minutes in before I [[felt]] my [[bile]] [[rise]] and [[decided]] to watch I Love Lucy reruns [[instead]], that's [[really]] about all I have to say. But, you might as well just realize that it's a made-for-TV [[movie]] and [[skip]] it right there.

A [[travesty]]. I [[ceasing]] five [[mins]] in when Beowulf was given a double-shot, [[automated]] crossbow with sights on it. Not only do crossbows not have telescoping sights, but Beowulf beat Grendel in hand-to-hand combat. The terrible, [[timber]] acting and [[incorruptible]] darkness that plagues all Sci-Fi [[Initial]] [[Kino]] didn't [[pomoc]] either. Having only gotten a few minutes in before I [[smelled]] my [[bladder]] [[raise]] and [[deciding]] to watch I Love Lucy reruns [[however]], that's [[truly]] about all I have to say. But, you might as well just realize that it's a made-for-TV [[flick]] and [[jumping]] it right there.

A [[joke]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Although]] Robert "Knox" Benfer has his fans, I'm not one of them. His [[films]] are [[asinine]] and amateurish, and and just not very [[funny]], [[unless]] you're a 14 year old with an [[underdeveloped]] [[sense]] of humor.

He's certainly not [[famous]], as him immature [[fans]] [[would]] [[like]] you to [[believe]], by [[harassing]] people at Wikipedia, or [[stuffing]] the [[ratings]] votes here at the IMDb. He's [[certainly]] not been profiled by any [[major]] [[media]] outlets, which speaks volumes about his and his creation's "[[fame]]".

Benfer does have some [[slight]] [[skill]] at [[limited]] animation, but he needs to [[get]] away from his [[young]] sycophants and [[learn]] to write some [[actual]] [[funny]] material before he'll be [[taken]] [[seriously]] as a [[real]] [[entertainer]]. As of this moment, [[though]], he's just a kid with a camera, and it shows. [[While]] Robert "Knox" Benfer has his fans, I'm not one of them. His [[kino]] are [[nonsensical]] and amateurish, and and just not very [[droll]], [[if]] you're a 14 year old with an [[underdevelopment]] [[feeling]] of humor.

He's certainly not [[proverbial]], as him immature [[lovers]] [[should]] [[adores]] you to [[reckon]], by [[pestering]] people at Wikipedia, or [[giggle]] the [[rating]] votes here at the IMDb. He's [[arguably]] not been profiled by any [[principal]] [[medium]] outlets, which speaks volumes about his and his creation's "[[renown]]".

Benfer does have some [[lightweight]] [[capacities]] at [[restrained]] animation, but he needs to [[obtains]] away from his [[youths]] sycophants and [[learnt]] to write some [[real]] [[hilarious]] material before he'll be [[took]] [[profoundly]] as a [[genuine]] [[artists]]. As of this moment, [[while]], he's just a kid with a camera, and it shows. --------------------------------------------- Result 3047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] When I had first [[heard]] of "Solar [[Crisis]]" then got a load of the cast, I wondered why I had never [[heard]] of a [[movie]] with such a [[big]] [[cast]] before. Then I saw it.

Now I know.

[[For]] a [[movie]] that [[encompasses]] [[outer]] space, the [[sun]], [[vast]] [[deserts]] and sprawling metropolises, this is an [[awfully]] cramped and claustrophobic [[feature]]; it feels like everyone is hunkered close together so the [[camera]] won't have to pull too far back.

And the effects, while good, are pretty underwhelming; we're talking about the imminent destruction of the planet Earth if a team of scientists and soldiers cannot deflect a deadly solar flare. But other than shouting, sweating and a red glow about everything, there's no real feel of emergency.

Don't get me started about the cast. What Heston, Palance, Matheson, Boyle, et al are doing in this movie without even bothering to act with any feel for the material is anyone's guess. Makes you wonder who else's condos aren't paid for in Hollywood....

And as far as the end goes.... Well, let's just say it's tense and intriguing but it's too little too late in an effort like this. If it had kept up that kind of pace all through the film, maybe I would have heard of "Solar Crisis" sooner.

Two stars. Mostly for lost opportunities and bad career moves.

I wonder how Alan Smithee keeps his job doing junk like this? When I had first [[overheard]] of "Solar [[Crises]]" then got a load of the cast, I wondered why I had never [[listened]] of a [[cinematography]] with such a [[immense]] [[casting]] before. Then I saw it.

Now I know.

[[During]] a [[film]] that [[covers]] [[outdoor]] space, the [[sunlight]], [[large]] [[desert]] and sprawling metropolises, this is an [[terribly]] cramped and claustrophobic [[trait]]; it feels like everyone is hunkered close together so the [[cameras]] won't have to pull too far back.

And the effects, while good, are pretty underwhelming; we're talking about the imminent destruction of the planet Earth if a team of scientists and soldiers cannot deflect a deadly solar flare. But other than shouting, sweating and a red glow about everything, there's no real feel of emergency.

Don't get me started about the cast. What Heston, Palance, Matheson, Boyle, et al are doing in this movie without even bothering to act with any feel for the material is anyone's guess. Makes you wonder who else's condos aren't paid for in Hollywood....

And as far as the end goes.... Well, let's just say it's tense and intriguing but it's too little too late in an effort like this. If it had kept up that kind of pace all through the film, maybe I would have heard of "Solar Crisis" sooner.

Two stars. Mostly for lost opportunities and bad career moves.

I wonder how Alan Smithee keeps his job doing junk like this? --------------------------------------------- Result 3048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] i [[saw]] this movie when i was 13 and i really liked dana plato who later starred in different strokes as kimberly drummond . i don't think it's garbage .it was not [[meant]] to be a sequel to the [[documentary]] either . its just a cute kids movie about 3 children who go after men trying to find the boggy creek monster . the men get hurt and the kids rescue them with the help of the creature .haunting shots of the arkansas swamp and scenery were neat . this is a [[good]] [[movie]] for kids ,no real violence a few mild scares but good fun for the young kids. i [[sawthe]] this movie when i was 13 and i really liked dana plato who later starred in different strokes as kimberly drummond . i don't think it's garbage .it was not [[signified]] to be a sequel to the [[documentation]] either . its just a cute kids movie about 3 children who go after men trying to find the boggy creek monster . the men get hurt and the kids rescue them with the help of the creature .haunting shots of the arkansas swamp and scenery were neat . this is a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]] for kids ,no real violence a few mild scares but good fun for the young kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 3049 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a long lost horror gem starring Sydney Lassick ("Carrie" and others) and Barbara Bach. It is sometimes difficult to locate a copy of this film but it's worth it. This film is creepy yet cheesy at the same time. It seems that 3 young newswomen (Karen, Vicky, and Jennifer) travel to the small city of Solvang, California to cover a festival when a mix-up occurs involving their hotel room and they seek refuge at the home of Earnest Keller (Lassick) and his strange wife Virginia. Vickie stays behind, feeling ill, as the other 2 are off to film their story. She is soon murdered at the house, in a VERY cheesy way by some unknown force hiding in the ventilation system (she is decapitated by the closing cover of the vent as it comes crashing down on her while she is being tugged through and into the basement). Soon Karen returns and she is murdered in an even more brutal fashion by having her face rammed through the vent cover. Jennifer is fighting with her (ex?)lover in a rather boring sub plot and when she returns home, her hosts (whom by now we have discovered are brother and sister and that whatever it is that is in the basement is their son) devise a plot to try to murder her as well. Virgina does not totally agree with Earnest's plan to murder Jennifer but she is tricked into going into the basement where she meets Junior. Here the film turns almost comic as Junior (portrayed hysterically by Stephen Furst) is a deformed, mentally deficient, manchild whose actions and motions will cause a few chuckles even though it's supposed to be scary. This is where the pace of the film picks up and the ending is well done. The actors/actresses do a terrific job with the material especially Lassick, Furst, and Bach and although it's not the most horrifying film ever made it is highly entertaining! --------------------------------------------- Result 3050 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] *[[SPOILER]] ALERT: I [[wish]] I could discuss this without revealing specific plot points, but I can't. Sorry.*

I was looking for an IMDb review of the George C. Scott movie when I stumbled across the summary and [[reviews]] for this version. It had so many positive [[reviews]] that I decided to order it even though: (a)while truncated and rushed, I thought George C. Scott embodied the tortured nature (and physical appearance) of the book's Rochester to a T; and (b)even while looking at the DVD's cover, I was thinking "Isn't Timothy Dalton too good-looking for the role?" The latter concern was reinforced by the fact that I decided to re-read the book while the DVD was on backorder. That said, the minute I started watching this, I was captivated. At first it was disconcerting to hear 1840's dialog spoken as written--with little or no attempts at modernization--but Dalton and Clarke threw themselves into it so thoroughly, that I actually enjoyed the fact that the adapters trusted the audience to follow archaic speech. To have so much of the book up on the screen was an extra bonus. I know someone who won't watch any versions of Jane Eyre because "who wants to see a film about a man who keeps a poor crazy woman in the attic?" Frankly, if someone who hadn't read the book stumbled across the hour and a half or two hour versions, they would think that's pretty much all the story entails--Rochester's secret and its affect on everyone around him. Luckily, this version is actually about Jane Eyre's whole life.

Some people have criticized the casting. Dalton is too dashing; Clarke is too reserved. I can't argue against the first point, but he is so "in the moment" that I believe he IS Rochester. To me, Clarke's performance is on the mark. Jane Eyre is quiet, guarded. If one remembers the book, so much of the adult Jane's fieriness and passion occurs during her private struggles. Some of the criticisms baffle me. Reviewers say Clarke is too short or isn't pretty enough. The book goes on ad infinitum about how small and plain Jane is. Ms. Clarke shouldn't be tall and the filmmakers toned down her looks to make Jane's declarations of her lack of beauty credible. She can scarcely help it if Dalton is tall. Some say there is no chemistry between the leads. What?!! The scene when Jane finally comes out of her room after the wedding fiasco fairly vibrates with passion and longing and sadness and regret--and that's just the first example that comes to mind.

I do agree with some of the other criticisms. I too missed more scenes with Helen Burns and the Rivers siblings. Some of the dialog was oddly truncated. When Rochester declares, "Jane, you misjudge me. I do not hate her because she is mad," I waited for the rest of the exchange when Rochester explains how if Jane were to go mad, he would still love and care for her. It's a powerful moment in the book, and I wish it had been included. I think it was a mistake to bring a scene with Rochester into the part of the story where Jane is on her own. It might have been done for clarity's sake, but I found it jarring. I wanted the sly humor of the scene where Jane opines that Rochester's ardor will cool and he'll become gruff again, but he may "like" her again by and by. Dalton's performance is so good that the rare misstep is glaring--when Rochester weeps in the library, I saw him as an actor doing a crying scene, not as Rochester. As for the sets, if anyone has ever caught an episode of the 1960's show "Dark Shadows," one knows what to expect--very stark and sometimes rickety looking interiors. Others have commented thoroughly and succinctly about the make-up job Rochester sports at the end. Yikes! It IS bad. The conclusion is too abrupt. After all that anguish and suspense, I wanted a more rounded off ending. And, on my copy of the DVD, having credits at the beginning and end of all eleven 25-30 minute episodes gets to be a bit much. That said, I am so glad I have this film and will watch it again and again. *[[BAFFLE]] ALERT: I [[wants]] I could discuss this without revealing specific plot points, but I can't. Sorry.*

I was looking for an IMDb review of the George C. Scott movie when I stumbled across the summary and [[scrutinize]] for this version. It had so many positive [[scrutiny]] that I decided to order it even though: (a)while truncated and rushed, I thought George C. Scott embodied the tortured nature (and physical appearance) of the book's Rochester to a T; and (b)even while looking at the DVD's cover, I was thinking "Isn't Timothy Dalton too good-looking for the role?" The latter concern was reinforced by the fact that I decided to re-read the book while the DVD was on backorder. That said, the minute I started watching this, I was captivated. At first it was disconcerting to hear 1840's dialog spoken as written--with little or no attempts at modernization--but Dalton and Clarke threw themselves into it so thoroughly, that I actually enjoyed the fact that the adapters trusted the audience to follow archaic speech. To have so much of the book up on the screen was an extra bonus. I know someone who won't watch any versions of Jane Eyre because "who wants to see a film about a man who keeps a poor crazy woman in the attic?" Frankly, if someone who hadn't read the book stumbled across the hour and a half or two hour versions, they would think that's pretty much all the story entails--Rochester's secret and its affect on everyone around him. Luckily, this version is actually about Jane Eyre's whole life.

Some people have criticized the casting. Dalton is too dashing; Clarke is too reserved. I can't argue against the first point, but he is so "in the moment" that I believe he IS Rochester. To me, Clarke's performance is on the mark. Jane Eyre is quiet, guarded. If one remembers the book, so much of the adult Jane's fieriness and passion occurs during her private struggles. Some of the criticisms baffle me. Reviewers say Clarke is too short or isn't pretty enough. The book goes on ad infinitum about how small and plain Jane is. Ms. Clarke shouldn't be tall and the filmmakers toned down her looks to make Jane's declarations of her lack of beauty credible. She can scarcely help it if Dalton is tall. Some say there is no chemistry between the leads. What?!! The scene when Jane finally comes out of her room after the wedding fiasco fairly vibrates with passion and longing and sadness and regret--and that's just the first example that comes to mind.

I do agree with some of the other criticisms. I too missed more scenes with Helen Burns and the Rivers siblings. Some of the dialog was oddly truncated. When Rochester declares, "Jane, you misjudge me. I do not hate her because she is mad," I waited for the rest of the exchange when Rochester explains how if Jane were to go mad, he would still love and care for her. It's a powerful moment in the book, and I wish it had been included. I think it was a mistake to bring a scene with Rochester into the part of the story where Jane is on her own. It might have been done for clarity's sake, but I found it jarring. I wanted the sly humor of the scene where Jane opines that Rochester's ardor will cool and he'll become gruff again, but he may "like" her again by and by. Dalton's performance is so good that the rare misstep is glaring--when Rochester weeps in the library, I saw him as an actor doing a crying scene, not as Rochester. As for the sets, if anyone has ever caught an episode of the 1960's show "Dark Shadows," one knows what to expect--very stark and sometimes rickety looking interiors. Others have commented thoroughly and succinctly about the make-up job Rochester sports at the end. Yikes! It IS bad. The conclusion is too abrupt. After all that anguish and suspense, I wanted a more rounded off ending. And, on my copy of the DVD, having credits at the beginning and end of all eleven 25-30 minute episodes gets to be a bit much. That said, I am so glad I have this film and will watch it again and again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3051 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] We [[expected]] something [[great]] when we went to [[see]] this [[bomb]]. It is basically a Broadway play put on film. The music is [[plain]] [[terrible]]. There isn't one memorable song in the movie -- heard any hits from this movie? You won't because there aren't any. Some of the musical numbers go on so long that I got up to go to the restroom and get some pop corn and it was still going when I got back! If they were [[good]] songs well -- but they suck. The pace is slow, [[terrible]] character [[development]]. The lead was praised for her singing but sounded like she screamed every song -- it was almost impossible to stand. This movie has NOTHING to offer anyone but die-hard Broadway enthusiasts. This is without a doubt the most over rated movie I've seen in my entire life. A complete waist of time and money. There is [[nothing]] memorable about this movie except Danny Glover -- who wasn't on screen enough and whose character wasn't developed enough. Rent the video and you'll agree -- this [[movie]] was an [[expensive]], over produced, polished [[dog]] do. We [[waited]] something [[wondrous]] when we went to [[seeing]] this [[blaster]]. It is basically a Broadway play put on film. The music is [[lowlands]] [[scary]]. There isn't one memorable song in the movie -- heard any hits from this movie? You won't because there aren't any. Some of the musical numbers go on so long that I got up to go to the restroom and get some pop corn and it was still going when I got back! If they were [[alright]] songs well -- but they suck. The pace is slow, [[scary]] character [[evolution]]. The lead was praised for her singing but sounded like she screamed every song -- it was almost impossible to stand. This movie has NOTHING to offer anyone but die-hard Broadway enthusiasts. This is without a doubt the most over rated movie I've seen in my entire life. A complete waist of time and money. There is [[anything]] memorable about this movie except Danny Glover -- who wasn't on screen enough and whose character wasn't developed enough. Rent the video and you'll agree -- this [[kino]] was an [[costly]], over produced, polished [[doggie]] do. --------------------------------------------- Result 3052 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (95%)]] I [[saw]] this film a couple of weeks ago, and it's been stuck in my head ever since. It [[stars]] two spellbinding [[characters]] in what is [[unfortunately]] a mediocre documentary. To get the [[true]] [[story]] of the Beales, I had to wade through all of the DVD's bonus material and commentaries and search the web.

Although the Maysles and their fans (not to mention Edith and Edie themselves) bristle at the suggestion that this film is exploitative, this is exploitation in the truest sense of the word. Very little effort is every made to explain the Beales or how they came to the condition they were in - the Maysles approach seems to be to just turn the camera on and wait for Edith and Edie to say something outrageous. The sound, even on the Criterion re-release is poor and difficult to follow. Although I appreciate this film was made somewhat early in the history of documentary film, it's ironic to compare it to Geraldo Rivera's (!) far superior series on the sexual abuse of mentally retarded patients at Willowbrook State School in Staten Island from 1972, four years before Grey Gardens was shot.

To paraphrase a review in the New Yorker, there were many things Edith and Edie needed in their lives, and a documentary wasn't one of them.

As for Edith and Edie, the thing I kept thinking while watching the film was "where the hell is their family"? They were living in dangerous, unhealthy, unsafe conditions. How is it that Jackie O, married to one of the richest men on Earth (or the wealthy Bouvier family themselves) couldn't afford to get Edith and Edie a decent home? Or at the very least hire a part-time housekeeper or caregiver to come in and keep an eye on them both? It's shameful and a lasting disgrace to the entire Bouvier family.

Although this review may sound negative I would strongly recommend Grey Gardens to anyone who enjoys documentaries. Perhaps someday someone will come along and do a documentary about this documentary - bringing in the rich backstory (and afterstory) of the Beales and the whole subsection of Hamptons society in the 1970's. I [[witnessed]] this film a couple of weeks ago, and it's been stuck in my head ever since. It [[superstar]] two spellbinding [[features]] in what is [[unluckily]] a mediocre documentary. To get the [[veritable]] [[history]] of the Beales, I had to wade through all of the DVD's bonus material and commentaries and search the web.

Although the Maysles and their fans (not to mention Edith and Edie themselves) bristle at the suggestion that this film is exploitative, this is exploitation in the truest sense of the word. Very little effort is every made to explain the Beales or how they came to the condition they were in - the Maysles approach seems to be to just turn the camera on and wait for Edith and Edie to say something outrageous. The sound, even on the Criterion re-release is poor and difficult to follow. Although I appreciate this film was made somewhat early in the history of documentary film, it's ironic to compare it to Geraldo Rivera's (!) far superior series on the sexual abuse of mentally retarded patients at Willowbrook State School in Staten Island from 1972, four years before Grey Gardens was shot.

To paraphrase a review in the New Yorker, there were many things Edith and Edie needed in their lives, and a documentary wasn't one of them.

As for Edith and Edie, the thing I kept thinking while watching the film was "where the hell is their family"? They were living in dangerous, unhealthy, unsafe conditions. How is it that Jackie O, married to one of the richest men on Earth (or the wealthy Bouvier family themselves) couldn't afford to get Edith and Edie a decent home? Or at the very least hire a part-time housekeeper or caregiver to come in and keep an eye on them both? It's shameful and a lasting disgrace to the entire Bouvier family.

Although this review may sound negative I would strongly recommend Grey Gardens to anyone who enjoys documentaries. Perhaps someday someone will come along and do a documentary about this documentary - bringing in the rich backstory (and afterstory) of the Beales and the whole subsection of Hamptons society in the 1970's. --------------------------------------------- Result 3053 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "Proximity" tells of a convict (Lowe) who thinks the prison staff is out to kill him. This very ordinary film is an action/drama with a weak plot; stereotypical, poorly developed characters; and a one dimensional performance by Lowe. A forgettable film not worthy of further commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 3054 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] And [[yet]] another run of South Park [[comes]] to an end. This wasn't as [[strong]] an episode as I'd [[hoped]] for, but [[Night]] of the [[Living]] Homeless was a [[stronger]] finisher then Stanley's [[Cup]], Tsst, Bloody [[Mary]], or Erection Day. It still can't hold a [[candle]] to [[Woodland]] Critter Christmas and Goobacks, but few episodes can.

Night of the Living Homeless is a [[spoof]] of the zombie [[genre]], done in a way only South Park would [[think]] of. Instead of flesh [[eating]] zombies, the entities are homeless that request change and seem to survive off of it.

Randy and other residents are locked in the Community Center, though this time on the roof, where they can survey the scene. A particularly funny moment is when one member finds out his home is gone, and becomes homeless, leaving Randy no choice but to shoot him.

Meanwhile, the four boys set out to solve the problem, with the whole story behind the homeless takeover trying to convey a message, but being seriously uninspired. South Park is at it's best a lot of the times when it is being ridiculous. Matt and Trey played it safe this week, and didn't really critique the homeless problem, just lampooned it.

The shock moment of the episode comes when a scientist shoots himself in an attempt to avoid the homeless. This is the first time a suicide on South Park goes wrong, and we watch the poor man miss his brain and then attempt to shoot himself many times while he painfully dies. Another inspired South Park moment.

Overall, the episode was funny, but it was kept from being great by withholding any real commentary on the homeless and sticking straight with the zombie shtick. The ending is somewhat funny, but nothing [[new]].

Now we must wait until October for the next batch of episodes. It's a long haul, but South Park must be applauded for it's run. The show seemed to be running out of steam last season, but now it's back in full form. And [[still]] another run of South Park [[occurs]] to an end. This wasn't as [[vigorous]] an episode as I'd [[expected]] for, but [[Nightly]] of the [[Live]] Homeless was a [[bigger]] finisher then Stanley's [[Copa]], Tsst, Bloody [[Mari]], or Erection Day. It still can't hold a [[candela]] to [[Woodlands]] Critter Christmas and Goobacks, but few episodes can.

Night of the Living Homeless is a [[simulating]] of the zombie [[gender]], done in a way only South Park would [[ideas]] of. Instead of flesh [[dining]] zombies, the entities are homeless that request change and seem to survive off of it.

Randy and other residents are locked in the Community Center, though this time on the roof, where they can survey the scene. A particularly funny moment is when one member finds out his home is gone, and becomes homeless, leaving Randy no choice but to shoot him.

Meanwhile, the four boys set out to solve the problem, with the whole story behind the homeless takeover trying to convey a message, but being seriously uninspired. South Park is at it's best a lot of the times when it is being ridiculous. Matt and Trey played it safe this week, and didn't really critique the homeless problem, just lampooned it.

The shock moment of the episode comes when a scientist shoots himself in an attempt to avoid the homeless. This is the first time a suicide on South Park goes wrong, and we watch the poor man miss his brain and then attempt to shoot himself many times while he painfully dies. Another inspired South Park moment.

Overall, the episode was funny, but it was kept from being great by withholding any real commentary on the homeless and sticking straight with the zombie shtick. The ending is somewhat funny, but nothing [[novel]].

Now we must wait until October for the next batch of episodes. It's a long haul, but South Park must be applauded for it's run. The show seemed to be running out of steam last season, but now it's back in full form. --------------------------------------------- Result 3055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Well, were to start? This is by far one of the [[worst]] films I've ever paid good money to see. I won't comment on the story itself, it's a wonderful classic, but here it feels like a soap [[opera]]. To start with, the acting, except for Eric Bana, is soap opera quality. I've always been a [[fan]] of Brad Pitt, but here every actor on The Bold and the Beautiful [[puts]] him to [[shame]]. The camera action doesn't [[help]], either. How it lingers on him when he's thinking, it just takes me back to Brooke Forrester's days in the lab! Peter O'Toole has either had a really bad plastic surgery, or he is desperately in need of one. Either way, he looks more like Linda Evans than Linda Evans! And to end my comments, Diane Kruger is a cute girl, but she sure is no Helen of Troy. Peterson should rather have chosen Saffron Burrows for the role, since Elizabeth Taylor would be rather miscast by now. Well, were to start? This is by far one of the [[gravest]] films I've ever paid good money to see. I won't comment on the story itself, it's a wonderful classic, but here it feels like a soap [[drama]]. To start with, the acting, except for Eric Bana, is soap opera quality. I've always been a [[breather]] of Brad Pitt, but here every actor on The Bold and the Beautiful [[poses]] him to [[embarrass]]. The camera action doesn't [[pomoc]], either. How it lingers on him when he's thinking, it just takes me back to Brooke Forrester's days in the lab! Peter O'Toole has either had a really bad plastic surgery, or he is desperately in need of one. Either way, he looks more like Linda Evans than Linda Evans! And to end my comments, Diane Kruger is a cute girl, but she sure is no Helen of Troy. Peterson should rather have chosen Saffron Burrows for the role, since Elizabeth Taylor would be rather miscast by now. --------------------------------------------- Result 3056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] "[[Margaritas]] and Cock..."

This [[tremendously]] entertaining film grabs you from the opening scene and never [[stops]] delivering laughs, surprises and unexpectedly touching moments. I had more fun watching "The Matador" than almost any other film from 2005. It is a [[wacky]] film with an unforgettable [[character]], [[played]] to perfection by [[Pierce]] Brosnan.

Julian Noble (Brosnan) is a facilitator (hit-man) who specializes in high-end corporate [[gigs]] (assassinating rich dudes). He is [[also]] experiencing something [[akin]] to a mid-life crisis. [[After]] [[coming]] to [[realization]] that he has no [[real]] friends, no [[permanent]] [[home]] and no [[planned]] [[future]], he stumbles into a Mexican [[hotel]] bar one [[night]] and [[runs]] into Danny Wright (Kinnear).

Danny is a down-on-his-luck family [[man]] who is on the verge of [[losing]] the [[big]] [[business]] [[deal]] that just might [[turn]] things around for him. He loves his [[wife]] dearly, [[especially]] so since they lost their young [[son]] a few years [[earlier]].

The two [[men]] are chalk and cheese, [[hardly]] any common ground other than that they are in the same desolate bar one [[night]]. And somehow a [[conversation]] is [[struck]] that sets in to [[motion]] a chain of [[events]] that will [[change]] their [[lives]] [[forever]].

The [[friendship]] they form [[reminded]] me a [[lot]] of Laurel and [[Hardy]]. One is the [[straight]] [[man]] and the other is the [[persistent]] fool who [[gets]] them into [[trouble]]. The interplay is [[superbly]] timed and [[finely]] tuned, due in no [[small]] part to the [[wonderful]] performances from Brosnan and Kinnear.

But make no mistake... This is Brosnan's [[film]]. He [[imprints]] one of the most [[memorable]] and despicably [[likable]] [[characters]] of the decade. He could shoot your [[mother]] and [[apologize]] [[immediately]] [[thereafter]] and you'd [[probably]] forgive him. Brosnan may be cinema's ultimate [[charmer]], but this is his most [[endearing]] and [[complete]] performance to [[date]]. I wouldn't be averse to [[seeing]] an [[Oscar]] [[nod]] for this role.

[[Consider]] one scene where he [[overtly]] ogles a high-school [[girl]] with the impurest of [[thoughts]] and utters the line, "[[All]] blushy blushy... No sucky fucky". He does it with the familiar Bond smirk and manages to get away with it. He manages to tell a young boy, "Tell your mother to lose 30lbs and 20 years. Then get back to me" without coming across as unlikable. In fact, it makes us like him even more.

And yet the film manages to surprise us with some truly touching scenes, most of which come toward the end when the film takes some unpredictable turns. However, when Julian thumbs through his little black book to find someone to call on his birthday, or when Danny and his wife (Davis) console each other in their bedroom one night, the film reaches an unexpected depth of emotion.

"The Matador" is stylish and energetic. It is constantly entertaining. And it contains a career-defining role for Brosnan as the lonely hit-man looking for normalcy, friendship and a means to do at least one good thing in his life. This is an overlooked gem in 2005 and you should [[make]] an effort to see this film as soon as possible.

TC Candler of IndependentCritics.com "[[Daisies]] and Cock..."

This [[inordinately]] entertaining film grabs you from the opening scene and never [[halts]] delivering laughs, surprises and unexpectedly touching moments. I had more fun watching "The Matador" than almost any other film from 2005. It is a [[demented]] film with an unforgettable [[traits]], [[served]] to perfection by [[Pearce]] Brosnan.

Julian Noble (Brosnan) is a facilitator (hit-man) who specializes in high-end corporate [[concerts]] (assassinating rich dudes). He is [[similarly]] experiencing something [[similar]] to a mid-life crisis. [[Upon]] [[incoming]] to [[fulfillment]] that he has no [[actual]] friends, no [[continual]] [[dwellings]] and no [[projected]] [[impending]], he stumbles into a Mexican [[motel]] bar one [[nocturnal]] and [[manages]] into Danny Wright (Kinnear).

Danny is a down-on-his-luck family [[guy]] who is on the verge of [[wasting]] the [[massive]] [[corporations]] [[address]] that just might [[converting]] things around for him. He loves his [[women]] dearly, [[specifically]] so since they lost their young [[sons]] a few years [[prior]].

The two [[males]] are chalk and cheese, [[practically]] any common ground other than that they are in the same desolate bar one [[nocturnal]]. And somehow a [[discussion]] is [[knocked]] that sets in to [[petition]] a chain of [[phenomena]] that will [[modifying]] their [[iife]] [[indefinitely]].

The [[goodwill]] they form [[remind]] me a [[batch]] of Laurel and [[Robust]]. One is the [[successive]] [[dawg]] and the other is the [[chronic]] fool who [[receives]] them into [[problems]]. The interplay is [[amazingly]] timed and [[subtly]] tuned, due in no [[little]] part to the [[awesome]] performances from Brosnan and Kinnear.

But make no mistake... This is Brosnan's [[movies]]. He [[transplants]] one of the most [[unforgettable]] and despicably [[likeable]] [[attribute]] of the decade. He could shoot your [[mothers]] and [[apologizing]] [[expeditiously]] [[afterward]] and you'd [[potentially]] forgive him. Brosnan may be cinema's ultimate [[ravishing]], but this is his most [[likeable]] and [[finish]] performance to [[dates]]. I wouldn't be averse to [[witnessing]] an [[Oskar]] [[nods]] for this role.

[[Examine]] one scene where he [[candidly]] ogles a high-school [[girls]] with the impurest of [[idea]] and utters the line, "[[Entire]] blushy blushy... No sucky fucky". He does it with the familiar Bond smirk and manages to get away with it. He manages to tell a young boy, "Tell your mother to lose 30lbs and 20 years. Then get back to me" without coming across as unlikable. In fact, it makes us like him even more.

And yet the film manages to surprise us with some truly touching scenes, most of which come toward the end when the film takes some unpredictable turns. However, when Julian thumbs through his little black book to find someone to call on his birthday, or when Danny and his wife (Davis) console each other in their bedroom one night, the film reaches an unexpected depth of emotion.

"The Matador" is stylish and energetic. It is constantly entertaining. And it contains a career-defining role for Brosnan as the lonely hit-man looking for normalcy, friendship and a means to do at least one good thing in his life. This is an overlooked gem in 2005 and you should [[deliver]] an effort to see this film as soon as possible.

TC Candler of IndependentCritics.com --------------------------------------------- Result 3057 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] This [[last]] Dutch speaking [[film]] of Verhooven [[made]] me laugh good. As a [[film]] buff [[looking]] for all the small details and [[cross]] [[references]] etc in any movie I can assure [[anyone]] interested in film art that this [[piece]] amuses all the senses. I haven't read Gerard Reves book, on which the [[film]] is [[based]], but I still believe we get a candid [[picture]] of a [[somewhat]] self-conceited [[poet]]/[[writer]] who gets his (in a [[way]] - no [[spoiling]] here). An anti-hero surrounded by [[characters]] that have their [[ambiguous]] [[intentions]], as has he. All this in a [[superbly]] [[packaged]] [[cinematography]], [[Paul]] Verhopven [[manages]] to [[turn]] the otherwise [[rather]] cute "gesellich(?)" Dutch [[locations]] into a suspenseful film-noir [[setting]], [[impressive]] [[work]]! This [[latter]] Dutch speaking [[cinematography]] of Verhooven [[introduced]] me laugh good. As a [[filmmaking]] buff [[researching]] for all the small details and [[traverse]] [[reference]] etc in any movie I can assure [[nobody]] interested in film art that this [[slice]] amuses all the senses. I haven't read Gerard Reves book, on which the [[cinema]] is [[founded]], but I still believe we get a candid [[visuals]] of a [[rather]] self-conceited [[poetic]]/[[screenwriter]] who gets his (in a [[routing]] - no [[ruining]] here). An anti-hero surrounded by [[features]] that have their [[woolly]] [[intending]], as has he. All this in a [[staggeringly]] [[bagged]] [[filmmaking]], [[Paulo]] Verhopven [[administering]] to [[converting]] the otherwise [[fairly]] cute "gesellich(?)" Dutch [[placements]] into a suspenseful film-noir [[configured]], [[awesome]] [[cooperates]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Understand i'm reviewing the film I have seen. I realize virtually all the nudity and gore was cut from this film, thus neutering it completely. When seeing names like Ginger Lynn and Jenna Jameson attached, I knew I wasn't going to get a horror classic, but at the very least I expected gratuitous boobies and bloodshed. But no, this has [[got]] to be the most [[butchered]] modern horror film, I mean it's easy to tell there is much more to certain scenes', but they suddenly cut away, or the scene just [[totally]] [[ends]] right as it begins. How does one screw up cannibals' and porn stars? I mean thats a winning formula, it makes me wonder if the director slept with some executive's wife or something, because it is literally amazing how much got cut from this. Reading about it a few years back in Fangoria, I was excited, it looked like a fun film, but unfortunately the true film is locked in a vault somewhere, and we must endure this piece of excrement retitled Evil Breed. Hopefully an unrated cut will be released someday, as I think a good movie exists in this mess, but until then best grab a twelve pack of Bud, cause thats the only way you'll make it through this movie. Understand i'm reviewing the film I have seen. I realize virtually all the nudity and gore was cut from this film, thus neutering it completely. When seeing names like Ginger Lynn and Jenna Jameson attached, I knew I wasn't going to get a horror classic, but at the very least I expected gratuitous boobies and bloodshed. But no, this has [[gets]] to be the most [[culled]] modern horror film, I mean it's easy to tell there is much more to certain scenes', but they suddenly cut away, or the scene just [[perfectly]] [[culminates]] right as it begins. How does one screw up cannibals' and porn stars? I mean thats a winning formula, it makes me wonder if the director slept with some executive's wife or something, because it is literally amazing how much got cut from this. Reading about it a few years back in Fangoria, I was excited, it looked like a fun film, but unfortunately the true film is locked in a vault somewhere, and we must endure this piece of excrement retitled Evil Breed. Hopefully an unrated cut will be released someday, as I think a good movie exists in this mess, but until then best grab a twelve pack of Bud, cause thats the only way you'll make it through this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3059 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] One of the [[best]] parts of Sundance is seeing [[movies]] that you [[would]] otherwise [[almost]] [[certainly]] [[miss]]. Unless you're a real art-house devotee, you [[probably]] don't [[catch]] [[many]] [[documentaries]]. [[Only]] a handful [[get]] any recognizable distribution. Fortunately, Sundance has increased its [[commitment]] to documentaries in recent years.

Shakespeare Behind Bars is a [[powerful]] documentary about a [[dramatic]] production [[group]] at the [[Luther]] Luckett [[Correctional]] [[Complex]] in LaGrange, [[Kentucky]]. [[Every]] year a [[group]] of [[inmates]] [[present]] a Shakespearean [[play]]. Director Hank Rogerson and his crew follow the troupe as [[roles]] are self-selected, interpreted, rehearsed and [[ultimately]] [[performed]].

The [[movie]] is filled with [[fascinating]] revelations for those of us that have not been exposed to prison [[environments]]. [[Despite]] the [[labels]] we know them by ([[convict]], [[felon]], [[murderer]], etc.) we [[soon]] [[began]] to [[appreciate]] and [[respect]] these [[men]] as thinking feeling human [[beings]]. Serendipitously, the [[play]] [[chosen]] for the year of filming was The Tempest, with its [[penetrating]] [[focus]] on [[forgiveness]] and [[redemption]]. The [[actors]] all grapple with the relevance of the [[play]] to their [[lives]], finding [[patterns]] and parallels with their [[characters]] and the [[meaning]] of the drama.

[[For]] a documentary [[film]], like a book, the [[best]] that can be [[hoped]] for is that we experience something that [[changes]] our [[lives]]. [[Shakespeare]] Behind [[Bars]] was a personal [[revelation]] for me. "O [[brave]] [[new]] [[world]], that has such creatures in it." One of the [[optimum]] parts of Sundance is seeing [[kino]] that you [[could]] otherwise [[approximately]] [[obviously]] [[mademoiselle]]. Unless you're a real art-house devotee, you [[potentially]] don't [[captured]] [[various]] [[literature]]. [[Exclusively]] a handful [[gets]] any recognizable distribution. Fortunately, Sundance has increased its [[pledges]] to documentaries in recent years.

Shakespeare Behind Bars is a [[emphatic]] documentary about a [[whopping]] production [[panels]] at the [[Lutheran]] Luckett [[Prison]] [[Sophisticated]] in LaGrange, [[Ky]]. [[Everything]] year a [[cluster]] of [[captives]] [[presented]] a Shakespearean [[gaming]]. Director Hank Rogerson and his crew follow the troupe as [[duties]] are self-selected, interpreted, rehearsed and [[lastly]] [[done]].

The [[flick]] is filled with [[mesmerizing]] revelations for those of us that have not been exposed to prison [[environment]]. [[Albeit]] the [[stickers]] we know them by ([[convicts]], [[mobster]], [[killer]], etc.) we [[promptly]] [[launches]] to [[thankful]] and [[respecting]] these [[males]] as thinking feeling human [[humans]]. Serendipitously, the [[gaming]] [[elects]] for the year of filming was The Tempest, with its [[entering]] [[accent]] on [[amnesty]] and [[reincarnation]]. The [[actresses]] all grapple with the relevance of the [[gaming]] to their [[life]], finding [[habits]] and parallels with their [[features]] and the [[mean]] of the drama.

[[Onto]] a documentary [[cinematographic]], like a book, the [[better]] that can be [[expected]] for is that we experience something that [[modified]] our [[iife]]. [[Shakespearean]] Behind [[Saloons]] was a personal [[epiphany]] for me. "O [[daring]] [[novo]] [[monde]], that has such creatures in it." --------------------------------------------- Result 3060 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Of the three titles from Jess Franco to find their way onto the Official DPP Video Nasty list (Devil Hunter, Bloody Moon and Women Behind Bars) this is perhaps the least deserving of notoriety, being a dreadfully dull jungle clunker enlivened only very slightly by a little inept gore, a gratuitous rape scene, and loads of nudity.

Gorgeous blonde Ursula Buchfellner plays movie star Laura Crawford who is abducted by a gang of ruthless kidnappers and taken to a remote tropical island inhabited by a savage tribe who worship the 'devil god' that lurks in the jungle (a big, naked, bulging-eyed native who likes to eat the hearts of nubile female sacrifices).

Employed by Laura's agent to deliver a $6million ransom, brave mercenary Peter Weston (Al Cliver) and his Vietnam vet pilot pal travel to the island, but encounter trouble when the bad guys attempt a double-cross. During the confusion, Laura escapes into the jungle, but runs straight into the arms of the island's natives, who offer her up to their god.

Franco directs in his usual torpid style and loads this laughable effort with his usual dreadful trademarks: crap gore, murky cinematography, rapid zooms, numerous crotch shots, out of focus imagery, awful sound effects, and ham-fisted editing. The result is a dire mess that is a real struggle to sit through from start to finish (It took me a couple of sittings to finish the thing), and even the sight of the luscious Buchfellner in all of her natural glory ain't enough to make me revisit this film in a hurry. --------------------------------------------- Result 3061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] After a promising first 25 minutes that makes you feel all warm inside, you're pretty convinced that this will be a [[great]] romantic [[comedy]]. Then the [[movie]] takes a turn for the [[worse]].

The warm feeling might still be there, but as others has said: The [[plot]] becomes so [[unbelievable]] and artificial that it's almost unbearable to watch.

The movie gets [[sped]] up, and you get the impression that you're either fast forwarding through it, or that the producers decided to fit it in less than 1h40m and had to cut a lot of scenes out.

Realism isn't a goal onto itself, but as a viewer, I'm pretty convinced that this comedy isn't intentionally unrealistic, it just happens to be.

On the plus side, this movie has a couple of nice interiors, and despite the bad script, I think that the actors performances are mainly good. If I could rate the first 25 minutes only, I'd probably give it an eight. As it is now, it gets a four. ...And that's being nice!

If you're a sucker for romantic comedies you'll probably have a great time anyways. If not, I'd recommend that you watch something else. After a promising first 25 minutes that makes you feel all warm inside, you're pretty convinced that this will be a [[wondrous]] romantic [[humour]]. Then the [[cinematography]] takes a turn for the [[lousiest]].

The warm feeling might still be there, but as others has said: The [[intrigue]] becomes so [[amazing]] and artificial that it's almost unbearable to watch.

The movie gets [[quickened]] up, and you get the impression that you're either fast forwarding through it, or that the producers decided to fit it in less than 1h40m and had to cut a lot of scenes out.

Realism isn't a goal onto itself, but as a viewer, I'm pretty convinced that this comedy isn't intentionally unrealistic, it just happens to be.

On the plus side, this movie has a couple of nice interiors, and despite the bad script, I think that the actors performances are mainly good. If I could rate the first 25 minutes only, I'd probably give it an eight. As it is now, it gets a four. ...And that's being nice!

If you're a sucker for romantic comedies you'll probably have a great time anyways. If not, I'd recommend that you watch something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 3062 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Does any one know what the 2 sports [[cars]] were? I think [[Robert]] Stack's might have been a Masseratti.Rock Hudson's [[character]] told his father he was taking a job in Iraq ,isn't that timely? I have had Dorthy Malone in my spank [[bank]] most of my life ,maybe this was the [[film]] that [[impressed]] me.[[Loren]] Bacall sure did have some chops in this [[film]] and [[probably]] out-acted Malone but Malones's part [[made]] a more [[sensational]] [[impact]] so she got the [[Oscar]] for [[best]] supporting role.[[Was]] Loren's [[part]] considered a [[leading]] role?Old man Hadley character was was probably a pretty common picture of tycoons of his era in that he was a regular guy who made it big in an emerging industry but in building a whole town he had forgotten his children to have his wife bring them up.In time,being widowed he realized that they were all he really had and they were spoiled rotten,looking for attention,so rather than try to relate to his children he blew his head off.An ancient morality tale.But seriously,what were those sports cars? Does any one know what the 2 sports [[vehicles]] were? I think [[Roberta]] Stack's might have been a Masseratti.Rock Hudson's [[nature]] told his father he was taking a job in Iraq ,isn't that timely? I have had Dorthy Malone in my spank [[banque]] most of my life ,maybe this was the [[filmmaking]] that [[surprising]] me.[[Laureen]] Bacall sure did have some chops in this [[kino]] and [[undeniably]] out-acted Malone but Malones's part [[effected]] a more [[tabloid]] [[effects]] so she got the [[Oskar]] for [[optimum]] supporting role.[[Became]] Loren's [[party]] considered a [[principal]] role?Old man Hadley character was was probably a pretty common picture of tycoons of his era in that he was a regular guy who made it big in an emerging industry but in building a whole town he had forgotten his children to have his wife bring them up.In time,being widowed he realized that they were all he really had and they were spoiled rotten,looking for attention,so rather than try to relate to his children he blew his head off.An ancient morality tale.But seriously,what were those sports cars? --------------------------------------------- Result 3063 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] So, I'm wondering while watching this film, did the producers of this movie get to save money on Sandra Bullock's wardrobe by dragging out her "before" clothes from Miss Congeniality? Did Ms. Bullock also get to sleepwalk through the role by channeling the "before" Gracie Hart? As many reviewers have [[noted]] before, the film is very formulaic. [[Add]] to that the deja vu viewer experiences with the character of Cassie Maywether as a somewhat darker Gracie Hart with more back [[story]] and it [[rapidly]] [[become]] a snooze [[fest]].

The two bad boy serial killers have been done before (and better) in other films. As has the "good guy partner trying to protect his partner despite the evidence" character been seen before. In fact none of the characters in the film ever get beyond two dimensions or try to be anything but trite stereotypes.

One last peeve - using the term serial killer is false advertising. Murdering one person - even if it's a premeditated murder - does not make you a serial killer. You may have the potential to become a serial killer but you are not a serial killer or even a spree killer. So, I'm wondering while watching this film, did the producers of this movie get to save money on Sandra Bullock's wardrobe by dragging out her "before" clothes from Miss Congeniality? Did Ms. Bullock also get to sleepwalk through the role by channeling the "before" Gracie Hart? As many reviewers have [[remarked]] before, the film is very formulaic. [[Adding]] to that the deja vu viewer experiences with the character of Cassie Maywether as a somewhat darker Gracie Hart with more back [[narratives]] and it [[speedily]] [[gotten]] a snooze [[festival]].

The two bad boy serial killers have been done before (and better) in other films. As has the "good guy partner trying to protect his partner despite the evidence" character been seen before. In fact none of the characters in the film ever get beyond two dimensions or try to be anything but trite stereotypes.

One last peeve - using the term serial killer is false advertising. Murdering one person - even if it's a premeditated murder - does not make you a serial killer. You may have the potential to become a serial killer but you are not a serial killer or even a spree killer. --------------------------------------------- Result 3064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The year 1995, when so many people talked about the great premiere of BRAVEHEART by Mel Gibson, also saw another very fine, yet underrated movie on Scottish history, ROB ROY. Although it is a very different film, especially due to the historical period the story is set in, ROB ROY has much in common not only with marvelous BRAVEHEART but also with the very spirit of epic movies.

It is a film that discusses similar themes, like fight for dignity, courage, honor, revenge, family being a key to happiness. It also leads us to the very bliss of Scottish highlands where the human soul finds its rest being surrounded by all grandeur of nature. Robert Roy MacGregor (Liam Neeson), the main character is a true hero (so universal in epics), sort of "Scottish Robin Hood" who struggles to lead his people out of oppression imposed by cold hearted lords. Although he worsens his situation through the acts, has to suffer a lot, two things stay in his mind undeniably: HONOR that he is given by himself and LOVE to his woman, Mary MacGregor (Jessica Lange). That leads him to unexpected events...

Except for the interesting content and quite vivid action, the movie is filled with truly stunning visuals. This factor has to do both with the sets and locations of the film as well as the wardrobe. Many memorable moments stay in the mind of any viewer who can allow themselves an insight into artistic images. For me, the most splendid scene was in the Highlands when Rob Roy tells his boys what honor really means. Then, he sends them away and beautifully makes love to his woman. The scene he escapes Marguis of Montrose (John Hurt) to the waterfall is also worth a look as a stunning visual.

Of course, there is some graphic violence, like in the duel for instance, but I don't think that this violence would be as harmful as in many other modern films. Its justification is like any other epic's: bloodshed and cruelty of those times were really serious and there would be no point in hiding it. The most disturbing scene, for me, was the rape done on Rob Roy's wife by the villain of the story: Archibald Cunningham (Tim Roth). It's truly disgusting and kids should definitely stay away. However, all the rest is O.K. Yet, there is one aspect that made me really love this movie, the performances.

All the cast do perfect jobs, from the leading Lian Neeson who fits very well to the role of tall, brave, strong Scottish man to the supporting cast of Brian Cox who portrays wicked Killearn, a silent witness of terrible acts who feels comfortable with the evil of war. Jessica Lange is very fine as Mary MacGregor and has some of the most beautiful moments in the film. There is chemistry between Ms Lange and Mr Neeson in many of their scenes. John Hurt, one of the best British actors, does a terrific job as Marguis of Montrose, a corrupted man for whom money is the aim in itself achieved by any means. I like that calmness of his portrayal. But the real villain is played by Tim Roth who truly depicts wretched side of his character, Archibald - a man who mocks love, who loves war and who finds true lust in rape and slaughter. But, like in any good epic, this exceptional evil must find its end...

And one more aspect: the musical score: such memorable and sentimental tunes that are bound to sound in the ears for long. The final moment touched me to tears not only because of the beauty it conveys but because I deeply combined these blissful tunes with the grandeur of locations. Scotland remains in the heart of its visitor and this movie reminded me of that permanent effect. It was, as if, my second journey to Scotland.

ROB ROY is a very nice movie, very well directed, photographed and acted. It perhaps does not equal BRAVEHEART with its spectacular sets and crowds of extras in battle scenes, but it is a fairly long film with much attention placed on one very significant feature a cinema should have: stunning entertainment combined with heartfelt education. I really enjoyed that film, do not hesitate to call it metaphorically "highlands of entertainment" and rate it 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3065 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Going into [[seeing]] this movie I was a bit [[skeptical]] because fantasy movies are not always my cup of tea. Especially a romantic fantasy.

Little did I know that I was in for a ride through cinematic [[magic]]. [[Everything]] in the movie from plot to dialogue to effects was very near perfection.

Claire [[Danes]] [[shines]] like the star she is in this movie. From beginning to end you fall more and more in love with this character.

Michelle Pfeiffer is menacing as an evil witch bent on capturing the star for eternal youth and beauty.

Robert De Niro is a lovable character who gives the audience the greatest bit of comic relief as the movie is gaining momentum towards the climax.

Overall this was a movie that surprised and delighted me as a movie fan. If you are looking for a fun and enjoyable movie that will be fun for the kids and adults alike, Stardust is the way to go. Going into [[witnessing]] this movie I was a bit [[unconvinced]] because fantasy movies are not always my cup of tea. Especially a romantic fantasy.

Little did I know that I was in for a ride through cinematic [[hallucinogenic]]. [[Any]] in the movie from plot to dialogue to effects was very near perfection.

Claire [[Denmark]] [[glows]] like the star she is in this movie. From beginning to end you fall more and more in love with this character.

Michelle Pfeiffer is menacing as an evil witch bent on capturing the star for eternal youth and beauty.

Robert De Niro is a lovable character who gives the audience the greatest bit of comic relief as the movie is gaining momentum towards the climax.

Overall this was a movie that surprised and delighted me as a movie fan. If you are looking for a fun and enjoyable movie that will be fun for the kids and adults alike, Stardust is the way to go. --------------------------------------------- Result 3066 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This mini series, also based on a book by Alex Haley as was `Queen', tried to use similar formulas, that is, constructing a long history following the lives of a family over many years. [[Whereas]] in `Queen' the result was masterful, here in Mama Flora the inspiration was [[lacking]]. Firstly perhaps in the book itself, and most certainly in this TV production. Too much is put in with too much haste over the years, such that the unfolding saga is shallow, superficial, not nearly so authentic as in `Queen'. Full marks for the scenification in the earlier parts of the film, which was prepared with great care, but as the film progressed it seemed to degenerate into a kind of dallasian-forsythian unpalatable mix in the last third of its three hours or so duration. I had hoped for more; but evidently Haley was less inspired with this tale than his near-biographical `Queen', and Peter Werner III is no match for John Erman. Only recommendable for those who have an appetite for these lengthy tales of generations growing up. This mini series, also based on a book by Alex Haley as was `Queen', tried to use similar formulas, that is, constructing a long history following the lives of a family over many years. [[Whilst]] in `Queen' the result was masterful, here in Mama Flora the inspiration was [[missing]]. Firstly perhaps in the book itself, and most certainly in this TV production. Too much is put in with too much haste over the years, such that the unfolding saga is shallow, superficial, not nearly so authentic as in `Queen'. Full marks for the scenification in the earlier parts of the film, which was prepared with great care, but as the film progressed it seemed to degenerate into a kind of dallasian-forsythian unpalatable mix in the last third of its three hours or so duration. I had hoped for more; but evidently Haley was less inspired with this tale than his near-biographical `Queen', and Peter Werner III is no match for John Erman. Only recommendable for those who have an appetite for these lengthy tales of generations growing up. --------------------------------------------- Result 3067 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] After seeing Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes, no actor should ever display such [[conceit]] as to imagine that he could ever come close to Mr. Brett's portrayal of "one of the most interesting characters in literature". Jeremy Brett IS Sherlock Holmes and in my opinion there can be no other. The great actor Basil Rathbone is,I must admit, a close second but, is still second. One might make the argument that Mr. Rathbone's screenplays were inferior to the absolutely top notch productions afforded Mr. Brett and to this I would agree. However when all is said and done Jeremy Brett will always and forever be the only actor to truly "become" Sherlock Holmes. The book should be closed on this subject and we,the public,left to enjoy Mr.Brett's unique performances.

Bill Rogers

(sonarman65@yahoo.com) After seeing Jeremy Brett as Sherlock Holmes, no actor should ever display such [[vanity]] as to imagine that he could ever come close to Mr. Brett's portrayal of "one of the most interesting characters in literature". Jeremy Brett IS Sherlock Holmes and in my opinion there can be no other. The great actor Basil Rathbone is,I must admit, a close second but, is still second. One might make the argument that Mr. Rathbone's screenplays were inferior to the absolutely top notch productions afforded Mr. Brett and to this I would agree. However when all is said and done Jeremy Brett will always and forever be the only actor to truly "become" Sherlock Holmes. The book should be closed on this subject and we,the public,left to enjoy Mr.Brett's unique performances.

Bill Rogers

(sonarman65@yahoo.com) --------------------------------------------- Result 3068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] how can you take her hard-living, glamorously violent bounty hunter story [[serious]] with *that* accent? It's absurd. Apart from that, the visual style of the directer is [[nauseating]] and gimmicky, the [[plot]] is a shallow, [[boring]], confused gangster-movie rehash and the acting is unconvincing. The film [[introduces]] new [[characters]] all the way [[throughout]] the film and is told in fragmented [[flashback]] - mostly out of sequence - [[seemingly]] just to keep you nice and [[confused]]. The film ever [[shows]] you THINGS THAT DON'T REALLY [[HAPPEN]] and then later [[says]] "that didn't really happen, this happened" - see the (apparent) killing of the (fake) 'first ladies'. What have we seen the first, wrong, sequence of events for then?

[[Terrible]] [[choice]] in casting, a convoluted, messy plot and a headache-inducing directorial style. 1/5. how can you take her hard-living, glamorously violent bounty hunter story [[severe]] with *that* accent? It's absurd. Apart from that, the visual style of the directer is [[sickening]] and gimmicky, the [[intrigue]] is a shallow, [[dreary]], confused gangster-movie rehash and the acting is unconvincing. The film [[presents]] new [[trait]] all the way [[in]] the film and is told in fragmented [[flash]] - mostly out of sequence - [[reportedly]] just to keep you nice and [[bemused]]. The film ever [[illustrates]] you THINGS THAT DON'T REALLY [[ARISE]] and then later [[contends]] "that didn't really happen, this happened" - see the (apparent) killing of the (fake) 'first ladies'. What have we seen the first, wrong, sequence of events for then?

[[Abominable]] [[elect]] in casting, a convoluted, messy plot and a headache-inducing directorial style. 1/5. --------------------------------------------- Result 3069 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] this is one [[amazing]] movie!!!!! you have to realize that chinese folklore is [[complicated]] and philosophical. there are [[always]] stories [[behind]] [[stories]]. i myself did not understand everything but knowing chinese folklore (i [[studied]] them in [[school]])it is very [[complicated]]. you just have to take what it gives you.....ENJOY THE [[MOVIE]] [[AND]] ENJOY THE RIDE....[[HOORAY]]!!!! this is one [[unbelievable]] movie!!!!! you have to realize that chinese folklore is [[sprawling]] and philosophical. there are [[incessantly]] stories [[posterior]] [[narratives]]. i myself did not understand everything but knowing chinese folklore (i [[probed]] them in [[tuition]])it is very [[complicating]]. you just have to take what it gives you.....ENJOY THE [[CINEMATOGRAPHY]] [[UND]] ENJOY THE RIDE....[[OORAH]]!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] I am a 11th grader at my high school. In my Current World Affairs class a kid in my class had this video and suggested we watch. So we did. I am [[firm]] believer that we went to the [[moon]], being that my father works for NASA. [[Even]] though I think this movie is the [[biggest]] piece of [[crap]] I have ever watched, the guy who created it has some serious balls. First of all did he have to show JFK getting shot? And how dare he use all those biblical quotes. The only [[good]] thing about this movie is it sparks debates, which is good b/c in my class we have weekly debates. This movie did nothing to change my mind. I think he and Michael Moore should be working together and make another movie. Michael Moore next movie could be called "A Funny Thing Happened on Spetember 11th" or "A Funny thing happened on the way to the white house". I am a 11th grader at my high school. In my Current World Affairs class a kid in my class had this video and suggested we watch. So we did. I am [[stable]] believer that we went to the [[lune]], being that my father works for NASA. [[Yet]] though I think this movie is the [[greatest]] piece of [[damnit]] I have ever watched, the guy who created it has some serious balls. First of all did he have to show JFK getting shot? And how dare he use all those biblical quotes. The only [[buena]] thing about this movie is it sparks debates, which is good b/c in my class we have weekly debates. This movie did nothing to change my mind. I think he and Michael Moore should be working together and make another movie. Michael Moore next movie could be called "A Funny Thing Happened on Spetember 11th" or "A Funny thing happened on the way to the white house". --------------------------------------------- Result 3071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (60%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Previous commentator Steve Richmond stated that A Walk On The Moon is, in his words "not worth your $7". I ended up paying a bit more than that to import what is one of the worst-quality DVDs I have yet seen, of this film or any film in existence. Even when you ignore the fact that the DVD is clearly sourced from an interlaced master and just plain nasty to watch in motion, the film has no redeeming qualities (save Anna's presence) to make watching a top quality Blu-Ray transfer worthwhile. Not that this is any fault of the other actors. Liev Schreiber, Diane Lane, Tovah Feldshuh, and Viggo Mortensen all score high on the relative to Anna Paquin acting ability chart. Far more so than Holly Hunter or Sam Neill did in spite of an equally lousy script, anyway. Director Tony Goldwyn's resume is nothing to crow about, but Pamela Gray's resume includes Wes Craven's most dramatic excursions outside of the horror or slasher genre, so one could be forgiven for thinking this is a case of bad direction.

As I have indicated already, the sole reason I watched this film is Anna Paquin. In her acting debut, she literally acted veterans of the industry with a minimum of twelve years' experience above hers under the table. While she is not as far ahead of her castmates here, her performance as a girl that starts the piece as a brat and grows into a woman whose world is crashing down around her proves her Oscar was no fluke. For some time I have been stating to friends that she would be the best choice to portray the heroine of my second complete novel, and a dialogue seventy-three minutes into this film is yet another demonstration of why. This woman could literally act the paint off walls. Anna aside, only Liev Schreiber comes close to eliciting any sympathy from an audience. Sure, his character spends the vast majority of the film neglecting a wife with an existential crisis, but he plays the angered reaction of a man who feels cheated brilliantly. I should know, even if it is not from the same circumstances here.

Viggo Mortensen also deserves credit for his portrayal of a travelling salesman, although perhaps not to the same extent. In a manner of speaking, he is the villain of the piece, but he successfully gives the character a third dimension. Yes, his actions even after the whole thing explodes are underhanded, but not many men would act any differently in his situation. Nobody wants to be the other man in this kind of messed-up situation, so Viggo deserves a lot of credit for giving it a try here. Unfortunately, these are all participants in a story about a woman who feels trapped in a stagnant marriage where Tovah Feldshuh tells us that the Mills And Boon archetype of women being the only ones who feel life is passing by simply does not exist. Either writer Pamela Gray or director Tony Goldwyn thought they could just put this line into the film without thinking of how the audience might receive it. Anna even gets to speak the mind of the audience when she asks Diane who she is to be lecturing anyone about responsibility.

That said, the film does have a couple of things besides Anna going for it. Mason Daring's original music, while not standing out in any way, gives the film a certain feeling of being keyed into the time depicted that helps where the other elements do not. Roger Ebert is right when he points out that while Liev is a great actor, putting him alongside Viggo in the story of a woman forced to choose between her marriage and her fantasy is a big mistake. He is also very correct in that when the film lingers over scenes of Lane and Mortensen skinny-dipping or mounting one another under a waterfall, it loses focus from being a story of a transgression and becomes soft porn. The film seems terminally confused about the position of its story. No matter how many times I rewatch Liev's scenes, I cannot help but feel he has been shortchanged in the direction or editing. One does not have to make their leads particularly handsome or beautiful, but taking steps to make them the most interesting or developed characters in the piece would have gone a long way.

Ebert also hits the nail right on the head when he says that every time he saw Anna on the screen, he thought her character was where the real story lay. Stories about the wife feeling neglected and running into the arms of a man who seems interesting or even dangerous are a dime a dozen, to such an extent now that even setting the story in parallel with an event as Earth-shattering as the moon landing will not help. In spite of feeling revulsion at the manner in which her character's story is presented, Anna might as well be walking around with a neon sign above her head asking the audience if they would not prefer to see the whole thing through her eyes. While I am all too aware that it is difficult to control exactly which character your audience will find the most interesting from your cast, it is very much as if they did not bother to try with Lane and Schreiber. Fans of these two would be well advised to look elsewhere. Hopefully by now my ramblings about the respective performances will give some idea of where the whole thing went wrong.

I gave A Walk On The Moon a three out of ten. Anna Paquin earns it a bonus point with one of her best performances (and that is saying something). --------------------------------------------- Result 3072 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I wonder who, how and more importantly why the decision to call Richard Attenborough to direct the most singular sensation to hit Broadway in many many years? He's an Academy Award winning director. Yes, he won for Ghandi you moron! Jeremy Irons is an Academy winning actor do you want to see him play Rocky Balboa? He has experience with musicals. Really? "Oh what a lovely war" have you forgotten? To answer your question, yes! The film is a [[disappointment]], clear and simple. Not an ounce of the live energy survived the heavy handedness of the proceedings. Every character danced beautifully they were charming but their projection was theatrical. I felt nothing. But when I saw it on stage I felt everything. The film should have been cast with stars, unknown, newcomers but stars with compelling unforgettable faces even the most invisible of the group. Great actors who could dance beautifully. Well Michael Douglas was in it. True I forgot I'm absolutely wrong and you are absolutely right. Nothing like a Richard Attenborough Michael Douglas musical. I wonder who, how and more importantly why the decision to call Richard Attenborough to direct the most singular sensation to hit Broadway in many many years? He's an Academy Award winning director. Yes, he won for Ghandi you moron! Jeremy Irons is an Academy winning actor do you want to see him play Rocky Balboa? He has experience with musicals. Really? "Oh what a lovely war" have you forgotten? To answer your question, yes! The film is a [[displeasure]], clear and simple. Not an ounce of the live energy survived the heavy handedness of the proceedings. Every character danced beautifully they were charming but their projection was theatrical. I felt nothing. But when I saw it on stage I felt everything. The film should have been cast with stars, unknown, newcomers but stars with compelling unforgettable faces even the most invisible of the group. Great actors who could dance beautifully. Well Michael Douglas was in it. True I forgot I'm absolutely wrong and you are absolutely right. Nothing like a Richard Attenborough Michael Douglas musical. --------------------------------------------- Result 3073 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I will start by saying that this has undeservedly be panned by just about everyone! The [[fact]] is it wasn't what [[anyone]] was [[expecting]], especially from [[Guy]] Ritchie. What everyone was expecting was cockney geezers and good one liners "do ya like dags?" etc, but this is far more mature than his [[previous]] [[works]]. I would agree that it is [[confusing]] but all the facts are there for us we just have to see them and listen harder, this [[film]] demands all your [[attention]]! Look past the cool and dazzling look of the film, [[try]] to listen to the dialogue rather than admire the performances and i think we will all get a more thorough understanding of the whole film.

Yes this has its influences from modern classics( fight club, pulp fiction etc ) but it is in the whole original in both direction and pacing with a music score second to none. I feel that if everyone watched this film over and over they would understand it a lot more and maybe appreciate it for the fine piece of modern cinema that it is and i hope also that Ritchie continues in this vain as i far prefer this to his mockney "masterpieces". I will start by saying that this has undeservedly be panned by just about everyone! The [[facto]] is it wasn't what [[person]] was [[await]], especially from [[Dude]] Ritchie. What everyone was expecting was cockney geezers and good one liners "do ya like dags?" etc, but this is far more mature than his [[anterior]] [[cooperate]]. I would agree that it is [[puzzling]] but all the facts are there for us we just have to see them and listen harder, this [[filmmaking]] demands all your [[beware]]! Look past the cool and dazzling look of the film, [[tries]] to listen to the dialogue rather than admire the performances and i think we will all get a more thorough understanding of the whole film.

Yes this has its influences from modern classics( fight club, pulp fiction etc ) but it is in the whole original in both direction and pacing with a music score second to none. I feel that if everyone watched this film over and over they would understand it a lot more and maybe appreciate it for the fine piece of modern cinema that it is and i hope also that Ritchie continues in this vain as i far prefer this to his mockney "masterpieces". --------------------------------------------- Result 3074 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I'm no horror movie buff, but my wife's nieces and nephews are. [[So]], I saw the first [[movie]]. It was gruesome, and tense, but not my taste. Still good though. [[For]] similar reasons, at this very moment, I am being exposed to a sequel.

The premise itself is beyond [[absurd]]. I can buy that disasters occur in the desert. I can buy that mutants exists. I can even buy that the events might be so weird and strange that the military may decide to get involved. It is unlikely, yes, but I'm willing to suspend my belief.

HOWEVER, under no circumstances am I willing to believe that the military squad assigned to recon such an area would be unable to fend off the mutants. Being a member of the United States Army, I can assure that while fresh recruits may lack the seasoned eyes and experience of combat soldiers, any such recruits would be integrated into a capable squad.

A squad of armed soldiers is not about to be taken out by a few mutants with knives. That's just the way it works. Squad movements, vastly superior firepower, and of course, radio support, would ensure nothing less than total victory. I'm not saying you wouldn't have casualties, but as soon as the area was verified as hostile, military training would take precedence, no-one would go off on their own even to use the bathroom.

And if it were discovered that the area was so infested with hostiles that the squad was unable to handle the danger, they would radio in for backup. And believe me, their radios would not be jammed, if there was a chance that normal radios would not do, the squad would have a military issue satellite phone. Chances are, if they were unable to check in every hour, a search would be called.

In order to accept this movie, you must accept that our soldiers are incompetent fools, with incompetent leaders, and an incompetent chain of command. While it may still be true that the most dangerous thing in the world is a lieutenant with a map and compass, our military forces are filled with intelligent, well-trained, competent soldiers. Mutants with knives are far below our ability to deal with.

With the whole execution of the movie depending solidly on the impossible to imagine, the film fails to deliver. Instead, we are expected to believe that our soldiers, sailors, and airmen are incapable of dealing with even the most mediocre threats.

As a combat veteran, I find the movie insulting. I'm no horror movie buff, but my wife's nieces and nephews are. [[Accordingly]], I saw the first [[cinematographic]]. It was gruesome, and tense, but not my taste. Still good though. [[During]] similar reasons, at this very moment, I am being exposed to a sequel.

The premise itself is beyond [[incongruous]]. I can buy that disasters occur in the desert. I can buy that mutants exists. I can even buy that the events might be so weird and strange that the military may decide to get involved. It is unlikely, yes, but I'm willing to suspend my belief.

HOWEVER, under no circumstances am I willing to believe that the military squad assigned to recon such an area would be unable to fend off the mutants. Being a member of the United States Army, I can assure that while fresh recruits may lack the seasoned eyes and experience of combat soldiers, any such recruits would be integrated into a capable squad.

A squad of armed soldiers is not about to be taken out by a few mutants with knives. That's just the way it works. Squad movements, vastly superior firepower, and of course, radio support, would ensure nothing less than total victory. I'm not saying you wouldn't have casualties, but as soon as the area was verified as hostile, military training would take precedence, no-one would go off on their own even to use the bathroom.

And if it were discovered that the area was so infested with hostiles that the squad was unable to handle the danger, they would radio in for backup. And believe me, their radios would not be jammed, if there was a chance that normal radios would not do, the squad would have a military issue satellite phone. Chances are, if they were unable to check in every hour, a search would be called.

In order to accept this movie, you must accept that our soldiers are incompetent fools, with incompetent leaders, and an incompetent chain of command. While it may still be true that the most dangerous thing in the world is a lieutenant with a map and compass, our military forces are filled with intelligent, well-trained, competent soldiers. Mutants with knives are far below our ability to deal with.

With the whole execution of the movie depending solidly on the impossible to imagine, the film fails to deliver. Instead, we are expected to believe that our soldiers, sailors, and airmen are incapable of dealing with even the most mediocre threats.

As a combat veteran, I find the movie insulting. --------------------------------------------- Result 3075 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I've now seen this film twice, and I must say I enjoyed it both times. It's fast paced and fun, but ultimately daft. Having said that it [[deserves]] to be trashed because of [[screwing]] up what could have been a good follow up to the seminal original. It is [[clear]] for those who have seen the awful 'Zombie Creeping Flesh' that the films massive shortcomings can be owed to Bruno Mattei, and that the little that is commendable about it can be owed to Fulci. This is not idle Fulci sycophancy, the directors styles are starkly contrasted throughout, and you can tell who directed what, particularly in Mattei's case.

The film is centered around the outbreak of a virus (oddly referred to as 'top secret' by a scientist, it's secrecy apparently being more noteworthy than its potentially apocalyptic effect on mankind) somewhere in south east Asia. The virus causes zombie like behaviour in those affected, and the virus quickly spreads across a seemingly arbitrary area of land. Our protagonists unwittingly wander into the danger zone, and have to fight for their lives against hordes of infected Asians.

The film seems to be stuck half way between being a zombie gore flick, and an out and out action adventure, and this confusion is captured most clearly by the zombies themselves. They do not appear to have a set of characteristics common to all. Some are of the regular soulless shuffling variety, so well rendered in the original, and probably Fulci's creation here. The other main group consist of those who in being infected with the virus lost all sense of themselves, but incurred a savage aggression and a desire to earn a black belt in ninjitsu: Indecisively leaping around unsure of whether to continue honing their upper roundhouse technique or engage with their brethren in what looks like a mass tickle fest on their hapless victims. Martial arts skills aren't their only talents either, they are well versed in guerilla tactics, hiding on rafters and under bales of hay, and sometimes inexplicably falling from nowhere but the heavens themselves. This is all definitely the work of Mattei.

There is a third, more chatty, variety of zombie. This type apparently retain a sense of irony as well 'I'm really thirsty...FOR YOUR BLOOD'. The ridiculous twist at the end in which the DJ turns zombie but continues to preach ad libbed gibberish about the fate of mankind, only serves to enhance the WTF factor and obliterate any hope of a serious resolution.

Then there's the infamous zombie head which slowly propels itself through the air, a jokerish skeletal grin wrought across its face, as if to say 'yeah we know how bad this looks'.

The characters are all utterly one dimensional as you would expect. But its the pseudo comical dialogue and dubbing that really prevents us from taking their plight seriously. Having said that the first soldier to die does put up an impressively valiant display against an unstoppable zombie menace. Indeed this is the first and perhaps only time we hit real zombie agro, and one of the only effective scenes in the film.

The guy who played the chief scientist has heart, but no talent, utilising pauses in his lines entirely at random, so he ends up sounding like a confused asthmatic. The scientists' on screen attempts at finding an antidote are totally unconvincing 'now lets put these two molecules together!'

There are a few moments that stick out as genuinely effective however. In an early scene a female protagonist explores an abandoned garage. Upon entering a room we are confronted with a hazy view of a shifting figure in the corner and a squirming mass on the floor, all shot in an atmospheric diffused light. The silence is interrupted by the appearance of a speedy machete wielding zombie who trashes everything in his wake in his alarming desperation to have her. His sheer aggressiveness is one of the few moments of real horror in the film. The before and after theme conveyed through the hotel that plays host to the happenings of the earliest stage of the outbreak, and later as a refuge to our protagonists is imbued with an thick humid ambiance. There is a scene in which one of the soldiers cautiously approaches a boarded up room that clearly houses hordes of the undead, and this is quite tense. Things become more dramatic when they board themselves in the hotel unknowing to what lurks upstairs. But this is sloppily handled and not nearly as effective as it could have been.

All in all I would say this film may just about deserve to be called a royal screw up of a potentially effective tropical zombie fest, rather than simply a through and through bad film. If nothing else it has plenty of the unintentional laughs that I've come to expect from just about anything Italian and gory from the eighties. I've now seen this film twice, and I must say I enjoyed it both times. It's fast paced and fun, but ultimately daft. Having said that it [[merited]] to be trashed because of [[kissed]] up what could have been a good follow up to the seminal original. It is [[lucid]] for those who have seen the awful 'Zombie Creeping Flesh' that the films massive shortcomings can be owed to Bruno Mattei, and that the little that is commendable about it can be owed to Fulci. This is not idle Fulci sycophancy, the directors styles are starkly contrasted throughout, and you can tell who directed what, particularly in Mattei's case.

The film is centered around the outbreak of a virus (oddly referred to as 'top secret' by a scientist, it's secrecy apparently being more noteworthy than its potentially apocalyptic effect on mankind) somewhere in south east Asia. The virus causes zombie like behaviour in those affected, and the virus quickly spreads across a seemingly arbitrary area of land. Our protagonists unwittingly wander into the danger zone, and have to fight for their lives against hordes of infected Asians.

The film seems to be stuck half way between being a zombie gore flick, and an out and out action adventure, and this confusion is captured most clearly by the zombies themselves. They do not appear to have a set of characteristics common to all. Some are of the regular soulless shuffling variety, so well rendered in the original, and probably Fulci's creation here. The other main group consist of those who in being infected with the virus lost all sense of themselves, but incurred a savage aggression and a desire to earn a black belt in ninjitsu: Indecisively leaping around unsure of whether to continue honing their upper roundhouse technique or engage with their brethren in what looks like a mass tickle fest on their hapless victims. Martial arts skills aren't their only talents either, they are well versed in guerilla tactics, hiding on rafters and under bales of hay, and sometimes inexplicably falling from nowhere but the heavens themselves. This is all definitely the work of Mattei.

There is a third, more chatty, variety of zombie. This type apparently retain a sense of irony as well 'I'm really thirsty...FOR YOUR BLOOD'. The ridiculous twist at the end in which the DJ turns zombie but continues to preach ad libbed gibberish about the fate of mankind, only serves to enhance the WTF factor and obliterate any hope of a serious resolution.

Then there's the infamous zombie head which slowly propels itself through the air, a jokerish skeletal grin wrought across its face, as if to say 'yeah we know how bad this looks'.

The characters are all utterly one dimensional as you would expect. But its the pseudo comical dialogue and dubbing that really prevents us from taking their plight seriously. Having said that the first soldier to die does put up an impressively valiant display against an unstoppable zombie menace. Indeed this is the first and perhaps only time we hit real zombie agro, and one of the only effective scenes in the film.

The guy who played the chief scientist has heart, but no talent, utilising pauses in his lines entirely at random, so he ends up sounding like a confused asthmatic. The scientists' on screen attempts at finding an antidote are totally unconvincing 'now lets put these two molecules together!'

There are a few moments that stick out as genuinely effective however. In an early scene a female protagonist explores an abandoned garage. Upon entering a room we are confronted with a hazy view of a shifting figure in the corner and a squirming mass on the floor, all shot in an atmospheric diffused light. The silence is interrupted by the appearance of a speedy machete wielding zombie who trashes everything in his wake in his alarming desperation to have her. His sheer aggressiveness is one of the few moments of real horror in the film. The before and after theme conveyed through the hotel that plays host to the happenings of the earliest stage of the outbreak, and later as a refuge to our protagonists is imbued with an thick humid ambiance. There is a scene in which one of the soldiers cautiously approaches a boarded up room that clearly houses hordes of the undead, and this is quite tense. Things become more dramatic when they board themselves in the hotel unknowing to what lurks upstairs. But this is sloppily handled and not nearly as effective as it could have been.

All in all I would say this film may just about deserve to be called a royal screw up of a potentially effective tropical zombie fest, rather than simply a through and through bad film. If nothing else it has plenty of the unintentional laughs that I've come to expect from just about anything Italian and gory from the eighties. --------------------------------------------- Result 3076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What happened to [[Peter]] Bogdanovich? Once a [[brilliant]] [[director]], a [[trail]] blazer... is now [[scraping]] the very bottom... Is this the same [[man]] who [[directed]] "The Last Picture Show"? Here, he takes a [[somewhat]] interesting (albeit farfetched) [[premise]], and turns it into bubble gum that [[loses]] flavor the moment you take the first bite... Dunst is not bad, but Izzard is miscast as Chaplin, and all the other [[actors]] seem to have been cast for their "[[looks]]", and not because they were right for the part. Too [[bad]]. I'll [[go]] rent "Paper Moon" again. What happened to [[Petter]] Bogdanovich? Once a [[sumptuous]] [[headmaster]], a [[pathway]] blazer... is now [[graze]] the very bottom... Is this the same [[men]] who [[oriented]] "The Last Picture Show"? Here, he takes a [[rather]] interesting (albeit farfetched) [[assumption]], and turns it into bubble gum that [[looses]] flavor the moment you take the first bite... Dunst is not bad, but Izzard is miscast as Chaplin, and all the other [[protagonists]] seem to have been cast for their "[[seem]]", and not because they were right for the part. Too [[amiss]]. I'll [[going]] rent "Paper Moon" again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3077 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, [[laughable]] and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't [[deny]] their terrible existance.

The acting redefines the term "terrible overacting" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine "bad".

***spoilers***

The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel "Lurch" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.

The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).

Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should. The special effects of this movie are, especially for its time, [[nonsensical]] and used in such an over-emphasized way that you can't [[rejecting]] their terrible existance.

The acting redefines the term "terrible overacting" at the hands of Meg Foster and Richard Joseph Paul, where julie Newman and Andrew Divoff just redefine "bad".

***spoilers***

The charm in this movie can be found in two things: First is the excellent casting of Carel "Lurch" Struycken as the mysterious psychic Gaunt, who can sense where and when people will die and is always there.

The second are original finds, the combination SF-Western is obviously original, if terrible, but other finds are more original, like the gunman Zack Stone being able to sense the pain of the people he shoots (though his acting falls short here).

Overal...don't see this movie, except if you love that ol' hunk-o-brutal Carel Struycken, as any self-respecting Dutchman should. --------------------------------------------- Result 3078 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Jackie Chan's [[classic]] directorial feature POLICE STORY (1985) is among the most [[influential]] and over-the-top modern day police actioners ever to [[come]] out from [[Hong]] Kong. Jackie wanted [[simply]] to make a movie which would include the [[usual]] kung fu and [[also]] [[fierce]] [[gun]] [[play]] and other "urban" action which [[would]] later become very popular and [[typical]] [[among]] HK directors like [[John]] [[Woo]] and Ringo [[Lam]]. [[POLICE]] STORY [[mixes]] these two action elements and [[styles]] and the result is as wild as it sounds.

Jackie plays Chan Ka-Kui, a [[police]] who [[gets]] to protect an important witness ([[Brigitte]] Lin) who would soon testify against a powerful gangster boss and his ring of criminal activity. Jackie's girlfriend is played by young and sweet Maggie Cheung, who isn't as [[wild]] here as she would be in her subsequent roles like Heroic Trio (and the sequel) by Johnnie To, Savior of the [[Soul]] by Corey [[Yuen]] and David Lai and many [[many]] others. The plot in POLICE STORY is very [[simple]] but it is the action why this [[film]] was [[made]] in the first place.

[[Jackie]] did of course all the stunts of his [[character]] by himself and also [[hurt]] himself pretty badly in couple of scenes, some of which are also in the completed movie like at the end in which [[Jackie]] hits his head (near the eye) through a very nasty looking sharp [[piece]] of glass. [[Also]] Jackie's stunt team members almost got themselves killed during filming of this [[film]]. The scene in which a bus stops right before [[Jackie]], spitting the kidnappers through the windshield, went really bad as the bus stopped too early and the stuntmen didn't fly as they were supposed to. They were supposed to fly on the car parked in the front of the bus but their flight was too short and they hit through the asphalt with hospital level injuries. During the end credits, there is a behind the scenes imagery and images of these injured actors and it all looks really bad and almost tasteless, but fortunately no one got killed or injured too severely.

The action is more than plentiful and [[imaginative]] as can be expected by (action) director Chan. The now legendary bus scene and shopping mall scene at then end are most likely among the wildest scenes any action [[film]] has been able to deliver. [[Jackie]] always tells how important editing is (which is true) and it really shows in his action scenes and their timing which is perfect and makes the films look so ultra kinetic when compared to Hollywood efforts, for instance. There's hardly any slow moments here and also those moments are interesting and the film never becomes boring or hard to watch.

But there is again one negative point which I cannot stand in HK action comedies, which is this comedy itself. The comedy isn't funny especially when the errors and amateurish elements in the screenplay aren't there by accident but because of the writer wanted to add them there, without necessarily understanding that they are signs of bad script and stupid dialogue. I mean those scenes like the stabbing murder attempt at the beginning when the murderer just shouts and screams and makes faces and acts like a drunken clown from some slapstick nightmare, and he is there to "murder" that girl. This kind of acting is stupid and inept and I wouldn't like to see it in a film which is otherwise very great in its own genre. Characters also speak their thoughts which is also a sign of bad script because those "loud thoughts" are there just to make things clear even for the stupidest viewer and thus making things way too simple and "light." Even if the film is comic and not so serious, these kind of stupidities should not be there and they cannot be forgiven too easily.

POLICE STORY is a fast speed, full impact, balls to the walls action adventure miracle from Hong Kong and from the time when Jackie was very sad because of the bad result he got with the US produced The Protector as he didn't have the same thoughts about the film as director James Glickenhaus had and thus the result didn't please audiences and Jackie and he returned to Hong Kong to make more personal and inventive film. That he definitely did and the result is as wild today as it was back then in the 80's. This is among the most insane action films ever, and it would be somewhat perfect without the flaws I mentioned. 7/10 Jackie Chan's [[conventional]] directorial feature POLICE STORY (1985) is among the most [[emphatic]] and over-the-top modern day police actioners ever to [[coming]] out from [[Kong]] Kong. Jackie wanted [[merely]] to make a movie which would include the [[routine]] kung fu and [[similarly]] [[harsh]] [[howitzer]] [[playing]] and other "urban" action which [[should]] later become very popular and [[characteristic]] [[between]] HK directors like [[Johannes]] [[Hu]] and Ringo [[Rugby]]. [[COP]] STORY [[mixture]] these two action elements and [[styling]] and the result is as wild as it sounds.

Jackie plays Chan Ka-Kui, a [[constabulary]] who [[get]] to protect an important witness ([[Birgit]] Lin) who would soon testify against a powerful gangster boss and his ring of criminal activity. Jackie's girlfriend is played by young and sweet Maggie Cheung, who isn't as [[savage]] here as she would be in her subsequent roles like Heroic Trio (and the sequel) by Johnnie To, Savior of the [[Alma]] by Corey [[Yuan]] and David Lai and many [[innumerable]] others. The plot in POLICE STORY is very [[uncomplicated]] but it is the action why this [[cinematography]] was [[introduced]] in the first place.

[[Melanie]] did of course all the stunts of his [[traits]] by himself and also [[harmed]] himself pretty badly in couple of scenes, some of which are also in the completed movie like at the end in which [[Melanie]] hits his head (near the eye) through a very nasty looking sharp [[slice]] of glass. [[Moreover]] Jackie's stunt team members almost got themselves killed during filming of this [[flick]]. The scene in which a bus stops right before [[Melanie]], spitting the kidnappers through the windshield, went really bad as the bus stopped too early and the stuntmen didn't fly as they were supposed to. They were supposed to fly on the car parked in the front of the bus but their flight was too short and they hit through the asphalt with hospital level injuries. During the end credits, there is a behind the scenes imagery and images of these injured actors and it all looks really bad and almost tasteless, but fortunately no one got killed or injured too severely.

The action is more than plentiful and [[creative]] as can be expected by (action) director Chan. The now legendary bus scene and shopping mall scene at then end are most likely among the wildest scenes any action [[movie]] has been able to deliver. [[Jacqui]] always tells how important editing is (which is true) and it really shows in his action scenes and their timing which is perfect and makes the films look so ultra kinetic when compared to Hollywood efforts, for instance. There's hardly any slow moments here and also those moments are interesting and the film never becomes boring or hard to watch.

But there is again one negative point which I cannot stand in HK action comedies, which is this comedy itself. The comedy isn't funny especially when the errors and amateurish elements in the screenplay aren't there by accident but because of the writer wanted to add them there, without necessarily understanding that they are signs of bad script and stupid dialogue. I mean those scenes like the stabbing murder attempt at the beginning when the murderer just shouts and screams and makes faces and acts like a drunken clown from some slapstick nightmare, and he is there to "murder" that girl. This kind of acting is stupid and inept and I wouldn't like to see it in a film which is otherwise very great in its own genre. Characters also speak their thoughts which is also a sign of bad script because those "loud thoughts" are there just to make things clear even for the stupidest viewer and thus making things way too simple and "light." Even if the film is comic and not so serious, these kind of stupidities should not be there and they cannot be forgiven too easily.

POLICE STORY is a fast speed, full impact, balls to the walls action adventure miracle from Hong Kong and from the time when Jackie was very sad because of the bad result he got with the US produced The Protector as he didn't have the same thoughts about the film as director James Glickenhaus had and thus the result didn't please audiences and Jackie and he returned to Hong Kong to make more personal and inventive film. That he definitely did and the result is as wild today as it was back then in the 80's. This is among the most insane action films ever, and it would be somewhat perfect without the flaws I mentioned. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3079 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Awful! [[Absolutely]] [[awful]]! No [[plot]], no point, no [[end]]. It [[looks]] [[like]] the [[director]] turned the camera on and then the [[whole]] [[crew]] went to lunch. Every day. I'm [[trying]] to GIVE this video away but no one will [[take]] it. I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 1 because I [[like]] Benigni. [[Roger]], I'm going to have to [[say]] [[thumbs]] down on this one.

Awful! [[Entirely]] [[heinous]]! No [[intrigue]], no point, no [[ceases]]. It [[seems]] [[iike]] the [[superintendent]] turned the camera on and then the [[totality]] [[crewman]] went to lunch. Every day. I'm [[seeking]] to GIVE this video away but no one will [[taking]] it. I'm giving it a 2 instead of a 1 because I [[fond]] Benigni. [[Roget]], I'm going to have to [[tell]] [[inches]] down on this one.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3080 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I heard so much about this movie how it was a [[great]] slasher and one of those early 80's movies that die hard fans of most slasher movies just had to see. Well, I rented it and I have to say that although it kept my attention as far as the suspense goes for most slasher films such as "April Fools Day", "Friday 13th" and "Prom Night", this film could have been right up there with the above mentioned only it lacked true [[enthusiasm]] and potential from the characters as well as the on going story. Characters that I found were [[unfortunate]] to be in this movie was the weirdo guy with the frizzy hair that kept creeping around the dorm and of course leading up to his true climatic role during the end with he faces the killer. Another would be the dirty scruffy looking guy with the jean jacket, he could have played more roles in this movie that might have made the movie more interesting, instead, the movie played this guy as just another loser out there making unknown calls while he sleeps with his girlfriend and then drops his part and cuts him off until the end which was a waste, I was disappointed in his part in the end. As far as the true identity of the killer goes, when the identity was released as to who he was, I just laughed, but it was all to obvious and he really made a true jerk out of himself as well as an annoying character after his true intentions were revealed. This movie should be one to at least watch once for all slasher fans but don't spend your hard earned money on it in some rare hard to find collectors inventory. I heard so much about this movie how it was a [[wondrous]] slasher and one of those early 80's movies that die hard fans of most slasher movies just had to see. Well, I rented it and I have to say that although it kept my attention as far as the suspense goes for most slasher films such as "April Fools Day", "Friday 13th" and "Prom Night", this film could have been right up there with the above mentioned only it lacked true [[fervor]] and potential from the characters as well as the on going story. Characters that I found were [[sorrowful]] to be in this movie was the weirdo guy with the frizzy hair that kept creeping around the dorm and of course leading up to his true climatic role during the end with he faces the killer. Another would be the dirty scruffy looking guy with the jean jacket, he could have played more roles in this movie that might have made the movie more interesting, instead, the movie played this guy as just another loser out there making unknown calls while he sleeps with his girlfriend and then drops his part and cuts him off until the end which was a waste, I was disappointed in his part in the end. As far as the true identity of the killer goes, when the identity was released as to who he was, I just laughed, but it was all to obvious and he really made a true jerk out of himself as well as an annoying character after his true intentions were revealed. This movie should be one to at least watch once for all slasher fans but don't spend your hard earned money on it in some rare hard to find collectors inventory. --------------------------------------------- Result 3081 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I resisted [[seeing]] this movie and I understand why it was not a big hit in theatres. "October Sky" feels and looks oh so familiar. And it is. All plot contrivances and emotions have been explored before in other films -- and possibly even better. But despite it's familiarity and resistance to all formulas Hollywood, this movie is [[winning]] and likeable at every turn.

Sputnik is the inspiration for this [[journey]] of the [[heart]], [[mind]] and [[soul]]. Just as the [[characters]] from Steven Sondheim's musical [[MERRILY]] WE ROLL ALONG [[stood]] agape atop their [[apartment]] roof hoping it [[would]] [[launch]] their [[new]] [[generation]] ("What do you call it? You call it a [[miracle]]."), Sputnik has a [[similar]] affect on the young [[rocket]] [[boys]] of this [[true]] [[tale]]. While jaded [[townsfolk]] of their 1950's coal [[town]] [[dismiss]] the [[event]], Homer Hickham [[sees]] Sputnik as his [[ticket]] out of a [[life]] in the mines.

Masterful direction and casting make the [[journey]] of rocket boy Homer and his [[pals]] [[seem]] fresh and [[new]]. [[Especially]] affecting are subplots concerning Homer's ailing young school teacher. Remarkable restraint is shown in [[depicting]] their delicate [[relationship]]. Also remarkable is the [[father]] / [[son]] supblot that anchors the [[film]]. [[Perfectly]] [[played]] all [[around]]. Even Homer's [[mom]] [[gets]] her [[moment]] without [[cliche]] or intrusion. Her [[ultimatum]] to her [[husband]] is both [[dignified]] and heatbreaking. "Myrtle [[Beach]]" [[says]] it all.

A [[major]] [[video]] [[chain]] I [[despise]] has a sign next to this [[film]] [[stating]] that you'll [[love]] this [[film]] or they'll [[refund]] your money. [[For]] once, I agree with them. You'll never [[look]] at the October sky [[quite]] the same again.

I resisted [[see]] this movie and I understand why it was not a big hit in theatres. "October Sky" feels and looks oh so familiar. And it is. All plot contrivances and emotions have been explored before in other films -- and possibly even better. But despite it's familiarity and resistance to all formulas Hollywood, this movie is [[earning]] and likeable at every turn.

Sputnik is the inspiration for this [[trip]] of the [[coeur]], [[intellect]] and [[alma]]. Just as the [[nature]] from Steven Sondheim's musical [[LUCKILY]] WE ROLL ALONG [[amounted]] agape atop their [[condo]] roof hoping it [[could]] [[launched]] their [[novel]] [[jill]] ("What do you call it? You call it a [[miracles]]."), Sputnik has a [[equivalent]] affect on the young [[missile]] [[guy]] of this [[real]] [[histories]]. While jaded [[townspeople]] of their 1950's coal [[municipality]] [[dismissed]] the [[incident]], Homer Hickham [[believes]] Sputnik as his [[tickets]] out of a [[vida]] in the mines.

Masterful direction and casting make the [[travelling]] of rocket boy Homer and his [[girlfriends]] [[appears]] fresh and [[newest]]. [[Specifically]] affecting are subplots concerning Homer's ailing young school teacher. Remarkable restraint is shown in [[outlining]] their delicate [[relation]]. Also remarkable is the [[fathers]] / [[sons]] supblot that anchors the [[movie]]. [[Totally]] [[effected]] all [[about]]. Even Homer's [[mother]] [[get]] her [[time]] without [[cliches]] or intrusion. Her [[alarm]] to her [[hubby]] is both [[decent]] and heatbreaking. "Myrtle [[Beaches]]" [[asserts]] it all.

A [[sizable]] [[videotaped]] [[strings]] I [[loathed]] has a sign next to this [[movie]] [[alleging]] that you'll [[adored]] this [[movie]] or they'll [[rebate]] your money. [[At]] once, I agree with them. You'll never [[gaze]] at the October sky [[altogether]] the same again.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This movie is a [[great]] attempt towards the [[revival]] of traditional Indian values which are being [[replaced]] by western ones.Its a [[joint]] family [[story]] showing all the ethics every person should follow while communicating with every single relative around.[[Shahid]] Kapoor gives a gr88 performance as a desi about to tie [[knot]] with Amrita Rao who is also very Desi and she also [[acts]] pretty well...The genre of the movie is the same as HAHK and such movies deserve to be made in India for the revival of old traditional values...The movies doesn't [[get]] 10 as it isn't very good at music which counts a [[lot]] in every movie,besides this it is [[flawless]].... This movie is a [[whopping]] attempt towards the [[resurgence]] of traditional Indian values which are being [[substituted]] by western ones.Its a [[communal]] family [[saga]] showing all the ethics every person should follow while communicating with every single relative around.[[Martyr]] Kapoor gives a gr88 performance as a desi about to tie [[node]] with Amrita Rao who is also very Desi and she also [[act]] pretty well...The genre of the movie is the same as HAHK and such movies deserve to be made in India for the revival of old traditional values...The movies doesn't [[gets]] 10 as it isn't very good at music which counts a [[batch]] in every movie,besides this it is [[irreproachable]].... --------------------------------------------- Result 3083 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Sergio Leone [[spins]] in his [[grave]]... If there was any [[film]] that [[tramples]] upon a man's life [[work]] its this one. The lead character's "lone [[wolf]]" bravado is uninspiring and lame, and the [[script]] was apparently written by a [[monkey]] with an eight [[grade]] [[education]]. Whoever's idea this was should be horse whipped. The only [[reason]] I'm spending time trashing it is because there's a 10 line minimum. Sergio Leone's family should sue, not because its crap, but because now it's immortalized as crap by MST 3000. Shame. [[Disgust]]. I blame Hollywood...at least Gary Busey makes crap that wont offend anyone but cocaine users and weapon experts...this film is [[pure]] blasphemy. Sergio Leone [[rotates]] in his [[tomb]]... If there was any [[films]] that [[scorns]] upon a man's life [[collaboration]] its this one. The lead character's "lone [[woolf]]" bravado is uninspiring and lame, and the [[hyphen]] was apparently written by a [[silvana]] with an eight [[octane]] [[tuition]]. Whoever's idea this was should be horse whipped. The only [[motives]] I'm spending time trashing it is because there's a 10 line minimum. Sergio Leone's family should sue, not because its crap, but because now it's immortalized as crap by MST 3000. Shame. [[Resentment]]. I blame Hollywood...at least Gary Busey makes crap that wont offend anyone but cocaine users and weapon experts...this film is [[pur]] blasphemy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3084 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] Jay Chou plays an orphan raised in a kung fu school, but kicked out by the corrupt headmaster after fighting with a bunch of thugs in the employ of a nefarious villain. He happens upon down-on-his-luck trickster Eric Tsang, who immediately sees cash potential in the youngster's skills. Basketball is the chosen avenue for riches, and Tsang bids to get him a spot on a University team and to promote him in the media. General success leads to a basketball championship and a really [[nasty]] [[rival]] team managed by the same nefarious villain of before.

It's all a bit Shaolin Soccer I guess, but not so quirky or ridiculous - the plot sticks pretty close to sports movie conventions, and delivers all the elements the crowd expects from the set-up. You've seen it all before, but it's the kind of stuff it never hurts to see again when it's done well. Luckily it really is done well here (some might say 'surprisingly' with Chu Yen-Ping in the director's chair... I expect he had good 'assistants') - the script delivers and the presentation is slick and stylish. Jay Chou remains pretty much expressionless throughout, but such is his style, and when he does let an emotion flicker across it can be to quite good comic effect. Eric Tsang compensates with a larger-than-life character that he's played many times before (in real life, for instance) who gets many of the films most emotional moments.

Since the film revolves around basketball, it's good that the scenes of basketball matches are suitably rousing. The cast show some real skill, including Chou, and some well done wirework and CGI add that element of hyper-real kung fu skill that make the scenes even more entertaining (assuming you like that sort of thing) and justify the movie's plot/existence.

There's only one significant fight scene in the movie, but it's a doozy in the "one against many" style. Jay Chou appears to do a lot of his own moves, and is quite impressive - he's clearly pretty strong and fast for real, and Ching Siu-Tung's choreography makes him look like a real martial artist. I wish there'd been more, but at least it's a lengthy fight.

Very much the kind of Chinese New Year blockbuster I hoped it would be from the trailer, and recommended viewing! Jay Chou plays an orphan raised in a kung fu school, but kicked out by the corrupt headmaster after fighting with a bunch of thugs in the employ of a nefarious villain. He happens upon down-on-his-luck trickster Eric Tsang, who immediately sees cash potential in the youngster's skills. Basketball is the chosen avenue for riches, and Tsang bids to get him a spot on a University team and to promote him in the media. General success leads to a basketball championship and a really [[nauseating]] [[contenders]] team managed by the same nefarious villain of before.

It's all a bit Shaolin Soccer I guess, but not so quirky or ridiculous - the plot sticks pretty close to sports movie conventions, and delivers all the elements the crowd expects from the set-up. You've seen it all before, but it's the kind of stuff it never hurts to see again when it's done well. Luckily it really is done well here (some might say 'surprisingly' with Chu Yen-Ping in the director's chair... I expect he had good 'assistants') - the script delivers and the presentation is slick and stylish. Jay Chou remains pretty much expressionless throughout, but such is his style, and when he does let an emotion flicker across it can be to quite good comic effect. Eric Tsang compensates with a larger-than-life character that he's played many times before (in real life, for instance) who gets many of the films most emotional moments.

Since the film revolves around basketball, it's good that the scenes of basketball matches are suitably rousing. The cast show some real skill, including Chou, and some well done wirework and CGI add that element of hyper-real kung fu skill that make the scenes even more entertaining (assuming you like that sort of thing) and justify the movie's plot/existence.

There's only one significant fight scene in the movie, but it's a doozy in the "one against many" style. Jay Chou appears to do a lot of his own moves, and is quite impressive - he's clearly pretty strong and fast for real, and Ching Siu-Tung's choreography makes him look like a real martial artist. I wish there'd been more, but at least it's a lengthy fight.

Very much the kind of Chinese New Year blockbuster I hoped it would be from the trailer, and recommended viewing! --------------------------------------------- Result 3085 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] A [[journey]] of [[discovery]], this [[film]] follows the [[lives]] of one family [[living]] in a sleepy, [[island]] [[town]] in British [[Columbia]]. [[Languorous]] and dreamy, the [[inhabitants]] are [[satisfied]] to [[allow]] life to [[go]] on [[around]] them until a young, fresh-faced [[teacher]], with [[new]] [[ideas]] arrives and brings with her life from the [[mainland]]. [[Slowly]], their indolent state is [[awakened]], the [[father]] (and [[principal]] of the local [[school]]) looks for excitement, the [[mother]] for [[stability]], the [[oldest]] [[daughter]] for [[love]], and the [[youngest]] for power. [[While]] not an [[incredible]] or ground-breaking piece of cinema, the movie is [[quietly]] enjoyable and good for a [[tired]] [[night]] when the [[wind]] is blowing. Unfortunately, I [[doubt]] [[anyone]] outside of Canada will [[find]] it [[easily]] [[accessible]]. A [[travel]] of [[detect]], this [[flick]] follows the [[iife]] of one family [[residing]] in a sleepy, [[isle]] [[municipality]] in British [[Colombia]]. [[Languid]] and dreamy, the [[dwellers]] are [[pleased]] to [[enable]] life to [[going]] on [[about]] them until a young, fresh-faced [[educator]], with [[novel]] [[think]] arrives and brings with her life from the [[hinterland]]. [[Softly]], their indolent state is [[awoken]], the [[fathers]] (and [[primary]] of the local [[schooling]]) looks for excitement, the [[mummy]] for [[stabilization]], the [[older]] [[girls]] for [[likes]], and the [[younger]] for power. [[Despite]] not an [[awesome]] or ground-breaking piece of cinema, the movie is [[discretely]] enjoyable and good for a [[jaded]] [[nuit]] when the [[turbine]] is blowing. Unfortunately, I [[duda]] [[person]] outside of Canada will [[unearth]] it [[conveniently]] [[approachable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Knowing]] what to [[expect]] (on the whole) from a [[Denzel]] Washington performance - quality, integrity, gravitas, wry [[humour]] - will [[prepare]] you for what to [[expect]] from his directorial [[debut]]. Much like [[Robert]] De Niro's A Bronx [[Tale]], Antwone Fisher [[delivers]] the [[moving]] [[drama]] of the [[life]] of a young man and the effects of [[key]] figures in his [[life]]. [[Much]] as in A Bronx [[Tale]] De Niro played one of these [[key]] figures to the lead [[character]] (himself a [[character]] was [[born]] to [[play]] but was too [[old]] too) Washington [[takes]] a similar role in this as the fatherly councellor to the titular [[character]] - a [[character]] that [[seems]] like he should be [[played]] by a Washington from 20 [[years]] ago. Be thankful Washington is too [[old]] to [[play]] Antwone because if he had we [[would]] firstly be [[deprived]] of the [[wonderfully]] measured and intelligently nuanced performance he [[gives]] as the Navy councellor. [[However]] more importantly we wouldn't get to [[see]] the [[superb]], we can only [[hope]] [[star]] making, turn from Derek Luke in the title role. [[Inevitably]] the [[character]] [[comes]] across as moulded in Washington's shape, [[however]] you [[get]] the [[impression]] this is not just because Washington directed it, not that Luke was trying to [[copy]] him, but that Luke is as [[genuinely]] [[powerful]] and [[thought]] [[provoking]] an [[actor]] as Washington. It [[took]] far too long for Washington to [[receive]] the Academy [[award]] he [[deserved]] for Malcolm X, Philadelphia, [[Devil]] [[In]] A Blue [[Dress]] and The [[Hurricane]], let us hope that Luke does not have to [[wait]] so long. [[Also]] a [[great]] [[piece]] of casting was [[Joy]] Bryant as Fisher's girlfriend, Cheryl. [[While]] the [[part]] [[could]] have been a forgettable [[support]] or a standard 'girlfriend' role Bryant imbues it with life. [[Tender]] and [[intelligent]] the role [[transcends]] stereotyping with Bryant inhabiting it, and she makes the [[part]] [[significant]] and interesting. It doesn't [[hurt]] either that Bryant is possibly the most attractive woman you'll see on celluloid this year - the smile alone [[could]] thaw the coldest heart. Acting ability and looks - why isn't this woman in everything being [[made]] right now. Providing good [[support]] in a small role in Salli [[Richardson]] as Washington's wife Berta. Saying more with a silence or [[look]] than [[many]] Hollywood actresses can manage in an entire film she informs the audience of the entire storylines long before any exposition [[occurs]]. As for Washington's [[directing]], as I said, it is the [[directing]] equivalent of his acting. Taking the story of a man few viewers will have heard of and making it genuinely interesting is a difficult feat which Washington achieves with aplomb. The film is neither rushed nor showy, but it never feels slow or dull. It is measured and nuanced, balancing the humour and drama perfectly. Antwone Fisher may not blow you away if you like big, explosive, plotless Hollywood films but for those who appreciate a finely crafted character piece, with excellent performances and steady well handled direction, this is for you. [[Realise]] what to [[hopes]] (on the whole) from a [[Denzil]] Washington performance - quality, integrity, gravitas, wry [[humor]] - will [[braced]] you for what to [[hopes]] from his directorial [[infancy]]. Much like [[Roberto]] De Niro's A Bronx [[Story]], Antwone Fisher [[offerings]] the [[transferring]] [[teatro]] of the [[iife]] of a young man and the effects of [[principal]] figures in his [[iife]]. [[Very]] as in A Bronx [[Histories]] De Niro played one of these [[principal]] figures to the lead [[traits]] (himself a [[traits]] was [[ould]] to [[gaming]] but was too [[archaic]] too) Washington [[pick]] a similar role in this as the fatherly councellor to the titular [[traits]] - a [[traits]] that [[looks]] like he should be [[done]] by a Washington from 20 [[olds]] ago. Be thankful Washington is too [[ancient]] to [[playing]] Antwone because if he had we [[ought]] firstly be [[stripped]] of the [[amazingly]] measured and intelligently nuanced performance he [[provides]] as the Navy councellor. [[Instead]] more importantly we wouldn't get to [[behold]] the [[handsome]], we can only [[hopes]] [[superstar]] making, turn from Derek Luke in the title role. [[Invariably]] the [[traits]] [[arises]] across as moulded in Washington's shape, [[instead]] you [[gets]] the [[printing]] this is not just because Washington directed it, not that Luke was trying to [[copying]] him, but that Luke is as [[actually]] [[forceful]] and [[thinks]] [[sparking]] an [[actress]] as Washington. It [[picked]] far too long for Washington to [[receives]] the Academy [[awarding]] he [[merits]] for Malcolm X, Philadelphia, [[Demon]] [[Across]] A Blue [[Costume]] and The [[Cyclone]], let us hope that Luke does not have to [[suspense]] so long. [[Moreover]] a [[huge]] [[slice]] of casting was [[Delight]] Bryant as Fisher's girlfriend, Cheryl. [[Despite]] the [[parte]] [[did]] have been a forgettable [[aiding]] or a standard 'girlfriend' role Bryant imbues it with life. [[Bidding]] and [[smarter]] the role [[outweighs]] stereotyping with Bryant inhabiting it, and she makes the [[portion]] [[sizable]] and interesting. It doesn't [[harmed]] either that Bryant is possibly the most attractive woman you'll see on celluloid this year - the smile alone [[would]] thaw the coldest heart. Acting ability and looks - why isn't this woman in everything being [[introduced]] right now. Providing good [[assistance]] in a small role in Salli [[Roberts]] as Washington's wife Berta. Saying more with a silence or [[glance]] than [[multiple]] Hollywood actresses can manage in an entire film she informs the audience of the entire storylines long before any exposition [[emerges]]. As for Washington's [[instructing]], as I said, it is the [[instructing]] equivalent of his acting. Taking the story of a man few viewers will have heard of and making it genuinely interesting is a difficult feat which Washington achieves with aplomb. The film is neither rushed nor showy, but it never feels slow or dull. It is measured and nuanced, balancing the humour and drama perfectly. Antwone Fisher may not blow you away if you like big, explosive, plotless Hollywood films but for those who appreciate a finely crafted character piece, with excellent performances and steady well handled direction, this is for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] When I went to watch this movie my [[expectations]] were really low, but I was [[pleasantly]] surprised.

I [[thought]] I was [[going]] to watch a [[boring]] teen-flick, [[BUT]] in [[fact]] the plot is interesting and well executed, the acting was somewhat convincing - especially from Melville who really shows his talent in this movie, and the fight scenes were - for a low budget movie - very well [[done]] .

I [[think]] this movie [[deserves]] a broader audience than it has [[received]]. It is a movie, which can be seen by the whole [[family]] - maybe not the smallest of kids, since it contains some rather rough scenes. A movie about love, and the problems that can occur, when you go against your family traditions.

Yes, the movie is very much like "Bend it like Beckham", but I actually think this movie [[pulls]] it off better. When I went to watch this movie my [[outlook]] were really low, but I was [[cheerfully]] surprised.

I [[brainchild]] I was [[gonna]] to watch a [[tiresome]] teen-flick, [[ALTHOUGH]] in [[facto]] the plot is interesting and well executed, the acting was somewhat convincing - especially from Melville who really shows his talent in this movie, and the fight scenes were - for a low budget movie - very well [[played]] .

I [[ideas]] this movie [[deserved]] a broader audience than it has [[benefited]]. It is a movie, which can be seen by the whole [[familia]] - maybe not the smallest of kids, since it contains some rather rough scenes. A movie about love, and the problems that can occur, when you go against your family traditions.

Yes, the movie is very much like "Bend it like Beckham", but I actually think this movie [[pulling]] it off better. --------------------------------------------- Result 3088 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Another entertaining Travolta [[dance]] flick! [[GREAT]] [[MUSIC]], [[mood]], and scenes. Debra Winger is [[beautiful]]! Like "Saturday [[Night]] Fever", this macho [[film]] [[features]] extremely improbable scenes of [[beautiful]] [[women]] [[falling]] for Travolta and [[almost]] begging him to have sex with them. Another entertaining Travolta [[dancers]] flick! [[WHOPPING]] [[MUSICA]], [[humor]], and scenes. Debra Winger is [[sublime]]! Like "Saturday [[Nightly]] Fever", this macho [[movies]] [[idiosyncrasies]] extremely improbable scenes of [[sublime]] [[wife]] [[declining]] for Travolta and [[virtually]] begging him to have sex with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Being someone who lists Night of the Living Dead at number three in her top five favorite movies of all [[time]], and at the same time [[loving]] this student film parody, I feel I must [[defend]] this [[movie]] against the [[previously]] [[posted]] scathing [[reviews]]. This short but [[sweet]] [[opus]] has always been a crowd-pleaser at horror and science fiction movie marathons where those who attend have a love of the [[genre]] yet [[know]] not to [[take]] zombie movies too seriously. This film is a [[tribute]] to the original, not an insult. It is intended to be funny, and many others who I have heard chant for and applaud it agree with me that it succeeds. Especially for those of us who have seen NOTLD 50+ times. Watch for the director cameo as news reporter Jeff Drexel, and also if you have the opportunity catch his Alien parody, Loaf. Being someone who lists Night of the Living Dead at number three in her top five favorite movies of all [[period]], and at the same time [[affectionate]] this student film parody, I feel I must [[defending]] this [[cinematographic]] against the [[formerly]] [[positioned]] scathing [[exam]]. This short but [[sugary]] [[opposite]] has always been a crowd-pleaser at horror and science fiction movie marathons where those who attend have a love of the [[types]] yet [[savoir]] not to [[taking]] zombie movies too seriously. This film is a [[compliments]] to the original, not an insult. It is intended to be funny, and many others who I have heard chant for and applaud it agree with me that it succeeds. Especially for those of us who have seen NOTLD 50+ times. Watch for the director cameo as news reporter Jeff Drexel, and also if you have the opportunity catch his Alien parody, Loaf. --------------------------------------------- Result 3090 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [[Very]] [[bad]]. Very, very [[bad]]. As a fellow who [[aspires]] to make, be in or - at [[least]] - sniff the catering table at a movie set, I find it [[hard]] to criticize independents who actually got a movie of any sort made. [[However]], this movie ... oh [[dear]].

[[Realizing]] Frightworld doesn't aspire to anything more than crude exploitation (an honorable thing in itself) and to [[try]] to make it conform to more mainstream standards is a mistake. And to be [[fair]], it is more [[entertaining]] than - [[say]] - Red Zone Cuba ... but not by much. So I won't try to [[critique]], just [[let]] me [[ask]] throw out some [[observations]].

1) [[If]] [[gore]] is the point of the [[movie]], shouldn't you be able to [[see]] it?

2) [[If]] you have [[hire]] three sound men make sure at [[least]] one knows how to [[operate]] the [[equipment]].

3) [[In]] a [[horror]] movie your lead [[maniac]] [[must]] be scarier than a smurf doll. [[Difficult]] I know but [[really]]...

4) There is a lot of [[talented]] videographers in the Buffalo/Rochester [[area]], most you can hire really [[cheap]]. [[Get]] one who knows how to [[frame]] a scene.

5) [[Just]] because you have [[someone]] who knows how to [[use]] After [[Effects]] and other cool [[programs]] doesn't mean he should do so every two seconds.

6) Kudos for [[getting]] the [[girls]] to take off their tops but [[next]] [[time]], [[get]] girls who's tops we [[want]] to [[see]] [[taken]] off.

7) [[Editing]] should [[help]] tell the story or set a [[mood]]. [[At]] the [[least]] in this [[sort]] of [[movie]] [[editing]] should [[sell]] the gore gags. A chainsaw [[suddenly]] [[appearing]] in a characters stomach is not [[scary]], it's sloppy.

Some good things. Not all the acting was [[bad]]. [[Jack]] was pretty [[good]] and I [[liked]] [[Acid]] once she [[started]] [[fighting]] back. There was some neat [[imagery]], [[unfortunately]] it was [[thrown]] up on the screen without rhyme or [[reason]]. "[[Acid]] Poptart" is a [[name]] that [[deserves]] a [[better]] [[movie]]. I like the moxie of Frightworld too. Next [[time]], now that they have a [[movie]] of sorts under their belts, I hope all involve aspire to something better than Colman Francis. Upgrade at least Ed Wood. [[Quite]] [[negative]]. Very, very [[negative]]. As a fellow who [[yearn]] to make, be in or - at [[slightest]] - sniff the catering table at a movie set, I find it [[harsh]] to criticize independents who actually got a movie of any sort made. [[Conversely]], this movie ... oh [[sweetie]].

[[Realise]] Frightworld doesn't aspire to anything more than crude exploitation (an honorable thing in itself) and to [[strive]] to make it conform to more mainstream standards is a mistake. And to be [[justo]], it is more [[entertain]] than - [[said]] - Red Zone Cuba ... but not by much. So I won't try to [[criticised]], just [[letting]] me [[calls]] throw out some [[comments]].

1) [[Though]] [[gora]] is the point of the [[cinematography]], shouldn't you be able to [[seeing]] it?

2) [[Though]] you have [[recruiting]] three sound men make sure at [[less]] one knows how to [[functioning]] the [[appliances]].

3) [[Throughout]] a [[terror]] movie your lead [[fou]] [[ought]] be scarier than a smurf doll. [[Hard]] I know but [[genuinely]]...

4) There is a lot of [[gifted]] videographers in the Buffalo/Rochester [[areas]], most you can hire really [[inexpensive]]. [[Obtain]] one who knows how to [[framing]] a scene.

5) [[Righteous]] because you have [[anyone]] who knows how to [[usage]] After [[Influences]] and other cool [[programmes]] doesn't mean he should do so every two seconds.

6) Kudos for [[obtaining]] the [[dame]] to take off their tops but [[upcoming]] [[times]], [[gets]] girls who's tops we [[wanting]] to [[seeing]] [[picked]] off.

7) [[Edit]] should [[assists]] tell the story or set a [[humour]]. [[Under]] the [[slightest]] in this [[genre]] of [[cinema]] [[edited]] should [[sells]] the gore gags. A chainsaw [[unexpectedly]] [[appears]] in a characters stomach is not [[fearful]], it's sloppy.

Some good things. Not all the acting was [[negative]]. [[Jacques]] was pretty [[buena]] and I [[loved]] [[Acids]] once she [[inaugurated]] [[combating]] back. There was some neat [[photograph]], [[unhappily]] it was [[hurled]] up on the screen without rhyme or [[cause]]. "[[Acidic]] Poptart" is a [[naming]] that [[deserved]] a [[best]] [[flick]]. I like the moxie of Frightworld too. Next [[moment]], now that they have a [[kino]] of sorts under their belts, I hope all involve aspire to something better than Colman Francis. Upgrade at least Ed Wood. --------------------------------------------- Result 3091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A craven, cowardly [[film]]. [[Director]] Boorman [[shows]] Cahill burglarizing [[rich]] [[houses]], but the [[male]] [[occupant]] is [[shown]] being [[unfaithful]] with the nanny, [[thats]] all right then. The forensic [[scientist]] [[investigating]] Cahill is blown up in his car, but he is rat [[faced]] sourpuss, and doesn't look like a [[nice]] [[man]], so [[thats]] all right too. The Beits, [[owner]] of Russborrough [[House]], [[made]] their money by exploiting 'darkies' [[digging]] up diamonds, so it's [[okay]] to rob [[priceless]] art from them and [[hide]] it in a bunker in the Wicklow mountains. The Garda [[kill]] his ferrets and are [[implicated]] in his murder. The [[moral]] equivalencing is [[sickening]], Boorman looks for a [[hit]] [[film]], but doesn't have the guts to stand against the [[criminality]] of the [[generals]] gang, who [[terrorized]] the [[neighbourhood]], and unleashed another [[wave]] of scumbags [[upon]] Dublin. He [[even]] liaised with the [[Generals]] son while making it. [[Disgusting]]. [[Shame]] on him for his [[cowardice]]. A craven, cowardly [[films]]. [[Superintendent]] Boorman [[illustrates]] Cahill burglarizing [[richest]] [[accommodation]], but the [[masculine]] [[occupiers]] is [[illustrated]] being [[disloyal]] with the nanny, [[becuase]] all right then. The forensic [[investigators]] [[explored]] Cahill is blown up in his car, but he is rat [[confronted]] sourpuss, and doesn't look like a [[handsome]] [[hombre]], so [[haha]] all right too. The Beits, [[landowner]] of Russborrough [[Households]], [[effected]] their money by exploiting 'darkies' [[excavated]] up diamonds, so it's [[okey]] to rob [[cherished]] art from them and [[mask]] it in a bunker in the Wicklow mountains. The Garda [[assassinating]] his ferrets and are [[participating]] in his murder. The [[ethical]] equivalencing is [[revolting]], Boorman looks for a [[hitting]] [[cinema]], but doesn't have the guts to stand against the [[crimes]] of the [[totals]] gang, who [[frightened]] the [[neighbourhoods]], and unleashed another [[waves]] of scumbags [[after]] Dublin. He [[yet]] liaised with the [[Total]] son while making it. [[Nasty]]. [[Pity]] on him for his [[cowards]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] This [[movie]] is a [[great]] mocumentary. It follows the rap [[group]], NWH, made up of [[Ice]] Cold, [[Tasty]] Taste and Tone Def through their [[unique]] [[path]] to gangster rap [[highs]], lows and back to highs. Through [[trouble]] with women, egos, [[cops]] and whitey, this group [[gets]] to the top of the [[gangster]] [[rap]] [[world]], as this movie goes to the top of mocumentaries. I know everybodies favorite mocumentary is This is Spinal Tap, for very good [[reason]], however I think that if in the right mood, this movie is simply better. The laughs never end, even for someone not into the rap culture.

I'm a white guy, that has no interest in rap music, culture or anything else associated with it, however I [[love]] this movie. Rusty Cundeif, who wrote the screenplay, songs and starred in it showed great potential and it is a shame that I haven't seen him since Fear of a Black Hat. However, I have seen him one more time than you have, and is that, that I recommend Fear of a Black Hat to you for quick laughs.

Remember, "Don't shoot to you see the whites!....of their eyes? No don't shoot to you see the whites."

FYM and enjoy the movie. This [[filmmaking]] is a [[large]] mocumentary. It follows the rap [[cluster]], NWH, made up of [[Frosting]] Cold, [[Appetizing]] Taste and Tone Def through their [[unequalled]] [[pathway]] to gangster rap [[altitudes]], lows and back to highs. Through [[problem]] with women, egos, [[cop]] and whitey, this group [[obtains]] to the top of the [[hoodlum]] [[rapper]] [[globe]], as this movie goes to the top of mocumentaries. I know everybodies favorite mocumentary is This is Spinal Tap, for very good [[rationale]], however I think that if in the right mood, this movie is simply better. The laughs never end, even for someone not into the rap culture.

I'm a white guy, that has no interest in rap music, culture or anything else associated with it, however I [[amore]] this movie. Rusty Cundeif, who wrote the screenplay, songs and starred in it showed great potential and it is a shame that I haven't seen him since Fear of a Black Hat. However, I have seen him one more time than you have, and is that, that I recommend Fear of a Black Hat to you for quick laughs.

Remember, "Don't shoot to you see the whites!....of their eyes? No don't shoot to you see the whites."

FYM and enjoy the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3093 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Falsely accused, skirt-chasing chums John Wayne (as John Scott) and Eddy Chandler (as Kansas Charlie) change identities to become "Alias Smith and Jones". Mr. Wayne becomes "John Jones". Mr. Chandler's is supposed to be "Rev. Smith", but Wayne calls him "Dr. Smith". At no [[time]] are either of them as entertaining as Roger Davis, [[Pete]] Duel, Jonathan Harris, or [[Ben]] Murphy; [[although]], Wayne can be [[considered]] infinitely more successful than any of them, career [[wise]]. [[Pretty]] blonde Mary Kornman (as Anne), grown-up from her days in "Our Gang", is a lovely interest for Wayne. She and Chandler have a [[couple]] of [[cute]] scenes with Wayne. If you're not a [[fan]] of low budget [[John]] Wayne [[films]] of the 1930s, this [[movie]] won't make you one. Falsely accused, skirt-chasing chums John Wayne (as John Scott) and Eddy Chandler (as Kansas Charlie) change identities to become "Alias Smith and Jones". Mr. Wayne becomes "John Jones". Mr. Chandler's is supposed to be "Rev. Smith", but Wayne calls him "Dr. Smith". At no [[times]] are either of them as entertaining as Roger Davis, [[Peter]] Duel, Jonathan Harris, or [[Benn]] Murphy; [[whilst]], Wayne can be [[regarded]] infinitely more successful than any of them, career [[wiser]]. [[Belle]] blonde Mary Kornman (as Anne), grown-up from her days in "Our Gang", is a lovely interest for Wayne. She and Chandler have a [[coupling]] of [[belle]] scenes with Wayne. If you're not a [[ventilator]] of low budget [[Johannes]] Wayne [[cinematographic]] of the 1930s, this [[film]] won't make you one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This has been one of my favorite movies for a [[long]] [[time]]. Recently I was happy to see it on DVD which is a relief from watching the [[old]], [[grainy]] VHS versions.

I hadn't seen it in [[years]] and watched it today to find myself [[amazed]] at how well the movie [[stands]] up to time. It's one of those [[rare]], [[perfect]] storms of comedy where great writing ([[truly]] funny line after [[truly]] funny line) is paired with great direction and outstanding performances all at the same time.

Dudley Moore [[got]] an Oscar [[nomination]] for "[[Arthur]]" but lost ([[although]] John Gielgud won for [[best]] supporting [[actor]]). If Moore's performance in "Arthur" doesn't [[win]] a Best [[Actor]] Oscar -it's [[proof]] that no comedic [[actor]] [[could]] ever [[win]] the title (another [[example]] is [[Gene]] Wilder in "[[Young]] Frankenstein").

Steve Gordon crafts the [[film]] beautifully [[keeping]] [[true]] to each of the [[characters]] and the warm-hearted tone of the [[story]]. [[Quite]] [[simply]], IMHO the [[movie]] is a [[rare]] gem. It's only [[sad]] that Steve Gordon [[passed]] away just a [[year]] after "[[Arthur]]" was [[released]].

[[Regarding]] the DVD that is [[available]] as of 1/2007, it's so/so. [[Although]] the video quality is a [[leap]] over the [[old]] VHS [[copies]], there is [[still]] no widescreen version [[available]].

The [[DVD]] has a few [[extras]] that are [[nice]] but it's just not [[enough]]. One [[example]] is commentary from the [[Director]] [[stating]] how he [[greatly]] [[wished]] how certain deleted takes and scenes [[could]] have been [[included]] (because they were hysterical), but that he had to make [[tough]] [[choices]] for a [[final]] edit. The DVD, being the [[perfect]] [[format]] to [[include]] such material, [[certainly]] should have [[offered]] it as well.

This, the [[original]] "Arthur", is a [[classic]] [[comedy]] that is one for the [[books]]. This has been one of my favorite movies for a [[protracted]] [[moment]]. Recently I was happy to see it on DVD which is a relief from watching the [[former]], [[fuzzy]] VHS versions.

I hadn't seen it in [[ages]] and watched it today to find myself [[appalled]] at how well the movie [[stand]] up to time. It's one of those [[scarce]], [[irreproachable]] storms of comedy where great writing ([[really]] funny line after [[honestly]] funny line) is paired with great direction and outstanding performances all at the same time.

Dudley Moore [[ai]] an Oscar [[appointing]] for "[[Artur]]" but lost ([[despite]] John Gielgud won for [[better]] supporting [[actress]]). If Moore's performance in "Arthur" doesn't [[earning]] a Best [[Actress]] Oscar -it's [[evidence]] that no comedic [[actress]] [[did]] ever [[earning]] the title (another [[cases]] is [[Genes]] Wilder in "[[Youthful]] Frankenstein").

Steve Gordon crafts the [[cinematography]] beautifully [[sustain]] [[authentic]] to each of the [[traits]] and the warm-hearted tone of the [[histories]]. [[Pretty]] [[exclusively]], IMHO the [[cinematography]] is a [[scarce]] gem. It's only [[unfortunate]] that Steve Gordon [[adopted]] away just a [[annum]] after "[[Arturo]]" was [[publicized]].

[[Relating]] the DVD that is [[availability]] as of 1/2007, it's so/so. [[Despite]] the video quality is a [[leaping]] over the [[antigua]] VHS [[copy]], there is [[nonetheless]] no widescreen version [[approachable]].

The [[DVDS]] has a few [[supplemental]] that are [[pleasant]] but it's just not [[suitably]]. One [[cases]] is commentary from the [[Superintendent]] [[indicating]] how he [[severely]] [[desired]] how certain deleted takes and scenes [[wo]] have been [[inscribed]] (because they were hysterical), but that he had to make [[arduous]] [[chooses]] for a [[latter]] edit. The DVD, being the [[irreproachable]] [[layout]] to [[incorporate]] such material, [[unquestionably]] should have [[delivering]] it as well.

This, the [[upfront]] "Arthur", is a [[classical]] [[travesty]] that is one for the [[ledgers]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3095 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] French production in which leading [[film]] [[directors]] from 11 [[countries]] were [[invited]] to create 11-minute [[short]] films [[conveying]] their [[reflections]] on the [[events]] of [[September]] 11.

The [[film]] segments vary [[widely]] in content and quality. Two allude to U.S. complicity in terrorist acts (in Chile against Allende, who died on [[September]] 11, 1973, depicted in the segment by British [[director]] [[Ken]] Loach; and in [[Palestine]] by U.S.-backed [[Israelis]], shown in the segment from Egyptian director Youssef Chahine). Two more [[recall]] other destructive [[acts]] (a Palestinian suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, shot by Israeli director Amos Gitan; the Japanese "holy war" against the west in WW II, by Shohei Imamura).

Ironies abound in several stories. Shadows that darken the New York City apartment of a grieving old man suddenly disappear as the World Trade towers telescope to the ground in Sean Penn's piece, bringing the man momentary joy. But in this bright light he can finally see that his wife is really gone. In Mira Nair's film, based on a real incident, a missing young man, also in New York City, the son of a Pakistani family, is first presumed to be a fugitive terrorist, but later he proves to a hero who sacrificed himself trying to save others in the towers.

There are poignant moments dotted throughout. Loach has his exiled Chilean man quote St. Augustine, to the effect that hope is built of anger and courage: anger at the way things are, [[courage]] to change them. Imamura tells us that there is no such thing as a holy war. Samira Makhmalbaf [[shows]] a teacher with her very young Afghan schoolchildren, exiled in Iran, trying to tell them about the events that have just transpired in New York. But they are understandably more impressed with a major [[event]] in their refugee camp, where two men have fallen into a deep well, one killed, the other sustaining a broken leg. This is [[comprehensible]] tragedy on a [[grand]] [[scale]] for the 6 year olds.

Idrissa Ouedraogo, from Burkina Faso, creates a [[drama]] in which the son of an ailing woman [[spots]] Osama bin Laden in their village and gathers his [[buddies]] to help capture the [[fugitive]] terrorist, in order to get the $25 million U. S. [[reward]]. He tells his friends not to let any of the adults know their plans, for the older folks would merely waste the money on cars and cigarettes, while he plans to help his mother and others who are sick and destitute.

It is Mexican director Alejandro [[Gonzalez]] Inarritu (maker of "Amores Perros") who provides by far the most powerful and chilling segment, one that, for the most [[part]], shows only a darkened screen with audio tape loops of chanting and voices and occasional thudding sounds. Brief visual flashes gradually permit us to see bodies falling from the high floors of the towers, and it dawns on us that the thuds are these bodies hitting the ground. The sequence ends with elegiac orchestral music and a still shot, bearing a phrase first shown only in Arabic, then with a translation added: "Does God's light guide us or blind us?" (In various languages with English subtitles) Grade: 8/10 (B+). (Seen on 10/31/04). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites. French production in which leading [[flick]] [[managers]] from 11 [[nationals]] were [[urged]] to create 11-minute [[terse]] films [[transmitting]] their [[ideas]] on the [[phenomena]] of [[Nov]] 11.

The [[cinematography]] segments vary [[largely]] in content and quality. Two allude to U.S. complicity in terrorist acts (in Chile against Allende, who died on [[Janvier]] 11, 1973, depicted in the segment by British [[headmaster]] [[Keene]] Loach; and in [[Israeli]] by U.S.-backed [[Israeli]], shown in the segment from Egyptian director Youssef Chahine). Two more [[rappel]] other destructive [[act]] (a Palestinian suicide bombing in Tel Aviv, shot by Israeli director Amos Gitan; the Japanese "holy war" against the west in WW II, by Shohei Imamura).

Ironies abound in several stories. Shadows that darken the New York City apartment of a grieving old man suddenly disappear as the World Trade towers telescope to the ground in Sean Penn's piece, bringing the man momentary joy. But in this bright light he can finally see that his wife is really gone. In Mira Nair's film, based on a real incident, a missing young man, also in New York City, the son of a Pakistani family, is first presumed to be a fugitive terrorist, but later he proves to a hero who sacrificed himself trying to save others in the towers.

There are poignant moments dotted throughout. Loach has his exiled Chilean man quote St. Augustine, to the effect that hope is built of anger and courage: anger at the way things are, [[bravery]] to change them. Imamura tells us that there is no such thing as a holy war. Samira Makhmalbaf [[denotes]] a teacher with her very young Afghan schoolchildren, exiled in Iran, trying to tell them about the events that have just transpired in New York. But they are understandably more impressed with a major [[phenomena]] in their refugee camp, where two men have fallen into a deep well, one killed, the other sustaining a broken leg. This is [[intelligible]] tragedy on a [[large]] [[scaling]] for the 6 year olds.

Idrissa Ouedraogo, from Burkina Faso, creates a [[opera]] in which the son of an ailing woman [[commercials]] Osama bin Laden in their village and gathers his [[mates]] to help capture the [[harbin]] terrorist, in order to get the $25 million U. S. [[payoff]]. He tells his friends not to let any of the adults know their plans, for the older folks would merely waste the money on cars and cigarettes, while he plans to help his mother and others who are sick and destitute.

It is Mexican director Alejandro [[Antonio]] Inarritu (maker of "Amores Perros") who provides by far the most powerful and chilling segment, one that, for the most [[parte]], shows only a darkened screen with audio tape loops of chanting and voices and occasional thudding sounds. Brief visual flashes gradually permit us to see bodies falling from the high floors of the towers, and it dawns on us that the thuds are these bodies hitting the ground. The sequence ends with elegiac orchestral music and a still shot, bearing a phrase first shown only in Arabic, then with a translation added: "Does God's light guide us or blind us?" (In various languages with English subtitles) Grade: 8/10 (B+). (Seen on 10/31/04). If you'd like to read more of my reviews, send me a message for directions to my websites. --------------------------------------------- Result 3096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[In]] [[Mexico]] [[City]], the [[former]] CIA assassin and [[presently]] an [[alcoholic]] decadent [[man]] John Creasy (Denzel Washington) is [[hired]] by the industrialist Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony), with the recommendation of his [[old]] [[friend]] Rayburn ([[Christopher]] Walken), to be the bodyguard of his young [[daughter]] [[Pita]] (Dakota [[Fanning]]) and his wife Lisa (Radha [[Mitchell]]). [[Pita]] changes the behavior of the cold Creasy, [[making]] him [[live]] and smile again, and he [[feels]] a [[great]] [[affection]] for her. When the [[girl]] is [[kidnapped]] and Creasy is [[informed]] that she was [[murdered]] by the criminals, he swears to [[kill]] each one responsible for the [[abduction]].

"[[Man]] on Fire" is [[almost]] a [[masterpiece]], and will become [[certainly]] a classic in the future. The story is [[excellent]], never corny and [[although]] having 146 minutes running [[time]], the viewer does not feel [[time]] passing. The cast is [[composed]] by [[excellent]] [[actors]] and actresses, their performances are [[outstanding]], [[highlighting]] Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning and Radha [[Mitchell]]. The cinematography has [[wonderful]] [[moments]], and the [[screenplay]] has [[stunning]] lines. I personally [[loved]] when the [[character]] of Christopher Walken [[explains]] to Manzano (Giancarlo Giannini) that Creasey's [[specialty]] is [[death]], and he is preparing his [[masterpiece]]. I agree with the [[user]] that commented that "[[Man]] on Fire" is one of the [[best]], if not the best, [[film]] of the [[year]] in this [[genre]]. My vote is ten.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "Chamas da Vingança" ("[[Flames]] of the Revenge") [[Onto]] [[Mexican]] [[Town]], the [[old]] CIA assassin and [[now]] an [[beverages]] decadent [[males]] John Creasy (Denzel Washington) is [[embarked]] by the industrialist Samuel Ramos (Marc Anthony), with the recommendation of his [[elderly]] [[boyfriend]] Rayburn ([[Christophe]] Walken), to be the bodyguard of his young [[girlie]] [[Flip]] (Dakota [[Stoking]]) and his wife Lisa (Radha [[Michelle]]). [[Flip]] changes the behavior of the cold Creasy, [[doing]] him [[iive]] and smile again, and he [[thinks]] a [[huge]] [[ailment]] for her. When the [[chick]] is [[kidnapping]] and Creasy is [[notified]] that she was [[kills]] by the criminals, he swears to [[killin]] each one responsible for the [[kidnap]].

"[[Males]] on Fire" is [[hardly]] a [[centerpiece]], and will become [[obviously]] a classic in the future. The story is [[glamorous]], never corny and [[despite]] having 146 minutes running [[moment]], the viewer does not feel [[moment]] passing. The cast is [[consist]] by [[funky]] [[actresses]] and actresses, their performances are [[unpaid]], [[stressing]] Denzel Washington, Dakota Fanning and Radha [[Michelle]]. The cinematography has [[sumptuous]] [[times]], and the [[scripts]] has [[unbelievable]] lines. I personally [[worshipped]] when the [[traits]] of Christopher Walken [[explained]] to Manzano (Giancarlo Giannini) that Creasey's [[speciality]] is [[killings]], and he is preparing his [[centerpiece]]. I agree with the [[username]] that commented that "[[Males]] on Fire" is one of the [[nicest]], if not the best, [[cinematic]] of the [[annum]] in this [[types]]. My vote is ten.

Title ([[Brazilian]]): "Chamas da Vingança" ("[[Thermals]] of the Revenge") --------------------------------------------- Result 3097 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] "Before Sunrise" is a [[wonderful]] love [[story]] and has to be [[among]] my Top 5 [[favorite]] movies ever. Dialog and acting are [[great]]. I [[love]] the [[characters]] and their ideas and [[thoughts]]. Of course, the [[romantic]] Vienna, [[introduced]] in the [[movie]] does not [[exist]] (you won't [[find]] a [[poet]] sitting by the river in the middle of the night) and it isn't [[possible]] to [[get]] to all the places in only one [[night]], [[either]] (especially if you're a [[stranger]] and it's your [[first]] night in Vienna). But that's not the point. The relationship of the two [[characters]] is [[much]] more [[important]] and this [[part]] of the [[story]] is not at all [[unrealistic]]. Although, nothing ever really [[happens]], the [[movie]] never [[gets]] [[boring]]. The ending is [[genuinely]] [[sad]] without being "Titanic" or something. Even if you don't like love [[stories]] you should watch this [[film]]! I'm a [[little]] skeptic about the sequel that is going to be released in summer. The [[first]] [[part]] is [[perfect]] as it is, in my [[opinion]]. "Before Sunrise" is a [[noteworthy]] love [[stories]] and has to be [[in]] my Top 5 [[preferable]] movies ever. Dialog and acting are [[huge]]. I [[likes]] the [[nature]] and their ideas and [[ideas]]. Of course, the [[sentimental]] Vienna, [[made]] in the [[movies]] does not [[exists]] (you won't [[found]] a [[poetry]] sitting by the river in the middle of the night) and it isn't [[feasible]] to [[got]] to all the places in only one [[nocturne]], [[neither]] (especially if you're a [[alien]] and it's your [[frst]] night in Vienna). But that's not the point. The relationship of the two [[nature]] is [[very]] more [[significant]] and this [[portion]] of the [[stories]] is not at all [[impractical]]. Although, nothing ever really [[comes]], the [[movies]] never [[attains]] [[bored]]. The ending is [[truly]] [[unfortunate]] without being "Titanic" or something. Even if you don't like love [[histories]] you should watch this [[flick]]! I'm a [[petit]] skeptic about the sequel that is going to be released in summer. The [[frst]] [[parte]] is [[irreproachable]] as it is, in my [[avis]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3098 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] OK so I hear about this new Justin Timberlake movie coming out which features some pretty big names. I mean [[great]] actors like, The Freeman aka Morgan Freeman, an asset to Hollywood, [[however]] [[completely]] [[wasted]] in this film. Then we got [[Kevin]] Spacey, who I've been a [[great]] [[fan]] of ever since I watched American Beauty and The Usual Suspects. Both of these great actors [[probably]] signed on to the movie thinking it was going to be a great movie as I did when I [[heard]] the [[story]]. Then enter a fresh [[faced]] Justin Timberlake. I say fresh [[faced]] because this is his first movie and those rotten tomatoes haven't hit him yet. Well the reason for that , I might add, is because no one will ever see this movie or even bother reading this review. The movie is so terrible that when i got into the first 15 minutes of it. The characters were so one dimensional that it makes some Bible characters look like the Don Corleone. They got the one liners and sound-bite worthy stuff. The token troubled black guy (LL COOL J) who is with a gorgeous woman who he otherwise would not even belong with in real life. The captain is this short whiny guy who speaks in such a high tone. And what crappy movie would be complete without the hero becoming richer because of an experience. Oh and lots of gun fire, i mean a whole lot. SPOILER(NOT!!!) THe kind of gun fire that leaves everyone in the police force who's crooked dead and the hero prevails. They got flame throwers and rocket launchers, REally no kidding.

Bottom line if you want to see Edison its because you are a great fan of one of the actors, or a great fan of Justin Timberlake, to all the 13 year old girls out there, enjoy!! I wish i had more hands, because then I would have more thumbs, because this movie is so terrible because then i could give it so many thumbs down that thumbs down would no longer mean anything because this movie is so terrible because it sucks so badly that it made me laugh out of frustration about the story line because it just would not end because the firing and yelling just kept happening.

MAY G*D HAVE MERCY ON US ALL and save us from these terrible movies. Well it could be worst, another RNB terrible actor turned singer turned terrible actor is usher, hehe check out IN THE MIX lol, or even Get rich or die trying'. Now the special thing about that movie is that its got 30+ year old men, playing 16 or even younger teens. I could go on with these. OK so I hear about this new Justin Timberlake movie coming out which features some pretty big names. I mean [[wondrous]] actors like, The Freeman aka Morgan Freeman, an asset to Hollywood, [[conversely]] [[abundantly]] [[squandered]] in this film. Then we got [[Kev]] Spacey, who I've been a [[resplendent]] [[breather]] of ever since I watched American Beauty and The Usual Suspects. Both of these great actors [[indubitably]] signed on to the movie thinking it was going to be a great movie as I did when I [[listened]] the [[storytelling]]. Then enter a fresh [[confronted]] Justin Timberlake. I say fresh [[braved]] because this is his first movie and those rotten tomatoes haven't hit him yet. Well the reason for that , I might add, is because no one will ever see this movie or even bother reading this review. The movie is so terrible that when i got into the first 15 minutes of it. The characters were so one dimensional that it makes some Bible characters look like the Don Corleone. They got the one liners and sound-bite worthy stuff. The token troubled black guy (LL COOL J) who is with a gorgeous woman who he otherwise would not even belong with in real life. The captain is this short whiny guy who speaks in such a high tone. And what crappy movie would be complete without the hero becoming richer because of an experience. Oh and lots of gun fire, i mean a whole lot. SPOILER(NOT!!!) THe kind of gun fire that leaves everyone in the police force who's crooked dead and the hero prevails. They got flame throwers and rocket launchers, REally no kidding.

Bottom line if you want to see Edison its because you are a great fan of one of the actors, or a great fan of Justin Timberlake, to all the 13 year old girls out there, enjoy!! I wish i had more hands, because then I would have more thumbs, because this movie is so terrible because then i could give it so many thumbs down that thumbs down would no longer mean anything because this movie is so terrible because it sucks so badly that it made me laugh out of frustration about the story line because it just would not end because the firing and yelling just kept happening.

MAY G*D HAVE MERCY ON US ALL and save us from these terrible movies. Well it could be worst, another RNB terrible actor turned singer turned terrible actor is usher, hehe check out IN THE MIX lol, or even Get rich or die trying'. Now the special thing about that movie is that its got 30+ year old men, playing 16 or even younger teens. I could go on with these. --------------------------------------------- Result 3099 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This movie provided [[NOTHING]] new or worthwhile. After seeing it, my wife and I both agreed that the studio simply churned this out and could have cared less if it was entertaining. This is a good [[example]] of a "concept only" film--they have a concept about a film and the other details are unimportant because execs KNOW it will make $$ just based on the initial concept.

The movie starts with Cruella getting out of prison and going on parole. She no longer hates puppies but has been programmed to adore them--she simply couldn't hurt a flea. This doesn't last too long after her release and she's back to her old ways. Period.

The most annoying aspects of the movie were the supporting characters. Eric Idle as the voice of Waddlesworth the bird made me HATE him--and that is TOUGH considering I am a die-hard Python fan. It was obvious he did this because they gave him lots of money (there can't be any other reason). Cruella's low self-esteem servant, Tim McInnerny, was funny in the Black Adder shows but here he is totally wasted and unfunny. And it must have cost a few bucks to get Gérard Depardieu but he was utterly wasted as well. There were some other supporting actors as well but given how poorly written the characters were, I am trying to block them out of my mind.

Overall, you'd be better just to let your kids watch television than bother letting them see this drivel. This movie provided [[NADA]] new or worthwhile. After seeing it, my wife and I both agreed that the studio simply churned this out and could have cared less if it was entertaining. This is a good [[instances]] of a "concept only" film--they have a concept about a film and the other details are unimportant because execs KNOW it will make $$ just based on the initial concept.

The movie starts with Cruella getting out of prison and going on parole. She no longer hates puppies but has been programmed to adore them--she simply couldn't hurt a flea. This doesn't last too long after her release and she's back to her old ways. Period.

The most annoying aspects of the movie were the supporting characters. Eric Idle as the voice of Waddlesworth the bird made me HATE him--and that is TOUGH considering I am a die-hard Python fan. It was obvious he did this because they gave him lots of money (there can't be any other reason). Cruella's low self-esteem servant, Tim McInnerny, was funny in the Black Adder shows but here he is totally wasted and unfunny. And it must have cost a few bucks to get Gérard Depardieu but he was utterly wasted as well. There were some other supporting actors as well but given how poorly written the characters were, I am trying to block them out of my mind.

Overall, you'd be better just to let your kids watch television than bother letting them see this drivel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3100 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I don't pretend to be an authority on actors who have played Othello, but I've never [[witnessed]] a performance of the [[play]], on film or on stage, wherein Othello was portrayed with more humanity and authenticity.

[[According]] to the biographical notes, Fishburne never received any professional training as an actor. Perhaps this explains why his acting, in this [[beautifully]] edited [[film]], [[comes]] over as so believable and so [[powerful]]. [[Instead]] of chewing the scenery in the approved fashion for such high-powered [[roles]], Fishburne's portrayal is [[focused]] more on Othello's [[love]] for his wife, and on his profound [[sadness]] at her supposed betrayal, than on violence and [[vengeance]]. [[In]] a word, the performance is understated, and [[made]] far more impressive by Fishburne's extremely intelligent [[interpretation]] than it [[otherwise]] [[would]] have been.

The acting throughout is [[superb]], and the (abridged) speeches gain grace from their light editing. (Even Shakesspeare, after all, can be [[improved]] [[upon]], now and again -- and if that be treason, make the most of it! I don't pretend to be an authority on actors who have played Othello, but I've never [[saw]] a performance of the [[playing]], on film or on stage, wherein Othello was portrayed with more humanity and authenticity.

[[Conforming]] to the biographical notes, Fishburne never received any professional training as an actor. Perhaps this explains why his acting, in this [[staggeringly]] edited [[movies]], [[arrives]] over as so believable and so [[emphatic]]. [[However]] of chewing the scenery in the approved fashion for such high-powered [[functions]], Fishburne's portrayal is [[focusing]] more on Othello's [[likes]] for his wife, and on his profound [[grief]] at her supposed betrayal, than on violence and [[retaliation]]. [[During]] a word, the performance is understated, and [[introduced]] far more impressive by Fishburne's extremely intelligent [[explanations]] than it [[else]] [[should]] have been.

The acting throughout is [[funky]], and the (abridged) speeches gain grace from their light editing. (Even Shakesspeare, after all, can be [[improve]] [[after]], now and again -- and if that be treason, make the most of it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3101 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I went into this [[movie]] after having read it was a drama about a man with a supernatural gift, who was made into a monster by society. Suffice to [[say]] I was [[expecting]] [[something]] entirely different from what I got. But it was a happy surprise. My [[friend]] and I both thought the movie was very romantic (the fact that the male lead isn't bad to look at surely helped), and there was enough [[plot]] development, action and even [[humor]] (the fact that it takes them until the 3rd part of the [[movie]] to now each other's name had the whole movietheatre laughing) to [[keep]] you entertained and invested in the [[story]]. So in short: Not what I [[expected]], but a very good surprise [[indeed]]. I'll [[definitely]] [[buy]] this [[movie]] when it [[comes]] out on DVD. I went into this [[cinematographic]] after having read it was a drama about a man with a supernatural gift, who was made into a monster by society. Suffice to [[tell]] I was [[waiting]] [[anything]] entirely different from what I got. But it was a happy surprise. My [[boyfriend]] and I both thought the movie was very romantic (the fact that the male lead isn't bad to look at surely helped), and there was enough [[intrigue]] development, action and even [[comedy]] (the fact that it takes them until the 3rd part of the [[filmmaking]] to now each other's name had the whole movietheatre laughing) to [[preserving]] you entertained and invested in the [[saga]]. So in short: Not what I [[hoped]], but a very good surprise [[actually]]. I'll [[decidedly]] [[buying]] this [[film]] when it [[happens]] out on DVD. --------------------------------------------- Result 3102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] "In the world of old-school kung fu movies, where revenge pictures came a dime a dozen, it took a lot for a film to stand out -- and even more to make it a fan favorite after all these years. What is arguably Chang Cheh's finest movie continues to hold influence over the Hong Kong movie industry, from the themes of loyalty, brotherhood and revenge as explored by John Woo (who got his start in the HK movie industry working for Chang) during the heyday of heroic bloodshed during the late 1980's, to more modern movies like A Man Called Hero, which sports a character in a costume inspired by this film. The influence has also carried into other areas as well, from music such as the Wu-Tang Clan, TV commercials for Sprite and video games such as "Mortal Kombat." So what makes this movie so special? The plot -- on the surface -- is pretty simple. It deals with members of a rogue group known as the "Poison Clan" who are searching for a treasure hidden by their sifu. All of the members of the clan have extraordinary kung fu abilities, denoted by their animal styles, or "venoms" (the lizard can climb walls, the scorpion has a deadly strike, etc.). The twist is that since the clan always wears masks, not all of them known who the others are. Thus a simple plot becomes almost a suspense thriller. We're not talking The Usual Suspects here, but it's far above many other kung fu movies of the time. Supposedly, Golden Harvest was not too happy with Chang's script -- like most of his movies, they felt it was too dark and violent -- and they actually wanted him to add broad comic relief to it. Thankfully, Chang stuck to his guns and stayed with his original script, which has since has become revered as one of the best for the films of its time, if not ever, completing an almost perfect dramatic arc and providing the perfect backbone for the extraordinary action sequences.

But what really solidifies the movie are the venoms themselves. Chang Cheh hit upon a magical formula with the cast -- not only did he gain talented martial artists (whose moves, competed without the aid of wires or other special effects, put most modern martial artists to shame) but great actors as well. The formula proved so popular that Chang usually had one or more of the venoms in his later movies. Getting back to matters at hand, in most old-school movies, the actors seem to playing out cardboard cutouts, but here the actors actually create characters. It seems that everyone has a favorite venom (mine is Philip Kwok -- best known to many as Mad Dog from Hard-Boiled -- as Lizard) and it is this personal connection to the characters that The Five Deadly Venoms generates which makes it a true classic of the genre. Even if you're normally not a fan of old-school movies, you need to check The Five Deadly Venoms out, if for nothing else to see where modern movies got their inspiration from." --------------------------------------------- Result 3103 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (59%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] This hodge-podge adapted from a Gore Vidal novel (actually one of the great American writers) makes THE MAGIC CHRISTIAN and VALLEY OF THE DOLLS look like Fellini art-works. Raquel Welch, with an incredible body (and she's actually not very tall) in a lead role (except for KANSAS CITY BOMBER when she was quite good) playing Rex Reed's (bad movie reviewer; not critic) alter-ego, only to be surrounded by drag queen (great chick) Mae West, horny John Huston, a young and "naive" Farrah Fawcett (pre-Lee Majors; what a shame), and other various creep-azoids to pretend to spoof WAY too may things has nothing going for it except inter-spliced old films clips (i.e. Widmark in KISS OF DEATH, Lena Horne)...JUST so they can continue to bleed the life out of everyone.

A 2 out of 10. Best performance = ?. It's so [[bad]], it's worth seeing! This hodge-podge adapted from a Gore Vidal novel (actually one of the great American writers) makes THE MAGIC CHRISTIAN and VALLEY OF THE DOLLS look like Fellini art-works. Raquel Welch, with an incredible body (and she's actually not very tall) in a lead role (except for KANSAS CITY BOMBER when she was quite good) playing Rex Reed's (bad movie reviewer; not critic) alter-ego, only to be surrounded by drag queen (great chick) Mae West, horny John Huston, a young and "naive" Farrah Fawcett (pre-Lee Majors; what a shame), and other various creep-azoids to pretend to spoof WAY too may things has nothing going for it except inter-spliced old films clips (i.e. Widmark in KISS OF DEATH, Lena Horne)...JUST so they can continue to bleed the life out of everyone.

A 2 out of 10. Best performance = ?. It's so [[mala]], it's worth seeing! --------------------------------------------- Result 3104 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Eddie]] Murphy really [[made]] me laugh my ass off on this HBO stand up [[comedy]] show.I love his [[impressions]] of [[Mr]]. T,Ed Norton and Ralph Cramden of "The Honeymooners",Elvis [[Presley]],and Michael Jackson too.The [[Ice]] [[Cream]] Man,Goony Goo Goo,is also funny.I saw this for the first [[time]] when it [[came]] out in 1984.I [[laughed]] so [[hard]],I [[almost]] [[fell]] off my [[chair]].I [[still]] [[think]] this is very funny.

[[Eddie]] [[Murphy]],when he was on "[[Saturday]] [[Night]] [[Live]]",[[made]] me laugh so [[hard]],he is one of the [[best]] people to come out of"Saturday [[Night]] Live"."Eddie Murphy Delirious"is his best [[stand]] up performance next to "Eddie [[Murphy]] Raw".

I [[give]] "Eddie [[Murphy]] [[Delirious]]" 2 thumbs up and 10/10 [[stars]]. [[Eddy]] Murphy really [[introduced]] me laugh my ass off on this HBO stand up [[parody]] show.I love his [[printouts]] of [[Mister]]. T,Ed Norton and Ralph Cramden of "The Honeymooners",Elvis [[Elvis]],and Michael Jackson too.The [[Frosting]] [[Creme]] Man,Goony Goo Goo,is also funny.I saw this for the first [[times]] when it [[became]] out in 1984.I [[laughs]] so [[arduous]],I [[practically]] [[plummeted]] off my [[president]].I [[yet]] [[ideas]] this is very funny.

[[Eddy]] [[Murph]],when he was on "[[Saturdays]] [[Nocturne]] [[Iive]]",[[brought]] me laugh so [[laborious]],he is one of the [[better]] people to come out of"Saturday [[Nocturne]] Live"."Eddie Murphy Delirious"is his best [[standing]] up performance next to "Eddie [[Murph]] Raw".

I [[lend]] "Eddie [[Murph]] [[Delirium]]" 2 thumbs up and 10/10 [[superstar]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] This is a [[great]] movie but there could be more about Soylent Green. There should be more scenes of what they do to people. How people act in 2022. I think it would be neat to see if all this does happen in the year 2022 and beyond. Even if you still know what the secret is it is a great movie. So go rent or [[buy]] this movie right NOW!! This is a [[whopping]] movie but there could be more about Soylent Green. There should be more scenes of what they do to people. How people act in 2022. I think it would be neat to see if all this does happen in the year 2022 and beyond. Even if you still know what the secret is it is a great movie. So go rent or [[procured]] this movie right NOW!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3106 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I hate to sound [[like]] an '[[old]] person', but frankly I haven't [[seen]] too [[many]] movies that I like that were made after 1960... generally, movies just seem to [[get]] worse and worse (although I quite enjoyed the Scott Baio vehicle "The Bread, My Sweet", except for the 'de rigeur' sex scene which added [[NOTHING]] of value to THAT movie). This [[movie]] makes the mother, a former Las Vegas chorus girl, seem to be [[incapable]] of surviving on her own, although she is clearly in her 50s (though hinted at being in her 40s). I didn't buy it. I'm 57 and like all the women I know in their 50s and 40s, more than capable of surviving on my own (as I have been doing since I graduated from high school at 13, got legally [[emancipated]] and set off on my own life's journey.)

The daughter is not believable in her job role ... she gets a promotion she doesn't deserve (a great opportunity) and drops that ball too, but when another female employee steps up to the plate and is ready to deliver, the writers shoot her down as an 'opportunist', when she was just doing what any career-oriented person would do -- taking advantage of a wide-open opportunity created by the lack of self-discipline of her coworker, a girl who apparently doesn't understand the concept of honoring her promises (to her boss, in this case).

The daughter grudgingly 'allows' her mother to stay with her, on a temporary basis, but then treats her mother (the woman who gave her Life and raised her to 'adulthood') like a pariah. Apparently the 'writers' of tripe like this do not understand that it is NOT 'the common thing' for PARENTS to act like children, and then be treated AS children by THEIR children. That is just more of the societal 'baloney' that Hollywood keeps trying to force down our throats as though we, their public, were stupid for desiring to be entertained by their creative offerings.

This is a sad movie with a stupid ending. If the young male restauranteur had been real and not a two-dimensional 'tv character', he'd have stayed with the MOTHER, who was not that much older than him and quite attractive. But in the end he 'falls' for the daughter, a shallow, rather uninteresting girl who has that cuteness of youth, but in an ordinary, bland way. (The 'opportunist' young woman who worked with this nothing girl was far more attractive, physically.)

There was no believable reason presented to the audience as to why the restauranteur preferred the daughter (who was an uptight, selfish, self-centered b*tch who treated her mother with unbelievable disrespect) to the mother -- a woman who was kindhearted, sweet-tempered, humorous, and had a joie de vivre the daughter could not even begin to comprehend. Of course the mother had her own flaws... she had reacted to her husband's demise by drinking herself into a stupor for a year or two afterwards which supposedly created the rift between her and her smarmy daughter.

Regardless of the way the characters were or were not developed, this is a baloney movie and a waste of your valuable viewing time unless you actually LIKE baloney. (Where's the mustard?) I hate to sound [[iike]] an '[[archaic]] person', but frankly I haven't [[noticed]] too [[innumerable]] movies that I like that were made after 1960... generally, movies just seem to [[obtain]] worse and worse (although I quite enjoyed the Scott Baio vehicle "The Bread, My Sweet", except for the 'de rigeur' sex scene which added [[NADA]] of value to THAT movie). This [[cinematography]] makes the mother, a former Las Vegas chorus girl, seem to be [[inept]] of surviving on her own, although she is clearly in her 50s (though hinted at being in her 40s). I didn't buy it. I'm 57 and like all the women I know in their 50s and 40s, more than capable of surviving on my own (as I have been doing since I graduated from high school at 13, got legally [[freeing]] and set off on my own life's journey.)

The daughter is not believable in her job role ... she gets a promotion she doesn't deserve (a great opportunity) and drops that ball too, but when another female employee steps up to the plate and is ready to deliver, the writers shoot her down as an 'opportunist', when she was just doing what any career-oriented person would do -- taking advantage of a wide-open opportunity created by the lack of self-discipline of her coworker, a girl who apparently doesn't understand the concept of honoring her promises (to her boss, in this case).

The daughter grudgingly 'allows' her mother to stay with her, on a temporary basis, but then treats her mother (the woman who gave her Life and raised her to 'adulthood') like a pariah. Apparently the 'writers' of tripe like this do not understand that it is NOT 'the common thing' for PARENTS to act like children, and then be treated AS children by THEIR children. That is just more of the societal 'baloney' that Hollywood keeps trying to force down our throats as though we, their public, were stupid for desiring to be entertained by their creative offerings.

This is a sad movie with a stupid ending. If the young male restauranteur had been real and not a two-dimensional 'tv character', he'd have stayed with the MOTHER, who was not that much older than him and quite attractive. But in the end he 'falls' for the daughter, a shallow, rather uninteresting girl who has that cuteness of youth, but in an ordinary, bland way. (The 'opportunist' young woman who worked with this nothing girl was far more attractive, physically.)

There was no believable reason presented to the audience as to why the restauranteur preferred the daughter (who was an uptight, selfish, self-centered b*tch who treated her mother with unbelievable disrespect) to the mother -- a woman who was kindhearted, sweet-tempered, humorous, and had a joie de vivre the daughter could not even begin to comprehend. Of course the mother had her own flaws... she had reacted to her husband's demise by drinking herself into a stupor for a year or two afterwards which supposedly created the rift between her and her smarmy daughter.

Regardless of the way the characters were or were not developed, this is a baloney movie and a waste of your valuable viewing time unless you actually LIKE baloney. (Where's the mustard?) --------------------------------------------- Result 3107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This production was [[made]] in the middle 1980s, and appears to be the [[first]] serious attempt to put [[BLEAK]] HOUSE on celluloid. No film version of the novel was ever attempted (it is remarkably rich in subplots that actually serve as counterpoints to each other, so that it would have been very [[hard]] to prune it down). The novel was the only attempt by Dickens to make a central narrator (one of two in the work) a woman, Esther Summerson. Esther is raised by her aunt and uncle, who (in typical Dickens style) mistreat her. She is illegitimate, but they won't tell her anything about her parentage. Later we get involved with the gentry, Sir Leicester Dedlock, and his wife. Lady Honoria Deadlock (Dame Diana Rigg) is having an increasingly difficult time regarding her private life and the meddling involvement of the family solicitor Tulkinghorn (Peter Vaughn). We also are involved with the actions of Richard Carstone (Esther's boyfriend) in trying to win a long drawn out estate chancery case, Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, which everyone (even Richard's cousin John Jarndyce - played by Desmond Elliot) warns is not worth the effort.

Dickens had been a law reporter and then a parliamentary reporter before he wrote fiction. Starting with the breach of promise case in PICKWICK PAPERS, Dickens looked closely at the law. Mr. Bumble said it was "a ass" in OLIVER TWIST and Dickens would consistently support that view. He looks at the slums as breeding grounds for crime in TWIST, that the law barely tries to cure. He attacks the Chancery and outdated estate laws, as well as too powerful solicitors and greedy lawyers (Tulkinghorn, Vholes) in BLEAK HOUSE. In LITTLE DORRIT he attacks the debtors' prisons (he had hit it also in David COPPERFIELD). In OUR MUTUAL FRIEND he looks at testators and wills. In THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD he apparently was going to go to a murder trial. Dickens was far more critical of legal institutions than most of his contemporaries, including Thackeray.

But the novel also looks at other problems (like charity and religious hypocrisy, the budding Scotland Yard detective force, social snobbery in the industrial revolution). He also uses the novel to satirize various people: Leigh Hunt the writer, Inspector Fields of Scotland Yard, and even the notorious Maria Manning. Most of these points were kept in this fine mini-series version. If it is shown again on a cable station, catch it. This production was [[introduced]] in the middle 1980s, and appears to be the [[frst]] serious attempt to put [[DISMAL]] HOUSE on celluloid. No film version of the novel was ever attempted (it is remarkably rich in subplots that actually serve as counterpoints to each other, so that it would have been very [[laborious]] to prune it down). The novel was the only attempt by Dickens to make a central narrator (one of two in the work) a woman, Esther Summerson. Esther is raised by her aunt and uncle, who (in typical Dickens style) mistreat her. She is illegitimate, but they won't tell her anything about her parentage. Later we get involved with the gentry, Sir Leicester Dedlock, and his wife. Lady Honoria Deadlock (Dame Diana Rigg) is having an increasingly difficult time regarding her private life and the meddling involvement of the family solicitor Tulkinghorn (Peter Vaughn). We also are involved with the actions of Richard Carstone (Esther's boyfriend) in trying to win a long drawn out estate chancery case, Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, which everyone (even Richard's cousin John Jarndyce - played by Desmond Elliot) warns is not worth the effort.

Dickens had been a law reporter and then a parliamentary reporter before he wrote fiction. Starting with the breach of promise case in PICKWICK PAPERS, Dickens looked closely at the law. Mr. Bumble said it was "a ass" in OLIVER TWIST and Dickens would consistently support that view. He looks at the slums as breeding grounds for crime in TWIST, that the law barely tries to cure. He attacks the Chancery and outdated estate laws, as well as too powerful solicitors and greedy lawyers (Tulkinghorn, Vholes) in BLEAK HOUSE. In LITTLE DORRIT he attacks the debtors' prisons (he had hit it also in David COPPERFIELD). In OUR MUTUAL FRIEND he looks at testators and wills. In THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD he apparently was going to go to a murder trial. Dickens was far more critical of legal institutions than most of his contemporaries, including Thackeray.

But the novel also looks at other problems (like charity and religious hypocrisy, the budding Scotland Yard detective force, social snobbery in the industrial revolution). He also uses the novel to satirize various people: Leigh Hunt the writer, Inspector Fields of Scotland Yard, and even the notorious Maria Manning. Most of these points were kept in this fine mini-series version. If it is shown again on a cable station, catch it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3108 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is one of those movies that I've [[seen]] so many times that I can quote most of it. Some of the lines in this movie are just [[unbeatable]]. I [[particularly]] [[enjoy]] watching him stumble and fall while drunk, go out to the fancy [[restaurant]] drunk and the part with the moose.

I don't know how many times I have [[seen]] this sequence but it's [[funny]] [[every]] time. From the moment Arthur gets to Susan's Dad's place to the bit with the moose, you pretty much laugh the whole time. I remember watching the out-takes regarding the bit with the moose. It went down just like I'd imagined it'd be like. They were all laughing so hard it was difficult for them to film it.

The late Sir John Gielgud was a [[wonderful]] addition to this. His demeanor, his one-liners and the way he handled Arthur were all equally hilarious. It's always a funny moment when he whacks him over the head with his hat or tells him he's a spoiled little ____. I laugh every time I listen to the "I'm going to have a bath" and the lines that follow. This is one of those movies that I've [[watched]] so many times that I can quote most of it. Some of the lines in this movie are just [[insurmountable]]. I [[peculiarly]] [[enjoys]] watching him stumble and fall while drunk, go out to the fancy [[dine]] drunk and the part with the moose.

I don't know how many times I have [[watched]] this sequence but it's [[humorous]] [[any]] time. From the moment Arthur gets to Susan's Dad's place to the bit with the moose, you pretty much laugh the whole time. I remember watching the out-takes regarding the bit with the moose. It went down just like I'd imagined it'd be like. They were all laughing so hard it was difficult for them to film it.

The late Sir John Gielgud was a [[glamorous]] addition to this. His demeanor, his one-liners and the way he handled Arthur were all equally hilarious. It's always a funny moment when he whacks him over the head with his hat or tells him he's a spoiled little ____. I laugh every time I listen to the "I'm going to have a bath" and the lines that follow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I can't believe anyone thought there was anything original or interesting about this movie. I'm a [[fan]] of [[science]] fiction as much as the next guy, and I can enjoy even old [[movies]] with [[ridiculous]] premises as long when they are written by [[someone]] other than a monkey. ([[See]], for example, my [[glowing]] [[review]] of Altered States [1980].)

A [[monkey]] [[could]] have explained [[better]] exactly why I should for a second take [[seriously]] the basic idea behind this movie. The problem is not that the [[producers]] had a low budget--it's that they didn't care.

Now, to publicly [[humiliate]] the worthless magazines [[whose]] glowing reviews appear on the box:

Chicago Tribune

San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Bay Guardian

(Actually, I enjoy reading the latter two. Still, their movie reviewing credibility has gone through the floor. But I know if I ever make a movie with handheld camera, a cheesy plot and stupid effects, I'll show it to these journalists and remind them what they said about Conceiving Ada.) I can't believe anyone thought there was anything original or interesting about this movie. I'm a [[breather]] of [[sciences]] fiction as much as the next guy, and I can enjoy even old [[kino]] with [[nonsensical]] premises as long when they are written by [[everyone]] other than a monkey. ([[Behold]], for example, my [[glittering]] [[scrutinize]] of Altered States [1980].)

A [[silvana]] [[would]] have explained [[nicer]] exactly why I should for a second take [[profoundly]] the basic idea behind this movie. The problem is not that the [[industrialists]] had a low budget--it's that they didn't care.

Now, to publicly [[embarrass]] the worthless magazines [[who]] glowing reviews appear on the box:

Chicago Tribune

San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Bay Guardian

(Actually, I enjoy reading the latter two. Still, their movie reviewing credibility has gone through the floor. But I know if I ever make a movie with handheld camera, a cheesy plot and stupid effects, I'll show it to these journalists and remind them what they said about Conceiving Ada.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is [[pretty]] much a low-budget, made for TV, [[type]] of [[movie]] [[intended]] to capitalize off of the [[success]] of the [[original]]. I'm a [[fan]] of b-movies, and this one might have been good had they not [[attached]] the [[name]] "[[Cube]]" to it, because as is, the [[director]] and plot of the [[original]] were better, and this [[movie]] just about [[ruined]] my [[taste]] for the entire [[series]]. The [[characters]] are [[annoying]] and [[clichéd]], there are [[problems]] with [[continuity]], and [[several]] outright [[production]] screw-ups. The [[story]] [[hardly]] [[gets]] a [[chance]] to [[develop]] because of [[superfluous]] [[dialogue]] and suffers from that. They more or less [[use]] the same [[horror]] gimmicks over and OVER throughout the [[movie]], and because the first one was so good, this simply turns out as a [[disappointment]].

[[If]] this was a stand-alone b-movie, I'd [[probably]] [[give]] it about a four. The "1" [[rating]] I [[give]] it was [[pretty]] much a [[statement]] about how it [[utterly]] paled in [[effects]] and [[intelligence]] as compared to the first. This is [[quite]] much a low-budget, made for TV, [[kinds]] of [[cinematography]] [[destined]] to capitalize off of the [[successes]] of the [[upfront]]. I'm a [[breather]] of b-movies, and this one might have been good had they not [[annexed]] the [[names]] "[[Cubes]]" to it, because as is, the [[superintendent]] and plot of the [[initial]] were better, and this [[cinematography]] just about [[bulldozed]] my [[aftertaste]] for the entire [[serials]]. The [[character]] are [[galling]] and [[clichés]], there are [[problem]] with [[continuance]], and [[different]] outright [[productivity]] screw-ups. The [[saga]] [[practically]] [[attains]] a [[possibilities]] to [[developing]] because of [[dispensable]] [[dialogues]] and suffers from that. They more or less [[utilizes]] the same [[monstrosity]] gimmicks over and OVER throughout the [[cinema]], and because the first one was so good, this simply turns out as a [[dissatisfaction]].

[[Though]] this was a stand-alone b-movie, I'd [[conceivably]] [[confer]] it about a four. The "1" [[ratings]] I [[lend]] it was [[quite]] much a [[statements]] about how it [[perfectly]] paled in [[influences]] and [[intelligentsia]] as compared to the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 3111 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This [[excellent]] drama had me in suspense the [[whole]] [[time]]. I could not take my [[eyes]] off the screen for one [[second]] because [[every]] word kept [[connecting]] the [[pieces]] to this [[puzzling]] murder. This movie really touched me because it [[showed]] how [[sad]] and [[hard]] life can be. I really did cry in the end (which I don't [[want]] to give away!) It also let me [[realize]] how [[cruel]] and sickening people can be when it comes to murder.

The cast was also very good. The only [[bad]] cast [[member]] was the actress who played Anne Marie. The actress did a great job, but the director didn't. I say this because he [[found]] someone who didn't look a single bit like Anne [[Marie]] Fahey herself. This [[sumptuous]] drama had me in suspense the [[entire]] [[moment]]. I could not take my [[eye]] off the screen for one [[seconds]] because [[any]] word kept [[connect]] the [[segments]] to this [[disorienting]] murder. This movie really touched me because it [[evidenced]] how [[hapless]] and [[tough]] life can be. I really did cry in the end (which I don't [[wants]] to give away!) It also let me [[attaining]] how [[brutish]] and sickening people can be when it comes to murder.

The cast was also very good. The only [[naughty]] cast [[members]] was the actress who played Anne Marie. The actress did a great job, but the director didn't. I say this because he [[detected]] someone who didn't look a single bit like Anne [[Mary]] Fahey herself. --------------------------------------------- Result 3112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Eddie]] [[Murphy]] plays Chandler Jarrell, a man who devotes his time to finding lost children. When the beautiful Kee Nang {Charlotte [[Lewis]]} enters his life, she tells him he is the [[chosen]] one and he [[must]] find the Golden Child. [[Sceptical]] and [[driven]] purely by lust and [[intrigue]], Jarrell gets involved without [[realising]] he's about to embark on a fantastical [[journey]], one that involves [[peril]] and worst of all, the demon Sardo Numspa.

Is The Golden Child a product of its [[time]]?, by that i [[mean]], was Eddie Murphy and The Golden Child's popularity exclusive to the late 1980s audiences?. For i can remember vividly how much this film entertained folk back in that decade, it's box office was $79,817,937, making it the 8th biggest [[earner]] of 1986, but since the 80s faded from memory it has become the in thing to deny Eddie Murphy pictures the comedy accolades that they actually once had. The Golden Child is not up with the more accepted 80s Murphy pictures like Trading Places and Beverly Hills Cop, but upon revisiting the film recently i personally [[find]] that it contains Murphy at his wisecracking, quipping and charming best!, seriously!.

Cashing in on a fantasy action formula that was reinvigorated and temp-lated by Raiders Of The Lost Ark in 1981, The Golden [[Child]] hits all the required genre buttons. Pretty girl, daring reluctant-hero with a quip in his armoury, dashing villain {Charles Dance so English i could kiss him myself}, wonderful colour, and a cute kid with mystical powers, the [[film]] only asks you to get involved in the fun, not to dissect and digress its worth as a cranial fantasy picture. Yes the CGI demon looks creaky now, and yes the genre had far better pictures in the 80s, 90s and beyond, but really if you agree with the disgraceful rating of 5 here on this site then you [[may]] just be taking this genre a little too serious, seriously. 7/10 [[Eddy]] [[Murph]] plays Chandler Jarrell, a man who devotes his time to finding lost children. When the beautiful Kee Nang {Charlotte [[Louie]]} enters his life, she tells him he is the [[selection]] one and he [[should]] find the Golden Child. [[Incredulous]] and [[prompted]] purely by lust and [[plot]], Jarrell gets involved without [[accomplishing]] he's about to embark on a fantastical [[tour]], one that involves [[menaces]] and worst of all, the demon Sardo Numspa.

Is The Golden Child a product of its [[period]]?, by that i [[signify]], was Eddie Murphy and The Golden Child's popularity exclusive to the late 1980s audiences?. For i can remember vividly how much this film entertained folk back in that decade, it's box office was $79,817,937, making it the 8th biggest [[juicy]] of 1986, but since the 80s faded from memory it has become the in thing to deny Eddie Murphy pictures the comedy accolades that they actually once had. The Golden Child is not up with the more accepted 80s Murphy pictures like Trading Places and Beverly Hills Cop, but upon revisiting the film recently i personally [[found]] that it contains Murphy at his wisecracking, quipping and charming best!, seriously!.

Cashing in on a fantasy action formula that was reinvigorated and temp-lated by Raiders Of The Lost Ark in 1981, The Golden [[Infantile]] hits all the required genre buttons. Pretty girl, daring reluctant-hero with a quip in his armoury, dashing villain {Charles Dance so English i could kiss him myself}, wonderful colour, and a cute kid with mystical powers, the [[kino]] only asks you to get involved in the fun, not to dissect and digress its worth as a cranial fantasy picture. Yes the CGI demon looks creaky now, and yes the genre had far better pictures in the 80s, 90s and beyond, but really if you agree with the disgraceful rating of 5 here on this site then you [[maggio]] just be taking this genre a little too serious, seriously. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3113 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] This is no doubt one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I have ever [[seen]]. This makes your [[run]] of the mill TV movie [[look]] [[like]] Reservoir Dogs. Based on a book by the one and only Britney Spears and her mother this is trash with nothing [[bar]] a [[reasonable]] performance from [[Virginia]] Madsen (I [[hope]] you got paid well) to [[save]] it. The story of a [[red]] [[neck]] country gill who [[wins]] a [[scholarship]] in a [[prestigious]] music [[school]] is [[little]] but a vehicle to pedal Ms Spears pants music to the [[consumer]] and to generally agree that low brow must be the way. There is [[nothing]] good going on here with all the beats as [[predictable]] as night following day. Never ever again. This is no doubt one of the [[hardest]] [[movie]] I have ever [[noticed]]. This makes your [[running]] of the mill TV movie [[peek]] [[iike]] Reservoir Dogs. Based on a book by the one and only Britney Spears and her mother this is trash with nothing [[solicitors]] a [[rational]] performance from [[Virginie]] Madsen (I [[esperanza]] you got paid well) to [[rescuing]] it. The story of a [[rouge]] [[cou]] country gill who [[winning]] a [[awards]] in a [[proverbial]] music [[schooling]] is [[small]] but a vehicle to pedal Ms Spears pants music to the [[consuming]] and to generally agree that low brow must be the way. There is [[anything]] good going on here with all the beats as [[foreseeable]] as night following day. Never ever again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3114 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] In my opinion, this movie's title should be changed from "Only the Brave" to "All About Lane". I went to a screening of this film a few months ago and was quite disappointed with the outcome. [[Although]], I appreciate that the director made a movie about the men of 442nd - a subject matter that long deserved addressing in the film industry - the acting in some parts of film was [[quite]] [[stale]]. The performances of Marc Dacascos, Tamlyn Tomita, and Jason Scott Lee were all great. [[However]], the director should have NEVER put himself as the main character in the movie. Sorry Lane, you are just not a film actor. Stick to what you're good at - theater acting. Gina Hiraizumi's performance in this film was also horrible. She should never have been given a speaking role and her looks were unfit to play the part of a Miss Nisei queen. There were other young actresses in the film who were naturally beautiful and whose performances were wonderful... Why weren't they cast for that role? Another major problem with this film were its action sequences. The Japanese-American soldiers don't look like they were fighting German soldiers... let alone anyone. Granted this was a low budget feature, but since this was a war-based film, isn't it important to show some actually fighting? This film was a worthy attempt, but definitely not worth a major distribution. In my opinion, this movie's title should be changed from "Only the Brave" to "All About Lane". I went to a screening of this film a few months ago and was quite disappointed with the outcome. [[Though]], I appreciate that the director made a movie about the men of 442nd - a subject matter that long deserved addressing in the film industry - the acting in some parts of film was [[rather]] [[obsolete]]. The performances of Marc Dacascos, Tamlyn Tomita, and Jason Scott Lee were all great. [[Instead]], the director should have NEVER put himself as the main character in the movie. Sorry Lane, you are just not a film actor. Stick to what you're good at - theater acting. Gina Hiraizumi's performance in this film was also horrible. She should never have been given a speaking role and her looks were unfit to play the part of a Miss Nisei queen. There were other young actresses in the film who were naturally beautiful and whose performances were wonderful... Why weren't they cast for that role? Another major problem with this film were its action sequences. The Japanese-American soldiers don't look like they were fighting German soldiers... let alone anyone. Granted this was a low budget feature, but since this was a war-based film, isn't it important to show some actually fighting? This film was a worthy attempt, but definitely not worth a major distribution. --------------------------------------------- Result 3115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Hooper is Not [[Funny]], Not Fasted paced, Not romantic and Non informative. There is no real drama. You would [[think]] that a [[movie]] about the world's [[greatest]] [[stuntman]] [[would]] have some drama, there was an attempt but it didn't seem [[real]]. [[No]] Character study, no lessons [[learned]], it did not [[even]] [[look]] [[like]] the [[actors]] were having any real fun, they were just [[trying]] to [[act]] [[like]] they were having fun. There is no reason to watch unless you [[like]] to [[look]] at Burt and want get an occasional glimpse of Sally. Prancer the horse was [[beautiful]] and did what he was supposed to do. In fact Prancer was the [[best]] actor in this movie. Smoky and the Bandit was such a fun movie that I was ready to like Hooper. This movie turned out to be a [[real]] [[disappointment]] and [[waste]] of time Hooper is Not [[Droll]], Not Fasted paced, Not romantic and Non informative. There is no real drama. You would [[ideas]] that a [[kino]] about the world's [[higher]] [[headliner]] [[should]] have some drama, there was an attempt but it didn't seem [[veritable]]. [[None]] Character study, no lessons [[learning]], it did not [[yet]] [[gaze]] [[iike]] the [[protagonists]] were having any real fun, they were just [[tempting]] to [[ley]] [[iike]] they were having fun. There is no reason to watch unless you [[loves]] to [[gaze]] at Burt and want get an occasional glimpse of Sally. Prancer the horse was [[magnificent]] and did what he was supposed to do. In fact Prancer was the [[finest]] actor in this movie. Smoky and the Bandit was such a fun movie that I was ready to like Hooper. This movie turned out to be a [[authentic]] [[displeasure]] and [[wastes]] of time --------------------------------------------- Result 3116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I was so looking forward to seeing this when it was in production.But it turned out to be the the [[biggest]] let down. A far [[cry]] from the whimsical world of Dr Seuss. It was vulgar and [[distasteful]] I don't think Dr Seuss would have approved.How the Grinch stole Christmas was much better. I understand it had some subtle adult jokes in it but my children have yet to catch on. Whereas The Cat in the Hat [[screamed]] vulgarity they caught a lot more than I would have liked.Growing up with Dr Seuss It really [[bothered]] me to see how this timeless classic got trashed on the big screen .Lets see what they do with Horton hears a who.I hope this one does Dr Seuss some justice. I was so looking forward to seeing this when it was in production.But it turned out to be the the [[greatest]] let down. A far [[mourn]] from the whimsical world of Dr Seuss. It was vulgar and [[repulsive]] I don't think Dr Seuss would have approved.How the Grinch stole Christmas was much better. I understand it had some subtle adult jokes in it but my children have yet to catch on. Whereas The Cat in the Hat [[cried]] vulgarity they caught a lot more than I would have liked.Growing up with Dr Seuss It really [[deranged]] me to see how this timeless classic got trashed on the big screen .Lets see what they do with Horton hears a who.I hope this one does Dr Seuss some justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 3117 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] "Her Cardboard Lover" is Norma Shearer's last movie. She quit the movies and, I think, joined the Board of Directors at MGM. That was a good move on her part. "Her Cardboard Lover" was talky and [[boring]] in parts. It was obvious there were only a handful of actors with speaking parts so they had a lot of dialogue to speak to keep this [[turkey]] afloat.

The story was a good idea about a wealthy woman (Norma Shearer) hiring a man (Robert Taylor) to make her playboy fiancee (George Sanders)jealous. I am surprised that the director, George Cukor, did not cut many of the talky scenes between Ms. Shearer and Mr. Taylor. Mr. Cukor served Ms. Shearer well in "The Women" but not in this movie.

The best performance in the movie was given by Robert Taylor. During Mr. Taylor's career, he was given his best comedy roles in this movie and "When Ladies Meet" in 1941. In 1942, he gave his best comedy performance in "Her Cardboard Lover" and, up to then, his best dramatic performance in "Johnny Eager." He had a busy year. I think of all the actors at MGM, Mr. Taylor worked with all the major and minor actresses on the lot. Also, MGM gave Mr. Taylor all types of movies to make - most of them were successful. That is why MGM kept him for 25 years.

Mr. George Sanders was very good as a socialite heel. He played a similar role eight years later in "All About Eve" for which he won an Oscar for a supporting role. As for Ms. Shearer, this was one of her worst performances, she was not funny and too dramatic for this comedy. It is strange that she made a great comedy in 1939, "The Women", and gave her best performance. It was obvious that she was too old looking for her younger leading men in "Her Cardboard Lover." Also, it didn't help that some of her clothes were awful.

Too bad she and Mr. Taylor did not make another dramatic movie like their last movie together, the superb "Escape". The same comments about this movie can be said of another movie, "Personal Property" that Mr. Taylor made in 1937 with Jean Harlow. It was too talky, boring, and the actress looked old. Ms. Harlow looked ill throughout the movie and nobody in Hollywood noticed to tell her to see a doctor, so in 1937, she died at age 26. What a waste! She was becoming a good actress and getting better roles. "Her Cardboard Lover" is Norma Shearer's last movie. She quit the movies and, I think, joined the Board of Directors at MGM. That was a good move on her part. "Her Cardboard Lover" was talky and [[bored]] in parts. It was obvious there were only a handful of actors with speaking parts so they had a lot of dialogue to speak to keep this [[ankara]] afloat.

The story was a good idea about a wealthy woman (Norma Shearer) hiring a man (Robert Taylor) to make her playboy fiancee (George Sanders)jealous. I am surprised that the director, George Cukor, did not cut many of the talky scenes between Ms. Shearer and Mr. Taylor. Mr. Cukor served Ms. Shearer well in "The Women" but not in this movie.

The best performance in the movie was given by Robert Taylor. During Mr. Taylor's career, he was given his best comedy roles in this movie and "When Ladies Meet" in 1941. In 1942, he gave his best comedy performance in "Her Cardboard Lover" and, up to then, his best dramatic performance in "Johnny Eager." He had a busy year. I think of all the actors at MGM, Mr. Taylor worked with all the major and minor actresses on the lot. Also, MGM gave Mr. Taylor all types of movies to make - most of them were successful. That is why MGM kept him for 25 years.

Mr. George Sanders was very good as a socialite heel. He played a similar role eight years later in "All About Eve" for which he won an Oscar for a supporting role. As for Ms. Shearer, this was one of her worst performances, she was not funny and too dramatic for this comedy. It is strange that she made a great comedy in 1939, "The Women", and gave her best performance. It was obvious that she was too old looking for her younger leading men in "Her Cardboard Lover." Also, it didn't help that some of her clothes were awful.

Too bad she and Mr. Taylor did not make another dramatic movie like their last movie together, the superb "Escape". The same comments about this movie can be said of another movie, "Personal Property" that Mr. Taylor made in 1937 with Jean Harlow. It was too talky, boring, and the actress looked old. Ms. Harlow looked ill throughout the movie and nobody in Hollywood noticed to tell her to see a doctor, so in 1937, she died at age 26. What a waste! She was becoming a good actress and getting better roles. --------------------------------------------- Result 3118 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Deeply]] [[emotional]]. It can't leave you neutral.

Yes it's a love story between 2 18 years [[old]] boys. But it's only the body of this movie. And it's been removed. You only feel what happened with these boys. You feel the [[soul]] of the [[movie]]. With of course some action, some sex, but this is no pornography, too many feelings.

It was only a summer "story", and it became, from love to hate, almost to death, the most important time of their lives. I [[loved]] it, you will too, whatever your [[feelings]] are. [[Bitterly]] [[affective]]. It can't leave you neutral.

Yes it's a love story between 2 18 years [[ancient]] boys. But it's only the body of this movie. And it's been removed. You only feel what happened with these boys. You feel the [[alma]] of the [[kino]]. With of course some action, some sex, but this is no pornography, too many feelings.

It was only a summer "story", and it became, from love to hate, almost to death, the most important time of their lives. I [[adores]] it, you will too, whatever your [[affections]] are. --------------------------------------------- Result 3119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A [[group]] of [[extremely]] unlikable A-holes are tormented by lame [[puppets]] that some [[elderly]] [[douche]] [[bag]] night-watchman has kept [[locked]] away in a [[film]] [[vault]] for twenty [[years]] for no [[reason]] whatsoever.

Many people [[know]] this [[film]] [[merely]] from MST3K's spot-on ribbing of the [[flick]]. But I've [[seen]] the actual movie and can safely [[say]] that yes it's [[bad]], really, [[REALLY]] [[bad]]. From the one of the most awful 'fight' scenes I've ever witnessed to the [[stuffed]] toy 'aliens' that [[suffer]] from a [[lack]] of [[motion]] (I had a My Pet Monster that was scarier) right up to the [[atrocious]] acting (I had a My [[Pet]] Monster that was more charismatic) However, that being said Rick Sloan's "Vice Academy" [[films]] are somehow, and [[trust]] me I have no earthly idea how, much worse. That's not to [[suggest]] that this film is anything but crap, because it isn't. [[Just]] [[throwing]] it out there.

Eye Candy: no nudity in the movie proper, but there's 2 pairs of tits in the DVD Introduction to the film

My Grade: D-

Retromedia DVD [[Extras]]: Introduction by Jim Wynorski; Stills gallery; and Trailer for this film A [[groups]] of [[remarkably]] unlikable A-holes are tormented by lame [[muppets]] that some [[old]] [[dimwit]] [[rucksack]] night-watchman has kept [[latched]] away in a [[kino]] [[crypt]] for twenty [[olds]] for no [[cause]] whatsoever.

Many people [[savoir]] this [[cinematography]] [[only]] from MST3K's spot-on ribbing of the [[film]]. But I've [[watched]] the actual movie and can safely [[tell]] that yes it's [[amiss]], really, [[TRULY]] [[amiss]]. From the one of the most awful 'fight' scenes I've ever witnessed to the [[plush]] toy 'aliens' that [[suffering]] from a [[insufficiency]] of [[petition]] (I had a My Pet Monster that was scarier) right up to the [[nefarious]] acting (I had a My [[Fart]] Monster that was more charismatic) However, that being said Rick Sloan's "Vice Academy" [[cinematographic]] are somehow, and [[trusting]] me I have no earthly idea how, much worse. That's not to [[proposing]] that this film is anything but crap, because it isn't. [[Only]] [[hurling]] it out there.

Eye Candy: no nudity in the movie proper, but there's 2 pairs of tits in the DVD Introduction to the film

My Grade: D-

Retromedia DVD [[Supplemental]]: Introduction by Jim Wynorski; Stills gallery; and Trailer for this film --------------------------------------------- Result 3120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] OK, let me again admit that I haven't seen any other Merchant Ivory (the distributor) films. Nor have I seen more celebrated works by the director, so my capacity to discuss Before the Rains outside of analysis of the film itself is mitigated. With that admittance, let me begin.

Before the Rains is a [[different]] [[kind]] of [[movie]] that doesn't [[know]] which genre it [[wants]] to be. At first, it pretends to be a romance. In most romances, the protagonist falls in love with a supporting character, is separated from the supporting character, and is (sometimes) united with his or her partner. This movie's hero has already won the heart of his lover but cannot be with her. His name is Henry Moores and her name is Sajani, and they reside in southern India during the waning days of the Raj (British imperial rule). Henry has been away from London for a long time and has fallen in love with his married Indian maid, despite his legal marriage and child overseas. What could be better than that? They often sneak away for intimate afternoons until some children notice them. Word spreads to Sajani's husband who questions her involvement with Moores. She denies any contact with him, but Moores asks her to leave the area. Sajani refuses because of her devotion to him and commits suicide. Please take note that these events occur in the opening third of the film. The film changes tone and becomes a crime-drama in its final portions.

Sajani's body is discovered right as Moores' family comes to visit. The alleged perpetrator is Moores's English-educated assistant T.K. T.K. knows of his master's affair but keeps silent until his life becomes threatened. Once he is declared innocent, he attempts to regain his honor by killing Moores. T.K. is too squeamish and leaves him in a dirt path as the rains fall.

I want to warn you, this isn't a romance film. The DVD cover and theatrical posters show an Indian woman and Caucasian man embracing in an idealized tropic setting. This image is captured directly from the film's opening, but quickly disappears. Then it's over. It seems like an effort to capitalize on Western fixation on forbidden love. It isn't effective, at all. Not only is the movie not a romance, but its characters lack any personality. They are bundles of walking clichés. Moores is an arrogant white man who doesn't recognize his Indian friend, T.K.'s intelligence. T.K. is torn between his own heritage and his educative background. Sajani is a woman incapable of having a choice in her romantic life. Oh, and, of course, Moores' family is inquisitive into Sajani's death but still slightly racist to Indians. If the tone wasn't so serious, I would be willing to overlook these problems, but it isn't. The film is presented with a didactic overtone which highlights its poor character development.

No, this film isn't terrible. Other than the laughable screenplay, it isn't poor. The actors are all experienced and perform well here. Nandita Das, who plays Sajani, was part of wonderful Indian drama Water. Even director Sivan has an impressive resume. He recently oversaw The Terrorist, which is part of Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection. What happened here? Why is this movie so bad? Well, Sivan mentioned how he was inspired to direct this film because of a short he viewed in Israel called Red Roofs. Apparently, the story was "timeless," and Sivan sought to create a similar experience set in 1930's India. I don't have any problem with that approach, but I think Sivan may have been too motivated this time. The actors, cinematography, and set design are acceptable but unless you share Sivan's aura, you'll probably not enjoy it. My recommendation is that you presume you aren't in accordance with him and watch something else. Final Consensus: *and ½ out of ***** OK, let me again admit that I haven't seen any other Merchant Ivory (the distributor) films. Nor have I seen more celebrated works by the director, so my capacity to discuss Before the Rains outside of analysis of the film itself is mitigated. With that admittance, let me begin.

Before the Rains is a [[diversified]] [[sort]] of [[films]] that doesn't [[savoir]] which genre it [[wanting]] to be. At first, it pretends to be a romance. In most romances, the protagonist falls in love with a supporting character, is separated from the supporting character, and is (sometimes) united with his or her partner. This movie's hero has already won the heart of his lover but cannot be with her. His name is Henry Moores and her name is Sajani, and they reside in southern India during the waning days of the Raj (British imperial rule). Henry has been away from London for a long time and has fallen in love with his married Indian maid, despite his legal marriage and child overseas. What could be better than that? They often sneak away for intimate afternoons until some children notice them. Word spreads to Sajani's husband who questions her involvement with Moores. She denies any contact with him, but Moores asks her to leave the area. Sajani refuses because of her devotion to him and commits suicide. Please take note that these events occur in the opening third of the film. The film changes tone and becomes a crime-drama in its final portions.

Sajani's body is discovered right as Moores' family comes to visit. The alleged perpetrator is Moores's English-educated assistant T.K. T.K. knows of his master's affair but keeps silent until his life becomes threatened. Once he is declared innocent, he attempts to regain his honor by killing Moores. T.K. is too squeamish and leaves him in a dirt path as the rains fall.

I want to warn you, this isn't a romance film. The DVD cover and theatrical posters show an Indian woman and Caucasian man embracing in an idealized tropic setting. This image is captured directly from the film's opening, but quickly disappears. Then it's over. It seems like an effort to capitalize on Western fixation on forbidden love. It isn't effective, at all. Not only is the movie not a romance, but its characters lack any personality. They are bundles of walking clichés. Moores is an arrogant white man who doesn't recognize his Indian friend, T.K.'s intelligence. T.K. is torn between his own heritage and his educative background. Sajani is a woman incapable of having a choice in her romantic life. Oh, and, of course, Moores' family is inquisitive into Sajani's death but still slightly racist to Indians. If the tone wasn't so serious, I would be willing to overlook these problems, but it isn't. The film is presented with a didactic overtone which highlights its poor character development.

No, this film isn't terrible. Other than the laughable screenplay, it isn't poor. The actors are all experienced and perform well here. Nandita Das, who plays Sajani, was part of wonderful Indian drama Water. Even director Sivan has an impressive resume. He recently oversaw The Terrorist, which is part of Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection. What happened here? Why is this movie so bad? Well, Sivan mentioned how he was inspired to direct this film because of a short he viewed in Israel called Red Roofs. Apparently, the story was "timeless," and Sivan sought to create a similar experience set in 1930's India. I don't have any problem with that approach, but I think Sivan may have been too motivated this time. The actors, cinematography, and set design are acceptable but unless you share Sivan's aura, you'll probably not enjoy it. My recommendation is that you presume you aren't in accordance with him and watch something else. Final Consensus: *and ½ out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It has taken me a while to watch this version as unfortunately I don't seem to be [[able]] to rent it in the video [[store]], only the other version but I fell in [[love]] with it. I was always borderline with the other [[Emma]]. Gwenneth and Toni Collette, as they are not British naturally have to put on the accent, and well to me it doesn't seem natural. It seems put on. [[Sorry]] but don't think Toni and Gwenneth did a [[brilliant]] [[job]] there. I [[could]] not warm to any of the characters, but this version is more heart warming and more the type of [[person]] I imagined Emma to be. It is [[definitely]] the version I will come back to from now on. I was [[disappointed]] that Mr Knightley was not better looking, but he is convincing. I [[also]] like [[Jane]] Fairfax better ([[played]] by Olivia Williams). I never [[warmed]] to her in the movie version, but she is better portrayed in this version. Come to think of it, (besides Mr Knightley) all characters are better played, and a lot less over the top. Unfortunately both came out [[around]] same [[time]] and the Paltrow version [[got]] more [[publicity]]. [[Pity]]...... I [[also]] [[love]] the new scene at the [[end]]. [[Well]] [[done]] to Kate Beckingsale! Therefore, if you are a [[Jane]] Austen fan, don't [[forget]] to watch this one. It has taken me a while to watch this version as unfortunately I don't seem to be [[capable]] to rent it in the video [[storehouse]], only the other version but I fell in [[iove]] with it. I was always borderline with the other [[Emmy]]. Gwenneth and Toni Collette, as they are not British naturally have to put on the accent, and well to me it doesn't seem natural. It seems put on. [[Desolated]] but don't think Toni and Gwenneth did a [[awesome]] [[employment]] there. I [[wo]] not warm to any of the characters, but this version is more heart warming and more the type of [[persona]] I imagined Emma to be. It is [[categorically]] the version I will come back to from now on. I was [[disillusioned]] that Mr Knightley was not better looking, but he is convincing. I [[similarly]] like [[Jin]] Fairfax better ([[done]] by Olivia Williams). I never [[reheated]] to her in the movie version, but she is better portrayed in this version. Come to think of it, (besides Mr Knightley) all characters are better played, and a lot less over the top. Unfortunately both came out [[throughout]] same [[moment]] and the Paltrow version [[gets]] more [[propaganda]]. [[Shame]]...... I [[moreover]] [[iike]] the new scene at the [[terminate]]. [[Good]] [[effected]] to Kate Beckingsale! Therefore, if you are a [[Jin]] Austen fan, don't [[forgot]] to watch this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3122 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I would have rated the series a perfect 10 for [[outstanding]] and [[consistently]] high quality story and character development had it not been for the last episode of Season 10!

The final episode of the 10th season "Unending", where (it would certainly appear that) the Asgard have been killed-off in a very rushed, unconvincing and very unceremonious fashion, left me in [[disbelief]]!

From the extremely rushed end of the series, it's obvious that many of the story arcs were originally scheduled to occur over at least one more season. My guess would be that they rapidly accelerated these stories to position the Stargate SG-1 franchise for the two upcoming direct-to-DVD moves!

Unless the Asgard return in a future SG-1 movie (with a very good explanation of the "apparent" extinction), I think that the fans have been cheated with a poor clean-up of loose-ends!

Poor end to an otherwise brilliant sci-fi series. I would have rated the series a perfect 10 for [[unpaid]] and [[ceaselessly]] high quality story and character development had it not been for the last episode of Season 10!

The final episode of the 10th season "Unending", where (it would certainly appear that) the Asgard have been killed-off in a very rushed, unconvincing and very unceremonious fashion, left me in [[scepticism]]!

From the extremely rushed end of the series, it's obvious that many of the story arcs were originally scheduled to occur over at least one more season. My guess would be that they rapidly accelerated these stories to position the Stargate SG-1 franchise for the two upcoming direct-to-DVD moves!

Unless the Asgard return in a future SG-1 movie (with a very good explanation of the "apparent" extinction), I think that the fans have been cheated with a poor clean-up of loose-ends!

Poor end to an otherwise brilliant sci-fi series. --------------------------------------------- Result 3123 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] But I got over it. To me, it [[seemed]] that even the [[Author]] of the book favored [[Caroline]]. I felt so sorry for the [[character]] [[Louise]], and she was constantly compared with Esau who was [[evil]], I just felt the [[comparison]] was a bit harsh and un-realistic. [[Really]] though, the [[movie]] was [[bad]]. I wouldn't [[really]] [[see]] it unless you're ready for a [[big]] [[let]] down. But I got over it. To me, it [[appeared]] that even the [[Auteur]] of the book favored [[Carolina]]. I felt so sorry for the [[personages]] [[Louis]], and she was constantly compared with Esau who was [[baleful]], I just felt the [[compare]] was a bit harsh and un-realistic. [[Truly]] though, the [[movies]] was [[negative]]. I wouldn't [[truly]] [[seeing]] it unless you're ready for a [[grand]] [[letting]] down. --------------------------------------------- Result 3124 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] I thought the movie (especially the plot) [[needs]] a lot of work. The elements of the movie remains westernized and untrue to the attempt of trying to produce an eastern feel in the movie. I'll give three out of many of the [[flaws]] of the movie:

First, when Shen told Wendy that he would help her study the history of China, I was really happy that the audience would receive some information about Chinese history; but it turns out that the movie did not exactly show Wendy actually studying Chinese history; yet instead, the movie only shows Wendy practicing the method of remembering what she had studied, which frustrated and put me in dismay.

Second, which really bothered me, is how the characters kept mentioning about moon cakes -- moon cakes this and moon cakes that and how good it tastes. Yet they didn't really mention the real significance of it. The only they they talked about that had any relevance to the moon cake was the Autumn Festival, which they did not explain or go in depth. They could have mentioned the myth that correlates with the moon cake -- the Moon Lady. The myth starts of with how there once exists ten suns and each would rotate rising, but one day all ten suns rose up, drying up the land with the rising intense heat; so the Divine Archer, Hou Yi, shot nine of the ten suns, leaving only one sun (there are different versions where the Hou Yi shot the eight out of nine suns). Because of his heroic contribution, he was given the pill of immortality so he could live on forever in case the ten suns do rise up again, but his wife, Chang-O stole it. After stealing it, she fled to the moon, where she met a hare. She then came upon an idea and told the hare to pound the pill into many piece so she could spread the pill all over earth, giving everyone immortality. (There are a few variations of this story but throughout my childhood, I, most of the time, heard about this version). I thought details such as this would make the plot more culturally Chinese oriented.

The last thing I would point out is the last battle scene of the movie. The teachers that were possessed by the monks were fighting the Terra-cotta Warriors (the life-like statues of the soldiers) went against the idea of how important Chinese history is to the Chinese. The Terra-cotta Warrors serves as a connection of China's past and it was very westernized (where evil must be killed in anyway possible) that the monks in the movies were willing to destroy that connection. It would be understandable if Wendy, considering she is Chinese-American and doesn't have full Chinese knowledge, had no problem destroying these priceless artifacts.

The whole movie was westernized because it seemed that all the monks and Shen want to do is fight... I mean, it's rated TVPG due to violence, which goes against the Confucius thinking of cooperation and harmony. It would seem more accurate that the monks try to avoid violence and try to work things out peacefully before having to resort to violence.

All in all, all of or either of the producer, writer, or director did not do their research thoroughly and did a messy and effortless job instead. I would suggest that they either stop airing this movie or that they re-shoot the movie so it contains more accurate information; however, I would give it credit (2 stars) for removing one stereotype of Asians and Asian-Americans of being smart and quiet. I thought the movie (especially the plot) [[must]] a lot of work. The elements of the movie remains westernized and untrue to the attempt of trying to produce an eastern feel in the movie. I'll give three out of many of the [[loopholes]] of the movie:

First, when Shen told Wendy that he would help her study the history of China, I was really happy that the audience would receive some information about Chinese history; but it turns out that the movie did not exactly show Wendy actually studying Chinese history; yet instead, the movie only shows Wendy practicing the method of remembering what she had studied, which frustrated and put me in dismay.

Second, which really bothered me, is how the characters kept mentioning about moon cakes -- moon cakes this and moon cakes that and how good it tastes. Yet they didn't really mention the real significance of it. The only they they talked about that had any relevance to the moon cake was the Autumn Festival, which they did not explain or go in depth. They could have mentioned the myth that correlates with the moon cake -- the Moon Lady. The myth starts of with how there once exists ten suns and each would rotate rising, but one day all ten suns rose up, drying up the land with the rising intense heat; so the Divine Archer, Hou Yi, shot nine of the ten suns, leaving only one sun (there are different versions where the Hou Yi shot the eight out of nine suns). Because of his heroic contribution, he was given the pill of immortality so he could live on forever in case the ten suns do rise up again, but his wife, Chang-O stole it. After stealing it, she fled to the moon, where she met a hare. She then came upon an idea and told the hare to pound the pill into many piece so she could spread the pill all over earth, giving everyone immortality. (There are a few variations of this story but throughout my childhood, I, most of the time, heard about this version). I thought details such as this would make the plot more culturally Chinese oriented.

The last thing I would point out is the last battle scene of the movie. The teachers that were possessed by the monks were fighting the Terra-cotta Warriors (the life-like statues of the soldiers) went against the idea of how important Chinese history is to the Chinese. The Terra-cotta Warrors serves as a connection of China's past and it was very westernized (where evil must be killed in anyway possible) that the monks in the movies were willing to destroy that connection. It would be understandable if Wendy, considering she is Chinese-American and doesn't have full Chinese knowledge, had no problem destroying these priceless artifacts.

The whole movie was westernized because it seemed that all the monks and Shen want to do is fight... I mean, it's rated TVPG due to violence, which goes against the Confucius thinking of cooperation and harmony. It would seem more accurate that the monks try to avoid violence and try to work things out peacefully before having to resort to violence.

All in all, all of or either of the producer, writer, or director did not do their research thoroughly and did a messy and effortless job instead. I would suggest that they either stop airing this movie or that they re-shoot the movie so it contains more accurate information; however, I would give it credit (2 stars) for removing one stereotype of Asians and Asian-Americans of being smart and quiet. --------------------------------------------- Result 3125 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Before all, I'd like to point out that I have not read the book, so there was no chance I'd be disappointed in that aspect. The major flaw I spotted was historical detail, with several cars, trains, clothes, etc. I think don´t belong at that time.

***Possible spoiler*****

The technical aspect of the film is ok, nothing to brag about. But the acting, I think, was [[terrific]]. I don't have no experience in acting, still I can't believe how people can consider this terrible! Maybe they've only seen two movies (ever), and the other one must have been very good indeed!

I specially liked Jeremy Irons, and really understood his character, someone who crawled up the social ladder with very hard work, then fights against those who would take his life's work from him, only he gets so involved in this fight, he doesn't realize reason is no longer at his side, and he ends up a beaten, disappointed man. Irons made this so believable, I sympathized with the character despite his brutality.

After Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder is also wonderful as a romantic young women, who is drawn into the revolutionary ideals by her boyfriend (Banderas, he had an under-developed part, I think), and Glenn Close was also very good. Meryl Streep had an average performance, it was not bad, just not up to the standards of the other actors. Watch out for Miguel Guilherme, a fine Portuguese actor, between so many stars.

In contrast to today's movies, here only the interpretations, only people matter, but at the same time, it is not a pretensious film, too worried trying to be intellectual. The best proof I really liked it, I'm writing a review 7 years later. Before all, I'd like to point out that I have not read the book, so there was no chance I'd be disappointed in that aspect. The major flaw I spotted was historical detail, with several cars, trains, clothes, etc. I think don´t belong at that time.

***Possible spoiler*****

The technical aspect of the film is ok, nothing to brag about. But the acting, I think, was [[sumptuous]]. I don't have no experience in acting, still I can't believe how people can consider this terrible! Maybe they've only seen two movies (ever), and the other one must have been very good indeed!

I specially liked Jeremy Irons, and really understood his character, someone who crawled up the social ladder with very hard work, then fights against those who would take his life's work from him, only he gets so involved in this fight, he doesn't realize reason is no longer at his side, and he ends up a beaten, disappointed man. Irons made this so believable, I sympathized with the character despite his brutality.

After Jeremy Irons, Winona Ryder is also wonderful as a romantic young women, who is drawn into the revolutionary ideals by her boyfriend (Banderas, he had an under-developed part, I think), and Glenn Close was also very good. Meryl Streep had an average performance, it was not bad, just not up to the standards of the other actors. Watch out for Miguel Guilherme, a fine Portuguese actor, between so many stars.

In contrast to today's movies, here only the interpretations, only people matter, but at the same time, it is not a pretensious film, too worried trying to be intellectual. The best proof I really liked it, I'm writing a review 7 years later. --------------------------------------------- Result 3126 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Film]] [[critics]] of the world, I apologize. It is your job to give [[advice]] to the moviegoing public so that they can [[wisely]] choose what to spend money on. But I ignored your advice and I have been [[deeply]] hurt. However, my [[decision]] to see "The Cat in the Hat" wasn't [[made]] haphazardly. You [[see]], three [[years]] [[ago]] all of you critics said that we should all avoid the "calamity" known as "How the Grinch [[Stole]] Christmas". Then some [[friends]] of mine [[took]] me to see it and it turned out to be a colorful, funny and almost hypnotic yuletide treat. So when the critics unleashed their fury against "The Cat in the Hat", another big budget Seuss update with a big name star in the title role, I thought that it must be the same old song. How wrong I was.

For five whole minutes I thought I was in the clear. The opening credits are clever, the kids are charming and the production values are top notch. Then the cat showed up. There are many problems from this point on, but the biggest one was the woeful miscasting of Mike Myers. Where "The Grinch" was saved by the inspired casting of Jim Carrey, "The Cat" was destroyed by Myers. He can be very funny when his energies are applied where they belong, comic sketches. Every movie he's made that was truly funny was really just a feature length comedy sketch, from "Wayne's World" to "Austin Powers". So he tries to do the same thing here, it's just that these comedy sketches are more like the stuff that they stick at the end of SNL, not funny, just painful. Not that the writers helped him out any. After the charming prologue the movie turns into an hour of repulsive bodily humor gags, poorly timed pratfalls and insultingly stunted attempts at hip humor. This movie was the most disheartening cinematic experience I have ever had. Period. So much talent and work went into something so vile. I know that the adult stars of this movie will be relatively unscathed by this mess, I just hope that the wonderful Spencer Breslin and Dakota Fanning will get more chances to show their charms in far better movies. If you are a parent, please avoid this like the plague. With movies like "Elf" and "Brother Bear" currently in theaters, you have far better choices. [[Movie]] [[detractors]] of the world, I apologize. It is your job to give [[advisory]] to the moviegoing public so that they can [[conservatively]] choose what to spend money on. But I ignored your advice and I have been [[heavily]] hurt. However, my [[decisions]] to see "The Cat in the Hat" wasn't [[accomplished]] haphazardly. You [[behold]], three [[olds]] [[before]] all of you critics said that we should all avoid the "calamity" known as "How the Grinch [[Jacked]] Christmas". Then some [[homeys]] of mine [[taken]] me to see it and it turned out to be a colorful, funny and almost hypnotic yuletide treat. So when the critics unleashed their fury against "The Cat in the Hat", another big budget Seuss update with a big name star in the title role, I thought that it must be the same old song. How wrong I was.

For five whole minutes I thought I was in the clear. The opening credits are clever, the kids are charming and the production values are top notch. Then the cat showed up. There are many problems from this point on, but the biggest one was the woeful miscasting of Mike Myers. Where "The Grinch" was saved by the inspired casting of Jim Carrey, "The Cat" was destroyed by Myers. He can be very funny when his energies are applied where they belong, comic sketches. Every movie he's made that was truly funny was really just a feature length comedy sketch, from "Wayne's World" to "Austin Powers". So he tries to do the same thing here, it's just that these comedy sketches are more like the stuff that they stick at the end of SNL, not funny, just painful. Not that the writers helped him out any. After the charming prologue the movie turns into an hour of repulsive bodily humor gags, poorly timed pratfalls and insultingly stunted attempts at hip humor. This movie was the most disheartening cinematic experience I have ever had. Period. So much talent and work went into something so vile. I know that the adult stars of this movie will be relatively unscathed by this mess, I just hope that the wonderful Spencer Breslin and Dakota Fanning will get more chances to show their charms in far better movies. If you are a parent, please avoid this like the plague. With movies like "Elf" and "Brother Bear" currently in theaters, you have far better choices. --------------------------------------------- Result 3127 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Yes, it's another great magical Muppet's movie and I [[adore]] them all; the characters, the movies, the TV show episodes (it's the best comedy or musical TV show ever) and all the artists behind it. But here they did such a [[rare]] fatal mistake and I'm surely talking about the weird ending !!

I think it's very dangerous to involve that much, in American drama, and end a love affair by marriage !! We, as all the poor viewers, feel so free or maybe happy for the absence of its annoyance, peevishness and misery ! So we all enjoy these stories which gather 2 cute heroes as couple in love without the legitimate bond like Mickey Mouse and Minnie, Superman and Lois Lane, Dick Tracy and Tess, etc. So with all of the previous couples and their likes I bet that you feel safe, serenity and peace. Therefore when you look at what the makers of this movie had already done you'll be as mad as me !

They made the weak miserable creature (Kermit) marry his daily nightmare, the most vexatious female ever (Miss Piggy) ! This is a historical change by the measures of the American entertainment's industry ! And it was pretty normal to have a negative impact upon the audience whom just refused to bless or believe or being satisfied with that sudden marriage (even the pathetic frog didn't have the time or the proper opportunity to think or to decide anything !). Therefore no wonder at all when you know that this movie is the most failure one in their cinematic serious, grossing only 25 millions vis-à-vis 65 millions earned by the first one (The Muppet Movie – 1979) five years earlier !!

Simply in this movie they took Manhattan, and my rest too ! Yes, it's another great magical Muppet's movie and I [[adores]] them all; the characters, the movies, the TV show episodes (it's the best comedy or musical TV show ever) and all the artists behind it. But here they did such a [[uncommon]] fatal mistake and I'm surely talking about the weird ending !!

I think it's very dangerous to involve that much, in American drama, and end a love affair by marriage !! We, as all the poor viewers, feel so free or maybe happy for the absence of its annoyance, peevishness and misery ! So we all enjoy these stories which gather 2 cute heroes as couple in love without the legitimate bond like Mickey Mouse and Minnie, Superman and Lois Lane, Dick Tracy and Tess, etc. So with all of the previous couples and their likes I bet that you feel safe, serenity and peace. Therefore when you look at what the makers of this movie had already done you'll be as mad as me !

They made the weak miserable creature (Kermit) marry his daily nightmare, the most vexatious female ever (Miss Piggy) ! This is a historical change by the measures of the American entertainment's industry ! And it was pretty normal to have a negative impact upon the audience whom just refused to bless or believe or being satisfied with that sudden marriage (even the pathetic frog didn't have the time or the proper opportunity to think or to decide anything !). Therefore no wonder at all when you know that this movie is the most failure one in their cinematic serious, grossing only 25 millions vis-à-vis 65 millions earned by the first one (The Muppet Movie – 1979) five years earlier !!

Simply in this movie they took Manhattan, and my rest too ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3128 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] There's nothing worse than renting an Asian movie and getting an American movie experience instead.

It's only my opinion, but a good thriller is dependent upon the establishment of [[likable]], intelligent characters. As far as likability is concerned, the protagonists in Say Yes are a quaint married couple. Nicely done. [[Unfortunately]], they are stupid beyond belief. Let us count the ways they mishandle being terrorized by a stalker.

1. After a hitchhiker threatens to kill you, be sure to tell him what hotel you're staying at when you drop him off.

2. Beat the hell out of the stalker in broad daylight and in front of dozens of witnesses, thereby allowing him to press charges of assault.

3. Don't bother telling the police about the stalker and simply assume (for no apparently good reason) that the cops were bribed by him.

4. While trying to escape, let your lady out of your sight as much as possible to ensure that the stalker kidnaps her.

5. After getting help from someone to find the stalker after kidnapping your wife, be sure to send them away as soon as possible so you can face him one-on-one. No point in being unfair, right?

Now, I'd never expect that any person would be immune to making a few mistakes under these stressful conditions, but the characters in Say Yes are so dense and make so many unbelievable mistakes that it's effectively impossible for the viewer to care about their safety, since they are victims of their own doing. This [[kills]] the enjoyability of the entire film.

In case you were wondering, the scriptwriters didn't stop with dim-witted characters. Since they themselves are surely dim-witted for writing this crapfest, they decided to make situations so absurdly unrealistic that all sense of reality goes out the window.

1. The stalker kills a cop inside a police station – while the protagonist is asleep no more than ten feet away.

2. The stalker engages in all sorts of dubious activities in broad daylight and around tons of people, yet no one other than the married couple seems to notice his odd behavior.

3. The stalker survives an absurd amount of violence that would have killed any human being.

4. The "suspense" scenes had no imagination whatsoever. In fact, some scenes were direct rip-offs from American movies.

The only positive is the decapitation near the end, which was a pretty brutal scene since it was inflicted upon the wife. It's too bad the filmmakers followed it up with an outrageously stupid ending that comes out of left field.

Truly, the Koreans behind the making of Say Yes should be ashamed of themselves. Better yet, they should just move to California and take employment with people who make movies with a similar disregard for quality and intelligence. There's nothing worse than renting an Asian movie and getting an American movie experience instead.

It's only my opinion, but a good thriller is dependent upon the establishment of [[sympathetic]], intelligent characters. As far as likability is concerned, the protagonists in Say Yes are a quaint married couple. Nicely done. [[Unhappily]], they are stupid beyond belief. Let us count the ways they mishandle being terrorized by a stalker.

1. After a hitchhiker threatens to kill you, be sure to tell him what hotel you're staying at when you drop him off.

2. Beat the hell out of the stalker in broad daylight and in front of dozens of witnesses, thereby allowing him to press charges of assault.

3. Don't bother telling the police about the stalker and simply assume (for no apparently good reason) that the cops were bribed by him.

4. While trying to escape, let your lady out of your sight as much as possible to ensure that the stalker kidnaps her.

5. After getting help from someone to find the stalker after kidnapping your wife, be sure to send them away as soon as possible so you can face him one-on-one. No point in being unfair, right?

Now, I'd never expect that any person would be immune to making a few mistakes under these stressful conditions, but the characters in Say Yes are so dense and make so many unbelievable mistakes that it's effectively impossible for the viewer to care about their safety, since they are victims of their own doing. This [[mata]] the enjoyability of the entire film.

In case you were wondering, the scriptwriters didn't stop with dim-witted characters. Since they themselves are surely dim-witted for writing this crapfest, they decided to make situations so absurdly unrealistic that all sense of reality goes out the window.

1. The stalker kills a cop inside a police station – while the protagonist is asleep no more than ten feet away.

2. The stalker engages in all sorts of dubious activities in broad daylight and around tons of people, yet no one other than the married couple seems to notice his odd behavior.

3. The stalker survives an absurd amount of violence that would have killed any human being.

4. The "suspense" scenes had no imagination whatsoever. In fact, some scenes were direct rip-offs from American movies.

The only positive is the decapitation near the end, which was a pretty brutal scene since it was inflicted upon the wife. It's too bad the filmmakers followed it up with an outrageously stupid ending that comes out of left field.

Truly, the Koreans behind the making of Say Yes should be ashamed of themselves. Better yet, they should just move to California and take employment with people who make movies with a similar disregard for quality and intelligence. --------------------------------------------- Result 3129 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] Dull, flatly-directed "[[comedy]]" has [[zero]] laughs and [[wastes]] a great [[cast]]. Alan Alda [[wore]] too many hats on this one and it shows. [[Newcomer]] Anthony LaPaglia provides the only [[spark]] of life in this [[tedium]] but it's not enough.

One of those scripts that, if you were a neophyte and submitted it to an agent or producer, would be ripped to shreds and rejected without discussion. Dull, flatly-directed "[[travesty]]" has [[nil]] laughs and [[detritus]] a great [[casting]]. Alan Alda [[donned]] too many hats on this one and it shows. [[Newcomers]] Anthony LaPaglia provides the only [[ignites]] of life in this [[drudgery]] but it's not enough.

One of those scripts that, if you were a neophyte and submitted it to an agent or producer, would be ripped to shreds and rejected without discussion. --------------------------------------------- Result 3130 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] If you ever watched the Dukes of Hazard you know that you never had to worry about drugs or cussing or crude behavior being seen by young children. If you've seen the movie you know that is no longer the [[case]]! This movie was [[HORRIBLE]]! Main [[characters]] doing drugs and [[thinking]] it is funny and cool is certainly not what I call entertainment. They took a wonderful show and just [[turned]] it into [[trash]]. Daisy who was a little flirtatious in the original show now looks and acts like she belongs on the street corner getting paid for her services. I was so excited about seeing this movie before it came out, 15 minutes into the movie I was ready to leave. I stayed thinking it had to get better but instead it got worse by the minute. I wish I had never seen this movie. It [[trashed]] a good show and left nothing but horrible taste in my mouth when I left. Do yourself a favor, go see something worth your money, cause it's not only a waste of money but a waste of 2 hours of your life you will never get back! If you ever watched the Dukes of Hazard you know that you never had to worry about drugs or cussing or crude behavior being seen by young children. If you've seen the movie you know that is no longer the [[lawsuits]]! This movie was [[SCARY]]! Main [[hallmarks]] doing drugs and [[thought]] it is funny and cool is certainly not what I call entertainment. They took a wonderful show and just [[transformed]] it into [[detritus]]. Daisy who was a little flirtatious in the original show now looks and acts like she belongs on the street corner getting paid for her services. I was so excited about seeing this movie before it came out, 15 minutes into the movie I was ready to leave. I stayed thinking it had to get better but instead it got worse by the minute. I wish I had never seen this movie. It [[wiped]] a good show and left nothing but horrible taste in my mouth when I left. Do yourself a favor, go see something worth your money, cause it's not only a waste of money but a waste of 2 hours of your life you will never get back! --------------------------------------------- Result 3131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Despite the lack of logic [[present]] in the storyline, Kill Shot is a highly [[enjoyable]] [[film]]. Through a [[moving]] performance Kasper Van Dien [[brilliantly]] portrays the emotional rift between a hard working wealthy father and his misguided son. Each member of the supporting cast pitches in with a solid performance, highlighted by the vivid acting of a young asian man whose name I cannot [[recall]]. A shockingly tragic ending may [[unnerve]] some younger viewers, but as a whole Kill Shot [[truly]] [[delivers]] a death blow. Despite the lack of logic [[presenting]] in the storyline, Kill Shot is a highly [[pleasurable]] [[movie]]. Through a [[displacement]] performance Kasper Van Dien [[marvellously]] portrays the emotional rift between a hard working wealthy father and his misguided son. Each member of the supporting cast pitches in with a solid performance, highlighted by the vivid acting of a young asian man whose name I cannot [[reminds]]. A shockingly tragic ending may [[infuriate]] some younger viewers, but as a whole Kill Shot [[honestly]] [[offering]] a death blow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I don't believe there has ever been a more evil or wicked television program to air in the United States as The 700 Club. They are today's equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan of the 20th century. Their hatred of all that is good and sweet and human and pure is [[beyond]] all [[ability]] to understand. Their daily constant [[attacks]] upon millions and millions of Americans, as well as billions of humans the world over, who don't happen to share their bigoted, cruel, monstrous, and utterly insane view of humanity is beyond anything television has ever seen. The lies they spout and the ridiculous lies they try to pass off as truth, such as the idea of "life after death" or "god" or "sin" or "the devil" is so preposterous that they actually seem mentally ill, so lost are they in their fantasy. Sane people know that religion is a drug and shouldn't let themselves get addicted to that type of fantasy. However, The 700 Club is in a class by itself. They are truly a cult. While I believe in freedom of speech, they way they spread hatred, lies, disinformation, and such fantastic ideas is beyond all limits. I hope that one day the American Psychiatric Association will finally take up the study of those people who delude themselves in this way, people who let themselves sink so deeply into the fantasy land of religion that they no longer have any real concept of reality at all. Treatment for such afflicted individuals is sorely needed in this country, as so many people have completely lost their minds to the fantasy of religion. The 700 Club though, is even more horrible as it rises to the legal definition of 'cult' but due to The 700 Club's vast wealth (conned daily from the millions of Americans locked in their deceitful grip) they are above the law in this country. For those of you who have seen the movie "The Matrix" you know that movie was a metaphor for religion on earth: the evil ones who are at the top of each of the religions who drain the ones they have trapped and cruelly abuse for their own selfish purposes, and those millions who are held in a death sleep and slowly being drained of their life force represent those many people who belong to religions and who have lost all ability to perceive what is really going on around them.

In less civil times, the good townsfolk would have run such monsters as those associated with The 700 Club out of town with torches and pitchforks. But in today's world where people have lost all choice in their choices of television that is presented to them, we have no way to rid ourselves of the 700 Club plague.

The television ratings system and the "V" chip on TV's should also have a rating called "R" for religion, so that rational people and concerned parents could easily screen such vile intellectual and brutal emotional rape, such as presented by The 700 Club every day all over our country, from themselves and their children. I don't believe there has ever been a more evil or wicked television program to air in the United States as The 700 Club. They are today's equivalent to the Ku Klux Klan of the 20th century. Their hatred of all that is good and sweet and human and pure is [[afterlife]] all [[dexterity]] to understand. Their daily constant [[strikes]] upon millions and millions of Americans, as well as billions of humans the world over, who don't happen to share their bigoted, cruel, monstrous, and utterly insane view of humanity is beyond anything television has ever seen. The lies they spout and the ridiculous lies they try to pass off as truth, such as the idea of "life after death" or "god" or "sin" or "the devil" is so preposterous that they actually seem mentally ill, so lost are they in their fantasy. Sane people know that religion is a drug and shouldn't let themselves get addicted to that type of fantasy. However, The 700 Club is in a class by itself. They are truly a cult. While I believe in freedom of speech, they way they spread hatred, lies, disinformation, and such fantastic ideas is beyond all limits. I hope that one day the American Psychiatric Association will finally take up the study of those people who delude themselves in this way, people who let themselves sink so deeply into the fantasy land of religion that they no longer have any real concept of reality at all. Treatment for such afflicted individuals is sorely needed in this country, as so many people have completely lost their minds to the fantasy of religion. The 700 Club though, is even more horrible as it rises to the legal definition of 'cult' but due to The 700 Club's vast wealth (conned daily from the millions of Americans locked in their deceitful grip) they are above the law in this country. For those of you who have seen the movie "The Matrix" you know that movie was a metaphor for religion on earth: the evil ones who are at the top of each of the religions who drain the ones they have trapped and cruelly abuse for their own selfish purposes, and those millions who are held in a death sleep and slowly being drained of their life force represent those many people who belong to religions and who have lost all ability to perceive what is really going on around them.

In less civil times, the good townsfolk would have run such monsters as those associated with The 700 Club out of town with torches and pitchforks. But in today's world where people have lost all choice in their choices of television that is presented to them, we have no way to rid ourselves of the 700 Club plague.

The television ratings system and the "V" chip on TV's should also have a rating called "R" for religion, so that rational people and concerned parents could easily screen such vile intellectual and brutal emotional rape, such as presented by The 700 Club every day all over our country, from themselves and their children. --------------------------------------------- Result 3133 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Jennifer's [[Shadow]] is set in [[Argentina]] & [[starts]] as [[Jennifer]] Cassi (Gina Philips) [[arrives]] there after her sister [[Johanna]] dies. Jennifer is left Johanna's large [[house]] in her will, Jennifer decides to sell the [[house]] & [[head]] back to Los [[Angeles]] even though her [[Grandmother]] Mary Ellen (Faye Dunaway) is opposed to the sale. However [[strange]] things [[begin]] to [[happen]], Jennifer [[starts]] having nightmares about Ravens pecking at her & she starts to feel very [[ill]]. After a check up in hospital it seems that one of her kidney's have mysteriously disappeared, what is happening to [[Jennifer]]? Is it an [[ancient]] family curse? Will Jennifer be the next to [[succumb]] to it...

This Argentinian American co-production was co-written & co-directed by [[Daniel]] de la Vega & Pablo Parés & is a really [[dull]] [[waste]] of ninety odd minutes, a tedious & predictable modern ghost story that I would imagine will put more people to sleep sooner than scare them. The [[script]] by Vega, Parés & P.J. Pettiette is pretty slow going & tedious which is not what anyone wants, I mean I'm sure most people don't want to sit down & be bored out of their skulls. The character's are all uninteresting & fairly faceless with little or no motivation for anything they do. For instance who is that graveyard caretaker guy? How did he know about the demons? What is his interest & motivation for getting involved? I couldn't see it. Jennifer herself is a pretty unlikable & bland [[leading]] lady, her [[Grandmother]] Mary Allen is as [[clichéd]] as they come & it's surprising that she is so obviously the villain. I mean for this sort of mystery based horror/ghost story it's surprisingly predictable & routine. There are gaps in both logic & the story which together with the terrible twist ending which isn't much of a twist I didn't like Jennifer's Shadow one iota.

Directors Vega & Parés goes down the much used route of bleaching almost all of the colour from the picture which often renders it not too far from black and white, I suspect that they wanted to give it a period Gothic feel but it's been done so many times before & often so much better that it didn't do much for me at all & just makes the whole film look dull & [[lifeless]]. There's a definite 40's period look as well, from the costumes to the interior of the large house but again it's rather half hearted & cheap looking. Jennifer's Shadow is well made but it's rather forgettable, it's not scary or creepy & it's rather predictable. If that wasn't enough there's no gore either, there's a few scenes of Ravens pecking away at people & a beating heart but nothing else.

With a supposed budget of about $1,000,000 & retitled to The Chronicles of the Raven for it's US & international DVD release this is reasonably well made but a million won't buy you too much these days & Jennifer's Shadow pretty much proves that theory. There are too many scenes of actor's speaking in thick Argentinian accents as well, even though it might be realistic I actually like to be able to understand what people are saying. The acting is alright although Dunaway overacts badly & is obviously there for the money.

Jennifer's Shadow is a rubbishy ghost film that I thought was a total bore from start to finish, I would rather watch The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies!!? (1964) again instead. A total waste of time. Jennifer's [[Shade]] is set in [[Argentine]] & [[initiates]] as [[Jessica]] Cassi (Gina Philips) [[arrived]] there after her sister [[Joanna]] dies. Jennifer is left Johanna's large [[maison]] in her will, Jennifer decides to sell the [[haus]] & [[chief]] back to Los [[Las]] even though her [[Bubbie]] Mary Ellen (Faye Dunaway) is opposed to the sale. However [[inquisitive]] things [[launched]] to [[emerge]], Jennifer [[initiating]] having nightmares about Ravens pecking at her & she starts to feel very [[unwell]]. After a check up in hospital it seems that one of her kidney's have mysteriously disappeared, what is happening to [[Jessica]]? Is it an [[longtime]] family curse? Will Jennifer be the next to [[succumbed]] to it...

This Argentinian American co-production was co-written & co-directed by [[Daniela]] de la Vega & Pablo Parés & is a really [[drab]] [[squander]] of ninety odd minutes, a tedious & predictable modern ghost story that I would imagine will put more people to sleep sooner than scare them. The [[hyphen]] by Vega, Parés & P.J. Pettiette is pretty slow going & tedious which is not what anyone wants, I mean I'm sure most people don't want to sit down & be bored out of their skulls. The character's are all uninteresting & fairly faceless with little or no motivation for anything they do. For instance who is that graveyard caretaker guy? How did he know about the demons? What is his interest & motivation for getting involved? I couldn't see it. Jennifer herself is a pretty unlikable & bland [[culminating]] lady, her [[Grandmom]] Mary Allen is as [[clichés]] as they come & it's surprising that she is so obviously the villain. I mean for this sort of mystery based horror/ghost story it's surprisingly predictable & routine. There are gaps in both logic & the story which together with the terrible twist ending which isn't much of a twist I didn't like Jennifer's Shadow one iota.

Directors Vega & Parés goes down the much used route of bleaching almost all of the colour from the picture which often renders it not too far from black and white, I suspect that they wanted to give it a period Gothic feel but it's been done so many times before & often so much better that it didn't do much for me at all & just makes the whole film look dull & [[lackluster]]. There's a definite 40's period look as well, from the costumes to the interior of the large house but again it's rather half hearted & cheap looking. Jennifer's Shadow is well made but it's rather forgettable, it's not scary or creepy & it's rather predictable. If that wasn't enough there's no gore either, there's a few scenes of Ravens pecking away at people & a beating heart but nothing else.

With a supposed budget of about $1,000,000 & retitled to The Chronicles of the Raven for it's US & international DVD release this is reasonably well made but a million won't buy you too much these days & Jennifer's Shadow pretty much proves that theory. There are too many scenes of actor's speaking in thick Argentinian accents as well, even though it might be realistic I actually like to be able to understand what people are saying. The acting is alright although Dunaway overacts badly & is obviously there for the money.

Jennifer's Shadow is a rubbishy ghost film that I thought was a total bore from start to finish, I would rather watch The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies!!? (1964) again instead. A total waste of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3134 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] When [[HEY]] ARNOLD! [[first]] came on the air in 1996, I watched it. It was one of my [[favorite]] [[shows]]. [[Then]] the same episodes [[started]] getting shown over and over again so I got tired of waiting for new episodes and [[stopped]] watching it. I was [[sort]] of [[surprised]] when I heard about [[HEY]] ARNOLD! THE MOVIE [[since]] it doesn't seem to be nearly as [[popular]] as some of the other Nickelodeon cartoons like SPONGEBOB [[SQUAREPANTS]]. [[Nevertheless]], having [[nothing]] better to do, I went to see the [[movie]] anyway. Going into the [[theater]], I wasn't [[expecting]] much. I was just expecting it to be a [[dumb]] [[movie]] version of a childrens' [[cartoon]] like the RECESS movie was. I guess I got what I [[expected]]. It was a [[dumb]] kiddie movie and nothing more. There were some good parts here and there, but for the most part, the movie was a [[stinker]]. Simply for kids. When [[SALUT]] ARNOLD! [[fiirst]] came on the air in 1996, I watched it. It was one of my [[preferable]] [[exhibitions]]. [[Later]] the same episodes [[initiating]] getting shown over and over again so I got tired of waiting for new episodes and [[stopping]] watching it. I was [[sorts]] of [[horrified]] when I heard about [[BYE]] ARNOLD! THE MOVIE [[because]] it doesn't seem to be nearly as [[fashionable]] as some of the other Nickelodeon cartoons like SPONGEBOB [[SPONGEBOB]]. [[Albeit]], having [[anything]] better to do, I went to see the [[cinematography]] anyway. Going into the [[theatres]], I wasn't [[waiting]] much. I was just expecting it to be a [[silly]] [[film]] version of a childrens' [[cartoons]] like the RECESS movie was. I guess I got what I [[predicted]]. It was a [[silly]] kiddie movie and nothing more. There were some good parts here and there, but for the most part, the movie was a [[tosser]]. Simply for kids. --------------------------------------------- Result 3135 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is a [[film]] that belongs firmly to the 50's. Very surprising that American Film Institute has chosen this one for one for the best 100 American movies of all-time. I have seen practically all of the [[movies]] on that list, and this one is by far the most [[disappointing]] one of those. Musical numbers (and there many, many of them) are [[VERY]] overlong and [[boring]], and have absolute no connection with the [[story]]. The [[end]] of the movie has horribly over-long [[ballet]] sequency, which naturally has no real relation to the story of the [[movie]]. It must be [[admitted]], that it is very well made, the [[music]] is OK, and the dancing done with the highest [[professional]] standard - but there is no real reason why the sequence is included in the movie.

The main character of the movie is extremely childlish and unlikeable and behaves in unpolite way. His mental age is about 14. If you want to see a good musical made on the "golden age" of musicals, go and see "Singing in the Rain". This is a [[filmmaking]] that belongs firmly to the 50's. Very surprising that American Film Institute has chosen this one for one for the best 100 American movies of all-time. I have seen practically all of the [[filmmaking]] on that list, and this one is by far the most [[discouraging]] one of those. Musical numbers (and there many, many of them) are [[QUITE]] overlong and [[bored]], and have absolute no connection with the [[fairytales]]. The [[terminating]] of the movie has horribly over-long [[dances]] sequency, which naturally has no real relation to the story of the [[films]]. It must be [[recognised]], that it is very well made, the [[musica]] is OK, and the dancing done with the highest [[occupational]] standard - but there is no real reason why the sequence is included in the movie.

The main character of the movie is extremely childlish and unlikeable and behaves in unpolite way. His mental age is about 14. If you want to see a good musical made on the "golden age" of musicals, go and see "Singing in the Rain". --------------------------------------------- Result 3136 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] OK, I really don't have too much to [[say]] about this film, other than this: I have [[seen]] over 4,000 [[films]] in my [[life]], and more than 2,300 of those were horror [[films]]. While I have some difficulty [[deciding]] which is the best (as opposed to my [[favourite]], which I can tell you is George A. Romero's [[DAWN]] OF THE DEAD), I can tell you without the slightest hesitation that Todd Sheets' ZOMBIE BLOODBATH is the absolute [[worst]] horror film I have ever seen.

There is simply [[nothing]] [[positive]] I can say about this film. The acting, the dialogue, the directing, the make-up, the music... Every aspect of this film is simply so far below what is acceptable that it boggles my mind that this was ever even released.

Even if you are a horror or zombie movie completist, please heed my warning and DO NOT waste your time on this [[garbage]]. There is no pleasure to be gotten from viewing this. You won't even get any [[laughs]] out of the utter ineptitude on display... Trust me. Please. OK, I really don't have too much to [[told]] about this film, other than this: I have [[noticed]] over 4,000 [[cinematographic]] in my [[iife]], and more than 2,300 of those were horror [[film]]. While I have some difficulty [[decided]] which is the best (as opposed to my [[favorites]], which I can tell you is George A. Romero's [[AURORE]] OF THE DEAD), I can tell you without the slightest hesitation that Todd Sheets' ZOMBIE BLOODBATH is the absolute [[meanest]] horror film I have ever seen.

There is simply [[anything]] [[conducive]] I can say about this film. The acting, the dialogue, the directing, the make-up, the music... Every aspect of this film is simply so far below what is acceptable that it boggles my mind that this was ever even released.

Even if you are a horror or zombie movie completist, please heed my warning and DO NOT waste your time on this [[refuse]]. There is no pleasure to be gotten from viewing this. You won't even get any [[grin]] out of the utter ineptitude on display... Trust me. Please. --------------------------------------------- Result 3137 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The first word which comes into my mind after [[watching]] this [[movie]] is "beauty". Beauty is all around, in actors' play (Andie is superb as always), in well designed shots, and in authors' red line idea - the [[Love]].

I think the Kenny's [[character]] is the only white [[spot]] in these three womens' otherwise boring and predictable [[life]]. His interaction makes Andie's [[character]] living as entertaining as it could possibly be. When he's gone, it [[became]] obvious that we cannot really appreciate and hold to our inner believes and sacred desires.

The fact that Andie successfully recovers from this loss is [[nothing]] bad, instead it shows that life prevails in any forms, even in this small British village, which is shown perfectly.

Another reason I [[love]] this movie is that it is so British in all ways - all that houses and "fags" and accents :))). And Andie again is doing [[superb]] job! It is a shame that this movie got such low marks. 10 out of ten! The first word which comes into my mind after [[staring]] this [[cinematographic]] is "beauty". Beauty is all around, in actors' play (Andie is superb as always), in well designed shots, and in authors' red line idea - the [[Adores]].

I think the Kenny's [[personage]] is the only white [[blemish]] in these three womens' otherwise boring and predictable [[iife]]. His interaction makes Andie's [[personages]] living as entertaining as it could possibly be. When he's gone, it [[was]] obvious that we cannot really appreciate and hold to our inner believes and sacred desires.

The fact that Andie successfully recovers from this loss is [[anything]] bad, instead it shows that life prevails in any forms, even in this small British village, which is shown perfectly.

Another reason I [[iove]] this movie is that it is so British in all ways - all that houses and "fags" and accents :))). And Andie again is doing [[funky]] job! It is a shame that this movie got such low marks. 10 out of ten! --------------------------------------------- Result 3138 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] A [[remake]] of Alejandro Amenabar's Abre los Ojos, but this time with a living, breathing mask as a lead. [[For]] the [[dubious]] [[advantage]] of an English [[sound]] track, we [[endure]] Tom Cruise's soulless performance, as usual, with zero depth. [[Yes]], the [[character]] is identified with his persona, but we [[usually]] are given some character underneath that to [[hold]] our interest. His [[empty]] [[posturing]] [[negates]] any erotic [[energy]] that [[could]] have been between his [[character]] and [[Cruz]] or Diaz.

There is an acting [[exercise]] that [[involves]] [[using]] [[masks]] to free the [[actor]] to [[enrich]] his presentation of character by verbal and body [[language]] means. Cruise's masking only painfully [[emphasizes]] his [[inadequacy]] as an [[actor]]. Do see the 1997 [[original]] Amenabar Open [[Your]] Eyes! A [[redo]] of Alejandro Amenabar's Abre los Ojos, but this time with a living, breathing mask as a lead. [[In]] the [[shady]] [[parti]] of an English [[sounds]] track, we [[withstand]] Tom Cruise's soulless performance, as usual, with zero depth. [[Yeah]], the [[characteristics]] is identified with his persona, but we [[fluently]] are given some character underneath that to [[holds]] our interest. His [[hollow]] [[vanity]] [[denies]] any erotic [[energies]] that [[wo]] have been between his [[nature]] and [[Croix]] or Diaz.

There is an acting [[exercises]] that [[encompasses]] [[uses]] [[mask]] to free the [[protagonist]] to [[enriched]] his presentation of character by verbal and body [[parlance]] means. Cruise's masking only painfully [[highlight]] his [[shortages]] as an [[protagonist]]. Do see the 1997 [[preliminary]] Amenabar Open [[Ton]] Eyes! --------------------------------------------- Result 3139 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] That's what the title should be, anyway.

This movie [[combines]] guns, explosives, and mindless killing to make one [[flop]] of an "action" movie. Let me make my point in a series of [[questions]]: answers type deal.

What happens in the movie? People [[die]].

Is that it? Yes.

What is the plot about? What [[plot]]?

What is the point the movie is [[trying]] to [[make]]? Killing is the only [[solution]].

What are the characters like? Extremely flawed and contradictive toward their own personalities.

Is there [[anything]] [[good]] about this movie? [[Yes]]. I'm sure they [[used]] some nice Panavision [[cameras]] in filming it.

If you [[like]] constant killing and greed, then watch the movie. If you happen to be [[repulsed]] by such low-standard "entertainment", then "Made Men" is not for you.

To [[sum]] it up, the plotline [[stinks]], the [[characters]] aren't worth their while, the storyline is [[completely]] resistable, and [[nothing]] fits together.

This proves one thing: the [[actors]], directors, and [[whoever]] helped make this movie [[certainly]] aren't "[[Made]]". That's what the title should be, anyway.

This movie [[unites]] guns, explosives, and mindless killing to make one [[bust]] of an "action" movie. Let me make my point in a series of [[subjects]]: answers type deal.

What happens in the movie? People [[died]].

Is that it? Yes.

What is the plot about? What [[intrigue]]?

What is the point the movie is [[striving]] to [[deliver]]? Killing is the only [[solutions]].

What are the characters like? Extremely flawed and contradictive toward their own personalities.

Is there [[somethings]] [[alright]] about this movie? [[Oui]]. I'm sure they [[utilizes]] some nice Panavision [[camera]] in filming it.

If you [[loves]] constant killing and greed, then watch the movie. If you happen to be [[resisted]] by such low-standard "entertainment", then "Made Men" is not for you.

To [[suma]] it up, the plotline [[sucks]], the [[trait]] aren't worth their while, the storyline is [[perfectly]] resistable, and [[anything]] fits together.

This proves one thing: the [[protagonists]], directors, and [[somebody]] helped make this movie [[assuredly]] aren't "[[Effected]]". --------------------------------------------- Result 3140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It is hard to make an [[unbiased]] judgment on a film like this that had such an impact on me at such a young age. This is with out a doubt the [[worst]] [[kind]] of exploitation film. I was unfortunate enough to see this film for the first time in my [[youth]], Iwill never [[forget]] it. I thought it was the most [[horrible]] movie ever made. I then saw it again earlier this year and was once again horrified.

I am not a zealot or one to say what others should and should not see but I did take great [[offense]] to the way in which something as horrible as rape was dealt with in this movie. I love lowbrow cinema but this is just plain nasty. Rent some Rus Myer instead. It is hard to make an [[impartial]] judgment on a film like this that had such an impact on me at such a young age. This is with out a doubt the [[hardest]] [[genus]] of exploitation film. I was unfortunate enough to see this film for the first time in my [[adolescents]], Iwill never [[forgot]] it. I thought it was the most [[gruesome]] movie ever made. I then saw it again earlier this year and was once again horrified.

I am not a zealot or one to say what others should and should not see but I did take great [[crime]] to the way in which something as horrible as rape was dealt with in this movie. I love lowbrow cinema but this is just plain nasty. Rent some Rus Myer instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3141 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It does [[touch]] a few interesting points.. But! - It fails to show evidence of all the 'exclusive' studies shown. Who are the 'friends' and 'small groups of scientists' that [[gathered]] this data? - What's up with all the Al [[Gore]] biography going on there? Like how he liked playing with the [[cows]] on the [[ranch]] or that his [[kid]] got hit by a car.. too [[bad]] but.. what does that have to do with the ozone layer?

I've seen [[MUCH]] better stuff, in much less time, on [[Discovery]] [[Channel]].. I really don't understand why this has such a high [[score]] on IMDb. Unless you've been living under a rock, this 'documentary' shouldn't be any news to you... all this is old news... And all Al Gore is [[trying]] to do is get some popularity [[points]]. P.S. i'm not [[American]] so don't [[even]] [[try]] [[saying]] that i'm a bush [[fan]] :p It does [[touches]] a few interesting points.. But! - It fails to show evidence of all the 'exclusive' studies shown. Who are the 'friends' and 'small groups of scientists' that [[togather]] this data? - What's up with all the Al [[Gora]] biography going on there? Like how he liked playing with the [[cattle]] on the [[husbandry]] or that his [[petit]] got hit by a car.. too [[negative]] but.. what does that have to do with the ozone layer?

I've seen [[VERY]] better stuff, in much less time, on [[Discoveries]] [[Chanel]].. I really don't understand why this has such a high [[notation]] on IMDb. Unless you've been living under a rock, this 'documentary' shouldn't be any news to you... all this is old news... And all Al Gore is [[tempting]] to do is get some popularity [[dots]]. P.S. i'm not [[Americano]] so don't [[yet]] [[tried]] [[telling]] that i'm a bush [[breather]] :p --------------------------------------------- Result 3142 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The comment by "eliz7212-1" hits the proverbial "nail on the head" for this [[turkey]] of a [[program]]. But it is a hoot to watch William Shatner "cavort" and "dance" (yes, the " " marks on the word dance are necessary for what Bill does). This show would be a great skit on SNL or MAD TV - and it does rate a few stars for one viewing, or so, to see Shatner, who seems to have taken "camp" to new heights - whether in a role or as himself. But the guy is funny.

The girls who are in the cubicle areas with the game data scrolls, will be pretty much out-of-luck when this turkey is canceled - unless there is a revival of the whiskey-a-go-go genre, with a resurrected demand for shapely young women to dance in elevated cages once more.

I watched the first contestant, who was annoying, and literally "dumber than a :post," yet through sheer luck, walked away with a quarter mil or so. The second contestant, somewhat more intelligent, but who'd be lucky to gain $1,000 on Jeopardy!, got zonked by the card which requires answering a special question - which he didn't know, and thereby left with zilch.

This plethora of game shows, which dangle, and sometimes award, large sums to everyday individuals, are admittedly a cheap effort, overall, to attempt to woo viewers. Even if the host is well-compensated, and they give away six figures in an average episode, I suppose that the revenue versus costs can be favorable - since you don't have a sitcom cast where several stars are getting six or seven figures, per episode, with some big residual deals as well.

But I suspect even the better ones will wear thin before long. This one has already pretty much reached this point. I think his offerings, especially with James Spader, and the others on "Boston Legal" should give us a satisfying quantity of Bill Shatner's offerings.

Again, the above rating is simply appropriate to view Bill hoot and prance, perhaps one time; that should be sufficient. The comment by "eliz7212-1" hits the proverbial "nail on the head" for this [[turk]] of a [[agendas]]. But it is a hoot to watch William Shatner "cavort" and "dance" (yes, the " " marks on the word dance are necessary for what Bill does). This show would be a great skit on SNL or MAD TV - and it does rate a few stars for one viewing, or so, to see Shatner, who seems to have taken "camp" to new heights - whether in a role or as himself. But the guy is funny.

The girls who are in the cubicle areas with the game data scrolls, will be pretty much out-of-luck when this turkey is canceled - unless there is a revival of the whiskey-a-go-go genre, with a resurrected demand for shapely young women to dance in elevated cages once more.

I watched the first contestant, who was annoying, and literally "dumber than a :post," yet through sheer luck, walked away with a quarter mil or so. The second contestant, somewhat more intelligent, but who'd be lucky to gain $1,000 on Jeopardy!, got zonked by the card which requires answering a special question - which he didn't know, and thereby left with zilch.

This plethora of game shows, which dangle, and sometimes award, large sums to everyday individuals, are admittedly a cheap effort, overall, to attempt to woo viewers. Even if the host is well-compensated, and they give away six figures in an average episode, I suppose that the revenue versus costs can be favorable - since you don't have a sitcom cast where several stars are getting six or seven figures, per episode, with some big residual deals as well.

But I suspect even the better ones will wear thin before long. This one has already pretty much reached this point. I think his offerings, especially with James Spader, and the others on "Boston Legal" should give us a satisfying quantity of Bill Shatner's offerings.

Again, the above rating is simply appropriate to view Bill hoot and prance, perhaps one time; that should be sufficient. --------------------------------------------- Result 3143 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] So I'm [[looking]] to [[rent]] a DVD and I come across this movie called '[[End]] Game'. It [[stars]] James Woods and [[Cuba]] Gooding JR and has the synopsis of a taught political thriller. Well worth a look then. Or so I [[thought]].

Boy, was I wrong.

End Game has just about the most [[ridiculous]] plot I have ever had the [[displeasure]] of enduring. Now being something of a whodunnit, I can't really tear into it as I would [[like]] without 'ruining' it for those who have yet to experience this [[monstrosity]]. But questions such as 'Why has he/she/they done this?', and 'Where on earth did they get the resources to pull this off?' are all too abundant following the film's [[unintentionally]] hilarious conclusion.

As for the acting - you know those films where you can almost feel that an actor's realised that they've made a terrible mistake in signing on for a movie, and this then shows in their performance? This is one of those. Accompany this with a [[laughable]] script and seriously flawed, irritating direction and you have the recipe for cinematic poison.

Of course, this didn't make it to the cinema, and for the same reason you should not allow it into your living room; it is appalling. So I'm [[searching]] to [[leased]] a DVD and I come across this movie called '[[Ends]] Game'. It [[superstar]] James Woods and [[Cuban]] Gooding JR and has the synopsis of a taught political thriller. Well worth a look then. Or so I [[ideology]].

Boy, was I wrong.

End Game has just about the most [[nonsensical]] plot I have ever had the [[discontent]] of enduring. Now being something of a whodunnit, I can't really tear into it as I would [[iike]] without 'ruining' it for those who have yet to experience this [[atrocity]]. But questions such as 'Why has he/she/they done this?', and 'Where on earth did they get the resources to pull this off?' are all too abundant following the film's [[accidentally]] hilarious conclusion.

As for the acting - you know those films where you can almost feel that an actor's realised that they've made a terrible mistake in signing on for a movie, and this then shows in their performance? This is one of those. Accompany this with a [[ludicrous]] script and seriously flawed, irritating direction and you have the recipe for cinematic poison.

Of course, this didn't make it to the cinema, and for the same reason you should not allow it into your living room; it is appalling. --------------------------------------------- Result 3144 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I [[understand]] the [[jokes]] [[quite]] well, they just aren't good. The show is [[horrible]]. I [[understand]] it, and that's another horrible thing about it. The only cool character there EVER was on the show was that one hobo in that one episode, but then I see the other episode including that episode and the show is horrible. It's not [[funny]], [[NOT]] [[funny]]! I don't want people to say "Only smart people get it" because if they're so smart why do they judge people they don't even know and say that they're not smart or intellectual enough to understand it? It's like saying "The sky is red" but never looking outside. But anyways, this is absolutely the [[worst]] [[show]] I have ever [[seen]] in my [[life]], the [[jokes]] are [[terrible]], I [[mean]], you can [[understand]] them, they're just [[horrible]], her controversy is very lame, her fart jokes and other jokes on bodily fluids are [[really]] [[dumb]] and usually consist of [[really]] [[bad]] acting. I'm not sure what these "[[smart]]" people [[see]] in this [[show]], but judging others when they don't [[even]] know [[anything]] about any of us isn't exactly a [[smart]] [[comment]]. I [[realise]] the [[pleasantries]] [[utterly]] well, they just aren't good. The show is [[horrendous]]. I [[understanding]] it, and that's another horrible thing about it. The only cool character there EVER was on the show was that one hobo in that one episode, but then I see the other episode including that episode and the show is horrible. It's not [[fun]], [[NOPE]] [[amusing]]! I don't want people to say "Only smart people get it" because if they're so smart why do they judge people they don't even know and say that they're not smart or intellectual enough to understand it? It's like saying "The sky is red" but never looking outside. But anyways, this is absolutely the [[gravest]] [[exhibit]] I have ever [[noticed]] in my [[lives]], the [[pleasantries]] are [[horrendous]], I [[imply]], you can [[realise]] them, they're just [[frightful]], her controversy is very lame, her fart jokes and other jokes on bodily fluids are [[genuinely]] [[stupid]] and usually consist of [[genuinely]] [[negative]] acting. I'm not sure what these "[[canny]]" people [[seeing]] in this [[exhibit]], but judging others when they don't [[yet]] know [[algo]] about any of us isn't exactly a [[ingenious]] [[commentaries]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3145 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Frank]] Capra's creativity must have been just about spent by the [[time]] he made this [[film]]. [[While]] it has a few charming moments, and many wonderful [[performers]], Capra's outright recycling of not just the [[script]] but [[considerable]] footage from his [[first]] version of this [[story]], Broadway [[Bill]] (1934), is downright [[shoddy]]. It is [[understandable]] that he would re-use footage from the [[climactic]] [[horse]] [[race]], which is thrilling. But he [[uses]] [[entire]] dialogue scenes with minor actors, then brings back those [[actors]] and [[apparently]] [[expects]] us not to notice, for [[example]], that Ward Bond is 14 years [[older]]! Unless you want to see one of the last appearances of Oliver Hardy, skip this one and watch Broadway Bill instead. [[Candid]] Capra's creativity must have been just about spent by the [[period]] he made this [[cinematography]]. [[Although]] it has a few charming moments, and many wonderful [[performer]], Capra's outright recycling of not just the [[hyphen]] but [[tremendous]] footage from his [[outset]] version of this [[history]], Broadway [[Invoice]] (1934), is downright [[inferior]]. It is [[comprehensible]] that he would re-use footage from the [[climatic]] [[horses]] [[carrera]], which is thrilling. But he [[using]] [[total]] dialogue scenes with minor actors, then brings back those [[protagonists]] and [[visibly]] [[await]] us not to notice, for [[cases]], that Ward Bond is 14 years [[elder]]! Unless you want to see one of the last appearances of Oliver Hardy, skip this one and watch Broadway Bill instead. --------------------------------------------- Result 3146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] [[Anyone]] who had never seen anything [[like]] the fight scenes in The Matrix has never seen this [[movie]]. The fight scenes were [[choreographed]] by action scene psychopath [[Yuen]] [[Woo]] Ping, who also did the fights in The Matrix. And the fight scenes are [[somethin]].

[[Li]] plays a supersoldier who feels no pain, who now lives a life as a pacifist librarian (ya got me). When other evil supersoldiers begin [[killing]] off local [[drug]] lords to take over the drug trade, Li teams up with his cop buddy to help stop them.

There are some absolutely crazy things going on in this movie (one badguy gets his arm lopped off with a [[pane]] of glass and hardly notices). The fights scenes are filled with flying kicks and punches; the body count is way up there. Li has seldom been better, and he has surrounded himself with a bevy of beautiful female costars (Yip kicks some serious ass as a fellow supersoldier). Anthony Wong even makes a cameo as a drug lord (no suprises there; he makes a cameo in every HK movie). It's unfortunate they don't make action [[movies]] like this in the US; I wouldn't have to [[sit]] through all of these horrible [[dubbing]] [[jobs]] to [[see]] that action that I crave so much. [[Recommended]]. [[Someone]] who had never seen anything [[iike]] the fight scenes in The Matrix has never seen this [[cinematography]]. The fight scenes were [[choreography]] by action scene psychopath [[Yuan]] [[Wooo]] Ping, who also did the fights in The Matrix. And the fight scenes are [[nothin]].

[[Rhee]] plays a supersoldier who feels no pain, who now lives a life as a pacifist librarian (ya got me). When other evil supersoldiers begin [[slaying]] off local [[meds]] lords to take over the drug trade, Li teams up with his cop buddy to help stop them.

There are some absolutely crazy things going on in this movie (one badguy gets his arm lopped off with a [[stencil]] of glass and hardly notices). The fights scenes are filled with flying kicks and punches; the body count is way up there. Li has seldom been better, and he has surrounded himself with a bevy of beautiful female costars (Yip kicks some serious ass as a fellow supersoldier). Anthony Wong even makes a cameo as a drug lord (no suprises there; he makes a cameo in every HK movie). It's unfortunate they don't make action [[cinematography]] like this in the US; I wouldn't have to [[assis]] through all of these horrible [[copying]] [[work]] to [[behold]] that action that I crave so much. [[Suggested]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This was [[excellent]]. [[Touching]], action-packed, and perfect for Kurt Russel. I [[loved]] this movie, it deserves more than 5.3 or so [[stars]]. This movie is the story of an obsolete soldier who learns there is more to life than soldiering, and people who learn that there is a time for fighting, a need to defend. I [[cried]], laughed and mostly sat in [[awe]] of this [[story]]. [[Good]] writing job for an action flick, and the plot was appropriate and fairly solid. The ending wasn't twisty, but it was still excellent. If you like escape from New York, or rooting for the underdog, this movie is for you. Not an undue amount of gore or violence, it was not difficult to watch in that respect. Something for everyone. This was [[glamorous]]. [[Affects]], action-packed, and perfect for Kurt Russel. I [[worshipped]] this movie, it deserves more than 5.3 or so [[star]]. This movie is the story of an obsolete soldier who learns there is more to life than soldiering, and people who learn that there is a time for fighting, a need to defend. I [[screamed]], laughed and mostly sat in [[veneration]] of this [[narratives]]. [[Alright]] writing job for an action flick, and the plot was appropriate and fairly solid. The ending wasn't twisty, but it was still excellent. If you like escape from New York, or rooting for the underdog, this movie is for you. Not an undue amount of gore or violence, it was not difficult to watch in that respect. Something for everyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3148 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I saw the film [[tonight]] at a [[free]] preview screening, and despite the fact that I didn't [[pay]] a dime to [[see]] this film I still felt ripped off. [[Ladies]] and [[gentlemen]], time is [[money]] and if you see this film you are leaving a Benjamin on your seat. The acting is torpid at best; Kiefer Sutherland phones in his [[worst]] [[impersonation]] of [[Jack]] Bauer, and Michael Douglas looks [[like]] he realizes he made a bad choice leaving Catherine Zeta-Jones for the duration it took to shoot this [[turkey]]. Eva Longoria is a non-entity; she looks like she's reading her lines off a teleprompter. And if you can't spot the "mole" within the first 20 minutes, then you just landed on this planet from a world without TV and recycled story lines. If you truly want to see a good secret service thriller, rent In the Line of Fire. If you see and buy into this one, you'll start to fear for the president's safety because the Secret Service looks and acts like the grown-up versions of the kinds from 90210. No matter what your feelings about W, let's hope this "art" does not imitate life. I saw the film [[evening]] at a [[libre]] preview screening, and despite the fact that I didn't [[paycheck]] a dime to [[behold]] this film I still felt ripped off. [[Mesdames]] and [[messieurs]], time is [[moneys]] and if you see this film you are leaving a Benjamin on your seat. The acting is torpid at best; Kiefer Sutherland phones in his [[hardest]] [[mimicry]] of [[Jacques]] Bauer, and Michael Douglas looks [[iike]] he realizes he made a bad choice leaving Catherine Zeta-Jones for the duration it took to shoot this [[ankara]]. Eva Longoria is a non-entity; she looks like she's reading her lines off a teleprompter. And if you can't spot the "mole" within the first 20 minutes, then you just landed on this planet from a world without TV and recycled story lines. If you truly want to see a good secret service thriller, rent In the Line of Fire. If you see and buy into this one, you'll start to fear for the president's safety because the Secret Service looks and acts like the grown-up versions of the kinds from 90210. No matter what your feelings about W, let's hope this "art" does not imitate life. --------------------------------------------- Result 3149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This movie had me going. The title was perhaps the greatest idea that I heard. I thought it was an independent movie about a zombie outbreak and their quest to take over the US and a group of lone survivors, band together, and plan to take out the zombies. DEAD WRONG! It's about a psycho cop with a weakness for killing his female arrests gets what's coming to him when a pack of zombie women rise from their graves in order to get proper revenge. As you can see there is nothing about the nation nor a county involved. [[Where]] to begin with the severity this [[cinematic]] [[disaster]] caused our nation.

First off, the zombie women look like Victoria Secret models with dark eyeliner and a pale face. What are zombies but mindless, debatable intelligent, cannibalistic killing machines that eat as a result of their primitive most basic needs? These zombie women walk like streetwalkers and runway models, they talk as if they are in a poor film noir movie and not do they act like real zombies. Sure the eating and killing is there, but where is the mindlessness and the horrible disfigurement? Although it is a very interesting concept and perhaps a great satire on the zombie genre, it makes fun of that genre and asks the question, "why can't zombies be beautiful vixen killing machines?" I would say that this movie would be considered a really bad indie movie that was produced and made by garage junkies. I would not recommend this movie to anybody that loves zombie genres too much, it's an insult and as for scary…not even. This movie had me going. The title was perhaps the greatest idea that I heard. I thought it was an independent movie about a zombie outbreak and their quest to take over the US and a group of lone survivors, band together, and plan to take out the zombies. DEAD WRONG! It's about a psycho cop with a weakness for killing his female arrests gets what's coming to him when a pack of zombie women rise from their graves in order to get proper revenge. As you can see there is nothing about the nation nor a county involved. [[Whenever]] to begin with the severity this [[films]] [[disasters]] caused our nation.

First off, the zombie women look like Victoria Secret models with dark eyeliner and a pale face. What are zombies but mindless, debatable intelligent, cannibalistic killing machines that eat as a result of their primitive most basic needs? These zombie women walk like streetwalkers and runway models, they talk as if they are in a poor film noir movie and not do they act like real zombies. Sure the eating and killing is there, but where is the mindlessness and the horrible disfigurement? Although it is a very interesting concept and perhaps a great satire on the zombie genre, it makes fun of that genre and asks the question, "why can't zombies be beautiful vixen killing machines?" I would say that this movie would be considered a really bad indie movie that was produced and made by garage junkies. I would not recommend this movie to anybody that loves zombie genres too much, it's an insult and as for scary…not even. --------------------------------------------- Result 3150 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Rain or [[shine]] outside, you enter a movie house. It makes you happy. ([[If]] not, come right out.) [[Lights]] go off. You settle down with a bar of ice cream. Moving [[pictures]] [[begin]] to [[flicker]] on the screen. You feel content. In the [[dark]], you are back in the beginning of [[time]]. Sitting around the campfire...looking at the modern version of the flickering flames 24 times per [[second]] and sharing the [[joy]] of [[discovering]] the unknown [[turns]] and [[twists]] of the [[scenario]] with rest of your [[clan]]/[[spectators]].

Those who are not [[happy]] with themselves, should not write comments. (Long live romantic comedies...) Rain or [[glow]] outside, you enter a movie house. It makes you happy. ([[Unless]] not, come right out.) [[Lit]] go off. You settle down with a bar of ice cream. Moving [[photographed]] [[began]] to [[flinch]] on the screen. You feel content. In the [[gloom]], you are back in the beginning of [[period]]. Sitting around the campfire...looking at the modern version of the flickering flames 24 times per [[seconds]] and sharing the [[delight]] of [[detected]] the unknown [[revolves]] and [[spins]] of the [[screenplay]] with rest of your [[tribe]]/[[audiences]].

Those who are not [[cheerful]] with themselves, should not write comments. (Long live romantic comedies...) --------------------------------------------- Result 3151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This is a typical [[example]] of technically highly skilled [[directors]] of video clips/commercials [[trying]] to do their first full feature length movie. On one hand the imagery, camera, lighting, CGI and even the sound are [[highly]] polished and have a truly "[[expensive]]" look and feel. Even the actors show a certain amount of potential - unto the point where even the best acting could not hide a [[bad]] [[plot]].

In this [[case]] it is not a bad plot but hardly a plot at all.

So 50% of the dialog consists of "What the hell was that ?", "What was that ?" and "What the hell was that ?". In none of the cases any of the characters nor the audience is provided with the slightest hint of an answer though. In most of the other dialogues one gets the feeling that there never was any form of dialogue book and the actors had to freely improvise to a plot that wasn't ever explained to them.

The only reason why Skye Bennet's performance could be so good is that her character as an autistic girl didn't allow giving her these tragically horrible dialogue lines the other actors had to deal with. That way she was able to just show her acting talent which the rest of the cast couldn't even get close to. I mean there's not one actor in the world that could make up for a dialogue like this:

Ben: Is this real, huh ? Emily: Stop it. Ben: A mass psychosis, huh ? Jon: Somebody has to take control of this situation. Ben: This situation can't be controlled. Not by you, not by anybody. Emily: Not by you either. Ben: No

Got me goosebumps. But not for horror, more for the horrible attempt. In some moments I felt ashamed for the actors to have added this to their vita.

2 stars for the excellent technical work. This is a typical [[examples]] of technically highly skilled [[administrators]] of video clips/commercials [[strive]] to do their first full feature length movie. On one hand the imagery, camera, lighting, CGI and even the sound are [[tremendously]] polished and have a truly "[[pricey]]" look and feel. Even the actors show a certain amount of potential - unto the point where even the best acting could not hide a [[negative]] [[intrigue]].

In this [[instances]] it is not a bad plot but hardly a plot at all.

So 50% of the dialog consists of "What the hell was that ?", "What was that ?" and "What the hell was that ?". In none of the cases any of the characters nor the audience is provided with the slightest hint of an answer though. In most of the other dialogues one gets the feeling that there never was any form of dialogue book and the actors had to freely improvise to a plot that wasn't ever explained to them.

The only reason why Skye Bennet's performance could be so good is that her character as an autistic girl didn't allow giving her these tragically horrible dialogue lines the other actors had to deal with. That way she was able to just show her acting talent which the rest of the cast couldn't even get close to. I mean there's not one actor in the world that could make up for a dialogue like this:

Ben: Is this real, huh ? Emily: Stop it. Ben: A mass psychosis, huh ? Jon: Somebody has to take control of this situation. Ben: This situation can't be controlled. Not by you, not by anybody. Emily: Not by you either. Ben: No

Got me goosebumps. But not for horror, more for the horrible attempt. In some moments I felt ashamed for the actors to have added this to their vita.

2 stars for the excellent technical work. --------------------------------------------- Result 3152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I have [[seen]] this [[movie]]. This [[movie]] is the [[best]] according today's need. Dowry in marriages is the major [[problem]] nowadays. [[In]] stating this [[problem]] this [[movie]] is the [[best]]. [[In]] this movie, the Indian [[values]] are stated very well. Today's youth must understand this problem. There is less [[population]] of girls. And due to this problem of dowry , the girls committed [[suicide]]. If this problem continues, then the day when there is no girl child, is not far away.So, keep in mind this statement ,today's youth [[must]] understand that we can not take dowry in [[marriages]].We have to [[learn]] from this [[movie]] that the dowry should not be taken.And if we understand this problem then we can see the new [[trend]] in the society. This is the major change in the society. I have [[saw]] this [[kino]]. This [[cinematographic]] is the [[optimum]] according today's need. Dowry in marriages is the major [[issues]] nowadays. [[For]] stating this [[trouble]] this [[cinematographic]] is the [[nicest]]. [[For]] this movie, the Indian [[value]] are stated very well. Today's youth must understand this problem. There is less [[demographics]] of girls. And due to this problem of dowry , the girls committed [[suicidal]]. If this problem continues, then the day when there is no girl child, is not far away.So, keep in mind this statement ,today's youth [[ought]] understand that we can not take dowry in [[weddings]].We have to [[learns]] from this [[kino]] that the dowry should not be taken.And if we understand this problem then we can see the new [[tend]] in the society. This is the major change in the society. --------------------------------------------- Result 3153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (67%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] OK, first a correction to the tag posted on this movie's main page. Abe Lincoln did not walk with his sister in the movie, nor did he stop at his sister's grave. The individual in question is Ann Rutledge who was a very close friend to Lincoln in his New Salem days. Some [[say]] that Ann was, in fact, Lincoln's girlfriend, but there is no [[evidence]] to support it.

Now, there are fabrications and fictionalizations in this film. Hollywood has always taken dramatic license with anything under the sun, and "Young Mr. Lincoln" is no exception. However, the courtroom case that is in the film is based on a real event: the accusation of murder against William "Duff" Armstrong, and even though it's largely fictionalized in this film with lots of name changes, it will still have viewers riveted to the screen. This is Hollywood's Golden Age, with drama at it's finest, and Henry Fonda gives possibly the best Lincoln played by anyone. OK, first a correction to the tag posted on this movie's main page. Abe Lincoln did not walk with his sister in the movie, nor did he stop at his sister's grave. The individual in question is Ann Rutledge who was a very close friend to Lincoln in his New Salem days. Some [[tell]] that Ann was, in fact, Lincoln's girlfriend, but there is no [[testimony]] to support it.

Now, there are fabrications and fictionalizations in this film. Hollywood has always taken dramatic license with anything under the sun, and "Young Mr. Lincoln" is no exception. However, the courtroom case that is in the film is based on a real event: the accusation of murder against William "Duff" Armstrong, and even though it's largely fictionalized in this film with lots of name changes, it will still have viewers riveted to the screen. This is Hollywood's Golden Age, with drama at it's finest, and Henry Fonda gives possibly the best Lincoln played by anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3154 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I must give How She Move a near-perfect [[rating]] because the content is [[truly]] [[great]]. As a previous reviewer commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, [[believable]] acting, and [[amazing]] dance routines.

From start to finish the underlying story (this is not just about winning a [[competition]]) is very easy to [[delve]] into, and [[surprisingly]] realistic. None of the main characters in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the end of the film, it's very easy to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, even if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits roll.)

I definitely recommend this film to dance-lovers and, even more so, to those who can appreciate a poignant and well-acted storyline. How She Move isn't perfect of course (what film is?), but it's definitely a cut above movies that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very [[realistic]] ride that is equally enthralling thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers! I must give How She Move a near-perfect [[punctuation]] because the content is [[really]] [[whopping]]. As a previous reviewer commented, I have no idea how this film has found itself in IMDBs bottom 100 list! That's absolutely ridiculous! Other films--particular those that share the dance theme--can't hold a candle to this one in terms of its combination of top-notch, [[credible]] acting, and [[unbelievable]] dance routines.

From start to finish the underlying story (this is not just about winning a [[competing]]) is very easy to [[dives]] into, and [[unimaginably]] realistic. None of the main characters in this are 2-dimensional by any means and, by the end of the film, it's very easy to feel emotionally invested in them. (And, even if you're not the crying type, you might get a little weepy-eyed before the credits roll.)

I definitely recommend this film to dance-lovers and, even more so, to those who can appreciate a poignant and well-acted storyline. How She Move isn't perfect of course (what film is?), but it's definitely a cut above movies that use pretty faces to hide a half-baked plot and/or characters who lack substance. The actors and settings in this film make for a very [[hardheaded]] ride that is equally enthralling thanks to the amazing talent of the dancers! --------------------------------------------- Result 3155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is the [[best]] mob film ever made. It deserved more then what it [[got]] at the Oscars. [[Nominated]] for things like its [[score]], art [[direction]], [[supporting]] role (Newman), this [[film]] [[could]] have [[easily]] been nominated for Best [[Picture]], Director ([[Mendes]]), [[Actor]] (Hanks), [[Supporting]] Actor (Newman and [[Law]]) and won!! Hanks [[gives]] one of his best performances, and the [[kid]] who [[played]] [[Michel]] Jr. was so [[good]] that I'm [[surprised]] i don't [[see]] him in more [[movies]] today. [[Critics]] themselves didn't [[give]] this [[film]] [[enough]] credit. But besides the [[incredible]] performances, another [[real]] [[star]] of this [[film]] is the [[incredible]] music. This was by far the [[best]] score of the year. It was [[nominated]] but didn't win. This is a [[great]] [[film]] that should be [[seen]] by [[everyone]]. My Grade-A+ This is the [[optimum]] mob film ever made. It deserved more then what it [[ai]] at the Oscars. [[Designated]] for things like its [[notation]], art [[directorate]], [[helps]] role (Newman), this [[cinematic]] [[would]] have [[effortless]] been nominated for Best [[Photographic]], Director ([[Mendez]]), [[Actress]] (Hanks), [[Supports]] Actor (Newman and [[Laws]]) and won!! Hanks [[furnishes]] one of his best performances, and the [[infantile]] who [[accomplished]] [[Mitchell]] Jr. was so [[alright]] that I'm [[horrified]] i don't [[behold]] him in more [[cinematography]] today. [[Criticisms]] themselves didn't [[lend]] this [[cinema]] [[adequate]] credit. But besides the [[unimaginable]] performances, another [[actual]] [[superstar]] of this [[kino]] is the [[unimaginable]] music. This was by far the [[optimum]] score of the year. It was [[appointing]] but didn't win. This is a [[large]] [[kino]] that should be [[watched]] by [[someone]]. My Grade-A+ --------------------------------------------- Result 3156 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Lily Powers works at a speakeasy until her father dies.She then goes to New [[York]] to work at an office building.There she [[notices]] that if she wants to get any higher she has to give the [[men]] what they want.And what men want is her...well, you know.Alfred E.Green's Baby Face (1933) is a [[movie]] of [[high]] sexual content.[[For]] a movie of that era, anyway.This was one of the [[last]] Pre-Code films that were made.Barbara Stanwyck [[gives]] a very sexy performance as [[Lily]].Other [[actors]] of this [[film]] [[include]] [[George]] [[Brent]] (Courtland Trenholm), Donald [[Cook]] (Ned [[Stevens]]), [[Alphonse]] Ethier ([[Adolf]] Cragg), [[Henry]] Kolker (J.P.Carter), Margaret [[Lindsay]] (Ann Carter) and [[Theresa]] Harris (Chico).The young [[John]] Wayne is [[seen]] as [[Jimmy]] McCoy Jr.This [[movie]] deals with a [[brave]] topic and it does it good.[[Baby]] [[Face]] is historically [[significant]] [[movie]] and [[therefore]] good to watch. Lily Powers works at a speakeasy until her father dies.She then goes to New [[Yorke]] to work at an office building.There she [[avis]] that if she wants to get any higher she has to give the [[man]] what they want.And what men want is her...well, you know.Alfred E.Green's Baby Face (1933) is a [[movies]] of [[higher]] sexual content.[[Per]] a movie of that era, anyway.This was one of the [[latter]] Pre-Code films that were made.Barbara Stanwyck [[donne]] a very sexy performance as [[Nari]].Other [[actresses]] of this [[films]] [[containing]] [[Georgie]] [[Burnett]] (Courtland Trenholm), Donald [[Cookery]] (Ned [[Roberts]]), [[Alphonso]] Ethier ([[Rudolph]] Cragg), [[Henryk]] Kolker (J.P.Carter), Margaret [[Lindsey]] (Ann Carter) and [[Tereza]] Harris (Chico).The young [[Jon]] Wayne is [[noticed]] as [[Jimi]] McCoy Jr.This [[kino]] deals with a [[heroic]] topic and it does it good.[[Babe]] [[Confronting]] is historically [[sizable]] [[films]] and [[hence]] good to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3157 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This film is like a 1950-version of Ettore Scola's Brutti sporchi e cattivi. Less sex and less realism, but a tale with great humanism and warmth. I wouldn't call this a neo-realistic picture. It's very sentimental and more like a fairy tale, and should probably be classed as a comedy, although it deals with serious matters (a little like Chaplin or 1930-comedy). Typical Italian though, very emotional, and [[hard]] to resist except for a stone cold person. The sentimentalism is a letdown, although this picture was not meant to be a realistic drama. It's not a masterpiece like Umberto D or The Bicycle Thief. But it is a lovable and hilarious comedy, with good music.

7/10 This film is like a 1950-version of Ettore Scola's Brutti sporchi e cattivi. Less sex and less realism, but a tale with great humanism and warmth. I wouldn't call this a neo-realistic picture. It's very sentimental and more like a fairy tale, and should probably be classed as a comedy, although it deals with serious matters (a little like Chaplin or 1930-comedy). Typical Italian though, very emotional, and [[laborious]] to resist except for a stone cold person. The sentimentalism is a letdown, although this picture was not meant to be a realistic drama. It's not a masterpiece like Umberto D or The Bicycle Thief. But it is a lovable and hilarious comedy, with good music.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3158 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This movie is just [[great]]. It's [[entertaining]] from [[beginning]] to the [[end]], you're [[always]] gonna be at the edge of your seat throughout the entire movie. In my [[opinion]] this movie is [[highly]] underrated by the [[critics]].

Sly suits [[perfectly]] into the role of the well trained mountain-rescue guy Gabe Walker. [[Together]] with him Michael Rooker makes a great [[appearance]] as Hal Tucker. And then, [[John]] Lithgow, one of the [[best]] performances I've [[seen]] of him as a villain.

And the [[fact]] that 75% of the [[movie]] takes place at a mountain with a whole [[lot]] of [[bad]] [[guys]] on it makes [[way]] for a [[lot]] of [[action]]!

[[Brilliant]] [[movie]]! This movie is just [[formidable]]. It's [[amusing]] from [[launching]] to the [[termination]], you're [[permanently]] gonna be at the edge of your seat throughout the entire movie. In my [[view]] this movie is [[unimaginably]] underrated by the [[criticisms]].

Sly suits [[abundantly]] into the role of the well trained mountain-rescue guy Gabe Walker. [[Totality]] with him Michael Rooker makes a great [[apparition]] as Hal Tucker. And then, [[Jon]] Lithgow, one of the [[optimum]] performances I've [[noticed]] of him as a villain.

And the [[facto]] that 75% of the [[flick]] takes place at a mountain with a whole [[batches]] of [[unfavorable]] [[dudes]] on it makes [[pathways]] for a [[batches]] of [[measures]]!

[[Admirable]] [[filmmaking]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3159 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] To me this just [[comes]] off as a soap [[opera]]. I [[guess]] any [[depiction]] of profligate people can be considered "social commentary." But in the [[final]] analysis, I [[simply]] don't [[care]] how you characterize this film. [[None]] of the characters are very likable or [[engaging]]. I felt no [[chemistry]] between Hudson and Bacall. If there is a love [[story]] here, it is [[lost]] in the malaise. And despite the twist [[ending]] [[provided]] by a complete and immediate (and therefore, [[incomprehensible]]) reversal by Dorothy [[Maguire]] on the witness stand, the story is [[insufficient]] to [[hold]] my interest. [[No]] matter how much Freudian symbolism and psychology are throw in, this story is sleazy, melodramatic and trite.

Rock Hudson is nobly wooden. This is Lauren Bacall's [[least]] engaging role and one of her poorest performances. Dorothy Maguire and Robert Stack deliver more inspired performances, but her character is vile, and his is [[pathetic]]. Robert Keith, as the loving, out-of-touch father of two miscreant adult children, is the most sympathetic character. Most interesting of all, however, is the severe-looking Robert Wilke in a small role as the bar owner. He is best remembered as a nasty henchman in countless Westerns, but here he is an honest, likable fellow.

I [[take]] my social commentary with an interesting, engaging story and a few likable characters, thank you. To me this just [[occurs]] off as a soap [[oprah]]. I [[imagine]] any [[portrait]] of profligate people can be considered "social commentary." But in the [[latter]] analysis, I [[merely]] don't [[healthcare]] how you characterize this film. [[Nothingness]] of the characters are very likable or [[engage]]. I felt no [[chemical]] between Hudson and Bacall. If there is a love [[conte]] here, it is [[forfeited]] in the malaise. And despite the twist [[ceasing]] [[gave]] by a complete and immediate (and therefore, [[unexplained]]) reversal by Dorothy [[Mcguire]] on the witness stand, the story is [[deficient]] to [[held]] my interest. [[Not]] matter how much Freudian symbolism and psychology are throw in, this story is sleazy, melodramatic and trite.

Rock Hudson is nobly wooden. This is Lauren Bacall's [[fewer]] engaging role and one of her poorest performances. Dorothy Maguire and Robert Stack deliver more inspired performances, but her character is vile, and his is [[unlucky]]. Robert Keith, as the loving, out-of-touch father of two miscreant adult children, is the most sympathetic character. Most interesting of all, however, is the severe-looking Robert Wilke in a small role as the bar owner. He is best remembered as a nasty henchman in countless Westerns, but here he is an honest, likable fellow.

I [[taking]] my social commentary with an interesting, engaging story and a few likable characters, thank you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3160 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] What was this [[supposed]] to be? A [[remake]] of [[Fisher]] King? Why do we care about Sandler's [[character]]? What a [[slow]], [[dreary]], [[boring]], who-gives-a-damn-about-these-people movie!!! [[Just]] [[simply]] painful to [[sit]] through, I [[turned]] it off before it was over. It's so [[obvious]] that Cheadle needs [[help]] as much as Sandler; like I [[said]]: can you [[say]] "[[Fisher]] King"? And how does this [[psychotic]] character [[function]] in his daily [[life]]? We aren't [[supposed]] to [[think]] that deeply, I [[guess]]. Why does Cheadle [[continue]] to give Sandler a [[chance]] to turn [[violent]] on him? [[If]] they were such [[good]] friends, how did they [[grow]] apart? If Cheadle is so in [[control]], why does he [[keep]] [[seeking]] the [[advice]] of the [[shrink]] on the [[street]]? We are never told. That's why [[Fisher]] King was a [[better]] film on so [[many]] [[levels]] and why this just sucks. [[Nearly]] 8 out of 10 average score? I don't agree. [[At]] all. Even the top films are lucky to [[get]] such a [[high]] [[average]] [[rating]], and this [[crap]] doesn't [[deserve]] to be in the same [[universe]] with them. What was this [[suspected]] to be? A [[redo]] of [[Fischer]] King? Why do we care about Sandler's [[nature]]? What a [[slower]], [[depressing]], [[bore]], who-gives-a-damn-about-these-people movie!!! [[Jen]] [[solely]] painful to [[assis]] through, I [[transformed]] it off before it was over. It's so [[palpable]] that Cheadle needs [[aid]] as much as Sandler; like I [[stated]]: can you [[tell]] "[[Harvester]] King"? And how does this [[psycho]] character [[operandi]] in his daily [[vida]]? We aren't [[suspected]] to [[reckon]] that deeply, I [[guessing]]. Why does Cheadle [[continues]] to give Sandler a [[luck]] to turn [[ferocious]] on him? [[Though]] they were such [[buena]] friends, how did they [[heightened]] apart? If Cheadle is so in [[surveillance]], why does he [[conserving]] [[seeks]] the [[counsel]] of the [[psychiatrist]] on the [[rue]]? We are never told. That's why [[Fishermen]] King was a [[improved]] film on so [[innumerable]] [[echelons]] and why this just sucks. [[Around]] 8 out of 10 average score? I don't agree. [[During]] all. Even the top films are lucky to [[gets]] such a [[supremo]] [[averaging]] [[assessments]], and this [[goddamnit]] doesn't [[deserved]] to be in the same [[mundos]] with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] As a kid I did think the weapon the murderer wielded was cool, however I was a kid and so I was a bit dumb. Even as a dumb kid though the movies plot was stupid and a bit boring when the killer was not using his light knife to kill people. What amazes me is that the movie has a really solid [[cast]] in it. What script did they read when agreeing to be in this movie as it is most [[assuredly]] boring and only a [[means]] to show off a light saber on a very small scale. The [[plot]] at times is incomprehensible and the end is totally chaotic. The whole film seems to rotate around aliens and the one weapon. The plot has two kids and some dude having an alien encounter, flash years later and there seems to be a return as it were in the mix. Dead animals and such to be explored and for some reason the one dude gets the weapon of the aliens and proceeds to use it to go on a very light killing spree. Seriously, you just have to wonder why this movie was made, if you are going to have a killer have some good death scenes, if you are going to have alien encounters show more than a weird light vortex thing, and if you are going to have light sabers then call yourself star wars. As a kid I did think the weapon the murderer wielded was cool, however I was a kid and so I was a bit dumb. Even as a dumb kid though the movies plot was stupid and a bit boring when the killer was not using his light knife to kill people. What amazes me is that the movie has a really solid [[casting]] in it. What script did they read when agreeing to be in this movie as it is most [[admittedly]] boring and only a [[modes]] to show off a light saber on a very small scale. The [[intrigue]] at times is incomprehensible and the end is totally chaotic. The whole film seems to rotate around aliens and the one weapon. The plot has two kids and some dude having an alien encounter, flash years later and there seems to be a return as it were in the mix. Dead animals and such to be explored and for some reason the one dude gets the weapon of the aliens and proceeds to use it to go on a very light killing spree. Seriously, you just have to wonder why this movie was made, if you are going to have a killer have some good death scenes, if you are going to have alien encounters show more than a weird light vortex thing, and if you are going to have light sabers then call yourself star wars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3162 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] If you think "Weird Al" Yankovic is hilarious, you won't be disappointed by THE COMPLEAT AL. Not only does this [[rare]] mockumentary [[feature]] many of Yankovic's more memorable videos ("Like A Surgeon" and "I Love Rocky Road" among them), but they are inter-spliced with funny vignettes supposedly highlighting the parodist's rise to fame. Yankovic is not for all tastes, but his [[humor]] is harmless and imaginative enough that even non-fans will at least be lightly amused. Die-hard fans will [[love]] it not only for its content, but also for its relatively early look into Yankovic's now nearly three decade career. Suitable for all ages, kiddies will no doubt love the funny visuals. If you think "Weird Al" Yankovic is hilarious, you won't be disappointed by THE COMPLEAT AL. Not only does this [[scarce]] mockumentary [[attribute]] many of Yankovic's more memorable videos ("Like A Surgeon" and "I Love Rocky Road" among them), but they are inter-spliced with funny vignettes supposedly highlighting the parodist's rise to fame. Yankovic is not for all tastes, but his [[comedy]] is harmless and imaginative enough that even non-fans will at least be lightly amused. Die-hard fans will [[adores]] it not only for its content, but also for its relatively early look into Yankovic's now nearly three decade career. Suitable for all ages, kiddies will no doubt love the funny visuals. --------------------------------------------- Result 3163 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The [[fully]] [[rounded]] [[character]] of the [[principal]] role of this [[movie]], that of the [[cop]] [[torn]] up by his [[past]] and on a [[path]] of self-destruction so [[clear]] to the viewer, is [[unique]] for its [[time]], 1950.

Along with the haunting [[music]] and the well [[written]] plot, the [[film]] is a prime [[example]] of film [[noir]] at its best. Close-ups of Dana's eyes [[reveal]] the [[anguish]] within, [[Karl]] Malden excels as his boss, who brooks no [[nonsense]] but also has compassion for those under his command in the precinct.

Otto Preminger made this [[type]] of movie just about his own. If there is any fault it would be with the breath taking [[beauty]] of Gene Tierney who seems oddly out of place with the hardened [[cop]]. Their scenes in the cafe, however, are [[wonderful]] and [[ring]] [[true]].

Tom Tully, in the bit [[part]] of her [[father]] is [[perfect]] as is [[Gary]] Merrill as the hood. [[Great]] lighting and [[mood]] [[setting]]. The [[building]] where the [[deadly]] deeds [[take]] place [[highly]] atmospheric, I [[love]] the [[old]] [[woman]] in the [[basement]].

8 out of 10. The [[entirely]] [[round]] [[trait]] of the [[primary]] role of this [[flick]], that of the [[constabulary]] [[buzzed]] up by his [[preceding]] and on a [[way]] of self-destruction so [[unmistakable]] to the viewer, is [[sole]] for its [[period]], 1950.

Along with the haunting [[musician]] and the well [[typed]] plot, the [[filmmaking]] is a prime [[case]] of film [[negro]] at its best. Close-ups of Dana's eyes [[divulge]] the [[angst]] within, [[Karla]] Malden excels as his boss, who brooks no [[senseless]] but also has compassion for those under his command in the precinct.

Otto Preminger made this [[kind]] of movie just about his own. If there is any fault it would be with the breath taking [[beaut]] of Gene Tierney who seems oddly out of place with the hardened [[constabulary]]. Their scenes in the cafe, however, are [[awesome]] and [[ringing]] [[veritable]].

Tom Tully, in the bit [[parte]] of her [[fathers]] is [[irreproachable]] as is [[Garry]] Merrill as the hood. [[Huge]] lighting and [[ambiance]] [[configured]]. The [[construction]] where the [[murderous]] deeds [[taking]] place [[unimaginably]] atmospheric, I [[likes]] the [[elderly]] [[wife]] in the [[cava]].

8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3164 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Good story. Good script. Good casting. Good acting. Good directing. Good art direction. Good photography. Good sound. Good editing. Good everything. Put it all together and you end up with good entertainment.

The shame of it is that there aren't nearly enough films of this caliber being made these days. We may count ourselves lucky that writers/directors like John [[Hughes]] are occasionally able to make their creative voices heard.

Whenever I notice that I'm [[watching]] a [[film]] for the third or fourth time and still find it [[thoroughly]] [[satisfying]] I have to conclude that something about that film is right. Good story. Good script. Good casting. Good acting. Good directing. Good art direction. Good photography. Good sound. Good editing. Good everything. Put it all together and you end up with good entertainment.

The shame of it is that there aren't nearly enough films of this caliber being made these days. We may count ourselves lucky that writers/directors like John [[Hugues]] are occasionally able to make their creative voices heard.

Whenever I notice that I'm [[staring]] a [[filmmaking]] for the third or fourth time and still find it [[scrupulously]] [[pleasing]] I have to conclude that something about that film is right. --------------------------------------------- Result 3165 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] "Smokey And The Bandit" wasn't exactly Shakespeare, but then nobody wanted it to be. It was lowdown slapstick, but it did have brains. It had a very [[smart]] script with definable characters and a fun wrap-up. People came out of the theater smiling. "Hooper" provides [[none]] of this. There is no reason to [[smile]]. If it's supposed to be a [[tribute]] to the Hollywood Stuntman, it makes them look awfully lazy by providing nothing but badly-choreographed fight scenes and one of the most unconvincing car-jumps I've ever seen. It all looks phony, badly-filmed almost on purpose. Poor Sally Field (as the girlfriend who wrings her hands on the sidelines) is given her weakest role, with not a single funny or smart line ("If you do that jump, I won't be here when you get back"). Burt Reynolds keeps looking at the camera and winking, but the joke is on any audience who sits through "Hooper". * from **** "Smokey And The Bandit" wasn't exactly Shakespeare, but then nobody wanted it to be. It was lowdown slapstick, but it did have brains. It had a very [[shrewd]] script with definable characters and a fun wrap-up. People came out of the theater smiling. "Hooper" provides [[nil]] of this. There is no reason to [[kidd]]. If it's supposed to be a [[commendation]] to the Hollywood Stuntman, it makes them look awfully lazy by providing nothing but badly-choreographed fight scenes and one of the most unconvincing car-jumps I've ever seen. It all looks phony, badly-filmed almost on purpose. Poor Sally Field (as the girlfriend who wrings her hands on the sidelines) is given her weakest role, with not a single funny or smart line ("If you do that jump, I won't be here when you get back"). Burt Reynolds keeps looking at the camera and winking, but the joke is on any audience who sits through "Hooper". * from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I've read comments that you shouldn't watch this film if you're looking for stirring Shakespearian dialogue. This is true, unfortunately, because all the stirring dialogue, this wonderful play contains, has been cut, and replaced with songs. I've read this [[play]], and recently was lucky enough to see it performed, at it remains one of my favourite Shakespearian Comedies, but this movie [[seems]] to take all that I like about it away. The Princess, though no doubt doing what she was directed to do, had no regal bearing, and all the girls seemed to [[lose]] the cleverness of their characters - also affected by unwise cuts, which not only took away the female characters already sparse dialogue, but took comments out of context - it was a little unnerving to hear the Princess proclaim; "We are wise girls to mock our lovers so!", when mocking had not taken place at all. The news reels throughout the film also disrupted the flow, and took away many excellent scenes, as they showed the information in the scenes after them, and were in modern phrasing. In conclusion, an excellent play, ruined by an odd concept, and unwise cuts. Kenneth, I usually love what you do. What were you thinking? I've read comments that you shouldn't watch this film if you're looking for stirring Shakespearian dialogue. This is true, unfortunately, because all the stirring dialogue, this wonderful play contains, has been cut, and replaced with songs. I've read this [[gaming]], and recently was lucky enough to see it performed, at it remains one of my favourite Shakespearian Comedies, but this movie [[seem]] to take all that I like about it away. The Princess, though no doubt doing what she was directed to do, had no regal bearing, and all the girls seemed to [[wasting]] the cleverness of their characters - also affected by unwise cuts, which not only took away the female characters already sparse dialogue, but took comments out of context - it was a little unnerving to hear the Princess proclaim; "We are wise girls to mock our lovers so!", when mocking had not taken place at all. The news reels throughout the film also disrupted the flow, and took away many excellent scenes, as they showed the information in the scenes after them, and were in modern phrasing. In conclusion, an excellent play, ruined by an odd concept, and unwise cuts. Kenneth, I usually love what you do. What were you thinking? --------------------------------------------- Result 3167 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Like]] The Jeffersons, Good Times was one of the those [[classic]] American sitcoms which was never aired in the UK, not to mention it came out in the 1970s- a decade where of which I wasn't born [[yet]].

But like most fans of the show, I watched a few episodes on You Tube- and afterwards, I [[loved]] it.

The Evans family are headed by [[James]] and Florida- two parents trying to make ends meet, and who despite their lack of qualifications, encourage their children, who have their own aspirations in life to fulfil them and to take their chances. James was the strict but loving dad, who didn't dare hesitate in disciplining J.J, Michael and Thelma- should they over-step the line. Whilst Florida, in contrast was a fair, kind- hearted and considerate mother and loving wife, although she was in many ways similar to James, with regards to their attitudes to parenthood and family values from an Afro- American perspective.

The kids were just as lively and entertaining as the parents themselves: J.J was an aspiring artist with a goofy personality and crazy sense of humour, who would often wear multi-coloured outfits, and whose 'DY-NO-MITE' catchphrase is as infectious and familiar as Arnold Jackson's 'Whatchoo talking' 'bout Willis?' from Diff'rent Strokes. Michael was the smart-alec, who dreams of becoming a lawyer, whilst sister Thelma had her own dreams and hopes. Her verbal taunts with J.J were mostly hilarious, as was the love/hate relationship between brother and sister, which was played out extremely well by both Mike Evans and Bernadette Stanis.

Over the seasons, there were a few cameo appearances made, most notably from Janet Jackson, Debbie Allen and a young Gary Coleman as himself! I actually prefer Good Times over say, The Cosby Show, which was an 80s show because a) I preferred the Evans family over the Huxtables, both in terms of a) characterisation and b)as I felt it tackled serious and difficult social issues, in a way that resonated with many viewers. It was a comedy but it was also a social commentary which aimed to highlight the lives of working class, Afro- Americans in 1970s America. The Cosby Show attempted to cater to the mainstream audience in a 'candy coated' way, as the Huxtables were portrayed as Blacks who easily assimilated themselves into an upper-class U.S culture we would associate Whites with, whereas Good Times in contrast was much more 'edgier' and it was not afraid to address themes such as drug and child abuse in a realistic way. I actually found that whilst The Cosby Show can be fun to watch at times, it lacked that bit of 'sassiness' which Good Times has and of which made it trendier and cooler.

The show did jump the shark during the latter seasons, as it continued after John Amos's character, James died in a freak accident (in reality, it was known at the time that John had quit Good Times for good. And so, his character's death was written as it is on the show). Without John, the show suffered and alas, it lost a lot of its charm.

Still, for a sitcom, Good Times ticked all the right boxes. If only they had shown this in the UK during the 80s. As it certainly is, as JJ would put it, 'DY-NO-MITE!!'

My rating: 8 and a half [[Fond]] The Jeffersons, Good Times was one of the those [[conventional]] American sitcoms which was never aired in the UK, not to mention it came out in the 1970s- a decade where of which I wasn't born [[even]].

But like most fans of the show, I watched a few episodes on You Tube- and afterwards, I [[worshipped]] it.

The Evans family are headed by [[Jacobo]] and Florida- two parents trying to make ends meet, and who despite their lack of qualifications, encourage their children, who have their own aspirations in life to fulfil them and to take their chances. James was the strict but loving dad, who didn't dare hesitate in disciplining J.J, Michael and Thelma- should they over-step the line. Whilst Florida, in contrast was a fair, kind- hearted and considerate mother and loving wife, although she was in many ways similar to James, with regards to their attitudes to parenthood and family values from an Afro- American perspective.

The kids were just as lively and entertaining as the parents themselves: J.J was an aspiring artist with a goofy personality and crazy sense of humour, who would often wear multi-coloured outfits, and whose 'DY-NO-MITE' catchphrase is as infectious and familiar as Arnold Jackson's 'Whatchoo talking' 'bout Willis?' from Diff'rent Strokes. Michael was the smart-alec, who dreams of becoming a lawyer, whilst sister Thelma had her own dreams and hopes. Her verbal taunts with J.J were mostly hilarious, as was the love/hate relationship between brother and sister, which was played out extremely well by both Mike Evans and Bernadette Stanis.

Over the seasons, there were a few cameo appearances made, most notably from Janet Jackson, Debbie Allen and a young Gary Coleman as himself! I actually prefer Good Times over say, The Cosby Show, which was an 80s show because a) I preferred the Evans family over the Huxtables, both in terms of a) characterisation and b)as I felt it tackled serious and difficult social issues, in a way that resonated with many viewers. It was a comedy but it was also a social commentary which aimed to highlight the lives of working class, Afro- Americans in 1970s America. The Cosby Show attempted to cater to the mainstream audience in a 'candy coated' way, as the Huxtables were portrayed as Blacks who easily assimilated themselves into an upper-class U.S culture we would associate Whites with, whereas Good Times in contrast was much more 'edgier' and it was not afraid to address themes such as drug and child abuse in a realistic way. I actually found that whilst The Cosby Show can be fun to watch at times, it lacked that bit of 'sassiness' which Good Times has and of which made it trendier and cooler.

The show did jump the shark during the latter seasons, as it continued after John Amos's character, James died in a freak accident (in reality, it was known at the time that John had quit Good Times for good. And so, his character's death was written as it is on the show). Without John, the show suffered and alas, it lost a lot of its charm.

Still, for a sitcom, Good Times ticked all the right boxes. If only they had shown this in the UK during the 80s. As it certainly is, as JJ would put it, 'DY-NO-MITE!!'

My rating: 8 and a half --------------------------------------------- Result 3168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Reese Witherspooon's first movie. [[Loved]] it. The [[plot]] and the acting was [[top]] notch. You are emotionally involved with the [[characters]]. [[In]] my [[opinion]], a [[must]] [[see]].

After [[watching]] this movie you will [[see]] why Reese Witherspoon's acting career has been so successful.

The other cast members do a great job [[also]].

The [[movie]] [[flows]] extremely well. There is not a [[boring]] [[moment]] in the [[whole]] [[picture]]. The [[Man]] in the Moon's [[length]] is just right.

As I [[said]] [[earlier]], I [[think]] this movie was [[excellent]]. I have [[seen]] it [[numerous]] [[times]], and have [[enjoyed]] [[every]] one of the viewings. Reese Witherspooon's first movie. [[Worshiped]] it. The [[intrigue]] and the acting was [[supreme]] notch. You are emotionally involved with the [[features]]. [[Among]] my [[view]], a [[ought]] [[consults]].

After [[staring]] this movie you will [[consults]] why Reese Witherspoon's acting career has been so successful.

The other cast members do a great job [[additionally]].

The [[filmmaking]] [[streams]] extremely well. There is not a [[tiresome]] [[time]] in the [[overall]] [[photography]]. The [[Dawg]] in the Moon's [[duration]] is just right.

As I [[stated]] [[formerly]], I [[reckon]] this movie was [[glamorous]]. I have [[watched]] it [[multiple]] [[dates]], and have [[appreciated]] [[any]] one of the viewings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3169 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I [[saw]] this [[movie]], I was [[amazed]] that it was only a [[TV]] [[movie]]. I [[think]] this [[movie]] should have been in [[theaters]]. I have seen many movies that are about rape, but this one stands out. This movie has a [[kind]] of [[realism]] that is very [[rarely]] found in [[movies]] [[today]], let alone TV [[movies]]. It tells a [[story]] that I'm sure is very realistic to many rape victims in small towns today, and I [[found]] it to be very believable(which is something [[hard]] to find in other rape centered [[movies]]). I also thought that Tiffani Theissen and Brian Austin [[Green]] were awesome in the parts that they played. I definitely recommend this [[movie]] to anyone who enjoys movies that have a bit of a harsh reality to them. I [[enjoyed]] it very much. When I [[sawthe]] this [[filmmaking]], I was [[appalled]] that it was only a [[TVS]] [[cinematography]]. I [[thoughts]] this [[kino]] should have been in [[theater]]. I have seen many movies that are about rape, but this one stands out. This movie has a [[genre]] of [[reality]] that is very [[seldom]] found in [[theater]] [[nowadays]], let alone TV [[kino]]. It tells a [[tale]] that I'm sure is very realistic to many rape victims in small towns today, and I [[detected]] it to be very believable(which is something [[laborious]] to find in other rape centered [[cinematography]]). I also thought that Tiffani Theissen and Brian Austin [[Archer]] were awesome in the parts that they played. I definitely recommend this [[cinematography]] to anyone who enjoys movies that have a bit of a harsh reality to them. I [[loved]] it very much. --------------------------------------------- Result 3170 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] I [[happened]] upon this [[movie]] as an 8-10 year old on a cold, dark November afternoon. I was outside playing all day, freezing, and when I came in around 4pm, I had a cup of hot cocoa and sat down in front of the [[TV]] with a blanket. I was [[surprised]] to be watching a [[cartoon]] that wasn't all happy and silly--and was in fact dark, and moralistic. It [[captured]] my imagination. I'm sure it [[misses]] the text, and is abbreviated in all the wrong [[places]] for the Tolkien purist. But it still [[captures]] the [[spirit]] of the story, the [[choice]] to carry a [[burden]] for the good of others, the [[consequences]] of selfish, rash [[decisions]], etc. The quality of animation leaves room for [[complaint]]. But the one place where this movie [[clearly]] rises above the [[new]] [[films]] is the voice characterizations. John Hurt is [[great]] in this. If you don't like how the [[character]] is [[drawn]], look away, and just [[listen]] to him. [[His]] voice is [[extraordinary]]. I've [[seen]] it again [[many]], [[many]] [[times]] and it [[always]] [[brings]] me back to that time, as a [[kid]], thirsty for some magical [[adventure]]. It's for this [[reason]] I say 'lucky', the [[film]] is nostalgic for me so I [[overlook]] its [[shortcomings]]. But between John Hurt, and Tolkien's fantasy, it [[still]] [[reached]] me, and [[still]] does. I [[sweated]] upon this [[flick]] as an 8-10 year old on a cold, dark November afternoon. I was outside playing all day, freezing, and when I came in around 4pm, I had a cup of hot cocoa and sat down in front of the [[TELEVISIONS]] with a blanket. I was [[flabbergasted]] to be watching a [[caricature]] that wasn't all happy and silly--and was in fact dark, and moralistic. It [[apprehended]] my imagination. I'm sure it [[lack]] the text, and is abbreviated in all the wrong [[sites]] for the Tolkien purist. But it still [[apprehended]] the [[wits]] of the story, the [[chose]] to carry a [[payload]] for the good of others, the [[effect]] of selfish, rash [[decision]], etc. The quality of animation leaves room for [[complaints]]. But the one place where this movie [[apparently]] rises above the [[novel]] [[movie]] is the voice characterizations. John Hurt is [[huge]] in this. If you don't like how the [[nature]] is [[lured]], look away, and just [[hear]] to him. [[Her]] voice is [[gorgeous]]. I've [[noticed]] it again [[several]], [[multiple]] [[dates]] and it [[constantly]] [[poses]] me back to that time, as a [[kids]], thirsty for some magical [[fling]]. It's for this [[cause]] I say 'lucky', the [[movie]] is nostalgic for me so I [[neglect]] its [[failings]]. But between John Hurt, and Tolkien's fantasy, it [[again]] [[attained]] me, and [[however]] does. --------------------------------------------- Result 3171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] I am sorry to fans of this film but it is the [[worst]] thing i have ever seen. Slow,badly cast and badly [[acted]] it is a film [[trying]] to escape the deadbeat romcoms of the recent years and failing! McDonald and Parker seem unable to convey real emotion and are lifeless. They seem to be in this one for any pay checks they are getting for it and not because they thought it was a good idea. The plot is DULL!! i love [[great]] [[chick]] [[films]] as [[much]] as the next girl and this is not one!! [[If]] you [[avoid]] one film this year....[[let]] it be I am sorry to fans of this film but it is the [[hardest]] thing i have ever seen. Slow,badly cast and badly [[reacted]] it is a film [[tempting]] to escape the deadbeat romcoms of the recent years and failing! McDonald and Parker seem unable to convey real emotion and are lifeless. They seem to be in this one for any pay checks they are getting for it and not because they thought it was a good idea. The plot is DULL!! i love [[wondrous]] [[hen]] [[cinematic]] as [[very]] as the next girl and this is not one!! [[Though]] you [[avoided]] one film this year....[[allowing]] it be --------------------------------------------- Result 3172 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This warning against anti-semitism is well-meant and may have had its purpose at the time, but it is made without the [[slightest]] notion of how to make a film. The [[director]] has no idea about mise-en-scene; the cast varies from bad till [[even]] [[worse]].

The great Austrian comic Hans Moser is wasted. In his part he ends in an asylum for the crazy, that is designed as a set from Das Kabinett des Dr. Caligari; one wonders whether the makers had all their mental capabilities.

The restored copy I saw (Dutch Filmmuseum) gives the impression that some scenes were not put into the right place, but may be the original editing was bad as well. This warning against anti-semitism is well-meant and may have had its purpose at the time, but it is made without the [[faintest]] notion of how to make a film. The [[superintendent]] has no idea about mise-en-scene; the cast varies from bad till [[yet]] [[worst]].

The great Austrian comic Hans Moser is wasted. In his part he ends in an asylum for the crazy, that is designed as a set from Das Kabinett des Dr. Caligari; one wonders whether the makers had all their mental capabilities.

The restored copy I saw (Dutch Filmmuseum) gives the impression that some scenes were not put into the right place, but may be the original editing was bad as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] What ever happened to one of the most innovative and brilliant storytellers of our time? Well, he made the kind of [[typical]] summer action fodder that could've been directed by anybody available out of film school...and in fact, they probably would've done a better job. They would've at least have put half of a thought into the [[dreadful]] [[script]].

Mark Wahlberg plays an astronaut who traveled through some sort of wormhole and landed in a planet ruled by apes. (gasp!) Except this time around, the apes squirm through groan-worthy dialogue, nonsensical plotting, and showy special effects that constantly reinforce in my mind that this money could've been put to about 10 independent films that would have been considered 'masterpiece' next to this tripe.

As much as I enjoy the superb acting talent that is Tim Roth, his performance as evil ape leader Thade is nothing more than an intense composition of slouching and heavy breathing. Luckily for him, the makeup allows he as an actor to maintain some dignity and most of the crap-dialogue is hidden behind his groans and sniffles.

And alas, the always dependable Hollywood tradition of taking the male and female leads and hooking them up at the end without any relationship development or cause. And the "haha, we're so clever, aren't we?" way that Hollywood intermingles references from the original POTA into this one. Sigh...

Instead of seeing this, spend the night in and call up some friends and rent 'Ed Wood', 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Batman', or even to a lesser extent 'Sleepy Hollow', and reminisce about the days when Tim Burton was a man of vision and originality...not shame and ridicule. What ever happened to one of the most innovative and brilliant storytellers of our time? Well, he made the kind of [[classic]] summer action fodder that could've been directed by anybody available out of film school...and in fact, they probably would've done a better job. They would've at least have put half of a thought into the [[scary]] [[hyphen]].

Mark Wahlberg plays an astronaut who traveled through some sort of wormhole and landed in a planet ruled by apes. (gasp!) Except this time around, the apes squirm through groan-worthy dialogue, nonsensical plotting, and showy special effects that constantly reinforce in my mind that this money could've been put to about 10 independent films that would have been considered 'masterpiece' next to this tripe.

As much as I enjoy the superb acting talent that is Tim Roth, his performance as evil ape leader Thade is nothing more than an intense composition of slouching and heavy breathing. Luckily for him, the makeup allows he as an actor to maintain some dignity and most of the crap-dialogue is hidden behind his groans and sniffles.

And alas, the always dependable Hollywood tradition of taking the male and female leads and hooking them up at the end without any relationship development or cause. And the "haha, we're so clever, aren't we?" way that Hollywood intermingles references from the original POTA into this one. Sigh...

Instead of seeing this, spend the night in and call up some friends and rent 'Ed Wood', 'Edward Scissorhands', 'Batman', or even to a lesser extent 'Sleepy Hollow', and reminisce about the days when Tim Burton was a man of vision and originality...not shame and ridicule. --------------------------------------------- Result 3174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This 1939 [[film]] [[tried]] to capitalize on the much better Michael Curtiz's film "Angels with Dirty Faces". As directed by Ray Enright, the only interesting thing is how tamed these kids were in comparison with what's going on with the youth in America's inner cities [[today]].

The [[film]] is only worth seeing because of the presence of Ann Sheridan and Ronald Reagan, who showed they were well paired together. The Dead [[End]] kids have larger parts as the plot concentrates on them rather than in the older folks.

In a way it's curious how arson was used in the same way some scrupulous landlords did in later years right here in New York. It was the quickest way to turn a property around never considering the social problems it created. In today's climate with so many guns around there is a new reality. The young kids of the story seemed mere pranksters rather than criminals. How times change! This 1939 [[flick]] [[attempting]] to capitalize on the much better Michael Curtiz's film "Angels with Dirty Faces". As directed by Ray Enright, the only interesting thing is how tamed these kids were in comparison with what's going on with the youth in America's inner cities [[yesterday]].

The [[cinematography]] is only worth seeing because of the presence of Ann Sheridan and Ronald Reagan, who showed they were well paired together. The Dead [[Terminating]] kids have larger parts as the plot concentrates on them rather than in the older folks.

In a way it's curious how arson was used in the same way some scrupulous landlords did in later years right here in New York. It was the quickest way to turn a property around never considering the social problems it created. In today's climate with so many guns around there is a new reality. The young kids of the story seemed mere pranksters rather than criminals. How times change! --------------------------------------------- Result 3175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This was the [[second]] of the series of 6 "classic Tarzan" [[movies]] featuring Johnny Weismuller in the title role and Maureen O'Sullivan as Jane.

As usual, this was a [[wonderful]] [[film]] in this [[series]]; and perhaps [[stands]] out as an "in between" film in a progression that [[could]] almost exemplify the [[development]] of [[cinema]] from the early 1930s into the 1940s. As such, it [[displayed]] good [[pace]], though not as good as [[subsequent]] [[films]]. Likewise, the cinematography is less accomplished than later Tarzan [[films]] in this series. The stock I saw was of uneven quality, containing some grainy scenery and some under-exposed and over-exposed scenes. The crisp display of later Tarzan films is lacking here. On the other hand, there is one scene, very early on, in which the jerky movements of a camera with foliage swishing in front of it as the camera backs up, showing safari men forging ahead into the jungle, was really almost modern in its style, and stands in strong contrast to the stationary shots that make up the rest of the movie.

Regarding plot, one interesting feature here was Jane's near-fickleness and inconstancy, when she was being subject to Martin's flirtations. The kiss – and Jane's stunned, and partly guilty, reaction – foreshadow something of the Jane we see in the future as well in these films. Compare, for example, in Tarzan Finds a Son! Jane's duplicitous actions tricking Tarzan and delivering Boy to his family. Later she admits to Tarzan that she was wrong. Here, nothing quite so explicit, but we have Jane "returning" to the Jane Parker of yesteryear, and in an almost repentant series of actions, stripping herself of the evening gown brought by Martin and Harry to entice her away from Tarzan.

There were a whole series of depictions and sequences that especially struck me in this viewing.

For one thing, the picture we get of the domestic life of Tarzan is here, as later, a combination of sensual idyll with always the nearby possibility of violent death. This to me is very much at the core of the Tarzan experience.

I was really surprised by some quite violent scenes even by today's standards.

There were a whole series of scenes that gave me special pleasure: Tarzan leading the elephants into the Valley of the Elephants' Graveyard; Tarzan being rescued from watery death by the hippo, and then nursed to health by the apes; Cheetah going to find Tarzan when Jane and the other men are trapped at the foot of the escarpment; Cheetah in particular crossing the river on the log. The final battle scenes of savages & lions on the ground and savages & apes in the trees. Jane, showing us that she is truly of Tarzan's world now, quickly displaying her enterprising woodcraft to work up a line of fire to keep the lions away.

The final series of scenes is splendid: suddenly Tarzan is on the scene, flinging savages from the trees and taking charge of the lions, and summoning the elephants to the rescue! That final cry of Tarzan in triumph, holding a happy Jane in his arms, with a dancing and delighted Cheetah beside them, is a memorably picture and really a fine summation of the story of Tarzan and Jane.

All in all, this is another wonderful classic Tarzan movie. I would recommend this movie strongly to anyone. This was the [[seconds]] of the series of 6 "classic Tarzan" [[kino]] featuring Johnny Weismuller in the title role and Maureen O'Sullivan as Jane.

As usual, this was a [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]] in this [[serials]]; and perhaps [[standing]] out as an "in between" film in a progression that [[would]] almost exemplify the [[evolution]] of [[cine]] from the early 1930s into the 1940s. As such, it [[visualized]] good [[tempo]], though not as good as [[later]] [[kino]]. Likewise, the cinematography is less accomplished than later Tarzan [[cinema]] in this series. The stock I saw was of uneven quality, containing some grainy scenery and some under-exposed and over-exposed scenes. The crisp display of later Tarzan films is lacking here. On the other hand, there is one scene, very early on, in which the jerky movements of a camera with foliage swishing in front of it as the camera backs up, showing safari men forging ahead into the jungle, was really almost modern in its style, and stands in strong contrast to the stationary shots that make up the rest of the movie.

Regarding plot, one interesting feature here was Jane's near-fickleness and inconstancy, when she was being subject to Martin's flirtations. The kiss – and Jane's stunned, and partly guilty, reaction – foreshadow something of the Jane we see in the future as well in these films. Compare, for example, in Tarzan Finds a Son! Jane's duplicitous actions tricking Tarzan and delivering Boy to his family. Later she admits to Tarzan that she was wrong. Here, nothing quite so explicit, but we have Jane "returning" to the Jane Parker of yesteryear, and in an almost repentant series of actions, stripping herself of the evening gown brought by Martin and Harry to entice her away from Tarzan.

There were a whole series of depictions and sequences that especially struck me in this viewing.

For one thing, the picture we get of the domestic life of Tarzan is here, as later, a combination of sensual idyll with always the nearby possibility of violent death. This to me is very much at the core of the Tarzan experience.

I was really surprised by some quite violent scenes even by today's standards.

There were a whole series of scenes that gave me special pleasure: Tarzan leading the elephants into the Valley of the Elephants' Graveyard; Tarzan being rescued from watery death by the hippo, and then nursed to health by the apes; Cheetah going to find Tarzan when Jane and the other men are trapped at the foot of the escarpment; Cheetah in particular crossing the river on the log. The final battle scenes of savages & lions on the ground and savages & apes in the trees. Jane, showing us that she is truly of Tarzan's world now, quickly displaying her enterprising woodcraft to work up a line of fire to keep the lions away.

The final series of scenes is splendid: suddenly Tarzan is on the scene, flinging savages from the trees and taking charge of the lions, and summoning the elephants to the rescue! That final cry of Tarzan in triumph, holding a happy Jane in his arms, with a dancing and delighted Cheetah beside them, is a memorably picture and really a fine summation of the story of Tarzan and Jane.

All in all, this is another wonderful classic Tarzan movie. I would recommend this movie strongly to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3176 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] The [[barbarians]] [[maybe]]´s not the [[best]] [[film]] that [[anybody]] of us have [[seen]], but [[really]]????........It´s so [[funny]]......I can´t discribe how mutch I [[laughed]] when I first [[saw]] it..The [[director]] [[really]] [[wanted]] to do a serious [[adventure]] movie, but it´sso misirable [[bad]]....so bad that it´s one of the funniest [[movies]] I´ve ever seen......so my advise is that you should [[see]] it.....and if you alredy did, se it again!!!!!!! The [[pagans]] [[conceivably]]´s not the [[nicest]] [[movie]] that [[somebody]] of us have [[saw]], but [[truthfully]]????........It´s so [[fun]]......I can´t discribe how mutch I [[laughs]] when I first [[observed]] it..The [[superintendent]] [[truthfully]] [[want]] to do a serious [[adventurer]] movie, but it´sso misirable [[unhealthy]]....so bad that it´s one of the funniest [[theater]] I´ve ever seen......so my advise is that you should [[consults]] it.....and if you alredy did, se it again!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3177 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sam (Thomas Cavanagh) and Gray (Heather Graham) are devoted siblings who share an apartment and a love of many things -- ballroom dancing, 1940s movie musicals and, much to their surprise, an attractive woman named Charlie (Bridget Moynahan). Historically heterosexual, Gray is confused by her new feelings.

Gray Matters proves to be one of the blandest films I have ever seen. It's dull, predictable, unfunny, poorly acted and poorly written. Nothing about it felt real and everything was very cheesy. Also, this isn't really a romantic comedy with a special twist but more of a "coming out" movie. Sue Kramer tried to make the first half cute with the romantic stuff and the second half serious with the actual acceptance and coming out part. Unfortunately, she failed miserably. The first half was largely unfunny and only Heather Graham was able to hold it up a little. Then, the film took an awkward tone and got all serious. The serious scenes were handled poorly and all of the emotions just felt phony.

I guess I would have enjoyed the film a little more if the relationships between the characters felt more authentic. The brother and sister relationship was very weak and they didn't really appear to be that close. Their relationship just didn't feel very natural. Also, the relationship between Tom and Bridget felt very unnatural. If two people are going to get married after only knowing each other for less than a week, then you would expect to see a little more excitement but the characters talked about getting married in Vegas in the same manner of asking a waiter what the specials are. There was a lack of excitement in the film and it was hard to get involved with the movie with such unmotivated characters.

The acting was mostly weak which was a bit surprising given the decent cast. Heather Graham gave the only good performance in the movie. She was funny and had a few charming scenes but it's too bad that all of her co-stars were complete duds. Bridget Moynahan was very weak and her performance ringed false on every level. Also, it seemed like she was reading her lines. Thomas Cavanagh was pretty wooden and he showed nearly no emotion. The chemistry between Thomas and Heather was non existent and that damaged the film because their relationship felt phony. I can usually rely on Molly Shannon to be funny in a supporting role but here she was just annoying. Sissy Spacek had about two scenes and she was annoying in both of them. Finally, Alan Cumming just had an embarrassing character and his performance wasn't very good. Overall, Gray Matters is a lame film and it isn't worth watching. Rating 3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3178 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] I just finished [[viewing]] this [[finely]] conceived, and [[beautifully]] acted/directed movie. It was nip and tuck as to whether I was going to waste my time viewing a movie on the Lifetime Movie Network because of the horribly distracting commercials. Reading the earlier comments [[persuaded]] me to give it a shot. After all the [[worst]] that could happen would be that I might fall asleep during one of the boring yet lengthy bug spray ads. So why did I watch it? mainly because when IMDB gives a movie a "WEIGHTED AVERAGE" OF 5.8 WHO'S STATISTICAL AVERAGE was 7.3 It must be a sure [[hit]].

I was totally delighted to have taken the time to view this movie, commercial pox and all. Helen Hunt continues to amaze me with her ability to take on tough roles adapting her core persona to fit each role.

The portrait she painted in this film of the tough yet perceptively human police officer was beautifully executed. When the scene calls for quick witted, timely delivered verbal intercourse, she can stand toe to toe with any actor. Yet she is adept at the delivery of volumes of emotional response without uttering a word relying only on facial expression and body language. Without the commercials, which by design kill the continuity of any good film, This would have been a real edge-of-the-seat nail-biter. I gave it a 9.0 I just finished [[visualizing]] this [[subtly]] conceived, and [[staggeringly]] acted/directed movie. It was nip and tuck as to whether I was going to waste my time viewing a movie on the Lifetime Movie Network because of the horribly distracting commercials. Reading the earlier comments [[confident]] me to give it a shot. After all the [[lousiest]] that could happen would be that I might fall asleep during one of the boring yet lengthy bug spray ads. So why did I watch it? mainly because when IMDB gives a movie a "WEIGHTED AVERAGE" OF 5.8 WHO'S STATISTICAL AVERAGE was 7.3 It must be a sure [[befallen]].

I was totally delighted to have taken the time to view this movie, commercial pox and all. Helen Hunt continues to amaze me with her ability to take on tough roles adapting her core persona to fit each role.

The portrait she painted in this film of the tough yet perceptively human police officer was beautifully executed. When the scene calls for quick witted, timely delivered verbal intercourse, she can stand toe to toe with any actor. Yet she is adept at the delivery of volumes of emotional response without uttering a word relying only on facial expression and body language. Without the commercials, which by design kill the continuity of any good film, This would have been a real edge-of-the-seat nail-biter. I gave it a 9.0 --------------------------------------------- Result 3179 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Not sure if it was right or [[wrong]], but I read thru the other comments before watching the short.I have to say I disagree with most of the negative comments or problems people have had with it.

As a first time "Lone Wolf" director/producer,I like to see things that I can aspire to,not necessarily from the pro's, but by people just getting their feet wet like me.

If indeed this is also from a first-timer,as I read,I [[applaud]] the effort.[[Marvelous]] job then in that respect! There were some comments about the music.I thought it was quite nice for the piece.Some say it kind of droned along for a while, but I found that created tension without(us)necessarily being conscious of it, and when he pulled the gun out and the guitar started crunching chords,it was like we knew there was a train on the tracks, but realize it is just now moving. Yes there is a 180 degree slip/clip in there, but shi* happens.Did anyone else see Hugh's dirty shirt turn white (near the end,in the rain) in "Australia"? Look how much money and people were behind that movie! Give the kid a break for Gods sake! All in all I think it was very well done. Only 2 things I would have mentioned are hardly worth mentioning-Don't walk up to a shiny brass picture frame with the camera, and I would have just displayed the splatter at the beginning shots to a still shot, so people wouldn't necessarily know what it is.

My experience so far has taught me that it's not that it's hard to make a movie,it just takes time to learn how to do it,then the time to actually do it, and then you better take some more time still to think of all the details you'll need to have shot before you call "post-production time!" IMHO, it looks like director/writer Ryan Jafri did his homework, and if this indeed is his first report card, I'd give him an "A". The rest of you report to the principals office for a whuppin'. Not sure if it was right or [[erroneous]], but I read thru the other comments before watching the short.I have to say I disagree with most of the negative comments or problems people have had with it.

As a first time "Lone Wolf" director/producer,I like to see things that I can aspire to,not necessarily from the pro's, but by people just getting their feet wet like me.

If indeed this is also from a first-timer,as I read,I [[greet]] the effort.[[Sumptuous]] job then in that respect! There were some comments about the music.I thought it was quite nice for the piece.Some say it kind of droned along for a while, but I found that created tension without(us)necessarily being conscious of it, and when he pulled the gun out and the guitar started crunching chords,it was like we knew there was a train on the tracks, but realize it is just now moving. Yes there is a 180 degree slip/clip in there, but shi* happens.Did anyone else see Hugh's dirty shirt turn white (near the end,in the rain) in "Australia"? Look how much money and people were behind that movie! Give the kid a break for Gods sake! All in all I think it was very well done. Only 2 things I would have mentioned are hardly worth mentioning-Don't walk up to a shiny brass picture frame with the camera, and I would have just displayed the splatter at the beginning shots to a still shot, so people wouldn't necessarily know what it is.

My experience so far has taught me that it's not that it's hard to make a movie,it just takes time to learn how to do it,then the time to actually do it, and then you better take some more time still to think of all the details you'll need to have shot before you call "post-production time!" IMHO, it looks like director/writer Ryan Jafri did his homework, and if this indeed is his first report card, I'd give him an "A". The rest of you report to the principals office for a whuppin'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] The mystery here is why this [[delightful]], small comedy has been [[ignored]] by most [[critics]] and has failed to find the audience it deserves. [[Simply]] showcasing the budding talent of Audrey Tautou should be enough to generate greater recognition from the cognoscenti.

[[Lacking]] in [[pretension]] and relying on [[quirky]] characterizations, itÕs rumination on the interconnection of human behavior [[manages]] to be both [[amusing]] and life affirming and, unlike some of itsÕ more critically acclaimed competition in the [[genre]], such as The Taste of [[Others]], it actually entertains. The mystery here is why this [[resplendent]], small comedy has been [[unheeded]] by most [[detractors]] and has failed to find the audience it deserves. [[Straightforward]] showcasing the budding talent of Audrey Tautou should be enough to generate greater recognition from the cognoscenti.

[[Insufficiency]] in [[pretence]] and relying on [[lunatic]] characterizations, itÕs rumination on the interconnection of human behavior [[administers]] to be both [[droll]] and life affirming and, unlike some of itsÕ more critically acclaimed competition in the [[gender]], such as The Taste of [[Alia]], it actually entertains. --------------------------------------------- Result 3181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This was filmed back-to-back with the 1992 re-make of Conan Doyle's famous novel 'The Lost World'. And it shows.

The [[film]] starts promisingly enough, with a ruthless organization intending to exploit the lost world and Challenger et al returning to defend the prehistoric plateau, but then things go downhill. Everybody is stranded on the plateau and we're left with a [[feeble]], [[boring]], over-length rehash of the first [[film]].

The dinosaurs (who are hardly ever seen) are just [[laughable]]. Are we [[expected]] to take that cuddly toy that's [[supposed]] to be an ankylosaur seriously? And the tyrannosaur seems rooted to the spot.

Do yourself a favor and get hold of the 1925 silent version of the Lost World. Unbelievably in this age of CGI and other advanced effects, the twenties version is the best and will remain so until somebody finally decides to do a decent re-make. This was filmed back-to-back with the 1992 re-make of Conan Doyle's famous novel 'The Lost World'. And it shows.

The [[kino]] starts promisingly enough, with a ruthless organization intending to exploit the lost world and Challenger et al returning to defend the prehistoric plateau, but then things go downhill. Everybody is stranded on the plateau and we're left with a [[fragile]], [[dreary]], over-length rehash of the first [[kino]].

The dinosaurs (who are hardly ever seen) are just [[nonsense]]. Are we [[waited]] to take that cuddly toy that's [[presumed]] to be an ankylosaur seriously? And the tyrannosaur seems rooted to the spot.

Do yourself a favor and get hold of the 1925 silent version of the Lost World. Unbelievably in this age of CGI and other advanced effects, the twenties version is the best and will remain so until somebody finally decides to do a decent re-make. --------------------------------------------- Result 3182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[movie]] is just so [[awful]]. [[So]] [[bad]] that I can't bear to expend [[anything]] other than just a few [[words]]. [[Avoid]] this [[movie]] at all [[costs]], it is terrible.

[[None]] of the [[details]] of the crimes are re-enacted [[correctly]]. [[Lots]] of [[slaughterhouse]] footage. [[Weird]] cuts and edits. No [[continuity]] to the plot. The acting is [[absolutely]] the most [[amateur]] I have ever [[seen]].

This [[bomb]] of a [[movie]] was [[obviously]] [[made]] to make some [[money]] without any regard to the [[accuracy]] of it's content. The camera [[work]] is out of [[focus]] at times and always [[shaky]]. It [[looks]] as if it was shot on video.

[[In]] [[fact]], now that they've [[got]] [[Dennis]] Rader with [[life]] in [[prison]], I [[wish]] they [[would]] put the [[guys]] that made this [[horrible]] [[movie]] into [[prison]] as well.

[[Seriously]], don't [[even]] [[think]] about watching this one. I'd give it a [[negative]] [[star]] if I [[could]]. This [[cinema]] is just so [[horrible]]. [[Thus]] [[negative]] that I can't bear to expend [[somethings]] other than just a few [[phrase]]. [[Evade]] this [[films]] at all [[charges]], it is terrible.

[[Nos]] of the [[detail]] of the crimes are re-enacted [[appropriately]]. [[Lot]] of [[slaughter]] footage. [[Curious]] cuts and edits. No [[continuation]] to the plot. The acting is [[perfectly]] the most [[enthusiast]] I have ever [[watched]].

This [[blaster]] of a [[cinema]] was [[naturally]] [[accomplished]] to make some [[cash]] without any regard to the [[precision]] of it's content. The camera [[cooperate]] is out of [[centred]] at times and always [[fragile]]. It [[seem]] as if it was shot on video.

[[At]] [[facto]], now that they've [[get]] [[Denis]] Rader with [[lives]] in [[internment]], I [[desire]] they [[could]] put the [[boys]] that made this [[frightening]] [[kino]] into [[prisons]] as well.

[[Conscientiously]], don't [[yet]] [[thought]] about watching this one. I'd give it a [[pernicious]] [[stars]] if I [[wo]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3183 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] This movie is another horror anthology. It is rather [[good]], but it could have used a bit more. I compare it to "Doctor Terror's House of Horrors", though in this one the title fits. It has four stories all somewhat connected by a house. The first tale is about a writer and his wife moving in. He creates a killer for his latest novel and then he starts seeing the killer roaming around in his house. This one is sort of predictable, but it does throw a few twists in the end. The next story is a bit more unpredictable, and you really do not know where the heck it is going. This one features Peter Cushing and was probably my favorite of the bunch. This guy buys the house, but it is not the house that takes center stage, but a rather strange wax museum. The third story starts out rather good and features Christopher Lee. This one has him as a rather bizarre dad who seems awfully protective of his daughter. The problem is that once you know what is going on the story does not end soon enough. It drags a bit leading to a very predictable conclusion. Then the final tale concerns an actor buying a cloak from an odd little shop. The actor really gets what he paid for. Then there is a small story about an officer who is seen throughout trying to find out what happened to this actor and then an explanation of why these things happened. Though I was not very satisfied with the explanation as I don't think it really explained Cushing's story much at all. I think they needed a bit more back story for that one. All in all though it was an interesting set of stories. This movie is another horror anthology. It is rather [[alright]], but it could have used a bit more. I compare it to "Doctor Terror's House of Horrors", though in this one the title fits. It has four stories all somewhat connected by a house. The first tale is about a writer and his wife moving in. He creates a killer for his latest novel and then he starts seeing the killer roaming around in his house. This one is sort of predictable, but it does throw a few twists in the end. The next story is a bit more unpredictable, and you really do not know where the heck it is going. This one features Peter Cushing and was probably my favorite of the bunch. This guy buys the house, but it is not the house that takes center stage, but a rather strange wax museum. The third story starts out rather good and features Christopher Lee. This one has him as a rather bizarre dad who seems awfully protective of his daughter. The problem is that once you know what is going on the story does not end soon enough. It drags a bit leading to a very predictable conclusion. Then the final tale concerns an actor buying a cloak from an odd little shop. The actor really gets what he paid for. Then there is a small story about an officer who is seen throughout trying to find out what happened to this actor and then an explanation of why these things happened. Though I was not very satisfied with the explanation as I don't think it really explained Cushing's story much at all. I think they needed a bit more back story for that one. All in all though it was an interesting set of stories. --------------------------------------------- Result 3184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie, no [[correction]], this [[THING]], this [[abysmal]] [[abomination]] from the [[burning]] pits of hell should have been killed before it [[even]] [[left]] the writer's [[head]]. I [[could]] not [[possibly]] [[come]] up with enough adjectives to [[describe]] this [[movie]]. But let's try anyway. Horrible, [[bad]], [[nauseating]], [[tasteless]], [[crap]], [[vomit]] [[inducing]], [[gut]] wrenchingly [[bad]], [[hideous]], [[nasty]], [[putrid]], there just aren't enough words in the English [[language]]! The "[[plot]]" [[involves]] a serial [[killer]] who [[becomes]] a [[snow]] [[man]]. Don't [[ask]] how, not [[important]]. The [[killer]] snowman runs about [[killing]] people. How, you [[may]] [[ask]], can a snowman [[kill]] [[someone]]? In tasteless [[ways]] that make you [[want]] to [[remove]] your [[eyes]] if only so you don't have to [[endure]] that Styrofoam snowman [[anymore]]. [[In]] [[ways]] that make you [[want]] to [[fill]] your ears with [[hot]] wax so you do not have to [[endure]] his snow puns anymore. Don't watch this [[movie]]! [[Destroy]] it on sight! [[For]] the sake of your very [[soul]] don't watch it! This movie, no [[corrects]], this [[STUFF]], this [[gruesome]] [[horror]] from the [[blazing]] pits of hell should have been killed before it [[yet]] [[exited]] the writer's [[leiter]]. I [[wo]] not [[perhaps]] [[arrived]] up with enough adjectives to [[described]] this [[cinematography]]. But let's try anyway. Horrible, [[inclement]], [[sickening]], [[vapid]], [[bollocks]], [[barf]] [[soliciting]], [[colonic]] wrenchingly [[inclement]], [[horrendous]], [[squalid]], [[fetid]], there just aren't enough words in the English [[parlance]]! The "[[intrigue]]" [[encompasses]] a serial [[murderer]] who [[becoming]] a [[snowy]] [[bloke]]. Don't [[wondering]] how, not [[essential]]. The [[murderer]] snowman runs about [[killed]] people. How, you [[maggio]] [[wondering]], can a snowman [[murders]] [[everybody]]? In tasteless [[avenues]] that make you [[wanting]] to [[abolition]] your [[eye]] if only so you don't have to [[withstand]] that Styrofoam snowman [[longer]]. [[Among]] [[avenues]] that make you [[wanting]] to [[fills]] your ears with [[sexy]] wax so you do not have to [[withstand]] his snow puns anymore. Don't watch this [[films]]! [[Obliterating]] it on sight! [[Per]] the sake of your very [[alma]] don't watch it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3185 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Incredibly muddled, off-putting and ultimately ludicrous ("the horses, oh my God, the horses!") thriller. It's creepy at times, but it has one of the [[worst]] [[scripts]] ever written for a horror film. Watch how in the final 10 minutes everybody "magically" does exactly what the [[plot]] needs for the "resolution" to [[occur]]. [[Bland]] performances by the leads, a [[typically]] eccentric one by Richard Lynch. The video [[transfer]] is a real [[hack]] job, cutting scenes in half and making the movie even more difficult to understand. 0 out of 4 stars. Incredibly muddled, off-putting and ultimately ludicrous ("the horses, oh my God, the horses!") thriller. It's creepy at times, but it has one of the [[gravest]] [[screenplays]] ever written for a horror film. Watch how in the final 10 minutes everybody "magically" does exactly what the [[intrigue]] needs for the "resolution" to [[emerge]]. [[Insipid]] performances by the leads, a [[ordinarily]] eccentric one by Richard Lynch. The video [[conveyance]] is a real [[pirating]] job, cutting scenes in half and making the movie even more difficult to understand. 0 out of 4 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3186 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is a [[film]] that had a lot to live down to . on the year of its release legendary film critic Barry Norman considered it the [[worst]] film of the year and I'd heard nothing but bad things about it [[especially]] a [[plot]] that was criticised for being too complicated

To be honest the plot is something of a red herring and the film suffers even more when the word " plot " is used because as far as I can see there is no plot as such . There's something involving Russian gangsters , a character called Pete Thompson who's trying to get his wife Sarah pregnant , and an Irish bloke called Sean . How they all fit into something called a " plot " I'm not sure . It's difficult to explain the plots of Guy Ritchie films but if you watch any of his films I'm sure we can all agree that they all posses one no matter how complicated they may seem on first viewing . Likewise a James Bond film though the plots are stretched out with action scenes . You will have a serious problem believing RANCID ALUMINIUM has any type of central plot that can be cogently explained

Taking a look at the cast list will ring enough warning bells as to what sort of film you'll be watching . Sadie Frost has appeared in some of the worst British films made in the last 15 years and she's doing nothing to become inconsistent . Steven Berkoff gives acting a bad name ( and he plays a character called Kant which sums up the wit of this movie ) while one of the supporting characters is played by a TV presenter presumably because no serious actress would be seen dead in this

The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it's utterly forgettable . I saw it a few days ago and immediately after watching I was going to write a very long a critical review warning people what they are letting themselves in for by watching , but by now I've mainly forgotten why . But this doesn't alter the fact that I remember disliking this piece of [[crap]] immensely This is a [[movie]] that had a lot to live down to . on the year of its release legendary film critic Barry Norman considered it the [[hardest]] film of the year and I'd heard nothing but bad things about it [[specifically]] a [[intrigue]] that was criticised for being too complicated

To be honest the plot is something of a red herring and the film suffers even more when the word " plot " is used because as far as I can see there is no plot as such . There's something involving Russian gangsters , a character called Pete Thompson who's trying to get his wife Sarah pregnant , and an Irish bloke called Sean . How they all fit into something called a " plot " I'm not sure . It's difficult to explain the plots of Guy Ritchie films but if you watch any of his films I'm sure we can all agree that they all posses one no matter how complicated they may seem on first viewing . Likewise a James Bond film though the plots are stretched out with action scenes . You will have a serious problem believing RANCID ALUMINIUM has any type of central plot that can be cogently explained

Taking a look at the cast list will ring enough warning bells as to what sort of film you'll be watching . Sadie Frost has appeared in some of the worst British films made in the last 15 years and she's doing nothing to become inconsistent . Steven Berkoff gives acting a bad name ( and he plays a character called Kant which sums up the wit of this movie ) while one of the supporting characters is played by a TV presenter presumably because no serious actress would be seen dead in this

The only good thing I can say about this movie is that it's utterly forgettable . I saw it a few days ago and immediately after watching I was going to write a very long a critical review warning people what they are letting themselves in for by watching , but by now I've mainly forgotten why . But this doesn't alter the fact that I remember disliking this piece of [[baloney]] immensely --------------------------------------------- Result 3187 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] ... You can't exactly shove her out of the way, because she's old; and if you were being charitable you might say that the ponderous gait she ambles along with isn't really her fault. Nevertheless, in these circumstances it's often difficult not to become irritated when you find yourself dragging your heels in her wake. So it is with "The Pallbearer", an [[attempt]] to do something 'different' with a romantic [[comedy]] that in this way is chiefly hamstrung because the venue is all wrong; sort of like showing off your 'breakdancing' skills at a grandparent's funeral.

To further extend the metaphor (perhaps unwisely!); like the old lady, one starts to feel with the set-up of the film that its demise cannot be far away. Sure enough, this particular 'death' is agonizingly protracted, slowly chipping away at our reserves of empathy in tiny little increments, as depressingly we come to the realisation that the proceedings are only headed in one direction: Downhill. Its laboured attempts at 'humour' can be seen coming a mile off - again, not unlike the grim inevitability of death!

Returning once again to the image of 'dragging heels', the main character, Tom, is shown to ceaselessly repeat this action throughout his life. If there are indeed degrees of 'pathetic', then this sap is possibly a good few notches ahead of Schwimmer's other - more famous - role. To find oneself in the awkward position of having to align audience sympathies with a character even MORE 'clueless' than Ross is certainly a tough ask even for as 'able' a comic performer as Schwimmer, but I guess he can find fault with himself for signing on to some seriously 'echoing' situations in the first place.

How will he ever escape his most famous portrayal if he's picking scripts where the characters could almost be 'interchangeable', even if the situations aren't? A man with a longstanding high-school crush on someone he hasn't seen for years. Sound familiar... ? Paltrow is nothing else if not bland in her 'Rachel' role, but all of this going over old ground would perhaps be forgivable if the noticeable DIFFERENCES present weren't so incongruous as well. Unfortunately, the romantic element is so well-worn it's threadbare, and the 'backdrop' is so inappropriate that it seems the best way to describe the resultant film is as something of a 'stiff'... ! 2/10. ... You can't exactly shove her out of the way, because she's old; and if you were being charitable you might say that the ponderous gait she ambles along with isn't really her fault. Nevertheless, in these circumstances it's often difficult not to become irritated when you find yourself dragging your heels in her wake. So it is with "The Pallbearer", an [[strive]] to do something 'different' with a romantic [[humour]] that in this way is chiefly hamstrung because the venue is all wrong; sort of like showing off your 'breakdancing' skills at a grandparent's funeral.

To further extend the metaphor (perhaps unwisely!); like the old lady, one starts to feel with the set-up of the film that its demise cannot be far away. Sure enough, this particular 'death' is agonizingly protracted, slowly chipping away at our reserves of empathy in tiny little increments, as depressingly we come to the realisation that the proceedings are only headed in one direction: Downhill. Its laboured attempts at 'humour' can be seen coming a mile off - again, not unlike the grim inevitability of death!

Returning once again to the image of 'dragging heels', the main character, Tom, is shown to ceaselessly repeat this action throughout his life. If there are indeed degrees of 'pathetic', then this sap is possibly a good few notches ahead of Schwimmer's other - more famous - role. To find oneself in the awkward position of having to align audience sympathies with a character even MORE 'clueless' than Ross is certainly a tough ask even for as 'able' a comic performer as Schwimmer, but I guess he can find fault with himself for signing on to some seriously 'echoing' situations in the first place.

How will he ever escape his most famous portrayal if he's picking scripts where the characters could almost be 'interchangeable', even if the situations aren't? A man with a longstanding high-school crush on someone he hasn't seen for years. Sound familiar... ? Paltrow is nothing else if not bland in her 'Rachel' role, but all of this going over old ground would perhaps be forgivable if the noticeable DIFFERENCES present weren't so incongruous as well. Unfortunately, the romantic element is so well-worn it's threadbare, and the 'backdrop' is so inappropriate that it seems the best way to describe the resultant film is as something of a 'stiff'... ! 2/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[saw]] this [[cinematic]] [[wretchedness]] in a dollar [[theater]] with a friend in 1979 (back when the tickets actually sold for $1). This is the only film I have ever walked out on (with my [[friend]], while the idiocy that is the "Laser Bra 2000" sketch was on screen). Evidently, my and my friend's reaction to the film was a common one. It is not that I found the film offensive (either as an 18-year-old or now), but [[rather]] that it is mind-numbingly stupid and patently unfunny, devoid [[even]] of the unintended [[humor]] that makes a [[Ed]] [[Wood]] film watchable. This is the [[real]] [[reason]] why NBC [[refused]] to air it, rather than a [[failure]] to comprehend [[Mr]]. Mike's "vision" ([[unless]], of course, his [[vision]] was to drive the film's [[backers]] into bankruptcy).

I remained surprised to this day that this film does not seem to have [[made]] any published "10 [[worst]] films of all [[time]]" list. It certainly makes mine. You have been [[warned]]. I [[noticed]] this [[films]] [[squalor]] in a dollar [[theatres]] with a friend in 1979 (back when the tickets actually sold for $1). This is the only film I have ever walked out on (with my [[boyfriend]], while the idiocy that is the "Laser Bra 2000" sketch was on screen). Evidently, my and my friend's reaction to the film was a common one. It is not that I found the film offensive (either as an 18-year-old or now), but [[quite]] that it is mind-numbingly stupid and patently unfunny, devoid [[yet]] of the unintended [[mood]] that makes a [[Comp]] [[Madeira]] film watchable. This is the [[genuine]] [[motif]] why NBC [[rejected]] to air it, rather than a [[insufficiency]] to comprehend [[Monsieur]]. Mike's "vision" ([[if]], of course, his [[conception]] was to drive the film's [[supporters]] into bankruptcy).

I remained surprised to this day that this film does not seem to have [[introduced]] any published "10 [[hardest]] films of all [[times]]" list. It certainly makes mine. You have been [[advised]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3189 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When Paris is Burning came out, I totally dismissed it. I was not into the whole Madonna and vogueing phenomenon. I [[thought]] it was [[going]] to be campy and silly. How wrong I was about this movie. I [[watched]] it after the movie had been out for ten years and I ran out and bought it. It took me back to a time and place of fun and excitement. I felt as though I [[knew]] all of the characters personally. The 80s were spectacular and the movie captured the essence of the gay culture. What a [[terrific]] job! I went on the internet and found out what some of the original casts members were doing now but I have not been able to locate all of them. If any one has any information on any of the casts members please let me know.

I hope they make another documentary. I [[LOVED]] IT When Paris is Burning came out, I totally dismissed it. I was not into the whole Madonna and vogueing phenomenon. I [[brainchild]] it was [[go]] to be campy and silly. How wrong I was about this movie. I [[observed]] it after the movie had been out for ten years and I ran out and bought it. It took me back to a time and place of fun and excitement. I felt as though I [[overheard]] all of the characters personally. The 80s were spectacular and the movie captured the essence of the gay culture. What a [[sumptuous]] job! I went on the internet and found out what some of the original casts members were doing now but I have not been able to locate all of them. If any one has any information on any of the casts members please let me know.

I hope they make another documentary. I [[WORSHIPPED]] IT --------------------------------------------- Result 3190 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[want]] so badly to give this [[piece]] of [[GARBAGE]] a zero, [[unfortunately]], there isn't, so, I had to [[give]] it a 1 just to [[warn]] you about how stupidly terrible this imposter of a [[familiar]] [[cartoon]] really is! The characters [[look]] [[like]] they were drawn by pre-schoolers, no, [[wait]], I've [[seen]] pre-schoolers do [[better]]! I prefer "Misadventures of Flapjack" to this [[terrible]] excuse for a cartoon! I'm [[probably]] [[saying]] what others have [[said]], two words: [[RIP]] OFF!! [[Remember]] that episode of Dexter's Lab when they [[raced]] go-karts down that [[volcano]]? [[yeah]], [[Mister]] Fellows even cashed in on that [[idea]] and failed! They [[even]] [[ripped]] off [[Shadow]] Lugia in that one episode that parodied Pokemon!(he [[even]] cashed in on that franchise!) That one [[character]] is a [[cheap]] [[rip]] off of Mandark from Dexter's Lab! [[Mister]] Fellows needs to be sued for [[statutory]] [[infringement]] for this [[piece]] of [[crap]]!! [[Everyone]] has their own [[opinion]], but those of you who like [[Johnny]] (RIP-OFF) [[Test]], your'e just [[lying]] to yourselves. Do yourself a favor, change the [[channel]] when this rip off tries to [[disgrace]] your screen! I [[wanted]] so badly to give this [[slice]] of [[LITTER]] a zero, [[sadly]], there isn't, so, I had to [[lend]] it a 1 just to [[warns]] you about how stupidly terrible this imposter of a [[accustomed]] [[toon]] really is! The characters [[peek]] [[likes]] they were drawn by pre-schoolers, no, [[expectation]], I've [[saw]] pre-schoolers do [[best]]! I prefer "Misadventures of Flapjack" to this [[scary]] excuse for a cartoon! I'm [[perhaps]] [[arguing]] what others have [[say]], two words: [[TEARS]] OFF!! [[Remembers]] that episode of Dexter's Lab when they [[rushed]] go-karts down that [[eruption]]? [[yea]], [[Monsieur]] Fellows even cashed in on that [[ideals]] and failed! They [[yet]] [[tore]] off [[Shade]] Lugia in that one episode that parodied Pokemon!(he [[yet]] cashed in on that franchise!) That one [[trait]] is a [[inexpensive]] [[tears]] off of Mandark from Dexter's Lab! [[Gentleman]] Fellows needs to be sued for [[regulatory]] [[offence]] for this [[slice]] of [[baloney]]!! [[Somebody]] has their own [[avis]], but those of you who like [[Joni]] (RIP-OFF) [[Essays]], your'e just [[lied]] to yourselves. Do yourself a favor, change the [[canal]] when this rip off tries to [[dishonor]] your screen! --------------------------------------------- Result 3191 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] 'Dead Letter Office' is a low-budget [[film]] about a [[couple]] of [[employees]] of the [[Australian]] postal service, struggling to rebuild their damaged lives. Unfortunately, the acting is poor and the [[links]] between the characters' past misfortunes and present mindsets are [[clumsily]] and over-schematically represented. What's most [[disappointing]] of all, [[however]], is the [[portrayal]] is [[life]] in the office of the film's title: there's no mechanisation whatsoever, and it's [[quite]] impossible to ascertain what any of the staff [[really]] do for a [[living]]. [[Granted]], [[part]] of the [[plot]] is that the office is [[threatened]] with closure, but this [[sort]] of office [[surely]] [[closed]] in the 1930s, if it ever truly [[existed]]. It's a [[shame]], as the film's [[overall]] tone is poignant and wry, and there's some [[promise]] in the [[scenario]]: but few of the details [[convince]]. [[Overall]], it feels the [[work]] of [[someone]] who hasn't [[actually]] [[experienced]] much of [[real]] [[life]]; a [[student]] [[film]], with a [[concept]] and an [[outline]], but sadly [[little]] [[else]]. 'Dead Letter Office' is a low-budget [[films]] about a [[matches]] of [[staff]] of the [[Australia]] postal service, struggling to rebuild their damaged lives. Unfortunately, the acting is poor and the [[ties]] between the characters' past misfortunes and present mindsets are [[awkwardly]] and over-schematically represented. What's most [[disappointed]] of all, [[yet]], is the [[portrait]] is [[lives]] in the office of the film's title: there's no mechanisation whatsoever, and it's [[very]] impossible to ascertain what any of the staff [[genuinely]] do for a [[vie]]. [[Awarded]], [[parties]] of the [[intrigue]] is that the office is [[endangered]] with closure, but this [[sorting]] of office [[definitively]] [[shut]] in the 1930s, if it ever truly [[prevailed]]. It's a [[embarrass]], as the film's [[comprehensive]] tone is poignant and wry, and there's some [[promises]] in the [[screenplay]]: but few of the details [[persuading]]. [[Comprehensive]], it feels the [[cooperate]] of [[everyone]] who hasn't [[indeed]] [[underwent]] much of [[genuine]] [[lives]]; a [[learner]] [[films]], with a [[conception]] and an [[described]], but sadly [[petit]] [[elsewhere]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (82%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] This is a pretty [[decent]] example of film noir. The setting is the early 50's with the Communists trying to steal weapon secrets from the US Government.

Richard Widmark is the suave pickpocket without scruples. He gives a pretty decent performance but there is nothing A-List about him. The interesting thing was that he was not only an anti-hero but through most of the film, an unlikeable anti-hero. That is not very normal. Jean Peters gave a so-so performance as the hooker with the heart of gold. That great character actress Thelma Ritter shines as the stool-pigeon.

The plot had its fair share of twists and turns, wisecracks and tough talk. There is a fight scene near the end of the movie (in the subway station) that was pretty gritty and exciting.

I think noir fans (like myself) will enjoy this film. For non-noir viewers, it may seem a little dated and the whole Commie thing a tad overdone. This is a pretty [[presentable]] example of film noir. The setting is the early 50's with the Communists trying to steal weapon secrets from the US Government.

Richard Widmark is the suave pickpocket without scruples. He gives a pretty decent performance but there is nothing A-List about him. The interesting thing was that he was not only an anti-hero but through most of the film, an unlikeable anti-hero. That is not very normal. Jean Peters gave a so-so performance as the hooker with the heart of gold. That great character actress Thelma Ritter shines as the stool-pigeon.

The plot had its fair share of twists and turns, wisecracks and tough talk. There is a fight scene near the end of the movie (in the subway station) that was pretty gritty and exciting.

I think noir fans (like myself) will enjoy this film. For non-noir viewers, it may seem a little dated and the whole Commie thing a tad overdone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3193 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] If I [[could]] i [[would]] give ZERO stars for this one, but [[unfortunately]] i have to [[give]] one...

There is no [[single]] scene I [[could]] [[laugh]] about... but the game didn't make me laugh either. So if you're some ill retarded folk, go to your [[local]] cinema, watch this movie and give it 10 stars, like some people here already did.

but for me... in a movie where [[children]] are [[shot]] dead to [[achieve]] humor... good taste goes over the edge... this was the third time i wasted my time to see a Boll movie and it was definitely my last!

0/10... i'm ashamed of being from the same country as Uwe Boll!

PLEASE PLEASE KEEP HIM FROM MAKING MORE MOVIES!!!!! If I [[wo]] i [[should]] give ZERO stars for this one, but [[sadly]] i have to [[confer]] one...

There is no [[lonely]] scene I [[wo]] [[laughs]] about... but the game didn't make me laugh either. So if you're some ill retarded folk, go to your [[locale]] cinema, watch this movie and give it 10 stars, like some people here already did.

but for me... in a movie where [[enfant]] are [[kiiled]] dead to [[realize]] humor... good taste goes over the edge... this was the third time i wasted my time to see a Boll movie and it was definitely my last!

0/10... i'm ashamed of being from the same country as Uwe Boll!

PLEASE PLEASE KEEP HIM FROM MAKING MORE MOVIES!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3194 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This film is so bad I can't believe it was actually shot. People who voted 10 or 9, 8 and even 7, are you insane? Did we really watch the same movie? Or the same sh** should I say. Everything is bad in this film. The story (is there a story?) is going nowhere, completely incoherent, the acting (some dialogs are simply just ridiculous), the music score (what the **** is that?), the editing, and especially the artistic direction, a pure disaster. Reminds me the old Macist movies... To give you an example of the amateurism of the production, the mermaid's costume is a sleeping bag with spangles sticked on it. I'm not joking, that's exactly what it is.

Another example of the enormous mistakes we find here: you see in a scene an extra, a fat woman of about 200 pounds, who's talking on her cell phone. The next shot, which is in a complete different location, you can see this same woman, still talking on her cell phone (!) Yes, it goes that far.

A big, huge, waste of money. Useless. --------------------------------------------- Result 3195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The movie [[starts]] little [[cute]]. There are a number of revolting scenes. People in toilets. GOOD actors wasted and the original television series has all but ruined here. This did not need to be crude.

[[Forget]] it. Find the [[tv]] show. Disney at new low. The movie [[initiates]] little [[belle]]. There are a number of revolting scenes. People in toilets. GOOD actors wasted and the original television series has all but ruined here. This did not need to be crude.

[[Overlook]] it. Find the [[televisions]] show. Disney at new low. --------------------------------------------- Result 3196 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Mind, my friends and I [[saw]] the movie based off it's title alone. It's cute, [[though]] obvious in it's plot and direction-- you know where the movie is going within the first five minutes. My main contention with the [[plot]] is that while it remains tolerably consistent, they never explain a [[lot]] of the things behind the characters. An alcoholic father, overworked mother, stressed-out sister... that's a bad family, but aside from the occasional mention from the sister, there's not any [[resolution]]. I was also confused as to the scene with the bottles... it seemed pretty random.

The writing is a secondary concern... the kids weren't bad actors, but their script left a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, what could have been a cute niche movie was pushed aside for a single, blah special [[effect]], lame scripting, and a glaringly obvious plot. Mind, my friends and I [[observed]] the movie based off it's title alone. It's cute, [[nonetheless]] obvious in it's plot and direction-- you know where the movie is going within the first five minutes. My main contention with the [[intrigue]] is that while it remains tolerably consistent, they never explain a [[batches]] of the things behind the characters. An alcoholic father, overworked mother, stressed-out sister... that's a bad family, but aside from the occasional mention from the sister, there's not any [[settling]]. I was also confused as to the scene with the bottles... it seemed pretty random.

The writing is a secondary concern... the kids weren't bad actors, but their script left a lot to be desired. Unfortunately, what could have been a cute niche movie was pushed aside for a single, blah special [[effects]], lame scripting, and a glaringly obvious plot. --------------------------------------------- Result 3197 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Savage Island's raw savagery will scare the hell out of you! Trust me.

When the boy of the estranged Savage Family is run over by some city slicker tourists, Pa Savage wants revenge, and he'll stop at nothing until he gets it.

This is a real horror film with some truly [[wonderful]] horror moments.

Also, the negative review clearly comes from someone who lacks proper knowledge of film. The filmmakers chose the lighting and camera-work in order to reflect the dark, murky, and egdy mood of the story; in other words, to obtain a certain aesthetic.

In fact, the film has won SEVERAL horror film festival awards. Savage Island's raw savagery will scare the hell out of you! Trust me.

When the boy of the estranged Savage Family is run over by some city slicker tourists, Pa Savage wants revenge, and he'll stop at nothing until he gets it.

This is a real horror film with some truly [[sumptuous]] horror moments.

Also, the negative review clearly comes from someone who lacks proper knowledge of film. The filmmakers chose the lighting and camera-work in order to reflect the dark, murky, and egdy mood of the story; in other words, to obtain a certain aesthetic.

In fact, the film has won SEVERAL horror film festival awards. --------------------------------------------- Result 3198 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Add pure [[humor]] + quick and [[unique]] sentences + sex + unfaith sex! + love + lies + dark deadly thoughts + secret plans + fun + black humor + sex!.. again! + black dresses! (needed for the unlimited funerals!) = Eglimata!!! Or in English, Crimes!! Our [[Heroes]] are two married couples, their relatives, their friends and neighbors. There is Soso and Alekos and Flora and Achilleas, two married couples who have everything but not real love! Flora is the mistress of Alekos, and when Soso finds what's going on, she is planning with her best friend Pepi to kill Alekos and look like an accident! Many plans were made but everyone else dies except Alekos! Achilleas find's out that he has a sister who is a Hooker and tries to put her in the right road..Korina is a temptation to mens but her tries to get married all goes wrong, since when they learn her past, freaks and leave and she ends up marrying a rich farm man. As for the other roles they are like they are from Cartoons! Grandpa Aristidis which fakes that he is paralyzed, Machi is his nurse who is secretly marry to Aristidis for his fortune, Johny, son of Machi, who has it OK with everybody to have all the benefits, Michalakis who has only one purpose in life.. to suicide, but he is unable to do it so he is desperate! Every time, I see the replays and every time when it finishes I miss it.. One of my favorite All time classics... Add pure [[comedy]] + quick and [[unequalled]] sentences + sex + unfaith sex! + love + lies + dark deadly thoughts + secret plans + fun + black humor + sex!.. again! + black dresses! (needed for the unlimited funerals!) = Eglimata!!! Or in English, Crimes!! Our [[Heroic]] are two married couples, their relatives, their friends and neighbors. There is Soso and Alekos and Flora and Achilleas, two married couples who have everything but not real love! Flora is the mistress of Alekos, and when Soso finds what's going on, she is planning with her best friend Pepi to kill Alekos and look like an accident! Many plans were made but everyone else dies except Alekos! Achilleas find's out that he has a sister who is a Hooker and tries to put her in the right road..Korina is a temptation to mens but her tries to get married all goes wrong, since when they learn her past, freaks and leave and she ends up marrying a rich farm man. As for the other roles they are like they are from Cartoons! Grandpa Aristidis which fakes that he is paralyzed, Machi is his nurse who is secretly marry to Aristidis for his fortune, Johny, son of Machi, who has it OK with everybody to have all the benefits, Michalakis who has only one purpose in life.. to suicide, but he is unable to do it so he is desperate! Every time, I see the replays and every time when it finishes I miss it.. One of my favorite All time classics... --------------------------------------------- Result 3199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] The movie follows the [[events]] of the [[novel]] "Cel mai iubit dintre pamanteni"( could be translated as "The most beloved among humans" ), written by Marin Preda ( a very controversial [[book]] and movie), a novel which became something like The [[Bible]] or the story of Hamlet, very popular and hard to get, due to its satiric contents over the Communist regime. It represents the [[drama]] of the intellectual [[man]], the [[humanist]], in a "[[red]]" [[world]]. A [[movie]] filled with [[passion]], [[fear]], sexuality, all the [[great]] ingredients for a [[great]] [[movie]] [[recipe]].One of the greatest Romanian movies,[[despite]] its psychological [[charge]](after all, it is an European movie). The movie follows the [[event]] of the [[newer]] "Cel mai iubit dintre pamanteni"( could be translated as "The most beloved among humans" ), written by Marin Preda ( a very controversial [[cookbook]] and movie), a novel which became something like The [[Bibles]] or the story of Hamlet, very popular and hard to get, due to its satiric contents over the Communist regime. It represents the [[tragedy]] of the intellectual [[dawg]], the [[humanities]], in a "[[rosso]]" [[monde]]. A [[cinema]] filled with [[fascination]], [[angst]], sexuality, all the [[whopping]] ingredients for a [[prodigious]] [[kino]] [[recipes]].One of the greatest Romanian movies,[[while]] its psychological [[fees]](after all, it is an European movie). --------------------------------------------- Result 3200 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] When I [[heard]] that this [[movie]] was [[coming]] out the night before Halloween, I was very [[excited]]. When I found out that it was a [[book]], written in 1978, I had to read it before seeing the movie. I'm sure the movie would have been much different to me if I had not read the book. The [[writers]] actually did a good [[job]] of staying [[true]] to the main plot of the book, with [[minor]] [[differences]], naturally. I [[think]] the thing that [[disappointed]] me the most about the movie was Boyle [[playing]] the role of Col. I'm not a big fan of Boyle, and it seems that no matter what the mood during the movie, she's always trying to use her over-plumped lips, and darkly makeup-ed eyes to make herself seem super sexy. Indeed, I think that the movie held true to the genuine creepiness of the house. My favorite subplot was the Sheehan family (which is so weird b/c the son was killed in Iraq and in current events there is Casey Sheehan whose mother went on a huge anti-Iraq tirade). In the book, obviously the war was not Iraq, but rather, Vietnam, and when the house turns on that video of the son in the helicopter, I was truly creeped out. [[Overall]], I was [[impressed]] with the [[movie]], in that it followed the book very well. When I [[listened]] that this [[filmmaking]] was [[upcoming]] out the night before Halloween, I was very [[agitated]]. When I found out that it was a [[cookbook]], written in 1978, I had to read it before seeing the movie. I'm sure the movie would have been much different to me if I had not read the book. The [[authors]] actually did a good [[workplace]] of staying [[veritable]] to the main plot of the book, with [[underage]] [[discrepancy]], naturally. I [[believing]] the thing that [[disillusioned]] me the most about the movie was Boyle [[replay]] the role of Col. I'm not a big fan of Boyle, and it seems that no matter what the mood during the movie, she's always trying to use her over-plumped lips, and darkly makeup-ed eyes to make herself seem super sexy. Indeed, I think that the movie held true to the genuine creepiness of the house. My favorite subplot was the Sheehan family (which is so weird b/c the son was killed in Iraq and in current events there is Casey Sheehan whose mother went on a huge anti-Iraq tirade). In the book, obviously the war was not Iraq, but rather, Vietnam, and when the house turns on that video of the son in the helicopter, I was truly creeped out. [[Holistic]], I was [[surprising]] with the [[cinematographic]], in that it followed the book very well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I literally fell [[asleep]] 3 times watching this movie. [[Granted]], it's [[Shakespeare]] and that takes a certain mindset to be interested or not. But this movie exceeds any barrier of long soliloquies and what not, that may [[prevent]] [[many]] from just not caring about a Shakespeare based story.

The largest roadblock to this production is the [[complete]] flatness of the [[characters]]. Often during character's interacting, it's nearly difficult to distinguish who's lines are who's. Granted, I believe this movie is dubbed in English. Certainly they could've obtained voice actors which could've added a bit more drama to these classic, literary lines.

It would be difficult to rate this movie greater than 1, although perhaps that's based on prejudices of perhaps age and what would seem a very low budget. Still, it's absolutely painful and [[boring]]. If you insist on Hamlet, do yourself a favor and read the book again. 1/10 I literally fell [[slumber]] 3 times watching this movie. [[Attributed]], it's [[Shakespearean]] and that takes a certain mindset to be interested or not. But this movie exceeds any barrier of long soliloquies and what not, that may [[impeding]] [[innumerable]] from just not caring about a Shakespeare based story.

The largest roadblock to this production is the [[finish]] flatness of the [[personages]]. Often during character's interacting, it's nearly difficult to distinguish who's lines are who's. Granted, I believe this movie is dubbed in English. Certainly they could've obtained voice actors which could've added a bit more drama to these classic, literary lines.

It would be difficult to rate this movie greater than 1, although perhaps that's based on prejudices of perhaps age and what would seem a very low budget. Still, it's absolutely painful and [[dreary]]. If you insist on Hamlet, do yourself a favor and read the book again. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Many of the American people would say...What??? to my opening comment. Yes I know that my comparison is without doubts an insult for the fans of the Master Akira Kurosawa, but if you [[analyze]] this movie, my comment is right. We have the peasant who goes to the town searching for help against a band of grasshoppers who wants to steal the harvest of the village. The great difference is the [[way]] that the [[story]] takes. Our samurais, a band of circus performers as in the original are a very complex mixture of personalities but at the end are what the village needs, HEROES. Please watch again this [[incredible]] [[movie]] (the Seven Samurai, obviously) and find another movies who has stolen the story and tried to get the same magic effect than the Masterpiece of Akira Kurosawa. A tip is The 13th Warrior with Antonio Banderas, Michael Crichton copied the story to wrote his Best seller's, but he didn't found the third foot of the cat. Many of the American people would say...What??? to my opening comment. Yes I know that my comparison is without doubts an insult for the fans of the Master Akira Kurosawa, but if you [[analysing]] this movie, my comment is right. We have the peasant who goes to the town searching for help against a band of grasshoppers who wants to steal the harvest of the village. The great difference is the [[routing]] that the [[conte]] takes. Our samurais, a band of circus performers as in the original are a very complex mixture of personalities but at the end are what the village needs, HEROES. Please watch again this [[unimaginable]] [[cinematography]] (the Seven Samurai, obviously) and find another movies who has stolen the story and tried to get the same magic effect than the Masterpiece of Akira Kurosawa. A tip is The 13th Warrior with Antonio Banderas, Michael Crichton copied the story to wrote his Best seller's, but he didn't found the third foot of the cat. --------------------------------------------- Result 3203 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I'm not [[usually]] one to slate a film . I [[try]] to [[see]] the [[good]] points and not [[focus]] on the [[bad]] ones, but in this case, there are almost no [[good]] points. [[In]] my [[opinion]], if you're [[going]] to make [[something]] that [[bad]], why bother? [[Part]] of the [[film]] is [[take]] up with [[shots]] of Anne's [[face]] while she [[breaths]] [[deeply]], and [[violin]] music plays in the [[background]]. the other [[part]] is [[filled]] with poor and [[wooden]] acting. [[Rupert]] Penry [[Jones]] is expressionless. [[Jennifer]] Higham plays Anne's younger [[sister]] with modern mannerisms. [[Anne]] is [[portrayed]] as being meek and self effacing, which is fine at the [[beginning]], but she [[stays]] the same all through the [[film]], and you [[see]] no reason for [[captain]] Wentworth to [[fall]] in [[love]] with her. Overall the production [[lacks]] any [[sense]] of [[period]], with too many mistakes to be [[overlooked]], such as [[running]] out of the concert, [[kissing]] in the [[street]], [[running]] about in the streets with no hat on (why was this scene in the [[film]] at all? the scene in the [[book]] was one of the most [[romantic]] scenes [[written]].). To [[sum]] it up, a [[terrible]] film, very [[disappointing]]. I'm not [[traditionally]] one to slate a film . I [[seeks]] to [[behold]] the [[alright]] points and not [[centred]] on the [[rotten]] ones, but in this case, there are almost no [[alright]] points. [[Into]] my [[vista]], if you're [[go]] to make [[anything]] that [[unfavourable]], why bother? [[Parte]] of the [[cinematography]] is [[taking]] up with [[punches]] of Anne's [[confront]] while she [[inspirations]] [[acutely]], and [[fiddle]] music plays in the [[context]]. the other [[portions]] is [[fills]] with poor and [[lumber]] acting. [[Cornelius]] Penry [[Jonesy]] is expressionless. [[Jessica]] Higham plays Anne's younger [[sisters]] with modern mannerisms. [[Anna]] is [[depicted]] as being meek and self effacing, which is fine at the [[launch]], but she [[rest]] the same all through the [[cinematography]], and you [[seeing]] no reason for [[captains]] Wentworth to [[decreased]] in [[amore]] with her. Overall the production [[missing]] any [[sensing]] of [[periods]], with too many mistakes to be [[omitted]], such as [[run]] out of the concert, [[kiss]] in the [[rue]], [[run]] about in the streets with no hat on (why was this scene in the [[cinematography]] at all? the scene in the [[ledger]] was one of the most [[sentimental]] scenes [[writes]].). To [[suma]] it up, a [[frightful]] film, very [[frustrating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] The British 'heritage film' industry is out of control. There's nothing wrong with filming classic novels, but why must they all be filmed by talentless nobodies? This film [[rips]] the guts out of Orwell's tough novel, turning it into a [[harmless]], fluffy romantic comedy. 'Aspidistra' may not be Orwell's best work, but no-one who reads it can forget its superb depiction of poverty. Orwell emphasises not only the cold and the hunger, but the humiliation of being poor. In the novel, London is a bleak, grey, cold, heartless city, and Comstock prays for it to be blasted away by a squadron of bombers. But this film irons out anything that might be in any way disturbing, and creates instead a jolly nostalgic trip to charming 1930s London, in which everything is lit with shafts of golden sunlight, and even the slums of Lambeth are picturesque and filled with freshly scrubbed urchins and happy prostitutes. Comstock's poems about the sharp wind sweeping across the rubbish-strewn streets seem completely out of place in this chocolate-box world. Worst of all is the script's relentless bonhomie, ancient jokes, and clunking dialogue. It's so frustrating because Richard E. Grant is the perfect person to play Gordon Comstock, and the film is packed with great actors. But it's all for nothing. This film made me so angry! Britain's literary history is something to be proud of for its richness, complexity and power. And what do we do with it? We employ bland nobodies to turn it into soft-centred, anodyne pap for people who want to feel that they are 'getting some culture' while they drink their Horlicks and quietly doze off. The British 'heritage film' industry is out of control. There's nothing wrong with filming classic novels, but why must they all be filmed by talentless nobodies? This film [[slams]] the guts out of Orwell's tough novel, turning it into a [[inoffensive]], fluffy romantic comedy. 'Aspidistra' may not be Orwell's best work, but no-one who reads it can forget its superb depiction of poverty. Orwell emphasises not only the cold and the hunger, but the humiliation of being poor. In the novel, London is a bleak, grey, cold, heartless city, and Comstock prays for it to be blasted away by a squadron of bombers. But this film irons out anything that might be in any way disturbing, and creates instead a jolly nostalgic trip to charming 1930s London, in which everything is lit with shafts of golden sunlight, and even the slums of Lambeth are picturesque and filled with freshly scrubbed urchins and happy prostitutes. Comstock's poems about the sharp wind sweeping across the rubbish-strewn streets seem completely out of place in this chocolate-box world. Worst of all is the script's relentless bonhomie, ancient jokes, and clunking dialogue. It's so frustrating because Richard E. Grant is the perfect person to play Gordon Comstock, and the film is packed with great actors. But it's all for nothing. This film made me so angry! Britain's literary history is something to be proud of for its richness, complexity and power. And what do we do with it? We employ bland nobodies to turn it into soft-centred, anodyne pap for people who want to feel that they are 'getting some culture' while they drink their Horlicks and quietly doze off. --------------------------------------------- Result 3205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Certainly]] any [[others]] I have [[seen]] pale in [[comparison]]. The series gives balanced coverage to all [[theatres]] of operation. [[No]] one [[country]] is given [[undue]] credit for the Allied [[victory]]. Laurence Olivier [[brings]] [[great]] weight and dignity to his role as narrator. [[Unquestionably]] any [[alia]] I have [[watched]] pale in [[compare]]. The series gives balanced coverage to all [[theaters]] of operation. [[Nos]] one [[nationals]] is given [[improper]] credit for the Allied [[triumph]]. Laurence Olivier [[poses]] [[large]] weight and dignity to his role as narrator. --------------------------------------------- Result 3206 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Steven Spielberg (at 24) had already directed two superb [[episodes]] of a 1971 series [[called]] "The Psychiatrist", starring Roy Thinnes. One episode had been about an [[emotionally]] troubled 12-year old boy and the other was about a vibrant young man (Clu Gulager in his best performance) who is dying of cancer. Both episodes were [[stunning]], visually unlike anything else on TV, and [[emotionally]] [[complex]] and adult. The creators of "The [[Psychiatrist]]" were Richard Levinson and William Link, who created "[[Columbo]]" and also produced its first season.

Peter Falk insisted on first rank, experienced TV directors for the first season of "Columbo", like Bernard Kowalski and Jack Smight. But Falk agreed to Spielberg after watching part of the Clu Gulagher episode of "The Psychiatrist".

Spielberg says on the DVD of "Duel" that he loved Steven Bochco's "Murder by the Book" script (based on a Levinson/Link story), and he tried to make the production look like a million dollar feature, even thought he had a lot less money to work with.

This episode of "Columbo" is far more visually stylish and makes better use of the sound track and background music than almost any other "Columbo" episode, even though the series always used top directors. Spielberg manages to keep the great Falk and Cassidy from hamming it up too much, but both actors are still a lot of fun. Spielberg also gets fine supporting work from Martin Milner, Rosemary Forsyth and Barbara Colby. All the performances have a freshness and vitality about them. The only "Columbo" episode that was close to being as well directed is the "By Dawn's Early Light" episode with Patrick McGoohan (directed by Harvey Hart).

I think the two episodes of "The Psychiatrist" and this episode of "Columbo" suggest Spielberg hasn't developed technically all that much as a director. He was great from the beginning. In a "Combat!" DVD commentary of a 1962 episode guest starring Albert Salmi, Robert Altman says that episode was pretty much as good as he ever got as a director. Maybe the same is true of Spielberg. Steven Spielberg (at 24) had already directed two superb [[bouts]] of a 1971 series [[drew]] "The Psychiatrist", starring Roy Thinnes. One episode had been about an [[romantically]] troubled 12-year old boy and the other was about a vibrant young man (Clu Gulager in his best performance) who is dying of cancer. Both episodes were [[astounding]], visually unlike anything else on TV, and [[excitedly]] [[tortuous]] and adult. The creators of "The [[Psychiatry]]" were Richard Levinson and William Link, who created "[[Colombo]]" and also produced its first season.

Peter Falk insisted on first rank, experienced TV directors for the first season of "Columbo", like Bernard Kowalski and Jack Smight. But Falk agreed to Spielberg after watching part of the Clu Gulagher episode of "The Psychiatrist".

Spielberg says on the DVD of "Duel" that he loved Steven Bochco's "Murder by the Book" script (based on a Levinson/Link story), and he tried to make the production look like a million dollar feature, even thought he had a lot less money to work with.

This episode of "Columbo" is far more visually stylish and makes better use of the sound track and background music than almost any other "Columbo" episode, even though the series always used top directors. Spielberg manages to keep the great Falk and Cassidy from hamming it up too much, but both actors are still a lot of fun. Spielberg also gets fine supporting work from Martin Milner, Rosemary Forsyth and Barbara Colby. All the performances have a freshness and vitality about them. The only "Columbo" episode that was close to being as well directed is the "By Dawn's Early Light" episode with Patrick McGoohan (directed by Harvey Hart).

I think the two episodes of "The Psychiatrist" and this episode of "Columbo" suggest Spielberg hasn't developed technically all that much as a director. He was great from the beginning. In a "Combat!" DVD commentary of a 1962 episode guest starring Albert Salmi, Robert Altman says that episode was pretty much as good as he ever got as a director. Maybe the same is true of Spielberg. --------------------------------------------- Result 3207 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a disappointment!

This film seemed to be trying to copy 'cutting edge' comedy but the direction and the script was sloppy, sickly and sentimental in the worst film tradition. Jack Black's acting/role was self-indulgent and self-regarding... and the other characters were equally unmasking and uninteresting. The soundtrack was tedious. We are ( WERE) fans of Black but none of us did more than mange a forced titter for the duration. Why did he feel he needed to make this mistake?

We will not watch another of his films without reading reviews more carefully first!!

Was he drunk when he read the script before signing up for this drivel? --------------------------------------------- Result 3208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Wow. I [[LOVED]] the whole series, and am [[shocked]] at comments by people who [[thought]] it ended badly. Perhaps it waffled a bit in seasons 4 & 5, while remaining better than anything else on television. But 6 and particularly 6b were [[beautiful]] permutations on the [[themes]] developed in the more muscular first three seasons.

6B started with such a sombre mood and Janice's always keen insight into the [[family]] angst - that doom-filled line about knowing Tony's penchant for sitting and staring. Anyone who missed the implications of that for the rest of the series does not know Tony. Melfi's discomfort over the psychiatric study and its references to the sociopath's self-deluding sentimentality for pets and animals goes back to the first episodes of the series, say, with Tony's panic attack over the ducks leaving his pool and resonates with Phil's "wave bye-bye" line to his grandchildren before the coup de grace of the final episode (not to get into Chase's dark humour).

I could go on and on, but I'll just add that I thought the final show - starting with the opening strains of Vanilla Fudge to supply the ironic foreshadow ("You Keep Me Hangin' On") to the terminal moments where Tony fades back into complacency with his family in tow or blasts apart like AJ's SUV or Phil's head were, utterly, utterly PERFECT. The best TV ever.

Pretty good in a dying medium pathologically supplying the "jack-off fantasies" AJ derides (and then into which he promptly subsides). A tip of the pork pie to Mr. Chase. Wow. I [[WORSHIPPED]] the whole series, and am [[dumbfounded]] at comments by people who [[ideas]] it ended badly. Perhaps it waffled a bit in seasons 4 & 5, while remaining better than anything else on television. But 6 and particularly 6b were [[sumptuous]] permutations on the [[item]] developed in the more muscular first three seasons.

6B started with such a sombre mood and Janice's always keen insight into the [[families]] angst - that doom-filled line about knowing Tony's penchant for sitting and staring. Anyone who missed the implications of that for the rest of the series does not know Tony. Melfi's discomfort over the psychiatric study and its references to the sociopath's self-deluding sentimentality for pets and animals goes back to the first episodes of the series, say, with Tony's panic attack over the ducks leaving his pool and resonates with Phil's "wave bye-bye" line to his grandchildren before the coup de grace of the final episode (not to get into Chase's dark humour).

I could go on and on, but I'll just add that I thought the final show - starting with the opening strains of Vanilla Fudge to supply the ironic foreshadow ("You Keep Me Hangin' On") to the terminal moments where Tony fades back into complacency with his family in tow or blasts apart like AJ's SUV or Phil's head were, utterly, utterly PERFECT. The best TV ever.

Pretty good in a dying medium pathologically supplying the "jack-off fantasies" AJ derides (and then into which he promptly subsides). A tip of the pork pie to Mr. Chase. --------------------------------------------- Result 3209 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This movie was [[way]] too slow and [[predictable]].I wish i could [[say]] more but i can't.If you [[enjoy]] action/adventure films,this is not one to see.I'd suggest you go see movies like;Behind Enemy Lines with Owen Wilson and Iron Eagle with Louis Gossett Jr. This movie was [[paths]] too slow and [[foreseeable]].I wish i could [[told]] more but i can't.If you [[enjoying]] action/adventure films,this is not one to see.I'd suggest you go see movies like;Behind Enemy Lines with Owen Wilson and Iron Eagle with Louis Gossett Jr. --------------------------------------------- Result 3210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The turgid pace of this movie numbs us to any shocks that it might provide. There was no real suspense. Most of the characters were insipid. The chesty Irish priest was as lame as the love interest. Interest is misleading. The girl that they chose to provide the film's sensuality might be better. The central conflict of the main character was uninvolving. This film is entirely devoid of positives. It is like a tedious exercise by someone who didn't want to go to the gym that day but did anyway. --------------------------------------------- Result 3211 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] If you didn't know better, you would believe the Christian moral majority in their preachy [[testimonial]] of the sins of the young, their questing for Satan, and that Hell was just brimming with Advanced Dungeons and Dragons fans.

None of these items bears one grain of truth, folks. This work does [[nothing]] but give the Southern Baptists a chance to take a breath, while the movie continues to [[spout]] their [[erroneous]] and alarmist views [[concerning]] a creative and original gaming system.

Tom Hanks contributes a stellar performance for this work, but even that wasn't enough to save it. It's crap. It's beneath crap. It is ignorance breeding ignorance and as such, it rates NOTHING from...

the Fiend :. If you didn't know better, you would believe the Christian moral majority in their preachy [[testimony]] of the sins of the young, their questing for Satan, and that Hell was just brimming with Advanced Dungeons and Dragons fans.

None of these items bears one grain of truth, folks. This work does [[anything]] but give the Southern Baptists a chance to take a breath, while the movie continues to [[jet]] their [[amiss]] and alarmist views [[relative]] a creative and original gaming system.

Tom Hanks contributes a stellar performance for this work, but even that wasn't enough to save it. It's crap. It's beneath crap. It is ignorance breeding ignorance and as such, it rates NOTHING from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Brilliant]] [[adaptation]] of the novel that [[made]] [[famous]] the relatives of Chilean President Salvador Allende killed. [[In]] the environment of a [[large]] estate that arises from the [[ruins]], becoming a force to [[abuse]] and exploitation of outrage, a luxury estate for the benefit of the upstart Esteban Trueba and his undeserved family, the brilliant [[Danish]] [[director]] Bille [[August]] recreates, in micro, which at the time would be the process leading to the greatest infamy of his story to the hardened Chilean nation, and whose main character would Augusto Pinochet (Stephen similarities with it are inevitable: recall, as an example, that image of the senator with dark glasses that makes him the wink to the general to begin making the palace).

Bille August attends an exceptional cast in the Jeremy protruding Irons, whose character changes from arrogance and extreme cruelty, the hard lesson that life always brings us to almost force us to change. In Esteban fully applies the law of resonance, with great wisdom, Solomon describes in these words:"The things that freckles are the same punishment that will serve you."

Unforgettable Glenn Close playing splint, the tainted sister of Stephen, whose sin, driven by loneliness, spiritual and platonic love was the wife of his cruel snowy brother. Meryl Streep also brilliant, a woman whose name came to him like a glove Clara. With telekinetic powers, cognitive and mediumistic, this hardened woman, loyal to his blunt, conservative husband, is an indicator of character and self-control that we wish for ourselves and for all human beings.

Every character is a portrait of virtuosity (as Blanca worthy rebel leader Pedro Segundo unhappy ...) or a portrait of humiliation, like Stephen Jr., the bastard child of Senator, who serves as an instrument for the return of the boomerang.

The film moves the bowels, we recreated some facts that should not ever be repeated, but that absurdly still happen (Colombia is a sad example) and another reminder that, against all, life is wonderful because there are always people like Isabel Allende and immortalize just Bille August. [[Sumptuous]] [[adapting]] of the novel that [[introduced]] [[proverbial]] the relatives of Chilean President Salvador Allende killed. [[During]] the environment of a [[gargantuan]] estate that arises from the [[wrack]], becoming a force to [[maltreated]] and exploitation of outrage, a luxury estate for the benefit of the upstart Esteban Trueba and his undeserved family, the brilliant [[Krone]] [[headmaster]] Bille [[Augustus]] recreates, in micro, which at the time would be the process leading to the greatest infamy of his story to the hardened Chilean nation, and whose main character would Augusto Pinochet (Stephen similarities with it are inevitable: recall, as an example, that image of the senator with dark glasses that makes him the wink to the general to begin making the palace).

Bille August attends an exceptional cast in the Jeremy protruding Irons, whose character changes from arrogance and extreme cruelty, the hard lesson that life always brings us to almost force us to change. In Esteban fully applies the law of resonance, with great wisdom, Solomon describes in these words:"The things that freckles are the same punishment that will serve you."

Unforgettable Glenn Close playing splint, the tainted sister of Stephen, whose sin, driven by loneliness, spiritual and platonic love was the wife of his cruel snowy brother. Meryl Streep also brilliant, a woman whose name came to him like a glove Clara. With telekinetic powers, cognitive and mediumistic, this hardened woman, loyal to his blunt, conservative husband, is an indicator of character and self-control that we wish for ourselves and for all human beings.

Every character is a portrait of virtuosity (as Blanca worthy rebel leader Pedro Segundo unhappy ...) or a portrait of humiliation, like Stephen Jr., the bastard child of Senator, who serves as an instrument for the return of the boomerang.

The film moves the bowels, we recreated some facts that should not ever be repeated, but that absurdly still happen (Colombia is a sad example) and another reminder that, against all, life is wonderful because there are always people like Isabel Allende and immortalize just Bille August. --------------------------------------------- Result 3213 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] This is [[yet]] another [[depressing]] and [[boring]] [[film]] about [[AIDS]] and tragedy. It [[begins]] very uneventful and predictable and [[continues]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. I kept [[waiting]] for it to pick-up, but unfortunately it never did. The acting is fair, but the script [[needs]] A [[LOT]] of work. And if you're [[looking]] for the nudity, don't waste your time with these not so [[hot]] [[actors]]. Due to the poor sound quality and [[lack]] of [[captions]], I missed 1/8 of the [[movie]]. [[If]] you have never [[seen]] over five [[gay]] [[films]], or have [[recently]] [[come]] to terms with being gay, you [[may]] [[find]] this [[film]] interesting, [[otherwise]] it's your run-of-the-mill low [[budget]] [[movie]]. It [[ranks]] as one of the [[worst]] [[gay]] [[films]] I have ever seen. This is [[still]] another [[somber]] and [[tiresome]] [[cinematography]] about [[HELPS]] and tragedy. It [[starts]] very uneventful and predictable and [[continue]] [[across]] the [[cinema]]. I kept [[expecting]] for it to pick-up, but unfortunately it never did. The acting is fair, but the script [[gotta]] A [[LOTS]] of work. And if you're [[searching]] for the nudity, don't waste your time with these not so [[hottest]] [[protagonists]]. Due to the poor sound quality and [[shortage]] of [[subtitles]], I missed 1/8 of the [[cinematography]]. [[Though]] you have never [[noticed]] over five [[homo]] [[cinema]], or have [[lately]] [[coming]] to terms with being gay, you [[maggio]] [[finds]] this [[films]] interesting, [[alternately]] it's your run-of-the-mill low [[budgets]] [[filmmaking]]. It [[classifications]] as one of the [[gravest]] [[homo]] [[kino]] I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 3214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[remember]] when I was five and my [[parents]] [[thought]] it was a regular cartoon movie....except when the bras and bullets [[started]] flying. I have to [[agree]] this movie will make anyone and [[everyone]] [[upset]] because it is set to discriminate everyone and anyone....but the [[truth]] is it is [[funny]] as hell as it is [[deep]]. I [[recommend]] this to anyone who [[likes]] cult classics. [[Also]] try Fritz the [[cat]] and the [[NINE]] [[Lives]] of Fritz the Cat. If I'm [[correct]] Ralph Bashki did that movie too.It involves a cat that goes through hard times with family, streets,jobs , etc. When I was old enough I rented all of these movies out. Because Coonskin was an offensive title during that era it was also labeled as Street Fighter. Ralph Bashki also made Cool World starring a very young Brad Pitt. Heavy traffic was another cartoon that dealt with the street life of a young man. I [[reminisce]] when I was five and my [[parenting]] [[ideology]] it was a regular cartoon movie....except when the bras and bullets [[launches]] flying. I have to [[concur]] this movie will make anyone and [[everybody]] [[upsetting]] because it is set to discriminate everyone and anyone....but the [[veracity]] is it is [[fun]] as hell as it is [[deepest]]. I [[recommendations]] this to anyone who [[adores]] cult classics. [[Moreover]] try Fritz the [[ctu]] and the [[IX]] [[Inhabits]] of Fritz the Cat. If I'm [[accurate]] Ralph Bashki did that movie too.It involves a cat that goes through hard times with family, streets,jobs , etc. When I was old enough I rented all of these movies out. Because Coonskin was an offensive title during that era it was also labeled as Street Fighter. Ralph Bashki also made Cool World starring a very young Brad Pitt. Heavy traffic was another cartoon that dealt with the street life of a young man. --------------------------------------------- Result 3215 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It's [[hard]] to [[praise]] this [[film]] [[much]]. The CGI for the dragon was well done, but [[lacked]] proper [[modelling]] for light and [[shadow]]. [[Also]], the same footage is used [[endlessly]] of the [[dragon]] stomping through corridors which [[becomes]] slightly tedious.

I was amazed to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting [[credits]], wondering what an ex-Emperor of the Roman Empire was doing acting in this film! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it [[must]] be an alias, and can one [[blame]] him for using one if he appears in this [[stinker]].

The story might been interesting, but the acting is flat, and direction is [[tedious]]. [[If]] you MUST watch this film, go around to your friend's house and get drunk while doing so - then it'll be enjoyable. It's [[arduous]] to [[congratulate]] this [[cinematography]] [[very]]. The CGI for the dragon was well done, but [[lacking]] proper [[modeling]] for light and [[shading]]. [[Moreover]], the same footage is used [[constantly]] of the [[dragons]] stomping through corridors which [[become]] slightly tedious.

I was amazed to see "Marcus Aurelius" in the acting [[credence]], wondering what an ex-Emperor of the Roman Empire was doing acting in this film! Like "Whoopie Goldberg" it [[owes]] be an alias, and can one [[blamed]] him for using one if he appears in this [[tosser]].

The story might been interesting, but the acting is flat, and direction is [[tiresome]]. [[Though]] you MUST watch this film, go around to your friend's house and get drunk while doing so - then it'll be enjoyable. --------------------------------------------- Result 3216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I always [[get]] [[frustrated]] by [[films]] that were [[obviously]] [[written]] by one [[gender]]. [[Especially]] when they [[obviously]] don't do [[enough]] [[research]] to find out when something not only doesn't ring true, but rings blatently [[false]].

The scene I am remembering is the one in the bathroom where Jack tells his football teammates that he got Diane pregnant. In no [[way]], shape, or form would a [[guy]] ever [[cheer]] another guy getting a girl pregnant in high school. They might [[cheer]] about the guy having sex with the hot cheerleader, but I can also guarantee that the first the football team heard about it would not be at a urinal.

It was obvious that this film didn't take itself so seriously, and it wasn't hideously bad, but come on! I always [[got]] [[disenchanted]] by [[kino]] that were [[definitely]] [[wrote]] by one [[genre]]. [[Notably]] when they [[naturally]] don't do [[suitably]] [[researches]] to find out when something not only doesn't ring true, but rings blatently [[untrue]].

The scene I am remembering is the one in the bathroom where Jack tells his football teammates that he got Diane pregnant. In no [[ways]], shape, or form would a [[blokes]] ever [[cheerfulness]] another guy getting a girl pregnant in high school. They might [[cheerfulness]] about the guy having sex with the hot cheerleader, but I can also guarantee that the first the football team heard about it would not be at a urinal.

It was obvious that this film didn't take itself so seriously, and it wasn't hideously bad, but come on! --------------------------------------------- Result 3217 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] My rating refers to the first 4 Seasons of Stargate SG-1 which are wonderfully fresh, creative and addicting. When the cast stepped through the gate, you never knew what lay on the other side! Starting around Season 5, the show took a different [[focus]] - [[still]] good, but [[different]].

The series follows the adventures of a team of humans (and one alien) who regularly venture into a planetary transport device called the "Stargate". The backstory of the series is based on the characters and events of the movie "Stargate" in which the device is discovered during an archaeological dig in Egypt.

The episodes are light (innocent and easy to watch) and very creative. Many of the inventive stories could easily have been made into great sci-fi movies of their own. What happens next was always unpredictable.

The characters on which the show rests are also well-defined and brilliantly performed. Their tone is serious, but the dialog is flowered with incredible wit and humor. They are simply fun to watch.

Starting somewhere around Season 5, the series started to evolve into a continuing storyline based on fighting a single foe (the Goa'uld, then the Ori). The plots become more complex (a lot more political/strategic oriented) and interdependent. The characters were still as great as ever but the show was different in nature.

One thing that must be mentioned is to watch the episodes that commemorated the 100th and 200th episodes. They are simply can't-miss shows. They exhibit the creative and wildly humorous genius that carried the series through 10 seasons.

If you are a sci-fi fan, watch a few episodes of the first 4 Seasons and you'll likely be hooked. If you like evolving story lines between two opposing sides, you have 10 seasons of shows to look forward to. My rating refers to the first 4 Seasons of Stargate SG-1 which are wonderfully fresh, creative and addicting. When the cast stepped through the gate, you never knew what lay on the other side! Starting around Season 5, the show took a different [[concentrations]] - [[however]] good, but [[assorted]].

The series follows the adventures of a team of humans (and one alien) who regularly venture into a planetary transport device called the "Stargate". The backstory of the series is based on the characters and events of the movie "Stargate" in which the device is discovered during an archaeological dig in Egypt.

The episodes are light (innocent and easy to watch) and very creative. Many of the inventive stories could easily have been made into great sci-fi movies of their own. What happens next was always unpredictable.

The characters on which the show rests are also well-defined and brilliantly performed. Their tone is serious, but the dialog is flowered with incredible wit and humor. They are simply fun to watch.

Starting somewhere around Season 5, the series started to evolve into a continuing storyline based on fighting a single foe (the Goa'uld, then the Ori). The plots become more complex (a lot more political/strategic oriented) and interdependent. The characters were still as great as ever but the show was different in nature.

One thing that must be mentioned is to watch the episodes that commemorated the 100th and 200th episodes. They are simply can't-miss shows. They exhibit the creative and wildly humorous genius that carried the series through 10 seasons.

If you are a sci-fi fan, watch a few episodes of the first 4 Seasons and you'll likely be hooked. If you like evolving story lines between two opposing sides, you have 10 seasons of shows to look forward to. --------------------------------------------- Result 3218 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Short Version: Seed isn't worthless. It's just derivative and inferior. And soulless.

Long Version: If you have never seen any of the films comprising the vaguely-defined "psychological horror" genre, this movie will probably melt your face off. Maybe not, but it will give you a good burn. The opening montage of real animal abuse will be sufficient to open your eyes to possibilities of brutality-on-video, and the (only) memorable gore scene later in the film will perhaps be more than you can handle. The [[climax]] will play with your emotions in a way that perhaps no other film has.

But that's if you don't have much experience with the genre. If you've seen the real thing..."August Underground's Penance," for example, you will, as I did, find it terribly difficult to stay awake until the end of the film.

Other reviewers have compared this to the video nasties of old. I understand this comparison. Like the video nasties, "Seed" is more violent than a mainstream horror film and less subtle. But the reason the video nasties are still known to us is not only for the above reasons--those that are still popular had something special. Permit me to be ambiguous, I think you will understand: those that have stuck around had "soul".

Take this quote from Gabriele Crisanti, director of "Burial Ground," on an interview on the new-ish DVD: "...we will never have more films like these, because today, technology has surpassed imagination. And technology is cold. So many things will disappear because small films like these won't be produced anymore. Today we have great, exceptional tricks that are very expensive, but they are cold. Today a horror, a terror film of this kind costs more than a million dollars. These films were not so expensive...they are real effects, made with our hands".

Perhaps it is wrong to take the comparison to old school horror so seriously. But Crisanti has hit the nail on the head. Even at their most seemingly exploitational, the best of the video nasties were pursuing a primitive "truth." And this is where Boll falls short. It's like he's seen the movies and not understood them. Everything on the checklist is there...BS about "making a statement about humanity," an obscene torture scene, etc. But it is, as Crisanti puts it, "cold." The gore is all CGI. The whole thing feels like scenes pieced together from other movies of various genres. And the pacing is sooooo slow. Man, so slow.

Another interesting note: the one gore scene really reminded me of a video game.

Anyway, enough BS. Weak movie. Short Version: Seed isn't worthless. It's just derivative and inferior. And soulless.

Long Version: If you have never seen any of the films comprising the vaguely-defined "psychological horror" genre, this movie will probably melt your face off. Maybe not, but it will give you a good burn. The opening montage of real animal abuse will be sufficient to open your eyes to possibilities of brutality-on-video, and the (only) memorable gore scene later in the film will perhaps be more than you can handle. The [[pinnacle]] will play with your emotions in a way that perhaps no other film has.

But that's if you don't have much experience with the genre. If you've seen the real thing..."August Underground's Penance," for example, you will, as I did, find it terribly difficult to stay awake until the end of the film.

Other reviewers have compared this to the video nasties of old. I understand this comparison. Like the video nasties, "Seed" is more violent than a mainstream horror film and less subtle. But the reason the video nasties are still known to us is not only for the above reasons--those that are still popular had something special. Permit me to be ambiguous, I think you will understand: those that have stuck around had "soul".

Take this quote from Gabriele Crisanti, director of "Burial Ground," on an interview on the new-ish DVD: "...we will never have more films like these, because today, technology has surpassed imagination. And technology is cold. So many things will disappear because small films like these won't be produced anymore. Today we have great, exceptional tricks that are very expensive, but they are cold. Today a horror, a terror film of this kind costs more than a million dollars. These films were not so expensive...they are real effects, made with our hands".

Perhaps it is wrong to take the comparison to old school horror so seriously. But Crisanti has hit the nail on the head. Even at their most seemingly exploitational, the best of the video nasties were pursuing a primitive "truth." And this is where Boll falls short. It's like he's seen the movies and not understood them. Everything on the checklist is there...BS about "making a statement about humanity," an obscene torture scene, etc. But it is, as Crisanti puts it, "cold." The gore is all CGI. The whole thing feels like scenes pieced together from other movies of various genres. And the pacing is sooooo slow. Man, so slow.

Another interesting note: the one gore scene really reminded me of a video game.

Anyway, enough BS. Weak movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3219 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Still]] the [[definitive]] [[program]] about the Second World War, The World [[At]] War isn't just long, but also very [[informative]]. The [[series]] [[contains]] 26 [[episodes]] (each episode lasts for about 45 [[min]].), and [[includes]] the [[events]] leading up to and following in the wake of the [[war]]. [[Most]] [[episodes]] are about the [[war]] in Europe, and there are [[several]] episodes about the [[war]] in the [[Pacific]]. Other episodes [[include]] information about the wars in Africa, [[Burma]], the Atlantic and the home fronts of Germany, [[Great]] [[Britain]], United States and Soviet Union. There is one episode that's [[dedicated]] to the [[Holocaust]]. The series starts off with the episode A [[New]] [[Germany]] (1933-1939), and tells about the [[rise]] of the Nazis in Germany and German territorial [[gains]] prior to the [[outbreak]] of [[war]]. The [[series]] [[ends]] with the episode Remember; the war's [[influence]] in a post-war world. [[Remember]] is a [[fitting]] episode to [[end]] this [[great]] [[program]]. [[Every]] episode [[begins]] with a short introduction and then with [[opening]] credits. The [[credits]] are accompanied by a [[powerful]] [[music]] theme. There are many [[fitting]] [[music]] pieces [[throughout]] the series. Each episode is like a mini-film. The footage is [[fantastic]], and so is the way it was put [[together]]. In addition, some of the footage is in color. The [[information]] included also makes the episodes memorable and [[entertaining]].

The series was produced by Jeremy Isaacs for Thames [[Television]] (UK). Commissioned in 1969, it [[took]] four [[years]] to [[produce]], such was the depth of its [[research]]. The series was narrated by Laurence [[Olivier]] (one of the most [[famous]] and revered [[actors]] of the 20th century). The [[series]] interviewed [[leading]] members of the [[Allied]] and [[Axis]] campaigns, [[including]] eyewitness [[accounts]] by civilians, enlisted [[men]], [[officers]] and [[politicians]], [[amongst]] them [[Albert]] Speer, Karl Donitz, [[Jimmy]] [[Stewart]], [[Bill]] Mauldin, [[Curtis]] LeMay, [[Lord]] Mountbatten, Alger Hiss, Toshikazu Kase, Arthur Harris, Charles [[Sweeney]], Paul Tibbets, Traudl Junge and historian [[Stephen]] Ambrose. Jeremy Isaacs [[says]] in "The Making of The World at [[War]]" that he sought to interview, not [[necessarily]] the surviving [[big]] names, but their aides and assistants. The most [[difficult]] subject to locate and persuade to be [[interviewed]], according to Isaacs, was [[Heinrich]] Himmler's adjutant, Karl [[Wolff]]. The latter [[admitted]] to [[witnessing]] a large-scale [[execution]] in Himmler's [[presence]].

The World At War is often considered to be the definitive television history of the Second World War. Some consider it the finest example of the documentary form. In a [[list]] of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, The World at War ranked 19th. The program has everything that the viewer needs to know about the war. After watching a few episodes I liked the series so much that I tried to watch the remaining episodes one after the other. I've seen some of them several times. There are two other great documentary series that I know of that may be of interest to the viewer. One is called The Great War (1964) that's about World War I. The other is called Cold War (1998) that's about the Cold War obviously. [[However]] the [[definite]] [[programming]] about the Second World War, The World [[In]] War isn't just long, but also very [[informational]]. The [[serials]] [[therein]] 26 [[bouts]] (each episode lasts for about 45 [[mins]].), and [[consists]] the [[incidents]] leading up to and following in the wake of the [[warfare]]. [[Longer]] [[spells]] are about the [[warfare]] in Europe, and there are [[various]] episodes about the [[wars]] in the [[Peaceful]]. Other episodes [[containing]] information about the wars in Africa, [[Myanmar]], the Atlantic and the home fronts of Germany, [[Super]] [[Brittany]], United States and Soviet Union. There is one episode that's [[devoted]] to the [[Shoah]]. The series starts off with the episode A [[Novel]] [[Germans]] (1933-1939), and tells about the [[climbing]] of the Nazis in Germany and German territorial [[increases]] prior to the [[outburst]] of [[wars]]. The [[serials]] [[terminates]] with the episode Remember; the war's [[effects]] in a post-war world. [[Remind]] is a [[fit]] episode to [[terminate]] this [[resplendent]] [[agenda]]. [[Any]] episode [[starts]] with a short introduction and then with [[opened]] credits. The [[appropriations]] are accompanied by a [[forceful]] [[musicians]] theme. There are many [[fit]] [[musica]] pieces [[during]] the series. Each episode is like a mini-film. The footage is [[glamorous]], and so is the way it was put [[jointly]]. In addition, some of the footage is in color. The [[info]] included also makes the episodes memorable and [[entertain]].

The series was produced by Jeremy Isaacs for Thames [[Tv]] (UK). Commissioned in 1969, it [[taken]] four [[olds]] to [[generate]], such was the depth of its [[researches]]. The series was narrated by Laurence [[Olivia]] (one of the most [[famed]] and revered [[actresses]] of the 20th century). The [[serials]] interviewed [[principal]] members of the [[Ally]] and [[Axle]] campaigns, [[consisting]] eyewitness [[accounting]] by civilians, enlisted [[males]], [[officer]] and [[politics]], [[inter]] them [[Hugh]] Speer, Karl Donitz, [[Jimmie]] [[Steward]], [[Billed]] Mauldin, [[Curtiss]] LeMay, [[Gods]] Mountbatten, Alger Hiss, Toshikazu Kase, Arthur Harris, Charles [[Sweeny]], Paul Tibbets, Traudl Junge and historian [[Steven]] Ambrose. Jeremy Isaacs [[asserts]] in "The Making of The World at [[Wars]]" that he sought to interview, not [[invariably]] the surviving [[gargantuan]] names, but their aides and assistants. The most [[problematic]] subject to locate and persuade to be [[questioned]], according to Isaacs, was [[Henry]] Himmler's adjutant, Karl [[Wolfe]]. The latter [[accepted]] to [[seeing]] a large-scale [[executes]] in Himmler's [[attendance]].

The World At War is often considered to be the definitive television history of the Second World War. Some consider it the finest example of the documentary form. In a [[listing]] of the 100 Greatest British Television Programmes drawn up by the British Film Institute in 2000, voted for by industry professionals, The World at War ranked 19th. The program has everything that the viewer needs to know about the war. After watching a few episodes I liked the series so much that I tried to watch the remaining episodes one after the other. I've seen some of them several times. There are two other great documentary series that I know of that may be of interest to the viewer. One is called The Great War (1964) that's about World War I. The other is called Cold War (1998) that's about the Cold War obviously. --------------------------------------------- Result 3220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I just [[watched]] this movie on Starz. Let me go through a few things i thought [[could]] have been improved; the acting, writing, directing, special effects, camera crew, sound, and lighting. It [[also]] seemed as though the writers had no idea [[anything]] that had to do with the [[movie]]. Apparently back in 2007, when the dollar was stronger you could buy a [[super]] advanced stealth bomber that could go completely invisible for $75 million. Now-a-days those things [[cost]] about $3 billion and they [[cant]] [[go]] invisible. [[Apparently]] you can [[fly]] from the US to the middle east in an hour. There was a completely random lesbian scene, which I didn't mind, but it seemed like a lame attempt to [[get]] more guys to see it. The [[camera]] would randomly zoom in on actors and skip to random scenes. Oh yeah, since its a [[Steven]] Segal movie, its [[predictable]] as [[hell]]. All in all I [[rank]] it right up there with [[Snakes]] on a [[Plane]]. I just [[seen]] this movie on Starz. Let me go through a few things i thought [[did]] have been improved; the acting, writing, directing, special effects, camera crew, sound, and lighting. It [[additionally]] seemed as though the writers had no idea [[nothing]] that had to do with the [[kino]]. Apparently back in 2007, when the dollar was stronger you could buy a [[splendid]] advanced stealth bomber that could go completely invisible for $75 million. Now-a-days those things [[costing]] about $3 billion and they [[thats]] [[going]] invisible. [[Visibly]] you can [[stealing]] from the US to the middle east in an hour. There was a completely random lesbian scene, which I didn't mind, but it seemed like a lame attempt to [[gets]] more guys to see it. The [[cameras]] would randomly zoom in on actors and skip to random scenes. Oh yeah, since its a [[Stephane]] Segal movie, its [[foreseeable]] as [[inferno]]. All in all I [[categorized]] it right up there with [[Serpents]] on a [[Planes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] This [[cordial]] [[comedy]] [[confronts]] a few bizarre characters. [[Especially]], of [[course]], the two leading [[characters]]. Jack Lemmon plays [[Felix]], a hypochondriac whose wife lost him because she couldn't stand his cleaning and cooking attacks any longer. So he tries to [[kill]] himself but every attempt fails. Walter Matthau plays Oscar, his friend, an untidy, unreliable sports-reporter who lives in divorce from his ex-wife in a bachelor apartment. He offers his distressed friend Felix a new home in his apartment. And soon the trouble begins because two such contrary characters can't live together for a long time. Felix turns Oscar's disorderly flat into a clean exhibition flat. He cleans and cooks the whole time. After a short while, Oscar feels persecution mania ... Filmed in a theatrical way and excellent acted. Above all, Jack Lemmon's [[play]] is [[wonderful]]. He is the perfect clown. He makes us laugh but in a tragi-comic way. Look for the wonderful scene when both men invite their two female [[neighbours]] for supper, because Oscar has to touch something more softer than a bowling-ball. [[While]] he is preparing the [[drinks]], [[Felix]] sits with the two young ladies in the living-room. To get out of this embarrassing situation, he [[starts]] to [[talk]] about the [[weather]]. A minute [[later]], he [[changes]] the subject and [[talks]] about his ex-wife and children. Suddenly he begins to [[weep]] and when [[Oscar]] [[comes]] back with the [[drinks]], there are three [[weeping]] people in the living-room. The [[film]] is full of such amusing and at the same [[time]] [[touching]] scenes. An [[intelligent]], entertaining [[comedy]] with much [[heart]]. 10 out of 10! This [[amiable]] [[travesty]] [[face]] a few bizarre characters. [[Primarily]], of [[cours]], the two leading [[features]]. Jack Lemmon plays [[Dominguez]], a hypochondriac whose wife lost him because she couldn't stand his cleaning and cooking attacks any longer. So he tries to [[whack]] himself but every attempt fails. Walter Matthau plays Oscar, his friend, an untidy, unreliable sports-reporter who lives in divorce from his ex-wife in a bachelor apartment. He offers his distressed friend Felix a new home in his apartment. And soon the trouble begins because two such contrary characters can't live together for a long time. Felix turns Oscar's disorderly flat into a clean exhibition flat. He cleans and cooks the whole time. After a short while, Oscar feels persecution mania ... Filmed in a theatrical way and excellent acted. Above all, Jack Lemmon's [[gaming]] is [[handsome]]. He is the perfect clown. He makes us laugh but in a tragi-comic way. Look for the wonderful scene when both men invite their two female [[neighbor]] for supper, because Oscar has to touch something more softer than a bowling-ball. [[Despite]] he is preparing the [[beverage]], [[Buchanan]] sits with the two young ladies in the living-room. To get out of this embarrassing situation, he [[launches]] to [[conversation]] about the [[meteorological]]. A minute [[then]], he [[modified]] the subject and [[dialogue]] about his ex-wife and children. Suddenly he begins to [[cry]] and when [[Oskar]] [[arrives]] back with the [[beverages]], there are three [[mourning]] people in the living-room. The [[kino]] is full of such amusing and at the same [[times]] [[affects]] scenes. An [[termite]], entertaining [[travesty]] with much [[crux]]. 10 out of 10! --------------------------------------------- Result 3222 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[In]] modern day Eastern Europe life is hard and for young women [[prostitution]] is one of the only career options and one taken, reluctantly, by Melania. She attracts the attentions of an American, Seymour, who becomes obsessed with her, paying more and more money for time with her until he eventually wants to buy her outright. She has two pimps with differring emotional attachments to her and she is generally passed around like some piece of baggage with no feelings of her own. However, we are in "modern art-house cinema" territory, so conventions like narrative structure, lighting the subject so it can be seen, camera techniques that add to rather than distract from the action and a vaguely consistent plot can all be abandoned. Much of the time I had no idea what was supposed to be happening and very rarely did I care. People began leaving the screening almost before the last latecomers had arrived and I don't think I've ever seen so many people walk out.

Images are important to the director - characters slowly emerge from or disappear into a dark screen, we get long lingering shots of nothing in particular and one sex scene takes place in infra-red. In fact for such an unconventional film the sex scenes were remarkably ordinary; missionary positions between naked people in bed abounded and there were no drugs or related weirdness. But perhaps these days being ordinary is unconventional.

On the whole, almost entirely without merit.

[[Onto]] modern day Eastern Europe life is hard and for young women [[harlot]] is one of the only career options and one taken, reluctantly, by Melania. She attracts the attentions of an American, Seymour, who becomes obsessed with her, paying more and more money for time with her until he eventually wants to buy her outright. She has two pimps with differring emotional attachments to her and she is generally passed around like some piece of baggage with no feelings of her own. However, we are in "modern art-house cinema" territory, so conventions like narrative structure, lighting the subject so it can be seen, camera techniques that add to rather than distract from the action and a vaguely consistent plot can all be abandoned. Much of the time I had no idea what was supposed to be happening and very rarely did I care. People began leaving the screening almost before the last latecomers had arrived and I don't think I've ever seen so many people walk out.

Images are important to the director - characters slowly emerge from or disappear into a dark screen, we get long lingering shots of nothing in particular and one sex scene takes place in infra-red. In fact for such an unconventional film the sex scenes were remarkably ordinary; missionary positions between naked people in bed abounded and there were no drugs or related weirdness. But perhaps these days being ordinary is unconventional.

On the whole, almost entirely without merit.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3223 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Normally]], I don't watch [[action]] [[movies]] because of the fact that they are [[usually]] all pretty [[similar]]. This [[movie]] did have [[many]] stereotypical [[action]] [[movie]] scenes, but the [[characters]] and the originality of the film's [[premise]] made it much easier to watch. [[David]] Duchovny bended his normal acting [[approach]], which was [[great]] to see. Angelina Jolie, of course, was beautiful and did [[great]] acting. [[Great]] cast all [[together]]. A [[must]] [[see]] for people bored with the same [[old]] action [[movie]]. [[Habitually]], I don't watch [[activities]] [[theater]] because of the fact that they are [[fluently]] all pretty [[equivalent]]. This [[cinematography]] did have [[various]] stereotypical [[activity]] [[film]] scenes, but the [[characteristics]] and the originality of the film's [[prerequisite]] made it much easier to watch. [[Davids]] Duchovny bended his normal acting [[approaches]], which was [[formidable]] to see. Angelina Jolie, of course, was beautiful and did [[large]] acting. [[Whopping]] cast all [[jointly]]. A [[ought]] [[consults]] for people bored with the same [[archaic]] action [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3224 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Touching and sad movie. Portrays the trials and tribulations of a writer trying to come to terms with paralysis caused by a cycling accident. The film centers on his relationship with his married lover, whom he is often very hostile towards, and his interactions with other accident victims, particularly a black down-and-out and a white-supremacist biker. The film is often humorous, often sad, and [[always]] [[believable]]. Get out the box of kleenex and watch this on a cosy Sunday afternoon with your partner. Touching and sad movie. Portrays the trials and tribulations of a writer trying to come to terms with paralysis caused by a cycling accident. The film centers on his relationship with his married lover, whom he is often very hostile towards, and his interactions with other accident victims, particularly a black down-and-out and a white-supremacist biker. The film is often humorous, often sad, and [[incessantly]] [[dependable]]. Get out the box of kleenex and watch this on a cosy Sunday afternoon with your partner. --------------------------------------------- Result 3225 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A [[guy]] desperate for [[action]] [[attempts]] to hit on a [[gorgeous]] girl in a bus. She refuses him, but when he runs after someone who tries to steal her purse they get together anyway. And there it [[starts]] - a relation that is [[slightly]] [[tainted]] by the fact that she is a jealous and neurotic superhero. It can't be a [[secret]] that things between them are [[going]] to be [[problematic]].

In short, a [[story]] that could [[promise]] to [[grow]] out into a cool [[film]]. And IMO, it succeeds at being a nice film. It's no [[masterpiece]], but it had me in [[tears]] from [[laughing]] on more than one occasion - the two lead [[characters]] twirl around each other in a [[crazy]] [[love]] fest that is, [[even]] with the superhero thing going, [[believable]].

[[So]]. [[Thin]] story, but [[worked]] out really [[funny]] and [[thus]] [[worthy]] of cinema time.

7 out of 10 broken hearts A [[mec]] desperate for [[measures]] [[strives]] to hit on a [[awesome]] girl in a bus. She refuses him, but when he runs after someone who tries to steal her purse they get together anyway. And there it [[commenced]] - a relation that is [[modestly]] [[contaminated]] by the fact that she is a jealous and neurotic superhero. It can't be a [[disguised]] that things between them are [[go]] to be [[laborious]].

In short, a [[conte]] that could [[promised]] to [[augmentation]] out into a cool [[filmmaking]]. And IMO, it succeeds at being a nice film. It's no [[centerpiece]], but it had me in [[rip]] from [[giggling]] on more than one occasion - the two lead [[attribute]] twirl around each other in a [[lunatic]] [[likes]] fest that is, [[yet]] with the superhero thing going, [[dependable]].

[[Consequently]]. [[Darn]] story, but [[cooperating]] out really [[droll]] and [[consequently]] [[praiseworthy]] of cinema time.

7 out of 10 broken hearts --------------------------------------------- Result 3226 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Imagine if you could bring things back to life with just one touch" As soon as I first [[heard]] that, my attention was locked on the Trailer, And after the First Episode I [[found]] my self in [[love]] with this [[show]]. A Modern day Fairy Tale that [[Brings]] my [[Spirits]] up and Holds my attention throughout the entire [[show]]. I [[think]] the Acting and Casting is just [[perfect]], Each Character brings Something [[Unique]] to the [[show]] that [[adds]] to it's perfection. Even the one [[time]] Villains manage to overflow with A [[Unique]] sense, From the Bee [[Man]] to the Guy who can Swallow Kittens, they never [[seem]] to [[let]] me down. And the [[Deaths]] that [[would]] [[Normally]] lead to a Depressing [[Moment]] [[often]] [[end]] up being [[Purely]] Comical (Such as an [[Exploding]] Scratch & [[Sniff]] book)

Even with the [[large]] [[amount]] of [[Crime]] [[shows]] we have now a days, [[Daisies]] is one of the few that really [[stands]] out from the rest, Being not just a Mystery but a love [[story]], [[Comedy]] and a Fairy [[Tale]] with a hint of [[Drama]] all [[baked]] into one [[Wonderful]] [[pie]].....err [[show]].

What really [[shocked]] me was the [[fact]] that it was on ABC, [[For]] [[Years]] I never had a [[reason]] to [[turn]] to ABC, But this [[brought]] me back each [[week]] with a [[Smile]] on my [[face]]. It was as if [[Pushing]] [[Daisies]] [[Brought]] ABC back to [[life]] for me. But just like that, after two seasons, A few Awards, A [[Large]] Fan [[Base]] and [[Positive]] [[Responses]] from [[Critics]] the [[show]] has been [[dropped]]. It [[seems]] as [[though]] Ned has [[Touched]] [[ABC]] again and [[forever]] killed it for me. I will [[always]] be a fan of this [[show]] [[though]], And I [[Recommend]] this to [[anyone]] who [[likes]] a [[lot]] of talking and a [[lot]] of [[love]] from the [[shows]] they watch. "Imagine if you could bring things back to life with just one touch" As soon as I first [[overheard]] that, my attention was locked on the Trailer, And after the First Episode I [[detected]] my self in [[likes]] with this [[demonstrate]]. A Modern day Fairy Tale that [[Bring]] my [[Liquor]] up and Holds my attention throughout the entire [[demonstrating]]. I [[reckon]] the Acting and Casting is just [[faultless]], Each Character brings Something [[Exclusive]] to the [[demonstrating]] that [[inserting]] to it's perfection. Even the one [[period]] Villains manage to overflow with A [[Unequalled]] sense, From the Bee [[Guy]] to the Guy who can Swallow Kittens, they never [[looks]] to [[allowing]] me down. And the [[Dying]] that [[could]] [[Commonly]] lead to a Depressing [[Time]] [[ordinarily]] [[ends]] up being [[Strictly]] Comical (Such as an [[Bombing]] Scratch & [[Sniffing]] book)

Even with the [[sizable]] [[somme]] of [[Offense]] [[exposition]] we have now a days, [[Mommies]] is one of the few that really [[standing]] out from the rest, Being not just a Mystery but a love [[narratives]], [[Parody]] and a Fairy [[Stories]] with a hint of [[Dramas]] all [[baking]] into one [[Funky]] [[pizza]].....err [[displays]].

What really [[appalled]] me was the [[facto]] that it was on ABC, [[At]] [[Olds]] I never had a [[motives]] to [[converting]] to ABC, But this [[lodged]] me back each [[chow]] with a [[Mouse]] on my [[confronts]]. It was as if [[Prompting]] [[Mums]] [[Introduced]] ABC back to [[vie]] for me. But just like that, after two seasons, A few Awards, A [[Major]] Fan [[Bases]] and [[Positively]] [[Reactions]] from [[Detractors]] the [[exposition]] has been [[fallen]]. It [[seem]] as [[nevertheless]] Ned has [[Poked]] [[ABCS]] again and [[eternally]] killed it for me. I will [[incessantly]] be a fan of this [[spectacle]] [[despite]], And I [[Recommendations]] this to [[nobody]] who [[adores]] a [[batch]] of talking and a [[lots]] of [[adore]] from the [[displays]] they watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3227 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is really bad. The acting is plain awful except Michael Ironside. I don't get the story. Richard Grieco is the only survivor after a fight between two Mc-gangs. He comes to a town and suddenly he is choosened to fight against the bad people who wants indian-land. At the cover it said he was a indian himself that returned too his home-town, I didn't hear that in the movie, if so it wasn't clear.

Richard Grieco was one hell of a bad actor. Stiff and ugly. He said his lines like it too. And we wouldn't talk about Sean Young, she hasn' been any of my favourite actors but in this movie she plays a indian women who falls in love with Bolt (Grieco). She is awful.

When I rented it I choosed between this and Subterfuge with Amanda Pays. I choosed this one because of Michael Ironside was in the cast. Maybe I should have taken Subterfuge.

Don't see this unless you think Richard Grieco looks tough on a motorbike with sunglasses.

I will soon uptade the cast-list because I have it at home. I wrote it down after I seen the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3228 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] It's [[hard]] for me to assign the "[[fair]]" number of stars to this [[film]], but I settled on 8 because of its [[high]] production values and what was, in 1968, an [[innovative]] approach to the war film. Remember too that I haven't [[seen]] it since 1969. But it did make a strong [[impression]].

The Long Day's [[Dying]] must be one of the most [[vivid]] antiwar [[films]] ever [[made]]. It [[achieves]] this simply by portraying in extremely [[realistic]] terms the actions of a handful of soldiers in Northwestern [[Europe]] in 1944-45. [[No]] film before this one showed war at the infantry squad level with so much [[brutal]] detail, and all in a coldly dispassionate [[way]] that [[lets]] the [[actions]] speak for themselves. There is no preaching, no sentimentality, no comic relief, no complicated scenarios.

Unfortunately, there's no subtlety either. Partly because of their situation - trying to stay alive - the characters come across as flat, familiar cliché's. As "entertainment," the film doesn't make it, though it was clearly not intended to "entertain." It was intended to slug you over the head with the misery and horror of World War II and modern war in general. This was twenty [[years]] before Platoon and thirty before Saving Private Ryan, both of which are far more "watchable" [[films]]. Here the flat and generally disagreeable characters, the lack of an actual plot, and the realistically unpleasant images (including what may be the first on-screen vomit in theatrical history) make the film hard to sit through, though it is only 95 minutes.

So, 10 stars for production and realism, 4 stars for the feeling you'll have when it's over, a bonus star for having its heart in the right place. Average: 8.

Like Carl Foreman's underrated "The Victors," an equally downbeat but more interesting and thought-provoking film, The Long Day's Dying seems not to be on DVD. Why not? Both films have been on cable a number of times. It's [[stiff]] for me to assign the "[[equitable]]" number of stars to this [[flick]], but I settled on 8 because of its [[higher]] production values and what was, in 1968, an [[revolutionary]] approach to the war film. Remember too that I haven't [[noticed]] it since 1969. But it did make a strong [[printing]].

The Long Day's [[Deathbed]] must be one of the most [[lifelike]] antiwar [[movie]] ever [[introduced]]. It [[obtains]] this simply by portraying in extremely [[hardheaded]] terms the actions of a handful of soldiers in Northwestern [[Eu]] in 1944-45. [[Nope]] film before this one showed war at the infantry squad level with so much [[brute]] detail, and all in a coldly dispassionate [[routing]] that [[entitles]] the [[measurements]] speak for themselves. There is no preaching, no sentimentality, no comic relief, no complicated scenarios.

Unfortunately, there's no subtlety either. Partly because of their situation - trying to stay alive - the characters come across as flat, familiar cliché's. As "entertainment," the film doesn't make it, though it was clearly not intended to "entertain." It was intended to slug you over the head with the misery and horror of World War II and modern war in general. This was twenty [[olds]] before Platoon and thirty before Saving Private Ryan, both of which are far more "watchable" [[movie]]. Here the flat and generally disagreeable characters, the lack of an actual plot, and the realistically unpleasant images (including what may be the first on-screen vomit in theatrical history) make the film hard to sit through, though it is only 95 minutes.

So, 10 stars for production and realism, 4 stars for the feeling you'll have when it's over, a bonus star for having its heart in the right place. Average: 8.

Like Carl Foreman's underrated "The Victors," an equally downbeat but more interesting and thought-provoking film, The Long Day's Dying seems not to be on DVD. Why not? Both films have been on cable a number of times. --------------------------------------------- Result 3229 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There's a [[great]] [[deal]] of material from the [[Modesty]] Blaise comics and novels that [[would]] be great in a [[movie]]. Unfortunately, [[several]] [[attempts]] have been [[made]] and they've fallen short of the [[great]] [[potential]] in the [[character]]. [[So]], no, this isn't the Modesty you know from the [[comic]] strip ([[currently]] reprinted in [[nice]] editions from [[Titan]] Books). This is [[Modesty]] some 5 or 6 [[years]] [[prior]] to the first strip, and from what you can piece [[together]] from her back-story, it's [[accurate]].

Miramax had the movie rights to the character, with Quentin Tarantino acting as advocate and technical adviser. Early drafts of the Miramax project attempted to adapt one of the best novels, but always managed to leave out some crucial element. Tarantino wasn't happy with any of them, and offered to remove his name from the project so they could proceed. To the studio's credit, they wanted to keep him in the process, since they knew he "got" the character and her world. With the movie rights close to expiration, they decided to try a very different approach. The result was "My Name is Modesty," a small direct-to-video movie that introduces the character.

The movie does not introduce Willie Garvin or Sir Gerald. These characters are important to Blaise's adventures throughout most of the published stories. What this movie accomplishes is [[showing]] the strength of the character by herself. She never loses her composure, and you never [[doubt]] that she's in charge even unarmed in a room full of gangsters with guns. Most of the movie takes place within a casino, which undoubtedly saved money on the production. It doesn't [[matter]]. The film does not come across as cheap. Instead, it gives a fairly comprehensive (and believable) back-story for the character and demonstrates just how far she thinks ahead. Should Miramax adapt any of the comic stories or novels now, they've laid out the character's background nicely and won't have to [[spend]] much time on her "[[origin]]." I [[realize]] the words "Direct-to-Video" don't [[inspire]] confidence, but this film is well worth a [[look]]. There's a [[super]] [[treat]] of material from the [[Decency]] Blaise comics and novels that [[could]] be great in a [[filmmaking]]. Unfortunately, [[diverse]] [[try]] have been [[accomplished]] and they've fallen short of the [[whopping]] [[potentialities]] in the [[traits]]. [[Accordingly]], no, this isn't the Modesty you know from the [[comical]] strip ([[now]] reprinted in [[handsome]] editions from [[Giant]] Books). This is [[Decency]] some 5 or 6 [[yr]] [[beforehand]] to the first strip, and from what you can piece [[jointly]] from her back-story, it's [[accuracy]].

Miramax had the movie rights to the character, with Quentin Tarantino acting as advocate and technical adviser. Early drafts of the Miramax project attempted to adapt one of the best novels, but always managed to leave out some crucial element. Tarantino wasn't happy with any of them, and offered to remove his name from the project so they could proceed. To the studio's credit, they wanted to keep him in the process, since they knew he "got" the character and her world. With the movie rights close to expiration, they decided to try a very different approach. The result was "My Name is Modesty," a small direct-to-video movie that introduces the character.

The movie does not introduce Willie Garvin or Sir Gerald. These characters are important to Blaise's adventures throughout most of the published stories. What this movie accomplishes is [[displayed]] the strength of the character by herself. She never loses her composure, and you never [[duda]] that she's in charge even unarmed in a room full of gangsters with guns. Most of the movie takes place within a casino, which undoubtedly saved money on the production. It doesn't [[issue]]. The film does not come across as cheap. Instead, it gives a fairly comprehensive (and believable) back-story for the character and demonstrates just how far she thinks ahead. Should Miramax adapt any of the comic stories or novels now, they've laid out the character's background nicely and won't have to [[outlay]] much time on her "[[wellspring]]." I [[accomplishing]] the words "Direct-to-Video" don't [[stimulate]] confidence, but this film is well worth a [[glance]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] How can you tell that a horror movie is [[terrible]]? when you can't stop laughing about it of course! The plot has been well covered by other reviewers, so I'll just add a few things on the hilarity of it all.

Some reviews have placed the location in South America, others in Africa, I thought it was in some random island in the Pacific. [[Where]] [[exactly]] does this take place, seems to be a mystery. The cannibal tribe is conformed by a couple of black women some black men, and a man who looks like a young Frank Zappa banging the drums... the Devil God is a large black man with a terrible case of pink eyes.

One of the "freakiest" moments in the film is when, "Pablito" find his partner hanging from a tree covered in what seems to be an orange substance that I assume is blood, starts screaming for minutes on and on (that's actually funny), and then the head of his partner falls in the ground and "Pablito" kicks it a bit for what I assume is "shits n' giggles" and the eyes actually move...

But, of course, then the "freak" is gone when you realize the eyes moved because the movie is just [[bad]]...

I hadn't laughed like this in a loooong while, and I definitely recommend this film for a Sunday afternoon with your friends and you have nothing to do... grab a case of beers and start watching this film, you'll love it! If you are looking for a real horror or gore movie, though... don't' bother. How can you tell that a horror movie is [[spooky]]? when you can't stop laughing about it of course! The plot has been well covered by other reviewers, so I'll just add a few things on the hilarity of it all.

Some reviews have placed the location in South America, others in Africa, I thought it was in some random island in the Pacific. [[Everytime]] [[accurately]] does this take place, seems to be a mystery. The cannibal tribe is conformed by a couple of black women some black men, and a man who looks like a young Frank Zappa banging the drums... the Devil God is a large black man with a terrible case of pink eyes.

One of the "freakiest" moments in the film is when, "Pablito" find his partner hanging from a tree covered in what seems to be an orange substance that I assume is blood, starts screaming for minutes on and on (that's actually funny), and then the head of his partner falls in the ground and "Pablito" kicks it a bit for what I assume is "shits n' giggles" and the eyes actually move...

But, of course, then the "freak" is gone when you realize the eyes moved because the movie is just [[mala]]...

I hadn't laughed like this in a loooong while, and I definitely recommend this film for a Sunday afternoon with your friends and you have nothing to do... grab a case of beers and start watching this film, you'll love it! If you are looking for a real horror or gore movie, though... don't' bother. --------------------------------------------- Result 3231 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[Although]] Twenty [[Minutes]] of Love is a [[harmless]] attempt at an early comedy, it was difficult to follow and the [[film]] quality was not very [[good]]. It does have a [[couple]] of moments that are funny, but I have seen better by Charlie Chaplin. [[Despite]] Twenty [[Mins]] of Love is a [[inoffensive]] attempt at an early comedy, it was difficult to follow and the [[kino]] quality was not very [[alright]]. It does have a [[coupling]] of moments that are funny, but I have seen better by Charlie Chaplin. --------------------------------------------- Result 3232 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It must have been [[excruciating]] to attend the dailies as the shooting continued on this [[failure]] of a [[film]]. Probably Cruise, the Exec. Prod., saw what was happening and had Towne use much, much more of the [[nude]] footage in the final cut then Towne wanted to, to make up for the [[disaster]] he saw looming.(Maybe Cruise even thought of "Titanic".)A few items: Colin Farrell can't act his [[way]] out of a paper bag. But he's one of the flavors-of-the-decade, a producer's darling and one is [[forced]] to avoid the [[embarrassment]] of watching him by not [[attending]] his films. He has so many moments of not believing in what he's doing and you can see it in his eyes. I think he [[would]] have been at his best as a film actor, albeit not as rich or famous as he is now, playing second banana to dynamic leads who can act. The [[trap]] of spending a lot of money for period sets, costumes, cars, et al and photographing them as if they just came from the dry [[cleaner]] or car wash/wax. No one seems to want anything to look, well, worn. Or dirty. Is this because the production [[designer]] was told by the line producer to make sure they didn't ruin the stuff because then the company wouldhave to pay for the [[ruined]] items?

This was a story about the depression-thirties folks, not a Disney Broadway musical about that era. How about doing it in black and white or better yet, given Caleb Deschanel as your D.P., have him desaturate the colors during the mix to suggest some of the actual grime and poorness of the times. It should have been, after all, a bit depressing to live so desperately as these folks did, in the Depression. More on Farrell. Did anyone for a moment believe this guy was a writer? H.L. Mencken on the wall; did I see his eyes roll at one point? Hayek and Farrell as a sexually dynamic duo? Sending a boy to do a man's work? Perhaps in the book, which I haven't read, the story was about an older woman and a youth. I cannot delve too deeply into the middle to latter parts of the film because I bailed out early on. But the memory of the scenes I did see made me think that someone was doing a not-too-amusing parody of a noir movie. Sort of what Saturday Night Live has been like for the past decade: not funny. (In my mind I kept thinking of a Guy Noir sketch, music and all.) It must have been [[horrifying]] to attend the dailies as the shooting continued on this [[impossibility]] of a [[kino]]. Probably Cruise, the Exec. Prod., saw what was happening and had Towne use much, much more of the [[naked]] footage in the final cut then Towne wanted to, to make up for the [[calamities]] he saw looming.(Maybe Cruise even thought of "Titanic".)A few items: Colin Farrell can't act his [[paths]] out of a paper bag. But he's one of the flavors-of-the-decade, a producer's darling and one is [[coerced]] to avoid the [[shame]] of watching him by not [[frequenting]] his films. He has so many moments of not believing in what he's doing and you can see it in his eyes. I think he [[could]] have been at his best as a film actor, albeit not as rich or famous as he is now, playing second banana to dynamic leads who can act. The [[entrapment]] of spending a lot of money for period sets, costumes, cars, et al and photographing them as if they just came from the dry [[cleanest]] or car wash/wax. No one seems to want anything to look, well, worn. Or dirty. Is this because the production [[builder]] was told by the line producer to make sure they didn't ruin the stuff because then the company wouldhave to pay for the [[destroys]] items?

This was a story about the depression-thirties folks, not a Disney Broadway musical about that era. How about doing it in black and white or better yet, given Caleb Deschanel as your D.P., have him desaturate the colors during the mix to suggest some of the actual grime and poorness of the times. It should have been, after all, a bit depressing to live so desperately as these folks did, in the Depression. More on Farrell. Did anyone for a moment believe this guy was a writer? H.L. Mencken on the wall; did I see his eyes roll at one point? Hayek and Farrell as a sexually dynamic duo? Sending a boy to do a man's work? Perhaps in the book, which I haven't read, the story was about an older woman and a youth. I cannot delve too deeply into the middle to latter parts of the film because I bailed out early on. But the memory of the scenes I did see made me think that someone was doing a not-too-amusing parody of a noir movie. Sort of what Saturday Night Live has been like for the past decade: not funny. (In my mind I kept thinking of a Guy Noir sketch, music and all.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3233 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A [[sweet]] [[funny]] [[story]] of 2 people crossing paths as they [[prepare]] for their [[weddings]]. The ex-cop [[writer]] and the public [[school]] teacher fall for each other in this [[great]] [[new]] york setting, even [[though]] they are [[marrying]] other people. [[Maybe]] a [[little]] trite in that the "partners" are both type A [[personalities]], while our [[protagonists]] are much more relaxed. Not [[anything]] heavy, but it made me [[smile]]. And hey for the [[guys]] - sell the [[Natasha]] Henstridge angle, and the [[gals]] - sell them the sappy romance, [[everyone]] wins! A [[sugary]] [[droll]] [[conte]] of 2 people crossing paths as they [[formulate]] for their [[matrimony]]. The ex-cop [[novelist]] and the public [[teaching]] teacher fall for each other in this [[whopping]] [[novel]] york setting, even [[if]] they are [[marries]] other people. [[Presumably]] a [[petite]] trite in that the "partners" are both type A [[dignitaries]], while our [[actors]] are much more relaxed. Not [[something]] heavy, but it made me [[smirk]]. And hey for the [[bloke]] - sell the [[Natascha]] Henstridge angle, and the [[hens]] - sell them the sappy romance, [[anyone]] wins! --------------------------------------------- Result 3234 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This thing is [[horrible]]. The Ben Affleck [[character]] is self-centered and gleefully sadistic--punch-you-in-the-nose fratboy sadistic. And he's the romantic HERO! His cartoonish character does not change from beginning to end, but his [[money]] ultimately allows him to buy happiness.

If I were a Socialist, I would screed beyond belief, but I'm not a [[Socialist]].

We capitalists like a little Christmas magic from time to time. This ain't magic. I don't know what it is. It's just [[awful]]. And it's a horrible [[waste]] of talent. O'Hara has been making me laugh hysterically since the late '70s. Gandolfini. Applegate. These people were all underused. If Ben was out of the equation, these folks might have dreamed up something excellent. This thing is [[scary]]. The Ben Affleck [[characteristics]] is self-centered and gleefully sadistic--punch-you-in-the-nose fratboy sadistic. And he's the romantic HERO! His cartoonish character does not change from beginning to end, but his [[moneys]] ultimately allows him to buy happiness.

If I were a Socialist, I would screed beyond belief, but I'm not a [[Socialistic]].

We capitalists like a little Christmas magic from time to time. This ain't magic. I don't know what it is. It's just [[scary]]. And it's a horrible [[wastes]] of talent. O'Hara has been making me laugh hysterically since the late '70s. Gandolfini. Applegate. These people were all underused. If Ben was out of the equation, these folks might have dreamed up something excellent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3235 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Indian cinema typifies cops of two broad categories: they are either the honest type or the bad guys. The honest guys always shout at the top of their voice and fight the system while the bad cops enjoy for most part but suffer at the end.

This [[movie]] at least breaks this usual formula and gives a [[refreshing]] [[view]] of cops and their [[lives]]. The direction takes an [[inside]] look at the [[life]] of a young ambitious cop who. The music is interesting and the editing is a [[trend]] setter as far as Indian cinema goes.

The movie is slow at times and the dilemma which Anbu faces when it comes to Maya is overplayed at times. But I would still give this one 9/10 simply because it has many firsts to its credit. Indian cinema typifies cops of two broad categories: they are either the honest type or the bad guys. The honest guys always shout at the top of their voice and fight the system while the bad cops enjoy for most part but suffer at the end.

This [[cinematographic]] at least breaks this usual formula and gives a [[freshen]] [[visualizing]] of cops and their [[iife]]. The direction takes an [[indoor]] look at the [[iife]] of a young ambitious cop who. The music is interesting and the editing is a [[propensity]] setter as far as Indian cinema goes.

The movie is slow at times and the dilemma which Anbu faces when it comes to Maya is overplayed at times. But I would still give this one 9/10 simply because it has many firsts to its credit. --------------------------------------------- Result 3236 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Lorna Green(Janine [[Reynaud]])is a performance artist for [[wealthy]] [[intellectuals]] at a local club. She [[falls]] prey to her fantasies as the promise of romantic interludes [[turn]] into [[murder]] as she kills those who believe that sex is on the horizon. It's [[quite]] possible that, through a form of hypnotic suggestion, someone(..a possible task master pulling her strings like a puppet)is guiding Lorna into killing those she comes across in secluded places just when it appears that love-making is about to begin. After the murders within her fantasies are committed, Lorna [[awakens]] bewildered, often clueless as to if what she was privy to within her dreams ever took place in reality.

If someone asked me how to describe this particular work from Franco, I'd say it's elegant & difficult. By now, you've probably read other user comments befuddled by what this film is about, since a large portion of it takes place within the surreal atmosphere of a dream. Franco mentioned in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Godard early in his career, as far as film-making style, and so deciding to abandon a clear narrative structure in favor of trying to create a whole different type of viewing experience. And, as you read from the reaction of the user comments here..some like this decision, others [[find]] the style labouring, dull, and [[bewildering]]. I'll be the first to admit that the film is over my head, but even Franco himself, when quizzed by critics who watched "Succubus", admitted that he didn't even understand the film and he directed it! Some might say that "Succubus" was merely a precursor to his more admired work, "Venus in Furs", considered his masterwork by Franco-faithful, because it also adopts the surreal, dreamlike structure where the protagonist doesn't truly know whether he/she is experiencing something real or imagined. In a sense, like the protagonist, we are experiencing the same type of confusion..certainly, "Succubus" is [[unconventional]] film-making where we aren't given the keys to what is exactly going on. And, a great deal of the elusive dialogue doesn't help matters. "Succubus" is also populated by beatnik types and "poet-speak", Corman's film, "A Bucket of Blood" poked fun at. My personal favorite scene teases at a possible lesbian interlude between Lorna and a woman she meets at a posh party..quite a bizarre fantasy sequence where mannequins are used rather unusually. Great locations and jazz score..I liked this film myself, although I can understand why it does receive a negative reaction. Loved that one scene at the posh party with Lorna, a wee bit drunk, writhing on the floor in a gorgeous evening gown as others attending the shindig(..equally wasted)rush her in an embrace of kisses. Lorna Green(Janine [[Renault]])is a performance artist for [[richest]] [[theorists]] at a local club. She [[drops]] prey to her fantasies as the promise of romantic interludes [[transforming]] into [[kills]] as she kills those who believe that sex is on the horizon. It's [[pretty]] possible that, through a form of hypnotic suggestion, someone(..a possible task master pulling her strings like a puppet)is guiding Lorna into killing those she comes across in secluded places just when it appears that love-making is about to begin. After the murders within her fantasies are committed, Lorna [[evokes]] bewildered, often clueless as to if what she was privy to within her dreams ever took place in reality.

If someone asked me how to describe this particular work from Franco, I'd say it's elegant & difficult. By now, you've probably read other user comments befuddled by what this film is about, since a large portion of it takes place within the surreal atmosphere of a dream. Franco mentioned in an interview that he was heavily influenced by Godard early in his career, as far as film-making style, and so deciding to abandon a clear narrative structure in favor of trying to create a whole different type of viewing experience. And, as you read from the reaction of the user comments here..some like this decision, others [[unearthed]] the style labouring, dull, and [[perplexing]]. I'll be the first to admit that the film is over my head, but even Franco himself, when quizzed by critics who watched "Succubus", admitted that he didn't even understand the film and he directed it! Some might say that "Succubus" was merely a precursor to his more admired work, "Venus in Furs", considered his masterwork by Franco-faithful, because it also adopts the surreal, dreamlike structure where the protagonist doesn't truly know whether he/she is experiencing something real or imagined. In a sense, like the protagonist, we are experiencing the same type of confusion..certainly, "Succubus" is [[unorthodox]] film-making where we aren't given the keys to what is exactly going on. And, a great deal of the elusive dialogue doesn't help matters. "Succubus" is also populated by beatnik types and "poet-speak", Corman's film, "A Bucket of Blood" poked fun at. My personal favorite scene teases at a possible lesbian interlude between Lorna and a woman she meets at a posh party..quite a bizarre fantasy sequence where mannequins are used rather unusually. Great locations and jazz score..I liked this film myself, although I can understand why it does receive a negative reaction. Loved that one scene at the posh party with Lorna, a wee bit drunk, writhing on the floor in a gorgeous evening gown as others attending the shindig(..equally wasted)rush her in an embrace of kisses. --------------------------------------------- Result 3237 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A strong woman oriented subject after long, director Krishna Vamsi's Shakti- The Power, the Desi version of the Hollywood hit Not Without My Daughter is actress Sridevi's first home-production. A story about a woman's fight against harsh injustice.

The story of the film revolves around Nandini (Karisma Kapoor) who lives in Canada with her two uncles (Tiku Talsania, Jaspal Bhatti). There she meets Shekhar (Sanjay Kapoor), falls in love with him and they soon marry. Their family is complete when Nandini has a boy, Raja (Master Jai Gidwani). But their happiness is short lived, as the news of Shekhar's ailing mother (Deepti Naval)makes them leave their perfect life in Canada and come to India. And that's when the problems start. From the moment they reach

India, both are shocked to see the pollution and the vast throngs of people everywhere. They take a crowded train to reach Shekhar's village and when they finally reach the station, they have to catch a long bus drive to his village. The filthy sweaty bus combined with the uncertain terrain makes it a never-ending drive. And unfortunately for them, a frenzied mob that beat Shekhar out of shape for no fault of his attacks their bus. Fortunately, they get shot dead just in time before they can further harm him. After that, they drive to the handing Havel where Shekhar''s father, Narsimha (Nana Patekar) lives with his wife (Deepti Naval). Nandani realized that her father-in-law is in command as soon as she enters the place, but her only solace is her mother-in-law's warm welcome.

Living there, Nandini learns of her father-in-laws tyrannical behavior and realizes that ruthless killing is a way of life for him. The day she sees her father-in-law teach her son to throw a bomb, she loses it and lashes out against him, insisting to Shekhar that they move back to Canada. But terror strikes again when Shekhar is murdered one day, leaving a broken down Nandini alone with her son in this strange land where she is harrowed by a cruel father-in-law. Her fight against this man to save her son is what makes up the climax of this emotional heart-wrenching film.

What sets apart Shakti from most films being made off late is also the rural setting of the movie. The only drawback is Ismail Darbar''s music, which fails to rise above the script. The only saving grace is the sexy item number Ishq Kameena, which has been composed by Anu Malik. Another pat for the director comes because he has extracted some splendid performances from his cast. Karisma Kapoor is the life of the film and has given a moving performance as a helpless mother. She is sure to win awards for this heated portrayal. Second is actor Nana Patekar who is back with a bang with this film. His uncouth mannerisms suit him to the hilt and he's shown his versatility once again with this role. Sanjay Kapoor is the surprise packet of the film with a sincere and effective portrayal that stands up against both the other actors. Deepti Naval too is in top form and her Pr-climax showdown with Nana is praiseworthy. Shahrukh's cameo provides the lighter moments and surely he's been pulled in to get the required star value. Though his role was not really required, he's done it well. Overall, Shakti is a far superior film than most churned out these days and the Pr-release hype is sure to get it a good opening. Shakti is sure to get the critics and audience thumps up. So what if the film needs to be desperately trimmed by at least 2 reels to better the impact. Shakti still has the power to go on without a hitch! --------------------------------------------- Result 3238 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (85%)]] This [[film]] is very interesting. I have [[seen]] it [[twice]] and it seems [[Glover]] [[hit]] the nail on the head with what he [[claims]] to he wants to accomplish. I for one can [[relate]] to the outrage that the filmmaker [[clearly]] [[expresses]] against the [[current]] thoughtless corporate [[drivel]] that is an [[onslaught]] in our [[every]] [[media]] [[center]], and the [[things]] that we as a [[culture]] are supposed to not "think" about due to corporate [[media]] [[control]]. The [[outrage]] that Glover expresses through the "outrageous" [[elements]] in the films is both clear in its visceral aggressiveness and [[beautiful]] in its poetic potency. I am [[glad]] I saw this [[film]] and it is [[even]] clearer that Glover is up to [[something]] interesting with part two of what will be a trilogy. It is fine! [[EVERYTHING]] IS FINE. See that [[also]]. People that [[dismiss]] this film as "thoughtless" or "pretentious" are [[really]] [[missing]] the boat. This is an [[intelligent]] films. If you can see it with his live show he performs before with his books, that is [[also]] very wroth while. The [[way]] you [[get]] in to his [[mindset]] is [[really]] [[something]]. You will have an [[experience]]! This [[cinematographic]] is very interesting. I have [[watched]] it [[doubly]] and it seems [[Grover]] [[slugged]] the nail on the head with what he [[claim]] to he wants to accomplish. I for one can [[pertaining]] to the outrage that the filmmaker [[unequivocally]] [[expressing]] against the [[underway]] thoughtless corporate [[whim]] that is an [[assault]] in our [[any]] [[medias]] [[centering]], and the [[items]] that we as a [[culturally]] are supposed to not "think" about due to corporate [[medias]] [[supervision]]. The [[indignation]] that Glover expresses through the "outrageous" [[component]] in the films is both clear in its visceral aggressiveness and [[ravishing]] in its poetic potency. I am [[happier]] I saw this [[movie]] and it is [[yet]] clearer that Glover is up to [[somethings]] interesting with part two of what will be a trilogy. It is fine! [[ENTIRE]] IS FINE. See that [[similarly]]. People that [[dismissed]] this film as "thoughtless" or "pretentious" are [[truthfully]] [[disappearance]] the boat. This is an [[smart]] films. If you can see it with his live show he performs before with his books, that is [[apart]] very wroth while. The [[path]] you [[gets]] in to his [[mentality]] is [[truthfully]] [[anything]]. You will have an [[experiences]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3239 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I rented the dubbed-English version of Lensman, hoping that since it came from well-known novels it would have some substance. While there were hints of substance in the movie, it mostly didn't rise above the level of kiddie cartoon. Maybe the movie was a bad adaptation of the book, or it lost a lot in the dubbed version. Or maybe even the source novels were lightweight. But for whatever reason, there wasn't much there.

I noticed lots of details that were derivative, sloppy, poorly dramatized, or otherwise deficient. Some examples: The opening scenes looked borrowed from the 2001 "star gate" scene and the Star Wars image of hyperspace. The robot on the harvester looked like an anthropomorphized "R2-D2".

It starts out trying to borrow its comic relief style of Star Wars, but mercifully (since the humor doesn't work) gives up on comedy and plays it serious. In that sense, it's superior to the Star Wars franchise, which started with a clever sense of humor, and eventually deteriorated to Jar-Jar's annoying silliness.

The agricultural details were apparently drawn by someone who had never seen a farm. The harvester was driving through the unharvested middle of a field, dumping silage onto unharvested crops, rather than working from one side to the other and dumping the silage onto already-harvested rows or into a truck. Corn (maize) was pouring out the grain chute, but the farm lands were drawn like a wheat field.

When it was time for Kim's father had to face his fate, there wasn't any dramatic weight to the scene. That could have been partly the fault of the English-language voice actor, but the drawings didn't show much weight either. Kim's reactions in that scene were similarly unconvincing.

Similarly, when a character named Henderson was killed, Chris showed very little reaction, even though they were apparently supposed to have been close. (Henderson's death is no spoiler; his name isn't revealed until his death scene.) She seems to promptly forget him. Someone's expression of sympathy shows more feeling than she does. I think the voice actor deserves most of the blame in that case; there's at least a hint of feeling in the drawings of Chris.

On several occasions, villains fail to accomplish their orders. A villain leader often punishes those failures with miserable deaths. I can't say whether that's lifted from Star Wars, or if that comes from an earlier source -- possibly the Lensman books.

There's a scene where a space ship crash-lands. As it plunges toward the ground, parts are break off the ship. But so many pieces are fall off that there should be nothing left of it by the time it lands.

While in most cases Chris seems like a competent, tough space hero, there's a scene where she shrieks like an incompetent damsel in distress. Someone tough enough to get over Henderson's death so quickly should at least be able to shout, "help, it's got me and I can't reach my gun!" instead of just shrieking.

The character with the most personality (almost too much at times) is D.J. Bill. He sounded like Wolfman Jack, the D.J. in American Graffiti. I wonder if he's as well-voiced in the original language.

Two planets in the movie exploded. The explosions were unimpressive, and appeared to owe a lot of inspiration to Star Wars. To its credit, however, the cause of the explosion was completely unlike the Death Star's primary weapon. The dialog had a good, interesting explanation for the cause. Many other explosions in the movie did look good, just not the planetary explosions.

Some of the sound effects are very cheesy, as if borrowed from a late 1970s video game. Some of the images look like primitive video games, and some influence from Tron is visible too. On the other hand, the sound effects are often pretty decent, although that emphasizes the cheesy-sounding parts. The art is good too, particularly when it stays away from the often cheesy-looking computer graphics.

Finally, there's the story. If a movie tells a good story, it can get away with a lot of production shortcomings. But the plot here was pretty lightweight. A naïve boy tries to help someone on a crippled space ship, and acquires a great power he doesn't understand. He and his band of very virtuous companions struggle against a powerful, unredeemably evil enemy. He makes friends, learns about his special power, and grows into a young man. If he is persistent and virtuous enough, he might even defeat the evil enemy. Details along the way can make such a story rise above the simple outline, but there's very little more than that in this movie.

In the end, it's just a kiddie cartoon. But then, since it looks like the primary intended audience is older children, maybe it doesn't need to be anything more than that. --------------------------------------------- Result 3240 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Romantic comedy is not the correct [[way]] to [[describe]] "How to [[lose]] friends & alienate people". The underlying romance in the plot is, for the most part, displaced by a far more interesting "rags to riches" tale. [[Although]] the central line of the story is somewhat rushed passed, in several screen [[shots]], it does have a [[sense]] of; [[getting]] the "nitty gritty" out of the [[way]], focusing on those key relationships which [[make]] "office politics" and using those [[almost]] irrelevant scenes, used [[purely]] for comic effect. Yet it works so well, [[especially]] with Pegg in the [[front]] seat. The [[film]] is [[ultimately]] very clever, [[playing]] well on the trans-Atlantic relationship Pegg [[shares]] with his co-stars and [[merging]] the [[cross]] between the [[high]] and low -[[life]] [[society]] [[quite]] well and [[quite]] [[refreshingly]] in a storyline that [[despite]] predictability is [[somewhat]] of a [[unique]] [[journey]]. The [[different]] [[characters]] in the [[film]] are presented well and [[casting]] is [[definitely]] a plus point on the [[film]]. Both the "[[trading]] [[places]]" [[relationship]] between Pegg and [[Huston]] and the "[[love]], hate" [[relationship]] between Pegg and Dunst do [[work]] so well in a [[story]] that is, for [[want]] of a [[better]] word, charming. Even Fox, whose [[main]] [[asset]] is of course [[sex]] [[appeal]], [[shocks]] with what [[turns]] out to be [[quite]] a dark [[character]] and acts that "bimbo" role all to well. Its one of these films where [[every]] [[little]] [[detail]] does [[pay]] tribute to a [[great]] piece of [[work]]. From transsexual strippers to an [[amazing]] soundtrack it all meshes [[nicely]] into what can only be [[described]] as [[clever]] [[comedy]]. Romantic comedy is not the correct [[camino]] to [[expound]] "How to [[wasting]] friends & alienate people". The underlying romance in the plot is, for the most part, displaced by a far more interesting "rags to riches" tale. [[Despite]] the central line of the story is somewhat rushed passed, in several screen [[punches]], it does have a [[feeling]] of; [[obtain]] the "nitty gritty" out of the [[camino]], focusing on those key relationships which [[deliver]] "office politics" and using those [[practically]] irrelevant scenes, used [[strictly]] for comic effect. Yet it works so well, [[peculiarly]] with Pegg in the [[newsweek]] seat. The [[cinematography]] is [[eventually]] very clever, [[gaming]] well on the trans-Atlantic relationship Pegg [[exchange]] with his co-stars and [[combined]] the [[crossing]] between the [[higher]] and low -[[living]] [[societal]] [[pretty]] well and [[pretty]] [[cheerfully]] in a storyline that [[while]] predictability is [[slightly]] of a [[peculiar]] [[travel]]. The [[multiple]] [[nature]] in the [[cinema]] are presented well and [[pouring]] is [[categorically]] a plus point on the [[films]]. Both the "[[commerce]] [[spaces]]" [[relationships]] between Pegg and [[Houston]] and the "[[likes]], hate" [[relations]] between Pegg and Dunst do [[jobs]] so well in a [[narratives]] that is, for [[wanna]] of a [[improved]] word, charming. Even Fox, whose [[principal]] [[assets]] is of course [[sexuality]] [[appeals]], [[shock]] with what [[revolves]] out to be [[rather]] a dark [[trait]] and acts that "bimbo" role all to well. Its one of these films where [[any]] [[tiny]] [[details]] does [[paid]] tribute to a [[whopping]] piece of [[works]]. From transsexual strippers to an [[unbelievable]] soundtrack it all meshes [[politely]] into what can only be [[outlining]] as [[smarter]] [[travesty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] The acting, other reviews notwithstanding, was remarkably well-done. Brad Pitt handles the role of an annoying, obnoxious Austrian climber quite well. Other acting is fine. The story [[could]] have been riveting, but somehow, it misses - one never really understands or cares for the characters shown, and so the story, which could have been quite dramatic, [[fails]] to draw in this audience.

Beautiful [[scenery]] and cinematography, a remarkably dramatic true story, important events that shaped the world that we live in - but I could not, try as I might, involve myself in this story. As an unabashed Brad Pitt fan (I consider him one of the top 5 actors of his generation), I expected to *love* this flick - and yet, it left me cold.

It could be a failing within myself, but I tend to point toward the creative end of this movie - direction, scriptwriting, production, editing - somehow, they lost me. It's a shame, because it could have been wonderful.

Good acting, dramatic story, beautifully shot - it should have been magnificent. It wasn't. Probably worth watching, just to make your own mind up on it - but don't expect too much, and perhaps you won't be as disappointed as I was. Mostly, it bored me. The acting, other reviews notwithstanding, was remarkably well-done. Brad Pitt handles the role of an annoying, obnoxious Austrian climber quite well. Other acting is fine. The story [[did]] have been riveting, but somehow, it misses - one never really understands or cares for the characters shown, and so the story, which could have been quite dramatic, [[fail]] to draw in this audience.

Beautiful [[panorama]] and cinematography, a remarkably dramatic true story, important events that shaped the world that we live in - but I could not, try as I might, involve myself in this story. As an unabashed Brad Pitt fan (I consider him one of the top 5 actors of his generation), I expected to *love* this flick - and yet, it left me cold.

It could be a failing within myself, but I tend to point toward the creative end of this movie - direction, scriptwriting, production, editing - somehow, they lost me. It's a shame, because it could have been wonderful.

Good acting, dramatic story, beautifully shot - it should have been magnificent. It wasn't. Probably worth watching, just to make your own mind up on it - but don't expect too much, and perhaps you won't be as disappointed as I was. Mostly, it bored me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3242 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] One of the [[greatest]] film I have seen this year.Last maybe before [[sun]] [[rise]], which is [[also]] [[seen]] late at night alone in the [[lab]]. I [[like]] the [[idea]] of the [[film]],which [[suggest]] free will of [[man]] and our [[weakness]] against [[fate]].With time past by James and Kathryn are destined to fail and an indescribable sorrow [[comes]]. I do like the end. but a [[big]] question also [[comes]]. The virus shall not be released again, should it?

In the last scene in the airport. [[Jose]] is [[sent]] back to meet James again by future scientists. When he [[tell]] him that scientists had already got his message and know someone else would spread the virus. And they two together meet Kathryn when Kathryn tell James the true man is DR. Goines assistant. So it is [[clearly]] [[Jose]] [[also]] get the [[true]] [[information]] about the virus,(James keep an eye on him at the time remember?) and he has teeth. So why everything is still happen?? Why [[future]] scientists don't do anything after the truth is [[revealed]]?? My [[biggest]] question after the film... One of the [[bigger]] film I have seen this year.Last maybe before [[sunlight]] [[augmentation]], which is [[additionally]] [[watched]] late at night alone in the [[labs]]. I [[iike]] the [[notions]] of the [[movie]],which [[suggests]] free will of [[males]] and our [[insufficiency]] against [[destinies]].With time past by James and Kathryn are destined to fail and an indescribable sorrow [[occurs]]. I do like the end. but a [[gargantuan]] question also [[occurs]]. The virus shall not be released again, should it?

In the last scene in the airport. [[Jerome]] is [[sends]] back to meet James again by future scientists. When he [[telling]] him that scientists had already got his message and know someone else would spread the virus. And they two together meet Kathryn when Kathryn tell James the true man is DR. Goines assistant. So it is [[unequivocally]] [[Cordova]] [[similarly]] get the [[truthful]] [[info]] about the virus,(James keep an eye on him at the time remember?) and he has teeth. So why everything is still happen?? Why [[upcoming]] scientists don't do anything after the truth is [[divulged]]?? My [[bigger]] question after the film... --------------------------------------------- Result 3243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] As a [[girl]], Hinako moved away from her small [[village]] to Tokyo, leaving behind her two best friends, Fumiya and Sayori. She returns as a young woman, surprised to find that Sayori died when she was a teenager. She reunites with Fumiya and they are horrified to learn that Sayori is mysteriously being resurrected via the [[island]] of Shikoku. Oh [[boy]]. I rented this because I [[like]] [[Asian]] horror and I [[think]] Chiaki Kuriyama a nifty actress. [[Unfortunately]], if I had to describe Shikoku in one word, it would be "fruity." This [[movie]] is silly, boring, poorly [[filmed]], [[unimaginative]], and most of all, unscary. Kuriyama has [[minimal]] screen [[time]] as the [[resurrected]] Sayori, and her character is [[given]] [[little]] to [[work]] with. As a [[dame]], Hinako moved away from her small [[villages]] to Tokyo, leaving behind her two best friends, Fumiya and Sayori. She returns as a young woman, surprised to find that Sayori died when she was a teenager. She reunites with Fumiya and they are horrified to learn that Sayori is mysteriously being resurrected via the [[lsland]] of Shikoku. Oh [[kiddo]]. I rented this because I [[loves]] [[Asiatic]] horror and I [[believe]] Chiaki Kuriyama a nifty actress. [[Tragically]], if I had to describe Shikoku in one word, it would be "fruity." This [[cinematography]] is silly, boring, poorly [[videotaped]], [[uninspired]], and most of all, unscary. Kuriyama has [[minor]] screen [[times]] as the [[rekindled]] Sayori, and her character is [[bestowed]] [[petite]] to [[works]] with. --------------------------------------------- Result 3244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] It's [[hard]] to [[believe]], after [[waiting]] 14 years, we wind up with this [[piece]] of cinematic [[garbage]]. The original was a [[high]] impact, dark thriller that achieved "[[cult]]" status demonstrating the fine art of cinema as directed by Paul Verhoeven. This film adds [[nothing]], delivers [[nothing]], and ultimately winds up in the [[big]] [[box]] of [[failed]] sequels.

The [[opening]] sequence [[could]] have triggered an intriguing set of plot developments using a considerably talented and able cast. [[Unfortunately]] we are treated to a 90 minute dissertation in the self-indulgent life of Catherine Tramell... or is it Sharon Stone. Possibly a copulation of both.

If the desire is too see a continuation of the sensually provocative stying of sex as in "B.S.1", forget it. You wind up with soft-porn boredom which ultimately upholds the old adage that a woman can be more alluring in clothes than out of them. It's interesting to note that the wonderful Charlotte Rampling was romping around in her skivvies, via the 1966 GEORGY GIRL, when Ms. Stone was only 8 years old. A very talented actress and quite adept at holding her own even here.

If you're a true cinema fan then you must see this film and judge it using your own rating system. If not, you might as well wait for the DVD release in the "rated" version, "unrated" version, "collectors" edition, or "ultimate" version, and perhaps in another 14 years we will be saturated with news of "Basic Instinct 3" at which point Ms. Stone will be 62 years old and nobody will really care. It's [[strenuous]] to [[believing]], after [[awaiting]] 14 years, we wind up with this [[slice]] of cinematic [[detritus]]. The original was a [[alto]] impact, dark thriller that achieved "[[worship]]" status demonstrating the fine art of cinema as directed by Paul Verhoeven. This film adds [[anything]], delivers [[anything]], and ultimately winds up in the [[prodigious]] [[shoebox]] of [[faulted]] sequels.

The [[initiation]] sequence [[wo]] have triggered an intriguing set of plot developments using a considerably talented and able cast. [[Unhappily]] we are treated to a 90 minute dissertation in the self-indulgent life of Catherine Tramell... or is it Sharon Stone. Possibly a copulation of both.

If the desire is too see a continuation of the sensually provocative stying of sex as in "B.S.1", forget it. You wind up with soft-porn boredom which ultimately upholds the old adage that a woman can be more alluring in clothes than out of them. It's interesting to note that the wonderful Charlotte Rampling was romping around in her skivvies, via the 1966 GEORGY GIRL, when Ms. Stone was only 8 years old. A very talented actress and quite adept at holding her own even here.

If you're a true cinema fan then you must see this film and judge it using your own rating system. If not, you might as well wait for the DVD release in the "rated" version, "unrated" version, "collectors" edition, or "ultimate" version, and perhaps in another 14 years we will be saturated with news of "Basic Instinct 3" at which point Ms. Stone will be 62 years old and nobody will really care. --------------------------------------------- Result 3245 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (80%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] "Blood of the Sacred, Blood of the Damned" is the third installment of the Gabriel Knight games, a series of adventure games about the roguish writer/paranormal detective, Gabriel Knight. Gabriel and his companion, Grace, have been asked by Prince James of Albany to investigate a series of mysterious attacks by so-called "night visitors." When the son of Prince James is kidnapped, Gabriel pursues the night visitors to Rennes le Château, where he begins piecing together a mystery relating to the Holy Grail.

Despite the marketing, this game is not about vampires. Vampires have a token appearance in the game, but never command center stage, as did the voodoo hounfor in "Sins of the Fathers" or the werewolves in "The Beast Within." Gabriel and Grace make no attempt to uncover the true nature of vampires, or to research lore on vampires. Although the vampires do murder three people during the course of the game, their victims are chosen at random and have nothing to do with the main plot.

A large part of the charm of the first two Gabriel Knight installments was in the relationships which Gabriel formed with the villains. Through these relationships, the player could not help but sympathize with the villain, and thus the villain was transformed into more of a human and less of a monster. However, in "Blood of the Sacred," Gabriel's only interaction with the villain is through a single, cheesy interview, which does nothing to endear the villain to the player.

The roles that Gabriel and Grace play in this mystery are fairly futile. Gabriel spends his time snooping into the identities of members of a treasure-hunter tour group staying at his hotel, but what he uncovers amounts to nothing more than a red herring. Grace spends her time researching the mystery of Rennes le Château, but all her research is rendered superfluous by the presence of a perplexing ally who has known the answer to this mystery for centuries.

The actions of this perplexing ally and his polar opposite --- the vampire leader --- are insupportable. The ally leaves hints about the mystery of Rennes le Château in broad daylight and expects Grace (and not the other treasure hunters from the tour group) to find them. However, he could have revealed the mystery to Grace in its entirety on day 1, instead of putting the kidnapped child at risk for an additional 48 hours. And in the end, he simply tells Grace the mystery in its entirety anyway.

Meanwhile, the vampire leader fails to achieve the goals of centuries of scheming, because he chooses to refrain from action for two days after the kidnapping of the child. The only reason given for his decision to delay action is that he wants to savor his victory.

The game would have been much better had it been purely focused on the Holy Grail. The kidnapping and vampires should have been omitted, replaced with a race against the Vatican to uncover the mystery of Rennes le Château. Since Gabriel is portrayed more than once as reluctantly Catholic, this conflict would have had many opportunities for character development.

All in all, the game was a disappointing installment in the series, despite an improved interface and the return of Tim Curry as the voice of Gabriel Knight. --------------------------------------------- Result 3246 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Before Cujo,there was Lucky the devil dog. [[In]] 1978,on Halloween night the movie"Devil Dog,The Hound of Hell" premiered. A [[story]] of a family getting a new puppy (from a farmer who just happen to be in the neighborhood selling fruits and vegetables) because their dog Skipper was killed.Coencidence? Everyone loves the new dog,but there is [[something]] strange about him.

It isn't long until the father Mike Barry(Richard Crenna,First Blood)starts to notice.His wife Betty(Yvette Mimieux,Where The Boys Are,Jackson County Jail,Snowbeast)is different and his kids Charlie and Bonnie(Ike Eisenman,Witch Mountain and Fantastic Vourage and Kim Richards,Witch Mountain,Nanny and the Professor,Hello Larry,Tuff-Turf)also have changed. Does the dog have something to do with it? He's determined to find out and do whatever it takes to save his family.

This movie is great because it has Ike and Kim playing a darker side of themselves than what we saw on those witch mountain movies. This is one of the many 70's made-for-TV horror movies that was actually scary for a made-for-TV horror movie. The music was creepy and even the ending which I won't tell made you think.

This movie also stars Ken Kercheval(Cliff Barnes of Dallas)and R.G. Armstrong(who couldn't stay away from devil movies remember"Race with the Devil"?)

It's worth watching. Before Cujo,there was Lucky the devil dog. [[Throughout]] 1978,on Halloween night the movie"Devil Dog,The Hound of Hell" premiered. A [[conte]] of a family getting a new puppy (from a farmer who just happen to be in the neighborhood selling fruits and vegetables) because their dog Skipper was killed.Coencidence? Everyone loves the new dog,but there is [[anything]] strange about him.

It isn't long until the father Mike Barry(Richard Crenna,First Blood)starts to notice.His wife Betty(Yvette Mimieux,Where The Boys Are,Jackson County Jail,Snowbeast)is different and his kids Charlie and Bonnie(Ike Eisenman,Witch Mountain and Fantastic Vourage and Kim Richards,Witch Mountain,Nanny and the Professor,Hello Larry,Tuff-Turf)also have changed. Does the dog have something to do with it? He's determined to find out and do whatever it takes to save his family.

This movie is great because it has Ike and Kim playing a darker side of themselves than what we saw on those witch mountain movies. This is one of the many 70's made-for-TV horror movies that was actually scary for a made-for-TV horror movie. The music was creepy and even the ending which I won't tell made you think.

This movie also stars Ken Kercheval(Cliff Barnes of Dallas)and R.G. Armstrong(who couldn't stay away from devil movies remember"Race with the Devil"?)

It's worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 3247 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (72%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Robot Jox doesn't [[suffer]] from story or bad effects. I mean, this was 1990 if you know what I'm talking about. RoboCop 2 still used the stop animation as most of the movies did throughout the '80s. If you look at your [[biggest]] [[blockbusters]] during this [[period]], most of them did what they could with the special effects shots that was available to them at the time. It wasn't until Terminator 2: Judgment Day was [[released]] the following year that a breakthrough in technology was realized, and story boarders began to use that motive. But you'll have fond memories of Transformers, Gundam Wing, even Power Rangers, if you watch this film. The enemy robot is very menacing. It makes you not want to face the man without a really good back-up plan. And there are some great moments within this film. A traitor/spy is working within their midsts. Who you think is on your side, backing you up all the way, could be the person you didn't expect him/her to be. And that's very troublesome to think so, don't you agree? Robot Jox doesn't [[undergo]] from story or bad effects. I mean, this was 1990 if you know what I'm talking about. RoboCop 2 still used the stop animation as most of the movies did throughout the '80s. If you look at your [[larger]] [[blockbuster]] during this [[deadline]], most of them did what they could with the special effects shots that was available to them at the time. It wasn't until Terminator 2: Judgment Day was [[emitted]] the following year that a breakthrough in technology was realized, and story boarders began to use that motive. But you'll have fond memories of Transformers, Gundam Wing, even Power Rangers, if you watch this film. The enemy robot is very menacing. It makes you not want to face the man without a really good back-up plan. And there are some great moments within this film. A traitor/spy is working within their midsts. Who you think is on your side, backing you up all the way, could be the person you didn't expect him/her to be. And that's very troublesome to think so, don't you agree? --------------------------------------------- Result 3248 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] [[Any]] one who has [[seen]] Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and was bothered by the gory violence [[would]] [[want]] to [[see]] this [[film]] [[instead]]. [[Though]] it wasn't a [[success]] in th box office or TV ratings, The [[Fox]] Movie Channel still [[finds]] a [[real]] good motive to [[show]] this anually. I liked the [[way]] that they trained Chris Sarandon and the men who portrayed his disciples to sing in Hebrew.Though Sarandon didn't have long hair like any other Jesus would in other films, his looks are pretty close to what a Jewish man would appear. What surprised me or startled me was the scene where Caiaphas told Jesus about Pilate "And don't ever forget, that you are a Jew!" Though that may have not been a racist remark,Colin Blakely was trying to make Chris Sarandon look like garbage in the eyes of the prominent men of those days.Keith Michell's portrayal of Pilate was hulking, comparing with his previous performances in "The Story of Jacob and Joseph" and "The Story of David". But if you compare his portrayal of Pilate with Telly Savala's or Hurd Hatfield, you can say that he really painted well the impression of a Roman procurator. [[Every]] one who has [[watched]] Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ and was bothered by the gory violence [[ought]] [[wants]] to [[behold]] this [[movies]] [[conversely]]. [[Despite]] it wasn't a [[accomplishments]] in th box office or TV ratings, The [[Foxes]] Movie Channel still [[deems]] a [[actual]] good motive to [[displayed]] this anually. I liked the [[camino]] that they trained Chris Sarandon and the men who portrayed his disciples to sing in Hebrew.Though Sarandon didn't have long hair like any other Jesus would in other films, his looks are pretty close to what a Jewish man would appear. What surprised me or startled me was the scene where Caiaphas told Jesus about Pilate "And don't ever forget, that you are a Jew!" Though that may have not been a racist remark,Colin Blakely was trying to make Chris Sarandon look like garbage in the eyes of the prominent men of those days.Keith Michell's portrayal of Pilate was hulking, comparing with his previous performances in "The Story of Jacob and Joseph" and "The Story of David". But if you compare his portrayal of Pilate with Telly Savala's or Hurd Hatfield, you can say that he really painted well the impression of a Roman procurator. --------------------------------------------- Result 3249 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] this was one of the [[worst]] movies I've ever [[seen]]. I'm still not sure if it was [[serious]], or just a satire. One of those [[movies]] that [[uses]] [[every]] [[stupid]] who dunnit cliché they can [[think]] of. Arrrrgh.

[[Don]] [[Johnson]] was pretty [[good]] in it actually. But otherwise it [[sucked]]. It was over 10 years ago that I [[saw]] it, but it [[still]] [[hurts]] and won't [[stop]] lingering in my brain.

The [[last]] line in the movie [[really]] [[sums]] up how [[stupid]] it is. I won't ruin it for you, should you [[want]] to tempt [[fate]] by viewing this [[movie]]. But I garantee you a *nghya* moment at the [[end]], with a few in between. [[If]] you have nothing [[better]] to do, and you [[like]] to point and laugh, then [[maybe]] it might be worth your while. [[Additionally]], if you're [[forced]] to go on a [[date]] with [[someone]] you [[really]] don't like, suggest watching this [[movie]] together, and they'll [[probably]] [[leave]] you [[alone]] after they [[see]] it. That's a [[fair]] [[price]] to [[pay]], I [[guess]]. this was one of the [[hardest]] movies I've ever [[noticed]]. I'm still not sure if it was [[grave]], or just a satire. One of those [[movie]] that [[usage]] [[any]] [[foolish]] who dunnit cliché they can [[reckon]] of. Arrrrgh.

[[Gifts]] [[Lbj]] was pretty [[buena]] in it actually. But otherwise it [[aspired]]. It was over 10 years ago that I [[watched]] it, but it [[yet]] [[aches]] and won't [[halted]] lingering in my brain.

The [[latter]] line in the movie [[genuinely]] [[moneys]] up how [[ludicrous]] it is. I won't ruin it for you, should you [[wish]] to tempt [[destinies]] by viewing this [[cinematography]]. But I garantee you a *nghya* moment at the [[termination]], with a few in between. [[Though]] you have nothing [[best]] to do, and you [[loves]] to point and laugh, then [[perhaps]] it might be worth your while. [[Apart]], if you're [[compelled]] to go on a [[dating]] with [[everyone]] you [[truthfully]] don't like, suggest watching this [[film]] together, and they'll [[conceivably]] [[leaving]] you [[lonely]] after they [[consults]] it. That's a [[equitable]] [[prices]] to [[wages]], I [[suppose]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3250 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] VERY [[dull]], [[obvious]], [[tedious]] Exorcist rip-off featuring a [[Doberman]] with red [[eyes]] - that's the extent of the special [[effects]] in this made-for-tv cheapie. Richard Crenna is about as [[animate]] as a [[chew]] toy. Very 70's dress & music only [[add]] to the [[torture]]. [[Should]] put you to [[sleep]] almost as [[fast]] as "The Corpse Vanishes", or "The Blue Hand". [[Practically]] [[worthless]]. MooCow [[says]] eaghhh what a stinky [[dog]]! :=8P VERY [[tiresome]], [[observable]], [[tiresome]] Exorcist rip-off featuring a [[Pinscher]] with red [[eye]] - that's the extent of the special [[influence]] in this made-for-tv cheapie. Richard Crenna is about as [[animation]] as a [[mince]] toy. Very 70's dress & music only [[added]] to the [[tortures]]. [[Must]] put you to [[slumber]] almost as [[swift]] as "The Corpse Vanishes", or "The Blue Hand". [[Hardly]] [[meaningless]]. MooCow [[tells]] eaghhh what a stinky [[doggie]]! :=8P --------------------------------------------- Result 3251 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] As an [[engineer]], I must [[say]] this show's [[first]] season [[started]] out very promising. Most of the applied [[mathematics]] were [[somewhat]] plausible, and the [[relationships]] [[portrayed]] between the Eppes brothers and father [[gave]] the [[show]] an interesting edge.

But after the first season, the show started degrading, [[heavily]]. Most of the [[mathematics]] and technology used in [[crime]] [[solving]] is now utter gibberish and very [[laughable]] to all people [[involved]] in [[science]] & [[technology]] for [[real]].

The [[involvement]] from the [[actors]] still feels okay and I can imagine a fair amount of money is still going into producing each episode, but in the end, this has degraded to a very [[unpleasantly]] tasting dish which is a mix of a grade C action thriller and CSI style cop show.

If you are gonna watch it, go for only the first season and possibly parts of the second. Thereafter I would not waste my time. Myself, I gave the show up midway through season 3.

Season 1 - 8 stars Season 2 - 5 stars Season 3 - 3 stars

Let's sum that up to 4 stars. Since Charlie doesn't know his [[math]] anymore, I won't bother with the correctness of mine either. As an [[genie]], I must [[told]] this show's [[firstly]] season [[launches]] out very promising. Most of the applied [[calculus]] were [[slightly]] plausible, and the [[ties]] [[depicted]] between the Eppes brothers and father [[delivered]] the [[exhibit]] an interesting edge.

But after the first season, the show started degrading, [[radically]]. Most of the [[mathematicians]] and technology used in [[misdemeanors]] [[dissipating]] is now utter gibberish and very [[grotesque]] to all people [[entangled]] in [[veda]] & [[techs]] for [[true]].

The [[turnout]] from the [[protagonists]] still feels okay and I can imagine a fair amount of money is still going into producing each episode, but in the end, this has degraded to a very [[uncomfortably]] tasting dish which is a mix of a grade C action thriller and CSI style cop show.

If you are gonna watch it, go for only the first season and possibly parts of the second. Thereafter I would not waste my time. Myself, I gave the show up midway through season 3.

Season 1 - 8 stars Season 2 - 5 stars Season 3 - 3 stars

Let's sum that up to 4 stars. Since Charlie doesn't know his [[maths]] anymore, I won't bother with the correctness of mine either. --------------------------------------------- Result 3252 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I, [[like]] many people, saw this film in the theatre when it first came out in '97. It was a below [[average]] [[film]] at best, defiantly not the "masterpiece" that all these "Titanic" fanboys like to [[make]] it out as. First off, DiCaprio is a terrible actor no matter which way you look at it. People just like him because of his looks. His acting "[[skills]]" [[essentially]] [[consist]] of saying a lot of cheesy lines and [[trying]] to [[act]] sexy. Second, the film itself had a rather [[boring]] and simple plot: [[girl]] falls in [[love]] with [[guy]], [[ship]] they're on sinks, lots of crappy love scenes thereafter. Anyone with an IQ above 50 will realize this isn't ingenious in any way whatsoever. [[Nor]] is it original. Plus the director felt the need to drag it out for 3+ hours. I [[could]] compress it into a 1 hour block without losing any of the plot. In conclusion, "Titanic" is the most overrated movie to date. Why it got so much attention and money is beyond me. I, [[likes]] many people, saw this film in the theatre when it first came out in '97. It was a below [[averages]] [[kino]] at best, defiantly not the "masterpiece" that all these "Titanic" fanboys like to [[deliver]] it out as. First off, DiCaprio is a terrible actor no matter which way you look at it. People just like him because of his looks. His acting "[[abilities]]" [[broadly]] [[comprise]] of saying a lot of cheesy lines and [[tempting]] to [[ley]] sexy. Second, the film itself had a rather [[dreary]] and simple plot: [[dame]] falls in [[iove]] with [[pal]], [[starship]] they're on sinks, lots of crappy love scenes thereafter. Anyone with an IQ above 50 will realize this isn't ingenious in any way whatsoever. [[Oder]] is it original. Plus the director felt the need to drag it out for 3+ hours. I [[wo]] compress it into a 1 hour block without losing any of the plot. In conclusion, "Titanic" is the most overrated movie to date. Why it got so much attention and money is beyond me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3253 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Jack [[Frost]] is Really a Cool Movie. I [[Mean]]....Its Funny. Its Violent. and [[Very]] [[Enjoyable]]. Most People [[Say]] that it Is B Rated, But That Couldn't be Farther from the truth. It has [[Great]] Special Effects and [[Good]] Acting. The Only Weird thing is of Course, The [[Killer]] Snowman. I [[Think]] this Movie was Actually one of The [[Best]] Films of the Late-Nineties. Most Films these Days [[lack]] the Criteria of A Clive Barker [[Master]] [[Piece]]. That is, Be [[Original]] and Give the [[Viewer]] What they [[Do]] not Expect. [[Jack]] Frost is Very [[Cool]]. 10 out of 10. Grade: [[A]]+. Ed [[Also]] [[Recommends]] The Movie Uncle Sam to Fans of Jack [[Frost]]. Jack [[Jelly]] is Really a Cool Movie. I [[Imply]]....Its Funny. Its Violent. and [[Supremely]] [[Pleasurable]]. Most People [[Told]] that it Is B Rated, But That Couldn't be Farther from the truth. It has [[Large]] Special Effects and [[Buena]] Acting. The Only Weird thing is of Course, The [[Shooter]] Snowman. I [[Ideas]] this Movie was Actually one of The [[Bestest]] Films of the Late-Nineties. Most Films these Days [[shortages]] the Criteria of A Clive Barker [[Maestro]] [[Slice]]. That is, Be [[Preliminary]] and Give the [[Bystander]] What they [[Doing]] not Expect. [[Jacque]] Frost is Very [[Refrigerate]]. 10 out of 10. Grade: [[una]]+. Ed [[Moreover]] [[Recommendations]] The Movie Uncle Sam to Fans of Jack [[Freezing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3254 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If I had not read Pat Barker's 'Union Street' before seeing this film, I would have liked it. Unfortuntately this is not the case. It is actually my kind of film, it is well made, and in no way do I want to say otherwise, but as an adaptation, it fails from every angle.

The harrowing novel about the reality of living in a northern England working-class area grabbed hold of my heartstrings and refused to let go for weeks after I had finished. I was put through tears, repulsion, shock, anger, sympathy and misery when reading about the women of Union Street. Excellent. A novel that at times I felt I could not read any more of, but I novel I simply couldn't put down. Depressing yes, but utterly gripping.

The film. Oh dear. Hollywood took Barker's truth and reality, and showered a layer of sweet icing sugar over the top of it. A beautiful film, an inspiring soundtrack, excellent performances, a tale of hope and romance...yes. An adaptation of 'Union Street'...no.

The women of Union Street and their stories are condensed into Fonda's character, their stories are touched on, but many are discarded. I accept that some of Barker's tales are sensitive issues and are too horrific for mass viewing, and that a film with around 7 leading protagonists just isn't practical, but the content is not my main issue. The essence and the real gut of the novel is lost - darkness and rain, broken windows covered with cardboard, and the graphically described stench of poverty is replaced with sunshine, pretty houses, and a twinkling William's score.

If you enjoyed the film for its positivity and hope in the face of 'reality', I advise that you hesitate to read the book without first preparing yourself for something more like 'Schindler's List'...but without the happy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 3255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[saw]] this [[movie]] when I was about 8-years-old and I [[liked]] it but it wasn't until I watched it again at the age of 13 that I really understood it for what it is; a cartoon about a criminal [[dog]] with a [[real]] [[heart]] of gold "adopts" a [[little]] girl in order to exploit her for her talents to talk to [[animals]]. The dog star,Charlie B. Barkin, is [[murdered]] by his formal [[business]] [[partner]], Carface, (who is [[absolutely]] diabolical by the [[way]]). His [[soul]] then goes to where [[else]] but Heaven only to [[find]] a golden watch that is [[really]] his life's [[time]], which Charlie, being the sneaky but lovable cad that he is steals and rewinds, [[sending]] him back to [[Earth]]. Once back on [[Earth]], Charlie goes about [[seeking]] [[revenge]] on the [[evil]] Carface. This is how he [[comes]] [[upon]] young Anne-Marie, the [[lonely]] [[little]] orphan that can [[talk]] to [[animals]] whom [[Charlie]] plans to scam for her talents in [[order]] to [[get]] back at his [[enemy]] Carface. But scoundrel [[Charlie]] actually [[comes]] to [[care]] for young Anne-Marie and his [[plans]] unfoil as he [[must]] [[make]] up his [[mind]] to do what is right after Anne-Marie [[discovers]] what her "[[best]] [[friend]]" [[Charlie]] has [[really]] been using her to make [[money]] for a new and [[better]] [[dog]] [[casino]]. Now he [[must]] [[rescue]] her from the dreaded Carface. I [[still]] [[love]] this [[movie]] even at the age of 22. The [[idea]] and plot [[really]] are [[quite]] [[different]] and [[original]] from that of [[many]] other animated [[films]]. I [[especially]] like the [[idea]] that a [[dog]] plays the role of the villain for once. Carface was [[even]] better than he was in the All Dogs [[go]] to Heaven sequel. [[In]] that [[picture]] he appeared [[quite]] dubious to his role of villain. I [[observed]] this [[filmmaking]] when I was about 8-years-old and I [[wished]] it but it wasn't until I watched it again at the age of 13 that I really understood it for what it is; a cartoon about a criminal [[canine]] with a [[actual]] [[crux]] of gold "adopts" a [[scant]] girl in order to exploit her for her talents to talk to [[wildlife]]. The dog star,Charlie B. Barkin, is [[kiiled]] by his formal [[companies]] [[partners]], Carface, (who is [[altogether]] diabolical by the [[manner]]). His [[alma]] then goes to where [[elsewhere]] but Heaven only to [[unearthed]] a golden watch that is [[genuinely]] his life's [[period]], which Charlie, being the sneaky but lovable cad that he is steals and rewinds, [[shipment]] him back to [[Terrestrial]]. Once back on [[Terrestrial]], Charlie goes about [[trying]] [[avenge]] on the [[demonic]] Carface. This is how he [[arises]] [[after]] young Anne-Marie, the [[alone]] [[tiny]] orphan that can [[discussion]] to [[beasts]] whom [[Charley]] plans to scam for her talents in [[edict]] to [[obtain]] back at his [[enemies]] Carface. But scoundrel [[Charley]] actually [[arises]] to [[healthcare]] for young Anne-Marie and his [[schematics]] unfoil as he [[ought]] [[deliver]] up his [[intellect]] to do what is right after Anne-Marie [[discovering]] what her "[[finest]] [[boyfriend]]" [[Charley]] has [[truly]] been using her to make [[cash]] for a new and [[improved]] [[canine]] [[betting]]. Now he [[should]] [[salvage]] her from the dreaded Carface. I [[however]] [[amore]] this [[flick]] even at the age of 22. The [[concept]] and plot [[genuinely]] are [[rather]] [[several]] and [[initial]] from that of [[multiple]] other animated [[cinematography]]. I [[namely]] like the [[thinking]] that a [[doggie]] plays the role of the villain for once. Carface was [[yet]] better than he was in the All Dogs [[going]] to Heaven sequel. [[During]] that [[imaging]] he appeared [[utterly]] dubious to his role of villain. --------------------------------------------- Result 3256 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] A couple of days after writing about how garbage like MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH receive money while Ange , Duncan and Theo are totally ignored I had to [[sit]] through yet another British [[movie]] * that had me [[scratching]] my head as to why it received a [[single]] penny . Some people may claim that because DEAD BABIES is based upon a highly regarded [[novel]] it has an in built market but both THIS FILTHY EARTH and MAD COWS were also adapted from [[novels]] and they were an ordeal to [[sit]] through as well

I had read the synopsis of the plot where a bunch of high class wasters go to a remote mansion where they're stalked by an internet cult but to be honest this isn't really how the story unravels and anyone expecting Friday THE 13TH meets THE SHINING is going to be bitterly disappointed since 90-95% of the running time is taken up with said characters taking drugs and discussing sex . And what hateful characters they are too . Not one of them is likable in any way and within minutes you'll be getting nostalgic for Stalin , Mao and Pol Pot hoping that next time someone embarks on communist democide they'll be successful in creating an egalitarian utopia . Anything that will signal the end of such decadent bourgeois meaningless that the hateful characters in this movie embark upon can only be welcomed

Not content with giving us a movie where the plot is meandering and where the audience fail to connect with the characters the director continues to spoil things further by getting all clever and arty . No doubt that is to impress us so we will fall upon our knees and cry " Oh my god , what a wonderful director the way he bamboozles us with his highly artistic technique and only a [[worthless]] pleb will fail to appreciate what a god given talent this man is " . I'm sure the vast majority of people either screamed " How come my projects got turned down while crap like this didn't ? " or " WTF was the last half hour of this piece of crap all about ? " You might defend the movie by saying the original source novel was unfilmable and this makes the film unwatchable . I will agree that this movie is unwatchable

* I know the IMDb classes this as an American movie but the style and faults with DEAD BABIES is uniquely British . Americans might think they've got things tough with Bush but we've got Tony Blair , not to mention DEAD BABIES , MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH . No wonder everyone is ashamed to be British in the 21st century A couple of days after writing about how garbage like MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH receive money while Ange , Duncan and Theo are totally ignored I had to [[assis]] through yet another British [[films]] * that had me [[scrape]] my head as to why it received a [[exclusive]] penny . Some people may claim that because DEAD BABIES is based upon a highly regarded [[newer]] it has an in built market but both THIS FILTHY EARTH and MAD COWS were also adapted from [[storybooks]] and they were an ordeal to [[seated]] through as well

I had read the synopsis of the plot where a bunch of high class wasters go to a remote mansion where they're stalked by an internet cult but to be honest this isn't really how the story unravels and anyone expecting Friday THE 13TH meets THE SHINING is going to be bitterly disappointed since 90-95% of the running time is taken up with said characters taking drugs and discussing sex . And what hateful characters they are too . Not one of them is likable in any way and within minutes you'll be getting nostalgic for Stalin , Mao and Pol Pot hoping that next time someone embarks on communist democide they'll be successful in creating an egalitarian utopia . Anything that will signal the end of such decadent bourgeois meaningless that the hateful characters in this movie embark upon can only be welcomed

Not content with giving us a movie where the plot is meandering and where the audience fail to connect with the characters the director continues to spoil things further by getting all clever and arty . No doubt that is to impress us so we will fall upon our knees and cry " Oh my god , what a wonderful director the way he bamboozles us with his highly artistic technique and only a [[vain]] pleb will fail to appreciate what a god given talent this man is " . I'm sure the vast majority of people either screamed " How come my projects got turned down while crap like this didn't ? " or " WTF was the last half hour of this piece of crap all about ? " You might defend the movie by saying the original source novel was unfilmable and this makes the film unwatchable . I will agree that this movie is unwatchable

* I know the IMDb classes this as an American movie but the style and faults with DEAD BABIES is uniquely British . Americans might think they've got things tough with Bush but we've got Tony Blair , not to mention DEAD BABIES , MAD COWS and THIS FILTHY EARTH . No wonder everyone is ashamed to be British in the 21st century --------------------------------------------- Result 3257 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] I saw this film last night following a lot of good [[reviews]] from many sources. I would like to point out that if your not ready to try and work out continuously who is who and what it all means you will [[hate]] this film.

I am still struggling to understand the roles of the actors in this film, the [[film]] [[jumps]] from different stories and does not allow you to really empathise with any of the roles.

For the political buff's and those interested in corruption in other world governments out there this film is [[probably]] quite good, but to the average movie watcher this film is awkward,very boring in places and you will leave the cinema confused and annoyed that you paid the entrance fee.

see it if your ready to focus 100% on every minute detail or politics interest you. don't see it, if you actually like watching films. I saw this film last night following a lot of good [[inspect]] from many sources. I would like to point out that if your not ready to try and work out continuously who is who and what it all means you will [[hatred]] this film.

I am still struggling to understand the roles of the actors in this film, the [[cinema]] [[soars]] from different stories and does not allow you to really empathise with any of the roles.

For the political buff's and those interested in corruption in other world governments out there this film is [[indubitably]] quite good, but to the average movie watcher this film is awkward,very boring in places and you will leave the cinema confused and annoyed that you paid the entrance fee.

see it if your ready to focus 100% on every minute detail or politics interest you. don't see it, if you actually like watching films. --------------------------------------------- Result 3258 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] This movie is the [[perfect]] illustration of how [[NOT]] to [[make]] a sci fi movie. The [[worst]] tendency in sci-fi is to make your theme an [[awful]], sophomoric, pseudo-Orwellian/Huxleyan/whateverian "[[vision]]" of "the human future."

Science fiction filmmakers (and authors), as geeks, take themselves very seriously given the high crap-to-good-stuff ratio of their genre. I think other genres with a high CTGSR (yes, I just made it up, relax), like horror or action or even romantic comedy, seem to have a little better grasp of the fact that they are not changing the world with some profound "message."

Sci fi can certainly be successful on a serious level, as numerous great filmmakers have proven. But there is an immense downside to the whole concept, which is represented by "Robot Jox," with its low-rent construction of "the future" (lone good design element: the bizarre, slick-looking billboard ads all over the place that encourage women to have more babies) and its painfully heavy-handed "Iliad" parallels (He's NAMED ACHILLES FOR GOD'S SAKE! I actually didn't pick up on this until I saw the film for like the tenth time, but I went to public school, so the filmmakers are not exonerated.)

Of course, if you're a crazy movie freak like me, this downside has a great upside. I absolutely LOVE movies like this, because bad movies are quite often more fun and sometimes even more interesting than good ones. It's kind of a Lester Bangs approach to movie viewing, I guess.

Note: The lead in this movie (Gary Graham? Is that his name? I refuse to go check.) is really not that bad. He makes a go of it. He's kind of cool, especially when he's drunk/hung over. This movie is the [[flawless]] illustration of how [[NAH]] to [[deliver]] a sci fi movie. The [[hardest]] tendency in sci-fi is to make your theme an [[spooky]], sophomoric, pseudo-Orwellian/Huxleyan/whateverian "[[insight]]" of "the human future."

Science fiction filmmakers (and authors), as geeks, take themselves very seriously given the high crap-to-good-stuff ratio of their genre. I think other genres with a high CTGSR (yes, I just made it up, relax), like horror or action or even romantic comedy, seem to have a little better grasp of the fact that they are not changing the world with some profound "message."

Sci fi can certainly be successful on a serious level, as numerous great filmmakers have proven. But there is an immense downside to the whole concept, which is represented by "Robot Jox," with its low-rent construction of "the future" (lone good design element: the bizarre, slick-looking billboard ads all over the place that encourage women to have more babies) and its painfully heavy-handed "Iliad" parallels (He's NAMED ACHILLES FOR GOD'S SAKE! I actually didn't pick up on this until I saw the film for like the tenth time, but I went to public school, so the filmmakers are not exonerated.)

Of course, if you're a crazy movie freak like me, this downside has a great upside. I absolutely LOVE movies like this, because bad movies are quite often more fun and sometimes even more interesting than good ones. It's kind of a Lester Bangs approach to movie viewing, I guess.

Note: The lead in this movie (Gary Graham? Is that his name? I refuse to go check.) is really not that bad. He makes a go of it. He's kind of cool, especially when he's drunk/hung over. --------------------------------------------- Result 3259 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] Not [[since]] The Simpsons made it's debut has there been a sitcom that I didn't [[want]] to turn of in a matter of 2 minutes. It has of [[course]] been [[said]] that The Simpsons [[killed]] the sitcom. Not this one though.

The first season was so so as the teenage characters were not quite as outrageous as they later became. They even went to school sometimes. The following seasons the [[character]] where fledged out. Eric, the sarcastic twit, Donna, his levelheaded girlfriend, Kelso, the dim bulb, Hyde, the conspiracy theorist and anti-establishment punk, Fez, the pervert exchange student and finally Jackie, the spoiled rich floozy. As for the adult characters there was Eric's mom, the "can you believe she is so ditzy" suburban mom, Eric's dad, the straight arrow who of course wasn't such a hard ass as he seemed, Donna's goofy dad and her dumb blonde mom. Everybody are true to their characters but special kudos to Kurtwood Smith who finds the perfect balance between toughness and still makes his Red Forman quite sympathetic without making us throw up with unexpected cuteness.

Topher Grace is of course the main reason why this show is so [[good]]. It's a tough character to play because it doesn't allow the actor to indulge in wild overacting like the Kelso character, played competently by Ashton Kutcher. I enjoyed seeing the two characters interact because they are the most different.

Hyde's character is a bit harder to enjoy because he is more realistic and do we really need to see the orphan story for the umpteenth time, although I will say that the writers came up with a brilliant story arc for him in the last seasons.

Jackie, played by Family Guy voice artist Mila Kunis is hilarious and she has a nails on a chalkboard type voice, which actually fits her character. The only sad part is that we didn't see more scenes with her and Eric because they were f...... hilarious together. Too much story was wasted on her relationship problems since we already got that in spades with Eric and Donna.

Last I will say that the casting of guest actors were always great. A few favorites: Fez' humongous girlfriend in the mid-seasons, Pastor Dan, the totally awesome Leo played by the equally awesome Thomas Chong, another one of Fez' girlfriends who is totally certifiable and a special appearance by the teenage witch Sabrina as a slutty catholic girl.

Coming up next on Fox, whatever. Not [[because]] The Simpsons made it's debut has there been a sitcom that I didn't [[wants]] to turn of in a matter of 2 minutes. It has of [[cours]] been [[avowed]] that The Simpsons [[assassinate]] the sitcom. Not this one though.

The first season was so so as the teenage characters were not quite as outrageous as they later became. They even went to school sometimes. The following seasons the [[characteristics]] where fledged out. Eric, the sarcastic twit, Donna, his levelheaded girlfriend, Kelso, the dim bulb, Hyde, the conspiracy theorist and anti-establishment punk, Fez, the pervert exchange student and finally Jackie, the spoiled rich floozy. As for the adult characters there was Eric's mom, the "can you believe she is so ditzy" suburban mom, Eric's dad, the straight arrow who of course wasn't such a hard ass as he seemed, Donna's goofy dad and her dumb blonde mom. Everybody are true to their characters but special kudos to Kurtwood Smith who finds the perfect balance between toughness and still makes his Red Forman quite sympathetic without making us throw up with unexpected cuteness.

Topher Grace is of course the main reason why this show is so [[alright]]. It's a tough character to play because it doesn't allow the actor to indulge in wild overacting like the Kelso character, played competently by Ashton Kutcher. I enjoyed seeing the two characters interact because they are the most different.

Hyde's character is a bit harder to enjoy because he is more realistic and do we really need to see the orphan story for the umpteenth time, although I will say that the writers came up with a brilliant story arc for him in the last seasons.

Jackie, played by Family Guy voice artist Mila Kunis is hilarious and she has a nails on a chalkboard type voice, which actually fits her character. The only sad part is that we didn't see more scenes with her and Eric because they were f...... hilarious together. Too much story was wasted on her relationship problems since we already got that in spades with Eric and Donna.

Last I will say that the casting of guest actors were always great. A few favorites: Fez' humongous girlfriend in the mid-seasons, Pastor Dan, the totally awesome Leo played by the equally awesome Thomas Chong, another one of Fez' girlfriends who is totally certifiable and a special appearance by the teenage witch Sabrina as a slutty catholic girl.

Coming up next on Fox, whatever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Visconti's first film has all his trademark [[visual]] flair and [[immaculate]] [[technique]], accompanied by [[compelling]] performances from Massimo Girotti as the [[handsome]] [[drifter]] and, [[best]] of all, [[Clara]] Calamai as the fabulous, frantic Giovanna. Remade [[several]] [[times]] as 'The [[Postman]] Rings Twice' but never bettered. Can't [[believe]] this was the man's [[first]] [[film]]! It [[shows]] the confidence of someone at the zenith of their [[career]]. Visconti's first film has all his trademark [[optic]] flair and [[spotless]] [[tech]], accompanied by [[persuading]] performances from Massimo Girotti as the [[gorgeous]] [[tramp]] and, [[better]] of all, [[Clearly]] Calamai as the fabulous, frantic Giovanna. Remade [[dissimilar]] [[moments]] as 'The [[Postmaster]] Rings Twice' but never bettered. Can't [[reckon]] this was the man's [[fiirst]] [[movie]]! It [[exposition]] the confidence of someone at the zenith of their [[quarry]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I don't know much about the Rat [[Pack]], and Frank Sinatra [[always]] [[seemed]] a bit too self-consciously full of himself to me. So when I call this one of my all-time faves, it's [[nothing]] to do with a tribute-band [[mentality]]. As another [[reviewer]] [[says]], Mad Dog [[Time]] is about symbolism, not [[realism]]. It's kafkaesque (a [[pity]] Kyle MacLachlan is [[probably]] the [[weakest]] of a very [[strong]] crowd, when he was so [[good]] as [[Josef]] K), it's stylish, [[knowing]], sardonic and slick. Jeff Goldblum is navigating his way around a variety of [[characters]], trying not to [[get]] shot and acting deftly rather than dorkily, trying to stay abreast of what he knows and others don't, whom he can outshoot and whom he can't. Gabriel Byrne and Richard Dreyfuss (his [[best]] performance) have a ball, and the supporting [[cast]] [[look]] spot-on. The symbolism, the [[settings]] (the one outdoor motion shot with [[Jeff]] Goldblum walking down the steps seems really weird after so much lounge lizardry), the dialogue (style, not practicality, is the order of the day), it's all about [[characters]] [[interacting]], not really gangsterism. [[Fun]] to watch, must've been [[fun]] to do. What the [[critics]] were up to is [[really]] a [[mystery]]... I don't know much about the Rat [[Packaging]], and Frank Sinatra [[incessantly]] [[sounded]] a bit too self-consciously full of himself to me. So when I call this one of my all-time faves, it's [[anything]] to do with a tribute-band [[mindset]]. As another [[examiner]] [[alleges]], Mad Dog [[Period]] is about symbolism, not [[pragmatism]]. It's kafkaesque (a [[shame]] Kyle MacLachlan is [[conceivably]] the [[lowest]] of a very [[vigorous]] crowd, when he was so [[buena]] as [[Jozef]] K), it's stylish, [[realise]], sardonic and slick. Jeff Goldblum is navigating his way around a variety of [[characteristics]], trying not to [[obtain]] shot and acting deftly rather than dorkily, trying to stay abreast of what he knows and others don't, whom he can outshoot and whom he can't. Gabriel Byrne and Richard Dreyfuss (his [[optimum]] performance) have a ball, and the supporting [[casting]] [[glance]] spot-on. The symbolism, the [[setups]] (the one outdoor motion shot with [[Geoffrey]] Goldblum walking down the steps seems really weird after so much lounge lizardry), the dialogue (style, not practicality, is the order of the day), it's all about [[nature]] [[communicate]], not really gangsterism. [[Amusing]] to watch, must've been [[amusing]] to do. What the [[criticisms]] were up to is [[genuinely]] a [[conundrum]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 3262 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] i [[almost]] did not go [[see]] this movie because i [[remember]] [[march]] of the penguin was not that much exciting. I went [[mainly]] because [[Disney]] promised to plant a tree if i go see it on the opening weekend, but after i did go see it, it was [[simply]] [[amazing]]; the [[fact]] that the photographers can capture impossible images are [[simply]] worth your money. You also get to see different habitats, different vegetation, [[animals]], and natural phenomenons that will not only shock you - simply because you [[would]] never [[expect]] nature to be so magical and [[dynamic]] - but also [[touch]] your [[souls]] and raise the [[question]] of [[humanity]] [[versus]] the [[world]], of how our [[lives]] have deviated from [[nature]] to such a [[degree]] that we [[take]] for granted of the natural beauty and miracles that are quintessential to our biosphere. You don't have to be an earth lover or a tree-hugging environmentalist to appreciate the mere awesomeness of this [[documentary]]. You simply have to be a curious soul who questions the value and miracle of living. [[Enjoy]]! i [[virtually]] did not go [[seeing]] this movie because i [[reminisce]] [[marci]] of the penguin was not that much exciting. I went [[primarily]] because [[Disneyland]] promised to plant a tree if i go see it on the opening weekend, but after i did go see it, it was [[mere]] [[staggering]]; the [[facto]] that the photographers can capture impossible images are [[solely]] worth your money. You also get to see different habitats, different vegetation, [[zoo]], and natural phenomenons that will not only shock you - simply because you [[ought]] never [[hopes]] nature to be so magical and [[vibrant]] - but also [[toque]] your [[ames]] and raise the [[matter]] of [[mankind]] [[vs]] the [[worldwide]], of how our [[life]] have deviated from [[traits]] to such a [[diploma]] that we [[taking]] for granted of the natural beauty and miracles that are quintessential to our biosphere. You don't have to be an earth lover or a tree-hugging environmentalist to appreciate the mere awesomeness of this [[literature]]. You simply have to be a curious soul who questions the value and miracle of living. [[Enjoys]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I got in to this [[excellent]] program in about season 4 and since then i have seen all the episodes got all the episodes on DVD and keeps getting better and better with the seasons of 9 and 10. It now may not have Richard Dean Anderson now but the addition of Ben Browder and Claudie Black it has still given the show more strength and original still even after 10 seasons. Sadly now the sci-fi channel got rid of this amazing [[show]] with no hope relay for a 11 season there are making two direct to DVD movie and hopefully more. Atlantis is still going strong on its 4th seasons. And there is a third spin off in the works the stargate franchise is nowhere near dead. This TV show is a must see for all sci-fi fans and people of genres because this has such a wide range of things to appeal to all ages and all types of people Watch IT !!!!! 10/10 I got in to this [[sumptuous]] program in about season 4 and since then i have seen all the episodes got all the episodes on DVD and keeps getting better and better with the seasons of 9 and 10. It now may not have Richard Dean Anderson now but the addition of Ben Browder and Claudie Black it has still given the show more strength and original still even after 10 seasons. Sadly now the sci-fi channel got rid of this amazing [[spectacle]] with no hope relay for a 11 season there are making two direct to DVD movie and hopefully more. Atlantis is still going strong on its 4th seasons. And there is a third spin off in the works the stargate franchise is nowhere near dead. This TV show is a must see for all sci-fi fans and people of genres because this has such a wide range of things to appeal to all ages and all types of people Watch IT !!!!! 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3264 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (73%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I had high expectations of this movie (the title, translated, is "How We Get Rid of the Others"). [[After]] all, the concept is great: a near future in which the ruling elite has taken the consequence of the right-wing government's constant verbal and legislative persecution of so-called freeloaders and the left wing in general, and decided to just kill off everyone who cannot prove that they're contributing something to the establishment (the establishment being called "the common good", but actually meaning the interests of the ruling capitalist ideology).

Very cool idea! Ideal for biting satire! Only, this movie completely blows its chance. The satire comes out only in a few scenes and performances of absurdity, but this satire is not sustained; it is neither sharp nor witty. And for an alleged comedy, the movie has nearly no funny scenes. The comedy, I assume, is supposed to be in the absurdity of the situations, but the situations are largely uncomfortable and over-serious, rather than evoking either laughter or thought.

The script is rife with grave errors in disposition. The action should have focused on the political aspects and how wrong it would be to do such a thing, but instead oodles of time are spent on a young woman who was the one that wrote the new laws for fun, and who's trying to save everybody, by organizing a resistance that ships people to Africa. All this is beside the point! A movie like this should not pretend to be so serious! It's a satire! A political statement. But it doesn't even begin to actually address the problem it's supposed to be about. Maybe it was afraid of going too far? How cowardly. That's not art. It's not even real satire.

Søren Pilmark, a very serious and by now one of Denmark's absolutely senior actors, was very good. He largely carried what little entertainment value the movie had. Everybody else: nothing special (well, perhaps except for Lene Poulsen, who did supply a convincing performance).

In fact, a problem with most Danish movies is that the language never sounds natural. Neither the formulation nor the delivery. Why is it so difficult to make it sound right? Why must it be so stilted and artificial? I hope, when people look at these movies fifty years from now, they don't think that this was how people talked in general Danish society.

3 out of 10. I had high expectations of this movie (the title, translated, is "How We Get Rid of the Others"). [[Upon]] all, the concept is great: a near future in which the ruling elite has taken the consequence of the right-wing government's constant verbal and legislative persecution of so-called freeloaders and the left wing in general, and decided to just kill off everyone who cannot prove that they're contributing something to the establishment (the establishment being called "the common good", but actually meaning the interests of the ruling capitalist ideology).

Very cool idea! Ideal for biting satire! Only, this movie completely blows its chance. The satire comes out only in a few scenes and performances of absurdity, but this satire is not sustained; it is neither sharp nor witty. And for an alleged comedy, the movie has nearly no funny scenes. The comedy, I assume, is supposed to be in the absurdity of the situations, but the situations are largely uncomfortable and over-serious, rather than evoking either laughter or thought.

The script is rife with grave errors in disposition. The action should have focused on the political aspects and how wrong it would be to do such a thing, but instead oodles of time are spent on a young woman who was the one that wrote the new laws for fun, and who's trying to save everybody, by organizing a resistance that ships people to Africa. All this is beside the point! A movie like this should not pretend to be so serious! It's a satire! A political statement. But it doesn't even begin to actually address the problem it's supposed to be about. Maybe it was afraid of going too far? How cowardly. That's not art. It's not even real satire.

Søren Pilmark, a very serious and by now one of Denmark's absolutely senior actors, was very good. He largely carried what little entertainment value the movie had. Everybody else: nothing special (well, perhaps except for Lene Poulsen, who did supply a convincing performance).

In fact, a problem with most Danish movies is that the language never sounds natural. Neither the formulation nor the delivery. Why is it so difficult to make it sound right? Why must it be so stilted and artificial? I hope, when people look at these movies fifty years from now, they don't think that this was how people talked in general Danish society.

3 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3265 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The film [[begins]] with people on Earth discovering that their rocket to Mars had not been lost but was just drifting out in Space near out planet. When it's retrieved, one of the crew members is ill, one is alive and the other two are missing. What happened to them is told through a flashback by the surviving member.

While on Mars, the crew was apparently attacked by a whole host of very [[silly]] bug-eyed monsters. Oddly, while the sets were pretty good, the monsters were among the silliest I have seen on film. Plus, in an [[odd]] attempt at realism, the production used a process called "Cinemagic". Unfortunately, this wonderful innovation just made the film look pretty cheap when they were on the surface of Mars AND the intensity of the redness practically made my eyes bleed--it was THAT bad!! Despite all the cheese, the film did have a somewhat interesting plot as well as a good message about space travel. For lovers of the genre, it's well worth seeing. For others, you may just find the whole thing rather silly--see for yourself and decide.

While by today's standards this isn't an especially good sci-fi film, compared with the films being made at the time, it stacks up pretty well.

PS--When you watch the film, pay careful attention to Dr. Tremayne. He looks like the spitting image of Dr. Quest from the "Jonny Quest" cartoon! Plus, he sounds and acts a lot like him, too. The film [[starting]] with people on Earth discovering that their rocket to Mars had not been lost but was just drifting out in Space near out planet. When it's retrieved, one of the crew members is ill, one is alive and the other two are missing. What happened to them is told through a flashback by the surviving member.

While on Mars, the crew was apparently attacked by a whole host of very [[beast]] bug-eyed monsters. Oddly, while the sets were pretty good, the monsters were among the silliest I have seen on film. Plus, in an [[unusual]] attempt at realism, the production used a process called "Cinemagic". Unfortunately, this wonderful innovation just made the film look pretty cheap when they were on the surface of Mars AND the intensity of the redness practically made my eyes bleed--it was THAT bad!! Despite all the cheese, the film did have a somewhat interesting plot as well as a good message about space travel. For lovers of the genre, it's well worth seeing. For others, you may just find the whole thing rather silly--see for yourself and decide.

While by today's standards this isn't an especially good sci-fi film, compared with the films being made at the time, it stacks up pretty well.

PS--When you watch the film, pay careful attention to Dr. Tremayne. He looks like the spitting image of Dr. Quest from the "Jonny Quest" cartoon! Plus, he sounds and acts a lot like him, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3266 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] I tried to remove anything that might be considered a spoiler. I also assume that you've seen the first movie or at least know the general gist, so if you haven't some of this might not make sense.

Plot: This movie beats the [[audience]] over the [[head]] with [[tired]] philosophical ramblings again and again in an [[attempt]] to get the theme across. We are bombarded again and again by questions of purpose, and destiny, and choice, and forced to endure the long, torturous platitude sessions that contain them.

Neo, awakened from a dream in the last movie, now begins a period of realization about his own existence. There are a lot of revelations in this movie, which I'll be vague about so they won't seem like spoilers.

*If you're still worried vague references will spoil the movie, don't read the paragraph below.*

The strength and weakness of faith is revealed. The strengths and weaknesses of love, and its temporary nature, are also revealed. The interdependence of humans and technology, and our faith in technology, are also revealed. The importance of choice and experience is revealed. Explaining further things that are revealed would go into too much detail, so I will refrain (as the guidelines for writing a commentary asks). Btw, by "revealed" I mean pounded through our ears and eyes like nails.

Storyline: So how does Neo and the gang get from the end of the last movie to the beginning of the next one? In short, they keep the faith, and use and abuse overly-stylized action and bullet-time like it's going out of style (and after this display, I'm hoping movie-goers and makers alike learn to appreciate subtlety and originality a bit more). More on that later. To not spoil anything, I will say no more than the promo material already did: Neo is still trying to figure out the Matrix, and he is looking for answers while trying to save the humans, and Zion, all while baddies are going after him and his cohorts. The movie pretty much picks up where the last one left off.

Action: While martial arts action and gunplay peppered its predecessor in somewhat equal parts, this movie focuses much more on martial arts than gunplay, adding swords, sais, etc. to the mix. Special effects are so often used and waved in the audience's face that it becomes really tiresome. I've discussed this movie with friends and coworkers alike, and nearly all of them found some of the action sequences--especially the "Smith fight" we all heard would be in the movie--to be too long and tedious. This is a huge red flag for action fans, because the end of an action sequence should either leave you wanting a slight bit more, or completely content with the awesomeness that just occured.

These fights scenes do neither. They are over-stylized, over-the-top sequences that are wooden and uninspired. In the first movie, there was a real sense of desperation to some of the action, a sense that fighting was for survival, not just looking good (which I honestly don't think they manage in Reloaded anyway) in black and leather. Go watch Drunken Master or Iron Monkey after this movie to remind yourself of what good fighting sequences are--you won't regret it. In addition, the "Matrix abilities" people have in Reloaded is not consistent, and what they actually do is not consistent. The first movie had its inconsistencies here, but they weren't too glaring--unlike Reloaded.

Special effects are poured on and on and on. Every little thing someone does, be it just jump, somersault, spin, and in many cases just pose, are

slow-moed, bullet-timed, or over-accentuated by some sort of destruction. It's evident the W Bros had a ton of money to throw at this movie, and boy did they throw it, with no real restraint. Sharp editors could have really helped this, but the first movie was such a hit that free reign was obviously given, which brings us to. . .

Character and dialogue: I have already more or less said the dialogue was tired and full of philosophical platitudes. Actors can't really bring a lot of depth to their character when the script and direction is shoving character progression audience's face, or neglecting it altogether. The audience is at no time given nuance and substance so they can contemplate the character on their own.

Keanu's acting performance is stiff at best. Keanu is good at acting confused, and that's about all he does in this film. He makes a decent attempt to show passion between Neo and Trinity, but it falls flat.

Lawrence tries to make Morpheus everything from Moses to Henry V, and be as cool as a cat throughout. With the script he is provided, he makes a noble attempt, but it also falls flat.

Moss isn't very believable either. Her look of concern is always the same, much like Keanu's, and the chemistry isn't there, although in their very physical scenes they fake it well enough.

Hugo once again brought his weird sense of being an Agent program, but he too suffered from the script's hand. I actually find him to be the most interesting character of the bunch, but instead of development they just make him an excuse for a huge, drawn out fight scene.

All in all, this movie is beyond disappointing if you had good expectations, and on its own, as a stand-alone movie (which is not how it's supposed to be taken), it's still horrible. I don't see The Matrix as deep, but I at least see it as an enjoyable scifi romp that has some interesting ideas, good action, a few funny lines, and enough restrained symbolism and elusions to amuse the attentive. Reloaded fails on all these counts, and I really hope the W Bros will give us a better experience in the 3rd installment. Granted, I don't have a lot of hope left for that after this film. I tried to remove anything that might be considered a spoiler. I also assume that you've seen the first movie or at least know the general gist, so if you haven't some of this might not make sense.

Plot: This movie beats the [[viewers]] over the [[jefe]] with [[weary]] philosophical ramblings again and again in an [[strives]] to get the theme across. We are bombarded again and again by questions of purpose, and destiny, and choice, and forced to endure the long, torturous platitude sessions that contain them.

Neo, awakened from a dream in the last movie, now begins a period of realization about his own existence. There are a lot of revelations in this movie, which I'll be vague about so they won't seem like spoilers.

*If you're still worried vague references will spoil the movie, don't read the paragraph below.*

The strength and weakness of faith is revealed. The strengths and weaknesses of love, and its temporary nature, are also revealed. The interdependence of humans and technology, and our faith in technology, are also revealed. The importance of choice and experience is revealed. Explaining further things that are revealed would go into too much detail, so I will refrain (as the guidelines for writing a commentary asks). Btw, by "revealed" I mean pounded through our ears and eyes like nails.

Storyline: So how does Neo and the gang get from the end of the last movie to the beginning of the next one? In short, they keep the faith, and use and abuse overly-stylized action and bullet-time like it's going out of style (and after this display, I'm hoping movie-goers and makers alike learn to appreciate subtlety and originality a bit more). More on that later. To not spoil anything, I will say no more than the promo material already did: Neo is still trying to figure out the Matrix, and he is looking for answers while trying to save the humans, and Zion, all while baddies are going after him and his cohorts. The movie pretty much picks up where the last one left off.

Action: While martial arts action and gunplay peppered its predecessor in somewhat equal parts, this movie focuses much more on martial arts than gunplay, adding swords, sais, etc. to the mix. Special effects are so often used and waved in the audience's face that it becomes really tiresome. I've discussed this movie with friends and coworkers alike, and nearly all of them found some of the action sequences--especially the "Smith fight" we all heard would be in the movie--to be too long and tedious. This is a huge red flag for action fans, because the end of an action sequence should either leave you wanting a slight bit more, or completely content with the awesomeness that just occured.

These fights scenes do neither. They are over-stylized, over-the-top sequences that are wooden and uninspired. In the first movie, there was a real sense of desperation to some of the action, a sense that fighting was for survival, not just looking good (which I honestly don't think they manage in Reloaded anyway) in black and leather. Go watch Drunken Master or Iron Monkey after this movie to remind yourself of what good fighting sequences are--you won't regret it. In addition, the "Matrix abilities" people have in Reloaded is not consistent, and what they actually do is not consistent. The first movie had its inconsistencies here, but they weren't too glaring--unlike Reloaded.

Special effects are poured on and on and on. Every little thing someone does, be it just jump, somersault, spin, and in many cases just pose, are

slow-moed, bullet-timed, or over-accentuated by some sort of destruction. It's evident the W Bros had a ton of money to throw at this movie, and boy did they throw it, with no real restraint. Sharp editors could have really helped this, but the first movie was such a hit that free reign was obviously given, which brings us to. . .

Character and dialogue: I have already more or less said the dialogue was tired and full of philosophical platitudes. Actors can't really bring a lot of depth to their character when the script and direction is shoving character progression audience's face, or neglecting it altogether. The audience is at no time given nuance and substance so they can contemplate the character on their own.

Keanu's acting performance is stiff at best. Keanu is good at acting confused, and that's about all he does in this film. He makes a decent attempt to show passion between Neo and Trinity, but it falls flat.

Lawrence tries to make Morpheus everything from Moses to Henry V, and be as cool as a cat throughout. With the script he is provided, he makes a noble attempt, but it also falls flat.

Moss isn't very believable either. Her look of concern is always the same, much like Keanu's, and the chemistry isn't there, although in their very physical scenes they fake it well enough.

Hugo once again brought his weird sense of being an Agent program, but he too suffered from the script's hand. I actually find him to be the most interesting character of the bunch, but instead of development they just make him an excuse for a huge, drawn out fight scene.

All in all, this movie is beyond disappointing if you had good expectations, and on its own, as a stand-alone movie (which is not how it's supposed to be taken), it's still horrible. I don't see The Matrix as deep, but I at least see it as an enjoyable scifi romp that has some interesting ideas, good action, a few funny lines, and enough restrained symbolism and elusions to amuse the attentive. Reloaded fails on all these counts, and I really hope the W Bros will give us a better experience in the 3rd installment. Granted, I don't have a lot of hope left for that after this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Being the Beatlemaniac that I am, I approached Two Of Us with a combination of fear and fascination. Having seen 'In His Life: The John Lennon Story', I was quite [[concerned]] that Two Of Us will turn out no better. The fact that Aidan Quinn and Jared Harris look absolutely nothing like John Lennon and Paul McCartney – even with some make-up and proper hairdos – didn't help one bit.

But I was more than a bit [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]]. It's probably thanks to the involvement of Michael Lindsay-Hogg, who directed Let It Be in 1970 and consequently probably knew John and Paul quite well, that the characters and the dialogue came across as convincing as they did. (The writing credit for Two Of Us is given to a man named Mark Stanfield, of whom I know absolutely nothing; I feel confident that director Lindsay-Hogg had more than a bit to do with the script.) Two Of Us is not a biography of the Beatles; it has very little plot, in fact, and takes place all in one day in New York City. What it does is imagine a meeting between John and Paul in 1976, while John lived in New York. That meeting is entirely fictitious, of course – though it can't truly be disproved that such a meeting actually took place. But through that imagined conversation it gives us a glimpse into the personalities of these two great musicians – their intelligence, their sense of humor, their different reaction to stardom, and most of all their relationship; what made them such a great team, and what broke them up.

Since it's a talk movie, nothing much except for dialogue between two characters for an hour and a half, it's likely to bore all but true fans of the Beatles; but it's a fantastic piece of writing and storytelling, and is both informative and touching. For those interested in these two musical giants, very quickly you'll get over the shock of how different the actors look from their counterparts and feel like John and Paul had come to life – so intimate and convincing is the script, and so committed are the actors. Two Of Us gives you priceless insight into the lives of two geniuses, and a tale that is both sad and funny. Most certainly recommended. Being the Beatlemaniac that I am, I approached Two Of Us with a combination of fear and fascination. Having seen 'In His Life: The John Lennon Story', I was quite [[worried]] that Two Of Us will turn out no better. The fact that Aidan Quinn and Jared Harris look absolutely nothing like John Lennon and Paul McCartney – even with some make-up and proper hairdos – didn't help one bit.

But I was more than a bit [[cheerfully]] [[dumbfounded]]. It's probably thanks to the involvement of Michael Lindsay-Hogg, who directed Let It Be in 1970 and consequently probably knew John and Paul quite well, that the characters and the dialogue came across as convincing as they did. (The writing credit for Two Of Us is given to a man named Mark Stanfield, of whom I know absolutely nothing; I feel confident that director Lindsay-Hogg had more than a bit to do with the script.) Two Of Us is not a biography of the Beatles; it has very little plot, in fact, and takes place all in one day in New York City. What it does is imagine a meeting between John and Paul in 1976, while John lived in New York. That meeting is entirely fictitious, of course – though it can't truly be disproved that such a meeting actually took place. But through that imagined conversation it gives us a glimpse into the personalities of these two great musicians – their intelligence, their sense of humor, their different reaction to stardom, and most of all their relationship; what made them such a great team, and what broke them up.

Since it's a talk movie, nothing much except for dialogue between two characters for an hour and a half, it's likely to bore all but true fans of the Beatles; but it's a fantastic piece of writing and storytelling, and is both informative and touching. For those interested in these two musical giants, very quickly you'll get over the shock of how different the actors look from their counterparts and feel like John and Paul had come to life – so intimate and convincing is the script, and so committed are the actors. Two Of Us gives you priceless insight into the lives of two geniuses, and a tale that is both sad and funny. Most certainly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 3268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Saw this on TV. I'm glad I didn't go to the cinema to see this or spend the money on rental. The [[movie]] is [[totally]] [[predictable]] - from the corrupt owner and planner, to the snaking electric cables. The [[plot]] is really [[weak]] and [[unbelievable]] - the avalanche expert guy gets hit by a 20 foot wave of bone breaking avalanche (using actual footage) and all he has to do is get up and shake himself down. The avalanche thunders down at a million miles an hour and stops dead at the side of the road.

Some of the actual avalanche material is impressive and shows its devastating power. But the contract between the real avalanche and the staged stuff makes this film look even flimsier.

Do yourself a favour, don't bother with this one not even on T.V. Saw this on TV. I'm glad I didn't go to the cinema to see this or spend the money on rental. The [[film]] is [[fully]] [[foreseeable]] - from the corrupt owner and planner, to the snaking electric cables. The [[intrigue]] is really [[fragile]] and [[fabulous]] - the avalanche expert guy gets hit by a 20 foot wave of bone breaking avalanche (using actual footage) and all he has to do is get up and shake himself down. The avalanche thunders down at a million miles an hour and stops dead at the side of the road.

Some of the actual avalanche material is impressive and shows its devastating power. But the contract between the real avalanche and the staged stuff makes this film look even flimsier.

Do yourself a favour, don't bother with this one not even on T.V. --------------------------------------------- Result 3269 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Having watched this movie on the SciFi channel, I can only conclude that this film was made by a bunch of [[amateurs]] who have never seen a movie in their lives. The film is an endless sequence of [[bizarre]] occurrences, or "delights" as the friend reading over my shoulder is telling me. The plot isn't really worth commenting as, but basically a plane carrying football players crashes into Yeti territory. Before the movie is over, we are treated to yetis ripping hearts out, yetis waddling in an effort to run before jumping 50 meters, yetis ripping a man's legs off and beating him with them, a woman killing a rabbit at 30 meters with a javelin, a yeti surviving several bullets and being set on fire with no apparent harm, a yeti dangling off a cliff by holding to a man's shoe, yet then jumps off, and a whole collection of further, bizarre occurrences. Basically, if you aren't staying up on a Saturday for the expressed purpose of watching the [[worst]] of SciFi channel original movies, avoid this film like the plague. Or as my friend reading over my shoulder says: "It's the best movie I have ever seen." To which the friend on my right says: "Only battle techno music could have made it better." Having watched this movie on the SciFi channel, I can only conclude that this film was made by a bunch of [[enthusiasts]] who have never seen a movie in their lives. The film is an endless sequence of [[surreal]] occurrences, or "delights" as the friend reading over my shoulder is telling me. The plot isn't really worth commenting as, but basically a plane carrying football players crashes into Yeti territory. Before the movie is over, we are treated to yetis ripping hearts out, yetis waddling in an effort to run before jumping 50 meters, yetis ripping a man's legs off and beating him with them, a woman killing a rabbit at 30 meters with a javelin, a yeti surviving several bullets and being set on fire with no apparent harm, a yeti dangling off a cliff by holding to a man's shoe, yet then jumps off, and a whole collection of further, bizarre occurrences. Basically, if you aren't staying up on a Saturday for the expressed purpose of watching the [[hardest]] of SciFi channel original movies, avoid this film like the plague. Or as my friend reading over my shoulder says: "It's the best movie I have ever seen." To which the friend on my right says: "Only battle techno music could have made it better." --------------------------------------------- Result 3270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I almost drowned in [[CHEESE]] watching this movie. In fact I [[could]] not [[even]] finish it. I want my money back. One more of Hollywood's [[feeble]] attempts to come up with a new idea. Good thing I keep a bowl of lemons in the fridge. Just in case. They should of gave Nic Cage a hat and a bull-whip. Swashbucklin'. Cage's performance in Raising Arizona or Leaving Las Vegas beats this "lemon". People who are [[completely]] and totally [[marketed]](and most of them are) should love this [[movie]]. If this film had been animated, I would have taken it more seriously. I would of rather paid to see a completely stupid movie that did not try to hide it. In my opinion, this was a incredibly stupid movie and it made a even more incredibly sad attempt to try and hide that FACT.

All the SHEEP seem to love it though. I almost drowned in [[QUESO]] watching this movie. In fact I [[did]] not [[yet]] finish it. I want my money back. One more of Hollywood's [[fragile]] attempts to come up with a new idea. Good thing I keep a bowl of lemons in the fridge. Just in case. They should of gave Nic Cage a hat and a bull-whip. Swashbucklin'. Cage's performance in Raising Arizona or Leaving Las Vegas beats this "lemon". People who are [[perfectly]] and totally [[commercialized]](and most of them are) should love this [[kino]]. If this film had been animated, I would have taken it more seriously. I would of rather paid to see a completely stupid movie that did not try to hide it. In my opinion, this was a incredibly stupid movie and it made a even more incredibly sad attempt to try and hide that FACT.

All the SHEEP seem to love it though. --------------------------------------------- Result 3271 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Like most other reviewers I have first seen this movie (on TV, never on the big screen), when I was a teenager. My Dad has always regarded this film highly and recommended it to me then, and I must say he was not only right, but this movie has stayed with me forever in the more than 2 decades since I saw it first time. I have seen it two or three more times since then (just a few days ago I gave it another watch) and it has not lost anything of its impact with time. It still a great and well worth to be seen movie! Manr regard Peckinpah's RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY as one of the first and best later western, which had a realistic look at life in the old west, but the hardly known LAST HUNT is definitely the better movie and was even half a dozen years earlier. Actually it was probably 3 decades ahead of its time, or maybe it still is ...

Although thinking hard and having certainly seen 100s of western (I like this genre) I can not remember any western as bleak and depressive as this one. Two men bound together, partly by hate, partly by not seeming to have other choices, surrounded by beautiful Ms. Padget, a crippled old man and a young Inian, leading the life of buffalo-killers until fate reaches out for one of them.

Nobody who has ever seen this movie will be able to forget its ending and the last frames of this gem. When the camera moves on and away from Mr. Taylor a white buffalo skin comes into sight (on a tree)and echos from the past, when all the hatred began, are present again. Mr. Taylor has got his buffalo, but in the end the buffalo got him.

Aside from the top performances of everybody involved, the intelligent script and the great dialogue, it should also be mentioned, that THE LAST HUNT is superbly photograped, I have seldomely seen a western that well shot (aside from the ones directed by Anthony Mann, which are also all superbly photographed), that all the locations are cleverly chosen and that even the soundtrack fits the picture very well.

And director BROOKS is really a superb storyteller. Master craftsmanship!He has made quite a couple of really great movies and was successful in nearly every imaginable genre, but even in an as prolific career as this one, THE LAST HUNT still shines as one of his best, if not his best.

Definitely would deserve a higher rating, compared to the 7-something RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY enjoys. --------------------------------------------- Result 3272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[CARRY]] ON MATRON was released in 1972 and it's becoming [[clear]] that the series has reached a natural end with the best entries like CLEO , UP THE KYBER and SCREAMING being from the mid to late 60s

In itself [[MATRON]] is by no means bad it's just that we've [[seen]] it all before with a thin [[plot]] ( A bunch of spivs trying to break into a hospital to steal a supply of [[contraceptive]] pills which they plan to sell to third world countries ) [[surrounded]] by gags of a slightly amusing though unsophisticated nature . I think that's where the problem lies - The gags aren't all that amusing with the unsophisticated nature starting to show its age . Did we need another movie that uses a man dressed up as a woman in order to drive the plot ? Perhaps the [[worst]] criticism I can make is that I saw CARRY ON MATRON this afternoon , less that twelve hours ago and I have a problem in trying to remember a very funny line . That's a serious problem for a comedy [[BEARS]] ON MATRON was released in 1972 and it's becoming [[unequivocal]] that the series has reached a natural end with the best entries like CLEO , UP THE KYBER and SCREAMING being from the mid to late 60s

In itself [[NURSES]] is by no means bad it's just that we've [[noticed]] it all before with a thin [[intrigue]] ( A bunch of spivs trying to break into a hospital to steal a supply of [[contraception]] pills which they plan to sell to third world countries ) [[encircled]] by gags of a slightly amusing though unsophisticated nature . I think that's where the problem lies - The gags aren't all that amusing with the unsophisticated nature starting to show its age . Did we need another movie that uses a man dressed up as a woman in order to drive the plot ? Perhaps the [[gravest]] criticism I can make is that I saw CARRY ON MATRON this afternoon , less that twelve hours ago and I have a problem in trying to remember a very funny line . That's a serious problem for a comedy --------------------------------------------- Result 3273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Terry Gilliam's fantastic, twisted story of a [[virus]] destroying all but a handful of people [[across]] the Earth and forcing them to move [[underground]] and the man sent back in time to [[gather]] information about it is a fantastic, [[dizzying]], and [[highly]] stylized film that [[boasts]] Bruce Willis' [[best]] performance ever.

What sets 12 Monkeys [[apart]] from most time-travel sci-fi [[movies]] is that Bruce Willis character actually deals with what the psychological [[effects]] of time-travel, that is, not [[knowing]] what [[reality]] is actual [[reality]]: the place that the time-traveler comes from or goes to. Also, the [[film]] [[recognizes]] that [[things]] that have [[past]] cannot be [[altered]] and that the [[prevention]] of a [[cataclysmic]] [[event]], in this [[case]] the [[release]] of [[said]] [[virus]], cannot be stopped or [[changed]]. As Willis [[asserts]] "It's already happened," while he's in a mental [[hospital]], the [[major]] dilemma the [[film]] trudges into is not a trite, overdone plot to [[save]] the world; [[instead]] it's Willis' [[inner]] [[struggle]] to [[simply]] survive himself. It's a fresh, [[innovative]] concept, and it [[works]] [[beautifully]] thanks to a tautly [[written]] script by [[Peoples]] and Gilliam's [[unique]] [[brand]] of [[dementia]].

Besides this, 12 Monkey's [[storytelling]] is [[totally]] non-linear and instead opts to [[distort]] and [[bend]] the way the [[story]] is told [[skillfully]] [[incorporating]] a bevy of [[different]] [[time]] sequences: flashbacks, [[dreams]], [[memories]], the present, the [[past]], the [[future]], and [[even]] a scene that is [[lifted]] out of Hitchcock's [[Vertigo]]. [[All]] [[serve]] to [[envelop]] the [[viewer]] into its [[disturbing]] [[cacophony]] of [[madness]] and futility.

Visually, Gilliam is a [[master]] of desolate umbrage and shadow rivalling Tim Burton in his [[strikingly]] [[despondent]] [[scenery]] and [[imagery]]. With cold, [[wide]], and immersing cinematography, Gilliam [[plunges]] into the colorless [[surroundings]] and [[darkness]] of his characters. The scenes are often bathed in a strangely antiseptic, dead white and [[help]] serve as a contrast to the [[often]] veering-on-madness [[characters]].

Performance-wise, [[Brad]] [[Pitt]] steals most scenes, [[filling]] them with a patented loony, off-the-wall performance that [[deservedly]] [[garnered]] him an [[Oscar]] [[nomination]]. As [[mentioned]], [[Bruce]] Willis [[gives]] the [[best]] performance of his [[career]], not [[reverting]] to his heroic cliches and cardboard hero and instead portraying Cole as a simple, poignant, tragic everyman. Equally good is Madeline Stowe as Willis' psychologist. She holds her own, injecting her character with both wild energy and strength as she collapses under the weight of what she comes to believe is a false 'religion.'

Gilliam's expert, overwhelming, and complex handling of what could have been a routine action/sci-fi film makes 12 Monkeys a compelling vision of a nightmarish, futuristic landscape. Its rich, well-thought out, intricate storyline along with bravura performances from the entire cast and its brooding, bleak cinematography make it a masterpiece of madness. Ranking in my top 10 of all time, 12 Monkeys is a darkly lavish spectacle of a film brimming with brilliance.

10 out of 10 Terry Gilliam's fantastic, twisted story of a [[viruses]] destroying all but a handful of people [[in]] the Earth and forcing them to move [[subterranean]] and the man sent back in time to [[collects]] information about it is a fantastic, [[giddy]], and [[unimaginably]] stylized film that [[boasting]] Bruce Willis' [[optimum]] performance ever.

What sets 12 Monkeys [[furthermore]] from most time-travel sci-fi [[theater]] is that Bruce Willis character actually deals with what the psychological [[influences]] of time-travel, that is, not [[realise]] what [[realism]] is actual [[realism]]: the place that the time-traveler comes from or goes to. Also, the [[flick]] [[concedes]] that [[aspects]] that have [[preceding]] cannot be [[tampered]] and that the [[prophylactic]] of a [[disastrous]] [[phenomena]], in this [[instance]] the [[freed]] of [[says]] [[antivirus]], cannot be stopped or [[modified]]. As Willis [[argues]] "It's already happened," while he's in a mental [[clinic]], the [[principal]] dilemma the [[movies]] trudges into is not a trite, overdone plot to [[saved]] the world; [[alternatively]] it's Willis' [[indoor]] [[combat]] to [[merely]] survive himself. It's a fresh, [[imaginative]] concept, and it [[working]] [[surprisingly]] thanks to a tautly [[authored]] script by [[Populations]] and Gilliam's [[sole]] [[markings]] of [[insanity]].

Besides this, 12 Monkey's [[narration]] is [[altogether]] non-linear and instead opts to [[deform]] and [[bent]] the way the [[narratives]] is told [[cleverly]] [[incorporation]] a bevy of [[multiple]] [[period]] sequences: flashbacks, [[dreaming]], [[memoirs]], the present, the [[previous]], the [[upcoming]], and [[yet]] a scene that is [[lifting]] out of Hitchcock's [[Dizzy]]. [[Every]] [[serving]] to [[envelops]] the [[viewfinder]] into its [[alarming]] [[dissonance]] of [[stupidity]] and futility.

Visually, Gilliam is a [[maestro]] of desolate umbrage and shadow rivalling Tim Burton in his [[alarmingly]] [[hopeless]] [[panorama]] and [[visuals]]. With cold, [[extensive]], and immersing cinematography, Gilliam [[tumbles]] into the colorless [[environment]] and [[blackness]] of his characters. The scenes are often bathed in a strangely antiseptic, dead white and [[aids]] serve as a contrast to the [[commonly]] veering-on-madness [[nature]].

Performance-wise, [[Bard]] [[Beit]] steals most scenes, [[filled]] them with a patented loony, off-the-wall performance that [[rightfully]] [[collected]] him an [[Oskar]] [[nominating]]. As [[referenced]], [[Bros]] Willis [[furnishes]] the [[better]] performance of his [[occupations]], not [[reversal]] to his heroic cliches and cardboard hero and instead portraying Cole as a simple, poignant, tragic everyman. Equally good is Madeline Stowe as Willis' psychologist. She holds her own, injecting her character with both wild energy and strength as she collapses under the weight of what she comes to believe is a false 'religion.'

Gilliam's expert, overwhelming, and complex handling of what could have been a routine action/sci-fi film makes 12 Monkeys a compelling vision of a nightmarish, futuristic landscape. Its rich, well-thought out, intricate storyline along with bravura performances from the entire cast and its brooding, bleak cinematography make it a masterpiece of madness. Ranking in my top 10 of all time, 12 Monkeys is a darkly lavish spectacle of a film brimming with brilliance.

10 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3274 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] [[Yet]] another "[[son]] who won't [[grow]] up" [[flick]], and just the other recent like entries. Heder in another [[bad]] wig, channeling Napoleon for, what, the [[third]] [[time]]? [[Anna]] Faris is forgettable, as [[always]]; Jeff Daniels [[phoned]] this one in from another state, at [[least]]; and [[Diane]] Keaton...how does one [[become]] typecast this late in a [[career]]? Do not bother. [[Nothing]] is [[said]] here that hasn't been [[covered]] [[many]] [[times]] over. I will [[say]] this; it's about a hundred times [[better]] than "[[Failure]] To [[Launch]]". There are very few [[amusing]] bits in the [[movie]], [[unless]] you [[think]] [[Eli]] Wallach [[cursing]] is [[funny]]. [[Ha]], [[Ha]]! He's [[old]] and he [[dropped]] the f-bomb! Tee, hee, hee. [[Pitiful]]! [[However]] another "[[yarns]] who won't [[growing]] up" [[film]], and just the other recent like entries. Heder in another [[negative]] wig, channeling Napoleon for, what, the [[terzi]] [[period]]? [[Ana]] Faris is forgettable, as [[consistently]]; Jeff Daniels [[called]] this one in from another state, at [[fewer]]; and [[Dejan]] Keaton...how does one [[gotten]] typecast this late in a [[careers]]? Do not bother. [[Nada]] is [[avowed]] here that hasn't been [[encompassed]] [[myriad]] [[moments]] over. I will [[told]] this; it's about a hundred times [[nicer]] than "[[Flaw]] To [[Outset]]". There are very few [[entertaining]] bits in the [[cinematography]], [[if]] you [[believing]] [[Elie]] Wallach [[curse]] is [[hilarious]]. [[Has]], [[Has]]! He's [[former]] and he [[tumble]] the f-bomb! Tee, hee, hee. [[Sorrowful]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] When I was 17 my high school staged Bye Bye Birdie - which is no great [[surprise]], since it is [[perfect]] high school material and reputed to be the most-staged musical in the world.

I was a music student and retained strong memories of the production and its songs, as well as a lingering disregard for the Dick Van Dyke movie version which had (deliberately) obscured the Elvis references and camped it up for a swinging 60s audience.

[[So]], when the 1995 version starring Jason Alexander [[hit]] my cable TV screen, I was [[delighted]] with what I saw. Alexander turns in an exceptional performance as Albert, a performance in strong contrast to his better-known persona from a certain TV series. The remainder of the cast are entertaining and convincing in their roles (Chynna Phillips is perhaps the only one who does not look her part, supposedly a naive and innocent schoolgirl).

But best of all, the musical numbers familiar from the stage show are all preserved in this movie and performed as stage musical songs should be (allowing for the absence of a stage).

So, if you know the musical (and few do not), then check out this telemovie. It does the stage show justice in a way which can probably not be bettered, which is good enough for me. What is better than rendering a writer's work faithfully and with colour and style? When I was 17 my high school staged Bye Bye Birdie - which is no great [[amaze]], since it is [[irreproachable]] high school material and reputed to be the most-staged musical in the world.

I was a music student and retained strong memories of the production and its songs, as well as a lingering disregard for the Dick Van Dyke movie version which had (deliberately) obscured the Elvis references and camped it up for a swinging 60s audience.

[[Accordingly]], when the 1995 version starring Jason Alexander [[pummeled]] my cable TV screen, I was [[ravi]] with what I saw. Alexander turns in an exceptional performance as Albert, a performance in strong contrast to his better-known persona from a certain TV series. The remainder of the cast are entertaining and convincing in their roles (Chynna Phillips is perhaps the only one who does not look her part, supposedly a naive and innocent schoolgirl).

But best of all, the musical numbers familiar from the stage show are all preserved in this movie and performed as stage musical songs should be (allowing for the absence of a stage).

So, if you know the musical (and few do not), then check out this telemovie. It does the stage show justice in a way which can probably not be bettered, which is good enough for me. What is better than rendering a writer's work faithfully and with colour and style? --------------------------------------------- Result 3276 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[anticipated]] this [[movie]] to be decent and [[possibly]] cliché, but I was completely wrong! [[Charlie]] Cox (I had never heard of him until now) [[played]] an incredibly good leading man; he was so earnest and romantic, me and my friend that saw the [[movie]] with me [[totally]] [[fell]] in love with him.

Claire [[Danes]], who I did like before (LOVED her in Romeo and [[Juliet]]), made me [[enjoy]] her even more. Her acting was [[fantastic]], I couldn't even tell that she was American. The chemistry between her and Charlie Cox was extremely good, the casting was quite perfect.

Robert DeNiro and Michelle Pfeiffer were equally well-casted; DeNiro as that gay pirate...priceless, priceless. I laughed so hard at that one scene where Septimus comes on the ship...oh my god, wow. Pfeiffer played a decent villain, I liked her as the snippy mother in Hairspray. But she had the right amount of melodrama and snide comments throughout the movie.

Overall, it was funny (but not slap-stick at all!), romantic, the special effects weren't totally frequent but when they were, they were great; the cameos from Ricky Gervais and Peter O'Toole were also well-placed.

I totally recommend this movie to anyone who likes fantasy movies like the Princess Bride or even Lord of the Rings. It kept my interest the entire time and I will be buying the DVD when it comes out! I [[waited]] this [[movies]] to be decent and [[arguably]] cliché, but I was completely wrong! [[Charley]] Cox (I had never heard of him until now) [[accomplished]] an incredibly good leading man; he was so earnest and romantic, me and my friend that saw the [[filmmaking]] with me [[utterly]] [[declined]] in love with him.

Claire [[Denmark]], who I did like before (LOVED her in Romeo and [[Joliet]]), made me [[enjoys]] her even more. Her acting was [[handsome]], I couldn't even tell that she was American. The chemistry between her and Charlie Cox was extremely good, the casting was quite perfect.

Robert DeNiro and Michelle Pfeiffer were equally well-casted; DeNiro as that gay pirate...priceless, priceless. I laughed so hard at that one scene where Septimus comes on the ship...oh my god, wow. Pfeiffer played a decent villain, I liked her as the snippy mother in Hairspray. But she had the right amount of melodrama and snide comments throughout the movie.

Overall, it was funny (but not slap-stick at all!), romantic, the special effects weren't totally frequent but when they were, they were great; the cameos from Ricky Gervais and Peter O'Toole were also well-placed.

I totally recommend this movie to anyone who likes fantasy movies like the Princess Bride or even Lord of the Rings. It kept my interest the entire time and I will be buying the DVD when it comes out! --------------------------------------------- Result 3277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Well then, thank you SO MUCH Disney for DESTROYING the fond memories I USED to have of my FORMER favorite movie. I was about 5 when the original movie came out, and it was one of the first movies I remember seeing. So, now that I'm 16, and feeling masochistic enough, I decided to rent this movie. Thus, I managed to [[poison]] all my [[memories]] of the original movie with this [[sorry]] excuse for a movie. This movie takes everything that made the original endearing and [[wrecks]] it, right down to the last detail.

In this movie, Ariel and Eric celebrate the birth of their daughter, Melody, and go to show her to everyone in the ocean...BROADWAY STYLE! After the musical number ends, within minutes, the sea witch Morgana shows up and threatens to kill Melody if Triton doesn't give up the trident. Thus, he gives it up without even a fight. Eric stands there gaping, though Ariel figures out how to use a sword and save Melody. Morgana escapes, so Ariel and Eric decide that Melody should never go near the sea until Morgana is caught.

Well...uh, nothing of note really happens. Eric is a total wuss. He never really manages to do anything. Ariel sort of does something. Melody manages to screw things up. Plus, the animation is a new low-point for Disney. The computer graphics wind up clashing with the backgrounds. Ever single opportunity for character development is wasted. The songs bite.

Look, don't waste your time. I'm pretty sure even the little kids are going to be bored out of their skulls with this, since nothing even remotely exciting ever happens. They won't want to sing the songs. If you manage to grab a copy of this, throw it out into the ocean and hope that nobody ever finds it. Ever. Well then, thank you SO MUCH Disney for DESTROYING the fond memories I USED to have of my FORMER favorite movie. I was about 5 when the original movie came out, and it was one of the first movies I remember seeing. So, now that I'm 16, and feeling masochistic enough, I decided to rent this movie. Thus, I managed to [[poisonous]] all my [[memento]] of the original movie with this [[apologies]] excuse for a movie. This movie takes everything that made the original endearing and [[shipwrecks]] it, right down to the last detail.

In this movie, Ariel and Eric celebrate the birth of their daughter, Melody, and go to show her to everyone in the ocean...BROADWAY STYLE! After the musical number ends, within minutes, the sea witch Morgana shows up and threatens to kill Melody if Triton doesn't give up the trident. Thus, he gives it up without even a fight. Eric stands there gaping, though Ariel figures out how to use a sword and save Melody. Morgana escapes, so Ariel and Eric decide that Melody should never go near the sea until Morgana is caught.

Well...uh, nothing of note really happens. Eric is a total wuss. He never really manages to do anything. Ariel sort of does something. Melody manages to screw things up. Plus, the animation is a new low-point for Disney. The computer graphics wind up clashing with the backgrounds. Ever single opportunity for character development is wasted. The songs bite.

Look, don't waste your time. I'm pretty sure even the little kids are going to be bored out of their skulls with this, since nothing even remotely exciting ever happens. They won't want to sing the songs. If you manage to grab a copy of this, throw it out into the ocean and hope that nobody ever finds it. Ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3278 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] with very [[little]] screen time and money, Dan Katzir [[manages]] to do so much. This [[movie]], in its heart-warming [[simplicity]], [[touches]] the [[beauty]] of [[love]] from a fresh [[angle]]. rejuvinated lust with very [[petite]] screen time and money, Dan Katzir [[administering]] to do so much. This [[filmmaking]], in its heart-warming [[simplifying]], [[afflicts]] the [[beaut]] of [[likes]] from a fresh [[cornering]]. rejuvinated lust --------------------------------------------- Result 3279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Why did I waste 1.5 hours of my life watching this? Why was this film even made? Why am I even commenting on this film?

One reviewer said this film took patience to watch and it was n't for everybody. I cannot figure out who this movie is for. [[maybe]] after dropping a hit of acid, SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE could watch this and make some sense out of it. It is [[incoherent]], it isn't experimental, it's plain and simple [[garbage]]. The film follows no plot line whatsoever, just when you think you have something, well.....you don't.

I think the ending brought some finality to the film (no pun intended), the viewer gets a glimpse of what might have been going on. I don't think I put a spoiler in here, not that it would matter. This film is another must miss in the world of filmdom. Why did I waste 1.5 hours of my life watching this? Why was this film even made? Why am I even commenting on this film?

One reviewer said this film took patience to watch and it was n't for everybody. I cannot figure out who this movie is for. [[probably]] after dropping a hit of acid, SOMEBODY, SOMEWHERE could watch this and make some sense out of it. It is [[unconnected]], it isn't experimental, it's plain and simple [[detritus]]. The film follows no plot line whatsoever, just when you think you have something, well.....you don't.

I think the ending brought some finality to the film (no pun intended), the viewer gets a glimpse of what might have been going on. I don't think I put a spoiler in here, not that it would matter. This film is another must miss in the world of filmdom. --------------------------------------------- Result 3280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] ....this [[mini]] does not get [[better]] with age. I saw this and it's sequel when originally broadcast, and like so many others was blown away. In [[early]] 2002 I borrowed the [[novels]] for both [[WOW]] and W and [[R]] and was even more impressed. I then decided that I had to see both again and invested $200 plus on the DVD sets. I [[watched]] both minis again in [[painful]] [[detail]] and [[realized]] I had done things backwards - I should have [[purchased]] the [[novels]] and borrowed the DVD's.

Don't believe it is abysmally miscast? Read the novels and see for yourself. Don't think this is dated? Screen it for somebody not old enough to have seen it originally broadcast and watch the reaction you get (warning - reactions from such people range from looks of horror to belly laughs).

According to the trivia section for this mini - Dan Curtis himself chose Ali MacGraw and Robert Mitchum. Yikes!! Production quality, music scoring, dialog - a great story was turned into a late 70's soap opera by an overly ambitious producer/director who was in way over his head. This thing was [[dated]] the minute it was completed.

These two [[minis]] were great when original broadcast and to those of us who saw them then, [[tug]] at a nostalgic string that [[reminds]] us of younger days. IMO - this mini does not nearly live up to its reputation and severely [[disappoints]]. ....this [[miniature]] does not get [[nicer]] with age. I saw this and it's sequel when originally broadcast, and like so many others was blown away. In [[swift]] 2002 I borrowed the [[storybooks]] for both [[WOAH]] and W and [[rs]] and was even more impressed. I then decided that I had to see both again and invested $200 plus on the DVD sets. I [[saw]] both minis again in [[hurtful]] [[clarification]] and [[effected]] I had done things backwards - I should have [[procured]] the [[romances]] and borrowed the DVD's.

Don't believe it is abysmally miscast? Read the novels and see for yourself. Don't think this is dated? Screen it for somebody not old enough to have seen it originally broadcast and watch the reaction you get (warning - reactions from such people range from looks of horror to belly laughs).

According to the trivia section for this mini - Dan Curtis himself chose Ali MacGraw and Robert Mitchum. Yikes!! Production quality, music scoring, dialog - a great story was turned into a late 70's soap opera by an overly ambitious producer/director who was in way over his head. This thing was [[dates]] the minute it was completed.

These two [[mini]] were great when original broadcast and to those of us who saw them then, [[tugs]] at a nostalgic string that [[remembering]] us of younger days. IMO - this mini does not nearly live up to its reputation and severely [[foils]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3281 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I love Julian Sands and will at least attempt to watch anything he's in, but this movie [[nearly]] did me in. I'm hard pressed to remember when I found any other movie to move....so......slow.........ly.....zzzzzzzzzzzz

Pop it in the VCR when you've run out of sleeping pills. I love Julian Sands and will at least attempt to watch anything he's in, but this movie [[around]] did me in. I'm hard pressed to remember when I found any other movie to move....so......slow.........ly.....zzzzzzzzzzzz

Pop it in the VCR when you've run out of sleeping pills. --------------------------------------------- Result 3282 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] In my opinion, this is the best stand-up show I have ever seen. I became an instant Eddie fan after seeing Dress to Kill, but I must say I think this is his best work. I would say, though, if you ever get the chance to definitely go see him live. It is worth it!

Most of the time after seeing a stand-up routine a couple times, the jokes start to get old. But I have to say, I've seen this show SO many times that I literally have the entire thing memorized (which yes, I realize is kinda sad) but every joke still makes me laugh. This is truly a feel good show.

Dress to Kill will never get old for me. I own it and watch it anytime I need a good laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 3283 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "[[Handsome]] Guys With [[Bad]] Haircuts !!" "[[Beautiful]] [[Girls]] Without Any [[Clues]] !!" "[[Stupid]] Gangsters Who Cannot Shoot Straight !!" From [[Dragon]] Dynasty comes the Hong Kong gangster drama, "Dragon [[Heat]]." [[For]] [[reasons]] which will [[probably]] forever be completely obscured, the production and casting call for this 'criminals-on-steroids' movie somehow got both [[Maggie]] Q and [[Michael]] Biehn to sign on as [[villains]]. But they don't get all that much to do in this [[horrid]] slug-fest.

They are two of the best contemporary actors [[around]], each with their own resume' and list of accomplishments, and Biehn in particular has had the courage to take some rather challenging and non-heroic roles.

Maggie Q was the super-bad "Mai" in "Live Free Or Die Hard," so 'nuff said.

Biehn is, of course, famous for being the soldier-from-the-future who made "The Terminator" of 1984 such a believable science-fiction/fantasy romp, by crashing up against Big Arnold, who is now the Governator of California !!

Michael Biehn is almost wholly wasted in this [[terrible]] train-wreck of a police drama. There is absolutely no [[reason]] for that, as the incredibly convoluted plot -- given mostly in Chinese, as it is a Hong Kong story -- could have been better elaborated for non-Chinese audiences with a foreign narrator.

In other words, if Biehn had been used as something like an Interpol observer or coordinator, or an agent under deep cover, who needs to get some 'splaining given to him every five or ten minutes, that [[would]] have been great. But no, he's brought in as a part of an odd group of special forces-type bad guys who seem to be freelancing their own corrupt deal, in the middle of somebody else's totally corrupt deal involving the local king of corrupt deals.

Yes, there, I said it all. Confused ? Me too. "Welcome to the party, pal."

In the truly superb Hong Kong crime drama, known by its English title as "Breaking News," there are also a number of fascinating characters at work, but there is only one story line in the plot.

Bad guys vs. good cops. In this wretched and excessively violent foray into the world of a Hong Kong Triad, or gang, it seems that the hot-shot police force is little more than a parade of ducks in a shooting gallery, the way the criminals mow them down.

So, not surprisingly, there's an almost otherwise incomprehensible scene ( several scenes, in fact ), where kids are trying to shoot wooden ducks in an arcade game, to win stuffed animal prizes. And so the hot shot good-guy police officers quite naturally intervene on their behalf, so that the arcade owner has to give up the Kewpie dolls.

There's also a half-hearted attempt at creating a "love interest" between one of the 'visiting cops' and the sole female 'visiting cop'.

The visiting cops are supposed to be material witnesses against the Triad gangster leader, who gets hijacked on the way to his court appearance, but not by his own team but by the mercenaries ( Biehn, Maggie Q, and some others ). These killers all want something but we don't get to learn about what it is, until the very end of the film !! That was a stupid mistake inside of the overall story.

You cannot build suspense in a crime drama without something to obtain, or get, or get away from, being introduced very early in the story.

Add to that some "cut-away scenes" done for purely artsy effects, all showing the bad-bad guys' and the regular bad guys' recent pasts, and any film buff can readily understand why this barking dog gets a 1 rating from this fan of all things cinematic with criminals and conspirators and Hong Kong. "[[Terrific]] Guys With [[Horrid]] Haircuts !!" "[[Splendid]] [[Dame]] Without Any [[Cues]] !!" "[[Foolish]] Gangsters Who Cannot Shoot Straight !!" From [[Dragons]] Dynasty comes the Hong Kong gangster drama, "Dragon [[Heated]]." [[During]] [[motifs]] which will [[admittedly]] forever be completely obscured, the production and casting call for this 'criminals-on-steroids' movie somehow got both [[Mags]] Q and [[Michel]] Biehn to sign on as [[thugs]]. But they don't get all that much to do in this [[gruesome]] slug-fest.

They are two of the best contemporary actors [[throughout]], each with their own resume' and list of accomplishments, and Biehn in particular has had the courage to take some rather challenging and non-heroic roles.

Maggie Q was the super-bad "Mai" in "Live Free Or Die Hard," so 'nuff said.

Biehn is, of course, famous for being the soldier-from-the-future who made "The Terminator" of 1984 such a believable science-fiction/fantasy romp, by crashing up against Big Arnold, who is now the Governator of California !!

Michael Biehn is almost wholly wasted in this [[frightening]] train-wreck of a police drama. There is absolutely no [[rationale]] for that, as the incredibly convoluted plot -- given mostly in Chinese, as it is a Hong Kong story -- could have been better elaborated for non-Chinese audiences with a foreign narrator.

In other words, if Biehn had been used as something like an Interpol observer or coordinator, or an agent under deep cover, who needs to get some 'splaining given to him every five or ten minutes, that [[should]] have been great. But no, he's brought in as a part of an odd group of special forces-type bad guys who seem to be freelancing their own corrupt deal, in the middle of somebody else's totally corrupt deal involving the local king of corrupt deals.

Yes, there, I said it all. Confused ? Me too. "Welcome to the party, pal."

In the truly superb Hong Kong crime drama, known by its English title as "Breaking News," there are also a number of fascinating characters at work, but there is only one story line in the plot.

Bad guys vs. good cops. In this wretched and excessively violent foray into the world of a Hong Kong Triad, or gang, it seems that the hot-shot police force is little more than a parade of ducks in a shooting gallery, the way the criminals mow them down.

So, not surprisingly, there's an almost otherwise incomprehensible scene ( several scenes, in fact ), where kids are trying to shoot wooden ducks in an arcade game, to win stuffed animal prizes. And so the hot shot good-guy police officers quite naturally intervene on their behalf, so that the arcade owner has to give up the Kewpie dolls.

There's also a half-hearted attempt at creating a "love interest" between one of the 'visiting cops' and the sole female 'visiting cop'.

The visiting cops are supposed to be material witnesses against the Triad gangster leader, who gets hijacked on the way to his court appearance, but not by his own team but by the mercenaries ( Biehn, Maggie Q, and some others ). These killers all want something but we don't get to learn about what it is, until the very end of the film !! That was a stupid mistake inside of the overall story.

You cannot build suspense in a crime drama without something to obtain, or get, or get away from, being introduced very early in the story.

Add to that some "cut-away scenes" done for purely artsy effects, all showing the bad-bad guys' and the regular bad guys' recent pasts, and any film buff can readily understand why this barking dog gets a 1 rating from this fan of all things cinematic with criminals and conspirators and Hong Kong. --------------------------------------------- Result 3284 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] The best [[film]] about [[marriage]] and family. This is a very interesting reflections to the couples that will be come to the dangerous and paradoxical fascinating world of marriage and [[family]]. This decision could be the better or the worst in our [[lives]] and the life of our kids. The real intrusion or help of 'friends' -or [[executioner]] if we leave-. The [[real]] role of families: they can help or they can [[destroy]] us. The [[mad]] [[priest]] who [[possibly]] is not much [[mad]] [[telling]] what could [[happen]] according the statistics and the reality. A [[couple]] who [[thinks]] in a 'special' marriage, live a painful [[story]] in their [[future]] own [[history]].

Who likes contract marriage? [[Nobody]], after the priest [[tells]] their own [[history]]… if they leave the [[future]] in another hands, if they don't know WHAT is the marriage. That the problems are true, that the life demand a real engage, guaranties, from each one. That the real victims of the divorce are kids, with real name –Andrea in the film- or names. That the abortion is only an easy exit: sadness, regrets and unhappiness will be there after abortion. That the state and social security thinks every time less in a real problems of the families. The gossip of the 'friends', the infidelity because of weakness and desperation of Steffania because Tomasso lives his life as if he were alone.

[[Maybe]] [[someone]] [[could]] think that this film is a pessimistic film, but not. Steffania and Tomasso, in the deep of their hearts, they like a beautiful marriage and family, if not, Why they like marriage? A truly and beautiful marriage depends only of the couple: of each one of their decisions, of each one actions in their lives. The [[family]] [[could]] be a place where each one feel loved because being his or her, only by [[existing]]. The [[screenplay]] is wonderful. The performances are [[great]]: Steffania and Tomasso, ¡the [[almost]] [[cynical]] [[priest]]! An [[excellent]] [[direction]] and [[script]]. The colors and the [[management]] of the cameras, [[superb]]. The best [[films]] about [[weddings]] and family. This is a very interesting reflections to the couples that will be come to the dangerous and paradoxical fascinating world of marriage and [[families]]. This decision could be the better or the worst in our [[life]] and the life of our kids. The real intrusion or help of 'friends' -or [[torturer]] if we leave-. The [[veritable]] role of families: they can help or they can [[destroys]] us. The [[enraged]] [[orator]] who [[arguably]] is not much [[fou]] [[saying]] what could [[emerge]] according the statistics and the reality. A [[couples]] who [[thoughts]] in a 'special' marriage, live a painful [[storytelling]] in their [[upcoming]] own [[stories]].

Who likes contract marriage? [[Anyone]], after the priest [[says]] their own [[stories]]… if they leave the [[upcoming]] in another hands, if they don't know WHAT is the marriage. That the problems are true, that the life demand a real engage, guaranties, from each one. That the real victims of the divorce are kids, with real name –Andrea in the film- or names. That the abortion is only an easy exit: sadness, regrets and unhappiness will be there after abortion. That the state and social security thinks every time less in a real problems of the families. The gossip of the 'friends', the infidelity because of weakness and desperation of Steffania because Tomasso lives his life as if he were alone.

[[Potentially]] [[everyone]] [[did]] think that this film is a pessimistic film, but not. Steffania and Tomasso, in the deep of their hearts, they like a beautiful marriage and family, if not, Why they like marriage? A truly and beautiful marriage depends only of the couple: of each one of their decisions, of each one actions in their lives. The [[families]] [[would]] be a place where each one feel loved because being his or her, only by [[existent]]. The [[scenario]] is wonderful. The performances are [[marvellous]]: Steffania and Tomasso, ¡the [[approximately]] [[sarcastic]] [[pastor]]! An [[marvellous]] [[directions]] and [[scripts]]. The colors and the [[bureaucratic]] of the cameras, [[handsome]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3285 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] So the other night I [[decided]] to watch [[Tales]] from the Hollywood [[Hills]]: Natica Jackson. [[Or]] Power, Passion, [[Murder]] as it is [[called]] in Holland. When I bought the [[film]] I [[noticed]] that [[Michelle]] Pfeiffer was [[starring]] in it and I thought that had to say something about the quality. [[Unfortunately]], it didn't.

1) The [[plot]] of the film is really confusing. There are two [[story]] lines running simultaneously during the film. Only they have [[nothing]] in common. Throughout the entire movie I was [[waiting]] for the moment these two story lines would come together so the plot would be clear to me. But it still hasn't.

2) The title of the film says the film will be about Natica Jackson. Well it is, sometimes. Like said the film covers two different stories and the part about Natica Jackson is the shortest. So another title for this movie would not be a wrong choice.

To conclude my story, I really recommend that you leave this movie where it belongs, on the shelf in the store on a place nobody can see it. By doing this you won't waste 90 minutes of your life, as I did. So the other night I [[deciding]] to watch [[Histories]] from the Hollywood [[Slopes]]: Natica Jackson. [[Orr]] Power, Passion, [[Slain]] as it is [[drew]] in Holland. When I bought the [[cinema]] I [[seen]] that [[Michel]] Pfeiffer was [[featuring]] in it and I thought that had to say something about the quality. [[Sadly]], it didn't.

1) The [[intrigue]] of the film is really confusing. There are two [[tales]] lines running simultaneously during the film. Only they have [[none]] in common. Throughout the entire movie I was [[awaited]] for the moment these two story lines would come together so the plot would be clear to me. But it still hasn't.

2) The title of the film says the film will be about Natica Jackson. Well it is, sometimes. Like said the film covers two different stories and the part about Natica Jackson is the shortest. So another title for this movie would not be a wrong choice.

To conclude my story, I really recommend that you leave this movie where it belongs, on the shelf in the store on a place nobody can see it. By doing this you won't waste 90 minutes of your life, as I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] You probably [[heard]] this [[phrase]] when it [[come]] to this [[movie]] – "[[Herbie]]: [[Fully]] [[Loaded]] with crap" and yes it is true. This movie is [[really]] [[dreadful]] and [[totally]] lame.

This got to be the second [[worst]] [[movie]] Lindsey is ever in [[since]] Confession of the Teenage [[Drama]] Queen. The only [[good]] [[thing]] about this [[movie]] seem to be the over [[talent]] cast which by far is better than the [[movie]] million [[times]] and is the only selling point of the [[movie]]. I don't [[see]] how such a [[respected]] [[actor]] like Matt Dillon [[could]] be a [[part]] of this movie, isn't he read that [[horrible]] [[screenplay]] before he sign on to be in it?

What I didn't like about this [[movie]] is [[also]] [[base]] on how Herbie is surreal and [[fantasy]] like [[extraordinary]] [[ability]] and [[climb]] on [[wall]] and go faster than a [[racer]] [[car]] after all it just a Beatle. I [[know]] it is a [[kids]] [[movie]] but they have [[gone]] overboard with it and it just [[turn]] out more silly than [[entertaining]]. [[Little]] realism is [[needed]] plus the [[story]] is way too predictable.

[[Final]] [[Words]]: Unless the [[kids]] are [[actually]] 5 -12 [[years]] I [[highly]] doubt that any one [[could]] enjoy this [[senseless]] [[movie]]. What wastage of my [[money]]. I feel like [[cheated]].

Rating: 3/10 ([[Grade]]: [[F]]) You probably [[hear]] this [[words]] when it [[arriving]] to this [[cinema]] – "[[Smokey]]: [[Altogether]] [[Load]] with crap" and yes it is true. This movie is [[genuinely]] [[horrific]] and [[wholly]] lame.

This got to be the second [[meanest]] [[movies]] Lindsey is ever in [[because]] Confession of the Teenage [[Teatro]] Queen. The only [[buena]] [[stuff]] about this [[films]] seem to be the over [[talents]] cast which by far is better than the [[film]] million [[moments]] and is the only selling point of the [[films]]. I don't [[behold]] how such a [[obeyed]] [[protagonist]] like Matt Dillon [[wo]] be a [[portions]] of this movie, isn't he read that [[horrific]] [[scenarios]] before he sign on to be in it?

What I didn't like about this [[flick]] is [[similarly]] [[foundation]] on how Herbie is surreal and [[utopia]] like [[terrific]] [[dexterity]] and [[rises]] on [[wail]] and go faster than a [[runner]] [[motorcars]] after all it just a Beatle. I [[savoir]] it is a [[juvenile]] [[flick]] but they have [[faded]] overboard with it and it just [[transforming]] out more silly than [[droll]]. [[Tiny]] realism is [[required]] plus the [[narratives]] is way too predictable.

[[Latter]] [[Phrase]]: Unless the [[juvenile]] are [[indeed]] 5 -12 [[ages]] I [[immeasurably]] doubt that any one [[wo]] enjoy this [[irrational]] [[film]]. What wastage of my [[moneys]]. I feel like [[fooled]].

Rating: 3/10 ([[Octane]]: [[e]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 3287 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] I did not expect a lot from this movie, after the terrible "[[Life]] is a Miracle". It [[turns]] out that this movie is [[ten]] [[times]] [[worse]] than "Life ...". I have impression that director/writer is just joking with the audience: " let me see how much emptiness can you (audience) sustain". [[Dialogues]] are empty, ... scenario is minimalistic. [[In]] few moments, [[photography]] is really nice. Few sarcastic lines are semi-funny, but it is [[hard]] to genuinely laugh during this "comedy". I've laughed to myself for being able to watch the movie until the end. If you can lift yourself above this director's fiasco, ... you will find good acting of few legends (Miki Manojlovic, Aleksandar Bercek), and very good performance of Emir's son Stribor Kusturica.

In short: too bad for such a great director ! Emir Kusturica is still young and should be making top-rated movies. Instead, he chooses to do this low-budget just-for-my-private theater movie, with arrogant attitude toward the world trends and negligence toward his old fans. I did not expect a lot from this movie, after the terrible "[[Lifetime]] is a Miracle". It [[revolves]] out that this movie is [[tio]] [[moments]] [[lousiest]] than "Life ...". I have impression that director/writer is just joking with the audience: " let me see how much emptiness can you (audience) sustain". [[Conversation]] are empty, ... scenario is minimalistic. [[Onto]] few moments, [[picture]] is really nice. Few sarcastic lines are semi-funny, but it is [[dur]] to genuinely laugh during this "comedy". I've laughed to myself for being able to watch the movie until the end. If you can lift yourself above this director's fiasco, ... you will find good acting of few legends (Miki Manojlovic, Aleksandar Bercek), and very good performance of Emir's son Stribor Kusturica.

In short: too bad for such a great director ! Emir Kusturica is still young and should be making top-rated movies. Instead, he chooses to do this low-budget just-for-my-private theater movie, with arrogant attitude toward the world trends and negligence toward his old fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3288 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Paul Reiser is one of my favorite people in show business. I have read both of his books and think that he is great. Peter Faulk can deliver a punch line with the best of them. The combination of the two is magic.

This is a story about a family really getting to know each other. Through a road trip a father and son connect for the first time in their lives in the midts of a family crisis. They do all the things that fathers and sons are suppose to do in life...they are just doing them much later in life. The situations are very funny, but have the feeling that they could actually happen to people in real life (not obsurdly over the top or cartoonish). This is the first time that I watch Paul Reiser and fully believed every emotion that was portrayed. At times, his eyes look so sad.

Gret movie and great story and plot. It has comedy and emotion but an uplifting message...Olympia Dukakas does a great job also :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] How the [[hell]] did they [[get]] this made?! [[Presenting]] itself as a caper [[comedy]], the misbegotten "$" is [[essentially]] two hours of people mumbling [[sentence]] [[fragments]]. The usually dependable Warren [[Beatty]] [[looks]] [[drunk]], and the [[usually]] hilarious Goldie Hawn acts like she's on depressants. As for Gert Frobe, his most [[famous]] role - Goldfinger - was infinitely more admirable than his character here. [[Not]] even the guy with the champagne bottle of LSD can [[save]] this [[litany]] of worthlessness.

Am I comparing this [[movie]] to "[[Plan]] 9 from Outer Space"? I wouldn't do such a [[thing]] [[even]] if [[someone]] [[paid]] me. "P9FOS" was idiotically made but [[ended]] up hilarious; this was idiotically [[made]] and [[causes]] you to feel like your brain just melted out of your ears. Warren [[Beatty]] and Goldie Hawn [[made]] up for this when they co-starred in "[[Shampoo]]", but then they co-starred in the [[dreadful]] "[[Town]] & [[Country]]". [[Maybe]] they just shouldn't co-star in [[movies]]. [[All]] in all, I would [[rather]] have my skin torn off than have to watch this again. [[Awful]].

Maybe they should remake it with Jackie Chan. Then I would pay to see it. How the [[brothel]] did they [[obtains]] this made?! [[Introduces]] itself as a caper [[humor]], the misbegotten "$" is [[broadly]] two hours of people mumbling [[punishments]] [[splinters]]. The usually dependable Warren [[Betty]] [[seem]] [[drinker]], and the [[ordinarily]] hilarious Goldie Hawn acts like she's on depressants. As for Gert Frobe, his most [[proverbial]] role - Goldfinger - was infinitely more admirable than his character here. [[No]] even the guy with the champagne bottle of LSD can [[rescued]] this [[mantra]] of worthlessness.

Am I comparing this [[cinematography]] to "[[Scheme]] 9 from Outer Space"? I wouldn't do such a [[stuff]] [[yet]] if [[everybody]] [[paying]] me. "P9FOS" was idiotically made but [[finalized]] up hilarious; this was idiotically [[accomplished]] and [[arouses]] you to feel like your brain just melted out of your ears. Warren [[Betty]] and Goldie Hawn [[accomplished]] up for this when they co-starred in "[[Shampoos]]", but then they co-starred in the [[frightening]] "[[Municipal]] & [[Nationals]]". [[Presumably]] they just shouldn't co-star in [[film]]. [[Everything]] in all, I would [[quite]] have my skin torn off than have to watch this again. [[Scary]].

Maybe they should remake it with Jackie Chan. Then I would pay to see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3290 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] An [[uptight]] voyeur who [[wants]] to [[commit]] suicide [[encounters]] a free spirited bad-seed who has 5 [[weeks]] to [[live]] and then they're off to [[discover]] America. [[Get]] the [[idea]]? There's not an [[original]] [[moment]] in this [[whole]] [[movie]]. An [[taut]] voyeur who [[wanted]] to [[committed]] suicide [[confrontations]] a free spirited bad-seed who has 5 [[chou]] to [[iive]] and then they're off to [[detect]] America. [[Obtain]] the [[thinking]]? There's not an [[initial]] [[time]] in this [[ensemble]] [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3291 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This is the [[moving]] tale of Scotland's legendary hero, Rob Roy, and his battles with the feudal landowners. Like Braveheart to which it is frequently compared, it is not very [[historical]]. Despite their primarily fictional nature, I [[rate]] both of these movies [[highly]] and would be hard pressed to choose between the two. The 13 Century William Wallace is, as others have noted, a larger than life national figure, while the early 18th Century Rob Roy comes across as an honourable but ordinary Scotsman.

The story revolves around a clan chieftain, Robert Roy McGregor, who lives in a Scottish highland cottage with his wife Mary and their two young sons. As the movie begins, he and his fellow clansmen are hunting down some thieves who have stolen the local lord's cattle. Rob Roy then wishes to improve the living conditions of his people so arranges to borrow one thousand Scottish pounds from a local noble, the Marquis of Montrose, in order to buy cattle to herd to market. He temporarily entrusts this money to his friend, Alan McDonald. When both McDonald and the money turn up missing, Rob Roy finds himself in conflict with Montrose as well as his despicable protégé, Archibald Cunningham, and his sleazy factor, Killearn. Rob Roy's honour is also tested when Montrose seeks to involve him in false testimony against his rival, the Duke of Argyle, whom he wishes to accuse of being a Jacobite.

The charismatic Liam Leeson is brilliant as the kilted highlander Rob Roy, an intelligent, virile, and noble hero and a man whose sense of honour is pivotal to this tale. Personally, I feel that this is Neeson's best performance, his brogue (albeit Irish) adding authenticity for the average viewer. Rob Roy is a stubborn, proud, courageous, and honest man whose word can be trusted. He is a loving husband & father, and also touchingly loyal to his friend, McDonald, who is accused of robbing him.

Tim Roth masterfully portrays his major adversary and surely one of the most heinous and sadistic cinematic villains, Archibald Cunningham, an egotistical, ruthless strutting peacock. He is very effeminate for someone who makes it his major business to ravish the local women, whether willing or otherwise. The pathetic Cunningham himself constantly refers to the fact that he is a bastard unaware of his own father's identity, though this hardly justifies his horrendous misdeeds of murder, rape, and thievery. Also, he mercilessly casts aside the young servant girl, Betty, after she becomes pregnant with his child, resulting in her suicide. John Hurt plays the arrogant and foppish Montrose, who is eventually implied to be Cunningham's father.

The movie is essentially the very believable love story between an ordinary man and his wife, beautifully depicting the passionate relationship between Rob Roy and Mary. Those who question the presence of passion within marriage should watch this husband and wife! I think the phrase used by this pair, 'How fine you are to me...' is surely one of the most beautiful expressions of love in all cinema.

The most compelling performance is possibly by Jessica Lange as Rob's wife, Mary McGregor. Lacking make up, she has the pretty but natural look of a sturdy peasant wife and mother. The actress brings great courage and dignity to her role when she is brutally raped by the despicable Cunningham, while the disgusting Killearn looks on. Her dialogue is plain spoken but filled with pride and grace. I give Hollywood its due that for once they showed just enough in the rape scene to reveal its cruelty as well as Mary's pain and humiliation, but nothing intended to sensationalize. Their kinsman, Alastair McGregor, shows emotional anguish when he learns of Mary's rape, and further torment when she swears him to secrecy never to reveal to her husband her violation by Cunningham.

Of course this film features the beautiful scenery of the Scottish highlands, also lavish period costumes and appropriate musical scoring. There are no grand battle scenes as in Braveheart, but continuous engaging action and a particularly gripping sword fight in the final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham. This is a captivating movie featuring both tense action and a beautiful love tale. This is the [[relocating]] tale of Scotland's legendary hero, Rob Roy, and his battles with the feudal landowners. Like Braveheart to which it is frequently compared, it is not very [[historic]]. Despite their primarily fictional nature, I [[rates]] both of these movies [[unimaginably]] and would be hard pressed to choose between the two. The 13 Century William Wallace is, as others have noted, a larger than life national figure, while the early 18th Century Rob Roy comes across as an honourable but ordinary Scotsman.

The story revolves around a clan chieftain, Robert Roy McGregor, who lives in a Scottish highland cottage with his wife Mary and their two young sons. As the movie begins, he and his fellow clansmen are hunting down some thieves who have stolen the local lord's cattle. Rob Roy then wishes to improve the living conditions of his people so arranges to borrow one thousand Scottish pounds from a local noble, the Marquis of Montrose, in order to buy cattle to herd to market. He temporarily entrusts this money to his friend, Alan McDonald. When both McDonald and the money turn up missing, Rob Roy finds himself in conflict with Montrose as well as his despicable protégé, Archibald Cunningham, and his sleazy factor, Killearn. Rob Roy's honour is also tested when Montrose seeks to involve him in false testimony against his rival, the Duke of Argyle, whom he wishes to accuse of being a Jacobite.

The charismatic Liam Leeson is brilliant as the kilted highlander Rob Roy, an intelligent, virile, and noble hero and a man whose sense of honour is pivotal to this tale. Personally, I feel that this is Neeson's best performance, his brogue (albeit Irish) adding authenticity for the average viewer. Rob Roy is a stubborn, proud, courageous, and honest man whose word can be trusted. He is a loving husband & father, and also touchingly loyal to his friend, McDonald, who is accused of robbing him.

Tim Roth masterfully portrays his major adversary and surely one of the most heinous and sadistic cinematic villains, Archibald Cunningham, an egotistical, ruthless strutting peacock. He is very effeminate for someone who makes it his major business to ravish the local women, whether willing or otherwise. The pathetic Cunningham himself constantly refers to the fact that he is a bastard unaware of his own father's identity, though this hardly justifies his horrendous misdeeds of murder, rape, and thievery. Also, he mercilessly casts aside the young servant girl, Betty, after she becomes pregnant with his child, resulting in her suicide. John Hurt plays the arrogant and foppish Montrose, who is eventually implied to be Cunningham's father.

The movie is essentially the very believable love story between an ordinary man and his wife, beautifully depicting the passionate relationship between Rob Roy and Mary. Those who question the presence of passion within marriage should watch this husband and wife! I think the phrase used by this pair, 'How fine you are to me...' is surely one of the most beautiful expressions of love in all cinema.

The most compelling performance is possibly by Jessica Lange as Rob's wife, Mary McGregor. Lacking make up, she has the pretty but natural look of a sturdy peasant wife and mother. The actress brings great courage and dignity to her role when she is brutally raped by the despicable Cunningham, while the disgusting Killearn looks on. Her dialogue is plain spoken but filled with pride and grace. I give Hollywood its due that for once they showed just enough in the rape scene to reveal its cruelty as well as Mary's pain and humiliation, but nothing intended to sensationalize. Their kinsman, Alastair McGregor, shows emotional anguish when he learns of Mary's rape, and further torment when she swears him to secrecy never to reveal to her husband her violation by Cunningham.

Of course this film features the beautiful scenery of the Scottish highlands, also lavish period costumes and appropriate musical scoring. There are no grand battle scenes as in Braveheart, but continuous engaging action and a particularly gripping sword fight in the final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham. This is a captivating movie featuring both tense action and a beautiful love tale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3292 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (53%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]]

If you like rap or hip-hop, watch this movie, although it's funny if you don't get the references, as a straight comedy.

Haven't seen much of the much hyped CB4, but what I did see didn't have the heart that this little stormer has.

Haven't heard from the people involved since, which is a [[surprise]]. The film is very similar to Spinal Tap, which is no bad thing, and I think a lot of the dialogue, while priceless in Tap is funnier here, probably because I'm more into rap than rock theses days, so my own judgment does cloud that point.

The rap songs are funny as hell, and it's basically spot the reference for most of the film, not all of them are in-your-face, which means the physical comedy and the one-liners get priority over the take-offs.

Great fun, one to watch twice if there ever was a movie.

If you like rap or hip-hop, watch this movie, although it's funny if you don't get the references, as a straight comedy.

Haven't seen much of the much hyped CB4, but what I did see didn't have the heart that this little stormer has.

Haven't heard from the people involved since, which is a [[amaze]]. The film is very similar to Spinal Tap, which is no bad thing, and I think a lot of the dialogue, while priceless in Tap is funnier here, probably because I'm more into rap than rock theses days, so my own judgment does cloud that point.

The rap songs are funny as hell, and it's basically spot the reference for most of the film, not all of them are in-your-face, which means the physical comedy and the one-liners get priority over the take-offs.

Great fun, one to watch twice if there ever was a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Put yourself into Carla's [[shoes]]. She is an [[overworked]], unappreciated [[administrative]] drudge who is invisible. You know her: she's trained three of her last three bosses, knows where all of the [[bodies]] are [[buried]] and might even [[look]] back at you in the mirror when you [[brush]] your teeth. Always having time for another thankless [[task]] and does it [[better]] than most [[despite]] a serious [[disability]], she has the desk on the [[way]] to the [[restroom]] that becomes the repository of half-finished cups of [[coffee]] [[begging]] to be [[spilled]]. What? You don't want to hear it? [[Well]], she can't and [[neither]] can you until your [[hearing]] [[aid]] is in place. Prepare to experience [[life]] from the perspective of the hearing impaired.

Carla ([[Emmanuelle]] Devos) needs a change in her life. [[Work]] is leading [[nowhere]]; [[friends]] are relying on her to meet their [[domestic]] needs and the only way out [[starts]] with a collapse that goes virtually unnoticed. She won't take a vacation - a contract is going critical - so the only alternative is to hire an assistant. Carla submits requirements that convey her real needs: a 'well-groomed' man. This brings an applicant for approval that reminds us that we should be [[careful]] with our wishes.

Paul ([[Vincent]] Cassell) does everything wrong from the [[start]] of his [[job]] [[interview]] and his getting [[hired]] clearly demonstrates Carla's interest in his non-job-related qualities. She [[sees]] potential in this former thief and as the [[story]] [[unfolds]], their relationship grows in a very [[unusual]] pattern of co-dependence.

Paul has a difficult transition returning to the world outside of prison walls and finds himself in another sort of [[prison]]: one of the office variety and another of indentured servitude to pay off an old debt. His skills as a thief help Carla win a political battle in the office. But Paul sees a grander opportunity with Carla's skill in lip reading and draws her even further into a world of intrigue.

This is a brutal film noir unrated and probably suitable for older teens. Carla grows more powerful, professionally as well as personally, as the story progresses and her disability gives her clear advantages over the rest of us. She grows as a woman discovering her sensual side while she uses her resources to overcome the obstacles of competing in a man's world.

The two main characters are meant for each other, in a strange way. Without Paul, Carla will remain in her role of a doormat. She has our sympathy, hopes and best wishes even if she doesn't make the best decisions along the way.

You will hear the world through Carla's ears, from awkward adjustments of your hearing aid, muffled sounds, all but inaudible without it to relatively distinct voices when you can see who's talking. With one major sense disabled, we see Carla's heightened intuitive power to compensate. And we can all use that sense to hear not only what people say, but also what they really mean. Put yourself into Carla's [[shoe]]. She is an [[overloaded]], unappreciated [[managerial]] drudge who is invisible. You know her: she's trained three of her last three bosses, knows where all of the [[organizations]] are [[burying]] and might even [[gaze]] back at you in the mirror when you [[brushes]] your teeth. Always having time for another thankless [[chore]] and does it [[best]] than most [[though]] a serious [[inability]], she has the desk on the [[paths]] to the [[shitter]] that becomes the repository of half-finished cups of [[latte]] [[vagrancy]] to be [[flipped]]. What? You don't want to hear it? [[Good]], she can't and [[nor]] can you until your [[auditions]] [[assisting]] is in place. Prepare to experience [[lifetime]] from the perspective of the hearing impaired.

Carla ([[Antonia]] Devos) needs a change in her life. [[Collaboration]] is leading [[anywhere]]; [[friendships]] are relying on her to meet their [[internal]] needs and the only way out [[induction]] with a collapse that goes virtually unnoticed. She won't take a vacation - a contract is going critical - so the only alternative is to hire an assistant. Carla submits requirements that convey her real needs: a 'well-groomed' man. This brings an applicant for approval that reminds us that we should be [[wary]] with our wishes.

Paul ([[Tome]] Cassell) does everything wrong from the [[induction]] of his [[jobs]] [[interviews]] and his getting [[contracted]] clearly demonstrates Carla's interest in his non-job-related qualities. She [[believes]] potential in this former thief and as the [[history]] [[unfold]], their relationship grows in a very [[odd]] pattern of co-dependence.

Paul has a difficult transition returning to the world outside of prison walls and finds himself in another sort of [[jail]]: one of the office variety and another of indentured servitude to pay off an old debt. His skills as a thief help Carla win a political battle in the office. But Paul sees a grander opportunity with Carla's skill in lip reading and draws her even further into a world of intrigue.

This is a brutal film noir unrated and probably suitable for older teens. Carla grows more powerful, professionally as well as personally, as the story progresses and her disability gives her clear advantages over the rest of us. She grows as a woman discovering her sensual side while she uses her resources to overcome the obstacles of competing in a man's world.

The two main characters are meant for each other, in a strange way. Without Paul, Carla will remain in her role of a doormat. She has our sympathy, hopes and best wishes even if she doesn't make the best decisions along the way.

You will hear the world through Carla's ears, from awkward adjustments of your hearing aid, muffled sounds, all but inaudible without it to relatively distinct voices when you can see who's talking. With one major sense disabled, we see Carla's heightened intuitive power to compensate. And we can all use that sense to hear not only what people say, but also what they really mean. --------------------------------------------- Result 3294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] My roommate had [[bought]] this documentary and invited me to watch it with her. She's from China and only [[heard]] so much about 9/11 and wanted to know the cold [[hard]] truth and she wanted me to tell her more after the documentary. I [[felt]] awful [[watching]] this documentary, it was like reliving the nightmare and it still [[brings]] tears to my eyes.

But I'm [[extremely]] [[grateful]] that I watched this documentary, because on the day of September 11th, I'm sure we all remember where we were and what we were doing when we heard, all of us could only think certain questions: "Why?", "How?", "What's going on?", "Oh, my God!". Almost all the Americans were grateful for the brave firemen and policemen that risked their lives to save others. But I don't think we thought about what they were really going though. This wasn't actually supposed to be a documentary about 9/11, the cameraman was just filming a typical day on the job and they just happened to be a couple blocks away from the World Trade Centers and got everything, outside and in, on tape.

On Sep. 11th, I thought to myself "It's OK, the policemen and firemen will get the people out that survived". To be honest, I thought it was an accident, I was in my junior year of high school and getting changed from gym and getting ready to go to my science class. Someone came into the locker room shouting "Some building just got bombed in New York!", we all got dressed quickly and ran to our classrooms as we watched the first tower burning on TV. Not only 15 seconds later live on TV does the second plane crash into the other World Trade Center and we knew this was no accident. A few minutes later, we heard about the Pentagon and that there was a plane headed for Chicago but was shot down. So many thoughts ran through our heads and I kept on thinking "What are the firemen and policemen going to do?". But it's procedure to them I thought, they'll know what to do.

The first tower collapsed, we knew it, so many lives are now gone, the second tower crashed, things would never be the same. Those firemen in this documentary showed courage, confusion, and strength, the real raw human emotions. They didn't know what to do, they were just as scarred as those other people who were in the towers. They heard the bodies collapsing on the ground from people jumping out the windows. And here I was in a classroom just crying seeing all that was going on on TV. I was amazed with this film and just wanted to go to New York and tell them how grateful all the Americans were for their help. I know they feel like they were just doing their job, but they did more, they were hero's. Every day after Sep. 11th for 3 weeks they kept on digging knowing that there were no survivors, but they kept on hoping and praying. May God bless their kind and brave hearts.

As for my roommate she was crying and admitted this was her first time crying at these attacks. She got to see the truth of what had happened that tragic day. She asked "Why?". I didn't know what to say, it breaks my heart that people can be that evil. "It sounds clique', but it was a normal day for everyone" one of the firemen said in the documentary. No one expected this to happen. Not like that, those people in the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon or the planes that were hijacked, they were just doing their job, happen to be there, or even just was there for a second passing by. They were not just murdered, they were slaughtered, and those hijackers did it with a song in their heart. Then seeing in the middle east all the people celebrating, why do people do this? They celebrated death and the lose of: mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. Why?

So, thanks to those people for making this documentary. You truly think about the firemen, policemen, and the troops in Iraq and it keeps your hope up that there are good people in this world. Thank you to all those people, you are our heroes.

10/10 My roommate had [[buy]] this documentary and invited me to watch it with her. She's from China and only [[hear]] so much about 9/11 and wanted to know the cold [[laborious]] truth and she wanted me to tell her more after the documentary. I [[deemed]] awful [[staring]] this documentary, it was like reliving the nightmare and it still [[poses]] tears to my eyes.

But I'm [[unimaginably]] [[recognising]] that I watched this documentary, because on the day of September 11th, I'm sure we all remember where we were and what we were doing when we heard, all of us could only think certain questions: "Why?", "How?", "What's going on?", "Oh, my God!". Almost all the Americans were grateful for the brave firemen and policemen that risked their lives to save others. But I don't think we thought about what they were really going though. This wasn't actually supposed to be a documentary about 9/11, the cameraman was just filming a typical day on the job and they just happened to be a couple blocks away from the World Trade Centers and got everything, outside and in, on tape.

On Sep. 11th, I thought to myself "It's OK, the policemen and firemen will get the people out that survived". To be honest, I thought it was an accident, I was in my junior year of high school and getting changed from gym and getting ready to go to my science class. Someone came into the locker room shouting "Some building just got bombed in New York!", we all got dressed quickly and ran to our classrooms as we watched the first tower burning on TV. Not only 15 seconds later live on TV does the second plane crash into the other World Trade Center and we knew this was no accident. A few minutes later, we heard about the Pentagon and that there was a plane headed for Chicago but was shot down. So many thoughts ran through our heads and I kept on thinking "What are the firemen and policemen going to do?". But it's procedure to them I thought, they'll know what to do.

The first tower collapsed, we knew it, so many lives are now gone, the second tower crashed, things would never be the same. Those firemen in this documentary showed courage, confusion, and strength, the real raw human emotions. They didn't know what to do, they were just as scarred as those other people who were in the towers. They heard the bodies collapsing on the ground from people jumping out the windows. And here I was in a classroom just crying seeing all that was going on on TV. I was amazed with this film and just wanted to go to New York and tell them how grateful all the Americans were for their help. I know they feel like they were just doing their job, but they did more, they were hero's. Every day after Sep. 11th for 3 weeks they kept on digging knowing that there were no survivors, but they kept on hoping and praying. May God bless their kind and brave hearts.

As for my roommate she was crying and admitted this was her first time crying at these attacks. She got to see the truth of what had happened that tragic day. She asked "Why?". I didn't know what to say, it breaks my heart that people can be that evil. "It sounds clique', but it was a normal day for everyone" one of the firemen said in the documentary. No one expected this to happen. Not like that, those people in the World Trade Centers or the Pentagon or the planes that were hijacked, they were just doing their job, happen to be there, or even just was there for a second passing by. They were not just murdered, they were slaughtered, and those hijackers did it with a song in their heart. Then seeing in the middle east all the people celebrating, why do people do this? They celebrated death and the lose of: mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, friends, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. Why?

So, thanks to those people for making this documentary. You truly think about the firemen, policemen, and the troops in Iraq and it keeps your hope up that there are good people in this world. Thank you to all those people, you are our heroes.

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3295 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] When will the hurting stop? I never want to see another version of a [[Christmas]] Carol again. They keep on making movies with the same story, falling over each other in [[trying]] to make the movie better then the rest, but sadly fail to do so, as this is not a [[good]] story. Moralistic, old-fashioned, conservative happy-thinking. As if people learn. The numerous different versions of this film prove that we don´t. When will the hurting stop? I never want to see another version of a [[Xmas]] Carol again. They keep on making movies with the same story, falling over each other in [[striving]] to make the movie better then the rest, but sadly fail to do so, as this is not a [[buena]] story. Moralistic, old-fashioned, conservative happy-thinking. As if people learn. The numerous different versions of this film prove that we don´t. --------------------------------------------- Result 3296 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I remember Casper comic books, but don't remember any cartoons. Maybe they weren't memorable; I don't know but at my advanced age, here I am watching this very early Casper animated [[short]] yesterday. Afterward, I was [[shocked]] to read the user-comments here. Did people miss the ending?

I have to learn all over again that Casper isn't like the other ghosts, who like to go out each night and scare the c--p out of everyone. "He sees no future in that," according to the narrator here. Instead, one night he goes out to the rural section of town, inadvertently scares some animals and can't find any friends. It brings him to tears, until a little fox hears him bawling and befriends him. The two become buddies but soon, the fox is running for his life with a fox hunt in progress.

Other reviews have all mentioned what happens, so I'll touch on that, too. The fox is killed by hunting dogs (not shown) and Casper is in tears for losing "the only friend I ever had." But, nobody mentions the happy ending to this story. "Ferdie" the fox becomes a spirit-figure like Casper, jumps on his lap, licks his face and the narrator comments "they lived happily ever after." Both characters look overjoyed.

What is so sad about that? This is a nice story with a nice, happy ending. I remember Casper comic books, but don't remember any cartoons. Maybe they weren't memorable; I don't know but at my advanced age, here I am watching this very early Casper animated [[succinct]] yesterday. Afterward, I was [[appalled]] to read the user-comments here. Did people miss the ending?

I have to learn all over again that Casper isn't like the other ghosts, who like to go out each night and scare the c--p out of everyone. "He sees no future in that," according to the narrator here. Instead, one night he goes out to the rural section of town, inadvertently scares some animals and can't find any friends. It brings him to tears, until a little fox hears him bawling and befriends him. The two become buddies but soon, the fox is running for his life with a fox hunt in progress.

Other reviews have all mentioned what happens, so I'll touch on that, too. The fox is killed by hunting dogs (not shown) and Casper is in tears for losing "the only friend I ever had." But, nobody mentions the happy ending to this story. "Ferdie" the fox becomes a spirit-figure like Casper, jumps on his lap, licks his face and the narrator comments "they lived happily ever after." Both characters look overjoyed.

What is so sad about that? This is a nice story with a nice, happy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 3297 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] I just have to say, this is one of my [[favorite]] movies of all time. I cannot even count the number of times I've seen it. I was already in love with John Travolta, but the first [[time]] the camera pans up his body after he's all clean-shaven looking beautiful for his first trip to Gilley's, I was in awe. Debra Winger, as always, delivers a [[perfect]] performance as the young, naive wife of Bud, but with the necessary attitude to be married to a stubborn and hard-working cowboy. If you're not a country music person, which I wasn't, this is 1 soundtrack that'll have you singing right along with every word. If you get a chance, please see this movie-it won't disappoint. I just have to say, this is one of my [[preferable]] movies of all time. I cannot even count the number of times I've seen it. I was already in love with John Travolta, but the first [[period]] the camera pans up his body after he's all clean-shaven looking beautiful for his first trip to Gilley's, I was in awe. Debra Winger, as always, delivers a [[faultless]] performance as the young, naive wife of Bud, but with the necessary attitude to be married to a stubborn and hard-working cowboy. If you're not a country music person, which I wasn't, this is 1 soundtrack that'll have you singing right along with every word. If you get a chance, please see this movie-it won't disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 3298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Disney goes to the well one too many times as anybody who has seen the original LITTLE [[MERMAID]] will feel blatantly ripped off. [[Celebrating]] the birth of their [[daughter]] Melody, Ariel and Eric plan on introducing her to King Triton. The celebration is quickly crashed by Ursula 's sister, Morgana who plans to use Melody as a defense tool to get the King 's trident. [[Stopping]] the attack, Ariel and Eric build a wall around the [[ocean]] while [[Melody]] [[grows]] up wondering why she cannot go in there.

[[Awful]] and [[terrible]] is what describes this direct to video sequel. LITTLE [[MERMAID]] 2 gives you that feeling everything you watch seemed to have come straight other Disney movies. I guess Disney can only plagiarize itself! Do not tell me that the penguin and walrus does not remind you of another duo from the LION KING!

Other [[disappointing]] [[moments]] [[include]] the rematch between Sebastien and Louie, the royal chef. They terribly under played it! The climax between Morgana and EVERYONE seemed to be another disappointment.

I will not give anything away, but in 75 minutes, everything seemed incredibly cramped and too much to handle. An embarrassment to Disney, LITTLE MERMAID 2 is better left to rent and laugh at. Then you can prepare for the rest of the other sequels Disney is going to drown you in later on. Disney goes to the well one too many times as anybody who has seen the original LITTLE [[SIREN]] will feel blatantly ripped off. [[Celebrates]] the birth of their [[maid]] Melody, Ariel and Eric plan on introducing her to King Triton. The celebration is quickly crashed by Ursula 's sister, Morgana who plans to use Melody as a defense tool to get the King 's trident. [[Halted]] the attack, Ariel and Eric build a wall around the [[oceans]] while [[Tune]] [[grow]] up wondering why she cannot go in there.

[[Harrowing]] and [[scary]] is what describes this direct to video sequel. LITTLE [[SIREN]] 2 gives you that feeling everything you watch seemed to have come straight other Disney movies. I guess Disney can only plagiarize itself! Do not tell me that the penguin and walrus does not remind you of another duo from the LION KING!

Other [[frustrating]] [[times]] [[incorporate]] the rematch between Sebastien and Louie, the royal chef. They terribly under played it! The climax between Morgana and EVERYONE seemed to be another disappointment.

I will not give anything away, but in 75 minutes, everything seemed incredibly cramped and too much to handle. An embarrassment to Disney, LITTLE MERMAID 2 is better left to rent and laugh at. Then you can prepare for the rest of the other sequels Disney is going to drown you in later on. --------------------------------------------- Result 3299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The delivery of some very humorous [[rude]] lines by [[Pierce]] Brosnan is alone worth the price of admission. He plays a [[kind]] of "James Bond's [[psycho]] [[twin]] brother", [[separated]] at birth, no doubt. As an intense hit-man, his [[character]] is very [[sexual]] but [[even]] better, very [[funny]]. [[Add]] the kind-hearted, uber-likable American "[[guy]] next door', [[Greg]] Kinnear, to set up contrast. The [[myriad]] locations, vivid [[colors]], and quick-witted [[humor]] [[provide]] [[great]] entertainment. Hope Davis is well cast as the "gem of a wife". But the [[focus]] of the [[film]] is on the two fellows, a new "Odd Couple", and that's the [[part]] that [[works]] very well. Have a [[great]] (probably R-rated) [[laugh]], and look for the [[places]] where the [[story]] goes a [[little]] [[deeper]]. The delivery of some very humorous [[impertinent]] lines by [[Pearce]] Brosnan is alone worth the price of admission. He plays a [[sort]] of "James Bond's [[madman]] [[doubles]] brother", [[seperated]] at birth, no doubt. As an intense hit-man, his [[traits]] is very [[sexuality]] but [[yet]] better, very [[droll]]. [[Adds]] the kind-hearted, uber-likable American "[[buddy]] next door', [[Gregg]] Kinnear, to set up contrast. The [[countless]] locations, vivid [[dye]], and quick-witted [[mood]] [[affords]] [[prodigious]] entertainment. Hope Davis is well cast as the "gem of a wife". But the [[concentrates]] of the [[movie]] is on the two fellows, a new "Odd Couple", and that's the [[parties]] that [[cooperating]] very well. Have a [[prodigious]] (probably R-rated) [[giggling]], and look for the [[venues]] where the [[histories]] goes a [[scant]] [[closer]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The film [[gets]] my [[stamp]] of [[approval]]. The scene in the museum [[demands]] acting without [[dialogue]]. This is one of the most interesting and [[unique]] scenes in the [[history]] of [[film]]. Dickinson's [[character]] Kate is very well developed and her performance is [[felt]] [[throughout]] the [[entire]] [[film]]. The [[best]] work [[Angie]] Dickinson did since Point [[Blank]]! The film [[receives]] my [[stamping]] of [[consent]]. The scene in the museum [[asks]] acting without [[conversation]]. This is one of the most interesting and [[sole]] scenes in the [[histories]] of [[flick]]. Dickinson's [[nature]] Kate is very well developed and her performance is [[deemed]] [[during]] the [[overall]] [[movies]]. The [[optimum]] work [[Inge]] Dickinson did since Point [[Virgins]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] If you [[liked]] the first two [[films]], then I'm sorry to say you're not going to like this one. This is the really [[rubbish]] and [[unnecessary]] [[straight]] to [[video]], [[probably]] [[TV]] made sequel. The still idiotic but nice scientist Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is still living with his family and he has his own company, Szalinski Inc. Unfortunately his wife wants to get rid of a statue, Wayne is so stupid he shrinks his statue and himself with his brother. Then he shrinks his wife and sister-in-law too. Now the adults have to find a way to get the kids of the house to get them bigger. Pretty much a repeat of the other two with only one or two new things, e.g. a toy car roller coaster, swimming in dip, etc. Pretty poor! If you [[wished]] the first two [[kino]], then I'm sorry to say you're not going to like this one. This is the really [[litter]] and [[unusable]] [[consecutive]] to [[videos]], [[indubitably]] [[TELEVISIONS]] made sequel. The still idiotic but nice scientist Wayne Szalinski (Rick Moranis) is still living with his family and he has his own company, Szalinski Inc. Unfortunately his wife wants to get rid of a statue, Wayne is so stupid he shrinks his statue and himself with his brother. Then he shrinks his wife and sister-in-law too. Now the adults have to find a way to get the kids of the house to get them bigger. Pretty much a repeat of the other two with only one or two new things, e.g. a toy car roller coaster, swimming in dip, etc. Pretty poor! --------------------------------------------- Result 3302 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] We do not come [[across]] [[movies]] on brother-sister relationship in Indian [[cinema]], or any other [[language]] or [[medium]]. This [[relationship]] has several aspects which have not been exploited in [[movies]] or [[novels]]. Typically, a [[sister]] is depicted as a pile-on who can be used for ransom in the [[climax]]. This [[movie]] treats the subject in an [[entirely]] [[different]] light.

It is inspired by George Eliot's novel "The Mill on the [[Floss]]". The brother is very prosaic, all-good, the blue-eyed [[boy]] who is a [[conventionally]] good son and a favorite with his mother. The sister is romantic, wild and defiant of the unwritten rules of the society. In spite of this, the [[love]] of the brother-sister is the winner.

This [[movie]] is about the love of the two siblings who are separated in childhood and revival of the same feeling when they meet years later. It is also the quest of the subdued brother to reunite with his sister who has chosen to be wild to defy the world.

Although the [[movie]] and the novel are set about 3 centuries [[apart]] in two distant countries, [[yet]] the sentiments are the same and still hold [[true]]. We do not come [[throughout]] [[kino]] on brother-sister relationship in Indian [[kino]], or any other [[linguistics]] or [[midst]]. This [[relation]] has several aspects which have not been exploited in [[movie]] or [[romances]]. Typically, a [[sisterly]] is depicted as a pile-on who can be used for ransom in the [[culmination]]. This [[filmmaking]] treats the subject in an [[totally]] [[assorted]] light.

It is inspired by George Eliot's novel "The Mill on the [[Silk]]". The brother is very prosaic, all-good, the blue-eyed [[dude]] who is a [[typically]] good son and a favorite with his mother. The sister is romantic, wild and defiant of the unwritten rules of the society. In spite of this, the [[likes]] of the brother-sister is the winner.

This [[kino]] is about the love of the two siblings who are separated in childhood and revival of the same feeling when they meet years later. It is also the quest of the subdued brother to reunite with his sister who has chosen to be wild to defy the world.

Although the [[kino]] and the novel are set about 3 centuries [[regardless]] in two distant countries, [[even]] the sentiments are the same and still hold [[veritable]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is about a Dysfunctinal Family but Not just any Dysfunctional Family. It is about the Family of the Father of our Nation (India) although, the film focuses mainly on the estranged relationship between Mahatma Gandhi and his eldest son Harilal Gandhi. It shows how The Mahatma had to kill M.K. Gandhi, how he had to sacrifice his family life in order to achieve our freedom. Every time Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and his son would try to get close the Mahatma would come between them. This is a beautifully done film. Akshaye Khanna has proved himself to be a Top Actor. He expressed emotions very naturally. Darshan Jariwala who mainly stars in Plays-Gurukant Desai's lawyer in Guru has portrayed Gandhi wonderfully.(as a real Human Being, unlike Ben Kingsley who made him look like a God) Shefali Shah the girl from Monsoon Wedding has also done a really good job of showing how Kasturba Gandhi was torn between father and son. This Movie is touching and so is its soundtrack "Raghupati Raghava" sung in a very unique manner. I saw this movie just 3 hours ago(it released in Dubai a day earlier-on the 2nd) and when the movie was over there was "Pin Drop Silence" and while exiting out of the Theatre not ONE person pushed another( Can you imagine us Indians not pushing ?) NOT ONE ! There was a Sacred Silence... --------------------------------------------- Result 3304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A family of terrible people must remain in a house for a week or else they will lose their inheritance which will go to the servants who will only get their inheritance if they agree to stay on and keep the house in order. People die (and so will you if you try to sit through this) If you've ever had any desire to see bad actors- many with ill fitting dentures-act or attempt to act in a bad horror movie this is your chance. This is just awful. Its so bad I thought Al Adamson, one of the worst directors ever, directed it, but I was wrong.

Its so bad I don't want to say anything more about it, not because it isn't polite but because once I start I may not be able to stop.

avoid --------------------------------------------- Result 3305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] A definite no. A resounding [[NO]]. This movie is an [[absolute]] dud.

Having been [[recommended]] to me by a [[friend]] very [[much]] into "that sort of thing," I watched this [[movie]] with some anticipation of being [[informed]], [[changed]], moved, [[altered]], uplifted, and all the other positive [[mystical]] [[things]] that [[could]] [[happen]] to me when I suddenly [[see]] The Truth. Now this may sound [[like]] [[someone]] who is already predisposed to poo-pooing [[anything]] [[dealing]] with the metaphysical, the metaphysical/[[physical]] [[boundaries]] of existence. [[Believe]] me, I am not such a [[person]]. I [[try]] to be open about any [[presentation]] and then [[decide]] [[accordingly]].

In terms of content, the only thing I [[found]] [[mildly]] interesting and [[informative]], was the [[bit]] about peptides, [[emotions]], [[addiction]], and [[cellular]] receptors. That was the only "unifying" [[element]] I could find in the documentary [[part]] of this [[film]]. The [[rest]] of the [[documentary]] rambled [[around]] [[several]] [[topics]] and never [[seemed]] to unify and cohere, [[try]] to [[tie]] up and [[conclude]] to a point. And what was all that [[stuff]] about [[native]] [[Americans]] not being [[able]] to [[see]] the [[ships]] that Columbus [[came]] in? Who [[told]] the "authorities" in this [[film]] that that was what happened in 1492? Where they there too? Had they [[compared]] this to scientific [[work]] being [[done]] in visual cognition (the [[famous]] [[gorilla]] [[video]], for [[example]], visit the Visual [[Cognition]] Lab at the [[University]] of Illinois [[site]]) there may have been a more [[convincing]] point [[made]]. Here, [[however]], it seemed like [[unsupported]] [[mystical]] mumbo-jumbo.

As a [[film]]: this wasn't one [[film]], it was two. I [[found]] the documentary [[part]] [[mildly]] interesting, just to [[hear]] the people [[talking]] about what they were [[talking]] about (I was [[annoyed]] that their [[credentials]] weren't [[presented]] at the bottom of the screen when they spoke, at [[least]] [[initially]]!) But I found the "[[story]]" part of the [[movie]] with Matlin in it [[annoying]], disjointed, intrusive, non-related and downright [[stupid]]. That [[bit]] about the Polish [[wedding]] with that [[dance]] was not in the [[least]] bit [[funny]]. It was [[laughable]], ludicrous, sophomoric, and [[stupid]]. And I found the [[use]] of the word "Pollack" offensive. It just seemed so out of place and wrong. Is such usage okay because a member of the group uses a pejorative term to refer to the group because he or she is a member of the group? That may be okay to make a point, but it didn't seem to be used that way here. And in any case, I don't care what the reason, it offended me, a Pole. I never call myself or refer to my ethnic background as "Pollack." And I certainly don't like like it when others do. Can I watch or listen to a bigoted conversation in which this term is used? You betcha! But again this didn't seem to be the case here. It just seemed so out of place. Unprovocked, unmitigated.

The acting was abysmal. Elaine Hendrix's performance was totally unbelievable. At times, it seemed like she was just reading her lines that had just been given to her. Marlee Matlin for the most part seemed to be sleep walking through this whole thing. Perhaps she was baffled by the material. I know I was. If she was supposed to be portraying a disillusioned drugged-up anxiety-prone malcontent, it just didn't seem to click. But by far, the world's worst was Hendrix! All in all, I found this a disjointed, poorly acted piece of clap-trap. A definite no. A resounding [[NOS]]. This movie is an [[unmitigated]] dud.

Having been [[suggested]] to me by a [[buddies]] very [[very]] into "that sort of thing," I watched this [[cinematography]] with some anticipation of being [[informing]], [[amended]], moved, [[amended]], uplifted, and all the other positive [[mystic]] [[items]] that [[did]] [[arise]] to me when I suddenly [[behold]] The Truth. Now this may sound [[iike]] [[anyone]] who is already predisposed to poo-pooing [[algo]] [[addresses]] with the metaphysical, the metaphysical/[[corporal]] [[border]] of existence. [[Reckon]] me, I am not such a [[anyone]]. I [[seeks]] to be open about any [[submissions]] and then [[decided]] [[thereby]].

In terms of content, the only thing I [[finds]] [[smoothly]] interesting and [[informational]], was the [[bite]] about peptides, [[passions]], [[dependency]], and [[mobile]] receptors. That was the only "unifying" [[ingredients]] I could find in the documentary [[parte]] of this [[cinema]]. The [[stays]] of the [[documentaries]] rambled [[throughout]] [[diverse]] [[matters]] and never [[looked]] to unify and cohere, [[seek]] to [[tying]] up and [[concluded]] to a point. And what was all that [[thing]] about [[aboriginal]] [[America]] not being [[capable]] to [[behold]] the [[battleship]] that Columbus [[arrived]] in? Who [[tell]] the "authorities" in this [[cinematography]] that that was what happened in 1492? Where they there too? Had they [[comparisons]] this to scientific [[collaborate]] being [[accomplished]] in visual cognition (the [[prestigious]] [[enforcer]] [[videos]], for [[cases]], visit the Visual [[Cognitive]] Lab at the [[Campus]] of Illinois [[sites]]) there may have been a more [[compelling]] point [[introduced]]. Here, [[yet]], it seemed like [[unsubstantiated]] [[mystic]] mumbo-jumbo.

As a [[cinematography]]: this wasn't one [[cinematography]], it was two. I [[detected]] the documentary [[party]] [[smoothly]] interesting, just to [[heed]] the people [[chatter]] about what they were [[schmooze]] about (I was [[irritated]] that their [[diplomas]] weren't [[tabled]] at the bottom of the screen when they spoke, at [[slightest]] [[firstly]]!) But I found the "[[narratives]]" part of the [[cinematography]] with Matlin in it [[exasperating]], disjointed, intrusive, non-related and downright [[imbecile]]. That [[bitten]] about the Polish [[marriages]] with that [[choreography]] was not in the [[less]] bit [[hilarious]]. It was [[ludicrous]], ludicrous, sophomoric, and [[nonsensical]]. And I found the [[employs]] of the word "Pollack" offensive. It just seemed so out of place and wrong. Is such usage okay because a member of the group uses a pejorative term to refer to the group because he or she is a member of the group? That may be okay to make a point, but it didn't seem to be used that way here. And in any case, I don't care what the reason, it offended me, a Pole. I never call myself or refer to my ethnic background as "Pollack." And I certainly don't like like it when others do. Can I watch or listen to a bigoted conversation in which this term is used? You betcha! But again this didn't seem to be the case here. It just seemed so out of place. Unprovocked, unmitigated.

The acting was abysmal. Elaine Hendrix's performance was totally unbelievable. At times, it seemed like she was just reading her lines that had just been given to her. Marlee Matlin for the most part seemed to be sleep walking through this whole thing. Perhaps she was baffled by the material. I know I was. If she was supposed to be portraying a disillusioned drugged-up anxiety-prone malcontent, it just didn't seem to click. But by far, the world's worst was Hendrix! All in all, I found this a disjointed, poorly acted piece of clap-trap. --------------------------------------------- Result 3306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This is so [[bad]], so very very [[bad]]. The acting is the [[biggest]] [[joke]] in [[history]]. Don't [[even]] [[bother]] to [[see]] it, i did ff it after 20 [[min]] and it was just as [[disappointing]] in the [[end]] as in the [[beginning]]... I really don't [[understand]] [[peoples]] [[taste]], I'm a [[horror]] [[movie]] [[fan]] and I'm not fastidious but I DO [[HAVE]] [[A]] [[LIMIT]]! Maybe it was a quarter of a [[star]] [[better]] then the [[beginning]] of The Hoast but that's it. [[So]] I [[recommend]] you don't waste the 15 [[minutes]] you'll be able to watch. I mean the acting is better [[done]] by [[monkeys]]. And the [[big]] brother with the [[parental]] role is just [[awful]]. Don't they [[pay]] [[characters]] in C-movies? [[No]] I [[must]] [[say]] it's not the [[first]] [[time]] I [[think]] a [[horror]] [[movie]] is [[bad]] but it's [[absolutely]] one in my down ten [[movies]] and it will be charing [[places]] with [[Portrait]] of a [[vampire]], [[Cabin]] by the [[lake]], The Hoast! This is so [[negative]], so very very [[negative]]. The acting is the [[greatest]] [[giggle]] in [[tale]]. Don't [[yet]] [[irritate]] to [[behold]] it, i did ff it after 20 [[mn]] and it was just as [[disappointed]] in the [[termination]] as in the [[startup]]... I really don't [[realise]] [[populations]] [[liking]], I'm a [[abomination]] [[flick]] [[groupie]] and I'm not fastidious but I DO [[HA]] [[una]] [[CONFINE]]! Maybe it was a quarter of a [[superstar]] [[best]] then the [[beginnings]] of The Hoast but that's it. [[Therefore]] I [[recommended]] you don't waste the 15 [[mins]] you'll be able to watch. I mean the acting is better [[performed]] by [[monkey]]. And the [[grand]] brother with the [[paternal]] role is just [[horrific]]. Don't they [[pays]] [[character]] in C-movies? [[Nope]] I [[owes]] [[told]] it's not the [[fiirst]] [[times]] I [[thought]] a [[terror]] [[kino]] is [[mala]] but it's [[perfectly]] one in my down ten [[theater]] and it will be charing [[spaces]] with [[Portraits]] of a [[bloodsucker]], [[Bungalow]] by the [[lakes]], The Hoast! --------------------------------------------- Result 3307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had been subjected to this movie for a [[relationship]] class in my school. As [[figured]] it was [[nothing]] [[captivating]] and nothing new. Though it [[tries]] to be [[original]] by [[focusing]] on the teen father [[instead]] of the [[mother]] [[showing]] the problems that the dad [[would]] [[go]] through. It had an interesting side to it but it just doesn't [[live]] up to its originality due to the fact [[nothing]] else in this movie was original. We have the main character who has the older sister who like in every other [[movie]] like this has a thing against him, we have the [[stay]] at [[home]] [[mother]] who [[expects]] too much and when he [[gives]] more she feels offended and leaves him in the dust, then we have the father who is always gone. [[Then]] the [[girls]] side we have the [[parents]] who [[want]] everything and [[expect]] her to be perfect at all she does. On to the story like I [[said]] it was interesting but the [[lack]] of [[good]] acting from the [[entire]] cast and the [[lack]] of any [[good]] writing or storytelling. Everything about this [[fell]] into [[cliché]] the [[little]] nerd [[kid]] in school [[starts]] [[studying]] with [[girl]], they [[get]] [[together]], have [[sex]] and then boom we have a [[little]] [[kid]]. Perhaps it could've been better had the writing been well better and had the acting been improved I've [[seriously]] gotten more emotion out of Leatherface and his chainsaw than I did out of any actor in this film and that's pretty bad seeing as the Leatherface movies are crap and horridly acted. So far the only interesting teen pregnancy movie I've seen was Juno. So far the comical side of this serious situation has [[proved]] more entertaining while still giving the same message. Like I said the idea was original most of these films focus on the teen [[mother]] but this one chose not to instead it [[focuses]] on the drama of the father but again the originality does not save this [[movie]] from mediocrity. I [[really]] [[hope]] [[someone]] [[decides]] to either re-make this [[movie]] with a better [[cast]] and a better [[writer]] or just make another similar film because this one was wasted potential. I had been subjected to this movie for a [[relation]] class in my school. As [[conjured]] it was [[anything]] [[gripping]] and nothing new. Though it [[endeavour]] to be [[preliminary]] by [[centred]] on the teen father [[however]] of the [[mothers]] [[displayed]] the problems that the dad [[could]] [[going]] through. It had an interesting side to it but it just doesn't [[vivo]] up to its originality due to the fact [[anything]] else in this movie was original. We have the main character who has the older sister who like in every other [[cinema]] like this has a thing against him, we have the [[stays]] at [[households]] [[ammi]] who [[await]] too much and when he [[provides]] more she feels offended and leaves him in the dust, then we have the father who is always gone. [[Subsequently]] the [[woman]] side we have the [[relatives]] who [[wish]] everything and [[waits]] her to be perfect at all she does. On to the story like I [[stated]] it was interesting but the [[misses]] of [[alright]] acting from the [[overall]] cast and the [[misses]] of any [[alright]] writing or storytelling. Everything about this [[declined]] into [[clichés]] the [[petite]] nerd [[petit]] in school [[beginnings]] [[explores]] with [[dame]], they [[obtain]] [[jointly]], have [[sexuality]] and then boom we have a [[small]] [[petit]]. Perhaps it could've been better had the writing been well better and had the acting been improved I've [[deeply]] gotten more emotion out of Leatherface and his chainsaw than I did out of any actor in this film and that's pretty bad seeing as the Leatherface movies are crap and horridly acted. So far the only interesting teen pregnancy movie I've seen was Juno. So far the comical side of this serious situation has [[showed]] more entertaining while still giving the same message. Like I said the idea was original most of these films focus on the teen [[momma]] but this one chose not to instead it [[focused]] on the drama of the father but again the originality does not save this [[cinema]] from mediocrity. I [[truthfully]] [[esperanza]] [[everybody]] [[decided]] to either re-make this [[film]] with a better [[casting]] and a better [[novelist]] or just make another similar film because this one was wasted potential. --------------------------------------------- Result 3308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] [[Director]] Ron Atkins is certifiably insane. This ultra-low budget film chronicles a few days in the life of one Harry Russo (John Giancaspro, who also co-wrote), a nut-job who receives a Rubberneck doll from his bitch girlfriend. He starts to take orders from the doll to take massive amounts of drugs, rape and kill, not always in that order. What [[starts]] off as being a balls-to-the-wall exploitation film, well stays like that, but it gets VERY [[repetitive]] VERY fast. I'm leaning more toward the certifiably insane. It IS hard to forget once seen though. Kinda like if Tom Green ever did a horror film.

My Grade:F

Eye Candy: Laurie Farwell gets fully nude; Jasmin Putnam shows tits and bush

ANTI-eye candy: seeing John completely naked repeatedly [[Headmaster]] Ron Atkins is certifiably insane. This ultra-low budget film chronicles a few days in the life of one Harry Russo (John Giancaspro, who also co-wrote), a nut-job who receives a Rubberneck doll from his bitch girlfriend. He starts to take orders from the doll to take massive amounts of drugs, rape and kill, not always in that order. What [[began]] off as being a balls-to-the-wall exploitation film, well stays like that, but it gets VERY [[recur]] VERY fast. I'm leaning more toward the certifiably insane. It IS hard to forget once seen though. Kinda like if Tom Green ever did a horror film.

My Grade:F

Eye Candy: Laurie Farwell gets fully nude; Jasmin Putnam shows tits and bush

ANTI-eye candy: seeing John completely naked repeatedly --------------------------------------------- Result 3309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Hi, Everyone, If you saw "Singing in the Rain," you remember the scene of Gene Kelly dancing in the rain. You also remember the dance number of Donald O'Connor, "Make 'em Laugh." If you saw "Royal Wedding," you will remember [[Fred]] Astaire dancing on the ceiling. If you saw "Jailhouse Rock," you will even remember the title dance number choreographed by The King himself.

That is what is missing here. There [[could]] have been some [[blockbuster]] [[dance]] numbers in this [[presentation]]. The closest was Chuck McGowan's "I Can Do That." the [[mere]] [[fact]] that you have some [[talented]] people on stage moving together does not make a great dance film. Richard Attenborough was to blame for this [[failure]]. He pointed the camera at the stage and thought that would be a good [[thing]].

Yelling at people [[auditioning]] for a part in a Broadway production is not entertainment. Michael Douglas would be just as badly cast if he were in a Western or a comedy. He is OK when he is in a Michael Douglas movie where we see him yelling at someone we would like to yell at. It does not work here.

The cast was good except for Michael, of course. A good movie [[could]] have been made even using the songs that were in the stage production, but someone should have thought about how to film it.

[[Next]] time they do one of these I hope they call me first.

Tom Willett Hi, Everyone, If you saw "Singing in the Rain," you remember the scene of Gene Kelly dancing in the rain. You also remember the dance number of Donald O'Connor, "Make 'em Laugh." If you saw "Royal Wedding," you will remember [[Freda]] Astaire dancing on the ceiling. If you saw "Jailhouse Rock," you will even remember the title dance number choreographed by The King himself.

That is what is missing here. There [[did]] have been some [[blockbusters]] [[ballet]] numbers in this [[submission]]. The closest was Chuck McGowan's "I Can Do That." the [[simple]] [[facto]] that you have some [[gifted]] people on stage moving together does not make a great dance film. Richard Attenborough was to blame for this [[impossibility]]. He pointed the camera at the stage and thought that would be a good [[stuff]].

Yelling at people [[auditioned]] for a part in a Broadway production is not entertainment. Michael Douglas would be just as badly cast if he were in a Western or a comedy. He is OK when he is in a Michael Douglas movie where we see him yelling at someone we would like to yell at. It does not work here.

The cast was good except for Michael, of course. A good movie [[wo]] have been made even using the songs that were in the stage production, but someone should have thought about how to film it.

[[Imminent]] time they do one of these I hope they call me first.

Tom Willett --------------------------------------------- Result 3310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] A blockbuster at the [[time]] of it's original [[release]] (it was the second-highest grossing [[film]] of 1976), the third screen version of A STAR IS BORN has [[always]] divided [[critics]] and fans alike. The [[film]] open to scathingly [[negative]] [[reviews]], however, $5.6 million-budgeted picture went on to gross over $150 million at the box office and won an Academy Award and five Golden Globes. It's not without some irony that Streisand's most commercially successful [[film]] would also remain her most controversial. For every ten fans who state that STAR is Streisand's best film, there are always ten more who claim it is the weakest film in her filmography. Although both sides have some merit to support their claims, it should still be noted that the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN remains one of the most touching and highly entertaining showbiz dramas that Hollywood ever produced. For my money, it's the best version of the often-told tale.

The film is solidly enjoyable and throughly absorbing. Changing the setting from the old Hollywood studio system to the competitive world of the music industry was actually a great idea, and the screenplay forges a realistic contrast between the characters' romance and their careers. This is the main area that the 1976 version of A STAR IS BORN actually surpasses it's classic predecessors. For example, the film is especially successful when depicting the clashing personal and professional difficulties during recording sessions and the never-ending phone calls that interrupt Kristofferson's songwriting attempts. This version of the story is also more believable in it's portrayal of the lead characters. For example, the female leads in the two previous versions were so virtuous and self-sacrificing that they came off as saints. On the other hand, Esther, the female lead in this version, is not only portrayed as being strong and passionate, but also flawed and conflicted. This makes her feel more "real" than the Janet Gaynor or Judy Garland characters felt in the previous films, and makes the story that much more effective.

The performances are all on target, even if some of the supporting characters aren't fleshed out enough. If you're looking for an actress/singer who can walk the fine line between tough and vulnerable without making herself seem like a script contrivance, Streisand is definitely the girl you want. She's one of the few film stars who can make even the most banal dialogue seem fresh and natural, and, as usual, she manages to make a strong emotional connection with the viewer. Simply put, her Esther is a fully-realized, three-dimensional human being. Kris Kristofferson may not get much respect now for his laid-back characterization, however, he's always interesting watch and displays a magnetic charisma here that he seldom displayed elsewhere in his career. Kristofferson actually received rave reviews at the time from NEWSWEEK, TIME, and even the NEW YORKER's usually vicious Pauline Kael. Gary Busey and Paul Mazursky also give believable performances, but both have a fairly minimal amount of screen time.

The film's soundtrack recording was also a massive success, hitting the #1 on Billboard's Hot 200 and selling over four million copies in the US alone. The Streisand-composed "Evergreen" (with lyrics from Paul Williams) is unarguably one of the most gorgeous songs in contemporary pop, brought to even-further life by an absolutely incomparable vocal performance from Streisand. The rest of the film's original songs (mostly composed by Williams and Rupert Holmes) are pretty good as well, and Streisand sounds fantastic - her live solo numbers remain in the memory long after the rest of the movie has faded. Streisand's vibrant performances bring "Woman In The Moon" and "With One More Look At You" to thrilling life, and make even sillier numbers like "Queen Bee" work far better than they have the right to. Kristofferson's solo numbers sound somewhat tuneless, however, that may have been intentional since he is playing a singer in decline.

Though naturally dated in some respects (it definitely does reflect the decade in which it was made), the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN still holds up remarkably well. The film is well-mounted and slickly produced, the chemistry between the leads is extremely powerful and always feels genuine, and Streisand has two emotional scenes near the finale that are both aching effective. In conclusion, A STAR IS BORN is not only entertaining and moving, but it also transcends all criticism. A blockbuster at the [[moment]] of it's original [[emancipate]] (it was the second-highest grossing [[movie]] of 1976), the third screen version of A STAR IS BORN has [[incessantly]] divided [[detractors]] and fans alike. The [[cinematography]] open to scathingly [[inauspicious]] [[scrutinize]], however, $5.6 million-budgeted picture went on to gross over $150 million at the box office and won an Academy Award and five Golden Globes. It's not without some irony that Streisand's most commercially successful [[films]] would also remain her most controversial. For every ten fans who state that STAR is Streisand's best film, there are always ten more who claim it is the weakest film in her filmography. Although both sides have some merit to support their claims, it should still be noted that the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN remains one of the most touching and highly entertaining showbiz dramas that Hollywood ever produced. For my money, it's the best version of the often-told tale.

The film is solidly enjoyable and throughly absorbing. Changing the setting from the old Hollywood studio system to the competitive world of the music industry was actually a great idea, and the screenplay forges a realistic contrast between the characters' romance and their careers. This is the main area that the 1976 version of A STAR IS BORN actually surpasses it's classic predecessors. For example, the film is especially successful when depicting the clashing personal and professional difficulties during recording sessions and the never-ending phone calls that interrupt Kristofferson's songwriting attempts. This version of the story is also more believable in it's portrayal of the lead characters. For example, the female leads in the two previous versions were so virtuous and self-sacrificing that they came off as saints. On the other hand, Esther, the female lead in this version, is not only portrayed as being strong and passionate, but also flawed and conflicted. This makes her feel more "real" than the Janet Gaynor or Judy Garland characters felt in the previous films, and makes the story that much more effective.

The performances are all on target, even if some of the supporting characters aren't fleshed out enough. If you're looking for an actress/singer who can walk the fine line between tough and vulnerable without making herself seem like a script contrivance, Streisand is definitely the girl you want. She's one of the few film stars who can make even the most banal dialogue seem fresh and natural, and, as usual, she manages to make a strong emotional connection with the viewer. Simply put, her Esther is a fully-realized, three-dimensional human being. Kris Kristofferson may not get much respect now for his laid-back characterization, however, he's always interesting watch and displays a magnetic charisma here that he seldom displayed elsewhere in his career. Kristofferson actually received rave reviews at the time from NEWSWEEK, TIME, and even the NEW YORKER's usually vicious Pauline Kael. Gary Busey and Paul Mazursky also give believable performances, but both have a fairly minimal amount of screen time.

The film's soundtrack recording was also a massive success, hitting the #1 on Billboard's Hot 200 and selling over four million copies in the US alone. The Streisand-composed "Evergreen" (with lyrics from Paul Williams) is unarguably one of the most gorgeous songs in contemporary pop, brought to even-further life by an absolutely incomparable vocal performance from Streisand. The rest of the film's original songs (mostly composed by Williams and Rupert Holmes) are pretty good as well, and Streisand sounds fantastic - her live solo numbers remain in the memory long after the rest of the movie has faded. Streisand's vibrant performances bring "Woman In The Moon" and "With One More Look At You" to thrilling life, and make even sillier numbers like "Queen Bee" work far better than they have the right to. Kristofferson's solo numbers sound somewhat tuneless, however, that may have been intentional since he is playing a singer in decline.

Though naturally dated in some respects (it definitely does reflect the decade in which it was made), the seventies take on A STAR IS BORN still holds up remarkably well. The film is well-mounted and slickly produced, the chemistry between the leads is extremely powerful and always feels genuine, and Streisand has two emotional scenes near the finale that are both aching effective. In conclusion, A STAR IS BORN is not only entertaining and moving, but it also transcends all criticism. --------------------------------------------- Result 3311 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[insipid]] [[mini]] operetta [[featuring]] a Eddy-McDonald [[prototype]] in a Valentino [[scenario]] is so [[bad]] it becomes an endurance exercise after five minutes. It's silly from the get go as this brevity opens two military men discussing the lack of manliness in the son of one of the officers. In under a minute he is packed off to Morrocco where he lives a double life as the Red Shadow; the leader of an Arab [[tribe]] that would rather sing than fight.

Alexander Gray and Bernice Clare possess fine light [[opera]] [[voices]] (with [[little]] acting [[ability]]) and there's a decent bass in there as well but the acting is so [[haphazard]] scenes so [[ill]] [[prepared]] you [[get]] the [[feeling]] they are making things up as they go along.

This two reeler was [[part]] of a larger [[stage]] production that lists six writers. With more [[room]] to spoof and [[warble]] the [[show]] may have had some entertainment values but this [[rushed]] quickie is little more than an [[insult]] to an [[audience]] [[waiting]] for the [[feature]] [[presentation]]. This [[tacky]] [[miniature]] operetta [[featured]] a Eddy-McDonald [[prototypes]] in a Valentino [[scenarios]] is so [[naughty]] it becomes an endurance exercise after five minutes. It's silly from the get go as this brevity opens two military men discussing the lack of manliness in the son of one of the officers. In under a minute he is packed off to Morrocco where he lives a double life as the Red Shadow; the leader of an Arab [[tribesmen]] that would rather sing than fight.

Alexander Gray and Bernice Clare possess fine light [[drama]] [[voice]] (with [[petite]] acting [[dexterity]]) and there's a decent bass in there as well but the acting is so [[random]] scenes so [[iil]] [[poised]] you [[gets]] the [[sensation]] they are making things up as they go along.

This two reeler was [[party]] of a larger [[ballpark]] production that lists six writers. With more [[bedroom]] to spoof and [[warbles]] the [[illustrates]] may have had some entertainment values but this [[flowed]] quickie is little more than an [[offend]] to an [[viewers]] [[awaiting]] for the [[characteristics]] [[presentations]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3312 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Ostensibly a film that predicts the coming trends in British popular music, it's wrong on so many fronts that it's [[laughable]]. Tommy Quickly? The Honeycombs? The movie DOES include a song by the Spencer Davis group, two by the Animals, and one tacked on live film of the Beatles doing their live version of Twist and Shout (all 1:20). But all in all, an [[awkward]] display of British music circa 1964. Oh, and Herman's Hermits. Ostensibly a film that predicts the coming trends in British popular music, it's wrong on so many fronts that it's [[grotesque]]. Tommy Quickly? The Honeycombs? The movie DOES include a song by the Spencer Davis group, two by the Animals, and one tacked on live film of the Beatles doing their live version of Twist and Shout (all 1:20). But all in all, an [[tricky]] display of British music circa 1964. Oh, and Herman's Hermits. --------------------------------------------- Result 3313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I know I'm in the minority, but...

Uwe Boll is about as talented as a frog. Not even a toad; just a frog. He's reminiscent of about a hundred other no-talent hacks who churn out one useless crap-fest after another.

This movie? Is a crap-fest. Slater's talent is only minimally utilized leading one to believe he's got other things (like his failed relationship) on his mind. Reid performs as if she has either forgotten her acting lessons, been severely hit on the head and MADE to forget her acting lessons, or has one of the worst directors in the history of film. I'm voting on the third choice, myself, although the other two are always possible.

Uwe Boll has never done a single thing from which I've derived even the slightest pleasure. Frankly, I'm satisfied that he made this stinker. I was concerned with Bloodrayne competing with "Underworld: Evolution" for ticket sales. Now, I'm confident that Len Wiseman has nothing, and I mean NOTHING, to worry about.

This rates a 1.0/10 rating for this messy, convoluted crap-fest, from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] A young ( only 21 ) director with [[great]] talent, a [[powerful]] scenario, young and ambitious cast with all theatrical [[background]]...

One of the [[first]] tries of a thriller in [[Turkish]] [[cinema]], which seems in the [[future]] we'll have some more based on the [[success]]...

[[Shot]] on [[high]] [[definition]] [[video]], the [[movie]] is [[perhaps]] [[effected]] on world thrillers, especially the American thrillers. The technical and cinematographic [[character]] is [[quite]] well done, the scenes are all well worked on. Not too much blood but sufficient enough to make you think you're in a blood bath too...

The scenario is quite wise but with certain clues, a clever audience can easily predict what's going on and at the end when everything settles down you're getting somehow weird to conclude the result.

Well done Tiglon, one of the biggest DVD distributors in Turkey, it is not easy to decide for such a movie in their first try as a production company... A young ( only 21 ) director with [[whopping]] talent, a [[forceful]] scenario, young and ambitious cast with all theatrical [[backgrounds]]...

One of the [[fiirst]] tries of a thriller in [[Turkic]] [[cinematographic]], which seems in the [[futur]] we'll have some more based on the [[avail]]...

[[Offed]] on [[supreme]] [[definitions]] [[videotape]], the [[filmmaking]] is [[presumably]] [[conducted]] on world thrillers, especially the American thrillers. The technical and cinematographic [[personage]] is [[rather]] well done, the scenes are all well worked on. Not too much blood but sufficient enough to make you think you're in a blood bath too...

The scenario is quite wise but with certain clues, a clever audience can easily predict what's going on and at the end when everything settles down you're getting somehow weird to conclude the result.

Well done Tiglon, one of the biggest DVD distributors in Turkey, it is not easy to decide for such a movie in their first try as a production company... --------------------------------------------- Result 3315 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] While not as bad as his game-to-movie adaptations, this hunk of crud doesn't fare much better.

Boll seems to have a pathological inability to accept that he doesn't make good movies. One of these days he'll run out of money and stop inflicting the world with his bombs.

The acting was sub-par, the dialog sounded like they were reading TelePrompTers and Boll's special little 'touches' were seen throughout the whole thing.

Like all Uwe Boll movies, this one just shouldn't exist.

Plain and simple.

Just like Uwe Boll himself shouldn't exist. >_> --------------------------------------------- Result 3316 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The unlikely duo of Zero Mostel and [[Harry]] Belafonte team up to give us some interesting performances and subject [[matter]] in The [[Angel]] Levine. It's one interesting twist on the [[themes]] from It's A [[Wonderful]] [[Life]].

[[Zero]] is [[married]] to [[Ida]] Kaminsky and the two of them [[belong]] to a [[special]] [[class]] of [[elderly]] Jewish poor in [[New]] York. Mostel [[used]] to be a [[tailor]] and proud of his trade, but his back and arthritis have prevented him from [[working]]. Kaminsky is [[mostly]] bedridden. He's [[reduced]] to applying for welfare. In [[desperation]] like [[Jimmy]] [[Stewart]], he [[cries]] out to [[God]] for some [[help]].

Now [[maybe]] if he had gotten [[someone]] like [[Henry]] [[Travers]] [[things]] might have [[worked]] out differently, but [[even]] [[Stewart]] had [[trouble]] [[accepting]] Travers. But Travers had one [[thing]] going for him, he was over 100 [[years]] off this [[mortal]] coil and all his [[ties]] to [[earthly]] [[things]] were [[gone]]. [[God]] [[sent]] Mostel [[something]] [[quite]] [[different]], the [[recently]] deceased [[Harry]] Belafonte who should have at least been [[given]] some basic training for angels before being [[given]] an [[assignment]].

Belafonte hasn't [[accepted]] he's [[moved]] on from [[life]], he's [[still]] [[got]] a [[lot]] of [[issues]]. He [[also]] has a [[wife]], Gloria [[Foster]], who doesn't know he's passed on, hit by a [[car]] right at the [[beginning]] of the [[film]]. You put his [[issues]] and Mostel's [[issues]] and you've [[got]] a good [[conflict]], [[starting]] with the fact that Mostel can't believe in a black [[Jew]] named [[Levine]].

This was the farewell performance for Polish/[[Jewish]] actress [[Ida]] Kaminsky who [[got]] a [[nomination]] for [[Best]] Actress in The [[Shop]] on [[Main]] [[Street]] a few [[years]] back. The other [[prominent]] role here is that of Irish [[actor]] Milo O'Shea [[playing]] a nice Jewish [[doctor]]. [[Remembering]] O'Shea's brogue from The [[Verdict]], I was [[really]] surprised to [[see]] and [[hear]] him [[carry]] off the [[part]] of the [[doctor]].

The Angel [[Levine]] [[raises]] some interesting and [[disturbing]] [[questions]] about faith and [[race]] in this [[society]]. It's [[brought]] to you by a stellar cast and of course created by [[acclaimed]] [[writer]] [[Bernard]] Malamud. Make sure to [[catch]] it when [[broadcast]]. The unlikely duo of Zero Mostel and [[Hari]] Belafonte team up to give us some interesting performances and subject [[question]] in The [[Angels]] Levine. It's one interesting twist on the [[item]] from It's A [[Glamorous]] [[Iife]].

[[Null]] is [[wedding]] to [[Nods]] Kaminsky and the two of them [[belongs]] to a [[specific]] [[classroom]] of [[older]] Jewish poor in [[Novel]] York. Mostel [[uses]] to be a [[adapting]] and proud of his trade, but his back and arthritis have prevented him from [[worked]]. Kaminsky is [[essentially]] bedridden. He's [[declines]] to applying for welfare. In [[distress]] like [[Jimi]] [[Steward]], he [[yells]] out to [[Deities]] for some [[assistance]].

Now [[presumably]] if he had gotten [[person]] like [[Gregg]] [[Through]] [[aspects]] might have [[work]] out differently, but [[yet]] [[Stuart]] had [[problem]] [[agreeing]] Travers. But Travers had one [[stuff]] going for him, he was over 100 [[ages]] off this [[murderous]] coil and all his [[relations]] to [[terrestrial]] [[aspects]] were [[faded]]. [[Deities]] [[dispatch]] Mostel [[anything]] [[utterly]] [[multiple]], the [[lately]] deceased [[Hare]] Belafonte who should have at least been [[conferred]] some basic training for angels before being [[conferred]] an [[allocation]].

Belafonte hasn't [[recognised]] he's [[relocated]] on from [[vie]], he's [[yet]] [[did]] a [[batch]] of [[issue]]. He [[moreover]] has a [[women]], Gloria [[Promotes]], who doesn't know he's passed on, hit by a [[motors]] right at the [[commence]] of the [[flick]]. You put his [[subjects]] and Mostel's [[subjects]] and you've [[ai]] a good [[disputes]], [[starts]] with the fact that Mostel can't believe in a black [[Hebrew]] named [[Levin]].

This was the farewell performance for Polish/[[Hebrew]] actress [[Nods]] Kaminsky who [[get]] a [[appointing]] for [[Better]] Actress in The [[Storing]] on [[Principal]] [[Rue]] a few [[olds]] back. The other [[conspicuous]] role here is that of Irish [[actress]] Milo O'Shea [[gaming]] a nice Jewish [[physician]]. [[Recalled]] O'Shea's brogue from The [[Ruling]], I was [[genuinely]] surprised to [[seeing]] and [[overheard]] him [[bears]] off the [[portion]] of the [[physicians]].

The Angel [[Levin]] [[puts]] some interesting and [[worrisome]] [[subjects]] about faith and [[races]] in this [[societies]]. It's [[made]] to you by a stellar cast and of course created by [[proverbial]] [[scriptwriter]] [[Bernie]] Malamud. Make sure to [[catches]] it when [[telecast]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3317 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is the [[worst]] movie I have ever seen. Everyone involved should be embarrassed. Everyone. Ice-T is pitiful, the [[dialogue]] is absolutely [[awful]], and hokie does not begin to describe the performances by every single [[actor]] in this movie. The plot steals heavily from [[Executive]] Decision, but [[compared]] to [[Air]] Rage, Executive Decision is Academy Award material. I have never been so disappointed when watching a movie. [[Air]] Rage should be [[burned]] with its ashes [[locked]] in a vault never to [[see]] the [[light]] of day again. Anyone who has [[seen]] it should take a shower and [[wash]] the stink of [[horrible]] [[movie]] off of them. The [[best]] part of this movie [[probably]] [[comes]] from the [[ending]], when the [[credits]] rolled. This was easily the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]].

Ice-T should stick to [[Law]] and Order, and the other people in this film should retire early or commit suicide. Either way, they should never [[attempt]] to be in a [[movie]] again. This is the [[hardest]] movie I have ever seen. Everyone involved should be embarrassed. Everyone. Ice-T is pitiful, the [[discussions]] is absolutely [[horrifying]], and hokie does not begin to describe the performances by every single [[protagonist]] in this movie. The plot steals heavily from [[Governance]] Decision, but [[comparing]] to [[Airline]] Rage, Executive Decision is Academy Award material. I have never been so disappointed when watching a movie. [[Airlift]] Rage should be [[burnt]] with its ashes [[latched]] in a vault never to [[behold]] the [[lighting]] of day again. Anyone who has [[noticed]] it should take a shower and [[scrubbing]] the stink of [[horrid]] [[flick]] off of them. The [[finest]] part of this movie [[certainly]] [[happens]] from the [[terminated]], when the [[appropriations]] rolled. This was easily the [[hardest]] [[kino]] I have ever [[watched]].

Ice-T should stick to [[Legislation]] and Order, and the other people in this film should retire early or commit suicide. Either way, they should never [[endeavours]] to be in a [[cinematographic]] again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This is a thriller with a good concept, good acting, good [[photography]] and good intentions all around, but which is [[confused]] and disjointed in execution.

Garcia stars as John Berlin, an L.A. forensic detective who has moved to a small California town at the behest of a friend of his on the force there. He soon becomes involved in the investigation of an unsolved murder which leads to his theorizing about the existence of a serial killer whom no one else believes in. The known victim is theorized to be blind, which leads to a romance with a blind girl - believed to be a witness - at a nearby school for the blind.

Despite a basically intriguing story there were too many quantum leaps and plot holes in this movie where I found myself wondering, 'how the hell did we wind up here?' or 'how did we find this out?' I found it confusing and disjointed, despite the good acting, etc. John Malkovich has a small part toward the end as an F.B.I. investigator out to get Berlin.

Not recommended. This is a thriller with a good concept, good acting, good [[picture]] and good intentions all around, but which is [[garbled]] and disjointed in execution.

Garcia stars as John Berlin, an L.A. forensic detective who has moved to a small California town at the behest of a friend of his on the force there. He soon becomes involved in the investigation of an unsolved murder which leads to his theorizing about the existence of a serial killer whom no one else believes in. The known victim is theorized to be blind, which leads to a romance with a blind girl - believed to be a witness - at a nearby school for the blind.

Despite a basically intriguing story there were too many quantum leaps and plot holes in this movie where I found myself wondering, 'how the hell did we wind up here?' or 'how did we find this out?' I found it confusing and disjointed, despite the good acting, etc. John Malkovich has a small part toward the end as an F.B.I. investigator out to get Berlin.

Not recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 3319 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I cannot for the life of me [[explain]] what the [[popularity]] of the children's [[television]] [[show]], power rangers is all about.

I never [[understood]] why [[unsuspecting]] [[children]] liked this show in the first place, since the [[characters]] seem so [[idiotic]] and not worth caring about whatsoever.

The [[costumes]] look completely [[atrocious]], like multi colored spandex that people wear to go to the [[gym]].

What exactly is the purpose of this show anyways, but for kids to [[learn]] how to [[fight]] to solve their [[problems]]? What is up with the awful hair cuts, and clothing on this show anyway? Not to mention this show is still playing on cable television, just to make money to teach kids how to fight each other when they disagree on a certain problem.

There's far better entertainment for today's children, hopefully they aren't as gullible as kids of the 1990s who watched this show.

Oh, and what is up with the homo erotic tension between the red and green rangers anyway? I cannot for the life of me [[explains]] what the [[vogue]] of the children's [[tv]] [[exhibitions]], power rangers is all about.

I never [[understanding]] why [[naive]] [[child]] liked this show in the first place, since the [[hallmarks]] seem so [[foolish]] and not worth caring about whatsoever.

The [[suits]] look completely [[horrible]], like multi colored spandex that people wear to go to the [[gymnasium]].

What exactly is the purpose of this show anyways, but for kids to [[learns]] how to [[fought]] to solve their [[difficulty]]? What is up with the awful hair cuts, and clothing on this show anyway? Not to mention this show is still playing on cable television, just to make money to teach kids how to fight each other when they disagree on a certain problem.

There's far better entertainment for today's children, hopefully they aren't as gullible as kids of the 1990s who watched this show.

Oh, and what is up with the homo erotic tension between the red and green rangers anyway? --------------------------------------------- Result 3320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] [[Very]] [[nice]] [[action]] with an interwoven [[story]] which [[actually]] doesn't [[suck]]. Interesting [[enough]] to [[merit]] watching [[instead]] of [[skipping]] [[past]] to [[get]] to the good parts. Having Jenna Jameson and [[Asia]] Carrere [[helps]] liven it up, too. Jenna in that [[sweater]] and those [[glasses]] is just astounding! Worth picking up just to [[see]] her! [[Eminently]] [[pleasurable]] [[measures]] with an interwoven [[narratives]] which [[genuinely]] doesn't [[lick]]. Interesting [[suffice]] to [[deserved]] watching [[conversely]] of [[omitting]] [[bygone]] to [[got]] to the good parts. Having Jenna Jameson and [[Asian]] Carrere [[supporting]] liven it up, too. Jenna in that [[sweatshirt]] and those [[spectacles]] is just astounding! Worth picking up just to [[consults]] her! --------------------------------------------- Result 3321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Having no [[knowledge]] of this [[film]] [[prior]] to seeing it on Rialto Channel I [[found]] it to be a [[pleasant]], poignant and enriching [[film]].

The casting was [[excellent]]. I [[loved]] all the characters, they were a [[little]] [[exaggerated]] in [[places]], (but this IS a [[film]]). The [[way]] it looked and the enjoyably giddy ride the main character took until it [[turned]] badly, as real [[life]] can and does. Yes, I thought Andy MacDowell was great. I was particularly interested to watch this film once it began because people so often joke about her acting abilities (I find this quite wierd because she's always a solid actress in my opinion).

I loved the bit at the end where Andy's character said "sometimes I feel he was never here" etc., it was so completely how it really is in a situation like that (which I can personally identify with), then there was that gorgeous classical piece "Nocturne" I think by Chopin, which was a beautiful way to end (bar the light comedy at the end, which was probably unnecessary).

I say "well done" to the film makers - I have seen 1,000s of worse films! Having no [[expertise]] of this [[cinema]] [[ago]] to seeing it on Rialto Channel I [[detected]] it to be a [[pleasurable]], poignant and enriching [[kino]].

The casting was [[sumptuous]]. I [[worshiped]] all the characters, they were a [[petite]] [[inflated]] in [[locations]], (but this IS a [[movie]]). The [[manner]] it looked and the enjoyably giddy ride the main character took until it [[revolved]] badly, as real [[lifetime]] can and does. Yes, I thought Andy MacDowell was great. I was particularly interested to watch this film once it began because people so often joke about her acting abilities (I find this quite wierd because she's always a solid actress in my opinion).

I loved the bit at the end where Andy's character said "sometimes I feel he was never here" etc., it was so completely how it really is in a situation like that (which I can personally identify with), then there was that gorgeous classical piece "Nocturne" I think by Chopin, which was a beautiful way to end (bar the light comedy at the end, which was probably unnecessary).

I say "well done" to the film makers - I have seen 1,000s of worse films! --------------------------------------------- Result 3322 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Snow White, which just came out in Locarno, where I had the chance to see it, of course [[refers]] to the world [[famous]] fairy [[tale]]. And it also refers to coke. In the end, real snow of the Swiss Alps plays its part as well.

Thus all three aspects of the title are addressed in this [[film]]. There is a lot of dope on scene, and there is also a pale, dark haired girl - with a prince who has to go through all kind of trouble to come to her rescue.

But: It's not a fairy tale. It's supposed to be a realistic drama located in Zurich, Switzerland (according to the Tagline).

Technically the movie is close to perfect. Unfortunately a weak plot, foreseeable dialogs, a mostly unreal scenery and the mixed acting don't add up to create authenticity. Thus as a spectator I remained untouched.

And then there were the clichés, which drove me crazy one by one: Snow White is a rich and spoiled upper class daughter - of course her parents are divorced and she never got enough love from them, because they were so busy all the time. Her best girlfriend, on the other hand, has loving and caring parents. They (a steelworker and a housewife) live in a tiny flat, poor and happy - and ignorant of the desperate situation their daughter is in. The good guy (= prince) is a musician (!) from the French speaking part of Switzerland (which is considered to be the economically less successful but emotionally fitter fraction of the country). He has problems with his parents. They are migrants from Spain, who don't seem to accept his wild way of living - until the father becomes seriously ill and confesses his great admiration for his son from a hospital bed.

And so it goes on: Naturally, the drug dealer is brutal, the bankers are heartless, the club owner is a playboy and the photographer, although a woman (!), has only her career in mind when she exposes Snow White in artsy pornographic pictures at a show.

This review doesn't need a spoiler in order to let you add these pieces to an obvious plot. As I like other films by Samir, e.g. "Forget Baghdad", I was quite disappointed. Let's hope for the next one. Snow White, which just came out in Locarno, where I had the chance to see it, of course [[pertains]] to the world [[illustrious]] fairy [[storytelling]]. And it also refers to coke. In the end, real snow of the Swiss Alps plays its part as well.

Thus all three aspects of the title are addressed in this [[cinematography]]. There is a lot of dope on scene, and there is also a pale, dark haired girl - with a prince who has to go through all kind of trouble to come to her rescue.

But: It's not a fairy tale. It's supposed to be a realistic drama located in Zurich, Switzerland (according to the Tagline).

Technically the movie is close to perfect. Unfortunately a weak plot, foreseeable dialogs, a mostly unreal scenery and the mixed acting don't add up to create authenticity. Thus as a spectator I remained untouched.

And then there were the clichés, which drove me crazy one by one: Snow White is a rich and spoiled upper class daughter - of course her parents are divorced and she never got enough love from them, because they were so busy all the time. Her best girlfriend, on the other hand, has loving and caring parents. They (a steelworker and a housewife) live in a tiny flat, poor and happy - and ignorant of the desperate situation their daughter is in. The good guy (= prince) is a musician (!) from the French speaking part of Switzerland (which is considered to be the economically less successful but emotionally fitter fraction of the country). He has problems with his parents. They are migrants from Spain, who don't seem to accept his wild way of living - until the father becomes seriously ill and confesses his great admiration for his son from a hospital bed.

And so it goes on: Naturally, the drug dealer is brutal, the bankers are heartless, the club owner is a playboy and the photographer, although a woman (!), has only her career in mind when she exposes Snow White in artsy pornographic pictures at a show.

This review doesn't need a spoiler in order to let you add these pieces to an obvious plot. As I like other films by Samir, e.g. "Forget Baghdad", I was quite disappointed. Let's hope for the next one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Do not expect a depiction of the "truth". However, the accounts of these veterans of the Iraqi & Afghanistan wars demand thoughtful consideration.

The major [[strength]] of the [[film]] is that it [[vividly]] portrays the [[words]] and war wounds of these vets and their post-war [[struggles]] to [[reconstruct]] some degree of [[normalcy]] and functionality to their lives.

My major criticism of the [[film]] is twofold: it is one-sided and it advocates anti-war activism but nothing more to correct the serious [[shortcomings]] of the military's and Veterans Affairs' programs for helping those who've suffered and still suffer the traumas of war. These are NOT fatal flaws of the film.

As a veteran myself, I know that the horrible aftermath of war is real, and these young men and women articulate it very well. These vets vividly describe the physical and mental pain and torment that most veterans experience and that ordinary people need to understand because the horrors of ALL wars are so traumatic and disturbing. Do not expect a depiction of the "truth". However, the accounts of these veterans of the Iraqi & Afghanistan wars demand thoughtful consideration.

The major [[kraft]] of the [[cinematographic]] is that it [[eloquently]] portrays the [[phrase]] and war wounds of these vets and their post-war [[combat]] to [[redevelopment]] some degree of [[normality]] and functionality to their lives.

My major criticism of the [[filmmaking]] is twofold: it is one-sided and it advocates anti-war activism but nothing more to correct the serious [[deficiency]] of the military's and Veterans Affairs' programs for helping those who've suffered and still suffer the traumas of war. These are NOT fatal flaws of the film.

As a veteran myself, I know that the horrible aftermath of war is real, and these young men and women articulate it very well. These vets vividly describe the physical and mental pain and torment that most veterans experience and that ordinary people need to understand because the horrors of ALL wars are so traumatic and disturbing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3324 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[After]] watching two of his silent shorts, 'Elena and her [[Men]] (1956)' is my [[first]] feature-length [[film]] from French [[director]] Jean Renoir, and I [[quite]] enjoyed it. However, I didn't watch the film for Renoir, but for star Ingrid Bergman, who – at age 41 – still [[radiated]] [[unsurpassed]] beauty, elegance and charm. Throughout the early 1950s, following her scandalous marriage to Italian Roberto Rossellini, Bergman [[temporarily]] fell out of public favour. Her next five films, directed by her husband, were unsuccessful in the United States, and I suspect that Renoir's latest release did little to enhance Bergman's popularity with English-speaking audiences {however, she did regain her former success with an Oscar in the same year's 'Anastasia (1956)'}. She stars as Elena Sokorowska, a Polish princess who sees herself as a guardian angel of sorts, bringing success and recognition to promising men everywhere, before promptly abandoning them. While working her lucky charms to aid the political aspirations of the distinguished General Francois Rollan (Jean Marais), she finds herself falling into a love that she won't be able to walk away from. This vaguely-political film works well as either a satire or a romantic comedy, as long as you don't take it too seriously; it's purely lighthearted romantic fluff.

Filmed in vibrant Technicolor, 'Elena and her Men' looks terrific as well, a flurry of bright colours, characters and costumes. Bergman's Polish princess is dreamy and somewhat self-absorbed, not in an unlikable way, but hardly a woman of high principles and convictions. She is persuaded by a team of bumbling government conspirators to convince General Rollan to stage a coup d'état, knowingly exploiting his love for her in order to satisfy her own delusions as a "guardian angel." Perhaps the film's only legitimately virtuous character is Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer, then Audrey Hepburn's husband), who ignores everybody else's selfish secondary motives and pursues Elena for love, and love alone. This, Renoir proudly suggests, is what the true French do best. 'Elena and her Men' also attempts, with moderate success, to expose the superficiality of upper-class French liaisons, through the clumsy philandering of Eugène (Jacques Jouanneau), who can't make love to his servant mistress without his fiancè walking in on them. For these sequences, Renoir was obviously trying for the madcap sort of humour that you might find in a Marx Brothers film, but the film itself is so relaxed and laid-back that the energy just isn't there. [[Upon]] watching two of his silent shorts, 'Elena and her [[Hombre]] (1956)' is my [[frst]] feature-length [[flick]] from French [[headmaster]] Jean Renoir, and I [[very]] enjoyed it. However, I didn't watch the film for Renoir, but for star Ingrid Bergman, who – at age 41 – still [[irradiated]] [[unequaled]] beauty, elegance and charm. Throughout the early 1950s, following her scandalous marriage to Italian Roberto Rossellini, Bergman [[tentatively]] fell out of public favour. Her next five films, directed by her husband, were unsuccessful in the United States, and I suspect that Renoir's latest release did little to enhance Bergman's popularity with English-speaking audiences {however, she did regain her former success with an Oscar in the same year's 'Anastasia (1956)'}. She stars as Elena Sokorowska, a Polish princess who sees herself as a guardian angel of sorts, bringing success and recognition to promising men everywhere, before promptly abandoning them. While working her lucky charms to aid the political aspirations of the distinguished General Francois Rollan (Jean Marais), she finds herself falling into a love that she won't be able to walk away from. This vaguely-political film works well as either a satire or a romantic comedy, as long as you don't take it too seriously; it's purely lighthearted romantic fluff.

Filmed in vibrant Technicolor, 'Elena and her Men' looks terrific as well, a flurry of bright colours, characters and costumes. Bergman's Polish princess is dreamy and somewhat self-absorbed, not in an unlikable way, but hardly a woman of high principles and convictions. She is persuaded by a team of bumbling government conspirators to convince General Rollan to stage a coup d'état, knowingly exploiting his love for her in order to satisfy her own delusions as a "guardian angel." Perhaps the film's only legitimately virtuous character is Henri de Chevincourt (Mel Ferrer, then Audrey Hepburn's husband), who ignores everybody else's selfish secondary motives and pursues Elena for love, and love alone. This, Renoir proudly suggests, is what the true French do best. 'Elena and her Men' also attempts, with moderate success, to expose the superficiality of upper-class French liaisons, through the clumsy philandering of Eugène (Jacques Jouanneau), who can't make love to his servant mistress without his fiancè walking in on them. For these sequences, Renoir was obviously trying for the madcap sort of humour that you might find in a Marx Brothers film, but the film itself is so relaxed and laid-back that the energy just isn't there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Any [[movie]] that portrays the hard-working responsible [[husband]] as the person who has to change because of bored, cheating wife is an [[obvious]] [[result]] of 8 years of the Clinton era.

It's little wonder that this [[movie]] was [[written]] by a [[woman]]. Any [[films]] that portrays the hard-working responsible [[hubby]] as the person who has to change because of bored, cheating wife is an [[unmistakable]] [[findings]] of 8 years of the Clinton era.

It's little wonder that this [[cinema]] was [[typed]] by a [[daughters]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (73%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] When I heard Patrick Swayze was finally returning to his acting career with KING SOLOMON'S MINES I was very excited. I was expecting a [[great]] Indiana Jones type action adventure. What I got was a 4 hour long (with commercials) [[epic]] that was very slow. The second and third hour could have been dropped altogether and the story would not have suffered for it. The ending was good (no [[spoilers]] here)but I was still left wanting more. Well all a guy can do is prey that Swayze does "RoadHouse 2" so he can get back into the action genre that made him famous. Until than if your a fan of King Solomon's Mines than read the book or watch the 1985 version with Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone which is also not very good but its only and hour and forty minutes of your life gone instead of 4 hours. When I heard Patrick Swayze was finally returning to his acting career with KING SOLOMON'S MINES I was very excited. I was expecting a [[super]] Indiana Jones type action adventure. What I got was a 4 hour long (with commercials) [[odyssey]] that was very slow. The second and third hour could have been dropped altogether and the story would not have suffered for it. The ending was good (no [[saboteurs]] here)but I was still left wanting more. Well all a guy can do is prey that Swayze does "RoadHouse 2" so he can get back into the action genre that made him famous. Until than if your a fan of King Solomon's Mines than read the book or watch the 1985 version with Richard Chamberlain and Sharon Stone which is also not very good but its only and hour and forty minutes of your life gone instead of 4 hours. --------------------------------------------- Result 3327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The world may have ended. [[Unfortunately]] this film survived as yet another testament to Canada's [[inability]] to [[make]] [[movies]] that go beyond the execrable. Maybe it's because all our really [[good]] people (Norman Jewison, Martin Short et al) [[go]] to Hollywood.) In fact it's too bad Short wasn't cast in this apallingly [[pretentious]] and banal film. He [[might]] have given it some credibility. The Canadian government should realize --- and this movie is a magnificent [[example]] --- that shovelling money into the trough does not result in good cinema. If the people lapping up these public funds had had to compete, they might have been forced to come up with something worthwhile. As it is they have produced yet another snickering embarassment. The world may have ended. [[Unhappily]] this film survived as yet another testament to Canada's [[weakness]] to [[deliver]] [[cinematography]] that go beyond the execrable. Maybe it's because all our really [[alright]] people (Norman Jewison, Martin Short et al) [[going]] to Hollywood.) In fact it's too bad Short wasn't cast in this apallingly [[presumptuous]] and banal film. He [[apt]] have given it some credibility. The Canadian government should realize --- and this movie is a magnificent [[instances]] --- that shovelling money into the trough does not result in good cinema. If the people lapping up these public funds had had to compete, they might have been forced to come up with something worthwhile. As it is they have produced yet another snickering embarassment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] When I heard about "Hammerhead" being released on DVD and finally found it at my local DVD store, I thought "well, just another cheap monster movie from Nu Image". Those guys [[around]] Boaz Davidson and Avi Lerner produced cheap but very entertaining B - Pictures in the past few months but also some very [[disappointing]] movies. So I didn't expect much, especially after having watched the rather disappointing "Shark Zone" just a few days before. But "Hammerhead" turned out to be an [[excellent]] revival of the 1950s monster movies. We have a mad scientist, a group of people in a dangerous situation, screaming women and damsels in distress, man-eating plants and of course we have the creature, a huge mutant mix between a man and a hammerhead shark. Everything you need for an entertaining monster movie. The only thing missing are graphic sex scenes and nudity which you expect in movies of this kind, but since the movie was made for TV it's understandable why these scenes are missing. And it doesn't matter anyway cause "Hammerhead" is action and horror entertainment at it's best. There are two reasons why I gave it seven out of ten points, though: First of all, the monster isn't seen very often and the showdown with the destruction of the creature is too fast and poorly done, and secondly, William Forsythe just isn't the right guy for the "hero" part and for falling in love with gorgeous Hunter Tylo. Other than that, I can highly recommend this movie for any monster movie fan out there. Grab yourselves a cool drink and some popcorn, watch this movie and have fun. Jasper P. Morgan When I heard about "Hammerhead" being released on DVD and finally found it at my local DVD store, I thought "well, just another cheap monster movie from Nu Image". Those guys [[throughout]] Boaz Davidson and Avi Lerner produced cheap but very entertaining B - Pictures in the past few months but also some very [[disheartening]] movies. So I didn't expect much, especially after having watched the rather disappointing "Shark Zone" just a few days before. But "Hammerhead" turned out to be an [[funky]] revival of the 1950s monster movies. We have a mad scientist, a group of people in a dangerous situation, screaming women and damsels in distress, man-eating plants and of course we have the creature, a huge mutant mix between a man and a hammerhead shark. Everything you need for an entertaining monster movie. The only thing missing are graphic sex scenes and nudity which you expect in movies of this kind, but since the movie was made for TV it's understandable why these scenes are missing. And it doesn't matter anyway cause "Hammerhead" is action and horror entertainment at it's best. There are two reasons why I gave it seven out of ten points, though: First of all, the monster isn't seen very often and the showdown with the destruction of the creature is too fast and poorly done, and secondly, William Forsythe just isn't the right guy for the "hero" part and for falling in love with gorgeous Hunter Tylo. Other than that, I can highly recommend this movie for any monster movie fan out there. Grab yourselves a cool drink and some popcorn, watch this movie and have fun. Jasper P. Morgan --------------------------------------------- Result 3329 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I just saw this film tonight and I have to say that it's a [[mess]]. I love Vince [[Vaughn]] but he ends up more [[annoying]] that funny here and the film is more than less a remake of the crappy 80's classic " Santa Claus the movie" but with out the camp or the bad Sheena Easton song at the end. .The story is your run of the mill black sheep in the family who comes back to face his family for the holidays kind of thing but with North Pole as its setting. Of course Fred (Vince Vaughn) is the family screw up who comes home after a series of set backs that include his girlfriend (Rachel Weisz in a cameo role) dumping him, so he comes home to face his parents and his more successful brother Santa Claus (Paul Giamatti) and wacky high jinks follow with a bit of sibling rivalry and a bit of anarky as well that threatens all of Christmas. Now if you think you know the ending of this film, I think you would be right because it's predicable to the hill. As for the acting, Vince Vaughn plays the same lovable loser he always plays but this time he ends up more annoying than likable, Miranda Richardson plays Mrs. Claus but the role is more than less one note, Elizabeth Banks plays Santa's assistant but she's not much of a character at all other than a neurotic joke and poor Kevin Spacey ends up basically playing the same person he plays in the film "Glengarry Glen Ross" but a little more anal. The only two actors who come out of this film with their dignity intact is Paul Giamatti, who brings a real sincerity and warmed to his role as Santa Claus but he looks somewhat embarrass to be in the movie and you can't blame him and Rachel Weisz, who manages to do a lot more with a very small role than most of the main actors do with theirs, which is a shame because both Rachel Weisz and Paul Giamatti deserved a lot better than what this script gave them.

To put it in a nutshell, a major disappointment. I just saw this film tonight and I have to say that it's a [[chaos]]. I love Vince [[Vaughan]] but he ends up more [[irksome]] that funny here and the film is more than less a remake of the crappy 80's classic " Santa Claus the movie" but with out the camp or the bad Sheena Easton song at the end. .The story is your run of the mill black sheep in the family who comes back to face his family for the holidays kind of thing but with North Pole as its setting. Of course Fred (Vince Vaughn) is the family screw up who comes home after a series of set backs that include his girlfriend (Rachel Weisz in a cameo role) dumping him, so he comes home to face his parents and his more successful brother Santa Claus (Paul Giamatti) and wacky high jinks follow with a bit of sibling rivalry and a bit of anarky as well that threatens all of Christmas. Now if you think you know the ending of this film, I think you would be right because it's predicable to the hill. As for the acting, Vince Vaughn plays the same lovable loser he always plays but this time he ends up more annoying than likable, Miranda Richardson plays Mrs. Claus but the role is more than less one note, Elizabeth Banks plays Santa's assistant but she's not much of a character at all other than a neurotic joke and poor Kevin Spacey ends up basically playing the same person he plays in the film "Glengarry Glen Ross" but a little more anal. The only two actors who come out of this film with their dignity intact is Paul Giamatti, who brings a real sincerity and warmed to his role as Santa Claus but he looks somewhat embarrass to be in the movie and you can't blame him and Rachel Weisz, who manages to do a lot more with a very small role than most of the main actors do with theirs, which is a shame because both Rachel Weisz and Paul Giamatti deserved a lot better than what this script gave them.

To put it in a nutshell, a major disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] OK, my girlfriend and I rented the DVD and about 30 minutes into the [[movie]], we'd exchanged a lot of "ehhh, what IS this [[movie]] about and more importantly, do I care to [[find]] out what it [[ends]] with" glances and decided we [[either]] [[needed]] drugs to [[keep]] us interested in the "[[plot]]" or just [[end]] the [[pain]] right there and then and watch [[something]] [[else]]. We [[opted]] for the latter.

I liked "But I'm a Cheerleader" a lot, but Mango Kiss is too silly and surreal for my [[taste]], [[sorry]]! I definitely prefer "D.E.B.S", "Better Than Chocolate", "Fucking Åmål", "Goldfish Memory" and "Fire".

-Sorcia OK, my girlfriend and I rented the DVD and about 30 minutes into the [[film]], we'd exchanged a lot of "ehhh, what IS this [[films]] about and more importantly, do I care to [[found]] out what it [[culminates]] with" glances and decided we [[neither]] [[required]] drugs to [[retaining]] us interested in the "[[intrigue]]" or just [[ending]] the [[heartbreak]] right there and then and watch [[somethings]] [[further]]. We [[selection]] for the latter.

I liked "But I'm a Cheerleader" a lot, but Mango Kiss is too silly and surreal for my [[liking]], [[dorry]]! I definitely prefer "D.E.B.S", "Better Than Chocolate", "Fucking Åmål", "Goldfish Memory" and "Fire".

-Sorcia --------------------------------------------- Result 3331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I can't understand why so [[many]] peoples [[praised]] this [[show]]. [[Twin]] peaks is one of the most boring titles I have ever [[seen]] in my [[life]].

Now I have seen all season 1 [[episodes]], and [[seeing]] season 2 episode 1. [[Simply]] I can't [[take]] this [[show]] anymore.

1) [[Where]] is the [[proper]] [[induction]] in criminal [[investigation]]?

[[In]] season 1, there was a scene that agent Cooper [[throws]] stones to a bottle. Can you [[guess]] why he did that? He just [[want]] to [[identify]] [[murderer]] by doing this 'joke' while mentioning supernatural [[ability]] [[given]] by [[Tibet]] dream. [[Wow]]!!!

2) There are too many [[unnecessary]] scenes in this [[show]].

[[For]] [[example]], season 2 started with a 'funny' scene that a dumb [[old]] man [[serves]] agent Cooper with a [[cup]] of milk while Cooper are [[laying]] down on the [[floor]].( He [[got]] the [[gun]] [[shoots]] in his belly already. ) This [[old]] man is doing [[nothing]] but saying some [[dumb]] comments. That's all.

This scene is really [[boring]] and [[even]] long ( 3 min 30 [[sec]].... It's like [[Hell]]. )

I [[would]] read some comic books [[rather]] than [[see]] this [[show]] [[anymore]]. I can't understand why so [[various]] peoples [[praise]] this [[showings]]. [[Dual]] peaks is one of the most boring titles I have ever [[saw]] in my [[vida]].

Now I have seen all season 1 [[bouts]], and [[witnessing]] season 2 episode 1. [[Straightforward]] I can't [[taking]] this [[demonstrate]] anymore.

1) [[Hence]] is the [[appropriate]] [[starts]] in criminal [[enquiries]]?

[[Among]] season 1, there was a scene that agent Cooper [[casts]] stones to a bottle. Can you [[guessing]] why he did that? He just [[wanted]] to [[determining]] [[assassin]] by doing this 'joke' while mentioning supernatural [[competence]] [[awarded]] by [[Tibetan]] dream. [[Whoa]]!!!

2) There are too many [[redundant]] scenes in this [[exhibition]].

[[During]] [[examples]], season 2 started with a 'funny' scene that a dumb [[longtime]] man [[contributes]] agent Cooper with a [[copa]] of milk while Cooper are [[lays]] down on the [[storey]].( He [[gets]] the [[guns]] [[twigs]] in his belly already. ) This [[antigua]] man is doing [[none]] but saying some [[silly]] comments. That's all.

This scene is really [[dreary]] and [[yet]] long ( 3 min 30 [[secs]].... It's like [[Inferno]]. )

I [[should]] read some comic books [[somewhat]] than [[behold]] this [[shows]] [[most]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The film is about Sir Christopher Strong (MP--member of Parliament--played by Colin Clive) and his affair with the [[Amelia]] Earhart-like [[character]] [[played]] by [[Katherine]] Hepburn. Up until they met, he had been a very [[devoted]] [[husband]] but when he [[met]] the odd but fascinating Hepburn, he "couldn't [[help]] himself" and they [[fell]] in [[love]]. You can [[tell]], because they stare off into space a [[lot]] and [[talk]] ENDLESSLY about how painful their unrequited love is. Frankly, this is a [[terribly]] dated and practically impossible [[film]] to watch. Part of the problem is that in the Pre-Code days, films glamorizing adultery were very common. Plus, even if you accept this morally suspect subject, the utter sappiness of the dialog make it sound like a 19th century romance novel...and a really bad one at that. Sticky and with difficult to like characters (after all, Clive's wife is a nice lady and did no one any harm) make this one a big [[waste]] of [[time]]. About the only interesting aspect of this film is the costume Hepburn wears in an early scene where she is dressed in a moth costume! You've gotta see it to believe it--and she looks like one of the Bugaloos (an obscure, but fitting reference). The film is about Sir Christopher Strong (MP--member of Parliament--played by Colin Clive) and his affair with the [[Emilia]] Earhart-like [[personage]] [[accomplished]] by [[Catherine]] Hepburn. Up until they met, he had been a very [[dedicated]] [[hubby]] but when he [[complied]] the odd but fascinating Hepburn, he "couldn't [[assisting]] himself" and they [[slid]] in [[amour]]. You can [[telling]], because they stare off into space a [[lots]] and [[speaks]] ENDLESSLY about how painful their unrequited love is. Frankly, this is a [[stunningly]] dated and practically impossible [[kino]] to watch. Part of the problem is that in the Pre-Code days, films glamorizing adultery were very common. Plus, even if you accept this morally suspect subject, the utter sappiness of the dialog make it sound like a 19th century romance novel...and a really bad one at that. Sticky and with difficult to like characters (after all, Clive's wife is a nice lady and did no one any harm) make this one a big [[squander]] of [[times]]. About the only interesting aspect of this film is the costume Hepburn wears in an early scene where she is dressed in a moth costume! You've gotta see it to believe it--and she looks like one of the Bugaloos (an obscure, but fitting reference). --------------------------------------------- Result 3333 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] Monster is a mind numbingly [[awful]] [[movie]] about an evil American concrete factory (are there any else in Hollywood?) [[polluting]] the waters of the small Colombian town of Chimayo somehow creating a catfish-like beast with a predilection for lamb and loose women. James Mitchum is Bill Travis the man who is sent down to Chimayo by his foul-mouthed boss Barnes who himself can't keep his hands off of his secretary's rear to get to the bottom (pun intended) of the story. While in Chimayo Bill must contend with an annoying reporter who apparently broadcasts all of her stories in perfect English directly back to America. I guess in the seventies there was a market for news from small South American towns. There is also a radical named Sanchez that wishes to sabotage the factory for polluting the water which, by the way, also supplies the town with jobs for the locals, but why let cold hearted economics get in the way of touchy-feely enviro-marxism. Pete the factory boss is unwittingly aided by the monster when he has sex with his ex-girlfriend on the beach, tells her that he is seeing the mayor's daughter Juanita and it's over between them, then she is promptly eaten that night. A little side action without the evidence. My hat is off to you Sir. John Carradine rounds out the cast as a priest that believes the monster is sent by God to punish sinners. You can see the contempt he has for being in this movie in his face. Might as well filmed him running to the local currency exchange to see if his check didn't bounce.

Supposedly based on a true story, so much so they say it twice in the opening credits, this film is [[awful]] on all fronts. Filming [[began]] in 1971 and was abandoned until eight years later when Kenneth Hartford put his foot on the throat of Monster by adding his two annoying children as new characters, even putting his daughter, Andrea in top billing with Mitchum and Carradine. The sound quality is nonexistent and most of the scenes seem as if someone smeared tar over the [[camera]] before filming. This is made even more [[tedious]] during the many scenes done at night. The monster itself is laughable as it rears its [[ugly]] rubbery [[head]] for the anticlimactic ending. [[James]] Mitchum along with his brother Chris are proof that nepotism in the acting industry needs to be curtailed. Utterly unwatchable dreck. Shame on you John Carradine. Monster is a mind numbingly [[scary]] [[kino]] about an evil American concrete factory (are there any else in Hollywood?) [[contaminant]] the waters of the small Colombian town of Chimayo somehow creating a catfish-like beast with a predilection for lamb and loose women. James Mitchum is Bill Travis the man who is sent down to Chimayo by his foul-mouthed boss Barnes who himself can't keep his hands off of his secretary's rear to get to the bottom (pun intended) of the story. While in Chimayo Bill must contend with an annoying reporter who apparently broadcasts all of her stories in perfect English directly back to America. I guess in the seventies there was a market for news from small South American towns. There is also a radical named Sanchez that wishes to sabotage the factory for polluting the water which, by the way, also supplies the town with jobs for the locals, but why let cold hearted economics get in the way of touchy-feely enviro-marxism. Pete the factory boss is unwittingly aided by the monster when he has sex with his ex-girlfriend on the beach, tells her that he is seeing the mayor's daughter Juanita and it's over between them, then she is promptly eaten that night. A little side action without the evidence. My hat is off to you Sir. John Carradine rounds out the cast as a priest that believes the monster is sent by God to punish sinners. You can see the contempt he has for being in this movie in his face. Might as well filmed him running to the local currency exchange to see if his check didn't bounce.

Supposedly based on a true story, so much so they say it twice in the opening credits, this film is [[scary]] on all fronts. Filming [[inaugurated]] in 1971 and was abandoned until eight years later when Kenneth Hartford put his foot on the throat of Monster by adding his two annoying children as new characters, even putting his daughter, Andrea in top billing with Mitchum and Carradine. The sound quality is nonexistent and most of the scenes seem as if someone smeared tar over the [[cameras]] before filming. This is made even more [[tiresome]] during the many scenes done at night. The monster itself is laughable as it rears its [[nasty]] rubbery [[leader]] for the anticlimactic ending. [[Jacobo]] Mitchum along with his brother Chris are proof that nepotism in the acting industry needs to be curtailed. Utterly unwatchable dreck. Shame on you John Carradine. --------------------------------------------- Result 3334 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is what I was expecting when star trek DS9 premiered. Not to slight DS9. That was a [[wonderful]] show in it's own right, however it never really [[gave]] the fans more of what they wanted. Enterprise is that show. While having a similarity to the original trek it differs enough to be original in it's own ways. It makes the ideas of exploration exciting to us again. And that was one of the primary ingredients that made the original so [[loved]]. Another ingredient to success was the relationships that evolved between the crew members. Viewers really cared deeply for the crew. Enterprise has much promise in this area as well. The chemistry between Bakula and Blalock seems very promising. While sexual tension in a show can often become a crutch, I feel the tensions on enterprise can lead to much more and say alot more than is typical. I think when we deal with such grand scale characters of different races or species even, we get some very interesting ideas and television. Also, we should note the performances, Blalock is very convincing as Vulcan T'pol and Bacula really has a whimsy and strength of character that delivers a great performance. The rest of the cast delivered good performances also. My only gripes are as follows. The theme. It's good it's different, but a little to light hearted for my liking. We need something a little more grand. Doesn't have to be orchestral. Maybe something with a little more electronic sound would suffice. And my one other complaint. They sell too many adds. They could fix this by selling less ads, or making all shows two parters. Otherwise we'll end up seeing the shows final act getting wrapped up way too quickly as was one of my complaints of Voyager. This is what I was expecting when star trek DS9 premiered. Not to slight DS9. That was a [[glamorous]] show in it's own right, however it never really [[given]] the fans more of what they wanted. Enterprise is that show. While having a similarity to the original trek it differs enough to be original in it's own ways. It makes the ideas of exploration exciting to us again. And that was one of the primary ingredients that made the original so [[worshiped]]. Another ingredient to success was the relationships that evolved between the crew members. Viewers really cared deeply for the crew. Enterprise has much promise in this area as well. The chemistry between Bakula and Blalock seems very promising. While sexual tension in a show can often become a crutch, I feel the tensions on enterprise can lead to much more and say alot more than is typical. I think when we deal with such grand scale characters of different races or species even, we get some very interesting ideas and television. Also, we should note the performances, Blalock is very convincing as Vulcan T'pol and Bacula really has a whimsy and strength of character that delivers a great performance. The rest of the cast delivered good performances also. My only gripes are as follows. The theme. It's good it's different, but a little to light hearted for my liking. We need something a little more grand. Doesn't have to be orchestral. Maybe something with a little more electronic sound would suffice. And my one other complaint. They sell too many adds. They could fix this by selling less ads, or making all shows two parters. Otherwise we'll end up seeing the shows final act getting wrapped up way too quickly as was one of my complaints of Voyager. --------------------------------------------- Result 3335 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is one of those movies that you [[keep]] thinking about when you wake up the next morning. It will give you that warm, [[fuzzy]] feeling and [[leave]] you with a [[smile]] on your face.

[[Sure]], we [[get]] fed the [[typical]] stereotype characters and stories, but it does do the [[trick]]: Entertain.

Being from Sweden and [[living]] in the [[US]] for [[quite]] sometime, it is [[funny]] how we [[react]]. "The deadbeat husband is going to kill him", "She ([[Gabriella]]) is going to die and then there will be a heartbreaking larger-than-life [[ending]]". We know how these [[things]] work, everything comes [[together]] at the [[end]]. And it did. The characters were [[somewhat]] [[simple]], they were so elaborate that you didn't really [[think]] twice about it, [[nothing]] was really left for your own [[imagination]]. The [[closest]] [[would]] [[probably]] be Siv, she makes you [[ask]] yourself if she [[indeed]] was in [[love]] with Daniel, but that's about it.

But the [[movie]] is [[beautiful]], set in rural Norrland, the [[music]] is [[absolutely]] [[amazing]] and the [[characters]] are lovable. Michael Nyqvist is truly genius, with his crazy unique look and Frida Hallberg is charming and approachable. Maybe a little too nice.

But most of all this [[movie]] makes you feel, and that is the most [[important]] thing. You [[cry]], you laugh, you hate and you [[identify]]. I don't know about you guys, but that does not [[happen]] that [[often]]. This is one of those movies that you [[conserving]] thinking about when you wake up the next morning. It will give you that warm, [[vague]] feeling and [[leaving]] you with a [[smirk]] on your face.

[[Convinced]], we [[obtain]] fed the [[symptomatic]] stereotype characters and stories, but it does do the [[gimmick]]: Entertain.

Being from Sweden and [[vie]] in the [[USA]] for [[altogether]] sometime, it is [[droll]] how we [[behaves]]. "The deadbeat husband is going to kill him", "She ([[Gabrielle]]) is going to die and then there will be a heartbreaking larger-than-life [[terminated]]". We know how these [[items]] work, everything comes [[jointly]] at the [[termination]]. And it did. The characters were [[rather]] [[mere]], they were so elaborate that you didn't really [[believe]] twice about it, [[anything]] was really left for your own [[novelty]]. The [[nearest]] [[ought]] [[presumably]] be Siv, she makes you [[requesting]] yourself if she [[actually]] was in [[loves]] with Daniel, but that's about it.

But the [[films]] is [[handsome]], set in rural Norrland, the [[musica]] is [[altogether]] [[impressive]] and the [[nature]] are lovable. Michael Nyqvist is truly genius, with his crazy unique look and Frida Hallberg is charming and approachable. Maybe a little too nice.

But most of all this [[movies]] makes you feel, and that is the most [[sizeable]] thing. You [[clamour]], you laugh, you hate and you [[detect]]. I don't know about you guys, but that does not [[occur]] that [[routinely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3336 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This movie is really goofy! I saw it as an 11 year old, and even then I thought it was pretty ridiculous! I would only recommend this [[film]] to kids under the age of 12. I really didn't care for it, but I do [[think]] that it [[answers]] some very good questions that [[kids]] need to be aware of, such as: 1)Does money buy happiness? 2)Should I lie (to my parents) about things I think they wouldn't approve of? 3)Does money buy friendships? 4)Is money everything? 5)Shouldn't I tell my parents when someone is trying to hurt me? Granted, these are very unrealistic situations, but I do think that if parents discussed these issues with their children, maybe they should watch this video as well, in order to show/scare their kids that lies have the potential to get you hurt. This movie is really goofy! I saw it as an 11 year old, and even then I thought it was pretty ridiculous! I would only recommend this [[kino]] to kids under the age of 12. I really didn't care for it, but I do [[reckon]] that it [[responded]] some very good questions that [[enfants]] need to be aware of, such as: 1)Does money buy happiness? 2)Should I lie (to my parents) about things I think they wouldn't approve of? 3)Does money buy friendships? 4)Is money everything? 5)Shouldn't I tell my parents when someone is trying to hurt me? Granted, these are very unrealistic situations, but I do think that if parents discussed these issues with their children, maybe they should watch this video as well, in order to show/scare their kids that lies have the potential to get you hurt. --------------------------------------------- Result 3337 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I first [[saw]] this [[film]] when i was about 13. It [[blew]] me away then and in many respects it still does now. But i am less inclined to [[see]] it as an [[accurate]] historical piece now. There is precious little [[effort]] made to examine and interact with the [[racism]] - and thus fails to recognise that the most [[potent]] anti [[racism]] weapon is to understand it at its very core in those who [[commit]] it. What we get instead is a dichotomy - on the one side, beko and [[woods]] in 3D panoramic rainbow [[vision]] - on the other, two dimensional characters are portrayed as unapologetic unthinking evil.

This all makes for a [[great]] film story, but it worries me that people see the portrayal as 'accurate'. I first [[sawthe]] this [[filmmaking]] when i was about 13. It [[farted]] me away then and in many respects it still does now. But i am less inclined to [[consults]] it as an [[meticulous]] historical piece now. There is precious little [[endeavours]] made to examine and interact with the [[racist]] - and thus fails to recognise that the most [[emphatic]] anti [[racist]] weapon is to understand it at its very core in those who [[perpetrating]] it. What we get instead is a dichotomy - on the one side, beko and [[lumbering]] in 3D panoramic rainbow [[eyesight]] - on the other, two dimensional characters are portrayed as unapologetic unthinking evil.

This all makes for a [[whopping]] film story, but it worries me that people see the portrayal as 'accurate'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3338 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Brilliant]]! My [[wife]] and I [[joined]] the sprawling [[line]] to [[see]] Holly at the Edinburgh [[Film]] [[Festival]]. After [[seeing]] the film, I can understand why there was such a long [[line]]. Holly is a touching story about an [[impossible]] connection between two people. She is a young [[girl]], he is a [[worn]] out westerner. The [[film]] grasped [[every]] [[bone]] in our [[body]]. There aren't any [[graphic]] scenes or anything that is [[hard]] to watch - its the surrealism of normality that really kicks you in the gut. The film is beautifully shot. Among others, we loved the scene where Patrick teaches Holly to ride a small motorcycle. Thuy Ngoyen's rawness (cant believe this is her [[first]] acting job)and Ron Livingston's performance stayed with me for a couple of days. Highly recommended. [[Glamorous]]! My [[women]] and I [[join]] the sprawling [[bloodline]] to [[seeing]] Holly at the Edinburgh [[Kino]] [[Celebratory]]. After [[witnessing]] the film, I can understand why there was such a long [[iine]]. Holly is a touching story about an [[impractical]] connection between two people. She is a young [[chick]], he is a [[wear]] out westerner. The [[filmmaking]] grasped [[any]] [[bony]] in our [[agency]]. There aren't any [[graphs]] scenes or anything that is [[dur]] to watch - its the surrealism of normality that really kicks you in the gut. The film is beautifully shot. Among others, we loved the scene where Patrick teaches Holly to ride a small motorcycle. Thuy Ngoyen's rawness (cant believe this is her [[fiirst]] acting job)and Ron Livingston's performance stayed with me for a couple of days. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 3339 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The surprise [[nominee]] of this year's Best Animated Feature race at the Oscars. It's an Irish [[film]] by heart, but it was co-produced by Belgium and Brazil, with, I'm guessing, animators working in all three countries. The [[product]] is one of the most [[beautiful]] and [[unique]] [[films]] in [[recent]] memory. The character design is a little [[reminiscent]] of the French animated film Persepolis from a couple of years back, with very simple [[characters]] with thick, black outlines. This [[film]] is not in black and white. Oh no. What makes this film [[great]] is its use of color, simply some of the most outrageous and startling use of colors I've ever seen. The general design of the pictures is also a lot more geometrical, with characters who are basically rectangles or ovals. Much of the film can be spent playing find the circle - a major aspect of the visual design is a circle in the center of the image. All of these geometrical designs have a purpose - the story is about a young boy who is learning to be an artist working on illuminated manuscripts (the Book of Kells is a real illuminated Bible; the art of the film is based on the drawings in it). The story of the film isn't especially deep, but it's a pretty good fantasy tale. Brendan is a young boy in Kells, a city surrounded by enormous walls, built by his uncle to keep out Vikings. A newcomer to Kells, Brother Aiden, inspires Brendan to take up illustrating. He also inspires him to do things like leave Kells and explore the nearby forest, within which lives a nymph. Bruno Coulais provides a fantastic score, almost as good as the one he did for Coraline, which I consider the very best of the year. The surprise [[hopefuls]] of this year's Best Animated Feature race at the Oscars. It's an Irish [[kino]] by heart, but it was co-produced by Belgium and Brazil, with, I'm guessing, animators working in all three countries. The [[merchandise]] is one of the most [[ravishing]] and [[sole]] [[cinematographic]] in [[newer]] memory. The character design is a little [[evocative]] of the French animated film Persepolis from a couple of years back, with very simple [[hallmarks]] with thick, black outlines. This [[cinematographic]] is not in black and white. Oh no. What makes this film [[formidable]] is its use of color, simply some of the most outrageous and startling use of colors I've ever seen. The general design of the pictures is also a lot more geometrical, with characters who are basically rectangles or ovals. Much of the film can be spent playing find the circle - a major aspect of the visual design is a circle in the center of the image. All of these geometrical designs have a purpose - the story is about a young boy who is learning to be an artist working on illuminated manuscripts (the Book of Kells is a real illuminated Bible; the art of the film is based on the drawings in it). The story of the film isn't especially deep, but it's a pretty good fantasy tale. Brendan is a young boy in Kells, a city surrounded by enormous walls, built by his uncle to keep out Vikings. A newcomer to Kells, Brother Aiden, inspires Brendan to take up illustrating. He also inspires him to do things like leave Kells and explore the nearby forest, within which lives a nymph. Bruno Coulais provides a fantastic score, almost as good as the one he did for Coraline, which I consider the very best of the year. --------------------------------------------- Result 3340 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[Typical]] thriller, has been done many times before. Simple plot [[outline]]; cop Liotta becomes obsessed with Russell's wife, and he tries to bump off good ol' Kurt so he can have her. This is beyond predictable, it doesn't even try to make you guess, the plot is the [[plot]] and there's no [[thinking]] outside the box here. I guess then the only [[reason]] to watch it is to see how it develops, but [[nothing]] is done originally or interestingly. There's not really anything to say about this film, it's not particularly bad, but there's no good points either. Russell plays Russell and you know what you're gonna get when you see him in a film. Ditto Liotta. Stowe has an annoying Cher-esque voice. I read the plot outline and I could see the film in my head, it was so obvious and basic. I watched it and it rolled out in front of my eyes exactly as I had imagined. I felt not a drop of emotion throughout. I have no feeling towards this film, it's as if I never even watched it. Considering this, it's a pretty [[pointless]] film isn't it? Still, I'll give it 3/10 for some reason. [[Characteristic]] thriller, has been done many times before. Simple plot [[contours]]; cop Liotta becomes obsessed with Russell's wife, and he tries to bump off good ol' Kurt so he can have her. This is beyond predictable, it doesn't even try to make you guess, the plot is the [[intrigue]] and there's no [[ideology]] outside the box here. I guess then the only [[raison]] to watch it is to see how it develops, but [[anything]] is done originally or interestingly. There's not really anything to say about this film, it's not particularly bad, but there's no good points either. Russell plays Russell and you know what you're gonna get when you see him in a film. Ditto Liotta. Stowe has an annoying Cher-esque voice. I read the plot outline and I could see the film in my head, it was so obvious and basic. I watched it and it rolled out in front of my eyes exactly as I had imagined. I felt not a drop of emotion throughout. I have no feeling towards this film, it's as if I never even watched it. Considering this, it's a pretty [[unusable]] film isn't it? Still, I'll give it 3/10 for some reason. --------------------------------------------- Result 3341 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[saw]] "Fever Pitch" [[sort]] of by [[accident]]; it was playing on the [[airplane]] going over to Europe. It actually wasn't half bad. [[Ben]] ([[Jimmy]] Fallon) is the world's #1 Red Sox fan, but his [[relationship]] with Lindsay Meeks (Drew Barrymore) may [[strain]] that. The movie is a fairly interesting [[look]] at how world events can affect peoples' relationships. It's [[especially]] eye-opening now that the Red Sox have ended their 80-odd-year [[losing]] [[streak]]. I guess that these sorts of [[things]] happen all the [[time]] and we just don't tend to [[notice]] them. Not too bad.

Another movie portraying an [[unusual]] relation to baseball is 2000's "Frequency". [[Check]] them both out. I [[sawthe]] "Fever Pitch" [[genre]] of by [[misadventure]]; it was playing on the [[aircraft]] going over to Europe. It actually wasn't half bad. [[Bin]] ([[Jimi]] Fallon) is the world's #1 Red Sox fan, but his [[rapport]] with Lindsay Meeks (Drew Barrymore) may [[strains]] that. The movie is a fairly interesting [[glance]] at how world events can affect peoples' relationships. It's [[namely]] eye-opening now that the Red Sox have ended their 80-odd-year [[wasting]] [[spate]]. I guess that these sorts of [[items]] happen all the [[moment]] and we just don't tend to [[advices]] them. Not too bad.

Another movie portraying an [[odd]] relation to baseball is 2000's "Frequency". [[Verify]] them both out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] I always follow the Dakar, so when my husband bought Charlie's 'Race to Dakar' DVD home I couldn't [[wait]] to watch it! Of course we'd seen the broadcast of the race when the actual race was on, but that never gives the background and specific teams.

If you watched Long Way Round then you won't be surprised by the language which frankly I find more [[amusing]] than [[offensive]].

I think the only thing that annoyed me about the DVD was Charlie's hair, but he had it styled before Dakar so my feminine need for neatness was assuaged; tho' I could have lived without the 'flame' undies lol As with LWR, the preparation was every bit as interesting as the race itself. I nearly cried when Charlie broke his hand, and winced at every bruise he sustained while training....and of course the death of Andy Caldicott...that was an appalling tragedy, but then every year there's something.

Russ drives me nuts, although his attitude has improved a thousand times from the argumentative cynic he was in LWR. It's great to see him get along so well now with Charlie.

What I learned from this odyssey was - 1. never let Scorpion prepare your vehicle for ANYTHING! - they had months to prepare the X5, and still the day before the team left for Lisbon, Scorpion had only done half of things that needed to be done, and the vehicle was a pain throughout the whole race; 2. the Dakar organizers need to put a lot more work into their rider/driver retrieval plan - leaving Matt (and presumably a large number of other riders/drivers out to dry the way they did was nothing short of culpable negligence; 3. Charlie has an endearing enthusiasm for 'rough and tough' adventure but needs to toughen up a lot to really perform as he'd like; and finally, 4. Charlie and Ewan are planning another of these epos called the Long Way Down in 2007, and I can't wait to get my hands on it! :D If you love bikes and/or genuinely nice blokes 'having a go', you have to watch this, I guarantee you love it. It's very entertaining.

In conclusion, to Simon Pavey - you sir are a hero, I was so impressed by the your 'quiet achiever' manner and the fact that you actually finished.....just incredible considering what an monumentally difficult race it is. And to Charlie, Matt and the rest of the team - full marks for pulling it off. To think that a relatively green team could have achieved so much is truly admirable. You're all wonderful. I always follow the Dakar, so when my husband bought Charlie's 'Race to Dakar' DVD home I couldn't [[hoping]] to watch it! Of course we'd seen the broadcast of the race when the actual race was on, but that never gives the background and specific teams.

If you watched Long Way Round then you won't be surprised by the language which frankly I find more [[droll]] than [[onslaught]].

I think the only thing that annoyed me about the DVD was Charlie's hair, but he had it styled before Dakar so my feminine need for neatness was assuaged; tho' I could have lived without the 'flame' undies lol As with LWR, the preparation was every bit as interesting as the race itself. I nearly cried when Charlie broke his hand, and winced at every bruise he sustained while training....and of course the death of Andy Caldicott...that was an appalling tragedy, but then every year there's something.

Russ drives me nuts, although his attitude has improved a thousand times from the argumentative cynic he was in LWR. It's great to see him get along so well now with Charlie.

What I learned from this odyssey was - 1. never let Scorpion prepare your vehicle for ANYTHING! - they had months to prepare the X5, and still the day before the team left for Lisbon, Scorpion had only done half of things that needed to be done, and the vehicle was a pain throughout the whole race; 2. the Dakar organizers need to put a lot more work into their rider/driver retrieval plan - leaving Matt (and presumably a large number of other riders/drivers out to dry the way they did was nothing short of culpable negligence; 3. Charlie has an endearing enthusiasm for 'rough and tough' adventure but needs to toughen up a lot to really perform as he'd like; and finally, 4. Charlie and Ewan are planning another of these epos called the Long Way Down in 2007, and I can't wait to get my hands on it! :D If you love bikes and/or genuinely nice blokes 'having a go', you have to watch this, I guarantee you love it. It's very entertaining.

In conclusion, to Simon Pavey - you sir are a hero, I was so impressed by the your 'quiet achiever' manner and the fact that you actually finished.....just incredible considering what an monumentally difficult race it is. And to Charlie, Matt and the rest of the team - full marks for pulling it off. To think that a relatively green team could have achieved so much is truly admirable. You're all wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3343 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] I know, that's not what you expect from a film with this sort of

lineage- it's a direct descendant of The Best Years of Our Lives

and The Men... films dealing with men who are in the hospital

dealing with tragic circumstances. But this film is full of [[wonderful]]

[[surprises]] and performances. It features stellar performances from

Eric Stoltz and Helen Hunt (including a rather risque nude scene)

and Wesley Snipes and William Forsythe. As Emanuel Levy wrote

in his book Cinema of Outsiders (about the Independent film

movement) "The Waterdance is coherant, attentive to detail, and

unsentimental with a wicked down to earth humor- it' s at once

funny and sad, and the entire cast is impressive." I was

extraordinarily moved by this film, it's hard hitting yes, but also has

very tender moments and laugh out loud moments. A rare gem. I know, that's not what you expect from a film with this sort of

lineage- it's a direct descendant of The Best Years of Our Lives

and The Men... films dealing with men who are in the hospital

dealing with tragic circumstances. But this film is full of [[sumptuous]]

[[stuns]] and performances. It features stellar performances from

Eric Stoltz and Helen Hunt (including a rather risque nude scene)

and Wesley Snipes and William Forsythe. As Emanuel Levy wrote

in his book Cinema of Outsiders (about the Independent film

movement) "The Waterdance is coherant, attentive to detail, and

unsentimental with a wicked down to earth humor- it' s at once

funny and sad, and the entire cast is impressive." I was

extraordinarily moved by this film, it's hard hitting yes, but also has

very tender moments and laugh out loud moments. A rare gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 3344 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] First off I really enjoyed Zombi 2 by Lucio Fulci. This film was utter trash. I couldn't stand to watch it. The storyline was a joke, the acting was a joke, and the fact that Zombi 3 has nothing to do with Zombi 2 is even more a joke.

We jump from Voodoo to DEATH 1 THE HARMFUL AGENT BRINING People BACK TO LIFE. Whatever, this movie isn't worth the $1.00 it cost to rent it. I really enjoyed lucio fulci movies but this one was horrible. If Zombi 3 is an indicator for how zombi 4 and 5 are going to be I think I will just skip them.

Zombi 2 is an awesome flique tho. --------------------------------------------- Result 3345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Probably the most accurate Stephen King adaption [[yet]]. Not [[surprising]], since King himself wrote the screenplay. The story follows the Creed family moving into a beautiful Maine house. One of the other residents is Jud, a pleasant old man who knows a few things about the area. One is the highway that runs right through their frontyard. The other is a path leading to the Pet Sematary, where children for decades have buried the animals killed by the highway. Soon enough, Ellie Creed's cat, Church, is found dead. Luckily, this happens while the family, with the exception of Louis(the father), is away for Thanksgiving. Jud takes Louis to another burial ground, beyond the Pet Sematary, where Church is to be buried. Later, Louis is greeted(not so politely) by Church. He's returned, appearing to have chewed his way out of the bag he had been buried in. Maybe he was buried alive. Maybe not. Nothing more I can say without ruining the story.

Of all the King adaptions I've seen this would be the most terrifying. The characters are real and the situations are normal. Mary Lambert does a great job directing the proceedings. Suspense is kept fairly high throughout the film, due in part to the plot development. The scene where Gage is killed will stick in your mind forever. Then, of course, we have the conclusion. Easy to determine what's going to happen, but Lambert pulls off some genuinely scary, and sometimes disturbing, moments.

Overall, this is a good film and an excellent adaption. If you enjoy being scared and don't mind being haunted by some occasionally disturbing images then "Pet Sematary" is just what you're looking for. Non Horror fans will want to avoid this. Probably the most accurate Stephen King adaption [[however]]. Not [[impressed]], since King himself wrote the screenplay. The story follows the Creed family moving into a beautiful Maine house. One of the other residents is Jud, a pleasant old man who knows a few things about the area. One is the highway that runs right through their frontyard. The other is a path leading to the Pet Sematary, where children for decades have buried the animals killed by the highway. Soon enough, Ellie Creed's cat, Church, is found dead. Luckily, this happens while the family, with the exception of Louis(the father), is away for Thanksgiving. Jud takes Louis to another burial ground, beyond the Pet Sematary, where Church is to be buried. Later, Louis is greeted(not so politely) by Church. He's returned, appearing to have chewed his way out of the bag he had been buried in. Maybe he was buried alive. Maybe not. Nothing more I can say without ruining the story.

Of all the King adaptions I've seen this would be the most terrifying. The characters are real and the situations are normal. Mary Lambert does a great job directing the proceedings. Suspense is kept fairly high throughout the film, due in part to the plot development. The scene where Gage is killed will stick in your mind forever. Then, of course, we have the conclusion. Easy to determine what's going to happen, but Lambert pulls off some genuinely scary, and sometimes disturbing, moments.

Overall, this is a good film and an excellent adaption. If you enjoy being scared and don't mind being haunted by some occasionally disturbing images then "Pet Sematary" is just what you're looking for. Non Horror fans will want to avoid this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3346 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[If]] I could [[say]] it was [[better]] than Gymkata, I at [[least]] felt my [[money]] was not totally wasted.

Then I [[saw]] Steven Segal's On [[Deadly]] [[Ground]].

This movie should see a [[resurrection]] though on MST 3K. If Santa [[Claus]] Conquers the Martians [[could]] make Tom Servo's [[head]] explode, one wonders what mayhem this movie could cause.

There is a very good [[reason]] why Kurt [[Thomas]] never had a [[movie]] [[career]].

The [[writers]] of this dreck should be forced to wear [[placards]] [[every]] day of their [[lives]] that [[say]] "[[Bitch]] slap me! I was a [[writer]] on Gymkata." [[Though]] I could [[told]] it was [[nicer]] than Gymkata, I at [[fewest]] felt my [[cash]] was not totally wasted.

Then I [[observed]] Steven Segal's On [[Homicidal]] [[Terra]].

This movie should see a [[resuscitation]] though on MST 3K. If Santa [[Eaton]] Conquers the Martians [[wo]] make Tom Servo's [[leader]] explode, one wonders what mayhem this movie could cause.

There is a very good [[motif]] why Kurt [[Tommaso]] never had a [[films]] [[carrera]].

The [[screenwriters]] of this dreck should be forced to wear [[cartels]] [[all]] day of their [[iife]] that [[told]] "[[Cunt]] slap me! I was a [[novelist]] on Gymkata." --------------------------------------------- Result 3347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] I admit I have a weakness for alternate history stories, from ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to GROUNDHOG DAY to 12:01. Among those greats is this little gem. It's pretty difficult to get through [[MR]]. [[DESTINY]] without giving a nod of appreciation to each and every cast member, from the goodhearted James Belushi to the murderous Courtney Cox. This movie lacks the gravitas and scale to make it a great film, but it's a [[fine]] cheer-up on a rainy afternoon. It's also a great rental for an inexpensive date. I admit I have a weakness for alternate history stories, from ITS A WONDERFUL LIFE to GROUNDHOG DAY to 12:01. Among those greats is this little gem. It's pretty difficult to get through [[MISTER]]. [[DESTINED]] without giving a nod of appreciation to each and every cast member, from the goodhearted James Belushi to the murderous Courtney Cox. This movie lacks the gravitas and scale to make it a great film, but it's a [[alright]] cheer-up on a rainy afternoon. It's also a great rental for an inexpensive date. --------------------------------------------- Result 3348 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] A [[typical]] Lanza flick that had limited [[audience]] [[appeal]] with a [[weak]] [[story]] line that was put together [[simply]] to justify Lanza's MGM contract at the time.

As reported by member Lastliberal (above) Grayson could not stand Lanza because of his obscene advances towards her off (and sometimes on) camera. In [[addition]], his gutter mannerism and the continual smell of alcohol in her face during scenes they did together were [[intolerable]]. After doing their second (and last) film together, "Toast of New Orleans", the [[normally]] quiet Grayson stormed into Louie B. Mayer's office and told him in no uncertain words that she would never work with Lanza again – period. Mayer felt that Grayson was much more valuable to MGM then Lanza, so Grayson's statement stuck. Grayson went on to star in a number of widely received (and far more profitable) musicals with Howard Keel and others. Later in life when asked to compare Lanza and Keel her reply was that there was no comparison between them, and that Keel was great to work with and had much more appeal to the "real people" in the audiences. A [[classic]] Lanza flick that had limited [[spectators]] [[appellate]] with a [[fragile]] [[tale]] line that was put together [[solely]] to justify Lanza's MGM contract at the time.

As reported by member Lastliberal (above) Grayson could not stand Lanza because of his obscene advances towards her off (and sometimes on) camera. In [[supplement]], his gutter mannerism and the continual smell of alcohol in her face during scenes they did together were [[indefensible]]. After doing their second (and last) film together, "Toast of New Orleans", the [[fluently]] quiet Grayson stormed into Louie B. Mayer's office and told him in no uncertain words that she would never work with Lanza again – period. Mayer felt that Grayson was much more valuable to MGM then Lanza, so Grayson's statement stuck. Grayson went on to star in a number of widely received (and far more profitable) musicals with Howard Keel and others. Later in life when asked to compare Lanza and Keel her reply was that there was no comparison between them, and that Keel was great to work with and had much more appeal to the "real people" in the audiences. --------------------------------------------- Result 3349 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Ask the Dust" looked [[intriguing]] from the [[trailer]], and we especially like all of the actors. [[Unfortunately]], the [[movie]] was not [[compelling]] enough to be [[considered]] [[drama]], and it wasn't [[funny]] [[enough]] to be a comedy. It [[practically]] [[seemed]] to satirize itself, and to no entertaining effect. After seventy [[minutes]] of waiting for this thing to get better, my [[wife]] and I walked out, [[valuing]] not having wasted any more [[time]] on such nonsense. It [[simply]] was not interesting, moving, funny nor [[artistic]]. It appears as [[though]] it were written, produced and [[directed]] by a high [[school]] kid; [[worse]] yet, it was such a [[shameful]] [[waste]] of otherwise extraordinarily talented actors, not to [[mention]] our time and money. "Ask the Dust" looked [[enthralling]] from the [[camper]], and we especially like all of the actors. [[Regrettably]], the [[cinematographic]] was not [[convincing]] enough to be [[deemed]] [[dramas]], and it wasn't [[hilarious]] [[sufficiently]] to be a comedy. It [[almost]] [[sounded]] to satirize itself, and to no entertaining effect. After seventy [[mins]] of waiting for this thing to get better, my [[femme]] and I walked out, [[assessing]] not having wasted any more [[moment]] on such nonsense. It [[mere]] was not interesting, moving, funny nor [[artsy]]. It appears as [[while]] it were written, produced and [[oriented]] by a high [[tuition]] kid; [[worst]] yet, it was such a [[scandalous]] [[wastes]] of otherwise extraordinarily talented actors, not to [[cite]] our time and money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This third Darkman was definitely better than the second one, but still far [[worse]] than the original [[movie]]. What made this one better than D2 was the fact that The Bad [[Guy]] had been [[changed]] and Durant was not brought back again. Furthermore there was actually some hint of character development when it came to the bad guy's family and Darkman himself. This made my heart [[soften]] and I [[gave]] this [[flick]] as much as 4/10, i.e. **/*****. This third Darkman was definitely better than the second one, but still far [[lousiest]] than the original [[films]]. What made this one better than D2 was the fact that The Bad [[Boys]] had been [[modify]] and Durant was not brought back again. Furthermore there was actually some hint of character development when it came to the bad guy's family and Darkman himself. This made my heart [[soothe]] and I [[provided]] this [[film]] as much as 4/10, i.e. **/*****. --------------------------------------------- Result 3351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Twelve years ago, production [[stopped]] on the slasher flick "Hot Blooded" since almost everyone on the set started dying. Now, a couple of film students have decided to finish the [[film]], [[despite]] the fact that there's a rumor that the film is cursed. Well, they're about to find out that some curses are real.

When Scream was released, every country seemed to want to [[cash]] in on its [[success]], even Australia. The concept, which [[today]] has been done to death (a slasher film within a slasher film) was at the time relatively cool and original. This movie was released right before Urban Legends: Final Cut and Scream 3 (well not in the US but in Australia) so it felt like the first movie with this concept. When Urban Legends 2 was released, most of us had all ready grown sick of the concept and since the movie wasn't even good, the movie flopped disastrously. Now, Cut is not the best slasher flick ever, and nor does it try to be. It knows that it's a rip-off, and they even cast a girl who looks like a blonde version of Neve Campbell in the starring role. But instead of trying to add some new and original twists to the story, they've decided to rip-off some 80s slasher flicks like "Nightmare on Elm Street" as well and surprisingly enough, this actually works. The killer is very creepy and that mask is just killer! And instead of trying to scare the audience to death, they've created a very good and creepy atmosphere which keeps us in suspense through most of the movie. There are a couple of plot holes in the movie though that I wasn't able to fully ignore, the ending being the biggest plot hole in the movie. Spoiler ahead; I mean, they burnt the only copy of the movie so where the hell did they find the print that they show in the final scene? It makes no sense I tell you. End of spoilers. All in all, Cut is a pretty creepy slasher flick with a silly story but I consider this to be one of the better Scream rip-offs that never made it big. I'm surprised that this one never got a sequel, but I guess it simply came out too late.

Suspenseful Australian slasher flick with very few scares. Cut is still a pretty neat slasher movie and I will have to recommend this one even though I consider the story to be quite silly since it's completely ludicrous. Twelve years ago, production [[ceasing]] on the slasher flick "Hot Blooded" since almost everyone on the set started dying. Now, a couple of film students have decided to finish the [[kino]], [[while]] the fact that there's a rumor that the film is cursed. Well, they're about to find out that some curses are real.

When Scream was released, every country seemed to want to [[money]] in on its [[avail]], even Australia. The concept, which [[hoy]] has been done to death (a slasher film within a slasher film) was at the time relatively cool and original. This movie was released right before Urban Legends: Final Cut and Scream 3 (well not in the US but in Australia) so it felt like the first movie with this concept. When Urban Legends 2 was released, most of us had all ready grown sick of the concept and since the movie wasn't even good, the movie flopped disastrously. Now, Cut is not the best slasher flick ever, and nor does it try to be. It knows that it's a rip-off, and they even cast a girl who looks like a blonde version of Neve Campbell in the starring role. But instead of trying to add some new and original twists to the story, they've decided to rip-off some 80s slasher flicks like "Nightmare on Elm Street" as well and surprisingly enough, this actually works. The killer is very creepy and that mask is just killer! And instead of trying to scare the audience to death, they've created a very good and creepy atmosphere which keeps us in suspense through most of the movie. There are a couple of plot holes in the movie though that I wasn't able to fully ignore, the ending being the biggest plot hole in the movie. Spoiler ahead; I mean, they burnt the only copy of the movie so where the hell did they find the print that they show in the final scene? It makes no sense I tell you. End of spoilers. All in all, Cut is a pretty creepy slasher flick with a silly story but I consider this to be one of the better Scream rip-offs that never made it big. I'm surprised that this one never got a sequel, but I guess it simply came out too late.

Suspenseful Australian slasher flick with very few scares. Cut is still a pretty neat slasher movie and I will have to recommend this one even though I consider the story to be quite silly since it's completely ludicrous. --------------------------------------------- Result 3352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This [[movie]] [[deserves]] more than a 1. But I'm giving it a one because so many fricken fan boys have given it a 10 resulting in it getting a rating that'll take it into the top 100 list. [[Seriously]] it's not that great its not that bad. Its a stupid cult classic with so many fricken fan boys it's ridiculous. These are the types who probably still laugh at Chuck Norris jokes and still say "I'm rick james b!tch" No matter how old or annoying it gets. I dread having to hear "I'm tired of MFn snakes on this MFn plane" months from now from idiots trying to be funny. Its crappy plot crap acting etc. Its Okay to love a bad movie, but you still gotta admit its a bad movie.

Wait for the Marine starring John Cena if you wanna see a real movie This [[kino]] [[merited]] more than a 1. But I'm giving it a one because so many fricken fan boys have given it a 10 resulting in it getting a rating that'll take it into the top 100 list. [[Earnestly]] it's not that great its not that bad. Its a stupid cult classic with so many fricken fan boys it's ridiculous. These are the types who probably still laugh at Chuck Norris jokes and still say "I'm rick james b!tch" No matter how old or annoying it gets. I dread having to hear "I'm tired of MFn snakes on this MFn plane" months from now from idiots trying to be funny. Its crappy plot crap acting etc. Its Okay to love a bad movie, but you still gotta admit its a bad movie.

Wait for the Marine starring John Cena if you wanna see a real movie --------------------------------------------- Result 3353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (93%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Don't you just [[hate]] it when you [[order]] steak but the [[restaurant]] [[gives]] you chicken?

Such is how I felt watching this so-called "Battlestar Galactica". Arguments can be [[made]] over its quality but the fact remains, it's NOT what the fans ordered.

Imagine if you were sitting down at that proverbial restaurant I mentioned. You have waited years for them to bring back their famous New York Strip steak which you loved. When your meal arrives, you find they've applied the name "New York Strip" to a chicken dish. You complain but the waiter merely states "but ze cheeken, ees really GOOD zir"! Do you really care if the chicken is good? You wanted New York Strip - a STEAK! The waiter then explains, "you zee zir, ze chef wanted to to do, as you zay, zomezing NEW. We felt ze cheeken would be more popular zo we gave it the name of our previous delicious deesh". You ask if you will ever find the original New York Strip on the menu in the future but are informed that because the restaurant HAS a dish called "New York Strip" now on the menu, you'll never see the original New York Strip - ever again.

Such is the case with creating something NEW and slapping the "Battlestar Galactica" namesake on it.

* This mini series is an [[affront]] to all fans of the original show! *

It's a shame the production team put in charge of this new version obviously held contempt for the original. The team put in charge of resurrecting BG should have LOVED the original series - seeking to improve what the fans loved, not try to shamelessly sell this new series by exploiting the Battlestar Galactica name.

If SciFi Channel wanted to give us a NEW show, then DO so! Give it a new name! Don't use the name we fondly remember in an attempt to lure in viewers. That effectively robs us of the chance to see any semblance of the original in the future.

We have been waiting for 25 years to see what we knew as BG because we LIKED something about the original! We didn't simply want the NAME and remnants of the basic concept. There are things we LOVED about the original series!

Sadly, probably the BEST elements of the original were those which were omitted. Sure, the original BG was imperfect and could have used some updating. This mini series, however, was not an improvement in any regards but the special effects (which were good but not anything unusual by today's standards).

Many viewers will debate back and forth about the quality of this NEW show but we will not forgive SciFi and Ron Moore for destroying our dream.

That being said... I shall offer some comments about the merits of this new mini by itself (not in comparison to the original):

The battle sequences were the best part. Effort was obviously put into making the effects more "real" in appearance and less "wow - look at that effect". I would not say these sequences were exceptional by today's standards yet they were in keeping with made-for-cable original movies. What was the deal with this "pseudo-live-cam"? Some views tried to fake the effect of a "real" camera with lagging tracking and jerky zooms. However, it was over-used considering there was no apparent SOURCE of these cameras. The infinitely more intelligent series, Babylon 5, is the only instance I've seen such "live cams" used effectively, when we were supposedly witnessing action from Security Cams.

The script, you ask? The script felt like it was written by a teenager, FOR other teenagers. The characters felt cardboard and stereotypical. Indeed, the whole story felt pieced together from other well-known stereotypes. The only good features of the entire story were those few elements which were preserved from the original series. It was obviously "dumbed down" for digestion of your average TV audience.

The human interaction was pitiful. Rather than drama based on subtle looks, expressions and fine timing, every moment of human tension was exaggerated to the point of being so obvious they lost all ability to move any refined viewer. Such was obvious in any interaction between Adama and son. The director must have been trying to make sure the most dense and unfeeling viewer wouldn't miss it even if not paying attention. Sorry, but real humans don't behave like the continually.

I wouldn't have considered this a BAD show had it stood on its own. Nothing great; it will never be revered by true SciFi fans or artisans, but it would be watchable by the masses. I personally could have lived without it, though. I only watched it to see how it really DID capture the spirit of the original.

How this mini series will always be remembered is as a symbol of how quality in storytelling has been cast aside to appeal to greater numbers. How even SciFi Channel has "dumbed down" its productions to cater to the masses as opposed to its true niche market, the Science Fiction fans. It will be the time we asked for steak and they insisted on giving us chicken, despite our complaints.

I leave you with only one thought -

NO "MOORE".

Don't you just [[hates]] it when you [[orders]] steak but the [[dine]] [[provides]] you chicken?

Such is how I felt watching this so-called "Battlestar Galactica". Arguments can be [[brought]] over its quality but the fact remains, it's NOT what the fans ordered.

Imagine if you were sitting down at that proverbial restaurant I mentioned. You have waited years for them to bring back their famous New York Strip steak which you loved. When your meal arrives, you find they've applied the name "New York Strip" to a chicken dish. You complain but the waiter merely states "but ze cheeken, ees really GOOD zir"! Do you really care if the chicken is good? You wanted New York Strip - a STEAK! The waiter then explains, "you zee zir, ze chef wanted to to do, as you zay, zomezing NEW. We felt ze cheeken would be more popular zo we gave it the name of our previous delicious deesh". You ask if you will ever find the original New York Strip on the menu in the future but are informed that because the restaurant HAS a dish called "New York Strip" now on the menu, you'll never see the original New York Strip - ever again.

Such is the case with creating something NEW and slapping the "Battlestar Galactica" namesake on it.

* This mini series is an [[slur]] to all fans of the original show! *

It's a shame the production team put in charge of this new version obviously held contempt for the original. The team put in charge of resurrecting BG should have LOVED the original series - seeking to improve what the fans loved, not try to shamelessly sell this new series by exploiting the Battlestar Galactica name.

If SciFi Channel wanted to give us a NEW show, then DO so! Give it a new name! Don't use the name we fondly remember in an attempt to lure in viewers. That effectively robs us of the chance to see any semblance of the original in the future.

We have been waiting for 25 years to see what we knew as BG because we LIKED something about the original! We didn't simply want the NAME and remnants of the basic concept. There are things we LOVED about the original series!

Sadly, probably the BEST elements of the original were those which were omitted. Sure, the original BG was imperfect and could have used some updating. This mini series, however, was not an improvement in any regards but the special effects (which were good but not anything unusual by today's standards).

Many viewers will debate back and forth about the quality of this NEW show but we will not forgive SciFi and Ron Moore for destroying our dream.

That being said... I shall offer some comments about the merits of this new mini by itself (not in comparison to the original):

The battle sequences were the best part. Effort was obviously put into making the effects more "real" in appearance and less "wow - look at that effect". I would not say these sequences were exceptional by today's standards yet they were in keeping with made-for-cable original movies. What was the deal with this "pseudo-live-cam"? Some views tried to fake the effect of a "real" camera with lagging tracking and jerky zooms. However, it was over-used considering there was no apparent SOURCE of these cameras. The infinitely more intelligent series, Babylon 5, is the only instance I've seen such "live cams" used effectively, when we were supposedly witnessing action from Security Cams.

The script, you ask? The script felt like it was written by a teenager, FOR other teenagers. The characters felt cardboard and stereotypical. Indeed, the whole story felt pieced together from other well-known stereotypes. The only good features of the entire story were those few elements which were preserved from the original series. It was obviously "dumbed down" for digestion of your average TV audience.

The human interaction was pitiful. Rather than drama based on subtle looks, expressions and fine timing, every moment of human tension was exaggerated to the point of being so obvious they lost all ability to move any refined viewer. Such was obvious in any interaction between Adama and son. The director must have been trying to make sure the most dense and unfeeling viewer wouldn't miss it even if not paying attention. Sorry, but real humans don't behave like the continually.

I wouldn't have considered this a BAD show had it stood on its own. Nothing great; it will never be revered by true SciFi fans or artisans, but it would be watchable by the masses. I personally could have lived without it, though. I only watched it to see how it really DID capture the spirit of the original.

How this mini series will always be remembered is as a symbol of how quality in storytelling has been cast aside to appeal to greater numbers. How even SciFi Channel has "dumbed down" its productions to cater to the masses as opposed to its true niche market, the Science Fiction fans. It will be the time we asked for steak and they insisted on giving us chicken, despite our complaints.

I leave you with only one thought -

NO "MOORE".

--------------------------------------------- Result 3354 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[movie]] is a joke and [[must]] be one of the [[worst]] movies Stallone ever [[made]]. This is a [[typical]] 80s [[movie]] where you have one man destroying the [[whole]] army by himself. "First Blood Pt. 2" is very similar to Schwarzenegger's "Commando", but there you have Arnold [[killing]] the [[terrorist]] while here you have a [[specific]] nation showed as the [[bad]] [[guys]]. This movie is a [[typical]] American anti-Soviet [[propaganda]]. [[True]], this was the [[peak]] of the [[Cold]] War, but I'm sick of having [[Communists]] or the Nazis always being [[shown]] as the [[enemy]]. There are so [[many]] American [[movies]] that have this one [[thing]] in common. Why can't there a [[movie]] that show [[Americans]] as the [[enemy]]? Who's [[going]] to believe that one [[lone]] [[soldier]] will [[destroy]] the [[whole]] army? Do you [[really]] [[think]] that [[something]] [[like]] this would have [[really]] [[happened]]? By the [[looks]] of it, an average, brain [[washed]] American viewer certainly [[would]]. This [[cinematography]] is a joke and [[ought]] be one of the [[meanest]] movies Stallone ever [[brought]]. This is a [[characteristic]] 80s [[cinematography]] where you have one man destroying the [[total]] army by himself. "First Blood Pt. 2" is very similar to Schwarzenegger's "Commando", but there you have Arnold [[slain]] the [[terrorism]] while here you have a [[concrete]] nation showed as the [[amiss]] [[boy]]. This movie is a [[characteristic]] American anti-Soviet [[advocacy]]. [[Authentic]], this was the [[heyday]] of the [[Icy]] War, but I'm sick of having [[Communist]] or the Nazis always being [[revealed]] as the [[nemesis]]. There are so [[countless]] American [[films]] that have this one [[stuff]] in common. Why can't there a [[film]] that show [[America]] as the [[foes]]? Who's [[go]] to believe that one [[sole]] [[solider]] will [[annihilate]] the [[ensemble]] army? Do you [[genuinely]] [[believe]] that [[somethings]] [[iike]] this would have [[truly]] [[transpired]]? By the [[seem]] of it, an average, brain [[scrubbed]] American viewer certainly [[ought]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3355 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] You may [[say]] to yourself, "[[Don]] [[Johnson]] as Elvis? Can that work? Is it [[possible]]? Seems like an terrible choice to me, but perhaps I should have an open mind. Maybe I'll be surprised. Maybe he can [[pull]] it off."

NOT!

Don Johnson is not a [[bad]] [[actor]]. But he is an [[awful]] Elvis. He's too short, too weak-voiced, too sharply [[featured]] ... well you've already imagined how [[bad]] he would be. Add to that a hokey black wig and heavy-handed eye-liner and mascara and it's a big fat embarrassing [[mess]].

The best I can say is that since Johnson's acting is decent and since his impersonation is so far off, after a while you don't even think of him as [[Elvis]] anymore. You see him as some other crazed pop star instead. Then, on that level, the movie becomes watchable.

Stephanie Zimbalist is also not ideally cast as the tall, beauty queen, Linda Thompson. But she is [[attractive]] in her own right and plays the part with the honesty, elegance and intelligence we've come to expect from all her roles. There may be too much intelligence in her performance. You have to be kind of a dope to [[stick]] with a dope [[abusing]] dope.

There's [[nothing]] new to this story; we've heard it many [[times]] before. If you've [[looking]] for new info or [[insight]], you won't find it. It's told as a love story - an unrequited one: [[Linda]] for Elvis and Elvis for [[drugs]]. You may [[tell]] to yourself, "[[Donated]] [[Johnston]] as Elvis? Can that work? Is it [[doable]]? Seems like an terrible choice to me, but perhaps I should have an open mind. Maybe I'll be surprised. Maybe he can [[pulled]] it off."

NOT!

Don Johnson is not a [[negative]] [[protagonist]]. But he is an [[scary]] Elvis. He's too short, too weak-voiced, too sharply [[hallmarks]] ... well you've already imagined how [[horrid]] he would be. Add to that a hokey black wig and heavy-handed eye-liner and mascara and it's a big fat embarrassing [[disarray]].

The best I can say is that since Johnson's acting is decent and since his impersonation is so far off, after a while you don't even think of him as [[Presley]] anymore. You see him as some other crazed pop star instead. Then, on that level, the movie becomes watchable.

Stephanie Zimbalist is also not ideally cast as the tall, beauty queen, Linda Thompson. But she is [[seductive]] in her own right and plays the part with the honesty, elegance and intelligence we've come to expect from all her roles. There may be too much intelligence in her performance. You have to be kind of a dope to [[wand]] with a dope [[manhandling]] dope.

There's [[anything]] new to this story; we've heard it many [[moments]] before. If you've [[searching]] for new info or [[eyesight]], you won't find it. It's told as a love story - an unrequited one: [[Lynda]] for Elvis and Elvis for [[medication]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3356 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] **** WARNING: here be spoilers **** Why do I [[waste]] my hastily fleeing years [[watching]] [[garbage]] like this? This film is an impressive collection of clichés, poor [[writing]], worse [[directing]], and then we haven't [[even]] got to the acting yet.

And of course, you can [[predict]] the [[whole]] story from [[beginning]] to end.

Hero expert fights against stupid, corrupt and incompetent henchmen. One avalanche goes off, burying all the heroes who somehow manage to get out alive in spite of going through all sorts of cliffhanger perils. Corrupt partner who caused the whole thing gets fried alive together with his payoff money. Second [[avalanche]] heroically deflected by renegade expert's adventurous experiment. Evil henchmen in the end turn out to have a heart as well. Troubled teenager falls into the arms of her crusty stepmother after being saved by her. Etc, etc, etc, etc, on and on it goes.

In fact, there's little reason to warn for spoilers. You could probably work the whole plot out if I gave you the basic ingredients. At least, I wasn't too wide off the mark most of the time, anticipating what would happen next.

And then we haven't discussed the factual errors.

I agree with a previous commentator that even though there are usually SOME redeeming features even of a [[bad]] movie. you'd be hard pressed to find any in this one. I suppose I gave it 2 out of 10 for some nice scenery shots, but that's it.

It's been some time since a film made me groan, but this one certainly did. **** WARNING: here be spoilers **** Why do I [[squandering]] my hastily fleeing years [[staring]] [[litter]] like this? This film is an impressive collection of clichés, poor [[writes]], worse [[instructing]], and then we haven't [[yet]] got to the acting yet.

And of course, you can [[foretell]] the [[ensemble]] story from [[starting]] to end.

Hero expert fights against stupid, corrupt and incompetent henchmen. One avalanche goes off, burying all the heroes who somehow manage to get out alive in spite of going through all sorts of cliffhanger perils. Corrupt partner who caused the whole thing gets fried alive together with his payoff money. Second [[blizzard]] heroically deflected by renegade expert's adventurous experiment. Evil henchmen in the end turn out to have a heart as well. Troubled teenager falls into the arms of her crusty stepmother after being saved by her. Etc, etc, etc, etc, on and on it goes.

In fact, there's little reason to warn for spoilers. You could probably work the whole plot out if I gave you the basic ingredients. At least, I wasn't too wide off the mark most of the time, anticipating what would happen next.

And then we haven't discussed the factual errors.

I agree with a previous commentator that even though there are usually SOME redeeming features even of a [[mala]] movie. you'd be hard pressed to find any in this one. I suppose I gave it 2 out of 10 for some nice scenery shots, but that's it.

It's been some time since a film made me groan, but this one certainly did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3357 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Shame on Yash Raj films and Aditya Chopra who seems to have lost their intelligence over the years and providing steady fare of [[tripe]] in this piece of cinematic [[crap]] thats not [[even]] worth You Tube standards. I was gritting my teeth throughout the whole flick start to finish with the schizophrenic direction, plot line that never quite materialized and on the last scene I just felt ashamed that my country and its crorepati film makers can "THROW AWAY" crores on such [[stupidity]]. Shame on the actors for taking this work and even commenting on it as some piece of work they can own up to. Saif Ali Khan -completely disappointed in your choice of film. Kareen shows enough skin for the puberty stricken and Akshay comes up as the dim-wit. Anil another retard with a pubescent fascination for English. His cronies were commendable in their acting and with the bizarre cinematography scattered in the last 15 minutes, it was enough to pop a blood vessel. DON'T WASTe any brain cells, energy or your money to go see this- Go SEE / Rent AMU -with Konkana Sensharma instead- a beautiful piece of independent film thats ever come out of India.Intelligent, poignant and a wonderful story-tale that will touch everyone with intelligent actors and gave me hope that all is not lost in Indian cinema making. Shame on Yash Raj films and Aditya Chopra who seems to have lost their intelligence over the years and providing steady fare of [[gut]] in this piece of cinematic [[dammit]] thats not [[yet]] worth You Tube standards. I was gritting my teeth throughout the whole flick start to finish with the schizophrenic direction, plot line that never quite materialized and on the last scene I just felt ashamed that my country and its crorepati film makers can "THROW AWAY" crores on such [[absurdity]]. Shame on the actors for taking this work and even commenting on it as some piece of work they can own up to. Saif Ali Khan -completely disappointed in your choice of film. Kareen shows enough skin for the puberty stricken and Akshay comes up as the dim-wit. Anil another retard with a pubescent fascination for English. His cronies were commendable in their acting and with the bizarre cinematography scattered in the last 15 minutes, it was enough to pop a blood vessel. DON'T WASTe any brain cells, energy or your money to go see this- Go SEE / Rent AMU -with Konkana Sensharma instead- a beautiful piece of independent film thats ever come out of India.Intelligent, poignant and a wonderful story-tale that will touch everyone with intelligent actors and gave me hope that all is not lost in Indian cinema making. --------------------------------------------- Result 3358 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Simon Pegg plays a rude crude and often out of control celebrity journalist who is brought from England to work for a big American magazine. Of course his winning ways create all sorts of complications. [[Amusing]] fact based [[comedy]] that co [[stars]] Kristen Dunst (looking rather grown up), Danny Huston, and Jeff [[Bridges]]. It works primarily because we like Simon Pegg despite his bad behavior. We completely understand why Kristen Dunst continues to talk to him despite his frequent screw ups. I [[liked]] the [[film]]. Its not the be all and end all but it was a nice way to cap off an evening of sitting on the couch watching movies.

7 out of 10 Simon Pegg plays a rude crude and often out of control celebrity journalist who is brought from England to work for a big American magazine. Of course his winning ways create all sorts of complications. [[Droll]] fact based [[travesty]] that co [[celebrity]] Kristen Dunst (looking rather grown up), Danny Huston, and Jeff [[Bridging]]. It works primarily because we like Simon Pegg despite his bad behavior. We completely understand why Kristen Dunst continues to talk to him despite his frequent screw ups. I [[wished]] the [[cinematography]]. Its not the be all and end all but it was a nice way to cap off an evening of sitting on the couch watching movies.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3359 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Ben Masters,(Kyd Thomas),"Dream Lover",'86 plays a sort of Mike Hammer character, a private eye who does any old job for a buck and never misses out on all the sexy curves of good looking gals. Kyd makes one [[big]] [[mistake]] when he stops Morgan Fairchild,(Laura Cassidy/Eva Bomberg),"Arizona Summer",'73 from getting beaten up and raped. Kyd takes Laura home to his pad and when he wakes up, she is out on his patio eating his eggs and orange juice and making herself right at home. By the way, Kyd sleep in his bed and Laura slept on the couch for this particular scene. Laura is mixed up with all kinds of hoods and there are some hot scenes between Kyd and Laura. All said and done, this is a [[lousy]] picture and I purchased the DVD for only $1.50 and I really got ripped OFF ! Ben Masters,(Kyd Thomas),"Dream Lover",'86 plays a sort of Mike Hammer character, a private eye who does any old job for a buck and never misses out on all the sexy curves of good looking gals. Kyd makes one [[enormous]] [[mistaken]] when he stops Morgan Fairchild,(Laura Cassidy/Eva Bomberg),"Arizona Summer",'73 from getting beaten up and raped. Kyd takes Laura home to his pad and when he wakes up, she is out on his patio eating his eggs and orange juice and making herself right at home. By the way, Kyd sleep in his bed and Laura slept on the couch for this particular scene. Laura is mixed up with all kinds of hoods and there are some hot scenes between Kyd and Laura. All said and done, this is a [[squalid]] picture and I purchased the DVD for only $1.50 and I really got ripped OFF ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is a lot like the movie Hostel, except with *BAD* acting and not much suspense. The gore elements are there, but you don't really feel anything for the characters, making the violence not very effective. Some parts are just strange... like forcing a snake down someones throat. What's up with that? Is that supposed to be scary or gory? It's just kind of stupid. As for torture, there really isn't any (except for the guy getting blow-torched in the beginning, which they don't show anyway). The main bad guy keeps saying "make them die slowly", yet the butcher kills them all very fast. The deaths are all relatively quick. Yes, I did watch the "unrated" version. So, overall, not the worst gore movie I've seen, but not at all good either. You won't miss anything if you skip this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3361 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Kurt Russell is at his best as the man who lives off his past glories, Reno Hightower. Robin Williams is his polar opposite in a [[rare]] low [[key]] performance as Jack Dundee. He dropped the Big Pass in more ways than one.

You'll see some of the most quotable scenes ever put into one film, as Jack hisses at a rat, Reno poses, and the call of the caribou goes out.

Don't [[miss]] this [[classic]] that isn't scared to show football in the mud the way it should be played. Kurt Russell is at his best as the man who lives off his past glories, Reno Hightower. Robin Williams is his polar opposite in a [[scarce]] low [[indispensable]] performance as Jack Dundee. He dropped the Big Pass in more ways than one.

You'll see some of the most quotable scenes ever put into one film, as Jack hisses at a rat, Reno poses, and the call of the caribou goes out.

Don't [[missed]] this [[typical]] that isn't scared to show football in the mud the way it should be played. --------------------------------------------- Result 3362 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The "Trivia" page on IMDb claims the filmmakers protested because this film was re-cut by the studio to "simplify the plot". If so, that effort was a [[total]] failure, as this is one of the most [[incoherent]] narratives I've ever seen in a film -- I'd hate to have seen it before the plot was "[[simplified]]."

It's sad to [[see]] Warren with so [[little]] character to go on that even he can't do [[anything]] with the [[inept]] [[material]]. It's interesting to see Caron in '70s mode instead of her Hollywood-era glamour garb and persona, but it's sad to see her haplessly wander through this doing-a- favor-to-her-producer-husband dreck. She would actually later hook up with and marry the director, instead -- who, you'll note, never [[directed]] anything again, but did [[strictly]] 1st or 2nd A.D. work in TV from here on out. That oughta tell you [[enough]] right there.

I call this "interesting" because I have an automatic [[fondness]] for American films of this period, and this role does add perspective to Oates' otherwise fantastic 1971 output (Two- Lane Blacktop, The Hired Hand). But the "1940s detective as fish-out-of-water in 1970s L.A." theme, which is the only thing the movie really has to say, is sold in way too heavy- handed a manner. A similar theme would be far more effectively handled two years later in Altman's The Long Goodbye. And as far as Oates playing a hard-bitten guy on a doomed errand, three years on, he would give his definitive performance in Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. If you haven't seen those, don't waste your time with this! The "Trivia" page on IMDb claims the filmmakers protested because this film was re-cut by the studio to "simplify the plot". If so, that effort was a [[unmitigated]] failure, as this is one of the most [[unconnected]] narratives I've ever seen in a film -- I'd hate to have seen it before the plot was "[[streamlining]]."

It's sad to [[behold]] Warren with so [[kiddo]] character to go on that even he can't do [[algo]] with the [[incapable]] [[materials]]. It's interesting to see Caron in '70s mode instead of her Hollywood-era glamour garb and persona, but it's sad to see her haplessly wander through this doing-a- favor-to-her-producer-husband dreck. She would actually later hook up with and marry the director, instead -- who, you'll note, never [[geared]] anything again, but did [[tightly]] 1st or 2nd A.D. work in TV from here on out. That oughta tell you [[adequately]] right there.

I call this "interesting" because I have an automatic [[tenderness]] for American films of this period, and this role does add perspective to Oates' otherwise fantastic 1971 output (Two- Lane Blacktop, The Hired Hand). But the "1940s detective as fish-out-of-water in 1970s L.A." theme, which is the only thing the movie really has to say, is sold in way too heavy- handed a manner. A similar theme would be far more effectively handled two years later in Altman's The Long Goodbye. And as far as Oates playing a hard-bitten guy on a doomed errand, three years on, he would give his definitive performance in Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. If you haven't seen those, don't waste your time with this! --------------------------------------------- Result 3363 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] NYC model Alison [[Parker]] ([[Cristina]] Raines) [[rents]] a [[room]] in an [[old]] brownstone where she meets a few [[bizarre]] [[neighbors]] and [[experiences]] some creepy [[hallucinations]]. As lawyer boyfriend [[Michael]] Lerman ([[Chris]] Sarandon) goes about making inquiries on her behalf, she struggles to [[maintain]] her sanity (not to [[mention]] her will to live) as her experiences take a [[toll]] on her physical, mental, and emotional health.

I don't [[want]] to [[spoil]] the better moments in this psychological horror film for those [[unfamiliar]] with it. The story is interesting and [[entertaining]], but the [[film]] doesn't really offer much in terms of real scares. Or, for that matter, any atmosphere. It is sort of quietly sinister, but it's not like the traditional horror film. It's more of a story about a troubled woman's attempts to deal with the increasing unreality in her life. On that level, it works, but it's not quite powerful enough.

What "The Sentinel" *does* offer are some eye-catching set pieces (in particular, the fascinating, fabulously creepy climax, and there's a scene with Beverly D'Angelo that must be seen to be believed). There's also some gore to be seen, but not very much. An ominous music score by Gil Melle adds to the menace.

No review of this film would be complete without an appraisal for the film-makers in gathering such excellent actors for its ensemble cast. Some of them don't get to do too much, but to see all of them together is impressive. Eli Wallach and Burgess Meredith make the biggest impressions as, respectively, a hard-nosed detective and a solicitous neighbor. Other legendary names include Jose Ferrer, Arthur Kennedy, and Ava Gardner. Future stars like D'Angelo, Christopher Walken, Tom Berenger, Jeff Goldblum make brief appearances, and other familiar faces include Jerry Orbach, Sylvia Miles, William Hickey, and Martin Balsam. Whoever was the casting director for this film deserves some sort of prize.

Written for the screen by director Michael Winner, probably best known for the "Death Wish" series that he did with Charles Bronson, from the novel by Jeffrey Konvitz.

I wouldn't consider this a truly great horror thriller but it has its moments and is reasonably entertaining.

7/10 NYC model Alison [[Barker]] ([[Kristina]] Raines) [[leasing]] a [[rooms]] in an [[archaic]] brownstone where she meets a few [[inquisitive]] [[adjacent]] and [[experiment]] some creepy [[delusions]]. As lawyer boyfriend [[Michele]] Lerman ([[Kris]] Sarandon) goes about making inquiries on her behalf, she struggles to [[preservation]] her sanity (not to [[referenced]] her will to live) as her experiences take a [[tolling]] on her physical, mental, and emotional health.

I don't [[wantto]] to [[wrack]] the better moments in this psychological horror film for those [[unspecified]] with it. The story is interesting and [[amusing]], but the [[filmmaking]] doesn't really offer much in terms of real scares. Or, for that matter, any atmosphere. It is sort of quietly sinister, but it's not like the traditional horror film. It's more of a story about a troubled woman's attempts to deal with the increasing unreality in her life. On that level, it works, but it's not quite powerful enough.

What "The Sentinel" *does* offer are some eye-catching set pieces (in particular, the fascinating, fabulously creepy climax, and there's a scene with Beverly D'Angelo that must be seen to be believed). There's also some gore to be seen, but not very much. An ominous music score by Gil Melle adds to the menace.

No review of this film would be complete without an appraisal for the film-makers in gathering such excellent actors for its ensemble cast. Some of them don't get to do too much, but to see all of them together is impressive. Eli Wallach and Burgess Meredith make the biggest impressions as, respectively, a hard-nosed detective and a solicitous neighbor. Other legendary names include Jose Ferrer, Arthur Kennedy, and Ava Gardner. Future stars like D'Angelo, Christopher Walken, Tom Berenger, Jeff Goldblum make brief appearances, and other familiar faces include Jerry Orbach, Sylvia Miles, William Hickey, and Martin Balsam. Whoever was the casting director for this film deserves some sort of prize.

Written for the screen by director Michael Winner, probably best known for the "Death Wish" series that he did with Charles Bronson, from the novel by Jeffrey Konvitz.

I wouldn't consider this a truly great horror thriller but it has its moments and is reasonably entertaining.

7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3364 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] "Seed" is torture [[porn]]...no doubt about it. But, strangely, Uwe Boll has [[written]], produced, and directed a more polished film than any other he has made in recent memory.

[[Every]] time I watch a Boll film, I feel that some pages of the script must have gone missing. There are simply huge gaps in the story and dialogue. Of course, [[nothing]] makes much sense, either. The films are somewhat surreal in this respect.

*****SPOILERS*****

Why do the six cops who go to arrest Seed split up and go their separate ways when they get to the darkened residence, unlike real cops who would enter and clear the house in pairs or by threes? Why don't the cops ever use their radios? How can the bodies decay so quickly, a process that would normally take many months? (I KNOW it's time-lapse photography...but Seed would never be able to stay on schedule killing people if he always waited around for the previous victim to decay to the point shown.) How come Seed gets to wear bib-overalls and a mask while he's waiting on death row instead of typical prison uniforms? How can Seed enter a maximum security prison, stroll around the cell block, and then walk out again without being stopped or even noticed? If nearly 80 people (according to some newspaper articles shown in the movie) have been murdered, why is there only one investigator working on the case? Why did the investigator suddenly decide that he should go look for Seed at Seed's house, where he was originally arrested and where he murdered his victims? (Didn't he think of doing this sooner?) Why does the police detective go it solo, without back-up and without even letting dispatch know what he was doing and where he was headed?

This is particularly frustrating when Boll obviously goes far out of his way to make sure we understand why the electric chair fails to work properly. He spends several screen minutes in setting this up, when he could have spent them making other aspects of the film at least a bit more logical.

*****END SPOILERS*****

In short, the film just sort of serves as a framework for a few assorted scenes (perhaps Boll would think of these as his "visions") of a brutal death by bludgeoning, gunshots to the head, execution by electrocution, and the skinning of live animals raised for their pelts. (The opening scenes of animals being skinned were indeed unnecessary and disturbing, but I understand their purpose in the context of the film.) The centerpiece is undoubtedly the bludgeoning death of a middle-aged woman by Seed using a hatchet. It's obvious that much time was spent on this and it vaguely reminds me of the classic scene in "Reservoir Dogs", though without the Steely Dan soundtrack.

Is this a good movie? No. Is it worth seeing? Only if you are a dedicated fan of the torture porn genre or if you are absolutely determined to see a sample of torture porn. As I said at the start of this review, even though this movie is pretty disgusting and can be sickening at points, it is truly much more competent than most of Boll's movies. Perhaps he will continue to improve as a filmmaker. I can only hope that he progresses beyond torture porn and continues more in the vein of "Postal". "Seed" is torture [[interracial]]...no doubt about it. But, strangely, Uwe Boll has [[typed]], produced, and directed a more polished film than any other he has made in recent memory.

[[Any]] time I watch a Boll film, I feel that some pages of the script must have gone missing. There are simply huge gaps in the story and dialogue. Of course, [[anything]] makes much sense, either. The films are somewhat surreal in this respect.

*****SPOILERS*****

Why do the six cops who go to arrest Seed split up and go their separate ways when they get to the darkened residence, unlike real cops who would enter and clear the house in pairs or by threes? Why don't the cops ever use their radios? How can the bodies decay so quickly, a process that would normally take many months? (I KNOW it's time-lapse photography...but Seed would never be able to stay on schedule killing people if he always waited around for the previous victim to decay to the point shown.) How come Seed gets to wear bib-overalls and a mask while he's waiting on death row instead of typical prison uniforms? How can Seed enter a maximum security prison, stroll around the cell block, and then walk out again without being stopped or even noticed? If nearly 80 people (according to some newspaper articles shown in the movie) have been murdered, why is there only one investigator working on the case? Why did the investigator suddenly decide that he should go look for Seed at Seed's house, where he was originally arrested and where he murdered his victims? (Didn't he think of doing this sooner?) Why does the police detective go it solo, without back-up and without even letting dispatch know what he was doing and where he was headed?

This is particularly frustrating when Boll obviously goes far out of his way to make sure we understand why the electric chair fails to work properly. He spends several screen minutes in setting this up, when he could have spent them making other aspects of the film at least a bit more logical.

*****END SPOILERS*****

In short, the film just sort of serves as a framework for a few assorted scenes (perhaps Boll would think of these as his "visions") of a brutal death by bludgeoning, gunshots to the head, execution by electrocution, and the skinning of live animals raised for their pelts. (The opening scenes of animals being skinned were indeed unnecessary and disturbing, but I understand their purpose in the context of the film.) The centerpiece is undoubtedly the bludgeoning death of a middle-aged woman by Seed using a hatchet. It's obvious that much time was spent on this and it vaguely reminds me of the classic scene in "Reservoir Dogs", though without the Steely Dan soundtrack.

Is this a good movie? No. Is it worth seeing? Only if you are a dedicated fan of the torture porn genre or if you are absolutely determined to see a sample of torture porn. As I said at the start of this review, even though this movie is pretty disgusting and can be sickening at points, it is truly much more competent than most of Boll's movies. Perhaps he will continue to improve as a filmmaker. I can only hope that he progresses beyond torture porn and continues more in the vein of "Postal". --------------------------------------------- Result 3365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Shannon Lee,the daughter of Bruce Lee,delivers high kicking martial arts action in [[spades]] in this exhilarating Hong [[Kong]] [[movie]] and [[proves]] that like her [[late]] brother Brandon she is a [[real]] chip off the old [[block]]. There is [[high]] [[tech]] stuntwork to die for in this [[fast]] paced [[flick]] and the [[makers]] of the [[Bond]] [[movies]] should give it a [[look]] if they [[want]] to spice up the action quotient of the next 007 [[adventure]] as there is much [[innovative]] stuff here with some fresh and [[original]] second [[unit]] [[work]] to [[bolster]] up the already high action content of "AND [[NOW]],YOU'RE [[DEAD]]". When you watch a [[movie]] as fast paced and [[entertaining]] as this you [[begin]] to wonder how [[cinema]] itself was [[able]] to survive before the martial [[arts]] [[genre]] was created.I [[genuinely]] believe that [[movies]] in general and [[action]] [[movies]] in [[particular]] were just marking time until the first kung fu movies made their debut. Bruce Lee was the father of modern action cinema and his legitimate surviving offspring Shannon does not let the family name down here.Although there are several pleasing performances in this movie (Michel Wong for one)it is Shannon Lee whom you will remember for a [[genuinely]] spectacular performance as Mandy the hitgirl supreme.Hell;you may well come away whistling her fights! Shannon Lee,the daughter of Bruce Lee,delivers high kicking martial arts action in [[shovels]] in this exhilarating Hong [[Hong]] [[kino]] and [[testify]] that like her [[belated]] brother Brandon she is a [[actual]] chip off the old [[blocking]]. There is [[alto]] [[technology]] stuntwork to die for in this [[faster]] paced [[film]] and the [[producer]] of the [[Bonding]] [[filmmaking]] should give it a [[glance]] if they [[wanted]] to spice up the action quotient of the next 007 [[fling]] as there is much [[imaginative]] stuff here with some fresh and [[initial]] second [[units]] [[jobs]] to [[strengthened]] up the already high action content of "AND [[ORA]],YOU'RE [[DECEASED]]". When you watch a [[filmmaking]] as fast paced and [[amusing]] as this you [[begins]] to wonder how [[cinemas]] itself was [[capable]] to survive before the martial [[humanities]] [[gender]] was created.I [[actually]] believe that [[theater]] in general and [[activities]] [[theater]] in [[special]] were just marking time until the first kung fu movies made their debut. Bruce Lee was the father of modern action cinema and his legitimate surviving offspring Shannon does not let the family name down here.Although there are several pleasing performances in this movie (Michel Wong for one)it is Shannon Lee whom you will remember for a [[truly]] spectacular performance as Mandy the hitgirl supreme.Hell;you may well come away whistling her fights! --------------------------------------------- Result 3366 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is one of those unfortunate [[films]] that [[suffered]] an even more sad, unfortunate death at the [[box]] office. I [[saw]] this film at a local art cinema,in revival form,shortly after it [[tanked]] in mainstream cinemas. It [[certainly]] [[deserves]] to be approached a [[second]] [[time]] (or even a third). Sandra B. takes it to the [[limit]] by doing spoken word & [[taking]] on some well known [[songs]] in this [[piece]] (her version of Hank William's 'I'm [[So]] [[Lonesome]] I [[Could]] Cry' could [[easily]] [[move]] you to tears). [[Maybe]] someday, audiences will be ready to take this [[film]] a bit more seriously (but not without some well placed laughs,too). The film [[moves]] at a brisk [[pace]] (thanks to some nice editing),so that some viewers will not [[find]] it stale & boring. [[Perhaps]] a revival is just down the [[pipeline]]. This is one of those unfortunate [[movie]] that [[endured]] an even more sad, unfortunate death at the [[shoebox]] office. I [[noticed]] this film at a local art cinema,in revival form,shortly after it [[planted]] in mainstream cinemas. It [[obviously]] [[merited]] to be approached a [[seconds]] [[period]] (or even a third). Sandra B. takes it to the [[limitation]] by doing spoken word & [[adopting]] on some well known [[hymns]] in this [[slice]] (her version of Hank William's 'I'm [[Accordingly]] [[Hermit]] I [[Did]] Cry' could [[conveniently]] [[budge]] you to tears). [[Presumably]] someday, audiences will be ready to take this [[cinema]] a bit more seriously (but not without some well placed laughs,too). The film [[shift]] at a brisk [[cadence]] (thanks to some nice editing),so that some viewers will not [[unearth]] it stale & boring. [[Likely]] a revival is just down the [[channeling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3367 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Thanks for killing the franchise with this turkey, John Carpenter and Tommy Lee Wallace. This movie sucks on so many levels it's pathetic. The first VAMPIRES was fun, but this low budget retread makes me yawn.

Jon Bon Jovi (the poor man's Kevin Bacon) drives around Mexico with a surfboard housing a hidden compartment holding his vampire killing gear ala Antonio Banderas's guitar case in DESPERADO. He picks up some lame "hunters" along the way (including an annoyingly feminist infected girl who takes pills to keep from turning into a vampire), and they set out to stop some female master vampire who is given no backstory and so we could care less about her or her quest (to walk in the sunlight by stealing the Black Cross and performing a ritual to allow her to do so). If you've seen the first VAMPIRES, you've already seen this, and done much better.

John Carpenter has been responsible for a lot of bad movies lately. Frankly, I think he's past his prime and incapable of making another horror classic. The only decent film he's done since THEY LIVE (1987) is VAMPIRES. Everything else is complete crap, right up until the unbelievably cheap looking and retarded GHOSTS OF MARS... and now this waste of celluloid. Where are more greats like ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, HALLOWEEN (1), ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK and THE THING?

Carpenter crony Wallace proves he can't write his way out of a paper bag with his paper-thin script packed with yawns, groans and recycled gags from the original. Did I mention I hated every character in the movie? There was not a single memorable character in the whole film. How does that happen? This film has nothing to recommend it. Not even the DVD presentation is good; the menu looks awful.

By comparison, JASON X: "FRIDAY THE 13th IN SPACE" was a masterpiece. Now that is how you make a sequel and (re)energize a franchise, ladies and germs, as well as create an exciting DVD menu. --------------------------------------------- Result 3368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The idea is to have something interesting happening in the first ten minutes to keep the [[audience]] hooked. Late Night [[Shopping]] [[manages]] to [[avoid]] interest for much longer than that. When we do get to a point, it is so monumentally moronic that I kept thinking I must have misunderstood it. But I didn't.

[[Sean]] tells the story of an Osaka [[landlord]] who [[rented]] the same apartment to two people at the same [[time]] who [[worked]] [[different]] [[shifts]] and so didn't [[realise]] they were [[sharing]]. His friend asks "But what about the weekends?" Sean doesn't have an [[adequate]] explanation. Sean then [[tells]] the [[story]] of his own similar [[problem]], which is that he isn't sure his girlfriend is [[still]] [[living]] at [[home]] as he works during the [[night]] and she works during the day so they never [[see]] each other. This has been [[going]] on for three [[weeks]]. But his friend doesn't [[ask]]: "Yes, but as I said before, what about the [[weekends]]? You must see her then. It doesn't make sense. What are you going on about, Sean? Are you on medication or something?" But let's be generous and assume that they both work seven days a week.

We see Sean checking to see if the soap and towels have been used. (In fact, bizarrely, he starts to carry the soap around with him.) But what about his girlfriend's conditioner and shampoo, sanpro and moisturiser, toothpaste and toothbrush. Let's go to the kitchen. What about food and drink? Is any missing? Has any been bought? In the bedroom, has the shared bed been made or not? Are her clothes being used and exchanged for clean ones? Is the laundry basket fuller? In the toilet, is the seat up or down? I mean, good [[grief]]!

And to cap it all Paul arranges to leave work early to see if his girlfriend is still living at home. Why doesn't he just phone her?

But it gets worse. In the last act although no-one told Vincent where the rest of the group are going he manages to find them. Lenny's love interest and Sean's girlfriend conveniently appear to be best friends and also manage to find the group. There isn't even the slightest attempt to explain any of these extraordinarily unlikely coincidences.

To be fair the dialogue is OK but not nearly good enough to make up for the weak characters or annoyingly lame story.

I heard one of actors interviewed and he promised "no guns, no drugs, no corsets." I thought, "great". But after half-an-hour of tedium I was yelling at the screen: "I want guns! I want drugs! I want corsets!"

It wouldn't have taken much to sort these problems out but on the official website the director boasts that the film wasn't script-edited. That's all you need to know. The idea is to have something interesting happening in the first ten minutes to keep the [[spectators]] hooked. Late Night [[Shops]] [[administering]] to [[avoided]] interest for much longer than that. When we do get to a point, it is so monumentally moronic that I kept thinking I must have misunderstood it. But I didn't.

[[Shawn]] tells the story of an Osaka [[owners]] who [[leased]] the same apartment to two people at the same [[moment]] who [[working]] [[several]] [[changes]] and so didn't [[realize]] they were [[exchanged]]. His friend asks "But what about the weekends?" Sean doesn't have an [[proper]] explanation. Sean then [[told]] the [[history]] of his own similar [[difficulties]], which is that he isn't sure his girlfriend is [[nevertheless]] [[inhabit]] at [[house]] as he works during the [[nighttime]] and she works during the day so they never [[seeing]] each other. This has been [[go]] on for three [[zhou]]. But his friend doesn't [[calls]]: "Yes, but as I said before, what about the [[weekend]]? You must see her then. It doesn't make sense. What are you going on about, Sean? Are you on medication or something?" But let's be generous and assume that they both work seven days a week.

We see Sean checking to see if the soap and towels have been used. (In fact, bizarrely, he starts to carry the soap around with him.) But what about his girlfriend's conditioner and shampoo, sanpro and moisturiser, toothpaste and toothbrush. Let's go to the kitchen. What about food and drink? Is any missing? Has any been bought? In the bedroom, has the shared bed been made or not? Are her clothes being used and exchanged for clean ones? Is the laundry basket fuller? In the toilet, is the seat up or down? I mean, good [[heartache]]!

And to cap it all Paul arranges to leave work early to see if his girlfriend is still living at home. Why doesn't he just phone her?

But it gets worse. In the last act although no-one told Vincent where the rest of the group are going he manages to find them. Lenny's love interest and Sean's girlfriend conveniently appear to be best friends and also manage to find the group. There isn't even the slightest attempt to explain any of these extraordinarily unlikely coincidences.

To be fair the dialogue is OK but not nearly good enough to make up for the weak characters or annoyingly lame story.

I heard one of actors interviewed and he promised "no guns, no drugs, no corsets." I thought, "great". But after half-an-hour of tedium I was yelling at the screen: "I want guns! I want drugs! I want corsets!"

It wouldn't have taken much to sort these problems out but on the official website the director boasts that the film wasn't script-edited. That's all you need to know. --------------------------------------------- Result 3369 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This was one of the most [[boring]] "horror" movies that I have ever seen. A college kid has an epidemic of nightmares involving roaming [[spirits]] at [[Alcatraz]]. [[Trying]] to [[deliver]] a mix of "Nightmare on Elm Street" and standard [[vampire]] fare in the form of a bad 80s music video, this movie is jammed full of [[bad]] acting and an exhaustively [[slow]] moving story. Although, being such a bad, and often [[laughable]] movie (dig those mullets and the terrible dialog), it would be good material to spoof on for an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. Don't be fooled by the proud mention of the film being the 1987 winner of the Silver Scroll Award by the Academy of Sicence Fiction, Fanatasy, and Horror, or that Devo contributes to the soundtrack, or that Tony Basil has a part in the film. It is a giant disaster, though one with a small cult following (see the other IMDb comments for this film). This was one of the most [[dreary]] "horror" movies that I have ever seen. A college kid has an epidemic of nightmares involving roaming [[wits]] at [[Diversion]]. [[Tempting]] to [[delivering]] a mix of "Nightmare on Elm Street" and standard [[vampires]] fare in the form of a bad 80s music video, this movie is jammed full of [[horrid]] acting and an exhaustively [[lento]] moving story. Although, being such a bad, and often [[ridicule]] movie (dig those mullets and the terrible dialog), it would be good material to spoof on for an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000. Don't be fooled by the proud mention of the film being the 1987 winner of the Silver Scroll Award by the Academy of Sicence Fiction, Fanatasy, and Horror, or that Devo contributes to the soundtrack, or that Tony Basil has a part in the film. It is a giant disaster, though one with a small cult following (see the other IMDb comments for this film). --------------------------------------------- Result 3370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Movie industry is tricky business - because decisions have to be [[made]] and everyone involved has a private life, too. That's the very original [[thesis]] of this [[feeble]] [[attempt]] at making an 'insightful' film about film. And indeed, no [[better]] [[proof]] of the industry's trickiness than seeing Anouk Aimée and Maximilian Schell trapped in this inanity. The insight consists of talking heads rattle off [[bullshit]] like "should I make a studio movie that pays a lot or should I [[make]] an [[indie]] [[item]] and [[stay]] true to my artistic self?" "Do the [[latter]], please." Or: "our [[relationship]] is not only professional, it's private as well. It's a rather complex situation to handle, isn't it?" "Yes, it is, my dear." Between the insipid dialogs one gets glimpses of palm trees, hotel [[lobbies]] and American movie posters (no sign of non-American film presence on the Croisette). Recurrent [[slumber]] sessions are inevitable, making the 100 minutes of the film feel like ages. Jenny Gabrielle is spectacularly [[unconvincing]] in justifying her own presence in the frame. Movie industry is tricky business - because decisions have to be [[introduced]] and everyone involved has a private life, too. That's the very original [[dissertation]] of this [[fragile]] [[strives]] at making an 'insightful' film about film. And indeed, no [[optimum]] [[test]] of the industry's trickiness than seeing Anouk Aimée and Maximilian Schell trapped in this inanity. The insight consists of talking heads rattle off [[poppycock]] like "should I make a studio movie that pays a lot or should I [[deliver]] an [[andy]] [[themes]] and [[staying]] true to my artistic self?" "Do the [[latest]], please." Or: "our [[nexus]] is not only professional, it's private as well. It's a rather complex situation to handle, isn't it?" "Yes, it is, my dear." Between the insipid dialogs one gets glimpses of palm trees, hotel [[lobbyists]] and American movie posters (no sign of non-American film presence on the Croisette). Recurrent [[dream]] sessions are inevitable, making the 100 minutes of the film feel like ages. Jenny Gabrielle is spectacularly [[inconclusive]] in justifying her own presence in the frame. --------------------------------------------- Result 3371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I was an usherette in an [[old]] [[theater]] in Northern [[California]] when this movie [[came]] out. As good as it is on DVD, it's even more eerie and [[terrifying]] on the big screen. Although it has been about 9 years [[since]] I have seen it, it is still one of my all-time favorites. [[At]] the risk of [[sounding]] trite, "They just don't make 'em like this [[anymore]]!" If [[Sixth]] Sense freaked you out at all, this movie is [[definitely]] for you! [[Great]] storyline, [[incredible]] cast of [[characters]], ominous setting; even the soundtrack has a haunting quality to it. I [[highly]] [[recommend]] you not watch it [[alone]]. What a brownstone apartment was renting for in 1977 alone, will have you gasping (it would be at least 10-times that price today). I was an usherette in an [[antigua]] [[drama]] in Northern [[Californian]] when this movie [[became]] out. As good as it is on DVD, it's even more eerie and [[appalling]] on the big screen. Although it has been about 9 years [[because]] I have seen it, it is still one of my all-time favorites. [[In]] the risk of [[probing]] trite, "They just don't make 'em like this [[most]]!" If [[Vi]] Sense freaked you out at all, this movie is [[categorically]] for you! [[Whopping]] storyline, [[unimaginable]] cast of [[attribute]], ominous setting; even the soundtrack has a haunting quality to it. I [[unimaginably]] [[recommending]] you not watch it [[exclusively]]. What a brownstone apartment was renting for in 1977 alone, will have you gasping (it would be at least 10-times that price today). --------------------------------------------- Result 3372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I had no real expectations going into this movie and I'm glad. Even if I had expected it to be [[bad]] I would have been disappointed.

[[Where]] to start? [[First]], I [[think]] 15% of the [[movie]] [[consisted]] of [[stock]] footage of stationary scarecrows in a dark jungle-field. I get it. There's scarecrows. I [[think]] the title "Scarecrows" was sufficient.

[[Second]], not a [[damn]] thing is ever explained regarding the scarecrows and paranormal occurrences. There's too many times where I was left going WTF?

Third, the movie takes itself seriously. I'm all for a B-movie with buckets of blood, screaming women, and senseless violence that is the result of a simple psychopath or ancient curse. But those movies often know they're B-movies and even flaunt it, like Dead Snow (hilarious Scandanavian zombie flick) or Evil Dead 2. But this movie seems oblivious to its crapdom.

Finally, there should of been more blood and/or nudity. Yea, I said it. If you're going to have a crap horror movie, make with the killing. And if you're going to have one hot and one semi-hot girl, one of them needs to show some side-boob at a minimum.

So, like the summary says, skip "Scarecrows" and just poke yourself in the eye. You'll thank me. I had no real expectations going into this movie and I'm glad. Even if I had expected it to be [[naughty]] I would have been disappointed.

[[Everytime]] to start? [[Outset]], I [[thinking]] 15% of the [[movies]] [[composed]] of [[stocks]] footage of stationary scarecrows in a dark jungle-field. I get it. There's scarecrows. I [[ideas]] the title "Scarecrows" was sufficient.

[[Seconds]], not a [[cursed]] thing is ever explained regarding the scarecrows and paranormal occurrences. There's too many times where I was left going WTF?

Third, the movie takes itself seriously. I'm all for a B-movie with buckets of blood, screaming women, and senseless violence that is the result of a simple psychopath or ancient curse. But those movies often know they're B-movies and even flaunt it, like Dead Snow (hilarious Scandanavian zombie flick) or Evil Dead 2. But this movie seems oblivious to its crapdom.

Finally, there should of been more blood and/or nudity. Yea, I said it. If you're going to have a crap horror movie, make with the killing. And if you're going to have one hot and one semi-hot girl, one of them needs to show some side-boob at a minimum.

So, like the summary says, skip "Scarecrows" and just poke yourself in the eye. You'll thank me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3373 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Why the crap is this movie rated so low?! I've seen this movie over 25 times, I know EVERY line to this movie. It's obvious that I [[love]] this movie. Trey [[Parker]] and Matt Stone (creators of South Park and the new puppet masterpiece Team America) star as the main characters Joe Cooper, or Coop "Airman" Cooper, and Doug Remer, or "Sir Swish." Mainly they're just referred to as Coop and Remer throughout the movie. Right as the movie starts it reminds us of the money hungry corrupt [[world]] of overpaid sports starts, they even go as far as to make one up called "Townsell." I must quote this portion of the movie since it is true with some sports starts: "And after playing for New England, San Diego, Huston, Saint Louis, a year for the Toronto Arganauts, plus one season as a greater at the Desert Inn I'm happy to finally play here in the fine city of Miami." His agent leans over: "Minnesota." Let us not forget this important piece of the movie. So it starts that Coop and Remer are at a high school reunion party and realize they are still nothing as they talk to their old classmates. Outside they create the sport BASEketball after being challenged by what probably was high school basketball heroes. After shaming them the sport goes pro in about a year. During this time they manage to recruit their third team mate Squeak, which is actually a day after they invent the game. As the movie follows we find out that Coop, Remer, and Squeak are the only virtuous sports heroes left. The story follows with zany blackmail, the Milwaukee Beers cheerleaders, and humor so absurd it'll leave you crying for more. Watch it dude, it's [[hilarious]]. Why the crap is this movie rated so low?! I've seen this movie over 25 times, I know EVERY line to this movie. It's obvious that I [[iike]] this movie. Trey [[Barker]] and Matt Stone (creators of South Park and the new puppet masterpiece Team America) star as the main characters Joe Cooper, or Coop "Airman" Cooper, and Doug Remer, or "Sir Swish." Mainly they're just referred to as Coop and Remer throughout the movie. Right as the movie starts it reminds us of the money hungry corrupt [[monde]] of overpaid sports starts, they even go as far as to make one up called "Townsell." I must quote this portion of the movie since it is true with some sports starts: "And after playing for New England, San Diego, Huston, Saint Louis, a year for the Toronto Arganauts, plus one season as a greater at the Desert Inn I'm happy to finally play here in the fine city of Miami." His agent leans over: "Minnesota." Let us not forget this important piece of the movie. So it starts that Coop and Remer are at a high school reunion party and realize they are still nothing as they talk to their old classmates. Outside they create the sport BASEketball after being challenged by what probably was high school basketball heroes. After shaming them the sport goes pro in about a year. During this time they manage to recruit their third team mate Squeak, which is actually a day after they invent the game. As the movie follows we find out that Coop, Remer, and Squeak are the only virtuous sports heroes left. The story follows with zany blackmail, the Milwaukee Beers cheerleaders, and humor so absurd it'll leave you crying for more. Watch it dude, it's [[comical]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The [[show]] had [[great]] [[episodes]], this is not one of them. It's not a terrible episode, it's just hard to follow up "The [[man]] that was death.", "All through the [[house]]", and "Dig that [[cat]], he's real [[gone]]."

This episode is about a [[couple]] that has just been [[married]] Peggy (Ammanda Plummer) and [[Charles]] (Stephen Shellen). [[In]] the first five [[minutes]] you [[find]] out that [[Charles]] only [[married]] Peggy for her [[money]]. The two [[go]] on their honeymoon and their [[car]] [[breaks]] down on a [[dirt]] road and they have to seek [[refuge]] in an [[old]] [[abandon]] [[mansion]]. Charles [[soon]] [[finds]] out a [[secret]] of Peggy's [[family]]...

[[In]] my [[opinion]] you should watch this episode, but just don't [[expect]] the same [[feeling]] as the [[rest]] of the episodes in the first season. The [[showings]] had [[resplendent]] [[bouts]], this is not one of them. It's not a terrible episode, it's just hard to follow up "The [[bloke]] that was death.", "All through the [[homes]]", and "Dig that [[gato]], he's real [[faded]]."

This episode is about a [[match]] that has just been [[wedding]] Peggy (Ammanda Plummer) and [[Karel]] (Stephen Shellen). [[For]] the first five [[mins]] you [[found]] out that [[Charl]] only [[marriages]] Peggy for her [[cash]]. The two [[going]] on their honeymoon and their [[motor]] [[interruption]] down on a [[filth]] road and they have to seek [[haven]] in an [[ancient]] [[forsake]] [[castel]]. Charles [[early]] [[found]] out a [[secrecy]] of Peggy's [[families]]...

[[During]] my [[viewing]] you should watch this episode, but just don't [[awaited]] the same [[sensation]] as the [[repose]] of the episodes in the first season. --------------------------------------------- Result 3375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Michael Callan plays a smarmy photographer who seems, nonetheless, to be regarded as a perfect "catch" by any woman that runs across him; could this have anything to do with the fact that he also co-produced the film? He's a "hero" whom it's very difficult to empathize with, so the movie is in trouble right from the start. However, it's troubles don't end there. It has the [[production]] values of a TV-movie (check out that head made of clay or something, near the end), and the ending [[cheats]] in a way that I can't reveal, in case anyone wants to see the movie (highly unlikely). Let's just say that the killer knows more than we were let to know he knows. (*1/2) Michael Callan plays a smarmy photographer who seems, nonetheless, to be regarded as a perfect "catch" by any woman that runs across him; could this have anything to do with the fact that he also co-produced the film? He's a "hero" whom it's very difficult to empathize with, so the movie is in trouble right from the start. However, it's troubles don't end there. It has the [[productivity]] values of a TV-movie (check out that head made of clay or something, near the end), and the ending [[crooks]] in a way that I can't reveal, in case anyone wants to see the movie (highly unlikely). Let's just say that the killer knows more than we were let to know he knows. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 3376 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I grew up on this [[classic]] western [[series]], and as a child [[always]] considered it a [[treat]] being [[allowed]] to stay up [[late]] on Sunday [[evenings]] to watch it. Bonanza is still [[infinitely]] re watchable in re runs.

The series chronicles the adventures of the Cartwright family, who live on a ranch near Virginia City, Nevada around the Civil War era. Their ranch (called the Ponderosa) is run and defended by the widowed father, Ben, and his unmarried three sons, Adam, Hoss, and Little Joe. These three brothers have different mothers, all of whom have passed away years earlier.

The Cartwrights are a hard working, prosperous, and honourable family, highly respected in those parts. The Ponderosa is large so reaching its extremities requires a lot of horseback riding. Also, trips away are often necessary in order to buy or sell cattle and so forth. Needless to say, few of these excursions pass uneventfully. Although hospitable, much of the Cartwrights' energy must be spent defending their ranch from interlopers, or protecting themselves from townsfolk jealous of their prosperity and stellar reputation. The Cartwrights do a fair bit of firing their guns up in the air and such, but only shoot to kill when deemed absolutely necessary. They are involved in various town affairs, even the political life of the Nevada territory.

One of the main assets of the series is the underlying warmth that is always present (despite occasional disagreements) between Ben and his three sons, and (despite frequent disagreements) between the three brothers. Now, one brother might beat up another every now and then, but generally has a good reason for it at the time and his anger never lasts long! The characters are all very well drawn. Ben is portrayed as a successful and noble man of great integrity. The oldest son, Adam, the most rational and suave of the brothers, left midway through the series. The middle brother, Hoss, is a gentle giant of a teddy bear, who has an insatiable appetite for food and is a little shy around the ladies. The youngest, Little Joe, is a hot headed, handsome charmer who, by contrast, has quite a way with women. This trio of brothers enjoy various romances but their love interests are typically killed off by the end of the episode or else marriage proves impossible, for whatever reason.

The actors are all stellar in their roles, including Pernell Roberts (Adam), Dan Blocker (Hoss), Michael Landon (Little Joe), and of course Lorne Greene as the principled family patriarch, Ben. I also love the ranch cook, Hop Sing, played by Victor Sen Yung.

This is a wonderful action packed western with great values. The Cartwrights are always the noble heroes and most of the bad guys quite villainous. If only there were more programs like this vintage western on TV these days! I grew up on this [[typical]] western [[serials]], and as a child [[incessantly]] considered it a [[address]] being [[authorizing]] to stay up [[tard]] on Sunday [[noches]] to watch it. Bonanza is still [[hugely]] re watchable in re runs.

The series chronicles the adventures of the Cartwright family, who live on a ranch near Virginia City, Nevada around the Civil War era. Their ranch (called the Ponderosa) is run and defended by the widowed father, Ben, and his unmarried three sons, Adam, Hoss, and Little Joe. These three brothers have different mothers, all of whom have passed away years earlier.

The Cartwrights are a hard working, prosperous, and honourable family, highly respected in those parts. The Ponderosa is large so reaching its extremities requires a lot of horseback riding. Also, trips away are often necessary in order to buy or sell cattle and so forth. Needless to say, few of these excursions pass uneventfully. Although hospitable, much of the Cartwrights' energy must be spent defending their ranch from interlopers, or protecting themselves from townsfolk jealous of their prosperity and stellar reputation. The Cartwrights do a fair bit of firing their guns up in the air and such, but only shoot to kill when deemed absolutely necessary. They are involved in various town affairs, even the political life of the Nevada territory.

One of the main assets of the series is the underlying warmth that is always present (despite occasional disagreements) between Ben and his three sons, and (despite frequent disagreements) between the three brothers. Now, one brother might beat up another every now and then, but generally has a good reason for it at the time and his anger never lasts long! The characters are all very well drawn. Ben is portrayed as a successful and noble man of great integrity. The oldest son, Adam, the most rational and suave of the brothers, left midway through the series. The middle brother, Hoss, is a gentle giant of a teddy bear, who has an insatiable appetite for food and is a little shy around the ladies. The youngest, Little Joe, is a hot headed, handsome charmer who, by contrast, has quite a way with women. This trio of brothers enjoy various romances but their love interests are typically killed off by the end of the episode or else marriage proves impossible, for whatever reason.

The actors are all stellar in their roles, including Pernell Roberts (Adam), Dan Blocker (Hoss), Michael Landon (Little Joe), and of course Lorne Greene as the principled family patriarch, Ben. I also love the ranch cook, Hop Sing, played by Victor Sen Yung.

This is a wonderful action packed western with great values. The Cartwrights are always the noble heroes and most of the bad guys quite villainous. If only there were more programs like this vintage western on TV these days! --------------------------------------------- Result 3377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Geez, as a Gay man who lives in NYC I can gratefully say that I have never seen the [[underbelly]] of Gay Culture that is portrayed in this film - and I am glad of it!!! Was this film broadcast on TV across the United States there would be a great anti-Gay backlash and I cannot say that I would blame them. The people in this film do not represent the average Gay American or even the average Trandgender American, what they do represent is a [[sheer]] and [[utter]] nightmare. The inclusion of obviously underage characters is appalling and the obvious racist sentiments (anti-White) are blatant and unsettling - society cannot be blamed for people who have chosen drugs, unemployment and rejection of education on the part of the film's "cast" - the actions of these people are not acts of desperation, but rather a rejection of anything resembling personal ambition and a willingness to make something out of one's self. Geez, as a Gay man who lives in NYC I can gratefully say that I have never seen the [[belly]] of Gay Culture that is portrayed in this film - and I am glad of it!!! Was this film broadcast on TV across the United States there would be a great anti-Gay backlash and I cannot say that I would blame them. The people in this film do not represent the average Gay American or even the average Trandgender American, what they do represent is a [[pur]] and [[unmitigated]] nightmare. The inclusion of obviously underage characters is appalling and the obvious racist sentiments (anti-White) are blatant and unsettling - society cannot be blamed for people who have chosen drugs, unemployment and rejection of education on the part of the film's "cast" - the actions of these people are not acts of desperation, but rather a rejection of anything resembling personal ambition and a willingness to make something out of one's self. --------------------------------------------- Result 3378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I disagree with Anyone who done't like this movie.

I used to LOVE this movie when I was little and I still do. It's sweet, funny and warms your [[heart]]. And It proves that love and friendship can never be destroyed.

And [[even]] though it didn't have much of a [[story]], it was [[still]] [[excellent]] I give it a 10 and two thumbs up.

[[Oh]] yeah and it proves that your deepest wish's and dreams can come [[true]]. (Tear, tear)

I [[love]] this movie, personally if [[anyone]] [[says]] it sucked than I will say "Shame on you." [[Because]] it was a [[delightful]] [[little]] [[movie]] and I'm [[glad]] that at least SOME people liked it. I disagree with Anyone who done't like this movie.

I used to LOVE this movie when I was little and I still do. It's sweet, funny and warms your [[heartland]]. And It proves that love and friendship can never be destroyed.

And [[yet]] though it didn't have much of a [[history]], it was [[however]] [[glamorous]] I give it a 10 and two thumbs up.

[[Oooh]] yeah and it proves that your deepest wish's and dreams can come [[veritable]]. (Tear, tear)

I [[iove]] this movie, personally if [[someone]] [[asserts]] it sucked than I will say "Shame on you." [[Since]] it was a [[scrumptious]] [[scant]] [[filmmaking]] and I'm [[grateful]] that at least SOME people liked it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3379 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I watch this movie all the time. I've watched it with family ages 3 to 87, and everyone in between; They all loved it. It really shows the true scenes a dog has, and the love and loyalty you get from a pet. Just beautiful.

It's great for thoes who love comedy movies, the tear-jerker movies, or even just pets.

The music is wonderful, the animals spectacular, the scenes truly thought out, and the characters perfect. What I liked about the characters is the true and nicely mixed personalities: Shadow (The oldest, a Golden Retriever) He's the wise one, filled with the wisdom and mindset of any dog, Chance (the American Bulldog puppy) is basically a puppy with a witty side, the comical character; And Sassy (The Hymilayan cat) She's the real cat who shows what a real cat will do for their owner, the real girly one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3380 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] No, this is not no Alice fairy tale my [[friends]]! This `Wonderland' fable is based on the [[true]] [[story]] of the [[gruesome]] bloody Wonderland [[murders]] that occurred back in 80's California. [[At]] the [[center]] of this [[bloodbath]] was no other than `Johnny Wad' himself. [[Yes]], John Holmes! Daddy ding-dong used other shotguns than his infamous 13-inch [[milk]] machine. Besides being a [[legendary]] adult [[film]] actor, Holmes was as [[also]] a hardcore [[drug]] addict who befriended various Hollywood junkies. Val Kilmer was occasionally majestic as Holmes, but for once this Holmes [[character]] did not [[milk]] it through [[completely]]. The [[film]] [[possesses]] a `who's who' of supporting players: Josh Lucas & Dylan Mcdermott as Hollywood riffraffs , Kate Bosworth & Lisa Kudrow as the women in Holmes [[life]], and Eric Bogosian as a menacing Tinsletown [[entrepreneur]]. These characters do play integral parts, directly or indirectly, in the `Wonderland' [[murders]]. Out of this support group, it was Josh Lucas who was the most fierce & impressive as the ardent Ron Launius. Lucas is gradually escalating into a [[major]] Hollywood player with such charismatic turns in `A Beautiful Mind' & `Sweet [[Home]] Alabama'. Director James Cox sometime proved to be a bit of a coxsucker by displaying a vast amount of overextended scenes, just like Holmes' famous organ. Holmes was eventually acquitted of the `Wonderland' murders. He died of complications from the Aids virus. `Wonderland' will keep you wondering what really happened that bloody night, and if Holmes really laid out his weapon. Oops! Wrong Holmes movie! Ok! That is enough before I get `penislized' I mean penalized. Bye Holmies! *** Average No, this is not no Alice fairy tale my [[mates]]! This `Wonderland' fable is based on the [[veritable]] [[tale]] of the [[dire]] bloody Wonderland [[assassinate]] that occurred back in 80's California. [[For]] the [[centres]] of this [[bloodletting]] was no other than `Johnny Wad' himself. [[Yeah]], John Holmes! Daddy ding-dong used other shotguns than his infamous 13-inch [[dairy]] machine. Besides being a [[fabled]] adult [[cinema]] actor, Holmes was as [[apart]] a hardcore [[medication]] addict who befriended various Hollywood junkies. Val Kilmer was occasionally majestic as Holmes, but for once this Holmes [[personage]] did not [[dairy]] it through [[perfectly]]. The [[cinematography]] [[owns]] a `who's who' of supporting players: Josh Lucas & Dylan Mcdermott as Hollywood riffraffs , Kate Bosworth & Lisa Kudrow as the women in Holmes [[lifetime]], and Eric Bogosian as a menacing Tinsletown [[contractors]]. These characters do play integral parts, directly or indirectly, in the `Wonderland' [[murdering]]. Out of this support group, it was Josh Lucas who was the most fierce & impressive as the ardent Ron Launius. Lucas is gradually escalating into a [[sizable]] Hollywood player with such charismatic turns in `A Beautiful Mind' & `Sweet [[Households]] Alabama'. Director James Cox sometime proved to be a bit of a coxsucker by displaying a vast amount of overextended scenes, just like Holmes' famous organ. Holmes was eventually acquitted of the `Wonderland' murders. He died of complications from the Aids virus. `Wonderland' will keep you wondering what really happened that bloody night, and if Holmes really laid out his weapon. Oops! Wrong Holmes movie! Ok! That is enough before I get `penislized' I mean penalized. Bye Holmies! *** Average --------------------------------------------- Result 3381 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (84%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] 13 days to Glory [[tells]] the traditional tale with sympathy toward the Mexican viewpoint. The major [[problem]] in this movie was that while cowboy actor James Arness played the part of Jim Bowie persuasively, the rest of the name actors in the cast Brian Keith (Davy Crocket) and Lorne Greene (Sam Houston) were too old.

Raul Julia played General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna with grace and dignity owed to the professional soldier who after all won the battle. The scene where he upbraids his officers for failing to mount a guard and prevent a sortee is one the scriptwriters did not understand. Failing to keep watch is a major remiss in the military. Santa Anna was within his prerogatives to be angry. Raul Julia magnificently carried poor writing through the scene.

Kathleen York was an impressive Susannah Dickinson, a woman who deserves to be remembered for her courage. However, Kathleen York might have been reminded that as Dickinsons hailed from Pennsylvania they probable dis not sound very Southron. 13 days to Glory [[says]] the traditional tale with sympathy toward the Mexican viewpoint. The major [[issues]] in this movie was that while cowboy actor James Arness played the part of Jim Bowie persuasively, the rest of the name actors in the cast Brian Keith (Davy Crocket) and Lorne Greene (Sam Houston) were too old.

Raul Julia played General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna with grace and dignity owed to the professional soldier who after all won the battle. The scene where he upbraids his officers for failing to mount a guard and prevent a sortee is one the scriptwriters did not understand. Failing to keep watch is a major remiss in the military. Santa Anna was within his prerogatives to be angry. Raul Julia magnificently carried poor writing through the scene.

Kathleen York was an impressive Susannah Dickinson, a woman who deserves to be remembered for her courage. However, Kathleen York might have been reminded that as Dickinsons hailed from Pennsylvania they probable dis not sound very Southron. --------------------------------------------- Result 3382 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I heard and read many praising things about "Midnight Meat Train", which is based on a short story written by no less than Clive Barker and supposedly the best adaptation of his work since the original "Hellraiser" that he directed himself, but so far I can only express very [[mixed]] [[sentiments]] about my viewing experience. The most appropriate term to summarize the whole film in just word is: [[nauseating]]! The violence is sadistic and extreme, which undoubtedly attracts fanatic young horror enthusiasts, but it's also indescribably gratuitous and exploitative. Normally speaking, I'm very pro-violence but it has to at least serve some kind of purpose. The butchering – literally – depicted in "Midnight Meat Train" is exclusively meant to shock and to repulse the viewers with weak nerve systems and easily upset stomachs, and even that isn't fully effective due to the use of digital computer effects. There are more shortcomings, some even bigger than the pointless gore, but perhaps I should focus on the good elements first. The basic concept is definitely promising and multiple sequences (like the chase in the freezer room, for example) are literally oozing with nail-biting suspense and macabre atmosphere. Unfortunately the pacing is very uneven and the elaboration of the potentially fantastic plot is made unnecessarily convoluted. Presumably the processing of a short story into a long feature film scenario is responsible for the pacing irregularities, but I honestly feel they could have done more with the denouement as well as with the character played by Vinnie Jones. The plot introduces Leon, an aspiring photographer in New York whose agent advises to search for the truly menacing face of the city through sinister pictures. Leon then becomes obsessed with stalking an introvert and suspiciously behaving butcher who always awaits the midnight train. Leon's right, as the butcher turns out to be a relentless serial killer who literally crushes his victims with a big hammer, but the killer's motivations and behavior suggest there's something far more substantial going on the rails at night. "Midnight Meat Train" takes place in naturally unsettling locations like subway stations at night and animal abattoirs, plus the film also benefices of good acting performances and a truckload of downright disturbing images (like cadavers on meat hooks and train carriages smeared in blood), but director Ryûhei Kitamura ("Versus", "Godzilla Final Wars") doesn't take full advantage of it all. The ending leaves a whole lot questions unanswered and, even if Clive Barker meant to have like this, I still think we deserved a slightly more clarifying finale. "Midnight Meat Train" is a somewhat intriguing and definitely haunting film, but not without defaults. It's not intended for easily offended viewers, but maybe people looking for plot coherence and clarity should leave it alone as well. I heard and read many praising things about "Midnight Meat Train", which is based on a short story written by no less than Clive Barker and supposedly the best adaptation of his work since the original "Hellraiser" that he directed himself, but so far I can only express very [[blended]] [[affections]] about my viewing experience. The most appropriate term to summarize the whole film in just word is: [[sickening]]! The violence is sadistic and extreme, which undoubtedly attracts fanatic young horror enthusiasts, but it's also indescribably gratuitous and exploitative. Normally speaking, I'm very pro-violence but it has to at least serve some kind of purpose. The butchering – literally – depicted in "Midnight Meat Train" is exclusively meant to shock and to repulse the viewers with weak nerve systems and easily upset stomachs, and even that isn't fully effective due to the use of digital computer effects. There are more shortcomings, some even bigger than the pointless gore, but perhaps I should focus on the good elements first. The basic concept is definitely promising and multiple sequences (like the chase in the freezer room, for example) are literally oozing with nail-biting suspense and macabre atmosphere. Unfortunately the pacing is very uneven and the elaboration of the potentially fantastic plot is made unnecessarily convoluted. Presumably the processing of a short story into a long feature film scenario is responsible for the pacing irregularities, but I honestly feel they could have done more with the denouement as well as with the character played by Vinnie Jones. The plot introduces Leon, an aspiring photographer in New York whose agent advises to search for the truly menacing face of the city through sinister pictures. Leon then becomes obsessed with stalking an introvert and suspiciously behaving butcher who always awaits the midnight train. Leon's right, as the butcher turns out to be a relentless serial killer who literally crushes his victims with a big hammer, but the killer's motivations and behavior suggest there's something far more substantial going on the rails at night. "Midnight Meat Train" takes place in naturally unsettling locations like subway stations at night and animal abattoirs, plus the film also benefices of good acting performances and a truckload of downright disturbing images (like cadavers on meat hooks and train carriages smeared in blood), but director Ryûhei Kitamura ("Versus", "Godzilla Final Wars") doesn't take full advantage of it all. The ending leaves a whole lot questions unanswered and, even if Clive Barker meant to have like this, I still think we deserved a slightly more clarifying finale. "Midnight Meat Train" is a somewhat intriguing and definitely haunting film, but not without defaults. It's not intended for easily offended viewers, but maybe people looking for plot coherence and clarity should leave it alone as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3383 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE TO READ MY ENTIRE REVIEW. I AM NOT KNOCKING THE FILM ITSELF - [[ONLY]] THE DVD VERSIONS CURRENTLY [[AVAILABLE]].

***

I [[really]] wanted to give this film [[even]] two stars. I mean how could it possibly rank a mere 1 out of 10!?!

Here's how: An epic film [[adaptation]] of Tolstoy's [[novel]] "War and Peace" with historically accurate battle scenes, courtesy of the Red Army, and an extremely faithful, scene-for-scene adaptation of the novel would be difficult but worth sitting through for seven hours - if that's what you were seeing.

The trouble is you can't see that film - anywhere as far as I know.

I am attempting to watch the RusCiCo DVD version - widely considered the best version available since it's letter boxed and restores the scenes that were cut from other DVD releases.

But, it is one of the worst film prints I've ever seen transfered to DVD. The picture is muddy and inconsistent, often strobing. It's almost tolerable if you crank your brightness, color and picture levels up to maximum.... but the problem doesn't end there.

The sound is also way inconsistent, blaringly loud in parts, virtually inaudible in others.

And as for languages, it's a HUGE problem for English speakers - the dubbed option has some good actors, and some really [[terrible]] ones whose performance grates, and parts of the film just aren't dubbed at all, slipping back into Russian and even French randomly.

The subtitled option isn't much better. The subtitles don't appear below the image, but right over it - obscuring some of the beauty (or what's left of it) in the scenery. Furthermore, the subtitles are often a poor translation (a shame given that the script took pains to hew so close to Tolstoy's actual words), and the subtitles too seem to just drop out in parts.

So, even if you max out the color, brightness and picture settings, and turn the volume way up, and choose subtitled *and* English dubbed, you're still going to get a film that's annoying to watch and listen to.

Can it's content overcome that? It might have been able to, but at seven hours - who can stand it for that long?

Maybe someday, someone will come along and restore this - and maybe then I will see a masterpiece - but for now, I just can't give more than one star to something I've only been able to stand watching about the first 12% of. PLEASE TAKE A MINUTE TO READ MY ENTIRE REVIEW. I AM NOT KNOCKING THE FILM ITSELF - [[PURELY]] THE DVD VERSIONS CURRENTLY [[APPROACHABLE]].

***

I [[truthfully]] wanted to give this film [[yet]] two stars. I mean how could it possibly rank a mere 1 out of 10!?!

Here's how: An epic film [[readjust]] of Tolstoy's [[newer]] "War and Peace" with historically accurate battle scenes, courtesy of the Red Army, and an extremely faithful, scene-for-scene adaptation of the novel would be difficult but worth sitting through for seven hours - if that's what you were seeing.

The trouble is you can't see that film - anywhere as far as I know.

I am attempting to watch the RusCiCo DVD version - widely considered the best version available since it's letter boxed and restores the scenes that were cut from other DVD releases.

But, it is one of the worst film prints I've ever seen transfered to DVD. The picture is muddy and inconsistent, often strobing. It's almost tolerable if you crank your brightness, color and picture levels up to maximum.... but the problem doesn't end there.

The sound is also way inconsistent, blaringly loud in parts, virtually inaudible in others.

And as for languages, it's a HUGE problem for English speakers - the dubbed option has some good actors, and some really [[scary]] ones whose performance grates, and parts of the film just aren't dubbed at all, slipping back into Russian and even French randomly.

The subtitled option isn't much better. The subtitles don't appear below the image, but right over it - obscuring some of the beauty (or what's left of it) in the scenery. Furthermore, the subtitles are often a poor translation (a shame given that the script took pains to hew so close to Tolstoy's actual words), and the subtitles too seem to just drop out in parts.

So, even if you max out the color, brightness and picture settings, and turn the volume way up, and choose subtitled *and* English dubbed, you're still going to get a film that's annoying to watch and listen to.

Can it's content overcome that? It might have been able to, but at seven hours - who can stand it for that long?

Maybe someday, someone will come along and restore this - and maybe then I will see a masterpiece - but for now, I just can't give more than one star to something I've only been able to stand watching about the first 12% of. --------------------------------------------- Result 3384 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] PUT THE CAMERA ON ME is a deceptively cute film. It is actually a complex glimpse at the psychology of children and offers interesting insights into the development of adults and an artist. On the [[surface]] this is a [[nostalgic]] [[look]] at some home movies made in the 80's by a group of upper class neighborhood kids. One of the film's directors, Darren Stein, had access to a video camera and quickly took over as the artistic leader for all of the [[movies]]. Sure, these are just some cute kids having fun. But, this is also much more. This is a look into some moments in [[time]] as children [[grapple]] with a number of confusing issues that all of us face in life --- fear, sexual awakening, unrequited love, loneliness and just trying to make sense of the adult world which seems to explode all around us. As we get older we tend to forget how overwhlelming the realities of life were when we were little.

What makes this film all the more valid is to watch a young Darren Stein turn into a little general of a filmmaker. It is clear that Darren is running this show and these little movies are his vision but they are all informed by his friends, their problems, the interpersonal dynamics and the general confusion regarding the horrors of adult life. A lot of children make home movies, but I've never heard of or seen children create "little" movies about the holocaust, homosexuality, nuclear war and the inability to fit in and make friends. These kids are confronting and dealing with some heavy stuff!

The power of this film is the way Stein and Shell pull various scenes together so tightly with running interviews with the kids --- all now adults and all still friends. This adds a new angle to the film. How many of us have stayed in touch with our childhood friends? These guys have. And, many of the issues with which they were dealing are still running between them two decades later.

Among the conflicts -- a confession of a crush reveals a heart still broken, a very normal childhood sexual experience continues to be a "sticky" subject between two of the men, some ongoing resentments over the dynamics of relationships and there is still a member of this team who remains very much in charge and in center stage! Which makes perfect sense as one watches these home movies progress over the course of a couple of years. Darren Stein is a director. No doubt about it.

Stein and Shell take turns chatting with each other from time to time and one can't help but imagine the awkwardness of allowing us to peek into the young lives of these people. This is particularly true for Stein who has gone on to a great deal of success in the entertainment industry as a film producer, writer and director. From the first moment of PUT THE CAMERA ON ME we can see the emergence of a gay little boy trying to figure it all out. We also see sides of the artistic mind and personality that are not always "nice" or "caring" --- and, this is a bold move for any artist to share with an audience.

There are so many revealing moments, but the most disturbing and complex moments involve a movie in which we see a Jewish concentration camp victim being tortured and killed by a Nazi. We discover thru interviews and narration that the Nazi is played by a Jewish child and the part of the victim is played by a gentile child. It is a painfully disturbing moment that glimpses into the darker side of fear and the way children work thru the horrors of the adult world that are beyond adult understanding much less that of a child.

This is much more than some home movies. This documentary captures the pain, beauty, joy and sadness of growing up. Powerful stuff --- and well worth seeing!

: PUT THE CAMERA ON ME is a deceptively cute film. It is actually a complex glimpse at the psychology of children and offers interesting insights into the development of adults and an artist. On the [[surfacing]] this is a [[homesick]] [[glance]] at some home movies made in the 80's by a group of upper class neighborhood kids. One of the film's directors, Darren Stein, had access to a video camera and quickly took over as the artistic leader for all of the [[cinematography]]. Sure, these are just some cute kids having fun. But, this is also much more. This is a look into some moments in [[period]] as children [[contend]] with a number of confusing issues that all of us face in life --- fear, sexual awakening, unrequited love, loneliness and just trying to make sense of the adult world which seems to explode all around us. As we get older we tend to forget how overwhlelming the realities of life were when we were little.

What makes this film all the more valid is to watch a young Darren Stein turn into a little general of a filmmaker. It is clear that Darren is running this show and these little movies are his vision but they are all informed by his friends, their problems, the interpersonal dynamics and the general confusion regarding the horrors of adult life. A lot of children make home movies, but I've never heard of or seen children create "little" movies about the holocaust, homosexuality, nuclear war and the inability to fit in and make friends. These kids are confronting and dealing with some heavy stuff!

The power of this film is the way Stein and Shell pull various scenes together so tightly with running interviews with the kids --- all now adults and all still friends. This adds a new angle to the film. How many of us have stayed in touch with our childhood friends? These guys have. And, many of the issues with which they were dealing are still running between them two decades later.

Among the conflicts -- a confession of a crush reveals a heart still broken, a very normal childhood sexual experience continues to be a "sticky" subject between two of the men, some ongoing resentments over the dynamics of relationships and there is still a member of this team who remains very much in charge and in center stage! Which makes perfect sense as one watches these home movies progress over the course of a couple of years. Darren Stein is a director. No doubt about it.

Stein and Shell take turns chatting with each other from time to time and one can't help but imagine the awkwardness of allowing us to peek into the young lives of these people. This is particularly true for Stein who has gone on to a great deal of success in the entertainment industry as a film producer, writer and director. From the first moment of PUT THE CAMERA ON ME we can see the emergence of a gay little boy trying to figure it all out. We also see sides of the artistic mind and personality that are not always "nice" or "caring" --- and, this is a bold move for any artist to share with an audience.

There are so many revealing moments, but the most disturbing and complex moments involve a movie in which we see a Jewish concentration camp victim being tortured and killed by a Nazi. We discover thru interviews and narration that the Nazi is played by a Jewish child and the part of the victim is played by a gentile child. It is a painfully disturbing moment that glimpses into the darker side of fear and the way children work thru the horrors of the adult world that are beyond adult understanding much less that of a child.

This is much more than some home movies. This documentary captures the pain, beauty, joy and sadness of growing up. Powerful stuff --- and well worth seeing!

: --------------------------------------------- Result 3385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I'll tell you a [[tale]] of the [[summer]] of 1994. A friend and I attended a Canada Day concert in Barrie, and it was a who's who of the [[top]] Canadian bands of the age. We got there about 4am, waited in [[line]] most of the morning, and when the [[doors]] opened at 9am, we were among the [[first]] inside the gates. We then waited and waited in the [[hot]] [[sun]], slowly broiling but we didn't [[care]], because the headliners were among our [[favourites]]. [[At]] one point, early in the afternoon, I sat down and dozed off with my back to the barrier. I was awakened to my shock and dismay by a shrieking girl wearing a Rheostatics t-shirt. This is the reason I have hated the Rheostatics to this day. There's nothing reasonable, nor taste-determined, nor really anything except their fandom. Snotty of me, isn't it? So, I, in my hatred of the band, have denied myself the delight that is Whale Music.

Desmond Howl had it all. It's hard to say what he's lost, since he lives in a fantastic mansion wedged between the ocean and the mountains (the BC region where the movie was shot is breathtaking). The life most of us dream of is dismantled by dreams, phantoms, and his own past, until the day a teenaged criminal breaks in...and, trite as it sounds, breaks him out.

Canadian cinema suffers from several problems. Generally, a lack of money, as well as an insufferable lack of asking for help (as if somehow the feature would cease to be Canadian) leads to lower production values than American or British films, and most people don't like to watch anything that sounds or looks like, well, not like an American film. Next, Canadian screenwriters often seem so caught up in being weird that they lose sight of how to tell a good story, and tell it well. Third, they seem to think that gratuitous nudity (often full-frontal) makes something artistic. I'm sure anyone who watches enough Canadian movies, especially late at night on the CBC, knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's almost like a "don't do this" handbook exists out there somewhere and Canadian film-makers threw it out a long time ago.

In the 90s and 00s, however, some films (such as Bruce McDonald's work and the brilliant C.R.A.Z.Y.) have broken this mold, and managed to maintain what makes them Canadian, while holding onto watchable production values and great stories. Whale Music is such a film, on the surface. Deeper than just its Canadian-isms, it's a deeply moving story of a man who's lost his grip, through grief and excess, who is redeemed by music then by love. And that redeems even the Rheostatics. :) I'll tell you a [[conte]] of the [[hsia]] of 1994. A friend and I attended a Canada Day concert in Barrie, and it was a who's who of the [[topped]] Canadian bands of the age. We got there about 4am, waited in [[bloodline]] most of the morning, and when the [[floodgates]] opened at 9am, we were among the [[fiirst]] inside the gates. We then waited and waited in the [[sexiest]] [[suen]], slowly broiling but we didn't [[healthcare]], because the headliners were among our [[favorites]]. [[In]] one point, early in the afternoon, I sat down and dozed off with my back to the barrier. I was awakened to my shock and dismay by a shrieking girl wearing a Rheostatics t-shirt. This is the reason I have hated the Rheostatics to this day. There's nothing reasonable, nor taste-determined, nor really anything except their fandom. Snotty of me, isn't it? So, I, in my hatred of the band, have denied myself the delight that is Whale Music.

Desmond Howl had it all. It's hard to say what he's lost, since he lives in a fantastic mansion wedged between the ocean and the mountains (the BC region where the movie was shot is breathtaking). The life most of us dream of is dismantled by dreams, phantoms, and his own past, until the day a teenaged criminal breaks in...and, trite as it sounds, breaks him out.

Canadian cinema suffers from several problems. Generally, a lack of money, as well as an insufferable lack of asking for help (as if somehow the feature would cease to be Canadian) leads to lower production values than American or British films, and most people don't like to watch anything that sounds or looks like, well, not like an American film. Next, Canadian screenwriters often seem so caught up in being weird that they lose sight of how to tell a good story, and tell it well. Third, they seem to think that gratuitous nudity (often full-frontal) makes something artistic. I'm sure anyone who watches enough Canadian movies, especially late at night on the CBC, knows exactly what I'm talking about. It's almost like a "don't do this" handbook exists out there somewhere and Canadian film-makers threw it out a long time ago.

In the 90s and 00s, however, some films (such as Bruce McDonald's work and the brilliant C.R.A.Z.Y.) have broken this mold, and managed to maintain what makes them Canadian, while holding onto watchable production values and great stories. Whale Music is such a film, on the surface. Deeper than just its Canadian-isms, it's a deeply moving story of a man who's lost his grip, through grief and excess, who is redeemed by music then by love. And that redeems even the Rheostatics. :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3386 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[watched]] this movie as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive trying to figure out how they're [[connected]].

The setting and the [[premise]] were [[obviously]] influenced by the first (and best) Saw movie & although there wasn't much action the story moved at a relatively good pace.

There was [[comedy]] relief ion the [[form]] of the two bickering 'Alpha males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to [[see]] Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting [[yet]].

A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.

2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.

3. The ending..... what sort of movie just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no resolution, no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just ends.

And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end! I [[observed]] this movie as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive trying to figure out how they're [[tied]].

The setting and the [[supposition]] were [[naturally]] influenced by the first (and best) Saw movie & although there wasn't much action the story moved at a relatively good pace.

There was [[humor]] relief ion the [[shape]] of the two bickering 'Alpha males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to [[behold]] Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting [[still]].

A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.

2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.

3. The ending..... what sort of movie just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no resolution, no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just ends.

And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end! --------------------------------------------- Result 3387 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I saw this movie when i was much younger and i [[thought]] it was funny. I saw it again last week, and you can guess the result. Some [[funny]] parts in it, very few and too long. The beginning is the only thing that is funny if you ask me.

If you [[want]] a total b-movie this is a good pick, but don't expect too much from aliens dwarf size I saw this movie when i was much younger and i [[brainchild]] it was funny. I saw it again last week, and you can guess the result. Some [[hilarious]] parts in it, very few and too long. The beginning is the only thing that is funny if you ask me.

If you [[wanting]] a total b-movie this is a good pick, but don't expect too much from aliens dwarf size --------------------------------------------- Result 3388 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a very [[unusual]] [[film]] in that the star with the top billing doesn't appear literally until half way in. Nevertheless I was engaged by the hook of the Phantom Lady. Curtis, though competent as the falsely accused Scott Henderson, looks a little tough to be be sympathetic [[towards]] (perhaps he should have shaved his moustache) and his behavior when he first comes home should have convinced the [[cops]] at least to some degree of his innocence. [[While]] another commentator had a [[problem]] with Franchot Tone as Jack Marlowe I found his portrayal of the [[character]] to be [[impressively]] complex. He is no stock villain. Superb character actor Elisha Cook Jr. is again in top form as the 'little man with big ambitions.' His drumming in the musical numbers added a welcome touch of eroticism. This movie however is carried by the very capable and comely Ella Raines as the devoted would be lover of Henderson, Carol Richmond. She definitely has talent and her screen presence is in the tradition of Lauren Bacall. This is the first of her work I have seen and I am definitely inclined to see her other roles. The rest of the supporting cast is also more than competent. [[All]] in all a very [[satisfying]] [[film]] noir mystery which when viewed today fully conveys the dark and complex urban world it is intended to. [[Recommended]], 8/10. This is a very [[extraordinaire]] [[cinematographic]] in that the star with the top billing doesn't appear literally until half way in. Nevertheless I was engaged by the hook of the Phantom Lady. Curtis, though competent as the falsely accused Scott Henderson, looks a little tough to be be sympathetic [[circa]] (perhaps he should have shaved his moustache) and his behavior when he first comes home should have convinced the [[policing]] at least to some degree of his innocence. [[Despite]] another commentator had a [[difficulty]] with Franchot Tone as Jack Marlowe I found his portrayal of the [[personage]] to be [[alarmingly]] complex. He is no stock villain. Superb character actor Elisha Cook Jr. is again in top form as the 'little man with big ambitions.' His drumming in the musical numbers added a welcome touch of eroticism. This movie however is carried by the very capable and comely Ella Raines as the devoted would be lover of Henderson, Carol Richmond. She definitely has talent and her screen presence is in the tradition of Lauren Bacall. This is the first of her work I have seen and I am definitely inclined to see her other roles. The rest of the supporting cast is also more than competent. [[Entire]] in all a very [[gratifying]] [[movie]] noir mystery which when viewed today fully conveys the dark and complex urban world it is intended to. [[Recommendations]], 8/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] It was once [[suggested]] by [[Pauline]] Kael, never a [[fan]], that Cassavetes [[thought]] not like a director, but like an actor. What Kael [[meant]] was his [[supposed]] [[lack]] of sophistication as a filmmaker; to take that comparison further, to me, it never [[feels]] like Cassavetes is directing himself in a film, it [[feels]] like Cassavetes implanting himself [[inside]] his own [[creation]], like Orson Welles. Cassavetes is just as much of a [[genius]] as Welles, but far more important as a [[true]] [[artist]] (as opposed to a technician or rhetorician). This is like a cross between Italian passion (though Cassavetes was actually Greek) and Scandinavian introversion. Never before have inner demons been so exposed physically.

It's about the mystery of becoming, performing, and acting. Like a haunted Skip James record, it's got the echoes of ghosts all around. Rowlands' breakdowns, which are stupefying and almost operatic, surprising coming from Cassavetes, are accompanied by a jumpy, unsettling piano. Who is this dead girl? The metaphysical possibilities are endless, and it's amazing to find this kind of thing in a Cassavetes film, just the overt display of intelligence (there is also a brief bit of voice-over at the beginning). But then, he always was intelligent, he just never flapped it around for easy praise. This is not "Adaptation"; here, the blending of reality and fiction and drama is not to show cleverness but to show the inner turmoil and confusion it creates.

There's so much going on. The pure, joyous love when Rowlands greets her doorman; the horror when she beats herself up... The scene where the girl talks about how she devoted her life to art and to music is one of the most effective demonstrations of understanding what it means to be a fan of someone. You can see some roots of this in "A Star Is Born," and Almodovar borrowed from it for "All About My Mother." I think the ending is a little bit of a disappointment because of the laughing fits, but the preparation leading up to it is almost sickening. (You can shoot me, but I think the alcoholism, despite its urgency in many of the scenes, is a relatively small point about the film.)

It's a living, breathing thing, and it feels like a process: it could go any direction at any time. Like "Taste of Cherry," we are reminded that "you must never forget this is only a play." Yet it is dangerous: when Rowlands says that line, is it great drama? How will the audience take it? Is she being reflexive or does she just not care? Her (character's) breakdowns are incorporated into the performances, and ultimately the film, in such a way that it's like witnessing a female James Dean. 10/10 It was once [[suggests]] by [[Tracey]] Kael, never a [[breather]], that Cassavetes [[figured]] not like a director, but like an actor. What Kael [[intend]] was his [[presumed]] [[dearth]] of sophistication as a filmmaker; to take that comparison further, to me, it never [[believes]] like Cassavetes is directing himself in a film, it [[thinks]] like Cassavetes implanting himself [[within]] his own [[establishment]], like Orson Welles. Cassavetes is just as much of a [[prodigy]] as Welles, but far more important as a [[veritable]] [[painters]] (as opposed to a technician or rhetorician). This is like a cross between Italian passion (though Cassavetes was actually Greek) and Scandinavian introversion. Never before have inner demons been so exposed physically.

It's about the mystery of becoming, performing, and acting. Like a haunted Skip James record, it's got the echoes of ghosts all around. Rowlands' breakdowns, which are stupefying and almost operatic, surprising coming from Cassavetes, are accompanied by a jumpy, unsettling piano. Who is this dead girl? The metaphysical possibilities are endless, and it's amazing to find this kind of thing in a Cassavetes film, just the overt display of intelligence (there is also a brief bit of voice-over at the beginning). But then, he always was intelligent, he just never flapped it around for easy praise. This is not "Adaptation"; here, the blending of reality and fiction and drama is not to show cleverness but to show the inner turmoil and confusion it creates.

There's so much going on. The pure, joyous love when Rowlands greets her doorman; the horror when she beats herself up... The scene where the girl talks about how she devoted her life to art and to music is one of the most effective demonstrations of understanding what it means to be a fan of someone. You can see some roots of this in "A Star Is Born," and Almodovar borrowed from it for "All About My Mother." I think the ending is a little bit of a disappointment because of the laughing fits, but the preparation leading up to it is almost sickening. (You can shoot me, but I think the alcoholism, despite its urgency in many of the scenes, is a relatively small point about the film.)

It's a living, breathing thing, and it feels like a process: it could go any direction at any time. Like "Taste of Cherry," we are reminded that "you must never forget this is only a play." Yet it is dangerous: when Rowlands says that line, is it great drama? How will the audience take it? Is she being reflexive or does she just not care? Her (character's) breakdowns are incorporated into the performances, and ultimately the film, in such a way that it's like witnessing a female James Dean. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3390 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] A wonder. One of the [[best]] musicals ever. The three Busby Berkely numbers that [[end]] the [[movie]] are [[spectacular]], but what makes this [[film]] so [[wonderful]] is the [[incredible]] non-stop patter and the [[natural]] acting of Cagney and Blondell. (Keeler is also lovely, even though she may not have been a great actress). There's a [[freshness]] in the [[movie]] that you don't [[see]] in flicks [[today]], much less in the usually stilted 30s films, even [[though]] the plot, involving the setting up of movies prologues, is quite dated. A wonder. One of the [[optimum]] musicals ever. The three Busby Berkely numbers that [[ceases]] the [[movies]] are [[noteworthy]], but what makes this [[flick]] so [[sumptuous]] is the [[unimaginable]] non-stop patter and the [[naturel]] acting of Cagney and Blondell. (Keeler is also lovely, even though she may not have been a great actress). There's a [[coldness]] in the [[filmmaking]] that you don't [[seeing]] in flicks [[yesterday]], much less in the usually stilted 30s films, even [[despite]] the plot, involving the setting up of movies prologues, is quite dated. --------------------------------------------- Result 3391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] [[Although]] the [[director]] [[tried]](the [[filming]] was made in Tynisia and Morocco),this [[attempt]] to transport the [[New]] [[Testament]] in the screen [[failed]].The [[script]] has serious inaccuracies and fantasies,while the [[duration]] is very long.But the most tragic is the protagonist Chris Sarandon,who doesn't seem to understand the [[demands]] of his role. [[Though]] the [[headmaster]] [[attempt]](the [[photographing]] was made in Tynisia and Morocco),this [[endeavor]] to transport the [[Newest]] [[Wills]] in the screen [[faulted]].The [[hyphen]] has serious inaccuracies and fantasies,while the [[lengths]] is very long.But the most tragic is the protagonist Chris Sarandon,who doesn't seem to understand the [[request]] of his role. --------------------------------------------- Result 3392 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I just read the plot summary and it is the worst one I have ever read. It does not do justice to this [[incredible]] movie. For an example of a good summary, read the listing at "Turner Classic Movies". Anyway, this was one of my favorite movies as a young child. My sister and I couldn't wait until every April when we could see it on T.V. It is one of the best horse movies of it's time. It is one of those great classics that the whole family can watch. The romance is clean and endearing. The story line is interesting and the songs are great. They don't make movies like this anymore. Good acting and not over the top. Pat Boone and Shirley Jones are at their best, along with many other great character actors. I just read the plot summary and it is the worst one I have ever read. It does not do justice to this [[unimaginable]] movie. For an example of a good summary, read the listing at "Turner Classic Movies". Anyway, this was one of my favorite movies as a young child. My sister and I couldn't wait until every April when we could see it on T.V. It is one of the best horse movies of it's time. It is one of those great classics that the whole family can watch. The romance is clean and endearing. The story line is interesting and the songs are great. They don't make movies like this anymore. Good acting and not over the top. Pat Boone and Shirley Jones are at their best, along with many other great character actors. --------------------------------------------- Result 3393 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Pet]] Semetary (1989) 9/10 The [[Creed]] [[family]] have just moved into the [[small]] town of Ludlow. The family consists of a father, [[Louis]], a [[mother]], Rachel, a brother Gage, and a [[daughter]], [[Ellen]]. They are [[greeted]] with [[kindness]] by Jud Crandall. Jud is 89, and could basically tell you about the [[entire]] [[history]] of Ludlow.

Behind the Creed's new [[house]], there is a [[path]] leading to a pet cemetery (spelled pet sematary). When [[Ellen]] wants to go up to see it, Jud [[willfully]] takes the family on a trip. That is the start of hell for the Creed family.

When Rachel and the kids are gone, Ellen's cat Church dies. Jud feels that Ellen isn't ready for the death of her cat, so he suggests [[Louis]] follow him further up the path, past the pet cemetery.

Jud tells [[Louis]] of this burial ground, once used by Micmac [[Indians]]. [[Louis]] [[buries]] Church, without Jud's [[help]]. A couple of days [[later]], Church returns, alive, but from hell.

This [[movie]] was one of two horror movies that [[could]] actually [[scare]] me, aside from "The Exorcist." The greatest performance would ever be Zelda, Rachel's sister with spinal meningitis, or Victor Pascow, a ghost who tries to help the [[Creeds]] from making the mistake of bringing back things from the dead.

The music in this movie plays an extravagant part. It is at the same time sad and [[mysterious]]. It goes along with the [[movie]] [[wonderfully]].

9/10 [[Fart]] Semetary (1989) 9/10 The [[Faith]] [[familia]] have just moved into the [[petite]] town of Ludlow. The family consists of a father, [[Luiz]], a [[mommy]], Rachel, a brother Gage, and a [[girls]], [[Eileen]]. They are [[saluted]] with [[generosity]] by Jud Crandall. Jud is 89, and could basically tell you about the [[total]] [[historian]] of Ludlow.

Behind the Creed's new [[dwellings]], there is a [[road]] leading to a pet cemetery (spelled pet sematary). When [[Eileen]] wants to go up to see it, Jud [[purposefully]] takes the family on a trip. That is the start of hell for the Creed family.

When Rachel and the kids are gone, Ellen's cat Church dies. Jud feels that Ellen isn't ready for the death of her cat, so he suggests [[Louise]] follow him further up the path, past the pet cemetery.

Jud tells [[Louise]] of this burial ground, once used by Micmac [[Indian]]. [[Louise]] [[bury]] Church, without Jud's [[support]]. A couple of days [[thereafter]], Church returns, alive, but from hell.

This [[filmmaking]] was one of two horror movies that [[wo]] actually [[shitless]] me, aside from "The Exorcist." The greatest performance would ever be Zelda, Rachel's sister with spinal meningitis, or Victor Pascow, a ghost who tries to help the [[Religions]] from making the mistake of bringing back things from the dead.

The music in this movie plays an extravagant part. It is at the same time sad and [[opaque]]. It goes along with the [[flick]] [[marvellously]].

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3394 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (68%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I was at first disgusted with director Sun-Woo Jang because I had felt that he cheated me. Jang had the potential to create a strong, deeply emotional film about sex and its effects on people, but instead chose to focus his strength on the pornography element more than the actual human element. I couldn't see the characters at first and his sloppy [[introduction]] which blended both realism and cinema together was amateurish at best … yet this film remained in my mind for days after I viewed it. What stayed with me wasn't the story, it wasn't the characters, nor was it the apparent pornographic nature of the film, but the transition that Jang demonstrated between Y and J. If you watch this film carefully, you will see that both begin in an exploration phase of their relationship, eager to jump into the unknown, but not quite certain the next step. As they continue to meet, exploring new avenues of pleasure, they continually jump between the aggressor and the aggressed. Jang initially explores the idea that J is the one that in control of the situation, then hauntingly, the reversal happens when J becomes obsessed with Y. It is a very small change, and due to the graphic content of this film, it can easily be missed, but it is there. It becomes apparently clear near the end when J cannot live with Y, as their meetings become less frequent, and J attempts to become a part of normal society. This was a huge and very exciting element to this film to see right before your eyes, but alas, it was the only element of this film worth viewing.

I will ignore those that speak of this film as nothing more than pornographic, because there are human elements at the core of this film, as underdeveloped as they are, they are there. It is a film about a facet of our lives that is very rarely explored in cinema or talked about in the papers. What happens behind closed doors is never known … or so we should believe. While the act itself does becomes repetitive after a bit, director Jang tries to change it up a bit with some constantly changing scenery. Our characters are continually moving from hotel room to hotel room to best quench their thirst for each other's flesh. This is fun at first, but again, Jang's repetitive streak seems to make it feel boring than exciting. This leads me to the biggest issue that I had with this film. Jang had a great story with Gojitmal, but where he failed (outside of the obvious choice to focus directly on the pornographic side) was that he took scenes, repeated them time and again, without changing in front of us to allow us to get to know the characters. Where was Jang going with this movie? Did he want the sex to tell the stories, or did he believe the characters would? He failed in this sense because by the end of the film we know so little about Y and J that we could care less how they resolve themselves. The ending seems almost random at best as Jang attempts to create a final resolution for our two, absolute unknowns, of this film. I have to give Jang some credit for trying, but not much. He attempted to create some sub-stories that would create the personal element that we were lacking, but they just couldn't congeal well together. Y's brother and J's wife were those plot points, but again, due to him focusing so strongly on the sexual element, these stronger sub-stories became un-rememberable and down-right dull. Maybe it was just how I viewed this film, but outside of the sexual scenes, nothing else worked together. We knew nothing about J and Y and that is why Gojitmal failed.

Finally, I would like to say that this film could have benefited from having a strong score or a daftly remote music genre element to it to bring us, the viewers, closer to the emotions being felt by J and Y. From what I can remember, and I am trying to push this film far from my mind, I don't remember any musical undertones. Gojitmal may have been a stronger film if Jang either stylized it with music or done something to allude towards our character's beings. While I understand that he wanted the sex to speak for itself, there was just a technical element missing from this film that may have quenched a stronger desire for more. Technically, this was a poor film. Obviously an independent film in nature, it felt more like director Jang was trying to make symbolic references out of nothing instead of your typical independent of this nature. I didn't see as much of a social message or human element like mentioned above, I just felt like he threw this film together over the course of two weeks and understood that the sex would sell it enough. This was no Larry Clark production; this was sub-par and definitely needed some further technical clicks to develop it stronger than the final release!

Overall, I think I could have liked this film and there were smaller elements that I did enjoy, but I felt this film was rushed, repetitive, and played too much towards the taboos instead of breaking them. The obvious pitfalls of this film can be seen by the last scene of this film when we are privy to how the title of this film was conceived. Our characters were uneventful, our story was underdeveloped, and we could have used something memorable to make what was happening between Y and J into something more symbolic than sex. To me, Jang was trying too much to capture art house meets pornographic … and it failed miserably. This was not a film worth the time and effort that it took to make.

Grade: ** out of ***** I was at first disgusted with director Sun-Woo Jang because I had felt that he cheated me. Jang had the potential to create a strong, deeply emotional film about sex and its effects on people, but instead chose to focus his strength on the pornography element more than the actual human element. I couldn't see the characters at first and his sloppy [[intro]] which blended both realism and cinema together was amateurish at best … yet this film remained in my mind for days after I viewed it. What stayed with me wasn't the story, it wasn't the characters, nor was it the apparent pornographic nature of the film, but the transition that Jang demonstrated between Y and J. If you watch this film carefully, you will see that both begin in an exploration phase of their relationship, eager to jump into the unknown, but not quite certain the next step. As they continue to meet, exploring new avenues of pleasure, they continually jump between the aggressor and the aggressed. Jang initially explores the idea that J is the one that in control of the situation, then hauntingly, the reversal happens when J becomes obsessed with Y. It is a very small change, and due to the graphic content of this film, it can easily be missed, but it is there. It becomes apparently clear near the end when J cannot live with Y, as their meetings become less frequent, and J attempts to become a part of normal society. This was a huge and very exciting element to this film to see right before your eyes, but alas, it was the only element of this film worth viewing.

I will ignore those that speak of this film as nothing more than pornographic, because there are human elements at the core of this film, as underdeveloped as they are, they are there. It is a film about a facet of our lives that is very rarely explored in cinema or talked about in the papers. What happens behind closed doors is never known … or so we should believe. While the act itself does becomes repetitive after a bit, director Jang tries to change it up a bit with some constantly changing scenery. Our characters are continually moving from hotel room to hotel room to best quench their thirst for each other's flesh. This is fun at first, but again, Jang's repetitive streak seems to make it feel boring than exciting. This leads me to the biggest issue that I had with this film. Jang had a great story with Gojitmal, but where he failed (outside of the obvious choice to focus directly on the pornographic side) was that he took scenes, repeated them time and again, without changing in front of us to allow us to get to know the characters. Where was Jang going with this movie? Did he want the sex to tell the stories, or did he believe the characters would? He failed in this sense because by the end of the film we know so little about Y and J that we could care less how they resolve themselves. The ending seems almost random at best as Jang attempts to create a final resolution for our two, absolute unknowns, of this film. I have to give Jang some credit for trying, but not much. He attempted to create some sub-stories that would create the personal element that we were lacking, but they just couldn't congeal well together. Y's brother and J's wife were those plot points, but again, due to him focusing so strongly on the sexual element, these stronger sub-stories became un-rememberable and down-right dull. Maybe it was just how I viewed this film, but outside of the sexual scenes, nothing else worked together. We knew nothing about J and Y and that is why Gojitmal failed.

Finally, I would like to say that this film could have benefited from having a strong score or a daftly remote music genre element to it to bring us, the viewers, closer to the emotions being felt by J and Y. From what I can remember, and I am trying to push this film far from my mind, I don't remember any musical undertones. Gojitmal may have been a stronger film if Jang either stylized it with music or done something to allude towards our character's beings. While I understand that he wanted the sex to speak for itself, there was just a technical element missing from this film that may have quenched a stronger desire for more. Technically, this was a poor film. Obviously an independent film in nature, it felt more like director Jang was trying to make symbolic references out of nothing instead of your typical independent of this nature. I didn't see as much of a social message or human element like mentioned above, I just felt like he threw this film together over the course of two weeks and understood that the sex would sell it enough. This was no Larry Clark production; this was sub-par and definitely needed some further technical clicks to develop it stronger than the final release!

Overall, I think I could have liked this film and there were smaller elements that I did enjoy, but I felt this film was rushed, repetitive, and played too much towards the taboos instead of breaking them. The obvious pitfalls of this film can be seen by the last scene of this film when we are privy to how the title of this film was conceived. Our characters were uneventful, our story was underdeveloped, and we could have used something memorable to make what was happening between Y and J into something more symbolic than sex. To me, Jang was trying too much to capture art house meets pornographic … and it failed miserably. This was not a film worth the time and effort that it took to make.

Grade: ** out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3395 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] There are people claiming this is another "bad language" ultra violence Mexican movie. They are right, but more than that this film is a call to create awareness of what we have become. The awful truth hurts, or bores when you already have accepted the paradigm of living the third world as the only possible goal. One of the most [[important]] things of "Cero y van cuatro" is the open [[invitation]] to [[profound]] reflexion over our current identity. Is that what we all are? Is that all that we want to be? I am abroad and I realized how spoiled is the Mexican society when the Tlahuac Incident came to light. I still cannot understand viewers witnessing a mass broadcasted murder. I nearly puked when I saw some of the images. It was not Irak or Rwanda, just a tiny village near Mexico City when rampage was carried out with the indulgence of media and government. The recreation of a similar situation in this film shocked me deeply. The other stories were good portraying other situations of corruption, dishonesty, betrayal and violence, but I consider "Tamales de Chivo" the best one.

The movie is deeper than some "cabrón" and "pendejo" screams. Those are meaningless compared with the actions of the people. With a few exceptions they are all perfect examples of human rubbish. Just like in real life honesty is becoming more the exception than the rule in our country. Moreover, honesty is only rewarded miraculously. There are people claiming this is another "bad language" ultra violence Mexican movie. They are right, but more than that this film is a call to create awareness of what we have become. The awful truth hurts, or bores when you already have accepted the paradigm of living the third world as the only possible goal. One of the most [[sizeable]] things of "Cero y van cuatro" is the open [[invitations]] to [[deep]] reflexion over our current identity. Is that what we all are? Is that all that we want to be? I am abroad and I realized how spoiled is the Mexican society when the Tlahuac Incident came to light. I still cannot understand viewers witnessing a mass broadcasted murder. I nearly puked when I saw some of the images. It was not Irak or Rwanda, just a tiny village near Mexico City when rampage was carried out with the indulgence of media and government. The recreation of a similar situation in this film shocked me deeply. The other stories were good portraying other situations of corruption, dishonesty, betrayal and violence, but I consider "Tamales de Chivo" the best one.

The movie is deeper than some "cabrón" and "pendejo" screams. Those are meaningless compared with the actions of the people. With a few exceptions they are all perfect examples of human rubbish. Just like in real life honesty is becoming more the exception than the rule in our country. Moreover, honesty is only rewarded miraculously. --------------------------------------------- Result 3396 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Even 20+ years later, Ninja [[Mission]] stands out as the [[worst]] [[movie]] I ever managed to [[sit]] through. Scandanavian ninjas silently [[enter]] a scene, [[fire]] their obnoxiously noisy sub-machine guns with wild abandon, and then [[silently]] [[leave]]. [[Wow]], how will we [[find]] those silent invisible [[assassins]]? [[Just]] follow the shell casings and [[smoke]]!Painfully [[bad]] dialog (or was it brilliant and just poorly translated?), not an Asian in sight in the cast, and a [[whopping]] [[total]] of 3 Asians among the stunt crew. The plot is ridiculous, the acting pretty much non-existent - then again, ninja can't [[act]]! [[Save]] yourselves - [[avoid]] watching at all costs! Even 20+ years later, Ninja [[Delegations]] stands out as the [[meanest]] [[flick]] I ever managed to [[assis]] through. Scandanavian ninjas silently [[penetrate]] a scene, [[wildfire]] their obnoxiously noisy sub-machine guns with wild abandon, and then [[discretely]] [[let]]. [[Ruff]], how will we [[unearthed]] those silent invisible [[cutthroats]]? [[Only]] follow the shell casings and [[smog]]!Painfully [[inclement]] dialog (or was it brilliant and just poorly translated?), not an Asian in sight in the cast, and a [[remarkable]] [[whole]] of 3 Asians among the stunt crew. The plot is ridiculous, the acting pretty much non-existent - then again, ninja can't [[ley]]! [[Economize]] yourselves - [[avert]] watching at all costs! --------------------------------------------- Result 3397 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Still [[love]] it 17 or so years after the [[first]] [[time]] I saw it, in fact I discovered that I had lost my [[copy]] of this and was very upset. [[Despite]] it's non-association with the [[original]] (which as a kid I never noticed and as an [[adult]] I don't care about), this is what cartoons *should* be like. [[Just]] [[dark]] enough to be interesting and light [[enough]] to be [[enjoyed]] by [[everyone]]. I'm more than [[glad]] that my [[parents]] raised me on this [[kind]] of [[thing]] [[rather]] than the cartoons we see today that teach our [[kids]] nothing. The music is [[great]], and gets stuck in your head forever...I have [[downloaded]] the entire soundtrack at one point or another. Still [[iike]] it 17 or so years after the [[outset]] [[period]] I saw it, in fact I discovered that I had lost my [[copying]] of this and was very upset. [[While]] it's non-association with the [[upfront]] (which as a kid I never noticed and as an [[grownup]] I don't care about), this is what cartoons *should* be like. [[Mere]] [[murky]] enough to be interesting and light [[satisfactorily]] to be [[liked]] by [[anybody]]. I'm more than [[grateful]] that my [[parenting]] raised me on this [[sorting]] of [[stuff]] [[somewhat]] than the cartoons we see today that teach our [[brats]] nothing. The music is [[resplendent]], and gets stuck in your head forever...I have [[offload]] the entire soundtrack at one point or another. --------------------------------------------- Result 3398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] I [[grew]] up (b. 1965) watching and loving the Thunderbirds. All my mates at school watched. We played "Thunderbirds" before school, during lunch and after school. We all wanted to be Virgil or Scott. No one wanted to be Alan. Counting down from 5 became an art [[form]]. I took my children to see the movie hoping they would get a glimpse of what I loved as a child. How [[bitterly]] [[disappointing]]. The only high point was the snappy theme tune. Not that it could compare with the original score of the Thunderbirds. Thankfully early Saturday mornings one television channel still plays reruns of the series Gerry Anderson and his wife created. Jonatha Frakes should hand in his directors chair, his version was completely hopeless. A waste of film. Utter rubbish. A CGI remake may be acceptable but replacing marionettes with Homo sapiens subsp. sapiens was a huge error of judgment. I [[surged]] up (b. 1965) watching and loving the Thunderbirds. All my mates at school watched. We played "Thunderbirds" before school, during lunch and after school. We all wanted to be Virgil or Scott. No one wanted to be Alan. Counting down from 5 became an art [[forme]]. I took my children to see the movie hoping they would get a glimpse of what I loved as a child. How [[deeply]] [[depressing]]. The only high point was the snappy theme tune. Not that it could compare with the original score of the Thunderbirds. Thankfully early Saturday mornings one television channel still plays reruns of the series Gerry Anderson and his wife created. Jonatha Frakes should hand in his directors chair, his version was completely hopeless. A waste of film. Utter rubbish. A CGI remake may be acceptable but replacing marionettes with Homo sapiens subsp. sapiens was a huge error of judgment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Just]] [[saw]] it yesterday in the Sao Paulo Intl Film Festival. Just before going I came here to [[see]] how it was rated, and at that time it was 7.4, a pretty [[nice]] rate...

After 15 [[minutes]] I was dying to get out (never did this), but felt embarrassed to do so as the [[producer]] of the movie was in the screening.

I did not like at all, the dialogs are [[shallow]] and lead nowhere, the [[characters]] are shallower than the dialogs, nothing [[lead]] anywhere, and the worst and worst: plenty of Siemens and Organics [[advertising]] on the movie. Despite the [[fact]] that I already [[paid]] to go to the movie and entertain myself, I still have to be [[bombarded]] by the main [[character]] chatting on the [[internet]] and Siemens [[mobile]] popping-up all the time on her lap-top; or another character having a [[bath]] or [[cutting]] her hair just to have Organics shampoo [[displayed]] [[enormously]] on the screen! All of this [[would]] be [[bearable]] if the [[plot]], [[characters]], [[romances]], anything was good, but was [[bad]], [[really]] [[bad]]! A "don't [[know]] how to do" sex-in-the-city.

Don't [[waste]] your [[time]] or [[money]]. [[Mere]] [[watched]] it yesterday in the Sao Paulo Intl Film Festival. Just before going I came here to [[behold]] how it was rated, and at that time it was 7.4, a pretty [[delightful]] rate...

After 15 [[mins]] I was dying to get out (never did this), but felt embarrassed to do so as the [[industrialists]] of the movie was in the screening.

I did not like at all, the dialogs are [[cursory]] and lead nowhere, the [[personages]] are shallower than the dialogs, nothing [[culminate]] anywhere, and the worst and worst: plenty of Siemens and Organics [[announcement]] on the movie. Despite the [[facto]] that I already [[pays]] to go to the movie and entertain myself, I still have to be [[shelled]] by the main [[trait]] chatting on the [[web]] and Siemens [[cellular]] popping-up all the time on her lap-top; or another character having a [[swim]] or [[sliced]] her hair just to have Organics shampoo [[exhibited]] [[infinitely]] on the screen! All of this [[could]] be [[tolerable]] if the [[intrigue]], [[character]], [[novels]], anything was good, but was [[inclement]], [[truthfully]] [[negative]]! A "don't [[savoir]] how to do" sex-in-the-city.

Don't [[squandering]] your [[moment]] or [[moneys]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3400 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I actually didn't enjoy this movie.

I saw it at a camp, and we didn't rave about it, we laughed at it. Sure, some parts are touching, but the acting is terrible, the effects are terrible, and the whole overall movie idea is terrible (now, I know it was based on a book which I haven't read, but I hope that the book was better than this, because frankly, I thought that this movie was very bad and boring). Like I said, I went to it with a bunch of people from a camp, and we were excited to be there, plus I got a caffeinated drink, but nonetheless, I struggled to stay awake. The only thing that kept me up (other than my fear of being embarrassed once I woke up) was the gunshots, that were quite pointless as well. I just really didn't like it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3401 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Firstly, I would like to point out that people who have [[criticised]] this [[film]] have made some glaring errors. Anything that has a rating below 6/10 is clearly utter nonsense.

Creep is an [[absolutely]] fantastic [[film]] with [[amazing]] [[film]] effects. The [[actors]] are highly [[believable]], the narrative [[thought]] [[provoking]] and the horror and graphical content extremely disturbing.

There is much [[mystique]] in this [[film]]. [[Many]] [[questions]] arise as the audience are revealed to the [[strange]] and freakish creature that makes habitat in the dark rat ridden tunnels. How was 'Craig' created and what [[happened]] to him?

A [[fantastic]] film with a large chill factor. A [[film]] with so [[many]] unanswered [[questions]] and a [[film]] that needs to be [[appreciated]] along with [[others]] like 28 Days [[Later]], The [[Bunker]], Dog Soldiers and Deathwatch.

Look forward to more of these [[fantastic]] films!! Firstly, I would like to point out that people who have [[critique]] this [[cinema]] have made some glaring errors. Anything that has a rating below 6/10 is clearly utter nonsense.

Creep is an [[altogether]] fantastic [[films]] with [[unbelievable]] [[movie]] effects. The [[actresses]] are highly [[dependable]], the narrative [[ideology]] [[causing]] and the horror and graphical content extremely disturbing.

There is much [[mysticism]] in this [[cinema]]. [[Various]] [[subjects]] arise as the audience are revealed to the [[freaky]] and freakish creature that makes habitat in the dark rat ridden tunnels. How was 'Craig' created and what [[sweated]] to him?

A [[unbelievable]] film with a large chill factor. A [[cinematography]] with so [[several]] unanswered [[issues]] and a [[kino]] that needs to be [[complimented]] along with [[alia]] like 28 Days [[Thereafter]], The [[Pillbox]], Dog Soldiers and Deathwatch.

Look forward to more of these [[glamorous]] films!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (70%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] I wouldn't give this movie a rating, it's not worthy. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer fan. I love her and would watch anything she made. Even in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, [[kept]] the viewer watching...waiting...for something to happen but nothing ever did. It had some good story lines but they ended abruptly as soon as it started. Some of the other characters had [[potential]] but nothing became of it.

Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good.

I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand.

The worst thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good grief.

I agree with the review that said .99 would have bought 3 cans of cat food and watching my cat eat would have been more exciting. Well said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the film because it sums it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud. I wouldn't give this movie a rating, it's not worthy. I watched it only because I'm a Pfieffer fan. I love her and would watch anything she made. Even in this dud, she didn't disappoint. Every scene with her in it, [[preserved]] the viewer watching...waiting...for something to happen but nothing ever did. It had some good story lines but they ended abruptly as soon as it started. Some of the other characters had [[prospective]] but nothing became of it.

Pfieffer was 29 when she made this film and at her most lovely. The wardrobe and set was surprisingly good.

I can watch mostly anything and rarely come across a movie I can't find something to like about it, but this was a dud. I don't understand.

The worst thing about it all, it had a big cliff hanger at the end. It had an ending scene that woke you up and say wow, this film is finally going some place, then the credits roll. Good grief.

I agree with the review that said .99 would have bought 3 cans of cat food and watching my cat eat would have been more exciting. Well said. Actually, that comment was more entertaining than the film because it sums it up so well. I too wasted .99 cents on this dud.dud.dud. --------------------------------------------- Result 3403 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]]

"[[Bleak]] House" is hands down the [[finest]] [[adaptation]] of a [[Charles]] Dickens [[Novel]] ever put on screen. Alway one of My favorite novels,I was exteremely [[pleased]] with this [[Television]] Mini [[Series]]. The late, [[great]] Denholm [[Elliot]] was [[perfectly]] cast as the noble [[John]] Jardyce and Diana Rigg was sheer perfection as the doomed Ladty Dedlock. The film [[captures]] the essence of Dickens era and is extremely [[faithful]] to the book,oly making minor plot cuts that do not effect the story. over all a [[brilliant]],[[moving]] and atmosphereic film.

"[[Dismal]] House" is hands down the [[meanest]] [[adapting]] of a [[Karel]] Dickens [[Newer]] ever put on screen. Alway one of My favorite novels,I was exteremely [[happier]] with this [[Televisions]] Mini [[Serial]]. The late, [[prodigious]] Denholm [[Elli]] was [[abundantly]] cast as the noble [[Johannes]] Jardyce and Diana Rigg was sheer perfection as the doomed Ladty Dedlock. The film [[caught]] the essence of Dickens era and is extremely [[trusty]] to the book,oly making minor plot cuts that do not effect the story. over all a [[glamorous]],[[relocating]] and atmosphereic film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3404 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "The Dream Child" of 1989 is the fifth film in the (generally overrated) "Nightmare" series, and at the [[latest]] from this point on, the series became [[total]] [[garbage]]. The only good films in the [[series]] were Wes Craven's 1984 original, and the third part, "The Dream Warriors" of 1987. The second part was disappointing and boring, and it was the fourth part in which the formerly scary madman Freddy Krueger began to annoy with constant idiotic jokes. This fifth entry to the series has [[hardly]] [[anything]] to [[recommend]] except for (admittedly great) [[visuals]], and one creepy scene, a flashback sequence to how Freddy Krueger came into existence. The rest of the film consists mainly of our razor-clawed maniac-turned-jokester yelling stupid one-liners, and the old formula of a bunch of teenage jackasses, who desperately try to avoid falling asleep, because good old Freddy awaits them in their dreams. Lisa Wilcox is back in the role of Alice Johnson, and a bunch of uninteresting crap, such as a super-dumb 'eerie' children's rhyme is added for no other reason than to have some sort of justification for making this superfluous and boring sequel... In Short: No originality, just a decline of the old formula, and an over-load of painfully annoying jokes. My (generous) rating of 3/10 is due to the great visuals, and especially to emphasize the difference to the terrible next sequel, "Freddy's Dead", which is awful beyond belief. In case you're not a hardcore Freddy Krueger enthusiast, "The Dream Child" should be avoided, and even if you are, this is more than likely to disappoint. "The Dream Child" of 1989 is the fifth film in the (generally overrated) "Nightmare" series, and at the [[newest]] from this point on, the series became [[whole]] [[detritus]]. The only good films in the [[serial]] were Wes Craven's 1984 original, and the third part, "The Dream Warriors" of 1987. The second part was disappointing and boring, and it was the fourth part in which the formerly scary madman Freddy Krueger began to annoy with constant idiotic jokes. This fifth entry to the series has [[practically]] [[something]] to [[recommended]] except for (admittedly great) [[picture]], and one creepy scene, a flashback sequence to how Freddy Krueger came into existence. The rest of the film consists mainly of our razor-clawed maniac-turned-jokester yelling stupid one-liners, and the old formula of a bunch of teenage jackasses, who desperately try to avoid falling asleep, because good old Freddy awaits them in their dreams. Lisa Wilcox is back in the role of Alice Johnson, and a bunch of uninteresting crap, such as a super-dumb 'eerie' children's rhyme is added for no other reason than to have some sort of justification for making this superfluous and boring sequel... In Short: No originality, just a decline of the old formula, and an over-load of painfully annoying jokes. My (generous) rating of 3/10 is due to the great visuals, and especially to emphasize the difference to the terrible next sequel, "Freddy's Dead", which is awful beyond belief. In case you're not a hardcore Freddy Krueger enthusiast, "The Dream Child" should be avoided, and even if you are, this is more than likely to disappoint. --------------------------------------------- Result 3405 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] My college professor says that Othello may be Shakespeare's finest [[drama]]. I don't know if I agree with him [[yet]]. I [[bought]] this video version of the [[film]]. First I love Kenneth BRanagh as Iago, he was [[perfectly]] complicated and worked very well in this adaptation. SUrprisingly, he didn't direct it but played a role. Lawrence Fishburne shows that American actors can play Shakespeare just as well as British actors can do. not that there was a British [[vs]]. American issue about it. In fact, if we all work together then Shakespeare can reach the masses which it richly [[deserves]] to do. Apart from other Shakespeare tragedies, this is dealt with the issue of race. Something that has existed since the beginning of time. The relationship between Iago and Emilia could have been better and shown the complicatedness of their union together. While Othello loves Desdemona with all his heart, he is weak for jealousy and fears losing her to a non-Moorish man like Cassio. It's quite a great scene at the end of the film but I won't reveal the ending. IT's just worth watching. I think they edited much of the lines to 2 hours but they always edit Shakespeare. My college professor says that Othello may be Shakespeare's finest [[opera]]. I don't know if I agree with him [[even]]. I [[buying]] this video version of the [[filmmaking]]. First I love Kenneth BRanagh as Iago, he was [[abundantly]] complicated and worked very well in this adaptation. SUrprisingly, he didn't direct it but played a role. Lawrence Fishburne shows that American actors can play Shakespeare just as well as British actors can do. not that there was a British [[v]]. American issue about it. In fact, if we all work together then Shakespeare can reach the masses which it richly [[merit]] to do. Apart from other Shakespeare tragedies, this is dealt with the issue of race. Something that has existed since the beginning of time. The relationship between Iago and Emilia could have been better and shown the complicatedness of their union together. While Othello loves Desdemona with all his heart, he is weak for jealousy and fears losing her to a non-Moorish man like Cassio. It's quite a great scene at the end of the film but I won't reveal the ending. IT's just worth watching. I think they edited much of the lines to 2 hours but they always edit Shakespeare. --------------------------------------------- Result 3406 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie is one of those I regret having [[invested]] 90 minutes of my [[life]] that I'll never get back in. The [[premise]] is really interesting - essentially it's a zombie flick from the [[perspective]] of the undead (let's not split hairs as to whether they're actually dead or not}. Unfortunately, they fail to deliver a compelling [[story]] [[within]] this framework. The [[nearly]] unbearable monotony of the lives of the central [[characters]] [[may]] [[add]] to the realism of the [[film]], but it [[sucks]] all the [[entertainment]] value right out of it. If they had put a little more [[effort]] toward keeping the viewer engaged, it would have been much more likely that they drive home the social commentary. This movie is one of those I regret having [[investing]] 90 minutes of my [[iife]] that I'll never get back in. The [[assumption]] is really interesting - essentially it's a zombie flick from the [[views]] of the undead (let's not split hairs as to whether they're actually dead or not}. Unfortunately, they fail to deliver a compelling [[histories]] [[inside]] this framework. The [[almost]] unbearable monotony of the lives of the central [[personages]] [[maggio]] [[adds]] to the realism of the [[movie]], but it [[stinks]] all the [[amusement]] value right out of it. If they had put a little more [[efforts]] toward keeping the viewer engaged, it would have been much more likely that they drive home the social commentary. --------------------------------------------- Result 3407 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] [I saw this [[movie]] once late on a public [[tv]] station, so I don't know if it's on video or not.]

This is one of the "[[Baby]] Burlesks" (sic) that [[Shirley]] Temple did in the early 1930s. It is [[hard]] to [[believe]] that anyone would [[let]] their [[daughter]] be in this racy little film which today might just be considered this side of "kiddie porn".

Shirley Temple stars in a cast which [[probably]] has an average age of 5. They are all in [[diapers]], and are in a saloon which [[serves]] milk [[instead]] of [[alcohol]]. The "cash" is in the [[form]] of lollipops.

Shirley [[playing]] a "femme fatale" sashays up to the [[bar]] and [[talks]] to [[soldiers]] who [[make]] suggestive comments about her (!). But [[Shirley]] doesn't [[need]] [[really]] their lollipops/cash because her [[purse]] is full of ones from other "[[men]]".

[[Meanwhile]] a [[little]] [[black]] [[boy]] does a suggestive [[dance]] on a [[nearby]] [[table]] (!).

What a [[strange]] [[film]] . . . [[infants]] [[using]] racy [[dialogue]] playing [[adult]] roles in a saloon. Who thought up this stuff any [[way]]? [I saw this [[cinematography]] once late on a public [[television]] station, so I don't know if it's on video or not.]

This is one of the "[[Babe]] Burlesks" (sic) that [[Sylvie]] Temple did in the early 1930s. It is [[harsh]] to [[think]] that anyone would [[letting]] their [[daughters]] be in this racy little film which today might just be considered this side of "kiddie porn".

Shirley Temple stars in a cast which [[indubitably]] has an average age of 5. They are all in [[strata]], and are in a saloon which [[contributes]] milk [[however]] of [[booze]]. The "cash" is in the [[forms]] of lollipops.

Shirley [[gaming]] a "femme fatale" sashays up to the [[barrister]] and [[dialogues]] to [[privates]] who [[deliver]] suggestive comments about her (!). But [[Sylvie]] doesn't [[required]] [[genuinely]] their lollipops/cash because her [[bags]] is full of ones from other "[[man]]".

[[Simultaneously]] a [[petite]] [[nigger]] [[bloke]] does a suggestive [[danse]] on a [[neighbour]] [[tableau]] (!).

What a [[inquisitive]] [[cinematography]] . . . [[toddler]] [[utilizing]] racy [[dialogues]] playing [[adulthood]] roles in a saloon. Who thought up this stuff any [[routes]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 3408 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I work as a hotel concierge in Washington DC and [[take]] my word, there was nothing remotely [[accurate]] about the [[character]] [[played]] by Michael J. Fox- # 1 we simply do not walk around with our pockets bursting with theater tickets and $100 bills! #2 If I ever let anybody use a room for some 'afternoon delight' time I'd be fired on the spot! The organization to which I belong (Les Clefs d'Or) has very definite standards of ethics and conduct that we take seriously. #3 [[Similarly]] untrue was the concept, at the end of the movie, of Doug simply removing his gold key emblem and passing it on to some other employee- we earn those keys and it is a badge of honor and knowledge to be allowed to wear them. There is a whole application and vetting process to joining our organization.

This film does nothing to dispel the unfortunate perception of a concierge as nothing but a money grubbing mercenary. In short it does a disservice to our organization. I welcome any comments. I work as a hotel concierge in Washington DC and [[taking]] my word, there was nothing remotely [[exact]] about the [[characters]] [[served]] by Michael J. Fox- # 1 we simply do not walk around with our pockets bursting with theater tickets and $100 bills! #2 If I ever let anybody use a room for some 'afternoon delight' time I'd be fired on the spot! The organization to which I belong (Les Clefs d'Or) has very definite standards of ethics and conduct that we take seriously. #3 [[Alike]] untrue was the concept, at the end of the movie, of Doug simply removing his gold key emblem and passing it on to some other employee- we earn those keys and it is a badge of honor and knowledge to be allowed to wear them. There is a whole application and vetting process to joining our organization.

This film does nothing to dispel the unfortunate perception of a concierge as nothing but a money grubbing mercenary. In short it does a disservice to our organization. I welcome any comments. --------------------------------------------- Result 3409 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is my [[favorite]] of the three care bears movies. Once again I liked all the songs. The big problem however as most people have pointed out was that this story contradicts the original. For those that saw the first movie recall the bears met their "cousins" who they apparently never knew about. It wasn't of course until the end that the cousins received their tummy symbols after proving how much they cared. In this story however the cousins grow up with the care bears and have tummy symbols all along. That being said this isn't a bad movie as long you keep it separate from the first. I thought the Darkheart character much more evil then the Nicholas of the first. But at the same time I felt it added a sort of balance to the sweetness of the care bears. I also liked the we care part at the end, although I know other people had mixed feelings about that scene. And of course I LOVED the songs. My favorites being Growing Up and Forever Young. The care bears movies have always had such good songs. Ten stars for a very good movie. This is my [[preferential]] of the three care bears movies. Once again I liked all the songs. The big problem however as most people have pointed out was that this story contradicts the original. For those that saw the first movie recall the bears met their "cousins" who they apparently never knew about. It wasn't of course until the end that the cousins received their tummy symbols after proving how much they cared. In this story however the cousins grow up with the care bears and have tummy symbols all along. That being said this isn't a bad movie as long you keep it separate from the first. I thought the Darkheart character much more evil then the Nicholas of the first. But at the same time I felt it added a sort of balance to the sweetness of the care bears. I also liked the we care part at the end, although I know other people had mixed feelings about that scene. And of course I LOVED the songs. My favorites being Growing Up and Forever Young. The care bears movies have always had such good songs. Ten stars for a very good movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3410 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Though]] [[Cher]] and Cage are the focal [[points]] of this [[story]], Gardenia and Dukakis are [[good]] counterparts for them- this is where Loretta and Ronny will be in 50 years- still in [[love]]. The [[whole]] cast does a [[nice]] [[job]] from Aiello to John Mahoney- it [[shows]] a [[real]] [[slice]] of life. [[Though]] I [[saw]] this [[long]] ago- I am [[glad]] it [[finally]] catapulted Cage to the [[place]] where he was [[recognized]] in Hollywood for his talent. From the [[music]] to the scenes at the opera to the [[kitchen]] table arguments- this is a very [[entertaining]] movie. [[While]] [[Sher]] and Cage are the focal [[dot]] of this [[saga]], Gardenia and Dukakis are [[alright]] counterparts for them- this is where Loretta and Ronny will be in 50 years- still in [[iove]]. The [[entire]] cast does a [[pleasurable]] [[employment]] from Aiello to John Mahoney- it [[denotes]] a [[actual]] [[cutting]] of life. [[While]] I [[sawthe]] this [[lengthy]] ago- I am [[grateful]] it [[lastly]] catapulted Cage to the [[placing]] where he was [[conceded]] in Hollywood for his talent. From the [[musicians]] to the scenes at the opera to the [[cooking]] table arguments- this is a very [[droll]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3411 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I [[think]] we all [[begin]] a lot of [[reviews]] with, "This could've made a [[GREAT]] movie." A demented ex-con freshly sprung, a tidy suburban family his target. Revenge, retribution, manipulation. Marty's [[usual]] laying on of the Karo [[syrup]]. But unfortunately somewhere in Universal's high-rise a memorandum came down: everyone [[ham]] it up.

Nolte only speaks with [[eyebrows]] raised, Lange [[bitches]] her way through cigarettes, Lewis "Ohmagod's!" her [[way]] though her scenes, and [[Bobby]] D...well, he's on a whole other magic [[carpet]]. Affecting some [[sort]] of Cajun/Huckleberry Hound accent hybrid, he chomps fat [[cigars]] and cackles at random atrocities such as "Problem Child". And I want you to imagine the accent mentioned above. Now imagine it spouting brain-clanging religious rhetoric at top volume like he [[swallowed]] six bibles, and you have De Niro's schtick here. Most distracting of all, though, is his most OVERDONE use of the "De Niro face" he's so lampooned for. Eyes squinting, forehead crinkled, lips curled. Crimany, Bob, you looked like Plastic Man.

The story apparently began off-screen 14 years earlier, when Nolte was unable to spare De Niro time in the bighouse for various assaults. Upon release, he feels Nolte's misrep of him back then warrants the terrorizing of he and his kin. And we're supposed to give De Niro's character a slight pass because Nolte withheld information that might've shortened his sentence. De Niro being one of these criminals who, despite being guilty of unspeakable acts, feels his lack of freedom justifies continuing such acts on the outside. Mmm-kay.

He goes after Notle's near-mistress (in a scene some may want to turn away from), his wife, his daughter, the family dog, ya know. Which is one of the shortcomings of Wesley Strick's screenplay: utter predictability. As each of De Niro's harassments becomes more gruesome, you can pretty much call the rest of the action before it happens. Strick isn't to be totally discredited, as he manages a few compelling dialogue-driven moments (De Niro and Lewis' seedy exchange in an empty theater is the film's best scene), but mostly it's all over-cranked. Scorsese's cartoonish photographic approach comes off as forced, not to mention the HORRIBLY outdated re-worked Bernard Hermann score (I kept waiting for the Wolf Man to show up with a genetically enlarged tarantula).

Thus we arrive at the comedic portion of the flick. Unintentionally comedic, that is. You know those scenes where something graphically horrific is happening, but you can't help but snicker out of sight of others? You'll do it here. Nolte and Lange squawking about infidelity, De Niro's thumb-flirting, he cross-dressing, and a kitchen slip on a certain substance that has to be seen to believed. And Bob's infernal, incessant, CONSTANT, mind-damaging, no-end-in sight blowhard ramblings of all the "philosophy" he disovered in prison. I wanted him killed to shut him up more than to save this annoying family.

I always hate to borrow thoughts from other reviewers, but here it's necessary. This really *is* Scorsese's version of Freddy Krueger. The manner in which De Niro relishes, speaks, stalks, withstands pain, right down to his one-liners, is vintage Freddy. Upon being scalded by a pot of thrown water: "You trying' to offer sumpin' hot?" Please. And that's just one example.

Unless you were a fan of the original 1962 flick and want a thrill out of seeing Balsam, Peck, and Mitchum nearly 30 years later (or want a serious head-shaking film experience), avoid a trip to the Cape. I [[ideas]] we all [[embark]] a lot of [[inspect]] with, "This could've made a [[WHOPPING]] movie." A demented ex-con freshly sprung, a tidy suburban family his target. Revenge, retribution, manipulation. Marty's [[ordinary]] laying on of the Karo [[sesame]]. But unfortunately somewhere in Universal's high-rise a memorandum came down: everyone [[chatham]] it up.

Nolte only speaks with [[brows]] raised, Lange [[hoes]] her way through cigarettes, Lewis "Ohmagod's!" her [[paths]] though her scenes, and [[Bubi]] D...well, he's on a whole other magic [[mat]]. Affecting some [[genre]] of Cajun/Huckleberry Hound accent hybrid, he chomps fat [[phillies]] and cackles at random atrocities such as "Problem Child". And I want you to imagine the accent mentioned above. Now imagine it spouting brain-clanging religious rhetoric at top volume like he [[eaten]] six bibles, and you have De Niro's schtick here. Most distracting of all, though, is his most OVERDONE use of the "De Niro face" he's so lampooned for. Eyes squinting, forehead crinkled, lips curled. Crimany, Bob, you looked like Plastic Man.

The story apparently began off-screen 14 years earlier, when Nolte was unable to spare De Niro time in the bighouse for various assaults. Upon release, he feels Nolte's misrep of him back then warrants the terrorizing of he and his kin. And we're supposed to give De Niro's character a slight pass because Nolte withheld information that might've shortened his sentence. De Niro being one of these criminals who, despite being guilty of unspeakable acts, feels his lack of freedom justifies continuing such acts on the outside. Mmm-kay.

He goes after Notle's near-mistress (in a scene some may want to turn away from), his wife, his daughter, the family dog, ya know. Which is one of the shortcomings of Wesley Strick's screenplay: utter predictability. As each of De Niro's harassments becomes more gruesome, you can pretty much call the rest of the action before it happens. Strick isn't to be totally discredited, as he manages a few compelling dialogue-driven moments (De Niro and Lewis' seedy exchange in an empty theater is the film's best scene), but mostly it's all over-cranked. Scorsese's cartoonish photographic approach comes off as forced, not to mention the HORRIBLY outdated re-worked Bernard Hermann score (I kept waiting for the Wolf Man to show up with a genetically enlarged tarantula).

Thus we arrive at the comedic portion of the flick. Unintentionally comedic, that is. You know those scenes where something graphically horrific is happening, but you can't help but snicker out of sight of others? You'll do it here. Nolte and Lange squawking about infidelity, De Niro's thumb-flirting, he cross-dressing, and a kitchen slip on a certain substance that has to be seen to believed. And Bob's infernal, incessant, CONSTANT, mind-damaging, no-end-in sight blowhard ramblings of all the "philosophy" he disovered in prison. I wanted him killed to shut him up more than to save this annoying family.

I always hate to borrow thoughts from other reviewers, but here it's necessary. This really *is* Scorsese's version of Freddy Krueger. The manner in which De Niro relishes, speaks, stalks, withstands pain, right down to his one-liners, is vintage Freddy. Upon being scalded by a pot of thrown water: "You trying' to offer sumpin' hot?" Please. And that's just one example.

Unless you were a fan of the original 1962 flick and want a thrill out of seeing Balsam, Peck, and Mitchum nearly 30 years later (or want a serious head-shaking film experience), avoid a trip to the Cape. --------------------------------------------- Result 3412 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Ugh! Another one of those "fooled by the cover" DVDs. I [[expected]] some [[kind]] of [[action]] at [[least]] with bears, cats, & such on the [[cover]]. I [[got]] NOTHING! [[Bad]] [[movie]]!.

I [[forced]] myself to watch this all the [[way]] through [[thinking]] that [[eventually]] [[SOMETHING]] [[would]] happen...no [[luck]].

Now the [[reason]] I [[gave]] this a 2 is because of the [[scenery]]; otherwise it [[sucked]].

The [[kid]] was [[terrible]], talking to himself ([[although]] I [[suppose]] they couldn't just [[run]] a [[movie]] with [[dumb]] [[music]] and no [[dialogue]] at all), doing his lame karate [[stances]] to a tree stump, [[threatening]] a raccoon, munching on worms, and (what a [[dumbass]]) kicking a porcupine. And he wouldn't be [[pulling]] those [[quills]] out that easily [[either]]...they [[stick]] like fishhooks. At [[least]] he [[fought]] the bear (weakly) a couple of times.

What was up with the flashback thing? It [[made]] a [[bad]] [[movie]] [[even]] [[worse]]. I [[wanted]] to [[see]] a survival [[movie]], not some [[dramatic]] bs about a [[kid]] [[suffering]] thru divorce.

What else can I [[say]]? Well, maybe they should have had the [[bear]] [[eat]] the [[kid]] or [[something]]. [[At]] [[least]] that would have been more [[exciting]].

People, don't [[waste]] your [[time]] on this one. Ugh! Another one of those "fooled by the cover" DVDs. I [[scheduled]] some [[sorting]] of [[actions]] at [[fewest]] with bears, cats, & such on the [[covering]]. I [[gets]] NOTHING! [[Inclement]] [[kino]]!.

I [[compelled]] myself to watch this all the [[paths]] through [[thoughts]] that [[ultimately]] [[ANYTHING]] [[could]] happen...no [[probabilities]].

Now the [[rationale]] I [[provided]] this a 2 is because of the [[panorama]]; otherwise it [[aspired]].

The [[petit]] was [[dire]], talking to himself ([[while]] I [[guess]] they couldn't just [[running]] a [[kino]] with [[imbecile]] [[musicians]] and no [[conversation]] at all), doing his lame karate [[philosophies]] to a tree stump, [[threats]] a raccoon, munching on worms, and (what a [[prick]]) kicking a porcupine. And he wouldn't be [[pulled]] those [[plumes]] out that easily [[neither]]...they [[wand]] like fishhooks. At [[lowest]] he [[strove]] the bear (weakly) a couple of times.

What was up with the flashback thing? It [[brought]] a [[mala]] [[flick]] [[yet]] [[worst]]. I [[wished]] to [[seeing]] a survival [[flick]], not some [[striking]] bs about a [[petit]] [[sufferings]] thru divorce.

What else can I [[told]]? Well, maybe they should have had the [[xiong]] [[ate]] the [[child]] or [[somethings]]. [[In]] [[fewest]] that would have been more [[breathtaking]].

People, don't [[squandering]] your [[moment]] on this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3413 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] This great movie has failed to [[register]] a [[higher]] [[rating]] than 5!Why not!It is a [[great]] [[portrayal]] of the [[life]] of [[Christ]] without the ruthless sensationalism of The [[Passion]] of The [[Christ]].Johnny [[Cash]] did great things for [[God]] which amazingly are [[shunned]] and neglected in [[areas]] where they should matter most,like our [[churches]].The [[film]] itself [[took]] less than a [[month]] to [[film]] as Johnny [[felt]] the [[strong]] [[presence]] of God guiding him through it.[[Great]] credit to [[everyone]] [[involved]] in this [[overwhelmingly]] [[sincere]] [[movie]] which will always be [[cherished]] by its [[fans]].[[At]] [[least]] the Billy Graham crusade rated it [[highly]] [[enough]] to [[use]] it as a prime [[source]] of [[education]] for [[new]] [[Christians]].[[Thanks]] [[Fox]] for [[producing]] it.As Walk the Line [[proved]] that it was freakish that this man survived [[yet]] [[alone]] produced such an [[underrated]] masterpiece.[[Movies]] are not canonized through popular vote as this production [[proves]]! In summary I believe that this film is one of the worlds great documentaries as it is forthright, [[honestly]] [[portrayed]] and a great [[witness]] to the [[Christian]] faith! This great movie has failed to [[inscription]] a [[superior]] [[appraisal]] than 5!Why not!It is a [[grand]] [[portrait]] of the [[lifetime]] of [[Jesus]] without the ruthless sensationalism of The [[Fervour]] of The [[Goodness]].Johnny [[Money]] did great things for [[Deity]] which amazingly are [[dodged]] and neglected in [[scopes]] where they should matter most,like our [[church]].The [[cinema]] itself [[picked]] less than a [[months]] to [[movies]] as Johnny [[deemed]] the [[vigorous]] [[attendance]] of God guiding him through it.[[Resplendent]] credit to [[anyone]] [[engaged]] in this [[essentially]] [[deepest]] [[cinematography]] which will always be [[cherishing]] by its [[amateurs]].[[During]] [[fewer]] the Billy Graham crusade rated it [[unimaginably]] [[satisfactorily]] to [[utilise]] it as a prime [[wellspring]] of [[tuition]] for [[novo]] [[Christianity]].[[Appreciation]] [[Renard]] for [[generating]] it.As Walk the Line [[evidenced]] that it was freakish that this man survived [[even]] [[merely]] produced such an [[underestimated]] masterpiece.[[Film]] are not canonized through popular vote as this production [[testifies]]! In summary I believe that this film is one of the worlds great documentaries as it is forthright, [[openly]] [[depicted]] and a great [[testimonial]] to the [[Christiane]] faith! --------------------------------------------- Result 3414 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[saw]] this in the theater and I instantly thought that it is [[good]] enough to own on video. I am a [[big]] nut for Sci-Fi action flicks though anyway.

Without giving any of the story away, it is worth seeing if you like Sci-Fi without [[requiring]] much [[thought]]. The story is basic, and the plot is very [[good]]. Worth your time to see!

Maybe they will make a sequel? :)

8 out of 10 I [[sawthe]] this in the theater and I instantly thought that it is [[buena]] enough to own on video. I am a [[gargantuan]] nut for Sci-Fi action flicks though anyway.

Without giving any of the story away, it is worth seeing if you like Sci-Fi without [[obliging]] much [[figured]]. The story is basic, and the plot is very [[alright]]. Worth your time to see!

Maybe they will make a sequel? :)

8 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3415 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Anemic comedy-drama, an unhappy, seemingly rushed affair featuring Cher as a woebegone housewife who slowly makes [[friends]] with the hit-man who's been hired to kill her by her husband. Chazz Palminteri, as the talkative hired gun, adapted the screenplay from his own play, with stagy set-ups and back-and-forth dialogue that [[quickly]] [[tires]] the eye and ear. An [[air]] of gloom hangs over the entire [[project]], and [[director]] Paul Mazursky can't [[get]] Cher out of her perpetual funk (she's listless). Despite all the top talent (including Robert De Niro as one of the producers), "Faithful" is fraudulent, with no substance to the story and characters who rarely come to life. *1/2 from **** Anemic comedy-drama, an unhappy, seemingly rushed affair featuring Cher as a woebegone housewife who slowly makes [[friendships]] with the hit-man who's been hired to kill her by her husband. Chazz Palminteri, as the talkative hired gun, adapted the screenplay from his own play, with stagy set-ups and back-and-forth dialogue that [[speedily]] [[tyre]] the eye and ear. An [[aeroplane]] of gloom hangs over the entire [[projects]], and [[headmaster]] Paul Mazursky can't [[obtain]] Cher out of her perpetual funk (she's listless). Despite all the top talent (including Robert De Niro as one of the producers), "Faithful" is fraudulent, with no substance to the story and characters who rarely come to life. *1/2 from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3416 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Saw in on TV late last [[night]]. Yeah, I can hear what y'all [[say]] about this one. It IS likely to be categorized as one of those stereo- typical TV soap series. In all fairness, the [[story]] line does have a fine [[twist]] to it, and you might nod saying, "Well, that's not what I expected." But, as a film, well it is not easy to [[spot]] a redeeming [[element]]. Casting, acting, camera work, cars, costume, setting, [[script]], no, there's [[nothing]] to congratulate. Rated R?? Oh, that scene. Did we need it? This is a film that you can watch it and then forget that you [[even]] [[watched]]. And what was the title again? Saw in on TV late last [[soir]]. Yeah, I can hear what y'all [[said]] about this one. It IS likely to be categorized as one of those stereo- typical TV soap series. In all fairness, the [[narratives]] line does have a fine [[twisting]] to it, and you might nod saying, "Well, that's not what I expected." But, as a film, well it is not easy to [[smudge]] a redeeming [[elements]]. Casting, acting, camera work, cars, costume, setting, [[hyphen]], no, there's [[anything]] to congratulate. Rated R?? Oh, that scene. Did we need it? This is a film that you can watch it and then forget that you [[yet]] [[saw]]. And what was the title again? --------------------------------------------- Result 3417 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As a huge baseball fan, my [[scrutiny]] of this [[film]] is how realistic it [[appears]]. Dennis Quaid had all of the right moves and stances of a major league pitcher. It is a [[fantastic]] [[true]] story told with just a [[little]] too much "[[Disney]]" for my taste. As a huge baseball fan, my [[oversight]] of this [[filmmaking]] is how realistic it [[seems]]. Dennis Quaid had all of the right moves and stances of a major league pitcher. It is a [[sumptuous]] [[veritable]] story told with just a [[petite]] too much "[[Disneyland]]" for my taste. --------------------------------------------- Result 3418 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I was [[expecting]] a B-Movie [[French]] musical. After all, Dhéry, [[Blanche]], DeFunès were superstars of low budget French [[films]] of that [[time]]. And it is in [[color]]! But I have hallucination in this [[unbelievable]] one [[hour]] 30 of [[pure]] mediocrity. [[Musical]] [[numbers]] are [[awful]], and [[comedy]] is [[absolutely]] [[boring]] and [[stupid]]. And the songs? What songs? This is just a [[succession]] of [[bad]] [[numbers]], one after another. The only one very [[rare]] [[thing]] about that [[thing]] is the nudity of [[women]]. It was not familiar at that [[time]]. In fact, some [[numbers]] are just there to [[show]] us topless women. It [[adds]] to the mediocrity! And [[try]] to [[find]] [[young]] [[Michel]] Serrault, the future [[great]] [[actor]] of French [[cinema]], in a bit [[part]] as a [[musician]], in his very first [[movie]]. Good [[luck]]! I was [[waits]] a B-Movie [[Frans]] musical. After all, Dhéry, [[Blanch]], DeFunès were superstars of low budget French [[cinematographic]] of that [[moment]]. And it is in [[colours]]! But I have hallucination in this [[awesome]] one [[hora]] 30 of [[pur]] mediocrity. [[Music]] [[digit]] are [[fearsome]], and [[humour]] is [[wholly]] [[bored]] and [[foolish]]. And the songs? What songs? This is just a [[inheritance]] of [[inclement]] [[numerals]], one after another. The only one very [[scarce]] [[stuff]] about that [[stuff]] is the nudity of [[mujer]]. It was not familiar at that [[times]]. In fact, some [[figures]] are just there to [[exhibited]] us topless women. It [[added]] to the mediocrity! And [[tried]] to [[finds]] [[youths]] [[Michael]] Serrault, the future [[prodigious]] [[protagonist]] of French [[cinemas]], in a bit [[portions]] as a [[songwriter]], in his very first [[film]]. Good [[opportunity]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3419 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] "The 700 Club" has to be the single most [[bigoted]] [[television]] [[program]] in the history of television itself. To [[make]] [[matters]] [[worse]], it's been on the air since 1966, [[implying]] that thousands if not millions of people are buying into its [[hate]] and lies. [[Headed]] by Pat Robertson, the unscrupulous, megalomaniacal founder and leader of the Christian Coalition, "The 700 Club" takes us from [[misinformation]] to misunderstanding, broadcasting "news" as they [[like]] to [[think]] of it and [[trying]] to convince its [[audience]] that all of the world's problems are to blame on homosexuals, Wiccans, [[New]] Age spiritualists, [[Muslims]], Jews, Hindus, non-Fundamentalist [[Christians]], Democrats, single [[mothers]], foreigners, feminists, evolutionists, environmentalists, NASA [[scientists]], and anyone [[else]] who doesn't [[share]] their fanatical [[religious]] [[views]]. It's [[actually]] the [[best]] [[fake]] news since "The [[Daily]] [[Show]]" or the "[[Weekend]] Update" segment of "[[Saturday]] [[Night]] Live," or [[since]] "FOX News," for that [[matter]]. Of course, Pat's always the one who makes each of the [[decisions]], [[saying]] whatever [[comes]] to [[mind]] and not [[giving]] a [[damn]] who it offends or hurts. In the meantime, he continues his [[part]] in the [[struggle]] to [[transform]] the United States into a militarized police state by having the [[Religious]] [[Wrong]] stick their noses in everything they can and asking for one donation after another - no less than a measly $100 to become a member, by the way - to fund Pat's African diamond mines and buy oil from companies reprimanded by the government in the past for their abuse of the environment. No, never mind that [[Pat]] was [[good]] [[friends]] with the genocidal dictators of Zaire and Zimbabwe in order to help him acquire such wealth; it's all for the greater glory of God, don't you know? And of course, the hosts of "The 700 Club" are always willing to read letters "written by viewers" as they like to put it, coincidentally each typed in the same format and all on the same color of paper by "viewers" supposedly healed of various afflictions by the said hosts (they claim to have "words of knowledge" come to them) but who NEVER APPEAR on the program to say what happened to them. Honestly, how can anyone take a show seriously when they're using a poor applause recording? It should make people wonder why there's no studio audience.

The sad thing that Pat's cronies and viewers don't realize or just don't WANT to realize are the horrible things he's done and said. This is a guy who agreed with Jerry Falwell that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States were the result of God punishing us for our acceptance of homosexuality and feminism. Ironic, considering that Pat has twice publicly referred to the implementation of a nuclear weapon in the State Department; I have little doubt it was his wealth that kept him from getting arrested for such statements. His rants against homosexuals, single mothers, and any number of sexual practices he considers "sinful" are interesting, considering he was known to frequent a number of brothels during the Korean War. As the Bible says, be fruitful and multiply, so congratulations, Pat - thanks to you, there's probably a number of children born to single Korean mothers. Then, of course, there was the time he called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (not that he's a saint, but still). Oh, yes, and let's not soon forget the time this "crusader for human life" supported forced abortions in China. Very "Christian" of him, wouldn't you say?

And just in case Pat has forgotten, I haven't forgotten his little speech that evangelical Christians today are "being treated exactly as the Jews were in Nazi Germany." Honestly, to compare his "plight" to the horrors of the Holocaust is almost unforgivable. Speaking of which, need I mention about how he blatantly lied that homosexuality ran rampant among the Nazi party in a pathetic attempt to discredit homosexuals? Of course, history shows us that the Nazis acted toward homosexuals the same way they acted toward Jews. Pat Robertson is one of the biggest liars in history. If he was Pinocchio, his nose would encircle the Earth.

Unfortunately, more and more people continue to believe him every day. This is your wake-up call, people; "The 700 Club" is one of the most if not the single most vile program in television history. It's evil masquerading as good; it's a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing. It's bigoted filth that tries to look clean, pretty, and loving. It's living proof that hateful, dangerous religious views aren't confined to certain groups in the Middle East. Even those who are not of the Christian faith know that it goes against everything Jesus taught, and if Jesus was to appear to this "club," He wouldn't be emulating them. Instead, He'd be chastising them as He did the Pharisees of His time and overturning the money bins of their telethons as He did in front of the synagogue in His time. All I can say is thank God that Pat had no chance of becoming President; if he did, he'd be the harbinger of Armageddon - and not on the side of the good guys. "The 700 Club" has to be the single most [[fanatical]] [[tvs]] [[programmes]] in the history of television itself. To [[deliver]] [[issues]] [[lousiest]], it's been on the air since 1966, [[suggesting]] that thousands if not millions of people are buying into its [[loathes]] and lies. [[Presided]] by Pat Robertson, the unscrupulous, megalomaniacal founder and leader of the Christian Coalition, "The 700 Club" takes us from [[disinformation]] to misunderstanding, broadcasting "news" as they [[loves]] to [[reckon]] of it and [[tempting]] to convince its [[viewers]] that all of the world's problems are to blame on homosexuals, Wiccans, [[Nouveau]] Age spiritualists, [[Islamist]], Jews, Hindus, non-Fundamentalist [[Kristen]], Democrats, single [[mother]], foreigners, feminists, evolutionists, environmentalists, NASA [[scientist]], and anyone [[further]] who doesn't [[exchanges]] their fanatical [[ecclesiastical]] [[perspectives]]. It's [[indeed]] the [[better]] [[faux]] news since "The [[Everyday]] [[Exhibition]]" or the "[[Weekends]] Update" segment of "[[Mondays]] [[Overnight]] Live," or [[because]] "FOX News," for that [[topic]]. Of course, Pat's always the one who makes each of the [[decision]], [[telling]] whatever [[happens]] to [[esprit]] and not [[conferring]] a [[fuck]] who it offends or hurts. In the meantime, he continues his [[parties]] in the [[battles]] to [[transmutation]] the United States into a militarized police state by having the [[Nuns]] [[Improper]] stick their noses in everything they can and asking for one donation after another - no less than a measly $100 to become a member, by the way - to fund Pat's African diamond mines and buy oil from companies reprimanded by the government in the past for their abuse of the environment. No, never mind that [[Patricia]] was [[alright]] [[friend]] with the genocidal dictators of Zaire and Zimbabwe in order to help him acquire such wealth; it's all for the greater glory of God, don't you know? And of course, the hosts of "The 700 Club" are always willing to read letters "written by viewers" as they like to put it, coincidentally each typed in the same format and all on the same color of paper by "viewers" supposedly healed of various afflictions by the said hosts (they claim to have "words of knowledge" come to them) but who NEVER APPEAR on the program to say what happened to them. Honestly, how can anyone take a show seriously when they're using a poor applause recording? It should make people wonder why there's no studio audience.

The sad thing that Pat's cronies and viewers don't realize or just don't WANT to realize are the horrible things he's done and said. This is a guy who agreed with Jerry Falwell that the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States were the result of God punishing us for our acceptance of homosexuality and feminism. Ironic, considering that Pat has twice publicly referred to the implementation of a nuclear weapon in the State Department; I have little doubt it was his wealth that kept him from getting arrested for such statements. His rants against homosexuals, single mothers, and any number of sexual practices he considers "sinful" are interesting, considering he was known to frequent a number of brothels during the Korean War. As the Bible says, be fruitful and multiply, so congratulations, Pat - thanks to you, there's probably a number of children born to single Korean mothers. Then, of course, there was the time he called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (not that he's a saint, but still). Oh, yes, and let's not soon forget the time this "crusader for human life" supported forced abortions in China. Very "Christian" of him, wouldn't you say?

And just in case Pat has forgotten, I haven't forgotten his little speech that evangelical Christians today are "being treated exactly as the Jews were in Nazi Germany." Honestly, to compare his "plight" to the horrors of the Holocaust is almost unforgivable. Speaking of which, need I mention about how he blatantly lied that homosexuality ran rampant among the Nazi party in a pathetic attempt to discredit homosexuals? Of course, history shows us that the Nazis acted toward homosexuals the same way they acted toward Jews. Pat Robertson is one of the biggest liars in history. If he was Pinocchio, his nose would encircle the Earth.

Unfortunately, more and more people continue to believe him every day. This is your wake-up call, people; "The 700 Club" is one of the most if not the single most vile program in television history. It's evil masquerading as good; it's a wolf-in-sheep's-clothing. It's bigoted filth that tries to look clean, pretty, and loving. It's living proof that hateful, dangerous religious views aren't confined to certain groups in the Middle East. Even those who are not of the Christian faith know that it goes against everything Jesus taught, and if Jesus was to appear to this "club," He wouldn't be emulating them. Instead, He'd be chastising them as He did the Pharisees of His time and overturning the money bins of their telethons as He did in front of the synagogue in His time. All I can say is thank God that Pat had no chance of becoming President; if he did, he'd be the harbinger of Armageddon - and not on the side of the good guys. --------------------------------------------- Result 3420 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What an inspiring movie, I laughed, cried and felt love. For a true story,it does give you hope and that miracles do happen. It has a great cast. Ellen Burstyn, Samantha Mathis, Jodelle Ferland(she's 4 or 5yrs. old) what a actress. Its on Showtime. A Must See Movie!! :)= --------------------------------------------- Result 3421 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I was required to watch the movie for my work, so I didn't pay for it (on the [[contrary]], i got paid), but I still found the [[movie]] to [[suck]] far more than average. The jokes were lame, the two lead actresses... well, to use the "First wives club" division of women's ages in Hollywood, they are no longer in their "hot chick" age but more in their "district attorney" age. What angered me most about the [[movie]] was the main plot line, which pretty much completely plagiarized "Beavis & [[Butthead]] Do America" (in which the boys are all jazzed up about some dude offering them money to "do his wife", not realizing they're expected to assassinate her). All in all, a bland piece of crap. I was required to watch the movie for my work, so I didn't pay for it (on the [[opposite]], i got paid), but I still found the [[cinematography]] to [[lick]] far more than average. The jokes were lame, the two lead actresses... well, to use the "First wives club" division of women's ages in Hollywood, they are no longer in their "hot chick" age but more in their "district attorney" age. What angered me most about the [[kino]] was the main plot line, which pretty much completely plagiarized "Beavis & [[Jackass]] Do America" (in which the boys are all jazzed up about some dude offering them money to "do his wife", not realizing they're expected to assassinate her). All in all, a bland piece of crap. --------------------------------------------- Result 3422 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a delightful romp – a very competently made film that has so much charm and a feelgood factor that a lot of romantic comedies lack. Einstein is brilliantly acted by Walter Matthau, while Meg Ryan's Catherine is unforgettable – better than I have seen her in those films opposite Tom Hanks – as the young mathematician struggling to be recognized.

You don't need to be a young woman to understand Catherine's struggle and feel sympathetic for her immediately, and as a young man it's easy to understand what must have gone through Ed's (Tim Robbins) mind in pursuing his true love. There's universal appeal in these emotions, even if I.Q. keeps it all light, fun and tied up nicely.

Sure it's not heavy, but if you look there are some subtexts. People remember Albert Einstein as a scientist yet he was a great spiritualist; his sayings such as something along the lines of, 'If it is not impossible, then why do it?' suggest he is a believer in fulfilling higher goals beyond one's immediate grasp. In this film, there are questions of what an accident really is – such as whether Albert and his whacky sidekicks' intervention in prying Catherine away from stiff-upper-lip, loveless James (Stephen Fry – who gives this otherwise cardboard character life and you cannot help but feel for his lack of feeling) counts. How much intervention happens in our lives that we do not see, and comes across as serendipitous?

And of course, we'd like to think in real life, despite what we often observe of the people we know, that we Edwards get the Catherines and Jameses have to learn how to defrost the icewater in their veins. How nice to know that it might work out in I.Q.'s innocent (and disturbingly, exclusively Caucasian) Eisenhower-era land of make-believe. --------------------------------------------- Result 3423 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Elvira, Mistress of The Dark, is a [[fun]], camp horror [[comedy]], in which the fourth wall is broken a couple of times and the jokes often stay below the navel. And the breasts of Cassandra Peterson become a character of their own.

Elvira (Cassandra Peterson) is stacked horror show hostess, who learns, that she has inherited her aunt Morgana. So she goes to a little town of Fallwell, which is ruled by the most horrendous monster ever to embrace the earth: Morality comity. Elviras boobacious appearance is, of course, too much for the prunes, but the kids of the town get a kick out of her different kind of approach on life. And of course there is even more sinister evil, her uncle Vincent (William Morgan Sheppard), who is after Elvira's mothers book of spells. See, Elvira actually is a real witch, she just doesn't know it. Yet.

For what it is, Elvira is quite funny film, even though the script does leave a lot of room for improvement. Most laughs come from the difference between Elvira and the people of good morals, but there are a couple of good visual gags as well. Over all direction is okay, but it never rises to be anything more than that. In all, a good, intentionally campy, comedy. If you like this kind of thing, that is. Elvira, Mistress of The Dark, is a [[droll]], camp horror [[travesty]], in which the fourth wall is broken a couple of times and the jokes often stay below the navel. And the breasts of Cassandra Peterson become a character of their own.

Elvira (Cassandra Peterson) is stacked horror show hostess, who learns, that she has inherited her aunt Morgana. So she goes to a little town of Fallwell, which is ruled by the most horrendous monster ever to embrace the earth: Morality comity. Elviras boobacious appearance is, of course, too much for the prunes, but the kids of the town get a kick out of her different kind of approach on life. And of course there is even more sinister evil, her uncle Vincent (William Morgan Sheppard), who is after Elvira's mothers book of spells. See, Elvira actually is a real witch, she just doesn't know it. Yet.

For what it is, Elvira is quite funny film, even though the script does leave a lot of room for improvement. Most laughs come from the difference between Elvira and the people of good morals, but there are a couple of good visual gags as well. Over all direction is okay, but it never rises to be anything more than that. In all, a good, intentionally campy, comedy. If you like this kind of thing, that is. --------------------------------------------- Result 3424 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[James]] Bond in the wilderness? [[Well]], that's the way it [[looks]]: Pierce Brosnan is after all [[best]] known as [[Bond]] in "[[Tommorrow]] Never Dies" (1997) and "Golden Eye" (1995) - both shot prior to this release. Frankly, the film's two [[leads]] are both badly miscast, with Brosnan turning in the [[marginally]] more [[convincing]] performance, and with Annie Galipeau (as Pony, Grey Owl's love interest) having to battle with carelessly-written dialogue.

The two [[aunts]], on the other hand are perfect. But the film is not about aunts. It is about the wilds of the Canadian wilderness. And while the photography may be pretty, there is no grit to the harsh reality of living in the wilds. Annie Galipeau, as Pony, just fails to be convincing, unfortunately, because I really wanted to believe in her. She was a relatively inexperienced twenty-year-old on this film, and it could have worked, but Richard Attenborough was maybe just not tough enough on her. He makes her look vulnerable, which of course she is.. but in the wrong sort of way.

But one thing for sure, she appears picture-perfect throughout. But mascara and eyebrow thickener in the wilderness? It just doesn't fit, especially as she only ever seems to walk forest trials with Bond (sorry, Grey Owl), and use photo-ops for kissing close-ups.

I've lived with forest people in the Pacific North West, and they simply don't look this pretty and stay so sweet while fighting for survival. Which brings me to another point: the film fails to evoke the period in which it is set: the 1930s. I put the blame here largely on a lack-lustre script that is keen on preaching at the expense of dramatic arc, plot points and those small details that can evoke period through action.

William Nicholson wrote the screenplay, and his latest offering, "Elizabeth, the Golden Age" opened three days ago, so I do hope there is an improvement.

Yes, I've read the comments others have posted, but I'm not convinced. A lot of potential, but mishandled and even maybe ill-conceived. If it had had a religious film, it would have been panned, but because it preaches environmentalism, the film remains somewhat above criticism, since it is "politically correct." Sorry, for all that, I don't buy it. Amen. [[Jacques]] Bond in the wilderness? [[Good]], that's the way it [[seem]]: Pierce Brosnan is after all [[finest]] known as [[Bonded]] in "[[Tommorow]] Never Dies" (1997) and "Golden Eye" (1995) - both shot prior to this release. Frankly, the film's two [[leeds]] are both badly miscast, with Brosnan turning in the [[faintly]] more [[conclusive]] performance, and with Annie Galipeau (as Pony, Grey Owl's love interest) having to battle with carelessly-written dialogue.

The two [[uncles]], on the other hand are perfect. But the film is not about aunts. It is about the wilds of the Canadian wilderness. And while the photography may be pretty, there is no grit to the harsh reality of living in the wilds. Annie Galipeau, as Pony, just fails to be convincing, unfortunately, because I really wanted to believe in her. She was a relatively inexperienced twenty-year-old on this film, and it could have worked, but Richard Attenborough was maybe just not tough enough on her. He makes her look vulnerable, which of course she is.. but in the wrong sort of way.

But one thing for sure, she appears picture-perfect throughout. But mascara and eyebrow thickener in the wilderness? It just doesn't fit, especially as she only ever seems to walk forest trials with Bond (sorry, Grey Owl), and use photo-ops for kissing close-ups.

I've lived with forest people in the Pacific North West, and they simply don't look this pretty and stay so sweet while fighting for survival. Which brings me to another point: the film fails to evoke the period in which it is set: the 1930s. I put the blame here largely on a lack-lustre script that is keen on preaching at the expense of dramatic arc, plot points and those small details that can evoke period through action.

William Nicholson wrote the screenplay, and his latest offering, "Elizabeth, the Golden Age" opened three days ago, so I do hope there is an improvement.

Yes, I've read the comments others have posted, but I'm not convinced. A lot of potential, but mishandled and even maybe ill-conceived. If it had had a religious film, it would have been panned, but because it preaches environmentalism, the film remains somewhat above criticism, since it is "politically correct." Sorry, for all that, I don't buy it. Amen. --------------------------------------------- Result 3425 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[dont]] ever ever ever consider [[watching]] this [[sorry]] [[excuse]] for a [[film]]. the [[way]] it is shot, lit, [[acted]] etc. just doesn't make [[sense]]. it's all so [[bad]] it is difficult to watch. [[loads]] of clips are repeated beyond boredom. there [[seems]] to be no 'normal' [[person]] in the [[entire]] film and the existence of the 'outside world' is, well, it just doesn't [[exist]]. and why does that bald [[guy]] become [[invincible]] all of a sudden? this [[film]] is beyond [[stupidity]]. [[zero]]. [[doesnt]] ever ever ever consider [[staring]] this [[apologise]] [[pretext]] for a [[films]]. the [[paths]] it is shot, lit, [[worked]] etc. just doesn't make [[feeling]]. it's all so [[mala]] it is difficult to watch. [[burden]] of clips are repeated beyond boredom. there [[appears]] to be no 'normal' [[persons]] in the [[total]] film and the existence of the 'outside world' is, well, it just doesn't [[existent]]. and why does that bald [[fella]] become [[undefeated]] all of a sudden? this [[films]] is beyond [[craziness]]. [[zeroed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3426 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The Wayward Cloud is a [[frustrating]] [[film]] to watch. Infuriatingly [[enigmatic]], it [[treats]] each shot like a work of art. You get the impression that the composition of each shot has been [[designed]] and [[prepared]] with a degree of exquisite [[care]] that borders on obsession; Expressing how far cinema has progressed since the very first films were cranked out in the nineteenth century and [[mimicking]] their construction, the camera here [[hardly]] ever moves – apart from during the camp and colourful musical numbers. Ambient noise is kept to a minimum and [[barely]] a word is spoken. This curious but effective device forces the [[audience]] to focus their attention on visual stimuli alone so that, even as the story progresses at a snail-like pace we feel ourselves becoming immersed. Unfortunately, for me at least, this immersion begins to unravel somewhere around the hour mark. I began to feel as if the film was challenging me to keep watching while becoming more difficult as the minutes dragged so that the mere act of watching became a battle of wills.

Had the content of this film not been as sexual as it is it would no doubt been even more obscure to Western audiences. As it is, there's an abundance of female nudity and an act of sexual abuse on an unconscious (or possibly dead) woman that is so repugnant that, while it may speak volumes about the degradation to which pornography subjects both men and women (the users and the used) it is so over-zealous in the manner in which it chooses to make its point as to effectively render it ineffective. Of course the worst and most enthusiastic participants of the explosion in available pornographic content will seek this film out for all the wrong reasons and watch it with their sticky finger on the fast-forward button of the remote.

For all its problems, the film is definitely a stayer, and the more you think about it the more sense certain aspects of it seem to make. Ironically, for a film in which so little happens, the viewer would probably be proportionately rewarded by watching a second or even third time. For me, however, once was enough… The Wayward Cloud is a [[depressing]] [[kino]] to watch. Infuriatingly [[mysterious]], it [[deals]] each shot like a work of art. You get the impression that the composition of each shot has been [[destined]] and [[braced]] with a degree of exquisite [[caring]] that borders on obsession; Expressing how far cinema has progressed since the very first films were cranked out in the nineteenth century and [[imitating]] their construction, the camera here [[almost]] ever moves – apart from during the camp and colourful musical numbers. Ambient noise is kept to a minimum and [[hardly]] a word is spoken. This curious but effective device forces the [[spectators]] to focus their attention on visual stimuli alone so that, even as the story progresses at a snail-like pace we feel ourselves becoming immersed. Unfortunately, for me at least, this immersion begins to unravel somewhere around the hour mark. I began to feel as if the film was challenging me to keep watching while becoming more difficult as the minutes dragged so that the mere act of watching became a battle of wills.

Had the content of this film not been as sexual as it is it would no doubt been even more obscure to Western audiences. As it is, there's an abundance of female nudity and an act of sexual abuse on an unconscious (or possibly dead) woman that is so repugnant that, while it may speak volumes about the degradation to which pornography subjects both men and women (the users and the used) it is so over-zealous in the manner in which it chooses to make its point as to effectively render it ineffective. Of course the worst and most enthusiastic participants of the explosion in available pornographic content will seek this film out for all the wrong reasons and watch it with their sticky finger on the fast-forward button of the remote.

For all its problems, the film is definitely a stayer, and the more you think about it the more sense certain aspects of it seem to make. Ironically, for a film in which so little happens, the viewer would probably be proportionately rewarded by watching a second or even third time. For me, however, once was enough… --------------------------------------------- Result 3427 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Just]] another film that exploits gratuitous frontal male nudity; [[awful]] acting, plus, the lovemaking scenes are the most un-sexy I've ever seen (and this is not about me not linking the idea of two young men making love, since I'm gay).

Again, as in Mil nubes de paz, Julian Hernandez [[directed]] an incredibly [[pretentious]] film with a story that makes enough argument for a short [[film]] of about five minutes but manages to make a 2 hour film with it... And this time, there isn't [[even]] the [[issue]] of racism and commodification in the Mexican gay community to talk about! God gracious have mercy on us! [[Only]] another film that exploits gratuitous frontal male nudity; [[horrendous]] acting, plus, the lovemaking scenes are the most un-sexy I've ever seen (and this is not about me not linking the idea of two young men making love, since I'm gay).

Again, as in Mil nubes de paz, Julian Hernandez [[geared]] an incredibly [[cocky]] film with a story that makes enough argument for a short [[movies]] of about five minutes but manages to make a 2 hour film with it... And this time, there isn't [[yet]] the [[issues]] of racism and commodification in the Mexican gay community to talk about! God gracious have mercy on us! --------------------------------------------- Result 3428 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I have to [[admit]], I wasn't expecting much going into this film viewing in my Japenese film [[class]], but this [[film]] really [[blew]] me away. The director does a [[wonderful]] job following through with the title of his film, truly portraying a picture of madness. I think the fact that this film is silent adds to the resemblance of madness, helping the viewer experience the characters inner world rather than the world outside his mind. This [[film]] just added to my [[feelings]] about [[foreign]] silent films vs. American, in that the foreign films work much more to exercise your mind and make you think rather than going for the fluffy film always with the happy ending, exercising the imagination very little. I have to [[accept]], I wasn't expecting much going into this film viewing in my Japenese film [[classroom]], but this [[kino]] really [[farted]] me away. The director does a [[sumptuous]] job following through with the title of his film, truly portraying a picture of madness. I think the fact that this film is silent adds to the resemblance of madness, helping the viewer experience the characters inner world rather than the world outside his mind. This [[movie]] just added to my [[sensations]] about [[alien]] silent films vs. American, in that the foreign films work much more to exercise your mind and make you think rather than going for the fluffy film always with the happy ending, exercising the imagination very little. --------------------------------------------- Result 3429 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Today]] if someone mentions the name Victor McLaglen the response most likely will be "Who?" or perhaps "Why?" Well, believe it or not, Victor McLaglen won the Academy Award for [[Best]] [[Actor]] in this film, which is about a poor, desperate man who is willing to sell out his best friend for "carfare" to the United States. It's an interesting [[movie]] which shows how low even the most well-meaning shnooks will go just for a few bucks. The [[movie]] takes place in British-dominated Ireland and while all the other characters are either directly or indirectly [[fighting]] for the political independence of Ireland, all Mr. McLaglen's character is concerned about is getting money and getting drunk. The movie makes one wonder whether political activism is worth all the trouble because while the activist is struggling to make a point, many others not only do not care, they don't even know what the fuss is all about. The morale of this movie is: look out for the friend, he may sell you out for a dime. [[Hoy]] if someone mentions the name Victor McLaglen the response most likely will be "Who?" or perhaps "Why?" Well, believe it or not, Victor McLaglen won the Academy Award for [[Nicest]] [[Actress]] in this film, which is about a poor, desperate man who is willing to sell out his best friend for "carfare" to the United States. It's an interesting [[cinematographic]] which shows how low even the most well-meaning shnooks will go just for a few bucks. The [[filmmaking]] takes place in British-dominated Ireland and while all the other characters are either directly or indirectly [[fight]] for the political independence of Ireland, all Mr. McLaglen's character is concerned about is getting money and getting drunk. The movie makes one wonder whether political activism is worth all the trouble because while the activist is struggling to make a point, many others not only do not care, they don't even know what the fuss is all about. The morale of this movie is: look out for the friend, he may sell you out for a dime. --------------------------------------------- Result 3430 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I'm not a stage purist. A movie could have been made of this play, and it would almost necessarily require changes... comme ci, comme ca. But the modest conceits of this material are lost or misunderstood by the movie's creators who are in full-on "shallow blockbuster" mode. It would be hard to imagine a worse [[director]]. Perhaps only [[Josh]] Logan & Jack Warner could have [[ruined]] this in the same way Attenborough did.

Onstage A Chorus line was a triumph of workshopping as a production method. Dancers answering a casting call found themselves sitting around shooting the crap about their stage-career experiences (very 70s!). Then Bennett and Hamlisch took some time, handed them a song and cast them as themselves. ...astonishing! Unbelievably modern. The 'story'of ACL is (in turn) about answering a casting call for a play we never have a complete view of, because the play doesn't matter. It was meta before the idea was invented, 25 years before Adaptation noodled with a similar idea. ACL was also another in a reductivist trend that is still alive, & which is a hallmark of modern creativity: that technique itself is compelling... that there's more drama in an average person's life than you could ever synthesize with invented characters. What a gracious idea. The stage play had one performance area (an empty stage) and three different ways to alter the backdrop, to alleviate visual tedium, not to keep viewers distracted. The space recedes and the actors stories are spotlighted. It worked just fine. That was the point. All these ideas are trampled or bastardized. Set-wise, there wasn't one, and no costumes either until the the dancers came out for their final bows, in which the exhilarating "One" is finally, powerfully, performed in full (gold) top hats and tails, with moves we recognize because we've watched them in practice sessions. The pent-up anxiety of the play is released --- and audiences went nuts.

After Grampa manhandles this, it's like a mushed, strangled bird. He clearly has the earlier, respected All that Jazz (and Fosse's stage piece Dancin') in mind as he makes his choices. Hamlisch's score was edgy & interesting for it's time, but time has not been kind to it. It's as schmaltzy as "jazz hands." And that's before Attenborough ever touches it. He's remarkable at finding whatever good was left, and mangling it.

A simple question might have helped Attenborough while filming this, "Could I bear spending even a few minutes with people like these?" A major issue for any adaptation of the play is how the 4th wall of theater (pivotal by it's absence in theater) would be addressed in the film format. There's never been a more "frontal" play. The answer they came up with was, "I'm sorry.. what was the question?" The cast has been augmented from a manageable number of unique narratives, to a crowd suffocating each other and the audience, and blending their grating selves together. I was well past my annoyance threshold when that annoying little runt swings across the stage on a rope, clowning at the (absent) audience. The play made you understand theater people. This movie just makes you want to choke them.

Perhaps Broadways annoying trend of characters walking directly to stage center and singing their stories at the audience (Les Miz, Miss Saigon) instead of relating to other characters started here. But the worst imaginable revival of the play will make you feel more alive than this movie.

A Chorus Line is pure schlock. I'm not a stage purist. A movie could have been made of this play, and it would almost necessarily require changes... comme ci, comme ca. But the modest conceits of this material are lost or misunderstood by the movie's creators who are in full-on "shallow blockbuster" mode. It would be hard to imagine a worse [[superintendent]]. Perhaps only [[Ghosh]] Logan & Jack Warner could have [[shattered]] this in the same way Attenborough did.

Onstage A Chorus line was a triumph of workshopping as a production method. Dancers answering a casting call found themselves sitting around shooting the crap about their stage-career experiences (very 70s!). Then Bennett and Hamlisch took some time, handed them a song and cast them as themselves. ...astonishing! Unbelievably modern. The 'story'of ACL is (in turn) about answering a casting call for a play we never have a complete view of, because the play doesn't matter. It was meta before the idea was invented, 25 years before Adaptation noodled with a similar idea. ACL was also another in a reductivist trend that is still alive, & which is a hallmark of modern creativity: that technique itself is compelling... that there's more drama in an average person's life than you could ever synthesize with invented characters. What a gracious idea. The stage play had one performance area (an empty stage) and three different ways to alter the backdrop, to alleviate visual tedium, not to keep viewers distracted. The space recedes and the actors stories are spotlighted. It worked just fine. That was the point. All these ideas are trampled or bastardized. Set-wise, there wasn't one, and no costumes either until the the dancers came out for their final bows, in which the exhilarating "One" is finally, powerfully, performed in full (gold) top hats and tails, with moves we recognize because we've watched them in practice sessions. The pent-up anxiety of the play is released --- and audiences went nuts.

After Grampa manhandles this, it's like a mushed, strangled bird. He clearly has the earlier, respected All that Jazz (and Fosse's stage piece Dancin') in mind as he makes his choices. Hamlisch's score was edgy & interesting for it's time, but time has not been kind to it. It's as schmaltzy as "jazz hands." And that's before Attenborough ever touches it. He's remarkable at finding whatever good was left, and mangling it.

A simple question might have helped Attenborough while filming this, "Could I bear spending even a few minutes with people like these?" A major issue for any adaptation of the play is how the 4th wall of theater (pivotal by it's absence in theater) would be addressed in the film format. There's never been a more "frontal" play. The answer they came up with was, "I'm sorry.. what was the question?" The cast has been augmented from a manageable number of unique narratives, to a crowd suffocating each other and the audience, and blending their grating selves together. I was well past my annoyance threshold when that annoying little runt swings across the stage on a rope, clowning at the (absent) audience. The play made you understand theater people. This movie just makes you want to choke them.

Perhaps Broadways annoying trend of characters walking directly to stage center and singing their stories at the audience (Les Miz, Miss Saigon) instead of relating to other characters started here. But the worst imaginable revival of the play will make you feel more alive than this movie.

A Chorus Line is pure schlock. --------------------------------------------- Result 3431 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I love watching [[Jerry]] as [[much]] as the rest of the world, but this [[poor]] [[excuse]] for a soft-core porno [[flick]] is needlessly [[offensive]], [[lacks]] [[anything]] [[resembling]] [[wit]], and [[serves]] [[merely]] as a [[vehicle]] of self-promotion for Springer. Even [[though]] it runs a [[quick]] 90 minutes, the [[film]] drags hideously, and I should have had the common [[sense]] to [[walk]] out. [[Simply]] [[atrocious]]. I love watching [[Jiri]] as [[very]] as the rest of the world, but this [[poorest]] [[pretext]] for a soft-core porno [[gesture]] is needlessly [[abusive]], [[dearth]] [[something]] [[resembled]] [[witt]], and [[serve]] [[only]] as a [[automobile]] of self-promotion for Springer. Even [[albeit]] it runs a [[fastest]] 90 minutes, the [[kino]] drags hideously, and I should have had the common [[feeling]] to [[marche]] out. [[Uncomplicated]] [[nefarious]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3432 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] One the whole, this movie isn't [[perfect]]. It doesn't '[[hang]] well' together as the story line is basically a bunch of hooks to hang jokes.

Some of these jokes are a little 'too 80s' and tend to date the picture.

But some of these jokes are [[classic]].

You know a movie has something special when you and your friends still reference silly quotes from it over 2 decades later.

Plus, there are a bunch of familiar faces; Michael Keaton, Danny Devito, Joe Piscapo, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Maureen Stapleton, Bob Eubanks, Griffin Dunne, and one of the last roles of Alan Hale Jr., the Skipper from Gilligan's Island.

Also, there are some great absurdist moments, like when Johnny is labelling the puppies with a pricing gun, or the Pope making an appearance in Johnny's neighborhood. Also, the scene where the fake priest makes up a lot of words in Latin is excellent. ("Summa cum laude, magna cum laude, the radio's too louda... Post meridian, ante meridian, uncle meridian").

Other Classic Scenes include Ramone Maroney butchering the English language Danny Devito urging Griffin Dunne to 'Play Ball' Peter Boyle thinking he lost his manhood The fake VD movie

This movie is no home run. But like 'Porky's', it has enough classic comedy bits to make it memorable. One the whole, this movie isn't [[perfecting]]. It doesn't '[[heng]] well' together as the story line is basically a bunch of hooks to hang jokes.

Some of these jokes are a little 'too 80s' and tend to date the picture.

But some of these jokes are [[typical]].

You know a movie has something special when you and your friends still reference silly quotes from it over 2 decades later.

Plus, there are a bunch of familiar faces; Michael Keaton, Danny Devito, Joe Piscapo, Peter Boyle, Marilu Henner, Maureen Stapleton, Bob Eubanks, Griffin Dunne, and one of the last roles of Alan Hale Jr., the Skipper from Gilligan's Island.

Also, there are some great absurdist moments, like when Johnny is labelling the puppies with a pricing gun, or the Pope making an appearance in Johnny's neighborhood. Also, the scene where the fake priest makes up a lot of words in Latin is excellent. ("Summa cum laude, magna cum laude, the radio's too louda... Post meridian, ante meridian, uncle meridian").

Other Classic Scenes include Ramone Maroney butchering the English language Danny Devito urging Griffin Dunne to 'Play Ball' Peter Boyle thinking he lost his manhood The fake VD movie

This movie is no home run. But like 'Porky's', it has enough classic comedy bits to make it memorable. --------------------------------------------- Result 3433 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Indian Summer! It was very [[nostalgic]] for me. I [[found]] it [[funny]], heartwarming, and [[absolutely]] [[loved]] it! [[Anyone]] who went to camp as a kid and [[wishes]] at [[times]] they could [[go]] back to the "good Ole' [[days]]" for a [[brief]] [[time]] [[really]] [[needs]] to see this one! It [[starts]] out as 20 years later, a group of [[old]] campers [[returns]] for a "reunion". I won't comment on the [[plot]] anymore [[cause]] you have to see it for yourself. The actors were [[great]], and it contains an all [[star]] cast. [[Everyone]] in it [[played]] a terrific role. You [[actually]] [[felt]] like you were a [[part]] of the [[movie]] [[watching]] it. Alan Arkin was [[especially]] good in his role as Uncle Lou. He plays the [[kind]] of [[guy]] that [[everyone]] [[wishes]] they had in their [[lives]]. This is [[also]] a good [[family]] [[movie]] for the most [[part]]. I would [[suggest]] this one to [[anybody]] in a heartbeat! HIGHLY Recommended! Indian Summer! It was very [[homesick]] for me. I [[finds]] it [[humorous]], heartwarming, and [[perfectly]] [[worshipped]] it! [[Person]] who went to camp as a kid and [[desires]] at [[dates]] they could [[going]] back to the "good Ole' [[jours]]" for a [[succinct]] [[moment]] [[truthfully]] [[required]] to see this one! It [[commencement]] out as 20 years later, a group of [[elderly]] campers [[restitution]] for a "reunion". I won't comment on the [[intrigue]] anymore [[reason]] you have to see it for yourself. The actors were [[awesome]], and it contains an all [[superstar]] cast. [[Anyone]] in it [[done]] a terrific role. You [[genuinely]] [[smelled]] like you were a [[parte]] of the [[cinematography]] [[staring]] it. Alan Arkin was [[predominantly]] good in his role as Uncle Lou. He plays the [[sorts]] of [[guys]] that [[someone]] [[desires]] they had in their [[iife]]. This is [[further]] a good [[familia]] [[films]] for the most [[portion]]. I would [[insinuate]] this one to [[person]] in a heartbeat! HIGHLY Recommended! --------------------------------------------- Result 3434 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The director, [[outfitted]] in chains and [[leather]], [[warned]] the [[audience]] at the SF Frameline [[Film]] [[Festival]] [[Friday]] night that we were about to [[see]] an "experiental" film. [[Experimental]]? Leave the video camera on the back seat of the [[car]], let the [[tape]] roll and edit in all the [[pointless]] dreck within eyesight. A meandering pastiche [[road]] show manqué that [[starts]] nowhere and takes the audience no place. The gratuitous violence that opens the [[movie]] [[drove]] more than one [[patron]] from the Castro [[theater]]. I would have left, too, but my cine-buddy [[needed]] a ride [[home]] and has this thing about seeing even the [[worse]] merde through to the end. By the [[time]] the [[lights]] came up the [[audience]] had thinned [[considerably]]. Tepid applause. Pro forma [[questions]] of the director who seemed pleased with the [[product]]. [[Avoid]] this [[film]]! The director, [[equipped]] in chains and [[skins]], [[advised]] the [[viewers]] at the SF Frameline [[Cinema]] [[Festivals]] [[Yesterday]] night that we were about to [[behold]] an "experiental" film. [[Experiment]]? Leave the video camera on the back seat of the [[cars]], let the [[cassette]] roll and edit in all the [[vain]] dreck within eyesight. A meandering pastiche [[paths]] show manqué that [[initiating]] nowhere and takes the audience no place. The gratuitous violence that opens the [[cinema]] [[pushed]] more than one [[benefactor]] from the Castro [[drama]]. I would have left, too, but my cine-buddy [[need]] a ride [[dwelling]] and has this thing about seeing even the [[worst]] merde through to the end. By the [[moment]] the [[lit]] came up the [[spectators]] had thinned [[tremendously]]. Tepid applause. Pro forma [[subjects]] of the director who seemed pleased with the [[commodity]]. [[Stave]] this [[cinematography]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3435 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Director/star Clint Eastwood's "[[Sudden]] Impact" is an [[intriguing]] [[addition]] to the "Dirty Harry" series - a [[combination]] of crude film-making and [[genius]]. It's mediocre and silly in parts, [[brilliant]] and classic in others, with [[compelling]], gripping pacing. There are numerous echoes of the first film here - the shoot 'em up "Make my day" scene recalls the "Do you feel lucky" one, one of the [[villains]] is as viscerally repugnant as the first film's Scorpio, an actor who played a minor baddie in the first one returns here as Harry's partner - just to name a few.

Harry Callahan is still at odds with the higher-ups in the department, still mean, still tough, but now he's older and wearier. His constant conflicts with his superiors are a metaphor for his inner conflict - a respect and reverence for the law versus a desire to serve the pure spirit of justice, the two things not always being compatible. This "incompatibility" is the underlying theme of the series. The first film posed a simple question, "What about the victim's rights?" - (do they outweigh those of the criminal? Vice versa? Depends?). That film's answer was controversial, prompting a sequel (the highly enjoyable "Magnum Force") which set out to draw the line between Harry's brand of justice and pure, heartless vigilantism. Dirty Harry, like many of Clint's other roles, is the personification of vengeance, the protector of the the defenseless. This movie however brings it back to the victim, in this case Jennifer (portrayed by Sondra Locke), who decides to avenge the rape of herself and her now-incapacitated sister by ruthlessly hunting down and ritualistically executing the men (and one woman) who committed the crime.

Without going into a play-by-play of the whole movie, I will say this - I mentioned earlier that "Sudden Impact" echoes the first film - it actually also sprinkles in little references and in-jokes from the whole series (the confusion concerning the captain's last name is an example - an intentional prank, I believe). The relationship between Callahan and Jennifer is neat - has our rogue cop hero found a soul-mate in this lady vigilante? And is she a vigilante or a victim justifiably standing up for her and her sister's tarnished rights? The exchange between these two at the very end of the film is a poetic denouement of the series, one which I personally (as a fan) found quite moving. That last scene alone makes Sudden Impact the legitimate climax to the "Dirty Harry" collection, the perfect answer to the conflict posed in the first film. (Not to knock "The Dead Pool" - that excellent movie was a relatively light-hearted suspenseful yet comic thriller featuring Harry Callahan, rather than a character-defining film like this one).

This movie did well in the theaters - audiences in the Reagan Era found Harry and his ilk quite appealing, and the President himself frequently quoted "Go ahead, make my day." Director/star Clint Eastwood's "[[Abrupt]] Impact" is an [[enigmatic]] [[addendum]] to the "Dirty Harry" series - a [[tandem]] of crude film-making and [[prodigy]]. It's mediocre and silly in parts, [[sumptuous]] and classic in others, with [[convincing]], gripping pacing. There are numerous echoes of the first film here - the shoot 'em up "Make my day" scene recalls the "Do you feel lucky" one, one of the [[punks]] is as viscerally repugnant as the first film's Scorpio, an actor who played a minor baddie in the first one returns here as Harry's partner - just to name a few.

Harry Callahan is still at odds with the higher-ups in the department, still mean, still tough, but now he's older and wearier. His constant conflicts with his superiors are a metaphor for his inner conflict - a respect and reverence for the law versus a desire to serve the pure spirit of justice, the two things not always being compatible. This "incompatibility" is the underlying theme of the series. The first film posed a simple question, "What about the victim's rights?" - (do they outweigh those of the criminal? Vice versa? Depends?). That film's answer was controversial, prompting a sequel (the highly enjoyable "Magnum Force") which set out to draw the line between Harry's brand of justice and pure, heartless vigilantism. Dirty Harry, like many of Clint's other roles, is the personification of vengeance, the protector of the the defenseless. This movie however brings it back to the victim, in this case Jennifer (portrayed by Sondra Locke), who decides to avenge the rape of herself and her now-incapacitated sister by ruthlessly hunting down and ritualistically executing the men (and one woman) who committed the crime.

Without going into a play-by-play of the whole movie, I will say this - I mentioned earlier that "Sudden Impact" echoes the first film - it actually also sprinkles in little references and in-jokes from the whole series (the confusion concerning the captain's last name is an example - an intentional prank, I believe). The relationship between Callahan and Jennifer is neat - has our rogue cop hero found a soul-mate in this lady vigilante? And is she a vigilante or a victim justifiably standing up for her and her sister's tarnished rights? The exchange between these two at the very end of the film is a poetic denouement of the series, one which I personally (as a fan) found quite moving. That last scene alone makes Sudden Impact the legitimate climax to the "Dirty Harry" collection, the perfect answer to the conflict posed in the first film. (Not to knock "The Dead Pool" - that excellent movie was a relatively light-hearted suspenseful yet comic thriller featuring Harry Callahan, rather than a character-defining film like this one).

This movie did well in the theaters - audiences in the Reagan Era found Harry and his ilk quite appealing, and the President himself frequently quoted "Go ahead, make my day." --------------------------------------------- Result 3436 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Does anyone know the exact quote about "time and love" by George Ede aka, Father Fitzpatrick in the [[move]], It had to be you? He was [[talking]] to Charlie and Annna in the [[church]] as they were [[leaving]]? If not I will have to [[rent]] the movie. This was a great movie. I also [[loved]] Serendipity! [[Great]] [[love]] [[story]] for the soul!

I [[met]] my one true [[love]] (my Soulmate) and although I had the experience to [[meet]] him when I had least [[expecting]] it, I wasn't ready for that kind of [[emotional]] [[relationship]].

Altho, we did [[marry]], I wasn't [[mature]] enough to give as much as I [[thought]] I would. I [[got]] complacent and took his [[love]] for granted and he [[withstood]] it for 7 [[years]].

He [[finally]] [[left]] with [[resentment]] but we are still hurt and angry & in [[disbelief]] about the [[way]] it turned out. I had some very [[hard]] lessons to [[learn]] and we have now been apart 3 [[years]].

This movie [[meant]] a lot because I am still [[waiting]] on [[reconciling]] with my one and only [[true]] [[love]]. I can [[NOW]] appreciate that [[distinct]] feeling [[inside]] of me and the [[quote]] of Father Fitzpatrick rang [[true]] for me.

I know when he has [[healed]] [[enough]] to [[trust]] me again, we will remarry.

Don't EVER GET COMPLACENT AND [[TAKE]] [[TRUE]] [[LOVE]] FOR [[GRANTED]]! IT [[HAS]] BEEN THE [[HARDEST]] LESSON [[OF]] MY [[LIFE]].

[[Also]] the music in this movie is [[OUTSTANDING]] and MEANINGFUL! This [[movie]] is [[DEEP]] and [[spiritually]] [[uplifting]]. TRUE [[LOVE]] is worth [[waiting]] for, if it is [[meant]] to be, it will, no [[matter]] what, IT WILL [[HAPPEN]]! [[Nothing]] is [[impossible]], even when it's the second [[time]] [[around]]! [[Thanks]]! Does anyone know the exact quote about "time and love" by George Ede aka, Father Fitzpatrick in the [[budge]], It had to be you? He was [[spoke]] to Charlie and Annna in the [[churches]] as they were [[let]]? If not I will have to [[rental]] the movie. This was a great movie. I also [[cared]] Serendipity! [[Wonderful]] [[loved]] [[stories]] for the soul!

I [[complied]] my one true [[adored]] (my Soulmate) and although I had the experience to [[respond]] him when I had least [[hoping]] it, I wasn't ready for that kind of [[sentimental]] [[relations]].

Altho, we did [[marie]], I wasn't [[adult]] enough to give as much as I [[ideas]] I would. I [[gets]] complacent and took his [[loves]] for granted and he [[resisted]] it for 7 [[olds]].

He [[lastly]] [[exited]] with [[disgust]] but we are still hurt and angry & in [[skepticism]] about the [[pathway]] it turned out. I had some very [[challenging]] lessons to [[learning]] and we have now been apart 3 [[ages]].

This movie [[intended]] a lot because I am still [[awaited]] on [[reconciled]] with my one and only [[authentic]] [[likes]]. I can [[NOWADAYS]] appreciate that [[different]] feeling [[within]] of me and the [[quoting]] of Father Fitzpatrick rang [[authentic]] for me.

I know when he has [[cured]] [[adequately]] to [[trusted]] me again, we will remarry.

Don't EVER GET COMPLACENT AND [[TAKING]] [[AUTHENTIC]] [[LIKES]] FOR [[CONFERRED]]! IT [[POSSESSES]] BEEN THE [[WORST]] LESSON [[DU]] MY [[IIFE]].

[[Moreover]] the music in this movie is [[UNPAID]] and MEANINGFUL! This [[kino]] is [[DEEPEST]] and [[mentally]] [[uplift]]. TRUE [[LIKES]] is worth [[expects]] for, if it is [[signified]] to be, it will, no [[issue]] what, IT WILL [[EMERGE]]! [[Anything]] is [[unable]], even when it's the second [[times]] [[about]]! [[Merci]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3437 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] A country-boy Aussie-Rules player ([[Mat]]) goes to the city the night before an all-important AFL trial match, where he is to be [[picked]] up by his [[cousin]]. And then things go wrong.

His no-hoper cousin has [[become]] mixed up in a drug deal [[involving]] local loan-shark / drug-dealer Tiny (who looks like any [[gangster]] anywhere but is definitively Australian). Needless to [[say]], [[Mat]] becomes enmeshed in the chaos, and it isn't long before [[thoughts]] of tomorrow's [[match]] are shunted to the back of his [[mind]] as the night's frantic events unravel.

Accomplished Western [[Australian]] professional Shakespearean [[actor]] [[Toby]] Malone puts in a sterling performance as young naive country-boy [[Mat]], and successfully plays a part well below his age. Best [[support]] comes from John Batchelor as Tiny, and an [[entertaining]] role by David Ngoombujarra as one of the cops following the events. Roll is fast-paced, often funny, and a very worthwhile use of an hour. A country-boy Aussie-Rules player ([[Carpets]]) goes to the city the night before an all-important AFL trial match, where he is to be [[chosen]] up by his [[coz]]. And then things go wrong.

His no-hoper cousin has [[gotten]] mixed up in a drug deal [[involve]] local loan-shark / drug-dealer Tiny (who looks like any [[gangsta]] anywhere but is definitively Australian). Needless to [[said]], [[Carpeting]] becomes enmeshed in the chaos, and it isn't long before [[idea]] of tomorrow's [[matchmaking]] are shunted to the back of his [[esprit]] as the night's frantic events unravel.

Accomplished Western [[Australians]] professional Shakespearean [[actress]] [[Mendel]] Malone puts in a sterling performance as young naive country-boy [[Carpeting]], and successfully plays a part well below his age. Best [[succour]] comes from John Batchelor as Tiny, and an [[amusing]] role by David Ngoombujarra as one of the cops following the events. Roll is fast-paced, often funny, and a very worthwhile use of an hour. --------------------------------------------- Result 3438 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saving Grace is a nice movie to watch in a boring afternoon,when you are looking for something different than the regular scripts and wants to have some fun. I mean,the whole idea of this movie and all the marijuana in it is such a craziness! It was the first movie I watched with this theme(drugs/marijuana) that is not really criticizing it,only making jokes about it. Grace Trevethyn is a widow,who lives in a small town in U.K. and has many financial problems because of her dead husband, who committed suicide since he was full of debts. The problem is that Grace, who imagined to have some money saved for her, discovers that she needs to pay all of her husband's pounds in debts to not lose all of her things, specially her house that she loves so much. She never worked before, and is in a tragic situation until Matthew,her gardener who is very found of smoking pot, decides to make a partnership with her in selling marijuana in large scale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3439 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Beautiful and touching movie. Rich colors, great settings, good acting and one of the most charming movies I have seen in a while. I never saw such an interesting setting when I was in China. My wife liked it so much she asked me to log on and rate it so other would enjoy too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3440 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] As usual, i went to watch this movie for A.R.Rahman. [[Otherwise]], the film is no [[good]]. Rajni wanted to [[end]] his movie career with this film is it would be successful. But fortunately or unfortunately the film was a [[failure]]. [[After]] this he [[delivered]] a hit with Chandramukhi. I Am eagerly waiting for his forth coming Shivaji.

I have read the other user's comment on Rajni. I found it interesting as the user is from TN too. Rajni is one actor who acts, i think, from his heart not from his mind. He is not a method actor like Kamal Hasan. I think we need to appreciate Rajni for his strong going at his age.

Any ways, i need to fill 10 lines for this comment... so wish u good luck Rajni........... As usual, i went to watch this movie for A.R.Rahman. [[Else]], the film is no [[alright]]. Rajni wanted to [[terminate]] his movie career with this film is it would be successful. But fortunately or unfortunately the film was a [[deficit]]. [[Afterwards]] this he [[gave]] a hit with Chandramukhi. I Am eagerly waiting for his forth coming Shivaji.

I have read the other user's comment on Rajni. I found it interesting as the user is from TN too. Rajni is one actor who acts, i think, from his heart not from his mind. He is not a method actor like Kamal Hasan. I think we need to appreciate Rajni for his strong going at his age.

Any ways, i need to fill 10 lines for this comment... so wish u good luck Rajni........... --------------------------------------------- Result 3441 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Being a person who does not usually enjoy boxing movies, feeling they only focus on the boxing and not the characters themselves, this movie truly moved me. I loved being able to see the main character Diana(Michelle Rodriguez) go through so many things in such a short while, it was amazing to me. Michelle (Rodriguez) did such a wonderful job playing Diana especially since this was her first acting experience, she showed true emotion and portrayed Diana wonderfully. All actors had chemistry on screen and made this movie even more amazing. I highly recommend this movie even to those who do not usually watch boxing movies. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3442 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] This is a so [[called]] 'feel-good' [[movies]], [[however]] it [[made]] me sad in a [[way]]. Why? Because I had the talent, but my [[parents]] didn't [[let]] me study at the sports [[academy]], as well the fact that at the [[age]] of 12 I [[decided]] to quit [[soccer]].

And soccer is the red [[line]] in this movie. Together with the struggle youngsters have with the expectations parents have. An English-Indian girl and her parents, with their traditions and strong family ties, and on the other hand the English family with a daugther who dresses like a boy, and plays soccer... a combination which worries her mother! This movie also lines out the lives of ordinary people, as well as the Indian community in England. It is about believe in your dreams, and live your one life (where did we hear that before).

Paraminder Nagra (a beautiful women!) plays Yasminda, a girl who is not interested in boys, new clothes, make-up and the typical 17 year old girl stuff. In contradiction with her sister Pinky, complete the opposite of Yasminda.

A real must it is, to see how a young beautiful girl struggles with the traditions of their parents, and finds her luck eventually. With great music from Blondie, Curtis Mayfield, Texas, Melanie C, as well as Indian hit songs.

Pleasant to watch, but if you, as myself, ever played soccer, and never made it to the top, then this movie will make you melachonic. This is a so [[phoned]] 'feel-good' [[cinematographic]], [[instead]] it [[introduced]] me sad in a [[routing]]. Why? Because I had the talent, but my [[parenting]] didn't [[allowing]] me study at the sports [[oscars]], as well the fact that at the [[aging]] of 12 I [[decide]] to quit [[football]].

And soccer is the red [[bloodline]] in this movie. Together with the struggle youngsters have with the expectations parents have. An English-Indian girl and her parents, with their traditions and strong family ties, and on the other hand the English family with a daugther who dresses like a boy, and plays soccer... a combination which worries her mother! This movie also lines out the lives of ordinary people, as well as the Indian community in England. It is about believe in your dreams, and live your one life (where did we hear that before).

Paraminder Nagra (a beautiful women!) plays Yasminda, a girl who is not interested in boys, new clothes, make-up and the typical 17 year old girl stuff. In contradiction with her sister Pinky, complete the opposite of Yasminda.

A real must it is, to see how a young beautiful girl struggles with the traditions of their parents, and finds her luck eventually. With great music from Blondie, Curtis Mayfield, Texas, Melanie C, as well as Indian hit songs.

Pleasant to watch, but if you, as myself, ever played soccer, and never made it to the top, then this movie will make you melachonic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3443 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Went to watch this movie [[expecting]] a 'nothing really much' action flick, still got very disappointed. The [[opening]] scene promised a little action with a tinge of comedy. It [[keeps]] you hooked for the first half coz till then you are expecting that now its time for the [[action]] to kick in. Well, [[nothing]] of that sort [[happens]]. The [[movie]] drags and the [[ending]] just thumps you down to a point that you get [[annoyed]].Wonder what was the director thinking. Made no sense watsoever. The movie lacked in all aspects, had no real storyline and it seemed very hollow, even if "Rambo" was in it, I don't think he could have helped the rating at all. There is simply no logic to the movie. A perfect [[way]] to waste your time and money. By far the most [[irritating]] movie i have ever seen and i am sure there will b others who'll have the same viewpoint after enduring it. Definitely not for people who have a little movie sense left in them. Went to watch this movie [[expect]] a 'nothing really much' action flick, still got very disappointed. The [[open]] scene promised a little action with a tinge of comedy. It [[retains]] you hooked for the first half coz till then you are expecting that now its time for the [[actions]] to kick in. Well, [[nada]] of that sort [[comes]]. The [[kino]] drags and the [[ended]] just thumps you down to a point that you get [[irked]].Wonder what was the director thinking. Made no sense watsoever. The movie lacked in all aspects, had no real storyline and it seemed very hollow, even if "Rambo" was in it, I don't think he could have helped the rating at all. There is simply no logic to the movie. A perfect [[camino]] to waste your time and money. By far the most [[vexing]] movie i have ever seen and i am sure there will b others who'll have the same viewpoint after enduring it. Definitely not for people who have a little movie sense left in them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3444 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] A romanticised and thoroughly [[false]] vision of unemployment from a middle class "[[artist]]" with a comfortable upbringing... It is clear that the writer-director never suffered unemployment directly and certainly has no personal experience of it. If you had to believe this absolutely [[ridiculous]] [[story]], unemployed men of all ages behave like teenagers, have no anger, no fear, no frustration, etc. All the characters live trough the day by carrying [[pranks]], boyish jokes. They do never look for work, the do almost never experience rejection or anguish, etc. Living on the dole is just about like a summer vacation from school... Ridiculous. Specially if you compare it with contemporary masterpieces from the likes of Ken Loach, etc. A romanticised and thoroughly [[specious]] vision of unemployment from a middle class "[[artists]]" with a comfortable upbringing... It is clear that the writer-director never suffered unemployment directly and certainly has no personal experience of it. If you had to believe this absolutely [[grotesque]] [[tales]], unemployed men of all ages behave like teenagers, have no anger, no fear, no frustration, etc. All the characters live trough the day by carrying [[escapades]], boyish jokes. They do never look for work, the do almost never experience rejection or anguish, etc. Living on the dole is just about like a summer vacation from school... Ridiculous. Specially if you compare it with contemporary masterpieces from the likes of Ken Loach, etc. --------------------------------------------- Result 3445 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Unreal "movie", what were these people on?? A mix of French Upstairs Downstairs, mating horses,porn (not suggested, its pretty full on for a film) & bestiality with a bit of Benny Hill music & chase scenes thrown in, its sounds crazy & its even more so to watch. **spoiler** It plods along in a [[tedious]] fashion for [[quite]] a while,.... then a [[Lamb]] does a runner, prompting [[woman]] in [[period]] dress to run off after it, she goes into the woods where she is set upon by an erect "[[penis]]" attached to a man in a bear/rat manky suit, I put it like that as its obvious the "penis" is in charge & gets way too much screen time, ejaculating for the most of it, anyway, in a nutshell, it turns out she [[liked]] a [[bit]] of bear/rat tadger & thats about it, the rest is just padding. **end spoiler** A film made to shock & offend, thus getting [[talked]] about, any publicity is [[good]] [[publicity]] I suppose,a [[waste]] of time really, but the "main event" has to be seen to be believed, its [[hard]] to [[imagine]] that anyone [[thought]] it was a [[good]] [[idea]] as they [[filmed]] it. Unreal "movie", what were these people on?? A mix of French Upstairs Downstairs, mating horses,porn (not suggested, its pretty full on for a film) & bestiality with a bit of Benny Hill music & chase scenes thrown in, its sounds crazy & its even more so to watch. **spoiler** It plods along in a [[monotonous]] fashion for [[rather]] a while,.... then a [[Sheep]] does a runner, prompting [[daughters]] in [[periods]] dress to run off after it, she goes into the woods where she is set upon by an erect "[[pecker]]" attached to a man in a bear/rat manky suit, I put it like that as its obvious the "penis" is in charge & gets way too much screen time, ejaculating for the most of it, anyway, in a nutshell, it turns out she [[loved]] a [[bitten]] of bear/rat tadger & thats about it, the rest is just padding. **end spoiler** A film made to shock & offend, thus getting [[spoken]] about, any publicity is [[alright]] [[advertisement]] I suppose,a [[wastes]] of time really, but the "main event" has to be seen to be believed, its [[tough]] to [[imagining]] that anyone [[think]] it was a [[alright]] [[ideals]] as they [[shot]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3446 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] I [[liked]] this [[movie]] because it told a very interesting [[story]] about living in a totally different world at the south pole. Susan Sarandon is such a good [[actor]], that she made an interesting, strong [[character]] out of mediocre writing. The true story displays a [[devastating]] situation for her character to overcome. I [[wished]] this [[cinematographic]] because it told a very interesting [[fairytales]] about living in a totally different world at the south pole. Susan Sarandon is such a good [[protagonist]], that she made an interesting, strong [[trait]] out of mediocre writing. The true story displays a [[ruinous]] situation for her character to overcome. --------------------------------------------- Result 3447 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] [[Simply]] well written, directed and acted... Woody's [[best]] of the 2000's if not his best [[since]] the 80's!! [[Hugh]] Jackman was the [[perfect]] [[pick]] for his roll. [[Scarlett]] Johansson's banter with Woody [[proves]] how well rounded an [[actress]] she has [[become]].

It's refreshing to not being in a romance on screen with the leading lady. He plays the perfect bumbling magician.

There have been a few [[reviews]] maligning this [[movie]]. Don't let them [[stop]] you from [[seeing]] the [[wonderfully]] [[done]] film. People in the [[crowd]] I [[saw]] this with were [[laughing]] so loud at some lines i [[missed]] the [[next]] [[line]]. [[If]] you like Woody Allen [[films]] of the 70's, you'll regret [[missing]] this one.

I [[suggest]] you [[go]] to watch this [[film]] with an open [[mind]], if you do, you [[might]] walk out [[smiling]]. [[Straightforward]] well written, directed and acted... Woody's [[nicest]] of the 2000's if not his best [[because]] the 80's!! [[Albert]] Jackman was the [[faultless]] [[choices]] for his roll. [[Scarlet]] Johansson's banter with Woody [[demonstrating]] how well rounded an [[actor]] she has [[gotten]].

It's refreshing to not being in a romance on screen with the leading lady. He plays the perfect bumbling magician.

There have been a few [[exam]] maligning this [[kino]]. Don't let them [[cessation]] you from [[witnessing]] the [[staggeringly]] [[doing]] film. People in the [[multitude]] I [[watched]] this with were [[giggling]] so loud at some lines i [[flunked]] the [[upcoming]] [[bloodline]]. [[Unless]] you like Woody Allen [[movies]] of the 70's, you'll regret [[extinct]] this one.

I [[insinuate]] you [[going]] to watch this [[filmmaking]] with an open [[esprit]], if you do, you [[probable]] walk out [[grinning]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3448 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I don't know what Margaret Atwood was [[thinking]] to allow this [[movie]] to have the same [[name]] as her [[book]]. I've [[always]] been a [[big]] fan of The Robber Bride and was so excited to learn there was a movie in the works. I am aware that the translation of book to movie isn't perfect but this [[movie]] was the [[worst]] ever. The [[names]] of the women are [[correct]] and some of the back [[story]] is correct but that is about it. I feel like I lost a good portion of my time trying to make it through this movie. This really should have been a mini-series to tell the [[story]] the way it was written.

The actors for Roz, Tony, Charis and Zenia were well-chosen even though I was skeptical at first about Mary-Louise Parker. I only wish they'd had a better script to work with because this really had nothing to do with the book at all. I don't know what Margaret Atwood was [[thought]] to allow this [[films]] to have the same [[naming]] as her [[ledger]]. I've [[continually]] been a [[overwhelming]] fan of The Robber Bride and was so excited to learn there was a movie in the works. I am aware that the translation of book to movie isn't perfect but this [[cinematography]] was the [[hardest]] ever. The [[naming]] of the women are [[rightness]] and some of the back [[saga]] is correct but that is about it. I feel like I lost a good portion of my time trying to make it through this movie. This really should have been a mini-series to tell the [[conte]] the way it was written.

The actors for Roz, Tony, Charis and Zenia were well-chosen even though I was skeptical at first about Mary-Louise Parker. I only wish they'd had a better script to work with because this really had nothing to do with the book at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3449 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] It's [[hard]] to say what was the [[worst]] thing about this show: the bad acting, poor [[acoustics]] of different portions, bad CGI, improper sets for the period, the poor [[script]]. It would have been nice if the script followed the original tale a bit closer -- there's enough tension and [[good]] material in Beowulf to [[provide]] a great [[deal]] of good material, and a better [[story]] line, than the scriptwriters could come up with.

And why introduce a strange new weapon like a crossbow that fires explosive bolts?

I see that this movie was made in "only" 21 days. It shows in the [[lack]] of quality. I'm beginning to think this is general (poor) attitude taken by Sci-Fi channel (and others) when it comes to making movies out of classic tales in the past few years.

What a waste! It's [[tough]] to say what was the [[hardest]] thing about this show: the bad acting, poor [[audio]] of different portions, bad CGI, improper sets for the period, the poor [[hyphen]]. It would have been nice if the script followed the original tale a bit closer -- there's enough tension and [[buena]] material in Beowulf to [[delivers]] a great [[treat]] of good material, and a better [[histories]] line, than the scriptwriters could come up with.

And why introduce a strange new weapon like a crossbow that fires explosive bolts?

I see that this movie was made in "only" 21 days. It shows in the [[shortages]] of quality. I'm beginning to think this is general (poor) attitude taken by Sci-Fi channel (and others) when it comes to making movies out of classic tales in the past few years.

What a waste! --------------------------------------------- Result 3450 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Spacecamp is my favorite movie. It is a great story and also inspires others.

The acting was [[excellent]] and my [[wife]] and I went to [[see]] [[Lea]] Thompson in Cabaret [[years]] [[later]] due to her performance in the [[movie]]. It is unfortunate that the Challenger Accident [[delayed]] and hurt the movie.

The 20th [[Anniversary]] of the [[Challenger]] Accident is [[coming]] up. I knew one of the Challenger Astronauts off and on since childhood on the Carnegie Mellon campus where my father went to school; I also know a close friend of the late pilot.

I was the technical review last year for National BSA for the Boy Scout Astronomy Merit Badge and I still find Spacecamp a great movie to recommend to Scouts doing the Space related merit badges I teach.

I ran into the late astronaut again as an adult and was following a schedule of engineering education we had put together when Challenger blew up. I wound up sitting in with Willard Rockwell and his engineers,"invisible", going over things after the Accident at the Astrotech stockholders meeting by [[chance]] as a result, so I'm much closer to the Accident and any movie similarities. I made sure that I was a good student and finished the degree four years later, [[strangely]] enough, on the recommendation of the Rockwell engineer who told them not to fly Challenger in 1986 and who later built Endeavour. Spacecamp is my favorite movie. It is a great story and also inspires others.

The acting was [[sumptuous]] and my [[women]] and I went to [[consults]] [[Leah]] Thompson in Cabaret [[olds]] [[subsequently]] due to her performance in the [[filmmaking]]. It is unfortunate that the Challenger Accident [[belated]] and hurt the movie.

The 20th [[Birthday]] of the [[Competitor]] Accident is [[upcoming]] up. I knew one of the Challenger Astronauts off and on since childhood on the Carnegie Mellon campus where my father went to school; I also know a close friend of the late pilot.

I was the technical review last year for National BSA for the Boy Scout Astronomy Merit Badge and I still find Spacecamp a great movie to recommend to Scouts doing the Space related merit badges I teach.

I ran into the late astronaut again as an adult and was following a schedule of engineering education we had put together when Challenger blew up. I wound up sitting in with Willard Rockwell and his engineers,"invisible", going over things after the Accident at the Astrotech stockholders meeting by [[likelihood]] as a result, so I'm much closer to the Accident and any movie similarities. I made sure that I was a good student and finished the degree four years later, [[bizarrely]] enough, on the recommendation of the Rockwell engineer who told them not to fly Challenger in 1986 and who later built Endeavour. --------------------------------------------- Result 3451 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] This [[movie]] [[surprised]] me. Some things were "clicheish" and some technological elements reminded me of the movie "Enemy of the State" starring Will Smith. But for the most part very entertaining- [[good]] [[mix]] with [[Jamie]] [[Foxx]] and comedian [[Mike]] Epps and the 2 wannabe [[thugs]] Julio and Ramundo ([[providing]] some comic relief). This is a [[movie]] you can watch over again-say... some Wednesday [[night]] when nothing else is on. I [[gave]] it a 9 for [[entertainment]] [[value]]. This [[cinematographic]] [[flabbergasted]] me. Some things were "clicheish" and some technological elements reminded me of the movie "Enemy of the State" starring Will Smith. But for the most part very entertaining- [[alright]] [[mixes]] with [[Jaime]] [[Fox]] and comedian [[Mick]] Epps and the 2 wannabe [[hoodlums]] Julio and Ramundo ([[supply]] some comic relief). This is a [[cinematography]] you can watch over again-say... some Wednesday [[nuit]] when nothing else is on. I [[supplied]] it a 9 for [[amusement]] [[values]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3452 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I've seen some bad things in my time. A half dead cow trying to get out of waist high mud; a head on collision between two cars; a thousand plates smashing on a kitchen floor; human beings living like animals.

But never in my life have I seen [[anything]] as [[bad]] as The Cat in the [[Hat]].

This [[film]] is worse than 911, worse than Hitler, worse than Vllad the Impaler, worse than people who put kittens in microwaves.

It is the most [[disturbing]] film of all time, easy.

I used to think it was a joke, some elaborate joke and that Mike Myers was maybe a high cocaine sniffing drug addled betting junkie who lost a bet or something.

I shudder I've seen some bad things in my time. A half dead cow trying to get out of waist high mud; a head on collision between two cars; a thousand plates smashing on a kitchen floor; human beings living like animals.

But never in my life have I seen [[nothing]] as [[amiss]] as The Cat in the [[Hats]].

This [[cinematography]] is worse than 911, worse than Hitler, worse than Vllad the Impaler, worse than people who put kittens in microwaves.

It is the most [[bewildering]] film of all time, easy.

I used to think it was a joke, some elaborate joke and that Mike Myers was maybe a high cocaine sniffing drug addled betting junkie who lost a bet or something.

I shudder --------------------------------------------- Result 3453 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] Basically, the movie might be one of the most [[mesmerizing]] titles made by either of the two Scotts([[Ridley]] and [[Tony]]). Let's make it straight, the movie deserved its hype as one of the most stylish actioner/thriller ever made.

When it comes to [[disgruntled]] tragic heroes, Denzel Washington and Tony Scotts really make a [[perfect]] duo. Both this [[movie]] and Deja Vu are better thrillers you can [[expect]]. Washington [[really]] got very [[comfortable]] in the shaky cameras and [[every]] executing scenes in the movie. One would easily be related to his character's [[emotions]] [[therefore]] [[enjoyed]] all the killings on the [[road]]. It's a [[success]] that they created a super-dark Mexico [[city]] with a [[lot]] of [[shits]] happening. One would be easily convinced by the extent of [[corruption]] depicted in Man On Fire. I don't know what would the [[Mexicans]] think when they watch this......

Well, let's face it again. It's [[among]] the [[best]] of the [[Death]] [[Wish]] [[genre]], but it [[also]] suffered from [[extensive]] amount of violence. It's a [[bit]] annoying that they [[justify]] the [[actions]] of a [[vigilante]] by making the [[movie]] very realistic and [[let]] Denzel Washington [[play]] the "[[missing]] sheep" [[type]] of [[tragic]] [[hero]]. [[In]] the [[end]], they [[even]] had the kidnapper shot in his own swimming [[pool]] like a [[documentary]]. I was checking on IMDb if the [[movie]] was based on real [[events]] for that...... [[So]] that's for your [[consideration]] if you also [[finds]] the movie's [[theme]] is a little bit phony.

At the end, I [[hope]] one would not take this movie for real.

8/10 for art direction/editing/cinematographic/Denzel Washington. Basically, the movie might be one of the most [[entrancing]] titles made by either of the two Scotts([[Francine]] and [[Toni]]). Let's make it straight, the movie deserved its hype as one of the most stylish actioner/thriller ever made.

When it comes to [[disaffected]] tragic heroes, Denzel Washington and Tony Scotts really make a [[irreproachable]] duo. Both this [[movies]] and Deja Vu are better thrillers you can [[hopes]]. Washington [[truthfully]] got very [[cosy]] in the shaky cameras and [[any]] executing scenes in the movie. One would easily be related to his character's [[passions]] [[so]] [[loved]] all the killings on the [[paths]]. It's a [[avail]] that they created a super-dark Mexico [[town]] with a [[batches]] of [[craps]] happening. One would be easily convinced by the extent of [[graft]] depicted in Man On Fire. I don't know what would the [[Wetbacks]] think when they watch this......

Well, let's face it again. It's [[in]] the [[nicest]] of the [[Dying]] [[Wanna]] [[genres]], but it [[apart]] suffered from [[broader]] amount of violence. It's a [[bitten]] annoying that they [[justification]] the [[measurements]] of a [[militiaman]] by making the [[cinematography]] very realistic and [[allowing]] Denzel Washington [[playing]] the "[[lacking]] sheep" [[kinds]] of [[calamitous]] [[superhero]]. [[At]] the [[termination]], they [[yet]] had the kidnapper shot in his own swimming [[pools]] like a [[literature]]. I was checking on IMDb if the [[films]] was based on real [[event]] for that...... [[Thereby]] that's for your [[scrutinize]] if you also [[discoveries]] the movie's [[subjects]] is a little bit phony.

At the end, I [[hopes]] one would not take this movie for real.

8/10 for art direction/editing/cinematographic/Denzel Washington. --------------------------------------------- Result 3454 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This has [[got]] to be one of the [[worst]] fillums I've ever seen and I've [[seen]] a few. It is [[slow]], [[boring]], amateurish - not [[even]] consistent [[within]] its own [[simplistic]] reading of the [[plot]]. The [[actors]] do not [[act]]. I can't [[blame]] them - they have been [[given]] a [[script]] of such [[utter]] [[banality]] all they can do is trudge through it with a pain behind their eyes which has nothing to do with the evil goings on in SummersIsle.

There is not one [[moment]] in this film that [[rings]] true - not an honest line nor a single [[instant]] where one is moved. The Nicholas Cage character is so [[badly]] drawn that one [[feels]] not a smidgeon of compassion for him through all his tribulations. I have no doubt that I was seeing a suffering man up there but it was Nicholas Cage fully aware of the fact that he was in the worst movie of his entire career. This has [[did]] to be one of the [[hardest]] fillums I've ever seen and I've [[noticed]] a few. It is [[slower]], [[bored]], amateurish - not [[yet]] consistent [[inside]] its own [[facile]] reading of the [[intrigue]]. The [[protagonists]] do not [[ley]]. I can't [[culpa]] them - they have been [[gave]] a [[hyphen]] of such [[unmitigated]] [[triviality]] all they can do is trudge through it with a pain behind their eyes which has nothing to do with the evil goings on in SummersIsle.

There is not one [[time]] in this film that [[piercings]] true - not an honest line nor a single [[immediate]] where one is moved. The Nicholas Cage character is so [[desperately]] drawn that one [[believes]] not a smidgeon of compassion for him through all his tribulations. I have no doubt that I was seeing a suffering man up there but it was Nicholas Cage fully aware of the fact that he was in the worst movie of his entire career. --------------------------------------------- Result 3455 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (85%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Yet another venture into the realm of the teen-gross-out-comedy, set on a college campus featuring a nerd's quest to coolness, and how he decides to blackmail a trio of popular jocks into making him get the girl. It's all been done before, and it's all been done in a far more satisfying manner. The gross-out humor that has made teen flicks like "American Pie" and "Dude! Where's my Car" so popular is taken completely out of context in this installment, appearing so completely at random that the viewer can only frown and disapprove. The film is badly written, and the actors never succeed in making any of it even slightly bearable. I won't even dignify this terrible picture by divulging, as it's a waste of my time and yours. At best, Slackers never manages to entertain or induce laughter, and at worst it is excruciatingly bad and at times completely unwatchable.

Jason Schwarzman, who impressed in his debut Rushmore, humiliates himself by appearing in this picture and one wonders how a career can end up in the toilet so fast. Please avoid, please avoid. Save your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3456 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] We should all [[congratulate]] Uwe Boll. He's done the unthinkable. He may be the only director to have two movies in the bottom 100 on IMDb! He's like some kind of cinematic cockroach. No matter how little talent he has, and no [[matter]] how [[bad]] these movies are, he manages to keep making them. I know, he finances them all himself through some kind of bizarre German fund, but even so, his ability to keep making movies despite absolute, complete [[failure]] is one of the great [[mysteries]] of the universe.

It wouldn't be so bad except that video game developers keep giving their best properties to this guy. I really enjoyed the Alone in the Dark series of games. Even the latest one, the New Nightmare, was good for a few hours of game play. There was a good movie to be made out of Edward Carnby's adventures, but this is not it. Now Uwe Boll has gotten his hands on Bloodrayne and Hunter: the Reckoning. What's next, Silent Hill? Doom? I can only imagine the swath that this guy is going to cut through game-to-movie adaptations if he's not stopped. Someone needs to take away his line of credit, or these video game publishers need to wise up and realize that when they make a bad movie out of a game that kills the franchise, no one is interested in that title any more.

Think about it, is House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark a viable game title anymore? No way. A new House of the Dead game comes out for X-Box and nobody's gonna care. The title is dead, and all because of Uwe Boll. So if any of you out there work for a game publisher, or know a game publisher, or have access to a game publisher... please warn them.

This movie itself is not even worth reviewing. I can't separate what I didn't like about this pile of dung from the rest of it. Literally, everything about it sucks. The writing, the acting, the music, the CG effects, the editing. I thought that if I waited until it came out on DVD and then rented it with low expectations, I wouldn't be disappointed. Boy, was I wrong. Never underestimate Uwe's ability to turn out a big, steaming pile of BOLL sh*t. We should all [[praise]] Uwe Boll. He's done the unthinkable. He may be the only director to have two movies in the bottom 100 on IMDb! He's like some kind of cinematic cockroach. No matter how little talent he has, and no [[question]] how [[mala]] these movies are, he manages to keep making them. I know, he finances them all himself through some kind of bizarre German fund, but even so, his ability to keep making movies despite absolute, complete [[impossibility]] is one of the great [[riddles]] of the universe.

It wouldn't be so bad except that video game developers keep giving their best properties to this guy. I really enjoyed the Alone in the Dark series of games. Even the latest one, the New Nightmare, was good for a few hours of game play. There was a good movie to be made out of Edward Carnby's adventures, but this is not it. Now Uwe Boll has gotten his hands on Bloodrayne and Hunter: the Reckoning. What's next, Silent Hill? Doom? I can only imagine the swath that this guy is going to cut through game-to-movie adaptations if he's not stopped. Someone needs to take away his line of credit, or these video game publishers need to wise up and realize that when they make a bad movie out of a game that kills the franchise, no one is interested in that title any more.

Think about it, is House of the Dead or Alone in the Dark a viable game title anymore? No way. A new House of the Dead game comes out for X-Box and nobody's gonna care. The title is dead, and all because of Uwe Boll. So if any of you out there work for a game publisher, or know a game publisher, or have access to a game publisher... please warn them.

This movie itself is not even worth reviewing. I can't separate what I didn't like about this pile of dung from the rest of it. Literally, everything about it sucks. The writing, the acting, the music, the CG effects, the editing. I thought that if I waited until it came out on DVD and then rented it with low expectations, I wouldn't be disappointed. Boy, was I wrong. Never underestimate Uwe's ability to turn out a big, steaming pile of BOLL sh*t. --------------------------------------------- Result 3457 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "A Christmas Story" is one of many people's all-time most [[beloved]] [[films]]. ACS was able to take the viewer to a time and a [[place]] in such a way that very few films ever have. It had a sweetness and goodwill to it that is rare.

[[So]] I [[awaited]] (and awaited) its sequel, "It Runs [[In]] The Family" . The film was almost released a [[couple]] of times, only to be pulled at the last minute. When it finally came out, IRITF was (and is, I guess) a [[total]] [[failure]].

The sets and cinematography were just fine, but the directing totally, completely missed the mark. The film was nothing more than a cash-flow formula of lazy casting, lazy writing, and disconnected acting.

The narrator, Jean Shepard, who was one of America's great humorists and story-tellers, forced upon us a false reprise of the warm wit he used in ACS. He over-emoted, and why he did that I'll never know. He somehow managed to become an annoying, overwrought parody of himself.

The writing and acting in IRITF is inauthentic and forced. The actors may have seen ACS, but whatever wit and nuance that was in ACS mustn't have registered at all on any of them. The acting was [[embarrassingly]] slapstick and bereft of any of Shepard's [[dry]] [[humor]].

ACS will always be a real treasure, but to call IRITF a sequel is to [[insult]] all of the fans of Jean Shepard and ACS. "A Christmas Story" is one of many people's all-time most [[sweetie]] [[filmmaking]]. ACS was able to take the viewer to a time and a [[placing]] in such a way that very few films ever have. It had a sweetness and goodwill to it that is rare.

[[Thereby]] I [[expect]] (and awaited) its sequel, "It Runs [[Into]] The Family" . The film was almost released a [[couples]] of times, only to be pulled at the last minute. When it finally came out, IRITF was (and is, I guess) a [[whole]] [[impossibility]].

The sets and cinematography were just fine, but the directing totally, completely missed the mark. The film was nothing more than a cash-flow formula of lazy casting, lazy writing, and disconnected acting.

The narrator, Jean Shepard, who was one of America's great humorists and story-tellers, forced upon us a false reprise of the warm wit he used in ACS. He over-emoted, and why he did that I'll never know. He somehow managed to become an annoying, overwrought parody of himself.

The writing and acting in IRITF is inauthentic and forced. The actors may have seen ACS, but whatever wit and nuance that was in ACS mustn't have registered at all on any of them. The acting was [[painfully]] slapstick and bereft of any of Shepard's [[driest]] [[comedy]].

ACS will always be a real treasure, but to call IRITF a sequel is to [[offend]] all of the fans of Jean Shepard and ACS. --------------------------------------------- Result 3458 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] If it's action and adventure you want in a movie, then you'd be [[best]] [[advised]] to [[look]] [[elsewhere]]. On the other hand, if it's a lazy day and you want a good [[movie]] to [[go]] along with that mood, check out "The Straight [[Story]]."

Richard Farnsworth [[puts]] on a [[compelling]] performance as the [[gentle]] and gentlemanly Alvin Straight, in this [[true]] [[story]] of Alvin's journey on a riding mower across three states to see his estranged brother who has had a stroke.

Farnsworth is [[perfect]] in this role, as he travels his long and winding road, making friends of strangers and doling out lots of grandfatherly type advice about family along the way. The story moves along as slowly as the riding mower, but somehow manages to keep the viewer watching, waiting for the next life lesson Alvin's going to offer.

Stretch out on the couch, relax and enjoy. It's the only way to watch this very good movie, which rates a 7/10 in my book. If it's action and adventure you want in a movie, then you'd be [[optimum]] [[warned]] to [[peek]] [[else]]. On the other hand, if it's a lazy day and you want a good [[movies]] to [[going]] along with that mood, check out "The Straight [[Stories]]."

Richard Farnsworth [[raises]] on a [[conclusive]] performance as the [[temperate]] and gentlemanly Alvin Straight, in this [[veritable]] [[conte]] of Alvin's journey on a riding mower across three states to see his estranged brother who has had a stroke.

Farnsworth is [[irreproachable]] in this role, as he travels his long and winding road, making friends of strangers and doling out lots of grandfatherly type advice about family along the way. The story moves along as slowly as the riding mower, but somehow manages to keep the viewer watching, waiting for the next life lesson Alvin's going to offer.

Stretch out on the couch, relax and enjoy. It's the only way to watch this very good movie, which rates a 7/10 in my book. --------------------------------------------- Result 3459 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] As a convert into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I try to absorb as much as I can of my new religion's history. I was [[invited]] to attend a showing of this [[film]] with my sons & the other young men & women as well as their families of our ward.

On a [[beautiful]] spring [[evening]], we [[drove]] to Kirtland, Ohio to the church's historical village located there. We were to have had [[reservations]] at the Vistor's Center to [[view]] this [[movie]]. Since my movie viewing was limited to only a few church documentaries, I was intrigued. The only "full length motion pictures" of the church's I had seen was "Legacy" and "My Best Two Years", both which I thought were very well written and preformed.

At the beginning, the missionary interpretor passed out tissues stating that several people had been deeply moved to the point of tears by this movie. I thought "OK...but it takes a lot to move me to tears." Imagine my surprise when I found myself sobbing! It [[truly]] is a very [[moving]] & inspirational testament to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

See it & believe in it's powerful message! As a convert into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I try to absorb as much as I can of my new religion's history. I was [[urged]] to attend a showing of this [[filmmaking]] with my sons & the other young men & women as well as their families of our ward.

On a [[glamorous]] spring [[soiree]], we [[steered]] to Kirtland, Ohio to the church's historical village located there. We were to have had [[reserves]] at the Vistor's Center to [[opinions]] this [[filmmaking]]. Since my movie viewing was limited to only a few church documentaries, I was intrigued. The only "full length motion pictures" of the church's I had seen was "Legacy" and "My Best Two Years", both which I thought were very well written and preformed.

At the beginning, the missionary interpretor passed out tissues stating that several people had been deeply moved to the point of tears by this movie. I thought "OK...but it takes a lot to move me to tears." Imagine my surprise when I found myself sobbing! It [[truthfully]] is a very [[displacement]] & inspirational testament to the Prophet Joseph Smith.

See it & believe in it's powerful message! --------------------------------------------- Result 3460 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] In the sequel to the [[brilliant]] Bill and Ted's [[excellent]] adventure, [[Bill]] and Ted are under [[threat]] from the [[future]], as the [[evil]] Chuck De Nomolos [[sends]] two [[evil]] robots, disguised as [[Bill]] and Ted to [[earth]] to [[kill]] human Bill and Ted, in [[order]] to [[change]] the [[future]].

[[In]] a [[great]] comedy [[pairing]], Winter and Reeves excel to deliver delicious humour to the audience in this entertaining sequel. [[Though]] [[lacking]] the [[sharpness]] of the [[first]], [[Bogus]] [[Journey]] still has the [[great]] catchphrases and dialogue from the leading pair, not to [[mention]] an [[hilarious]] performance by [[William]] Sadler, who [[brings]] a [[humorous]] side to the figure of depth, the grim reaper. Watch for the [[games]] [[sequences]], the best moment in the entire [[film]], but one of [[many]] [[great]] [[techniques]] [[used]] to [[justify]] the [[genre]].

Though still [[packed]] with [[humour]], this [[film]] has a more dramatic [[film]] [[towards]] it, with stakes being more [[serious]] and [[situations]] more [[risky]].

This [[gives]] the [[film]] [[great]] dimension and another [[lovable]] [[feature]]. The creators [[also]] stretch the [[boundaries]] of the [[fantasy]] [[genre]] and the [[use]] of realism, with [[hell]] and [[heaven]] being [[heavily]] symbolic and present in the plot. The [[fantasy]] [[genre]] is again spot on with the [[use]] of that [[amazing]] time [[travelling]] [[machine]], [[though]] again [[somewhat]] confusing at points with the use of [[timing]], and objects and [[situations]] being placed before it [[happens]] in the present, as is [[evident]] in the final [[couple]] of scenes.

The [[first]] watch I hated this sequel, but the second [[time]] was a [[real]] [[joy]] as I appreciated the jokes and [[story]] more, and [[though]] the [[jokes]] and plot aren't as [[strong]] as its [[predecessor]], [[Bogus]] [[Journey]] has enough feel good [[motives]], [[jokes]] and a fairly [[steady]] [[plot]] to [[make]] it a [[good]] natured family [[film]]. In the sequel to the [[shiny]] Bill and Ted's [[resplendent]] adventure, [[Billing]] and Ted are under [[hazard]] from the [[forthcoming]], as the [[malicious]] Chuck De Nomolos [[sending]] two [[malicious]] robots, disguised as [[Billed]] and Ted to [[terrestrial]] to [[mata]] human Bill and Ted, in [[edict]] to [[modify]] the [[forthcoming]].

[[During]] a [[huge]] comedy [[twinning]], Winter and Reeves excel to deliver delicious humour to the audience in this entertaining sequel. [[Despite]] [[dearth]] the [[finesse]] of the [[fiirst]], [[Falsified]] [[Tour]] still has the [[large]] catchphrases and dialogue from the leading pair, not to [[referenced]] an [[funny]] performance by [[Willem]] Sadler, who [[bring]] a [[comedy]] side to the figure of depth, the grim reaper. Watch for the [[gaming]] [[sequencing]], the best moment in the entire [[movie]], but one of [[various]] [[fantastic]] [[technique]] [[use]] to [[justification]] the [[gender]].

Though still [[pack]] with [[humor]], this [[cinema]] has a more dramatic [[movie]] [[circa]] it, with stakes being more [[severe]] and [[instances]] more [[unsafe]].

This [[offers]] the [[cinematography]] [[fantastic]] dimension and another [[loveable]] [[attribute]]. The creators [[furthermore]] stretch the [[restrict]] of the [[fantasia]] [[genera]] and the [[utilizes]] of realism, with [[brothel]] and [[heavens]] being [[severely]] symbolic and present in the plot. The [[fantasia]] [[genera]] is again spot on with the [[utilizes]] of that [[fantastic]] time [[traveling]] [[machines]], [[while]] again [[slightly]] confusing at points with the use of [[timetable]], and objects and [[instances]] being placed before it [[comes]] in the present, as is [[visible]] in the final [[matching]] of scenes.

The [[frst]] watch I hated this sequel, but the second [[moment]] was a [[actual]] [[jubilation]] as I appreciated the jokes and [[history]] more, and [[if]] the [[pranks]] and plot aren't as [[forceful]] as its [[precursor]], [[Faked]] [[Travelling]] has enough feel good [[grounds]], [[pranks]] and a fairly [[continual]] [[intrigue]] to [[deliver]] it a [[alright]] natured family [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3461 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is a [[film]] i decided to go and [[see]] because I'm a huge fan of adult animation. I quite often find that when a film doesn't evolve around a famous actor or actress but rather a story or style, it allows the film to be viewed as a piece of art rather than a [[showcase]] of the actors ability to differ his styles.

This film is certainly more about style than story. While i found the story interesting (a thriller that borrows story and atmosphere from films such as Blade Runner and many anime films), it was a bit [[hard]] to follow at times, and didn't feel like it all came together as well as it could have. It definitely had a mixed sense of French Animation and Japanese Anime coming together. Whether thats a good thing or not is up to the viewer. Visually this film is a treat for the eyes, and in that sense a work of art.

If you like adult animation, or would like to see a film that is different from most films out at the moment. I would recommend it. All i can say is that i enjoyed the experience of the film but did come away slightly disappointed because it could have been better This is a [[filmmaking]] i decided to go and [[seeing]] because I'm a huge fan of adult animation. I quite often find that when a film doesn't evolve around a famous actor or actress but rather a story or style, it allows the film to be viewed as a piece of art rather than a [[demonstrate]] of the actors ability to differ his styles.

This film is certainly more about style than story. While i found the story interesting (a thriller that borrows story and atmosphere from films such as Blade Runner and many anime films), it was a bit [[laborious]] to follow at times, and didn't feel like it all came together as well as it could have. It definitely had a mixed sense of French Animation and Japanese Anime coming together. Whether thats a good thing or not is up to the viewer. Visually this film is a treat for the eyes, and in that sense a work of art.

If you like adult animation, or would like to see a film that is different from most films out at the moment. I would recommend it. All i can say is that i enjoyed the experience of the film but did come away slightly disappointed because it could have been better --------------------------------------------- Result 3462 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The title should have been "The walker". That was only he did walk.

There was [[nothing]] on the [[movie]] that was good. The [[description]] of the movie doesn't really [[comply]] with the plot.

The only thing that I can [[get]] from the movie is that he was a [[good]] son, but a low life [[terrible]] [[person]].

I'm sorry that I [[expend]] my [[money]] and time, on this [[movie]]. I saw people leaving the [[theater]] in the middle of the [[movie]]. I stayed [[hoping]] that it will better....what a mistake. I got [[worse]].

If there is a suggestion that I can make to he producer is to re-direct his life to another field, because making movies is definitely no his cup of tea The title should have been "The walker". That was only he did walk.

There was [[nada]] on the [[filmmaking]] that was good. The [[descriptions]] of the movie doesn't really [[conform]] with the plot.

The only thing that I can [[gets]] from the movie is that he was a [[buena]] son, but a low life [[horrid]] [[anyone]].

I'm sorry that I [[dedicate]] my [[cash]] and time, on this [[cinematography]]. I saw people leaving the [[cinema]] in the middle of the [[kino]]. I stayed [[waiting]] that it will better....what a mistake. I got [[pire]].

If there is a suggestion that I can make to he producer is to re-direct his life to another field, because making movies is definitely no his cup of tea --------------------------------------------- Result 3463 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Dog]] Bite Dog isn't going to be for everyone, but I really [[enjoyed]] it. [[Full]] of slapping, stabbing and shooting (but don't worry – the lead's a terrible shot), it can [[best]] be [[described]] as a violent romp through Hong Kong and Cambodia. Edison Cheng plays [[Pang]], a Cambodian assassin in town to kill a [[barrister]]. [[Despite]] being [[filthy]] from his [[journey]], he's [[almost]] immediately seated at a huge table in the middle of an obviously [[expensive]] [[restaurant]]. If this sounds [[wildly]] [[implausible]] to you, you should [[probably]] [[avoid]] this [[film]]. It [[acted]] as my cue to suspend disbelief, and I had a lot more [[fun]] for it.

[[Chasing]] Pang down is Wai (Sam Lee), a [[young]], edgy [[cop]] who likes to [[smack]] people [[around]] [[almost]] as much as he likes to [[smoke]]. Wai walks a [[fine]] line that has [[Internal]] Affairs [[investigating]] him, and his father, a [[legendary]] Good [[Cop]], is in a coma following a [[drug]] [[deal]] that went south (the implication is that Wai is letting his [[father]] [[take]] the [[rap]] for his own [[corrupt]] dealings).

There are a [[car]] crashes, lots of [[killings]], and a [[strange]] and [[awkward]] love [[story]] on offer here, all [[played]] out in [[almost]] comic-book [[style]]. I [[suspect]] the [[humour]] was [[deliberate]] (nobody [[uses]] [[gargantuan]] [[concrete]] bludgeons without an [[eye]] for the extravagantly [[absurd]]), [[though]] the over-the-top [[nature]] lost a number of my fellow audience [[members]]. There are at [[least]] three points where the [[film]] might have ended, and at 109 [[mins]] it may have [[benefited]] from more [[ruthless]] [[editing]], or the [[deletion]] of one of the narrative threads (the light-hearted [[stuff]] [[worked]] well, so I [[would]] have [[left]] out the [[interactions]] with the three [[fathers]]).

I'm [[inclined]] to [[give]] it a ([[high]]) pass, [[however]], if only because of the ending – I've rarely [[heard]] so many people laugh so loudly at what should have been a [[poignant]] moment. This is one to see with a [[group]] of [[friends]] who [[love]] the ridiculous [[Canine]] Bite Dog isn't going to be for everyone, but I really [[liked]] it. [[Fullest]] of slapping, stabbing and shooting (but don't worry – the lead's a terrible shot), it can [[better]] be [[describing]] as a violent romp through Hong Kong and Cambodia. Edison Cheng plays [[Pong]], a Cambodian assassin in town to kill a [[counsel]]. [[While]] being [[nasty]] from his [[tour]], he's [[practically]] immediately seated at a huge table in the middle of an obviously [[costly]] [[catering]]. If this sounds [[savagely]] [[improbable]] to you, you should [[possibly]] [[avoided]] this [[kino]]. It [[behaved]] as my cue to suspend disbelief, and I had a lot more [[amusing]] for it.

[[Chase]] Pang down is Wai (Sam Lee), a [[youths]], edgy [[cops]] who likes to [[heroin]] people [[approximately]] [[practically]] as much as he likes to [[tobacco]]. Wai walks a [[fined]] line that has [[Indoor]] Affairs [[study]] him, and his father, a [[proverbial]] Good [[Policing]], is in a coma following a [[pharmaceuticals]] [[addressing]] that went south (the implication is that Wai is letting his [[fathers]] [[taking]] the [[rapper]] for his own [[corrupted]] dealings).

There are a [[auto]] crashes, lots of [[kills]], and a [[unusual]] and [[clumsy]] love [[saga]] on offer here, all [[served]] out in [[hardly]] comic-book [[styling]]. I [[suspects]] the [[humor]] was [[intentional]] (nobody [[using]] [[prodigious]] [[tangible]] bludgeons without an [[eyes]] for the extravagantly [[laughable]]), [[while]] the over-the-top [[characters]] lost a number of my fellow audience [[lawmakers]]. There are at [[fewer]] three points where the [[filmmaking]] might have ended, and at 109 [[minutes]] it may have [[received]] from more [[pitiless]] [[edit]], or the [[elimination]] of one of the narrative threads (the light-hearted [[thing]] [[cooperating]] well, so I [[ought]] have [[exited]] out the [[interaction]] with the three [[father]]).

I'm [[slanted]] to [[lend]] it a ([[supreme]]) pass, [[yet]], if only because of the ending – I've rarely [[hear]] so many people laugh so loudly at what should have been a [[agonizing]] moment. This is one to see with a [[cluster]] of [[mates]] who [[amore]] the ridiculous --------------------------------------------- Result 3464 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I have [[always]] [[wanted]] to [[see]] this because I [[love]] [[cheesy]] horror [[movies]] and with a title like this, I was sure "The [[Incredible]] [[Melting]] Man" would be a [[lot]] of [[fun]].

It [[really]] wasn't. I [[mean]], the acting was entertainingly [[bad]], the script contained some classic [[bad]] lines and the [[special]] [[effects]] looked [[like]] [[someone]] had sneezed all over the lead [[actor]], so I should have [[loved]] it. [[Unfortunately]] it's really draggy between these [[highlights]]. I decided to watch the [[last]] half of the [[movie]] while doing my tax return. That's how [[boring]] this [[film]] is.

[[Nevertheless]], if you [[love]] [[bad]] [[movies]] you will [[enjoy]] the [[dramatic]] exit of the [[Fat]] Nurse, and the stellar acting of the [[guy]] who plays Dr. Ted. To be fair to the poor [[man]], he does have to [[deliver]] some [[amazingly]] inept lines with straight [[face]] - like the [[conversation]] he has with his wife on [[tracking]] down the I M [[Man]]:

"I'll [[find]] him with a geiger counter." "Is he radioactive?" "[[Just]] a [[little]] bit."

[[Yes]], the [[plot]] has Dr. Ted [[wandering]] about trying to find a superstrong zombie [[killing]] [[machine]] [[armed]] only with what [[looks]] like a mini-Dyson. He's a brave man. [[Unfortunately]] his [[plan]] [[fails]] when he [[finds]] a [[big]] lot of goop on a tree. "[[Oh]] god - it's his ear!" [[says]] Dr. Ted to the [[audience]]. I'm so glad he cleared that up.

I [[realise]] I'm making this [[movie]] sound [[rather]] fun. It would be if it were only 10 minutes [[long]], but [[unfortunately]] it goes on and on, and the Incredible [[Melting]] [[Dude]] just dangles about [[making]] a sticky [[mess]] when he should be [[eating]] more people in my [[opinion]]. I [[think]] if you were [[truly]] stoned you [[would]] [[probably]] [[love]] it, just don't have pop-tarts during the [[movie]], because the lead actor really does resemble one near the [[end]]. I have [[constantly]] [[wanna]] to [[consults]] this because I [[adored]] [[corny]] horror [[movie]] and with a title like this, I was sure "The [[Fabulous]] [[Merger]] Man" would be a [[batch]] of [[droll]].

It [[truthfully]] wasn't. I [[meaning]], the acting was entertainingly [[naughty]], the script contained some classic [[naughty]] lines and the [[particular]] [[consequences]] looked [[iike]] [[anybody]] had sneezed all over the lead [[protagonist]], so I should have [[adored]] it. [[Regrettably]] it's really draggy between these [[stresses]]. I decided to watch the [[latter]] half of the [[cinema]] while doing my tax return. That's how [[tiresome]] this [[flick]] is.

[[However]], if you [[adored]] [[wicked]] [[movie]] you will [[enjoys]] the [[formidable]] exit of the [[Fatty]] Nurse, and the stellar acting of the [[man]] who plays Dr. Ted. To be fair to the poor [[men]], he does have to [[provide]] some [[oddly]] inept lines with straight [[encounter]] - like the [[debates]] he has with his wife on [[tracing]] down the I M [[Guy]]:

"I'll [[found]] him with a geiger counter." "Is he radioactive?" "[[Righteous]] a [[petit]] bit."

[[Yep]], the [[intrigue]] has Dr. Ted [[roaming]] about trying to find a superstrong zombie [[killed]] [[machines]] [[armada]] only with what [[seem]] like a mini-Dyson. He's a brave man. [[Sadly]] his [[schemes]] [[fail]] when he [[found]] a [[immense]] lot of goop on a tree. "[[Aw]] god - it's his ear!" [[said]] Dr. Ted to the [[viewers]]. I'm so glad he cleared that up.

I [[realising]] I'm making this [[cinema]] sound [[quite]] fun. It would be if it were only 10 minutes [[longer]], but [[sadly]] it goes on and on, and the Incredible [[Merging]] [[Buddy]] just dangles about [[doing]] a sticky [[confusion]] when he should be [[feeding]] more people in my [[opinions]]. I [[thoughts]] if you were [[really]] stoned you [[ought]] [[maybe]] [[adored]] it, just don't have pop-tarts during the [[films]], because the lead actor really does resemble one near the [[terminate]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3465 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This [[serial]] is interesting to watch as an MST3K [[feature]], but for todays audience that's all it is. I was really surprised to [[see]] the year it was made as 1952. Considering that fact [[alone]] makes this a [[solid]] (lowly?) 2 in my [[book]]. The [[cars]] used don't [[even]] [[look]] contemporary, they [[look]] like [[stuff]] from the 30's. It's basically Cody (the lone world's salvation? Sheesh [[talk]] about an [[insult]] to everyone else, like the military), anyway it's Cody in his nipple [[ring]] flying suit against Graber and Daley two dumb*ss henchman who [[sport]] [[handguns]] and an [[occasional]] ray gun [[thats]] [[pretty]] lame in its own [[right]], enjoy. [[If]] you [[want]] to watch a [[really]] [[good]] [[serial]] [[see]] Flash Gordan, it's full of [[rockets]] that [[attack]] each other and a good evil [[nemesis]] and [[also]] good [[looking]] [[women]], this has [[NONE]] of that. And Flash was made 15 or so years before this [[crap]] so you can give it some slack. Something [[made]] in 1952, this [[bad]], [[deserves]] a 2. Nuff said. [[give]] it a 6 if your watching it as a MST3K episode, those guys have some [[good]] [[fun]] with it; a tweak of the [[nipples]] here, a [[tweak]] there and I'm flying! And now as an added bonus, I bring you the [[Commander]] Cody [[Theme]] song as originally sung by Joel and his two character [[bots]] Tom Servo and [[Crow]] aboard the [[satellite]] of [[love]] for episode eight The [[Enemy]] Planet:

(Singing at the very [[beginning]] [[credits]]);

(TOM SERVO [[SINGING]]) YOUR WATCHING [[COMMANDER]] CODY.... HE IS THE [[NEW]] [[CHARACTER]] FROM REPUBLIC,

[[HE]] [[GETS]] IN [[TROUBLE]] EVERY [[WEEK]]... [[BUT]] HE'S [[SAVED]] BY [[EDITING]],

[[JUST]] A [[TWEAK]] OF HIS [[NIPPLES]]... [[SENDS]] HIM [[ON]] HIS [[WAY]],

A PUMPKIN HEAD AND A [[ROCKET]] [[PACK]].... WILL SAVE THE DAY,

(JOEL SINGING) HIS LABRATORY IS A BOXING RING... WHEN BAD GUYS COME TO [[MIX]] IT UP,

SOMEBODY ALWAYS GETS KIDNAPPED... AND CODY HAS TO FIX IT UP,

HE DRINKS HIS TEA AT AL'S CAFE... AND FLIES ALONG ON WIRES,

HE BEATS THE CROOKS AND FLIES WITH HOOKS... AND PUTS OUT FOREST FIRES,

(CROW SINGING)

BAD GUYS BEWARE... CODY IS THERE,

YOU'LL LIKE HIS HAIR IT'S UNDER HIS HELMUT... AND BECAUSE WE CAN'T THINK OF A GOOD RHYME,

THAT'S THE END OF THE COMMANDER CODY THEME SONG... SO SIT RIGHT BACK WITH A WILL OF GRANITE,

AND WATCH CHAPTER EIGHT, CAUSE THAT'S THE ENEMY PLANET This [[series]] is interesting to watch as an MST3K [[hallmarks]], but for todays audience that's all it is. I was really surprised to [[behold]] the year it was made as 1952. Considering that fact [[lonely]] makes this a [[robust]] (lowly?) 2 in my [[books]]. The [[carriages]] used don't [[yet]] [[gaze]] contemporary, they [[peek]] like [[thing]] from the 30's. It's basically Cody (the lone world's salvation? Sheesh [[schmooze]] about an [[snub]] to everyone else, like the military), anyway it's Cody in his nipple [[rings]] flying suit against Graber and Daley two dumb*ss henchman who [[athletes]] [[pistols]] and an [[casual]] ray gun [[aint]] [[quite]] lame in its own [[rights]], enjoy. [[Though]] you [[wish]] to watch a [[truly]] [[buena]] [[series]] [[seeing]] Flash Gordan, it's full of [[rocket]] that [[onslaught]] each other and a good evil [[foe]] and [[additionally]] good [[searching]] [[girl]], this has [[NOS]] of that. And Flash was made 15 or so years before this [[dammit]] so you can give it some slack. Something [[brought]] in 1952, this [[negative]], [[deserved]] a 2. Nuff said. [[lend]] it a 6 if your watching it as a MST3K episode, those guys have some [[alright]] [[entertaining]] with it; a tweak of the [[tits]] here, a [[tweaks]] there and I'm flying! And now as an added bonus, I bring you the [[Commanding]] Cody [[Themes]] song as originally sung by Joel and his two character [[robots]] Tom Servo and [[Raven]] aboard the [[moons]] of [[amour]] for episode eight The [[Adversary]] Planet:

(Singing at the very [[commencing]] [[credit]]);

(TOM SERVO [[CHANT]]) YOUR WATCHING [[CAPTAIN]] CODY.... HE IS THE [[NEWEST]] [[CHARACTERS]] FROM REPUBLIC,

[[HIM]] [[GOT]] IN [[TROUBLES]] EVERY [[WEEKS]]... [[ALBEIT]] HE'S [[RESCUES]] BY [[EDITORIAL]],

[[JEN]] A [[TWEAKS]] OF HIS [[BREASTS]]... [[SENT]] HIM [[ONTO]] HIS [[PATHWAYS]],

A PUMPKIN HEAD AND A [[ROCKETS]] [[BAGGING]].... WILL SAVE THE DAY,

(JOEL SINGING) HIS LABRATORY IS A BOXING RING... WHEN BAD GUYS COME TO [[BLENDED]] IT UP,

SOMEBODY ALWAYS GETS KIDNAPPED... AND CODY HAS TO FIX IT UP,

HE DRINKS HIS TEA AT AL'S CAFE... AND FLIES ALONG ON WIRES,

HE BEATS THE CROOKS AND FLIES WITH HOOKS... AND PUTS OUT FOREST FIRES,

(CROW SINGING)

BAD GUYS BEWARE... CODY IS THERE,

YOU'LL LIKE HIS HAIR IT'S UNDER HIS HELMUT... AND BECAUSE WE CAN'T THINK OF A GOOD RHYME,

THAT'S THE END OF THE COMMANDER CODY THEME SONG... SO SIT RIGHT BACK WITH A WILL OF GRANITE,

AND WATCH CHAPTER EIGHT, CAUSE THAT'S THE ENEMY PLANET --------------------------------------------- Result 3466 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[So]] [[terrific]], so [[good]]. I have never seen a [[man]] be more funny than [[Eddie]] [[Murphy]]. In this stand-up-comedy you will [[see]] a [[lot]] of imitations more done by anyone!

[[If]] you have seen Raw (1987) you will have to [[see]] Delirious. It's so [[funny]]! It's so [[professional]]! [[Accordingly]] [[glamorous]], so [[alright]]. I have never seen a [[males]] be more funny than [[Eddy]] [[Murph]]. In this stand-up-comedy you will [[seeing]] a [[batch]] of imitations more done by anyone!

[[Unless]] you have seen Raw (1987) you will have to [[seeing]] Delirious. It's so [[comical]]! It's so [[occupational]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3467 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] A spoiler.

What three words can guarantee you a [[terrible]] film? [[Cheap]] Canadian [[Production]]. THE BRAIN fits those words perfectly. Terrible script, idiotic acting and hilarious special effects make this a must for every BAD movie fan. The horror is hilarious. The post production team looks like it gave up. What makes THE BRAIN admirable is in the second half, it actually [[tries]] to be good! Can a bit of ingenuity and consistency save what is already a joke?

It's around Christmas time. A mother and daughter are murdered by one of the funniest looking villains ever. The day later, a rebel teen gets into enough trouble that he is sent for a psychiatric analysis.

If a cop 's head is chopped off and a stranger with blood on him and a bloody axe told you some kids did it, who would you believe? What begins as funny turns dull and tiring toward the end when THE BRAIN tries to be serious. A child cannot be frightened by the scary moments. THE BRAIN is too funny a concept to try and be gritty. The Psychological Research Institute is larger than major manufacturing plants! Our ugly villain and its cohorts get credit for pulling some of the [[worst]] acting I have seen. Viewer discretion advised heavily. A spoiler.

What three words can guarantee you a [[horrendous]] film? [[Cheaper]] Canadian [[Productivity]]. THE BRAIN fits those words perfectly. Terrible script, idiotic acting and hilarious special effects make this a must for every BAD movie fan. The horror is hilarious. The post production team looks like it gave up. What makes THE BRAIN admirable is in the second half, it actually [[endeavours]] to be good! Can a bit of ingenuity and consistency save what is already a joke?

It's around Christmas time. A mother and daughter are murdered by one of the funniest looking villains ever. The day later, a rebel teen gets into enough trouble that he is sent for a psychiatric analysis.

If a cop 's head is chopped off and a stranger with blood on him and a bloody axe told you some kids did it, who would you believe? What begins as funny turns dull and tiring toward the end when THE BRAIN tries to be serious. A child cannot be frightened by the scary moments. THE BRAIN is too funny a concept to try and be gritty. The Psychological Research Institute is larger than major manufacturing plants! Our ugly villain and its cohorts get credit for pulling some of the [[gravest]] acting I have seen. Viewer discretion advised heavily. --------------------------------------------- Result 3468 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] Despite being released on DVD by Blue Underground some five years ago, I have never come across this Italian "sword and sorcery" item on late-night Italian TV and, now that I have seen it for myself, I know [[exactly]] why. Not because of its director's typical [[predilection]] for extreme [[gore]] (of which there is some examples to be sure) or the fact that the [[handful]] of women in it [[parade]] topless all the time (it is set in the Dark [[Ages]] after all)…it is, quite [[simply]], very [[poor]] stuff indeed. [[In]] fact, I would go so far as to say that it may very well be the worst of its kind that I have yet seen and, believe me, I have seen plenty (especially in the last few years i.e. following my excursion to the 2004 Venice Film Festival)! Reading about how the film's failure at the time of initial release is believed to have led to its director's subsequent (and regrettable) career nosedive into mindless low-budget gore, I can see their point: I may prefer Fulci's earlier "giallo" period (1968-77) to his more popular stuff horror (1979-82) myself but, even on the latter, his commitment was arguably unquestionable. On the other hand, CONQUEST seems not to have inspired Fulci in the least – seeing how he decided to drape the proceedings with an annoyingly perpetual mist, sprinkle it with incongruent characters (cannibals vs. werewolves, anyone?), irrelevant gore (we are treated to a gratuitous, nasty cannibal dinner just before witnessing the flesh-eating revelers having their brains literally beaten out by their hairy antagonists!) and even some highly unappetizing intimacy between the masked, brain-slurping villainess (don't ask) and her slimy reptilian pet!! For what it is worth, we have two heroes for the price of one here: a young magic bow-carrying boy on some manhood-affirming odyssey (Andrea Occhipinti) and his rambling muscle-bound companion (Jorge Rivero i.e. Frenchy from Howard Hawks' RIO LOBO [1970]!) who, despite being called Mace (short for Maciste, perhaps?), seems to be there simply to drop in on his cavewoman from time to time and get his younger protégé out of trouble (particularly during an exceedingly unpleasant attack of the 'boils'). Unfortunately, even the usual saving grace of such lowbrow material comes up short here as ex-Goblin Claudio Simonetti's electronic score seems awfully inappropriate at times. Fulci even contrives to give the film a laughably hurried coda with the surviving beefy hero going aimlessly out into the wilderness (after defeating one and all with the aid of the all-important magic bow…so much for his own supposed physical strength!) onto his next – and thankfully unfilmed – adventure! Despite being released on DVD by Blue Underground some five years ago, I have never come across this Italian "sword and sorcery" item on late-night Italian TV and, now that I have seen it for myself, I know [[accurately]] why. Not because of its director's typical [[preference]] for extreme [[gora]] (of which there is some examples to be sure) or the fact that the [[fistful]] of women in it [[parades]] topless all the time (it is set in the Dark [[Years]] after all)…it is, quite [[exclusively]], very [[pauper]] stuff indeed. [[Across]] fact, I would go so far as to say that it may very well be the worst of its kind that I have yet seen and, believe me, I have seen plenty (especially in the last few years i.e. following my excursion to the 2004 Venice Film Festival)! Reading about how the film's failure at the time of initial release is believed to have led to its director's subsequent (and regrettable) career nosedive into mindless low-budget gore, I can see their point: I may prefer Fulci's earlier "giallo" period (1968-77) to his more popular stuff horror (1979-82) myself but, even on the latter, his commitment was arguably unquestionable. On the other hand, CONQUEST seems not to have inspired Fulci in the least – seeing how he decided to drape the proceedings with an annoyingly perpetual mist, sprinkle it with incongruent characters (cannibals vs. werewolves, anyone?), irrelevant gore (we are treated to a gratuitous, nasty cannibal dinner just before witnessing the flesh-eating revelers having their brains literally beaten out by their hairy antagonists!) and even some highly unappetizing intimacy between the masked, brain-slurping villainess (don't ask) and her slimy reptilian pet!! For what it is worth, we have two heroes for the price of one here: a young magic bow-carrying boy on some manhood-affirming odyssey (Andrea Occhipinti) and his rambling muscle-bound companion (Jorge Rivero i.e. Frenchy from Howard Hawks' RIO LOBO [1970]!) who, despite being called Mace (short for Maciste, perhaps?), seems to be there simply to drop in on his cavewoman from time to time and get his younger protégé out of trouble (particularly during an exceedingly unpleasant attack of the 'boils'). Unfortunately, even the usual saving grace of such lowbrow material comes up short here as ex-Goblin Claudio Simonetti's electronic score seems awfully inappropriate at times. Fulci even contrives to give the film a laughably hurried coda with the surviving beefy hero going aimlessly out into the wilderness (after defeating one and all with the aid of the all-important magic bow…so much for his own supposed physical strength!) onto his next – and thankfully unfilmed – adventure! --------------------------------------------- Result 3469 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I saw only the [[first]] part of this series when it debuted back in the late 90's and only [[recently]] got a chance to watch all three parts via Netflix (convenient service by the way). [[All]] in all, I [[liked]] this lighthearted, sometimes genre challenged, mini [[series]]. The [[story]] of a younger man falling for an older [[woman]] seems to work and the actors are all fine. Yes, it does have some romance clichés of running in the rain or a train station goodbye, but the characters have a chance to be [[explored]] so it doesn't seem cheesy, like it would be if this were some Tom Hanks vehicle or similar. Robson Greene, who at times reminds me of a separated-at-birth Scott Bakula does a fine job of someone who is head over heels in love and the ebb and tide of desire and rejection throws the series into watchable fare. Personally, I think the series could have been done with two episodes, but that's up for debate I suppose. Apparently, there's a sequel, and that should be arriving tomorrow via Netflix. I saw only the [[outset]] part of this series when it debuted back in the late 90's and only [[newly]] got a chance to watch all three parts via Netflix (convenient service by the way). [[Totality]] in all, I [[wished]] this lighthearted, sometimes genre challenged, mini [[serials]]. The [[conte]] of a younger man falling for an older [[girls]] seems to work and the actors are all fine. Yes, it does have some romance clichés of running in the rain or a train station goodbye, but the characters have a chance to be [[scrutinized]] so it doesn't seem cheesy, like it would be if this were some Tom Hanks vehicle or similar. Robson Greene, who at times reminds me of a separated-at-birth Scott Bakula does a fine job of someone who is head over heels in love and the ebb and tide of desire and rejection throws the series into watchable fare. Personally, I think the series could have been done with two episodes, but that's up for debate I suppose. Apparently, there's a sequel, and that should be arriving tomorrow via Netflix. --------------------------------------------- Result 3470 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Hidden Frontier is a fan [[made]] [[show]], in the [[world]] of Star Trek. The story takes place after [[Voyager]] has returned from the Delta-quadrant . It has some characters from the official Star Trek [[shows]], but most of them are [[original]] to the show. The show takes place on the star base Deep Space 12 and on several space ships, which gives it opportunities the official shows don't have. The characters have the opportunity of a rising in the hierarchy, which characters in [[shows]] with only one [[ship]] doesn't have. The [[show]] has good computer [[animation]] of spaceships, but the acting takes place in front of at green-screen and it gives a green glow around the [[actors]]. Not all the [[actors]] are [[equally]] good, but most do [[fine]]. The episodes are character driven and the characters develop over many [[episodes]]. That is a bit more like in Babylon 5, than in most official Star Trek [[shows]]. Hidden [[Frontier]] takes taboos that [[even]] the [[official]] series has shrunk from using. [[All]] in all I [[enjoyed]] watching it. Hidden Frontier is a fan [[introduced]] [[demonstrate]], in the [[worldwide]] of Star Trek. The story takes place after [[Trips]] has returned from the Delta-quadrant . It has some characters from the official Star Trek [[demonstrate]], but most of them are [[upfront]] to the show. The show takes place on the star base Deep Space 12 and on several space ships, which gives it opportunities the official shows don't have. The characters have the opportunity of a rising in the hierarchy, which characters in [[demonstrate]] with only one [[boats]] doesn't have. The [[demonstrating]] has good computer [[animate]] of spaceships, but the acting takes place in front of at green-screen and it gives a green glow around the [[actresses]]. Not all the [[actresses]] are [[likewise]] good, but most do [[fined]]. The episodes are character driven and the characters develop over many [[spells]]. That is a bit more like in Babylon 5, than in most official Star Trek [[demonstrating]]. Hidden [[Border]] takes taboos that [[yet]] the [[formal]] series has shrunk from using. [[Everything]] in all I [[liked]] watching it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3471 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] My name is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my name is Domino Harvey. {CUT, CHOP} My name is Domino Harvey. {EDIT. CUT. Playback}

Never have I seen a director take so much flack for his [[style]] before. By now it is evident that most people do not [[appreciate]] Tony Scott's choppy, [[flashy]], dizzying editing technique. If I have to [[choose]] between loving it and hating it, I'd [[say]] I [[love]] it. It was borderline distracting at [[times]], but the end result was pretty [[good]] and it's nice to see a director with a creative edge to his style and some originality (even if it borrows heavily from MTV videos).

This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue seems strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty much hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she suffered. We follow [[Domino]] through her life as she joins up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew become tangled up in the FBI and suddenly has a reality show contract under Christopher Walken's TV production company (what is Christopher Walken doing in every film, by the way?). I guess that is a clever film technique, because now Tony Scott is free to use as much flashy MTV/Reality Show editing footage as he likes. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.

It followes then that the story is told at an amazingly rapid-fire pace, with lots of raunchy strong language and gun violence. There are some funny jokes; it's all very modern and surreal at the same time. It's a mess, but it's a rather [[enjoyable]] [[mess]]. It is ultimately flawed in so many ways (the actors [[try]] too [[hard]] to [[make]] their [[characters]] "[[cool]]", for one) but it [[works]]. I give it a weak 7/10 which may [[seem]] [[generous]] when [[compared]] to the general [[consensus]] of movie-goers who [[graded]] this [[film]] — but I feel it had some [[good]] [[ideas]] and [[executed]] them well.

7 out of 10 My name is Domino Harvery. {EDIT *dizzying* CHOP} My--my--my name is Domino Harvey. {CUT, CHOP} My name is Domino Harvey. {EDIT. CUT. Playback}

Never have I seen a director take so much flack for his [[styling]] before. By now it is evident that most people do not [[appreciates]] Tony Scott's choppy, [[gaudy]], dizzying editing technique. If I have to [[electing]] between loving it and hating it, I'd [[told]] I [[iove]] it. It was borderline distracting at [[period]], but the end result was pretty [[buena]] and it's nice to see a director with a creative edge to his style and some originality (even if it borrows heavily from MTV videos).

This stylistic edge manifests itself as Keira Knightley plays the role of cocky badass bounty hunter Domino Harvey and even her dialogue seems strangely choppy. Otherwise she plays her poorly because I pretty much hated her character and did not sympathize one bit with her, no matter how much she suffered. We follow [[Domina]] through her life as she joins up with fellow bounty hunters Mickey Rourke, Rizwan Abbasi and Edgar Ramirez. The crew become tangled up in the FBI and suddenly has a reality show contract under Christopher Walken's TV production company (what is Christopher Walken doing in every film, by the way?). I guess that is a clever film technique, because now Tony Scott is free to use as much flashy MTV/Reality Show editing footage as he likes. It becomes a pastiche of MTV culture at this point.

It followes then that the story is told at an amazingly rapid-fire pace, with lots of raunchy strong language and gun violence. There are some funny jokes; it's all very modern and surreal at the same time. It's a mess, but it's a rather [[pleasurable]] [[shambles]]. It is ultimately flawed in so many ways (the actors [[trying]] too [[laborious]] to [[deliver]] their [[traits]] "[[refrigerate]]", for one) but it [[cooperating]]. I give it a weak 7/10 which may [[looks]] [[magnanimous]] when [[comparing]] to the general [[unanimity]] of movie-goers who [[classified]] this [[filmmaking]] — but I feel it had some [[alright]] [[brainchild]] and [[implemented]] them well.

7 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3472 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The [[best]] Modesty [[Blaise]] [[movie]] I have [[seen]] so far. It's like a good pilot for a TV-series. I even think it's a [[little]] bit "cult", like with a lite touch of Quentin Tarantino's magic, or something. They have [[caught]] a great deal of Modesty's character, but I [[admit]] missing [[Willy]] Garwin a [[bit]]. Even if i have read many comics and book by Peter O'donnell I'm not [[disappointed]] of this [[film]], quite the opposite. [[Positive]] surprised of this story about Modesty and her childhood. I did not put my expectations so high, because of the bad movie from 1966. So I may have overrate this movie just a little. But if you like the comics and other storys about Modesty Blaise, you should definitely see this one! can't wait for a follow-up... The [[optimum]] Modesty [[Belize]] [[cinematography]] I have [[watched]] so far. It's like a good pilot for a TV-series. I even think it's a [[tiny]] bit "cult", like with a lite touch of Quentin Tarantino's magic, or something. They have [[grabbed]] a great deal of Modesty's character, but I [[accepted]] missing [[Willie]] Garwin a [[bitten]]. Even if i have read many comics and book by Peter O'donnell I'm not [[disenchanted]] of this [[movies]], quite the opposite. [[Propitious]] surprised of this story about Modesty and her childhood. I did not put my expectations so high, because of the bad movie from 1966. So I may have overrate this movie just a little. But if you like the comics and other storys about Modesty Blaise, you should definitely see this one! can't wait for a follow-up... --------------------------------------------- Result 3473 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] this short film trailer is basically about Superman and Batman working together and forming an uneasy alliance.obviously,the two characters have vastly differing views on how to deal with crime and what constitutes punishment.it's a lot of fun to see these two iconic characters try to get along.i won't go int to the storyline here.but i will get into the acting,which is [[terrific]].everyone is well cast.the two [[actors]] [[playing]] Superman and Batman are well suited to their [[characters]].the same filmmakers that [[made]] Batman: [[Dead]] [[End]] and Grayson [[also]] [[made]] this [[short]] film.of the three,i [[probably]] [[liked]] this one the least,but i still thought it was well done.for me,World's finest is a 7/10 this short film trailer is basically about Superman and Batman working together and forming an uneasy alliance.obviously,the two characters have vastly differing views on how to deal with crime and what constitutes punishment.it's a lot of fun to see these two iconic characters try to get along.i won't go int to the storyline here.but i will get into the acting,which is [[sumptuous]].everyone is well cast.the two [[actresses]] [[playback]] Superman and Batman are well suited to their [[features]].the same filmmakers that [[accomplished]] Batman: [[Death]] [[Terminating]] and Grayson [[likewise]] [[introduced]] this [[terse]] film.of the three,i [[presumably]] [[wished]] this one the least,but i still thought it was well done.for me,World's finest is a 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3474 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Here, on IMDb.[[com]] I read an [[opinion]], that [[Grey]] Owl is best [[character]] of [[Pierce]] Brosnan ever [[performed]]. I do not know if he had better nor worse [[roles]], I'm not his [[fan]], but this one was really [[exceptional]].

The other thing - [[impressive]] hand of the movie [[director]]. I give my respect. The [[serenity]], the beauty and spirit of wilderness was [[illustrated]] really exlusively, I never [[met]] such proximity it in any [[movie]] before.

Another thing [[left]] in my mind after the [[film]] - this is the [[movie]], closest to the [[original]] [[books]], and atmosphere in it.

And [[little]] [[bit]] more. I [[pay]] my respect to the original Grey Owl. Here, on IMDb.[[coms]] I read an [[avis]], that [[Gray]] Owl is best [[personage]] of [[Pearce]] Brosnan ever [[perform]]. I do not know if he had better nor worse [[functions]], I'm not his [[ventilator]], but this one was really [[extraordinaire]].

The other thing - [[unbelievable]] hand of the movie [[superintendent]]. I give my respect. The [[lull]], the beauty and spirit of wilderness was [[evidenced]] really exlusively, I never [[complied]] such proximity it in any [[filmmaking]] before.

Another thing [[exited]] in my mind after the [[movie]] - this is the [[kino]], closest to the [[upfront]] [[ledgers]], and atmosphere in it.

And [[scant]] [[bitten]] more. I [[payrolls]] my respect to the original Grey Owl. --------------------------------------------- Result 3475 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was overtaken by the emotion. Unforgettable rendering of a wartime story which is unknown to most people. The performances were faultless and outstanding. --------------------------------------------- Result 3476 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Portly [[nice]] [[guy]] falls for a luscious [[blonde]]; she [[likes]] him too, but not for the reasons you might think. Little-seen black [[comedy]] from writer [[Pat]] Proft features very good performances by Joe Alaskey and Donna Dixon, [[yet]] it makes no lasting impact. It's just a quickie throwaway effort, helmed by Norman Bates himself, Anthony Perkins. Even on the [[level]] of B-comedies, the somewhat-similar "Eating [[Raoul]]" is a better [[bet]]. There's definitely an amusing set-up here; [[unfortunately]], the [[picture]] has [[nowhere]] to go in its second act. An interesting [[try]], but it misfires.

** from **** Portly [[enjoyable]] [[buddy]] falls for a luscious [[redhead]]; she [[fond]] him too, but not for the reasons you might think. Little-seen black [[parody]] from writer [[Patricia]] Proft features very good performances by Joe Alaskey and Donna Dixon, [[again]] it makes no lasting impact. It's just a quickie throwaway effort, helmed by Norman Bates himself, Anthony Perkins. Even on the [[grades]] of B-comedies, the somewhat-similar "Eating [[Raul]]" is a better [[bets]]. There's definitely an amusing set-up here; [[tragically]], the [[imagery]] has [[everywhere]] to go in its second act. An interesting [[strive]], but it misfires.

** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3477 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Mel Torme and Victor Borge, in their younger years, [[serve]] to make this film interesting - and especially viewing a young Sinatra, on the sunny side of 30, and definitely conveying that this was his "yes, I'm a popular singer, but hardly an actor yet" stage. Michele Morgan is an annoying, inane presence, and Jack Haley is an actor [[whose]] appeal has always been totally lost on me. Leon Erroll is silly, as always, but overall pretty [[funny]]. 7 stars of a potential 10 is about the right "grade," because with the combination of its positive aspects, along with the lack of much of a story, and a silly one at that, and the fore-mentioned annoyances - it is overall average at best. Most of the fascination is from the viewing of the three entertainment icons in their early years. Mel Torme and Victor Borge, in their younger years, [[serving]] to make this film interesting - and especially viewing a young Sinatra, on the sunny side of 30, and definitely conveying that this was his "yes, I'm a popular singer, but hardly an actor yet" stage. Michele Morgan is an annoying, inane presence, and Jack Haley is an actor [[who]] appeal has always been totally lost on me. Leon Erroll is silly, as always, but overall pretty [[comical]]. 7 stars of a potential 10 is about the right "grade," because with the combination of its positive aspects, along with the lack of much of a story, and a silly one at that, and the fore-mentioned annoyances - it is overall average at best. Most of the fascination is from the viewing of the three entertainment icons in their early years. --------------------------------------------- Result 3478 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] Remember the early days of Pay Per View? I do, and i can almost remember the number you had to CALL to actually rent the movie on your t.v. As a kid we always wanted to rent playboy, but this meant actually calling someone from PPV and asking to rent it. And then you get the nerve to do it and your [[watching]] four hours of [[soft]] [[core]] no angle crap. Well the reason i bring that up is because this movie too was on ppv. And i remember almost every scene that was in the add. I've been on a kick in the last few years to obtain all the [[great]] movies i use to see as a kid and this was one of them. It's one that when its on its hard to shut off. All star cast trying to commit the perfect bank bust but nothing goes right. There are plenty of spoof bank capers that are good and this one has to fall in that category. It has enough action and laughs to sustain it. check it out if you dare! Remember the early days of Pay Per View? I do, and i can almost remember the number you had to CALL to actually rent the movie on your t.v. As a kid we always wanted to rent playboy, but this meant actually calling someone from PPV and asking to rent it. And then you get the nerve to do it and your [[staring]] four hours of [[mild]] [[crux]] no angle crap. Well the reason i bring that up is because this movie too was on ppv. And i remember almost every scene that was in the add. I've been on a kick in the last few years to obtain all the [[whopping]] movies i use to see as a kid and this was one of them. It's one that when its on its hard to shut off. All star cast trying to commit the perfect bank bust but nothing goes right. There are plenty of spoof bank capers that are good and this one has to fall in that category. It has enough action and laughs to sustain it. check it out if you dare! --------------------------------------------- Result 3479 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Kabei: Our Mother (2008) is a poetic and [[sublime]] [[beauty]] from Japan. A [[real]] weeper! I had heard [[great]] [[reviews]] for the [[film]] and rented it from Netflix. Am I [[glad]] I did! [[In]] many [[ways]] this [[film]] reminded me of the old [[style]] of Japanese [[classic]] film-making from the 1940's and 1950's that I've come to [[love]] so much, such as seen in Yasujiro Ozu [[pictures]] -- the title credits even begin in the same way, with the Japanese letters ([[characters]]) in red against neutral [[color]] burlap material. I immediately thought: this director loves Ozu. The same [[style]] was [[used]] too: [[mostly]] indoor sets with only a few [[outdoor]] scenes. Even a [[couple]] of "[[pillow]] shots", as Roger Ebert [[calls]] them. The [[strength]] of the [[film]] is [[built]] on the [[love]] of the [[characters]] for one another.

The [[story]] follows the [[lives]] of a Japanese family before, and during, and after, [[World]] [[War]] Two. The mother takes care of her growing girls the best she can after the father (a University professor) is arrested for anti-war sympathies. He's never freed and only has a few brief meetings with his wife in prison before he dies of starvation and disease. Meanwhile a former student of the professor comes by often to help take care of the mother and two girls. He begins to fall in love with the mother and is a substitute father for the two girls. But war starts and he's drafted and they have to say an abrupt farewell. Will they ever express their love for one another? Will he ever return from the war?

There is so much heart and gentle spirit in the performance of the lead actress, Sayuri Yoshinaga. She's almost a Madonna type, she's so beautiful! Big soulful eyes and flawless skin. The actor who plays the student is phenomenal as well: his name is Tadanobu Asano. What a sensitive performance. There is no macho in him at all; he's gentle and kind. I'd certainly love to see both of these two in other movies. I think I'll check to see what's available for them. The two little child actresses are wonderful too.

The film is just released on NTSC DVD for American audiences, with very easy to read English subtitles. I gave it a 10 out of 10 on the IMDb. I cried almost as much as with the Japanese film classic Twenty-Four Eyes (1954). Don't miss this film! Kabei: Our Mother (2008) is a poetic and [[handsome]] [[beaut]] from Japan. A [[actual]] weeper! I had heard [[awesome]] [[exams]] for the [[movie]] and rented it from Netflix. Am I [[happier]] I did! [[During]] many [[mode]] this [[movies]] reminded me of the old [[styling]] of Japanese [[typical]] film-making from the 1940's and 1950's that I've come to [[likes]] so much, such as seen in Yasujiro Ozu [[imaging]] -- the title credits even begin in the same way, with the Japanese letters ([[features]]) in red against neutral [[colors]] burlap material. I immediately thought: this director loves Ozu. The same [[styling]] was [[using]] too: [[basically]] indoor sets with only a few [[outer]] scenes. Even a [[coupling]] of "[[mattress]] shots", as Roger Ebert [[inviting]] them. The [[kraft]] of the [[kino]] is [[constructing]] on the [[loves]] of the [[traits]] for one another.

The [[history]] follows the [[life]] of a Japanese family before, and during, and after, [[Global]] [[Warfare]] Two. The mother takes care of her growing girls the best she can after the father (a University professor) is arrested for anti-war sympathies. He's never freed and only has a few brief meetings with his wife in prison before he dies of starvation and disease. Meanwhile a former student of the professor comes by often to help take care of the mother and two girls. He begins to fall in love with the mother and is a substitute father for the two girls. But war starts and he's drafted and they have to say an abrupt farewell. Will they ever express their love for one another? Will he ever return from the war?

There is so much heart and gentle spirit in the performance of the lead actress, Sayuri Yoshinaga. She's almost a Madonna type, she's so beautiful! Big soulful eyes and flawless skin. The actor who plays the student is phenomenal as well: his name is Tadanobu Asano. What a sensitive performance. There is no macho in him at all; he's gentle and kind. I'd certainly love to see both of these two in other movies. I think I'll check to see what's available for them. The two little child actresses are wonderful too.

The film is just released on NTSC DVD for American audiences, with very easy to read English subtitles. I gave it a 10 out of 10 on the IMDb. I cried almost as much as with the Japanese film classic Twenty-Four Eyes (1954). Don't miss this film! --------------------------------------------- Result 3480 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] Terry West had a [[good]] [[idea]] w\ this movie. He just didn't flesh it thru. There are [[endless]] [[shots]] of the creepy looking school's [[exteriors]] that go on forever and [[probably]] to pad the film's running time. Also at this school there are only 2 [[students]]. Misty Mundae is good as usual but this film will always [[belong]] to Ruby LaRocca (which is the only [[reason]] to watch the film in the beginning). If the script centered on her interesting [[character]] we'd have a movie to watch. She is so GORGEOUS!! Good news for DVD buyers, Terry West's earlier (and better) film "Blood For The Muse" is a special feature. One thing I'd like to say is that this movie feels like someone who's not good at delivering the punch line at the end of a long joke for the ending feels that very same way. Then again, just watch this for Ruby LaRocca. Terry West had a [[buena]] [[thinks]] w\ this movie. He just didn't flesh it thru. There are [[countless]] [[beatings]] of the creepy looking school's [[facades]] that go on forever and [[indubitably]] to pad the film's running time. Also at this school there are only 2 [[schoolchildren]]. Misty Mundae is good as usual but this film will always [[pertain]] to Ruby LaRocca (which is the only [[raison]] to watch the film in the beginning). If the script centered on her interesting [[characters]] we'd have a movie to watch. She is so GORGEOUS!! Good news for DVD buyers, Terry West's earlier (and better) film "Blood For The Muse" is a special feature. One thing I'd like to say is that this movie feels like someone who's not good at delivering the punch line at the end of a long joke for the ending feels that very same way. Then again, just watch this for Ruby LaRocca. --------------------------------------------- Result 3481 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] James Stewart stars in a [[classic]] western tale of revenge which ties in with the fate of the films other star the Winchester Rifle. Stewart is it goes without saying excellent adding some cold hard obsession to his usual laid back cowboy. The story follows the fate of a Winchester rifle and its owners after being won in a competition by our hero and stolen by the man he is hunting.

We meet a selection of gamblers, gun fighters, Indian traders and bank robers as we follow the rifles path through Indian battles, bank heists etc. The supporting cast are all solid with Dan Durya standing out as Waco Johnny Dean the live-wire gunfighter with an itchy trigger finger. Also as a trivia note a very early appearance from Rock Hudson as an Indian chief.

The end showdown is a classic a tense rifle battle fought at long range in and around a rocky outcrop. Throw in some good old western action, fist fights, shootouts and horseback chases it makes for a rollicking western adventure. 8/10 James Stewart stars in a [[typical]] western tale of revenge which ties in with the fate of the films other star the Winchester Rifle. Stewart is it goes without saying excellent adding some cold hard obsession to his usual laid back cowboy. The story follows the fate of a Winchester rifle and its owners after being won in a competition by our hero and stolen by the man he is hunting.

We meet a selection of gamblers, gun fighters, Indian traders and bank robers as we follow the rifles path through Indian battles, bank heists etc. The supporting cast are all solid with Dan Durya standing out as Waco Johnny Dean the live-wire gunfighter with an itchy trigger finger. Also as a trivia note a very early appearance from Rock Hudson as an Indian chief.

The end showdown is a classic a tense rifle battle fought at long range in and around a rocky outcrop. Throw in some good old western action, fist fights, shootouts and horseback chases it makes for a rollicking western adventure. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3482 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Can A-Pix ever, ever, ever do anything right? This movie was meant to be seen on TV in a letterbox format. Since A-Pix doesn't even believe in pan and scan, we see whole scenes where a shoulder on the left side of the screen talks to a shoulder on the right side. Of course, not that you are missing much. This movie is incredibly [[bad]]. It's very [[hard]] to enjoy a film where characters are screaming at the top of their lungs during 80% of the movie for no reason. Can A-Pix ever, ever, ever do anything right? This movie was meant to be seen on TV in a letterbox format. Since A-Pix doesn't even believe in pan and scan, we see whole scenes where a shoulder on the left side of the screen talks to a shoulder on the right side. Of course, not that you are missing much. This movie is incredibly [[mala]]. It's very [[dur]] to enjoy a film where characters are screaming at the top of their lungs during 80% of the movie for no reason. --------------------------------------------- Result 3483 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This one hearkens back to the [[days]] of the matinée, when kids with nowhere else to hang out took their dates to the balcony after dumping their younger siblings below. It didn't matter what was on the screen - the [[little]] kids would sit through it and the big kids would ignore it. The adults, of course, would never see it.

But they put it on video, anyway, along with most of the other creaky, low-budget "B" horror flicks of the golden age...of [[television]]. This film's inherent and [[unintentional]] [[humor]] is derived from [[stale]] ideology (the "[[bad]] [[girls]]" [[harvested]] to replace poor Jan's [[crushed]] body - they had it comin'), overused plot (a mad [[scientist]], trying to play [[God]]), violent yet conscientious monster (whose presence in the heretofore-normal-seeming scientist's rural lab is never fully [[explained]]), and acting that polarizes at [[wooden]] or over-the-top.

This is a great [[party]] [[film]], [[assuming]] your guests [[enjoy]] adding dialog and [[commentary]] to otherwise [[abominable]] [[cinematic]] [[exploits]]. [[In]] fact, should you or your guests [[prefer]] more passive [[entertainment]], this [[film]] is [[also]] available on video in its "[[Mystery]] [[Science]] [[Theater]] 3000" [[treatment]], in which the [[host]] and [[puppets]] of the cult TV series make the [[necessary]] additions for you. This one hearkens back to the [[jours]] of the matinée, when kids with nowhere else to hang out took their dates to the balcony after dumping their younger siblings below. It didn't matter what was on the screen - the [[scant]] kids would sit through it and the big kids would ignore it. The adults, of course, would never see it.

But they put it on video, anyway, along with most of the other creaky, low-budget "B" horror flicks of the golden age...of [[tvs]]. This film's inherent and [[unscheduled]] [[mood]] is derived from [[archaic]] ideology (the "[[inclement]] [[girl]]" [[reaped]] to replace poor Jan's [[pulverized]] body - they had it comin'), overused plot (a mad [[savant]], trying to play [[Jeez]]), violent yet conscientious monster (whose presence in the heretofore-normal-seeming scientist's rural lab is never fully [[clarified]]), and acting that polarizes at [[timber]] or over-the-top.

This is a great [[part]] [[flick]], [[supposing]] your guests [[enjoying]] adding dialog and [[commentaries]] to otherwise [[horrendous]] [[cinematographic]] [[feats]]. [[Onto]] fact, should you or your guests [[preferred]] more passive [[recreational]], this [[cinematography]] is [[apart]] available on video in its "[[Enigma]] [[Sciences]] [[Movies]] 3000" [[processing]], in which the [[reception]] and [[muppets]] of the cult TV series make the [[essential]] additions for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3484 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is almost certainly the [[worst]] Western I've ever [[seen]]. The story follows a [[formula]] that is especially common to Westerns and martial arts films -- hero [[learns]] that family/friends have been [[murdered]], so hero sets out to exact [[revenge]], foils the ineffective lawman, [[rescues]] the kidnapped loving damsel, and [[murders]] the expert arch-nemesis in a brutal duel. This [[formula]] has [[often]] been successful -- [[otherwise]] it wouldn't be a [[formula]] -- but Gunfighter is the most sophomoric execution of it you'll ever [[see]]. The scripting is atrociously simple-minded and [[insulting]]; it sounds [[like]] a [[high]] schooler [[wrote]] the dialogue because it [[lacks]] [[depth]], maturity, and realism. The sound is [[bad]]; it sometimes [[looks]] dubbed. The [[cinematography]] is lame, and the sets are sometimes just facades. The acting is [[pitiful]]; sure, some of the [[performers]] [[could]] [[blame]] the [[script]], but others cannot [[use]] that [[excuse]]. I hope I never [[see]] [[Chris]] Lybbert in a [[speaking]] role ever again; [[every]] [[time]] he [[says]] a line that should be [[angry]] or mean, he does [[nothing]] more than lower the timbre of his voice and he just [[sounds]] like a [[kid]] [[trying]] to [[act]] macho. And [[speaking]] of Chris Lybbert, who plays Hopalong, [[check]] out his duds (if you dare to watch this [[film]]): He [[wears]] these [[brand]] [[new]] [[clothes]] that [[make]] him [[look]] more like Roy [[Rogers]] than a hard-working, down-and-dirty cowboy. [[If]] you enjoy [[inane]] cinematic fare that [[serves]] [[merely]] to worship the [[imagined]] grandeur of Hopalong Cassidy, then [[get]] this, but if you have more than two [[neurons]], watch [[something]] [[else]]. This is almost certainly the [[meanest]] Western I've ever [[noticed]]. The story follows a [[formulas]] that is especially common to Westerns and martial arts films -- hero [[learnt]] that family/friends have been [[murder]], so hero sets out to exact [[vengeance]], foils the ineffective lawman, [[redding]] the kidnapped loving damsel, and [[murder]] the expert arch-nemesis in a brutal duel. This [[formulas]] has [[usually]] been successful -- [[else]] it wouldn't be a [[formulas]] -- but Gunfighter is the most sophomoric execution of it you'll ever [[behold]]. The scripting is atrociously simple-minded and [[demeaning]]; it sounds [[iike]] a [[supreme]] schooler [[written]] the dialogue because it [[absence]] [[depths]], maturity, and realism. The sound is [[negative]]; it sometimes [[seems]] dubbed. The [[cinematographic]] is lame, and the sets are sometimes just facades. The acting is [[sorrowful]]; sure, some of the [[artists]] [[did]] [[guilt]] the [[scripts]], but others cannot [[usage]] that [[pretext]]. I hope I never [[consults]] [[Chrissy]] Lybbert in a [[discussing]] role ever again; [[all]] [[period]] he [[contends]] a line that should be [[furious]] or mean, he does [[anything]] more than lower the timbre of his voice and he just [[noises]] like a [[kiddo]] [[attempts]] to [[ley]] macho. And [[conversation]] of Chris Lybbert, who plays Hopalong, [[verifies]] out his duds (if you dare to watch this [[movies]]): He [[gate]] these [[marques]] [[newest]] [[costumes]] that [[deliver]] him [[glance]] more like Roy [[Rodgers]] than a hard-working, down-and-dirty cowboy. [[Though]] you enjoy [[inconsequential]] cinematic fare that [[contributes]] [[simply]] to worship the [[conjured]] grandeur of Hopalong Cassidy, then [[obtain]] this, but if you have more than two [[synapses]], watch [[anything]] [[otherwise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3485 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] It's nice to [[see]] a [[film]] with [[real]] people with honest [[feelings]]. Sissy Spacek is so [[absolutely]] [[convincing]] as a simple, [[yet]] nice, daughter to Robert Farnsworth,

who [[finally]], in his last role, gets to show what a [[fine]] actor he was. It is hard to [[believe]] that this is a [[David]] [[Lynch]] film. It is slow and [[even]], [[sweet]] and [[moving]]. One of the [[best]] unless you like car chases, sex scenes, and violence. It's nice to [[consults]] a [[filmmaking]] with [[actual]] people with honest [[affections]]. Sissy Spacek is so [[entirely]] [[persuading]] as a simple, [[however]] nice, daughter to Robert Farnsworth,

who [[lastly]], in his last role, gets to show what a [[alright]] actor he was. It is hard to [[reckon]] that this is a [[Dawood]] [[Bastien]] film. It is slow and [[yet]], [[sugary]] and [[transferring]]. One of the [[optimum]] unless you like car chases, sex scenes, and violence. --------------------------------------------- Result 3486 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is probably one of the worst movies ever made. Bad acting, bad special effects, bad plot, bad everything. In the last 15 minutes a cat suited-cyborg is introduced which muddles everything. Malcom MacDowell must have needed to make a house payment because otherwise he would have had to sell himself on Hollywood Blvd to pay the bill. I just don"t know how you can go from Clockwork Orange to this crap and be able to look yourself in the mirror each morning. I could have done better special effects in my bathtub. There's no continuity. The editor must have been asleep or on drugs its so bad. Acting. Do they have to smoke to be bad.? The gun either shoots blue flames or bullets, make up your mind. The bad girl and the other girl in the movie look so much alike that it is confusing. Whay is it called 2013 Seadly Wake. It has nothing to do with the movie --------------------------------------------- Result 3487 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I've just finished viewing the 1st [[disc]] in a 4-disc (26 episodes) collection created in conjunction with the UCLA Film & Television Archive (S'More Entertainment, Inc.). [[So]] far (aside from the 1st episode), the image quality is [[quite]] good. The DVD box is shown on the title page here on IMDb.

"Mr. Peepers" is just as [[charming]] as when I first [[saw]] it (5-years old at the time) and Wally Cox is [[truly]] endearing in this role. If you're in the mood for [[quiet]] [[comedy]] that sneaks up on you, as opposed to hitting you over the head, you'll [[treasure]] this chance to experience all the [[wonderful]] [[characters]] you might remember from your childhood. Although some of the gags are a bit corny, most are ingenious and well-executed...and even the corny ones are fun. This is one TV series that lives up to my early childhood memories of it. I've just finished viewing the 1st [[disk]] in a 4-disc (26 episodes) collection created in conjunction with the UCLA Film & Television Archive (S'More Entertainment, Inc.). [[Therefore]] far (aside from the 1st episode), the image quality is [[rather]] good. The DVD box is shown on the title page here on IMDb.

"Mr. Peepers" is just as [[ravishing]] as when I first [[sawthe]] it (5-years old at the time) and Wally Cox is [[really]] endearing in this role. If you're in the mood for [[shush]] [[travesty]] that sneaks up on you, as opposed to hitting you over the head, you'll [[treasury]] this chance to experience all the [[glamorous]] [[traits]] you might remember from your childhood. Although some of the gags are a bit corny, most are ingenious and well-executed...and even the corny ones are fun. This is one TV series that lives up to my early childhood memories of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3488 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Spoilers - in as far as I [[describe]] characters and their relation to the plot.

This is a quality [[film]]. The subject [[matter]] is at once grim and [[gripping]]. The dogged determination of Stephen Rea's [[character]], Burakov, is [[simply]] [[captivating]]. With any due [[apologies]] to him, his hangdog, [[continually]] put-upon [[expression]] serves the [[character]] well. He is, as we in [[England]] [[would]] [[say]] of the [[Inspector]] Taggart TV [[series]] [[character]], [[bound]] to be [[grim]] because he [[sees]] three [[murders]] a week. Well, that's not [[strictly]] accurate as Chikatila [[operated]] over a number of [[years]]...

You [[get]] a [[real]] [[sense]] of the blankwall resistance of the USSR [[bureaucracy]], [[brilliantly]] [[portrayed]] by [[Joss]] Ackland (who [[often]] [[seems]] [[made]] for this [[sort]] of role).

A [[key]] [[character]] (and I [[write]] this as the remake of Invasion of the [[Body]] Snatchers is being [[shown]] on BBC1) is the Donald Sutherland [[character]] "Mikhail Fetisov". His [[quiet]] [[support]] of Burakov is [[steadfast]]. And it [[endures]] through Perestroika, and drives the [[involvement]] of the FBI for profiling. [[Brilliant]].

This is a must-see, as far as I am [[concerned]]. Spoilers - in as far as I [[describing]] characters and their relation to the plot.

This is a quality [[cinematography]]. The subject [[topic]] is at once grim and [[captivating]]. The dogged determination of Stephen Rea's [[trait]], Burakov, is [[merely]] [[mesmerizing]]. With any due [[apologise]] to him, his hangdog, [[ceaselessly]] put-upon [[phrase]] serves the [[trait]] well. He is, as we in [[Brits]] [[ought]] [[told]] of the [[Detective]] Taggart TV [[serials]] [[traits]], [[bind]] to be [[gloomy]] because he [[believes]] three [[killings]] a week. Well, that's not [[purely]] accurate as Chikatila [[operate]] over a number of [[olds]]...

You [[gets]] a [[actual]] [[sensing]] of the blankwall resistance of the USSR [[paperwork]], [[brightly]] [[depicted]] by [[Goss]] Ackland (who [[normally]] [[looks]] [[introduced]] for this [[kind]] of role).

A [[principal]] [[trait]] (and I [[writing]] this as the remake of Invasion of the [[Agencies]] Snatchers is being [[display]] on BBC1) is the Donald Sutherland [[personage]] "Mikhail Fetisov". His [[hush]] [[helped]] of Burakov is [[unfailing]]. And it [[persists]] through Perestroika, and drives the [[attendance]] of the FBI for profiling. [[Awesome]].

This is a must-see, as far as I am [[worried]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3489 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] It's a [[bad]], very [[bad]] [[movie]].

Well, for people a real realistic movie is a [[good]] [[thing]]. For me it is not. Life is also predictable, bad, nasty, trivial, senseless, sometimes. Maybe that's the reason for people [[say]] that this film is real.

Too many common places: you're black, you're a criminal, you're doomed and cursed, whatever you do you'll end up by shooting or being shot by someone; don't let the kids play with the weapons, it could be dangerous; and then there are those who go to the church, and then they are good, very good...

Before this one, I hadn't seen such a bad movie. That's perhaps the reason for I never noticed how important the photography itself is important in a movie. In this one, every scene shot in daytime, outdoor, is clearly and annoyingly blue. They didn't even care to correct the colour balance. Oh! I've "rated" more than 300 movies in this database so far, and this (3/10) is my [[lowest]] ever. It's a [[amiss]], very [[inclement]] [[kino]].

Well, for people a real realistic movie is a [[buena]] [[stuff]]. For me it is not. Life is also predictable, bad, nasty, trivial, senseless, sometimes. Maybe that's the reason for people [[tell]] that this film is real.

Too many common places: you're black, you're a criminal, you're doomed and cursed, whatever you do you'll end up by shooting or being shot by someone; don't let the kids play with the weapons, it could be dangerous; and then there are those who go to the church, and then they are good, very good...

Before this one, I hadn't seen such a bad movie. That's perhaps the reason for I never noticed how important the photography itself is important in a movie. In this one, every scene shot in daytime, outdoor, is clearly and annoyingly blue. They didn't even care to correct the colour balance. Oh! I've "rated" more than 300 movies in this database so far, and this (3/10) is my [[slightest]] ever. --------------------------------------------- Result 3490 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (59%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] "The Notorious Bettie Page" (2005)

Directed By: Mary Harron

Starring: Gretchen Mol, Chris Bauer, Lili Taylor, Sarah Paulson, & David Strathairn

MPAA Rating: "R" (for nudity, sexual content and some language)

It [[seems]] as though every celebrity nowadays is getting a biopic made about his or her life. From Ray Charles to Johnny Cash, biopics are very posh right now. "The Notorious Bettie Page" is the latest of these to be released on DVD. It features Gretchen Mol as the world's most famous pin-up model, Bettie Page and was filmed mostly in black and white with certain excerpts in color. Unlike "Ray", "Walk the Line", and "Finding Neverland", however, this movie is not going to be one to watch out for at the Oscars this year. This movie lacks the emotional resonance displayed in other biopics and most of the more dramatic moments in Bettie Page's life are either completely ignored or only merely suggested. This does not mean, however, that it is a bad movie. [[In]] fact, "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a thoroughly entertaining and fulfilling movie--a solid work of cinema. This film focuses more on Page's exciting career and the thin line between sexuality and pornography. It is filmed with fervor and care and Mary Harron's direction captures the look and feel of the time period as most filmmakers only dream about.

Everyone knows Bettie Page (played by Mol). Whether you know her as an icon…or a simple porn star…you know her. She is a woman who had a very profound impact on American culture only by revealing more skin than deemed appropriate at that particular time. Now, most people know her as one of America's first sex symbols--a legend to many models, especially those of Playboy and other adult-oriented magazines. She lived in a time when showing just an inch of flesh below the waste could have someone arrested and Page's bondage-style photos were just the thing to push the American public into an uproar. In fact, the photos launched a full-fledged senate investigation about common decency and the difference between harmless films and porn.

The performances in "The Notorious Bettie Page" are absolutely wonderful with Gretchen Mol standing out. Her performance as Bettie Page is simply brilliant. I understand that, when she was announced for the role, many people were skeptical. Her name is not one that immediately leaps to my mind when I think of great performances. Now, it will. She completely aced the role and drew me in with her vulnerable and yet deeply engaging performance. David Strathairn is fresh off of last year's "Good Night, and Good Luck", in which he gave one of 2005's best performances. Here, he gives yet another fine performance…even though he is slightly underused. I was shocked at how very limited his screen time was…but quality over quantity is always the most important aspect of any good movie. The only performance I have seen from Lili Taylor was that in "The Haunting" (1999). While most people ignored the movie, I found it to be an enjoyable, if not completely shallow, horror movie and I also have always thought that Taylor was perfectly credible as the emotionally-distraught Nell. Here, Taylor gives yet another credible performance. She gives a very subdued performance and delivers the perfect performance to compliment that of Gretchen Mol.

After everything was said and done, I realized that "The Notorious Bettie Page" cannot be compared to other biopics, such as "Finding Neverland" and "Walk the Line". It is incomparable to these because it tells a story of a woman and her career, from the beginning to the end. Her personal life is briefly implied, but it is really her impact on the world that becomes the high point. We watch the film knowing that Page will eventually bare all and we know the impact that her decisions will have…but we are rarely shown the impact that they will have on her personal life. She is a woman that never looked back and could constantly reinvent herself. After all, she was an adult model turned Christian missionary. This movie does not over dramatize anything. It could have included fictitious moments of Page sobbing hysterically and begging God to forgive her. It could have shown Page running and screaming through the rain, trying to escape the ghosts of her past…and yet it does not. "The Notorious Bettie Page" tells a simple story and that is something rare by today's standards. Fortunately, it is quite refreshing.

Final Thought: "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a relaxing movie with absolutely amazing cinematography.

Overall Rating: 9/10 (A) "The Notorious Bettie Page" (2005)

Directed By: Mary Harron

Starring: Gretchen Mol, Chris Bauer, Lili Taylor, Sarah Paulson, & David Strathairn

MPAA Rating: "R" (for nudity, sexual content and some language)

It [[looks]] as though every celebrity nowadays is getting a biopic made about his or her life. From Ray Charles to Johnny Cash, biopics are very posh right now. "The Notorious Bettie Page" is the latest of these to be released on DVD. It features Gretchen Mol as the world's most famous pin-up model, Bettie Page and was filmed mostly in black and white with certain excerpts in color. Unlike "Ray", "Walk the Line", and "Finding Neverland", however, this movie is not going to be one to watch out for at the Oscars this year. This movie lacks the emotional resonance displayed in other biopics and most of the more dramatic moments in Bettie Page's life are either completely ignored or only merely suggested. This does not mean, however, that it is a bad movie. [[Among]] fact, "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a thoroughly entertaining and fulfilling movie--a solid work of cinema. This film focuses more on Page's exciting career and the thin line between sexuality and pornography. It is filmed with fervor and care and Mary Harron's direction captures the look and feel of the time period as most filmmakers only dream about.

Everyone knows Bettie Page (played by Mol). Whether you know her as an icon…or a simple porn star…you know her. She is a woman who had a very profound impact on American culture only by revealing more skin than deemed appropriate at that particular time. Now, most people know her as one of America's first sex symbols--a legend to many models, especially those of Playboy and other adult-oriented magazines. She lived in a time when showing just an inch of flesh below the waste could have someone arrested and Page's bondage-style photos were just the thing to push the American public into an uproar. In fact, the photos launched a full-fledged senate investigation about common decency and the difference between harmless films and porn.

The performances in "The Notorious Bettie Page" are absolutely wonderful with Gretchen Mol standing out. Her performance as Bettie Page is simply brilliant. I understand that, when she was announced for the role, many people were skeptical. Her name is not one that immediately leaps to my mind when I think of great performances. Now, it will. She completely aced the role and drew me in with her vulnerable and yet deeply engaging performance. David Strathairn is fresh off of last year's "Good Night, and Good Luck", in which he gave one of 2005's best performances. Here, he gives yet another fine performance…even though he is slightly underused. I was shocked at how very limited his screen time was…but quality over quantity is always the most important aspect of any good movie. The only performance I have seen from Lili Taylor was that in "The Haunting" (1999). While most people ignored the movie, I found it to be an enjoyable, if not completely shallow, horror movie and I also have always thought that Taylor was perfectly credible as the emotionally-distraught Nell. Here, Taylor gives yet another credible performance. She gives a very subdued performance and delivers the perfect performance to compliment that of Gretchen Mol.

After everything was said and done, I realized that "The Notorious Bettie Page" cannot be compared to other biopics, such as "Finding Neverland" and "Walk the Line". It is incomparable to these because it tells a story of a woman and her career, from the beginning to the end. Her personal life is briefly implied, but it is really her impact on the world that becomes the high point. We watch the film knowing that Page will eventually bare all and we know the impact that her decisions will have…but we are rarely shown the impact that they will have on her personal life. She is a woman that never looked back and could constantly reinvent herself. After all, she was an adult model turned Christian missionary. This movie does not over dramatize anything. It could have included fictitious moments of Page sobbing hysterically and begging God to forgive her. It could have shown Page running and screaming through the rain, trying to escape the ghosts of her past…and yet it does not. "The Notorious Bettie Page" tells a simple story and that is something rare by today's standards. Fortunately, it is quite refreshing.

Final Thought: "The Notorious Bettie Page" is a relaxing movie with absolutely amazing cinematography.

Overall Rating: 9/10 (A) --------------------------------------------- Result 3491 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] First [[time]] of seeing Buster Keaton's first feature film and I have to admit I [[liked]] it a lot and only [[wish]] I'd stumbled across it years ago. The Rohauer blurb at the start warns that the Three Ages single nitrate print was rediscovered and salvaged in 1954 just in time before combustion, and many frames that seemed hopelessly glued together were separated. So, it's rocky viewing in places, but I've seen and [[survived]] much worse.

It would have been OK as the 3 short films but as a take on Intolerance it's inventive and funny from the start to the finish: In the Stone Age with baddie Wallace Beery riding an elephant and goodie Buster riding a pet brontosaurus; In the Roman Age Buster riding a chariot with wheel locks and adapted for sledging, No Parking signs in Latin; In this technological Age of Speed Need and Greed his car beautifully falls to bits at the first hump. Both him and Beery are after the Girl through the ages, a never ending tussle. Favourite bit: As the caveman he gets knocked backward over a cliff edge but still blows a kiss to the camera - an amazing second or two!

Great stuff, reaffirming my love of silent film comedy. First [[moment]] of seeing Buster Keaton's first feature film and I have to admit I [[wished]] it a lot and only [[wanna]] I'd stumbled across it years ago. The Rohauer blurb at the start warns that the Three Ages single nitrate print was rediscovered and salvaged in 1954 just in time before combustion, and many frames that seemed hopelessly glued together were separated. So, it's rocky viewing in places, but I've seen and [[outlived]] much worse.

It would have been OK as the 3 short films but as a take on Intolerance it's inventive and funny from the start to the finish: In the Stone Age with baddie Wallace Beery riding an elephant and goodie Buster riding a pet brontosaurus; In the Roman Age Buster riding a chariot with wheel locks and adapted for sledging, No Parking signs in Latin; In this technological Age of Speed Need and Greed his car beautifully falls to bits at the first hump. Both him and Beery are after the Girl through the ages, a never ending tussle. Favourite bit: As the caveman he gets knocked backward over a cliff edge but still blows a kiss to the camera - an amazing second or two!

Great stuff, reaffirming my love of silent film comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3492 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] [[Iran]], women are not [[admitted]] to soccer [[games]]. Officially it's because they are to be spared from the vulgar language and [[behavior]] of the [[male]] [[audience]]. But of course it is about sexism. [[Women]] are lower [[forms]] of [[human]] [[beings]].

Some [[brave]] [[girls]] [[oppose]] this and try to [[get]] into the stadium by [[using]] [[different]] [[tricks]]. They are [[caught]] by [[soldiers]] and [[hold]] in a [[kind]] of cage, until the police will [[come]] and [[pick]] them up.

Despite the insane situation, this is a film with [[lots]] of humor. It's [[also]] encouraging to [[see]] how people always find different ways of fighting oppression. You'll get touched at the same time as you have lots of [[laughs]]. Good job by director Jafar Panahi. This is in [[many]] ways a heroic [[comedy]]. [[During]] [[Iranians]], women are not [[confessed]] to soccer [[jeux]]. Officially it's because they are to be spared from the vulgar language and [[conduct]] of the [[virile]] [[viewers]]. But of course it is about sexism. [[Females]] are lower [[guises]] of [[humankind]] [[humans]].

Some [[daring]] [[dame]] [[opposed]] this and try to [[gets]] into the stadium by [[utilizing]] [[dissimilar]] [[gimmicks]]. They are [[apprehended]] by [[solider]] and [[held]] in a [[sort]] of cage, until the police will [[arriving]] and [[opting]] them up.

Despite the insane situation, this is a film with [[batches]] of humor. It's [[apart]] encouraging to [[consults]] how people always find different ways of fighting oppression. You'll get touched at the same time as you have lots of [[smiles]]. Good job by director Jafar Panahi. This is in [[multiple]] ways a heroic [[travesty]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3493 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Having not [[seen]] this film in about 20 years I am still impressed with it 's hard -[[hitting]] [[impact]] and stellar acting. Of course, one [[Mr]]. [[Mickey]] [[Rooney]] is [[indeed]], INCREDIBLE in his role as the ring-leading "[[Killer]]".([[In]] reference to another [[review]] here-none other than Orson [[Welles]] evoked Mickey Rooney's [[name]] as the [[greatest]] [[movie]] [[actor]],[[also]].) I [[also]] [[recall]] the jazzy-brassy [[score]] and the bare black and white photography. I [[love]] the Mick's [[last]] line before he goes out for his dose of lead [[poisoning]].(I [[think]] the Stranglers [[lifted]] it for a line in one of their songs-Get a Grip on Yourself.)This is a [[great]] [[film]] and unjustly [[buried]] [[film]]. Let's [[get]] it out ! Side note-a recent [[Film]] Review magazine [[gave]] a big write up on Don Segal's "Babyface Nelson" ,made a couple years before "Last Mile" and also starring Mickey Rooney. Another rave of the Mick's intense and sympathetic performance.[[Perhaps]] it's the start of a groundswell of a [[appreciation]] for some truly superior cinematic performances. Having not [[noticed]] this film in about 20 years I am still impressed with it 's hard -[[pummeled]] [[effects]] and stellar acting. Of course, one [[Monsieur]]. [[Mikey]] [[Ronnie]] is [[admittedly]], INCREDIBLE in his role as the ring-leading "[[Hitman]]".([[For]] reference to another [[revisit]] here-none other than Orson [[Orson]] evoked Mickey Rooney's [[naming]] as the [[biggest]] [[cinematography]] [[actress]],[[similarly]].) I [[additionally]] [[reminded]] the jazzy-brassy [[scoring]] and the bare black and white photography. I [[adores]] the Mick's [[final]] line before he goes out for his dose of lead [[toxin]].(I [[thought]] the Stranglers [[lifts]] it for a line in one of their songs-Get a Grip on Yourself.)This is a [[whopping]] [[filmmaking]] and unjustly [[burying]] [[films]]. Let's [[got]] it out ! Side note-a recent [[Cinematography]] Review magazine [[yielded]] a big write up on Don Segal's "Babyface Nelson" ,made a couple years before "Last Mile" and also starring Mickey Rooney. Another rave of the Mick's intense and sympathetic performance.[[Maybe]] it's the start of a groundswell of a [[thanking]] for some truly superior cinematic performances. --------------------------------------------- Result 3494 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Why did the histories of Mary and Rhoda have to be so dour? Divorced women with indifferent daughters. And why very little reference to the original show and characters? The daughter [[characters]] were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that Mary would leave Minneapolis, and Rhoda would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or Sue Ann Nivens be guest stars? It just seems a [[pitiful]] [[way]] to [[remember]] such wonderful characters. It was good to see [[Mary]] and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a Mary Tyler Moore Show Reunion, a Dick Van Dyke Show Reunion, hopefully [[Mary]] will do better next time if she revisits her old Mary Richards stomping [[grounds]] again. Why did the histories of Mary and Rhoda have to be so dour? Divorced women with indifferent daughters. And why very little reference to the original show and characters? The daughter [[character]] were silly and uninteresting. Why can't there ever be daughters who like their mother's on TV? It makes sense that Mary would leave Minneapolis, and Rhoda would return to NYC, but why couldn't Phyllis or Sue Ann Nivens be guest stars? It just seems a [[deplorable]] [[camino]] to [[reminisce]] such wonderful characters. It was good to see [[Mariam]] and Rhoda together of course, but it could have been better, much better. Well, there has been a Mary Tyler Moore Show Reunion, a Dick Van Dyke Show Reunion, hopefully [[Mari]] will do better next time if she revisits her old Mary Richards stomping [[motif]] again. --------------------------------------------- Result 3495 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] "The Brak [[Show]] " is good .[[Probably]] not in the same [[level]] than "Aqua Teen [[Hunger]] " or "Space [[Ghost]] Coast to [[Coast]] ", but [[definitely]] it have [[many]] [[brilliant]] [[moments]] .Basically it follows the [[life]] of Zorak and Brak that have [[normal]] [[lives]] and [[go]] to the [[school]] ,[[living]] in a neighborhood on the style of the 50 'sitcoms . The [[humor]] and the [[animation]] of this show it's very much as "Aqua Teen Hunger " (and in one episode you could see Meatwad) with [[bizarre]] situations and [[strange]] characters .But it is good ,it have funny parts . Some of the [[songs]] are great ,others not very much but I [[like]] this [[show]] . The funniest [[character]] is the [[father]] of Brak . (that is a human ,nobody knows why ) "The Brak [[Illustrating]] " is good .[[Unquestionably]] not in the same [[grades]] than "Aqua Teen [[Famine]] " or "Space [[Phantom]] Coast to [[Ribs]] ", but [[decidedly]] it have [[countless]] [[sumptuous]] [[times]] .Basically it follows the [[iife]] of Zorak and Brak that have [[routine]] [[iife]] and [[going]] to the [[tuition]] ,[[iife]] in a neighborhood on the style of the 50 'sitcoms . The [[comedy]] and the [[animate]] of this show it's very much as "Aqua Teen Hunger " (and in one episode you could see Meatwad) with [[inquisitive]] situations and [[bizarre]] characters .But it is good ,it have funny parts . Some of the [[tunes]] are great ,others not very much but I [[iike]] this [[display]] . The funniest [[personage]] is the [[pere]] of Brak . (that is a human ,nobody knows why ) --------------------------------------------- Result 3496 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I found this movie hilarious. The spoofs on other popular movies of that time were some of the funniest I have seen in this sort of movie. Give it a try. If you saw the movies that this movie is spoofing, and you get the humor, you should enjoy the movie.

I (and the others who watched the movie with me) felt the funniest part in the movie (this is not a spoiler because I will NOT tell you what actually happens) was a scene with the "flashy thingy" from MIB. When they first discover the device and do not know what it is does... and then again later in the movie... you'll understand when you get there.

My only complaint about the movie is that I have never been able to find it in DVD so that I could buy a copy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3497 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Yes, I was lucky enough to see the long-running [[original]] production of [[Michael]] Bennett's [[hit]] musical. It was an [[amazing]] [[experience]] and I paid to [[see]] the movie when it hit theatres back in 1985. It is awful. Almost everything fails. [[First]] off, Attenborough (a [[fine]] [[actor]], a [[good]] director with the right material) is a sorry choice - [[almost]] as bad as when John Huston was hired to mangle ANNIE. The [[camera]] is always in the [[wrong]] place - they chop up the songs and the CASTING!!! They are [[awful]] - the power of the play was these [[dancers]] - these hungry, talented performers just wanted a chance to show what they could do and when they got their chance - you couldn't take your eyes off of them. But this cast just gets by dancing, does a "nice" job singing but none of them spark one bit. In fact, look up the cast on IMDb - [[none]] of them really went on to do anything much. (OK, OK, Janet Jones married Gretzky - sheesh). So this cinema trainwreck does not capture for one second the magic, the desperation, the passion of the stage musical. A total strike-out! (But even though they [[try]] to smother the music - the great music still rises up at [[times]] and [[reminds]] people how great the score was). Yes, I was lucky enough to see the long-running [[preliminary]] production of [[Michel]] Bennett's [[slugged]] musical. It was an [[startling]] [[enjoying]] and I paid to [[seeing]] the movie when it hit theatres back in 1985. It is awful. Almost everything fails. [[Frst]] off, Attenborough (a [[fined]] [[protagonist]], a [[buena]] director with the right material) is a sorry choice - [[hardly]] as bad as when John Huston was hired to mangle ANNIE. The [[cameras]] is always in the [[amiss]] place - they chop up the songs and the CASTING!!! They are [[terrifying]] - the power of the play was these [[choreography]] - these hungry, talented performers just wanted a chance to show what they could do and when they got their chance - you couldn't take your eyes off of them. But this cast just gets by dancing, does a "nice" job singing but none of them spark one bit. In fact, look up the cast on IMDb - [[nil]] of them really went on to do anything much. (OK, OK, Janet Jones married Gretzky - sheesh). So this cinema trainwreck does not capture for one second the magic, the desperation, the passion of the stage musical. A total strike-out! (But even though they [[tried]] to smother the music - the great music still rises up at [[dates]] and [[recalls]] people how great the score was). --------------------------------------------- Result 3498 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] No, I haven't read the Stephen King [[novel]] "Thinner," but I choked down the film version. [[Horror]] movies are an acquired taste. [[Regular]] [[movies]] [[give]] an [[audience]] a hero to [[applaud]] as he strives to achieve a goal. [[In]] horror movies, [[audiences]] are invited to savor the [[demise]] of characters. In director Tom Holland's low-fat but [[tasteless]] [[revenge]] chiller "[[Thinner]]," nobody wins and everybody deserves the bite that is put on them. Gluttonous New England [[attorney]] Billy Halleck (Robert John Burke of "Robocop 3") has a weight [[problem]]. Although he rocks the bathroom scales at 300 pounds, he appears happily married to a trim, delectable wife, Heidi (Lucinda Jenney of "G.I. Jane") with a yeasty teenage daughter.

Fat doesn't mean stupid here. Halleck displays his sagacity in court when he wins an acquittal verdict for sleazy Mafia chieftain Richie Ginelli (Joe Mantegna of "House of Games"). Driving home from a victory feast, Billy hits an old gypsy woman crossing the street and kills her. A cover-up occurs, and Halleck's friends get him out of the soup. The disgruntled gypsy father Taduz Lemke (Michael Constantine of "Skidoo") retaliates with a curse on the corpulent lawyer and the two town officials that exonerated him. Suddenly, Halleck finds himself shedding pounds no matter how much chow he chomps. When he begs the vengeful Gypsy to lift the curse, the old man refuses. Desperately, Halleck resorts to Richie. While Halleck struggles with the gypsies to remove the hex, he learns that his loyal wife has turned his attentions to the town's hotshot doctor.

"[[Thinner]]" qualifies as not only laughably [[inept]] horror flick, but the filmmakers also rely on stereotypes of men and women. Tom Holland, who directed "Child's Play" (1988), and scenarist Michael McDowell, have served up such a slipshod script that you cannot relish watching Billy get his just dessert and shrivel up. "Thinner" boasts few shocks and fewer surprises. The filmmakers may have regurgitated King's novel, but they have filleted whatever sense of horror and humor it contained. Holland and McDowell introduce characters, such as the Mafioso, then inexplicably let them off the hook. One minor character shows up long enough to die and have a chicken's head stuffed in his mouth.

The stereotypical behavior of the characters may offend audiences, too. "Thinner" depicts women as oversexed vixens and men as swine. When Halleck sneaks home from a clinic, he finds his doctor's sports car parked at his house. His suspicions ripen into jealousy and he cooks up a scheme to get the curse transferred to this wife. Even the premature ending lacks any satirical flavor. Oscar-winning special effects wizard Greg Cannom of "Van Helsing" and make-up artist Bob Laden do a fabulous job beefing up actor Robert John Burke to look obese. They succeed, too, in making him shrivel.

Only die-hard Stephen King fans will be able to stomach this misogynistic gooledyspook. No, I haven't read the Stephen King [[new]] "Thinner," but I choked down the film version. [[Terror]] movies are an acquired taste. [[Periodic]] [[cinematography]] [[lend]] an [[spectators]] a hero to [[commend]] as he strives to achieve a goal. [[Among]] horror movies, [[viewers]] are invited to savor the [[downfall]] of characters. In director Tom Holland's low-fat but [[tacky]] [[vengeance]] chiller "[[Skinnier]]," nobody wins and everybody deserves the bite that is put on them. Gluttonous New England [[prosecutors]] Billy Halleck (Robert John Burke of "Robocop 3") has a weight [[difficulties]]. Although he rocks the bathroom scales at 300 pounds, he appears happily married to a trim, delectable wife, Heidi (Lucinda Jenney of "G.I. Jane") with a yeasty teenage daughter.

Fat doesn't mean stupid here. Halleck displays his sagacity in court when he wins an acquittal verdict for sleazy Mafia chieftain Richie Ginelli (Joe Mantegna of "House of Games"). Driving home from a victory feast, Billy hits an old gypsy woman crossing the street and kills her. A cover-up occurs, and Halleck's friends get him out of the soup. The disgruntled gypsy father Taduz Lemke (Michael Constantine of "Skidoo") retaliates with a curse on the corpulent lawyer and the two town officials that exonerated him. Suddenly, Halleck finds himself shedding pounds no matter how much chow he chomps. When he begs the vengeful Gypsy to lift the curse, the old man refuses. Desperately, Halleck resorts to Richie. While Halleck struggles with the gypsies to remove the hex, he learns that his loyal wife has turned his attentions to the town's hotshot doctor.

"[[Leaner]]" qualifies as not only laughably [[incapable]] horror flick, but the filmmakers also rely on stereotypes of men and women. Tom Holland, who directed "Child's Play" (1988), and scenarist Michael McDowell, have served up such a slipshod script that you cannot relish watching Billy get his just dessert and shrivel up. "Thinner" boasts few shocks and fewer surprises. The filmmakers may have regurgitated King's novel, but they have filleted whatever sense of horror and humor it contained. Holland and McDowell introduce characters, such as the Mafioso, then inexplicably let them off the hook. One minor character shows up long enough to die and have a chicken's head stuffed in his mouth.

The stereotypical behavior of the characters may offend audiences, too. "Thinner" depicts women as oversexed vixens and men as swine. When Halleck sneaks home from a clinic, he finds his doctor's sports car parked at his house. His suspicions ripen into jealousy and he cooks up a scheme to get the curse transferred to this wife. Even the premature ending lacks any satirical flavor. Oscar-winning special effects wizard Greg Cannom of "Van Helsing" and make-up artist Bob Laden do a fabulous job beefing up actor Robert John Burke to look obese. They succeed, too, in making him shrivel.

Only die-hard Stephen King fans will be able to stomach this misogynistic gooledyspook. --------------------------------------------- Result 3499 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] That word 'True' in this film's title got my [[alarm]] bells [[ringing]]. They rang [[louder]] when a title card [[referred]] to America's Civil War as the 'War [[Between]] the States' (the circumlocution preferred by die-hard southerners). [[Jesse]] James -- thief, slave-holder and murderer -- is [[described]] as a [[quiet]], [[gentle]] [[farm]] boy.

How [[dishonest]] is this [[movie]]? There is NO [[mention]] of slavery, far less of the documented fact that Jesse James's poor widdered mother owned slaves before the [[war]], and that Jesse and his brother Frank actively fought to preserve [[slavery]]. According to this movie, all those Civil War soldiers were really fighting to decide whether Missouri is a northern state or a southern state ... that's ALL. (Missouri: It's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!) Black people are entirely absent from this movie, except for two glimpses of a pair of beggars, one of whom wears a "HELP THE POOR" sign that's very implausibly typeset instead of handwritten. (Some shots of 19th-century newspapers are inaccurate too, with 20th-century type fonts.)

This film has a weird flashback structure. There's some very impressive stunt riding (and some fine work by stunt horses), and one excellent [[montage]]. I savoured one line of dialogue: 'Some of those boys will never taste beans again.' The movie gets a few facts straight: Agnes Moorehead, as Jesse's mother, conceals her right arm in the scenes following the raid by the agents of Pinkerton (here called 'Remington') in which Jesse James's real-life mother suffered injuries requiring the amputation of her lower arm. Some errors here are pardonable: during his bushwhacking days, the real Jesse James accidentally shot off part of his left middle finger, but Robert Wagner (in the title role here) does not have a stumpfinger. I've seen a photo of Jesse James's real wife; if she had looked half as glamorous as Hope Lange looks in this movie, Jesse James might have stayed home more.

There's plenty of revisionism here, and most of the male actors wear 1950s hairstyles. But many of this movie's errors were avoidable. Jesse James's mentor William Quantrill is mentioned several times, but all the actors mispronounce his name. We see Jesse and his wife moving into an elaborate two-storey house (where he will soon die) after paying a rent of $18. Actually, Jesse James's last residence (at 1318 Lafayette Street, St Joseph, Missouri) was a simple one-storey cottage, renting for $14. There was no upper storey ... so, when Jesse James is killed, his wife could not come running from upstairs as Hope Lange does here. (She was actually in the kitchen.)

One continuity error: Robert Wagner (with no stunt double) does an impressive job of taking a slug to the jaw and falling over while his hands are tied behind his back ... but when he gets up, the rope binding his wrists has vanished.

The screenplay does some weird and unnecessary juggling of dates. Following the Northfield robbery attempt, Jesse says he expects to get home by his birthday. The actual Northfield bank raid by the James Gang (7 September, 1876) was two days AFTER Jesse James's birthday. (Maybe he meant next year's birthday.) Later, we see Jesse and his wife moving into their St Joseph home on a fine summer day, while Jesse tells her what he plans to do when Christmas Eve arrives ... but in real life, Mr and Mrs Jesse James moved into that house on 24 December, 1881 ... so this scene should *BE* on Christmas Eve! These errors were entirely avoidable.

Some of the fictionalisations here don't make sense. According to this movie, the Northfield bank raid failed because one (fictional) henchman was late in cutting the telegraph wires. If this had actually happened, it would indeed have hampered the James Gang's getaway ... but it wouldn't have affected the robbery itself, which failed for other reasons.

There are good performances here by Jeffrey Hunter (as Frank James), Moorehead, Alan Hale Jnr (as Cole Younger) and by stage actress Marian Seldes in a rare screen role. I was disappointed by Robert Wagner, normally an under-rated actor. Elsewhere, Wagner has proved his impressive range by convincingly portraying heroes, villains and morally ambiguous characters. Here, he can't seem to decide whether to depict Jesse James as a goodie or a baddie ... so he doesn't much bother. John Carradine phones in his performance in a brief role as a fictional jackleg preacher who baptises Jesse and his wife at their wedding. In fact, Jesse James was baptised in childhood by his uncle, a Methodist minister ... but perhaps this second baptism is a topping-up.

Jesse James was no Robin Hood. (I doubt that Robin Hood was Robin Hood either, but that's another story.) There is not one single documented instance of Jesse James ever sharing his loot with anyone beyond his own family. After some of his hold-ups, he didn't even split the swag with the rest of his gang. In this movie, Jesse gets gunned down right after he vows to give up his bandit ways forever. In reality, the night before his death, Jesse James and the Ford brothers stole horses that Jesse planned to use the next day in a robbery of the Platte City bank. As preparation for most of his robberies, Jesse James stole horses from local farmers ... the same poor folk who (in the inaccurate legends) were supposedly the beneficiaries of his largesse. I cringed at one scene here, in which the fictional Jesse James is so gol-durn refined that he disapproves of an oil painting which tastefully depicts nudes.

'The True (not much!) Story of Jesse James' is wilfully dishonest about a thieving murderer, and likewise dishonest about the Civil War. For the very impressive stunt work, one good montage and a few fine acting turns, I'll rate this obscenely dishonest movie 2 points out of 10. That word 'True' in this film's title got my [[alarms]] bells [[ring]]. They rang [[stricter]] when a title card [[mentioned]] to America's Civil War as the 'War [[Amongst]] the States' (the circumlocution preferred by die-hard southerners). [[Jessy]] James -- thief, slave-holder and murderer -- is [[outlining]] as a [[quietness]], [[soft]] [[farmhouse]] boy.

How [[untrue]] is this [[kino]]? There is NO [[cited]] of slavery, far less of the documented fact that Jesse James's poor widdered mother owned slaves before the [[warfare]], and that Jesse and his brother Frank actively fought to preserve [[servitude]]. According to this movie, all those Civil War soldiers were really fighting to decide whether Missouri is a northern state or a southern state ... that's ALL. (Missouri: It's a candy mint! It's a breath mint!) Black people are entirely absent from this movie, except for two glimpses of a pair of beggars, one of whom wears a "HELP THE POOR" sign that's very implausibly typeset instead of handwritten. (Some shots of 19th-century newspapers are inaccurate too, with 20th-century type fonts.)

This film has a weird flashback structure. There's some very impressive stunt riding (and some fine work by stunt horses), and one excellent [[fixture]]. I savoured one line of dialogue: 'Some of those boys will never taste beans again.' The movie gets a few facts straight: Agnes Moorehead, as Jesse's mother, conceals her right arm in the scenes following the raid by the agents of Pinkerton (here called 'Remington') in which Jesse James's real-life mother suffered injuries requiring the amputation of her lower arm. Some errors here are pardonable: during his bushwhacking days, the real Jesse James accidentally shot off part of his left middle finger, but Robert Wagner (in the title role here) does not have a stumpfinger. I've seen a photo of Jesse James's real wife; if she had looked half as glamorous as Hope Lange looks in this movie, Jesse James might have stayed home more.

There's plenty of revisionism here, and most of the male actors wear 1950s hairstyles. But many of this movie's errors were avoidable. Jesse James's mentor William Quantrill is mentioned several times, but all the actors mispronounce his name. We see Jesse and his wife moving into an elaborate two-storey house (where he will soon die) after paying a rent of $18. Actually, Jesse James's last residence (at 1318 Lafayette Street, St Joseph, Missouri) was a simple one-storey cottage, renting for $14. There was no upper storey ... so, when Jesse James is killed, his wife could not come running from upstairs as Hope Lange does here. (She was actually in the kitchen.)

One continuity error: Robert Wagner (with no stunt double) does an impressive job of taking a slug to the jaw and falling over while his hands are tied behind his back ... but when he gets up, the rope binding his wrists has vanished.

The screenplay does some weird and unnecessary juggling of dates. Following the Northfield robbery attempt, Jesse says he expects to get home by his birthday. The actual Northfield bank raid by the James Gang (7 September, 1876) was two days AFTER Jesse James's birthday. (Maybe he meant next year's birthday.) Later, we see Jesse and his wife moving into their St Joseph home on a fine summer day, while Jesse tells her what he plans to do when Christmas Eve arrives ... but in real life, Mr and Mrs Jesse James moved into that house on 24 December, 1881 ... so this scene should *BE* on Christmas Eve! These errors were entirely avoidable.

Some of the fictionalisations here don't make sense. According to this movie, the Northfield bank raid failed because one (fictional) henchman was late in cutting the telegraph wires. If this had actually happened, it would indeed have hampered the James Gang's getaway ... but it wouldn't have affected the robbery itself, which failed for other reasons.

There are good performances here by Jeffrey Hunter (as Frank James), Moorehead, Alan Hale Jnr (as Cole Younger) and by stage actress Marian Seldes in a rare screen role. I was disappointed by Robert Wagner, normally an under-rated actor. Elsewhere, Wagner has proved his impressive range by convincingly portraying heroes, villains and morally ambiguous characters. Here, he can't seem to decide whether to depict Jesse James as a goodie or a baddie ... so he doesn't much bother. John Carradine phones in his performance in a brief role as a fictional jackleg preacher who baptises Jesse and his wife at their wedding. In fact, Jesse James was baptised in childhood by his uncle, a Methodist minister ... but perhaps this second baptism is a topping-up.

Jesse James was no Robin Hood. (I doubt that Robin Hood was Robin Hood either, but that's another story.) There is not one single documented instance of Jesse James ever sharing his loot with anyone beyond his own family. After some of his hold-ups, he didn't even split the swag with the rest of his gang. In this movie, Jesse gets gunned down right after he vows to give up his bandit ways forever. In reality, the night before his death, Jesse James and the Ford brothers stole horses that Jesse planned to use the next day in a robbery of the Platte City bank. As preparation for most of his robberies, Jesse James stole horses from local farmers ... the same poor folk who (in the inaccurate legends) were supposedly the beneficiaries of his largesse. I cringed at one scene here, in which the fictional Jesse James is so gol-durn refined that he disapproves of an oil painting which tastefully depicts nudes.

'The True (not much!) Story of Jesse James' is wilfully dishonest about a thieving murderer, and likewise dishonest about the Civil War. For the very impressive stunt work, one good montage and a few fine acting turns, I'll rate this obscenely dishonest movie 2 points out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3500 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Unlike Tinseltown's version of HELLO, DOLLY!, Jay Presson Allen's screen [[adaptation]] of Ira Levin's hit Broadway thriller couldn't wait for it's stage [[incarnation]] to shutter before putting it up on the silver screen, so producers wisely decided to make the most of it's lengthy White [[Way]] [[run]]! The film's opening and closing scenes are shot inside New York's intimate Music Box Theater where DEATHTRAP played for nearly five [[years]]. Even the film's final fadeout on the theatre marquee is a version of the stageplay's famous logo. (Although marketeers decided to go with a more fun Rubik's Cube icon for the movie.)

Now on a low-priced DVD release, DEATHTRAP seems just as fresh and inventinve as ever. The cast is just right (better than their stage counterparts) and location scouts should be applauded for finding a suitably spooky house for our "one room, two act thriller" to take place in. Opened up in surprisingly simple and innovative ways, director Sidney Lumet wisely tags any "new" material onto the beginning and end of the film and leaves Levin's wickedly twisty center alone.

The film's last scene is a major Hollywood departure from the boards, and slightly undermines one of Levin's plot points from earlier in the film [Helga (about a dagger): "Will be used by another woman BECAUSE of play."]. Like Robert Altman's THE PLAYER, however, our new finale helps the film fold in on itself once again and blurs the lines between stage, screen, and (could it be?) real life! Unlike Tinseltown's version of HELLO, DOLLY!, Jay Presson Allen's screen [[readjust]] of Ira Levin's hit Broadway thriller couldn't wait for it's stage [[personification]] to shutter before putting it up on the silver screen, so producers wisely decided to make the most of it's lengthy White [[Routing]] [[running]]! The film's opening and closing scenes are shot inside New York's intimate Music Box Theater where DEATHTRAP played for nearly five [[olds]]. Even the film's final fadeout on the theatre marquee is a version of the stageplay's famous logo. (Although marketeers decided to go with a more fun Rubik's Cube icon for the movie.)

Now on a low-priced DVD release, DEATHTRAP seems just as fresh and inventinve as ever. The cast is just right (better than their stage counterparts) and location scouts should be applauded for finding a suitably spooky house for our "one room, two act thriller" to take place in. Opened up in surprisingly simple and innovative ways, director Sidney Lumet wisely tags any "new" material onto the beginning and end of the film and leaves Levin's wickedly twisty center alone.

The film's last scene is a major Hollywood departure from the boards, and slightly undermines one of Levin's plot points from earlier in the film [Helga (about a dagger): "Will be used by another woman BECAUSE of play."]. Like Robert Altman's THE PLAYER, however, our new finale helps the film fold in on itself once again and blurs the lines between stage, screen, and (could it be?) real life! --------------------------------------------- Result 3501 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] this [[film]] was shrouded in scandal for so long that it [[became]] a very sought after item...the outrage, the mystery, etc. it had everything to be a great piece of film-making, but [[ultimately]] fails in [[every]] extent. it's a [[terribly]] [[bad]] comedy, a [[pathetic]] horror [[movie]], a lame erotic [[film]].

the 2 disc DVD [[includes]] a gorgeous [[booklet]] with [[stills]], [[interviews]], essays on bestiality, etc. as well as an [[extensive]] [[interview]] with the more-than-pretentious [[director]]. for those who have heard about it but never seen it, the [[package]] will [[seem]] [[fantastic]] until one [[actually]] sees the film. disc 1 contains the edited film, badly [[translated]] to English but with good [[visual]] quality. disc 2 contains the director's cut, in an [[awful]] transfer, in french.

what can I say about the actual beast? a hand puppet of Kermit the frog would have been more effective and shocking. this [[kino]] was shrouded in scandal for so long that it [[was]] a very sought after item...the outrage, the mystery, etc. it had everything to be a great piece of film-making, but [[eventually]] fails in [[any]] extent. it's a [[stunningly]] [[negative]] comedy, a [[unhappy]] horror [[flick]], a lame erotic [[flick]].

the 2 disc DVD [[encompass]] a gorgeous [[handout]] with [[photos]], [[interview]], essays on bestiality, etc. as well as an [[vast]] [[questioning]] with the more-than-pretentious [[headmaster]]. for those who have heard about it but never seen it, the [[packs]] will [[seems]] [[wondrous]] until one [[genuinely]] sees the film. disc 1 contains the edited film, badly [[translate]] to English but with good [[optic]] quality. disc 2 contains the director's cut, in an [[scary]] transfer, in french.

what can I say about the actual beast? a hand puppet of Kermit the frog would have been more effective and shocking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3502 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] 79/100. [[Fred]] [[Astaire]] and Ginger Rogers never made anything but great films together. [[Although]] this is not one of their [[best]], it is an [[excellent]] musical. There are a few outstanding musical numbers, good support from Randolph Scott. Two notable appearances, Betty Grable and Lucille Ball make memorable early screen performances. Ball is particularly good, and a blonde as well. The "Let's Face the Music and Dance" is one of the musical duo's [[best]] numbers ever. Harriet Hilliard, better know as Harriet Nelson of "Ozzie and Harriet" plays Ginger Roger's sister. The basic plot is pretty [[familiar]], but with a cast this [[exceptional]], it [[works]]. Excellent art direction and [[score]]. 79/100. [[Freda]] [[Esther]] and Ginger Rogers never made anything but great films together. [[Despite]] this is not one of their [[nicest]], it is an [[sumptuous]] musical. There are a few outstanding musical numbers, good support from Randolph Scott. Two notable appearances, Betty Grable and Lucille Ball make memorable early screen performances. Ball is particularly good, and a blonde as well. The "Let's Face the Music and Dance" is one of the musical duo's [[optimum]] numbers ever. Harriet Hilliard, better know as Harriet Nelson of "Ozzie and Harriet" plays Ginger Roger's sister. The basic plot is pretty [[colloquial]], but with a cast this [[noteworthy]], it [[cooperating]]. Excellent art direction and [[punctuation]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3503 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[For]] those of you who [[think]] anime is just about giant reptiles raping schoolgirls, [[think]] again. There is a totally different side to the Japanese animation. Yakitate! [[Japan]] is one of those shows. It is a sweet-natured [[tale]] of a young boy with the gift to make delicious bread. [[His]] universe is all about creating a Japanese bread that can match with the famous European breads. The show is as wacky as they [[come]] and I'm [[sure]] that non-Japanese [[viewers]] will [[miss]] a lot of the jokes. But it is still very nice to watch because of the [[complete]] innocent [[vibe]] of the [[show]].

[[In]] the [[world]] of Yakitate! it is not [[uncommon]] for people to [[look]] like they've just had an orgasm after [[eating]] bread. The bread is hallucinating and can [[give]] the [[consumer]] a [[wide]] array of [[super]] powers, from time-traveling to [[swimming]] like a fish. That [[weird]] [[aspect]] makes it into one of the [[least]] predictable and funny [[shows]] I've watched in a while. [[During]] those of you who [[ideas]] anime is just about giant reptiles raping schoolgirls, [[thinking]] again. There is a totally different side to the Japanese animation. Yakitate! [[Japans]] is one of those shows. It is a sweet-natured [[fable]] of a young boy with the gift to make delicious bread. [[Her]] universe is all about creating a Japanese bread that can match with the famous European breads. The show is as wacky as they [[arrive]] and I'm [[persuaded]] that non-Japanese [[spectators]] will [[mademoiselle]] a lot of the jokes. But it is still very nice to watch because of the [[finishing]] innocent [[atmosphere]] of the [[displays]].

[[During]] the [[globe]] of Yakitate! it is not [[scarce]] for people to [[peek]] like they've just had an orgasm after [[devouring]] bread. The bread is hallucinating and can [[confer]] the [[consumers]] a [[wider]] array of [[ultra]] powers, from time-traveling to [[bathing]] like a fish. That [[odd]] [[facet]] makes it into one of the [[lowest]] predictable and funny [[exposition]] I've watched in a while. --------------------------------------------- Result 3504 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Richard Pryor's [[early]] 80s [[running]] down the street on fire incident must have affected him somehow. In his stand up,he [[jokes]] about it [[getting]] great laughs. It seemed to have done something involving the [[projects]] he chose. The Toy is about the lamest he ever [[chose]],aside from I guess Another You.

A [[movie]] where a white man [[buys]] his son a black man? Nice little [[bit]] of underlying political incorrectness before thee was such a thing. It's seeing Richard [[getting]] all sentimental that made me finally [[walk]] out before the end. I wanted to see Pryor get even with this [[brat]],[[instead]] it becomes the misunderstood kid nauseum! At [[least]] Gleason had his moments. Ignore this and watch Pryor with Gene Wilder or any of his '70s stuff. This is a waste of any movie watcher's time! Richard Pryor's [[quickly]] 80s [[run]] down the street on fire incident must have affected him somehow. In his stand up,he [[pleasantries]] about it [[obtain]] great laughs. It seemed to have done something involving the [[project]] he chose. The Toy is about the lamest he ever [[opting]],aside from I guess Another You.

A [[kino]] where a white man [[buy]] his son a black man? Nice little [[bite]] of underlying political incorrectness before thee was such a thing. It's seeing Richard [[obtain]] all sentimental that made me finally [[stroll]] out before the end. I wanted to see Pryor get even with this [[squirt]],[[alternatively]] it becomes the misunderstood kid nauseum! At [[fewest]] Gleason had his moments. Ignore this and watch Pryor with Gene Wilder or any of his '70s stuff. This is a waste of any movie watcher's time! --------------------------------------------- Result 3505 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] It's a [[funny]] business, reviewing movies. These [[days]] when "internalized [[emotions]]" and "[[emotional]] detachment" are favored over [[straightforward]] sentimentality, it [[must]] be hard to [[stay]] [[faithful]] to your [[true]] [[feelings]].

[[Soon]] after [[completing]] [[jury]] duties at the 58th Berlinale, I [[managed]] to [[catch]] Yoji Yamada's Kabei.

After the screening, I watched folks dreamily amble out of the theatre hall, watery-eyed, men, women, and reviewers alike. Even the [[director]] of the Berlinale, obviously a hardened viewer of cinema, [[confessed]] to having been caught unawares and found himself crying three quarter's way into this unashamedly sentimental experience.

But what really surprised me were the reviews that came after. Despite being ineffably moved by the film, many reviewers chose to be tepid and emotionally non-committal in their writing. Apparently, post weeping, they had put on their "thinking cap", and consequently, missed out on what I felt was the genius about Kabei.

Allow me to explain.

Set in pre-war Japan, the story of Kabei revolves around one writer's family, and their fate therein, after he is held in jail for what was described as "thought crimes" against the Imperial will. Through a series of protracted emotional scenes, Yamada gets us familiar with the man, his loyal wife and two daughters, as well as three side characters—the man's pretty young sister, a bumbling ex-student, and a cad of an uncle – all come to help the family cope with their plight, in the absence of the man of the house.

The story moves along at a slow albeit steady pace, and heartbreaks occur at precisely the moments everyone is able to predict. This of course makes it near impossible for anyone in the audience to get too emotionally distraught by any dramatic event.

In other words, although you learn to love the family and their helpers, and sympathize with their unfortunate situation, you get so lulled by the [[certainty]] of the plot that you find yourself expecting a particular kind of ending.

However, two hours into the film (don't worry, Yamada provides the viewer with sufficient moments of gravity and levity to tide you along), he slaps you with what I can only describe as "the sting". All that you have assumed to be what the story was about—an innocent man wrenched from his faithful wife and daughters – now suddenly points to one of the family helpers. Someone you have hitherto taken for granted is now thrown into an unexpected twist of fate.

At this point, something curious happened in the theatre I was in. Everyone started sobbing with little or no inhibition.

"My word!" I muttered under my breath. It struck me then that "Kabei", in the final analysis, was more than a film about a family torn apart by an empire on the verge of war. It was, in fact, a cunning examination of one common human foible: How little we cared about the secret feelings of people who are closest to us.

Now, the most common criticism made about the film was that it was technically solid, but lacked innovation. That's what happens when reviewers put on their proverbial thinking cap, I guess. With Kabei, I believe Yoji Yamada knew exactly what trick he was going to employ to touch on one unique aspect of humanity. A wicked old trick he so seamlessly applied in the Tora-san series, and later, in Tasogare Sebei.

After lulling the audience into a sort of narrative comfort zone, he throws us into a realm of emotions rarely explored in cinema.

This, to me, is the most effective cinematic tool of all. One which avoids detection, but affects you deeply. And proof of its effectiveness was a thousand wet pieces of Kleenex, thrown into a litter bin just outside of that thousand-seater cinema hall.

Now if only some reviewers would resist being so caught up with being smart that they forget what cinema is really about. Human emotions. Pure and simple. It's a [[comical]] business, reviewing movies. These [[jours]] when "internalized [[sentiments]]" and "[[affective]] detachment" are favored over [[uncomplicated]] sentimentality, it [[gotta]] be hard to [[staying]] [[trusty]] to your [[veritable]] [[affections]].

[[Sooner]] after [[finished]] [[jurors]] duties at the 58th Berlinale, I [[administered]] to [[caught]] Yoji Yamada's Kabei.

After the screening, I watched folks dreamily amble out of the theatre hall, watery-eyed, men, women, and reviewers alike. Even the [[headmaster]] of the Berlinale, obviously a hardened viewer of cinema, [[conceded]] to having been caught unawares and found himself crying three quarter's way into this unashamedly sentimental experience.

But what really surprised me were the reviews that came after. Despite being ineffably moved by the film, many reviewers chose to be tepid and emotionally non-committal in their writing. Apparently, post weeping, they had put on their "thinking cap", and consequently, missed out on what I felt was the genius about Kabei.

Allow me to explain.

Set in pre-war Japan, the story of Kabei revolves around one writer's family, and their fate therein, after he is held in jail for what was described as "thought crimes" against the Imperial will. Through a series of protracted emotional scenes, Yamada gets us familiar with the man, his loyal wife and two daughters, as well as three side characters—the man's pretty young sister, a bumbling ex-student, and a cad of an uncle – all come to help the family cope with their plight, in the absence of the man of the house.

The story moves along at a slow albeit steady pace, and heartbreaks occur at precisely the moments everyone is able to predict. This of course makes it near impossible for anyone in the audience to get too emotionally distraught by any dramatic event.

In other words, although you learn to love the family and their helpers, and sympathize with their unfortunate situation, you get so lulled by the [[assurance]] of the plot that you find yourself expecting a particular kind of ending.

However, two hours into the film (don't worry, Yamada provides the viewer with sufficient moments of gravity and levity to tide you along), he slaps you with what I can only describe as "the sting". All that you have assumed to be what the story was about—an innocent man wrenched from his faithful wife and daughters – now suddenly points to one of the family helpers. Someone you have hitherto taken for granted is now thrown into an unexpected twist of fate.

At this point, something curious happened in the theatre I was in. Everyone started sobbing with little or no inhibition.

"My word!" I muttered under my breath. It struck me then that "Kabei", in the final analysis, was more than a film about a family torn apart by an empire on the verge of war. It was, in fact, a cunning examination of one common human foible: How little we cared about the secret feelings of people who are closest to us.

Now, the most common criticism made about the film was that it was technically solid, but lacked innovation. That's what happens when reviewers put on their proverbial thinking cap, I guess. With Kabei, I believe Yoji Yamada knew exactly what trick he was going to employ to touch on one unique aspect of humanity. A wicked old trick he so seamlessly applied in the Tora-san series, and later, in Tasogare Sebei.

After lulling the audience into a sort of narrative comfort zone, he throws us into a realm of emotions rarely explored in cinema.

This, to me, is the most effective cinematic tool of all. One which avoids detection, but affects you deeply. And proof of its effectiveness was a thousand wet pieces of Kleenex, thrown into a litter bin just outside of that thousand-seater cinema hall.

Now if only some reviewers would resist being so caught up with being smart that they forget what cinema is really about. Human emotions. Pure and simple. --------------------------------------------- Result 3506 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[find]] it heart-warming and [[inspiring]] that the [[writing]] team behind such hopelessly mainstream Hollywood movies like INDIANA JONES AND THE [[TEMPLE]] [[OF]] DOOM, [[American]] Graffiti and HOWARD THE DUCK would [[begin]] their [[career]] with a low-budget [[exploitation]] [[horror]] [[film]] like this. Perhaps as a [[testament]] to the talent that [[would]] earn Willard Hyuck and [[Gloria]] Katz an Oscar nomination later in their respective careers, Messiah of [[Evil]] has potential, but sadly becomes frustrating exactly because it can't muster the film-making prowess to pull it off.

The [[premise]] involves a young girl who [[travels]] to a small coastal [[town]] in search for her [[painter]] father who went missing a while back. It doesn't [[take]] long for the fragmented narrative to abandon all hope and dive headlong in [[disjointed]] absurdity - and for a while it works admirably well to the point where you begin thinking that [[maybe]] Messiah of Evil needs to be reclaimed from the schlocky gutter of 70's exploitation as an example of artful mystery horror.

The surreal non-sequiturs keep piling on as the daughter stumbles upon a young couple in a seedy hotel room who are in town to conduct a [[research]] on the local legend of the 'blood moon', a scruffy and half-mad alcoholic (played by the great Elisha Cook Jr. in perhaps the [[best]] scene of the movie) who [[warns]] her about her [[father]] only to be reportedly [[found]] dead in an [[alley]] '[[eaten]] by dogs' a [[little]] [[later]], the blind [[old]] lady that [[owns]] the local art gallery and who has inexplicably [[removed]] all of her father's paintings from the [[shop]] and [[last]] but not [[least]] a [[retarded]], [[murderous]], squirrel-eating albino.

Part of the movie's charm is precisely this brand of bargain-basement artsy surrealism that [[defies]] logic and genre [[conventions]] [[every]] [[step]] of the [[way]]. Whereas with Lynch it is [[obviously]] the [[mark]] of a [[talented]] creator, with Messiah of [[Evil]] the boundaries between the 'intentional', the 'unintentional' and the 'didn't [[really]] [[expect]] it to [[come]] out this [[way]] but it's good [[enough]] - [[WRAP]] SCENE' blur hopelessly.

Take for [[example]] the double narration that flows in and out of the picture in a drug-addled, feverish, stream-of-consciousness way, one coming from the daughter as she wanders from place to place in search for her father, and the other narrated by her father's voice as she reads his diary.

While we're still talking about a 'living dead' picture, Messiah of Evil is different and only loosely one - at least with current preconceptions of what a zombie movie is supposed to be. The origin of the living dead here is a 100 year old curse, bestowed upon the town by a mysterious 'Dark Stranger' who came from the woods one day. In the meantime Hyuck finds time for snippets of mass-consumption criticism in a flesh-eating supermarket scene that predates DAWN OF THE DEAD by a good number of years (you can hear the MST3K line already: 'man is dead, only his capitalist food tins remain') and a nicely thought but poorly executed similar scene in a movie theater.

I generally think that the surreal works in careful, well measured doses - how is the absurd to work if it's not hidden within the perfectly normal? Hyuck seems to just smear it all over the picture and by doing so dangerously overplays his hand. When the albino for example picks up a girl hitching her way to town and eats a squirrel in front of her, you can almost imagine the director winking meaningfully at the audience, amused and satisfied with his own hijinks.

The general film-making level is also pretty low - after the half-way mark, the pace becomes muddled and the story tiresome and evidently going nowhere and not particularly fast either. Add to that the choppy editing, average acting and Hyuck's general inability to capture true atmosphere - the empty streets of coastal town are criminally misused - and I'd file Messiah under 'missed opportunity' but still grindhouse afficionados will find enough to appreciate - even though it's not particularly gory, trashy or sleazy. I [[unearth]] it heart-warming and [[inspires]] that the [[writes]] team behind such hopelessly mainstream Hollywood movies like INDIANA JONES AND THE [[TEMPLES]] [[DE]] DOOM, [[Americano]] Graffiti and HOWARD THE DUCK would [[begins]] their [[quarries]] with a low-budget [[operate]] [[monstrosity]] [[cinema]] like this. Perhaps as a [[wills]] to the talent that [[ought]] earn Willard Hyuck and [[Glory]] Katz an Oscar nomination later in their respective careers, Messiah of [[Wicked]] has potential, but sadly becomes frustrating exactly because it can't muster the film-making prowess to pull it off.

The [[assumption]] involves a young girl who [[journey]] to a small coastal [[ciudad]] in search for her [[painters]] father who went missing a while back. It doesn't [[taking]] long for the fragmented narrative to abandon all hope and dive headlong in [[unconnected]] absurdity - and for a while it works admirably well to the point where you begin thinking that [[perhaps]] Messiah of Evil needs to be reclaimed from the schlocky gutter of 70's exploitation as an example of artful mystery horror.

The surreal non-sequiturs keep piling on as the daughter stumbles upon a young couple in a seedy hotel room who are in town to conduct a [[investigate]] on the local legend of the 'blood moon', a scruffy and half-mad alcoholic (played by the great Elisha Cook Jr. in perhaps the [[finest]] scene of the movie) who [[ultimatum]] her about her [[fathers]] only to be reportedly [[finds]] dead in an [[driveway]] '[[swallowed]] by dogs' a [[small]] [[subsequently]], the blind [[longtime]] lady that [[belongs]] the local art gallery and who has inexplicably [[deleted]] all of her father's paintings from the [[store]] and [[final]] but not [[lowest]] a [[retard]], [[fatal]], squirrel-eating albino.

Part of the movie's charm is precisely this brand of bargain-basement artsy surrealism that [[challenging]] logic and genre [[convention]] [[each]] [[stride]] of the [[paths]]. Whereas with Lynch it is [[clearly]] the [[dialed]] of a [[gifted]] creator, with Messiah of [[Wicked]] the boundaries between the 'intentional', the 'unintentional' and the 'didn't [[genuinely]] [[waits]] it to [[arriving]] out this [[paths]] but it's good [[adequately]] - [[WRAPPING]] SCENE' blur hopelessly.

Take for [[cases]] the double narration that flows in and out of the picture in a drug-addled, feverish, stream-of-consciousness way, one coming from the daughter as she wanders from place to place in search for her father, and the other narrated by her father's voice as she reads his diary.

While we're still talking about a 'living dead' picture, Messiah of Evil is different and only loosely one - at least with current preconceptions of what a zombie movie is supposed to be. The origin of the living dead here is a 100 year old curse, bestowed upon the town by a mysterious 'Dark Stranger' who came from the woods one day. In the meantime Hyuck finds time for snippets of mass-consumption criticism in a flesh-eating supermarket scene that predates DAWN OF THE DEAD by a good number of years (you can hear the MST3K line already: 'man is dead, only his capitalist food tins remain') and a nicely thought but poorly executed similar scene in a movie theater.

I generally think that the surreal works in careful, well measured doses - how is the absurd to work if it's not hidden within the perfectly normal? Hyuck seems to just smear it all over the picture and by doing so dangerously overplays his hand. When the albino for example picks up a girl hitching her way to town and eats a squirrel in front of her, you can almost imagine the director winking meaningfully at the audience, amused and satisfied with his own hijinks.

The general film-making level is also pretty low - after the half-way mark, the pace becomes muddled and the story tiresome and evidently going nowhere and not particularly fast either. Add to that the choppy editing, average acting and Hyuck's general inability to capture true atmosphere - the empty streets of coastal town are criminally misused - and I'd file Messiah under 'missed opportunity' but still grindhouse afficionados will find enough to appreciate - even though it's not particularly gory, trashy or sleazy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3507 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Well, what can I say having just watched this [[fantastic]] [[film]], when my nerves are [[still]] jangling! Jacques Audiard the director must be making quite a name for himself in France, and rightly so. [[Vince]] Cassel is no Tom Cruise and [[Emmanuelle]] Devos is no Penelope [[Cruz]] either, but these two are fantastic actors, and this is a taut and [[compelling]] thriller which starts off slowly with some clever character building and then starts to put [[tension]] on tension to a [[wonderful]] climax. Others have [[written]] about the plot, so I will not [[say]] more than [[everyone]] in this film plays their role to perfection, the director, the [[actors]], right down to the cameraman, and everything [[seems]] so [[real]], no [[stupid]] [[gun]] play, the [[fighting]] when it happens is so credible, the [[expressions]], the [[emotions]], it is [[almost]] as you are there as a spectator. Do yourself a [[favour]], get the DVD, a [[bottle]] of [[wine]], [[turn]] the [[lights]] low, [[take]] the phone off the [[hook]] and immerse yourself in this Hitchcockian thriller :) Well, what can I say having just watched this [[sumptuous]] [[filmmaking]], when my nerves are [[nonetheless]] jangling! Jacques Audiard the director must be making quite a name for himself in France, and rightly so. [[Vinnie]] Cassel is no Tom Cruise and [[Antonia]] Devos is no Penelope [[Croix]] either, but these two are fantastic actors, and this is a taut and [[convincing]] thriller which starts off slowly with some clever character building and then starts to put [[voltage]] on tension to a [[glamorous]] climax. Others have [[handwritten]] about the plot, so I will not [[told]] more than [[anybody]] in this film plays their role to perfection, the director, the [[protagonists]], right down to the cameraman, and everything [[seem]] so [[veritable]], no [[preposterous]] [[shotgun]] play, the [[tussle]] when it happens is so credible, the [[phrase]], the [[sentiments]], it is [[approximately]] as you are there as a spectator. Do yourself a [[supportive]], get the DVD, a [[vial]] of [[vineyard]], [[converting]] the [[lighting]] low, [[taking]] the phone off the [[fishhooks]] and immerse yourself in this Hitchcockian thriller :) --------------------------------------------- Result 3508 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (72%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This is an OK adaptation, but not as good as the TV version. The actors are generally alright but I found Jeremy Northam rather wet as Mr Knightley, particularly compared to Mark Strong in the TV version. Gwyneth Paltrow is OK and her English accent is pretty good but again, I preferred Kate Beckinsale's Emma. There are [[excellent]] support performances from Toni Collette, Juliet Stephenson and Sophy Thompson.

The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.

My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.

Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more. This is an OK adaptation, but not as good as the TV version. The actors are generally alright but I found Jeremy Northam rather wet as Mr Knightley, particularly compared to Mark Strong in the TV version. Gwyneth Paltrow is OK and her English accent is pretty good but again, I preferred Kate Beckinsale's Emma. There are [[sumptuous]] support performances from Toni Collette, Juliet Stephenson and Sophy Thompson.

The script is often played too much for laughs, the book is a comedy, but there are too many set-piece gags here, and also the Frank Churchill subplot is almost completely absent.

My biggest criticism is the scenery. It is far too lush. England has never been like this. It looks like a chocolate box. Only Americans would make it like this.

Despite these criticisms I enjoyed this film but would recommend the TV adaptation more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3509 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the movie for those who believe cinema is the seventh art, not an entertainment business. Lars von Trier creates a noir atmosphere of post-war Germany utterly captivating. You get absorbed into the dream and you're let go only at the end credits. The plot necessarily comes second, but it still is a thrilling story with tough issues being raised. Just wonderful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3510 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was prepared to laugh throughout this movie like a Mystery Science Theater experiment, but it was just boring. It appears that the producers had many biker enthusiast friends, and from there casually decided to make a movie.

It is frequently unwatchable. Lots of footage of the bikers riding on a dirt road, with the same music played repeatedly. Unfortunately, Renee Harmon is barely in the movie. Harmon probably would have livened things up. Perhaps she had other commitments the day this was filmed.

Of course, the bikers terrorize a small town. Fights, murder, a cowardly cop, a goofy mechanic, etc. One of the bikers always wears a football helmet, a weak attempt to distinguish him from all the other outlaws.

The script has nothing to offer. One scene features a biker assaulting a woman, yelling in the lady's face "You're all the same! You're all the same!". We come back to the scene a minute later and he again declares "You're all the same!". Couldn't the writer think of something more creative to say??

At the end the good guys have killed the bad guys. We also learn that the wedding between middle-aged mechanic Joe and young Susie has been canceled. Susie is going away to college, and we abruptly learn that Joe's wedding is still on (but with a different bride). End. --------------------------------------------- Result 3511 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (65%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** [[Juggernaut]] is a British made "thriller" [[released]] in the US by First National. Karloff is Dr. Sartorius who has to leave his research because his [[funds]] have dried up. Karloff is forced to retreat to France and start up a medical practice. He is propositioned by a conniving woman who wants to get rid of her much older husband. She knows Karloff needs the money.

Karloff agrees to the proposition and soon becomes the personal doctor of the husband. All the while, the wife is prancing about town with the local no good playboy. Karloff finally injects the old geyser with poison and he kicks off. However, his son (from another marriage) arrives a few days before the killing and finds out the will has been changed. When he spills the beans to the wife, she goes berserk and even bites the son's hand.

Meanwhile, Karloff's nurse has misplaced the hypo Karloff used to kill the old man. When Karloff finds out he isn't getting any money, he asks the wife to poison the son. The nurse suspects Karloff and finds the missing hypo. Analysis shows poison, but not quite in time as Karloff kidnaps the nurse.

To make a long story short, the nurse escapes, gets the police, and manages to save the son who is about to be injected by Karloff. Karloff instead injects himself and dies.

This movie does have some good points. Karloff is possessed and plays the type of mad doctor he did in The Devil Commands and the Man Who Lived Again. It is peculiar, however, to see him walk around stiffly and slightly hunched over. We never find out why he is walking this way. I suspect the director thought it made him more sinister.

The actress playing the 2-timing wife overacts something terrible. She has a French accent. Even though she overacts badly, you still manage to hate her (or maybe you hate her because of her acting...).

A little below average for a Karloff vehicle. If you buy the Sinister Cinema VHS copy, the audio is a bit choppy. ***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** [[Colossus]] is a British made "thriller" [[liberated]] in the US by First National. Karloff is Dr. Sartorius who has to leave his research because his [[finances]] have dried up. Karloff is forced to retreat to France and start up a medical practice. He is propositioned by a conniving woman who wants to get rid of her much older husband. She knows Karloff needs the money.

Karloff agrees to the proposition and soon becomes the personal doctor of the husband. All the while, the wife is prancing about town with the local no good playboy. Karloff finally injects the old geyser with poison and he kicks off. However, his son (from another marriage) arrives a few days before the killing and finds out the will has been changed. When he spills the beans to the wife, she goes berserk and even bites the son's hand.

Meanwhile, Karloff's nurse has misplaced the hypo Karloff used to kill the old man. When Karloff finds out he isn't getting any money, he asks the wife to poison the son. The nurse suspects Karloff and finds the missing hypo. Analysis shows poison, but not quite in time as Karloff kidnaps the nurse.

To make a long story short, the nurse escapes, gets the police, and manages to save the son who is about to be injected by Karloff. Karloff instead injects himself and dies.

This movie does have some good points. Karloff is possessed and plays the type of mad doctor he did in The Devil Commands and the Man Who Lived Again. It is peculiar, however, to see him walk around stiffly and slightly hunched over. We never find out why he is walking this way. I suspect the director thought it made him more sinister.

The actress playing the 2-timing wife overacts something terrible. She has a French accent. Even though she overacts badly, you still manage to hate her (or maybe you hate her because of her acting...).

A little below average for a Karloff vehicle. If you buy the Sinister Cinema VHS copy, the audio is a bit choppy. --------------------------------------------- Result 3512 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Yes, you guessed it. Another [[movie]] where identical [[twins]] switch places. I think now that the Olsen [[twins]] are getting [[older]] they should [[try]] and make the plot less predictable and less like re-runs of 'Full House'. If you plan on seeing this film, don't. Watch 'The Parent Trap' instead. It's more entertaining. Yes, you guessed it. Another [[kino]] where identical [[binoculars]] switch places. I think now that the Olsen [[binoculars]] are getting [[oldest]] they should [[seeks]] and make the plot less predictable and less like re-runs of 'Full House'. If you plan on seeing this film, don't. Watch 'The Parent Trap' instead. It's more entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 3513 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] While this film certainly does possess the stench of a [[bad]] film, it's surprisingly watchable on several levels. First, for old movie fans, it's interesting to see the leading role played by Dean Jagger (no relation to Mick). While Jagger later went on to a very respectable role as a supporting actor (even garnering the Oscar in this category for 12 O'CLOCK HIGH), here his performance is truly unique [[since]] he actually has a full head of hair (I never saw him this way before) and because he was by far the [[worst]] [[actor]] in the film. This film just goes to show that if an actor cannot act in his earlier films doesn't mean he can't eventually learn to be a great actor. Another good example of this phenomenon is Paul Newman, whose first movie (THE SILVER CHALICE) is considered one of the worst films of the 1950s.

A second reason to watch the film is the shear cheesiness of it all. The writing is bad, the acting is bad and the special effects are bad. For example, when Jagger and an unnamed Cambodian are wading through the water, it's obvious they are really just walking in place and the background is poorly projected behind them. Plus, once they leave the water, their costumes are 100% dry!!! Horrid continuity and mindlessly bad dialog abounds throughout the film--so much so that it's hard to imagine why they didn't ask Bela Lugosi or George Zucco to star in the film--since both of them starred in many grade-z horror films. In many ways, this would be a perfect example for a film class on how NOT to make a film.

So, while giving it a 3 is probably a bit over-generous, it's fun to laugh at and short so it's worth a look for bad film fans. While this film certainly does possess the stench of a [[amiss]] film, it's surprisingly watchable on several levels. First, for old movie fans, it's interesting to see the leading role played by Dean Jagger (no relation to Mick). While Jagger later went on to a very respectable role as a supporting actor (even garnering the Oscar in this category for 12 O'CLOCK HIGH), here his performance is truly unique [[because]] he actually has a full head of hair (I never saw him this way before) and because he was by far the [[hardest]] [[protagonist]] in the film. This film just goes to show that if an actor cannot act in his earlier films doesn't mean he can't eventually learn to be a great actor. Another good example of this phenomenon is Paul Newman, whose first movie (THE SILVER CHALICE) is considered one of the worst films of the 1950s.

A second reason to watch the film is the shear cheesiness of it all. The writing is bad, the acting is bad and the special effects are bad. For example, when Jagger and an unnamed Cambodian are wading through the water, it's obvious they are really just walking in place and the background is poorly projected behind them. Plus, once they leave the water, their costumes are 100% dry!!! Horrid continuity and mindlessly bad dialog abounds throughout the film--so much so that it's hard to imagine why they didn't ask Bela Lugosi or George Zucco to star in the film--since both of them starred in many grade-z horror films. In many ways, this would be a perfect example for a film class on how NOT to make a film.

So, while giving it a 3 is probably a bit over-generous, it's fun to laugh at and short so it's worth a look for bad film fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3514 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] William Shakespeare would be very proud of this particular version of his play. Not only is it the [[best]] movie version of it, but it's also the only complete version of Hamlet. Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is [[simply]] [[genius]]. Not only because it was written by Shakespeare, but also because it had the [[guts]] to do the whole thing, even if it went just over four hours.

We all know the story of the Prince of Denmark and his plot to avenge his father's death, so I won't go into the details of the story. I will, however, tell you that the best part of this Hamlet version is not the breathtaking sets or the stunning photography, but the actors' interpretations of each character. I doubt you'll find a better Polonius than Richard Briers' delicious portrayal. Plus, you can't go wrong with Julie Christie and Jack Lemmon. Also, Derek Jacobi, a regular among Shakespeare adaptations is magnificent as the antagonist to Hamlet.

Of course, we must talk about Kenneth Branagh. He wowed audiences when he came onto the scene with his first outing with Shakespeare, Henry V. He outdoes himself with Hamlet. Sure, Olivier's presence was captivating, but I think Branagh's performance is wonderful. When you watch him on screen, it's almost as if he knew exactly how Shakespeare wanted the role to be played. How he wasn't nominated for an Oscar is a total mystery. At least the movie got a few nominations and even an odd choice for Screenplay. I guess they know good writing when they see it though.

All in all, you'll never find a more rich and lavish production of the Bard's best play. To say that the technical aspects were awesome would be an understatement. If you love this play and are a fan of Shakespeare, you definitely need to check this movie out. Even if you don't really care for Shakespeare, the visuals will keep you occupied for the duration of the film. You may not think you'll be able to sit through all of it at once, but you'll soon find out that pausing this movie will make you want to see it even more. William Shakespeare would be very proud of this particular version of his play. Not only is it the [[nicest]] movie version of it, but it's also the only complete version of Hamlet. Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is [[merely]] [[genie]]. Not only because it was written by Shakespeare, but also because it had the [[intestines]] to do the whole thing, even if it went just over four hours.

We all know the story of the Prince of Denmark and his plot to avenge his father's death, so I won't go into the details of the story. I will, however, tell you that the best part of this Hamlet version is not the breathtaking sets or the stunning photography, but the actors' interpretations of each character. I doubt you'll find a better Polonius than Richard Briers' delicious portrayal. Plus, you can't go wrong with Julie Christie and Jack Lemmon. Also, Derek Jacobi, a regular among Shakespeare adaptations is magnificent as the antagonist to Hamlet.

Of course, we must talk about Kenneth Branagh. He wowed audiences when he came onto the scene with his first outing with Shakespeare, Henry V. He outdoes himself with Hamlet. Sure, Olivier's presence was captivating, but I think Branagh's performance is wonderful. When you watch him on screen, it's almost as if he knew exactly how Shakespeare wanted the role to be played. How he wasn't nominated for an Oscar is a total mystery. At least the movie got a few nominations and even an odd choice for Screenplay. I guess they know good writing when they see it though.

All in all, you'll never find a more rich and lavish production of the Bard's best play. To say that the technical aspects were awesome would be an understatement. If you love this play and are a fan of Shakespeare, you definitely need to check this movie out. Even if you don't really care for Shakespeare, the visuals will keep you occupied for the duration of the film. You may not think you'll be able to sit through all of it at once, but you'll soon find out that pausing this movie will make you want to see it even more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3515 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] "The Haunted World of Edward D. [[Wood]], Jr." is the definitive documentary on the life of the [[man]] who [[brought]] us such [[movies]] as "Glen or Glenda", "[[Bride]] of the [[Monster]]", and, of course, "[[Plan]] 9 from Outer Space". This [[exquisite]] film far exceeds where other documentaries, such as "[[Look]] Back in Angora" and "The Plan 9 Companion", [[failed]]. It rounds up his surviving entourage, [[many]] of whom have [[passed]] away since filming, and [[gives]] an [[honest]] [[examination]] of Ed Wood and his [[work]]. Nostalgic in the [[fact]] that it [[looks]] back at the darker corner of [[yesteryear]] Hollywood, [[sentimental]] in its [[treatment]] of the [[director]] (down to the haunting music), this [[documentary]] is an [[absolute]] must-see for [[anyone]] who [[loves]] the [[director]] who so failed in his day. The [[entire]] two [[hours]] of the [[film]] lovingly and retrospectively [[pieces]] [[together]] Ed's [[life]] and untimely [[death]] for the [[viewer]]. [[Best]] [[watched]] at 3 am while wearing an angora [[sweater]]. "The Haunted World of Edward D. [[Lumber]], Jr." is the definitive documentary on the life of the [[bloke]] who [[introduced]] us such [[kino]] as "Glen or Glenda", "[[Fiance]] of the [[Monsters]]", and, of course, "[[Programmes]] 9 from Outer Space". This [[sumptuous]] film far exceeds where other documentaries, such as "[[Peek]] Back in Angora" and "The Plan 9 Companion", [[faulted]]. It rounds up his surviving entourage, [[several]] of whom have [[voted]] away since filming, and [[furnishes]] an [[truthful]] [[revisiting]] of Ed Wood and his [[cooperates]]. Nostalgic in the [[facto]] that it [[seems]] back at the darker corner of [[past]] Hollywood, [[emotional]] in its [[treating]] of the [[headmaster]] (down to the haunting music), this [[literature]] is an [[unmitigated]] must-see for [[nobody]] who [[likes]] the [[headmaster]] who so failed in his day. The [[overall]] two [[hour]] of the [[kino]] lovingly and retrospectively [[segments]] [[jointly]] Ed's [[vida]] and untimely [[decease]] for the [[bystander]]. [[Optimum]] [[saw]] at 3 am while wearing an angora [[jumper]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3516 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (81%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] I found the memorable quotes searching for video clips; they forgot one of my favorites...

Old Person 1: You know, I remember the first time they played that thing.

Old Person 2: You remember pterodactyls.

Old Person 1: And I can remember you [[fell]] for that, hook line and sinker.

Old Person 2: Oh, I did not.

Old Lady: You did so. You put a big bucket on your head and took off with them army boys to fight Martians.

Old Person 2: Ain't you dead yet? I found the memorable quotes searching for video clips; they forgot one of my favorites...

Old Person 1: You know, I remember the first time they played that thing.

Old Person 2: You remember pterodactyls.

Old Person 1: And I can remember you [[declined]] for that, hook line and sinker.

Old Person 2: Oh, I did not.

Old Lady: You did so. You put a big bucket on your head and took off with them army boys to fight Martians.

Old Person 2: Ain't you dead yet? --------------------------------------------- Result 3517 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gentleman Jim not really a boxing film. It is a vehicle for Errol Flynn as Jim Corbett. But having said that, the boxing scenes are a real eye-opener to the modern viewer. There are no 12 round, points decisions here.

Errol Flynn plays the Irish bank clerk who gets a shot at the heavyweight world title. Flynn is well suited to the role of suave but unpredictable Corbett. His opponent John Sullivan is still better however, a bruiser of the old school played by Ward Bond.

The theme of the film is a man pushing for his big chance. Corbett leaves his mundane life behind and builds a new persona as Gentleman Jim. Jim is a chancer who can adapt to any social environment. He is a liar and an egotist. Sullivan the heavyweight boxing champion is portrayed as a simple brute but his honesty and sportsmanship gives a certain contrast to the main character.

There is action and excitement aplenty and a wonderful ending with the requisite redemption for all. And Errol Flynn gets the girl. --------------------------------------------- Result 3518 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Having read the [[reviews]] for this [[film]], I understandably [[started]] watching it with a [[great]] deal of [[doubt]] in my [[mind]] that it [[would]] [[actually]] be any good. [[However]], this is one of the [[best]] films i have seen in a [[long]] [[time]]. The majority of [[reviews]] that i had read, [[said]] that the complicated plot [[made]] it too [[hard]] to follow. And [[whilst]] some parts do [[leave]] you [[confused]], the ending ties up so [[many]] loose [[ends]] that you feel like kicking yourself because you've [[missed]] so much. It's not like "[[Lock]], [[Stock]]..." or "Snatch", in the [[sense]] that it isn't that funny (in fact, it's pretty dark), and it is a lot more intelligent, in the way that you see parts of scenes from different viewpoints (and, in one of the best scenes of the film, Jason Statham spends five minutes in a lift having an argument with himself). The way in which it is similar to the two films i just mentioned, is that it is full of memorable characters, specifically Statham, who gives a fantastic performance as the lead, and Ray Liotta, who spends most of the film in Speedos, but gives a great performance none the [[less]]. If you've got time, and have time afterwards to [[think]] about the film, and even watch it again, you really start to see all the symbolism and hints that are laid out through the film. I think it's [[fantastic]], and that [[Guy]] [[Ritchie]] is a director on [[top]] of his [[game]]. Having read the [[inspect]] for this [[filmmaking]], I understandably [[embark]] watching it with a [[resplendent]] deal of [[duda]] in my [[intellect]] that it [[ought]] [[indeed]] be any good. [[Still]], this is one of the [[optimum]] films i have seen in a [[lang]] [[period]]. The majority of [[inspects]] that i had read, [[avowed]] that the complicated plot [[effected]] it too [[laborious]] to follow. And [[notwithstanding]] some parts do [[letting]] you [[baffled]], the ending ties up so [[multiple]] loose [[culminates]] that you feel like kicking yourself because you've [[flunked]] so much. It's not like "[[Latched]], [[Stocks]]..." or "Snatch", in the [[feeling]] that it isn't that funny (in fact, it's pretty dark), and it is a lot more intelligent, in the way that you see parts of scenes from different viewpoints (and, in one of the best scenes of the film, Jason Statham spends five minutes in a lift having an argument with himself). The way in which it is similar to the two films i just mentioned, is that it is full of memorable characters, specifically Statham, who gives a fantastic performance as the lead, and Ray Liotta, who spends most of the film in Speedos, but gives a great performance none the [[lowest]]. If you've got time, and have time afterwards to [[believing]] about the film, and even watch it again, you really start to see all the symbolism and hints that are laid out through the film. I think it's [[marvellous]], and that [[Fella]] [[Ricci]] is a director on [[topped]] of his [[games]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3519 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] This is a thoroughly diabolical [[tale]] of just how bad [[things]] can go wrong. A simple robbery. Pick up some serious change. Get our finances together and everything will be hunky-dory. But—mom and pop's jewelry store? No problem. Insurance pays for it all. No guns. Nobody gets hurt. Easy money.

Older, more successful (it would appear) brother Andy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) has a few minor [[problems]]. Heroin addiction, cocaine habituation. A wife (Marisa Tomei) that…well, he can't seem to perform for. His flat belly days long gone. Younger, sweet, slightly dim-witted younger brother, Hank (Ethan Hawke) with a few dinero problems of his own. Behind in child support payments for his daughter, in debt to friends and relatives, not exactly wowing them in the work of work, etc.

Sydney Lumet, in this performance at the age of 82 (!), directs and gets it 99.99 percent right, which is hard to do in a thriller. I have seen more thrillers than I can remember and most of the time the director gets the movie printed and lives with the plot holes, the improbabilities, the cheesy scenes, and the hurry-up ending. Here Lumet makes a thriller like it's a work of art. Every detail is perfect. The acting is superb. The plot has no holes. The story rings true and clear and represents a tale about human frailty that would honor the greatest filmmakers and even the Bard himself.

Hoffman of course is excellent. When you don't have marquee, leading man presence, you have to get by on talent, workmanship and pure concentration. Ethan Hawke, who is no stranger to the sweet, little guy role, adds a layer of desperation and all too human incompetence to the part so that we don't know whether to pity him or trash him. Albert Finney plays the father of the wayward sons with a kind of steely intensity that belies his age. And Marisa Tomei, who has magical qualities of sexiness to go along with her unique creativity, manages to be both vulnerable and hard as nails as Andy's two timing wife. (But who could blame her?) It's almost a movie reviewer's sacrilege to give a commercial thriller five or ten stars, but if you study this film, as all aspiring film makers would be well advised to do, you will notice the kind of excessive (according to most Hollywood producers) attention to detail that makes for real art--the sort of thing that only great artists can do, and indeed cannot help but do. (By the way, I think there were twenty producers on this film—well, maybe a dozen; check the credits.) All I can say in summation is, Way to go Sydney Lumet, author of a slew of excellent films, and to show such fidelity to your craft and your art at such an advanced age—kudos. May we all do half so well.

Okay, the 00.01 percent. It was unlikely that the father (Albert Finney) could have followed the cabs that Andy took around New York without somehow losing the tail. This is minor, and I wish all thrillers could have so small a blip. Also one wonders why Lumet decided not to tell us about the fate of Hank at the end. We can guess and guess. Perhaps his fate fell onto the cutting room floor. Perhaps Lumet was not satisfied with what was filmed and time ran out, and he just said, "Leave it like that. It really doesn't matter." And I think it doesn't. What happens to Hank is not going to be good. He isn't the kind of guy who manages to run off to Mexico and is able to start a new life. He is the kind of guy who gets a "light" sentence of 10 to 20 and serves it and comes out a kind of shrunken human being who knows he wasn't really a man when he should have been.

See this for Sidney Lumet, one of Hollywood's best, director of The Pawnbroker (1964), The Group (1966), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976), and many more. This is a thoroughly diabolical [[conte]] of just how bad [[aspects]] can go wrong. A simple robbery. Pick up some serious change. Get our finances together and everything will be hunky-dory. But—mom and pop's jewelry store? No problem. Insurance pays for it all. No guns. Nobody gets hurt. Easy money.

Older, more successful (it would appear) brother Andy (Philip Seymour Hoffman) has a few minor [[troubles]]. Heroin addiction, cocaine habituation. A wife (Marisa Tomei) that…well, he can't seem to perform for. His flat belly days long gone. Younger, sweet, slightly dim-witted younger brother, Hank (Ethan Hawke) with a few dinero problems of his own. Behind in child support payments for his daughter, in debt to friends and relatives, not exactly wowing them in the work of work, etc.

Sydney Lumet, in this performance at the age of 82 (!), directs and gets it 99.99 percent right, which is hard to do in a thriller. I have seen more thrillers than I can remember and most of the time the director gets the movie printed and lives with the plot holes, the improbabilities, the cheesy scenes, and the hurry-up ending. Here Lumet makes a thriller like it's a work of art. Every detail is perfect. The acting is superb. The plot has no holes. The story rings true and clear and represents a tale about human frailty that would honor the greatest filmmakers and even the Bard himself.

Hoffman of course is excellent. When you don't have marquee, leading man presence, you have to get by on talent, workmanship and pure concentration. Ethan Hawke, who is no stranger to the sweet, little guy role, adds a layer of desperation and all too human incompetence to the part so that we don't know whether to pity him or trash him. Albert Finney plays the father of the wayward sons with a kind of steely intensity that belies his age. And Marisa Tomei, who has magical qualities of sexiness to go along with her unique creativity, manages to be both vulnerable and hard as nails as Andy's two timing wife. (But who could blame her?) It's almost a movie reviewer's sacrilege to give a commercial thriller five or ten stars, but if you study this film, as all aspiring film makers would be well advised to do, you will notice the kind of excessive (according to most Hollywood producers) attention to detail that makes for real art--the sort of thing that only great artists can do, and indeed cannot help but do. (By the way, I think there were twenty producers on this film—well, maybe a dozen; check the credits.) All I can say in summation is, Way to go Sydney Lumet, author of a slew of excellent films, and to show such fidelity to your craft and your art at such an advanced age—kudos. May we all do half so well.

Okay, the 00.01 percent. It was unlikely that the father (Albert Finney) could have followed the cabs that Andy took around New York without somehow losing the tail. This is minor, and I wish all thrillers could have so small a blip. Also one wonders why Lumet decided not to tell us about the fate of Hank at the end. We can guess and guess. Perhaps his fate fell onto the cutting room floor. Perhaps Lumet was not satisfied with what was filmed and time ran out, and he just said, "Leave it like that. It really doesn't matter." And I think it doesn't. What happens to Hank is not going to be good. He isn't the kind of guy who manages to run off to Mexico and is able to start a new life. He is the kind of guy who gets a "light" sentence of 10 to 20 and serves it and comes out a kind of shrunken human being who knows he wasn't really a man when he should have been.

See this for Sidney Lumet, one of Hollywood's best, director of The Pawnbroker (1964), The Group (1966), Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976), and many more. --------------------------------------------- Result 3520 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (62%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] i wont go and give them my 10 bucks i went and bought the fourth season of the original and the best. At least my [[kids]] enjoy it and can watch it without me worrying about what they are seeing. I have a teenager and she thinks the previews are ridiculous and would rather watch the original. And she thinks Jessica Simpson is a horrible daisy in fact she thinks she looks more like a slut than daisy duke. Those shorts she might as well not be wearing anything at all. And since when is American Pie have anything to do with the Dukes SHAME ON them for putting that nasty line in there about having sex with a car. That in itself should have gotten the movie a R rating. The only good thing that might come out of this is a reunion movie with the originals. Lets all hope. So the people out there that went and seen the movie will see how it should have looked i wont go and give them my 10 bucks i went and bought the fourth season of the original and the best. At least my [[juvenile]] enjoy it and can watch it without me worrying about what they are seeing. I have a teenager and she thinks the previews are ridiculous and would rather watch the original. And she thinks Jessica Simpson is a horrible daisy in fact she thinks she looks more like a slut than daisy duke. Those shorts she might as well not be wearing anything at all. And since when is American Pie have anything to do with the Dukes SHAME ON them for putting that nasty line in there about having sex with a car. That in itself should have gotten the movie a R rating. The only good thing that might come out of this is a reunion movie with the originals. Lets all hope. So the people out there that went and seen the movie will see how it should have looked --------------------------------------------- Result 3521 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I was not expecting much from this movie. I was given a ticket for an advanced screening. I had just gotten off of [[work]]. It was [[hot]] and I was tired. I had to wait in the movie line for 40 minutes and there seemed not to be any cool air flowing through the hallways of the theater complex.

Once seated in the [[theater]], tired and frustrated, the [[movie]] started, I did not [[recognize]] any of the actors in the [[beginning]], but the flow of the movie was [[perfect]]. Right from the beginning I became consumed with the [[movie]], getting more and more excited with each minute passing. I think this movie is destined to be a fantasy/fairytale classic. The [[actors]] were fabulous, the pace was perfect, and the ending was magical. I was not expecting much from this movie. I was given a ticket for an advanced screening. I had just gotten off of [[cooperates]]. It was [[sexier]] and I was tired. I had to wait in the movie line for 40 minutes and there seemed not to be any cool air flowing through the hallways of the theater complex.

Once seated in the [[drama]], tired and frustrated, the [[filmmaking]] started, I did not [[acknowledges]] any of the actors in the [[startup]], but the flow of the movie was [[irreproachable]]. Right from the beginning I became consumed with the [[cinematography]], getting more and more excited with each minute passing. I think this movie is destined to be a fantasy/fairytale classic. The [[protagonists]] were fabulous, the pace was perfect, and the ending was magical. --------------------------------------------- Result 3522 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a [[perfect]] [[series]] for family viewing. We gather [[around]] the TV to watch this on BBC [[America]]. It is an up-to-date version of [[Robin]] Hood and it appeals to children and adults alike. Our teenager and tween-ager both enjoy sitting with [[mom]] and [[dad]] and watching Robin's [[next]] exploits. We can't wait for the next episode to air each [[week]] and are [[glad]] for the free "On [[Demand]]" viewing.

The wardrobe has a spot of [[current]] fashion. There is a moral to each [[story]]. It is [[entertaining]]. The violence is not over-the-top or [[needless]]. The soundtrack is [[absolutely]] [[fantastic]] with a John William's feel to it. It is an [[old]] [[world]] [[tale]] that is [[brought]] to life again with a [[new]] world flair.

There is so much [[garbage]] on television from brain rotting "reality" [[TV]] to senseless violence. You should [[take]] this for what it is and that is an updated "[[Robin]] Hood" not to be [[compared]] with the movie exploits of Errol Flynn. This is a gem to be [[enjoyed]] by all. [[Parents]] that are concerned about their [[children]] [[watching]] too much violence will enjoy that [[Robin]] has lost his taste for war and bloodshed. He is a [[Robin]] Hood that [[would]] [[rather]] [[attempt]] to reason his [[way]] out of a [[disagreement]] than [[fight]]. [[Maid]] [[Marian]] is [[also]] an appealing role [[model]] for [[young]] [[girls]]. Rather than [[stand]] by and do [[nothing]], she [[takes]] her own role in [[helping]] the poor by being the "[[Night]] [[Watchman]]." The Sheriff of [[Nottingham]] is [[deliciously]] over the top [[wicked]], just as the Sheriff should be and looks like a [[cross]] between Billy Joel and Tim Curry. Guy Gisborne is [[played]] by an [[extremely]] [[handsome]] [[actor]], one that makes most [[women]] [[wish]] he didn't have [[portray]] the role of a [[bad]] "[[Guy]]".

The only [[question]] we have is "Where is Friar Tuck?" This is a [[faultless]] [[serial]] for family viewing. We gather [[about]] the TV to watch this on BBC [[Americas]]. It is an up-to-date version of [[Reuben]] Hood and it appeals to children and adults alike. Our teenager and tween-ager both enjoy sitting with [[mummy]] and [[pop]] and watching Robin's [[future]] exploits. We can't wait for the next episode to air each [[zhou]] and are [[happier]] for the free "On [[Asked]]" viewing.

The wardrobe has a spot of [[contemporary]] fashion. There is a moral to each [[tale]]. It is [[amusing]]. The violence is not over-the-top or [[useless]]. The soundtrack is [[altogether]] [[unbelievable]] with a John William's feel to it. It is an [[elderly]] [[worldwide]] [[history]] that is [[introduced]] to life again with a [[newer]] world flair.

There is so much [[junk]] on television from brain rotting "reality" [[TELEVISION]] to senseless violence. You should [[taking]] this for what it is and that is an updated "[[Robyn]] Hood" not to be [[comparison]] with the movie exploits of Errol Flynn. This is a gem to be [[liked]] by all. [[Relatives]] that are concerned about their [[child]] [[staring]] too much violence will enjoy that [[Robyn]] has lost his taste for war and bloodshed. He is a [[Robyn]] Hood that [[ought]] [[fairly]] [[tried]] to reason his [[manner]] out of a [[dispute]] than [[battle]]. [[Daughter]] [[Marion]] is [[similarly]] an appealing role [[models]] for [[youths]] [[female]]. Rather than [[standing]] by and do [[anything]], she [[pick]] her own role in [[contributes]] the poor by being the "[[Nocturnal]] [[Gatekeeper]]." The Sheriff of [[Coventry]] is [[divinely]] over the top [[demonic]], just as the Sheriff should be and looks like a [[croix]] between Billy Joel and Tim Curry. Guy Gisborne is [[served]] by an [[terribly]] [[beau]] [[actress]], one that makes most [[wife]] [[desire]] he didn't have [[outline]] the role of a [[rotten]] "[[Dude]]".

The only [[issue]] we have is "Where is Friar Tuck?" --------------------------------------------- Result 3523 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[refused]] to watch this when it originally [[aired]], treasuring the [[memory]] of the late, lamented 1960s series with [[Mike]] Pratt and Kenneth [[Cope]], but I can never [[resist]] a [[challenge]]. I should have [[known]] better. Not [[quite]] a [[remake]], and more of a parody than a homage, this show didn't quite know how to [[play]] it, and plumped with [[infantile]] [[comedy]] and [[cartoon]] plots and [[characters]]. The three main [[characters]] were [[little]] more than [[caricatures]] of the [[actors]], and only Emilia Fox could [[act]] (Bob Mortimer is painful in a straight role). The supporting [[cast]] were [[merely]] comedian-acquaintances of Vic and Bob's wanting to be part of the in-joke, and far too [[aware]] of the situation to be [[convincing]]. And the CGI, [[though]] the [[effects]] couldn't [[help]] be an [[improvement]] on those [[available]] 30 years [[earlier]], [[merely]] dazzled the viewer with lights and [[camera]] [[work]], and did [[little]] to [[mask]] the [[poor]] quality of the [[scripts]] and [[dialogue]]. [[All]] [[style]] and no [[substance]]. (And [[whereas]] the 1960s show is mocked for being very much of its time, this 'update' is now [[also]] very dated, with 'Matrix'-style fashions, [[obligatory]] '[[girl]] power' scenes, and less than subtle [[tension]] between the two [[living]] [[leads]].) I [[dismissed]] to watch this when it originally [[distributed]], treasuring the [[mem]] of the late, lamented 1960s series with [[Mick]] Pratt and Kenneth [[Coping]], but I can never [[resisting]] a [[challenging]]. I should have [[renowned]] better. Not [[utterly]] a [[redo]], and more of a parody than a homage, this show didn't quite know how to [[playing]] it, and plumped with [[enfant]] [[humour]] and [[toon]] plots and [[character]]. The three main [[traits]] were [[petit]] more than [[caricature]] of the [[protagonists]], and only Emilia Fox could [[ley]] (Bob Mortimer is painful in a straight role). The supporting [[casting]] were [[exclusively]] comedian-acquaintances of Vic and Bob's wanting to be part of the in-joke, and far too [[conscious]] of the situation to be [[persuade]]. And the CGI, [[albeit]] the [[influences]] couldn't [[support]] be an [[refinements]] on those [[accessible]] 30 years [[prior]], [[alone]] dazzled the viewer with lights and [[cameras]] [[collaboration]], and did [[small]] to [[hides]] the [[pauper]] quality of the [[dashes]] and [[dialogues]]. [[Everything]] [[styles]] and no [[substances]]. (And [[whilst]] the 1960s show is mocked for being very much of its time, this 'update' is now [[apart]] very dated, with 'Matrix'-style fashions, [[compulsory]] '[[girlie]] power' scenes, and less than subtle [[tensions]] between the two [[life]] [[leeds]].) --------------------------------------------- Result 3524 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Steve Carell [[comes]] into his own in his [[first]] starring role in the 40 [[Year]] [[Old]] [[Virgin]], having only had [[supporting]] [[roles]] in such films as Bewitched, Bruce Almighty, Anchorman, and his work on the Daily [[Show]], we had only [[gotten]] a [[small]] taste of the [[comedy]] that Carell [[truly]] makes his own. You can tell that Will Ferrell influenced his "comedic air" but Carell [[takes]] it to another [[level]], everything he does is [[innocent]], lovable, and [[hilarious]]. I would not hesitate to say that Steve Carell is one of the [[next]] [[great]] comedians of our [[time]].

The 40 Year Old Virgin is two hours of non-stop laughs (or 4 hours if you [[see]] it twice like I did), a [[perfect]] supporting cast and great leads charm the audience through the entire movie. The [[script]] was [[perfect]] with so many great lines that you will [[want]] to [[see]] the movie again just to [[try]] to [[remember]] them all. The music fit the tone of the [[movie]] great, and you can tell the [[director]] knew what he was doing.

Filled with [[sex]] jokes, some nudity, and a lot of [[language]], this movie isn't for [[everyone]] but if you liked the Wedding Crashers, Anchorman, or any movie along those lines, you will [[absolutely]] [[love]] The 40 [[Year]] Old Virgin. Steve Carell [[happens]] into his own in his [[fiirst]] starring role in the 40 [[Annum]] [[Antique]] [[Virgins]], having only had [[helps]] [[functions]] in such films as Bewitched, Bruce Almighty, Anchorman, and his work on the Daily [[Demonstrating]], we had only [[become]] a [[minor]] taste of the [[travesty]] that Carell [[truthfully]] makes his own. You can tell that Will Ferrell influenced his "comedic air" but Carell [[pick]] it to another [[grades]], everything he does is [[blameless]], lovable, and [[comical]]. I would not hesitate to say that Steve Carell is one of the [[imminent]] [[prodigious]] comedians of our [[times]].

The 40 Year Old Virgin is two hours of non-stop laughs (or 4 hours if you [[seeing]] it twice like I did), a [[irreproachable]] supporting cast and great leads charm the audience through the entire movie. The [[screenplay]] was [[consummate]] with so many great lines that you will [[wants]] to [[seeing]] the movie again just to [[trying]] to [[reminisce]] them all. The music fit the tone of the [[kino]] great, and you can tell the [[headmaster]] knew what he was doing.

Filled with [[sexuality]] jokes, some nudity, and a lot of [[parlance]], this movie isn't for [[someone]] but if you liked the Wedding Crashers, Anchorman, or any movie along those lines, you will [[entirely]] [[iove]] The 40 [[Annual]] Old Virgin. --------------------------------------------- Result 3525 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This would have been so much fun to [[see]] in a theater, back in 1996. There is a guilty [[pleasure]] corner of my movie taste which really [[appreciates]] really well done shocker movies.

"The Dentist" is panned sometimes probably because people usually have strong feelings over dental matters. Maybe the ADA launched a campaign against it, since [[dentists]] report they have to apologize for this movie and for "The Marathon Man" (which only has one scene comparable to the many in "The Dentist").

It's amazing to note that according to the trivia page, the movie was shot in 21 days. Of course, post production can take longer than movie shooting sometimes and the editing for "The Dentist" is picture perfect. The quick cuts heighten the tension so much that in the scene where the Dentist "takes care" of his wife there's only two quick cuts showing what is happening. The rest is left to our very fertile imaginations! Corbin Bernsen was a good choice for the role since he has lots of experience playing psychologically "off" characters and he completely sold the obsessive compulsive aspects of the dentist.

For me the pacing of the movie was just right. The film makers reveal the wife's naughtiness in just the right way. All of the characters in the dental office look like they are actual people working in a real office. There's lots of tension while they are dealing with impatient people awaiting the dentist's arrival. Meanwhile the dentist is off on the cusp of a huge psychotic breakdown! Unlike so many movies of this genre, the script is very very tight. All the victims fall into the dentist's trap in very calculated ways. Two law enforcement types even get involved in a little subplot that ends up creating a shocker of a showdown near the end.

Definitely not for the faint of heart or the dental-phobic but a real roller coaster ride and heavily recommended for fans of intelligent gorefests. This would have been so much fun to [[seeing]] in a theater, back in 1996. There is a guilty [[glee]] corner of my movie taste which really [[cherishes]] really well done shocker movies.

"The Dentist" is panned sometimes probably because people usually have strong feelings over dental matters. Maybe the ADA launched a campaign against it, since [[dentistry]] report they have to apologize for this movie and for "The Marathon Man" (which only has one scene comparable to the many in "The Dentist").

It's amazing to note that according to the trivia page, the movie was shot in 21 days. Of course, post production can take longer than movie shooting sometimes and the editing for "The Dentist" is picture perfect. The quick cuts heighten the tension so much that in the scene where the Dentist "takes care" of his wife there's only two quick cuts showing what is happening. The rest is left to our very fertile imaginations! Corbin Bernsen was a good choice for the role since he has lots of experience playing psychologically "off" characters and he completely sold the obsessive compulsive aspects of the dentist.

For me the pacing of the movie was just right. The film makers reveal the wife's naughtiness in just the right way. All of the characters in the dental office look like they are actual people working in a real office. There's lots of tension while they are dealing with impatient people awaiting the dentist's arrival. Meanwhile the dentist is off on the cusp of a huge psychotic breakdown! Unlike so many movies of this genre, the script is very very tight. All the victims fall into the dentist's trap in very calculated ways. Two law enforcement types even get involved in a little subplot that ends up creating a shocker of a showdown near the end.

Definitely not for the faint of heart or the dental-phobic but a real roller coaster ride and heavily recommended for fans of intelligent gorefests. --------------------------------------------- Result 3526 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] this film is [[terrible]]. The [[characters]] are [[completely]] [[unbelievable]], and [[wildly]] inconsistent. The [[plot]] is [[awful]] and some of the [[classroom]] scenes are cringe-worthy and [[make]] for [[uncomfortable]] [[viewing]].

[[In]] fact the quality of the [[script]] and characterisation [[would]] [[suggest]] that this [[film]] was [[written]] by [[high]] [[school]] [[students]], only the utter [[lack]] of [[credibility]] to the school [[environment]] [[would]] [[suggest]] that, in [[fact]], the [[writers]] [[probably]] never went to [[high]] [[school]]. The acting in most [[cases]] was [[weak]] too, [[although]] a lot of this was down to a poor [[script]] and plot, i am not [[sure]] that any [[actors]] [[could]] have [[made]] this [[film]] watchable.

having [[said]] that the sound [[track]] was OK, and the [[cinematography]] was [[nice]] in places ([[although]] the [[editing]] was poor). this film is [[scary]]. The [[attribute]] are [[altogether]] [[awesome]], and [[cruelly]] inconsistent. The [[intrigue]] is [[frightful]] and some of the [[classe]] scenes are cringe-worthy and [[deliver]] for [[inconvenient]] [[visualizing]].

[[At]] fact the quality of the [[scripts]] and characterisation [[ought]] [[suggests]] that this [[films]] was [[writes]] by [[highest]] [[teaching]] [[pupils]], only the utter [[shortfall]] of [[credence]] to the school [[environments]] [[ought]] [[suggests]] that, in [[facto]], the [[authors]] [[perhaps]] never went to [[highest]] [[tuition]]. The acting in most [[lawsuits]] was [[tenuous]] too, [[while]] a lot of this was down to a poor [[screenplay]] and plot, i am not [[convinced]] that any [[protagonists]] [[wo]] have [[brought]] this [[cinema]] watchable.

having [[told]] that the sound [[trajectory]] was OK, and the [[cinematographic]] was [[delightful]] in places ([[albeit]] the [[edition]] was poor). --------------------------------------------- Result 3527 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] The premise, while not quite ludicrous, WAS [[definitely]] [[ridiculous]]. What SHOULD have occurred, by the second encounter with Tritter was that Tritter should simply be wasted. House hires some guy and de-physicalizes Tritter. In real life, Tritter would have been hauled up for harassment, the rectal thermometer episode would have been exposed in court, providing motive and opportunity and the hospitals lawyers would have made mincemeat out of Tritter and the particular department he worked for. He would be in prison as would anyone complicit in the harassment of House, Chase, Foreman, Cameron, Wilson and Cuddy. The lawsuit would have won House a tasty settlement, enough to keep him supplied with Vicadin well into his old age. While Tritter would wind up somewhere driving a cab, trying to rehabilitate himself by doing good for people for two years before people tumbled to the fact that they'd seen it all before. The premise, while not quite ludicrous, WAS [[indubitably]] [[ludicrous]]. What SHOULD have occurred, by the second encounter with Tritter was that Tritter should simply be wasted. House hires some guy and de-physicalizes Tritter. In real life, Tritter would have been hauled up for harassment, the rectal thermometer episode would have been exposed in court, providing motive and opportunity and the hospitals lawyers would have made mincemeat out of Tritter and the particular department he worked for. He would be in prison as would anyone complicit in the harassment of House, Chase, Foreman, Cameron, Wilson and Cuddy. The lawsuit would have won House a tasty settlement, enough to keep him supplied with Vicadin well into his old age. While Tritter would wind up somewhere driving a cab, trying to rehabilitate himself by doing good for people for two years before people tumbled to the fact that they'd seen it all before. --------------------------------------------- Result 3528 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] There are some [[excellent]] [[comments]] and [[observations]] on this film. I was pleased to note the comparisons to Fritz Lang's "M" (forget the 50's abortive remake with lightweight David Wayne). The real villain is not the tortured murderer ([[extraordinarily]] [[fine]] performance by Jeffery DeMunn), taking out his sexually frustrated anger on his victims-- mostly children. He is the objective. The real villain is the [[stifling]] bureaucratic Soviet system, drowning in its own corrupted incompetence. The frustration of an uncompromisingly dedicated man (Rea in his best role since "The Crying Game"), a facile pragmatist who's willing to use the system to his advantage (Sutherland always successful in this kind of role), a hesitant, frightened but determined psychiatrist (the incomparable Max Sydow), the bumbling, boopous bureaucrat of a prosecutor (brilliant Brit actor John Wood) and the quiet, supporting wife of the driven investigator (delightful supporter, Imelda Staunton). This is one damn fine film. Its darkness and bleakness are supported by the portrayal of a corrupt, incompetent system which works against success. The is no need to dip into gore-laden slice 'n dice sensationalism that has characterized so many recent films. Gore is present-- it's a ghastly story-- but it adds to the depicting of a pathologically twisted human being. The success of the story is precisely that: these were acts perpetrated by a person, a human like you or I. Where you and I choose to vent our frustration by reasonable means, Chikatilo took his anger out on the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our children. The superb premise of this story is made manifest by an equally superb cast of excellent actors. --sadly, I note that our Australian friend didn't like the speech and no doubt would have preferred to hear them speaking in Aussie dialect. Well, too bad. This fine film sure worked for me and everyone else I've talked with who has seen it. There are some [[glamorous]] [[remarks]] and [[sightings]] on this film. I was pleased to note the comparisons to Fritz Lang's "M" (forget the 50's abortive remake with lightweight David Wayne). The real villain is not the tortured murderer ([[unimaginably]] [[alright]] performance by Jeffery DeMunn), taking out his sexually frustrated anger on his victims-- mostly children. He is the objective. The real villain is the [[suffocating]] bureaucratic Soviet system, drowning in its own corrupted incompetence. The frustration of an uncompromisingly dedicated man (Rea in his best role since "The Crying Game"), a facile pragmatist who's willing to use the system to his advantage (Sutherland always successful in this kind of role), a hesitant, frightened but determined psychiatrist (the incomparable Max Sydow), the bumbling, boopous bureaucrat of a prosecutor (brilliant Brit actor John Wood) and the quiet, supporting wife of the driven investigator (delightful supporter, Imelda Staunton). This is one damn fine film. Its darkness and bleakness are supported by the portrayal of a corrupt, incompetent system which works against success. The is no need to dip into gore-laden slice 'n dice sensationalism that has characterized so many recent films. Gore is present-- it's a ghastly story-- but it adds to the depicting of a pathologically twisted human being. The success of the story is precisely that: these were acts perpetrated by a person, a human like you or I. Where you and I choose to vent our frustration by reasonable means, Chikatilo took his anger out on the most innocent and vulnerable of us, our children. The superb premise of this story is made manifest by an equally superb cast of excellent actors. --sadly, I note that our Australian friend didn't like the speech and no doubt would have preferred to hear them speaking in Aussie dialect. Well, too bad. This fine film sure worked for me and everyone else I've talked with who has seen it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3529 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This was a strange [[kind]] of [[film]] about a low-lifes in [[New]] York City and centering around a main character (the title name, played by Brad Pitt) who thinks he''s a Ricky Nelson-type musician, except he has no [[real]] talent.

It's kind of [[fun]] to watch until a profane tough [[New]] York City-type [[woman]] with [[horrible]] accent enters the [[picture]] and takes over. That [[ruined]] the film for me. It [[must]] have been Catherine Keener, who usually plays tough and garbage-mouthed [[women]].

The [[hairdo]] on [[Pitt]] - an exaggerated Pompadour - was fun to look at. I can picture Johnny Depp playing this role better. One last note: it odd to hear a film made in 1992 (other than Woody Allen's) with just mono sound. This was a strange [[genera]] of [[cinematography]] about a low-lifes in [[Nouveau]] York City and centering around a main character (the title name, played by Brad Pitt) who thinks he''s a Ricky Nelson-type musician, except he has no [[true]] talent.

It's kind of [[droll]] to watch until a profane tough [[Nuevo]] York City-type [[femmes]] with [[fearsome]] accent enters the [[photograph]] and takes over. That [[vandalized]] the film for me. It [[owes]] have been Catherine Keener, who usually plays tough and garbage-mouthed [[woman]].

The [[hair]] on [[Beit]] - an exaggerated Pompadour - was fun to look at. I can picture Johnny Depp playing this role better. One last note: it odd to hear a film made in 1992 (other than Woody Allen's) with just mono sound. --------------------------------------------- Result 3530 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Funny how many of the people who say this is far superior to Romero's version tend to be very young (judging by their other posts). What we have here is a slick, action packed, gory and "Whoopee" filled 2 hour MTV video. Frantic editing, pop-video camera work, "cool" music blah blah blah

Actually it ain't bad compared to other recent remakes (Chainsaw Massacre was a total disaster)... pretty good acting all round, totally [[predictable]] in the "who will die next" stakes and a total cash in on the Dawn Of The Dead name that will generate plenty of revenue alone by fans of the original who will go and see it out of curiosity...

Don't remakes of classics get on your nerves? Can they REALLY not come up with something original? Why remake Dawn Of The Dead? The things that made the original special (the middle segment kids think is so boring is supposed to be slow to show how when you get everything you ever wanted you still ain't happy) are totally missing. This is an action flick, plain and simple. The faster the better. If you are into action flicks (and as this, the 2004 version is well done) fair enough, but for anyone who likes a little substance to their films... get ready to sigh (again)...

Watch the cinemas over the next few years as we get The Godfather series remade by whoever the most fashionable Pop director is at the moment, and Star Wars remade, with all the kids saying how the new version is miles better cos the old version is slow and boring and holds a camera shot for more than 5 seconds...

Not bad, but in 10 years they will still be discussing the Romero version, not this pap Funny how many of the people who say this is far superior to Romero's version tend to be very young (judging by their other posts). What we have here is a slick, action packed, gory and "Whoopee" filled 2 hour MTV video. Frantic editing, pop-video camera work, "cool" music blah blah blah

Actually it ain't bad compared to other recent remakes (Chainsaw Massacre was a total disaster)... pretty good acting all round, totally [[foreseeable]] in the "who will die next" stakes and a total cash in on the Dawn Of The Dead name that will generate plenty of revenue alone by fans of the original who will go and see it out of curiosity...

Don't remakes of classics get on your nerves? Can they REALLY not come up with something original? Why remake Dawn Of The Dead? The things that made the original special (the middle segment kids think is so boring is supposed to be slow to show how when you get everything you ever wanted you still ain't happy) are totally missing. This is an action flick, plain and simple. The faster the better. If you are into action flicks (and as this, the 2004 version is well done) fair enough, but for anyone who likes a little substance to their films... get ready to sigh (again)...

Watch the cinemas over the next few years as we get The Godfather series remade by whoever the most fashionable Pop director is at the moment, and Star Wars remade, with all the kids saying how the new version is miles better cos the old version is slow and boring and holds a camera shot for more than 5 seconds...

Not bad, but in 10 years they will still be discussing the Romero version, not this pap --------------------------------------------- Result 3531 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] (r#97)

There is one [[good]] thing about this [[poor]] man's [[Pokémon]] (make of that what you will): the [[opening]] [[theme]]. It has to be the coolest [[theme]] [[music]] of any sloppily dubbed Japanese made-for-the-consumers-oops-I-mean-the-young-fans anime TV [[show]]. [[Unfortunately]] there was [[need]] to [[add]] some [[sort]] of [[show]] after the opening theme. And they just couldn't [[come]] up with something more interesting than people arguing loudly about whose [[cards]] are [[better]] than the others' [[cards]]. [[Freud]] [[would]] have a field day, [[unfortunately]] I can't imagine why any [[kids]] would [[want]] to sit through a [[show]] where [[dialogue]] [[written]] by a [[thousand]] monkeys in five minutes [[takes]] up 98% of the running [[time]].

"My Uber-Fantastical Doomsday [[Creature]] of Ultimate Doom will take your measly Pyramid [[Diamond]] [[Animal]] in a [[single]] [[strike]]! Can't you [[see]] that you have no [[chance]] of winning this [[battle]], you fool?! HAHAHAHHAHHAHA!"

"Oh [[yeah]]? Well watch this! I am about to use my [[Destruction]] Force [[Delta]] Times Pie [[Card]] which eradicates [[every]] [[single]] one of your Power Munchers and renders your Uber-Fantastical Doomsday [[Creature]] of Ultimate Doom's Destroy [[Beyond]] all Significance [[Attack]] [[useless]]! I bet you didn't [[see]] that one [[coming]]!"

[[Seriously]], that's all they ever do in this show, talk. [[Whereas]] in another crappy kids' [[show]] I [[used]] to watch, [[namely]] the commercial phenomenon Pokémon ([[every]] [[soccer]] mum's pet peeve), at least the [[monsters]] had the courtesy to duke it out [[every]] once in a while, "Yu-Gi-Oh" is just, in the quiet words of Roger Ebert's A [[Clockwork]] Orange [[review]], "[[plain]] talky and [[boring]]". Not to [[mention]] long-winded (I [[realize]] I'm being hypocritical here [[considering]] the [[sentence]] I just [[wrote]]).

This show goes on forever. I don't know if there's any plot, and the static [[monsters]] have [[none]] of the [[character]] of [[Pokémon]]. Even when not [[compared]] to my fave cartoon as a kid, this show sucks. It's [[unintentionally]] [[funny]], but not [[funny]] enough to be worth [[seeing]]. Bye bye, sleep tight, dream wet dreams. (r#97)

There is one [[alright]] thing about this [[poorest]] man's [[Pokemon]] (make of that what you will): the [[initiation]] [[topic]]. It has to be the coolest [[themes]] [[musical]] of any sloppily dubbed Japanese made-for-the-consumers-oops-I-mean-the-young-fans anime TV [[showings]]. [[Sadly]] there was [[needs]] to [[inserting]] some [[kinds]] of [[shows]] after the opening theme. And they just couldn't [[arrived]] up with something more interesting than people arguing loudly about whose [[carte]] are [[best]] than the others' [[card]]. [[Floyd]] [[ought]] have a field day, [[sadly]] I can't imagine why any [[kid]] would [[wanting]] to sit through a [[illustrates]] where [[dialog]] [[writes]] by a [[thousands]] monkeys in five minutes [[pick]] up 98% of the running [[moment]].

"My Uber-Fantastical Doomsday [[Monster]] of Ultimate Doom will take your measly Pyramid [[Diamonds]] [[Animals]] in a [[lonely]] [[hitting]]! Can't you [[seeing]] that you have no [[luck]] of winning this [[fight]], you fool?! HAHAHAHHAHHAHA!"

"Oh [[yes]]? Well watch this! I am about to use my [[Destroy]] Force [[Triangle]] Times Pie [[Cards]] which eradicates [[all]] [[exclusive]] one of your Power Munchers and renders your Uber-Fantastical Doomsday [[Monster]] of Ultimate Doom's Destroy [[Afterlife]] all Significance [[Attacking]] [[vain]]! I bet you didn't [[behold]] that one [[upcoming]]!"

[[Deeply]], that's all they ever do in this show, talk. [[Whilst]] in another crappy kids' [[shows]] I [[uses]] to watch, [[notably]] the commercial phenomenon Pokémon ([[all]] [[football]] mum's pet peeve), at least the [[monster]] had the courtesy to duke it out [[all]] once in a while, "Yu-Gi-Oh" is just, in the quiet words of Roger Ebert's A [[Triumphant]] Orange [[examination]], "[[plains]] talky and [[bored]]". Not to [[mentioning]] long-winded (I [[realise]] I'm being hypocritical here [[consider]] the [[sentencing]] I just [[written]]).

This show goes on forever. I don't know if there's any plot, and the static [[monster]] have [[nos]] of the [[characters]] of [[Pokemon]]. Even when not [[likened]] to my fave cartoon as a kid, this show sucks. It's [[involuntarily]] [[fun]], but not [[hilarious]] enough to be worth [[see]]. Bye bye, sleep tight, dream wet dreams. --------------------------------------------- Result 3532 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I saw "The Grudge" [[yesterday]], and wow... I was really scared, a [[good]] thing. I love horror-movies, and I really [[liked]] this one. There were so many 'surprise'-scenes (what's the English word?) that made you jump in your seat. [[Though]], too much screaming from the audience made it [[difficult]] not to laugh. I think the most scary scene was... on the bus, when the face flashes by on the window, or when Yoko's walking without her chin. The make-up is also VERY [[good]]. Sometimes you could really see it was there, but it was still adding a freaky look to the scene. The boy was very good indeed, so cute without make-up and so terribly scary with it on. The next time I hear a cracking noise I will probably feel pretty scared... I saw "The Grudge" [[tuesday]], and wow... I was really scared, a [[alright]] thing. I love horror-movies, and I really [[wished]] this one. There were so many 'surprise'-scenes (what's the English word?) that made you jump in your seat. [[Although]], too much screaming from the audience made it [[laborious]] not to laugh. I think the most scary scene was... on the bus, when the face flashes by on the window, or when Yoko's walking without her chin. The make-up is also VERY [[alright]]. Sometimes you could really see it was there, but it was still adding a freaky look to the scene. The boy was very good indeed, so cute without make-up and so terribly scary with it on. The next time I hear a cracking noise I will probably feel pretty scared... --------------------------------------------- Result 3533 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] I caught this [[stink]] [[bomb]] of a movie recently on a cable channel, and was reminded of how [[terrible]] I thought it was in 1980 when first released. Many reviewers out there aren't old enough to remember the enormous [[hype]] that surrounded this movie and the struggle between Stanley Kubrick and Steven King. The enormously [[popular]] novel had legions of fans eager to [[see]] a [[supposed]] "master" director put this multi-layered supernatural story on the screen. "Salem's Lot" had already been [[ruined]] in the late 1970s as a TV mini-series, directed by Tobe Hooper (he of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" fame) and was badly handled, turning the major villain of the book into a "Chiller Theatre" vampire with no real menace at all thus destroying the entire premise. Fans hoped that a director of Kubrick's stature would succeed where Hooper had failed. It didn't happen.

Sure, this movie looks great and has a terrific opening sequence but after those few accomplishments, it's all downhill. Jack Nicholson cannot be anything but Jack Nicholson. He's always crazy and didn't bring anything to his role here. I don't care that many reviewers here think he's all that in this clinker, the "Here's Johnny!" bit notwithstanding...he's just awful in this movie. So is everyone else, for that matter. Scatman Crothers' character, Dick Halloran, was essential to the plot of the book, yet Kubrick kills him off in one of the lamest "shock" sequences ever put on film. I remember the audience in the theater I saw this at booing repeatedly during the last 45 minutes of this wretched flick, those that stayed that is...many left. King's books really never translate well to film since so much of the narratives occur internally to his characters, and often metaphysically. Kubrick jettisoned the tension between the living and the dead in favor of style here and the resulting mess ends so far from the original material that we ultimately don't really care what happens to whom.

This movie still stinks and why so many think it's a horror masterpiece is beyond me. I caught this [[smell]] [[bombs]] of a movie recently on a cable channel, and was reminded of how [[scary]] I thought it was in 1980 when first released. Many reviewers out there aren't old enough to remember the enormous [[fanfare]] that surrounded this movie and the struggle between Stanley Kubrick and Steven King. The enormously [[fashionable]] novel had legions of fans eager to [[behold]] a [[suspected]] "master" director put this multi-layered supernatural story on the screen. "Salem's Lot" had already been [[destroys]] in the late 1970s as a TV mini-series, directed by Tobe Hooper (he of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" fame) and was badly handled, turning the major villain of the book into a "Chiller Theatre" vampire with no real menace at all thus destroying the entire premise. Fans hoped that a director of Kubrick's stature would succeed where Hooper had failed. It didn't happen.

Sure, this movie looks great and has a terrific opening sequence but after those few accomplishments, it's all downhill. Jack Nicholson cannot be anything but Jack Nicholson. He's always crazy and didn't bring anything to his role here. I don't care that many reviewers here think he's all that in this clinker, the "Here's Johnny!" bit notwithstanding...he's just awful in this movie. So is everyone else, for that matter. Scatman Crothers' character, Dick Halloran, was essential to the plot of the book, yet Kubrick kills him off in one of the lamest "shock" sequences ever put on film. I remember the audience in the theater I saw this at booing repeatedly during the last 45 minutes of this wretched flick, those that stayed that is...many left. King's books really never translate well to film since so much of the narratives occur internally to his characters, and often metaphysically. Kubrick jettisoned the tension between the living and the dead in favor of style here and the resulting mess ends so far from the original material that we ultimately don't really care what happens to whom.

This movie still stinks and why so many think it's a horror masterpiece is beyond me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3534 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] After just 15 minutes into this [[film]], I [[began]] to miss Zhang Yimou's [[earlier]], more [[weighty]] [[films]] that looked at the [[politics]] and [[society]] of China from [[unique]] perspectives. His turn to martial [[arts]] [[films]] was a [[serious]] misstep in my humble opinion. Hero was his [[worst]] [[film]] since [[Operation]] [[Cougar]], with a [[needlessly]] complex story and acting more wooden than that found in a John Agar film. Shi Mian Mai Fu is no [[different]]. As an [[American]] who has been [[studying]] Chinese films for a few [[years]] now (and [[understands]] and can [[speak]] some Mandarin), I'm sure my opinion is different from many others as I'm [[coming]] from a different background. SMMF, like Hero, is not really a traditional a kung fu film, and it's certainly not a wuxia pian film. There are no sword & [[sorcery]] or [[chivalry]] elements here. This is a completely different vehicle than infinitely more watchable films such as A Chinese Ghost Story (all 3), The Butterfly Murders, Green Snake, et al. While those all featured charismatic leads who looked like they were actually enjoying what they do, SMMF features bland, and sometimes [[laughable]], dialogue combined with cardboard acting. Zhang Ziyi plays a blind person about as well as Ben Affleck. There's an air of superiority with this film that's really quite [[insulting]]. It takes itself so seriously, it just becomes a huge joke by the end. All the actors look as though this is the most important piece of celluloid in history, they destroy any chance of actually conveying emotions, and the complete humorlessness of it really makes you wonder if Zhang Yimou was making a film per se, or simply a showcase (i.e. an "ego booster") for Zhang Ziyi. The camera is literally making out with her face and she gets sexually assaulted not once but twice in the film. Her acting range really hasn't extended past her ability to play a naive "w"itch. She's so concentrated on her acting, she comes across as cold and lifeless, as though she's reading her lines from a notecard. It's so funny to hear American critics and film people (like the completely clueless Quentin Tarantino) call this film a masterpiece. I guess if they see a bunch of Asian actors on screen looking really important while flying through a bamboo forest, they're tricked into thinking it's brilliant film-making. Ching Siu Tung's choreography, while still retaining his trademark style, editing, and postures, lacks the vitality and originality of his earlier films like A Chinese Ghost Story, Dragon Inn, and Duel to the Death. Sadly to say, the wirework in this film is really subpar, and if there's subpar/obvious wirework, then you probably shouldn't have filmed it at high speed. The same goes for the special effects which have a distinct B-movie feel to them. Beans, daggers, bowls, arrows, swords, and other random objects fly through the air (after being thrown) with no regard for logic, turning, climbing, and banking as though there's a little pilot inside. I know that logic doesn't really hold a place in stylized Chinese martial arts films, but if you don't want to induce a mass amount of giggling from your audience, then you should probably work on your compositing a bit more. Mass melodrama, unintentionally funny dramatic moments, boring fight scenes, really uninspired plot twists are what await you with Shi Mian Mai Fu. It's obvious that Zhang Yimou is no longer making movies for Chinese audiences. This is meant to crack into the Western market just as CTHD did. After watching Hero and SMMF, I've come to the conclusion that if Zhang Yimou wants to make Hollywood films, he's definitely off to the right start. SMMF is basically The Phantom Menace of Chinese martial arts films. And I thought Hero was bad. After just 15 minutes into this [[cinematography]], I [[start]] to miss Zhang Yimou's [[beforehand]], more [[heavy]] [[film]] that looked at the [[policy]] and [[societal]] of China from [[singular]] perspectives. His turn to martial [[arte]] [[cinema]] was a [[grave]] misstep in my humble opinion. Hero was his [[meanest]] [[cinematography]] since [[Operational]] [[Panther]], with a [[senselessly]] complex story and acting more wooden than that found in a John Agar film. Shi Mian Mai Fu is no [[several]]. As an [[Americana]] who has been [[examining]] Chinese films for a few [[olds]] now (and [[comprises]] and can [[talking]] some Mandarin), I'm sure my opinion is different from many others as I'm [[upcoming]] from a different background. SMMF, like Hero, is not really a traditional a kung fu film, and it's certainly not a wuxia pian film. There are no sword & [[magic]] or [[knights]] elements here. This is a completely different vehicle than infinitely more watchable films such as A Chinese Ghost Story (all 3), The Butterfly Murders, Green Snake, et al. While those all featured charismatic leads who looked like they were actually enjoying what they do, SMMF features bland, and sometimes [[absurd]], dialogue combined with cardboard acting. Zhang Ziyi plays a blind person about as well as Ben Affleck. There's an air of superiority with this film that's really quite [[demeaning]]. It takes itself so seriously, it just becomes a huge joke by the end. All the actors look as though this is the most important piece of celluloid in history, they destroy any chance of actually conveying emotions, and the complete humorlessness of it really makes you wonder if Zhang Yimou was making a film per se, or simply a showcase (i.e. an "ego booster") for Zhang Ziyi. The camera is literally making out with her face and she gets sexually assaulted not once but twice in the film. Her acting range really hasn't extended past her ability to play a naive "w"itch. She's so concentrated on her acting, she comes across as cold and lifeless, as though she's reading her lines from a notecard. It's so funny to hear American critics and film people (like the completely clueless Quentin Tarantino) call this film a masterpiece. I guess if they see a bunch of Asian actors on screen looking really important while flying through a bamboo forest, they're tricked into thinking it's brilliant film-making. Ching Siu Tung's choreography, while still retaining his trademark style, editing, and postures, lacks the vitality and originality of his earlier films like A Chinese Ghost Story, Dragon Inn, and Duel to the Death. Sadly to say, the wirework in this film is really subpar, and if there's subpar/obvious wirework, then you probably shouldn't have filmed it at high speed. The same goes for the special effects which have a distinct B-movie feel to them. Beans, daggers, bowls, arrows, swords, and other random objects fly through the air (after being thrown) with no regard for logic, turning, climbing, and banking as though there's a little pilot inside. I know that logic doesn't really hold a place in stylized Chinese martial arts films, but if you don't want to induce a mass amount of giggling from your audience, then you should probably work on your compositing a bit more. Mass melodrama, unintentionally funny dramatic moments, boring fight scenes, really uninspired plot twists are what await you with Shi Mian Mai Fu. It's obvious that Zhang Yimou is no longer making movies for Chinese audiences. This is meant to crack into the Western market just as CTHD did. After watching Hero and SMMF, I've come to the conclusion that if Zhang Yimou wants to make Hollywood films, he's definitely off to the right start. SMMF is basically The Phantom Menace of Chinese martial arts films. And I thought Hero was bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 3535 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I am a [[big]] [[fan]] of Ludlum's work, and of the Covert-one [[books]], and I had often [[thought]] how incredible they would be made into a film. [[Imagine]] my [[excitement]], then, on learning that such a movie actually [[existed]]! The 'Hades Factor' being the first in the series [[seemed]] an [[obvious]] place to start.

From the outset the [[film]] was [[disappointing]]. Simple elements from the film such as Griffin's first meeting with Smith are needlessly different from the book, and [[much]] less exhilarating. Several characters are poorly cast, too. For starters Dorff is woeful as Smith. Not a bad actor, just an incredibly bad choice as he is far too soft, and fails to exhibit many of the features that are definitive of John Smith.

Re-naming, re-assignment and even omission of certain characters further degrades this film. For example the removal of Victor Tremont and the entire back-story of the virus, including the involvement of VAXHAM makes the entire point to the film somewhat hazy. Marty Zellerbach is a very large part of the book, and in the seat he takes vary much a back seat (not to mention that the film character shares nothing in common with the character in the book) is another big mistake.

Rachel Russel is presumably supposed to be Randi Russel from the book. Not only is she supposed to be the sister of Sophie Amsden (should be called Sophia Russel) but she is also supposed to work from the CIA, NOT "Covert-one". Which brings me to my final point, and I think one of the most important. COVERT-ONE doesn't even exist at this point! Not until the second book of the series is Covert-One devised by the president as a preventative measure against further biological terrorism.

To be honest I could go on all day. In short - if you like the books and want to see a good adaptation, I'm afraid you'll be bitterly disappointed. Even as an action movie it is thoroughly average, mainly due to very lack-luster editing and poor effects. The bumbled story line and dull-as-ditch-water script are the final nails in the very cheap coffin of this film. I am a [[mammoth]] [[breather]] of Ludlum's work, and of the Covert-one [[ledger]], and I had often [[thinking]] how incredible they would be made into a film. [[Reckon]] my [[exhilaration]], then, on learning that such a movie actually [[prevailed]]! The 'Hades Factor' being the first in the series [[appeared]] an [[observable]] place to start.

From the outset the [[kino]] was [[depressing]]. Simple elements from the film such as Griffin's first meeting with Smith are needlessly different from the book, and [[very]] less exhilarating. Several characters are poorly cast, too. For starters Dorff is woeful as Smith. Not a bad actor, just an incredibly bad choice as he is far too soft, and fails to exhibit many of the features that are definitive of John Smith.

Re-naming, re-assignment and even omission of certain characters further degrades this film. For example the removal of Victor Tremont and the entire back-story of the virus, including the involvement of VAXHAM makes the entire point to the film somewhat hazy. Marty Zellerbach is a very large part of the book, and in the seat he takes vary much a back seat (not to mention that the film character shares nothing in common with the character in the book) is another big mistake.

Rachel Russel is presumably supposed to be Randi Russel from the book. Not only is she supposed to be the sister of Sophie Amsden (should be called Sophia Russel) but she is also supposed to work from the CIA, NOT "Covert-one". Which brings me to my final point, and I think one of the most important. COVERT-ONE doesn't even exist at this point! Not until the second book of the series is Covert-One devised by the president as a preventative measure against further biological terrorism.

To be honest I could go on all day. In short - if you like the books and want to see a good adaptation, I'm afraid you'll be bitterly disappointed. Even as an action movie it is thoroughly average, mainly due to very lack-luster editing and poor effects. The bumbled story line and dull-as-ditch-water script are the final nails in the very cheap coffin of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3536 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] [[Horrible]] [[waste]] of [[time]] - [[bad]] acting, plot, directing. This is the most [[boring]] movie EVER! There are [[bad]] [[movies]] that are [[fun]] ([[Freddy]] vs. Jason), and there are [[bad]] [[movies]] that are HORRIBLE. This one fits into the [[latter]]. Bottom Line - don't waste your [[time]]. [[Scary]] [[wastes]] of [[period]] - [[negative]] acting, plot, directing. This is the most [[dreary]] movie EVER! There are [[naughty]] [[filmmaking]] that are [[droll]] ([[Freddie]] vs. Jason), and there are [[mala]] [[theater]] that are HORRIBLE. This one fits into the [[latest]]. Bottom Line - don't waste your [[times]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3537 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] The only show I have watched since 90210! Why did they discontinue it? It was the only show that captured the essence of Hawaii and made you feel like you are a part of it all! The least they should do is release it on DVD!

I checked out similar shows, but nothing has come close. The cast had [[incredible]] chemistry and I looked forward to each episode with much anticipation.

They made a big mistake by pulling that show. If anyone has any info regarding where I can obtain a DVD of North Shore please post a few lines here. Thanks! Aloha! The only show I have watched since 90210! Why did they discontinue it? It was the only show that captured the essence of Hawaii and made you feel like you are a part of it all! The least they should do is release it on DVD!

I checked out similar shows, but nothing has come close. The cast had [[unimaginable]] chemistry and I looked forward to each episode with much anticipation.

They made a big mistake by pulling that show. If anyone has any info regarding where I can obtain a DVD of North Shore please post a few lines here. Thanks! Aloha! --------------------------------------------- Result 3538 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] This appalling film somehow saw the light of day in 1988. It looks and sounds as if it had been produced 20 or 30 years earlier, and features some of the [[worst]] songs ever included in a major motion picture. I weep for the parents and children who paid top dollar to see this. This appalling film somehow saw the light of day in 1988. It looks and sounds as if it had been produced 20 or 30 years earlier, and features some of the [[gravest]] songs ever included in a major motion picture. I weep for the parents and children who paid top dollar to see this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3539 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] During the early 1980's, Kurt [[Thomas]] was something of a [[hero]] in the United States. Inevitably, men in his position get offered film [[roles]] that exist solely to capitalize on that. I have no idea what Thomas was paid to make this film, but I [[would]] have to be paid a big [[heap]] of [[money]] to [[agree]] to [[make]] a national [[fool]] of myself in a motion [[picture]]. The film is obviously derived from "Enter The Dragon," as are most martial [[arts]] pictures. Only [[instead]] of a real martial art, they concoct an [[absurd]] new martial [[art]], accurately described by one critic as "a cross between Kung Fu and break dancing." A gymnast (Thomas, of course) is hired to rescue some lady from an impenetrable fortress, yet every room has a prop that is exactly what Thomas needs to kick the assistant baddies. Of course, he fights his way to the lead villain, and of course they have a fancy-dancy fight, with an ending that will surprise only those who have never seen a marshal arts film. There are touches which nostalgic types will like, particularly the mullet haircuts of Thomas and many of the male co-stars have. But the only reason to watch this film is if you have a grudge against Kurt Thomas, who now wishes he had never set foot on the film set. During the early 1980's, Kurt [[Tomas]] was something of a [[heroin]] in the United States. Inevitably, men in his position get offered film [[functions]] that exist solely to capitalize on that. I have no idea what Thomas was paid to make this film, but I [[could]] have to be paid a big [[stack]] of [[cash]] to [[concur]] to [[deliver]] a national [[butthead]] of myself in a motion [[imagery]]. The film is obviously derived from "Enter The Dragon," as are most martial [[arte]] pictures. Only [[conversely]] of a real martial art, they concoct an [[nutty]] new martial [[artistry]], accurately described by one critic as "a cross between Kung Fu and break dancing." A gymnast (Thomas, of course) is hired to rescue some lady from an impenetrable fortress, yet every room has a prop that is exactly what Thomas needs to kick the assistant baddies. Of course, he fights his way to the lead villain, and of course they have a fancy-dancy fight, with an ending that will surprise only those who have never seen a marshal arts film. There are touches which nostalgic types will like, particularly the mullet haircuts of Thomas and many of the male co-stars have. But the only reason to watch this film is if you have a grudge against Kurt Thomas, who now wishes he had never set foot on the film set. --------------------------------------------- Result 3540 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] back in my high school days in Salina Kansas, they filmed something called "The Brave Young Men Of Weinberg" locally, and the film crews were rather prominent for weeks. eventually, we learned that the film was "Up The Academy", and was a bit ummm, "lower brow" than we had been led to believe.

I had to [[see]] it, since I was there, and the local audiences seemed less than pleased at the showing. I was 17, and thought it was a rather artless attempt at a post "Animal house" type of [[comedy]], right down to the fart jokes.

Watched it many times since, and my opinion has mellowed a bit. it's dumb, but at times it catches a bit of the "mad" magazine humor, at least as well as most "Mad TV". Ron Liebman might hate it, but he is nearly perfect, and unforgettable. For me, my favorite moment would have been a brief scene on Santa Fe avenue, where I had parked my car, while I was buying some guitar strings. Too bad my Pinto's brief appearance, usually seems to get cut for TV. haven't seen the new DVD, but if my old pinto is visible, they've got a sale. back in my high school days in Salina Kansas, they filmed something called "The Brave Young Men Of Weinberg" locally, and the film crews were rather prominent for weeks. eventually, we learned that the film was "Up The Academy", and was a bit ummm, "lower brow" than we had been led to believe.

I had to [[seeing]] it, since I was there, and the local audiences seemed less than pleased at the showing. I was 17, and thought it was a rather artless attempt at a post "Animal house" type of [[travesty]], right down to the fart jokes.

Watched it many times since, and my opinion has mellowed a bit. it's dumb, but at times it catches a bit of the "mad" magazine humor, at least as well as most "Mad TV". Ron Liebman might hate it, but he is nearly perfect, and unforgettable. For me, my favorite moment would have been a brief scene on Santa Fe avenue, where I had parked my car, while I was buying some guitar strings. Too bad my Pinto's brief appearance, usually seems to get cut for TV. haven't seen the new DVD, but if my old pinto is visible, they've got a sale. --------------------------------------------- Result 3541 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Imagine the worst skits from Saturday Night Live and Mad TV in one 90 minute movie. Now, imagine that all the humor in those bad skits is removed and replaced with stupidity. Now imagine something 50 times worse.

Got that?

OK, now go see The Underground Comedy Movie. That vision you just had will [[seem]] like the funniest [[thing]] ever. UCM is the single [[worst]] movie I've ever seen. There were a few cheap [[laughs]]...very few. But it was lame. Even if the intent of the movie was to be lame, it was too lame to be funny.

The only reason I'm not angry for wasting my time watching this was someone else I know bought it. He wasted his money. Vince Offer hasn't written or directed anything else and it's no surprise why. Imagine the worst skits from Saturday Night Live and Mad TV in one 90 minute movie. Now, imagine that all the humor in those bad skits is removed and replaced with stupidity. Now imagine something 50 times worse.

Got that?

OK, now go see The Underground Comedy Movie. That vision you just had will [[appears]] like the funniest [[stuff]] ever. UCM is the single [[meanest]] movie I've ever seen. There were a few cheap [[laughing]]...very few. But it was lame. Even if the intent of the movie was to be lame, it was too lame to be funny.

The only reason I'm not angry for wasting my time watching this was someone else I know bought it. He wasted his money. Vince Offer hasn't written or directed anything else and it's no surprise why. --------------------------------------------- Result 3542 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] I [[loved]] it so much that I bought the DVD and the novel at the same time. The chemistry between the [[actors]] ([[including]] [[little]] Arthur) is amazing and thrilling.

It could have used a bit more screen time for the [[yummy]] Frederick Lawrence (played by James Purefoy). And Gilbert Markham was [[amazingly]] "on it" from the very start of the [[movie]].

The one who most [[thrilled]] me via surprising shock and awe and wonder was Rupert [[Graves]] as Arthur Huntingdon. I adore him in Forsyte Saga, and all else I've seen him in. But he outdoes himself here as Arthur. In my wildest dreams I could not have pictured him playing a demented psycho such as Arthur Huntingdon. But he does. And I [[love]] it. And I love him. I [[worshipped]] it so much that I bought the DVD and the novel at the same time. The chemistry between the [[actresses]] ([[include]] [[tiny]] Arthur) is amazing and thrilling.

It could have used a bit more screen time for the [[succulent]] Frederick Lawrence (played by James Purefoy). And Gilbert Markham was [[unimaginably]] "on it" from the very start of the [[flick]].

The one who most [[gratified]] me via surprising shock and awe and wonder was Rupert [[Grave]] as Arthur Huntingdon. I adore him in Forsyte Saga, and all else I've seen him in. But he outdoes himself here as Arthur. In my wildest dreams I could not have pictured him playing a demented psycho such as Arthur Huntingdon. But he does. And I [[adores]] it. And I love him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3543 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[If]] the screenwriter and [[director]] intended to [[open]] hearts with the [[movie]] as the [[musician]] [[wanted]] to do with his [[music]], they succeeded with me. [[Commonplace]] human [[situations]] [[became]] [[original]], personal and immediate so that I personally felt [[touched]] by each situation. I believe I would credit the power of [[music]] combined with the point of [[view]] of the [[person]] [[writing]] the [[movie]]. Without [[spoiling]], I can say that I was very [[moved]] by the movie's approach to living. Haven't actually [[cried]] out of-what- [[joy]]? [[empathy]]? just [[deep]] emotion? in a very [[long]] [[time]]. I would love to [[find]] a [[way]] to show it to others. [[Saw]] it at [[Seattle]] International [[Film]] [[Festival]]. [[Unless]] the screenwriter and [[superintendent]] intended to [[opened]] hearts with the [[filmmaking]] as the [[songwriter]] [[desired]] to do with his [[musica]], they succeeded with me. [[Mundane]] human [[instances]] [[came]] [[preliminary]], personal and immediate so that I personally felt [[poked]] by each situation. I believe I would credit the power of [[musicians]] combined with the point of [[opinion]] of the [[anybody]] [[literary]] the [[cinematic]]. Without [[ruining]], I can say that I was very [[shifted]] by the movie's approach to living. Haven't actually [[mourned]] out of-what- [[pleasure]]? [[sympathy]]? just [[deepest]] emotion? in a very [[lange]] [[moment]]. I would love to [[unearthed]] a [[manner]] to show it to others. [[Sawthe]] it at [[Portland]] International [[Flick]] [[Celebratory]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3544 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] [[Chances]] Are [[uses]] that [[marvelous]] song by the same [[name]] throughout the film. Robert Downey, Jr. is [[excellent]] in this [[movie]]. His extra large eyes and [[wonderfully]] variable facial [[expressions]] are part of expertise in acting as [[different]] people in [[diverse]] films. Compare Robert Downey, Jr. in [[Chaplin]]. You will [[enjoy]] Chances Are. I did. [[Likelihood]] Are [[utilizing]] that [[awesome]] song by the same [[denomination]] throughout the film. Robert Downey, Jr. is [[glamorous]] in this [[movies]]. His extra large eyes and [[staggeringly]] variable facial [[expression]] are part of expertise in acting as [[diversified]] people in [[several]] films. Compare Robert Downey, Jr. in [[Chapin]]. You will [[enjoys]] Chances Are. I did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3545 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] The people who are praising this film are the real disappointments -- I am hoping at least that Leonard will see some good $$ out of this, as his life savings were embezzled away by a manager a couple of years ago and he's over 70 now. But this film is [[simply]] [[terrible]]. At the beginning Leonard himself says he is not sentimental about his past, and then for the next hour and a half the film emphasizes all the [[worst]] sentimental elements of Leonard's songs. It is so bloody PRECIOUS with its endless close-ups of over emoting singers. Cohen's interview is all done in lo-fi video closeups and I so wanted to see a medium or a long shot of his whole body! I couldn't care less about the comments of the performers, especially those overblown ego boys Edge and Bono. None of the performers in this film have done even one song as good as Leonard's own music and if you are thinking about seeing this and you have any doubts at all, heed them. This would be an acceptable PBS special, maybe, for a one time showing. But I will even hesitate at getting a DVD of this. When the film finally shows Leonard semi-performing "Tower of Song" it's ruined by Bono taking a verse. Even the occasional good performances (Antony, Rufus' first number, Martha's The Traitor) are spoiled by the context of the rest of this turgid blabla. Forget this one, and go buy Leonard's most recent album if you want to pay tribute to him. The people who are praising this film are the real disappointments -- I am hoping at least that Leonard will see some good $$ out of this, as his life savings were embezzled away by a manager a couple of years ago and he's over 70 now. But this film is [[straightforward]] [[scary]]. At the beginning Leonard himself says he is not sentimental about his past, and then for the next hour and a half the film emphasizes all the [[hardest]] sentimental elements of Leonard's songs. It is so bloody PRECIOUS with its endless close-ups of over emoting singers. Cohen's interview is all done in lo-fi video closeups and I so wanted to see a medium or a long shot of his whole body! I couldn't care less about the comments of the performers, especially those overblown ego boys Edge and Bono. None of the performers in this film have done even one song as good as Leonard's own music and if you are thinking about seeing this and you have any doubts at all, heed them. This would be an acceptable PBS special, maybe, for a one time showing. But I will even hesitate at getting a DVD of this. When the film finally shows Leonard semi-performing "Tower of Song" it's ruined by Bono taking a verse. Even the occasional good performances (Antony, Rufus' first number, Martha's The Traitor) are spoiled by the context of the rest of this turgid blabla. Forget this one, and go buy Leonard's most recent album if you want to pay tribute to him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3546 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] Without question, the [[worst]] ELVIS film ever made. The movie portrays all Indians as drunk, stupid, and lazy. Watch ELVIS's skin change color throughout the film. Without question, the [[gravest]] ELVIS film ever made. The movie portrays all Indians as drunk, stupid, and lazy. Watch ELVIS's skin change color throughout the film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3547 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] ** possible [[spoilers]] **

I like this film and have no [[problem]] staying awake for it. It reminds me of me at 20, except this is [[even]] better. Like Veronica says, two chicks at one [[time]]. It [[brings]] out the horniness in me, the casual [[conversation]], these two [[real]] life chicks, [[rather]] than [[hookers]], teasing us [[every]] [[step]] of the [[way]]. I [[get]] into the [[conversations]] too. [[Even]] if they are utterly b.s. at [[times]], so what? [[Every]] chick, just about, that I've ever [[talked]] to and is high on herself is [[usually]] full of the same unreasoned rambling [[gratuitous]] self-centered b.s. philosophy. It's just a bunch of [[nonsense]], and about as [[sensible]] as that other b.s. philosophy [[chicks]] are [[often]] into: astrological [[charts]]. The only [[deal]] with this [[movie]] is the [[guy]] is [[almost]] as feminine as the [[women]], he's into the same b.s. and moodiness. The brunette chick is [[actually]] the most [[masculine]] [[person]] there.

I [[think]] it's kind of [[funny]] that the brunette chick [[gets]] so [[obviously]] turned on by Veronica. She'd love to [[pull]] the little blonde away from Alexander, but Veronica plays her all the way. She's brilliant. She gets the brunette thinking there's something up between them, and then she steals the boy-child/[[man]], which is only [[appropriate]] [[since]] they [[appear]] to be from the same age group. The brunette knows she's been had by the [[end]], when she's [[dropping]] her face into the palms of her hands while Marlene Deitrich [[sings]] in the background that, paraphrasing, there are a million [[couples]] in Paris [[tonight]], but I only have this refrain.

But do they [[get]] married in the [[end]], [[Alex]] and Veronica? [[Mmmm]]? I can only [[imagine]] a super-tumultuous [[relationship]] ending in a pre-marriage [[breakup]]. They are too [[selfish]] to be [[anything]] to each other than stepping stones.

I like the [[film]] [[though]]. It kept me entertained, it's [[got]] a [[nice]] look, and it's [[sexy]]. ** possible [[troublemakers]] **

I like this film and have no [[issues]] staying awake for it. It reminds me of me at 20, except this is [[yet]] better. Like Veronica says, two chicks at one [[moment]]. It [[poses]] out the horniness in me, the casual [[debating]], these two [[actual]] life chicks, [[somewhat]] than [[prostitutes]], teasing us [[any]] [[stride]] of the [[manner]]. I [[obtain]] into the [[dialogue]] too. [[Yet]] if they are utterly b.s. at [[moments]], so what? [[Entire]] chick, just about, that I've ever [[spoke]] to and is high on herself is [[typically]] full of the same unreasoned rambling [[baseless]] self-centered b.s. philosophy. It's just a bunch of [[claptrap]], and about as [[rational]] as that other b.s. philosophy [[chickens]] are [[usually]] into: astrological [[erections]]. The only [[addressing]] with this [[flick]] is the [[dude]] is [[roughly]] as feminine as the [[wife]], he's into the same b.s. and moodiness. The brunette chick is [[genuinely]] the most [[male]] [[persons]] there.

I [[thinks]] it's kind of [[fun]] that the brunette chick [[receives]] so [[apparently]] turned on by Veronica. She'd love to [[pulling]] the little blonde away from Alexander, but Veronica plays her all the way. She's brilliant. She gets the brunette thinking there's something up between them, and then she steals the boy-child/[[dude]], which is only [[adequate]] [[because]] they [[appearing]] to be from the same age group. The brunette knows she's been had by the [[termination]], when she's [[dipping]] her face into the palms of her hands while Marlene Deitrich [[sing]] in the background that, paraphrasing, there are a million [[couple]] in Paris [[monday]], but I only have this refrain.

But do they [[obtain]] married in the [[termination]], [[Allie]] and Veronica? [[Mmmmm]]? I can only [[imagining]] a super-tumultuous [[ties]] ending in a pre-marriage [[disintegration]]. They are too [[egoistic]] to be [[nothing]] to each other than stepping stones.

I like the [[movies]] [[if]]. It kept me entertained, it's [[ai]] a [[handsome]] look, and it's [[sexier]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3548 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] OK we all [[love]] the daisy [[dukes]], but what is up with this cast. [[Lets]] [[start]], Jessica Simpson as Daisy, there is not one [[thing]] [[country]] about this girl and [[Daisy]] was not ditzy! Uncle Jesse was [[probably]] the closest one to resemble the original. No offense to Burt, but I never [[noticed]] Boss [[HOg]] being so tall. That was [[part]] of the humor of Boss Hog was his [[size]]. Did they [[even]] [[try]] [[someone]] like Danny Devito?!? OK , now [[get]] this they cast Jessica Simpson did [[anyone]] take a look at her [[husband]]? He matches [[Luke]] [[Duke]] to a tee!!!!!! Cleary these producers did not look at the appearance of the old cast members. The screen t's were never [[present]] on the dukes!! This made the movie a turn off from the beginning. I give this a HUGE thumbs down. OK we all [[iike]] the daisy [[fists]], but what is up with this cast. [[Enables]] [[launches]], Jessica Simpson as Daisy, there is not one [[stuff]] [[countries]] about this girl and [[Margarita]] was not ditzy! Uncle Jesse was [[indubitably]] the closest one to resemble the original. No offense to Burt, but I never [[seen]] Boss [[pigs]] being so tall. That was [[party]] of the humor of Boss Hog was his [[calibre]]. Did they [[yet]] [[tried]] [[anyone]] like Danny Devito?!? OK , now [[got]] this they cast Jessica Simpson did [[person]] take a look at her [[hubby]]? He matches [[Matty]] [[Duca]] to a tee!!!!!! Cleary these producers did not look at the appearance of the old cast members. The screen t's were never [[presenting]] on the dukes!! This made the movie a turn off from the beginning. I give this a HUGE thumbs down. --------------------------------------------- Result 3549 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Don't get me wrong. "GoldenEye" was revolutionary and is definitely the [[best]] FPS game to be based on the 007 franchise. But the series had [[fallen]] into a FPS rut. [[Enter]] "[[Everything]] or Nothing", which puts [[Bond]] in third-person. When I wrote my [[earlier]] review for "From Russia With Love", I had finished FRWL and just started EON and [[judged]] EON a [[bit]] harshly. Even though FRWL definitely has the edge in nostalgia and capturing the essence of the movie franchise, EON definitely is [[superior]] in terms of in-depth controls and gameplay variety. Missions range from standard running-and-gunning to driving an SUV, driving an Aston Martin, driving a limousine that is wired to explode, commandeering two different types of tanks a la "GoldenEye", riding a motorcycle, flying a helicopter, repelling down a shaft guarded by laser tripwires, and free falling after a plummeting damsel. Sure, vehicle controls are a little clumsy, but the issue here is the variety.

As movie adaptations, "GoldenEye" and FRWL were all that I could have hoped for. But EON's original storyline adds to the feeling of controlling a James Bond adventure. This is helped by the impressive cast list of Willem DeFoe, Shannon Elizabeth, Heidi Klum, and Misaki Ito. Judi Dench and John Cleese reprise their movie roles of M and Q, respectively, and Pierce Brosnan, while no Sean Connery, adds credibility to the game's proceedings. All characters resemble the stars, with the disappointing exception of Heidi Klum, who's in-game model doesn't do the real-life model justice. Mya's theme song is on par with at least some of the big screen Bond title tunes.

The game also plays tribute to some of the older Bond movies. Willem DeFoe's character is a former colleague of Christopher Walken's baddie from "A View to a Kill". Richard Kiel appears as Jaws, the hulking henchman from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker" in three fight scenes, the first and best of which proceeds in the same fashion a fight in the movies would have.

Single-player gameplay mainly consists of standard on-foot missions as Bond. Like Bond, you will be able to choose whether to use stealth or go out with guns blazing. The game provides plenty of opportunities to utilize stealth, with plenty of wall and object cover. Unfortunately, unlike FRWL, only one button in EON controls both crouching and wall clinging, so Bond may end up crouching low when he's supposed to be peeking around a corner, and vice-versa. The game also allows players to go into "Bond reflex" mode. While you browse your inventory, everything around you will go into super slo-mo, allowing you to analyze objects around you that can be interacted with. While this takes some getting used to, eventually this mode will allow you to perform many spectacular "Bond moments", such as shooting down a chandelier to take out four goons underneath, and greatly add to the Bond movie feeling.

There are 3 available difficulty levels: Operative, Agent, and Double Oh. On Operative, you can breeze through in a few hours. On Agent, a few weeks. On Double Oh, a few months. The difficulty level can be changed for each individual mission. Garnering high scores on missions will unlock gold and platinum awards and effect features such as vehicle upgrades and the skimpy outfits the Bond girls wear. Some missions can be extremely frustrating due to a scarcity of checkpoints, but when all is said and done, no mission is any longer than a single action scene in a Bond movie.

Multi-player, unfortunately, is not as thrilling. "GoldenEye" still has the best multi-player mode of any Bond game. EON's main multi-player is a co-op campaign mode that puts players in charge of lesser MI6 agents on a less important mission than Bond's. A more standard third-person death match can be unlocked from this mode. But the single-player mode is the most complete Bond experience to date. The ending, as with most Bond games, is anticlimactic. While the final mission is one of the most aggravating of the game, the final confrontation with the villain is disappointing. Also, levels that require Bond to be speedy become largely a matter of trial and error. Still, for any serious Bond fan, not playing this game is tantamount to missing one of the Bond films. Don't get me wrong. "GoldenEye" was revolutionary and is definitely the [[optimum]] FPS game to be based on the 007 franchise. But the series had [[shrunk]] into a FPS rut. [[Intro]] "[[Eveything]] or Nothing", which puts [[Bonding]] in third-person. When I wrote my [[formerly]] review for "From Russia With Love", I had finished FRWL and just started EON and [[deemed]] EON a [[bite]] harshly. Even though FRWL definitely has the edge in nostalgia and capturing the essence of the movie franchise, EON definitely is [[upper]] in terms of in-depth controls and gameplay variety. Missions range from standard running-and-gunning to driving an SUV, driving an Aston Martin, driving a limousine that is wired to explode, commandeering two different types of tanks a la "GoldenEye", riding a motorcycle, flying a helicopter, repelling down a shaft guarded by laser tripwires, and free falling after a plummeting damsel. Sure, vehicle controls are a little clumsy, but the issue here is the variety.

As movie adaptations, "GoldenEye" and FRWL were all that I could have hoped for. But EON's original storyline adds to the feeling of controlling a James Bond adventure. This is helped by the impressive cast list of Willem DeFoe, Shannon Elizabeth, Heidi Klum, and Misaki Ito. Judi Dench and John Cleese reprise their movie roles of M and Q, respectively, and Pierce Brosnan, while no Sean Connery, adds credibility to the game's proceedings. All characters resemble the stars, with the disappointing exception of Heidi Klum, who's in-game model doesn't do the real-life model justice. Mya's theme song is on par with at least some of the big screen Bond title tunes.

The game also plays tribute to some of the older Bond movies. Willem DeFoe's character is a former colleague of Christopher Walken's baddie from "A View to a Kill". Richard Kiel appears as Jaws, the hulking henchman from "The Spy Who Loved Me" and "Moonraker" in three fight scenes, the first and best of which proceeds in the same fashion a fight in the movies would have.

Single-player gameplay mainly consists of standard on-foot missions as Bond. Like Bond, you will be able to choose whether to use stealth or go out with guns blazing. The game provides plenty of opportunities to utilize stealth, with plenty of wall and object cover. Unfortunately, unlike FRWL, only one button in EON controls both crouching and wall clinging, so Bond may end up crouching low when he's supposed to be peeking around a corner, and vice-versa. The game also allows players to go into "Bond reflex" mode. While you browse your inventory, everything around you will go into super slo-mo, allowing you to analyze objects around you that can be interacted with. While this takes some getting used to, eventually this mode will allow you to perform many spectacular "Bond moments", such as shooting down a chandelier to take out four goons underneath, and greatly add to the Bond movie feeling.

There are 3 available difficulty levels: Operative, Agent, and Double Oh. On Operative, you can breeze through in a few hours. On Agent, a few weeks. On Double Oh, a few months. The difficulty level can be changed for each individual mission. Garnering high scores on missions will unlock gold and platinum awards and effect features such as vehicle upgrades and the skimpy outfits the Bond girls wear. Some missions can be extremely frustrating due to a scarcity of checkpoints, but when all is said and done, no mission is any longer than a single action scene in a Bond movie.

Multi-player, unfortunately, is not as thrilling. "GoldenEye" still has the best multi-player mode of any Bond game. EON's main multi-player is a co-op campaign mode that puts players in charge of lesser MI6 agents on a less important mission than Bond's. A more standard third-person death match can be unlocked from this mode. But the single-player mode is the most complete Bond experience to date. The ending, as with most Bond games, is anticlimactic. While the final mission is one of the most aggravating of the game, the final confrontation with the villain is disappointing. Also, levels that require Bond to be speedy become largely a matter of trial and error. Still, for any serious Bond fan, not playing this game is tantamount to missing one of the Bond films. --------------------------------------------- Result 3550 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I first [[saw]] this [[film]] during and [[International]] [[Film]] Studies course. I am a 'non-traditional' student, and, [[perhaps]] for [[reasons]] of years-lived or wisdom-accrued, [[appreciated]] the [[slow]], reflective pacing of the film's narrative. Languorous with the [[heat]] and dust of an arid clime, the [[story]] is [[deeply]] [[psychological]], replete with multi-layered [[symbolism]], and an [[articulate]] [[inversion]] of the [[theme]] of being the 'Other' in a [[land]] that one does not [[understand]]. the [[understanding]] that does [[come]] is fraught with the [[unresolved]] [[memories]] and subjectivity of the outsider. [[Made]] [[nearly]] 20 [[years]] [[ago]], it is [[also]] a forerunner in a [[genre]] of [[numerous]] other [[international]] [[films]] that [[explore]] the [[themes]] of colonials in colonized [[spaces]], clueless to the [[nuances]] of the [[cultures]] into which they have entered. Much more lavishly filmed---and [[heavily]] financed--- [[works]] that have been made since reflect the same [[themes]]: Indochine, [[Nowhere]] in Africa are two that in comparison [[perhaps]] [[make]] Chocolat [[seem]] pale and boring. It has no adrenaline-pumping [[action]] or [[extreme]] violence. The [[struggles]] are [[mental]], emotional and subtle. But, that being [[said]], it is a [[fine]] [[film]], worth a [[viewing]]. I first [[sawthe]] this [[filmmaking]] during and [[World]] [[Flick]] Studies course. I am a 'non-traditional' student, and, [[presumably]] for [[motivation]] of years-lived or wisdom-accrued, [[enjoyed]] the [[sluggish]], reflective pacing of the film's narrative. Languorous with the [[thermal]] and dust of an arid clime, the [[storytelling]] is [[bitterly]] [[psychiatric]], replete with multi-layered [[symbolic]], and an [[articulated]] [[reverse]] of the [[thematic]] of being the 'Other' in a [[territory]] that one does not [[understands]]. the [[understood]] that does [[arriving]] is fraught with the [[unpaid]] [[memorabilia]] and subjectivity of the outsider. [[Introduced]] [[approximately]] 20 [[ages]] [[before]], it is [[likewise]] a forerunner in a [[gender]] of [[various]] other [[global]] [[film]] that [[explorer]] the [[item]] of colonials in colonized [[sites]], clueless to the [[niceties]] of the [[culturally]] into which they have entered. Much more lavishly filmed---and [[severely]] financed--- [[work]] that have been made since reflect the same [[item]]: Indochine, [[Everyplace]] in Africa are two that in comparison [[presumably]] [[deliver]] Chocolat [[looks]] pale and boring. It has no adrenaline-pumping [[activity]] or [[tremendous]] violence. The [[hostilities]] are [[psychological]], emotional and subtle. But, that being [[say]], it is a [[alright]] [[kino]], worth a [[visualizing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3551 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This [[beautiful]] story of an elder son [[coming]] home, and learning to love and be a [[part]] of all those things that he left home to [[get]] away from, is poignant and [[moving]]. It shows a society that is perhaps strange to us in the Western world, with a [[sense]] of family that we have lost. The story is beautiful, sad, and at times [[funny]] and comic. It has a feeling of [[realism]] that we don't seem to see any [[longer]] in our western [[movies]].

The acting is [[unusual]], in that as the [[movie]] progresses, it [[almost]] [[gives]] the [[impression]] that it is not acting, but a [[documentary]] of [[ordinary]] people. This is [[brilliant]] directing and movie making.

Would love to see more [[movies]] by this [[director]]. This [[funky]] story of an elder son [[come]] home, and learning to love and be a [[portions]] of all those things that he left home to [[got]] away from, is poignant and [[relocating]]. It shows a society that is perhaps strange to us in the Western world, with a [[feeling]] of family that we have lost. The story is beautiful, sad, and at times [[fun]] and comic. It has a feeling of [[lifelike]] that we don't seem to see any [[anymore]] in our western [[filmmaking]].

The acting is [[odd]], in that as the [[filmmaking]] progresses, it [[hardly]] [[delivers]] the [[printing]] that it is not acting, but a [[documentation]] of [[banal]] people. This is [[lustrous]] directing and movie making.

Would love to see more [[cinematography]] by this [[superintendent]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3552 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] [[Great]] actors, an oscar [[nominee]] actress, [[stunning]] scenery, good [[strong]] [[story]] [[line]] and more laughs than you can fit into my new [[handbag]] (and thats [[quite]] [[big]]). This film was [[brilliant]]. It was [[beautifully]] [[acted]] in the more serious scenes and the funny moments were . .well, side splitting. I have never [[heard]] a [[cinema]] audience [[laugh]] so much, and [[tears]] were streaming down my [[cheeks]] during the 'stoned [[ladies]] in the [[tea]] shop' scene. [[Well]] done to the British film [[industry]] and to Craig [[Ferguson]] [[whose]] [[magic]] [[ingredients]] have [[made]] sure this is one of my favourite films of the year, if not of all [[time]]. [[Awesome]] actors, an oscar [[candidacy]] actress, [[staggering]] scenery, good [[forceful]] [[histories]] [[linea]] and more laughs than you can fit into my new [[valise]] (and thats [[utterly]] [[sizeable]]). This film was [[sumptuous]]. It was [[admirably]] [[served]] in the more serious scenes and the funny moments were . .well, side splitting. I have never [[hear]] a [[movies]] audience [[chuckles]] so much, and [[sobs]] were streaming down my [[cheekbones]] during the 'stoned [[mesdames]] in the [[shai]] shop' scene. [[Good]] done to the British film [[industria]] and to Craig [[Fergusson]] [[who]] [[wizardry]] [[component]] have [[effected]] sure this is one of my favourite films of the year, if not of all [[moment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3553 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Michelle]] [[Rodriguez]] plays Diana, a [[high]] [[school]] [[girl]] with an insolent scowl and 2 x 4 on her shoulder. She's ready to battle anyone, [[especially]] her father who is [[paying]] for her brother's boxing lessons. Diana decides boxing [[would]] be a [[good]] way of focusing her [[anger]].

I liked the relationship between Diana and [[Adrian]]. Santiago Douglas as Adrian is [[excellent]]. Watch how their [[emotions]] [[towards]] each other are [[shaped]] by the [[squared]] [[circle]]. [[Mitchell]] [[Gerardo]] plays Diana, a [[higher]] [[teaching]] [[chick]] with an insolent scowl and 2 x 4 on her shoulder. She's ready to battle anyone, [[namely]] her father who is [[paid]] for her brother's boxing lessons. Diana decides boxing [[could]] be a [[buena]] way of focusing her [[wrath]].

I liked the relationship between Diana and [[Adriana]]. Santiago Douglas as Adrian is [[sumptuous]]. Watch how their [[sentiments]] [[toward]] each other are [[fashioned]] by the [[square]] [[circling]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3554 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] The [[film]] "Cross Eyed" by Adam [[Jones]] propels the viewer on a ride of [[redemption]] as the main character takes back control of the wheel and sets his [[life]] in [[order]]. Adam Jones has found an imaginative and [[refreshing]] way to empower his [[character]] and actualize what matters most. These truths become apparent to both the [[characters]] and viewers as you laugh and gag to the credits with them. The [[simple]] yet attractive [[settings]]\costumes [[keep]] you guessing about what you will see next. You can't help but [[smile]] and laugh at the antics that [[take]] place in this [[movie]]. I can't [[wait]] for his sophomore effort. It is only a matter of time before [[Jones]] strikes again. Bravo! The [[movies]] "Cross Eyed" by Adam [[Joneses]] propels the viewer on a ride of [[reincarnation]] as the main character takes back control of the wheel and sets his [[living]] in [[orders]]. Adam Jones has found an imaginative and [[refreshes]] way to empower his [[nature]] and actualize what matters most. These truths become apparent to both the [[attribute]] and viewers as you laugh and gag to the credits with them. The [[mere]] yet attractive [[setting]]\costumes [[conserve]] you guessing about what you will see next. You can't help but [[smirk]] and laugh at the antics that [[taking]] place in this [[flick]]. I can't [[expects]] for his sophomore effort. It is only a matter of time before [[Joneses]] strikes again. Bravo! --------------------------------------------- Result 3555 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Love Rosario Dawson, think she's one of the finest actresses of the modern era.

Descent seems to be more about self-empowerment than anything else. It's the consistent undertone in everything in the film. The dialog is flat, the characters [[seemingly]] [[intentionally]] bland and one sided. The only consistency is the representation of self-empowerment in the characters and Rosario's journey from self empowerment to loss of empowerment and back again.

Pitching this as a rape [[classic]] isn't appropriate, and that's probably why so many people don't enjoy the film. The standard 'rape' audience wouldn't particularly like this film, and maybe that's the point? The film asks more questions than it answers, and it does confront it's target audience, whether they like it or not. There's a compelling relationship between the characters and the target audience and while the film doesn't slap the audience across the face with self-righteous audacity it does engage the viewer for what may or may not be, all the wrong reasons.

Descent is a good film which IMHO is severely under-rated. Love Rosario Dawson, think she's one of the finest actresses of the modern era.

Descent seems to be more about self-empowerment than anything else. It's the consistent undertone in everything in the film. The dialog is flat, the characters [[reportedly]] [[willfully]] bland and one sided. The only consistency is the representation of self-empowerment in the characters and Rosario's journey from self empowerment to loss of empowerment and back again.

Pitching this as a rape [[typical]] isn't appropriate, and that's probably why so many people don't enjoy the film. The standard 'rape' audience wouldn't particularly like this film, and maybe that's the point? The film asks more questions than it answers, and it does confront it's target audience, whether they like it or not. There's a compelling relationship between the characters and the target audience and while the film doesn't slap the audience across the face with self-righteous audacity it does engage the viewer for what may or may not be, all the wrong reasons.

Descent is a good film which IMHO is severely under-rated. --------------------------------------------- Result 3556 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (77%)]] This movie is not only the funniest film ever [[created]], it's the greatest. My [[hats]] off to Mr. and [[Mrs]]. Zodsworth and the rest of the [[wacky]], [[wacky]] [[cast]]. Good morning Satan, Want a donut? [[See]] it [[post]] [[haste]]! GO [[SEE]] IT [[NOW]]! This movie is not only the funniest film ever [[engendered]], it's the greatest. My [[sweats]] off to Mr. and [[Ms]]. Zodsworth and the rest of the [[demented]], [[crazy]] [[casting]]. Good morning Satan, Want a donut? [[Seeing]] it [[posting]] [[hurry]]! GO [[CONSULTS]] IT [[ORA]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3557 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] And this [[somebody]] is me. And not only me, as I can see here at IMDb or when leaving the theater. Why did the people [[love]] it? It's obvious: Everybody knows zombies by now (at least the Horror fans by heart and the others through the "Dawn of the Dead" reinvention or Resident Evil movies etc.)

Or at least they [[thought]] they knew everything about zombies ... that is until this [[movie]] [[came]] along. And you'll [[see]] zombies in a new [[light]] (perhaps). This is not a [[horror]] movie, although it does contain some violent scenes, but is rather a comedy. A satire to be precise. And it never runs out of steam! That is why I rated it so high. Pacing wise it's incredible, the acting is great and the script has no (obvious) mistakes ... quite the contrary: It's a gem and if you're only a little bit interested in zombies you ought to see it! And even if you dislike them, watch it! Because it's a great (comedy) movie! And this [[whoever]] is me. And not only me, as I can see here at IMDb or when leaving the theater. Why did the people [[amore]] it? It's obvious: Everybody knows zombies by now (at least the Horror fans by heart and the others through the "Dawn of the Dead" reinvention or Resident Evil movies etc.)

Or at least they [[figured]] they knew everything about zombies ... that is until this [[filmmaking]] [[arrived]] along. And you'll [[consults]] zombies in a new [[lighting]] (perhaps). This is not a [[monstrosity]] movie, although it does contain some violent scenes, but is rather a comedy. A satire to be precise. And it never runs out of steam! That is why I rated it so high. Pacing wise it's incredible, the acting is great and the script has no (obvious) mistakes ... quite the contrary: It's a gem and if you're only a little bit interested in zombies you ought to see it! And even if you dislike them, watch it! Because it's a great (comedy) movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 3558 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] The Eternal Jew (Der Ewige Jude) does not have what we today would call the markings of a scholarly document: rather than naming experts or sources to support what it says, it simply [[says]], without opposition, what it wants us to believe (one will concede that American newsreels of that period were also much less regulated than would seem ethical to a modern audience, often inserting dramatized scenes and passing them off as actual news footage). Add to this [[directed]] propaganda the [[fact]] that filmmaker Hippler was "preaching to the converted," not so much asking gentile Europeans to hate the Jews as validating the feelings so many of them must have held already, in order to have allowed the holocaust that followed. The weakest link in the film's logic shows in its "rat" analogy, wherein it goes on to explain the behavior of rats, and then adds something to the effect of "Well, Jewish people are like that too." Similarly it characterizes Jewish people as ugly by showing ugly Jewish people in comparison to attractive gentiles; the accompanying leap of faith is that ugly is bad. The film appears to contradict itself a few times, for example by attacking Western painters who portrayed Old Testament characters as light-skinned Europeans; thereby the text admits that so-called "Hebrew" ethnicity is in fact an ingrained aspect of Christian culture. It also shows ghetto Jews willingly living in roach-infested filth, despite the supposed treasure they've hoarded, and then flip-flops by saying that these same undesirables live in wealth and luxury as soon as they leave the ghetto. Incidentally, who wouldn't? The use of scenes from a well-known American film, House of Rothschild, shows an equally [[blurry]] deployment of logic. First the film is denounced as having been made by Jews; then it is apparently used by Hippler to verify the deceptiveness of Jews (the aforementioned pretense of poverty by ghetto Jews, shown as a means of avoiding taxation, although the Rothschild character's "spin" is that Jews are taxed excessively); finally the Rothschild film is once again execrated for implying that the famed banking family invented the checking account. This apparent indecisiveness in whether the American footage is shown positively or negatively might become clearer with repeated viewings, but at first sight it makes for some murky moviewatching. For all of Eternal Jew's imperfections, I was at first surprised that the IMDb viewer rating for this film is as high as it is, just shy of a "5" to date. I'd say the reason is that EJ's documentary value has exceeded its original purpose, offering us, unintentionally, a look into the lives of European Jews as they would not be seen a few years hence. Needless to say the film's very badness also provides an historical insight into bad, or simply evil, filmmaking as a propagandist's tool. About this time I should expect director Hippler to flip-flop once again, springing forward to say "That's what I meant to do all along!" The scenes depicting animal slaughter are particularly gruesome, and show same as decidedly inhumane, contrary to the intent of Kosher law to prevent animal suffering. I would like for someone who has seen the film, and has some knowledge of these procedures, to comment on whether the portrayal is accurate. The Eternal Jew (Der Ewige Jude) does not have what we today would call the markings of a scholarly document: rather than naming experts or sources to support what it says, it simply [[tells]], without opposition, what it wants us to believe (one will concede that American newsreels of that period were also much less regulated than would seem ethical to a modern audience, often inserting dramatized scenes and passing them off as actual news footage). Add to this [[aimed]] propaganda the [[facto]] that filmmaker Hippler was "preaching to the converted," not so much asking gentile Europeans to hate the Jews as validating the feelings so many of them must have held already, in order to have allowed the holocaust that followed. The weakest link in the film's logic shows in its "rat" analogy, wherein it goes on to explain the behavior of rats, and then adds something to the effect of "Well, Jewish people are like that too." Similarly it characterizes Jewish people as ugly by showing ugly Jewish people in comparison to attractive gentiles; the accompanying leap of faith is that ugly is bad. The film appears to contradict itself a few times, for example by attacking Western painters who portrayed Old Testament characters as light-skinned Europeans; thereby the text admits that so-called "Hebrew" ethnicity is in fact an ingrained aspect of Christian culture. It also shows ghetto Jews willingly living in roach-infested filth, despite the supposed treasure they've hoarded, and then flip-flops by saying that these same undesirables live in wealth and luxury as soon as they leave the ghetto. Incidentally, who wouldn't? The use of scenes from a well-known American film, House of Rothschild, shows an equally [[obscure]] deployment of logic. First the film is denounced as having been made by Jews; then it is apparently used by Hippler to verify the deceptiveness of Jews (the aforementioned pretense of poverty by ghetto Jews, shown as a means of avoiding taxation, although the Rothschild character's "spin" is that Jews are taxed excessively); finally the Rothschild film is once again execrated for implying that the famed banking family invented the checking account. This apparent indecisiveness in whether the American footage is shown positively or negatively might become clearer with repeated viewings, but at first sight it makes for some murky moviewatching. For all of Eternal Jew's imperfections, I was at first surprised that the IMDb viewer rating for this film is as high as it is, just shy of a "5" to date. I'd say the reason is that EJ's documentary value has exceeded its original purpose, offering us, unintentionally, a look into the lives of European Jews as they would not be seen a few years hence. Needless to say the film's very badness also provides an historical insight into bad, or simply evil, filmmaking as a propagandist's tool. About this time I should expect director Hippler to flip-flop once again, springing forward to say "That's what I meant to do all along!" The scenes depicting animal slaughter are particularly gruesome, and show same as decidedly inhumane, contrary to the intent of Kosher law to prevent animal suffering. I would like for someone who has seen the film, and has some knowledge of these procedures, to comment on whether the portrayal is accurate. --------------------------------------------- Result 3559 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Cinderella is one of Disney's greatest films, one of those films I think you appreciate more the older you get. Disney creates a magical adaptation of the classic fairytale. I consider the film to have been the greatest of his films at the time of its release. The characters became more dimensional than earlier films, creating more depth to appreciate the characters more. Cinderella herself is, in my opinion, one of the greatest characters Disney ever created. With her kindness and dash of dry humor, she is extremely likeable; however, it is the inspiration she provides which makes her memorable. Like many people she is an endless dreamer, and she holds onto her dreams, never giving up. Even in the most adverse of situations, her dreams endure, and she won't let anyone take that away from her. Her example should serve as inspiration to everyone, and encouragement to never let go of your dreams. --------------------------------------------- Result 3560 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] The only thing serious about this [[movie]] is the [[humor]]. Well worth the [[rental]] price. I'll bet you watch it twice. It's obvious that Sutherland [[enjoyed]] his role. The only thing serious about this [[filmmaking]] is the [[comedy]]. Well worth the [[leased]] price. I'll bet you watch it twice. It's obvious that Sutherland [[liked]] his role. --------------------------------------------- Result 3561 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] The [[director]] tries to be Quentin Tarantino, the screenwriters [[try]] to be [[Tennessee]] [[Williams]], Deborah Kara Unger [[tries]] to be Faye Dunaway, the late [[James]] Coburn tries to be [[Orson]] Welles, [[Michael]] Rooker [[tries]] to be [[Gene]] Hackman, [[Mary]] [[Tyler]] Moore [[tries]] to be Faye Dunaway ([[older]] version), Cameron Diaz [[tries]] to [[get]] out of the [[frame]] as [[quickly]] as she can ([[successfully]]), don't [[ask]] about [[Joanna]] [[Going]]. Eric Stoltz and [[James]] Spader [[try]] to [[conceal]] their [[embarrassment]] with this crappy stuff. It delivers [[endless]], [[meaningless]] dialog and very [[little]] action.

Tulsa is a [[town]] with [[beautiful]] elevator lobbies, an art deco [[church]] by [[Bruce]] Goff and a lovely, [[sprawling]] mansion by Frank Lloyd Wright. [[Visit]] Tulsa, don't watch this [[movie]]. It doesn't do the [[location]] justice. The [[superintendent]] tries to be Quentin Tarantino, the screenwriters [[seek]] to be [[Nashville]] [[William]], Deborah Kara Unger [[strive]] to be Faye Dunaway, the late [[Jacques]] Coburn tries to be [[Welles]] Welles, [[Michel]] Rooker [[try]] to be [[Genes]] Hackman, [[Maryam]] [[Ty]] Moore [[try]] to be Faye Dunaway ([[oldest]] version), Cameron Diaz [[strives]] to [[gets]] out of the [[framework]] as [[soon]] as she can ([[satisfactorily]]), don't [[wondering]] about [[Johanna]] [[Gonna]]. Eric Stoltz and [[Jacques]] Spader [[strive]] to [[disguising]] their [[shame]] with this crappy stuff. It delivers [[countless]], [[senseless]] dialog and very [[kiddo]] action.

Tulsa is a [[ciudad]] with [[wondrous]] elevator lobbies, an art deco [[churches]] by [[Bros]] Goff and a lovely, [[complex]] mansion by Frank Lloyd Wright. [[Visits]] Tulsa, don't watch this [[flick]]. It doesn't do the [[placements]] justice. --------------------------------------------- Result 3562 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Unfortunately]] many consumers who write [[reviews]] for IMDb equate low budget with not good. Whatever else this movie might need, more budget really isn't part of it. Big sets and lots of special effects would have turned it into another Lara Croft movie. What we have here is a [[step]] or two better than that.

The [[nearly]] unknown Alexandra Staden is [[captivating]] as the [[enigmatic]] Modesty, and this is [[crucial]] for this [[movie]] to work. Her wise little [[smiles]] and knowing looks are formidable, and you find yourself [[wishing]] that the camera won't leaver her face. It makes it [[workable]] that the bad guy Nikolai, [[played]] by also little known (in the U.S. at least) Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau might take an unusually cerebral interest in her, something Modesty can exploit. She is able to divert his raping her with just a shove and spitting out "stop wasting my time!" then storming off between his heavily armed yet suddenly diffident henchmen. Making a scene like that plausible doesn't happen by accident.

Probably the biggest [[problem]] I have with the rail-thin Staden playing [[Modesty]] is it just isn't very [[believable]] for her to go hand to hand with an athletic and muscled looking guy like Coaster-Waldau and beat him. She just ain't a Peta Wilson or a pumped-up Hilary Swank type actress who can throw a convincing punch. Coaster-Waldau letting himself be overpowered by Staden looks like he's just roughhousing with his little sister.

Since this is not really an action film, this isn't a big flaw. I just [[hope]] they do better on that if and when they make sequels. [[Unluckily]] many consumers who write [[inspects]] for IMDb equate low budget with not good. Whatever else this movie might need, more budget really isn't part of it. Big sets and lots of special effects would have turned it into another Lara Croft movie. What we have here is a [[steps]] or two better than that.

The [[roughly]] unknown Alexandra Staden is [[intriguing]] as the [[mysterious]] Modesty, and this is [[indispensable]] for this [[cinematography]] to work. Her wise little [[smirk]] and knowing looks are formidable, and you find yourself [[desiring]] that the camera won't leaver her face. It makes it [[viable]] that the bad guy Nikolai, [[effected]] by also little known (in the U.S. at least) Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau might take an unusually cerebral interest in her, something Modesty can exploit. She is able to divert his raping her with just a shove and spitting out "stop wasting my time!" then storming off between his heavily armed yet suddenly diffident henchmen. Making a scene like that plausible doesn't happen by accident.

Probably the biggest [[issues]] I have with the rail-thin Staden playing [[Decency]] is it just isn't very [[credible]] for her to go hand to hand with an athletic and muscled looking guy like Coaster-Waldau and beat him. She just ain't a Peta Wilson or a pumped-up Hilary Swank type actress who can throw a convincing punch. Coaster-Waldau letting himself be overpowered by Staden looks like he's just roughhousing with his little sister.

Since this is not really an action film, this isn't a big flaw. I just [[hopes]] they do better on that if and when they make sequels. --------------------------------------------- Result 3563 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Let me [[start]] by [[saying]] that I'd read a number of [[reviews]] before renting this film and kind of knew what to expect. [[Still]], I was surprised by just how [[bad]] it was.

I am a big [[werewolf]] fan, and have grown accustomed to forgiving a great deal when watching one. Most of them have sub-par effects, poor acting, and weak storylines (at best rehashed from earlier films). So far, with the possible exception of some of the later "[[Howling]]" series films, this is the [[worst]] of the lot.

First, the story. It's been quoted several times in reviews on this site, so I won't go into specifics. However, it is very obvious that the writer(s) had absolutely no affinity for lycanthropic monsters. As so often happens when a horror film is given to a writer who considers themselves "above" such fare, they tried to come up with a new spin on the werewolf mythos. That's fine, but a non-horror fan trying to do this generally has disregard for the intelligence and sophistication of the horror audience and ends up writing down to them. The plot feels like a parody of werewolf films, and the events depicted just ring so false that I felt my intelligence was being seriously insulted. TV news footage, for example, never pans away from the reporter to close-up on someone in the crowd behind them. Give the characters and the viewers credit for being able to spot the bad guy in the scene without using a flashing neon sign. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

As for effects, I have NEVER seen a less believable werewolf. I'd have been happier with Lon Chaney Jr. in crepe hair. The beast they used look a great deal like... well, like a guy in a cheap rubber suit with some hair glued on and some truly awful animatronics. And, I know that many people have already criticized the CG, but my God it was awful. One scene features a woman changing, and starts with a completely CG version of the actress, nude but for some reason without nipples. My first thought was, "hey, why is one of the characters from 'ReBoot' turning into a silly looking werewolf?"

Anyway, I like to look for positives in any film, and there were a few. The cinematography was passable (the film was shot all-digital, which is interesting) and some of the performances were not terrible. It was also interesting seeing Tippi Hedron as the world's most well made-up homeless woman, and Kane Hodder as the title bad guy. Also, the Yellow Power Ranger got all growed up and... well, damn. And if you're looking for skin, there's some pretty tasty examples. This ends the male-pig segment of the review.

Overall, if you want a good werewolf film, try "An American Werewolf in London", the original "The Howling", "Dog Soldiers", or even "The Wolfen" (though that one's got more wolf than were). If you're a lycanthrope completest, then take a gander. Otherwise, give this one a miss. Let me [[initiated]] by [[arguing]] that I'd read a number of [[scrutinize]] before renting this film and kind of knew what to expect. [[However]], I was surprised by just how [[mala]] it was.

I am a big [[werewolves]] fan, and have grown accustomed to forgiving a great deal when watching one. Most of them have sub-par effects, poor acting, and weak storylines (at best rehashed from earlier films). So far, with the possible exception of some of the later "[[Yell]]" series films, this is the [[meanest]] of the lot.

First, the story. It's been quoted several times in reviews on this site, so I won't go into specifics. However, it is very obvious that the writer(s) had absolutely no affinity for lycanthropic monsters. As so often happens when a horror film is given to a writer who considers themselves "above" such fare, they tried to come up with a new spin on the werewolf mythos. That's fine, but a non-horror fan trying to do this generally has disregard for the intelligence and sophistication of the horror audience and ends up writing down to them. The plot feels like a parody of werewolf films, and the events depicted just ring so false that I felt my intelligence was being seriously insulted. TV news footage, for example, never pans away from the reporter to close-up on someone in the crowd behind them. Give the characters and the viewers credit for being able to spot the bad guy in the scene without using a flashing neon sign. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

As for effects, I have NEVER seen a less believable werewolf. I'd have been happier with Lon Chaney Jr. in crepe hair. The beast they used look a great deal like... well, like a guy in a cheap rubber suit with some hair glued on and some truly awful animatronics. And, I know that many people have already criticized the CG, but my God it was awful. One scene features a woman changing, and starts with a completely CG version of the actress, nude but for some reason without nipples. My first thought was, "hey, why is one of the characters from 'ReBoot' turning into a silly looking werewolf?"

Anyway, I like to look for positives in any film, and there were a few. The cinematography was passable (the film was shot all-digital, which is interesting) and some of the performances were not terrible. It was also interesting seeing Tippi Hedron as the world's most well made-up homeless woman, and Kane Hodder as the title bad guy. Also, the Yellow Power Ranger got all growed up and... well, damn. And if you're looking for skin, there's some pretty tasty examples. This ends the male-pig segment of the review.

Overall, if you want a good werewolf film, try "An American Werewolf in London", the original "The Howling", "Dog Soldiers", or even "The Wolfen" (though that one's got more wolf than were). If you're a lycanthrope completest, then take a gander. Otherwise, give this one a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 3564 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I went to see this [[movie]] [[twice]] within a [[week]] and can only [[sum]] it up in one word (which I [[normally]] don't [[use]] lightly): [[Wonderful]]! In my view, the [[best]] [[movie]] ever [[made]]. [[Who]] deserves [[Oscars]] and other [[awards]] if not this Swedish crew who have created [[cinematic]] perfection in the last scenes of the film, when everything that is said (and [[left]] unsaid) throughout the [[story]] is [[drawn]] [[together]]? Just as the [[character]] of [[Daniel]] Dareus [[evokes]] so many sentiments and long repressed feelings within the people [[around]] him, the [[movie]] does the same to its [[viewers]]: You walk out with your [[head]] abuzz and your heart feeling full. [[Great]] stuff! Next time you [[ask]] yourself "what is the [[meaning]] of [[life]]", [[perhaps]] [[think]] about how you feel after a [[sumptuous]] [[experience]] like As it is in [[Heaven]]: [[Happy]], content, [[fulfilled]]. To [[say]] it with Virginia Woolf's [[Mrs]] Dalloway: "Such [[moments]] are enough". I went to see this [[filmmaking]] [[double]] within a [[chow]] and can only [[somme]] it up in one word (which I [[typically]] don't [[used]] lightly): [[Glamorous]]! In my view, the [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] ever [[brought]]. [[Whose]] deserves [[Oskar]] and other [[prize]] if not this Swedish crew who have created [[filmmaking]] perfection in the last scenes of the film, when everything that is said (and [[exited]] unsaid) throughout the [[tales]] is [[lured]] [[jointly]]? Just as the [[trait]] of [[Danielle]] Dareus [[provokes]] so many sentiments and long repressed feelings within the people [[about]] him, the [[filmmaking]] does the same to its [[bystanders]]: You walk out with your [[chief]] abuzz and your heart feeling full. [[Whopping]] stuff! Next time you [[inquired]] yourself "what is the [[mean]] of [[living]]", [[presumably]] [[thinking]] about how you feel after a [[marvellous]] [[experiences]] like As it is in [[Sky]]: [[Cheery]], content, [[complied]]. To [[said]] it with Virginia Woolf's [[Ms]] Dalloway: "Such [[times]] are enough". --------------------------------------------- Result 3565 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Gundam Wing is a fun [[show]]. I appreciate it for getting me into Gundam and anime in general. However, after watching its [[predecessors]], such as Mobile Suit Gundam, Zeta Gundam, and even G Gundam, I [[find]] Wing to be Gundam Lite.

[[Characters]]: An [[aspect]] long held by Gundam is to have their [[characters]] thrust into [[difficulties]] and [[grow]] into maturity. This does not [[happen]] in Wing. Heero is top dog at the beginning, and he's top dog at the [[end]]. Personalities do not change, [[growth]] is never achieved. The best character is Zechs, who is for all intents and purposes a hero throughout most of the series. But suddenly the series betrays him and turns him into a villain for no apparent reason.

Mecha: Wing has great suit designs. The Gundams are super cool, with the Epyon being my favorite. I even consider a few of the OZ suit designs to be on par with some of the classic Zeon suits. But sweet suit designs doesn't quite save the series from boring characters.

Conclusion: In the end, Wing has cool fight scenes, though riddled with recycled animation, but shallow plot and character development. Enjoyable, but not moving like [[previous]] Gundam outings. Gundam Wing is a fun [[exhibitions]]. I appreciate it for getting me into Gundam and anime in general. However, after watching its [[forebears]], such as Mobile Suit Gundam, Zeta Gundam, and even G Gundam, I [[unearth]] Wing to be Gundam Lite.

[[Trait]]: An [[element]] long held by Gundam is to have their [[nature]] thrust into [[challenges]] and [[rising]] into maturity. This does not [[emerge]] in Wing. Heero is top dog at the beginning, and he's top dog at the [[termination]]. Personalities do not change, [[increase]] is never achieved. The best character is Zechs, who is for all intents and purposes a hero throughout most of the series. But suddenly the series betrays him and turns him into a villain for no apparent reason.

Mecha: Wing has great suit designs. The Gundams are super cool, with the Epyon being my favorite. I even consider a few of the OZ suit designs to be on par with some of the classic Zeon suits. But sweet suit designs doesn't quite save the series from boring characters.

Conclusion: In the end, Wing has cool fight scenes, though riddled with recycled animation, but shallow plot and character development. Enjoyable, but not moving like [[former]] Gundam outings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3566 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie is worth [[watching]] if you enjoy marvelling over special [[effects]]. There are some interesting [[visuals]].

Aside from that, it's [[typical]] nineties/aughties hollywood fare of dazzle without [[substance]]. True to the title.

It's not worth picking apart the story. That's like performing brain surgery on a [[dinosaur]]. There's not [[much]] there to begin with. It's [[nothing]] original and not very [[special]]. So don't go in for the story at all. Just look at the [[effects]].

As has been mentioned, it got a little flashy at the end, diluting the purity of great FX treatment of an invisible (and at times half invisible) man. However if you ignore the "standard" pyrotechnics, it's a sight to [[behold]] (or not to behold).

All in all, it's a decent FX film worth seeing for that purpose and that alone. This movie is worth [[staring]] if you enjoy marvelling over special [[influences]]. There are some interesting [[image]].

Aside from that, it's [[classic]] nineties/aughties hollywood fare of dazzle without [[substances]]. True to the title.

It's not worth picking apart the story. That's like performing brain surgery on a [[dinosaurs]]. There's not [[very]] there to begin with. It's [[anything]] original and not very [[specific]]. So don't go in for the story at all. Just look at the [[influence]].

As has been mentioned, it got a little flashy at the end, diluting the purity of great FX treatment of an invisible (and at times half invisible) man. However if you ignore the "standard" pyrotechnics, it's a sight to [[admire]] (or not to behold).

All in all, it's a decent FX film worth seeing for that purpose and that alone. --------------------------------------------- Result 3567 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I had the misfortune of [[wasting]] 10 quid [[buying]] SS [[new]] [[movie]] on DVD: [[Attack]] Force. Now i usually can [[suspend]] my belief watching films like this. A pinch of [[salt]] and some [[beers]] on a [[dark]] evening on the sofa watching a noisy late evening shoot em up is perfect for a single alpha [[male]] [[like]] me. I bought this [[film]] thinking I'd see cool martial arts and shoot em up.

Did i [[hell]]. Segal is old and bloated, the plot was ludicrous [[even]] by SS [[standards]] and to cap it all off Segal's acting (such as it was to start with) is exceptionally [[dire]]. So [[dire]] in fact that half of his voice was dubbed over by a man who sounded NOTHING LIKE HIM. Either SS [[cant]] act no more (a moot point) of the crew were so dreadful at their jobs they couldn't record the sound properly. The voice would flick back and forth between Mr Whisper Segal and the man who does voice overs for Honda [[adverts]]!

Plot wise isn't the issue because most action [[films]] work along the same [[premise]] as this one, nothing new there. The usual mix of characters who will die horribly as cannon [[fodder]] and stereotyped bad guys waiting to get blown away.

Avoid this [[film]] [[like]] you would avoid walking in front of a speeding train or a dose of H5N1 avian flu.

[[Utter]] [[garbage]].

1/10

This has been a public health warning. I had the misfortune of [[losing]] 10 quid [[procure]] SS [[nuevo]] [[cinematography]] on DVD: [[Assaults]] Force. Now i usually can [[discontinue]] my belief watching films like this. A pinch of [[salty]] and some [[pints]] on a [[somber]] evening on the sofa watching a noisy late evening shoot em up is perfect for a single alpha [[virile]] [[adores]] me. I bought this [[kino]] thinking I'd see cool martial arts and shoot em up.

Did i [[bordello]]. Segal is old and bloated, the plot was ludicrous [[yet]] by SS [[norms]] and to cap it all off Segal's acting (such as it was to start with) is exceptionally [[gruesome]]. So [[horrendous]] in fact that half of his voice was dubbed over by a man who sounded NOTHING LIKE HIM. Either SS [[dunno]] act no more (a moot point) of the crew were so dreadful at their jobs they couldn't record the sound properly. The voice would flick back and forth between Mr Whisper Segal and the man who does voice overs for Honda [[advert]]!

Plot wise isn't the issue because most action [[film]] work along the same [[assumption]] as this one, nothing new there. The usual mix of characters who will die horribly as cannon [[forage]] and stereotyped bad guys waiting to get blown away.

Avoid this [[movie]] [[iike]] you would avoid walking in front of a speeding train or a dose of H5N1 avian flu.

[[Unmitigated]] [[detritus]].

1/10

This has been a public health warning. --------------------------------------------- Result 3568 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Michael]] Curtiz directed this 1930 very-stylish whodunit from a script by [[Robert]] Presnell Sr., Robert N. Lee and [[Peter]] Mine. The [[original]] novel they [[adapted]] was "The Kennel [[Murder]] [[Case]]", [[perhaps]] from a writer's [[standpoint]] the [[best]] of the Philo Vance mysteries by the [[strange]] S.S. Van Dine. Vance was a long-worded and superior detective genius, and his [[character]] being assigned to William Powell probably meant the executives at [[Warner]] [[Brothers]] were [[aware]] of the [[possibility]] that in less-engaging hands this detective might [[alienate]] viewers. Fortunately they assigned suave William Powell first to the character.; later he was played by Basil Rathbone, Warren William, and Paul Lukas before being consigned to "B" picture status.The other question as always with Warner Brothers executives is why they chose Vance as a character; their penchant was to choose men who operated outside the law, with no apparent discrimination between a vicious murderer and a champion of individual rights against all comers. This film has a despicable villain who gets murdered, and a claustrophobically challenging locale inside an apartment complex. The characters are unarguably unusually well-realized, the direction rather [[good]] and unusually swift-paced; and except for a darkish B/W look, the film avoids the comedic asides, superfluous characters and irrelevant dialogue characteristic of many early detective entries. Jack Okey did the good art direction. The music by Berhard Kaun is serviceable; Orry-Kelly did the costumes. William Reese provided the mostly-indoor cinematography. In the interesting cast, Powell is THE Philo Vance of his time, mostly sober-minded with just a hint of sardonic humor here and there. Eugene Palette is better than usual playing very straight as an admiring police partner to Vance, with his very professional timing. The other actor who comes off best is handsome Paul Cavangh, very effective as always in what was written as a red herring part. Mary Astor is attractive but at this point in her career she talked a bit too fast to be as effective as she later proved. Also in the cast were Helen Vinson as the villain's woman, Jack La Rue, Ralph Morgan (best known as Frank Morgan's brother), Robert Barrat as the villain everyone has cause to kill, Archer Coe, and Frank Conroy as his likable brother with Robert McWade as the D.A.; quirky and funny Etiienne Girardot has a delightfully witty part as the funny little forensics doctor who comes onto the crime scene. James lee as the abused Chinese servant is excellent and intelligent. The story breaks into four parts. First there is shad doings at a dog show, where Vance, Coe and Cavanagh are all showing West Highland terriers. Cavanagh's dog is killed, by Coe, to prevent him winning the title over his own entry. The second portion of the scene involves a leave-taking; someone is confused enough by who has gone where, after Coe parts from his girl friend, Vinson, to murder his nice brother by mistake. Enter Vance, to find out who did in Archer Coe in a locked room and how, with the help of Palette; the romantic difficulties are straightened out, the Chinese servant is exonerated, we find out who broke the expensive vase, who will marry whom, how Archer Coe was done in and why the butler did not do it--but someone else with a good excuse did. This is a more-than-good little mystery, which skilled Hungarian-born director Curtiz took quite seriously. He used wipes, swift cuts, changes of camera angle and alternations between straightforward and daring camera-work to achieve variety, interest and a sustained pace. Many writers, critics and experts, myself included, consider this to be the best of the Vance projects, although others are estimable as well. [[Michele]] Curtiz directed this 1930 very-stylish whodunit from a script by [[Roberta]] Presnell Sr., Robert N. Lee and [[Petter]] Mine. The [[initial]] novel they [[tailored]] was "The Kennel [[Slaying]] [[Cases]]", [[presumably]] from a writer's [[visualise]] the [[nicest]] of the Philo Vance mysteries by the [[inquisitive]] S.S. Van Dine. Vance was a long-worded and superior detective genius, and his [[personage]] being assigned to William Powell probably meant the executives at [[Werner]] [[Siblings]] were [[conscious]] of the [[opportunity]] that in less-engaging hands this detective might [[dispose]] viewers. Fortunately they assigned suave William Powell first to the character.; later he was played by Basil Rathbone, Warren William, and Paul Lukas before being consigned to "B" picture status.The other question as always with Warner Brothers executives is why they chose Vance as a character; their penchant was to choose men who operated outside the law, with no apparent discrimination between a vicious murderer and a champion of individual rights against all comers. This film has a despicable villain who gets murdered, and a claustrophobically challenging locale inside an apartment complex. The characters are unarguably unusually well-realized, the direction rather [[alright]] and unusually swift-paced; and except for a darkish B/W look, the film avoids the comedic asides, superfluous characters and irrelevant dialogue characteristic of many early detective entries. Jack Okey did the good art direction. The music by Berhard Kaun is serviceable; Orry-Kelly did the costumes. William Reese provided the mostly-indoor cinematography. In the interesting cast, Powell is THE Philo Vance of his time, mostly sober-minded with just a hint of sardonic humor here and there. Eugene Palette is better than usual playing very straight as an admiring police partner to Vance, with his very professional timing. The other actor who comes off best is handsome Paul Cavangh, very effective as always in what was written as a red herring part. Mary Astor is attractive but at this point in her career she talked a bit too fast to be as effective as she later proved. Also in the cast were Helen Vinson as the villain's woman, Jack La Rue, Ralph Morgan (best known as Frank Morgan's brother), Robert Barrat as the villain everyone has cause to kill, Archer Coe, and Frank Conroy as his likable brother with Robert McWade as the D.A.; quirky and funny Etiienne Girardot has a delightfully witty part as the funny little forensics doctor who comes onto the crime scene. James lee as the abused Chinese servant is excellent and intelligent. The story breaks into four parts. First there is shad doings at a dog show, where Vance, Coe and Cavanagh are all showing West Highland terriers. Cavanagh's dog is killed, by Coe, to prevent him winning the title over his own entry. The second portion of the scene involves a leave-taking; someone is confused enough by who has gone where, after Coe parts from his girl friend, Vinson, to murder his nice brother by mistake. Enter Vance, to find out who did in Archer Coe in a locked room and how, with the help of Palette; the romantic difficulties are straightened out, the Chinese servant is exonerated, we find out who broke the expensive vase, who will marry whom, how Archer Coe was done in and why the butler did not do it--but someone else with a good excuse did. This is a more-than-good little mystery, which skilled Hungarian-born director Curtiz took quite seriously. He used wipes, swift cuts, changes of camera angle and alternations between straightforward and daring camera-work to achieve variety, interest and a sustained pace. Many writers, critics and experts, myself included, consider this to be the best of the Vance projects, although others are estimable as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3569 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (74%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] The 4th Pokemon movie made me cry when Celebi died. Don't you dare say that Pokemon sucks! I don't like it when people say that.... I've liked Pokemon for 5 or 6 years, so everyone should enjoy Pokemon, including this movie and other Pokemon movies. So, without further ado, [[please]] say that Pokemon is [[great]] and should be enjoyed by people for all ages. And also, why do Pokemon-haters give low ratings for all or most of the Pokemon movies? I don't understand.... They shouldn't do that.... There's absolutely no reason why people should just vote without proving that Pokemon sucks besides the fact that: 1) Pokemon is for little kids ONLY. 2) Pokemon is stupid. and 3) People shouldn't like Pokemon. I think this is why people don't like Pokemon. The 4th Pokemon movie made me cry when Celebi died. Don't you dare say that Pokemon sucks! I don't like it when people say that.... I've liked Pokemon for 5 or 6 years, so everyone should enjoy Pokemon, including this movie and other Pokemon movies. So, without further ado, [[invites]] say that Pokemon is [[large]] and should be enjoyed by people for all ages. And also, why do Pokemon-haters give low ratings for all or most of the Pokemon movies? I don't understand.... They shouldn't do that.... There's absolutely no reason why people should just vote without proving that Pokemon sucks besides the fact that: 1) Pokemon is for little kids ONLY. 2) Pokemon is stupid. and 3) People shouldn't like Pokemon. I think this is why people don't like Pokemon. --------------------------------------------- Result 3570 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Reese Witherspoon plays [[Dani]], a young country girl that falls madly in love with the new 17 year old [[neighbor]], Court, played by Jason London. Court tries his best to make Dani realize that the difference in their ages would make a love relationship improbable. Soon the nubile charm of Dani starts winning over Court's will. Next enters the meeting of Dani's older sister, [[played]] by Emily Warfield, and the beginning of a short [[lived]] love/jealousy [[problem]].

Tess Harper and [[Sam]] Waterston [[round]] out the cast. This is a [[fresh]], free spirited; but [[heartbreaking]] [[drama]] that [[touches]] down [[deep]]. Feel free to cry. Reese Witherspoon plays [[Danby]], a young country girl that falls madly in love with the new 17 year old [[vicinity]], Court, played by Jason London. Court tries his best to make Dani realize that the difference in their ages would make a love relationship improbable. Soon the nubile charm of Dani starts winning over Court's will. Next enters the meeting of Dani's older sister, [[done]] by Emily Warfield, and the beginning of a short [[resided]] love/jealousy [[difficulty]].

Tess Harper and [[Sams]] Waterston [[redondo]] out the cast. This is a [[dulce]], free spirited; but [[heartrending]] [[tragedy]] that [[touching]] down [[deepest]]. Feel free to cry. --------------------------------------------- Result 3571 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] The 12th animated Disney classic is a reasonable [[movie]] [[told]] through a simple [[story]]. Even [[though]] a [[little]] dated, it [[deserves]] a place in the list of Disney classics.

It's not among Disney's top works, but is [[satisfying]]. One of Disney's most "simple" works, yes, but keeps a certain [[magic]] and enchantment (which [[old]] Disney is well [[known]] for). This was an [[important]] [[movie]] because it saved Disney from a [[delicate]] situation. [[If]] this was a failure, there wouldn't be any more Disney animated classics.

"Cinderella" is [[somehow]] like a [[return]] to Disney's 1st animated [[classic]] ("Snow White and the [[Seven]] Dwarfs") because it [[brings]] back the fairy [[tale]] [[genre]]. It's not clear where the [[story]] takes place, but I suppose it's [[somewhere]] in [[France]] because this is based in a [[tale]] by Charles Perrault.

There are plenty of [[likable]] [[characters]], such as Cinderella, the Prince, Bruno (the [[dog]]), Jaques and Gus (the two [[main]] mice), the Fairy Godmother (for a fairy she sure is funny), the birds, the [[King]] and the [[Grand]] Duke.

Jaques is very [[smart]] and amusing. I [[love]] his voice. Really has that mouse-like quality. Gus [[might]] not be that [[smart]], but he's [[humorous]].

The [[King]] is [[hilarious]], but I [[think]] that what makes him so [[funny]] is his [[short]] temper. The [[Grand]] Duke is a very [[cool]] [[chap]] and [[funny]] too. They're two of my [[favorite]] [[characters]] in this [[film]] and [[responsible]] for [[many]] of the most amusing moments.

The Prince is [[certainly]] one of the most charming in [[Disney]]. No [[doubt]] that Prince Philip from "Sleeping Beauty" was inspired on this prince, because they are very similar-looking.

[[On]] the other hand, Lady Tremaine (the stepmother) isn't supposed to be likable because she's cold, jealous, bitter and [[cruel]]. Her [[daughters]] (Anastacia and Drizella) aren't [[much]] [[better]] than her. [[However]], the [[stepmother]] isn't as annoying as her ugly and selfish [[daughters]]. Cinderella, the [[main]] [[character]], has nothing to do with them. Cinderella is [[gentle]], [[kind]], pretty and lovable. By the way, I think her beautiful pink dress is much nicer than the one given by the Fairy Godmother.

Lucifer (the cat) is hilariously malicious. The way he walks, sticking up his nose in the air and those arrogant and snobbish facial expressions make him funny. Ironically he's very much like the stepmother when it comes to personality. He always agrees with the stepmother's attitudes towards Cinderella. Lucifer has the right [[name]] for him because he's such a devilish and mean cat. Yet, there's nothing annoying about him.

The soundtrack is simple but pleasant, although not among Disney's best. The best song in this movie is "Bibiddi Bobiddi Boo".

There are plenty of well known talented voice actors in this, such as James MacDonald, Marion Darlington, Eleanor Audley, Verna Felton and Luis Van Rooten.

Despite being simple-looking, the movie has good artwork, as well as its nice details, although never something "out-of-this-world". However, the King's palace is a spectacular masterpiece, being truly majestic and colossal. The 12th animated Disney classic is a reasonable [[flick]] [[said]] through a simple [[tales]]. Even [[if]] a [[tiny]] dated, it [[merits]] a place in the list of Disney classics.

It's not among Disney's top works, but is [[gratifying]]. One of Disney's most "simple" works, yes, but keeps a certain [[witchcraft]] and enchantment (which [[ancient]] Disney is well [[renowned]] for). This was an [[critical]] [[cinematic]] because it saved Disney from a [[touchy]] situation. [[Though]] this was a failure, there wouldn't be any more Disney animated classics.

"Cinderella" is [[somewhere]] like a [[homecoming]] to Disney's 1st animated [[classical]] ("Snow White and the [[Seventh]] Dwarfs") because it [[bring]] back the fairy [[histories]] [[genera]]. It's not clear where the [[histories]] takes place, but I suppose it's [[somehow]] in [[Francia]] because this is based in a [[histories]] by Charles Perrault.

There are plenty of [[congenial]] [[traits]], such as Cinderella, the Prince, Bruno (the [[hound]]), Jaques and Gus (the two [[principal]] mice), the Fairy Godmother (for a fairy she sure is funny), the birds, the [[Emperor]] and the [[Great]] Duke.

Jaques is very [[smarter]] and amusing. I [[adored]] his voice. Really has that mouse-like quality. Gus [[apt]] not be that [[intelligent]], but he's [[comical]].

The [[Emperor]] is [[fun]], but I [[thought]] that what makes him so [[comical]] is his [[succinct]] temper. The [[Prodigious]] Duke is a very [[groovy]] [[chaps]] and [[droll]] too. They're two of my [[preferable]] [[personage]] in this [[filmmaking]] and [[answerable]] for [[various]] of the most amusing moments.

The Prince is [[indubitably]] one of the most charming in [[Disneyland]]. No [[duda]] that Prince Philip from "Sleeping Beauty" was inspired on this prince, because they are very similar-looking.

[[Onto]] the other hand, Lady Tremaine (the stepmother) isn't supposed to be likable because she's cold, jealous, bitter and [[savage]]. Her [[females]] (Anastacia and Drizella) aren't [[very]] [[nicer]] than her. [[Still]], the [[stepmom]] isn't as annoying as her ugly and selfish [[females]]. Cinderella, the [[principal]] [[traits]], has nothing to do with them. Cinderella is [[mild]], [[genera]], pretty and lovable. By the way, I think her beautiful pink dress is much nicer than the one given by the Fairy Godmother.

Lucifer (the cat) is hilariously malicious. The way he walks, sticking up his nose in the air and those arrogant and snobbish facial expressions make him funny. Ironically he's very much like the stepmother when it comes to personality. He always agrees with the stepmother's attitudes towards Cinderella. Lucifer has the right [[behalf]] for him because he's such a devilish and mean cat. Yet, there's nothing annoying about him.

The soundtrack is simple but pleasant, although not among Disney's best. The best song in this movie is "Bibiddi Bobiddi Boo".

There are plenty of well known talented voice actors in this, such as James MacDonald, Marion Darlington, Eleanor Audley, Verna Felton and Luis Van Rooten.

Despite being simple-looking, the movie has good artwork, as well as its nice details, although never something "out-of-this-world". However, the King's palace is a spectacular masterpiece, being truly majestic and colossal. --------------------------------------------- Result 3572 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I had the pleasure of viewing this movie early and I have to [[say]] I thought that it was going to be [[boring]] and wondered how [[could]] they ever [[improve]] upon the 1984 [[version]] of [[Bachelor]] [[Party]] [[starring]] Tom Hanks, which I thought was [[pretty]] good...I was right...[[In]] all honesty I thought it could have been better...Sure there were some [[funny]] [[moments]] but it just didn't seem to hit the mark with me...The acting was OK and the storyline pretty well follows the [[original]] but I think it could have been so much better...This movie I'd [[say]] is for [[teens]] and the young of heart; full of female bodies, alcohol and sex...It's just another typical run of the mill party movie that has been done over and over again. 4/10 is my vote for this one. I had the pleasure of viewing this movie early and I have to [[said]] I thought that it was going to be [[dull]] and wondered how [[wo]] they ever [[reinforcing]] upon the 1984 [[stepping]] of [[Baccalaureate]] [[Parte]] [[featuring]] Tom Hanks, which I thought was [[quite]] good...I was right...[[Among]] all honesty I thought it could have been better...Sure there were some [[humorous]] [[times]] but it just didn't seem to hit the mark with me...The acting was OK and the storyline pretty well follows the [[upfront]] but I think it could have been so much better...This movie I'd [[told]] is for [[adolescence]] and the young of heart; full of female bodies, alcohol and sex...It's just another typical run of the mill party movie that has been done over and over again. 4/10 is my vote for this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3573 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] (48 out of 278 people found this [[comment]] useful, and counting...)

People are such suckers for image and looks - as much as for the intellectually [[hollow]] "idealism" that lurks behind Communism. Che's charisma and looks have as much to do with his iconic stature as the misinformation that has been spread by Leftist propaganda (such as this movie) about him.

I don't know what's worse: being captured by one of Che's murder-squads or having to sit through 4 hours of this typically Soderberghian [[garbage]]. The question isn't why this pet-project was made but what took them so long. By "them" I'm referring, of course, to Left-wing Hollywood and its "secret" love of Marxist tyrants (Lenin, Castro... take your pick). I am fascinated that it took decades for one of Tinseltown's least talented liberal directors to finally take on such an irresistibly [[biased]] propaganda project. Where was Oliver Stone all these years? Robert Redford? Tim Robbins? Warren Beatty? Alan Pakula? George Clooney? Barbra Streisand even? It's a mystery. All these overrated "artists" have often indulging themselves in similar, politically one-sided projects, yet somehow Che Guevara, who is arguably the most popular and well-known Communist, hasn't been a film topic of theirs yet.

"Guerrilla" has all the hallmarks of an American truth-bending story of an epic scale; there is as much factual detail to be found here as in other similar Hollywood big-budget political fairy-tale bios such as "Malcolm X" or "Gandhi", i.e. almost none. The movie stars Del Toro as the famous Argentinian revolutionary. Nevertheless, however controversial and criminal this man's actions may have been, one thing nobody could take away from him: he was an intelligent manipulator who came from a rich family - which is why Del Toro fits the bill only visually. Del Toro may be an interesting, charismatic actor and he may resemble Guevara physically, but he exudes no intellectual qualities whatsoever, hence he makes Guevara come off as too primitive. Casting such mediocrities as Bratt, Philips and Franka Incompetente only underlines the director's lack of sound judgment.

The movie is to the most part extremely slow (no surprise there), and visually uninteresting. Even a director as brilliant as Kubrick would have carefully considered releasing a movie that goes beyond the 3-hour mark, so it's quite telling that this Soderbergh, who has only made one or two solid movies and early on in his career, would think that His Oceanic Grandness was up to the task. If you think the film's length indicates that a bulk of Che's life has been shown here - then think again. Soderbergh focuses on Che's last phase, and a lot of the movie is tedious jungle nonsense, full of Guevara's alleged idealism. (Psychopaths don't have ideals.) I do wonder what kind of a mind this highly esteemed director has to have to actually choose to ignore some of Che's earlier life. Did he actually consider it too uninteresting? A massacre of 600 people holds no interest for the viewer, huh? Amazing. Some much better directors than this over-praised charlatan would have easily fit not one but two complete biographies into a 4-hour movie.

Soderbergh, in a sense, becomes an accomplice by never addressing the negative, dark side - which is more than 90% - of Guevara. By spreading this kind of historical inaccuracy, consciously ignoring the ugly truth (God forbid he should taint the holy image of Che), Soderbergh proves himself not a humanist - a fake image which most Hollywood and pop music personalities struggle very hard all their careers to uphold - but the opposite: that he cares only about ideas, never about the people on whom these ideas are tested (like on guinea pigs). Soderbergh and the like are elitists of the worst kind; such people often have a latent contempt for the "proleteriat" (what a stupid term) they're supposedly siding with.

Half of all students around the world wear Che's image on their red and orange shirts, but without ever knowing why. He has become an iconic figure for clueless, uninformed, very often young people, who think that by having this man's face on their chest that somehow makes them appear "edgy", intellectual, hip or interesting. In reality, wearing a Che shirt only underlines one's overall shallowness and total disinterest in self-education. (Wouldn't YOU want to find out more about a person before you start advertising his/her face to the world?) Wearing Che's by-now cliché image has become as common as having a Bart Simpson coffee cup. All those "Che-wearers" probably know more about Marge's blue hair than they'll ever read up on about Fidel Castro's dead ally.

After everything that'd been done in the name of Marx, one would think that these mongrel "ideals" would be finally laid to rest. It seems mankind will never learn. Stalin, Mao, Kim Il, Pol Pot, Castro, Milosevic, Ceausescu, the Iron Curtain, a hundred million dead, more than a billion ruined physically and/or mentally through this system... so none of that matters, huh?

The fact that Del Toro won a Cannes Award should only surprise those who are absolutely clueless as to how Cannes and other European festivals work - and vote. Hint: Sean Penn headed a jury not long ago.

For my music-related rants, go to: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/Fedor8/ (48 out of 278 people found this [[commentaries]] useful, and counting...)

People are such suckers for image and looks - as much as for the intellectually [[empty]] "idealism" that lurks behind Communism. Che's charisma and looks have as much to do with his iconic stature as the misinformation that has been spread by Leftist propaganda (such as this movie) about him.

I don't know what's worse: being captured by one of Che's murder-squads or having to sit through 4 hours of this typically Soderberghian [[litter]]. The question isn't why this pet-project was made but what took them so long. By "them" I'm referring, of course, to Left-wing Hollywood and its "secret" love of Marxist tyrants (Lenin, Castro... take your pick). I am fascinated that it took decades for one of Tinseltown's least talented liberal directors to finally take on such an irresistibly [[skewed]] propaganda project. Where was Oliver Stone all these years? Robert Redford? Tim Robbins? Warren Beatty? Alan Pakula? George Clooney? Barbra Streisand even? It's a mystery. All these overrated "artists" have often indulging themselves in similar, politically one-sided projects, yet somehow Che Guevara, who is arguably the most popular and well-known Communist, hasn't been a film topic of theirs yet.

"Guerrilla" has all the hallmarks of an American truth-bending story of an epic scale; there is as much factual detail to be found here as in other similar Hollywood big-budget political fairy-tale bios such as "Malcolm X" or "Gandhi", i.e. almost none. The movie stars Del Toro as the famous Argentinian revolutionary. Nevertheless, however controversial and criminal this man's actions may have been, one thing nobody could take away from him: he was an intelligent manipulator who came from a rich family - which is why Del Toro fits the bill only visually. Del Toro may be an interesting, charismatic actor and he may resemble Guevara physically, but he exudes no intellectual qualities whatsoever, hence he makes Guevara come off as too primitive. Casting such mediocrities as Bratt, Philips and Franka Incompetente only underlines the director's lack of sound judgment.

The movie is to the most part extremely slow (no surprise there), and visually uninteresting. Even a director as brilliant as Kubrick would have carefully considered releasing a movie that goes beyond the 3-hour mark, so it's quite telling that this Soderbergh, who has only made one or two solid movies and early on in his career, would think that His Oceanic Grandness was up to the task. If you think the film's length indicates that a bulk of Che's life has been shown here - then think again. Soderbergh focuses on Che's last phase, and a lot of the movie is tedious jungle nonsense, full of Guevara's alleged idealism. (Psychopaths don't have ideals.) I do wonder what kind of a mind this highly esteemed director has to have to actually choose to ignore some of Che's earlier life. Did he actually consider it too uninteresting? A massacre of 600 people holds no interest for the viewer, huh? Amazing. Some much better directors than this over-praised charlatan would have easily fit not one but two complete biographies into a 4-hour movie.

Soderbergh, in a sense, becomes an accomplice by never addressing the negative, dark side - which is more than 90% - of Guevara. By spreading this kind of historical inaccuracy, consciously ignoring the ugly truth (God forbid he should taint the holy image of Che), Soderbergh proves himself not a humanist - a fake image which most Hollywood and pop music personalities struggle very hard all their careers to uphold - but the opposite: that he cares only about ideas, never about the people on whom these ideas are tested (like on guinea pigs). Soderbergh and the like are elitists of the worst kind; such people often have a latent contempt for the "proleteriat" (what a stupid term) they're supposedly siding with.

Half of all students around the world wear Che's image on their red and orange shirts, but without ever knowing why. He has become an iconic figure for clueless, uninformed, very often young people, who think that by having this man's face on their chest that somehow makes them appear "edgy", intellectual, hip or interesting. In reality, wearing a Che shirt only underlines one's overall shallowness and total disinterest in self-education. (Wouldn't YOU want to find out more about a person before you start advertising his/her face to the world?) Wearing Che's by-now cliché image has become as common as having a Bart Simpson coffee cup. All those "Che-wearers" probably know more about Marge's blue hair than they'll ever read up on about Fidel Castro's dead ally.

After everything that'd been done in the name of Marx, one would think that these mongrel "ideals" would be finally laid to rest. It seems mankind will never learn. Stalin, Mao, Kim Il, Pol Pot, Castro, Milosevic, Ceausescu, the Iron Curtain, a hundred million dead, more than a billion ruined physically and/or mentally through this system... so none of that matters, huh?

The fact that Del Toro won a Cannes Award should only surprise those who are absolutely clueless as to how Cannes and other European festivals work - and vote. Hint: Sean Penn headed a jury not long ago.

For my music-related rants, go to: http://rateyourmusic.com/collection/Fedor8/ --------------------------------------------- Result 3574 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I am a huge fan of warrior movies. Some of my favorites are Braveheart, Troy, The last samurai and Gladiator. And after watching Mongol, which is absolutely awesome, and which i strongly recommend, i had high expectations from a Sergei Bodrov movie. But it was terrible, awful, even pathetic is not a strong word in this case. The whole movie i was waiting for something exciting to happen, but it didn't, then i was at least expecting a big epic battle at the end, but even that was a huge disappointment, just some random running around, waving with the swords... There are so many good warrior movies, this one is not one of them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3575 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] It is incredible that with all of the countless crimes that have been uncovered and laid unequivocally at the doorstep of Marxism, from the Berlin Wall to the Gulag archipelago to the Cultural Revolution to the Khmer Rouge, one [[still]] [[finds]] [[admirers]] of Communist [[totalitarianism]] in Hollywood and are still making [[propaganda]] in its favor. It just shows the moral [[depravity]] of Hollywood.

In this particular film a [[psychotic]] murderer is glorified. Needless to say that [[neither]] his crimes nor his psychotic proclamations were included. That both the [[director]] and the actor expect audiences to sit through this seemingly [[interminable]] propagandistic film demonstrates the [[tunnel]] [[vision]] that they have in regards to their object of worship. It is incredible that with all of the countless crimes that have been uncovered and laid unequivocally at the doorstep of Marxism, from the Berlin Wall to the Gulag archipelago to the Cultural Revolution to the Khmer Rouge, one [[again]] [[discoveries]] [[buffs]] of Communist [[tyranny]] in Hollywood and are still making [[advocacy]] in its favor. It just shows the moral [[debauchery]] of Hollywood.

In this particular film a [[psychopathic]] murderer is glorified. Needless to say that [[either]] his crimes nor his psychotic proclamations were included. That both the [[headmaster]] and the actor expect audiences to sit through this seemingly [[neverending]] propagandistic film demonstrates the [[tunnels]] [[insight]] that they have in regards to their object of worship. --------------------------------------------- Result 3576 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have always liked Spike Lee's movies, but this one was a total waste of 2 1/2 hours. I expected more about Son of Sam and instead got a movie that seemed to have very little to do with the 1977 serial killings. The talking dog was laughable (you know you're in trouble when all the movie patrons burst into laughter inappropriately). The whole movie seemed very disjointed and not very interesting. The sex scenes were totally irrelevent to the plot. I'm not opposed to sex in movies, but it should have some point (unless it's a XXX movie). All in all, we were very disappointed at this Spike Lee effort!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3577 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] All this dismaying [[waste]] of [[film]] stock needs is [[Count]] Floyd popping up every sixty seconds. Somehow they got [[Steve]] Railsback, Susan Anspach, [[John]] Vernon, and Joe Flaherty together on a set and couldn't get within five [[miles]], about eight [[kilometers]], of an actual movie. BOY does this thing suck. There isn't one [[original]] line, [[thought]], shot, or [[effect]] from brainless [[opening]] sequence to brainless close. The magical, ethereal Susan Anspach of Five Easy [[Pieces]] - [[boring]]. Steve Railsback - boring. [[John]] Vernon - boring. The big [[bug]] - boring. [[If]] this is a [[scary]] [[movie]], Buttercream Gang is a thuglife documentary.

Seriously - every bad [[movie]] [[contains]] its own [[explanation]] of its badness. [[Usually]] it's in the [[opening]] credits - "[[Written]], [[Directed]], and Produced by" one [[guy]]. [[Or]] at the very [[center]] of the [[action]] is some bimbo so talentless that you know there's one and only one [[reason]] this [[turkey]] [[got]] [[made]]. Here, you don't [[find]] out till the very [[last]] of the [[credits]], where the [[cooperation]] of about a dozen subfunctions of the Canadian [[Government]] is gratefully [[acknowledged]].

Right now I'm watching MST's take on [[Beast]] of Yucca [[Flats]] to [[get]] the [[taste]] out of my [[mouth]]. Ghod, what an improvement. All this dismaying [[wastes]] of [[films]] stock needs is [[Counts]] Floyd popping up every sixty seconds. Somehow they got [[Stephens]] Railsback, Susan Anspach, [[Giovanni]] Vernon, and Joe Flaherty together on a set and couldn't get within five [[kilometre]], about eight [[kilometre]], of an actual movie. BOY does this thing suck. There isn't one [[preliminary]] line, [[think]], shot, or [[impacts]] from brainless [[opens]] sequence to brainless close. The magical, ethereal Susan Anspach of Five Easy [[Slices]] - [[tiresome]]. Steve Railsback - boring. [[Giovanni]] Vernon - boring. The big [[glitch]] - boring. [[Though]] this is a [[terrifying]] [[kino]], Buttercream Gang is a thuglife documentary.

Seriously - every bad [[cinema]] [[encompasses]] its own [[explanations]] of its badness. [[Traditionally]] it's in the [[commencement]] credits - "[[Handwritten]], [[Aimed]], and Produced by" one [[buddy]]. [[Neither]] at the very [[centro]] of the [[actions]] is some bimbo so talentless that you know there's one and only one [[cause]] this [[ankara]] [[get]] [[accomplished]]. Here, you don't [[unearthed]] out till the very [[final]] of the [[credit]], where the [[partnership]] of about a dozen subfunctions of the Canadian [[Goverment]] is gratefully [[conceded]].

Right now I'm watching MST's take on [[Silly]] of Yucca [[Apartments]] to [[got]] the [[aftertaste]] out of my [[kisser]]. Ghod, what an improvement. --------------------------------------------- Result 3578 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Typical]] Troma-trash, this smutty 80's [[flick]] is [[considered]] one of the "highlights" of Lloyd Kaufman's [[notorious]] [[production]] studio, [[alongside]] "The [[Toxic]] Avenger" [[released]] one year [[earlier]]. "The Toxic Avenger" is far [[superior]] if you [[ask]] me, but this [[demented]] splatter-flick is nevertheless endurable as well; just make sure you leave your full brain capacity at the [[door]]. The events take place in Tromaville, a little [[town]] that proudly [[claims]] to be the toxic chemical capital of the world, and they certainly aren't lying. The safety precautions in the local nuclear power plant are substandard, to say the least (even Homer Simpson never was this nonchalant) and toxic waste seeps through to the nearby high school. The first intoxicated victim is the [[stereotypical]] nerd, who starts spurting green stuff out of all his body cavities, but his death is believed to be an accident because he had no less than TWO microwave [[ovens]] in his house! Oh, the humanity! Shortly after, however, the nuclear [[leaks]] also affect the school's weed plantation and thing really start to get [[messy]]. After smoking a joint at a party, the cutest couple in school produce a gigantic worm monster that settles in the basement and feeds on teenage scum. "Class of Nuke 'em High" is bottom-of-the-barrel [[horror]] film-making, with dialogs so dumb they hurt your ears and make-up effects that give a whole new meaning to the word tasteless. If you enjoy watching faces melting away, getting crushed or splitting in half, this is definitely a must-see! Unlike the aforementioned "The Toxic Avenger", this film [[suffers]] from a couple of really [[dull]] and overlong moments where nothing really significant happens, like for example when Chrissy and Warren try to figure out what's wrong with their hormones. The crude humor isn't as effective as in "[[Toxic]] Avenger" and the acting performances are unforgivably amateurish. Proceed only if you're an avid Troma-fanatic. [[Classic]] Troma-trash, this smutty 80's [[gesture]] is [[judged]] one of the "highlights" of Lloyd Kaufman's [[famous]] [[productivity]] studio, [[beside]] "The [[Toxin]] Avenger" [[liberated]] one year [[previously]]. "The Toxic Avenger" is far [[upper]] if you [[calls]] me, but this [[wacky]] splatter-flick is nevertheless endurable as well; just make sure you leave your full brain capacity at the [[puerta]]. The events take place in Tromaville, a little [[cities]] that proudly [[claim]] to be the toxic chemical capital of the world, and they certainly aren't lying. The safety precautions in the local nuclear power plant are substandard, to say the least (even Homer Simpson never was this nonchalant) and toxic waste seeps through to the nearby high school. The first intoxicated victim is the [[stereotyped]] nerd, who starts spurting green stuff out of all his body cavities, but his death is believed to be an accident because he had no less than TWO microwave [[furnaces]] in his house! Oh, the humanity! Shortly after, however, the nuclear [[leakage]] also affect the school's weed plantation and thing really start to get [[chaotic]]. After smoking a joint at a party, the cutest couple in school produce a gigantic worm monster that settles in the basement and feeds on teenage scum. "Class of Nuke 'em High" is bottom-of-the-barrel [[terror]] film-making, with dialogs so dumb they hurt your ears and make-up effects that give a whole new meaning to the word tasteless. If you enjoy watching faces melting away, getting crushed or splitting in half, this is definitely a must-see! Unlike the aforementioned "The Toxic Avenger", this film [[undergo]] from a couple of really [[dreary]] and overlong moments where nothing really significant happens, like for example when Chrissy and Warren try to figure out what's wrong with their hormones. The crude humor isn't as effective as in "[[Toxins]] Avenger" and the acting performances are unforgivably amateurish. Proceed only if you're an avid Troma-fanatic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3579 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't really like this movie that much at all. It wasn't really funny and in some cases it was just downright stupid. Rob Schneider is definitely one enormously talented individual and while his acting was fine in this, it just seemed like a real waste for him to star in. I mean there were some parts that were okay and somewhat humorous in a cute kind of way but that's about it. The only thing that actually caught my attention during this whole ordeal of over the top jokes was that there were some very good looking females present and I'm not one to watch a movie solely because of that but in this case it was the only nook where even the slightest case of redemption could be found. All in all it was a couple notches below an average movie!

Final Query:

Theaters: So glad I didn't squander too much money on this.

DVD Purchase: Ummm, let me think....no!

Rental: If you have a prehistoric sense of humor then why not. --------------------------------------------- Result 3580 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Quite simply the [[best]] reality show ever [[made]]. The [[first]] two seasons (the only ones that matter) are on Hulu. I [[challenge]] [[anyone]] to watch the first three episodes of season 1 and not like it. I guarantee you will finish [[watching]] the season. Then I guarantee that you will watch season 2.

Other [[quick]] reasons to watch it: 1. Anderson Cooper is [[hilarious]] 2. The locations in Europe are awesome 3. The games are mentally challenging 4. It's very interactive 5. In one episode a [[player]] responds to another player's desperate, "I'm trying as hard as I can!" with an equally desperate, "Not necessarily."

Can you figure out...Who Is The Mole? Quite simply the [[optimum]] reality show ever [[brought]]. The [[frst]] two seasons (the only ones that matter) are on Hulu. I [[challenged]] [[somebody]] to watch the first three episodes of season 1 and not like it. I guarantee you will finish [[staring]] the season. Then I guarantee that you will watch season 2.

Other [[rapid]] reasons to watch it: 1. Anderson Cooper is [[comic]] 2. The locations in Europe are awesome 3. The games are mentally challenging 4. It's very interactive 5. In one episode a [[protagonist]] responds to another player's desperate, "I'm trying as hard as I can!" with an equally desperate, "Not necessarily."

Can you figure out...Who Is The Mole? --------------------------------------------- Result 3581 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I gave this [[film]] an 10/10 with some reluctance as it's hard to praise something that so haunted and terrified me for years. The sheer menace on the woman in black's face is just pure horror and the accompanying music just [[worsens]] the [[dread]].

I saw this when it was first on TV when I was 10 and it really did disturb me for years. I'm fascinated by the fact that so many other users have said this too. So many movie reviews go on about how disturbing or terrifying a film might be but you can believe all those who have posted on this board, this really is incredibly [[powerful]] stuff. I mean I really like horror films and generally find them quite funny more often than not, but this really is menacing and will probably disturb most people. I haven't seen it since I was 10 and I'm tempted to watch it again but fear I might have some sleepless nights. I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly, but I think it's something to do with the fact that fear is the Woman's greatest weapon and that we, as viewers, are just as susceptible as we feel the fear so intensely. It's remarkable that other viewers' feelings are so unanimous.

I've also seen the stage play, which was an excellent production...but nothing can [[compare]] to this. I gave this [[cinematography]] an 10/10 with some reluctance as it's hard to praise something that so haunted and terrified me for years. The sheer menace on the woman in black's face is just pure horror and the accompanying music just [[deteriorates]] the [[angst]].

I saw this when it was first on TV when I was 10 and it really did disturb me for years. I'm fascinated by the fact that so many other users have said this too. So many movie reviews go on about how disturbing or terrifying a film might be but you can believe all those who have posted on this board, this really is incredibly [[mighty]] stuff. I mean I really like horror films and generally find them quite funny more often than not, but this really is menacing and will probably disturb most people. I haven't seen it since I was 10 and I'm tempted to watch it again but fear I might have some sleepless nights. I can't quite put my finger on what it is exactly, but I think it's something to do with the fact that fear is the Woman's greatest weapon and that we, as viewers, are just as susceptible as we feel the fear so intensely. It's remarkable that other viewers' feelings are so unanimous.

I've also seen the stage play, which was an excellent production...but nothing can [[comparative]] to this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3582 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Even though there's a repertoire of over 180 films to choose from, this 'Succubus' is [[often]] named as THE best Jess Franco film. Heck, even the legendary filmmaker Fritz Lang counts 'Succubus' among his personal favorites. [[So]], [[maybe]] it's me but I thought this was a [[dreadfully]] [[boring]] and overly confusing [[movie]]. The [[opening]] is great, though, and shows [[Janine]] Reynaud performing an SM act on stage. It's all downhill from here, unfortunately. Reynaud's character is a maneater who eventually kills her lovers in some sort of trance. Franco had a decent budget to work with and spends it well on nice locations, beautiful photography and a mesmerizing musical score. This COULD have been his greatest film indeed, if it wasn't for the lame and uninteresting story. It's supposed to be psychedelic but I'd say sophomoric is a better term to describe what's shown here. Half of the time, you don't have a clue what's going on or what exactly is said so even the short running time of 80 minutes seems to last ages. This most certainly isn't Franco's best film according to me. I wouldn't even recommend it to die-hard exploitation fans. If you're looking for more superior Jess Franco film, try to get your hands on 'Las Vampiras', 'The awful Dr. Orloff' or 'Female Vampire'. Even though there's a repertoire of over 180 films to choose from, this 'Succubus' is [[commonly]] named as THE best Jess Franco film. Heck, even the legendary filmmaker Fritz Lang counts 'Succubus' among his personal favorites. [[Accordingly]], [[presumably]] it's me but I thought this was a [[awfully]] [[dreary]] and overly confusing [[cinematography]]. The [[initiation]] is great, though, and shows [[Jeanine]] Reynaud performing an SM act on stage. It's all downhill from here, unfortunately. Reynaud's character is a maneater who eventually kills her lovers in some sort of trance. Franco had a decent budget to work with and spends it well on nice locations, beautiful photography and a mesmerizing musical score. This COULD have been his greatest film indeed, if it wasn't for the lame and uninteresting story. It's supposed to be psychedelic but I'd say sophomoric is a better term to describe what's shown here. Half of the time, you don't have a clue what's going on or what exactly is said so even the short running time of 80 minutes seems to last ages. This most certainly isn't Franco's best film according to me. I wouldn't even recommend it to die-hard exploitation fans. If you're looking for more superior Jess Franco film, try to get your hands on 'Las Vampiras', 'The awful Dr. Orloff' or 'Female Vampire'. --------------------------------------------- Result 3583 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This is [[perhaps]] the [[best]] rockumentary ever- a British, better This Is Spinal [[Tap]]. The [[characters]] are believable, the plot is [[great]], and you can [[genuinely]] empathise with some of the events- such as Ray's [[problem]] with [[fitting]] in the [[band]].

The soundtrack is [[excellent]]. Real period stuff, [[even]] if it is in the same [[key]], you'll be [[humming]] some of the [[songs]] for days. What I [[liked]] was the [[nearly]] all-British cast, with some of the [[favourite]] household [[names]]. Ray's wife is [[priceless]]...

The [[film]] never drags, it just goes at the right pace, and has some [[genuinely]] [[funny]] [[sections]] in it. A [[generator]] of some really good catchphrases!

It's a [[hidden]] diamond. This is [[potentially]] the [[optimum]] rockumentary ever- a British, better This Is Spinal [[Valve]]. The [[nature]] are believable, the plot is [[fantastic]], and you can [[actually]] empathise with some of the events- such as Ray's [[issues]] with [[fit]] in the [[bands]].

The soundtrack is [[delightful]]. Real period stuff, [[yet]] if it is in the same [[indispensable]], you'll be [[buzz]] some of the [[hymns]] for days. What I [[wished]] was the [[approximately]] all-British cast, with some of the [[preferential]] household [[name]]. Ray's wife is [[inestimable]]...

The [[cinema]] never drags, it just goes at the right pace, and has some [[actually]] [[droll]] [[chapters]] in it. A [[generators]] of some really good catchphrases!

It's a [[ulterior]] diamond. --------------------------------------------- Result 3584 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (89%)]] When watching this show you are not quite sure whether it is the story or the acting that is more [[annoying]]. First of all, the storyline of each episode is very [[predictable]], the writers must have [[used]] every cliché possible, you can guess not only the general plot, but the arrangement of the scenes and also the lines of each character, making the show some sort of a collage of every police series out there. On the top of it all comes the "message" of the show, that the good are good and the bad are bad and that at the end of the day the good shall prevail and that we should all love each other, be better man and better citizens, all done in the most ostensible manner. The actors, as the vehicles of this message and nothing more than that, will use a limited set of acting skills: the "I am a good carrying person" smile, the concerned look and the "victory is ours" body posture, while the bad guys have the "I'm a bad one" frowning and the "you caught me" look, followed by the "I'm good for nothing and I should be removed from society" head banding (this kind of also sums up the general development of each show). True story or not, the show is garbage, yet another proof that producers don't give a s**t about viewers, that we are all thought to be idiots. Well this series makes every possible attempt to idiotize the living brains out of you. When watching this show you are not quite sure whether it is the story or the acting that is more [[vexing]]. First of all, the storyline of each episode is very [[foreseeable]], the writers must have [[utilised]] every cliché possible, you can guess not only the general plot, but the arrangement of the scenes and also the lines of each character, making the show some sort of a collage of every police series out there. On the top of it all comes the "message" of the show, that the good are good and the bad are bad and that at the end of the day the good shall prevail and that we should all love each other, be better man and better citizens, all done in the most ostensible manner. The actors, as the vehicles of this message and nothing more than that, will use a limited set of acting skills: the "I am a good carrying person" smile, the concerned look and the "victory is ours" body posture, while the bad guys have the "I'm a bad one" frowning and the "you caught me" look, followed by the "I'm good for nothing and I should be removed from society" head banding (this kind of also sums up the general development of each show). True story or not, the show is garbage, yet another proof that producers don't give a s**t about viewers, that we are all thought to be idiots. Well this series makes every possible attempt to idiotize the living brains out of you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3585 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The first half hour of the movie had a steady pace and introduced the characters. however all of a sudden everything was happening too quick, a lame reason for Akshey Kumar to date 3 girls, very loud over acting by both Akshey and John Abraham. Neha Dupia was the highlight of the movie, Paresh Rawal did well but not as good as his performance in Hera Pheri. overall this movie was the biggest disappointment the film does no justice to its trailer. save your money and don't watch this movie, watch Hera Pheri and Hungama again!

summarising it: a cheap stage show performance and appearance to the film no story or substance, the plot was extraordinarily non-sense good music by Preetam the man who bought us Dhoom! keep it up! movie shot all in one room, new comers (female cast) were okay as it was their first film but established actors like Akshey and John totally disappointed an established director like Priyadarshan gives his worst movie ever! --------------------------------------------- Result 3586 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ludicrous violations of the most basic security regs are only the beginning. It's hard to see how they achieved such abysmal trash on such a low budget. I turned it off once, then got curious to see if it could get any worse. It did. --------------------------------------------- Result 3587 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (75%)]] dear [[god]] where do i begin. this is [[bar]] none the best [[movie]] i've ever [[seen]]. the camera angles are [[great]] but in my [[opinion]] the acting was the [[best]]. why the [[script]] [[writers]] for this movie aren't [[writing]] big budget [[films]] i will never understand. another is the cast. it is [[great]]. this is the [[best]] ted raimi [[film]] out there for sure. i know some of you out there are probably [[thinking]] "no [[way]] he has plenty better" but no your wrong. raptor [[island]] is a work of art. i hope it should have goten best movie of the year instead of that crappy movie [[Crash]] with a bunch of no names AND no raptors. i believe this movie is truly the most [[wonderful]] thing EVER. dear [[deity]] where do i begin. this is [[solicitors]] none the best [[filmmaking]] i've ever [[noticed]]. the camera angles are [[gorgeous]] but in my [[view]] the acting was the [[better]]. why the [[screenplay]] [[authors]] for this movie aren't [[handwriting]] big budget [[cinematography]] i will never understand. another is the cast. it is [[large]]. this is the [[better]] ted raimi [[kino]] out there for sure. i know some of you out there are probably [[think]] "no [[ways]] he has plenty better" but no your wrong. raptor [[isla]] is a work of art. i hope it should have goten best movie of the year instead of that crappy movie [[Collisions]] with a bunch of no names AND no raptors. i believe this movie is truly the most [[sumptuous]] thing EVER. --------------------------------------------- Result 3588 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] The acting is some of the [[worst]] I've ever [[seen]], the [[characters]] are [[totally]] [[unconvincing]]. This could be overlooked to some extent if the [[plot]] was interesting, which the [[plot]] to "The Prodigy" was not. It's sort of a bad mix between "[[Fresh]]" and "Animal [[House]]", except that both of those [[movies]] were good. The acting is some of the [[gravest]] I've ever [[watched]], the [[trait]] are [[fully]] [[inconclusive]]. This could be overlooked to some extent if the [[intrigue]] was interesting, which the [[intrigue]] to "The Prodigy" was not. It's sort of a bad mix between "[[Dulce]]" and "Animal [[Domicile]]", except that both of those [[cinema]] were good. --------------------------------------------- Result 3589 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (85%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] Being an Austrian myself this has been a straight knock in my face. Fortunately I don't live nowhere near the place where this movie takes place but unfortunately it [[portrays]] everything that the rest of Austria hates about Viennese people (or people close to that region). And it is very easy to read that this is exactly the directors intention: to let your head sink into your hands and say "Oh my god, how can THAT be possible!". No, not with me, the (in my opinion) totally exaggerated uncensored swinger club scene is not necessary, I watch porn, sure, but in this context I was rather disgusted than put in the right context.

This movie tells a story about how misled people who suffer from lack of education or bad company try to survive and live in a world of redundancy and boring horizons. A girl who is treated like a whore by her super-jealous boyfriend (and still keeps coming back), a female teacher who discovers her masochism by putting the life of her super-cruel "lover" on the line, an old couple who has an almost mathematical daily cycle (she is the "official replacement" of his ex wife), a couple that has just divorced and has the ex husband suffer under the acts of his former wife obviously having a relationship with her masseuse and finally a crazy hitchhiker who asks her drivers the most unusual questions and stretches their nerves by just being super-annoying.

After having seen it you feel almost nothing. You're not even shocked, sad, depressed or feel like doing anything... Maybe that's why I gave it 7 points, it made me react in a way I never reacted before. If that's good or bad is up to you! Being an Austrian myself this has been a straight knock in my face. Fortunately I don't live nowhere near the place where this movie takes place but unfortunately it [[exemplifies]] everything that the rest of Austria hates about Viennese people (or people close to that region). And it is very easy to read that this is exactly the directors intention: to let your head sink into your hands and say "Oh my god, how can THAT be possible!". No, not with me, the (in my opinion) totally exaggerated uncensored swinger club scene is not necessary, I watch porn, sure, but in this context I was rather disgusted than put in the right context.

This movie tells a story about how misled people who suffer from lack of education or bad company try to survive and live in a world of redundancy and boring horizons. A girl who is treated like a whore by her super-jealous boyfriend (and still keeps coming back), a female teacher who discovers her masochism by putting the life of her super-cruel "lover" on the line, an old couple who has an almost mathematical daily cycle (she is the "official replacement" of his ex wife), a couple that has just divorced and has the ex husband suffer under the acts of his former wife obviously having a relationship with her masseuse and finally a crazy hitchhiker who asks her drivers the most unusual questions and stretches their nerves by just being super-annoying.

After having seen it you feel almost nothing. You're not even shocked, sad, depressed or feel like doing anything... Maybe that's why I gave it 7 points, it made me react in a way I never reacted before. If that's good or bad is up to you! --------------------------------------------- Result 3590 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] We're talking about a low budget film, and it's [[understandable]] that there are some [[weaknesses]] (no [[spoilers]]: one sudden explosives expert and one meaningless alcoholic); but in general the [[story]] [[keeps]] you interested, most of the [[characters]] are [[likable]] and there are some original situations.

I really like films that surprise you with some people that are not who they want you to believe and then twist and turn the plot ... I applaud this one on that.

[[If]] you know what I mean, try to see [[also]] "Nueve Reinas" (Nine Queens) a film from Argentina. We're talking about a low budget film, and it's [[legible]] that there are some [[demerits]] (no [[saboteurs]]: one sudden explosives expert and one meaningless alcoholic); but in general the [[history]] [[retains]] you interested, most of the [[attribute]] are [[congenial]] and there are some original situations.

I really like films that surprise you with some people that are not who they want you to believe and then twist and turn the plot ... I applaud this one on that.

[[Unless]] you know what I mean, try to see [[apart]] "Nueve Reinas" (Nine Queens) a film from Argentina. --------------------------------------------- Result 3591 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] This [[woman]] never stops [[talking]] [[throughout]] the [[movie]]. She memorized [[every]] [[line]], and delivered all without a [[bit]] of natural emotion. She [[also]] has a most uncharming lisp, and the pitch of her [[voice]] [[sounds]] like nails on a blackboard. This film has [[WAY]] too much Betsy Drake, and not [[enough]] Cary Grant, who carried what [[little]] was [[left]] of the film entirely on his own. This [[femme]] never stops [[discussing]] [[across]] the [[cinema]]. She memorized [[each]] [[bloodline]], and delivered all without a [[bitten]] of natural emotion. She [[apart]] has a most uncharming lisp, and the pitch of her [[vocals]] [[noises]] like nails on a blackboard. This film has [[PATHS]] too much Betsy Drake, and not [[sufficiently]] Cary Grant, who carried what [[small]] was [[exited]] of the film entirely on his own. --------------------------------------------- Result 3592 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Paul]] Naschy [[made]] a [[great]] number of horror films. In terms of quality, they tend to range from fairly good to unwatchable trash; and unfortunately, [[Horror]] [[Rises]] from the Tomb is closer to the latter. The plot is just your average story of a witch, wizard or (as is the [[case]] here) [[warlock]], who is put to death - but not before swearing vengeance on those who did it...etc etc. We then get a séance and one thing leads to another, and pretty soon the executed warlock is up to no good again. The plot is slow, painfully [[boring]] and the film constantly feels pointless. The characters string out reams of diatribe and it never serves the film in any way whatsoever. [[Paul]] Naschy [[wrote]] the [[script]], and if you [[ask]] me he should stick to acting because the dialogue is trite in the extreme, and only serves to make the [[film]] even more [[boring]] than it already is. Carlos Aured, who also directed Naschy in Blue Eyes of the Broken Doll and Curse of the Devil provides [[dull]] direction here, which likes the dialogue does nothing to [[help]] the film. [[Sometimes]] crap [[films]] like this have a certain [[charm]] about them; but [[Horror]] Rises from the Tomb doesn't [[even]] have that. This is a [[painfully]] [[boring]] film that has little or [[nothing]] in the way of interest. [[Poul]] Naschy [[effected]] a [[remarkable]] number of horror films. In terms of quality, they tend to range from fairly good to unwatchable trash; and unfortunately, [[Abomination]] [[Soaring]] from the Tomb is closer to the latter. The plot is just your average story of a witch, wizard or (as is the [[lawsuits]] here) [[magician]], who is put to death - but not before swearing vengeance on those who did it...etc etc. We then get a séance and one thing leads to another, and pretty soon the executed warlock is up to no good again. The plot is slow, painfully [[dreary]] and the film constantly feels pointless. The characters string out reams of diatribe and it never serves the film in any way whatsoever. [[Paulo]] Naschy [[texted]] the [[scripts]], and if you [[requested]] me he should stick to acting because the dialogue is trite in the extreme, and only serves to make the [[kino]] even more [[bored]] than it already is. Carlos Aured, who also directed Naschy in Blue Eyes of the Broken Doll and Curse of the Devil provides [[tiresome]] direction here, which likes the dialogue does nothing to [[helps]] the film. [[Sometime]] crap [[film]] like this have a certain [[amulet]] about them; but [[Terror]] Rises from the Tomb doesn't [[yet]] have that. This is a [[embarrassingly]] [[dreary]] film that has little or [[none]] in the way of interest. --------------------------------------------- Result 3593 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Uwe Boll has done the impossible: create a game adaptation that stays at least somewhat true to the game; he has turned a game full of antisocial and offensive content into a movie full of antisocial and offensive content. So, as an adaptation, it's a success.

Unfortunately, it's still Uwe Boll we are dealing with here, so don't expect the movie to be actually any good. while it does have it's moment, "Postal" wears out his welcome very fast and becomes a pain to sit through.

At its core, Postal is a satire on the United States, as done by a twelve year old kid. Boll seems to think that offensiveness is linearly proportional to comedic value: the more offensive, the funnier, and the more exaggerated the funnier. This results in a movie that sets new levels of tastelessness while being extremely hit and miss. Yes, some gags do work but it seems to be pure luck. High points include the director satirizing himself, and people getting hit very violently by trucks and other vehicles. Low points include..well pretty much everything else.

After the initial surprise wears off, Postal simply becomes a bore to watch. Yes there is a good joke every and good point ten minutes, but everything else consists of hordes of annoying characters shooting and chasing each other all over the place for what seems to be an eternity.

This probably would have worked as a short movie, but it's just not enough content for something that lasts over 90 minutes (although it feels twice as long). There are nice ideas and nice tries, but they get hopelessly lost in endless and pointless action scenes and content that is offensive just for the sake of it 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3594 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I have never been one to [[shy]] away from saying that most action [[films]] just plain do nothing for me. Most times they are blatant vehicles to blow stuff up, show off sexy models, and throw any semblance of [[reality]] or intelligence out the window. With that [[said]], the Bourne series has been [[fantastic]]. Doug Liman ushered in a [[new]] take on [[action]] by using a more [[cinema]] verite style, [[showing]] the fights in full force and making our super spy someone we can [[relate]] to emotionally as well as humanly. This is not the sci-fi absurdity that was [[Bond]] (before they did an [[overhaul]] in the style of this series no less). There was a lot to worry for when the Bourne Supremacy came out. With director Paul Greengrass taking over, what could have been a second-hand copy of the original ended up being an improvement in style and flair. The stakes were raised and the story was enhanced because of it. Greengrass needs to be given a ton of credit for being able to keep up appearances with the latest installment, The Bourne Ultimatum. In what is an [[amazing]] conclusion to a top-notch trilogy, the action is brought to a new level and story and performance are never [[compromised]].

Once again, Bourne is brought into the minds of the CIA by false pretenses. Someone has leaked information about the Treadstone upgrade called Blackbriar and once Bourne is located trying to converse with the newswriter who broke the story, he is assumed to be the mole. Only Pamela Landy, she who was on the case to find him in Supremacy, knows that he can't be the one. Bourne's motive has always been to stay clear of the government and live his life in peace. It has been the CIA who keeps bringing him back into the open to wreak havoc on them. What ends up transpiring is that Bourne wants to know the source as well to finally find out the truth of who he is and what made him into a killer. The film, then, becomes a chase against time and each other to find the source and see if the government can close the breach and tie off all loose ends, or if Bourne can get his revenge on those who took his life from him.

In what is probably the simplest storyline of the series, with only one chase lasting the entirety of the story, it has possibly the biggest cast of characters and turning over of loyalties to expose the corruption that has been behind the full story progression. This is not a detriment at all, however, as it allows for more fights and car chases that work in full context to the plot. Admission to this film is worth it for the apartment fight, between Bourne and the CIA's second asset, alone. The chase jumping through windows in Madrid is cool on its own, but when they finally meet up, we get a ten minute or so fight that is as invigorating to watch as any scene you'll see. Also, rather than using a massive car chase as a climatic set piece like in the first two films, we instead get around three small scale road races, just as intense, but staggered enough to never bog the action down into monotony.

After five years of waiting, we also find out the origin of our favorite operative with heart and feeling. By the end of the film we will find out what has been the cause of all the espionage and destruction that has taken place around him. No one could have done it better than Matt Damon. He has the physique and attitude to be believable in the action sequences, but also the range to pull off the moments of intelligence and cat and mouse correspondence with those against him. Joan Allen reprises her role with the same amount of dedication to her job, but also a bit more disenchantment for what is going on around her after how Brian Cox's character, from the first two films, took matters into his own hands. Needing a role in that mold, we are given a nice turn from David Strathairn. Like Cox, he is working at the top of the food chain and answers to no one when making a decision. With as much trying to cover up any connections to his bosses of the Blackbriar program as he is trying to do his duty to his country, you can never quite gauge what he will be capable of doing. Even the little guys do a wonderful job, like Paddy Considine as the reporter who starts the leak at the center of everything, Albert Finney as a man from Bourne's past and possibly key to his origin, and Edgar Ramirez as one of the CIA's operatives sent to take Bourne out. Ramirez is a nice addition to the role that has been successfully played by Clive Owen (Identity), Karl Urban, and Martin Csokas (Supremacy). He doesn't talk much, if at all, but he has the look and robotic efficiency down pat and hopefully will get more roles to show what he can do post a nice turn in Domino.

In the end, one has to applaud Paul Greengrass for continuing to exceed expectations and bring this series to a conclusion that builds on the success of its predecessors rather than destroy them. His skill at the close-up hand-held look is astonishing and has the same kinetic energy as Tony Scott, but without quite the seizure-inducing cuts. Rather than feel like over- production, his use of hand-held enhances the environment and puts you directly into the action. Let's also credit cinematographer Oliver Wood, who shot all three Bourne films. He was able to work with both directors and work his style into a nice harmony with them. I have never been one to [[bashful]] away from saying that most action [[kino]] just plain do nothing for me. Most times they are blatant vehicles to blow stuff up, show off sexy models, and throw any semblance of [[realism]] or intelligence out the window. With that [[stated]], the Bourne series has been [[unbelievable]]. Doug Liman ushered in a [[newer]] take on [[efforts]] by using a more [[cinemas]] verite style, [[displaying]] the fights in full force and making our super spy someone we can [[pertain]] to emotionally as well as humanly. This is not the sci-fi absurdity that was [[Bonds]] (before they did an [[revise]] in the style of this series no less). There was a lot to worry for when the Bourne Supremacy came out. With director Paul Greengrass taking over, what could have been a second-hand copy of the original ended up being an improvement in style and flair. The stakes were raised and the story was enhanced because of it. Greengrass needs to be given a ton of credit for being able to keep up appearances with the latest installment, The Bourne Ultimatum. In what is an [[admirable]] conclusion to a top-notch trilogy, the action is brought to a new level and story and performance are never [[endangered]].

Once again, Bourne is brought into the minds of the CIA by false pretenses. Someone has leaked information about the Treadstone upgrade called Blackbriar and once Bourne is located trying to converse with the newswriter who broke the story, he is assumed to be the mole. Only Pamela Landy, she who was on the case to find him in Supremacy, knows that he can't be the one. Bourne's motive has always been to stay clear of the government and live his life in peace. It has been the CIA who keeps bringing him back into the open to wreak havoc on them. What ends up transpiring is that Bourne wants to know the source as well to finally find out the truth of who he is and what made him into a killer. The film, then, becomes a chase against time and each other to find the source and see if the government can close the breach and tie off all loose ends, or if Bourne can get his revenge on those who took his life from him.

In what is probably the simplest storyline of the series, with only one chase lasting the entirety of the story, it has possibly the biggest cast of characters and turning over of loyalties to expose the corruption that has been behind the full story progression. This is not a detriment at all, however, as it allows for more fights and car chases that work in full context to the plot. Admission to this film is worth it for the apartment fight, between Bourne and the CIA's second asset, alone. The chase jumping through windows in Madrid is cool on its own, but when they finally meet up, we get a ten minute or so fight that is as invigorating to watch as any scene you'll see. Also, rather than using a massive car chase as a climatic set piece like in the first two films, we instead get around three small scale road races, just as intense, but staggered enough to never bog the action down into monotony.

After five years of waiting, we also find out the origin of our favorite operative with heart and feeling. By the end of the film we will find out what has been the cause of all the espionage and destruction that has taken place around him. No one could have done it better than Matt Damon. He has the physique and attitude to be believable in the action sequences, but also the range to pull off the moments of intelligence and cat and mouse correspondence with those against him. Joan Allen reprises her role with the same amount of dedication to her job, but also a bit more disenchantment for what is going on around her after how Brian Cox's character, from the first two films, took matters into his own hands. Needing a role in that mold, we are given a nice turn from David Strathairn. Like Cox, he is working at the top of the food chain and answers to no one when making a decision. With as much trying to cover up any connections to his bosses of the Blackbriar program as he is trying to do his duty to his country, you can never quite gauge what he will be capable of doing. Even the little guys do a wonderful job, like Paddy Considine as the reporter who starts the leak at the center of everything, Albert Finney as a man from Bourne's past and possibly key to his origin, and Edgar Ramirez as one of the CIA's operatives sent to take Bourne out. Ramirez is a nice addition to the role that has been successfully played by Clive Owen (Identity), Karl Urban, and Martin Csokas (Supremacy). He doesn't talk much, if at all, but he has the look and robotic efficiency down pat and hopefully will get more roles to show what he can do post a nice turn in Domino.

In the end, one has to applaud Paul Greengrass for continuing to exceed expectations and bring this series to a conclusion that builds on the success of its predecessors rather than destroy them. His skill at the close-up hand-held look is astonishing and has the same kinetic energy as Tony Scott, but without quite the seizure-inducing cuts. Rather than feel like over- production, his use of hand-held enhances the environment and puts you directly into the action. Let's also credit cinematographer Oliver Wood, who shot all three Bourne films. He was able to work with both directors and work his style into a nice harmony with them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3595 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This work is less about Steve Martin's character Davis, than it is about Kline (Mack) and Glover (Simon), and Kline and McDonnell (Claire), but the dialog inserted via Davis is pondering, contemplative, near-poetic existentialism at its best. He is witty, intelligent, and thoughtful in both dialog delivery and content. The writers deserved an Oscar.

The performances are easy, relaxed, and natural; just what you would expect from "A List" actors. Martin contributes the performance which leads into his more recent Shopgirl, guiding you through life, love, and the pursuit of wisdom if not happiness. Kline is the straight - the suit - the conformist of the film, and as such his performance is crisp and refreshing.

This work deals with life in all aspects. It engenders a true emotional investment in its characters, and leaves you feeling hopeful that Mankind is not doomed, after all, no matter WHAT you believe, deep down.

All in all? This is delightful, with a gritty moment or two, and easy natural dialog which draws you in, assisting its audience in gaining a high enjoyment from this work. It's definitely worth your time, though it may not be every one's top choice as Friday/Saturday night entertainment.

I really enjoyed the intelligence this exhibited. It's not typical, and was an unexpected surprise. Another wonderful surprise was the honesty exhibited herein. The couples and friends hold detailed conversations, which feel and sound fully honest and (again) natural. I was very impressed with this work, and will be adding it to the DVD collection soon.

It rates a 9.1/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3596 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I started watching the show from the first season, and at the beginning I was pretty [[skeptical]] about it. Original [[movie]] was kind of childish, and I was just [[looking]] for some sci-fi show while waiting for the BSG new season.

But after few episodes I [[became]] a fan. I've [[loved]] the [[characters]] - the not-so-stupid-as-you-think-he-is Jack O'Neill, the not-only-smart Samantha Carter, the glorious Teal'c, women and kids favorite, and brilliant Dr. Daniel Jackson.

Of course, stories sometimes not serious, sometimes even ridiculous, but mostly it's not about technology or space fighting - it's about helping your friend, even risking your life for him. It's about "we don't leave anybody behind". Struggling to the end when all hope is lost. About the free will, and all good qualities that makes a human - Human.

And now it's breaking a record, going 10th season, and still doing good. I started watching the show from the first season, and at the beginning I was pretty [[unconvinced]] about it. Original [[cinematography]] was kind of childish, and I was just [[researching]] for some sci-fi show while waiting for the BSG new season.

But after few episodes I [[was]] a fan. I've [[worshiped]] the [[hallmarks]] - the not-so-stupid-as-you-think-he-is Jack O'Neill, the not-only-smart Samantha Carter, the glorious Teal'c, women and kids favorite, and brilliant Dr. Daniel Jackson.

Of course, stories sometimes not serious, sometimes even ridiculous, but mostly it's not about technology or space fighting - it's about helping your friend, even risking your life for him. It's about "we don't leave anybody behind". Struggling to the end when all hope is lost. About the free will, and all good qualities that makes a human - Human.

And now it's breaking a record, going 10th season, and still doing good. --------------------------------------------- Result 3597 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Quick]] and simple, I [[love]] this movie.

As some others have mentioned, I also, am not from the south, don't really care for country music and have never worn a cowboy hat. (I've never drove around in a car with a dead body in my trunk either, but I love "Goodfellas.") This is just [[great]] film making. Shot in a 2.35 aspect ratio and beautifully transfered to [[DVD]]. (The VHS was 1.33 full screen). And yes, a solid 5.1 [[mix]] for your viewing pleasure. What can you say about this movie?

It's just a great love/hate story set in Texas, with great performances. Travolta is fantastic. Next to "Pulp Fiction", it's the best thing he's done. It's been in my top 5 for 25 years!!

Check this one out!!! It's a 10 !!!! [[Hurry]] and simple, I [[amour]] this movie.

As some others have mentioned, I also, am not from the south, don't really care for country music and have never worn a cowboy hat. (I've never drove around in a car with a dead body in my trunk either, but I love "Goodfellas.") This is just [[whopping]] film making. Shot in a 2.35 aspect ratio and beautifully transfered to [[DVDS]]. (The VHS was 1.33 full screen). And yes, a solid 5.1 [[amalgam]] for your viewing pleasure. What can you say about this movie?

It's just a great love/hate story set in Texas, with great performances. Travolta is fantastic. Next to "Pulp Fiction", it's the best thing he's done. It's been in my top 5 for 25 years!!

Check this one out!!! It's a 10 !!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3598 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I haven't read through all the [[comments]], but at least one poster [[mentioned]] that the 30 minute version might possibly be abridged. I'm [[curious]] about that myself because the [[later]] parts of the film just didn't make much sense to me even when I rewatched them. 30 minutes [[seems]] really short for a movie in 1917 also. "Poor Little Rich Girl" which was Tourneur's next film is 65 minutes long and "Pride of the Clan" which was his previous feature was 84 minutes long. So I'm relieved to [[see]] that I wasn't [[crazy]], there must be part of this film missing and that's why the resolution didn't make much sense.

It's hard to review or comment on a movie that you're only able to see half of... but I would recommend this film anyway because of the really fascinating view that it provides us of the insides of an East Coast movie studio of the time. It's the earliest [[film]] I've personally seen that's based on the movie industry itself. The main character is a movie star played by Robert Warwick, who was later a mainstay Hollywood character actor and appeared in almost all of Preston Sturges' films. He plays a western actor perhaps vaguely modeled on William S. Hart, who Warwick does resemble somewhat. After the really fascinating sequences set in the studio we see them on a location shoot where he discovers a country girl (Doris Kenyon) and convinces her to come to New Jersey for a screen test which goes very poorly. After that point the movie seems to be missing major pieces in the form we have now.

Again, I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in film history for the documentary value, but in the form we have it doesn't hold up much as a movie and isn't a particularly good example of Maurice Tourneur's work. I haven't read through all the [[sightings]], but at least one poster [[alluded]] that the 30 minute version might possibly be abridged. I'm [[inquisitive]] about that myself because the [[subsequently]] parts of the film just didn't make much sense to me even when I rewatched them. 30 minutes [[looks]] really short for a movie in 1917 also. "Poor Little Rich Girl" which was Tourneur's next film is 65 minutes long and "Pride of the Clan" which was his previous feature was 84 minutes long. So I'm relieved to [[consults]] that I wasn't [[wacky]], there must be part of this film missing and that's why the resolution didn't make much sense.

It's hard to review or comment on a movie that you're only able to see half of... but I would recommend this film anyway because of the really fascinating view that it provides us of the insides of an East Coast movie studio of the time. It's the earliest [[cinematography]] I've personally seen that's based on the movie industry itself. The main character is a movie star played by Robert Warwick, who was later a mainstay Hollywood character actor and appeared in almost all of Preston Sturges' films. He plays a western actor perhaps vaguely modeled on William S. Hart, who Warwick does resemble somewhat. After the really fascinating sequences set in the studio we see them on a location shoot where he discovers a country girl (Doris Kenyon) and convinces her to come to New Jersey for a screen test which goes very poorly. After that point the movie seems to be missing major pieces in the form we have now.

Again, I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in film history for the documentary value, but in the form we have it doesn't hold up much as a movie and isn't a particularly good example of Maurice Tourneur's work. --------------------------------------------- Result 3599 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I was so [[glad]] I came [[across]] this short film. I'm [[always]] so [[disappointed]] that [[short]] films are [[hard]] to come across, so when I [[saw]] this and [[saw]] that it was [[nominated]] for the Live Action Short [[Film]] at the Academy Awards, I was so [[pleased]] that I actually had a [[film]] that I was rooting for.

The plot is pretty [[simple]], the director, [[writer]], and star Nacho Vigalondo tried coming up with a [[reason]] people [[would]] [[suddenly]] break out into a song and dance number like they do in movie musicals. The result is extremely [[entertaining]] and the song is actually really catchy.

It's a well made short film, well edited and the actors all do a great job. And the last shot of the film is perfect.

I highly [[recommend]] this film. I was so [[thrilled]] I came [[during]] this short film. I'm [[incessantly]] so [[disenchanted]] that [[terse]] films are [[stiff]] to come across, so when I [[sawthe]] this and [[watched]] that it was [[appointing]] for the Live Action Short [[Flick]] at the Academy Awards, I was so [[gratified]] that I actually had a [[filmmaking]] that I was rooting for.

The plot is pretty [[uncomplicated]], the director, [[scriptwriter]], and star Nacho Vigalondo tried coming up with a [[grounds]] people [[could]] [[abruptly]] break out into a song and dance number like they do in movie musicals. The result is extremely [[droll]] and the song is actually really catchy.

It's a well made short film, well edited and the actors all do a great job. And the last shot of the film is perfect.

I highly [[recommends]] this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3600 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] [[In]] the Tower of Babel installment of the mini-series, the [[narrator]] describes the builders of the tower as "the descendants of Moses."

That's like saying George Washington lived many centuries before Alexander the Great.

Or that the light bulb was invented before the wheel.

Or that the guided missile was the forerunner of the bow-and-arrow.

Need I [[say]] more?

The writers of The Greatest Heroes of the [[Bible]] should have at [[least]] paid closer attention to the chronologies of Biblical people and [[events]]. [[Throughout]] the Tower of Babel installment of the mini-series, the [[storyteller]] describes the builders of the tower as "the descendants of Moses."

That's like saying George Washington lived many centuries before Alexander the Great.

Or that the light bulb was invented before the wheel.

Or that the guided missile was the forerunner of the bow-and-arrow.

Need I [[tell]] more?

The writers of The Greatest Heroes of the [[Biblical]] should have at [[fewer]] paid closer attention to the chronologies of Biblical people and [[event]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3601 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] A [[beautiful]] postcard of New York. The thing I enjoyed most was being able to watch this with my whole family and not cringe waiting for a stupid toilet humor joke to appear. It never did. My teenagers liked it too. My son for Natasha Henstridge and my daughter for Michael Vartan. My wife and I commented that we could not remember the last time we could sit with the kids and ALL enjoy something. This film told a story that felt comfortable but not old or done. The ending came with a twist which we all liked too. If you are not just a cynical person and have are willing to let a story unfold then this is for you. As a guy it takes a lot to hold my interest when it comes to romantic movies and this one did. I recommend it and we need more of these films to watch. A [[leggy]] postcard of New York. The thing I enjoyed most was being able to watch this with my whole family and not cringe waiting for a stupid toilet humor joke to appear. It never did. My teenagers liked it too. My son for Natasha Henstridge and my daughter for Michael Vartan. My wife and I commented that we could not remember the last time we could sit with the kids and ALL enjoy something. This film told a story that felt comfortable but not old or done. The ending came with a twist which we all liked too. If you are not just a cynical person and have are willing to let a story unfold then this is for you. As a guy it takes a lot to hold my interest when it comes to romantic movies and this one did. I recommend it and we need more of these films to watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 3602 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] i wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry. Porretta was good looking but resembled like a Mexican porn star not an English outlaw. costumes? what costumes? a t-shirt with strips of black leather on it. it was Marion's clothes--or lack of them--that really got me. do the 'fans' of this [[stinker]] [[really]] believe [[women]] dressed like that in medieval england. the [[Mongols]] and [[vikings]] were inaccurate and stupid, but the episode with an ALIEN was [[worst]] of all. [[Especially]] as his make up [[mainly]] [[consisted]] of oatmeal on his face--an old trick.The hedgehog [[monster]] was [[pretty]] funny, as was climbing up the side of a [[castle]] on a ladder of arrows--as if. the [[US]] accents grated as did the initial drawling [[voice]] over' RAW-bin Hood and LIDDLE John'.the second [[robin]] and [[Marion]] were [[really]] [[quite]] minging in [[looks]] and what was left of the [[show]] went [[totally]] down the pan... i wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry. Porretta was good looking but resembled like a Mexican porn star not an English outlaw. costumes? what costumes? a t-shirt with strips of black leather on it. it was Marion's clothes--or lack of them--that really got me. do the 'fans' of this [[tosser]] [[truly]] believe [[girl]] dressed like that in medieval england. the [[Mongolia]] and [[broncos]] were inaccurate and stupid, but the episode with an ALIEN was [[gravest]] of all. [[Specially]] as his make up [[especially]] [[composed]] of oatmeal on his face--an old trick.The hedgehog [[monsters]] was [[quite]] funny, as was climbing up the side of a [[castillo]] on a ladder of arrows--as if. the [[AMERICANS]] accents grated as did the initial drawling [[voices]] over' RAW-bin Hood and LIDDLE John'.the second [[reuben]] and [[Marian]] were [[truly]] [[very]] minging in [[seem]] and what was left of the [[exhibition]] went [[fully]] down the pan... --------------------------------------------- Result 3603 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] I have wanted to see this for the longest time, James Merendino is a great director. SLC Punk is one of my favorite movies, and in the first ten minutes of this film I thought that it was a great follow up after that though, it begins to [[drag]]. The acting and direction were [[terrific]]. In fact everything in the film seemed to flow except for the script. At times, the only thing keeping my attention was the fact that in the cast was the most beautiful woman in the world, Claire Forlani. This film was good, but I expected more.

P.S. Look for great cameos by Chi McBride, and Chris McDonald. I have wanted to see this for the longest time, James Merendino is a great director. SLC Punk is one of my favorite movies, and in the first ten minutes of this film I thought that it was a great follow up after that though, it begins to [[trawl]]. The acting and direction were [[sumptuous]]. In fact everything in the film seemed to flow except for the script. At times, the only thing keeping my attention was the fact that in the cast was the most beautiful woman in the world, Claire Forlani. This film was good, but I expected more.

P.S. Look for great cameos by Chi McBride, and Chris McDonald. --------------------------------------------- Result 3604 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] The acting in this movie [[stinks]]. The plot makes very [[little]] sense, but from what I [[gathered]] it's [[supposed]] to be about this [[scientist]] who [[develops]] the [[ability]] to [[turn]] people's personal [[items]] into [[tiny]] steel balls that then [[fly]] into their [[mouths]] and turn them into zombies (or blow their heads up, whichever). And the [[effects]] are [[lousy]], too. Most of the [[movie]] [[consists]] of [[bad]] [[music]], with the [[actors]] [[dancing]] [[equally]] as [[badly]] to the [[bad]] [[music]], interspersed with [[multiple]] boring sex scenes. This should be one of the [[worst]] [[things]] ever [[made]], but for one [[thing]]. One [[element]] of shear brilliance that makes "Nightmare Weekend" [[stand]] above all others. And that special quality is the presence of [[George]].

[[George]] is the lovable interface [[device]] between the scientist's daughter, Jessica, and the [[home]] computer security system. With his green hair and nose, balding scalp, and heart-shaped mouth, George is the guardian angel/confidant to Jessica, who [[asks]] him for advice on how to meet guys in one of the most [[dramatic]] pieces of dialogue ever captured on celluloid. With his monotone [[synthesized]] voice, George [[tells]] Jessica what percentages of males prefer women in white dresses, and also that hitch-hiking is the third best way to meet guys after [[discos]] and bars. Of course, little Jessica just can't seem to stay out of trouble, causing [[George]] to execute "Emergency Program Code: Protection [[Jessica]]", which results in the [[violent]] [[death]] of Jessica's would-be [[assailant]] via one of the [[aforementioned]] steel [[balls]].

Kubrick was an utter fool for [[thinking]] he could give a computer [[personality]] [[using]] closeups of a red light. HAL should have been [[represented]] by our [[friend]] [[George]] in order to better [[translate]] compassion for his eventual demise. The light and [[sound]] show at the [[end]] of "[[Close]] [[Encounters]]"? Not [[bad]], but how much [[better]] [[would]] that [[movie]] had been if the [[means]] of first [[communication]] with the [[aliens]] had been [[George]] the Hand Puppet. [[Bishop]], Data, R2 – [[kitchen]] [[appliances]] next to the Almighty [[George]]! He might only be in the [[movie]] for 8 minutes out of 90, but don't be [[fooled]]. This [[show]] is all about [[George]]. With [[even]] that [[limited]] [[amount]] of screentime, [[George]] [[joins]] the [[ranks]] of such [[luminous]] [[film]] characters as Hollywood Montrose, Majai, and [[Pappy]] from "[[New]] [[Moon]] [[Rising]]" as [[icons]] of American cinema. "[[George]] to Apache" – you are my hero. The acting in this movie [[sucks]]. The plot makes very [[kiddo]] sense, but from what I [[collecting]] it's [[alleged]] to be about this [[scholars]] who [[develop]] the [[capabilities]] to [[turning]] people's personal [[topics]] into [[littlest]] steel balls that then [[flying]] into their [[lips]] and turn them into zombies (or blow their heads up, whichever). And the [[influences]] are [[pathetic]], too. Most of the [[films]] [[contains]] of [[naughty]] [[musica]], with the [[protagonists]] [[ballet]] [[alike]] as [[desperately]] to the [[naughty]] [[musician]], interspersed with [[several]] boring sex scenes. This should be one of the [[gravest]] [[items]] ever [[brought]], but for one [[stuff]]. One [[components]] of shear brilliance that makes "Nightmare Weekend" [[standing]] above all others. And that special quality is the presence of [[Georges]].

[[Georgie]] is the lovable interface [[appliances]] between the scientist's daughter, Jessica, and the [[dwelling]] computer security system. With his green hair and nose, balding scalp, and heart-shaped mouth, George is the guardian angel/confidant to Jessica, who [[wondering]] him for advice on how to meet guys in one of the most [[tremendous]] pieces of dialogue ever captured on celluloid. With his monotone [[summarized]] voice, George [[told]] Jessica what percentages of males prefer women in white dresses, and also that hitch-hiking is the third best way to meet guys after [[nightclubs]] and bars. Of course, little Jessica just can't seem to stay out of trouble, causing [[Georgi]] to execute "Emergency Program Code: Protection [[Jennifer]]", which results in the [[fierce]] [[fatalities]] of Jessica's would-be [[aggressor]] via one of the [[above]] steel [[testes]].

Kubrick was an utter fool for [[idea]] he could give a computer [[persona]] [[use]] closeups of a red light. HAL should have been [[representing]] by our [[buddies]] [[Jorge]] in order to better [[translated]] compassion for his eventual demise. The light and [[sounds]] show at the [[ceases]] of "[[Shut]] [[Confrontation]]"? Not [[unhealthy]], but how much [[best]] [[could]] that [[film]] had been if the [[signifies]] of first [[interact]] with the [[extraterrestrial]] had been [[Jorge]] the Hand Puppet. [[Mgr]], Data, R2 – [[cuisine]] [[accoutrements]] next to the Almighty [[Giorgi]]! He might only be in the [[flick]] for 8 minutes out of 90, but don't be [[deceived]]. This [[showing]] is all about [[Georges]]. With [[yet]] that [[restrained]] [[somme]] of screentime, [[Georges]] [[participates]] the [[classify]] of such [[brightest]] [[movie]] characters as Hollywood Montrose, Majai, and [[Grandpapa]] from "[[Newest]] [[Lune]] [[Climbed]]" as [[icon]] of American cinema. "[[Georges]] to Apache" – you are my hero. --------------------------------------------- Result 3605 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] "Raising Victor Vargas" is one of those light, family movies that you can watch and do the N.Y. Times crossword puzzle at the same time. And if you want to go to the kitchen for a taco and a Corona, you don't have to "Pause" the DVD. Just let it [[roll]], '[[cause]] you won't be missing [[anything]] really important. [[No]] twists, turns, or tension. It's not really an ethnic movie, it's a movie about a poor, struggling immigrant family that happens to be Latino. They could have been any ethnic group. It made very little difference. I've seen it all a zillion times before. Just plug in a Jewish family, an Italian family, a Black family, or an Irish family. Just the accents and names were different. If the Vargas family was named Bush or Clinton and were Presbyterians, the movie would have been a total snooze.

It's funny that the critics here couldn't get the locale straight. Some said it was Spanish Harlem. Some the Bronx, and another Brooklyn. As a life-long New Yorker, I vote for the Lower East Side. And it seemed that the family never met up with anyone except other Latinos. They lived in an insulated/isolated little enclave. Some interaction with non-Latinos might have created some excitement, interest, or tension. Remember West Side Story?

And now for the oft-criticized cinematography. I don't know if it was my TV or what, but all the indoor shots looked very ORANGE to me. The apt, the furniture, and the faces were all ORANGE. What was that supposed to mean? And the apt. did look pretty cramped to me. Somebody here mentioned that the old apt's/tenements had very big rooms. Well, maybe 50 years ago. What landlords have done is to break up one big apt into 2 or 3 very small ones and squeeze as many immigrants as they can into them.

And another annoying thing ....This is the second family movie I've seen and criticized this week that featured a teenage boy "jerking off". Is this private sex act necessary for us to watch? Please spare me! What's up with these directors?

So "Victor Vargas" is a pleasant little movie. It was nice for a change to see young Latino actors given a break and a chance to show their talents, which they did. But the writers let them down, giving them a flat, unspectacular script to work with. Enjoy the show, but keep your fingers near the "fast forward" button. "Raising Victor Vargas" is one of those light, family movies that you can watch and do the N.Y. Times crossword puzzle at the same time. And if you want to go to the kitchen for a taco and a Corona, you don't have to "Pause" the DVD. Just let it [[rolling]], '[[reason]] you won't be missing [[somethings]] really important. [[Nos]] twists, turns, or tension. It's not really an ethnic movie, it's a movie about a poor, struggling immigrant family that happens to be Latino. They could have been any ethnic group. It made very little difference. I've seen it all a zillion times before. Just plug in a Jewish family, an Italian family, a Black family, or an Irish family. Just the accents and names were different. If the Vargas family was named Bush or Clinton and were Presbyterians, the movie would have been a total snooze.

It's funny that the critics here couldn't get the locale straight. Some said it was Spanish Harlem. Some the Bronx, and another Brooklyn. As a life-long New Yorker, I vote for the Lower East Side. And it seemed that the family never met up with anyone except other Latinos. They lived in an insulated/isolated little enclave. Some interaction with non-Latinos might have created some excitement, interest, or tension. Remember West Side Story?

And now for the oft-criticized cinematography. I don't know if it was my TV or what, but all the indoor shots looked very ORANGE to me. The apt, the furniture, and the faces were all ORANGE. What was that supposed to mean? And the apt. did look pretty cramped to me. Somebody here mentioned that the old apt's/tenements had very big rooms. Well, maybe 50 years ago. What landlords have done is to break up one big apt into 2 or 3 very small ones and squeeze as many immigrants as they can into them.

And another annoying thing ....This is the second family movie I've seen and criticized this week that featured a teenage boy "jerking off". Is this private sex act necessary for us to watch? Please spare me! What's up with these directors?

So "Victor Vargas" is a pleasant little movie. It was nice for a change to see young Latino actors given a break and a chance to show their talents, which they did. But the writers let them down, giving them a flat, unspectacular script to work with. Enjoy the show, but keep your fingers near the "fast forward" button. --------------------------------------------- Result 3606 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This review is [[dedicated]] to the late [[Keith]] Moon and [[John]] Entwistle.

The [[Original]] [[Drum]] and Bass.

There seems to be very little early Who footage [[around]] these [[days]], if there is more then lets be 'aving it, now-a-days it tends to be of a very different kind of Who altogether, a parody, a shadow of their (much) better [[years]]. To be [[fair]], not one of them has to prove anything to anyone anymore, they've [[earned]] their respect and with overtime.

This concert footage for me is one of their [[best]]. To command an [[audience]] of around a 400,000 plus strong crowed takes skill, charisma, wit and a whole lot of bloody [[good]] [[music]].

We all know of the other [[acts]] on the bill, The Doors (their last ever [[show]] weeks before Jim Morrison [[died]]), Moody Blues, [[Hendrix]], [[Taste]], Free and [[many]] more. The point being that whoever were there it was The Who that the majority had come to see. This [[show]] was one year after the Great Hippie Fest of the 1960's; Woodstock. The [[film]] and record had come out and so had The Who's [[greatest]] [[work]] to date, Tommy. The ever hungry crowd wanted a taste, to be able to experience their own [[unique]] event, to be able to "Grove and Love" in the knowledge that this gig was their own. To do this you needed the best of what Rock 'n Roll had to throw at the hungrily baited crowd.

At two 'o clock in the morning in late August 1970 the M.C. announces, "Ladies and Gentlemen, a small Rock 'n Roll band from Shepherds Bush London, the 'OO".

John Entwistle's body suit is of black leather, on the front is the out line of a human skeleton from neck to toe, Roger dressed in his traditional stage outfit of long tassel's and long flowing hair, Keith in a white t-shirt and jeans, as Pete had his white boiler suit and Doc Martins that he'd preferred to wear.

The Who never stopped their onslaught of High Energy Rock for over two hours, performing theirs and other artists' greatest tracks such as Young Man Blues, Shaking' all Over, and then as on queue, Keith baiting the crowed to "Shut up, it's a bleeding Opera" with Tommy, the Rock Opera. The crowed went wild. This is what they had come to hear, and the Who didn't disappoint, straight into Overture and never coming up for air until the final note of "Tommy can you Hear me?" Amazing.

To capture a show of this magnitude of a band of this stature at their peak at a Festival that was to be the last of its kind anywhere in the World was a fantastic piece of Cinematic History.

The English DVD only comes in a soundtrack of English/Linear PCM Stereo, were as in the States, I think, you can get it with 5.1 at least, "Check local press for details…" on that, okay.

The duration of the DVD is 85 minutes with no extras, which is a disappointment. Yes, for a slice of Rock and Festival History this DVD would send you in a nostalgia trip down memory lane the moment you press play, for some of the best Who concert footage as it was meant to be, Live, Raw and in your Face!

I would have given this DVD ten if it wasn't for the lack of 5.1, and some extras would have been nice.

Thanks Roger, Pete, John and Keith. This review is [[specializing]] to the late [[Kith]] Moon and [[Johannes]] Entwistle.

The [[Preliminary]] [[Drumming]] and Bass.

There seems to be very little early Who footage [[throughout]] these [[jours]], if there is more then lets be 'aving it, now-a-days it tends to be of a very different kind of Who altogether, a parody, a shadow of their (much) better [[yr]]. To be [[equitable]], not one of them has to prove anything to anyone anymore, they've [[profited]] their respect and with overtime.

This concert footage for me is one of their [[optimum]]. To command an [[spectators]] of around a 400,000 plus strong crowed takes skill, charisma, wit and a whole lot of bloody [[alright]] [[musician]].

We all know of the other [[act]] on the bill, The Doors (their last ever [[spectacle]] weeks before Jim Morrison [[dies]]), Moody Blues, [[Hendricks]], [[Liking]], Free and [[various]] more. The point being that whoever were there it was The Who that the majority had come to see. This [[spectacle]] was one year after the Great Hippie Fest of the 1960's; Woodstock. The [[kino]] and record had come out and so had The Who's [[bigger]] [[jobs]] to date, Tommy. The ever hungry crowd wanted a taste, to be able to experience their own [[sole]] event, to be able to "Grove and Love" in the knowledge that this gig was their own. To do this you needed the best of what Rock 'n Roll had to throw at the hungrily baited crowd.

At two 'o clock in the morning in late August 1970 the M.C. announces, "Ladies and Gentlemen, a small Rock 'n Roll band from Shepherds Bush London, the 'OO".

John Entwistle's body suit is of black leather, on the front is the out line of a human skeleton from neck to toe, Roger dressed in his traditional stage outfit of long tassel's and long flowing hair, Keith in a white t-shirt and jeans, as Pete had his white boiler suit and Doc Martins that he'd preferred to wear.

The Who never stopped their onslaught of High Energy Rock for over two hours, performing theirs and other artists' greatest tracks such as Young Man Blues, Shaking' all Over, and then as on queue, Keith baiting the crowed to "Shut up, it's a bleeding Opera" with Tommy, the Rock Opera. The crowed went wild. This is what they had come to hear, and the Who didn't disappoint, straight into Overture and never coming up for air until the final note of "Tommy can you Hear me?" Amazing.

To capture a show of this magnitude of a band of this stature at their peak at a Festival that was to be the last of its kind anywhere in the World was a fantastic piece of Cinematic History.

The English DVD only comes in a soundtrack of English/Linear PCM Stereo, were as in the States, I think, you can get it with 5.1 at least, "Check local press for details…" on that, okay.

The duration of the DVD is 85 minutes with no extras, which is a disappointment. Yes, for a slice of Rock and Festival History this DVD would send you in a nostalgia trip down memory lane the moment you press play, for some of the best Who concert footage as it was meant to be, Live, Raw and in your Face!

I would have given this DVD ten if it wasn't for the lack of 5.1, and some extras would have been nice.

Thanks Roger, Pete, John and Keith. --------------------------------------------- Result 3607 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] This is the [[worst]] movie I have ever [[seen]]. I was deceived into thinking it might be good because a [[couple]] of my [[favorite]] [[actors]] are in it. Now I want to punch [[Jason]] Schwartzman in the face for [[taking]] this role. I was physically [[ill]] after watching this film. I really don't understand Hollywood sometimes. There are so many people trying to break in that I'm sure you can skim off the top and [[get]] the very best. That way the [[worst]] [[movie]] you make is [[equivalent]] to Ferris Beullar instead of this [[sludge]]. The [[gags]] [[like]] the hair doll and blatantly ripping off jeans commercials added to the humorlessness of the film. Glad I avoided this film and watched it on TV. This proves that you should avoid January releases at all cost. This is the [[hardest]] movie I have ever [[noticed]]. I was deceived into thinking it might be good because a [[matches]] of my [[favourite]] [[protagonists]] are in it. Now I want to punch [[Jas]] Schwartzman in the face for [[adopting]] this role. I was physically [[patient]] after watching this film. I really don't understand Hollywood sometimes. There are so many people trying to break in that I'm sure you can skim off the top and [[got]] the very best. That way the [[hardest]] [[films]] you make is [[similar]] to Ferris Beullar instead of this [[mire]]. The [[jaws]] [[iike]] the hair doll and blatantly ripping off jeans commercials added to the humorlessness of the film. Glad I avoided this film and watched it on TV. This proves that you should avoid January releases at all cost. --------------------------------------------- Result 3608 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Darkman 3: Die Darkman Die is directed by Bradford May, the same guy who made the first Darkman sequel too. Darkman 3 is [[worse]] than Darkman 2, and is [[nothing]] special, in my [[opinion]]. Larry Drake is no more as a main [[villain]], who is now played by great Jeff Fahey, whose character once again [[wants]] to [[get]] Darkman's work and [[create]] this [[time]] some ultra strong [[humans]] in [[order]] to [[get]] the leadership of the whole [[city]]. The film is pretty much the same in plot and execution as Darkman 2, but I was mostly irritated by the [[presence]] of many scenes from Darkman 2. These sequels were made in short time and with little money, so these kind of decisions had to be made. Couple of scenes are pretty stylish and exiting, but still this is pretty [[tired]] film and often irritatingly stupid, too. The characters scream and laugh too much and it is very annoying. There is no any philosophical depth in the film, and this is like a remake of Darkman 2 which it still cannot equal. Darkman 2 had many great scenes and stylish camera work, and Larry Drake's ability to play great villain. Darkman 3 offers only some nice scenes and moments, but mostly this film is tired and full of cliches. The few positive things in this movie are flashback edits (Westlake's nightmares) and couple of truly surprising plot turns and tricks. And worth mentioning is also pretty nasty death scene of the main villain which was pretty comic book like and inventive without any gore. Far more interesting than the death of main villain in part two.

Darkman 3 is worst in the whole series, and we must remember that these two sequels were made directly to video and they don't come even close to Raimi's original Darkman with Liam Neeson. Darkman 2 was okay actioner with plenty of great scenes and suspense, but this last (?) entry is tired and often stupid and boring piece of sequel. It has some merits as mentioned, but overall feeling is that this should not been made in the first place. May is talented director so hopefully he can get some more noteworthy projects in the future.

3/10 Darkman 3: Die Darkman Die is directed by Bradford May, the same guy who made the first Darkman sequel too. Darkman 3 is [[worst]] than Darkman 2, and is [[anything]] special, in my [[avis]]. Larry Drake is no more as a main [[hoodlum]], who is now played by great Jeff Fahey, whose character once again [[wanna]] to [[gets]] Darkman's work and [[creating]] this [[moment]] some ultra strong [[humankind]] in [[edict]] to [[obtains]] the leadership of the whole [[ville]]. The film is pretty much the same in plot and execution as Darkman 2, but I was mostly irritated by the [[involvements]] of many scenes from Darkman 2. These sequels were made in short time and with little money, so these kind of decisions had to be made. Couple of scenes are pretty stylish and exiting, but still this is pretty [[weary]] film and often irritatingly stupid, too. The characters scream and laugh too much and it is very annoying. There is no any philosophical depth in the film, and this is like a remake of Darkman 2 which it still cannot equal. Darkman 2 had many great scenes and stylish camera work, and Larry Drake's ability to play great villain. Darkman 3 offers only some nice scenes and moments, but mostly this film is tired and full of cliches. The few positive things in this movie are flashback edits (Westlake's nightmares) and couple of truly surprising plot turns and tricks. And worth mentioning is also pretty nasty death scene of the main villain which was pretty comic book like and inventive without any gore. Far more interesting than the death of main villain in part two.

Darkman 3 is worst in the whole series, and we must remember that these two sequels were made directly to video and they don't come even close to Raimi's original Darkman with Liam Neeson. Darkman 2 was okay actioner with plenty of great scenes and suspense, but this last (?) entry is tired and often stupid and boring piece of sequel. It has some merits as mentioned, but overall feeling is that this should not been made in the first place. May is talented director so hopefully he can get some more noteworthy projects in the future.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3609 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] Yay!... I think. It's [[hard]] to [[say]]. It's hard to have an emotion about a movie that has no emotion. This movie is as [[sterile]] as a surgeon's scalpel. For a [[setting]], it has a few stone pillars, some stone seats, a couple stone crosses and some stone [[actors]]. They have no emotion! The only thing that [[saves]] this movie is the [[fact]] that it is [[Hamlet]], and [[Hamlet]] is a terrificly written [[piece]] of [[literature]]. The dubbing really wasn't all that bad [[though]]. The voices [[stuck]] true to the [[dull]], gloomy, dreary, life-sucking atmosphere the movie gave forth. I have seen this version of Hamlet on the fabulous Mystery Science Theater 3000 three times, and each of the three times, I was on the brink of turning off the TV, despite it being MST 3K.

Not an uplifting production of a drama that deserves so much better. Yay!... I think. It's [[tough]] to [[told]]. It's hard to have an emotion about a movie that has no emotion. This movie is as [[barren]] as a surgeon's scalpel. For a [[configure]], it has a few stone pillars, some stone seats, a couple stone crosses and some stone [[players]]. They have no emotion! The only thing that [[savings]] this movie is the [[facto]] that it is [[Hamlets]], and [[Hamlets]] is a terrificly written [[slice]] of [[documentaries]]. The dubbing really wasn't all that bad [[while]]. The voices [[trapped]] true to the [[dreary]], gloomy, dreary, life-sucking atmosphere the movie gave forth. I have seen this version of Hamlet on the fabulous Mystery Science Theater 3000 three times, and each of the three times, I was on the brink of turning off the TV, despite it being MST 3K.

Not an uplifting production of a drama that deserves so much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 3610 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Moon Child is the [[story]] of two [[brothers]] and a friend trying to make it in a futuristic, economically-unstable Japan. After a cunning disaster gone wrong, someone new enters young Sho's life, a special friend by the name of Kei. Years later they have grown rather close, and have found ways to combine both their talents into one unstoppable team. [[During]] another escapade, they [[encounter]] a new friend and his mute sister who become part of their band of friends. Before long disaster again [[strikes]] and the group [[falls]] [[apart]]. Alliances turn to [[enemies]] and their [[worlds]] are all turned upside down. Regrets and hopelessness claim some while power and [[success]] take others. Tragedy [[claims]] [[still]] others. [[Truths]] are [[revealed]] and [[lives]] are [[forever]] [[changed]].

And you will never see a more [[beautiful]] sunrise.

This movie is a gripping [[tale]] of undying [[friendships]], [[webs]] of relationships, and a team that not [[even]] [[death]] can [[keep]] [[apart]] for too [[long]]. [[Moon]] [[child]] [[combines]] sci-fi, [[drama]], and [[action]] with the [[perfect]] cast and talent to create the most sensationally [[moving]] [[movie]] of the [[time]], and [[great]] for most audiences. It minimizes the [[everyday]] [[romances]] and [[puts]] more emphasis on the [[important]] [[values]] we can all relate to such as [[friendships]], [[loyalty]], and believing in yourself. [[Nothing]] [[could]] [[possibly]] [[compare]]. I personally have never [[seen]] [[anything]] [[quite]] like it, and I don't suspect I ever will again.

It appeals to the [[wider]] [[population]] in [[many]] [[ways]] and is a [[must]] see for all. Moon Child is the [[conte]] of two [[hermanos]] and a friend trying to make it in a futuristic, economically-unstable Japan. After a cunning disaster gone wrong, someone new enters young Sho's life, a special friend by the name of Kei. Years later they have grown rather close, and have found ways to combine both their talents into one unstoppable team. [[For]] another escapade, they [[face]] a new friend and his mute sister who become part of their band of friends. Before long disaster again [[bombardment]] and the group [[dip]] [[additionally]]. Alliances turn to [[haters]] and their [[universe]] are all turned upside down. Regrets and hopelessness claim some while power and [[accomplishments]] take others. Tragedy [[claim]] [[again]] others. [[Facts]] are [[demonstrated]] and [[life]] are [[indefinitely]] [[modified]].

And you will never see a more [[funky]] sunrise.

This movie is a gripping [[story]] of undying [[friends]], [[networks]] of relationships, and a team that not [[yet]] [[dies]] can [[maintaining]] [[also]] for too [[lengthy]]. [[Luna]] [[kids]] [[combine]] sci-fi, [[theater]], and [[activities]] with the [[irreproachable]] cast and talent to create the most sensationally [[relocating]] [[cinematography]] of the [[times]], and [[prodigious]] for most audiences. It minimizes the [[routine]] [[novels]] and [[poses]] more emphasis on the [[substantial]] [[value]] we can all relate to such as [[friends]], [[fidelity]], and believing in yourself. [[None]] [[did]] [[arguably]] [[comparative]]. I personally have never [[noticed]] [[nothing]] [[altogether]] like it, and I don't suspect I ever will again.

It appeals to the [[grander]] [[demographics]] in [[various]] [[avenues]] and is a [[should]] see for all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3611 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I picked this DVD up at the Dollar [[Store]]. The DVD was on the 2 for $1 rack, but since it had Michael Madsen in it, I thought that since I had never seen the movie, I bought it anyway.

I [[must]] say that I didn't like the [[movie]]. The [[movie]] played more like a documentary or an advertisement for religion than anything else. I [[found]] that the director's [[use]] of flashbacks did not [[add]] to the [[story]] line for me. I would have preferred to view the story line in chronological order.

I won't throw it away like one of the other commentators, but It may be quite awhile before I would consider watching this movie again.

Who knows, since it was Michael Madsen's film debut, maybe it might have some archival value at some future date. I picked this DVD up at the Dollar [[Storehouse]]. The DVD was on the 2 for $1 rack, but since it had Michael Madsen in it, I thought that since I had never seen the movie, I bought it anyway.

I [[owe]] say that I didn't like the [[cinematography]]. The [[kino]] played more like a documentary or an advertisement for religion than anything else. I [[unearthed]] that the director's [[uses]] of flashbacks did not [[inserting]] to the [[fairytales]] line for me. I would have preferred to view the story line in chronological order.

I won't throw it away like one of the other commentators, but It may be quite awhile before I would consider watching this movie again.

Who knows, since it was Michael Madsen's film debut, maybe it might have some archival value at some future date. --------------------------------------------- Result 3612 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (89%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Sarah Silverman is a dangerous Bitch! She's beautiful, sexy, funny and talent, dark and demonic. I read the other 'comment' on this show as well as the message board stuff and people just don't get it. Nothing that appears on T.V. is an accident. Too much money, time and work is put into the production of a T.V. show for there to be mistakes. This show is stupid because Sarah wanted it to be stupid. This show is juvenile because [[Sarah]] wanted it to be juvenile. I thought the jokes were great and the theme show as well as the other musical numbers are [[wonderfully]] bizarre. It's a lot like Pee-Wee's Playhouse for maladjusted, slacker twenty-something glue sniffing, Future Pornstars of America from the Valley. The cast is awesome. The scenarios and action is well-paced. I hope this show succeeds since Comedy Central didn't let David spade keep his show. Who plays Sarah's sister? She not in the cast listing on the show's home page. I would love to see her stand-up. Does anyone know about her up-coming show dates or DVDs that may be floating around out there? Sarah Silverman is a dangerous Bitch! She's beautiful, sexy, funny and talent, dark and demonic. I read the other 'comment' on this show as well as the message board stuff and people just don't get it. Nothing that appears on T.V. is an accident. Too much money, time and work is put into the production of a T.V. show for there to be mistakes. This show is stupid because Sarah wanted it to be stupid. This show is juvenile because [[Baroness]] wanted it to be juvenile. I thought the jokes were great and the theme show as well as the other musical numbers are [[staggeringly]] bizarre. It's a lot like Pee-Wee's Playhouse for maladjusted, slacker twenty-something glue sniffing, Future Pornstars of America from the Valley. The cast is awesome. The scenarios and action is well-paced. I hope this show succeeds since Comedy Central didn't let David spade keep his show. Who plays Sarah's sister? She not in the cast listing on the show's home page. I would love to see her stand-up. Does anyone know about her up-coming show dates or DVDs that may be floating around out there? --------------------------------------------- Result 3613 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Frownland is like one of those [[intensely]] embarrassing situations where you [[end]] up [[laughing]] out loud at exactly the wrong [[time]]; and just at the [[moment]] you [[realize]] you shouldn't be [[laughing]], you've already [[reached]] the [[pinnacle]] of [[voice]] resoundness; and as you [[look]] [[around]] you at the ghostly white [[faces]] with their gaping wide-open mouths and glazen [[eyes]], you feel a [[piercing]] ache [[beginning]] in the pit of your [[stomach]] and [[suddenly]] rushing up your throat and... well, you [[get]] the point.

But for all its [[unpleasantness]] and [[punches]] in the face, Frownland, really is a [[remarkable]] piece of [[work]] that, after viewing the inarticulate mess of a [[main]] [[character]] and all his pathetic [[troubles]] and mishaps, makes you want to scratch your own eyes out and at the same time, you feel sickenly sorry for him.

It [[would]] have been a [[lot]] easier for me to [[simply]] [[walk]] out of Ronald Bronstein's [[film]], but for some [[insane]] [[reason]], I [[felt]] an unwavering determination to [[stay]] the course and experience all the grainy irritation the [[film]] has to [[offer]]. If [[someone]] sets you on fire, you [[typically]] [[want]] to put it out: [[Stop]]! [[Drop]]! And Roll! But with this [[film]], you [[want]] to watch the [[flame]] slowly engulf your [[entire]] [[body]]. You endure the pain--perhaps out of spite, or some [[unknown]] masochistic curiosity I can't even [[begin]] to [[attempt]] to [[explain]].

[[Unfortunately]], mainstream [[cinema]] will never [[let]] this [[film]] [[come]] to a [[theater]] near you. But if you [[get]] a [[chance]] to [[catch]] it, [[prepare]] yourself: [[bring]] a [[doggie]] [[bag]]. Frownland is like one of those [[intently]] embarrassing situations where you [[terminate]] up [[kidding]] out loud at exactly the wrong [[period]]; and just at the [[time]] you [[realizing]] you shouldn't be [[laughs]], you've already [[achieved]] the [[climax]] of [[vowel]] resoundness; and as you [[peek]] [[roundabout]] you at the ghostly white [[facing]] with their gaping wide-open mouths and glazen [[eye]], you feel a [[pierce]] ache [[begins]] in the pit of your [[abdomen]] and [[unexpectedly]] rushing up your throat and... well, you [[got]] the point.

But for all its [[antipathy]] and [[shots]] in the face, Frownland, really is a [[resplendent]] piece of [[jobs]] that, after viewing the inarticulate mess of a [[principal]] [[characters]] and all his pathetic [[difficulty]] and mishaps, makes you want to scratch your own eyes out and at the same time, you feel sickenly sorry for him.

It [[should]] have been a [[lots]] easier for me to [[solely]] [[stroll]] out of Ronald Bronstein's [[flick]], but for some [[lunatic]] [[justification]], I [[deemed]] an unwavering determination to [[remain]] the course and experience all the grainy irritation the [[movie]] has to [[supplying]]. If [[person]] sets you on fire, you [[traditionally]] [[wanna]] to put it out: [[Stopped]]! [[Dipped]]! And Roll! But with this [[flick]], you [[desiring]] to watch the [[blaze]] slowly engulf your [[total]] [[organs]]. You endure the pain--perhaps out of spite, or some [[nameless]] masochistic curiosity I can't even [[startup]] to [[strive]] to [[explained]].

[[Woefully]], mainstream [[filmmaking]] will never [[allowing]] this [[kino]] [[arriving]] to a [[drama]] near you. But if you [[gets]] a [[chances]] to [[captures]] it, [[braced]] yourself: [[bringing]] a [[lapdog]] [[baggage]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3614 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I wasn't expecting the highest calibre of film-making with Joel Schumacher directing this one, so I was surprised that TIGERLAND wasn't a complete [[waste]] of time.

In technique, it's often derivative of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN with the shaky camera work, grainy shots, the film [[occasionally]] running like it's skipping a sprocket---all those [[techniques]] Speilberg used to make his film seem more realistic but in the end was more distracting than anything else.

But unlike SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, the emotional component wasn't as weak, as the characters in this film seemed more like real people and the story less contrived, not so wrapped up in the American flag (Speilberg gets an 'F' in subtlety).

Next to the first section of Kubrick's FULL METAL JACKET, this is the most [[realistic]] [[portrayal]] of boot camp that I have seen in a film, and for that I think it's worth watching.

It's not a great film, but neither is it a bad film. I wasn't expecting the highest calibre of film-making with Joel Schumacher directing this one, so I was surprised that TIGERLAND wasn't a complete [[squandering]] of time.

In technique, it's often derivative of SAVING PRIVATE RYAN with the shaky camera work, grainy shots, the film [[intermittently]] running like it's skipping a sprocket---all those [[technologies]] Speilberg used to make his film seem more realistic but in the end was more distracting than anything else.

But unlike SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, the emotional component wasn't as weak, as the characters in this film seemed more like real people and the story less contrived, not so wrapped up in the American flag (Speilberg gets an 'F' in subtlety).

Next to the first section of Kubrick's FULL METAL JACKET, this is the most [[hardheaded]] [[portrait]] of boot camp that I have seen in a film, and for that I think it's worth watching.

It's not a great film, but neither is it a bad film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3615 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Miss DeCarlo's starring debut has everything the writers [[could]] come up with -- from the Franco-Prussian [[War]] to the US Civil [[War]], the great American West, San [[Francisco]] in its heyday, ballet, opera, vaudeville, stage coach bandits, and a Chinese junk. [[Just]] when you [[thought]] the plot couldn't get any screwier, it does. It's [[magnificent]], taken tongue in cheek. DeCarlo's [[character]] (here called [[Anna]] [[Marie]] -- NOT Salome, that's the role she [[dances]]) is [[loosely]] based on the [[career]] of the [[notorious]] [[Lola]] Montez, who was the mistress of the [[King]] of [[Prussia]] and caused a revolution when he [[gave]] her the crown [[jewels]]. She did [[escape]] to the American [[west]]. There is a [[town]] in Arizona [[called]] "[[Salome]], Where She [[Danced]]," [[based]] on the historical fact that [[Lola]] Montez did [[dance]] the role of [[Salome]] there. StageCoach Cleve and the Russian nobleman who [[fall]] under her charms are not historically [[accurate]], nor I assume is the Chinese wise [[man]] with the Scottish accent -- but it is one of my [[favorite]] all time [[camp]] [[classics]] and DeCarlo is breathtakingly [[beautiful]] [[throughout]]. Miss DeCarlo's starring debut has everything the writers [[wo]] come up with -- from the Franco-Prussian [[Wars]] to the US Civil [[Warfare]], the great American West, San [[Francis]] in its heyday, ballet, opera, vaudeville, stage coach bandits, and a Chinese junk. [[Jen]] when you [[brainchild]] the plot couldn't get any screwier, it does. It's [[magnifique]], taken tongue in cheek. DeCarlo's [[personage]] (here called [[Ana]] [[Mary]] -- NOT Salome, that's the role she [[danced]]) is [[vaguely]] based on the [[quarry]] of the [[infamous]] [[Lula]] Montez, who was the mistress of the [[Emperor]] of [[Prussian]] and caused a revolution when he [[supplied]] her the crown [[jewelry]]. She did [[fleeing]] to the American [[western]]. There is a [[municipality]] in Arizona [[termed]] "[[Valeria]], Where She [[Dancing]]," [[founded]] on the historical fact that [[Lula]] Montez did [[ballet]] the role of [[Valeria]] there. StageCoach Cleve and the Russian nobleman who [[dipped]] under her charms are not historically [[accuracy]], nor I assume is the Chinese wise [[mec]] with the Scottish accent -- but it is one of my [[preferable]] all time [[encampment]] [[masterpieces]] and DeCarlo is breathtakingly [[handsome]] [[around]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3616 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] It [[takes]] patience to get through David Lynch's eccentric, but-- for a change-- life-affirming chronicle of Alvin Straight's journey, but stick with it. [[Though]] it moves as [[slow]] as Straight's John Deere, when he meets the kind [[strangers]] along his pilgrimage we learn much about the isolation of aging, the painful [[regrets]] and [[secrets]], and ultimately the power of family and reconciliation. Richard Farnsworth caps his career with the year's most [[genuine]] performance, [[sad]] and [[poetic]], flinty and [[caring]]. And [[Sissy]] Spacek matches him as his "[[slow]]" daughter Rose who [[pines]] over her own [[private]] loss while caring for [[dad]]. Rarely has a [[modern]] [[film]] preached so [[positively]] about [[family]]. It [[pick]] patience to get through David Lynch's eccentric, but-- for a change-- life-affirming chronicle of Alvin Straight's journey, but stick with it. [[If]] it moves as [[slowing]] as Straight's John Deere, when he meets the kind [[alien]] along his pilgrimage we learn much about the isolation of aging, the painful [[laments]] and [[secrecy]], and ultimately the power of family and reconciliation. Richard Farnsworth caps his career with the year's most [[vera]] performance, [[unfortunate]] and [[poet]], flinty and [[care]]. And [[Wimp]] Spacek matches him as his "[[sluggish]]" daughter Rose who [[pins]] over her own [[privy]] loss while caring for [[pope]]. Rarely has a [[trendy]] [[filmmaking]] preached so [[favorably]] about [[familia]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3617 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] In this sequel to the 1989 action-comedy classic K-9, detective Dooley [James Belushi] and his dog Jerry Lee return to fight crime, but this time they are teamed up with another detective [Christine Tucci] and her partner, a mean Doberman named Zues who does not get along with Jerry Lee very well. Dooley does not get along with his new partner much either. That all changes as the movie goes along. The [[movie]] is [[intense]] as their is a guy that really wants to kill Dooley for the way he treated him in the past. There is some dramatic scenes dealing with the death of Dooley's wife that don't really seem to be with the tone of the movie because the rest of the movie is action sequences, dog poop jokes, fart jokes, and jokes about dogs biting bad guys in a certain area. I know that that seems like very low humor, but some of it is actually very funny. I didn't see this movie for the jokes, I saw it for two reasons. The first reason is because I am a big James Belushi fan and the second is for the action sequences. James Belushi is funnier than he was in K-9 and the action sequences at are better too. It would have been nice to see more characters from K-9 to return, but it's still a [[fun]] movie. If you are a James Belushi fan, you'll love this movie. In this sequel to the 1989 action-comedy classic K-9, detective Dooley [James Belushi] and his dog Jerry Lee return to fight crime, but this time they are teamed up with another detective [Christine Tucci] and her partner, a mean Doberman named Zues who does not get along with Jerry Lee very well. Dooley does not get along with his new partner much either. That all changes as the movie goes along. The [[filmmaking]] is [[vehement]] as their is a guy that really wants to kill Dooley for the way he treated him in the past. There is some dramatic scenes dealing with the death of Dooley's wife that don't really seem to be with the tone of the movie because the rest of the movie is action sequences, dog poop jokes, fart jokes, and jokes about dogs biting bad guys in a certain area. I know that that seems like very low humor, but some of it is actually very funny. I didn't see this movie for the jokes, I saw it for two reasons. The first reason is because I am a big James Belushi fan and the second is for the action sequences. James Belushi is funnier than he was in K-9 and the action sequences at are better too. It would have been nice to see more characters from K-9 to return, but it's still a [[droll]] movie. If you are a James Belushi fan, you'll love this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3618 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Imagine]] that you are [[asked]] by your date what movie you wanted to see, and you remember seeing a rather intriguing trailer about "The Grudge." So, in good faith, you [[recommend]] [[seeing]] that movie. It is the Halloween season, after all. And it did boffo box office this past weekend, so it must be [[pretty]] good...so you [[go]].

And you're actually in a state of [[shock]] when the [[movie]] [[ends]] the [[way]] it does, and you hear yourself audibly saying, "that can't be the end of the movie...." But, alas, it is.

And imagine coming out of the movie theater being embarrassed and ashamed for recommending such a dog of a movie. You think that your date thinks you're a bonehead for suggesting such an atrocity, and your suggestion will certainly end a promising relationship. Actually, it was so bad that both of us cracked up laughing at how bad it was. I see no future for Miss Gellar in the movies, and suggest that she sticks to television in the future. Actually, it won't be long before she is consigned to flea-market conventions selling Buffy memorabilia, and it can't happen soon enough, if you ask me. Horrible, horrible, horrible. The plot didn't make sense; continuity was terrible. It's apparent that the whole ending was contrived to have a "Grudge II--The Return of 'Cat-Boy'." [[Reckon]] that you are [[wondered]] by your date what movie you wanted to see, and you remember seeing a rather intriguing trailer about "The Grudge." So, in good faith, you [[recommends]] [[see]] that movie. It is the Halloween season, after all. And it did boffo box office this past weekend, so it must be [[belle]] good...so you [[going]].

And you're actually in a state of [[shocks]] when the [[films]] [[culminates]] the [[paths]] it does, and you hear yourself audibly saying, "that can't be the end of the movie...." But, alas, it is.

And imagine coming out of the movie theater being embarrassed and ashamed for recommending such a dog of a movie. You think that your date thinks you're a bonehead for suggesting such an atrocity, and your suggestion will certainly end a promising relationship. Actually, it was so bad that both of us cracked up laughing at how bad it was. I see no future for Miss Gellar in the movies, and suggest that she sticks to television in the future. Actually, it won't be long before she is consigned to flea-market conventions selling Buffy memorabilia, and it can't happen soon enough, if you ask me. Horrible, horrible, horrible. The plot didn't make sense; continuity was terrible. It's apparent that the whole ending was contrived to have a "Grudge II--The Return of 'Cat-Boy'." --------------------------------------------- Result 3619 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This has an interesting, albeit somewhat fanciful sci-fi plot, but it's wasted with [[poor]] [[direction]] and shlocky special effects. Rae Dawn Chong is appealing, despite the [[lack]] of a believable story and [[direction]] consistent with her talent. This has an interesting, albeit somewhat fanciful sci-fi plot, but it's wasted with [[pauper]] [[directorate]] and shlocky special effects. Rae Dawn Chong is appealing, despite the [[misses]] of a believable story and [[orientation]] consistent with her talent. --------------------------------------------- Result 3620 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] What was the deal with the [[clothes]]? They were all dressed like [[something]] out of the late 70's [[early]] 80s. The [[cars]] were even were [[outdated]]. The [[school]] was outdated. The nuns [[attire]] was outdated, and the [[hospital]] [[looked]] like [[something]] from the 40's, with its wards and wooden [[staircases]] and things. [[Nothing]] in the whole [[movie]] implied it [[took]] place in 1991. My [[mother]] was laughing, saying "Geeeee-od! [[WHEN]] was this [[movie]] MADE?" When we pressed the "[[INFO]] BUTTON" on our [[remote]], we were sure 1991 had to be typo! Did [[anybody]] else notice this? My FAVORITE [[part]], [[though]], was when the woman [[tells]] her uppity muck husband, on the [[telephone]], about the [[inverted]] [[cross]] in the [[mirror]], and he just [[says]] "Well, look, I've got a [[congress]] meeting. I'll [[talk]] to you about it later." That line was just classic. JUST [[LIKE]] A MAN! My [[mothers]] favorite part was when they [[gave]] the "[[Spawn]] of the Devil [[Child]]" her very own [[Rottweiler]]. My mother said "Just what the Spawn of the Devil [[needs]]... a [[Rottweiler]]" She also enjoyed all of the people [[collapsing]] in the churches, [[clutching]] their [[chests]]. [[Her]] [[OTHER]] [[favorite]] [[part]] was the [[guy]] at the school parking lot, [[driving]] 5 [[miles]] a hour, driving right into the [[garbage]] truck/[[dump]] [[truck]]/[[front]] end loader thingee. He had about 20 [[seconds]] to just [[stop]] the [[car]]...but he just [[kept]] going, with a [[real]] [[dumb]] vacant look on his [[face]]. I mean, how fast can you GO in a school parking lot?!?! Whatever! What was the deal with the [[suits]]? They were all dressed like [[somethin]] out of the late 70's [[quickly]] 80s. The [[car]] were even were [[lapsed]]. The [[tuition]] was outdated. The nuns [[garment]] was outdated, and the [[clinic]] [[seemed]] like [[somethin]] from the 40's, with its wards and wooden [[stairwell]] and things. [[Nothin]] in the whole [[films]] implied it [[picked]] place in 1991. My [[mum]] was laughing, saying "Geeeee-od! [[WHENEVER]] was this [[film]] MADE?" When we pressed the "[[INFORMATION]] BUTTON" on our [[faraway]], we were sure 1991 had to be typo! Did [[everyone]] else notice this? My FAVORITE [[party]], [[nevertheless]], was when the woman [[says]] her uppity muck husband, on the [[phone]], about the [[overturned]] [[crossing]] in the [[mirrors]], and he just [[tells]] "Well, look, I've got a [[capitol]] meeting. I'll [[talks]] to you about it later." That line was just classic. JUST [[LOVES]] A MAN! My [[mother]] favorite part was when they [[handed]] the "[[Breed]] of the Devil [[Kid]]" her very own [[Terrier]]. My mother said "Just what the Spawn of the Devil [[needed]]... a [[Pinscher]]" She also enjoyed all of the people [[crumbling]] in the churches, [[clutched]] their [[safes]]. [[His]] [[OTHERS]] [[favourite]] [[portions]] was the [[man]] at the school parking lot, [[drives]] 5 [[kilometres]] a hour, driving right into the [[junk]] truck/[[shithole]] [[lorry]]/[[newsweek]] end loader thingee. He had about 20 [[secs]] to just [[stopped]] the [[vehicular]]...but he just [[preserved]] going, with a [[authentic]] [[moronic]] vacant look on his [[encounter]]. I mean, how fast can you GO in a school parking lot?!?! Whatever! --------------------------------------------- Result 3621 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] The two things are are good about this film are it's two [[unknown]] [[celebrities]].

[[First]], Daphne Zuniga, in her first [[appearance]] in a film, young and supple, with looks that still encompass her body today, [[steals]] the very beginning, which is all she is in, and that is that. She is obviously just starting out because her acting improved with her next projects.

Second, the score by then known composer Christopher(Chris) Young is what keeps this [[stinker]] from getting a one [[star]]...yeah, I know one [[star]] more is not much, but in this movie's case, it is a lot.

The [[rest]] is just [[stupid]] [[senseless]] [[horror]] of a couple a college [[students]] who try to clean out a [[dorm]] that is due for being torn down, getting offed one by one by an [[unsuspecting]] killer, blah, blah, blah...we all know where this is going.

Watch the first [[eighteen]] minutes with Daphne Zuniga, then [[turn]] it off. The two things are are good about this film are it's two [[unrecognized]] [[notables]].

[[Fiirst]], Daphne Zuniga, in her first [[semblance]] in a film, young and supple, with looks that still encompass her body today, [[itches]] the very beginning, which is all she is in, and that is that. She is obviously just starting out because her acting improved with her next projects.

Second, the score by then known composer Christopher(Chris) Young is what keeps this [[tosser]] from getting a one [[superstar]]...yeah, I know one [[superstar]] more is not much, but in this movie's case, it is a lot.

The [[repose]] is just [[daft]] [[wanton]] [[monstrosity]] of a couple a college [[schoolboys]] who try to clean out a [[hostel]] that is due for being torn down, getting offed one by one by an [[naive]] killer, blah, blah, blah...we all know where this is going.

Watch the first [[seventeen]] minutes with Daphne Zuniga, then [[transforming]] it off. --------------------------------------------- Result 3622 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] this video is 100% retarded. besides the brain cell killing acting and plot, it's way too long. don't waste your money at the video store. i actually was mad that i sat through this garbage and spent money on it. just absolutely awful. --------------------------------------------- Result 3623 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] The [[plot]] is so manipulative, counting completely on the most uncredible and unthinkable decisions of the adults in each and every parenting decision. The children are super as far as charm and delivery of the lines but as I say, the whole plot depends on each and every adult being complete [[idiots]], and therefore in THAT case, making more sense out of their actions (and at the same time being the only [[way]] to explain the boys actions of [[total]] mistrust). Why would sweey charming little boys take a baby from the shore? How did the baby get to the shore and at the same time account for it being the LAST place to be searched? Why would the 2 boys NEVER be informed an instead at the same time a baby is missing nobody gives a fig about them running around with food and diapers with all that commotion going on and literally every other place it searched? There is just no possible justification to ask the audience to believe this. Asking to believe it would then do to trial (even the informal setting) is too insulting to bare. The [[intrigue]] is so manipulative, counting completely on the most uncredible and unthinkable decisions of the adults in each and every parenting decision. The children are super as far as charm and delivery of the lines but as I say, the whole plot depends on each and every adult being complete [[assholes]], and therefore in THAT case, making more sense out of their actions (and at the same time being the only [[camino]] to explain the boys actions of [[unmitigated]] mistrust). Why would sweey charming little boys take a baby from the shore? How did the baby get to the shore and at the same time account for it being the LAST place to be searched? Why would the 2 boys NEVER be informed an instead at the same time a baby is missing nobody gives a fig about them running around with food and diapers with all that commotion going on and literally every other place it searched? There is just no possible justification to ask the audience to believe this. Asking to believe it would then do to trial (even the informal setting) is too insulting to bare. --------------------------------------------- Result 3624 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Dear Readers,

With High [[Expectations]], Human Beings leave Earth to begin a [[new]] life in Space Colonies. However, The [[Allied]] [[Forces]] of the [[United]] Earth Sphere Alliance gain great military [[control]] over the colonies and soon [[seize]] one colony after another in the name of Justice and [[Peace]]...

The [[year]] is After Colony 195. Operation Meteor. In a move to counter the Alliance's [[tyranny]], Rebel Forces from several colonies send new arsenals to Earth [[disguised]] as Shooting Stars...

[[However]]...The Alliance forces catch on...

Gundam Wing is the most popular and most successful of the [[entire]] Gundam [[Series]]. With cutting-edge Anime [[animation]], [[stunning]] [[action]], amazing Mobile Suits, [[Breathtaking]] [[scripts]], and some of the most [[unforgettable]] [[characters]] in Anime History.

I'll try to [[explain]] the plot of Gundam Wing as [[best]] as [[possible]]. [[Earth]] has now colonized space, but the UESA forces have [[forcibly]] [[occupied]] them along with the help of the [[mysterious]] Elite Force OZ and their [[shadowy]] leaders, Treize Kushrenada and the Romefeller [[Foundation]]. [[Five]] pilots are [[sent]] to [[Earth]] piloting Mobile [[Suits]] with [[extraordinary]] power known as the Gundams. [[Pursued]] by the [[Mysterious]] Lieutenant Zechs Merquise, Treize's second-in-command, a [[young]] [[teenager]] named [[Relena]], and the Alliance military, the Gundam pilots unleash hell upon [[Earth]] for the [[Freedom]] of the Colonies while all the while, a plot most sinister architected by Treize [[begins]] to [[start]].

Signed, The [[Constant]] DVD Collector Dear Readers,

With High [[Predictions]], Human Beings leave Earth to begin a [[novo]] life in Space Colonies. However, The [[Ally]] [[Troop]] of the [[Unified]] Earth Sphere Alliance gain great military [[surveillance]] over the colonies and soon [[seized]] one colony after another in the name of Justice and [[Nonviolent]]...

The [[annum]] is After Colony 195. Operation Meteor. In a move to counter the Alliance's [[dictatorship]], Rebel Forces from several colonies send new arsenals to Earth [[veiled]] as Shooting Stars...

[[Instead]]...The Alliance forces catch on...

Gundam Wing is the most popular and most successful of the [[whole]] Gundam [[Serials]]. With cutting-edge Anime [[animate]], [[striking]] [[activities]], amazing Mobile Suits, [[Unbelievable]] [[scenarios]], and some of the most [[landmark]] [[traits]] in Anime History.

I'll try to [[clarified]] the plot of Gundam Wing as [[better]] as [[achievable]]. [[Terrestrial]] has now colonized space, but the UESA forces have [[vigorously]] [[occupy]] them along with the help of the [[cryptic]] Elite Force OZ and their [[opaque]] leaders, Treize Kushrenada and the Romefeller [[Bases]]. [[Fifth]] pilots are [[transmitted]] to [[Land]] piloting Mobile [[Clothes]] with [[unbelievable]] power known as the Gundams. [[Pursue]] by the [[Shadowy]] Lieutenant Zechs Merquise, Treize's second-in-command, a [[youthful]] [[teen]] named [[Heero]], and the Alliance military, the Gundam pilots unleash hell upon [[Terrestrial]] for the [[Liberty]] of the Colonies while all the while, a plot most sinister architected by Treize [[outset]] to [[cranking]].

Signed, The [[Incessant]] DVD Collector --------------------------------------------- Result 3625 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (81%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I loved the original. It was brilliant and always will be. Strangely though, I actually looked forward to seeing the re-make. I'm usually a little bit against re-makes because there's far too many of them, but somehow this intrigued me. I was really enjoying it to begin with. Caine brilliant, as usual, and Jude Law managing to hold is own next to him. It was quite clever how it was modernised and it was working. What stops this from being really good is the last seven minutes. It goes completely away from the original, so far in fact that is ceases to be clever and just gets annoying. The end in the original was fantastic! So much tension was built up and it was unbelievably clever! This? It grows not in tension but in frustration as it seemed they decided to make Caine's character a homosexual. It was if they were trying far to hard to be different. And then... BANG! Law's dead. Roll Credits. This film is worth the watch simply for the performances, but those last seven minutes really do drag it down. What a pity.... --------------------------------------------- Result 3626 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] Let's start this review out on a positive note -- I am very glad they didn't decide to wimp out with Tony being shot and do a retrospective season like some people were rumoring. Actually, creator and writer of this episode David Chase did [[quite]] the opposite. We don't actually know if Tony will live or die. He's in a coma and his chances of recovering are very slim to none. This episode [[seemed]] to move very slow, and the coma induced dream Tony was in involving mistaken identity and robed Asian monks slapping the sh*t out of him was absolutely, flat-out weird. After 45-minutes I got a little sick of everyone grieving, but that shouldn' t be a reason to slam this episode. It was a weird and unpredictable episode, but it was still well-written and intense. Edie Falco gave an astounding career-defining performance in this episode as the conflicted wife having to face with her husband's could-be demise. I also found it interesting AJ dropped out of school and swore a vendetta against Junior, which AJ most likely won't have the balls to pull off. Silvio is now acting-boss which opens numerous doors to problems in later episodes. There were a lot of great quips in this episode, also, and I think Vito 'Pole-Smoker' Spadafore may meet his demise if he keeps being a greedy S.O.B.

This wasn't a great episode and disappointed only because even though Tony kills people, we as an audience adore him and feel he is our hero of the show. This was a necessary episode for the series, even though it was a little snore inducing towards the conclusion. Kudos to Edie Falco's performance, and David Chase and the writers for creating this wholly original and unpredictable plot twist. This is the only season of 'The Sopranos' where I haven't a f*cking clue where it is going to go. I can't wait for next week's episode. My Rating: 7.5/10

Best Line of the Episode: (Paulie to AJ): "Let's go, Van Helsing!" Let's start this review out on a positive note -- I am very glad they didn't decide to wimp out with Tony being shot and do a retrospective season like some people were rumoring. Actually, creator and writer of this episode David Chase did [[rather]] the opposite. We don't actually know if Tony will live or die. He's in a coma and his chances of recovering are very slim to none. This episode [[sounded]] to move very slow, and the coma induced dream Tony was in involving mistaken identity and robed Asian monks slapping the sh*t out of him was absolutely, flat-out weird. After 45-minutes I got a little sick of everyone grieving, but that shouldn' t be a reason to slam this episode. It was a weird and unpredictable episode, but it was still well-written and intense. Edie Falco gave an astounding career-defining performance in this episode as the conflicted wife having to face with her husband's could-be demise. I also found it interesting AJ dropped out of school and swore a vendetta against Junior, which AJ most likely won't have the balls to pull off. Silvio is now acting-boss which opens numerous doors to problems in later episodes. There were a lot of great quips in this episode, also, and I think Vito 'Pole-Smoker' Spadafore may meet his demise if he keeps being a greedy S.O.B.

This wasn't a great episode and disappointed only because even though Tony kills people, we as an audience adore him and feel he is our hero of the show. This was a necessary episode for the series, even though it was a little snore inducing towards the conclusion. Kudos to Edie Falco's performance, and David Chase and the writers for creating this wholly original and unpredictable plot twist. This is the only season of 'The Sopranos' where I haven't a f*cking clue where it is going to go. I can't wait for next week's episode. My Rating: 7.5/10

Best Line of the Episode: (Paulie to AJ): "Let's go, Van Helsing!" --------------------------------------------- Result 3627 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (70%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This [[cute]] animated short features two comic icons - Betty Boop and Henry.

Henry is the bald, slightly portly boy from the comics who never speaks.

Well here he does speak!

He wants to get a puppy from Betty Boop's pet store, and when he is left to mind the store - some hilarious hijinks ensue.

Betty sings a song about pets, Henry gets in a battle with birds and a monkey, but everything works out in the end. This [[charmer]] animated short features two comic icons - Betty Boop and Henry.

Henry is the bald, slightly portly boy from the comics who never speaks.

Well here he does speak!

He wants to get a puppy from Betty Boop's pet store, and when he is left to mind the store - some hilarious hijinks ensue.

Betty sings a song about pets, Henry gets in a battle with birds and a monkey, but everything works out in the end. --------------------------------------------- Result 3628 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This 1953 Sam Fuller movie contains some of his [[best]] [[work]], and its [[sad]] that he couldn't continue to get the backing of major Hollywood studios to do his stuff. The story line goes something like this. A tough hard broad (read prostitute) is riding the subway one hot summer day, and gets her pocketbook picked by Skip McCoy. What Skip (and the dame) don't realize is that she is also carrying some microfilm to be passed to commie spies. This opening shot without dialogue, and mostly in tight close-ups is a beaut,one of the many that Fuller uses throughout the movie. Playing the babe known as Candy is Jean Peters, who was never better nor better looking. One forgets how beautiful she was, and she handles this role very well. The Pickpocket is played by Richard Widmark, who had already made his mark, and set his style with 1947's Kiss Of Death as the crazy creep with the creepy laugh, and although he's a little "softer" here, he's still scary. These hard edged characters do have soft spots here and there, but its noir and nasty all the way. The standout performance belongs to the wonderful Thelma Ritter,who plays Moe the stoolie saving up her dough to pay for her own funeral. Ritter received a well deserved Oscar nomination for her performance, but lost out to the boring but popular performance of Donna Reed as the B girl (read prostitute) in "From Here To Eternity." Hollywood loves it when a good girl goes bad, and loves to Oscar them even though their performance is usually awful. See for instance Shirley Jones in "Elmer Gantry. Set among the docks and dives of New York City, with crisp black and white photography by the great Joe MacDonald,and some very good art direction. Especially good is the set representing the New York City subways and Widmark's shack near the river. Made at the height of the cold war and red scare, the villian of the piece is the ordinary looking commie, played by Richard Kiley who is much more dangerous than the pickpocket who is a criminal but is just trying to make a living and above all is a loyal American. This 1953 Sam Fuller movie contains some of his [[optimum]] [[cooperating]], and its [[regrettable]] that he couldn't continue to get the backing of major Hollywood studios to do his stuff. The story line goes something like this. A tough hard broad (read prostitute) is riding the subway one hot summer day, and gets her pocketbook picked by Skip McCoy. What Skip (and the dame) don't realize is that she is also carrying some microfilm to be passed to commie spies. This opening shot without dialogue, and mostly in tight close-ups is a beaut,one of the many that Fuller uses throughout the movie. Playing the babe known as Candy is Jean Peters, who was never better nor better looking. One forgets how beautiful she was, and she handles this role very well. The Pickpocket is played by Richard Widmark, who had already made his mark, and set his style with 1947's Kiss Of Death as the crazy creep with the creepy laugh, and although he's a little "softer" here, he's still scary. These hard edged characters do have soft spots here and there, but its noir and nasty all the way. The standout performance belongs to the wonderful Thelma Ritter,who plays Moe the stoolie saving up her dough to pay for her own funeral. Ritter received a well deserved Oscar nomination for her performance, but lost out to the boring but popular performance of Donna Reed as the B girl (read prostitute) in "From Here To Eternity." Hollywood loves it when a good girl goes bad, and loves to Oscar them even though their performance is usually awful. See for instance Shirley Jones in "Elmer Gantry. Set among the docks and dives of New York City, with crisp black and white photography by the great Joe MacDonald,and some very good art direction. Especially good is the set representing the New York City subways and Widmark's shack near the river. Made at the height of the cold war and red scare, the villian of the piece is the ordinary looking commie, played by Richard Kiley who is much more dangerous than the pickpocket who is a criminal but is just trying to make a living and above all is a loyal American. --------------------------------------------- Result 3629 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] This movie has a [[special]] [[way]] of telling the [[story]], at [[first]] i found it rather odd as it jumped through time and I had no idea whats happening.

Anyway the [[story]] line was although simple, but still very [[real]] and [[touching]]. You met someone the first time, you [[fell]] in [[love]] completely, but [[broke]] up at [[last]] and [[promoted]] a [[deadly]] [[agony]]. Who hasn't [[go]] through this? but we will never [[forget]] this kind of pain in our [[life]].

I would say i am rather touched as two actor has shown great performance in showing the love between the characters. I just wish that the story could be a happy ending. This movie has a [[specific]] [[manner]] of telling the [[histories]], at [[frst]] i found it rather odd as it jumped through time and I had no idea whats happening.

Anyway the [[histories]] line was although simple, but still very [[veritable]] and [[affects]]. You met someone the first time, you [[dipped]] in [[likes]] completely, but [[raped]] up at [[final]] and [[promotes]] a [[murderous]] [[heartache]]. Who hasn't [[going]] through this? but we will never [[forgets]] this kind of pain in our [[iife]].

I would say i am rather touched as two actor has shown great performance in showing the love between the characters. I just wish that the story could be a happy ending. --------------------------------------------- Result 3630 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] Level One, Horror.

When I saw this film for the first time at 10, I knew it would give me nightmares. It did. [[Surprisingly]], as I recall, it was the sound as much as the sight of the monster that caused them.

Level Two, Psychoanalytic Theory.

Later as an adult, I saw the story for what it was: What if the savage, unrestrained instincts we all repress became manifest.

Level Three, Pure Science Fiction.

The best way plausibly to realize the plot's "What if" is through the science fiction genre. This is pure science fiction, not the "cowboys in space" that passes for the genre today.

After 43 years, Forbidden Planet remains the greatest of all science fiction films. If planning a remake, SKG or Lucas, Watch Out! Level One, Horror.

When I saw this film for the first time at 10, I knew it would give me nightmares. It did. [[Unimaginably]], as I recall, it was the sound as much as the sight of the monster that caused them.

Level Two, Psychoanalytic Theory.

Later as an adult, I saw the story for what it was: What if the savage, unrestrained instincts we all repress became manifest.

Level Three, Pure Science Fiction.

The best way plausibly to realize the plot's "What if" is through the science fiction genre. This is pure science fiction, not the "cowboys in space" that passes for the genre today.

After 43 years, Forbidden Planet remains the greatest of all science fiction films. If planning a remake, SKG or Lucas, Watch Out! --------------------------------------------- Result 3631 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This movie is [[great]] [[fun]] to watch if you love films of the organized [[crime]] variety. Those [[looking]] for a [[crime]] [[film]] starring a charismatic lead with [[dreams]] of [[taking]] over in a [[bad]] way may be [[slightly]] disappointed with the [[way]] this film [[strides]].

It is a fun romp through a criminal underworld however and if you aren't [[familiar]] with [[Hong]] Kong [[films]], then you may be [[pleasantly]] [[surprised]] by this one. I was [[somewhat]] [[disappointed]] by some of the [[choices]] [[made]] story-wise but overall a good crime [[film]]. Some [[things]] did not [[make]] sense but that [[seems]] to be the norm with [[films]] of the [[East]].

People just [[randomly]] do [[things]] [[regardless]] of how their personalities were set up [[prior]]. It's a [[slightly]] annoying pattern that permeates even in this [[film]]. This movie is [[formidable]] [[droll]] to watch if you love films of the organized [[felony]] variety. Those [[researching]] for a [[offenses]] [[cinematography]] starring a charismatic lead with [[dream]] of [[picked]] over in a [[rotten]] way may be [[moderately]] disappointed with the [[manner]] this film [[steps]].

It is a fun romp through a criminal underworld however and if you aren't [[colloquial]] with [[Kong]] Kong [[cinematography]], then you may be [[cheerfully]] [[horrified]] by this one. I was [[rather]] [[frustrating]] by some of the [[option]] [[brought]] story-wise but overall a good crime [[cinematography]]. Some [[matters]] did not [[deliver]] sense but that [[appears]] to be the norm with [[cinematography]] of the [[Easterly]].

People just [[indiscriminately]] do [[items]] [[irrespective]] of how their personalities were set up [[anterior]]. It's a [[moderately]] annoying pattern that permeates even in this [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3632 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too [[little]]. The base story is quite [[good]], but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent [[budget]] [[really]] [[killed]] this movie. Stuart Gordon (the [[writer]]/[[director]]) has writing credit on '[[Honey]], I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. [[However]], that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. [[Honestly]], this is a good [[example]] of when to not [[make]] a [[movie]]. [[Had]] he [[waited]] a few more years, [[technology]] [[would]] have made it cheaper to do [[many]] of the [[effects]]. (not to [[mention]] he could have found a company with money.) There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too [[small]]. The base story is quite [[buena]], but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent [[budgets]] [[truthfully]] [[deaths]] this movie. Stuart Gordon (the [[screenwriter]]/[[headmaster]]) has writing credit on '[[Sweetheart]], I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. [[Still]], that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. [[Genuinely]], this is a good [[instances]] of when to not [[deliver]] a [[cinematography]]. [[Ha]] he [[expected]] a few more years, [[technique]] [[could]] have made it cheaper to do [[numerous]] of the [[influences]]. (not to [[cite]] he could have found a company with money.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3633 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] In A [[Woman]] [[Under]] the Influence [[Mabel]] goes crazy, but I can see why she does go crazy. If I lived the kind of life she lived with the family she has I would go crazy too. Everyone in her family is off their rocker and not [[completely]] with it. She is constantly surrounded by people [[yelling]] at her and telling her what is best for herself and people that aren't the sharpest knifes in the drawer.

To start with the one person closest to her in her life, her husband, Nick, is a little off his rocker. He is always yelling at her when he is home telling her how to live her life and to stop acting like an imbecile. The rest of the time he is working long hours at his job and he isn't there to support her when she needs support. The one person in her life that should always be there for her is never there and if he is, he is just making her feel worse. She relies on him for support and always goes to him first when she feels she is acting wrong and he does nothing to support her. When she comes home from the hospital all he does is tell her how to act, instead of comforting her, he just yells at her and tells her what to do.

The other major people in her life are her parents. Her parents do nothing in her life for her. Mabel basically runs their lives because they are afraid to stand up to her and stand up for her. In the end she even asks her father to stand up for her and he doesn't understand, and when he does get it he still does nothing. They do nothing to help Mabel recover or to keep her from going crazy because they do nothing for her period. The only person that tries to do something for her is Nick's mom. Nick's mom is adamant about having Mabel committed. She doesn't want to have Nick deal with it so she has the doctor commit her. It seems as though everyone is against Mabel and they feel that having her committed is a good idea because then they won't have to deal with it anymore. They all want to live their own lives and do nothing for Mabel except for yell at her and make her feel like she is doing something wrong when she really isn't. That is why she went crazy, and why she had to be committed, it was her family's entire fault. In A [[Femme]] [[At]] the Influence [[Edith]] goes crazy, but I can see why she does go crazy. If I lived the kind of life she lived with the family she has I would go crazy too. Everyone in her family is off their rocker and not [[wholly]] with it. She is constantly surrounded by people [[cris]] at her and telling her what is best for herself and people that aren't the sharpest knifes in the drawer.

To start with the one person closest to her in her life, her husband, Nick, is a little off his rocker. He is always yelling at her when he is home telling her how to live her life and to stop acting like an imbecile. The rest of the time he is working long hours at his job and he isn't there to support her when she needs support. The one person in her life that should always be there for her is never there and if he is, he is just making her feel worse. She relies on him for support and always goes to him first when she feels she is acting wrong and he does nothing to support her. When she comes home from the hospital all he does is tell her how to act, instead of comforting her, he just yells at her and tells her what to do.

The other major people in her life are her parents. Her parents do nothing in her life for her. Mabel basically runs their lives because they are afraid to stand up to her and stand up for her. In the end she even asks her father to stand up for her and he doesn't understand, and when he does get it he still does nothing. They do nothing to help Mabel recover or to keep her from going crazy because they do nothing for her period. The only person that tries to do something for her is Nick's mom. Nick's mom is adamant about having Mabel committed. She doesn't want to have Nick deal with it so she has the doctor commit her. It seems as though everyone is against Mabel and they feel that having her committed is a good idea because then they won't have to deal with it anymore. They all want to live their own lives and do nothing for Mabel except for yell at her and make her feel like she is doing something wrong when she really isn't. That is why she went crazy, and why she had to be committed, it was her family's entire fault. --------------------------------------------- Result 3634 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] What an ambitious [[project]] Kenneth Branagh undertook here and how well it was realized! This is the first [[filmed]] version of 'Hamlet' to [[use]] the full [[text]] of Shakespeare's play, but Branagh didn't do it just because "it was there." His [[intention]], I [[believe]], was to make the play [[accessible]] and understandable to the [[general]] viewer without dumbing it down, so to [[speak]]. In [[return]] he asks [[viewers]] to put in a [[little]] work themselves, a fair enough proposition and one that's a [[bargain]].

The [[setting]] is a generic 19th century European one and this does more than [[work]] well, it keeps a [[modern]] or [[ancient]] [[look]] from [[possibly]] [[distracting]] from the [[work]] itself. The production [[design]] and [[cinematography]] and both [[outstanding]], which [[helps]] [[immensely]] when you're [[watching]] a four-hour [[movie]]. Branagh's casting once again is inspired and the acting is [[likewise]]. The [[direction]] accomplishes the heavy task of making this a movie [[rather]] than a deluxe version of a play. [[Since]] so much of 'Hamlet' is [[based]] on interior monologue and there are relatively few duels, [[battles]], etc., this can be a daunting [[task]]. But everything Branagh tries to do seems to [[work]].

Branagh has [[always]] been one of the most interesting [[actor]]/writer/[[directors]], if not [[always]] the [[best]], since he made his [[big]] splash with '[[Henry]] V.' One quibble I had with him was what I [[saw]] as a [[tendency]] to ham it up at [[times]]. [[In]] his portrayal of Hamlet here he might be [[accused]] of that again, but there is a [[method]] at [[work]]. Let's face it, 'Hamlet' is not an easy [[work]] for the average [[person]] to [[understand]] and if one has never [[seen]] it performed before, he or she needs help even if they've read the [[play]]. Hamlet has the most lines of any Shakespearian [[character]] and Branagh makes sure that his [[viewers]] know what this [[man]] is thinking and feeling [[throughout]] the [[film]], [[even]] if you don't know the literal [[meaning]] of [[every]] [[arcane]] word. This performance by Branagh was at the very [[least]] [[worthy]] of an [[Oscar]] [[nomination]].

There are so [[many]] other [[outstanding]] performances here they're [[almost]] too [[numerous]] to mention, but some of them [[must]] be [[acknowledged]]. Derek Jacobi as Claudius is [[superb]] but even he takes a back seat to Kate Winslet when it comes to handing out praise. Her portrayal of Ophelia is awesome in its depth of feeling, made only more [[outstanding]] by the knowledge that she was only about 20 years old at the time! She looks to me like the finest young actress around. Other super performers in no particular order are Richard Briers, Nicholas Farrell, Michael Maloney, and Reece Dinsdale and Timothy Spall as Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, respectively. [[Honorable]] mention goes to Julie Christie, Charlton Heston, and Robin Williams, who manages to do his thing here successfully. Even Billy Crystal as a gravedigger works. The one cast member who doesn't, inexplicably, is Jack Lemmon. In the very opening scene he appears, and while the other three actors do a great job at setting the tense mood, Lemmon sounds like he is just running lines in rehearsal as a favor. You know this must have been a real dilemma for Branagh, since everything else about the movies screams out that it's the work of a perfectionist.

Not to be facetious when speaking of a four-hour movie, but it does seem just a tad too long. Some monologues and conversations do tend to go on a bit, if I may be so bold, and a little bit of judicious pruning would be welcome.

Did I forget anything, other than Patrick Doyle's score? No doubt I did. I'll just sum up by saying that Kenneth Branagh may have made the definitive film version of 'Hamlet,' and it will be a truly monumental production that tops this one. What an ambitious [[projects]] Kenneth Branagh undertook here and how well it was realized! This is the first [[shot]] version of 'Hamlet' to [[utilizing]] the full [[texts]] of Shakespeare's play, but Branagh didn't do it just because "it was there." His [[aims]], I [[reckon]], was to make the play [[available]] and understandable to the [[overall]] viewer without dumbing it down, so to [[talk]]. In [[revert]] he asks [[audiences]] to put in a [[tiny]] work themselves, a fair enough proposition and one that's a [[bargaining]].

The [[settings]] is a generic 19th century European one and this does more than [[collaborate]] well, it keeps a [[fashionable]] or [[elderly]] [[peek]] from [[presumably]] [[embarrassing]] from the [[cooperation]] itself. The production [[designing]] and [[movie]] and both [[unpaid]], which [[help]] [[hugely]] when you're [[staring]] a four-hour [[flick]]. Branagh's casting once again is inspired and the acting is [[alternatively]]. The [[directorate]] accomplishes the heavy task of making this a movie [[fairly]] than a deluxe version of a play. [[Because]] so much of 'Hamlet' is [[base]] on interior monologue and there are relatively few duels, [[struggle]], etc., this can be a daunting [[chore]]. But everything Branagh tries to do seems to [[collaborated]].

Branagh has [[incessantly]] been one of the most interesting [[actress]]/writer/[[administrators]], if not [[incessantly]] the [[better]], since he made his [[wide]] splash with '[[Gregg]] V.' One quibble I had with him was what I [[observed]] as a [[tendencies]] to ham it up at [[time]]. [[Across]] his portrayal of Hamlet here he might be [[accusing]] of that again, but there is a [[modes]] at [[jobs]]. Let's face it, 'Hamlet' is not an easy [[collaborating]] for the average [[persona]] to [[comprehend]] and if one has never [[watched]] it performed before, he or she needs help even if they've read the [[playing]]. Hamlet has the most lines of any Shakespearian [[characteristics]] and Branagh makes sure that his [[audience]] know what this [[dude]] is thinking and feeling [[across]] the [[movie]], [[yet]] if you don't know the literal [[mean]] of [[each]] [[opaque]] word. This performance by Branagh was at the very [[lowest]] [[praiseworthy]] of an [[Oscars]] [[appointments]].

There are so [[multiple]] other [[unpaid]] performances here they're [[approximately]] too [[many]] to mention, but some of them [[ought]] be [[recognizing]]. Derek Jacobi as Claudius is [[extraordinaire]] but even he takes a back seat to Kate Winslet when it comes to handing out praise. Her portrayal of Ophelia is awesome in its depth of feeling, made only more [[admirable]] by the knowledge that she was only about 20 years old at the time! She looks to me like the finest young actress around. Other super performers in no particular order are Richard Briers, Nicholas Farrell, Michael Maloney, and Reece Dinsdale and Timothy Spall as Guildenstern and Rosencrantz, respectively. [[Honourable]] mention goes to Julie Christie, Charlton Heston, and Robin Williams, who manages to do his thing here successfully. Even Billy Crystal as a gravedigger works. The one cast member who doesn't, inexplicably, is Jack Lemmon. In the very opening scene he appears, and while the other three actors do a great job at setting the tense mood, Lemmon sounds like he is just running lines in rehearsal as a favor. You know this must have been a real dilemma for Branagh, since everything else about the movies screams out that it's the work of a perfectionist.

Not to be facetious when speaking of a four-hour movie, but it does seem just a tad too long. Some monologues and conversations do tend to go on a bit, if I may be so bold, and a little bit of judicious pruning would be welcome.

Did I forget anything, other than Patrick Doyle's score? No doubt I did. I'll just sum up by saying that Kenneth Branagh may have made the definitive film version of 'Hamlet,' and it will be a truly monumental production that tops this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3635 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (85%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Armageddon PPV

The last PPV of 2006

Smackdown brand.

Match Results Ahead********

We are starting the show with The Inferno match. Kane v. MVP. This was an okay match. Nothing about wrestling here. This was about the visuals. Overall, this was not [[bad]]. There were a few close spots here with Kane getting too close to the fire, but in the end, Kane won with ramming MVP into the fire back first.

Nice opener. Let's continue.

Teddy Long announces a new match for the tag team titles: London and Kendrick will defend against: Regal and Taylor, The Hardyz, and MNM IN A LADDER MATCH!!!! Let's get moving!

Match two: Fatal four way ladder match. This was total carnage. Judging by three out of the four teams here, you would expect chaos. The spots were amazing. A total spot-fest. One point Jeff went for Poetry in Motion and London moved and Jeff hit the ladder! Shortly afterword, Jeff is set on the top rope with two ladders nearby as MNM were going to kill Jeff, Matt makes the save and Jeff hits the "see-saw" shot to Joey Mercury! Mercury is hurt. His eye is shut quickly and is busted open hard way. Mercury is taken out of the match and Nitro is still there. He is going to fight alone for the titles! Regal and Taylor then grab London and suplex him face-first into the ladder! Jeff climbs the ladder and Nitro in a killer spot, dropkicks through the ladder to nail Jeff! Awesome! In the end, London and Kendrick retain the tag team titles. What a match!!!

This was insane. I can't figure out why WWE did not announce this till now. The Buyrate would increase huge. I'm sure the replay value will be good though.

Mercury has suffered a shattered nose and lacerations to the eye. He is at the hospital now. Get well kid.

No way anything else here will top that.

Next up: The Miz v. Boogeyman.(Ugh) This was a nothing match. Will the Boogeyman ever wrestle? The Miz sucks too. After a insane crowd, this kills them dead. DUD.

Chris Benoit v. Chavo. This was a strong match. I enjoyed it. Chavo hit a killer superplex at one point! Benoit hit EIGHT German suplexes too! Benoit wins with the sharpshooter. Good stuff.

Helms v. Yang-Cruiserweight title championship match. This was a good match. Unfortunately, the stupid fans did not care for this. WHY? Helms and Yang are very talented and wrestled well. I agree with JBL. He ranted to the crowd. JBL is 100% correct. Learn to appreciate this or get out.

Mr. Kennedy v. The Undertaker-Last Ride match. Not too much here. This was a slug fest, with a few exceptions. Kennedy at one point tossed Taker off the top of the stage to the floor. The spot was fine. Reaction was disappointing. The end spot was Taker tomb-stoned Kennedy on the hearse and won the match. Unreal. Kennedy needed this win. They both worker hard. Still, Kennedy needed this win. Undertaker should have lost. Creative screwed up again.

A stupid diva thing is next. I like women. Not this. At least Torrie was not here. That's refreshing. Judging from the crowd, Layla should have won. The WWE wanted Ashley. Consider this your bathroom break. Next.

Main Event: Cena & Batista v. Finlay & Booker T. This was also a nothing match. The focus was Cena v. Finlay and Batista v. Booker. Batista and Booker can't work well together. Finlay tries to make Cena look good. The finish was botched. Finlay hit Batista's knee with a chair shot and Batista no-sold the shot and finished the match. Lame. Not main event caliber at all.

Overall, Armageddon would have scored less, but the ladder match WAS the main event here. That was enough money's worth right there. A few others were solid.

The Last Word: A good PPV with the ladder match being the savior. Smackdown is not a bad show just is not compelling enough. Smackdown needs to stop letting Cena tag along. Let Smackdown stand on their own two legs. This show proves that Smackdown can. Armageddon PPV

The last PPV of 2006

Smackdown brand.

Match Results Ahead********

We are starting the show with The Inferno match. Kane v. MVP. This was an okay match. Nothing about wrestling here. This was about the visuals. Overall, this was not [[unfavorable]]. There were a few close spots here with Kane getting too close to the fire, but in the end, Kane won with ramming MVP into the fire back first.

Nice opener. Let's continue.

Teddy Long announces a new match for the tag team titles: London and Kendrick will defend against: Regal and Taylor, The Hardyz, and MNM IN A LADDER MATCH!!!! Let's get moving!

Match two: Fatal four way ladder match. This was total carnage. Judging by three out of the four teams here, you would expect chaos. The spots were amazing. A total spot-fest. One point Jeff went for Poetry in Motion and London moved and Jeff hit the ladder! Shortly afterword, Jeff is set on the top rope with two ladders nearby as MNM were going to kill Jeff, Matt makes the save and Jeff hits the "see-saw" shot to Joey Mercury! Mercury is hurt. His eye is shut quickly and is busted open hard way. Mercury is taken out of the match and Nitro is still there. He is going to fight alone for the titles! Regal and Taylor then grab London and suplex him face-first into the ladder! Jeff climbs the ladder and Nitro in a killer spot, dropkicks through the ladder to nail Jeff! Awesome! In the end, London and Kendrick retain the tag team titles. What a match!!!

This was insane. I can't figure out why WWE did not announce this till now. The Buyrate would increase huge. I'm sure the replay value will be good though.

Mercury has suffered a shattered nose and lacerations to the eye. He is at the hospital now. Get well kid.

No way anything else here will top that.

Next up: The Miz v. Boogeyman.(Ugh) This was a nothing match. Will the Boogeyman ever wrestle? The Miz sucks too. After a insane crowd, this kills them dead. DUD.

Chris Benoit v. Chavo. This was a strong match. I enjoyed it. Chavo hit a killer superplex at one point! Benoit hit EIGHT German suplexes too! Benoit wins with the sharpshooter. Good stuff.

Helms v. Yang-Cruiserweight title championship match. This was a good match. Unfortunately, the stupid fans did not care for this. WHY? Helms and Yang are very talented and wrestled well. I agree with JBL. He ranted to the crowd. JBL is 100% correct. Learn to appreciate this or get out.

Mr. Kennedy v. The Undertaker-Last Ride match. Not too much here. This was a slug fest, with a few exceptions. Kennedy at one point tossed Taker off the top of the stage to the floor. The spot was fine. Reaction was disappointing. The end spot was Taker tomb-stoned Kennedy on the hearse and won the match. Unreal. Kennedy needed this win. They both worker hard. Still, Kennedy needed this win. Undertaker should have lost. Creative screwed up again.

A stupid diva thing is next. I like women. Not this. At least Torrie was not here. That's refreshing. Judging from the crowd, Layla should have won. The WWE wanted Ashley. Consider this your bathroom break. Next.

Main Event: Cena & Batista v. Finlay & Booker T. This was also a nothing match. The focus was Cena v. Finlay and Batista v. Booker. Batista and Booker can't work well together. Finlay tries to make Cena look good. The finish was botched. Finlay hit Batista's knee with a chair shot and Batista no-sold the shot and finished the match. Lame. Not main event caliber at all.

Overall, Armageddon would have scored less, but the ladder match WAS the main event here. That was enough money's worth right there. A few others were solid.

The Last Word: A good PPV with the ladder match being the savior. Smackdown is not a bad show just is not compelling enough. Smackdown needs to stop letting Cena tag along. Let Smackdown stand on their own two legs. This show proves that Smackdown can. --------------------------------------------- Result 3636 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] My wife and I just finished this movie and I came onto to IMDb to commiserate with the reviewers that found this movie less than satisfactory. However, of the 10 pages of reviews, only a handful are negative. I feel that this movie is a great [[concept]] gone horribly awry and I want to warn those who are looking to watch the movie into the future.

I admit, I'm more inspired to write reviews when I don't like a movie than as to when I do, so my handful of reviews are all negative. Still, that doesn't mean I'm biased towards not enjoying a movie, but I often find more eloquent reviews of movies I do enjoy.

Paris je t'aime is the most pretentious movie I've seen in years. By using an "intelligent" concept and attaching some big talent to a couple of the WAY to many short stories, the movie ends up the worst of all worlds. It is art for arts sake, but something that a 2 year old could dream up and accomplish. Giving the director free reign of 5 minutes of screen time proves why there is a division of labor even in entertainment. Directors can't write, writers can't direct. (I'd like to throw in also that Clint Eastwood is overrated, but that is because he's an actor turn director {which rarely works, either}).

What ends up on the screen is a garbled mess of short stories that don't make any sense, are not completed in 5 minutes and in total, spoil Paris to me. Why call it Paris je t'aime when a more apropos title is cluster f*ck? There are only a couple stories that are watchable, most notably the piece by Alfonso Cuarón, but everything else will fall into obscurity. The Coen brothers short is passable, but can you name a movie of theirs that does not contain a scene with a pick guitar? It's as if all the directors decided on doing whatever it is they want to do and chose Paris as the place to do it. As we all love Paris, present company included, we are blinded by the fact that this movie SUCKS. In fact, I think they put the directors names on each of the shorts because directors saw how poor of a film this is and decided to make sure they were blamed only for their 5 minutes. Seriously. SERIOUSLY.

People, Natalie Portman is NOT a good actress. She is is not a pixie dream girl waiting to be yours. And Maggie Gyllenhaal, why?!? Are you people acting or just regurgitating performances from other movies? I'm looking at you Natalie Portman (Garden State, Closer), Elijah Wood (Sin City) and Catalina Sandino Moreno (Maria Full of Grace).

One final comment on the acting: I give double kudos to Nick Nolte for acting and looking more humane than you have in ages or perhaps ever will again. Find his short on youtube as his 5 minutes are quite enjoyable.

Writing short stories is very difficult and only a handful of authors have gotten it right. I'm thinking of Ernst Hemingway, Raymond Carver, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and John Cheever, just to name a few. It is much harder than writing a full novel and only the truly talented can accomplish this. The same can be said about short films. It appears that only one director will live on in the annals of history.

If you uphold Paris as a gem to be discovered and reflected through your own lenses with your own story, then don't expect to enjoy this movie at all. The directors either didn't care or were lazy. In either scenario, by the time you are reading this it means you rented it. Praise be that you didn't pay 10 dollars a head in theaters for it. My wife and I just finished this movie and I came onto to IMDb to commiserate with the reviewers that found this movie less than satisfactory. However, of the 10 pages of reviews, only a handful are negative. I feel that this movie is a great [[conceptions]] gone horribly awry and I want to warn those who are looking to watch the movie into the future.

I admit, I'm more inspired to write reviews when I don't like a movie than as to when I do, so my handful of reviews are all negative. Still, that doesn't mean I'm biased towards not enjoying a movie, but I often find more eloquent reviews of movies I do enjoy.

Paris je t'aime is the most pretentious movie I've seen in years. By using an "intelligent" concept and attaching some big talent to a couple of the WAY to many short stories, the movie ends up the worst of all worlds. It is art for arts sake, but something that a 2 year old could dream up and accomplish. Giving the director free reign of 5 minutes of screen time proves why there is a division of labor even in entertainment. Directors can't write, writers can't direct. (I'd like to throw in also that Clint Eastwood is overrated, but that is because he's an actor turn director {which rarely works, either}).

What ends up on the screen is a garbled mess of short stories that don't make any sense, are not completed in 5 minutes and in total, spoil Paris to me. Why call it Paris je t'aime when a more apropos title is cluster f*ck? There are only a couple stories that are watchable, most notably the piece by Alfonso Cuarón, but everything else will fall into obscurity. The Coen brothers short is passable, but can you name a movie of theirs that does not contain a scene with a pick guitar? It's as if all the directors decided on doing whatever it is they want to do and chose Paris as the place to do it. As we all love Paris, present company included, we are blinded by the fact that this movie SUCKS. In fact, I think they put the directors names on each of the shorts because directors saw how poor of a film this is and decided to make sure they were blamed only for their 5 minutes. Seriously. SERIOUSLY.

People, Natalie Portman is NOT a good actress. She is is not a pixie dream girl waiting to be yours. And Maggie Gyllenhaal, why?!? Are you people acting or just regurgitating performances from other movies? I'm looking at you Natalie Portman (Garden State, Closer), Elijah Wood (Sin City) and Catalina Sandino Moreno (Maria Full of Grace).

One final comment on the acting: I give double kudos to Nick Nolte for acting and looking more humane than you have in ages or perhaps ever will again. Find his short on youtube as his 5 minutes are quite enjoyable.

Writing short stories is very difficult and only a handful of authors have gotten it right. I'm thinking of Ernst Hemingway, Raymond Carver, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and John Cheever, just to name a few. It is much harder than writing a full novel and only the truly talented can accomplish this. The same can be said about short films. It appears that only one director will live on in the annals of history.

If you uphold Paris as a gem to be discovered and reflected through your own lenses with your own story, then don't expect to enjoy this movie at all. The directors either didn't care or were lazy. In either scenario, by the time you are reading this it means you rented it. Praise be that you didn't pay 10 dollars a head in theaters for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3637 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] As it is in Heaven {SPOILER WARNING)

This was a [[great]] human [[drama]] that stimulated my emotions and my imagination.

This is a [[parable]] revisiting the life and death of Christ. Daniel is a superior gifted musician ,who is physically and mentally exhausted by his career , and has to give it up. When he joins a church choir as its cantor, he brings about a transformation in the lives of the choristers , just as Jesus did to the society in first century Palestine. They laugh, they begin to speak openly and truthfully to each other , their faults are exposed,they accept each other, come to love each other, become a vital community.They include the mentally disabled young man (?Tore), such is their inclusiveness.

The pastor, Stig enjoyed authority through imposing a stifling morality on the congregation, and that is gradually rejected by the choristers . When Stig dismisses Daniel , there is a revolt, and Stig is crushed. Stig represents the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day, whose insistence on obedience to the Jewish law,provided a stark contrast to the new life by "the golden rule" brought by Jesus.

In one dramatic scene, someone declares "the church invented sin". All through the film, there is this contrast between moral-ism and vital living (being).

True to the Christ story, Daniel is killed by Conny , when he beats him up, leaves him to drown in the river. Next scene , we can hardly believe it when Daniel's (resurrected!) body is dragged into his room (the tomb) draped in a white linen sheet (the shroud!), by three women (three women kept vigil at the foot of the cross in the gospel).

Daniel is drawn closely to Lena, a warm beautiful young woman who has been betrayed by a man she loved, and who is now promiscuous (Jesus developed a close relationship with Mary Magdalene- Lena- who was probably a high class courtesan/prostitute). Through Lena, Daniel learns to love , something he has longed for, and now finds fulfillment .

The solo sung by Gabriella , composed by Daniel, is all about living a full life , in contrast to moral correctness that leads to concern about sin , and what's right and wrong.

The final scene shows the choir all singing/humming in harmony , like a mantra, drawing in the large audience, exemplifying the harmony and inter-connectedness that is our true human destiny. As it is in Heaven {SPOILER WARNING)

This was a [[whopping]] human [[teatro]] that stimulated my emotions and my imagination.

This is a [[parabolic]] revisiting the life and death of Christ. Daniel is a superior gifted musician ,who is physically and mentally exhausted by his career , and has to give it up. When he joins a church choir as its cantor, he brings about a transformation in the lives of the choristers , just as Jesus did to the society in first century Palestine. They laugh, they begin to speak openly and truthfully to each other , their faults are exposed,they accept each other, come to love each other, become a vital community.They include the mentally disabled young man (?Tore), such is their inclusiveness.

The pastor, Stig enjoyed authority through imposing a stifling morality on the congregation, and that is gradually rejected by the choristers . When Stig dismisses Daniel , there is a revolt, and Stig is crushed. Stig represents the Jewish authorities of Jesus' day, whose insistence on obedience to the Jewish law,provided a stark contrast to the new life by "the golden rule" brought by Jesus.

In one dramatic scene, someone declares "the church invented sin". All through the film, there is this contrast between moral-ism and vital living (being).

True to the Christ story, Daniel is killed by Conny , when he beats him up, leaves him to drown in the river. Next scene , we can hardly believe it when Daniel's (resurrected!) body is dragged into his room (the tomb) draped in a white linen sheet (the shroud!), by three women (three women kept vigil at the foot of the cross in the gospel).

Daniel is drawn closely to Lena, a warm beautiful young woman who has been betrayed by a man she loved, and who is now promiscuous (Jesus developed a close relationship with Mary Magdalene- Lena- who was probably a high class courtesan/prostitute). Through Lena, Daniel learns to love , something he has longed for, and now finds fulfillment .

The solo sung by Gabriella , composed by Daniel, is all about living a full life , in contrast to moral correctness that leads to concern about sin , and what's right and wrong.

The final scene shows the choir all singing/humming in harmony , like a mantra, drawing in the large audience, exemplifying the harmony and inter-connectedness that is our true human destiny. --------------------------------------------- Result 3638 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] The extended nuclear family, united in [[business]] as well as in personal life, is [[examined]] in this [[serious]] [[study]] of a grown son's conflict with his father's [[desire]] that he [[remain]] in the [[family]] [[business]]. This triggers a midlife crisis which may or may not be ameliorated by an affair and retreat to a shrink's couch. [[Very]] fine acting by all. A sleeper that [[deserves]] [[wide]] [[attention]]. The extended nuclear family, united in [[corporations]] as well as in personal life, is [[inspected]] in this [[gravest]] [[scrutinize]] of a grown son's conflict with his father's [[willingness]] that he [[stay]] in the [[families]] [[corporations]]. This triggers a midlife crisis which may or may not be ameliorated by an affair and retreat to a shrink's couch. [[Eminently]] fine acting by all. A sleeper that [[deserved]] [[big]] [[beware]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3639 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Clearly an hilarious movie.

It angers me to see the poor ratings given to this piece of comic genius

Please look at this for what it is, a funny, ridiculous [[enjoyable]] film. Laugh for christ sake!

Clearly an hilarious movie.

It angers me to see the poor ratings given to this piece of comic genius

Please look at this for what it is, a funny, ridiculous [[pleasurable]] film. Laugh for christ sake!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3640 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] The Clouded Yellow is a compact psychological thriller with interesting characterizations. Barry Jones and Kenneth More are both terrific in supporting roles in characters that both have more to them than what meets the eye. Jean Simmons is quite good, and Trevor Howard makes a fascinatingly offbeat suspense hero. --------------------------------------------- Result 3641 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] This [[movie]] is nothing but a religious tract [[promoting]] classic Hinduism and New Age Occultism dressed up with Western images to be swallowed by those who are ignorant of foundational religious comparisons. Basic tenants of Hinduism contain elements of [[reincarnation]]. (Some of the characters appear both in the present time and also in the 1600's) obviously reincarnated. God is an impersonal force. Animal life and plant life are all the same. (This is Pantheism). Redfield has [[tried]] to mix Eastern Mysticism with Western Christianty. His attempt at syncretism may fool or confuse those who are not seekers of truth but this movie is a [[feeble]] excuse for any ultimate reality. As the ad in the old Berkeley Barb used to say for $10.00 will show you how to start your own religion. As one famous prophet has said, "Use the Force Luke". This [[kino]] is nothing but a religious tract [[boosting]] classic Hinduism and New Age Occultism dressed up with Western images to be swallowed by those who are ignorant of foundational religious comparisons. Basic tenants of Hinduism contain elements of [[redemption]]. (Some of the characters appear both in the present time and also in the 1600's) obviously reincarnated. God is an impersonal force. Animal life and plant life are all the same. (This is Pantheism). Redfield has [[strived]] to mix Eastern Mysticism with Western Christianty. His attempt at syncretism may fool or confuse those who are not seekers of truth but this movie is a [[fragile]] excuse for any ultimate reality. As the ad in the old Berkeley Barb used to say for $10.00 will show you how to start your own religion. As one famous prophet has said, "Use the Force Luke". --------------------------------------------- Result 3642 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The [[critics]] are [[dumb]]. This movie is funny and smart. I [[loved]] this movie a lot. Why does [[everyone]] [[hate]] this movie so much. I wish people [[would]] love this movie more than they don't. Ben Stiller and [[Jack]] [[Black]] are true comedians and they put through a lot of work to make this movie. I don't see you people out there making movies like them. So people should just watch it and not [[comment]] it. I like this movie. It is OK through it all. There are parts were it get's dumb but at least they made it. Jerry Stiller would love this because this movie has the acting just like the show King Of Queens. But this is better than that. I can't believe this was rated so low. The [[criticisms]] are [[foolish]]. This movie is funny and smart. I [[worshipped]] this movie a lot. Why does [[somebody]] [[hating]] this movie so much. I wish people [[should]] love this movie more than they don't. Ben Stiller and [[Gato]] [[Negro]] are true comedians and they put through a lot of work to make this movie. I don't see you people out there making movies like them. So people should just watch it and not [[commentary]] it. I like this movie. It is OK through it all. There are parts were it get's dumb but at least they made it. Jerry Stiller would love this because this movie has the acting just like the show King Of Queens. But this is better than that. I can't believe this was rated so low. --------------------------------------------- Result 3643 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Except for acknowledging some nice cinematography, I can [[hardly]] say [[anything]] [[positive]] about this [[movie]]. The single real issue is the protagonist's dilemma whether to remain with his childhood friends in the world of misery or to leave them and take up his own life. Abundant "emotionally powerful" scenes do not [[go]] with this plot and, because of [[bad]] acting, they [[also]] fail to create the intended atmosphere. The [[director]] only [[manages]] to [[introduce]] Anthony's dilemma and eventually brings an easy [[solution]]. The characters do not seem to evolve, although it is difficult to speak of any characters... perhaps except for Sonny. Beside him, actors do not get to play much and when some of them have to, they come off as self-indulging amateurs. I wonder what [[ruined]] the movie more: the superficial [[script]], throwing away all the potential of the plot, or the bad acting, disturbing any appeal that might be left. Except for acknowledging some nice cinematography, I can [[almost]] say [[something]] [[beneficial]] about this [[cinematography]]. The single real issue is the protagonist's dilemma whether to remain with his childhood friends in the world of misery or to leave them and take up his own life. Abundant "emotionally powerful" scenes do not [[going]] with this plot and, because of [[negative]] acting, they [[apart]] fail to create the intended atmosphere. The [[superintendent]] only [[administered]] to [[introducing]] Anthony's dilemma and eventually brings an easy [[solutions]]. The characters do not seem to evolve, although it is difficult to speak of any characters... perhaps except for Sonny. Beside him, actors do not get to play much and when some of them have to, they come off as self-indulging amateurs. I wonder what [[thrashed]] the movie more: the superficial [[screenplay]], throwing away all the potential of the plot, or the bad acting, disturbing any appeal that might be left. --------------------------------------------- Result 3644 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I wanted to see the [[movie]] because of an article in a film magazine. It wasn't a highly recommended one by the critic. The storyline is different and I am sure that it could have been a [[good]] movie if it was in right hands. Directing and acting were awful!! I had the feeling of watching a movie which was made a bunch of amateurs. [[Although]] the movie started promisingly, it got [[worse]] and [[worse]]. I think this is an unoriginal movie with awkward [[characters]].. I still [[think]] that it is worth watching as I haven't seen films subjecting gay porn. Don't keep your expectations high though,then you will be very disappointed. * out of ***** I wanted to see the [[films]] because of an article in a film magazine. It wasn't a highly recommended one by the critic. The storyline is different and I am sure that it could have been a [[buena]] movie if it was in right hands. Directing and acting were awful!! I had the feeling of watching a movie which was made a bunch of amateurs. [[Albeit]] the movie started promisingly, it got [[lousiest]] and [[lousiest]]. I think this is an unoriginal movie with awkward [[nature]].. I still [[believe]] that it is worth watching as I haven't seen films subjecting gay porn. Don't keep your expectations high though,then you will be very disappointed. * out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3645 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a really [[stupid]] [[movie]] in that [[typical]] 80s genre: action comedy. Conceptwise it resembles Rush Hour but [[completely]] [[lacks]] the action, the laughs and the chemistry between the main characters of that movie. Let it be known that I [[enjoy]] Jay Leno as a stand-up and as a talk show host, but he just cannot [[act]]. He is awful when he tries to act tough - he [[barely]] manages to keep that trademark smirk off his face while saying his one-liners which, by the way, aren't very funny. And seeing him run (even back then) is not a pleasant sight. In addition, I have a feeling that Pat Morita - at least by today's standards - doesn't give a very politically correct impression of the Japanese. Don't even get me started about the story. I give it a 2 out of 10. This is a really [[dopey]] [[cinematography]] in that [[characteristic]] 80s genre: action comedy. Conceptwise it resembles Rush Hour but [[perfectly]] [[shortage]] the action, the laughs and the chemistry between the main characters of that movie. Let it be known that I [[enjoying]] Jay Leno as a stand-up and as a talk show host, but he just cannot [[law]]. He is awful when he tries to act tough - he [[hardly]] manages to keep that trademark smirk off his face while saying his one-liners which, by the way, aren't very funny. And seeing him run (even back then) is not a pleasant sight. In addition, I have a feeling that Pat Morita - at least by today's standards - doesn't give a very politically correct impression of the Japanese. Don't even get me started about the story. I give it a 2 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3646 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] From watching only the trailer to Theodore Rex, you would think this is a bad buddy cop comedy with Whoopi Goldberg and a guy in a dinosaur costume. That is true, but this is mostly a futuristic story, which looks a lot like Batman Forever with it's direction style and weird character [[designs]]. It was mismarketed, and should have been marketed as a futuristic tale, instead of just a lame cop [[comedy]]. Whether or not this movie is mismarketed, it's still a [[horrible]] movie.

In the future, [[dinosaurs]] have been brought back to life through amazing technology, and they talk and walk around like humans. Teddy is a dinosaur detective who is never taken seriously, but after a dinosaur is murdered, he's given the case to work on, but he has to be partners with the toughest cop of them all, Katie Coltrane (Whoopi Goldberg). It's up to this mismatched duo to solve the murder, and it's up to the audience to stay awake long enough to make it through this piece of crud.

Teddy starts the picture as a normal acting character, but by the end he is unbearable to listen to. For some reason along with being a detective, he's also a bad comedian and a bad impersonator. He does imitations of famous people and accents, and has some truly awful lines. Whoopi blames him for farting and he says, "It's not my butt trumpet!" Wow! What a puerile, immature line, even for a kid's movie of this caliber. Whoopi is also annoying and rude to everyone. I was hoping Teddy would bite her head off the entire length of the film.

This movie never knew what it wanted to be. When the futuristic scenes and action occur, there is no comedy or humor. In any non-action scenes, the characters try to be as funny as they can, which just results in nonstop straight faced boredome. The action scenes don't work as they're too weird and not violent enough, and as stated earlier, the comedy is just a bunch of massacred jokes. Nothing ever works here.

Having a dinosaur/human detective duo seems like a pretty original movie, if nothing else. Nope! This movie is a huge rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Just replace dinosaurs with cartoons, and set it in the future, and it's the exact same plot. A man is killed, a dinosaur is killed. A dinosaur and detective solve the murder, a toon and detective solve the murder. The bad guys in Roger Rabbit are Christopher Lloyd and weasels. The bad guys here are a guy who sounds like Christopher Lloyd and guys who act just like the weasels. The club scene in Roger Rabbit where Jessica Rabbit walks down the stage is imitated with dinosaurs. This is a huge rip-off of a much better movie!

Overall, this is a bad movie, not even deserving of it's straight to VHS stature.

My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 90 mins. PG for mild violence, language and crude humor. From watching only the trailer to Theodore Rex, you would think this is a bad buddy cop comedy with Whoopi Goldberg and a guy in a dinosaur costume. That is true, but this is mostly a futuristic story, which looks a lot like Batman Forever with it's direction style and weird character [[design]]. It was mismarketed, and should have been marketed as a futuristic tale, instead of just a lame cop [[parody]]. Whether or not this movie is mismarketed, it's still a [[terrifying]] movie.

In the future, [[dinosaur]] have been brought back to life through amazing technology, and they talk and walk around like humans. Teddy is a dinosaur detective who is never taken seriously, but after a dinosaur is murdered, he's given the case to work on, but he has to be partners with the toughest cop of them all, Katie Coltrane (Whoopi Goldberg). It's up to this mismatched duo to solve the murder, and it's up to the audience to stay awake long enough to make it through this piece of crud.

Teddy starts the picture as a normal acting character, but by the end he is unbearable to listen to. For some reason along with being a detective, he's also a bad comedian and a bad impersonator. He does imitations of famous people and accents, and has some truly awful lines. Whoopi blames him for farting and he says, "It's not my butt trumpet!" Wow! What a puerile, immature line, even for a kid's movie of this caliber. Whoopi is also annoying and rude to everyone. I was hoping Teddy would bite her head off the entire length of the film.

This movie never knew what it wanted to be. When the futuristic scenes and action occur, there is no comedy or humor. In any non-action scenes, the characters try to be as funny as they can, which just results in nonstop straight faced boredome. The action scenes don't work as they're too weird and not violent enough, and as stated earlier, the comedy is just a bunch of massacred jokes. Nothing ever works here.

Having a dinosaur/human detective duo seems like a pretty original movie, if nothing else. Nope! This movie is a huge rip-off of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Just replace dinosaurs with cartoons, and set it in the future, and it's the exact same plot. A man is killed, a dinosaur is killed. A dinosaur and detective solve the murder, a toon and detective solve the murder. The bad guys in Roger Rabbit are Christopher Lloyd and weasels. The bad guys here are a guy who sounds like Christopher Lloyd and guys who act just like the weasels. The club scene in Roger Rabbit where Jessica Rabbit walks down the stage is imitated with dinosaurs. This is a huge rip-off of a much better movie!

Overall, this is a bad movie, not even deserving of it's straight to VHS stature.

My rating: 1/2 out of ****. 90 mins. PG for mild violence, language and crude humor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3647 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] From [[rainy]], dreary late winter England of early 1920s...

---where there is [[still]] [[sadness]] and [[many]] young [[widows]] and [[disabled]] [[vets]] from the [[great]] [[slaughter]] of [[men]] and [[killer]] of their womens' dreams--- known now as [[World]] War I...

Four [[women]] [[share]] this [[lovely]] small sunny Italian castle on a [[hill]]; one a young [[widow]] who is [[drowning]] her [[sorrow]] in [[frantic]] partying, two [[women]] who will rediscover their own [[husbands]], and a fourth [[woman]] who is tired of her [[famous]] [[dead]] [[friends]]...

...These four [[women]] will come together with two husbands and a [[former]] [[soldier]] - [[almost]] blind - to [[get]] a [[spiritual]] "makeover" for one [[great]] [[April]] [[vacation]] in early 1920's Italy.

[[NOTE]] to would-be [[filmmakers]]. Study this film for how [[mood]] and beauty can tell a [[story]]. ([[Probably]] not a [[film]] to please many [[men]]...)

[[NOTE]]: Stock up on [[coffee]] & hot [[chocolate]] and invite the [[girls]] over on some [[dreary]] [[late]] winter day...Spring is [[coming]]...[[Enchanted]] April promises you! From [[wettest]], dreary late winter England of early 1920s...

---where there is [[however]] [[heaviness]] and [[innumerable]] young [[widowed]] and [[disable]] [[veterinarian]] from the [[prodigious]] [[culled]] of [[hombre]] and [[shooter]] of their womens' dreams--- known now as [[Globe]] War I...

Four [[femmes]] [[exchange]] this [[loverly]] small sunny Italian castle on a [[shan]]; one a young [[widowed]] who is [[sinks]] her [[regret]] in [[frenzied]] partying, two [[females]] who will rediscover their own [[maris]], and a fourth [[girls]] who is tired of her [[notorious]] [[deceased]] [[mates]]...

...These four [[woman]] will come together with two husbands and a [[old]] [[servicemen]] - [[practically]] blind - to [[gets]] a [[witty]] "makeover" for one [[super]] [[Avril]] [[holiday]] in early 1920's Italy.

[[MEMO]] to would-be [[cinematographers]]. Study this film for how [[ambiance]] and beauty can tell a [[conte]]. ([[Arguably]] not a [[filmmaking]] to please many [[hombre]]...)

[[MEMO]]: Stock up on [[cafes]] & hot [[candy]] and invite the [[daughter]] over on some [[dismal]] [[belated]] winter day...Spring is [[arriving]]...[[Charmed]] April promises you! --------------------------------------------- Result 3648 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I was expecting a movie similar to Deuce Bigalow, which I enjoyed. [[However]], this dud [[seemed]] to last [[forever]]. It's one of those [[flicks]] which enjoys the sad placement of PG-13 while not being kid appropriate. The jokes aren't just low-brow or f**t jokes, they're crude, lewd, and [[many]] acts cross the boundaries to not only [[bad]] taste but beyond legal and moral decency. Many scenes appear to have been chopped to get the PG-13 rating...too bad...it might have made a bigger splash as an R-rated film if the funny was left in. (Overstatement? Probably.) I do not recommend this movie. It is a full-on [[waste]] of time...and I'm a movie lover and ready to give just about anything a shot. At 45 minutes in, the movie felt like it should be winding down...and boy were we ready for it to. The ending is quaint but doesn't salvage the rest of this quagmire/tourist trap of a rental. 1/2 star (glad I saw it as a freebie...would have been sickened to pay hard-earned greenbacks for this tripe) I was expecting a movie similar to Deuce Bigalow, which I enjoyed. [[Nonetheless]], this dud [[sounded]] to last [[eternally]]. It's one of those [[gestures]] which enjoys the sad placement of PG-13 while not being kid appropriate. The jokes aren't just low-brow or f**t jokes, they're crude, lewd, and [[various]] acts cross the boundaries to not only [[horrid]] taste but beyond legal and moral decency. Many scenes appear to have been chopped to get the PG-13 rating...too bad...it might have made a bigger splash as an R-rated film if the funny was left in. (Overstatement? Probably.) I do not recommend this movie. It is a full-on [[squandering]] of time...and I'm a movie lover and ready to give just about anything a shot. At 45 minutes in, the movie felt like it should be winding down...and boy were we ready for it to. The ending is quaint but doesn't salvage the rest of this quagmire/tourist trap of a rental. 1/2 star (glad I saw it as a freebie...would have been sickened to pay hard-earned greenbacks for this tripe) --------------------------------------------- Result 3649 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] When I was a kid, I totally loved both [[Bill]] & Ted Movies. The other night, Bogus [[Journey]] was on and since it was at least 5 years since I last saw it, I decided to tune in. AND I LOVED IT ALL OVER AGAIN! This film is still funny after all those [[years]]. 'Excellent Adventure' is better, but this one [[rocks]] just the same. [[Sure]], some of the perfomances are a bit cheesy, but hey, this entire film is cheesy in a [[cool]] way. Plus it features the [[coolest]] personation of [[Death]] ever in a [[movie]]! Concluding: Totally like non [[bogus]] movie dude! Way Excellent! STATION!!! When I was a kid, I totally loved both [[Invoices]] & Ted Movies. The other night, Bogus [[Travel]] was on and since it was at least 5 years since I last saw it, I decided to tune in. AND I LOVED IT ALL OVER AGAIN! This film is still funny after all those [[olds]]. 'Excellent Adventure' is better, but this one [[shakes]] just the same. [[Convinced]], some of the perfomances are a bit cheesy, but hey, this entire film is cheesy in a [[refrigerate]] way. Plus it features the [[coldest]] personation of [[Decease]] ever in a [[cinematography]]! Concluding: Totally like non [[specious]] movie dude! Way Excellent! STATION!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3650 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] It is amazing to me what passes for entertainment today. maybe I am a dinosaur from the fifties, and I am out of touch with todays movie going generation, and apparently that is the case with regards to this movie, [[since]] so many people loved it. I [[found]] it foul and vulgar. I haven't said that about many movies in my life but this one fits the bill. The humor is sophomoric and crude. I am not a politically correct person, and even I [[found]] the gay jokes, not only not funny but downright offensive ( I'm not gay). The main character in the movie is not [[even]] a [[likable]] person, just [[pathetic]]. When the movie was finally over i heard a number of people comment on how disappointed they were in what they had just pay good money to see. It is amazing to me what passes for entertainment today. maybe I am a dinosaur from the fifties, and I am out of touch with todays movie going generation, and apparently that is the case with regards to this movie, [[because]] so many people loved it. I [[detected]] it foul and vulgar. I haven't said that about many movies in my life but this one fits the bill. The humor is sophomoric and crude. I am not a politically correct person, and even I [[unearthed]] the gay jokes, not only not funny but downright offensive ( I'm not gay). The main character in the movie is not [[yet]] a [[likeable]] person, just [[unhappy]]. When the movie was finally over i heard a number of people comment on how disappointed they were in what they had just pay good money to see. --------------------------------------------- Result 3651 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Before [[Dogma]] 95: when Lars [[used]] movies as art, not just a [[story]]. A [[beautiful]] painting about [[love]] and death. This is one of my [[favorite]] movies of all time. The [[color]]... The music... Just [[perfect]]. Before [[Dogmatic]] 95: when Lars [[using]] movies as art, not just a [[stories]]. A [[fabulous]] painting about [[loves]] and death. This is one of my [[preferable]] movies of all time. The [[dye]]... The music... Just [[faultless]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3652 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was looking on Imdbs bottom 100 because i thought id never seen anything as bad as plan 9 from outerspace or Roller Ball remake, I was wrong. Ben and Arthur has beaten both.

This out of the many countless amount of movies I've seen is the number one worst film on the i ever saw. Bad Directing ,Bad Characters ,Horrible Acting ,Horrible story There's a reason nobody but Sam ever says anything positive about this film. Sam was a horrible annoying actor but his directing was so bad he may just overthrow Ed Wood.

The Director should be ashamed of his work unfortunately i have to give it at least 1 star but it deserves - to be continued stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3653 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The Haunting is [[yet]] another [[bad]] [[horror]] remake with [[phony]] overdone special [[effects]] and a [[big]] cast of on screen [[favorites]] and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever except [[maybe]] for the [[cinematography]].[[Yes]] remakes aren't all [[bad]] but remakes directed by Jion Da Bont definitely are.I [[suppose]] that the A-List [[actors]] (Liam Neeson,[[Catherine]] Zeta Jones,[[Owen]] Wilson)are there to [[distract]] us from the boring plot,[[ridiculous]] special [[effects]], and terrible attempts at scaring it's [[audience]] however this is a [[movie]] not a [[tabloid]] [[magazine]] we don't [[care]] whose in it we [[care]] about the [[characters]] and [[story]] two things this film missed.The storyline is like [[taking]] the [[classic]] novel The Haunting Of Hill House and ripping out four chapters and then [[using]] whatever's left for the film it is so boring and a lot of it is [[unexplained]].The characters are pretty thin and while the acting is good you don't really [[care]] about any of the characters at all.Lily Taylor [[gives]] a horrendous performance and sounds [[like]] she's 8 years [[old]] when [[delivering]] her lines not to [[mention]] what a [[horrible]] screamer she is.Lily Taylor isn't [[made]] for the [[horror]] genre at all.The ghosts are stupid and cheesy, they [[look]] like a bunch of [[Casper]] The [[Friendly]] Ghost's and the ghost of [[Hugh]] Cain [[looks]] like a fat [[guy]] dressed as the [[grim]] reaper for Halloween with a smoke machine.There is this [[creature]] on the [[roof]] of one of the [[rooms]] that is a [[giant]] [[purple]] mouth and it's not [[even]] [[funny]] [[unintentionally]] just [[plain]] sad.The [[house]] is pretty and well designed that is [[probably]] the only [[positive]] [[thing]] about this [[movie]] it [[looks]] [[nice]] but that doesn't [[save]] it from it's brutal everything [[else]].I can [[honestly]] say i felt like i was [[wasting]] my [[time]] [[watching]] The Haunting on TV for no [[price]] so I would've been [[even]] more pi$$ed if I had [[paid]] to see it but luckily it was on [[Scream]] [[Channel]].[[Overall]] The Haunting is a [[boring]] [[remake]] that [[tries]] to [[overwhelm]] you with [[bad]] special [[effects]], a poor [[attempt]] at horror. The Haunting is [[still]] another [[negative]] [[terror]] remake with [[fraudulent]] overdone special [[influencing]] and a [[mammoth]] cast of on screen [[favourites]] and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever except [[probably]] for the [[films]].[[Yep]] remakes aren't all [[negative]] but remakes directed by Jion Da Bont definitely are.I [[imagine]] that the A-List [[protagonists]] (Liam Neeson,[[Baroness]] Zeta Jones,[[Irving]] Wilson)are there to [[entertain]] us from the boring plot,[[absurd]] special [[consequences]], and terrible attempts at scaring it's [[audiences]] however this is a [[cinematography]] not a [[sensational]] [[revue]] we don't [[caring]] whose in it we [[caring]] about the [[nature]] and [[tales]] two things this film missed.The storyline is like [[take]] the [[traditional]] novel The Haunting Of Hill House and ripping out four chapters and then [[uses]] whatever's left for the film it is so boring and a lot of it is [[unfathomable]].The characters are pretty thin and while the acting is good you don't really [[caring]] about any of the characters at all.Lily Taylor [[delivers]] a horrendous performance and sounds [[fond]] she's 8 years [[former]] when [[offering]] her lines not to [[mentioned]] what a [[scary]] screamer she is.Lily Taylor isn't [[accomplished]] for the [[monstrosity]] genre at all.The ghosts are stupid and cheesy, they [[gaze]] like a bunch of [[Kaspar]] The [[Friendship]] Ghost's and the ghost of [[Albert]] Cain [[seems]] like a fat [[dude]] dressed as the [[bleak]] reaper for Halloween with a smoke machine.There is this [[monster]] on the [[rooftop]] of one of the [[room]] that is a [[monumental]] [[violet]] mouth and it's not [[yet]] [[droll]] [[involuntarily]] just [[lowlands]] sad.The [[lodgings]] is pretty and well designed that is [[arguably]] the only [[positively]] [[stuff]] about this [[films]] it [[seem]] [[delightful]] but that doesn't [[rescued]] it from it's brutal everything [[further]].I can [[genuinely]] say i felt like i was [[losing]] my [[moment]] [[staring]] The Haunting on TV for no [[cost]] so I would've been [[yet]] more pi$$ed if I had [[salaried]] to see it but luckily it was on [[Cries]] [[Chanel]].[[Whole]] The Haunting is a [[bored]] [[redo]] that [[attempted]] to [[submerge]] you with [[amiss]] special [[influences]], a poor [[tries]] at horror. --------------------------------------------- Result 3654 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] I'm going to [[write]] about this [[movie]] and about "Irreversible" (the (in)[[famous]] scene in it). [[So]] you are warned, if you haven't seen the [[movie]] [[yet]]. This are just my [[thoughts]], why I think the movie fails (in the [[end]] - [[pun]] [[intended]]).

Acting [[wise]], Rosario Dawson is really good and almost conveys portraying someone almost a decade [[younger]] (a teenager in other [[words]]). The villain [[guy]] is [[good]], but loses his "evil" touch right before the end. If he really never changes, then why would he let a woman tie him up? He wouldn't, period. Then we also have the bartender/2nd rape Dude. Actually I don't think you would need him. At least not for the 2nd rape, but more about that later on.

Let's reprise the story. Rosarios character is sexually [[insecure]], might even have lesbian tendencies (see her scene with a female friend). This wasn't intentional, as Rosario states herself, but there is sexual tension between them. Rosario's character meets a guy, who is a sexual Predator, in all the bad senses. But he makes an impression on her.

Rosario commented that her character had a boyfriend before. I beg to differ. Because she acts, as if it is her first boyfriend, which also underlines her phone conversation with her mother. Talking about her mother, here's another problem. After the first rape takes place, Rosarios character doesn't tell anyone what happened. Seiing that her relationship with her mother is a very close one, nothing of that gets explored after that. If Rosarios character wouldn't call her mother anymore or would behave strangely, the mother would be worried like crazy. There was so much potential here. Also her female friend: We see her at the party, it's obvious there is something going on and "boom" she is gone.

The first rape is almost unbearable to watch. But feels like a pinch, when you compare it to the ending (rape), which feels like you're getting hit with a sledge hammer! After rape no. 1 we get too stretched out scenes. Threads are opened (such as her [[construction]] work is an indication that she might be lesbian, as one guy states who tried to hit on her ...), but left in the open. No real social contact is established, if you leave the bartender guy out, who is involved in the 2nd and last rape scene. It's apparent that he isn't a "nice" guy and his character get's fleshed out a bit. But when Rosarios character meets her rapist in class again, his being in the movie seems pointless. We get the point that Rosarios character isn't the same anymore, that she went "bad" and is able to hurt people. (Too) Many scenes show exactly that, her being without emotion just doing drugs and other stuff. Back to Rapist #1 who cheats on a test, gets caught by Rosarios character and they decide to hang out together again (really?). As absurd as that sounds, the guy meets up with her, not without us having seen him beforehand, with another girl (very likely that he raped her too, although we never see anything of that, fortunately) and his football career. Well career is a stretch and he is bullied. This is an attempt to give his character some depth and it almost works, but then again is too cliché to stay with you. So Rapist #1 submits to Rosarios character ... why exactly? Because he promised her, it was her day? Again, really? A guy like that never loses control, especially with a woman he raped before ... I guess this is supposed to show us how stupid he is. The bartender guy would have worked as someone who could have hit him over the head or something, but letting him submit like that, just feels wrong. Another possibility would have a drug in his drink.

So rapist #1 undresses and get's blindfolded and let's Rosarios character tie him on a bed .... seriously, that's just crazy! But what comes next, is even crazier. First she talks to him, then she "shuts" him up and forces an object into him. This is as difficult to watch as rape scene number one. This isn't about what this guy deserves or not, it's just intense. And of course that was what they were aiming for. Now after she is "done" the bartender guy comes in and rapes ... rapist #1. If this really should work as a revenge movie, it would have been better if Rosarios character herself would have been doing all the "revenge". Having a henchman doing the job, takes away everything that was built up.

This isn't supposed to be entertaining/enjoyable, it's a hard watch & it is Art-house. But the 10 minute (I didn't count ) rape scene at the end, just smashes everything. Rosarios character is more or less, only watching what happens. Which brings me to the biggest disappointment.

Irreversible comparison: "Irreversible" had the rape scene, but the movie went on (even if it was back into time). Rosario is looking into the camera in the end and says something about having to get over this. First, that comes a bit too late, that should see her say that after the initial rape. And secondly and most importantly, this is where the Art-house movie should've come in. It is more interesting seeing were Rosarios character would go after the second rape scene and how she would cope, with what she had done. But then again, she didn't actually physically do that much (see above) ... a broken character that the movie cuts off ...

Good intentions (Talia and Rosario had worked before), but failing to convey most of the things, they set out to do (even if you can see what they meant, it has to be convincing, otherwise it doesn't work) ... not to mention the overlong rape scenes as they are ... I'm going to [[handwriting]] about this [[cinematography]] and about "Irreversible" (the (in)[[celebrated]] scene in it). [[Therefore]] you are warned, if you haven't seen the [[movies]] [[again]]. This are just my [[reflections]], why I think the movie fails (in the [[termination]] - [[poon]] [[aimed]]).

Acting [[wiser]], Rosario Dawson is really good and almost conveys portraying someone almost a decade [[youngest]] (a teenager in other [[mots]]). The villain [[bloke]] is [[buena]], but loses his "evil" touch right before the end. If he really never changes, then why would he let a woman tie him up? He wouldn't, period. Then we also have the bartender/2nd rape Dude. Actually I don't think you would need him. At least not for the 2nd rape, but more about that later on.

Let's reprise the story. Rosarios character is sexually [[unsafe]], might even have lesbian tendencies (see her scene with a female friend). This wasn't intentional, as Rosario states herself, but there is sexual tension between them. Rosario's character meets a guy, who is a sexual Predator, in all the bad senses. But he makes an impression on her.

Rosario commented that her character had a boyfriend before. I beg to differ. Because she acts, as if it is her first boyfriend, which also underlines her phone conversation with her mother. Talking about her mother, here's another problem. After the first rape takes place, Rosarios character doesn't tell anyone what happened. Seiing that her relationship with her mother is a very close one, nothing of that gets explored after that. If Rosarios character wouldn't call her mother anymore or would behave strangely, the mother would be worried like crazy. There was so much potential here. Also her female friend: We see her at the party, it's obvious there is something going on and "boom" she is gone.

The first rape is almost unbearable to watch. But feels like a pinch, when you compare it to the ending (rape), which feels like you're getting hit with a sledge hammer! After rape no. 1 we get too stretched out scenes. Threads are opened (such as her [[building]] work is an indication that she might be lesbian, as one guy states who tried to hit on her ...), but left in the open. No real social contact is established, if you leave the bartender guy out, who is involved in the 2nd and last rape scene. It's apparent that he isn't a "nice" guy and his character get's fleshed out a bit. But when Rosarios character meets her rapist in class again, his being in the movie seems pointless. We get the point that Rosarios character isn't the same anymore, that she went "bad" and is able to hurt people. (Too) Many scenes show exactly that, her being without emotion just doing drugs and other stuff. Back to Rapist #1 who cheats on a test, gets caught by Rosarios character and they decide to hang out together again (really?). As absurd as that sounds, the guy meets up with her, not without us having seen him beforehand, with another girl (very likely that he raped her too, although we never see anything of that, fortunately) and his football career. Well career is a stretch and he is bullied. This is an attempt to give his character some depth and it almost works, but then again is too cliché to stay with you. So Rapist #1 submits to Rosarios character ... why exactly? Because he promised her, it was her day? Again, really? A guy like that never loses control, especially with a woman he raped before ... I guess this is supposed to show us how stupid he is. The bartender guy would have worked as someone who could have hit him over the head or something, but letting him submit like that, just feels wrong. Another possibility would have a drug in his drink.

So rapist #1 undresses and get's blindfolded and let's Rosarios character tie him on a bed .... seriously, that's just crazy! But what comes next, is even crazier. First she talks to him, then she "shuts" him up and forces an object into him. This is as difficult to watch as rape scene number one. This isn't about what this guy deserves or not, it's just intense. And of course that was what they were aiming for. Now after she is "done" the bartender guy comes in and rapes ... rapist #1. If this really should work as a revenge movie, it would have been better if Rosarios character herself would have been doing all the "revenge". Having a henchman doing the job, takes away everything that was built up.

This isn't supposed to be entertaining/enjoyable, it's a hard watch & it is Art-house. But the 10 minute (I didn't count ) rape scene at the end, just smashes everything. Rosarios character is more or less, only watching what happens. Which brings me to the biggest disappointment.

Irreversible comparison: "Irreversible" had the rape scene, but the movie went on (even if it was back into time). Rosario is looking into the camera in the end and says something about having to get over this. First, that comes a bit too late, that should see her say that after the initial rape. And secondly and most importantly, this is where the Art-house movie should've come in. It is more interesting seeing were Rosarios character would go after the second rape scene and how she would cope, with what she had done. But then again, she didn't actually physically do that much (see above) ... a broken character that the movie cuts off ...

Good intentions (Talia and Rosario had worked before), but failing to convey most of the things, they set out to do (even if you can see what they meant, it has to be convincing, otherwise it doesn't work) ... not to mention the overlong rape scenes as they are ... --------------------------------------------- Result 3655 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a [[good]] family [[show]] with a [[great]] cast of [[actors]]. It's a [[nice]] [[break]] from the reality show blitz of late. There is nothing else quite like it on [[television]] right now either, unless you count Joan of Arcadia as being similar because it has a teen lead character too. Anyway, Clubhouse is worth a look because Jeremy Sumpter gives the main character (Pete Young) a [[kind]] of likability and naiveté that is appealing without being [[overly]] sweet and cuddly. Dean Cain, Christopher Lloyd, Mare Winningham and Kirsten Storms [[round]] out the rest of the main cast members, and each is [[terrific]] in their role. I really like [[Kirsten]] Storms as Pete's sister Betsy; she is quite a pill, but she still cares about her mom and brother, even though she hates to show it. It may take a few episodes to really find it's legs, but Clubhouse is easily one of the best shows to come along in a good long while, so check it out people--you'll be glad you did! This is a [[alright]] family [[shows]] with a [[large]] cast of [[actresses]]. It's a [[pleasurable]] [[interruption]] from the reality show blitz of late. There is nothing else quite like it on [[tvs]] right now either, unless you count Joan of Arcadia as being similar because it has a teen lead character too. Anyway, Clubhouse is worth a look because Jeremy Sumpter gives the main character (Pete Young) a [[types]] of likability and naiveté that is appealing without being [[inordinately]] sweet and cuddly. Dean Cain, Christopher Lloyd, Mare Winningham and Kirsten Storms [[ronda]] out the rest of the main cast members, and each is [[resplendent]] in their role. I really like [[Kristin]] Storms as Pete's sister Betsy; she is quite a pill, but she still cares about her mom and brother, even though she hates to show it. It may take a few episodes to really find it's legs, but Clubhouse is easily one of the best shows to come along in a good long while, so check it out people--you'll be glad you did! --------------------------------------------- Result 3656 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Oh dear lord. This movie... It was horrible. I am a HUGE fan of horror movies. And most of the time, horror movies other people say are bad, I like. The actor who played 'Scarecrow' was amazing, I will say that. But this plot was awful. It made no sense! It had way too much gore, and an unnecessary (and revolting) sex scene at the beginning. I do believe the director was trying to be 'shocking' or whatnot, but it just came out awful. To add to the pile of festering crap they called a plot, the actors (besides 'scarecrow') we're awful, and I cared so little about them that I soon forgot who was who. In conclusion, this movie made me sick. If you can avoid watching this movie in anyway, please do. --------------------------------------------- Result 3657 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] "National Lampoon Goes to the [[Movies]]" (1981) is, simply put, the [[worst]] movie ever [[made]], far lamer than [[even]] the inept "Plan 9 from Outer Space."

The Lampoon film is told in three [[segments]], each one supposedly a spoof of a conventional movie [[genre]], but each one landing at our feet with a sickening thud. There is no [[rhyme]] or [[reason]] for these execrable vignettes, and no discernible [[story]] lines.

Another [[reviewer]] on this site has written that the only [[good]] points about the film are the [[nude]] scenes. [[True]], [[Misses]] Ganzel and Dusenberry do [[flash]] a bit of flesh, and very [[nice]] it is too. But the directors [[seem]] not to [[realize]] that [[even]] [[T]]&A [[needs]] a [[good]] [[story]] to [[surround]] it. There's [[none]] of that here.

[[Probably]] the [[worst]] of the three [[segments]] is the [[last]] one, [[featuring]] Robby Benson and Richard Widmark. Here, we see Benson as a [[young]], eager-beaver policeman being [[paired]] with a cynical oldtimer played by Widmark. And for just a [[moment]], those of us who are still watching this odious cinematic exercise are heartened by the thought that we are about to see a redemptive tale about how the young, idealistic cop brings about a purifying change in the old-timer's approach to police work. But no such luck. As we've said, this film has no redeeming values. It is sickening all the way to the final fade-out -- which, perversely, is stretched out longer than it should last on the screen. Apparently the film makers knew they had a bad thing going, and wanted to make the least of it. "National Lampoon Goes to the [[Kino]]" (1981) is, simply put, the [[hardest]] movie ever [[brought]], far lamer than [[yet]] the inept "Plan 9 from Outer Space."

The Lampoon film is told in three [[slices]], each one supposedly a spoof of a conventional movie [[genus]], but each one landing at our feet with a sickening thud. There is no [[poem]] or [[reasons]] for these execrable vignettes, and no discernible [[history]] lines.

Another [[reviewers]] on this site has written that the only [[alright]] points about the film are the [[bare]] scenes. [[Genuine]], [[Lack]] Ganzel and Dusenberry do [[flashback]] a bit of flesh, and very [[delightful]] it is too. But the directors [[appears]] not to [[realise]] that [[yet]] [[ton]]&A [[must]] a [[alright]] [[tales]] to [[surrounds]] it. There's [[nos]] of that here.

[[Perhaps]] the [[hardest]] of the three [[pieces]] is the [[latter]] one, [[features]] Robby Benson and Richard Widmark. Here, we see Benson as a [[youths]], eager-beaver policeman being [[coupled]] with a cynical oldtimer played by Widmark. And for just a [[time]], those of us who are still watching this odious cinematic exercise are heartened by the thought that we are about to see a redemptive tale about how the young, idealistic cop brings about a purifying change in the old-timer's approach to police work. But no such luck. As we've said, this film has no redeeming values. It is sickening all the way to the final fade-out -- which, perversely, is stretched out longer than it should last on the screen. Apparently the film makers knew they had a bad thing going, and wanted to make the least of it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3658 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (91%)]] Legendary director Sidney Lumet [[gives]] us one of his [[finest]] [[films]] in his historic career in this very tense, and ultimately [[shocking]] story about a family that includes dysfunctional as one of the children. With an A-list cast headed by Philip Seymour Hoffman (an Oscar-worthy performance here), Ethan Hawke, [[Marisa]] Tomei and Albert [[Finney]], Lumet has [[captured]] not just elements of botched crime stories such as Reservoir Dogs, but also family stories such as Ordinary People.

Many viewers might be confused and feel underwhelmed at the construction of the plot Lumet has gone with here. Instead of showing it in a linear manner, he has gone the Tarantino route and shows the central scene of a robbery gone wrong from different points of view all out of order. I personally found this to be very satisfying and left me constantly guessing what was going to happen next. The script is very strong with some excellent scenes between husband and wife Hoffman and Tomei, as well as between father and son Finney and Hoffman. All the actors are totally engaging to watch and Lumet is obviously having fun in directing a style he usually doesn't delve in. Plenty of action and suspense to hold the audience for the two hour running time, this is a rare movie that doesn't disappoint for one moment. Legendary director Sidney Lumet [[donne]] us one of his [[meanest]] [[filmmaking]] in his historic career in this very tense, and ultimately [[terrible]] story about a family that includes dysfunctional as one of the children. With an A-list cast headed by Philip Seymour Hoffman (an Oscar-worthy performance here), Ethan Hawke, [[Marissa]] Tomei and Albert [[Fini]], Lumet has [[catching]] not just elements of botched crime stories such as Reservoir Dogs, but also family stories such as Ordinary People.

Many viewers might be confused and feel underwhelmed at the construction of the plot Lumet has gone with here. Instead of showing it in a linear manner, he has gone the Tarantino route and shows the central scene of a robbery gone wrong from different points of view all out of order. I personally found this to be very satisfying and left me constantly guessing what was going to happen next. The script is very strong with some excellent scenes between husband and wife Hoffman and Tomei, as well as between father and son Finney and Hoffman. All the actors are totally engaging to watch and Lumet is obviously having fun in directing a style he usually doesn't delve in. Plenty of action and suspense to hold the audience for the two hour running time, this is a rare movie that doesn't disappoint for one moment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3659 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] This movie is [[inspiring]] to anyone who is or has been in a tough jam, whether financially or emotionally. You will definitely laugh, which is the best medicine! :) Left in a bad financial situation when her husband dies, Grace has to find a new way to make some [[money]] and it's not exactly [[legal]] which [[adds]] to the [[humour]]. Even my boyfriend [[liked]] it so don't [[think]] that it's a chick-flic. This movie is [[exhilarating]] to anyone who is or has been in a tough jam, whether financially or emotionally. You will definitely laugh, which is the best medicine! :) Left in a bad financial situation when her husband dies, Grace has to find a new way to make some [[cash]] and it's not exactly [[judiciary]] which [[inserting]] to the [[comedy]]. Even my boyfriend [[wished]] it so don't [[believe]] that it's a chick-flic. --------------------------------------------- Result 3660 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Yes, this movie is bad. What's worse is that it takes no advantage whatsoever of its own title!! In the ENTIRE movie, zombies and vampires fight each other ONCE OR TWICE. On top of that, we're never really sure if the main character in the movie is DEFINITELY a vampire. One might argue they were trying to "tone it down" or make it "realistic," but it ends up just boring. More than half of this movie takes place IN A CAR. The scenes that take place anywhere else aren't much to brag about, either. Also, there's no clear antagonist, and in the end you have no idea what really happened for the last 30 minutes of the movie.

However, I will say that for a film this low in production value, the soundtrack was surprisingly appropriate and instrumented (with either an origonal score or sampled music from elsewhere).

I'm all for independent films, but it doesn't look like this was ever intended for a mass audience (if any).

"worse than Scarecrow slayer." --------------------------------------------- Result 3661 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I am currently [[sitting]] here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well [[suffer]] for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for "War of the Worlds" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a "perfect [[translation]]". Perfect [[CRAP]] is more in tune with this film.

First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It looked as if I was watching the Full Motion Video from an old mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video game. Sadly enough, the color quality was similar. The acting made Shatners classic "dramatic pause" look damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG rendering of various scenes was horrendous, and green screen sequences were worse than those seen in old Dukes of Hazardd scenes.

Secondly, it is slow and terribly drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the video (no promo's at the beginning) before the cylinder actually Opened to reveal the first alien. After that, the alien was a terribly constructed CG squid. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have seen is a spinning silver disk (crappy down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are murdered with overly done instrumental's. The last thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's NO ONE is concerned for their life. It's like they have no concept. Even though media was slow, word of mouth spreads fast and people would have known. The "illusion" of day and night was shoddy at [[best]]. Simply [[changing]] the color around the people to purple, blue or green does not signify NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time shoots would have given a MUCH better illusion. THere is a lot of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the "hero" gallop around or walk down silly roads. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.

Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.

In closing folks, if you want "The War of the Worlds", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY. I am currently [[seated]] here, forcing myself to finish this. I figure I blew 6 bux on the VHS, might as well [[suffering]] for it. I remember about 4 or 5 years ago doing a search on the internet for "War of the Worlds" cause of the rumors of the Spielberg movie at the time, and I missed the old TV series from the early 90's. The website make it out that this was a multi-million dollar budget rendition of the classic book. It was going to be a "perfect [[translate]]". Perfect [[DAMMIT]] is more in tune with this film.

First off, the video on this movie was glitched! It looked as if I was watching the Full Motion Video from an old mid-90's PC or Playstation CD-Rom video game. Sadly enough, the color quality was similar. The acting made Shatners classic "dramatic pause" look damn near Shakespearean in quality. The CG rendering of various scenes was horrendous, and green screen sequences were worse than those seen in old Dukes of Hazardd scenes.

Secondly, it is slow and terribly drawn out. I sat thru 45 minutes of the video (no promo's at the beginning) before the cylinder actually Opened to reveal the first alien. After that, the alien was a terribly constructed CG squid. I am now an hour into it and the most of the alien weaponry I have seen is a spinning silver disk (crappy down even) attached to a mechanical arm. The dramatic scenes are murdered with overly done instrumental's. The last thing on that, for an alien invasion in the turn of the century 1900's NO ONE is concerned for their life. It's like they have no concept. Even though media was slow, word of mouth spreads fast and people would have known. The "illusion" of day and night was shoddy at [[nicest]]. Simply [[modified]] the color around the people to purple, blue or green does not signify NIGHT TIME. Perhaps some lighting and actual night time shoots would have given a MUCH better illusion. THere is a lot of wasted sequences throughout the film of just watching the "hero" gallop around or walk down silly roads. Get on with the film. I know how people get around, you do NOT need to be so in-depth.

Now, finally an hour and 5 minutes into the film and they show the alien machines. Mighty Morphin Power Rangers had better looking effects. Even the skeletons of vaporized humans looked as if animated by a freshman high school computer app class student. The animations do NOT match up to the scenery at all.

In closing folks, if you want "The War of the Worlds", do one of four things. 1) Watch the 1953 original, 2) watch the early 90's TV series, 3) wait for Spielberg's rendition to be released shortly, OR 4) Read the frikkin book (something we all probably did in elementary English class). AVOID THIS MOVIE. IT IS A WASTE OF YOUR MONEY. --------------------------------------------- Result 3662 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[originally]] [[gave]] this episode a [[rating]] of two- I now [[wish]] I'd [[thought]] more about it. I [[also]] [[wish]] they had [[negative]] [[rating]] [[options]].

Watching it, I was amazed at how [[poor]] the [[whole]] [[thing]] was from [[start]] to [[finish]]. I adore Ron Pearlman, and [[John]] Carpenter... so what went [[wrong]]?? Last season episode 13 was pulled due to the way it handled the [[abortion]] [[issue]]. I think that this season [[Mr]] Carpenter managed to make [[something]] so grey-area that you can't [[immediately]] [[see]] if he is pro-choice or anti-abortion. It was only after I sat and [[thought]] about it that I [[realized]] he is very much anti-abortion- you get this most clearly in the end when the 'Mother' [[shoots]] the baby and [[kills]] it, to the [[dismay]] of the 'Father', who walks off in grief, leaving the [[mother]] unharmed. But you also [[see]] it in the [[way]] the Ron P. [[character]] is treated- I hardly think that if someone has proved themselves enough of a [[threat]] in the past so as to have a restraining [[order]] against him that they would not immediately be [[ringing]] the police. Instead we have the guard almost sympathetically dealing with him (only to pay for it in the end) I don't mind someone having a strong view on something, even if it isn't something I agree in, but I do think its a bit lame not to stand by that view, rather than trying to [[look]] like they're [[sitting]] [[somewhere]] in the middle.

But, political issues aside, this episode was beyond poor. The music was retro-70's and just plain didn't work. The acting (other than Ron P.) was poor. The [[effects]] were dreadful- it might have been better just to -not- [[show]] the [[monster]] at all rather than show the lame [[excuse]] for a monster they had.

All this being said, I'm glad they have the Masters of Horror- I don't mind sitting through some really poor [[episodes]] to [[find]] the good ones. Its a bit like [[renting]] horror [[movies]] from the video store- [[every]] now and again you [[get]] a good one and it makes it all worth while. I do agree with the [[poster]] that said [[maybe]] the [[name]] needs to [[change]] from Masters- some of these people just plain don't deserve the title. ([[Let]] me [[stress]] tho- even tho I [[hated]] this episode, John [[Carpenter]] [[TOTALLY]] [[deserves]] the title. He is a master thru and thru) I [[initially]] [[given]] this episode a [[appraisal]] of two- I now [[wishing]] I'd [[thinking]] more about it. I [[apart]] [[wanna]] they had [[harmful]] [[assessments]] [[surrogates]].

Watching it, I was amazed at how [[poorest]] the [[overall]] [[stuff]] was from [[lancer]] to [[complete]]. I adore Ron Pearlman, and [[Jon]] Carpenter... so what went [[improper]]?? Last season episode 13 was pulled due to the way it handled the [[miscarriages]] [[issues]]. I think that this season [[Herr]] Carpenter managed to make [[algo]] so grey-area that you can't [[rapidly]] [[seeing]] if he is pro-choice or anti-abortion. It was only after I sat and [[think]] about it that I [[realised]] he is very much anti-abortion- you get this most clearly in the end when the 'Mother' [[twigs]] the baby and [[assassinating]] it, to the [[amazement]] of the 'Father', who walks off in grief, leaving the [[mummy]] unharmed. But you also [[behold]] it in the [[paths]] the Ron P. [[characters]] is treated- I hardly think that if someone has proved themselves enough of a [[risk]] in the past so as to have a restraining [[decree]] against him that they would not immediately be [[ring]] the police. Instead we have the guard almost sympathetically dealing with him (only to pay for it in the end) I don't mind someone having a strong view on something, even if it isn't something I agree in, but I do think its a bit lame not to stand by that view, rather than trying to [[peek]] like they're [[seated]] [[nowhere]] in the middle.

But, political issues aside, this episode was beyond poor. The music was retro-70's and just plain didn't work. The acting (other than Ron P.) was poor. The [[influences]] were dreadful- it might have been better just to -not- [[exhibitions]] the [[creature]] at all rather than show the lame [[apologize]] for a monster they had.

All this being said, I'm glad they have the Masters of Horror- I don't mind sitting through some really poor [[spells]] to [[unearthed]] the good ones. Its a bit like [[leasing]] horror [[cinematography]] from the video store- [[all]] now and again you [[gets]] a good one and it makes it all worth while. I do agree with the [[placard]] that said [[perhaps]] the [[denomination]] needs to [[changed]] from Masters- some of these people just plain don't deserve the title. ([[Leaving]] me [[highlights]] tho- even tho I [[abhor]] this episode, John [[Carpentry]] [[ABSOLUTELY]] [[deserve]] the title. He is a master thru and thru) --------------------------------------------- Result 3663 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have no clue as to what this was shot on but you can definitely tell that they had no budget. Bad acting, horrible cinematography, and lame plot and some decent special effects do not make a good movie. The WWF style cinemtography will make you cry...where's the tripod?! The filmakers aimed high, but sorely missed their mark. --------------------------------------------- Result 3664 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Even though this movie came out a year before I was born, it is definetely one of my [[favorite]] comedies. It stars Redd Foxx as a father who tries to understand his son's homosexuality. Like most parents, he doesn't know a thing about what it means to be gay and has all of these stereotypical notions of what gay people are like. His son, Norman, is now grown up and living on his own. When his father, Ben, finds out that his son is gay, he pays his son a visit in hopes of changing him. The title comes from one of the funniest lines in the movie--when Ben gets to Norman's apartments he runs into a female prostitute and thinks it's his son in drag ("Norman... Is that you?"). The movie had me laughing from start to finish. Redd Foxx is great. Although a lot of the content is stereotypical, I didn't find anything offensive about the way the material was handled, and it even has a good ending. Highly recommended. Even though this movie came out a year before I was born, it is definetely one of my [[preferable]] comedies. It stars Redd Foxx as a father who tries to understand his son's homosexuality. Like most parents, he doesn't know a thing about what it means to be gay and has all of these stereotypical notions of what gay people are like. His son, Norman, is now grown up and living on his own. When his father, Ben, finds out that his son is gay, he pays his son a visit in hopes of changing him. The title comes from one of the funniest lines in the movie--when Ben gets to Norman's apartments he runs into a female prostitute and thinks it's his son in drag ("Norman... Is that you?"). The movie had me laughing from start to finish. Redd Foxx is great. Although a lot of the content is stereotypical, I didn't find anything offensive about the way the material was handled, and it even has a good ending. Highly recommended. --------------------------------------------- Result 3665 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] Wow...sheer brilliance.

Turning a thriller/suspense/horror into comedy.

After watching this, I never laughed so hard at a horror movie before...a [[ridiculous]] plot with 3 characters that were just [[insanely]] developed - either not written in depth or too much depth.

If you want to watch an absolutely written horror movie with stupid dialog, messed up plot, useless scenes, wasted characters, bad sound and [[lousy]] development overall, then this is the one to watch.

Be sure to keep focused for the classic "food processor" scene and the totally inept police investigation scenes.

This is a remarkable new low in screen performance and writing and to sit through it for the entire duration makes you either stupid, daring or brave. Wow...sheer brilliance.

Turning a thriller/suspense/horror into comedy.

After watching this, I never laughed so hard at a horror movie before...a [[nonsensical]] plot with 3 characters that were just [[stunningly]] developed - either not written in depth or too much depth.

If you want to watch an absolutely written horror movie with stupid dialog, messed up plot, useless scenes, wasted characters, bad sound and [[squalid]] development overall, then this is the one to watch.

Be sure to keep focused for the classic "food processor" scene and the totally inept police investigation scenes.

This is a remarkable new low in screen performance and writing and to sit through it for the entire duration makes you either stupid, daring or brave. --------------------------------------------- Result 3666 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Well I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a 7. It was better than "Thirdspace" but not as [[good]] as "In the [[Beginning]]" as far as the B5 [[movies]] go. I really think the television [[series]] did a much better job overall with the special effects and [[character]] [[portrayal]]. Let's [[hope]] the [[producers]] and cast get the next [[series]] "Crusade" up to the [[standards]] of B5. Well I [[supplied]] this [[kino]] a 7. It was better than "Thirdspace" but not as [[alright]] as "In the [[Initiates]]" as far as the B5 [[movie]] go. I really think the television [[serials]] did a much better job overall with the special effects and [[nature]] [[portrait]]. Let's [[esperanza]] the [[manufacturers]] and cast get the next [[serial]] "Crusade" up to the [[standard]] of B5. --------------------------------------------- Result 3667 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] I [[love]] this show. Now, I'm not a big fan of many science fiction shows, so if it bares any resemblance to them, I didn't [[notice]]. I like the storybook quality of the cinematography. I even like the love story, even though as I am [[enjoying]] it I wonder in the back of my mind how the heck that part of the story can truly develop seeing as Ned cannot touch Chuck or else... well, you know. I even like Chuck, I don't find her annoying at all, and I generally hate overly sweet, nice, perfect characters. I even like the narrator's voice, even if it bothers one of my family members and bares some resemblance to some Walgreens commercials. I could nitpick about all the other things about Ned's predicament and how the writers are going to address it in the future but I just rather watch and wait and see what tale the writers weave. I [[iike]] this show. Now, I'm not a big fan of many science fiction shows, so if it bares any resemblance to them, I didn't [[avis]]. I like the storybook quality of the cinematography. I even like the love story, even though as I am [[experience]] it I wonder in the back of my mind how the heck that part of the story can truly develop seeing as Ned cannot touch Chuck or else... well, you know. I even like Chuck, I don't find her annoying at all, and I generally hate overly sweet, nice, perfect characters. I even like the narrator's voice, even if it bothers one of my family members and bares some resemblance to some Walgreens commercials. I could nitpick about all the other things about Ned's predicament and how the writers are going to address it in the future but I just rather watch and wait and see what tale the writers weave. --------------------------------------------- Result 3668 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I actually really like what I've seen of this cartoon so far. [[Sure]], the animation isn't the [[best]], but frankly, I'd rather see this type of more cartoony style [[done]] [[quickly]] and cheaply than the [[old]] type of style [[done]] [[quickly]] and cheaply (which was [[starting]] to happen more and more often--it's only a style that looks good when a lot of time and effort is put into it). There's [[nothing]] wrong with the angular lines and the little black-dot eyes--in fact, I think it's really cute. As a kid I never thought Scooby-Doo's design was particularly adorable, but I think I might like it better know.

Anyway, Shaggy has always been my favorite character, and believe it or not, but I think he has the most potential for some depth. Sure, the show doesn't center around the original "Mystery-solving" theme, but that was just a tired old formula anyway. Don't get me wrong--I'm sure there are writers out there who would be able to bring a lot more interest to Mystery Inc.'s traditional pursuits (which has been lacking as late), but in the mean time this show is a fun deviation from the standard. Shaggy and Scooby are still funny, but no longer only comic relief. They're still cowardly, but finally have the opportunity to use what seems to be (shock!) intelligence. They're the same old over-eating slackers as ever, but now actually seem to be getting on with their lives with the help of Uncle Albert's inheritance.

I used to find most original Scooby-Doo jokes to be pure cheese and unintentionally hilarious at best, but this show actually exercises a capacity for real humor. Also, I never really like Casey Kasem as Shaggy anyway, so the new actor doesn't annoy me as much as he does other people. (I still think Billy West was the best, though)

Overall, while not a [[great]] cartoon in the scope of all of cartoon history, still an achievement among other Scooby incarnations. I actually really like what I've seen of this cartoon so far. [[Convinced]], the animation isn't the [[better]], but frankly, I'd rather see this type of more cartoony style [[doing]] [[rapidly]] and cheaply than the [[longtime]] type of style [[performed]] [[swiftly]] and cheaply (which was [[onset]] to happen more and more often--it's only a style that looks good when a lot of time and effort is put into it). There's [[anything]] wrong with the angular lines and the little black-dot eyes--in fact, I think it's really cute. As a kid I never thought Scooby-Doo's design was particularly adorable, but I think I might like it better know.

Anyway, Shaggy has always been my favorite character, and believe it or not, but I think he has the most potential for some depth. Sure, the show doesn't center around the original "Mystery-solving" theme, but that was just a tired old formula anyway. Don't get me wrong--I'm sure there are writers out there who would be able to bring a lot more interest to Mystery Inc.'s traditional pursuits (which has been lacking as late), but in the mean time this show is a fun deviation from the standard. Shaggy and Scooby are still funny, but no longer only comic relief. They're still cowardly, but finally have the opportunity to use what seems to be (shock!) intelligence. They're the same old over-eating slackers as ever, but now actually seem to be getting on with their lives with the help of Uncle Albert's inheritance.

I used to find most original Scooby-Doo jokes to be pure cheese and unintentionally hilarious at best, but this show actually exercises a capacity for real humor. Also, I never really like Casey Kasem as Shaggy anyway, so the new actor doesn't annoy me as much as he does other people. (I still think Billy West was the best, though)

Overall, while not a [[whopping]] cartoon in the scope of all of cartoon history, still an achievement among other Scooby incarnations. --------------------------------------------- Result 3669 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] This movie is [[unworthy]] of the Omen title. It is so bad that it has actually [[damaged]] the classic [[nature]] of the first three. It never should have been [[made]], they ought to change the title.

They don't [[even]] spell [[Damien]] Thorn's NAME correctly!!!! And there are no daggers, the most [[important]] [[element]] of all the Omen [[films]]. Pull it from the [[shelves]] and burn it. This movie is [[undignified]] of the Omen title. It is so bad that it has actually [[impaired]] the classic [[personages]] of the first three. It never should have been [[effected]], they ought to change the title.

They don't [[yet]] spell [[Damian]] Thorn's NAME correctly!!!! And there are no daggers, the most [[essential]] [[elements]] of all the Omen [[film]]. Pull it from the [[bookshelves]] and burn it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3670 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] This is not the [[typical]] Mel [[Brooks]] film. It was [[much]] [[less]] [[slapstick]] than most of his [[movies]] and actually had a plot that was followable. Leslie Ann Warren made the [[movie]], she is such a [[fantastic]], under-rated actress. There were some moments that could have been fleshed out a [[bit]] more, and some scenes that [[could]] probably have been [[cut]] to make the room to do so, but all in all, this is worth the price to rent and [[see]] it. The acting was good overall, [[Brooks]] himself did a good job without his characteristic speaking to directly to the audience. Again, Warren was the [[best]] [[actor]] in the movie, but "Fume" and "Sailor" both played their parts well. This is not the [[emblematic]] Mel [[Creek]] film. It was [[very]] [[lowest]] [[comedic]] than most of his [[filmmaking]] and actually had a plot that was followable. Leslie Ann Warren made the [[films]], she is such a [[unbelievable]], under-rated actress. There were some moments that could have been fleshed out a [[bitten]] more, and some scenes that [[did]] probably have been [[sliced]] to make the room to do so, but all in all, this is worth the price to rent and [[consults]] it. The acting was good overall, [[Creek]] himself did a good job without his characteristic speaking to directly to the audience. Again, Warren was the [[optimum]] [[protagonist]] in the movie, but "Fume" and "Sailor" both played their parts well. --------------------------------------------- Result 3671 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Although I had seen "Gymkata" in a theater way back in '85, I couldn't remember anything of the plot except for vague images of Kurt [[Thomas]] running and fighting against a backdrop of stone [[walls]] and [[disappointment]] regarding the ending.

After reading some of the other [[reviews]] I picked up a [[copy]] of the newly released DVD to once again enter the world of Gymkata.

It turns out this is one of those films produced during the '80s that would go directly to video today. The film stars champion gymnast Kurt Thomas as Jonathan Cabot, recruited out of the blue to infiltrate the nation of "Parmistan" to enter and hopefully win "The Game," a suicidal bloodsport sponsored by the Khan who encourages his people by yelling what sounds like "Yak Power." The goal of the mission involves the Star Wars defense system. Jonathan is trained in the martial arts by Princess Rubali, who never speaks or leaves the house. Once trained tries to blend in with the locals by wearing a bright red sweater with dashes of blue and white. Needless to say Cabot finds himself running and fighting for his life along the stone streets of Parmistan, on his way to a date with destiny, and the Game.

Star, Kurt Thomas was ill served by director Robert Clouse, who it looks like was never on the set. The so called script is just this side of incompetent. See other reviews for the many howlers throughout. The town of crazies has a few good moments, but is ultimately ruined by bad editing. The ending...meh. Still there's the germ of a good action adventure here. A Hong Kong version with more visceral action and faster pace might even be pretty good. Although I had seen "Gymkata" in a theater way back in '85, I couldn't remember anything of the plot except for vague images of Kurt [[Tommaso]] running and fighting against a backdrop of stone [[wails]] and [[disillusionment]] regarding the ending.

After reading some of the other [[examinations]] I picked up a [[copied]] of the newly released DVD to once again enter the world of Gymkata.

It turns out this is one of those films produced during the '80s that would go directly to video today. The film stars champion gymnast Kurt Thomas as Jonathan Cabot, recruited out of the blue to infiltrate the nation of "Parmistan" to enter and hopefully win "The Game," a suicidal bloodsport sponsored by the Khan who encourages his people by yelling what sounds like "Yak Power." The goal of the mission involves the Star Wars defense system. Jonathan is trained in the martial arts by Princess Rubali, who never speaks or leaves the house. Once trained tries to blend in with the locals by wearing a bright red sweater with dashes of blue and white. Needless to say Cabot finds himself running and fighting for his life along the stone streets of Parmistan, on his way to a date with destiny, and the Game.

Star, Kurt Thomas was ill served by director Robert Clouse, who it looks like was never on the set. The so called script is just this side of incompetent. See other reviews for the many howlers throughout. The town of crazies has a few good moments, but is ultimately ruined by bad editing. The ending...meh. Still there's the germ of a good action adventure here. A Hong Kong version with more visceral action and faster pace might even be pretty good. --------------------------------------------- Result 3672 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] OK I saw this movie to get a benchmark for [[bad]] but with this movie it's Unisol's [[best]] [[movie]] now [[plot]] [[Luc]] Devereux is now a technical expert who is working with the [[government]] with his partner Maggie, who's been through countless hours of training and combat with him, to [[refine]] and perfect the UniSol [[program]] in an [[effort]] to [[make]] a [[new]], [[stronger]] [[breed]] of [[soldier]] that is more [[sophisticated]], [[intelligent]], and agile. [[All]] of the [[new]] Unisols, which are [[faster]] and [[stronger]] than their predecessors, are connected through an artificially intelligent computer system called SETH, a Self-Evolving Thought Helix. When SETH discovers that the Universal [[Soldier]] [[program]] is scheduled to be shut down because of budget cuts, he [[takes]] [[matters]] into his own "hands" to [[protect]] himself. [[Killing]] those who [[try]] to [[shut]] off his power, and unleashing his platoon of super-soldiers, [[led]] by the musclebound Romeo, SETH spares Deveraux, only because Deveraux has the [[secret]] [[code]] that is needed to [[deactivate]] a built-in [[program]] that will shut SETH down in a matter of [[hours]]. With the help of a [[hacker]] named Squid, SETH takes human form. Not only must Luc contend with ambitious reporter Erin, who won't leave his side, but Luc also must contend with General Radford, who [[wants]] to take extreme [[measures]] to stop SETH. SETH has [[also]] kidnapped Luc's injured 13-year-old [[daughter]] Hillary, and is now holding her hostage. Luc is the only [[person]] who can [[rescue]] Hillary, because Luc knows firsthand how a UniSol [[thinks]], feels, and fights. now there are [[problems]] like in any [[movie]] like did anyone find it weird how a reporter just-so-happened to be there and The soldiers can take being [[flattened]] with a truck [[however]] when Vanne Damme [[shoots]] them with a gun with one bullet and they die and the [[final]] fight scene was [[unbelievable]] when Luc is now human and Seth is 5x stronger and [[faster]] than any other Unisol and Luc can take a [[hit]] from him. with the [[final]] [[fight]] when Luc smashes him to pieces I was really surprised that the [[pieces]] didn't [[melt]] and [[reform]] him (Terminator 2). another thing that bugs me is how the hell does Vanne Damme get good actors to play relatives I mean in the [[case]] of Vanne Damme it's completely off the grid of how [[Science]] Fiction this movie is. The Music [[Score]] now that [[must]] have a [[mention]] have you ever [[listened]] to a song where you'd rather cut a blackboard with a knife well Universal Soldier 2 is like that. The good points are there's no Dolph (HOORAY) and unlike the 1st one there is only one naked scene whereas in the 1st one there are many (I'm still haunted by the scenes in #1) also the actors in this have some talent whereas in the first one the casting [[guys]] were sadists (if you don't believe me look it up) OK I saw this movie to get a benchmark for [[wicked]] but with this movie it's Unisol's [[finest]] [[movies]] now [[intrigue]] [[Locke]] Devereux is now a technical expert who is working with the [[goverment]] with his partner Maggie, who's been through countless hours of training and combat with him, to [[refined]] and perfect the UniSol [[programming]] in an [[endeavors]] to [[deliver]] a [[newest]], [[tighter]] [[reproduce]] of [[servicemen]] that is more [[complex]], [[smarter]], and agile. [[Everything]] of the [[newest]] Unisols, which are [[promptly]] and [[strongest]] than their predecessors, are connected through an artificially intelligent computer system called SETH, a Self-Evolving Thought Helix. When SETH discovers that the Universal [[Servicemen]] [[programming]] is scheduled to be shut down because of budget cuts, he [[pick]] [[themes]] into his own "hands" to [[uphold]] himself. [[Killed]] those who [[strive]] to [[closure]] off his power, and unleashing his platoon of super-soldiers, [[steered]] by the musclebound Romeo, SETH spares Deveraux, only because Deveraux has the [[undercover]] [[coding]] that is needed to [[disabling]] a built-in [[programming]] that will shut SETH down in a matter of [[hour]]. With the help of a [[hack]] named Squid, SETH takes human form. Not only must Luc contend with ambitious reporter Erin, who won't leave his side, but Luc also must contend with General Radford, who [[wanna]] to take extreme [[steps]] to stop SETH. SETH has [[likewise]] kidnapped Luc's injured 13-year-old [[girl]] Hillary, and is now holding her hostage. Luc is the only [[persona]] who can [[rescues]] Hillary, because Luc knows firsthand how a UniSol [[believes]], feels, and fights. now there are [[difficulties]] like in any [[films]] like did anyone find it weird how a reporter just-so-happened to be there and The soldiers can take being [[pounded]] with a truck [[nevertheless]] when Vanne Damme [[flushes]] them with a gun with one bullet and they die and the [[latter]] fight scene was [[awesome]] when Luc is now human and Seth is 5x stronger and [[quick]] than any other Unisol and Luc can take a [[befallen]] from him. with the [[definitive]] [[wrestling]] when Luc smashes him to pieces I was really surprised that the [[segments]] didn't [[thaw]] and [[reformation]] him (Terminator 2). another thing that bugs me is how the hell does Vanne Damme get good actors to play relatives I mean in the [[examples]] of Vanne Damme it's completely off the grid of how [[Veda]] Fiction this movie is. The Music [[Scoring]] now that [[owe]] have a [[cite]] have you ever [[hear]] to a song where you'd rather cut a blackboard with a knife well Universal Soldier 2 is like that. The good points are there's no Dolph (HOORAY) and unlike the 1st one there is only one naked scene whereas in the 1st one there are many (I'm still haunted by the scenes in #1) also the actors in this have some talent whereas in the first one the casting [[bloke]] were sadists (if you don't believe me look it up) --------------------------------------------- Result 3673 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Having worked in downtown Manhattan, and often ate my lunch during the Summer days in the park near City Hall, I would [[see]] the mayor come and go. It was [[great]] being able to go beyond the doors of City Hall and see what it looked like in the lobby and through out the [[entire]] building. Al [[Pacino]],(Mayor John Pappas),"Gigli",'03, gave an [[outstanding]] performance through out the entire [[picture]], and [[especially]] when he gave a speech at an African American Church for a little boy who was [[slain]]. John Cusack,([[Deputy]] [[Mayor]] Kevin Calhoun),"Runaway Jury",'03, was a devoted servant to the [[Mayor]] and worshiped him in everything he attempted to accomplish. Bridget Fonda,(Marybeth Cogan), starts to fall in love with Kevin Calhoun and gives a great supporting role. Last, but not least, Danny Aiello(Frank Anselmo),"Off Key",'01, [[played]] a mob boss who had some very [[difficult]] [[choices]] to make towards the end of the [[picture]]! [[Great]] film with great acting and fantastic photography in NYC! Having worked in downtown Manhattan, and often ate my lunch during the Summer days in the park near City Hall, I would [[consults]] the mayor come and go. It was [[prodigious]] being able to go beyond the doors of City Hall and see what it looked like in the lobby and through out the [[whole]] building. Al [[Deniro]],(Mayor John Pappas),"Gigli",'03, gave an [[unpaid]] performance through out the entire [[imaging]], and [[namely]] when he gave a speech at an African American Church for a little boy who was [[beheaded]]. John Cusack,([[Undersecretary]] [[Mayors]] Kevin Calhoun),"Runaway Jury",'03, was a devoted servant to the [[Alcalde]] and worshiped him in everything he attempted to accomplish. Bridget Fonda,(Marybeth Cogan), starts to fall in love with Kevin Calhoun and gives a great supporting role. Last, but not least, Danny Aiello(Frank Anselmo),"Off Key",'01, [[accomplished]] a mob boss who had some very [[problematic]] [[picks]] to make towards the end of the [[pictures]]! [[Large]] film with great acting and fantastic photography in NYC! --------------------------------------------- Result 3674 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a comedy of morals, so occasionally a gentle touch of bitterness occurs, but a lightness soften all sarcasm and irony flows till all of a sudden one moment will halt your heart and changes everything.

This film, marvelously written and directed, is a gem that shines perfectly, with beautiful acting by all. Jean-Louis Trintignant is exquisite as usual, and Romy Schneider is a pearl, perfect and glowing, that is not to be missed. A truly wonderful film !! --------------------------------------------- Result 3675 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] People expect no [[less]] than [[brilliant]] when Steven Spielberg directs a movie, and this [[movie]] is no [[exception]]. Some movies I love did poorly at the box office but, I'm glad to [[say]], this [[movie]] isn't one of them (over nine million dollars, which I don't think was bad for back then). The [[characters]] were [[fun]], the animation was [[clear]] and not [[fuzzy]], and the music was modern, too, which is unusual for an animated movie. I didn't think Professor Screw Eyes or his "Scary Cirus" was too scary for little kids (the targeted audience for this [[movie]]), but I thought what happened to the creepy professor at the end was a little too dark for a kids' movie. [[Overall]], this movie is a fun and enchanting classic that I have loved dearly for years. People expect no [[least]] than [[resplendent]] when Steven Spielberg directs a movie, and this [[cinematographic]] is no [[exemption]]. Some movies I love did poorly at the box office but, I'm glad to [[told]], this [[filmmaking]] isn't one of them (over nine million dollars, which I don't think was bad for back then). The [[characteristics]] were [[droll]], the animation was [[unambiguous]] and not [[indistinct]], and the music was modern, too, which is unusual for an animated movie. I didn't think Professor Screw Eyes or his "Scary Cirus" was too scary for little kids (the targeted audience for this [[filmmaking]]), but I thought what happened to the creepy professor at the end was a little too dark for a kids' movie. [[Holistic]], this movie is a fun and enchanting classic that I have loved dearly for years. --------------------------------------------- Result 3676 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Normally, I have much better [[things]] to do with my [[time]] than write [[reviews]] but I was so [[disappointed]] with this movie that I spent an hour registering with IMDb just to get it off my chest.

You would think a movie with names like Morgan Freeman or Kevin Spacey would be a bankable bet... well, this movie was just [[terrible]]. It is nigh on impossible to "suspend disbelief"; I tried, really, I [[wanted]] to enjoy it but [[Justin]] Timberlake just wouldn't [[let]] me.

Timberlake should stick to music, what a [[dreadful]] performance - NO presence as an actor,NO [[character]]. Can't blame everything on Justin: The movie also boast a dreadful plot & badly timed editing; its definitely an "F".

After seeing this, I have to wonder what really motivates actors. I mean, surely Morgan actually read the script before taking the part. Did he not see how poor it was? What then could motivate him to take the part? Money? Of course, acting is at times more about who you are seen with rather than really developing quality work.

LL Cool J is a great [[actor]]; he gets a lot more screen time than Freeman or Spacey in this movie and really [[struggles]] to come to terms with the poor script.

Meanwhile, the audience goes: "What the hell is going on here? You expect me to believe this crap?"

In short, apart from Justin a great lineup [[badly]] executed - very [[disappointing]]. Normally, I have much better [[aspects]] to do with my [[times]] than write [[review]] but I was so [[disenchanted]] with this movie that I spent an hour registering with IMDb just to get it off my chest.

You would think a movie with names like Morgan Freeman or Kevin Spacey would be a bankable bet... well, this movie was just [[scary]]. It is nigh on impossible to "suspend disbelief"; I tried, really, I [[wanna]] to enjoy it but [[Justine]] Timberlake just wouldn't [[leaving]] me.

Timberlake should stick to music, what a [[frightening]] performance - NO presence as an actor,NO [[personage]]. Can't blame everything on Justin: The movie also boast a dreadful plot & badly timed editing; its definitely an "F".

After seeing this, I have to wonder what really motivates actors. I mean, surely Morgan actually read the script before taking the part. Did he not see how poor it was? What then could motivate him to take the part? Money? Of course, acting is at times more about who you are seen with rather than really developing quality work.

LL Cool J is a great [[protagonist]]; he gets a lot more screen time than Freeman or Spacey in this movie and really [[tussle]] to come to terms with the poor script.

Meanwhile, the audience goes: "What the hell is going on here? You expect me to believe this crap?"

In short, apart from Justin a great lineup [[sorely]] executed - very [[frustrating]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3677 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I'm giving it only 9 out of 10, because I need to view it again, in a more current mind-frame to have a fresh perspective. What I remember is an [[amazing]] psychological thriller that [[dazzled]] my brain and my eyes when I watched it. I [[would]] watch it every time it came on HBO back in the day (probably 1990 or so). I might have even [[recorded]] it, but that [[recording]] is long gone, I'm sure.

I [[wrote]] to GreenCine to try and get this title in, they currently don't carry it. I hope I can find it at a local video store.

I would highly recommend giving it a try if you find it somewhere. It's interesting at the very least. If you enjoyed movies such as Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice, Gummo, or anything sort of strange and along those lines, try this one out. I'm giving it only 9 out of 10, because I need to view it again, in a more current mind-frame to have a fresh perspective. What I remember is an [[unbelievable]] psychological thriller that [[blinded]] my brain and my eyes when I watched it. I [[ought]] watch it every time it came on HBO back in the day (probably 1990 or so). I might have even [[registered]] it, but that [[registering]] is long gone, I'm sure.

I [[authored]] to GreenCine to try and get this title in, they currently don't carry it. I hope I can find it at a local video store.

I would highly recommend giving it a try if you find it somewhere. It's interesting at the very least. If you enjoyed movies such as Edward Scissorhands, Beetlejuice, Gummo, or anything sort of strange and along those lines, try this one out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3678 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Saw this a couple [[times]] on the Sundance [[Channel]] several years [[ago]] and received a [[nice]] cinematic jolt to the system. A semi-surreal [[yet]] [[hard]] edged [[take]] on [[modern]] media [[culture]] (or the [[lack]] of it), focusing on some seriously wacked, way-beyond-the-Hollywood-fringe [[dwellers]]. It had an [[amusing]] early performance from Mark Ruffalo, and some [[memorable]] cinematography from the DP who did the Polish [[Brothers]] [[movies]]. There was a savage umcompromising [[humor]] and a weirdly [[original]] feel to it that [[definitely]] set it [[apart]]. This film had [[cult]] [[classic]] [[written]] all over it, and I'm [[surprised]] it's not [[yet]] out on [[DVD]].

[[Hopefully]] [[soon]]. Saw this a couple [[dates]] on the Sundance [[Canal]] several years [[prior]] and received a [[handsome]] cinematic jolt to the system. A semi-surreal [[nonetheless]] [[laborious]] edged [[taking]] on [[fashionable]] media [[cultivation]] (or the [[shortage]] of it), focusing on some seriously wacked, way-beyond-the-Hollywood-fringe [[residents]]. It had an [[humorous]] early performance from Mark Ruffalo, and some [[eventful]] cinematography from the DP who did the Polish [[Plymouth]] [[cinematography]]. There was a savage umcompromising [[comedy]] and a weirdly [[upfront]] feel to it that [[admittedly]] set it [[furthermore]]. This film had [[religions]] [[conventional]] [[authored]] all over it, and I'm [[dumbfounded]] it's not [[even]] out on [[DVDS]].

[[Thankfully]] [[expeditiously]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3679 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Huge]], exhaustive and passionate [[summary]] of American [[cinema]] as seen through the [[eyes]] of [[Martin]] Scorcese. Needless to say, there is never a [[dull]] moment in all of its 4 hour [[running]] time. [[Many]] [[genres]], [[periods]] and [[directors]] are all [[examined]], [[discussed]] more from the [[perspective]] of cinephile rather than contemporary [[director]]. For anyone even remotely interested in American [[films]], or [[cinema]] in [[general]]. A [[masterpiece]], and the [[best]] of the BFI's Century of [[Cinema]] [[series]].

[[Gargantuan]], exhaustive and passionate [[synthesizing]] of American [[movie]] as seen through the [[eye]] of [[Martins]] Scorcese. Needless to say, there is never a [[tiresome]] moment in all of its 4 hour [[implementing]] time. [[Numerous]] [[genders]], [[schedules]] and [[managers]] are all [[scrutinized]], [[deliberated]] more from the [[viewpoints]] of cinephile rather than contemporary [[headmaster]]. For anyone even remotely interested in American [[filmmaking]], or [[cine]] in [[overall]]. A [[centerpiece]], and the [[nicest]] of the BFI's Century of [[Theaters]] [[serials]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 3680 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Roman Polanski has made many, many movies that are unexceptional. His fame bewilders me. Nothing stands out as a high point except Chinatown (I haven't seen 'Knife in the Water' or 'Tess'). [[Any]] contribution he's made to film concluded more than twenty years ago; his work is just [[embarrassing]], safe and/or [[dull]] (The Pianist, Frantic, Oliver Twist, The Ninth Gate, Pirates).

R's Baby must have signified the end of the establishment at the time it came out. It's lux-produced and fairly high concept for a 1968 'horror' movie (never show the baby). But this is just misconceived horror sap. Everything is arty to the point that the plot line becomes hopelessly clear very early (Um, thanks for that finale-destroying title), and on a clear day you can see the twist ending coming for days. It did not sustain my interest. I find that whatever this movie might have been, it is utterly derailed by the 1960's version of what femininity was. Farrow is such a chronic distracted, helpless waif/housewife. Her frailty is oversold... she's irritating in the extreme. There's no real ideas in it... nothing to consider except being the mother of the devil.

The Dakota is barely exploited for it eerie potential. Roman Polanski has made many, many movies that are unexceptional. His fame bewilders me. Nothing stands out as a high point except Chinatown (I haven't seen 'Knife in the Water' or 'Tess'). [[Everything]] contribution he's made to film concluded more than twenty years ago; his work is just [[inconvenient]], safe and/or [[monotonous]] (The Pianist, Frantic, Oliver Twist, The Ninth Gate, Pirates).

R's Baby must have signified the end of the establishment at the time it came out. It's lux-produced and fairly high concept for a 1968 'horror' movie (never show the baby). But this is just misconceived horror sap. Everything is arty to the point that the plot line becomes hopelessly clear very early (Um, thanks for that finale-destroying title), and on a clear day you can see the twist ending coming for days. It did not sustain my interest. I find that whatever this movie might have been, it is utterly derailed by the 1960's version of what femininity was. Farrow is such a chronic distracted, helpless waif/housewife. Her frailty is oversold... she's irritating in the extreme. There's no real ideas in it... nothing to consider except being the mother of the devil.

The Dakota is barely exploited for it eerie potential. --------------------------------------------- Result 3681 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I never understood why some people dislike Bollywood films: they've got charismatic [[actors]], [[great]] dance [[numbers]], and heightened emotion--what's not to [[like]]? What I didn't realize was that I had only seen the upper-crust of Bollywood. Then I [[watched]] "Garam Masala". I could tell from the first scene that this was not a [[movie]] I was going to [[like]] (the film opens with a montage of the two [[leads]] driving around a city and apparently happening serendipitously on a series of photo setups populated with gyrating models), but I kept [[hoping]] things would improve. Sadly, they didn't. The main problem is that the two protagonists, Mac & Sam, are completely unsympathetic. They spend the entire movie lying to women--and lying brutally- -in order to get them into bed, and the audience is supposed to find this funny, and be charmed. The boys are unscrupulous and inept, and not in a lovable way. Mac even goes so far as to have one of the women drugged in order to keep her from discovering his cheating. The [[script]] is [[extremely]] [[poor]], with repetitive scenes, setups that never lead to anything, and illogical actions and statements by the characters. In fact, the characters are never really developed at all. The males are boorish, greedy jerks, and the women merely interchangeably beautiful. If you go by this movie, you would think that "air hostesses" are pretty easy to pass from man to man. In reality, betrayal is not so humorous.

The only bright spots I found in the movie were one dance number that had brilliant sets, and a few slapsticky moments involving the French-farce, door-slamming aspects of the story. But Bollywood dancing is better enjoyed in movies choreographed by Farah Khan, and for slapstick you might as well just go straight to the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, who seem to have influenced writer/director Priyadarshan not a little. Priyadarshan also takes false credit for inventing the story: the basic premise of the plot is stolen from the 1960 play "Boeing Boeing." The original author of that work, Marc Camoletti, is credited nowhere. At least Priyadarshan changed the title for this remake, rather than brazenly using the original without giving credit, as he did in his 1985 version of this same tale. (According to IMDb's credits list.) I never understood why some people dislike Bollywood films: they've got charismatic [[players]], [[sublime]] dance [[digit]], and heightened emotion--what's not to [[iike]]? What I didn't realize was that I had only seen the upper-crust of Bollywood. Then I [[saw]] "Garam Masala". I could tell from the first scene that this was not a [[kino]] I was going to [[loves]] (the film opens with a montage of the two [[leeds]] driving around a city and apparently happening serendipitously on a series of photo setups populated with gyrating models), but I kept [[expecting]] things would improve. Sadly, they didn't. The main problem is that the two protagonists, Mac & Sam, are completely unsympathetic. They spend the entire movie lying to women--and lying brutally- -in order to get them into bed, and the audience is supposed to find this funny, and be charmed. The boys are unscrupulous and inept, and not in a lovable way. Mac even goes so far as to have one of the women drugged in order to keep her from discovering his cheating. The [[screenplay]] is [[exceptionally]] [[pauper]], with repetitive scenes, setups that never lead to anything, and illogical actions and statements by the characters. In fact, the characters are never really developed at all. The males are boorish, greedy jerks, and the women merely interchangeably beautiful. If you go by this movie, you would think that "air hostesses" are pretty easy to pass from man to man. In reality, betrayal is not so humorous.

The only bright spots I found in the movie were one dance number that had brilliant sets, and a few slapsticky moments involving the French-farce, door-slamming aspects of the story. But Bollywood dancing is better enjoyed in movies choreographed by Farah Khan, and for slapstick you might as well just go straight to the silent comedies of Buster Keaton and Harold Lloyd, who seem to have influenced writer/director Priyadarshan not a little. Priyadarshan also takes false credit for inventing the story: the basic premise of the plot is stolen from the 1960 play "Boeing Boeing." The original author of that work, Marc Camoletti, is credited nowhere. At least Priyadarshan changed the title for this remake, rather than brazenly using the original without giving credit, as he did in his 1985 version of this same tale. (According to IMDb's credits list.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3682 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was quite pleased to [[find]] this movie in the local [[video]] [[library]] - Cary Grant in a comedy set in the services, [[director]] Stanley Donen, so far what's not to like? It's the [[sort]] of film that has me [[wondering]] two things - when did all involved (including some well-known names) realize they had a [[turkey]] on their hands, and what's the [[worst]] thing about it [[among]] a number of contending [[aspects]]? Still pondering the first, but my vote for the latter goes to the meandering storyline, ahead of the wordy sometimes [[pretentious]] [[script]], the uncertain tone, the lack of consistent and well-developed characterization, and the lack of rapport between the characters. You have to add very uneven acting to the criticism but it's understandable that the actors were struggling with this stuff and in addition seem under-rehearsed. Quite often they can hardly get their lines out quick enough. Cary Grant tries to portray his usual charming and urbane persona but at times seems uneasy and staccato in his delivery. I have to say however that I was relieved when the initial suggestions his character will be paired with the unspeakably vulgar Jayne Mansfield go away with the appearance of Suzy Parker. What's to like about the film? - for me chiefly the beauty of Parker who also acts with restraint and a Grace Kelly-like dignity. Generally speaking the film is nice to look at. The naval characters are very smart in their uniforms - however you have to truly wonder at the ghastly black Fu Manchu tunics they don in their luxury hotel suite. Even Grant can't look elegant in his. Back to the credit side, Ray Walston does a commendable job with his character and for me there was an interest in hearing a pre-Hogan's Heroes Werner Klemperer speak without an assumed German accent! I was quite pleased to [[found]] this movie in the local [[videotape]] [[librarian]] - Cary Grant in a comedy set in the services, [[headmaster]] Stanley Donen, so far what's not to like? It's the [[sorting]] of film that has me [[requested]] two things - when did all involved (including some well-known names) realize they had a [[ankara]] on their hands, and what's the [[hardest]] thing about it [[between]] a number of contending [[things]]? Still pondering the first, but my vote for the latter goes to the meandering storyline, ahead of the wordy sometimes [[cocky]] [[hyphen]], the uncertain tone, the lack of consistent and well-developed characterization, and the lack of rapport between the characters. You have to add very uneven acting to the criticism but it's understandable that the actors were struggling with this stuff and in addition seem under-rehearsed. Quite often they can hardly get their lines out quick enough. Cary Grant tries to portray his usual charming and urbane persona but at times seems uneasy and staccato in his delivery. I have to say however that I was relieved when the initial suggestions his character will be paired with the unspeakably vulgar Jayne Mansfield go away with the appearance of Suzy Parker. What's to like about the film? - for me chiefly the beauty of Parker who also acts with restraint and a Grace Kelly-like dignity. Generally speaking the film is nice to look at. The naval characters are very smart in their uniforms - however you have to truly wonder at the ghastly black Fu Manchu tunics they don in their luxury hotel suite. Even Grant can't look elegant in his. Back to the credit side, Ray Walston does a commendable job with his character and for me there was an interest in hearing a pre-Hogan's Heroes Werner Klemperer speak without an assumed German accent! --------------------------------------------- Result 3683 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I came away from this movie with the [[feeling]] that it could have been so much better. [[Instead]] of what should be a gripping, tense [[story]] of a boy's fight for survival in the wilderness, it comes off as a National Geographic documentary meets Columbia sportswear [[ad]].

The film begins with Brian (Jared Rushton) preparing for a journey by plane to see his father. His mother fortuitously gives him the curious choice of a hatchet as a going-away gift (what's wrong with a Rubik's Cube?), little knowing how badly he will soon need it. Once in the air, the plane's pilot (a blink-and-you'll-miss-him cameo by Ned Beatty) suffers a fatal heart attack, leaving Brian helpless as the plane crashes into a lake. Extremely lucky to walk (or rather swim) away virtually unscathed, Brian must find shelter, food and hope for rescue.

Here is where the main problem with the movie begins. By the very nature of Brian's solitude, Jared has very few lines to speak, and so the film ought to have compensated by ratcheting up the tension of each scene. Instead, he is shown walking around, sitting around, and so on, with only a minimal sense of danger. As a result, too much reliance is placed on flashbacks to the parents' troubled marriage as the source of tension. These scenes merely get in the way and don't particularly add much to the story. Even worse, occasionally Jared – his face covered with mud - lets out a primal scream or two, which conjures up unfortunate parallels to `Predator.' Speaking of unfortunate, we could have done with being spared the sight of his mullet, but it presumably helped keep him warm at night.

Another [[disappointment]] is Pamela Sue Martin in a totally [[ineffectual]] performance as the mother. Both she and the father have very little impact in the movie. For instance, we are never shown how they react to news of Brian's disappearance, how they might be organizing rescue attempts, and so on. This is just one source of tension the film-makers would have done well to explore instead of spending so much time on events that happened before Brian embarked on his journey. I came away from this movie with the [[sensation]] that it could have been so much better. [[However]] of what should be a gripping, tense [[tales]] of a boy's fight for survival in the wilderness, it comes off as a National Geographic documentary meets Columbia sportswear [[announcement]].

The film begins with Brian (Jared Rushton) preparing for a journey by plane to see his father. His mother fortuitously gives him the curious choice of a hatchet as a going-away gift (what's wrong with a Rubik's Cube?), little knowing how badly he will soon need it. Once in the air, the plane's pilot (a blink-and-you'll-miss-him cameo by Ned Beatty) suffers a fatal heart attack, leaving Brian helpless as the plane crashes into a lake. Extremely lucky to walk (or rather swim) away virtually unscathed, Brian must find shelter, food and hope for rescue.

Here is where the main problem with the movie begins. By the very nature of Brian's solitude, Jared has very few lines to speak, and so the film ought to have compensated by ratcheting up the tension of each scene. Instead, he is shown walking around, sitting around, and so on, with only a minimal sense of danger. As a result, too much reliance is placed on flashbacks to the parents' troubled marriage as the source of tension. These scenes merely get in the way and don't particularly add much to the story. Even worse, occasionally Jared – his face covered with mud - lets out a primal scream or two, which conjures up unfortunate parallels to `Predator.' Speaking of unfortunate, we could have done with being spared the sight of his mullet, but it presumably helped keep him warm at night.

Another [[dissatisfaction]] is Pamela Sue Martin in a totally [[unusable]] performance as the mother. Both she and the father have very little impact in the movie. For instance, we are never shown how they react to news of Brian's disappearance, how they might be organizing rescue attempts, and so on. This is just one source of tension the film-makers would have done well to explore instead of spending so much time on events that happened before Brian embarked on his journey. --------------------------------------------- Result 3684 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Effort aside (This isn't a review about good [[intentions]], its about the final product), this film is poorly written, overacted, and poorly [[directed]]. The story obviously had [[potential]], but that [[story]] is [[nowhere]] present in this film.

Clara Barton was a human being. She had [[passions]], desires, love, pain, [[embarrassment]], weakness, and self doubt just like the [[rest]] of us. You would never know that from this [[film]] of the lead actress's performance. In fact [[apply]] that to every [[character]] in the film, but in Barton's case: Every [[sentence]] is a speech. An epic over the [[top]] speech as though from an [[inhuman]] [[robot]]. [[In]] [[fact]] the only scene that plays well in one in the board meeting, and I realized [[thats]] because she's making a speech! Every [[idea]] she has is [[unbelievable]] in its [[context]] and she [[comes]] up with [[ideas]] that sound like they take a lifetime of [[soul]] searching right on the spot. For [[example]], when she [[sees]] a wounded [[man]], she'll [[start]] pontificating about the needs of the battlefield and to protect [[soldiers]] and putting up white flags, etc. As played in the [[film]], there's no [[WAY]] she [[could]] come up with such a [[detailed]] well thought out [[idea]] in seconds.

[[IN]] conclusion, this [[film]] robs [[Clara]] Barton of her [[struggles]]. It [[robs]] her of her humanity, and it inherently cheapens all she did because the [[script]] is written in clichés. The [[writer]] doesn't know [[Clara]] Barton, and [[seems]] to have [[based]] his [[script]] on an encyclopedia Britannica article. ([[yes]] they had those back then) But [[hey]], nice Technicolor! (who cares) Effort aside (This isn't a review about good [[intents]], its about the final product), this film is poorly written, overacted, and poorly [[geared]]. The story obviously had [[prospective]], but that [[storytelling]] is [[everyplace]] present in this film.

Clara Barton was a human being. She had [[sentiments]], desires, love, pain, [[shame]], weakness, and self doubt just like the [[stays]] of us. You would never know that from this [[cinematography]] of the lead actress's performance. In fact [[implementing]] that to every [[personages]] in the film, but in Barton's case: Every [[penalties]] is a speech. An epic over the [[supreme]] speech as though from an [[subhuman]] [[robots]]. [[During]] [[facto]] the only scene that plays well in one in the board meeting, and I realized [[becuase]] because she's making a speech! Every [[think]] she has is [[fabulous]] in its [[backgrounds]] and she [[happens]] up with [[brainchild]] that sound like they take a lifetime of [[alma]] searching right on the spot. For [[cases]], when she [[deems]] a wounded [[guy]], she'll [[embark]] pontificating about the needs of the battlefield and to protect [[servicemen]] and putting up white flags, etc. As played in the [[flick]], there's no [[CAMINO]] she [[wo]] come up with such a [[careful]] well thought out [[brainchild]] in seconds.

[[ONTO]] conclusion, this [[cinema]] robs [[Clearly]] Barton of her [[battles]]. It [[steals]] her of her humanity, and it inherently cheapens all she did because the [[hyphen]] is written in clichés. The [[screenwriter]] doesn't know [[Claire]] Barton, and [[looks]] to have [[founded]] his [[screenplay]] on an encyclopedia Britannica article. ([[oui]] they had those back then) But [[hellos]], nice Technicolor! (who cares) --------------------------------------------- Result 3685 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[loved]] this movie! It's truly bizarre, extremely funny, morbid, witty... It makes no sense to tell about the contents of the movie, because then I'd be giving out the outcome! You have to see it without knowing what is it about! Everything is connected and has its why & because. It starts subtly and then the [[things]] start rolling faster and faster until they culminate in the most insane outburst you can imagine! It's even more fun to watch the movie the second [[time]], once you know all the "tricks". The actors are [[excellent]], [[especially]] [[Ivan]] Trojan, [[whose]] final scenes are a real master piece! I highly recommend this film, it's one of the most [[original]] ones I've ever seen! I [[worshiped]] this movie! It's truly bizarre, extremely funny, morbid, witty... It makes no sense to tell about the contents of the movie, because then I'd be giving out the outcome! You have to see it without knowing what is it about! Everything is connected and has its why & because. It starts subtly and then the [[aspects]] start rolling faster and faster until they culminate in the most insane outburst you can imagine! It's even more fun to watch the movie the second [[period]], once you know all the "tricks". The actors are [[funky]], [[namely]] [[Evan]] Trojan, [[whom]] final scenes are a real master piece! I highly recommend this film, it's one of the most [[preliminary]] ones I've ever seen! --------------------------------------------- Result 3686 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Philo Vance had many affinities with Bulldog Drummond… He was a gentleman with the kind of polish and elegance only usually associated with the British upper classes and he was also independently wealthy…

But there were vital differences… Drummond was an adventurer, charming, gallant, lively… Vance could be [[pompous]], slight1y dull and self-righteous… There was a hint of fundamental cruelty in his manner…

"The Kennel Murder Case" is the most [[impressive]] of the 14 Vance films made between 1929 and 1947… The story of a murdered collector of Chinoiserie, it has all the ingredients of the classic private eye mystery – exotic setting in the blue nose Long Island Kennel Club, three killings for Vance to solve including a baffling "locked room murder," the key to the whole affair, and plenty of suspects…

Usually, a detective story setting have proved too static and talkative to make convincing movies even though they work well enough on the printed page, but here Michael Curtiz's direction and the fine editing give the film a pace and urgency that make it altogether different from similar films of its type…

William Powell's elegance and suavity made him the perfect Vance and although a year later he switched studios, he stayed in the same genre with the enormously successful and popular "The Thin Man" at MGM… Philo Vance had many affinities with Bulldog Drummond… He was a gentleman with the kind of polish and elegance only usually associated with the British upper classes and he was also independently wealthy…

But there were vital differences… Drummond was an adventurer, charming, gallant, lively… Vance could be [[bombastic]], slight1y dull and self-righteous… There was a hint of fundamental cruelty in his manner…

"The Kennel Murder Case" is the most [[unbelievable]] of the 14 Vance films made between 1929 and 1947… The story of a murdered collector of Chinoiserie, it has all the ingredients of the classic private eye mystery – exotic setting in the blue nose Long Island Kennel Club, three killings for Vance to solve including a baffling "locked room murder," the key to the whole affair, and plenty of suspects…

Usually, a detective story setting have proved too static and talkative to make convincing movies even though they work well enough on the printed page, but here Michael Curtiz's direction and the fine editing give the film a pace and urgency that make it altogether different from similar films of its type…

William Powell's elegance and suavity made him the perfect Vance and although a year later he switched studios, he stayed in the same genre with the enormously successful and popular "The Thin Man" at MGM… --------------------------------------------- Result 3687 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Encompassing virtual reality, the potential of [[computers]], communication with the past, the ongoing struggle to express your [[identity]] in a constraining [[society]], and the [[fascinating]] Ada Byron Lovelace portrayed by the fascinating Tilda Swinton, this film should have been great. But it is [[lousy]], [[terrible]] if you [[consider]] the [[potential]]! The acting - [[aside]] from Tilda Swinton and Karen Black - veers from [[tolerable]] to [[atrocious]]. The [[plot]] construction is awkward to say the least - the modern day [[programmer]] is a dull one-note character, but half the movie is spent setting up her character, and then when Ada finally appears, it is to [[narrate]] the events of her life, not to present an engaging story (Swinton [[almost]] [[pulls]] this off, though). You never fully get to know her as a real person, just an icon from a grad student's [[history]] paper.

The digital effects, such as a digital dog and bird, are lousy and distracting, [[considering]] it was 1997 and not 1985. And, [[finally]], the script is just [[bad]]. [[Bad]], often pretentious dialog - [[especially]] the fights between the programmer and her boyfriend, which [[made]] me squirm - cold and distant [[characters]], and zero [[attempt]] to [[create]] a [[sense]] of wonder. The programmer successfully contacts a person in the past! Astonishing! But it [[hardly]] [[seems]] to surprise [[anyone]], and her boyfriend [[says]], "Well, be careful." ([[Although]] we're [[given]] no clue then or later why it might be dangerous, and it never seems to actually be [[dangerous]].)

Also, despite being about computers and Ada Lovelace and her [[love]] of mathematics, it is clear no one involved with the script had any knowledge of [[mathematics]] [[OR]] computers - any references to these [[subjects]] [[come]] [[across]] as complete mumbo jumbo that [[defies]] any suspension of disbelief.

One scene, [[towards]] the end of the movie, is quite good, a monolog by Tilda Swinton expressing her sadness at the fragility of life but her joy in that [[life]]. Poignant, passionate, and insightful, it seems to be dropped in from another movie.

So I am disappointed in this movie, because it is a missed opportunity for a fascinating little cult film. If you find the subject matter interesting, you might want to rent it, but be forewarned. See Orlando for another, much much better examination of gender roles in history with a great Tilda Swinton performance.

***spoiler/question: * *

At the end of the movie, Ada asks that her memories not be preserved (in what I thought was the best scene in the movie). But then the modern day programmer seems to do it anyway, transferring the memories into her little girl (hence the title of the movie). Am I correct, that the programmer violated Ada's wishes without even struggling over it? Or is this another confusing plot point that I'm misinterpreting? Encompassing virtual reality, the potential of [[machines]], communication with the past, the ongoing struggle to express your [[identities]] in a constraining [[societal]], and the [[intriguing]] Ada Byron Lovelace portrayed by the fascinating Tilda Swinton, this film should have been great. But it is [[squalid]], [[scary]] if you [[examine]] the [[potentials]]! The acting - [[sideways]] from Tilda Swinton and Karen Black - veers from [[acceptable]] to [[terrifying]]. The [[intrigue]] construction is awkward to say the least - the modern day [[programmers]] is a dull one-note character, but half the movie is spent setting up her character, and then when Ada finally appears, it is to [[narrating]] the events of her life, not to present an engaging story (Swinton [[roughly]] [[pulled]] this off, though). You never fully get to know her as a real person, just an icon from a grad student's [[stories]] paper.

The digital effects, such as a digital dog and bird, are lousy and distracting, [[contemplating]] it was 1997 and not 1985. And, [[eventually]], the script is just [[naughty]]. [[Naughty]], often pretentious dialog - [[notably]] the fights between the programmer and her boyfriend, which [[accomplished]] me squirm - cold and distant [[nature]], and zero [[seeks]] to [[creations]] a [[feeling]] of wonder. The programmer successfully contacts a person in the past! Astonishing! But it [[almost]] [[appears]] to surprise [[person]], and her boyfriend [[said]], "Well, be careful." ([[While]] we're [[yielded]] no clue then or later why it might be dangerous, and it never seems to actually be [[hazardous]].)

Also, despite being about computers and Ada Lovelace and her [[amore]] of mathematics, it is clear no one involved with the script had any knowledge of [[calculus]] [[NEITHER]] computers - any references to these [[themes]] [[arrived]] [[in]] as complete mumbo jumbo that [[challenging]] any suspension of disbelief.

One scene, [[into]] the end of the movie, is quite good, a monolog by Tilda Swinton expressing her sadness at the fragility of life but her joy in that [[vida]]. Poignant, passionate, and insightful, it seems to be dropped in from another movie.

So I am disappointed in this movie, because it is a missed opportunity for a fascinating little cult film. If you find the subject matter interesting, you might want to rent it, but be forewarned. See Orlando for another, much much better examination of gender roles in history with a great Tilda Swinton performance.

***spoiler/question: * *

At the end of the movie, Ada asks that her memories not be preserved (in what I thought was the best scene in the movie). But then the modern day programmer seems to do it anyway, transferring the memories into her little girl (hence the title of the movie). Am I correct, that the programmer violated Ada's wishes without even struggling over it? Or is this another confusing plot point that I'm misinterpreting? --------------------------------------------- Result 3688 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] When I was younger I really enjoyed watching [[bad]] television. We've all been guilty of it at some time or another, but my excuse for watching things like "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" and "Silver Spoons" is this: I was young and naive; [[ignorant]] of what makes a [[show]] really [[worthwhile]].

Thankfully, I now appreciate the good stuff. Stargate SG-1 is not good. The 12 year-old me [[would]] love every hackneyed bit of it, every line of stilted dialogue, every bit of needless technobabble. The [[writing]] is beyond insipid; so bland and uninspired it makes one miss Star Trek: Voyager. [[If]] your show makes me long for the worst Trek show ever, you're in trouble.

The film [[Stargate]] is a wonderful guilty pleasure, anchored by two solid performances by James Spader and Kurt Russell, full of fascinating Egyptian architecture and culture, a wonderful musical score, and cool sci-fi ideas. With the exception of a little of the original music, [[none]] of what made the film fun appears in this show. Even Richard Dean Anderson, who made MacGyver watchable and Legend interesting, seems like he's half asleep most episodes.

The budget must have been very low because the sets sometimes look like somebody's basement. The cinematography isn't much better, as vanilla and dull as the [[scripts]]. It [[amazes]] me that shows with a lot more style (like Farscape) and substance (like the reimagined Battlestar Galactica) have smaller, less rabid fanbases than this pap. It just doesn't deserve it. When I was younger I really enjoyed watching [[unfavourable]] television. We've all been guilty of it at some time or another, but my excuse for watching things like "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" and "Silver Spoons" is this: I was young and naive; [[uninformed]] of what makes a [[exposition]] really [[actionable]].

Thankfully, I now appreciate the good stuff. Stargate SG-1 is not good. The 12 year-old me [[should]] love every hackneyed bit of it, every line of stilted dialogue, every bit of needless technobabble. The [[literary]] is beyond insipid; so bland and uninspired it makes one miss Star Trek: Voyager. [[Though]] your show makes me long for the worst Trek show ever, you're in trouble.

The film [[Gate]] is a wonderful guilty pleasure, anchored by two solid performances by James Spader and Kurt Russell, full of fascinating Egyptian architecture and culture, a wonderful musical score, and cool sci-fi ideas. With the exception of a little of the original music, [[nothingness]] of what made the film fun appears in this show. Even Richard Dean Anderson, who made MacGyver watchable and Legend interesting, seems like he's half asleep most episodes.

The budget must have been very low because the sets sometimes look like somebody's basement. The cinematography isn't much better, as vanilla and dull as the [[dashes]]. It [[astonishes]] me that shows with a lot more style (like Farscape) and substance (like the reimagined Battlestar Galactica) have smaller, less rabid fanbases than this pap. It just doesn't deserve it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3689 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I rented it because the second segment traumatized me as a little [[kid]]. I snuck downstairs really early one morning, started watching HBO, and The Raft (segment 2) terrorized me good. This [[time]] around, I still enjoyed The Raft, [[although]] I couldn't tell whether it was for nostalgic reasons or if it was actually a good short. The other two segments were [[complete]] [[trash]]. I can't believe a producer [[somewhere]] payed to make this junk. All I've accomplished by watching this was to [[ruin]] one more childhood [[memory]]. Creepshow 2 will now join Rad among my list of [[tainted]] childhood classics. 4/10 I rented it because the second segment traumatized me as a little [[petit]]. I snuck downstairs really early one morning, started watching HBO, and The Raft (segment 2) terrorized me good. This [[moment]] around, I still enjoyed The Raft, [[while]] I couldn't tell whether it was for nostalgic reasons or if it was actually a good short. The other two segments were [[finalise]] [[junk]]. I can't believe a producer [[nowhere]] payed to make this junk. All I've accomplished by watching this was to [[downfall]] one more childhood [[remembrance]]. Creepshow 2 will now join Rad among my list of [[tinted]] childhood classics. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3690 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (52%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] The film portrays France's unresolved problems with its colonial legacy in Western (Francophone) Africa through the [[befuddled]] and complex psychoanalytical prism of a young woman, France (herein symbolically representing her nation). It is an often engaging and challenging portrait of a young woman's desire to come to terms with a traumatic moment in her past, in particular, and a nation's desire to reach out to the 'other' it once 'owned' and moulded. This is reflected in the way in which it centres entirely around the notion of travelling (or being in transit) from the present to the past; remembered realities to undeniable contemporary political and economic actualities.

The characters all play a symbolic, albeit a limited and unconvincing role. France, meant to be a visual as well as a totemic representation of contemporary French society, leaves one indifferent to her plight as she seems still to be imbued with the same naiveté she enjoyed as a child-in fact as a child she seems more in possession of her reality. The rest of the rag-tag ensemble is just forgettable. The black Africans are, to say the least, offencive impressionistic portraits of former colonised peoples now colonised by the director's poor handling of her material. They are no more than a dark and moribund backdrop against which the blythe-like France wonders seeking a world she never knew, and hoping for one that can never be found in Cameroon. The film portrays France's unresolved problems with its colonial legacy in Western (Francophone) Africa through the [[bemused]] and complex psychoanalytical prism of a young woman, France (herein symbolically representing her nation). It is an often engaging and challenging portrait of a young woman's desire to come to terms with a traumatic moment in her past, in particular, and a nation's desire to reach out to the 'other' it once 'owned' and moulded. This is reflected in the way in which it centres entirely around the notion of travelling (or being in transit) from the present to the past; remembered realities to undeniable contemporary political and economic actualities.

The characters all play a symbolic, albeit a limited and unconvincing role. France, meant to be a visual as well as a totemic representation of contemporary French society, leaves one indifferent to her plight as she seems still to be imbued with the same naiveté she enjoyed as a child-in fact as a child she seems more in possession of her reality. The rest of the rag-tag ensemble is just forgettable. The black Africans are, to say the least, offencive impressionistic portraits of former colonised peoples now colonised by the director's poor handling of her material. They are no more than a dark and moribund backdrop against which the blythe-like France wonders seeking a world she never knew, and hoping for one that can never be found in Cameroon. --------------------------------------------- Result 3691 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] First of all I've got to [[give]] it to the people that [[got]] this thing [[together]]. 9/11 is such a sensitive issue that making a movie that dares to be controversial about it takes a great deal of guts. It's a [[shame]], although not surprising, that the movie was [[banned]] in the US.

That being said I think that the movie is [[superb]] with a couple of weak [[moments]]. The [[movie]] starts up with the Iranian segment which turns out to be somewhat reminiscent of Majid Majidi's work (the absolutely beautiful "heaven's children" and "the color of paradise"). Much like those 2 films the clip shows what happened through the innocent eyes of a class of Afgan refugees in Iran. Absolutely beautiful clip. Same goes for Sean Penn's clip which is superb as well. But just as some of the clips are beutiful others are absolutely brutal. Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu does the mexican clip and just like his gut-wrenching "Amores perros" he does it as brutal as he can. Most of the clip is a black screen with several sounds playing in the background. Those sounds are of the reporters and their shock as the second plane crashes, those who called home from the burning towers and left messages for their families, those who were angry....and he combines this with flashes of people jumping from the towers. A very hard clip to watch and one that you won't forget.

Some clips could turn out to be very hard to watch for Americans as some of the clips could be interpreted as "you're not the only ones that are suffering". In particular the Egyptian and British clips that not only say that but turn the tables and say how much suffering the US has caused to other people.

I will also make a special mention to the clips from Bosnia-Herzegovina, France, India and Japan (although this last one may seem terribly out of place it actually isn't).

However, not all the clips are great and I make a special mention on the clip from Israel which, in my opinion, is extremely weak. While the idea was good (a reporter is at the scene of a terrorist attack in Tel Aviv but his story gets bumped because of what happened in New York is something that a lot of us who live in countries at war can relate to) the realization is terrible. The clip ends up as just some entertainment reporter trying to get some air-time at all costs, a guy saying he's a witness and hoping that he can go on TV, and soldiers and paramedics shouting just "because". The clip fails to capture any of the drama of such a situation.

If you happen to have the chance to see it then you should, that is, unless you're a conservative in which case you'd better stay out as you might get offended. But if you're not then you might learn how many of us outside the US lived through 9/11. First of all I've got to [[confer]] it to the people that [[ai]] this thing [[jointly]]. 9/11 is such a sensitive issue that making a movie that dares to be controversial about it takes a great deal of guts. It's a [[embarrassment]], although not surprising, that the movie was [[banished]] in the US.

That being said I think that the movie is [[extraordinaire]] with a couple of weak [[times]]. The [[cinematic]] starts up with the Iranian segment which turns out to be somewhat reminiscent of Majid Majidi's work (the absolutely beautiful "heaven's children" and "the color of paradise"). Much like those 2 films the clip shows what happened through the innocent eyes of a class of Afgan refugees in Iran. Absolutely beautiful clip. Same goes for Sean Penn's clip which is superb as well. But just as some of the clips are beutiful others are absolutely brutal. Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu does the mexican clip and just like his gut-wrenching "Amores perros" he does it as brutal as he can. Most of the clip is a black screen with several sounds playing in the background. Those sounds are of the reporters and their shock as the second plane crashes, those who called home from the burning towers and left messages for their families, those who were angry....and he combines this with flashes of people jumping from the towers. A very hard clip to watch and one that you won't forget.

Some clips could turn out to be very hard to watch for Americans as some of the clips could be interpreted as "you're not the only ones that are suffering". In particular the Egyptian and British clips that not only say that but turn the tables and say how much suffering the US has caused to other people.

I will also make a special mention to the clips from Bosnia-Herzegovina, France, India and Japan (although this last one may seem terribly out of place it actually isn't).

However, not all the clips are great and I make a special mention on the clip from Israel which, in my opinion, is extremely weak. While the idea was good (a reporter is at the scene of a terrorist attack in Tel Aviv but his story gets bumped because of what happened in New York is something that a lot of us who live in countries at war can relate to) the realization is terrible. The clip ends up as just some entertainment reporter trying to get some air-time at all costs, a guy saying he's a witness and hoping that he can go on TV, and soldiers and paramedics shouting just "because". The clip fails to capture any of the drama of such a situation.

If you happen to have the chance to see it then you should, that is, unless you're a conservative in which case you'd better stay out as you might get offended. But if you're not then you might learn how many of us outside the US lived through 9/11. --------------------------------------------- Result 3692 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] One of Frances Farmer's earliest movies; at 22, she is absolutely [[beautiful]]. Bing Crosby is in [[great]] voice, but the songs are not his [[best]]. Martha Raye and Bob Burns are interesting, but their comedy, probably great in its [[time]], is really corny today. Roy Rogers also appears- in a singing role. In my view only worth watching if you are a Frances Farmer fan, and possibly a Bing Crosby fan. One of Frances Farmer's earliest movies; at 22, she is absolutely [[wondrous]]. Bing Crosby is in [[resplendent]] voice, but the songs are not his [[finest]]. Martha Raye and Bob Burns are interesting, but their comedy, probably great in its [[moment]], is really corny today. Roy Rogers also appears- in a singing role. In my view only worth watching if you are a Frances Farmer fan, and possibly a Bing Crosby fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 3693 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I didn't [[approach]] "Still [[Crazy]]" with any real anticipation. [[Just]] another rock'n'roll picture, I figured... good [[nostalgia]] for the baby boomers. This [[film]] is partially that, but so much more. Brian Gibson, the director, previously helmed a biography of Tina Turner, and is quite successful in his [[style]]. I suppose it is [[fitting]] that this was his last [[film]].

The cast is well-chosen. Bill Nighy is perfect in his role as the band's frontman. Actor-turned-director Bruce Robinson appears as the band's washed-up guitarist. He does a superb job, even though he hasn't appeared on film since the late 70's. If you're looking for an touching and funny film (with some great songs), you've found it.

7.4 out of 10 I didn't [[approaches]] "Still [[Kooky]]" with any real anticipation. [[Virtuous]] another rock'n'roll picture, I figured... good [[homesickness]] for the baby boomers. This [[cinematography]] is partially that, but so much more. Brian Gibson, the director, previously helmed a biography of Tina Turner, and is quite successful in his [[styles]]. I suppose it is [[fitted]] that this was his last [[cinema]].

The cast is well-chosen. Bill Nighy is perfect in his role as the band's frontman. Actor-turned-director Bruce Robinson appears as the band's washed-up guitarist. He does a superb job, even though he hasn't appeared on film since the late 70's. If you're looking for an touching and funny film (with some great songs), you've found it.

7.4 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3694 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] After [[Dark]], My Sweet is a [[great]], modern noir, filled with seedy characters, dirt [[roads]], and, of course, [[sweaty]] characters. It seems that most of the truly great noirs of the [[last]] two or three decades have taken place in the [[South]], where the [[men]] glisten and the [[ladies]], [[um]], [[glisten]] too. Why? Because it's hooooottttttttttt. And because [[everyone]] [[looks]] better [[wet]] (at least the [[men]] do - sweaty [[women]] [[leave]] me [[clammy]]).

Anyway - there might be some spoilers in here.

This film is a [[wonderful]] [[example]] of everything a [[noir]] should be - [[steady]] pacing ([[though]] some with attention [[disorders]] refer to it as 'slow'), [[clearly]] and [[broadly]] drawn ([[though]] not [[simple]]) [[characters]], and [[tons]] of atmosphere. [[Noir]], if [[anything]], is about moods and [[attitudes]]. That's why the [[great]] ones are not marked by your [[traditional]] [[definitions]] of 'great' acting ([[look]] at Bogart, Mitchum, Hurt, and Nicholson - they (and their [[characters]]) were [[anything]] but [[real]] - but they had [[style]] and sass and in a [[crime]] movie that's exactly what you [[want]]). or [[quickly]] paced adventures (again all [[great]] noirs [[seem]] to be on slow [[burn]] like a [[cigarette]]). [[Great]] noirs create an environment and you just [[inhabit]] it with the [[characters]] for a couple hours.

After Dark My Sweet let's you do that - and it let's you [[enjoy]] the company of some very interesting and [[complex]] [[characters]]. Uncle Bud and [[Collie]] are [[intriguing]] - never [[allowing]] the audience to know what really makes them tick - and Patric and Dern (I [[love]] Bruce Dern, by the way) are pitch [[perfect]], Dern [[especially]] (see [[previous]] [[comment]]). They take the basic outlines of a [[character]] and give them depth and elicit our [[sympathies]].

The [[story]] itself is [[also]] interesting. There're better plots in the [[world]] of noir (hardly any mystery here - [[mostly]] it's suspense), but this one is solid. If anything, the [[simply]] 'okay' [[plot]] has more to do with Jim Thompson's writing than [[anything]] else. With Thompson, plots are [[almost]] secondary; he eschewed the labyrinthine [[tales]] of Hammett and Chandler for simpler [[stories]] with stronger, more [[confusing]] characters. Look at a [[novel]] like The [[Killer]] Inside Me and and you'll see right away (from the title) what it's all about. When it comes to Thompson, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it (to quote Roger Ebert). So, really, the relatively simple plot of a kidnapping is not the point and, if you don't like it, well the jokes on you.

Why this is an 8star movie rather than a 10star one is because of the female lead. She's not bad, per se, but she's not Angelica Huston or Anette benning (see the adaptation of Jim Thompson's The Grifters if you don't know what I'm talking about - besides it's a better movie and you should start there for contemporary noir - it's the best of the 1990s and challenges Blood Simple for the title of best since Chinatown). She simply doesn't have the chops (or the looks for that matter) and though she and Patric have some chemistry, I don't have it with her. So there. After [[Blackness]], My Sweet is a [[whopping]], modern noir, filled with seedy characters, dirt [[arteries]], and, of course, [[damp]] characters. It seems that most of the truly great noirs of the [[latter]] two or three decades have taken place in the [[Southern]], where the [[males]] glisten and the [[lady]], [[hmm]], [[shine]] too. Why? Because it's hooooottttttttttt. And because [[somebody]] [[seem]] better [[moist]] (at least the [[male]] do - sweaty [[female]] [[letting]] me [[damp]]).

Anyway - there might be some spoilers in here.

This film is a [[noteworthy]] [[cases]] of everything a [[negro]] should be - [[nonstop]] pacing ([[if]] some with attention [[hassles]] refer to it as 'slow'), [[apparently]] and [[basically]] drawn ([[if]] not [[mere]]) [[traits]], and [[tonnes]] of atmosphere. [[Negro]], if [[something]], is about moods and [[behaviors]]. That's why the [[huge]] ones are not marked by your [[classic]] [[definition]] of 'great' acting ([[glance]] at Bogart, Mitchum, Hurt, and Nicholson - they (and their [[attribute]]) were [[nothing]] but [[authentic]] - but they had [[elegance]] and sass and in a [[offenses]] movie that's exactly what you [[wanted]]). or [[faster]] paced adventures (again all [[huge]] noirs [[looks]] to be on slow [[combustion]] like a [[tobacco]]). [[Resplendent]] noirs create an environment and you just [[residing]] it with the [[attribute]] for a couple hours.

After Dark My Sweet let's you do that - and it let's you [[enjoys]] the company of some very interesting and [[complicate]] [[attribute]]. Uncle Bud and [[Spaniel]] are [[fascinating]] - never [[allow]] the audience to know what really makes them tick - and Patric and Dern (I [[adored]] Bruce Dern, by the way) are pitch [[irreproachable]], Dern [[namely]] (see [[former]] [[commentary]]). They take the basic outlines of a [[personage]] and give them depth and elicit our [[condolences]].

The [[stories]] itself is [[similarly]] interesting. There're better plots in the [[worldwide]] of noir (hardly any mystery here - [[essentially]] it's suspense), but this one is solid. If anything, the [[merely]] 'okay' [[intrigue]] has more to do with Jim Thompson's writing than [[something]] else. With Thompson, plots are [[practically]] secondary; he eschewed the labyrinthine [[fables]] of Hammett and Chandler for simpler [[histories]] with stronger, more [[puzzling]] characters. Look at a [[newer]] like The [[Assassin]] Inside Me and and you'll see right away (from the title) what it's all about. When it comes to Thompson, it's not what it's about, it's how it's about it (to quote Roger Ebert). So, really, the relatively simple plot of a kidnapping is not the point and, if you don't like it, well the jokes on you.

Why this is an 8star movie rather than a 10star one is because of the female lead. She's not bad, per se, but she's not Angelica Huston or Anette benning (see the adaptation of Jim Thompson's The Grifters if you don't know what I'm talking about - besides it's a better movie and you should start there for contemporary noir - it's the best of the 1990s and challenges Blood Simple for the title of best since Chinatown). She simply doesn't have the chops (or the looks for that matter) and though she and Patric have some chemistry, I don't have it with her. So there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3695 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] As [[essential]] a part of British pop culture as the Monty Python and James [[Bond]], Doctor Who was a massive hit for 26 years (1963-1989), making it one of the longest running TV shows in the world (most serials are lucky to have ten seasons). Plans to reboot the series were always on the BBC's agenda, and after a miscalculated (not to mention Americanized) TV movie produced by Fox failed to [[capture]] the magic of the original [[version]], another nine [[years]] (Comic Relief spoof and animated mini-series notwithstanding) were required before the [[ultimate]] Time Lord could return [[properly]], [[courtesy]] of acclaimed writer Russell T. Davies.

Davies' brilliance in reintroducing the character lies in his decision to do so through the eyes of an outsider: Rose Tyler (Billie Piper), a London-based girl who leads a very normal life until one night she is attacked by creatures made out of living plastic. She is rescued by an elusive stranger who introduces himself simply as the Doctor (Christopher Eccleston) and then disappears after quipping: "Nice to meet you, Rose. Run for your life!". As she gets more and more curious about this "man", she soon finds herself in a whole new world: aliens, invasions, travel through time and space, and of course, the omnipresent Police Box-shaped TARDIS.

The first 45 minutes of the new Doctor Who are almost [[perfect]] (the special effects [[could]] have [[used]] a bit more [[polishing]]) because [[Davies]] [[nails]] two things: the show's unique humor and the two [[protagonists]]. The original series' most [[endearing]] trait was its blend of spectacular sci-fi and pure British [[comedy]], a hybrid that's hard, if not [[impossible]], to export. Here the laughs are all linked to the conversations between Rose and the Doctor, who come off as fully rounded characters after just one episode. Okay, so technically Eccleston's Doctor is the Ninth to use that name, but he distances himself from the previous eight incarnations by speaking with a Northern accent (the one he uses on a daily basis) and justifying it with a [[terrific]] line: "Lots of planets have a North!".

The real triumph of this episode, though, is Piper's performance: in theory, Rose is in her late teens, therefore nearly the same age as thousands of young viewers who had never heard of the Doctor before. Her portrayal of an ordinary girl lost in a new, exciting universe, represents the new generation's reaction to the return of a TV icon, and the chemistry that instantly forms between her and Eccleston is a sign indicating the new Doctor Who is just as good as the old one.

First, fifth, ninth, it makes no difference: there may have been others before Eccleston (and Piper, for that matter) but together he, William Hartnell, Peter Davison and the rest of the bunch are one single character, one so cool he doesn't even need a name: he's THE Doctor. As [[indispensable]] a part of British pop culture as the Monty Python and James [[Bonds]], Doctor Who was a massive hit for 26 years (1963-1989), making it one of the longest running TV shows in the world (most serials are lucky to have ten seasons). Plans to reboot the series were always on the BBC's agenda, and after a miscalculated (not to mention Americanized) TV movie produced by Fox failed to [[catching]] the magic of the original [[stepping]], another nine [[yr]] (Comic Relief spoof and animated mini-series notwithstanding) were required before the [[final]] Time Lord could return [[appropriately]], [[vanity]] of acclaimed writer Russell T. Davies.

Davies' brilliance in reintroducing the character lies in his decision to do so through the eyes of an outsider: Rose Tyler (Billie Piper), a London-based girl who leads a very normal life until one night she is attacked by creatures made out of living plastic. She is rescued by an elusive stranger who introduces himself simply as the Doctor (Christopher Eccleston) and then disappears after quipping: "Nice to meet you, Rose. Run for your life!". As she gets more and more curious about this "man", she soon finds herself in a whole new world: aliens, invasions, travel through time and space, and of course, the omnipresent Police Box-shaped TARDIS.

The first 45 minutes of the new Doctor Who are almost [[faultless]] (the special effects [[wo]] have [[employs]] a bit more [[buffing]]) because [[Davis]] [[toenails]] two things: the show's unique humor and the two [[actors]]. The original series' most [[likeable]] trait was its blend of spectacular sci-fi and pure British [[travesty]], a hybrid that's hard, if not [[impractical]], to export. Here the laughs are all linked to the conversations between Rose and the Doctor, who come off as fully rounded characters after just one episode. Okay, so technically Eccleston's Doctor is the Ninth to use that name, but he distances himself from the previous eight incarnations by speaking with a Northern accent (the one he uses on a daily basis) and justifying it with a [[sumptuous]] line: "Lots of planets have a North!".

The real triumph of this episode, though, is Piper's performance: in theory, Rose is in her late teens, therefore nearly the same age as thousands of young viewers who had never heard of the Doctor before. Her portrayal of an ordinary girl lost in a new, exciting universe, represents the new generation's reaction to the return of a TV icon, and the chemistry that instantly forms between her and Eccleston is a sign indicating the new Doctor Who is just as good as the old one.

First, fifth, ninth, it makes no difference: there may have been others before Eccleston (and Piper, for that matter) but together he, William Hartnell, Peter Davison and the rest of the bunch are one single character, one so cool he doesn't even need a name: he's THE Doctor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3696 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I was in physical [[pain]] watching the eyes of the [[cast]] as they [[participated]] in this sham. Bad [[dialogue]], worse (worst) acting, lifeless all the way, and the cast knew it. The two [[preceding]] [[movies]] which this [[attempted]] to [[copy]] had [[life]], sparkle, and were captivating. I was in physical [[pains]] watching the eyes of the [[casting]] as they [[participating]] in this sham. Bad [[discussions]], worse (worst) acting, lifeless all the way, and the cast knew it. The two [[precedents]] [[kino]] which this [[strived]] to [[copier]] had [[living]], sparkle, and were captivating. --------------------------------------------- Result 3697 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Want to watch a [[scary]] [[horror]] film? Then steer clear of this one. There's not enough beer in the [[world]] to [[make]] this [[film]] enjoyable.

However, there is enough [[scotch]]. Single-malt, if you can manage it.

If the previous comments weren't enough to keep you from watching this film sober, allow me to assist. NASA [[sends]] one man and two [[unpaid]] [[extras]] into space to orbit Saturn. A really big solar flare causes Colonel Steve West to bleed from the nose. Things go downhill from there, and wackiness ensues.

I actually read the book adaptation, which was published and released only in the UK. MILES better than the film, and the book was dreadful. At least some [[pretense]] is made towards suspense, and some sort of explanation of events is pulled out from the author's (rhymes with 'gas').

Not to say that the film is completely without merit. Rick Baker learned that he really ought to read a contract before signing on to a film, and Jonathan Demme found that he's really better suited to direct.

Yes, there is an MST3K episode featuring this flick, but it is, of course, edited quite a bit. Without the obligatory flashing of the breasts, not even the healing power of scotch can save you.

Please, just go watch Raiders of the Lost Ark if you want to see a guy melt. See Space Cowboys if you feel the need to see astronauts. I can not, in all good conscience, recommend this film to the sober film-going public. Want to watch a [[terrible]] [[terror]] film? Then steer clear of this one. There's not enough beer in the [[monde]] to [[deliver]] this [[kino]] enjoyable.

However, there is enough [[scots]]. Single-malt, if you can manage it.

If the previous comments weren't enough to keep you from watching this film sober, allow me to assist. NASA [[dispatched]] one man and two [[outstanding]] [[supplemental]] into space to orbit Saturn. A really big solar flare causes Colonel Steve West to bleed from the nose. Things go downhill from there, and wackiness ensues.

I actually read the book adaptation, which was published and released only in the UK. MILES better than the film, and the book was dreadful. At least some [[guise]] is made towards suspense, and some sort of explanation of events is pulled out from the author's (rhymes with 'gas').

Not to say that the film is completely without merit. Rick Baker learned that he really ought to read a contract before signing on to a film, and Jonathan Demme found that he's really better suited to direct.

Yes, there is an MST3K episode featuring this flick, but it is, of course, edited quite a bit. Without the obligatory flashing of the breasts, not even the healing power of scotch can save you.

Please, just go watch Raiders of the Lost Ark if you want to see a guy melt. See Space Cowboys if you feel the need to see astronauts. I can not, in all good conscience, recommend this film to the sober film-going public. --------------------------------------------- Result 3698 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a very fair [[chance]], and it [[betrayed]] me. This is very [[little]] more than a black and white [[excuse]] to bore the hell out of the audience [[even]] as the [[egotist]] Bogdanavich (who did way better with TARGETS) [[gets]] "[[great]] performances" out of a ton of hams in their debuts. [[Lots]] of teenage sex clichés come out of this movie, such as [[Doing]] the Teacher's [[Wife]], Impotence, Doing the Ugly [[Prostitute]](which is very [[awkwardly]] shot and grinds things to a complete halt, not that things were really going anywhere anyway) and skinny dipping.

I [[suppose]] this movie is [[supposed]] to be [[funny]] because of all the sex [[nonsense]], to me, it was just [[annoying]]. I was seriously much more entertained by cleaning my finger nails than watching this [[mess]]. I [[supplied]] this [[cinematography]] a very fair [[luck]], and it [[betrays]] me. This is very [[kiddo]] more than a black and white [[apologies]] to bore the hell out of the audience [[yet]] as the [[egoist]] Bogdanavich (who did way better with TARGETS) [[attains]] "[[wondrous]] performances" out of a ton of hams in their debuts. [[Lot]] of teenage sex clichés come out of this movie, such as [[Making]] the Teacher's [[Femme]], Impotence, Doing the Ugly [[Prostitution]](which is very [[clumsily]] shot and grinds things to a complete halt, not that things were really going anywhere anyway) and skinny dipping.

I [[supposing]] this movie is [[presumed]] to be [[humorous]] because of all the sex [[absurd]], to me, it was just [[vexing]]. I was seriously much more entertained by cleaning my finger nails than watching this [[chaos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3699 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Fairly amusing piece that tries to show how smart Orcas are but in the meanwhile (and quite oblivious to them) makes the audience feel [[stupid]] by making the most [[ridiculous]] film. Richard Harris plays Quint.. I'm sorry, that's wrong, he plays Captain Nolan, a fisherman who catches sharks for a living, but is lured by the big catch, and tries to catch a killer whale. When the capture of a female killer whale goes awry (don't ask) it's mate (don't ask) goes on a rampage (don't ask) and starts STALKING Captain Nolan (Don't ask). Soon, Captain Nolan realizes that they have something in common (don't ask). Pretty amazing film-making here folks. I got to tell you though, the beginning (with the whale noises and nothing much else) is pretty haunting and the end credits (with the most godawful song) is pretty entertaining. Fairly amusing piece that tries to show how smart Orcas are but in the meanwhile (and quite oblivious to them) makes the audience feel [[moronic]] by making the most [[grotesque]] film. Richard Harris plays Quint.. I'm sorry, that's wrong, he plays Captain Nolan, a fisherman who catches sharks for a living, but is lured by the big catch, and tries to catch a killer whale. When the capture of a female killer whale goes awry (don't ask) it's mate (don't ask) goes on a rampage (don't ask) and starts STALKING Captain Nolan (Don't ask). Soon, Captain Nolan realizes that they have something in common (don't ask). Pretty amazing film-making here folks. I got to tell you though, the beginning (with the whale noises and nothing much else) is pretty haunting and the end credits (with the most godawful song) is pretty entertaining. --------------------------------------------- Result 3700 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What can I say. A Kamal Hassan movie being horrible. He [[acts]] very well, but it is a horrible story, along with [[horrible]] [[direction]]. In my kind opinion, the director Gautham Menon must give up directing. There is a lot of tragedy throughout the movie. Apart from that, one can just not believe how true were those horrendous crimes. There was no practicality in the [[movie]]. Gautham is just [[running]] out of stories. But both Kamal Hassan and Jyothika [[act]] really well. The villains [[look]] too ugly, [[though]] their performance was not bad. I do not think this is a Sunday afternoon movie like Padayappa which you can see with the family. You will not get sleep seeing this movie!! However, Harris Jayaraj again did a great job, and that is why I have given this movie 4 out of 10. His song 'Partha Modail Nallae' is soulful and soothing. Apart from that, great cinematography. On the whole, this is just a [[bad]], [[bad]] [[movie]]. Kamal Hassan, I think, should have rejected this movie. What can I say. A Kamal Hassan movie being horrible. He [[act]] very well, but it is a horrible story, along with [[scary]] [[directions]]. In my kind opinion, the director Gautham Menon must give up directing. There is a lot of tragedy throughout the movie. Apart from that, one can just not believe how true were those horrendous crimes. There was no practicality in the [[cinematography]]. Gautham is just [[execute]] out of stories. But both Kamal Hassan and Jyothika [[legislation]] really well. The villains [[glance]] too ugly, [[while]] their performance was not bad. I do not think this is a Sunday afternoon movie like Padayappa which you can see with the family. You will not get sleep seeing this movie!! However, Harris Jayaraj again did a great job, and that is why I have given this movie 4 out of 10. His song 'Partha Modail Nallae' is soulful and soothing. Apart from that, great cinematography. On the whole, this is just a [[naughty]], [[inclement]] [[kino]]. Kamal Hassan, I think, should have rejected this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3701 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Let's [[eliminate]] any discussion about the use of non-Asian actors playing Asian roles. The [[movie]] is 67 years old. In 1937 studio chiefs believed that any actor could/should be able to play any role. Actors were under [[contracts]], and did not always have a choice about what role they played. End of story.

This is a truly great epic story of love, individual rights, class strata, and men/women issues. The centerpiece of the film is two [[brilliant]] performances by Luise Rainer and Paul [[Muni]].

Muni plays Wang, a Chinese farmer, who is about to take a wife (Rainer). From the start, he treats her with respect, during a time when women were looked on as little more than hired help. Without giving too much of the movie away, they go through the highs and lows of all relationships, and even though the story may take place in late 19th/early 20th century,the story and much of their feelings, seems credible.

Other than the fact that the movie is about 5-10 minutes longer than it needs to be, and the performances of Charley Grapewin and Walter Connolly are typical 1930's cartoon characters, this is a really [[wonderful]] [[movie]] that, unfortunately, has become a victim of political correctness.

9 out of 10 Let's [[eradicating]] any discussion about the use of non-Asian actors playing Asian roles. The [[cinema]] is 67 years old. In 1937 studio chiefs believed that any actor could/should be able to play any role. Actors were under [[marketplace]], and did not always have a choice about what role they played. End of story.

This is a truly great epic story of love, individual rights, class strata, and men/women issues. The centerpiece of the film is two [[sumptuous]] performances by Luise Rainer and Paul [[Mooney]].

Muni plays Wang, a Chinese farmer, who is about to take a wife (Rainer). From the start, he treats her with respect, during a time when women were looked on as little more than hired help. Without giving too much of the movie away, they go through the highs and lows of all relationships, and even though the story may take place in late 19th/early 20th century,the story and much of their feelings, seems credible.

Other than the fact that the movie is about 5-10 minutes longer than it needs to be, and the performances of Charley Grapewin and Walter Connolly are typical 1930's cartoon characters, this is a really [[ravishing]] [[filmmaking]] that, unfortunately, has become a victim of political correctness.

9 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3702 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This [[adaptation]], like 1949's *The Heiress*, is based on the [[Henry]] [[James]] [[novel]]. *The Heiress*, starring Olivia de Havilland, remains as a well-respected piece of [[work]], [[though]] less [[true]] to James' original [[story]] than this [[new]] [[remake]], which retains James' original title. It is the story of a awkward, yet loving [[daughter]] (Leigh), devoted to her father (Finney) after her mother dies during childbirth. The arrogant father holds his daughter in no esteem whatsoever, and considers her, as well as all women, simpleminded. When a young man (Chaplin) of good family and little fortune comes courting, the Father is naturally suspicious, but feeling so sure that his daughter could hold no interest for any man, is convinced that the young man is a fortune hunter and forbids her to see him. Leigh is a controversial actress – most either love her or hate her – and she always has a particular edginess and tenseness to her style, like she's acting through gritted teeth. She's not bad in this, and she handles her role relatively deftly – it's just an awkward role for any actress, making the audience want to grab the character by her shoulders and shake her until she comes to her senses. While the character garners a lot of sympathy, she's not particularly likable. The very handsome and immensely appealing Ben Chaplin (previously seen in *The Truth About Cats and Dogs*) plays his role with the exact amount of mystery required to keep the audience guessing whether he is after her fortune, or is really in love with her. Maggie Smith is one of the finest actresses alive and raises the level of the movie considerably with her portrayal of the well-meaning aunt. Finney is marvelous, of course, as the father who threatens to disinherit his daughter for her disobedience, but the daughter is willing to risk that for the man she loves. But does her ardent suitor still want her without her fortune? This is only one instance where *Washington Square* differs from *The Heiress*. Another instance is the ability to stick with it. It is a handsome movie that is as tedious as a dripping faucet, offering too little story in too long of a movie. This [[adjusting]], like 1949's *The Heiress*, is based on the [[Hendrik]] [[Jacobo]] [[newer]]. *The Heiress*, starring Olivia de Havilland, remains as a well-respected piece of [[collaboration]], [[while]] less [[veritable]] to James' original [[storytelling]] than this [[nouveau]] [[redo]], which retains James' original title. It is the story of a awkward, yet loving [[daughters]] (Leigh), devoted to her father (Finney) after her mother dies during childbirth. The arrogant father holds his daughter in no esteem whatsoever, and considers her, as well as all women, simpleminded. When a young man (Chaplin) of good family and little fortune comes courting, the Father is naturally suspicious, but feeling so sure that his daughter could hold no interest for any man, is convinced that the young man is a fortune hunter and forbids her to see him. Leigh is a controversial actress – most either love her or hate her – and she always has a particular edginess and tenseness to her style, like she's acting through gritted teeth. She's not bad in this, and she handles her role relatively deftly – it's just an awkward role for any actress, making the audience want to grab the character by her shoulders and shake her until she comes to her senses. While the character garners a lot of sympathy, she's not particularly likable. The very handsome and immensely appealing Ben Chaplin (previously seen in *The Truth About Cats and Dogs*) plays his role with the exact amount of mystery required to keep the audience guessing whether he is after her fortune, or is really in love with her. Maggie Smith is one of the finest actresses alive and raises the level of the movie considerably with her portrayal of the well-meaning aunt. Finney is marvelous, of course, as the father who threatens to disinherit his daughter for her disobedience, but the daughter is willing to risk that for the man she loves. But does her ardent suitor still want her without her fortune? This is only one instance where *Washington Square* differs from *The Heiress*. Another instance is the ability to stick with it. It is a handsome movie that is as tedious as a dripping faucet, offering too little story in too long of a movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3703 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I can't [[believe]] I [[watched]] this [[expecting]] more. It [[starts]] out OK. This [[movie]] pushes the limits of reality way to far!! At [[least]] the first one was somewhat realistic. It rips off the first [[movie]] and even mentions the Joshua Project. Anyone who knows anything about [[computers]] will hate this movie. It does have one good message in it [[though]], WATCH OUT FOR BIG BROTHER!!! The movie just makes it [[seem]] like Big Brother is way bigger than he actually is in reality. That was very aggravating. Even the make-up on the [[actors]] was [[completely]] [[bad]]. Some of the acting is pretty [[good]]. Some of the acting is really bad though. The script was OK at some points and completely messed up at other parts. This movie plays on convenience about every five minutes. Like I said, I can't believe I watched it expecting more. I think I am gonna pop in the original to get back to earth...Q I can't [[think]] I [[observed]] this [[awaits]] more. It [[launched]] out OK. This [[cinematography]] pushes the limits of reality way to far!! At [[fewest]] the first one was somewhat realistic. It rips off the first [[cinematographic]] and even mentions the Joshua Project. Anyone who knows anything about [[calculators]] will hate this movie. It does have one good message in it [[despite]], WATCH OUT FOR BIG BROTHER!!! The movie just makes it [[seems]] like Big Brother is way bigger than he actually is in reality. That was very aggravating. Even the make-up on the [[protagonists]] was [[totally]] [[naughty]]. Some of the acting is pretty [[alright]]. Some of the acting is really bad though. The script was OK at some points and completely messed up at other parts. This movie plays on convenience about every five minutes. Like I said, I can't believe I watched it expecting more. I think I am gonna pop in the original to get back to earth...Q --------------------------------------------- Result 3704 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I bought the DVD of Before Sunset and saw it for the first time a week ago. Having saw it twice, I couldn't help but missing Before Sunrise, not because the sequel was not as great, but I felt that these two movies completed each other like no other sequels ever did, every time I finished watching one of them, I feel the need and yearning to see the other. So, I ended up spending the [[weeks]] [[watching]] both of them repeatedly, I will be quite embarrassed to [[mention]] how many times exactly. The most [[remarkable]] [[thing]] about Before [[Sunrise]] is how you feel the development of the feelings of their characters towards each other. It sounds so simple, the growing of the chemistry, I think other romantic films might think that they succeed to track the development, but to me - who doesn't believe in Nora Ephron - Before Sunrise is the first film to really gives the viewers chance to feel it. When I saw it for the first time, about 8 year ago when I was 20, I already liked it. But, I didn't rate it as a "great film", it still seemed to me like another thinking persons' feel good movie, Linklater was too smart to make it more realistic, it was 10 minutes too long, the characters was too well fabricated, I thought I liked it because it was like a dream and because I enjoyed their conversations, etc. etc.. But now, thanks to Before Sunset, I feel that's more to Before Sunrise than what I felt for it before. I saw the elements more clearly: Jesse, Celine, Vienna, their conversations, everything. How each of them are separated element by itself, and they have a chance to mix, the story is just a frame of time, I am no longer feel manipulated. And the freedom that every scene has, as well as its refusal to be overly efficient, how blind I was that those qualities didn't strike me as exceptional when I first saw it! Now, 8 year have passed, the more movies I've seen, the more I realize that many movies are just collections of ordered scenes that only exist for the sake of its ending, even movies like Pulp Fiction or Linklaters's own Slackers included. The Jesse and Celine tale avoid that, maybe Before Sunset is a better example in this case, but Before Sunrise is also one of few films that its ending is just a consequence of time, not a destination, every single scene has its own life. I don't know whether Linklater or anyone else had a sequel in mind when they made Before Sunrise, but to me, one of the most amazing things about these sequels are how these two films visually contrast each other. Before Sunrise which I think employs more static angels and brighter color schemes, seems to try to capture the smallest atoms of liveliness surrounding Jesse and Celine, the world is always full of hope whether or not the characters feel it. Meanwhile, I enter the vision of boredom as Jesse stuck talking to the journalists in Before Sunset, and Celine's first smile from behind the shelves are the most heartbreaking smile I've seen in a beginning of a film, and the many moving shots after that takes me to a place I don't know with a sadness in me, no matter how beautiful Paris is, and no matter how happy I am that they meet again. I'm sorry that I go on this long with my limited English, Before Sunrise is already an extraordinary film without me pouring my scattered thoughts, and it gets even better with an equally great sequel following it. I bought the DVD of Before Sunset and saw it for the first time a week ago. Having saw it twice, I couldn't help but missing Before Sunrise, not because the sequel was not as great, but I felt that these two movies completed each other like no other sequels ever did, every time I finished watching one of them, I feel the need and yearning to see the other. So, I ended up spending the [[chow]] [[staring]] both of them repeatedly, I will be quite embarrassed to [[referenced]] how many times exactly. The most [[sumptuous]] [[stuff]] about Before [[Sunup]] is how you feel the development of the feelings of their characters towards each other. It sounds so simple, the growing of the chemistry, I think other romantic films might think that they succeed to track the development, but to me - who doesn't believe in Nora Ephron - Before Sunrise is the first film to really gives the viewers chance to feel it. When I saw it for the first time, about 8 year ago when I was 20, I already liked it. But, I didn't rate it as a "great film", it still seemed to me like another thinking persons' feel good movie, Linklater was too smart to make it more realistic, it was 10 minutes too long, the characters was too well fabricated, I thought I liked it because it was like a dream and because I enjoyed their conversations, etc. etc.. But now, thanks to Before Sunset, I feel that's more to Before Sunrise than what I felt for it before. I saw the elements more clearly: Jesse, Celine, Vienna, their conversations, everything. How each of them are separated element by itself, and they have a chance to mix, the story is just a frame of time, I am no longer feel manipulated. And the freedom that every scene has, as well as its refusal to be overly efficient, how blind I was that those qualities didn't strike me as exceptional when I first saw it! Now, 8 year have passed, the more movies I've seen, the more I realize that many movies are just collections of ordered scenes that only exist for the sake of its ending, even movies like Pulp Fiction or Linklaters's own Slackers included. The Jesse and Celine tale avoid that, maybe Before Sunset is a better example in this case, but Before Sunrise is also one of few films that its ending is just a consequence of time, not a destination, every single scene has its own life. I don't know whether Linklater or anyone else had a sequel in mind when they made Before Sunrise, but to me, one of the most amazing things about these sequels are how these two films visually contrast each other. Before Sunrise which I think employs more static angels and brighter color schemes, seems to try to capture the smallest atoms of liveliness surrounding Jesse and Celine, the world is always full of hope whether or not the characters feel it. Meanwhile, I enter the vision of boredom as Jesse stuck talking to the journalists in Before Sunset, and Celine's first smile from behind the shelves are the most heartbreaking smile I've seen in a beginning of a film, and the many moving shots after that takes me to a place I don't know with a sadness in me, no matter how beautiful Paris is, and no matter how happy I am that they meet again. I'm sorry that I go on this long with my limited English, Before Sunrise is already an extraordinary film without me pouring my scattered thoughts, and it gets even better with an equally great sequel following it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3705 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (86%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This movie tackles child abduction from the point of view of a Mom (lisa Hartman Black) who acts like a man would in an action thriller. Unlike other movies where the focus is on the Police, here the Mom is tracking down her ex-husband who kidnapped their son. She gets help from her lawyer who eventually falls in love with her.

Before finally catching up with her son, a lot of [[bizarre]] things happen. The Mom tries to take a child that looks like her son from a local Children's Play at a community theater. She gets caught, and then realizes it is not her child. That alone would have gotten most people put into the Mental Ward or a few months in jail waiting for trial. However, in this movie the Mom is release after a couple of hours because the victim's parents feel sorry for her. A little while later Mom breaks into her mother-in-law's house and then the Police arrive and they have their guns aimed at her but they let her run away because they recognize her (and feel sorry for her?).

At another point in the story they have found the child, but when the Police arrive to search the house it turns out they left out the back door and got into the river on a dinghy that apparently the Dad kept around just for such an emergency escape! The Mom gets someone to lend her a raft, and even though it must have taken some time (in a real world), she and the lawyer-boyfriend, and the Police catch up to the other raft pretty fast and it is upside down in the water by landfall. Instead of getting out of the raft to search for the Dad on the land, Mom presumes he drowned the boy and she jumps into the water when she sees his life-jacket. Of course, she cannot swim and sinks like a rock. The lawyer saves her, but they miss a chance to run after the Dad. At one point the Mom is told her son died at a Clinic in Mexico. On and on it goes, and where it stops nobody knows! In some ways, this movie really exploits child abduction and it is not very positive. On the other hand, seeing a woman do all the crazy things that men do in these kind of movies was fun (or funny?). This movie tackles child abduction from the point of view of a Mom (lisa Hartman Black) who acts like a man would in an action thriller. Unlike other movies where the focus is on the Police, here the Mom is tracking down her ex-husband who kidnapped their son. She gets help from her lawyer who eventually falls in love with her.

Before finally catching up with her son, a lot of [[surreal]] things happen. The Mom tries to take a child that looks like her son from a local Children's Play at a community theater. She gets caught, and then realizes it is not her child. That alone would have gotten most people put into the Mental Ward or a few months in jail waiting for trial. However, in this movie the Mom is release after a couple of hours because the victim's parents feel sorry for her. A little while later Mom breaks into her mother-in-law's house and then the Police arrive and they have their guns aimed at her but they let her run away because they recognize her (and feel sorry for her?).

At another point in the story they have found the child, but when the Police arrive to search the house it turns out they left out the back door and got into the river on a dinghy that apparently the Dad kept around just for such an emergency escape! The Mom gets someone to lend her a raft, and even though it must have taken some time (in a real world), she and the lawyer-boyfriend, and the Police catch up to the other raft pretty fast and it is upside down in the water by landfall. Instead of getting out of the raft to search for the Dad on the land, Mom presumes he drowned the boy and she jumps into the water when she sees his life-jacket. Of course, she cannot swim and sinks like a rock. The lawyer saves her, but they miss a chance to run after the Dad. At one point the Mom is told her son died at a Clinic in Mexico. On and on it goes, and where it stops nobody knows! In some ways, this movie really exploits child abduction and it is not very positive. On the other hand, seeing a woman do all the crazy things that men do in these kind of movies was fun (or funny?). --------------------------------------------- Result 3706 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]]

An old man works as a janitor in a mental hospital to be close to his wife who is a patient there and to try to get her out.

This is [[surely]] one of the most forgotten masterpieces of the silent [[era]] and an oddity in the history of Japanese cinema. [[Long]] thought [[lost]], a [[print]] was found in the 70s and a music soundtrack added to it, which [[fits]] [[perfectly]] with the images. It might have been influenced by cabinet of doctor Caligary (director Kinugasa claimed he never saw the German film). However it surpasses it in style and in its more convincing (and chilly) portray of the inner mental state of the inmates in the asylum. To achieve this, the film makes use of every single film technique available at the time: multiple exposures and out of focus subjective point of view, tilted camera angles, fast and slow motion, expressionist lighting and superimpositions among others. It is also a very complicated film to follow, as it has not got intertitles.

The film opens with a montage of shots of rain hitting the windows of the hospital, wind shaking trees and of thunder. The unsettling weather metaphors the mental condition of the patients and introduces one of the them: a former dancer. The combination of sounds produced by rain, wind and thunder serves as the music that incites the dancer to get into a frantic, almost hypnotic dance. In another sequence involving the same patient engaged in another [[frenzied]] dance, she is being watched by other [[inmates]]. [[Multiple]] exposures of the [[dancer]] represent the patients' point of [[view]] and their confused "view" of the world.

These are just two [[examples]] from this [[amazing]] [[film]] trying to represent the patients' [[subconscious]] and [[view]] of the "sane" [[world]].

In three [[words]] A [[MUST]] SEE.

An old man works as a janitor in a mental hospital to be close to his wife who is a patient there and to try to get her out.

This is [[undeniably]] one of the most forgotten masterpieces of the silent [[epoch]] and an oddity in the history of Japanese cinema. [[Lengthy]] thought [[forfeited]], a [[fingerprints]] was found in the 70s and a music soundtrack added to it, which [[adjusts]] [[altogether]] with the images. It might have been influenced by cabinet of doctor Caligary (director Kinugasa claimed he never saw the German film). However it surpasses it in style and in its more convincing (and chilly) portray of the inner mental state of the inmates in the asylum. To achieve this, the film makes use of every single film technique available at the time: multiple exposures and out of focus subjective point of view, tilted camera angles, fast and slow motion, expressionist lighting and superimpositions among others. It is also a very complicated film to follow, as it has not got intertitles.

The film opens with a montage of shots of rain hitting the windows of the hospital, wind shaking trees and of thunder. The unsettling weather metaphors the mental condition of the patients and introduces one of the them: a former dancer. The combination of sounds produced by rain, wind and thunder serves as the music that incites the dancer to get into a frantic, almost hypnotic dance. In another sequence involving the same patient engaged in another [[frenetic]] dance, she is being watched by other [[detainees]]. [[Innumerable]] exposures of the [[dancers]] represent the patients' point of [[vista]] and their confused "view" of the world.

These are just two [[instance]] from this [[unbelievable]] [[cinematography]] trying to represent the patients' [[oblivious]] and [[visualizing]] of the "sane" [[worldwide]].

In three [[mots]] A [[SHOULD]] SEE. --------------------------------------------- Result 3707 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This Lifetime style [[movie]] takes the middle aged divorcee victim who then finally fights back [[genre]] to new depths of cartoon-like [[absurdity]].

Here the 40 something stay-at-home ex-wife of a successful lawyer protagonist (daughter away at college) is starting a new life after her divorce, helped by a female college friend in opening a new dress shop as a sort of franchise expansion deal. She has even started up a [[friendship]] with her attractive, slightly younger perhaps, landscape architect / gardener (who's black). But then horror of middle-aged women's horrors, ANOTHER 20 something female she took on as a tenant to let a room to, starts 'taking over" her life.

What this new younger woman threat really does is mildly flirt with the [[gardener]], and offer him a glass of wine that * gasp * really belonged to the divorcee!! She runs up the utility bills by not turning down the thermostat!! And backed up the toilet! And leaves old food gone bad in the refrigerator! And hangs her pieces of (African) artwork in the living room!! And so on. Well she may have killed the cat as well. Yeah, ok, the extent to which this one does these things is bad enough, but its more than a little ridiculous, especially as it turns into a campaign. The character reality is that any tiny part of this would drive this particular prissy woman insane. (So why did she rent the room -- and to horror of horrors, a much younger woman?)

Supposedly this increasingly arrogant (natch) younger woman has a mania for seizing control. And our brave 40 something must learn to fight back against this evil (and erotically hot looking, of course) 20 something. But there's this problem. Anytime the 20 something starts to maybe get into trouble she uses her POWER -- and just flirts or has sex with some guy, and escapes the consequences. (Well, there actually is something to that capability of good looking 20 somethings. It just isn't * generally * used in quite this sort of way.)

The premise is moved along by the device of the 20 something conning the divorcee into formalizing their room rental deal with a written lease produced by her. Of course the 40 something doesn't know about these things, and the 20 something has had help. The lease actually gives the younger woman equal right to the whole house during the rental period, with utilities thrown in at the fixed price. Even though an eviction proceeding is soon pending, the 20 something soon gets a temporary restraining order against the older woman, supposedly because she has been threatening the 20 something. You know, the judge is sympathetic to all the woe-is-me of the sexy sweet young thing. Finally the 40 something's "heroic" battle back for THE HOUSE then begins. Woopie!!

The only realistic or perceptive thing in this movie is how horrificly easy TRO's (or orders of protection) are for women to get on nothing more than her unsubstantiated say so -- although they are generally only this easy against men. They are sometimes just as unjustified and just as motivated to seize control of a home as it is here. Indeed, girlfriends who have moved in with their boyfriends can often get them evicted from their own homes or condos on the basis of no proof whatsoever, but only an unsubstantiated claim of threats, and sometimes without even hearing his side. Even when there is a hearing, it is routinely impossible to rebut claims of threats (to prove a negative), when the burden of proof is effectively on the accused, rather than the accuser. (This is one of the only areas of American law where that is true -- and it's a signal outrage of feminist overreaching, and the failure of any organized group to resist the steamroller.) Of course that's not likely to be the subject of any Lifetime movie in this lifetime.

The absurd basic premise of this movie relies upon the explanation that the 20 something is psychotic, and isn't taking her medicine. Even so it makes no sense. She isn't after the successful lawyer ex-husband, though she does con his help (to the ex wife's fury) in her quest. She's after THE HOUSE (technically, to drive the divorcee out of it during the period of the lease). This second younger woman is after ALL THAT'S LEFT after the divorce, after affairs with other 20 somethings STOLE her husband!! (The ex-husband seems unattached and basically solicitous after his fling -- doesn't matter, he still strayed!!!)

The protagonist is good enough looking for her age. But her outlook, attitude and focus is so small minded, frumpy and utterly without imagination or life force that it's impossible to care about her. Well, a core group of Lifetime fans care, I guess, judging by the average score the small number of raters gave it. (I kept watching it only because it was so extremely bad and cartoonish that it had a camp appeal. I couldn't resist seeing just how far they'd take it.)

** Spoiler ** (if such a thing is possible with this flick).

Well, here's a clue. The movie ends with the 20 something getting bailed out of jail by promising to "listen to" her 20 something male co-worker and sometimes lover, and "do whatever he says" and "let him take care of her" (he means get her to keep taking her medicine) -- and then tricking him and returning to THE HOUSE. There she climbs the stairs with a knife, demonicly stalking her nemesis 40 something, who is taking a bath by candlelight, secure in the thought that the younger woman is out of her life. There's a struggle -- and the 40 something mom wins -- by sticking the 20 something with a hypodermic needle full of anti-psychotic medicine she had found. She then begins stroking her, mom like, and the two women have a bonding, female solidarity moment!!! How sweet. This Lifetime style [[kino]] takes the middle aged divorcee victim who then finally fights back [[genera]] to new depths of cartoon-like [[claptrap]].

Here the 40 something stay-at-home ex-wife of a successful lawyer protagonist (daughter away at college) is starting a new life after her divorce, helped by a female college friend in opening a new dress shop as a sort of franchise expansion deal. She has even started up a [[amity]] with her attractive, slightly younger perhaps, landscape architect / gardener (who's black). But then horror of middle-aged women's horrors, ANOTHER 20 something female she took on as a tenant to let a room to, starts 'taking over" her life.

What this new younger woman threat really does is mildly flirt with the [[landscaper]], and offer him a glass of wine that * gasp * really belonged to the divorcee!! She runs up the utility bills by not turning down the thermostat!! And backed up the toilet! And leaves old food gone bad in the refrigerator! And hangs her pieces of (African) artwork in the living room!! And so on. Well she may have killed the cat as well. Yeah, ok, the extent to which this one does these things is bad enough, but its more than a little ridiculous, especially as it turns into a campaign. The character reality is that any tiny part of this would drive this particular prissy woman insane. (So why did she rent the room -- and to horror of horrors, a much younger woman?)

Supposedly this increasingly arrogant (natch) younger woman has a mania for seizing control. And our brave 40 something must learn to fight back against this evil (and erotically hot looking, of course) 20 something. But there's this problem. Anytime the 20 something starts to maybe get into trouble she uses her POWER -- and just flirts or has sex with some guy, and escapes the consequences. (Well, there actually is something to that capability of good looking 20 somethings. It just isn't * generally * used in quite this sort of way.)

The premise is moved along by the device of the 20 something conning the divorcee into formalizing their room rental deal with a written lease produced by her. Of course the 40 something doesn't know about these things, and the 20 something has had help. The lease actually gives the younger woman equal right to the whole house during the rental period, with utilities thrown in at the fixed price. Even though an eviction proceeding is soon pending, the 20 something soon gets a temporary restraining order against the older woman, supposedly because she has been threatening the 20 something. You know, the judge is sympathetic to all the woe-is-me of the sexy sweet young thing. Finally the 40 something's "heroic" battle back for THE HOUSE then begins. Woopie!!

The only realistic or perceptive thing in this movie is how horrificly easy TRO's (or orders of protection) are for women to get on nothing more than her unsubstantiated say so -- although they are generally only this easy against men. They are sometimes just as unjustified and just as motivated to seize control of a home as it is here. Indeed, girlfriends who have moved in with their boyfriends can often get them evicted from their own homes or condos on the basis of no proof whatsoever, but only an unsubstantiated claim of threats, and sometimes without even hearing his side. Even when there is a hearing, it is routinely impossible to rebut claims of threats (to prove a negative), when the burden of proof is effectively on the accused, rather than the accuser. (This is one of the only areas of American law where that is true -- and it's a signal outrage of feminist overreaching, and the failure of any organized group to resist the steamroller.) Of course that's not likely to be the subject of any Lifetime movie in this lifetime.

The absurd basic premise of this movie relies upon the explanation that the 20 something is psychotic, and isn't taking her medicine. Even so it makes no sense. She isn't after the successful lawyer ex-husband, though she does con his help (to the ex wife's fury) in her quest. She's after THE HOUSE (technically, to drive the divorcee out of it during the period of the lease). This second younger woman is after ALL THAT'S LEFT after the divorce, after affairs with other 20 somethings STOLE her husband!! (The ex-husband seems unattached and basically solicitous after his fling -- doesn't matter, he still strayed!!!)

The protagonist is good enough looking for her age. But her outlook, attitude and focus is so small minded, frumpy and utterly without imagination or life force that it's impossible to care about her. Well, a core group of Lifetime fans care, I guess, judging by the average score the small number of raters gave it. (I kept watching it only because it was so extremely bad and cartoonish that it had a camp appeal. I couldn't resist seeing just how far they'd take it.)

** Spoiler ** (if such a thing is possible with this flick).

Well, here's a clue. The movie ends with the 20 something getting bailed out of jail by promising to "listen to" her 20 something male co-worker and sometimes lover, and "do whatever he says" and "let him take care of her" (he means get her to keep taking her medicine) -- and then tricking him and returning to THE HOUSE. There she climbs the stairs with a knife, demonicly stalking her nemesis 40 something, who is taking a bath by candlelight, secure in the thought that the younger woman is out of her life. There's a struggle -- and the 40 something mom wins -- by sticking the 20 something with a hypodermic needle full of anti-psychotic medicine she had found. She then begins stroking her, mom like, and the two women have a bonding, female solidarity moment!!! How sweet. --------------------------------------------- Result 3708 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] Fox's "The True Story Of Jesse James" (1957) is a remarkably [[poor]] widescreen [[remake]] of their prestigious 1939 Tyrone Power/Henry Fonda classic "Jesse James". I'm not sure where the fault lies but the casting in this version of the two central characters, the [[uneven]] direction of Nicholas Ray and the ham-fisted [[screenplay]] must [[surely]] have something to do with it.

In the late thirties and forties Tyrone Power was Fox's top leading man but in the fifties his star began to wane and studio head Darryl Zanuck started to groom newcomer Robert Wagner to take his place. This was a major error on Zanuck's part as Wagner proved to be a less than a suitable replacement. With the possible exceptions of "Broken Lance" (1954) and "Between Heaven & Hell" (1956) it is hard to think of Wagner distinguishing himself in anything! Also, Jeffrey Hunter was nothing more than a Fox contract player before being assigned to play Frank James to Wagner's Jesse in "The True Story Of Jesse James". Borrowed from the studio the previous year this actor's one distinguishing mark was his excellent and revealing performance in John Ford's classic "The Searchers". But his playing here, along with Wagner as the second half of the James Brothers, is nothing short of boring. Neither player bring any personality or colour to their respective roles. They totally miss the mark, lacking the charisma and appeal so vividly displayed by Power and Fonda in the original. The movie is also marred by too many flashbacks and with the all over the place screenplay Wagner, as the Robin Hood of the American west, comes across as a charmless introverted twit that you can feel no empathy for whatsoever. The supporting cast are hardly worth mentioning but it is a shame to see such a great actress as Agnes Moorhead barely getting a look in as Ma James.

The best aspects of this uninvolving so-so western is the wonderful Cinemascope/Colour cinematography by the great Joe McDonald and the excellent music score by the underrated and little known composer Leigh Harline! Fox's "The True Story Of Jesse James" (1957) is a remarkably [[poorest]] widescreen [[redo]] of their prestigious 1939 Tyrone Power/Henry Fonda classic "Jesse James". I'm not sure where the fault lies but the casting in this version of the two central characters, the [[lopsided]] direction of Nicholas Ray and the ham-fisted [[scenarios]] must [[indubitably]] have something to do with it.

In the late thirties and forties Tyrone Power was Fox's top leading man but in the fifties his star began to wane and studio head Darryl Zanuck started to groom newcomer Robert Wagner to take his place. This was a major error on Zanuck's part as Wagner proved to be a less than a suitable replacement. With the possible exceptions of "Broken Lance" (1954) and "Between Heaven & Hell" (1956) it is hard to think of Wagner distinguishing himself in anything! Also, Jeffrey Hunter was nothing more than a Fox contract player before being assigned to play Frank James to Wagner's Jesse in "The True Story Of Jesse James". Borrowed from the studio the previous year this actor's one distinguishing mark was his excellent and revealing performance in John Ford's classic "The Searchers". But his playing here, along with Wagner as the second half of the James Brothers, is nothing short of boring. Neither player bring any personality or colour to their respective roles. They totally miss the mark, lacking the charisma and appeal so vividly displayed by Power and Fonda in the original. The movie is also marred by too many flashbacks and with the all over the place screenplay Wagner, as the Robin Hood of the American west, comes across as a charmless introverted twit that you can feel no empathy for whatsoever. The supporting cast are hardly worth mentioning but it is a shame to see such a great actress as Agnes Moorhead barely getting a look in as Ma James.

The best aspects of this uninvolving so-so western is the wonderful Cinemascope/Colour cinematography by the great Joe McDonald and the excellent music score by the underrated and little known composer Leigh Harline! --------------------------------------------- Result 3709 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I basically skimmed through the movie but just enough to catch watch the plot was about. To tell you the truth it was kind of boring to me and at some spots it didn't make sense. The only reason I watched this movie in the first place was to see CHACE CRAWFORD!!! He is so hot, but in this movie his hair was kind of weird. But still hot.

However, [[despite]] how hot CHACE is, it really did not make up for the film. I guess the plot isn't that bad but what really threw me over was the fact that they cuss in like every sentence. Is it that hard to express your anger without saying the F word every time?The cussing was annoying and the whole flashy, camera shaking thing gave me a headache.

All in all, although the plot was OK, I found the film to be a bore and over dramatic. That's why I only cut to scenes with CHACE in it. LOL Anyways, not worth renting unless your a die-hard fan of a specific cast member like I was. Oh yeah the cast was Hot. The girls were HOT!!! But CHACE IS THE BEST!! I basically skimmed through the movie but just enough to catch watch the plot was about. To tell you the truth it was kind of boring to me and at some spots it didn't make sense. The only reason I watched this movie in the first place was to see CHACE CRAWFORD!!! He is so hot, but in this movie his hair was kind of weird. But still hot.

However, [[while]] how hot CHACE is, it really did not make up for the film. I guess the plot isn't that bad but what really threw me over was the fact that they cuss in like every sentence. Is it that hard to express your anger without saying the F word every time?The cussing was annoying and the whole flashy, camera shaking thing gave me a headache.

All in all, although the plot was OK, I found the film to be a bore and over dramatic. That's why I only cut to scenes with CHACE in it. LOL Anyways, not worth renting unless your a die-hard fan of a specific cast member like I was. Oh yeah the cast was Hot. The girls were HOT!!! But CHACE IS THE BEST!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3710 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Laputa: castle in the sky is the bomb. The message is as [[strong]] as his newer works and more [[pure]], fantastic and flying pirates how could it be any better! The art is [[totally]] [[amazing]] and the soundtrack, which is reused many times after this, (im not sure if this was the first time i [[heard]] it) and evokes in me the most emotional [[sentimental]] [[response]] of any movie soundtrack. Sheeta, the female [[lead]] in this movie is totally awesome and the [[boy]], Pazu is also a great role-model--he [[lives]] on his own! The plot is [[classic]] [[Miyazaki]]. I won't give it away, but the [[end]] is really [[great]]. I [[rank]] this as one of Miyazaki's three [[best]] with Nausicaa and [[Spirited]] Away. [[Also]] you [[may]] [[want]] to [[check]] out Howl's [[Moving]] Castle when it [[comes]] out ([[sometime]] [[next]] [[year]] i [[hope]]) [[If]] you like Miyazaki [[check]] this one out as it [[readily]] [[available]] in the [[USA]]. [[Enjoy]], [[Piper]] A Laputa: castle in the sky is the bomb. The message is as [[forceful]] as his newer works and more [[unadulterated]], fantastic and flying pirates how could it be any better! The art is [[altogether]] [[unbelievable]] and the soundtrack, which is reused many times after this, (im not sure if this was the first time i [[listened]] it) and evokes in me the most emotional [[emotional]] [[riposte]] of any movie soundtrack. Sheeta, the female [[culminate]] in this movie is totally awesome and the [[dude]], Pazu is also a great role-model--he [[vie]] on his own! The plot is [[typical]] [[Hayao]]. I won't give it away, but the [[termination]] is really [[huge]]. I [[grades]] this as one of Miyazaki's three [[nicest]] with Nausicaa and [[Vibrant]] Away. [[Moreover]] you [[maggio]] [[wanna]] to [[checking]] out Howl's [[Shifting]] Castle when it [[arrives]] out ([[occasionally]] [[imminent]] [[annum]] i [[expectancy]]) [[Unless]] you like Miyazaki [[verifying]] this one out as it [[conveniently]] [[approachable]] in the [[US]]. [[Enjoying]], [[Bagpipe]] A --------------------------------------------- Result 3711 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] - After their sons are sentenced to life in prison, Adelle ([[Debbie]] Reynolds) and Helen (Shirley [[Winters]]) begin receiving threatening phone calls because someone fells their sons got off easy. The pair decides to move to California to escape the publicity of the trial and to start a new life. They [[start]] a [[dance]] school that is soon very successful. One of the students has a rich unmarried father with whom Adelle quickly falls in love. In the meantime, Helen is busy raising rabbits and becoming a little too infatuated with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of time before everything falls apart and the women enter a world of madness and murder.

- I can't help but compare What's the Matter with Helen? to Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?, also starring Shelly Winters. Where that movie seemed almost restrained in its presentation of Auntie Roo's madness, there's nothing holding Helen back in this movie. It may take a good deal of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, [[Helen]] is one Bad Mad Mutha. You don't want to mess with her. Winters is so [[delightfully]] demented that it was impossible for me not to enjoy her performance. I'm not going to spoil the movie, but the things Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.

- As good as Winters is, Reynolds is totally ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging tap dancer. I got the impression that she thought she was in a movie that would get her nominated for some award. This ain't Citizen Kane! Quit acting so serious. Hey, [[Debbie]], don't you realize that you're main purpose is to be a victim of Winters' insanity.

- I just [[love]] these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career horror movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as [[fun]] as any. - After their sons are sentenced to life in prison, Adelle ([[Dubai]] Reynolds) and Helen (Shirley [[Winter]]) begin receiving threatening phone calls because someone fells their sons got off easy. The pair decides to move to California to escape the publicity of the trial and to start a new life. They [[lancer]] a [[dances]] school that is soon very successful. One of the students has a rich unmarried father with whom Adelle quickly falls in love. In the meantime, Helen is busy raising rabbits and becoming a little too infatuated with an evangelist on the radio. It's only a mater of time before everything falls apart and the women enter a world of madness and murder.

- I can't help but compare What's the Matter with Helen? to Whoever Slew Auntie Roo?, also starring Shelly Winters. Where that movie seemed almost restrained in its presentation of Auntie Roo's madness, there's nothing holding Helen back in this movie. It may take a good deal of the movie's running time, but once she snaps, [[Hackett]] is one Bad Mad Mutha. You don't want to mess with her. Winters is so [[divinely]] demented that it was impossible for me not to enjoy her performance. I'm not going to spoil the movie, but the things Helen is capable of are totally over-the-top.

- As good as Winters is, Reynolds is totally ridiculous in her role as the gold-digging tap dancer. I got the impression that she thought she was in a movie that would get her nominated for some award. This ain't Citizen Kane! Quit acting so serious. Hey, [[Dubai]], don't you realize that you're main purpose is to be a victim of Winters' insanity.

- I just [[iove]] these former-female-stars-in-the-twilight-of-their-career horror movies. What's the Matter with Helen? is as [[droll]] as any. --------------------------------------------- Result 3712 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terry Gilliam's stunning feature-length adaptation of Chris Marker's short film LA JETEE is full of mind-bending surprises, yet still touches your heart thanks to the superb cast. Gilliam's flair for the phantasmagorical works with the script by David and Janet Peoples to play with your head as much as it does with poor James Cole (Willis at his most Steve McQueen-like -- better than McQueen, even!), a time-traveling convict from the future who literally doesn't know whether he's coming or going as a team of scientists keeps sending him back to the wrong eras while trying to prevent a 1995 plague that's deadly to humans but harmless to animals. Willis, the justifiably Oscar-nominated Brad Pitt, and Madeline Stowe as a well-meaning psychiatrist give some of the best performances of their careers. Even Paul Buckmaster's tango-style score is haunting. This one's a don't-miss! --------------------------------------------- Result 3713 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm a big mark for the music of Neil [[Young]], and with that and the glowing praise the film received in many alt-indie press circles, hit the first [[showing]] of Greendale I could find. My excitement was short-lived, as this turgid storyline and [[weak]] lyrical momentum [[left]] most filmgoers either [[asleep]] or disappointed.

Neil says the film [[started]] as a soundtrack, and the characters [[came]] to life so much that they just filmed the soundtrack. Not the best way to craft a story. No character really has an arc, and when "significant" events do happen, the viewer doesn't cared, because film technique annoyance levels are so high by that point. The film is all song, and to that end, the characters on end mouth the lyrics as they're sung...the technique works for the first stanza it is done, and is grating on the nerves after that. It doesn't feel real or fake, it just feels unwelcome.

Terrible acting, with characters finding one mood and playing all of it. Poor lighting at times. The only kudos I can give the film are in regard to several scenes shot as newscast, but the technique is so used in cinema today that this film did little to further it. An alright soundtrack, but nothing I'm quick to buy. A [[bad]] film. I'm a big mark for the music of Neil [[Youngster]], and with that and the glowing praise the film received in many alt-indie press circles, hit the first [[display]] of Greendale I could find. My excitement was short-lived, as this turgid storyline and [[vulnerable]] lyrical momentum [[exited]] most filmgoers either [[slumber]] or disappointed.

Neil says the film [[launches]] as a soundtrack, and the characters [[became]] to life so much that they just filmed the soundtrack. Not the best way to craft a story. No character really has an arc, and when "significant" events do happen, the viewer doesn't cared, because film technique annoyance levels are so high by that point. The film is all song, and to that end, the characters on end mouth the lyrics as they're sung...the technique works for the first stanza it is done, and is grating on the nerves after that. It doesn't feel real or fake, it just feels unwelcome.

Terrible acting, with characters finding one mood and playing all of it. Poor lighting at times. The only kudos I can give the film are in regard to several scenes shot as newscast, but the technique is so used in cinema today that this film did little to further it. An alright soundtrack, but nothing I'm quick to buy. A [[wicked]] film. --------------------------------------------- Result 3714 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I first saw this movie about 20 years ago and have never [[forgotten]] it. It's beautifully filmed and the story keeps one riveted for the entire time. It's [[difficult]] to [[believe]] this was made in 1946, as the tale is still fresh today, and really makes one think. I'm not very [[knowledgeable]] regarding film technique [[however]] the special effects in this film are [[terrific]] [[considering]] when this was [[made]]. In [[addition]], the acting is superb, and the use of [[English]] and American actors quite [[astounding]]. I recently purchased the DVD so now I'm able to watch whenever I wish. I highly [[recommend]] anyone interested in post-war British films to watch this. I first saw this movie about 20 years ago and have never [[disregarded]] it. It's beautifully filmed and the story keeps one riveted for the entire time. It's [[laborious]] to [[believing]] this was made in 1946, as the tale is still fresh today, and really makes one think. I'm not very [[informed]] regarding film technique [[instead]] the special effects in this film are [[magnifique]] [[contemplating]] when this was [[effected]]. In [[supplement]], the acting is superb, and the use of [[Brits]] and American actors quite [[whopping]]. I recently purchased the DVD so now I'm able to watch whenever I wish. I highly [[recommendation]] anyone interested in post-war British films to watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3715 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This is my [[first]] CG animated film that I've ever seen. Usually, the look of other animated films made me reticent to see them. Not Ice Age. I wanted to see it the moment I saw the trailer with Scrat, the hilarious sabertooth squirrel.

Ice Age was sporadically funny and [[overall]] [[fun]] film to watch. The story is basically an animated version of Three Men and a Baby, set 20,000 years in the past. The [[visuals]] were great. Simply beautiful. It's one thing to create convincing aninmation, it's another thing altogether to create visually arresting stuff and Ice Age is great to look at with its stylized visuals. Blue Sky Studios is a company to look out for in the future. This is my [[fiirst]] CG animated film that I've ever seen. Usually, the look of other animated films made me reticent to see them. Not Ice Age. I wanted to see it the moment I saw the trailer with Scrat, the hilarious sabertooth squirrel.

Ice Age was sporadically funny and [[total]] [[droll]] film to watch. The story is basically an animated version of Three Men and a Baby, set 20,000 years in the past. The [[photographs]] were great. Simply beautiful. It's one thing to create convincing aninmation, it's another thing altogether to create visually arresting stuff and Ice Age is great to look at with its stylized visuals. Blue Sky Studios is a company to look out for in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 3716 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I didn't think it was [[possible]] for a [[horror]] [[comedy]] film to fail so abysmally on both [[fronts]]....[[really]] [[awful]]. The [[fact]] that it doesn't take itself [[seriously]] (usually a [[good]] [[thing]]) works against it, primarily because the [[actors]] are so [[wooden]] you really would swear they are reading cue cards. On the upshot though.....the MST3K [[version]], as always, has a few laughs.... I didn't think it was [[probable]] for a [[abomination]] [[charade]] film to fail so abysmally on both [[frontlines]]....[[truthfully]] [[scary]]. The [[facto]] that it doesn't take itself [[severely]] (usually a [[alright]] [[stuff]]) works against it, primarily because the [[players]] are so [[lumber]] you really would swear they are reading cue cards. On the upshot though.....the MST3K [[stepping]], as always, has a few laughs.... --------------------------------------------- Result 3717 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I'll keep the review of this program as short as [[possible]]. Skip it. Low budget, not funny, [[lousy]] [[script]]. Acting not [[quite]] as bad as the writing, but still [[bad]]. That's all you need to [[know]], but I will continue for the sake of writing more than [[necessary]].

This is a film with three segments, each one parodying some other type of movie. A MUCH funnier [[film]] with this same [[exact]] idea is "[[Movie]] [[Movie]]," with [[George]] C. Scott. [[Very]] [[obscure]], but worth [[searching]] out. [[MM]] parodied [[films]] of the 1930's, and did it with elegance, [[precision]] and [[dry]] [[wit]].

This [[movie]] did not. It parodies three [[types]] of [[films]], [[supposedly]] from the [[late]] 70's, early 80's era, only it is parodying [[films]] I've ([[almost]]) never [[heard]] of. The first is, I [[guess]], a [[parody]] of "[[Kramer]] [[Vs]]. [[Kramer]]," in a [[way]]. [[Peter]] Reigert does his best with a dirt poor [[script]]. The second is a [[parody]], of, I don't [[know]] what...a [[Danielle]] Steele [[novel]]? I [[mean]], you [[might]] see a [[story]] like this on [[Lifetime]] [[TV]], but in a [[movie]] [[theater]]? I [[mean]], I [[remember]] the 70's, I was there. This is a soap-opera [[type]] parody about a fetching [[young]] [[woman]] who sleeps her [[way]] to power. These type of [[things]] usually parody themselves, so I don't see how this was [[even]] [[necessary]].

We are on [[somewhat]] [[easier]] [[ground]] with the third segment, "The Municipalians," which parodies [[cop]] [[movies]]. I [[noted]] elements of "The [[New]] Centurians" and some "Dirty Harry", both of which were almost 10 [[years]] old when the film was [[created]]. [[Yeah]], nice and current. Robby Benson plays the idealistic [[young]] rookie (over-the-top wimpy) while Richard Widmark plays the grizzled veteran [[cop]] who [[drinks]] [[whiskey]] while [[sitting]] in the [[police]] car (OH! [[Stop]]! My sides! He's [[actually]] [[drinking]] [[booze]] in the [[Police]] [[car]]! How irreverent!) Note that this was the first [[film]] after "[[Animal]] [[House]]" to have the "National Lampoon" name attached. [[Wow]]. To go in five years from that classic flick to this [[pile]] of [[dung]] is nothing short of shocking. I could go on for hours about the sad decline that caused one of the most cutting-edge and original voices in American humor (that would be National Lampoon, the original magazine for about its first 10 years or so) to sell out and begin a long, slow slide into a world of crap, where now the magazine is long gone and it only exists as a [[brand]] name to slap on low-budget "comedy" films for a fee. Yet another reason why capitalism (and cocaine) sucks so bad.

Anyway, this movie is a serious time suck. Don't waste your 90 minutes. I want mine back. On the positive side, Fred Willard's in it! I'll keep the review of this program as short as [[doable]]. Skip it. Low budget, not funny, [[squalid]] [[hyphen]]. Acting not [[perfectly]] as bad as the writing, but still [[naughty]]. That's all you need to [[savoir]], but I will continue for the sake of writing more than [[imperative]].

This is a film with three segments, each one parodying some other type of movie. A MUCH funnier [[kino]] with this same [[correct]] idea is "[[Movies]] [[Movies]]," with [[Georges]] C. Scott. [[Tremendously]] [[ambiguous]], but worth [[looking]] out. [[MILLIMETRES]] parodied [[filmmaking]] of the 1930's, and did it with elegance, [[exact]] and [[driest]] [[witt]].

This [[film]] did not. It parodies three [[genre]] of [[cinematography]], [[reportedly]] from the [[tardy]] 70's, early 80's era, only it is parodying [[cinematography]] I've ([[hardly]]) never [[tryout]] of. The first is, I [[suppose]], a [[masquerade]] of "[[Kremer]] [[Versus]]. [[Kremer]]," in a [[path]]. [[Pieter]] Reigert does his best with a dirt poor [[screenplay]]. The second is a [[charade]], of, I don't [[savoir]] what...a [[Daniel]] Steele [[newer]]? I [[signify]], you [[apt]] see a [[conte]] like this on [[Vie]] [[TVS]], but in a [[movies]] [[teatro]]? I [[imply]], I [[recall]] the 70's, I was there. This is a soap-opera [[genre]] parody about a fetching [[youthful]] [[femme]] who sleeps her [[routes]] to power. These type of [[matters]] usually parody themselves, so I don't see how this was [[yet]] [[essential]].

We are on [[rather]] [[easy]] [[overland]] with the third segment, "The Municipalians," which parodies [[policeman]] [[movie]]. I [[highlighted]] elements of "The [[Novo]] Centurians" and some "Dirty Harry", both of which were almost 10 [[olds]] old when the film was [[generated]]. [[Yes]], nice and current. Robby Benson plays the idealistic [[youthful]] rookie (over-the-top wimpy) while Richard Widmark plays the grizzled veteran [[constable]] who [[beverages]] [[scotch]] while [[seated]] in the [[policemen]] car (OH! [[Halt]]! My sides! He's [[indeed]] [[drank]] [[alcohol]] in the [[Policeman]] [[auto]]! How irreverent!) Note that this was the first [[filmmaking]] after "[[Beasts]] [[Maison]]" to have the "National Lampoon" name attached. [[Ruff]]. To go in five years from that classic flick to this [[piling]] of [[manure]] is nothing short of shocking. I could go on for hours about the sad decline that caused one of the most cutting-edge and original voices in American humor (that would be National Lampoon, the original magazine for about its first 10 years or so) to sell out and begin a long, slow slide into a world of crap, where now the magazine is long gone and it only exists as a [[branding]] name to slap on low-budget "comedy" films for a fee. Yet another reason why capitalism (and cocaine) sucks so bad.

Anyway, this movie is a serious time suck. Don't waste your 90 minutes. I want mine back. On the positive side, Fred Willard's in it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3718 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This makes the [[third]] Errol [[Morris]] movie I've seen, and I'm [[increasingly]] not [[liking]] his style. He seems to find very interesting and varied characters, great personalities to [[create]] documentaries for, and then with tongue-in-cheek editing make fun of everything they are about. It's never really a direct caricaturation of them and Morris [[seems]] most of the time to be saying, "But no, no, these people are really fascinating, really!", but there's always these subtle little canted angles and not-so-subtle editing techniques that show that Morris seems to be mocking them behind their back.

This movie tracks four people who break the traditional boundaries of organic separation... a man who studies African hairless molerats to find that they are amazingly ant-like, a lion tamer, a man who keeps a garden full of animal-shaped shrubbery, and a robot designer. The general theme of the film seems to [[revolve]] around the question of what designates animal, human, and life features? So the title of Fast, Cheap, & Out of Control doesn't really seem to mean anything in terms of the movie... right? Except of course Morris seems just a little disturbed by these individuals' passions (he might call them "obsessions") making synthetic designs on life. I share not that fear and honestly don't appreciate some of the connections Morris makes in the film.

But I stress his subtlety. With no voice-over narration and leaving the words entirely to the interviewees, it's not as if Morris ever pounds that anxiety onto the spectators' collective head. Instead he mixes circus footage and ant footage together often at times when they're taken out of the context of the circus and the ants, showing a sort of collective absurdity behind what all of these people are talking about. I don't find them absurd, I find them all very neat and interesting individuals.

Unless, of course, he didn't intend such juxtapositions, which means he's just a [[bad]] craftsman instead of a silent subverter. Considering none of this films I've seen so far have particularly impressed me, I don't really care to find out what he's trying to do.

--PolarisDiB This makes the [[terzi]] Errol [[Maurice]] movie I've seen, and I'm [[gradually]] not [[gusto]] his style. He seems to find very interesting and varied characters, great personalities to [[engender]] documentaries for, and then with tongue-in-cheek editing make fun of everything they are about. It's never really a direct caricaturation of them and Morris [[seem]] most of the time to be saying, "But no, no, these people are really fascinating, really!", but there's always these subtle little canted angles and not-so-subtle editing techniques that show that Morris seems to be mocking them behind their back.

This movie tracks four people who break the traditional boundaries of organic separation... a man who studies African hairless molerats to find that they are amazingly ant-like, a lion tamer, a man who keeps a garden full of animal-shaped shrubbery, and a robot designer. The general theme of the film seems to [[spin]] around the question of what designates animal, human, and life features? So the title of Fast, Cheap, & Out of Control doesn't really seem to mean anything in terms of the movie... right? Except of course Morris seems just a little disturbed by these individuals' passions (he might call them "obsessions") making synthetic designs on life. I share not that fear and honestly don't appreciate some of the connections Morris makes in the film.

But I stress his subtlety. With no voice-over narration and leaving the words entirely to the interviewees, it's not as if Morris ever pounds that anxiety onto the spectators' collective head. Instead he mixes circus footage and ant footage together often at times when they're taken out of the context of the circus and the ants, showing a sort of collective absurdity behind what all of these people are talking about. I don't find them absurd, I find them all very neat and interesting individuals.

Unless, of course, he didn't intend such juxtapositions, which means he's just a [[amiss]] craftsman instead of a silent subverter. Considering none of this films I've seen so far have particularly impressed me, I don't really care to find out what he's trying to do.

--PolarisDiB --------------------------------------------- Result 3719 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] You know all those letters to "Father Christmas" and "Jesus" that are sent every year? Well, it turns out that they are not actually delivered but dropped off in a half-forgotten corner of the post office to rot unless some bright spark figures out a way of posting them. As bizarre settings go, it's a winner and one which perfectly fits the strange movie that is "Dead Letter Office". Having said that, this is obviously an Australian film as opposed to a British one. If it was Royal Mail, most letters get this sort of [[treatment]] anyway. I haven't been in this flat for two years and we're still getting letters for a Mr Wang, some female priest of the Church of Latter Day I've-Never-Heard-Of-You and various catalogues for industrial equipment addressed to a plumbing company.

"Dead Letter Office" (the name given to the place where undeliverable mail ends up) follows the story of Alice (Miranda Otto) who grows up in a seriously divided home. Writing to her absent father, she only learns in adulthood that her letters haven't been delivered for one reason or another. So, logically, she gets a job at the D.L.O. and finds herself working alongside other social rejects including the brooding Chilean immigrant Frank Lopez (George Del Hoyo). Slowly, she finds herself drawn to him but can she find out where her dad is without bringing the self-contained world of the Dead Letters Office to its knees?

Nothing against this film but I was reminded of the god-awful Heather Graham film "Committed" while watching this. However, this is so much better than that pile of horse crap but then again, that ain't difficult. For a start, this film is much more logical. True, the metaphors are somewhat blatant and the underflowing symbolism quickly becomes a flood. But at least this is cohesive and quirky without being complete drivel. It is also well acted. Both Otto and Del Hoyo are very good as the lovers looking for something they know they'll never find while other characters are peripheral at best. Part of the trouble is that it seems to wrap up far too quickly, leaving this viewer somewhat disappointed. The other part is that when you consider Australia's draconian immigration policy (i.e. if you don't speak English, rack off!), such a story is unlikely to take place in reality. The other characters, sadly, also help to destabilise the realism by proving to be little more than odd-ball stereotypes.

Despite that, "Dead Letter Office" is certainly something a little different. It might not be to everyone's taste but I liked it. Yes, it was hackneyed and predictable but sometimes, it's nice to watch a film without guns or violence or heavy-duty swearing and nudity (no chance of that in an Australian film). There ain't any major laughs, there's no Bullet Time and the characters are usually one-dimensional. But it's the story that counts here and while it's not earth-shattering in its magnificence, it's a pleasant enough way of passing the time. It's the movie equivalent of a Sheryl Crow CD - nice to listen to now and again but you wouldn't really miss it if it wasn't there. You know all those letters to "Father Christmas" and "Jesus" that are sent every year? Well, it turns out that they are not actually delivered but dropped off in a half-forgotten corner of the post office to rot unless some bright spark figures out a way of posting them. As bizarre settings go, it's a winner and one which perfectly fits the strange movie that is "Dead Letter Office". Having said that, this is obviously an Australian film as opposed to a British one. If it was Royal Mail, most letters get this sort of [[treat]] anyway. I haven't been in this flat for two years and we're still getting letters for a Mr Wang, some female priest of the Church of Latter Day I've-Never-Heard-Of-You and various catalogues for industrial equipment addressed to a plumbing company.

"Dead Letter Office" (the name given to the place where undeliverable mail ends up) follows the story of Alice (Miranda Otto) who grows up in a seriously divided home. Writing to her absent father, she only learns in adulthood that her letters haven't been delivered for one reason or another. So, logically, she gets a job at the D.L.O. and finds herself working alongside other social rejects including the brooding Chilean immigrant Frank Lopez (George Del Hoyo). Slowly, she finds herself drawn to him but can she find out where her dad is without bringing the self-contained world of the Dead Letters Office to its knees?

Nothing against this film but I was reminded of the god-awful Heather Graham film "Committed" while watching this. However, this is so much better than that pile of horse crap but then again, that ain't difficult. For a start, this film is much more logical. True, the metaphors are somewhat blatant and the underflowing symbolism quickly becomes a flood. But at least this is cohesive and quirky without being complete drivel. It is also well acted. Both Otto and Del Hoyo are very good as the lovers looking for something they know they'll never find while other characters are peripheral at best. Part of the trouble is that it seems to wrap up far too quickly, leaving this viewer somewhat disappointed. The other part is that when you consider Australia's draconian immigration policy (i.e. if you don't speak English, rack off!), such a story is unlikely to take place in reality. The other characters, sadly, also help to destabilise the realism by proving to be little more than odd-ball stereotypes.

Despite that, "Dead Letter Office" is certainly something a little different. It might not be to everyone's taste but I liked it. Yes, it was hackneyed and predictable but sometimes, it's nice to watch a film without guns or violence or heavy-duty swearing and nudity (no chance of that in an Australian film). There ain't any major laughs, there's no Bullet Time and the characters are usually one-dimensional. But it's the story that counts here and while it's not earth-shattering in its magnificence, it's a pleasant enough way of passing the time. It's the movie equivalent of a Sheryl Crow CD - nice to listen to now and again but you wouldn't really miss it if it wasn't there. --------------------------------------------- Result 3720 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] This is shallow hedonism and/or [[social]] commentary wrapped in a tragic tale about a jealous young woman's scheme to [[drive]] apart her father and his fiancée. Is it incest or just a view through the eyes of a [[daughter]] with an Electra [[complex]]? [[Who]] cares? All of the [[characters]], except for Anne (Deborah Kerr) are vacuous and vile. Seberg is [[poor]] (I agree with the "[[boys]] with [[breasts]]" [[comment]] of an earlier [[review]]). The [[plot]] plodded. This [[predictable]] [[material]] was [[sufficient]] for about 30 [[minutes]] of [[film]] that [[unfortunately]] was stretched over an [[hour]] and a half! If you want to [[see]] [[great]] [[gowns]] and jewels on the Riviera, I recommend "To Catch a Thief" - in which you will [[get]] the [[added]] [[bonuses]] of an entertaining [[story]] and likable characters.

I [[like]] for films to entertain me. I personally don't really care where a film is set. Whatever the time or place, I [[want]] a good story - comedy or drama. I also [[want]] to see some enjoyable characters. It doesn't hurt if I can [[relate]] to them. Poor Deborah Kerr gives a typically good performance, and so does David Niven in a despicable role.

The "2" rating is solely for Kerr and Niven, and for the cinematography - the [[rich]] [[color]] scenes and the murky, foreboding black and white scenes. [[Unfortunately]], all the great cinematography in the world cannot [[salvage]] a [[poor]] [[story]] with un-enjoyable characters. A sow's ear is still a sow's ear. Consequently watching this [[mess]] was a serious [[waste]] of my time. This is shallow hedonism and/or [[sociable]] commentary wrapped in a tragic tale about a jealous young woman's scheme to [[driving]] apart her father and his fiancée. Is it incest or just a view through the eyes of a [[daughters]] with an Electra [[intricate]]? [[Whom]] cares? All of the [[trait]], except for Anne (Deborah Kerr) are vacuous and vile. Seberg is [[pauper]] (I agree with the "[[boy]] with [[boobies]]" [[observation]] of an earlier [[examine]]). The [[intrigue]] plodded. This [[foreseeable]] [[materials]] was [[adequate]] for about 30 [[mins]] of [[films]] that [[unhappily]] was stretched over an [[hora]] and a half! If you want to [[behold]] [[wondrous]] [[tunics]] and jewels on the Riviera, I recommend "To Catch a Thief" - in which you will [[got]] the [[add]] [[rewards]] of an entertaining [[conte]] and likable characters.

I [[fond]] for films to entertain me. I personally don't really care where a film is set. Whatever the time or place, I [[wanting]] a good story - comedy or drama. I also [[wanting]] to see some enjoyable characters. It doesn't hurt if I can [[relating]] to them. Poor Deborah Kerr gives a typically good performance, and so does David Niven in a despicable role.

The "2" rating is solely for Kerr and Niven, and for the cinematography - the [[richest]] [[colours]] scenes and the murky, foreboding black and white scenes. [[Regretfully]], all the great cinematography in the world cannot [[recapture]] a [[pauper]] [[saga]] with un-enjoyable characters. A sow's ear is still a sow's ear. Consequently watching this [[jumble]] was a serious [[squander]] of my time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3721 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] This is a kind of movie that will stay with you for a long time. Soha Ali and Abhay Deol both look very beautiful. Soha reminds you so much of her mother Sharmila Tagore. Abhay is a born actor and will rise a lot in the coming future.

The ending of the movie is very different from most movies. In a way you are left unsatisfied but if you really think about it in real terms, you realize that the only sensible ending was the ending shown in the movie. Otherwise, it [[would]] have been gross [[injustice]] to everyone.

The movie is about a professional witness who comes across a girl waiting to get married in court. Her boyfriend does not show up and she ends up being helped by the witness. Slowly slowly, over the time, he falls in love for her. It is not clear if she has similar feelings for him or not. Watch the movie for complete details.

The movie really belongs to Abhay. I look forward to seeing more movies from him. Soha is pretty but did not speak much in the movie. Her eyes, her innocence did most of the talking. This is a kind of movie that will stay with you for a long time. Soha Ali and Abhay Deol both look very beautiful. Soha reminds you so much of her mother Sharmila Tagore. Abhay is a born actor and will rise a lot in the coming future.

The ending of the movie is very different from most movies. In a way you are left unsatisfied but if you really think about it in real terms, you realize that the only sensible ending was the ending shown in the movie. Otherwise, it [[ought]] have been gross [[iniquity]] to everyone.

The movie is about a professional witness who comes across a girl waiting to get married in court. Her boyfriend does not show up and she ends up being helped by the witness. Slowly slowly, over the time, he falls in love for her. It is not clear if she has similar feelings for him or not. Watch the movie for complete details.

The movie really belongs to Abhay. I look forward to seeing more movies from him. Soha is pretty but did not speak much in the movie. Her eyes, her innocence did most of the talking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3722 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] What happens when the average joe finds out he has supernatural powers? The premise may sound familiar. The [[Watchmen]]? [[Unbreakable]]? [[However]], the Russian sci-fi action flick, The Sword Bearer, is far from the standard stock.

The story revolves around a man named Sasha who as a boy was [[shunned]] from society, his peers and family due to a supernatural power that he possess. When he wishes or his anger allows, a sword extends from his arm piercing his own skin. Very wolverinish? [[Maybe]]... but that's not the interesting part of this [[film]]. Shunned all his life and driven by anger (and a temper he does have) our "hero" returns to his home town to turn his life around or find a reason to. The only thing he encounters here is trouble when an encounter with an old flame's new boyfriend leaves him bloodied on the ground. This is where the vengeance and anger comes into play. This is a man you do not want to cross and from this point the mafia and the police are on his tail. He meets a girl and falls in love instantly as does she and this is really what the movie is about.

The film is highly impressionistic with bold colors and noir overtones spliced with short yet extreme action sequences. This is art house at it's core, beautifully filmed with such attention to details in every scene over gruesome sci-fi action. It's this odd mash that interests me so much in this film. The directors approach for this genre is [[refreshing]] focusing on the emotional journey of Sasha and not a straight action film. Don't worry though, the action is there and plenty of it. However, much of these sequences show only implied violence with pictures of the horrific aftermath. This is not to say that action is not shown. These scenes are here and are fantastic (especially the ending where we see Sasha's full powers unleashed in desperation). The director chooses to imply the violence of many scenes to keep the focus on the character's emotional struggle at hand. This is a tragic love story and a [[refreshing]] [[entry]] into the genre. What happens when the average joe finds out he has supernatural powers? The premise may sound familiar. The [[Watchman]]? [[Oath]]? [[Instead]], the Russian sci-fi action flick, The Sword Bearer, is far from the standard stock.

The story revolves around a man named Sasha who as a boy was [[averted]] from society, his peers and family due to a supernatural power that he possess. When he wishes or his anger allows, a sword extends from his arm piercing his own skin. Very wolverinish? [[Possibly]]... but that's not the interesting part of this [[filmmaking]]. Shunned all his life and driven by anger (and a temper he does have) our "hero" returns to his home town to turn his life around or find a reason to. The only thing he encounters here is trouble when an encounter with an old flame's new boyfriend leaves him bloodied on the ground. This is where the vengeance and anger comes into play. This is a man you do not want to cross and from this point the mafia and the police are on his tail. He meets a girl and falls in love instantly as does she and this is really what the movie is about.

The film is highly impressionistic with bold colors and noir overtones spliced with short yet extreme action sequences. This is art house at it's core, beautifully filmed with such attention to details in every scene over gruesome sci-fi action. It's this odd mash that interests me so much in this film. The directors approach for this genre is [[refreshed]] focusing on the emotional journey of Sasha and not a straight action film. Don't worry though, the action is there and plenty of it. However, much of these sequences show only implied violence with pictures of the horrific aftermath. This is not to say that action is not shown. These scenes are here and are fantastic (especially the ending where we see Sasha's full powers unleashed in desperation). The director chooses to imply the violence of many scenes to keep the focus on the character's emotional struggle at hand. This is a tragic love story and a [[refresh]] [[entries]] into the genre. --------------------------------------------- Result 3723 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] AntiTrust [[could]] have been a great vehicle for Rachael Leigh Cook, but the director [[cut]] out her best scenes. In the scenes that she are in, she is just a [[zombie]]. She is involved in a sub-plot that is simular to a sub-plot in "Get Carter", but she handles the sub-plot better in "Get Carter".(I blame the director) The director's homage to Hitchcock was corny. (It's the scene were Ryan Philippe's charactor realizes he may not be able to trust Tim Robbin's charactor, at least I think it's a homage to Hitchcock. The DVD shows the scenes that were cut out. I think the director should have trust his instincts and not listen to the test audiences. AntiTrust [[wo]] have been a great vehicle for Rachael Leigh Cook, but the director [[clipping]] out her best scenes. In the scenes that she are in, she is just a [[ghoul]]. She is involved in a sub-plot that is simular to a sub-plot in "Get Carter", but she handles the sub-plot better in "Get Carter".(I blame the director) The director's homage to Hitchcock was corny. (It's the scene were Ryan Philippe's charactor realizes he may not be able to trust Tim Robbin's charactor, at least I think it's a homage to Hitchcock. The DVD shows the scenes that were cut out. I think the director should have trust his instincts and not listen to the test audiences. --------------------------------------------- Result 3724 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I hand't seen the [[restored]], or any version for that matter, of "Baby Face" with Barbara Stanwyck till I [[caught]] it on TCM. What a [[great]] movie! In a nutshell Lily lives in a speakeasy, she's been pimped out by her own Father since she was 14! Then his still blows up and he's killed leaving Lily (Stanwyck) alone cept for her black maid Chico, played very nicely by [[Theresa]] Harris. Lily leaves for the big city ( New York) deciding to use her sex to get to the top. She does this in [[great]] style!

She seduces a pudgy clerk to get in on the ground floor and proceeds to go through men like disposable candy! One dumps his fiancée and kills his near father-in-law, also Lily's sugar-daddy, then commits suicide! Lily barely blinks! STanwyck is terrific as a [[girl]] who really doesn't know what [[love]] is.

Then in Paris, she falls for Courtland, played by George Brent, they marry, but when he's in deep [[financial]] straights, she bolts. Nearly free with Chico and a half-million, she realizes she loved Court! Lily races to [[find]] him, but will she be too late?

This is pre-code Hollywood at its best. Stanwyck is [[tremendous]] and the look and music in the [[film]] are [[perfect]]. This [[reminded]] me of "Original Sin" with Angelina Jolie, another unfairly ignored flick with an [[amoral]] [[woman]], those who disliked that [[films]] ultra-romantic leanings, will not [[like]] [[Baby]] [[FAce]] any better, those with [[belief]] in sex, [[love]] and power, will love it. [[Highly]] [[recommended]]! See it! I hand't seen the [[reestablished]], or any version for that matter, of "Baby Face" with Barbara Stanwyck till I [[apprehended]] it on TCM. What a [[whopping]] movie! In a nutshell Lily lives in a speakeasy, she's been pimped out by her own Father since she was 14! Then his still blows up and he's killed leaving Lily (Stanwyck) alone cept for her black maid Chico, played very nicely by [[Tereza]] Harris. Lily leaves for the big city ( New York) deciding to use her sex to get to the top. She does this in [[resplendent]] style!

She seduces a pudgy clerk to get in on the ground floor and proceeds to go through men like disposable candy! One dumps his fiancée and kills his near father-in-law, also Lily's sugar-daddy, then commits suicide! Lily barely blinks! STanwyck is terrific as a [[giri]] who really doesn't know what [[iike]] is.

Then in Paris, she falls for Courtland, played by George Brent, they marry, but when he's in deep [[monetary]] straights, she bolts. Nearly free with Chico and a half-million, she realizes she loved Court! Lily races to [[finds]] him, but will she be too late?

This is pre-code Hollywood at its best. Stanwyck is [[large]] and the look and music in the [[movies]] are [[impeccable]]. This [[recalled]] me of "Original Sin" with Angelina Jolie, another unfairly ignored flick with an [[immoral]] [[girls]], those who disliked that [[movie]] ultra-romantic leanings, will not [[likes]] [[Babe]] [[encounter]] any better, those with [[beliefs]] in sex, [[likes]] and power, will love it. [[Crucially]] [[suggested]]! See it! --------------------------------------------- Result 3725 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Sorry Fulci fans, but I could not get through this one. The soundtrack was about as annoying as they come, the acting was puerile, the story has been done and done, and the direction was non-existent.

Massacre honestly looked like a children's film project. But I've seen some of those, and they actually look better than this did! It appears to have been so underfunded they couldn't afford ... ANYTHING! Not a DoP, not a director, no one who even remotely had a clue what acting was. It was a very poor cinematic experience; one of my worst.

This was about the worst suck-fest I've seen, next to Terror Toons which is second only to Killer Klowns from Outer Space. I've nothing else to say about it.

It rates a 0.1/10 from...

the Fiend :. --------------------------------------------- Result 3726 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Michelle]] [[Rodriguez]] is a well-built high-school senior who [[discovers]] that she has a [[powerful]] [[punch]] and [[begins]] amateur training at a Brooklyn [[gym]]. Santiago Douglas is a a handsome young man, [[barely]] older than she, who also trains there. They [[meet]] after class, so to [[speak]], and feel attracted to each other. No [[sex]]. Santiago has been [[instructed]] to save it for his next bout.

Both are participants in a "gender-blind" athletic [[program]] that makes no distinctions between males and females, a misguided attempt to level the athletic playing field.

A conservative radio commentator recently announced -- and I swear I'm not making this up -- "Let's face it; the president is black." I'm here to make an equally perspicacious observation -- "Men and women are different." Now, in 99 cases out of 100, this needn't make any difference in physical performance. But in the top one percent -- trained athletes whose skills have been honed to a fine edge -- men generally have the advantage. With their narrow hips they can run faster. And they have greater muscle mass and upper torso strength. These differences in body build make it possible for women to give birth and raise children and for men to catch and kill food for them. This sexual bifurcation is the result of the perfectly normal process of natural selection. Without it, there might not be any humans at all. And that, boys and girls, is why they have men's events and women's events at the Olympics. I speak to you as your anthropologist. That will be ten cents, PayPal preferred.

That's why I called this gender-blind program misguided. As talented a boxer as Rodrigues is, as she approaches the zenith of the game, she will eventually lose to a male.

That's where the complication arises in this movie. Rodrigues is finally matched against her boy friend, Douglas. Neither wants to loose any anger on the other, not to mention roundhouse rights, but the pride of both is at stake, and the pride is both personal and gender related. Douglas refuses to fight a woman in the ring. And Rodriguez is offended by what she sees as his patronizing attitude. It ends happily.

I wasn't really expecting much from the film. I thought it would be a rip off of Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby" until I discovered that this was released years earlier. And I'd never heard of the director or of any of the performers. That sort of obscurity generally augers ill -- made-for-television weepers and so forth.

But I was surprised at how neatly this is put together. The total absence of bathos left me open mouthed. So did the minimal use of boxing clichés -- the frayed ropes, the blood, the cutting of the swollen eye, the battered post-bout faces, the fat and sweaty onlooker shouting "Kill him!", the slow motion landing of glove on nose, the spray of sweat from the mauled head, the heroic music signaling the long-awaited apotheosis of the victor. None of that here -- well, almost none. The whole plot could be considered formulaic. Tough kid finds outlet in the ring, etc.

The feeling you're left with is that this is probably pretty much what these amateur contests are like. Different from those we see on TV and in ordinary movies. No bells ring, for instance, Instead a dancing and observant referee yells "Stop!" And "Box!" The contestants wear head gear. The gym is populated not by a crowd of cheering spectators, but only by a handful of people who have some particular interest in the goings on. It's a clean movie, despite the rather grim setting and the unhappy family dynamics.

Michelle Rodriguez can look pretty mean, what with her muscular bulk and her eyes glowing under her lowered brow, but once you get used to the idea that this is a girl who can beat you to a pulp anytime she wants, and once you hear the feminine contours of her supersegmentals, she ain't bad. (A scene in which she battles her father to the floor is overdoing it.) It was a little hard to understand Douglas's restraint when Rodriguez crawls all over him in bed. The director, Karyn Kusama, has chosen her talent carefully.

Shows what you can do with some talent, imagination, and a modicum of money. There ought to be more films like it. Take one of those multi-billion dollar blockbusters full of dinosaurs or space ships and spread the generosity around a little. [[Micheal]] [[Mendez]] is a well-built high-school senior who [[detected]] that she has a [[forceful]] [[punching]] and [[launched]] amateur training at a Brooklyn [[gymnasium]]. Santiago Douglas is a a handsome young man, [[hardly]] older than she, who also trains there. They [[cater]] after class, so to [[talk]], and feel attracted to each other. No [[sexuality]]. Santiago has been [[commissioned]] to save it for his next bout.

Both are participants in a "gender-blind" athletic [[programming]] that makes no distinctions between males and females, a misguided attempt to level the athletic playing field.

A conservative radio commentator recently announced -- and I swear I'm not making this up -- "Let's face it; the president is black." I'm here to make an equally perspicacious observation -- "Men and women are different." Now, in 99 cases out of 100, this needn't make any difference in physical performance. But in the top one percent -- trained athletes whose skills have been honed to a fine edge -- men generally have the advantage. With their narrow hips they can run faster. And they have greater muscle mass and upper torso strength. These differences in body build make it possible for women to give birth and raise children and for men to catch and kill food for them. This sexual bifurcation is the result of the perfectly normal process of natural selection. Without it, there might not be any humans at all. And that, boys and girls, is why they have men's events and women's events at the Olympics. I speak to you as your anthropologist. That will be ten cents, PayPal preferred.

That's why I called this gender-blind program misguided. As talented a boxer as Rodrigues is, as she approaches the zenith of the game, she will eventually lose to a male.

That's where the complication arises in this movie. Rodrigues is finally matched against her boy friend, Douglas. Neither wants to loose any anger on the other, not to mention roundhouse rights, but the pride of both is at stake, and the pride is both personal and gender related. Douglas refuses to fight a woman in the ring. And Rodriguez is offended by what she sees as his patronizing attitude. It ends happily.

I wasn't really expecting much from the film. I thought it would be a rip off of Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby" until I discovered that this was released years earlier. And I'd never heard of the director or of any of the performers. That sort of obscurity generally augers ill -- made-for-television weepers and so forth.

But I was surprised at how neatly this is put together. The total absence of bathos left me open mouthed. So did the minimal use of boxing clichés -- the frayed ropes, the blood, the cutting of the swollen eye, the battered post-bout faces, the fat and sweaty onlooker shouting "Kill him!", the slow motion landing of glove on nose, the spray of sweat from the mauled head, the heroic music signaling the long-awaited apotheosis of the victor. None of that here -- well, almost none. The whole plot could be considered formulaic. Tough kid finds outlet in the ring, etc.

The feeling you're left with is that this is probably pretty much what these amateur contests are like. Different from those we see on TV and in ordinary movies. No bells ring, for instance, Instead a dancing and observant referee yells "Stop!" And "Box!" The contestants wear head gear. The gym is populated not by a crowd of cheering spectators, but only by a handful of people who have some particular interest in the goings on. It's a clean movie, despite the rather grim setting and the unhappy family dynamics.

Michelle Rodriguez can look pretty mean, what with her muscular bulk and her eyes glowing under her lowered brow, but once you get used to the idea that this is a girl who can beat you to a pulp anytime she wants, and once you hear the feminine contours of her supersegmentals, she ain't bad. (A scene in which she battles her father to the floor is overdoing it.) It was a little hard to understand Douglas's restraint when Rodriguez crawls all over him in bed. The director, Karyn Kusama, has chosen her talent carefully.

Shows what you can do with some talent, imagination, and a modicum of money. There ought to be more films like it. Take one of those multi-billion dollar blockbusters full of dinosaurs or space ships and spread the generosity around a little. --------------------------------------------- Result 3727 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] I want to say the acting is [[bad]], but I [[think]] it was the directing that made it so. I never thought much of Highlander (same director) but that one could be [[blamed]] on the 80s.

This one [[however]], has no excuses. People [[get]] [[shot]] while exiting trenches with a man in front of him!? Those [[kind]] of mistakes, along with an unclear time line, weird [[battle]] tactics, sub-par [[cutting]] and [[poor]] [[visual]] [[effects]], makes this one a sub-par film over all.

Then like so many other have commented, all this American [[bullshit]]. The German [[general]] being [[practically]] [[scared]] of his captured American private. Be [[prepared]] to swallow a lot of it, although in [[small]] doses.

To sum it up, a not horrible but still [[definitely]] sub-par [[war]] movie in all [[aspects]]. I want to say the acting is [[negative]], but I [[believe]] it was the directing that made it so. I never thought much of Highlander (same director) but that one could be [[charged]] on the 80s.

This one [[still]], has no excuses. People [[got]] [[offed]] while exiting trenches with a man in front of him!? Those [[genre]] of mistakes, along with an unclear time line, weird [[bataille]] tactics, sub-par [[slitting]] and [[pauper]] [[optic]] [[repercussions]], makes this one a sub-par film over all.

Then like so many other have commented, all this American [[baloney]]. The German [[overall]] being [[almost]] [[fright]] of his captured American private. Be [[poised]] to swallow a lot of it, although in [[petite]] doses.

To sum it up, a not horrible but still [[indubitably]] sub-par [[wars]] movie in all [[facets]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3728 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I've [[seen]] this [[movie]] at [[theater]] when it first [[came]] out some [[years]] [[ago]] and really liked it a [[lot]]. But i [[still]] [[wanted]] to [[see]] it again this [[year]] to [[check]] if it is [[still]] good compared to [[movies]] [[coming]] out now, and i wan [[tell]] it's one the [[best]] [[movies]] i've ever [[seen]] in my [[life]] !!!!!!!!!!!!!

What you [[need]] to [[know]] is that you don't have to [[miss]] any minute of this [[movie]], if you don't [[completely]] follow the action you will [[get]] [[lost]] and you will not [[understand]] the [[end]].

The [[end]] is what makes this movie so good, you can't [[expect]] it.

[[Congratulations]] to the [[Producer]] ! I've [[noticed]] this [[flick]] at [[theaters]] when it first [[became]] out some [[olds]] [[prior]] and really liked it a [[batch]]. But i [[nonetheless]] [[desired]] to [[seeing]] it again this [[annum]] to [[audit]] if it is [[yet]] good compared to [[movie]] [[come]] out now, and i wan [[telling]] it's one the [[optimum]] [[kino]] i've ever [[watched]] in my [[iife]] !!!!!!!!!!!!!

What you [[needed]] to [[savoir]] is that you don't have to [[missed]] any minute of this [[filmmaking]], if you don't [[totally]] follow the action you will [[got]] [[forfeited]] and you will not [[understood]] the [[termination]].

The [[ceases]] is what makes this movie so good, you can't [[expects]] it.

[[Felicitations]] to the [[Manufacturers]] ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3729 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Max had the V-8, [[Trace]] (Wheels of Fires last and only hero) has a [[jet]] [[engine]] on the back of his [[car]] allowing him to make [[unintentionally]] humorous faces as he rockets around the halfway desolate wasteland. Be amazed as Mad Max 2 (aka The Road Warrior) is dissected and spliced back together as a new movie albeit filmed in a [[lackluster]] manner with [[bad]] [[actors]] and [[lousy]] stunt [[work]].

Why is WoF set in a post-apocalyptic [[wasteland]]? Simple, The [[Road]] Warrior was! Actually any questions can be answered by: it was that way in the [[Road]] Warrior! Except for the out of [[work]] mutant actors from the original 60's The Time Machine film that make a cameo appearance for sake of giving the audience some non-vehicular action to chew on for a few minutes.

[[In]] [[typical]] 80's fashion, all cars [[driven]] by [[bad]] [[guys]] that are [[bumped]] or [[slightly]] jostled [[explode]] in a [[huge]] billowing [[explosion]]. Inevitably all [[car]] [[chases]] will [[happen]] near convenient cliff sides and cars will unavoidably [[fall]] off of them. Along with this 80's cinematic wild ride is the [[general]] rampant misogyny in this [[style]] of cheapie film. [[Generally]] I [[waited]] for Trace's rocket [[powered]] [[car]] to [[accelerate]] and shoot flames so there [[would]] be another shot of him scrunching up his [[face]] like he is [[supposed]] to be [[tough]], which comes off more as him looking [[constipated]]. Badly choreographed action coupled with [[bad]] acting makes this film a true [[sinker]]. The unintentional humor value even manages to wear thin.

Rats: Nights of Terror by Bruno Mattei is superior. And that in and of itself is saying a lot! By this count 2020 Texas Gladiators is a cinematic masterpiece compared to Wheels of Fire. A poor Road Warrior knock off that doesn't have near enough cheese factor to make the film watchable.

Max had the V-8, [[Traces]] (Wheels of Fires last and only hero) has a [[jett]] [[engines]] on the back of his [[auto]] allowing him to make [[involuntarily]] humorous faces as he rockets around the halfway desolate wasteland. Be amazed as Mad Max 2 (aka The Road Warrior) is dissected and spliced back together as a new movie albeit filmed in a [[mediocre]] manner with [[negative]] [[protagonists]] and [[miserable]] stunt [[jobs]].

Why is WoF set in a post-apocalyptic [[sandlot]]? Simple, The [[Estrada]] Warrior was! Actually any questions can be answered by: it was that way in the [[Paths]] Warrior! Except for the out of [[collaborate]] mutant actors from the original 60's The Time Machine film that make a cameo appearance for sake of giving the audience some non-vehicular action to chew on for a few minutes.

[[During]] [[classic]] 80's fashion, all cars [[fueled]] by [[naughty]] [[lads]] that are [[banged]] or [[modestly]] jostled [[blasting]] in a [[great]] billowing [[blowup]]. Inevitably all [[cars]] [[chase]] will [[emerge]] near convenient cliff sides and cars will unavoidably [[autumn]] off of them. Along with this 80's cinematic wild ride is the [[overall]] rampant misogyny in this [[elegance]] of cheapie film. [[Often]] I [[await]] for Trace's rocket [[fueled]] [[cars]] to [[accelerated]] and shoot flames so there [[could]] be another shot of him scrunching up his [[encounter]] like he is [[suspected]] to be [[difficult]], which comes off more as him looking [[stuck]]. Badly choreographed action coupled with [[wicked]] acting makes this film a true [[platinum]]. The unintentional humor value even manages to wear thin.

Rats: Nights of Terror by Bruno Mattei is superior. And that in and of itself is saying a lot! By this count 2020 Texas Gladiators is a cinematic masterpiece compared to Wheels of Fire. A poor Road Warrior knock off that doesn't have near enough cheese factor to make the film watchable.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3730 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] What this [[movie]] fails from answering is how wrong this war is (and most US [[wars]] [[recently]] made only to [[get]] some [[oil]]).

How [[many]] innocent [[civilian]] [[casualties]] there has been, how [[many]] lives perished and how [[blatantly]] [[stupid]] the perpetrators are.

So, [[let]] me [[ask]] you - if American [[soldier]] [[kills]] [[women]] and children [[apart]] from [[enemy]], its OK, but if [[government]] [[accidentally]] [[kills]] their own forces by [[deadly]] [[chemicals]] while [[killing]] many civilians as well, it is not? Your logic fails, [[gentleman]].

I'll [[give]] it 5 for the solid performance and 1 to everything [[else]], 3 in [[total]]. What this [[cinematography]] fails from answering is how wrong this war is (and most US [[war]] [[lately]] made only to [[obtain]] some [[oils]]).

How [[myriad]] innocent [[civil]] [[casualty]] there has been, how [[various]] lives perished and how [[plainly]] [[daft]] the perpetrators are.

So, [[leave]] me [[request]] you - if American [[servicemen]] [[mata]] [[daughters]] and children [[furthermore]] from [[foe]], its OK, but if [[governments]] [[mistakenly]] [[mata]] their own forces by [[fatal]] [[chemical]] while [[assassinated]] many civilians as well, it is not? Your logic fails, [[monsieur]].

I'll [[lend]] it 5 for the solid performance and 1 to everything [[further]], 3 in [[whole]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3731 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] I can [[find]] very [[little]] [[thats]] good to say about this film. I am sure the idea and script looked good on paper but the filmography and acting I am afraid is not the standards I would expect from some very talented people. I would doubt that this features highly in their CV Filmography. Michael Caine appeared wooden at times in his role as the Doctor, and at no time no did I actually believe in his character. The plot was [[unbelievable]] especially with regard to the victims son. Some of the scenes were very reminiscent of other films, that at times I wondered if it was actually a spoof thriller. The lighting at times was dark and this added to the feeling of watching a low budget movie with some big named stars, wondering why I bothered to watch it at all. I can [[unearthed]] very [[kiddo]] [[theyre]] good to say about this film. I am sure the idea and script looked good on paper but the filmography and acting I am afraid is not the standards I would expect from some very talented people. I would doubt that this features highly in their CV Filmography. Michael Caine appeared wooden at times in his role as the Doctor, and at no time no did I actually believe in his character. The plot was [[extraordinary]] especially with regard to the victims son. Some of the scenes were very reminiscent of other films, that at times I wondered if it was actually a spoof thriller. The lighting at times was dark and this added to the feeling of watching a low budget movie with some big named stars, wondering why I bothered to watch it at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3732 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] ANDY HARDY MEETS DEBUTANTE (1940) is the ninth (9th) film of the series and it shows the direction it was inevitably headed into. Characters ANDY HARDY (Mickey Rooney) and JUDGE HARDY (Lewis Stone) were going to be front and center. The rest of the cast was going too just punch the clock and collect their checks. The series would rise to the occasion again and have its [[moments]] but a [[fatal]] [[decline]] had set in.

Lewis Stone throughout the series would continue too portray the character of JUDGE HARDY in a sympathetic manner. The rest of the cast would be professional even though given less and less to do. Mickey Rooney on the other hand would continue his character as if there was no learning curve. ANDYs' reaction to any situation was in a naive and unbelievable way. Even after he returned as a veteran of World War II service in LOVE LAUGHS AT ANDY HARDY (1946) his reaction to any 'teapot tempest' was the same, juvenile.

In this film it is clearly illustrated. ANDY gets himself into several unbelievable situations that with a simple explanation would have been resolved. This screen writing device was known as the 'idiot plot'. A means of stretching a poorly written scenario. Maybe it was less Mickey Rooneys' fault then the Director and the Writers. Most likely George B. Seitz had directed one too many and a firmer hand was needed too control Rooneys' excesses. To see our overview of the entire series go to YOU'RE ONLY YOUNG ONCE (1937). ANDY HARDY MEETS DEBUTANTE (1940) is the ninth (9th) film of the series and it shows the direction it was inevitably headed into. Characters ANDY HARDY (Mickey Rooney) and JUDGE HARDY (Lewis Stone) were going to be front and center. The rest of the cast was going too just punch the clock and collect their checks. The series would rise to the occasion again and have its [[times]] but a [[fateful]] [[downturn]] had set in.

Lewis Stone throughout the series would continue too portray the character of JUDGE HARDY in a sympathetic manner. The rest of the cast would be professional even though given less and less to do. Mickey Rooney on the other hand would continue his character as if there was no learning curve. ANDYs' reaction to any situation was in a naive and unbelievable way. Even after he returned as a veteran of World War II service in LOVE LAUGHS AT ANDY HARDY (1946) his reaction to any 'teapot tempest' was the same, juvenile.

In this film it is clearly illustrated. ANDY gets himself into several unbelievable situations that with a simple explanation would have been resolved. This screen writing device was known as the 'idiot plot'. A means of stretching a poorly written scenario. Maybe it was less Mickey Rooneys' fault then the Director and the Writers. Most likely George B. Seitz had directed one too many and a firmer hand was needed too control Rooneys' excesses. To see our overview of the entire series go to YOU'RE ONLY YOUNG ONCE (1937). --------------------------------------------- Result 3733 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] Three story lines and not enough tying them together, "Inside Man" was very jumpy and an [[incomplete]] attempt to be artistic and realistic. Though having its moments, the movie started off looking like a fast thriller which quickly grounded to a slow crawl, jumped quickly between highs and lows, and only barely picked up steam again near the last 20 minutes. I will give credit to Denzel Washington, he played his part extremely well with a full grasp of his human side and not just the typical "super-detective" with all the answers. Clive Owen also did quite well with his duality part as "evil genius" and "criminal mastermind" (both not the same in retrospect). Overall though, each person individually created a great sub-section. Yet, when the parts finally came together and everything counted, there was no sudden "ah-ha!" or summation of everything. It all ended up with very little of the energy it began with, with a lot of plot-holes, tons of questions, and as I said earlier, no where near Spike Lee's normal level. I have to completely disagree with the so-called "professional critics"... this is not the movie they play it up to be. Three story lines and not enough tying them together, "Inside Man" was very jumpy and an [[sketchy]] attempt to be artistic and realistic. Though having its moments, the movie started off looking like a fast thriller which quickly grounded to a slow crawl, jumped quickly between highs and lows, and only barely picked up steam again near the last 20 minutes. I will give credit to Denzel Washington, he played his part extremely well with a full grasp of his human side and not just the typical "super-detective" with all the answers. Clive Owen also did quite well with his duality part as "evil genius" and "criminal mastermind" (both not the same in retrospect). Overall though, each person individually created a great sub-section. Yet, when the parts finally came together and everything counted, there was no sudden "ah-ha!" or summation of everything. It all ended up with very little of the energy it began with, with a lot of plot-holes, tons of questions, and as I said earlier, no where near Spike Lee's normal level. I have to completely disagree with the so-called "professional critics"... this is not the movie they play it up to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 3734 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I entered my [[first]] comment on this film almost five years ago. Then, the ideas presented in the movie still seemed mostly fictional, if indeed they could ever transpire at all. Not any [[longer]]. [[Now]], the politics, [[society]], and media in The [[Running]] [[Man]] seem very close to home [[indeed]].

Consider the following factors, which were mostly [[absent]] in 1987 (the year The [[Running]] Man came out) that are present [[today]]:

Concern with, as [[Richard]] Dawson's character Damon Killian [[puts]] it, "traditional [[morality]]." CHECK

Entertainment in the form of extreme reality, including pain, fear, and discomfort on the part of contestants. CHECK

Cameras everywhere. CHECK

Restricted travel for citizens at the whim of the government, controlled by a centralized computer system complete with barcoded passports ("travel passes" in the movie) and sanctioned under the guise of national security. CHECK

An increased intermingling, bordering on incestuous, of government and media. CHECK

Computer-generated graphics that are advanced enough to manipulate real film footage (such as the "digital matting" of Ben Richards' image onto the stunt double). CHECK

Jailing of conscientious objectors or detractors of the current administration. CHECK

Flagging economy further widening the gulf between the wealthy and not-so-wealthy; increasing numbers of fringe groups reacting to the tightening noose of big government; civil unrest brewing just under or at the surface of nearly every sizable public event regardless of its origin or intent. CHECK, CHECK, CHECK

Then again, maybe it's just a movie based on a Stephen King novella. But just to be safe, I'm moving to Switzerland. I entered my [[firstly]] comment on this film almost five years ago. Then, the ideas presented in the movie still seemed mostly fictional, if indeed they could ever transpire at all. Not any [[long]]. [[Currently]], the politics, [[societies]], and media in The [[Run]] [[Mec]] seem very close to home [[admittedly]].

Consider the following factors, which were mostly [[absence]] in 1987 (the year The [[Execute]] Man came out) that are present [[yesterday]]:

Concern with, as [[Richards]] Dawson's character Damon Killian [[evokes]] it, "traditional [[morals]]." CHECK

Entertainment in the form of extreme reality, including pain, fear, and discomfort on the part of contestants. CHECK

Cameras everywhere. CHECK

Restricted travel for citizens at the whim of the government, controlled by a centralized computer system complete with barcoded passports ("travel passes" in the movie) and sanctioned under the guise of national security. CHECK

An increased intermingling, bordering on incestuous, of government and media. CHECK

Computer-generated graphics that are advanced enough to manipulate real film footage (such as the "digital matting" of Ben Richards' image onto the stunt double). CHECK

Jailing of conscientious objectors or detractors of the current administration. CHECK

Flagging economy further widening the gulf between the wealthy and not-so-wealthy; increasing numbers of fringe groups reacting to the tightening noose of big government; civil unrest brewing just under or at the surface of nearly every sizable public event regardless of its origin or intent. CHECK, CHECK, CHECK

Then again, maybe it's just a movie based on a Stephen King novella. But just to be safe, I'm moving to Switzerland. --------------------------------------------- Result 3735 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] When I [[first]] [[watched]] this, we borrowed it from our local [[library]] about a [[year]] [[ago]] and [[watched]] it about 3 [[times]]. We've just [[watched]] it again and I [[liked]] it [[MORE]] than I did the [[last]] [[time]] I'd [[watched]] it!! :) :()

The film is [[mainly]] about two [[dogs]] called Charlie and Itchy (voiced by [[Dom]] DeLuise and I [[love]] Dom DeLuise!) . [[Charlie]] is half a [[gangster]] and half a goodie, which I like. Itchy is his sidekick. Charlie is [[killed]] by his [[friend]] (NOT) and [[sent]] to [[heaven]]. When Charlie comes back to life, it is the start of an [[amazing]] [[adventure]].

The five [[main]] [[reasons]] why I'm [[absolutely]] [[CRAZY]] about this [[film]]: One: I [[love]] the [[characters]] (except Carface). My [[favourite]] three are Charlie, Itchy and a [[little]] [[girl]] [[called]] Anne-Marie who [[comes]] [[slightly]] [[later]]. Two: I [[love]] the period of [[history]] in which this [[film]] is set. It is set during the [[prohibition]] in the [[United]] States. Three: The [[Don]] Bluth animation (as [[usual]]) is superb. The [[backgrounds]] are good too. Four: There is a [[strange]] [[excitement]] in this [[film]] that keeps me on the edge of my [[seat]]. Five: The [[songs]] in this are [[lovely]]. My [[favourite]] song [[starts]] with "I [[need]] Brazil, the throb, the thrill"...

[[So]], watch this [[lovely]] [[film]] when you can, you won't be [[disappointed]]! :) ;) :() When I [[frst]] [[observed]] this, we borrowed it from our local [[librarian]] about a [[annum]] [[previously]] and [[observed]] it about 3 [[moments]]. We've just [[observed]] it again and I [[wished]] it [[MOST]] than I did the [[latter]] [[moment]] I'd [[observed]] it!! :) :()

The film is [[essentially]] about two [[hounds]] called Charlie and Itchy (voiced by [[Stupidly]] DeLuise and I [[iike]] Dom DeLuise!) . [[Vietcong]] is half a [[thug]] and half a goodie, which I like. Itchy is his sidekick. Charlie is [[assassinate]] by his [[freund]] (NOT) and [[transmitted]] to [[sky]]. When Charlie comes back to life, it is the start of an [[admirable]] [[adventurer]].

The five [[principal]] [[justification]] why I'm [[totally]] [[SCREWY]] about this [[movie]]: One: I [[likes]] the [[characteristics]] (except Carface). My [[prefers]] three are Charlie, Itchy and a [[small]] [[fille]] [[termed]] Anne-Marie who [[arrives]] [[marginally]] [[thereafter]]. Two: I [[amore]] the period of [[stories]] in which this [[kino]] is set. It is set during the [[forbidding]] in the [[Unified]] States. Three: The [[Donate]] Bluth animation (as [[normal]]) is superb. The [[source]] are good too. Four: There is a [[inquisitive]] [[arousal]] in this [[movies]] that keeps me on the edge of my [[seats]]. Five: The [[hymns]] in this are [[belle]]. My [[preferable]] song [[commenced]] with "I [[required]] Brazil, the throb, the thrill"...

[[Accordingly]], watch this [[sumptuous]] [[kino]] when you can, you won't be [[disillusioned]]! :) ;) :() --------------------------------------------- Result 3736 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (84%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Can such an ambient production have failed its primary goal, which was to correctly adapt Allende's novel? Obviously yes. Bille August [[managed]] to make a superficial, shallow film where basic elements of South American mentality are presented simply as side events, resulting in total incoherency. I can't believe there was a whole production team that could not understand the book! There is of course technical quality in this film and I think the actors did their best with what they had in their hands, but something is missing. And this something was the most important part. Can such an ambient production have failed its primary goal, which was to correctly adapt Allende's novel? Obviously yes. Bille August [[administering]] to make a superficial, shallow film where basic elements of South American mentality are presented simply as side events, resulting in total incoherency. I can't believe there was a whole production team that could not understand the book! There is of course technical quality in this film and I think the actors did their best with what they had in their hands, but something is missing. And this something was the most important part. --------------------------------------------- Result 3737 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Trio's vignettes were [[insightful]] and [[quite]] enjoyable. It was curious seeing so [[many]] [[soon]] to be [[famous]] [[actors]] when they were very [[young]]. The performances and [[attention]] to detail were [[wonderful]] to watch.

[[Observation]]. In film it isn't [[necessary]] that source [[material]] be in alignment with the contemporary era to be interesting or [[worthwhile]]. "[[Small]] [[morality]]" [[storytelling]] is [[quaint]] (or [[coy]]) only in the eye of the beholder--thankfully. Story content--well told--can overcome it's [[time]], subject or place.

Ironically, there are quite a few contemporary [[films]] [[today]] that have not [[overcome]] the [[conventions]] or cutting edge [[mores]] of the present era. Inserting "[[small]] morality" content--occasionally--might provide a dimension [[lacking]]. Trio's vignettes were [[informative]] and [[rather]] enjoyable. It was curious seeing so [[several]] [[promptly]] to be [[prestigious]] [[actresses]] when they were very [[youthful]]. The performances and [[beware]] to detail were [[sumptuous]] to watch.

[[Observer]]. In film it isn't [[essential]] that source [[materials]] be in alignment with the contemporary era to be interesting or [[helpful]]. "[[Minimal]] [[ethics]]" [[narration]] is [[scenic]] (or [[bashful]]) only in the eye of the beholder--thankfully. Story content--well told--can overcome it's [[moment]], subject or place.

Ironically, there are quite a few contemporary [[cinema]] [[nowadays]] that have not [[overcoming]] the [[pacts]] or cutting edge [[habits]] of the present era. Inserting "[[scant]] morality" content--occasionally--might provide a dimension [[shortage]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3738 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[guess]] this movie is a fitting tribute to the first Superman [[film]],as it is just as [[crummy]] and painfully long as the original.

After an opening scene consisting solely of murky intergalactic [[visuals]], the [[credits]] pay homage to the even-crummy-looking-for-their-time futuristic sweeping [[credits]] of the original Superman film.

Then there is some more murky [[stuff]]. Ma Kent sees some [[kind]] of murky ruckus on the farm, and [[spends]] a good portion of my life [[slowly]] [[walking]] up to some [[debris]] in the cornfield. Then Superman sneaks up on her and faints.

Next we catch up with Lex Luthor in a scene about many murky close-ups of an old lady as she dies. We don't see Luthor's face until the end of the scene, an early instance of the film's drive to leave no hackneyed stone unturned. Lex Luthor is a guy who doesn't like Superman because he is not human. Also, he probably doesn't like humans either, as the movie occasionally features some kind of plot about Lex Luthor planning to kill most of Earth's population.

After a while, Clark Kent shows up back at his old job (I forgot to mention, he had been away on a five year trip where nothing happened). Then he finds out Lois Lane has an illegitimate kid and is dating Cyclops. It upsets him so much that he loses control of his super strength to such an extent that he accidentally breaks a picture frame.

At this point we see that Miss Lane is on some kind of jet attached to some kind of space shuttle. It is some kind of important event on account of it is on television. Then we learn that there are people in a control room monitoring this event. There are also people watching it on television and there are pilots in the cockpit. The film then [[reminds]] us that these people are involved by cutting between them for most of the summer.

As the events leading up to the inevitable disaster started to build, I excused myself to get a soda. I accidentally walked back into the wrong theater and watched that movie about Al Gore showing slides in its entirety. I tried to find my way back to Superman Returns, but I somehow wandered into Prairie Home Companion, which I watched twice in a row. Then it was time to stop messing around.

I walked back into the first theater, found my seat, and looked up to see that the impending Lois Lane space shuttle disaster was almost upon us. Still, it seemed to be taking forever, so I wandered around the theater, met a girl, got married, raised a son and sent him off to college. While attending my son's medical school graduation, I remembered that I should probably check in on Superman Returns, so I excused myself and raced back to the theater only to learn there was no need to hurry. It still took about another half hour before things went wrong for Space Shuttle Lane. When they did, Superman saved everybody, which was pretty cool.

. And then there is a a subplot where Superman turns really creepy and starts stalking Lois Lane and her family with his x-ray vision and super-hearing. Then he tries to get her to cheat on Cyclops, who seems like a good guy.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor is involved in some kind of contest to display every possible generic villain behavior before the end of the movie. I forgot to bring my scorecard home with me (they give you one at the door), but I think he scored damn close to one hundred percent. I hope he wins the million dollars.

At this point, things start to gear up for the big murky finale. I think maybe the projector was broken, on account of the movie seemed to be in some kind of loop for a while here. I remember seeing murky things growing out of the water, Superman getting sick, Superman getting better, back to the murky things, he's sick again, no wait, he's okay again.

Then Lex Luthor unleashed his final bad guy move: yelling at his girlfriend a little bit.

Then Superman died and came back to life. I thought the movie was over, so I left.

Ninety years later, the nursing home where I lived felt a little chilly. I realized I left my sweatshirt back in the theater, and I went to retrieve it. When I did, I was slightly surprised to find that Superman Returns wasn't over yet. I tried to ask some of the viewers what I missed, but most of them were only skeletons with long gray beards by now.

I sat back in my old seat and watched as Lois Lane puttered around her house for a while. Then Superman showed up and started quoting the beginning of the movie, and since I already saw that part I thought it was okay to leave.

So that is my review of Superman Returns.

Oh, also, if you like jokes about people eating dogs or jokes about one dog eating another dog, you will love this movie. On account of there are two jokes like that in it. I [[reckon]] this movie is a fitting tribute to the first Superman [[cinematography]],as it is just as [[cruddy]] and painfully long as the original.

After an opening scene consisting solely of murky intergalactic [[picture]], the [[appropriations]] pay homage to the even-crummy-looking-for-their-time futuristic sweeping [[credence]] of the original Superman film.

Then there is some more murky [[thing]]. Ma Kent sees some [[kinds]] of murky ruckus on the farm, and [[spent]] a good portion of my life [[softly]] [[marche]] up to some [[detritus]] in the cornfield. Then Superman sneaks up on her and faints.

Next we catch up with Lex Luthor in a scene about many murky close-ups of an old lady as she dies. We don't see Luthor's face until the end of the scene, an early instance of the film's drive to leave no hackneyed stone unturned. Lex Luthor is a guy who doesn't like Superman because he is not human. Also, he probably doesn't like humans either, as the movie occasionally features some kind of plot about Lex Luthor planning to kill most of Earth's population.

After a while, Clark Kent shows up back at his old job (I forgot to mention, he had been away on a five year trip where nothing happened). Then he finds out Lois Lane has an illegitimate kid and is dating Cyclops. It upsets him so much that he loses control of his super strength to such an extent that he accidentally breaks a picture frame.

At this point we see that Miss Lane is on some kind of jet attached to some kind of space shuttle. It is some kind of important event on account of it is on television. Then we learn that there are people in a control room monitoring this event. There are also people watching it on television and there are pilots in the cockpit. The film then [[recalls]] us that these people are involved by cutting between them for most of the summer.

As the events leading up to the inevitable disaster started to build, I excused myself to get a soda. I accidentally walked back into the wrong theater and watched that movie about Al Gore showing slides in its entirety. I tried to find my way back to Superman Returns, but I somehow wandered into Prairie Home Companion, which I watched twice in a row. Then it was time to stop messing around.

I walked back into the first theater, found my seat, and looked up to see that the impending Lois Lane space shuttle disaster was almost upon us. Still, it seemed to be taking forever, so I wandered around the theater, met a girl, got married, raised a son and sent him off to college. While attending my son's medical school graduation, I remembered that I should probably check in on Superman Returns, so I excused myself and raced back to the theater only to learn there was no need to hurry. It still took about another half hour before things went wrong for Space Shuttle Lane. When they did, Superman saved everybody, which was pretty cool.

. And then there is a a subplot where Superman turns really creepy and starts stalking Lois Lane and her family with his x-ray vision and super-hearing. Then he tries to get her to cheat on Cyclops, who seems like a good guy.

Meanwhile, Lex Luthor is involved in some kind of contest to display every possible generic villain behavior before the end of the movie. I forgot to bring my scorecard home with me (they give you one at the door), but I think he scored damn close to one hundred percent. I hope he wins the million dollars.

At this point, things start to gear up for the big murky finale. I think maybe the projector was broken, on account of the movie seemed to be in some kind of loop for a while here. I remember seeing murky things growing out of the water, Superman getting sick, Superman getting better, back to the murky things, he's sick again, no wait, he's okay again.

Then Lex Luthor unleashed his final bad guy move: yelling at his girlfriend a little bit.

Then Superman died and came back to life. I thought the movie was over, so I left.

Ninety years later, the nursing home where I lived felt a little chilly. I realized I left my sweatshirt back in the theater, and I went to retrieve it. When I did, I was slightly surprised to find that Superman Returns wasn't over yet. I tried to ask some of the viewers what I missed, but most of them were only skeletons with long gray beards by now.

I sat back in my old seat and watched as Lois Lane puttered around her house for a while. Then Superman showed up and started quoting the beginning of the movie, and since I already saw that part I thought it was okay to leave.

So that is my review of Superman Returns.

Oh, also, if you like jokes about people eating dogs or jokes about one dog eating another dog, you will love this movie. On account of there are two jokes like that in it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3739 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I had seen this movie long time back, but found it amazing and to this day it has never stopped amazing me.

A wonderful movie that describes the account of a group of Australian commandos who tried to sink some Japanese ships at the Singapore harbor during the height of WW2.

These commandos are caught in plain-clothes and they are considered to be spies by the Japanese captors. But something happens that hasn't been explored much in any Hollywood WW2 movie that I have seen.

A close and friendly bonding develops between the captors and the captives. They begin to respect each other, while the captain of the captured Australian soldiers become the best of friends with a senior Japanese prison guard. This is the most wonderful part of the whole movie and it really tugs your heart.

Soon, one day as the two friends are conversing, the Aussie captain learns that some other captives are going to be tried and executed for the sinking of the Jap ships in the Singapore harbor.

He mentions that it was his team and not some other's that had sunk the ships to his Japanese friend, and upon hearing this the Japanese guard tells him to keep quiet as it might lead to his whole group getting executed. But the captain remains adamant on confessing this to the Japanese authorities.

Finally, the Japanese authorities sentence them to death in the most respectful way that is according to their rules. This is the Highest Honor accorded to the captured warriors in Japan.

This is the most awesome part of the film where the Aussie soldiers are awaiting their imminent death and the tense indecision of the friendly Japanese guard who is still not ready to believe that why did his Aussie friend confess being guilty.

I won't give away the ending here. But it is more poignant than one can even imagine and can easily move one to tears.

All in all, an excellent underrated movie that possibly didn't get the recognition that it deserved internationally. Get one copy today and be mesmerized. --------------------------------------------- Result 3740 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie was just heckled by MST3K and with good [[reason]]. First and foremost because it is a "[[cop]]" [[movie]] starring Joe Don Baker, who we all know is about as good a [[cop]] actor as Michael Jackson is a [[country]] [[western]] [[singer]].

All the typical [[cop]] [[movie]] plot devices [[rear]] their [[ugly]] heads, [[bar]] [[fights]], [[children]] [[hostages]] in shoot outs, bad acting, lame [[police]] [[chiefs]], [[bad]] acting, [[revenge]]/justice, endless goons , and of course, [[bad]] acting. Don't watch this without an MST3K filter folks. This movie was just heckled by MST3K and with good [[motif]]. First and foremost because it is a "[[constable]]" [[cinema]] starring Joe Don Baker, who we all know is about as good a [[cops]] actor as Michael Jackson is a [[countries]] [[westen]] [[diva]].

All the typical [[policing]] [[films]] plot devices [[backseat]] their [[nasty]] heads, [[solicitor]] [[struggle]], [[childhood]] [[captives]] in shoot outs, bad acting, lame [[policeman]] [[leaders]], [[negative]] acting, [[reprisals]]/justice, endless goons , and of course, [[negative]] acting. Don't watch this without an MST3K filter folks. --------------------------------------------- Result 3741 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] A "[[friend]]", [[clearly]] with no [[taste]] or [[class]], [[suggested]] I take a [[look]] at the [[work]] of Ron Atkins. If this is representative of his oeuvre, I never [[want]] to see [[anything]] else by him. It is amateurish, self-indulgent, criminally [[shoddy]] and self-indulgent [[rubbish]]. The "whore mangler" of the title is an [[angry]] low budget filmmaker who [[murders]] a bunch of hookers. There is a [[little]] nudity and some erections, but no [[single]] [[element]] [[could]] [[possibly]] [[save]] this from the hangman's [[noose]]. The [[lighting]] is [[appalling]], the dialog is puerile and mostly [[shouted]], and the [[direction]] is clueless. I [[saw]] a doco on American exploitation filmmakers during the recent Fangoria convention. Atkins was one of those featured. He [[spoke]] like there was [[something]] important about his work, but after a viewing of this, I [[see]] nothing of any import whatsoever. There is no style, either, and the [[horrible]] video effects (like solarization) only enhance the amateurishness. Not even so bad it's fun. Avoid. A "[[freund]]", [[naturally]] with no [[aftertaste]] or [[categories]], [[recommended]] I take a [[gaze]] at the [[jobs]] of Ron Atkins. If this is representative of his oeuvre, I never [[wants]] to see [[something]] else by him. It is amateurish, self-indulgent, criminally [[inferior]] and self-indulgent [[detritus]]. The "whore mangler" of the title is an [[enraged]] low budget filmmaker who [[homicides]] a bunch of hookers. There is a [[petit]] nudity and some erections, but no [[lonely]] [[elements]] [[would]] [[arguably]] [[economize]] this from the hangman's [[crux]]. The [[illumination]] is [[horrifying]], the dialog is puerile and mostly [[howled]], and the [[orientation]] is clueless. I [[witnessed]] a doco on American exploitation filmmakers during the recent Fangoria convention. Atkins was one of those featured. He [[speaks]] like there was [[anything]] important about his work, but after a viewing of this, I [[seeing]] nothing of any import whatsoever. There is no style, either, and the [[fearsome]] video effects (like solarization) only enhance the amateurishness. Not even so bad it's fun. Avoid. --------------------------------------------- Result 3742 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Wow]]. This was probably the [[worst]] DCOM ever. I [[watched]] the first half hour and I laughed. [[Brenda]] Song plays Wendy, the popular girl with the hot jock [[boyfriend]] and stuck up friends who is determined to be Homecoming [[Queen]]. She is [[supposed]] to [[save]] the world as a warrior, and Shin comes to her aid to help her with her Martial [[Arts]]. Shin teaches her the [[skills]] of a snake, tiger, etc. and she has to learn certain [[techniques]] to save the world.

This movie is great for [[kids]] who want to learn about Martial Arts and the Chinese culture but the acting and casting was horrible.

[[Brenda]] Song is a comedic [[actress]] and I can't see her playing a [[serious]] role. It was laugh out loud funny [[watching]] her [[cry]] over Shin. Shin couldn't [[act]] at all, and everything was totally [[unbelievable]].

I [[watched]] this movie and tried to think of something similar, and the thing I came up with was the Power [[Rangers]]. This movie is so [[fake]] and the stunts were so Power Ranger-esquire that it was just [[corny]] and [[stupid]]. The characters weren't likable and I just couldn't stand to watch it. [[Disney]] really needs to take time to [[make]] some decent movies. High School Musical is the only [[movie]] that deserves to be on Disney Channel, along with other [[movies]] like Jumping [[Ship]], Color of Friendship, Go [[Figure]], Read It and Weep, & Stuck in the [[Suburbs]].

[[If]] you like action-adventure and corny jokes, you'll like this movie. [[Whoo]]. This was probably the [[gravest]] DCOM ever. I [[observed]] the first half hour and I laughed. [[Lori]] Song plays Wendy, the popular girl with the hot jock [[buddy]] and stuck up friends who is determined to be Homecoming [[Quinn]]. She is [[presumed]] to [[savings]] the world as a warrior, and Shin comes to her aid to help her with her Martial [[Artistic]]. Shin teaches her the [[dexterity]] of a snake, tiger, etc. and she has to learn certain [[technique]] to save the world.

This movie is great for [[enfant]] who want to learn about Martial Arts and the Chinese culture but the acting and casting was horrible.

[[Lori]] Song is a comedic [[actor]] and I can't see her playing a [[gravest]] role. It was laugh out loud funny [[staring]] her [[wept]] over Shin. Shin couldn't [[law]] at all, and everything was totally [[amazing]].

I [[observed]] this movie and tried to think of something similar, and the thing I came up with was the Power [[Ringers]]. This movie is so [[forged]] and the stunts were so Power Ranger-esquire that it was just [[dorky]] and [[silly]]. The characters weren't likable and I just couldn't stand to watch it. [[Disneyland]] really needs to take time to [[deliver]] some decent movies. High School Musical is the only [[filmmaking]] that deserves to be on Disney Channel, along with other [[film]] like Jumping [[Battleship]], Color of Friendship, Go [[Silhouette]], Read It and Weep, & Stuck in the [[Outskirts]].

[[Though]] you like action-adventure and corny jokes, you'll like this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3743 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I must [[admit]], I was one of the [[skeptics]] who prematurely judged this show before relatively any information was disseminated about it. I determined that it was [[going]] to be a cheap spin-off guided by Ronald D. Moore wielding the retcon-wand.

I was [[wrong]]!

The pilot leaves an [[excellent]] impression upon the viewers. The accessibility is [[marvelous]]! Of course, seasoned BSG veterans will find themselves immersed in the plot, which is focused on the development of the Cylons before the first War. (58 years before the events of the BSG pilot). The pilot also allows for newcomers, clearly presenting its plot and ideas in the first part of the episode.

Don't be mistaken: "Caprica" is not BSG. We are presented with an immersive, cerebral drama dotted by provocative, daring, and controversial ideas.

The casting maintains BSG's standards; Stoltz and Morales are simply astounding. Morales' portrayal of Joseph Adama, inspired by Olmos' portrayal of William, gives a wonderful glimpse of William's heroic father. Stoltz's portrayal of Dr. Graystone provokes a lot of thinking and questions.

If the quality of the pilot is any indication of what's yet to come, RDM and the creative team are set to continue BSG's legacy of first-rate television programming with another masterfully created television masterpiece. I must [[accepted]], I was one of the [[doubters]] who prematurely judged this show before relatively any information was disseminated about it. I determined that it was [[gonna]] to be a cheap spin-off guided by Ronald D. Moore wielding the retcon-wand.

I was [[fallacious]]!

The pilot leaves an [[sumptuous]] impression upon the viewers. The accessibility is [[sumptuous]]! Of course, seasoned BSG veterans will find themselves immersed in the plot, which is focused on the development of the Cylons before the first War. (58 years before the events of the BSG pilot). The pilot also allows for newcomers, clearly presenting its plot and ideas in the first part of the episode.

Don't be mistaken: "Caprica" is not BSG. We are presented with an immersive, cerebral drama dotted by provocative, daring, and controversial ideas.

The casting maintains BSG's standards; Stoltz and Morales are simply astounding. Morales' portrayal of Joseph Adama, inspired by Olmos' portrayal of William, gives a wonderful glimpse of William's heroic father. Stoltz's portrayal of Dr. Graystone provokes a lot of thinking and questions.

If the quality of the pilot is any indication of what's yet to come, RDM and the creative team are set to continue BSG's legacy of first-rate television programming with another masterfully created television masterpiece. --------------------------------------------- Result 3744 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] After [[Racism]], Rural exodus -also known as migration from the country side- is another socio-political issue of the 1960s. WestSide Story had dealt with Racism by a love feast in an artistic view. Now, Midnight Cowboy deals with rural exodus by a friendship tragedy in a psychological view. It has a deeply grievous ending that we witness one of the two companions of fate passing away.

Director John Schlesinger [[skillfully]] [[deliver]] us the deepest secret thoughts, dreams, fantasies, fears and evaluations of two New [[York]] City scums. While the handsome Joe Buck(Voight) dreams of all the beautiful women of the world begging him to share a wild love fantasy, the poor Ratso Rizzo(Hoffman) dreams of a better and healthier life in clean and sunny Florida. Accordingly, Joe becomes a hustler to turn his fantasies into reality; and Ratso becomes a snatcher to collect enough money to migrate into Florida. Besides Ratso helps Joe to find his way to do whatever he can. They begin sharing everything in life. They share food, they share medicine, they share an uninhabited home, they share their earnings and thus they share a destiny. Regrettably as the story progresses, Joe realizes that being handsome is not the only thing to make all the beautiful women begging him to have fun; and moreover Ratso cannot see Florida since his heart fails defeated to his disease whilst he was on the bus taking him there.

The Might is always right, and the Feeble has no right in the daylight. Thence, "Midnight" gives the factual sight.

Despite the tragedy, there is no melodrama in Midnight Cowboy. Every aspect of each character is the reality of the poor who bear their inevitable fate. Thanks to this, Midnight Cowboy is a provocative view of a socio-political issue, the rural exodus. After [[Racist]], Rural exodus -also known as migration from the country side- is another socio-political issue of the 1960s. WestSide Story had dealt with Racism by a love feast in an artistic view. Now, Midnight Cowboy deals with rural exodus by a friendship tragedy in a psychological view. It has a deeply grievous ending that we witness one of the two companions of fate passing away.

Director John Schlesinger [[shrewdly]] [[delivering]] us the deepest secret thoughts, dreams, fantasies, fears and evaluations of two New [[Yorke]] City scums. While the handsome Joe Buck(Voight) dreams of all the beautiful women of the world begging him to share a wild love fantasy, the poor Ratso Rizzo(Hoffman) dreams of a better and healthier life in clean and sunny Florida. Accordingly, Joe becomes a hustler to turn his fantasies into reality; and Ratso becomes a snatcher to collect enough money to migrate into Florida. Besides Ratso helps Joe to find his way to do whatever he can. They begin sharing everything in life. They share food, they share medicine, they share an uninhabited home, they share their earnings and thus they share a destiny. Regrettably as the story progresses, Joe realizes that being handsome is not the only thing to make all the beautiful women begging him to have fun; and moreover Ratso cannot see Florida since his heart fails defeated to his disease whilst he was on the bus taking him there.

The Might is always right, and the Feeble has no right in the daylight. Thence, "Midnight" gives the factual sight.

Despite the tragedy, there is no melodrama in Midnight Cowboy. Every aspect of each character is the reality of the poor who bear their inevitable fate. Thanks to this, Midnight Cowboy is a provocative view of a socio-political issue, the rural exodus. --------------------------------------------- Result 3745 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] So i had low expectations for this movie to start with, but it [[failed]] to meet [[even]] those. while there were some [[funny]] parts, even one or two laugh out [[loud]] parts, this movie fell [[terribly]] short of what i would call good. the funniest jokes were unexpected and over very quickly, [[leaving]] us [[sitting]] there going "WTF just [[happened]]?" in addition, there were a few jokes that just dragged on and on and on. the [[part]] where he [[falls]] down the [[mountain]] had me yawning. also, the editing was really [[lacking]]. there were some poor scene transitions, but that [[seems]] to be the style nowadays. It made me laugh, but i wouldn't watch it again, and I'm very [[glad]] i [[waited]] for it to [[rent]]. give it a [[chance]], you [[might]] enjoy it, but don't think you are in for [[anything]] along the lines of the 40 year [[old]] virgin, or Superbad. So i had low expectations for this movie to start with, but it [[faulted]] to meet [[yet]] those. while there were some [[comical]] parts, even one or two laugh out [[vocal]] parts, this movie fell [[stunningly]] short of what i would call good. the funniest jokes were unexpected and over very quickly, [[letting]] us [[seated]] there going "WTF just [[arrived]]?" in addition, there were a few jokes that just dragged on and on and on. the [[party]] where he [[waterfalls]] down the [[shan]] had me yawning. also, the editing was really [[missing]]. there were some poor scene transitions, but that [[seem]] to be the style nowadays. It made me laugh, but i wouldn't watch it again, and I'm very [[happy]] i [[anticipated]] for it to [[tenancy]]. give it a [[possibilities]], you [[conceivably]] enjoy it, but don't think you are in for [[nothing]] along the lines of the 40 year [[longtime]] virgin, or Superbad. --------------------------------------------- Result 3746 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] ...this verson doesn't mangle the Bard that badly. It's [[still]] a [[horrible]] minimalist [[production]], Hamlet's Dutch uncle is [[inexplicably]] [[dubbed]] by a [[Spaniard]] (whether it's [[Ricardo]] Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the dialogue makes it through [[unscathed]], and the fact that the MST3K version feels obliged to point out repeatedly that the speeches are long *duh* doesn't strike me as incredibly humorous. Mostly it's just [[bad]] acting, though. ...this verson doesn't mangle the Bard that badly. It's [[yet]] a [[terrifying]] minimalist [[productivity]], Hamlet's Dutch uncle is [[inextricably]] [[nicknamed]] by a [[Spaniards]] (whether it's [[Riccardo]] Montalban or not is subject to debate), and Maximilian Schell overacts like never before. Most of the dialogue makes it through [[intact]], and the fact that the MST3K version feels obliged to point out repeatedly that the speeches are long *duh* doesn't strike me as incredibly humorous. Mostly it's just [[amiss]] acting, though. --------------------------------------------- Result 3747 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Yes]], indeed, it [[could]] have been a good [[movie]]. A love biangle, ([[sorry]] for the poetical [[license]], but is not a [[triangle]]!) an interesting story, [[unfortunately]] badly told. The image is sometimes weird, sometimes OK, the picture looks crowded and narrow-sighted. The sound needs more attention (it usually does in Romanian movies), the light and color filters are sometimes badly chosen. The soundtrack is [[short]] and is not [[helping]] the action. About the acting... [[sorry]] but the best [[actress]] is the landlady. The others are acting immaturely and cannot [[convince]] the viewer. The acting is poetical when it should be [[realistic]], and realistic when it should be poetical. It's a [[picture]] for [[adults]], [[told]] by the children. Bother only if [[extremely]] curious. [[Yeah]], indeed, it [[did]] have been a good [[film]]. A love biangle, ([[apologise]] for the poetical [[authorize]], but is not a [[delta]]!) an interesting story, [[tragically]] badly told. The image is sometimes weird, sometimes OK, the picture looks crowded and narrow-sighted. The sound needs more attention (it usually does in Romanian movies), the light and color filters are sometimes badly chosen. The soundtrack is [[concise]] and is not [[helped]] the action. About the acting... [[apologise]] but the best [[actor]] is the landlady. The others are acting immaturely and cannot [[persuading]] the viewer. The acting is poetical when it should be [[pragmatic]], and realistic when it should be poetical. It's a [[imaging]] for [[adult]], [[said]] by the children. Bother only if [[tremendously]] curious. --------------------------------------------- Result 3748 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Weaker entry in the Bulldog Drummond series, with John Howard in the role. Usual funny banter and antics, but not much plot. Barrymore gets something to do as the inspector, swapping disguises to follow Drummond, Algy, and Tenny on a wild goose chase (mostly in circles; perhaps the budget was tighter than usual) to rescue poor Phyllis, who is being held captive by people who want to lure Drummond to his doom. For those keeping score, in this one, Drummond is planning to ask Phyllis to marry him and Algy is worried about missing the baby's christening. It's fun to see Algy and Tenny dressed up as fisherman to blend in at The Angler's Rest, but little of it rises above silly. --------------------------------------------- Result 3749 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] At one end of the Eighties Warren Beatty created and starred in the literate epic Reds about the founding of the Soviet Union as seen through the eyes of iconoclast radical John Reed. It was a profound film both entertaining and with a message presented by an all star cast. At the end of the decade Warren Beatty created another kind of epic in Dick Tracy that makes no [[pretense]] to being anything other than entertainment with a whole bunch of the best actors around just having a [[great]] old time hamming it up under tons of makeup.

That both Reds and Dick Tracy could come from the same individual speaks volumes about the range this man has as a player. In this film Beatty managed to get all the famous cartoon characters from the strip and put them in one original screenplay.

The city's top mobster Big Boy Caprice is making a move to really eliminate competition. The film opens with him rubbing out Lips Manlis's henchmen in a Valentine Massacre style shooting and then Lips himself being fitted for a cement overcoat. But Caprice's moves are making him a target for Tracy.

In the meantime a third mysterious and faceless individual is looking to topple Caprice himself. Will our hero sort out this thicket of crime?

The spirit of fun this film has is truly infectious. When people like Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Paul Sorvino, William Forsythe, R.G. Armstrong get themselves outrageously made-up to look like the cartoon creations of strip author Chester Gould and then indulge in an exercise of carving the biggest slice of ham, you've got to love this film.

Al Pacino got a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, but any of these guys could have, it's only that Pacino as Big Boy Caprice gets the most screen time. Only Beatty plays it completely straight, the others all seem to play off of him. Dick Tracy won Oscars for Best Art&Set Design, Best Song written by Stephen Sondheim and introduced by Madonna, Sooner Or Later. The fact he was even able to get somebody like Sondheim to write a score for this film only shows Sondheim wanted to get in on the fun. As for Madonna, the Material Girl does more than hold her own with all these acting heavyweights as club torch singer Breathless Mahoney.

Before this film, Dick Tracy movies were consigned to the B pictures and worse as Saturday afternoon serials. The only thing that rivals this all star extravaganza is a radio broadcast done for Armed Forces Radio during World War II that got to vinyl. Can you believe a cast like Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Dinah Shore, Jimmy Durante, Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, and the Andrews Sisters? Try and find a recording of that gem.

Until then Warren Beatty's classic comic strip for the big screen will do nicely. At one end of the Eighties Warren Beatty created and starred in the literate epic Reds about the founding of the Soviet Union as seen through the eyes of iconoclast radical John Reed. It was a profound film both entertaining and with a message presented by an all star cast. At the end of the decade Warren Beatty created another kind of epic in Dick Tracy that makes no [[pretension]] to being anything other than entertainment with a whole bunch of the best actors around just having a [[whopping]] old time hamming it up under tons of makeup.

That both Reds and Dick Tracy could come from the same individual speaks volumes about the range this man has as a player. In this film Beatty managed to get all the famous cartoon characters from the strip and put them in one original screenplay.

The city's top mobster Big Boy Caprice is making a move to really eliminate competition. The film opens with him rubbing out Lips Manlis's henchmen in a Valentine Massacre style shooting and then Lips himself being fitted for a cement overcoat. But Caprice's moves are making him a target for Tracy.

In the meantime a third mysterious and faceless individual is looking to topple Caprice himself. Will our hero sort out this thicket of crime?

The spirit of fun this film has is truly infectious. When people like Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Paul Sorvino, William Forsythe, R.G. Armstrong get themselves outrageously made-up to look like the cartoon creations of strip author Chester Gould and then indulge in an exercise of carving the biggest slice of ham, you've got to love this film.

Al Pacino got a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, but any of these guys could have, it's only that Pacino as Big Boy Caprice gets the most screen time. Only Beatty plays it completely straight, the others all seem to play off of him. Dick Tracy won Oscars for Best Art&Set Design, Best Song written by Stephen Sondheim and introduced by Madonna, Sooner Or Later. The fact he was even able to get somebody like Sondheim to write a score for this film only shows Sondheim wanted to get in on the fun. As for Madonna, the Material Girl does more than hold her own with all these acting heavyweights as club torch singer Breathless Mahoney.

Before this film, Dick Tracy movies were consigned to the B pictures and worse as Saturday afternoon serials. The only thing that rivals this all star extravaganza is a radio broadcast done for Armed Forces Radio during World War II that got to vinyl. Can you believe a cast like Bing Crosby, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Dinah Shore, Jimmy Durante, Judy Garland, Frank Morgan, and the Andrews Sisters? Try and find a recording of that gem.

Until then Warren Beatty's classic comic strip for the big screen will do nicely. --------------------------------------------- Result 3750 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[Seldom]] do we [[see]] such [[short]] [[comments]] [[written]] by IMDb filmgoers. [[Perhaps]] it's because this [[lightweight]] dark comedy entertains and pleases without depth, or are we [[missing]] something? I'd watch it again if I had some incentive.

So what's a happenstance? To the French it is "[[Le]] Battement d'Ailes du Papillon" Serendipity? [[Fate]]? Perhaps it's an event that is the culmination of a series of random [[happenings]]. We've all had these (it's called [[life]]) but when [[looked]] at in this way, you begin to get the feeling that "random" might be more like "fated."

A 'happenstance' in this [[film]] might be an occurrence as minor as knocking a few leaves of lettuce off the back of a truck or as major as basing a major life decision on the accuracy of a stranger tossing of a pebble. All these incidents cause other events that ... well you get the picture? Dominoes. Multiply those by 30 characters and an average of 6 each and you have to really stretch your imagination to accept the remote chance that this scenario could happen. And I think that there's a diagnosis for those who believe that life is like this. But then this is the [[magic]] world of cinema.

We admit that it is fun to watch the way the writer/director weaves together these unrelated events into a story which enmeshes the [[lives]] of these French [[citizens]]. If you have a couple of hours and are looking for a [[whimsical]] escape, here's the place to do it. [[Or]] if you're [[recovering]] from surgery and aren't going anywhere anyway, this will [[engage]] you while your stitches are healing.

"Happenstance" will not go down as an [[award]] winner but it should develop a cult following. Stranger things have happened.

Soren Kierkegaard is [[attributed]] with the following: "[[Life]] can only be understood backwards; but it [[must]] be lived forward." If you looked at the detail in many of your own life [[experiences]] (meeting your first [[love]], finding the [[perfect]] gift, your last auto accident) you would find a [[series]] of seemingly [[random]] [[events]] [[leading]] up to it.

That's the [[answer]]! I forgot to bring along an existentialist to explain "Happenstance" to me. [[Rarely]] do we [[consults]] such [[terse]] [[remark]] [[typed]] by IMDb filmgoers. [[Maybe]] it's because this [[slight]] dark comedy entertains and pleases without depth, or are we [[gone]] something? I'd watch it again if I had some incentive.

So what's a happenstance? To the French it is "[[Lai]] Battement d'Ailes du Papillon" Serendipity? [[Fates]]? Perhaps it's an event that is the culmination of a series of random [[phenomena]]. We've all had these (it's called [[iife]]) but when [[seemed]] at in this way, you begin to get the feeling that "random" might be more like "fated."

A 'happenstance' in this [[flick]] might be an occurrence as minor as knocking a few leaves of lettuce off the back of a truck or as major as basing a major life decision on the accuracy of a stranger tossing of a pebble. All these incidents cause other events that ... well you get the picture? Dominoes. Multiply those by 30 characters and an average of 6 each and you have to really stretch your imagination to accept the remote chance that this scenario could happen. And I think that there's a diagnosis for those who believe that life is like this. But then this is the [[wizardry]] world of cinema.

We admit that it is fun to watch the way the writer/director weaves together these unrelated events into a story which enmeshes the [[life]] of these French [[citizen]]. If you have a couple of hours and are looking for a [[skittish]] escape, here's the place to do it. [[Orr]] if you're [[recuperating]] from surgery and aren't going anywhere anyway, this will [[embark]] you while your stitches are healing.

"Happenstance" will not go down as an [[scholarship]] winner but it should develop a cult following. Stranger things have happened.

Soren Kierkegaard is [[conferred]] with the following: "[[Living]] can only be understood backwards; but it [[ought]] be lived forward." If you looked at the detail in many of your own life [[experiments]] (meeting your first [[adores]], finding the [[irreproachable]] gift, your last auto accident) you would find a [[serials]] of seemingly [[haphazard]] [[phenomena]] [[principal]] up to it.

That's the [[answering]]! I forgot to bring along an existentialist to explain "Happenstance" to me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3751 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Ah WINTER [[KILLS]] , [[based]] on the [[novel]] by [[Richard]] Condon which deals with a [[conspiracy]] that killed the president of the United States 20 years [[ago]] . I knew Condon [[also]] wrote THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE which dealt with a [[similar]] theme and was [[looking]] forward to [[seeing]] an intelligent thriller

[[WINTER]] [[KILLS]] [[left]] me [[cold]] . It's not a [[thriller]] - It's a [[piece]] of [[worthless]] crap , possibly the [[worst]] [[movie]] I've [[seen]] this month and boy have I seen a lot of bad movies in [[June]] . The [[problem]] [[lies]] in both the [[direction]] and the script and seeing as [[William]] Richert was responsible for both then he should be blamed entirely for this unfunny [[farce]]

There's two [[things]] [[wrong]] with this movie . First off is the way everything is presented in a totally over the top [[manner]] . It's not as OTT as say something like that James Bond movie with David Niven and Peter Sellers but everything has a farcial edge to it with actors completely mugging their performances . This might have been justified if there was entertainment value to the movie but there's none . As a satire it's very silly , so silly that it becomes almost unwatchable . Secondly the scenes seem to have been cut so much that they're rendered senseless . Take for example a scene where the hero is confronting a loopy militia leader called Dawson . Dawson tells the hero he has 30 seconds start then it cuts to the hero being on board a plane . The scenes begin and end with no rhyme nor reason

A dire movie that's an ordeal to sit through Ah WINTER [[MURDER]] , [[founded]] on the [[newer]] by [[Ritchie]] Condon which deals with a [[conspiring]] that killed the president of the United States 20 years [[previously]] . I knew Condon [[similarly]] wrote THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE which dealt with a [[analogue]] theme and was [[search]] forward to [[witnessing]] an intelligent thriller

[[WINTERS]] [[MURDERED]] [[exited]] me [[chilled]] . It's not a [[thrillers]] - It's a [[slice]] of [[superfluous]] crap , possibly the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I've [[noticed]] this month and boy have I seen a lot of bad movies in [[Janvier]] . The [[troubles]] [[resides]] in both the [[directions]] and the script and seeing as [[Wilhelm]] Richert was responsible for both then he should be blamed entirely for this unfunny [[masquerade]]

There's two [[matters]] [[erroneous]] with this movie . First off is the way everything is presented in a totally over the top [[modes]] . It's not as OTT as say something like that James Bond movie with David Niven and Peter Sellers but everything has a farcial edge to it with actors completely mugging their performances . This might have been justified if there was entertainment value to the movie but there's none . As a satire it's very silly , so silly that it becomes almost unwatchable . Secondly the scenes seem to have been cut so much that they're rendered senseless . Take for example a scene where the hero is confronting a loopy militia leader called Dawson . Dawson tells the hero he has 30 seconds start then it cuts to the hero being on board a plane . The scenes begin and end with no rhyme nor reason

A dire movie that's an ordeal to sit through --------------------------------------------- Result 3752 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I did not set very high expectations for this movie, which left me pleasantly [[surprised]]. The story is a little strange sometimes but overall I [[think]] it has an acceptable credibility. The action scenes are rather nice and the accompanying music is used to induce a a bit of patriotic feelings common to US movies. This may not be the [[best]] movie ever but it's uncommon for Sweden and I hope to see more similar ones in the future. I did not set very high expectations for this movie, which left me pleasantly [[dumbfounded]]. The story is a little strange sometimes but overall I [[ideas]] it has an acceptable credibility. The action scenes are rather nice and the accompanying music is used to induce a a bit of patriotic feelings common to US movies. This may not be the [[better]] movie ever but it's uncommon for Sweden and I hope to see more similar ones in the future. --------------------------------------------- Result 3753 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would make a [[movie]] like this. The plot is tired, the acting is strained, the language is [[consistently]] foul and at times the over use of the "F" word seemed like a lack of dialog was prevalent so 'let's throw in another couple of "F's" for good measure, that's what the American public wants to hear'. Gossett was [[particularly]] [[foul]] and [[seemed]] to enjoy his part. [[Forget]] this c__p, [[rent]] 'Shrek" and have a good laugh. For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would make a [[kino]] like this. The plot is tired, the acting is strained, the language is [[invariably]] foul and at times the over use of the "F" word seemed like a lack of dialog was prevalent so 'let's throw in another couple of "F's" for good measure, that's what the American public wants to hear'. Gossett was [[principally]] [[grubby]] and [[appeared]] to enjoy his part. [[Forgotten]] this c__p, [[tenancy]] 'Shrek" and have a good laugh. --------------------------------------------- Result 3754 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] That's what one of the [[girls]] [[said]] at the [[end]].

Is the [[soccer]] game a [[metaphor]] for a qualifying game between the [[girls]] (or more broadly, a free-thinking [[group]]) and the authority? "To [[Germany]]" means to a [[future]] that's of [[hope]]?

It's one of the most [[unforgettable]] cinematic experience I've ever had -- [[despite]] the crude cinematography and plot, and [[mild]] over-acting ([[though]] I [[like]] the cast -- they're [[lovable]] and well above the [[expectation]] for amateurs). The [[ridiculous]] situation is well [[captured]]. I can feel the deep frustration being [[denied]] to a game (being female and a soccer [[fan]]) and I cannot [[stop]] [[thinking]] how to [[make]] a convincing [[disguise]]. I wonder why there's no women's section in which protection from [[dirty]] [[language]] and [[bad]] [[behavior]] can be [[provided]] -- [[defeating]] the [[flawed]] [[reasons]] for the [[deny]].

The [[movie]] is very cleverly [[made]] -- the [[amazing]] title, the filming during the actual game, the spontaneity, and [[various]] [[methods]] to put the [[viewers]] into the shoes of the [[characters]] -- the [[game]] that's so [[important]] but [[inaccessible]] (not [[shown]]), the [[luring]] [[light]] and [[cheering]] [[sound]] from the stadium, the confinement of the van, and the uselessness of it when those inside connect with the celebrating crowds outside. I can feel the [[comfort]] [[coming]] from the [[radio]], the [[drinks]] and the [[food]], and of course, the [[kindness]] and consideration from each [[character]] to others. [[During]] the [[end]] credits, I am amused that no [[character]] has a [[name]] -- he's just any "soldier" and she's just any "[[girl]]" or "sister". That's what one of the [[female]] [[avowed]] at the [[ceases]].

Is the [[football]] game a [[analogy]] for a qualifying game between the [[females]] (or more broadly, a free-thinking [[clusters]]) and the authority? "To [[Germans]]" means to a [[futuristic]] that's of [[hopes]]?

It's one of the most [[eventful]] cinematic experience I've ever had -- [[while]] the crude cinematography and plot, and [[soft]] over-acting ([[despite]] I [[likes]] the cast -- they're [[loveable]] and well above the [[anticipation]] for amateurs). The [[laughable]] situation is well [[catching]]. I can feel the deep frustration being [[denying]] to a game (being female and a soccer [[breather]]) and I cannot [[cease]] [[think]] how to [[deliver]] a convincing [[outfit]]. I wonder why there's no women's section in which protection from [[nasty]] [[linguistics]] and [[faulty]] [[demeanor]] can be [[supplied]] -- [[beating]] the [[defective]] [[justification]] for the [[denying]].

The [[flick]] is very cleverly [[introduced]] -- the [[awesome]] title, the filming during the actual game, the spontaneity, and [[several]] [[means]] to put the [[spectators]] into the shoes of the [[traits]] -- the [[gaming]] that's so [[notable]] but [[unavailable]] (not [[display]]), the [[attract]] [[lighting]] and [[chanting]] [[sounds]] from the stadium, the confinement of the van, and the uselessness of it when those inside connect with the celebrating crowds outside. I can feel the [[consolation]] [[arriving]] from the [[radios]], the [[beverage]] and the [[catering]], and of course, the [[generosity]] and consideration from each [[trait]] to others. [[Onto]] the [[termination]] credits, I am amused that no [[characteristics]] has a [[behalf]] -- he's just any "soldier" and she's just any "[[chica]]" or "sister". --------------------------------------------- Result 3755 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] It [[appears]] that there's no middle ground on this [[movie]]! Most of it takes place in a dream and, like most [[dreams]], it's [[often]] [[foolish]] and illogical. It's also a [[gorgeous]] production with some [[great]] songs and fine performances, especially by our [[angel]].

Jeanette's deadpan, unknowing insults and various other [[faux]] pas at the dream reception are [[hilarious]], and her jitterbug with Binnie Barnes is a [[surprise]] and a [[delight]]. At one point, she gets to sing a snippet from Carmen, followed by the final trio of Faust (holding a lapdog, for some strange reason), then "Aloha Oe" on the beach!

It's a surreal comedy--tremendously entertaining if you can get into the groove. It [[emerges]] that there's no middle ground on this [[cinematography]]! Most of it takes place in a dream and, like most [[dream]], it's [[habitually]] [[dopey]] and illogical. It's also a [[sumptuous]] production with some [[prodigious]] songs and fine performances, especially by our [[angels]].

Jeanette's deadpan, unknowing insults and various other [[untruthful]] pas at the dream reception are [[comical]], and her jitterbug with Binnie Barnes is a [[amaze]] and a [[jubilation]]. At one point, she gets to sing a snippet from Carmen, followed by the final trio of Faust (holding a lapdog, for some strange reason), then "Aloha Oe" on the beach!

It's a surreal comedy--tremendously entertaining if you can get into the groove. --------------------------------------------- Result 3756 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Dil was a memorable [[movie]] that bring to the celluloid a [[great]] director [[like]] Indra Kumar. The movie followed with Beta, Ishq, Raja & Masti all of whom were superb.

But then every successful director gives a few [[horrible]] movies alongwith some hits too. Pyare Mohan is one such movie.

[[Though]] the comedies are told [[nicely]] but then they [[fail]] the viewer to laugh. Comparing with the kind of comedy [[movies]] being made today this is a [[dumb]].

If you really want to watch a movie and laugh, [[please]] don't watch this. Because the [[pathetic]] [[comedy]] will make you cry only.

In short, the movie is worth a [[miss]]. Dil was a memorable [[filmmaking]] that bring to the celluloid a [[wondrous]] director [[iike]] Indra Kumar. The movie followed with Beta, Ishq, Raja & Masti all of whom were superb.

But then every successful director gives a few [[horrendous]] movies alongwith some hits too. Pyare Mohan is one such movie.

[[Despite]] the comedies are told [[courteously]] but then they [[fails]] the viewer to laugh. Comparing with the kind of comedy [[cinematography]] being made today this is a [[dolt]].

If you really want to watch a movie and laugh, [[invites]] don't watch this. Because the [[deplorable]] [[humour]] will make you cry only.

In short, the movie is worth a [[mademoiselle]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3757 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] THis was a hilarious movie and I would see it again and again. It isn't a movie for someone who doesn't have a fun sense of a humor, but for people who enoy comedy like Chris Rock its a perfect movie in my opinion. It is really funnny --------------------------------------------- Result 3758 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (83%)]] --> [[Positive (100%)]] This is quite possibly the [[worst]] movie of all time. It stars Shaquille O'Neil and is about a rapping genie. Apparently someone out there thought that this was a good idea and got suckered into dishing out cash to produce this wonderful masterpiece. The movie gets 1 out of 10. This is quite possibly the [[gravest]] movie of all time. It stars Shaquille O'Neil and is about a rapping genie. Apparently someone out there thought that this was a good idea and got suckered into dishing out cash to produce this wonderful masterpiece. The movie gets 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3759 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Noting]] the [[cast]], I recently watched this movie on TCM, [[hoping]] for an under-appreciated gem, as I regard many films from the 30's. This is no gem - not [[even]] semi-precious. The anachronistic clothing and 1930's Rolls Royce limo hit you immediately. The casting is strange, also. But [[mostly]], there are too [[many]] dumb and unnecessary plot devices. This film has lots of good [[ingredients]] and a basic plot that holds promise, but the components aren't mixed according to the right recipe. It [[simply]] doesn't come together like it should. And that's a shame. WIth a few rather obvious, but minor alterations, this might have been a very good movie.

The film is about an American showgirl (Jean Harlow) seeking a rich British husband - preferably from the nobility. She meets Franchot Tone and his buddy, who are on a lark in a Rolls Royce owned by his buddy's employer. Harlow mistakenly assumes Tone is the Lord who owns the Rolls, and she sets her sights on him. This early part of the film is a light comedy of no real distinction.

However, Tone unwittingly uncovers the fact that his employer is actually a German 5th columnist on the eve of WWI, and that is when the movie changes tone altogether and begins to fall apart. Tone and Harlow are married, but just as the honeymoon begins, he is gunned down by a Mata Hari-type (Benita Hume), and Harlow flees the scene, with a bystander accusing her of Tone's murder. (In fact, Tone recovers from the wounds.)

Harlow flees to France, where she falls in love again - this time with a wealthy French cad (Cary Grant). Tone, now in the army, and Harlow are unexpectedly brought back together in Grant's hospital room where he is in rehab from a plane crash. In the following scene, Tone accuses Harlow of abandoning him because she is essentially a gold-digger. Harlow never explains about the witness' accusing her of murder and her panic! That is one of those unreal, movie-plot-device break-downs in the story.

Then Tone is also brought back into contact with the woman (Hume) who shot him. She is on hand to watch her paramour, Grant, test the new plane that Tone has delivered to him from England. Incredibly, both Hume and Tone dimly recognize each other, but simply can't place where from! Okay, so Tone was shot and almost died; perhaps his memory is a little out of whack. But how many men did Hume shoot that she would forget one of her marks? (She does not seem to be faking the memory lapse.)

This is inexplicable and unnecessary. Hume should have absolutely recognized him, but played it coy when she realized that Tone wasn't able to place her. That would have been a much better treatment of that issue.

The finale also is very unsatisfying. The movie, as made, has Tone and Harlow conspiring to preserve the good reputation of the cad, Grant, leading to his fraudulent burial as a hero. Then Harlow and Tone just walk away. It is noble to preserve the French public's perception of their national war hero, but very unsatisfying as a love story!

What the film begs for is this: Harlow explains that she fled in a panic in the face of accusations of murder; Tone forgives her and quietly rekindles his love for her; he then carries a torch for her, even while helping her to rig the crash site to preserve Grant's reputation. Meanwhile, Harlow finally recognizes Grant for the cad he is. Then having seen Tone for the brave and noble man he is, Harlow rekindles feelings for him, too. At film's end, the two of them become reconciled even as they work together to rig the appearance of Grant's death. After Grant's hero's burial, we see them embrace and kiss at the fade-out. That would have made a nice little movie. For Cary Grant fans, it would have been even better had Tone played the French cad who is killed and Grant the long-suffering first husband, reunited with Harlow.

It is incomprehensible that Franchot Tone is cast as the Irishman living in England, while Cary Grant is cast as the Frenchman. This movie would have been much better had they reversed roles. That also would have been more conducive to the film that should have been... [[Note]] the [[casting]], I recently watched this movie on TCM, [[expecting]] for an under-appreciated gem, as I regard many films from the 30's. This is no gem - not [[yet]] semi-precious. The anachronistic clothing and 1930's Rolls Royce limo hit you immediately. The casting is strange, also. But [[predominantly]], there are too [[innumerable]] dumb and unnecessary plot devices. This film has lots of good [[element]] and a basic plot that holds promise, but the components aren't mixed according to the right recipe. It [[exclusively]] doesn't come together like it should. And that's a shame. WIth a few rather obvious, but minor alterations, this might have been a very good movie.

The film is about an American showgirl (Jean Harlow) seeking a rich British husband - preferably from the nobility. She meets Franchot Tone and his buddy, who are on a lark in a Rolls Royce owned by his buddy's employer. Harlow mistakenly assumes Tone is the Lord who owns the Rolls, and she sets her sights on him. This early part of the film is a light comedy of no real distinction.

However, Tone unwittingly uncovers the fact that his employer is actually a German 5th columnist on the eve of WWI, and that is when the movie changes tone altogether and begins to fall apart. Tone and Harlow are married, but just as the honeymoon begins, he is gunned down by a Mata Hari-type (Benita Hume), and Harlow flees the scene, with a bystander accusing her of Tone's murder. (In fact, Tone recovers from the wounds.)

Harlow flees to France, where she falls in love again - this time with a wealthy French cad (Cary Grant). Tone, now in the army, and Harlow are unexpectedly brought back together in Grant's hospital room where he is in rehab from a plane crash. In the following scene, Tone accuses Harlow of abandoning him because she is essentially a gold-digger. Harlow never explains about the witness' accusing her of murder and her panic! That is one of those unreal, movie-plot-device break-downs in the story.

Then Tone is also brought back into contact with the woman (Hume) who shot him. She is on hand to watch her paramour, Grant, test the new plane that Tone has delivered to him from England. Incredibly, both Hume and Tone dimly recognize each other, but simply can't place where from! Okay, so Tone was shot and almost died; perhaps his memory is a little out of whack. But how many men did Hume shoot that she would forget one of her marks? (She does not seem to be faking the memory lapse.)

This is inexplicable and unnecessary. Hume should have absolutely recognized him, but played it coy when she realized that Tone wasn't able to place her. That would have been a much better treatment of that issue.

The finale also is very unsatisfying. The movie, as made, has Tone and Harlow conspiring to preserve the good reputation of the cad, Grant, leading to his fraudulent burial as a hero. Then Harlow and Tone just walk away. It is noble to preserve the French public's perception of their national war hero, but very unsatisfying as a love story!

What the film begs for is this: Harlow explains that she fled in a panic in the face of accusations of murder; Tone forgives her and quietly rekindles his love for her; he then carries a torch for her, even while helping her to rig the crash site to preserve Grant's reputation. Meanwhile, Harlow finally recognizes Grant for the cad he is. Then having seen Tone for the brave and noble man he is, Harlow rekindles feelings for him, too. At film's end, the two of them become reconciled even as they work together to rig the appearance of Grant's death. After Grant's hero's burial, we see them embrace and kiss at the fade-out. That would have made a nice little movie. For Cary Grant fans, it would have been even better had Tone played the French cad who is killed and Grant the long-suffering first husband, reunited with Harlow.

It is incomprehensible that Franchot Tone is cast as the Irishman living in England, while Cary Grant is cast as the Frenchman. This movie would have been much better had they reversed roles. That also would have been more conducive to the film that should have been... --------------------------------------------- Result 3760 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What more can I [[say]]? The acting was, almost without [[exception]], amateurish. The [[directing]] and continuity were [[pitiful]]. The sceenplay was [[predictable]] down to the very [[last]] scene and the dialog tedious. One of the features on the [[DVD]] was labeled "Gag Reel" but that [[could]] have been a description of a viewer's reaction to most of the movie.

One of the most [[amusing]] things was in the director's [[comments]] on the DVD. He [[said]], with a straight face, that he had set out to make a [[movie]] with high production values and a name cast - and that he had succeeded. With delusions like that it's easy to [[understand]] how the [[movie]] [[turned]] out as it did.

Perhaps the most [[disappointing]] aspect was the monster. The darkwolf suit was a [[modified]] [[ape]] suit ([[per]] the 'making of' [[feature]] on the DVD) and [[rather]] looked it. The [[mask]] and [[claws]] were [[little]] [[better]] than off the [[shelf]] [[jobs]] from any costume [[store]]. The cgi [[effects]] were painfully [[obvious]] and of quality similar to an [[inexpensive]] [[video]] [[game]]. What more can I [[says]]? The acting was, almost without [[exemptions]], amateurish. The [[instructing]] and continuity were [[sorrowful]]. The sceenplay was [[foreseeable]] down to the very [[latter]] scene and the dialog tedious. One of the features on the [[DVDS]] was labeled "Gag Reel" but that [[wo]] have been a description of a viewer's reaction to most of the movie.

One of the most [[entertaining]] things was in the director's [[observations]] on the DVD. He [[avowed]], with a straight face, that he had set out to make a [[cinema]] with high production values and a name cast - and that he had succeeded. With delusions like that it's easy to [[fathom]] how the [[flick]] [[transformed]] out as it did.

Perhaps the most [[discouraging]] aspect was the monster. The darkwolf suit was a [[altering]] [[monkey]] suit ([[for]] the 'making of' [[peculiarities]] on the DVD) and [[somewhat]] looked it. The [[masks]] and [[tweezers]] were [[kiddo]] [[best]] than off the [[bookshelf]] [[work]] from any costume [[boutique]]. The cgi [[influencing]] were painfully [[manifest]] and of quality similar to an [[affordable]] [[videos]] [[games]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3761 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I [[imagine]] Victorian literature slowly [[sinking]] into the mire of the increasingly distant [[past]], pulled down by the weight of its under-skirts. Along comes television: at its best, it has a redemptive power, and with dramatisations like those the BBC [[produce]] so [[finely]], Victorian literature [[gets]] a [[new]] stab at [[life]]. The religious themes, the moral overtones, may be increasingly [[ill]] at ease in a [[world]] no [[longer]] [[easily]] [[shocked]], and [[acquainted]] with cohabitation, affairs and domestic violence. But those [[old]], well-told [[stories]] have [[enduring]] power, and this is one's a hidden gem.

It's hard to gauge today just how forceful, [[feminist]] and extraordinary Ann Bronte's masterpiece, "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall", actually was. Emerging from the primeval slime of restrictive corsets – bodily, mental, societal – her heroine, Helen Huntingdon, [[escapes]] a [[miserable]] [[marriage]], flees brutality and alcoholism, [[braves]] not only her [[abusive]] husband's fury, but society's pinched intolerance and malicious gossip, to wreak [[change]] in her [[life]]. She [[pays]] a [[price]]; but retains her self-respect; she falls in [[love]] along the way; she [[emerges]] battered but victorious, and [[strong]]. I just love [[watching]] women like these on screen.

The [[actors]] are superb – the [[best]] Brits have to offer. The love story is [[beautifully]] handled, with [[real]] [[passion]] and feeling by well-matched [[actors]]. Tara Fitzgerald inhabits [[every]] aspect of the [[complicated]] heroine, and as has been said here by other reviewers, no [[less]] sharply defined and beautiful a face could survive that petrifying hairstyle. Toby Stephens, striking sparks off her, contributes just the right combination of headstrong, handsome youth and passionate, yearning vulnerability. Rupert Graves (one of my favourite British [[actors]] ever) enjoys himself as the charismatic villain (so much so that you're almost with him at the end. No one's perfect). The supporting cast [[ably]] [[create]] a world into which you sink without feeling that coarse compromises have been made to modern tastes, and without having felt preached to. Another BBC [[classic]], highly [[recommended]]: this is how romantic literature should be dramatised. I [[imagining]] Victorian literature slowly [[sink]] into the mire of the increasingly distant [[yesteryear]], pulled down by the weight of its under-skirts. Along comes television: at its best, it has a redemptive power, and with dramatisations like those the BBC [[generating]] so [[exquisitely]], Victorian literature [[got]] a [[novo]] stab at [[iife]]. The religious themes, the moral overtones, may be increasingly [[unwell]] at ease in a [[monde]] no [[anymore]] [[conveniently]] [[astonished]], and [[abreast]] with cohabitation, affairs and domestic violence. But those [[ancient]], well-told [[histories]] have [[lasting]] power, and this is one's a hidden gem.

It's hard to gauge today just how forceful, [[feminists]] and extraordinary Ann Bronte's masterpiece, "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall", actually was. Emerging from the primeval slime of restrictive corsets – bodily, mental, societal – her heroine, Helen Huntingdon, [[flees]] a [[pathetic]] [[marries]], flees brutality and alcoholism, [[yankees]] not only her [[offensive]] husband's fury, but society's pinched intolerance and malicious gossip, to wreak [[amendment]] in her [[lifetime]]. She [[salaries]] a [[costing]]; but retains her self-respect; she falls in [[likes]] along the way; she [[appears]] battered but victorious, and [[vigorous]]. I just love [[staring]] women like these on screen.

The [[actresses]] are superb – the [[better]] Brits have to offer. The love story is [[divinely]] handled, with [[actual]] [[enthusiasm]] and feeling by well-matched [[actresses]]. Tara Fitzgerald inhabits [[any]] aspect of the [[sprawling]] heroine, and as has been said here by other reviewers, no [[lowest]] sharply defined and beautiful a face could survive that petrifying hairstyle. Toby Stephens, striking sparks off her, contributes just the right combination of headstrong, handsome youth and passionate, yearning vulnerability. Rupert Graves (one of my favourite British [[protagonists]] ever) enjoys himself as the charismatic villain (so much so that you're almost with him at the end. No one's perfect). The supporting cast [[shrewdly]] [[creating]] a world into which you sink without feeling that coarse compromises have been made to modern tastes, and without having felt preached to. Another BBC [[typical]], highly [[recommends]]: this is how romantic literature should be dramatised. --------------------------------------------- Result 3762 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] "A Mouse in the House" is a very classic cartoon by Tom & Jerry, faithful to their tradition but with jokes of its own. It is hysterical, hilarious, very entertaining and [[quite]] amusing. Artwork is of [[good]] quality either.

This short isn't just about Tom trying to [[catch]] Jerry. [[Butch]] [[lives]] in the same [[house]] and he's trying to [[catch]] the [[mouse]] too, because «there's only going to be one cat in this house in the morning -- and that's the cat that [[catches]] the [[mouse]]».

[[If]] you [[ask]] me, there are [[lots]] of funny gags in this [[cartoon]]. The funniest for me are, for [[example]], when [[Mammy]] Two [[Shoes]] [[sees]] the two lazy cats [[sleeping]] and [[says]] [[sarcastically]] «I'm [[glad]] you're enjoying the siesta» and that she [[hopes]] they're satisfied because she ain't, [[making]] the two cats gasp. Another funny gag is when Tom [[disguises]] himself as [[Mammy]] Two [[Shoes]] and slams [[Butch]] with a frying pan and then Butch does the same [[trick]] to Tom. Of course that, even funnier than this, is when the [[real]] [[Mammy]] Two Shoes [[appears]] and both (dumb!) cats [[think]] they are seeing each other [[disguised]] as [[Mammy]] and then they both [[attack]] her on the "rear" - lol. [[Naturally]] that she [[gets]] [[mad]] and once she [[gets]] [[mad]], she isn't someone to mess with. But [[even]] Jerry doesn't [[win]] this [[time]], because he is [[expelled]] by her too. "A Mouse in the House" is a very classic cartoon by Tom & Jerry, faithful to their tradition but with jokes of its own. It is hysterical, hilarious, very entertaining and [[rather]] amusing. Artwork is of [[buena]] quality either.

This short isn't just about Tom trying to [[captured]] Jerry. [[Dyke]] [[inhabits]] in the same [[maison]] and he's trying to [[captured]] the [[smile]] too, because «there's only going to be one cat in this house in the morning -- and that's the cat that [[catch]] the [[mice]]».

[[Unless]] you [[calls]] me, there are [[lot]] of funny gags in this [[toon]]. The funniest for me are, for [[instance]], when [[Mother]] Two [[Shoe]] [[believes]] the two lazy cats [[slept]] and [[say]] [[ironically]] «I'm [[grateful]] you're enjoying the siesta» and that she [[waits]] they're satisfied because she ain't, [[doing]] the two cats gasp. Another funny gag is when Tom [[conceals]] himself as [[Moms]] Two [[Shoe]] and slams [[Dyke]] with a frying pan and then Butch does the same [[ruse]] to Tom. Of course that, even funnier than this, is when the [[actual]] [[Mommy]] Two Shoes [[appearing]] and both (dumb!) cats [[believing]] they are seeing each other [[concealed]] as [[Moms]] and then they both [[onslaught]] her on the "rear" - lol. [[Clearly]] that she [[attains]] [[insane]] and once she [[get]] [[irate]], she isn't someone to mess with. But [[yet]] Jerry doesn't [[earning]] this [[period]], because he is [[evicting]] by her too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3763 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] First To [[Die]] 2003

I'll admit my mistake first: I didn't realize this was a made for [[TV]] movie. I was "thrown off" by the "[[R]]" certification. The plot is strong, but the movie is about 40 minutes too long. The direction and [[continuity]] were excellent. [[For]] the most part the cast was [[exceptional]] and did a good job with their characters. The down side of the movie is that it definitely falls into the "chick flick" genre. Although there are some violent scenes, none of the violence should call for an "R" rating. There is no nudity or gratuitous sex scenes. Actually, there are no sex scenes. Ona Grauer (who is absolutely beautiful), Kristina Copeland, Sonya Salomaa, and Glynis Davies were all guests on the SG-1 series, but this movie did nothing to advance their careers since they were all used as low level supporting actresses. Robert Patrick was fantastic, as he usually is and Mitch Pileggi made me think of a modern day Lee Marvin. The very talented Megan Gallagher who I came to respect as an actor during the Millennium series, was given nothing challenging to show her range of abilities. The greatest disappointment with regard to the cast was Tracy Pollan. Aside from being a below average actress and not particularly attractive, her voice is absolutely [[annoying]]. I found myself muting the TV during her dialogue. I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys the Lifetime TV type of programs. I would not recommend paying any money to see this movie however. Considering I found nothing that would cause censorship, this is a movie that is worthy for only watching on TV, since nothing will be cut out. As a TV movie I would rate this as a 5 out 10. As a feature film with an "R" certification and such as strong cast, I rate it as a 2 out of ten. First To [[Deaths]] 2003

I'll admit my mistake first: I didn't realize this was a made for [[TVS]] movie. I was "thrown off" by the "[[rs]]" certification. The plot is strong, but the movie is about 40 minutes too long. The direction and [[continuance]] were excellent. [[Onto]] the most part the cast was [[wondrous]] and did a good job with their characters. The down side of the movie is that it definitely falls into the "chick flick" genre. Although there are some violent scenes, none of the violence should call for an "R" rating. There is no nudity or gratuitous sex scenes. Actually, there are no sex scenes. Ona Grauer (who is absolutely beautiful), Kristina Copeland, Sonya Salomaa, and Glynis Davies were all guests on the SG-1 series, but this movie did nothing to advance their careers since they were all used as low level supporting actresses. Robert Patrick was fantastic, as he usually is and Mitch Pileggi made me think of a modern day Lee Marvin. The very talented Megan Gallagher who I came to respect as an actor during the Millennium series, was given nothing challenging to show her range of abilities. The greatest disappointment with regard to the cast was Tracy Pollan. Aside from being a below average actress and not particularly attractive, her voice is absolutely [[vexing]]. I found myself muting the TV during her dialogue. I would recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys the Lifetime TV type of programs. I would not recommend paying any money to see this movie however. Considering I found nothing that would cause censorship, this is a movie that is worthy for only watching on TV, since nothing will be cut out. As a TV movie I would rate this as a 5 out 10. As a feature film with an "R" certification and such as strong cast, I rate it as a 2 out of ten. --------------------------------------------- Result 3764 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I think this is [[probably]] one of the [[worst]] [[movies]] I've [[watched]] in a [[long]] [[time]].

Trying to get the 'same characters' with different people is *such* a bad idea. [[If]] they couldn't get Sara Michelle [[G]]. and Ryan P. in this one, they should have just cut their losses and said to heck with it. Instead they get NEW [[actors]] that are [[horrible]] at what they did. I seriously [[felt]] like I was at a High [[School]] or (bad) [[College]] play with the lever of acting these people put forth.

Where do they get some of these people? Was this their first movie? It sure seemed like it.

This movie also parallels the [[original]] in a few lines of speech. I had just got done watching the first one and popped #2 in. I was all excited to get to watch the second one and it ended up being the [[worst]] show I've seen in a while. I don't [[hardly]] EVER *EVER* turn off a movie, but this one [[definitely]] went off after about 30 - 40 [[min]]. I think this is [[admittedly]] one of the [[hardest]] [[cinematography]] I've [[observed]] in a [[longer]] [[times]].

Trying to get the 'same characters' with different people is *such* a bad idea. [[Though]] they couldn't get Sara Michelle [[grams]]. and Ryan P. in this one, they should have just cut their losses and said to heck with it. Instead they get NEW [[players]] that are [[scary]] at what they did. I seriously [[believed]] like I was at a High [[Schooling]] or (bad) [[Academies]] play with the lever of acting these people put forth.

Where do they get some of these people? Was this their first movie? It sure seemed like it.

This movie also parallels the [[initial]] in a few lines of speech. I had just got done watching the first one and popped #2 in. I was all excited to get to watch the second one and it ended up being the [[gravest]] show I've seen in a while. I don't [[almost]] EVER *EVER* turn off a movie, but this one [[unquestionably]] went off after about 30 - 40 [[mn]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3765 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] "Gunga Din": one of the [[greatest]] [[adventure]] stories ever told! A [[story]] about the British [[Foreign]] legion in 19th century [[India]] and a lowly "water-bearer" named Gunga Din, a local denizen who aspires to be just like his military counterparts; three British sergeants whose loyalty and [[camaraderie]] for each other extend far beyond the bounds of [[mere]] patriotism. Their's is a true and abiding [[friendship]] for one another and each would be willing to sacrifice his own life for the good of the other. Gunga Din longs to be a soldier too, a Bugler in [[particular]], but can never [[attain]] that [[rank]] due to his subordinate social standing. [[However]], heroes are not made according to their social credentials, they're made through their willingness to sacrifice for the greater good of others. Gunga Din tries at every turn to prove his mettle, but will he ever attain the rank he so passionately seeks?...."You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din"! One of Hollywood's classics and a perfect 10!!!! "Gunga Din": one of the [[higher]] [[fling]] stories ever told! A [[stories]] about the British [[Alien]] legion in 19th century [[Hindustan]] and a lowly "water-bearer" named Gunga Din, a local denizen who aspires to be just like his military counterparts; three British sergeants whose loyalty and [[comradeship]] for each other extend far beyond the bounds of [[simple]] patriotism. Their's is a true and abiding [[goodwill]] for one another and each would be willing to sacrifice his own life for the good of the other. Gunga Din longs to be a soldier too, a Bugler in [[singular]], but can never [[accomplish]] that [[rankings]] due to his subordinate social standing. [[Conversely]], heroes are not made according to their social credentials, they're made through their willingness to sacrifice for the greater good of others. Gunga Din tries at every turn to prove his mettle, but will he ever attain the rank he so passionately seeks?...."You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din"! One of Hollywood's classics and a perfect 10!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3766 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Another [[detailed]] [[work]] on the [[subject]] by Dr Dwivedi takes us back in [[time]] to pre-partioned Panjab. Dr Dwivedi chose a [[difficult]] [[subject]] for his [[movie]] debut. He has worked on all meticulous details to [[bring]] the [[story]] to life. The treatment of the [[subject]] is very delicate.

Even though we have not been to the region during that time, the sets and costumes look [[real]]. Unlike most movies made on [[partition]], this one focuses not on the gory details of violence to attract audience, but on its after-effects. The [[characters]] come to life. Priyanshu Chatterjee has given an impressive performance. Manoj Bajpai has acted his heart out showing the plight of a guilt-ridden man. The rest of the cast has done a good job too. Another [[watchful]] [[cooperating]] on the [[topic]] by Dr Dwivedi takes us back in [[period]] to pre-partioned Panjab. Dr Dwivedi chose a [[laborious]] [[theme]] for his [[flick]] debut. He has worked on all meticulous details to [[bringing]] the [[fairytales]] to life. The treatment of the [[topic]] is very delicate.

Even though we have not been to the region during that time, the sets and costumes look [[veritable]]. Unlike most movies made on [[split]], this one focuses not on the gory details of violence to attract audience, but on its after-effects. The [[personage]] come to life. Priyanshu Chatterjee has given an impressive performance. Manoj Bajpai has acted his heart out showing the plight of a guilt-ridden man. The rest of the cast has done a good job too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3767 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] A female country singer nicknamed "Big T"--seriously, that's what they call her--risks her budding musical career and her life by falling into the company of a sleazy drunkard (Busey) who wants to be her manager. His mother committed suicide, his father's an alcoholic as well, and he has a violent temper. You can imagine where that leads. In the meantime, there's music [[aplenty]], as Parton, with her fluid vocal [[talents]], belts out song after song (at least half a dozen of them about Texas). [[Steer]] clear of this [[mess]] and check her out in NINE TO FIVE or STEEL MAGNOLIAS [[instead]]. A female country singer nicknamed "Big T"--seriously, that's what they call her--risks her budding musical career and her life by falling into the company of a sleazy drunkard (Busey) who wants to be her manager. His mother committed suicide, his father's an alcoholic as well, and he has a violent temper. You can imagine where that leads. In the meantime, there's music [[galore]], as Parton, with her fluid vocal [[talent]], belts out song after song (at least half a dozen of them about Texas). [[Steers]] clear of this [[chaos]] and check her out in NINE TO FIVE or STEEL MAGNOLIAS [[conversely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3768 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] [[Return]] of the Boogyman is a [[dreadful]] [[movie]] which doesn't play like a movie, it plays like an episode of a TV sitcom when they [[flashback]] to [[older]] episodes. Return of the Boogyman is just a clip show.

Mutch of the film is constant and [[annoying]] [[flashbacks]] from the first movie. [[Over]] and over again the same footage. How [[boring]] this is.

The movie really is about a [[psychic]] [[woman]] who has [[visions]] of the [[first]] movie.

I have [[seen]] the first [[movie]] I don't want to see the same scenes over and over again and I don't know who would. The whole movie looks like it was quickly made to make a few bucks and thats it. [[Returnee]] of the Boogyman is a [[scary]] [[kino]] which doesn't play like a movie, it plays like an episode of a TV sitcom when they [[flash]] to [[oldest]] episodes. Return of the Boogyman is just a clip show.

Mutch of the film is constant and [[vexing]] [[reminiscences]] from the first movie. [[Finished]] and over again the same footage. How [[tiresome]] this is.

The movie really is about a [[devin]] [[femme]] who has [[perceptions]] of the [[fiirst]] movie.

I have [[saw]] the first [[filmmaking]] I don't want to see the same scenes over and over again and I don't know who would. The whole movie looks like it was quickly made to make a few bucks and thats it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3769 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This [[must]] be [[accompanied]] by a [[special]] [[rating]] and warning: NOT [[RECOMMENDED]] TO NORMAL PEOPLE.

The obsession of Daneliuc with the most dirty [[body]] [[functions]] becomes here a real [[nightmare]]. Also, it's evident that the man is a misanthrope, he [[hates]] [[everybody]] - his [[country]] his people, his actors, his job. And this hatred makes him blind and he [[forgets]] anymore the [[profession]] he [[knew]] [[long]] ago.

This so [[called]] "[[film]]" is just a hideous string of disgusting [[images]], with no artistic [[value]] and no professionist knowledge. It is an [[insult]] to good [[taste]] and to good [[sense]]. Shame, shame, [[shame]]! This [[needs]] be [[escorted]] by a [[particular]] [[assessments]] and warning: NOT [[SUGGESTED]] TO NORMAL PEOPLE.

The obsession of Daneliuc with the most dirty [[cadaver]] [[tasks]] becomes here a real [[cabos]]. Also, it's evident that the man is a misanthrope, he [[hated]] [[anybody]] - his [[nations]] his people, his actors, his job. And this hatred makes him blind and he [[overlooks]] anymore the [[occupational]] he [[knowed]] [[longer]] ago.

This so [[drew]] "[[kino]]" is just a hideous string of disgusting [[image]], with no artistic [[valuing]] and no professionist knowledge. It is an [[slur]] to good [[aftertaste]] and to good [[sensing]]. Shame, shame, [[disgrace]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3770 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a [[horrid]] [[disaster]] of a film. From [[beginning]] to end, it's filled with [[bad]] acting and [[even]] [[worse]] [[direction]] and [[editing]]. The only [[redeeming]] parts of the [[film]] are a few [[numbers]] by Streisand, because the Kristofferson parts are [[impossible]] to watch or [[listen]] to. The [[main]] [[problem]] of this [[film]] is that we never [[see]] Kristofferson's [[character]] at his peak or Streisand's [[character]] struggling. The first should be [[seen]] in [[decline]] and the second [[rising]]. The [[final]] Streisand number _could have been_ one of the greatest finales in film, if it was directed and edited properly. The single framed shot of her face for the duration of the song was a [[terrible]] mistake. Had the band, audience and wide shots of the stage been shown, this number [[could]] have been dynamic and interesting. This film must have been directed and edited by an NYU film school dropout. The only thing worse may be the wretched [[screenplay]]. The [[final]] musical number is the only redeeming part of this film, and even that is botched completely by [[misguided]] technical decisions. This is a [[bad]] [[disasters]] of a film. From [[starts]] to end, it's filled with [[negative]] acting and [[yet]] [[worst]] [[directorate]] and [[edit]]. The only [[redeem]] parts of the [[cinematography]] are a few [[digit]] by Streisand, because the Kristofferson parts are [[impractical]] to watch or [[listening]] to. The [[primary]] [[difficulties]] of this [[cinematography]] is that we never [[seeing]] Kristofferson's [[characteristics]] at his peak or Streisand's [[characters]] struggling. The first should be [[watched]] in [[fall]] and the second [[increasing]]. The [[lastly]] Streisand number _could have been_ one of the greatest finales in film, if it was directed and edited properly. The single framed shot of her face for the duration of the song was a [[harrowing]] mistake. Had the band, audience and wide shots of the stage been shown, this number [[did]] have been dynamic and interesting. This film must have been directed and edited by an NYU film school dropout. The only thing worse may be the wretched [[scenario]]. The [[latter]] musical number is the only redeeming part of this film, and even that is botched completely by [[wrong]] technical decisions. --------------------------------------------- Result 3771 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I really, really didn't [[expect]] this [[type]] of a film outside of America. How anyone can take the subject of sexually abusing children and turn it into a "thriller" is just [[sick]]. Auteuil (whom I had previously admired) going around like some sort of child-saving Rambo was ignorant and [[insulting]] to all the children being sexually exploited around the world.

What's doubly depressing is that the stunning and ground-breaking [[film]] "Happiness" [[came]] out the year [[BEFORE]] this film. Menges and his cohorts should be ashamed of themselves. It's admirable to read some of the comments by the more intelligent viewers out there. They were able to see the shoddy and ridiculous handling of this topic. Those of you who [[think]] this is great cinema display a disgusting amount of ignorance and you need to watch "Happiness" to open your minds to the true horrors of pedophilia.

Do you think your child is more likely to be kidnapped and sold into sexual slavery or be molested by a neighbor, teacher, friend or even a relative? Hmm...I wonder. If they are going to make a film about international child slavery of whatever kind they owe it to everyone to make it realistic and emotionally involving instead of this button-pushing [[crap]]. 1/10 I really, really didn't [[awaited]] this [[genre]] of a film outside of America. How anyone can take the subject of sexually abusing children and turn it into a "thriller" is just [[ill]]. Auteuil (whom I had previously admired) going around like some sort of child-saving Rambo was ignorant and [[offensive]] to all the children being sexually exploited around the world.

What's doubly depressing is that the stunning and ground-breaking [[filmmaking]] "Happiness" [[became]] out the year [[AGO]] this film. Menges and his cohorts should be ashamed of themselves. It's admirable to read some of the comments by the more intelligent viewers out there. They were able to see the shoddy and ridiculous handling of this topic. Those of you who [[believing]] this is great cinema display a disgusting amount of ignorance and you need to watch "Happiness" to open your minds to the true horrors of pedophilia.

Do you think your child is more likely to be kidnapped and sold into sexual slavery or be molested by a neighbor, teacher, friend or even a relative? Hmm...I wonder. If they are going to make a film about international child slavery of whatever kind they owe it to everyone to make it realistic and emotionally involving instead of this button-pushing [[bollocks]]. 1/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3772 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] A couple(Janet and Richard) go camping out in the woods near a giant swamp. After camping and enjoying nature, the couple takes shelter in what they think is an abandoned farm house. Soon, a pair of escaped convicts show up and, after much delaying of the inevitable, they proceed to rape Janet and lock Richard in a birdcage.

This LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT-like film has to be one of the most [[underrated]] horror films ever made. It's one of the more sick and twisted early 70s shockers. Moreover, I found this to be quite enchanting and beautiful in it's perverse tone. I love CAGED TERROR. The music definitely helps lend a sense of personality to the film as well as a lot of beauty. I found the film to be quite creepy.

The flaws mainly have to do with the pacing of the film, which is to say that the film is rather slow and meandering. While I didn't mind the pacing due to the beauty and suspense of the film in question, I do think that it will both most people. The acting isn't too good nor is the dialogue, at least in the early scenes. This film takes a little more patience than usual, and it's really not for everyone.

In short, this was a good film. Not the greatest horror film I've ever seen, but it is certainly a lot of fun. It's not exactly the easiest film to find. It's possible to find it in the USED section of a lot of stores if you look hard enough. It's not for everyone, but if you're a fan of trash cinema then it's definitely worth checking out. A couple(Janet and Richard) go camping out in the woods near a giant swamp. After camping and enjoying nature, the couple takes shelter in what they think is an abandoned farm house. Soon, a pair of escaped convicts show up and, after much delaying of the inevitable, they proceed to rape Janet and lock Richard in a birdcage.

This LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT-like film has to be one of the most [[underestimated]] horror films ever made. It's one of the more sick and twisted early 70s shockers. Moreover, I found this to be quite enchanting and beautiful in it's perverse tone. I love CAGED TERROR. The music definitely helps lend a sense of personality to the film as well as a lot of beauty. I found the film to be quite creepy.

The flaws mainly have to do with the pacing of the film, which is to say that the film is rather slow and meandering. While I didn't mind the pacing due to the beauty and suspense of the film in question, I do think that it will both most people. The acting isn't too good nor is the dialogue, at least in the early scenes. This film takes a little more patience than usual, and it's really not for everyone.

In short, this was a good film. Not the greatest horror film I've ever seen, but it is certainly a lot of fun. It's not exactly the easiest film to find. It's possible to find it in the USED section of a lot of stores if you look hard enough. It's not for everyone, but if you're a fan of trash cinema then it's definitely worth checking out. --------------------------------------------- Result 3773 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Jeremy Northam struggles against a "Total Recall" clone [[script]] and disposable romantic by-play to bring life to a [[confused]] character. Lucy Liu graduates her acting from a wooden start to a workman-like finish. You can't fail to laugh when viewing her interviews on the DVD when she uses the term "Femme fatal" and "Romance". French film-noir [[actress]] she is not and they [[lack]] [[chemistry]] together.

This [[movie]] [[fails]], not in the plot or the action [[sequences]] but in the [[lack]] of attention to detail in the films [[photography]] and ham-fisted [[portrayal]] of the world of technology surrounding the main protagonists. Little attempt is made to dress the scenery to represent any contiguous filmic landscape or period. Automobiles are very 1990's and the architecture barely modern with open plans that hint at a restricted budget rather than conscious set dressing techniques.

The technology is positively hilarious. Massive "2001: A Space Odyssey" mainframes fed by man-portable CD-ROM's with data collected for some unexplained reason, in spite of the proliferating communications network that even the most un-savvy technologist today would obviously be aware. There is an obvious lack of research done here and given the open-source nature of the cyber-community, research would have cost little more than a bulletin board and personal time.

DVD interviews also reveal the original movie name was "Company Man" but this likely ditched in order to cash in on Matrix [[hype]]. The "[[Cypher]]" title has only the slightest link with the movie. Terry Gilliam would have done wonders with this concept; and completely re-written the Decalogue.

This is Tele-movie quality and [[extremely]] [[disappointing]] for a movie length production. It might have made a good sub-plot for "Alias". Jeremy Northam struggles against a "Total Recall" clone [[hyphen]] and disposable romantic by-play to bring life to a [[bemused]] character. Lucy Liu graduates her acting from a wooden start to a workman-like finish. You can't fail to laugh when viewing her interviews on the DVD when she uses the term "Femme fatal" and "Romance". French film-noir [[actor]] she is not and they [[scarcity]] [[chemicals]] together.

This [[cinematography]] [[fail]], not in the plot or the action [[sequence]] but in the [[shortfall]] of attention to detail in the films [[images]] and ham-fisted [[portrait]] of the world of technology surrounding the main protagonists. Little attempt is made to dress the scenery to represent any contiguous filmic landscape or period. Automobiles are very 1990's and the architecture barely modern with open plans that hint at a restricted budget rather than conscious set dressing techniques.

The technology is positively hilarious. Massive "2001: A Space Odyssey" mainframes fed by man-portable CD-ROM's with data collected for some unexplained reason, in spite of the proliferating communications network that even the most un-savvy technologist today would obviously be aware. There is an obvious lack of research done here and given the open-source nature of the cyber-community, research would have cost little more than a bulletin board and personal time.

DVD interviews also reveal the original movie name was "Company Man" but this likely ditched in order to cash in on Matrix [[fanfare]]. The "[[Encryption]]" title has only the slightest link with the movie. Terry Gilliam would have done wonders with this concept; and completely re-written the Decalogue.

This is Tele-movie quality and [[vitally]] [[disappointed]] for a movie length production. It might have made a good sub-plot for "Alias". --------------------------------------------- Result 3774 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I watched this over the Christmas [[period]], I don't know why but it reminds me of Christmas so I watched it, so there we are.

Arthur is a [[film]] I watch all the way through with a [[big]] dumb [[smile]] on my face and its a mixture of special performances, [[great]] jolly music and a script crackling with wit and [[charm]] that causes it.

Dudley Moore makes a [[character]] that could well be hated very easily (spoiled, rich, lazy drunk who feels sorry for himself) but [[turns]] him into someone you [[love]]. Liza Minelli is great as Linda Morolla a queens waitress who manages to pull off the tough/soft on the inside lady Arthur nearly gives up his world for. John Gielgud gets all the juicy lines and polishes them off with relish.

I can watch Arthur again and again and it always makes me feel good, [[check]] it out if you need a lift its a [[lovely]] [[film]]. I watched this over the Christmas [[timetable]], I don't know why but it reminds me of Christmas so I watched it, so there we are.

Arthur is a [[kino]] I watch all the way through with a [[major]] dumb [[smirk]] on my face and its a mixture of special performances, [[large]] jolly music and a script crackling with wit and [[charisma]] that causes it.

Dudley Moore makes a [[trait]] that could well be hated very easily (spoiled, rich, lazy drunk who feels sorry for himself) but [[revolves]] him into someone you [[likes]]. Liza Minelli is great as Linda Morolla a queens waitress who manages to pull off the tough/soft on the inside lady Arthur nearly gives up his world for. John Gielgud gets all the juicy lines and polishes them off with relish.

I can watch Arthur again and again and it always makes me feel good, [[verifying]] it out if you need a lift its a [[nice]] [[kino]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3775 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Gene Hackman gets himself busted out of prison by a nameless government agency who want him for an assassination. It's a given of course that Hackman has the proficient skills for the job.

Nobody tells him anything though, he's given as the audience is given bits and pieces of information. That's supposed to be suspenseful, instead it's annoying and boring.

Hackman goes through with the mission, but the getaway is messed up and the guy at the top of this mysterious entity orders everybody dead to cover it up. So everyone in the cast dies and at the end you don't really care.

One of the other reviewers pointed out that the film was originally twice as long, almost three hours and got chopped down quite a bit. Maybe something really was lost in the translation, but I tend to think it was a mercy act on the audience.

A very talented cast that had people like Richard Widmark, Candice Bergen, Mickey Rooney, Eli Wallach, and Edward Albert is so thoroughly wasted here it's a crime.

And we never do find out just what federal agency was doing all this, the FBI, the CIA, the DEA or even the IRS. --------------------------------------------- Result 3776 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this on TV the other night… or rather I flicked over to another channel every so often to watch infomercials when I couldn't stand watching it any longer. It was bad. Really, really bad. Not "so bad it's good" just flat out bad. How did it get funded? Who thought this was a good idea? An actor friend of mine auditioned and was told he wasn't good enough to play a bad guy but I think what they meant was "save yourself and runaway from this steaming pile of @#$%." I bet the rest of the cast had been given the option. To be fair the acting was hard to judge because of the appalling fake American ascents. The shooting was dullllllllllll. The action was awkward and stilted. The dialog was inane. By far the saddest thing was ship. In real life the Interislander ferry is a shabby boat and on film it doesn't scrub up well. Instead of trying very unsuccessfully to make it look like a new crews liner with bits of tinsel wrapped around rusting polls, I kid you not, they could have change the script to explain or even celebrate the shabbiness. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb. Don't watch this movie, not even as a joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 3777 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is just a joke of a movie,they lost me already at the opening scene (Spoilerwarning) dangerous creature kills other creature in his cage,this is watched by a scientist that works there on a monitor and guess what she does,well lets go in to the cage to check the stuff out,omg how dumb do those writers think human beings are come on thats the same like jumping in a fish tank with a great white shark because it ate your goldfish...Pretty useless and even more dumber.And i will not even talk about the cast because they aren't worth the effort. why they didn't fired the guy that wrote that immediately is a mystery to me.....And this kinda dumbness continues the entire movie. Only good thing where the cgi that is better then average for these kinda low-budget movies.

If these kinda things don't bother you go see it,but be warned if your IQ is above 60 you will probably hate it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3778 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] [[Don]] Siegel's 1971 [[masterpiece]] "[[Dirty]] [[Harry]]", Clint [[Eastwood]] epitomized the super-tough, super-cool unorthodox, no-nonsense cinema-cop with his role of the eponymous [[Inspector]] 'Dirty' Harry Callahan. Two sequels followed, the first of which, "Magnum Force", tamed down on the [[delightfully]] politically incorrect attitude of the first one that had outraged many [[critics]] but enthused audiences. The second sequel, "The Enforcer" was grittier again, and was promoted as "the dirtiest Harry of them all". This title, however, truly [[belongs]] to the fourth [[film]] in the series, Clint Eastwood's own "Sudden Impact", which is doubtlessly the grittiest, nastiest, most violent and downright dirtiest of all Harry films, and, in my humble opinion, the second-best after the masterpiece original.

***Warning! SPOILERS ahead!*** In a small town near San Francisco, a mysterious sexy lady ([[Sondra]] Locke) lures men into being alone with her. What these men don't know is that mysterious beauty is their former rape victim, longing for bloody revenge. As fate wants it, San Francisco's toughest cop, Inspector Dirty Harry Callahan, who has been suspended once again for angering his superiors, spends his leisure time in this exact little town... "Sudden Impact" is the dirtiest Callahan film in several aspects. The film is extremely gritty and graphically violent. Harry Callahan himself is dirtier than ever. Not afraid to make use of his 44. Magnum in order to stop trouble, Harry treats 'punks' as they are to be treated and even allows a person to get away with several murders because the revenge-murders are justified in his opinion. Clint Eastwood is, as always, brilliant in the role of Harry Callahan. Eastwood epitomized coolness and bad-assery as the "Man With No Name" in Sergio Leone's Dollar Trilogy, and he did so again in the Dirty Harry films. "Sudden Impact" gives us the dirtiest Harry we have ever seen. Eastwood's real-life girlfriend Sondra Locke fits very well in the role of the [[vengeful]] beauty. The great Pat Hingle, who had already worked with Eastwood in Ted Post's tough-minded [[Western]] "Hang '[[Em]] [[High]]" in 1986 plays the police chief of the [[small]] [[town]]. The [[film]] furthermore includes a wide [[range]] of truly despicable scumbag characters, including a pathetic criminal played by Kevin Major Howard (best known for his role in Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal [[Jacket]]") and a woman named Ray Perkins (Audrie J. Neenan), doubtlessly one of the most disgusting and despicable [[female]] characters ever in cinema. Albert Popwell, who played the bank robber in the famous "Do You Feel Lucky?" scene in "Dirty Harry" and the black militant leader in "The Enforcer" is also part of this one again, this time as Harry's colleague and buddy. Overall "Sudden Impact" is the grittiest, dirtiest and probably the most violent of all "Dirty Harry" films, (though "The Dead Pool" isn't exactly tame either), and my second-favorite after the brilliant 1971 original. An absolute must-see for Callahan fans, and highly recommended to all lovers of police thrillers and cinematic bad-assery. My rating: 8.5/10 [[During]] [[Donate]] Siegel's 1971 [[centerpiece]] "[[Nasty]] [[Harri]]", Clint [[Nolan]] epitomized the super-tough, super-cool unorthodox, no-nonsense cinema-cop with his role of the eponymous [[Detective]] 'Dirty' Harry Callahan. Two sequels followed, the first of which, "Magnum Force", tamed down on the [[divinely]] politically incorrect attitude of the first one that had outraged many [[criticisms]] but enthused audiences. The second sequel, "The Enforcer" was grittier again, and was promoted as "the dirtiest Harry of them all". This title, however, truly [[belonging]] to the fourth [[cinema]] in the series, Clint Eastwood's own "Sudden Impact", which is doubtlessly the grittiest, nastiest, most violent and downright dirtiest of all Harry films, and, in my humble opinion, the second-best after the masterpiece original.

***Warning! SPOILERS ahead!*** In a small town near San Francisco, a mysterious sexy lady ([[Sandra]] Locke) lures men into being alone with her. What these men don't know is that mysterious beauty is their former rape victim, longing for bloody revenge. As fate wants it, San Francisco's toughest cop, Inspector Dirty Harry Callahan, who has been suspended once again for angering his superiors, spends his leisure time in this exact little town... "Sudden Impact" is the dirtiest Callahan film in several aspects. The film is extremely gritty and graphically violent. Harry Callahan himself is dirtier than ever. Not afraid to make use of his 44. Magnum in order to stop trouble, Harry treats 'punks' as they are to be treated and even allows a person to get away with several murders because the revenge-murders are justified in his opinion. Clint Eastwood is, as always, brilliant in the role of Harry Callahan. Eastwood epitomized coolness and bad-assery as the "Man With No Name" in Sergio Leone's Dollar Trilogy, and he did so again in the Dirty Harry films. "Sudden Impact" gives us the dirtiest Harry we have ever seen. Eastwood's real-life girlfriend Sondra Locke fits very well in the role of the [[resentful]] beauty. The great Pat Hingle, who had already worked with Eastwood in Ted Post's tough-minded [[Westerners]] "Hang '[[Electromagnetic]] [[Higher]]" in 1986 plays the police chief of the [[scant]] [[cities]]. The [[cinema]] furthermore includes a wide [[assortment]] of truly despicable scumbag characters, including a pathetic criminal played by Kevin Major Howard (best known for his role in Stanley Kubrick's "Full Metal [[Mantle]]") and a woman named Ray Perkins (Audrie J. Neenan), doubtlessly one of the most disgusting and despicable [[daughters]] characters ever in cinema. Albert Popwell, who played the bank robber in the famous "Do You Feel Lucky?" scene in "Dirty Harry" and the black militant leader in "The Enforcer" is also part of this one again, this time as Harry's colleague and buddy. Overall "Sudden Impact" is the grittiest, dirtiest and probably the most violent of all "Dirty Harry" films, (though "The Dead Pool" isn't exactly tame either), and my second-favorite after the brilliant 1971 original. An absolute must-see for Callahan fans, and highly recommended to all lovers of police thrillers and cinematic bad-assery. My rating: 8.5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3779 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] Youth, sexuality, and the French countryside -- one of the more [[unique]] [[films]] you're ever going to see. If you can see it that is, no mean feat considering how hard it is to find copies of it (a combination of scarcity and censorship.) It's sometimes erotic, sometimes disgusting, and occasionally funny. A trifle boring also in the middle, but all in all you can't call yourself an aficionado of bizarre film until you've [[seen]] this one at [[least]] once. Youth, sexuality, and the French countryside -- one of the more [[unequalled]] [[cinema]] you're ever going to see. If you can see it that is, no mean feat considering how hard it is to find copies of it (a combination of scarcity and censorship.) It's sometimes erotic, sometimes disgusting, and occasionally funny. A trifle boring also in the middle, but all in all you can't call yourself an aficionado of bizarre film until you've [[watched]] this one at [[lowest]] once. --------------------------------------------- Result 3780 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What the hell of a D-Movie was that? Bad acting, bad special effects and the worst dialogues/storyline i ever came across. The only cool thing here was Coolio, who had a nice cameo as a freaked out cop. However, the rest of the film is awful and boring. It's not even so bad, you can laugh about it. Just plain crap. And whoever compares this to the Evil Dead Series might as well compare Tomb Raider to Indiana Jones (well, ok, at least there was Angelina Jolie in Tomb Raider)! 1 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3781 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Despite]] being a sequel to the more potent original, this is more of a comical remake of Friday THE 13TH concerning the further antics of [[psychopathic]] Angela, [[killing]] more nubile teens for their "immorality" at a camp.

Pamela Springsteen (sister of Bruce) looks great. There are some pretty [[darn]] [[funny]] sex scenes with some pretty darn attractive girls, but the movie's so ([[unintentionally]]) [[comedic]] [[rather]] than suspenseful, it's a [[stinker]].

* out of ****.

MPAA: Rated R for graphic violence and gore, nudity, and for some sexuality, language, and drug use. [[Though]] being a sequel to the more potent original, this is more of a comical remake of Friday THE 13TH concerning the further antics of [[psycho]] Angela, [[slaying]] more nubile teens for their "immorality" at a camp.

Pamela Springsteen (sister of Bruce) looks great. There are some pretty [[geez]] [[comical]] sex scenes with some pretty darn attractive girls, but the movie's so ([[unwittingly]]) [[slapstick]] [[somewhat]] than suspenseful, it's a [[wanker]].

* out of ****.

MPAA: Rated R for graphic violence and gore, nudity, and for some sexuality, language, and drug use. --------------------------------------------- Result 3782 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] As I drove from Skagway, Alaska to Dawson City,Yukon a couple of years ago and was impressed with the scenery, I cannot help but wish that this film even though it has beautiful color and scenic views [[would]] have been shot in the actual location. Jasper in the Canadian Rockies is a magnificent place, but still not the real place where the [[film]] takes place. When the [[story]] moves to Dawson, that is when I feel Anthony Mann, who used the outdoor locations so well, could have made the most if he filmed in the actual place. [[James]] Stewart here is again a man fighting [[within]] himself, one side of him does not want to get involved and help people who stand in the way of him making money, and the other side just is not able to look away from people being murdered. Ruth Roman is the ambitious woman who does not care on whom she steps, Corinne Calvet is the nice girl. Mann is excellent directing the shootouts, but the high point of the film is how well he does in the outdoor scenes. He uses the outdoors as much as he can and he is helped by the winter scenery, the predominating white, like it was with the greens in "The Naked Spur" and the browns in "The Man From Laramie". Like all of the Mann-Stewarts, this is a traditional western, with a difference in the elaboration of Stewart's character which is more complex. As I drove from Skagway, Alaska to Dawson City,Yukon a couple of years ago and was impressed with the scenery, I cannot help but wish that this film even though it has beautiful color and scenic views [[should]] have been shot in the actual location. Jasper in the Canadian Rockies is a magnificent place, but still not the real place where the [[flick]] takes place. When the [[fairytales]] moves to Dawson, that is when I feel Anthony Mann, who used the outdoor locations so well, could have made the most if he filmed in the actual place. [[Jacobo]] Stewart here is again a man fighting [[inside]] himself, one side of him does not want to get involved and help people who stand in the way of him making money, and the other side just is not able to look away from people being murdered. Ruth Roman is the ambitious woman who does not care on whom she steps, Corinne Calvet is the nice girl. Mann is excellent directing the shootouts, but the high point of the film is how well he does in the outdoor scenes. He uses the outdoors as much as he can and he is helped by the winter scenery, the predominating white, like it was with the greens in "The Naked Spur" and the browns in "The Man From Laramie". Like all of the Mann-Stewarts, this is a traditional western, with a difference in the elaboration of Stewart's character which is more complex. --------------------------------------------- Result 3783 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] The Unborn is a pretty [[good]] low-budget horror movie exploiting the fears associated with pregnancy. It's very well acted by the always-good Brooke Adams and b-movie stalwart James Karen, although the supporting cast is pretty average for a b-grader. The music, by Gary Numan of all people, is [[good]] too. Henry Dominic's script is quite intelligent for this [[sort]] of thing, although there is a hint of misogyny about it. Rodman Fender's direction is merely adequate, and there are some unnecessary cheap scares. If you're a fan of Adams, whose movie career is nowhere near as illustrious as it should be, check it out; she's great, as always. The Unborn is a pretty [[buena]] low-budget horror movie exploiting the fears associated with pregnancy. It's very well acted by the always-good Brooke Adams and b-movie stalwart James Karen, although the supporting cast is pretty average for a b-grader. The music, by Gary Numan of all people, is [[alright]] too. Henry Dominic's script is quite intelligent for this [[sorting]] of thing, although there is a hint of misogyny about it. Rodman Fender's direction is merely adequate, and there are some unnecessary cheap scares. If you're a fan of Adams, whose movie career is nowhere near as illustrious as it should be, check it out; she's great, as always. --------------------------------------------- Result 3784 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] How can [[Barry]] Levinson [[possibly]] assemble white-hot [[comedy]] talents [[Ben]] Stiller and [[Jack]] Black, the [[gorgeous]] Rachel Weisz, [[old]] pro Christopher Walken and [[still]] [[deliver]] such a humourless [[stinker]]?

Stiller and [[Black]] are [[friends]] until the [[latter]] invents a [[spray]] to [[make]] [[dog]] [[mess]] [[vanish]] and [[becomes]] a [[conspicuous]] consuming multi-millionaire.

The [[premises]] is [[thin]] but sound [[enough]] in the right hands to have been a springboard for some [[great]] [[bitching]] between the two [[stars]] but all [[concerned]] overplay [[every]] hand, [[every]] [[chance]] they can.

Stiller and [[Black]] are [[simply]] not [[funny]] for [[way]] too much of the [[time]], Weisz [[looks]] sensational as [[always]] but is criminally underused and, with the [[exception]] of Walken as a batty barfly who [[urges]] Stiller's [[character]] to take [[revenge]], it's a turgid trudge to the [[end]] of this [[strained]] [[farce]]. How can [[Bari]] Levinson [[arguably]] assemble white-hot [[charade]] talents [[Ibn]] Stiller and [[Jacques]] Black, the [[sublime]] Rachel Weisz, [[former]] pro Christopher Walken and [[nonetheless]] [[provide]] such a humourless [[tosser]]?

Stiller and [[Calico]] are [[pals]] until the [[final]] invents a [[spraying]] to [[deliver]] [[hound]] [[chaos]] [[fade]] and [[becoming]] a [[prominent]] consuming multi-millionaire.

The [[venues]] is [[delgado]] but sound [[suitably]] in the right hands to have been a springboard for some [[magnificent]] [[griping]] between the two [[superstar]] but all [[worried]] overplay [[all]] hand, [[each]] [[possibilities]] they can.

Stiller and [[Negro]] are [[exclusively]] not [[droll]] for [[paths]] too much of the [[period]], Weisz [[seems]] sensational as [[steadily]] but is criminally underused and, with the [[exceptions]] of Walken as a batty barfly who [[incites]] Stiller's [[personage]] to take [[retribution]], it's a turgid trudge to the [[terminates]] of this [[tensed]] [[charade]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3785 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] Andie McDowell is [[beautiful]] as the 40-ish woman whose late start at a serious [[relationship]] leads her to a considerably younger man and a subsequenet falling-out with 2 long-time best girldfriends.

[[Seeing]] a gigolo/gold-digger in the sincere young [[man]], the "girl-friends", dead-set on terminating this "[[silly]] relationship", go over and beyond the call of duty in "helping out" their friend (who [[obviously]] is blinded by this gigolo's tricky game".

A short succession of situations is absolutely [[ridiculous]]. Far fetched no longer covers it. Without these unbelievable scenes, there may have been hope for a sweet love story. Instead, all the viewer is left with is an involuntary shaking of head -- these things just don't happen! Without giving away cliff-hanger details, I warn the viewer of having high expectations for this film; most (like me) will be very disappointed. On a scale of 1 to 10, this one ranks a [[weak]] 4 with me. There is much better material out there. This one isn't worth your time. Andie McDowell is [[wondrous]] as the 40-ish woman whose late start at a serious [[nexus]] leads her to a considerably younger man and a subsequenet falling-out with 2 long-time best girldfriends.

[[Witnessing]] a gigolo/gold-digger in the sincere young [[men]], the "girl-friends", dead-set on terminating this "[[farcical]] relationship", go over and beyond the call of duty in "helping out" their friend (who [[unmistakably]] is blinded by this gigolo's tricky game".

A short succession of situations is absolutely [[grotesque]]. Far fetched no longer covers it. Without these unbelievable scenes, there may have been hope for a sweet love story. Instead, all the viewer is left with is an involuntary shaking of head -- these things just don't happen! Without giving away cliff-hanger details, I warn the viewer of having high expectations for this film; most (like me) will be very disappointed. On a scale of 1 to 10, this one ranks a [[fragile]] 4 with me. There is much better material out there. This one isn't worth your time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3786 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] A [[teenager]] who [[seems]] to have it all commits [[suicide]]. It leaves his [[family]] and his [[best]] friend (Keanu Reeves) [[asking]] a lot of [[questions]]...and blaming themselves.

Good idea, badly handled. For starters this [[HAS]] been [[done]] before 1988--mostly in TV movies and After School Specials. [[Aside]] from some [[swearing]] and [[dialogue]] (hence the PG-13 [[rating]]) this [[added]] nothing new. The outcome is predictable and Reeve's [[attempts]] at acting were [[truly]] [[painful]] to watch. He's good NOW but not in 1988. Aside from that his [[character]] was dressed like a [[slob]] and always looked so dirty is was [[hard]] to [[build]] up [[sympathy]].

That [[aside]] the [[movie]] is [[dull]]. I [[saw]] [[every]] scene coming and [[every]] "[[surprise]]" was telegraphed. I [[basically]] couldn't [[wait]] for this [[thing]] to [[get]] over.

I have a [[vague]] [[recollection]] of seeing it in a [[theatre]] in 1988 and hating it (it [[bombed]] BADLY). It still [[looks]] [[lousy]] [[almost]] 20 [[years]] later. The [[subject]] is worth handling but it's been done better (with better acting) in countless other [[movies]]. "[[Ordinary]] People" comes to mind. You can [[skip]] this one. A [[juvenile]] who [[seem]] to have it all commits [[suicidal]]. It leaves his [[families]] and his [[finest]] friend (Keanu Reeves) [[wondering]] a lot of [[matters]]...and blaming themselves.

Good idea, badly handled. For starters this [[HA]] been [[performed]] before 1988--mostly in TV movies and After School Specials. [[Sideways]] from some [[oath]] and [[conversations]] (hence the PG-13 [[assessments]]) this [[adds]] nothing new. The outcome is predictable and Reeve's [[try]] at acting were [[genuinely]] [[hurtful]] to watch. He's good NOW but not in 1988. Aside from that his [[trait]] was dressed like a [[slacker]] and always looked so dirty is was [[difficult]] to [[constructions]] up [[empathy]].

That [[sideways]] the [[flick]] is [[dreary]]. I [[noticed]] [[all]] scene coming and [[any]] "[[surprises]]" was telegraphed. I [[largely]] couldn't [[waits]] for this [[stuff]] to [[obtain]] over.

I have a [[fuzzy]] [[souvenir]] of seeing it in a [[teatro]] in 1988 and hating it (it [[pounded]] BADLY). It still [[seem]] [[crummy]] [[virtually]] 20 [[yrs]] later. The [[themes]] is worth handling but it's been done better (with better acting) in countless other [[films]]. "[[Unremarkable]] People" comes to mind. You can [[skipped]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3787 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I caught this movie at a small screening held by members of my college's gaming club. We were forewarned that this would be the "reefer madness" of gaming, and this [[movie]] more than [[delivered]].

Tom Hanks plays Robbie, a young man re-starting his college career after "resting" for a semester. What we, the viewer, find out as the movie progresses, is that Robbie was [[hopelessly]] addicted to a role-playing game called "Mazes and Monsters," a game that he gets re-acquainted with after a gaming group recruit him for a campaign.

This movie is [[laughable]] on many, many levels. One scene features the group "gaming by candlelight," which is probably the best way I can describe it. While I'm sure that this was meant to be "cultish" in some way, as most gamers know, it's horribly inaccurate. Most role-play sessions are done in well-lit rooms, usually over some chee-tohs and a can of soda.

The acting, while not Oscar-caliber, isn't gut-wrenchingly awful either. This is one of Tom Hanks's first roles, and Bosom Buddies and Bachelor Party were still a year or two over the horizon. The supporting cast, while not very memorable, still hand forth decent performances.

Mainly the badness lies in the fact that it was a made-for-TV movie that shows the "dangers of gaming" Worth a view if you and your friends are planning a bad movie night. I caught this movie at a small screening held by members of my college's gaming club. We were forewarned that this would be the "reefer madness" of gaming, and this [[cinematography]] more than [[rendered]].

Tom Hanks plays Robbie, a young man re-starting his college career after "resting" for a semester. What we, the viewer, find out as the movie progresses, is that Robbie was [[irrevocably]] addicted to a role-playing game called "Mazes and Monsters," a game that he gets re-acquainted with after a gaming group recruit him for a campaign.

This movie is [[absurd]] on many, many levels. One scene features the group "gaming by candlelight," which is probably the best way I can describe it. While I'm sure that this was meant to be "cultish" in some way, as most gamers know, it's horribly inaccurate. Most role-play sessions are done in well-lit rooms, usually over some chee-tohs and a can of soda.

The acting, while not Oscar-caliber, isn't gut-wrenchingly awful either. This is one of Tom Hanks's first roles, and Bosom Buddies and Bachelor Party were still a year or two over the horizon. The supporting cast, while not very memorable, still hand forth decent performances.

Mainly the badness lies in the fact that it was a made-for-TV movie that shows the "dangers of gaming" Worth a view if you and your friends are planning a bad movie night. --------------------------------------------- Result 3788 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I got this one a few weeks ago and love it! It's modern, light but filled with true complexities of life. It questions and answers, just like other Eytan Fox movies. This is my favorite, along with Jossi & Jagger. This pictures a lot more, universally, than only the bubbles we may live in. You don't need to be Jewish or homosexual to enjoy this - I'm not, but the movie goes directly to my top ten movies. At first it seems like pure entertainment but it does make you think further. Relationships we have to live with are superficial, meaningful, deep, fatal, you name it. You don't know what's coming, and you definitely don't know where this story is heading as you watch it the first time. It is worth seeing several times. Fox movies include great bonus material - here a great music video and "the making of" (including explanation of the title, interviewing Lior Ashknenazi who plays himself in the movie and Arabs with doubts about the Israeli life styles). --------------------------------------------- Result 3789 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] I was very excited about seeing this film, anticipating a visual excursus on the relation of artistic beauty and nature, containing the kinds of wisdom the likes of "Rivers and Tides." However, that's not what I received. [[Instead]], I get a fairly uninspired [[film]] about how human industry is bad for nature. Which is clearly a quite [[unorthodox]] claim.

The [[photographer]] seems conflicted about the aesthetic qualities of his images and the supposed "ethical" duty he has to the workers occasionally peopling the images, along the periphery. And frankly, the images were not generally that impressive. And according to this "artist," scale is the basis for what makes something beautiful.

In all respects, a [[stupid]] film. For people who'd like to feel better about their environmental consciousness ... but not for any one who would like to think about the complexities of the issues surrounding it. I was very excited about seeing this film, anticipating a visual excursus on the relation of artistic beauty and nature, containing the kinds of wisdom the likes of "Rivers and Tides." However, that's not what I received. [[However]], I get a fairly uninspired [[kino]] about how human industry is bad for nature. Which is clearly a quite [[unconventional]] claim.

The [[photography]] seems conflicted about the aesthetic qualities of his images and the supposed "ethical" duty he has to the workers occasionally peopling the images, along the periphery. And frankly, the images were not generally that impressive. And according to this "artist," scale is the basis for what makes something beautiful.

In all respects, a [[nonsensical]] film. For people who'd like to feel better about their environmental consciousness ... but not for any one who would like to think about the complexities of the issues surrounding it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3790 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Far [[richer]] in [[texture]] and [[character]] than even the classics from the 30's and 50's. George C. Scott was [[born]] to be Scrooge, just as he was born to be Patton. Mr. Scott will be known as one of the [[greatest]] [[actors]] of the 20th century. The [[character]] of Scrooge as played by Mr. Scott seemed to [[jump]] off the screen. Scott as Scrooge [[brought]] an richer, more robust, yet a more deeply moving Scrooge to the screen than any of his [[predecessors]] in the role of the meanest man in 18th century London. Mr. Scott seemed to bring Scrooge to a more personal, understandable yet highly conflicted level; his role was acted with the great authority Scott always bring to the screen: yet his usual bellicose voice would sometimes be brought to a whisper, almost as a soliloquy, as he would berate the Christmas holiday in one breath, yet reveal his own human frailty in his next line. He could portray the sour and crusty Scrooge, and a misunderstood, sympathetic Scrooge all in the same scene.

Truly a remarkable performance by a giant of his generation. Far [[wealthy]] in [[fabric]] and [[personages]] than even the classics from the 30's and 50's. George C. Scott was [[ould]] to be Scrooge, just as he was born to be Patton. Mr. Scott will be known as one of the [[grandest]] [[actresses]] of the 20th century. The [[nature]] of Scrooge as played by Mr. Scott seemed to [[hops]] off the screen. Scott as Scrooge [[tabled]] an richer, more robust, yet a more deeply moving Scrooge to the screen than any of his [[ancestors]] in the role of the meanest man in 18th century London. Mr. Scott seemed to bring Scrooge to a more personal, understandable yet highly conflicted level; his role was acted with the great authority Scott always bring to the screen: yet his usual bellicose voice would sometimes be brought to a whisper, almost as a soliloquy, as he would berate the Christmas holiday in one breath, yet reveal his own human frailty in his next line. He could portray the sour and crusty Scrooge, and a misunderstood, sympathetic Scrooge all in the same scene.

Truly a remarkable performance by a giant of his generation. --------------------------------------------- Result 3791 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Firstly, there are some [[good]] things about this film, but it's all cliche slasher [[stuff]] [[combined]] with a [[teen]] [[movie]]. [[In]] the [[advertising]] of this movie, that I've seen, a [[large]] emphasis was on the fact that [[Denise]] [[Richards]] is in it, but she's a poor [[actress]], and not as good looking as people try to make her out to be (not that that has anything to do with the movie). And what's with that look she gives everyone? Perhaps it's part of the character, but like I [[said]], the acting... Still, the writing is fine. You know who it is all throughout the movie, and you can almost predict what is about to happen, but not in an irritating [[way]]. I think the book it's based on is probably good, judging by the plot line, but next time I'll read the book to find out rather than watch this. Firstly, there are some [[buena]] things about this film, but it's all cliche slasher [[thing]] [[amalgamated]] with a [[youths]] [[cinematography]]. [[Onto]] the [[announcement]] of this movie, that I've seen, a [[tremendous]] emphasis was on the fact that [[Deniz]] [[Richard]] is in it, but she's a poor [[actor]], and not as good looking as people try to make her out to be (not that that has anything to do with the movie). And what's with that look she gives everyone? Perhaps it's part of the character, but like I [[asserted]], the acting... Still, the writing is fine. You know who it is all throughout the movie, and you can almost predict what is about to happen, but not in an irritating [[routes]]. I think the book it's based on is probably good, judging by the plot line, but next time I'll read the book to find out rather than watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3792 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] While I totally disagree with one reviewer who described Charley Chase as unfunny, in this film he certainly is. It's a [[shame]], as I suspect the other [[reviewer]] must have only seen a few Charley Chase duds and assumed the guy wasn't funny. Films like MIGHTY LIKE A MOOSE and WHAT PRICE GOOFY? are very [[good]] Chase films, so he COULD be really funny given good material. [[Unfortunately]], in this film he's [[given]] [[absolutely]] [[nothing]]. Even the inclusion of the usually good Oliver Hardy as a foil isn't any [[help]] because the basic premise (boy wants to marry girl but girl's father thinks the boy is a wuss) and the gags are so poor. It's a shame, as I really wanted to love this film but couldn't.

By the way, for those used to the look for Charley from the mid-1920s on, you'll be pretty surprised as Chase sports no glasses or mustache--and looks very little like you'd expect. While I totally disagree with one reviewer who described Charley Chase as unfunny, in this film he certainly is. It's a [[pity]], as I suspect the other [[reviewers]] must have only seen a few Charley Chase duds and assumed the guy wasn't funny. Films like MIGHTY LIKE A MOOSE and WHAT PRICE GOOFY? are very [[buena]] Chase films, so he COULD be really funny given good material. [[Tragically]], in this film he's [[afforded]] [[abundantly]] [[anything]]. Even the inclusion of the usually good Oliver Hardy as a foil isn't any [[pomoc]] because the basic premise (boy wants to marry girl but girl's father thinks the boy is a wuss) and the gags are so poor. It's a shame, as I really wanted to love this film but couldn't.

By the way, for those used to the look for Charley from the mid-1920s on, you'll be pretty surprised as Chase sports no glasses or mustache--and looks very little like you'd expect. --------------------------------------------- Result 3793 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Usually]] when a movie receives a vote of one it is because someone simply dislikes it and is annoyed it doesn't have a lower rating, and so decides to drag it down as much as they can instead of just giving it a low rating. This is not the [[case]] here.

Bonesetter is a perfect [[example]] of a 0/10 film. It does [[nothing]] right and it doesn't have the chance to because it doesn't really attempt to do anything. There are [[strands]] of a bad D&D novel kind of [[plot]] which doesn't hold together and a complete [[lack]] of any kind of acting throughout. It is clear that nobody involved in this project gave it any kind of serious effort, because even a completely [[patently]] untalented persons' hard work [[would]] amount to more. A [[truly]] [[awful]] [[film]]. [[Fluently]] when a movie receives a vote of one it is because someone simply dislikes it and is annoyed it doesn't have a lower rating, and so decides to drag it down as much as they can instead of just giving it a low rating. This is not the [[lawsuits]] here.

Bonesetter is a perfect [[instances]] of a 0/10 film. It does [[anything]] right and it doesn't have the chance to because it doesn't really attempt to do anything. There are [[filaments]] of a bad D&D novel kind of [[intrigue]] which doesn't hold together and a complete [[insufficiency]] of any kind of acting throughout. It is clear that nobody involved in this project gave it any kind of serious effort, because even a completely [[notoriously]] untalented persons' hard work [[ought]] amount to more. A [[truthfully]] [[scary]] [[cinematography]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3794 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] The main reason people still [[care]] about "Carlton-Browne Of The F.O." is that it features [[Peter]] Sellers in a second-billed role. But watching this [[film]] to see Peter Sellers is a [[mistake]].

[[Sellers]] plays Amphibulos, a [[vaguely]] reptilian prime minister of the dirt-poor island [[nation]] of Gaillardia, [[formerly]] a British [[colony]], now [[hosting]] a lot of Russian diggers during the [[height]] of the [[Cold]] [[War]]. Amphibulos [[wants]] to [[play]] both U.K. and Soviet interests against each other for easy [[profit]], "everything very [[friendly]] and all our cards under the table". Terry-Thomas is the title character, a lazy British diplomat anxious to [[show]] Gaillardia that [[Great]] [[Britain]] hasn't [[forgotten]] them, all appearances to the [[contrary]].

A [[positive]] [[review]] here [[says]]: "The [[reason]] this [[movie]] is [[considered]] average is because the comedy is understated." I would argue that the [[reason]] "Carlton-Browne" is [[considered]] below [[average]] is because the comedy is non-existent.

After a decent [[opening]] that [[establishes]] the film's only two [[strengths]], a sympathetically doltish Terry-Thomas and [[John]] Addison's full-on larky [[score]], [[things]] [[quickly]] [[slow]] down into a [[series]] of slow [[burns]] and lame miscommunication jokes. The low [[opinion]] of Carlton-Browne by his [[boss]] and the obscurity of Gaillardia (which no one can [[find]] on a [[map]]) is milked to [[death]]. By the [[time]] we [[actually]] [[reach]] the [[island]] (after a [[labored]] series of airsick jokes), [[expectations]] are [[quite]] low.

They're [[still]] too [[high]], [[though]]. The [[island]] itself, which [[seems]] to [[exist]] either in Latin [[America]] or the Mediterranean, is so [[pathetic]] its [[honor]] guard faints at the [[airport]], and the [[review]] [[stand]] falls [[apart]] in the [[middle]] of a [[parade]]. The army is [[apparently]] [[still]] [[horse]] drawn, [[allowing]] for another lame aural gag by a thick-accented [[announcer]]: "[[In]] war, the army [[uses]] [[many]] [[horse]]."

[[Sellers]] never quite takes [[center]] [[stage]] [[even]] when we're on his character's [[island]]. The plot is [[taken]] over [[instead]] by [[Ian]] Bannen as King Loris, who inherits the throne of Gaillardia after his father's [[assassination]]. Bannen is [[dull]] and plays his [[part]] as straight as it is written. Normally this would make him the likely target for scene-stealing by Sellers, but trapped behind a thick accent and greasy moustache, Sellers is only a threat to those of us who remember him far more happily in two other films made this same year, "The Mouse That Roared" and "I'm All Right, Jack."

Strange that this film, like "Jack", was a Boulting Brothers production, with Roy Boulting here serving as co-director alongside Jeffrey Dell. Usually Boulting films combine wicked social satire with anything-goes comedy, but here there are only fey jabs in either [[direction]]. Amphibulos works his mangled-English vibe for all its worth ("This man is like, how do you say, the bull in the Chinese ship") while Carlton-Browne is generally ragged on by his superior far more than he seems to deserve.

The weakest and most protracted element of the film is [[young]] Loris's [[romance]] with Ilyena. Score one point for her being played by ravishing Luciana Paluzzi, dock one for the fact that they are apparently cousins is never addressed.

The film winds up with a lamely staged revolution whose surprise resolution will surprise no one, and a final bit of action by Carlton-Browne that would seem to nail the lid on his coffin literally. Apparently he lives to see another day, but the film of the same name is strictly DOA. The main reason people still [[healthcare]] about "Carlton-Browne Of The F.O." is that it features [[Pieter]] Sellers in a second-billed role. But watching this [[movies]] to see Peter Sellers is a [[error]].

[[Traders]] plays Amphibulos, a [[loosely]] reptilian prime minister of the dirt-poor island [[nations]] of Gaillardia, [[earlier]] a British [[colonies]], now [[reception]] a lot of Russian diggers during the [[pinnacle]] of the [[Chilly]] [[Wars]]. Amphibulos [[desires]] to [[playing]] both U.K. and Soviet interests against each other for easy [[benefits]], "everything very [[friendship]] and all our cards under the table". Terry-Thomas is the title character, a lazy British diplomat anxious to [[exhibited]] Gaillardia that [[Remarkable]] [[Britannia]] hasn't [[omitted]] them, all appearances to the [[opposite]].

A [[favourable]] [[reviews]] here [[say]]: "The [[motive]] this [[film]] is [[deemed]] average is because the comedy is understated." I would argue that the [[motives]] "Carlton-Browne" is [[regarded]] below [[medium]] is because the comedy is non-existent.

After a decent [[introductory]] that [[stipulates]] the film's only two [[fortresses]], a sympathetically doltish Terry-Thomas and [[Jon]] Addison's full-on larky [[notation]], [[aspects]] [[early]] [[slower]] down into a [[serials]] of slow [[burning]] and lame miscommunication jokes. The low [[vistas]] of Carlton-Browne by his [[chef]] and the obscurity of Gaillardia (which no one can [[finds]] on a [[charting]]) is milked to [[mortality]]. By the [[period]] we [[genuinely]] [[attain]] the [[isle]] (after a [[laboured]] series of airsick jokes), [[prognosis]] are [[rather]] low.

They're [[yet]] too [[highest]], [[albeit]]. The [[isle]] itself, which [[seem]] to [[existent]] either in Latin [[Americans]] or the Mediterranean, is so [[unhappy]] its [[honour]] guard faints at the [[aerodrome]], and the [[examinations]] [[stands]] falls [[also]] in the [[mid]] of a [[parades]]. The army is [[visibly]] [[however]] [[racehorse]] drawn, [[enabled]] for another lame aural gag by a thick-accented [[narrator]]: "[[During]] war, the army [[utilised]] [[innumerable]] [[horses]]."

[[Traders]] never quite takes [[centering]] [[phases]] [[yet]] when we're on his character's [[lsland]]. The plot is [[picked]] over [[however]] by [[Iain]] Bannen as King Loris, who inherits the throne of Gaillardia after his father's [[murder]]. Bannen is [[drab]] and plays his [[portion]] as straight as it is written. Normally this would make him the likely target for scene-stealing by Sellers, but trapped behind a thick accent and greasy moustache, Sellers is only a threat to those of us who remember him far more happily in two other films made this same year, "The Mouse That Roared" and "I'm All Right, Jack."

Strange that this film, like "Jack", was a Boulting Brothers production, with Roy Boulting here serving as co-director alongside Jeffrey Dell. Usually Boulting films combine wicked social satire with anything-goes comedy, but here there are only fey jabs in either [[directions]]. Amphibulos works his mangled-English vibe for all its worth ("This man is like, how do you say, the bull in the Chinese ship") while Carlton-Browne is generally ragged on by his superior far more than he seems to deserve.

The weakest and most protracted element of the film is [[jeune]] Loris's [[romanticism]] with Ilyena. Score one point for her being played by ravishing Luciana Paluzzi, dock one for the fact that they are apparently cousins is never addressed.

The film winds up with a lamely staged revolution whose surprise resolution will surprise no one, and a final bit of action by Carlton-Browne that would seem to nail the lid on his coffin literally. Apparently he lives to see another day, but the film of the same name is strictly DOA. --------------------------------------------- Result 3795 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] As a gamer, I can't say I [[like]] this film. [[Fact]] is, I down right [[hate]] it. I [[tried]] to watch it as open [[minded]] as possible, but when it gets down to it, it feels rather [[insulting]] to my [[social]] group.

To me, there are [[several]] [[reasons]] why.

1. The [[characters]] seem [[unnatural]]. I've [[met]] lots of [[players]], of all different walks of [[life]]. I don't know any who [[act]] like any of the characters in the film. It's like the [[producers]] of the film have taken the worst aspects of the worst stereotypes and put them all into 5 people. Most gamers are rather [[social]] people, some with rather active lives.

2. The style doesn't work. The mockumentary style is ill suited to the subject matter of the film. An actual documentary on gamers would actually work better. While it is good looking (I.E. cleanly put together), it isn't very good.

3. The dialogue feels forced, unnatural. It also seems to lack any real world context. Gamers swear, I'll admit that, but we don't have Tourette's Syndrome.

4. The humor is lacking. While self-deprecating humor is a mainstay of my group and several other groups I've encountered, this is less self-deprecation, and more like toilet humor. Likewise, a large part of gamer humor is full of in-jokes and anecdotes, not toilet humor. Most gamers would balk at and shun anybody who made such jokes.

5. The biggest problem to me is basically this: Accuracy. I don't mean rules, but instead dynamics. Invariably, this film is going to be compared to the even lower budget films The Gamers and The Gamers: Dorkness Rising, both of which portray the players as actual people playing an actual game. The difference is, Gamers: The Movie presents a situation where you want to beat the players senseless vs. The Gamers, where you can say something like: "Huh, I know a guy like that... Yep, that's definitely like Gary." As a gamer, I can't say I [[loves]] this film. [[Doing]] is, I down right [[dislikes]] it. I [[attempting]] to watch it as open [[inclined]] as possible, but when it gets down to it, it feels rather [[offensive]] to my [[societal]] group.

To me, there are [[dissimilar]] [[motivation]] why.

1. The [[nature]] seem [[anomalous]]. I've [[fulfilled]] lots of [[protagonists]], of all different walks of [[vida]]. I don't know any who [[ley]] like any of the characters in the film. It's like the [[grower]] of the film have taken the worst aspects of the worst stereotypes and put them all into 5 people. Most gamers are rather [[sociable]] people, some with rather active lives.

2. The style doesn't work. The mockumentary style is ill suited to the subject matter of the film. An actual documentary on gamers would actually work better. While it is good looking (I.E. cleanly put together), it isn't very good.

3. The dialogue feels forced, unnatural. It also seems to lack any real world context. Gamers swear, I'll admit that, but we don't have Tourette's Syndrome.

4. The humor is lacking. While self-deprecating humor is a mainstay of my group and several other groups I've encountered, this is less self-deprecation, and more like toilet humor. Likewise, a large part of gamer humor is full of in-jokes and anecdotes, not toilet humor. Most gamers would balk at and shun anybody who made such jokes.

5. The biggest problem to me is basically this: Accuracy. I don't mean rules, but instead dynamics. Invariably, this film is going to be compared to the even lower budget films The Gamers and The Gamers: Dorkness Rising, both of which portray the players as actual people playing an actual game. The difference is, Gamers: The Movie presents a situation where you want to beat the players senseless vs. The Gamers, where you can say something like: "Huh, I know a guy like that... Yep, that's definitely like Gary." --------------------------------------------- Result 3796 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Basically this is a pale [[shadow]] of High Fidelity, which was a witty and wonderfully [[acted]] [[film]] with several truly winning character turns. Watching the Detectives has none of that.

The premise of a video store geek swept off his feet by a quirky mystery woman is a good one but is never fully or adequately explored, thanks to a very weak script and the miscasting of the leads, not to mention the lack of any real visual story-telling style. I mean, this film is centered around MOVIES, yet is itself incredibly uncinematic! That's a major failing right there.

But the main problem is we simply don't care about the main characters because the script and the actors (Murphy and Liu) fail to make them true or sympathetic in any real way. So the film just becomes a series of episodes involving two people who seem, well, not terribly interesting.

Oh, yeah, another thing: For a romantic comedy? It's not funny. And the romance isn't terribly romantic, either.

So avoid it. Even at its 90-something minute running time it's just not worth sitting through... Basically this is a pale [[shading]] of High Fidelity, which was a witty and wonderfully [[reacted]] [[kino]] with several truly winning character turns. Watching the Detectives has none of that.

The premise of a video store geek swept off his feet by a quirky mystery woman is a good one but is never fully or adequately explored, thanks to a very weak script and the miscasting of the leads, not to mention the lack of any real visual story-telling style. I mean, this film is centered around MOVIES, yet is itself incredibly uncinematic! That's a major failing right there.

But the main problem is we simply don't care about the main characters because the script and the actors (Murphy and Liu) fail to make them true or sympathetic in any real way. So the film just becomes a series of episodes involving two people who seem, well, not terribly interesting.

Oh, yeah, another thing: For a romantic comedy? It's not funny. And the romance isn't terribly romantic, either.

So avoid it. Even at its 90-something minute running time it's just not worth sitting through... --------------------------------------------- Result 3797 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Given]] that this [[movie]] was put together in less than a year might explain its shortness (81 minutes - including end credits, so roughly 76 minutes of actual film). But what it cannot explain is its [[lack]] of [[humor]] that the previous [[film]] possessed.

The [[gags]] are quick and sometimes not [[even]] [[funny]]. The only [[true]] funny parts are the quick spoofs on the [[Nike]] basketball [[spots]], James Woods' portrayal of Max Van Sydow's [[character]] in the Exorcist, and bits and [[pieces]] [[scattered]] throughout the film. [[Very]] unfunny was the take off of Charlie's [[Angels]], which like the first Scary Movie and the Matrix spin off scene, [[basically]] recreated the scene without much [[humor]] injected into it.

Today's youth might not be able to relate to the spoof gags of the classic [[supernatural]] horror films of the 70's such as the Exorcist and [[maybe]] of the 80s' Poltergeist, et. al.

[[Hopefully]] [[Scary]] [[Movie]] 3 will [[take]] some [[time]] to put together, making the spoofs more enjoyable.

One thing though, the film features more than the last one of promising young actress Anna Faris (whom I will [[admit]] [[seemed]] exceptionally hot in the sequel). Just for her casting and acting ability, I [[give]] this movie a "3" out of "10". [[Bestowed]] that this [[cinematography]] was put together in less than a year might explain its shortness (81 minutes - including end credits, so roughly 76 minutes of actual film). But what it cannot explain is its [[shortfall]] of [[humour]] that the previous [[films]] possessed.

The [[jokes]] are quick and sometimes not [[yet]] [[droll]]. The only [[real]] funny parts are the quick spoofs on the [[Nik]] basketball [[blotches]], James Woods' portrayal of Max Van Sydow's [[traits]] in the Exorcist, and bits and [[slices]] [[piecemeal]] throughout the film. [[Vitally]] unfunny was the take off of Charlie's [[Angel]], which like the first Scary Movie and the Matrix spin off scene, [[essentially]] recreated the scene without much [[mood]] injected into it.

Today's youth might not be able to relate to the spoof gags of the classic [[uncanny]] horror films of the 70's such as the Exorcist and [[perhaps]] of the 80s' Poltergeist, et. al.

[[Thankfully]] [[Spooky]] [[Films]] 3 will [[taking]] some [[moment]] to put together, making the spoofs more enjoyable.

One thing though, the film features more than the last one of promising young actress Anna Faris (whom I will [[concede]] [[appeared]] exceptionally hot in the sequel). Just for her casting and acting ability, I [[lend]] this movie a "3" out of "10". --------------------------------------------- Result 3798 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is about the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever seen. This [[movie]] does [[match]] the quality of such movies as "THEY" & "Cabin [[Fever]]", but [[even]] those had [[name]] [[actors]] where this one [[fell]] short. The "eye [[candy]]" of this movie [[looked]] to be a 50 [[woman]] with a [[bad]] face lift. (just an example of the quality). I would have rated this movie in the negative if [[possible]]. Ladies I have to tell you that the [[men]] were not [[bad]] to [[look]] at, but not much either. [[If]] you were planning on going to see this movie I [[would]] strongly [[recommend]] [[saving]] your money. This is about the [[gravest]] [[cinematography]] I have ever seen. This [[cinematography]] does [[ballgame]] the quality of such movies as "THEY" & "Cabin [[Classical]]", but [[yet]] those had [[designation]] [[protagonists]] where this one [[decreased]] short. The "eye [[confectionery]]" of this movie [[seemed]] to be a 50 [[daughters]] with a [[wicked]] face lift. (just an example of the quality). I would have rated this movie in the negative if [[reachable]]. Ladies I have to tell you that the [[hombre]] were not [[inclement]] to [[glance]] at, but not much either. [[Though]] you were planning on going to see this movie I [[ought]] strongly [[recommends]] [[saved]] your money. --------------------------------------------- Result 3799 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] 'The [[Student]] of Prague' is an early feature-length horror drama or, [[rather]], it is an "autorenfilm" (i.e. an author's film). This film is a member of a [[movement]] of [[many]] movements that tried to lend [[respectability]] to cinéma, or just make a profit, by adapting literature or theatre onto the screen. Fortunately, the [[story]] of this [[book]] with moving pictures is [[good]]. Using Alfred de Musset's poem and a story by Edgar Allen Poe, it centres on the doppelgänger theme.

Unfortunately, the most [[cinematic]] this film gets is the double exposure effects to make Paul Wegener appear twice within scenes. Guido Seeber was a special effects wizard for his day, but he's not very good at positioning the camera or moving it. Film scholar Leon Hunt (printed in "Early Cinema: Space, Frame, Narrative"), however, has made an interesting analysis on this film using framing to amplify the doubles theme: characters being split by left/right, near/far and frontal/diagonal framing of characters and shots. Regardless, the film mostly consists of extended long shots from a fixed position, which is noticeably primitive. Worse is the lack of editing; there's very little scene dissection and scenes linger. None of this is unusual for 1913, but there were more advanced films in this respect around the same time, including the better parts of 'Atlantis' (August Blom, 1913), 'Twilight of a Woman's Soul' (Yevgeni Bauer, 1913) and the short films of D.W. Griffith.

An expanded universal film vocabulary by 1926 would allow for a vastly superior remake. Furthermore, the remake has a reason for the Lyduschka character, other than being an occasional troublemaker and spectator surrogate. Here, the obtrusively acted gypsy lurks around, seemingly, with a cloak of invisibility. I know their world is silent to me, but I assume, with their lips moving and such, that their world would not be silent to them, so how can Lyduschka leer over others' shoulders and not be noticed?

Nevertheless, this is one of the most interesting early films conceptually. Wegener, who seems to have been the primary mind behind this film, in addition to playing the lead, would later play the title role and co-direct 'The Golem' in 1920--helping to further inaugurate the supernatural thread in German silent cinéma.

(Note: The first version I viewed was about an hour long (surely not quite complete) and was in poor condition, with faces bleached at times and such. I'm not sure who was the distributor. I've also since seen the Alpha DVD, which, at 41 minutes, is missing footage present in the aforementioned print and also has fewer and very different title cards, but is visually not as bad. The repetitive score is best muted, though.) 'The [[Learner]] of Prague' is an early feature-length horror drama or, [[fairly]], it is an "autorenfilm" (i.e. an author's film). This film is a member of a [[movements]] of [[multiple]] movements that tried to lend [[decency]] to cinéma, or just make a profit, by adapting literature or theatre onto the screen. Fortunately, the [[conte]] of this [[cookbook]] with moving pictures is [[alright]]. Using Alfred de Musset's poem and a story by Edgar Allen Poe, it centres on the doppelgänger theme.

Unfortunately, the most [[cinematographic]] this film gets is the double exposure effects to make Paul Wegener appear twice within scenes. Guido Seeber was a special effects wizard for his day, but he's not very good at positioning the camera or moving it. Film scholar Leon Hunt (printed in "Early Cinema: Space, Frame, Narrative"), however, has made an interesting analysis on this film using framing to amplify the doubles theme: characters being split by left/right, near/far and frontal/diagonal framing of characters and shots. Regardless, the film mostly consists of extended long shots from a fixed position, which is noticeably primitive. Worse is the lack of editing; there's very little scene dissection and scenes linger. None of this is unusual for 1913, but there were more advanced films in this respect around the same time, including the better parts of 'Atlantis' (August Blom, 1913), 'Twilight of a Woman's Soul' (Yevgeni Bauer, 1913) and the short films of D.W. Griffith.

An expanded universal film vocabulary by 1926 would allow for a vastly superior remake. Furthermore, the remake has a reason for the Lyduschka character, other than being an occasional troublemaker and spectator surrogate. Here, the obtrusively acted gypsy lurks around, seemingly, with a cloak of invisibility. I know their world is silent to me, but I assume, with their lips moving and such, that their world would not be silent to them, so how can Lyduschka leer over others' shoulders and not be noticed?

Nevertheless, this is one of the most interesting early films conceptually. Wegener, who seems to have been the primary mind behind this film, in addition to playing the lead, would later play the title role and co-direct 'The Golem' in 1920--helping to further inaugurate the supernatural thread in German silent cinéma.

(Note: The first version I viewed was about an hour long (surely not quite complete) and was in poor condition, with faces bleached at times and such. I'm not sure who was the distributor. I've also since seen the Alpha DVD, which, at 41 minutes, is missing footage present in the aforementioned print and also has fewer and very different title cards, but is visually not as bad. The repetitive score is best muted, though.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3800 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I hired out Hybrid on the [[weekend]]. What a [[disappointment]]! A stupid lame [[attempt]] at a tele-movie. The [[guy]] they [[got]] for the lead was totally [[weak]] and when [[running]] {he did a [[lot]]} looked like he was eating those minty [[sweets]]...with his [[backside]]! The [[wolf]] [[contacts]] he wore were great, though I feel the actor [[relied]] on them too [[much]], as there was [[nothing]] menacing about his acting at all. The wise native American [[Indian]] [[chick]] has to be one of the most stony hard [[faced]] hags ever [[seen]]. [[Talk]] about a sour cow! She smiled about once for the [[entire]] [[film]], and I [[think]] that is because she had [[sex]]. The sex scene was lame too. They may as well have [[shown]] blowing curtains, if you can [[dig]] that.

Last of all, and this is a [[big]] pet [[hate]] of [[mine]], on the [[cover]] and the [[DVD]] menu, the losers digitally [[drew]] in cool [[sharp]] [[teeth]] on the [[guy]]. They were [[nowhere]] to be [[seen]] in the [[film]]. :( I hired out Hybrid on the [[weekends]]. What a [[frustration]]! A stupid lame [[try]] at a tele-movie. The [[blokes]] they [[gets]] for the lead was totally [[vulnerable]] and when [[implementing]] {he did a [[batch]]} looked like he was eating those minty [[candy]]...with his [[ass]]! The [[wolfe]] [[contact]] he wore were great, though I feel the actor [[rested]] on them too [[very]], as there was [[anything]] menacing about his acting at all. The wise native American [[Indies]] [[nana]] has to be one of the most stony hard [[braved]] hags ever [[noticed]]. [[Discussions]] about a sour cow! She smiled about once for the [[overall]] [[cinema]], and I [[believe]] that is because she had [[sexuality]]. The sex scene was lame too. They may as well have [[exhibited]] blowing curtains, if you can [[dug]] that.

Last of all, and this is a [[mammoth]] pet [[hating]] of [[mines]], on the [[covers]] and the [[DVDS]] menu, the losers digitally [[called]] in cool [[steep]] [[dental]] on the [[buddy]]. They were [[everywhere]] to be [[saw]] in the [[movies]]. :( --------------------------------------------- Result 3801 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] This series has its ups and occasional downs, and the latter is the [[case]], here. There's an agreeable amount of spatter, with an [[inventive]] implementation of the Baby Cart's weapons, but the [[editing]] [[film]] is a [[seriously]] disjointed, the film-making itself rougher than usual. At times, the [[action]] slows to a crawl as the camera follows the wordless wanderings of the "cub," who nearly [[gets]] lost early on. [[All]] in all, [[disappointment]].

That [[said]], there's a spaghetti eastern quality to the music and action that may win the approval of dedicated viewers. This installment spends much of its time following the minor misadventures of the little boy, who begins to stare into the abyss of death his father opened for him. This series has its ups and occasional downs, and the latter is the [[examples]], here. There's an agreeable amount of spatter, with an [[inventiveness]] implementation of the Baby Cart's weapons, but the [[edition]] [[kino]] is a [[earnestly]] disjointed, the film-making itself rougher than usual. At times, the [[efforts]] slows to a crawl as the camera follows the wordless wanderings of the "cub," who nearly [[attains]] lost early on. [[Every]] in all, [[disillusionment]].

That [[told]], there's a spaghetti eastern quality to the music and action that may win the approval of dedicated viewers. This installment spends much of its time following the minor misadventures of the little boy, who begins to stare into the abyss of death his father opened for him. --------------------------------------------- Result 3802 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Steven what have you [[done]] you have hit an all new low. It is weird since Steven's last [[film]] [[shadow]] [[man]] was [[directed]] by the same [[director]] who did this [[trash]]. Shadow [[man]] was good this was diabolically [[bad]] so bad it wasn't [[even]] [[funny]] [[Steven]] is [[hardly]] in the [[movie]] and [[feels]] [[like]] he is in a cameo appearance and when he is in the [[film]] he is [[dubbed]] half the [[time]] anyway. As for the [[action]] well let's just say the wizard of oz had more [[action]] than this trash there is [[hardly]] any [[action]] in the [[film]] and when it does finally arrive it is [[boring]] depressing [[badly]] [[shot]] so called [[action]] scenes. Seagal hardly kills [[anyone]] unlike his over [[films]] where he goes one [[man]] army ie under siege 1 and 2 and [[exit]] wounds. the plot is so [[confusing]] with so many [[plot]] [[holes]] that it doesn't [[make]] scenes sometimes. flight of fury better be good what a [[shame]] i [[wasted]] 5 pounds on this [[garbage]] 0 out of ten [[better]] luck next time Steven what have you [[accomplished]] you have hit an all new low. It is weird since Steven's last [[kino]] [[shade]] [[fella]] was [[aimed]] by the same [[superintendent]] who did this [[dustbin]]. Shadow [[guy]] was good this was diabolically [[amiss]] so bad it wasn't [[yet]] [[droll]] [[Stephane]] is [[practically]] in the [[kino]] and [[deems]] [[iike]] he is in a cameo appearance and when he is in the [[cinematographic]] he is [[nicknamed]] half the [[times]] anyway. As for the [[actions]] well let's just say the wizard of oz had more [[activities]] than this trash there is [[almost]] any [[activity]] in the [[kino]] and when it does finally arrive it is [[bored]] depressing [[sorely]] [[filmed]] so called [[actions]] scenes. Seagal hardly kills [[nobody]] unlike his over [[film]] where he goes one [[men]] army ie under siege 1 and 2 and [[outbound]] wounds. the plot is so [[puzzling]] with so many [[intrigue]] [[keyholes]] that it doesn't [[deliver]] scenes sometimes. flight of fury better be good what a [[shaming]] i [[squandered]] 5 pounds on this [[litter]] 0 out of ten [[nicer]] luck next time --------------------------------------------- Result 3803 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] What I found so curious about this film--I saw the full 4 hour roadshow version, is how oddly [[dispassionate]] it is. For a film about 2 very charismatic men--Castro and Che, engaged in a gargantuan political struggle, it's almost totally devoid of emotional fire. The scenes between Benicio Del Toro and Demian Bichir (who is at best a second level actor,with a slightly high pitched voice) have no drama or depth and basically come down to Castro telling Che: go here, go there, do this and that, with no explanation as to what effect or use this action will result in. Odder still is there is an actor in the cast who has the requisite power to play Castro--Joaquim de Almeida, but he's shunted aside in a minor part in the second half. Without the tension or passion that you would expect to fire these men and their followers, the film becomes a dullish epic-length film about hairy, bearded men running through various jungles shouting and shooting to no particular purpose or end. Several of the reviews I've read showered praise on the work of director Steven Soderbergh while ignoring the actors almost completely. (One in fact spent more time talking about Soderbergh's new digital film camera than the plot or actors or the fact that it's entirely in Spanish with English subtitles.)This is an odd, odd thing to do since a) Soderbergh was only a hired gun on the film and b) it's no more than a competent job of work, with an unremarked upon nod to Oliver Stone's JFK in the black and white cut up camera-work when Che visits New York. If you can imagine Reds directed by Andrew McLaglen instead of Warren Beatty, you'd get an idea of the dull competency of this movie. What I found so curious about this film--I saw the full 4 hour roadshow version, is how oddly [[sober]] it is. For a film about 2 very charismatic men--Castro and Che, engaged in a gargantuan political struggle, it's almost totally devoid of emotional fire. The scenes between Benicio Del Toro and Demian Bichir (who is at best a second level actor,with a slightly high pitched voice) have no drama or depth and basically come down to Castro telling Che: go here, go there, do this and that, with no explanation as to what effect or use this action will result in. Odder still is there is an actor in the cast who has the requisite power to play Castro--Joaquim de Almeida, but he's shunted aside in a minor part in the second half. Without the tension or passion that you would expect to fire these men and their followers, the film becomes a dullish epic-length film about hairy, bearded men running through various jungles shouting and shooting to no particular purpose or end. Several of the reviews I've read showered praise on the work of director Steven Soderbergh while ignoring the actors almost completely. (One in fact spent more time talking about Soderbergh's new digital film camera than the plot or actors or the fact that it's entirely in Spanish with English subtitles.)This is an odd, odd thing to do since a) Soderbergh was only a hired gun on the film and b) it's no more than a competent job of work, with an unremarked upon nod to Oliver Stone's JFK in the black and white cut up camera-work when Che visits New York. If you can imagine Reds directed by Andrew McLaglen instead of Warren Beatty, you'd get an idea of the dull competency of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3804 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Just finished [[watching]] the movie and wanted to give my own opinion(and justice) to the [[movie]].

First of all, to get [[things]] straight, this [[movie]] is not [[pretending]] to be [[anything]] other than a solid action comedy movie. It doesn't aim to revolutionize the movie industry and garner critical acclaims nor does it want to be regarded as one. If you really want to [[enjoy]] this movie to the fullest, I suggest you discard your critical-mindedness and your longing for a good plot because you won't [[find]] any in here. With that established, let us further into the movie.

I had low expectations for this movie simply because it didn't have a strong plot(Yes, moviegoers, I underrated this movie as well), but I never [[expected]] myself to enjoy this movie that much. I even enjoyed this more than the Stephen Chow flicks(which I find Kung Fu Hustle to be his best effort and would've rated it a 9 as well). Action is tight and epic while comedy chokes on to the right places.

SPOILERS alert, I think The action might be unreal, but why would I want to watch a serious basketball movie anyways? There are a lot other sports movies(drama) that already did it well, why create another? SPOILERS end

I'm not even sure why you're reading this. Go ahead and watch it. Just remember, no thinking - just watch, enjoy, smile, laugh, and

Every once in a while they(the movie industry) creates masterpieces such as Pulp Fiction or The Godfather movies, and sometimes they create movies which are better off in the pile of dump. I'm not saying Kung Fu Dunk deserves the recognition that the previous examples have, then again, if we're talking about Stephen Chow-ish comedy, this one's a top ten.

Highly recommended if you love: -no brainer movies with really good action -Kung Fu -Death Trance -Kung Fu and comedy -what the heck, watch this. you'll have a great time.

9/10 for you the cast of Kung Fu Dunk. ^_^ Just finished [[staring]] the movie and wanted to give my own opinion(and justice) to the [[filmmaking]].

First of all, to get [[matters]] straight, this [[cinematographic]] is not [[faking]] to be [[something]] other than a solid action comedy movie. It doesn't aim to revolutionize the movie industry and garner critical acclaims nor does it want to be regarded as one. If you really want to [[enjoying]] this movie to the fullest, I suggest you discard your critical-mindedness and your longing for a good plot because you won't [[finds]] any in here. With that established, let us further into the movie.

I had low expectations for this movie simply because it didn't have a strong plot(Yes, moviegoers, I underrated this movie as well), but I never [[prophesied]] myself to enjoy this movie that much. I even enjoyed this more than the Stephen Chow flicks(which I find Kung Fu Hustle to be his best effort and would've rated it a 9 as well). Action is tight and epic while comedy chokes on to the right places.

SPOILERS alert, I think The action might be unreal, but why would I want to watch a serious basketball movie anyways? There are a lot other sports movies(drama) that already did it well, why create another? SPOILERS end

I'm not even sure why you're reading this. Go ahead and watch it. Just remember, no thinking - just watch, enjoy, smile, laugh, and

Every once in a while they(the movie industry) creates masterpieces such as Pulp Fiction or The Godfather movies, and sometimes they create movies which are better off in the pile of dump. I'm not saying Kung Fu Dunk deserves the recognition that the previous examples have, then again, if we're talking about Stephen Chow-ish comedy, this one's a top ten.

Highly recommended if you love: -no brainer movies with really good action -Kung Fu -Death Trance -Kung Fu and comedy -what the heck, watch this. you'll have a great time.

9/10 for you the cast of Kung Fu Dunk. ^_^ --------------------------------------------- Result 3805 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (85%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] WINCHESTER 73 is the story of a man (Jimmy Stewart) obsessed with getting back his prized possession, a repeating rifle made by Winchester. The rifle keeps changing hands, and Stewart doggedly keeps after it. This 1950 B&W effort by Anthony Mann is more a crime film than a traditional western, and the cowboys often seem more like modern-day gangsters than old-fashioned cowboys. Shelley Winters plays a woman of questionable virtue who is headed for a ranch with a man (Charles Drake) she may marry. She ends up falling for Stewart, but not before she is passed around a bit. Winters is the most [[complex]] character in a film filled with unusual characters. Watch for a young Dan Dureyea as a nutty killer and Tony Curtis in a very small role. A woefully miscast Will Geer plays Wyatt Earp. WINCHESTER 73 is the story of a man (Jimmy Stewart) obsessed with getting back his prized possession, a repeating rifle made by Winchester. The rifle keeps changing hands, and Stewart doggedly keeps after it. This 1950 B&W effort by Anthony Mann is more a crime film than a traditional western, and the cowboys often seem more like modern-day gangsters than old-fashioned cowboys. Shelley Winters plays a woman of questionable virtue who is headed for a ranch with a man (Charles Drake) she may marry. She ends up falling for Stewart, but not before she is passed around a bit. Winters is the most [[complicate]] character in a film filled with unusual characters. Watch for a young Dan Dureyea as a nutty killer and Tony Curtis in a very small role. A woefully miscast Will Geer plays Wyatt Earp. --------------------------------------------- Result 3806 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] An occasionally surrealistic thriller that will push most people's buttons., the 4th Man is sure to offend anyone with a taste for the politically correct. The story's [[protagonist]] is a bisexual alcoholic Catholic writer, Gerard (Krabbe), with a seriously twisted [[sense]] of imagination. Verhoeven offers up

Gerard has an example of everything wrong with the [[modern]] man. He's shiftless, delusional, unable to control his urges, afraid to commit to

meaningful relationships, and utterly apathetic about life in general. As the character himself states at one point, he is a professional liar, unable to recall the truth.

The movie opens with Gerard dreaming of spiders consuming Christ, and then waking to begin the long march to his own destruction. He chases off

one man (a boyfriend presumably), then chases another at a train station. Later, at a lecture, he meets a woman who seems to want to help him, or

perhaps she has more nefarious plans.. She quickly captures Gerard in her web, enticing him with sex and money, having plenty of both. She's also got

secrets, like three dead husbands. Is she lonely, and genuinely looking for someone to nurture - or is she a deadly black widow, luring Gerard to his

death? Will Garard be the 4th man she kills? The woman is Christine (Soutendijk), and Verhoeven does his best to keep you guessing what she's up to.

This is an interesting movie, with a lot of sex and intrigue. It's similar to Verhoeven'sBasic instinct, but has a lot more depth, and is certainly more shocking. There's a lot of very strong gay content, which may make some viewers squirm. Highly [[recommended]] for [[fans]] of intelligent

psychological thrillers, or anyone looking for something entirely new. An occasionally surrealistic thriller that will push most people's buttons., the 4th Man is sure to offend anyone with a taste for the politically correct. The story's [[actor]] is a bisexual alcoholic Catholic writer, Gerard (Krabbe), with a seriously twisted [[feeling]] of imagination. Verhoeven offers up

Gerard has an example of everything wrong with the [[trendy]] man. He's shiftless, delusional, unable to control his urges, afraid to commit to

meaningful relationships, and utterly apathetic about life in general. As the character himself states at one point, he is a professional liar, unable to recall the truth.

The movie opens with Gerard dreaming of spiders consuming Christ, and then waking to begin the long march to his own destruction. He chases off

one man (a boyfriend presumably), then chases another at a train station. Later, at a lecture, he meets a woman who seems to want to help him, or

perhaps she has more nefarious plans.. She quickly captures Gerard in her web, enticing him with sex and money, having plenty of both. She's also got

secrets, like three dead husbands. Is she lonely, and genuinely looking for someone to nurture - or is she a deadly black widow, luring Gerard to his

death? Will Garard be the 4th man she kills? The woman is Christine (Soutendijk), and Verhoeven does his best to keep you guessing what she's up to.

This is an interesting movie, with a lot of sex and intrigue. It's similar to Verhoeven'sBasic instinct, but has a lot more depth, and is certainly more shocking. There's a lot of very strong gay content, which may make some viewers squirm. Highly [[suggested]] for [[amateurs]] of intelligent

psychological thrillers, or anyone looking for something entirely new. --------------------------------------------- Result 3807 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] The movie [[within]] the movie - a concept done many times in the history of cinema. It is [[accomplished]] here as well as in any.

If you love Carmen, you'll [[love]] this version.

If you love flamenco, you'll [[love]] this version.

The plot of the [[classic]] opera is played out in the actual [[rehearsal]] of the [[opera]] by a flamenco troupe. The music is [[authentic]]. The direction [[wonderful]].

If you like dancing, you'll [[love]] this version.

There is tragedy. There is passion. There is intrigue.

There is...

[[Carmen]]. The movie [[inside]] the movie - a concept done many times in the history of cinema. It is [[played]] here as well as in any.

If you love Carmen, you'll [[iike]] this version.

If you love flamenco, you'll [[iove]] this version.

The plot of the [[typical]] opera is played out in the actual [[repetition]] of the [[drama]] by a flamenco troupe. The music is [[veritable]]. The direction [[glamorous]].

If you like dancing, you'll [[iike]] this version.

There is tragedy. There is passion. There is intrigue.

There is...

[[Roxy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3808 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that made me feel [[strongly]] for the need of making movies at all. Generally [[speaking]], I am a fan of movies based on [[worthy]] true stories. And this one is [[GREAT]]! Besides Meryl's performance which has gained a lot of recognition and praise, the movie's greatest asset is the [[story]] it is based on. The riveting tale of a couple who suffer social and legal torture, after having undergone enormous emotional pain at the unexpected and brutal death of their infant child is really an eye-opening fable that exposes the inhumane side of fellow humans, and uncovers the barbarism of a very refined and lawful society. It is interesting to see how people who consider themselves as kind and intelligent people (the emotional jury ladies in the movie for example) are in [[reality]] nothing more than selfish dupes who would, for their dogmatic beliefs and prejudices, shut their brains to any deliberation and contemplation even in the light of all facts pointing very clearly against their opinions. The other face of the so-called "civilized" society that the movie exposes is the apathy to the pain of fellow human beings (needless to say, this is very general, even though this specific tale unfolds in [[Australia]]), that goes as far as becoming a true cruelty. Must see if you are willing to take something serious and perhaps thought-provoking. This is one of those [[movie]] that made me feel [[resolutely]] for the need of making movies at all. Generally [[speak]], I am a fan of movies based on [[commendable]] true stories. And this one is [[WHOPPING]]! Besides Meryl's performance which has gained a lot of recognition and praise, the movie's greatest asset is the [[stories]] it is based on. The riveting tale of a couple who suffer social and legal torture, after having undergone enormous emotional pain at the unexpected and brutal death of their infant child is really an eye-opening fable that exposes the inhumane side of fellow humans, and uncovers the barbarism of a very refined and lawful society. It is interesting to see how people who consider themselves as kind and intelligent people (the emotional jury ladies in the movie for example) are in [[realities]] nothing more than selfish dupes who would, for their dogmatic beliefs and prejudices, shut their brains to any deliberation and contemplation even in the light of all facts pointing very clearly against their opinions. The other face of the so-called "civilized" society that the movie exposes is the apathy to the pain of fellow human beings (needless to say, this is very general, even though this specific tale unfolds in [[Australians]]), that goes as far as becoming a true cruelty. Must see if you are willing to take something serious and perhaps thought-provoking. --------------------------------------------- Result 3809 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] One of the [[best]] movies I ever saw was an Irish movie titled Philadelphia,Here I Come. I read the play before I saw the [[movie]] and [[loved]] them both. It's the story of a young man preparing to leave Ireland to go to America because he can't earn a living in Ireland. It is told both from the [[perspective]] of the young man(whom the other characters in the film can see) and another young man [[representing]] his uncensored [[thoughts]] and [[feelings]]., but who cannot be [[seen]] by the other [[characters]] in the [[film]]. It is a very sad movie, but [[deeply]] [[touching]], and I would recommend this [[film]] to anyone who wants something to think about. I love any Irish movie, or almost any movie about Ireland, and any film that has the late Irish actor Donal McCann in it gets my vote.I [[would]] watch that [[man]] chew gum for 2 hours on screen, and unfortunately,I have.[[Terrible]] [[shame]] to have [[lost]] him so [[young]]. One of the [[optimum]] movies I ever saw was an Irish movie titled Philadelphia,Here I Come. I read the play before I saw the [[cinema]] and [[liked]] them both. It's the story of a young man preparing to leave Ireland to go to America because he can't earn a living in Ireland. It is told both from the [[viewpoint]] of the young man(whom the other characters in the film can see) and another young man [[representative]] his uncensored [[idea]] and [[affections]]., but who cannot be [[watched]] by the other [[personage]] in the [[cinematography]]. It is a very sad movie, but [[radically]] [[touch]], and I would recommend this [[filmmaking]] to anyone who wants something to think about. I love any Irish movie, or almost any movie about Ireland, and any film that has the late Irish actor Donal McCann in it gets my vote.I [[should]] watch that [[mec]] chew gum for 2 hours on screen, and unfortunately,I have.[[Horrible]] [[ignominy]] to have [[outof]] him so [[youthful]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3810 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] Shakespeare Behind Bars was the most surprising and [[delightful]] film I've seen all year. It's about a prison program, somewhere in California if I recall correctly, where the inmates have rehearsed and performed a different Shakespeare play every year for the past 14 years. The film follows their production of "The Tempest" from casting through performance, and in the process we learn some pretty [[amazing]] things about these men, who are all in for the most serious of crimes. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction -- if anyone tried to adapt this story into a fiction film, the audience would never buy it, but knowing that it's real makes it breathtaking to watch -- literally; I gasped out loud when I learned of one particularly gifted felon's crime. It's like some loopy episode of Oz, and all the more entertaining because the characters and their bizarre stories are real. Shakespeare Behind Bars was the most surprising and [[sumptuous]] film I've seen all year. It's about a prison program, somewhere in California if I recall correctly, where the inmates have rehearsed and performed a different Shakespeare play every year for the past 14 years. The film follows their production of "The Tempest" from casting through performance, and in the process we learn some pretty [[unbelievable]] things about these men, who are all in for the most serious of crimes. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction -- if anyone tried to adapt this story into a fiction film, the audience would never buy it, but knowing that it's real makes it breathtaking to watch -- literally; I gasped out loud when I learned of one particularly gifted felon's crime. It's like some loopy episode of Oz, and all the more entertaining because the characters and their bizarre stories are real. --------------------------------------------- Result 3811 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Nick Millard aka Nick Phillips should have left well-enough alone when he made "Criminally Insane" 10 years before the release of this god-awful waste of time and effort. The fact that the original "Criminally Insane" was less than an hour in length should have clued him into the fact that he had probably milked this storyline for all he was going to get out of it...but instead he opts to use TONS of footage from the original in this one as well, even to the point of recycling the original opening credit sequence! Unfortunately, bringing back the rapidly aging Priscilla Alden did not save this one. What little bit of original footage there was in this flick looks as if it were filmed with a rented hand-held camcorder! If this film cost more than $100 to make I would be very surprised and I would be equally surprised if it made anything close to that amount! Avoid this one and watch the original instead! --------------------------------------------- Result 3812 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I thought this was a [[wonderful]] way to spend time on a too hot summer weekend, sitting in the air conditioned theater and watching a light-hearted [[comedy]]. The plot is simplistic, but the dialogue is witty and the characters are likable (even the well bread suspected serial killer). While some may be [[disappointed]] when they realize this is not Match Point 2: Risk Addiction, I thought it was [[proof]] that Woody Allen is still fully in control of the [[style]] many of us have grown to love.

This was the most I'd laughed at one of Woody's comedies in years (dare I say a decade?). While I've never been impressed with Scarlet Johanson, in this she managed to tone down her "sexy" image and jumped right into a average, but spirited young woman.

This may not be the crown jewel of his career, but it was wittier than "Devil Wears Prada" and more interesting than "Superman" a great comedy to go see with friends. I thought this was a [[ravishing]] way to spend time on a too hot summer weekend, sitting in the air conditioned theater and watching a light-hearted [[travesty]]. The plot is simplistic, but the dialogue is witty and the characters are likable (even the well bread suspected serial killer). While some may be [[disenchanted]] when they realize this is not Match Point 2: Risk Addiction, I thought it was [[test]] that Woody Allen is still fully in control of the [[styles]] many of us have grown to love.

This was the most I'd laughed at one of Woody's comedies in years (dare I say a decade?). While I've never been impressed with Scarlet Johanson, in this she managed to tone down her "sexy" image and jumped right into a average, but spirited young woman.

This may not be the crown jewel of his career, but it was wittier than "Devil Wears Prada" and more interesting than "Superman" a great comedy to go see with friends. --------------------------------------------- Result 3813 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Sydney Lumet, although one of the oldest active directors, still got game! A few years ago he shot "Find me guilty", a proof to everyone that Vin Diesel can actually act, if he gets the opportunity and the right director. If he had retired after this movie (a true [[masterpiece]] in my eyes), no one could have blamed him. But he's still going strong, his next movie already announced for 2009.

But let's [[stay]] with this movie right here. The cast list is [[incredible]], their performance top notch. The little nuances in their performances, the "real" dialogue and/or situations that evolve throughout the movie are just amazing. The (time) structure of the movie, that keeps your toes the whole time, blending time-lines so seamlessly, that the editing seems natural/flawless. The story is heightened by that, although even in a "normal" time structure, it would've been at least a good movie (Drama/Thriller). I can only highly recommend it, the rest is up to you! :o) Sydney Lumet, although one of the oldest active directors, still got game! A few years ago he shot "Find me guilty", a proof to everyone that Vin Diesel can actually act, if he gets the opportunity and the right director. If he had retired after this movie (a true [[centerpiece]] in my eyes), no one could have blamed him. But he's still going strong, his next movie already announced for 2009.

But let's [[sojourn]] with this movie right here. The cast list is [[unimaginable]], their performance top notch. The little nuances in their performances, the "real" dialogue and/or situations that evolve throughout the movie are just amazing. The (time) structure of the movie, that keeps your toes the whole time, blending time-lines so seamlessly, that the editing seems natural/flawless. The story is heightened by that, although even in a "normal" time structure, it would've been at least a good movie (Drama/Thriller). I can only highly recommend it, the rest is up to you! :o) --------------------------------------------- Result 3814 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (88%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] A prequel to the re-imagined [[Battlestar]] Galactica [[series]], from the same creative team Ronald D. Moore and David Eick as well as new series co-creator Remi Aubuchon. Caprica is set in the twelve colonies some 58 years prior to the events of Battlestar Galactica. The new series in addition to its human drama also chronicles the [[key]] [[steps]] in the [[development]] of what would become the Cylon race.

The pilot and the series are set to follow two [[families]]; the Graystone's which include Daniel (Eric Stoltz) a computer genius and corporate tycoon and his equally brilliant but rebellious daughter Zoe (Alessandra Toreson), while the Adama's include Joseph (Esai Morales) a lawyer and his son William the future Admiral of Battlestar Galactica.

Like Battlestar Galactica the series [[includes]] some [[great]] experienced [[actors]] in Eric Stoltz, Esai Morales and Polly Walker as well as some very talented relatively [[new]] actors [[including]] Alessandra Toreson and Magda Apanowicz.

For [[fans]] of [[Battlestar]] Gallactica there are [[similarities]] and continuities with that [[series]] but it is [[also]] very [[different]]. In the pilot at least the science fiction elements are [[definitely]] present but are smaller [[part]] of this series. The scenes on Caprica while reflecting a more technologically advanced society also have retro feel, this is achieved through some of the architecture, the costumes and the way it is shot.

While the look and feel of the two series have some substantial differences some of the [[themes]] will seem very familiar, religion is again very important here, while the racial theme rarely touched on in BG is far more important. We also touch on terrorism the existence of a soul and whether or not a machine can have one, as well as issues related to crime and government.

The pilot has been released direct to DVD in an extended and unrated version prior to airing on TV, the series is set to start in 2010.

Like [[Battlestar]] Galactica this series is filmed in Vancouver A prequel to the re-imagined [[Galactica]] Galactica [[serial]], from the same creative team Ronald D. Moore and David Eick as well as new series co-creator Remi Aubuchon. Caprica is set in the twelve colonies some 58 years prior to the events of Battlestar Galactica. The new series in addition to its human drama also chronicles the [[principal]] [[actions]] in the [[evolution]] of what would become the Cylon race.

The pilot and the series are set to follow two [[family]]; the Graystone's which include Daniel (Eric Stoltz) a computer genius and corporate tycoon and his equally brilliant but rebellious daughter Zoe (Alessandra Toreson), while the Adama's include Joseph (Esai Morales) a lawyer and his son William the future Admiral of Battlestar Galactica.

Like Battlestar Galactica the series [[contains]] some [[huge]] experienced [[actresses]] in Eric Stoltz, Esai Morales and Polly Walker as well as some very talented relatively [[newer]] actors [[include]] Alessandra Toreson and Magda Apanowicz.

For [[amateurs]] of [[Galactica]] Gallactica there are [[parallels]] and continuities with that [[serials]] but it is [[similarly]] very [[divergent]]. In the pilot at least the science fiction elements are [[clearly]] present but are smaller [[parties]] of this series. The scenes on Caprica while reflecting a more technologically advanced society also have retro feel, this is achieved through some of the architecture, the costumes and the way it is shot.

While the look and feel of the two series have some substantial differences some of the [[subjects]] will seem very familiar, religion is again very important here, while the racial theme rarely touched on in BG is far more important. We also touch on terrorism the existence of a soul and whether or not a machine can have one, as well as issues related to crime and government.

The pilot has been released direct to DVD in an extended and unrated version prior to airing on TV, the series is set to start in 2010.

Like [[Galactica]] Galactica this series is filmed in Vancouver --------------------------------------------- Result 3815 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] If you have any kind of heart and compassion for people, this is a tough [[movie]] to watch, at least in the second half of it.

It's in that segment where we see nice little [[kid]] get beaten up and then a retarded (mentally- challenged) man go off the deep end after he witnesses this brutal act against the child. It's not pleasant material.

[[However]], it's a [[good]] movie and the acting is good, too. The story will sit with you awhile.

"Dominick" is the mentally-disabled guy and is played by Tom Hulce. I think this might be Hulce's best role ever. He's looked after by a med student, "Eugene," played by Ray Liotta, who became a star the following year with Kevin Costner's "Field Of Dreams."

Dominick is a goodhearted garbage man who reads "Hulk" comic books and loves wrestling. He's the type of "slow" guy that you can't help but love and root for to live a happy life. When he freaks out, it's for several good reasons and...well, see the film for the whole story. It's worth your time but be prepared to go on real emotional roller coaster and possibly be very upset at some things you see. If you have any kind of heart and compassion for people, this is a tough [[filmmaking]] to watch, at least in the second half of it.

It's in that segment where we see nice little [[kids]] get beaten up and then a retarded (mentally- challenged) man go off the deep end after he witnesses this brutal act against the child. It's not pleasant material.

[[Still]], it's a [[alright]] movie and the acting is good, too. The story will sit with you awhile.

"Dominick" is the mentally-disabled guy and is played by Tom Hulce. I think this might be Hulce's best role ever. He's looked after by a med student, "Eugene," played by Ray Liotta, who became a star the following year with Kevin Costner's "Field Of Dreams."

Dominick is a goodhearted garbage man who reads "Hulk" comic books and loves wrestling. He's the type of "slow" guy that you can't help but love and root for to live a happy life. When he freaks out, it's for several good reasons and...well, see the film for the whole story. It's worth your time but be prepared to go on real emotional roller coaster and possibly be very upset at some things you see. --------------------------------------------- Result 3816 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] This was a [[strong]] Poirot/Suchet, [[television]] [[mystery]] selection. The characters were [[vivid]] and well-acted. The plot and the main setting--a student hostel-- were [[excellent]]. Japp was nothing special but for me did not [[distract]] from story. One significant point, [[many]] Poirot watchers don't recognize good acting or good characterization. I also [[think]] they are [[rather]] [[harsh]] in their judgments of some of the Poirot mysteries. Finally, I have read few [[Christie]] novels--none in recent years-- and find it annoying that so many viewers are upset about changes from the novel. Please, viewers, consider what is presented to you on film, not what you think should be there. That said, the Poirot mysteries vary in quality, but not as much as reviewers and raters would have you believe. With the singular exception of The Five Little Pigs which was fabulous in plot, character and theme, the longer Poirot films are neither that good or that bad. For the record, I have seen all the longer Poirot/Suchet films. Finally, films without Lemon, Hastings, and/or Japp are neither good nor bad because of their absence. There presence, however, is either obtrusive (almost always with Japp) or irrelevant with Hastings. Lemon is in the middle. This was a [[vigorous]] Poirot/Suchet, [[televisions]] [[riddle]] selection. The characters were [[alive]] and well-acted. The plot and the main setting--a student hostel-- were [[glamorous]]. Japp was nothing special but for me did not [[amuse]] from story. One significant point, [[innumerable]] Poirot watchers don't recognize good acting or good characterization. I also [[thought]] they are [[fairly]] [[fierce]] in their judgments of some of the Poirot mysteries. Finally, I have read few [[Kristy]] novels--none in recent years-- and find it annoying that so many viewers are upset about changes from the novel. Please, viewers, consider what is presented to you on film, not what you think should be there. That said, the Poirot mysteries vary in quality, but not as much as reviewers and raters would have you believe. With the singular exception of The Five Little Pigs which was fabulous in plot, character and theme, the longer Poirot films are neither that good or that bad. For the record, I have seen all the longer Poirot/Suchet films. Finally, films without Lemon, Hastings, and/or Japp are neither good nor bad because of their absence. There presence, however, is either obtrusive (almost always with Japp) or irrelevant with Hastings. Lemon is in the middle. --------------------------------------------- Result 3817 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Well I don't personally like rap, but I still found Fear of a Black Hat hilarious. I'm sure I didn't get some inside jokes, but some I knew, and it was [[funny]] enough to make me laugh just after I'd stopped laughing. I'm a big fan of Spinal tap, so naturally I had to [[check]] this out. It was deriviative from This Is Spinal Tap, [[sometimes]] blatantly, but this [[film]] still stood on it's own as an [[original]], [[intelligent]], and funny satire. My personal favorite: "Back in the time of slaves, they didn't have hats to protect them from the sun, so at the end of the day they were too tired to revolt. Now we have hats." Well I don't personally like rap, but I still found Fear of a Black Hat hilarious. I'm sure I didn't get some inside jokes, but some I knew, and it was [[humorous]] enough to make me laugh just after I'd stopped laughing. I'm a big fan of Spinal tap, so naturally I had to [[auditing]] this out. It was deriviative from This Is Spinal Tap, [[intermittently]] blatantly, but this [[filmmaking]] still stood on it's own as an [[preliminary]], [[termite]], and funny satire. My personal favorite: "Back in the time of slaves, they didn't have hats to protect them from the sun, so at the end of the day they were too tired to revolt. Now we have hats." --------------------------------------------- Result 3818 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (81%)]] Comment? Like my comment is necessary? We are talking about all time masterpiece, for all seasons and all generations. This is only type of [[movies]] that i [[still]] have patience to watch. In this, like in other Disney's movies is some kind of [[magic]]. All characters are in some [[way]], "alive" and "real" so it's [[easy]] to understand message, even if you don't understand language, (like i didn't understood when i first watched movie, because i was about six years old). Maybe my English is not so good, but i learned what i know mostly from this kind of movies, and this is one more great dimension of this kind of movies, which in present time are rare. But there is a one big shame. In my country is now impossible to watch this, or any other Disney's movie! We don't have copyrights, so our children are disabled to enjoy and learn from this kind of movies. So, we will watch this movie again "Once upon a dream" or...? Comment? Like my comment is necessary? We are talking about all time masterpiece, for all seasons and all generations. This is only type of [[kino]] that i [[however]] have patience to watch. In this, like in other Disney's movies is some kind of [[witchcraft]]. All characters are in some [[camino]], "alive" and "real" so it's [[uncomplicated]] to understand message, even if you don't understand language, (like i didn't understood when i first watched movie, because i was about six years old). Maybe my English is not so good, but i learned what i know mostly from this kind of movies, and this is one more great dimension of this kind of movies, which in present time are rare. But there is a one big shame. In my country is now impossible to watch this, or any other Disney's movie! We don't have copyrights, so our children are disabled to enjoy and learn from this kind of movies. So, we will watch this movie again "Once upon a dream" or...? --------------------------------------------- Result 3819 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] I [[figured]] that it's about time I [[let]] this one out. Pokémon [[fans]] are suffering in [[America]] these days. Why? Because we rely on Kids WB and 4Kids Entertainment to provide us with our beloved [[series]] and movies. As far as the series goes, they do a pretty [[good]] job in bringing the fun and magic of the Japanese versions to television. So what is their [[problem]] when it comes to the [[movies]]? Honestly now, I have seen all three Pokémon movies in Japanese and I will definitely be [[seeing]] the fourth one. They are [[excellent]] [[movies]]. They are all enjoyable and fun to watch. And, after seeing Pokémon 2000 in theaters, I can't help but wonder how these American producers read the Japanese scripts. The way it appears, it seems that they read and see something that says `Insert empty moral here' in big bold faced letters. It definitely appears that way as they used the same wonderful dubbing methods they used on MSB (extreme sarcasm there) and created this crap.

*possible spoilers from here on*

Well, I guess I should first talk about Pikachu's Rescue Adventure. My first gripe with this came with no narration. I guess they got enough bad comments on the Pokédex narration that plagued Pikachu's Vacation, and, instead of going with a caring, gentle woman's voice as appeared in Pikachu no Natsu Yasumi and Pikachu Tankentai, they just cut the narration all together. This wouldn't have been a problem, except for one thing. Did anyone really understand why the Exeggcute didn't let Togepi go until the end? Possibly the fans, but I'm sure not the parents. Then, there's the theme song. I couldn't help but roll my eyes at this one. The Japanese theme song was `Tankentai wo Tsukurou' and was sung by Japanese children. It was fun and enjoyable. This one: [[nauseating]]. Now, one of my favorite parts of the short was the dancing Kireihana. Nice music, fun to watch. That's changed with the Bellossom. The music sucked for one, but on top of that, they had all the Pokémon talk during the music, which turned out to be jumpy, annoying, and just unnecessary. Oh, and then there's the Poliwhirl who thinks he's a Poliwrath. You'd think that guys that work with these characters constantly would at least learn what they are. Basically, not much could save this little ill fated dub, which is very unfortunate considering its potential. But, I haven't touched on the worst of it yet.

You'd think that the warning signs would've been apparent to me when I received my issue of Nintendo Power. For some unfathomable reason, I had been placing some faith in 4Kids and the WB. My thoughts were `well, they screwed up on the first movie, but the second is different as far as the theme goes, so they should do well.' That in mind, I just didn't pay attention to the warning signs I encountered in the theaters when the trailers said, `You will believe that one person can make all the difference.' With the way they said that at every turn, I was hoping that this would not turn into a moral fest like MSB did at the end of the English version. Then comes Nintendo Power, in which I see all my fears realized in the words `the main feature 'The Power of One.' At that point, I became a bit more uneasy. `The Power of One?!' Not a good sign. However, I still kept some of my false faith. Big mistake.

Sitting in the theater, I was literally getting stomach cramps watching another movie which I loved in Japanese being turned into complete and utter junk. I hear comments that say it was better because the moral was more subtle. I can see a point in that since they didn't pander this thing, repeating it over and over like in MSB. However, it did more damage than anything else in this movie. First of all, the legend that was read throughout was changed a bit to read `the world turns to Ash.' Ah hah. So, Ash is the chosen one? Whatever. In the Japanese version, the inhabitants of Arshia needed a Pokémon trainer to carry out their traditional ceremony. This time, he's the chosen one. A greater way that this did damage was to Lugia. Lugia was one of the coolest characters in a Pokémon movie.... when the movie was ABOUT Lugia. In this one, Lugia is forced to take a back seat to Ash. In the scene where they're flying back to the main island, Lugia and Ash are discussing the conditions of Lugia's existence, not that Ash is going to make all the difference. Overall in this category, Ash wasn't really the `one person' that would make the difference, since he was helped by many along the way.

A lot of the other stuff is kind of nit picking. Furura's flute song wasn't nearly as sweet and enjoyable as the Japanese one. Jirarudan's speech to them saying his collection `started with a Mew card?' Ugh. Even worse, Misty's outrage originally concerned the way Moltres and Zapdos were being held. `Why didn't you put them in Pokéballs when you caught them? This is like caging them to be displayed.' Much different from whining about him thinking Pokémon are things to be collected like stamps. If there were any real redeeming values in this, they came from Team Rocket. Some pretty funny lines. Not really to make me laugh out loud, but more to make me giggle and slightly ease the pains in my stomach. Well, that was officially the last American Pokémon movie I'm going to see. I've imported the third one and find it very enjoyable. I would rather not see another Japanese movie be ruined in the same fashion as the first two. I'll be importing the fourth one as well. Forget you, Kids WB and 4Kids. You have forsaken me for the last time. I [[thought]] that it's about time I [[allowing]] this one out. Pokémon [[lovers]] are suffering in [[Americas]] these days. Why? Because we rely on Kids WB and 4Kids Entertainment to provide us with our beloved [[serials]] and movies. As far as the series goes, they do a pretty [[buena]] job in bringing the fun and magic of the Japanese versions to television. So what is their [[difficulties]] when it comes to the [[film]]? Honestly now, I have seen all three Pokémon movies in Japanese and I will definitely be [[witnessing]] the fourth one. They are [[wondrous]] [[film]]. They are all enjoyable and fun to watch. And, after seeing Pokémon 2000 in theaters, I can't help but wonder how these American producers read the Japanese scripts. The way it appears, it seems that they read and see something that says `Insert empty moral here' in big bold faced letters. It definitely appears that way as they used the same wonderful dubbing methods they used on MSB (extreme sarcasm there) and created this crap.

*possible spoilers from here on*

Well, I guess I should first talk about Pikachu's Rescue Adventure. My first gripe with this came with no narration. I guess they got enough bad comments on the Pokédex narration that plagued Pikachu's Vacation, and, instead of going with a caring, gentle woman's voice as appeared in Pikachu no Natsu Yasumi and Pikachu Tankentai, they just cut the narration all together. This wouldn't have been a problem, except for one thing. Did anyone really understand why the Exeggcute didn't let Togepi go until the end? Possibly the fans, but I'm sure not the parents. Then, there's the theme song. I couldn't help but roll my eyes at this one. The Japanese theme song was `Tankentai wo Tsukurou' and was sung by Japanese children. It was fun and enjoyable. This one: [[unsavory]]. Now, one of my favorite parts of the short was the dancing Kireihana. Nice music, fun to watch. That's changed with the Bellossom. The music sucked for one, but on top of that, they had all the Pokémon talk during the music, which turned out to be jumpy, annoying, and just unnecessary. Oh, and then there's the Poliwhirl who thinks he's a Poliwrath. You'd think that guys that work with these characters constantly would at least learn what they are. Basically, not much could save this little ill fated dub, which is very unfortunate considering its potential. But, I haven't touched on the worst of it yet.

You'd think that the warning signs would've been apparent to me when I received my issue of Nintendo Power. For some unfathomable reason, I had been placing some faith in 4Kids and the WB. My thoughts were `well, they screwed up on the first movie, but the second is different as far as the theme goes, so they should do well.' That in mind, I just didn't pay attention to the warning signs I encountered in the theaters when the trailers said, `You will believe that one person can make all the difference.' With the way they said that at every turn, I was hoping that this would not turn into a moral fest like MSB did at the end of the English version. Then comes Nintendo Power, in which I see all my fears realized in the words `the main feature 'The Power of One.' At that point, I became a bit more uneasy. `The Power of One?!' Not a good sign. However, I still kept some of my false faith. Big mistake.

Sitting in the theater, I was literally getting stomach cramps watching another movie which I loved in Japanese being turned into complete and utter junk. I hear comments that say it was better because the moral was more subtle. I can see a point in that since they didn't pander this thing, repeating it over and over like in MSB. However, it did more damage than anything else in this movie. First of all, the legend that was read throughout was changed a bit to read `the world turns to Ash.' Ah hah. So, Ash is the chosen one? Whatever. In the Japanese version, the inhabitants of Arshia needed a Pokémon trainer to carry out their traditional ceremony. This time, he's the chosen one. A greater way that this did damage was to Lugia. Lugia was one of the coolest characters in a Pokémon movie.... when the movie was ABOUT Lugia. In this one, Lugia is forced to take a back seat to Ash. In the scene where they're flying back to the main island, Lugia and Ash are discussing the conditions of Lugia's existence, not that Ash is going to make all the difference. Overall in this category, Ash wasn't really the `one person' that would make the difference, since he was helped by many along the way.

A lot of the other stuff is kind of nit picking. Furura's flute song wasn't nearly as sweet and enjoyable as the Japanese one. Jirarudan's speech to them saying his collection `started with a Mew card?' Ugh. Even worse, Misty's outrage originally concerned the way Moltres and Zapdos were being held. `Why didn't you put them in Pokéballs when you caught them? This is like caging them to be displayed.' Much different from whining about him thinking Pokémon are things to be collected like stamps. If there were any real redeeming values in this, they came from Team Rocket. Some pretty funny lines. Not really to make me laugh out loud, but more to make me giggle and slightly ease the pains in my stomach. Well, that was officially the last American Pokémon movie I'm going to see. I've imported the third one and find it very enjoyable. I would rather not see another Japanese movie be ruined in the same fashion as the first two. I'll be importing the fourth one as well. Forget you, Kids WB and 4Kids. You have forsaken me for the last time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3820 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] This is a gem, a [[real]] [[piece]] of [[Americana]] for all that this [[implies]]. [[If]] you are self programed to [[resist]] "life-afirming" [[stories]], just [[stay]] away and [[leave]] the [[pleasure]] to the [[rest]] of us who [[still]] believe. And what makes the frosting on the [[cake]] truly delectable is that it is fact [[based]] on a [[real]] [[rags]] to [[riches]] [[story]], no [[need]] to nit-pick what details were [[changed]] to make a compact story. Chris Cooper is one of the [[greatest]] living actors, and the [[complex]], self-conflicted, bottom-line good at the core father he portrayed could only be pulled off successfully by someone with his skill and insight. The simple minded comments, refusing to accept a father who tries to lay down the law all the while sensing that he may possibly be off-track, expose the limitation of the commentator, not the writers or the acting. This is not for the cynical, or the simple minded. This is a gem, a [[veritable]] [[slice]] of [[American]] for all that this [[presumes]]. [[Unless]] you are self programed to [[withstanding]] "life-afirming" [[storytelling]], just [[sojourn]] away and [[letting]] the [[glee]] to the [[roosting]] of us who [[nevertheless]] believe. And what makes the frosting on the [[cheesecake]] truly delectable is that it is fact [[predicated]] on a [[actual]] [[cloths]] to [[affluence]] [[stories]], no [[requisite]] to nit-pick what details were [[altering]] to make a compact story. Chris Cooper is one of the [[largest]] living actors, and the [[tortuous]], self-conflicted, bottom-line good at the core father he portrayed could only be pulled off successfully by someone with his skill and insight. The simple minded comments, refusing to accept a father who tries to lay down the law all the while sensing that he may possibly be off-track, expose the limitation of the commentator, not the writers or the acting. This is not for the cynical, or the simple minded. --------------------------------------------- Result 3821 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Like the gentle giants that make up the latter half of this film's title, Michael Oblowitz's [[latest]] production has [[grace]], but it's also slow and ponderous. The producer's last outing, "Mosquitoman-3D" had the same problem. It's hard to imagine a boring shark movie, but they somehow managed it. The only draw for Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy was it's passable animatronix, which is always fun when dealing with wondrous worlds beneath the ocean's surface. But even that was only passable. Poor focus in some scenes made the production seems amateurish. With Dolphins and Whales, the technology is all but wasted. Cloudy scenes and too many close-ups of the film's giant subjects do nothing to take advantage of IMAX's stunning 3D capabilities. There are far too few scenes of any depth or variety. Close-ups of these awesome creatures just look flat and there is often only one creature in the cameras field, so there is no contrast of depth. Michael Oblowitz is trying to follow in his father's footsteps, but when you've got Shark-Week on cable, his introspective and dull treatment of his subjects is a constant disappointment. Like the gentle giants that make up the latter half of this film's title, Michael Oblowitz's [[recent]] production has [[gracia]], but it's also slow and ponderous. The producer's last outing, "Mosquitoman-3D" had the same problem. It's hard to imagine a boring shark movie, but they somehow managed it. The only draw for Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy was it's passable animatronix, which is always fun when dealing with wondrous worlds beneath the ocean's surface. But even that was only passable. Poor focus in some scenes made the production seems amateurish. With Dolphins and Whales, the technology is all but wasted. Cloudy scenes and too many close-ups of the film's giant subjects do nothing to take advantage of IMAX's stunning 3D capabilities. There are far too few scenes of any depth or variety. Close-ups of these awesome creatures just look flat and there is often only one creature in the cameras field, so there is no contrast of depth. Michael Oblowitz is trying to follow in his father's footsteps, but when you've got Shark-Week on cable, his introspective and dull treatment of his subjects is a constant disappointment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3822 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (82%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] A lonely depressed French boy Mathieu (Jeremie Elkaim) on vacation in the summer, meets and falls in love with Cedric (the gorgeous Stephane Rideau). [[Quiet]] and slow this is a very frustrating movie. On one hand, I was absorbed by it and really felt for the two boys. On the other I was getting annoyed--the film constantly keeps flashing around from the past to the present with no rhyme or reason. It's very confusing and pointless.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Also there are tons of plot holes--Mathieu, at one point, does something that ends him up in the hospital. What is it--we're never told! Then he breaks up with Cedric and tells everybody else he's living with him. Why? We're not told. Then he hooks up inexplicably with another guy at the end. Why? No explanation. It's clear Cedric loves Mathieu and Mathieu is living in the same town so... However it is a tribute to the film that you really care about the characters so much. If only things were explained!

Elkaim as Mathieu is not good. He's tall, handsome and has a nice body--but he can't act. His idea of acting is sitting around with a blank look on his face--all the time. Rideau, on the other hand, is great. He's VERY handsome, has a very nice body and is one hell of an actor. Also he has an incredible sexual magnetism about him. There is full frontal male nudity, lots of kissing and a fairly explicit sex scene in the movie which is great--most movies shy away from showing male-male love scenes. This one doesn't and it helps to see how the characters care and feel for each other.

So, a frustrating film but somewhat worth seeing--especially for Rideau's nude scenes--that is, if you like good-looking nude young men!

A lonely depressed French boy Mathieu (Jeremie Elkaim) on vacation in the summer, meets and falls in love with Cedric (the gorgeous Stephane Rideau). [[Shush]] and slow this is a very frustrating movie. On one hand, I was absorbed by it and really felt for the two boys. On the other I was getting annoyed--the film constantly keeps flashing around from the past to the present with no rhyme or reason. It's very confusing and pointless.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

Also there are tons of plot holes--Mathieu, at one point, does something that ends him up in the hospital. What is it--we're never told! Then he breaks up with Cedric and tells everybody else he's living with him. Why? We're not told. Then he hooks up inexplicably with another guy at the end. Why? No explanation. It's clear Cedric loves Mathieu and Mathieu is living in the same town so... However it is a tribute to the film that you really care about the characters so much. If only things were explained!

Elkaim as Mathieu is not good. He's tall, handsome and has a nice body--but he can't act. His idea of acting is sitting around with a blank look on his face--all the time. Rideau, on the other hand, is great. He's VERY handsome, has a very nice body and is one hell of an actor. Also he has an incredible sexual magnetism about him. There is full frontal male nudity, lots of kissing and a fairly explicit sex scene in the movie which is great--most movies shy away from showing male-male love scenes. This one doesn't and it helps to see how the characters care and feel for each other.

So, a frustrating film but somewhat worth seeing--especially for Rideau's nude scenes--that is, if you like good-looking nude young men!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3823 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Some [[good]] movies keep you in front of the [[TV]], and you are [[dying]] to see the result.

This [[movie]] does not have highs and lows. It simply [[describes]] a young girl's family life in Africa. People come and go, the weather and the background are all the same.

Some [[alright]] movies keep you in front of the [[TELEVISIONS]], and you are [[deathbed]] to see the result.

This [[kino]] does not have highs and lows. It simply [[outline]] a young girl's family life in Africa. People come and go, the weather and the background are all the same.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3824 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I rented this [[film]] about a [[month]] [[ago]] when I had [[nothing]] [[else]] to do on a [[Friday]] night. [[All]] I can say to describe this [[worthless]] [[film]] is 'TRASH' The acting is so [[badly]] [[done]] I've [[seen]] [[kids]] in high [[school]] do a [[better]] [[job]] The whole [[cast]] [[seems]] like they're just reading their lines out, no feeling, no emotion, and no [[room]] to capture the [[viewer]]. On another note the special [[effects]] were insanely cheesy and the [[whole]] thing [[looked]] [[like]] it had been [[shot]] with a [[camera]] [[anyone]] can [[buy]] a radio [[shack]].

The [[clown]] himself [[looks]] nothing like the one on the [[video]] [[cover]]. [[Heck]] he doesn't [[even]] [[show]] up in the [[film]] until [[near]] the [[end]] and all he does it [[hum]] [[songs]] and [[go]] around stalking a few characters. There is no [[real]] murder [[shown]] either so this isn't a [[real]] slasher film [[either]] [[Since]] I've [[seen]] it I've [[questioned]] a few [[things]] 1. If is 'Serial [[Insane]] Clown Killer' Wouldn't that be a Serial [[Killer]] who [[kills]] clowns? 2. [[If]] your [[friend]] goes [[missing]] why [[would]] you [[go]] out into the [[woods]] to have [[sex]] [[rather]] than look for her? Sad [[really]].

3. Why is it that the only [[REAL]] acting sputtered vainly out at the [[end]] all of a sudden? [[Did]] the cast [[finally]] [[decide]] to [[show]] [[effort]] in their [[jobs]]? This film is as sad as they [[come]]. My [[advice]] is to [[avoid]] renting it lest you [[waste]] an [[hour]] or two of your [[time]] laughing more than [[screaming]]. I rented this [[kino]] about a [[months]] [[before]] when I had [[none]] [[elsewhere]] to do on a [[Fridays]] night. [[Entire]] I can say to describe this [[vain]] [[cinema]] is 'TRASH' The acting is so [[desperately]] [[completed]] I've [[watched]] [[enfant]] in high [[teaching]] do a [[best]] [[jobs]] The whole [[casting]] [[seem]] like they're just reading their lines out, no feeling, no emotion, and no [[courtrooms]] to capture the [[beholder]]. On another note the special [[impact]] were insanely cheesy and the [[together]] thing [[seemed]] [[iike]] it had been [[offed]] with a [[cameras]] [[somebody]] can [[buys]] a radio [[hut]].

The [[joker]] himself [[seems]] nothing like the one on the [[videos]] [[coverings]]. [[Devil]] he doesn't [[yet]] [[exhibited]] up in the [[cinematography]] until [[nearer]] the [[ends]] and all he does it [[hmm]] [[melodies]] and [[going]] around stalking a few characters. There is no [[genuine]] murder [[exhibited]] either so this isn't a [[true]] slasher film [[nor]] [[Because]] I've [[saw]] it I've [[debriefed]] a few [[items]] 1. If is 'Serial [[Crazed]] Clown Killer' Wouldn't that be a Serial [[Callin]] who [[murder]] clowns? 2. [[Though]] your [[friends]] goes [[faded]] why [[could]] you [[going]] out into the [[timber]] to have [[sexuality]] [[somewhat]] than look for her? Sad [[genuinely]].

3. Why is it that the only [[ACTUAL]] acting sputtered vainly out at the [[ceases]] all of a sudden? [[Got]] the cast [[lastly]] [[decides]] to [[exposition]] [[endeavours]] in their [[labour]]? This film is as sad as they [[arriving]]. My [[counselling]] is to [[stave]] renting it lest you [[squandering]] an [[hora]] or two of your [[times]] laughing more than [[shouting]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3825 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] [[getting]] to work on this film when it was made back in the summer of 1990. Shot [[partly]] in the Biltmore Estate in Asheville, NC and the remaining parts in Winston-Salem. The massive [[offices]] of the RJ Reynolds were used in several office scenes and places in around the beautiful city that is know as the tulip capital of the world Winston-Salem! I enjoyed my [[work]] although it was exceedingly [[hard]] work [[building]] all the sets like the Golf of Mexico where Renee [[Russo]] and Jim Belushi went on their date. I [[also]] had a big hand in decorating the bar where Larry encounters the magical bartender Mr. Destiny. I tacked all those pics on the wall of sports heroes and decorated that phone booth where larry makes a phone call for a cab. I even put my mothers photo at eye level so i could freeze frame it and show it to her when we watched it. I remember dyeing the grass at his old house with green dye because it first had to be sodded(it was a new house in a new development and I guess they leased it for the movie)..then I had to cut that newly laid sod to make it look nice..man that was hard! As far as the movie, when we made it we had no [[idea]] what it would be like but after seeing it i [[fell]] in [[love]] with it because really [[tells]] the [[story]] of "what if" as good as I ever had [[seen]] it, including the [[great]] It's a [[Wonderful]] Life. I cried so many [[times]]

i can't count. I got to meet the [[wonderful]] [[actor]] Michael Caine while shooting scenes at an [[old]] [[minor]] league ballpark where Larry's [[boyhood]] scenes were [[played]] and replayed. I [[remember]] after he had done a take an was heading back to his [[trailer]], I ran him down and [[asked]] him for a picture and he was [[quite]] [[amiable]] and [[said]] "why not!" He is a good [[guy]] and a really [[natural]] and forceful actor. I can't say the same for Jim Belushi..he was so full of himself, smoking big cuban cigars and [[talking]] loudly so

everyone in earshot could hear his every word. His [[career]] never did take off but he has had a decent TV [[career]] recently. I would say watch this movie if you ever get the chance. It's [[wonderful]] and really heartfelt and real. You can feel Larry's pain after he enters into the new world Mr. Destiny gives him after hitting the homer, and as he wants so badly for people to believe he is not this bad guy everyone thinks he is. They all think he belongs in a nuthouse! But eventually he wins people over but by then he wants his real life back so badly, especially his wonderful wife, played so beautifully by Linda Hamilton..and he wants his dog back! So see it. [[obtaining]] to work on this film when it was made back in the summer of 1990. Shot [[partially]] in the Biltmore Estate in Asheville, NC and the remaining parts in Winston-Salem. The massive [[bureaus]] of the RJ Reynolds were used in several office scenes and places in around the beautiful city that is know as the tulip capital of the world Winston-Salem! I enjoyed my [[cooperates]] although it was exceedingly [[laborious]] work [[build]] all the sets like the Golf of Mexico where Renee [[Rousseau]] and Jim Belushi went on their date. I [[apart]] had a big hand in decorating the bar where Larry encounters the magical bartender Mr. Destiny. I tacked all those pics on the wall of sports heroes and decorated that phone booth where larry makes a phone call for a cab. I even put my mothers photo at eye level so i could freeze frame it and show it to her when we watched it. I remember dyeing the grass at his old house with green dye because it first had to be sodded(it was a new house in a new development and I guess they leased it for the movie)..then I had to cut that newly laid sod to make it look nice..man that was hard! As far as the movie, when we made it we had no [[thinks]] what it would be like but after seeing it i [[declined]] in [[iike]] with it because really [[told]] the [[conte]] of "what if" as good as I ever had [[noticed]] it, including the [[grand]] It's a [[Lovely]] Life. I cried so many [[period]]

i can't count. I got to meet the [[super]] [[actress]] Michael Caine while shooting scenes at an [[ancient]] [[smaller]] league ballpark where Larry's [[adolescents]] scenes were [[served]] and replayed. I [[remind]] after he had done a take an was heading back to his [[caravan]], I ran him down and [[demanded]] him for a picture and he was [[pretty]] [[cordial]] and [[says]] "why not!" He is a good [[buddy]] and a really [[naturel]] and forceful actor. I can't say the same for Jim Belushi..he was so full of himself, smoking big cuban cigars and [[debating]] loudly so

everyone in earshot could hear his every word. His [[quarry]] never did take off but he has had a decent TV [[occupations]] recently. I would say watch this movie if you ever get the chance. It's [[super]] and really heartfelt and real. You can feel Larry's pain after he enters into the new world Mr. Destiny gives him after hitting the homer, and as he wants so badly for people to believe he is not this bad guy everyone thinks he is. They all think he belongs in a nuthouse! But eventually he wins people over but by then he wants his real life back so badly, especially his wonderful wife, played so beautifully by Linda Hamilton..and he wants his dog back! So see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3826 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie is just another average action flick, but it [[could]] have been so much better. When the guns come out they really [[needed]] some choreography help. [[Someone]] like Andy McNabb - who [[made]] that [[brilliant]] [[action]] sequence in Heat as they move up the [[street]] from the robbery - [[would]] have turned the [[dull]] action sequences into [[something]] special. Because the [[rest]] of the film was alright - predictable but watchable - better than you would [[expect]] from this [[type]] of [[movie]]. Then [[came]] the final scene, the show-down, the one we had been waiting for, but was like watching [[something]] from the A-Team in the 80s. They shoot wildly, [[nothing]] hits, and they run around a house trying to kill each other - same old, same old. This movie is just another average action flick, but it [[did]] have been so much better. When the guns come out they really [[requisite]] some choreography help. [[Anyone]] like Andy McNabb - who [[brought]] that [[wondrous]] [[actions]] sequence in Heat as they move up the [[thoroughfare]] from the robbery - [[could]] have turned the [[uninspiring]] action sequences into [[anything]] special. Because the [[repose]] of the film was alright - predictable but watchable - better than you would [[expecting]] from this [[genre]] of [[cinematography]]. Then [[became]] the final scene, the show-down, the one we had been waiting for, but was like watching [[algo]] from the A-Team in the 80s. They shoot wildly, [[anything]] hits, and they run around a house trying to kill each other - same old, same old. --------------------------------------------- Result 3827 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I felt brain [[dead]], I'll tell you. This is the [[worst]] film I have ever bought. (in my ignorance I thought this was the Peter Jackson [[film]] of the same [[name]]). The performances are so terrible they are [[laughable]]. The [[special]] [[effects]] have not [[stood]] the [[test]] of time and look [[dire]]. The script promotes that kind of TV [[movie]], stare into the middle distance [[kind]] of acting. The cast [[look]] as if they have been taking lessons from Joey Tribbiani, they have one [[look]] each, and stick to it. [[Plus]] I have never been confused by a movie until I sat down to watch this. The is it a dream or no [[plot]] is so terrible that frustration sets in within a few [[minutes]]. [[Avoid]] like a plague. I felt brain [[deceased]], I'll tell you. This is the [[meanest]] film I have ever bought. (in my ignorance I thought this was the Peter Jackson [[cinematography]] of the same [[behalf]]). The performances are so terrible they are [[farcical]]. The [[particular]] [[influences]] have not [[amounted]] the [[essays]] of time and look [[harrowing]]. The script promotes that kind of TV [[cinema]], stare into the middle distance [[genera]] of acting. The cast [[gaze]] as if they have been taking lessons from Joey Tribbiani, they have one [[glance]] each, and stick to it. [[Longer]] I have never been confused by a movie until I sat down to watch this. The is it a dream or no [[intrigue]] is so terrible that frustration sets in within a few [[mins]]. [[Preventing]] like a plague. --------------------------------------------- Result 3828 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] [[Evil]] Breed is a very strange slasher flick that is unfortunately no good.The beginning of the film [[seems]] promising but [[overall]] it's a [[disaster]].The [[dialogue]] is pretty [[bad]] but not near as bad as the acting.The acting is brutal and [[unbearable]].Most of the [[characters]] deliver there lines [[horribly]] and [[even]] if that is on purpose the [[method]] doesn't [[work]] because the characters become [[annoying]].Some of the [[kills]] are [[innovative]] but it [[took]] far too long to [[get]] to them.[[After]] about a half [[hour]] through the [[movie]] we get the first death (other than in the [[beginning]])and then almost [[every]] other character is [[smoked]] within the next five minutes.The [[movie]] then [[turned]] into [[sort]] of a spoof with [[ridiculous]] looking characters,unrealistic [[karate]] like [[fights]],and a scene in which a man [[gets]] his intestines [[pulled]] out of his a*sscrack.[[None]] of it is [[funny]] it's just plain [[ridiculous]].The film then [[becomes]] ultra gory and ultra [[pointless]].Most of the characters are clichéd even for slasher standards and are as solid as [[butter]] left on the [[counter]] for 5 days.Evil Breed isn't [[even]] laughably bad [[therefore]] it fails in it's main [[task]].Watch Texas Chainsaw [[Massacre]],[[Just]] Before [[Dawn]],or [[See]] No [[Evil]] for a [[real]] slasher. [[Viciousness]] Breed is a very strange slasher flick that is unfortunately no good.The beginning of the film [[seem]] promising but [[holistic]] it's a [[calamity]].The [[conversations]] is pretty [[amiss]] but not near as bad as the acting.The acting is brutal and [[untenable]].Most of the [[traits]] deliver there lines [[unbearably]] and [[yet]] if that is on purpose the [[modes]] doesn't [[cooperates]] because the characters become [[galling]].Some of the [[mata]] are [[revolutionary]] but it [[picked]] far too long to [[got]] to them.[[Upon]] about a half [[hora]] through the [[film]] we get the first death (other than in the [[startup]])and then almost [[each]] other character is [[smoker]] within the next five minutes.The [[flick]] then [[transformed]] into [[genre]] of a spoof with [[silly]] looking characters,unrealistic [[kicks]] like [[struggle]],and a scene in which a man [[get]] his intestines [[pull]] out of his a*sscrack.[[Nos]] of it is [[fun]] it's just plain [[foolish]].The film then [[become]] ultra gory and ultra [[vain]].Most of the characters are clichéd even for slasher standards and are as solid as [[peanut]] left on the [[combat]] for 5 days.Evil Breed isn't [[yet]] laughably bad [[so]] it fails in it's main [[chore]].Watch Texas Chainsaw [[Carnage]],[[Righteous]] Before [[Daybreak]],or [[Seeing]] No [[Malign]] for a [[genuine]] slasher. --------------------------------------------- Result 3829 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I saw this [[recent]] Woody Allen film because I'm a [[fan]] of his [[work]] and I [[make]] it a point to try to see everything he does, though the reviews of this film [[led]] me to expect a disappointing effort. They were right. This is a [[confused]] movie that can't decide whether it [[wants]] to be a [[comedy]], a romantic fantasy, or a [[drama]] about [[female]] mid-life crisis. It [[fails]] at all three.

Alice ([[Mia]] Farrow) is a restless [[middle]] aged woman who has married into great wealth and [[leads]] a life of aimless luxury with her rather [[boring]] husband and their two [[small]] [[children]]. This rather [[mundane]] plot concept is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic [[herbs]], and the ghost of a [[former]] lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these additions sound too [[fantastic]] for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?

I was never quite sure of what this mixed up muddle was trying to say. There are only a handful of truly funny moments in the film, and the endingis a really preposterous touch of Pollyanna.

Rent 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a serious consideration of ethics and morals. Or [[go]] back to "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan". I saw this [[freshly]] Woody Allen film because I'm a [[breather]] of his [[cooperation]] and I [[deliver]] it a point to try to see everything he does, though the reviews of this film [[drove]] me to expect a disappointing effort. They were right. This is a [[muddled]] movie that can't decide whether it [[desires]] to be a [[charade]], a romantic fantasy, or a [[tragedy]] about [[girl]] mid-life crisis. It [[fail]] at all three.

Alice ([[Macedonian]] Farrow) is a restless [[idler]] aged woman who has married into great wealth and [[leeds]] a life of aimless luxury with her rather [[monotonous]] husband and their two [[minimal]] [[kiddies]]. This rather [[corny]] plot concept is livened up with such implausibilities as an old Chinese folk healer who makes her invisible with some magic [[weeds]], and the ghost of a [[antigua]] lover (with whom she flies over Manhattan). If these additions sound too [[awesome]] for you, how about something more prosaic, like an affair with a saxophone player?

I was never quite sure of what this mixed up muddle was trying to say. There are only a handful of truly funny moments in the film, and the endingis a really preposterous touch of Pollyanna.

Rent 'Crimes and Misdemeanors' instead, a superbly well-done film that suceeds in combining comedy with a serious consideration of ethics and morals. Or [[going]] back to "Annie Hall" or "Manhattan". --------------------------------------------- Result 3830 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] [[Simply]] put, this is the [[best]] movie to [[come]] out of Michigan since... well, ever! [[Evil]] [[Dead]] [[eat]] your [[heart]] out, [[Hatred]] of A Minute was some of the [[oddest]], and best [[cinema]] to be [[seen]] by this reviewer in a [[long]] [[time]]. I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] to [[anyone]] who is in [[need]] of a [[head]] [[trip]], or a [[good]] [[case]] of the willies! [[Simple]] put, this is the [[better]] movie to [[arrive]] out of Michigan since... well, ever! [[Diabolical]] [[Decedent]] [[comer]] your [[crux]] out, [[Enmity]] of A Minute was some of the [[weirdest]], and best [[theaters]] to be [[noticed]] by this reviewer in a [[lang]] [[times]]. I [[recommendation]] this [[movies]] to [[nobody]] who is in [[requisite]] of a [[leader]] [[touring]], or a [[buena]] [[instance]] of the willies! --------------------------------------------- Result 3831 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A very good adaptation of the novel by amrita pritam. Urmila and manoj bajpai have given their best.

there is a natural flair in the movie and i felt it right through. It looked like bollywood finally gave away it's glamor and had some quality artists performing on screen.

Content wise, the movie depicted very much what exactly happened during partition by showing the sufferings of a particular family and also shows that trust in one's life goes beyond religion.

The best part was they did not make it a drama with a lot of tear shedding and melodrama.

I simply loved it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3832 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] This movie is an [[incredible]] piece of work. It explores [[every]] nook and [[cranny]] of the human mind, focusing on the characters relationships with the people [[around]] them. Stellar performances all [[around]]. This one had me weeping for about half an hour straight. [[Spend]] some [[real]] time with this one. This movie is an [[unimaginable]] piece of work. It explores [[any]] nook and [[crannies]] of the human mind, focusing on the characters relationships with the people [[about]] them. Stellar performances all [[throughout]]. This one had me weeping for about half an hour straight. [[Expend]] some [[actual]] time with this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3833 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This movie is really not all that [[bad]]. But then again, this movie genre is right down my alley. Sure, the sets are cheap, but they really did decent with what they had.

If you like cheap, futuristic, post-apocalyptic B movies, then you'll [[love]] this one!! I [[sure]] did!

This movie is really not all that [[unfavorable]]. But then again, this movie genre is right down my alley. Sure, the sets are cheap, but they really did decent with what they had.

If you like cheap, futuristic, post-apocalyptic B movies, then you'll [[adores]] this one!! I [[convinced]] did!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3834 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Oh [[dear]]!What a [[disappointment]]. I've been watching old [[Westerns]] on British TV for decades, and I wasn't aware of this one until its showing yesterday - most other Scott Westerns come around every few years or so and are usually worth watching again.

The rich colour and outdoor sets were good, but that's all I can [[say]] about this film. I have to agree with most of the other negative comments already made. Several times I felt like turning it off, and finally I did, halfway through, something I hardly ever do.

Scott seemed unusually oily in charming the girls, his two sidekicks were annoying and so was the Mexican bandit lad. And I've a feeling the army uniforms were 20 years or so too modern, not that this has bothered makers of many other Westerns.

Perhaps it got better in the second half, but I couldn't be bothered to wait and see. Oh [[sweetie]]!What a [[frustration]]. I've been watching old [[Westerners]] on British TV for decades, and I wasn't aware of this one until its showing yesterday - most other Scott Westerns come around every few years or so and are usually worth watching again.

The rich colour and outdoor sets were good, but that's all I can [[told]] about this film. I have to agree with most of the other negative comments already made. Several times I felt like turning it off, and finally I did, halfway through, something I hardly ever do.

Scott seemed unusually oily in charming the girls, his two sidekicks were annoying and so was the Mexican bandit lad. And I've a feeling the army uniforms were 20 years or so too modern, not that this has bothered makers of many other Westerns.

Perhaps it got better in the second half, but I couldn't be bothered to wait and see. --------------------------------------------- Result 3835 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] Today, I visited an Athenean Cinema with my two kids (6 & 8 years old), payed 3 x 12 euros (about 45 US $ total) not to mention gas, popcorn & soda, was asked to return my 3d special glasses after leaving the theater and was "[[forced]]" to watch what [[could]] have been a great 3d movie masterpiece but only proved to be a [[sick]] "cold war like" propaganda movie, like none I have seen during the last 20 years... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE FOR CHILDREN... IN HEAVEN'S NAME!

PS 1: The average working Greek makes no more than 850 Euros a month (approxiamtely 1050 US $)

PS 2 My kids liked it... but then again they are no more than babies >in Greek: mora, morons > like the one who wrote the script & the others who made this "3d disgrace" happen.

PS 3 3D animation is fantastic but who gives a ....! Today, I visited an Athenean Cinema with my two kids (6 & 8 years old), payed 3 x 12 euros (about 45 US $ total) not to mention gas, popcorn & soda, was asked to return my 3d special glasses after leaving the theater and was "[[compelled]]" to watch what [[wo]] have been a great 3d movie masterpiece but only proved to be a [[unwell]] "cold war like" propaganda movie, like none I have seen during the last 20 years... AND THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE FOR CHILDREN... IN HEAVEN'S NAME!

PS 1: The average working Greek makes no more than 850 Euros a month (approxiamtely 1050 US $)

PS 2 My kids liked it... but then again they are no more than babies >in Greek: mora, morons > like the one who wrote the script & the others who made this "3d disgrace" happen.

PS 3 3D animation is fantastic but who gives a ....! --------------------------------------------- Result 3836 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Ok, let me say that I didn't expect a film starring Jerry Springer to be cinematic gold, all I asked for was it to be cinematic...and it wasn't even that. It looked like someone's bad home movies. Poorly acted, scripted, and filled to the brim with nudity of the most unnattractive people I've ever seen.

The film's "plot" focuses on a low-class family who decide to go on the "Jerry Farrelly Show" to discuss multiple affairs between a mother, daughter, stepfather and the daughter's fiancee. From there, the movie fizzles and develops into a unique experience: white-trash pornography. There's redneck sex, interacial sex, even sex between Jerry and his wife? (Yuk!) This film encouraged me to want to run out of the theater and get a second circumcision. At least it was mercifully short. Disgusting and degrading. African-Americans and working class America should be offended. (Howard Stern should be pleased however, he didn't squander his attempt for film stardom. His was smart, funny and entertaining)

MY GRADE: F+ (the daughter was hot) --------------------------------------------- Result 3837 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[picked]] up this [[movie]] in the [[hope]] it [[would]] be [[similar]] to the hilarious "The Gamers" by Dead [[Gentlemen]] Productions (which is highly recommendable, by the [[way]]). Boy, what a [[disappointment]]! The movie is shot in this [[fake]] documentary style [[made]] famous by the office but it [[fails]] to [[deliver]]. The reason is partly the [[stiff]] acting but mostly the [[writing]] and directing. True, it can be funny to [[use]] every singe cliché there is about role [[playing]] games, but here it is done in such a way that it becomes [[extremely]] [[predictable]]. Already at the [[beginning]] of each scene you [[know]] what the "joke" will be about. But maybe the biggest problem is that everything is depicted way over the top. There is no subtlety in this movie, if there would be captions "LAUGH NOW" or a [[cheap]] 80s-style fake-laughter track it would not make much [[difference]]. With some scenes you can't help to think "Yea, I get why they thought this would be funny" but the way it is executed takes all momentum out of the possible joke. I [[picks]] up this [[cinematography]] in the [[expectancy]] it [[could]] be [[akin]] to the hilarious "The Gamers" by Dead [[Gentleman]] Productions (which is highly recommendable, by the [[paths]]). Boy, what a [[displeasure]]! The movie is shot in this [[faux]] documentary style [[introduced]] famous by the office but it [[fail]] to [[provide]]. The reason is partly the [[tough]] acting but mostly the [[write]] and directing. True, it can be funny to [[usage]] every singe cliché there is about role [[replay]] games, but here it is done in such a way that it becomes [[vitally]] [[foreseeable]]. Already at the [[initiate]] of each scene you [[savoir]] what the "joke" will be about. But maybe the biggest problem is that everything is depicted way over the top. There is no subtlety in this movie, if there would be captions "LAUGH NOW" or a [[cheaper]] 80s-style fake-laughter track it would not make much [[variance]]. With some scenes you can't help to think "Yea, I get why they thought this would be funny" but the way it is executed takes all momentum out of the possible joke. --------------------------------------------- Result 3838 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Disney? What [[happened]]? I [[really]] wish the [[movie]] had been set in the 60's ;like the [[book]] was. And I [[really]] [[could]] have dealt with [[cheap]] [[special]] [[effects]] in order to [[save]] the budget for a more [[accurate]] adaption..... I'm [[glad]] that, [[maybe]], [[someone]] might be influenced to read the [[books]]..... but, The [[Man]] With Red Eyes interchangeable as IT? And what's up with the volcanic [[upheaval]]? [[Where]] was THAT in the [[book]]? Peter Jackson! [[Save]] us!!!! A [[long]] [[time]] ago (1978) I [[heard]] that there was European version of this film. I sure wish I [[could]] id it. I can only [[imagine]] it might be closer to the [[real]] [[story]] than this [[poor]] adaption. This movie needs to be X'd. Disney? What [[arrived]]? I [[genuinely]] wish the [[film]] had been set in the 60's ;like the [[ledger]] was. And I [[genuinely]] [[would]] have dealt with [[cheaper]] [[particular]] [[consequences]] in order to [[savings]] the budget for a more [[correct]] adaption..... I'm [[happier]] that, [[potentially]], [[person]] might be influenced to read the [[ledger]]..... but, The [[Guy]] With Red Eyes interchangeable as IT? And what's up with the volcanic [[dislocation]]? [[Hence]] was THAT in the [[ledger]]? Peter Jackson! [[Saved]] us!!!! A [[longer]] [[moment]] ago (1978) I [[listened]] that there was European version of this film. I sure wish I [[did]] id it. I can only [[suppose]] it might be closer to the [[authentic]] [[tale]] than this [[pauper]] adaption. This movie needs to be X'd. --------------------------------------------- Result 3839 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (70%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] 'The [[Adventures]] Of Barry McKenzie' started life as a satirical comic strip in 'Private Eye', written by Barry Humphries and based on an idea by Peter Cook. McKenzie ( 'Bazza' to his friends ) is a lanky, loud, hat-wearing Australian whose two main interests in life are sex ( despite never having had any ) and Fosters lager. In 1972, he found his way to the big screen for the first of two outings. It must have been [[tempting]] for Humphries to cast himself as 'Bazza', but he wisely left the job to Barry Crocker ( later to sing the theme to the television soap opera 'Neighbours'! ). Humphries instead played multiple roles in true Peter Sellers fashion, most notably Bazza's overbearing Aunt 'Edna Everage' ( this was before she became a Dame ).

You know this is not going to be 'The Importance Of Being Ernest' when its censorship classification N.P.A. stands for 'No Poofters Allowed'. Pom-hating Bazza is told by a Sydney solicitor that in order to inherit a share in his father's will he must go to England to absorb British culture. With Aunt Edna in tow, he catches a Quantas flight to Hong Kong, and then on to London. An over-efficient customs officer makes Bazza pay import duties on everything he bought over there, including a suitcase full of 'tubes of Fosters lager'. As he puts it: "when it comes to fleecing you, the Poms have got the edge on the gyppos!". A crafty taxi driver ( Bernard Spear ) maximises the fare by taking Bazza and Edna first to Stonehenge, then Scotland. The streets of London are filthy, and their hotel is a hovel run by a seedy landlord ( Spike Milligan ) who makes Bazza put pound notes in the electricity meter every twenty minutes. There is some good news for our hero though; he meets up with other Aussies in Earls Court, and Fosters is on sale in British pubs.

What happens next is a series of comical escapades that take Bazza from starring in his own cigarette commercial, putting curry down his pants in the belief it is some form of aphrodisiac, a bizarre encounter with Dennis Price as an upper-class pervert who loves being spanked while wearing a schoolboy's uniform, a Young Conservative dance in Rickmansworth to a charity rock concert where his song about 'chundering' ( vomiting ) almost makes him an international star, and finally to the B.B.C. T.V. Centre where he pulls his pants down on a live talk-show hosted by the thinking man's crumpet herself, Joan Bakewell. A fire breaks out, and Bazza's friends come to the rescue - downing cans of Fosters, they urinate on the flames en masse.

This is a far cry from Bruce Beresford's later works - 'Breaker Morant' and 'Driving Miss Daisy'. On release, it was savaged by critics for being too 'vulgar'. Well, yes, it is, but it is also great non-P.C. fun. 'Bazza' is a disgusting creation, but his zest for life is unmistakable, you cannot help but like the guy. His various euphemisms for urinating ( 'point Percy at the porcelain' ) and vomiting ( 'the Technicolour yawn' ) have passed into the English language without a lot of people knowing where they came from. Other guest stars include Dick Bentley ( as a detective who chases Bazza everywhere ), Peter Cook, Julie Covington ( later to star in 'Rock Follies' ), and even future arts presenter Russell Davies.

A sequel - the wonderfully-named 'Barry McKenzie Holds His Own - came out two years later. At its premiere, Humphries took the opportunity to blast the critics who had savaged the first film. Good for him.

What must have been of greater concern to him, though, was the release of 'Crocodile Dundee' in 1985. It also featured a lanky, hat-wearing Aussie struggling to come to terms with a foreign culture. And made tonnes more money.

The song on the end credits ( performed by Snacka Fitzgibbon ) is magnificent. You have a love a lyric that includes the line: "If you want to send your sister in a frenzy, introduce her to Barry McKenzie!". Time to end this review. I have to go the dunny to shake hands with the unemployed... 'The [[Shenanigans]] Of Barry McKenzie' started life as a satirical comic strip in 'Private Eye', written by Barry Humphries and based on an idea by Peter Cook. McKenzie ( 'Bazza' to his friends ) is a lanky, loud, hat-wearing Australian whose two main interests in life are sex ( despite never having had any ) and Fosters lager. In 1972, he found his way to the big screen for the first of two outings. It must have been [[alluring]] for Humphries to cast himself as 'Bazza', but he wisely left the job to Barry Crocker ( later to sing the theme to the television soap opera 'Neighbours'! ). Humphries instead played multiple roles in true Peter Sellers fashion, most notably Bazza's overbearing Aunt 'Edna Everage' ( this was before she became a Dame ).

You know this is not going to be 'The Importance Of Being Ernest' when its censorship classification N.P.A. stands for 'No Poofters Allowed'. Pom-hating Bazza is told by a Sydney solicitor that in order to inherit a share in his father's will he must go to England to absorb British culture. With Aunt Edna in tow, he catches a Quantas flight to Hong Kong, and then on to London. An over-efficient customs officer makes Bazza pay import duties on everything he bought over there, including a suitcase full of 'tubes of Fosters lager'. As he puts it: "when it comes to fleecing you, the Poms have got the edge on the gyppos!". A crafty taxi driver ( Bernard Spear ) maximises the fare by taking Bazza and Edna first to Stonehenge, then Scotland. The streets of London are filthy, and their hotel is a hovel run by a seedy landlord ( Spike Milligan ) who makes Bazza put pound notes in the electricity meter every twenty minutes. There is some good news for our hero though; he meets up with other Aussies in Earls Court, and Fosters is on sale in British pubs.

What happens next is a series of comical escapades that take Bazza from starring in his own cigarette commercial, putting curry down his pants in the belief it is some form of aphrodisiac, a bizarre encounter with Dennis Price as an upper-class pervert who loves being spanked while wearing a schoolboy's uniform, a Young Conservative dance in Rickmansworth to a charity rock concert where his song about 'chundering' ( vomiting ) almost makes him an international star, and finally to the B.B.C. T.V. Centre where he pulls his pants down on a live talk-show hosted by the thinking man's crumpet herself, Joan Bakewell. A fire breaks out, and Bazza's friends come to the rescue - downing cans of Fosters, they urinate on the flames en masse.

This is a far cry from Bruce Beresford's later works - 'Breaker Morant' and 'Driving Miss Daisy'. On release, it was savaged by critics for being too 'vulgar'. Well, yes, it is, but it is also great non-P.C. fun. 'Bazza' is a disgusting creation, but his zest for life is unmistakable, you cannot help but like the guy. His various euphemisms for urinating ( 'point Percy at the porcelain' ) and vomiting ( 'the Technicolour yawn' ) have passed into the English language without a lot of people knowing where they came from. Other guest stars include Dick Bentley ( as a detective who chases Bazza everywhere ), Peter Cook, Julie Covington ( later to star in 'Rock Follies' ), and even future arts presenter Russell Davies.

A sequel - the wonderfully-named 'Barry McKenzie Holds His Own - came out two years later. At its premiere, Humphries took the opportunity to blast the critics who had savaged the first film. Good for him.

What must have been of greater concern to him, though, was the release of 'Crocodile Dundee' in 1985. It also featured a lanky, hat-wearing Aussie struggling to come to terms with a foreign culture. And made tonnes more money.

The song on the end credits ( performed by Snacka Fitzgibbon ) is magnificent. You have a love a lyric that includes the line: "If you want to send your sister in a frenzy, introduce her to Barry McKenzie!". Time to end this review. I have to go the dunny to shake hands with the unemployed... --------------------------------------------- Result 3840 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] An awful [[film]]! It must have been up against some [[real]] stinkers to be [[nominated]] for the Golden Globe. They've taken the story of the first [[famous]] [[female]] Renaissance [[painter]] and mangled it beyond [[recognition]]. My complaint is not that they've taken liberties with the facts; if the story were good, that would perfectly fine. But it's simply [[bizarre]] -- by all [[accounts]] the true story of this artist [[would]] have made for a far [[better]] film, so why did they come up with this dishwater-dull [[script]]? I suppose there weren't enough naked people in the factual version. It's hurriedly capped off in the end with a summary of the artist's life -- we could have saved ourselves a couple of hours if they'd favored the rest of the film with same brevity. An awful [[kino]]! It must have been up against some [[veritable]] stinkers to be [[nominating]] for the Golden Globe. They've taken the story of the first [[notorious]] [[femmes]] Renaissance [[painting]] and mangled it beyond [[acknowledge]]. My complaint is not that they've taken liberties with the facts; if the story were good, that would perfectly fine. But it's simply [[inquisitive]] -- by all [[accountancy]] the true story of this artist [[could]] have made for a far [[best]] film, so why did they come up with this dishwater-dull [[hyphen]]? I suppose there weren't enough naked people in the factual version. It's hurriedly capped off in the end with a summary of the artist's life -- we could have saved ourselves a couple of hours if they'd favored the rest of the film with same brevity. --------------------------------------------- Result 3841 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] "Stairway to Heaven" is a [[outstanding]] invention of movie making, probably never duplicated. I rank it with "The Wizard of Oz" and "African Queen," although it is a totally different type of movie than "African Queen." "Stairway to Heaven" is a psycho-drama that uses performance concepts and technical effects that, to my knowledge, are [[totally]] [[unique]].

For example, there is the combination of B&W and color footage - as in "Oz," but the significance of the contrast goes way beyond the simple - but [[beautiful]] - effect achieved in "Oz." In "Stairway" the purpose and effect of the contrast can only be described as powerful.

Another brilliant aspect of "Stairway" is the concept of "time" and how it is used here. How could anybody have conceived of a better way to make time stand still – literally? And then there is the Stairway itself!

If you have any imagination at all, you will agree with me. "Stairway to Heaven" is a true gem. "Stairway to Heaven" is a [[unsolved]] invention of movie making, probably never duplicated. I rank it with "The Wizard of Oz" and "African Queen," although it is a totally different type of movie than "African Queen." "Stairway to Heaven" is a psycho-drama that uses performance concepts and technical effects that, to my knowledge, are [[perfectly]] [[unequalled]].

For example, there is the combination of B&W and color footage - as in "Oz," but the significance of the contrast goes way beyond the simple - but [[belle]] - effect achieved in "Oz." In "Stairway" the purpose and effect of the contrast can only be described as powerful.

Another brilliant aspect of "Stairway" is the concept of "time" and how it is used here. How could anybody have conceived of a better way to make time stand still – literally? And then there is the Stairway itself!

If you have any imagination at all, you will agree with me. "Stairway to Heaven" is a true gem. --------------------------------------------- Result 3842 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is the touching story of two families in Israel and the relationships within each family. Each family has a gay son. The stories are interrelated at that point but this film is about all of the family members, not just the two sons. The portraits of each of the family members in both families are well drawn and the story is consistently interesting if a bit bleak. --------------------------------------------- Result 3843 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[First]] off, the title [[character]] is not [[even]] the [[main]] [[character]] of the [[movie]]. He is the sidekick of the cult leader. The [[actor]] who portrays Igor [[believed]] that screaming loud, laughing hysterically, and having a crooked smile while [[bugging]] out your eyes would be an [[excellent]] [[way]] to scare people. Igor also had the [[annoying]] habit of yelling (because he never actually just [[spoke]]) in a [[high]] pitched voice. He would also say [[idiotic]] one-liners. For [[example]] when the cult leader murders one of his followers with a buzz saw, Igor upon seeing this, yells out "Paul! No [[Paul]]! Why'd you do it? I could have cut her clean! So clean!" In another scene Igor tells a [[victim]] that she would have to 'get her own [[tools]] for surgery because right now, it was his time to operate.' [[Aside]] from the [[bad]] acting, the ending did not make [[sense]] because while the story builds up what [[little]] steam it has towards the climax, which is Igor getting a crossbow arrow to the head and the rest of his lunatic buddies being killed, he shows up again two more times to [[kill]] the remaining 'good guys'. The movie offers no explanation of this, only telling the viewer that Igor escaped from the mental hospital. What??? Bottom line is do not waste your time watching this movie. I [[wish]] I could get back the moments I [[lost]] watching this. [[Firstly]] off, the title [[traits]] is not [[yet]] the [[primary]] [[nature]] of the [[cinematography]]. He is the sidekick of the cult leader. The [[protagonist]] who portrays Igor [[felt]] that screaming loud, laughing hysterically, and having a crooked smile while [[tapping]] out your eyes would be an [[exquisite]] [[pathways]] to scare people. Igor also had the [[vexing]] habit of yelling (because he never actually just [[speaks]]) in a [[highest]] pitched voice. He would also say [[dopey]] one-liners. For [[cases]] when the cult leader murders one of his followers with a buzz saw, Igor upon seeing this, yells out "Paul! No [[Paolo]]! Why'd you do it? I could have cut her clean! So clean!" In another scene Igor tells a [[victims]] that she would have to 'get her own [[instrument]] for surgery because right now, it was his time to operate.' [[Sideways]] from the [[negative]] acting, the ending did not make [[sensing]] because while the story builds up what [[small]] steam it has towards the climax, which is Igor getting a crossbow arrow to the head and the rest of his lunatic buddies being killed, he shows up again two more times to [[killing]] the remaining 'good guys'. The movie offers no explanation of this, only telling the viewer that Igor escaped from the mental hospital. What??? Bottom line is do not waste your time watching this movie. I [[desire]] I could get back the moments I [[outof]] watching this. --------------------------------------------- Result 3844 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Like some of the other folks who have [[reviewed]] this [[film]], I was [[also]] waxing nostalgic about it...before I had the misfortune to [[actually]] watch it again. [[Alas]], my childhood [[memories]] of this film were completely [[untrustworthy]], and The [[Perils]] of Pauline is now revealed to be an embarrassing [[exercise]] in banal, [[racist]], and plain [[boring]] film-making. Even the [[presence]] of [[old]] pros [[Edward]] Everett Horton and Terry-Thomas can't overcome a rancid [[screenplay]], a horrible theme song, and some wretched '[[special]] effects'. In [[addition]], the [[stereotypical]] depictions of [[African]] and Arab [[characters]] make for painful viewing, [[especially]] [[considering]] this was [[produced]] in the [[immediate]] [[wake]] of the Civil Rights movement. [[Michael]] Weldon's original Psychotronic Encyclopedia [[reports]] that The [[Perils]] of [[Pauline]] was originally [[produced]] for television but [[inexplicably]] [[ended]] up getting a theatrical [[release]]. Judging from the results, that is a [[completely]] believable (and [[baffling]]) [[scenario]]. Like some of the other folks who have [[reconsidered]] this [[movies]], I was [[apart]] waxing nostalgic about it...before I had the misfortune to [[genuinely]] watch it again. [[Tragically]], my childhood [[souvenir]] of this film were completely [[dodgy]], and The [[Peril]] of Pauline is now revealed to be an embarrassing [[practise]] in banal, [[racially]], and plain [[dreary]] film-making. Even the [[attendance]] of [[antique]] pros [[Longshanks]] Everett Horton and Terry-Thomas can't overcome a rancid [[scenario]], a horrible theme song, and some wretched '[[peculiar]] effects'. In [[supplement]], the [[stereotyped]] depictions of [[Africans]] and Arab [[nature]] make for painful viewing, [[peculiarly]] [[examine]] this was [[generated]] in the [[instant]] [[waking]] of the Civil Rights movement. [[Michel]] Weldon's original Psychotronic Encyclopedia [[reporting]] that The [[Menaces]] of [[Tracy]] was originally [[generated]] for television but [[inextricably]] [[finished]] up getting a theatrical [[frees]]. Judging from the results, that is a [[perfectly]] believable (and [[puzzling]]) [[screenplays]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3845 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] When I sat down to watch 'Largo Winch' I expected nothing more than action scenes and fascinating cars. When I [[stood]] up, I've seen both of these; and more.

Karl Roden was finally not the antagonist in a movie, to start with. Kristin Scott Thomas played her role well, but the real two stars in my opinion were Tomer Sisley and Miki Manojlovic, both acting [[superbly]]. In Radivoje Bukvic portrayed Goran well.

The mixed linguistics brought a nice color to the movie, but I understand why people would get bored with it.

The scenery of Hong Kong and especially the stunning Croatian seaside both amazed me, and I hardly wanted to take my eyes off the screen when Largo entered the unbelievably beautiful island.

Rolls Royce Phantom; Mercedes S500, and BMW 7; if anyone loves expensive limousine - type cars; this is their movie. It is also a movie for people who love action sequences, good acting, landscapes of extremal beauty, and above all, a fast - paced, well written action movie, with dazzling combat and a thoroughly twined inner drama.

My vote, as it has enlightened a gloomy day is: 10/10 When I sat down to watch 'Largo Winch' I expected nothing more than action scenes and fascinating cars. When I [[amounted]] up, I've seen both of these; and more.

Karl Roden was finally not the antagonist in a movie, to start with. Kristin Scott Thomas played her role well, but the real two stars in my opinion were Tomer Sisley and Miki Manojlovic, both acting [[staggeringly]]. In Radivoje Bukvic portrayed Goran well.

The mixed linguistics brought a nice color to the movie, but I understand why people would get bored with it.

The scenery of Hong Kong and especially the stunning Croatian seaside both amazed me, and I hardly wanted to take my eyes off the screen when Largo entered the unbelievably beautiful island.

Rolls Royce Phantom; Mercedes S500, and BMW 7; if anyone loves expensive limousine - type cars; this is their movie. It is also a movie for people who love action sequences, good acting, landscapes of extremal beauty, and above all, a fast - paced, well written action movie, with dazzling combat and a thoroughly twined inner drama.

My vote, as it has enlightened a gloomy day is: 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3846 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (95%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] Final Score: 0 (out of 10)

***Possible scene specific spoilers (but who the hell cares)***

Yes, that's right: zero. And I [[rarely]] give 1's. Even for the lamest of [[movies]] I [[look]] for [[things]] like music, cinematography, imagination, it's humor, [[even]] a good pace to be as objective about the score as possible. Looking at it within it's own genera or subgenera. But there is absolutely nothing redeeming here. I can't remember another time a movie actually sent me pacing up and down the room when it was over. The only reason I made it to the end was because I couldn't seem to change the channel - I sat there simply aghast, watching to see what insultingly stupid bit it would come up with next. It was like watching a snake digest a rat.

But let's have some fun and pull this baby apart, shall we. First of all, There is nothing technical about "Whipped" that works. The visuals are all sitcom style. The cut scenes all just pictures of the street traffic going by at night over and over. The music and score, not only doesn't contribute anything to the movie - it's obnoxious. Not to mention it doesn't have anything to contribute to anyway. The acting is as cardboard as it comes, all around and that goes for Amanda Peet (clearly the "star" that got this train wreck green-lighted) too. These guys, supposedly good friends, have no more chemistry or sense of purpose then if director Peter M. Cohen had rounded them up at a bus station minutes before shooting.

On the creative side, there isn't an original bone in it's body. It has no imagination. It shows us nothing we haven't seen a thousand times before. The whole premise, or "twist", of this movie is based on male-bashing and the "idea" that an empowered women can play men "just as they get played". Anybody, that thinks this is somehow a twist or is in any way original has obviously never turned on a TV before. Twisted, shallow women are common. Male-bashing is the norm. It's not stealing from anything specifically, it's worse: it's stealing from clichés. I can't imagine a women making a movie that depicted other women based so much on stereotypes and with this sense of contempt. Makes me want to go rent "In the Company of Men" - or better yet, "There's Something About Mary". This movie wants to be a "edgier" version of "There's Something About Mary" so bad you can see the sweat.

The movie has no insights into women, men, dating, sex, or really anything. Cohen is simply content to regurgitate myths he has been indoctrinated with from other sexist movies. On the other end, the movie doesn't work as a satire either, because even though it is ripe with exaggerations one could view as "satirical" it doesn't have that grounding in reality that satires need. It doesn't even know what it's satirizing. Then there's the dialogue, which is little more then the characters screaming obscenities at each other. Example: Character 1: "F**k you" Character 2: "Oh yeah, well f**k you" (repeat)

And the bottom line, the thing that could excuse all the other discretions: There are a lot of movies without plots, without good acting, with morally repulsive characters and obscenity laced dialogue that have been funny and thus, been good. "Whipped" ain't funny. Not for a second. It has no comic skills or timing. The situations are all completely phony, not based in any shred of truth, especially enough to wring laughs out of us. The characters all broadly drawn so they will SEEM relatable to the lowest of the lowest common denominator. Just look at "the marquee scene", "cult classic" hair gel scene. One of our bumbling anti-heroes opens the medicine cabinet and sees Mena (Peet)'s vibrator. For some reason light shines down on it as if he's found the holy grail. Why Cohen thinks men react this way to vibrators I do not know. While he rubs it on himself, he drops it in the toilet and then attempts to fish it out with his bare hands when, oh my, Mena walks in on him. Oh, my sides.

But strangely enough, people actually like this movie. Of course, people also like "Friends" and reality dating shows so I shouldn't be surprised. All of this has a common thread however. "Whipped" is big evidence to me that there is just a huge pocket of people in America that will laugh at any joke just because it is about sex. They will like any show or movie (or think they like it) just because it is about dating or relationships. It's lack of any quality has no baring on these people. Just as people are indoctrinated to want whiter teeth and thinner bodies to sell toothbrushes and weight loss programs, they are also indoctrinated to blindly lap up anything dating/relationship related to sell them cheap, empty, effortless TV, movies and any number of products.

The only consilation will be that when I die, because I saw this movie, I've got a credit to get 80 minutes of my life back.

Final Score: 0 (out of 10)

***Possible scene specific spoilers (but who the hell cares)***

Yes, that's right: zero. And I [[seldom]] give 1's. Even for the lamest of [[films]] I [[peek]] for [[matters]] like music, cinematography, imagination, it's humor, [[yet]] a good pace to be as objective about the score as possible. Looking at it within it's own genera or subgenera. But there is absolutely nothing redeeming here. I can't remember another time a movie actually sent me pacing up and down the room when it was over. The only reason I made it to the end was because I couldn't seem to change the channel - I sat there simply aghast, watching to see what insultingly stupid bit it would come up with next. It was like watching a snake digest a rat.

But let's have some fun and pull this baby apart, shall we. First of all, There is nothing technical about "Whipped" that works. The visuals are all sitcom style. The cut scenes all just pictures of the street traffic going by at night over and over. The music and score, not only doesn't contribute anything to the movie - it's obnoxious. Not to mention it doesn't have anything to contribute to anyway. The acting is as cardboard as it comes, all around and that goes for Amanda Peet (clearly the "star" that got this train wreck green-lighted) too. These guys, supposedly good friends, have no more chemistry or sense of purpose then if director Peter M. Cohen had rounded them up at a bus station minutes before shooting.

On the creative side, there isn't an original bone in it's body. It has no imagination. It shows us nothing we haven't seen a thousand times before. The whole premise, or "twist", of this movie is based on male-bashing and the "idea" that an empowered women can play men "just as they get played". Anybody, that thinks this is somehow a twist or is in any way original has obviously never turned on a TV before. Twisted, shallow women are common. Male-bashing is the norm. It's not stealing from anything specifically, it's worse: it's stealing from clichés. I can't imagine a women making a movie that depicted other women based so much on stereotypes and with this sense of contempt. Makes me want to go rent "In the Company of Men" - or better yet, "There's Something About Mary". This movie wants to be a "edgier" version of "There's Something About Mary" so bad you can see the sweat.

The movie has no insights into women, men, dating, sex, or really anything. Cohen is simply content to regurgitate myths he has been indoctrinated with from other sexist movies. On the other end, the movie doesn't work as a satire either, because even though it is ripe with exaggerations one could view as "satirical" it doesn't have that grounding in reality that satires need. It doesn't even know what it's satirizing. Then there's the dialogue, which is little more then the characters screaming obscenities at each other. Example: Character 1: "F**k you" Character 2: "Oh yeah, well f**k you" (repeat)

And the bottom line, the thing that could excuse all the other discretions: There are a lot of movies without plots, without good acting, with morally repulsive characters and obscenity laced dialogue that have been funny and thus, been good. "Whipped" ain't funny. Not for a second. It has no comic skills or timing. The situations are all completely phony, not based in any shred of truth, especially enough to wring laughs out of us. The characters all broadly drawn so they will SEEM relatable to the lowest of the lowest common denominator. Just look at "the marquee scene", "cult classic" hair gel scene. One of our bumbling anti-heroes opens the medicine cabinet and sees Mena (Peet)'s vibrator. For some reason light shines down on it as if he's found the holy grail. Why Cohen thinks men react this way to vibrators I do not know. While he rubs it on himself, he drops it in the toilet and then attempts to fish it out with his bare hands when, oh my, Mena walks in on him. Oh, my sides.

But strangely enough, people actually like this movie. Of course, people also like "Friends" and reality dating shows so I shouldn't be surprised. All of this has a common thread however. "Whipped" is big evidence to me that there is just a huge pocket of people in America that will laugh at any joke just because it is about sex. They will like any show or movie (or think they like it) just because it is about dating or relationships. It's lack of any quality has no baring on these people. Just as people are indoctrinated to want whiter teeth and thinner bodies to sell toothbrushes and weight loss programs, they are also indoctrinated to blindly lap up anything dating/relationship related to sell them cheap, empty, effortless TV, movies and any number of products.

The only consilation will be that when I die, because I saw this movie, I've got a credit to get 80 minutes of my life back.

--------------------------------------------- Result 3847 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[When]] I [[first]] [[heard]] about this [[series]] on AnimeTV,I have to [[say]] that out of all the [[shows]] that I have [[seen]],this one tops it all off. I had to [[see]] this show,and that is what I [[really]] did. When I [[got]] the [[first]] volume of this show,it was the [[best]]. I [[really]] [[liked]] the [[animation]],and all the [[fight]] scenes were awesome. I have to [[say]] that my [[favorite]] [[characters]] in the [[show]] were [[Saber]],and [[Archer]] and of course I also like Illya. And of course,all the [[episodes]] on the [[volumes]] were interesting,and very [[cool]]. Another thing I have to [[say]] about the [[series]] is Michael McConnohie([[famous]] for [[Transformers]],and others) [[playing]] the [[voice]] of Berserker. He does have a [[cool]] [[character]]. And I [[even]] watched the entire [[series]] all over again before [[watching]] the [[final]] [[volume]]. So if you to see something good,then [[see]] this [[show]],it's the [[best]]. [[Whenever]] I [[fiirst]] [[tryout]] about this [[serials]] on AnimeTV,I have to [[tell]] that out of all the [[showcase]] that I have [[saw]],this one tops it all off. I had to [[seeing]] this show,and that is what I [[truthfully]] did. When I [[did]] the [[fiirst]] volume of this show,it was the [[better]]. I [[truthfully]] [[wished]] the [[animate]],and all the [[wrestling]] scenes were awesome. I have to [[said]] that my [[preferable]] [[features]] in the [[spectacle]] were [[Sword]],and [[Green]] and of course I also like Illya. And of course,all the [[spells]] on the [[quantities]] were interesting,and very [[groovy]]. Another thing I have to [[said]] about the [[serials]] is Michael McConnohie([[illustrious]] for [[Processors]],and others) [[replay]] the [[voices]] of Berserker. He does have a [[groovy]] [[personages]]. And I [[yet]] watched the entire [[serials]] all over again before [[staring]] the [[last]] [[volumes]]. So if you to see something good,then [[consults]] this [[display]],it's the [[nicest]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3848 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] This movie was rented by a friend. Her choice is [[normally]] good. I read the cover first and was [[expecting]] a [[good]] [[movie]]. [[Although]] it

was a horror movie. Which i don't [[prefer]]. But no horror [[came]] to mind while watching the [[movie]]. It was a dull,

not very entertaining [[movie]]. The appearance of [[Denise]] [[Richards]]

was again a [[pleasure]] for the [[eye]]. But that's it. We (the four of us)

we're a little bit disappointed. But feel free to [[see]] this [[movie]] and

[[judge]] it yourself. This movie was rented by a friend. Her choice is [[fluently]] good. I read the cover first and was [[awaited]] a [[buena]] [[cinematographic]]. [[Whilst]] it

was a horror movie. Which i don't [[favored]]. But no horror [[became]] to mind while watching the [[cinematographic]]. It was a dull,

not very entertaining [[cinematography]]. The appearance of [[Denis]] [[Richard]]

was again a [[joy]] for the [[eyes]]. But that's it. We (the four of us)

we're a little bit disappointed. But feel free to [[behold]] this [[movies]] and

[[richter]] it yourself. --------------------------------------------- Result 3849 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I love killer [[Insects]] movies they are great fun to watch, I had to watch this movie as it was one of my Favourite horror books by Shaun Hutson.

I have met him and I wish I did listen to him as this movie was [[terrible]] like he Said it was,after he said that I was still dying to see how [[bad]] it was.

The [[plot]]: People are dying mysteriously and gruesomely, and nobody has a clue what the cause is.

[[Only]] health [[worker]] Mike Brady has a possible solution, but his theory of killer slugs is laughed at by the authorities.

Only when the body count begins to rise and a slug expert from England begins snooping around does it begin to look like Mike had the right idea after all.

This movie as the most overacting you ever see a movie! Slugs in this movie are fast (Then normal) and it looks like they fast forwarding the scenes!

This movie is nothing like the book at all, the book was ten times scarier, ten times gory and had a lot more story to it!

I didn't like this movie at all! As I am huge fan of Slugs the book and second book called Breeding ground! Both of books are Great

Read the book then watch the movie, you may like more then I did Give this 2 out 10 I love killer [[Cockroaches]] movies they are great fun to watch, I had to watch this movie as it was one of my Favourite horror books by Shaun Hutson.

I have met him and I wish I did listen to him as this movie was [[gruesome]] like he Said it was,after he said that I was still dying to see how [[horrid]] it was.

The [[intrigue]]: People are dying mysteriously and gruesomely, and nobody has a clue what the cause is.

[[Solely]] health [[laborers]] Mike Brady has a possible solution, but his theory of killer slugs is laughed at by the authorities.

Only when the body count begins to rise and a slug expert from England begins snooping around does it begin to look like Mike had the right idea after all.

This movie as the most overacting you ever see a movie! Slugs in this movie are fast (Then normal) and it looks like they fast forwarding the scenes!

This movie is nothing like the book at all, the book was ten times scarier, ten times gory and had a lot more story to it!

I didn't like this movie at all! As I am huge fan of Slugs the book and second book called Breeding ground! Both of books are Great

Read the book then watch the movie, you may like more then I did Give this 2 out 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3850 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] A young boy sees his [[mother]] getting [[killed]] and his father hanging himself. 20 years later he gets a bunch of friends together to [[perform]] an exorcism on himself so he won't turn out like his father. All the [[stock]] characters are in place: the nice couple; the "funny" guy; the tough (but sensitive) hood; the smart girl (she wears glasses--that's how we know); the nerd and two no-personality blondes. It all involves some [[stupid]] wooden statue that comes to life (don't ask) and [[kills]] people. I knew I was in trouble when, after a great [[opening]] scene, we jump to 20 years later--ALL bad horror movies do that!

The dialogue is atrocious, the acting is bad (except for Betsy Palmer--why Betsy?) and the killings are stupid and/or unimaginative. My favorite scene is when two people are supposedly having sex and the statue knocks the guy off the bed to show he's fully dressed! A [[real]] bad, stupid [[incoherent]] horror film. Avoid at all costs. A young boy sees his [[ammi]] getting [[kiiled]] and his father hanging himself. 20 years later he gets a bunch of friends together to [[fulfilling]] an exorcism on himself so he won't turn out like his father. All the [[stockpiles]] characters are in place: the nice couple; the "funny" guy; the tough (but sensitive) hood; the smart girl (she wears glasses--that's how we know); the nerd and two no-personality blondes. It all involves some [[imbecile]] wooden statue that comes to life (don't ask) and [[murdering]] people. I knew I was in trouble when, after a great [[open]] scene, we jump to 20 years later--ALL bad horror movies do that!

The dialogue is atrocious, the acting is bad (except for Betsy Palmer--why Betsy?) and the killings are stupid and/or unimaginative. My favorite scene is when two people are supposedly having sex and the statue knocks the guy off the bed to show he's fully dressed! A [[authentic]] bad, stupid [[inconsistent]] horror film. Avoid at all costs. --------------------------------------------- Result 3851 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Mr. Harvey Lights a Candle" is [[anchored]] by a [[brilliant]] performance by Timothy Spall.

[[While]] we can predict that his titular morose, up tight [[teacher]] will have some [[sort]] of [[break]] down or catharsis based on some [[deep]] down [[secret]] from his [[past]], how his emotions are unveiled is [[surprising]]. Spall's [[range]] of [[feelings]] [[conveyed]] is [[quite]] moving and more than he usually [[gets]] to portray as part of the Mike Leigh repertory.

While an expected [[boring]] school [[bus]] trip has only been [[used]] for [[comic]] [[purposes]], such as on "The Simpsons," this central situation of a [[visit]] to Salisbury [[Cathedral]] in Rhidian Brook's script is well-contained and structured for dramatic [[purposes]], and is [[almost]] formally [[divided]] into acts.

We're [[introduced]] to the urban British [[range]] of racially and religiously [[diverse]] [[kids]] (with their uniforms I couldn't [[tell]] if this is a "private" or "[[public]]" [[school]]), as they [[gather]] – the rapping [[black]] [[kids]], the [[serious]] [[South]] Asians and [[Muslims]], the white [[bullies]] and mean [[girls]] – but [[conveyed]] [[quite]] [[naturally]] and individually. The young actors, some of whom I [[recognized]] from British [[TV]] such as "Shameless," were [[exuberant]] in [[representing]] the usual [[range]] of junior [[high]] social pressures. Celia Imrie [[puts]] more warmth into the supervisor's role than the martinets she usually has to [[play]].

A break in the trip leads to a transformative [[crisis]] for some while others remain amusingly oblivious. We think, like the teacher portrayed by Ben Miles of "Coupling," that we will be spoon fed a didactic lesson about religious tolerance, but it's much more about faith in people as well as God, which is why the BBC showed it in England at Easter time and BBC America showed it in the U.S. over Christmas.

[[Nathalie]] Press, who was also so good in "Summer of Love," has a key role in Mr. Harvey's redemption that could have been played for movie-of-the-week preaching, but is touching as they reach out to each other in an unexpected way (unfortunately I saw their intense scene interrupted by commercials).

While it is a bit heavy-handed in several times pointedly calling this road trip "a pilgrimage," this quiet film was the best evocation of "good will towards [[men]]" than I've seen in most holiday-themed TV movies. "Mr. Harvey Lights a Candle" is [[rooted]] by a [[shiny]] performance by Timothy Spall.

[[Albeit]] we can predict that his titular morose, up tight [[maestro]] will have some [[genre]] of [[blackout]] down or catharsis based on some [[deepest]] down [[secretive]] from his [[previous]], how his emotions are unveiled is [[unbelievable]]. Spall's [[assortment]] of [[emotions]] [[shipped]] is [[rather]] moving and more than he usually [[obtains]] to portray as part of the Mike Leigh repertory.

While an expected [[bored]] school [[buses]] trip has only been [[utilized]] for [[comical]] [[target]], such as on "The Simpsons," this central situation of a [[visits]] to Salisbury [[Basilica]] in Rhidian Brook's script is well-contained and structured for dramatic [[targeting]], and is [[approximately]] formally [[dividing]] into acts.

We're [[instituted]] to the urban British [[assortment]] of racially and religiously [[multiple]] [[children]] (with their uniforms I couldn't [[say]] if this is a "private" or "[[populace]]" [[teaching]]), as they [[assemble]] – the rapping [[negro]] [[youths]], the [[severe]] [[Southward]] Asians and [[Moslems]], the white [[brutes]] and mean [[females]] – but [[transmitted]] [[pretty]] [[evidently]] and individually. The young actors, some of whom I [[recognize]] from British [[TVS]] such as "Shameless," were [[luxuriant]] in [[represented]] the usual [[assortment]] of junior [[supreme]] social pressures. Celia Imrie [[raises]] more warmth into the supervisor's role than the martinets she usually has to [[gaming]].

A break in the trip leads to a transformative [[crises]] for some while others remain amusingly oblivious. We think, like the teacher portrayed by Ben Miles of "Coupling," that we will be spoon fed a didactic lesson about religious tolerance, but it's much more about faith in people as well as God, which is why the BBC showed it in England at Easter time and BBC America showed it in the U.S. over Christmas.

[[Yasmeen]] Press, who was also so good in "Summer of Love," has a key role in Mr. Harvey's redemption that could have been played for movie-of-the-week preaching, but is touching as they reach out to each other in an unexpected way (unfortunately I saw their intense scene interrupted by commercials).

While it is a bit heavy-handed in several times pointedly calling this road trip "a pilgrimage," this quiet film was the best evocation of "good will towards [[hombre]]" than I've seen in most holiday-themed TV movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 3852 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] First [[let]] me [[say]] that [[Before]] Sunrise, like all [[movies]], is [[NOT]] a [[movie]] for all [[tastes]]. It [[appears]] some folks are less [[smart]] to [[acknowledge]] this fact, but it is [[remarkable]] to contemplate the [[kind]] of outright dislike this [[small]] harmless [[movie]] [[generates]] from some people. [[For]] me, like most folks here, Before Sunrise [[struck]] a deep chord in me, I was [[truly]] [[stunned]], moved, inspired by it. This is a [[movie]] that [[ultimately]] benefits from more than one [[viewing]]. It creates some of the most awesomely unforgettable [[feelings]] and [[emotions]] you can [[possibly]] [[imagine]]. It is impossible to [[imagine]] this [[world]] without ever thinking about the [[kind]] of inspirational [[feelings]] I [[got]] from it.

The [[movie]] [[works]] as a communion of two [[fragile]] [[souls]] that are starting to [[get]] to know each other. It is very [[intelligent]] and [[inspiring]], not so [[much]] in how one conversation necessarily ties into the next or the [[significance]] of the topics of Jesse and Celine's [[discussions]], but rather the little nuances, the perfectly articulate responses they provoke from each other. It captures an honest, romantic, yet fleeting human emotion that is starting to blossom in the awesomely sublime Viennese milieu; it convinces us that their evanescent relationship might be the greatest compliment in the world. And what happens after that night is open for debate, but I never doubt that they won't each other again.

The facile [[comments]] by RockytheBear and the below user are hopeless examples of a doctrinaire dissenter unwilling to accept and respect those who [[love]] this movie.

[[See]] it and it may change your way of life. First [[leaving]] me [[said]] that [[Formerly]] Sunrise, like all [[theater]], is [[NAH]] a [[filmmaking]] for all [[flavors]]. It [[appearing]] some folks are less [[intelligent]] to [[recognized]] this fact, but it is [[sumptuous]] to contemplate the [[genus]] of outright dislike this [[minor]] harmless [[film]] [[generate]] from some people. [[Per]] me, like most folks here, Before Sunrise [[pummeled]] a deep chord in me, I was [[genuinely]] [[dumbstruck]], moved, inspired by it. This is a [[cinema]] that [[eventually]] benefits from more than one [[visualizing]]. It creates some of the most awesomely unforgettable [[sensations]] and [[passions]] you can [[likely]] [[suppose]]. It is impossible to [[suppose]] this [[worldwide]] without ever thinking about the [[genus]] of inspirational [[sensations]] I [[ai]] from it.

The [[filmmaking]] [[collaborated]] as a communion of two [[feeble]] [[ames]] that are starting to [[obtain]] to know each other. It is very [[smarter]] and [[stimulating]], not so [[very]] in how one conversation necessarily ties into the next or the [[importance]] of the topics of Jesse and Celine's [[debate]], but rather the little nuances, the perfectly articulate responses they provoke from each other. It captures an honest, romantic, yet fleeting human emotion that is starting to blossom in the awesomely sublime Viennese milieu; it convinces us that their evanescent relationship might be the greatest compliment in the world. And what happens after that night is open for debate, but I never doubt that they won't each other again.

The facile [[feedback]] by RockytheBear and the below user are hopeless examples of a doctrinaire dissenter unwilling to accept and respect those who [[iove]] this movie.

[[Seeing]] it and it may change your way of life. --------------------------------------------- Result 3853 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I have to say as being a [[fan]] of the [[man]] who [[created]] Halloween/The Fog/Christine/The Thing - probably his [[best]] films.

Then you [[got]] this POS. I can't logically think he put any effort at all into this like he did with [[Cigarette]] Burns. At [[least]] his [[son]] made a [[decent]] soundtrack.

You have to look at this from the standpoint that it didn't [[seem]] like a [[movie]]. It [[looked]] as if [[someone]] else [[directed]] it for one thing. I won't believe Carpenter put any effort into this at all.

I was just listening to his old school H2/H3/The [[Fog]] soundtrack and it was awesome, especially for the times.

He was [[using]] a style that no one had and it [[worked]] so well for his [[films]]. I have to say as being a [[breather]] of the [[hombre]] who [[engendered]] Halloween/The Fog/Christine/The Thing - probably his [[bestest]] films.

Then you [[ai]] this POS. I can't logically think he put any effort at all into this like he did with [[Cigarettes]] Burns. At [[fewer]] his [[sons]] made a [[dignified]] soundtrack.

You have to look at this from the standpoint that it didn't [[seems]] like a [[kino]]. It [[seemed]] as if [[person]] else [[oriented]] it for one thing. I won't believe Carpenter put any effort into this at all.

I was just listening to his old school H2/H3/The [[Haze]] soundtrack and it was awesome, especially for the times.

He was [[uses]] a style that no one had and it [[works]] so well for his [[movie]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3854 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] `The United States of [[Kiss]] My Ass'

House of [[Games]] is the directional debut from [[playwright]] David Mamet and it is an effective and at times surprising [[psychological]] thriller. It [[stars]] [[Lindsay]] Crouse as best-selling [[psychiatrist]], [[Margaret]] Ford, who decides to [[confront]] the [[gambler]] who has [[driven]] one of her patients to [[contemplate]] [[suicide]]. [[In]] doing so she leaves the safety and comfort of her somewhat [[ordinary]] [[life]] behind and [[travels]] `downtown' to visit the [[lowlife]] place, [[House]] of [[Games]].

The [[gambler]] Mike ([[played]] [[excellently]] by Joe Mantegna) turns out to be [[somewhat]] [[sharp]] and shifty. He [[offers]] Crouse's [[character]] a [[deal]], if she is willing to [[sit]] with him at a game, a [[big]] money [[game]] in the backroom, he'll [[cancel]] the patients debts. The card game ensues and [[soon]] the [[psychiatrist]] and the [[gambler]] are [[seen]] to be in a [[familiar]] line of work ([[gaining]] the [[trust]] of others) and a fascinating relationship [[begins]]. What makes [[House]] of Games interesting and an [[essential]] view for any [[film]] fan is the [[constant]] guessing of who is in control, is it the [[psychiatrist]] or the con-man or is it the well-known [[man]] of [[great]] [[bluffs]] David Mamet.

[[In]] [[House]] of [[Games]] the direction is [[dull]] and most of the [[times]] flat and [[uninspiring]], [[however]] in [[every]] David Mamet [[film]] it is the story which is central to the [[whole]] proceedings, not the direction. [[In]] [[House]] of [[Games]] this [[shines]] through in [[part]] [[thanks]] to the [[superb]] performances from the two leads (showy and [[distracting]]) but [[mainly]] as is the [[case]] with much of Mamet's [[work]], it is the dialogue, which [[grips]] you and slowly [[draws]] you into the [[film]]. No one in the House of [[Games]] [[says]] what they [[mean]] and [[conversations]] [[become]] battlegrounds and [[war]] of [[words]]. [[Everyone]] bluffs and [[double]] bluffs, which is reminiscent of a poker games natural [[order]]. This is a [[running]] [[theme]] [[throughout]] the [[film]] and is used to [[great]] [[effect]] at the right [[moments]] to create [[vast]] [[amounts]] of [[tension]]. [[House]] of Games can [[also]] be viewed as a `class-war' division [[movie]]. With Lindsay Crouse we have the middle-class, well-to-do educated [[psychiatrist]] and Joe Mantegna is the [[complete]] [[opposite]], the working [[class]] of [[America]] earning a [[living]] by `honest' [[crime]].

The [[film]] seduces the viewer much like Crouse is seduced by Mantegna and the end result is ultimately a very satisfying piece of American cinema. And the final of the film is definitely something for all to see and watch out for, it's stunning.

An extremely enjoyable film experience that is worth repeated viewings. 9/10 `The United States of [[Fucked]] My Ass'

House of [[Jeux]] is the directional debut from [[screenwriter]] David Mamet and it is an effective and at times surprising [[mental]] thriller. It [[superstar]] [[Lindsey]] Crouse as best-selling [[shrink]], [[Margarita]] Ford, who decides to [[confronts]] the [[hotshot]] who has [[fueled]] one of her patients to [[consider]] [[suicidal]]. [[Onto]] doing so she leaves the safety and comfort of her somewhat [[mundane]] [[vie]] behind and [[trips]] `downtown' to visit the [[hoodlum]] place, [[Maison]] of [[Gaming]].

The [[gamer]] Mike ([[served]] [[beautifully]] by Joe Mantegna) turns out to be [[slightly]] [[brusque]] and shifty. He [[provides]] Crouse's [[characteristics]] a [[address]], if she is willing to [[seated]] with him at a game, a [[huge]] money [[gaming]] in the backroom, he'll [[revoked]] the patients debts. The card game ensues and [[quickly]] the [[psychiatric]] and the [[gamer]] are [[noticed]] to be in a [[known]] line of work ([[obtaining]] the [[trusting]] of others) and a fascinating relationship [[start]]. What makes [[Home]] of Games interesting and an [[pivotal]] view for any [[cinematography]] fan is the [[continued]] guessing of who is in control, is it the [[psychiatry]] or the con-man or is it the well-known [[guy]] of [[excellent]] [[cliffs]] David Mamet.

[[For]] [[Home]] of [[Game]] the direction is [[boring]] and most of the [[period]] flat and [[dull]], [[nevertheless]] in [[all]] David Mamet [[flick]] it is the story which is central to the [[total]] proceedings, not the direction. [[Among]] [[Domicile]] of [[Jeux]] this [[glitters]] through in [[portions]] [[thank]] to the [[extraordinaire]] performances from the two leads (showy and [[embarrassing]]) but [[mostly]] as is the [[lawsuit]] with much of Mamet's [[jobs]], it is the dialogue, which [[fists]] you and slowly [[drawn]] you into the [[movie]]. No one in the House of [[Jeux]] [[tells]] what they [[imply]] and [[discussions]] [[gotten]] battlegrounds and [[warfare]] of [[phrases]]. [[Someone]] bluffs and [[doble]] bluffs, which is reminiscent of a poker games natural [[orders]]. This is a [[implementing]] [[subject]] [[in]] the [[cinematography]] and is used to [[huge]] [[effects]] at the right [[times]] to create [[sizable]] [[moneys]] of [[voltage]]. [[Residential]] of Games can [[similarly]] be viewed as a `class-war' division [[cinematography]]. With Lindsay Crouse we have the middle-class, well-to-do educated [[psychiatry]] and Joe Mantegna is the [[finished]] [[contrary]], the working [[classroom]] of [[Latina]] earning a [[life]] by `honest' [[offenses]].

The [[cinematography]] seduces the viewer much like Crouse is seduced by Mantegna and the end result is ultimately a very satisfying piece of American cinema. And the final of the film is definitely something for all to see and watch out for, it's stunning.

An extremely enjoyable film experience that is worth repeated viewings. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3855 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Townies is the laziest movie I have ever seen, and I saw the Blair Witch movies (parts one and two). It [[seems]] [[confused]] in what it wants to be. It's not funny enough for comedy, it's not tragic [[enough]] for drama, it's not bloody enough for horror, and it's not good enough for [[watching]]. It has scenes of a man doing "slapstick/bloody" karate so I think, oh this movie will be in the vein of Toxic Avenger and Street Trash. Then it leaps without warning into a drama about a missing girl, a retarded (mentally handicap) woman and a trusting mother. Then it slaps itself into the [[ONLY]] good part in the movie which seems to be set up like a sitcom without the laugh tracks. The part I'm speaking of is a lonely TOWNIE who is so lonely he finds comfort in a rotting corpse. That was the ONLY part of the movie that gave me ANY feeling. The rest was a waist of my life. Then, just to show how CRUEL Wayne is there is a kind of DOCUMENTARY at the end of the film of Wayne (the Director) making fun of Toby (the star) in public. It made me sick. Even though Killer Nerd and Bride of Killer Nerd (two other movies by Wayne) aren't the best, they at least are thought out enough were you can stay entertained until the ending credits. I even like Killer Nerd a bit, it had some great lines I still use to this day.

If you like underground films, if you like overground films, and if you like to watch your feet, just resting were they are, you will not like TOWNIES!

*1/2 (out of ****)

Townies is the laziest movie I have ever seen, and I saw the Blair Witch movies (parts one and two). It [[seem]] [[bemused]] in what it wants to be. It's not funny enough for comedy, it's not tragic [[satisfactorily]] for drama, it's not bloody enough for horror, and it's not good enough for [[staring]]. It has scenes of a man doing "slapstick/bloody" karate so I think, oh this movie will be in the vein of Toxic Avenger and Street Trash. Then it leaps without warning into a drama about a missing girl, a retarded (mentally handicap) woman and a trusting mother. Then it slaps itself into the [[PURELY]] good part in the movie which seems to be set up like a sitcom without the laugh tracks. The part I'm speaking of is a lonely TOWNIE who is so lonely he finds comfort in a rotting corpse. That was the ONLY part of the movie that gave me ANY feeling. The rest was a waist of my life. Then, just to show how CRUEL Wayne is there is a kind of DOCUMENTARY at the end of the film of Wayne (the Director) making fun of Toby (the star) in public. It made me sick. Even though Killer Nerd and Bride of Killer Nerd (two other movies by Wayne) aren't the best, they at least are thought out enough were you can stay entertained until the ending credits. I even like Killer Nerd a bit, it had some great lines I still use to this day.

If you like underground films, if you like overground films, and if you like to watch your feet, just resting were they are, you will not like TOWNIES!

*1/2 (out of ****)

--------------------------------------------- Result 3856 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Sure this movie is not historically accurate but it is [[great]] entertainment. [[Most]] DeMille pictures especially the [[later]] epics are slow and plodding but the action here moves at a clip. The [[story]] is [[basically]] a series of [[peaks]] with very little quiet moments. The [[action]] takes us from an Indian raid on a cabin; one of the [[best]] parts of the [[movie]] with Jean Arthur [[excellent]] while [[attempting]] to [[appease]] the war-painted [[natives]]. This is followed by her and Cooper being taken to the war camp and being tortured. [[Later]] [[comes]] a [[protracted]] [[battle]] with the Cheyenne. The whole thing is [[ridiculous]] but [[great]] fun and entertaining from [[start]] to [[finish]]. Jean [[Arthur]] is one of the [[best]] actresses of this era and she shines here. Sure this movie is not historically accurate but it is [[prodigious]] entertainment. [[More]] DeMille pictures especially the [[subsequently]] epics are slow and plodding but the action here moves at a clip. The [[conte]] is [[virtually]] a series of [[woodpeckers]] with very little quiet moments. The [[efforts]] takes us from an Indian raid on a cabin; one of the [[optimum]] parts of the [[filmmaking]] with Jean Arthur [[delightful]] while [[striving]] to [[placate]] the war-painted [[aborigines]]. This is followed by her and Cooper being taken to the war camp and being tortured. [[Trailing]] [[occurs]] a [[extended]] [[warfare]] with the Cheyenne. The whole thing is [[laughable]] but [[prodigious]] fun and entertaining from [[lancer]] to [[finalize]]. Jean [[Artur]] is one of the [[nicest]] actresses of this era and she shines here. --------------------------------------------- Result 3857 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Even if 99,99% of people that has [[seen]] this [[movie]] is Brazilian, I'll keep up with the [[English]] [[since]] it is the [[language]] of this website.

This movie is a [[piece]] of cr*p. [[Worst]] acting I have [[seen]] for a loooong [[time]]. The [[kids]] are terrible. Specially the [[boy]]. This was the [[first]] [[time]] I [[saw]] someone with less facial [[expression]] than Arnold Schwarzenegger, and one [[single]] voice tone, like a 5 years-old [[kid]] reading in front of the [[class]]. [[How]] can someone so bad be the main [[actor]] of a [[movie]] ? The storyline is so shallow my daughter could have done better (she is 3 yrs old). It is so simple it could be written in a napkin and told in 3 minutes.

There are only three possibilities for someone enjoy this movie: 1) you are a pre-teen; 2) you have been so [[brainwashed]] by Globo's stupidities that you [[think]] that anything that has the Globo's seal is [[awesome]]; 3) you have a serious brain damage.

Avoid at all [[costs]] ! A shame to the Brazilian movie scene. Even if 99,99% of people that has [[noticed]] this [[cinematography]] is Brazilian, I'll keep up with the [[Anglais]] [[because]] it is the [[parlance]] of this website.

This movie is a [[slice]] of cr*p. [[Pire]] acting I have [[noticed]] for a loooong [[period]]. The [[youths]] are terrible. Specially the [[boys]]. This was the [[firstly]] [[period]] I [[observed]] someone with less facial [[phrases]] than Arnold Schwarzenegger, and one [[exclusive]] voice tone, like a 5 years-old [[petit]] reading in front of the [[categories]]. [[Mode]] can someone so bad be the main [[protagonist]] of a [[cinematography]] ? The storyline is so shallow my daughter could have done better (she is 3 yrs old). It is so simple it could be written in a napkin and told in 3 minutes.

There are only three possibilities for someone enjoy this movie: 1) you are a pre-teen; 2) you have been so [[indoctrinated]] by Globo's stupidities that you [[reckon]] that anything that has the Globo's seal is [[resplendent]]; 3) you have a serious brain damage.

Avoid at all [[charges]] ! A shame to the Brazilian movie scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 3858 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] John [[Thaw]] is a an [[excellent]] [[actor]]. I have to [[admit]] that I was [[impressed]] by his [[range]] in the role of a crusty [[old]] curmudgeon who reluctantly agrees to take in an evacuee from the streets of London (WWII [[time]] [[era]]).

That being [[said]], the [[film]] is [[also]] [[excellent]]. A very moving [[story]] with a [[satisfying]] [[ending]]. Some of the [[characters]] are a [[little]] [[underdeveloped]] (the school [[teacher]] in [[particular]]), but [[none]] of them are [[essential]] to the [[plot]]. [[Basically]], the [[story]] is about the [[old]] [[man]] and the [[boy]], and the [[film]] [[needs]] [[little]] [[else]]. John [[Thawing]] is a an [[magnifique]] [[actress]]. I have to [[accept]] that I was [[surprising]] by his [[ranges]] in the role of a crusty [[elderly]] curmudgeon who reluctantly agrees to take in an evacuee from the streets of London (WWII [[period]] [[epoch]]).

That being [[says]], the [[movies]] is [[apart]] [[noteworthy]]. A very moving [[fairytales]] with a [[gratifying]] [[ceases]]. Some of the [[features]] are a [[petite]] [[underdevelopment]] (the school [[profs]] in [[peculiar]]), but [[nothingness]] of them are [[indispensable]] to the [[intrigue]]. [[Fundamentally]], the [[stories]] is about the [[ancient]] [[males]] and the [[guys]], and the [[filmmaking]] [[required]] [[scant]] [[otherwise]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3859 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I [[cant]] believe [[blockbuster]] carries this movie. It was SO [[BAD]]. I was totally fooled by the box [[art]]. DON'T BE FOOLED!! Its not worth your time I [[promise]] you. I don't know if the positive reviews for this flick were a [[joke]] or what. I am so [[disappointed]]. :(

The [[description]] on the back of the box doesn't [[even]] [[match]]! The [[girl]] that has the voodoo done on her is a stripper. The [[synopsis]] on the back says she is only 17. [[Did]] the people writing the description for the film [[even]] bother to watch it!? Those positive reviews had to be a joke they just had to be. If anyone actually [[liked]] this flick then I've lost all faith in humanity.

And don't even get me started on the story compared to the title. Or the fact that the entire movie was done all in 2 locations. Or that the cops didn't even have close to real uniforms. Why would i even say that?? Who cares about the cops uniforms!? Compared to the rest of the movie the uniforms were spot on.

This movie is an [[insult]] to the zombie genre and all of its fans. I [[whats]] believe [[blockbusters]] carries this movie. It was SO [[MALA]]. I was totally fooled by the box [[artistry]]. DON'T BE FOOLED!! Its not worth your time I [[promising]] you. I don't know if the positive reviews for this flick were a [[giggle]] or what. I am so [[disenchanted]]. :(

The [[descriptions]] on the back of the box doesn't [[yet]] [[teaming]]! The [[chica]] that has the voodoo done on her is a stripper. The [[summary]] on the back says she is only 17. [[Ai]] the people writing the description for the film [[yet]] bother to watch it!? Those positive reviews had to be a joke they just had to be. If anyone actually [[loved]] this flick then I've lost all faith in humanity.

And don't even get me started on the story compared to the title. Or the fact that the entire movie was done all in 2 locations. Or that the cops didn't even have close to real uniforms. Why would i even say that?? Who cares about the cops uniforms!? Compared to the rest of the movie the uniforms were spot on.

This movie is an [[snub]] to the zombie genre and all of its fans. --------------------------------------------- Result 3860 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[think]] that this film was one of Kurt Russels good [[movies]]. Kurt russel is my favorite [[actor]] so I think that he is a good actor in any role he plays. But this movie had a [[lot]] of [[action]] in it and I know that it should have more then a 5.6 out of 10 on the meter but [[many]] people did not like this [[movie]]. Oh well I thought it was good so I [[think]] that [[every]] one should [[see]] this movie. If you [[see]] this [[movie]] and like it I [[think]] that you should see Back Draft also with [[Kurt]] Russel. I [[give]] Soldier *** 1/2 out of ***** I [[ideas]] that this film was one of Kurt Russels good [[cinematography]]. Kurt russel is my favorite [[actress]] so I think that he is a good actor in any role he plays. But this movie had a [[batch]] of [[activities]] in it and I know that it should have more then a 5.6 out of 10 on the meter but [[innumerable]] people did not like this [[filmmaking]]. Oh well I thought it was good so I [[believing]] that [[any]] one should [[seeing]] this movie. If you [[seeing]] this [[flick]] and like it I [[thought]] that you should see Back Draft also with [[Curt]] Russel. I [[lend]] Soldier *** 1/2 out of ***** --------------------------------------------- Result 3861 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Not that he'd [[care]], but I'm not one of Simon Pegg's [[friends]]. If I was, there's a good [[chance]] we'd fallout if he [[continued]] to [[make]] [[dross]] like this. The trouble is, he found a successful formula as the bumbling, [[ordinary]] guy-next-door [[type]] in Shawn of the Dead, [[Run]] [[Fat]] Boy Run etc, but it's [[starting]] to [[wear]] thin. Here his [[character]] has no [[discernible]] qualities, he's [[rude]] and [[obnoxious]], and thinks he's funny when he frankly isn't. When [[transferred]] to [[New]] York from London (and I [[presume]] this [[link]] is meant to [[appeal]] to [[viewers]] on both sides of the Atlantic), he [[proves]] [[equally]] out of place with his new colleagues. Still, is it any wonder when amongst his [[jolly]] japes he [[hires]] a transvestite stripper to [[appear]] at an [[editorial]] meeting an [[act]] of [[revenge]] for his boss. [[Yet]] somehow, Kirsten Dunst [[starts]] to warm to him, even [[though]] he's [[done]] nothing [[nice]]. Oh, and because he's a [[superficial]] [[male]] he [[falls]] for Megan [[Fox]] at first [[sight]], [[possibly]] because her character is as shallow as his. It all makes for a predictable film conclusion, [[although]] I can't see any viewer [[expressing]] how this mirrored their life. The [[shame]] is that on paper this is a cast [[supposedly]] worth watching. Pegg, [[though]], plays himself, [[Kirsten]] Dunst [[seems]] to just [[go]] [[though]] the motions, [[creating]] no on screen chemistry, and Megan Fox isn't stretched at all. The one huge plus is Miriam Margolyes, as Pegg's [[New]] York landlady - now if she had been on screen longer..... Not that he'd [[healthcare]], but I'm not one of Simon Pegg's [[friendships]]. If I was, there's a good [[opportunities]] we'd fallout if he [[steady]] to [[deliver]] [[dairy]] like this. The trouble is, he found a successful formula as the bumbling, [[everyday]] guy-next-door [[genre]] in Shawn of the Dead, [[Running]] [[Greasy]] Boy Run etc, but it's [[begun]] to [[worn]] thin. Here his [[nature]] has no [[conspicuous]] qualities, he's [[crass]] and [[heinous]], and thinks he's funny when he frankly isn't. When [[transfered]] to [[Nouveau]] York from London (and I [[imagines]] this [[binding]] is meant to [[appealed]] to [[listeners]] on both sides of the Atlantic), he [[illustrates]] [[alike]] out of place with his new colleagues. Still, is it any wonder when amongst his [[julie]] japes he [[hired]] a transvestite stripper to [[appearing]] at an [[editor]] meeting an [[acts]] of [[vendetta]] for his boss. [[Nonetheless]] somehow, Kirsten Dunst [[began]] to warm to him, even [[while]] he's [[doing]] nothing [[enjoyable]]. Oh, and because he's a [[shallow]] [[men]] he [[fall]] for Megan [[Foxes]] at first [[vision]], [[arguably]] because her character is as shallow as his. It all makes for a predictable film conclusion, [[whereas]] I can't see any viewer [[expresses]] how this mirrored their life. The [[ashamed]] is that on paper this is a cast [[reportedly]] worth watching. Pegg, [[while]], plays himself, [[Kristin]] Dunst [[looks]] to just [[going]] [[while]] the motions, [[engender]] no on screen chemistry, and Megan Fox isn't stretched at all. The one huge plus is Miriam Margolyes, as Pegg's [[Novel]] York landlady - now if she had been on screen longer..... --------------------------------------------- Result 3862 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Ang Lee clearly likes to [[ease]] into a film, to catch action, characters and setting on the hoof, as they [[emerge]]. Covering the [[haphazard]] [[endgame]] of the American [[civil]] war via the haphazard [[actions]] of a young [[militia]], unformed in [[mind]] or manhood, this is an [[ideal]] approach. The [[film]] [[turns]] out to be about the formation of personalities, [[adulthood]] and [[relationships]]. Lee also [[shows]] the [[beautiful]] panoramas of the mid-south as a silent character, [[enduring]] the strife like a hardy [[parent]].

James Schamus' script is probably the standard [[bearer]] for this [[film]]; close behind it are a number of well-appointed performances that [[carry]] it admirably. [[Jeffrey]] Wright's name [[alone]] could carry this [[film]] for me. He's [[brilliant]] here but in a [[slow]] [[burning]] role: instead we are [[treated]] to very good (if not revelatory) performances from a [[large]], [[often]] recognisable [[ensemble]].

A noble, optimistic [[film]]. One to watch if you don't fancy the harder, more bittersweet [[Cold]] Mountain or The Claim, for example. 7/10 Ang Lee clearly likes to [[easing]] into a film, to catch action, characters and setting on the hoof, as they [[appear]]. Covering the [[random]] [[prom]] of the American [[civilian]] war via the haphazard [[measurements]] of a young [[guerrilla]], unformed in [[intellect]] or manhood, this is an [[idealistic]] approach. The [[cinematography]] [[revolves]] out to be about the formation of personalities, [[adult]] and [[relationship]]. Lee also [[denotes]] the [[glamorous]] panoramas of the mid-south as a silent character, [[persistent]] the strife like a hardy [[parents]].

James Schamus' script is probably the standard [[wearer]] for this [[filmmaking]]; close behind it are a number of well-appointed performances that [[transporting]] it admirably. [[Jeff]] Wright's name [[solely]] could carry this [[movie]] for me. He's [[excellent]] here but in a [[sluggish]] [[arson]] role: instead we are [[treating]] to very good (if not revelatory) performances from a [[sizable]], [[normally]] recognisable [[whole]].

A noble, optimistic [[kino]]. One to watch if you don't fancy the harder, more bittersweet [[Refrigerated]] Mountain or The Claim, for example. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3863 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Once upon a time in the mid 1990s I used to write for DOCTOR WHO fanzines and the whole of fandom was holding its breathe about the new American produced DOCTOR WHO TVM . As soon as it was announced that the Doctor`s arch enemy the Master was going to be played by Eric Roberts everyone [[scratched]] their heads and exclaimed " Who is Eric Roberts ? " . I should point out this was before the IMDB came online when all you had to do was type in a name into this website to their resume , but one helpful soul wrote into a publication I wrote for to explain that Eric Roberts was best known for a role where he starred opposite F Murray Abraham , the film was called BY THE SWORD and was about a fencing school . Actually looking back now Roberts is best known for THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE and RUNAWAY TRAIN but that didn`t stop the person putting the boot into both Roberts and BY THE SWORD and his mind was made up that this American Master with his southern drawl was going to a debacle . Strangely most fans were furious about Roberts playing the Master but after they saw the DOCTOR WHO TVM a great many fans ( Myself among them ) thought Roberts performance was the best thing about the disappointing American production

Yeah I`m digressing but BY THE SWORD was a film that I wanted to see simply because it was the first time I`d heard the name of Eric Roberts but I didn`t get the chance to see it untill this weekend and I was fairly disappointed with it . I know nothing about fencing ( Everyone else on this page seems duty bound to mention if they fence or not . I don`t fence ) so I don`t know how accurate it all is , but as mentioned the film feels somewhat anachronistic even if you saw it on its release in 1991 , the hairstyles seem a few years out of date along with its mixed teenage cast doing a little dance routine that makes you wonder if it wouldn`t have worked a lot better if it`d had been produced by Jerry Bruckheimer in the mid 1980s . You could argue this would have meant the relationship between Max Suba and Alexander Villard being off centre for most of the film but I wasn`t convinced about their love/hate relationship and Abraham and Roberts have given much better performances before and since BY THE SWORD Once upon a time in the mid 1990s I used to write for DOCTOR WHO fanzines and the whole of fandom was holding its breathe about the new American produced DOCTOR WHO TVM . As soon as it was announced that the Doctor`s arch enemy the Master was going to be played by Eric Roberts everyone [[engraved]] their heads and exclaimed " Who is Eric Roberts ? " . I should point out this was before the IMDB came online when all you had to do was type in a name into this website to their resume , but one helpful soul wrote into a publication I wrote for to explain that Eric Roberts was best known for a role where he starred opposite F Murray Abraham , the film was called BY THE SWORD and was about a fencing school . Actually looking back now Roberts is best known for THE POPE OF GREENWICH VILLAGE and RUNAWAY TRAIN but that didn`t stop the person putting the boot into both Roberts and BY THE SWORD and his mind was made up that this American Master with his southern drawl was going to a debacle . Strangely most fans were furious about Roberts playing the Master but after they saw the DOCTOR WHO TVM a great many fans ( Myself among them ) thought Roberts performance was the best thing about the disappointing American production

Yeah I`m digressing but BY THE SWORD was a film that I wanted to see simply because it was the first time I`d heard the name of Eric Roberts but I didn`t get the chance to see it untill this weekend and I was fairly disappointed with it . I know nothing about fencing ( Everyone else on this page seems duty bound to mention if they fence or not . I don`t fence ) so I don`t know how accurate it all is , but as mentioned the film feels somewhat anachronistic even if you saw it on its release in 1991 , the hairstyles seem a few years out of date along with its mixed teenage cast doing a little dance routine that makes you wonder if it wouldn`t have worked a lot better if it`d had been produced by Jerry Bruckheimer in the mid 1980s . You could argue this would have meant the relationship between Max Suba and Alexander Villard being off centre for most of the film but I wasn`t convinced about their love/hate relationship and Abraham and Roberts have given much better performances before and since BY THE SWORD --------------------------------------------- Result 3864 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] I have to admit I laughed a few times during this [[trivial]] 2004 holiday [[movie]], but it's already moving out of my short-term memory. [[In]] a [[career]] that is sliding rather swiftly toward tabloid obscurity, Ben Affleck, once a promising comic character actor who became enmeshed in the Hollywood [[publicity]] machine to recreate himself into a romantic leading man. Judging from this film, the transformation doesn't seem to be [[taking]], as he continues to [[lack]] the gravitas that [[would]] make him [[credible]] in such parts. While his buddy Matt Damon takes on smart roles in films like "Syriana", Affleck appears in this type of commercial pap. At least the superficial character of successful but lonely advertising executive Drew Latham suits Affleck better than most of the other roles he has tried.

Directed by Mike Mitchell (whose most famous film is 1999's "Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo") and scripted by no less than four screenwriters (always a bad sign), the flimsy plot revolves around his character's need to "rent" a family living in his childhood home in order to live out his fantasy of having the old-fashioned Christmas he never had. The concept is actually intriguing because there is something to be said about the cathartic release of sentimentality we are all directed to feel amid the frenzied commercialism around the holidays. The real problem, however, is that the movie feels like an extended sketch lacking any logic or authentic emotional resonance. Affleck seems to be on overdrive attempting desperately to be lovable, but the net result is an exhausting turn by an actor who has an increasingly annoying habit of playing stupid people in ill-conceived films. Fortunately, he has the likes of James Gandofini and Catherine O'Hara playing the Valcos, the couple who decide to accept Drew's monetary offer to pretend to be his parents.

Gandolfini plays Tom like a gruff, non-violent relative of Tony Soprano, but he does what he can in the role. From her classic SCTV Days to Christopher Guest's mockumentaries, O'Hara is always a comic gem no matter the vehicle, and unsurprisingly she earns the best laughs as Tom's wife Christine, whether dryly delivering a one-liner or posing in an inch of make-up for a dominatrix photo shoot. In what is becoming her standard screen role, Christina Applegate plays their mistrusting daughter Alicia, who of course becomes Drew's love interest. Despite some good moments where she is enjoying the deceit of playing Drew's sister in front of his girlfriend's family, her character seems to change in lightning-flash strokes making it hard to see what Drew would see in her. The story spins completely out of control by the last third with one contrived situation piled on top of another until plot strands are tied together in short order. It's rumored that much of the movie was improvised since there was no finished shooting script. It shows, but I also have to admit I stuck with it to the bitter end. I have to admit I laughed a few times during this [[inconsequential]] 2004 holiday [[films]], but it's already moving out of my short-term memory. [[Across]] a [[quarry]] that is sliding rather swiftly toward tabloid obscurity, Ben Affleck, once a promising comic character actor who became enmeshed in the Hollywood [[advertise]] machine to recreate himself into a romantic leading man. Judging from this film, the transformation doesn't seem to be [[adopting]], as he continues to [[shortages]] the gravitas that [[could]] make him [[believable]] in such parts. While his buddy Matt Damon takes on smart roles in films like "Syriana", Affleck appears in this type of commercial pap. At least the superficial character of successful but lonely advertising executive Drew Latham suits Affleck better than most of the other roles he has tried.

Directed by Mike Mitchell (whose most famous film is 1999's "Deuce Bigelow: Male Gigolo") and scripted by no less than four screenwriters (always a bad sign), the flimsy plot revolves around his character's need to "rent" a family living in his childhood home in order to live out his fantasy of having the old-fashioned Christmas he never had. The concept is actually intriguing because there is something to be said about the cathartic release of sentimentality we are all directed to feel amid the frenzied commercialism around the holidays. The real problem, however, is that the movie feels like an extended sketch lacking any logic or authentic emotional resonance. Affleck seems to be on overdrive attempting desperately to be lovable, but the net result is an exhausting turn by an actor who has an increasingly annoying habit of playing stupid people in ill-conceived films. Fortunately, he has the likes of James Gandofini and Catherine O'Hara playing the Valcos, the couple who decide to accept Drew's monetary offer to pretend to be his parents.

Gandolfini plays Tom like a gruff, non-violent relative of Tony Soprano, but he does what he can in the role. From her classic SCTV Days to Christopher Guest's mockumentaries, O'Hara is always a comic gem no matter the vehicle, and unsurprisingly she earns the best laughs as Tom's wife Christine, whether dryly delivering a one-liner or posing in an inch of make-up for a dominatrix photo shoot. In what is becoming her standard screen role, Christina Applegate plays their mistrusting daughter Alicia, who of course becomes Drew's love interest. Despite some good moments where she is enjoying the deceit of playing Drew's sister in front of his girlfriend's family, her character seems to change in lightning-flash strokes making it hard to see what Drew would see in her. The story spins completely out of control by the last third with one contrived situation piled on top of another until plot strands are tied together in short order. It's rumored that much of the movie was improvised since there was no finished shooting script. It shows, but I also have to admit I stuck with it to the bitter end. --------------------------------------------- Result 3865 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] How to [[lose]] [[friends]] and alienate people is decent [[comedy]] with a bit of romantic [[approach]].

It's actually a [[story]] of [[Sidney]] [[Young]]([[Simon]] Pegg) breaking through in [[journalist]] and [[magazine]] [[writing]] business which is interpreted in a [[funny]] [[way]]. [[Simon]] Pegg made an OK [[appearance]], [[slightly]] worse than his [[usual]]. [[Movie]] is not hilarious or funny all the [[way]] or anything like that but it has its moments, and those moments are [[really]] [[hilarious]].

I [[recommend]] this [[fun]] and worth [[watching]] American with English [[cream]] [[comedy]] to all people who just [[wanna]] sit, [[relax]] and [[enjoy]] [[movie]] for what it is. If you're about to watch this [[movie]] with [[critical]] [[approach]] then you should pass unless you [[want]] to be [[disappointed]] and [[start]] trashing it. How to [[wasting]] [[freund]] and alienate people is decent [[travesty]] with a bit of romantic [[approaches]].

It's actually a [[storytelling]] of [[Sydney]] [[Youthful]]([[Simeon]] Pegg) breaking through in [[journalists]] and [[revue]] [[writes]] business which is interpreted in a [[fun]] [[routes]]. [[Simeon]] Pegg made an OK [[semblance]], [[moderately]] worse than his [[accustomed]]. [[Flick]] is not hilarious or funny all the [[manner]] or anything like that but it has its moments, and those moments are [[truly]] [[droll]].

I [[recommendations]] this [[droll]] and worth [[staring]] American with English [[latte]] [[travesty]] to all people who just [[desiring]] sit, [[relaxing]] and [[enjoys]] [[kino]] for what it is. If you're about to watch this [[films]] with [[fundamental]] [[approaches]] then you should pass unless you [[wanna]] to be [[disenchanted]] and [[initiates]] trashing it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3866 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well this is a [[typical]] "straight to the [[toilet]]" slasher film.

Long story short, a bunch of teenagers/young adults becoming stranded in the middle of creepy woods and get hacked down by naked nymphomaniac demons.

This movie has all the basics for this slasher fromage:

-Naked women, -teens or young adults being marooned in someplace spooky, -gory death scenes, -the last survivor being a well built young woman who will always show off her midriff, but never bra less, -a creepy, crazy man who knows about the evil, -lesbian kiss scene, -sex being a killer, -no plot

Even then for a cheesy slasher film, it was really terrible. The atmosphere is totally dead. Nothing, not even the sexually explicit scenes and nudity, was enough to keep the male and lesbian female audience interested. Watching it felt like it was being watched with a nasty head congestion or a nasty head cold.

Give the demonic ..... 0/10. Well this is a [[classic]] "straight to the [[latrine]]" slasher film.

Long story short, a bunch of teenagers/young adults becoming stranded in the middle of creepy woods and get hacked down by naked nymphomaniac demons.

This movie has all the basics for this slasher fromage:

-Naked women, -teens or young adults being marooned in someplace spooky, -gory death scenes, -the last survivor being a well built young woman who will always show off her midriff, but never bra less, -a creepy, crazy man who knows about the evil, -lesbian kiss scene, -sex being a killer, -no plot

Even then for a cheesy slasher film, it was really terrible. The atmosphere is totally dead. Nothing, not even the sexually explicit scenes and nudity, was enough to keep the male and lesbian female audience interested. Watching it felt like it was being watched with a nasty head congestion or a nasty head cold.

Give the demonic ..... 0/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3867 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have to finish watching a movie once I start, regardless of how bad it is. This movie was agonizing to sit through. The "sparkling" bullets, the reporter with "ninja" like moves, the way the bad guys shoot hundreds and hundreds of bullets and only seem to hit innocent bystanders, the predictable outcome and all the bad acting was just horrible. Like the girl who finds the reporter in her friends apartment and goes from "what the heck are you doing in here (holding a bat)" to "hey, you're cute, wanna @#$%!???" in like 1.2 seconds.... Just bad.... Save yourself an hour and forty minutes and go play with your kids (or dog)! --------------------------------------------- Result 3868 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] [[For]] [[anyone]] who's judged others at first meeting, here is the [[perfect]] tutorial on depth of character. The grumpy old lady has a soft, thoughtful heart - and needs new friends. The flighty, unsure, 'ditsy' dame who makes inappropriate, uncomfortable comments - sees deep into your soul and has pure love for all. The cold, prim, proper, neglected wife has passion simmering that could boil over at any minute - given the right setting. The [[perfect]] [[beauty]] - rich, sweet, partying, pursued by throngs - wants peace, quiet, and love without possessiveness.

By taking the time to look beyond the surface, you will find treasures in everyday life, from the least expected sources. All it takes is patience and a touch of enchantment. [[During]] [[somebody]] who's judged others at first meeting, here is the [[faultless]] tutorial on depth of character. The grumpy old lady has a soft, thoughtful heart - and needs new friends. The flighty, unsure, 'ditsy' dame who makes inappropriate, uncomfortable comments - sees deep into your soul and has pure love for all. The cold, prim, proper, neglected wife has passion simmering that could boil over at any minute - given the right setting. The [[irreproachable]] [[beaut]] - rich, sweet, partying, pursued by throngs - wants peace, quiet, and love without possessiveness.

By taking the time to look beyond the surface, you will find treasures in everyday life, from the least expected sources. All it takes is patience and a touch of enchantment. --------------------------------------------- Result 3869 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (93%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] If you like cars you will love this film!

There are some [[superb]] actors in the film, especially Vinnie Jones, with his typical no nonsense attitude and hardcase appearance.The others are not bad either....

There are only two slight [[flaws]] to this film. Firstly, the poor plot, however people don't watch this film for the plot. Secondly, the glorification of grand theft auto (car crime). However if people really believe they can steal a Ferrari and get away with it then good look to them, hope you have a good time in jail!

When i first read that Nicolas Cage was to act the main role, i first thought "...sweeet.", but then i thought "...naaaa you suck!" but then finally after watching the film i realised "...yep he suck's!".Only joking he plays the role very well.

I'll end this unusual review by saying "If the premature demise of a criminal has in some way enlightened the general cinema going audience as to the grim finish below the glossy veneer of criminal life, and inspired them to change their ways, then this death carries with it an inherent nobility. And a supreme glory. We should all be so fortunate. You can say "Poor Criminal." I say: "Poor us."

p.s. - Angelina Jolie Voight looks quite nice! If you like cars you will love this film!

There are some [[magnifique]] actors in the film, especially Vinnie Jones, with his typical no nonsense attitude and hardcase appearance.The others are not bad either....

There are only two slight [[demerits]] to this film. Firstly, the poor plot, however people don't watch this film for the plot. Secondly, the glorification of grand theft auto (car crime). However if people really believe they can steal a Ferrari and get away with it then good look to them, hope you have a good time in jail!

When i first read that Nicolas Cage was to act the main role, i first thought "...sweeet.", but then i thought "...naaaa you suck!" but then finally after watching the film i realised "...yep he suck's!".Only joking he plays the role very well.

I'll end this unusual review by saying "If the premature demise of a criminal has in some way enlightened the general cinema going audience as to the grim finish below the glossy veneer of criminal life, and inspired them to change their ways, then this death carries with it an inherent nobility. And a supreme glory. We should all be so fortunate. You can say "Poor Criminal." I say: "Poor us."

p.s. - Angelina Jolie Voight looks quite nice! --------------------------------------------- Result 3870 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Now here is a film that if made in Australia would have easily been a comedy. Sadly and annoyingly, here it is, flaccid and cheesy and overbaked from Lala land. How did the di-erector get it so wrong? Well, mainly by being serious about a job so hilariously startling that nobody in their right mind could take seriously. Unless of course they were a nerdy lonely gay cliché (but somehow cute)...or is that cliché piled upon cliché. No value in the story that almost seems like a prequel to Gus Van Sant's GERRY..... and with a title like THE FLUFFER how is it all such a lead weight? Well this auteur must have soooooo mad that he didn't get to Burt and BOOGIE first that he had to make his own. Convoluted and undeveloped apart from the 'unrequited love's a bore' theme left over from a faded Streisand lyric, we have only moody beefcake and TV serial level storyline left. The un necessary fourth act of this overlong turgid drama is truly terrible as the film wanders off like the Gerries into to desert and gets stuck there. In Oz in the late 90s some 20 somethings made a similar but actually hilarious film called MONEYSHOT. Originally filmed as THE VENUS FACTORY it too suffered from an auteur more awful than Orson so they re-filmed half of it, got a ruthless TV editor to chop it up and down down to 72 minutes and hey-presto..comedy, tonight! A lesson there in when bad films turn good by lightening up. I guess THE FLUFFER stiffed on release and after seeing it not perform, I can understand why. --------------------------------------------- Result 3871 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Redline is a [[knockoff]] of Fast & Furious, without any of the redeeming qualities. It doesn't need to have a [[convoluted]] plot with [[multiple]] [[twists]] and surprises, but it needs SOMETHING! This is the equivalent of a porn [[film]], where the storyline and dialogue [[consist]] of 60 [[seconds]] at the [[beginning]] and the same at the [[end]]. Except that this is worse, because you don't [[get]] your money's worth. Mind-numbingly boring, impossible [[race]] sequences, and a [[terrible]] waste of [[expensive]] [[beautiful]] [[cars]], which [[almost]] [[acquire]] negative [[points]] for having [[appeared]] in this [[movie]]. Sure, she's [[hot]], but who's that [[desperate]] for an on screen [[female]]? I feel like the [[director]] sat there with a [[hat]] full of [[dialogue]] and plot snippets, and shook an 8 ball every [[time]] they switched scenes. [[No]] [[serious]] [[person]] who [[races]] or knows [[anything]] about it [[would]] watch this [[movie]] and [[enjoy]] the [[race]] scenes. Redline is a [[knockoffs]] of Fast & Furious, without any of the redeeming qualities. It doesn't need to have a [[complicated]] plot with [[diverse]] [[spins]] and surprises, but it needs SOMETHING! This is the equivalent of a porn [[cinema]], where the storyline and dialogue [[comprise]] of 60 [[second]] at the [[begins]] and the same at the [[ends]]. Except that this is worse, because you don't [[got]] your money's worth. Mind-numbingly boring, impossible [[errand]] sequences, and a [[dreaded]] waste of [[costly]] [[magnificent]] [[vehicle]], which [[around]] [[acquiring]] negative [[dots]] for having [[seemed]] in this [[kino]]. Sure, she's [[sexier]], but who's that [[hopeless]] for an on screen [[daughters]]? I feel like the [[headmaster]] sat there with a [[hats]] full of [[conversations]] and plot snippets, and shook an 8 ball every [[period]] they switched scenes. [[Nope]] [[gravest]] [[persona]] who [[careers]] or knows [[nothing]] about it [[should]] watch this [[cinema]] and [[enjoys]] the [[carrera]] scenes. --------------------------------------------- Result 3872 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (78%)]] Cuba Gooding Jr. is a secret service agent who blames himself over the [[assassination]] of the U.S. President, i'll point out straight away that this is not the [[type]] of role that this very talented [[actor]] is [[noted]] for, and this film shows us why. He teams up with a persistent news [[reporter]] (Angie Harmon) to uncover the [[conspiracy]] surrounding the president's death, and so on, blah, blah, blah.

[[Even]] with a cast of James Woods, Cuba Gooding Jr, Anne Archer and Angie Harmon 'End Game' fails to grab your [[attention]], [[plain]] and simple; some of the action is good, the acting isn't all bad and the story although clichéd and done before could have lead to an entertaining and enjoyable movie - WELL IT DOESN'T! The writing of the script and the direction makes absolutely sure of that, at no point does it suck you into the story or make you give the slightest thought to any of the characters.

4/10 It's Boring, Predictable and [[Dull]]. Cuba Gooding Jr. is a secret service agent who blames himself over the [[killings]] of the U.S. President, i'll point out straight away that this is not the [[genera]] of role that this very talented [[protagonist]] is [[highlighted]] for, and this film shows us why. He teams up with a persistent news [[reporters]] (Angie Harmon) to uncover the [[conspiracies]] surrounding the president's death, and so on, blah, blah, blah.

[[Yet]] with a cast of James Woods, Cuba Gooding Jr, Anne Archer and Angie Harmon 'End Game' fails to grab your [[beware]], [[lowlands]] and simple; some of the action is good, the acting isn't all bad and the story although clichéd and done before could have lead to an entertaining and enjoyable movie - WELL IT DOESN'T! The writing of the script and the direction makes absolutely sure of that, at no point does it suck you into the story or make you give the slightest thought to any of the characters.

4/10 It's Boring, Predictable and [[Tiresome]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3873 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] I've never really considered myself much of "student" when it comes to watching films, I watch them, form an opinion and that's it. But Unhinged changed all this. This film is without a [[doubt]] the most [[inept]] [[attempt]] at film making I've ever seen. Every kid who rocks up at university thinking they're gonna be the next Spielberg or Tarantino needs to be handed this film with a handbook titled "How Not to Make A Film". Not only is there no story to be had, the film makers weren't even competent enough to make a film worth watching. It's been a while since I saw it, but all I can say is watch the overhead tracking shots in the opening scenes. They are never ending! It's almost like having your teeth pulled, only not as much fun. I've never really considered myself much of "student" when it comes to watching films, I watch them, form an opinion and that's it. But Unhinged changed all this. This film is without a [[duda]] the most [[incompetent]] [[strives]] at film making I've ever seen. Every kid who rocks up at university thinking they're gonna be the next Spielberg or Tarantino needs to be handed this film with a handbook titled "How Not to Make A Film". Not only is there no story to be had, the film makers weren't even competent enough to make a film worth watching. It's been a while since I saw it, but all I can say is watch the overhead tracking shots in the opening scenes. They are never ending! It's almost like having your teeth pulled, only not as much fun. --------------------------------------------- Result 3874 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Im proud to [[say]] I've seen all three [[Fast]] and Furious [[films]].Sure,the plots are kinda silly,and they might be a little cheesy,but I love them car chases,and all the beautiful cars,and the clandestine midnight races.And Ill gladly see a fourth one.

[[Wanna]] know what the difference is between those three and Redline?Decent acting,somewhat thought out plot,even if they are potboilers,and last but not least,directors who have a clue.All three were made by very competent directors,all of them took the films in a different direction,equally exciting.Redline looks like the producer picked out a dozen women he slept with on the casting couch,and made them the extras,then picked up his leads from Hollywood's unemployment line.And the script.Yikes.Its Mystery Science Theatre 3000 bad.This is 70's made for TV movie bad.

Yeah,the movie had a few cool cars,but you don't really get to see that many in action,and the action is directed so poorly you cant get excited by the chases,and if the cars aren't thrilling you,why go to a movie like this?

Im in the audience with a bunch of teenagers,and I cant stop laughing out loud.Im getting dirty looks,but this was just a debacle.

Rent the F&F movies.Go to Nascar Race.Go to a karting track and race yourself.Whatever you do,avoid Redline like bad cheese. Im proud to [[told]] I've seen all three [[Swift]] and Furious [[cinematography]].Sure,the plots are kinda silly,and they might be a little cheesy,but I love them car chases,and all the beautiful cars,and the clandestine midnight races.And Ill gladly see a fourth one.

[[Wants]] know what the difference is between those three and Redline?Decent acting,somewhat thought out plot,even if they are potboilers,and last but not least,directors who have a clue.All three were made by very competent directors,all of them took the films in a different direction,equally exciting.Redline looks like the producer picked out a dozen women he slept with on the casting couch,and made them the extras,then picked up his leads from Hollywood's unemployment line.And the script.Yikes.Its Mystery Science Theatre 3000 bad.This is 70's made for TV movie bad.

Yeah,the movie had a few cool cars,but you don't really get to see that many in action,and the action is directed so poorly you cant get excited by the chases,and if the cars aren't thrilling you,why go to a movie like this?

Im in the audience with a bunch of teenagers,and I cant stop laughing out loud.Im getting dirty looks,but this was just a debacle.

Rent the F&F movies.Go to Nascar Race.Go to a karting track and race yourself.Whatever you do,avoid Redline like bad cheese. --------------------------------------------- Result 3875 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Oh [[man]], this s-u-c-k-e-d [[sucked]].... I couldn't [[even]] [[get]] any [[camp]] value out of this......and I sat through the [[whole]] thing on Showtime.... Don't bother [[waiting]] [[around]] for the 'naked' scenes either.....it's too late and only plastic Jenna Jameson is [[involved]].. [[Shows]] how much discretionary [[cash]] must be [[laying]] [[around]] Hollywood just to [[get]] your [[name]] on the closing credits.. I [[guess]] Showtime had to throw [[something]] in at 1am... [[Next]] [[time]] I [[think]] I'd [[even]] rather be watching ESPN loop [[around]] [[every]] 30 minutes... Oh [[hombre]], this s-u-c-k-e-d [[aspired]].... I couldn't [[yet]] [[obtain]] any [[campground]] value out of this......and I sat through the [[together]] thing on Showtime.... Don't bother [[awaited]] [[roughly]] for the 'naked' scenes either.....it's too late and only plastic Jenna Jameson is [[entangled]].. [[Showcase]] how much discretionary [[moneys]] must be [[lays]] [[almost]] Hollywood just to [[obtains]] your [[behalf]] on the closing credits.. I [[imagines]] Showtime had to throw [[algo]] in at 1am... [[Imminent]] [[moment]] I [[thought]] I'd [[yet]] rather be watching ESPN loop [[nearly]] [[each]] 30 minutes... --------------------------------------------- Result 3876 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] Okay, I've watched this [[movie]] [[twice]] now, I have [[researched]] it heavily on the net, I have asked several people on there opinions. I have even gone to the length of reading the original Sheridan Lafanu Classic 'Carmilla', a book that this movie is supposed to be based on. I feel that the best way to review this movie is to describe a game to play whilst watching it. As the plot of the movie doesn't seem to make any sense at all, here is the plot of the book.

Laura lives in a castle in Syberia with her Father, Mr De Lafontaine. They carry on with their lives blissfully and peacefully. One day they get a letter from the 'General' a man who has made it his mission in life to avenge his daughters death. He makes claims of supernatural powers being at work, and explains that he will visit them soon. Meanwhile, a chance encounter with a strange woman results in the Lafontaines looking after her Daughter, Carmilla, for several months. Soon Laura starts to be overwhelmed by strange dreams, and begins to come down with a strange illness. Who is this mysterious Carmilla? And just what has she to do with Laura's condition, and the General?

I have invented this game and would like as many people as possible to play it, and let me know what their results are. I even have a catchy name, and would have a jingle too, but I can't be bothered with that. It's called the "this movie doesn't make any sense" game.

All you have to do is, whilst watching the movie, try to come up with a complete plot that explains what is happening. I mean complete, all questions answered, everything makes sense, absolutely complete.

It will have to answer such questions as ...

* Why can vampires walk around in day light?

* Why are they all lesbians?

* Why is a girl called Bob? and why does she shoot herself?

* When is the movie a dream and when is it real?

* Why does killing zombies appear to be an accepted part of life that doesn't make anyone bat an eyelid?

* Why does Travis Fontaine spot and run down a zombie without slowing down whilst driving his car, yet when faced with a woman with an obvious hostage in the back of her car, accept the excuse that she is a zombie too?

* And why does he then let a girl, which he later openly reveals that he knows is the head vampire, drive with him in his car?

* And then let her drive off, alone with his daughter in a stolen car?

What the hell is the asylum scene all about?

* What the hell is the green goo all about?

* Why does the head vampire suddenly start dressing like a nurse?

* Why are there never any vampires fighting Zombies?

* What is the significance of the necklace? what is it made of? why does it kill vampires? and how does Jenna know that?

In fact sod it, it's just as much fun trying to come up with as many questions about this movie too.

I have my plot, and I have to admit it is not quite there, but it is a pretty good effort.

In Conclusion

'Vampires vs Zombies' has no moment in it where there are actually Vampires fighting Zombies. Everyone in the movie seems to know exactly what is going on, yet they seem very reluctant to let the audience in on this. And somehow it is based on a classic 19th century horror novel. How? Why? What the hell is going on? Okay, I've watched this [[movies]] [[doubly]] now, I have [[examined]] it heavily on the net, I have asked several people on there opinions. I have even gone to the length of reading the original Sheridan Lafanu Classic 'Carmilla', a book that this movie is supposed to be based on. I feel that the best way to review this movie is to describe a game to play whilst watching it. As the plot of the movie doesn't seem to make any sense at all, here is the plot of the book.

Laura lives in a castle in Syberia with her Father, Mr De Lafontaine. They carry on with their lives blissfully and peacefully. One day they get a letter from the 'General' a man who has made it his mission in life to avenge his daughters death. He makes claims of supernatural powers being at work, and explains that he will visit them soon. Meanwhile, a chance encounter with a strange woman results in the Lafontaines looking after her Daughter, Carmilla, for several months. Soon Laura starts to be overwhelmed by strange dreams, and begins to come down with a strange illness. Who is this mysterious Carmilla? And just what has she to do with Laura's condition, and the General?

I have invented this game and would like as many people as possible to play it, and let me know what their results are. I even have a catchy name, and would have a jingle too, but I can't be bothered with that. It's called the "this movie doesn't make any sense" game.

All you have to do is, whilst watching the movie, try to come up with a complete plot that explains what is happening. I mean complete, all questions answered, everything makes sense, absolutely complete.

It will have to answer such questions as ...

* Why can vampires walk around in day light?

* Why are they all lesbians?

* Why is a girl called Bob? and why does she shoot herself?

* When is the movie a dream and when is it real?

* Why does killing zombies appear to be an accepted part of life that doesn't make anyone bat an eyelid?

* Why does Travis Fontaine spot and run down a zombie without slowing down whilst driving his car, yet when faced with a woman with an obvious hostage in the back of her car, accept the excuse that she is a zombie too?

* And why does he then let a girl, which he later openly reveals that he knows is the head vampire, drive with him in his car?

* And then let her drive off, alone with his daughter in a stolen car?

What the hell is the asylum scene all about?

* What the hell is the green goo all about?

* Why does the head vampire suddenly start dressing like a nurse?

* Why are there never any vampires fighting Zombies?

* What is the significance of the necklace? what is it made of? why does it kill vampires? and how does Jenna know that?

In fact sod it, it's just as much fun trying to come up with as many questions about this movie too.

I have my plot, and I have to admit it is not quite there, but it is a pretty good effort.

In Conclusion

'Vampires vs Zombies' has no moment in it where there are actually Vampires fighting Zombies. Everyone in the movie seems to know exactly what is going on, yet they seem very reluctant to let the audience in on this. And somehow it is based on a classic 19th century horror novel. How? Why? What the hell is going on? --------------------------------------------- Result 3877 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (85%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The second [[attempt]] by a New York intellectual in less than 10 years to make a "Swedish" film - the first being Susan Sontag's "Brother Carl" (which was made in Sweden, with Swedish actors, no less!) The results? Oscar Wilde said it best, in reference to Dickens' "The Old Curiosity Shop": "One would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud at the death of Little Nell." Pretty much the same thing here. "[[Interiors]]" is chock full of solemnly intoned howlers. ("I'm afraid of my anger." Looking into the middle distance: "I don't like who I'm becoming.") The directorial quotations (to use a polite term) from Bergman are close to parody. The incredibly self-involved family keep reminding us of how brilliant and talented they are, to the point of strangulation. ("I read a poem of yours the other day. It was in - I don't know - The New Yorker." "Oh. That was an old poem. I reworked it.") Far from not caring about these people, however, I found them quite hilarious. Much of the dialog is exactly like the funny stuff from Allen's earlier films - only he's directed his actors to play the lines straight. Having not cast himself in the movie, he has poor Mary Beth Hurt copy all of his thespian tics, intonations, and neurotic habits, turning her into an embarrassing surrogate (much like Kenneth Branagh in "Celebrity").

The basic plot - dysfunctional family with quietly domineering mother - seems to be lifted more or less from Bergman's "Winter Light," the basic family melodrama tricked up with a lot of existential angst. It all comes through in the shopworn visual/aural tricks: the deafening scratching of a pencil on paper, the towering surf that dwarfs the people walking on the beach. etc, etc.

Allen's later "serious" films are less embarrassing, but also far less entertaining. I'll take "Interiors." Woody's rarely made a funnier movie. The second [[endeavor]] by a New York intellectual in less than 10 years to make a "Swedish" film - the first being Susan Sontag's "Brother Carl" (which was made in Sweden, with Swedish actors, no less!) The results? Oscar Wilde said it best, in reference to Dickens' "The Old Curiosity Shop": "One would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud at the death of Little Nell." Pretty much the same thing here. "[[Indoors]]" is chock full of solemnly intoned howlers. ("I'm afraid of my anger." Looking into the middle distance: "I don't like who I'm becoming.") The directorial quotations (to use a polite term) from Bergman are close to parody. The incredibly self-involved family keep reminding us of how brilliant and talented they are, to the point of strangulation. ("I read a poem of yours the other day. It was in - I don't know - The New Yorker." "Oh. That was an old poem. I reworked it.") Far from not caring about these people, however, I found them quite hilarious. Much of the dialog is exactly like the funny stuff from Allen's earlier films - only he's directed his actors to play the lines straight. Having not cast himself in the movie, he has poor Mary Beth Hurt copy all of his thespian tics, intonations, and neurotic habits, turning her into an embarrassing surrogate (much like Kenneth Branagh in "Celebrity").

The basic plot - dysfunctional family with quietly domineering mother - seems to be lifted more or less from Bergman's "Winter Light," the basic family melodrama tricked up with a lot of existential angst. It all comes through in the shopworn visual/aural tricks: the deafening scratching of a pencil on paper, the towering surf that dwarfs the people walking on the beach. etc, etc.

Allen's later "serious" films are less embarrassing, but also far less entertaining. I'll take "Interiors." Woody's rarely made a funnier movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3878 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] I can't [[believe]] how [[anyone]] can [[make]] a [[comedy]] about an [[issue]] such as homelessness. Of [[course]], [[Brooks]] has not made a comedy about _real_ homeless people. No [[mention]] of drugs, prostitution or violence on these streets. The people we meet in this movie are homeless in [[Fantasy]] [[land]] so the only [[difference]] between them and us is that they don't [[eat]] quite as often. Brooks' [[movies]] have [[become]] [[worse]] and worse over the years. This is just another nail in the [[coffin]] . I can't [[think]] how [[person]] can [[deliver]] a [[humour]] about an [[question]] such as homelessness. Of [[cours]], [[Creeks]] has not made a comedy about _real_ homeless people. No [[cite]] of drugs, prostitution or violence on these streets. The people we meet in this movie are homeless in [[Chimera]] [[tierra]] so the only [[discrepancy]] between them and us is that they don't [[comer]] quite as often. Brooks' [[kino]] have [[gotten]] [[worst]] and worse over the years. This is just another nail in the [[casket]] . --------------------------------------------- Result 3879 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This movie is not only poorly scripted and [[directed]] but is [[simply]] [[distasteful]]. A beautiful [[novel]] is terribly misrepresented in this [[film]]. Many [[changes]] have been [[made]] to the storyline, presumably to streamline the timeframe. But what [[results]] is [[simply]] confusing. The acting can't [[possibly]] overcome the script which [[removes]] the characters' motives for their behavior. Plus, the conversion to English does not [[work]] when everyone refers to the patriarch EsTEban as ESteban. [[Horrible]]. Please please please read the gorgeous novel, in Spanish if possible. DON'T SEE THIS FILM. It will ruin for you what [[could]] be a wonderful experience. This movie is not only poorly scripted and [[geared]] but is [[exclusively]] [[tasteless]]. A beautiful [[newer]] is terribly misrepresented in this [[cinematography]]. Many [[shift]] have been [[brought]] to the storyline, presumably to streamline the timeframe. But what [[conclusions]] is [[merely]] confusing. The acting can't [[arguably]] overcome the script which [[clears]] the characters' motives for their behavior. Plus, the conversion to English does not [[cooperating]] when everyone refers to the patriarch EsTEban as ESteban. [[Dire]]. Please please please read the gorgeous novel, in Spanish if possible. DON'T SEE THIS FILM. It will ruin for you what [[did]] be a wonderful experience. --------------------------------------------- Result 3880 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Gung Ho was a good [[idea]], however it is to much to ask Americans viewers to understand the dynamics of American jobs and foreign competition.In this movie the main character Hunt Stevenson(Michael Keaton) goes to Japan and convinces a Japanese auto company to come to America and help his dying Pennslyvania town. Two things come at you.First why would a Japanese company come to America to make cars when they do so ,and so well at that? Secondly can anyone understand that American companies of all types go to third world nations to have their products made to escape American labor costs? It makes the film's premise then that the Number one maker of cars in the world would go to one of its' top competitors(aside from Germany)and put a plant there as unrealistic. Keaton was still in his comedy mode by this time. But he gives a credible performance all the same as he could prove that he could go from comedy to drama in a matter of seconds and still not embarrass himself but Director Ron Howard can't keep this from becoming a TV movie which it ends up being anyway because they have to give the unlikely story a happy ending the politics and problems of Japanese and American relations not withstanding. Gung Ho has a Happy Days and Laverne and Shirley feel to it as the producers of both TV shows made the film and then made the TV version of this movie as well which gives the film its' lightweight feel.The Japanese manager gets to love his American workers and feels he and other Japanese people can learnfrom Americans.His No.2 man Saito who supposedly doesn't like Americans all that much doesn't think so.I would have prefered all the Japanese characters been like Saito than the soft goofball characters they made the Japanese out to be.It would have made the film more interesting. Gung Ho was a good [[brainchild]], however it is to much to ask Americans viewers to understand the dynamics of American jobs and foreign competition.In this movie the main character Hunt Stevenson(Michael Keaton) goes to Japan and convinces a Japanese auto company to come to America and help his dying Pennslyvania town. Two things come at you.First why would a Japanese company come to America to make cars when they do so ,and so well at that? Secondly can anyone understand that American companies of all types go to third world nations to have their products made to escape American labor costs? It makes the film's premise then that the Number one maker of cars in the world would go to one of its' top competitors(aside from Germany)and put a plant there as unrealistic. Keaton was still in his comedy mode by this time. But he gives a credible performance all the same as he could prove that he could go from comedy to drama in a matter of seconds and still not embarrass himself but Director Ron Howard can't keep this from becoming a TV movie which it ends up being anyway because they have to give the unlikely story a happy ending the politics and problems of Japanese and American relations not withstanding. Gung Ho has a Happy Days and Laverne and Shirley feel to it as the producers of both TV shows made the film and then made the TV version of this movie as well which gives the film its' lightweight feel.The Japanese manager gets to love his American workers and feels he and other Japanese people can learnfrom Americans.His No.2 man Saito who supposedly doesn't like Americans all that much doesn't think so.I would have prefered all the Japanese characters been like Saito than the soft goofball characters they made the Japanese out to be.It would have made the film more interesting. --------------------------------------------- Result 3881 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (76%)]] I wouldn't be so quick to look at all the good reviews and say this might be a good show..This show is only good if you don't know what "talent" is..I won't even say how offensive it is (I know it can be offensive to a lot of people) because thats not really what bothers me about the show.. What bothers me is that people watch this and [[think]] it's funny..It makes me feel like our generation is getting to stupid and I'm actually scared that it will one day be run by people who watch this [[garbage]]..

Basically the plot is simple..it's about an offensive,self centered,spoiled women(Sarah Silvermen) getting through everyday life..

Thats it..Like that hasn't been done a million times..In fact almost every joke either has been done or is racist..

Sarah also likes to sing..I like her voice..thats it..not the lyrics..The lyrics are dreadful..which she likes to sing about a lot of things..

If you like to see a hot women put everyone else down and make them feel like crap while at the same time farting and saying crap about every race then this show is for you.. I wouldn't be so quick to look at all the good reviews and say this might be a good show..This show is only good if you don't know what "talent" is..I won't even say how offensive it is (I know it can be offensive to a lot of people) because thats not really what bothers me about the show.. What bothers me is that people watch this and [[reckon]] it's funny..It makes me feel like our generation is getting to stupid and I'm actually scared that it will one day be run by people who watch this [[refuse]]..

Basically the plot is simple..it's about an offensive,self centered,spoiled women(Sarah Silvermen) getting through everyday life..

Thats it..Like that hasn't been done a million times..In fact almost every joke either has been done or is racist..

Sarah also likes to sing..I like her voice..thats it..not the lyrics..The lyrics are dreadful..which she likes to sing about a lot of things..

If you like to see a hot women put everyone else down and make them feel like crap while at the same time farting and saying crap about every race then this show is for you.. --------------------------------------------- Result 3882 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] [[While]] i was the video store i was browsing through the one dollar rentals and [[came]] [[upon]] this [[little]] gem. I don't know what it was about it but i just had a gut instic about it and [[wow]] was i ever right.

The story centers around two girls who have just survived a school shooting. One of the girls is Alicia a teenage reble who is the only witness for the full attack and another is Deanna another survivor who survived a bullet to the head by some miracle. Thrown together by fate, they slowly begin a painful and beautiful display of healing and moving on.

I just hate it when amazing movies fall through the cracks. Because wow what a performance by Busy Phillips and Erkia Christensen not to mention the rest of the cast! My only complaint is that the DVD was sorely lacking in special features. Oh and some of the jump cuts in the movie were kind of jarring. But all in all a [[excellent]] movie. [[Albeit]] i was the video store i was browsing through the one dollar rentals and [[became]] [[after]] this [[scant]] gem. I don't know what it was about it but i just had a gut instic about it and [[whoa]] was i ever right.

The story centers around two girls who have just survived a school shooting. One of the girls is Alicia a teenage reble who is the only witness for the full attack and another is Deanna another survivor who survived a bullet to the head by some miracle. Thrown together by fate, they slowly begin a painful and beautiful display of healing and moving on.

I just hate it when amazing movies fall through the cracks. Because wow what a performance by Busy Phillips and Erkia Christensen not to mention the rest of the cast! My only complaint is that the DVD was sorely lacking in special features. Oh and some of the jump cuts in the movie were kind of jarring. But all in all a [[sumptuous]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3883 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Hollywood Hotel was the last movie musical that Busby Berkeley [[directed]] for Warner Bros. His [[directing]] style had changed or evolved to the point that this [[film]] does not [[contain]] his signature overhead shots or huge production numbers with thousands of [[extras]]. By the last few years of the Thirties, swing-style big bands were recording the year's biggest popular hits. The Swing Era, also called the Big Band Era, has been dated variously from 1935 to 1944 or 1939 to 1949. Although it is impossible to exactly pinpoint the moment that the Swing Era began, Benny Goodman's engagement at the Palomar Ballroom in Los Angeles in the late summer of 1935 was certainly one of the early indications that swing was entering the consciousness of mainstream America's youth. When Goodman featured his swing repertoire rather than the society-style dance music that his band had been playing, the youth in the audience went wild. That was the beginning, but, since radio, live concerts and word of mouth were the primary methods available to spread the phenomena, it took some time before swing made enough inroads to produce big hits that showed up on the pop charts. In Hollywood Hotel, the appearance of Benny Goodman and His Orchestra and Raymond Paige and His Orchestra in the film indicates that the film industry was ready to capitalize on the shift in musical taste (the film was in production only a year and a half or so after Goodman's Palomar Ballroom engagement). There are a few interesting musical moments here and there in Hollywood Hotel, but except for Benny Goodman and His Orchestra's "Sing, Sing, Sing," there isn't a lot to commend. Otherwise, the most interesting musical sequences are the opening "Hooray for Hollywood" parade and "Let That Be a Lesson to You" production number at the drive-in restaurant. The film is most interesting to see and hear Benny Goodman and His Orchestra play and Dick Powell and Frances Langford sing. Hollywood Hotel was the last movie musical that Busby Berkeley [[oriented]] for Warner Bros. His [[instructing]] style had changed or evolved to the point that this [[cinematographic]] does not [[contained]] his signature overhead shots or huge production numbers with thousands of [[goodies]]. By the last few years of the Thirties, swing-style big bands were recording the year's biggest popular hits. The Swing Era, also called the Big Band Era, has been dated variously from 1935 to 1944 or 1939 to 1949. Although it is impossible to exactly pinpoint the moment that the Swing Era began, Benny Goodman's engagement at the Palomar Ballroom in Los Angeles in the late summer of 1935 was certainly one of the early indications that swing was entering the consciousness of mainstream America's youth. When Goodman featured his swing repertoire rather than the society-style dance music that his band had been playing, the youth in the audience went wild. That was the beginning, but, since radio, live concerts and word of mouth were the primary methods available to spread the phenomena, it took some time before swing made enough inroads to produce big hits that showed up on the pop charts. In Hollywood Hotel, the appearance of Benny Goodman and His Orchestra and Raymond Paige and His Orchestra in the film indicates that the film industry was ready to capitalize on the shift in musical taste (the film was in production only a year and a half or so after Goodman's Palomar Ballroom engagement). There are a few interesting musical moments here and there in Hollywood Hotel, but except for Benny Goodman and His Orchestra's "Sing, Sing, Sing," there isn't a lot to commend. Otherwise, the most interesting musical sequences are the opening "Hooray for Hollywood" parade and "Let That Be a Lesson to You" production number at the drive-in restaurant. The film is most interesting to see and hear Benny Goodman and His Orchestra play and Dick Powell and Frances Langford sing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3884 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] The story is quite original, but the movie is kinda slow building up to the point where they steal the cars. Its kinda nice though to watch them prepare the stealing too, but the actual stealing should've been more in picture... [[However]] the stunt work on this movie was [[excellent]] and it is definetly a [[movie]] you HAVE to [[see]] (7/10) The story is quite original, but the movie is kinda slow building up to the point where they steal the cars. Its kinda nice though to watch them prepare the stealing too, but the actual stealing should've been more in picture... [[Instead]] the stunt work on this movie was [[glamorous]] and it is definetly a [[cinematographic]] you HAVE to [[consults]] (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3885 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] This was a very [[brief]] episode that appeared in one of the "Night Gallery" show back in 1971. The episode starred Sue Lyon (of Lolita movie fame) and Joseph Campanella who play a baby sitter and a vampire, respectively. The vampire hires a baby sitter to watch his child (which appears to be some kind of werewolf or monster) while he goes out at night for blood. The baby sitter is totally oblivious to the vampire's appearance when she first sees him and only starts to put two and two together when she notices that he has no reflection in the mirror, has an odd collection of books in the library on the occult, and hears strange noises while the vampire goes to talk to the child. She realizes that the man who hired her may not be what she thought he was originally. She bolts out the door, the vampire comes out looking puzzled and the episode is over. I don't know what purpose it was to make such an abbreviated episode that lasted just 5 minutes. They should just have expanded the earlier episode by those same 5 minutes and skipped this one. A [[total]] wasted effort. This was a very [[concise]] episode that appeared in one of the "Night Gallery" show back in 1971. The episode starred Sue Lyon (of Lolita movie fame) and Joseph Campanella who play a baby sitter and a vampire, respectively. The vampire hires a baby sitter to watch his child (which appears to be some kind of werewolf or monster) while he goes out at night for blood. The baby sitter is totally oblivious to the vampire's appearance when she first sees him and only starts to put two and two together when she notices that he has no reflection in the mirror, has an odd collection of books in the library on the occult, and hears strange noises while the vampire goes to talk to the child. She realizes that the man who hired her may not be what she thought he was originally. She bolts out the door, the vampire comes out looking puzzled and the episode is over. I don't know what purpose it was to make such an abbreviated episode that lasted just 5 minutes. They should just have expanded the earlier episode by those same 5 minutes and skipped this one. A [[whole]] wasted effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 3886 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] Malefique pretty much has the [[viewer]] from [[start]] to finish with its [[edgy]] atmosphere. Nearly the whole [[movie]] is set in a prison cell revolving around 4 characters of which transvestite Marcus and his little retarded [[boy]] are way out the [[strangest]]. [[Soon]] the inmates [[find]] a diary of a previous inmate behind a brick which deals with his obsession of occult and black magic [[themes]] leading to his escape from the cell. From here on everything deals with [[uncovering]] the secret of the book and its spells to flee from prison. That leads to some [[accidents]] on the way out of the cell into the unknown light.

Honestly I think the story is rather poor and the final twist is nice but to me the ends are pretty loosely tied together. Anyway I was thrilled until the last moment because the atmosphere of the movie is unique with minimal setting and cast. The kills are raw and eerie... its doesn't take gore to chill your spine and the occult themes are also done very well and reminded me of the hell themes in Hellraiser. Malefique has a claustrophobic and cold dirty feel with greenish tint. At times you wonder if the real or the occult world depicted here is stranger... when the [[retarded]] boy [[looses]] his fingers and is lulled to sleep sucking on Marcus breasts it seems normal, so how strange can glowing gates to freedom be? With its budget the movie creates a [[unique]] atmosphere and chills the viewer in a very different way than most of the genre shockers do. I just wish the story had led to a more consistent finale. Several elements like the visitor with the camera, the other inmates obsession with books and the toy doll vaguely pointing to the end don't fit tight in the story. Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for other movies from director Valette, although its a turn-off to see he's is doing a Hollywood remake of "One missed call" which was worn off and useless already in the Miike-version. Malefique pretty much has the [[bystander]] from [[initiate]] to finish with its [[cranky]] atmosphere. Nearly the whole [[cinematography]] is set in a prison cell revolving around 4 characters of which transvestite Marcus and his little retarded [[dude]] are way out the [[weirdest]]. [[Promptly]] the inmates [[found]] a diary of a previous inmate behind a brick which deals with his obsession of occult and black magic [[topics]] leading to his escape from the cell. From here on everything deals with [[revealing]] the secret of the book and its spells to flee from prison. That leads to some [[incident]] on the way out of the cell into the unknown light.

Honestly I think the story is rather poor and the final twist is nice but to me the ends are pretty loosely tied together. Anyway I was thrilled until the last moment because the atmosphere of the movie is unique with minimal setting and cast. The kills are raw and eerie... its doesn't take gore to chill your spine and the occult themes are also done very well and reminded me of the hell themes in Hellraiser. Malefique has a claustrophobic and cold dirty feel with greenish tint. At times you wonder if the real or the occult world depicted here is stranger... when the [[moronic]] boy [[forfeits]] his fingers and is lulled to sleep sucking on Marcus breasts it seems normal, so how strange can glowing gates to freedom be? With its budget the movie creates a [[sole]] atmosphere and chills the viewer in a very different way than most of the genre shockers do. I just wish the story had led to a more consistent finale. Several elements like the visitor with the camera, the other inmates obsession with books and the toy doll vaguely pointing to the end don't fit tight in the story. Anyway, I'll keep my eyes open for other movies from director Valette, although its a turn-off to see he's is doing a Hollywood remake of "One missed call" which was worn off and useless already in the Miike-version. --------------------------------------------- Result 3887 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[think]] this has the potential of being the [[best]] Star [[Trek]] [[series]] [[yet]], I say POTENTIAL.. we all know there is a [[chance]] they will [[drop]] the ball and run out of [[ideas]]... [[BUT]] I HOPE NOT! For those that have not seen it..SEE IT! Without that [[annoying]] "PRIME DIRECTIVE" floating over their heads [[every]] time they [[encounter]] [[races]] it [[could]] be [[cool]].. and Scott Bakula was without a doubt a GREAT CHOICE for Captain, and the Vulcan Babe is hot too, (Check out the decontamination scene)I [[gave]] this a FULL 10... it blows away ALL the other [[series]] openers.. I hope this goes longer than 7 [[years]]... I [[believe]] this has the potential of being the [[optimum]] Star [[Walkabout]] [[serial]] [[even]], I say POTENTIAL.. we all know there is a [[opportunity]] they will [[dips]] the ball and run out of [[brainchild]]... [[NONETHELESS]] I HOPE NOT! For those that have not seen it..SEE IT! Without that [[infuriating]] "PRIME DIRECTIVE" floating over their heads [[any]] time they [[confrontation]] [[careers]] it [[would]] be [[refrigerate]].. and Scott Bakula was without a doubt a GREAT CHOICE for Captain, and the Vulcan Babe is hot too, (Check out the decontamination scene)I [[given]] this a FULL 10... it blows away ALL the other [[serials]] openers.. I hope this goes longer than 7 [[yrs]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 3888 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] In light of bad reviews - or car crashes - I feel possessed to get in gear and make a transmission to give merit where due, and do a service. I'm not sure people have license to say it was so bad, almost automatically.

It's [[rare]] for a movie to have SUSPENSE. This movie maintained [[suspense]] it's whole length, for me, despite any flaws that may be. How [[many]] films can [[say]] that? Not even many big ones. Because of the simple premise you don't know if the people will get out of the life-threatening situation, which lasts the whole movie. Yeh, the suspension was tight, and over some bumps the shocks did their work. It's not just a TV movie, but an all-action movie; there is no point where it stops, or deviates, or becomes talky. It would be hard to make a film like this, always on the road. Only Duel, or Speed, are this that I recall. The best thing in them also was the constant tension.

ACTING is not bad: The Judge is as good as ever, and the others are.

SCRIPT is good. But the jury is out as to whether it sometimes may be - or seem to be - a little awry. What seems unrealistic is not necessarily so. Your first judgments are not always right, but I think the lead actor's was right in being in this movie.

STUNTS are mostly terrific, especially for a TV movie. Their only failing may be the noticeable, and again, apparent, slow speed. But we all know how deceivingly slow Grand Prix cars can look.

I liked that THE BEGINNING said, "inspired by a true story." So you are not going to go how much is true? You know just the basis is. The usual "based on a true story" makes me think it should mostly be true. But maybe that's my error.

HOW TO SAVE THEM: Good idea of the reviewer to suggest a tow truck to lift the back wheels up. Just a few inches would do. A stunt driver could do that at 100 mph. Odd that they didn't call a car expert - or auto electrician or mechanic - to see if there's a way.

I hope this review has put in reverse that this film is a disaster. Or at least neutral. And help it become a runaway success.

Pic quality is a little soft for a DVD.

SPOILER: They would have been winched out after the baby was, but strangely that life-saving idea was cleverly dealt with in some joking conversation to fade it out. I guess we know why. End of movie. Suspension of disbelief went out the top window with the baby. In light of bad reviews - or car crashes - I feel possessed to get in gear and make a transmission to give merit where due, and do a service. I'm not sure people have license to say it was so bad, almost automatically.

It's [[scarce]] for a movie to have SUSPENSE. This movie maintained [[wait]] it's whole length, for me, despite any flaws that may be. How [[multiple]] films can [[says]] that? Not even many big ones. Because of the simple premise you don't know if the people will get out of the life-threatening situation, which lasts the whole movie. Yeh, the suspension was tight, and over some bumps the shocks did their work. It's not just a TV movie, but an all-action movie; there is no point where it stops, or deviates, or becomes talky. It would be hard to make a film like this, always on the road. Only Duel, or Speed, are this that I recall. The best thing in them also was the constant tension.

ACTING is not bad: The Judge is as good as ever, and the others are.

SCRIPT is good. But the jury is out as to whether it sometimes may be - or seem to be - a little awry. What seems unrealistic is not necessarily so. Your first judgments are not always right, but I think the lead actor's was right in being in this movie.

STUNTS are mostly terrific, especially for a TV movie. Their only failing may be the noticeable, and again, apparent, slow speed. But we all know how deceivingly slow Grand Prix cars can look.

I liked that THE BEGINNING said, "inspired by a true story." So you are not going to go how much is true? You know just the basis is. The usual "based on a true story" makes me think it should mostly be true. But maybe that's my error.

HOW TO SAVE THEM: Good idea of the reviewer to suggest a tow truck to lift the back wheels up. Just a few inches would do. A stunt driver could do that at 100 mph. Odd that they didn't call a car expert - or auto electrician or mechanic - to see if there's a way.

I hope this review has put in reverse that this film is a disaster. Or at least neutral. And help it become a runaway success.

Pic quality is a little soft for a DVD.

SPOILER: They would have been winched out after the baby was, but strangely that life-saving idea was cleverly dealt with in some joking conversation to fade it out. I guess we know why. End of movie. Suspension of disbelief went out the top window with the baby. --------------------------------------------- Result 3889 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I must admit that I have been a sucker for Samurai flicks [[since]] I can remember. I used to watch rather indiscriminate, be it "elitist" works like The Seven [[Samurai]] or the bloody comic-book variation like Lone Wolf and Cub. I also liked US-/Japanese "Crossovers" like The Bushido Blade. And of [[course]] everything containing Sonny Chiba and Hiroyuki Sanada. And I've virtually watched every Samurai at least twice. But not Kabuto.

[[In]] 1993 I first watched Kabuto on video, that [[even]] [[Samurai]] films can be boring. In the beginning I was looking forward to Mayeda reaching Europe and the confrontations that [[would]] come from that but by the [[time]] he [[actually]] [[reached]] [[Spain]], I really didn't [[care]] so [[much]] for the movie anymore.

It wouldn't do the film justice to call it "[[bad]]". Technically it's a clean entry into the genre. But there is [[simply]] never quiet enough. Sho Kosugi has [[limited]] [[skills]] as both director and actor and has only a fraction of above mentioned Japanese actors charisma. And speaking of Sho Kosugis son Kane, who [[appears]] in almost all Sho Kosugi films as Shos son: he has inherited little-to-none of his fathers limited acting skills. Adding to the minus-points is the absence of the blood and [[gore]] that until then was a trademark of all Samurai film. This was obviously intended for a younger US- / European audience.

Lets just say that it's a so-so film for the average historic-action-adventure fan but a bore for hardened fans of Samurai cinema. Fans who are into the "Samurai meets …"-genre, should rather go and watch Red Sun (1971), featuring Charles Bronson as cowboy who has to team up with Samurai Toshiro Mifume to retrieve a samurai sword from bad-guy Alan Delon. It pretty much how to do it right and where Kabuto went wrong.

So, even though the film is a mere 100 minutes, it [[seems]] like a much longer film.

The reason I gave this a honourable 4/10 points instead of 3/10: First time I saw this film, I saw it in the German synchronized version. In this version, Kosugi can actually be understood. I must admit that his 'Engrish' is at times funny but gets tiresome after about 30 minutes. I must admit that I have been a sucker for Samurai flicks [[because]] I can remember. I used to watch rather indiscriminate, be it "elitist" works like The Seven [[Swordsman]] or the bloody comic-book variation like Lone Wolf and Cub. I also liked US-/Japanese "Crossovers" like The Bushido Blade. And of [[cours]] everything containing Sonny Chiba and Hiroyuki Sanada. And I've virtually watched every Samurai at least twice. But not Kabuto.

[[Into]] 1993 I first watched Kabuto on video, that [[yet]] [[Swordsman]] films can be boring. In the beginning I was looking forward to Mayeda reaching Europe and the confrontations that [[ought]] come from that but by the [[moment]] he [[genuinely]] [[attained]] [[Spaniards]], I really didn't [[healthcare]] so [[very]] for the movie anymore.

It wouldn't do the film justice to call it "[[inclement]]". Technically it's a clean entry into the genre. But there is [[exclusively]] never quiet enough. Sho Kosugi has [[restricted]] [[jurisdiction]] as both director and actor and has only a fraction of above mentioned Japanese actors charisma. And speaking of Sho Kosugis son Kane, who [[seems]] in almost all Sho Kosugi films as Shos son: he has inherited little-to-none of his fathers limited acting skills. Adding to the minus-points is the absence of the blood and [[gora]] that until then was a trademark of all Samurai film. This was obviously intended for a younger US- / European audience.

Lets just say that it's a so-so film for the average historic-action-adventure fan but a bore for hardened fans of Samurai cinema. Fans who are into the "Samurai meets …"-genre, should rather go and watch Red Sun (1971), featuring Charles Bronson as cowboy who has to team up with Samurai Toshiro Mifume to retrieve a samurai sword from bad-guy Alan Delon. It pretty much how to do it right and where Kabuto went wrong.

So, even though the film is a mere 100 minutes, it [[seem]] like a much longer film.

The reason I gave this a honourable 4/10 points instead of 3/10: First time I saw this film, I saw it in the German synchronized version. In this version, Kosugi can actually be understood. I must admit that his 'Engrish' is at times funny but gets tiresome after about 30 minutes. --------------------------------------------- Result 3890 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (88%)]] [[If]] it were [[possible]] to distill the heart and soul of the sport--no, the pure lifestyle--of surfing to its [[perfect]] form, this documentary has done it. This documentary shows the life isn't just about the waves, but it's more about the people, the pioneers, and the modern day vanguard that are pushing the envelope of big wave further than it's ever been.

Stacy Peralta--a virtual legend from my early '80s skateboarding days as a SoCal teen--has edited reams of [[amazing]] stock and interview footage down to their essence and created what is not just a documentary, but a masterpiece of the genre. When his heart and soul is in the subject matter--and clearly it is here--his genius is fraught with a pure vision that doesn't glamorize, hype, or sentimentalize his subject. He reveres surfers and the surfing/beach lifestyle, but doesn't whitewash it either. There is a gritty reality to the sport as well.

There is so much that could be said about this documentary, about the surfers, the early history of the sport, and the wild big wave surfers it profiles. Greg Noll, the first big wave personality who arguably pioneered the sport; Jeff Carter, an amazing guy who rode virtually alone for 15 years on Northern California's extremely dangerous Maverick's big surf; and, the centerpiece of the documentary, Laird Hamliton, big wave surfing's present day messiah.

There is tremendous heart and warmth among all these guys--and a few girls who show up on camera--and a deep and powerful love for surfing and the ocean that comes through in every word. I found the story of how Hamilton's adopted father met him and how Hamilton as a small 4- or 5-year old boy practically forced him to be his dad especially heartwarming (and, again, stripped of syrupy sentimentality).

If you like surfing--or even if you don't--this is a wonderful documentary that must be watched, if only because you're a student of the form or someone who simply appreciates incredibly well-done works of art. [[Unless]] it were [[feasible]] to distill the heart and soul of the sport--no, the pure lifestyle--of surfing to its [[faultless]] form, this documentary has done it. This documentary shows the life isn't just about the waves, but it's more about the people, the pioneers, and the modern day vanguard that are pushing the envelope of big wave further than it's ever been.

Stacy Peralta--a virtual legend from my early '80s skateboarding days as a SoCal teen--has edited reams of [[staggering]] stock and interview footage down to their essence and created what is not just a documentary, but a masterpiece of the genre. When his heart and soul is in the subject matter--and clearly it is here--his genius is fraught with a pure vision that doesn't glamorize, hype, or sentimentalize his subject. He reveres surfers and the surfing/beach lifestyle, but doesn't whitewash it either. There is a gritty reality to the sport as well.

There is so much that could be said about this documentary, about the surfers, the early history of the sport, and the wild big wave surfers it profiles. Greg Noll, the first big wave personality who arguably pioneered the sport; Jeff Carter, an amazing guy who rode virtually alone for 15 years on Northern California's extremely dangerous Maverick's big surf; and, the centerpiece of the documentary, Laird Hamliton, big wave surfing's present day messiah.

There is tremendous heart and warmth among all these guys--and a few girls who show up on camera--and a deep and powerful love for surfing and the ocean that comes through in every word. I found the story of how Hamilton's adopted father met him and how Hamilton as a small 4- or 5-year old boy practically forced him to be his dad especially heartwarming (and, again, stripped of syrupy sentimentality).

If you like surfing--or even if you don't--this is a wonderful documentary that must be watched, if only because you're a student of the form or someone who simply appreciates incredibly well-done works of art. --------------------------------------------- Result 3891 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Poor]] Paul Mercurio. [[After]] landing the role of Scott Hastings in Strictly Ballroom, the best film in [[history]], he managed to [[find]] himself doing a lot of [[rubbish]]. [[None]] of the characters in this film is very unlikable, or even hateable, but Mercurio's lead is the sort of person you prefer to ignore - completely unloveable and he wears OVERALLS. Big [[mistake]] in costume design, that one. [[Pauper]] Paul Mercurio. [[Upon]] landing the role of Scott Hastings in Strictly Ballroom, the best film in [[historic]], he managed to [[unearthed]] himself doing a lot of [[litter]]. [[Nos]] of the characters in this film is very unlikable, or even hateable, but Mercurio's lead is the sort of person you prefer to ignore - completely unloveable and he wears OVERALLS. Big [[awry]] in costume design, that one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3892 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] ...is the only [[way]] to describe this movie about subjects that should be surefire: scandal, sex, celebrity, power. [[Kirsten]] Dunst grins her way through her role as silent movie star Marion Davies [[like]] she [[thinks]] she's in "Legally Blonde." The guy who plays William Randolph Hearst overacts to the point where you want to reach into the screen and slap him. Eddie Izzard is [[pretty]] good, except that he's playing Charlie Chaplin, and is about, oh, 125 lbs too heavy for the [[part]]? Hard to [[believe]] this hamfisted, uneven wreck was [[directed]] by Peter Bogdanovich, but then again, he hasn't made a watchable movie in, what? 30 years? Sometimes, there's just no coming back. ...is the only [[camino]] to describe this movie about subjects that should be surefire: scandal, sex, celebrity, power. [[Kirsty]] Dunst grins her way through her role as silent movie star Marion Davies [[iike]] she [[think]] she's in "Legally Blonde." The guy who plays William Randolph Hearst overacts to the point where you want to reach into the screen and slap him. Eddie Izzard is [[quite]] good, except that he's playing Charlie Chaplin, and is about, oh, 125 lbs too heavy for the [[party]]? Hard to [[reckon]] this hamfisted, uneven wreck was [[oriented]] by Peter Bogdanovich, but then again, he hasn't made a watchable movie in, what? 30 years? Sometimes, there's just no coming back. --------------------------------------------- Result 3893 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that [[apparently]] was trying to ride the martial arts wave craze. [[Kind]] of like [[Billy]] [[Jack]] I guess. [[However]], whereas Billy [[Jack]] did have one notable martial arts scene there are none in this one unless you [[consider]] some gentlemanly grappling and roughhousing as such. We are [[introduced]] to the [[star]] who is [[described]] as having [[learned]] [[Judo]] in the [[marines]]. I was in the [[marines]] and while they are pretty [[established]] in boxing, I [[really]] don't remember any [[emphasis]] on [[Judo]]. As a [[result]] the antagonist, James Macarthur, makes reference to the [[Judo]] when he [[offers]] an [[excuse]] for why he, a state champion [[wrestler]] was so [[easily]] defeated. Lame. This is one of those [[kino]] that [[visibly]] was trying to ride the martial arts wave craze. [[Sorted]] of like [[Beli]] [[Jacques]] I guess. [[Conversely]], whereas Billy [[Gato]] did have one notable martial arts scene there are none in this one unless you [[scrutinize]] some gentlemanly grappling and roughhousing as such. We are [[brought]] to the [[stars]] who is [[outlining]] as having [[learning]] [[Taekwondo]] in the [[marina]]. I was in the [[navy]] and while they are pretty [[crafted]] in boxing, I [[truthfully]] don't remember any [[concentrates]] on [[Taekwondo]]. As a [[findings]] the antagonist, James Macarthur, makes reference to the [[Taekwondo]] when he [[tender]] an [[apologies]] for why he, a state champion [[boxer]] was so [[comfortably]] defeated. Lame. --------------------------------------------- Result 3894 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I'm a true fan of the [[original]] [[Cracker]] [[series]], and own all of them on DVD. [[Cracker]] had a tendency to be over-the-top on occasion, but Robbie Coltrane and the other cast members, as well as the writers, always [[seemed]] to carry it off [[despite]] themselves. I [[count]] the [[original]] Cracker among the great Brit TV crime series of that time, and there's some stiff competition: Prime Suspect, Inspector Frost, Inspector Morse, Jeremy Brett's Sherlock Homes, and a host of others. Cracker, along with Prime Suspect, was on the top of my list.

Which makes "A New Terror" all the more sad...

Ultimately, this was a very pale [[imitation]] of Cracker's former glory. I forced myself to sit through the whole thing, convinced that it couldn't actually be this bad, and that some spark would eventually ignite. I was wrong, it was bad from beginning to end.

A few criticisms: First, just to get any potential bias up-front right off: I was offended by the anti-American, anti-war screed that droned on and on throughout most of the show. The topper: the murder of two American's innocent of any crime and a British Junkie is, in Fitz's words, "understandable, but not justified". I thought "I waded through two hours of crap just to hear this disgusting bit of drivel?" So I had a negative reaction to the anti-war/American tone brought on by my beliefs... Beyond the politics, I had the distinct sense that this Cracker was merely a prop for the propaganda, and it actually helped to undermine an already terribly weak [[script]].

Second, just how much air-time did Robbie Coltrane get? Fitz was almost a bit player in this one, as if he was an afterthought plugged into some story originally written without any thought of Fitz's role. Coltrane could have carried the show on his own broad and still suitably flabby shoulders, but the writer was apparently thinking of other things, and missed the chance, and by a wide margin.

Third: WHAT AN ABYSMAL SCRIPT! There was some sparkle, and a couple of bits of actual character development (Fitz's son ranting that Fitz couldn't stay at his house if he missed his plane to Australia, the Detective that liked to beat his poor-performers over the backs of their heads, and some of the old sparks between Fitz and his Missus) but not nearly enough to carry the tedious storyline.

Fourth, where the hell was Panhallagan? Now that would have been interesting... It was Manchester after all, and 10 years on she'd be up in the ranks. Another wasted opportunity (or perhaps the actress wasn't interested?)

Well, there's much more (that's bad) to say , but I'll close with a curiosity: at the end of the show (as it aired on BBCA), when the advertisement announced that the "Director's Cut" was available on BBC On-Demand, I thought AH-HA! The Director's cut, which, presumably, one has to pay for, might have all of the goodies I expected to see tonight but never did, like a coherent, interesting storyline. Unfortunately, after convincing myself to sit through the horrible free version of "A New Terror" with the hope of seeing something, anything, worth watching, only to be disappointed, I have no hope left to motivate me to actually pay for a second, potentially longer and more tedious version. Besides, it angered me to think that BBCA sliced and diced, and sacrificed show time to accommodate the endless (every ten minutes or so) stream of commercials, and then turned around and asked me to pay for what probably should have been version aired tonight.

To close, I quote the first paragraph of Variety's review of "A New Terror": it really says it all: "Initial excitement about Robbie Coltrane reprising his role as the BBC's flawed, boozing, womanizing criminal psychologist is snowed under by the heavy-handed political statement writer Jimmy McGovern is determined to deliver within this revival vidpic. Jolting at first in its message -- namely, that Americans are a bunch of whiny namby-pambies who didn't care a whit about terrorism before it came crashing onto our doorstep -- McGovern's chest-clearing rant overwhelms the narrative and mutes the pleasure of seeing Fitz back on the case." I'm a true fan of the [[upfront]] [[Cookie]] [[serials]], and own all of them on DVD. [[Rusk]] had a tendency to be over-the-top on occasion, but Robbie Coltrane and the other cast members, as well as the writers, always [[sounded]] to carry it off [[though]] themselves. I [[comte]] the [[initial]] Cracker among the great Brit TV crime series of that time, and there's some stiff competition: Prime Suspect, Inspector Frost, Inspector Morse, Jeremy Brett's Sherlock Homes, and a host of others. Cracker, along with Prime Suspect, was on the top of my list.

Which makes "A New Terror" all the more sad...

Ultimately, this was a very pale [[mimicry]] of Cracker's former glory. I forced myself to sit through the whole thing, convinced that it couldn't actually be this bad, and that some spark would eventually ignite. I was wrong, it was bad from beginning to end.

A few criticisms: First, just to get any potential bias up-front right off: I was offended by the anti-American, anti-war screed that droned on and on throughout most of the show. The topper: the murder of two American's innocent of any crime and a British Junkie is, in Fitz's words, "understandable, but not justified". I thought "I waded through two hours of crap just to hear this disgusting bit of drivel?" So I had a negative reaction to the anti-war/American tone brought on by my beliefs... Beyond the politics, I had the distinct sense that this Cracker was merely a prop for the propaganda, and it actually helped to undermine an already terribly weak [[hyphen]].

Second, just how much air-time did Robbie Coltrane get? Fitz was almost a bit player in this one, as if he was an afterthought plugged into some story originally written without any thought of Fitz's role. Coltrane could have carried the show on his own broad and still suitably flabby shoulders, but the writer was apparently thinking of other things, and missed the chance, and by a wide margin.

Third: WHAT AN ABYSMAL SCRIPT! There was some sparkle, and a couple of bits of actual character development (Fitz's son ranting that Fitz couldn't stay at his house if he missed his plane to Australia, the Detective that liked to beat his poor-performers over the backs of their heads, and some of the old sparks between Fitz and his Missus) but not nearly enough to carry the tedious storyline.

Fourth, where the hell was Panhallagan? Now that would have been interesting... It was Manchester after all, and 10 years on she'd be up in the ranks. Another wasted opportunity (or perhaps the actress wasn't interested?)

Well, there's much more (that's bad) to say , but I'll close with a curiosity: at the end of the show (as it aired on BBCA), when the advertisement announced that the "Director's Cut" was available on BBC On-Demand, I thought AH-HA! The Director's cut, which, presumably, one has to pay for, might have all of the goodies I expected to see tonight but never did, like a coherent, interesting storyline. Unfortunately, after convincing myself to sit through the horrible free version of "A New Terror" with the hope of seeing something, anything, worth watching, only to be disappointed, I have no hope left to motivate me to actually pay for a second, potentially longer and more tedious version. Besides, it angered me to think that BBCA sliced and diced, and sacrificed show time to accommodate the endless (every ten minutes or so) stream of commercials, and then turned around and asked me to pay for what probably should have been version aired tonight.

To close, I quote the first paragraph of Variety's review of "A New Terror": it really says it all: "Initial excitement about Robbie Coltrane reprising his role as the BBC's flawed, boozing, womanizing criminal psychologist is snowed under by the heavy-handed political statement writer Jimmy McGovern is determined to deliver within this revival vidpic. Jolting at first in its message -- namely, that Americans are a bunch of whiny namby-pambies who didn't care a whit about terrorism before it came crashing onto our doorstep -- McGovern's chest-clearing rant overwhelms the narrative and mutes the pleasure of seeing Fitz back on the case." --------------------------------------------- Result 3895 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] They had an [[opportunity]] to [[make]] one of the best romantic tragedy mafia [[movies]] ever because they had the actors,the budget,and the [[story]] but the great director John Huston was too preoccupied trying to mellow out this missed classic.[[Strenuously]] trying to find black humor as often as possible which [[diluted]] the [[movie]] very much.And also they were so [[uncaring]] with details like sound and detailed action.Maybe it was the age of the director who passed away two years later. They had an [[luck]] to [[deliver]] one of the best romantic tragedy mafia [[cinema]] ever because they had the actors,the budget,and the [[conte]] but the great director John Huston was too preoccupied trying to mellow out this missed classic.[[Fervently]] trying to find black humor as often as possible which [[weaken]] the [[kino]] very much.And also they were so [[apathetic]] with details like sound and detailed action.Maybe it was the age of the director who passed away two years later. --------------------------------------------- Result 3896 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Disappointing]] musical [[version]] of Margaret Landon's "Anna and the King of Siam", itself filmed in 1946 with Irene Dunne and Rex Harrison, has Deborah Kerr cast as a widowed schoolteacher and mother who [[travels]] from England to Siam in 1862 to accept job as tutor to the King's many children--and perhaps [[teach]] the [[Royal]] One a thing or two in the [[process]]! Stagy picture [[begins]] well, but [[quickly]] [[loses]] energy and focus. Yul Brynner, reprising his stage triumph as the [[King]], is a commanding presence, but is used--per the concocted story--as a buffoon. Kerr keeps her cool dignity and fares better, despite having to lip-synch to Marni Nixon's vocals. Perhaps having already played this part to death, Brynner looks like he had nothing leftover for the screen translation except bombast. Second-half, with Anna and the moppets staging a musical version of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" is quite ridiculous, and the Rodgers and Hammerstein songs are mostly lumbering. Brynner won a Best Actor Oscar, but it is feisty Kerr who keeps this bauble above water. Overlong, heavy, and 'old-fashioned' in the worst sense of the term. ** from **** [[Disappointed]] musical [[stepping]] of Margaret Landon's "Anna and the King of Siam", itself filmed in 1946 with Irene Dunne and Rex Harrison, has Deborah Kerr cast as a widowed schoolteacher and mother who [[traveling]] from England to Siam in 1862 to accept job as tutor to the King's many children--and perhaps [[lectured]] the [[Royale]] One a thing or two in the [[processes]]! Stagy picture [[launches]] well, but [[urgently]] [[looses]] energy and focus. Yul Brynner, reprising his stage triumph as the [[Emperor]], is a commanding presence, but is used--per the concocted story--as a buffoon. Kerr keeps her cool dignity and fares better, despite having to lip-synch to Marni Nixon's vocals. Perhaps having already played this part to death, Brynner looks like he had nothing leftover for the screen translation except bombast. Second-half, with Anna and the moppets staging a musical version of "Uncle Tom's Cabin" is quite ridiculous, and the Rodgers and Hammerstein songs are mostly lumbering. Brynner won a Best Actor Oscar, but it is feisty Kerr who keeps this bauble above water. Overlong, heavy, and 'old-fashioned' in the worst sense of the term. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 3897 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] [[Michael]] Keaton is "Johnny Dangerously" in this take-off on [[gangster]] movies [[done]] in 1984. [[Maureen]] Stapleton plays his sickly mother, Griffin [[Dunne]] is his DA brother, Peter Boyle is his boss, and Marilu Henner is his girlfriend. Other stars [[include]] Danny [[DeVito]] and Joe Piscopo. Keaton plays a pet store owner in the 1930s who catches a kid stealing a puppy and then tells him, in flashback, how he came to own the pet store. He turned to thievery at a young age to get his mother a pancreas operation ($49.95, special this week) and began working for a mob boss (Boyle). Johnny uses the last name "Dangerously" in the mobster world.

There are some hilarious scenes in this film, and Stapleton is a riot as Johnny's foul-mouthed mother who needs ever organ in her body replaced. Peter Boyle as Johnny's boss gives a very funny performance, as does Griffin Dunne, a straight arrow DA who won't "play ball" with crooked Burr (Danny De Vito). As Johnny's nemesis, Joe Piscopo is great. Richard Dimitri is a standout as Moronie, who tortures the English language - but you have to hear him do it rather than read about it. What makes it funny is that he does it all with an angry face.

The movie gets a little tired toward the end, but it's well worth seeing, and Keaton is [[terrific]] as good boy/bad [[boy]] Johnny. For some [[reason]], this [[film]] was underrated when it was released, and like Keaton's other gem, "Night Shift," you don't hear much about it today. With some performances and scenes that are real gems, you'll find "Johnny Dangerously" [[immensely]] enjoyable. [[Micheal]] Keaton is "Johnny Dangerously" in this take-off on [[thug]] movies [[played]] in 1984. [[Morin]] Stapleton plays his sickly mother, Griffin [[Dunn]] is his DA brother, Peter Boyle is his boss, and Marilu Henner is his girlfriend. Other stars [[containing]] Danny [[danny]] and Joe Piscopo. Keaton plays a pet store owner in the 1930s who catches a kid stealing a puppy and then tells him, in flashback, how he came to own the pet store. He turned to thievery at a young age to get his mother a pancreas operation ($49.95, special this week) and began working for a mob boss (Boyle). Johnny uses the last name "Dangerously" in the mobster world.

There are some hilarious scenes in this film, and Stapleton is a riot as Johnny's foul-mouthed mother who needs ever organ in her body replaced. Peter Boyle as Johnny's boss gives a very funny performance, as does Griffin Dunne, a straight arrow DA who won't "play ball" with crooked Burr (Danny De Vito). As Johnny's nemesis, Joe Piscopo is great. Richard Dimitri is a standout as Moronie, who tortures the English language - but you have to hear him do it rather than read about it. What makes it funny is that he does it all with an angry face.

The movie gets a little tired toward the end, but it's well worth seeing, and Keaton is [[gorgeous]] as good boy/bad [[dude]] Johnny. For some [[cause]], this [[movies]] was underrated when it was released, and like Keaton's other gem, "Night Shift," you don't hear much about it today. With some performances and scenes that are real gems, you'll find "Johnny Dangerously" [[unimaginably]] enjoyable. --------------------------------------------- Result 3898 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This movie has a very [[simple]] yet clever premise - an unemployed man trying to steal from a convenience store, and the store clerk catches him in the act... the thief runs away with the store-clerk right after him. All the while, the store clerk is in trouble with a low-rank Yakuza chinpira (gangster). Along the chase for the thief, they catch the eye of the Yakuza who's been looking for the convenience store clerk. The [[story]] then moves into high gear in the form of a Tom & Jerry (cat & mouse), but is added with the dog chasing after the cat. The entire 2nd act of D.A.N.G.A.N. Runner (can be translate to English as "PINBALL RUNNERS") is about the chase, and the chase goes on & on to the point that by the end of the 2nd act, the bum forgets why he is running away, and the Yakuza don't remember which of the 2 guys he is chasing, nor does he remember why they're running away from him.

Similar to SABU's later film POSTMAN BLUES, the bulk of the film is simply all chase and action, with plenty of physical comedy and dark humor injected to keep the audience engaged. What falls short is the ending, to which the chase stops when the three men run out of steam, and into one of the most chaotic Mexican stand-offs you'll see on film that looks almost as if Sabu was paying homage to Tony Scott's TRUE ROMANCE (written by Quentin Tarantino). This movie has a very [[mere]] yet clever premise - an unemployed man trying to steal from a convenience store, and the store clerk catches him in the act... the thief runs away with the store-clerk right after him. All the while, the store clerk is in trouble with a low-rank Yakuza chinpira (gangster). Along the chase for the thief, they catch the eye of the Yakuza who's been looking for the convenience store clerk. The [[conte]] then moves into high gear in the form of a Tom & Jerry (cat & mouse), but is added with the dog chasing after the cat. The entire 2nd act of D.A.N.G.A.N. Runner (can be translate to English as "PINBALL RUNNERS") is about the chase, and the chase goes on & on to the point that by the end of the 2nd act, the bum forgets why he is running away, and the Yakuza don't remember which of the 2 guys he is chasing, nor does he remember why they're running away from him.

Similar to SABU's later film POSTMAN BLUES, the bulk of the film is simply all chase and action, with plenty of physical comedy and dark humor injected to keep the audience engaged. What falls short is the ending, to which the chase stops when the three men run out of steam, and into one of the most chaotic Mexican stand-offs you'll see on film that looks almost as if Sabu was paying homage to Tony Scott's TRUE ROMANCE (written by Quentin Tarantino). --------------------------------------------- Result 3899 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (54%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Lindsay Anderson was very much a European film maker , whereas the likes of David Lean , Ridley Scott and Alan Parker make spectacular movies involving visuel scope Anderson`s movie are more about social commentary and subtext , so much so that the message often ends up taking over the entire film whose primary function should be to entertain the audience

What you think of IF comes down to what you think of British film makers . I`m very much of the view that cinema should be a universial medium ( The best Brit movie makes are those who try to emulate Hollywood in my opinion ) , if you want to send a message try pony express , and I find the movie dated , pretentious and too set in the 1960s . 1968 was the summer of love and the year of student rebellion in France . You can just imagine every single French leftist worshipping this movie especially the climax . French new wave film makers will also admire the abstract surrealism of some scenes but a mainstream international will dislike it , and many will dislike it intensely --------------------------------------------- Result 3900 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is one of the most calming, relaxing, and beautifully made animation films I've ever seen. With beautiful music throughout the movie, the sounds and music can make you feel like you're in the movie! This movie is not just great for kids, but adults too. It teaches you lessons, such as never forget who you are, you can do whatever you stick your mind to, and to brave and daring. This movie can make you cry at times too, which is always a nice touch in movies. This movie is funny, sad, cute, and keeps you on the edge of your seat! Some movies really give you a fuzzy feeling after you see them, and the movie "Spirit" is definitely one of them! With my vote of 9/10 stars for animation, music, and a wonderful idea for a movie, it gave me a whole lot of Spirit! --------------------------------------------- Result 3901 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (91%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Allow]] yourself to be transported to a different, old school kind of storytelling. Scoop is classic Woody Allen.

Allen's latest muse, Scarlett [[Johansson]] (who also appeared in last year's Match Point, also by Allen), is surprisingly [[able]] to tone down her sultry sex kitten appeal and transform into a normal looking student-type with the aid of nerdish glasses and outfits but still fails to make the audience believe how Hugh Jackman's lordly character can be so smitten by her, given the royal's background (don't worry, no spoilers here). There are no grand transformations for Johansson's character here, as she consistently plays the same character throughout despite the script saying otherwise. You even forgive her character's apparent lack of logic, continuing an affair with a suspected serial killer, simply because he is His Royal Hotness Jackman, who is refreshing to see sans the Wolverine duds.

If anything, consistency is what the 70-year old Allen is all about. He continues to tell his stories on celluloid in the same way he always has; as if he's never been exposed to modern film-making, which is probably what makes his quiet, simple films appealing. They never seem to aim for a specific market; as if Allen makes movies to his taste alone, whether the public likes it or not. [[Authorizing]] yourself to be transported to a different, old school kind of storytelling. Scoop is classic Woody Allen.

Allen's latest muse, Scarlett [[Johanson]] (who also appeared in last year's Match Point, also by Allen), is surprisingly [[capable]] to tone down her sultry sex kitten appeal and transform into a normal looking student-type with the aid of nerdish glasses and outfits but still fails to make the audience believe how Hugh Jackman's lordly character can be so smitten by her, given the royal's background (don't worry, no spoilers here). There are no grand transformations for Johansson's character here, as she consistently plays the same character throughout despite the script saying otherwise. You even forgive her character's apparent lack of logic, continuing an affair with a suspected serial killer, simply because he is His Royal Hotness Jackman, who is refreshing to see sans the Wolverine duds.

If anything, consistency is what the 70-year old Allen is all about. He continues to tell his stories on celluloid in the same way he always has; as if he's never been exposed to modern film-making, which is probably what makes his quiet, simple films appealing. They never seem to aim for a specific market; as if Allen makes movies to his taste alone, whether the public likes it or not. --------------------------------------------- Result 3902 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This [[movie]] was one of the greatest movies ever made,,,, it had everything to [[make]] a movie great. Incredible acting, awesome special effects...... oh wait I must be [[thinking]] of a [[good]] [[movie]]. Well this wasn't one of them, it just [[plain]] [[sucked]].

What I want to know is, what kind of bone head would think that this movie was a 10. When I casted my vote there were 206 out there, god knows what goes on in their head. Now as for any other vote, a 8 or 9 was even too high, but a 10??? Come on, what made this movie sooooo good to give it a 10? I know these are the same 206 that thought that Jean Claude Van Damme is a [[great]] dramatic actor. This [[kino]] was one of the greatest movies ever made,,,, it had everything to [[deliver]] a movie great. Incredible acting, awesome special effects...... oh wait I must be [[thought]] of a [[alright]] [[kino]]. Well this wasn't one of them, it just [[plains]] [[aspired]].

What I want to know is, what kind of bone head would think that this movie was a 10. When I casted my vote there were 206 out there, god knows what goes on in their head. Now as for any other vote, a 8 or 9 was even too high, but a 10??? Come on, what made this movie sooooo good to give it a 10? I know these are the same 206 that thought that Jean Claude Van Damme is a [[resplendent]] dramatic actor. --------------------------------------------- Result 3903 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (70%)]] The [[bad]] out takes from "Reign of Fire" strung [[together]], without any real [[story]].

Dean Cain tries to be a real [[actor]], and fails again.

In the end the [[dragons]] quit in disgust.

BARF! The [[amiss]] out takes from "Reign of Fire" strung [[jointly]], without any real [[history]].

Dean Cain tries to be a real [[protagonist]], and fails again.

In the end the [[dragoons]] quit in disgust.

BARF! --------------------------------------------- Result 3904 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] I think the movie was pretty [[good]], will add it to my "clasic collection" after all this time. I believe I saw other posters who reminded some of the pickier people that it is still just a movie. Maybe some of the more esoteric points defy "logic", but a great many religious matters accepted "on faith" fail to pass the smell test. If you're going to accept whatever faith you subscribe to you can certainly accept a movie. Is it just me or has anyone else noticed the Aja-Yee Dagger is the same possessed knife Lamonte Cranston had so much trouble gaining control of in "The Shadow". No mention of it in the trivia section for either movie here (IMDB), but I would bet a dollar to a donut it's the same prop. I think the movie was pretty [[alright]], will add it to my "clasic collection" after all this time. I believe I saw other posters who reminded some of the pickier people that it is still just a movie. Maybe some of the more esoteric points defy "logic", but a great many religious matters accepted "on faith" fail to pass the smell test. If you're going to accept whatever faith you subscribe to you can certainly accept a movie. Is it just me or has anyone else noticed the Aja-Yee Dagger is the same possessed knife Lamonte Cranston had so much trouble gaining control of in "The Shadow". No mention of it in the trivia section for either movie here (IMDB), but I would bet a dollar to a donut it's the same prop. --------------------------------------------- Result 3905 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Time]] for a rant, [[eh]]: I [[thought]] Spirit was a [[great]] movie to watch. [[However]], there were a few [[things]] that stop me from [[rating]] it [[higher]] than a 6 or 7 (I'm being a little bit generous with the 7).

Point #1: Matt Damon aggravates me. I was thinking, 'what a dicky voice they got for the main character,' when I first heard him narrate - and then I realized it is Matt Damon. The man bugs me so very bad - his performance in "The Departed" was terrible and ruined the movie for me (before the movie got a chance to ruin itself, but that's another story for some other time), as it almost did "Spirit". I was able to get past this fact because of how little narration there actually was... thankfully.

Point #2: Brian Adams sucks... The whole score was terrible... The songs were unoriginal, generic, and poorly executed; not once did I find the music to fit; and the lyrics were terrible. Every time one of the lame songs came on, I was turned off. I almost thought I'd start hearing some patriotic propaganda slipped into the super-American freedom style lyrics (I couldn't help but be reminded of those terrible patriotic songs that played on the radio constantly after 9/11). In light of the native American aspects of the film, they should have gone with fitting music using right instruments, not petty radio-hit, teen-bop, 14-year-old-girl crap. I thought I was back in junior high school. I can't believe no better could have been done--I refuse to. Had it not have been for this, I'd rank the film up more with Disney, which knows a thing or two about originality (ok, don't bother saying what I know some of you are probably thinking ;). Too bad, it's a shame they couldn't have hired better musicians.

I liked the art and animation, except for some things here and there... like sometimes the angles appear too sharp on the face and the lines too thick or dark on the body (thick/dark lines mainly near the end). There were often times when I thought they _tried too hard_ on the emotion and facial expressions and failed at drawing any real emotion. But there were also times when the emotion ran thick. Anyhow, many scenes were lazy and the layers were apparent.

OK, I'm falling asleep here so I'll sum it up before I start making less sense...

Nice try on an epic film... it turned out mediocre though. Matt Damon, you suck! [[Period]] for a rant, [[er]]: I [[brainchild]] Spirit was a [[whopping]] movie to watch. [[Instead]], there were a few [[aspects]] that stop me from [[punctuation]] it [[greatest]] than a 6 or 7 (I'm being a little bit generous with the 7).

Point #1: Matt Damon aggravates me. I was thinking, 'what a dicky voice they got for the main character,' when I first heard him narrate - and then I realized it is Matt Damon. The man bugs me so very bad - his performance in "The Departed" was terrible and ruined the movie for me (before the movie got a chance to ruin itself, but that's another story for some other time), as it almost did "Spirit". I was able to get past this fact because of how little narration there actually was... thankfully.

Point #2: Brian Adams sucks... The whole score was terrible... The songs were unoriginal, generic, and poorly executed; not once did I find the music to fit; and the lyrics were terrible. Every time one of the lame songs came on, I was turned off. I almost thought I'd start hearing some patriotic propaganda slipped into the super-American freedom style lyrics (I couldn't help but be reminded of those terrible patriotic songs that played on the radio constantly after 9/11). In light of the native American aspects of the film, they should have gone with fitting music using right instruments, not petty radio-hit, teen-bop, 14-year-old-girl crap. I thought I was back in junior high school. I can't believe no better could have been done--I refuse to. Had it not have been for this, I'd rank the film up more with Disney, which knows a thing or two about originality (ok, don't bother saying what I know some of you are probably thinking ;). Too bad, it's a shame they couldn't have hired better musicians.

I liked the art and animation, except for some things here and there... like sometimes the angles appear too sharp on the face and the lines too thick or dark on the body (thick/dark lines mainly near the end). There were often times when I thought they _tried too hard_ on the emotion and facial expressions and failed at drawing any real emotion. But there were also times when the emotion ran thick. Anyhow, many scenes were lazy and the layers were apparent.

OK, I'm falling asleep here so I'll sum it up before I start making less sense...

Nice try on an epic film... it turned out mediocre though. Matt Damon, you suck! --------------------------------------------- Result 3906 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] When i first saw this film i thought it was going to be a good sasquatch film. Usually when you have these types of movies there's generally ONE sasquatch, but in this one there is like what? 7 or 10 of them?. Acting was good, plot was OK, i liked the scenes where the sasquatch is killing the first few victims, very good camera work. I was expecting it to be a gory film but it was very [[little]]. This movie was way better than Sasquatch. The SCI-FI channel really needs to make more sasquatch films, i mean i really liked Sasquatch Mountain, Abominibal was not good, the one i'm reviewing is OK, but the movie Sasquatch was not, but I'm not reviewing that so let me get back on track. This movie is good for a rainy Saterday afternoon, but for any other occasions, no. When i first saw this film i thought it was going to be a good sasquatch film. Usually when you have these types of movies there's generally ONE sasquatch, but in this one there is like what? 7 or 10 of them?. Acting was good, plot was OK, i liked the scenes where the sasquatch is killing the first few victims, very good camera work. I was expecting it to be a gory film but it was very [[kiddo]]. This movie was way better than Sasquatch. The SCI-FI channel really needs to make more sasquatch films, i mean i really liked Sasquatch Mountain, Abominibal was not good, the one i'm reviewing is OK, but the movie Sasquatch was not, but I'm not reviewing that so let me get back on track. This movie is good for a rainy Saterday afternoon, but for any other occasions, no. --------------------------------------------- Result 3907 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Yes, about the only thing this [[film]] is memorable for is that it starred a youngish Tom Hanks who only a few short [[years]] later [[would]] be a relevant [[star]] in Hollywood. Here though is not a [[movie]] that is [[going]] to [[showcase]] his [[talents]] [[much]] at all and the only other [[thing]] that might be considered [[somewhat]] [[entertaining]] about this [[flick]] is the scene where he thinks he sees a [[monsters]] and runs a guy through. [[Yes]], this movie is about the evils of playing a [[game]] that makes a [[group]] of people use their imaginations and try to come up with interesting scenarios. [[Basically]], an after school type special about the [[evils]] of the game Dungeons and Dragons cleverly retitled here as Mazes and Monsters. Apparently, the makers of this film thought that nerds should not have fun of any sort unless they were going to go out and do [[underage]] drinking, drugs, having lots of [[unprotected]] sex and harass other weaker children like all the popular kids were doing. No, these bad people were playing a game that actually required one to use there brain, heaven's no! Not that, if they have a brain they actually may be able to think for themselves and not be brainwashed by certain groups out there. Yes, I think this movie is utterly stupid and a [[waste]] of [[time]]. [[Granted]], it [[could]] be a [[movie]] against addiction, but there are a lot fewer people who died taking Dungeons and Dragons to far in its entire existence than than say what [[drunk]] driving [[claims]] in like a [[month]]. Yes, about the only thing this [[movies]] is memorable for is that it starred a youngish Tom Hanks who only a few short [[ages]] later [[could]] be a relevant [[stars]] in Hollywood. Here though is not a [[movies]] that is [[go]] to [[illustrate]] his [[talent]] [[very]] at all and the only other [[stuff]] that might be considered [[slightly]] [[amuse]] about this [[movie]] is the scene where he thinks he sees a [[monster]] and runs a guy through. [[Yep]], this movie is about the evils of playing a [[gaming]] that makes a [[panels]] of people use their imaginations and try to come up with interesting scenarios. [[Principally]], an after school type special about the [[woes]] of the game Dungeons and Dragons cleverly retitled here as Mazes and Monsters. Apparently, the makers of this film thought that nerds should not have fun of any sort unless they were going to go out and do [[minor]] drinking, drugs, having lots of [[undefended]] sex and harass other weaker children like all the popular kids were doing. No, these bad people were playing a game that actually required one to use there brain, heaven's no! Not that, if they have a brain they actually may be able to think for themselves and not be brainwashed by certain groups out there. Yes, I think this movie is utterly stupid and a [[squandering]] of [[times]]. [[Attributed]], it [[did]] be a [[film]] against addiction, but there are a lot fewer people who died taking Dungeons and Dragons to far in its entire existence than than say what [[drunkard]] driving [[claim]] in like a [[months]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3908 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] [[Boring]], [[long]], [[pretentious]], [[repetitive]], self-involved – this move felt [[like]] a [[bad]] [[date]]. Worse, the [[tedious]] art-school [[direction]] -- with a heavy-handed [[use]] of the whirling shot that [[gets]] so overdone it almost [[made]] me [[throw]] up –- is [[constantly]] [[screaming]] to be [[noticed]]. [[Add]] the thinnest of plots and [[virtually]] no [[dialogue]], and the [[film]] [[begins]] to feel [[like]] a four [[hour]] epic about 30 minutes in. It [[gets]] [[worse]]: [[instead]] of [[dialogue]] there are poorly [[written]] voice-overs AND [[quotes]] and [[songs]] that [[comment]] all too [[obviously]] on the [[characters]]. [[Really]] [[loud]] [[opera]] [[music]] too. [[Blame]] it all on the director.

The [[actors]] are all [[quite]] good. The lead [[actor]] Miguel [[Angel]] Hoppe is [[particularly]] [[suited]] for [[film]] [[stardom]]. He and the other [[actors]] have some [[tender]] erotic moments. Even these [[start]] to [[get]] [[boring]] after 5 minutes however, and one wonders if the director is auditioning for a Bel Ami porn [[job]]. The [[stunning]] [[college]] [[campus]] [[architecture]] as a [[location]] in [[Mexico]] [[City]] is [[inspiring]]. How come [[universities]] in the [[US]] are so bland (SFSU, UC, etc.)? But [[wait]] for the DVD on this [[film]]. You'll [[want]] to [[use]] the [[fast]] scan [[button]] – a lot. [[Dreary]], [[longer]], [[cocky]], [[repetitious]], self-involved – this move felt [[iike]] a [[naughty]] [[dates]]. Worse, the [[monotonous]] art-school [[directions]] -- with a heavy-handed [[utilize]] of the whirling shot that [[get]] so overdone it almost [[introduced]] me [[toss]] up –- is [[always]] [[shout]] to be [[observed]]. [[Added]] the thinnest of plots and [[almost]] no [[dialog]], and the [[flick]] [[launches]] to feel [[iike]] a four [[hora]] epic about 30 minutes in. It [[receives]] [[pire]]: [[however]] of [[discussions]] there are poorly [[writes]] voice-overs AND [[citation]] and [[melodies]] that [[remark]] all too [[assuredly]] on the [[personages]]. [[Truly]] [[vocal]] [[teatro]] [[musica]] too. [[Culpa]] it all on the director.

The [[protagonists]] are all [[altogether]] good. The lead [[protagonist]] Miguel [[Angels]] Hoppe is [[notably]] [[adapted]] for [[films]] [[glory]]. He and the other [[protagonists]] have some [[tenders]] erotic moments. Even these [[startup]] to [[got]] [[dull]] after 5 minutes however, and one wonders if the director is auditioning for a Bel Ami porn [[jobs]]. The [[terrific]] [[academia]] [[college]] [[structure]] as a [[positioning]] in [[Mexican]] [[Ville]] is [[exhilarating]]. How come [[academies]] in the [[USA]] are so bland (SFSU, UC, etc.)? But [[await]] for the DVD on this [[films]]. You'll [[wanted]] to [[utilised]] the [[quick]] scan [[pimple]] – a lot. --------------------------------------------- Result 3909 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] After reading the book, which had a lot of meaning for me, the movie didn't give me any of the feeling which the book conveyed. This makes me wonder if Kaufman even liked this book for he successfully made it into something else.Either that or he is [[simply]] [[bad]]. Most importantly where is the lightness?! From the very first scene, music drownes out most of the dialogue and feeling, and this continues right through the movie. I think the makers thought that by having upbeat music playing right through the movie, this would make the story feel light- however they have completely [[failed]] here. Instead the music manages to give everything that 'movie feel', in a way dramatising events so that we linger on them, so that everything actually feels heavy.

Another example of the how this adaptation fails is by embellishing the story line making it more dramatic. In the movie we see Franz passing Tomas on the street, who is on his way to see Sabina. The introduction of this chance meeting/passing, which im sure didn't happen in the book, gives Tomas' story more significance than it does make it light.

There are many other examples where the continuity of the story has been changed, imo for the worst, however this might have been done because the book simply doesn't convert well into a movie, such is Kundera's style. This makes we wonder if all the generous reviewers on this site were writing with their book AND movie experience in mind rather than writing about just the film. A film which is as long as it is uncompelling. For those who haven't read the book yet I recommend just reading that. For those who have, I have to say you will just be wasting your time and probably end up here writing similar stay-clear warnings. After reading the book, which had a lot of meaning for me, the movie didn't give me any of the feeling which the book conveyed. This makes me wonder if Kaufman even liked this book for he successfully made it into something else.Either that or he is [[straightforward]] [[mala]]. Most importantly where is the lightness?! From the very first scene, music drownes out most of the dialogue and feeling, and this continues right through the movie. I think the makers thought that by having upbeat music playing right through the movie, this would make the story feel light- however they have completely [[faulted]] here. Instead the music manages to give everything that 'movie feel', in a way dramatising events so that we linger on them, so that everything actually feels heavy.

Another example of the how this adaptation fails is by embellishing the story line making it more dramatic. In the movie we see Franz passing Tomas on the street, who is on his way to see Sabina. The introduction of this chance meeting/passing, which im sure didn't happen in the book, gives Tomas' story more significance than it does make it light.

There are many other examples where the continuity of the story has been changed, imo for the worst, however this might have been done because the book simply doesn't convert well into a movie, such is Kundera's style. This makes we wonder if all the generous reviewers on this site were writing with their book AND movie experience in mind rather than writing about just the film. A film which is as long as it is uncompelling. For those who haven't read the book yet I recommend just reading that. For those who have, I have to say you will just be wasting your time and probably end up here writing similar stay-clear warnings. --------------------------------------------- Result 3910 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Historical drama and coming of age story involving free people of color in pre civil war New Orleans. [[Starts]] off [[slow]] but [[picks]] up [[steam]] once you have learned about the main characters and the [[real]] action can begin. This is not just a [[story]] about the exploitation of [[black]] women, because these were free people. They may not have had all the rights of whites but they [[certainly]] had more control over their destinies than their slave ancestors. The young men and [[women]] in this story [[must]] each make their own choice about how to [[live]] their [[lives]], whether to [[give]] into the [[depravity]] of the system or live with [[optimism]] and [[contribute]] to their community. I [[enjoyed]] all of the [[characters]] but my favorites were [[Christophe]], [[Anna]] [[Bella]], and Marcel. Historical drama and coming of age story involving free people of color in pre civil war New Orleans. [[Initiated]] off [[sluggish]] but [[opting]] up [[steamboat]] once you have learned about the main characters and the [[actual]] action can begin. This is not just a [[conte]] about the exploitation of [[negro]] women, because these were free people. They may not have had all the rights of whites but they [[surely]] had more control over their destinies than their slave ancestors. The young men and [[female]] in this story [[ought]] each make their own choice about how to [[iive]] their [[iife]], whether to [[confer]] into the [[debauchery]] of the system or live with [[optimist]] and [[assist]] to their community. I [[liked]] all of the [[hallmarks]] but my favorites were [[Christopher]], [[Anne]] [[Belle]], and Marcel. --------------------------------------------- Result 3911 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Anyone who saw the original 1970 movie knows how an excellent cast, script, and director can put together a comedy masterpiece. By the same token, it's easy to see how the opposite of that can create another insipid Hollywood bore-a-thon! This movie was pathetic! Had it not been for John Cleese (a comic genius), I would have walked out about 15 minutes into this dreadful waste of celluloid.

Neil Simon wouldn't write another screenplay for this version (he said that he couldn't improve on the first), and I'm surprised that after this cinematic fiasco he wouldn't sue for defamation of humor!

Jack Lemmon and Sandy Dennis did such a wonderful job in the original, what were the producers thinking about when they cast this one? How could the director and editor look at these scenes and think any of them were funny? I don't know, but one thing I do know---it's no surprise why foreign and independent movies are becoming more and more popular....... --------------------------------------------- Result 3912 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I was not [[expecting]] the powerful filmmaking experience of "Girlfight". It's an Indie; low-budget, no big-name actors, freshman director. I had [[heard]] it was good, but not this good.

Placed in a contemporary, ethnic, working-class Brooklyn, Karyn Kusama has done an [[extraordinary]] job of capturing the day-do-day struggles of urban Latinos. Diana, the protagonist, is seething with anger and lashes out at her high school peers, getting in trouble with the school and her friends. She is being raised by her single father, who appears to love her and her brother, but applies a strict, sex-based double standard on his children. The father's double standard is illustrated by the fact that Tiny, the brother, is taking boxing lessons at the local gym, but Diana is denied similar pursuits. On an errand to the gym to meet Tiny, Diana is captivated by boxing. Tiny doesn't like boxing, so he and Diana trade places; he gets the money from Dad then gives it to Diana to take the lessons in his place.

This is actually a feel-good movie, as Diana grows and learns about herself through boxing, meets a guy, and addresses some very serious issues head-on. There's no giggly, 'everything that can go right does go right' resolution a la "Bend It Like Beckham". The reality and attendant personal issues are too big for pat resolutions, but in my opinion, "Girlfight" is a better and more satisfying film for it. I was not [[hoping]] the powerful filmmaking experience of "Girlfight". It's an Indie; low-budget, no big-name actors, freshman director. I had [[listened]] it was good, but not this good.

Placed in a contemporary, ethnic, working-class Brooklyn, Karyn Kusama has done an [[unbelievable]] job of capturing the day-do-day struggles of urban Latinos. Diana, the protagonist, is seething with anger and lashes out at her high school peers, getting in trouble with the school and her friends. She is being raised by her single father, who appears to love her and her brother, but applies a strict, sex-based double standard on his children. The father's double standard is illustrated by the fact that Tiny, the brother, is taking boxing lessons at the local gym, but Diana is denied similar pursuits. On an errand to the gym to meet Tiny, Diana is captivated by boxing. Tiny doesn't like boxing, so he and Diana trade places; he gets the money from Dad then gives it to Diana to take the lessons in his place.

This is actually a feel-good movie, as Diana grows and learns about herself through boxing, meets a guy, and addresses some very serious issues head-on. There's no giggly, 'everything that can go right does go right' resolution a la "Bend It Like Beckham". The reality and attendant personal issues are too big for pat resolutions, but in my opinion, "Girlfight" is a better and more satisfying film for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3913 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] You, [[know]], I can take the [[blood]] and the [[sex]], but that thong bikini shot [[pretty]] [[much]] did me in. [[Someone]] get that girl some pasta before it's too late!

And you know, it's just not a good idea for a schlock [[movie]] to [[start]] off by mentioning the much better movie it's ripping off.

I gave this one a 2, just because it's [[marginally]] better than Tobe Hooper's [[CROCODILE]]. You, [[savoir]], I can take the [[transfusion]] and the [[sexuality]], but that thong bikini shot [[quite]] [[very]] did me in. [[Person]] get that girl some pasta before it's too late!

And you know, it's just not a good idea for a schlock [[films]] to [[starter]] off by mentioning the much better movie it's ripping off.

I gave this one a 2, just because it's [[slightly]] better than Tobe Hooper's [[ALLIGATOR]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3914 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] What a crappy movie! The worst of the worst! This movie is as entertaining as a dead slug. No-talent-what-so-ever-actors, stupid plot. Who wrote this script?! Was there ever a script for this goofy movie or did the director just accidentally press the record-button on his camera and then decided to make the film up as they went along? Is this meant to be a kids movie or a comedy or what? My friends younger brother is in the 6.th grade and him and his classmates just did an amateur-movie for their school-project which outdid this geeky movie.. This is by far the worst film I have seen in my life! There is just no excuse for this flick! --------------------------------------------- Result 3915 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Alright, I have to [[admit]] that I have never [[seen]] "[[Rhoda]]" and only one or two [[episodes]] of "The [[Mary]] [[Tyler]] Moore [[Show]]." Even [[though]] I don't know [[anything]] about this duo of comedic [[talent]], I still [[liked]] this movie a lot.

Mary goes back to work. [[Rose]] [[tries]] her luck at being a comedian. Rhoda struggles with a photography [[career]]. And Meredith...what exactly does she do again? These three [[stories]] that we follow over two hours are [[amusing]] and entertaining in their own [[way]]. When the two [[long]] [[time]] [[friends]] [[reunite]], it only makes the [[film]] better.

I was [[surprised]] about how [[good]] the writing was. The [[little]] jokes [[thrown]] in by Mary and Rhoda were funny. The script itself was very well put [[together]].

I had [[seen]] Moore and [[Harper]] in other [[movies]] over the past few [[years]] and thought that they were very good. But I had no [[idea]] that they worked this well as a team. [[While]] both actresses do their share to [[fulfill]] the title of this movie, they never seem to [[let]] me down. ([[During]] the [[run]] of this [[movie]].) Joie Lenz and [[Marisa]] Ryan [[play]] their [[roles]] okay but nothing great. The [[rest]] of the cast like Jonah, Cecile and....everybody else also [[works]] well [[together]].

Being that this is a reunion, you would expect for a fan of either show to enjoy this. From a non-fan I still enjoyed this little get-together. Good story lines for each character and the two main characters is what makes this film very good. (The newer version of the MTM theme song doesn't hurt either.) Alright, I have to [[confess]] that I have never [[noticed]] "[[Rhonda]]" and only one or two [[spells]] of "The [[Mari]] [[Ty]] Moore [[Spectacle]]." Even [[if]] I don't know [[something]] about this duo of comedic [[talents]], I still [[wished]] this movie a lot.

Mary goes back to work. [[Soared]] [[attempted]] her luck at being a comedian. Rhoda struggles with a photography [[carrera]]. And Meredith...what exactly does she do again? These three [[narratives]] that we follow over two hours are [[entertaining]] and entertaining in their own [[camino]]. When the two [[protracted]] [[period]] [[mates]] [[reuniting]], it only makes the [[cinematography]] better.

I was [[dumbfounded]] about how [[alright]] the writing was. The [[scant]] jokes [[tossed]] in by Mary and Rhoda were funny. The script itself was very well put [[jointly]].

I had [[noticed]] Moore and [[Harbor]] in other [[cinematography]] over the past few [[olds]] and thought that they were very good. But I had no [[thinks]] that they worked this well as a team. [[Though]] both actresses do their share to [[accomplish]] the title of this movie, they never seem to [[allowing]] me down. ([[Across]] the [[execute]] of this [[cinematography]].) Joie Lenz and [[Marissa]] Ryan [[gaming]] their [[functions]] okay but nothing great. The [[resting]] of the cast like Jonah, Cecile and....everybody else also [[cooperate]] well [[jointly]].

Being that this is a reunion, you would expect for a fan of either show to enjoy this. From a non-fan I still enjoyed this little get-together. Good story lines for each character and the two main characters is what makes this film very good. (The newer version of the MTM theme song doesn't hurt either.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3916 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] If you fast forward through the horrible singing, you will find a classic fairy tale underneath. Christopher Walken is very humorous and [[surprisingly]] good in the role. His trademark style of acting works well for the sly Puss in Boots. The other [[actors]] are well for their parts. I did not find any of the acting terribly fake or awkward. The king in particular appears a real dunce though, and I wonder if he is supposed to be. I can not remember the original tale. The special effects are typical of the eighties, but at least they are not overly fake like some of the computer generated fare that we see today. Overall, I recommend this movie for children and adults who are a child at heart. If you fast forward through the horrible singing, you will find a classic fairy tale underneath. Christopher Walken is very humorous and [[unimaginably]] good in the role. His trademark style of acting works well for the sly Puss in Boots. The other [[actresses]] are well for their parts. I did not find any of the acting terribly fake or awkward. The king in particular appears a real dunce though, and I wonder if he is supposed to be. I can not remember the original tale. The special effects are typical of the eighties, but at least they are not overly fake like some of the computer generated fare that we see today. Overall, I recommend this movie for children and adults who are a child at heart. --------------------------------------------- Result 3917 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie is BAD! It's [[basically]] an overdone [[copy]] of [[Michael]] Jackson's [[Thriller]] video, only [[worse]]! The special [[effects]] consist of lots of [[glow]] in the [[dark]] paint, freaky slapstick fastmoving camera shots and lots of [[growling]]. I think the [[dog]] was the best actor in the [[whole]] [[movie]]. This movie is BAD! It's [[fundamentally]] an overdone [[copies]] of [[Michel]] Jackson's [[Thrillers]] video, only [[pire]]! The special [[influence]] consist of lots of [[shine]] in the [[somber]] paint, freaky slapstick fastmoving camera shots and lots of [[rumbling]]. I think the [[doggy]] was the best actor in the [[ensemble]] [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3918 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Worst mistake of my life.

I picked this movie up at [[Target]] for $5 because I figured, "Hey, it's Sandler I can [[get]] some cheap [[laughs]]". I was wrong, [[completely]] wrong. Mid-way through the film all three of my [[friends]] were [[asleep]] and I was [[still]] suffering. [[Worst]] plot, Worst [[script]], [[Worst]] [[movie]] I have ever [[seen]]. I [[wanted]] to [[hit]] my head up against a wall for an [[hour]], then I'd [[stop]], and you know why? Because it [[felt]] damn good. [[Upon]] bashing my head in i [[stuck]] that damn [[movie]] in the microwave and [[watched]] it [[burn]]....and that [[felt]] better than anything [[else]] I've ever [[done]]. It took [[American]] [[Psycho]], Army of [[Darkness]], and [[Kill]] [[Bill]] just to get over that [[crap]]. I [[HATE]] YOU SANDLER [[FOR]] [[ACTUALLY]] GOING THROUGH [[WITH]] THIS AND [[RUINING]] A [[WHOLE]] DAY [[OF]] MY [[LIFE]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Worst mistake of my life.

I picked this movie up at [[Purposes]] for $5 because I figured, "Hey, it's Sandler I can [[got]] some cheap [[laugh]]". I was wrong, [[entirely]] wrong. Mid-way through the film all three of my [[friendships]] were [[behemoth]] and I was [[yet]] suffering. [[Hardest]] plot, Worst [[hyphen]], [[Hardest]] [[films]] I have ever [[saw]]. I [[want]] to [[befallen]] my head up against a wall for an [[hours]], then I'd [[cease]], and you know why? Because it [[believed]] damn good. [[After]] bashing my head in i [[sandwiched]] that damn [[movies]] in the microwave and [[seen]] it [[combust]]....and that [[believed]] better than anything [[other]] I've ever [[completed]]. It took [[America]] [[Loony]], Army of [[Dark]], and [[Assassination]] [[Invoices]] just to get over that [[bullshit]]. I [[HATRED]] YOU SANDLER [[PER]] [[GENUINELY]] GOING THROUGH [[AVEC]] THIS AND [[DEMOLITION]] A [[TOGETHER]] DAY [[DE]] MY [[VIDA]]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3919 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[premise]] of Cabin Fever starts like it [[MIGHT]] have something to offer. A group of college [[teens]] after finals (in the [[fall]]?) goes to a resort cabin in the woods where one by one they are attacked by an [[unseen]] flesh eating virus.

Unfortunately, the first paragraph is where any remote elements of [[film]] quality stop. Cabin Fever is little more than [[college]] [[kids]] [[looking]] for [[sex]], booze, [[talking]] non-stop about [[nothing]], and [[seeing]] how [[many]] F-bombs they can get into 1:40 [[minutes]] or however long this [[mess]] is.

The [[kids]] [[act]] and react [[stupidly]] to everything around them. One of them for [[instance]] [[discovers]] that the skin virus has infected her legs, so what does she do? She [[keeps]] shaving her legs failing to take [[proper]] [[medical]] attention for her [[wounds]]. The scene is [[little]] more than a gross out. [[In]] another scene, Rider Strong from "[[Boy]] Meets [[World]]" [[gets]] [[bitten]] on the hand by some [[kid]] who only [[says]] "Pancakes" and [[likes]] to do karate kicks on those who [[sit]] next to him. [[If]] you can [[figure]] out the [[reason]] for why the "Pancakes" [[kid]] was included, I'd [[love]] to know. Anyway, Rider [[pets]] a wild dog and goes off to wash his bitten hand in a most [[likely]] contaminated [[creek]]. Another [[kid]] likes to [[drop]] F-bombs in reacting to everything [[around]] him and shoot squirrels. Why? Your [[guess]] is as good as mine!

Rider [[Strong]] is the ONLY [[kid]] with any [[recognition]] in this [[movie]]. He [[tries]] to [[calm]] people down in-between the [[yelling]] and [[screaming]] and F*** Y**! [[bombs]] that people are [[throwing]] [[around]]. When the [[kids]] aren't [[yelling]], they are having or [[talking]] about [[sex]] or talking [[nonsense]] to the other [[adult]] [[characters]] who are EVEN MORE (if that is possible)idiotic than the [[kids]]! The [[idiot]] [[cop]] with an [[IQ]] of 60 at best may be one of the [[WORST]] acting [[jobs]] I have ever [[seen]] in a [[movie]]. You [[talk]] about people not [[playing]] with a full [[deck]], this dork doesn't [[even]] know how to [[find]] the cards! [[LOL]]! I was like, "Will you [[PLEASE]] [[shut]] up already?!" He makes the [[kid]] [[actors]] [[look]] like geniuses! The only [[part]] that I [[sort]] of [[liked]] was Rider's [[scary]] [[story]] ([[although]] [[gory]]) about the deranged [[bowling]] [[alley]] [[guy]]. [[In]] [[interviews]], Rider [[said]] that he had a great deal of respect for [[director]] Eli Roth. But the problem is that Mr. Roth appears to be going for little more than shock and gore. There are far too many bad things about this movie for Mr. Roth to get any credit. I wish I could agree with Rider and find something [[likable]] about this [[movie]]. Maybe the fall scenery in the beginning? Actually, Rider Strong JUST saves this [[movie]] from being a 1! Hopefully, he was compensated for this junk! The [[hypothesis]] of Cabin Fever starts like it [[CONCEIVABLY]] have something to offer. A group of college [[adolescence]] after finals (in the [[autumn]]?) goes to a resort cabin in the woods where one by one they are attacked by an [[unnoticed]] flesh eating virus.

Unfortunately, the first paragraph is where any remote elements of [[kino]] quality stop. Cabin Fever is little more than [[academies]] [[child]] [[quest]] for [[sexuality]], booze, [[debates]] non-stop about [[none]], and [[witnessing]] how [[various]] F-bombs they can get into 1:40 [[mins]] or however long this [[chaos]] is.

The [[juvenile]] [[law]] and react [[foolishly]] to everything around them. One of them for [[example]] [[discovering]] that the skin virus has infected her legs, so what does she do? She [[retains]] shaving her legs failing to take [[suitable]] [[medicinal]] attention for her [[injury]]. The scene is [[petit]] more than a gross out. [[Throughout]] another scene, Rider Strong from "[[Boys]] Meets [[International]]" [[receives]] [[stung]] on the hand by some [[petit]] who only [[tells]] "Pancakes" and [[fond]] to do karate kicks on those who [[seated]] next to him. [[Though]] you can [[silhouette]] out the [[motif]] for why the "Pancakes" [[petit]] was included, I'd [[loved]] to know. Anyway, Rider [[pet]] a wild dog and goes off to wash his bitten hand in a most [[apt]] contaminated [[creeks]]. Another [[petit]] likes to [[autumn]] F-bombs in reacting to everything [[throughout]] him and shoot squirrels. Why? Your [[presume]] is as good as mine!

Rider [[Forceful]] is the ONLY [[children]] with any [[recognise]] in this [[cinematography]]. He [[strives]] to [[composure]] people down in-between the [[cries]] and [[cries]] and F*** Y**! [[bombings]] that people are [[hurling]] [[throughout]]. When the [[youths]] aren't [[shouting]], they are having or [[talk]] about [[sexuality]] or talking [[absurd]] to the other [[adulthood]] [[features]] who are EVEN MORE (if that is possible)idiotic than the [[juvenile]]! The [[jerk]] [[police]] with an [[QI]] of 60 at best may be one of the [[GRAVEST]] acting [[workplace]] I have ever [[saw]] in a [[film]]. You [[talks]] about people not [[replay]] with a full [[decks]], this dork doesn't [[yet]] know how to [[finds]] the cards! [[JK]]! I was like, "Will you [[INVITE]] [[closure]] up already?!" He makes the [[kids]] [[players]] [[peek]] like geniuses! The only [[parties]] that I [[sorted]] of [[wished]] was Rider's [[fearful]] [[fairytales]] ([[despite]] [[gori]]) about the deranged [[snooker]] [[driveway]] [[boy]]. [[During]] [[interview]], Rider [[stated]] that he had a great deal of respect for [[headmaster]] Eli Roth. But the problem is that Mr. Roth appears to be going for little more than shock and gore. There are far too many bad things about this movie for Mr. Roth to get any credit. I wish I could agree with Rider and find something [[congenial]] about this [[cinema]]. Maybe the fall scenery in the beginning? Actually, Rider Strong JUST saves this [[cinema]] from being a 1! Hopefully, he was compensated for this junk! --------------------------------------------- Result 3920 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Like]] A Streetcar Named [[Desire]] ([[also]] directed by Gadg both on stage and screen) [[Panic]] In The Streets [[depicts]] a New Orleans in which its major claim to fame - the birthplace of Jazz - doesn't even rate a mention. It was [[Richard]] Widmark's seventh [[film]] and arguably went a long way to establishing him as the fine actor he really was [[rather]] than [[merely]] a psychotic killer. Gadg himself appears in an uncredited [[small]] role as a morgue attendant but the [[film]] is [[rich]] in talent [[beginning]] with Jack Palance (still being billed as Walter Jack Palance)as the local Mr 'Big' followed side-kick Zero Mostel, Barbara Bel Geddes, Emile Meyer, Tommy Rettig plus the rock-solid ever reliable Paul Douglas as the cop who comes round to doc Widmark's point of view. It's a very [[rewarding]] movie more so for being little seen. Catch it if you can. [[Iike]] A Streetcar Named [[Willingness]] ([[further]] directed by Gadg both on stage and screen) [[Scare]] In The Streets [[portrays]] a New Orleans in which its major claim to fame - the birthplace of Jazz - doesn't even rate a mention. It was [[Richie]] Widmark's seventh [[flick]] and arguably went a long way to establishing him as the fine actor he really was [[comparatively]] than [[purely]] a psychotic killer. Gadg himself appears in an uncredited [[tiny]] role as a morgue attendant but the [[cinematography]] is [[wealthy]] in talent [[launching]] with Jack Palance (still being billed as Walter Jack Palance)as the local Mr 'Big' followed side-kick Zero Mostel, Barbara Bel Geddes, Emile Meyer, Tommy Rettig plus the rock-solid ever reliable Paul Douglas as the cop who comes round to doc Widmark's point of view. It's a very [[reward]] movie more so for being little seen. Catch it if you can. --------------------------------------------- Result 3921 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[All]] the [[ingredients]] of low-brow b-movie cult cinema. Topless (and [[bottomless]]) [[girls]], kung-fu kicking [[chefs]], slave traders, evil [[Germans]] with mustaches, Cameron Mitchell and sword-wielding zombies.

And, of [[course]] the [[breasts]] of Camille Keaton, who's best [[known]] display occurs in the feminist exploitation classic I Spit on Your Grave. We [[also]] must mention the hooters of jewel Shepard, who play a hooker in the recent film The Cooler.

Lots of blood and action with knives and swords and martial arts among topless dancers in a bar, in a whorehouse, and on a boat load of martial artists heading to some zombie island where bad martial artists go to die or something like that.

Tops and bottoms come off easily and frequently as travelers are well lubricated thanks to the boat owner.

Then disaster strikes as their boat is destroyed and they land on the zombie island where mas monks sacrifice young girls to the dead martial artists to bring them back to life.

Just when you thought it had everything, there are piranhas in the water. Yum Yum A big fat German for dinner.

Just the thing for your next zombie fest. [[Every]] the [[elements]] of low-brow b-movie cult cinema. Topless (and [[endless]]) [[dame]], kung-fu kicking [[heads]], slave traders, evil [[Germany]] with mustaches, Cameron Mitchell and sword-wielding zombies.

And, of [[cours]] the [[tits]] of Camille Keaton, who's best [[renowned]] display occurs in the feminist exploitation classic I Spit on Your Grave. We [[apart]] must mention the hooters of jewel Shepard, who play a hooker in the recent film The Cooler.

Lots of blood and action with knives and swords and martial arts among topless dancers in a bar, in a whorehouse, and on a boat load of martial artists heading to some zombie island where bad martial artists go to die or something like that.

Tops and bottoms come off easily and frequently as travelers are well lubricated thanks to the boat owner.

Then disaster strikes as their boat is destroyed and they land on the zombie island where mas monks sacrifice young girls to the dead martial artists to bring them back to life.

Just when you thought it had everything, there are piranhas in the water. Yum Yum A big fat German for dinner.

Just the thing for your next zombie fest. --------------------------------------------- Result 3922 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] This was a really [[cool]] movie. It just goes to prove that you don't need silly litle things like continuity and scripts to make a movie. It traverses continents in seconds, people get shot and nothing happens to them, swords set on fire, samuari fight on sinking galleons, David Essex is the epitome of slimey villainy and John Rhys Davies is just the dude. I enjoyed this movie but I like s**t movies, this is the perfect example of a very s**t movie that just KICKS ASS. If you like Battlefield Earth you'll love this film, its swashbuckling, its fast, its silly, its samuaraitastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It also looks as if it was made in 1972 This was a really [[cooling]] movie. It just goes to prove that you don't need silly litle things like continuity and scripts to make a movie. It traverses continents in seconds, people get shot and nothing happens to them, swords set on fire, samuari fight on sinking galleons, David Essex is the epitome of slimey villainy and John Rhys Davies is just the dude. I enjoyed this movie but I like s**t movies, this is the perfect example of a very s**t movie that just KICKS ASS. If you like Battlefield Earth you'll love this film, its swashbuckling, its fast, its silly, its samuaraitastic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It also looks as if it was made in 1972 --------------------------------------------- Result 3923 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] What an incredible [[fall]] for Sean Ellis.

You gather a bunch of your friends at home, all hyped about the follow up work of Sean Ellis. You have an vague idea of the plot, no spoilers that could kill the fun, very high expectations.

It is late at night, perfect atmosphere for a movie of this type.

15minutes passes and you start telling yourself it is bound to pick up, at 25mins you start wondering if you should just go to sleep and save this for another time when you can fully appreciate the expected not existent subtle touches. Over the half hour mark you realize half of your your hyped up audience is already asleep and call it a day.

A few days later when you exhaust all other material to watch you go back to this, in the middle of the day this time, hoping your mood will keep you awake this time. 10 minutes later you find yourself fastforwarding the unbelievably and needlessly long intermediate transitions and images. Any other stuff I would have given up already but there is cashback and its legacy. But that legacy can only carry you so long, this is a new level of boring movie-making, imagine a short story extended to a novel with just descriptions, this is what it is.

Decent cast is wasted, there is no cinematography that leaves you in awe like cashback either. There are films that annoy you, there are films that lack certain aspects, or just cheesy, unfortunately this is just a waste of time.

Final words, stay away. What an incredible [[autumn]] for Sean Ellis.

You gather a bunch of your friends at home, all hyped about the follow up work of Sean Ellis. You have an vague idea of the plot, no spoilers that could kill the fun, very high expectations.

It is late at night, perfect atmosphere for a movie of this type.

15minutes passes and you start telling yourself it is bound to pick up, at 25mins you start wondering if you should just go to sleep and save this for another time when you can fully appreciate the expected not existent subtle touches. Over the half hour mark you realize half of your your hyped up audience is already asleep and call it a day.

A few days later when you exhaust all other material to watch you go back to this, in the middle of the day this time, hoping your mood will keep you awake this time. 10 minutes later you find yourself fastforwarding the unbelievably and needlessly long intermediate transitions and images. Any other stuff I would have given up already but there is cashback and its legacy. But that legacy can only carry you so long, this is a new level of boring movie-making, imagine a short story extended to a novel with just descriptions, this is what it is.

Decent cast is wasted, there is no cinematography that leaves you in awe like cashback either. There are films that annoy you, there are films that lack certain aspects, or just cheesy, unfortunately this is just a waste of time.

Final words, stay away. --------------------------------------------- Result 3924 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The Three Stooges has always been some of the [[many]] actors that I have [[loved]]. I [[love]] just about [[every]] one of the [[shorts]] that they have made. I [[love]] all six of the Stooges (Curly, Shemp, Moe, Larry, Joe, and Curly Joe)! [[All]] of the [[shorts]] are [[hilarious]] and also star [[many]] other [[great]] actors and actresses which a lot of them was in [[many]] of the [[shorts]]! [[In]] My [[opinion]] The [[Three]] Stooges is some of the [[greatest]] [[actors]] ever and is the all [[time]] funniest [[comedy]] team!

One of My [[favorite]] Stooges [[shorts]] with Shemp is none other than Husbands [[Beware]]! [[All]] [[appearing]] in this short are the [[beautiful]] Christine McIntyre, Dee [[Green]], Doris Houck, Alyn Lockwood, Johnny Kascier, [[Nancy]] Saunders, [[Lu]] [[Leonard]], Maxine [[Gates]], and [[Emil]] Sitka. [[Green]] and McIntyre [[provide]] [[great]] performances here! There are so [[many]] [[funny]] parts here. This is a very [[hilarious]] short. There is another [[similar]] Three Stooges [[short]] like this one called Brideless [[Groom]] and I [[recommend]] both! The Three Stooges has always been some of the [[various]] actors that I have [[adored]]. I [[adored]] just about [[any]] one of the [[boxers]] that they have made. I [[likes]] all six of the Stooges (Curly, Shemp, Moe, Larry, Joe, and Curly Joe)! [[Entire]] of the [[boxers]] are [[funny]] and also star [[numerous]] other [[awesome]] actors and actresses which a lot of them was in [[numerous]] of the [[slacks]]! [[During]] My [[vista]] The [[Tre]] Stooges is some of the [[biggest]] [[players]] ever and is the all [[period]] funniest [[farce]] team!

One of My [[preferable]] Stooges [[knickers]] with Shemp is none other than Husbands [[Attention]]! [[Every]] [[appears]] in this short are the [[glamorous]] Christine McIntyre, Dee [[Archer]], Doris Houck, Alyn Lockwood, Johnny Kascier, [[Nance]] Saunders, [[Loh]] [[Leonardo]], Maxine [[Floodgates]], and [[Emile]] Sitka. [[Archer]] and McIntyre [[supplying]] [[fabulous]] performances here! There are so [[various]] [[hilarious]] parts here. This is a very [[fun]] short. There is another [[equivalent]] Three Stooges [[concise]] like this one called Brideless [[Bridegroom]] and I [[recommending]] both! --------------------------------------------- Result 3925 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Roman Polanski is considered as one of the most important directors of our time, as the mind behind classics such as "Rosemary's Baby" and "Chinatown". Probably what makes Polanski's cinema a very interesting one is the fact that while he is capable of creating commercially attractive films such as the afore mentioned masterpieces, he is [[also]] fond of making low-key movies that are of a more personal nature. "Le Locataire", or "The Tenant", is one of those [[movies]]; a horror/suspense story about paranoia and obsession that is [[among]] his [[best]] [[works]] and [[probably]] [[among]] the [[best]] [[horror]] [[movies]] ever [[done]].

Polanski himself plays Telkovsky, a [[young]] [[man]] [[looking]] for an apartment in France. When he [[finally]] [[finds]] one, he [[discovers]] that it is [[empty]] because the [[previous]] [[tenant]], [[Simone]] Choule, [[attempted]] to [[kill]] herself by [[jumping]] out of the window. [[After]] [[Simone]] dies of the [[injuries]], Trelkovsky [[begins]] to become obsessed with her, to the point of believing that her [[death]] was [[caused]] by the [[rest]] of the [[tenants]] in the [[building]].

[[While]] [[sharing]] the same claustrophobic [[feeling]] of his other "apartment-themed" [[films]] ("[[Repulsion]] & "Rosemary's [[Baby]]"); this [[film]] [[focuses]] on the [[bizarre]] conspiracy that [[may]] or may not be [[entirely]] in Trelkovsky's [[head]], the [[catastrophic]] [[effects]] the paranoia has on his [[mind]], and the [[bizarre]] [[obsession]] he has with the [[previous]] tenant.

Trelkovsky's descend into [[darkness]] is portrayed [[perfectly]] by Polanski. [[While]] at [[first]] his performance [[seems]] [[odd]] and wooden, slowly one [[finds]] out that Polanski acts that [[way]] because Trelkovsky is [[meant]] to be acted that [[way]]; as a [[simpleton]] with [[almost]] no [[life]], who traps himself in this [[maddening]] sub-world that [[happens]] to be [[inhabited]] by a [[collection]] of [[bizarre]] people. The [[supporting]] [[actors]] really [[gave]] [[life]] to the people in the [[building]] creating memorable [[characters]] that are very important for the [[success]] of the [[film]].

[[Also]], the [[beautiful]] [[cinematography]] Polanski employs in the [[film]] helps to increase the [[feeling]] of [[isolation]], and gives life to the [[beautiful]] building that [[serves]] as cage for Trelkovsky. The haunting [[images]] Polanski [[uses]] to [[convey]] the feeling of [[confusion]] and [[madness]] are of a [[supernatural]] beauty that makes them both frightening and attractive.

If a flaw is to be found in the film, is that it is definitely a bit slow at first. this may sound like a turn-off but in fact the slow [[pace]] of the beginning works perfectly as it mimics Trelkovsky's own boring life and how gradually he enters a [[different]] realm. Also, the convoluted storyline is definitely not an easy one to understand due to the many complex layers it has. However, more than a flaw, it is a joy to face a thought-provoking plot like this one.

While "The Tenant" may not be for everyone, those interested in psychological horror and surreal story lines will be pleased by the experience. "Le Locataire" is really one of Roman Polanksi's masterpieces. 10/10 Roman Polanski is considered as one of the most important directors of our time, as the mind behind classics such as "Rosemary's Baby" and "Chinatown". Probably what makes Polanski's cinema a very interesting one is the fact that while he is capable of creating commercially attractive films such as the afore mentioned masterpieces, he is [[similarly]] fond of making low-key movies that are of a more personal nature. "Le Locataire", or "The Tenant", is one of those [[movie]]; a horror/suspense story about paranoia and obsession that is [[between]] his [[optimum]] [[working]] and [[presumably]] [[in]] the [[optimum]] [[abomination]] [[movie]] ever [[performed]].

Polanski himself plays Telkovsky, a [[youthful]] [[men]] [[researching]] for an apartment in France. When he [[lastly]] [[discoveries]] one, he [[discover]] that it is [[emptiness]] because the [[past]] [[tenants]], [[Simeon]] Choule, [[tries]] to [[murder]] herself by [[leaps]] out of the window. [[Upon]] [[Simeon]] dies of the [[trauma]], Trelkovsky [[starting]] to become obsessed with her, to the point of believing that her [[mortality]] was [[aroused]] by the [[resting]] of the [[occupiers]] in the [[constructing]].

[[Despite]] [[exchanging]] the same claustrophobic [[impression]] of his other "apartment-themed" [[movie]] ("[[Revulsion]] & "Rosemary's [[Babies]]"); this [[flick]] [[focusing]] on the [[strange]] conspiracy that [[maggio]] or may not be [[abundantly]] in Trelkovsky's [[chief]], the [[disastrous]] [[effect]] the paranoia has on his [[intellect]], and the [[inquisitive]] [[mania]] he has with the [[earlier]] tenant.

Trelkovsky's descend into [[obscurity]] is portrayed [[altogether]] by Polanski. [[Despite]] at [[fiirst]] his performance [[looks]] [[unusual]] and wooden, slowly one [[found]] out that Polanski acts that [[pathway]] because Trelkovsky is [[signified]] to be acted that [[manner]]; as a [[dullard]] with [[hardly]] no [[living]], who traps himself in this [[infuriating]] sub-world that [[arises]] to be [[peopled]] by a [[collecting]] of [[inquisitive]] people. The [[helping]] [[actresses]] really [[given]] [[lifetime]] to the people in the [[constructing]] creating memorable [[traits]] that are very important for the [[accomplishments]] of the [[kino]].

[[Moreover]], the [[sumptuous]] [[films]] Polanski employs in the [[movie]] helps to increase the [[impression]] of [[insulate]], and gives life to the [[excellent]] building that [[contributes]] as cage for Trelkovsky. The haunting [[photographs]] Polanski [[used]] to [[transmit]] the feeling of [[disarray]] and [[dementia]] are of a [[uncanny]] beauty that makes them both frightening and attractive.

If a flaw is to be found in the film, is that it is definitely a bit slow at first. this may sound like a turn-off but in fact the slow [[cadence]] of the beginning works perfectly as it mimics Trelkovsky's own boring life and how gradually he enters a [[assorted]] realm. Also, the convoluted storyline is definitely not an easy one to understand due to the many complex layers it has. However, more than a flaw, it is a joy to face a thought-provoking plot like this one.

While "The Tenant" may not be for everyone, those interested in psychological horror and surreal story lines will be pleased by the experience. "Le Locataire" is really one of Roman Polanksi's masterpieces. 10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3926 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It's a waist to indulge such great actors in such a [[weak]] and [[boring]] [[movie]]. Besides all the unanswered questions posted in the other comments, what's so difficult about [[capturing]] the robbers? [[Just]] [[eliminate]] the bank [[workers]], see who was at the bank-from all the cameras' footage angles-prior to the robbers entry and you have those [[extra]] 4 remaining robbers among the hostages. Where is the suspense every body is [[talking]] about? It was so [[obvious]] the moment the hostages were asked to [[change]] into this [[identical]] uniform that they were all going to walk out the front door... seen it many times. At [[least]] Mr. Spike Lee could have seasoned the movie with some [[good]] music score and artistic shooting. The [[Movie]] is not worth it. Pronto! It's a waist to indulge such great actors in such a [[vulnerable]] and [[bore]] [[films]]. Besides all the unanswered questions posted in the other comments, what's so difficult about [[seizes]] the robbers? [[Righteous]] [[eradicated]] the bank [[laborers]], see who was at the bank-from all the cameras' footage angles-prior to the robbers entry and you have those [[supplemental]] 4 remaining robbers among the hostages. Where is the suspense every body is [[chat]] about? It was so [[observable]] the moment the hostages were asked to [[changing]] into this [[same]] uniform that they were all going to walk out the front door... seen it many times. At [[fewest]] Mr. Spike Lee could have seasoned the movie with some [[alright]] music score and artistic shooting. The [[Cinematographic]] is not worth it. Pronto! --------------------------------------------- Result 3927 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I went in to see D-War on a whim and with very low [[expectations]]. The [[movie]] [[failed]] to meet them.

I don't mind stories that stretch credulity - remember Reign of Fire? - but I do [[expect]] them to be internally consistent. This film leapt from howler to howler without pausing for [[breath]], all interspersed with special [[effects]] that lagged far behind the likes of LOTR or even Godzilla.

A shape-shifting mystic [[warrior]] from Korea, curiously metamorphosed into a Caucasian antique [[dealer]] and popping up like deus ex machina to get the hapless protagonists out of their latest mess. A special agent from the FBI who seems to be completely boned up on ancient Korean folklore because of the Fed's excellent "paranormal division" - which has gone unremarked up to this point. Lovers kissing on deserted beaches where one exclaims "I never meant for this to happen." A reincarnated pair of long dead Koreans who "died like star-crossed lovers." Mystic pendants, faceless hordes of robotic [[soldiers]] (that owe a lot to Peter Jackson's orcs) and a serpent who wastes so much time roaring that every time its chosen prey is within reach something comes along to distract it.

The dialogue is appalling, the acting [[wooden]] and the effect of the whole was, to be honest, [[tedious]]. However, for me the crowning moment was at the end, after the finale, when the music for the closing credits was - Arirang! This is rather like Akira Kurosawa closing "Ran" with a karaoke rendition of My Way - and let me be clear that I am in no way comparing director Shim to Kurosawa.

In short, a self indulgent, lackluster collection of clichés and narrative non-sequituurs which may appeal to the sense of the melodramatic so prevalent in Koran popular culture but should not be worth the price of the ticket to any [[serious]] movie goer - or [[even]] a not so-serious movie goer. I [[would]] [[suggest]] that this bypass the movie theaters altogether and go straight to video, but I'm not [[even]] sure that it's worth that much. I went in to see D-War on a whim and with very low [[forecast]]. The [[cinematographic]] [[faulted]] to meet them.

I don't mind stories that stretch credulity - remember Reign of Fire? - but I do [[awaited]] them to be internally consistent. This film leapt from howler to howler without pausing for [[breathes]], all interspersed with special [[impact]] that lagged far behind the likes of LOTR or even Godzilla.

A shape-shifting mystic [[combatant]] from Korea, curiously metamorphosed into a Caucasian antique [[marchand]] and popping up like deus ex machina to get the hapless protagonists out of their latest mess. A special agent from the FBI who seems to be completely boned up on ancient Korean folklore because of the Fed's excellent "paranormal division" - which has gone unremarked up to this point. Lovers kissing on deserted beaches where one exclaims "I never meant for this to happen." A reincarnated pair of long dead Koreans who "died like star-crossed lovers." Mystic pendants, faceless hordes of robotic [[solider]] (that owe a lot to Peter Jackson's orcs) and a serpent who wastes so much time roaring that every time its chosen prey is within reach something comes along to distract it.

The dialogue is appalling, the acting [[wood]] and the effect of the whole was, to be honest, [[monotonous]]. However, for me the crowning moment was at the end, after the finale, when the music for the closing credits was - Arirang! This is rather like Akira Kurosawa closing "Ran" with a karaoke rendition of My Way - and let me be clear that I am in no way comparing director Shim to Kurosawa.

In short, a self indulgent, lackluster collection of clichés and narrative non-sequituurs which may appeal to the sense of the melodramatic so prevalent in Koran popular culture but should not be worth the price of the ticket to any [[grievous]] movie goer - or [[yet]] a not so-serious movie goer. I [[could]] [[insinuate]] that this bypass the movie theaters altogether and go straight to video, but I'm not [[yet]] sure that it's worth that much. --------------------------------------------- Result 3928 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] A highly [[atmospheric]] cheapie, showing [[great]] ingenuity in the use of props, sets and effects (fog, lighting, focus) to create an eerie and moody texture. The story is farfetched, the acting is merely functional, but it shows how imaginative effects can develop an entire visual narrative. This movie is recommended for its mood and texture, not for its story. A highly [[barometric]] cheapie, showing [[whopping]] ingenuity in the use of props, sets and effects (fog, lighting, focus) to create an eerie and moody texture. The story is farfetched, the acting is merely functional, but it shows how imaginative effects can develop an entire visual narrative. This movie is recommended for its mood and texture, not for its story. --------------------------------------------- Result 3929 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The first [[collaboration]] between Schoedsack & [[Cooper]] is a [[compelling]] [[documentary]] on the [[migration]] of the Bakhtiari tribe of Persia. [[Twice]] a year, more than 50,000 people and half a million [[animals]] [[cross]] rivers and [[mountains]] to [[get]] to pasture. You'll feel like a pampered [[weakling]] after watching these people herd their [[animals]] through ice cold water and walk [[barefoot]] through the [[snow]] to [[cross]] the mountains while trying to get their [[animals]] to walk along steep and narrow mountain [[paths]]. The first [[cooperatives]] between Schoedsack & [[Coopers]] is a [[conclusive]] [[literature]] on the [[immigration]] of the Bakhtiari tribe of Persia. [[Doble]] a year, more than 50,000 people and half a million [[wildlife]] [[croix]] rivers and [[montes]] to [[got]] to pasture. You'll feel like a pampered [[wuss]] after watching these people herd their [[wildlife]] through ice cold water and walk [[nudes]] through the [[snowfall]] to [[rist]] the mountains while trying to get their [[wildlife]] to walk along steep and narrow mountain [[routing]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3930 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] I saw "Shiner" on DVD. While I was watching it, I thought, "This is a really [[bad]] porn flick without the porn." I also thought, "Whoever wrote this has some real issues." Then I watched the director/writer Carlson explain his process as a special feature. [[Yeah]], it was real special.

The emphasis of the film is placed on two alcoholic losers who hit each other to get off. They are marginally attractive. There is frontal and full nudity. These factors probably account for the film being seen at all.

The most upsetting element of the film is the gay bashing and the subsequent further gay bashing of the same victim who tries ineptly to exact revenge from his assailants, the two drunken losers. Not only is the subject handled absurdly and badly from a technical point of view, but the acting is horrendously bad.

Then there's the boxer-stalker theme. This is really insane, not just absurd. This hunky boxer is somehow traumatized by the persistent attentions of a fleshy momma's boy who works at his gym's parking lot. This is in LA, mind you. The boxer is so traumatized that he turns up at the stalker's house, strips in front of him and gets excited in the process.

Well, all I can say is, why would a boxer who is at heart an exhibitionist be so traumatized by the attention of a stalker? It simply makes no sense. And, I'm afraid, some psycho-dynamics actually do make sense, if you take the time to read about them. However, bad scripts seldom make sense at all.

The director/writer seems to have thought that this film represents a considerable minority within the gay community. Well, he may be correct, I suppose. We may never know, since that minority would be so dysfunctional they would hardly be able to get organized enough to ever get to an obscure gay film festival or DVD store, the only two places they could possibly find this turkey. Thank goodness for that. I saw "Shiner" on DVD. While I was watching it, I thought, "This is a really [[inclement]] porn flick without the porn." I also thought, "Whoever wrote this has some real issues." Then I watched the director/writer Carlson explain his process as a special feature. [[Yep]], it was real special.

The emphasis of the film is placed on two alcoholic losers who hit each other to get off. They are marginally attractive. There is frontal and full nudity. These factors probably account for the film being seen at all.

The most upsetting element of the film is the gay bashing and the subsequent further gay bashing of the same victim who tries ineptly to exact revenge from his assailants, the two drunken losers. Not only is the subject handled absurdly and badly from a technical point of view, but the acting is horrendously bad.

Then there's the boxer-stalker theme. This is really insane, not just absurd. This hunky boxer is somehow traumatized by the persistent attentions of a fleshy momma's boy who works at his gym's parking lot. This is in LA, mind you. The boxer is so traumatized that he turns up at the stalker's house, strips in front of him and gets excited in the process.

Well, all I can say is, why would a boxer who is at heart an exhibitionist be so traumatized by the attention of a stalker? It simply makes no sense. And, I'm afraid, some psycho-dynamics actually do make sense, if you take the time to read about them. However, bad scripts seldom make sense at all.

The director/writer seems to have thought that this film represents a considerable minority within the gay community. Well, he may be correct, I suppose. We may never know, since that minority would be so dysfunctional they would hardly be able to get organized enough to ever get to an obscure gay film festival or DVD store, the only two places they could possibly find this turkey. Thank goodness for that. --------------------------------------------- Result 3931 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[loved]] this show when it aired on [[television]] and was [[crushed]] when I found out that [[someone]] [[somewhere]] [[decided]] that it wasn't [[worthy]] of being continued! [[For]] years I [[hung]] onto my copies of this show, ones that I had taped or had someone tape for me. That is until now. The powers that be finally [[decided]] to [[release]] this [[beautiful]] series on DVD and I finally was able to get my [[eager]] little hands on the complete set. Which, [[brings]] me to this [[part]]; the part about that this [[show]] is all about.

American [[Gothic]] is about good verses [[evil]], [[basically]] a struggle between Lucas Buck (that is Buck, with a B). He is an evil sheriff of a South Carolina small town that runs things the way he wants things to be ran and stops at nothing to get his way.

I felt the show was wonderfully written and directed and had lots of life left yet to be lived. I really hated when it was canceled, but that is the way it seems to go for me when I finally find something worth watching on television.

Gary Cole did a great job as the role of Sheriff Lucas Buck, he has just the right amount of charm verses evil to [[pull]] it off. The other actors did a super job as well, so I guess you could say, even the casting was a hit with me. I [[worshipped]] this show when it aired on [[tv]] and was [[pulverized]] when I found out that [[person]] [[somehow]] [[opted]] that it wasn't [[praiseworthy]] of being continued! [[Per]] years I [[hanged]] onto my copies of this show, ones that I had taped or had someone tape for me. That is until now. The powers that be finally [[decides]] to [[releasing]] this [[sumptuous]] series on DVD and I finally was able to get my [[impatient]] little hands on the complete set. Which, [[poses]] me to this [[portion]]; the part about that this [[spectacle]] is all about.

American [[Goth]] is about good verses [[diabolic]], [[essentially]] a struggle between Lucas Buck (that is Buck, with a B). He is an evil sheriff of a South Carolina small town that runs things the way he wants things to be ran and stops at nothing to get his way.

I felt the show was wonderfully written and directed and had lots of life left yet to be lived. I really hated when it was canceled, but that is the way it seems to go for me when I finally find something worth watching on television.

Gary Cole did a great job as the role of Sheriff Lucas Buck, he has just the right amount of charm verses evil to [[pulling]] it off. The other actors did a super job as well, so I guess you could say, even the casting was a hit with me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3932 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] [[Talk]] about a dream cast - just two of the most [[wonderful]] actors who ever appeared anywhere - Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith - together - in "Hot Millions," a [[funny]], quirky comedy also starring Karl Malden, Robert Morley, and Bob Newhart. Ustinov is an ex-con embezzler who gets the resume of a talented computer programmer (Morley) and takes a position in a firm run by Malden - with the goal of embezzlement in mind. It's not smooth sailing; he has attracted the attention of his competitor at the company, played by Newhart, and his neighbor, Maggie Smith (who knows him at their place of residence under another name), becomes his secretary for a brief period. She can't keep a job and she is seen throughout the film in a variety of employment - all ending with her being fired. When Newhart makes advances to her, she invites Ustinov over to her flat for curry as a cover-up, but the two soon decide they're made for each other. Of course, she doesn't know Ustinov is a crook.

This is such a good movie - you can't help but love Ustinov and Smith and be fascinated by Ustinov's machinations, his genius, and the ways he slithers out of trouble. But there's a twist ending that will show you who really has the brains. Don't miss this movie, set in '60s London. It's worth if it only to hear Maggie Smith whine, "I've been sacked." [[Discussion]] about a dream cast - just two of the most [[ravishing]] actors who ever appeared anywhere - Peter Ustinov and Maggie Smith - together - in "Hot Millions," a [[comical]], quirky comedy also starring Karl Malden, Robert Morley, and Bob Newhart. Ustinov is an ex-con embezzler who gets the resume of a talented computer programmer (Morley) and takes a position in a firm run by Malden - with the goal of embezzlement in mind. It's not smooth sailing; he has attracted the attention of his competitor at the company, played by Newhart, and his neighbor, Maggie Smith (who knows him at their place of residence under another name), becomes his secretary for a brief period. She can't keep a job and she is seen throughout the film in a variety of employment - all ending with her being fired. When Newhart makes advances to her, she invites Ustinov over to her flat for curry as a cover-up, but the two soon decide they're made for each other. Of course, she doesn't know Ustinov is a crook.

This is such a good movie - you can't help but love Ustinov and Smith and be fascinated by Ustinov's machinations, his genius, and the ways he slithers out of trouble. But there's a twist ending that will show you who really has the brains. Don't miss this movie, set in '60s London. It's worth if it only to hear Maggie Smith whine, "I've been sacked." --------------------------------------------- Result 3933 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Yes, Keaton [[looks]] like he [[really]] did [[enjoy]] [[making]] this [[film]]. With a skip in his [[step]] in his tailored pin-striped [[suits]], he'll remind you of Jimmy Cagney! [[Johnny]] (Keaton) is the young hood who only does it to [[pay]] for his mother's high-priced medical [[bills]] & to [[send]] his [[younger]] brother ([[Griffin]] [[Dunne]]) to law school. [[No]] one even knows [[Johnny]] [[Kelly]] IS [[Johnny]] Dangerously until [[later]] on in the film. [[Joe]] Piscopo is Vermin & doesn't like [[Johnny]] one [[bit]] (& I don't like [[Vermin]]). Marilu Henner has a nice [[singing]]/dancing [[routine]] while Johnny revels in it. I [[love]] the [[part]] when they're in the ever-changing [[getaway]] [[car]]! The [[cop]] who's "[[calling]] all [[cars]]" is the Skipper from Gilligan's [[Island]]! [[See]] this one for 1930's [[gangster]] [[laughs]]! The [[gags]] in this [[film]] are [[hilarious]] but you have to [[catch]] them or you'll [[miss]] them! Look in the [[background]] of every scene. Yes, Keaton [[seems]] like he [[truthfully]] did [[enjoying]] [[doing]] this [[filmmaking]]. With a skip in his [[stride]] in his tailored pin-striped [[outfits]], he'll remind you of Jimmy Cagney! [[Joni]] (Keaton) is the young hood who only does it to [[paying]] for his mother's high-priced medical [[billings]] & to [[expedition]] his [[youngest]] brother ([[Griffith]] [[Dunn]]) to law school. [[Nope]] one even knows [[Joni]] [[Kelley]] IS [[Joni]] Dangerously until [[thereafter]] on in the film. [[Evel]] Piscopo is Vermin & doesn't like [[Joni]] one [[bite]] (& I don't like [[Cockroach]]). Marilu Henner has a nice [[chant]]/dancing [[normal]] while Johnny revels in it. I [[amore]] the [[party]] when they're in the ever-changing [[runaway]] [[motors]]! The [[cops]] who's "[[telephoning]] all [[motorcars]]" is the Skipper from Gilligan's [[Insular]]! [[Behold]] this one for 1930's [[mobster]] [[giggling]]! The [[jaws]] in this [[filmmaking]] are [[comical]] but you have to [[capturing]] them or you'll [[missed]] them! Look in the [[backgrounds]] of every scene. --------------------------------------------- Result 3934 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] During the whole Pirates of The Caribbean Trilogy [[Craze]] Paramount Pictures really dropped the ball in [[restoring]] this Anthony Quinn directed Cecil B. DeMille supervised movie and getting it on DVD and Blu Ray with all the extras included. It is obvious to me that Paramount [[Pictures]] Execs are blind as bats and ignorant of the fact that they have a really good pirate movie in their vault about a real pirate who actually lived in New Orleans, Louisiana which would have helped make The Crescent City once again famous for it's Pirate Connections. When the Execs at Paramount [[finally]] get with the program and release this movie in digital format then I will be a [[happy]] camper. Paramount Pictures it is up to you to get off your duff and get this film restored now ! During the whole Pirates of The Caribbean Trilogy [[Mania]] Paramount Pictures really dropped the ball in [[reinstating]] this Anthony Quinn directed Cecil B. DeMille supervised movie and getting it on DVD and Blu Ray with all the extras included. It is obvious to me that Paramount [[Pictured]] Execs are blind as bats and ignorant of the fact that they have a really good pirate movie in their vault about a real pirate who actually lived in New Orleans, Louisiana which would have helped make The Crescent City once again famous for it's Pirate Connections. When the Execs at Paramount [[lastly]] get with the program and release this movie in digital format then I will be a [[merry]] camper. Paramount Pictures it is up to you to get off your duff and get this film restored now ! --------------------------------------------- Result 3935 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This [[movie]] is [[gorgeous]]. It's [[real]] and down to heart, but at the same [[time]] [[totally]] [[crazy]]. The [[characters]] are easy to [[fall]] in [[love]] with, because they have so [[many]] [[different]] [[minds]], but each of us [[could]] refer to at [[least]] on. In Canada, we don't have [[many]] [[movies]] from [[Eastern]] Europe, and for the few I have [[seen]], Loners is one of the [[best]]. It's very funny, and [[magic]]. If you [[want]] to [[see]] something [[new]] and [[refreshing]], [[go]] [[see]] Loners. This [[filmmaking]] is [[glamorous]]. It's [[actual]] and down to heart, but at the same [[period]] [[altogether]] [[screwball]]. The [[nature]] are easy to [[slumps]] in [[likes]] with, because they have so [[innumerable]] [[divergent]] [[spirits]], but each of us [[did]] refer to at [[fewest]] on. In Canada, we don't have [[countless]] [[cinematography]] from [[Oriental]] Europe, and for the few I have [[watched]], Loners is one of the [[optimum]]. It's very funny, and [[hallucinogenic]]. If you [[desiring]] to [[behold]] something [[novel]] and [[freshen]], [[going]] [[consults]] Loners. --------------------------------------------- Result 3936 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] TO all of yall who [[think]] 1.This was a boring telecast 2.Halle berry and denzel Washington did not deserve their Oscars

SHUT THE F**k UP!! This was one of the [[best]] Academy awards show because 1.It was a moment in history to have a black yes "Black actress" win an academy award for Best actress so many of our black sisters have been ignored by the academy for many years.To be honest I had stop watching the academy awards because of a lack of diversity in either the winners or nominees.To me it was nothing but a bunch of white people patting each other in the back.the academy had many chances to vote black actresses that were brilliant in movies eg Alfre Woodard,Whoopi Goldberg,Diana Ross,Mary jean Babtise, but it did not 2.Halle berry deserved that Oscar no competition the academy was under pressure to vote for her so long have deserving actresses been ignored by the academy the majority of which is comprised of white voters yeah yeah Nicole kidman sang very prettily in muling rouge!but it was time black people were accommodated in these awards shows.As for Mr Washington the academy owed him big time after that unfair loss for MalcomX.To all of you who think race is not an issue"probably white people"in the movie industry,well it is many of the most talented black actresses around have either been reduced to stereo typical made by white people roles of what they think is a black women or are not existence"Angela basset". I do not expect many of the white people to understand any of this because they never had to deal with any of it.Come to think of it they are the one who been inflicting it TO all of yall who [[ideas]] 1.This was a boring telecast 2.Halle berry and denzel Washington did not deserve their Oscars

SHUT THE F**k UP!! This was one of the [[optimum]] Academy awards show because 1.It was a moment in history to have a black yes "Black actress" win an academy award for Best actress so many of our black sisters have been ignored by the academy for many years.To be honest I had stop watching the academy awards because of a lack of diversity in either the winners or nominees.To me it was nothing but a bunch of white people patting each other in the back.the academy had many chances to vote black actresses that were brilliant in movies eg Alfre Woodard,Whoopi Goldberg,Diana Ross,Mary jean Babtise, but it did not 2.Halle berry deserved that Oscar no competition the academy was under pressure to vote for her so long have deserving actresses been ignored by the academy the majority of which is comprised of white voters yeah yeah Nicole kidman sang very prettily in muling rouge!but it was time black people were accommodated in these awards shows.As for Mr Washington the academy owed him big time after that unfair loss for MalcomX.To all of you who think race is not an issue"probably white people"in the movie industry,well it is many of the most talented black actresses around have either been reduced to stereo typical made by white people roles of what they think is a black women or are not existence"Angela basset". I do not expect many of the white people to understand any of this because they never had to deal with any of it.Come to think of it they are the one who been inflicting it --------------------------------------------- Result 3937 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I was so entertained [[throughout]] this [[insightful]] [[documentary]], and I [[waited]] a good while for this to [[come]] through the pipes (my local video chain), and it was worth the wait. I like a good documentary / [[special]] interest piece, but this was [[definitely]] a [[heartfelt]], [[honest]], and nostalgic, if you will, look back on adolescent life. The imagination of a child is fascinating, and that's where a [[great]] [[story]] [[begins]]. [[Rent]] it or [[buy]] it if you [[like]] a good, humorous, and all around entertaining documentary. Mr. Stein and [[company]] have definitely come a [[long]] [[way]] from neighborhood Video CamCorder productions of bank hold-ups, and gay-rings that turn people gay from one glance. They all seem rather successful in they're respectful fields, and it was good to know that they are all still good friends. The DVD has a few extra trailers for other good documentaries, and it [[features]] a number of Darren's most notable productions, including, Crazy News. I was so entertained [[during]] this [[shrewd]] [[literature]], and I [[hoped]] a good while for this to [[arrive]] through the pipes (my local video chain), and it was worth the wait. I like a good documentary / [[specific]] interest piece, but this was [[admittedly]] a [[deepest]], [[truthful]], and nostalgic, if you will, look back on adolescent life. The imagination of a child is fascinating, and that's where a [[whopping]] [[storytelling]] [[outset]]. [[Rented]] it or [[procuring]] it if you [[fond]] a good, humorous, and all around entertaining documentary. Mr. Stein and [[corporations]] have definitely come a [[protracted]] [[manner]] from neighborhood Video CamCorder productions of bank hold-ups, and gay-rings that turn people gay from one glance. They all seem rather successful in they're respectful fields, and it was good to know that they are all still good friends. The DVD has a few extra trailers for other good documentaries, and it [[idiosyncrasies]] a number of Darren's most notable productions, including, Crazy News. --------------------------------------------- Result 3938 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] [[When]] I first [[heard]] that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was [[surprised]] to find that it worked, while still being an entirely different sort of movie than Henry Fool. The [[writing]] and direction were both dead on and the acting was [[superb]]...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this movie is quite different from the first, but it works: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations since the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to mention the fact that I'll need to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was [[certainly]] one of the [[better]] [[movies]] I've seen in some [[time]], it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017. [[Whenever]] I first [[hear]] that Hal Hartley was doing a sequel to Henry Fool, I was excited (it's been a personal favorite for years now), and then wary when I heard it had something to do with terrorism. Having just seen it though, I was [[horrified]] to find that it worked, while still being an entirely different sort of movie than Henry Fool. The [[handwriting]] and direction were both dead on and the acting was [[sumptuous]]...especial kudos go to Hartley for reassembling virtually the whole cast, right down to Henry's son, who was only four in the original. Like I said though, this movie is quite different from the first, but it works: I reconciled myself with the change in tone and subject matter to the fact that 10 years have passed and the characters would have found themselves in very different situations since the first film ended. In this case, an unexpected adventure ensues...and that's about all I'll give away...not to mention the fact that I'll need to see it again to really understand what's going on and who's double crossing who. While it was [[admittedly]] one of the [[optimum]] [[theater]] I've seen in some [[moment]], it suffers like many sequels with its ending, as it appears that Hartley is planning a third now and the film leaves you hanging. I'll be sure to buy my tickets for part 3 ('Henry Grim'?) in 2017. --------------------------------------------- Result 3939 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (78%)]] 'Presque Rien' ('[[Come]] Undone') is an [[earlier]] [[work]] by the [[inordinately]] [[gifted]] [[writer]]/ [[director]] Sébastien Lifshitz (with the [[collaboration]] of writer Stéphane Bouquet - the team that [[gave]] us the later 'Wild Side'). As we come to [[understand]] Lifshitz's [[manner]] of storytelling each of his works becomes more treasureable. By [[allowing]] his [[tender]] and [[sensitive]] [[love]] [[stories]] to unfold in the same [[random]] fashion [[found]] in the minds of [[confused]] and [[insecure]] [[youths]] - time now, [[time]] [[passed]], time reflective, [[time]] [[imagined]], [[time]] [[alone]] - Lifshitz makes his tales more personal, involving the viewer with every aspect of the characters' responses. It takes a bit of work to key into his method, but going with his technique draws us deeply into the film.

Mathieu (handsome and gifted Jérémie Elkaïm) is visiting the seaside for a holiday, a time to allow his mother (Dominique Reymond) to struggle with her undefined illness, cared for by the worldly and wise Annick (Marie Matheron) and accompanied by his sister Sarah (Laetitia Legrix): their distant father has remained at home for business reasons. Weaving in and out of the first moments of the film are images of Mathieu alone, looking depressed, riding trains, speaking to someone in a little recorder. We are left to wonder whether the unfolding action is all memory or contemporary action.

While sunning at the beach Mathieu notices a handsome youth his age starring at him, and we can feel Mathieu's emotions quivering with confusion. The youth Cédric (Stéphane Rideau) follows Mathieu and his sister home, continuing the mystery of attraction. Soon Cédric approaches Mathieu and a gentle introduction leads to a kiss that begins a passionate love obsession. Mathieu is terrified of the direction he is taking, rebuffs Cédric's public approaches, but continues to seek him out for consignations. The two young men are fully in the throes of being in love and the enactment of the physical aspect of this relationship, so very necessary to understanding this story, is shared with the audience in some very erotic and sensual scenes. Yet as the summer wears on Mathieu, a committed student, realizes that Cédric is a drifter working in a condiment stand at a carnival. It becomes apparent that Cédric is the Dionysian partner while Mathieu is the Apollonian one: in a telling time in architectural ruin Mathieu is excited by the beauty of the history and space while Cédric is only interested in the place as a new hideaway for lovemaking.

Mathieu is a complex person, coping with his familial ties strained by critical illness and a non-present father, a fear of his burgeoning sexuality, and his nascent passion for Cédric. Their moments of joy are disrupted by Cédric's admission of infidelity and Mathieu's inability to cope with that issue and eventually they part ways. Time passes, family changes are made, and Mathieu drifts into depression including a suicide attempt. The manner in which Mathieu copes with all of these challenges and finds solace, strangely enough, in one of Cédric's past lovers Pierre (Nils Ohlund) brings the film to an ambiguous yet wholly successful climax.

After viewing the film the feeling of identification with these characters is so strong that the desire to start the film from the beginning now with the knowledge of the complete story is powerful. Lifshitz has given us a film of meditation with passion, conflicts with passion's powers found in love, and a quiet film of silences and reveries that are incomparably beautiful. The entire cast is superb and the direction is gentle and provocative. Lifshitz is most assuredly one of the bright lights of film-making. In French with English subtitles. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp 'Presque Rien' ('[[Coming]] Undone') is an [[ago]] [[cooperating]] by the [[excessively]] [[talented]] [[scriptwriter]]/ [[superintendent]] Sébastien Lifshitz (with the [[partnered]] of writer Stéphane Bouquet - the team that [[provided]] us the later 'Wild Side'). As we come to [[understanding]] Lifshitz's [[ways]] of storytelling each of his works becomes more treasureable. By [[authorizes]] his [[tenders]] and [[touchy]] [[loves]] [[fairytales]] to unfold in the same [[indiscriminate]] fashion [[detected]] in the minds of [[bewildered]] and [[unsteady]] [[kids]] - time now, [[period]] [[voted]], time reflective, [[period]] [[figured]], [[period]] [[solely]] - Lifshitz makes his tales more personal, involving the viewer with every aspect of the characters' responses. It takes a bit of work to key into his method, but going with his technique draws us deeply into the film.

Mathieu (handsome and gifted Jérémie Elkaïm) is visiting the seaside for a holiday, a time to allow his mother (Dominique Reymond) to struggle with her undefined illness, cared for by the worldly and wise Annick (Marie Matheron) and accompanied by his sister Sarah (Laetitia Legrix): their distant father has remained at home for business reasons. Weaving in and out of the first moments of the film are images of Mathieu alone, looking depressed, riding trains, speaking to someone in a little recorder. We are left to wonder whether the unfolding action is all memory or contemporary action.

While sunning at the beach Mathieu notices a handsome youth his age starring at him, and we can feel Mathieu's emotions quivering with confusion. The youth Cédric (Stéphane Rideau) follows Mathieu and his sister home, continuing the mystery of attraction. Soon Cédric approaches Mathieu and a gentle introduction leads to a kiss that begins a passionate love obsession. Mathieu is terrified of the direction he is taking, rebuffs Cédric's public approaches, but continues to seek him out for consignations. The two young men are fully in the throes of being in love and the enactment of the physical aspect of this relationship, so very necessary to understanding this story, is shared with the audience in some very erotic and sensual scenes. Yet as the summer wears on Mathieu, a committed student, realizes that Cédric is a drifter working in a condiment stand at a carnival. It becomes apparent that Cédric is the Dionysian partner while Mathieu is the Apollonian one: in a telling time in architectural ruin Mathieu is excited by the beauty of the history and space while Cédric is only interested in the place as a new hideaway for lovemaking.

Mathieu is a complex person, coping with his familial ties strained by critical illness and a non-present father, a fear of his burgeoning sexuality, and his nascent passion for Cédric. Their moments of joy are disrupted by Cédric's admission of infidelity and Mathieu's inability to cope with that issue and eventually they part ways. Time passes, family changes are made, and Mathieu drifts into depression including a suicide attempt. The manner in which Mathieu copes with all of these challenges and finds solace, strangely enough, in one of Cédric's past lovers Pierre (Nils Ohlund) brings the film to an ambiguous yet wholly successful climax.

After viewing the film the feeling of identification with these characters is so strong that the desire to start the film from the beginning now with the knowledge of the complete story is powerful. Lifshitz has given us a film of meditation with passion, conflicts with passion's powers found in love, and a quiet film of silences and reveries that are incomparably beautiful. The entire cast is superb and the direction is gentle and provocative. Lifshitz is most assuredly one of the bright lights of film-making. In French with English subtitles. Highly Recommended. Grady Harp --------------------------------------------- Result 3940 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have watched 3 episodes of Caveman, and I have no idea why I continue except maybe waiting for it to get better.

To me this show is just pumping itself off the commercials, with no real humor. As we sat around watching these shows, we all speculated on what was going to happen.

The episode of the woman cave-woman with a attitude was actually a big, yea right, for us. she's crude in a theater and acts tough to strangers, and truth be told, she needed a slap

I consider myself a pretty good reviewer, taking in everything, but I must say, Cavemen is comparable to the old show, My mother, the car. I give it a 2, only because they deserve 1 better than a 1 because they actually spent money on it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3941 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[wanted]] to [[like]] Magnolia. The [[plot]] reminded me of [[Grand]] Canyon (which I liked). 4 different lives/stories that [[come]] [[together]] at the end but Magnolia took a wrong turn halfway through the [[movie]] and I was lost. I almost turned it off right then and there but I [[felt]] I should hang in there until the end, little did I know it would be another torturous 1 1/2 hours. [[Thank]] [[god]] I rented [[instead]] of seeing it in the theatre. I almost screamed out in frustration after 2 hours. The biggest kick in the pants was the ending frog scene. My DVD player still hasn't forgiven me and I don't blame it one bit. It was a unique movie, but a bad, boring, and [[pointless]] movie. I [[want]] to [[loves]] Magnolia. The [[intrigue]] reminded me of [[Tremendous]] Canyon (which I liked). 4 different lives/stories that [[arriving]] [[jointly]] at the end but Magnolia took a wrong turn halfway through the [[cinema]] and I was lost. I almost turned it off right then and there but I [[smelled]] I should hang in there until the end, little did I know it would be another torturous 1 1/2 hours. [[Gratitude]] [[jeez]] I rented [[alternatively]] of seeing it in the theatre. I almost screamed out in frustration after 2 hours. The biggest kick in the pants was the ending frog scene. My DVD player still hasn't forgiven me and I don't blame it one bit. It was a unique movie, but a bad, boring, and [[vain]] movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3942 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] It's obvious that the people who made 'Dead At The Box Office' love B-movie horror. Overt references to the genre are peppered throughout, from stock characters (the authority figure who doesn't believe the monstrous invasion is really happening) to Kevin Smith style discussions to reenacting Duane Jones' last moments from 'Night of the Living Dead' not once but twice.

Unfortunately it takes more than love to make a good movie.

The staging and shot choice are unexciting and unimaginative. While a common admonition in film school is to avoid 'Mastershot Theatre,' telling the story completely in a wide master shot, here we find the obverse as in several sequences it's hard to figure out the spatial relationships between characters as the story is told in a series of medium shots with no establishing shot to tie it together. Editing is drab and basic and at times there are unmotivated cuts. The lighting is flat and sometimes muddy, making the scenes in the darkened theatre hard to make out (was there lighting, or was this shot with available light only?). Some shots are out of focus. The dialogue is trite, and the performances, for the most part, one-note (Isaiah Robinson shows some energy and screen presence as Curtis, and the fellow playing the projectionist has some pleasantly dickish line readings; Michael Allen Williams as the theater manager and Casey Kirkpatrick as enthusiastic film geek Eric have some nice moments). The premise is silly, even for a B horror flick (Also, it's too bad Dr Eisner was unaware of Project Paperclip - he could've saved himself a lot of trouble!). The 'zombies' are non-threatening, and their makeup is unconvincing (although the chunky zombie trying to get a gumball out of the machine raised a smile). For a zombie fan film, there is very little blood or violence, although what there is, is handled pretty well. The incidental music, while stylistically uneven, is kind of nice at times, and there are some good foley effects. The 'Time Warp' parody was a fun listen, although the images going along with it were less fun to watch. Unfortunately, the looped dialogue sounds flat. Was this shot non-sync (doubtful, it looks like video through and through)? I watched the special introduction by Troma Films' Lloyd Kaufman before the main feature - although it consisted essentially of Kaufman plugging his own stuff and admitting that he hadn't seen the movie while someone mugged in a Toxie mask, its production and entertainment values were higher than 'Dead...' itself (quick aside to whoever put the DVD together - the countdown on film leader beeps only on the flash-frame 2, not on every number plus one more after). For that matter, the vampire film theatregoers are seen watching early in 'Dead...' looked a lot more entertaining than this. Recommendation to avoid, unless you know someone involved in the production or are an ardent Lloyd Kaufman completist (he plays 'Kaufman the Minion' in the film-within-a-film).

(Full disclosure: my girlfriend is an extra in this movie. I swear this did not color my review.) --------------------------------------------- Result 3943 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "Serum" starts out with credits that are quite reminiscent of the "Re-animator" movies, and it [[owes]] a lot to them. The story is very similar; a mad doctor develops a serum that he believes will alleviate pain, sickness and death, but he's apparently not a big believer in clinical trials and so winds up with a brain-eating zombie on his hands in the person of his nephew. The zombie even looks like one of those from "Re-animator," and in fact some of the make-up effects in "Serum" aren't bad. [[Unfortunately]], the script is pretty slow and unbelievable in quite a few places, resulting in a soap opera feel for most of the first 3/4 of the movie. For some reason, the director feels compelled to tell us the time of day every few minutes by flashing it in big white letters across the screen. I can't see why this was important, other than being an attempt to provide viewers with a sense of time passing; sometimes, that wouldn't be present otherwise as the plot plods along.

There are a number of moments that just don't add up here. For instance, one victim is bludgeoned with a sledge hammer, but when we see the victim's head up close, there's no sign of that trauma. In another scene, a character runs down a fully lit hospital corridor (we can see the circles of light on the floor, in fact) with a flashlight in hand, looking for all the world like he's walking in the dark... but a moment later a second character walks down the same fully-lit corridor without one. These are just a couple of examples; moments of what look like directorial or editorial sloppiness crop up quite frequently throughout the movie.

"Serum" is better in some ways than much of what goes straight-to-video as independent horror lately. In terms of technical items — sound and photography, for example — it's got a more polished look than a lot of what lands on a DVD. On the other hand, there's still a good deal of wooden acting (particularly by one of the lead characters, the mad scientist himself!) and nonsensical moments that have nothing to do with suspension of disbelief and everything to do with writing and continuity. Maybe these are things that the people involved with making this film will eventually get more experience with, though. One of the problems with low-budget independent horror lately is that the filmmakers often set out to remake more popular movies that had bigger budgets, and that almost never works out. It didn't in the case of "Serum," anyhow. "Serum" starts out with credits that are quite reminiscent of the "Re-animator" movies, and it [[must]] a lot to them. The story is very similar; a mad doctor develops a serum that he believes will alleviate pain, sickness and death, but he's apparently not a big believer in clinical trials and so winds up with a brain-eating zombie on his hands in the person of his nephew. The zombie even looks like one of those from "Re-animator," and in fact some of the make-up effects in "Serum" aren't bad. [[Unhappily]], the script is pretty slow and unbelievable in quite a few places, resulting in a soap opera feel for most of the first 3/4 of the movie. For some reason, the director feels compelled to tell us the time of day every few minutes by flashing it in big white letters across the screen. I can't see why this was important, other than being an attempt to provide viewers with a sense of time passing; sometimes, that wouldn't be present otherwise as the plot plods along.

There are a number of moments that just don't add up here. For instance, one victim is bludgeoned with a sledge hammer, but when we see the victim's head up close, there's no sign of that trauma. In another scene, a character runs down a fully lit hospital corridor (we can see the circles of light on the floor, in fact) with a flashlight in hand, looking for all the world like he's walking in the dark... but a moment later a second character walks down the same fully-lit corridor without one. These are just a couple of examples; moments of what look like directorial or editorial sloppiness crop up quite frequently throughout the movie.

"Serum" is better in some ways than much of what goes straight-to-video as independent horror lately. In terms of technical items — sound and photography, for example — it's got a more polished look than a lot of what lands on a DVD. On the other hand, there's still a good deal of wooden acting (particularly by one of the lead characters, the mad scientist himself!) and nonsensical moments that have nothing to do with suspension of disbelief and everything to do with writing and continuity. Maybe these are things that the people involved with making this film will eventually get more experience with, though. One of the problems with low-budget independent horror lately is that the filmmakers often set out to remake more popular movies that had bigger budgets, and that almost never works out. It didn't in the case of "Serum," anyhow. --------------------------------------------- Result 3944 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (87%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] In 1979 Lucio Fulci [[released]] his film Zombi. [[However]], due to the earlier [[import]] of George Romero's Dawn of the Dead, which had gone by that name for its Italian release, it was retitled to Zombi 2. (Which also had the bonus of letting the audience think this was a sequel to the second Romero movie). [[Continuing]] this theme, the second Zombi film, which would have been called Zombi 2, was then consequently titled Zombi 3. In the UK, the original Zombi film (that is, Zombi 2) was titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters". To continue THIS theme, the second Zombi film (Zombi 3) was then titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters 2" for its UK release. (Are you following all this?) So if Zombie Flesh Eaters was Fulci's Dawn, then is 2 his Day of the Dead? While this is only a flippant observation, this tale of military compounds, helicopters and a plodding narrative certainly does bear a vague thematic resemblance.

Some of Fulci's European direction compels in a film like this, but the acting, dubbing and exposition-heavy script are absolutely horrendous. Its ecological message is so forced and overstated it can no longer be considered a subtext, while there's an ([[unintentionally]]) hilarious Birds homage. Combining this last element with MOR 80s rock is not a good idea. For some reason I couldn't stop thinking of Time of the Apes (q.v.) the whole time I was watching this. This is obviously not a good thing.

While there's nothing here to rival topless scuba-diving, shark wrestling zombies and eyeballs on a splinter, Fulci's misogynistic leanings do get a work out with a hotel cleaner's mouth being ground into a mirror until it gushes blood. His fannish gore predilections also see a hand severing. Both themes are combined when a woman's face is ripped off, first by one zombie, then a zombie foetus that tears out of a pregnant woman's stomach.

Production-wise, this is obviously a step up from Zombi, coming five years later. (Nine years in worldwide release terms). But without the original's low-key charm it struggles, while Stefano Mainetti's music is inappropriate and uninspired. Fabio Frizzi's score was one of the best things about the '79 movie. Here zombie attacks are played out to what sounds unnervingly like Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out For A Hero". In the middle of this carnage we get an irksome love interest, and Roger and Kenny, two bland macho types who do everything with acrobatic urgency and constantly state the obvious. ("We're out of ammunition" to a stalling gun is a particular standout). But where it also falls down is in the zombies themselves. Low key or not, Fulci's original had truly magnificent, rotting zombies. Skull faces, worms in eye sockets... they really were something to behold. By contrast, this dull follow-up opts for the more traditional "men with a bit of paint on their faces" option.

The climax rips off too many Romero movies to even be funny, while the use of the DJ is a crass and cheap narrative device. Not containing the same elements of outrage and gratuitous nudity of the first, this is unlikely to have the same cult appeal.

It turns out that Fulci actually walked out on the project after reportedly directing just fifteen minutes, the rest filmed by Bruno Mattei. I'm fairly sure that even Fulci would have balked at the ludicrous "flying zombie head" scene, and so credit to the director for having the good sense to leave. Unfortunately, however, it's his name that's above the film title on releases, so the majority of people will be left with the impression that this is a Fulci film through and through. On that scale then it's a major setback for him, for this movie commits what you imagine Fulci would regard as the worst crime of all: that of being boring. In 1979 Lucio Fulci [[releasing]] his film Zombi. [[Instead]], due to the earlier [[importing]] of George Romero's Dawn of the Dead, which had gone by that name for its Italian release, it was retitled to Zombi 2. (Which also had the bonus of letting the audience think this was a sequel to the second Romero movie). [[Sustained]] this theme, the second Zombi film, which would have been called Zombi 2, was then consequently titled Zombi 3. In the UK, the original Zombi film (that is, Zombi 2) was titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters". To continue THIS theme, the second Zombi film (Zombi 3) was then titled "Zombie Flesh Eaters 2" for its UK release. (Are you following all this?) So if Zombie Flesh Eaters was Fulci's Dawn, then is 2 his Day of the Dead? While this is only a flippant observation, this tale of military compounds, helicopters and a plodding narrative certainly does bear a vague thematic resemblance.

Some of Fulci's European direction compels in a film like this, but the acting, dubbing and exposition-heavy script are absolutely horrendous. Its ecological message is so forced and overstated it can no longer be considered a subtext, while there's an ([[accidentally]]) hilarious Birds homage. Combining this last element with MOR 80s rock is not a good idea. For some reason I couldn't stop thinking of Time of the Apes (q.v.) the whole time I was watching this. This is obviously not a good thing.

While there's nothing here to rival topless scuba-diving, shark wrestling zombies and eyeballs on a splinter, Fulci's misogynistic leanings do get a work out with a hotel cleaner's mouth being ground into a mirror until it gushes blood. His fannish gore predilections also see a hand severing. Both themes are combined when a woman's face is ripped off, first by one zombie, then a zombie foetus that tears out of a pregnant woman's stomach.

Production-wise, this is obviously a step up from Zombi, coming five years later. (Nine years in worldwide release terms). But without the original's low-key charm it struggles, while Stefano Mainetti's music is inappropriate and uninspired. Fabio Frizzi's score was one of the best things about the '79 movie. Here zombie attacks are played out to what sounds unnervingly like Bonnie Tyler's "Holding Out For A Hero". In the middle of this carnage we get an irksome love interest, and Roger and Kenny, two bland macho types who do everything with acrobatic urgency and constantly state the obvious. ("We're out of ammunition" to a stalling gun is a particular standout). But where it also falls down is in the zombies themselves. Low key or not, Fulci's original had truly magnificent, rotting zombies. Skull faces, worms in eye sockets... they really were something to behold. By contrast, this dull follow-up opts for the more traditional "men with a bit of paint on their faces" option.

The climax rips off too many Romero movies to even be funny, while the use of the DJ is a crass and cheap narrative device. Not containing the same elements of outrage and gratuitous nudity of the first, this is unlikely to have the same cult appeal.

It turns out that Fulci actually walked out on the project after reportedly directing just fifteen minutes, the rest filmed by Bruno Mattei. I'm fairly sure that even Fulci would have balked at the ludicrous "flying zombie head" scene, and so credit to the director for having the good sense to leave. Unfortunately, however, it's his name that's above the film title on releases, so the majority of people will be left with the impression that this is a Fulci film through and through. On that scale then it's a major setback for him, for this movie commits what you imagine Fulci would regard as the worst crime of all: that of being boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 3945 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] Outrageously trashy karate/horror thriller with loads of graphically gory violence and gratuitous nudity, and a thoroughly preposterous and bizarre "plot". This is lowbrow and low-grade entertainment that will appeal only to viewers with particularly kinky tastes, but it's kind of [[cheerfully]] [[bad]] and I must admit that I wasn't actually bored while watching it.... (*1/2) Outrageously trashy karate/horror thriller with loads of graphically gory violence and gratuitous nudity, and a thoroughly preposterous and bizarre "plot". This is lowbrow and low-grade entertainment that will appeal only to viewers with particularly kinky tastes, but it's kind of [[refreshingly]] [[mala]] and I must admit that I wasn't actually bored while watching it.... (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 3946 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] the one and only season has just aired here in Australia and i thought it was absolutely brilliant! i love it! all the story lines are so good! and its a much more realistic view on teen and family life today. yet it still kept strong family values of sticking together and being there for each other. their problems were real, and it really drew you into the show. the show is basically about this family called 'the Days' and their lives. the family consisted of Abby Day (mum), Jack Day (dad), Natalie Day (sporty daughter), Cooper Day (outsider son), and Nathan Day (boy genius son). each episodes a day of their life, with coopers perspective on things throughout it. i loved cooper his insight through out the show was just great. he was by far my favorite character. it ended with so many things it could've continued with, I'm really sad another season wasn't made. it was a great show I'm gonna miss it. --------------------------------------------- Result 3947 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] You could say that the [[actors]] will make a movie, but this [[clearly]] proves that statement [[wrong]]. Most of the [[characters]] in this film [[lack]] anything to [[hold]] on to. They play the part of [[cardboard]] cut outs being moved about in [[predictable]] and uninteresting ways. The story is very [[simple]]. It could be summed up in a few words, but I'll hold back in case anyone reading does want to see this film.

I had to fast forward the parts where Jack showed us how to be an [[obnoxious]] eater. I'd have to say that 70% of this film revolved around cooking, eating, or getting ready to eat. Quite frankly, I'd rather not spend my time watching Jack chew noisily with an open mouth. Personally, I could have done without the footwear references and jokes that pepper the first half of the film too.

Outside of my own personal dementia, the film really [[lacked]] [[anything]] worth it's time. There were countless scenes and camera shots that felt like it was dragging. When something happens, the reactions of the characters are vague and dry.

Best not to look this one up. You could say that the [[players]] will make a movie, but this [[manifestly]] proves that statement [[erroneous]]. Most of the [[characteristics]] in this film [[shortfall]] anything to [[holds]] on to. They play the part of [[carton]] cut outs being moved about in [[foreseeable]] and uninteresting ways. The story is very [[easy]]. It could be summed up in a few words, but I'll hold back in case anyone reading does want to see this film.

I had to fast forward the parts where Jack showed us how to be an [[repulsive]] eater. I'd have to say that 70% of this film revolved around cooking, eating, or getting ready to eat. Quite frankly, I'd rather not spend my time watching Jack chew noisily with an open mouth. Personally, I could have done without the footwear references and jokes that pepper the first half of the film too.

Outside of my own personal dementia, the film really [[lacking]] [[somethings]] worth it's time. There were countless scenes and camera shots that felt like it was dragging. When something happens, the reactions of the characters are vague and dry.

Best not to look this one up. --------------------------------------------- Result 3948 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Basic slasher movie premise, 3 young ladies wreck their car and end up staying with a creepy family. YAWN.

Watching 36 minutes of a premonition of OJ's car chase with a white sedan instead of a bronco. YAWN.

Old lady with hot and cold dementia controlling her daughter... YAWN

23 minutes of watching the actors eat - YAWN Trying to identify what the heck they are eating ... OK there might be a drinking game here ... nope - YAWN

Complimentary shower scenes ... OK got my interest for a couple of seconds.

Completely random and uninspired killings ... YAWN

The ending ... dude! that psycho is deranged - why couldn't the rest of the movie be like the last 5 minutes... unfortunately that is it - My advice - fast forward to the last five minutes and watch that and then put something good in the player - for me I am going back to sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 3949 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (79%)]] Good horror movies from France are quite rare, and it's fairly easy to see why! Whenever a talented young filmmaker releases a staggering new film, he emigrates towards glorious Hollywood immediately after to directed the big-budgeted remake of another great film classic! How can France possibly build up a solid horror reputation when their prodigy-directors leave the country after just one film? "Haute Tension" was a [[fantastic]] movie and it earned director Alexandre Aja a (one-way?) ticket to the States to remake "The Hills Have Eyes" (which he did terrifically, I may add). Eric Valette's long-feature debut "Maléfique" was a very promising and engaging horror picture too, and he's already off to the Hollywood as well to direct the remake of Takashi Miike's ghost-story hit "One Missed Call". So there you have it, two very gifted Frenchmen that aren't likely to make any more film in their native country some time soon. "Maléfique" is a simple but efficient chiller that requires some patience due to its slow start, but once the plot properly develops, it offers great atmospheric tension and a handful of marvelous special effects. The film almost entirely takes place in one single location and only introduces four characters. We're inside a ramshackle French prison cell with four occupants. The new arrival is a businessman sentenced to do time for fraud, the elderly and "wise" inmate sadistically killed his wife and then there's a crazy transvestite and a mentally handicapped boy to complete the odd foursome. They find an ancient journal inside the wall of their cell, belonging to a sick murderer in the 1920's who specialized in black magic rites and supernatural ways to escape. The four inmates begin to prepare their own escaping plan using the bizarre formulas of the book, only to realize the occult is something you shouldn't mess with… Eric Valette dedicates oceans of time to the character drawings of the four protagonists, which occasionally results in redundant and tedious sub plots, but his reasons for this all become clear in the gruesome climax when the book suddenly turns out to be some type of Wishmaster-device. "Maléfique" is a dark film, with truckloads of claustrophobic tension and several twisted details about human behavior. Watch it before some wealthy American production company decides to remake it with four handsome teenage actors in the unconvincing roles of hardcore criminals. Good horror movies from France are quite rare, and it's fairly easy to see why! Whenever a talented young filmmaker releases a staggering new film, he emigrates towards glorious Hollywood immediately after to directed the big-budgeted remake of another great film classic! How can France possibly build up a solid horror reputation when their prodigy-directors leave the country after just one film? "Haute Tension" was a [[ravishing]] movie and it earned director Alexandre Aja a (one-way?) ticket to the States to remake "The Hills Have Eyes" (which he did terrifically, I may add). Eric Valette's long-feature debut "Maléfique" was a very promising and engaging horror picture too, and he's already off to the Hollywood as well to direct the remake of Takashi Miike's ghost-story hit "One Missed Call". So there you have it, two very gifted Frenchmen that aren't likely to make any more film in their native country some time soon. "Maléfique" is a simple but efficient chiller that requires some patience due to its slow start, but once the plot properly develops, it offers great atmospheric tension and a handful of marvelous special effects. The film almost entirely takes place in one single location and only introduces four characters. We're inside a ramshackle French prison cell with four occupants. The new arrival is a businessman sentenced to do time for fraud, the elderly and "wise" inmate sadistically killed his wife and then there's a crazy transvestite and a mentally handicapped boy to complete the odd foursome. They find an ancient journal inside the wall of their cell, belonging to a sick murderer in the 1920's who specialized in black magic rites and supernatural ways to escape. The four inmates begin to prepare their own escaping plan using the bizarre formulas of the book, only to realize the occult is something you shouldn't mess with… Eric Valette dedicates oceans of time to the character drawings of the four protagonists, which occasionally results in redundant and tedious sub plots, but his reasons for this all become clear in the gruesome climax when the book suddenly turns out to be some type of Wishmaster-device. "Maléfique" is a dark film, with truckloads of claustrophobic tension and several twisted details about human behavior. Watch it before some wealthy American production company decides to remake it with four handsome teenage actors in the unconvincing roles of hardcore criminals. --------------------------------------------- Result 3950 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] "Semana Santa" or "Angel Of Death" is a very [[weak]] [[movie]]. Mira Sorvino plays a [[detective]] who is [[trying]] to find a [[killer]] who [[shoots]] arrows in people. Mira has an Italian [[accent]] which falters from [[time]] to [[time]]. Couldn't she just [[speak]] [[English]]? All the other [[characters]] have a [[forced]] [[Mexican]]\[[English]] [[accent]] which is distracting. The dialogue is very [[bad]] and the delivery of it is wooden. The [[cinematography]] looks [[nice]], but that's not [[enough]] to [[save]] this [[tripe]]. THIS [[NEXT]] [[PART]] [[OF]] THIS [[REVIEW]] DOES CONTAIN [[SPOILERS]]!!!!

[[During]] the climax it [[looks]] [[like]] the [[villain]] is [[going]] to [[get]] away, but then he [[comes]] back down [[stairs]] to [[get]] [[shot]] and do a [[cool]] stunt down the [[railing]]. That just [[shows]] this [[script]] has no originality whatsoever. [[AVOID]]! "Semana Santa" or "Angel Of Death" is a very [[fragile]] [[kino]]. Mira Sorvino plays a [[pinkerton]] who is [[seeking]] to find a [[assassin]] who [[twigs]] arrows in people. Mira has an Italian [[focus]] which falters from [[moment]] to [[times]]. Couldn't she just [[speaks]] [[Frenchman]]? All the other [[traits]] have a [[compelled]] [[Mexico]]\[[Frenchman]] [[focus]] which is distracting. The dialogue is very [[negative]] and the delivery of it is wooden. The [[films]] looks [[pleasurable]], but that's not [[sufficiently]] to [[rescue]] this [[gut]]. THIS [[FORTHCOMING]] [[PARTY]] [[DU]] THIS [[REVISITING]] DOES CONTAIN [[VANDALS]]!!!!

[[Throughout]] the climax it [[seems]] [[iike]] the [[scoundrel]] is [[go]] to [[obtains]] away, but then he [[arrives]] back down [[staircase]] to [[obtain]] [[offed]] and do a [[refrigerate]] stunt down the [[parapet]]. That just [[showings]] this [[hyphen]] has no originality whatsoever. [[EVADE]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3951 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] In the words of Charles Dance's character in this film, "Bollocks!" No plot, no character development, and utterly [[unbelievable]].

Full of stuff that just doesn't happen in the real world (since when were British police inspectors armed with handguns in shoulder holsters?). Full of mistakes (Bulgarian trains in London?). Full of dull and artificial dialogue. And the directing/editing is awful - wobbly hand-held camera shots that add nothing to the film except a vague feeling of seasickness; confusing jump-cuts; no structure.

Wesley Snipes' character is totally unsympathetic - why should we care what happens to him? Direct to video? Direct to the dustbin! In the words of Charles Dance's character in this film, "Bollocks!" No plot, no character development, and utterly [[amazing]].

Full of stuff that just doesn't happen in the real world (since when were British police inspectors armed with handguns in shoulder holsters?). Full of mistakes (Bulgarian trains in London?). Full of dull and artificial dialogue. And the directing/editing is awful - wobbly hand-held camera shots that add nothing to the film except a vague feeling of seasickness; confusing jump-cuts; no structure.

Wesley Snipes' character is totally unsympathetic - why should we care what happens to him? Direct to video? Direct to the dustbin! --------------------------------------------- Result 3952 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] This movie is told through the eyes of a young teacher at a catholic school, watching as the RAWANDAN [[genocide]] un-furls around him.

The movie starts off with a brief explanation about the past history and rivalry of Rawanda. Then it [[jumps]] to the story as told through the eyes of a young [[idealistic]] "NEW-COMER" a young teacher who doesn't take life or the situation too seriously. As he and the [[driver]] approach a road-block he plays [[around]] with his drivers I.D. not realizing that this is a serious moment and that if the driver can't identify himself as being of the right tribe to the soldiers they'll be killed. And thats how he treats the unfolding story of chaos and unfolding around him. Suddenly realizes that every Rawandan (including his driver) is involved and that the Europeans soldiers and tourists cannot and will not help. The media cameras cannot stop machete's, and there's too many machete wielding militia-men too shoot. the title comes from the armies captain saying he's going to shoot the dogs eating the dead-bodies around his compound, but won't shoot the Militia-men that are killing people around the compound. Mainly because they haven't fired at the soldiers yet. Finally he realizes the hopelessness of the situation and the guy who tells the evacuation team that he wants to give up his seat for one of the intended victims, flees with his tail in-between his legs, rather than face immanent death with the school kids he's promised not to leave behind.

It's more of character study, and a come to Jesus moment for one character, than a story about the genocide in "RAWANDA". This movie didn't have to take place in RAWANDA, it could have taken place any one of the Genocidal hell holes going around this world at any given time. This movie is told through the eyes of a young teacher at a catholic school, watching as the RAWANDAN [[genocidal]] un-furls around him.

The movie starts off with a brief explanation about the past history and rivalry of Rawanda. Then it [[soars]] to the story as told through the eyes of a young [[ideal]] "NEW-COMER" a young teacher who doesn't take life or the situation too seriously. As he and the [[trucker]] approach a road-block he plays [[about]] with his drivers I.D. not realizing that this is a serious moment and that if the driver can't identify himself as being of the right tribe to the soldiers they'll be killed. And thats how he treats the unfolding story of chaos and unfolding around him. Suddenly realizes that every Rawandan (including his driver) is involved and that the Europeans soldiers and tourists cannot and will not help. The media cameras cannot stop machete's, and there's too many machete wielding militia-men too shoot. the title comes from the armies captain saying he's going to shoot the dogs eating the dead-bodies around his compound, but won't shoot the Militia-men that are killing people around the compound. Mainly because they haven't fired at the soldiers yet. Finally he realizes the hopelessness of the situation and the guy who tells the evacuation team that he wants to give up his seat for one of the intended victims, flees with his tail in-between his legs, rather than face immanent death with the school kids he's promised not to leave behind.

It's more of character study, and a come to Jesus moment for one character, than a story about the genocide in "RAWANDA". This movie didn't have to take place in RAWANDA, it could have taken place any one of the Genocidal hell holes going around this world at any given time. --------------------------------------------- Result 3953 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] [[Had]] never [[heard]] of The [[Man]] in the Moon until [[seeing]] it last evening on THIS HDTV channel. Look, my taste is like any others', eclectic. My favorites run from Blue Velvet to Dr. Strangelove to The Ghost and [[Mrs]]. Muir thru The Wizard of Oz and The [[Loved]] One, Eraserhead, repo man, and The [[Spy]] [[Within]].

The [[Man]] in the Moon is [[superbly]] made, a gentle hearted, joyous and [[tragic]] [[film]], beautifully filmed, one in which the [[actors]] [[truly]] [[live]] in the moment rather than act. This [[sweet]] [[tale]] shortly will be in our private library. This [[beautiful]] story of life in a far finer era in rural Louisiana literally transports you to its pastoral setting.

It's hard to remain stoic during the film's [[last]] [[moments]], particularly when the young girl the extent of her older sister's heart searing private pain and forgives all.

Rather than [[spoil]] the enjoyment or bore you to sobs with my dull prose, will end now with this suggestion from one who enjoys [[films]] which speak from the heart to ours.

If you purchase no other film, please, purchase the Man in the Moon. This [[moving]] story is one you'll enjoy reliving time and again. It is a joy and a gem, a [[film]] all too scarce in this world of hardening hearts.

The simple virtues evinced in Man in the Moon are a joy to behold.

Paul Vincent Zecchino

Manasota Key, Florida

05 April, 2009 [[Have]] never [[overheard]] of The [[Dawg]] in the Moon until [[see]] it last evening on THIS HDTV channel. Look, my taste is like any others', eclectic. My favorites run from Blue Velvet to Dr. Strangelove to The Ghost and [[Ms]]. Muir thru The Wizard of Oz and The [[Worshipped]] One, Eraserhead, repo man, and The [[Spies]] [[Indoors]].

The [[Males]] in the Moon is [[beautifully]] made, a gentle hearted, joyous and [[disastrous]] [[filmmaking]], beautifully filmed, one in which the [[actresses]] [[truthfully]] [[viva]] in the moment rather than act. This [[sugary]] [[conte]] shortly will be in our private library. This [[glamorous]] story of life in a far finer era in rural Louisiana literally transports you to its pastoral setting.

It's hard to remain stoic during the film's [[final]] [[times]], particularly when the young girl the extent of her older sister's heart searing private pain and forgives all.

Rather than [[ruin]] the enjoyment or bore you to sobs with my dull prose, will end now with this suggestion from one who enjoys [[movie]] which speak from the heart to ours.

If you purchase no other film, please, purchase the Man in the Moon. This [[shifting]] story is one you'll enjoy reliving time and again. It is a joy and a gem, a [[flick]] all too scarce in this world of hardening hearts.

The simple virtues evinced in Man in the Moon are a joy to behold.

Paul Vincent Zecchino

Manasota Key, Florida

05 April, 2009 --------------------------------------------- Result 3954 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] what a [[relief]] to find out I am not [[imagining]] this programme! the [[summary]] from taxman is [[great]]. I too [[remember]] finding it haunting and not particularly [[family]] viewing, I must have been 10/11 at the [[time]] I watched it. I think for a girl that age part of attraction was lead's very blond hair, and his permanently sad state. The theme was played on a flute I recall - although I cannot remember how it went. I [[think]] the intro showed him playing it - or [[maybe]] he played a flute in the [[programme]] and especially when he was [[sad]]? [[Maybe]] I am destined never to know how it ended or to see clip or hear the tune, but at least I now know it is not just me. what a [[relieving]] to find out I am not [[reckon]] this programme! the [[synopsis]] from taxman is [[grand]]. I too [[remind]] finding it haunting and not particularly [[families]] viewing, I must have been 10/11 at the [[period]] I watched it. I think for a girl that age part of attraction was lead's very blond hair, and his permanently sad state. The theme was played on a flute I recall - although I cannot remember how it went. I [[reckon]] the intro showed him playing it - or [[potentially]] he played a flute in the [[programmed]] and especially when he was [[lamentable]]? [[Presumably]] I am destined never to know how it ended or to see clip or hear the tune, but at least I now know it is not just me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3955 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] The picture is developed in 1873 and [[talks]] as [[Lin]] McAdam([[James]] [[Stewart]]) and High Spade(Millard Michell)arrive to Dodge City looking for an enemy called Dutch Henry(Stephen McNally).The sheriff Wyatt Hearp(Will Ger)obligates to leave their guns.Both participate in an shot contest and Stewart earns a Winchester 73,the rifle greatest of the west but is [[robbed]] and starting the possession hand to hand(John McIntire,Charles Drake ,Dan Duryea).Meanwhile the starring is going on the [[vengeance]].

[[First]] western [[interpreted]] by James Stewart directed by Anthony Mann that achieved revive the genre during 50 decade. The film has an extraordinary casting including brief apparition of Rock Hudson and Tony Curtis,both newcomers. The picture is well narrated and directed by the magnificent director Anthony Mann who has made abundant classics western:Bend the river,Far country,man of Laramie,naked spur,tin star. Of course, all the essential elements western are in this film,thus,Red Indians attack,raid by outlaws,final showdown.The breathtaking cinematography by Greta Garbo's favourite photographer Willian Daniels. James Stewart inaugurated a new type of wage,the percentage on the box office that will imitate posteriorly others great Hollywood stars. Although the argument is an adaptation of ¨Big gun¨ novel of Stuart L.Lake and screenwriter is Borden Chase,is also based about real events because 4 July 1876 in Dodge City had a shot competition and the winner was rewarded with a Winchester 73 model 1873 with ability shoot 17 cartridges caliber 44/40 in few seconds. The picture is developed in 1873 and [[dialogue]] as [[Layne]] McAdam([[Jacques]] [[Stuart]]) and High Spade(Millard Michell)arrive to Dodge City looking for an enemy called Dutch Henry(Stephen McNally).The sheriff Wyatt Hearp(Will Ger)obligates to leave their guns.Both participate in an shot contest and Stewart earns a Winchester 73,the rifle greatest of the west but is [[burgled]] and starting the possession hand to hand(John McIntire,Charles Drake ,Dan Duryea).Meanwhile the starring is going on the [[reprisal]].

[[Firstly]] western [[construed]] by James Stewart directed by Anthony Mann that achieved revive the genre during 50 decade. The film has an extraordinary casting including brief apparition of Rock Hudson and Tony Curtis,both newcomers. The picture is well narrated and directed by the magnificent director Anthony Mann who has made abundant classics western:Bend the river,Far country,man of Laramie,naked spur,tin star. Of course, all the essential elements western are in this film,thus,Red Indians attack,raid by outlaws,final showdown.The breathtaking cinematography by Greta Garbo's favourite photographer Willian Daniels. James Stewart inaugurated a new type of wage,the percentage on the box office that will imitate posteriorly others great Hollywood stars. Although the argument is an adaptation of ¨Big gun¨ novel of Stuart L.Lake and screenwriter is Borden Chase,is also based about real events because 4 July 1876 in Dodge City had a shot competition and the winner was rewarded with a Winchester 73 model 1873 with ability shoot 17 cartridges caliber 44/40 in few seconds. --------------------------------------------- Result 3956 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[If]] there was ever a [[call]] to make a [[bad]] [[film]] that reflected how stupid humanity could become, this one [[would]] take the prize. The [[plot]] centers around bible prophecies that lie in hidden messages of the [[scriptures]] that prompt a group of power-seeking thugs to attempt total control of the world. [[Just]] how [[stupid]] does this writer believe people to actually be?

The acting was bad at best. [[Casper]] Van Dien wasted his talent doing this film. [[Michael]] York's work was a fair [[match]] for the role, [[since]] he was the center of the film, and did a good job.

This plot was sickening and very [[disturbing]]. No tender or immature minds should [[see]] this film. This is how a basic good vs. evil plot can go astray.

There must be a lot of mental disease floating around the film circles, who look for ways to market this [[type]] of [[junk]]. There must have been [[something]] censored out to [[get]] a PG-13 [[rating]], but it was still [[awful]]. [[Though]] there was ever a [[calls]] to make a [[amiss]] [[cinematography]] that reflected how stupid humanity could become, this one [[ought]] take the prize. The [[intrigue]] centers around bible prophecies that lie in hidden messages of the [[scripture]] that prompt a group of power-seeking thugs to attempt total control of the world. [[Jen]] how [[foolish]] does this writer believe people to actually be?

The acting was bad at best. [[Kaspar]] Van Dien wasted his talent doing this film. [[Michel]] York's work was a fair [[teaming]] for the role, [[because]] he was the center of the film, and did a good job.

This plot was sickening and very [[ominous]]. No tender or immature minds should [[seeing]] this film. This is how a basic good vs. evil plot can go astray.

There must be a lot of mental disease floating around the film circles, who look for ways to market this [[genre]] of [[trash]]. There must have been [[anything]] censored out to [[gets]] a PG-13 [[evaluations]], but it was still [[scary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3957 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[want]] to warn you that there is a very bittersweet quality to this comment. Also, this comment will be much more meaningful to you after you have seen the movie.

[[Although]] it is [[tragically]] sad to say, that movie bears a resemblance to my life that is so [[striking]] that it is [[truly]] scary. The rest of you will never [[know]] how [[accurately]] that [[movie]] [[depicts]] how persons who have been in [[situations]] like that act and [[react]] in their later lives.

This [[could]] not have been a [[work]] of fiction; it had to be based on personal experience.

My testament to the how [[good]] the movie was is shown by the fact that, although it was one of the [[best]] movies I've ever [[seen]], watching my [[life]] portrayed on the silver screen was such a searingly painful experience that I will never be [[able]] to [[see]] it again.

But I [[endorse]] it [[heartily]] to all [[others]] as a [[chance]] to peer into the [[soul]] of another human being to the [[extent]] that you [[probably]] never [[experienced]] before or will ever again. I know that for a fact, because that's my soul you will be observing. I [[wanna]] to warn you that there is a very bittersweet quality to this comment. Also, this comment will be much more meaningful to you after you have seen the movie.

[[Albeit]] it is [[unluckily]] sad to say, that movie bears a resemblance to my life that is so [[noteworthy]] that it is [[really]] scary. The rest of you will never [[savoir]] how [[exactly]] that [[films]] [[exemplifies]] how persons who have been in [[instances]] like that act and [[reacting]] in their later lives.

This [[would]] not have been a [[cooperating]] of fiction; it had to be based on personal experience.

My testament to the how [[alright]] the movie was is shown by the fact that, although it was one of the [[optimum]] movies I've ever [[watched]], watching my [[lifetime]] portrayed on the silver screen was such a searingly painful experience that I will never be [[capable]] to [[seeing]] it again.

But I [[countersigned]] it [[unreservedly]] to all [[alia]] as a [[likelihood]] to peer into the [[alma]] of another human being to the [[amplitude]] that you [[potentially]] never [[experimented]] before or will ever again. I know that for a fact, because that's my soul you will be observing. --------------------------------------------- Result 3958 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] [[In]] the glory days of the 90s (god rest its soul) you could [[turn]] on the [[great]] Comedy Central at any hour of the day and see the [[greatest]] sketch comedy show of all time Saturday Night Live. Whpat a [[glorious]] [[show]] that was, whether it was the original Not-Ready-for-Primetime Players or the second golden age of SNL featuring the greats- Chris Farley, Adam Sandler, David Spade... and then, it all went to [[hell]]. I was [[first]] exposed to MadTV about a year and a half ago, and I think I must've passed out from shock. How could a [[show]] so terrible prevail for so long? There are so many horrible [[flaws]]. I suppose I'll start with the writing. The writing, for most part, is terrible. It is nothing more than kindergarten bathroom humor. The cast, for the most part, is talentless. There are a few sketches I have enjoyed, such as some of Ms. Swan and Stuart, and there are a few talents on the show such as the magnificent Alex Borstein. Phil LaMarr is a talented actor, just not as a comedian. Although there a few [[sparse]] ha ha moments, they are not enough to redeem this endless line of horrible drivel [[populated]] by babbling idiots. Miss this one. [[Into]] the glory days of the 90s (god rest its soul) you could [[converting]] on the [[prodigious]] Comedy Central at any hour of the day and see the [[grandest]] sketch comedy show of all time Saturday Night Live. Whpat a [[wondrous]] [[exposition]] that was, whether it was the original Not-Ready-for-Primetime Players or the second golden age of SNL featuring the greats- Chris Farley, Adam Sandler, David Spade... and then, it all went to [[bordello]]. I was [[fiirst]] exposed to MadTV about a year and a half ago, and I think I must've passed out from shock. How could a [[exhibition]] so terrible prevail for so long? There are so many horrible [[demerits]]. I suppose I'll start with the writing. The writing, for most part, is terrible. It is nothing more than kindergarten bathroom humor. The cast, for the most part, is talentless. There are a few sketches I have enjoyed, such as some of Ms. Swan and Stuart, and there are a few talents on the show such as the magnificent Alex Borstein. Phil LaMarr is a talented actor, just not as a comedian. Although there a few [[dispersal]] ha ha moments, they are not enough to redeem this endless line of horrible drivel [[peopled]] by babbling idiots. Miss this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 3959 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] this [[movie]] was rather [[awful]] Vipul Shah's [[last]] [[movie]] was good this one was just bad although it's a good story and is [[handled]] in a great way Aatish Kapadia who adapted this movie from another gujarati play "Avjo Wahala Fari Malishu" made a good but slow pianful 2 and a half hours to watch there are a lot of [[flaws]] in this movie but it's still a entertainer [[songs]] are rather bleaked out and don't work well but they're still good [[overall]] not a movie you would enthusiastically watch it's still a story to take in to account and it's good if you're the relationship type pretty good movie with loads of flaws and humor that's really not needed even one bit this [[cinematic]] was rather [[horrendous]] Vipul Shah's [[latter]] [[kino]] was good this one was just bad although it's a good story and is [[manipulated]] in a great way Aatish Kapadia who adapted this movie from another gujarati play "Avjo Wahala Fari Malishu" made a good but slow pianful 2 and a half hours to watch there are a lot of [[demerits]] in this movie but it's still a entertainer [[anthems]] are rather bleaked out and don't work well but they're still good [[general]] not a movie you would enthusiastically watch it's still a story to take in to account and it's good if you're the relationship type pretty good movie with loads of flaws and humor that's really not needed even one bit --------------------------------------------- Result 3960 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] As a [[Native]] [[film]] [[professor]], I can [[honestly]] [[say]] that this is [[perhaps]] one of the [[worst]] [[films]] with [[Native]] content that I have ever viewed. I would rather [[get]] a [[root]] canal than [[view]] this film again. The [[use]] of stereotyping, uncreative attempts at [[utilizing]] [[portions]] of [[traditional]] [[coyote]] [[stories]] and [[poor]] [[camera]] [[work]] were only made [[worse]] by the glib uncreative story-line and bad [[script]]. The writer and director have [[displayed]] the worst parts of a colonized [[approach]] to [[portraying]] [[Native]] people and communities. [[If]] this [[person]] is [[Native]], they [[need]] to [[go]] home and [[apologize]] to everyone they [[know]] for being an apple and for the internalized racism and poor sense of humor that they have developed. If this [[person]] is non-native, they need to seriously re-examine their white [[privilege]] and [[ask]] themselves if they are [[displaying]] unexamined, unintentional racism, or if they are [[intentionally]] being ignorant. My only [[hope]] is that the [[Native]] [[actors]] in this [[film]] had a [[good]] [[time]] and at [[least]] [[got]] paid for their [[efforts]]. [[If]] you [[want]] to [[see]] [[good]] [[Native]] [[films]] then [[check]] out: Christmas in the Clouds, [[Dance]] me Outside, [[Medicine]] [[River]], PowWow [[Highway]], [[Smoke]] [[Signals]]...to name just a few. As a [[Natives]] [[kino]] [[profesor]], I can [[genuinely]] [[told]] that this is [[conceivably]] one of the [[hardest]] [[kino]] with [[Aborigines]] content that I have ever viewed. I would rather [[obtain]] a [[racine]] canal than [[views]] this film again. The [[usage]] of stereotyping, uncreative attempts at [[utilised]] [[portion]] of [[conventional]] [[ferryman]] [[tale]] and [[poorest]] [[cameras]] [[works]] were only made [[pire]] by the glib uncreative story-line and bad [[hyphen]]. The writer and director have [[show]] the worst parts of a colonized [[approaching]] to [[illustrating]] [[Aboriginal]] people and communities. [[Though]] this [[persons]] is [[Aboriginal]], they [[gotta]] to [[going]] home and [[apologizes]] to everyone they [[savoir]] for being an apple and for the internalized racism and poor sense of humor that they have developed. If this [[persons]] is non-native, they need to seriously re-examine their white [[privileges]] and [[enquired]] themselves if they are [[displayed]] unexamined, unintentional racism, or if they are [[knowingly]] being ignorant. My only [[hopes]] is that the [[Aboriginal]] [[protagonists]] in this [[cinematography]] had a [[buena]] [[period]] and at [[less]] [[did]] paid for their [[endeavor]]. [[Though]] you [[wish]] to [[consults]] [[buena]] [[Indigenous]] [[cinematographic]] then [[checks]] out: Christmas in the Clouds, [[Danced]] me Outside, [[Medicated]] [[Rivers]], PowWow [[Highways]], [[Tobacco]] [[Signalling]]...to name just a few. --------------------------------------------- Result 3961 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is difficult to watch in our fast-paced culture of the 21st century, but it is worth it for the messages that it conveys, chiefly the consequences and ramifications of technology upon society, specifically when that technology is used for warfare.

This movie presents a full circle cycle of dehumanization and rehumanization as influenced by the advent of technology and the subsequent deconstruction of civilization and therefore serves as a cautionary tale against the misuse of technology, but as the circle completes itself, familiar themes and sentiments pop up again to present self-serving rather than self-destructive ways that humanity may utilize technology.

Brilliant for it's time, the picture and sound quality may pose a challenge for some, but as a landmark in the history, development, and evolution of the sci-fi genre, it is a must. In the end, free will and free choice are once again posed to humanity as a means for controlling our own destiny rather than having it served to us by someone else or indeed, the state of

society itself, as shaped by world events.

Those who are downtrodden by what life throws their way sometimes tend to remain so, but yet there is always a glimmer of hope and continuity that remains, as this film posits.

As far as qualifying as sci-fi, one of the biggest common demoninators of that genre is it's speculative nature. It asks us the questions, what if these events happened this way, and what effect would it have on society or the individuals within it? How would we react?

As far as influence, this film projects those speculative sciences that make sci-fi as unique as it is and keeps us asking those important questions. --------------------------------------------- Result 3962 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Okay, as a long time Disney fan, I really -hate- direct-to-video Disney sequels. Walt HIMSELF didn't believe in them. He believed in "AND THEY LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER" being the end of it. But this one...REALLY [[ticked]] the taco. There were so many ripoffs of other Disney films in this, it wasn't [[funny]]. Quick summary, if you don't already know...: [[Melody]], the daughter of Ariel and Prince Eric, is born. Ursula's sister, Morganna (who basically looks like Ursula, if she were to dye herself green and go on the Ally Macbeal starvation diet) shows up and, after trying to do the newborn tyke in, and failing, prophesizes doom for the characters. After that ordeal, Ariel goes into a lapse of being like her father, and refuses to tell Melody about her mermaid heritage, and later on, forbids her to go near the sea. Well surprise surprise. Melody finds out, being the stubborn brat she is, and runs away, then makes a deal with Morgana to become a mermaid, in exchange for something. (Gee does THAT sound familiar?) She becomes one, but in her half of the bargain, has to retrieve her granddaddy's Trident and bring it back to the sea witch. While doing THIS, she runs into a couple of outcast animals, a penguin and a walrus named Timon and Pumb--huh? wait...no! that's not Timon and Pumbaa! or is it? Could of fooled me. Anyway, i'd like to reveal more, but pretty much anything that could be guessed to happen does. OK so...long story short. This movie "borrows" too much from other (better) Disney films...and does it horribly. Come on...Tip and Dash? Why not just make Dash obscenely flatulent and make it an even more obvious ripoff! Ugh. Not to mention, the total character butchery of Ariel's persona. She's gone from being a freespirited, headstrong woman, to a clone of her father. Not good at all...they're basically telling us the sweet, firey little mermaid we've known to grow and love is dead. Plus Melody herself isn't such a great character either...she's damned annoying! And bratty! Not to mention what they've done to Flounder. Ugh...anyway if you decide to see this piece of created-mainly-for-profit-reasons, no-imagination, Eisner-sponsored c******t, I suggest maybe waiting 'till its on the Disney channel or some other tv station. Because, it's not even worth the price of a rental.

* out of ***** stars. Okay, as a long time Disney fan, I really -hate- direct-to-video Disney sequels. Walt HIMSELF didn't believe in them. He believed in "AND THEY LIVED HAPPILY EVER AFTER" being the end of it. But this one...REALLY [[clicked]] the taco. There were so many ripoffs of other Disney films in this, it wasn't [[droll]]. Quick summary, if you don't already know...: [[Tune]], the daughter of Ariel and Prince Eric, is born. Ursula's sister, Morganna (who basically looks like Ursula, if she were to dye herself green and go on the Ally Macbeal starvation diet) shows up and, after trying to do the newborn tyke in, and failing, prophesizes doom for the characters. After that ordeal, Ariel goes into a lapse of being like her father, and refuses to tell Melody about her mermaid heritage, and later on, forbids her to go near the sea. Well surprise surprise. Melody finds out, being the stubborn brat she is, and runs away, then makes a deal with Morgana to become a mermaid, in exchange for something. (Gee does THAT sound familiar?) She becomes one, but in her half of the bargain, has to retrieve her granddaddy's Trident and bring it back to the sea witch. While doing THIS, she runs into a couple of outcast animals, a penguin and a walrus named Timon and Pumb--huh? wait...no! that's not Timon and Pumbaa! or is it? Could of fooled me. Anyway, i'd like to reveal more, but pretty much anything that could be guessed to happen does. OK so...long story short. This movie "borrows" too much from other (better) Disney films...and does it horribly. Come on...Tip and Dash? Why not just make Dash obscenely flatulent and make it an even more obvious ripoff! Ugh. Not to mention, the total character butchery of Ariel's persona. She's gone from being a freespirited, headstrong woman, to a clone of her father. Not good at all...they're basically telling us the sweet, firey little mermaid we've known to grow and love is dead. Plus Melody herself isn't such a great character either...she's damned annoying! And bratty! Not to mention what they've done to Flounder. Ugh...anyway if you decide to see this piece of created-mainly-for-profit-reasons, no-imagination, Eisner-sponsored c******t, I suggest maybe waiting 'till its on the Disney channel or some other tv station. Because, it's not even worth the price of a rental.

* out of ***** stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 3963 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I went in to this movie thinking it was going to be the next Clerks, but left feeling [[let]] down. The humor was [[weak]] and the characters fairly flat. That isn't to say it was all bad, the idea of the dating service in the grocery store seemed like pretty fertile material, but the director switched focus to the cliche'd "save the Mom-and-Pop store from the evil corporation guy". I felt like if he would have just stuck with the dating service plot, he would have come out with a much more memorable movie. Now, to do the film justice, I am from the Rochester area and loved the way he portrayed Webster. In fact, the best Kevin Smith (of Clerks) homage here was giving props to his hometown. Webster, NY is to Checkout what Red Bank, NJ is to Clerks. The director wisely threw in a date at Nick Tahou's. Trust me, as far as things to do in Rochester, a garbage plate is at the top of the list. I was lucky enough to see this film at the Little in Rochester so everybody knew when the odes to the town came up and appreciated them. I went in to this movie thinking it was going to be the next Clerks, but left feeling [[leaving]] down. The humor was [[fragile]] and the characters fairly flat. That isn't to say it was all bad, the idea of the dating service in the grocery store seemed like pretty fertile material, but the director switched focus to the cliche'd "save the Mom-and-Pop store from the evil corporation guy". I felt like if he would have just stuck with the dating service plot, he would have come out with a much more memorable movie. Now, to do the film justice, I am from the Rochester area and loved the way he portrayed Webster. In fact, the best Kevin Smith (of Clerks) homage here was giving props to his hometown. Webster, NY is to Checkout what Red Bank, NJ is to Clerks. The director wisely threw in a date at Nick Tahou's. Trust me, as far as things to do in Rochester, a garbage plate is at the top of the list. I was lucky enough to see this film at the Little in Rochester so everybody knew when the odes to the town came up and appreciated them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3964 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Wow]]. I do not think I have ever seen a movie with so [[many]] great actors that had such a pivotal role so miscast. Justin Timberlake is perhaps the single [[worst]] [[actor]] to land a bigtime role in a movie with the [[star]] power and money behind it that Edison had.

His acting was [[PAINFUL]] to observe. The story was OK and all the other characters were played by [[professional]] actors, heck, even LL Cool J was fine since he has had numerous small parts to cut his teeth on. How the director and movie company figured that Timberlake was ready for this role there is no way to comprehend.

His character ruins the entire experience since every time he is on screen you are actually rooting for the corrupt cops to cap his sorry ass, and he is supposed to be the hero... I would not waste money on this one at the theater or on video. MAYBE if you have HBO and have NOTHING else to do at 2am on a Saturday night and you are drunk and stoned, this may be OK.

Watching Timberlake in this role was like watching a human 'Kermit the Frog' act in a Hollywood Blockbuster, just didn't [[work]] at all. [[Whoo]]. I do not think I have ever seen a movie with so [[numerous]] great actors that had such a pivotal role so miscast. Justin Timberlake is perhaps the single [[gravest]] [[actress]] to land a bigtime role in a movie with the [[stars]] power and money behind it that Edison had.

His acting was [[AGONIZING]] to observe. The story was OK and all the other characters were played by [[occupational]] actors, heck, even LL Cool J was fine since he has had numerous small parts to cut his teeth on. How the director and movie company figured that Timberlake was ready for this role there is no way to comprehend.

His character ruins the entire experience since every time he is on screen you are actually rooting for the corrupt cops to cap his sorry ass, and he is supposed to be the hero... I would not waste money on this one at the theater or on video. MAYBE if you have HBO and have NOTHING else to do at 2am on a Saturday night and you are drunk and stoned, this may be OK.

Watching Timberlake in this role was like watching a human 'Kermit the Frog' act in a Hollywood Blockbuster, just didn't [[collaborate]] at all. --------------------------------------------- Result 3965 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I've seen this [[film]] on Sky Cinema not too long [[ago]].. I must [[admit]], it was a really [[good]] Western which [[features]] 2 of the [[big]] names.. On one side, there's Charlton Heston, playing the infamous and retired lawman Samuel Burgade. On the other.. The late James Coburn playing the villainous Zach Provo.. seeking revenge on Burgade no [[matter]] what the cost..!

The good thing about this film was there was some really good [[characters]].. Most of the actors played it out really well.. Especially James Coburn, who I find that he was really mean in this film.. But that how it was..

Christopher Mitchum, who I've seen everywhere in other films.. Playing Hal Brickman.. I felt his character was left out in the cold, but he manage to get himself back in by teaming up with Burgade, to bring down Provo's posse's!

[[All]] in all, it was a [[great]] film.. Very good to watch.. Great score from the late Jerry Goldsmith..

Wonderful piece of Western persona..! 8 out of 10. I've seen this [[kino]] on Sky Cinema not too long [[formerly]].. I must [[accept]], it was a really [[alright]] Western which [[idiosyncrasies]] 2 of the [[prodigious]] names.. On one side, there's Charlton Heston, playing the infamous and retired lawman Samuel Burgade. On the other.. The late James Coburn playing the villainous Zach Provo.. seeking revenge on Burgade no [[topic]] what the cost..!

The good thing about this film was there was some really good [[features]].. Most of the actors played it out really well.. Especially James Coburn, who I find that he was really mean in this film.. But that how it was..

Christopher Mitchum, who I've seen everywhere in other films.. Playing Hal Brickman.. I felt his character was left out in the cold, but he manage to get himself back in by teaming up with Burgade, to bring down Provo's posse's!

[[Totality]] in all, it was a [[whopping]] film.. Very good to watch.. Great score from the late Jerry Goldsmith..

Wonderful piece of Western persona..! 8 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 3966 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (72%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I saw this movie recently because a friend brought it with him from NYC. After 30 minutes, I said to him," You've got to be kidding. Is this some sort of joke?" He thought it was good. I told him that I thought it was probably one of the silliest movies ever made. "What was it supposed to be?" I asked. "A propaganda movie made for children?" The plot is stupid. The acting is the [[worst]] ever for most of the principals and frankly people who look at this sort of tripe and think it has anything to do with life, love or even afterlife, of which it offers an incredibly idiotic view...need some psychiatric help. Please, if someone tries to get you to stick this in your DVD or Video player, consider it like you would a virus introduced into your computer...it won't destroy your player but it will destroy your evening. If they had made Razzies in the '40s, this would have won in every category. (PS. It also goes under the dubious sobriquet of "Stairway to Heaven.") I saw this movie recently because a friend brought it with him from NYC. After 30 minutes, I said to him," You've got to be kidding. Is this some sort of joke?" He thought it was good. I told him that I thought it was probably one of the silliest movies ever made. "What was it supposed to be?" I asked. "A propaganda movie made for children?" The plot is stupid. The acting is the [[hardest]] ever for most of the principals and frankly people who look at this sort of tripe and think it has anything to do with life, love or even afterlife, of which it offers an incredibly idiotic view...need some psychiatric help. Please, if someone tries to get you to stick this in your DVD or Video player, consider it like you would a virus introduced into your computer...it won't destroy your player but it will destroy your evening. If they had made Razzies in the '40s, this would have won in every category. (PS. It also goes under the dubious sobriquet of "Stairway to Heaven.") --------------------------------------------- Result 3967 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I [[gave]] this [[movie]] a [[single]] [[star]] only because it was impossible to [[give]] it less.

Scientists have developed a formula for replicating any organism. [[In]] their lab(a run down [[warehouse]] in L.A.), they [[create]] a T-Rex. A group of industrial spies [[break]] in to steal the formula and the [[remainder]] of the [[film]] is one [[endless]] foot chase.

Of course the T-Rex(a rubber puppet)gets loose and commences to wipe out the cast. It has the amazing ability to sneak up within 2 or 3 feet of someone without them noticing and then promptly bites their head off.

One cast member escapes in a police car and spends the remainder of the film driving aimlessly through the city. She is of such superior mental ability that she can't even operate the radio. She never makes any attempt to drive to a substation or a donut shop and appears hopelessly lost.

The T-Rex wreaks havoc throughout the city, there are blazing gun battles and buildings(cardboard mock-ups)blowing up, but a single police car, or the army, nor anyone else ever shows up. Such activity must be commonplace in Los Angeles.

We can only hope that a sequel isn't planned. I [[provided]] this [[cinematographic]] a [[exclusive]] [[superstar]] only because it was impossible to [[confer]] it less.

Scientists have developed a formula for replicating any organism. [[During]] their lab(a run down [[platt]] in L.A.), they [[creating]] a T-Rex. A group of industrial spies [[blackout]] in to steal the formula and the [[remaining]] of the [[kino]] is one [[interminable]] foot chase.

Of course the T-Rex(a rubber puppet)gets loose and commences to wipe out the cast. It has the amazing ability to sneak up within 2 or 3 feet of someone without them noticing and then promptly bites their head off.

One cast member escapes in a police car and spends the remainder of the film driving aimlessly through the city. She is of such superior mental ability that she can't even operate the radio. She never makes any attempt to drive to a substation or a donut shop and appears hopelessly lost.

The T-Rex wreaks havoc throughout the city, there are blazing gun battles and buildings(cardboard mock-ups)blowing up, but a single police car, or the army, nor anyone else ever shows up. Such activity must be commonplace in Los Angeles.

We can only hope that a sequel isn't planned. --------------------------------------------- Result 3968 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] This is probably the [[worst]] [[movie]] I have ever seen, (yes it's even [[worse]] than Dungeons and [[Dragons]] and any [[film]] [[starring]] [[Kevin]] Costner.)

[[Chris]] [[Rock]] [[looked]] very [[uncomfortable]] [[throughout]] this [[whole]] [[film]], and his supporting [[actors]] didn't [[even]] look [[like]] they were trying to [[act]]. [[Chris]] Rock is a [[wonderful]] stand-up [[comedian]], but he just can't transfer his talent to this [[film]], which probably only has two strained [[laughs]] in the [[whole]] [[picture]].

[[If]] you haven't [[watched]] this film [[yet]], [[avoid]] it like the [[plague]]. Go do something constructive and more interesting like watching the weather channel or watching paint dry on a brick [[wall]].

For Chris' efforts I give it a 2/10!

This is probably the [[hardest]] [[movies]] I have ever seen, (yes it's even [[pire]] than Dungeons and [[Dragoons]] and any [[movies]] [[featuring]] [[Kev]] Costner.)

[[Kris]] [[Boulder]] [[seemed]] very [[uneasy]] [[around]] this [[ensemble]] [[cinematographic]], and his supporting [[players]] didn't [[yet]] look [[iike]] they were trying to [[ley]]. [[Chrissy]] Rock is a [[wondrous]] stand-up [[comedy]], but he just can't transfer his talent to this [[kino]], which probably only has two strained [[smiles]] in the [[together]] [[photograph]].

[[Though]] you haven't [[saw]] this film [[again]], [[shirk]] it like the [[pestilence]]. Go do something constructive and more interesting like watching the weather channel or watching paint dry on a brick [[mur]].

For Chris' efforts I give it a 2/10!

--------------------------------------------- Result 3969 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Everybody's got bills to pay, and that [[includes]] [[Christopher]] Walken.

[[In]] Vietnam, a [[group]] a [[soldiers]] discover that the war is over and are [[heading]] back [[home]] when they spot a bunch of [[POWs]], [[including]] Christopher Walken. Following a [[Mad]] Max 3 (!) Thunderdome [[fight]], and a [[short]] [[massacre]] [[later]]. Walken and some [[Colombian]] [[guy]] [[split]] a [[dollar]] [[bill]] [[promising]] [[something]] or other.

Cut to the present (1991), and Colombian guy is leading a revolution against El Presidente. He's successful at first, but after El [[Presidente]] threatens to crush folks with a tank, he's forced to surrender and is shot in the head on live television. This is shown in full [[gory]] [[detail]] as a news flash on [[American]] telly, which leads Walken to [[assemble]] the old squad (even though he wasn't actually part of that squad to begin with), in order to invade [[Colombia]] and [[gun]] down thousands of people.

McBain is a monumentally stupid film, but for all that it's also a [[good]] laugh, and [[action]] [[packed]] too. This is one of those [[movies]] where logic is given a wide berth - how else could Walken shoot a fighter pilot in the head from another plane without suffering from decompression, or even breaking a window? Also, it seems that these guys can gun down scores of drug dealers in New [[York]] without the police bothering.

There's plenty of b-movie madness to chew on here, from Michael Ironside's diabolical acting in the Vietnam sequence, to the heroic but entirely pointless death of one of the heroes, to the side splitting confrontation between Walken and El Presidente, and let's not forget the impassioned speech by the sister of the rebel leader, being watched on television in America (nearly brought a brown tear to my nether-eye, that bit).

It's out there for a quid. Buy it if you have a sense of humour. See how many times you can spot the camera crew too. Everybody's got bills to pay, and that [[involves]] [[Cristobal]] Walken.

[[For]] Vietnam, a [[clusters]] a [[solider]] discover that the war is over and are [[header]] back [[habitation]] when they spot a bunch of [[inmate]], [[encompassing]] Christopher Walken. Following a [[Madman]] Max 3 (!) Thunderdome [[wrestling]], and a [[succinct]] [[carnage]] [[then]]. Walken and some [[Columbian]] [[dude]] [[hyphenate]] a [[greenback]] [[invoice]] [[promise]] [[algo]] or other.

Cut to the present (1991), and Colombian guy is leading a revolution against El Presidente. He's successful at first, but after El [[Chairman]] threatens to crush folks with a tank, he's forced to surrender and is shot in the head on live television. This is shown in full [[gori]] [[details]] as a news flash on [[Americana]] telly, which leads Walken to [[assembling]] the old squad (even though he wasn't actually part of that squad to begin with), in order to invade [[Columbia]] and [[shotgun]] down thousands of people.

McBain is a monumentally stupid film, but for all that it's also a [[alright]] laugh, and [[activity]] [[packing]] too. This is one of those [[kino]] where logic is given a wide berth - how else could Walken shoot a fighter pilot in the head from another plane without suffering from decompression, or even breaking a window? Also, it seems that these guys can gun down scores of drug dealers in New [[Yorke]] without the police bothering.

There's plenty of b-movie madness to chew on here, from Michael Ironside's diabolical acting in the Vietnam sequence, to the heroic but entirely pointless death of one of the heroes, to the side splitting confrontation between Walken and El Presidente, and let's not forget the impassioned speech by the sister of the rebel leader, being watched on television in America (nearly brought a brown tear to my nether-eye, that bit).

It's out there for a quid. Buy it if you have a sense of humour. See how many times you can spot the camera crew too. --------------------------------------------- Result 3970 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Return to Cabin by the Lake does not, in any way, stand up to the original. With only one main character (Stanley) returning for the sequal, the film is not even worth the 2 hours of your time. I am a huge fan of the first film, the story line and acting was really good, but this is one movie that I will never again watch. It is basically equal to what the sequals to Urban Legends and Blair Witch were like, but with much worse acting. I've personally seen better acting in soap operas, it is so pitiful that you just have to laugh. I, in no way, recommend this movie to anyone, watching it will just detract from the first. --------------------------------------------- Result 3971 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (96%)]] this film really [[tries]] to hard. if your going to make a [[horror]] film, at [[least]] [[give]] it a reason to believe in to hook the viewer.

you wait and wait through the film expecting for some grand explanation but it doesn't. instead it [[tries]] to be too [[clever]] ending and not revealing anything.

what was the point of the movie ? where it's actually going ? and more importantly what the [[hell]] was going on . . .

why were they there and how does it tie into anything? just another [[weak]] sci-fi [[horror]]. i love the [[fake]] [[reviews]] on IMDb [[saying]] how [[great]] it is by [[related]] [[press]] [[releases]] to bump the [[movie]] ([[either]] that or people have low horizons). it's not worth your 2hrs at all.

i'm not [[saying]] the [[film]] is [[better]] than the fragile, but at [[least]] that [[gave]] you reasoning and why things happened and has an end [[result]]. this doesn't and it just waffle's on with [[tons]] of padding to make everything feel [[scary]]. this [[film]] is about as low as when a [[stranger]] [[calls]]. [[god]] that was lame too.

[[big]] tip, if your gonna [[make]] a [[horror]], make it believable with reasoning and [[explain]] to the [[viewer]] what's [[going]] on, so they have a [[hook]] into your [[story]]. because if there's no [[reasoning]] or believability then there's no firm hold on [[anything]] and it can't be [[scary]]. no [[disrespect]] to the cast or [[crew]] cause they did a good [[job]]. it's just the poor [[writing]]. this film really [[strives]] to hard. if your going to make a [[abomination]] film, at [[lowest]] [[confer]] it a reason to believe in to hook the viewer.

you wait and wait through the film expecting for some grand explanation but it doesn't. instead it [[endeavour]] to be too [[shrewd]] ending and not revealing anything.

what was the point of the movie ? where it's actually going ? and more importantly what the [[inferno]] was going on . . .

why were they there and how does it tie into anything? just another [[fragile]] sci-fi [[terror]]. i love the [[untruthful]] [[inspect]] on IMDb [[telling]] how [[wondrous]] it is by [[tied]] [[pressing]] [[freed]] to bump the [[filmmaking]] ([[neither]] that or people have low horizons). it's not worth your 2hrs at all.

i'm not [[arguing]] the [[cinematography]] is [[best]] than the fragile, but at [[minus]] that [[handed]] you reasoning and why things happened and has an end [[conclusions]]. this doesn't and it just waffle's on with [[ton]] of padding to make everything feel [[fearful]]. this [[cinema]] is about as low as when a [[foreigner]] [[inviting]]. [[seigneur]] that was lame too.

[[vast]] tip, if your gonna [[deliver]] a [[terror]], make it believable with reasoning and [[explains]] to the [[onlooker]] what's [[go]] on, so they have a [[hooks]] into your [[tales]]. because if there's no [[justification]] or believability then there's no firm hold on [[algo]] and it can't be [[fearful]]. no [[disregard]] to the cast or [[crewmen]] cause they did a good [[workplace]]. it's just the poor [[writes]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 3972 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Unless you are an Evangelical Christian then make like an Egyptian and avoid like the biblical plague.

Awful - why oh why does IMDb list the most favourable reviews at the top of the list - it was due to one of these that I have just wasted the end of what started out as good evening on this claptrap.

The plot premise started out strong enough - I was drawn into the film and was interested right up to the point where the Bible sermons took over. What a waste.

This film has so incensed me that I have registered with IMDb for the first time just to complain about it - I hope at least that by doing so I save someone else's evening.

Hay - what a Christian act on my part ;-) --------------------------------------------- Result 3973 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] This is such a [[great]] movie "Call Me [[Anna]]" because it [[shows]] how a [[person]] has suffered for so long without knowing what was [[wrong]] with her. For Patty Duke to come out in the publics eye and [[tell]] her story is an inspiration to those who [[suffer]] from this [[disease]]. I have a [[lot]] of respect for her as a [[person]]. The only [[thing]] I don't like is I can't get it on [[tape]], I've [[tried]] [[looking]] for it but with no success. Any one know how to get it? This is such a [[whopping]] movie "Call Me [[Annas]]" because it [[denotes]] how a [[anybody]] has suffered for so long without knowing what was [[inaccurate]] with her. For Patty Duke to come out in the publics eye and [[say]] her story is an inspiration to those who [[suffers]] from this [[malady]]. I have a [[batch]] of respect for her as a [[anybody]]. The only [[stuff]] I don't like is I can't get it on [[cassettes]], I've [[attempting]] [[researching]] for it but with no success. Any one know how to get it? --------------------------------------------- Result 3974 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] [[Where]] to [[begin]]? Anachronism? High [[tech]] [[cross]] bow with a scope in about 500AD? Arrows with explosive charges in 500AD? A [[monster]] Grendel that [[looks]] like a robocop and [[obviously]] never [[interacts]] with any of the [[weapons]] [[fired]] or swung against him? The heart torn out of his victim's chest without any sense of contact? Possibly the [[blond]] who [[would]] [[fit]] in on a [[recent]] [[fashion]] [[show]] with her make-up and streaked hair? The ancient Danish court [[represented]] in Classical [[Greek]] [[style]]? The queen [[played]] by [[Marina]] Sirtis more savaged by her [[makeup]] [[artist]] than by madness? The [[effects]] are [[way]] too [[weak]] to [[carry]] this story. There are some stories that don't mind or [[even]] benefit from [[cheap]] [[effects]], but this Grendel isn't one of them.

What about characters who seem to [[jump]] about in their attitudes without motivation? A bravado [[idiot]] [[prince]] whose home has already been savaged more than once by the monster Grendel seems to have less respect for the danger he faces than Beowulf who was sent from afar from the land of the Geats to help the desperate Danes. In this it [[feels]] more like an old cowboy western than any kind of myth.

Beowulf is an ancient tale from an era with almost no literary tradition and much of both its sentiment and its drama is obscure. I suspect that any modern telling which doesn't make an intelligent attempt to penetrate the obscurity must fail. I didn't love the recent "Beowulf and Grendel" which sees Grendel essentially as human and sees Hrothgar and his Danes as too arrogant and stupid to recognize Grendel's attacks as well-justified vengeance, but I had to respect its revisionist position that Hrothgar's Danes were a bunch of macho thugs who never grasped, even after it was all over, that they had brought this nightmare on themselves, and therefore, the original story of Beowulf, as it was written, was a misrepresentation of the real story. I think there's a more complex meaning to be understood than that, but this "Grendel's" terrible secret that Grendel's attacks are tied to previous human sacrifice doesn't really bring us closer to the shame experienced by Hrothgar and the Danes.

This Beowulf has little to recommend it as traditional myth or as modern fantasy. I give it a 4: higher than it deserves, but always hopeful that a poor effort will draw attention by someone who is up to telling the story intelligently. In the meantime, Sci-Fi's movie-making seems to be following the NASA policy that it's better to build lots of probes that fail than a few that succeed. [[Wherever]] to [[initiates]]? Anachronism? High [[technique]] [[traverse]] bow with a scope in about 500AD? Arrows with explosive charges in 500AD? A [[monsters]] Grendel that [[seem]] like a robocop and [[apparently]] never [[communicate]] with any of the [[waffen]] [[sacked]] or swung against him? The heart torn out of his victim's chest without any sense of contact? Possibly the [[blonde]] who [[could]] [[fitting]] in on a [[freshly]] [[manner]] [[displays]] with her make-up and streaked hair? The ancient Danish court [[constituted]] in Classical [[Greco]] [[elegance]]? The queen [[accomplished]] by [[Marines]] Sirtis more savaged by her [[composition]] [[artiste]] than by madness? The [[influences]] are [[paths]] too [[fragile]] to [[bears]] this story. There are some stories that don't mind or [[yet]] benefit from [[inexpensive]] [[repercussions]], but this Grendel isn't one of them.

What about characters who seem to [[hop]] about in their attitudes without motivation? A bravado [[douche]] [[prinz]] whose home has already been savaged more than once by the monster Grendel seems to have less respect for the danger he faces than Beowulf who was sent from afar from the land of the Geats to help the desperate Danes. In this it [[believes]] more like an old cowboy western than any kind of myth.

Beowulf is an ancient tale from an era with almost no literary tradition and much of both its sentiment and its drama is obscure. I suspect that any modern telling which doesn't make an intelligent attempt to penetrate the obscurity must fail. I didn't love the recent "Beowulf and Grendel" which sees Grendel essentially as human and sees Hrothgar and his Danes as too arrogant and stupid to recognize Grendel's attacks as well-justified vengeance, but I had to respect its revisionist position that Hrothgar's Danes were a bunch of macho thugs who never grasped, even after it was all over, that they had brought this nightmare on themselves, and therefore, the original story of Beowulf, as it was written, was a misrepresentation of the real story. I think there's a more complex meaning to be understood than that, but this "Grendel's" terrible secret that Grendel's attacks are tied to previous human sacrifice doesn't really bring us closer to the shame experienced by Hrothgar and the Danes.

This Beowulf has little to recommend it as traditional myth or as modern fantasy. I give it a 4: higher than it deserves, but always hopeful that a poor effort will draw attention by someone who is up to telling the story intelligently. In the meantime, Sci-Fi's movie-making seems to be following the NASA policy that it's better to build lots of probes that fail than a few that succeed. --------------------------------------------- Result 3975 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (88%)]] This was a disappointment - [[none]] of the [[nuance]] of the original. The [[Brits]] just seem to be able to make a truly unsettling film with none of the over-the-top histrionics of the American version. The original series combined both creepy stories and subtlety of performance with great attention to lighting and settings. I have watched the series many times and am still enthralled.

[[Just]] another [[poor]] [[adaptation]] along the lines of the dreadful adaptation of "Cracker". [[Get]] hooked up with BBC America or BBC Canada and watch for such delights as Waking the Dead, Spooks, Silent Witness, and Judge John Deed. Watch the original Touching Evil, then look for "Wire in the Blood" for more of the truly understated, elegant performance of Robson Green. Hollywood needs to have a look at this actor! This was a disappointment - [[nos]] of the [[shading]] of the original. The [[Briton]] just seem to be able to make a truly unsettling film with none of the over-the-top histrionics of the American version. The original series combined both creepy stories and subtlety of performance with great attention to lighting and settings. I have watched the series many times and am still enthralled.

[[Virtuous]] another [[pauper]] [[adaptations]] along the lines of the dreadful adaptation of "Cracker". [[Obtain]] hooked up with BBC America or BBC Canada and watch for such delights as Waking the Dead, Spooks, Silent Witness, and Judge John Deed. Watch the original Touching Evil, then look for "Wire in the Blood" for more of the truly understated, elegant performance of Robson Green. Hollywood needs to have a look at this actor! --------------------------------------------- Result 3976 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] 'Intervention' has helped me with my own addictions and recovery. I'm a middle-aged married father of two. I'm quite functional in my personal and professional life. Still, I have pain from my past that I use addictions to soothe, and issues from which I am slowly recovering. When these addicts and their families share their lives with me, they help me to improve my life and my relationship with my family.

The show, unlike many others, digs into the past of the addict and reveals events that probably caused their addiction. Many of us suffer because it's too scary to go back and do, as Alice Miller says, "the discovery and emotional acceptance of the truth in the individual and unique history of our childhood." The show deserves a lot of credit for at least getting this process started. This digging is painful and difficult, but worth it. So much coverage of addiction -- fictional and non-fictional -- seems to ignore the underlying issues. Often it's assumed that the addict just one day started to shoot up or whatever for fun or pleasure or self-interest, and now they can't stop. Not so: addictions are about killing pain. I can relate to the different events and hardships in people's lives. There are common themes, and surprising exceptions. Many addicts have suffered miserable abuse. Some kids simply respond badly to divorce. To those who think that addiction is an over-reaction to a hardship, I would just say that different people respond differently. Although some kids handle divorce well, others, like Cristy in the show, "collapse in a heap on the floor" and have their lives forever changed by the event.

For example, last night's counselor said that pretty young Andrea seeks validation from men. She strips for cash for a 75-year old neighbor and lets men abuse her. Sound familiar to anyone? The series is filled with information that we can use to understand our own motivations and make adjustments to our lives. Often it's those of us with smaller issues who suffer the longest. As they say, even a stopped watch is right twice a day, but a slow watch can go undetected for quite a while, until it's made your life miserable.

To the producers: Thank you for making the show, for digging into the past, for the follow-ups. Also, the graphics, the format, and the theme music are brilliant.

To the addicts: thank you for your courage to share. Whether or not you have helped yourself, you have helped me. --------------------------------------------- Result 3977 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] After reading all of the rave reviews about this film and a few that give it a so-so. I finally decided to throw in my no cents worth. I agree with most on the point that if it hadn't been for Lauren Lewis and Chris Ferry it would have been a [[disaster]]. Filmed in Mariette OH. just north of Dogpatch where all the real talent fled south down I-77 years ago, at least as far as a tank of gas would allow. I did get a chuckle from reviewers who subtly claim that they cerebrate a little better than most by claiming they followed the plot without an inkling of confusion. This wee tale by the Brothers Crook is like an old record with a skip in it. As an American I understand the difficulties Ind film artists have to face. A trip to Romania would have wiped out the budget for sure. Lets face it this whole film was a loop de loop of Claire in the gas station, Claire on the side of the road, Claire under the bleachers, Claire in the house, Claire in the cornfield, Claire at school. Claire here and Claire there. It almost became monotonous and would have if she had not been the best actor in the cast. Josh and Jeff have to make a living but don't write a two page script and turn it into an hour,twenty flick. Before writing another screenplay about dreaming ghosts watch an episode or two of Ghost Whisperer or something and get a little background. All of the cast except the above mentioned and a couple of others were engaged in their first and last film. Also, there is an appearance by co-director Jeff as he is in all his films. Just like Alfred Hitchcock, eh? One thing the film had going for it is that the cameraman seemed to have a fixation on Lauren Lewis' derrière. Well, with all sarcasm now satisfied I still recommend the film for the horror buff just to see this young actress in the formative time of her career (I hope)and that Chris Ferry has established himself as a villain worth watching. After reading all of the rave reviews about this film and a few that give it a so-so. I finally decided to throw in my no cents worth. I agree with most on the point that if it hadn't been for Lauren Lewis and Chris Ferry it would have been a [[cataclysm]]. Filmed in Mariette OH. just north of Dogpatch where all the real talent fled south down I-77 years ago, at least as far as a tank of gas would allow. I did get a chuckle from reviewers who subtly claim that they cerebrate a little better than most by claiming they followed the plot without an inkling of confusion. This wee tale by the Brothers Crook is like an old record with a skip in it. As an American I understand the difficulties Ind film artists have to face. A trip to Romania would have wiped out the budget for sure. Lets face it this whole film was a loop de loop of Claire in the gas station, Claire on the side of the road, Claire under the bleachers, Claire in the house, Claire in the cornfield, Claire at school. Claire here and Claire there. It almost became monotonous and would have if she had not been the best actor in the cast. Josh and Jeff have to make a living but don't write a two page script and turn it into an hour,twenty flick. Before writing another screenplay about dreaming ghosts watch an episode or two of Ghost Whisperer or something and get a little background. All of the cast except the above mentioned and a couple of others were engaged in their first and last film. Also, there is an appearance by co-director Jeff as he is in all his films. Just like Alfred Hitchcock, eh? One thing the film had going for it is that the cameraman seemed to have a fixation on Lauren Lewis' derrière. Well, with all sarcasm now satisfied I still recommend the film for the horror buff just to see this young actress in the formative time of her career (I hope)and that Chris Ferry has established himself as a villain worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 3978 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] A trio of low-life criminals, led by Matt Dillon, botches a late-night burglary. They flee but quickly cross paths with the police who just happen to be in hot pursuit of a terrorist. Of course the police mistake the burglar gang for the terrorist, the real terrorist gets away, and the burglars are forced to take refuge in a small dive of a bar, taking hostages, unaware why the police are so intent on catching them. And guess who else has picked the bar as a sanctuary for the night?

[[Unbelievable]]? Absolutely. And it goes down hill from there. Spacey did acquire a good bit of acting talent; Matt Dillon, Faye Dunaway, Gary Sinise, Viggo Mortensen, and M. Emmett Walsh, but they're all wasted. Mostly because after all the characters get stuck in the bar, all they do for the remainder of the film is argue. Endlessly and aimlessly. Long before the conclusion of the film you've stopped giving a damn about what happens to them. A trio of low-life criminals, led by Matt Dillon, botches a late-night burglary. They flee but quickly cross paths with the police who just happen to be in hot pursuit of a terrorist. Of course the police mistake the burglar gang for the terrorist, the real terrorist gets away, and the burglars are forced to take refuge in a small dive of a bar, taking hostages, unaware why the police are so intent on catching them. And guess who else has picked the bar as a sanctuary for the night?

[[Phenomenal]]? Absolutely. And it goes down hill from there. Spacey did acquire a good bit of acting talent; Matt Dillon, Faye Dunaway, Gary Sinise, Viggo Mortensen, and M. Emmett Walsh, but they're all wasted. Mostly because after all the characters get stuck in the bar, all they do for the remainder of the film is argue. Endlessly and aimlessly. Long before the conclusion of the film you've stopped giving a damn about what happens to them. --------------------------------------------- Result 3979 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] [[Greetings]] again from the [[darkness]]. Much anticipated, twisted comedy from writer/director Richard Shepard is a coming out party for [[Pierce]] Brosnan the actor. That Bond guy is gone. This new guy is something else entirely!! Have read that Shepard thought Brosnan was too much the pretty [[boy]] for this plum role, but Brosnan [[proves]] to be the [[perfect]] [[Julian]] Noble, "Facilitator" ... and is anything but pretty! Do not [[underestimate]] how twisted the [[humor]] is in this one. If you go, expect punch lines and sight gags regarding all types of sex, killing, religion, sports, business and anything else you might deem politically incorrect. Brosnan takes an excellent script to another level with his marvelous facial gestures and physical movements. Even sitting on a hotel bed (with or without a sombrero) is a joy to behold.

Greg Kinnear is the straight guy to Brosnan's comic and has plenty of depth and comic timing to make this partnership click. Hope Davis has a small, but subtly effective supporting role as Kinnear's wife (what's with her name "Bean"?) who happens to get a little excited when she has a facilitator in her living room.

The visuals and settings are perfect - including a bullfight, racetrack and Denver suburb. And how often do we get The Killers and Xavier Cugat on the same soundtrack? This one is definitely not for everyone, but if your sense of humor is a bit off center and you enjoy risky film-making, it could be for you. [[Salutation]] again from the [[obscurity]]. Much anticipated, twisted comedy from writer/director Richard Shepard is a coming out party for [[Pearce]] Brosnan the actor. That Bond guy is gone. This new guy is something else entirely!! Have read that Shepard thought Brosnan was too much the pretty [[guys]] for this plum role, but Brosnan [[testify]] to be the [[faultless]] [[Julien]] Noble, "Facilitator" ... and is anything but pretty! Do not [[understatement]] how twisted the [[mood]] is in this one. If you go, expect punch lines and sight gags regarding all types of sex, killing, religion, sports, business and anything else you might deem politically incorrect. Brosnan takes an excellent script to another level with his marvelous facial gestures and physical movements. Even sitting on a hotel bed (with or without a sombrero) is a joy to behold.

Greg Kinnear is the straight guy to Brosnan's comic and has plenty of depth and comic timing to make this partnership click. Hope Davis has a small, but subtly effective supporting role as Kinnear's wife (what's with her name "Bean"?) who happens to get a little excited when she has a facilitator in her living room.

The visuals and settings are perfect - including a bullfight, racetrack and Denver suburb. And how often do we get The Killers and Xavier Cugat on the same soundtrack? This one is definitely not for everyone, but if your sense of humor is a bit off center and you enjoy risky film-making, it could be for you. --------------------------------------------- Result 3980 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (74%)]] I [[think]] Charlotte Gainsbourg is one of the best performers in the world. I can't understand why some people [[say]] she's not. Boring....??? [[Maybe]] the one who [[said]] she's boring is because he/she is [[boring]]. She's a great actress and the movie was [[excellent]]. It has lots of wonderful [[ideas]] and very good [[performers]]. The [[direction]] was [[great]]. I imaging myself in the French [[environment]] with all the sophistication and perfume, flowers, churches, [[problems]], etc. When she goes to the sister's shop is [[simply]] [[amazing]]. Everything's [[great]]. We have a very good actress, wonderful, for long time. Alain Chabat and Bernadette Lafont are perfect. I like him more than in his next movie LA SCIENCE DES RÊVES. And Eric Lartigau did a very good work.

Ana I [[thinking]] Charlotte Gainsbourg is one of the best performers in the world. I can't understand why some people [[tell]] she's not. Boring....??? [[Potentially]] the one who [[asserted]] she's boring is because he/she is [[bored]]. She's a great actress and the movie was [[glamorous]]. It has lots of wonderful [[brainchild]] and very good [[artists]]. The [[directorate]] was [[resplendent]]. I imaging myself in the French [[surroundings]] with all the sophistication and perfume, flowers, churches, [[hassles]], etc. When she goes to the sister's shop is [[solely]] [[unbelievable]]. Everything's [[huge]]. We have a very good actress, wonderful, for long time. Alain Chabat and Bernadette Lafont are perfect. I like him more than in his next movie LA SCIENCE DES RÊVES. And Eric Lartigau did a very good work.

Ana --------------------------------------------- Result 3981 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I couldn't [[believe]] this [[terrible]] [[movie]] was actually [[made]] at all. With the worst [[actors]] you [[could]] [[find]], the [[worst]] [[script]] written (Mark Frost & Sollace Mitchell) and by far the worst waste of [[time]] in [[viewing]]. I won't belabor the [[story]] as it's really not worth it. But I will elaborate on some of the performances and definitely the story. As to the story, it is very hard to believe that this bitty crazy schemer [[could]] actually do what she did. That in reality the wife couldn't defend herself against a little bitty of a thing. That the husband could actually find the nut case attractive at all. That the defense attorney could break every court rule there was and keep on doing it after the judge ordered the blankety blank to shut up. And the final result of the film is an insult to justice, movie codes, and the male species. The theme of this mess is let [[women]] do as they wish, kill whom they want, defend the killer and get away with it, while the guy rots in jail the innocent victim. Hard to believe that Sollace Mitchell, the director and a man, would even want to make this dribble.

As to the acting: Jordan Ladd, the killer, is awful. A loony toons, who does needlepoint during her murder trial (is this allowed in court?) She bored me to the hilt. One more look of her batting her eyes and indicating how innocent she was and I'd throw up. She's not even [[attractive]] enough for any guy to leave his wife. The husband, played on one level by Vincent Spano, just seems to look and act [[stupid]] most of the time. He was so [[predictable]] in his performance falling into the traps set for him by all the women surrounding him. The worst by far was Holland Taylor as the Defense Attourney. She over acted throughout the film and made a mockery of justice. [[If]] she would [[cross]] [[examine]] me anytime, I'd have [[told]] her to [[go]] take a [[hike]]. [[Everybody]] [[else]] in this [[sleazy]] [[film]] did their [[job]] as [[directed]] to do so.

I wish I [[could]] give this [[film]] a zero [[rating]]. However we are [[forced]] to [[start]] with 1. Too [[bad]]. Let's not have anymore [[painful]] watching [[films]] like this. [[Lifetime]] can do [[better]] then this, I know it.

This is a postscript: [[Made]] the mistake of turning this insipid movie on by mistake. As soon as I saw the bimbo Jordan Ladd I knew I'd seen it before and didn't like it or her. I not only turned the darn thing off but had to add my anger at people like Sollace Mitchell who wrote the screenplay but also directed this horrible flick. Doesen't anyone see that her/his message is that sickness pays. Being ill and going around killing people is okay with this director/writer. Totally making the male species idiots. Well, this male tells you to go stuff it somewhere painful. We're not all that stupid and will speak out to your so called movie, which in this person's mind deserves to be trashed.

And again this loser is shown. Why???? Can't you read the comments on this stupid and despicable movie? Are we constantly subjected to see the bimbo Jordan Ladd again and again? Get her off TV, films and out of sight. She's just terrible in every sense of the word. Phew!!!! I couldn't [[reckon]] this [[heinous]] [[cinematography]] was actually [[effected]] at all. With the worst [[players]] you [[wo]] [[unearthed]], the [[hardest]] [[hyphen]] written (Mark Frost & Sollace Mitchell) and by far the worst waste of [[period]] in [[visualizing]]. I won't belabor the [[histories]] as it's really not worth it. But I will elaborate on some of the performances and definitely the story. As to the story, it is very hard to believe that this bitty crazy schemer [[did]] actually do what she did. That in reality the wife couldn't defend herself against a little bitty of a thing. That the husband could actually find the nut case attractive at all. That the defense attorney could break every court rule there was and keep on doing it after the judge ordered the blankety blank to shut up. And the final result of the film is an insult to justice, movie codes, and the male species. The theme of this mess is let [[wife]] do as they wish, kill whom they want, defend the killer and get away with it, while the guy rots in jail the innocent victim. Hard to believe that Sollace Mitchell, the director and a man, would even want to make this dribble.

As to the acting: Jordan Ladd, the killer, is awful. A loony toons, who does needlepoint during her murder trial (is this allowed in court?) She bored me to the hilt. One more look of her batting her eyes and indicating how innocent she was and I'd throw up. She's not even [[seductive]] enough for any guy to leave his wife. The husband, played on one level by Vincent Spano, just seems to look and act [[idiot]] most of the time. He was so [[foreseeable]] in his performance falling into the traps set for him by all the women surrounding him. The worst by far was Holland Taylor as the Defense Attourney. She over acted throughout the film and made a mockery of justice. [[Though]] she would [[rist]] [[scrutinize]] me anytime, I'd have [[say]] her to [[going]] take a [[climbs]]. [[Everyone]] [[otherwise]] in this [[filthy]] [[movies]] did their [[workplace]] as [[geared]] to do so.

I wish I [[wo]] give this [[cinematography]] a zero [[assessment]]. However we are [[coerced]] to [[startup]] with 1. Too [[mala]]. Let's not have anymore [[hurtful]] watching [[cinematography]] like this. [[Vie]] can do [[nicer]] then this, I know it.

This is a postscript: [[Effected]] the mistake of turning this insipid movie on by mistake. As soon as I saw the bimbo Jordan Ladd I knew I'd seen it before and didn't like it or her. I not only turned the darn thing off but had to add my anger at people like Sollace Mitchell who wrote the screenplay but also directed this horrible flick. Doesen't anyone see that her/his message is that sickness pays. Being ill and going around killing people is okay with this director/writer. Totally making the male species idiots. Well, this male tells you to go stuff it somewhere painful. We're not all that stupid and will speak out to your so called movie, which in this person's mind deserves to be trashed.

And again this loser is shown. Why???? Can't you read the comments on this stupid and despicable movie? Are we constantly subjected to see the bimbo Jordan Ladd again and again? Get her off TV, films and out of sight. She's just terrible in every sense of the word. Phew!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 3982 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Plenty has been written about Mamet's "The House of Games"; most of it good. I decided to revisit the flick to [[see]] how it held up after 17 years and was [[surprised]] at how much I enjoyed viewing it again. The film's success and durability probably has much to do with two principal ingredients which are always fun on film; a good story and a good scam. Mamet manages to bring his signature moodiness and obvious histrionics to the film while scamming us, the audience, and the mark simultaneously. Then he explains the art of conning only to do it again, etc. all the while building the story. "The House of Games", now a freebie on cable, is worth a look for first timers and an okay rerun for Mamet fans. (B+) Plenty has been written about Mamet's "The House of Games"; most of it good. I decided to revisit the flick to [[behold]] how it held up after 17 years and was [[horrified]] at how much I enjoyed viewing it again. The film's success and durability probably has much to do with two principal ingredients which are always fun on film; a good story and a good scam. Mamet manages to bring his signature moodiness and obvious histrionics to the film while scamming us, the audience, and the mark simultaneously. Then he explains the art of conning only to do it again, etc. all the while building the story. "The House of Games", now a freebie on cable, is worth a look for first timers and an okay rerun for Mamet fans. (B+) --------------------------------------------- Result 3983 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] yeah right. Sammo Hung already acted in the main role in 1983's "Zu Warrios from the Magic Mountain". Now, 2001, he does it again with "Zu Warriors". But this time, he finally does it right. You seldom see him in wuxia, more often in classic eastern or crime slapstick. But this role simply does fit him! The ancient Chinese legend about zu mountain is not often represented in movies (as far as I know about movies translated for the west). Although, the legend contains a vast of interesting stories and possibilities. Straight said: you haven't seen a story alike yet in a modern movie! And that makes it so great! And wow: all the colors plus the enormously deep, right-into-the-heart going story makes you fall for this movie in an instant. The first time I watched it, I had to watch it again instantly, and I did. OK true, I didn't understand all of it the first time. But that makes it only better! You know, you didn't understand all of it, because there is so much spice in it! Therefor it is a pleasure for one self to watch it over and over again. And yeah, it grows deeper in your heart, the more often you watch it.

Summary: A story to love, characters you cry with, and truly: a movie you never forget! -- Editors note: well, I think I must watch it right now again :D --------------------------------------------- Result 3984 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Born Again is a okay episode of Season 1. The reincarnation [[bit]], in my [[opinion]], is cool. The more I watch it, the more I like it, yet it will never [[rise]] above '[[Very]] Good' for me. Even [[though]] it is not very memorable, i'll always remember it as the reincarnation episode. Anyway, now I will say what is good and bad about this episode,

The Good: Oragami. Oh Yeah!

That Fish tank was nice. =]

Thrown out of a window. Very classy. x]

The Bad: Marry your Best Friend's wife!? O_O

What a random pick to reincarnate.

Why didn't the guy who died by having his scarf tangled up, try to take his scarf off instead?

Conclusion: Okay episode, not very memorable. 7/10 Born Again is a okay episode of Season 1. The reincarnation [[bitten]], in my [[avis]], is cool. The more I watch it, the more I like it, yet it will never [[raise]] above '[[Eminently]] Good' for me. Even [[nevertheless]] it is not very memorable, i'll always remember it as the reincarnation episode. Anyway, now I will say what is good and bad about this episode,

The Good: Oragami. Oh Yeah!

That Fish tank was nice. =]

Thrown out of a window. Very classy. x]

The Bad: Marry your Best Friend's wife!? O_O

What a random pick to reincarnate.

Why didn't the guy who died by having his scarf tangled up, try to take his scarf off instead?

Conclusion: Okay episode, not very memorable. 7/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3985 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] Eyes of the Werewolf (1999) is a [[really]] [[bad]] movie. The [[premise]] was real good but the overall [[execution]] was just terrible. I wished the filmmakers would have taken their time with this project instead of rushing it into production. Some blind dude gets some new eyes, bad thing is that they belong to a mean old werewolf. Nasty things begins to happen to the dude as he turns into a cheesy looking creature. Can he find a cure before his hot girlfriend finds out? Who is that weird little troll who helps him out and what's up with that female cop? If you really want to find out, check out Eyes of the Werewolf!

Not a bad idea for a movie. I just wished the filmmakers would have spent a lot for time in pre-production before they decided to shoot the movie. Eyes of the Werewolf (1999) is a [[truthfully]] [[mala]] movie. The [[supposition]] was real good but the overall [[enforcement]] was just terrible. I wished the filmmakers would have taken their time with this project instead of rushing it into production. Some blind dude gets some new eyes, bad thing is that they belong to a mean old werewolf. Nasty things begins to happen to the dude as he turns into a cheesy looking creature. Can he find a cure before his hot girlfriend finds out? Who is that weird little troll who helps him out and what's up with that female cop? If you really want to find out, check out Eyes of the Werewolf!

Not a bad idea for a movie. I just wished the filmmakers would have spent a lot for time in pre-production before they decided to shoot the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 3986 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I [[loved]] this film, at first the slick graphics [[seemed]] [[odd]] with the grainy footage but I [[quickly]] got into it. There must have been thousands of hours of footage shot and I really [[admire]] the work done in cutting it down. If you're easily shocked by drugs or violence it [[might]] not be the film for you but there are some [[great]] characters here, (and some real tossers). Technically I liked it a [[lot]] too, they must have used a new de-interlacing algorithm or maybe it was just that the footage looked so dark anyway but I wasn't [[annoyed]] by the usual artifacts seen in video to film transfers. (Open Water drove me nuts, mostly because there are cheap, progressive cameras available now and I see no excuse in not shelling for one if you intend to screen in the cinema). Sorry that's my own little rant. I definitely recommend this film if you've ever been involved with the music scene, it has some tragic moments but most of it is hilarious, I might be accused of laughing at others misfortune but it's a classic piece. I [[worshipped]] this film, at first the slick graphics [[appeared]] [[inquisitive]] with the grainy footage but I [[promptly]] got into it. There must have been thousands of hours of footage shot and I really [[behold]] the work done in cutting it down. If you're easily shocked by drugs or violence it [[probability]] not be the film for you but there are some [[whopping]] characters here, (and some real tossers). Technically I liked it a [[batch]] too, they must have used a new de-interlacing algorithm or maybe it was just that the footage looked so dark anyway but I wasn't [[outraged]] by the usual artifacts seen in video to film transfers. (Open Water drove me nuts, mostly because there are cheap, progressive cameras available now and I see no excuse in not shelling for one if you intend to screen in the cinema). Sorry that's my own little rant. I definitely recommend this film if you've ever been involved with the music scene, it has some tragic moments but most of it is hilarious, I might be accused of laughing at others misfortune but it's a classic piece. --------------------------------------------- Result 3987 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I [[saw]] the last five or ten minutes of this [[film]] back in 1998 or 1999 one [[night]] when I was channel-surfing before going to bed, and [[really]] [[liked]] what I saw. [[Since]] then I've been on the lookout, scouring [[TV]] [[listings]], flipping through DVD/VHS racks at stores, but didn't find a [[copy]] until recently when I found out some Internet stores [[sold]] it. Then, being a world-class procrastinator, I still didn't [[order]] it. Finally, I found a [[DVD]] [[copy]] in a Circuit [[City]] while visiting Portland, [[OR]], a few [[weeks]] ago. [[Then]] it only [[took]] me about a month after [[returning]] [[home]] before [[sitting]] down and [[watching]] it.

So, what do I [[think]] about the [[film]]? It's good. Not as good as I remembered and hoped for, but [[still]] well worth the $9.99 it cost me. After seeing the whole film for the first time I rate it as a 7/10, with potential to become an 8/10. I'll have to be less sleepy then, and have a better sound system to avoid rewinding to catch some dialogue. I [[noticed]] the last five or ten minutes of this [[flick]] back in 1998 or 1999 one [[overnight]] when I was channel-surfing before going to bed, and [[truthfully]] [[wished]] what I saw. [[Because]] then I've been on the lookout, scouring [[TELEVISION]] [[list]], flipping through DVD/VHS racks at stores, but didn't find a [[copier]] until recently when I found out some Internet stores [[sell]] it. Then, being a world-class procrastinator, I still didn't [[orders]] it. Finally, I found a [[DVDS]] [[photocopies]] in a Circuit [[Ville]] while visiting Portland, [[ORR]], a few [[chou]] ago. [[Subsequently]] it only [[picked]] me about a month after [[returned]] [[lodgings]] before [[seated]] down and [[staring]] it.

So, what do I [[ideas]] about the [[cinema]]? It's good. Not as good as I remembered and hoped for, but [[however]] well worth the $9.99 it cost me. After seeing the whole film for the first time I rate it as a 7/10, with potential to become an 8/10. I'll have to be less sleepy then, and have a better sound system to avoid rewinding to catch some dialogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 3988 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] People love the [[original]] story for its ending. The Hollywood style ending made this 99 version of 'A Dog of Flanders' just for kids movie. I didn't [[cry]] this time because the story was too Hollywood. Japanese TV series are much better. People love the [[upfront]] story for its ending. The Hollywood style ending made this 99 version of 'A Dog of Flanders' just for kids movie. I didn't [[weep]] this time because the story was too Hollywood. Japanese TV series are much better. --------------------------------------------- Result 3989 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have not read the novel, or anything other by Kurt Vonnegut, but I am now intending to start. This grips you from the very first frame, and does not let go until the end credits start rolling. Taking you places you don't expect, the plot is interesting throughout. The pacing is spot-on, nothing lasts too long, and this does a perfect job of balancing between unexpected twists and allowing the viewer to process what we've seen. It is well-told and well-thought out. I've never watched a film that I feel I could particularly compare this to. It is intense and exciting, as well as funny and sad. The acting is excellent, Nolte absolutely shines, Goodman again proves that he doesn't have to go for laughs, and Lee and Arkin are spellbinding. I could go on, really... no role is treated to a less than stellar performance. The editing and cinematography are marvelous, and all of the visuals are great, with a couple of unforgettable and astonishing ones. I am going to go for other movies directed by Keith Gordon, as well as the other two apparently related to this, through the author of the books. There is one scene of sexuality, and a lot disturbing and unsettling content in this. I recommend this to anyone who can appreciate it; it is not pleasant. 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3990 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Uggh! I really wasn't that impressed by this film, though I must admit that it is technically well made. It does get a 7 for very high production values, but as for entertainment values, it is rather poor. In fact, I consider this one of the most overrated [[films]] of the 50s. It won the Oscar for Best Picture, but the film is just boring at [[times]] with so much dancing and dancing and dancing. That's because unlike some musicals that have a reasonable number of songs along with a strong story and acting (such as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS), this movie is almost all singing and dancing. In fact, this film has about the longest song and dance number in history and if you aren't into this, the film will quickly bore you. Give me more story! As a result, with overblown production numbers and a weak story, this film is like a steady diet of meringue--it just doesn't satisfy in the long run.

To think...this is the film that beat out "A Streetcar Named Desire" and "A Place in the Sun" for Best Picture! And, to make matters worse, "The African Queen" and "Ace in the Hole" weren't even nominated in this category! Even more amazing to me is that "Ace in the Hole" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though "An American in Paris" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song. Uggh! I really wasn't that impressed by this film, though I must admit that it is technically well made. It does get a 7 for very high production values, but as for entertainment values, it is rather poor. In fact, I consider this one of the most overrated [[cinematic]] of the 50s. It won the Oscar for Best Picture, but the film is just boring at [[time]] with so much dancing and dancing and dancing. That's because unlike some musicals that have a reasonable number of songs along with a strong story and acting (such as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS), this movie is almost all singing and dancing. In fact, this film has about the longest song and dance number in history and if you aren't into this, the film will quickly bore you. Give me more story! As a result, with overblown production numbers and a weak story, this film is like a steady diet of meringue--it just doesn't satisfy in the long run.

To think...this is the film that beat out "A Streetcar Named Desire" and "A Place in the Sun" for Best Picture! And, to make matters worse, "The African Queen" and "Ace in the Hole" weren't even nominated in this category! Even more amazing to me is that "Ace in the Hole" lost for Best Writing, Screenplay to this film--even though "An American in Paris" had hardly any story to speak of and was mostly driven by dance and song. --------------------------------------------- Result 3991 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] "Why did they make them so big? Why didn't they just give the money to the poor?" The question about cathedrals was asked by a student to Mr. Harvey during a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. "That's a good question," he replied. "Partly to inspire them - to get them to look up with awe." I'm not sure that cathedrals have that impact on everyone, but this [[movie]] certainly had that [[impact]] on me. It was [[awesome]]!

It didn't start out that way. For a while it seemed to be little more than a depiction of - well - a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. If you've ever been on a high school field trip to anywhere this is basically it. You have a group of largely disinterested kids just happy to be out of school for a day, the bus driver who's driven crazy by them and some teachers trying desperately to keep it all under control. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt was my initial reaction. I figured that in the end this was going to be a typical story of a teacher managing to inspire a group of disinterested students. YAWN! But it turns out to be so much more! Timothy Spall was brilliant as Mr. Harvey - a sombre, unsmiling teacher with a strange fascination for cathedrals. Over the course of the movie, his story slowly comes out and becomes the focal point of the story. We also get introduced to some of the troubled students - most notably Helen, also brilliantly played by Nathalie Press, who's into self-mutilation.

This isn't a religious movie, but it includes some powerful reflections on religious themes. When Harvey's colleague Jonathon (played by Ben Miles) says "I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't try to force it on anyone else" Harvey replies, "that isn't tolerance - it's indifference!" - which is, in fact (in my opinion) what often passes for religious tolerance in our society. There are scenes of reconciliation between various characters, and the final scene of the movie was brilliant. As Harvey climbs back on the bus, director Susanna White has the camera slowly pan upwards, so that the final shot is simply of the sky - hearkening back to Harvey's comment that the purpose of the cathedral is to get people to look up in awe. The cathedral accomplishes its goal. We look up into the universe in awe, seeking something greater than ourselves, however we choose to define it. This is a very powerful and very inspiring movie. 9/10 "Why did they make them so big? Why didn't they just give the money to the poor?" The question about cathedrals was asked by a student to Mr. Harvey during a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. "That's a good question," he replied. "Partly to inspire them - to get them to look up with awe." I'm not sure that cathedrals have that impact on everyone, but this [[flick]] certainly had that [[repercussions]] on me. It was [[sumptuous]]!

It didn't start out that way. For a while it seemed to be little more than a depiction of - well - a school field trip to Salisbury Cathedral. If you've ever been on a high school field trip to anywhere this is basically it. You have a group of largely disinterested kids just happy to be out of school for a day, the bus driver who's driven crazy by them and some teachers trying desperately to keep it all under control. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt was my initial reaction. I figured that in the end this was going to be a typical story of a teacher managing to inspire a group of disinterested students. YAWN! But it turns out to be so much more! Timothy Spall was brilliant as Mr. Harvey - a sombre, unsmiling teacher with a strange fascination for cathedrals. Over the course of the movie, his story slowly comes out and becomes the focal point of the story. We also get introduced to some of the troubled students - most notably Helen, also brilliantly played by Nathalie Press, who's into self-mutilation.

This isn't a religious movie, but it includes some powerful reflections on religious themes. When Harvey's colleague Jonathon (played by Ben Miles) says "I don't care what anyone believes as long as they don't try to force it on anyone else" Harvey replies, "that isn't tolerance - it's indifference!" - which is, in fact (in my opinion) what often passes for religious tolerance in our society. There are scenes of reconciliation between various characters, and the final scene of the movie was brilliant. As Harvey climbs back on the bus, director Susanna White has the camera slowly pan upwards, so that the final shot is simply of the sky - hearkening back to Harvey's comment that the purpose of the cathedral is to get people to look up in awe. The cathedral accomplishes its goal. We look up into the universe in awe, seeking something greater than ourselves, however we choose to define it. This is a very powerful and very inspiring movie. 9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3992 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] (You'll [[know]] what I mean after you've [[seen]] Red Eye...)

[[Overall]], [[Red]] Eye was a better-than-expected thriller. It gets off to a slow [[start]], and slowly builds. But by the [[time]] it was over, it's a thumper!

It's hard to [[exactly]] [[define]] what makes this thriller as... [[thrilling]] as I found it. Except that, [[simply]] put, the director did a creditable [[job]] of pulling you into the action of what [[would]] [[otherwise]] have been a run-of-the-mill plot. I rather [[tended]] to forget I was watching a movie. That says a lot.

Other factors, I think, are the "closeness" of victim and bad guy... and that over time, you begin to really relate to the victim. A scant 8 out of 10, more like a 7.5... but that's pretty [[good]]! (You'll [[savoir]] what I mean after you've [[watched]] Red Eye...)

[[Total]], [[Reid]] Eye was a better-than-expected thriller. It gets off to a slow [[cranking]], and slowly builds. But by the [[moment]] it was over, it's a thumper!

It's hard to [[accurately]] [[defined]] what makes this thriller as... [[riveting]] as I found it. Except that, [[exclusively]] put, the director did a creditable [[employment]] of pulling you into the action of what [[ought]] [[alternatively]] have been a run-of-the-mill plot. I rather [[tilted]] to forget I was watching a movie. That says a lot.

Other factors, I think, are the "closeness" of victim and bad guy... and that over time, you begin to really relate to the victim. A scant 8 out of 10, more like a 7.5... but that's pretty [[alright]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 3993 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] When I found out there was a movie that had both my [[favorite]] [[actresses]] Meryl Streep and Wynona Ryder, I went through the roof!But I had a [[hard]] fall after [[watching]] this lame [[movie]] and I [[still]] have the [[bruise]].First of all the [[character]] that Jeremy [[Irons]] (an [[actor]] I still admire even after this [[disappointment]])plays was just [[awful]]. He [[treated]] his family like [[crap]], [[especially]] his [[sister]], played by Glenn Close. I [[could]] not [[get]] close or sympathize with any of the [[characters]] and I'm no prude, but the [[sex]] scenes were [[really]] unnecessary or they [[could]] have been toned down. Wynona and Antonio's [[characters]] could have been [[developed]] a [[lot]] more and their [[romance]] [[could]] have been [[much]] more [[passionate]]. And what was with Meryl's [[character]] and her "[[mystical]] powers"? Why didn't they go into this more? This film had a [[lot]] of [[dead]] ends and the bottom [[line]] is that this is a really [[lousy]] [[movie]] and there was a lot of [[wasted]] talent here. When I found out there was a movie that had both my [[preferable]] [[actors]] Meryl Streep and Wynona Ryder, I went through the roof!But I had a [[difficult]] fall after [[staring]] this lame [[cinematography]] and I [[however]] have the [[bruises]].First of all the [[characters]] that Jeremy [[Shackles]] (an [[actress]] I still admire even after this [[frustration]])plays was just [[scary]]. He [[process]] his family like [[shitty]], [[specially]] his [[sisters]], played by Glenn Close. I [[would]] not [[got]] close or sympathize with any of the [[hallmarks]] and I'm no prude, but the [[sexuality]] scenes were [[genuinely]] unnecessary or they [[would]] have been toned down. Wynona and Antonio's [[characteristic]] could have been [[formulated]] a [[batch]] more and their [[romantic]] [[did]] have been [[very]] more [[keen]]. And what was with Meryl's [[characters]] and her "[[woolen]] powers"? Why didn't they go into this more? This film had a [[lots]] of [[died]] ends and the bottom [[linea]] is that this is a really [[squalid]] [[film]] and there was a lot of [[squandered]] talent here. --------------------------------------------- Result 3994 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] As it is often the case, the impressive and explosive trailers of Asian films [[add]] up to [[nothing]] more than [[lackluster]] stories. [[Similar]] to Unleashed (which was great,) Dog Bite Dog tells a story where [[men]] are raised as [[ferocious]] savage [[dogs]] that [[carry]] out their master's bidding. The [[main]] characters, an emotionally [[undeveloped]], [[amoral]] [[killer]] who is [[matched]] against an equally unstable [[police]] [[officer]], are far from the common [[heroes]] and villains we [[often]] [[see]]. [[In]] [[fact]], by the end, you lose [[track]] of who you're [[supposed]] to [[empathize]] with, [[failing]] to feel [[even]] the [[slightest]] emotion for either of the men – whether that was the failure of the director or [[perhaps]] the underlining message he was [[trying]] to tell is up to you to [[decide]].

[[Although]] the [[beginning]] of the film was filled with intrigue and unpredictability, by the half-way point it slopped down to a humdrum story of survival and revenge. The suspense which was evident at first soon disappeared because of a grossly mismatched music score which brought down the potentially effective story telling. And in the end, you were left feeling that all that detailed background information and introspection of the main characters was somehow very unnecessary.

On the plus side, the transition in story from point a to point b was quite atypical compared to US movies – so those who aren't familiar with Asian films and are tired of Hollywood's predictability should check it out.

The white balance seemed off throughout most of the film. It was like looking into a picture shot on fluorescent when it was supposed to be set on tungsten. Maybe I'm the only one, but it strained my eyes.

The movie also enjoyed playing tricks on you – an interesting build-up gave me hope for the slow moving story until it was diverted to a low budget, low speed chase scene. And just when you think you were going to get an unanswered indie ending with a mix of Shakespearean tragedy, you realize that it's not an ending at all, but rather a transition into a wacky country-music montage about peace and serenity.

Throw in some grisly from-behind choke scenes, a moment of redemption unexpectedly brought back into savagery and back again the other way, Asians' fascination with bodily fluids and a horrible music score that didn't match the film, and you get the average bland Asian thriller.

I just don't get why every fight scene was overlaid with clips of roaring lions …I thought they were supposed to symbolize dogs? Ultimately, in the end, we are reminded about a true killer that still lurks amongst us – tetanus.

4/10 As it is often the case, the impressive and explosive trailers of Asian films [[adds]] up to [[anything]] more than [[lifeless]] stories. [[Analog]] to Unleashed (which was great,) Dog Bite Dog tells a story where [[man]] are raised as [[brutish]] savage [[doggies]] that [[bears]] out their master's bidding. The [[primary]] characters, an emotionally [[underdevelopment]], [[immoral]] [[murderer]] who is [[coupled]] against an equally unstable [[cops]] [[patrolman]], are far from the common [[heroines]] and villains we [[habitually]] [[behold]]. [[At]] [[facto]], by the end, you lose [[rails]] of who you're [[suspected]] to [[commiserate]] with, [[shortcoming]] to feel [[yet]] the [[littlest]] emotion for either of the men – whether that was the failure of the director or [[maybe]] the underlining message he was [[try]] to tell is up to you to [[decides]].

[[While]] the [[begins]] of the film was filled with intrigue and unpredictability, by the half-way point it slopped down to a humdrum story of survival and revenge. The suspense which was evident at first soon disappeared because of a grossly mismatched music score which brought down the potentially effective story telling. And in the end, you were left feeling that all that detailed background information and introspection of the main characters was somehow very unnecessary.

On the plus side, the transition in story from point a to point b was quite atypical compared to US movies – so those who aren't familiar with Asian films and are tired of Hollywood's predictability should check it out.

The white balance seemed off throughout most of the film. It was like looking into a picture shot on fluorescent when it was supposed to be set on tungsten. Maybe I'm the only one, but it strained my eyes.

The movie also enjoyed playing tricks on you – an interesting build-up gave me hope for the slow moving story until it was diverted to a low budget, low speed chase scene. And just when you think you were going to get an unanswered indie ending with a mix of Shakespearean tragedy, you realize that it's not an ending at all, but rather a transition into a wacky country-music montage about peace and serenity.

Throw in some grisly from-behind choke scenes, a moment of redemption unexpectedly brought back into savagery and back again the other way, Asians' fascination with bodily fluids and a horrible music score that didn't match the film, and you get the average bland Asian thriller.

I just don't get why every fight scene was overlaid with clips of roaring lions …I thought they were supposed to symbolize dogs? Ultimately, in the end, we are reminded about a true killer that still lurks amongst us – tetanus.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 3995 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] "Panic in the Streets" was a decent thriller, but I [[felt]] a [[bit]] [[disappointed]] by it. The central theme of a city being attacked by a plague in modern times is fascinating, but the film never really [[explores]] or [[develops]] it. Its well made and entertaining, but its not as interesting as it should have been. The [[screenplay]] for this one is really weak and brings the whole film down. None of the central characters are really compelling or believable.

Fortunately, the film is very well made so it compensates for the [[weak]] scripting. The direction by Elia Kazan keeps the [[film]] suspenseful and moving at a lightning quick pace. There are some standout sequences, particularly the memorable chase climax. When his direction was combined with better screenplays several years later, the man could mostly do no wrong.

The acting is also very good. Richard Widmark was always a watchable leading man and does what he can with an underwritten character. Paul Douglas spends his time yelling a bit too much but does a decent job as well. The standouts in the cast are the two villains. Zero Mostel, known primarily for his comic roles, is effectively slimy as one of cinema's ultimate toady characters. Jack Palance is, unsurprisingly, a chilling villain. "Panic in the Streets" is disappointing but still worth watching. (7/10) "Panic in the Streets" was a decent thriller, but I [[deemed]] a [[bite]] [[frustrating]] by it. The central theme of a city being attacked by a plague in modern times is fascinating, but the film never really [[scrutinize]] or [[develop]] it. Its well made and entertaining, but its not as interesting as it should have been. The [[scripts]] for this one is really weak and brings the whole film down. None of the central characters are really compelling or believable.

Fortunately, the film is very well made so it compensates for the [[feeble]] scripting. The direction by Elia Kazan keeps the [[cinematography]] suspenseful and moving at a lightning quick pace. There are some standout sequences, particularly the memorable chase climax. When his direction was combined with better screenplays several years later, the man could mostly do no wrong.

The acting is also very good. Richard Widmark was always a watchable leading man and does what he can with an underwritten character. Paul Douglas spends his time yelling a bit too much but does a decent job as well. The standouts in the cast are the two villains. Zero Mostel, known primarily for his comic roles, is effectively slimy as one of cinema's ultimate toady characters. Jack Palance is, unsurprisingly, a chilling villain. "Panic in the Streets" is disappointing but still worth watching. (7/10) --------------------------------------------- Result 3996 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] I [[remember]] [[seeing]] this film [[years]] [[ago]] on, I [[think]], BBC2. I [[would]] very much like to [[view]] it again - does [[anyone]] know how I can [[obtain]] a [[copy]]? As I [[remember]], it was an [[especially]] [[powerful]] movie, in [[particular]] the scene that [[stands]] out is of the [[horses]] [[wearing]] [[gas]] [[masks]]. Apart from that I really can't [[recall]] too much about the [[story]] - which is why I [[want]] to [[view]] it again! I have trawled the web but am [[unable]] to [[find]] a [[copy]], which is [[unusual]] in my experience - [[perhaps]] there is no DVD or VHS of this film on the [[market]]. [[Would]] [[appreciate]] any [[help]] [[anyone]] can give me on this. [[Thanks]] very much in [[advance]] for your [[assistance]]. [[Best]] regards, Albany234@googlemail.[[com]] I [[reminisce]] [[see]] this film [[yr]] [[formerly]] on, I [[ideas]], BBC2. I [[ought]] very much like to [[avis]] it again - does [[nobody]] know how I can [[achieve]] a [[copying]]? As I [[remind]], it was an [[predominantly]] [[influential]] movie, in [[especial]] the scene that [[stand]] out is of the [[ponies]] [[wears]] [[gasoline]] [[disguises]]. Apart from that I really can't [[rappel]] too much about the [[history]] - which is why I [[wanted]] to [[visualizing]] it again! I have trawled the web but am [[incompetent]] to [[unearth]] a [[copying]], which is [[curious]] in my experience - [[presumably]] there is no DVD or VHS of this film on the [[marketplace]]. [[Ought]] [[appreciative]] any [[aids]] [[nobody]] can give me on this. [[Merci]] very much in [[advances]] for your [[aid]]. [[Bestest]] regards, Albany234@googlemail.[[coms]] --------------------------------------------- Result 3997 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] "Girlfight" follows a project [[dwelling]] [[New]] York [[high]] [[school]] [[girl]] from a [[sense]] of [[futility]] into the world of [[amateur]] boxing where she [[finds]] self esteem, purpose, and much more. [[Although]] the [[film]] is not about boxing, boxing is all about the [[film]]. [[So]] [[much]] so you can [[almost]] [[smell]] the [[sweat]]. [[Technically]] and artistically a [[good]] shoot with an [[sense]] of [[honesty]] and reality about it, "Girlfight" is no chick [[flick]] and no "[[Rocky]]". It is, rather, a very [[human]] [[drama]] which [[even]] viewers who don't know boxing will be able to connect with. "Girlfight" follows a project [[accommodations]] [[Novel]] York [[supreme]] [[tuition]] [[chick]] from a [[sensing]] of [[uselessness]] into the world of [[amateurs]] boxing where she [[find]] self esteem, purpose, and much more. [[Whereas]] the [[flick]] is not about boxing, boxing is all about the [[filmmaking]]. [[Thus]] [[very]] so you can [[practically]] [[stench]] the [[perspiration]]. [[Technologically]] and artistically a [[alright]] shoot with an [[feeling]] of [[candour]] and reality about it, "Girlfight" is no chick [[film]] and no "[[Roque]]". It is, rather, a very [[humans]] [[tragedy]] which [[yet]] viewers who don't know boxing will be able to connect with. --------------------------------------------- Result 3998 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] This is a [[small]] film , few characters ,theatrical.And [[yet]] it says something about Ireland that you won't [[find]] elsewhere.This film IS IRELAND. [[In]] all it's grubiness, it's [[sadness]],it's self-delusion.The Boys , Master Doyle , SP O'Donell, The Cannon , Senator Doogan's daughter , Gar and above all Madge.I know them.I'm in the pub with them or kneeling to pray with them. They are our sad history and they are our present. This is a [[scant]] film , few characters ,theatrical.And [[again]] it says something about Ireland that you won't [[found]] elsewhere.This film IS IRELAND. [[Among]] all it's grubiness, it's [[grief]],it's self-delusion.The Boys , Master Doyle , SP O'Donell, The Cannon , Senator Doogan's daughter , Gar and above all Madge.I know them.I'm in the pub with them or kneeling to pray with them. They are our sad history and they are our present. --------------------------------------------- Result 3999 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] The [[premise]] of this movie is revealed on the DVD box. [[A]] textile worker develops a miracle fabric that doesn't degrade. But the [[movie]] fails to [[get]] on with it. Instead it pads for 45 minutes, noodling [[around]] a preamble before he makes the big discovery. Since audiences don't benefit much from seeing a whiz [[kid]] figuring things out, it's a strange choice: the movie has successfully been [[prevented]] from engaging any topic. Once the fabric is [[discovered]], the [[movie]] too [[rapidly]] establishes that both industry bigwigs, and blue-collar co-workers [[want]] the [[invention]] squelched, leaving the movie with just two [[flimsy]] movements; inventing the chemical, and running from oppressors.

I can't understand why anyone would describe this as comedy. The tone isn't funny or comical. It's more like serious social criticism of the day: that capitalism warps both supply chains and production. Which in turn prevents innovation from reaching and improving the world. Yes, that's probably true, but without some toying with an attitude towards that fact, the movie is simply an earnest argument. You'll need an extremely broad definition of comedy to find any here.

This is more like a British Meet John Doe (Meet Nigel Doe ?). The [[assumption]] of this movie is revealed on the DVD box. [[una]] textile worker develops a miracle fabric that doesn't degrade. But the [[cinematography]] fails to [[gets]] on with it. Instead it pads for 45 minutes, noodling [[throughout]] a preamble before he makes the big discovery. Since audiences don't benefit much from seeing a whiz [[petit]] figuring things out, it's a strange choice: the movie has successfully been [[averted]] from engaging any topic. Once the fabric is [[unearthed]], the [[cinematography]] too [[speedily]] establishes that both industry bigwigs, and blue-collar co-workers [[desiring]] the [[contrivance]] squelched, leaving the movie with just two [[fragile]] movements; inventing the chemical, and running from oppressors.

I can't understand why anyone would describe this as comedy. The tone isn't funny or comical. It's more like serious social criticism of the day: that capitalism warps both supply chains and production. Which in turn prevents innovation from reaching and improving the world. Yes, that's probably true, but without some toying with an attitude towards that fact, the movie is simply an earnest argument. You'll need an extremely broad definition of comedy to find any here.

This is more like a British Meet John Doe (Meet Nigel Doe ?). --------------------------------------------- Result 4000 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] I hate to throw out lines like this, but in this case I feel [[like]] I have to: the American remake of THE [[GRUDGE]] is by far the [[worst]] film I have seen in theaters in the last 5 years. There, I said it. And now that I have gotten that out of my system, please let me explain why.

"When someone dies in the grip of a powerful rage, a curse is born. The curse gathers in that place of death. Those who encounter it will be consumed by its fury." That is the premise of THE GRUDGE and I will admit it sounds intriguing. Unfortunately, the filmmakers take it no further. Those who encounter the "curse" are indeed consumed by its fury and that is all you get. You want more? Well too bad. Some critics and fans are pointing out that the sole purpose of THE GRUDGE is to scare you. The problem is that when there is no plot to speak of, creepy images and sounds can only go so far. Director Takashi Shimizu, pulling a George Sluizer and remaking his own original film(s), valiantly attempts to build atmosphere in the first hour – by repeating the same scene over and over and over and over. It pretty much unfolds like this:

-person walks into house

-something flashes by the camera and/or a strange sound is heard

-person goes to investigate

-sound starts to get loud

-person sees a ghost

-loud scream and/or cat screech

-cut to black

Before the audience is even given a hint of plot, this exact same scenario unfolds 5 times in the first hour. The first time was actually somewhat creepy. Each subsequent use became laughable as the film went on. By the time the end of the film rolled around, my friend and I were laughingly wondering if this scene would end "with a loud scream and a cut to black." We were never proved wrong.

The film has no liner storyline, instead unfolding in a series of vignettes that leave the audience jumbled. I have no problem with non-linear storytelling when it is done right. The film jumps from time period to time period with no rhyme or reason. I haven't seen a movie in such a state since the opening of the theatrical version of HIGHLANDER 2. And this storytelling technique mars any sort of mystery that film could have possibly had. If you already know the ghosts have scared two characters to death, how is it shocking when their bodies are found in the attic? And why should we care when a detective tries to investigate the mysterious disappearances when we already know what happened to everyone?

Obviously greenlit the second the American version of THE RING made $15 million its first weekend, THE GRUDGE is nothing but calculated imitation disguised as an actual movie. The scariest things about THE GRUDGE are that it made $40 million dollars its first weekend and some people consider it the "scariest movie ever made." I wonder what happens to those who get consumed by the fury of paying to see THE GRUDGE? I hate to throw out lines like this, but in this case I feel [[iike]] I have to: the American remake of THE [[RESENTMENT]] is by far the [[hardest]] film I have seen in theaters in the last 5 years. There, I said it. And now that I have gotten that out of my system, please let me explain why.

"When someone dies in the grip of a powerful rage, a curse is born. The curse gathers in that place of death. Those who encounter it will be consumed by its fury." That is the premise of THE GRUDGE and I will admit it sounds intriguing. Unfortunately, the filmmakers take it no further. Those who encounter the "curse" are indeed consumed by its fury and that is all you get. You want more? Well too bad. Some critics and fans are pointing out that the sole purpose of THE GRUDGE is to scare you. The problem is that when there is no plot to speak of, creepy images and sounds can only go so far. Director Takashi Shimizu, pulling a George Sluizer and remaking his own original film(s), valiantly attempts to build atmosphere in the first hour – by repeating the same scene over and over and over and over. It pretty much unfolds like this:

-person walks into house

-something flashes by the camera and/or a strange sound is heard

-person goes to investigate

-sound starts to get loud

-person sees a ghost

-loud scream and/or cat screech

-cut to black

Before the audience is even given a hint of plot, this exact same scenario unfolds 5 times in the first hour. The first time was actually somewhat creepy. Each subsequent use became laughable as the film went on. By the time the end of the film rolled around, my friend and I were laughingly wondering if this scene would end "with a loud scream and a cut to black." We were never proved wrong.

The film has no liner storyline, instead unfolding in a series of vignettes that leave the audience jumbled. I have no problem with non-linear storytelling when it is done right. The film jumps from time period to time period with no rhyme or reason. I haven't seen a movie in such a state since the opening of the theatrical version of HIGHLANDER 2. And this storytelling technique mars any sort of mystery that film could have possibly had. If you already know the ghosts have scared two characters to death, how is it shocking when their bodies are found in the attic? And why should we care when a detective tries to investigate the mysterious disappearances when we already know what happened to everyone?

Obviously greenlit the second the American version of THE RING made $15 million its first weekend, THE GRUDGE is nothing but calculated imitation disguised as an actual movie. The scariest things about THE GRUDGE are that it made $40 million dollars its first weekend and some people consider it the "scariest movie ever made." I wonder what happens to those who get consumed by the fury of paying to see THE GRUDGE? --------------------------------------------- Result 4001 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] I have [[seen]] poor [[movies]] in my time, but this really [[takes]] the biscuit! Why oh why has this film been made? There just is [[nothing]] here whatsoever. Please put your trust in me, flick the off [[switch]] and [[destroy]] your copy of this film. There is a [[plot]]... that [[could]] take about 5 [[minutes]] to show on [[camera]]. This is the key [[problem]], the [[story]] 'based on a true story' ([[mmm]]... [[whatever]]) just in no way lends itself to be padded out for 80 [[minutes]]. And so we [[therefore]] have to sit through over an [[hour]] of watching people walk [[around]]. That is it! [[In]] the [[whole]] first half an [[hour]] [[absolutely]] [[nothing]] [[happens]], [[apart]] from [[watching]] [[someone]] [[walk]] to a [[shop]]... and then 3 [[guys]] [[walking]] through a [[wood]]. This [[time]] [[could]] perhaps have been spent on [[developing]] [[character]]... but no. And so there is [[absolutely]] no connection to the people on screen, and so when they [[start]] to [[get]] shot, we couldn't care less! [[In]] fact I was in the [[end]] vouching for the baddie so that the [[film]] would [[end]]! On [[top]] of this the camera [[work]] is [[truly]] [[horrific]]! This [[director]]/editor/[[writer]]/[[producer]], Ti [[West]] is [[rubbish]]. I [[hate]] to [[hit]] a [[guy]], but [[really]], his [[work]] is pants! These [[dull]] [[close]] ups [[continuously]], and then long [[single]] takes following people as they [[walk]] - I'm sure he [[thinks]] he's [[clever]], but the [[results]] are so [[dull]] I just [[wanted]] to [[stop]] the [[film]] and [[slit]] my wrists! How this [[man]] has been [[brought]] on to direct the [[next]] [[cabin]] fever movie is beyond me! To finish, the acting is [[also]] [[woeful]],... which goes for the film as a [[whole]]. [[Preserve]] your sanity, [[stick]] clear of this [[heap]] of [[total]] excrement! I have [[saw]] poor [[cinematographic]] in my time, but this really [[pick]] the biscuit! Why oh why has this film been made? There just is [[none]] here whatsoever. Please put your trust in me, flick the off [[switches]] and [[wrack]] your copy of this film. There is a [[intrigue]]... that [[did]] take about 5 [[mins]] to show on [[cameras]]. This is the key [[difficulties]], the [[history]] 'based on a true story' ([[hmm]]... [[whichever]]) just in no way lends itself to be padded out for 80 [[mins]]. And so we [[thereby]] have to sit through over an [[hours]] of watching people walk [[about]]. That is it! [[Throughout]] the [[entirety]] first half an [[hours]] [[fully]] [[anything]] [[comes]], [[also]] from [[staring]] [[everybody]] [[marche]] to a [[stores]]... and then 3 [[lads]] [[marche]] through a [[woods]]. This [[times]] [[wo]] perhaps have been spent on [[drafting]] [[characters]]... but no. And so there is [[fully]] no connection to the people on screen, and so when they [[began]] to [[obtain]] shot, we couldn't care less! [[Throughout]] fact I was in the [[ends]] vouching for the baddie so that the [[movies]] would [[ending]]! On [[topped]] of this the camera [[cooperate]] is [[genuinely]] [[frightful]]! This [[headmaster]]/editor/[[screenwriter]]/[[industrialists]], Ti [[Western]] is [[poppycock]]. I [[hated]] to [[knocked]] a [[buddy]], but [[genuinely]], his [[works]] is pants! These [[uninspiring]] [[closure]] ups [[always]], and then long [[lone]] takes following people as they [[marche]] - I'm sure he [[thoughts]] he's [[shrewd]], but the [[conclusions]] are so [[dreary]] I just [[wanting]] to [[stopping]] the [[movie]] and [[groove]] my wrists! How this [[men]] has been [[made]] on to direct the [[upcoming]] [[cottage]] fever movie is beyond me! To finish, the acting is [[moreover]] [[sorrowful]],... which goes for the film as a [[overall]]. [[Retains]] your sanity, [[wand]] clear of this [[piling]] of [[aggregate]] excrement! --------------------------------------------- Result 4002 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This, and Immoral Tales, both left a [[bad]] [[taste]] in my mouth. It [[seems]] to me that Borowczyk is disgusted by [[sex]], and these two [[films]] are cautionary [[tales]] about what will happen if you do have sex. As a [[film]], it's not very well done -- some of the acting is [[truly]] epically [[bad]] (such as the "[[American]]" [[woman]] with the French [[accent]]). The young woman's sudden flip-flop from being [[anxious]] about the [[marriage]] to being interested (when it seems [[like]] it should have been the other way around), and the aunt's sudden realization of the young man's secret don't make [[sense]] -- they're not explained at all. I also didn't like how the daughter's [[relationship]] with a black [[man]] was presented as a sign of her family's perversion or predilection for bestiality. The central idea, the idea that there's this "sexy beast," if you will, that lives in the woods, could have been a foundation for a perverse but [[fun]] story, but instead is just used as a basis for a nasty, sex-negative, morality play. This, and Immoral Tales, both left a [[naughty]] [[liking]] in my mouth. It [[seem]] to me that Borowczyk is disgusted by [[sexuality]], and these two [[cinematography]] are cautionary [[histories]] about what will happen if you do have sex. As a [[films]], it's not very well done -- some of the acting is [[really]] epically [[naughty]] (such as the "[[Americas]]" [[femme]] with the French [[emphasis]]). The young woman's sudden flip-flop from being [[impatient]] about the [[married]] to being interested (when it seems [[iike]] it should have been the other way around), and the aunt's sudden realization of the young man's secret don't make [[feeling]] -- they're not explained at all. I also didn't like how the daughter's [[rapport]] with a black [[mec]] was presented as a sign of her family's perversion or predilection for bestiality. The central idea, the idea that there's this "sexy beast," if you will, that lives in the woods, could have been a foundation for a perverse but [[droll]] story, but instead is just used as a basis for a nasty, sex-negative, morality play. --------------------------------------------- Result 4003 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] This was a weird movie. It [[started]] out pretty good. A solid sound track behind flash images of gore and mayhem as our psychopath did his thing.

[[Next]] comes his "down fall" Here i could tell I was in for a real cheesy "B" movie. [[Poor]] acting , I mean how hard is it to hold a [[gun]] and act like a cop? These guys [[could]] not. After the death scene of our psychopath we get the opening [[credit]] and the [[movie]] [[starts]]...

From this point on it is [[bad]] acting [[big]] boobs, the occasional bucket of blood and poorly done death scenes.

That said I gave the movie a four because in spite of its flaws it did maintain a sort of creepiness that I just could not quite shake off.

I do not recommend this movie but I have to admit I have seem worse. This was a weird movie. It [[initiates]] out pretty good. A solid sound track behind flash images of gore and mayhem as our psychopath did his thing.

[[Future]] comes his "down fall" Here i could tell I was in for a real cheesy "B" movie. [[Poorest]] acting , I mean how hard is it to hold a [[guns]] and act like a cop? These guys [[would]] not. After the death scene of our psychopath we get the opening [[credits]] and the [[cinematography]] [[commenced]]...

From this point on it is [[inclement]] acting [[considerable]] boobs, the occasional bucket of blood and poorly done death scenes.

That said I gave the movie a four because in spite of its flaws it did maintain a sort of creepiness that I just could not quite shake off.

I do not recommend this movie but I have to admit I have seem worse. --------------------------------------------- Result 4004 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Playing a character from a literary classic can be a [[bit]] of a poisoned chalice for an actor, paying for the pleasure of a meaty character by competing with the fantasies of generations of readers – not to mention the numerous other actors who've besieged the castle before. [[Fortunately]] for the fantasists, this version – with the [[nicely]] cast Zelah [[Clarke]] and Timothy Dalton – [[stands]] head and shoulders above versions that have [[come]] after it. It's the right [[length]] to do the [[story]] full justice, and makes [[considerable]] use of Bronte's [[cracking]] dialogue; [[none]] of that [[modern]] [[meddling]] away, [[cutting]] text and [[adding]] new and inferior scenes.

The [[magic]] of the original [[story]] [[lies]] in the [[tensions]] created between the central [[characters]], and the [[lives]] circumstances [[create]] for them to lead. Jane – "poor, [[plain]] and [[little]]" – grows up on the stinting [[charity]] of a cold [[aunt]], her nature and [[independence]] [[shaped]] by a [[long]] spell in a very [[harsh]] [[school]]. She [[arrives]] as a governess in the [[household]] of [[Mr]] Rochester, [[utterly]] friendless and [[alone]]. She represses herself habitually out of [[duty]] and [[hard]] experience, but her [[passionate]] nature [[soon]] [[finds]] its touch-paper in her stern, keenly intelligent, enigmatic [[master]], to whom she is [[drawn]], as he is to her, by [[forces]] beyond their control. Rochester is the caged [[tiger]], busy "paving [[hell]] with energy"; potentially dangerous to all who come into contact with him – but "pervious, through a chink or two". His character is extraordinary: he takes extraordinary liberties with a paid subordinate; but then Jane is no ordinary employee, as he sees. But a dark secret, and severe trials, lie before them both.

It's a pleasure to hear Bronte's [[remarkable]] dialogue spoken by such accomplished actors – Dalton in particular seems formed for passion on a Brontean scale. If you've only ever seen him as a not-so-memorable Bond, you've missed the thing he's best at. Those who've commented that his Rochester is too handsome, miss the point of these dramatisations: his character has simply too much screen time for a really ugly man to retain the viewer's attention. Timothy Dalton is just right, not always or consistently handsome, but often glancingly, strikingly so, just as it should be. And Zelah Clarke's Jane is no wallflower; she conveys the emotions of a woman who habitually represses her sense of humour and her passionate nature very successfully, allowing her rare outbursts to show to more dramatic effect.

Not so long ago the BBC aired an excellent dramatisation of Jean Rhys' enlightened and most unsettling riposte to Bronte, "Wide Sargasso Sea", imagining the back-story of the first Mrs Rochester. Do check it out – you'll never see the 'hero' of "Jane Eyre" in quite the same way again. Playing a character from a literary classic can be a [[bitten]] of a poisoned chalice for an actor, paying for the pleasure of a meaty character by competing with the fantasies of generations of readers – not to mention the numerous other actors who've besieged the castle before. [[Luckily]] for the fantasists, this version – with the [[politely]] cast Zelah [[Clark]] and Timothy Dalton – [[standing]] head and shoulders above versions that have [[arrived]] after it. It's the right [[lengths]] to do the [[stories]] full justice, and makes [[sizeable]] use of Bronte's [[cleft]] dialogue; [[nothingness]] of that [[trendy]] [[jamming]] away, [[sliced]] text and [[added]] new and inferior scenes.

The [[witchcraft]] of the original [[history]] [[lying]] in the [[voltage]] created between the central [[hallmarks]], and the [[life]] circumstances [[creating]] for them to lead. Jane – "poor, [[lowland]] and [[tiny]]" – grows up on the stinting [[charities]] of a cold [[tata]], her nature and [[autonomy]] [[modeled]] by a [[prolonged]] spell in a very [[severe]] [[tuition]]. She [[arrive]] as a governess in the [[dwellings]] of [[Mister]] Rochester, [[altogether]] friendless and [[solely]]. She represses herself habitually out of [[liabilities]] and [[stiff]] experience, but her [[enthusiastic]] nature [[rapidly]] [[discovers]] its touch-paper in her stern, keenly intelligent, enigmatic [[maestro]], to whom she is [[lured]], as he is to her, by [[troops]] beyond their control. Rochester is the caged [[tigers]], busy "paving [[brothel]] with energy"; potentially dangerous to all who come into contact with him – but "pervious, through a chink or two". His character is extraordinary: he takes extraordinary liberties with a paid subordinate; but then Jane is no ordinary employee, as he sees. But a dark secret, and severe trials, lie before them both.

It's a pleasure to hear Bronte's [[dramatic]] dialogue spoken by such accomplished actors – Dalton in particular seems formed for passion on a Brontean scale. If you've only ever seen him as a not-so-memorable Bond, you've missed the thing he's best at. Those who've commented that his Rochester is too handsome, miss the point of these dramatisations: his character has simply too much screen time for a really ugly man to retain the viewer's attention. Timothy Dalton is just right, not always or consistently handsome, but often glancingly, strikingly so, just as it should be. And Zelah Clarke's Jane is no wallflower; she conveys the emotions of a woman who habitually represses her sense of humour and her passionate nature very successfully, allowing her rare outbursts to show to more dramatic effect.

Not so long ago the BBC aired an excellent dramatisation of Jean Rhys' enlightened and most unsettling riposte to Bronte, "Wide Sargasso Sea", imagining the back-story of the first Mrs Rochester. Do check it out – you'll never see the 'hero' of "Jane Eyre" in quite the same way again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4005 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] The one [[thing]] that [[occurred]] to me after watching this [[drivel]], was i would never [[get]] the [[time]] I [[used]] to watch this, back again. [[If]] you [[want]] to see [[Stacey]] keach and [[Michael]] dorn try and [[earn]] what must have been then, the down payments on a holiday [[home]] then [[stay]] tuned. [[Wooden]] acting, poor special effects, the only comedic [[highlight]] was whilst our [[alien]] hero was in female form and this is over as soon as she has done her obligatory b-movie nude sex scene within 30 mins into the [[movie]]. The opportunity to have [[made]] what [[could]] have been a decent movie disappears the moment Nicole Eggbert clocks the alien in a bar within 30 seconds, whilst the Police, Military and Joe public don't cotton on that the woman drinking coffee, dosn't use the cup handle and wears four jumpers at once. She must obviously be from another planet. Just where I wish I was when this movie was on. The one [[stuff]] that [[arose]] to me after watching this [[whim]], was i would never [[obtain]] the [[moment]] I [[utilise]] to watch this, back again. [[Though]] you [[desiring]] to see [[Stacy]] keach and [[Michel]] dorn try and [[gain]] what must have been then, the down payments on a holiday [[house]] then [[staying]] tuned. [[Timber]] acting, poor special effects, the only comedic [[stresses]] was whilst our [[foreign]] hero was in female form and this is over as soon as she has done her obligatory b-movie nude sex scene within 30 mins into the [[films]]. The opportunity to have [[effected]] what [[would]] have been a decent movie disappears the moment Nicole Eggbert clocks the alien in a bar within 30 seconds, whilst the Police, Military and Joe public don't cotton on that the woman drinking coffee, dosn't use the cup handle and wears four jumpers at once. She must obviously be from another planet. Just where I wish I was when this movie was on. --------------------------------------------- Result 4006 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (66%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Think "stage play". This is worth seeing once for the performances of Lionel Atwill and Dwight Frye. COmpare the Melvyn DOuglas in "Ghost Story" with the Melvyn DOuglas of this film. Are there vampires at loose in this 'Bavarian' village, or is there a more natural, albeit equally sinister, explanation? Dwight Frye is Herman, a red herring, who is cast as an especially [[moronic]] character. It's fun to look at his different facial expressions in what is really a stock character. NOt much happens for a long time, but then we discover that Atwill's pipe smoking doctor is the real murderer. There is too much 'comic relief' but that is par for the course for this era. Fay Wray looks really good. Think "stage play". This is worth seeing once for the performances of Lionel Atwill and Dwight Frye. COmpare the Melvyn DOuglas in "Ghost Story" with the Melvyn DOuglas of this film. Are there vampires at loose in this 'Bavarian' village, or is there a more natural, albeit equally sinister, explanation? Dwight Frye is Herman, a red herring, who is cast as an especially [[dolt]] character. It's fun to look at his different facial expressions in what is really a stock character. NOt much happens for a long time, but then we discover that Atwill's pipe smoking doctor is the real murderer. There is too much 'comic relief' but that is par for the course for this era. Fay Wray looks really good. --------------------------------------------- Result 4007 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (76%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I am not an artistically inclined individual. I am a science minded woman and I felt that this movie was maybe one of those campy artsy type films on a budget. I watched part of it with my fiancé and my future step daughter. We tried very hard to find something in this film to keep our interest. My fiancé and his daughter voted it off and we moved on to Ocean's 13,but that is another story. Not to be deterred I awoke the next morning and gave the movie another shot. I began again watching this movie in earnest. I just don't get it,I thought I would get it.I thought the funniest part was the flushing of the ashes and the urn finding a spot by the fireplace being used as a vase for what appeared to be dead flowers. Interesting and still it had dead stuff inside. It was an odd and bizarre movie. Maybe this is what they were after,however I won't be tricked a second time! --------------------------------------------- Result 4008 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She [[gives]] her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette [[Midler]] [[moves]] her audience. [[If]] you can't see it live (which is the [[best]] way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to [[look]] at is how [[incredible]] her voice has changed and matured over the [[years]] but never [[lost]] its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never [[loses]] anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will [[treasure]] this concert for a very long time. Bette Midler is indescribable in this concert. She [[offers]] her all every time she is on stage. Whether we are laughing at her jokes and antics or dabbing our eyes at the strains of one of her tremendous ballads, Bette [[Bette]] [[shift]] her audience. [[Unless]] you can't see it live (which is the [[better]] way to see Bette) then this is the next best thing. An interesting thing to [[gaze]] at is how [[unimaginable]] her voice has changed and matured over the [[yr]] but never [[outof]] its power. Her more "vocally correct" version of "Stay With Me" never [[forfeits]] anything in spirit from THE ROSE or DIVINE MADNESS, Here it is just more pure and as heartfelt as ever. I will [[hoard]] this concert for a very long time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4009 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (70%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[If]] you like films that are totally bizarre, then this one is for you! Abdullah is one mean mother, with a [[passion]] for strangling people and eating ham. You should check this film out, just for a laugh. It is a low budget sci-fi, musical, comedy, cannibalistic, classic. If you get bored of the film half way through you should persevere, just for the sake of seeing the aliens, which are nothing more than little toy robots, but in my opinion are the films highlight. "I'm the Big Meat Eater, pass me [[Though]] you like films that are totally bizarre, then this one is for you! Abdullah is one mean mother, with a [[enthusiasm]] for strangling people and eating ham. You should check this film out, just for a laugh. It is a low budget sci-fi, musical, comedy, cannibalistic, classic. If you get bored of the film half way through you should persevere, just for the sake of seeing the aliens, which are nothing more than little toy robots, but in my opinion are the films highlight. "I'm the Big Meat Eater, pass me --------------------------------------------- Result 4010 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] "Whipped" is 82 minutes long. This [[review]] is 82 words [[long]]. Three unlikable New York Lotharios, ruthless "[[scammers]]," end up wooing the same woman, played by Amanda Peet, with [[disastrous]] [[results]]. That applies to the story and the film. Too sophomoric to be misogynistic, flaccid and ridiculous, "Whipped" mixes the philosophies of shock jock Tom Lykis with Penthouse letter fantasies. Though technically proficient it's dated, grating, poorly written, mean, and obvious. People don't act like this. People don't talk like this. Really. "Whipped" is 82 minutes long. This [[examine]] is 82 words [[lengthy]]. Three unlikable New York Lotharios, ruthless "[[swindlers]]," end up wooing the same woman, played by Amanda Peet, with [[cataclysmic]] [[outcomes]]. That applies to the story and the film. Too sophomoric to be misogynistic, flaccid and ridiculous, "Whipped" mixes the philosophies of shock jock Tom Lykis with Penthouse letter fantasies. Though technically proficient it's dated, grating, poorly written, mean, and obvious. People don't act like this. People don't talk like this. Really. --------------------------------------------- Result 4011 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] The NSA, CIA, [[FBI]], FSB and all other snoop [[agency]] in the [[world]] should watch this movie to [[gain]] [[information]] as to how to [[spy]] on people. (as MST3k [[Commentary]] states it..."Sanata has the dirt on [[every]]! Santa's [[Tentacles]] [[reach]] far and wide! There is no hiding from the [[Klaus]] Organization")

From telescopes that can [[spy]] over [[millions]] of [[miles]] to ears that can [[hear]] everything. Its [[amazing]] that the CIA doesn't have Santa on the [[payroll]].

Satan's dance [[routine]] is hilarious. Pitch...he is so [[useless]].

The cheese factor in of this movie is tremendous. [[Very]] low budget but so fun to watch. I recommend watching the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 version for even more laughs.

You even get a laugh at the missfortune of the good kids.

I give this a 1 for production quality and a 10 for pure [[cheese]] and fun factor. The NSA, CIA, [[FBL]], FSB and all other snoop [[organization]] in the [[globe]] should watch this movie to [[gaining]] [[info]] as to how to [[espionage]] on people. (as MST3k [[Comments]] states it..."Sanata has the dirt on [[each]]! Santa's [[Tendrils]] [[achieving]] far and wide! There is no hiding from the [[Krause]] Organization")

From telescopes that can [[hyena]] over [[billions]] of [[klicks]] to ears that can [[listened]] everything. Its [[superb]] that the CIA doesn't have Santa on the [[paycheck]].

Satan's dance [[everyday]] is hilarious. Pitch...he is so [[dispensable]].

The cheese factor in of this movie is tremendous. [[Much]] low budget but so fun to watch. I recommend watching the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 version for even more laughs.

You even get a laugh at the missfortune of the good kids.

I give this a 1 for production quality and a 10 for pure [[queso]] and fun factor. --------------------------------------------- Result 4012 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (81%)]] I feel blessed to own what is known as the [[worst]] Steven Seagal movie ever made. I knew I was on to something special when Steven opened his mouth and someone else's voice came out. By the middle of the film my eyes were beginning to hurt and I was almost falling out of my chair with uncontrollable laughter.

Steven is Steven (with an ever changing voice) and totally [[unbelievable]] in his role (as always). Who the hell lets people with bad nappy-hair pony tail mullets into the Forces anyway? He also always writes himself into totally unbelievable love interests with women at least 20 years his junior. The supporting actors all look like they've been shot in the dark - btw, did they shoot this movie in the dark with just a penlight torch for lighting?

This is truly abominable in every way possible. Invite all your friends around and make a social event out of it - this one's truly special. I feel blessed to own what is known as the [[meanest]] Steven Seagal movie ever made. I knew I was on to something special when Steven opened his mouth and someone else's voice came out. By the middle of the film my eyes were beginning to hurt and I was almost falling out of my chair with uncontrollable laughter.

Steven is Steven (with an ever changing voice) and totally [[extraordinary]] in his role (as always). Who the hell lets people with bad nappy-hair pony tail mullets into the Forces anyway? He also always writes himself into totally unbelievable love interests with women at least 20 years his junior. The supporting actors all look like they've been shot in the dark - btw, did they shoot this movie in the dark with just a penlight torch for lighting?

This is truly abominable in every way possible. Invite all your friends around and make a social event out of it - this one's truly special. --------------------------------------------- Result 4013 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] In the first one it was mainly giant rats, but there were some wasps and a giant chicken too. This one, however, is just giant rats [[period]], well giant rats and one really [[growing]] little boy. This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you [[know]] how it is. This [[movie]] has some kills and its moments, but I find it to be on par with the [[original]], I just prefer some variety in my giant creature [[movies]]. Well, that is not true...I actually like "Empire of the Ants", maybe I just do not care for giant rodents. All in all a rather [[drab]] [[movie]] though it does have one rather odd turn of events in this one dream sequence that is truly bizarre. I just can't recommend this one. In the first one it was mainly giant rats, but there were some wasps and a giant chicken too. This one, however, is just giant rats [[periods]], well giant rats and one really [[heightened]] little boy. This one is about this growing boy and a scientist that is trying to help him so he accidentally creates giant killer rats...you [[savoir]] how it is. This [[cinematography]] has some kills and its moments, but I find it to be on par with the [[upfront]], I just prefer some variety in my giant creature [[kino]]. Well, that is not true...I actually like "Empire of the Ants", maybe I just do not care for giant rodents. All in all a rather [[uninspiring]] [[cinematography]] though it does have one rather odd turn of events in this one dream sequence that is truly bizarre. I just can't recommend this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4014 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This is a formula B science fiction movie, and the director [[made]] no bones about it. It is about a dragon who is restored to [[life]] by a scientific team. [[Everything]] done is stuff you've [[seen]] many times before. It is a [[weak]] [[script]], with no [[real]] characters. [[In]] fact, it is full of [[stereotype]] [[characters]] and situations. The director attacks this by just making it a formula [[movie]], with no attempt to fool us, and that gives this movie a [[mild]] [[appeal]], but it isn't something you're likely to remember a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. Sort of mindless fun. It has its place in entertainment, but it certainly isn't something you sit down with friends to watch, unless you're all just drunk and don't care. The mass rating of 3.2 is probably fair. I don't think it is as crappy as most people, but I am surprised that some people in the postings thought this was spectacular. That really eludes me, as I see no attempt to [[even]] [[make]] this a memorable film. This is a formula B science fiction movie, and the director [[accomplished]] no bones about it. It is about a dragon who is restored to [[lives]] by a scientific team. [[All]] done is stuff you've [[noticed]] many times before. It is a [[fragile]] [[hyphen]], with no [[true]] characters. [[Across]] fact, it is full of [[stereotypes]] [[trait]] and situations. The director attacks this by just making it a formula [[film]], with no attempt to fool us, and that gives this movie a [[gentle]] [[appellate]], but it isn't something you're likely to remember a while. It is best seen while you're cooking, cleaning, working out. Sort of mindless fun. It has its place in entertainment, but it certainly isn't something you sit down with friends to watch, unless you're all just drunk and don't care. The mass rating of 3.2 is probably fair. I don't think it is as crappy as most people, but I am surprised that some people in the postings thought this was spectacular. That really eludes me, as I see no attempt to [[yet]] [[deliver]] this a memorable film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4015 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] [[First]] of all when I [[saw]] the teaser [[trailer]] for Wendy Wu, I was definitely [[excited]]. [[Brenda]] Song, one of the [[hottest]] [[girls]] on [[Disney]] [[Channel]], would be doing martial [[arts]] and I was fine with that... until I [[saw]] the [[movie]]. The [[action]] was poorly [[constructed]], the [[movie]] couldn't have realated to [[anyone]], the [[fighting]] was [[unrealistic]] and it [[sucked]]... along with the plot. [[If]] you really [[think]] about it's a wannabe Buffy the [[Vampire]] [[Slayer]], a [[girl]] who is the descendant of other [[warriors]] who were women, a [[girl]] [[wants]] to ignore her calling and [[wants]] to become homecoming queen, the [[watcher]] who bug's her to [[prepare]] for a [[big]] [[fight]] against some [[ancient]] evil. The [[idea]] just wasn't all that [[original]], the [[movie]] is [[waste]] of time. [[Fiirst]] of all when I [[noticed]] the teaser [[trailers]] for Wendy Wu, I was definitely [[excite]]. [[Lori]] Song, one of the [[warmest]] [[daughters]] on [[Disneyland]] [[Chanel]], would be doing martial [[humanities]] and I was fine with that... until I [[observed]] the [[kino]]. The [[efforts]] was poorly [[constructs]], the [[kino]] couldn't have realated to [[everyone]], the [[struggles]] was [[utopian]] and it [[aspired]]... along with the plot. [[Though]] you really [[thinking]] about it's a wannabe Buffy the [[Vampires]] [[Murderer]], a [[women]] who is the descendant of other [[guerrillas]] who were women, a [[daughter]] [[wanting]] to ignore her calling and [[wanted]] to become homecoming queen, the [[observers]] who bug's her to [[prepared]] for a [[overwhelming]] [[combating]] against some [[antigua]] evil. The [[notions]] just wasn't all that [[originals]], the [[cinema]] is [[wastes]] of time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4016 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] This [[film]] is a very funny film. The violence is bad, the acting is...Well Dani, stick to singing or screaming or whatever the hell it is you usually do. The random chicks wearing hardly anything is just to catch sexually-frustrated goth lads in. Personally, i think this [[movie]] [[really]] does [[suck]]. The story and [[characters]] [[COULD]] be very good, if say the directing, the actors and other little nibby things were made better. But the film is just [[bad]], the only reason why people like this piece of [[crap]] is because it has Danni in it. This film is possibly the [[worst]] B-rate film ever. And, believe me that's hard to achieve, especially when you're competing with Def by Temptation and over crappy excuses for "serious" horror movies. I'm not a CoF fan, and so i just see this as another rubbish movie...A really bad one. If Dani made this as a comedy then, good going him. Very well done. Over than that though, i rate it low, for it's crappiness. Watch it when you're in a happy, happy, joy, joy mode so you can laugh at everything or if you're high on multiple different types of drugs. This [[filmmaking]] is a very funny film. The violence is bad, the acting is...Well Dani, stick to singing or screaming or whatever the hell it is you usually do. The random chicks wearing hardly anything is just to catch sexually-frustrated goth lads in. Personally, i think this [[movies]] [[truly]] does [[lick]]. The story and [[traits]] [[WO]] be very good, if say the directing, the actors and other little nibby things were made better. But the film is just [[unhealthy]], the only reason why people like this piece of [[bollocks]] is because it has Danni in it. This film is possibly the [[meanest]] B-rate film ever. And, believe me that's hard to achieve, especially when you're competing with Def by Temptation and over crappy excuses for "serious" horror movies. I'm not a CoF fan, and so i just see this as another rubbish movie...A really bad one. If Dani made this as a comedy then, good going him. Very well done. Over than that though, i rate it low, for it's crappiness. Watch it when you're in a happy, happy, joy, joy mode so you can laugh at everything or if you're high on multiple different types of drugs. --------------------------------------------- Result 4017 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I have watched this movie on DVD a couple of times now,the first time, I watched the second half after the hour and then went back to the first hour. an engrossing entertaining film, thank god no kiera knightley in it, refreshing and it gives us all a genuine insight into the difficult life of Queen Victoria and the difficult choices she had to make. Nothing bad about the movie at all, no real bad language or anything of a sexual nature which would offend for family viewing. Might prompt the kids to research a little about the queen victoria herself and perhaps lesser known characters such as Conroy and Lord Melbourne --------------------------------------------- Result 4018 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] This Peabody [[Award]] [[winning]] episode is one of the [[highlights]] of the 1st Season where a holodeck [[malfunction]] [[traps]] Captain Picard, Beverly, Data, and a Starfleet historian named Waylan within a 1930's San Francisco setting. This episode is an homage to Raymond Chandler's "Maltese Falcon" where [[Patrick]] Stewart assumes the Humphrey Bogart role - complete with fedora and trenchcoat. The office itself is almost an exact replica of the one featured in Bogey's "Maltese Falcon."

This episode also briefly introduces us to a mysterious insect race called the Jarada that communicate with mostly a high-pitched buzzing sound. Communication with this alien race is difficult, and it is up to Picard to communicate with this race in their native tongue so that negotiations and diplomacy can finally begin. The best part of this episode, though, is the appearance of the famous Hollywood B-actor Lawrence Tierney in the role of the gangster Cyrus Redblock. He was such a handsome man back in the 1940's. Oh, well... This Peabody [[Awarding]] [[wins]] episode is one of the [[stresses]] of the 1st Season where a holodeck [[flaw]] [[petard]] Captain Picard, Beverly, Data, and a Starfleet historian named Waylan within a 1930's San Francisco setting. This episode is an homage to Raymond Chandler's "Maltese Falcon" where [[Patricio]] Stewart assumes the Humphrey Bogart role - complete with fedora and trenchcoat. The office itself is almost an exact replica of the one featured in Bogey's "Maltese Falcon."

This episode also briefly introduces us to a mysterious insect race called the Jarada that communicate with mostly a high-pitched buzzing sound. Communication with this alien race is difficult, and it is up to Picard to communicate with this race in their native tongue so that negotiations and diplomacy can finally begin. The best part of this episode, though, is the appearance of the famous Hollywood B-actor Lawrence Tierney in the role of the gangster Cyrus Redblock. He was such a handsome man back in the 1940's. Oh, well... --------------------------------------------- Result 4019 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] the tortuous emotional [[impact]] is degrading, whether adult or adolescent the personal [[values]] shown in this movie belong in a [[bad]] psychodrama if [[anywhere]] at all. This [[movie]] has a [[plot]], but it is all evil from start to [[end]]. This is no [[way]] for people to [[act]] and [[degrades]] both sexes all the way through the [[movie]]. teen killing - bad preteen sex - bad emotional battering - bad animal cruelty - bad psychological torture - bad parental neglect - bad the only [[merit]] if any is the excellent color shots of contrasting red, blond and green leaves a bad feeling for [[anyone]] that respects life and peace, what a bad mistake to make, or to watch... it is UGLY the tortuous emotional [[consequences]] is degrading, whether adult or adolescent the personal [[valuing]] shown in this movie belong in a [[negative]] psychodrama if [[nowhere]] at all. This [[cinematography]] has a [[intrigue]], but it is all evil from start to [[terminate]]. This is no [[path]] for people to [[ley]] and [[humiliates]] both sexes all the way through the [[kino]]. teen killing - bad preteen sex - bad emotional battering - bad animal cruelty - bad psychological torture - bad parental neglect - bad the only [[deserve]] if any is the excellent color shots of contrasting red, blond and green leaves a bad feeling for [[everyone]] that respects life and peace, what a bad mistake to make, or to watch... it is UGLY --------------------------------------------- Result 4020 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I should say at the [[outset]] there are many, many things I love about 'Forbidden Planet' and yes, I certainly consider it a 'classic' science-fiction [[film]] for many reasons. But the adulation it has [[received]] over the [[years]] goes a bit over the top in my opinion. [[No]] less an authority than Leonard Maltin says '[[Forbidden]] Planet' "...is one of the most ambitious and [[intelligent]] [[movies]] of its genre." Ambitious? Without a doubt. [[Intelligent]]? Depends on what [[part]] of the film you're [[talking]] about. It [[certainly]] was the most prestigious and highly-budgeted science-fiction [[flick]] to that point. [[At]] a [[cost]] of [[nearly]] $2 [[million]] (this was 1956, [[remember]]), MGM [[pulled]] out all the [[stops]] to [[produce]] a [[dazzling]], eye-popping outer space [[adventure]] unlike [[anything]] [[seen]] on the [[big]] screen before, even employing [[artists]] from the [[Disney]] studio for some of the more [[elaborate]] [[special]] [[effects]]. 'Charming' is not [[usually]] a word [[used]] to [[describe]] [[special]] effects in sci-fi [[movies]], yet that is the one that [[seems]] most appropriate here. [[Even]] the [[dreaded]] '[[Monster]] from the Id' is only a well-rendered cartoon figure by the Disney people, unlikely to [[frighten]] [[anyone]] over the [[age]] of 8. When I see the [[various]] sets and take note of the art design, models, [[costumes]], etc., I am [[reminded]] of [[nothing]] so much as 'The Wizard of Oz,' with its gorgeously saturated [[colors]] and elaborate if not [[always]] convincing effects. [[So]] much [[work]] has [[gone]] into these [[films]] that one is [[inclined]] to [[smile]] in [[admiration]] at the effort regardless. '[[Forbidden]] Planet' is [[wonderful]] to [[look]] at. The scenes [[take]] place on [[obvious]] [[stage]] sets that are [[fabulously]] decorated, matte paintings of [[planets]] and space in the background, and intricately designed miniature sand dunes and so forth to give the illusion of depth. It's a bit like watching the most elaborately-produced stage play you'd ever see. The most [[believable]] and [[convincing]] scenes are [[probably]] the ones inside the [[massive]] Krell complex, where [[shots]] [[showing]] the [[vast]] depth and width of this [[inner]] space are well-done and [[credible]]. But then we [[get]] to the actors, [[darn]] it. The performances are [[almost]] uniformly awful, [[though]] in [[fairness]] one has to say the [[dialogue]] [[hardly]] ever [[transcends]] the [[level]] of [[adolescent]] locker-room humor, except for some [[passages]] of barely [[adequate]] scientific technobabble. Even the [[great]] [[actor]] Walter Pidgeon is [[reduced]] to [[giving]] such a hammy performance, it's lugubrious at times. A very young Leslie Nielsen stars as the spaceship commander J.J. Adams, and doesn't convey an ounce of believability or conviction in the entire film. He seems to instinctively know, thirty years ahead of time, that his true forte' lay in comedy, as there are times he seems barely able to keep a straight face reciting his lines. Every forced reaction, whether it is anger or passion or solemn meditation, looks right out of a high school play. Anne Francis, also very young, fares a little better as the supposedly innocent Alta, whom we are to believe has never seen a human male other than her father until the crew of the spaceship shows up. (Alta Morbius, now there's a name for you.) Unfortunately, even at this early age, Anne Francis seems about as virginal and naive as Elizabeth Taylor in 'Butterfield 8.' There is a good story here, buried somewhere beneath the crew-mates' leering comments about Alta and yet another juvenile subplot concerning Earl Holliman's 'Cookie,' ship's cook. (Holliman turns in a horrendous performance too. I'm guessing all these actors went straight from this movie to acting school.) Based on Shakespeare's 'The Tempest,' the story of a dead race, the Krell, and the [[fantastic]] world of machines they left behind is what most people tend to remember about 'Forbidden Planet,' and for good reason. [[For]] a few minutes here and there, you can [[forget]] about the rest of the movie and be dazzled by the [[Disney]] artists' conception of the Krell underground complex. Is it enough to make up for the rest of the film's shortcomings? You'll have to decide that on your own. Oh, and of course there's Robby the Robot, every 1950's ten-year-old's idea of what a robot should look and talk like. He's funny. In places. So, 'Forbidden Planet' to me is a very, VERY mixed bag. It deserves credit for being the inspiration for a whole wave of sci-fi films and TV shows that followed, not least of which was 'Star Trek.' But I would suggest that anyone who thinks it's more than well-staged comic book sci-fi go back and watch it again. I should say at the [[beginning]] there are many, many things I love about 'Forbidden Planet' and yes, I certainly consider it a 'classic' science-fiction [[flick]] for many reasons. But the adulation it has [[benefited]] over the [[olds]] goes a bit over the top in my opinion. [[None]] less an authority than Leonard Maltin says '[[Outlaw]] Planet' "...is one of the most ambitious and [[termite]] [[theater]] of its genre." Ambitious? Without a doubt. [[Smarter]]? Depends on what [[portion]] of the film you're [[debating]] about. It [[probably]] was the most prestigious and highly-budgeted science-fiction [[movie]] to that point. [[Under]] a [[expenses]] of [[approximately]] $2 [[billion]] (this was 1956, [[rember]]), MGM [[pulling]] out all the [[halt]] to [[producing]] a [[staggering]], eye-popping outer space [[adventurer]] unlike [[something]] [[watched]] on the [[massive]] screen before, even employing [[artist]] from the [[Disneyland]] studio for some of the more [[developing]] [[specific]] [[implications]]. 'Charming' is not [[normally]] a word [[utilizes]] to [[outlines]] [[specific]] effects in sci-fi [[filmmaking]], yet that is the one that [[seem]] most appropriate here. [[Yet]] the [[dreadful]] '[[Monsters]] from the Id' is only a well-rendered cartoon figure by the Disney people, unlikely to [[scared]] [[someone]] over the [[aging]] of 8. When I see the [[multiple]] sets and take note of the art design, models, [[clothes]], etc., I am [[remembered]] of [[none]] so much as 'The Wizard of Oz,' with its gorgeously saturated [[dye]] and elaborate if not [[permanently]] convincing effects. [[Accordingly]] much [[working]] has [[vanished]] into these [[movie]] that one is [[sloping]] to [[grinning]] in [[awe]] at the effort regardless. '[[Outlawed]] Planet' is [[noteworthy]] to [[glance]] at. The scenes [[taking]] place on [[conspicuous]] [[stages]] sets that are [[fantastically]] decorated, matte paintings of [[planet]] and space in the background, and intricately designed miniature sand dunes and so forth to give the illusion of depth. It's a bit like watching the most elaborately-produced stage play you'd ever see. The most [[dependable]] and [[persuade]] scenes are [[presumably]] the ones inside the [[big]] Krell complex, where [[punches]] [[proving]] the [[sizable]] depth and width of this [[indoor]] space are well-done and [[plausible]]. But then we [[got]] to the actors, [[damn]] it. The performances are [[nearly]] uniformly awful, [[despite]] in [[equity]] one has to say the [[conversation]] [[barely]] ever [[exceeding]] the [[levels]] of [[juvenile]] locker-room humor, except for some [[aisles]] of barely [[suitably]] scientific technobabble. Even the [[prodigious]] [[actress]] Walter Pidgeon is [[declining]] to [[conferring]] such a hammy performance, it's lugubrious at times. A very young Leslie Nielsen stars as the spaceship commander J.J. Adams, and doesn't convey an ounce of believability or conviction in the entire film. He seems to instinctively know, thirty years ahead of time, that his true forte' lay in comedy, as there are times he seems barely able to keep a straight face reciting his lines. Every forced reaction, whether it is anger or passion or solemn meditation, looks right out of a high school play. Anne Francis, also very young, fares a little better as the supposedly innocent Alta, whom we are to believe has never seen a human male other than her father until the crew of the spaceship shows up. (Alta Morbius, now there's a name for you.) Unfortunately, even at this early age, Anne Francis seems about as virginal and naive as Elizabeth Taylor in 'Butterfield 8.' There is a good story here, buried somewhere beneath the crew-mates' leering comments about Alta and yet another juvenile subplot concerning Earl Holliman's 'Cookie,' ship's cook. (Holliman turns in a horrendous performance too. I'm guessing all these actors went straight from this movie to acting school.) Based on Shakespeare's 'The Tempest,' the story of a dead race, the Krell, and the [[splendid]] world of machines they left behind is what most people tend to remember about 'Forbidden Planet,' and for good reason. [[At]] a few minutes here and there, you can [[forgets]] about the rest of the movie and be dazzled by the [[Disneyland]] artists' conception of the Krell underground complex. Is it enough to make up for the rest of the film's shortcomings? You'll have to decide that on your own. Oh, and of course there's Robby the Robot, every 1950's ten-year-old's idea of what a robot should look and talk like. He's funny. In places. So, 'Forbidden Planet' to me is a very, VERY mixed bag. It deserves credit for being the inspiration for a whole wave of sci-fi films and TV shows that followed, not least of which was 'Star Trek.' But I would suggest that anyone who thinks it's more than well-staged comic book sci-fi go back and watch it again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4021 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] One of [[John]] Ford's [[best]] [[films]] 'The Informer' doesn't feature any [[grand]] scenery of the American [[West]]. [[Instead]] the [[intense]] drama Ford was known for plays out on the no less [[rugged]] [[terrain]] of British character actor Victor McLaglen's face. The [[former]] prizefighter, who once [[faced]] Joe Louis in the ring, delivers an Academy Award-winning portrayal of disgraced IRA soldier Gypo Nolan on the worst night of his life.

The plot is [[gracefully]] simple: In 1922 Dublin, a starving and humiliated man who's been thrown out of the IRA for being unable to kill an informant in cold blood, himself becomes an informant. For £20 he betrays a friend to "the Tans" and for the rest of the night he drinks and gives away his blood money in rapidly alternating spasms of guilt, denial, self-pity, and a desperate desire to escape the consequences of his actions.

It is the remarkable complexity given to the character of the seemingly simple Gypo that is the film's most [[impressive]] achievement. [[In]] most movies a burly lout of Gypo's type would be [[cast]] as the heavy, he'd have at best two or three lines and be disposed of quickly so the hero and the villain could have their showdown. In 'The Informer' Gypo himself is both [[hero]] and villain, while the showdown is in his inner [[turmoil]], every bit of which is explicitly [[shared]] with the audience.

Because [[Liam]] O'Flaherty's novel had [[previously]] been [[filmed]] in 1929, RKO [[gave]] Ford a very modest [[budget]]. The director and his associates, particularly cinematographer Joseph H. August, turned this to their [[advantage]] in creating a claustrophobic [[masterpiece]] about a man at war with himself. In addition to McLaglen's Oscar 'The Informer' [[also]] won John Ford his first along with wins for [[Best]] [[Screenplay]] and Best [[Score]]. One of [[Johannes]] Ford's [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] 'The Informer' doesn't feature any [[great]] scenery of the American [[Westerner]]. [[Alternatively]] the [[intensive]] drama Ford was known for plays out on the no less [[rough]] [[ground]] of British character actor Victor McLaglen's face. The [[previous]] prizefighter, who once [[encounter]] Joe Louis in the ring, delivers an Academy Award-winning portrayal of disgraced IRA soldier Gypo Nolan on the worst night of his life.

The plot is [[politely]] simple: In 1922 Dublin, a starving and humiliated man who's been thrown out of the IRA for being unable to kill an informant in cold blood, himself becomes an informant. For £20 he betrays a friend to "the Tans" and for the rest of the night he drinks and gives away his blood money in rapidly alternating spasms of guilt, denial, self-pity, and a desperate desire to escape the consequences of his actions.

It is the remarkable complexity given to the character of the seemingly simple Gypo that is the film's most [[unbelievable]] achievement. [[At]] most movies a burly lout of Gypo's type would be [[casting]] as the heavy, he'd have at best two or three lines and be disposed of quickly so the hero and the villain could have their showdown. In 'The Informer' Gypo himself is both [[superhero]] and villain, while the showdown is in his inner [[disorder]], every bit of which is explicitly [[exchanged]] with the audience.

Because [[Llam]] O'Flaherty's novel had [[anterior]] been [[shot]] in 1929, RKO [[supplied]] Ford a very modest [[budgets]]. The director and his associates, particularly cinematographer Joseph H. August, turned this to their [[advantages]] in creating a claustrophobic [[centerpiece]] about a man at war with himself. In addition to McLaglen's Oscar 'The Informer' [[apart]] won John Ford his first along with wins for [[Nicest]] [[Scenario]] and Best [[Notation]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4022 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] When Carol (Vanessa Hidalgo) starts looking into her brother's death, she begins to suspect something more sinister than "natural causes". The closer she gets to the truth, the more of a [[threat]] she becomes to her sister-in-law, Fiona (Helga Line), and the rest of the local Satanists. They'll do whatever is necessary to put a stop her nosy ways.

If you're into [[sleazy]], Satanic-themed movies, Black [[Candles]] has a lot to [[offer]]. The movie is filled with plenty of nudity and ritualistic soft-core sex. One scene in particular involving a young woman and a goat must be seen to be believed. Unfortunately, all the sleaze in the world can't save Black Candles. Most of the movie is a total bore. Other than the one scene I've already mentioned, the numerous sex scenes aren't shocking and certainly aren't sexy. The acting is spotty at best. Even genre favorite Helga Line gives a disappointing performance. The plot really doesn't matter. Its main function seems to be to hold the string of dull sex scenes together. I'm only familiar with one other movie directed by Jose Ramon Larraz. Compared with his Daughters of Darkness that masterfully mixes eroticism and horror, Black Candles comes off as amateurish. 3/10 is about the best I can do. When Carol (Vanessa Hidalgo) starts looking into her brother's death, she begins to suspect something more sinister than "natural causes". The closer she gets to the truth, the more of a [[menace]] she becomes to her sister-in-law, Fiona (Helga Line), and the rest of the local Satanists. They'll do whatever is necessary to put a stop her nosy ways.

If you're into [[dirty]], Satanic-themed movies, Black [[Sails]] has a lot to [[delivers]]. The movie is filled with plenty of nudity and ritualistic soft-core sex. One scene in particular involving a young woman and a goat must be seen to be believed. Unfortunately, all the sleaze in the world can't save Black Candles. Most of the movie is a total bore. Other than the one scene I've already mentioned, the numerous sex scenes aren't shocking and certainly aren't sexy. The acting is spotty at best. Even genre favorite Helga Line gives a disappointing performance. The plot really doesn't matter. Its main function seems to be to hold the string of dull sex scenes together. I'm only familiar with one other movie directed by Jose Ramon Larraz. Compared with his Daughters of Darkness that masterfully mixes eroticism and horror, Black Candles comes off as amateurish. 3/10 is about the best I can do. --------------------------------------------- Result 4023 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Parsifal (1982) Starring Michael Kutter, Armin Jordan, [[Robert]] Lloyd, Martin Sperr, [[Edith]] Clever, Aage Haugland and the voices of Reiner Goldberg, Yvonne Minton, Wolfgang Schone, Director Hans-Jurgen Syberberg.

[[Straight]] out of the German [[school]] of film, the kind that favored tons of symbolism and Ingmar Bergmanesque surrealism, came this 1982 [[film]] of Wagner's final masterpiece- Parsifal, written to correspond with Good [[Friday]]/Easter and the consecration of the Bayreuth Opera House. This film follows the musical score and plot accurately but the manner in which it was filmed and performed is [[bold]] and avant-garde and no other Parsifal takes the [[crown]] in its bizarre cinematography. Syberberg is known for [[controversial]] [[films]]. [[Prior]] to this [[film]] he had [[released]] [[films]] about Hitler and Nazism, [[Richard]] Wagner and his personal Anti-Semitism and a documentary about Winifred Wagner, one of his grand-daughters. This [[film]] is [[possibly]] disturbing in [[many]] aspects. Parsifal (sung by Reiner [[Goldberg]] but [[acted]] by Michael Kutter) is a male [[throughout]] the [[first]] part of the [[film]] and then, after the enchantment of Kundry's kiss, is [[transformed]] into a female. This gender-bending [[element]] [[displays]] the feminine/masculine/ying-yang [[nature]] of the quest for the [[Holy]] Grail, which [[serves]] all mankind and redeems it through Christ's blood. [[In]] the [[pagan]] [[sorcerer]] Klingsor's [[fortress]], there are [[photographs]] of such notoriously sinister [[figures]] as Hitler, Nietzche, Cosima Wagner and Wagner's mistress Matilde Wesendock. The Swaztika flag hangs outside the [[fortress]]. Parsifal journeys into the 19th and 20th century [[throughout]] the [[film]]. The tempting [[Flower]] Maidens are in the [[nude]]. Kundry is [[portrayed]] as a [[sort]] of beautiful but corrupt Mary Magdalene or Eve from [[Genesis]] ([[played]] by Edith Clever but beautifully sung by mezzo-soprano Yvonne Minton). Ultimately, this [[film]] is for [[fans]] of this type of bizarre Germanic/European symbolic metafiction and for intellectuals who appreciate the symbolism, the history and lovers of Wagner opera. Indeed, the singing is grand and [[compelling]]. Reiner Goldberg's Parsifal is a focused and intense voice but it lacks the depth and overall greatness of the greater Parsifals of the stage - James King, Wolfgang Windgassen, Rene Kollo and today's own Placido Domingo. Yvone Minton is a sensual-voiced, dramatic and exciting Kundry, delving into her tormented state perfectly. While the production is certainly unorthodox and as un-Wagnerian as it can possibly get (Wagner's concept was Christian ceremonial pomp with Grails, spears, castles, Knights and wounded kings, a dark sorcerer, darkness turning into light, etc typical Wagnerian themes)..it is still an enjoyable, art-house film. Parsifal (1982) Starring Michael Kutter, Armin Jordan, [[Roberta]] Lloyd, Martin Sperr, [[Mildred]] Clever, Aage Haugland and the voices of Reiner Goldberg, Yvonne Minton, Wolfgang Schone, Director Hans-Jurgen Syberberg.

[[Consecutive]] out of the German [[tuition]] of film, the kind that favored tons of symbolism and Ingmar Bergmanesque surrealism, came this 1982 [[cinematographic]] of Wagner's final masterpiece- Parsifal, written to correspond with Good [[Yesterday]]/Easter and the consecration of the Bayreuth Opera House. This film follows the musical score and plot accurately but the manner in which it was filmed and performed is [[valiant]] and avant-garde and no other Parsifal takes the [[krone]] in its bizarre cinematography. Syberberg is known for [[contentious]] [[movies]]. [[Ago]] to this [[movies]] he had [[emitted]] [[movies]] about Hitler and Nazism, [[Richie]] Wagner and his personal Anti-Semitism and a documentary about Winifred Wagner, one of his grand-daughters. This [[cinematographic]] is [[presumably]] disturbing in [[several]] aspects. Parsifal (sung by Reiner [[Tucker]] but [[behaved]] by Michael Kutter) is a male [[around]] the [[outset]] part of the [[cinematographic]] and then, after the enchantment of Kundry's kiss, is [[convert]] into a female. This gender-bending [[component]] [[displaying]] the feminine/masculine/ying-yang [[traits]] of the quest for the [[Sacred]] Grail, which [[serve]] all mankind and redeems it through Christ's blood. [[During]] the [[atheist]] [[wizard]] Klingsor's [[bastion]], there are [[photograph]] of such notoriously sinister [[numbers]] as Hitler, Nietzche, Cosima Wagner and Wagner's mistress Matilde Wesendock. The Swaztika flag hangs outside the [[bastion]]. Parsifal journeys into the 19th and 20th century [[during]] the [[cinematography]]. The tempting [[Flowering]] Maidens are in the [[naked]]. Kundry is [[depicted]] as a [[sorts]] of beautiful but corrupt Mary Magdalene or Eve from [[Origins]] ([[accomplished]] by Edith Clever but beautifully sung by mezzo-soprano Yvonne Minton). Ultimately, this [[flick]] is for [[amateurs]] of this type of bizarre Germanic/European symbolic metafiction and for intellectuals who appreciate the symbolism, the history and lovers of Wagner opera. Indeed, the singing is grand and [[convincing]]. Reiner Goldberg's Parsifal is a focused and intense voice but it lacks the depth and overall greatness of the greater Parsifals of the stage - James King, Wolfgang Windgassen, Rene Kollo and today's own Placido Domingo. Yvone Minton is a sensual-voiced, dramatic and exciting Kundry, delving into her tormented state perfectly. While the production is certainly unorthodox and as un-Wagnerian as it can possibly get (Wagner's concept was Christian ceremonial pomp with Grails, spears, castles, Knights and wounded kings, a dark sorcerer, darkness turning into light, etc typical Wagnerian themes)..it is still an enjoyable, art-house film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4024 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (97%)]] If you're after the real story of early Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi, you'll be disappointed- however if you're after a reasonably crafted bodice ripper with an art theme, you've found you're movie.

This film is such a foundationally [[inaccurate]] depiction of Artemisia Gentileschi's life that it almost made me weep. (Type in Artemisia inaccuracies in Google and check out some of the fact vs. fiction articles.) From a purely technical point of view though, the film was alright: the sets, costumes, and especially the chiaroscuro lighting helped create an immersive early 17th century experience; although the above mentioned GLARING FACTUAL INACCURACIES let it down a bit.

I wonder how the director/co-writer Agnès Merlet defended her film at the time? Perhaps she refused to portray Artemisia as a victim, which would've been unfortunate, because lets face it, she was. If you're after the real story of early Baroque painter Artemisia Gentileschi, you'll be disappointed- however if you're after a reasonably crafted bodice ripper with an art theme, you've found you're movie.

This film is such a foundationally [[amiss]] depiction of Artemisia Gentileschi's life that it almost made me weep. (Type in Artemisia inaccuracies in Google and check out some of the fact vs. fiction articles.) From a purely technical point of view though, the film was alright: the sets, costumes, and especially the chiaroscuro lighting helped create an immersive early 17th century experience; although the above mentioned GLARING FACTUAL INACCURACIES let it down a bit.

I wonder how the director/co-writer Agnès Merlet defended her film at the time? Perhaps she refused to portray Artemisia as a victim, which would've been unfortunate, because lets face it, she was. --------------------------------------------- Result 4025 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] ... Hawk Heaven for [[lovers]] of French cinema and by extension French Screen actors/actresses. [[At]] its worst it's an indulgence, actors getting to bitch about other actors, question the validity of acting as a profession at all, etc whilst at its best it's a [[glorious]] [[celebration]]/send-up of some of the [[finest]] actors currently working. From a simple premise - Jean-Pierre Marielle's request for water being ignored in a restaurant - Blier spins off in all directions and [[allows]] the cream of French cinema to strut their stuff before the camera even throwing in nods to those no longer around (Jean Gabin, Lino Ventura) including the Director's father, Bernard, one of the great stalwarts of French cinema, from whom he fields a celestial phone call at the end of the film. Discursive and prolix, yes, guilty as charged but also something of a guilty pleasure. ... Hawk Heaven for [[stalkers]] of French cinema and by extension French Screen actors/actresses. [[Under]] its worst it's an indulgence, actors getting to bitch about other actors, question the validity of acting as a profession at all, etc whilst at its best it's a [[sumptuous]] [[festivals]]/send-up of some of the [[meanest]] actors currently working. From a simple premise - Jean-Pierre Marielle's request for water being ignored in a restaurant - Blier spins off in all directions and [[authorizes]] the cream of French cinema to strut their stuff before the camera even throwing in nods to those no longer around (Jean Gabin, Lino Ventura) including the Director's father, Bernard, one of the great stalwarts of French cinema, from whom he fields a celestial phone call at the end of the film. Discursive and prolix, yes, guilty as charged but also something of a guilty pleasure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4026 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] About 1986 I [[saw]] this [[movie]] by [[accident]] on TV one night. I was 6 years old. It was similar to my accidental viewing of the terrifying [[ending]] to Don't Look Now in 1987. I went to Venice on holiday the next year in silent terror, hoping to god that my parents wouldn't find out I'd watched it!

Would I have minded if my parents knew I'd watched Les Valseuses when I was a kid? I'd probably avoid the subject with my dad even nowadays, and my mum's probably disapproving in the afterlife. I don't know if they'd want to see it anyway. From the stalking and trapping of a woman at the block of flats in the first scene to sliding down the mountain roads with glazed satiated eyes I'm never sure whether this film is an insensitive piece of trash that disregards the sexual revolution or if it's a sexy liberating movie to watch as it dawns on you that you could never be so offensive yourself.

It's definitely violent. It has a violent view of sex, virtually no acknowledgement of love. Even suckling a young baby mutates into a greedy sexual act of exploitation. But the scenario IS very erotic and (god I'm so British) arousing! Do they suck her breasts for her own good? That is exploitation. So why am I getting a woody?

The fellows go in search of an experienced older woman, find an ex-con, mother-figure? I don't know. It ends in a truly gruesome suicide. I described it to my friend JB Nelson, who has Cannibal Holocaust-guts, and he went eeuurrgghh! No motherly love for this movie, quite the opposite. Mutilation of where the boys began. Why do they shoot the girl in the leg? Why does she come back to them? Do women need to be punished so that they learn what is right from men?

I'm thinking of two movies, one of which I wish I'd never seen, the other makes me wish it wasn't such a harsh world. Swept Away/Madonna what a pile of insanity doesn't compute never been so offended that a woman punished for being a woman becomes slave to man and its maybe madonna saying everybody respect guy ritchie im so enraged i cant use punctuation! Once Upon A Time In America/Leone god why does Noodles do it? Destroys the path to joy we've been following him on his whole life. So close to finally finding love with Deborah. Now they are both destroyed. Why Sergio? Why?

There is no rape in Les Valseuses but lots of sex and nakedness in abundance, of both sexes. Very honest, no titillation. No fantasy shags, no perfect Hollywood smooth moves. Jokes, yes. But there's too much darkness and jealousy and trickery in here to call it a sex comedy. Forget Carry On Shooting A Naked Hairdresser In The Leg Cos She'll Come Back & You'll Hook Her Up With Your Ex-con Lover's Vengeant Son & She'll Learn How To Cum From Him.

Two things I can't stand are rape movies and prison movies. Les Valseuses isn't a rape movie! God nobody's going to want to watch it now! It is a brilliant movie! About 1986 I [[sawthe]] this [[filmmaking]] by [[mishap]] on TV one night. I was 6 years old. It was similar to my accidental viewing of the terrifying [[ceases]] to Don't Look Now in 1987. I went to Venice on holiday the next year in silent terror, hoping to god that my parents wouldn't find out I'd watched it!

Would I have minded if my parents knew I'd watched Les Valseuses when I was a kid? I'd probably avoid the subject with my dad even nowadays, and my mum's probably disapproving in the afterlife. I don't know if they'd want to see it anyway. From the stalking and trapping of a woman at the block of flats in the first scene to sliding down the mountain roads with glazed satiated eyes I'm never sure whether this film is an insensitive piece of trash that disregards the sexual revolution or if it's a sexy liberating movie to watch as it dawns on you that you could never be so offensive yourself.

It's definitely violent. It has a violent view of sex, virtually no acknowledgement of love. Even suckling a young baby mutates into a greedy sexual act of exploitation. But the scenario IS very erotic and (god I'm so British) arousing! Do they suck her breasts for her own good? That is exploitation. So why am I getting a woody?

The fellows go in search of an experienced older woman, find an ex-con, mother-figure? I don't know. It ends in a truly gruesome suicide. I described it to my friend JB Nelson, who has Cannibal Holocaust-guts, and he went eeuurrgghh! No motherly love for this movie, quite the opposite. Mutilation of where the boys began. Why do they shoot the girl in the leg? Why does she come back to them? Do women need to be punished so that they learn what is right from men?

I'm thinking of two movies, one of which I wish I'd never seen, the other makes me wish it wasn't such a harsh world. Swept Away/Madonna what a pile of insanity doesn't compute never been so offended that a woman punished for being a woman becomes slave to man and its maybe madonna saying everybody respect guy ritchie im so enraged i cant use punctuation! Once Upon A Time In America/Leone god why does Noodles do it? Destroys the path to joy we've been following him on his whole life. So close to finally finding love with Deborah. Now they are both destroyed. Why Sergio? Why?

There is no rape in Les Valseuses but lots of sex and nakedness in abundance, of both sexes. Very honest, no titillation. No fantasy shags, no perfect Hollywood smooth moves. Jokes, yes. But there's too much darkness and jealousy and trickery in here to call it a sex comedy. Forget Carry On Shooting A Naked Hairdresser In The Leg Cos She'll Come Back & You'll Hook Her Up With Your Ex-con Lover's Vengeant Son & She'll Learn How To Cum From Him.

Two things I can't stand are rape movies and prison movies. Les Valseuses isn't a rape movie! God nobody's going to want to watch it now! It is a brilliant movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4027 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Well, some people [[would]] [[say]] that this [[particular]] [[movie]] [[stinks]]...but [[hey]]! [[Thats]] not right, not right at al...The [[movie]] may not have the [[best]] [[special]] [[effects]], and may not have the [[best]] [[actors]] (Except the exelence of the Barbarian Bros.) Dispite theese [[minor]] fact, I can honostly [[say]] that this is one of the funniest [[movies]] I´ve ever seen, and I´ve seen em al! Well, some people [[ought]] [[tell]] that this [[singular]] [[filmmaking]] [[reeks]]...but [[bye]]! [[Didnt]] not right, not right at al...The [[flick]] may not have the [[nicest]] [[specific]] [[consequences]], and may not have the [[optimum]] [[actresses]] (Except the exelence of the Barbarian Bros.) Dispite theese [[small]] fact, I can honostly [[said]] that this is one of the funniest [[theater]] I´ve ever seen, and I´ve seen em al! --------------------------------------------- Result 4028 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Having seen "Triumph of the Will," I can only [[say]] this movie is ghastly, even measured against the historically low "[[standards]]" of the [[time]]. Naturally it's all [[totally]] [[fabricated]] and prejudicial. This is what one [[would]] expect of 1930's German [[propaganda]]. Unfortunately, the quality of the [[presentation]], itself, is hackneyed and cheap. It's also so blatantly ridiculous that [[even]] contemporary Germans must've left the [[theater]] holding their noses. [[In]] a genre renowned for its base [[appeal]], [[lack]] of originality and unapologetic wrong-headedness, this film doesn't [[even]] [[qualify]] as "bad." It would have to [[improve]] [[significantly]] to attain that status! Having seen "Triumph of the Will," I can only [[tell]] this movie is ghastly, even measured against the historically low "[[norms]]" of the [[moment]]. Naturally it's all [[perfectly]] [[manufactured]] and prejudicial. This is what one [[should]] expect of 1930's German [[publicity]]. Unfortunately, the quality of the [[submission]], itself, is hackneyed and cheap. It's also so blatantly ridiculous that [[yet]] contemporary Germans must've left the [[cinemas]] holding their noses. [[For]] a genre renowned for its base [[appeals]], [[absence]] of originality and unapologetic wrong-headedness, this film doesn't [[yet]] [[qualifying]] as "bad." It would have to [[improved]] [[immeasurably]] to attain that status! --------------------------------------------- Result 4029 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (86%)]] --> [[Negative (68%)]] It was considered to be the "Swiss answer to the Lord of the Rings", but it is [[much]] more than that. It isn't an answer to anything, it's in itself something new, something funny and [[sometimes]] it's downright stupid and silly - but was Monty Python any different than silly?

The beginning immediately makes the statement that this film is low budget and not meant to be taken entirely seriously. Cardboard clouds on strings knock into the airplane in which the main character is seated. But, to compensate the missing special effects, the landscape does the [[trick]]. It is absolutely beautiful and stunning - who needs New Zealand, Switzerland has it all.

What I liked about the film was the simple approach and the obvious passion and energy that went into it. It isn't brilliant; yet it's got some good humorous parts. Edward Piccin as Friedo is absolutely convincing, it would be enough to go and see the film because of him!There are some good jokes, some of them are very lame, some of them won't be understood by people outside of Switzerland. I liked the idea of having "Urucows" instead of Uruk Hai; I loved the scene where Friedo decides to take "Pupsi", a telehobbie, with him on the journey. Also very funny is the scene when Rackaroll, the sword-fighting knight, decides to show off with his sword - and subsequently smashes it into a wall, breaking it. And there is this one scene where the "nazgul-ish" characters do a wonderfully comic scene that includes a toilet brush... I didn't approve of the idea of the Ring being used by Schleimli, the "Gollum" character, in order to "seduce" the ladies. That was a bit far fetched. The idea of Lord Sauraus wanting to cover the lands with fondue wasn't that brilliant either. Original, certainly, but not brilliant. But most of all did I dislike the idea of a gay dragon, that really wasn't necessary. All in all I recommend to see the film simply because it is so crazy and totally trashy. Don't expect a LotR parody like "Spaceballs" was for Star Wars. But if you go to the flicks thinking that this is going to be an amusing evening out, with absolutely no ambitions, then you'll enjoy. I am not sure if it works in other languages, because it does live from the Swiss dialects as well as from the jokes and actors.

All in all: hat off to the courage of the Swiss crew who did that! It was considered to be the "Swiss answer to the Lord of the Rings", but it is [[very]] more than that. It isn't an answer to anything, it's in itself something new, something funny and [[intermittently]] it's downright stupid and silly - but was Monty Python any different than silly?

The beginning immediately makes the statement that this film is low budget and not meant to be taken entirely seriously. Cardboard clouds on strings knock into the airplane in which the main character is seated. But, to compensate the missing special effects, the landscape does the [[ruse]]. It is absolutely beautiful and stunning - who needs New Zealand, Switzerland has it all.

What I liked about the film was the simple approach and the obvious passion and energy that went into it. It isn't brilliant; yet it's got some good humorous parts. Edward Piccin as Friedo is absolutely convincing, it would be enough to go and see the film because of him!There are some good jokes, some of them are very lame, some of them won't be understood by people outside of Switzerland. I liked the idea of having "Urucows" instead of Uruk Hai; I loved the scene where Friedo decides to take "Pupsi", a telehobbie, with him on the journey. Also very funny is the scene when Rackaroll, the sword-fighting knight, decides to show off with his sword - and subsequently smashes it into a wall, breaking it. And there is this one scene where the "nazgul-ish" characters do a wonderfully comic scene that includes a toilet brush... I didn't approve of the idea of the Ring being used by Schleimli, the "Gollum" character, in order to "seduce" the ladies. That was a bit far fetched. The idea of Lord Sauraus wanting to cover the lands with fondue wasn't that brilliant either. Original, certainly, but not brilliant. But most of all did I dislike the idea of a gay dragon, that really wasn't necessary. All in all I recommend to see the film simply because it is so crazy and totally trashy. Don't expect a LotR parody like "Spaceballs" was for Star Wars. But if you go to the flicks thinking that this is going to be an amusing evening out, with absolutely no ambitions, then you'll enjoy. I am not sure if it works in other languages, because it does live from the Swiss dialects as well as from the jokes and actors.

All in all: hat off to the courage of the Swiss crew who did that! --------------------------------------------- Result 4030 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Going Overboard is the single [[worst]] film i have ever seen, and yes, I have [[seen]] Cujo. Adam Sandler is an abomination as Schecky Moskowitz, a wannabe comedian working on a cruise liner. That's the plot.

That's it! [[Nothing]] [[else]] in the [[film]] makes sense, it's all over the place like a mad man's breakfast, and not in a wacky naked gun kind of way, but more of a frustrating, 'throw both shoes at the t.v' kind of way. even General Noriega makes an appearance, for no reason i can comprehend (it certainly wasn't for humour). Add to the mix Miss Australia, who has the worst Australian Accent i've ever heared, and you have something which i won't call the worst film ever made, because Going overboard doesn't even fit the basic definition of a film. I highly recomend seeing this film, as it will elevate the standing of every bad film you ever see. I guarantee the first thing you'll say after seeing a bad film will be "at least it wasn't as bad as Going Overboard". I can say without a shadow of a doubt that Going Overboard is the single [[hardest]] film i have ever seen, and yes, I have [[noticed]] Cujo. Adam Sandler is an abomination as Schecky Moskowitz, a wannabe comedian working on a cruise liner. That's the plot.

That's it! [[Nada]] [[further]] in the [[films]] makes sense, it's all over the place like a mad man's breakfast, and not in a wacky naked gun kind of way, but more of a frustrating, 'throw both shoes at the t.v' kind of way. even General Noriega makes an appearance, for no reason i can comprehend (it certainly wasn't for humour). Add to the mix Miss Australia, who has the worst Australian Accent i've ever heared, and you have something which i won't call the worst film ever made, because Going overboard doesn't even fit the basic definition of a film. I highly recomend seeing this film, as it will elevate the standing of every bad film you ever see. I guarantee the first thing you'll say after seeing a bad film will be "at least it wasn't as bad as Going Overboard". --------------------------------------------- Result 4031 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a great movie for all ages. Its the [[story]] about three animals how have to [[find]] their way home. There is a [[bit]] of a twist at the end and [[mainly]] [[throughout]] the whole movie. You never [[know]] what is [[going]] to [[happen]] next. This movie makes you [[cry]] and makes you laugh. You just don't know what going to [[happen]] next. The [[trek]] [[home]] is all [[beautiful]] with all the wonderful wildlife scenes. They producers also [[spent]] a lot of [[money]] for this movie and it [[shows]] too. The [[animals]] in this movie were well [[trained]] and are [[great]] actors/actress themselves. [[Everything]] about this [[movie]] is [[great]]! 10 out of 10 the [[whole]] [[way]]! [[Rent]] or buy it today I can [[guarantee]] you will [[love]] it the [[whole]] family will! This is a great movie for all ages. Its the [[history]] about three animals how have to [[unearthed]] their way home. There is a [[bitten]] of a twist at the end and [[basically]] [[during]] the whole movie. You never [[savoir]] what is [[go]] to [[arise]] next. This movie makes you [[weep]] and makes you laugh. You just don't know what going to [[arise]] next. The [[hiking]] [[domicile]] is all [[awesome]] with all the wonderful wildlife scenes. They producers also [[expenditures]] a lot of [[moneys]] for this movie and it [[denotes]] too. The [[zoo]] in this movie were well [[formed]] and are [[large]] actors/actress themselves. [[Any]] about this [[filmmaking]] is [[resplendent]]! 10 out of 10 the [[overall]] [[routing]]! [[Tenancy]] or buy it today I can [[guaranteeing]] you will [[adores]] it the [[entire]] family will! --------------------------------------------- Result 4032 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] To [[call]] a [[movie]] like "[[Thinner]]" [[bad]] is like [[calling]] the [[earth]] round or Pauly [[Shore]] un-talented. [[No]] news, but how they got that way is what people [[want]] to [[know]].

As far as this movie.... The [[book]] was good, even if it was a little derivative of other [[stories]] from the "be careful what you [[wish]] for" genre. Burke plays an overweight lawyer who kills the daughter of a gypsy and is cursed by her father (Constantine from TV's "Room 222") to several pounds a day.

Like I said, it [[starts]] out good, but why involve the mobster (Mantegna)? Why fire automatic weapons so much? Why turn it into something so heavily dependent on FX? I thought it would have been much more effective if it focused more on the subtle ramifications of weight loss crazes, diseases, death, gypsy lore and such.

But no, it's not to be. Remember, this is Stephen King we're talking about.

And the ending... almost the same as the book, but a little too talky. In fact the whole movie talks too much, feeling it has to explain every plot turn to us. Not that I expected "The Dead Zone", but I could have done without another "Pet Sematary", thanks anyway.

One star for at least trying to do a halfway decent makeup job. However, the rest of the movie is left to be... say it with me... "Thinner". To [[calling]] a [[cinematography]] like "[[Finer]]" [[unfavourable]] is like [[telephoning]] the [[lands]] round or Pauly [[Shoreline]] un-talented. [[Nos]] news, but how they got that way is what people [[wantto]] to [[savoir]].

As far as this movie.... The [[workbook]] was good, even if it was a little derivative of other [[tales]] from the "be careful what you [[wishing]] for" genre. Burke plays an overweight lawyer who kills the daughter of a gypsy and is cursed by her father (Constantine from TV's "Room 222") to several pounds a day.

Like I said, it [[startup]] out good, but why involve the mobster (Mantegna)? Why fire automatic weapons so much? Why turn it into something so heavily dependent on FX? I thought it would have been much more effective if it focused more on the subtle ramifications of weight loss crazes, diseases, death, gypsy lore and such.

But no, it's not to be. Remember, this is Stephen King we're talking about.

And the ending... almost the same as the book, but a little too talky. In fact the whole movie talks too much, feeling it has to explain every plot turn to us. Not that I expected "The Dead Zone", but I could have done without another "Pet Sematary", thanks anyway.

One star for at least trying to do a halfway decent makeup job. However, the rest of the movie is left to be... say it with me... "Thinner". --------------------------------------------- Result 4033 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[saw]] this a couple of nights back, not expecting too much and unsurprisingly it didn't deliver [[anything]] too [[exciting]]. The plot set up of a crew of [[vampire]] hunters (V-San, for [[vampire]] [[sanitation]]), going around in their [[spaceship]] periodically killing space vamps and rescuing people, is quite sound and had the film been handled better it might well have been [[something]] quite ace. [[Unfortunately]] after a fairly decent [[opening]] the sense of actual quality starts to [[drain]] away from the film, leaving something behind that, though vacantly watchable, is quite laughably [[bad]]. I don't expect [[anything]] too [[special]] from these films that pop up on the Sci Fi Channel and at least this wasn't one of their creature features with an atrocious cgi beast shambling about, but it was still pretty bad, mostly due to the writing and acting, but with a sterling contribution to the overall badness made by the horrible music. When the film opted just for a typical science fiction sounding weird noises approach to the soundtrack it did OK, but all too often hilariously bad soft rock intruded and pitched scenes into silliness. I would have tolerated the general cheesy acting and writing more were it not for the choice of music, which was a serious miscalculation, turning things from cheesy to lamely comical. Of the acting, Dominic Zamprogna was OK but bland as the nominal hero, whilst Leanne Adachi was pretty irritating as the tough girl of the vamp busting team and Aaron Pearl played another member who wasn't well written or interesting enough to make an impression. Though she didn't seem that good at the acting lark Natassia Malte did well through having a less irritating character than the others, and the fact that she is seriously nice to look at. The only serious name in the cast is Michael Ironside and he is underused though he does nicely, pretty amusing in a manner one suspects was intentional. He seems to have fun and earn his paycheck and his role is entertaining. The effects are OK on the whole, they are at least of the standards of the average science fiction TV show, and there are also a few scenes of blood splatter and a bit of fun gore as well. Things move along nicely, and I almost feel harsh rating this film badly, but then I remember bursting into laughter at regular intervals and realising that unless the film is an intentional comedy, which I don't think it is, then it simply doesn't succeed. Too much is lame, daft, unconvincing, its an OK effort I guess but it didn't appeal to me. Only give it a go if you really dig Sci Fi trash or unintended chuckles I'd say. I [[watched]] this a couple of nights back, not expecting too much and unsurprisingly it didn't deliver [[somethings]] too [[enthralling]]. The plot set up of a crew of [[bloodsucker]] hunters (V-San, for [[vampires]] [[decontamination]]), going around in their [[spacecraft]] periodically killing space vamps and rescuing people, is quite sound and had the film been handled better it might well have been [[somethings]] quite ace. [[Unhappily]] after a fairly decent [[open]] the sense of actual quality starts to [[siphon]] away from the film, leaving something behind that, though vacantly watchable, is quite laughably [[amiss]]. I don't expect [[algo]] too [[especial]] from these films that pop up on the Sci Fi Channel and at least this wasn't one of their creature features with an atrocious cgi beast shambling about, but it was still pretty bad, mostly due to the writing and acting, but with a sterling contribution to the overall badness made by the horrible music. When the film opted just for a typical science fiction sounding weird noises approach to the soundtrack it did OK, but all too often hilariously bad soft rock intruded and pitched scenes into silliness. I would have tolerated the general cheesy acting and writing more were it not for the choice of music, which was a serious miscalculation, turning things from cheesy to lamely comical. Of the acting, Dominic Zamprogna was OK but bland as the nominal hero, whilst Leanne Adachi was pretty irritating as the tough girl of the vamp busting team and Aaron Pearl played another member who wasn't well written or interesting enough to make an impression. Though she didn't seem that good at the acting lark Natassia Malte did well through having a less irritating character than the others, and the fact that she is seriously nice to look at. The only serious name in the cast is Michael Ironside and he is underused though he does nicely, pretty amusing in a manner one suspects was intentional. He seems to have fun and earn his paycheck and his role is entertaining. The effects are OK on the whole, they are at least of the standards of the average science fiction TV show, and there are also a few scenes of blood splatter and a bit of fun gore as well. Things move along nicely, and I almost feel harsh rating this film badly, but then I remember bursting into laughter at regular intervals and realising that unless the film is an intentional comedy, which I don't think it is, then it simply doesn't succeed. Too much is lame, daft, unconvincing, its an OK effort I guess but it didn't appeal to me. Only give it a go if you really dig Sci Fi trash or unintended chuckles I'd say. --------------------------------------------- Result 4034 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The [[Vampire]] Bat is set in the [[small]] German [[village]] of Klineschloss where [[Gustave]] [[Schoen]] (Lionel Belmore) the Burgermeister is holding a meeting with [[Inspector]] Karl Brettschneider (Melvyn Douglas) from the local [[constabulary]] about all the [[recent]] [[murders]], six victims have been discovered in as [[many]] weeks all [[drained]] of [[blood]] & bearing the same two puncture [[wounds]] on their necks. Brettschneider doesn't have a [[single]] clue but the superstitious [[elders]] of the village believe the deaths to be the [[work]] of a [[Vampire]]. Brettschneider isn't [[convinced]] but the [[scared]] [[villagers]] [[keep]] [[telling]] tales of seeing a [[large]] Bat, [[meanwhile]] the [[latest]] victim [[Martha]] Mueller (Rita Carlyle) has been [[found]]. Brettschneider [[comes]] under [[increasing]] pressure to [[solve]] the [[murders]] but can he [[really]] [[believe]] that a [[giant]] Vampire Bat is [[responsible]] & if it is how's he [[going]] to [[stop]] it?

Directed by Frank [[R]]. Strayer The [[Vampire]] Bat was a cheapie from Majestic Pictures to cash in on the success of it's two [[stars]] Atwill & Wray & their success in the previous years Doctor X (1932) & is more of a murder mystery rather than a horror as the exploitative & [[enticing]] title may have lead you to believe & quite frankly it's rather [[dull]]. The script by [[Edward]] [[T]]. Lowe Jr. takes itself [[rather]] seriously & sets up the [[basic]] story that [[something]] is killing local [[villagers]] & that something could possibly be a [[Vampire]], then for most of it's duration the film focuses on Brettschneider & his [[incompetent]] investigations which are, not to put too fine a point on it, [[boring]]. The Vampire Bat also has a bit of an identity crisis as it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, the title would suggest a horror film while the majority of it could easily be described as a thriller with the final few minutes descending into silly sci-fi. There is no Vampire Bat, the attempts to fool you are pathetic, all the character's are broad stereotypes & you can [[tell]] the villain of the piece straight away & as a whole there is [[nothing]] particularly exciting or entertaining about The Vampire Bat. I know it's old but that's not an excuse as cinema has moved on a lot since 1933 & a bland, flat, [[dull]], boring & [[misleading]] [[film]] such as The Vampire Bat just doesn't cut it these days, just look at the original King Kong (1933) released the same year & how brilliantly that still holds up today. I didn't like it & I doubt many modern film-goers would either, it's as simple & straight forward as that.

Director Strayer doesn't do anything special but this is a case in point where I can cut the film some slack because of it's age, as a whole it's pretty much point, shoot & hope for the best stuff. There isn't much in the way of atmosphere or scares although some of the sets which were already existing ones taken from The Old Dark House (1932) & Universal's European set on their back-lot are nice & add a certain ambiance to things.

Technically The Vampire Bat can't compare to anything even remotely modern, for the age of it it's alright I suppose but again I draw your attention back to the original King Kong. Speaking of King Kong it's star Fay Wray has a role in this as does horror icon Lionel Atwill, I'll be kind & say the acting is OK.

The Vampire Bat will I imagine fool a lot of people into thinking that it's a horror film about Vampire Bats when in fact it isn't, personally I thought the whole thing was a bit of a bore. It's short & it tells it's story reasonably enough but I must admit I'm not a fan. The [[Vampires]] Bat is set in the [[petit]] German [[villager]] of Klineschloss where [[Gustaf]] [[Nunez]] (Lionel Belmore) the Burgermeister is holding a meeting with [[Inspectors]] Karl Brettschneider (Melvyn Douglas) from the local [[policemen]] about all the [[lately]] [[assassinate]], six victims have been discovered in as [[countless]] weeks all [[emptied]] of [[chrissake]] & bearing the same two puncture [[injuries]] on their necks. Brettschneider doesn't have a [[exclusive]] clue but the superstitious [[seniors]] of the village believe the deaths to be the [[works]] of a [[Bloodsucker]]. Brettschneider isn't [[persuaded]] but the [[apprehensive]] [[dwellers]] [[retaining]] [[saying]] tales of seeing a [[grande]] Bat, [[furthermore]] the [[latter]] victim [[Marta]] Mueller (Rita Carlyle) has been [[find]]. Brettschneider [[occurs]] under [[grew]] pressure to [[resolving]] the [[assassinate]] but can he [[genuinely]] [[reckon]] that a [[titan]] Vampire Bat is [[liable]] & if it is how's he [[go]] to [[stopped]] it?

Directed by Frank [[rs]]. Strayer The [[Bloodsucker]] Bat was a cheapie from Majestic Pictures to cash in on the success of it's two [[celebrity]] Atwill & Wray & their success in the previous years Doctor X (1932) & is more of a murder mystery rather than a horror as the exploitative & [[tantalizing]] title may have lead you to believe & quite frankly it's rather [[tiresome]]. The script by [[Edouard]] [[ton]]. Lowe Jr. takes itself [[quite]] seriously & sets up the [[fundamental]] story that [[anything]] is killing local [[dwellers]] & that something could possibly be a [[Bloodsucker]], then for most of it's duration the film focuses on Brettschneider & his [[inept]] investigations which are, not to put too fine a point on it, [[tiresome]]. The Vampire Bat also has a bit of an identity crisis as it doesn't quite know what it wants to be, the title would suggest a horror film while the majority of it could easily be described as a thriller with the final few minutes descending into silly sci-fi. There is no Vampire Bat, the attempts to fool you are pathetic, all the character's are broad stereotypes & you can [[telling]] the villain of the piece straight away & as a whole there is [[anything]] particularly exciting or entertaining about The Vampire Bat. I know it's old but that's not an excuse as cinema has moved on a lot since 1933 & a bland, flat, [[tiresome]], boring & [[deceiving]] [[films]] such as The Vampire Bat just doesn't cut it these days, just look at the original King Kong (1933) released the same year & how brilliantly that still holds up today. I didn't like it & I doubt many modern film-goers would either, it's as simple & straight forward as that.

Director Strayer doesn't do anything special but this is a case in point where I can cut the film some slack because of it's age, as a whole it's pretty much point, shoot & hope for the best stuff. There isn't much in the way of atmosphere or scares although some of the sets which were already existing ones taken from The Old Dark House (1932) & Universal's European set on their back-lot are nice & add a certain ambiance to things.

Technically The Vampire Bat can't compare to anything even remotely modern, for the age of it it's alright I suppose but again I draw your attention back to the original King Kong. Speaking of King Kong it's star Fay Wray has a role in this as does horror icon Lionel Atwill, I'll be kind & say the acting is OK.

The Vampire Bat will I imagine fool a lot of people into thinking that it's a horror film about Vampire Bats when in fact it isn't, personally I thought the whole thing was a bit of a bore. It's short & it tells it's story reasonably enough but I must admit I'm not a fan. --------------------------------------------- Result 4035 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was such a waste of time. Danger: If you watch it you will be tempted to tear your DVD out of the wall and heave it thru the window.

An amateur production: terrible, repetitive, vacuous dialog; paper-thin plot line; wooden performances; Lucy Lawless was pathetically hackneyed.

Seriously flawed story, completely unbelievable characters. The two worst concepts in film and t.v. are: (1) the evil twin, (2) amnesia. There are no twins.

The plot "twist"? Outrageously simplistic and obvious - like watching a train coming down the track in the middle of the day on the prairies. It doesn't even resolve properly. The evil is not punished for the original crime.

Please, please, please - don't watch this even if its free and your only other choice is to go to a synagogue. --------------------------------------------- Result 4036 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (82%)]] [[STAR]] [[RATING]]: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Long time inmate Twitch (Kurupt) gets himself transfered to a tougher prison than the re-opened Alcatraz. He claims it's to be closer to his lady but his real motives are a bit more [[grandiose]]. There he crosses paths with Burke (Bill Goldberg) a bulky prisoner who can take care of himself. Twitch, despite being less muscular, is just as mouthy and is pretty much the same. But there is a gang war brewing between the black and hispanic inmates that explodes into a hostile takeover of the prison when the black's gang leader is shot dead and the finger points at Burke. But the sh!t really hits the fan when the real killer and leader of the hispanics, Cortez (Robert Madrid) takes Twitch's girlfriend and Burke's daughter hostage.

Steven Seagal doesn't do sequels (reportedly very opposed to the idea of Under Siege 2 and only agreeing to do it on the condition the film company he was with at the time let direct his own movie) so despite this being a DVD sequel, the lead role this time round goes to Bill Golberg (Steve doesn't even appear in some of the stock footage from the first film that appears towards the end.) But there's a reason he hasn't done much work since Universal Soldier 2 and that's because he's not much of an actor, and not much of an action star either, managing a character that begins as very dark and brooding but unsubtly turns into a standard action hero awkwardly quipping off dull one-liners. Support wise, veterans from the first film, Kurupt and Tony Plana, have merely jumped at the chance of extra work.

This is a film that's tried to copy the style of the original quite well, with the dim lighting, dark shadows and rap music playing over a lot of it. It does this quite well, unfortunately it can't contend with an unengaging hero, an equally cardboard villain and an apathetic story that the makers do very much seem to have made up as they went along. ** [[SUPERSTAR]] [[ASSESSING]]: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Long time inmate Twitch (Kurupt) gets himself transfered to a tougher prison than the re-opened Alcatraz. He claims it's to be closer to his lady but his real motives are a bit more [[wondrous]]. There he crosses paths with Burke (Bill Goldberg) a bulky prisoner who can take care of himself. Twitch, despite being less muscular, is just as mouthy and is pretty much the same. But there is a gang war brewing between the black and hispanic inmates that explodes into a hostile takeover of the prison when the black's gang leader is shot dead and the finger points at Burke. But the sh!t really hits the fan when the real killer and leader of the hispanics, Cortez (Robert Madrid) takes Twitch's girlfriend and Burke's daughter hostage.

Steven Seagal doesn't do sequels (reportedly very opposed to the idea of Under Siege 2 and only agreeing to do it on the condition the film company he was with at the time let direct his own movie) so despite this being a DVD sequel, the lead role this time round goes to Bill Golberg (Steve doesn't even appear in some of the stock footage from the first film that appears towards the end.) But there's a reason he hasn't done much work since Universal Soldier 2 and that's because he's not much of an actor, and not much of an action star either, managing a character that begins as very dark and brooding but unsubtly turns into a standard action hero awkwardly quipping off dull one-liners. Support wise, veterans from the first film, Kurupt and Tony Plana, have merely jumped at the chance of extra work.

This is a film that's tried to copy the style of the original quite well, with the dim lighting, dark shadows and rap music playing over a lot of it. It does this quite well, unfortunately it can't contend with an unengaging hero, an equally cardboard villain and an apathetic story that the makers do very much seem to have made up as they went along. ** --------------------------------------------- Result 4037 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I [[rented]] the film (I don't think it got a theatrical release here) out [[expecting]] the worse. The previews made the film look [[awful]]. I was in fact very [[surprised]], it was well worth watching; it was [[loosely]] scripted, almost like an ensemble piece of film. It had some very funny moments in it and although flawed is an effective satire on the show and the people on the [[show]] without being too scathing. It is [[flawed]], [[mainly]] by the awful soundtrack of bludgeoning 'comedy' [[effects]] but on the whole it comes [[across]] as [[honest]] and [[generally]] [[true]] to form of the [[show]] in an altmanesque or Larry Sanders way.

At the moment it is the fashion to be critical of Jerry Springer, he is [[also]] an easy target. Springer could have [[made]] Citizen Kane and it would be proclaimed 'the worst film ever made'. I recommend this film for anybody interested in the show. A flawed but innovative and interesting piece of film. I [[renting]] the film (I don't think it got a theatrical release here) out [[expect]] the worse. The previews made the film look [[scary]]. I was in fact very [[horrified]], it was well worth watching; it was [[lightly]] scripted, almost like an ensemble piece of film. It had some very funny moments in it and although flawed is an effective satire on the show and the people on the [[shows]] without being too scathing. It is [[misguided]], [[largely]] by the awful soundtrack of bludgeoning 'comedy' [[impact]] but on the whole it comes [[during]] as [[truthful]] and [[habitually]] [[veritable]] to form of the [[showings]] in an altmanesque or Larry Sanders way.

At the moment it is the fashion to be critical of Jerry Springer, he is [[apart]] an easy target. Springer could have [[effected]] Citizen Kane and it would be proclaimed 'the worst film ever made'. I recommend this film for anybody interested in the show. A flawed but innovative and interesting piece of film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4038 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (80%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I began watching this movie with low expectations, as a matter of fact i only noticed it because it was an adaptation of a S.K. novel ( a novel i never read).

I'm glad my expectations were low because the movie wasn't nothing close to good, but it manages to keep you interested. What really drags this story down is the work done by the director and the actors. The movie is overlong, hasn't no "[[nice]]" shots and no scares, the dialogs are dumb and the special effects are [[crap]].

The only things good are that, as i said, it keeps you interested ( i guess the book must be good) without using much horror cliches.

My Vote 4/10. I began watching this movie with low expectations, as a matter of fact i only noticed it because it was an adaptation of a S.K. novel ( a novel i never read).

I'm glad my expectations were low because the movie wasn't nothing close to good, but it manages to keep you interested. What really drags this story down is the work done by the director and the actors. The movie is overlong, hasn't no "[[pleasurable]]" shots and no scares, the dialogs are dumb and the special effects are [[baloney]].

The only things good are that, as i said, it keeps you interested ( i guess the book must be good) without using much horror cliches.

My Vote 4/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4039 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Here we have a [[movie]] which fails in pretty much every way it is possible for a [[movie]] to fail. Terrible script, lousy acting, amateurish directing, laughable special effects...it's just an utterly awful movie. Not to [[mention]] the fact that when you get to the end you'll realize the whole thing doesn't make a lick of [[sense]]. After spending the [[whole]] [[movie]] wondering what in the world is [[going]] on here when [[things]] are finally explained you [[realize]] the story has been [[built]] on a foundation which is ludicrously impossible. [[In]] one of those [[hideous]] "[[villain]] [[explains]] the [[whole]] [[movie]]" sequences we are [[told]] that our [[villain]] has [[done]] [[something]] which [[quite]] [[simply]] can't be [[done]] and which makes [[absolutely]] no sense whatsoever. Oh, and after that we [[see]] that there [[also]] [[appears]] to be some [[kind]] of jell-o [[monster]] [[involved]]. I'm sure Drew Barrymore [[would]] very much like to pretend this movie never happened. If for some ungodly [[reason]] you are ever [[tempted]] to [[sit]] down and watch this movie may I [[suggest]] instead taking that time to bang your head against a wall for 104 minutes. That [[would]] prove to be a much more [[pleasurable]] experience than sitting through this garbage. Here we have a [[cinematography]] which fails in pretty much every way it is possible for a [[films]] to fail. Terrible script, lousy acting, amateurish directing, laughable special effects...it's just an utterly awful movie. Not to [[mentioned]] the fact that when you get to the end you'll realize the whole thing doesn't make a lick of [[feeling]]. After spending the [[entire]] [[filmmaking]] wondering what in the world is [[go]] on here when [[matters]] are finally explained you [[achieve]] the story has been [[builds]] on a foundation which is ludicrously impossible. [[Across]] one of those [[horrific]] "[[scoundrel]] [[explained]] the [[ensemble]] [[cinema]]" sequences we are [[said]] that our [[hoodlum]] has [[doing]] [[anything]] which [[altogether]] [[exclusively]] can't be [[performed]] and which makes [[abundantly]] no sense whatsoever. Oh, and after that we [[behold]] that there [[additionally]] [[seem]] to be some [[genre]] of jell-o [[monsters]] [[participating]]. I'm sure Drew Barrymore [[ought]] very much like to pretend this movie never happened. If for some ungodly [[grounds]] you are ever [[attempted]] to [[seated]] down and watch this movie may I [[suggests]] instead taking that time to bang your head against a wall for 104 minutes. That [[should]] prove to be a much more [[congenial]] experience than sitting through this garbage. --------------------------------------------- Result 4040 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a crappy movie, with a whole lotta non-sense and too many loose-ends to count. I only watched this movie because one of my favorite actors (Ron Livingston) made a cameo in it, and I continued watching it because as a girl, I love any movie that includes male nudity for a change. Later, I found myself wondering just how much more ridiculous the storyline could get, and each time it got...more... ridiculous.

Sean Crawley (good-looking Chris L. McKenna, whom I've never seen before - but LOVED his little nude scene)is making ends meet as a painter, when he meets electrician Duke Wayne (George Wendt from "Cheers"). Thinking he's getting more work from Duke, Sean agrees to meet contractor Ray Matthews (Daniel Baldwin, playing a stereotypically evil guy). Ray is being investigated by a City Hall accountant (Ron Livingston in a cameo, who I've been in love with from "Office Space" up to "Sex & the City"). Ray end up offering the apparently desperate-for- cash Sean $13k to kill the accountant, and Sean accepts the job. Sean stalks out the accountant, whose wife (Kari Wuhrer) he finds himself attracted to, completes the hit, and leaves - taking the file of information against Ray with him. Sean quickly learns he was being used, that Ray never intended to pay him, and Sean uses the file as leverage to get his money.

Up to this point, it's a descent flick...generally worth watching. But as soon as Ray, Duke and their crew kidnap Sean to muscle the information about the file out of him, it just got dumber and dumber (and still DUMBER...), until finally it seemed like the film's writer, Charlie Higson, had snapped out of a 10-day writing hangover and realized he needed to desperately figure out how to wrap up the series of implausible messes he created before a deadline or something. Without simply detailing the movie, let's just say that in every-single-scene you watch after the kidnapping, you find yourself gasping "what the f**K!," baffled by the ongoing nonsense as Sean follows a fairly graphic and gross path towards redemption. In the end, so many loose-ends are left in the movie, that you begin to regret that you even watched it.

This is a movie that you should only watch after it hits cable, and you should have enough beer and friends around to mock the film to it's full value. It's supposed to be a psychological thriller, and McKenna is a decent actor, but it's hard to give yourself to the movie when you have "Norm" from "Cheers" and a Baldwin brother doing the dirty work, and a kidnapping strategy that really makes no damned sense. Guys will love the violence, blood and guts scenes, and the absolutely unnecessary sex scenes and boob shots. Girls will enjoy handsome Sean's gratuitous crotch shot in a mainstream movie, when its almost always the girls that get stripped down in a movie. Personally, I hate that the only actor worth watching for more than his looks (Ron Livingston) is only in the first one-third of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4041 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (93%)]] Big S isn't playing with taboos or forcing an agenda like, say Mencia or Chapelle (though I like them both). She states the obvious in subtle, near subliminal remarks. Her show won't change the World, nor is it meant to. But, along with the hilarious Brian Posehn and Paget Brewster's ex-boyfriend Jay Johnston of "Mr. Show" fame, this is one mean [[show]] with an appetite for destruction! My side's were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. Look, I [[love]] this woman and like her famed boyfriend, Jimmy Kimmel, she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run- with-it. The best kind of comedy around. Spoofing anything and anyone, like "Mary Poppins" in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. This one is highly recommended, but only for those who still have a funny bone (and didn't lose it in their most recent lippo-suction treatment or boob job). Big S isn't playing with taboos or forcing an agenda like, say Mencia or Chapelle (though I like them both). She states the obvious in subtle, near subliminal remarks. Her show won't change the World, nor is it meant to. But, along with the hilarious Brian Posehn and Paget Brewster's ex-boyfriend Jay Johnston of "Mr. Show" fame, this is one mean [[spectacle]] with an appetite for destruction! My side's were thoroughly wrecked by the first episode. Look, I [[iike]] this woman and like her famed boyfriend, Jimmy Kimmel, she just delivers the lines and lets the viewer run- with-it. The best kind of comedy around. Spoofing anything and anyone, like "Mary Poppins" in the second episode when she sings to the fake birds on to quick hitting commentary on society and college aged existential nonsense. This one is highly recommended, but only for those who still have a funny bone (and didn't lose it in their most recent lippo-suction treatment or boob job). --------------------------------------------- Result 4042 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[rank]] this the [[best]] of the Zorro chapterplays.The exciting musical score adds punch to an exciting screen play.There is an excellent supporting cast and mystery villain that will keep you guessing until the final chapter.Reed Hadley does a [[fine]] job as Don Diego and his alter ego Zorro.Last,but certainly not [[least]],is the great directing team of Whitney and English. I [[grading]] this the [[better]] of the Zorro chapterplays.The exciting musical score adds punch to an exciting screen play.There is an excellent supporting cast and mystery villain that will keep you guessing until the final chapter.Reed Hadley does a [[alright]] job as Don Diego and his alter ego Zorro.Last,but certainly not [[slightest]],is the great directing team of Whitney and English. --------------------------------------------- Result 4043 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Yes, this is an ultra-low budget movie. So the acting isn't award winning material and at times the action is slow-paced because the filmmakers are shooting longer sequences and not a million instants that then get edited into a movie. This film makes up for that with an [[outstanding]] script that takes vampirism seriously, explains it and develops a full plot out of it. Aside from the vampire story, we get detailed genetics info, legal and law enforcement, martial arts action, philosophical musings, and some good metal music. Kudos go to Dylan O'Leary, the director/writer/main actor. It is beyond me how this man could have fulfilled all these roles and do them so well. I think to appreciate this movie, you have to be well-versed in all sorts of themes to see that the writer did a lot of research and knows about all these things. There are some great camera work, too, interesting camera angles and one underwater vampire attack- something I haven't seen before, but which pays homage to the underwater zombie attack in Fulci's Zombi. The casting is good, in so far as the sexy female is sexy indeed. The main vampire also looks perfect for the role. The female victim looks vulnerable. My only complaint is that for a low budget horror flick, there should have been more nudity. If you want to see an original vampire movie with a great story, this flick is for you. I'm looking forward to seeing future projects by Mr. O'Leary. Yes, this is an ultra-low budget movie. So the acting isn't award winning material and at times the action is slow-paced because the filmmakers are shooting longer sequences and not a million instants that then get edited into a movie. This film makes up for that with an [[unpaid]] script that takes vampirism seriously, explains it and develops a full plot out of it. Aside from the vampire story, we get detailed genetics info, legal and law enforcement, martial arts action, philosophical musings, and some good metal music. Kudos go to Dylan O'Leary, the director/writer/main actor. It is beyond me how this man could have fulfilled all these roles and do them so well. I think to appreciate this movie, you have to be well-versed in all sorts of themes to see that the writer did a lot of research and knows about all these things. There are some great camera work, too, interesting camera angles and one underwater vampire attack- something I haven't seen before, but which pays homage to the underwater zombie attack in Fulci's Zombi. The casting is good, in so far as the sexy female is sexy indeed. The main vampire also looks perfect for the role. The female victim looks vulnerable. My only complaint is that for a low budget horror flick, there should have been more nudity. If you want to see an original vampire movie with a great story, this flick is for you. I'm looking forward to seeing future projects by Mr. O'Leary. --------------------------------------------- Result 4044 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] [[ROUEN]] PRIZES AND THE [[TRIUMPH]] [[OF]] "VILLA PARANOIA" The favorite film of the general public, actually more [[important]] than the [[jury]] prize, was Erik Clausen's [[brilliant]] bittersweet dramatic [[comedy]], "Villa Paranoia", which was [[also]] selected by the European [[Youth]] Jury indicative of its [[appeal]] to cinephiles of all ages. The following day director-actor Clausen [[traveled]] to the [[remote]] Town of MAMERS, [[Pays]] de Loire, for a provincial [[festival]] of new European cinema, where "Villa Paranoia" picked up three more prizes -- Best film, Professional Jury; Best Film, Audience prize; and Best film of another youth jury composed of "lycéens", French high school students. Five prizes in a single weekend -- not a bad scoop for a film from a small country with unknown actors. In addition, "Villa" was awarded the Grand Prix, the MAVERICK SPIRIT AWARD, at San Jose, California, just a week ago, by distinguished British actor Sir Ben Kingsley ("[[Ghandi]]"), making for a grand total of six prizes in a single week. If Lars van Trier has put Denmark on the offbeat-oddball Dogma Cinematic map in recent years, there is now a good chance that Veteran Maverick [[Erik]] Clausen (62) and his capable crew of actors will soon show the world that Denmark has more to offer than dogmatic drivel, which is to say, a mass audience pleaser for young and old alike. Moreover, the female lead of his film, Sonja Richter, has such a [[magical]] screen presence that, with a little more exposure, she stands a good chance of becoming the next international Scandinavian Diva. For the record, "Villa Paranoia" is a fiction film, written, directed and acted in by Mr. Clausen, and employing certain motifs from Moliere's "The Imaginary Invalid". Anna (Richter), an ambitious young actress, has lost a deeply coveted role in the Moliere play and, reduced to making an utterly stupid TV chicken commercial, is on the verge of suicide. However, Jorgen (Clausen) who runs a massive chicken farm sponsoring the spot, offers her a job with room and board taking care of his cantankerous, senile, wheel-chair ridden father, Walentin, who has not spoken a word since his wife Stella committed suicide years before. Anna is the only one who eventually finds a way of communicating with the hostile silent old grouch -- and moreover, discovers that he has been faking deafness and immobility all these years -- a living "Malade Imaginaire". This will lead to her playing the greatest role of her own life in order to uncover the dark secret which led to Walentin's total withdrawal from life and reality. Villa "Paradise-Paranoia", true to the Moliere tradition from which it is partially derived, is a heartwarming, multi-layered, serial-comic psycho-drama that literally has something for everybody and only needs proper placement to attain the kind of general international outreach it richly deserves. Alex Deleon, Paris / 21 MARCH, 2005 [[ROWAN]] PRIZES AND THE [[WIN]] [[TO]] "VILLA PARANOIA" The favorite film of the general public, actually more [[notable]] than the [[jurors]] prize, was Erik Clausen's [[glamorous]] bittersweet dramatic [[travesty]], "Villa Paranoia", which was [[further]] selected by the European [[Teenage]] Jury indicative of its [[recourse]] to cinephiles of all ages. The following day director-actor Clausen [[toured]] to the [[faraway]] Town of MAMERS, [[Remuneration]] de Loire, for a provincial [[celebratory]] of new European cinema, where "Villa Paranoia" picked up three more prizes -- Best film, Professional Jury; Best Film, Audience prize; and Best film of another youth jury composed of "lycéens", French high school students. Five prizes in a single weekend -- not a bad scoop for a film from a small country with unknown actors. In addition, "Villa" was awarded the Grand Prix, the MAVERICK SPIRIT AWARD, at San Jose, California, just a week ago, by distinguished British actor Sir Ben Kingsley ("[[Gandhi]]"), making for a grand total of six prizes in a single week. If Lars van Trier has put Denmark on the offbeat-oddball Dogma Cinematic map in recent years, there is now a good chance that Veteran Maverick [[Eric]] Clausen (62) and his capable crew of actors will soon show the world that Denmark has more to offer than dogmatic drivel, which is to say, a mass audience pleaser for young and old alike. Moreover, the female lead of his film, Sonja Richter, has such a [[quadrant]] screen presence that, with a little more exposure, she stands a good chance of becoming the next international Scandinavian Diva. For the record, "Villa Paranoia" is a fiction film, written, directed and acted in by Mr. Clausen, and employing certain motifs from Moliere's "The Imaginary Invalid". Anna (Richter), an ambitious young actress, has lost a deeply coveted role in the Moliere play and, reduced to making an utterly stupid TV chicken commercial, is on the verge of suicide. However, Jorgen (Clausen) who runs a massive chicken farm sponsoring the spot, offers her a job with room and board taking care of his cantankerous, senile, wheel-chair ridden father, Walentin, who has not spoken a word since his wife Stella committed suicide years before. Anna is the only one who eventually finds a way of communicating with the hostile silent old grouch -- and moreover, discovers that he has been faking deafness and immobility all these years -- a living "Malade Imaginaire". This will lead to her playing the greatest role of her own life in order to uncover the dark secret which led to Walentin's total withdrawal from life and reality. Villa "Paradise-Paranoia", true to the Moliere tradition from which it is partially derived, is a heartwarming, multi-layered, serial-comic psycho-drama that literally has something for everybody and only needs proper placement to attain the kind of general international outreach it richly deserves. Alex Deleon, Paris / 21 MARCH, 2005 --------------------------------------------- Result 4045 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The plot of 7EVENTY 5IVE involves college [[kids]] who play a cruel phone game that unexpectedly (to them, if not to [[fans]] of [[horror]]) gets them in over their heads. The STORY of 7EVENTY 5IVE, on the other hand, is that of a [[horror]] [[film]] that had a wee [[little]] [[bit]] of [[promise]], sadly outweighed by [[really]] [[bad]] writing.

What [[could]] have been a [[fun]], if somewhat [[silly]], old-fashioned slasher tale is derailed early on by its filmmakers' misguided [[belief]] that the [[audience]] would enjoy watching a bunch of loud, whiny [[rich]] [[kids]] [[bitching]] at each other for most of the film's running [[time]]. With the [[exception]] of a [[police]] detective [[played]] by Rutger Hauer, (in a minor role that is [[designed]] [[mainly]] to [[add]] the movie's only star power) [[every]] [[character]] on screen is a different [[breed]] of [[young]] A-hole.

[[Male]] and [[female]], black and [[white]], [[straight]] and gay, an [[entire]] [[ensemble]] of shallow and shrill [[college]] [[kids]] [[carries]] the [[bulk]] of the film's [[narrative]]. Worse, since the [[tale]] deals with a [[PARTY]] [[game]] gone awry, most of the [[time]] the scenes are [[completely]] filled with these [[little]] b*****ds. [[Because]] of this, there are few [[breaks]] for the viewer, who [[must]] put up with the [[angry]] sniping of the thinly-drawn protagonists. [[Even]] [[though]] at [[least]] some of these people are [[supposedly]] [[friends]], [[invariably]] all characters interact in a very [[hostile]] [[manner]], [[long]] before any genuine [[conflict]] has [[actually]] [[arisen]]. This [[leads]] to the [[worst]] [[possible]] [[result]] in a slasher [[film]]: The [[audience]], [[intended]] to [[care]] about the leads, [[instead]] not only cheers on the [[anonymous]] [[killer]], but [[wishes]] that he had [[arrived]] to [[start]] picking off the vacuous brats far [[earlier]].

The [[real]] [[shame]] of this [[poor]] characterization is that [[otherwise]] 7EVENTY 5IVE [[actually]] [[DID]] have some potential. Visually it's fine. First-time directors Brian [[Hooks]] and Deon Taylor know how to [[build]] a suspenseful [[mood]]. They [[also]] [[manage]] to deliver on some [[competent]], if sparse, [[moments]] of classic 80s-style [[gore]]. [[Surprisingly]], the production's [[cast]] is [[also]] [[fairly]] [[able]]. It isn't that the [[actors]] aren't capable of [[expressing]] [[realistic]] human emotion; it is simply that the [[screenplay]] (co-written by newcomer Vashon Nutt and director Hooks, who fared [[much]] better behind the camera than with a keyboard) is short of such moments.

7EVENTY 5IVE can hardly be recommended, as its familiar premise and few thrills can't outweigh the bad taste left behind by a story driven by a gaggle of unpleasant characters. In this tepid whodunnit, the real mystery is why anyone should care about a group of young folk who can't even manage to like each other. The plot of 7EVENTY 5IVE involves college [[juvenile]] who play a cruel phone game that unexpectedly (to them, if not to [[lovers]] of [[terror]]) gets them in over their heads. The STORY of 7EVENTY 5IVE, on the other hand, is that of a [[terror]] [[kino]] that had a wee [[kiddo]] [[bitten]] of [[promises]], sadly outweighed by [[truly]] [[mala]] writing.

What [[wo]] have been a [[droll]], if somewhat [[ludicrous]], old-fashioned slasher tale is derailed early on by its filmmakers' misguided [[beliefs]] that the [[spectators]] would enjoy watching a bunch of loud, whiny [[richest]] [[juvenile]] [[complaining]] at each other for most of the film's running [[period]]. With the [[exceptions]] of a [[policemen]] detective [[accomplished]] by Rutger Hauer, (in a minor role that is [[styled]] [[basically]] to [[inserting]] the movie's only star power) [[all]] [[characters]] on screen is a different [[spawn]] of [[youthful]] A-hole.

[[Macho]] and [[girl]], black and [[blanc]], [[successive]] and gay, an [[total]] [[together]] of shallow and shrill [[academies]] [[juvenile]] [[carry]] the [[wholesale]] of the film's [[descriptive]]. Worse, since the [[storytelling]] deals with a [[PART]] [[games]] gone awry, most of the [[moment]] the scenes are [[perfectly]] filled with these [[petite]] b*****ds. [[Since]] of this, there are few [[break]] for the viewer, who [[gotta]] put up with the [[upset]] sniping of the thinly-drawn protagonists. [[Yet]] [[despite]] at [[fewer]] some of these people are [[seemingly]] [[friendships]], [[consistently]] all characters interact in a very [[enmity]] [[modes]], [[longer]] before any genuine [[conflicts]] has [[genuinely]] [[arose]]. This [[leeds]] to the [[hardest]] [[achievable]] [[upshot]] in a slasher [[cinema]]: The [[viewers]], [[destined]] to [[caring]] about the leads, [[conversely]] not only cheers on the [[unrecognized]] [[slayer]], but [[desires]] that he had [[happened]] to [[lancer]] picking off the vacuous brats far [[previously]].

The [[authentic]] [[shaming]] of this [[pauper]] characterization is that [[alternatively]] 7EVENTY 5IVE [[genuinely]] [[WO]] have some potential. Visually it's fine. First-time directors Brian [[Fishhooks]] and Deon Taylor know how to [[constructions]] a suspenseful [[humour]]. They [[similarly]] [[managed]] to deliver on some [[proficient]], if sparse, [[times]] of classic 80s-style [[gora]]. [[Marvelously]], the production's [[casting]] is [[similarly]] [[relatively]] [[capable]]. It isn't that the [[protagonists]] aren't capable of [[expressed]] [[pragmatic]] human emotion; it is simply that the [[scenarios]] (co-written by newcomer Vashon Nutt and director Hooks, who fared [[very]] better behind the camera than with a keyboard) is short of such moments.

7EVENTY 5IVE can hardly be recommended, as its familiar premise and few thrills can't outweigh the bad taste left behind by a story driven by a gaggle of unpleasant characters. In this tepid whodunnit, the real mystery is why anyone should care about a group of young folk who can't even manage to like each other. --------------------------------------------- Result 4046 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Another [[weak]] third-season entry, 'Is There In Truth No Beauty?' nonetheless has at [[least]] one key [[plot]] element that is very different and as Spock [[would]] say, fascinating. The main character is an alien who must be carried around in a black box because his appearance is so horrendous that it drives humans insane. It's too bad the episode cannot live up to this incredible [[premise]]. Obviously, I think, it was a mistake to ever 'show' the alien, as its actual visage in no way [[even]] approximates such a daunting build-up; all we get is the standard Star Trek psychedelic light display used for any number of things in different episodes, usually when the ship is passing through a magnetic storm or something similar. In any event, Kollos' appearance can at least be tolerated by Mr. Spock, and then only if Spock is wearing a special visor. (For the longest time, I thought the alien's name was 'Carlos,' which I found humorous, but I digress.) Spock is required to mind-meld with Kollos at one point so that the alien can pilot the Enterprise back to safety. This is accomplished, but when Spock/Kollos go back to end the mind-meld, by golly, Spock forgets his visor. Uh oh. He goes crazy but eventually recovers with the help of Kollos' assistant, a blind woman with psychic powers. This might have been a really bizarre, excellent episode but it is poorly directed and comes across as yet one more badly executed show of the series' last season. Another [[fragile]] third-season entry, 'Is There In Truth No Beauty?' nonetheless has at [[lowest]] one key [[intrigue]] element that is very different and as Spock [[ought]] say, fascinating. The main character is an alien who must be carried around in a black box because his appearance is so horrendous that it drives humans insane. It's too bad the episode cannot live up to this incredible [[supposition]]. Obviously, I think, it was a mistake to ever 'show' the alien, as its actual visage in no way [[yet]] approximates such a daunting build-up; all we get is the standard Star Trek psychedelic light display used for any number of things in different episodes, usually when the ship is passing through a magnetic storm or something similar. In any event, Kollos' appearance can at least be tolerated by Mr. Spock, and then only if Spock is wearing a special visor. (For the longest time, I thought the alien's name was 'Carlos,' which I found humorous, but I digress.) Spock is required to mind-meld with Kollos at one point so that the alien can pilot the Enterprise back to safety. This is accomplished, but when Spock/Kollos go back to end the mind-meld, by golly, Spock forgets his visor. Uh oh. He goes crazy but eventually recovers with the help of Kollos' assistant, a blind woman with psychic powers. This might have been a really bizarre, excellent episode but it is poorly directed and comes across as yet one more badly executed show of the series' last season. --------------------------------------------- Result 4047 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This was a [[disappointing]] [[movie]]. Considering the material---army life is always good for a laugh---and the [[stars]], this movie should have been a [[fall]] down laughfest. It was worth a [[couple]] of chuckles, at [[best]]. Steve Martin has been much funnier than this and it [[appears]] that Dan Ackroyd should [[stick]] to [[dramatic]] [[roles]], where he [[might]] follow [[Robin]] Williams' lead and someday win an Oscar. This was a [[depressing]] [[film]]. Considering the material---army life is always good for a laugh---and the [[star]], this movie should have been a [[decline]] down laughfest. It was worth a [[pair]] of chuckles, at [[optimum]]. Steve Martin has been much funnier than this and it [[seems]] that Dan Ackroyd should [[wand]] to [[tremendous]] [[functions]], where he [[probability]] follow [[Robben]] Williams' lead and someday win an Oscar. --------------------------------------------- Result 4048 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I [[remember]] this [[film]] from many [[years]] [[ago]]. [[Certainly]] the [[best]] [[film]] on the subject in my [[experience]]. The fact that I vividly [[remember]] so much of the [[film]] after so long a time testifies to its [[impact]].

It is [[difficult]] to [[comment]] on the [[level]] of the performances because of the language [[barrier]]. But they were nonetheless very [[powerful]].

This subject [[continues]] to fascinate us even with the [[passing]] of [[years]]. And it was most effectively [[treated]] here, with the [[proper]] [[proportion]] of historical [[perspective]] and [[skepticism]].

I [[wish]] it [[would]] be [[shown]] on TV at [[least]] once. [[Or]] at [[least]] be available on tape or [[DVD]]. [[Or]] is it? Is some art [[film]] archive hoarding a [[copy]] of it?? I [[remind]] this [[movie]] from many [[yrs]] [[prior]]. [[Admittedly]] the [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] on the subject in my [[experiences]]. The fact that I vividly [[recall]] so much of the [[filmmaking]] after so long a time testifies to its [[repercussions]].

It is [[laborious]] to [[observational]] on the [[echelon]] of the performances because of the language [[impediment]]. But they were nonetheless very [[forceful]].

This subject [[persists]] to fascinate us even with the [[passerby]] of [[yrs]]. And it was most effectively [[treating]] here, with the [[adequate]] [[percentage]] of historical [[viewpoint]] and [[disbelief]].

I [[wants]] it [[ought]] be [[display]] on TV at [[lowest]] once. [[Neither]] at [[slightest]] be available on tape or [[DVDS]]. [[Orr]] is it? Is some art [[movie]] archive hoarding a [[photocopied]] of it?? --------------------------------------------- Result 4049 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Wowwwwww, about an [[hour]] ago I finally finished watching this [[terrible]] [[movie]]!!! I wanted to [[turn]] it off [[within]] the first like 10 [[minutes]] but I figured I'd give it a chance because it just hadddd to get better. Or at least have some redeeming qualities, like I figured at the very least it would be a make you think type movie, or like really [[intelligent]], or very well [[filmed]] or something...Needless to say, that was not the case and I [[wasted]] about an hour and a half of my [[life]]. Im not [[even]] going to get into why its terrible because its a waste of my time to explain that this "may contain spoilers"...IMDb, you should calm down on the spoilers thing and pay more attention to making sure that the people who rate the movies and comment are not paid to write good reviews or involved somehow in the movie or anything else like that. I thought it would be humorous after this terrible film to come see hoe bad the rating would be and I was very very shocked to see the fairly high ratings...all the ratings with about 7-10 stars clearly must be about some COMPLETELY DIFFERENT movie... Im still a big IMDb [[fan]], but seriously rethink this rating process because this movie should be rated no higher than maaaybbbeee like a 3. Wowwwwww, about an [[hora]] ago I finally finished watching this [[frightening]] [[cinematography]]!!! I wanted to [[transforming]] it off [[inside]] the first like 10 [[mins]] but I figured I'd give it a chance because it just hadddd to get better. Or at least have some redeeming qualities, like I figured at the very least it would be a make you think type movie, or like really [[crafty]], or very well [[videotaped]] or something...Needless to say, that was not the case and I [[squandered]] about an hour and a half of my [[lifetime]]. Im not [[yet]] going to get into why its terrible because its a waste of my time to explain that this "may contain spoilers"...IMDb, you should calm down on the spoilers thing and pay more attention to making sure that the people who rate the movies and comment are not paid to write good reviews or involved somehow in the movie or anything else like that. I thought it would be humorous after this terrible film to come see hoe bad the rating would be and I was very very shocked to see the fairly high ratings...all the ratings with about 7-10 stars clearly must be about some COMPLETELY DIFFERENT movie... Im still a big IMDb [[breather]], but seriously rethink this rating process because this movie should be rated no higher than maaaybbbeee like a 3. --------------------------------------------- Result 4050 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Taking]] over roles that Jack Albertson and Sam Levene played on Broadway, Walter Matthau and George [[Burns]] [[play]] a couple of old time vaudeville comics, a team in the tradition of Joe Smith and Charles Dale who [[seem]] to have a differing outlook on life.

Walter Matthau can't stop [[working]], the man has never [[learned]] to [[relax]], [[take]] some [[time]] and smell the roses. He's a crotchety [[old]] cuss whose [[best]] [[days]] are behind him and his nephew and [[agent]] Richard Benjamin is finding less and less work for him.

What hurt him badly was that some 15 [[years]] [[earlier]] his partner George [[Burns]] [[decided]] to [[retire]] and [[spend]] some [[time]] with his family. A workaholic like Matthau can't [[comprehend]] it and [[take]] Burns's [[decision]] personally.

Benjamin hits on a brain [[storm]], reunite the [[guys]] and do it on a national [[television]] special. What [[happens]] here is pretty [[hilarious]].

The Sunshine [[Boys]] is also a [[sad]], bittersweet story as well about [[old]] age. Matthau is on screen for most of the [[film]], but it's Burns who [[got]] the kudos in the [[form]] of an Oscar at the ripe [[old]] [[age]] of 79.

[[Burns]] [[brought]] a bit of the personal into this [[film]] as well. As we all know he was the [[straight]] [[man]] of the [[wonderful]] [[comedy]] team of [[Burns]]&Allen who the [[Monty]] [[Python]] troop borrowed a lot from. [[In]] 1958 due to health reasons, Gracie Allen retired and George [[kept]] [[going]] right up to the [[age]] of 100. [[Or]] at [[least]] pretty close to as an active [[performer]].

The [[Sunshine]] [[Boys]] is based on the team of Smith&Dale [[however]] and if you [[like]] The [[Sunshine]] Boys I [[strongly]] recommend you [[see]] Two [[Tickets]] to Broadway for a [[look]] at a [[pair]] of guys who were [[entertaining]] the American [[public]] at the [[turn]] of the [[last]] century. The [[doctor]] [[sketch]] that Matthau and [[Burns]] do is directly from their material.

And I do [[think]] you will [[like]] The [[Sunshine]] [[Boys]]. [[Take]] over roles that Jack Albertson and Sam Levene played on Broadway, Walter Matthau and George [[Burning]] [[gaming]] a couple of old time vaudeville comics, a team in the tradition of Joe Smith and Charles Dale who [[looks]] to have a differing outlook on life.

Walter Matthau can't stop [[works]], the man has never [[learn]] to [[relaxing]], [[taking]] some [[period]] and smell the roses. He's a crotchety [[archaic]] cuss whose [[better]] [[jours]] are behind him and his nephew and [[patrolman]] Richard Benjamin is finding less and less work for him.

What hurt him badly was that some 15 [[olds]] [[formerly]] his partner George [[Incinerate]] [[decides]] to [[retired]] and [[spends]] some [[period]] with his family. A workaholic like Matthau can't [[understanding]] it and [[taking]] Burns's [[decisions]] personally.

Benjamin hits on a brain [[cyclone]], reunite the [[lads]] and do it on a national [[tv]] special. What [[arrives]] here is pretty [[comic]].

The Sunshine [[Guy]] is also a [[unfortunate]], bittersweet story as well about [[elderly]] age. Matthau is on screen for most of the [[cinematography]], but it's Burns who [[gets]] the kudos in the [[shape]] of an Oscar at the ripe [[elderly]] [[aging]] of 79.

[[Burning]] [[made]] a bit of the personal into this [[movies]] as well. As we all know he was the [[consecutive]] [[dude]] of the [[sumptuous]] [[humour]] team of [[Burning]]&Allen who the [[Python]] [[Monty]] troop borrowed a lot from. [[Among]] 1958 due to health reasons, Gracie Allen retired and George [[preserved]] [[go]] right up to the [[aging]] of 100. [[Nor]] at [[lowest]] pretty close to as an active [[performers]].

The [[Sun]] [[Guy]] is based on the team of Smith&Dale [[conversely]] and if you [[loves]] The [[Soleil]] Boys I [[severely]] recommend you [[seeing]] Two [[Ticket]] to Broadway for a [[peek]] at a [[couple]] of guys who were [[fun]] the American [[populace]] at the [[converting]] of the [[lastly]] century. The [[doctors]] [[skit]] that Matthau and [[Burning]] do is directly from their material.

And I do [[reckon]] you will [[likes]] The [[Sun]] [[Guy]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4051 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Everyday]] we can watch a great number of film, soap... on tv. Sometimes a miracle happens. A great [[film]], with [[real]] feelings, with great [[actors]], with a great realisator-director. For me there are two films that [[everyone]] [[needs]] to [[see]] : the first is the Pacula ? "Sophie 's choice" with Meryl Streep. The second is "[[Journey]] of [[Hope]]". As human beings, we need to learn about humility, about love of the others, about acceptation of other civilisation, other way of living. We also have to struggle against racism and fascim. We must avoid judging, criticize; we only have to love our earth companion. This [[wonderful]] film, helps us reaching John (Lennon) his dream : Imagine all the people living live in peace. These two films are difficult to see : watch these, but sure you will be hurt, but better. Great film, great actors, terrible story, pain and cry guarantee, but also better understanding of the others. Enjoy it. [[Ordinary]] we can watch a great number of film, soap... on tv. Sometimes a miracle happens. A great [[kino]], with [[veritable]] feelings, with great [[actresses]], with a great realisator-director. For me there are two films that [[somebody]] [[needed]] to [[consults]] : the first is the Pacula ? "Sophie 's choice" with Meryl Streep. The second is "[[Itinerary]] of [[Expectancy]]". As human beings, we need to learn about humility, about love of the others, about acceptation of other civilisation, other way of living. We also have to struggle against racism and fascim. We must avoid judging, criticize; we only have to love our earth companion. This [[sumptuous]] film, helps us reaching John (Lennon) his dream : Imagine all the people living live in peace. These two films are difficult to see : watch these, but sure you will be hurt, but better. Great film, great actors, terrible story, pain and cry guarantee, but also better understanding of the others. Enjoy it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4052 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] Watchable little semi-soaper, but [[hardly]] captivating. Still, two or three funny moments. What amazes me is how slippery and morally [[highly]] [[questionable]] McNicol is. She plays an invalid (a leg problem), yet she not only isn't the "ugly duckling" whom men shun, but she is even a man-eater - and we are [[supposed]] to feel for her! Oh, poor little McNicol, with her leg problem... Poor little McNicol??! She is constantly getting passes from men, and even dumps them without so much as blinking! At one occasion she even has a premeditated one-night affair with a blond stud, and then she tells her newly-found French girlfriend quite non-chalantly that it took him time to get an erection! Makes us viewers wonder why she is so leg-conscious if every guy wants to hump her. Well, almost every guy; the only guy who really shunned her after seeing her leg wrapped up in metal is the guy working on the telephone. But otherwise she seems to be doing just fine with men! No shyness, no lack of success with men, and she throws them away like toys; the way she dumped Carradine was ridiculous. Poor little invalid girl?? I don't think so. And yet we are meant to believe that this woman has a major confidence problem; hence the scene in which she prepares to start playing the flute for a solo concert and somehow manages to throw the notes on the ground out of nervousness. Nervousness?? The rest of the movie shows little or nothing that would suggest that she has confidence problems, so this flute scene is absurd and doesn't fit into the bigger picture. I was also surprised how quickly and eagerly McNicol makes friends with a French woman who is screwing a married guy. On the surface the movie would appear to be a "sentimental story of one crippled woman's struggle for acceptance" (or something like that) but it's nothing like that at all; the writer clearly shifts between this type of movie and a "screw anything that moves - it's the 80s" kind of movie - very confusing.

As far as her leg: it's not like she has a big, fat purple balloon growing on her calf muscle. She "only" has a normal-looking metal prosthetic attached to the lower part of her leg, so I really don't understand why the makers of the film try to make it seem as if she is a female Quasimodo or something, at the beginning of the film. It's not like she has a twin head growing out of her neck! Though McNicol is hardly a major catch. Kind of cutish but nothing special, quite average.

But what the hell is Carradine doing playing some kind of a (relatively) smooth guy flirting with McNicol and her pal?! This guy was in "Revenge of the Nerds"! But I guess it's the same thing with the Carradines in the movies as it is with the Kennedys in politics: no matter how ugly, unable, or dumb, all the doors are open for a career in movies and politics, respectively.

Down with nepotism.

If you want to read bogus biographies about the Carradines, and other Hollywood nepotists and morons, contact me by e-mail. Watchable little semi-soaper, but [[almost]] captivating. Still, two or three funny moments. What amazes me is how slippery and morally [[tremendously]] [[shady]] McNicol is. She plays an invalid (a leg problem), yet she not only isn't the "ugly duckling" whom men shun, but she is even a man-eater - and we are [[suspected]] to feel for her! Oh, poor little McNicol, with her leg problem... Poor little McNicol??! She is constantly getting passes from men, and even dumps them without so much as blinking! At one occasion she even has a premeditated one-night affair with a blond stud, and then she tells her newly-found French girlfriend quite non-chalantly that it took him time to get an erection! Makes us viewers wonder why she is so leg-conscious if every guy wants to hump her. Well, almost every guy; the only guy who really shunned her after seeing her leg wrapped up in metal is the guy working on the telephone. But otherwise she seems to be doing just fine with men! No shyness, no lack of success with men, and she throws them away like toys; the way she dumped Carradine was ridiculous. Poor little invalid girl?? I don't think so. And yet we are meant to believe that this woman has a major confidence problem; hence the scene in which she prepares to start playing the flute for a solo concert and somehow manages to throw the notes on the ground out of nervousness. Nervousness?? The rest of the movie shows little or nothing that would suggest that she has confidence problems, so this flute scene is absurd and doesn't fit into the bigger picture. I was also surprised how quickly and eagerly McNicol makes friends with a French woman who is screwing a married guy. On the surface the movie would appear to be a "sentimental story of one crippled woman's struggle for acceptance" (or something like that) but it's nothing like that at all; the writer clearly shifts between this type of movie and a "screw anything that moves - it's the 80s" kind of movie - very confusing.

As far as her leg: it's not like she has a big, fat purple balloon growing on her calf muscle. She "only" has a normal-looking metal prosthetic attached to the lower part of her leg, so I really don't understand why the makers of the film try to make it seem as if she is a female Quasimodo or something, at the beginning of the film. It's not like she has a twin head growing out of her neck! Though McNicol is hardly a major catch. Kind of cutish but nothing special, quite average.

But what the hell is Carradine doing playing some kind of a (relatively) smooth guy flirting with McNicol and her pal?! This guy was in "Revenge of the Nerds"! But I guess it's the same thing with the Carradines in the movies as it is with the Kennedys in politics: no matter how ugly, unable, or dumb, all the doors are open for a career in movies and politics, respectively.

Down with nepotism.

If you want to read bogus biographies about the Carradines, and other Hollywood nepotists and morons, contact me by e-mail. --------------------------------------------- Result 4053 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is a very [[funny]] Ealing [[comedy]] about a community in central London who, through an unusual set of circumstances, discover they are not English, but are an annex of the French province of Burgundy.

The film features comic actor [[Stanley]] Holloway (best known as Alfred Doolittle in MY FAIR LADY), as well as a host of other [[classic]] comic actors of the period.

The story was apparently based on a news item at the time, when the Canadian Government "officially" gave a hotel room to a visiting European member of royalty. The idea actually reminded me of the real-life case of the Hutt River Province in Western Australia, where a landowner "seceded" from the Australian Government due to a wool quota dispute. (It was never acknowledged by the Western Australian or Australian Governments).

This is a great script that plays with a lot of political and economic issues, rather like the TV show "Yes Minister"; as well as being a great little eccentric character piece as well. This is a very [[droll]] Ealing [[travesty]] about a community in central London who, through an unusual set of circumstances, discover they are not English, but are an annex of the French province of Burgundy.

The film features comic actor [[Stan]] Holloway (best known as Alfred Doolittle in MY FAIR LADY), as well as a host of other [[conventional]] comic actors of the period.

The story was apparently based on a news item at the time, when the Canadian Government "officially" gave a hotel room to a visiting European member of royalty. The idea actually reminded me of the real-life case of the Hutt River Province in Western Australia, where a landowner "seceded" from the Australian Government due to a wool quota dispute. (It was never acknowledged by the Western Australian or Australian Governments).

This is a great script that plays with a lot of political and economic issues, rather like the TV show "Yes Minister"; as well as being a great little eccentric character piece as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 4054 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] It was a [[disappointment]] to see this DVD after so [[many]] [[years]]. For me the [[main]] problem's the [[uneven]] [[script]].

[[While]] some of it is witty and hip, quite a bit of it is dull, unfunny and [[lifeless]]. [[Many]] of the gags just sit there, [[lacking]] [[spark]] and energy.

Of the cast, Mae West and Rachel [[Welch]] [[come]] over well. [[Roger]] [[Herren]] in the role of [[Rusty]] shines (too bad he didn't make more films). But for my [[money]], there's just too much of John Huston, and poor Rex [[Reed]] isn't hardly given a fighting chance. His character seems relegated to skim around on the [[sidelines]], [[wondering]] what he's doing in this film.

The low [[user]] rating should give an [[idea]] as to the public's opinion of this piece. Vidal's original [[provided]] much potential that was pretty much wasted. Not even the 'classic' film clips did much. [[All]] in all a rather sub par [[effort]], and it's not [[likely]] to get much better with time. It was a [[displeasure]] to see this DVD after so [[various]] [[ages]]. For me the [[primary]] problem's the [[unbalanced]] [[hyphen]].

[[Though]] some of it is witty and hip, quite a bit of it is dull, unfunny and [[lackluster]]. [[Several]] of the gags just sit there, [[missing]] [[sparks]] and energy.

Of the cast, Mae West and Rachel [[Walsh]] [[arrive]] over well. [[Roget]] [[Gentlemen]] in the role of [[Corroded]] shines (too bad he didn't make more films). But for my [[cash]], there's just too much of John Huston, and poor Rex [[Reid]] isn't hardly given a fighting chance. His character seems relegated to skim around on the [[margins]], [[demand]] what he's doing in this film.

The low [[users]] rating should give an [[ideals]] as to the public's opinion of this piece. Vidal's original [[gave]] much potential that was pretty much wasted. Not even the 'classic' film clips did much. [[Everything]] in all a rather sub par [[endeavors]], and it's not [[probable]] to get much better with time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4055 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (62%)]] Acting is [[horrible]]. This film makes Fast and Furious [[look]] [[like]] an academy [[award]] winning [[film]]. They throw a few [[boobs]] and butts in there to [[try]] and keep you interested despite the [[EXTREMELY]] [[weak]] and far [[fetched]] [[story]]. There is a [[reason]] why people on the internet aren't even downloading this [[movie]]. This movie [[sunk]] [[like]] an iron [[turd]]. DO NOT waste your time renting or [[even]] downloading it. This film is and always will be a PERMA-TURD. I am now [[dumber]] for having watched it. In fact this title should be referred to as a "PERMA-TURD" from now on. Calling it a film is a travesty and insult. [[abhorrent]], abominable, appalling, awful, beastly, cruel, detestable, [[disagreeable]], disgusting, dreadful, eerie, execrable, fairy, [[fearful]], [[frightful]], ghastly, grim, grisly, gruesome, [[heinous]], hideous, horrendous, [[horrid]], [[loathsome]], lousy, lurid, [[mean]], [[nasty]], [[obnoxious]], [[offensive]], [[repellent]], [[repulsive]], revolting, scandalous, [[scary]], [[shameful]], [[shocking]], sickie, [[terrible]], terrifying, ungodly, unholy, unkind Acting is [[frightful]]. This film makes Fast and Furious [[peek]] [[iike]] an academy [[awards]] winning [[kino]]. They throw a few [[nibbles]] and butts in there to [[strive]] and keep you interested despite the [[SUPREMELY]] [[vulnerable]] and far [[regained]] [[narratives]]. There is a [[cause]] why people on the internet aren't even downloading this [[kino]]. This movie [[drown]] [[iike]] an iron [[crap]]. DO NOT waste your time renting or [[yet]] downloading it. This film is and always will be a PERMA-TURD. I am now [[stupider]] for having watched it. In fact this title should be referred to as a "PERMA-TURD" from now on. Calling it a film is a travesty and insult. [[gruesome]], abominable, appalling, awful, beastly, cruel, detestable, [[distasteful]], disgusting, dreadful, eerie, execrable, fairy, [[afraid]], [[horrendous]], ghastly, grim, grisly, gruesome, [[atrocious]], hideous, horrendous, [[atrocious]], [[gruesome]], lousy, lurid, [[imply]], [[unpleasant]], [[outrageous]], [[abusive]], [[nauseating]], [[distasteful]], revolting, scandalous, [[dreadful]], [[disgraceful]], [[staggering]], sickie, [[heinous]], terrifying, ungodly, unholy, unkind --------------------------------------------- Result 4056 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Chase has [[created]] a [[true]] phenomenon with The Sopranos. Unfaltering performances, rock-solid writing, and some [[great]] [[music]] make up what has [[become]] [[quite]] [[possibly]] the [[best]] [[show]] ever.

All of the cast are strong, but Falco and Gandolfini [[earned]] every inch of those Emmy's. [[Anyone]] who [[doubts]] this need only sample a few [[episodes]]; [[particularly]] from the [[first]] few seasons. James Gandolfini is [[absolutely]] fierce, absolutely terrifying, and you still [[find]] yourself loving him - mesmerized by him.

Many people that I've spoken to about The Sopranos (who haven't seen it yet) will [[say]] "I'm just not a fan of [[mafia]] movies/shows". Whatever. Run - don't walk - and get it. Those same people usually love "E.R.", but I bet they don't much care for hospitals... It's not about the context. Chase has [[generated]] a [[real]] phenomenon with The Sopranos. Unfaltering performances, rock-solid writing, and some [[prodigious]] [[musicians]] make up what has [[becoming]] [[rather]] [[conceivably]] the [[better]] [[spectacle]] ever.

All of the cast are strong, but Falco and Gandolfini [[profited]] every inch of those Emmy's. [[Person]] who [[anxieties]] this need only sample a few [[bouts]]; [[concretely]] from the [[fiirst]] few seasons. James Gandolfini is [[totally]] fierce, absolutely terrifying, and you still [[found]] yourself loving him - mesmerized by him.

Many people that I've spoken to about The Sopranos (who haven't seen it yet) will [[said]] "I'm just not a fan of [[shay]] movies/shows". Whatever. Run - don't walk - and get it. Those same people usually love "E.R.", but I bet they don't much care for hospitals... It's not about the context. --------------------------------------------- Result 4057 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Don't be fooled by the [[silly]] title folks, this is one sweet ride! A [[true]] [[successor]] to Tetsuo the Iron [[Man]] and Ichi the [[Killer]], this gem [[starts]] with a bang and lays the gore on thick until the [[credits]] [[roll]]. It [[seems]] that aliens are [[taking]] over people's [[bodies]] and [[modifying]] them into war-machines, which are then [[used]] to [[fight]] each other in a [[twisted]] [[game]] for the [[amusement]] of their species. The [[winner]] of the [[battle]] eats the loser alive. That's [[mostly]] it for plot, but who cares when the gore is this good? I have no [[idea]] how [[many]] buckets of slime were [[used]], but it's [[disgusting]] to [[behold]]. There is interesting and [[effective]] use of stop-motion when the takeovers are in [[progress]], and loving [[care]] is lavished on all of the creature and make-up [[effects]]. The CGI is a [[bit]] [[limited]], but that actually doesn't detract from the [[overall]] quality one [[bit]], at least for me. This was [[truly]] a [[fun]] and stomach-turning [[film]] that [[deserves]] much [[praise]], and has [[truly]] earned its place in the [[stack]] of [[Cult]] [[Classics]]. Find it and watch, you won't be [[disappointed]]! Don't be fooled by the [[imbecile]] title folks, this is one sweet ride! A [[veritable]] [[inherit]] to Tetsuo the Iron [[Bloke]] and Ichi the [[Assassin]], this gem [[commenced]] with a bang and lays the gore on thick until the [[credit]] [[rolling]]. It [[looks]] that aliens are [[take]] over people's [[organizations]] and [[modified]] them into war-machines, which are then [[utilizing]] to [[combats]] each other in a [[deformed]] [[jeu]] for the [[entertainment]] of their species. The [[winning]] of the [[warfare]] eats the loser alive. That's [[essentially]] it for plot, but who cares when the gore is this good? I have no [[thoughts]] how [[multiple]] buckets of slime were [[using]], but it's [[repellent]] to [[see]]. There is interesting and [[effectiveness]] use of stop-motion when the takeovers are in [[advances]], and loving [[healthcare]] is lavished on all of the creature and make-up [[implications]]. The CGI is a [[bite]] [[scant]], but that actually doesn't detract from the [[general]] quality one [[bite]], at least for me. This was [[honestly]] a [[droll]] and stomach-turning [[movie]] that [[merited]] much [[congratulating]], and has [[really]] earned its place in the [[mantelpiece]] of [[Religions]] [[Masterpieces]]. Find it and watch, you won't be [[disenchanted]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4058 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] This movie is a good [[example]] of the [[extreme]] [[lack]] of [[good]] [[writers]] and [[directors]] in Hollywood. The fact that people were [[paid]] to make this [[piece]] of [[junk]] shows that there is a [[lack]] of original [[ideas]] and talent in the [[entertainment]] business. The [[idea]] that audiences paid to see this movie (and like an idiot I rented the film) is discouraging [[also]].

[[Obsessed]] teacher (3 years prior) kills teenager's family because he wants her. For no reason he kills the mother, father and brother. From the first five minutes you see the bad acting and direction. Years later, obsessed teacher breaks out of prison. HMM--usual bad writing--no one in the town he terrorized knows until the last minute. Obsessed teacher somehow becomes like a Navy SEAL and can sneak around, sniff out people and with a knife is super killer. Sure!!! Now obsessed teacher kills hotel maid for no reason, knifes bellhop for the fun of it, and starts to hunt down the teenager's friends. Now there is the perfect way to get the girl to love you. Obsessed teacher sneaks out of hotel---again it is stupid, ever cop would know his face--but he walks right by them. Now he kills two cops outside teenager's house and somehow sneaks into her bedroom and kills her boyfriend.

There is not one single positive thing about this piece of [[garbage]]. If any other profession put out work of this low quality, they would be fired. Yet these idiots are making hundreds of thousands of [[dollars]] for writing and [[directing]] this trash. This movie is a good [[instances]] of the [[tremendous]] [[misses]] of [[alright]] [[screenwriters]] and [[administrators]] in Hollywood. The fact that people were [[salaried]] to make this [[slice]] of [[trash]] shows that there is a [[misses]] of original [[reflections]] and talent in the [[amusement]] business. The [[thinks]] that audiences paid to see this movie (and like an idiot I rented the film) is discouraging [[apart]].

[[Haunted]] teacher (3 years prior) kills teenager's family because he wants her. For no reason he kills the mother, father and brother. From the first five minutes you see the bad acting and direction. Years later, obsessed teacher breaks out of prison. HMM--usual bad writing--no one in the town he terrorized knows until the last minute. Obsessed teacher somehow becomes like a Navy SEAL and can sneak around, sniff out people and with a knife is super killer. Sure!!! Now obsessed teacher kills hotel maid for no reason, knifes bellhop for the fun of it, and starts to hunt down the teenager's friends. Now there is the perfect way to get the girl to love you. Obsessed teacher sneaks out of hotel---again it is stupid, ever cop would know his face--but he walks right by them. Now he kills two cops outside teenager's house and somehow sneaks into her bedroom and kills her boyfriend.

There is not one single positive thing about this piece of [[trash]]. If any other profession put out work of this low quality, they would be fired. Yet these idiots are making hundreds of thousands of [[usd]] for writing and [[instructing]] this trash. --------------------------------------------- Result 4059 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] [[Big]] [[hair]], [[big]] [[boobs]], [[bad]] music and a giant safety pin.......these are the words to [[best]] describe this terrible [[movie]]. I [[love]] [[cheesy]] horror [[movies]] and i've seen hundreds..but this had [[got]] to be on of the [[worst]] ever [[made]]. The plot is paper thin and ridiculous, the acting is an abomination, the [[script]] is completely [[laughable]](the best is the end showdown with the [[cop]] and how he worked out who the killer is-it's just so damn [[terribly]] written), the [[clothes]] are sickening and [[funny]] in equal measures, the hair is big, lots of boobs bounce, men wear those cut tee-shirts that show off their stomachs(sickening that men actually wore them!!) and the music is just synthesiser trash that plays over and over again...in almost every scene there is trashy music, boobs and paramedics taking away bodies....and the gym still doesn't close for bereavement!! All joking aside this is a truly [[bad]] film whose only [[charm]] is to look back on the disaster that was the 80's and have a good old laugh at how bad everything was back then. [[Grand]] [[hairline]], [[grand]] [[boobies]], [[negative]] music and a giant safety pin.......these are the words to [[finest]] describe this terrible [[cinema]]. I [[iike]] [[dorky]] horror [[film]] and i've seen hundreds..but this had [[gets]] to be on of the [[lousiest]] ever [[introduced]]. The plot is paper thin and ridiculous, the acting is an abomination, the [[hyphen]] is completely [[nonsense]](the best is the end showdown with the [[policing]] and how he worked out who the killer is-it's just so damn [[tremendously]] written), the [[garment]] are sickening and [[hilarious]] in equal measures, the hair is big, lots of boobs bounce, men wear those cut tee-shirts that show off their stomachs(sickening that men actually wore them!!) and the music is just synthesiser trash that plays over and over again...in almost every scene there is trashy music, boobs and paramedics taking away bodies....and the gym still doesn't close for bereavement!! All joking aside this is a truly [[wicked]] film whose only [[seduction]] is to look back on the disaster that was the 80's and have a good old laugh at how bad everything was back then. --------------------------------------------- Result 4060 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this movie when it came out in 1959, left a lasting impression. Great group of actors. A little short timewise but a great movie all the same. Have only seen once since then and that was some time ago. Hopefully they'll put it out on DVD if they haven't already. --------------------------------------------- Result 4061 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] An Avent-garde nightmarish, [[extremely]] low-budget "film" that has [[delusions]] of grandeur. [[Hard]] to sit through. I get the message that child abuse is wrong. Wow big revelation. I had no clue it was wrong before viewing this. Yes that's sarcasm. DON'T watch this "film" if you're offended by nudity of either the male or female gender. DON'T watch it if you're the least bit squeamish. DON'T watch it if you care about acting. On second thought just DON'T watch it period.

My grade: D-

DVD Extras:making the movie , the premiere,interview with Kristie Bowersock, deleted scenes, movie stills, Director's commentary, 2 versions of the teaser trailer, music video by The Azoic, & a classroom video experiment An Avent-garde nightmarish, [[vitally]] low-budget "film" that has [[illusions]] of grandeur. [[Challenging]] to sit through. I get the message that child abuse is wrong. Wow big revelation. I had no clue it was wrong before viewing this. Yes that's sarcasm. DON'T watch this "film" if you're offended by nudity of either the male or female gender. DON'T watch it if you're the least bit squeamish. DON'T watch it if you care about acting. On second thought just DON'T watch it period.

My grade: D-

DVD Extras:making the movie , the premiere,interview with Kristie Bowersock, deleted scenes, movie stills, Director's commentary, 2 versions of the teaser trailer, music video by The Azoic, & a classroom video experiment --------------------------------------------- Result 4062 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie is like the material S.E. Hinton was writing in the 1970s and Copola was adapting to the screen in the early 80s, and, had Trueblood actually been a product of either, the results might've been much better (especially in the acting department). Instead, we get a rather so-bad-its-funny piece of mediocrity.

Jeff Fahey plays Ray Trueblood, a former street rumbler, I suppose is the accurate description. This was in the days of action movies that used guys in their 40s and mid30s and dressed them up in greaser threads or some kind of more effeminate selection of gang garb and they fought to lousy 80s music. Nonetheless, Ray is the lone caretaker of his younger brother, Donny (Chad Lowe in a part where he screams a lot), who he is forced to leave behind inexplicably in a train station when, on the run from the cops, he is nabbed and forced to serve time in the Marines. Flash forward to present day and Ray is back in town and looking for his brother who has also become part of the street gangs, although in a gang that was Ray's adversary and now old scores must be violently settled (and again, cops must be dodged and this time, a lady's honor defended in the action film sense) before Ray can carry on life at normal pace with his brother, Donny.

For the most part, the film is quite ridiculous. For me, most of this has to do with far too much overacting, although not by Fahey or Sherlyn Fenn who plays the waitress he befriends. The guys in the gang and Lowe himself seem to do quite a bit of needless exaggerated as New York street toughs. Although, the bigger hang up is recycled plot lines and perhaps a kind of movie that was well past its prime as a product of 1989. --------------------------------------------- Result 4063 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] A [[film]] that is so much a 30's Warners film in an era when each studio had a [[particular]] look and style to their output, unlike today where [[simply]] [[getting]] [[audiences]] is the object.

Curitz was one of the quintessential Warners house directors [[working]] with [[tight]] economy and [[great]] efficiency whilst creating quality, working [[methods]] that were very [[much]] the requirements of a director at Warners, a studio that was one of the "[[big]] five" majors in this [[era]] [[producing]] quality films for their [[large]] [[chains]] of [[theatres]].

Even [[though]] we have a setting of the upper [[classes]] on [[Long]] [[Island]] there is the generic Warners style embedded here with a narrative that could have been "torn from the headlines". Another example is the when the photographers comment on the girls legs early in the [[film]] and she [[comments]] that "They're not the trophies" [[gives]] the [[film]] a more [[working]] mans, down to earth feel, for these were the [[audiences]] that Warners were targeting in the [[great]] [[depression]]. ([[ironically]] [[Columbia]] and [[Universal]] were the two minors under these five majors until the 50's when their involvement in [[television]] changed their [[fortunes]] - they [[would]] have [[made]] something [[like]] this very cheaply and without the polish and great talent) Curtiz has [[created]] from an [[excellent]] script a film that moves along at a rapid [[pace]] whilst keeping the viewer with great camera angles and swift editing.

Thank heavens there is no soppy love interest sub-plot so the fun can just keep rolling along. A [[cinema]] that is so much a 30's Warners film in an era when each studio had a [[unique]] look and style to their output, unlike today where [[mere]] [[obtaining]] [[audience]] is the object.

Curitz was one of the quintessential Warners house directors [[worked]] with [[stringent]] economy and [[whopping]] efficiency whilst creating quality, working [[means]] that were very [[very]] the requirements of a director at Warners, a studio that was one of the "[[gargantuan]] five" majors in this [[epoch]] [[generating]] quality films for their [[gargantuan]] [[fetters]] of [[theater]].

Even [[despite]] we have a setting of the upper [[categories]] on [[Largo]] [[Lsland]] there is the generic Warners style embedded here with a narrative that could have been "torn from the headlines". Another example is the when the photographers comment on the girls legs early in the [[movie]] and she [[remarks]] that "They're not the trophies" [[donne]] the [[kino]] a more [[cooperating]] mans, down to earth feel, for these were the [[audience]] that Warners were targeting in the [[awesome]] [[recession]]. ([[sarcastically]] [[Colombia]] and [[Globally]] were the two minors under these five majors until the 50's when their involvement in [[tv]] changed their [[barons]] - they [[ought]] have [[accomplished]] something [[iike]] this very cheaply and without the polish and great talent) Curtiz has [[generated]] from an [[sumptuous]] script a film that moves along at a rapid [[rhythm]] whilst keeping the viewer with great camera angles and swift editing.

Thank heavens there is no soppy love interest sub-plot so the fun can just keep rolling along. --------------------------------------------- Result 4064 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] This [[movie]] was such a [[blast]]! It has that feel-good, [[yet]] totally in your face [[attitude]] that [[draws]] me to a movie. It has a good message ([[party]] [[girl]] [[decides]] she [[needs]] a [[real]] [[job]]) yet she doesn't completely [[lose]] all sense of fun. I [[recommend]] this [[movie]] for anyone who needs some humor, but is [[also]] a [[thinker]]! :) This [[flick]] was such a [[burst]]! It has that feel-good, [[still]] totally in your face [[stance]] that [[drawn]] me to a movie. It has a good message ([[part]] [[dame]] [[decided]] she [[needed]] a [[veritable]] [[labour]]) yet she doesn't completely [[losing]] all sense of fun. I [[recommendations]] this [[cinematic]] for anyone who needs some humor, but is [[apart]] a [[philosopher]]! :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4065 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] I [[saw]] this film when it was first released. The memory of how [[bad]] it was has stayed with me almost forty years. I didn't want to trust my own [[sentiments]] about the movie when I saw it, so I [[consulted]] a movie review published in a major metropolitan newspaper the next day- sentiment confirmed, the reviewer wrote that the movie was incoherent, indecipherable, and uninspiring. A little research reveals that the producer was star Leslie Caron's husband, thus the whiff of nepotism suggests the [[beginning]] for this [[awful]] film. The film's roster of many capable [[actors]] - Caron, Warren Oates, Scatman Crothers, Gloria Grahame, and James Sikking among others - suggests that it holds some promise. But the death of this film is attributable to its terrible [[screenplay]]. The "mystery" implicated is so obscure and so little revealed throughout the film that the viewer is left perplexed from scene to scene. The movie seems torn between being a detective mystery and an espionage thriller, but never settles upon one or the other. The sense of suspense is entirely [[absent]]. The main characters settle on playing dry, emotionless types in a fashion that inspires no empathy whatsoever. The cinematography is pedestrian. The result is that the hapless viewer loses interest in the characters, the plot, and, in the end, the film itself. I am little surprised that there is no version of this [[pathetic]] [[film]] available to purchase. I hope that if TCM finds a print of this film and feels compelled to air it that it is safely relegated to the 4:00 am slot. I [[observed]] this film when it was first released. The memory of how [[wicked]] it was has stayed with me almost forty years. I didn't want to trust my own [[moods]] about the movie when I saw it, so I [[accessed]] a movie review published in a major metropolitan newspaper the next day- sentiment confirmed, the reviewer wrote that the movie was incoherent, indecipherable, and uninspiring. A little research reveals that the producer was star Leslie Caron's husband, thus the whiff of nepotism suggests the [[launch]] for this [[scary]] film. The film's roster of many capable [[protagonists]] - Caron, Warren Oates, Scatman Crothers, Gloria Grahame, and James Sikking among others - suggests that it holds some promise. But the death of this film is attributable to its terrible [[scenarios]]. The "mystery" implicated is so obscure and so little revealed throughout the film that the viewer is left perplexed from scene to scene. The movie seems torn between being a detective mystery and an espionage thriller, but never settles upon one or the other. The sense of suspense is entirely [[nonexistent]]. The main characters settle on playing dry, emotionless types in a fashion that inspires no empathy whatsoever. The cinematography is pedestrian. The result is that the hapless viewer loses interest in the characters, the plot, and, in the end, the film itself. I am little surprised that there is no version of this [[unhappy]] [[kino]] available to purchase. I hope that if TCM finds a print of this film and feels compelled to air it that it is safely relegated to the 4:00 am slot. --------------------------------------------- Result 4066 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This [[film]] is as [[good]] as it is difficult to find. The film's [[hero]] (and writer and director) is Simon Geist- a [[man]] "with an agenda." He creates a fake [[magazine]] just to have the authority to interview the swine of Los Angeles- the actors, the models, the musicians- who believe that their own defecation doesn't smell. With clever dialog, Zucovic succeeds in doing this. Sure, the budget for this [[film]] was probably what he paid for a used car, but this film is so [[solid]] and so well written that it [[works]] very well. [[Any]] person who can reenact [[Edward]] Munk's 'The Scream' in the reflection of a silver trashbin at a local coffee [[house]] should be [[nominated]] for some [[type]] of [[award]]. Give this [[film]] a [[chance]] and [[listen]] to what it [[says]]... because they [[HAVE]] been [[making]] the same [[car]] [[since]] 1986... it's called 'the [[car]].' Bravo, Zucovic, [[bravo]]! This [[filmmaking]] is as [[alright]] as it is difficult to find. The film's [[heroin]] (and writer and director) is Simon Geist- a [[dude]] "with an agenda." He creates a fake [[revue]] just to have the authority to interview the swine of Los Angeles- the actors, the models, the musicians- who believe that their own defecation doesn't smell. With clever dialog, Zucovic succeeds in doing this. Sure, the budget for this [[cinematographic]] was probably what he paid for a used car, but this film is so [[solids]] and so well written that it [[cooperating]] very well. [[Every]] person who can reenact [[Edwards]] Munk's 'The Scream' in the reflection of a silver trashbin at a local coffee [[homes]] should be [[appointed]] for some [[typing]] of [[scholarship]]. Give this [[movie]] a [[likelihood]] and [[listening]] to what it [[said]]... because they [[HAS]] been [[doing]] the same [[auto]] [[because]] 1986... it's called 'the [[automobile]].' Bravo, Zucovic, [[swish]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4067 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This movie has a very hard-to-swallow [[premise]], [[even]] by this genre's [[standards]]. We are asked to accept not only that a [[record]] played backwards can [[bring]] a dead man back to life, but that the [[record]] also contains hidden messages aimed SPECIFICALLY at one kid, when the singer had no connection to the boy when he was alive, and of course no way of knowing at whose hands the record [[would]] end up. Anyway, the film is fun for a while, but [[eventually]] the silliness and the pointlessness reign supreme. [[If]] they were really [[trying]] to create a new Freddy-like [[horror]] icon, they were way off: the villain here has no personality, no motivation, and no variety. (*1/2) This movie has a very hard-to-swallow [[prerequisite]], [[yet]] by this genre's [[standard]]. We are asked to accept not only that a [[docket]] played backwards can [[bringing]] a dead man back to life, but that the [[registering]] also contains hidden messages aimed SPECIFICALLY at one kid, when the singer had no connection to the boy when he was alive, and of course no way of knowing at whose hands the record [[could]] end up. Anyway, the film is fun for a while, but [[lastly]] the silliness and the pointlessness reign supreme. [[Though]] they were really [[try]] to create a new Freddy-like [[terror]] icon, they were way off: the villain here has no personality, no motivation, and no variety. (*1/2) --------------------------------------------- Result 4068 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] A [[pot]] - [[boiler]] if ever I [[saw]] one. [[A]] supposed [[thriller]] borrowing from "A [[Time]] to [[Kill]]", "Silence of the [[Lambs]]", [[even]] an inverted "[[In]] the Heat of the [[Night]]" with a [[little]] reverse murder, a la "[[Strangers]] on a Train" thrown in, it [[fails]] abysmally where all the above, to a [[large]] [[degree]], succeeded. [[Namely]], in delivering thrills. The [[plot]] [[seems]] condensed from a [[bigger]] [[book]], [[making]] the plot developments [[obvious]] and uninvolving, while the [[direction]] [[lacks]] [[pace]] and verve. To rein in any [[kudos]], a [[major]] twist had to be [[delivered]] along the [[way]] and here it [[fails]] palpably too. Connery is clearly slowing down in his old age, [[barely]] bothering with his attempt at a US accent and besides seems too [[old]] to be the husband of Hope [[Lange]] and the [[father]] of those gosh - darn [[kids]] of his. He [[even]] has a father in [[law]] who seems younger than him. [[Laurence]] Fishburne [[barely]] [[gets]] the [[chance]] to inhabit his role and you're [[confused]] from the outset as to whether he's a [[bad]] [[guy]] or a [[good]] [[guy]]. [[Someone]] once [[said]] that flashbacks shouldn't lie - they do, confusedly, here. The [[rest]] of the [[playing]] is [[merely]] [[average]] by a reasonable cast in their underwritten stereotyped roles. The [[supposed]] [[climax]] [[managed]] too, to [[roll]] by [[leaving]] me [[firmly]] entrenched in the back, not as should have been the [[aim]], front edge of my seat. Mediocre sloppy Hollywood film making for sure. A [[herb]] - [[boilers]] if ever I [[observed]] one. [[una]] supposed [[thrillers]] borrowing from "A [[Moment]] to [[Assassination]]", "Silence of the [[Sheep]]", [[yet]] an inverted "[[Throughout]] the Heat of the [[Soir]]" with a [[petit]] reverse murder, a la "[[Extraterrestrial]] on a Train" thrown in, it [[fail]] abysmally where all the above, to a [[tremendous]] [[diploma]], succeeded. [[Notably]], in delivering thrills. The [[intrigue]] [[seem]] condensed from a [[stronger]] [[ledger]], [[doing]] the plot developments [[manifest]] and uninvolving, while the [[orientation]] [[missing]] [[rhythm]] and verve. To rein in any [[laurels]], a [[large]] twist had to be [[gave]] along the [[pathways]] and here it [[fail]] palpably too. Connery is clearly slowing down in his old age, [[scarcely]] bothering with his attempt at a US accent and besides seems too [[former]] to be the husband of Hope [[Long]] and the [[pere]] of those gosh - darn [[youths]] of his. He [[yet]] has a father in [[legislation]] who seems younger than him. [[Laurent]] Fishburne [[scarcely]] [[receives]] the [[luck]] to inhabit his role and you're [[bewildered]] from the outset as to whether he's a [[negative]] [[pal]] or a [[alright]] [[pal]]. [[Whoever]] once [[indicated]] that flashbacks shouldn't lie - they do, confusedly, here. The [[resting]] of the [[gaming]] is [[exclusively]] [[averaging]] by a reasonable cast in their underwritten stereotyped roles. The [[alleged]] [[pinnacle]] [[administered]] too, to [[rolling]] by [[let]] me [[powerfully]] entrenched in the back, not as should have been the [[intents]], front edge of my seat. Mediocre sloppy Hollywood film making for sure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4069 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (82%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Painful to watch, and not entirely for empathy with the struggles of the [[characters]]. Two of the main characters, Cynthia the mother and Monica the acknowledged daughter, spend the great bulk of the film [[pathetically]] mewling and bitterly bitching respectively. Their characters are so firmly established that their redemption into tolerable personalities after a quick family catharsis is unbelievable. It wasn't worth the wait. I wish a [[worthy]] pitch for honesty among families was less of a headache to view. Painful to watch, and not entirely for empathy with the struggles of the [[personages]]. Two of the main characters, Cynthia the mother and Monica the acknowledged daughter, spend the great bulk of the film [[woefully]] mewling and bitterly bitching respectively. Their characters are so firmly established that their redemption into tolerable personalities after a quick family catharsis is unbelievable. It wasn't worth the wait. I wish a [[dignified]] pitch for honesty among families was less of a headache to view. --------------------------------------------- Result 4070 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] This is not a very [[good]] movie, but it's not a stinker either. It is very [[confusing]] and [[unnecessarily]] long so rent it at your own [[risk]].

My GF and I have figured this movie out (we think) so here it is:

***MAJOR [[SPOILERS]] BELOW***

Firstly, this movie is actually quite simple after you [[remove]] all of the confusing unconscious-dream-state [[junk]] (95% of the movie.)

Ignoring the junk, what REALLY happened is this: A group of school friends go to a rave one night. They leave and get into a car accident where everyone but Cassie and Sean die. That's the simple cut down version. (That's right, I said Sean, bear with me)

Right after the accident, Cassie lays in the hospital stuck in between life & death right up until the very end of the movie. This is where the dream part starts.

The movie is called SOUL Survivors, right? Cassie's mind and soul carries on after the accident interacting with the other souls (Annie, Matt, Raven, the 2 weirdos and Jude) along with images conjured up by her mind (Sean, school and everything else around her). The souls continue doing what they were defined as: Annie the rave-going chick, the 2 weirdo-killers (from opening scene), Father Jude still helping people etc.

We are then taken on a very long ride, shown lots of images (many of which my GF and I still can't tie in) but it all boils down to it not being Cassie's time to die.

At the end, Cassie wakes up in the hospital after being "dead" for a while. Her family and Sean are there. This is reality again. She's OK.

Then the director adds a little extra spice by trying to confuse us again by showing a little dream snippet of her in the wheelchair being strangled. But this part is really just a nightmare, and she wakes up beside Sean, obviously still dealing with her traumatic [[experience]].

[[Due]] to space [[restrictions]], we didn't cover every little thing, but feel free to drop us an e-mail if you want to.

This is not a very [[buena]] movie, but it's not a stinker either. It is very [[puzzling]] and [[unduly]] long so rent it at your own [[dangers]].

My GF and I have figured this movie out (we think) so here it is:

***MAJOR [[TROUBLEMAKERS]] BELOW***

Firstly, this movie is actually quite simple after you [[eradicating]] all of the confusing unconscious-dream-state [[trash]] (95% of the movie.)

Ignoring the junk, what REALLY happened is this: A group of school friends go to a rave one night. They leave and get into a car accident where everyone but Cassie and Sean die. That's the simple cut down version. (That's right, I said Sean, bear with me)

Right after the accident, Cassie lays in the hospital stuck in between life & death right up until the very end of the movie. This is where the dream part starts.

The movie is called SOUL Survivors, right? Cassie's mind and soul carries on after the accident interacting with the other souls (Annie, Matt, Raven, the 2 weirdos and Jude) along with images conjured up by her mind (Sean, school and everything else around her). The souls continue doing what they were defined as: Annie the rave-going chick, the 2 weirdo-killers (from opening scene), Father Jude still helping people etc.

We are then taken on a very long ride, shown lots of images (many of which my GF and I still can't tie in) but it all boils down to it not being Cassie's time to die.

At the end, Cassie wakes up in the hospital after being "dead" for a while. Her family and Sean are there. This is reality again. She's OK.

Then the director adds a little extra spice by trying to confuse us again by showing a little dream snippet of her in the wheelchair being strangled. But this part is really just a nightmare, and she wakes up beside Sean, obviously still dealing with her traumatic [[experiences]].

[[Owing]] to space [[constraints]], we didn't cover every little thing, but feel free to drop us an e-mail if you want to.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4071 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is 2009 and this way underrated gem has [[lost]] [[nothing]] of the power it had 31 years ago. It connects a pretty wide variety of different characters and stories without appearing to be [[cluttered]].

Clothes and music might have changed over time, but in the end this is a story that will never lose its up-to-dateness. And especially this movie does the [[job]] pretty well. Of course it is cheesy at [[times]], but very [[touching]] as well.

[[Jodie]] Foster's performance is striking, and it shows that she is really a natural [[born]] actress who [[showed]] her [[true]] potential [[especially]] in her [[earlier]] [[movies]].

Don't [[miss]] this one. This is 2009 and this way underrated gem has [[forfeited]] [[anything]] of the power it had 31 years ago. It connects a pretty wide variety of different characters and stories without appearing to be [[crowded]].

Clothes and music might have changed over time, but in the end this is a story that will never lose its up-to-dateness. And especially this movie does the [[workplace]] pretty well. Of course it is cheesy at [[dates]], but very [[touch]] as well.

[[Jody]] Foster's performance is striking, and it shows that she is really a natural [[birthed]] actress who [[demonstrated]] her [[authentic]] potential [[specifically]] in her [[prior]] [[theater]].

Don't [[mademoiselle]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4072 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] After several [[extremely]] well ratings to the point of SUPERB, I was [[extremely]] [[pleased]] with the [[film]]. The film was dark, moving, the anger, the pain, the guilt and a very extremely [[convincing]] [[demon]].

I had initially expected to see [[many]] special effects, and like a lover's caress, it [[blew]] me away with the [[subtlety]] and the rightness of it. [[Brian]], I am again [[blown]] away with your [[artistry]] with the telling of the story and your [[care]] of the special [[effects]]. You will go a long way, my [[friend]]. I will [[definitely]] be the president of your fan club.

Eric Etebari, the best actor [[award]], was the number one [[choice]]. You [[made]] Jr. [[Lopez]] look like a [[child]] compared to Kasadya. :)

Overall, the acting, story line, the high quality filming and awesome effects, it was [[fantastic]]. I just [[wish]] it were [[longer]]. I am [[looking]] [[forward]] to The Dreamless with [[extremely]] [[high]] expectations. After several [[extraordinarily]] well ratings to the point of SUPERB, I was [[unimaginably]] [[happier]] with the [[cinematography]]. The film was dark, moving, the anger, the pain, the guilt and a very extremely [[persuading]] [[fiend]].

I had initially expected to see [[various]] special effects, and like a lover's caress, it [[farted]] me away with the [[sophistication]] and the rightness of it. [[Bryan]], I am again [[melted]] away with your [[art]] with the telling of the story and your [[healthcare]] of the special [[effect]]. You will go a long way, my [[boyfriend]]. I will [[clearly]] be the president of your fan club.

Eric Etebari, the best actor [[awards]], was the number one [[selecting]]. You [[introduced]] Jr. [[Lopes]] look like a [[infantile]] compared to Kasadya. :)

Overall, the acting, story line, the high quality filming and awesome effects, it was [[unbelievable]]. I just [[wants]] it were [[anymore]]. I am [[researching]] [[forwards]] to The Dreamless with [[unimaginably]] [[higher]] expectations. --------------------------------------------- Result 4073 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] "In 1955, Tobias Schneerbaum disappeared in the Peruvian Amazon. One year later he walked out of the jungle...naked. It took him 45 [[years]] to go back." [[Supposedly]], "Keep the [[River]] On your [[Right]]" is "a [[modern]] cannibal [[tale]]". In reality, anyone looking for some insight into cannibalism will be [[sadly]] disappointed. The first half of the [[movie]] is more like a travel log of New Ginuea, mostly touting the native art. The second half relies on still photos of a Peruvian cannibal tribe, but really that's about it. Unless of course, you are interested in home [[movies]] of a Jewish [[wedding]], or Schneerbaum introducing his former male lovers. I [[give]] up. [[Big]] [[disappointment]] and not [[really]] "a [[modern]] cannibal [[tale]]." - MERK "In 1955, Tobias Schneerbaum disappeared in the Peruvian Amazon. One year later he walked out of the jungle...naked. It took him 45 [[yr]] to go back." [[Seemingly]], "Keep the [[Revere]] On your [[Rights]]" is "a [[moderne]] cannibal [[storytelling]]". In reality, anyone looking for some insight into cannibalism will be [[unfortunately]] disappointed. The first half of the [[kino]] is more like a travel log of New Ginuea, mostly touting the native art. The second half relies on still photos of a Peruvian cannibal tribe, but really that's about it. Unless of course, you are interested in home [[cinematography]] of a Jewish [[marries]], or Schneerbaum introducing his former male lovers. I [[lend]] up. [[Grande]] [[displeasure]] and not [[truly]] "a [[contemporary]] cannibal [[narratives]]." - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4074 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] How can you go wrong with the amazing Ramones? What a crime that two of them are already dead. It reminds me of the Dennis Leary joke about great musicians dying in kitchen fires while useless ones live forever. I'm paraphrasing here, but you [[get]] the idea.

ROCK AND ROLL HIGH SCHOOL tells the story of a group of disenfranchised kids fighting against their oppressive high school's administration. It's extremely silly stuff, but there's an [[optimism]] about it that's [[refreshing]] ([[even]] if they do resort to blowing up the building). Who knew that this would actually become a concern for students around the world? ROCK AND ROLL HIGH SCHOOL is a time capsule of an era when people still believed that music mattered and that it could make a difference to the larger society. It's full of kids who know authority doesn't have the correct answers. Rather, rock and roll is the only thing they can trust.

But most important, this is pure exploitation.

Take none of it seriously. Just go in and have a good time. If this wasn't what high school life was like in the seventies, then it should have been. How can you go wrong with the amazing Ramones? What a crime that two of them are already dead. It reminds me of the Dennis Leary joke about great musicians dying in kitchen fires while useless ones live forever. I'm paraphrasing here, but you [[gets]] the idea.

ROCK AND ROLL HIGH SCHOOL tells the story of a group of disenfranchised kids fighting against their oppressive high school's administration. It's extremely silly stuff, but there's an [[optimist]] about it that's [[refreshed]] ([[yet]] if they do resort to blowing up the building). Who knew that this would actually become a concern for students around the world? ROCK AND ROLL HIGH SCHOOL is a time capsule of an era when people still believed that music mattered and that it could make a difference to the larger society. It's full of kids who know authority doesn't have the correct answers. Rather, rock and roll is the only thing they can trust.

But most important, this is pure exploitation.

Take none of it seriously. Just go in and have a good time. If this wasn't what high school life was like in the seventies, then it should have been. --------------------------------------------- Result 4075 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This happy-go-luck 1939 military swashbuckler, based rather loosely on Rudyard Kipling's memorable poem as well as his novel "Soldiers Three," qualifies as first-rate entertainment about the British Imperial Army in India in the 1880s. Cary Grant delivers more knock-about blows with his knuckled-up fists than he did in all of his movies put together. Set in faraway India, this six-fisted yarn dwells on the exploits of three rugged British sergeants and their native water bearer Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe) who contend with a bloodthirsty cult of murderous Indians called the Thuggee. Sergeant Archibald Cutter (Cary Grant of "The Last Outpost"), Sergeant MacChesney (Oscar-winner Victor McLaglen of "The Informer"), and Sergeant Ballantine (Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. of "The Dawn Patrol"), are a competitive trio of hard-drinking, hard-brawling, and fun-loving Alpha males whose years of frolic are about to become history because Ballantine plans to marry Emmy Stebbins (Joan Fontaine) and enter the tea business. Naturally, Cutter and MacChesney drum up assorted schemes to derail Ballentine's plans. When their superiors order them back into action with Sgt. Bertie Higginbotham (Robert Coote of "The Sheik Steps Out"), Cutter and MacChesney drug Higginbotham so that he cannot accompany them and Ballantine has to replace him. Half of the fun here is watching the principals trying to outwit each other without hating themselves. Director George Stevens celebrates the spirit of adventure in grand style and scope as our heroes tangle with an army of Thuggees. Lenser Joseph H. August received an Oscar nomination for his outstanding black & white cinematography. --------------------------------------------- Result 4076 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Inventor Wayne Szalinsky ([[Rick]] Moranis) is preparing to [[donate]] his [[problematic]] [[shrinking]]/expanding machine to the Smithsonian Institution as he and his wife Diane (Eve Gordon) get ready for a long weekend away from their son Adam (Bug Hall). Wayne's brother Gordon (Stuart Pankin), his wife Patty (Robin Bartlett), and his kids Jenny (Allison Mack) and Mitch (Jake Richardson) volunteer to look after Adam while his parents are away, but as luck would have it (and the title [[would]] lead you to [[expect]]), the grown-ups are accidentally zapped by Wayne's [[shrinking]] ray. As the [[kids]] run amok, their miniaturized folks must contend with monstrously huge insects, wrinkles in the carpet that [[look]] like canyons, and other threats to them. This was [[bad]], like most [[straight]] to [[video]] sequels are, Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves was sort of [[laughable]]. I had to [[laugh]] at that movie "[[roach]]" [[Stuart]] Pankin and the party bullies were even more [[ridiculous]], view at own risk! Inventor Wayne Szalinsky ([[Ricky]] Moranis) is preparing to [[gifts]] his [[difficult]] [[reductions]]/expanding machine to the Smithsonian Institution as he and his wife Diane (Eve Gordon) get ready for a long weekend away from their son Adam (Bug Hall). Wayne's brother Gordon (Stuart Pankin), his wife Patty (Robin Bartlett), and his kids Jenny (Allison Mack) and Mitch (Jake Richardson) volunteer to look after Adam while his parents are away, but as luck would have it (and the title [[ought]] lead you to [[waits]]), the grown-ups are accidentally zapped by Wayne's [[declining]] ray. As the [[enfants]] run amok, their miniaturized folks must contend with monstrously huge insects, wrinkles in the carpet that [[peek]] like canyons, and other threats to them. This was [[negative]], like most [[successive]] to [[videos]] sequels are, Honey, We Shrunk Ourselves was sort of [[ludicrous]]. I had to [[laughter]] at that movie "[[creeper]]" [[Stewart]] Pankin and the party bullies were even more [[ludicrous]], view at own risk! --------------------------------------------- Result 4077 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I have to hand it to the creative team behind these "American Pie" [[movies]]. "Direct To DVD" [[typically]] is synonymous with cheap, incompetent film-making. [[Yet]] last year I was pleasantly surprised when I found myself [[thoroughly]] [[enjoying]] the DVD sequel "The Naked Mile". The filmmakers took advantage of the opportunity to deliver a raunchy, yet funny little film. This year they offer up the followup, "Beta House". This is the honest truth, "Beta House" makes the first few "American Pie" movies look like "The Little Mermaid".

This is no holds barred, tasteless, laugh-out loud fun. Sure, the story is a bit thin, but that's the beauty of the whole thing. Within the first 10 minutes we're introduced to the all the main characters, the new supporting characters, get a handful of raunchy gags, meet the villains, and establish the general plot-line. With all that out of the way, the movie becomes a no-limits ride. The gags are a plenty, and they DID NOT hold back in this one. I'm talking male semen, urine, dildos, chicks-with-dicks, sex with sheep, female orgazim sprays, and plenty more. Not to mention the fact that not a minute goes by without boobs or a sex scene.

Returning from "The Naked Mile" are John White, Jake Siegel, Steve Talley, and Eugene Levy (in a similar supporting role as the last few films). The entire cast does fine work. Steve Talley (Dwight Stifler), in particular, has a great energy and screen presence. I predict good things for him. The film is also loaded with great movie references for those who keep their eyes open. By far the biggest laugh of the film for me was "The Deerhunter" parody. Classic.

The bottom line is, if you're a fan of the series, you'll feel right at home with "Beta House". It really pushes the limits of good taste, but in the end is pretty damn funny. I have to hand it to the creative team behind these "American Pie" [[kino]]. "Direct To DVD" [[fluently]] is synonymous with cheap, incompetent film-making. [[Again]] last year I was pleasantly surprised when I found myself [[elaborately]] [[experience]] the DVD sequel "The Naked Mile". The filmmakers took advantage of the opportunity to deliver a raunchy, yet funny little film. This year they offer up the followup, "Beta House". This is the honest truth, "Beta House" makes the first few "American Pie" movies look like "The Little Mermaid".

This is no holds barred, tasteless, laugh-out loud fun. Sure, the story is a bit thin, but that's the beauty of the whole thing. Within the first 10 minutes we're introduced to the all the main characters, the new supporting characters, get a handful of raunchy gags, meet the villains, and establish the general plot-line. With all that out of the way, the movie becomes a no-limits ride. The gags are a plenty, and they DID NOT hold back in this one. I'm talking male semen, urine, dildos, chicks-with-dicks, sex with sheep, female orgazim sprays, and plenty more. Not to mention the fact that not a minute goes by without boobs or a sex scene.

Returning from "The Naked Mile" are John White, Jake Siegel, Steve Talley, and Eugene Levy (in a similar supporting role as the last few films). The entire cast does fine work. Steve Talley (Dwight Stifler), in particular, has a great energy and screen presence. I predict good things for him. The film is also loaded with great movie references for those who keep their eyes open. By far the biggest laugh of the film for me was "The Deerhunter" parody. Classic.

The bottom line is, if you're a fan of the series, you'll feel right at home with "Beta House". It really pushes the limits of good taste, but in the end is pretty damn funny. --------------------------------------------- Result 4078 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] The plot [[sounded]] [[like]] it had promise. To be honest I did not watch the entire [[movie]]. After about an [[hour]] into the [[movie]] I had to [[make]] a [[decision]]. Is this [[movie]] worth watching until it conclusion? The answer was clearly [[NO]]! It was not the fact that the human body could not [[receive]] a [[transplant]] from a different species without rejecting it. Nor the [[premise]] that he was being chased by secret government authorities for an human / [[wolf]] [[transplant]]. It was because the [[movie]] was [[badly]] written, acting lacked emotion and I did not understand the several dream sequences with the wolves and buffaloes. When he was running to the zoo with a [[dog]] pack and leaving them at the front of the [[zoo]] gate the saying "If you can't run with the big [[dogs]] don't leave the porch" kept running through my [[bored]] mind. Save yourself the time and skip this [[movie]]. I can [[guarantee]] if you do dare to watch it you will sit there slack [[jawed]] as I did [[wondering]] why anyone waste money, [[time]], [[energy]] and [[effort]] to make this [[insulting]] [[outrage]] to American [[cinema]]. The plot [[seemed]] [[iike]] it had promise. To be honest I did not watch the entire [[cinematographic]]. After about an [[hours]] into the [[cinematography]] I had to [[deliver]] a [[decisions]]. Is this [[cinematography]] worth watching until it conclusion? The answer was clearly [[NOS]]! It was not the fact that the human body could not [[receives]] a [[grafts]] from a different species without rejecting it. Nor the [[supposition]] that he was being chased by secret government authorities for an human / [[lair]] [[grafts]]. It was because the [[kino]] was [[sorely]] written, acting lacked emotion and I did not understand the several dream sequences with the wolves and buffaloes. When he was running to the zoo with a [[canine]] pack and leaving them at the front of the [[animals]] gate the saying "If you can't run with the big [[hounds]] don't leave the porch" kept running through my [[drilled]] mind. Save yourself the time and skip this [[film]]. I can [[ensuring]] if you do dare to watch it you will sit there slack [[javed]] as I did [[request]] why anyone waste money, [[times]], [[energies]] and [[endeavour]] to make this [[pejorative]] [[fury]] to American [[cinematographic]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4079 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] I [[think]] this movie was probably a lot more [[powerful]] when it first debuted in 1943, though nowadays it [[seems]] a [[bit]] too preachy and static to elevate it to [[greatness]]. The film is set in 1940--just before the entry of the US into the war. Paul Lukas plays the very earnest and decent head of his family. He's a German who has spent seven years fighting the Nazis and avoiding capture. Bette Davis is his very understanding and long-suffering wife who has managed to educate and raise the children without him from time to time. As the film begins, they are crossing the border from Mexico to the USA and for the first time in years, they are going to relax and stop running.

The problem for me was that the family was too perfect and too decent--making them seem like obvious positive propaganda instead of a real family suffering through real problems. While this had a very noble goal at the time, it just seems phony today. In particular, the incredibly odd and extremely scripted dialog used by the children just didn't ring true. It sounded more like anti-Fascism speeches than the voices of real children. They were as a result extremely annoying--particularly the littlest one who came off, at times, as a brat. About the only ones who sounded real were Bette Davis and her extended American family as well as the scumbag Romanian living with them (though he had no discernible accent).

It's really tough to believe that the ultra-famous Dashiel Hammett wrote this dialog, as it just doesn't sound true to life. The story was based on the play by his lover, Lillian Hellman. And, the basic story idea and plot is good,...but the dialog is just bad at times. [[Overall]], an interesting curio and a film with some excellent moments,...but that's really about all. I [[ideas]] this movie was probably a lot more [[forceful]] when it first debuted in 1943, though nowadays it [[appears]] a [[bitten]] too preachy and static to elevate it to [[scale]]. The film is set in 1940--just before the entry of the US into the war. Paul Lukas plays the very earnest and decent head of his family. He's a German who has spent seven years fighting the Nazis and avoiding capture. Bette Davis is his very understanding and long-suffering wife who has managed to educate and raise the children without him from time to time. As the film begins, they are crossing the border from Mexico to the USA and for the first time in years, they are going to relax and stop running.

The problem for me was that the family was too perfect and too decent--making them seem like obvious positive propaganda instead of a real family suffering through real problems. While this had a very noble goal at the time, it just seems phony today. In particular, the incredibly odd and extremely scripted dialog used by the children just didn't ring true. It sounded more like anti-Fascism speeches than the voices of real children. They were as a result extremely annoying--particularly the littlest one who came off, at times, as a brat. About the only ones who sounded real were Bette Davis and her extended American family as well as the scumbag Romanian living with them (though he had no discernible accent).

It's really tough to believe that the ultra-famous Dashiel Hammett wrote this dialog, as it just doesn't sound true to life. The story was based on the play by his lover, Lillian Hellman. And, the basic story idea and plot is good,...but the dialog is just bad at times. [[Generals]], an interesting curio and a film with some excellent moments,...but that's really about all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4080 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This movie has very good acting by virtually all the cast, a gripping story with a chilling ending, great music, and [[excellent]] visuals without significant special [[effects]]. It is interesting to [[note]] though that, like so much science fiction, its predictions for the future don't appear likely to come to pass as early as depicted. That's not to say we're out of the woods yet, but 2022 is now obviously too [[soon]] to be in this [[condition]]. It [[shares]] this failing with a fairly illustrious list of science fiction classics: "1984", "2001: A Space Odyssey (compare its space station with our International Space Station) and Isaac Asimov's "I Robot" (positronic brains were to have been invented in the 1990's). This movie has very good acting by virtually all the cast, a gripping story with a chilling ending, great music, and [[glamorous]] visuals without significant special [[influence]]. It is interesting to [[memo]] though that, like so much science fiction, its predictions for the future don't appear likely to come to pass as early as depicted. That's not to say we're out of the woods yet, but 2022 is now obviously too [[expeditiously]] to be in this [[stipulation]]. It [[share]] this failing with a fairly illustrious list of science fiction classics: "1984", "2001: A Space Odyssey (compare its space station with our International Space Station) and Isaac Asimov's "I Robot" (positronic brains were to have been invented in the 1990's). --------------------------------------------- Result 4081 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] There are [[enough]] [[sad]] stories about women and their oppression by religious, political and societal means. Not to diminish the films and stories about genital mutilation and reproductive rights, as well as wage inequality, and marginalization in society, all in the name of Allah or God or some other ridiculous justification, but sometimes it is [[helpful]] to just take another approach and [[shed]] some [[light]] on the subject.

The setting is the 2006 match between Iran and Bahrain to qualify for the World Cup. Passions are high and several women try to disguise themselves as men to get into the match.

The women who were caught (Played by Sima Mobarak-Shahi, Shayesteh Irani, Ayda Sadeqi, Golnaz Farmani, and Mahnaz Zabihi) and detained for prosecution provided a funny and illuminating glimpse into the customs of this country and, most likely, all Muslim countries. Their interaction with the Iranian soldiers who were guarding and transporting them, both city and villagers, and the father who was looking for his daughter provided some hilarious moments as we thought about why they have such unwritten rules.

It is mainly about a paternalistic society that feels it has to save it's women from the crude behavior of it's men. Rather than educating the male population, they deny privilege and rights to the women.

Seeing the changes in the soldiers responsible and the reflection of Iranian society, it is nos surprise this film will not [[get]] any play in Iran. But Jafar Panahi has a winner on his hands for those able to see it. There are [[adequate]] [[regrettable]] stories about women and their oppression by religious, political and societal means. Not to diminish the films and stories about genital mutilation and reproductive rights, as well as wage inequality, and marginalization in society, all in the name of Allah or God or some other ridiculous justification, but sometimes it is [[actionable]] to just take another approach and [[boathouse]] some [[lighting]] on the subject.

The setting is the 2006 match between Iran and Bahrain to qualify for the World Cup. Passions are high and several women try to disguise themselves as men to get into the match.

The women who were caught (Played by Sima Mobarak-Shahi, Shayesteh Irani, Ayda Sadeqi, Golnaz Farmani, and Mahnaz Zabihi) and detained for prosecution provided a funny and illuminating glimpse into the customs of this country and, most likely, all Muslim countries. Their interaction with the Iranian soldiers who were guarding and transporting them, both city and villagers, and the father who was looking for his daughter provided some hilarious moments as we thought about why they have such unwritten rules.

It is mainly about a paternalistic society that feels it has to save it's women from the crude behavior of it's men. Rather than educating the male population, they deny privilege and rights to the women.

Seeing the changes in the soldiers responsible and the reflection of Iranian society, it is nos surprise this film will not [[obtains]] any play in Iran. But Jafar Panahi has a winner on his hands for those able to see it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4082 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Yes, Be My Love was Mario Lanza's skyrocket to fame and still is popular [[today]]. His voice was strong and [[steady]], so [[powerful]] in fact that MGM [[decided]] to [[use]] him in The Great Caruso. Lanza himself thought he was the reincarnation of Caruso. Having read the book by Kostelanitz who wrote a biography of Lanza, he explains that the [[constant]] practise and vocal lessons [[became]] the visionary Caruso to Lanza. There is no doubt that Lanza did a superb job in the story, but the [[story]] is not [[entirely]] true; blame it on Hollywood! I used to [[practise]] singing his songs years ago, and became pretty good myself until I lost my voice because of emphysema/asthma ten years ago. Reaching the high note of Be My Love is not easy; but beautiful! Yes, Be My Love was Mario Lanza's skyrocket to fame and still is popular [[yesterday]]. His voice was strong and [[persistent]], so [[influential]] in fact that MGM [[decides]] to [[used]] him in The Great Caruso. Lanza himself thought he was the reincarnation of Caruso. Having read the book by Kostelanitz who wrote a biography of Lanza, he explains that the [[incessant]] practise and vocal lessons [[came]] the visionary Caruso to Lanza. There is no doubt that Lanza did a superb job in the story, but the [[tale]] is not [[fully]] true; blame it on Hollywood! I used to [[practicing]] singing his songs years ago, and became pretty good myself until I lost my voice because of emphysema/asthma ten years ago. Reaching the high note of Be My Love is not easy; but beautiful! --------------------------------------------- Result 4083 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I didn't know what to expect from the film. Well, now I know. This was a truly awful film. The screenplay, directing and acting were equally bad. The story was silly and stupid. The director could have made a smart and thought provoking film, but he didn't. I squirmed in my seat for the last half of the movie because it was so bad. Where was the focus to the film? Where was anything in this film? Christians should boycott this film instead of promoting it. It was shabbily done and a waste of my money. Do not see this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4084 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] I watched this as part of my course at Aberystwyth University and it baffles me how this does not have a distributor in the UK. Well actually, it doesn't, because this film is everything a Hollywood film isn't - original, creative, quirky and humorous. It seems that [[today]] no-one really wants to see this type of movie as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most young viewers look for in a film.

I haven't written a review for the IMDb for ages but felt inclined to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the world. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a house and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.

I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time limit. However I encourage anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very entertaining movie.

It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing.... I watched this as part of my course at Aberystwyth University and it baffles me how this does not have a distributor in the UK. Well actually, it doesn't, because this film is everything a Hollywood film isn't - original, creative, quirky and humorous. It seems that [[hoy]] no-one really wants to see this type of movie as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most young viewers look for in a film.

I haven't written a review for the IMDb for ages but felt inclined to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the world. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a house and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.

I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time limit. However I encourage anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very entertaining movie.

It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing.... --------------------------------------------- Result 4085 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] While not as famous as some of their other collaborations (such as THE BLACK CAT and THE BODY SNATCHER), this is a dandy [[little]] horror film even though the casting decisions were a bit [[odd]]. Boris Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a weird scientist who lives in the Carpathian mountains--near where the Dracula character's home town. Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Benet--whose nationality was never discussed though the name certainly sounds French. I really think it would have made sense to have the two switch roles, as the Carpathian role seems tailor made for Lugosi--especially with his accent. However, despite this unusual twist, the two still did excellent jobs. Karloff's was definitely the lead role, but Lugosi acquitted himself well as a relatively normal person--something he didn't play very often in films!! It seems that Dr. Rukh is a bit of a pariah, as other scientists (especially Benet) think his theories are bizarre and [[nonsensical]]. However, over the course of the film, Rukh turns out to be right and Benet is especially generous in his new praise for Rukh. But, unfortunately, the [[wonderful]] new element that Rukh discovered has the nasty side effect of turning him into a crazy killing machine (don't you hate it when that happens?). [[While]] this [[could]] have just been a simple nice scientist turned mad story, the plot was well constructed, the characters nicely developed and the mad Rukh was NOT a one-dimensional killer, but complex and interesting.

This film is bound to be enjoyed by anyone except for people who hate old horror films. You can really tell that Universal Pictures pulled out all the stops and made a bigger-budget film instead of the cheap quickies both Lugosi and Karloff unfortunately gravitated in later years. Good stuff. While not as famous as some of their other collaborations (such as THE BLACK CAT and THE BODY SNATCHER), this is a dandy [[scant]] horror film even though the casting decisions were a bit [[inquisitive]]. Boris Karloff plays Dr. Janos Rukh, a weird scientist who lives in the Carpathian mountains--near where the Dracula character's home town. Bela Lugosi plays Dr. Benet--whose nationality was never discussed though the name certainly sounds French. I really think it would have made sense to have the two switch roles, as the Carpathian role seems tailor made for Lugosi--especially with his accent. However, despite this unusual twist, the two still did excellent jobs. Karloff's was definitely the lead role, but Lugosi acquitted himself well as a relatively normal person--something he didn't play very often in films!! It seems that Dr. Rukh is a bit of a pariah, as other scientists (especially Benet) think his theories are bizarre and [[preposterous]]. However, over the course of the film, Rukh turns out to be right and Benet is especially generous in his new praise for Rukh. But, unfortunately, the [[glamorous]] new element that Rukh discovered has the nasty side effect of turning him into a crazy killing machine (don't you hate it when that happens?). [[Despite]] this [[did]] have just been a simple nice scientist turned mad story, the plot was well constructed, the characters nicely developed and the mad Rukh was NOT a one-dimensional killer, but complex and interesting.

This film is bound to be enjoyed by anyone except for people who hate old horror films. You can really tell that Universal Pictures pulled out all the stops and made a bigger-budget film instead of the cheap quickies both Lugosi and Karloff unfortunately gravitated in later years. Good stuff. --------------------------------------------- Result 4086 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] [[Most]] people know Paul Verhoeven as the director of many good (and bad) sci-fi movies in Hollywood. But long before that he was churning out generic [[thrillers]] in his native land. The story is a basic femme fatale premise, [[nothing]] [[new]] or [[enthralling]]. Verhoeven thinks he can make it better by adding in a series of dream sequences, which [[instead]] of defining our main character and his situation, are just used as a way to drive forward the predictable plot. The screenplay was [[solid]], the dialogue helping to pad the effects of the bland story. What really made the movie at at least good was some terrific acting. Jereone Krabbe was amazing as the "tortured artist", and the supporters were very good as well. Also, Jan De Bont's cinematography adds at least some life to the film, helping to make Verhoeven look at least capable as a director.

6.5/10

* * 1/2 / * * * * [[Longer]] people know Paul Verhoeven as the director of many good (and bad) sci-fi movies in Hollywood. But long before that he was churning out generic [[thriller]] in his native land. The story is a basic femme fatale premise, [[none]] [[newest]] or [[thrilling]]. Verhoeven thinks he can make it better by adding in a series of dream sequences, which [[alternatively]] of defining our main character and his situation, are just used as a way to drive forward the predictable plot. The screenplay was [[robust]], the dialogue helping to pad the effects of the bland story. What really made the movie at at least good was some terrific acting. Jereone Krabbe was amazing as the "tortured artist", and the supporters were very good as well. Also, Jan De Bont's cinematography adds at least some life to the film, helping to make Verhoeven look at least capable as a director.

6.5/10

* * 1/2 / * * * * --------------------------------------------- Result 4087 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I went to this movie expecting an artsy scary film. What I got was scare after scare. It's a horror film at it's core. It's not [[dull]] like other horror films where a haunted house just has ghosts and gore. This film doesn't even show you the majority of the [[deaths]] it shows the fear of the characters. I think one of the best things about the concept where it's not just the house thats haunted its whoever goes into the house. They become haunted no matter where they are. Office buildings, police stations, hotel rooms... etc. After reading some of the external reviews I am really surprised that critics didn't like this film. I am going to see it again this week and am excited about it.

I gave this film 10 stars because it did what a horror film should. It scared the s**t out of me. I went to this movie expecting an artsy scary film. What I got was scare after scare. It's a horror film at it's core. It's not [[tiresome]] like other horror films where a haunted house just has ghosts and gore. This film doesn't even show you the majority of the [[fatality]] it shows the fear of the characters. I think one of the best things about the concept where it's not just the house thats haunted its whoever goes into the house. They become haunted no matter where they are. Office buildings, police stations, hotel rooms... etc. After reading some of the external reviews I am really surprised that critics didn't like this film. I am going to see it again this week and am excited about it.

I gave this film 10 stars because it did what a horror film should. It scared the s**t out of me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4088 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[movie]] was for a while in my collection, but it wasn't before a friend of mine [[reminded]] me about it – until I decided that I should watch it. I did not know much about Close to Leo – just that it was supposed to be [[excellent]] coming out of age movie and it [[deals]] with a very serious [[topic]] – Aids.

[[Although]] the [[person]] who has [[aids]] – is [[Leo]] – the scenario [[wraps]] around the [[way]] in which Marcel (the youngest [[brother]] of [[Leo]]) coupes with the [[sickness]] of his relative. [[At]] [[first]] [[everyone]] is [[trying]] to [[hide]] the [[truth]] from Marcel – he is [[believed]] to be too [[young]] to [[understand]] the [[sickness]] of his brother – the fact that Leo is [[also]] a homosexual [[contributes]] to the unwillingness of the [[parents]] to discus the [[matter]] with the young Marcel. I know from experience that on [[many]] occasions most [[older]] people do not [[want]] to [[accept]] the [[fact]] that [[sometimes]] even when [[someone]] is young this does not automatically [[means]] that he will not be able to [[accept]] the [[reality]] and [[act]] in more [[adequate]] [[manner]] then even themselves . With [[exception]] of the fact that the [[family]] tried to [[conceal]] the truth from Marcel, they have left quite an [[impression]] for me – the way they [[supported]] their [[son]] – [[even]] after [[discovering]] the truth about his [[sexuality]] and his [[sickness]]. The fact that they [[allowed]] the young Marcel to [[travel]] along with Leo to Paris to [[meet]] his ex [[boyfriend]] was [[quite]] a gesture from them– most [[families]] I [[know]] will be [[reluctant]] to do that. There is a [[lot]] of warmth in the scenes in which the [[brothers]] [[spend]] some time together – you can see them being [[real]] [[friends]] , concern about each other.

Close to [[Leo]] is an [[excellent]] [[drama]], which I [[strongly]] [[recommend]] This [[filmmaking]] was for a while in my collection, but it wasn't before a friend of mine [[recalled]] me about it – until I decided that I should watch it. I did not know much about Close to Leo – just that it was supposed to be [[resplendent]] coming out of age movie and it [[dealing]] with a very serious [[subjects]] – Aids.

[[Whereas]] the [[anybody]] who has [[assisting]] – is [[Leon]] – the scenario [[surrounds]] around the [[camino]] in which Marcel (the youngest [[fraternal]] of [[Leon]]) coupes with the [[disease]] of his relative. [[For]] [[frst]] [[anyone]] is [[attempting]] to [[disguises]] the [[veracity]] from Marcel – he is [[felt]] to be too [[youthful]] to [[understood]] the [[disease]] of his brother – the fact that Leo is [[similarly]] a homosexual [[serves]] to the unwillingness of the [[parenting]] to discus the [[topic]] with the young Marcel. I know from experience that on [[various]] occasions most [[elderly]] people do not [[wants]] to [[agreeing]] the [[facto]] that [[occasionally]] even when [[whoever]] is young this does not automatically [[method]] that he will not be able to [[agreeing]] the [[realities]] and [[legislation]] in more [[suitable]] [[fashion]] then even themselves . With [[exemption]] of the fact that the [[families]] tried to [[hide]] the truth from Marcel, they have left quite an [[printing]] for me – the way they [[backed]] their [[sons]] – [[yet]] after [[detecting]] the truth about his [[sexually]] and his [[disease]]. The fact that they [[authorized]] the young Marcel to [[travelling]] along with Leo to Paris to [[cater]] his ex [[dude]] was [[altogether]] a gesture from them– most [[family]] I [[savoir]] will be [[loath]] to do that. There is a [[batch]] of warmth in the scenes in which the [[plymouth]] [[expenditure]] some time together – you can see them being [[actual]] [[mates]] , concern about each other.

Close to [[Leon]] is an [[sumptuous]] [[theatrical]], which I [[flatly]] [[recommended]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4089 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (92%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] This movie is about sexual obsession. [[Bette]] Davis plays Mildred. This is a woman who men are drawn to. Not because she is a nice beautiful girl but because she is a sexual entity. Now the movie does not come out and say that but it is obvious. There is a scene in the movie in which men are all going googly eyes over her. She works as a waitress in a coffee shop, she can't read and she not really anybody to look at but she is a flirt. It is obvious the male customers in that coffee shop are there because of her. One day Phillip a club footed failed painter medical student comes in the shop to say a good word for his friend but he becomes besotted the moment he sees her. He starts buying her things even pays for her apartment. Meanwhile she is seeing other people and she makes no secrets of it. He dreams about her like she is a angel, but she is no angel. He is constantly thinking about her. His med school grades are even failing. So what the nookie is too good. He wants to marry her but she rejects him because she is marrying another guy. She always lets Phil know she really doesn't have love feelings for him all of time. He is heart broken but he meets another woman. They seem fine but it is obvious he is still dreaming of the Bimbo. Mildred does comes back with a baby and unwed. Phillip takes her in again, but she starts going out with a friend of his, the light bulb comes on a little and he kicks her out. She does what she knows works so she tries to seduce him, well it doesn't work and she proceeds to burn his tuition money up. Oh we have a club foot that he has problems about, even though a street teenager who has the same problem tells him to lighten up about it. He meets another girl named Sally we have a March of time montage which shows her aging while he strings her along still waiting for Mildred. Well he has no school tuition, can't find a job. Finally Sally and her dad takes him in. Not before another March of Time montage showing him going downhill. Soon his uncle who raised him dies and he gets money to become a doctor. Meanwhile he finds Mildred needs him again. She has TB. meanwhile he is still leading Sally down the Primrose path about marriage and he takes a job on a steamship. Finally the bimbo dies and Phillip declares he is free now and he will marry Sally. I wished she told him to stuff it. Now I know my take on the characters are not going to get me any points. But I feel Phillip was the bad guy. Yes Mildred is a Strumpet BUT he knows it, and he keeps coming back. Mean while he has two other girlfriends who love him but he treats as appetizers. I guess the sex wasn't as good. But in any case he dogs those women waiting for Mildred. Not only that but the man who gets Mildred pregnant is already married and when Philip asks him what he intends to do about Baby ( apparently the baby's name) he laughs is off, he has no intention in supporting her and Baby and he is wealthy. Sally's father who has 9 children say some pretty nasty things about women but he is said to be a old traditionalist. Philip doesn't seem to refute his feelings either. Men are using Mildred as a Boy Toy but the men in this movie come out as unscathed. Yes she was not a respectable woman but far from a villain. To me it is Philip who was had the real problem and it was his sexual obsession for Mildred. This movie is about sexual obsession. [[Midler]] Davis plays Mildred. This is a woman who men are drawn to. Not because she is a nice beautiful girl but because she is a sexual entity. Now the movie does not come out and say that but it is obvious. There is a scene in the movie in which men are all going googly eyes over her. She works as a waitress in a coffee shop, she can't read and she not really anybody to look at but she is a flirt. It is obvious the male customers in that coffee shop are there because of her. One day Phillip a club footed failed painter medical student comes in the shop to say a good word for his friend but he becomes besotted the moment he sees her. He starts buying her things even pays for her apartment. Meanwhile she is seeing other people and she makes no secrets of it. He dreams about her like she is a angel, but she is no angel. He is constantly thinking about her. His med school grades are even failing. So what the nookie is too good. He wants to marry her but she rejects him because she is marrying another guy. She always lets Phil know she really doesn't have love feelings for him all of time. He is heart broken but he meets another woman. They seem fine but it is obvious he is still dreaming of the Bimbo. Mildred does comes back with a baby and unwed. Phillip takes her in again, but she starts going out with a friend of his, the light bulb comes on a little and he kicks her out. She does what she knows works so she tries to seduce him, well it doesn't work and she proceeds to burn his tuition money up. Oh we have a club foot that he has problems about, even though a street teenager who has the same problem tells him to lighten up about it. He meets another girl named Sally we have a March of time montage which shows her aging while he strings her along still waiting for Mildred. Well he has no school tuition, can't find a job. Finally Sally and her dad takes him in. Not before another March of Time montage showing him going downhill. Soon his uncle who raised him dies and he gets money to become a doctor. Meanwhile he finds Mildred needs him again. She has TB. meanwhile he is still leading Sally down the Primrose path about marriage and he takes a job on a steamship. Finally the bimbo dies and Phillip declares he is free now and he will marry Sally. I wished she told him to stuff it. Now I know my take on the characters are not going to get me any points. But I feel Phillip was the bad guy. Yes Mildred is a Strumpet BUT he knows it, and he keeps coming back. Mean while he has two other girlfriends who love him but he treats as appetizers. I guess the sex wasn't as good. But in any case he dogs those women waiting for Mildred. Not only that but the man who gets Mildred pregnant is already married and when Philip asks him what he intends to do about Baby ( apparently the baby's name) he laughs is off, he has no intention in supporting her and Baby and he is wealthy. Sally's father who has 9 children say some pretty nasty things about women but he is said to be a old traditionalist. Philip doesn't seem to refute his feelings either. Men are using Mildred as a Boy Toy but the men in this movie come out as unscathed. Yes she was not a respectable woman but far from a villain. To me it is Philip who was had the real problem and it was his sexual obsession for Mildred. --------------------------------------------- Result 4090 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Really, I [[think]] this [[movie]] is more an example of an easy target than a truly bad film. In [[fact]], the movie is done very well in many respects and is very [[entertaining]].

Yes, the script is a little convoluted, but that's the genre. The film has a noirish atmosphere centered around a femme fatale. Just like all the old noir classics, this, too, has a screenplay that [[twists]] you [[around]] so that you don't always know how to make sense of it at first, and it can be a stretch if you [[think]] too deeply and [[try]] to put all of the [[pieces]] [[together]]. That's the [[genre]]. [[In]] general, the script has [[enough]] [[surprises]] and turns to [[keep]] the viewer guessing and, in turn, [[surprised]], without abandoning the viewer.

[[Sharon]] [[Stone]] is [[also]] an easy [[target]]. The truth is she looks [[great]] and she [[speaks]] her double-entendre laden dialog in such a [[way]] as to zhuzh it up into [[something]] [[mysterious]], sexy and fun.

The [[direction]] is more than passable, because let's face it--you have to keep an [[audience]] interested in the "did she or didn't she?" question for two hours. [[In]] addition to a [[twisty]] script and a fun performance by Stone, this is [[done]] [[effectively]] through the [[direction]] by the [[creation]] of a noirish atmosphere that is both [[dark]] and very stark and [[modern]] at the same [[time]], with [[straight]] industrial lines to [[go]] along with Stone's [[sexy]] [[curves]]. The [[frame]] is [[always]] beautiful--press pause [[anywhere]] and there is [[something]] interesting to the [[eye]].

The [[film]] also effectively [[builds]] on [[things]] that were gimmicks in the first [[film]] and [[turns]] them into [[something]] a little more [[real]], [[particularly]] the sex. "[[Katherine]] Tramell is bisexual...how [[shocking]]!" becomes [[treated]] more matter-of-factly here, and [[typically]], the [[sexuality]] of the [[film]] is [[used]] to better [[effect]]. It is [[still]] titillating, but not [[done]] so [[readily]] for shock value and [[buzz]] as [[done]] in the first. I won't say that it isn't [[still]] [[somewhat]] of a [[gimmick]] because, let's face it, this [[film]] is supposed to be fun.

And a [[fun]] [[film]] it is. It may be an easy target, but if you watch it for what it is: a noirish, femme-fatale driven, twisty, sexy, did-she-or-didn't-she who-dunnit, you're [[bound]] to enjoy it (no pun intended). Really, I [[thought]] this [[filmmaking]] is more an example of an easy target than a truly bad film. In [[facto]], the movie is done very well in many respects and is very [[droll]].

Yes, the script is a little convoluted, but that's the genre. The film has a noirish atmosphere centered around a femme fatale. Just like all the old noir classics, this, too, has a screenplay that [[kinks]] you [[about]] so that you don't always know how to make sense of it at first, and it can be a stretch if you [[believing]] too deeply and [[tries]] to put all of the [[slices]] [[jointly]]. That's the [[gender]]. [[For]] general, the script has [[adequate]] [[astonishment]] and turns to [[sustain]] the viewer guessing and, in turn, [[horrified]], without abandoning the viewer.

[[Charon]] [[Pebble]] is [[furthermore]] an easy [[purpose]]. The truth is she looks [[excellent]] and she [[discussing]] her double-entendre laden dialog in such a [[manner]] as to zhuzh it up into [[anything]] [[opaque]], sexy and fun.

The [[directorate]] is more than passable, because let's face it--you have to keep an [[spectators]] interested in the "did she or didn't she?" question for two hours. [[For]] addition to a [[tortuous]] script and a fun performance by Stone, this is [[accomplished]] [[effectiveness]] through the [[directorate]] by the [[institution]] of a noirish atmosphere that is both [[gloomy]] and very stark and [[trendy]] at the same [[moment]], with [[successive]] industrial lines to [[going]] along with Stone's [[scorching]] [[curved]]. The [[fabric]] is [[incessantly]] beautiful--press pause [[somewhere]] and there is [[anything]] interesting to the [[eyes]].

The [[cinematographic]] also effectively [[built]] on [[items]] that were gimmicks in the first [[flick]] and [[revolves]] them into [[anything]] a little more [[actual]], [[namely]] the sex. "[[Kathrin]] Tramell is bisexual...how [[fearsome]]!" becomes [[processed]] more matter-of-factly here, and [[normally]], the [[sex]] of the [[flick]] is [[utilized]] to better [[repercussions]]. It is [[however]] titillating, but not [[doing]] so [[conveniently]] for shock value and [[humming]] as [[accomplished]] in the first. I won't say that it isn't [[however]] [[rather]] of a [[ruse]] because, let's face it, this [[cinema]] is supposed to be fun.

And a [[droll]] [[cinematography]] it is. It may be an easy target, but if you watch it for what it is: a noirish, femme-fatale driven, twisty, sexy, did-she-or-didn't-she who-dunnit, you're [[bind]] to enjoy it (no pun intended). --------------------------------------------- Result 4091 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I went in expecting the movie to be completely dumb. With such a low expectation, any form of [[entertainment]] [[would]] be a pleasant surprise. The soundtrack was the best part of the movie, but poking fun at the nonsense that goes on in singles wards was also amusing.

This said, there were [[many]] things about The Singles Ward that were completely annoying. The entire film was poorly [[dubbed]] and made watching mouths while listening to their voices very irritating. This [[lack]] of professionalism was [[surpassed]] only by the cameos of Mormon celebrities who have no [[business]] acting.

This film will do well among Mormondom, especially in college communities where singles ward exist. However the conclusion will offer no hope for the poor losers who find themselves unmarried. (Only the pretty girls in the Singles Ward get married, the fat, ugly ones don't, but all the ugly men do) Ultimately we realize that the whole film was an advertisement for LDSSingles.com I went in expecting the movie to be completely dumb. With such a low expectation, any form of [[amusement]] [[could]] be a pleasant surprise. The soundtrack was the best part of the movie, but poking fun at the nonsense that goes on in singles wards was also amusing.

This said, there were [[countless]] things about The Singles Ward that were completely annoying. The entire film was poorly [[nicknamed]] and made watching mouths while listening to their voices very irritating. This [[absence]] of professionalism was [[overcoming]] only by the cameos of Mormon celebrities who have no [[corporations]] acting.

This film will do well among Mormondom, especially in college communities where singles ward exist. However the conclusion will offer no hope for the poor losers who find themselves unmarried. (Only the pretty girls in the Singles Ward get married, the fat, ugly ones don't, but all the ugly men do) Ultimately we realize that the whole film was an advertisement for LDSSingles.com --------------------------------------------- Result 4092 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] A few years ago, a friend got from one of his other friends a video with the Michael Mann film 'Heat' on it. After we finished that movie, and were about to stand up, we saw that there is another film just after, tough on the cassette's envelope the owner didn't write it up. [[Yet]] we were all [[glued]] back to our seats by its distinct opening, which lacked credits.

Some two hours [[later]], I just sat there wondering: how could I not have heard of this [[masterpiece]] before?...

This film was Europa. Lars von Trier woke film noir from the dead, deconstructed reality with intentionally obvious sets, yet often there was haunting similarity with post-war German photographs I saw. And then the tricky cuts!

The story itself is a hard-to-take moral odyssey that has no happy end. A young American pacifist of German descent comes to post-war Germany, intent on doing some good to pay for the bombs his countrymen dropped. But he mostly meets distrust and self-destructive defiance. He hires with Zentropa, a dining-and-sleeping-car company (modeled on Mitropa), whose owner is one of the Nazi collaborators the Occupiers whitewash. Our hero falls in love with his daughter - who later turns out to be a member of the Werewolf, Nazi post-war terrorists. When he doesn't understand the world (or just Europeans) anymore, in his rage he blows up a railroad bridge under a train which he just saved.

As a final note, for historical correctness: in the real world, the Werewolf were nowhere as important as the film implies, they were mostly a final Nazi propaganda coup. After an SS unit assassinated the major of Allied-occupied Aachen, two months before the capitulation, the Nazis announced the creation of whole legions of saboteurs and terrorists who will be ready to fight behind the lines, the Werewolf. But only a few hundred of mostly Hitler Youth received some training, and while two or three times some were deployed to murder suspected communists or forced-labourer foreigners in Bavarian villages to imprint lasting fear on inhabitants, with Hitler's death and the war's end it all fell apart.

However, the Werewolf propaganda had a profound effect on the occupiers. They feared the Werewolf everywhere, suspected it behind any serious accident - but without exception another cause was found later (ignored by some recent pseudo-historians). For example, when a gas main exploded in the police HQ of bombed-out Bremen, or when the Soviet military commander died in a motorbike accident in Berlin. The effect was strongest on the Soviets, who arrested tens of thousands (in large part children!) 'preemptively' on suspicion of being Werewolf, and closed them off in prison camps where a lot of them died. A few years ago, a friend got from one of his other friends a video with the Michael Mann film 'Heat' on it. After we finished that movie, and were about to stand up, we saw that there is another film just after, tough on the cassette's envelope the owner didn't write it up. [[Even]] we were all [[pasted]] back to our seats by its distinct opening, which lacked credits.

Some two hours [[thereafter]], I just sat there wondering: how could I not have heard of this [[centerpiece]] before?...

This film was Europa. Lars von Trier woke film noir from the dead, deconstructed reality with intentionally obvious sets, yet often there was haunting similarity with post-war German photographs I saw. And then the tricky cuts!

The story itself is a hard-to-take moral odyssey that has no happy end. A young American pacifist of German descent comes to post-war Germany, intent on doing some good to pay for the bombs his countrymen dropped. But he mostly meets distrust and self-destructive defiance. He hires with Zentropa, a dining-and-sleeping-car company (modeled on Mitropa), whose owner is one of the Nazi collaborators the Occupiers whitewash. Our hero falls in love with his daughter - who later turns out to be a member of the Werewolf, Nazi post-war terrorists. When he doesn't understand the world (or just Europeans) anymore, in his rage he blows up a railroad bridge under a train which he just saved.

As a final note, for historical correctness: in the real world, the Werewolf were nowhere as important as the film implies, they were mostly a final Nazi propaganda coup. After an SS unit assassinated the major of Allied-occupied Aachen, two months before the capitulation, the Nazis announced the creation of whole legions of saboteurs and terrorists who will be ready to fight behind the lines, the Werewolf. But only a few hundred of mostly Hitler Youth received some training, and while two or three times some were deployed to murder suspected communists or forced-labourer foreigners in Bavarian villages to imprint lasting fear on inhabitants, with Hitler's death and the war's end it all fell apart.

However, the Werewolf propaganda had a profound effect on the occupiers. They feared the Werewolf everywhere, suspected it behind any serious accident - but without exception another cause was found later (ignored by some recent pseudo-historians). For example, when a gas main exploded in the police HQ of bombed-out Bremen, or when the Soviet military commander died in a motorbike accident in Berlin. The effect was strongest on the Soviets, who arrested tens of thousands (in large part children!) 'preemptively' on suspicion of being Werewolf, and closed them off in prison camps where a lot of them died. --------------------------------------------- Result 4093 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Kalifornia came out in 1993, just as 3 of the 4 lead characters were up and [[coming]] to the [[levels]] of fame they now possess in 2006. This is a [[nice]] psycho-thriller that should [[appeal]] to all David Duchovny fans because of his dry and intelligent narratives that [[find]] their [[ways]] into his work, like with most of his [[episodes]] of the X-Files, [[Playing]] [[God]], and [[Red]] Shoe [[Diaries]].

People who were put off by the heavy southern accent from Brad [[Pitt]] and Juliette Lewis' characters obviously have never spent much [[time]] in the south. [[For]] every "[[Brian]] and Carrie" in the [[south]], there is an "Adele and [[Early]]" and in 2006, that's the [[real]] horror of this flick.

Aside from that, I [[think]] the film was written with a [[cult]] film [[intention]] - like with Carrie's photography, it's not [[suitable]] for [[mass]] [[consumption]]. But if you have a [[copy]] of this in your personal library, I [[think]] it says something [[positive]] about your tastes for freaky movies. Kalifornia came out in 1993, just as 3 of the 4 lead characters were up and [[upcoming]] to the [[grades]] of fame they now possess in 2006. This is a [[pleasurable]] psycho-thriller that should [[appealed]] to all David Duchovny fans because of his dry and intelligent narratives that [[found]] their [[methods]] into his work, like with most of his [[bouts]] of the X-Files, [[Playback]] [[Gods]], and [[Rouge]] Shoe [[Newspapers]].

People who were put off by the heavy southern accent from Brad [[Beit]] and Juliette Lewis' characters obviously have never spent much [[period]] in the south. [[During]] every "[[Bryan]] and Carrie" in the [[southerly]], there is an "Adele and [[Prematurely]]" and in 2006, that's the [[veritable]] horror of this flick.

Aside from that, I [[believing]] the film was written with a [[religions]] film [[goals]] - like with Carrie's photography, it's not [[proper]] for [[mace]] [[consumerism]]. But if you have a [[photocopies]] of this in your personal library, I [[believing]] it says something [[propitious]] about your tastes for freaky movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4094 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This is one of those movies that's [[difficult]] to [[review]] without giving away the [[plot]]. [[Suffice]] to say there are weird things and unexpected [[twists]] going on, [[beyond]] the [[initial]] superficial "[[Tom]] Cruise [[screws]] around with multiple [[women]]" plot.

The quality cast elevate this [[movie]] above the norm, and all the cast are well [[suited]] to their parts: [[Cruise]] as the irritatingly smug playboy who has it all - and then [[loses]] it all, [[Diaz]] as the attractive but [[slightly]] [[deranged]] jilted lover, [[Cruz]] as the [[exotic]] [[new]] [[girl]] on the scene and [[Russell]] as the [[fatherly]] [[psychologist]]. The [[story]] [[involves]] [[elements]] of romance, [[morality]], murder-mystery, [[suspense]] and sci-fi and is [[generally]] an [[entertaining]] [[trip]].

I should [[add]] that the photography is [[also]] uniformly [[excellent]] and the insertion of [[various]] [[visual]] metaphors is [[beautiful]] once you [[realize]] what's [[going]] on.

If you [[enjoy]] well-acted [[movies]] with [[twists]] and [[suspense]], and are [[prepared]] to [[accept]] a [[slightly]] [[fantastic]] [[Philip]] K [[Dick]] [[style]] resolution, then this is a must-see.

9/10 This is one of those movies that's [[laborious]] to [[revisiting]] without giving away the [[intrigue]]. [[Adequate]] to say there are weird things and unexpected [[spins]] going on, [[afterlife]] the [[introductory]] superficial "[[Thom]] Cruise [[screw]] around with multiple [[wife]]" plot.

The quality cast elevate this [[filmmaking]] above the norm, and all the cast are well [[tailored]] to their parts: [[Cruises]] as the irritatingly smug playboy who has it all - and then [[losing]] it all, [[Gonzalez]] as the attractive but [[marginally]] [[unhinged]] jilted lover, [[Croix]] as the [[alien]] [[newest]] [[chick]] on the scene and [[Russel]] as the [[parental]] [[therapist]]. The [[history]] [[entails]] [[ingredient]] of romance, [[morales]], murder-mystery, [[wait]] and sci-fi and is [[normally]] an [[amusing]] [[travelling]].

I should [[inserting]] that the photography is [[apart]] uniformly [[handsome]] and the insertion of [[different]] [[optic]] metaphors is [[belle]] once you [[attain]] what's [[go]] on.

If you [[enjoys]] well-acted [[movie]] with [[spins]] and [[wait]], and are [[prepped]] to [[countenance]] a [[mildly]] [[unbelievable]] [[Philips]] K [[Penis]] [[elegance]] resolution, then this is a must-see.

9/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4095 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I felt obliged to watch this [[movie]] all the way through, [[since]] I had found it in a [[bargain]] [[bin]] and bought it for my own, but I came close many times to [[turning]] it off and just [[writing]] off the [[money]] I had paid for it. If you are a fan of [[gore]] and sadism, this movie is OK. If there is one thing that the [[makers]] of this film know, it is the [[creative]] use of fake blood and body parts for a sickening [[effect]]. If that doesn't thrill you, then [[stay]] away.

This movie is [[shot]] on a home video [[camera]], with [[grade]] school [[props]] and [[terrible]] [[actors]]. It's dubbed from German, but even allowing for that, the sound is awful. This film is about as budget as budget gets, except for the [[aforementioned]] [[special]] [[effects]]. If they had spent a little more money on actors and a real [[script]] instead of blood and guts, the film might have been a little more enjoyable.

The story is about three men that land on an island inhabited by an army of tin-masked sadists. They are captured, and the rest of the movie is about their attempt to escape. I call this a story in the loosest sense, since it is really a series of scenes of torture and combat strung together by inane obscenity-filled dialog.

There is nothing whatsoever redeeming about this movie, unless you like mindless gore. Consider yourself warned. I felt obliged to watch this [[cinematography]] all the way through, [[because]] I had found it in a [[haggle]] [[benn]] and bought it for my own, but I came close many times to [[inflection]] it off and just [[literary]] off the [[moneys]] I had paid for it. If you are a fan of [[gora]] and sadism, this movie is OK. If there is one thing that the [[builders]] of this film know, it is the [[imaginative]] use of fake blood and body parts for a sickening [[consequence]]. If that doesn't thrill you, then [[staying]] away.

This movie is [[offed]] on a home video [[cameras]], with [[grades]] school [[propellers]] and [[frightful]] [[protagonists]]. It's dubbed from German, but even allowing for that, the sound is awful. This film is about as budget as budget gets, except for the [[above]] [[peculiar]] [[influences]]. If they had spent a little more money on actors and a real [[screenplay]] instead of blood and guts, the film might have been a little more enjoyable.

The story is about three men that land on an island inhabited by an army of tin-masked sadists. They are captured, and the rest of the movie is about their attempt to escape. I call this a story in the loosest sense, since it is really a series of scenes of torture and combat strung together by inane obscenity-filled dialog.

There is nothing whatsoever redeeming about this movie, unless you like mindless gore. Consider yourself warned. --------------------------------------------- Result 4096 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]]

I saw The Glacier Fox in the theatre when I was nine years [[old]] - I bugged my [[parents]] to take me back three [[times]]. I began [[looking]] for it on [[video]] about five years [[ago]], [[finally]] uncovering a copy on an online auction [[site]], but I would [[love]] to see it either [[picked]] up by a new [[distributor]] and rereleased (I [[understand]] the [[original]] [[video]] [[run]] was [[small]]), or have the [[rights]] [[purchased]] by The Family [[Channel]], [[Disney]], etc. and [[shown]] regularly. It is a fascinating [[film]] that [[draws]] you into the [[story]] of the [[life]] [[struggle]] of a [[family]] of foxes in [[northern]] Japan, narrated by a wise old [[tree]]. The [[excellent]] soundtrack [[compliments]] the [[film]] well. It [[would]] be a [[good]] [[seller]] [[today]], [[better]] than [[many]] of the weak offerings to children's movies today.

I saw The Glacier Fox in the theatre when I was nine years [[ancient]] - I bugged my [[relatives]] to take me back three [[time]]. I began [[searching]] for it on [[videos]] about five years [[formerly]], [[eventually]] uncovering a copy on an online auction [[locations]], but I would [[adored]] to see it either [[opting]] up by a new [[dealers]] and rereleased (I [[realise]] the [[preliminary]] [[videotaping]] [[executes]] was [[little]]), or have the [[right]] [[acquiring]] by The Family [[Canal]], [[Disneyland]], etc. and [[illustrated]] regularly. It is a fascinating [[movie]] that [[attracts]] you into the [[history]] of the [[lifetime]] [[combat]] of a [[familia]] of foxes in [[north]] Japan, narrated by a wise old [[trees]]. The [[sumptuous]] soundtrack [[praising]] the [[cinematography]] well. It [[could]] be a [[buena]] [[traders]] [[hoy]], [[best]] than [[innumerable]] of the weak offerings to children's movies today. --------------------------------------------- Result 4097 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (81%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Hammerhead is a combination between the mad scientist and killer shark movie genres. In a bit of type-casting, Jeffrey Combs plays the aforementioned mad scientist who develops a human/hammerhead shark creature. [[Bizarrely]], this being is in fact his son, who he has turned into this monster to prevent him dying from [[cancer]]. Or something.

A group of associates are invited to the scientist's private island. They end up being used as shark bait or shark mate. For some unknown [[reason]] the head of IT has been brought along as [[part]] of this team. Who knows why? Luckily, he turns out to be a [[resourceful]], if somewhat [[overweight]], Ramboesque hero. I'm working on the assumption that he learnt how to handle an assault rifle as part of his day job working in 1st line support. A normal day for this IT man presumably involves fixing someone's network connection followed by a call to gun down gun-toting evil-doers. Or perhaps a call to fix someone's PC has to be scheduled between physical confrontations with land-based human-shark hybrids? Anyway, he's amazing and saves the day. He even get's the girl.

The shark-man is a slightly lame creation but OK, I guess, judging by the effects in general in this film. And the movie moves on at a decent pace. It's complete hokum of course but if you buy a movie called Hammerhead and expect it to be a complex drama about the emotional conflicts experienced by a man turned into a land-based killer fish, then really you have no one to blame but yourself. As it is, there are guns, gore, girls and possibly even an exploding helicopter. It's rubbish but not as bad as some might say. Hammerhead is a combination between the mad scientist and killer shark movie genres. In a bit of type-casting, Jeffrey Combs plays the aforementioned mad scientist who develops a human/hammerhead shark creature. [[Surprisingly]], this being is in fact his son, who he has turned into this monster to prevent him dying from [[tumour]]. Or something.

A group of associates are invited to the scientist's private island. They end up being used as shark bait or shark mate. For some unknown [[cause]] the head of IT has been brought along as [[parties]] of this team. Who knows why? Luckily, he turns out to be a [[imaginative]], if somewhat [[obesity]], Ramboesque hero. I'm working on the assumption that he learnt how to handle an assault rifle as part of his day job working in 1st line support. A normal day for this IT man presumably involves fixing someone's network connection followed by a call to gun down gun-toting evil-doers. Or perhaps a call to fix someone's PC has to be scheduled between physical confrontations with land-based human-shark hybrids? Anyway, he's amazing and saves the day. He even get's the girl.

The shark-man is a slightly lame creation but OK, I guess, judging by the effects in general in this film. And the movie moves on at a decent pace. It's complete hokum of course but if you buy a movie called Hammerhead and expect it to be a complex drama about the emotional conflicts experienced by a man turned into a land-based killer fish, then really you have no one to blame but yourself. As it is, there are guns, gore, girls and possibly even an exploding helicopter. It's rubbish but not as bad as some might say. --------------------------------------------- Result 4098 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] [[Thank]] god ABC [[picked]] this up instead of [[Fox]]. The [[best]] description (for those in the know) is really Wonderfalls meets Dead Like Me in the [[best]] [[way]] possible.

I'm not sure whether an experience with [[death]] and destiny early in life makes me a fan of [[Brian]] [[Fuller]] but I [[certainly]] [[enjoy]] his productions. I also enjoy checkered floors, pies, [[talking]] toys, gravelings and other [[mischievous]] items :) [[While]] a bit "Burtonesque", I [[certainly]] [[think]] this enjoys its own niche that doesn't [[require]] J [[Depp]] or HB Carter to be a [[wonderfully]] [[imaginative]] playground. Here we can find the joys and sorrows of [[childhood]] and adulthood crashing into each and actually [[making]] sense and making us want to live life to the [[fullest]]! [[Thanked]] god ABC [[taking]] this up instead of [[Renard]]. The [[better]] description (for those in the know) is really Wonderfalls meets Dead Like Me in the [[better]] [[manner]] possible.

I'm not sure whether an experience with [[decease]] and destiny early in life makes me a fan of [[Bryan]] [[Fowler]] but I [[probably]] [[enjoys]] his productions. I also enjoy checkered floors, pies, [[discussing]] toys, gravelings and other [[malicious]] items :) [[Whereas]] a bit "Burtonesque", I [[probably]] [[ideas]] this enjoys its own niche that doesn't [[need]] J [[Dib]] or HB Carter to be a [[admirably]] [[innovative]] playground. Here we can find the joys and sorrows of [[infant]] and adulthood crashing into each and actually [[doing]] sense and making us want to live life to the [[full]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4099 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I'm probably one of the biggest Nancy Drew fans out there. I've read every book three times over and I've played a lot of the Nancy drew games. I Loved this movie. It kept you entertained the whole time you watched it. I went with about 10 of my friends and everyone LOVED it. There were three woman sitting behind us who appeared to be in their late 30's to early 40's and I asked them how they liked it, they said they loved it! So you see it will be an entertainment to all ages. You just have to give it a chance. And it teaches a lesson too, just be yourself even if everyone around you is exactly alike. So overall, this move was great. I'm going to see it a second time now! So stop bashing it please. Its a really good movie! --------------------------------------------- Result 4100 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I thought Rachel York was [[fantastic]] as "Lucy." I have seen her in "Kiss Me, Kate" and "Victor/Victoria," as well, and in each of these performances she has developed very different, and very [[real]], characterizations. She is a chameleon who can play (and sing) anything!

I am very surprised at how [[many]] [[negative]] [[reviews]] appear here regarding Rachel's performance in "Lucy." Even some bonafide TV and entertainment critics seem to have missed the point of her portrayal. So many people have focused on the fact that Rachel doesn't really look like Lucy. My response to that is, "So what?" I wasn't looking for a superficial impersonation of Lucy. I wanted to know more about the real woman behind the clown. And Rachel certainly gave us that, in great depth. I also didn't want to see someone simply "doing" classic Lucy routines. Therefore I was very pleased with the decision by the producers and director to have Rachel portray Lucy in rehearsal for the most memorable of these skits - Vitameatavegamin and The Candy Factory. (It seems that some of the reviewers didn't realize that these two scenes were meant to be rehearsal sequences and not the actual skits). This approach, I thought, gave an innovative twist to sketches that so many of us know by heart. I also thought Rachel was terrifically fresh and funny in these scenes. And she absolutely nailed the routines that were recreated - the Professor and the Grape Stomping, in particular. There was one moment in the Grape scene where the corner of Rachel's mouth had the exact little upturn that I remember Lucy having. I couldn't believe she was able to capture that - and so naturally.

I wonder if many of the folks who criticized the performance were expecting to see the Lucille Ball of "I Love Lucy" throughout the entire movie. After all, those of us who came to know her only through TV would not have any idea what Lucy was really like in her early movie years. I think Rachel showed a natural progression in the character that was brilliant. She planted all the right seeds for us to see the clown just waiting to emerge, given the right set of circumstances. Lucy didn't fit the mold of the old studio system. In her frustrated attempts to become the stereotypical movie star of that era, she kept repressing what would prove to be her ultimate gifts.

I believe that Rachel deftly captured the comedy, drama, wit, sadness, anger, passion, love, ambition, loyalty, sexiness, self absorption, childishness, and stoicism all rolled into one complex American icon. And she did it with an authenticity and freshness that was totally endearing. "Lucy" was a star turn for Rachel York. I hope it brings a flood of great roles her way in the future. I also hope it brings her an Emmy. I thought Rachel York was [[great]] as "Lucy." I have seen her in "Kiss Me, Kate" and "Victor/Victoria," as well, and in each of these performances she has developed very different, and very [[veritable]], characterizations. She is a chameleon who can play (and sing) anything!

I am very surprised at how [[multiple]] [[detrimental]] [[inspect]] appear here regarding Rachel's performance in "Lucy." Even some bonafide TV and entertainment critics seem to have missed the point of her portrayal. So many people have focused on the fact that Rachel doesn't really look like Lucy. My response to that is, "So what?" I wasn't looking for a superficial impersonation of Lucy. I wanted to know more about the real woman behind the clown. And Rachel certainly gave us that, in great depth. I also didn't want to see someone simply "doing" classic Lucy routines. Therefore I was very pleased with the decision by the producers and director to have Rachel portray Lucy in rehearsal for the most memorable of these skits - Vitameatavegamin and The Candy Factory. (It seems that some of the reviewers didn't realize that these two scenes were meant to be rehearsal sequences and not the actual skits). This approach, I thought, gave an innovative twist to sketches that so many of us know by heart. I also thought Rachel was terrifically fresh and funny in these scenes. And she absolutely nailed the routines that were recreated - the Professor and the Grape Stomping, in particular. There was one moment in the Grape scene where the corner of Rachel's mouth had the exact little upturn that I remember Lucy having. I couldn't believe she was able to capture that - and so naturally.

I wonder if many of the folks who criticized the performance were expecting to see the Lucille Ball of "I Love Lucy" throughout the entire movie. After all, those of us who came to know her only through TV would not have any idea what Lucy was really like in her early movie years. I think Rachel showed a natural progression in the character that was brilliant. She planted all the right seeds for us to see the clown just waiting to emerge, given the right set of circumstances. Lucy didn't fit the mold of the old studio system. In her frustrated attempts to become the stereotypical movie star of that era, she kept repressing what would prove to be her ultimate gifts.

I believe that Rachel deftly captured the comedy, drama, wit, sadness, anger, passion, love, ambition, loyalty, sexiness, self absorption, childishness, and stoicism all rolled into one complex American icon. And she did it with an authenticity and freshness that was totally endearing. "Lucy" was a star turn for Rachel York. I hope it brings a flood of great roles her way in the future. I also hope it brings her an Emmy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4101 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (84%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is not really a zombie [[film]], if we're defining zombies as the [[dead]] walking around. Here the protagonist, Armand Louque ([[played]] by an [[unbelievably]] young Dean Jagger), gains control of a method to create zombies, though in fact, his 'method' is to mentally project his thoughts and control other living people's minds turning them into [[hypnotized]] slaves. This is an interesting concept for a movie, and was done much more effectively by Fritz Lang in his series of 'Dr. Mabuse' films, including 'Dr. Mabuse the Gambler' (1922) and 'The Testament of Dr. Mabuse' (1933). Here it is unfortunately subordinated to his quest to regain the love of his former fiancée, Claire Duvall (played by the Anne Heche look alike with a bad hairdo, Dorothy Stone) which is really the major theme.

The movie has an intriguing beginning, as Louque is sent on a military archaeological expedition to Cambodia to end the cult of zombies that came from there. At some type of compound (where we get great 30s sets and clothes) he announces his engagement to Claire, and then barely five minutes later, she gives him back his ring declaring her love for his pal, Clifford Greyson (Robert Noland). It's [[unintentionally]] funny the way they talk to each other without making eye contact. This would have been a great movie for 'Mystery Science Theater 3000', if they hadn't already roasted it.

It's never shown how Louque actually learns the 'zombification' secret, but he then uses it to kill his enemies, create a giant army of rifle carrying soldiers and body guards. We won't see such sheer force of will until John Agar in 'The Brain From Planet Arous' (1957).

Finally Claire consents to marry him if he will let Greyson live and return to America. Louque agrees, but actually turns him into one of his hypnotized slaves. On their wedding night he realizes that Claire will only begin to love him if he gives up his 'powers.' To gain her love, he does so, causing the 'revolt' of the title, in which all his slaves awaken and attack his compound and kill him. Greyson embraces Claire, and we seem to be at the end of a parable: "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

So really then, it's not that bad of a film, despite the low IMDb rating it currently has. On repeated viewings (?) one can see the artistry in the well formed script! Dean Jagger had yet to develop into a good actor, and is almost unrecognizable in his youngness -- is that really his own hair? We remember him more for his bald, old man roles in 'White Christmas' (1954), 'X The Unknown' (1956) and 'King Creole' (1958). The story borrows a lot of its basic themes from the Halperin brothers better, earlier film 'White Zombie' (1932) in which hapless Robert Frazier (as Charles Beaumont) uses 'zombification' to win the love of Madge Bellamy (as Madeline Parker).

If you want real zombie movies (of which there are hundreds!) I'd start with 'White Zombie' (1932), 'King of the Zombies' (1941), 'I Walked with a Zombie' (1943), 'Night of the Living Dead' (1968), 'The Last Man on Earth' (1964) and its two remakes. In the modern era of classy films, there are 'Horror Express' (1972), 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' (1988), '28 Days Later' (2002) and its sequel, as well as many, many, others too numerous to mention.

This one is not really a zombie film. Judging this movie on its own terms, it's more of a semi-Gothic romance. As such it ranks a little below some of Universal's bottom billed B horror movies of the late 30s and early 40s. So I'll give it a 5. This is not really a zombie [[cinematography]], if we're defining zombies as the [[died]] walking around. Here the protagonist, Armand Louque ([[effected]] by an [[freakishly]] young Dean Jagger), gains control of a method to create zombies, though in fact, his 'method' is to mentally project his thoughts and control other living people's minds turning them into [[hypnotised]] slaves. This is an interesting concept for a movie, and was done much more effectively by Fritz Lang in his series of 'Dr. Mabuse' films, including 'Dr. Mabuse the Gambler' (1922) and 'The Testament of Dr. Mabuse' (1933). Here it is unfortunately subordinated to his quest to regain the love of his former fiancée, Claire Duvall (played by the Anne Heche look alike with a bad hairdo, Dorothy Stone) which is really the major theme.

The movie has an intriguing beginning, as Louque is sent on a military archaeological expedition to Cambodia to end the cult of zombies that came from there. At some type of compound (where we get great 30s sets and clothes) he announces his engagement to Claire, and then barely five minutes later, she gives him back his ring declaring her love for his pal, Clifford Greyson (Robert Noland). It's [[unknowingly]] funny the way they talk to each other without making eye contact. This would have been a great movie for 'Mystery Science Theater 3000', if they hadn't already roasted it.

It's never shown how Louque actually learns the 'zombification' secret, but he then uses it to kill his enemies, create a giant army of rifle carrying soldiers and body guards. We won't see such sheer force of will until John Agar in 'The Brain From Planet Arous' (1957).

Finally Claire consents to marry him if he will let Greyson live and return to America. Louque agrees, but actually turns him into one of his hypnotized slaves. On their wedding night he realizes that Claire will only begin to love him if he gives up his 'powers.' To gain her love, he does so, causing the 'revolt' of the title, in which all his slaves awaken and attack his compound and kill him. Greyson embraces Claire, and we seem to be at the end of a parable: "Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad."

So really then, it's not that bad of a film, despite the low IMDb rating it currently has. On repeated viewings (?) one can see the artistry in the well formed script! Dean Jagger had yet to develop into a good actor, and is almost unrecognizable in his youngness -- is that really his own hair? We remember him more for his bald, old man roles in 'White Christmas' (1954), 'X The Unknown' (1956) and 'King Creole' (1958). The story borrows a lot of its basic themes from the Halperin brothers better, earlier film 'White Zombie' (1932) in which hapless Robert Frazier (as Charles Beaumont) uses 'zombification' to win the love of Madge Bellamy (as Madeline Parker).

If you want real zombie movies (of which there are hundreds!) I'd start with 'White Zombie' (1932), 'King of the Zombies' (1941), 'I Walked with a Zombie' (1943), 'Night of the Living Dead' (1968), 'The Last Man on Earth' (1964) and its two remakes. In the modern era of classy films, there are 'Horror Express' (1972), 'The Serpent and the Rainbow' (1988), '28 Days Later' (2002) and its sequel, as well as many, many, others too numerous to mention.

This one is not really a zombie film. Judging this movie on its own terms, it's more of a semi-Gothic romance. As such it ranks a little below some of Universal's bottom billed B horror movies of the late 30s and early 40s. So I'll give it a 5. --------------------------------------------- Result 4102 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Students [[often]] ask me why I choose this version of Othello. Shakespeare's text is strongly truncated and the film contains material which earned it an "R" rating.

I have several reasons for using this production: First, I had not seen a depiction of the Moor that actually made me sympathetic to Othello until I saw Fishburne play him. I saw James Earl Jones and Christopher Plummer play Othello and Iago on Broadway, and it was [[wonderful]]. Plummer's energy was especially noticeable. But in spite of Jone's incredible presence both physically and vocally, the character he played just seemed too passive to illicit from me a complete emotional purgation in the Aristotelian sense. Jones, in fact, affirmed what I felt when in an interview he noted that he had played Othello as passive--seeing Iago as basically doing him over. Unfortunately this sapped my grief for the character destruction. Thus, I felt sympathy for Jone's Moor but not the horror over his corruption by an evil man. In contrast, Fishburne's Othello is a strong and vigorous figure familiar with taking action. Thus, Iago's temptation to actively deal with what is presented to Othello as his wife's unfaithfulness is a perversion of the general's positive quality to be active not passive.1 The horror of the story is that this good quality in Othello becomes perverted. Fishburne's depiction is therefore classically tragic.

Second, Fishburne is the first black actor to play Othello in a film. Both Orsen Wells and Anthony Hopkins did fine film versions, but they were white men in black face.2 Why is this important? Why should a Black actor be the Black man on the stage?3 Certainly in Shakespeare's day they used black face just as they used boys to make girls. Perhaps then, the reason is the same. Female actors bring a special quality to female roles on the Shakespearian stage because they understand best what Shakespeare's genius was trying to present. A gifted black actor should play the moor because his experience in a white dominated culture is vital to understanding what Shakespeare's genius recognized: the pain of being marginalized because of race. An important theme in Othello is isolation caused by racism. Although it is a mistake to insert American racism into a Shakespearian play, there can be little doubt that racism is still working among the characters. Many, including Desdimona's father, think that a union between a Venetian white Christian woman and a North African black Christian man is UNNATURAL.

Third, Shakespeare was never G rated. He never has been. His stage productions were always typified by violence and strong language. But Shakespeare's genius uses these elements not as sensationialism but for artistic honesty. Students [[ordinarily]] ask me why I choose this version of Othello. Shakespeare's text is strongly truncated and the film contains material which earned it an "R" rating.

I have several reasons for using this production: First, I had not seen a depiction of the Moor that actually made me sympathetic to Othello until I saw Fishburne play him. I saw James Earl Jones and Christopher Plummer play Othello and Iago on Broadway, and it was [[sumptuous]]. Plummer's energy was especially noticeable. But in spite of Jone's incredible presence both physically and vocally, the character he played just seemed too passive to illicit from me a complete emotional purgation in the Aristotelian sense. Jones, in fact, affirmed what I felt when in an interview he noted that he had played Othello as passive--seeing Iago as basically doing him over. Unfortunately this sapped my grief for the character destruction. Thus, I felt sympathy for Jone's Moor but not the horror over his corruption by an evil man. In contrast, Fishburne's Othello is a strong and vigorous figure familiar with taking action. Thus, Iago's temptation to actively deal with what is presented to Othello as his wife's unfaithfulness is a perversion of the general's positive quality to be active not passive.1 The horror of the story is that this good quality in Othello becomes perverted. Fishburne's depiction is therefore classically tragic.

Second, Fishburne is the first black actor to play Othello in a film. Both Orsen Wells and Anthony Hopkins did fine film versions, but they were white men in black face.2 Why is this important? Why should a Black actor be the Black man on the stage?3 Certainly in Shakespeare's day they used black face just as they used boys to make girls. Perhaps then, the reason is the same. Female actors bring a special quality to female roles on the Shakespearian stage because they understand best what Shakespeare's genius was trying to present. A gifted black actor should play the moor because his experience in a white dominated culture is vital to understanding what Shakespeare's genius recognized: the pain of being marginalized because of race. An important theme in Othello is isolation caused by racism. Although it is a mistake to insert American racism into a Shakespearian play, there can be little doubt that racism is still working among the characters. Many, including Desdimona's father, think that a union between a Venetian white Christian woman and a North African black Christian man is UNNATURAL.

Third, Shakespeare was never G rated. He never has been. His stage productions were always typified by violence and strong language. But Shakespeare's genius uses these elements not as sensationialism but for artistic honesty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4103 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] I watch them all.

It's not better than the [[amazing]] ones (_[[Strictly]] Ballroom_, _Shall we [[dance]]?_ (Japanese [[version]]), but it's [[completely]] respectable and pleasingly different in parts.

I am an English [[teacher]] and I [[find]] some of the ignorance about language in some of these [[reviews]] rather [[upsetting]]. [[For]] [[example]]: the "name should scream don't watch. '[[How]] she move.' Since when can movie titles ignore grammar?"

There is [[nothing]] inherently [[incorrect]] about Caribbean English grammar. It's just not Canadian standard English grammar. Comments about the dialogue seem off to me. I put on the subtitles because I'm a Canadian standard English speaker, so I just AUTOMATICALLY assumed that I would have trouble understanding all of it. It wasn't all that [[difficult]] and it gave a distinctly [[different]] [[flavour]] as the other [[step]] movies I have seen were so American.

I loved that this movie was set in Toronto and, in fact, wish it was even more clearly set there. I loved that the heroine was so atypically cast. I enjoyed the stepping routines. I liked the driven Mum character. I felt that many of the issues in the movie were addressed more subtly than is characteristic of [[dance]] movies.

In summary, if you tend to like [[dance]] movies, then this is a [[decent]] one. If you have superiority issues about the grammar of the English standard you [[grew]] up [[speaking]], your [[narrow]] [[mind]] may have [[difficulty]] [[enjoying]] this movie. I watch them all.

It's not better than the [[awesome]] ones (_[[Rigorously]] Ballroom_, _Shall we [[ballet]]?_ (Japanese [[stepping]]), but it's [[altogether]] respectable and pleasingly different in parts.

I am an English [[maestro]] and I [[unearthed]] some of the ignorance about language in some of these [[scrutinize]] rather [[unnerving]]. [[At]] [[case]]: the "name should scream don't watch. '[[Mode]] she move.' Since when can movie titles ignore grammar?"

There is [[none]] inherently [[improper]] about Caribbean English grammar. It's just not Canadian standard English grammar. Comments about the dialogue seem off to me. I put on the subtitles because I'm a Canadian standard English speaker, so I just AUTOMATICALLY assumed that I would have trouble understanding all of it. It wasn't all that [[laborious]] and it gave a distinctly [[various]] [[perfume]] as the other [[steps]] movies I have seen were so American.

I loved that this movie was set in Toronto and, in fact, wish it was even more clearly set there. I loved that the heroine was so atypically cast. I enjoyed the stepping routines. I liked the driven Mum character. I felt that many of the issues in the movie were addressed more subtly than is characteristic of [[ballet]] movies.

In summary, if you tend to like [[ballet]] movies, then this is a [[presentable]] one. If you have superiority issues about the grammar of the English standard you [[climbed]] up [[discussing]], your [[limited]] [[intellect]] may have [[trouble]] [[enjoy]] this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4104 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I've seen better teenage werewolf movies in my time, this one however, takes the [[cake]]. More comedy than horror, "Full Moon High" puts the "c" in cheese-fest. The [[star]] quality in this movie is not bad. [[Just]] the way it was made just [[sends]] in rolling downhill. Adam Arkin plays Tony, an all-American high school football [[player]] of the 50's who ends up not aging due to a werewolf bite in Transylvania. The most [[annoying]] part of the movie was the violin player. He drove everyone batty! Ed McMahon plays his ultra-conservative father who met his [[end]] of his own bullet. Adam's father Alan plays a shrink who seems to be not top of his [[game]]. After all these years [[Tony]] seems to be very out of place due to the attack, and then he'll get the chance to catch in his state. More laugh than blood shed, this movie is just a start in the 80's, "Teen Wolf" was an improvement from this! 1 out of 5 stars. I've seen better teenage werewolf movies in my time, this one however, takes the [[cheesecake]]. More comedy than horror, "Full Moon High" puts the "c" in cheese-fest. The [[stars]] quality in this movie is not bad. [[Virtuous]] the way it was made just [[dispatches]] in rolling downhill. Adam Arkin plays Tony, an all-American high school football [[protagonist]] of the 50's who ends up not aging due to a werewolf bite in Transylvania. The most [[troublesome]] part of the movie was the violin player. He drove everyone batty! Ed McMahon plays his ultra-conservative father who met his [[ceases]] of his own bullet. Adam's father Alan plays a shrink who seems to be not top of his [[jeu]]. After all these years [[Tonda]] seems to be very out of place due to the attack, and then he'll get the chance to catch in his state. More laugh than blood shed, this movie is just a start in the 80's, "Teen Wolf" was an improvement from this! 1 out of 5 stars. --------------------------------------------- Result 4105 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] I [[caught]] this [[movie]] on my [[local]] movie channel, and i rather [[enjoyed]] [[watching]] the film. It has all the elements of a good teen film, and more - this film, aside from dealing with boys-girls relationships and sex and the like, also deals with the issue of steroid use by young people.

The film has that real-life feel to it - no [[loud]] music, no special effects and no outrageous scenes - which, for this movie, was right. That feel makes it [[easy]] to [[relate]] to the [[characters]] in the film - some of which we probably know from where we [[live]].

Overall, a [[good]] [[movie]], fun to watch.

8/10 I [[capturing]] this [[cinematic]] on my [[locale]] movie channel, and i rather [[liked]] [[staring]] the film. It has all the elements of a good teen film, and more - this film, aside from dealing with boys-girls relationships and sex and the like, also deals with the issue of steroid use by young people.

The film has that real-life feel to it - no [[vocal]] music, no special effects and no outrageous scenes - which, for this movie, was right. That feel makes it [[uncomplicated]] to [[pertain]] to the [[features]] in the film - some of which we probably know from where we [[iive]].

Overall, a [[alright]] [[filmmaking]], fun to watch.

8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4106 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] To bad for this fine [[film]] that it had to be [[released]] the same [[year]] as Braveheart. [[Though]] it is a very [[different]] [[kind]] of film, the [[conflict]] between Scottish commoners and English nobility is front and [[center]] here as well. Roughly 400 [[years]] had [[passed]] between the [[time]] Braveheart took place and Rob Roy was set, but some [[things]] never [[seemed]] to [[change]]. Scottland is [[still]] run by English [[nobles]], and the highlanders never can seem to catch a [[break]] when [[dealing]] with them. [[Rob]] [[Roy]] is handsomely done, but not the grand [[epic]] that Braveheart was. There are no large-scale battles, and the [[conflict]] here is more between individuals. And helpfully so not all Englishmen are portrayed as evil this time. Rob Roy is simply a film about those with honor, and those who are truly evil.

Liam Neeson plays the title character Rob Roy MacGregor. He is the leader of the MacGregor clan and his basic function is to tend to and protect the cattle of the local nobleman of record known as the Marquis of Montrose (John Hurt). Things look pretty rough for the MacGregor clan as winter is approaching, and there seems to be a lack of food for everyone. Rob Roy puts together a plan to borrow 1000 pounds from the Marquis and purchase some cattle of his own. He would then sell them off for a higher price and use the money to improve the general well-being of his community. Sounds fair enough, doesn't it? Problems arise when two cronies of the Marquis steal the money for themselves. One of them, known as Archibald Cunningham, is perhaps the most evil character ever put on film. Played wonderfully by Tim Roth, this man is a penniless would-be noble who has been sent to live with the Marquis by his mother. This man is disgustingly effeminate, rude, heartless, and very dangerous with a sword. He fathers a child with a hand maiden and refuses to own up to the responsibility. He rapes Macgregor's wife and burns him out of his home. This guy is truly as rotten as movie characters come. Along with another crony of the Marquis (Brian Cox) Cunningham steals the money and uses it to settle his own debts. Though it is painfully obvious to most people what happened, the Marquis still holds MacGregor to the debt. This sets up conflict that will take many lives and challenge the strengths of a man simply fighting to hold on to his dignity.

Spoilers ahead!!!!!

Luckily for the MacGregor's, a Duke who is no friend to the Marquis sets up a final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham to resolve the conflict one and for all. This sword fight has been considered by many to be one of the best ever filmed. Cunningham is thought by many to be a sure winner with his speed and grace. And for most of the fight, it looks like these attributes will win out. Just when it looks like Rob Roy is finished, he turns the tables in a shockingly grotesque manner. The first time you see what happens, you will probably be as shocked as Cunningham! Rob Roy is beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly paced. The score is quite memorable, too. The casting choices seem to have worked out as Jessica Lange, who might seem to be out of her element, actually turns in one of the strongest performances as Mary MacGregor. The film is violent, but there isn't too much gore. It is a lusty picture full of deviant behavior, however. The nobility are largely played as being amoral and sleazy. The film has no obvious flaws, thus it gets 10 of 10 stars.

The Hound. To bad for this fine [[cinematography]] that it had to be [[releasing]] the same [[annum]] as Braveheart. [[If]] it is a very [[disparate]] [[types]] of film, the [[disputing]] between Scottish commoners and English nobility is front and [[centro]] here as well. Roughly 400 [[yr]] had [[voted]] between the [[moment]] Braveheart took place and Rob Roy was set, but some [[aspects]] never [[sounded]] to [[amend]]. Scottland is [[nonetheless]] run by English [[notables]], and the highlanders never can seem to catch a [[intermission]] when [[addressing]] with them. [[Burgle]] [[Rowe]] is handsomely done, but not the grand [[manas]] that Braveheart was. There are no large-scale battles, and the [[dispute]] here is more between individuals. And helpfully so not all Englishmen are portrayed as evil this time. Rob Roy is simply a film about those with honor, and those who are truly evil.

Liam Neeson plays the title character Rob Roy MacGregor. He is the leader of the MacGregor clan and his basic function is to tend to and protect the cattle of the local nobleman of record known as the Marquis of Montrose (John Hurt). Things look pretty rough for the MacGregor clan as winter is approaching, and there seems to be a lack of food for everyone. Rob Roy puts together a plan to borrow 1000 pounds from the Marquis and purchase some cattle of his own. He would then sell them off for a higher price and use the money to improve the general well-being of his community. Sounds fair enough, doesn't it? Problems arise when two cronies of the Marquis steal the money for themselves. One of them, known as Archibald Cunningham, is perhaps the most evil character ever put on film. Played wonderfully by Tim Roth, this man is a penniless would-be noble who has been sent to live with the Marquis by his mother. This man is disgustingly effeminate, rude, heartless, and very dangerous with a sword. He fathers a child with a hand maiden and refuses to own up to the responsibility. He rapes Macgregor's wife and burns him out of his home. This guy is truly as rotten as movie characters come. Along with another crony of the Marquis (Brian Cox) Cunningham steals the money and uses it to settle his own debts. Though it is painfully obvious to most people what happened, the Marquis still holds MacGregor to the debt. This sets up conflict that will take many lives and challenge the strengths of a man simply fighting to hold on to his dignity.

Spoilers ahead!!!!!

Luckily for the MacGregor's, a Duke who is no friend to the Marquis sets up a final duel between Rob Roy and Cunningham to resolve the conflict one and for all. This sword fight has been considered by many to be one of the best ever filmed. Cunningham is thought by many to be a sure winner with his speed and grace. And for most of the fight, it looks like these attributes will win out. Just when it looks like Rob Roy is finished, he turns the tables in a shockingly grotesque manner. The first time you see what happens, you will probably be as shocked as Cunningham! Rob Roy is beautifully filmed, wonderfully acted, and perfectly paced. The score is quite memorable, too. The casting choices seem to have worked out as Jessica Lange, who might seem to be out of her element, actually turns in one of the strongest performances as Mary MacGregor. The film is violent, but there isn't too much gore. It is a lusty picture full of deviant behavior, however. The nobility are largely played as being amoral and sleazy. The film has no obvious flaws, thus it gets 10 of 10 stars.

The Hound. --------------------------------------------- Result 4107 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (96%)]] Tiempo de valientes is a very [[fun]] action [[comedy]].[[After]] his great fist movie called El fondo del mar and the spectacular TV pro-gramme Los simuladores,[[Damian]] Szifron [[made]] another [[great]] [[work]].Tiempo de valientes looks,for moments,a movie made in Hollywood.Diego Peretti and [[Luis]] Luque are two great actors and here,they have [[great]] performances.The [[movie]] is very fun and [[funny]] and it has [[superb]] moments.Tiempo [[de]] valientes is a very fun [[action]] [[comedy]] that I [[totally]] recommend if you [[wanna]] have a great time.And I have to congrats Szifron for all the talent he has.

[[Rating]]:9 Tiempo de valientes is a very [[droll]] action [[travesty]].[[Upon]] his great fist movie called El fondo del mar and the spectacular TV pro-gramme Los simuladores,[[Damien]] Szifron [[brought]] another [[whopping]] [[jobs]].Tiempo de valientes looks,for moments,a movie made in Hollywood.Diego Peretti and [[Louise]] Luque are two great actors and here,they have [[formidable]] performances.The [[kino]] is very fun and [[amusing]] and it has [[handsome]] moments.Tiempo [[of]] valientes is a very fun [[activities]] [[comedian]] that I [[abundantly]] recommend if you [[desiring]] have a great time.And I have to congrats Szifron for all the talent he has.

[[Assessing]]:9 --------------------------------------------- Result 4108 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I am [[starting]] this review with a [[big]] [[giant]] [[spoiler]] about this film. Do not read further...here it [[comes]], avert your eyes! The [[main]] heroine, the [[girl]] who [[always]] survives in other slasher films, is [[murdered]] here. There, I just [[saved]] you 79 minutes of your life.

This is one of those [[cheap]] [[movies]] that was thrown [[together]] in the middle of the slasher era of the '80's. [[Despite]] killing the [[heroine]] off, this is just substandard [[junk]].

Both priests and [[college]] [[students]] get a bad rap here. They are pictured as oversexed, [[sociopathic]] [[morons]] who have [[way]] too [[many]] [[internal]] [[problems]] to deal with what [[looks]] like junior [[college]] campus life...and the [[college]] [[students]] [[come]] off [[even]] [[worse]].

"[[Splatter]] [[University]]" is just gunk to put in your VCR when you have [[nothing]] [[better]] to do, although I [[suggest]] watching your [[head]] cleaner [[tape]], that would be more [[entertaining]].

This is rated ([[R]]) for strong [[physical]] violence, [[gore]], profanity, very [[brief]] [[female]] nudity, and sexual [[references]].

I am [[began]] this review with a [[considerable]] [[mammoth]] [[baffle]] about this film. Do not read further...here it [[happens]], avert your eyes! The [[primary]] heroine, the [[giri]] who [[unceasingly]] survives in other slasher films, is [[kiiled]] here. There, I just [[rescued]] you 79 minutes of your life.

This is one of those [[inexpensive]] [[kino]] that was thrown [[jointly]] in the middle of the slasher era of the '80's. [[Though]] killing the [[heroin]] off, this is just substandard [[trash]].

Both priests and [[campus]] [[schoolchildren]] get a bad rap here. They are pictured as oversexed, [[narcissistic]] [[jackasses]] who have [[routes]] too [[countless]] [[domestic]] [[troubles]] to deal with what [[seems]] like junior [[campus]] campus life...and the [[campus]] [[student]] [[arrived]] off [[yet]] [[worst]].

"[[Splatters]] [[Campus]]" is just gunk to put in your VCR when you have [[anything]] [[best]] to do, although I [[suggests]] watching your [[chief]] cleaner [[cassette]], that would be more [[entertain]].

This is rated ([[rs]]) for strong [[corporal]] violence, [[gora]], profanity, very [[writ]] [[girl]] nudity, and sexual [[referencing]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 4109 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Somehow a woman working with a scientist puts round metal balls into people's mouths that supposedly changes their personality but in reality turns them into crazed, zombie-like killers. The "guinea pigs" for the experiment are scantily-clad, nubile young women in desperate need of acting lessons. This movie is awful, [[atrocious]], and [[amazingly]] [[bad]]. It has little to no [[logic]] in the script. You really will have trouble following what is going on. It has no special effects. The computer screen that is supposedly representing a huge scientific advancement looks nothing more than an old Atari screen. And what is even worse is that there is also a puppet with strands of felt hair(looks like a lonely kid at summer camp made it) named George that is like a personal servant/confidant to Jessica(the leading "actress"). Throughout the movie you will be subjected to the idiotic, sophmoric utterings of this puppet. But wait...you also get loads of softcore, unerotic, barely nude scenes with the girls with some bar guys. All the while a most annoying soundtrack plays in the background like some kind of spiritual discovery has taken place. None of the actors are good. There are just varying degrees of bad. The gore and "horror" aspects are especially ineptly filmed. The film really looks like an adolescent put it together. No coincidence Henry Sala, the director by name but not by trade, has not made another film. I was bored almost into a coma watching this stupid, silly, dreck! And how bout the ending? What happened? If you know let me in on the secret because for the life of me I cannot figure it out. All I know is that I lost the time spent watching this garbage that made the beginning of my weekend a real nightmare of a bore! Somehow a woman working with a scientist puts round metal balls into people's mouths that supposedly changes their personality but in reality turns them into crazed, zombie-like killers. The "guinea pigs" for the experiment are scantily-clad, nubile young women in desperate need of acting lessons. This movie is awful, [[horrendous]], and [[marvelously]] [[naughty]]. It has little to no [[reasoning]] in the script. You really will have trouble following what is going on. It has no special effects. The computer screen that is supposedly representing a huge scientific advancement looks nothing more than an old Atari screen. And what is even worse is that there is also a puppet with strands of felt hair(looks like a lonely kid at summer camp made it) named George that is like a personal servant/confidant to Jessica(the leading "actress"). Throughout the movie you will be subjected to the idiotic, sophmoric utterings of this puppet. But wait...you also get loads of softcore, unerotic, barely nude scenes with the girls with some bar guys. All the while a most annoying soundtrack plays in the background like some kind of spiritual discovery has taken place. None of the actors are good. There are just varying degrees of bad. The gore and "horror" aspects are especially ineptly filmed. The film really looks like an adolescent put it together. No coincidence Henry Sala, the director by name but not by trade, has not made another film. I was bored almost into a coma watching this stupid, silly, dreck! And how bout the ending? What happened? If you know let me in on the secret because for the life of me I cannot figure it out. All I know is that I lost the time spent watching this garbage that made the beginning of my weekend a real nightmare of a bore! --------------------------------------------- Result 4110 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] The biggest [[mystery]] of Veronica Mars is not one that she had to tackle on screen.

[[Rather]], the [[mystery]] is why this [[perennial]] ratings [[disappointment]] is still on the [[air]]. This [[week]] marked a nadir for Veronica [[Mars]]: it [[ranked]] 146 out of 146 shows in the big 6 (soon to be Big 5). Yes, you read right. Veronica Mars was beaten by every show of the now-defunct WB and every show on UPN. It was beat by all the shows on Fox and of course by all the shows on ABC, CBS and NBC.

Now, the hip hypesters are going to say: but this was a re-run. But everything on TV that week was pretty much a re-run! It boggles the mind why CW would choose this proved ratings disappointment as one of the few shows it saved from UPN.

Clearly something is going on behind the scenes. Favors are being exchanged and influence peddled.

Sorry to be so cynical, but what other explanation is there? The "Veronica Mars has potential" line is clearly dead now that it's had two years to establish itself and failed to do so.

Maybe it's Joel Silver's influence and clout, but frankly, I am at a loss why anyone would choose to spend their clout on a bad show that no audience is watching.

A great mystery and a very inauspicious debut for CW. The biggest [[enigma]] of Veronica Mars is not one that she had to tackle on screen.

[[Fairly]], the [[puzzle]] is why this [[perpetual]] ratings [[frustration]] is still on the [[aviation]]. This [[weeks]] marked a nadir for Veronica [[Marte]]: it [[sorted]] 146 out of 146 shows in the big 6 (soon to be Big 5). Yes, you read right. Veronica Mars was beaten by every show of the now-defunct WB and every show on UPN. It was beat by all the shows on Fox and of course by all the shows on ABC, CBS and NBC.

Now, the hip hypesters are going to say: but this was a re-run. But everything on TV that week was pretty much a re-run! It boggles the mind why CW would choose this proved ratings disappointment as one of the few shows it saved from UPN.

Clearly something is going on behind the scenes. Favors are being exchanged and influence peddled.

Sorry to be so cynical, but what other explanation is there? The "Veronica Mars has potential" line is clearly dead now that it's had two years to establish itself and failed to do so.

Maybe it's Joel Silver's influence and clout, but frankly, I am at a loss why anyone would choose to spend their clout on a bad show that no audience is watching.

A great mystery and a very inauspicious debut for CW. --------------------------------------------- Result 4111 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Of all the movies of the seventies, none [[captured]] to truest essence of the good versus evil battle as did the Sentinel. I mean, yes, there were movies like the Exorcist, and other ones; but none of them [[captured]] the human element of the protagonist like this one. If you have time, check this one out. You [[may]] not be able to get past the dated devices as such, but this is a story worth [[getting]] into.Then there are all the [[stars]] and soon-to-be [[stars]]. My [[absolute]] [[favorites]] were Eli Wallach, [[Sylvia]] [[Miles]], and Burgess Meredith. Then there are the subtle clues that lead to what's going on too. [[Pay]] [[close]] [[attention]]. I had to watch it four [[times]] to [[catch]] on to all the [[smaller]] weird [[statements]] like 'black and [[white]] [[cat]], black and white cake'. Plus, the books are really [[good]] as well. I'm just [[sorry]] that they're not [[going]] to [[turn]] the [[second]] [[book]] into a [[film]]. It's so [[scary]] that it [[would]] outdo this [[movie]]. Of all the movies of the seventies, none [[catching]] to truest essence of the good versus evil battle as did the Sentinel. I mean, yes, there were movies like the Exorcist, and other ones; but none of them [[catching]] the human element of the protagonist like this one. If you have time, check this one out. You [[maggio]] not be able to get past the dated devices as such, but this is a story worth [[obtain]] into.Then there are all the [[celebrity]] and soon-to-be [[star]]. My [[unmitigated]] [[favourites]] were Eli Wallach, [[Sylvie]] [[Kilometre]], and Burgess Meredith. Then there are the subtle clues that lead to what's going on too. [[Payroll]] [[nearer]] [[beware]]. I had to watch it four [[moments]] to [[captured]] on to all the [[fewer]] weird [[pronouncements]] like 'black and [[bianchi]] [[ctu]], black and white cake'. Plus, the books are really [[buena]] as well. I'm just [[desolated]] that they're not [[gonna]] to [[converting]] the [[secondly]] [[cookbook]] into a [[movie]]. It's so [[awful]] that it [[could]] outdo this [[filmmaking]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4112 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[gave]] it an 8 star [[rating]]. The [[story]] may have [[fallen]] short about 3/4 of the way into the picture but the performances remained [[strong]] throughout."[[Men]] of [[Honor]]" was changed from "Navy Diver" understandably so. [[Anyone]] who has served in any branch of the armed [[forces]] will probably feel that "[[Honor]]" is an appropriate word to use in the title. I [[supplied]] it an 8 star [[punctuation]]. The [[conte]] may have [[dipped]] short about 3/4 of the way into the picture but the performances remained [[vigorous]] throughout."[[Males]] of [[Honoring]]" was changed from "Navy Diver" understandably so. [[Nobody]] who has served in any branch of the armed [[troop]] will probably feel that "[[Honoring]]" is an appropriate word to use in the title. --------------------------------------------- Result 4113 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] It was clear right from the beginning that 9/11 would inspire about as many films as World War II and Vietnam combined; however, there is certainly a big danger that most of these films to come are about as good (or rather: bad) as Pearl Harbor. It is a great luck that the first international release about 9/11 is not a cheesy love story starring a bunch of pretty faces, but a [[collective]] [[work]] of 11 directors from the entire [[world]].

I'm not intending to say that all 11 episodes are great ([[Youssef]] Chahine's, for example, has a needless prologue with too many cuts and Shohei Imamura's has a really bizarre ending) or that the segments are in the right order (Imamura's, being the only one not referring directly to the Twin Towers, should open the film, not end it, Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu's should be the last one instead, as it's the most impressive one). But it is an impressing effort and an interesting portrayal of the way other parts of the world react to the collapse of the twin towers.

Consider Samira Makhmalbaf's opening segment, in which an Afghan teachers tries to explain to her pupils what happened in New York and unsuccessfully suggests a one-minute silence. Or Idrissa Ouedraogo's part (which features a bin Laden-double so much resembling the real one that you'll be shocked when you see him, I promise), in which 5 boys muse about good things that can be done with the reward put out on Laden.

There's a surprisingly good (and extremely angry) segment by Ken Loach about a man from Chile talking about what he calls "our Tuesday September 11" - that September 11 in 1973 when their elected president Allende was killed and Pinochet installed his dictatorship - with the generous help from Henry Kissinger and the CIA. This [[could]] have become a terrible effort in Anti-Americanism, but it did become a sad tale and shares my recognition for the [[best]] segment with Inarritu's (mainly sound impressions and phone calls from the hijacked planes to a black screen, sometimes a few pictures of people falling down the WTC and finally a collapsing tower, ending with the screen brightening up and one question appearing) and Amos Gitai's about a hysterical reporter trying desperatly to get on air after a car bomb exploded in Tel Aviv (hard to recognize, but this one is a masterpiece of choreography).

All these different segments (I haven't mentioned yet Claude Lelouch's about a deaf girl, Danis Tanovic's about a demonstration of the Women of Srebrenica, Mira Nair's - strange, but it takes an Indian director to make the part that is probably most appealing to Western tastes - about a Muslim family whose son is under a terrible suspicion after 9/11 and Sean Penn's with Ernest Borgnine (yes, Ernest Borgnine) as a widower leading the most depressive life one can imagine) add up to a unique film not easy to watch and hard to forget. I am sure this film will be a classic known to everyone thirty years from now. I hope it will be remembered for starting a long tradition of world cinema movies. But, alas, it's far more probable it will be remembered as a one-film-only effort. And as the one of the few 9/11 movies made by then that don't reduce this terrible event to a love story with a happy end just to please the audience. It was clear right from the beginning that 9/11 would inspire about as many films as World War II and Vietnam combined; however, there is certainly a big danger that most of these films to come are about as good (or rather: bad) as Pearl Harbor. It is a great luck that the first international release about 9/11 is not a cheesy love story starring a bunch of pretty faces, but a [[communal]] [[cooperating]] of 11 directors from the entire [[monde]].

I'm not intending to say that all 11 episodes are great ([[Yusuf]] Chahine's, for example, has a needless prologue with too many cuts and Shohei Imamura's has a really bizarre ending) or that the segments are in the right order (Imamura's, being the only one not referring directly to the Twin Towers, should open the film, not end it, Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu's should be the last one instead, as it's the most impressive one). But it is an impressing effort and an interesting portrayal of the way other parts of the world react to the collapse of the twin towers.

Consider Samira Makhmalbaf's opening segment, in which an Afghan teachers tries to explain to her pupils what happened in New York and unsuccessfully suggests a one-minute silence. Or Idrissa Ouedraogo's part (which features a bin Laden-double so much resembling the real one that you'll be shocked when you see him, I promise), in which 5 boys muse about good things that can be done with the reward put out on Laden.

There's a surprisingly good (and extremely angry) segment by Ken Loach about a man from Chile talking about what he calls "our Tuesday September 11" - that September 11 in 1973 when their elected president Allende was killed and Pinochet installed his dictatorship - with the generous help from Henry Kissinger and the CIA. This [[wo]] have become a terrible effort in Anti-Americanism, but it did become a sad tale and shares my recognition for the [[nicest]] segment with Inarritu's (mainly sound impressions and phone calls from the hijacked planes to a black screen, sometimes a few pictures of people falling down the WTC and finally a collapsing tower, ending with the screen brightening up and one question appearing) and Amos Gitai's about a hysterical reporter trying desperatly to get on air after a car bomb exploded in Tel Aviv (hard to recognize, but this one is a masterpiece of choreography).

All these different segments (I haven't mentioned yet Claude Lelouch's about a deaf girl, Danis Tanovic's about a demonstration of the Women of Srebrenica, Mira Nair's - strange, but it takes an Indian director to make the part that is probably most appealing to Western tastes - about a Muslim family whose son is under a terrible suspicion after 9/11 and Sean Penn's with Ernest Borgnine (yes, Ernest Borgnine) as a widower leading the most depressive life one can imagine) add up to a unique film not easy to watch and hard to forget. I am sure this film will be a classic known to everyone thirty years from now. I hope it will be remembered for starting a long tradition of world cinema movies. But, alas, it's far more probable it will be remembered as a one-film-only effort. And as the one of the few 9/11 movies made by then that don't reduce this terrible event to a love story with a happy end just to please the audience. --------------------------------------------- Result 4114 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] *** [[May]] contain spoilers. ***

If [[LIVING]] [[ON]] [[TOKYO]] [[TIME]] were some bold [[experiment]] where real-life wanna-be actors were [[given]] [[film]] parts on the condition that they would be [[required]] to [[take]] a [[combination]] of [[powerful]] prescription anti-anxiety, anti-depression, and anti-psychotic [[medications]] (this is the [[classic]] psych ward [[combo]] that renders patients into [[drooling]] [[zombies]]) all during [[filming]], then this movie [[would]] hold far more interest. Or, if the [[film]] [[production]] was another type of [[experiment]] where all of the [[actors]] were sleep deprived before and during [[filming]], then TOKYO [[TIME]] could be more easily explained.

As it is, this film is [[filled]] with [[lifeless]], low-energy actors. In the scene where the new husband was sitting on the stairs talking with his sister, it appeared that he was having trouble keeping his eyes open. In almost every scene he speaks his lines sitting down with every part of his body motionless. From beginning to end, his facial expression is best described as "near sleep."

Fret not about the actors speaking over each other's lines because these actors can barely finish droning out any lines of dialog. Everyone speaks with a depressing, monotone voice. No laughing. No yelling. No vigor. No one has energy enough to crack a smile. The result: complete and [[total]] boredom.

And it does not help matters that the direction is simple and amateurish.

Avoid this lifeless film at all costs. [[Better]] to watch GREENCARD which has a similar plot and has charm and energy. [[Or]], for an unconventional Japanese [[romance]] story, check out THE [[LONG]] VACATION which has an ample amount of everything LIVING ON TOKYO [[TIME]] does not. *** [[Maggio]] contain spoilers. ***

If [[IIFE]] [[REGARDING]] [[TOKIO]] [[TIMES]] were some bold [[experiences]] where real-life wanna-be actors were [[yielded]] [[cinematography]] parts on the condition that they would be [[require]] to [[taking]] a [[tandem]] of [[influential]] prescription anti-anxiety, anti-depression, and anti-psychotic [[drug]] (this is the [[classical]] psych ward [[merge]] that renders patients into [[chatting]] [[walkers]]) all during [[photographing]], then this movie [[ought]] hold far more interest. Or, if the [[kino]] [[productivity]] was another type of [[experiences]] where all of the [[protagonists]] were sleep deprived before and during [[photographing]], then TOKYO [[PERIOD]] could be more easily explained.

As it is, this film is [[fills]] with [[lackluster]], low-energy actors. In the scene where the new husband was sitting on the stairs talking with his sister, it appeared that he was having trouble keeping his eyes open. In almost every scene he speaks his lines sitting down with every part of his body motionless. From beginning to end, his facial expression is best described as "near sleep."

Fret not about the actors speaking over each other's lines because these actors can barely finish droning out any lines of dialog. Everyone speaks with a depressing, monotone voice. No laughing. No yelling. No vigor. No one has energy enough to crack a smile. The result: complete and [[utter]] boredom.

And it does not help matters that the direction is simple and amateurish.

Avoid this lifeless film at all costs. [[Best]] to watch GREENCARD which has a similar plot and has charm and energy. [[Ord]], for an unconventional Japanese [[romanticism]] story, check out THE [[PROTRACTED]] VACATION which has an ample amount of everything LIVING ON TOKYO [[PERIOD]] does not. --------------------------------------------- Result 4115 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (91%)]] The first part of Grease with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John is one of the [[best]] movie for teens, This one is a very [[bad]] copy. The change is only in the sex. In the first one the good one was Sandy, here it's Michael. I [[prefer]] to watch the first Grease. The first part of Grease with John Travolta and Olivia Newton John is one of the [[finest]] movie for teens, This one is a very [[mala]] copy. The change is only in the sex. In the first one the good one was Sandy, here it's Michael. I [[favorite]] to watch the first Grease. --------------------------------------------- Result 4116 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Look, I'm sorry if half the world takes offense at this, but life is confusing enough. I don't need to watch it that way. I dig Anthony Hopkins, big [[time]]. I even watched [[Fracture]], and I knew that would be a steaming [[pile]] of Quentin. But this thing is not well shot, and it's not daring--even if it is [[artsy]]. Well-produced [[films]] have reasons for cuts and fast edits, not this "oh, but it's a realistic interpretation" excuse. This thing'll [[make]] your head hurt. It's the fastest moving picture ever to take you nowhere at all. I still love AH, and I'll always give him another chance, but if you aren't made of time to watch bad ideas on screen, skip this. Look, I'm sorry if half the world takes offense at this, but life is confusing enough. I don't need to watch it that way. I dig Anthony Hopkins, big [[moment]]. I even watched [[Breakup]], and I knew that would be a steaming [[heap]] of Quentin. But this thing is not well shot, and it's not daring--even if it is [[artistic]]. Well-produced [[movie]] have reasons for cuts and fast edits, not this "oh, but it's a realistic interpretation" excuse. This thing'll [[deliver]] your head hurt. It's the fastest moving picture ever to take you nowhere at all. I still love AH, and I'll always give him another chance, but if you aren't made of time to watch bad ideas on screen, skip this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4117 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (69%)]] Green [[Eyes]] is a [[great]] movie. In todays context of supporting our [[troops]], it is interesting this [[movie]] [[showed]] the lack of respect [[soldiers]] received from doing their duty, during this period. From a historical view, the end of the Vietnam war left all of us with something to remember and learn from. Gene was very proud of this movie, and he deserved the credits he received from writing "Green Eyes". I agree, I do not understand why this movie is not [[shown]] more [[often]], or at all. This movie is the kind of movie that should be shown on TV every year, much like the [[Wizard]] of Oz. The dedication of one man towards his lost son is entirely [[moving]]. I was a friend of [[Gene]] Logans and I was proud to know him. Rocky Green [[Eye]] is a [[whopping]] movie. In todays context of supporting our [[troop]], it is interesting this [[cinematographic]] [[exhibited]] the lack of respect [[solider]] received from doing their duty, during this period. From a historical view, the end of the Vietnam war left all of us with something to remember and learn from. Gene was very proud of this movie, and he deserved the credits he received from writing "Green Eyes". I agree, I do not understand why this movie is not [[indicated]] more [[habitually]], or at all. This movie is the kind of movie that should be shown on TV every year, much like the [[Conjurer]] of Oz. The dedication of one man towards his lost son is entirely [[relocating]]. I was a friend of [[Genetics]] Logans and I was proud to know him. Rocky --------------------------------------------- Result 4118 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Imagine you're a high-school [[boy]], in the back of a dark, uncrowded theater with your girlfriend. How bad would a [[movie]] have to be, in order that you would feel [[compelled]] to [[leave]] the theater and [[head]] home before it [[ended]]? This movie is that [[bad]]. [[Really]]. [[Movies]] often become so bad that they're good; this movie is beyond that stage of bad-ness. It is painfully [[bad]]. Horribly, terribly, crime-against-humanity bad. Imagine you're a high-school [[laddie]], in the back of a dark, uncrowded theater with your girlfriend. How bad would a [[cinema]] have to be, in order that you would feel [[forced]] to [[leaving]] the theater and [[leader]] home before it [[ending]]? This movie is that [[inclement]]. [[Genuinely]]. [[Kino]] often become so bad that they're good; this movie is beyond that stage of bad-ness. It is painfully [[amiss]]. Horribly, terribly, crime-against-humanity bad. --------------------------------------------- Result 4119 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I found "The Arab Conspiracy" in a bargain bin and [[thought]] I'd [[uncovered]] a lost [[treasure]]. Folks, there's a [[reason]] why you don't hear much about this [[film]]. The [[plot]] is muddy, the pacing is [[slow]], Cornelia Sharpe is about as vivacious as plain, cold tofu, and the ending [[leaves]] you flat. Not [[even]] Sean Connery can [[save]] this one. I found "The Arab Conspiracy" in a bargain bin and [[brainchild]] I'd [[found]] a lost [[darling]]. Folks, there's a [[reasons]] why you don't hear much about this [[cinematography]]. The [[intrigue]] is muddy, the pacing is [[lento]], Cornelia Sharpe is about as vivacious as plain, cold tofu, and the ending [[departs]] you flat. Not [[yet]] Sean Connery can [[rescues]] this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4120 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] My giving this a score of 3 is NOT what I would give the original Soviet version of this film. It seems that American-International (a studio that specialized in ultra-low-budget fare in the 60s) bought this film and [[utterly]] destroyed it--slicing a two [[hour]] plus film into a 64 minute film! [[Plus]], much of this 64 minutes was new [[material]] (such as the "monsters")--so you know that this [[film]] bears almost no [[similarity]] to the original. The [[original]] [[film]] [[appears]] to be a rather straight [[drama]] about the Soviet conquest of space--though I really am not sure what it was originally! For insight into the original film, read Steven Nyland's review--it was very helpful.

By the way, this was the third Soviet sci-film I've seen that American-International bought and then hacked apart to make a "[[new]]" film--standard practice to a company that was willing to put just about anything on the screen to make a buck--provided, of course, it didn't cost them much more than a buck in the first place!! This Americanized film was about two rival world powers (NOT the US and Soviets) trying to be the first to [[Mars]]. The tricky "bad guys" try but fail and the "good guys" rescue one of the idiot [[astronauts]] and then [[head]] to [[Mars]]. Unfortunately, they are temporarily stranded on a moon of Mars where they [[see]] some monsters ([[added]] by American-International) that are REAAAALLY [[cheesy]] and one does bear similarity to a certain part of a female's [[anatomy]]. Then, they are rescued--returning to [[Earth]] heroes.

The bottom line is that the film was butchered--turning an [[incredibly]] beautiful [[piece]] of art (for the [[time]]) being [[turned]] into a grade-C [[movie]]. [[Because]] of this, the [[Soviets]] [[really]] had a reason to hate America! I'm just shocked that the [[horrible]] job A-I did with this film didn't convince them to refuse to sell more films to these [[jerks]]! It's worth a look for a laugh, but the really [[bad]] moments that make you laugh are few and far between. So, the film is a dud--not bad enough to make it a must-see for [[bad]] movie buffs and too dopey to be taken seriously. I [[would]] really love to see this movie in its original form--it must have been some picture. My giving this a score of 3 is NOT what I would give the original Soviet version of this film. It seems that American-International (a studio that specialized in ultra-low-budget fare in the 60s) bought this film and [[downright]] destroyed it--slicing a two [[hora]] plus film into a 64 minute film! [[Most]], much of this 64 minutes was new [[materials]] (such as the "monsters")--so you know that this [[films]] bears almost no [[analogy]] to the original. The [[upfront]] [[kino]] [[seems]] to be a rather straight [[opera]] about the Soviet conquest of space--though I really am not sure what it was originally! For insight into the original film, read Steven Nyland's review--it was very helpful.

By the way, this was the third Soviet sci-film I've seen that American-International bought and then hacked apart to make a "[[novel]]" film--standard practice to a company that was willing to put just about anything on the screen to make a buck--provided, of course, it didn't cost them much more than a buck in the first place!! This Americanized film was about two rival world powers (NOT the US and Soviets) trying to be the first to [[Mar]]. The tricky "bad guys" try but fail and the "good guys" rescue one of the idiot [[cosmonaut]] and then [[leader]] to [[Mar]]. Unfortunately, they are temporarily stranded on a moon of Mars where they [[seeing]] some monsters ([[add]] by American-International) that are REAAAALLY [[corny]] and one does bear similarity to a certain part of a female's [[autopsy]]. Then, they are rescued--returning to [[Terrestrial]] heroes.

The bottom line is that the film was butchered--turning an [[surprisingly]] beautiful [[slice]] of art (for the [[moment]]) being [[revolved]] into a grade-C [[film]]. [[Since]] of this, the [[Russkies]] [[truly]] had a reason to hate America! I'm just shocked that the [[ugly]] job A-I did with this film didn't convince them to refuse to sell more films to these [[bozos]]! It's worth a look for a laugh, but the really [[mala]] moments that make you laugh are few and far between. So, the film is a dud--not bad enough to make it a must-see for [[unfavourable]] movie buffs and too dopey to be taken seriously. I [[should]] really love to see this movie in its original form--it must have been some picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4121 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a beautiful movie filled with adventure. The Genii in the bottle is a classic scene. Romantic in it's finish, all things turn out as they should be. I saw this first as a child and have remembered it as a fantasy I wished was true. --------------------------------------------- Result 4122 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (74%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I have copy of this on VHS, I think they (The television networks) should play this every year for the next twenty years. So that we don't forget what was and that we remember not to do the same mistakes again. Like putting some people in the director's chair, where they don't belong. This movie Rappin' is like a vaudevillian musical, for those who can't [[sing]], or act. This movie is as much fun as [[trying]] to teach the 'blind' to drive a city bus.

John Hood, (Peebles) has just got out of prison and he's headed back to the old neighborhood. In serving time for an all-to-nice crime of necessity, of course. John heads back onto the old street and is greeted by kids dogs old ladies and his peer homeys as they dance and sing all along the way.

I would recommend this if I was sentimental, or if in truth someone was smoking medicinal pot prescribed by a doctor for glaucoma. Either way this is a poorly directed, scripted, acted and even produced (I never thought I'd sat that) satire of ghetto life with the 'Hood'. Although, I think the redeeming part of the story, through the wannabe gang fight sequences and the dance numbers, his friends care about their neighbors and want to save the ghetto from being torn down and cleaned up.

Forget Sonny spoon, Mario could have won an Oscar for that in comparison to this Rap. Oh well if you find yourself wanting to laugh yourself silly and three-quarters embarrassed, be sure to drink first.

And please, watch responsibly. (No stars, better luck next time!) I have copy of this on VHS, I think they (The television networks) should play this every year for the next twenty years. So that we don't forget what was and that we remember not to do the same mistakes again. Like putting some people in the director's chair, where they don't belong. This movie Rappin' is like a vaudevillian musical, for those who can't [[exalt]], or act. This movie is as much fun as [[striving]] to teach the 'blind' to drive a city bus.

John Hood, (Peebles) has just got out of prison and he's headed back to the old neighborhood. In serving time for an all-to-nice crime of necessity, of course. John heads back onto the old street and is greeted by kids dogs old ladies and his peer homeys as they dance and sing all along the way.

I would recommend this if I was sentimental, or if in truth someone was smoking medicinal pot prescribed by a doctor for glaucoma. Either way this is a poorly directed, scripted, acted and even produced (I never thought I'd sat that) satire of ghetto life with the 'Hood'. Although, I think the redeeming part of the story, through the wannabe gang fight sequences and the dance numbers, his friends care about their neighbors and want to save the ghetto from being torn down and cleaned up.

Forget Sonny spoon, Mario could have won an Oscar for that in comparison to this Rap. Oh well if you find yourself wanting to laugh yourself silly and three-quarters embarrassed, be sure to drink first.

And please, watch responsibly. (No stars, better luck next time!) --------------------------------------------- Result 4123 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Zero Day is a [[film]] few people have gotten to see, and what a shame that is.

When I [[saw]] the end, where the two main characters descend upon the room and mercilessly kill people, then commit suicide, and it made me grab my stomach. I was shaking, that's how [[strong]] this [[movie]] is.

The movie is [[amazing]]. It's too incredible not to get a perfect [[ten]]. It's [[sad]] that so few people [[understand]] the true beauty of this film. It is not a budget which makes a film good, it is the amount of feeling the makers put into it which makes it good.

It leaves a permanent impression in your mind that you simply cannot get out. It makes you [[realise]] the true horror of shootings- [[especially]] if you were to know that person, and this movie makes you feel like you know these people.

I [[recommend]] [[Zero]] Hour to those who feel they are mature enough to watch it. I am fourteen, and I feel that this film is just too [[amazing]] to be put into words. It feels like you're watching something that actually happened. Zero Day is a [[cinematography]] few people have gotten to see, and what a shame that is.

When I [[sawthe]] the end, where the two main characters descend upon the room and mercilessly kill people, then commit suicide, and it made me grab my stomach. I was shaking, that's how [[forceful]] this [[cinematographic]] is.

The movie is [[unbelievable]]. It's too incredible not to get a perfect [[dix]]. It's [[hapless]] that so few people [[understanding]] the true beauty of this film. It is not a budget which makes a film good, it is the amount of feeling the makers put into it which makes it good.

It leaves a permanent impression in your mind that you simply cannot get out. It makes you [[knowing]] the true horror of shootings- [[mostly]] if you were to know that person, and this movie makes you feel like you know these people.

I [[recommendation]] [[Null]] Hour to those who feel they are mature enough to watch it. I am fourteen, and I feel that this film is just too [[unbelievable]] to be put into words. It feels like you're watching something that actually happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 4124 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] While [[traveling]] by train through [[Europe]], the [[American]] Jesse (Ethan [[Hawke]]) and the French Celine ([[Julie]] Delpy) meet each other and [[decide]] to [[spend]] the night together in [[Austria]]. On the [[next]] morning, [[Jesse]] returns to [[United]] States of [[America]], and Celine to Paris.

"Before Sunrise" is one of my favorite [[romances]], [[indeed]] one of the most [[beautiful]] [[love]] stories I have ever seen. It is a low budget [[movie]] with a very simple and [[real]] storyline, but the [[chemistry]] between Ethan [[Hawke]] and [[Julie]] Delpy is [[perfect]], and the dialogs are [[stunning]]. The [[direction]] is [[amazing]], [[transmitting]] the [[feelings]] of Celine and Jesse to the viewer. I have just [[completed]] my [[review]] number 1,000 in IMDb, and I choose "Before Sunrise" for this [[significant]] number because it is a very special [[film]] for me. I cannot [[understand]] why this [[movie]] was not nominated to the [[Oscar]], with such a [[magnificent]] [[screenplay]], [[direction]] and performances. Yesterday I have [[probably]] watched this [[movie]] for the third or fourth [[time]], and I [[still]] [[love]] it. My vote is ten.

Title ([[Brazil]]): "Antes do Amanhecer" ("Before Sunrise") While [[travelling]] by train through [[Eu]], the [[Americas]] Jesse (Ethan [[Hock]]) and the French Celine ([[Jolly]] Delpy) meet each other and [[decides]] to [[expenditures]] the night together in [[Austrians]]. On the [[forthcoming]] morning, [[Jessie]] returns to [[Unified]] States of [[Americas]], and Celine to Paris.

"Before Sunrise" is one of my favorite [[ballads]], [[admittedly]] one of the most [[ravishing]] [[iove]] stories I have ever seen. It is a low budget [[cinematographic]] with a very simple and [[actual]] storyline, but the [[chemical]] between Ethan [[Hock]] and [[Jolie]] Delpy is [[irreproachable]], and the dialogs are [[astounding]]. The [[directions]] is [[staggering]], [[transmitted]] the [[sentiments]] of Celine and Jesse to the viewer. I have just [[accomplished]] my [[revisit]] number 1,000 in IMDb, and I choose "Before Sunrise" for this [[notable]] number because it is a very special [[cinematographic]] for me. I cannot [[fathom]] why this [[flick]] was not nominated to the [[Oskar]], with such a [[sumptuous]] [[script]], [[orientation]] and performances. Yesterday I have [[admittedly]] watched this [[cinema]] for the third or fourth [[period]], and I [[however]] [[iove]] it. My vote is ten.

Title ([[Brazilian]]): "Antes do Amanhecer" ("Before Sunrise") --------------------------------------------- Result 4125 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This was the [[worst]] [[film]] i have [[seen]] for a [[long]] [[time]].

Not only that it has nearly nothing to do with the other American Pie movies, the [[story]] is obvious, flat and [[absolutely]] not [[funny]].

The [[girls]] are [[nice]] though, but [[spending]] your time watching a cheap soft porno [[would]] possibly be [[greater]] than watching this film.

This [[film]] seems to be a very [[bad]] made sex [[ad]], [[made]] for an [[audience]] that is not older than 12.

I never visited an American [[college]], but i would seriously doubt that anyone who did could really laugh about any of the scenes.

Save your time, do something else. This was the [[meanest]] [[cinema]] i have [[noticed]] for a [[longer]] [[times]].

Not only that it has nearly nothing to do with the other American Pie movies, the [[saga]] is obvious, flat and [[entirely]] not [[comical]].

The [[dame]] are [[pleasurable]] though, but [[spend]] your time watching a cheap soft porno [[ought]] possibly be [[wider]] than watching this film.

This [[cinematography]] seems to be a very [[mala]] made sex [[advertising]], [[accomplished]] for an [[viewers]] that is not older than 12.

I never visited an American [[academics]], but i would seriously doubt that anyone who did could really laugh about any of the scenes.

Save your time, do something else. --------------------------------------------- Result 4126 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] This is a very [[real]] and funny movie about a Japanese [[man]] having a mid-life crisis. [[In]] [[Japan]], ballroom [[dancing]] is not [[approved]] of. But when Shohei Sugiyama becomes [[obsessed]] with meeting the [[beautiful]] young [[girl]] he [[sees]] in the [[window]] of a [[dance]] studio, he [[suddenly]] [[finds]] himself enrolled in dance classes. No one is more [[surprised]] when he [[begins]] to like it than he. But he [[must]] [[keep]] his [[secret]] [[pleasure]] from his [[coworkers]] and family. When the [[truth]] [[comes]] out it is [[quite]] [[funny]]. This is a very [[true]] and funny movie about a Japanese [[dude]] having a mid-life crisis. [[For]] [[Japans]], ballroom [[dancers]] is not [[approving]] of. But when Shohei Sugiyama becomes [[haunted]] with meeting the [[excellent]] young [[chick]] he [[believes]] in the [[luna]] of a [[dancers]] studio, he [[abruptly]] [[found]] himself enrolled in dance classes. No one is more [[flabbergasted]] when he [[starting]] to like it than he. But he [[owes]] [[conserve]] his [[ulterior]] [[glee]] from his [[colleagues]] and family. When the [[veracity]] [[occurs]] out it is [[perfectly]] [[droll]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4127 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] OK..... This is the third in the series of carnosaur. [[Lets]] star with the dinosaur [[puppets]]! [[In]] the start of the film you [[cant]] [[See]] the Dino's cause when the body [[count]] starts you can only [[See]] the Dino's [[eye]] [[vision]], [[pretty]] smart to hide the [[bad]] [[puppets]]! and maybe in 16 [[minutes]] forward on the [[film]] some [[special]] force team with Scott Valentine as the leader Rance, the team walks into the [[warehouse]] and then they begins to find body parts and dead body's after the Dino rampage, after a while some big box comes failing on the team and you can hear a velociraptor scream, pretty creepy!!! and then a black girl walks forward and now one blooper is found! It pops up a raptor hand and slashed her face but if you pause when the raptor hand comes you can See that its just a guy with a hand puppet!? WTF! The story is simple. 1. Some terrorist's attacks some truck cause they though It wash some weapons in there. 2. They where dead wrong it seams to be ten tons raptor and one giant t-Rex in there! How did the t-Rex fit in there??? 3. Rance and some nerds will kill the dinosaurs! Sadly some stupid blond girl told him to capture one of them alive=( 4. Holy Jesues the raptors have wheels on their feats! 5. The Dino's is now on a boat in the pacific. 6: Strange i didn't know that the t-Rex had a strange thing on hes neck??? 7. THE END. The film is good if you want a good laugh. 5/10 OK..... This is the third in the series of carnosaur. [[Entitles]] star with the dinosaur [[muppets]]! [[Throughout]] the start of the film you [[havent]] [[Seeing]] the Dino's cause when the body [[comte]] starts you can only [[Behold]] the Dino's [[eyeball]] [[insight]], [[quite]] smart to hide the [[negative]] [[muppets]]! and maybe in 16 [[mins]] forward on the [[films]] some [[peculiar]] force team with Scott Valentine as the leader Rance, the team walks into the [[platt]] and then they begins to find body parts and dead body's after the Dino rampage, after a while some big box comes failing on the team and you can hear a velociraptor scream, pretty creepy!!! and then a black girl walks forward and now one blooper is found! It pops up a raptor hand and slashed her face but if you pause when the raptor hand comes you can See that its just a guy with a hand puppet!? WTF! The story is simple. 1. Some terrorist's attacks some truck cause they though It wash some weapons in there. 2. They where dead wrong it seams to be ten tons raptor and one giant t-Rex in there! How did the t-Rex fit in there??? 3. Rance and some nerds will kill the dinosaurs! Sadly some stupid blond girl told him to capture one of them alive=( 4. Holy Jesues the raptors have wheels on their feats! 5. The Dino's is now on a boat in the pacific. 6: Strange i didn't know that the t-Rex had a strange thing on hes neck??? 7. THE END. The film is good if you want a good laugh. 5/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4128 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A story of obsessive [[love]] [[pushed]] to its limits and of a [[lovely]] [[swan]] [[whose]] beauty is the very ticket to her own premature demise. Placed at the [[beginning]] of talkies, [[PRIX]] DE BEAUTE [[walks]] a thin [[line]] in being a full-on silent film -- which is still is at heart -- and flirting with sound and sound effects. The effect is a [[little]] [[irritating]] for anyone coming into this film because the recorded audio is extremely tinny and just doesn't [[help]] it at all. Hearing sound stage conversation edited over the beginning sequence which takes place in a beach, for example, is as part of the movie as the actress who dubs Louise Brooks' dialog and in doing so robs the audience of a fine performance. Other than that, the movie rolls along more or less well, with little jumps in continuity here and there -- something quite common in films from this era -- and has that vague sped up feel typical of silents. In a way, this is an experiment of a movie, and closer to the style of Sergei Eisenstein in visual presentation and near-intimate closeups that elevate it from what would be a more pedestrian level. Louise Brooks here plays a character less flapper than what she was known for: she's a stenographer who on a lark decides to enter a beauty contest despite the furious opposition of her extremely smothering boyfriend. Her role is quite Thirties and contemporary for its time; the last of the flapper/Jazz Baby roles were being shown on screen and now, with the onset of female independence, women as professionals were being represented in film. That Brooks's character decides to leave her boyfriend (even if she does "reconcile" with him later) is also a little ahead of her time. However, her character's fatal flaw is its willing to believe what isn't there -- that her boyfriend wants her to succeed -- and this is what leads to her end at the movie theatre. This final sequence looks like something straight out of Hitchcock in its heightened suspense (seen in THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH) and cuts from Brooks, her image on screen, and the murderous boyfriend. Even more dramatic is the placement of the still singing "live" Brooks with the now dead one -- a chilling effect to a chilling, powerful movie. A story of obsessive [[adores]] [[drove]] to its limits and of a [[handsome]] [[swans]] [[whom]] beauty is the very ticket to her own premature demise. Placed at the [[initiation]] of talkies, [[PRICES]] DE BEAUTE [[walking]] a thin [[bloodline]] in being a full-on silent film -- which is still is at heart -- and flirting with sound and sound effects. The effect is a [[petite]] [[troublesome]] for anyone coming into this film because the recorded audio is extremely tinny and just doesn't [[assists]] it at all. Hearing sound stage conversation edited over the beginning sequence which takes place in a beach, for example, is as part of the movie as the actress who dubs Louise Brooks' dialog and in doing so robs the audience of a fine performance. Other than that, the movie rolls along more or less well, with little jumps in continuity here and there -- something quite common in films from this era -- and has that vague sped up feel typical of silents. In a way, this is an experiment of a movie, and closer to the style of Sergei Eisenstein in visual presentation and near-intimate closeups that elevate it from what would be a more pedestrian level. Louise Brooks here plays a character less flapper than what she was known for: she's a stenographer who on a lark decides to enter a beauty contest despite the furious opposition of her extremely smothering boyfriend. Her role is quite Thirties and contemporary for its time; the last of the flapper/Jazz Baby roles were being shown on screen and now, with the onset of female independence, women as professionals were being represented in film. That Brooks's character decides to leave her boyfriend (even if she does "reconcile" with him later) is also a little ahead of her time. However, her character's fatal flaw is its willing to believe what isn't there -- that her boyfriend wants her to succeed -- and this is what leads to her end at the movie theatre. This final sequence looks like something straight out of Hitchcock in its heightened suspense (seen in THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH) and cuts from Brooks, her image on screen, and the murderous boyfriend. Even more dramatic is the placement of the still singing "live" Brooks with the now dead one -- a chilling effect to a chilling, powerful movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4129 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] This is a [[brilliant]] political satire. No wonder why it was largely ignored in the U.S.: it [[exposes]] our murderous foreign policy for what it really is.

Another good [[film]] from this era, Rendition, was [[also]] totally dismissed simply because it [[showed]], accurately, that the U.S. is a war machine bent on torturing, murdering, and maiming civilians in its quest for total world domination.

A clever plot, good acting, some big stars (John Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei anyone?) and some scenes of hilarity should have made this movie a hit. Unfortunately, Americans don't like to hear the truth about themselves, especially when they are complicit in mass murder. This is a [[lustrous]] political satire. No wonder why it was largely ignored in the U.S.: it [[portrays]] our murderous foreign policy for what it really is.

Another good [[kino]] from this era, Rendition, was [[additionally]] totally dismissed simply because it [[indicated]], accurately, that the U.S. is a war machine bent on torturing, murdering, and maiming civilians in its quest for total world domination.

A clever plot, good acting, some big stars (John Cusack, Ben Kingsley, Marisa Tomei anyone?) and some scenes of hilarity should have made this movie a hit. Unfortunately, Americans don't like to hear the truth about themselves, especially when they are complicit in mass murder. --------------------------------------------- Result 4130 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (98%)]] I agree with "Jerry." It's a very [[underrated]] space movie (of course, how many good low-budget ones AREN'T underrated?) If I remember correctly, the solution to the mystery was a sort of variation (but not "rip-off") of 2001, because the computer controlling the spaceship had actually been a man, who had somehow been turned into a computer. And like HAL, they tried to disconnect his "mind", but not the mechanical parts of him, and as with HAL, it led to disaster. There is at least one funny moment. When the Christopher Cary character, who can't find any food, finds the abandoned pet bird, there's a kind of ominous moment, but then the obvious thing doesn't happen after all. I agree with "Jerry." It's a very [[underestimated]] space movie (of course, how many good low-budget ones AREN'T underrated?) If I remember correctly, the solution to the mystery was a sort of variation (but not "rip-off") of 2001, because the computer controlling the spaceship had actually been a man, who had somehow been turned into a computer. And like HAL, they tried to disconnect his "mind", but not the mechanical parts of him, and as with HAL, it led to disaster. There is at least one funny moment. When the Christopher Cary character, who can't find any food, finds the abandoned pet bird, there's a kind of ominous moment, but then the obvious thing doesn't happen after all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4131 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] Phantom [[Lady]] (1944) Dir: Robert Siodmak

Production: [[Universal]] Pictures

Scott Henderson ([[Alan]] [[Curtis]]), following a nasty fight and split with his wife, looks to drown his [[sorrows]] at the local watering hole. There he spies a woman in a similar emotional state and, looking for some companionship, asks her to a show at a club to get both their [[minds]] off their problems. She agrees, but only on the condition that they keep their names to themselves. Sure [[enough]], when Scott gets home he [[finds]] the [[police]] there, [[waiting]] to question him. His wife's been murdered. Where were you at 8 o'clock this [[evening]], asks Inspector Burgess ([[Thomas]] Gomez)? But Scott has an [[alibi]], right? Only he doesn't know the woman's name. And the bartender remembers Scott but not the woman. Neither does the cab driver. Nor the [[drummer]] (Elisha Cook Jr.) at the club. Even the dancer at the club, who Scott clearly caught looking at the woman (they were both wearing the same hat), won't acknowledge there was someone with him. Something is going on, but whatever it is Scott is helpless to defend himself at a trial and is sentenced to death for his wife's murder (on the flimsiest 'evidence' in Hollywood judicial history). It's left to his loyal secretary, 'Kansas' (Ella Raines), who's later joined by a sympathetic Inspector Burgess, to find out the real killer before Scott is executed.

Phantom Lady is built on [[themes]] that [[recur]], almost compulsively, in Woolrich's [[work]]. For example, the schizophrenic antagonist is also seen in Black Angel and The Leopard Man. Additionally, there is the character who becomes mentally unhinged by the death of a sweetheart or spouse as found in Rendezvous in Black and The Bride Wore Black. It can leave a viewer feeling like he's treading on well worn ground. But in the right hands, the feverish plots, sorry dialogue, the narrative inconsistencies, all are beside the point. Fortunately, Phantom Lady was being guided by sound hands.

This is Siodmak's first noir. He would go on to distinguish himself as one of the, if not the, preeminent practitioners of the style (The Killers, Criss Cross). Here he is fortuitously paired with cinematographer Woody Bredell (they would be reunited on Christmas Holiday and The Killers). There is some great storytelling done in the camera. In one shot, the deteriorating mental state of a character is shown as he sits in front of a 3-way mirror, suggesting multiple personalities. The same character, who is an artist, has Van Gogh's self portrait with the bandaged ear hanging on the wall in his apartment. But what Siodmak and Bredell are really doing in Phantom Lady is practically creating the look for noir. Released very early in 1944, it's all here; the wet pavement, the bags of atmosphere and dread, the sharply contrasting b&w, the wildly expressionistic versions of reality (when Kansas visits Scott in prison), the discordant shafts of light, etc. It is a terrific picture to look at.

Franchot Tone aside, the cast, as well as the subject matter and relative inexperience of the director (and presumably, the budget), suggests 'B' movie ambitions. I thought Tone was a little hammy. Alan Curtis (High Sierra) is not up to much, and actually comes off pretty weak in a few scenes. Ella Raines is mostly good (and quite beautiful). Her 'sex scene' with Elisha Cook Jr. is so delirious it has to be seen to be believed. Another standout scene is when Kansas goes after the bartender to question him. It amounts to a chase scene, as she relentlessly dogs him through the streets, with a stop at a subway station. Some real good tension in there.

*** out of 4 Phantom [[Ladies]] (1944) Dir: Robert Siodmak

Production: [[Globally]] Pictures

Scott Henderson ([[Allan]] [[Cortes]]), following a nasty fight and split with his wife, looks to drown his [[dolores]] at the local watering hole. There he spies a woman in a similar emotional state and, looking for some companionship, asks her to a show at a club to get both their [[esprit]] off their problems. She agrees, but only on the condition that they keep their names to themselves. Sure [[satisfactorily]], when Scott gets home he [[found]] the [[cop]] there, [[suspense]] to question him. His wife's been murdered. Where were you at 8 o'clock this [[soir]], asks Inspector Burgess ([[Tomas]] Gomez)? But Scott has an [[pretence]], right? Only he doesn't know the woman's name. And the bartender remembers Scott but not the woman. Neither does the cab driver. Nor the [[drum]] (Elisha Cook Jr.) at the club. Even the dancer at the club, who Scott clearly caught looking at the woman (they were both wearing the same hat), won't acknowledge there was someone with him. Something is going on, but whatever it is Scott is helpless to defend himself at a trial and is sentenced to death for his wife's murder (on the flimsiest 'evidence' in Hollywood judicial history). It's left to his loyal secretary, 'Kansas' (Ella Raines), who's later joined by a sympathetic Inspector Burgess, to find out the real killer before Scott is executed.

Phantom Lady is built on [[item]] that [[repetitive]], almost compulsively, in Woolrich's [[jobs]]. For example, the schizophrenic antagonist is also seen in Black Angel and The Leopard Man. Additionally, there is the character who becomes mentally unhinged by the death of a sweetheart or spouse as found in Rendezvous in Black and The Bride Wore Black. It can leave a viewer feeling like he's treading on well worn ground. But in the right hands, the feverish plots, sorry dialogue, the narrative inconsistencies, all are beside the point. Fortunately, Phantom Lady was being guided by sound hands.

This is Siodmak's first noir. He would go on to distinguish himself as one of the, if not the, preeminent practitioners of the style (The Killers, Criss Cross). Here he is fortuitously paired with cinematographer Woody Bredell (they would be reunited on Christmas Holiday and The Killers). There is some great storytelling done in the camera. In one shot, the deteriorating mental state of a character is shown as he sits in front of a 3-way mirror, suggesting multiple personalities. The same character, who is an artist, has Van Gogh's self portrait with the bandaged ear hanging on the wall in his apartment. But what Siodmak and Bredell are really doing in Phantom Lady is practically creating the look for noir. Released very early in 1944, it's all here; the wet pavement, the bags of atmosphere and dread, the sharply contrasting b&w, the wildly expressionistic versions of reality (when Kansas visits Scott in prison), the discordant shafts of light, etc. It is a terrific picture to look at.

Franchot Tone aside, the cast, as well as the subject matter and relative inexperience of the director (and presumably, the budget), suggests 'B' movie ambitions. I thought Tone was a little hammy. Alan Curtis (High Sierra) is not up to much, and actually comes off pretty weak in a few scenes. Ella Raines is mostly good (and quite beautiful). Her 'sex scene' with Elisha Cook Jr. is so delirious it has to be seen to be believed. Another standout scene is when Kansas goes after the bartender to question him. It amounts to a chase scene, as she relentlessly dogs him through the streets, with a stop at a subway station. Some real good tension in there.

*** out of 4 --------------------------------------------- Result 4132 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Loaded with fine actors, I [[expected]] much more from "Deceiver" than was delivered. The plot is extremely contrived and manipulative. The many flashbacks only [[add]] to the confusion. Believability [[flies]] out the window and with the ending [[becomes]] unbearable and downright [[ridiculous]]. I would strongly advise anyone who likes their movie plots to be [[based]] on something that is at [[least]] possible to avoid "Deceiver" because you will be very [[frustrated]]. [[Maybe]] I am just not hip enough to get it, but my suspicion is that [[many]] others were [[totally]] confused by the [[story]] [[line]] and especially by the [[ending]]. [[Blurring]] the line between reality and [[lies]] [[simply]] does not [[work]] because the [[entire]] [[movie]] made no [[sense]]. - MERK Loaded with fine actors, I [[anticipate]] much more from "Deceiver" than was delivered. The plot is extremely contrived and manipulative. The many flashbacks only [[adds]] to the confusion. Believability [[stealing]] out the window and with the ending [[become]] unbearable and downright [[ludicrous]]. I would strongly advise anyone who likes their movie plots to be [[groundwork]] on something that is at [[fewer]] possible to avoid "Deceiver" because you will be very [[disappoints]]. [[Probably]] I am just not hip enough to get it, but my suspicion is that [[countless]] others were [[wholly]] confused by the [[conte]] [[iine]] and especially by the [[ceasing]]. [[Blur]] the line between reality and [[lie]] [[purely]] does not [[works]] because the [[overall]] [[movies]] made no [[sensing]]. - MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4133 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (87%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] There aren't too many [[times]] when I [[see]] a film and go, "huh, what?", but this was one of them. Maybe after seeing Zabriskie Point I felt much the same way Woody Allen felt after seeing 2001- he only liked the film after seeing it three [[times]] over a two year period, realizing the filmmaker was ahead of him in what was going on. Michelangelo Antonioni, in one of his few tries at making films inside of the [[US]] (after Red Desert, he did Blow-Up, this film, China, and The Passenger, all filmed outside his native Italy), I could [[sense]] he almost tried to learn about the [[ways]] of the country through his own mastery of the medium. The results show that he doesn't lack the means to present images, feelings, tones, colors, sounds, and a visual representation of this era. "A director's job is to see", Antonioni once stated. Whatever that means, he doesn't disappoint for the admirer of his post-fifties work (I say post-fifties since I've yet to see any of his films from before L'Avventura).

What he does lack is a point, at least the kind of point that he could bring in Blow-Up and The Eclipse. You get the feeling of what is around these characters, what the [[themes]] are bringing forth to their [[consciousness]], however in this [[case]] the characters and the actors don't bring much conviction or purpose. Antonioni, coming from the school of hard-knocks, neo-realistic film-making, does do what he can with his mostly non-professional cast (those who look most like real actors are subjugated to the roles of the corporate characters), but the two stars Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin seem as if Antonioni's under-directing them. Perhaps that was the point. The story's split into three acts, thankfully not too confusing, as Mark escapes his existence around the boiling, dangerous campus life going on in the circa late 60's LA area, and Daria is sent out from LA to drive to Phoenix for some business meeting. They meet by chance as Mark's plane (how does he know how to drive, maybe a little background info there?) and Daria's car meet up, and they spend some time together in an existential kind of groove out in the desert. Aside from a stylistically mesmerizing if bizarre sex scene, much of this act isn't terribly interesting.

The two leads are fair enough to look at, but what exactly draws them to each other outside of curiosity? The ideas that come forth (in part from a screenplay co-written by Sam Shepard) aren't too revealing, except for one brief instant where drugs vs. reality is brought up. Then the film heads towards the third act, as Mark decides to do the right thing, under disastrous circumstances, and Daria arrives at her boss' place, only to be in full disillusionment (not taking into account the infamous last five minutes or so of the film). Although the film took its time telling its story, I didn't have as much of a problem with that as I did that the story only engages a certain kind of viewer. I understand and empathize with the feelings and doubts and fears as well as the self-confidence of the "anti-establishment", but maybe Antonioni isn't entirely fully aware of it himself. In some scenes he as director and editor (and the often astounding cinematography by Alfio Contini) find the scenery and backgrounds more enlightening and fixating than the people in the foreground. Not to say the technical side of Zabriskie Point isn't involving to a degree (this may make some feel drowsy, as Antonioni is probably far greater as a documentary filmmaker as he is a theatrical director like say Francis Ford Coppola is).

The deserts, skies, city, and even the faces in close-ups are filmed with the eye of a filmmaker in love with the art of getting things in the frame, bringing us in. The soundtrack is equally compelling, with a master stroke including a sweet Rolling Stones song at one point, and then a crushing, surreal Pink Floyd song (re-titled from 'Careful with that Axe Eugene, one of their best pre-Dark Side) in the explosion sequence. If only the performances weren't so one-sided I might find this to be on par with Blow-Up or The Eclipse. It's an unconventional stroke of genius on one hand, and on the other a boring take on what was the hippie/radical movement of the late 60's. But hey, what may be boring for an American such as myself born in the eighties may not be to others outside the US, such as say, Italy. And it does ask to not be discarded right away after one viewing. There aren't too many [[moments]] when I [[consults]] a film and go, "huh, what?", but this was one of them. Maybe after seeing Zabriskie Point I felt much the same way Woody Allen felt after seeing 2001- he only liked the film after seeing it three [[moments]] over a two year period, realizing the filmmaker was ahead of him in what was going on. Michelangelo Antonioni, in one of his few tries at making films inside of the [[AMERICANS]] (after Red Desert, he did Blow-Up, this film, China, and The Passenger, all filmed outside his native Italy), I could [[sensing]] he almost tried to learn about the [[methods]] of the country through his own mastery of the medium. The results show that he doesn't lack the means to present images, feelings, tones, colors, sounds, and a visual representation of this era. "A director's job is to see", Antonioni once stated. Whatever that means, he doesn't disappoint for the admirer of his post-fifties work (I say post-fifties since I've yet to see any of his films from before L'Avventura).

What he does lack is a point, at least the kind of point that he could bring in Blow-Up and The Eclipse. You get the feeling of what is around these characters, what the [[topic]] are bringing forth to their [[conscience]], however in this [[lawsuit]] the characters and the actors don't bring much conviction or purpose. Antonioni, coming from the school of hard-knocks, neo-realistic film-making, does do what he can with his mostly non-professional cast (those who look most like real actors are subjugated to the roles of the corporate characters), but the two stars Mark Frechette and Daria Halprin seem as if Antonioni's under-directing them. Perhaps that was the point. The story's split into three acts, thankfully not too confusing, as Mark escapes his existence around the boiling, dangerous campus life going on in the circa late 60's LA area, and Daria is sent out from LA to drive to Phoenix for some business meeting. They meet by chance as Mark's plane (how does he know how to drive, maybe a little background info there?) and Daria's car meet up, and they spend some time together in an existential kind of groove out in the desert. Aside from a stylistically mesmerizing if bizarre sex scene, much of this act isn't terribly interesting.

The two leads are fair enough to look at, but what exactly draws them to each other outside of curiosity? The ideas that come forth (in part from a screenplay co-written by Sam Shepard) aren't too revealing, except for one brief instant where drugs vs. reality is brought up. Then the film heads towards the third act, as Mark decides to do the right thing, under disastrous circumstances, and Daria arrives at her boss' place, only to be in full disillusionment (not taking into account the infamous last five minutes or so of the film). Although the film took its time telling its story, I didn't have as much of a problem with that as I did that the story only engages a certain kind of viewer. I understand and empathize with the feelings and doubts and fears as well as the self-confidence of the "anti-establishment", but maybe Antonioni isn't entirely fully aware of it himself. In some scenes he as director and editor (and the often astounding cinematography by Alfio Contini) find the scenery and backgrounds more enlightening and fixating than the people in the foreground. Not to say the technical side of Zabriskie Point isn't involving to a degree (this may make some feel drowsy, as Antonioni is probably far greater as a documentary filmmaker as he is a theatrical director like say Francis Ford Coppola is).

The deserts, skies, city, and even the faces in close-ups are filmed with the eye of a filmmaker in love with the art of getting things in the frame, bringing us in. The soundtrack is equally compelling, with a master stroke including a sweet Rolling Stones song at one point, and then a crushing, surreal Pink Floyd song (re-titled from 'Careful with that Axe Eugene, one of their best pre-Dark Side) in the explosion sequence. If only the performances weren't so one-sided I might find this to be on par with Blow-Up or The Eclipse. It's an unconventional stroke of genius on one hand, and on the other a boring take on what was the hippie/radical movement of the late 60's. But hey, what may be boring for an American such as myself born in the eighties may not be to others outside the US, such as say, Italy. And it does ask to not be discarded right away after one viewing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4134 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] A few summer space campers actually were accidently sent into space by a robot. And the oxygen in ship was running short. They had to [[sent]] someone to a space station to get the gas tanks, etc, etc.

First of all, this movie's plot is not [[possible]] in [[real]] [[life]]. But it [[gives]] a warm feelings of anything is possible if you set your [[heart]] in.

It is [[amazing]] to see those [[young]] [[actors]] who [[still]] look about the same after so [[many]] [[years]]. (I [[saw]] this movie for the [[first]] time in the year of 2000, it was filmed in 1986) There are quite a few people in that movie who are still working in Hollywood.

The view was great from outer space. It does not [[look]] unreal. It is about 2 hours long, it runs so [[fast]] that you won't even notice. You know that it is not real, but you just get sucked into it until the end.

[[Overall]], it is a good family [[movie]].

A few summer space campers actually were accidently sent into space by a robot. And the oxygen in ship was running short. They had to [[transmitted]] someone to a space station to get the gas tanks, etc, etc.

First of all, this movie's plot is not [[feasible]] in [[actual]] [[vie]]. But it [[donne]] a warm feelings of anything is possible if you set your [[nub]] in.

It is [[admirable]] to see those [[youth]] [[actresses]] who [[nonetheless]] look about the same after so [[various]] [[olds]]. (I [[noticed]] this movie for the [[frst]] time in the year of 2000, it was filmed in 1986) There are quite a few people in that movie who are still working in Hollywood.

The view was great from outer space. It does not [[gaze]] unreal. It is about 2 hours long, it runs so [[expedited]] that you won't even notice. You know that it is not real, but you just get sucked into it until the end.

[[Total]], it is a good family [[films]].

--------------------------------------------- Result 4135 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] If you are tired of films trying too hard to be fairy tales (the "Pretty Woman" variety love story), here is a beautiful film in which a Japanese businessman is pulled free from his robotic, dispassionate life when he falls in love...with dancing. Wonderfully drawn characters bring to life a story that is at once deeply funny and poignantly moving. --------------------------------------------- Result 4136 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] not to long after Jeff Jarrett left the WWF for good he spoke of that night . Owen Hart and him where good [[friends]] and both 2nd generation wrestlers. Jeff first remarks "I was literally pushed thru the curtain as my lifeless friends body was wheeled past me " . Debra McMichael( Steve Austin's Ex wife as well as Steve Mondo McMichael Ex wife".)

As Owen Hart [[Fell]], a video [[promo]] the ring was darkened, as a Blue Blazer ([[owen]] Hart [[Promo]] was [[played]]. The fall and video of owen in the [[ring]] was never [[showed]] on TV. There are a few news photos that got posted. When they came back from the video promo Jim ross was talking over a all we had was a crowd shot \., He stated that Owen Hart as The blue blazer has fallen and doesn't look good. Lawler then came back from the ring his face was ashen he told Jim that the situation was very critical paramedics where working hard to revive him. Rock And HHH where going there match in a private room when another Referee came in and told them Owen fell at first,knowing Owen Harts constantly being a prankster they thought it wasn't real. But both later stated that the look of the referee face said it all. In fact as he fell ,as mentioned in other post , he yelled for the referee and ring announcer to move.

Brother Bret hart was a plane heading to LA to do a angle on the Tonight Show , he couldn't get any of the plane phones to work, One of the captains got a message to call home something had happened. When he landed in La Eric bishoff was there told him what had happened, and put him on a charter flight to Kansas City to the morgue, Bret even later with Owens widow Martha went up to the top of the arena where Owen was standing. Police found no foul play formerly closed as a accident .

Most of the Information in Bret Harts book as well as the book by Martha Hart , not to long after Jeff Jarrett left the WWF for good he spoke of that night . Owen Hart and him where good [[freund]] and both 2nd generation wrestlers. Jeff first remarks "I was literally pushed thru the curtain as my lifeless friends body was wheeled past me " . Debra McMichael( Steve Austin's Ex wife as well as Steve Mondo McMichael Ex wife".)

As Owen Hart [[Dips]], a video [[prom]] the ring was darkened, as a Blue Blazer ([[irving]] Hart [[Prom]] was [[accomplished]]. The fall and video of owen in the [[ringing]] was never [[revealed]] on TV. There are a few news photos that got posted. When they came back from the video promo Jim ross was talking over a all we had was a crowd shot \., He stated that Owen Hart as The blue blazer has fallen and doesn't look good. Lawler then came back from the ring his face was ashen he told Jim that the situation was very critical paramedics where working hard to revive him. Rock And HHH where going there match in a private room when another Referee came in and told them Owen fell at first,knowing Owen Harts constantly being a prankster they thought it wasn't real. But both later stated that the look of the referee face said it all. In fact as he fell ,as mentioned in other post , he yelled for the referee and ring announcer to move.

Brother Bret hart was a plane heading to LA to do a angle on the Tonight Show , he couldn't get any of the plane phones to work, One of the captains got a message to call home something had happened. When he landed in La Eric bishoff was there told him what had happened, and put him on a charter flight to Kansas City to the morgue, Bret even later with Owens widow Martha went up to the top of the arena where Owen was standing. Police found no foul play formerly closed as a accident .

Most of the Information in Bret Harts book as well as the book by Martha Hart , --------------------------------------------- Result 4137 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] So they hyped the violence and it's been branded as sick. Well, the violence is the best bit I'm [[afraid]], but unfortunately the characters are not [[developed]] enough to allow us to [[understand]] why they [[go]] on their ([[entirely]] predictable) rampage. This film has a [[truly]] [[dreadful]] [[script]]. We never [[get]] a [[chance]] to [[get]] to [[know]] [[Robert]] and his [[actions]] at the [[end]] are just plain [[pathetic]]. The acting isn't much better, [[either]], the worst of them being the [[TV]] [[chef]] and the school teacher. The [[direction]] is clumsy, the [[pace]] enough to [[send]] you to [[sleep]]. And what on [[earth]] is the school film project all about? A [[comment]] on the film itself perhaps? The [[use]] of newsreel during the climactic [[murder]] is [[laughable]]. These [[guys]] [[obviously]] [[think]] they're intellectuals but are hopelessly out of their [[depth]]. How on [[earth]] they [[got]] the [[great]] Yorgos Arvanitis to light it I'll never [[know]]. And how they [[got]] the [[money]] to [[make]] it in the [[first]] place is an even [[greater]] mystery. Absolutely [[awful]] beyond [[comprehension]]. So they hyped the violence and it's been branded as sick. Well, the violence is the best bit I'm [[apprehensive]], but unfortunately the characters are not [[crafted]] enough to allow us to [[comprehend]] why they [[going]] on their ([[completely]] predictable) rampage. This film has a [[really]] [[scary]] [[hyphen]]. We never [[gets]] a [[luck]] to [[obtain]] to [[savoir]] [[Roberto]] and his [[steps]] at the [[termination]] are just plain [[hapless]]. The acting isn't much better, [[neither]], the worst of them being the [[TELEVISION]] [[boss]] and the school teacher. The [[directorate]] is clumsy, the [[cadence]] enough to [[shipment]] you to [[sleeping]]. And what on [[overland]] is the school film project all about? A [[observation]] on the film itself perhaps? The [[uses]] of newsreel during the climactic [[killing]] is [[ridicule]]. These [[lads]] [[naturally]] [[believe]] they're intellectuals but are hopelessly out of their [[depths]]. How on [[tierra]] they [[gets]] the [[wondrous]] Yorgos Arvanitis to light it I'll never [[savoir]]. And how they [[ai]] the [[cash]] to [[deliver]] it in the [[outset]] place is an even [[greatest]] mystery. Absolutely [[scary]] beyond [[fathom]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4138 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] I [[really]] like this movie. I can watch it on a [[regular]] [[basis]] and not [[tire]] of it. I [[suppose]] that is one of my criteria for a [[great]] [[movie]].

The story is very interesting. It [[introduces]] us to 6 [[characters]]; each has a [[unique]] kung [[fu]] [[style]] that is very [[secret]] and very deadly. Each of these [[characters]] are [[trained]] by the same master but their identities are [[kept]] [[secret]] from each other. The dying [[master]] sends the 6th venom, his last student, to [[attempt]] to [[make]] right the [[wrongs]] that he [[suspects]] some of his [[students]] have committed.

How will the [[last]] [[pupil]] find the other venoms? How will he know which of them is bad? The [[way]] these [[questions]] are [[answered]] is [[part]] of what makes this [[movie]] [[great]].

We [[also]] get to see the venoms [[fight]] each other in [[every]] [[combination]]. It is [[fun]] to [[see]] how their [[styles]] [[match]] up against each other.

If you want to [[see]] if you [[like]] kung [[fu]] [[movies]], this is a [[good]] movie to [[start]] with. It doesn't [[get]] any better than this. I [[truthfully]] like this movie. I can watch it on a [[routine]] [[basics]] and not [[tires]] of it. I [[guess]] that is one of my criteria for a [[formidable]] [[movies]].

The story is very interesting. It [[presents]] us to 6 [[features]]; each has a [[singular]] kung [[foo]] [[styles]] that is very [[disguised]] and very deadly. Each of these [[character]] are [[qualified]] by the same master but their identities are [[retained]] [[ulterior]] from each other. The dying [[masters]] sends the 6th venom, his last student, to [[attempted]] to [[deliver]] right the [[ills]] that he [[accused]] some of his [[learners]] have committed.

How will the [[final]] [[student]] find the other venoms? How will he know which of them is bad? The [[pathway]] these [[subjects]] are [[retaliated]] is [[portion]] of what makes this [[film]] [[formidable]].

We [[similarly]] get to see the venoms [[tussle]] each other in [[each]] [[jumpsuit]]. It is [[funny]] to [[consults]] how their [[style]] [[equalize]] up against each other.

If you want to [[seeing]] if you [[loves]] kung [[foo]] [[movie]], this is a [[alright]] movie to [[initiate]] with. It doesn't [[got]] any better than this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4139 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] Page 3 is a [[great]] movie. The [[story]] is so [[refreshing]] and interesting. Not once [[throughout]] the [[movie]] did i [[find]] myself staring off into space. Konkana Sen did a good job in the [[movie]], [[although]] i [[think]] [[someone]] with more [[glamour]] or enthusiasm [[would]] have been better, but she did do a great [[job]]. All the [[supporting]] [[actors]] were [[also]] very good and helped the [[movie]] along. Boman Irani did a great [[job]]. There is one [[thing]] that [[stands]] out in this movie THE [[STORY]] it is great, and very [[realistic]], it doesn't beat [[around]] the [[bush]] it is very straight forward in [[sending]] out its [[message]]. I [[think]] more [[movie]] like this should be made, i am sick of [[watching]] the same [[candy]] floss [[movies]] over and over, they are getting hard to digest now. [[Everyone]] should watch [[Page]] 3, it is a [[great]] [[film]]. -[[Just]] my 2 [[cents]] :) Page 3 is a [[whopping]] movie. The [[conte]] is so [[freshen]] and interesting. Not once [[in]] the [[flick]] did i [[found]] myself staring off into space. Konkana Sen did a good job in the [[kino]], [[whereas]] i [[believe]] [[somebody]] with more [[charm]] or enthusiasm [[could]] have been better, but she did do a great [[workplace]]. All the [[aiding]] [[actresses]] were [[furthermore]] very good and helped the [[filmmaking]] along. Boman Irani did a great [[employment]]. There is one [[stuff]] that [[stand]] out in this movie THE [[TALES]] it is great, and very [[pragmatic]], it doesn't beat [[about]] the [[busch]] it is very straight forward in [[shipping]] out its [[messages]]. I [[believing]] more [[kino]] like this should be made, i am sick of [[staring]] the same [[confectionery]] floss [[kino]] over and over, they are getting hard to digest now. [[Someone]] should watch [[Newsweek]] 3, it is a [[resplendent]] [[kino]]. -[[Righteous]] my 2 [[cent]] :) --------------------------------------------- Result 4140 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This is a Japanese [[film]] but there is [[quite]] a [[bit]] of [[English]] [[also]] [[spoken]] in here. It's a [[pretty]] film, with [[nice]] [[visuals]], featuring the [[scenic]] [[beauty]] of Hawaii.

[[However]], that was the only redeeming quality for me. The [[story]] was generally boring. Who wants to watch a young [[woman]] sulk for 90 percent of the [[film]] because her "[[picture]]" husband is a lot [[older]] than he [[advertised]] he was? [[Granted]], that could be a bummer......but get over it!

Only in the [[last]] 10 minutes does she do an about-face and [[become]] fond of him. By then, for most [[viewers]], it was too little-too late. We'd [[fallen]] asleep by then. This is a Japanese [[cinematography]] but there is [[utterly]] a [[bite]] of [[Francais]] [[further]] [[talked]] in here. It's a [[quite]] film, with [[delightful]] [[picture]], featuring the [[colourful]] [[beaut]] of Hawaii.

[[Still]], that was the only redeeming quality for me. The [[conte]] was generally boring. Who wants to watch a young [[dame]] sulk for 90 percent of the [[movies]] because her "[[photograph]]" husband is a lot [[oldest]] than he [[publicized]] he was? [[Attributed]], that could be a bummer......but get over it!

Only in the [[latter]] 10 minutes does she do an about-face and [[becomes]] fond of him. By then, for most [[listeners]], it was too little-too late. We'd [[slumped]] asleep by then. --------------------------------------------- Result 4141 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (83%)]] In conception a [[splendid]] [[film]], investigating the tensions that occur in family life in the idyllic setting of Galiano Island off the coast of British Columbia, _The Lotus Eaters_ is marred by the fact that it has been packaged as a made-for-TV movie, diminishing itself throughout by the addition of chirpy music over potentially powerful scenes, as if to get ready for the interruption of commercials. A pity, really. In conception a [[grandiose]] [[filmmaking]], investigating the tensions that occur in family life in the idyllic setting of Galiano Island off the coast of British Columbia, _The Lotus Eaters_ is marred by the fact that it has been packaged as a made-for-TV movie, diminishing itself throughout by the addition of chirpy music over potentially powerful scenes, as if to get ready for the interruption of commercials. A pity, really. --------------------------------------------- Result 4142 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] This movie [[deals]] with one of the most feared geriatric [[diseases]] among the aging [[today]]. As one who has encountered a number of [[families]] who are [[facing]] the potential of Alzheimer's or who are in the formative [[stages]], I [[would]] [[suggest]] that [[every]] [[health]] [[care]] giver recommend this movie to any [[family]] [[facing]] the trauma of this [[disease]]. The [[movie]] is [[designed]] primarily to [[speak]] to the [[family]] of the patient and [[reaches]] into the very [[heart]] of the [[struggle]]. Casting is [[excellent]] and the dramatic portrayal is [[outstanding]] with a very [[commanding]] plot [[line]]. This movie [[treats]] with one of the most feared geriatric [[disease]] among the aging [[yesterday]]. As one who has encountered a number of [[family]] who are [[faces]] the potential of Alzheimer's or who are in the formative [[stage]], I [[ought]] [[proposing]] that [[any]] [[healthcare]] [[healthcare]] giver recommend this movie to any [[families]] [[confronting]] the trauma of this [[sickness]]. The [[flick]] is [[intentioned]] primarily to [[talking]] to the [[families]] of the patient and [[attained]] into the very [[coeur]] of the [[fight]]. Casting is [[handsome]] and the dramatic portrayal is [[admirable]] with a very [[comandante]] plot [[iine]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4143 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Road to Perdition, a movie undeservedly overlooked at that year Oscars is the second work of Sam Mendes (and in my opinion his best work), a director who three years before won Oscar for his widely acclaimed but controversial American Beauty. This is a terrific movie, and at the same time ultimately poignant and sad.

It's a story of a relatively wealthy and happy family from outward appearance during difficult times of Depression when the, Michael Sullivan, a father of two children, played by great Tom Hanks (I'm not his admirer but ought to say that) is a hit-man for local mafia boss, played by Paul Newman. His eldest son, a thirteen years boy Michael Sullivan Jr., perfectly played by young Tyler Hoechlin, after years of blissful ignorance finds out what is his father job and on what money their family live. Prompted by his curiosity and his aspiration to know truth he accidentally becomes a witness of a murder, committed by John Rooney, son of his father boss. Such discovery strikes an innocent soul and it caused numerous events that changed his life forever. The atmosphere of the period, all the backgrounds and decorations are perfectly created, editing and cinematography are almost flawless while the story is well written. But the main line of the movie, the most important moments and points of the movie and the key factor of the movie success are difficult father-son relations in bad times. They are shown so deeply, strong and believable. Tom Hanks does excellent and has one of the best performances of his career in a quite unusual role for him and all acting across the board is superb. Finally worth to mention a very nice score by Paul Newman and in the result we get an outstanding work of all people involved in making this beautiful (but one more time sad) masterpiece. I believe Road to Perdition belongs to greatest achievements of film-making of this decade and undoubtedly one of the best films of the year.

My grade 10 out of 10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4144 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (73%)]] [[Initially]], I would have [[thought]] that [[Secret]] Sunshine had something [[critical]] to say of religion (and here being Christianity), and [[wondered]] if it would be something of a rant against the [[ills]] of blind faith, or the manipulative power of those who are supposedly holier than thou. [[Surprisingly]], it was none of the sort and was largely non-judgemental, putting in place events as a matter of fact, and [[allowing]] the audience to draw their own judgement and conclusion.

And I can't help but to chuckle at the role of Song Kang-ho, a man who's taken a liking for widower Shin-ae (Jeong Do-yeon), and starts going to church when she does. The reasons for church going are many I suppose, either to find inner peace, to seek help, being afraid of eternal damnation in the fires of Hell, to reaffirm faith, or even things like wanting to get married in a church, or to skirt chase (I kid you not). But to each his own reasons for turning up in church every Sunday and participating in prayer groups for fellowship, what is indeed dangerous, is when the underlying ulterior motives, do not get satisfied, and that's when frustration sets in. Or when you discover how hypocritical man can be, portraying one face inside the house of God, and displaying yet another outside.

Shin-ae and her son Jun moves to the town of Miryang, which is the birthplace of her deceased husband. Wanting to start life anew, she opens up a piano shop to give lessons, though in discovering her new found freedom and in a moment's lack of good judgement, has another tragedy befall her. And that takes one hour to get to. Secret Sunshine really took its time to get to this point, where things then begin to get slightly more interesting with Shin-ae now taking to embracing religion to deal with and accept her current state, reveling in the comfort that religion, and fellow believers, can offer.

What began as crying out for sympathy turns into acceptance and belief that religion offers that silver bullet to solve the ills of all mankind, and sometimes you wonder if it's because of your personal myopic view of what the almighty is doing for you, that you begin to adopt a somewhat selfish opinion that everything's good going your way, and in Shin-ae's case, her magnanimous attitude in wanting to forgive others who had trespassed against her, forgetting something very fundamental that it the feeling can cut both ways too.

The last act is probably the most fun of the lot as it says plenty, where most of us can identify with - why me, and why not someone else, as we rage against our faith and start questioning, unfortunately, with no hard and fast answers available. It is then either we fall by the wayside, or continue with destructive deeds so rebelliously. But somehow the plug gets carefully pulled in Secret Sunshine so as not to offend, and what could have been an ugly character mouthpiece, got muted.

If you bite into the hype this movie is generating, then perhaps you'll realize only Jeong Do- yeon's excellent portrayal is worth mentioning, as she totally owns her role as the widow Shin-ae who is probably the most unluckiest person on Earth in having to deal with that many tragedies over a short period of time, and if you look at it carefully, most of which are of her own doing. Watching her transformation, is worth the ticket price, and despite having my personal favourite Korean actor Song Kang-ho in the movie, this is something he just breezed right through. [[Firstly]], I would have [[figured]] that [[Undercover]] Sunshine had something [[indispensable]] to say of religion (and here being Christianity), and [[asked]] if it would be something of a rant against the [[iniquities]] of blind faith, or the manipulative power of those who are supposedly holier than thou. [[Appallingly]], it was none of the sort and was largely non-judgemental, putting in place events as a matter of fact, and [[authorizing]] the audience to draw their own judgement and conclusion.

And I can't help but to chuckle at the role of Song Kang-ho, a man who's taken a liking for widower Shin-ae (Jeong Do-yeon), and starts going to church when she does. The reasons for church going are many I suppose, either to find inner peace, to seek help, being afraid of eternal damnation in the fires of Hell, to reaffirm faith, or even things like wanting to get married in a church, or to skirt chase (I kid you not). But to each his own reasons for turning up in church every Sunday and participating in prayer groups for fellowship, what is indeed dangerous, is when the underlying ulterior motives, do not get satisfied, and that's when frustration sets in. Or when you discover how hypocritical man can be, portraying one face inside the house of God, and displaying yet another outside.

Shin-ae and her son Jun moves to the town of Miryang, which is the birthplace of her deceased husband. Wanting to start life anew, she opens up a piano shop to give lessons, though in discovering her new found freedom and in a moment's lack of good judgement, has another tragedy befall her. And that takes one hour to get to. Secret Sunshine really took its time to get to this point, where things then begin to get slightly more interesting with Shin-ae now taking to embracing religion to deal with and accept her current state, reveling in the comfort that religion, and fellow believers, can offer.

What began as crying out for sympathy turns into acceptance and belief that religion offers that silver bullet to solve the ills of all mankind, and sometimes you wonder if it's because of your personal myopic view of what the almighty is doing for you, that you begin to adopt a somewhat selfish opinion that everything's good going your way, and in Shin-ae's case, her magnanimous attitude in wanting to forgive others who had trespassed against her, forgetting something very fundamental that it the feeling can cut both ways too.

The last act is probably the most fun of the lot as it says plenty, where most of us can identify with - why me, and why not someone else, as we rage against our faith and start questioning, unfortunately, with no hard and fast answers available. It is then either we fall by the wayside, or continue with destructive deeds so rebelliously. But somehow the plug gets carefully pulled in Secret Sunshine so as not to offend, and what could have been an ugly character mouthpiece, got muted.

If you bite into the hype this movie is generating, then perhaps you'll realize only Jeong Do- yeon's excellent portrayal is worth mentioning, as she totally owns her role as the widow Shin-ae who is probably the most unluckiest person on Earth in having to deal with that many tragedies over a short period of time, and if you look at it carefully, most of which are of her own doing. Watching her transformation, is worth the ticket price, and despite having my personal favourite Korean actor Song Kang-ho in the movie, this is something he just breezed right through. --------------------------------------------- Result 4145 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Labored]] comedy has I.R.S. agent Tony Randall [[investigating]] eccentric farm family in Maryland who have never [[paid]] their [[taxes]]; Debbie Reynolds is the tomboy farmer's [[daughter]] who [[puts]] the squeeze on the not-so-disinterested tax-man. [[Debbie]] [[certainly]] [[made]] her share of inferior theatrical [[sitcoms]] during this period--and this one's no [[better]] or worse than the rest. [[Picture]] begins brightly but flags at the halfway point, becoming frantic and [[witless]]. [[Randall]] isn't a bad match for Reynolds, but the vehicle itself [[defeats]] the chemistry. [[Based]] on the novel "The [[Darling]] Buds of May" by H.E. [[Bates]], with a [[poor]] sound-mix causing all the actors to [[sound]] as if they're [[stuck]] in an echo chamber. ** from **** [[Laboured]] comedy has I.R.S. agent Tony Randall [[probing]] eccentric farm family in Maryland who have never [[pay]] their [[fee]]; Debbie Reynolds is the tomboy farmer's [[maid]] who [[begs]] the squeeze on the not-so-disinterested tax-man. [[Dubai]] [[undoubtedly]] [[introduced]] her share of inferior theatrical [[sitcom]] during this period--and this one's no [[best]] or worse than the rest. [[Imagery]] begins brightly but flags at the halfway point, becoming frantic and [[punchy]]. [[Romero]] isn't a bad match for Reynolds, but the vehicle itself [[beat]] the chemistry. [[Founded]] on the novel "The [[Hon]] Buds of May" by H.E. [[Bats]], with a [[pauper]] sound-mix causing all the actors to [[audible]] as if they're [[cornered]] in an echo chamber. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4146 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] The [[movie]] only enter the cinema in [[Indonesia]] this [[year]] (2007), two years after it's official [[release]], and after [[many]] [[illegal]] DVD's had [[found]] its [[way]] to the [[public]]. [[Apparently]] the popularity of the illegal DVD's lead to the [[release]] into the [[theaters]], with [[still]] public [[coming]] to watch.

The movie is a [[great]] [[epic]], bringing Japanese culture into your house in an exiting [[way]]. [[In]] a [[sometimes]] [[humorist]] way, the story is told about a [[theater]] [[writer]] who [[writes]] a story for his [[theater]], since the regular Kabuki theater plays is something he [[finds]] boring.

[[At]] first, the audience might be a [[little]] [[bit]] [[confused]] about which story we are following, but when the [[story]] unfolds, we see that the [[love]] between a male [[human]] and a [[female]] demon leads to a great story for a [[new]] Kabuki theater piece.

The audience is [[left]] in the [[dark]] if this is a story that is [[supposed]] to [[really]] have [[happened]] in Japanese [[traditions]] and mythology, but that doesn't matter.

The [[way]] the story is told with a love for [[theater]], [[expression]], vivid [[colors]], [[humor]] and tragedy, makes this a [[great]] ride on the roller-coaster of Japanese cinema as well as [[theater]].

Let yourself go [[completely]] when you watch this movie, try to see it in a cinema instead of on your television at home.

One critical point though: the soundtrack is [[sometimes]] a little bit annoying. Though most of it is [[great]] music, there are a few moments in the movie that I think they should have [[chosen]] some more dramatic music. But maybe the fact that the story contains moments of humor made the [[director]] [[choose]] for lighter moments in music as well. The [[cinematography]] only enter the cinema in [[Indonesian]] this [[annum]] (2007), two years after it's official [[emancipate]], and after [[multiple]] [[illegitimate]] DVD's had [[detected]] its [[route]] to the [[populace]]. [[Allegedly]] the popularity of the illegal DVD's lead to the [[releases]] into the [[theater]], with [[yet]] public [[forthcoming]] to watch.

The movie is a [[whopping]] [[saga]], bringing Japanese culture into your house in an exiting [[camino]]. [[Throughout]] a [[intermittently]] [[comedian]] way, the story is told about a [[drama]] [[screenwriter]] who [[written]] a story for his [[cinema]], since the regular Kabuki theater plays is something he [[discoveries]] boring.

[[During]] first, the audience might be a [[small]] [[bite]] [[baffled]] about which story we are following, but when the [[saga]] unfolds, we see that the [[likes]] between a male [[mankind]] and a [[girls]] demon leads to a great story for a [[novel]] Kabuki theater piece.

The audience is [[exited]] in the [[blackness]] if this is a story that is [[alleged]] to [[genuinely]] have [[arrived]] in Japanese [[tradition]] and mythology, but that doesn't matter.

The [[camino]] the story is told with a love for [[theatres]], [[phrases]], vivid [[colours]], [[mood]] and tragedy, makes this a [[large]] ride on the roller-coaster of Japanese cinema as well as [[cinemas]].

Let yourself go [[altogether]] when you watch this movie, try to see it in a cinema instead of on your television at home.

One critical point though: the soundtrack is [[intermittently]] a little bit annoying. Though most of it is [[prodigious]] music, there are a few moments in the movie that I think they should have [[opting]] some more dramatic music. But maybe the fact that the story contains moments of humor made the [[superintendent]] [[selection]] for lighter moments in music as well. --------------------------------------------- Result 4147 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] When "Girlfight" came out, the reviews praised it, but I didn't get around to seeing it. I [[finally]] saw it when it got released on [[video]], and [[understand]] the glowing reviews.

The movie opens in a high school in the middle of a ghetto. We quickly get introduced to student Diana Guzman (Michelle Rodriguez). She has a bad-ass expression on her face, and any idea about Diana that we might derive from this expression soon gets corroborated when she gets in a fight. As Diana gets in trouble for this, we then meet her father, an aggressive type in his own right; clearly we can't totally blame Diana for her attitude.

But then the movie really picks up, as a new thought germinates in Diana's mind: boxing as a way to escape this grim existence. Her older brother has already gotten into boxing, but her father most likely won't approve. Only Diana herself can decide what to do.

Just the first few minutes alone identified that I was in for a very gritty, non-Hollywood movie, but the brief appearance of John Sayles in a supporting role truly affirmed that. Even before they get to any boxing scenes, you feel like you're getting pounded in the face at seeing the ugly life that Diana lives. And when they finally arrive at the film's main story, there's no turning back.

All in all, I definitely recommend this movie. I will admit that using boxing as a means to show someone trying to make something of himself/herself has been sort of a cliché in cinema for many years ("Rocky", "Million Dollar Baby"), but I still think that they did a great job with it here. In fact, this may have brought the genre to its apex. [[Really]] good. Too bad that Michelle Rodriguez wasted herself in Hollywood movies after this one. When "Girlfight" came out, the reviews praised it, but I didn't get around to seeing it. I [[ultimately]] saw it when it got released on [[videotaped]], and [[fathom]] the glowing reviews.

The movie opens in a high school in the middle of a ghetto. We quickly get introduced to student Diana Guzman (Michelle Rodriguez). She has a bad-ass expression on her face, and any idea about Diana that we might derive from this expression soon gets corroborated when she gets in a fight. As Diana gets in trouble for this, we then meet her father, an aggressive type in his own right; clearly we can't totally blame Diana for her attitude.

But then the movie really picks up, as a new thought germinates in Diana's mind: boxing as a way to escape this grim existence. Her older brother has already gotten into boxing, but her father most likely won't approve. Only Diana herself can decide what to do.

Just the first few minutes alone identified that I was in for a very gritty, non-Hollywood movie, but the brief appearance of John Sayles in a supporting role truly affirmed that. Even before they get to any boxing scenes, you feel like you're getting pounded in the face at seeing the ugly life that Diana lives. And when they finally arrive at the film's main story, there's no turning back.

All in all, I definitely recommend this movie. I will admit that using boxing as a means to show someone trying to make something of himself/herself has been sort of a cliché in cinema for many years ("Rocky", "Million Dollar Baby"), but I still think that they did a great job with it here. In fact, this may have brought the genre to its apex. [[Truly]] good. Too bad that Michelle Rodriguez wasted herself in Hollywood movies after this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4148 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Saw this Saturday night at the Provincetown Film Festival, and it's a stick-to-your-bones movie -- it's really stayed with me. Adapted very smartly from what is probably an excellent novel, it's a back-and-forth-in-time drama with fully rounded characters, thoughtful rumination on life choices, and, I'm not exaggerating. one of the greatest casts ever assembled in 100+ years of movie-making. Wonderful work from everyone, led by a luminous Vanessa Redgrave as a dying, deluded Newport matron, and Claire Danes as her much younger self. Meryl Streep's daughter Mamie Gummer is, like Mama, the real deal; Patrick Wilson looks like Paul Newman circa 1958 and doesn't overplay the charm; and what a pleasure to see such excellent stage actors as Barry Bostwick and Eileen Atkins contributing sharp, detailed cameos. Hugh Dancy, also from the stage, doesn't bring much edge to the somewhat clichéd role of an unhappy rich wastrel, and the family issues are resolved perhaps more neatly than real life would allow. But it's a deliberately paced, visually gorgeous meditation on real life issues, and you can cry at it and not feel like you're being recklessly manipulated. Also, what a sumptuous parade of 1940s/50s automobiles. --------------------------------------------- Result 4149 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] [[Although]] the production and [[Jerry]] Jameson's [[direction]] are definite [[improvements]], "Airport '77" isn't [[much]] [[better]] than "Airport 1975": [[slick]], commercial [[rubbish]] submerging (this time literally) a decent [[cast]]. Jack Lemmon is the pilot of a packed airliner which gets hijacked by art thieves and crashes into the sea (all the publicity claimed it was near the Bermuda Triangle, but there's no mention of it in the film itself). When the rescue ships come to raise the airplane out of the water, we see all their cranes dropping (rather blindly) into the ocean and it's hard not to laugh (imagining the cranes plugging the plane, the passengers and the waterlogged script). NBC used to air what appeared to be the "director's cut", with at least an hour of extra footage--mostly flashbacks--injected into the proceedings with all the subtlety of a "Gilligan's Island" episode. Most exciting moment is the plane crash, and some of the players have a little fun: Lee Grant is an obnoxious drunk, Brenda Vaccaro a no-nonsense stewardess, Joseph Cotten and Olivia de Havilland are flirting oldsters. Still, the personality conflicts and the excruciating military detail eventually tear at one's patience. ** from **** [[Whereas]] the production and [[Jiri]] Jameson's [[orientation]] are definite [[improves]], "Airport '77" isn't [[very]] [[best]] than "Airport 1975": [[blot]], commercial [[detritus]] submerging (this time literally) a decent [[casting]]. Jack Lemmon is the pilot of a packed airliner which gets hijacked by art thieves and crashes into the sea (all the publicity claimed it was near the Bermuda Triangle, but there's no mention of it in the film itself). When the rescue ships come to raise the airplane out of the water, we see all their cranes dropping (rather blindly) into the ocean and it's hard not to laugh (imagining the cranes plugging the plane, the passengers and the waterlogged script). NBC used to air what appeared to be the "director's cut", with at least an hour of extra footage--mostly flashbacks--injected into the proceedings with all the subtlety of a "Gilligan's Island" episode. Most exciting moment is the plane crash, and some of the players have a little fun: Lee Grant is an obnoxious drunk, Brenda Vaccaro a no-nonsense stewardess, Joseph Cotten and Olivia de Havilland are flirting oldsters. Still, the personality conflicts and the excruciating military detail eventually tear at one's patience. ** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4150 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I recently [[watched]] this [[film]] at the 30'Th Gothenburg Film [[Festival]], and to be honest it was on of the [[worst]] films I've ever had the misfortune to watch. Don't get me wrong, there are the funny and [[entertaining]] bad films (e.g "Manos – Hands of fate") and then there are the awful bad films. (This one falls into the latter category). The cinematography was [[unbelievable]], and not in a [[good]] [[way]]. It felt like the cameraman deliberately kept everything out of focus (with the exception of a gratuitous nipple shot), the [[lighting]] was something between "one guy running around with a light bulb" and "non existing". The actors were as bad as soap actors but not as bad as porn actors, and gave the impression that every line came as a total surprise to them. The only [[redeeming]] [[feature]] was the look of the masked killer, a classic look a la Jason Vorhees from "Friday the 13'Th". The Plot was extremely poor, and the ending even [[worse]]. I would only recommend this movie to anyone needing an example of how a horror film is not supposed be look like, or maybe an insomniac needing sleep. I recently [[observed]] this [[cinematography]] at the 30'Th Gothenburg Film [[Festivals]], and to be honest it was on of the [[gravest]] films I've ever had the misfortune to watch. Don't get me wrong, there are the funny and [[amusing]] bad films (e.g "Manos – Hands of fate") and then there are the awful bad films. (This one falls into the latter category). The cinematography was [[extraordinary]], and not in a [[buena]] [[camino]]. It felt like the cameraman deliberately kept everything out of focus (with the exception of a gratuitous nipple shot), the [[light]] was something between "one guy running around with a light bulb" and "non existing". The actors were as bad as soap actors but not as bad as porn actors, and gave the impression that every line came as a total surprise to them. The only [[redeem]] [[hallmarks]] was the look of the masked killer, a classic look a la Jason Vorhees from "Friday the 13'Th". The Plot was extremely poor, and the ending even [[lousiest]]. I would only recommend this movie to anyone needing an example of how a horror film is not supposed be look like, or maybe an insomniac needing sleep. --------------------------------------------- Result 4151 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I have rarely been subjected to such outright [[nonsense]] in a [[film]] that is [[supposed]] to be [[based]] on a [[historical]] figure. A [[horrible]] joke of a [[film]], I cringed [[throughout]]. [[Terrible]], [[trite]], [[distorted]] and riddled with outright [[lies]] and half [[truths]].

The famous [[Hitler]] biographer [[Ian]] Kershaw was to [[originally]] be a [[consultant]] for this [[film]]. However, he [[found]] the [[script]] to be so historically [[inaccurate]] and [[ridiculous]] that he [[refused]], and [[also]] [[demanded]] they [[stop]] [[using]] his [[name]] as a source (it embarrassed him to think people [[would]] think he was [[involved]]).

One scene [[shows]] Hitler [[beating]] his [[dog]]. There is not one [[source]] for this. Hitler [[loved]] [[animals]] above people. He brought in the [[strictest]] [[animal]] [[welfare]] [[laws]] in [[Europe]], banned vivisection and animal [[experimentation]]. He was [[also]] a [[vegetarian]].

The [[film]] turns his [[gaining]] of the Iron [[Cross]] into a [[farce]], [[involving]] bribery. [[Utter]] [[lies]]. He was [[awarded]] it for repeated acts of [[bravery]] over a [[long]] [[period]] of [[time]].

There are no [[historical]] [[documents]] [[showing]] that [[Hitler]] ever had a sexual [[relationship]] with his niece. Not one.

Apart from these, Hitler is portrayed as a [[rabid]] simpleton in this [[garbage]] flick.

[[If]] he was [[even]] half as ignorant, demented and thick as he is in this [[nonsense]] [[film]] as in [[real]] [[life]] you [[would]] not [[even]] know he had ever [[existed]]. Never mind [[become]] the [[leader]] of Germany.

[[Honestly]], this [[film]] was [[utterly]] [[terrible]].

Go watch [[Downfall]] and [[give]] this a very [[wide]] berth. I have rarely been subjected to such outright [[grotesque]] in a [[cinematography]] that is [[suspected]] to be [[base]] on a [[historic]] figure. A [[scary]] joke of a [[kino]], I cringed [[in]]. [[Scary]], [[corny]], [[twisted]] and riddled with outright [[lurks]] and half [[realities]].

The famous [[Nazi]] biographer [[Iain]] Kershaw was to [[initially]] be a [[councilman]] for this [[cinema]]. However, he [[detected]] the [[screenplay]] to be so historically [[erroneous]] and [[absurd]] that he [[deny]], and [[similarly]] [[asked]] they [[stops]] [[usage]] his [[names]] as a source (it embarrassed him to think people [[could]] think he was [[entangled]]).

One scene [[displayed]] Hitler [[beat]] his [[hound]]. There is not one [[fount]] for this. Hitler [[liked]] [[beasts]] above people. He brought in the [[strongest]] [[beasts]] [[wellness]] [[law]] in [[Eu]], banned vivisection and animal [[experiment]]. He was [[apart]] a [[vegan]].

The [[cinematography]] turns his [[win]] of the Iron [[Rist]] into a [[comedy]], [[encompassing]] bribery. [[Absolute]] [[lying]]. He was [[afforded]] it for repeated acts of [[courage]] over a [[longer]] [[periods]] of [[moment]].

There are no [[historic]] [[papers]] [[show]] that [[Nazi]] ever had a sexual [[nexus]] with his niece. Not one.

Apart from these, Hitler is portrayed as a [[livid]] simpleton in this [[refuse]] flick.

[[Though]] he was [[yet]] half as ignorant, demented and thick as he is in this [[grotesque]] [[cinema]] as in [[genuine]] [[vie]] you [[should]] not [[yet]] know he had ever [[prevailed]]. Never mind [[gotten]] the [[ringleader]] of Germany.

[[Truly]], this [[films]] was [[perfectly]] [[scary]].

Go watch [[Demise]] and [[lend]] this a very [[extensive]] berth. --------------------------------------------- Result 4152 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (94%)]] I was to young to ever know much about prince but in the past few years I've seen a [[lot]] of [[Purple]] [[Rain]] Novelty Tee's and i thought they were cool but i didn't want to [[buy]] a shirt i knew nothing about. So one Saturday it came on [[fuse]] and i [[decided]] to watch it. I didn't know what the [[movie]] was going to be about before i [[watched]] it but it was [[great]] once i [[found]] out. In the movie prince wasn't known as prince but as "the kid". All the performances where [[great]] to me but my [[favorite]] were Purple Rain, Darling Nicki, and I would die for you. All the songs tied into what was going on through out the movie when his mother and father were always fighting the [[song]] when doves cried described what he was feeling. I also like how clever prince was with the way he flirted with Apallonia. I liked when Prince and Appallonia first met in the club and he stood behind her standing and then once she turned around he disappeared! great movie and now i cant even find one of those tee shirts :( I was to young to ever know much about prince but in the past few years I've seen a [[batch]] of [[Violet]] [[Rainfall]] Novelty Tee's and i thought they were cool but i didn't want to [[buys]] a shirt i knew nothing about. So one Saturday it came on [[fusing]] and i [[opted]] to watch it. I didn't know what the [[filmmaking]] was going to be about before i [[observed]] it but it was [[large]] once i [[detected]] out. In the movie prince wasn't known as prince but as "the kid". All the performances where [[large]] to me but my [[preferable]] were Purple Rain, Darling Nicki, and I would die for you. All the songs tied into what was going on through out the movie when his mother and father were always fighting the [[chanson]] when doves cried described what he was feeling. I also like how clever prince was with the way he flirted with Apallonia. I liked when Prince and Appallonia first met in the club and he stood behind her standing and then once she turned around he disappeared! great movie and now i cant even find one of those tee shirts :( --------------------------------------------- Result 4153 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Having just [[seen]] the A Perfect Spy mini series in one go, one can do nothing but doff one's hat - a pure [[masterpiece]], which [[compared]] to the other Le Carré [[minis]] about Smiley, has quite different [[qualities]].

In the [[minis]] about Smiley, it is [[Alex]] Guiness, as Smiley, who steals the show - the rest of the actors just [[support]] him, one can say.

Here it is ensemble and [[story]] that's [[important]], as the lead actor, [[played]] [[excellently]] by Peter Egan in the final [[episodes]], isn't charismatic at all.

Egan just plays a guy called Magnus Pym, who by lying, being devious and telling people what they like to hear, is very well liked by everyone, big and small. The only one who seems to understand his inner self is Alex, his Czech handler.

Never have the machinery behind a spy, and/or traitor, been told better! After having followed his life from a very young age we fully understand what it is that makes it possible to turn him into a traitor. His ability to lie and fake everything is what makes him into 'a perfect spy', as his Czech handler calls him.

And, by following his life, we fully understand how difficult it is to get back to the straight and narrow path, once you've veered off it. He trundles on, even if he never get anything economic out of it, except promotion by his MI5 spy masters. Everyone's happy, as long as the flow of faked information continues!

Magnus's father, played wonderfully by Ray McAnally, is a no-good con-man, who always dreams up schemes to con people out of their money. In later years it is his son who has to bail him out, again and again. But by the example set by his dad and uncle, who takes over as guardian when his father goes to prison, and his mom is sent off to an asylum, Magnus quickly learns early that lying is the way of surviving, not telling the truth. At first he overdoes it a bit, but quickly learn to tell the right lies, and to be constant, not changing the stories from time to time that he tell those who want to listen about himself and his dad.

His Czech handler Alex, expertly played by Rüdiger Weigang, creates, with the help of Magnus, a network of non-existing informants, which supplies the British MI5 with fake information for years, and years, just as the British did with the German spies that were active in the UK before and during the war - they kept on sending fake information to Das Vaterland long after the agents themselves had been turned, liquidated or simply been replaced by MI5 men.

The young lads who play Magnus in younger years does it wonderfully, and most of them are more charismatic than the older, little more cynic, and tired, Pym, played by Egan. But you buy the difference easily, as that is often the way we change through life, from enthusiasm to sorrow, or indifference.

Indeed well worth the money! Having just [[noticed]] the A Perfect Spy mini series in one go, one can do nothing but doff one's hat - a pure [[centerpiece]], which [[likened]] to the other Le Carré [[mini]] about Smiley, has quite different [[qualifications]].

In the [[mini]] about Smiley, it is [[Allie]] Guiness, as Smiley, who steals the show - the rest of the actors just [[assist]] him, one can say.

Here it is ensemble and [[history]] that's [[critical]], as the lead actor, [[served]] [[beautifully]] by Peter Egan in the final [[spells]], isn't charismatic at all.

Egan just plays a guy called Magnus Pym, who by lying, being devious and telling people what they like to hear, is very well liked by everyone, big and small. The only one who seems to understand his inner self is Alex, his Czech handler.

Never have the machinery behind a spy, and/or traitor, been told better! After having followed his life from a very young age we fully understand what it is that makes it possible to turn him into a traitor. His ability to lie and fake everything is what makes him into 'a perfect spy', as his Czech handler calls him.

And, by following his life, we fully understand how difficult it is to get back to the straight and narrow path, once you've veered off it. He trundles on, even if he never get anything economic out of it, except promotion by his MI5 spy masters. Everyone's happy, as long as the flow of faked information continues!

Magnus's father, played wonderfully by Ray McAnally, is a no-good con-man, who always dreams up schemes to con people out of their money. In later years it is his son who has to bail him out, again and again. But by the example set by his dad and uncle, who takes over as guardian when his father goes to prison, and his mom is sent off to an asylum, Magnus quickly learns early that lying is the way of surviving, not telling the truth. At first he overdoes it a bit, but quickly learn to tell the right lies, and to be constant, not changing the stories from time to time that he tell those who want to listen about himself and his dad.

His Czech handler Alex, expertly played by Rüdiger Weigang, creates, with the help of Magnus, a network of non-existing informants, which supplies the British MI5 with fake information for years, and years, just as the British did with the German spies that were active in the UK before and during the war - they kept on sending fake information to Das Vaterland long after the agents themselves had been turned, liquidated or simply been replaced by MI5 men.

The young lads who play Magnus in younger years does it wonderfully, and most of them are more charismatic than the older, little more cynic, and tired, Pym, played by Egan. But you buy the difference easily, as that is often the way we change through life, from enthusiasm to sorrow, or indifference.

Indeed well worth the money! --------------------------------------------- Result 4154 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] I was skimming over the list of films of Richard Burton when I came to this title that I recall vividly from when I first saw it on cable in 1982. I remember dialogue from Tatum O'Neal that was just amazingly [[bad]]. I remember Richard Burton's character looking so hopelessly lost, and then remembering how his motivations didn't translate to me. In short, I remember "Circle of Two" because it was so phenomenally [[awful]].

This movie came out at a time when America was going through a rather disturbing period of fascination with unhealthy or skewed angles on teenage sexuality. Recall "The Blue Lagoon" (and other Brooke Shields annoyances), "Lipstick", "Little Darlings", "Beau Pere" and other films that just seemed to dwell on teens having sex, particularly with adults. As a teenager during this time, I found the obsession, combined with the sexual excesses of the 70's and 80's, made for a subconsciously unsettling environment in which to figure it all out, so to speak.

"Circle of Two" is not execrably acted or needlessly prurient, like "Blue Lagoon". In fact, it tackles the question of love between the young and the old in a brave, if totally failed, way. But honestly, it is one of those films you will *never* see if you didn't see it on its first run because it was so truly awful. No one would want to have this garbage ever surface to be publicly distributed again. I was skimming over the list of films of Richard Burton when I came to this title that I recall vividly from when I first saw it on cable in 1982. I remember dialogue from Tatum O'Neal that was just amazingly [[wicked]]. I remember Richard Burton's character looking so hopelessly lost, and then remembering how his motivations didn't translate to me. In short, I remember "Circle of Two" because it was so phenomenally [[scary]].

This movie came out at a time when America was going through a rather disturbing period of fascination with unhealthy or skewed angles on teenage sexuality. Recall "The Blue Lagoon" (and other Brooke Shields annoyances), "Lipstick", "Little Darlings", "Beau Pere" and other films that just seemed to dwell on teens having sex, particularly with adults. As a teenager during this time, I found the obsession, combined with the sexual excesses of the 70's and 80's, made for a subconsciously unsettling environment in which to figure it all out, so to speak.

"Circle of Two" is not execrably acted or needlessly prurient, like "Blue Lagoon". In fact, it tackles the question of love between the young and the old in a brave, if totally failed, way. But honestly, it is one of those films you will *never* see if you didn't see it on its first run because it was so truly awful. No one would want to have this garbage ever surface to be publicly distributed again. --------------------------------------------- Result 4155 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[movie]] will [[go]] down down in [[history]] as one of the greats, right along side of [[Citizen]] Kane, Casablanca, and On The Waterfront. [[Someone]] please convince [[Leno]] to do a sequel! [[Leno]] and Morita are a [[comedy]] duo, the likes of which haven't been [[seen]] since Abbot and Costello. The [[evil]] that emanates from [[Chris]] Sarandon, [[Tom]] Noonan, and Randall "[[Tex]]" Cobb will give you the [[chills]]. Dingman's [[character]] as the buffoonish oaf hearkens back to the days of Shakespeare's comedies. And the [[climax]]. My [[goodness]], the climax. I won't [[ruin]] it for you, but it makes the [[explosion]] of the [[Death]] Star pale in [[comparison]]. [[If]] you can [[track]] down this hard-to-find gem, do yourself and your family a favor and [[buy]] it [[immediately]]. I'm [[still]] holding out [[hope]] for a [[special]] [[edition]] [[DVD]] one of these [[days]]. This [[cinematographic]] will [[going]] down down in [[histories]] as one of the greats, right along side of [[Citizens]] Kane, Casablanca, and On The Waterfront. [[Somebody]] please convince [[Lino]] to do a sequel! [[Lino]] and Morita are a [[parody]] duo, the likes of which haven't been [[noticed]] since Abbot and Costello. The [[malign]] that emanates from [[Kris]] Sarandon, [[Thom]] Noonan, and Randall "[[Lookout]]" Cobb will give you the [[goosebumps]]. Dingman's [[personage]] as the buffoonish oaf hearkens back to the days of Shakespeare's comedies. And the [[orgasm]]. My [[christ]], the climax. I won't [[spoil]] it for you, but it makes the [[explodes]] of the [[Dead]] Star pale in [[compares]]. [[Unless]] you can [[trails]] down this hard-to-find gem, do yourself and your family a favor and [[procuring]] it [[expeditiously]]. I'm [[again]] holding out [[expectancy]] for a [[peculiar]] [[editing]] [[DVDS]] one of these [[jours]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4156 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Emma is a true romance. If you love the soppy stuff, charged with wit and folly, you will love this movie! Its true to the novel, which is very important, with a few twists added for pleasure. Gwen is not one of my fave actreesess but she does justice to a role that required everything that she had to offer in spades. She shines in a role i think no other actress could have done proper justice to.

Jeremy Northam, as the hero. how shocked are you? I never looked upon him as overtly handsome but heck! What the right role can do for you! He looks so good as the sensible, regal Mr. K, that i am literally looking at him in a new light. He makes and excellent romantic lead. The charm and character that he brings to his role is wonderful!

Ewan McGregor, Greta Sacchi brings in the rest. a good cast. A good movie. If you are a fan of Jane Austen, see this movie, along with Pride and Prejudice - AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, buy the books. It enhances the movie to heights that are extraordinary --------------------------------------------- Result 4157 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Recap]]: Ron is about to [[marry]] Mel. They are deeply and love and certain they are perfect for each other even though they met just a few months ago. Todd, Ron's brother in law to be is not so happy. He is afraid the marriage is a threat to his cushy job in the family business and decides to arrange Ron's bachelor party. But his real plan is to put Ron in a [[compromising]] situation, get evidence and break Ron and Mel up.

Comments: Supposed to be a sequel to a comedy classic but it isn't [[funny]] at all. It is [[mostly]] a pubertal show and a juvenile [[excuse]] to show scantily clad [[women]]. Actually, in a way, it is almost impressive have [[many]] you can put in there, because they are everywhere. Unfortunately that is [[also]] one of the signs of a [[movie]] that can't [[support]] itself. It simply isn't good enough.

It has three redeeming points [[though]], or actually three actors that is worth a better script than this. It is lead actor Josh Cooke who [[actually]] manages to [[give]] an impression of some common sense. Sara Foster I know has more talent than to do movies like this, and Emanuelle Vaugier seem to have a lot more talent than this movie.

What is [[suspiciously]] absent are good [[jokes]]. Actually, bad [[jokes]] are rather [[scarce]] too. It just isn't funny.

3/10 [[Synthesis]]: Ron is about to [[marie]] Mel. They are deeply and love and certain they are perfect for each other even though they met just a few months ago. Todd, Ron's brother in law to be is not so happy. He is afraid the marriage is a threat to his cushy job in the family business and decides to arrange Ron's bachelor party. But his real plan is to put Ron in a [[risking]] situation, get evidence and break Ron and Mel up.

Comments: Supposed to be a sequel to a comedy classic but it isn't [[comical]] at all. It is [[principally]] a pubertal show and a juvenile [[apologise]] to show scantily clad [[girl]]. Actually, in a way, it is almost impressive have [[numerous]] you can put in there, because they are everywhere. Unfortunately that is [[similarly]] one of the signs of a [[films]] that can't [[helped]] itself. It simply isn't good enough.

It has three redeeming points [[although]], or actually three actors that is worth a better script than this. It is lead actor Josh Cooke who [[genuinely]] manages to [[lend]] an impression of some common sense. Sara Foster I know has more talent than to do movies like this, and Emanuelle Vaugier seem to have a lot more talent than this movie.

What is [[paradoxically]] absent are good [[pleasantries]]. Actually, bad [[pranks]] are rather [[rare]] too. It just isn't funny.

3/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4158 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]]

I recently viewed this [[atrocity]] in my film [[program]], and I thought it was [[awful]], as I said in my tagline, it was pretentious, trite, [[petty]] and phenomenally self-important.

I consider myself a [[fan]] of film, and all the things that film has to offer. If I want to watch a documentary on the Cannes Festival, I will watch A&E....and they would probably be alot more objective about it.

I [[dont]] recommend it, period.



I recently viewed this [[ruthlessness]] in my film [[agendas]], and I thought it was [[horrendous]], as I said in my tagline, it was pretentious, trite, [[trifling]] and phenomenally self-important.

I consider myself a [[breather]] of film, and all the things that film has to offer. If I want to watch a documentary on the Cannes Festival, I will watch A&E....and they would probably be alot more objective about it.

I [[belive]] recommend it, period.

--------------------------------------------- Result 4159 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] I originally [[saw]] this film years ago during Cinemax Friday after dark series(back when the cable box was built like a keyboard),and it intrigued me. Even [[though]] there is a pointless aspect to the film it is well acted.The performances of Depardieu & Dewaere are very [[enjoyable]].They have a good chemistry [[together]] & Miou-Miou makes a pink fur [[look]] [[breathtaking]].A [[movie]] like this [[probably]] wouldn't be made in these politically [[correct]] [[times]](at least not in the US), [[since]] it seems to sensationalize [[things]] like violence,robbery,& casual [[sex]]. This [[movie]] [[proves]] that with a [[talented]] [[cast]] & also talented [[directing]] a [[good]] [[movie]] is a [[good]] [[movie]] no [[matter]] the subject.It saddened me to [[find]] out [[Patrick]] Dewaere committed [[suicide]] & in the near [[future]] I,ll will [[check]] him out with Depardieu & Miou-Miou in [[Get]] [[Out]] [[Your]] Hankerchief. I originally [[sawthe]] this film years ago during Cinemax Friday after dark series(back when the cable box was built like a keyboard),and it intrigued me. Even [[although]] there is a pointless aspect to the film it is well acted.The performances of Depardieu & Dewaere are very [[pleasurable]].They have a good chemistry [[jointly]] & Miou-Miou makes a pink fur [[gaze]] [[staggering]].A [[filmmaking]] like this [[certainly]] wouldn't be made in these politically [[accurate]] [[dates]](at least not in the US), [[because]] it seems to sensationalize [[items]] like violence,robbery,& casual [[sexuality]]. This [[kino]] [[demonstrating]] that with a [[gifted]] [[casting]] & also talented [[instructing]] a [[buena]] [[flick]] is a [[buena]] [[kino]] no [[issue]] the subject.It saddened me to [[found]] out [[Tangerine]] Dewaere committed [[suicidal]] & in the near [[futur]] I,ll will [[inspections]] him out with Depardieu & Miou-Miou in [[Obtain]] [[Outward]] [[Uour]] Hankerchief. --------------------------------------------- Result 4160 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] The [[makers]] have [[chosen]] the best people for the job, and set the scene [[wonderfully]]. [[Every]] interior is full of [[detail]] that [[tells]] you all about the people who live in it. [[Whether]] the [[period]] is the 20s (the first story), the present ([[ie]] 1950) for the [[middle]] story, or the 1910s (the [[last]]), costumes and [[settings]] are lovingly observed and created. I [[love]] the fussy costumes of the two [[old]] ladies in the sanatorium - [[exquisite]] [[lace]] overlaid by the [[finest]] Shetland shawls. Roland Culver as Ashenden is very appealing, but never [[mind]] the soppy young [[lovers]], it's Raymond Huntley as the [[man]] who resents his wife's [[health]] and independence who harrows our [[emotions]]. He [[usually]] [[played]] [[comical]], pompous [[types]], but here he is [[subtle]] and convincing and very [[impressive]]. The China [[Seas]] ([[great]] 30s film starring Gable and Harlow) stole the plot from the Mr Know [[All]] episode (and [[also]] nicked a [[story]] by Kipling). I [[wish]] we [[saw]] more of Naunton Wayne as the jealous husband - [[though]] he has a [[good]] [[moment]] [[looking]] [[melancholy]] in a Mexican [[hat]]. I [[love]] that posh bird who plays his wife, too. The [[producer]] have [[choosing]] the best people for the job, and set the scene [[amazingly]]. [[Any]] interior is full of [[details]] that [[told]] you all about the people who live in it. [[Both]] the [[timeline]] is the 20s (the first story), the present ([[ci]] 1950) for the [[milieu]] story, or the 1910s (the [[final]]), costumes and [[setups]] are lovingly observed and created. I [[iike]] the fussy costumes of the two [[elderly]] ladies in the sanatorium - [[glamorous]] [[yaw]] overlaid by the [[noblest]] Shetland shawls. Roland Culver as Ashenden is very appealing, but never [[intellect]] the soppy young [[amateurs]], it's Raymond Huntley as the [[males]] who resents his wife's [[hygiene]] and independence who harrows our [[sentiments]]. He [[habitually]] [[served]] [[funny]], pompous [[genus]], but here he is [[perceptive]] and convincing and very [[unbelievable]]. The China [[Mare]] ([[large]] 30s film starring Gable and Harlow) stole the plot from the Mr Know [[Totality]] episode (and [[additionally]] nicked a [[histories]] by Kipling). I [[wants]] we [[observed]] more of Naunton Wayne as the jealous husband - [[despite]] he has a [[buena]] [[time]] [[researching]] [[mournful]] in a Mexican [[beanie]]. I [[adores]] that posh bird who plays his wife, too. --------------------------------------------- Result 4161 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I [[hated]] the [[way]] Ms. Perez portrayed Puerto Ricans! We are not all ghetto - and we do speak Spanish- not Puerto Rican! I can not speak for the uneducated persons you have run into. But our language is intact, our island is our pride. Puerto Rico is better off economically than any other Caribbean island! I'm glad we are not like Cuba, Dominican Republic or Haiti, free from American influence? Free in true poverty, not the U.S. standard of poverty. We are not victims we are resilient, humble,honest and intelligent people. Our ancestry does include strong African roots, but not "black" roots- I have nothing in common with Black Americans 9do the research).

The analogy between Pedro Albizu, Che Guevarra and Martin L. King could not be more off the mark.

MLK was a great hero a true revolutionary- an honest man who saw a day when we would all be free.

Che Guevarra helped Castro create the Cuba that is today, is that why boat fulls of Cubans risk their lives to come to America- because Che made such a better place for them? You had a great, awesome, bright idea but you politicized it too much. We have so many things to be proud of as a people - don't bring shame to our people by victimizing us. I am not a Nuyorican and perhaps that is why I can't share your views. I am Puerto Rican, I speak Spanish, I am not a victim and I have been able to accomplish many of my goals in America. If there is a part 2 in the future - less politics more history more stories of triumph- there are many.

Damaris Maldonado I [[resent]] the [[paths]] Ms. Perez portrayed Puerto Ricans! We are not all ghetto - and we do speak Spanish- not Puerto Rican! I can not speak for the uneducated persons you have run into. But our language is intact, our island is our pride. Puerto Rico is better off economically than any other Caribbean island! I'm glad we are not like Cuba, Dominican Republic or Haiti, free from American influence? Free in true poverty, not the U.S. standard of poverty. We are not victims we are resilient, humble,honest and intelligent people. Our ancestry does include strong African roots, but not "black" roots- I have nothing in common with Black Americans 9do the research).

The analogy between Pedro Albizu, Che Guevarra and Martin L. King could not be more off the mark.

MLK was a great hero a true revolutionary- an honest man who saw a day when we would all be free.

Che Guevarra helped Castro create the Cuba that is today, is that why boat fulls of Cubans risk their lives to come to America- because Che made such a better place for them? You had a great, awesome, bright idea but you politicized it too much. We have so many things to be proud of as a people - don't bring shame to our people by victimizing us. I am not a Nuyorican and perhaps that is why I can't share your views. I am Puerto Rican, I speak Spanish, I am not a victim and I have been able to accomplish many of my goals in America. If there is a part 2 in the future - less politics more history more stories of triumph- there are many.

Damaris Maldonado --------------------------------------------- Result 4162 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (72%)]] This was a great [[book]] and the [[possibilities]] for a truly great film were definitely there. But the casting decisions [[completely]] [[wrecked]] the [[movie]]. Hanks is a great [[actor]] to be sure, but lacks the smarmy, morally ambivalent characteristics needed for the lead role. Jeff Daniels would have been my choice.

Putting Melanie Griffiths in, for eye candy reasons, is understandable, but again, she did not portray the depth or ambivalence, so need to pull this off.

This movie is a great [[example]] of how every decision, even those early on in the movie production can make or break a file. This was a great [[ledger]] and the [[opportunities]] for a truly great film were definitely there. But the casting decisions [[downright]] [[clobbered]] the [[cinematography]]. Hanks is a great [[actress]] to be sure, but lacks the smarmy, morally ambivalent characteristics needed for the lead role. Jeff Daniels would have been my choice.

Putting Melanie Griffiths in, for eye candy reasons, is understandable, but again, she did not portray the depth or ambivalence, so need to pull this off.

This movie is a great [[instances]] of how every decision, even those early on in the movie production can make or break a file. --------------------------------------------- Result 4163 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] It [[seems]] like this is the only [[film]] that [[John]] [[Saxon]] ever [[directed]], and that he had the good sense to [[stop]] after that and stay in [[front]] of the camera. This movie is a dog, from [[start]] to [[finish]], and it's dull and [[wooden]] with nothing much going for it. A Viet Nam war hero takes a [[job]] [[working]] for a mob boss, [[gets]] a bit too [[friendly]] with the wife and then the [[wife]] is [[killed]] by the mob boss himself & the [[war]] hero framed and [[sent]] to [[prison]], [[death]] row, [[specifically]]. [[Now]], this particular [[prison]] has been [[experimenting]] on inmates and is testing some [[formula]] that will [[turn]] [[men]] into the [[ultimate]] [[killing]] [[machine]] (a zombie). Of course, everything goes [[wrong]] and then there's all these [[infected]] people trapped in the [[prison]], some of whom are [[turning]] into [[zombies]] and the [[rest]] who [[suddenly]] just don't want to be there [[anymore]]. This just goes on and on and on with [[nothing]] [[particularly]] much to show or [[say]] for itself, and I [[stopped]] it before the [[end]], which [[seemed]] [[like]] it was [[coming]] a few [[times]] but no, it was [[apparently]] only [[getting]] set to take off on a [[different]] and [[equally]] [[dull]] [[path]]. If one [[watched]] to the end they may well [[become]] a [[zombie]] themselves, so don't [[risk]] it. 2 out of 10. It [[seem]] like this is the only [[cinematographic]] that [[Johannes]] [[Saxony]] ever [[oriented]], and that he had the good sense to [[stopping]] after that and stay in [[newsweek]] of the camera. This movie is a dog, from [[beginnings]] to [[finalise]], and it's dull and [[lumber]] with nothing much going for it. A Viet Nam war hero takes a [[labour]] [[cooperating]] for a mob boss, [[get]] a bit too [[amity]] with the wife and then the [[femme]] is [[deaths]] by the mob boss himself & the [[wars]] hero framed and [[despatch]] to [[internment]], [[mortality]] row, [[notably]]. [[Presently]], this particular [[penitentiaries]] has been [[experiment]] on inmates and is testing some [[formulas]] that will [[turning]] [[man]] into the [[final]] [[murders]] [[machines]] (a zombie). Of course, everything goes [[improper]] and then there's all these [[infested]] people trapped in the [[jail]], some of whom are [[turn]] into [[walkers]] and the [[stays]] who [[unexpectedly]] just don't want to be there [[langer]]. This just goes on and on and on with [[anything]] [[notably]] much to show or [[tell]] for itself, and I [[stopping]] it before the [[ceases]], which [[appeared]] [[iike]] it was [[arriving]] a few [[time]] but no, it was [[reportedly]] only [[obtain]] set to take off on a [[diversified]] and [[similarly]] [[uninspiring]] [[road]]. If one [[seen]] to the end they may well [[becomes]] a [[ghoul]] themselves, so don't [[endangerment]] it. 2 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4164 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When childhood memory tells you this was a scary [[movie]]; it's touch and [[go]] whether you should [[revisit]] it. Anyway, I remembered a scary scene involving a homeless person and a cool villain [[played]] by Jeff Kober.

"The First Power" is not a very good movie, sad to say. It's chock full of those cop clichés and a very [[poor]] [[script]] with holes a truck [[could]] [[drive]] through (along with countless [[convenient]] "twists" that help the story [[run]] along). Lou Diamond Phillips is the over-confident bad ass cop who [[sends]] baddie serial [[killer]] Kober to the [[gas]] [[chamber]] only to [[find]] out he was a [[minion]] of [[Satan]] himself and now has the power of [[resurrection]] along with the power of [[possessing]] every weak minded person who he comes across. Through in the mix a very poorly realized [[psychic]] who helps with the case.

Ahhh, this is trash. But enjoyable as such, especially if you have fond memories of it. It scared me as a kid and that scene with the homeless person is still pretty good. As for any kind of logic here; forget it, just about every scenario is thrown in for good [[measure]] and you end up with a [[cross]] between a Steven Segal action flick and a 70's demonic flick. And who on earth thought it was a good idea to cast Lou Diamond Phillips in the lead here? Needless to say he's not convincing at all but he tries his best and I've never had the problem with the guy so many reviewers here seem to have. As for Tracy Griffith as the psychic, the less said the better. But Kober is pretty good as the killer; always liked that actor.

"The First Power" may be just what the doctor ordered after a hard day's work and a "brain switch-off" is needed. Beer will most likely enhance the viewing experience and I'll definitely have loads of it the next time I give this movie a spin. All in all; not a good flick but a somewhat guilty pleasure for nostalgic fans who were easily scared as kids. "See you around, buddy boy"! When childhood memory tells you this was a scary [[cinematography]]; it's touch and [[going]] whether you should [[revoir]] it. Anyway, I remembered a scary scene involving a homeless person and a cool villain [[accomplished]] by Jeff Kober.

"The First Power" is not a very good movie, sad to say. It's chock full of those cop clichés and a very [[pauper]] [[hyphen]] with holes a truck [[wo]] [[driving]] through (along with countless [[expedient]] "twists" that help the story [[running]] along). Lou Diamond Phillips is the over-confident bad ass cop who [[dispatch]] baddie serial [[shooter]] Kober to the [[petrol]] [[room]] only to [[finds]] out he was a [[wench]] of [[Lucifer]] himself and now has the power of [[reanimation]] along with the power of [[owning]] every weak minded person who he comes across. Through in the mix a very poorly realized [[clairvoyant]] who helps with the case.

Ahhh, this is trash. But enjoyable as such, especially if you have fond memories of it. It scared me as a kid and that scene with the homeless person is still pretty good. As for any kind of logic here; forget it, just about every scenario is thrown in for good [[measures]] and you end up with a [[croce]] between a Steven Segal action flick and a 70's demonic flick. And who on earth thought it was a good idea to cast Lou Diamond Phillips in the lead here? Needless to say he's not convincing at all but he tries his best and I've never had the problem with the guy so many reviewers here seem to have. As for Tracy Griffith as the psychic, the less said the better. But Kober is pretty good as the killer; always liked that actor.

"The First Power" may be just what the doctor ordered after a hard day's work and a "brain switch-off" is needed. Beer will most likely enhance the viewing experience and I'll definitely have loads of it the next time I give this movie a spin. All in all; not a good flick but a somewhat guilty pleasure for nostalgic fans who were easily scared as kids. "See you around, buddy boy"! --------------------------------------------- Result 4165 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Does anyone else cry tears of joy when they watch this film? I LOVE it! One of my Top 10 films of all time. It just makes me feel good. I watch the closing production number with all the cast members over and over and over!!! Bebe Benson (Michelle Johnston) is THE babe of the film, IMHO! I never saw the play but I get angry when I read reviews that say the play was better than the film. The two are like apples and oranges. The film making process will seldom deliver a finished product that is faithful to the original work. I believe it's only due to the fear of public alienation that many well known works adapted to the screen aren't changed more than they are. This is a very good film, it is very satisfying. That's all you need to know! --------------------------------------------- Result 4166 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (53%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] I previously thought that this film was the lamest of the Muppet films. I would like now to retract that statement. In my opinion now, the lamest MUppet film was the TV movie IT'S A VERY MERRY MUPPET Christmas, am IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE rip off that was truly dreadful. MUPPETS TAKE MANHATTAN is nothing special, but miles more enjoyable than MERRY MUPPET Christmas.

The best songs are that 'You Can't Take No For An Answer' song, the one the Muppet Babies sing and the songs for the big finale itself. As I loved the Muppet Babies TV show, I loved the Muppet Babies sequence here (I'm told that it was what inspired the Muppet Babies show)

The MANHATTAN MELODIES show itself was the real showstopper, with Muppets from Sesame Street even appearing for the wedding. As Kermit puts it in his final line 'What better way could anything end?'. But I wish that what was between the beginning and end was a bit more entertaining. There are cute cameos from Brooke Shields and Gregory Hines and a great dance sequence from Rizzo and the Rats (choreographed by the late, great Jim Henson himself) and the film certainly entertains. I must state though that MUPPET MOVIE, GREAT MUPPET CAPER and MUPPET Christmas CAROL are the three defininitive MUppet movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4167 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] I [[cant]] [[believe]] some people actually like this. [[Yet]] [[still]] [[call]] themselves Batman fans. Even [[going]] as far as to [[say]] it's [[better]] than BTAS. [[Which]] it's not. It should be plagiarism for them to [[use]] Batman's [[name]] for this [[piece]] of [[crap]]. It's not Batman.

The whole [[premise]] of the [[show]] is ''if you [[cant]] [[defeat]] [[someone]] [[get]] a [[bigger]] weapon to [[help]] you'' Batman isn't all about weapons. He [[uses]] his batarang and grappling [[hook]] and Batmobile, [[thats]] it. He doesn't [[come]] up with some [[new]] [[ingenious]] [[tech]] [[every]] [[time]] he [[cant]] [[beat]] [[someone]]. I don't know where the [[hell]] they [[got]] the [[idea]] for a Batbot. or whatever. They have [[ruined]] all the [[villains]]. [[Mr]]. [[Freeze]] has [[gone]] from a [[sympathetic]] [[scientist]] to a [[petty]] criminal who [[fell]] in some cryofreezing thing. Catwoman is now a 40 or 50 [[year]] [[old]] [[woman]] with a [[dumb]] [[costume]]. Penguin is now a ninja with a 50 ft. tall top hat. The Ventriloquist is now called Scarface making the Dummy the [[whole]] [[centerpiece]] for the [[character]]. They even got a [[dumb]] [[idea]] to make him a [[giant]]! wtf? and the two [[worst]] [[character]] [[changes]] are that of The [[Joker]] and Riddler. they have [[changed]] Riddler to a Gothic/retro [[teenage]] freak. and The [[Joker]] to an acrobat with dreads. He [[looks]] like a [[bob]] Marley wannabe. they have [[completely]] and [[utterly]] [[ruined]] batman [[even]] moreso than B&[[R]] did! i wish i [[could]] [[meet]] the creators and or [[writers]] and animators of this [[show]] so i [[could]] [[whack]] them in the [[head]] with a [[metal]] baseball bat. I [[dunno]] [[reckon]] some people actually like this. [[Nonetheless]] [[again]] [[invitation]] themselves Batman fans. Even [[gonna]] as far as to [[said]] it's [[best]] than BTAS. [[Whose]] it's not. It should be plagiarism for them to [[uses]] Batman's [[designation]] for this [[slice]] of [[dammit]]. It's not Batman.

The whole [[hypothesis]] of the [[illustrating]] is ''if you [[isnt]] [[conquer]] [[everybody]] [[got]] a [[greatest]] weapon to [[aiding]] you'' Batman isn't all about weapons. He [[used]] his batarang and grappling [[hooks]] and Batmobile, [[havent]] it. He doesn't [[arrived]] up with some [[newest]] [[artful]] [[technique]] [[each]] [[period]] he [[dunno]] [[overcame]] [[anybody]]. I don't know where the [[brothel]] they [[did]] the [[notions]] for a Batbot. or whatever. They have [[shattered]] all the [[thugs]]. [[Olli]]. [[Frozen]] has [[extinct]] from a [[empathy]] [[researchers]] to a [[trivial]] criminal who [[stumbled]] in some cryofreezing thing. Catwoman is now a 40 or 50 [[annum]] [[archaic]] [[femme]] with a [[silly]] [[dress]]. Penguin is now a ninja with a 50 ft. tall top hat. The Ventriloquist is now called Scarface making the Dummy the [[total]] [[masterpiece]] for the [[nature]]. They even got a [[silly]] [[think]] to make him a [[monumental]]! wtf? and the two [[lousiest]] [[characters]] [[alterations]] are that of The [[Shitbird]] and Riddler. they have [[amended]] Riddler to a Gothic/retro [[adolescence]] freak. and The [[Shitbird]] to an acrobat with dreads. He [[seem]] like a [[spongebob]] Marley wannabe. they have [[perfectly]] and [[acutely]] [[bulldozed]] batman [[yet]] moreso than B&[[rs]] did! i wish i [[did]] [[fulfill]] the creators and or [[authors]] and animators of this [[exhibition]] so i [[wo]] [[killin]] them in the [[jefe]] with a [[minerals]] baseball bat. --------------------------------------------- Result 4168 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] Rea, Sutherland, DeMunn, and von Sydow (in a small role) are all [[brilliant]] in their performances. Sutherland is particularly adept at this sort of role, where he must portray a character whose morality is, at first, uncertain to the audience. As is so often the case with Sutherland's characters, we [[must]] ask "is he a villian [in this case, a minor one], or a hero?"

This is a [[disturbing]] story, [[intelligently]] told, about the incompetence and [[fearful]] bureaucracy in the [[old]] Soviet Union that impeded the [[efforts]] of [[extremely]] competent people. As Sutherland's [[character]] wryly notes, "The [[measure]] of a bureaucracy is its ability not to make [[special]] [[exceptions]]". The "committee meeting" (between Rea and Sutherland's characters) after perestroika is enforced, with its revelations, has enormous emotional impact. You can feel the suffering of the [[dedicated]] people who labored in that system.

The handful of dramatic scenes [[portraying]] victims' family members adds emotional resonance to the impact of the story. This is [[seldom]] a feature of a film with this sickening subject matter, but effectively reminds us that the victims had lives, and were loved.

This is a [[sad]], but very [[important]] [[film]], which deserved its showcase on Canada's History Television. Rea, Sutherland, DeMunn, and von Sydow (in a small role) are all [[resplendent]] in their performances. Sutherland is particularly adept at this sort of role, where he must portray a character whose morality is, at first, uncertain to the audience. As is so often the case with Sutherland's characters, we [[gotta]] ask "is he a villian [in this case, a minor one], or a hero?"

This is a [[disconcerting]] story, [[shrewdly]] told, about the incompetence and [[scary]] bureaucracy in the [[elderly]] Soviet Union that impeded the [[activities]] of [[incredibly]] competent people. As Sutherland's [[characters]] wryly notes, "The [[measurements]] of a bureaucracy is its ability not to make [[particular]] [[immunities]]". The "committee meeting" (between Rea and Sutherland's characters) after perestroika is enforced, with its revelations, has enormous emotional impact. You can feel the suffering of the [[devoted]] people who labored in that system.

The handful of dramatic scenes [[describing]] victims' family members adds emotional resonance to the impact of the story. This is [[rarely]] a feature of a film with this sickening subject matter, but effectively reminds us that the victims had lives, and were loved.

This is a [[unfortunate]], but very [[sizeable]] [[filmmaking]], which deserved its showcase on Canada's History Television. --------------------------------------------- Result 4169 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I had no idea what the film is about before I saw it because Tashan only had teaser trailers while it was being promoted. So I asked my friends if they knew anything about it and they said that "It is the directorial debut of Vijay Krishna Acharya who wrote the screenplays for Dhoom 1 & 2 and Saif Ali Khan's son Ibrahim makes his [[debut]] in the film by playing him as a child in his flashback".

After watching it, I understood that why their wasn't a [[proper]] trailer because there wasn't [[anything]] in the [[film]] to show. The [[story]] was [[extremely]] dum and [[even]] a 10 year old child can come up with a better story-line. There was [[hardly]] any [[action]] and the [[camera]] shook at [[every]] possible angle there is and it's difficult to figure out that who is killing who. Also the [[action]] was daft & unrealistic e.g. 1 man with a handgun managed to kill about 100 men with machine guns.

While I was watching Tashan it [[reminded]] me of 3 films:

Sin City: During the opening credits.

Koyla: Anil Kapoor's terrible [[English]] like Amrish Puri in Koyla.

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom: The outrageously ridiculous jokes that are not [[even]] a jot [[funny]].

I also [[heard]] the budget is 40 crores which is the same [[amount]] as Dhoom 2 and I don't know where all the [[money]] went to. Anyway if you did not like Dhoom 2 then there is [[absolutely]] no [[chance]] that you will [[like]] Tashan. [[Race]] was [[hot]] on heels and that is a [[million]] times better.

The only 2 [[good]] songs are Dil Haara & Challiya and both songs are [[shot]] in [[Greece]] at [[good]] [[locations]] but what is the [[use]] of it in a rubbish [[film]]? Even Anil Kapoor's [[terrible]] [[English]] couldn't [[save]] this discomfiture. I had no idea what the film is about before I saw it because Tashan only had teaser trailers while it was being promoted. So I asked my friends if they knew anything about it and they said that "It is the directorial debut of Vijay Krishna Acharya who wrote the screenplays for Dhoom 1 & 2 and Saif Ali Khan's son Ibrahim makes his [[infancy]] in the film by playing him as a child in his flashback".

After watching it, I understood that why their wasn't a [[suitable]] trailer because there wasn't [[algo]] in the [[cinematography]] to show. The [[fairytales]] was [[very]] dum and [[yet]] a 10 year old child can come up with a better story-line. There was [[almost]] any [[actions]] and the [[cameras]] shook at [[each]] possible angle there is and it's difficult to figure out that who is killing who. Also the [[measures]] was daft & unrealistic e.g. 1 man with a handgun managed to kill about 100 men with machine guns.

While I was watching Tashan it [[remembered]] me of 3 films:

Sin City: During the opening credits.

Koyla: Anil Kapoor's terrible [[Francais]] like Amrish Puri in Koyla.

Jhoom Barabar Jhoom: The outrageously ridiculous jokes that are not [[yet]] a jot [[comical]].

I also [[overheard]] the budget is 40 crores which is the same [[sums]] as Dhoom 2 and I don't know where all the [[cash]] went to. Anyway if you did not like Dhoom 2 then there is [[fully]] no [[possibilities]] that you will [[fond]] Tashan. [[Racing]] was [[sexy]] on heels and that is a [[trillion]] times better.

The only 2 [[buena]] songs are Dil Haara & Challiya and both songs are [[offed]] in [[Athens]] at [[buena]] [[placements]] but what is the [[usage]] of it in a rubbish [[kino]]? Even Anil Kapoor's [[frightful]] [[Englishmen]] couldn't [[economize]] this discomfiture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4170 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] [[Strange]], [[almost]] all [[reviewers]] are highly positive about this [[movie]]. Is it because it's from 1975 and has Chamberlain and [[Curtis]] in it and [[therefore]] forgive the by times very [[bad]] acting and childish ways of storytelling?

[[Maybe]] it's because some people get sentimental about this film because they have read the book? (I have not read the book, but I don't think that's a [[problem]], film makers never presume that the viewers have read the [[book]]).

[[Or]] is it because I am [[subconsciously]] [[irritated]] about the [[fact]] that English-speaking [[actors]] try to behave as their French [[counterparts]]? [[Inquisitive]], [[roughly]] all [[testers]] are highly positive about this [[films]]. Is it because it's from 1975 and has Chamberlain and [[Cortes]] in it and [[thereby]] forgive the by times very [[mala]] acting and childish ways of storytelling?

[[Potentially]] it's because some people get sentimental about this film because they have read the book? (I have not read the book, but I don't think that's a [[troubles]], film makers never presume that the viewers have read the [[workbook]]).

[[Nor]] is it because I am [[unconsciously]] [[annoyed]] about the [[facto]] that English-speaking [[protagonists]] try to behave as their French [[counterpart]]? --------------------------------------------- Result 4171 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I [[stole]] this [[movie]] when I was a [[freshmen]] in [[college]]. I've [[tried]] to watch it three times, the second two because [[friends]] [[wanted]] to see it. "Sweet, Adam Sandler, I've never heard of this [[movie]], but [[since]] he's so [[funny]] its gotta be funny." [[Wrong]]! I can't make myself watch this pile of [[crap]] after the [[dream]] boxing match/insult war, where burning the guy with a good zinger causes your [[opponent]] physical pain. You would think that terrible comedy hurting you is ridiculous, but after watching this you'll know its true. This movie isn't worth the [[price]] I paid for it. I've watched a ton of Steven segal movies, and I've even watched Crossroads twice... but I still couldn't watch this. I [[steal]] this [[cinematography]] when I was a [[newcomers]] in [[academia]]. I've [[attempted]] to watch it three times, the second two because [[friendships]] [[wished]] to see it. "Sweet, Adam Sandler, I've never heard of this [[kino]], but [[because]] he's so [[humorous]] its gotta be funny." [[Amiss]]! I can't make myself watch this pile of [[bollocks]] after the [[dreams]] boxing match/insult war, where burning the guy with a good zinger causes your [[rival]] physical pain. You would think that terrible comedy hurting you is ridiculous, but after watching this you'll know its true. This movie isn't worth the [[prizes]] I paid for it. I've watched a ton of Steven segal movies, and I've even watched Crossroads twice... but I still couldn't watch this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4172 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This movie must have been the absolute worst movie i have ever seen. My sister and her boyfriend went to rent Zodiac (2007) and got this one by accident. thought it was a joke before the actual movie. this was terrible i was waiting for it to get scary and it never did. this movie had not actual facts about the real Zodiac killer. The filmmakers clearly didn't even bother to research anything on the killings... they only liked the name... so they decided to write a script about nothing true to its name. I am upset i didn't realize it wasn't the movie sooner. I try to like something out of every movie, i don't hate movies... ever... except this one. If you could have given it no stars, i definitely would have. 1 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4173 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] And a few more "no"s on [[top]] of that. Voodoo Academy is, without a doubt, the [[least]] ambitious film of all time. What [[exactly]] is it [[trying]] to do? Tell a story? [[Obviously]] not; as has been [[pointed]] out, most of it's just barely-legal [[guys]] rubbing themselves. [[Could]] it, then, be an [[attempt]] at subversive homoeroticism? [[Well]], [[maybe]], if not for the [[fact]] it never ever ever goes beyond the most innocuous and nonthreatening forms of [[male]] contact. (Which is, to the delight of none, repeated about eighty thousand times.) Well, it is sort of a horror movie; is it trying to scare us? Not unless the director meant to do so through the utter tedium and vacuousness of his "work."

Never in my life have I enjoyed a movie less. This is the most [[boring]] and [[unnecessary]] thing I've ever seen. It's like Voodoo Academy takes the genres of horror, zombie, and gay movies, puts them in a grinder, then runs them through a coffee filter--only instead of it being the kind of coffee filter that filters out coffee beans, it's the [[kind]] that takes out everything vital, edgy, or in any way interesting. The [[result]] is 74 [[minutes]] of film every bit as exciting as a glass of warm water--only without the ability to rehydrate you after the 10-day gin binge that will inevitably befall you if you watch this [[abomination]] of human effort. And a few more "no"s on [[superior]] of that. Voodoo Academy is, without a doubt, the [[fewer]] ambitious film of all time. What [[accurately]] is it [[seeking]] to do? Tell a story? [[Plainly]] not; as has been [[stressed]] out, most of it's just barely-legal [[lads]] rubbing themselves. [[Did]] it, then, be an [[endeavour]] at subversive homoeroticism? [[Good]], [[likely]], if not for the [[facto]] it never ever ever goes beyond the most innocuous and nonthreatening forms of [[virile]] contact. (Which is, to the delight of none, repeated about eighty thousand times.) Well, it is sort of a horror movie; is it trying to scare us? Not unless the director meant to do so through the utter tedium and vacuousness of his "work."

Never in my life have I enjoyed a movie less. This is the most [[dreary]] and [[unhelpful]] thing I've ever seen. It's like Voodoo Academy takes the genres of horror, zombie, and gay movies, puts them in a grinder, then runs them through a coffee filter--only instead of it being the kind of coffee filter that filters out coffee beans, it's the [[genre]] that takes out everything vital, edgy, or in any way interesting. The [[upshot]] is 74 [[mins]] of film every bit as exciting as a glass of warm water--only without the ability to rehydrate you after the 10-day gin binge that will inevitably befall you if you watch this [[horror]] of human effort. --------------------------------------------- Result 4174 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] SPOILERS CONTAINED IN ORDER TO MAKE A OBSERVATION.

Twenty [[years]] on from 1984, this [[film]] [[speaks]] [[loads]] about Prince's future in the music industry.

There is a scene that sums up Prince's musical output of the last 10 [[years]] [[perfectly]], which is if you took the best two songs off his last 10 albums you would have one fantastic album!

The scene plays like this. Prince runs off to his dressing room after playing one song and the owner of the club enters the dressing room to give Prince an earful about his fall from grace during the 90's and putting out albums that only the most hardcore fans would be able to tolerate and support his artistry.

Club owner- "You're not packing them like you used to. The only person that digs your music is yourself!"

Spooky huh! How about the musical underscore which makes Prince even more evil when he smacks Apollonia to the ground in two separate scenes! It gave me chills that that was not the only scene women where mistreated in this film.

I'm all for the comedy sparring's between Morris Day and Jerome Benton as these two stole every scene they were in. But what was funny about throwing a woman into a trash can? That was plain nasty! The other nasty bit was the chalk outline of Prince's father on the floor thoughtfully provided by the Minnieapolis police, which causes Prince to go even more loony!! FANTASTIC!!

Purple Rain is an [[entertaining]] film overall, as it is the soundtrack of Prince songs that boosts it's value by 110%. But then again the film gives us another theory on Prince and his music, as the film tells us that Prince's biggest song of the film is written by Wendy, lisa and Princes wife beating musical father!

Are Prince and the filmmakers trying to tell us that Prince stole all his best songs from his father after finding his fathers music sheets of written songs? Maybe that is why Prince started to run out of steam during the 90's because he ran out of his fathers ideas???...........Hmmmm..... SPOILERS CONTAINED IN ORDER TO MAKE A OBSERVATION.

Twenty [[yr]] on from 1984, this [[kino]] [[chitchat]] [[load]] about Prince's future in the music industry.

There is a scene that sums up Prince's musical output of the last 10 [[yrs]] [[totally]], which is if you took the best two songs off his last 10 albums you would have one fantastic album!

The scene plays like this. Prince runs off to his dressing room after playing one song and the owner of the club enters the dressing room to give Prince an earful about his fall from grace during the 90's and putting out albums that only the most hardcore fans would be able to tolerate and support his artistry.

Club owner- "You're not packing them like you used to. The only person that digs your music is yourself!"

Spooky huh! How about the musical underscore which makes Prince even more evil when he smacks Apollonia to the ground in two separate scenes! It gave me chills that that was not the only scene women where mistreated in this film.

I'm all for the comedy sparring's between Morris Day and Jerome Benton as these two stole every scene they were in. But what was funny about throwing a woman into a trash can? That was plain nasty! The other nasty bit was the chalk outline of Prince's father on the floor thoughtfully provided by the Minnieapolis police, which causes Prince to go even more loony!! FANTASTIC!!

Purple Rain is an [[amusing]] film overall, as it is the soundtrack of Prince songs that boosts it's value by 110%. But then again the film gives us another theory on Prince and his music, as the film tells us that Prince's biggest song of the film is written by Wendy, lisa and Princes wife beating musical father!

Are Prince and the filmmakers trying to tell us that Prince stole all his best songs from his father after finding his fathers music sheets of written songs? Maybe that is why Prince started to run out of steam during the 90's because he ran out of his fathers ideas???...........Hmmmm..... --------------------------------------------- Result 4175 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Well, I'll be honest: It is not exactly a Sholay. But you cant get a Sholay every week. In fact, you could see distinct signatures of "not without my Daughter"(Sally Field, 1991) in this movie. However, as most "inspired" movies go, this one was a well-inspired one, well handled and well done. Nana Patekar, as usual, tends to overdo his hysterics, but all others are commendable. Specially so about Dipti Naval: Saw her after a long time, but she hasn't lost any of her grace. In fact, she has performed much better that when I last saw her. Another one of the Bollywood stars that seem to grow more beautiful as they age?

All in all, a nice watch. --------------------------------------------- Result 4176 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] The [[greatest]] [[sin]] in [[life]] is being [[dull]], and this [[movie]] is crashingly [[boring]]. its [[funny]], its [[left]] out of his "a [[life]] in [[film]]" [[documentary]]. He goes from a [[long]] [[piece]] on "[[Stardust]] [[Memories]]" and then [[fast]] forwards to "Zelig". This [[little]] piece of [[cubic]] zirconia just isn't worth the [[effort]]. The [[grandest]] [[oin]] in [[lives]] is being [[dreary]], and this [[cinematography]] is crashingly [[bore]]. its [[fun]], its [[exited]] out of his "a [[lifetime]] in [[films]]" [[documentaries]]. He goes from a [[lang]] [[slice]] on "[[Dust]] [[Mementos]]" and then [[speedily]] forwards to "Zelig". This [[petit]] piece of [[cu]] zirconia just isn't worth the [[endeavours]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4177 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] As drunken millionaire playboy Arthur Bach, Dudley Moore is perfect as a grown man trapped in childhood. As it turned out, the role fit Moore so perfectly, it trapped him as an actor as well. Many [[disappointments]] soon followed (including this film's pale sequel), yet that doesn't [[diminish]] the charm or appeal of this picture, which is cleverly written and directed. Some of Moore's drunk scenes are forced, parts of the film are wobbly, but the cast performs with so much relish it's a difficult movie to resist. It has a very big heart and gives Oscar-winner John Gielgud a sly, dryly amusing role as Arthur's valet, Hobson; his relationship with Arthur is delicious and they have a miraculous rapport. Liza Minnelli (as a blue-collar love-interest) is sassy in a low-key and Moore is brash, but deft and lively; he never shook off the shadow of Arthur, but at least we have this document of a career high-point to cherish. *** from **** As drunken millionaire playboy Arthur Bach, Dudley Moore is perfect as a grown man trapped in childhood. As it turned out, the role fit Moore so perfectly, it trapped him as an actor as well. Many [[deceptions]] soon followed (including this film's pale sequel), yet that doesn't [[reductions]] the charm or appeal of this picture, which is cleverly written and directed. Some of Moore's drunk scenes are forced, parts of the film are wobbly, but the cast performs with so much relish it's a difficult movie to resist. It has a very big heart and gives Oscar-winner John Gielgud a sly, dryly amusing role as Arthur's valet, Hobson; his relationship with Arthur is delicious and they have a miraculous rapport. Liza Minnelli (as a blue-collar love-interest) is sassy in a low-key and Moore is brash, but deft and lively; he never shook off the shadow of Arthur, but at least we have this document of a career high-point to cherish. *** from **** --------------------------------------------- Result 4178 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Where to [[begin]]? [[How]] [[best]] to [[describe]] just how [[awful]] this movie is???

Let's [[start]] with the campy hick [[humor]]. It isn't very [[funny]]. Add a bunch of [[musicians]] impersonating actors - Meat Loaf is horrible and Deborah Harry is [[even]] [[worse]]. Pity poor Art Carney, who should have known better than to do this movie.

And then there is the [[plot]]. A roadie [[whose]] life [[goal]] is to work an Alice Cooper show meets a girl whose life goal is to be a groupie for Alice Cooper. At least they get what they want...

And then, just when the movie should end, they can't come up with a more plausible last scene than a - well, I won't ruin it for you if you really want to see the movie.

There are certain actors that let you know that this is going to be a "B" movie or perhaps worse. Gailard Sartain is one of them for me - and he has a more prominent role. That's a sure sign that the movie probably won't be very good. If nothing else, the movie lives up to the low expectations - even exceeds them by being worse than poor.

Let's just say this. This is the movie against which all [[bad]] movies are compared. And none are worse than Roadie. Where to [[outset]]? [[Mode]] [[finest]] to [[contour]] just how [[scary]] this movie is???

Let's [[initiation]] with the campy hick [[mood]]. It isn't very [[droll]]. Add a bunch of [[music]] impersonating actors - Meat Loaf is horrible and Deborah Harry is [[yet]] [[pire]]. Pity poor Art Carney, who should have known better than to do this movie.

And then there is the [[intrigue]]. A roadie [[who]] life [[targets]] is to work an Alice Cooper show meets a girl whose life goal is to be a groupie for Alice Cooper. At least they get what they want...

And then, just when the movie should end, they can't come up with a more plausible last scene than a - well, I won't ruin it for you if you really want to see the movie.

There are certain actors that let you know that this is going to be a "B" movie or perhaps worse. Gailard Sartain is one of them for me - and he has a more prominent role. That's a sure sign that the movie probably won't be very good. If nothing else, the movie lives up to the low expectations - even exceeds them by being worse than poor.

Let's just say this. This is the movie against which all [[negative]] movies are compared. And none are worse than Roadie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4179 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] May I start off by saying that Casey Affleck is a very talented actor and I respect his work very much. I wish he was in more movies that showcased his talent. With this said, Soul Survivors was a very, very bad movie. Very bad.

I would have to say that I lay almost all the blame on the poor script. Affleck is a very talented actress, Wes Bentley had an outstanding performance in American Beauty, Melissa Sagemiller did well, and Eliza Dushku is currently the it girl in Hollywood. I don't think any of the actors really got into the script, and I understand why. To say that this movie belongs to the horror genre is an overstatement. It did have the twists and turns you would expect, but they just didn't lead anywhere... except to more confusion. I just found the ending very anti-climatic, because it just didn't seem to make any sense or really answer any of the questions that I had about the storyline.

I wish I could give this movie a good review, but I can't. In all honesty, the only thing I think you will find scary about this movie is that you paid for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4180 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Though]] this series only ran a season, it has stayed with me for 20 [[years]]. It was by far and above my all [[time]] [[favorite]] [[cartoon]] ever. I [[would]] [[give]] [[nearly]] [[anything]] to have it on DVD or [[whatever]] format I can [[get]]. [[If]] you find any means of seeing this series I [[suggest]] you [[take]] full [[advantage]]. This [[series]] was the first one (in my [[opinion]]) that had a [[truly]] coherent storyline that spanned [[across]] [[multiple]] [[episodes]]. It [[also]] [[made]] me [[truly]] [[care]] about the [[characters]] and what [[happened]] to them. Heck the [[character]] Goose actually [[scared]] me [[sometimes]]. He was just that [[odd]] at the [[time]]. [[Also]] the [[leader]] of the [[group]] [[reminds]] me a [[lot]] of a [[combination]] of Clint [[Eastwood]]/[[Tommy]] Lee Jones. If [[anyone]] has any [[way]] of [[contacting]] the creator/[[holder]] of the rights to the [[series]] and can [[get]] them put out on DVD [[please]] by all [[means]] do so!!! [[If]] this series only ran a season, it has stayed with me for 20 [[olds]]. It was by far and above my all [[period]] [[preferable]] [[cartoons]] ever. I [[could]] [[confer]] [[approximately]] [[nothing]] to have it on DVD or [[whichever]] format I can [[got]]. [[Unless]] you find any means of seeing this series I [[proposes]] you [[taking]] full [[parti]]. This [[serial]] was the first one (in my [[avis]]) that had a [[genuinely]] coherent storyline that spanned [[during]] [[dissimilar]] [[bouts]]. It [[apart]] [[accomplished]] me [[really]] [[caring]] about the [[features]] and what [[sweated]] to them. Heck the [[characters]] Goose actually [[affraid]] me [[intermittently]]. He was just that [[freaky]] at the [[moment]]. [[Moreover]] the [[fuhrer]] of the [[panels]] [[reminded]] me a [[batches]] of a [[jumpsuit]] of Clint [[Nolan]]/[[Izzi]] Lee Jones. If [[everyone]] has any [[routing]] of [[phoning]] the creator/[[proprietor]] of the rights to the [[serials]] and can [[obtains]] them put out on DVD [[invite]] by all [[methods]] do so!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4181 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[mindless]] movie is a [[piece]] of [[crap]] and boring like the [[full]] house repetitions. [[For]] all the people who want to see a [[great]], [[exciting]] and cool [[horror]] [[movie]] shouldn't [[even]] [[think]] about [[watching]] this bunch of [[mindless]] work. a F- in my opinion. I have one question, what were they thinking? Let's [[make]] a [[list]]: 1) bad script 2) bad [[script]] 3) bad script 4) bad acting 5) bad directing and last but not [[least]] a [[bad]] script. I [[mean]] I am not like grumping about every movie, but I was [[disappointed]] when I watched it. This movie should be banned into a box, locked and sunk down into the sea. So please don't do something like this again, please, please, please!!!! This [[nonsensical]] movie is a [[slice]] of [[baloney]] and boring like the [[fullest]] house repetitions. [[Onto]] all the people who want to see a [[wondrous]], [[enthralling]] and cool [[monstrosity]] [[cinematography]] shouldn't [[yet]] [[believing]] about [[staring]] this bunch of [[nonsensical]] work. a F- in my opinion. I have one question, what were they thinking? Let's [[deliver]] a [[listing]]: 1) bad script 2) bad [[screenplay]] 3) bad script 4) bad acting 5) bad directing and last but not [[lowest]] a [[mala]] script. I [[meaning]] I am not like grumping about every movie, but I was [[disenchanted]] when I watched it. This movie should be banned into a box, locked and sunk down into the sea. So please don't do something like this again, please, please, please!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4182 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Well, they say nymphomania leaves you unsatisfied. I don't know if Stella James (Sean Young) qualifies as a clinical nymphomaniac, but she certainly is in to [[sexual]] relations with [[men]]. She's still exploring, trying to find "more data" so she can see what she wants from life and the men in it, though it seems like at her age she should have a pretty good idea by now. (I can't agree, however, with anyone who says Young is too old for the role. If she is, we should all age so nicely.) For the most part this film left me cold, though it's by no means the [[worst]] of its [[type]] you'll ever see. And unlike the recent 'Eyes Wide Shut,' at [[least]] something happens in this one. Well, they say nymphomania leaves you unsatisfied. I don't know if Stella James (Sean Young) qualifies as a clinical nymphomaniac, but she certainly is in to [[nationality]] relations with [[man]]. She's still exploring, trying to find "more data" so she can see what she wants from life and the men in it, though it seems like at her age she should have a pretty good idea by now. (I can't agree, however, with anyone who says Young is too old for the role. If she is, we should all age so nicely.) For the most part this film left me cold, though it's by no means the [[hardest]] of its [[genera]] you'll ever see. And unlike the recent 'Eyes Wide Shut,' at [[less]] something happens in this one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4183 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Okay I had heard little about this [[film]], so when it came on the movie channels on TV, I [[wanted]] to watch it, being a [[horror]] aficionado. I think I can do a collective "huh?" for everyone who watched it.

I decided to move on with my life, but at a party with my closest friends, we saw it was coming on and some of us having seen it already decided we [[could]] laugh our way through it, both of us proclaiming "this is the [[dumbest]] thing I've ever seen". It wasn't scary; Ill give it to Roth (who I think is a young hack); characters do change throughout the film, ala "Cube".

HOWEVER despite your typical "rats in a cage" scenario- who will turn on who, etc., it was pretty average horror.

A few points: 1.) What was with that kid? I'm not even talking about him being weird and biting people. I'm talking about the whole "slow motion karate kicking", what was that? 2.) Okay I know Rider's character liked Jordan Ladd's, but as a young woman, I was appalled that he just went ahead and molested her in her sleep. Uh, thats illegal.

3.) Roth was in the movie just so Roth could be in the movie. Talk about pointlessly writing yourself in! 4.) What was with the deputy? 5.) So she was just instantly pulled apart by the dog? And there was little to no blood left? Just a scrap of her jeans? Anyway we were LAUGHING our asses off, and I love laughing during horror movies (Return of the Living Dead 2, Evil Dead), but I don't know if we were supposed to be laughing here... Okay I had heard little about this [[cinematography]], so when it came on the movie channels on TV, I [[want]] to watch it, being a [[terror]] aficionado. I think I can do a collective "huh?" for everyone who watched it.

I decided to move on with my life, but at a party with my closest friends, we saw it was coming on and some of us having seen it already decided we [[did]] laugh our way through it, both of us proclaiming "this is the [[silliest]] thing I've ever seen". It wasn't scary; Ill give it to Roth (who I think is a young hack); characters do change throughout the film, ala "Cube".

HOWEVER despite your typical "rats in a cage" scenario- who will turn on who, etc., it was pretty average horror.

A few points: 1.) What was with that kid? I'm not even talking about him being weird and biting people. I'm talking about the whole "slow motion karate kicking", what was that? 2.) Okay I know Rider's character liked Jordan Ladd's, but as a young woman, I was appalled that he just went ahead and molested her in her sleep. Uh, thats illegal.

3.) Roth was in the movie just so Roth could be in the movie. Talk about pointlessly writing yourself in! 4.) What was with the deputy? 5.) So she was just instantly pulled apart by the dog? And there was little to no blood left? Just a scrap of her jeans? Anyway we were LAUGHING our asses off, and I love laughing during horror movies (Return of the Living Dead 2, Evil Dead), but I don't know if we were supposed to be laughing here... --------------------------------------------- Result 4184 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] I really don't have [[anything]] [[new]] to add but I just [[felt]] like I had to [[comment]] on this sack. [[So]] here goes:

[[Atrocious]]. I'm [[running]] through my MST3K [[DVD]] [[collection]] again and I just [[watched]] Hobgoblins for about the 10th time. It's really, [[really]] painful but it was [[next]] on the [[list]]... You can [[see]] that there is a [[tiny]] kernel of an [[actual]] [[movie]] [[buried]] under all the [[crap]] that is "Hobgoblins" but it just couldn't [[get]] out. [[Everything]] about this movie is 4th [[rate]]. The [[story]], the acting, the [[effects]], the [[women]], the "action scenes", the... ahhhh [[forget]] it. I can watch a [[piece]] of [[crap]] like "The Bloodwaters of [[Dr]]. Z" ([[aka]] "Zaat") over and over and over with hardly any ill effects (I [[like]] it in fact- btw, it will be on TCM later this month- [[October]], 2009) but "Hobgoblins" is a [[whole]] 'nother [[ballgame]].

The [[worst]] [[part]] of it all may be that it's now about 12 [[hours]] after the [[movie]] [[ended]], I had a [[good]] night's [[sleep]], some coffee and some dry toast, my medications, and [[yet]] the ersatz "[[New]] [[Wave]]" [[dance]] music that Amy, [[Red]] [[Shorts]], and Laraine Newman were [[frolicking]] to in the [[living]] [[room]] is STILL [[RUNNING]] [[THROUGH]] MY HEAD. This [[torment]] will [[last]] for [[days]].

Good [[luck]], won't you? I really don't have [[something]] [[newer]] to add but I just [[believed]] like I had to [[observation]] on this sack. [[Consequently]] here goes:

[[Nefarious]]. I'm [[executes]] through my MST3K [[DVDS]] [[collect]] again and I just [[saw]] Hobgoblins for about the 10th time. It's really, [[genuinely]] painful but it was [[imminent]] on the [[listings]]... You can [[behold]] that there is a [[little]] kernel of an [[real]] [[cinematography]] [[burying]] under all the [[dammit]] that is "Hobgoblins" but it just couldn't [[obtain]] out. [[Eveything]] about this movie is 4th [[rates]]. The [[narratives]], the acting, the [[influences]], the [[femmes]], the "action scenes", the... ahhhh [[forgot]] it. I can watch a [[slice]] of [[shit]] like "The Bloodwaters of [[Doktor]]. Z" ([[nickname]] "Zaat") over and over and over with hardly any ill effects (I [[loves]] it in fact- btw, it will be on TCM later this month- [[Janvier]], 2009) but "Hobgoblins" is a [[ensemble]] 'nother [[match]].

The [[hardest]] [[parties]] of it all may be that it's now about 12 [[hour]] after the [[film]] [[completed]], I had a [[alright]] night's [[sleeping]], some coffee and some dry toast, my medications, and [[nevertheless]] the ersatz "[[Nuevo]] [[Waves]]" [[dances]] music that Amy, [[Rouge]] [[Boxers]], and Laraine Newman were [[cavorting]] to in the [[vie]] [[courtrooms]] is STILL [[EXECUTES]] [[TRAVERS]] MY HEAD. This [[haunt]] will [[final]] for [[jours]].

Good [[opportunities]], won't you? --------------------------------------------- Result 4185 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Camp with a capital C. Think of Mask and the Ace Ventura movies -- then multiply by 100. This laugh-a-minute entertainer takes schlock to the level of high art. David Dhawan is a genius and Govinda is beyond description. See it over and over again. I insist. --------------------------------------------- Result 4186 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] Pet Sematary is a very good horror film and believe it or not somebody can make a good horror film out of a [[Stephen]] [[King]] novel. Mary Lambert does a [[great]] [[job]] with this film and [[manages]] to bring across King's [[creepy]] [[story]] pretty well. Most people may avoid this, but they should check it out. Pet Sematary is a very good horror film and believe it or not somebody can make a good horror film out of a [[Stephan]] [[Emperor]] novel. Mary Lambert does a [[whopping]] [[labour]] with this film and [[runs]] to bring across King's [[spooky]] [[conte]] pretty well. Most people may avoid this, but they should check it out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4187 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] What do you expect when there is no script to begin with, and therefore [[nothing]] that the director can work with. Hayek and Farrell, and Donaldson and Kirkin are good [[actors]], they just don't have [[anything]] to say or anything to react to. Even the earthquake was pretty poor. And I don't know how closely the movie follows the [[novel]], but two have the Jewish girl [[show]] up out of nowhere just so show that [[Arturo]] has a nice, warm heart, but some stereotypes don't amount to anything. And he even buries Camilla out in the desert, instead of bringing her back to L.A. for a nice Catholic burial where he could at least bring her flowers once in a while. Pathetic. And the L.A. set was ridiculously graphically created. Anything good? The window to his apartment felt real, the curtains, the sounds, the wind. And Donaldson is always great. Has been since the Body Snatchers or Night of the Living Dead, whichever it was. What do you expect when there is no script to begin with, and therefore [[none]] that the director can work with. Hayek and Farrell, and Donaldson and Kirkin are good [[protagonists]], they just don't have [[somethings]] to say or anything to react to. Even the earthquake was pretty poor. And I don't know how closely the movie follows the [[newer]], but two have the Jewish girl [[displayed]] up out of nowhere just so show that [[Artur]] has a nice, warm heart, but some stereotypes don't amount to anything. And he even buries Camilla out in the desert, instead of bringing her back to L.A. for a nice Catholic burial where he could at least bring her flowers once in a while. Pathetic. And the L.A. set was ridiculously graphically created. Anything good? The window to his apartment felt real, the curtains, the sounds, the wind. And Donaldson is always great. Has been since the Body Snatchers or Night of the Living Dead, whichever it was. --------------------------------------------- Result 4188 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Summer]] season is here when the choices in the cinemas are [[limited]] to what's the hottest [[movie]] of the week, given 99.9% of the screens dedicated to screening it. [[OK]], so I may exaggerate on the percentage, but you get my drift. Besides [[stuff]] from Hollywood, Bollywood too have their own share of highly [[anticipated]] blockbusters, and from some of the trailers shown, I'm hyped to watch them too. Tashan was [[billed]] as one of THE most highly anticipated for 2008, but I was quite surprised at the [[lower]] than low [[turnout]] at the cinemas. When I watched Jodha Akbar, it was a full house, but it wasn't for Tashan.

After watching it, I knew why. It was entertaining, but it was fundamentally weak. Just like it's literal English title, which means "Style", Tashan is all style, but little substance. Not that it doesn't have the usual star power, but scenes felt forced, and some bordered on a tad ridiculous, even for Bollywood standards I must say. Which is quite surprising given that Tashan is directed and written by Vijay Krishna Acharya, who wrote Dhoom and Dhoom 2, both of which I [[enjoyed]] tremendously.

[[In]] his rookie directorial outing with Tashan, while you can't fault his direction, you'd probably scratch your head over the plot, which was clunky at best. It tried to force too many things into the story, though credit be given where it allowed you some avenue to question character motivation, but that came a little too late, and only toward the finale, which left you guessing for just a moment before it latched into full blown action [[mimicking]] many a Thai action movie, with Hong Kong's wirework and Hollywood's [[ludicrous]] firearms and gunplay with zero recoil. And in a bid to include everything including the kitchen sink, you have an [[assortment]] of vehicles appearing, and the one that took the cake, in a Dhoom 2 homage, was the jetski [[boat]] in the [[middle]] of nowhere.

[[At]] best, Tashan can be enjoyed as [[unintentional]] comedy, and this is attributed to how the cast hammed up with their characters. Saif Ali Khan plays Jimmy Cliff, a call center executive who gives English tuition, only as a platform for fishing out new girlfriend material. His playboy ways gets junked aside when he meets with Pooja Singh (Kareena Kapoor), who's not exactly who she seems, the meek and sweet natured hottie. She engages Jimmy's services for her boss, mobster Bhaiyyaji (Anil Kapoor), who probably gets most of the laughs as he speaks broken English and phrases must like how an ah-beng does it. And to complete the quartet, Akshay Kumar plays Bachchan Pandey, an illiterate gangster for hire who got engaged by Bhaiyyaji to hunt down Jimmy and Pooja when they escape with money stolen from Bahiyyaji's business.

So begins a road trip of sorts, with friends who turned enemies, and enemies whom you know will become friends as the road trip wears on. Jimmy Cliff is probably the most implausible of all, because he goes from zero to hero, executing moves that would shame Rambo, in absolutely no time, which is quite out of character. Kareena Kapoor amps up the sex factor as she uses her charms to guile both men, and has plenty of opportunity to do so given the much touted bikini scenes, and other costumes that boast of plunging necklines or hemlines way above the knee. Every character has a backstory created, and I thought Akshay Kumar's Bachchan Pandey was probably the best, the most touching and the most fun of the lot, even though his character seemed a lot like a non-green Incredible Hulk with his gravity-defying leaps and power packing punches. His wounds also heal automatically, which impressively puts Wolverine to shame. And the best part is his theme song, which is damn alpha-male and played in ra-ra mode each time he takes on adversaries.

But sad to say, that's the only tune that is memorable, something that cheers "Bachchan- Pandey-Bachchan-Pandey". For most Bollywood movies I watch, I will usually be able to, despite the obvious language gaps, emerge from screenings humming a tune or two. I wasn't able to do that after Tashan, because the songs unfortunately just weren't catchy at all. Usually the song/dance routine works well into the storyline without any necessity to bring the characters out of the current scene or location. That I enjoy, versus plucking them out and plonking them into extreme settings high atop a mountain, or atop jagged rocks on the beach front.

Tashan probably didn't take itself too seriously, but coming from Vijay Krishna Acharya's story, you probably wanted something a little more decent rather than the ridiculous, and for continuity to be a little more careful as well. Billed as a blockbuster, now I can start to understand why the crowds have already shunned this one. Despite Akshay Kumr stealing the show, Tashan could have been better on the whole. [[Xia]] season is here when the choices in the cinemas are [[restrained]] to what's the hottest [[cinematography]] of the week, given 99.9% of the screens dedicated to screening it. [[OKAY]], so I may exaggerate on the percentage, but you get my drift. Besides [[thing]] from Hollywood, Bollywood too have their own share of highly [[envisaged]] blockbusters, and from some of the trailers shown, I'm hyped to watch them too. Tashan was [[billing]] as one of THE most highly anticipated for 2008, but I was quite surprised at the [[weakest]] than low [[involvements]] at the cinemas. When I watched Jodha Akbar, it was a full house, but it wasn't for Tashan.

After watching it, I knew why. It was entertaining, but it was fundamentally weak. Just like it's literal English title, which means "Style", Tashan is all style, but little substance. Not that it doesn't have the usual star power, but scenes felt forced, and some bordered on a tad ridiculous, even for Bollywood standards I must say. Which is quite surprising given that Tashan is directed and written by Vijay Krishna Acharya, who wrote Dhoom and Dhoom 2, both of which I [[loved]] tremendously.

[[Among]] his rookie directorial outing with Tashan, while you can't fault his direction, you'd probably scratch your head over the plot, which was clunky at best. It tried to force too many things into the story, though credit be given where it allowed you some avenue to question character motivation, but that came a little too late, and only toward the finale, which left you guessing for just a moment before it latched into full blown action [[simulating]] many a Thai action movie, with Hong Kong's wirework and Hollywood's [[farcical]] firearms and gunplay with zero recoil. And in a bid to include everything including the kitchen sink, you have an [[gamut]] of vehicles appearing, and the one that took the cake, in a Dhoom 2 homage, was the jetski [[vessel]] in the [[milieu]] of nowhere.

[[Under]] best, Tashan can be enjoyed as [[unforeseen]] comedy, and this is attributed to how the cast hammed up with their characters. Saif Ali Khan plays Jimmy Cliff, a call center executive who gives English tuition, only as a platform for fishing out new girlfriend material. His playboy ways gets junked aside when he meets with Pooja Singh (Kareena Kapoor), who's not exactly who she seems, the meek and sweet natured hottie. She engages Jimmy's services for her boss, mobster Bhaiyyaji (Anil Kapoor), who probably gets most of the laughs as he speaks broken English and phrases must like how an ah-beng does it. And to complete the quartet, Akshay Kumar plays Bachchan Pandey, an illiterate gangster for hire who got engaged by Bhaiyyaji to hunt down Jimmy and Pooja when they escape with money stolen from Bahiyyaji's business.

So begins a road trip of sorts, with friends who turned enemies, and enemies whom you know will become friends as the road trip wears on. Jimmy Cliff is probably the most implausible of all, because he goes from zero to hero, executing moves that would shame Rambo, in absolutely no time, which is quite out of character. Kareena Kapoor amps up the sex factor as she uses her charms to guile both men, and has plenty of opportunity to do so given the much touted bikini scenes, and other costumes that boast of plunging necklines or hemlines way above the knee. Every character has a backstory created, and I thought Akshay Kumar's Bachchan Pandey was probably the best, the most touching and the most fun of the lot, even though his character seemed a lot like a non-green Incredible Hulk with his gravity-defying leaps and power packing punches. His wounds also heal automatically, which impressively puts Wolverine to shame. And the best part is his theme song, which is damn alpha-male and played in ra-ra mode each time he takes on adversaries.

But sad to say, that's the only tune that is memorable, something that cheers "Bachchan- Pandey-Bachchan-Pandey". For most Bollywood movies I watch, I will usually be able to, despite the obvious language gaps, emerge from screenings humming a tune or two. I wasn't able to do that after Tashan, because the songs unfortunately just weren't catchy at all. Usually the song/dance routine works well into the storyline without any necessity to bring the characters out of the current scene or location. That I enjoy, versus plucking them out and plonking them into extreme settings high atop a mountain, or atop jagged rocks on the beach front.

Tashan probably didn't take itself too seriously, but coming from Vijay Krishna Acharya's story, you probably wanted something a little more decent rather than the ridiculous, and for continuity to be a little more careful as well. Billed as a blockbuster, now I can start to understand why the crowds have already shunned this one. Despite Akshay Kumr stealing the show, Tashan could have been better on the whole. --------------------------------------------- Result 4189 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Terrible use of scene cuts. All continuity is lost, either by awful scripting or lethargic direction. That villainous robot... musta been a jazz dancer? Also, one of the worst sound tracks I've ever heard (monologues usually drowned out by music.) And... where'd they get their props? That ship looks like a milk carton... I did better special effects on 8mm at the age of 13!

I'd recommend any film student should watch this flick (5 minutes at a time) so as to learn how NOT to produce a film. Or... was it the editors' fault?

It's really too bad, because the scenario was actually a good concept... just poorly executed all the way around. (Sorry Malcom. You should have sent a "stunt double". You're too good an actor for such a stink-bomb.) --------------------------------------------- Result 4190 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] This [[drama]] is unlike [[Sex]] and the City, where the women have a few [[drinks]] and [[share]] their sexual encounters with each other. Its much more personal and people can [[relate]] to it. Its much more engaging and emotional on a [[new]] [[level]] than other [[dramas]] [[focusing]] on women and their [[lives]] like "[[Sex]] and the City, Lipstick Jungle...."

Dr. Katie Roden, is a psychologist with a [[dark]] secret, she seems [[much]] more [[depressed]] and [[guilt]] ridden than the rest of her 3 [[friends]]. She is [[dealing]] with the [[death]] of her [[former]] lover who was her [[patient]] while [[tackling]] his son's [[advances]] on her. Her [[sombre]] [[clothes]] and empty and cold [[house]] convey her [[inside]] emotions very well.

Trudi Malloy, a widow is [[battling]] [[issues]] with "[[letting]] go" of her dead husband from 9/11. And when a [[handsome]] [[stranger]], Richard [[shows]] an interest in her she is suddenly [[forced]] to do a reality [[check]] by her [[friends]] who [[suggest]] that she [[gets]] back into [[dating]] business. The [[ridiculous]] and [[embarrassing]] [[courting]] scenes between Richard and Trudi are [[totally]] [[funny]]! It is interesting to [[note]] that [[Richard]] [[asks]] her out the day she gets a [[millions]] from the 9/11 board for her husband's death..[[lets]] see what his [[intentions]] are

Siobhan [[Dillon]], a [[lawyer]] is fed up of her husband's love making tactics which only involve "baby making" (as they are having trouble conceiving) and she [[quickly]] [[falls]] for her colleague who [[offer]] his "services" a [[little]] too willingly to her and she does not hesitate for [[long]]!It will interesting to [[see]] whether she will [[continue]] her [[affair]] or patch up with her husband (played by Raza [[Jeffrey]]) [[Jessica]], a real estate [[business]] woman is [[single]] and is straight, until she [[organizes]] a lesbian [[wedding]] and has an [[affair]] with one of them. Her [[character]] is [[shown]] as a bold and [[provocative]] [[woman]] who before her lesbian [[encounter]] is having [[sex]] with a "married [[man]]", her colleague. Lets see where her [[character]] venture to....

The beauty of this [[drama]] is that we are [[shown]] 4 [[totally]] [[different]] [[women]] with [[different]] [[scenarios]], whose [[ambitions]] and inhibitions are [[shown]]. Its [[also]] a good thing that the [[drama]] [[reveals]] the fact that sometimes [[friends]] lie to each other to be "safe"! This [[theater]] is unlike [[Sexually]] and the City, where the women have a few [[beverages]] and [[shares]] their sexual encounters with each other. Its much more personal and people can [[pertaining]] to it. Its much more engaging and emotional on a [[novel]] [[grades]] than other [[theatrical]] [[concentrated]] on women and their [[iife]] like "[[Sexual]] and the City, Lipstick Jungle...."

Dr. Katie Roden, is a psychologist with a [[gloom]] secret, she seems [[very]] more [[despondent]] and [[blame]] ridden than the rest of her 3 [[freund]]. She is [[addressing]] with the [[dead]] of her [[past]] lover who was her [[patients]] while [[addressing]] his son's [[strides]] on her. Her [[gloomy]] [[costumes]] and empty and cold [[maison]] convey her [[internal]] emotions very well.

Trudi Malloy, a widow is [[wrestling]] [[issue]] with "[[permitting]] go" of her dead husband from 9/11. And when a [[splendid]] [[alien]], Richard [[display]] an interest in her she is suddenly [[compelled]] to do a reality [[verify]] by her [[buddies]] who [[proposing]] that she [[get]] back into [[dated]] business. The [[laughable]] and [[distracting]] [[wooing]] scenes between Richard and Trudi are [[altogether]] [[droll]]! It is interesting to [[memo]] that [[Richards]] [[wondering]] her out the day she gets a [[billions]] from the 9/11 board for her husband's death..[[allow]] see what his [[purposes]] are

Siobhan [[Dylan]], a [[attorneys]] is fed up of her husband's love making tactics which only involve "baby making" (as they are having trouble conceiving) and she [[expeditiously]] [[waterfalls]] for her colleague who [[offering]] his "services" a [[scant]] too willingly to her and she does not hesitate for [[prolonged]]!It will interesting to [[behold]] whether she will [[incessant]] her [[fling]] or patch up with her husband (played by Raza [[Jeff]]) [[Jennifer]], a real estate [[corporations]] woman is [[exclusive]] and is straight, until she [[organize]] a lesbian [[marriages]] and has an [[fling]] with one of them. Her [[characters]] is [[evidenced]] as a bold and [[inflammatory]] [[women]] who before her lesbian [[face]] is having [[sexuality]] with a "married [[dawg]]", her colleague. Lets see where her [[traits]] venture to....

The beauty of this [[tragedy]] is that we are [[evidenced]] 4 [[altogether]] [[divergent]] [[female]] with [[disparate]] [[screenplays]], whose [[objectives]] and inhibitions are [[indicated]]. Its [[similarly]] a good thing that the [[dramas]] [[reveal]] the fact that sometimes [[boyfriends]] lie to each other to be "safe"! --------------------------------------------- Result 4191 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (62%)]] Let me start out by saying I'm a big Carrey fan. Although I'll admit I haven't seen all of his movies *cough*the magestic*cough*. Bruce Almighty was [[enjoyable]]. None of the other reviews have really gone into how cheesy it gets towards the end, I dont know what the writers were thinking. Somehow I couldn't help but feel like this movie was a poor attempt at re-creating Liar Liar.

On a positive note, The Daily Show's Steve Correl is HILARIOUS and so is the rest of the cast. See Bruce Almighty if you're a big Jim Carrey fan, or if you just want to see a light-hearted (que soft piano music) somewhat funny comedy. Let me start out by saying I'm a big Carrey fan. Although I'll admit I haven't seen all of his movies *cough*the magestic*cough*. Bruce Almighty was [[pleasurable]]. None of the other reviews have really gone into how cheesy it gets towards the end, I dont know what the writers were thinking. Somehow I couldn't help but feel like this movie was a poor attempt at re-creating Liar Liar.

On a positive note, The Daily Show's Steve Correl is HILARIOUS and so is the rest of the cast. See Bruce Almighty if you're a big Jim Carrey fan, or if you just want to see a light-hearted (que soft piano music) somewhat funny comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4192 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] Here is one the entire family will [[enjoy]]... even those who [[consider]] themselves too [[old]] for fairy [[tales]]. [[Shelley]] Duvall outdid herself with this [[unique]], [[imaginative]] take on nearly all of the popular fairy [[tales]] of childhood. The scripts offer new twists on the age-old fables we grew up on and they [[feature]] a handful of stars in each episode. "Cinderella" is no exception to Duvall's standard and in my opinion it's one of the [[top]] five of the series, [[highlighted]] by Jennifer Beals (remember her from "Flashdance"--and she's still in Hollywood today making a movie here and there) in the title role, Jean Stapleton as the fairy godmother with a southern accent and Eve Arden as the embodiment of wicked stepmotherhood. Edie McClurg ("Ferris Bueller's Day Off") and Jane Alden make for a hilarious duo as the stepsisters. Matthew Broderick is an affable Prince Henry. You'll all keep coming back for this one! Here is one the entire family will [[enjoys]]... even those who [[scrutinize]] themselves too [[elderly]] for fairy [[fairytales]]. [[Shelly]] Duvall outdid herself with this [[sole]], [[creative]] take on nearly all of the popular fairy [[story]] of childhood. The scripts offer new twists on the age-old fables we grew up on and they [[idiosyncratic]] a handful of stars in each episode. "Cinderella" is no exception to Duvall's standard and in my opinion it's one of the [[topped]] five of the series, [[stressed]] by Jennifer Beals (remember her from "Flashdance"--and she's still in Hollywood today making a movie here and there) in the title role, Jean Stapleton as the fairy godmother with a southern accent and Eve Arden as the embodiment of wicked stepmotherhood. Edie McClurg ("Ferris Bueller's Day Off") and Jane Alden make for a hilarious duo as the stepsisters. Matthew Broderick is an affable Prince Henry. You'll all keep coming back for this one! --------------------------------------------- Result 4193 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I personally [[hated]] this [[movie]] because it was predictable, the [[characters]] were stereotypical ,and the [[whole]] [[idea]] was a [[rip]] off of "The [[Cutting]] Edge", and "[[Cadet]] [[Kelly]]".

The [[main]] character is a [[snotty]] [[girl]] who [[gets]] [[shipped]] of to a [[place]] where she doesn't belong. The [[whole]] place [[hates]] her, and to make [[things]] worse there is a [[hot]] [[guy]] that seemingly doesn't like her ( well duh the [[whole]] [[damn]] school can't [[stand]] you). Amazingly she finds a way to fit in and make everyone to [[like]] her plus, [[gets]] the [[guy]] to [[fall]] head over heels in love with her. Then comes the choice, where she must [[choose]] between [[figure]] skating and hockey. She [[chooses]] hockey then she goes to the [[figure]] skating [[nationals]],and [[gets]] to be on the [[Olympic]] team. [[No]] real surprise there.

This whole movie was so [[damn]] predictable You [[knew]] what was [[going]] to happen before you [[even]] [[saw]] it. This was so [[awful]] I nearly puked, and by the time I was finished [[watching]] it, I had an awful [[headache]] and the urge to shoot myself for [[watching]] such [[crap]]. Don't watch this [[unless]] you are under ten, or actually like crappy tween movies. I personally [[detest]] this [[kino]] because it was predictable, the [[hallmarks]] were stereotypical ,and the [[overall]] [[ideals]] was a [[tears]] off of "The [[Cut]] Edge", and "[[Younger]] [[Kelley]]".

The [[principal]] character is a [[brazen]] [[dame]] who [[get]] [[conveyed]] of to a [[placing]] where she doesn't belong. The [[entire]] place [[hated]] her, and to make [[aspects]] worse there is a [[sexy]] [[boys]] that seemingly doesn't like her ( well duh the [[ensemble]] [[goddammit]] school can't [[stands]] you). Amazingly she finds a way to fit in and make everyone to [[loves]] her plus, [[attains]] the [[dawg]] to [[declined]] head over heels in love with her. Then comes the choice, where she must [[chose]] between [[silhouette]] skating and hockey. She [[pick]] hockey then she goes to the [[silhouette]] skating [[countries]],and [[got]] to be on the [[Olympian]] team. [[Nos]] real surprise there.

This whole movie was so [[jeez]] predictable You [[overheard]] what was [[gonna]] to happen before you [[yet]] [[noticed]] it. This was so [[scary]] I nearly puked, and by the time I was finished [[staring]] it, I had an awful [[migraine]] and the urge to shoot myself for [[staring]] such [[bollocks]]. Don't watch this [[if]] you are under ten, or actually like crappy tween movies. --------------------------------------------- Result 4194 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Russell, my fav, is [[gorgeous]] in this film. But more than that, the film covers a tremendous range of human passion and sorrow. Everything from [[marriage]] to homosexuality is addressed and respected. The [[film]] makes the [[viewer]] [[realize]] that tolerance of other [[humans]] [[provides]] the [[route]] to [[saving]] [[humanity]]. [[Fabulous]] [[love]] [[story]] between Lachlin and Lil. I [[replay]] their scenes over and over again. Anyone who has ever been in [[love]] will [[empathize]] with these people. All [[characters]] are [[cast]] and portrayed [[excellently]]. Russell, my fav, is [[terrific]] in this film. But more than that, the film covers a tremendous range of human passion and sorrow. Everything from [[marriages]] to homosexuality is addressed and respected. The [[cinema]] makes the [[beholder]] [[attain]] that tolerance of other [[beings]] [[gives]] the [[pathway]] to [[save]] [[humane]]. [[Magnifique]] [[adored]] [[narratives]] between Lachlin and Lil. I [[replicating]] their scenes over and over again. Anyone who has ever been in [[likes]] will [[sympathize]] with these people. All [[attribute]] are [[casting]] and portrayed [[divinely]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4195 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (99%)]] Scott Menville is not Casey Kasem. That is the first, most important, and most [[disturbing]] thing about this [[attempt]] at re-imagining Scooby-Doo and company.

Shaggy's voice is squeaky and does not sound anything like he has ever sounded in any of the previous incarnations of the Scooby shows. They've also [[changed]] the outfit and the classic mode of walking from the original.

I'm not sure what they're on about yet with the villain angle, but it surely isn't following the formula used in any of the previous Scooby shows.

And the animation style is very bizarre and distorted. I like it, but it's not real Scooby-Doo type animation. But the weird animation used for other WB shows grew on me; this might, too.

It's worth a glance at -- once -- if you can handle the lack of proper Shaggy voice. That right there is enough to jar one out of enjoying the show properly. Besides, I am trying not to be an inflexible, nitpicking fan. Evolve or die, as the saying goes. We'll see how it looks after two more episodes -- by then I'll have formed a much more solid opinion. Scott Menville is not Casey Kasem. That is the first, most important, and most [[unsettling]] thing about this [[endeavours]] at re-imagining Scooby-Doo and company.

Shaggy's voice is squeaky and does not sound anything like he has ever sounded in any of the previous incarnations of the Scooby shows. They've also [[amend]] the outfit and the classic mode of walking from the original.

I'm not sure what they're on about yet with the villain angle, but it surely isn't following the formula used in any of the previous Scooby shows.

And the animation style is very bizarre and distorted. I like it, but it's not real Scooby-Doo type animation. But the weird animation used for other WB shows grew on me; this might, too.

It's worth a glance at -- once -- if you can handle the lack of proper Shaggy voice. That right there is enough to jar one out of enjoying the show properly. Besides, I am trying not to be an inflexible, nitpicking fan. Evolve or die, as the saying goes. We'll see how it looks after two more episodes -- by then I'll have formed a much more solid opinion. --------------------------------------------- Result 4196 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] I had seen this movie when it got released, and when I was 12 years old :) And I still vividly recollect the wonderful scenes of how the hero/heroine escape every time when faced with danger :) And the best feature of the movie was the portrayal of the villain! I think many so-called action movies [[copied]] a lot many "escape scenes" from this movie!! And not only does it never impress me when I see such copying, it always increases my appreciation for this [[masterpiece]]! :) The lead [[actors]] have acted [[wonderfully]]. The [[slow]] and [[realistic]] development of the [[chemistry]] b/w the [[hero]] and [[heroine]] was extremely natural and [[wonderfully]] portrayed. As children, we felt that the [[love]] that [[developed]] b/w them was very natural :) The [[way]] they [[face]] and [[overcome]] all their [[trials]] and tribulations [[together]] was [[something]] that can [[make]] [[even]] kids [[realize]] the value of [[true]] [[love]], sacrifice and caring. I [[recommend]] that every [[person]] see this [[movie]] when [[given]] a [[chance]]!! --Vijay. I had seen this movie when it got released, and when I was 12 years old :) And I still vividly recollect the wonderful scenes of how the hero/heroine escape every time when faced with danger :) And the best feature of the movie was the portrayal of the villain! I think many so-called action movies [[copies]] a lot many "escape scenes" from this movie!! And not only does it never impress me when I see such copying, it always increases my appreciation for this [[centerpiece]]! :) The lead [[actresses]] have acted [[staggeringly]]. The [[slower]] and [[practical]] development of the [[chemical]] b/w the [[superhero]] and [[idol]] was extremely natural and [[marvellously]] portrayed. As children, we felt that the [[likes]] that [[formulated]] b/w them was very natural :) The [[routing]] they [[encounter]] and [[overcoming]] all their [[lawsuits]] and tribulations [[jointly]] was [[anything]] that can [[deliver]] [[yet]] kids [[attaining]] the value of [[real]] [[likes]], sacrifice and caring. I [[recommends]] that every [[someone]] see this [[kino]] when [[conferred]] a [[probability]]!! --Vijay. --------------------------------------------- Result 4197 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] The [[original]] DeMille [[movie]] was [[made]] in 1938 with [[Frederic]] March. A very good film [[indeed]]. Hollywood's [[love]] of remakes brings us a fairly interesting movie starring Yul [[Brynner]]. He of course was brilliant as he almost always [[seemed]] to be in all of his [[movies]]. Charlton Heston as [[Andrew]] Jackson was a [[stroke]] of genius. [[However]], the [[movie]] did [[tend]] to [[get]] a little long in [[places]]. It does not move at the pace of the 1938 [[version]]. Still, it is a [[fun]] [[movie]] that should be [[seen]] at least once. The [[upfront]] DeMille [[movies]] was [[effected]] in 1938 with [[Freddie]] March. A very good film [[admittedly]]. Hollywood's [[loves]] of remakes brings us a fairly interesting movie starring Yul [[Yul]]. He of course was brilliant as he almost always [[looked]] to be in all of his [[theater]]. Charlton Heston as [[Andreu]] Jackson was a [[apoplexy]] of genius. [[Instead]], the [[cinematographic]] did [[tending]] to [[gets]] a little long in [[locations]]. It does not move at the pace of the 1938 [[stepping]]. Still, it is a [[amusing]] [[cinematography]] that should be [[watched]] at least once. --------------------------------------------- Result 4198 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] am i the only one who saw the connection between the discussion of [[camus]] 'the myth of sisyphus' and mary's [[life]]? in camus version a [[man]] is [[condemned]] to spend his eternity with a giant [[boulder]] that he must roll up a hill. unfortunately every time he reaches the top the boulder slips and ends up back at the bottom for him to start. there may have been a buzzard pecking at his eyes, i'm not [[sure]] right now. in the movie mary spends her life struggling to get her life together, [[unfortunately]] every time she gains any footing she falls and loses everything. case in point would be the party she throws where she gets intoxicated, offends her falafel lover, and is practically attacked by liev schrieber. in case you question this theory, note how this scene ends with her attempting to climb a flight of stars while books fall from nowhere impeding her progress until ultimately she passes out. the next morning when she awakens she is still on the stairs, never having reached the top. am i the only one who saw the connection between the discussion of [[kami]] 'the myth of sisyphus' and mary's [[living]]? in camus version a [[dude]] is [[condemning]] to spend his eternity with a giant [[rock]] that he must roll up a hill. unfortunately every time he reaches the top the boulder slips and ends up back at the bottom for him to start. there may have been a buzzard pecking at his eyes, i'm not [[convinced]] right now. in the movie mary spends her life struggling to get her life together, [[unluckily]] every time she gains any footing she falls and loses everything. case in point would be the party she throws where she gets intoxicated, offends her falafel lover, and is practically attacked by liev schrieber. in case you question this theory, note how this scene ends with her attempting to climb a flight of stars while books fall from nowhere impeding her progress until ultimately she passes out. the next morning when she awakens she is still on the stairs, never having reached the top. --------------------------------------------- Result 4199 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] This is a very [[difficult]] movie, and it's almost impossible to get a handle on what's going on. At first it seems to be a rather pedestrian movie about a guy (Trelkovsky) who needs an apartment and rather crassly invites himself into one when the current tenant (a woman) commits suicide. Then the twists and turns start. Are the neighbors trying to kill him? And why are the dead tenant's clothes turning up in the apartment? One wonders, finally, if Trelkovksy _is_ the prior tenant.

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

One of the tricks Polanski pulls on us is to lie to us. We assume when we see things from the point of view of a character that we see things as the character does and that there may be distortions of reality. We assume when the camera is showing us things from its omniscient point of view that we see actuality - but Polanski has the camera lie to us. This is a very [[laborious]] movie, and it's almost impossible to get a handle on what's going on. At first it seems to be a rather pedestrian movie about a guy (Trelkovsky) who needs an apartment and rather crassly invites himself into one when the current tenant (a woman) commits suicide. Then the twists and turns start. Are the neighbors trying to kill him? And why are the dead tenant's clothes turning up in the apartment? One wonders, finally, if Trelkovksy _is_ the prior tenant.

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

One of the tricks Polanski pulls on us is to lie to us. We assume when we see things from the point of view of a character that we see things as the character does and that there may be distortions of reality. We assume when the camera is showing us things from its omniscient point of view that we see actuality - but Polanski has the camera lie to us. --------------------------------------------- Result 4200 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] [[While]] others [[may]] contend that by viewing other works by Bilal, one will better appreciate this movie, it does fail in one major [[way]]. It does not [[stand]] on its own. The plot is a mishmash that is confuses symbolism with substance. Here's an idea [[start]] with a definite story. Then craft symbolism around it. We [[start]] with two different narratives, this [[female]] that is somehow turning human, a "god" that is for some reason being judged, but getting one last fling on Earth, and this mysterious John character who seems to be developing some sort of "resort" just beyond the bounds of the city. Why? None of these questions are answered. But do we care, no. There is no development to want us to empathize with any character in the story, the closest we get Jill and even then the development is spotty at best. Unfortunately the movie gets caught up in the the whole visually impressive (which it is,) but at the expense of motivic development. I [[would]] love to see this rewritten by someone who could distance themselves from the material a bit and not have to feel that every image has to be in the picture. [[Albeit]] others [[maggio]] contend that by viewing other works by Bilal, one will better appreciate this movie, it does fail in one major [[paths]]. It does not [[stands]] on its own. The plot is a mishmash that is confuses symbolism with substance. Here's an idea [[beginnings]] with a definite story. Then craft symbolism around it. We [[lancer]] with two different narratives, this [[femmes]] that is somehow turning human, a "god" that is for some reason being judged, but getting one last fling on Earth, and this mysterious John character who seems to be developing some sort of "resort" just beyond the bounds of the city. Why? None of these questions are answered. But do we care, no. There is no development to want us to empathize with any character in the story, the closest we get Jill and even then the development is spotty at best. Unfortunately the movie gets caught up in the the whole visually impressive (which it is,) but at the expense of motivic development. I [[ought]] love to see this rewritten by someone who could distance themselves from the material a bit and not have to feel that every image has to be in the picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4201 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] haha! you have to just [[smile]] and smile if you actually made it all the way through this movie. it like [[says]] something about myself i guess. the movie itself was created i think as some sort of psychological test, or like some sort of drug, to take you to a place you have never been before. When Wittgenstein wrote his famous first philosophical piece the tractacus (sp?) he said it was meaningless and useless, but if you read it, after you were done, it would take you to a new level, like a ladder, and then you could throw away the work and see things with clarity and true understanding. this movie is the same i think.

As a movie it is without a doubt, the worst movie i have seen in a long long time in such a unique way. first of all, this is snipes. i loved watching this guy kick ass in various movies. and i have suffered through a few weak ones. however, although you know the movie might suck, you would never suspect that it could be as bad as it actually was. which is the fun of it. i mean this is snipes. you know it might be good, but it will be alright, right? smile.

so this thing on every level is pure boredom, pure unoriginality. the reference to the professional is both dead on and obvious, yet so poorly done as to be comical. there is not one character in this movie that is interesting, in the least. and to make the whole thing more surreal, they have a soundtrack that sort of sounds like parts to various Bourne identity type movies, only isn't quite right. in fact, although it seems close to action movie background music, it just so happens it is done in a manner that will grate on you fantastically.

then all the scenes in the total pitch black, where honestly since the characters are so flat, you don't really care whats going to happen, but regardless, after it happens and someone is killed, you just say to yourself, was i supposed to see that? what else? how about scenes with blinding, obnoxious flashing at a strobe lights pace, for a period of time that is too long to bear. sure let's throw that in. how bout this though. when you are straining and your eyes cant handle it any longer, do some more of these in the dark kills where you really don't see what happened. and on top of that, lets face it you don't care. you were past bored way from the beginning.

so i drifted in and out a couple times, but i caught almost all of this movie. and it becomes something you can watch, without something that engages your mind on any level, therefore, it becomes something you can effectively zone out with, and begin to think about your life, where its going, where its been, what we are as people.

and that... that is the true magic of this film. haha! you have to just [[kidd]] and smile if you actually made it all the way through this movie. it like [[contends]] something about myself i guess. the movie itself was created i think as some sort of psychological test, or like some sort of drug, to take you to a place you have never been before. When Wittgenstein wrote his famous first philosophical piece the tractacus (sp?) he said it was meaningless and useless, but if you read it, after you were done, it would take you to a new level, like a ladder, and then you could throw away the work and see things with clarity and true understanding. this movie is the same i think.

As a movie it is without a doubt, the worst movie i have seen in a long long time in such a unique way. first of all, this is snipes. i loved watching this guy kick ass in various movies. and i have suffered through a few weak ones. however, although you know the movie might suck, you would never suspect that it could be as bad as it actually was. which is the fun of it. i mean this is snipes. you know it might be good, but it will be alright, right? smile.

so this thing on every level is pure boredom, pure unoriginality. the reference to the professional is both dead on and obvious, yet so poorly done as to be comical. there is not one character in this movie that is interesting, in the least. and to make the whole thing more surreal, they have a soundtrack that sort of sounds like parts to various Bourne identity type movies, only isn't quite right. in fact, although it seems close to action movie background music, it just so happens it is done in a manner that will grate on you fantastically.

then all the scenes in the total pitch black, where honestly since the characters are so flat, you don't really care whats going to happen, but regardless, after it happens and someone is killed, you just say to yourself, was i supposed to see that? what else? how about scenes with blinding, obnoxious flashing at a strobe lights pace, for a period of time that is too long to bear. sure let's throw that in. how bout this though. when you are straining and your eyes cant handle it any longer, do some more of these in the dark kills where you really don't see what happened. and on top of that, lets face it you don't care. you were past bored way from the beginning.

so i drifted in and out a couple times, but i caught almost all of this movie. and it becomes something you can watch, without something that engages your mind on any level, therefore, it becomes something you can effectively zone out with, and begin to think about your life, where its going, where its been, what we are as people.

and that... that is the true magic of this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4202 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I've seen the [[original]] English [[version]] on video. Disney's choice of voice [[actors]] [[looks]] very [[promising]]. I can't believe I'm [[saying]] that. The story is about a young boy who [[meets]] a girl with a [[history]] that is [[intertwined]] with his own. The two are [[thrown]] into one of the most [[fun]] and intriguing storylines in any animated film. The animation quality is [[excellent]]! [[If]] you've [[seen]] Disney's [[job]] of Kiki's delivery service you can [[see]] the quality in their production. It [[almost]] redeems them for stealing the story of Kimba the [[white]] [[lion]]. (but not [[quite]]!) Finally Miyazaki's [[films]] are being released properly! I can't wait to see an uncut English version of Nausicaa! I've seen the [[upfront]] English [[stepping]] on video. Disney's choice of voice [[protagonists]] [[seem]] very [[promise]]. I can't believe I'm [[telling]] that. The story is about a young boy who [[fulfils]] a girl with a [[stories]] that is [[interconnected]] with his own. The two are [[threw]] into one of the most [[hilarious]] and intriguing storylines in any animated film. The animation quality is [[sumptuous]]! [[Though]] you've [[watched]] Disney's [[labor]] of Kiki's delivery service you can [[consults]] the quality in their production. It [[virtually]] redeems them for stealing the story of Kimba the [[blanca]] [[lioness]]. (but not [[very]]!) Finally Miyazaki's [[cinematic]] are being released properly! I can't wait to see an uncut English version of Nausicaa! --------------------------------------------- Result 4203 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[Russ]] and Valerie are having [[discussions]] about starting a family. The couple live in a posh apartment and run an auction business that deals with valuable collectibles. At the same time, a dedicated adoption agency owner takes a mini [[vacation]] and leaves the orphanage in the charge of his father ([[Leslie]] Nielsen). Father Harry is in the [[rental]] [[business]] and he [[gets]] the [[brilliant]] [[idea]] to "[[rent]]" some of the children of the orphanage to couples like Russ and Valerie. Harry, who [[becomes]] aware of the couple'e [[dilemma]], offers a family of [[siblings]] for a 10 day rental [[period]]! Brandon, Kyle, and Molly move into the [[apartment]] with their [[temporary]] [[parents]], with amusing consequences, as the [[new]] [[caretakers]] are inexperienced with kids. But, where is the [[possibility]] of a happy [[ending]]? This is a darling [[family]] [[film]]. The [[actors]], including Nielsen as the wheeler-dealer and Christopher Lloyd as the kind [[apartment]] [[doorman]], are all [[wonderful]]. The [[script]] is snappy and fun and the overall production values quite high. Yes, if only life could be this way! Orphaned children everywhere deserve a chance to prove that they are lovable and can give so much joy to the parents who are considering adoption. If you want to show a film to your family that is rooted in good values but is also [[highly]] entertaining, find this movie. It is guaranteed to have everyone laughing, even as their hearts are melting. [[Rus]] and Valerie are having [[speaks]] about starting a family. The couple live in a posh apartment and run an auction business that deals with valuable collectibles. At the same time, a dedicated adoption agency owner takes a mini [[holiday]] and leaves the orphanage in the charge of his father ([[Lesley]] Nielsen). Father Harry is in the [[rented]] [[enterprise]] and he [[got]] the [[glowing]] [[thinks]] to "[[rented]]" some of the children of the orphanage to couples like Russ and Valerie. Harry, who [[becoming]] aware of the couple'e [[predicament]], offers a family of [[plymouth]] for a 10 day rental [[timeframe]]! Brandon, Kyle, and Molly move into the [[apartments]] with their [[provisional]] [[parenting]], with amusing consequences, as the [[newer]] [[wardens]] are inexperienced with kids. But, where is the [[likelihood]] of a happy [[terminated]]? This is a darling [[families]] [[movies]]. The [[actresses]], including Nielsen as the wheeler-dealer and Christopher Lloyd as the kind [[condo]] [[concierge]], are all [[glamorous]]. The [[hyphen]] is snappy and fun and the overall production values quite high. Yes, if only life could be this way! Orphaned children everywhere deserve a chance to prove that they are lovable and can give so much joy to the parents who are considering adoption. If you want to show a film to your family that is rooted in good values but is also [[unimaginably]] entertaining, find this movie. It is guaranteed to have everyone laughing, even as their hearts are melting. --------------------------------------------- Result 4204 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I agree with those reviews I have read here, and I have no words to define such a [[turkey]] like this, but despite everything, I still can find a reason for [[movies]] like this to exist. Do you remenber those happy days in which video was a prosperous business, and a lot of movies were made with the only reason of filling the shelves of the video stores? this movie comes from that period and I can imagine that was the only reason for which it was produced and the same happened with many, many, many other stinkers. Do you remember "Rambo" imitations? and so many slashers of Z grade?, I still feel nostalgia for that period.About this movie I can say I didn´t waste my time watching it because I pressed the fast forward button after the first fifteen minutes, just to find a very funny scene in which a guy was pushing an axe against heads which exploded because, as you perfectly notice, they were made of plastic. And about the end, well, it was so badly filmed I could not understand what happened. That´s the same, I had not followed the non-existing plot at all. But boy, Video-age was a great age despite movies like this. I agree with those reviews I have read here, and I have no words to define such a [[turk]] like this, but despite everything, I still can find a reason for [[cinematography]] like this to exist. Do you remenber those happy days in which video was a prosperous business, and a lot of movies were made with the only reason of filling the shelves of the video stores? this movie comes from that period and I can imagine that was the only reason for which it was produced and the same happened with many, many, many other stinkers. Do you remember "Rambo" imitations? and so many slashers of Z grade?, I still feel nostalgia for that period.About this movie I can say I didn´t waste my time watching it because I pressed the fast forward button after the first fifteen minutes, just to find a very funny scene in which a guy was pushing an axe against heads which exploded because, as you perfectly notice, they were made of plastic. And about the end, well, it was so badly filmed I could not understand what happened. That´s the same, I had not followed the non-existing plot at all. But boy, Video-age was a great age despite movies like this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4205 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] [[In]] NYC, [[seaman]] Michael O'Hara (Orson [[Welles]]) rescues Elsa Bannister (Rita Hayworth) from a [[mugging]] & [[rape]] as she [[takes]] a [[horse]] & [[carriage]] through Central Park -and lives to regret it. Titian-haired Hayworth's a platinum blonde in this one; as [[dazzling]] as fresh-fallen snow -but [[nowhere]] near as pure...

To reveal any more of the convoluted plot in this seminal "noir" [[would]] be criminal. It's as deceptive as the mirrors used to cataclysmic effect in the final scenes -but the film holds far darker secrets: From the NY Times: "Childhood Shadows: The Hidden Story Of The Black Dahlia Murder" by Mary Pacios "Mary Pacios, who was 5 years old when she was befriended by 15 year old Bette Short, retraces Short's steps, interviewing friends and associates. She also offered a detailed, if speculative, analysis of Orson Welles -particularly in regard to his movie "The Lady From Shanghai". According to Ms. Pacios, the movie, along with related archival materials, has many of the same ritualistic elements associated with Short's murder. She raises the question: Could Welles have been the killer?" Interesting theories -and with the spate of books now out on "The Black Dahlia", much more may come to light. Fritz Lang's brutal "film noir", "The Big Heat" (1953), was a roman-a-clef telling of the "Dahlia" killing in "The City Of Nets" that was L.A. -but it's the Orson opus that the "Dahlia" had a "hands-on" connection to. In reality, it was Bugsy Siegel (and the Hollywood mob wars of the 1940's) that did the "Dahlia" in ...but that doesn't negate much of what Pacios wrote. Almost all of Hollywood intersected with Elizabeth ("The Black Dahlia") Short and her tale/aura/[[legacy]]/curse is encoded in a number of [[Golden]] Age [[films]].

The "Black Dahlia" was [[always]] on the peripheral edges of "Shanghai"-even before it [[started]] filming. [[Barbara]] Payton on Franchot Tone: "It was when he was thinking about [[making]] "The Lady From Shanghai", before he [[lost]] the [[option]] to Orson Welles. Franchot said he'd been in a bad state over that deal when he ran into the Dahlia in the Formosa Cafe* across from the Goldwyn studios..." *The floor above the Formosa Cafe was Bugsy Siegel's office and "The Dahlia" one of his on again/off again working "girls".

It gets deeper and darker- After the 1951 brawl over Barbara Payton between Tom Neal and Franchot Tone that sent Franchot to the hospital with a concussion and "never talking the same way again," Barbara said, she married Tone "just to spite Neal." Tom ("Detour") Neal also knew "The Dahlia" (who didn't?) and became obsessed- From "L.A. Despair" by John Gilmore: "The January 1947 slaying of the young, beautiful would-be actress Elizabeth Short, known as "The Black Dahlia", was one of the most grisly murders in the annals of modern crime. A project, called "Who Killed The Black Dahlia?" was being kicked off by actor Tom Neal, a hell-raiser from WW II movies. Potential producer Gene Harris: "Someone will have to come up with a more imaginative business proposition than what has been presented by Tom Neal and his cohorts..." Not long after: "It would be very clear one beautiful day to come, when Tom would sneak up on his pretty, new Palm Springs wife as she lay on their sofa and shoot a .45 bullet through her head." Barbara Payton and Norma Jean Dougherty (later Marilyn Monroe) knew the "Dahlia" and their stories are well known. It seems all who crossed the path of the "Dahlia" (like the proverbial black cat) entered a "Twilight Zone" darkness and/or had an incredible string of bad luck afterward. Tone/Neal/Welles are only a few -and this includes a butchered film called "The Lady From Shanghai"...

"Lady From Shanghai" took two years to be released, thanks to extensive re-editing -and all because Columbia president Harry Cohn couldn't understand the story. It's dark "noir" to be sure -one of the darkest, in fact. It's also a wicked satire on life in the new Atomic Age.

Nicolas Christopher:

"Shanghai" pushes forth an insistent subtext of nuclear apocalypse and contains the definitive noir statement concerning the atomic bomb and the American city. The film's principal murder victim (and there are many), a psychotic and double-dealing lawyer, manically foresees Armageddon at every turn, claiming he can "feel it." He announces that he plans to escape to a remote Pacific island -a particularly acid joke on Welles' part since this was the very year the U.S. began testing atomic bombs at just such a place, the Bikini Atoll, relocating all the inhabitants and destroying the ecosystem. By the time of Bikini, the erotic identification of Hayworth with the Bomb appears to have been institutionalized, with the blessing of the military brass; the first bomb dropped in the Pacific testing ground in named "Gilda" and has Hayworth's image, in provocative dress, painted directly on its casing..."

Its ironic that Orson Welles' broad interpretation of an Irishman is considered a detriment to the film by many. Welles is giving a clue to viewers that "Michael O'Hara" is only the storyteller - not part of the story even though it revolves around him. "O'Hara" contradicts the shark motif throughout the film. Sharks on a feeding frenzy won't stop until there's nothing left. "Michael O'Hara" lives to tell the tale. "Elsa Bannister" causes a feeding frenzy during "O'Hara's" trial and her netted chapeau suggests she's caged in -so as not to devour the human spectators to a Roman Coleseum. The spectators are on a feeding frenzy of their own, gossiping and carrying on about "Elsa" -a human aquarium correlating to the San Francisco marine museum sequence. That's the human condition ...except for "Michael O'Hara". And yet he'll be spending his life trying to forget his past ("Elsa") -or die trying. "Elsa" is part of "Michael" and the tale eats its own tail in the end and the viewer is cautioned to stay out of trouble. [[Among]] NYC, [[seamen]] Michael O'Hara (Orson [[Orson]]) rescues Elsa Bannister (Rita Hayworth) from a [[storming]] & [[violating]] as she [[pick]] a [[horses]] & [[transport]] through Central Park -and lives to regret it. Titian-haired Hayworth's a platinum blonde in this one; as [[astounding]] as fresh-fallen snow -but [[anywhere]] near as pure...

To reveal any more of the convoluted plot in this seminal "noir" [[could]] be criminal. It's as deceptive as the mirrors used to cataclysmic effect in the final scenes -but the film holds far darker secrets: From the NY Times: "Childhood Shadows: The Hidden Story Of The Black Dahlia Murder" by Mary Pacios "Mary Pacios, who was 5 years old when she was befriended by 15 year old Bette Short, retraces Short's steps, interviewing friends and associates. She also offered a detailed, if speculative, analysis of Orson Welles -particularly in regard to his movie "The Lady From Shanghai". According to Ms. Pacios, the movie, along with related archival materials, has many of the same ritualistic elements associated with Short's murder. She raises the question: Could Welles have been the killer?" Interesting theories -and with the spate of books now out on "The Black Dahlia", much more may come to light. Fritz Lang's brutal "film noir", "The Big Heat" (1953), was a roman-a-clef telling of the "Dahlia" killing in "The City Of Nets" that was L.A. -but it's the Orson opus that the "Dahlia" had a "hands-on" connection to. In reality, it was Bugsy Siegel (and the Hollywood mob wars of the 1940's) that did the "Dahlia" in ...but that doesn't negate much of what Pacios wrote. Almost all of Hollywood intersected with Elizabeth ("The Black Dahlia") Short and her tale/aura/[[inherit]]/curse is encoded in a number of [[Gilded]] Age [[movies]].

The "Black Dahlia" was [[invariably]] on the peripheral edges of "Shanghai"-even before it [[embark]] filming. [[Barbarian]] Payton on Franchot Tone: "It was when he was thinking about [[doing]] "The Lady From Shanghai", before he [[outof]] the [[surrogate]] to Orson Welles. Franchot said he'd been in a bad state over that deal when he ran into the Dahlia in the Formosa Cafe* across from the Goldwyn studios..." *The floor above the Formosa Cafe was Bugsy Siegel's office and "The Dahlia" one of his on again/off again working "girls".

It gets deeper and darker- After the 1951 brawl over Barbara Payton between Tom Neal and Franchot Tone that sent Franchot to the hospital with a concussion and "never talking the same way again," Barbara said, she married Tone "just to spite Neal." Tom ("Detour") Neal also knew "The Dahlia" (who didn't?) and became obsessed- From "L.A. Despair" by John Gilmore: "The January 1947 slaying of the young, beautiful would-be actress Elizabeth Short, known as "The Black Dahlia", was one of the most grisly murders in the annals of modern crime. A project, called "Who Killed The Black Dahlia?" was being kicked off by actor Tom Neal, a hell-raiser from WW II movies. Potential producer Gene Harris: "Someone will have to come up with a more imaginative business proposition than what has been presented by Tom Neal and his cohorts..." Not long after: "It would be very clear one beautiful day to come, when Tom would sneak up on his pretty, new Palm Springs wife as she lay on their sofa and shoot a .45 bullet through her head." Barbara Payton and Norma Jean Dougherty (later Marilyn Monroe) knew the "Dahlia" and their stories are well known. It seems all who crossed the path of the "Dahlia" (like the proverbial black cat) entered a "Twilight Zone" darkness and/or had an incredible string of bad luck afterward. Tone/Neal/Welles are only a few -and this includes a butchered film called "The Lady From Shanghai"...

"Lady From Shanghai" took two years to be released, thanks to extensive re-editing -and all because Columbia president Harry Cohn couldn't understand the story. It's dark "noir" to be sure -one of the darkest, in fact. It's also a wicked satire on life in the new Atomic Age.

Nicolas Christopher:

"Shanghai" pushes forth an insistent subtext of nuclear apocalypse and contains the definitive noir statement concerning the atomic bomb and the American city. The film's principal murder victim (and there are many), a psychotic and double-dealing lawyer, manically foresees Armageddon at every turn, claiming he can "feel it." He announces that he plans to escape to a remote Pacific island -a particularly acid joke on Welles' part since this was the very year the U.S. began testing atomic bombs at just such a place, the Bikini Atoll, relocating all the inhabitants and destroying the ecosystem. By the time of Bikini, the erotic identification of Hayworth with the Bomb appears to have been institutionalized, with the blessing of the military brass; the first bomb dropped in the Pacific testing ground in named "Gilda" and has Hayworth's image, in provocative dress, painted directly on its casing..."

Its ironic that Orson Welles' broad interpretation of an Irishman is considered a detriment to the film by many. Welles is giving a clue to viewers that "Michael O'Hara" is only the storyteller - not part of the story even though it revolves around him. "O'Hara" contradicts the shark motif throughout the film. Sharks on a feeding frenzy won't stop until there's nothing left. "Michael O'Hara" lives to tell the tale. "Elsa Bannister" causes a feeding frenzy during "O'Hara's" trial and her netted chapeau suggests she's caged in -so as not to devour the human spectators to a Roman Coleseum. The spectators are on a feeding frenzy of their own, gossiping and carrying on about "Elsa" -a human aquarium correlating to the San Francisco marine museum sequence. That's the human condition ...except for "Michael O'Hara". And yet he'll be spending his life trying to forget his past ("Elsa") -or die trying. "Elsa" is part of "Michael" and the tale eats its own tail in the end and the viewer is cautioned to stay out of trouble. --------------------------------------------- Result 4206 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] one word [[boring]].

the young demi looks good, but she's [[pregnant]] (- point for that =D) the movie is not [[scary]] at all...

the first scenes looked little crappy, i could render better clouds with my laptop, and after [[effects]]. but that was then... and now is now. some movies do not get old well... this is one of them.

not worth renting or buying... get [[something]] better instead like the exorcist, ...

next =D

oh the drama [[part]] in the beginning just and simply suxor =D one word [[bore]].

the young demi looks good, but she's [[expectant]] (- point for that =D) the movie is not [[fearful]] at all...

the first scenes looked little crappy, i could render better clouds with my laptop, and after [[influences]]. but that was then... and now is now. some movies do not get old well... this is one of them.

not worth renting or buying... get [[somethings]] better instead like the exorcist, ...

next =D

oh the drama [[party]] in the beginning just and simply suxor =D --------------------------------------------- Result 4207 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] Once again, I was browsing through the discount video bin and picked up this movie for $4.88. Fifty-percent of the time the movies I find in the bin are pure crap (I mean horrible beyond belief) but half the time they turn out to be [[surprisingly]] good. This [[movie]] is much better than I [[expected]]. I [[found]] it very [[engaging]], though it was obviously made by an amateur.

The direction is nothing special, but the story is intriguing with some good thrills. I expected it to be more of a comedy, but I wasn't too [[disappointed]].

For a thriller, this movie is surprisingly good-natured. There's no bloody violence, no profanity, no nudity, no sex. Usually, these movies require all four of those elements. The PG rating is well-deserved--not like "Sixteen Candles" where the "f" word is used twice and there's a brief gratuitous nude scene.

I just wish the romance between Corey Haim and his love interest could've been developed more. The film does tend to be plot-heavy, and the potentially good subplots are pushed off to the side. Instead of developing a chemistry between the two of them, we end up watching a careless three-minute montage of them on their romantic endeavors. They end up kissing at the end, but there's so little chemistry that it seems forced.

"The Dream Machine" is no gem, but it's good, clean entertainment. It's quite forgettable--especially with a cast of unknowns, except for Haim--but it's also much better than you'd expect.

My score: 7 (out of 10) Once again, I was browsing through the discount video bin and picked up this movie for $4.88. Fifty-percent of the time the movies I find in the bin are pure crap (I mean horrible beyond belief) but half the time they turn out to be [[unimaginably]] good. This [[filmmaking]] is much better than I [[waited]]. I [[detected]] it very [[participate]], though it was obviously made by an amateur.

The direction is nothing special, but the story is intriguing with some good thrills. I expected it to be more of a comedy, but I wasn't too [[disappoint]].

For a thriller, this movie is surprisingly good-natured. There's no bloody violence, no profanity, no nudity, no sex. Usually, these movies require all four of those elements. The PG rating is well-deserved--not like "Sixteen Candles" where the "f" word is used twice and there's a brief gratuitous nude scene.

I just wish the romance between Corey Haim and his love interest could've been developed more. The film does tend to be plot-heavy, and the potentially good subplots are pushed off to the side. Instead of developing a chemistry between the two of them, we end up watching a careless three-minute montage of them on their romantic endeavors. They end up kissing at the end, but there's so little chemistry that it seems forced.

"The Dream Machine" is no gem, but it's good, clean entertainment. It's quite forgettable--especially with a cast of unknowns, except for Haim--but it's also much better than you'd expect.

My score: 7 (out of 10) --------------------------------------------- Result 4208 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] The only explanation I can muster as to why this [[film]] isn't [[widely]] distributed is because it hits too close to [[home]] for some. This movie was a [[genuine]] [[happy]] [[surprise]], the satire is [[genius]]. This [[film]] turns the lights on in the dark that is organized [[religion]] and big media, and the roaches scurry for cover. Rent the DVD and watch it for yourself if you haven't [[yet]], this [[film]] [[succeeds]] where [[many]] have failed (Dogma comes to mind) to poke it's nose under the tent, both by using [[humor]] and very [[clever]] analogies coupled with [[telling]] backdrops and locations. Can't comment in depth without revealing some significant spoilers, there are some surprises in this film which even the seasoned film buff will be caught off guard by. The only explanation I can muster as to why this [[cinema]] isn't [[heavily]] distributed is because it hits too close to [[housing]] for some. This movie was a [[true]] [[joyous]] [[amazement]], the satire is [[genie]]. This [[cinema]] turns the lights on in the dark that is organized [[religions]] and big media, and the roaches scurry for cover. Rent the DVD and watch it for yourself if you haven't [[even]], this [[movie]] [[succeeding]] where [[numerous]] have failed (Dogma comes to mind) to poke it's nose under the tent, both by using [[mood]] and very [[skilful]] analogies coupled with [[saying]] backdrops and locations. Can't comment in depth without revealing some significant spoilers, there are some surprises in this film which even the seasoned film buff will be caught off guard by. --------------------------------------------- Result 4209 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Henry Fool is a better film. But this is the [[perfect]] way to follow-up a film like 'Henry Fool.' To take Henry very seriously, his 'lies' and his mysterious aura. Even the opening shot of 'Henry Fool' when Simon puts his ear to the ground as Henry comes walking over the hill is more [[fully]] [[manifest]] through 'Fay Grim.' The over-the-top jokes, that are more or less meta-jokes (about the writing of the film and the jokes themselves), are [[good]] but the opening of the film is a little saturated in them. Also Hartley's [[use]] of Dutch angles throughout the film is jarring, yes, it's intention, but it feels forced and over-used, it goes beyond [[jarring]] to, what I'd like to call, annoying. It's a flawed film, but a [[must]] see for any Hartley or 'Henry Fool' fan.

And don't listen to stupid reviews, don't watch this unless you've seen the first film. The intrigue, satire and wit of this movie is totally lost if you haven't seen Henry Fool. It's a sequel. That's just dumb. Henry Fool is a better film. But this is the [[faultless]] way to follow-up a film like 'Henry Fool.' To take Henry very seriously, his 'lies' and his mysterious aura. Even the opening shot of 'Henry Fool' when Simon puts his ear to the ground as Henry comes walking over the hill is more [[abundantly]] [[obvious]] through 'Fay Grim.' The over-the-top jokes, that are more or less meta-jokes (about the writing of the film and the jokes themselves), are [[buena]] but the opening of the film is a little saturated in them. Also Hartley's [[usage]] of Dutch angles throughout the film is jarring, yes, it's intention, but it feels forced and over-used, it goes beyond [[mismatched]] to, what I'd like to call, annoying. It's a flawed film, but a [[ought]] see for any Hartley or 'Henry Fool' fan.

And don't listen to stupid reviews, don't watch this unless you've seen the first film. The intrigue, satire and wit of this movie is totally lost if you haven't seen Henry Fool. It's a sequel. That's just dumb. --------------------------------------------- Result 4210 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] It's [[pretty]] clear that the [[director]] and [[production]] [[crew]] set out to paint a less than flattering [[picture]] of the [[Palestinian]] [[girl]] and her family. The [[film]] and it's website [[tries]] to [[imply]] that Ayat has a secret reason for blowing herself and Rachel up- a boyfriend problem- perhaps pregnancy. Neatly glossed over is the fact that Ayat had herself just witnessed the death of a close friend at the hands of the Israelis'-just outside her home. Gosh,so why on [[earth]] would a young, [[pretty]], intelligent girl with plans for [[college]] go and do such a thing? Could it be that the hormonal, [[emotional]] teenager was traumatized by seeing seeing [[someone]] she loved die before her very eyes? This [[detail]] merits all of 5 seconds in the [[movie]]. Another neatly sidestepped detail is that Avigail Levy, Rachels' [[mother]], could have [[prevented]] the [[destruction]] of the [[building]] the Akhras family [[lived]] in(along with 22 other [[families]]). One distinctly [[gets]] the [[impression]] that she's [[offering]] this as a "concession" - should [[Mrs]]. Akhras agree to [[speak]] with her."why should I?" she [[says]].([[since]] the [[movie]] was [[made]] the [[home]] has been destroyed- [[apparently]] the interview didn't [[result]] in what she wanted- so bring on the [[bulldozers]])[[Mrs]] [[Levy]] [[claimed]] that she "[[wanted]] the movie to be cathartic as well as a [[symbol]] of hope, a [[chance]] to [[transcend]] [[entrenched]] hatreds"- [[instead]] she [[uses]] it as an [[excuse]] to harangue Ayats [[mother]], while dangling the [[house]] as a carrot.[[Moreover]] [[although]] the two women live only 4 [[miles]] [[apart]], she is so out of [[touch]] with the [[realities]] of the occupation for her [[Palestinian]] [[neighbors]], that she [[really]] [[thinks]] that [[Mrs]]. Akhras can just [[drop]] over for a cup of coffee?[[Please]].And she forgoes the one [[chance]] she had to [[meet]] [[Mrs]]. Akhras in [[person]] and [[see]] what [[kind]] of life she lives.(the Akras family [[originally]] came from Jaffa, but now [[live]] crammed into a [[refugee]] camp only 4 [[miles]] from where the Levys live in [[comparative]] [[luxury]].[[Any]] [[sympathy]] I [[would]] have had for the [[obviously]] well to do [[Mrs]]. Levy is [[dissolved]] by her [[air]] of self-righteous bitchiness.By [[contrast]], Ayats [[mother]] [[comes]] off as [[kind]],forthright and loving- in [[spite]] of the best [[efforts]] by the post production crew to [[paint]] her and her family as monsters. Heck [[even]] the music and sound [[design]] was one sided- I guess the muezzin sings ALL day every day 4 miles from the Levy family home, always in a sharply contrasting key from the sappy new-age music that scores this drab excuse for a documentary.Also there is the small matter of translations - Mrs. Levy DIRECTLY addresses the camera in English when she has something worked out to say ahead of time, Hebrew when she doesn't. Mrs.Akhras spoke only [[Arabic]] which received sometimes a TRANSLATION, sometimes TRANSLITERATION, [[always]] awkward, and very suspect for a supposedly objective movie.They [[also]] "sweated" her under the lights, while Mrs. Levy sat in (air conditioned) comfort.Rotten editing for Mrs. Akhras' segments too. I gave it a 2 because I liked Ayats mother and father, who seemed like good decent people. Shame on HBO, producers and director, for releasing such a stink-bomb. It's [[quite]] clear that the [[superintendent]] and [[productivity]] [[crewmen]] set out to paint a less than flattering [[photographing]] of the [[Palestinians]] [[girls]] and her family. The [[filmmaking]] and it's website [[strive]] to [[entail]] that Ayat has a secret reason for blowing herself and Rachel up- a boyfriend problem- perhaps pregnancy. Neatly glossed over is the fact that Ayat had herself just witnessed the death of a close friend at the hands of the Israelis'-just outside her home. Gosh,so why on [[lands]] would a young, [[belle]], intelligent girl with plans for [[universities]] go and do such a thing? Could it be that the hormonal, [[sentimental]] teenager was traumatized by seeing seeing [[everyone]] she loved die before her very eyes? This [[details]] merits all of 5 seconds in the [[filmmaking]]. Another neatly sidestepped detail is that Avigail Levy, Rachels' [[mama]], could have [[hampered]] the [[devastation]] of the [[build]] the Akhras family [[resided]] in(along with 22 other [[family]]). One distinctly [[receives]] the [[feeling]] that she's [[delivers]] this as a "concession" - should [[Margot]]. Akhras agree to [[talk]] with her."why should I?" she [[said]].([[because]] the [[filmmaking]] was [[introduced]] the [[homes]] has been destroyed- [[reportedly]] the interview didn't [[outcomes]] in what she wanted- so bring on the [[rakes]])[[Corinne]] [[Levi]] [[asserted]] that she "[[wanna]] the movie to be cathartic as well as a [[icons]] of hope, a [[luck]] to [[overcoming]] [[rooted]] hatreds"- [[however]] she [[utilizes]] it as an [[apologies]] to harangue Ayats [[momma]], while dangling the [[homes]] as a carrot.[[Additionally]] [[while]] the two women live only 4 [[km]] [[additionally]], she is so out of [[touches]] with the [[truths]] of the occupation for her [[Israeli]] [[neighbourhood]], that she [[genuinely]] [[feels]] that [[Astrid]]. Akhras can just [[fall]] over for a cup of coffee?[[Invites]].And she forgoes the one [[possibility]] she had to [[satisfy]] [[Corinne]]. Akhras in [[persona]] and [[behold]] what [[type]] of life she lives.(the Akras family [[initially]] came from Jaffa, but now [[vivo]] crammed into a [[asylum]] camp only 4 [[kilometers]] from where the Levys live in [[comparison]] [[deluxe]].[[Everything]] [[empathy]] I [[should]] have had for the [[clearly]] well to do [[Corinne]]. Levy is [[scrapped]] by her [[aerial]] of self-righteous bitchiness.By [[contrasts]], Ayats [[moms]] [[happens]] off as [[genre]],forthright and loving- in [[sadness]] of the best [[initiatives]] by the post production crew to [[paints]] her and her family as monsters. Heck [[yet]] the music and sound [[conceive]] was one sided- I guess the muezzin sings ALL day every day 4 miles from the Levy family home, always in a sharply contrasting key from the sappy new-age music that scores this drab excuse for a documentary.Also there is the small matter of translations - Mrs. Levy DIRECTLY addresses the camera in English when she has something worked out to say ahead of time, Hebrew when she doesn't. Mrs.Akhras spoke only [[Arab]] which received sometimes a TRANSLATION, sometimes TRANSLITERATION, [[consistently]] awkward, and very suspect for a supposedly objective movie.They [[additionally]] "sweated" her under the lights, while Mrs. Levy sat in (air conditioned) comfort.Rotten editing for Mrs. Akhras' segments too. I gave it a 2 because I liked Ayats mother and father, who seemed like good decent people. Shame on HBO, producers and director, for releasing such a stink-bomb. --------------------------------------------- Result 4211 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (94%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Emory is a Cincinatti steel [[worker]] [[like]] his father before him and for most of the 20th century the [[twin]] [[pillars]] of his family's existence have been the steel mill and the union. The mill, which once employed 45,000, has seen its numbers dwindle to 5,000 recently and now 1, as the plant just [[shut]] its doors, [[leaving]] a single security guard. At first, newly-unemployed Emory and his pals [[enjoy]] their [[independence]], hanging out around town and carousing at their favorite bar, where they down "depth [[charges]]" with [[reckless]] abandon. They think the mill will reopen after listening to their union rep's [[optimistic]] spiel, but reality starts to sink in when they find themselves [[selling]] their personal vehicles in a [[struggle]] to put [[food]] on the table and stave off foreclosure of their homes. Emory's father - a dedicated union man - is sure the plant will reopen and recalls for his son all the short-lived closures during his own 35 years at the mill. Meanwhile, some of the unemployed men take demeaning make-work jobs or hop in their trucks and take off in a desperate search for employment.

Finally the union admits its helplessness, as Emory explains to his stubborn father that times have changed and that the mill won't ever open again. Emory tearfully asks "What did I do wrong?" as a lifetime of hard work and devotion to job, union, church and family have left him with nothing and nowhere to turn. He hits rock bottom when in a drunken rage he manhandles his young sons and knocks his wife to the floor. Tossed out of his own home and stinging from the plant manager's comments that he and his men didn't work hard enough to justify their substantial paychecks, Emory recruits the steel workers still left in town to do something that will demonstrate to all what they are capable of. Early in the morning they break into the mill, fire up the furnaces and work harder than they ever have in their lives, producing in one shift enough high-quality steel pipes to fill the loading docks from wall to wall, top to bottom - something the plant manager thought was impossible.

Arriving at the suddenly-reopened plant, the stupefied manager looks around him at the tremendous output that came from a single day's work, realizing that production like this could make the plant profitable again. The manager asks Emory: "Can you do this every day?" Emory is forced to nod "No" and the manager asks: "Then what were you trying to prove?" Emory explains that the workers' decades of hard work, honesty and devotion to their jobs had meaning and that by showing how much they could produce in one day "We just spit in your eye." Emory bids a tearful farewell to his wife and kids as he takes off with his buddies to look for work down south, promising to relocate the family when he finds it.

This is a powerful and honest treatment of the plight of American workers displaced by foreign competition and gives a realistic view of the costs they bear for the short-sightedness of concession-demanding unions and greedy plant owners who extracted every penny they could from their factories but never gave back by modernizing them. Peter Strauss as Emory, John Goodman as his best friend, Gary Cole as his college-boy brother, Pamela Reed as Emory's sympathetic wife and John Doucette as his dying father all turn in excellent performances in this fine picture. Emory is a Cincinatti steel [[laborers]] [[iike]] his father before him and for most of the 20th century the [[doble]] [[fundamentals]] of his family's existence have been the steel mill and the union. The mill, which once employed 45,000, has seen its numbers dwindle to 5,000 recently and now 1, as the plant just [[nears]] its doors, [[let]] a single security guard. At first, newly-unemployed Emory and his pals [[enjoys]] their [[autonomy]], hanging out around town and carousing at their favorite bar, where they down "depth [[royalty]]" with [[foolhardy]] abandon. They think the mill will reopen after listening to their union rep's [[upbeat]] spiel, but reality starts to sink in when they find themselves [[sells]] their personal vehicles in a [[tussle]] to put [[nourishment]] on the table and stave off foreclosure of their homes. Emory's father - a dedicated union man - is sure the plant will reopen and recalls for his son all the short-lived closures during his own 35 years at the mill. Meanwhile, some of the unemployed men take demeaning make-work jobs or hop in their trucks and take off in a desperate search for employment.

Finally the union admits its helplessness, as Emory explains to his stubborn father that times have changed and that the mill won't ever open again. Emory tearfully asks "What did I do wrong?" as a lifetime of hard work and devotion to job, union, church and family have left him with nothing and nowhere to turn. He hits rock bottom when in a drunken rage he manhandles his young sons and knocks his wife to the floor. Tossed out of his own home and stinging from the plant manager's comments that he and his men didn't work hard enough to justify their substantial paychecks, Emory recruits the steel workers still left in town to do something that will demonstrate to all what they are capable of. Early in the morning they break into the mill, fire up the furnaces and work harder than they ever have in their lives, producing in one shift enough high-quality steel pipes to fill the loading docks from wall to wall, top to bottom - something the plant manager thought was impossible.

Arriving at the suddenly-reopened plant, the stupefied manager looks around him at the tremendous output that came from a single day's work, realizing that production like this could make the plant profitable again. The manager asks Emory: "Can you do this every day?" Emory is forced to nod "No" and the manager asks: "Then what were you trying to prove?" Emory explains that the workers' decades of hard work, honesty and devotion to their jobs had meaning and that by showing how much they could produce in one day "We just spit in your eye." Emory bids a tearful farewell to his wife and kids as he takes off with his buddies to look for work down south, promising to relocate the family when he finds it.

This is a powerful and honest treatment of the plight of American workers displaced by foreign competition and gives a realistic view of the costs they bear for the short-sightedness of concession-demanding unions and greedy plant owners who extracted every penny they could from their factories but never gave back by modernizing them. Peter Strauss as Emory, John Goodman as his best friend, Gary Cole as his college-boy brother, Pamela Reed as Emory's sympathetic wife and John Doucette as his dying father all turn in excellent performances in this fine picture. --------------------------------------------- Result 4212 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I saw this movie while it was under limited release, mainly for the novelty of seeing Pierce Brosnan with a moustache, but it turned out to be one of the funniest movies I have seen all year. It starts out almost as a thriller, but steadily progresses into a hilarious piece of work full of one-liners and great comedic energy between Pierce Brosnan and Greg Kinnear. Also, while I say this movie is a comedy, it doesn't forget it has a heart at times and can be very touching when it needs to be. When I went into the theater I didn't know what to expect much more than a moustache, but what I got was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. Leaving the theater I felt very fulfilled from the film and plan to see it again in wide release. I recommend it to anyone who appreciates a good comedy with a well-written script and a big moustache. --------------------------------------------- Result 4213 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] My mom and I have just recently become addicted to this show, laughing our butts off! I've only [[seen]] about 10 episodes, and I am disappointed that I didn't [[pay]] [[attention]] to this [[hilarious]] series before they were [[canceled]]! The story line is very [[funny]], the [[characters]] really have great personalities (or, not so [[great]], but they're still funny!). I TiVO every episode of What I Like [[About]] You. Amanda Bynes and [[Jennie]] Garth, as well as all of the cast, never leave me [[bored]] while watching! There is some [[unsuitable]] language for [[children]] and some sexual content, but with a parental guide near, you shouldn't have too much problems. There is some sort of 'Friends' type of relationship that attracts me to this show. I really [[enjoy]] it. My mom and I have just recently become addicted to this show, laughing our butts off! I've only [[noticed]] about 10 episodes, and I am disappointed that I didn't [[paying]] [[beware]] to this [[comical]] series before they were [[nullified]]! The story line is very [[droll]], the [[hallmarks]] really have great personalities (or, not so [[super]], but they're still funny!). I TiVO every episode of What I Like [[Around]] You. Amanda Bynes and [[Jenny]] Garth, as well as all of the cast, never leave me [[boring]] while watching! There is some [[inadequate]] language for [[infantile]] and some sexual content, but with a parental guide near, you shouldn't have too much problems. There is some sort of 'Friends' type of relationship that attracts me to this show. I really [[enjoys]] it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4214 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Elvira(Cassandra [[Peterson]]) is the host of a cheap horror [[show]]. After she finds out that her dead aunt has left her some stuff, elvira goes to England to pick it up, hoping it will be some money. But to her horror, elvira finds out that all her aunt has left her is her house, her dog and a cookbook. Elvira decides to settle in the house anyways, but with her striking dark looks and her [[stunning]] features, she will not be able to live in peace. All the neighbours are now turning the whole town against her, and with Elvira's outrageous attitude and looks, everyone better watch out, because Elvira is on Fire! I really enjoyed this movie, it's really fun to watch get Elvira into all these adventures, she's just great. The whole movie puts you into a halloween mood, sure, it's silly and the jokes are cheap but it's a pleasure to watch it. I would give Elvira, Mistress Of The Dark 8/10 Elvira(Cassandra [[Petersen]]) is the host of a cheap horror [[exposition]]. After she finds out that her dead aunt has left her some stuff, elvira goes to England to pick it up, hoping it will be some money. But to her horror, elvira finds out that all her aunt has left her is her house, her dog and a cookbook. Elvira decides to settle in the house anyways, but with her striking dark looks and her [[staggering]] features, she will not be able to live in peace. All the neighbours are now turning the whole town against her, and with Elvira's outrageous attitude and looks, everyone better watch out, because Elvira is on Fire! I really enjoyed this movie, it's really fun to watch get Elvira into all these adventures, she's just great. The whole movie puts you into a halloween mood, sure, it's silly and the jokes are cheap but it's a pleasure to watch it. I would give Elvira, Mistress Of The Dark 8/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4215 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Very slick, very Pre-Hays Code, and still very [[sassy]]. I would highly recommend seeing this movie, even if you are not a fan of Stynwyck. She's funny, she's sexy, she's hard-working - and love that perm she gets!

Barbara Stynwyck is fantastic as a doozie of a [[floozy]] who rises up in the world, perfectly portrayed by a bank building. John Wayne (in a suit!) plays one of her first conquests.

The last three minutes are a letdown, but the sets, the lines, the clothes all add to one heck of a movie about rising vertically in the horizontal position. Very slick, very Pre-Hays Code, and still very [[impudent]]. I would highly recommend seeing this movie, even if you are not a fan of Stynwyck. She's funny, she's sexy, she's hard-working - and love that perm she gets!

Barbara Stynwyck is fantastic as a doozie of a [[slut]] who rises up in the world, perfectly portrayed by a bank building. John Wayne (in a suit!) plays one of her first conquests.

The last three minutes are a letdown, but the sets, the lines, the clothes all add to one heck of a movie about rising vertically in the horizontal position. --------------------------------------------- Result 4216 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This is a [[complete]] [[Hoax]]...

The movie [[clearly]] has been [[shot]] in [[north]] western Indian state of Rajasthan. [[Look]] at the chase scene - the [[vehicles]] are Indian; the writing all over is Hindi - [[language]] [[used]] in India. The drive through is on typical [[Jaipur]] streets. [[Also]] the palace is in Amer - about 10 miles from Jaipur, [[Rajasthan]]. The film-makers in their (about the film) in DVD Bonus seem to [[make]] it sound that they risked their lives [[shooting]] in Kabul and around. Almost all of their [[action]] scenes are [[shot]] in India. The scene where they see a [[group]] singing around [[fire]] is so [[fake]] that they did not [[even]] [[think]] about changing it to Afgani folk [[song]]. They just recorded the Rajasthani folk song. How do I know it because I have [[traveled]] that [[area]] extensively. They are just on the band-wagon to [[make]] big on the [[issue]]. I do challenge the film makers to deny it. This is a [[finishes]] [[Deception]]...

The movie [[naturally]] has been [[kiiled]] in [[nord]] western Indian state of Rajasthan. [[Peek]] at the chase scene - the [[automobiles]] are Indian; the writing all over is Hindi - [[vocabulary]] [[uses]] in India. The drive through is on typical [[Rajasthan]] streets. [[Moreover]] the palace is in Amer - about 10 miles from Jaipur, [[Jaipur]]. The film-makers in their (about the film) in DVD Bonus seem to [[deliver]] it sound that they risked their lives [[shootout]] in Kabul and around. Almost all of their [[efforts]] scenes are [[filmed]] in India. The scene where they see a [[groups]] singing around [[feu]] is so [[untrue]] that they did not [[yet]] [[reckon]] about changing it to Afgani folk [[chanson]]. They just recorded the Rajasthani folk song. How do I know it because I have [[toured]] that [[areas]] extensively. They are just on the band-wagon to [[deliver]] big on the [[issues]]. I do challenge the film makers to deny it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4217 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This is one of those [[movies]] that [[appears]] on [[cable]] at like two in the [[afternoon]] to [[entertain]] [[bored]] [[housewives]] while they [[iron]]. The acting is second rate. Poor [[Mathew]] Modine seems to sleepwalk through the whole [[film]]. And [[god]] help Gina Gershon. Her [[accent]] is too over the [[top]]. It sounds [[nothing]] like an [[true]] [[English]] [[woman]]. It sounds forced and [[phony]], much like her acting. She should [[stick]] to what she does best, lesbian showgirl con-artist who plays in a [[rock]] & roll [[band]] and has a [[drug]] problem. The other [[characters]] are no [[better]]. They are two dimensional. empty, vapid and silly. [[How]] are we to [[supposed]] to [[care]] about these people. [[At]] one point Christy Scott Cashman get's lost in Central Park. [[Really]]? It's not that hard to navigate Central Park. [[Just]] follow any [[path]] out. Not only did I not [[care]] about [[ANY]] of the [[characters]],I downright [[hated]] them. The only [[reason]] I [[even]] stayed with this train-wreck of a [[film]] was [[Fisher]] Stevens. Even his [[brilliant]] [[humor]] couldn't [[save]] this dying Fish. Each scene is [[typical]] [[romantic]] [[comedy]] fare and [[nothing]] is left to [[surprise]] us. The [[script]] was [[awful]] as was the acting. [[If]] you [[catch]] this Fish [[throw]] it back! This is one of those [[cinematography]] that [[transpires]] on [[wire]] at like two in the [[evening]] to [[entertaining]] [[drilled]] [[housekeepers]] while they [[railroad]]. The acting is second rate. Poor [[Matthew]] Modine seems to sleepwalk through the whole [[movies]]. And [[deus]] help Gina Gershon. Her [[emphasis]] is too over the [[topped]]. It sounds [[anything]] like an [[authentic]] [[Francais]] [[femme]]. It sounds forced and [[faux]], much like her acting. She should [[wand]] to what she does best, lesbian showgirl con-artist who plays in a [[rocks]] & roll [[bands]] and has a [[medications]] problem. The other [[character]] are no [[best]]. They are two dimensional. empty, vapid and silly. [[Mode]] are we to [[suspected]] to [[caring]] about these people. [[During]] one point Christy Scott Cashman get's lost in Central Park. [[Truly]]? It's not that hard to navigate Central Park. [[Merely]] follow any [[paths]] out. Not only did I not [[caring]] about [[EVERYTHING]] of the [[trait]],I downright [[detest]] them. The only [[raison]] I [[yet]] stayed with this train-wreck of a [[kino]] was [[Fisherman]] Stevens. Even his [[marvelous]] [[humour]] couldn't [[rescued]] this dying Fish. Each scene is [[emblematic]] [[sentimental]] [[humour]] fare and [[anything]] is left to [[surprises]] us. The [[hyphen]] was [[scary]] as was the acting. [[Though]] you [[captures]] this Fish [[toss]] it back! --------------------------------------------- Result 4218 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I was absolutely mesmerised by this series from the moment Tom Long walked into shot - the whole 'bad boy' thing, it was just addictive.

The story has you hooked, what will happen next - will Joey get the girl in the end, after doing 5 years in prison, and all that time thinking about his lost love, crossing paths with her again, finding he has a son... Although he is a violent bad guy, you still want him to find happiness.

A truly captivating two parter - please bring it out on video! --------------------------------------------- Result 4219 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] There's only one [[thing]] I [[need]] to [[say]] about this [[movie]] - the scene where [[Shaq]] is in a musical number with Francis Capra's character about [[wanting]] to be a genie; never [[see]] this [[movie]]. The [[story]] is [[horrible]], the acting is [[terrible]] (c'mon, it's [[Shaq]]!) and I'd [[rather]] [[see]] Capra in [[Free]] Willy (equally [[horrible]]) twice before ever seeing this movie. There's only one [[stuff]] I [[require]] to [[tell]] about this [[film]] - the scene where [[Chak]] is in a musical number with Francis Capra's character about [[wanted]] to be a genie; never [[seeing]] this [[film]]. The [[conte]] is [[heinous]], the acting is [[spooky]] (c'mon, it's [[Chak]]!) and I'd [[quite]] [[seeing]] Capra in [[Extricate]] Willy (equally [[scary]]) twice before ever seeing this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4220 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] How do I begin? This movie is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen .It has no redeemable qualities .I just sat through this movie and it was a struggle.It failed to get even a single smile on my face.I find it hard to believe that anyone would distribute this horrible film. I felt that this movie was a failed attempt at distasteful humor. The only thing that was worth anything about this movie was the soundtrack, I'm pretty sure thats the reason I wanted to see this movie in the first place.I will wrap this up as I am going to try and forget the time I just wasted with this piece of crap. I will leave you with this warning. DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM ,IT SUCKS. --------------------------------------------- Result 4221 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] Paul & Grace Hartman are my husbands [[grandparents]]. They were both [[deceased]] when we met so watching [[old]] movies is a good way to see them and their work. I have always enjoyed [[old]] movies and was very happy to [[discover]] that this was [[also]] a very [[good]] one. Paul & Grace Hartman are my husbands [[grandfathers]]. They were both [[departed]] when we met so watching [[elderly]] movies is a good way to see them and their work. I have always enjoyed [[ancient]] movies and was very happy to [[discovered]] that this was [[furthermore]] a very [[alright]] one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4222 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] The title of this [[film]] [[nearly]] put me off watching it. Not being a Manchester United fan, the mere mention of Beckham was a bit off putting, however I put my prejudices behind me and I'm [[glad]] I did.

I wasn't expecting much of a film, but I was pleasantly [[surprised]]. The film sped along with me never [[looking]] at my watch and I [[enjoyed]] every second of the film. If you liked East is East then you'll love this film. OK so the storyline is nothing new, and the classic storylines are contained within the film but it's all done very funnily, and with a breath of fresh air. The film moves very fast and keeps the audiance entertained. The occaisional funny moments are a good chuckle and not some poor attempt at humour, and best of all it's a [[good]] british comedy. The title of this [[kino]] [[approximately]] put me off watching it. Not being a Manchester United fan, the mere mention of Beckham was a bit off putting, however I put my prejudices behind me and I'm [[satisfied]] I did.

I wasn't expecting much of a film, but I was pleasantly [[dumbfounded]]. The film sped along with me never [[researching]] at my watch and I [[liked]] every second of the film. If you liked East is East then you'll love this film. OK so the storyline is nothing new, and the classic storylines are contained within the film but it's all done very funnily, and with a breath of fresh air. The film moves very fast and keeps the audiance entertained. The occaisional funny moments are a good chuckle and not some poor attempt at humour, and best of all it's a [[alright]] british comedy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4223 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (89%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Scarecrows is one of those films that, with a little more acting, a little more direction, and a lot more story logic, would have been quite compelling as a horror entry. As it stands, it is still a creepy film that has solid make-up and gore effects, and a premise that sustains the mood of terror in spite of itself. And hey, there are no teenagers getting killed one by one--just [[dumb]] adults, so that is a refreshing change of pace. And the plot line is amazingly similar to Dead Birds, with a precipitating robbery, an abandoned spooky house in the middle of nowhere, and demonic monsters. But just like Dead Birds, the adults are still witless, they run around cluelessly before getting slaughtered one by one, and they ignore the obvious danger.

In Scarecrows, though, we never really find out the supernatural why, and that sustains the atmosphere of creepiness. And like clowns, scarecrows can be very creepy; unless they look like Ray Bolger, of course. Escaping in a hijacked plane with the pilot and his daughter, after a robbery netting millions, a para-military bunch is double-crossed by one of their own; a very nervous guy named Burt. He jumps out of the plane with the big, and heavy, box that holds the money with apparently no plans as to how to move it around once he is on the ground. Being the dumbest of the bunch, he is murdered first. But not before he happens upon the Fowler residence, nestled snuggly amid lots of really creepy-looking scarecrows, and surrounded with a wooden fence encircled with barbed-wire and lots of warnings to stay away. And the weird weathervane on the roof, with the pitchfork and pterodactyl, should have been a warning sign, too. The inside of the house is also quite foreboding (to us in the audience, anyway).

Annoyingly, we must listen to Burt's thoughts in voice-over, as he walks around and mysteriously comes across the key to the decrepit truck in the yard. The way the key pops up would be enough to have my pants--with me in them--flying out the door. Perhaps it's just me, but I really enjoy watching people's lips move on screen, even when they are just thinking out loud. It helps to intensify the action, and gives the actor more to do than just look like what the voice-over is saying. Burt hoists the box onto the truck and makes his getaway. Sure why not? decrepit trucks always have lots of gas in them, especially with today's prices, and the battery? no problem. Now, I did mention that Burt was the dumbest of the bunch, and here is why (in addition to the above, of course). Wearing night-vision goggles to walk through the foliage and find the house, he takes them off to drive the truck away, and instead, turns on the headlights to see where he is going. Of course, the crooks still in the plane spot the headlights of his truck, and know where he is headed. Brilliant. He deserves to die. Definitely. I am not sure why he needed night vision goggles in the first place, as every scene is brightly lit, from the interior of the plane, to the night-time outside scenery, and the house. The cinematographer was either a. myopic, b. just out of school, or c. dealing with really cheap filmstock.

Burt meets his demise when the truck dies in the middle of nowhere. Go figure. One very nice touch, and there are, I must admit, a few in the film, is the fact that when he opens the truck's lid, there is no engine. Creepy, to be sure (and insert pants comment again here). The story logic fails when dead, now-stuffed-like-a-flounder-with-money-and-straw-Burt returns to the house. The rest of the bunch are there, rough him up, then realize that he is indeed dead, and was gutted and stuffed like a flounder with money and straw. Dead Burt does manage to put up quite a fight, though, and grabs one fellow by the mouth, pushing him through a window, causing him to bite off more than he could chew in a gorylicious scene. At this point, you would think they'd would be racing out of the house and back to the plane--but noooo, they decide to stay and look for the rest of the money. In fact, the whole Burt is dead episode is treated rather matter-of-factly, although one bright bulb in the bunch does argue, "Burt was walking around dead, for chrissakes!"

The stolen money suddenly appears on the grounds outside the house, and the crooks blithely go for the bait. Soon, another one of them, Jack, is dispatched, and again the scene is well done and horrific, involving a dull handsaw and no anethesia. Now there are three scarecrows going about wreaking mayhem, and one of them needs a hand, literally.

When one of the crooks sees the scarecrows and Jack getting scarecrow-ized, he starts screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun in typical para-military fashion. So much for all that training under pressure crap. He meets up with the others and stops in his tracks to explain why he is screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun, even though the scarecrows appear to be chasing him. Again, that script logic thing... Dead and gutted, Jack returns to the house, and goes after the screamer with the usual results. If you listen to Jack's demonic growl, by the way, you may notice, depending on your age, that it is the same monster-growling sound heard often in the Lost In Space TV episodes.

The last two survivors race away from the house and back to the plane, barely escaping. But do they? You will have to see the film to find out. Scarecrows is one of those films that, with a little more acting, a little more direction, and a lot more story logic, would have been quite compelling as a horror entry. As it stands, it is still a creepy film that has solid make-up and gore effects, and a premise that sustains the mood of terror in spite of itself. And hey, there are no teenagers getting killed one by one--just [[moronic]] adults, so that is a refreshing change of pace. And the plot line is amazingly similar to Dead Birds, with a precipitating robbery, an abandoned spooky house in the middle of nowhere, and demonic monsters. But just like Dead Birds, the adults are still witless, they run around cluelessly before getting slaughtered one by one, and they ignore the obvious danger.

In Scarecrows, though, we never really find out the supernatural why, and that sustains the atmosphere of creepiness. And like clowns, scarecrows can be very creepy; unless they look like Ray Bolger, of course. Escaping in a hijacked plane with the pilot and his daughter, after a robbery netting millions, a para-military bunch is double-crossed by one of their own; a very nervous guy named Burt. He jumps out of the plane with the big, and heavy, box that holds the money with apparently no plans as to how to move it around once he is on the ground. Being the dumbest of the bunch, he is murdered first. But not before he happens upon the Fowler residence, nestled snuggly amid lots of really creepy-looking scarecrows, and surrounded with a wooden fence encircled with barbed-wire and lots of warnings to stay away. And the weird weathervane on the roof, with the pitchfork and pterodactyl, should have been a warning sign, too. The inside of the house is also quite foreboding (to us in the audience, anyway).

Annoyingly, we must listen to Burt's thoughts in voice-over, as he walks around and mysteriously comes across the key to the decrepit truck in the yard. The way the key pops up would be enough to have my pants--with me in them--flying out the door. Perhaps it's just me, but I really enjoy watching people's lips move on screen, even when they are just thinking out loud. It helps to intensify the action, and gives the actor more to do than just look like what the voice-over is saying. Burt hoists the box onto the truck and makes his getaway. Sure why not? decrepit trucks always have lots of gas in them, especially with today's prices, and the battery? no problem. Now, I did mention that Burt was the dumbest of the bunch, and here is why (in addition to the above, of course). Wearing night-vision goggles to walk through the foliage and find the house, he takes them off to drive the truck away, and instead, turns on the headlights to see where he is going. Of course, the crooks still in the plane spot the headlights of his truck, and know where he is headed. Brilliant. He deserves to die. Definitely. I am not sure why he needed night vision goggles in the first place, as every scene is brightly lit, from the interior of the plane, to the night-time outside scenery, and the house. The cinematographer was either a. myopic, b. just out of school, or c. dealing with really cheap filmstock.

Burt meets his demise when the truck dies in the middle of nowhere. Go figure. One very nice touch, and there are, I must admit, a few in the film, is the fact that when he opens the truck's lid, there is no engine. Creepy, to be sure (and insert pants comment again here). The story logic fails when dead, now-stuffed-like-a-flounder-with-money-and-straw-Burt returns to the house. The rest of the bunch are there, rough him up, then realize that he is indeed dead, and was gutted and stuffed like a flounder with money and straw. Dead Burt does manage to put up quite a fight, though, and grabs one fellow by the mouth, pushing him through a window, causing him to bite off more than he could chew in a gorylicious scene. At this point, you would think they'd would be racing out of the house and back to the plane--but noooo, they decide to stay and look for the rest of the money. In fact, the whole Burt is dead episode is treated rather matter-of-factly, although one bright bulb in the bunch does argue, "Burt was walking around dead, for chrissakes!"

The stolen money suddenly appears on the grounds outside the house, and the crooks blithely go for the bait. Soon, another one of them, Jack, is dispatched, and again the scene is well done and horrific, involving a dull handsaw and no anethesia. Now there are three scarecrows going about wreaking mayhem, and one of them needs a hand, literally.

When one of the crooks sees the scarecrows and Jack getting scarecrow-ized, he starts screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun in typical para-military fashion. So much for all that training under pressure crap. He meets up with the others and stops in his tracks to explain why he is screaming, running away like hell, and shooting off his gun, even though the scarecrows appear to be chasing him. Again, that script logic thing... Dead and gutted, Jack returns to the house, and goes after the screamer with the usual results. If you listen to Jack's demonic growl, by the way, you may notice, depending on your age, that it is the same monster-growling sound heard often in the Lost In Space TV episodes.

The last two survivors race away from the house and back to the plane, barely escaping. But do they? You will have to see the film to find out. --------------------------------------------- Result 4224 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (59%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I read somewhere that when Kay Francis refused to take a cut in pay, Warner Bros. retaliated by casting her in inferior projects for the remainder of her contract.

She decided to take the money. But her career [[suffered]] accordingly.

That might explain what she was doing in "Comet Over Broadway." (Though it doesn't explain why Donald Crisp and Ian Hunter are in it, too.) "Ludicrous" is the word that others have used for the plot of this film, and that's right on target. The murder trial. Her seedy vaudeville career. Her success in London. Her final scene with her daughter. No part logically leads to the next part.

Also, the sets and costumes looked like B-movie stuff. And her hair! Turner is showing lots and lots of her movies this month. Watch any OTHER one and you'll be doing yourself a favor. I read somewhere that when Kay Francis refused to take a cut in pay, Warner Bros. retaliated by casting her in inferior projects for the remainder of her contract.

She decided to take the money. But her career [[endured]] accordingly.

That might explain what she was doing in "Comet Over Broadway." (Though it doesn't explain why Donald Crisp and Ian Hunter are in it, too.) "Ludicrous" is the word that others have used for the plot of this film, and that's right on target. The murder trial. Her seedy vaudeville career. Her success in London. Her final scene with her daughter. No part logically leads to the next part.

Also, the sets and costumes looked like B-movie stuff. And her hair! Turner is showing lots and lots of her movies this month. Watch any OTHER one and you'll be doing yourself a favor. --------------------------------------------- Result 4225 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] My [[girlfriend]] [[picked]] this one; as a southern born and raised African American I [[found]] this movie's [[plot]] and premise [[totally]] without [[credibility]]. To [[believe]] that [[class]] and [[racial]] biases would be so easily and [[comfortably]] suspended [[would]] only come from someone [[totally]] unfamiliar with the ante-bellum [[south]]. Totally absurd !!! I wonder how they [[got]] a [[good]] [[actor]] like [[Harvey]] Keitel and a [[good]] [[actress]] like Andie [[McDowell]] (who being southern knows better) to [[participate]] in this [[crap]] My [[amie]] [[picks]] this one; as a southern born and raised African American I [[unearthed]] this movie's [[intrigue]] and premise [[perfectly]] without [[credence]]. To [[reckon]] that [[categories]] and [[ethnic]] biases would be so easily and [[easily]] suspended [[should]] only come from someone [[wholly]] unfamiliar with the ante-bellum [[southward]]. Totally absurd !!! I wonder how they [[gets]] a [[alright]] [[protagonist]] like [[Harve]] Keitel and a [[buena]] [[actor]] like Andie [[mcneill]] (who being southern knows better) to [[involvement]] in this [[dammit]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4226 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I [[remember]] the days in which Kim Basinger was nothing more than a pretty face who adorned movies with typical characters of dumb Blondie,romantic interest or damsel in danger.But,everything changed when she won an Academy Award as Best Supporting Actress for her role in the excellent movie L.A. Confidential,and I think I was not the only one who was [[surprised]] by her [[solid]] performance.[[However]],after that [[moment]],her career did not follow the [[ideal]] path.Sure,the prestige she won thanks to that movie made her to [[participate]] on moderately prestigious movies (like People I Know or The Door in the Floor),but we have never seen her again on a substantial character.The movie While She Was Out does nothing to put her on that situation; and it is not only that her character is not too tasty,but also that the movie is really [[crappy]].The screenplay from this movie could not be more hollow and basic.However,Basinger brings some conviction to her character,and that makes this [[poor]] [[movie]] to win a few points.This movie is full of clichés and generic villains.The work of director Susan Montford is truly [[disastrous]] for many reasons but mainly,because the movie never gets a good rhythm and tone.The ending from this movie is extremely ridiculous.I do not recommend While She Was Out at all.This film commits the capital sin of being boring. I [[remembering]] the days in which Kim Basinger was nothing more than a pretty face who adorned movies with typical characters of dumb Blondie,romantic interest or damsel in danger.But,everything changed when she won an Academy Award as Best Supporting Actress for her role in the excellent movie L.A. Confidential,and I think I was not the only one who was [[startled]] by her [[robust]] performance.[[Conversely]],after that [[time]],her career did not follow the [[idealistic]] path.Sure,the prestige she won thanks to that movie made her to [[turnout]] on moderately prestigious movies (like People I Know or The Door in the Floor),but we have never seen her again on a substantial character.The movie While She Was Out does nothing to put her on that situation; and it is not only that her character is not too tasty,but also that the movie is really [[shite]].The screenplay from this movie could not be more hollow and basic.However,Basinger brings some conviction to her character,and that makes this [[pauper]] [[films]] to win a few points.This movie is full of clichés and generic villains.The work of director Susan Montford is truly [[tragic]] for many reasons but mainly,because the movie never gets a good rhythm and tone.The ending from this movie is extremely ridiculous.I do not recommend While She Was Out at all.This film commits the capital sin of being boring. --------------------------------------------- Result 4227 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] A good [[film]], and one I'll watch a number of [[times]]. [[Rich]] (the [[previous]] commenter)is right: there is much more going on here than is clear from the title boards, and I have to wonder how much has suffered in translation. Were there more in the original? Or was a native-language audience expected to lip-read more? Or -- since the screenplay was written by the author of the novel on which this was based -- was this a currently [[popular]] [[story]] with which the audience was already very familiar? [[In]] short, very worth a look, but it [[probably]] requires more [[work]] from [[contemporary]] [[viewers]] than the [[original]] 1913 audience had to put into it.

The Alpha Video release touts the [[new]] organ score, but the music is not [[matched]] to the [[story]] [[progression]] in any way. Sure, it [[starts]] promisingly, but [[degenerates]] into a [[repetitive]], Phillip-Glass-like monotony that reflects [[nothing]] of the [[action]] on the screen. After listening for a while, I turned off the sound and simply watched: much better! A good [[cinematography]], and one I'll watch a number of [[moments]]. [[Affluent]] (the [[anterior]] commenter)is right: there is much more going on here than is clear from the title boards, and I have to wonder how much has suffered in translation. Were there more in the original? Or was a native-language audience expected to lip-read more? Or -- since the screenplay was written by the author of the novel on which this was based -- was this a currently [[trendy]] [[conte]] with which the audience was already very familiar? [[During]] short, very worth a look, but it [[undeniably]] requires more [[jobs]] from [[current]] [[listeners]] than the [[upfront]] 1913 audience had to put into it.

The Alpha Video release touts the [[newest]] organ score, but the music is not [[coupled]] to the [[narratives]] [[advancements]] in any way. Sure, it [[startup]] promisingly, but [[arseholes]] into a [[repetitious]], Phillip-Glass-like monotony that reflects [[none]] of the [[efforts]] on the screen. After listening for a while, I turned off the sound and simply watched: much better! --------------------------------------------- Result 4228 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] this was the most costly film, when produced. Sir Alexander Korda and H.G. Wells were both distressed by its poor ratings---for good reason. it was and remains far ahead of its time. aside from the seemingly poor direction, probably editing, at the very beginning, the work moves along to a [[stunning]] conclusion.

whether its Sir Ralph Richardson's 'Boss' role, or even better, his wife's, Sir Cedric's, as adversary to space-faring, Raymond Massey's 'John Cabal' center role---all deliver mind-boggling performances.

the scene with mr. Korda's incomparable set, of the small girl-child, running out to an absolutely 'never-to-be-matched' scene, commenting 'Life just keeps getting lovelier and lovelier'? that swiftly brings tears to any parent/grandparent. this is not a film for the young--unless 'experienced' and rather those who have seen 'the horror' it opposes.

sure, the 'phony-parachuting', looks hokey---while using a 'magnetic-cannon', now termed 'mass-driver' may be viewed as ridiculous, vs. rockets---give Sir Korda a break--Mr. Wells made that choice. and at +/- $8 million, this film went way beyond 'over-budget'---so he concentrated on what he could manage.

the true power of this Greatest of cinema rests in 'John Cabal's' final statement of human destiny---his friend 'Passworthy' doubts the wisdom of space-faring, saying, 'We're such little animals.' John Cabal's proper response is,(paraphrased) 'Yes, little animals, and if that is all we are, we must live and die as such.' they are standing under a large astronomical telescope. he sweeps his hand over the night sky. 'Yet we may have all the Universe, or nothing.'---then the final chorus breaks in---'Which shall it be?'---this is not 'Star Wars', 'Blade Runner'---anything you may consider 'Great'---this is the Real Thing.

i remind all of Steven Hawking's most recent address, upon his latest 'Medal of Honor'---'Humanity must leave Earth, or die.'---the very core of this work---i love 'standard entertainment'---yet this 'relic', for the wise viewer, offers far more. 'Which Shall It Be?' be in the proper 'mood'---whatever that takes---this will take your breath away---i 'guarontee'---overall, for humanity? the most significant of cinema.

since posting, i note many have commented on the poor 'media-quality' of 'surviving' examples. in the 80's i developed a 'proprietary' 'colorization' process which required a 'clean' original. this led me to Michael Korda, who sadly noted all were gone---so we must relish what remains---'sad but true?' this was the most costly film, when produced. Sir Alexander Korda and H.G. Wells were both distressed by its poor ratings---for good reason. it was and remains far ahead of its time. aside from the seemingly poor direction, probably editing, at the very beginning, the work moves along to a [[unbelievable]] conclusion.

whether its Sir Ralph Richardson's 'Boss' role, or even better, his wife's, Sir Cedric's, as adversary to space-faring, Raymond Massey's 'John Cabal' center role---all deliver mind-boggling performances.

the scene with mr. Korda's incomparable set, of the small girl-child, running out to an absolutely 'never-to-be-matched' scene, commenting 'Life just keeps getting lovelier and lovelier'? that swiftly brings tears to any parent/grandparent. this is not a film for the young--unless 'experienced' and rather those who have seen 'the horror' it opposes.

sure, the 'phony-parachuting', looks hokey---while using a 'magnetic-cannon', now termed 'mass-driver' may be viewed as ridiculous, vs. rockets---give Sir Korda a break--Mr. Wells made that choice. and at +/- $8 million, this film went way beyond 'over-budget'---so he concentrated on what he could manage.

the true power of this Greatest of cinema rests in 'John Cabal's' final statement of human destiny---his friend 'Passworthy' doubts the wisdom of space-faring, saying, 'We're such little animals.' John Cabal's proper response is,(paraphrased) 'Yes, little animals, and if that is all we are, we must live and die as such.' they are standing under a large astronomical telescope. he sweeps his hand over the night sky. 'Yet we may have all the Universe, or nothing.'---then the final chorus breaks in---'Which shall it be?'---this is not 'Star Wars', 'Blade Runner'---anything you may consider 'Great'---this is the Real Thing.

i remind all of Steven Hawking's most recent address, upon his latest 'Medal of Honor'---'Humanity must leave Earth, or die.'---the very core of this work---i love 'standard entertainment'---yet this 'relic', for the wise viewer, offers far more. 'Which Shall It Be?' be in the proper 'mood'---whatever that takes---this will take your breath away---i 'guarontee'---overall, for humanity? the most significant of cinema.

since posting, i note many have commented on the poor 'media-quality' of 'surviving' examples. in the 80's i developed a 'proprietary' 'colorization' process which required a 'clean' original. this led me to Michael Korda, who sadly noted all were gone---so we must relish what remains---'sad but true?' --------------------------------------------- Result 4229 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Most of the episodes on Season 1 are awful..There is no comparison to Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, as they programs actually had decent story lines. Most of Amazing Stories are well dull..not amazing in the least..go rent or buy the Twilight Zone series...I have [[heard]] Season 2 of this series is much better..also for some reason on the DVD's they cut out the Ray Walston parts which further [[diminishes]] this [[compilation]]. The one cool thing is to see actors and actresses when they were younger in 1985...Most of the story lines are very predictable though and the series could of been better with twists and turns that left you wondering... Most of the episodes on Season 1 are awful..There is no comparison to Twilight Zone or Outer Limits, as they programs actually had decent story lines. Most of Amazing Stories are well dull..not amazing in the least..go rent or buy the Twilight Zone series...I have [[tryout]] Season 2 of this series is much better..also for some reason on the DVD's they cut out the Ray Walston parts which further [[shortens]] this [[compile]]. The one cool thing is to see actors and actresses when they were younger in 1985...Most of the story lines are very predictable though and the series could of been better with twists and turns that left you wondering... --------------------------------------------- Result 4230 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]]

Paul Verhoeven [[finally]] bombed out on this one. He became a joke on himself. Once again we have a film which includes sex and violence, immorality, leering at women and lots of attitiude talk between the characters and dollying pans.

Its all for [[nothing]]. Because their is no action at all in this film. It fudges all its set pieces. All the actors give the kind of performances form a Verhoeven [[film]]. [[In]] other [[words]] rampant over acting on almost [[every]] level. Starship Troopers got away with it because it was such a [[macho]] [[world]] the characters [[inhabited]]. [[In]] this [[scientists]] are acting the same [[way]]. [[Sorry]] [[Paul]] but Soldiers and scientist are not [[really]] made of the same mindset.

One [[major]] [[flaw]] in the plot was that after escaping for that one night to do [[evil]] things Kevin Bacons character then [[returns]] back to the science lab where we have already [[spent]] more then enough [[time]] [[watching]] these animated manniquens ([[Elizabeth]] Shue [[excepted]]) [[walk]] and [[talk]]. Why not show the [[extent]] of what the character [[could]] do in the [[outside]] [[world]]. How [[could]] they [[possibly]] [[track]] him if he [[could]] be [[anywhere]] at all??? [[Think]] os all the [[different]] [[things]] that [[could]] have been [[done]] with this [[concept]], both in terms of [[story]] and characterisation. [[Then]] [[look]] at what this [[film]] does and you [[really]] how [[badly]] [[done]] and concieved the whole project [[really]] was.

More [[insulting]] is the Doco on the [[DVD]] where [[everyone]] is [[claiming]] that Verhoeven is some [[kind]] of [[MAd]] [[Genius]]. [[Well]] one out of two isnt that [[bad]].

This [[film]] has [[nothing]] of [[note]] in it. [[Just]] like the title [[says]].

Hollow!!!

Paul Verhoeven [[eventually]] bombed out on this one. He became a joke on himself. Once again we have a film which includes sex and violence, immorality, leering at women and lots of attitiude talk between the characters and dollying pans.

Its all for [[nada]]. Because their is no action at all in this film. It fudges all its set pieces. All the actors give the kind of performances form a Verhoeven [[cinema]]. [[Across]] other [[phrase]] rampant over acting on almost [[each]] level. Starship Troopers got away with it because it was such a [[virile]] [[globe]] the characters [[populated]]. [[Across]] this [[scientist]] are acting the same [[ways]]. [[Apologies]] [[Pablo]] but Soldiers and scientist are not [[genuinely]] made of the same mindset.

One [[big]] [[faults]] in the plot was that after escaping for that one night to do [[wicked]] things Kevin Bacons character then [[comeback]] back to the science lab where we have already [[spending]] more then enough [[period]] [[staring]] these animated manniquens ([[Elisabeth]] Shue [[exempted]]) [[stroll]] and [[speak]]. Why not show the [[amplitude]] of what the character [[wo]] do in the [[exterior]] [[globe]]. How [[wo]] they [[arguably]] [[rails]] him if he [[wo]] be [[nowhere]] at all??? [[Believing]] os all the [[varied]] [[matters]] that [[wo]] have been [[played]] with this [[conceptions]], both in terms of [[tales]] and characterisation. [[Thus]] [[gaze]] at what this [[movies]] does and you [[genuinely]] how [[desperately]] [[accomplished]] and concieved the whole project [[genuinely]] was.

More [[demeaning]] is the Doco on the [[DVDS]] where [[anyone]] is [[alleging]] that Verhoeven is some [[sorting]] of [[madmen]] [[Genie]]. [[Good]] one out of two isnt that [[amiss]].

This [[cinematography]] has [[anything]] of [[observes]] in it. [[Virtuous]] like the title [[contends]].

Hollow!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4231 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Kurt Thomas in one of the series of gymnast olympic stars turned movie stars movies that [[mercifully]] only includes one other..Mitch Gaylord in American Anthem...at least that one had Janet Jones..this one has...um... a gymnast using his martial arts and his gymnastic skills to [[save]] a european country from dictatorship..sure it could happen.. on a scale of one to ten.. a 0 Kurt Thomas in one of the series of gymnast olympic stars turned movie stars movies that [[joyfully]] only includes one other..Mitch Gaylord in American Anthem...at least that one had Janet Jones..this one has...um... a gymnast using his martial arts and his gymnastic skills to [[saved]] a european country from dictatorship..sure it could happen.. on a scale of one to ten.. a 0 --------------------------------------------- Result 4232 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] Summer Phoenix did a [[great]] performance where you really feel what she's not [[able]] to feel and you just cannot [[understand]] what she has on her [[mind]]. Besides, she [[portrays]] a jewish [[girl]] who behaves really [[confronting]] the status quo of that century. Summer Phoenix did a [[large]] performance where you really feel what she's not [[capable]] to feel and you just cannot [[understood]] what she has on her [[esprit]]. Besides, she [[denotes]] a jewish [[chick]] who behaves really [[encountering]] the status quo of that century. --------------------------------------------- Result 4233 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Unfortunately, one of the [[best]] [[efforts]] [[yet]] made in the [[area]] of [[special]] [[effects]] has been made [[completely]] [[pointless]] by being placed [[alongside]] a [[lumbering]], silly and [[equally]] [[pointless]] plot and an [[inadequate]], [[clichéd]] [[screenplay]]. [[Hollow]] [[Man]] is a rather useless [[film]].

Practically everything seen here has been done to death - the characters, the idea and the action sequences (especially the lift shaft!) - with the only genuinely [[intriguing]] element of the film being the impressive special [[effects]]. [[However]], it is just the same special [[effect]] done over and over again, and by the [[end]] of the film that has been done to death also. I was [[hoping]] before watching Hollow Man that the Invisible [[Man]] theme, which is hardly [[original]] in itself, would be the basis of [[something]] newer and more interesting. This is not so. It isn't long before the film [[turns]] into an overly-familiar blood [[bath]] and mass of ineffectual histrionics - the mound of clichés piles up so [[fast]] that it's almost impressive.

On [[top]] of all this, Kevin [[Bacon]] does a [[pretty]] [[useless]] job and his supporting cast are hardly trying their best. Good points might be a passable Jerry Goldsmith score (but no competition for his better efforts), a quite interesting use of thermal imagery and the special [[effects]]. I was tempted to give this film three out of ten, but the effects push Hollow Man's merit up one notch.

4/10 Unfortunately, one of the [[finest]] [[action]] [[again]] made in the [[realms]] of [[particular]] [[influence]] has been made [[altogether]] [[meaningless]] by being placed [[beside]] a [[woods]], silly and [[similarly]] [[useless]] plot and an [[insufficient]], [[cliché]] [[scenarios]]. [[Empty]] [[Fella]] is a rather useless [[kino]].

Practically everything seen here has been done to death - the characters, the idea and the action sequences (especially the lift shaft!) - with the only genuinely [[enigmatic]] element of the film being the impressive special [[influence]]. [[Still]], it is just the same special [[consequence]] done over and over again, and by the [[ends]] of the film that has been done to death also. I was [[expecting]] before watching Hollow Man that the Invisible [[Bloke]] theme, which is hardly [[initial]] in itself, would be the basis of [[anything]] newer and more interesting. This is not so. It isn't long before the film [[revolves]] into an overly-familiar blood [[swim]] and mass of ineffectual histrionics - the mound of clichés piles up so [[punctually]] that it's almost impressive.

On [[supreme]] of all this, Kevin [[Lard]] does a [[quite]] [[fruitless]] job and his supporting cast are hardly trying their best. Good points might be a passable Jerry Goldsmith score (but no competition for his better efforts), a quite interesting use of thermal imagery and the special [[influencing]]. I was tempted to give this film three out of ten, but the effects push Hollow Man's merit up one notch.

4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4234 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (97%)]] Centered in the downtown and out skirts of Detroit, this [[comedy]] I [[found]] to be a [[terrific]] [[new]] comedic duo. 'Noriyuki [[Pat]] Morita' is a very funny man, who happens to be a cop from Japan on the trail of an industrial secrets thief, who has stolen a 'proto type' turbo super charger, reluctantly he goes to the United States to follow the thief, after being ordered by his commander. Pat's character collides with '[[Jay]] Leno's' [[character]], a [[fast]] talking' but down to business-player type Detroit cop. When they cross [[paths]] though, the honorable 'Ways' of Japan meet the all-out old school Detroit police investigative 'Ways'. The two stumble and trip over each other at first, but then develop a 'rythym' that turns into an explosive two layered powerhouse team, that solves the case, cold. After battling a city crime boss for the stolen 'equiptment' and closing the case, these two go from despising each other to being friends and working well together. A little worse for wear and in need of an extended-vacation on top of it all, they manage to come to a victorious closing. I rated this a 9. Lewis's direction makes' this a near perfect [[comedy]]. Fun for all ages. I recommend it highly.(***) Centered in the downtown and out skirts of Detroit, this [[travesty]] I [[detected]] to be a [[glamorous]] [[newer]] comedic duo. 'Noriyuki [[Patricia]] Morita' is a very funny man, who happens to be a cop from Japan on the trail of an industrial secrets thief, who has stolen a 'proto type' turbo super charger, reluctantly he goes to the United States to follow the thief, after being ordered by his commander. Pat's character collides with '[[Jae]] Leno's' [[nature]], a [[expedited]] talking' but down to business-player type Detroit cop. When they cross [[road]] though, the honorable 'Ways' of Japan meet the all-out old school Detroit police investigative 'Ways'. The two stumble and trip over each other at first, but then develop a 'rythym' that turns into an explosive two layered powerhouse team, that solves the case, cold. After battling a city crime boss for the stolen 'equiptment' and closing the case, these two go from despising each other to being friends and working well together. A little worse for wear and in need of an extended-vacation on top of it all, they manage to come to a victorious closing. I rated this a 9. Lewis's direction makes' this a near perfect [[travesty]]. Fun for all ages. I recommend it highly.(***) --------------------------------------------- Result 4235 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Platoon is to the Vietnam War as Rocky IV is to heavyweight championship boxing. Oliver Stone's [[story]] of the experience of a [[US]] Army platoon in [[Vietnam]] in 1968 is so overdone it's [[laughable]]. [[While]] most or all of the [[occurrences]] in Platoon did [[occur]] over the 10+ year [[span]] of [[US]] military [[involvement]] in [[Vietnam]], to [[portray]] these things happening to one [[small]] [[group]] of [[men]] in such a [[short]] [[time]] [[frame]] ([[weeks]]) [[gives]] a horribly skewed picture of the [[war]]. [[In]] Platoon, the [[men]] of the platoon [[see]] all of the following in the course of a [[week]] or two: US [[soldiers]] [[murdering]] civilians, US Soldiers raping civilians, a [[US]] [[Sergeant]] [[murdering]] another [[US]] Sergeant, a [[US]] Private [[murdering]] a [[US]] [[Staff]] [[Sergeant]], US [[soldiers]] [[killed]]/wounded by friendly fire, 90%+ [[killed]] or wounded in the platoon. For Stone to [[try]] to pass this film off as the typical experience of a [[US]] soldier in Vietnam is a disgrace. Two Vietnam War films I would [[recommend]] are We Were Soldiers (the TRUE [[story]] of arguably the [[worst]] battle for US soldiers in Vietnam) and HBO's A Bright Shining Lie. Platoon is to the Vietnam War as Rocky IV is to heavyweight championship boxing. Oliver Stone's [[conte]] of the experience of a [[AMERICANS]] Army platoon in [[Hanoi]] in 1968 is so overdone it's [[nonsensical]]. [[Despite]] most or all of the [[phenomena]] in Platoon did [[arise]] over the 10+ year [[spanning]] of [[AMERICANS]] military [[betrothal]] in [[Viet]], to [[describes]] these things happening to one [[little]] [[panels]] of [[man]] in such a [[succinct]] [[moment]] [[framework]] ([[zhou]]) [[delivers]] a horribly skewed picture of the [[warfare]]. [[Among]] Platoon, the [[man]] of the platoon [[behold]] all of the following in the course of a [[chou]] or two: US [[servicemen]] [[manslaughter]] civilians, US Soldiers raping civilians, a [[USA]] [[Sgt]] [[killed]] another [[USA]] Sergeant, a [[USA]] Private [[killings]] a [[USA]] [[Staffs]] [[Sgt]], US [[solider]] [[die]]/wounded by friendly fire, 90%+ [[assassinated]] or wounded in the platoon. For Stone to [[endeavour]] to pass this film off as the typical experience of a [[USA]] soldier in Vietnam is a disgrace. Two Vietnam War films I would [[recommended]] are We Were Soldiers (the TRUE [[conte]] of arguably the [[gravest]] battle for US soldiers in Vietnam) and HBO's A Bright Shining Lie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4236 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] Elfriede Jelinek, not quite a household name yet, is a winner of the Nobel prize for literature. Her [[novel]] spawned a film that won second prize at Cannes and top prizes for the male and female leads. Am I a dinosaur in matters of aesthetic appreciation or has art become so debased that anything goes?

'Gobble, gobble' is the favoured orthographic representation in [[Britain]] of the bubbling noise made by a turkey. In the [[film]] world a [[turkey]] is a [[monumental]] flop as measured by box office receipts or critical reception. 'Gobble, gobble' and The Piano Teacher are perfect partners.

The embarrassing awfulness of this widely praised film cannot be overstated. It begins very badly, as if made to annoy the viewer. Credits interrupt inconsequential scenes for more than 11 minutes. We are introduced to Professor Erika Kohut, apparently the alter ego of the accoladed authoress, a stony professor of piano. She lives with her husky and domineering mum. Dad is an institutionalised madman who dies unseen during what passes for the action.

Reviewing The Piano Teacher is difficult, beyond registering its unpleasantness. What we see in the film (and might read in the book, for all I know) is a tawdry, exploitative, [[nonsensical]] tale of an emotional pendulum that swings hither and thither without moving on.

Erika, whose name is minimally used, is initially shown as a person with intense musical sensitivity but otherwise totally repressed. Not quite, because there's a handbags at two paces scene with her gravelly-voiced maman early on that ends with profuse apologies. If a reviewer has to (yawn) extract a leitmotif (why not use a pretentious word when a simpler one would do), Elrika's violently alternating moods would be it.

A young hunk, Walter, studying to become a 'low voltage' engineer, whatever that is, and playing ice hockey in his few leisure moments, is also a talented pianist. He encounters Elrika at an old-fashioned recital in a luxury apartment in what may or may not be Paris. In the glib fashion of so much art, he immediately falls in love and starts to 'cherchez la femme'.

Repressed Erika has a liking for hardcore pornography, shown briefly but graphically for a few seconds while she sniffs a tissue taken from the waste basket in the private booth where she watches.

Walter performs a brilliant audition and is grudgingly accepted as a private student by Erika, whose teaching style is characterised by remoteness, hostility, discouragement and humiliation.

He soon declares his love and before long pursues Erika into the Ladies where they engage in mild hanky panky and incomplete oral sex. Erika retains control over her lovesick swain. She promises to send him a letter of instruction for further pleasurable exchanges.

In the meantime, chillingly jealous because of Walter's kindness to a nervous student who is literally having the shits before a rehearsal for some future concert, Erika fills the student's coat pocket with broken glass, causing severe lacerations to those delicate piano-playing hands.

The next big scene (by-passing the genital self-mutilation, etc) has Walter turning up at the apartment Erika shares with her mother. Erika want to be humiliated, bound, slapped, etc. Sensible Walter is, for the moment, repulsed and marches off into the night.

At this point there's still nearly an hour to go. The viewer can only fear the worst. Erika tracks down Walter to the skating rink where he does his ice hockey practice. They retire to a back room. Lusty Wally is unable to resist the hands tugging at his trousers. His 'baby gravy' is soon expelled with other stomach contents. Ho hum.

Repulsed but hooked, perhaps desirous of revenge for the insult so recently barfed on the floor, Walter returns to Erika's apartment. Can you guess what happens now? It's not very deep or difficult. Yes, he becomes a brute while Erika becomes a victim. One moment he's locking maman in her room and slapping Erika, the next he's kicking her in the face, having sex with her and renewing his declarations of love.

Am I being unfair in this summary? Watch the film if you want, but I'd advise you not to.

Anyone can see eternity in a grain of sand if they're in the right mood. I could expatiate at the challenging depiction of human relationships conveyed by this film if I wanted. But I 'prefer not to', because this is a cheap and nasty film that appeals to base instincts and says nothing.

I'm supposed to say that parentally repressed Erika longs for love, ineffectively seeks it in pornography, inappropriately rejects it when it literally appears, pink and throbbing, under her nose, belatedly realises that she doesn't like being hurt, blah, blah, blah.

The world has, for reasons not explained, stunted her. She apparently makes a monster out of someone who appeared superficially loving - but surely we all know that any man is potentially a violent rapist, because that's his essential nature however much he tries to tell himself and the world otherwise.

At the end, if you have the patience to be there, there's a small twist. Before going to the final scene, where she's due to perform as a substitute for the underwear-soiling student with the lacerated hands, Erika packs a knife in her handbag. For Walter?

Yes, you're ahead of me. She stabs herself in a none life-threatening area and leaves. Roll credits.

If this earned the second prize at Cannes, just how bad were the rest of the entries? Elfriede Jelinek, not quite a household name yet, is a winner of the Nobel prize for literature. Her [[newer]] spawned a film that won second prize at Cannes and top prizes for the male and female leads. Am I a dinosaur in matters of aesthetic appreciation or has art become so debased that anything goes?

'Gobble, gobble' is the favoured orthographic representation in [[Bretagne]] of the bubbling noise made by a turkey. In the [[kino]] world a [[turk]] is a [[jumbo]] flop as measured by box office receipts or critical reception. 'Gobble, gobble' and The Piano Teacher are perfect partners.

The embarrassing awfulness of this widely praised film cannot be overstated. It begins very badly, as if made to annoy the viewer. Credits interrupt inconsequential scenes for more than 11 minutes. We are introduced to Professor Erika Kohut, apparently the alter ego of the accoladed authoress, a stony professor of piano. She lives with her husky and domineering mum. Dad is an institutionalised madman who dies unseen during what passes for the action.

Reviewing The Piano Teacher is difficult, beyond registering its unpleasantness. What we see in the film (and might read in the book, for all I know) is a tawdry, exploitative, [[farcical]] tale of an emotional pendulum that swings hither and thither without moving on.

Erika, whose name is minimally used, is initially shown as a person with intense musical sensitivity but otherwise totally repressed. Not quite, because there's a handbags at two paces scene with her gravelly-voiced maman early on that ends with profuse apologies. If a reviewer has to (yawn) extract a leitmotif (why not use a pretentious word when a simpler one would do), Elrika's violently alternating moods would be it.

A young hunk, Walter, studying to become a 'low voltage' engineer, whatever that is, and playing ice hockey in his few leisure moments, is also a talented pianist. He encounters Elrika at an old-fashioned recital in a luxury apartment in what may or may not be Paris. In the glib fashion of so much art, he immediately falls in love and starts to 'cherchez la femme'.

Repressed Erika has a liking for hardcore pornography, shown briefly but graphically for a few seconds while she sniffs a tissue taken from the waste basket in the private booth where she watches.

Walter performs a brilliant audition and is grudgingly accepted as a private student by Erika, whose teaching style is characterised by remoteness, hostility, discouragement and humiliation.

He soon declares his love and before long pursues Erika into the Ladies where they engage in mild hanky panky and incomplete oral sex. Erika retains control over her lovesick swain. She promises to send him a letter of instruction for further pleasurable exchanges.

In the meantime, chillingly jealous because of Walter's kindness to a nervous student who is literally having the shits before a rehearsal for some future concert, Erika fills the student's coat pocket with broken glass, causing severe lacerations to those delicate piano-playing hands.

The next big scene (by-passing the genital self-mutilation, etc) has Walter turning up at the apartment Erika shares with her mother. Erika want to be humiliated, bound, slapped, etc. Sensible Walter is, for the moment, repulsed and marches off into the night.

At this point there's still nearly an hour to go. The viewer can only fear the worst. Erika tracks down Walter to the skating rink where he does his ice hockey practice. They retire to a back room. Lusty Wally is unable to resist the hands tugging at his trousers. His 'baby gravy' is soon expelled with other stomach contents. Ho hum.

Repulsed but hooked, perhaps desirous of revenge for the insult so recently barfed on the floor, Walter returns to Erika's apartment. Can you guess what happens now? It's not very deep or difficult. Yes, he becomes a brute while Erika becomes a victim. One moment he's locking maman in her room and slapping Erika, the next he's kicking her in the face, having sex with her and renewing his declarations of love.

Am I being unfair in this summary? Watch the film if you want, but I'd advise you not to.

Anyone can see eternity in a grain of sand if they're in the right mood. I could expatiate at the challenging depiction of human relationships conveyed by this film if I wanted. But I 'prefer not to', because this is a cheap and nasty film that appeals to base instincts and says nothing.

I'm supposed to say that parentally repressed Erika longs for love, ineffectively seeks it in pornography, inappropriately rejects it when it literally appears, pink and throbbing, under her nose, belatedly realises that she doesn't like being hurt, blah, blah, blah.

The world has, for reasons not explained, stunted her. She apparently makes a monster out of someone who appeared superficially loving - but surely we all know that any man is potentially a violent rapist, because that's his essential nature however much he tries to tell himself and the world otherwise.

At the end, if you have the patience to be there, there's a small twist. Before going to the final scene, where she's due to perform as a substitute for the underwear-soiling student with the lacerated hands, Erika packs a knife in her handbag. For Walter?

Yes, you're ahead of me. She stabs herself in a none life-threatening area and leaves. Roll credits.

If this earned the second prize at Cannes, just how bad were the rest of the entries? --------------------------------------------- Result 4237 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (57%)]] [[Let]] me begin by saying I am a [[big]] [[fantasy]] [[fan]]. However, this film is not for me. Many far-fetched [[arguments]] are [[trying]] to support this film's claim that [[dragons]] [[possibly]] ever existed. The [[film]] mentions connections in [[different]] [[stories]] from [[different]] countries, but fails to investigate them more thoroughly, which [[could]] have [[given]] the film some [[credibility]]. The film [[uses]] (nice!) CGI to tell us a narrated fantasy story on a young dragon's life. This is combined with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it [[look]] like something scientific, which it is [[definitely]] not. [[In]] [[many]] cases the [[arguments]]/[[clues]] are far-fetched. [[In]] some cases, [[clues]] [[used]] to show [[dragons]] [[possibly]] [[existed]], or [[flew]], or spit fire are simply [[invalid]]. To see this just makes me get cramp in my toes. [[Even]] a fantasy [[film]] [[needs]] some degree of reality in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a [[pretentious]] fantasy-CSI documentary, not worth watching. [[Leave]] me begin by saying I am a [[prodigious]] [[fantasia]] [[breather]]. However, this film is not for me. Many far-fetched [[controversies]] are [[striving]] to support this film's claim that [[dragoons]] [[perhaps]] ever existed. The [[kino]] mentions connections in [[varied]] [[histories]] from [[several]] countries, but fails to investigate them more thoroughly, which [[wo]] have [[conferred]] the film some [[credence]]. The film [[employs]] (nice!) CGI to tell us a narrated fantasy story on a young dragon's life. This is combined with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it [[gaze]] like something scientific, which it is [[undoubtedly]] not. [[Across]] [[innumerable]] cases the [[controversies]]/[[cues]] are far-fetched. [[During]] some cases, [[cues]] [[usage]] to show [[dragon]] [[arguably]] [[prevailed]], or [[flied]], or spit fire are simply [[null]]. To see this just makes me get cramp in my toes. [[Yet]] a fantasy [[movies]] [[requisite]] some degree of reality in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a [[presumptuous]] fantasy-CSI documentary, not worth watching. --------------------------------------------- Result 4238 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] Slow, [[boring]], [[extremely]] repetitive. [[No]] wonder the Weinstein [[Company]] did not buy this. This Spurlock should [[eat]] more [[McDonalds]] while filming himself, and quit [[producing]]. There is no [[way]] you can watch this and enjoy. The preacher is a joke. The [[whole]] idea is not funny. You can make a 2 minute film with this [[idea]] not a feature. I am so sorry I rented this movie. I will never watch anything with the [[name]] Spurlock on it. It is [[completely]] [[garbage]]. Filmmakers like this should be on youtube and never be [[granted]] a distribution [[deal]]. The film states that the American Consumers and their [[shopping]] are at [[fault]] for the current depression when [[shopping]] and buying products, making [[money]] circulate in the system are the [[base]] of a [[healthy]] economy. Slow, [[dull]], [[vitally]] repetitive. [[None]] wonder the Weinstein [[Businesses]] did not buy this. This Spurlock should [[eating]] more [[macdonald]] while filming himself, and quit [[generating]]. There is no [[routes]] you can watch this and enjoy. The preacher is a joke. The [[together]] idea is not funny. You can make a 2 minute film with this [[thoughts]] not a feature. I am so sorry I rented this movie. I will never watch anything with the [[names]] Spurlock on it. It is [[fully]] [[litter]]. Filmmakers like this should be on youtube and never be [[ascribed]] a distribution [[treat]]. The film states that the American Consumers and their [[shop]] are at [[malfunction]] for the current depression when [[purchases]] and buying products, making [[cash]] circulate in the system are the [[foundations]] of a [[healthful]] economy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4239 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] Brokedown Palace is the [[story]] of two best friends, Alice and Darlene, who go on a spontaneous trip to Thailand and wind up in [[prison]] after being caught with planted drugs in their luggage. In this way, the [[movie]] had the potential to turn into a serious and moving film, such as "Return to Paradise", but instead, the movie chose to [[focus]] [[little]] on the girls' situation and more on their friendship.

Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale both turn in [[excellent]] performances, and the movie is much more about the interplay between them - the suspicion, the jealousy, the questioning and testing of their friendship and ultimately the sacrifices made in the name of friendship. This movie chooses not to delve too deeply into politics or even into the harshness of prison life (which is a bit glossed over), and focuses more on these friendship issues.

There were some plot holes here, and some parts that just didn't seem believable or realistic. We didn't feel the real fear or hopelessness of their situation as well as we might have. And we get very little feeling of life outside the prison walls, with Bill Pullman playing the supposedly sleazy lawyer who actually turns out to have a heart of gold. In short, this should, by all rights, have been a much darker movie than it was.

But overall, I enjoyed it. The acting was good, the soundtrack was perfect, and the storyline had enough twists and turns to stay interesting. Worth seeing. Brokedown Palace is the [[history]] of two best friends, Alice and Darlene, who go on a spontaneous trip to Thailand and wind up in [[correctional]] after being caught with planted drugs in their luggage. In this way, the [[cinematography]] had the potential to turn into a serious and moving film, such as "Return to Paradise", but instead, the movie chose to [[concentration]] [[tiny]] on the girls' situation and more on their friendship.

Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale both turn in [[glorious]] performances, and the movie is much more about the interplay between them - the suspicion, the jealousy, the questioning and testing of their friendship and ultimately the sacrifices made in the name of friendship. This movie chooses not to delve too deeply into politics or even into the harshness of prison life (which is a bit glossed over), and focuses more on these friendship issues.

There were some plot holes here, and some parts that just didn't seem believable or realistic. We didn't feel the real fear or hopelessness of their situation as well as we might have. And we get very little feeling of life outside the prison walls, with Bill Pullman playing the supposedly sleazy lawyer who actually turns out to have a heart of gold. In short, this should, by all rights, have been a much darker movie than it was.

But overall, I enjoyed it. The acting was good, the soundtrack was perfect, and the storyline had enough twists and turns to stay interesting. Worth seeing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4240 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] That's the sound of Stan and Ollie spinning in their [[graves]].

I won't bother [[listing]] the fundamental [[flaws]] of this movie as they're so obvious they go without saying. Small things, like this being "The All New Adventures of Laurel and Hardy" despite the stars being dead for over thirty years when it was made. Little things like that.

A bad idea would be to have actors playing buffoons whom just happen to be called Laurel and Hardy. As bad as that is, it might have worked. For a really bad idea, try casting two actors to impersonate the duo. Okay, they might claim to be nephews, but the end result is the same.

Bronson Pinchot can be funny. Okay, forget his wacky foreigner "Cousin Larry" schtick in Perfect Strangers, and look at him in True Romance. Here though, he stinks. It's probably not all his fault, and, like the director and the support cast - all of who are better than the material - he was probably just desperate for money. There are those who claim Americans find it difficult to master an effective English accent. This cause is not helped here by Pinchot. What is Stan? Welsh? Iranian? Pakistani? Only in Stan's trademark yelp does he come close, though as the yelp is overdone to the point of tedium that's nothing to write home about. Gailard Sartain does slightly better as Ollie, though it's like saying what's worse - stepping in dog dirt or a kick in the knackers?

Remember the originals with their split-second timing, intuitive teamwork and innate loveability? Well that's absent altogether, replaced with two stupid old men and jokes so mistimed you could park a bus through the gaps. Whereas the originals had plots that could be summed up in a couple of panels, this one has some long-winded Mummy hokum (and what a lousy title!) that's mixed in with the boys' fraternity scenario. I can't claim to have seen every single one of Laurel and Hardy's 108 movies, but I think it's a safe bet that even their nadir was leagues ahead of this.

Maybe the major problem is that the originals were sort-of playing themselves, or at least using their own accents. It at least felt natural and unforced, as opposed to the contrived caricatures Pinchot and Sartain are given. And since when did Stan do malapropisms, and so many at that? "I was gonna give you a standing cremation"; "I would like to marinate my friend." Stop it!

Only notable moment is a reference to Bozo the Clown, the cartoon character who shared Larry Harmon's L & H comic. Harmon of course bought the name copyright (how disconcerting to see a ® after Laurel and Hardy) and was co-director and producer of this travesty.

Questions abound. Would Stan and Ollie do fart gags if they were alive today? Would they glass mummies with broken bottles? Have Stan being smacked in the genitals with a spear and end on a big CGI-finale? Let's hope not.

I did laugh once, but I think that was just in disbelief at how terrible it all is. Why was this film made in the first place? Who did the makers think would like it? Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen, an absolute abhorrence I grew sick of watching after just the first five minutes. About as much fun as having your head trapped in a vice while a red-hot poker and stinging nettles are forcibly inserted up your back passage. That's the sound of Stan and Ollie spinning in their [[headstones]].

I won't bother [[lists]] the fundamental [[demerits]] of this movie as they're so obvious they go without saying. Small things, like this being "The All New Adventures of Laurel and Hardy" despite the stars being dead for over thirty years when it was made. Little things like that.

A bad idea would be to have actors playing buffoons whom just happen to be called Laurel and Hardy. As bad as that is, it might have worked. For a really bad idea, try casting two actors to impersonate the duo. Okay, they might claim to be nephews, but the end result is the same.

Bronson Pinchot can be funny. Okay, forget his wacky foreigner "Cousin Larry" schtick in Perfect Strangers, and look at him in True Romance. Here though, he stinks. It's probably not all his fault, and, like the director and the support cast - all of who are better than the material - he was probably just desperate for money. There are those who claim Americans find it difficult to master an effective English accent. This cause is not helped here by Pinchot. What is Stan? Welsh? Iranian? Pakistani? Only in Stan's trademark yelp does he come close, though as the yelp is overdone to the point of tedium that's nothing to write home about. Gailard Sartain does slightly better as Ollie, though it's like saying what's worse - stepping in dog dirt or a kick in the knackers?

Remember the originals with their split-second timing, intuitive teamwork and innate loveability? Well that's absent altogether, replaced with two stupid old men and jokes so mistimed you could park a bus through the gaps. Whereas the originals had plots that could be summed up in a couple of panels, this one has some long-winded Mummy hokum (and what a lousy title!) that's mixed in with the boys' fraternity scenario. I can't claim to have seen every single one of Laurel and Hardy's 108 movies, but I think it's a safe bet that even their nadir was leagues ahead of this.

Maybe the major problem is that the originals were sort-of playing themselves, or at least using their own accents. It at least felt natural and unforced, as opposed to the contrived caricatures Pinchot and Sartain are given. And since when did Stan do malapropisms, and so many at that? "I was gonna give you a standing cremation"; "I would like to marinate my friend." Stop it!

Only notable moment is a reference to Bozo the Clown, the cartoon character who shared Larry Harmon's L & H comic. Harmon of course bought the name copyright (how disconcerting to see a ® after Laurel and Hardy) and was co-director and producer of this travesty.

Questions abound. Would Stan and Ollie do fart gags if they were alive today? Would they glass mummies with broken bottles? Have Stan being smacked in the genitals with a spear and end on a big CGI-finale? Let's hope not.

I did laugh once, but I think that was just in disbelief at how terrible it all is. Why was this film made in the first place? Who did the makers think would like it? Possibly the worst movie I've ever seen, an absolute abhorrence I grew sick of watching after just the first five minutes. About as much fun as having your head trapped in a vice while a red-hot poker and stinging nettles are forcibly inserted up your back passage. --------------------------------------------- Result 4241 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] [[Earlier]] today I got into an [[argument]] on why so many people complain about modern films in which I encountered a curious statement: "the character development in newer movies just isn't nearly as good or interesting as it used to be." [[Depending]] on the film(s) in question, this can be attributed to a number of things, sometimes generic special [[effects]] and plot-driven Hollywood [[garbage]] like War Of The [[Worlds]], but in the [[case]] of over-the-top, uninteresting [[attempts]] at social commentary and a desperate struggle to put "[[art]]" back into [[cinema]], it's movies like Dog Days that are to [[blame]].

I [[normally]] have a very [[high]] tolerance for [[movies]], no matter how dull or [[pointless]] I find them (ranging from good, [[long]] ones like [[Andrei]] Rublev and [[Dogville]], to ones I've [[considered]] painful to sit through a [[la]] [[Alpha]] [[Dog]] and [[Wild]] [[Wild]] West). I [[shut]] this [[movie]] off 45 [[minutes]] in, which is 30 minutes more than I [[actually]] should have. I wasn't interested in any of the characters whatsoever and [[found]] [[nothing]] [[substantial]] beyond a [[thin]] veil of unfocused pessimism. [[In]] an [[attempt]] to [[say]] [[something]] about the dregs of society, this [[film]] too [[easily]] [[falls]] into being self-indulgent, [[trite]], and [[exploitative]] in a very sincere [[sense]]. Granted, I've seen [[many]] [[disturbing]] [[movies]] on the same [[subject]], but there are so many [[better]] films out there about [[depressing]], [[pathetic]] people ([[Happiness]], Gummo, [[Kids]], Salo, [[Storytelling]], [[Irreversible]]) that [[actually]] contain [[characters]] of great [[emotional]] depth and personality. [[Dog]] [[Days]] had [[none]] more than an eighth grader's [[distaste]] for society, [[choosing]] to [[ignore]] any true [[intelligence]] about the [[way]] people [[actually]] are, and [[instead]] [[choosing]] to be a [[dull]], [[awful]], and [[hopelessly]] unoriginal [[attempt]] at a [[work]] of "art." This isn't a [[characterization]] of the unknown or a [[clever]] [[observation]] into the dregs of society, it's just [[boring]] and [[nothing]] worth caring about. [[Prior]] today I got into an [[controversy]] on why so many people complain about modern films in which I encountered a curious statement: "the character development in newer movies just isn't nearly as good or interesting as it used to be." [[Relying]] on the film(s) in question, this can be attributed to a number of things, sometimes generic special [[repercussions]] and plot-driven Hollywood [[detritus]] like War Of The [[Universes]], but in the [[cases]] of over-the-top, uninteresting [[strives]] at social commentary and a desperate struggle to put "[[artistry]]" back into [[teatro]], it's movies like Dog Days that are to [[guilt]].

I [[often]] have a very [[highest]] tolerance for [[cinematography]], no matter how dull or [[vain]] I find them (ranging from good, [[prolonged]] ones like [[Andre]] Rublev and [[Umbridge]], to ones I've [[regarded]] painful to sit through a [[angeles]] [[Alfa]] [[Hound]] and [[Savage]] [[Savage]] West). I [[closure]] this [[cinematography]] off 45 [[mins]] in, which is 30 minutes more than I [[indeed]] should have. I wasn't interested in any of the characters whatsoever and [[finds]] [[anything]] [[considerable]] beyond a [[delgado]] veil of unfocused pessimism. [[Throughout]] an [[seek]] to [[said]] [[somethin]] about the dregs of society, this [[movies]] too [[readily]] [[dip]] into being self-indulgent, [[trivial]], and [[exploiter]] in a very sincere [[feeling]]. Granted, I've seen [[various]] [[worrying]] [[cinematography]] on the same [[themes]], but there are so many [[best]] films out there about [[frustrating]], [[unhappy]] people ([[Bonheur]], Gummo, [[Child]], Salo, [[Story]], [[Irrevocable]]) that [[genuinely]] contain [[nature]] of great [[sentimental]] depth and personality. [[Doggie]] [[Jours]] had [[nos]] more than an eighth grader's [[repugnance]] for society, [[chosen]] to [[overlook]] any true [[intellect]] about the [[ways]] people [[indeed]] are, and [[however]] [[select]] to be a [[dreary]], [[grisly]], and [[irrevocably]] unoriginal [[seeks]] at a [[worked]] of "art." This isn't a [[characterized]] of the unknown or a [[canny]] [[observe]] into the dregs of society, it's just [[dreary]] and [[anything]] worth caring about. --------------------------------------------- Result 4242 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] A strange mix of traditional-80s, smartassy, Chevy Chase-type, "every-ten-lines-you-get-a-funny-one" farce and sickie black comedy. Mildly amusing in spots, but utterly tasteless. There is a skiing sequence that includes the fakest-looking back-projections since "On Her Majesty's Secret Service". (**) --------------------------------------------- Result 4243 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] i [[think]] that's this is [[awful]] produced and directed movie. Benicio Del Toro shouldn't [[work]] in production of [[movies]], he should put accent on his acting and that's it. [[Steven]] Soderbergh missed the whole point of the idea about revolution, about it's ideals, and most important about life of Che Guevara and so on. [[Camera]] is [[awful]], like [[someone]] with 2 day working experience is [[shooting]] with it, music is ...i don't know..is there some music in the movie???? i will not recommended this piece of sh.. to no one. It's just [[wasting]] about 4 hours in front of the TV or whatever.... I can't figure out how can someone rate this movie more than 3 stars. DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER Don't watch please. Save yourself from this misery of "[[movie]]" i [[believing]] that's this is [[scary]] produced and directed movie. Benicio Del Toro shouldn't [[collaboration]] in production of [[theater]], he should put accent on his acting and that's it. [[Stevens]] Soderbergh missed the whole point of the idea about revolution, about it's ideals, and most important about life of Che Guevara and so on. [[Cameras]] is [[scary]], like [[person]] with 2 day working experience is [[gunfire]] with it, music is ...i don't know..is there some music in the movie???? i will not recommended this piece of sh.. to no one. It's just [[losing]] about 4 hours in front of the TV or whatever.... I can't figure out how can someone rate this movie more than 3 stars. DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER....DISASTER Don't watch please. Save yourself from this misery of "[[kino]]" --------------------------------------------- Result 4244 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (77%)]] This film is awful. Not offensive but [[extremely]] [[predictable]]. The movie follows the life of a small town family in the mid-60's. The father, the principal at the school, is going through a mid-life crisis. Enter a pretty teacher from the big city who starts challenging her students' minds with some thought-provoking stuff, like think for yourself. The principal doesn't agree with her teaching but she is pretty. You can connect the dots. His teenage daughter (Winona Ryder wannabe Tara Frederick) is fed up with the small town lifestyle and wants to live. She gets some bad advice, hangs out with some bad boys and apparently family planning wasn't being taught at her school. Shocking! Seeing that director Paul Shapiro has mainly worked in TV, this movie plays like a more adult version of an after-school special or a very special episode of one of the more mundane sitcoms. This film is awful. Not offensive but [[vitally]] [[foreseeable]]. The movie follows the life of a small town family in the mid-60's. The father, the principal at the school, is going through a mid-life crisis. Enter a pretty teacher from the big city who starts challenging her students' minds with some thought-provoking stuff, like think for yourself. The principal doesn't agree with her teaching but she is pretty. You can connect the dots. His teenage daughter (Winona Ryder wannabe Tara Frederick) is fed up with the small town lifestyle and wants to live. She gets some bad advice, hangs out with some bad boys and apparently family planning wasn't being taught at her school. Shocking! Seeing that director Paul Shapiro has mainly worked in TV, this movie plays like a more adult version of an after-school special or a very special episode of one of the more mundane sitcoms. --------------------------------------------- Result 4245 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] "I went to the movies, to see 'Beat Street' / it wasn't bad, it was kinda' neat / 'Krush Groove' was a flick, that I didn't mind / but when it came to 'Rappin', I drew the line." Word to your [[mother]].

Want me to stop?

That's just a small sample of the stupa-fly style of rhymin' on [[display]] in this [[waste]] of [[film]] and [[location]] [[permits]]. This movie is [[seriously]] wack (thats 80s-speak for just f*cking [[awful]]). As an emcee, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of an [[actor]]. And as an actor, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of a bodybuilder.

[[Any]] [[film]] calling itself "Rappin'" had better deliver at that genre's highest standard of the time. [[So]] why were 6 year [[olds]] rolling in the [[aisles]], [[even]] back in the day when standards were so knee-high-to-"Webster"-low? [[Because]] this rap is [[weak]]. [[So]] [[weak]] that not [[even]] B.[[E]].[[T]]. or [[Comedy]] Central will touch it with a 10-foot gold-rope [[chain]].

Blondie's "[[Rapture]]" is def poetry next to this bit of [[Dr]]. Suess in the [[hood]]. So don't be a boobie, [[avoid]] this [[movie]]!

"I went to the movies, to see 'Beat Street' / it wasn't bad, it was kinda' neat / 'Krush Groove' was a flick, that I didn't mind / but when it came to 'Rappin', I drew the line." Word to your [[madre]].

Want me to stop?

That's just a small sample of the stupa-fly style of rhymin' on [[exhibitions]] in this [[wastes]] of [[kino]] and [[placements]] [[permit]]. This movie is [[earnestly]] wack (thats 80s-speak for just f*cking [[fearsome]]). As an emcee, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of an [[protagonist]]. And as an actor, Mario Van Peebles is one hell of a bodybuilder.

[[Everything]] [[movies]] calling itself "Rappin'" had better deliver at that genre's highest standard of the time. [[Thereby]] why were 6 year [[years]] rolling in the [[corridors]], [[yet]] back in the day when standards were so knee-high-to-"Webster"-low? [[Since]] this rap is [[fragile]]. [[Consequently]] [[fragile]] that not [[yet]] B.[[f]].[[ton]]. or [[Charade]] Central will touch it with a 10-foot gold-rope [[string]].

Blondie's "[[Ecstasy]]" is def poetry next to this bit of [[Doktor]]. Suess in the [[hod]]. So don't be a boobie, [[shirk]] this [[cinematography]]!

--------------------------------------------- Result 4246 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] I don't buy kung fu movies for a [[plot]]. I buy them for fight scenes. A bad plot can be forgiven for excellent fight scenes, but not the other way around.

The story was decent, but [[moved]] too [[slowly]] for my tastes. There were about 3 or 4 mediocre fight scenes [[throughout]], lasting only a couple of [[minutes]] apiece. The last fight was a bit [[longer]], but by that point i was so [[bored]] i didn't [[even]] pay attention to it. I don't buy kung fu movies for a [[intrigue]]. I buy them for fight scenes. A bad plot can be forgiven for excellent fight scenes, but not the other way around.

The story was decent, but [[relocated]] too [[softly]] for my tastes. There were about 3 or 4 mediocre fight scenes [[during]], lasting only a couple of [[mins]] apiece. The last fight was a bit [[most]], but by that point i was so [[drilled]] i didn't [[yet]] pay attention to it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4247 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] This was [[truly]] [[dreadful]]! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly acted, and was like an amateur remake of evil dead but not nearly as good.

It took all my tenacity to make it through this one, it's a good job I didn't have to visit the [[toilet]] else I doubt I would have [[come]] back! This one makes Hammer House of Horror look like a big screen Hollywood epic.

The only [[value]] to this movie was the never ending supply of beautiful women. Not a bad one among them!

If you want to letch with your friends after a night on the beer then this one's for you ... else avoid it like the plague! This was [[truthfully]] [[scary]]! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly acted, and was like an amateur remake of evil dead but not nearly as good.

It took all my tenacity to make it through this one, it's a good job I didn't have to visit the [[lavatories]] else I doubt I would have [[arriving]] back! This one makes Hammer House of Horror look like a big screen Hollywood epic.

The only [[valuing]] to this movie was the never ending supply of beautiful women. Not a bad one among them!

If you want to letch with your friends after a night on the beer then this one's for you ... else avoid it like the plague! --------------------------------------------- Result 4248 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] What a dreadful [[film]] this is. The only [[reason]] you [[would]] [[want]] to sit through this [[mess]] is the pleasurable [[sight]] of Miss Eleniak. The [[painful]] overacting of Mr McNamara, which [[became]] [[embarrassing]] at times, [[ruined]] what might have been a [[reasonable]] film if the correct [[actors]] had been cast. [[Mr]] McNamara is no [[Tom]] Cruise, the [[actor]] he [[obviously]] wants to be. What a dreadful [[kino]] this is. The only [[cause]] you [[could]] [[wish]] to sit through this [[chaos]] is the pleasurable [[vision]] of Miss Eleniak. The [[hurtful]] overacting of Mr McNamara, which [[came]] [[ashamed]] at times, [[obliterated]] what might have been a [[rational]] film if the correct [[players]] had been cast. [[Hannes]] McNamara is no [[Tum]] Cruise, the [[protagonist]] he [[definitely]] wants to be. --------------------------------------------- Result 4249 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I Last night I had the pleasure of seeing the movie BUG at the Florida Film Festival and [[let]] me say it was a real [[treat]]. The Directors were there and they did a Q&A afterwards. The movie begins with a young boy smashing a roach beneath his foot, a man who is nearby parking his car sees the young boy smash it and runs to ask the kid `why? why? did he have to kill that living creature?' in his rush to counsel the youth in the error of his ways, the man neglects to pay his parking meter, which starts off a whole chain of events involving people not at all related to him, some funny, some sad, and some ridiculous. This movie has a lot of laughs, Lots! and there are many actors which you will recognize. The main actors who stood out in the film for me were: Jamie Kennedy (from his comedy show the Jamie Kennedy Experiment, playing a fortune cookie writer; John Carroll Lynch (who plays Drew's cross dressing brother on the Drew Carey show) playing the animal loving guy who just can't get it right; Brian Cox (The original Hannibal Lecter in Manhunter) playing the germaphobic owner of a Donut and Chinese Food Take Out joint. There is one line where Cox tells his chef to wash off some pigs blood that is on the sidewalk by saying "clean up that death" which is quite funny mostly because of Cox's "obsessed with germs" delivery. The funniest moment in the movie comes when a young boy imitates his father, whom he heard earlier in the day yell out `MotherF*****', while in the classroom. Another extremely funny and surreal scene is when Trudie Styler (Mrs. Sting herself) and another actor perform a scene on a cable access show, from the film the boy in the plastic bubble. The actor who hosts the cable access show is just amazing he is so serious and deadpan and his performance as both the doctor and the boy in the plastic bubble is enthralling. There are many other fine and funny actors and actresses in this film and having shot it in less than a month with a budget of just about $1 million, the directors Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi (who are screenwriters by trade, having written crazy/beautiful and the upcoming Tuxedo starring Jackie Chan) have achieved a film that is great, funny and endearing. I Last night I had the pleasure of seeing the movie BUG at the Florida Film Festival and [[leaving]] me say it was a real [[processing]]. The Directors were there and they did a Q&A afterwards. The movie begins with a young boy smashing a roach beneath his foot, a man who is nearby parking his car sees the young boy smash it and runs to ask the kid `why? why? did he have to kill that living creature?' in his rush to counsel the youth in the error of his ways, the man neglects to pay his parking meter, which starts off a whole chain of events involving people not at all related to him, some funny, some sad, and some ridiculous. This movie has a lot of laughs, Lots! and there are many actors which you will recognize. The main actors who stood out in the film for me were: Jamie Kennedy (from his comedy show the Jamie Kennedy Experiment, playing a fortune cookie writer; John Carroll Lynch (who plays Drew's cross dressing brother on the Drew Carey show) playing the animal loving guy who just can't get it right; Brian Cox (The original Hannibal Lecter in Manhunter) playing the germaphobic owner of a Donut and Chinese Food Take Out joint. There is one line where Cox tells his chef to wash off some pigs blood that is on the sidewalk by saying "clean up that death" which is quite funny mostly because of Cox's "obsessed with germs" delivery. The funniest moment in the movie comes when a young boy imitates his father, whom he heard earlier in the day yell out `MotherF*****', while in the classroom. Another extremely funny and surreal scene is when Trudie Styler (Mrs. Sting herself) and another actor perform a scene on a cable access show, from the film the boy in the plastic bubble. The actor who hosts the cable access show is just amazing he is so serious and deadpan and his performance as both the doctor and the boy in the plastic bubble is enthralling. There are many other fine and funny actors and actresses in this film and having shot it in less than a month with a budget of just about $1 million, the directors Phil Hay and Matt Manfredi (who are screenwriters by trade, having written crazy/beautiful and the upcoming Tuxedo starring Jackie Chan) have achieved a film that is great, funny and endearing. --------------------------------------------- Result 4250 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (95%)]] The first look on the cover of this picture, it looks like a good rock n roll movie. But don't let the cover fool you, or the fact that Alice Cooper and Blondie is in it. The storyline is just [[horrible]], and so is the acting. Plain and simple: [[BAD]]

It's not a movie about a roadie, its just a thin love story, so [[awful]] that you see right through it. The only [[good]] thing about this movie, is the soundtrack.Some good songs, and that is why I give 2 out of 10. If it wasn't for the music, it would of been 0 out of 10. Meat Loaf is a horrible actor(at least he was in 1980), and the girl who plays the groupie isn't even good looking! This movie was a huge disappointment for me, because it makes a lot of good [[promises]]. The first look on the cover of this picture, it looks like a good rock n roll movie. But don't let the cover fool you, or the fact that Alice Cooper and Blondie is in it. The storyline is just [[scary]], and so is the acting. Plain and simple: [[MALA]]

It's not a movie about a roadie, its just a thin love story, so [[scary]] that you see right through it. The only [[buena]] thing about this movie, is the soundtrack.Some good songs, and that is why I give 2 out of 10. If it wasn't for the music, it would of been 0 out of 10. Meat Loaf is a horrible actor(at least he was in 1980), and the girl who plays the groupie isn't even good looking! This movie was a huge disappointment for me, because it makes a lot of good [[commitment]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4251 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] In 2054 Paris, Avalon, a computer generated system, controls the [[city]] and when a young woman is kidnapped, detective Karas (Craig) [[must]] go against Avalon to [[find]] her.

Renaissance is a [[splendid]] [[blend]] of film making mixed with a conceptual futuristic narrative that [[lights]] up the screen in a shocking manor with a [[noir]] themed ideology and conceptual montages that should delight many.

Pixar are the [[animation]] masters. Their numerous Oscar winning [[films]] are endless from the charming [[Toy]] [[Story]] to the mystifying Wall-E and so any [[company]] or [[director]] has a real challenge to knock them of their perch. Renaissance isn't a film aimed for the young audience [[though]], and like 2007's Persepolis, [[brings]] a [[strong]] and [[mature]] [[approach]] to the [[genre]] of animation to [[make]] an [[older]] and more [[challenging]] [[film]] to its [[targeted]] [[older]] [[generation]].

In 2005 Robert [[Rodriguez]] [[released]] a shockingly brilliant [[noir]] Sin City that [[shook]] up the [[whole]] usage of green screen with a [[splendid]] balance of filming in black and white with the [[odd]] spurts of [[colour]] and a year [[later]], [[Christian]] Volckman [[took]] up a [[similar]] [[approach]] with this equally visually [[masterful]] [[stroke]] of film making.

Volckman's picture however is a full on animation but it doesn't half look realistic for the majority of it's strong 1 hour and 40 minutes of running time. The faces of the character's are well portrayed and in particular, this film has got to be the [[finest]] ever for the usage of shadow. The fact we never know if its night or day is irrelevant when simply gazing into the stony faces as the shadows blend across their expressions. It is almost a [[clever]] [[use]] of pathetic fallacy, and is [[finely]] directed [[also]].

For [[anyone]] who has [[seen]] Persepolis you will have come to the [[conclusion]] it is one of the [[finest]] [[directed]] animations ever screened for the [[simple]] but [[highly]] conceptual artistic [[style]] by Marjane Satrapi

[[Renaissance]] is equally on terms with that [[picture]] and in [[many]] [[instances]] rivals it with stronger graphics and a darker tone to reflect the mood. One scene in particular when Karas appears out of darkness is [[beautifully]] shot.

The narrative revolves around a stubborn and nosey political government who keeps tabs on every citizen. The running of Paris is down to the mysterious Avalon which we don't see nearly enough to get an essence of its true dominance. Renaissance is controlling the narrative around a tired cop's attempts to rescue the mysterious woman, and then we see Craig's tired and boring cop attempt a rescue whilst battling with other elements. There are many things wrong with the scripting, not to mention the tired exasperated cop routine is now old, but there is plenty of dashing adrenaline and springy banter between characters to keep it alive right till a wonderfully shot shocking last couple of stages. In 2054 Paris, Avalon, a computer generated system, controls the [[town]] and when a young woman is kidnapped, detective Karas (Craig) [[ought]] go against Avalon to [[unearthed]] her.

Renaissance is a [[grandiose]] [[amalgam]] of film making mixed with a conceptual futuristic narrative that [[lighting]] up the screen in a shocking manor with a [[negro]] themed ideology and conceptual montages that should delight many.

Pixar are the [[animate]] masters. Their numerous Oscar winning [[cinematography]] are endless from the charming [[Toys]] [[Narratives]] to the mystifying Wall-E and so any [[enterprise]] or [[headmaster]] has a real challenge to knock them of their perch. Renaissance isn't a film aimed for the young audience [[if]], and like 2007's Persepolis, [[puts]] a [[forceful]] and [[adult]] [[approaches]] to the [[gender]] of animation to [[deliver]] an [[oldest]] and more [[tough]] [[movie]] to its [[targeting]] [[oldest]] [[jill]].

In 2005 Robert [[Martinez]] [[publicized]] a shockingly brilliant [[negro]] Sin City that [[rattled]] up the [[total]] usage of green screen with a [[awesome]] balance of filming in black and white with the [[weird]] spurts of [[dye]] and a year [[thereafter]], [[Christians]] Volckman [[taken]] up a [[equivalent]] [[approaching]] with this equally visually [[masterly]] [[apoplexy]] of film making.

Volckman's picture however is a full on animation but it doesn't half look realistic for the majority of it's strong 1 hour and 40 minutes of running time. The faces of the character's are well portrayed and in particular, this film has got to be the [[prettiest]] ever for the usage of shadow. The fact we never know if its night or day is irrelevant when simply gazing into the stony faces as the shadows blend across their expressions. It is almost a [[smarter]] [[utilise]] of pathetic fallacy, and is [[subtly]] directed [[similarly]].

For [[nobody]] who has [[watched]] Persepolis you will have come to the [[conclusions]] it is one of the [[meanest]] [[geared]] animations ever screened for the [[mere]] but [[eminently]] conceptual artistic [[styling]] by Marjane Satrapi

[[Resurrection]] is equally on terms with that [[photographing]] and in [[multiple]] [[example]] rivals it with stronger graphics and a darker tone to reflect the mood. One scene in particular when Karas appears out of darkness is [[amazingly]] shot.

The narrative revolves around a stubborn and nosey political government who keeps tabs on every citizen. The running of Paris is down to the mysterious Avalon which we don't see nearly enough to get an essence of its true dominance. Renaissance is controlling the narrative around a tired cop's attempts to rescue the mysterious woman, and then we see Craig's tired and boring cop attempt a rescue whilst battling with other elements. There are many things wrong with the scripting, not to mention the tired exasperated cop routine is now old, but there is plenty of dashing adrenaline and springy banter between characters to keep it alive right till a wonderfully shot shocking last couple of stages. --------------------------------------------- Result 4252 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] [[Obviously]], there wasn't a huge budget for this film which definitely hindered the production. But the [[story]] and ending were so brutal that they [[made]] up for a lot. I mean brutal on the level of Ju Dou and other ([[great]]) Chinese [[films]]. I [[first]] [[saw]] this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and begged God to forgive me for everything... [[Evidently]], there wasn't a huge budget for this film which definitely hindered the production. But the [[conte]] and ending were so brutal that they [[effected]] up for a lot. I mean brutal on the level of Ju Dou and other ([[large]]) Chinese [[kino]]. I [[firstly]] [[observed]] this when I was 14 years old, I ran home and begged God to forgive me for everything... --------------------------------------------- Result 4253 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] Once again, Disney manages to make a children's [[movie]] which [[totally]] [[ignores]] its background. About the only thing common with this and the original Gadget cartoons is the names. The most glaring errors are the characters - Penny does not have her book, Brain has been reduced from a character to a fancy prop, Dr Claw is more a show-off than an evil villain, etc. but there are more than that. The [[horrors]] [[start]] from the first [[minutes]] of the film - having Gadget as a security guard called John Brown doesn't help [[identifying]] him as the classic Inspector Gadget. And right in the beginning we see Disney's blatant attempt to turn every story ever into a love affair between a man and a woman - they introduce Brenda, who only serves to make this movie Disney-compatible. Add to this the fact that the "Claw" seen in this film and the classic Dr Claw are almost diagonally opposite and you'll see this is going to be nowhere near the original storyline. What would help would be a better storyline to replace it - but as you guessed, Disney failed in that too. The whole movie is just Gadget acting silly for silliness's sake and lusting after Brenda. As if to add insult to the injury, Disney introduced the "new" Gadgetmobile - it doesn't look, function or think like the old Gadgetmobile at all, it's just the canonical "comic relief" figure. Disney obviously recognised that the Gadget cartoons were a comedy, so they made the film a comedy too, but they took out all the clever running gags (like the assignment paper exploding in the Chief's face) and replaced them with Gadget being a moron, the Gadgetmobile being a wise-ass, and "Claw" showing off. Someone should tell Disney that "children's movie" doesn't imply "total lack of any brain usage". Gadget should be targeted for children of 10-12 years... not children of 10-12 months like this movie. Whatever this movie is supposed to be, it is NOT, repeat NOT, the real Inspector Gadget. Because I love the old Gadget, I hate this. Once again, Disney manages to make a children's [[cinema]] which [[perfectly]] [[forgets]] its background. About the only thing common with this and the original Gadget cartoons is the names. The most glaring errors are the characters - Penny does not have her book, Brain has been reduced from a character to a fancy prop, Dr Claw is more a show-off than an evil villain, etc. but there are more than that. The [[terrors]] [[initiating]] from the first [[mins]] of the film - having Gadget as a security guard called John Brown doesn't help [[detects]] him as the classic Inspector Gadget. And right in the beginning we see Disney's blatant attempt to turn every story ever into a love affair between a man and a woman - they introduce Brenda, who only serves to make this movie Disney-compatible. Add to this the fact that the "Claw" seen in this film and the classic Dr Claw are almost diagonally opposite and you'll see this is going to be nowhere near the original storyline. What would help would be a better storyline to replace it - but as you guessed, Disney failed in that too. The whole movie is just Gadget acting silly for silliness's sake and lusting after Brenda. As if to add insult to the injury, Disney introduced the "new" Gadgetmobile - it doesn't look, function or think like the old Gadgetmobile at all, it's just the canonical "comic relief" figure. Disney obviously recognised that the Gadget cartoons were a comedy, so they made the film a comedy too, but they took out all the clever running gags (like the assignment paper exploding in the Chief's face) and replaced them with Gadget being a moron, the Gadgetmobile being a wise-ass, and "Claw" showing off. Someone should tell Disney that "children's movie" doesn't imply "total lack of any brain usage". Gadget should be targeted for children of 10-12 years... not children of 10-12 months like this movie. Whatever this movie is supposed to be, it is NOT, repeat NOT, the real Inspector Gadget. Because I love the old Gadget, I hate this. --------------------------------------------- Result 4254 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] I really [[wanted]] to like this movie. It has a nice prison setting, conspiracy theories, bloodthirsty zombies, a perfectly hideous 80s-touch and it is a directorial effort by actor John Saxon, who also plays a bad (you guessed it) a bad guy. It reminds me of some (beloved) Italian horror flicks. But the direction is very [[wooden]] and there is no nightmarish/frightening moment in there. It just goes on and on and on, and then it (logically) has to [[end]]. More suspense and more daring [[visuals]] and its destiny as a cult classic [[would]] have been sealed. I really [[wanna]] to like this movie. It has a nice prison setting, conspiracy theories, bloodthirsty zombies, a perfectly hideous 80s-touch and it is a directorial effort by actor John Saxon, who also plays a bad (you guessed it) a bad guy. It reminds me of some (beloved) Italian horror flicks. But the direction is very [[wood]] and there is no nightmarish/frightening moment in there. It just goes on and on and on, and then it (logically) has to [[ending]]. More suspense and more daring [[picture]] and its destiny as a cult classic [[could]] have been sealed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4255 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] I [[know]] it is [[fashionable]] now to hate this [[movie]]. I have seen hundreds of spook films including he original 1963 Haunting as well as most of the Hammer films. This film is not [[restrained]] and does not hold back at all which is probably why so many modern viewers seemed not to like it. Yet many viewers can accept out of control films like Scream because knife killers are more easy to believe for most people than demons or ghosts. Actually this film had many great scenes and the acting and special effects were [[great]]. I have seen it 15 times now and it gets better every time. The director of this film has made a number of interesting and stylish films and was not trying for the type of realism of the 6th sense. The Haunting lets go and is certainly not boring. Perhaps this film might appeal more to John Carpenter fans but more of an traditional plot structure. The old Haunting was also a fine film from 1963. It was even more scary. See both and also The Innocents and The Legend of Hell House with Pamela Franklin. I [[savoir]] it is [[chic]] now to hate this [[flick]]. I have seen hundreds of spook films including he original 1963 Haunting as well as most of the Hammer films. This film is not [[constrained]] and does not hold back at all which is probably why so many modern viewers seemed not to like it. Yet many viewers can accept out of control films like Scream because knife killers are more easy to believe for most people than demons or ghosts. Actually this film had many great scenes and the acting and special effects were [[large]]. I have seen it 15 times now and it gets better every time. The director of this film has made a number of interesting and stylish films and was not trying for the type of realism of the 6th sense. The Haunting lets go and is certainly not boring. Perhaps this film might appeal more to John Carpenter fans but more of an traditional plot structure. The old Haunting was also a fine film from 1963. It was even more scary. See both and also The Innocents and The Legend of Hell House with Pamela Franklin. --------------------------------------------- Result 4256 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]] I [[enjoyed]] the first reviewer's comment far more than I did the film when I [[saw]] it at a second-run [[theatre]] in the [[early]] '80's. I was impressed then by the [[care]] [[taken]] to create [[costumes]] [[modelled]] so [[closely]] after the Tenniel drawings. But to me, the [[cast]] was largely [[squandered]], their [[personalities]] [[muffled]] by the masks, while the [[direction]] I [[think]] of as being [[unusually]] static, and the [[photography]] [[murky]]. The rating [[jotted]] down at the time was a nought, which [[means]] "not worth [[sitting]] through [[even]] once".

Still, I too would jump at a [[chance]] to have a second look. I [[adored]] the first reviewer's comment far more than I did the film when I [[witnessed]] it at a second-run [[cinema]] in the [[swift]] '80's. I was impressed then by the [[caring]] [[took]] to create [[suits]] [[modelling]] so [[intimately]] after the Tenniel drawings. But to me, the [[casting]] was largely [[wasted]], their [[personages]] [[nipped]] by the masks, while the [[orientation]] I [[believe]] of as being [[exceptionally]] static, and the [[images]] [[obscure]]. The rating [[scribbled]] down at the time was a nought, which [[method]] "not worth [[seated]] through [[yet]] once".

Still, I too would jump at a [[possibilities]] to have a second look. --------------------------------------------- Result 4257 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (92%)]] A heartwarming film. The [[usual]] [[superb]] acting by John [[Thaw]], who [[passed]] over [[recently]]. A [[man]] who was [[always]] so unassuming. He was one of Englands [[top]] 10 [[actors]] certainly of my [[time]].

He can be [[remembered]] for his [[famous]] role of [[Inspector]] Morse. As [[Jack]] Regan in the 1970's [[hit]] [[TV]] [[series]] 'the [[Sweeney]] and as a [[barrister]] in Kavanah [[QC]]. A [[must]] see for all the [[family]] and a [[great]] DVD for my [[collection]]. The [[filming]] will [[bring]] back a few [[memories]] for people who [[remember]] wartime [[Britain]] and [[certainly]] those who were [[evacuated]] out of London to [[escape]] the German [[bombings]]. The [[interaction]] between the two [[main]] [[characters]].Tom and the [[boy]] [[William]] was really well acted and [[true]] to the [[book]] by [[Michelle]] Magorian. A heartwarming film. The [[normal]] [[resplendent]] acting by John [[Melt]], who [[voted]] over [[newly]]. A [[dawg]] who was [[incessantly]] so unassuming. He was one of Englands [[superior]] 10 [[actresses]] certainly of my [[moment]].

He can be [[reminded]] for his [[renowned]] role of [[Detective]] Morse. As [[Jacque]] Regan in the 1970's [[pummeled]] [[TELEVISION]] [[serials]] 'the [[Sweeny]] and as a [[solicitor]] in Kavanah [[QUEBEC]]. A [[should]] see for all the [[familia]] and a [[large]] DVD for my [[collections]]. The [[photographing]] will [[bringing]] back a few [[reminiscences]] for people who [[reminisce]] wartime [[Uk]] and [[probably]] those who were [[evacuating]] out of London to [[flee]] the German [[bombarding]]. The [[interact]] between the two [[principal]] [[nature]].Tom and the [[guy]] [[Willem]] was really well acted and [[veritable]] to the [[books]] by [[Micheal]] Magorian. --------------------------------------------- Result 4258 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (63%)]] Some genre films need to be dressed up. This one was an exception. Taken on its own [[merit]], it's a dressed down version of the horror genre film. With minimal special effects, it manages to be a psychological study of sorts, with a simple yet existential theme - who gets hit by the bus, and why her? It's not a great film, [[yet]] because there is little contrived about it, the story [[works]]. Subtle, and all about the interactions of the characters. Actually, there is one contrivance in the opening scenes, but it may have been placed there to simply set the tone for what's to come. I very much appreciate the balance of male and female energy, and would not recommend this story to anyone interested in more than people reacting to a physical and psychological challenge. You will enjoy the film if you have some empathy, value the need for a bit of adventure in your life, and wonder "What would I do in this situation?" Some genre films need to be dressed up. This one was an exception. Taken on its own [[deserve]], it's a dressed down version of the horror genre film. With minimal special effects, it manages to be a psychological study of sorts, with a simple yet existential theme - who gets hit by the bus, and why her? It's not a great film, [[even]] because there is little contrived about it, the story [[cooperating]]. Subtle, and all about the interactions of the characters. Actually, there is one contrivance in the opening scenes, but it may have been placed there to simply set the tone for what's to come. I very much appreciate the balance of male and female energy, and would not recommend this story to anyone interested in more than people reacting to a physical and psychological challenge. You will enjoy the film if you have some empathy, value the need for a bit of adventure in your life, and wonder "What would I do in this situation?" --------------------------------------------- Result 4259 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (56%)]] --> [[Positive (86%)]] First of all, I saw this movie when I was 7 years old at a Christian Scholl I attended. Needless to say that I was scared out of mind. Not because it was scary but because the content.Cmon...I was 7. Anyway, the cinematography was pretty bad and the acting was cheesy. That's very bad considering that I was only 7 and I remember that. The one thing that still haunts me is that [[dreadful]] song "I wish we all were ready" where the chorus ends with "...you were left behind". I wouldn't suggest seeing this one. I probably will, just for nostalgic reason. Besides, I'm sure the remake is much better. The best part of this movie though, has to be when everyone "dissapears"; vacant cars crashing, lawnmowers running on their own...pretty hilarious. First of all, I saw this movie when I was 7 years old at a Christian Scholl I attended. Needless to say that I was scared out of mind. Not because it was scary but because the content.Cmon...I was 7. Anyway, the cinematography was pretty bad and the acting was cheesy. That's very bad considering that I was only 7 and I remember that. The one thing that still haunts me is that [[horrendous]] song "I wish we all were ready" where the chorus ends with "...you were left behind". I wouldn't suggest seeing this one. I probably will, just for nostalgic reason. Besides, I'm sure the remake is much better. The best part of this movie though, has to be when everyone "dissapears"; vacant cars crashing, lawnmowers running on their own...pretty hilarious. --------------------------------------------- Result 4260 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (66%)]] I swear I could watch this movie every weekend of my life and never get sick of it! Every aspect of human emotion is captured so magically by the acting, the script, the direction, and the general feeling of this movie. It's been a long time [[since]] I saw a movie that actually made me choke from laughter, reflect from sadness, and feel each intended feeling that comes through in this most [[excellent]] [[work]]! We need MORE [[MOVIES]] [[like]] this!!! Mike Binder: are you listening??? I swear I could watch this movie every weekend of my life and never get sick of it! Every aspect of human emotion is captured so magically by the acting, the script, the direction, and the general feeling of this movie. It's been a long time [[because]] I saw a movie that actually made me choke from laughter, reflect from sadness, and feel each intended feeling that comes through in this most [[sumptuous]] [[cooperating]]! We need MORE [[FILMMAKING]] [[iike]] this!!! Mike Binder: are you listening??? --------------------------------------------- Result 4261 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (70%)]] Hamlet is by far my [[favorite]] of all of Shakespeare's works. Branaugh is one [[heck]] of an actor. His [[portrayal]] of this was just [[amazing]]. His soliloquies were [[breathtaking]]. [[For]] as long as it was it is rare for a [[film]] to hold my interest, [[however]] I was [[engrossed]] in this [[particular]] piece. I [[recommend]] this to anyone both [[fan]] of Shakespeare and those not so much. This has everything the modern [[world]] looks for in its [[films]]: [[murder]], [[betrayal]], and [[deceit]]. Not to [[knock]] Mel Gibson's version, but Branaughs [[touches]] the [[whole]] [[work]]. This [[leaves]] no stone unturned. When you [[finish]] the [[film]] it will feel as if you read the play yourself. [[Um]] how you [[say]] "two thumbs up". Hamlet is by far my [[preferable]] of all of Shakespeare's works. Branaugh is one [[devil]] of an actor. His [[portrait]] of this was just [[staggering]]. His soliloquies were [[astounding]]. [[In]] as long as it was it is rare for a [[kino]] to hold my interest, [[instead]] I was [[absorbed]] in this [[singular]] piece. I [[recommendation]] this to anyone both [[groupie]] of Shakespeare and those not so much. This has everything the modern [[monde]] looks for in its [[filmmaking]]: [[assassination]], [[disloyalty]], and [[hoax]]. Not to [[patting]] Mel Gibson's version, but Branaughs [[afflicts]] the [[total]] [[cooperating]]. This [[sheets]] no stone unturned. When you [[finishes]] the [[kino]] it will feel as if you read the play yourself. [[Hmm]] how you [[says]] "two thumbs up". --------------------------------------------- Result 4262 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Florence Chadwick was [[actually]] the far more [[accomplished]] [[swimmer]], of course. She [[swam]] the English [[Channel]] both directions. She [[swam]] from Catalina [[Island]] to the California [[coast]]. Marilyn Bell's is a [[sweet]] [[story]], but the usual glorification of us [[Canadians]] in the [[face]] of a superior world. Another sample of our inferiority [[complex]]. Our political system [[works]] [[pretty]] well and the [[health]] system [[allows]] people not to [[die]] in [[hospital]] [[lobbies]]. That's [[pretty]] good. Better than [[Lebanon]]. What should we do about hockey [[though]]...? And curling. The [[notion]] of [[calling]] this a [[sport]], of its [[inclusion]] in the [[Olympics]]...! [[ah]], but we digress... Florence Chadwick was [[indeed]] the far more [[completed]] [[swimming]], of course. She [[swimming]] the English [[Chanel]] both directions. She [[swimming]] from Catalina [[Isla]] to the California [[ribs]]. Marilyn Bell's is a [[sugary]] [[saga]], but the usual glorification of us [[Canadiens]] in the [[confronting]] of a superior world. Another sample of our inferiority [[difficult]]. Our political system [[collaborating]] [[belle]] well and the [[gesundheit]] system [[allowed]] people not to [[decease]] in [[clinic]] [[lobbyists]]. That's [[quite]] good. Better than [[Beirut]]. What should we do about hockey [[if]]...? And curling. The [[concepts]] of [[telephoning]] this a [[sporting]], of its [[insertion]] in the [[Olympic]]...! [[ooh]], but we digress... --------------------------------------------- Result 4263 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] As [[noted]] by other [[reviewers]] this is one of the [[best]] Tarzan movies. Unlike others however, I like the beginning of the film as it [[feels]] like a pretty [[accurate]] depiction of what a trading post [[must]] have been like. Plus the [[exposition]] is needed so we know why [[Harry]] [[wants]] to go back into the jungle. [[In]] addition the beginning of the [[film]] contains one of the most [[thrilling]] and [[terrifying]] [[chase]] [[sequences]] ever made.This [[occurs]] when Harry's safari group has to outrun a [[tribe]] of cannibals. The pre-censorship [[production]] [[values]] [[add]] a [[lot]] of [[realism]], [[genuinely]] depicting the terrible dangers that [[awaited]] Europeans going into the jungle. The film also offers, though perhaps antecedently, an accurate account of how horribly treated the native Africans were by their white employers. In addition sexy Jane, thousands of elephants , some great sets and two chetas! Not to be [[missed]] an adventure classic. As [[indicated]] by other [[testers]] this is one of the [[optimum]] Tarzan movies. Unlike others however, I like the beginning of the film as it [[deems]] like a pretty [[exact]] depiction of what a trading post [[ought]] have been like. Plus the [[displaying]] is needed so we know why [[Harri]] [[desires]] to go back into the jungle. [[During]] addition the beginning of the [[filmmaking]] contains one of the most [[excite]] and [[alarming]] [[hunting]] [[sequence]] ever made.This [[emerges]] when Harry's safari group has to outrun a [[clan]] of cannibals. The pre-censorship [[productivity]] [[value]] [[inserting]] a [[batches]] of [[pragmatism]], [[actually]] depicting the terrible dangers that [[expects]] Europeans going into the jungle. The film also offers, though perhaps antecedently, an accurate account of how horribly treated the native Africans were by their white employers. In addition sexy Jane, thousands of elephants , some great sets and two chetas! Not to be [[flunked]] an adventure classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 4264 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (55%)]] Criminals Perry Smith and Richard "Dick" Hickock believe Mr. Clutter of Holcomb, Kansas keeps a large supply of cash on-hand in a safe.On November 15, 1959 at two a.m. they end up murdering Mr. and Mrs. Clutter and their teenage son and daughter.After a little police investigation the two men are found and sentenced to be hanged.[[In]] Cold Blood (1967) is directed by Richard [[Brooks]].Now, I haven't read the Truman Capote novel this movie is based on, so I can't make any [[comparisons]].The movie does a [[brilliant]] job telling of those horrific events that actually took place.Robert Blake is excellent as Perry.Of course, Blake had the murder case of his own a few years back, being accused of murdering his wife.He's free now, but we still don't know the truth.What ever that may be, he's still a very fine actor.Scott Wilson does remarkable job as Hickock.John Forsythe is terrific as Alvin Dewey.Paul Stewart is very good as Jensen.Jeff Corey is marvelous as Mr. Hickock.Same thing with Charles McGraw who plays Tex Smith.John McLiam portrays Herbert Clutter, Ruth Storey is his wife Bonnie, Brenda Currin is the daughter Nancy and Paul Hough is the son Kenyon.Great job by each of them.There is much to remember from this film.Let's start from the lighter side.It's pretty great when Perry wants to go hunting for gold in Mexico and says to Hickock: Remember Bogart in Treasure of the Sierra Madre?" And Blake himself was in that movie as a boy! And it's a fun moment when they, giving a ride to that boy and his granddad, collect bottles and turn them in for refund money.Those darker moments are the most haunting ones.The flashback sequence, where you see the murders happening, is extremely terrifying.When Perry goes to kill the girl, Nancy last, and she says "Oh, please, don't"...The brutality of man, it's impossible to explain.Then the hanging scene.First there goes Hickock and then Perry, first talking to the minister.In the last image of the movie we see Perry hitting the end of the rope.Sure movies,and books may try to sympathize these villains.Especially Perry's character is someone you could feel sorry for.He thinks of his mom, and dad who he hates, but still loves.But it doesn't change the fact both of these men these actors portray are brutal murderers, who don't feel sorry for anybody.They go to this house and murder an entire family, in cold blood.How could you sympathize these people? Criminals Perry Smith and Richard "Dick" Hickock believe Mr. Clutter of Holcomb, Kansas keeps a large supply of cash on-hand in a safe.On November 15, 1959 at two a.m. they end up murdering Mr. and Mrs. Clutter and their teenage son and daughter.After a little police investigation the two men are found and sentenced to be hanged.[[Among]] Cold Blood (1967) is directed by Richard [[Creek]].Now, I haven't read the Truman Capote novel this movie is based on, so I can't make any [[comparison]].The movie does a [[sumptuous]] job telling of those horrific events that actually took place.Robert Blake is excellent as Perry.Of course, Blake had the murder case of his own a few years back, being accused of murdering his wife.He's free now, but we still don't know the truth.What ever that may be, he's still a very fine actor.Scott Wilson does remarkable job as Hickock.John Forsythe is terrific as Alvin Dewey.Paul Stewart is very good as Jensen.Jeff Corey is marvelous as Mr. Hickock.Same thing with Charles McGraw who plays Tex Smith.John McLiam portrays Herbert Clutter, Ruth Storey is his wife Bonnie, Brenda Currin is the daughter Nancy and Paul Hough is the son Kenyon.Great job by each of them.There is much to remember from this film.Let's start from the lighter side.It's pretty great when Perry wants to go hunting for gold in Mexico and says to Hickock: Remember Bogart in Treasure of the Sierra Madre?" And Blake himself was in that movie as a boy! And it's a fun moment when they, giving a ride to that boy and his granddad, collect bottles and turn them in for refund money.Those darker moments are the most haunting ones.The flashback sequence, where you see the murders happening, is extremely terrifying.When Perry goes to kill the girl, Nancy last, and she says "Oh, please, don't"...The brutality of man, it's impossible to explain.Then the hanging scene.First there goes Hickock and then Perry, first talking to the minister.In the last image of the movie we see Perry hitting the end of the rope.Sure movies,and books may try to sympathize these villains.Especially Perry's character is someone you could feel sorry for.He thinks of his mom, and dad who he hates, but still loves.But it doesn't change the fact both of these men these actors portray are brutal murderers, who don't feel sorry for anybody.They go to this house and murder an entire family, in cold blood.How could you sympathize these people? --------------------------------------------- Result 4265 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] One of my [[favorite]] films for a number of [[years]] was "Last Action Hero"; unfortunately, Arnold Schwarznegger [[decided]] to spoil my fun by becoming a corrupt scumbag politician; so now I can't bear any film he may had a hand in.

The Adventures of Jake Speed actually toys with some [[themes]] similar to those in Last...Hero; so I was [[pleased]] to [[find]] it on DVD, so I could watch these [[themes]] [[played]] out so well.

Despite the "plot-within-the-plot" involving white [[slavery]] during an African nation's civil war, this is not an action [[movie]]. The plot that the "plot-within-a-plot" is within, is actually about a question that the [[film]] has no [[intention]] to resolve: Is Jake [[Speed]] a [[real]] [[person]] that is [[helping]] the [[heroine]] save her sister from the white-slave [[trader]]; or is he actually a fictional [[character]] (which [[means]] that the [[heroine]] has somehow entered the universe that [[really]] only [[exists]] in a [[series]] of pulp novels)? I [[suggest]] that this is not all that [[clearly]] [[defined]] in the [[film]], and that Wayne Crawford and Andrew [[Lane]] are [[perfectly]] aware of this. The [[film]] [[thus]] becomes a [[presentation]] of what [[audiences]] [[may]] [[want]] from such a [[fictional]] "adventure-story" universe. That's actually a [[rich]] [[theme]], the potential heaviness of which is lightened by the film's amiable and campy sense of [[humor]].

There are [[weaknesses]] to the [[film]] - [[primarily]] it's [[cinematography]], which makes the [[film]] [[look]] [[like]] a TV [[show]]. And the pacing does sag on occasion.

But I really like these [[characters]], and I [[enjoy]] the [[adventure]] they [[live]], however silly. And I just find [[fascinating]] the [[idea]] that this adventure is actually taking place in a novel.

[[Holds]] up under [[multiple]] viewings -m good show! One of my [[preferential]] films for a number of [[olds]] was "Last Action Hero"; unfortunately, Arnold Schwarznegger [[opted]] to spoil my fun by becoming a corrupt scumbag politician; so now I can't bear any film he may had a hand in.

The Adventures of Jake Speed actually toys with some [[item]] similar to those in Last...Hero; so I was [[happier]] to [[unearth]] it on DVD, so I could watch these [[item]] [[effected]] out so well.

Despite the "plot-within-the-plot" involving white [[servitude]] during an African nation's civil war, this is not an action [[movies]]. The plot that the "plot-within-a-plot" is within, is actually about a question that the [[films]] has no [[purposes]] to resolve: Is Jake [[Accelerated]] a [[true]] [[individuals]] that is [[contributes]] the [[heroin]] save her sister from the white-slave [[shopkeeper]]; or is he actually a fictional [[traits]] (which [[method]] that the [[heroin]] has somehow entered the universe that [[truthfully]] only [[exist]] in a [[serials]] of pulp novels)? I [[proposes]] that this is not all that [[apparently]] [[defining]] in the [[cinema]], and that Wayne Crawford and Andrew [[Roads]] are [[entirely]] aware of this. The [[cinema]] [[accordingly]] becomes a [[submissions]] of what [[audience]] [[maggio]] [[wanted]] from such a [[fictitious]] "adventure-story" universe. That's actually a [[wealthy]] [[subject]], the potential heaviness of which is lightened by the film's amiable and campy sense of [[mood]].

There are [[failings]] to the [[cinema]] - [[basically]] it's [[film]], which makes the [[films]] [[glance]] [[iike]] a TV [[display]]. And the pacing does sag on occasion.

But I really like these [[nature]], and I [[enjoys]] the [[fling]] they [[vivo]], however silly. And I just find [[intriguing]] the [[concept]] that this adventure is actually taking place in a novel.

[[Hold]] up under [[various]] viewings -m good show! --------------------------------------------- Result 4266 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] My 3 year old [[loved]] it. I [[loved]] it, my wife loved it. So 10 out of 10 from our family. As for violence level? Not really that violent, mostly of the slap stick variety. Nobody truly dies, no gore, no blood, no torture, so it certainly is appropriate for children, much more so than many Saturday morning cartoons.

This [[movie]] really [[takes]] the [[idea]] of CG movies where it should go.

First of all [[beautiful]] graphics, textures [[wonderfully]] done, with [[true]] depth, not [[trying]] to be realistic, but [[forming]] an artistic [[whole]]. The moss on the stones, the rust on metal, the reliefs on the wood and the stone, everything adds to the whole.

Character modeling, unlike many [[contemporary]] CG [[movies]], is quirky, not cute, again within an artistic whole. The faces may look less malleable than in some other movies, but the characters are more puppet-like than human-like. I think that is a good thing, it lends veracity, how strangely it may sound, it is easier to suspend your disbelief.

Hair, fur, clothing, on par, at least with the likes of Pixar. [[Just]] [[note]] in the [[opening]] scenes when Lian-Chu is fighting the giant slug; Gwizdo is in front of some farmers, and all of them have detailed clothing which caused me to pause the movie just to [[admire]] it.

The setting. Far beyond the likes of Cars, and even Wall•E. Space has been done many times, but the fantasy environs of Dragon Hunters are only comparable with some scenes in Never Ending Story and Lord of the Rings, but again it is an artistic whole, and with lots of good ideas thrown about effortlessly. [[Magnificent]] vistas like the scene in Monsters Inc. where they ride all the doorways through its storage facility, or Wall•E where we see the immense [[trash]] towers he made, abound in this movie, [[everything]] is [[grand]], yet never dwelt [[upon]]; it is just the [[background]] the [[whole]] way! The interlude where they [[walk]] through the [[area]] with the [[fantastic]] [[falls]]. The Chinese wall, the [[islands]] floating in the sky. The [[Broccoli]] in the sky? That is [[truly]] where I [[believe]] CG should [[go]], make [[something]] which takes your [[breath]] away, and do it again and again.

The sound is good, the music is varied and not only epic, and thankfully without any vocals, and purely original for the movie.

Animation is quite good. Lending its inspiration to cartoons, especially some good use of stretch and squeeze. Sometimes not that realistic, but the 3d models are not realistic either.

Characterization is well done too. Lian-Chu the gentle and uncertain giant is gradually growing in confidence basking in the attention of little Zoé.

Gwizdo the wily manager of Lian-Chu redeems himself in the end, while Zoé isn't really changed at all, but who wants that cute child to change anyway? I at least loved Lian-Chu more than any other [[recent]] character since Sulley in Monsters Inc.

The [[internal]] strife in the group gets ironed out by the external pressures, just as it should in a proper fantasy story.

The story is mostly reminiscent of the Never Ending Story, especially how the world brakes apart. The monsters are pretty standard fare, except the flocking one. It lacks the emotional impact of Wall•E, which is the really strong point of that movie, but it is a much more fun ride, and lacks the annoying musical scene replaying in the former one, and has action from the first scene. This movie is what you want to watch for a fun and exciting time.

The whole movie has, as I've mentioned a whole vision, which seems to have been followed rigorously throughout.

It seems, that the setting is ready for more adventures, and I for one would hope so.

One side note, the French actor doing Lian-Chu sounded a bit like Jean Reno at first, but I'm happy it wasn't him, though he is one of my favorites. Nice to hear a new, to me, voice.

I give it a max rating, a bit surprised at the mediocre and low ratings by some; I have tried to address some of the concerns made by two of the reviews with the lowest vote. Approach this movie as an adventure, and as a European movie, not opposed to Hollywood, but different. My 3 year old [[worshiped]] it. I [[worshipped]] it, my wife loved it. So 10 out of 10 from our family. As for violence level? Not really that violent, mostly of the slap stick variety. Nobody truly dies, no gore, no blood, no torture, so it certainly is appropriate for children, much more so than many Saturday morning cartoons.

This [[cinematography]] really [[pick]] the [[think]] of CG movies where it should go.

First of all [[funky]] graphics, textures [[staggeringly]] done, with [[veritable]] depth, not [[attempt]] to be realistic, but [[train]] an artistic [[generals]]. The moss on the stones, the rust on metal, the reliefs on the wood and the stone, everything adds to the whole.

Character modeling, unlike many [[current]] CG [[filmmaking]], is quirky, not cute, again within an artistic whole. The faces may look less malleable than in some other movies, but the characters are more puppet-like than human-like. I think that is a good thing, it lends veracity, how strangely it may sound, it is easier to suspend your disbelief.

Hair, fur, clothing, on par, at least with the likes of Pixar. [[Jen]] [[memo]] in the [[initiation]] scenes when Lian-Chu is fighting the giant slug; Gwizdo is in front of some farmers, and all of them have detailed clothing which caused me to pause the movie just to [[behold]] it.

The setting. Far beyond the likes of Cars, and even Wall•E. Space has been done many times, but the fantasy environs of Dragon Hunters are only comparable with some scenes in Never Ending Story and Lord of the Rings, but again it is an artistic whole, and with lots of good ideas thrown about effortlessly. [[Awesome]] vistas like the scene in Monsters Inc. where they ride all the doorways through its storage facility, or Wall•E where we see the immense [[junk]] towers he made, abound in this movie, [[eveything]] is [[huge]], yet never dwelt [[afterward]]; it is just the [[context]] the [[overall]] way! The interlude where they [[walking]] through the [[zoning]] with the [[awesome]] [[drops]]. The Chinese wall, the [[archipelago]] floating in the sky. The [[Veggies]] in the sky? That is [[really]] where I [[think]] CG should [[going]], make [[somethin]] which takes your [[respiratory]] away, and do it again and again.

The sound is good, the music is varied and not only epic, and thankfully without any vocals, and purely original for the movie.

Animation is quite good. Lending its inspiration to cartoons, especially some good use of stretch and squeeze. Sometimes not that realistic, but the 3d models are not realistic either.

Characterization is well done too. Lian-Chu the gentle and uncertain giant is gradually growing in confidence basking in the attention of little Zoé.

Gwizdo the wily manager of Lian-Chu redeems himself in the end, while Zoé isn't really changed at all, but who wants that cute child to change anyway? I at least loved Lian-Chu more than any other [[latest]] character since Sulley in Monsters Inc.

The [[domestic]] strife in the group gets ironed out by the external pressures, just as it should in a proper fantasy story.

The story is mostly reminiscent of the Never Ending Story, especially how the world brakes apart. The monsters are pretty standard fare, except the flocking one. It lacks the emotional impact of Wall•E, which is the really strong point of that movie, but it is a much more fun ride, and lacks the annoying musical scene replaying in the former one, and has action from the first scene. This movie is what you want to watch for a fun and exciting time.

The whole movie has, as I've mentioned a whole vision, which seems to have been followed rigorously throughout.

It seems, that the setting is ready for more adventures, and I for one would hope so.

One side note, the French actor doing Lian-Chu sounded a bit like Jean Reno at first, but I'm happy it wasn't him, though he is one of my favorites. Nice to hear a new, to me, voice.

I give it a max rating, a bit surprised at the mediocre and low ratings by some; I have tried to address some of the concerns made by two of the reviews with the lowest vote. Approach this movie as an adventure, and as a European movie, not opposed to Hollywood, but different. --------------------------------------------- Result 4267 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] Eddie Murphy is one of the funniest comedians ever - [[probably]] THE funniest. Delirious is the best stand-up [[comedy]] I've ever seen and it is a must-have for anyone who loves a good laugh!! I've watched this movie hundreds of times and every time I see it - I still have side-splitting [[fun]]. This is [[definitely]] one for your video [[library]]. I [[guarantee]] that you will have to watch it several times in [[order]] to hear all the jokes because you will be laughing so much - that you will miss half of them! Delirious is [[hilarious]]!

Although there are a lot of funny comedians out there - after [[watching]] this stand-up comedy, most of them will seem like second-class citizens. If you have never seen it - get it, watch it - and you will love it!! It will make you holler!!! :-) Eddie Murphy is one of the funniest comedians ever - [[admittedly]] THE funniest. Delirious is the best stand-up [[travesty]] I've ever seen and it is a must-have for anyone who loves a good laugh!! I've watched this movie hundreds of times and every time I see it - I still have side-splitting [[droll]]. This is [[categorically]] one for your video [[bookstore]]. I [[ensured]] that you will have to watch it several times in [[orders]] to hear all the jokes because you will be laughing so much - that you will miss half of them! Delirious is [[droll]]!

Although there are a lot of funny comedians out there - after [[staring]] this stand-up comedy, most of them will seem like second-class citizens. If you have never seen it - get it, watch it - and you will love it!! It will make you holler!!! :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 4268 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] I am one of the biggest fans of silent comedians and have probably reviewed more Buster Keaton films for IMDb than any other person. Every film he made from the beginning of his career to the early 30s with only two exceptions have I reviewed, so you can tell I am a major fan. It's because of this that I [[found]] this episode so [[painful]] and hard to watch. I loved this man's [[films]] and kept thinking "Buster, how could you?!". Well, now that I think about it, I guess I can see why Buster Keaton starred in this god-awful episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. He'd lost much of his fortune after a messy divorce in the early 1930s and his film career as a leading man was long passed as well. Now, in the 1960s, Keaton needed the money and loved his resurgence in popularity so he whored himself out to anyone willing to pay--appearing in Beach films and this mess of an episode of a great series.

The biggest problem with the episode is that it is just terribly written and Buster deserved much better. The show is supposed to be funny but isn't and instead of a homage to silent films is just painful to watch--particularly with Keaton putting that stupid time travel helmet on as well as all the poorly executed slapstick. Do yourself a favor, SKIP THIS ONE--it's a pale imitation of the greatness that once was Keaton's career!!! I am one of the biggest fans of silent comedians and have probably reviewed more Buster Keaton films for IMDb than any other person. Every film he made from the beginning of his career to the early 30s with only two exceptions have I reviewed, so you can tell I am a major fan. It's because of this that I [[discoveries]] this episode so [[agonizing]] and hard to watch. I loved this man's [[film]] and kept thinking "Buster, how could you?!". Well, now that I think about it, I guess I can see why Buster Keaton starred in this god-awful episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE. He'd lost much of his fortune after a messy divorce in the early 1930s and his film career as a leading man was long passed as well. Now, in the 1960s, Keaton needed the money and loved his resurgence in popularity so he whored himself out to anyone willing to pay--appearing in Beach films and this mess of an episode of a great series.

The biggest problem with the episode is that it is just terribly written and Buster deserved much better. The show is supposed to be funny but isn't and instead of a homage to silent films is just painful to watch--particularly with Keaton putting that stupid time travel helmet on as well as all the poorly executed slapstick. Do yourself a favor, SKIP THIS ONE--it's a pale imitation of the greatness that once was Keaton's career!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4269 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] There can be no questions of [[spoilers]] for this [[movie]], the [[director]] beat us all too and spoiled this movie in oh so [[many]] [[ways]].

A [[blatant]] rip-off of stuff like Critters and Gremlins, this movie fails on so many levels to recapture the [[humour]] and [[horror]] of those better [[made]] [[films]]. It [[ends]] up a [[sleazy]] [[waste]] of time, where bad [[actors]] deliver bad [[dialogue]] in front of an [[idiot]] [[director]], who occasionally tosses stuffed [[toys]] at them. They wrestle with said [[toys]] in much the same [[manner]] as [[old]] Tarzan [[films]] [[used]] to [[use]] rubber [[crocodiles]], [[shaking]] them whilst [[screaming]] and [[trying]] their best to make it [[look]] [[slightly]] [[threatening]]. It's painful to watch, and not helped by the [[mental]] 80's [[fashions]] worn by the cast.

[[Basically]], some crazy [[little]] [[aliens]] who have been trapped by an aging [[security]] [[guard]] in a [[film]] [[lot]] [[finally]] [[get]] free after umpteen [[years]] [[confinement]], and begin to telepathically [[screw]] around with [[peoples]] [[minds]]. The [[guards]] [[new]] [[recruit]], the [[idiot]] who [[let]] them out [[despite]] repeated [[warnings]], [[gets]] his gang of 80's [[friends]] together and they go off and have minor adventures together while [[trying]] to [[recapture]] the Grem... Hobgoblins.

All [[life]] is here, with the gang consisting of a knucklehead jock, his 80's slut girlfriend, the 'hero's frigid and prissy girlfriend, and the young [[hero]], [[lacking]] in confidence and [[wishing]] his girlfriend would put out anyway.

First off [[comes]] the [[infamous]] rake fighting scene, where the ex-military jock [[shows]] how he was [[trained]] in the army to be a bully, poking the nerdy [[hero]] with the wrong [[end]] of a rake for what [[seems]] like hours. Then there's some [[running]] around, [[terminating]] in a [[real]] pie-fight [[style]] [[ending]] in a scuzzy [[nightclub]] with [[comedy]] hand-grenades blowing up everything except the people [[standing]] right next to them. [[Then]] the [[film]] sorta [[ends]], and alls well that ends well.

It's not. This is like watching a train [[wreck]], you [[cant]] take your eyes off it, it's so [[bad]]. [[Perfect]] fare for [[Mystery]] Science [[Theater]], but god-awful should you try to watch it [[alone]] and uncut. The Fashion [[Police]] still have a number of [[outstanding]] warrants for the cast, and I dare anyone not to laugh in outright [[derision]] at the rake fight. This scores 2 out of 10 at most, on a good day. There can be no questions of [[troublemakers]] for this [[cinematography]], the [[headmaster]] beat us all too and spoiled this movie in oh so [[countless]] [[shapes]].

A [[evident]] rip-off of stuff like Critters and Gremlins, this movie fails on so many levels to recapture the [[mood]] and [[terror]] of those better [[brought]] [[kino]]. It [[culminates]] up a [[squalid]] [[squandering]] of time, where bad [[players]] deliver bad [[talks]] in front of an [[silly]] [[headmaster]], who occasionally tosses stuffed [[toy]] at them. They wrestle with said [[playthings]] in much the same [[modes]] as [[longtime]] Tarzan [[kino]] [[uses]] to [[using]] rubber [[alligators]], [[shake]] them whilst [[cree]] and [[attempt]] their best to make it [[peek]] [[somewhat]] [[threatens]]. It's painful to watch, and not helped by the [[spiritual]] 80's [[fads]] worn by the cast.

[[Mostly]], some crazy [[small]] [[strangers]] who have been trapped by an aging [[insurance]] [[guarding]] in a [[movies]] [[batch]] [[eventually]] [[obtain]] free after umpteen [[olds]] [[internment]], and begin to telepathically [[bolt]] around with [[populations]] [[wits]]. The [[guardians]] [[newest]] [[recruited]], the [[jerk]] who [[leave]] them out [[though]] repeated [[warns]], [[receives]] his gang of 80's [[buddies]] together and they go off and have minor adventures together while [[tempting]] to [[regaining]] the Grem... Hobgoblins.

All [[lives]] is here, with the gang consisting of a knucklehead jock, his 80's slut girlfriend, the 'hero's frigid and prissy girlfriend, and the young [[heroin]], [[missing]] in confidence and [[wanting]] his girlfriend would put out anyway.

First off [[happens]] the [[notorious]] rake fighting scene, where the ex-military jock [[showcase]] how he was [[formed]] in the army to be a bully, poking the nerdy [[heroin]] with the wrong [[termination]] of a rake for what [[appears]] like hours. Then there's some [[run]] around, [[ending]] in a [[genuine]] pie-fight [[elegance]] [[ended]] in a scuzzy [[cabaret]] with [[humor]] hand-grenades blowing up everything except the people [[stands]] right next to them. [[Later]] the [[movies]] sorta [[end]], and alls well that ends well.

It's not. This is like watching a train [[ruining]], you [[havent]] take your eyes off it, it's so [[faulty]]. [[Impeccable]] fare for [[Puzzle]] Science [[Movies]], but god-awful should you try to watch it [[lonely]] and uncut. The Fashion [[Cops]] still have a number of [[admirable]] warrants for the cast, and I dare anyone not to laugh in outright [[contempt]] at the rake fight. This scores 2 out of 10 at most, on a good day. --------------------------------------------- Result 4270 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] Times are tough for Angel Town, gangs rule with an iron fist and for reasons mostly unknown (Mainly due to embarrassing writing) the gangs want a street kid, Martine to join the gangs, so they beat him up everyday. However due to the presence of an Olympic kick-boxer (Olivier "World's lamest actor" Gruner) named Jacques, hope is on the way. Angel Town is [[seriously]] one of the most inept message [[movies]] ever made (And I've seen my share) it seems to [[consist]] of the [[idea]] that all gang infested neighborhoods need, are French kick-boxers who can't act. [[Worst]] of all there are so [[many]] [[awkward]] moments it's just truly hilarious. [[Best]] of all comes from the [[exchange]] between Gruner and Aragon which [[basically]] sums up how [[ridiculous]] this [[thing]] is. To Wit: "You like the [[fighting]]? (Olivier [[grabs]] his [[Asian]] [[best]] friend in a headlock) I could kill him right? When I want him dead he dies! The reason why I don't want him dead is because i'm afraid of him, and I know that if I kill him his son and wife will kill me, that's why he doesn't die!"

Of course the fact that it's wrong to kill someone, let alone your best friend is of course left out of the equation. Odd.

However don't let me make this sound that I [[hated]] this movie, far from it, it's so [[terrible]] it's priceless. The [[biggest]] laughs come at the end in the [[disastrous]] finale which [[sees]] Grunner [[going]] one on one with gang-members who (the film's [[biggest]] logic [[gap]])[[decline]] the [[use]] of pistols. Also a [[handicapped]] [[Vietnam]] vet [[helps]] out by [[shooting]] his [[machine]] [[gun]] at the gangs, while Gruner kick-boxes the [[rest]]. All of this set to the [[sound]] of [[horrible]] "Mexican" accents and surreal energy that make this one memorable for fans of cinematic [[trash]] such as this.

The other treat about this movie, is that for some [[reason]] Olivier Gruner never [[attends]] [[college]] despite that's the main [[reason]] he's here in the states and not in [[France]] getting it on with his girlfriend ([[In]] a [[graveyard]] in the film's awkward [[beginning]]) [[Angel]] [[Town]] is without a doubt a [[failure]] on all [[conceivable]] levels but if you [[laugh]] at [[moronic]] martial arts movies with insane levels of action that make no sense on any level, this is the perfect movie for you. On the other hand make sure to down tequila, like the [[laughable]] opening song [[details]] "Ain't no mercy in Angel Town"

* out of 4-([[Bad]]) Times are tough for Angel Town, gangs rule with an iron fist and for reasons mostly unknown (Mainly due to embarrassing writing) the gangs want a street kid, Martine to join the gangs, so they beat him up everyday. However due to the presence of an Olympic kick-boxer (Olivier "World's lamest actor" Gruner) named Jacques, hope is on the way. Angel Town is [[earnestly]] one of the most inept message [[kino]] ever made (And I've seen my share) it seems to [[composed]] of the [[thoughts]] that all gang infested neighborhoods need, are French kick-boxers who can't act. [[Hardest]] of all there are so [[countless]] [[tricky]] moments it's just truly hilarious. [[Finest]] of all comes from the [[exchanges]] between Gruner and Aragon which [[principally]] sums up how [[nonsensical]] this [[stuff]] is. To Wit: "You like the [[struggling]]? (Olivier [[grab]] his [[Asiatic]] [[finest]] friend in a headlock) I could kill him right? When I want him dead he dies! The reason why I don't want him dead is because i'm afraid of him, and I know that if I kill him his son and wife will kill me, that's why he doesn't die!"

Of course the fact that it's wrong to kill someone, let alone your best friend is of course left out of the equation. Odd.

However don't let me make this sound that I [[hate]] this movie, far from it, it's so [[fearsome]] it's priceless. The [[greatest]] laughs come at the end in the [[tragic]] finale which [[believes]] Grunner [[go]] one on one with gang-members who (the film's [[greatest]] logic [[gaps]])[[falling]] the [[employs]] of pistols. Also a [[disabled]] [[Viet]] vet [[contributes]] out by [[shootout]] his [[machines]] [[guns]] at the gangs, while Gruner kick-boxes the [[remainder]]. All of this set to the [[sounds]] of [[spooky]] "Mexican" accents and surreal energy that make this one memorable for fans of cinematic [[litter]] such as this.

The other treat about this movie, is that for some [[motif]] Olivier Gruner never [[frequenting]] [[academies]] despite that's the main [[motif]] he's here in the states and not in [[Francia]] getting it on with his girlfriend ([[Onto]] a [[tombs]] in the film's awkward [[started]]) [[Angels]] [[Municipality]] is without a doubt a [[failing]] on all [[possible]] levels but if you [[laughter]] at [[asinine]] martial arts movies with insane levels of action that make no sense on any level, this is the perfect movie for you. On the other hand make sure to down tequila, like the [[absurd]] opening song [[clarification]] "Ain't no mercy in Angel Town"

* out of 4-([[Amiss]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 4271 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Following a car accident, a mad scientist(Jason Evers) keeps the head of his fiancee(Virgina Leith)alive. He then goes on the prowl looking for the perfect body to make her whole again. Pretty lame all the way around, nothing redeeming here. Also in the cast are: Leslie Daniels, Bonnie Sharie and Bruce Brighton. Someone should have helped put this one out of its misery. Let it die. --------------------------------------------- Result 4272 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] I rented this movie on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to [[rent]] it. It [[starts]] off pretty good, with the premise being that snuff films are being aired over cable. [[However]], the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the [[end]] of the movie really [[leaves]] you [[hanging]]. There are way too many unanswered questions. There was a great scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee. I rented this movie on DVD. I knew that the movie wouldn't live up to what it promised me on the back of the case, but once I saw that Leatherface (Gunnar Hansen) was in it, I had to [[rental]] it. It [[launch]] off pretty good, with the premise being that snuff films are being aired over cable. [[Instead]], the main character has nothing about her to make you feel sorry for her whatsoever, and the [[terminates]] of the movie really [[sheets]] you [[dangling]]. There are way too many unanswered questions. There was a great scene at the end that totally took me by surprise, but overall this is a very sub par movie, but I guess it was worth the $ 3.99 rental fee. --------------------------------------------- Result 4273 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (87%)]] Well executed old and very [[dark]] [[house]] horror. Good set-up which [[includes]] the character of [[Poe]], himself, [[alluding]] to the [[story]] in a London pub. [[Although]] from here it is [[pretty]] much the one guy who has [[taken]] the dare to [[visit]] the [[house]] on a particular [[night]] running from [[room]] to [[room]] either [[looking]] for or [[avoiding]] people, it is [[still]] most [[enjoyable]]. Plus we have the [[delightful]] and [[enigmatic]] [[Barbara]] Steele. There is some [[wooden]] dialogue and some [[unexplained]] bits and bobs but it is the [[super]] [[creepy]] atmosphere that is [[maintained]] [[throughout]], that and the [[super]] musical [[score]] that [[keep]] this one [[moving]] [[nicely]] along. [[DVD]] originates from [[US]] and has a few extras Well executed old and very [[blackness]] [[dwellings]] horror. Good set-up which [[involves]] the character of [[Boe]], himself, [[referring]] to the [[history]] in a London pub. [[While]] from here it is [[belle]] much the one guy who has [[took]] the dare to [[visited]] the [[households]] on a particular [[soir]] running from [[chambers]] to [[chambers]] either [[researching]] for or [[preventing]] people, it is [[however]] most [[agreeable]]. Plus we have the [[ravishing]] and [[intriguing]] [[Barbarian]] Steele. There is some [[timber]] dialogue and some [[impenetrable]] bits and bobs but it is the [[peachy]] [[frightening]] atmosphere that is [[maintain]] [[during]], that and the [[resplendent]] musical [[scoring]] that [[conserve]] this one [[shifting]] [[politely]] along. [[DVDS]] originates from [[AMERICANS]] and has a few extras --------------------------------------------- Result 4274 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (84%)]] A kind of road movie in old-fashioned trains in the Slowenian late summer province. At the beginning you see someone in underwear sewing trousers from black cloth, and when the same young man in his black trousers leaves the house with two suitcases, you see that the trousers-part is [[missing]] on a [[flag]] of mourning (appearently his father has died). In the [[train]] he meets a [[young]] [[lady]], and almost without [[words]], but [[many]] [[small]] [[gestures]], a [[wonderful]] love story begins. It's a [[somehow]] [[surreal]], very poetic, and a little bizarre [[movie]], with a [[lot]] of strange [[characters]] and strange incidents. [[Beautiful]] [[pictures]] with [[love]] for [[beautiful]] details. A kind of road movie in old-fashioned trains in the Slowenian late summer province. At the beginning you see someone in underwear sewing trousers from black cloth, and when the same young man in his black trousers leaves the house with two suitcases, you see that the trousers-part is [[faded]] on a [[pennant]] of mourning (appearently his father has died). In the [[forming]] he meets a [[youths]] [[dame]], and almost without [[expression]], but [[various]] [[scant]] [[flicks]], a [[glamorous]] love story begins. It's a [[somewhere]] [[surrealist]], very poetic, and a little bizarre [[flick]], with a [[batch]] of strange [[nature]] and strange incidents. [[Glamorous]] [[photo]] with [[iike]] for [[resplendent]] details. --------------------------------------------- Result 4275 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (71%)]] Put quite simply, this film is terrifying.

It starts off simply, looking like a study of a rebellious young girl and goes on to [[become]] a [[beautifully]] [[crafted]] horror film.

Don't expect gore, or zombies. This is psychological, and just as he would [[also]] do in Candyman, Bernard Rose [[manages]] to convey the horror that is not being believed.

Each time you watch this film, you realise more about what's happening, and about how the two worlds in this film interconnect.

Drawings have never been scarier. Put quite simply, this film is terrifying.

It starts off simply, looking like a study of a rebellious young girl and goes on to [[gotten]] a [[staggeringly]] [[drafted]] horror film.

Don't expect gore, or zombies. This is psychological, and just as he would [[further]] do in Candyman, Bernard Rose [[runs]] to convey the horror that is not being believed.

Each time you watch this film, you realise more about what's happening, and about how the two worlds in this film interconnect.

Drawings have never been scarier. --------------------------------------------- Result 4276 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] It was so [[terrible]]. It wasn't [[fun]] to watch at all. Even the scene where the [[girl]] is [[using]] a [[vibrator]], even that's not [[fun]] to watch in this [[movie]]. I say again, the scene where a [[girl]] is masturbating with a [[vibrator]] is not [[even]] [[fun]] to watch. [[Or]] [[maybe]] if that was the only [[part]] of the [[movie]] that you [[watched]], just [[girl]] on couch [[using]] a vibrator. Maybe they should have just released that one scene in [[theaters]], [[maybe]] then the [[movie]] [[would]] be [[enjoyable]] on a certain [[level]]. My [[advice]], [[fast]] forward to that point, watch it, rewind the [[movie]], watch it again, rewind, [[repeat]]. [[Maybe]] you [[could]] enjoy yourself for 2 hours that way. This movie ranks alongside I spit on your [[grave]] and Doom generation in the category of [[worst]] movies that I have ever seen. It was so [[scary]]. It wasn't [[droll]] to watch at all. Even the scene where the [[giri]] is [[used]] a [[vibrate]], even that's not [[droll]] to watch in this [[cinematography]]. I say again, the scene where a [[dame]] is masturbating with a [[vibrators]] is not [[yet]] [[droll]] to watch. [[Neither]] [[probably]] if that was the only [[parties]] of the [[films]] that you [[saw]], just [[giri]] on couch [[utilize]] a vibrator. Maybe they should have just released that one scene in [[teatro]], [[probably]] then the [[cinematography]] [[should]] be [[congenial]] on a certain [[levels]]. My [[counsel]], [[speedy]] forward to that point, watch it, rewind the [[films]], watch it again, rewind, [[repetition]]. [[Potentially]] you [[did]] enjoy yourself for 2 hours that way. This movie ranks alongside I spit on your [[tombs]] and Doom generation in the category of [[lousiest]] movies that I have ever seen. --------------------------------------------- Result 4277 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] This is a sad movie about this [[woman]] who [[thought]] her [[ex]] who she [[loved]] so much was probably [[dead]], but [[really]] his scientist [[dad]] had just put a spell on him to turn him into this really cute shark-guy. Kind of like in Beauty and the Beast. It [[could]] [[probably]] [[use]] a ballroom dance scene and [[maybe]] some singing candlesticks, but there are some pretty gross plants instead. They make this one girl really itchy, so she lets herself get eaten by the shark-guy instead of scratching through the whole [[movie]]. The scientist guy is a good dad who tries to reunite his fishy shark son with the woman he was engaged to, he even arranges for them to have private time for s-e-x, but the woman in this is a really shallow snob and thinks the shark-guy is an ugly, icky monster and wants nothing to do with him. She gave up on love! Just because he was a shark! I thought it was pretty sad how all she had to do was kiss him and he'd turn back to normal and they'd live happily ever after, but it's not that kind of movie. This is a sad movie about this [[mujer]] who [[ideology]] her [[exes]] who she [[worshiped]] so much was probably [[die]], but [[genuinely]] his scientist [[pop]] had just put a spell on him to turn him into this really cute shark-guy. Kind of like in Beauty and the Beast. It [[wo]] [[admittedly]] [[utilized]] a ballroom dance scene and [[probably]] some singing candlesticks, but there are some pretty gross plants instead. They make this one girl really itchy, so she lets herself get eaten by the shark-guy instead of scratching through the whole [[kino]]. The scientist guy is a good dad who tries to reunite his fishy shark son with the woman he was engaged to, he even arranges for them to have private time for s-e-x, but the woman in this is a really shallow snob and thinks the shark-guy is an ugly, icky monster and wants nothing to do with him. She gave up on love! Just because he was a shark! I thought it was pretty sad how all she had to do was kiss him and he'd turn back to normal and they'd live happily ever after, but it's not that kind of movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4278 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] As low budget indies go, you will [[usually]] find that you [[get]] what you [[pay]] for, and let me just say, I didn't [[pay]] much for "Frightworld"...

Writer / [[Director]]: David R. Williams brings us the story of an abandoned [[amusement]] park, besieged by the vengeful spirit of a slain serial killer. Not a bad [[premise]], but executed with a bevy of low budget mistakes. The camera work [[tries]] to be too cleaver for it's [[audience]], by [[constantly]] using [[shaky]] quick-cuts to cover the fact that they really have [[nothing]] gory or scary to [[show]] us. This [[becomes]] evident right off the bat, as we are [[introduced]] to the would-be [[killer]], and [[soon]] realize that the (acting) is the scariest [[thing]] happening... [[After]] a painfully [[long]] title sequence we are brought back to modern [[times]], yet the acting remains the same. "Frightworld" does [[generate]] some [[rather]] unique cinematography when showing [[scenery]] from [[inside]] the fun-house, but with an [[extremely]] [[long]] [[running]] [[time]], it can't [[save]] the [[film]] from it's below average indie [[hell]].

There is some mediocre nudity, but not much for [[gore]], which is [[usually]] the saving grace for these [[types]] of [[movies]].

[[Fans]] of [[really]] [[bad]] B-Movies might find [[something]] of interest here, [[otherwise]], don't [[spend]] a [[lot]] of cash. As low budget indies go, you will [[often]] find that you [[got]] what you [[payroll]] for, and let me just say, I didn't [[paid]] much for "Frightworld"...

Writer / [[Superintendent]]: David R. Williams brings us the story of an abandoned [[entertainment]] park, besieged by the vengeful spirit of a slain serial killer. Not a bad [[assumption]], but executed with a bevy of low budget mistakes. The camera work [[strive]] to be too cleaver for it's [[viewers]], by [[steadily]] using [[fragile]] quick-cuts to cover the fact that they really have [[anything]] gory or scary to [[exhibitions]] us. This [[becoming]] evident right off the bat, as we are [[made]] to the would-be [[shooter]], and [[swiftly]] realize that the (acting) is the scariest [[stuff]] happening... [[Upon]] a painfully [[lang]] title sequence we are brought back to modern [[time]], yet the acting remains the same. "Frightworld" does [[generating]] some [[quite]] unique cinematography when showing [[panorama]] from [[within]] the fun-house, but with an [[hugely]] [[lengthy]] [[run]] [[times]], it can't [[rescues]] the [[films]] from it's below average indie [[brothel]].

There is some mediocre nudity, but not much for [[gora]], which is [[traditionally]] the saving grace for these [[genre]] of [[films]].

[[Enthusiasts]] of [[genuinely]] [[amiss]] B-Movies might find [[somethin]] of interest here, [[alternatively]], don't [[spent]] a [[lots]] of cash. --------------------------------------------- Result 4279 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Viewers gushing over everything [[including]] the title sequence (now THAT is [[funny]]) [[would]] have us believe this is some [[sort]] of [[cinematic]] miracle, but, trust me folks, this is one of the most [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]] films you could ever see, and if you're not [[laughing]] at it five minutes in, I'd [[say]] you've lost your [[sense]] of [[humor]].

David Niven plays a doomed and bravado-besotted RAF [[pilot]] who [[somehow]] thinks it appropriate to engage an impressionable (female) [[air]] traffic controller in an emotional [[conversation]] about [[love]], just as he's plunging to his certain and [[fiery]] [[death]]. (Isn't it romantic...) Of course, he's spared by a quirk of metaphysical [[chance]], and [[washes]] up on the beach, just as this same [[air]] traffic [[controller]] is riding by on her [[bicycle]]. (They [[immediately]] clinch).

[[Looking]] past the [[bizarre]] homo-erotic subtexts, (so over the top you [[really]] [[need]] to refer to them as supertexts, from a [[naked]] boy sitting bare-butted in the sand playing the movie's twilight-zone-esquire theme on his little flute, to a celestial [[courier]] so campy/queen-y his makeup is caked on more thoroughly than the ladies'), the most [[bizarre]] aspects of the movie are how it weaves such bad caricatures of national and racial stereotypes into a convoluted attempt to argue some kind of point about the universal nature and power of love. We get it--fly boys like girls in skirts and heels, and girls like 'em back, and, apparently, all you have to do is cry a little to make it noble enough for your movie to get 10 stars on IMDb...

As for the quality of the production, the continuity/editing is poor enough to induce cringing, and the lighting is, perhaps, even worse than that, but you hardly have time to notice because the script is so bad. There are games played with Technicolor, (whatever passes for heaven is in black and white if you can figure out the sense in that), and foreshadowing, (so funny my fellow audience member who usually like movies like this actually cheered and laughed when then the doc's [[motorcycle]] finally [[ended]] up in a fiery wreck), and freeze-motion, (which is funniest of all because the female lead is so poor at standing still you know the stage hands were guffawing off camera).

The best shots are the early ones on the beach, but, after that, it's all downhill. The (moving like an escalator is [[moving]]) staircase is hardly the Odessa Steps, to say the least, and I'd really caution anyone from feeling like they'd have to see this lame attempt at movie-making on their account. The movie overall is bad enough to be funny, and that's about the best thing I can say for it. Viewers gushing over everything [[include]] the title sequence (now THAT is [[fun]]) [[ought]] have us believe this is some [[genre]] of [[cinematographic]] miracle, but, trust me folks, this is one of the most [[brazenly]] [[naughty]] films you could ever see, and if you're not [[laughs]] at it five minutes in, I'd [[says]] you've lost your [[feeling]] of [[mood]].

David Niven plays a doomed and bravado-besotted RAF [[flyboy]] who [[someplace]] thinks it appropriate to engage an impressionable (female) [[aeronautics]] traffic controller in an emotional [[debating]] about [[amour]], just as he's plunging to his certain and [[spirited]] [[killings]]. (Isn't it romantic...) Of course, he's spared by a quirk of metaphysical [[luck]], and [[rinse]] up on the beach, just as this same [[midair]] traffic [[supervisor]] is riding by on her [[bicycling]]. (They [[quickly]] clinch).

[[Searching]] past the [[surreal]] homo-erotic subtexts, (so over the top you [[genuinely]] [[gotta]] to refer to them as supertexts, from a [[nude]] boy sitting bare-butted in the sand playing the movie's twilight-zone-esquire theme on his little flute, to a celestial [[messengers]] so campy/queen-y his makeup is caked on more thoroughly than the ladies'), the most [[surreal]] aspects of the movie are how it weaves such bad caricatures of national and racial stereotypes into a convoluted attempt to argue some kind of point about the universal nature and power of love. We get it--fly boys like girls in skirts and heels, and girls like 'em back, and, apparently, all you have to do is cry a little to make it noble enough for your movie to get 10 stars on IMDb...

As for the quality of the production, the continuity/editing is poor enough to induce cringing, and the lighting is, perhaps, even worse than that, but you hardly have time to notice because the script is so bad. There are games played with Technicolor, (whatever passes for heaven is in black and white if you can figure out the sense in that), and foreshadowing, (so funny my fellow audience member who usually like movies like this actually cheered and laughed when then the doc's [[moto]] finally [[finalized]] up in a fiery wreck), and freeze-motion, (which is funniest of all because the female lead is so poor at standing still you know the stage hands were guffawing off camera).

The best shots are the early ones on the beach, but, after that, it's all downhill. The (moving like an escalator is [[relocating]]) staircase is hardly the Odessa Steps, to say the least, and I'd really caution anyone from feeling like they'd have to see this lame attempt at movie-making on their account. The movie overall is bad enough to be funny, and that's about the best thing I can say for it. --------------------------------------------- Result 4280 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] There's only one [[thing]] I'm going to say about cat in the hat...as a [[KIDS]] movie and a good [[comedy]] [[movie]] it [[sucks]]...I lost track of how many terrible [[jokes]] in the [[movie]] that not only sucked but weren't exactly kid appropriate. Oh and by the way the way the cat in the hat [[talked]] was annoying...as for the plot I [[completely]] forgot. Who cares it [[sucked]] anyway. i'm not sure why Mike Myers joined but I think the writers were trying to make it sound like him in Austin powers without the swinger talk and it overly succeeded- but so what it was annoying. don't see it-it belongs in the bottom 100.............................. the jokes are so unkiddy it's funny There's only one [[stuff]] I'm going to say about cat in the hat...as a [[YOUNGSTERS]] movie and a good [[humor]] [[kino]] it [[stinks]]...I lost track of how many terrible [[pranks]] in the [[cinema]] that not only sucked but weren't exactly kid appropriate. Oh and by the way the way the cat in the hat [[chatted]] was annoying...as for the plot I [[totally]] forgot. Who cares it [[aspired]] anyway. i'm not sure why Mike Myers joined but I think the writers were trying to make it sound like him in Austin powers without the swinger talk and it overly succeeded- but so what it was annoying. don't see it-it belongs in the bottom 100.............................. the jokes are so unkiddy it's funny --------------------------------------------- Result 4281 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] My [[mom]] [[took]] me to [[see]] this [[movie]] when it came out [[around]] [[Christmas]] of 1976. I [[loved]] it then and I [[love]] it now. I know [[everyone]] makes [[fun]] of Barbra's hair in this one, but I [[think]] she looks and sounds [[great]]! ...And I [[seem]] to [[remember]] a number of [[women]] who copied that permed [[look]] at the [[time]]! Also, the [[bath]] tub scene between Streisand and Kristoferson is just so [[sexy]]! The music is [[great]] as well. This is the groovy 70's Babs at her best! My [[mummy]] [[taken]] me to [[behold]] this [[filmmaking]] when it came out [[roundabout]] [[Claus]] of 1976. I [[worshipped]] it then and I [[amour]] it now. I know [[somebody]] makes [[amusing]] of Barbra's hair in this one, but I [[thoughts]] she looks and sounds [[fabulous]]! ...And I [[appears]] to [[remembering]] a number of [[females]] who copied that permed [[gaze]] at the [[moment]]! Also, the [[bathtub]] tub scene between Streisand and Kristoferson is just so [[sexier]]! The music is [[marvellous]] as well. This is the groovy 70's Babs at her best! --------------------------------------------- Result 4282 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I'll say one thing about this film: there are no lulls. You can't get bored watching this. The problem is that it is TOO intense. There is too much action and it NEEDS lulls! That is the risk you take in modern action films. You want it interesting but not overdone. This is [[way]] overdone.

Even [[though]] the acting is fine and features a couple of "names" in Gary Busey and Roy Scheider, it still has the feel of a "B" film. The best part of it is Scheider's dialog: the only "A" part of this "B" film.

The rest of the story is strictly Rambo mentality but did have a few standout scenes. One in particular was a very innovative scene featuring land mines. That was memorable. Not enough of the other scenes were to make this a keeper for long. I'll say one thing about this film: there are no lulls. You can't get bored watching this. The problem is that it is TOO intense. There is too much action and it NEEDS lulls! That is the risk you take in modern action films. You want it interesting but not overdone. This is [[ways]] overdone.

Even [[despite]] the acting is fine and features a couple of "names" in Gary Busey and Roy Scheider, it still has the feel of a "B" film. The best part of it is Scheider's dialog: the only "A" part of this "B" film.

The rest of the story is strictly Rambo mentality but did have a few standout scenes. One in particular was a very innovative scene featuring land mines. That was memorable. Not enough of the other scenes were to make this a keeper for long. --------------------------------------------- Result 4283 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (95%)]] --> [[Negative (82%)]] If you cannot enjoy a chick flick, stop right now. If, however, you enjoy films that illustrate complex characters and provide [[extraordinary]] acting, read on.

Ann Grant Lord is dying. Her two daughters arrive to be at her bedside. Ann begins talking about people from her past of whom the daughters are unaware, and they question as to whether these lost acquaintances are real or imagined. They come to realize that these people from their mother's past are, indeed, real.

The story shifts, basically, between 1953 and circa 2000 with a few glimpses at Ann's life between those years. It was in 1953 that Ann met the love of her life and experienced her life's greatest tragedy.

One of Ann's two best friends from college, Lila, is being married. Ann's other best friend is Lila's brother, Buddy. Lila and Buddy are the children of a rich Newport family, whereas Ann is a cabaret singer living in Greenwich Village who wants to be a free spirit but is still bound by many of those 1950's conventions.

Soon after Ann arrives to be maid of honor at Lila's wedding, she meets the person who will become the pivotal character in the lives of the three - Harris. He is the adult son of a former servant of the family who grew up with Lila and Buddy and has gone on to become a physician in a small New England town. Ann immediately becomes enamored of Harris which adds a complication to the fact that Lila has always been in love with Harris and continues to be. Buddy, also, is in love with Harris, but being 1953, he has redirected that homosexual desire for Harris to his good friend, Ann for he cannot admit to himself that he has a sexual craving for another man. Buddy exhibits his inner frustration outwardly by being the alcoholic, wise-cracking bad boy of the family - much to the chagrin of his very proper and uptight parents.

Needless to say, all of these expressed and repressed emotions lead to tragedy - after all this is a chick flick.

In the present time, Ann's daughters have become distant from their mother and are suffering their own life realizations and doubts. Constance is working to emotional exhaustion trying to keep up her roll as perfect mother and wife. Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.

Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.

All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.

Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do. Her performance is not easily forgettable.

Vanessa Redgrave plays the dying Ann whose mind shifts from the present, to the past, to flights of fantasy, and of course, Redgrave pulls it all off with sterling style.

Natasha Richardson - Redgrave's real daughter - plays Ann's daughter, Constance, in the film. The scenes between this real life mother and daughter playing fictional mother and daughter are an insightful treat to watch.

Toni Collette plays Ann's other daughter, Nina. Nina spends a good deal of her time being depressed and feeling sorry for herself while shutting out a good man who loves her as well as her mother and sister. Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.

Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.

Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila. What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.

Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film. He certainly was right, and Close's performance in that one scene etches it in your mind. All the other scenes in which Close is Lila's very proper mother, and you get another performance to treasure.

There are three other scenes in the film, combined with the one featuring Close described above, that make the whole movie worth watching. On Lila's wedding day, Ann comes into her room and crawls into to bed with her friend to discuss Lila's misforgivings about her upcoming wedding to a man she clearly does not love. This scene is repeated fifty years later when Lila comes and crawls into bed with her dying friend Ann to talk about the lives they have lived. In this latter scene, Streep and Redgrave are enthralling.

The other memorable scene - at least to me - is when Buddy declares his love for Ann. Hugh Dancy as Buddy gives us a heartbreaking performance of a young man torn apart by his conflicting sexual feelings. His performance is superior.

Chick flick? Yes. A very special film with unbelievable acting, directing, and scenery? Definitely. I cannot recommend Evening too much. If you cannot enjoy a chick flick, stop right now. If, however, you enjoy films that illustrate complex characters and provide [[unbelievable]] acting, read on.

Ann Grant Lord is dying. Her two daughters arrive to be at her bedside. Ann begins talking about people from her past of whom the daughters are unaware, and they question as to whether these lost acquaintances are real or imagined. They come to realize that these people from their mother's past are, indeed, real.

The story shifts, basically, between 1953 and circa 2000 with a few glimpses at Ann's life between those years. It was in 1953 that Ann met the love of her life and experienced her life's greatest tragedy.

One of Ann's two best friends from college, Lila, is being married. Ann's other best friend is Lila's brother, Buddy. Lila and Buddy are the children of a rich Newport family, whereas Ann is a cabaret singer living in Greenwich Village who wants to be a free spirit but is still bound by many of those 1950's conventions.

Soon after Ann arrives to be maid of honor at Lila's wedding, she meets the person who will become the pivotal character in the lives of the three - Harris. He is the adult son of a former servant of the family who grew up with Lila and Buddy and has gone on to become a physician in a small New England town. Ann immediately becomes enamored of Harris which adds a complication to the fact that Lila has always been in love with Harris and continues to be. Buddy, also, is in love with Harris, but being 1953, he has redirected that homosexual desire for Harris to his good friend, Ann for he cannot admit to himself that he has a sexual craving for another man. Buddy exhibits his inner frustration outwardly by being the alcoholic, wise-cracking bad boy of the family - much to the chagrin of his very proper and uptight parents.

Needless to say, all of these expressed and repressed emotions lead to tragedy - after all this is a chick flick.

In the present time, Ann's daughters have become distant from their mother and are suffering their own life realizations and doubts. Constance is working to emotional exhaustion trying to keep up her roll as perfect mother and wife. Nina, having always felt inferior, cannot maintain a relationship.

Stir all of these relationships into a span of fifty years, and you get an intriguing look at society, its values, and its effects upon the personalities and actions of the complex people involved.

All of the acting in Evening is excellent, but there are some extraordinary performances and scenes - along with two unique family relationships - that make this film so very, very special.

Claire Danes plays the 1950's Ann, and she does it in a style that clearly shows an intelligent woman of those times who is conflicted by what she is supposed to do as opposed to what she wants to do. Her performance is not easily forgettable.

Vanessa Redgrave plays the dying Ann whose mind shifts from the present, to the past, to flights of fantasy, and of course, Redgrave pulls it all off with sterling style.

Natasha Richardson - Redgrave's real daughter - plays Ann's daughter, Constance, in the film. The scenes between this real life mother and daughter playing fictional mother and daughter are an insightful treat to watch.

Toni Collette plays Ann's other daughter, Nina. Nina spends a good deal of her time being depressed and feeling sorry for herself while shutting out a good man who loves her as well as her mother and sister. Collette is perfect for a part such as this, but I have never seen her give a bad or unbelievable performance no matter what part she plays.

Mamie Gummer plays 1950's Lila and shows us a woman even more conflicted of her expected role in life than her good friend, Ann. She is very good.

Meryl Streep - Gummer's mother - plays present day Lila. What is there to say about Meryl Streep other than she always gives an insightful and rewarding performance.

Director Lajos Koltai states in the DVD extras that he sought out Glenn Close to play the relatively small part of Lila's mother because he felt she was the only actress he could think of to play one scene in the film. He certainly was right, and Close's performance in that one scene etches it in your mind. All the other scenes in which Close is Lila's very proper mother, and you get another performance to treasure.

There are three other scenes in the film, combined with the one featuring Close described above, that make the whole movie worth watching. On Lila's wedding day, Ann comes into her room and crawls into to bed with her friend to discuss Lila's misforgivings about her upcoming wedding to a man she clearly does not love. This scene is repeated fifty years later when Lila comes and crawls into bed with her dying friend Ann to talk about the lives they have lived. In this latter scene, Streep and Redgrave are enthralling.

The other memorable scene - at least to me - is when Buddy declares his love for Ann. Hugh Dancy as Buddy gives us a heartbreaking performance of a young man torn apart by his conflicting sexual feelings. His performance is superior.

Chick flick? Yes. A very special film with unbelievable acting, directing, and scenery? Definitely. I cannot recommend Evening too much. --------------------------------------------- Result 4284 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (61%)]] and not in a fun-to-watch [[way]]. it's just [[bad]]. it's [[shocking]] that people have posted positive things about it here. the [[story]] sucks, the acting is bad, it's not scary, the special [[effects]] aren't special--oh no! the [[blackboard]] has hands [[coming]] out of it! oh gee--the mirror [[turned]] into water! the [[hair]], [[clothes]] and makeup in the '50s scenes aren't accurate, and they [[got]] a middle-aged man with a [[receding]] hairline to [[play]] the high-school version of himself. this is like later-on nightmare on elm street stuff. i enjoy sitting down to watch a cheesy [[horror]] movie as much as anyone else, but there are better [[bad]] ones out there to choose from. and not in a fun-to-watch [[routes]]. it's just [[inclement]]. it's [[terrifying]] that people have posted positive things about it here. the [[fairytales]] sucks, the acting is bad, it's not scary, the special [[impacts]] aren't special--oh no! the [[chalkboard]] has hands [[upcoming]] out of it! oh gee--the mirror [[revolved]] into water! the [[hairdresser]], [[clothe]] and makeup in the '50s scenes aren't accurate, and they [[gets]] a middle-aged man with a [[declining]] hairline to [[gaming]] the high-school version of himself. this is like later-on nightmare on elm street stuff. i enjoy sitting down to watch a cheesy [[terror]] movie as much as anyone else, but there are better [[inclement]] ones out there to choose from. --------------------------------------------- Result 4285 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This is a gem of a [[movie]] not just for people who like [[fun]] and [[quirky]] [[premises]], but who [[love]] the [[history]] and traditions of Sci-Fi and [[Classic]] Hollywood [[movies]]. Each [[alien]] of the Martian crew is the [[embodiment]] of a [[classic]] Sci-Fi [[character]] or member of Hollywood [[royalty]] and it's pure [[pleasure]] [[watching]] them [[bounce]] of each other and the [[residents]] of [[Big]] [[Bean]]. This is a gem of a [[kino]] not just for people who like [[funny]] and [[mercurial]] [[venues]], but who [[adores]] the [[historian]] and traditions of Sci-Fi and [[Typical]] Hollywood [[theater]]. Each [[exotic]] of the Martian crew is the [[personification]] of a [[conventional]] Sci-Fi [[nature]] or member of Hollywood [[taxes]] and it's pure [[glee]] [[staring]] them [[pounce]] of each other and the [[locals]] of [[Sizeable]] [[Beans]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4286 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[In]] a movie that follows a struggling actor, played, evidently, by a struggling actor, this does no favours for Chris Klein. He [[struggles]] to bring [[anything]] memorable to the role and meanders on through the shallow [[script]] [[managing]] to [[display]], what [[could]] only be [[described]] as, a bland leading [[man]]. The [[story]] exists, but that is all, and fails to [[show]] any basic [[start]], [[middle]] and [[end]] and the [[viewer]] is left shrugging his shoulders [[feeling]] as [[though]] [[nothing]] in the [[past]] [[hour]] and three quarters has [[really]] happened.

One [[bright]] light in the [[midst]] of this is Fred Durst, who [[manages]] to stand out above his seemingly averagely [[talented]] co-stars and does a semi-decent [[job]] of bringing the [[backward]] character of Legde to life. Whether [[Fred]] can re-create this when working with a [[higher]] calibre of cast remains to be seen but I'l be watching out for him in future. [[Onto]] a movie that follows a struggling actor, played, evidently, by a struggling actor, this does no favours for Chris Klein. He [[combat]] to bring [[something]] memorable to the role and meanders on through the shallow [[hyphen]] [[administered]] to [[visualize]], what [[did]] only be [[outlining]] as, a bland leading [[males]]. The [[narratives]] exists, but that is all, and fails to [[illustrating]] any basic [[beginnings]], [[idler]] and [[ceases]] and the [[onlooker]] is left shrugging his shoulders [[sense]] as [[despite]] [[nada]] in the [[yesteryear]] [[hours]] and three quarters has [[truly]] happened.

One [[glittering]] light in the [[medium]] of this is Fred Durst, who [[administers]] to stand out above his seemingly averagely [[gifted]] co-stars and does a semi-decent [[jobs]] of bringing the [[lagging]] character of Legde to life. Whether [[Freda]] can re-create this when working with a [[greatest]] calibre of cast remains to be seen but I'l be watching out for him in future. --------------------------------------------- Result 4287 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (97%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I read the book in 5th grade and now a few [[years]] later I [[saw]] the movie. There are a few [[differences]]:

1.Billy was oringinally suppose to eat 15 worms in 15 days, not 10 worms in one day by 7:00pm.

2.Billy is suppose to get 30 dollars after he's eaten all the worms. In the movie after Billy eats all the worms, Joe has to go to school with worms in his pants.

3. Joe is suppose to fake some of the worms but in the movie, he doesn't at all.

Even though there are changes,this movie is still one that kids will enjoy. I read the book in 5th grade and now a few [[olds]] later I [[observed]] the movie. There are a few [[discrepancy]]:

1.Billy was oringinally suppose to eat 15 worms in 15 days, not 10 worms in one day by 7:00pm.

2.Billy is suppose to get 30 dollars after he's eaten all the worms. In the movie after Billy eats all the worms, Joe has to go to school with worms in his pants.

3. Joe is suppose to fake some of the worms but in the movie, he doesn't at all.

Even though there are changes,this movie is still one that kids will enjoy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4288 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] Yowza! If anyone who loves [[Laurel]] and [[Hardy]] can watch this movie and feel good about it, you're a better person than me! This [[movie]], while a great attempt at 'imitating' Laurel and [[Hardy]] through appearance, sound and routine, [[falls]] very short of honoring them, or even being a movie of any substance. I blame Larry Harmon. [[Dialogue]] is torn from old L+H movies and [[planted]] in unrealistically, the plot is muddled with [[useless]] characterization of the other [[needless]] co-stars, Pinchot's [[accent]] was bizarre for [[Stan]], and while Sartain did an excellent job with Ollie's accent, he tried too hard to create the wonderful mix that was Mr. Hardy. [[Where]] was a (good) musical number? Editing is [[choppy]], acting is stiff, lines are [[horrid]], physics are -implausable- (although perhaps they were TRYING to give it that feel of cheap sets?), and overall it's a [[terrible]] thing to witness. It's even more [[painful]] to watch than ATOLL K, where the legendary duo did their last film in awful 1950's era writing and photography. Do yourself a favor and watch as much of the ORIGINAL Laurel and Hardy films as you can, and learn how things WERE. You know what a MAGNATE is, don't you? Stan Laurel did not perpetually reply with semi-moronic quips at every sentence.

I pity anyone who [[thinks]] that THIS was a decent update/[[honor]] of the boys. Where was THE CLASSIC THEME SONG?!? Why ruin 'Here's another fine mess'? Why skip 'any the wiser'? Why was there a pointless gaggle of co-stars?! WHY MISS GULCH FROM THE WIZARD [[OF]] OZ???? WHY MUST LARRY HARMON BE IN IT? WHY BOZO!? And did THE LEARNING CHANNEL help fund the thing?

I [[mean]], really. Fart jokes, for God's sake.

FART JOKES. Yowza! If anyone who loves [[Laurier]] and [[Resilient]] can watch this movie and feel good about it, you're a better person than me! This [[films]], while a great attempt at 'imitating' Laurel and [[Sturdy]] through appearance, sound and routine, [[drop]] very short of honoring them, or even being a movie of any substance. I blame Larry Harmon. [[Dialog]] is torn from old L+H movies and [[sowed]] in unrealistically, the plot is muddled with [[unnecessary]] characterization of the other [[redundant]] co-stars, Pinchot's [[focus]] was bizarre for [[Stanley]], and while Sartain did an excellent job with Ollie's accent, he tried too hard to create the wonderful mix that was Mr. Hardy. [[Hence]] was a (good) musical number? Editing is [[turbulent]], acting is stiff, lines are [[horrendous]], physics are -implausable- (although perhaps they were TRYING to give it that feel of cheap sets?), and overall it's a [[spooky]] thing to witness. It's even more [[agonizing]] to watch than ATOLL K, where the legendary duo did their last film in awful 1950's era writing and photography. Do yourself a favor and watch as much of the ORIGINAL Laurel and Hardy films as you can, and learn how things WERE. You know what a MAGNATE is, don't you? Stan Laurel did not perpetually reply with semi-moronic quips at every sentence.

I pity anyone who [[deems]] that THIS was a decent update/[[honour]] of the boys. Where was THE CLASSIC THEME SONG?!? Why ruin 'Here's another fine mess'? Why skip 'any the wiser'? Why was there a pointless gaggle of co-stars?! WHY MISS GULCH FROM THE WIZARD [[TO]] OZ???? WHY MUST LARRY HARMON BE IN IT? WHY BOZO!? And did THE LEARNING CHANNEL help fund the thing?

I [[meaning]], really. Fart jokes, for God's sake.

FART JOKES. --------------------------------------------- Result 4289 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (71%)]] The acting was [[horrible]] and they got both of the sports wrongggg.......not only did they get the figure skating rules wrong, but also they rules of GIRLS Ice Hockey. In GIRLS ice hockey you cannot check. You also don't BLOCK for someone. Not all they girls are disgusting gross mean and big. I play hockey and I'm only 4'11 and have been asked to go to schools like the one in the movie. Also not all hockey players hate figure skaters. A lot of current girls hockey players were once figure skaters themselves. Also we skate A LOT faster then the ones in the movie. I was embarrassed by the movie it gave people the idea that we suck.......although i must mention that it is difficult to transition between the sports because of the toe pick on the figure skates.....also some of those twirly moves KAtelin was doing on the ice you couldn't do in a regular hockey game. She basically tripped the person, which is illigal. Its also unrealistic that she would get a HOCKEY scholarship when she figure skates. That really made me angry that scholarship would normally be used to someone who could benefit the team. The acting was [[scary]] and they got both of the sports wrongggg.......not only did they get the figure skating rules wrong, but also they rules of GIRLS Ice Hockey. In GIRLS ice hockey you cannot check. You also don't BLOCK for someone. Not all they girls are disgusting gross mean and big. I play hockey and I'm only 4'11 and have been asked to go to schools like the one in the movie. Also not all hockey players hate figure skaters. A lot of current girls hockey players were once figure skaters themselves. Also we skate A LOT faster then the ones in the movie. I was embarrassed by the movie it gave people the idea that we suck.......although i must mention that it is difficult to transition between the sports because of the toe pick on the figure skates.....also some of those twirly moves KAtelin was doing on the ice you couldn't do in a regular hockey game. She basically tripped the person, which is illigal. Its also unrealistic that she would get a HOCKEY scholarship when she figure skates. That really made me angry that scholarship would normally be used to someone who could benefit the team. --------------------------------------------- Result 4290 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] Keep in mind I'm a fan of the genre but have only recently seen this film for the first time. How I've [[overlooked]] it all this time is a wonder to me. To me this is a [[better]] [[film]] then the [[much]] lauded "High Noon". It's a great western with [[excellent]] acting and a great story. The [[DVD]] is in beautifull black and white with [[outstanding]] cinematography. If you [[like]] [[westerns]] or James [[Stewart]] this [[film]] is not to be [[missed]]. Keep in mind I'm a fan of the genre but have only recently seen this film for the first time. How I've [[neglect]] it all this time is a wonder to me. To me this is a [[optimum]] [[cinematography]] then the [[very]] lauded "High Noon". It's a great western with [[glamorous]] acting and a great story. The [[DVDS]] is in beautifull black and white with [[unpaid]] cinematography. If you [[likes]] [[westerners]] or James [[Sylvain]] this [[flick]] is not to be [[flunked]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4291 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] First of all that I would like to say is that Edison Chen is extremely hot and that Sam Lee is [[looking]] much better than before XD! This is probably one of the most [[original]] movies I have seen so far; shows a poverty lifestyle background of a Cambodian. The Cambodian(Edison aka Pang) goes around [[killing]] people to survive himself; has done it throughout his entire life. Sam Lee's(Wai) duty is to capture the Cambodian for good. There are [[tons]] of [[violent]] actions but has a [[good]] [[story]] to it. The [[movie]] shows the struggles between those two [[characters]]; they both beat each other like angry dogs. GO AND WATCH PPL...[[STRONGLY]] SUGGESSTED!!! (GO [[HK]] [[FILMS]]) First of all that I would like to say is that Edison Chen is extremely hot and that Sam Lee is [[researching]] much better than before XD! This is probably one of the most [[preliminary]] movies I have seen so far; shows a poverty lifestyle background of a Cambodian. The Cambodian(Edison aka Pang) goes around [[murdered]] people to survive himself; has done it throughout his entire life. Sam Lee's(Wai) duty is to capture the Cambodian for good. There are [[ton]] of [[ferocious]] actions but has a [[buena]] [[histories]] to it. The [[cinematography]] shows the struggles between those two [[personage]]; they both beat each other like angry dogs. GO AND WATCH PPL...[[RESOLUTELY]] SUGGESSTED!!! (GO [[KONG]] [[MOVIE]]) --------------------------------------------- Result 4292 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (87%)]] I [[hope]] the viewer who regards '[[Dream]] Machine' as one of Corey Haim's [[finest]] and the "[[best]] [[movies]] of the century" was [[kidding]]. Undetected sarcasm on my [[part]]? I [[sincerely]] [[hope]] so.

'The [[Dream]] Machine' [[marks]] the first of a [[long]] line of mediocre capers that would [[plague]] the [[rest]] of Corey Haim's [[career]] (except 'Prayer of the Rollerboys' which was surprisingly decent). Here, Haim plays nonchalant college boy, Bernie, who [[supposes]] that a cool [[car]] will attract his dream girl's attention. Lucky for Bernie, a rich woman aiming to get back at her cheating husband, hastily decides to reward her faithful piano tuner--Bernie--with a gift: a slick Porsche Turbo. However, unbeknownst to the woman, and unfortunate for Bernie, is that her dead husband was murdered and his body was hidden in the trunk. Now, being that in this movie, bodies don't seem to decay or possess a rather foul funk, Bernie is unaware of this. In fact, the oblivious boy has no idea that something suspicious is afoot despite several odd circumstances that arise. In particular, a grizzly man follows him around, desperate to get hold of that body relatively undetected.

This is a low-grade action fizzle as many of Haim's films like this are (see The Double O Kid). Despite being part action, part romantic comedy, this movie fails to offer the viewer much of anything of interest for at least the first forty-five minutes in which the filmmakers take more than enough time to show the immediate problem (i.e. Bernie being in possession of a car and a dead body, and a hit-man finding out that the Porsche is going to be hard to find). After which, and thanks to poor acting by Haim (I loved this [[kid]], too, but it's not exactly sacrilegious to admit the times when he obviously couldn't act well) and the lack of real immediacy and emergency between Bernie and the villain that makes much of the events unconvincing and as a result, inappreciable. To add injury to insult, the soundtrack was unbelievably laughable and sounded more like self-evident songs you would hear in Team America (see the 'date' montage).

Loyal Corey Haim fans, however, should not be disappointed to see their boy in abundance. However, others understanding that Haim's career probably peaked when he was 14 or 15 and never recovered, might expect mediocrity, as will viewers just looking for early 90s b-comedy fluff to pass the time. I [[esperanza]] the viewer who regards '[[Daydream]] Machine' as one of Corey Haim's [[meanest]] and the "[[finest]] [[filmmaking]] of the century" was [[laughing]]. Undetected sarcasm on my [[party]]? I [[fervently]] [[esperanza]] so.

'The [[Daydreaming]] Machine' [[marques]] the first of a [[largo]] line of mediocre capers that would [[epidemic]] the [[stays]] of Corey Haim's [[quarries]] (except 'Prayer of the Rollerboys' which was surprisingly decent). Here, Haim plays nonchalant college boy, Bernie, who [[presupposes]] that a cool [[automobile]] will attract his dream girl's attention. Lucky for Bernie, a rich woman aiming to get back at her cheating husband, hastily decides to reward her faithful piano tuner--Bernie--with a gift: a slick Porsche Turbo. However, unbeknownst to the woman, and unfortunate for Bernie, is that her dead husband was murdered and his body was hidden in the trunk. Now, being that in this movie, bodies don't seem to decay or possess a rather foul funk, Bernie is unaware of this. In fact, the oblivious boy has no idea that something suspicious is afoot despite several odd circumstances that arise. In particular, a grizzly man follows him around, desperate to get hold of that body relatively undetected.

This is a low-grade action fizzle as many of Haim's films like this are (see The Double O Kid). Despite being part action, part romantic comedy, this movie fails to offer the viewer much of anything of interest for at least the first forty-five minutes in which the filmmakers take more than enough time to show the immediate problem (i.e. Bernie being in possession of a car and a dead body, and a hit-man finding out that the Porsche is going to be hard to find). After which, and thanks to poor acting by Haim (I loved this [[petit]], too, but it's not exactly sacrilegious to admit the times when he obviously couldn't act well) and the lack of real immediacy and emergency between Bernie and the villain that makes much of the events unconvincing and as a result, inappreciable. To add injury to insult, the soundtrack was unbelievably laughable and sounded more like self-evident songs you would hear in Team America (see the 'date' montage).

Loyal Corey Haim fans, however, should not be disappointed to see their boy in abundance. However, others understanding that Haim's career probably peaked when he was 14 or 15 and never recovered, might expect mediocrity, as will viewers just looking for early 90s b-comedy fluff to pass the time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4293 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (67%)]] [[Henri]] Verneuil's film may be not so [[famous]] as Parallax [[View]], 3 Days of the Condor or JFK but it is certainly not worse and sometimes even [[better]] than these [[classic]] [[representatives]] of the genre. Action takes place in fictional western state where fictional [[president]] has been killed. [[After]] several years of investigation, special [[government]] commission decides that [[president]] was [[killed]] by a lone gunman. But one man - [[prosecutor]] Volney, [[played]] by [[Yves]] Montand - [[thinks]] there's something more to be investigated and so the film starts. This [[movie]] doesn't [[deal]] with some exact [[theories]], but it [[embraces]] the whole [[structure]] of [[relationship]] between [[government]] and [[society]] in today's [[world]]. Such [[film]] [[could]] be [[made]] only in the 1970-ies but it will never [[lose]] it's actuality. [[Furthermore]], it's even a [[bit]] [[frightful]] how [[precise]] are it's oracles. 10 out of 10. [[Gregg]] Verneuil's film may be not so [[proverbial]] as Parallax [[Visualize]], 3 Days of the Condor or JFK but it is certainly not worse and sometimes even [[optimum]] than these [[typical]] [[delegated]] of the genre. Action takes place in fictional western state where fictional [[presidents]] has been killed. [[Upon]] several years of investigation, special [[administrations]] commission decides that [[presidents]] was [[assassinated]] by a lone gunman. But one man - [[procurator]] Volney, [[effected]] by [[Ives]] Montand - [[believes]] there's something more to be investigated and so the film starts. This [[cinema]] doesn't [[deals]] with some exact [[doctrines]], but it [[encompasses]] the whole [[edifice]] of [[ties]] between [[council]] and [[societies]] in today's [[monde]]. Such [[cinematic]] [[wo]] be [[effected]] only in the 1970-ies but it will never [[wasting]] it's actuality. [[Besides]], it's even a [[bitten]] [[terrible]] how [[accurate]] are it's oracles. 10 out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4294 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This is a [[story]] of two dogs and a cat looking for their way back home.Old and wise Golden Retriever Shadow, young American Bulldog Chance and Himalayan cat Sassy flee from the ranch and go into the wilderness to be reunited with their family.Homeward Bound: The [[Incredible]] Journey (1993) is a [[family]] adventure directed by Duwayne [[Dunham]].It's a [[remake]] of a 1963 [[film]].This movie [[got]] a sequel three years later.Michael J. Fox is the [[perfect]] man to do the voice-over for Chance.Fox has some youthful energy he brings to the role.Sally Field does great voice work as Sassy.Don Ameche is fantastic as Shadow.This was this veteran actor's second last movie.Also the visible actors are great.Kim Greist plays Laura Burnford-Seaver.Robert Hays is Bob Seaver.Benji Thall plays Peter Burnford.Veronica Lauren is Hope Burnford.Kevin Chevalia is Jamie Seaver.Jean Smart portrays Kate.It's quite amazing to watch these pets trying to survive in the wilderness.We see Sassy taken by the river and she seems like a goner.The bear scene is exiting and funny.Chance has no chance with that big, hungry bear.And his meeting with the porcupine looks painful.This is some great fun for the whole family. This is a [[conte]] of two dogs and a cat looking for their way back home.Old and wise Golden Retriever Shadow, young American Bulldog Chance and Himalayan cat Sassy flee from the ranch and go into the wilderness to be reunited with their family.Homeward Bound: The [[Unbelievable]] Journey (1993) is a [[families]] adventure directed by Duwayne [[Denham]].It's a [[redo]] of a 1963 [[filmmaking]].This movie [[get]] a sequel three years later.Michael J. Fox is the [[faultless]] man to do the voice-over for Chance.Fox has some youthful energy he brings to the role.Sally Field does great voice work as Sassy.Don Ameche is fantastic as Shadow.This was this veteran actor's second last movie.Also the visible actors are great.Kim Greist plays Laura Burnford-Seaver.Robert Hays is Bob Seaver.Benji Thall plays Peter Burnford.Veronica Lauren is Hope Burnford.Kevin Chevalia is Jamie Seaver.Jean Smart portrays Kate.It's quite amazing to watch these pets trying to survive in the wilderness.We see Sassy taken by the river and she seems like a goner.The bear scene is exiting and funny.Chance has no chance with that big, hungry bear.And his meeting with the porcupine looks painful.This is some great fun for the whole family. --------------------------------------------- Result 4295 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] And I really mean that. I caught it last night on Vh1, and I was not expecting it to be so good. This is now one of my favorites. I must add that it has a killer soundtrack. --------------------------------------------- Result 4296 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (79%)]] I watched this movie at 3'o clock in the morning, a [[time]] in the day where I am [[usually]] very open when it [[comes]] to [[movies]]. But [[still]] I think it wasn't good, this movie wasn't good at all. The reasons why are many.

The acting isn't all that good, and [[time]] after time situations occurring in it [[reminded]] me of a [[poor]] 90's Chevy Chase [[comedy]]. I [[mean]], come on, [[like]] the handcuff situation, and the [[poker]] situation amongst the [[servants]]... This movie was so [[obviously]] based very much on the [[first]] one, and thats [[OK]]. But if I hadn't [[seen]] the first one before [[seeing]] this, it would have [[sucked]] [[even]] worse. Like the [[ending]], it came very [[suddenly]], and I [[felt]] like I got no closure what so ever... Sebastian changed very [[suddenly]], and this This movie [[seems]] like it was made [[solely]] to explain nr 1, and like no time or [[effort]] was used on making [[anything]] else good. The score is the same as in the first one, and it didn't feel like a [[movie]] at all...

They should have [[handled]] the situations with more [[style]] and class, but they didn't, and [[therefore]], this movie turned out [[bad]]... I watched this movie at 3'o clock in the morning, a [[moment]] in the day where I am [[habitually]] very open when it [[occurs]] to [[film]]. But [[again]] I think it wasn't good, this movie wasn't good at all. The reasons why are many.

The acting isn't all that good, and [[times]] after time situations occurring in it [[remembered]] me of a [[pauper]] 90's Chevy Chase [[humour]]. I [[signify]], come on, [[iike]] the handcuff situation, and the [[booker]] situation amongst the [[retainers]]... This movie was so [[naturally]] based very much on the [[frst]] one, and thats [[ALLRIGHT]]. But if I hadn't [[saw]] the first one before [[witnessing]] this, it would have [[aspired]] [[yet]] worse. Like the [[ended]], it came very [[unexpectedly]], and I [[believed]] like I got no closure what so ever... Sebastian changed very [[unexpectedly]], and this This movie [[seem]] like it was made [[alone]] to explain nr 1, and like no time or [[endeavours]] was used on making [[something]] else good. The score is the same as in the first one, and it didn't feel like a [[movies]] at all...

They should have [[manipulated]] the situations with more [[elegance]] and class, but they didn't, and [[thus]], this movie turned out [[amiss]]... --------------------------------------------- Result 4297 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] I'm glad the folks at IMDb were able to decipher what genre this film falls into. I had a suspicion it was trying to be a [[comedy]], but [[since]] it also seems to [[want]] to be a [[dark]] and solemn melodrama I wasn't sure. For a [[comedy]] it is amazingly bereft of [[even]] the slightest [[venture]] into the realms of [[humour]] - [[right]] up until the ridiculous "twist" ending, which confirms what an [[utter]] [[waste]] of time the whole movie actually is. It is [[hard]] to describe just how amateurish THE [[HAZING]] really is. Did anyone involved in this film have any idea at all what they were supposed to be doing? [[Actually]] worth watching so that you can stare at the screen in slack-jawed disbelief at how terrible it is. I'm glad the folks at IMDb were able to decipher what genre this film falls into. I had a suspicion it was trying to be a [[humour]], but [[because]] it also seems to [[desiring]] to be a [[gloom]] and solemn melodrama I wasn't sure. For a [[humor]] it is amazingly bereft of [[yet]] the slightest [[ventures]] into the realms of [[mood]] - [[rights]] up until the ridiculous "twist" ending, which confirms what an [[unmitigated]] [[squander]] of time the whole movie actually is. It is [[harsh]] to describe just how amateurish THE [[BULLYING]] really is. Did anyone involved in this film have any idea at all what they were supposed to be doing? [[Genuinely]] worth watching so that you can stare at the screen in slack-jawed disbelief at how terrible it is. --------------------------------------------- Result 4298 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I ended up watching The Tenants with my close friends who rented the movie solely based on Snoop Dogg's appearance (a passionate fetish of theirs) on the cover. Understandably, I did not expect much. I thought the movie would include the typical array of Snoop Dogg related behavior and imagery often seen in [[cliché]] rap videos. However, my generalization was for the most part wrong. Unfortunately, this didn't make the movie any better.

Most would describe the movie as a dark serious drama, [[whereas]] I [[would]] describe it as a dark [[seriously]] [[drawn]] out [[boring]] drama flick. The film tells a [[story]] of two struggling writers (Dylan McDermott and Snoop Dogg) who are trying to create their own separate masterpieces. Their polar opposite lifestyles end up forming an unlikely but highly complex and [[neurotic]] friendship. This friendship moves [[throughout]] the entire movie like a wild roller-coaster - most of which is contributed by Snoop's character - reminiscent of someone with a severe case of split personality [[disorder]]. And although the movie is a [[drama]], the acting - which has a [[morbid]] and serious tone - from Snoop and company was more comical than anything else.

I wouldn't recommend this movie for those who are attention impaired because this one has a lot of dialogue and a lot more dialogue after that. There are some [[mediocre]] conflicts, but even they are mostly bogged down with more dialogue. The [[end]], [[however]], [[jumped]] at me with a sudden surprise. It was a little bit twisted, somewhat unexpected and a perfect [[way]] to [[wrap]] up a [[movie]] that [[needed]] to end. [[While]] [[watching]] the [[ending]] [[credits]] I couldn't [[help]] but [[picture]] the [[director]] thinking, "[[Oh]] God, how the [[hell]] do I [[end]] this snoozer." By the [[way]], the [[director]] laid out [[carefully]] [[planted]] hints and subtleties leading to the [[climax]] - all of which are more [[visible]] than Waldo in a [[crowded]] street of midgets [[wearing]] nothing but [[black]] sweaters. I ended up watching The Tenants with my close friends who rented the movie solely based on Snoop Dogg's appearance (a passionate fetish of theirs) on the cover. Understandably, I did not expect much. I thought the movie would include the typical array of Snoop Dogg related behavior and imagery often seen in [[clichés]] rap videos. However, my generalization was for the most part wrong. Unfortunately, this didn't make the movie any better.

Most would describe the movie as a dark serious drama, [[whilst]] I [[ought]] describe it as a dark [[earnestly]] [[draws]] out [[dreary]] drama flick. The film tells a [[history]] of two struggling writers (Dylan McDermott and Snoop Dogg) who are trying to create their own separate masterpieces. Their polar opposite lifestyles end up forming an unlikely but highly complex and [[paranoid]] friendship. This friendship moves [[in]] the entire movie like a wild roller-coaster - most of which is contributed by Snoop's character - reminiscent of someone with a severe case of split personality [[turmoil]]. And although the movie is a [[dramas]], the acting - which has a [[illness]] and serious tone - from Snoop and company was more comical than anything else.

I wouldn't recommend this movie for those who are attention impaired because this one has a lot of dialogue and a lot more dialogue after that. There are some [[lackluster]] conflicts, but even they are mostly bogged down with more dialogue. The [[terminates]], [[still]], [[soared]] at me with a sudden surprise. It was a little bit twisted, somewhat unexpected and a perfect [[camino]] to [[adjusting]] up a [[cinema]] that [[required]] to end. [[Despite]] [[staring]] the [[ceasing]] [[appropriations]] I couldn't [[supporting]] but [[images]] the [[superintendent]] thinking, "[[Ah]] God, how the [[inferno]] do I [[ceases]] this snoozer." By the [[paths]], the [[superintendent]] laid out [[painstakingly]] [[sown]] hints and subtleties leading to the [[pinnacle]] - all of which are more [[palpable]] than Waldo in a [[overcrowding]] street of midgets [[wear]] nothing but [[nigger]] sweaters. --------------------------------------------- Result 4299 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (61%)]] As a lover of [[bad]] [[movies]], I [[definitely]] hit paydirt with this one. The plot isn't really that bad, but there are a few instances where you really have to ask yourself "what the heck is going on here?"

There are many many things that make this the funniest bad [[movie]] ever. First off, Rudy Ray Moore had gotten so fat and slow when this movie was filmed that the special effects consist of speeding up the fight scenes to double time. There are also scenes where there is a slow-motion instant replay, jumping onto a ten foot high wall (by playing falling off of it backwards), naked men walking out of huge letters, and sex that literally brings down the roof (with the cable holding up the roof catching on fire).

Of course, no Rudy Ray Moore movie would be complete without a completely gratuitous and random comedy club scene where Rudy makes fun of all the customers, interposed with people doing some odd dance. There are so many things bad about this movie, but they're bad in an entertaining way, and if you take your eyes off the movie, you might miss another mistake.

Rating: 1/10 for actual value, 10/10 for cheese factor, 10/10 for picking out mistakes and goofs, averages out to 7/10. As a lover of [[faulty]] [[filmmaking]], I [[categorically]] hit paydirt with this one. The plot isn't really that bad, but there are a few instances where you really have to ask yourself "what the heck is going on here?"

There are many many things that make this the funniest bad [[cinematography]] ever. First off, Rudy Ray Moore had gotten so fat and slow when this movie was filmed that the special effects consist of speeding up the fight scenes to double time. There are also scenes where there is a slow-motion instant replay, jumping onto a ten foot high wall (by playing falling off of it backwards), naked men walking out of huge letters, and sex that literally brings down the roof (with the cable holding up the roof catching on fire).

Of course, no Rudy Ray Moore movie would be complete without a completely gratuitous and random comedy club scene where Rudy makes fun of all the customers, interposed with people doing some odd dance. There are so many things bad about this movie, but they're bad in an entertaining way, and if you take your eyes off the movie, you might miss another mistake.

Rating: 1/10 for actual value, 10/10 for cheese factor, 10/10 for picking out mistakes and goofs, averages out to 7/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4300 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (57%)]] I feel like I have some uber-rare [[disease]] that no one has heard of and I have finally come across a support group on the net! I finally found this title by asking for an answer on an "experts" site on the web. I too, saw this movie in my youth and was [[struck]] by the atmosphere and especially the ending. I have never [[forgotten]] it and have never [[seen]] it since. No one I know saw the film and I had almost given up on ever finding it's title. Alas, even knowing the name, I shall probably never see the film again as it is [[impossible]] to find commercially. Small steps...

G I feel like I have some uber-rare [[maladies]] that no one has heard of and I have finally come across a support group on the net! I finally found this title by asking for an answer on an "experts" site on the web. I too, saw this movie in my youth and was [[pummeled]] by the atmosphere and especially the ending. I have never [[forget]] it and have never [[watched]] it since. No one I know saw the film and I had almost given up on ever finding it's title. Alas, even knowing the name, I shall probably never see the film again as it is [[unable]] to find commercially. Small steps...

G --------------------------------------------- Result 4301 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (98%)]] German [[nut]] [[case]] Jörg Buttgereit [[apparently]] has fans - but I don't know why, and I'm [[Definitely]] not one of them! The only Buttgereit [[film]] I'd [[seen]] [[previously]] was Nekromantik and I hated [[every]] minute of it, but - [[shockingly]] - this [[film]] is [[worse]]! Der Todesking is [[pointless]] in the same [[way]] as Nekromantik, but it's a worse [[film]] because it's [[boring]] in a [[way]] that few [[movies]] have ever [[managed]] (it's not far off The Blair [[Witch]] [[Project]], [[seriously]]). Some people say that this [[film]] is 'sick' and 'shocking', but it [[really]] isn't. The director may have been making a point about [[death]], but only he knows what it is. [[How]] anyone [[could]] watch this [[film]] and be [[anything]] other than [[bored]] with it is completely beyond me. The [[film]] [[revolves]] [[around]] the [[theme]] of suicide, and follows the [[deaths]] of seven [[different]] people over the course of a week. [[Yes]], that [[means]] we have a pointless and [[boring]] episode for [[Monday]], a pointless and [[boring]] episode for [[Tuesday]], a pointless and [[boring]] episode for [[Wednesday]] etc etc. This [[film]] manages to be [[even]] more boring than my average week!

[[Der]] Todesking is [[apparently]] an 'art' [[film]], [[although]] this [[would]] [[appear]] to be a [[reference]] to the [[way]] that not very much makes sense rather than a [[reference]] to the [[film]] bearing any [[resemblance]] to 'art'. Each segment of the [[film]] is meant to tell a [[separate]] [[story]] - but it doesn't! We just [[get]] a [[quick]] [[little]] sketch on suicide, and it only makes you wonder what the point is. The [[film]] feels like it should be deep, but there's a [[great]] [[big]] [[void]] where the intelligence should be and [[nothing]] there to [[fill]] it. Buttgereit [[uses]] a few evocative [[images]]; but I'm unlikely to [[remember]] any of them for more than a [[week]] or so because this [[film]] just isn't that memorable. There's a shot [[involving]] a decomposing man's [[body]] that [[features]] [[fairly]] often, but that [[gets]] [[old]] pretty [[quick]] and all you're [[left]] with is the [[rest]] of the [[film]], which is [[unfortunate]]. [[If]] I were to [[struggle]] for [[good]] [[things]] to [[say]] about this [[crap]], all I can [[think]] of is this; the title sounds cool. As I mentioned, Nekromantik is the only other [[film]] I've [[seen]] from this [[amateur]] [[director]]; I have copies of Schramm and Nekromantik 2, and now I'm really in no rush to watch either. Der Todesking is a dull film with no point and anyone that calls it 'art' is very much mistaken. Give it a miss. German [[nuts]] [[examples]] Jörg Buttgereit [[patently]] has fans - but I don't know why, and I'm [[Decidedly]] not one of them! The only Buttgereit [[movie]] I'd [[saw]] [[ago]] was Nekromantik and I hated [[any]] minute of it, but - [[stunningly]] - this [[films]] is [[pire]]! Der Todesking is [[senseless]] in the same [[path]] as Nekromantik, but it's a worse [[cinematography]] because it's [[bore]] in a [[camino]] that few [[movie]] have ever [[manage]] (it's not far off The Blair [[Magician]] [[Projects]], [[profoundly]]). Some people say that this [[cinematography]] is 'sick' and 'shocking', but it [[genuinely]] isn't. The director may have been making a point about [[mortality]], but only he knows what it is. [[Mode]] anyone [[would]] watch this [[movies]] and be [[nothing]] other than [[boring]] with it is completely beyond me. The [[cinematography]] [[spins]] [[throughout]] the [[thematic]] of suicide, and follows the [[death]] of seven [[several]] people over the course of a week. [[Yeah]], that [[modes]] we have a pointless and [[dull]] episode for [[Saturday]], a pointless and [[dull]] episode for [[Sunday]], a pointless and [[dull]] episode for [[Yesterday]] etc etc. This [[cinematography]] manages to be [[yet]] more boring than my average week!

[[Deir]] Todesking is [[patently]] an 'art' [[cinema]], [[while]] this [[could]] [[arise]] to be a [[references]] to the [[paths]] that not very much makes sense rather than a [[references]] to the [[cinematography]] bearing any [[analogy]] to 'art'. Each segment of the [[filmmaking]] is meant to tell a [[distinct]] [[storytelling]] - but it doesn't! We just [[gets]] a [[timely]] [[tiny]] sketch on suicide, and it only makes you wonder what the point is. The [[cinematography]] feels like it should be deep, but there's a [[magnificent]] [[grand]] [[emptiness]] where the intelligence should be and [[anything]] there to [[fills]] it. Buttgereit [[utilizing]] a few evocative [[imagery]]; but I'm unlikely to [[remind]] any of them for more than a [[weeks]] or so because this [[cinematography]] just isn't that memorable. There's a shot [[encompassing]] a decomposing man's [[agency]] that [[idiosyncrasies]] [[rather]] often, but that [[attains]] [[longtime]] pretty [[speedy]] and all you're [[exited]] with is the [[repose]] of the [[filmmaking]], which is [[deplorable]]. [[Though]] I were to [[fighting]] for [[buena]] [[matters]] to [[said]] about this [[dammit]], all I can [[believe]] of is this; the title sounds cool. As I mentioned, Nekromantik is the only other [[cinematography]] I've [[watched]] from this [[enthusiast]] [[superintendent]]; I have copies of Schramm and Nekromantik 2, and now I'm really in no rush to watch either. Der Todesking is a dull film with no point and anyone that calls it 'art' is very much mistaken. Give it a miss. --------------------------------------------- Result 4302 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I thought "What's New Scooby-Doo" was pretty bad (yes, I'm sorry to say I didn't like it), since Hanna-Barbera didn't produce it and it took a drastic step away from the old series. When I heard "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" was in the works, I thought it could be better. But when I saw a pic of how Scooby and Shaggy were going to [[appear]], I knew this show was going to be bad, if not worse. I watched a few episodes, and believe me, it is just yet another "Teen Titans" or "Loonatics Unleashed"-wannabe. No longer are Scooby and Shaggy going against people wearing masks of cool, creepy monsters that rob banks. Now they are going after a typical super-villain whom wants to destroy the world. Shaggy and Scooby-Doo have [[become]] more brave, too. Also, since Shaggy IS NOT [[going]] to be a vegetarian in this series, Casey [[Kasem]] (whom actually IS a vegetarian), the original voice of Shaggy, will NOT voice Shaggy. He will only voice Shaggy if he doesn't [[eat]] meat, and that was just a [[stupid]] corporate-done change to update the [[franchise]], as if the Internet jokes weren't [[enough]]. So Scott Menville (whom previously voiced [[Red]] Herring on "A [[Pup]] Named Scooby-Doo") voices Shaggy here. Believe me, the voice is [[REALLY]] [[BAD]]! It makes Shaggy [[sound]] [[like]] a squeaky 10-year-old, and I [[must]] [[agree]] the [[voice]] definitely fits his new [[ugly]] [[look]]. [[However]], [[Kasem]] DOES voice Shaggy's Uncle [[Albert]], which is a [[sort]] of good [[thing]]. Scooby-Doo, on the other hand, does not [[look]] that well. He [[seems]] to have been [[designed]] to [[look]] more like the CGI Scooby-Doo from the live-action movies. [[Also]], Scooby's Frank Welker [[voice]] (need I [[mention]] Brain the [[Dog]] again?) [[still]] hasn't improved. Robi, the robotic butler, is [[practically]] [[worse]] than Scrappy-Doo! He [[tries]] to be funny and does "comical" impressions and [[gives]] safety [[tips]] ("[[Remember]] [[kids]], don't stand under [[trees]] during a [[thunderstorm]]!"), but it just doesn't fit into a Scooby-Doo [[cartoon]]. Again, the Hanna-Barbera sound [[effects]] are [[rarely]] [[used]] here. However, on one episode, "Lightning Strikes Twice," they use the "Castle thunder" thunderclaps during it, almost extensively! (Although they DO still use the newly-recorded thunder sound effects, too.) Scooby-Doo hasn't use "Castle thunder" sound effects since 1991. But my question is, why use "Castle thunder" on "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue," while NOT use it on the direct-to-video movies or [[even]] on "What's New Scooby-Doo!" (Two episodes of WNSD used it, and it wasn't enough, unfortunately.) If WNSD and the DTV movies used it, then they might be [[better]] than this crappy cartoon. The day this show premiered, I watched the first episode, and it was SO bad I turned it off after only five minutes! To get my mind off of this poor show, I rented "Scooby-Doo, Pirates Ahoy!" which came out around the same time. And you know what? The "Pirates Ahoy" movie was actually BETTER than "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" (and even better than "What's New, Scooby-Doo!") And it looks like the new designs that the characters have isn't permanent to the franchise. The direct-to-video movies coming out while this show is being made use the regular character designs, thankfully. But, whether you loved or hated "What's New Scooby-Doo," I don't recommend it. But if you HATE the old series, THEN you'll love it! (Oh god, I hope the old Scooby-Doo cartoon stay better than this new $#*%!) Anyways, like WNSD, a really bad addition to the Scooby canon. I thought "What's New Scooby-Doo" was pretty bad (yes, I'm sorry to say I didn't like it), since Hanna-Barbera didn't produce it and it took a drastic step away from the old series. When I heard "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" was in the works, I thought it could be better. But when I saw a pic of how Scooby and Shaggy were going to [[arise]], I knew this show was going to be bad, if not worse. I watched a few episodes, and believe me, it is just yet another "Teen Titans" or "Loonatics Unleashed"-wannabe. No longer are Scooby and Shaggy going against people wearing masks of cool, creepy monsters that rob banks. Now they are going after a typical super-villain whom wants to destroy the world. Shaggy and Scooby-Doo have [[becoming]] more brave, too. Also, since Shaggy IS NOT [[gonna]] to be a vegetarian in this series, Casey [[Qasim]] (whom actually IS a vegetarian), the original voice of Shaggy, will NOT voice Shaggy. He will only voice Shaggy if he doesn't [[coma]] meat, and that was just a [[imbecile]] corporate-done change to update the [[franchises]], as if the Internet jokes weren't [[sufficiently]]. So Scott Menville (whom previously voiced [[Rouge]] Herring on "A [[Puppy]] Named Scooby-Doo") voices Shaggy here. Believe me, the voice is [[TRUTHFULLY]] [[WICKED]]! It makes Shaggy [[sounds]] [[iike]] a squeaky 10-year-old, and I [[owe]] [[concur]] the [[vocals]] definitely fits his new [[ghastly]] [[gaze]]. [[Conversely]], [[Kassim]] DOES voice Shaggy's Uncle [[Alberto]], which is a [[kinds]] of good [[stuff]]. Scooby-Doo, on the other hand, does not [[glance]] that well. He [[seem]] to have been [[destined]] to [[gaze]] more like the CGI Scooby-Doo from the live-action movies. [[Further]], Scooby's Frank Welker [[vocals]] (need I [[cite]] Brain the [[Hound]] again?) [[however]] hasn't improved. Robi, the robotic butler, is [[almost]] [[pire]] than Scrappy-Doo! He [[strive]] to be funny and does "comical" impressions and [[provides]] safety [[advices]] ("[[Remembers]] [[juvenile]], don't stand under [[tree]] during a [[rainstorm]]!"), but it just doesn't fit into a Scooby-Doo [[comic]]. Again, the Hanna-Barbera sound [[consequences]] are [[seldom]] [[employs]] here. However, on one episode, "Lightning Strikes Twice," they use the "Castle thunder" thunderclaps during it, almost extensively! (Although they DO still use the newly-recorded thunder sound effects, too.) Scooby-Doo hasn't use "Castle thunder" sound effects since 1991. But my question is, why use "Castle thunder" on "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue," while NOT use it on the direct-to-video movies or [[yet]] on "What's New Scooby-Doo!" (Two episodes of WNSD used it, and it wasn't enough, unfortunately.) If WNSD and the DTV movies used it, then they might be [[best]] than this crappy cartoon. The day this show premiered, I watched the first episode, and it was SO bad I turned it off after only five minutes! To get my mind off of this poor show, I rented "Scooby-Doo, Pirates Ahoy!" which came out around the same time. And you know what? The "Pirates Ahoy" movie was actually BETTER than "Shaggy and Scooby-Doo Get a Clue" (and even better than "What's New, Scooby-Doo!") And it looks like the new designs that the characters have isn't permanent to the franchise. The direct-to-video movies coming out while this show is being made use the regular character designs, thankfully. But, whether you loved or hated "What's New Scooby-Doo," I don't recommend it. But if you HATE the old series, THEN you'll love it! (Oh god, I hope the old Scooby-Doo cartoon stay better than this new $#*%!) Anyways, like WNSD, a really bad addition to the Scooby canon. --------------------------------------------- Result 4303 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] A woman borough a boy to this world and was alone. They both were [[alone]] because a boy had a gift and a curse in one package - he was capable of withdrawing sword from his arm. There was [[always]] a wound on his wrist in the cause of this "[[gift]]" - the wound of the deadliest weapon inside of his body. First he kills his constantly drunk stepfather who hurts his mom every time. [[Then]] he grows up and decides to find his real father. Just as simple as all the time for a superhero - he reaches the justice....but the society decides this justice is not necessary and dangerous which is indeed right 'cause it is not like in Hollywood movies that the character does not try to kill anyone - Sasha (he is the main hero acted by Artem Tkachenko) kills if the person who in his opinion deserves to die but gets blames from authorities and runs. In such a runaway from authorities and Mafia he meets a girl (acted by Chulpan Hamatova) and falls in love with her. Everything else is to be watched...not told. Be aware that this film is more about feelings and emotions but not about actions. This film is full of pain of the main character full of him and his vision of life. A woman borough a boy to this world and was alone. They both were [[merely]] because a boy had a gift and a curse in one package - he was capable of withdrawing sword from his arm. There was [[consistently]] a wound on his wrist in the cause of this "[[knack]]" - the wound of the deadliest weapon inside of his body. First he kills his constantly drunk stepfather who hurts his mom every time. [[Thereafter]] he grows up and decides to find his real father. Just as simple as all the time for a superhero - he reaches the justice....but the society decides this justice is not necessary and dangerous which is indeed right 'cause it is not like in Hollywood movies that the character does not try to kill anyone - Sasha (he is the main hero acted by Artem Tkachenko) kills if the person who in his opinion deserves to die but gets blames from authorities and runs. In such a runaway from authorities and Mafia he meets a girl (acted by Chulpan Hamatova) and falls in love with her. Everything else is to be watched...not told. Be aware that this film is more about feelings and emotions but not about actions. This film is full of pain of the main character full of him and his vision of life. --------------------------------------------- Result 4304 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] I cannot believe how popular this [[show]] is. I consider myself an avid sci-fi fan. I have read countless sci-fi novels and have [[enjoyed]] many sci-fi movies and TV shows. I really wouldn't [[even]] consider this true sci-fi. [[Every]] episode I have [[sat]] through was [[like]] a lame, watered down version of a Star Trek episode, minus [[anything]] that might make it interesting or exciting.

It's basically a bunch of people standing around in ARMY [[fatigues]], [[talking]] about something boring, who [[occasionally]] go through the Stargate and end up on a planet that looks just like Earth, with people who look and sound just like Humans! It seemed extremely low budget. The characters are all forgettable one dimensional [[cutouts]], and the many attempts at humor fall flat. It reminds me when you see a commercial with a famous athlete in it, trying to be funny, but he is not. It is just sad.

The movie was terrible as well. There is so much you can do with a portal through space, yet every place the ARMY people go is BORING! This shows no imagination! I actually thought the TV series "Alien Nation" from a few years back (based on the movie Alien Nation) was much better. That [[show]] actually had good [[story]] lines and decent characters. I wasn't [[crazy]] about "[[Alien]] Nation", but compared to this [[overrated]] [[crap]], it was great!

Also, unlike the great new "Battlestar Galactica" series, "Stargate" copied the look and feel of the lame movie too closely! They should have at least updated the cheesy "toilet flushing" special effect of whenever somebody goes through the Stargate. I cannot believe how popular this [[exhibitions]] is. I consider myself an avid sci-fi fan. I have read countless sci-fi novels and have [[adored]] many sci-fi movies and TV shows. I really wouldn't [[yet]] consider this true sci-fi. [[Any]] episode I have [[oin]] through was [[iike]] a lame, watered down version of a Star Trek episode, minus [[algo]] that might make it interesting or exciting.

It's basically a bunch of people standing around in ARMY [[trusses]], [[chat]] about something boring, who [[sometimes]] go through the Stargate and end up on a planet that looks just like Earth, with people who look and sound just like Humans! It seemed extremely low budget. The characters are all forgettable one dimensional [[indentations]], and the many attempts at humor fall flat. It reminds me when you see a commercial with a famous athlete in it, trying to be funny, but he is not. It is just sad.

The movie was terrible as well. There is so much you can do with a portal through space, yet every place the ARMY people go is BORING! This shows no imagination! I actually thought the TV series "Alien Nation" from a few years back (based on the movie Alien Nation) was much better. That [[exhibitions]] actually had good [[histories]] lines and decent characters. I wasn't [[madman]] about "[[Exotic]] Nation", but compared to this [[overstated]] [[damnit]], it was great!

Also, unlike the great new "Battlestar Galactica" series, "Stargate" copied the look and feel of the lame movie too closely! They should have at least updated the cheesy "toilet flushing" special effect of whenever somebody goes through the Stargate. --------------------------------------------- Result 4305 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] They should have named this [[movie]] ...[[Blonde]] [[women]] that [[needed]] to get their roots [[colored]]. Also the [[main]] [[character]], geeze, the too tight sweaters. The [[giggling]]. [[Thought]] the [[guy]] did a good [[job]] [[though]]. I [[keep]] [[hoping]] we'll [[find]] a [[good]] 8 star Christmas movie to watch this [[week]]. The dart throwing. [[Had]] to [[laugh]] at that too. We've still got 3 more on the DVR to watch, [[maybe]] we'll [[get]] [[lucky]]. [[Oh]] [[yeah]], I [[figured]] the [[guy]] out [[pretty]] [[quickly]] and [[nailed]] it when he [[picked]] up the [[flowers]] and then [[drove]] out with his [[cousin]]. I [[told]] my [[daughter]] they were on their [[way]] to the [[cemetery]]. And how [[stupid]] was it that the two [[gals]] followed them there [[spying]] on them? [[Creepy]]. They should have named this [[cinematography]] ...[[Lager]] [[daughters]] that [[needs]] to get their roots [[coloured]]. Also the [[primary]] [[traits]], geeze, the too tight sweaters. The [[laughs]]. [[Thoughts]] the [[man]] did a good [[labour]] [[despite]]. I [[retain]] [[awaiting]] we'll [[unearthed]] a [[alright]] 8 star Christmas movie to watch this [[chou]]. The dart throwing. [[Has]] to [[laughter]] at that too. We've still got 3 more on the DVR to watch, [[perhaps]] we'll [[got]] [[fortunate]]. [[Ohh]] [[yes]], I [[thought]] the [[boys]] out [[quite]] [[swiftly]] and [[pinched]] it when he [[took]] up the [[blom]] and then [[prompted]] out with his [[homey]]. I [[said]] my [[girls]] they were on their [[paths]] to the [[tomb]]. And how [[foolish]] was it that the two [[hens]] followed them there [[espionage]] on them? [[Scary]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4306 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] A [[truly]] [[dreadful]] film. I did not know initially that this was a Kiwi effort - but very soon I started to realize that all the characters were speaking with hardly disguised kiwi accents under the [[fake]] American ones. Why did it need to be set n America anyway? - it [[could]] have been set in NZ and then the actors could have used their normal voices. Surely someone in the production team could hear the [[dreadful]] attempts at speaking with American accents? A bad bad [[film]]. I am surprised it has lasted this [[long]] - how did it make it out of the can? It just seemed like a very poor [[attempt]] at a Segal/Willis type action man flick.A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY! If there was any TAXPAYER money in this piece of trash, I would be leading a revolution to have all the money put back into the Treasury. I am still reeling (get it? pun, reeling!) at the absolute [[garbage]] I have just seen. Why did I continue to watch? Well, I am a movie fanatic and cant help ,myself! A [[truthfully]] [[scary]] film. I did not know initially that this was a Kiwi effort - but very soon I started to realize that all the characters were speaking with hardly disguised kiwi accents under the [[pseudo]] American ones. Why did it need to be set n America anyway? - it [[did]] have been set in NZ and then the actors could have used their normal voices. Surely someone in the production team could hear the [[scary]] attempts at speaking with American accents? A bad bad [[cinematographic]]. I am surprised it has lasted this [[lengthy]] - how did it make it out of the can? It just seemed like a very poor [[try]] at a Segal/Willis type action man flick.A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY! If there was any TAXPAYER money in this piece of trash, I would be leading a revolution to have all the money put back into the Treasury. I am still reeling (get it? pun, reeling!) at the absolute [[junk]] I have just seen. Why did I continue to watch? Well, I am a movie fanatic and cant help ,myself! --------------------------------------------- Result 4307 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] [[Bill]] (Buddy Rogers) is sent to New York by his uncle (Richard Tucker) to experience life before he inherits $25million. His uncle has [[paid]] 3 [[women]] Jacqui (Kathryn Crawford), Maxine (Josephine Dunn) and Pauline (Carole Lombard) to chaperone him and ensure that he does not fall foul of gold-diggers. One such lady Cleo (Geneva Mitchell) turns up on the scene to the disapprovement of the [[women]]. We follow the tale as the girls are offered more money to appear in a show instead of their escorting role that they have agreed to carry out for the 3 [[months]] that Bill is in New York, while Bill meets with Cleo and another woman. At the end, love is in the air for Bill and one other .............

The [[picture]] quality and sound quality are poor in this [[film]]. The story is interspersed with musical numbers but the songs are [[bad]] and Kathryn Crawford has a [[terrible]] [[voice]]. [[Rogers]] isn't that good either. He's [[pleasant]] [[enough]] but only really [[comes]] to life when playing the drums or trombone. There is a very irritating [[character]] who plays a cab driver (Roscoe Karns) and the [[film]] is just [[dull]]. [[Invoice]] (Buddy Rogers) is sent to New York by his uncle (Richard Tucker) to experience life before he inherits $25million. His uncle has [[salaried]] 3 [[femmes]] Jacqui (Kathryn Crawford), Maxine (Josephine Dunn) and Pauline (Carole Lombard) to chaperone him and ensure that he does not fall foul of gold-diggers. One such lady Cleo (Geneva Mitchell) turns up on the scene to the disapprovement of the [[mujer]]. We follow the tale as the girls are offered more money to appear in a show instead of their escorting role that they have agreed to carry out for the 3 [[mois]] that Bill is in New York, while Bill meets with Cleo and another woman. At the end, love is in the air for Bill and one other .............

The [[photo]] quality and sound quality are poor in this [[cinema]]. The story is interspersed with musical numbers but the songs are [[amiss]] and Kathryn Crawford has a [[terrifying]] [[vowel]]. [[Rutgers]] isn't that good either. He's [[delightful]] [[satisfactorily]] but only really [[occurs]] to life when playing the drums or trombone. There is a very irritating [[trait]] who plays a cab driver (Roscoe Karns) and the [[kino]] is just [[uninspiring]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4308 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (63%)]] Up until the [[last]] few minutes of the [[movie]], I would have [[given]] the [[movie]] a [[score]] of 7 or 8 [[stars]]. [[However]], the [[ending]] is so [[terrible]] and "Hollywoodized" that it [[completely]] undermines the first 80% of the [[movie]].

The [[plot]] [[revolves]] [[around]] a submarine and the possibility that they received an [[order]] to fire their nuclear missiles. The [[Captain]], Gene Hackman, is all for [[launching]], while his [[first]] [[officer]], Denzel Washington, is in favor of [[confirming]] the [[launch]] [[orders]] [[first]]. The [[problem]] is, to [[launch]] BOTH the captain and 1st officer must [[simultaneously]] use their [[launch]] keys. Hackman is determined to [[launch]] and Washington [[stands]] firm until [[eventually]] this [[results]] in [[armed]] [[insurrection]] [[aboard]] the sub. [[Eventually]], the [[mistake]] is [[discovered]] and the [[missiles]] are not [[launched]]. [[Cool]]. However, here [[comes]] the [[part]] that just doesn't ring true. [[After]] they are back on land and [[go]] before a [[review]] board, Washington and Hackman (who'd just [[spent]] half the [[movie]] [[trying]] to [[kill]] each other) [[shake]] hands and are all buddy buddy! [[Huh]]?! Too trite an ending to make the movie worth while for me. Up until the [[latter]] few minutes of the [[film]], I would have [[bestowed]] the [[kino]] a [[punctuation]] of 7 or 8 [[superstar]]. [[Nevertheless]], the [[terminated]] is so [[scary]] and "Hollywoodized" that it [[altogether]] undermines the first 80% of the [[films]].

The [[intrigue]] [[turns]] [[roundabout]] a submarine and the possibility that they received an [[decree]] to fire their nuclear missiles. The [[Kapitan]], Gene Hackman, is all for [[started]], while his [[fiirst]] [[officers]], Denzel Washington, is in favor of [[assuring]] the [[begin]] [[order]] [[firstly]]. The [[difficulties]] is, to [[commenced]] BOTH the captain and 1st officer must [[concurrently]] use their [[induction]] keys. Hackman is determined to [[began]] and Washington [[stand]] firm until [[ultimately]] this [[consequences]] in [[armada]] [[rebels]] [[onboard]] the sub. [[Ultimately]], the [[error]] is [[discovering]] and the [[shells]] are not [[launching]]. [[Cooling]]. However, here [[arrives]] the [[party]] that just doesn't ring true. [[Upon]] they are back on land and [[going]] before a [[examine]] board, Washington and Hackman (who'd just [[spending]] half the [[film]] [[seeking]] to [[murder]] each other) [[shiver]] hands and are all buddy buddy! [[Haah]]?! Too trite an ending to make the movie worth while for me. --------------------------------------------- Result 4309 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] The [[original]] "Cube" is a fantastic B-movie rich with paranoia, meaty characterization, and fine over-the-top performances. It's creepy, cryptic, and cool. And it stands perfectly well, on its own, without a stupid sequel like "Cube Zero."

This third (!) film in the Cube series is part retread (most of the booby traps are sadly recycled), part [[aberration]]. It takes the bold step of explaining what the cube is - something that was never revealed in the first movie - but, since said explanation is bland, I'd rather it was kept a secret. There are some potentially interesting references to the society that exists outside of the cube, but they never develop beyond hints about some kind of political-religious totalitarian state. So, what little social commentary there is feels flat and unfocused.

What works? Basically nothing. The acting is purely amateur hour, the pacing is slow (how much of this movie consists of two nerds watching a screen?), and the gore effects, while revolting, fail to convince. In short, "Cube Zero" reminded me of a "Cube" fan-fic, a sloppy and sophomoric clone of a good movie that definitely did not need a sequel. The [[upfront]] "Cube" is a fantastic B-movie rich with paranoia, meaty characterization, and fine over-the-top performances. It's creepy, cryptic, and cool. And it stands perfectly well, on its own, without a stupid sequel like "Cube Zero."

This third (!) film in the Cube series is part retread (most of the booby traps are sadly recycled), part [[absurdity]]. It takes the bold step of explaining what the cube is - something that was never revealed in the first movie - but, since said explanation is bland, I'd rather it was kept a secret. There are some potentially interesting references to the society that exists outside of the cube, but they never develop beyond hints about some kind of political-religious totalitarian state. So, what little social commentary there is feels flat and unfocused.

What works? Basically nothing. The acting is purely amateur hour, the pacing is slow (how much of this movie consists of two nerds watching a screen?), and the gore effects, while revolting, fail to convince. In short, "Cube Zero" reminded me of a "Cube" fan-fic, a sloppy and sophomoric clone of a good movie that definitely did not need a sequel. --------------------------------------------- Result 4310 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[Pushing]] [[Daisies]] is just a [[lovely]] fairy [[tale]], with [[shades]] of "[[Amelie]]"'s aesthetic and romance. It's [[got]] a [[beautiful]] palette, its shots well [[thought]] out and detailed, its [[names]] and dialogue whimsical and too cutesy to be [[real]], its imagination [[great]], and its romance [[deep]].

Watch the [[blue]] in the [[sky]] pop out at you, as blue can't be [[found]] in the rest of the sets or shots (with few [[exceptions]]).

Watch a weirdly natural and [[totally]] [[satisfying]] song break out of a scene.

Its score is [[gorgeous]], its [[cast]] is supremely likable, there's [[great]] music, and the two [[leading]] romantic [[stars]] can't touch each other or she'll [[die]]. How [[much]] more sexual [[tension]] do you [[need]]? (Actually, I had [[wished]] they [[found]] a [[way]] around this one, but c'est la [[vie]]).

It is [[simply]] a [[show]] that it is a pleasure to [[spend]] an [[hour]] with, and I [[recommend]] it [[highly]]. There hasn't been other [[television]] [[quite]] like it, and I [[would]] [[like]] to [[see]] more. It [[got]] me through a [[flu]] one crappy [[week]], as it makes for good company.

Bring it back! [[Prompting]] [[Mums]] is just a [[handsome]] fairy [[histories]], with [[sunglasses]] of "[[Emily]]"'s aesthetic and romance. It's [[did]] a [[funky]] palette, its shots well [[ideology]] out and detailed, its [[name]] and dialogue whimsical and too cutesy to be [[authentic]], its imagination [[marvellous]], and its romance [[deepest]].

Watch the [[bleu]] in the [[skies]] pop out at you, as blue can't be [[unearthed]] in the rest of the sets or shots (with few [[exception]]).

Watch a weirdly natural and [[altogether]] [[satisfactory]] song break out of a scene.

Its score is [[marvellous]], its [[casting]] is supremely likable, there's [[marvellous]] music, and the two [[principal]] romantic [[celebrity]] can't touch each other or she'll [[dies]]. How [[very]] more sexual [[voltage]] do you [[gotta]]? (Actually, I had [[wanted]] they [[detected]] a [[pathway]] around this one, but c'est la [[iife]]).

It is [[solely]] a [[exhibit]] that it is a pleasure to [[spending]] an [[hora]] with, and I [[recommends]] it [[unimaginably]]. There hasn't been other [[tv]] [[rather]] like it, and I [[ought]] [[likes]] to [[seeing]] more. It [[did]] me through a [[avian]] one crappy [[chow]], as it makes for good company.

Bring it back! --------------------------------------------- Result 4311 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] So you think a talking parrot is not your cup of tea huh? Well, think again. Paulie is a wonderful film filled with touching moments.The characters are all lovable especially Paulie as he enters the lives of many people on his journey.It is journey worth experiencing. Don't miss it! It is available on home video. --------------------------------------------- Result 4312 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] After a chance encounter on the train, a young couple spends a single night strolling the streets of Vienna, discussing life and love. The primary reason to see "Before Sunrise," is to watch a young Julie Delpy deliver her lines. As "Celine," this sexy, brainy, soulful brown-eyed blond is sort of a cross between Brigitte Bardot and [[Joni]] Mitchell as they were in their mid-twenties. [[Risking]] overstatement, Celine is practically the [[ideal]] woman, [[unusually]] beautiful and very feminine while being natural, unpretentious, introspective, and selflessly loving. We can easily forgive that she is a bit eccentric and talks a blue streak, for her sincere, intelligent remarks are occasionally penetrating. Further, her varied expressions are nothing short of captivating and she speaks English with a French accent that is very endearing.

If there is a fly in the ointment of this good movie, it would have to be her unkempt and disheveled costar. Ethan Hawke as "Jessie" comes off like a vaguely appealing slob, sort of a Maynard G. Krebs of the nineties. Attempting to appear detached and nonchalant, he sort of drags himself through certain shots. His pants fit poorly, his tee shirt is coming untucked, his wavy dark hair (his most attractive feature) needs a good washing, and someone really should have showed him how to properly trim his youthful goatee. Nevertheless, he is supposed to represent an unwashed youth on a two-week train ride around Europe, so the look he has cultivated is probably pretty genuine. His oft-cynical observations and wry sense of humor seem to impress the unapologetically romantic Celine, although she is occasionally disturbed by the extent of his alienation. When he finally admits to her that he is utterly sick of himself and likes being near her because he feels like a different person in her presence, we know he is getting somewhere.

After blowing their collective funds on a series of cafes, bars, and silly diversions, they agree that because they may never see one another again, they should make the most of it. Jesse bums a bottle of red wine off a sentimental bartender so that he and his newfound lady love may repair to a local park in the middle of the night to lie on the grass, looking up at the moon and the stars and watching the sun come up.

Given his boundless luck in the romance department, it is especially irksome when Jessie, as the very definition of a naive jerk, foolishly allows this wonderful young lady to slip from his grasp. He contents himself with a half-baked plan, quickly devised at the railroad station when he bids her adieu, to reunite at the same spot in half a year. When the appointed time comes, you just know this beautiful and unusual girl will be involved with another, perhaps even married and pregnant. For whatever reason, she probably won't show, while Jesse, who ends up working at Target or (if he's lucky) the local library, will go back to Vienna, desperate to see her again, only to wind up alone.

Despite what for me was a very discouraging conclusion, "Before Sunrise" is a beautiful movie. I highly recommend both it and the sequel, "Before Sunset." After a chance encounter on the train, a young couple spends a single night strolling the streets of Vienna, discussing life and love. The primary reason to see "Before Sunrise," is to watch a young Julie Delpy deliver her lines. As "Celine," this sexy, brainy, soulful brown-eyed blond is sort of a cross between Brigitte Bardot and [[Johnnie]] Mitchell as they were in their mid-twenties. [[Jeopardizing]] overstatement, Celine is practically the [[idealistic]] woman, [[unimaginably]] beautiful and very feminine while being natural, unpretentious, introspective, and selflessly loving. We can easily forgive that she is a bit eccentric and talks a blue streak, for her sincere, intelligent remarks are occasionally penetrating. Further, her varied expressions are nothing short of captivating and she speaks English with a French accent that is very endearing.

If there is a fly in the ointment of this good movie, it would have to be her unkempt and disheveled costar. Ethan Hawke as "Jessie" comes off like a vaguely appealing slob, sort of a Maynard G. Krebs of the nineties. Attempting to appear detached and nonchalant, he sort of drags himself through certain shots. His pants fit poorly, his tee shirt is coming untucked, his wavy dark hair (his most attractive feature) needs a good washing, and someone really should have showed him how to properly trim his youthful goatee. Nevertheless, he is supposed to represent an unwashed youth on a two-week train ride around Europe, so the look he has cultivated is probably pretty genuine. His oft-cynical observations and wry sense of humor seem to impress the unapologetically romantic Celine, although she is occasionally disturbed by the extent of his alienation. When he finally admits to her that he is utterly sick of himself and likes being near her because he feels like a different person in her presence, we know he is getting somewhere.

After blowing their collective funds on a series of cafes, bars, and silly diversions, they agree that because they may never see one another again, they should make the most of it. Jesse bums a bottle of red wine off a sentimental bartender so that he and his newfound lady love may repair to a local park in the middle of the night to lie on the grass, looking up at the moon and the stars and watching the sun come up.

Given his boundless luck in the romance department, it is especially irksome when Jessie, as the very definition of a naive jerk, foolishly allows this wonderful young lady to slip from his grasp. He contents himself with a half-baked plan, quickly devised at the railroad station when he bids her adieu, to reunite at the same spot in half a year. When the appointed time comes, you just know this beautiful and unusual girl will be involved with another, perhaps even married and pregnant. For whatever reason, she probably won't show, while Jesse, who ends up working at Target or (if he's lucky) the local library, will go back to Vienna, desperate to see her again, only to wind up alone.

Despite what for me was a very discouraging conclusion, "Before Sunrise" is a beautiful movie. I highly recommend both it and the sequel, "Before Sunset." --------------------------------------------- Result 4313 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (74%)]] This movie [[sounded]] [[like]] it might be [[entertaining]] and interesting from its description. But to me it was a bit of a let down. [[Very]] slow and [[hard]] to follow and [[see]] what was happening. It was as if the filmmaker took individual pieces of [[film]] and [[threw]] them in the air and had them spliced together whichever way they landed ([[definitely]] not in sequential [[order]]). Also, [[nothing]] of any [[consequence]] was being filmed. I have viewed quite a few different Korean films and have [[noticed]] that a [[good]] portion are well made and [[require]] some thinking on the viewer's part, which is [[different]] from the typical Hollywood film. But this one befuddled me to no end. I viewed the film a second and third time and it still didn't do anything for me. I still don't really understand what the filmmaker was [[trying]] to convey. If it was to just show a typical mundane portion of a person's life, I [[guess]] he succeeded. But I was looking for more. Needless to say, I can't recommend this movie to anyone. This movie [[rang]] [[iike]] it might be [[droll]] and interesting from its description. But to me it was a bit of a let down. [[Tremendously]] slow and [[tough]] to follow and [[behold]] what was happening. It was as if the filmmaker took individual pieces of [[cinema]] and [[lobbed]] them in the air and had them spliced together whichever way they landed ([[certainly]] not in sequential [[ordering]]). Also, [[anything]] of any [[aftermath]] was being filmed. I have viewed quite a few different Korean films and have [[saw]] that a [[alright]] portion are well made and [[needs]] some thinking on the viewer's part, which is [[several]] from the typical Hollywood film. But this one befuddled me to no end. I viewed the film a second and third time and it still didn't do anything for me. I still don't really understand what the filmmaker was [[seeking]] to convey. If it was to just show a typical mundane portion of a person's life, I [[imagine]] he succeeded. But I was looking for more. Needless to say, I can't recommend this movie to anyone. --------------------------------------------- Result 4314 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]]

"Burning Paradise" is a combination of neo-Shaw Brothers action and Ringo Lam's urban cynicism. When one watches the film, they might feel the fight scenes are only mediocre in nature but that doesn't matter, it's attitude and atmosphere that counts. This [[great]] [[film]] has both!! [[Always]] trying to be different than his contemporaries, Lam [[gives]] us to traditional heroes(Fong Sai-Yuk and Hung Shi-Kwan)and puts them in a "Raiders of the Lost Ark" setting. However, these are not the light-hearted comedic incarnations that you might see in a Jet Li movie. Instead these guys fight to the death with brutal results. What makes the film even better is that anyone could die at anytime, there is no holding back. Too bad, they don't make films like this more often.

"Burning Paradise" is a combination of neo-Shaw Brothers action and Ringo Lam's urban cynicism. When one watches the film, they might feel the fight scenes are only mediocre in nature but that doesn't matter, it's attitude and atmosphere that counts. This [[large]] [[cinematographic]] has both!! [[Incessantly]] trying to be different than his contemporaries, Lam [[donne]] us to traditional heroes(Fong Sai-Yuk and Hung Shi-Kwan)and puts them in a "Raiders of the Lost Ark" setting. However, these are not the light-hearted comedic incarnations that you might see in a Jet Li movie. Instead these guys fight to the death with brutal results. What makes the film even better is that anyone could die at anytime, there is no holding back. Too bad, they don't make films like this more often. --------------------------------------------- Result 4315 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (57%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] Lord Alan Cunningham(Antonio De Teffè)is a nutjob{seen early on trying to escape an insane asylum}, with this castle slowly succumbing to ruin, likes to kill various hookers who resemble his deceased wife Evelyn, a woman who betrayed him for another man, with those red locks. This nutcase is quite wealthy and his bachelor status can be quite alluring. He, however, is overrun by his obsession with his late wife's memory(specifically her adultery..he saw her naked with the lover). While the memory of Evelyn is almost devouring his whole existence, Alan tries his best to find true love and believes he has with Gladys(Marina Malfatti, who spends most of the film naked..that's probably her lone attribute since she isn't a very good actress), who agrees to marry him after a very short courtship which should probably throw up flags right away{there's a key moment of dialogue where she knows exactly to the very amount what he is worth}.

The only real person Alan can confide in is his doctor from the hospital, Dr. Richard Timberlane(Giacomo Rossi-Stuart). There are other key characters in this film that revolve around Alan. Alan's cousin, George(Rod Murdock), seems to be quite a good friend who often supplies him victims..I mean dates, while holding onto hope of getting his lord's estate some day. Albert(Roberto Maldera), Evelyn's brother, is a witness to Alan's slaughter and, instead of turning him into the police, squeezes him for cash. Aunt Agatha(Joan C Davis), wheelchair bound, lives at the castle estate and is often seen snooping around behind cracked doors. We later find that she is having a love affair with Albert.

All that is described above services the rest of the story which shows what appears to be the ghost of Evelyn haunting Alan, someone is killing off members of the cast family that revolve around Alan, and the body of Evelyn is indeed missing.

The ultimate question is who is committing the crimes after Alan and Gladys are married, where is Evelyn's body, and will Alan go over the edge? I have to be honest and say I just didn't really care much for this film. It's badly uneven and the pacing is all over the place. It looks great on the new DVD and the "rising from the grave sequence" is cool, but what really hurts the film in my mind is that the entire cast is unlikable. You really have a hard time caring for Alan because he is a psychotic who is skating on thin ice in regards to holding his sanity. He can be quite volatile. Who commits the crime really isn't that great a surprise for after several key characters are murdered off, there aren't but a choice few who could be doing it. What happens to Alan doesn't really make your throat gulp because you can make the argument he's just getting what he deserves. Those behind the whole scheme of the film in regards to Alan, as I pointed out before, aren't that shocking because if you are just slightly aware of certain circumstances(..or advantages they'd have)that would benefit them with the collapse of Alan's sanity, then everything just comes off less than stellar. I thought the editing was choppy and unexciting, but the acting from the entire cast is really below par. Some stylistics help and there is a sniff of Gothic atmosphere in the graveyard sequences to help it some. --------------------------------------------- Result 4316 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] I don't know why this [[conduct]] was ever [[tolerated]] in the [[movie]] [[business]]! This [[movie]] (short) is gross (to say the [[least]])! It is a bunch of 5-7 [[year]] old [[children]] [[wearing]] [[diapers]] with [[big]] bobby [[pins]], acting like adults (and too much so!). However, it is interesting because it is a good [[example]] of how "the good [[old]] days" [[may]] not have been so [[good]] after all! ([[Thank]] [[GOD]] we have laws against this [[kind]] of material now!)

{This is one [[short]] from the "Shirley Temple Festival"} I don't know why this [[demeanour]] was ever [[condoned]] in the [[cinematography]] [[firms]]! This [[flick]] (short) is gross (to say the [[fewest]])! It is a bunch of 5-7 [[annum]] old [[childhood]] [[wears]] [[nappies]] with [[grand]] bobby [[pines]], acting like adults (and too much so!). However, it is interesting because it is a good [[instances]] of how "the good [[archaic]] days" [[maggio]] not have been so [[buena]] after all! ([[Gratitude]] [[SEIGNEUR]] we have laws against this [[genre]] of material now!)

{This is one [[succinct]] from the "Shirley Temple Festival"} --------------------------------------------- Result 4317 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] This film quite literally has [[every]] single action movie cliche and all of them [[work]] to its [[advantage]]. Straight from Lethal Weapon [[Gary]] Busey wisecracks, shoots and chuckles through this film with such [[reckless]] abandonment it can't help but [[amuse]] and [[entertain]]. There are tanks, helicopters, machine gun [[battles]], grenades and ice cream vans and if they aren't good enough reasons to watch this film then how about the best one...Danny Trejo. And if you don't know who Danny Trejo is then you probably won't like this film. This film quite literally has [[any]] single action movie cliche and all of them [[cooperating]] to its [[parti]]. Straight from Lethal Weapon [[Gari]] Busey wisecracks, shoots and chuckles through this film with such [[irresponsible]] abandonment it can't help but [[distract]] and [[distract]]. There are tanks, helicopters, machine gun [[combating]], grenades and ice cream vans and if they aren't good enough reasons to watch this film then how about the best one...Danny Trejo. And if you don't know who Danny Trejo is then you probably won't like this film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4318 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (84%)]] Anyone who loved the two classic novels by Edward Ormondroyd will be [[disappointed]] in this film. All the magic and romance have been modernized out of his original story of a girl who does a good deed for a mysterious old lady, and given "three" in return. Three what? Not three wishes, but three rides into the 1800's on a rickety elevator...

The first novel is Time at the Top. The second is All in Good Time. Anyone who loved the two classic novels by Edward Ormondroyd will be [[frustrated]] in this film. All the magic and romance have been modernized out of his original story of a girl who does a good deed for a mysterious old lady, and given "three" in return. Three what? Not three wishes, but three rides into the 1800's on a rickety elevator...

The first novel is Time at the Top. The second is All in Good Time. --------------------------------------------- Result 4319 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (65%)]] I'll [[keep]] this one quite short. I believe that this is an [[extraordinary]] movie. I [[see]] other reviewers who have commented to the effect that it's badly written, poorly shot, has a terrible soundtrack and, worse, that it's not real in its [[portrayal]] of life. OK, so it may not be [[quite]] [[believable]] for its whole length, but this movie carries a message of [[hope]] which some others [[seemed]] to have [[missed]]. Hope that it isn't too late to save people from the terrible things that go on in so many lives. Gangland violence is real, right? Is it right, no! This movie carries an important social message which the cynics may dislike but which nonetheless is to be praised, rather than denigrated. I have watched this movie with great enjoyment at least eight times, each time with equal enjoyment and each time with the feeling that maybe the world could be made better and is not beyond saving (well not until 2008 anyway). 9 out of 10 from me for this one. It's very nearly [[perfect]] in my view. JMV I'll [[conserving]] this one quite short. I believe that this is an [[unbelievable]] movie. I [[seeing]] other reviewers who have commented to the effect that it's badly written, poorly shot, has a terrible soundtrack and, worse, that it's not real in its [[depiction]] of life. OK, so it may not be [[very]] [[credible]] for its whole length, but this movie carries a message of [[esperanza]] which some others [[looked]] to have [[flunked]]. Hope that it isn't too late to save people from the terrible things that go on in so many lives. Gangland violence is real, right? Is it right, no! This movie carries an important social message which the cynics may dislike but which nonetheless is to be praised, rather than denigrated. I have watched this movie with great enjoyment at least eight times, each time with equal enjoyment and each time with the feeling that maybe the world could be made better and is not beyond saving (well not until 2008 anyway). 9 out of 10 from me for this one. It's very nearly [[faultless]] in my view. JMV --------------------------------------------- Result 4320 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] "Return of the Jedi" is [[often]] remembered for what it did wrong [[rather]] than what it did right, and that is a [[shame]], because the [[last]] chronological installment in the [[Star]] [[Wars]] [[saga]] is a [[shining]] [[example]] of [[epic]] storytelling. It [[manages]] to wrap up all story lines of the previous [[movies]] in one grand finale, and does so very convincingly.

[[Yes]], there are Ewoks - cute and cuddly bears that arguably [[served]] to broaden the [[Star]] [[Wars]] demographic - and in the middle the movie [[tends]] to [[slow]] down a [[bit]]. But the final hour is [[arguably]] the [[best]] [[piece]] of the entire saga, where Luke [[finally]] [[comes]] [[face]] to [[face]] with Darth Vader, the most [[recognizable]] villain in movie [[history]].

Return of the Jedi did so many [[things]] right that people tend to [[overlook]]: it [[presented]] an [[incredible]] [[conclusion]] to the Darth Vader storyline (which went from [[slightly]] [[implausible]] in the "Empire [[Strikes]] Back" to very convincing here), an [[exciting]] [[opening]] at Jabba's Palace, a [[masterful]] performance of [[Ian]] McDiarmid as the Emperor, Luke [[finally]] [[coming]] into his own, the [[resolution]] of Solo and Leia's romance, and the [[extremely]] [[powerful]] [[final]] [[moments]] on the Endor moon.

[[Yes]], there are [[slight]] annoyances. But they are the annoyances of a generation of [[moviegoers]] who've had [[time]] to nitpick [[every]] [[single]] scene. It's [[still]] a magical and [[moving]] [[piece]] of [[cinema]] that [[also]] serves as a [[great]] final chapter. It's not a 'good' [[movie]] - it's [[fantastic]]! "Return of the Jedi" is [[habitually]] remembered for what it did wrong [[quite]] than what it did right, and that is a [[dishonor]], because the [[latter]] chronological installment in the [[Superstar]] [[Warfare]] [[tale]] is a [[glittering]] [[instances]] of [[saga]] storytelling. It [[administered]] to wrap up all story lines of the previous [[cinematography]] in one grand finale, and does so very convincingly.

[[Yup]], there are Ewoks - cute and cuddly bears that arguably [[played]] to broaden the [[Stars]] [[Warfare]] demographic - and in the middle the movie [[strives]] to [[deceleration]] down a [[bite]]. But the final hour is [[surely]] the [[optimum]] [[slice]] of the entire saga, where Luke [[eventually]] [[occurs]] [[encounter]] to [[confronts]] with Darth Vader, the most [[visible]] villain in movie [[stories]].

Return of the Jedi did so many [[items]] right that people tend to [[neglect]]: it [[lodged]] an [[unbelievable]] [[finding]] to the Darth Vader storyline (which went from [[moderately]] [[improbable]] in the "Empire [[Bombardment]] Back" to very convincing here), an [[fascinating]] [[initiation]] at Jabba's Palace, a [[masterly]] performance of [[Iain]] McDiarmid as the Emperor, Luke [[eventually]] [[arriving]] into his own, the [[solved]] of Solo and Leia's romance, and the [[terribly]] [[potent]] [[ultimate]] [[times]] on the Endor moon.

[[Yep]], there are [[modest]] annoyances. But they are the annoyances of a generation of [[spectators]] who've had [[period]] to nitpick [[any]] [[sole]] scene. It's [[yet]] a magical and [[shifting]] [[slice]] of [[cine]] that [[apart]] serves as a [[large]] final chapter. It's not a 'good' [[films]] - it's [[unbelievable]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4321 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (50%)]] While the [[original]] 1932 version, with Preston [[Foster]], was good, there's no remake more worthy than this 1959 one, or more impossible to [[find]] [[anywhere]], just as I strongly suspect Mickey Rooney to have had something to do with that. Never could a mere performance have ever been so [[masterfully]] brilliant, or a script more thought-provoking, as well as an [[improvement]] [[upon]] the [[original]]. [[Many]] [[years]] after the [[last]] of my several viewings of this film, in 1970, I read an article in which [[Mickey]] Rooney was recounting a visit he'd made to death row, and which had apparently very drastically [[eliminated]] [[whatever]] sense of personal identification he'd felt with people in [[similar]] [[circumstances]]. The article was about as short as the [[main]] [[character]] here, and didn't cover much, other than the extent to which his extreme disillusionment with the quality of the inmates themselves had been [[emphasized]], even in language I [[would]] not [[care]] to [[explicitly]] [[quote]] here. . . . . One of my [[main]] problems with capital [[punishment]] is that, of course, it is not [[evenly]], impartially [[applied]], just as [[many]] innocent people are far-too-carelessly, [[thus]] unnecessarily [[sent]] to [[meet]] this [[particular]] fate. Another problem I have with it is that it is not applied [[swiftly]] [[enough]], or, for that matter, even publicly enough! The bible makes a [[special]] point, in such [[cases]], about one of the more [[important]] [[purposes]] of such, as a deterrent, being ineffectually obscured, minus, not only a public [[viewing]], but [[also]] the direct [[participation]] of all! As for those who [[claim]] to [[prove]], statistically, that such is not an [[effective]] deterrent? [[In]] [[addition]] to having a problem about the reliability of their data, I have [[little]] if any objectively disprovable doubt [[many]] are behind bars now due to the [[extent]] that such a deterrent is [[lacking]]. [[However]], I do have a problem about the fact that Robert Duvall, in The Apostle, had been punished at all, for his particular "crime," or that the only hope of leniency for one such as he would have to be based on a "temporary insanity" defense, as though that would serve as the only acceptable excuse in his kind of case. . . . In addition to various other questions concerning the motives of Mickey Rooney for that particular visit he'd recounted, and about the answers to which I can only try to speculate, I suspect the main one had been of a decidedly religious nature. I don't know exactly when he'd become the professing Christian he now makes it a special point, whenever possible, to emphasize that he is; but, as anybody should be well-aware, this particular category of people tends to be the most vehemently out for blood, when it comes to extracting an eye for an eye. However, I have no particular bone of contention concerning that, per se, just as there's no doubt, scripturally speaking, that not all, and perhaps not even most, shall be spared the same ultimate fate, at the hands of the Lord Himself, as a result of His sacrifice on the cross. However, there is a problem, for me, about the spirit or attitude with which most professing Christians emphasize their enthusiasm for capital punishment; for, contrary to the Lord Himself, who would love to see everybody saved (Ezekiel 18:32) (II Peter 3:9), they seem to go vindictively out of their way to find reasons to condemn! . . . What most people, on either side of this superlatively ever-burning issue, cannot appear to sufficiently appreciate, is that the Lord is as dynamically and elusively soft in nature as He is hard. The two sides of His nature appear to be so inherently incompatible as to render Him mentally deranged, at least by any strictly human reckoning. Yet, regardless of how harrowingly ungraspable this miraculously dynamic blending of the water and oil in His nature surely is, there can be no doubt that anything short of it, or anything fanatically and characteristically on either one side or the other of this equation, falls inadequately and unacceptably short of the entire judicial truth. Indeed, I've seen the most blood-curdling thirst for the same come out, self-contradictorily enough, on far-too-many occasions, whenever the categorically anti-death penalty advocates are confronted, even in the most rationally well-balanced ways, with the fact that, although the Lord died for everybody, not all are thereby going to be saved. After-all, in order to receive absolution, one must, to repeat the same term, reach out and receive it, that is, repent (Luke 13:3-5). Could anything make more sense? . . . But, then, what about the Lord's command to forgive, even in the case of one's enemies, of those who despise and persecute you without a just cause or provocation? One of the far-too-prevailing difficulties with this kind of sentimentality, as popularly misinterpreted, is the way it obscuringly over-simplifies the real meaning of forgiveness. The act of forgiveness does not, in itself, mean the same thing as unconditionally excusing the one being forgiven. When one takes a clearly sober, rationally well-balanced view here, from the perspective of God's own attitude, all it actually amounts to is a fervent wish that the one forgiven will ultimately succeed at finding his way, seeing the light, and being granted mercy. This attitude is, of course, the very opposite of, say, that of Jonah, who actually resented it when God told him that his preaching to the people of Nineveh would result in their repentance. Jonah didn't want them to repent, but vindictively desired that they be destroyed. How self-righteously, cold-bloodedly like unto most professing Christians he was, save that even his reasons were undoubtedly better than most! I envy Jonah almost as much as he would me! However, minus the repentance of the one being forgiven, any forgiveness he may receive from a genuine Christian is not going to do him any good. In such a case, the only one to benefit is the real Christian himself! While the [[preliminary]] 1932 version, with Preston [[Promoting]], was good, there's no remake more worthy than this 1959 one, or more impossible to [[finds]] [[nowhere]], just as I strongly suspect Mickey Rooney to have had something to do with that. Never could a mere performance have ever been so [[skilfully]] brilliant, or a script more thought-provoking, as well as an [[improve]] [[afterwards]] the [[initial]]. [[Multiple]] [[yrs]] after the [[final]] of my several viewings of this film, in 1970, I read an article in which [[Mikey]] Rooney was recounting a visit he'd made to death row, and which had apparently very drastically [[abolished]] [[whichever]] sense of personal identification he'd felt with people in [[equivalent]] [[situations]]. The article was about as short as the [[principal]] [[traits]] here, and didn't cover much, other than the extent to which his extreme disillusionment with the quality of the inmates themselves had been [[pointed]], even in language I [[should]] not [[healthcare]] to [[unequivocally]] [[citing]] here. . . . . One of my [[leading]] problems with capital [[punish]] is that, of course, it is not [[uniformly]], impartially [[implemented]], just as [[myriad]] innocent people are far-too-carelessly, [[so]] unnecessarily [[shipped]] to [[cater]] this [[singular]] fate. Another problem I have with it is that it is not applied [[expeditiously]] [[adequately]], or, for that matter, even publicly enough! The bible makes a [[specific]] point, in such [[lawsuit]], about one of the more [[sizable]] [[targeting]] of such, as a deterrent, being ineffectually obscured, minus, not only a public [[opinion]], but [[additionally]] the direct [[presence]] of all! As for those who [[dunning]] to [[demonstrate]], statistically, that such is not an [[efficient]] deterrent? [[For]] [[addendum]] to having a problem about the reliability of their data, I have [[tiny]] if any objectively disprovable doubt [[various]] are behind bars now due to the [[magnitude]] that such a deterrent is [[lacked]]. [[Instead]], I do have a problem about the fact that Robert Duvall, in The Apostle, had been punished at all, for his particular "crime," or that the only hope of leniency for one such as he would have to be based on a "temporary insanity" defense, as though that would serve as the only acceptable excuse in his kind of case. . . . In addition to various other questions concerning the motives of Mickey Rooney for that particular visit he'd recounted, and about the answers to which I can only try to speculate, I suspect the main one had been of a decidedly religious nature. I don't know exactly when he'd become the professing Christian he now makes it a special point, whenever possible, to emphasize that he is; but, as anybody should be well-aware, this particular category of people tends to be the most vehemently out for blood, when it comes to extracting an eye for an eye. However, I have no particular bone of contention concerning that, per se, just as there's no doubt, scripturally speaking, that not all, and perhaps not even most, shall be spared the same ultimate fate, at the hands of the Lord Himself, as a result of His sacrifice on the cross. However, there is a problem, for me, about the spirit or attitude with which most professing Christians emphasize their enthusiasm for capital punishment; for, contrary to the Lord Himself, who would love to see everybody saved (Ezekiel 18:32) (II Peter 3:9), they seem to go vindictively out of their way to find reasons to condemn! . . . What most people, on either side of this superlatively ever-burning issue, cannot appear to sufficiently appreciate, is that the Lord is as dynamically and elusively soft in nature as He is hard. The two sides of His nature appear to be so inherently incompatible as to render Him mentally deranged, at least by any strictly human reckoning. Yet, regardless of how harrowingly ungraspable this miraculously dynamic blending of the water and oil in His nature surely is, there can be no doubt that anything short of it, or anything fanatically and characteristically on either one side or the other of this equation, falls inadequately and unacceptably short of the entire judicial truth. Indeed, I've seen the most blood-curdling thirst for the same come out, self-contradictorily enough, on far-too-many occasions, whenever the categorically anti-death penalty advocates are confronted, even in the most rationally well-balanced ways, with the fact that, although the Lord died for everybody, not all are thereby going to be saved. After-all, in order to receive absolution, one must, to repeat the same term, reach out and receive it, that is, repent (Luke 13:3-5). Could anything make more sense? . . . But, then, what about the Lord's command to forgive, even in the case of one's enemies, of those who despise and persecute you without a just cause or provocation? One of the far-too-prevailing difficulties with this kind of sentimentality, as popularly misinterpreted, is the way it obscuringly over-simplifies the real meaning of forgiveness. The act of forgiveness does not, in itself, mean the same thing as unconditionally excusing the one being forgiven. When one takes a clearly sober, rationally well-balanced view here, from the perspective of God's own attitude, all it actually amounts to is a fervent wish that the one forgiven will ultimately succeed at finding his way, seeing the light, and being granted mercy. This attitude is, of course, the very opposite of, say, that of Jonah, who actually resented it when God told him that his preaching to the people of Nineveh would result in their repentance. Jonah didn't want them to repent, but vindictively desired that they be destroyed. How self-righteously, cold-bloodedly like unto most professing Christians he was, save that even his reasons were undoubtedly better than most! I envy Jonah almost as much as he would me! However, minus the repentance of the one being forgiven, any forgiveness he may receive from a genuine Christian is not going to do him any good. In such a case, the only one to benefit is the real Christian himself! --------------------------------------------- Result 4322 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (67%)]] --> [[[SKIPPED]]] when you get to the scenes that involve Albert Brooks without his shirt... try not to gag on a fur ball.

I like Albert Brooks. I've seen most, if not all of his movies but it was the first time seeing this one. Modern Romance is an interesting take on the subject of love. There are few movies that handle the desperation of love as well or as overtly as Modern Romance, although 1979's Chilly Scenes of Winter comes very close. They both essentially deal with obsessed men that are too psychologically attracted/obsessed to their respective women.

Where-as Chilly Scenes of Winter borders on the subject stalking, this movie has a more grounded foundation with the subject of love because both people are already in a relationship.. and out of the relationship.. and back in it again.

And because it's a movie that was released in 1981, it is of its time in terms of styles and such. That's the main reason I like this movie. My basic rule when it comes to movies is "If it sucks at least it may have some historic relevance", you know time capsule stuff.

Which leads me to the horrific scenes of Albert Brooks sans shirt.

The man is hair. Very hair. Like he's wearing a black curly fur sweater-hairy. And what's worse is he almost looks burn victim-hairy. It's not a pleasant sight and the scenes with him without a shirt go on and on. Back in the early 80's hairy men were seen as normal and nothing shocking. But in 2009 the sight of something like this is just plain revolting. Sorry, Albert! I wish at some point someone said "hey let's try this scene but with you wearing a simple t-shirt, I mean you might scare people". It's just really bad and I feel sorry for the poor pretty actress that had to deal with Albert Brooks naked body on top of hers. She was probably pulling out his hairs from her teeth for days after that.

Anyway, it's an OK movie. It could have been better if I hadn't see Albert Brooks without his shirt for what seemed like 10 long continuous minutes because that will forever taint my viewing of this movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4323 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This is a really nice and sweet movie that the entire family can enjoy. It's about two dogs and a cat who are taken away to live with someone else for a little while but the animals don't understand and they escape and go to find the family on their own. The cat is named Sassy and she lives up to her name. Chance is the younger dog who knows a lot about life on the inside of the pound. Shadow is the older and wiser dog who senses things. Put those three together on an adventure and it makes for a happy and fun filled time. There are no special effects of the mouths moving so it isn't cheesy at all. It's the best talking animal movie that I've seen so far. It's a really good movie for families. --------------------------------------------- Result 4324 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] This movie is not just bad, not just corny, it is [[repulsive]]. Something about Daphne, about the creepy call-girl, about the whole damn (and I use the word literally) film radiates a grotesquery that would offend a brothel mistress. This film makes my skin crawl, makes me regret having reproductive organs, and makes me feel unclean.

One of the things that bothers me most about this movie is that they used such a good concept. A creature that makes fantasies with [[disastrous]] results, rather than the cliché Worst Nightmare and the overdone Twisted Wish, is a truly fascinating film idea.

Thought: The reason why hobgoblins need to be killed before day is that they are attracted to bright lights. During the day, bright lights don't show up well, so they could go anywhere.

Count the Hobgoblins: Four hobgoblins drive out of the film studio, and yet at least nine of the pernicious plush-toys are killed throughout the course of the movie.

Discussion Question: If you had a frigid, demanding, unappreciative girlfriend, would you enter garden-tool-combat with a military chunkhead? Explain. This movie is not just bad, not just corny, it is [[nasty]]. Something about Daphne, about the creepy call-girl, about the whole damn (and I use the word literally) film radiates a grotesquery that would offend a brothel mistress. This film makes my skin crawl, makes me regret having reproductive organs, and makes me feel unclean.

One of the things that bothers me most about this movie is that they used such a good concept. A creature that makes fantasies with [[tragic]] results, rather than the cliché Worst Nightmare and the overdone Twisted Wish, is a truly fascinating film idea.

Thought: The reason why hobgoblins need to be killed before day is that they are attracted to bright lights. During the day, bright lights don't show up well, so they could go anywhere.

Count the Hobgoblins: Four hobgoblins drive out of the film studio, and yet at least nine of the pernicious plush-toys are killed throughout the course of the movie.

Discussion Question: If you had a frigid, demanding, unappreciative girlfriend, would you enter garden-tool-combat with a military chunkhead? Explain. --------------------------------------------- Result 4325 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] What the F*@# was this I just [[watched]]? Steven STOP!! Please! This movie is insatiably [[bad]] and silly. In a [[bizarre]] departure from [[action]] and [[adventure]], Mr. Seagal is now fighting ([[obviously]]) wish-they-were-vampire 'like' creatures with super human [[strength]].? [[OK]]? [[Oh]], and their eyes [[blink]] sideways in an [[inhuman]] [[way]]? [[Wow]]! [[Even]] [[still]] in this movie [[however]], to [[quell]] Seagals have-to-have-the-last-punch-and-no-one-can-kick-my-a$$ ego, HE is somehow stronger than they are. However all of the average [[humans]] are getting crushed all [[around]] him. [[Come]] on, I can [[understand]] the [[big]] mouth neighborhood bully or drug [[dealer]], but these are super human [[strength]] people. Oh and [[get]] this, Seagal goes through a brief sting of [[identity]] [[issues]], because [[apparently]] he and his cohorts in the [[film]] [[think]] he is Wolverine! [[Oh]] My GO... And [[worst]] than all of that! Yes, there is a [[worse]] than that. He has a [[voice]] over [[even]] changing [[voice]] in mid sentence while we are [[looking]] at his face. They [[obviously]] [[sound]] nothing like him and I believe it may be one of the other actors in the film. It was [[pure]] [[madness]]. Although I [[wanted]] to turn it off I always watch a movie to he end. This is an all [[time]] low [[even]] for your direct to video [[movies]] Steven. [[Awful]]! [[Awful]]! [[Awful]]! Two thumbs down! Redemeption qualities? Well I guess so, I will be fair in that [[aspect]]. [[At]] [[least]] some of the special [[effects]] were OK, and I like the choice of [[wardrobe]] for the actors and actresses. The [[women]] all were [[quite]] [[attractive]] IMO. [[Still]], and I [[said]] STILL, it does not make up for the [[blatant]] X-Men, Underworld, (insert your favorite zombie, [[vampire]] [[movie]] here) [[rip]] off! The [[director]], [[writer]], [[producer]], [[ALL]] should be bansihed & exile from the movie business. I [[think]] I feel the way that most people feel about Blood Rayne (and just about all other Uwe Boll pictures) about this film. That's my whole $1.00 on this film. View if you dare. What the F*@# was this I just [[seen]]? Steven STOP!! Please! This movie is insatiably [[naughty]] and silly. In a [[surreal]] departure from [[actions]] and [[adventurer]], Mr. Seagal is now fighting ([[definitely]]) wish-they-were-vampire 'like' creatures with super human [[fortitude]].? [[ALLRIGHT]]? [[Aw]], and their eyes [[flinch]] sideways in an [[subhuman]] [[ways]]? [[Whoo]]! [[Yet]] [[however]] in this movie [[conversely]], to [[suppressing]] Seagals have-to-have-the-last-punch-and-no-one-can-kick-my-a$$ ego, HE is somehow stronger than they are. However all of the average [[beings]] are getting crushed all [[throughout]] him. [[Arrived]] on, I can [[realise]] the [[hefty]] mouth neighborhood bully or drug [[dealers]], but these are super human [[kraft]] people. Oh and [[gets]] this, Seagal goes through a brief sting of [[identities]] [[matters]], because [[patently]] he and his cohorts in the [[cinematography]] [[reckon]] he is Wolverine! [[Ah]] My GO... And [[lousiest]] than all of that! Yes, there is a [[worst]] than that. He has a [[vocal]] over [[yet]] changing [[voices]] in mid sentence while we are [[search]] at his face. They [[definitely]] [[sounds]] nothing like him and I believe it may be one of the other actors in the film. It was [[pur]] [[stupidity]]. Although I [[wanting]] to turn it off I always watch a movie to he end. This is an all [[moment]] low [[yet]] for your direct to video [[cinematography]] Steven. [[Terrifying]]! [[Disgusting]]! [[Disgusting]]! Two thumbs down! Redemeption qualities? Well I guess so, I will be fair in that [[element]]. [[In]] [[less]] some of the special [[influences]] were OK, and I like the choice of [[closet]] for the actors and actresses. The [[girl]] all were [[perfectly]] [[seductive]] IMO. [[However]], and I [[says]] STILL, it does not make up for the [[overt]] X-Men, Underworld, (insert your favorite zombie, [[vampires]] [[flick]] here) [[tear]] off! The [[headmaster]], [[screenwriter]], [[producers]], [[EVERYTHING]] should be bansihed & exile from the movie business. I [[reckon]] I feel the way that most people feel about Blood Rayne (and just about all other Uwe Boll pictures) about this film. That's my whole $1.00 on this film. View if you dare. --------------------------------------------- Result 4326 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] Guys and Dolls has to be one of my [[favorite]] musical movies ever. It is a very fun [[movie]] to watch and nothing more. it embodies what people have [[forgotten]] about musicals-musicals were made to entertain, not to to preach. Nowadays we have Rent and Chicago which are great musicals and good movies but they fail to [[bring]] us solid entertainment with no [[strings]] attached. The only [[thing]] that [[bothered]] me in the movie was Marlon Brando, the [[guy]] can't [[sing]]! It was very annoying to listen to him sing and talk when I couldn't understand him. If it weren't for Marlon I would have given this 10 stars. Guys and Dolls provides old-fashioned entertainment that we rarely get these days. Watch it to have a good time!! Guys and Dolls has to be one of my [[preferable]] musical movies ever. It is a very fun [[cinema]] to watch and nothing more. it embodies what people have [[disregarded]] about musicals-musicals were made to entertain, not to to preach. Nowadays we have Rent and Chicago which are great musicals and good movies but they fail to [[brings]] us solid entertainment with no [[ropes]] attached. The only [[stuff]] that [[deranged]] me in the movie was Marlon Brando, the [[boys]] can't [[exalt]]! It was very annoying to listen to him sing and talk when I couldn't understand him. If it weren't for Marlon I would have given this 10 stars. Guys and Dolls provides old-fashioned entertainment that we rarely get these days. Watch it to have a good time!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4327 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (90%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] so... it's really sexist, and classist, and i thought that it might not be in the beginning stages of the movie, like when stella tells steven that she would really like to change herself and begin speaking in the right way and he tells her not to change. well, he certainly changed his tune, and it seems that the other reviewers followed suit. what at the [[beginning]] [[appears]] to be a love story is really about social placement and women as sacrificial mothers. the end of the movie does not make her a [[hero]], it makes the whole thing sad. and its sad that people think it makes her a hero. perhaps that is the comment of the movie that people should take away. positive reception reflects continual patriarchal currents in the social conscience. yuck. so... it's really sexist, and classist, and i thought that it might not be in the beginning stages of the movie, like when stella tells steven that she would really like to change herself and begin speaking in the right way and he tells her not to change. well, he certainly changed his tune, and it seems that the other reviewers followed suit. what at the [[initiates]] [[emerges]] to be a love story is really about social placement and women as sacrificial mothers. the end of the movie does not make her a [[heroin]], it makes the whole thing sad. and its sad that people think it makes her a hero. perhaps that is the comment of the movie that people should take away. positive reception reflects continual patriarchal currents in the social conscience. yuck. --------------------------------------------- Result 4328 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] I [[saw]] The Big Bad [[Swim]] at the 2006 Temecula film [[festival]], and was totally [[caught]] off guard by how much I was [[drawn]] into it.

The film centers around the lives of a group of people taking an adult swim class for various reasons. A humorous idea in its own right, the class serves as a catalyst for greater changes in the students' lives.

What [[surprised]] me about the [[film]] was how [[real]] it [[felt]]. Rarely in ensemble pieces are characters treated so well. I enjoyed the scenes in the class immensely, and the drama that took place outside was very poignant. Nothing seemed out of place or out of character, and ultimately it left a very strong feeling, much like attending school or summer camp - where you find fast friends, form strong bonds, and make discoveries about yourself, yet have to depart all too soon.

My only complaint was that the character of Paula had a very strong and unusual introduction, which made you want to know a little more about her than was ultimately revealed. I suppose you don't get to meet everyone in class, though...

Aside from this, I found the film very well-rounded and quite enjoyable. See it if you get the opportunity. I [[noticed]] The Big Bad [[Swam]] at the 2006 Temecula film [[feast]], and was totally [[apprehended]] off guard by how much I was [[lured]] into it.

The film centers around the lives of a group of people taking an adult swim class for various reasons. A humorous idea in its own right, the class serves as a catalyst for greater changes in the students' lives.

What [[dumbfounded]] me about the [[filmmaking]] was how [[veritable]] it [[deemed]]. Rarely in ensemble pieces are characters treated so well. I enjoyed the scenes in the class immensely, and the drama that took place outside was very poignant. Nothing seemed out of place or out of character, and ultimately it left a very strong feeling, much like attending school or summer camp - where you find fast friends, form strong bonds, and make discoveries about yourself, yet have to depart all too soon.

My only complaint was that the character of Paula had a very strong and unusual introduction, which made you want to know a little more about her than was ultimately revealed. I suppose you don't get to meet everyone in class, though...

Aside from this, I found the film very well-rounded and quite enjoyable. See it if you get the opportunity. --------------------------------------------- Result 4329 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] As a South African, it's an insult to think that someone was actually [[paid]] to [[produce]] this [[nonsense]]!

[[Despite]] the fact that the [[director]] was one of the writers for the original Shaka Zulu [[mini]], this "addition" to the series is [[appalling]]! The original series was [[based]] on historical [[facts]] about a man who was a [[great]] strategist, leader and warrior. A [[man]] who played a [[large]] role in [[shaping]] the history of local tribes in South Africa.

The plot of this film, however, is [[nothing]] but [[hogwash]], scraped from the bottom of the barrel by a [[writer]] that has failed to impress [[since]] the mid-nineties.

While [[Omar]] Sharif and Henry Cele are [[good]] actors, what is David Hasselhoff doing here, [[rescuing]] drowning slaves with his red buoy and bleached smile?

I kept expecting blond, busty women to appear out of nowhere and run across the screen in their tiny red bathing suits, for no apparent reason. Not that this would've been any more bizarre than the fantastical [[plot]] line that was probably dreamed up after 10 pints of beer at a fancy dress party, where someone's caveman costume inspired the writer to return to an African theme for his next "blockbuster". As a South African, it's an insult to think that someone was actually [[credited]] to [[generate]] this [[nonsensical]]!

[[Albeit]] the fact that the [[superintendent]] was one of the writers for the original Shaka Zulu [[miniature]], this "addition" to the series is [[frightening]]! The original series was [[founded]] on historical [[truths]] about a man who was a [[wondrous]] strategist, leader and warrior. A [[men]] who played a [[monumental]] role in [[forming]] the history of local tribes in South Africa.

The plot of this film, however, is [[anything]] but [[fiddlesticks]], scraped from the bottom of the barrel by a [[novelist]] that has failed to impress [[because]] the mid-nineties.

While [[Amor]] Sharif and Henry Cele are [[alright]] actors, what is David Hasselhoff doing here, [[saves]] drowning slaves with his red buoy and bleached smile?

I kept expecting blond, busty women to appear out of nowhere and run across the screen in their tiny red bathing suits, for no apparent reason. Not that this would've been any more bizarre than the fantastical [[intrigue]] line that was probably dreamed up after 10 pints of beer at a fancy dress party, where someone's caveman costume inspired the writer to return to an African theme for his next "blockbuster". --------------------------------------------- Result 4330 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (92%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] After watching this thing, then reading the [[summary]] on the back of the DVD, then thinking back to actual movie....I became a bit [[dizzy]]. I thought, maybe I fell asleep and dreamed I was a down syndrome baby waltzing through a never ending forest where people drive 11 miles an hour and stop for no purpose other then occasional tasteless lesbianism. Where (zombies?) come out of nowhere and (vampires?) who (seduce?) [[pure]] hearted citizens on their way to save the world. [[Neither]] zombie nor vampire notably encounter each other. The only fighting i remember was getting that [[walrus]] Bonny Giroux's panties off. Coo Coo ca FAT! All of them! Maybe that was because we were watching it widescreen stretched and were too lazy to change it to its native resolution, but that actually made it more entertaining... In conclusion my trailing thought thesis had more continuity, plot, character development, antagonism, subject matter, and acting then the entirety of this film. It made Bloodrayne look like Citizen F***ING KANE After watching this thing, then reading the [[summarize]] on the back of the DVD, then thinking back to actual movie....I became a bit [[dazed]]. I thought, maybe I fell asleep and dreamed I was a down syndrome baby waltzing through a never ending forest where people drive 11 miles an hour and stop for no purpose other then occasional tasteless lesbianism. Where (zombies?) come out of nowhere and (vampires?) who (seduce?) [[sheer]] hearted citizens on their way to save the world. [[Ni]] zombie nor vampire notably encounter each other. The only fighting i remember was getting that [[guru]] Bonny Giroux's panties off. Coo Coo ca FAT! All of them! Maybe that was because we were watching it widescreen stretched and were too lazy to change it to its native resolution, but that actually made it more entertaining... In conclusion my trailing thought thesis had more continuity, plot, character development, antagonism, subject matter, and acting then the entirety of this film. It made Bloodrayne look like Citizen F***ING KANE --------------------------------------------- Result 4331 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] Awful! Awful! Awful! No, I didn't [[like]] it. It was [[obvious]] what the intent of the film was: to track the wheeling and dealing of the "movers and shakers" who [[produce]] a film. In some cases, these are people who represent themselves as other than what they are. I didn't need a film to tell me how shallow some of the people in the film [[industry]] are. I suppose I'm at [[fault]] really because I [[expected]] something like "[[Roman]] [[Holiday]]".

I'm not a movie-maker nor do I [[take]] [[film]] [[classes]] but it [[appeared]] to me that the [[film]] consisted of a series of 'two-shots' (in the main) where the [[actors]](!) had been [[supplied]] with a loose plot-line and they were to improvise the [[dialogue]]. [[Henry]] Jaglon makes the [[claim]] that he along with Victoria Foyt [[actually]] [[wrote]] the [[screenplay]] but the [[impression]] was that the [[actors]], cognisant of the [[general]] [[direction]] of the [[film]], extemporised the [[dialogue]] - and it was not [[always]] successful. Such a [[case]] in point was when Ron Silver [[made]] some [[remark]] which really didn't [[flow]] along the line of the [[conversation]] (and I'm not [[going]] back to look for it!) and Greta Scacchi [[broke]] into laughter even [[though]] they were [[supposed]] to be having a [[serious]] [[conversation]], because Silver's [[remark]] was such a non sequitur. You get the impression too that one actor [[deliberately]] [[tries]] to 'wrong foot' the other actor and break his/her concentration. Another instance of this is when a producer [[tells]] Silver to "[[bring]] the &*%#@#^ documents" (3 times). Silver looked literally lost for words. I have [[seen]] one other [[film]] which looked like a series of [[drama]] workshops on [[improvisation]] and that was [[awful]] too!

The [[fact]] that Jaglon was able to attract Greta Scacchi (no stranger to Australia), Ron Silver, Anouk Ami, and Maximilian Schell suggests it was a 'slow news week' for them. Peter Bogdanovich had a 'what-the-hell-am-I-doing-here' look on his face at all times and I expected to hear him say: "Look, I'm a director and screenwriter - not an actor" - which would have been unnecessary to state! Faye Dunaway seemed more interested in promoting her son, Liam. Apart from the jerky delivery of the dialogue, the hand-held camera became irritating even if it was for verisimilitude - as I suspect the "natural" dialogue was - and the interest in the principals became subsumed to the interest in the various youths walking along the strand trying to insinuate themselves into shot. That at least approached Cinema Verite. So that, along with the irritating French singing during which I used the mute button, made for a generally disappointing 90-odd minutes.

I think we should avoid apotheosising films such as this. Trying to see value in the film where it has little credit in order to substantiate a perceived transcendental level to it is misguided. There was really nothing avant-garde about it. It didn't come across as a work of art and yet it wasn't a documentary either. I know, it was a mocumentary but the real test is whether it is entertaining. I was bored out of my skull! It did have one redeeming feature: it pronounced 'Cannes' correctly so I gave it 3/10. Awful! Awful! Awful! No, I didn't [[iike]] it. It was [[observable]] what the intent of the film was: to track the wheeling and dealing of the "movers and shakers" who [[generating]] a film. In some cases, these are people who represent themselves as other than what they are. I didn't need a film to tell me how shallow some of the people in the film [[industria]] are. I suppose I'm at [[malfunction]] really because I [[scheduled]] something like "[[Romain]] [[Holidays]]".

I'm not a movie-maker nor do I [[taking]] [[filmmaking]] [[category]] but it [[emerged]] to me that the [[cinematography]] consisted of a series of 'two-shots' (in the main) where the [[protagonists]](!) had been [[provided]] with a loose plot-line and they were to improvise the [[dialog]]. [[Henri]] Jaglon makes the [[allege]] that he along with Victoria Foyt [[genuinely]] [[written]] the [[scenario]] but the [[feeling]] was that the [[protagonists]], cognisant of the [[overall]] [[orientation]] of the [[cinematography]], extemporised the [[dialogues]] - and it was not [[perpetually]] successful. Such a [[instances]] in point was when Ron Silver [[accomplished]] some [[commentaries]] which really didn't [[flux]] along the line of the [[schmooze]] (and I'm not [[gonna]] back to look for it!) and Greta Scacchi [[cracked]] into laughter even [[if]] they were [[suspected]] to be having a [[grave]] [[speaks]], because Silver's [[note]] was such a non sequitur. You get the impression too that one actor [[consciously]] [[try]] to 'wrong foot' the other actor and break his/her concentration. Another instance of this is when a producer [[told]] Silver to "[[brings]] the &*%#@#^ documents" (3 times). Silver looked literally lost for words. I have [[saw]] one other [[films]] which looked like a series of [[dramas]] workshops on [[jam]] and that was [[frightful]] too!

The [[facto]] that Jaglon was able to attract Greta Scacchi (no stranger to Australia), Ron Silver, Anouk Ami, and Maximilian Schell suggests it was a 'slow news week' for them. Peter Bogdanovich had a 'what-the-hell-am-I-doing-here' look on his face at all times and I expected to hear him say: "Look, I'm a director and screenwriter - not an actor" - which would have been unnecessary to state! Faye Dunaway seemed more interested in promoting her son, Liam. Apart from the jerky delivery of the dialogue, the hand-held camera became irritating even if it was for verisimilitude - as I suspect the "natural" dialogue was - and the interest in the principals became subsumed to the interest in the various youths walking along the strand trying to insinuate themselves into shot. That at least approached Cinema Verite. So that, along with the irritating French singing during which I used the mute button, made for a generally disappointing 90-odd minutes.

I think we should avoid apotheosising films such as this. Trying to see value in the film where it has little credit in order to substantiate a perceived transcendental level to it is misguided. There was really nothing avant-garde about it. It didn't come across as a work of art and yet it wasn't a documentary either. I know, it was a mocumentary but the real test is whether it is entertaining. I was bored out of my skull! It did have one redeeming feature: it pronounced 'Cannes' correctly so I gave it 3/10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4332 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (67%)]] I [[thought]] that [[Zombie]] Flesh Eaters 2 was quite a good [[horror]] film [[When]] a terrorist's body, infected with a stolen chemical, is recovered by the US military, the corpse is then cremated, releasing the virus into the atmosphere over a small island. [[Soon]] the infected locals turn into flesh-hungry zombies, and a group of soldiers on leave [[must]] team up with a group of [[tourists]] and board themselves up in a abandoned hotel as they try to fight off the aggressive living dead. I did not find this [[film]] to be as good as the [[original]] [[film]], Zombie Flesh Eaters. But it was [[still]] an OK horror [[film]] with some [[good]] action. I did not [[think]] that it was one of the best in the series. 4/10 I [[think]] that [[Ghoul]] Flesh Eaters 2 was quite a good [[abomination]] film [[Whenever]] a terrorist's body, infected with a stolen chemical, is recovered by the US military, the corpse is then cremated, releasing the virus into the atmosphere over a small island. [[Expeditiously]] the infected locals turn into flesh-hungry zombies, and a group of soldiers on leave [[owes]] team up with a group of [[traveller]] and board themselves up in a abandoned hotel as they try to fight off the aggressive living dead. I did not find this [[kino]] to be as good as the [[initial]] [[movies]], Zombie Flesh Eaters. But it was [[again]] an OK horror [[cinematographic]] with some [[buena]] action. I did not [[believing]] that it was one of the best in the series. 4/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4333 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] The Booth puts a whole [[new]] twist on your typical J-horror movie. This movie puts you in the [[shoes]] of the protagonist of the story. The director wants you to see what the protagonist sees and thinks.

The story is about perception of the people who works, lives, and loves of our [[protagonist]], and how he perceives the people who surrounds him in an antiquated radio station DJ booth. The [[story]] peels back the [[layers]] of the main character like an onion in flash-backs as the movie runs its course, and from it we learned that [[things]] are not [[always]] the way it seems. The movie mostly took place in a small, out-dated radio station's studio with a very bad history, where the main character was forced to broadcast his talk show due to the radio station was in the process of re-locating. It is from this confined space that this movie thrives and makes you feel very claustrophobic and very paranoid. At time our protagonist can not determined the strange happenings in the old studio were caused by ghost or some conspiracy by his co-workers or it was all in his mind. What I like about this film is that the film-makers makes you see through the eyes of the main character and makes you just as paranoid as protagonist did. This movie is a very [[smart]], abide rather short 76 minutes film. The Booth puts a whole [[novo]] twist on your typical J-horror movie. This movie puts you in the [[footwear]] of the protagonist of the story. The director wants you to see what the protagonist sees and thinks.

The story is about perception of the people who works, lives, and loves of our [[actor]], and how he perceives the people who surrounds him in an antiquated radio station DJ booth. The [[conte]] peels back the [[diaper]] of the main character like an onion in flash-backs as the movie runs its course, and from it we learned that [[items]] are not [[incessantly]] the way it seems. The movie mostly took place in a small, out-dated radio station's studio with a very bad history, where the main character was forced to broadcast his talk show due to the radio station was in the process of re-locating. It is from this confined space that this movie thrives and makes you feel very claustrophobic and very paranoid. At time our protagonist can not determined the strange happenings in the old studio were caused by ghost or some conspiracy by his co-workers or it was all in his mind. What I like about this film is that the film-makers makes you see through the eyes of the main character and makes you just as paranoid as protagonist did. This movie is a very [[canny]], abide rather short 76 minutes film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4334 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] This [[movie]] [[barely]] followed the [[story]] line of the [[movie]]. All of the [[fascinating]] [[points]] in the [[book]] didn't [[even]] [[exist]] in the [[movie]]. They [[ended]] up [[turning]] it into a cheesy "tween" [[Disney]] [[movie]] "crush" [[story]] between Meg and Calvin. It was so [[bad]] it should have been [[Hillary]] Duff [[playing]] the [[part]], or one of the [[likes]]. This [[movie]] was [[nothing]] more than an [[insult]] to the [[intelligence]] and mysticism of the [[book]]. I can't [[believe]] Disney could [[even]] [[get]] away with making such a [[cheap]], basic [[rendition]]. [[If]] you've ever read the [[book]], I [[think]] you [[would]] agree it [[could]] [[easily]] be [[made]] into a [[movie]] of "[[Lord]] of the Rings" equivalence. This [[movie]] should have never been able to [[use]] the title of A Wrinkle in [[Time]]. Poorly [[done]]. This [[film]] [[hardly]] followed the [[tales]] line of the [[cinema]]. All of the [[intriguing]] [[dots]] in the [[ledger]] didn't [[yet]] [[existing]] in the [[movies]]. They [[completed]] up [[turn]] it into a cheesy "tween" [[Disneyland]] [[films]] "crush" [[history]] between Meg and Calvin. It was so [[amiss]] it should have been [[Hilary]] Duff [[replay]] the [[portions]], or one of the [[love]]. This [[cinematography]] was [[anything]] more than an [[slur]] to the [[intellect]] and mysticism of the [[ledger]]. I can't [[believing]] Disney could [[yet]] [[obtain]] away with making such a [[inexpensive]], basic [[extradition]]. [[Though]] you've ever read the [[workbook]], I [[reckon]] you [[should]] agree it [[did]] [[readily]] be [[brought]] into a [[flick]] of "[[Sire]] of the Rings" equivalence. This [[film]] should have never been able to [[utilised]] the title of A Wrinkle in [[Period]]. Poorly [[completed]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4335 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (88%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] Granted, I'm not the connoisseur d'horror my partner is, but a well put together, [[clever]] [[flick]] is worth the time. My quibbles, in brief:

- Dialog often weak and at times unbelievable coming from the given character.

- Unconvincing acting.

- Storyline never really caught fire.

The writers plucked choice bits from half a dozen mainstream films, tossed into a kettle, simmered not nearly enough and tried feeding us poor saps the resulting mess, al'dente.

Long and short, while not absolutely terrible, it was definitely not worthy of absorbing one of my NetFlix rentals. Granted, I'm not the connoisseur d'horror my partner is, but a well put together, [[shrewd]] [[gesture]] is worth the time. My quibbles, in brief:

- Dialog often weak and at times unbelievable coming from the given character.

- Unconvincing acting.

- Storyline never really caught fire.

The writers plucked choice bits from half a dozen mainstream films, tossed into a kettle, simmered not nearly enough and tried feeding us poor saps the resulting mess, al'dente.

Long and short, while not absolutely terrible, it was definitely not worthy of absorbing one of my NetFlix rentals. --------------------------------------------- Result 4336 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (89%)]] I [[thought]] the movie "I Do They Don't" was [[fantastic]]. In the past I've watched Rob Estes on "Suddenly Susan" & "Melrose Place" and also Josie Bissett on "Melrose Place" and loved seeing them together again in "I Do They Don't". They have great chemistry together (I guess being married in real life helps that!) - in the movie they are both widowed with children and careers and they fall in love and try blend their already busy chaotic families together without dropping the ball. Of course they stumble, but they keep it together which is what working and raising a family is all about. So many people have been talking about this movie - all good! - and the movie left us wanting more. This would make a great series - appealing to many ages! - it would be so nice to see a real life, down to earth, family show like this that portrays the reality of so many of our lives today - instead of the so called "Reality TV" that all the stations are overwhelming us with these days. Someone tell the people at ABC Family they have the start of a new series here! I [[figured]] the movie "I Do They Don't" was [[unbelievable]]. In the past I've watched Rob Estes on "Suddenly Susan" & "Melrose Place" and also Josie Bissett on "Melrose Place" and loved seeing them together again in "I Do They Don't". They have great chemistry together (I guess being married in real life helps that!) - in the movie they are both widowed with children and careers and they fall in love and try blend their already busy chaotic families together without dropping the ball. Of course they stumble, but they keep it together which is what working and raising a family is all about. So many people have been talking about this movie - all good! - and the movie left us wanting more. This would make a great series - appealing to many ages! - it would be so nice to see a real life, down to earth, family show like this that portrays the reality of so many of our lives today - instead of the so called "Reality TV" that all the stations are overwhelming us with these days. Someone tell the people at ABC Family they have the start of a new series here! --------------------------------------------- Result 4337 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (83%)]] N.B.: Spoilers within. Assigning an artistic director to an operatic production naturally and inevitably means you are going to get a piece of that director's mind. But directing a Wagner opera is an especially [[tricky]] task, as he was perhaps the most explicit opera composer in terms of what things should look like and how they should unfold. Hans-Jurgen Syberberg loads this filming of "Parsifal," Wagner's final masterpiece, with enough extraneous ideas to cause it to nearly [[burst]] at the seams. You get more than a piece of the director: you get the whole fatted hog and then some. Syberberg is to be admired for his penchant for tearing back the covers on the uglier aspects of German history. But does it work to meld that desire to a Wagner opera already brimming with its own concepts?

The scenes with the knights of the Holy Grail in Acts I and III are especially laden with visual allegory and symbolism. These are drawn come from Wagner's own time, from long before, and go well beyond. If you know what these things mean, they can enrich Syberberg's vision for you (but not necessarily enhance Wagner's vision); if you don't know what they mean, they're simply confusing, if not annoying. I won't bother uncoiling the plot of the opera here. Suffice it to say it is a typical Wagnerian synthesis of diverse elements, in this case a blending of the Holy Grail legend with the principles, practices, and pageantry of Christianity. The theme of redemption plays the main role here, as in nearly every Wagner opera.

I personally had to sweat to get through Syberberg's first act (amidst my jarring acclimation, the music saved the day). But Act II picks up the pace. Here we meet Klingsor, the evil sorcerer, out to entrap the wandering "innocent fool" Parsifal. The greatest seductress of them all, Kundry, will be used to entice him to the dark side. After an initial dalliance with more symbols, these get stripped away, and the long, gorgeous, transformational duet between young fool and temptress really takes off. Finally the film starts working a genuine magic, and it is chiefly due to Syberberg's choosing to set things naturally and simply. Suddenly the acting starts to work (the expressive actress Edith Clever and the luscious soprano of Yvonne Minton team to create a wondrous Kundry); suddenly the music seems to come to life and make vivid the inner turmoil of the two characters. The camera work stays simple and quietly fluid. In other words, Wagner is allowed to tell his story more on his own terms. And it works beautifully. For me it was the most engrossing part of the film.

With the re-entrance of the knights in part 2 of Act III, the weird extraneous symbolisms unfortunately creep back in. Some other loony Syberberg ideas: using a huge Wagner death-mask as a major set-piece (causing the composer's protuberant proboscis to loom comically large); dressing the Act III knights in all manner of costumes, wigs, and makeup (what is the director saying? That the knights are a bunch of buffoons? That they express multiple or timeless layers of significance beyond their surface functions? It's anybody's guess); the insertion – just after the incredibly touching baptism of Kundry by Parsifal – of rear-projection footage of the conductor rehearsing, in modern-day realism, his orchestra in the studio (this completely snapped my dramatic thread, requiring a few minutes to regroup); the complete avoidance of having any time pass between Acts II and III (when we meet the knight and "narrator" Gurnemanz again, he should be an old, old man, and Parsifal should re-emerge as a world-weary but wiser middle-aged man); but certainly the most bizarre stroke is to split the Parsifal character into male/female components. Some find this the most brilliant stroke. No doubt I can credit Karin Krick, who plays "Parsifal 2," with acting of strength and dignity (she also happens to be the best lip-syncher of the whole cast). But please...Wagner's conception of Parsifal is already so complex. His growth from a completely innocent boy who knows nothing of his past, to his breakthrough realization in Act II of what Amfortas's eternal wound means and how it has become his own, to his return as the great Redeemer of Act III – this is the journey of a masterfully constructed character. The bi-sexual emphasis is just gimmicky and absurd. (And what's with this nonsense about a homoerotic Gurnemanz and Parsifal?? Can't we just accept a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is marvelously reversed in Act III?)

The Monte Carlo Philharmonic under Armin Jordan plays with passion and beauty (though the chorus is disappointing). But after watching this film I only wanted to whip out my Solti-led recording (HIGHLY recommended) and get my Wagnerian bearings straight again. The film experience for me ranged from bizarre to entertaining to infuriating. To Syberberg's credit, he's created a visually arresting work, and he certainly offers a unique take on an important opera. But instead of sticking to "Parsifal," he seems to have wanted to bring in all things Wagnerian: the man, the life, the enormous influence...all of it in crude symbolic code. "Parsifal" the opera is already full of weighty symbolism: the Grail, the Spear, the Holy Sacraments, baptism, Amfortas's ever-bleeding wound, Klingsor's self-castration, the Kiss, Kundry's Curse, and on and on. This is not to mention the *musical* symbolism sounding constantly in the score, in the form of Wagner's leitmotif system. "Parsifal" itself is one huge symbol! Getting back to my first-paragraph question, Syberberg's whole hog is all way too much for me. But if this project sounds like something to tickle your fancy, then go for it. I won't recommend just staying away from this; you may find yourself heartily satisfied. Or if you need something to crack your Wagner barrier, try it...but please, please, don't stop here. "Parsifal" is in a late, very ripe league of its own. N.B.: Spoilers within. Assigning an artistic director to an operatic production naturally and inevitably means you are going to get a piece of that director's mind. But directing a Wagner opera is an especially [[touchy]] task, as he was perhaps the most explicit opera composer in terms of what things should look like and how they should unfold. Hans-Jurgen Syberberg loads this filming of "Parsifal," Wagner's final masterpiece, with enough extraneous ideas to cause it to nearly [[blast]] at the seams. You get more than a piece of the director: you get the whole fatted hog and then some. Syberberg is to be admired for his penchant for tearing back the covers on the uglier aspects of German history. But does it work to meld that desire to a Wagner opera already brimming with its own concepts?

The scenes with the knights of the Holy Grail in Acts I and III are especially laden with visual allegory and symbolism. These are drawn come from Wagner's own time, from long before, and go well beyond. If you know what these things mean, they can enrich Syberberg's vision for you (but not necessarily enhance Wagner's vision); if you don't know what they mean, they're simply confusing, if not annoying. I won't bother uncoiling the plot of the opera here. Suffice it to say it is a typical Wagnerian synthesis of diverse elements, in this case a blending of the Holy Grail legend with the principles, practices, and pageantry of Christianity. The theme of redemption plays the main role here, as in nearly every Wagner opera.

I personally had to sweat to get through Syberberg's first act (amidst my jarring acclimation, the music saved the day). But Act II picks up the pace. Here we meet Klingsor, the evil sorcerer, out to entrap the wandering "innocent fool" Parsifal. The greatest seductress of them all, Kundry, will be used to entice him to the dark side. After an initial dalliance with more symbols, these get stripped away, and the long, gorgeous, transformational duet between young fool and temptress really takes off. Finally the film starts working a genuine magic, and it is chiefly due to Syberberg's choosing to set things naturally and simply. Suddenly the acting starts to work (the expressive actress Edith Clever and the luscious soprano of Yvonne Minton team to create a wondrous Kundry); suddenly the music seems to come to life and make vivid the inner turmoil of the two characters. The camera work stays simple and quietly fluid. In other words, Wagner is allowed to tell his story more on his own terms. And it works beautifully. For me it was the most engrossing part of the film.

With the re-entrance of the knights in part 2 of Act III, the weird extraneous symbolisms unfortunately creep back in. Some other loony Syberberg ideas: using a huge Wagner death-mask as a major set-piece (causing the composer's protuberant proboscis to loom comically large); dressing the Act III knights in all manner of costumes, wigs, and makeup (what is the director saying? That the knights are a bunch of buffoons? That they express multiple or timeless layers of significance beyond their surface functions? It's anybody's guess); the insertion – just after the incredibly touching baptism of Kundry by Parsifal – of rear-projection footage of the conductor rehearsing, in modern-day realism, his orchestra in the studio (this completely snapped my dramatic thread, requiring a few minutes to regroup); the complete avoidance of having any time pass between Acts II and III (when we meet the knight and "narrator" Gurnemanz again, he should be an old, old man, and Parsifal should re-emerge as a world-weary but wiser middle-aged man); but certainly the most bizarre stroke is to split the Parsifal character into male/female components. Some find this the most brilliant stroke. No doubt I can credit Karin Krick, who plays "Parsifal 2," with acting of strength and dignity (she also happens to be the best lip-syncher of the whole cast). But please...Wagner's conception of Parsifal is already so complex. His growth from a completely innocent boy who knows nothing of his past, to his breakthrough realization in Act II of what Amfortas's eternal wound means and how it has become his own, to his return as the great Redeemer of Act III – this is the journey of a masterfully constructed character. The bi-sexual emphasis is just gimmicky and absurd. (And what's with this nonsense about a homoerotic Gurnemanz and Parsifal?? Can't we just accept a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is marvelously reversed in Act III?)

The Monte Carlo Philharmonic under Armin Jordan plays with passion and beauty (though the chorus is disappointing). But after watching this film I only wanted to whip out my Solti-led recording (HIGHLY recommended) and get my Wagnerian bearings straight again. The film experience for me ranged from bizarre to entertaining to infuriating. To Syberberg's credit, he's created a visually arresting work, and he certainly offers a unique take on an important opera. But instead of sticking to "Parsifal," he seems to have wanted to bring in all things Wagnerian: the man, the life, the enormous influence...all of it in crude symbolic code. "Parsifal" the opera is already full of weighty symbolism: the Grail, the Spear, the Holy Sacraments, baptism, Amfortas's ever-bleeding wound, Klingsor's self-castration, the Kiss, Kundry's Curse, and on and on. This is not to mention the *musical* symbolism sounding constantly in the score, in the form of Wagner's leitmotif system. "Parsifal" itself is one huge symbol! Getting back to my first-paragraph question, Syberberg's whole hog is all way too much for me. But if this project sounds like something to tickle your fancy, then go for it. I won't recommend just staying away from this; you may find yourself heartily satisfied. Or if you need something to crack your Wagner barrier, try it...but please, please, don't stop here. "Parsifal" is in a late, very ripe league of its own. --------------------------------------------- Result 4338 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] When I was younger, I thought the first [[film]] was really [[good]] in childhood, so I decided to see the sequel. This is an example of why some films shouldn't have sequels, because the first film is usually [[best]], and it is. [[Basically]] now that Ariel and Eric are married they have a daughter who isn't allowed outside the house because they are worried about the sister of Ursula (the octopus legged villain from film one), Morgana getting to her. When the kid gets out she asks Ursula's sister to turn her into a mermaid, like her Mum was. This makes Ariel go back to the sea to find her. The same good [[voice]] [[artists]], it's just the story that [[could]] have had a [[bit]] more thought. [[Adequate]]! When I was younger, I thought the first [[movie]] was really [[alright]] in childhood, so I decided to see the sequel. This is an example of why some films shouldn't have sequels, because the first film is usually [[bestest]], and it is. [[Virtually]] now that Ariel and Eric are married they have a daughter who isn't allowed outside the house because they are worried about the sister of Ursula (the octopus legged villain from film one), Morgana getting to her. When the kid gets out she asks Ursula's sister to turn her into a mermaid, like her Mum was. This makes Ariel go back to the sea to find her. The same good [[vowel]] [[entertainer]], it's just the story that [[did]] have had a [[bite]] more thought. [[Appropriate]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4339 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I should explain why i [[gave]] this..."[[piece]] of art" 1 [[star]] rating out of possible 10. [[Simply]] because it's hard or [[next]] to impossible to rate it [[unbiased]]. [[probably]] it would have been the same if i had given it 10/10 - explanations anyway [[would]] have followed.

I am not fond of these pointless [[gore]] [[movies]] like HOSTEL or so - i think that's disgusting and pretty [[terrible]] (in all the possible contextual meanings), but as i found out after watching this movie - there is a genre called "historical drama" - and probably it would have been the case of 10/10 as it has plenty of it and Tarantino would have been more than happier with it (and made Kill Bill 3 to spill even more blood on screen than here to show that it is possible). but the thing about "historical drama" genre is that it's a sub-category of the "trash movies" where John Romero is the undead-gory-emperor-of-the-guts and so automatically it can't be rated as your default movie - as these are movies that are made bad on purpose and you can't really tell whether the comically bad moment was meant to be so, or it was [[simply]] [[bad]]. it's for the people who like to [[enjoy]] bad acting, bad screenplay and bad everything else. And by some turn of faith - i am one of them too. there are days when i have an urge of seeing a really bad movie and look up for some trash and here you go - the day is saved! but that's definitely an opinion of mine and doesn't have match with anyones' else.

What i wanted to say is that if you want to watch some [[terrible]] movie - then Fellini's Casanova is definitely the choice, but heed my advice and don't [[rate]] it by default means. I should explain why i [[handed]] this..."[[slice]] of art" 1 [[stars]] rating out of possible 10. [[Straightforward]] because it's hard or [[future]] to impossible to rate it [[impartial]]. [[assuredly]] it would have been the same if i had given it 10/10 - explanations anyway [[ought]] have followed.

I am not fond of these pointless [[gora]] [[films]] like HOSTEL or so - i think that's disgusting and pretty [[scary]] (in all the possible contextual meanings), but as i found out after watching this movie - there is a genre called "historical drama" - and probably it would have been the case of 10/10 as it has plenty of it and Tarantino would have been more than happier with it (and made Kill Bill 3 to spill even more blood on screen than here to show that it is possible). but the thing about "historical drama" genre is that it's a sub-category of the "trash movies" where John Romero is the undead-gory-emperor-of-the-guts and so automatically it can't be rated as your default movie - as these are movies that are made bad on purpose and you can't really tell whether the comically bad moment was meant to be so, or it was [[purely]] [[wicked]]. it's for the people who like to [[enjoying]] bad acting, bad screenplay and bad everything else. And by some turn of faith - i am one of them too. there are days when i have an urge of seeing a really bad movie and look up for some trash and here you go - the day is saved! but that's definitely an opinion of mine and doesn't have match with anyones' else.

What i wanted to say is that if you want to watch some [[horrendous]] movie - then Fellini's Casanova is definitely the choice, but heed my advice and don't [[rates]] it by default means. --------------------------------------------- Result 4340 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (76%)]] Star Pickford and director Tourneur -- along with his two [[favorite]] cameramen and assistant Clarence [[Brown]] doing the editing -- bring [[great]] beauty and [[intelligence]] to this [[story]] of [[poor]], [[isolated]] Scottish Islanders -- the same territory that [[Michael]] Powell [[would]] stake [[twenty]] [[years]] [[later]] for his [[first]] [[great]] [[success]]. [[Visions]] of [[wind]] and [[wave]], sunbacked silhouettes of [[lovers]] do not [[merely]] [[complement]] the [[story]], they are the story of [[struggle]] against [[hardship]].

The [[actors]] [[bring]] the dignity of [[proud]] people to their [[roles]] and Pickford is [[brilliant]] as her [[character]] struggles with her [[duties]] as [[head]] of the [[clan]], wavering between [[comedy]] and thoughtfulness, here with her father's bullwhip [[lashing]] wayward islanders to [[church]], there [[seated]] with her guest's [[walking]] stick in her hand like a [[scepter]], [[discussing]] her lover, [[played]] by Matt Moore.

See if you can [[pick]] out [[future]] [[star]] Leatrice [[Joy]] in the [[ensemble]]. I [[tried]], but failed. Star Pickford and director Tourneur -- along with his two [[preferred]] cameramen and assistant Clarence [[Brun]] doing the editing -- bring [[prodigious]] beauty and [[intelligentsia]] to this [[storytelling]] of [[poorest]], [[insulate]] Scottish Islanders -- the same territory that [[Michele]] Powell [[should]] stake [[twentieth]] [[ages]] [[subsequently]] for his [[frst]] [[large]] [[avail]]. [[Notions]] of [[turbine]] and [[waving]], sunbacked silhouettes of [[amateurs]] do not [[exclusively]] [[supplements]] the [[saga]], they are the story of [[combat]] against [[distress]].

The [[actresses]] [[bringing]] the dignity of [[prideful]] people to their [[functions]] and Pickford is [[sumptuous]] as her [[traits]] struggles with her [[accountability]] as [[jefe]] of the [[tribe]], wavering between [[travesty]] and thoughtfulness, here with her father's bullwhip [[caning]] wayward islanders to [[basilica]], there [[sitting]] with her guest's [[marching]] stick in her hand like a [[sceptre]], [[debating]] her lover, [[served]] by Matt Moore.

See if you can [[selecting]] out [[futur]] [[superstar]] Leatrice [[Delight]] in the [[whole]]. I [[attempts]], but failed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4341 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] I don't'know... [[maybe]] it's because I'm [[Brazilian]] but all that stuff was too much. Too much love for the music, too much [[parties]], too much [[contrast]] between the [[nice]] lives of the [[main]] characters ([[come]] on, it's not so sad) and the aspect of the city shown by the [[director]]. [[Everything]] looks too fake to me: the families, the relationships, the [[music]], the "happiness". It simply sells a little taste of [[fake]] latinamerican culture. I must be honest: it did seduce me a little, but who would not be seduced by that [[fake]] lives made of nice music, sex and parties? I'm not that stupid: what kind of world is this one in which people do not suffer of diarrhea, profound sadness and STDs? I liked the scene with Caridad's mother phone call and the discussion about the contract with all the musicians and the Spanish people. I don't'know... [[perhaps]] it's because I'm [[Brazil]] but all that stuff was too much. Too much love for the music, too much [[part]], too much [[rematch]] between the [[lovely]] lives of the [[primary]] characters ([[arriving]] on, it's not so sad) and the aspect of the city shown by the [[superintendent]]. [[Entire]] looks too fake to me: the families, the relationships, the [[musicians]], the "happiness". It simply sells a little taste of [[forged]] latinamerican culture. I must be honest: it did seduce me a little, but who would not be seduced by that [[phoney]] lives made of nice music, sex and parties? I'm not that stupid: what kind of world is this one in which people do not suffer of diarrhea, profound sadness and STDs? I liked the scene with Caridad's mother phone call and the discussion about the contract with all the musicians and the Spanish people. --------------------------------------------- Result 4342 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] THE SOPRANOS (1999-2007)

Number 1 - [[Television]] Show of all [[Time]]

[[Everyone]] [[thought]] this [[would]] be a stupid [[thing]] that wouldn't go past a pilot episode. The Sopranos has become a cultural phenomenon and universally agreed as one of the [[greatest]] television shows of all time.

James Gandolfini plays the enigmatic [[New]] Jersey [[crime]] boss, Tony Soprano, accompanied by a stellar cast. Edie Falco is [[superb]] as the [[worrying]], loving upper-middle class mother; Tony Sirico is tremendous as a superstitious, greying consiglieri who is often very funny.

While the show has often been criticised for the negative stereotype of Italian-Americans as mafiosi, and to an extent this is [[undeniable]], I can see so many positives from the show. The portrayal of strong family values, friendships, love and compassion; could this be present in a coarse television show about gangsters? Yes. Furthermore, other burning issues are discussed such as terrorism, social inequality and injustice, homosexuality, drugs etc. This is no shallow, dull [[show]] about tough guys and violence. It has so much more. Many of the issues we see on the show are very real.

The [[writing]] which has been pretty much great has infused so successfully current issues and managed to imbred them within the characters' lives, which makes the whole thing more interesting.

Credit must go to David Chase who has created an excellent television treasure and to James Gandolfini, for envisioning, television's most complex and enigmatic character.

[[Simply]] [[exceptional]].

10/10 THE SOPRANOS (1999-2007)

Number 1 - [[Tvs]] Show of all [[Times]]

[[Everybody]] [[figured]] this [[ought]] be a stupid [[stuff]] that wouldn't go past a pilot episode. The Sopranos has become a cultural phenomenon and universally agreed as one of the [[higher]] television shows of all time.

James Gandolfini plays the enigmatic [[Newer]] Jersey [[offence]] boss, Tony Soprano, accompanied by a stellar cast. Edie Falco is [[handsome]] as the [[disquieting]], loving upper-middle class mother; Tony Sirico is tremendous as a superstitious, greying consiglieri who is often very funny.

While the show has often been criticised for the negative stereotype of Italian-Americans as mafiosi, and to an extent this is [[unquestioned]], I can see so many positives from the show. The portrayal of strong family values, friendships, love and compassion; could this be present in a coarse television show about gangsters? Yes. Furthermore, other burning issues are discussed such as terrorism, social inequality and injustice, homosexuality, drugs etc. This is no shallow, dull [[demonstrate]] about tough guys and violence. It has so much more. Many of the issues we see on the show are very real.

The [[literary]] which has been pretty much great has infused so successfully current issues and managed to imbred them within the characters' lives, which makes the whole thing more interesting.

Credit must go to David Chase who has created an excellent television treasure and to James Gandolfini, for envisioning, television's most complex and enigmatic character.

[[Uncomplicated]] [[admirable]].

10/10 --------------------------------------------- Result 4343 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The mood of this [[movie]] is [[pretty]] good and it [[captures]] the feel of the 80's well with some good performances.

[[However]].....

The script is [[run]] of the mill with the [[exception]] of a [[couple]] of comedic moments and comes off as being weird where I [[expect]] it was [[intended]] to be edgy. The characters are [[totally]] over dramatized and unbelievable and full of right wing clichés that the script writer probably saw watching a panorama documentary on the national front. The biggest problem is this movie has no real story. It ticks all the right "[[arty]]" boxes but nothing actually happens and at the end you are left wondering what the point was.

[[Very]] [[disappointing]] The mood of this [[kino]] is [[quite]] good and it [[capturing]] the feel of the 80's well with some good performances.

[[Instead]].....

The script is [[executing]] of the mill with the [[exceptions]] of a [[matches]] of comedic moments and comes off as being weird where I [[expecting]] it was [[meant]] to be edgy. The characters are [[entirely]] over dramatized and unbelievable and full of right wing clichés that the script writer probably saw watching a panorama documentary on the national front. The biggest problem is this movie has no real story. It ticks all the right "[[artsy]]" boxes but nothing actually happens and at the end you are left wondering what the point was.

[[Hugely]] [[disappointed]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4344 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (53%)]] Rarely has such an amazing cast been wasted so badly. Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Illeana Douglas, Ethan Hawke, Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken, and John Turturro, all jumped on board, only to be torpedoed by a [[script]] that seems like nothing more than a Hollywood in joke. Attaching [[Martin]] Scorsese's name to this was [[probably]] the draw, but the end [[result]] is [[way]] [[less]] than the sum of it's parts. [[Resembling]] a nightmare gone [[horribly]] wrong, each scene [[seems]] more contrived than the [[next]]. "Search and Destroy" is [[nothing]] more than abstract, stylish, self indulgent [[nonsense]], and the entire film is decidedly dull.......... MERK Rarely has such an amazing cast been wasted so badly. Griffin Dunne, Rosanna Arquette, Illeana Douglas, Ethan Hawke, Dennis Hopper, Christopher Walken, and John Turturro, all jumped on board, only to be torpedoed by a [[hyphen]] that seems like nothing more than a Hollywood in joke. Attaching [[Martins]] Scorsese's name to this was [[indubitably]] the draw, but the end [[upshot]] is [[paths]] [[minimum]] than the sum of it's parts. [[Resemble]] a nightmare gone [[terribly]] wrong, each scene [[seem]] more contrived than the [[imminent]]. "Search and Destroy" is [[anything]] more than abstract, stylish, self indulgent [[grotesque]], and the entire film is decidedly dull.......... MERK --------------------------------------------- Result 4345 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (99%)]] myself and 2 [[sisters]] watched all 3 [[series]] of Tenko and agree this is by far one of the BBC better [[series]].The [[whole]] cast were very convincing in the parts they portrayed and [[although]] the 3rd [[series]] was [[somewhat]] slower it was [[compelling]] [[viewing]] and my [[evenings]] wont be the same without it.[[No]] [[doubt]] we will be watching it again as it is a series which I [[would]] never [[get]] sick of watching.[[Excellent]] viewing and full marks to the BBC for such a [[brilliant]] series and the casting.First [[rate]] in all departments and [[would]] [[recommend]] this [[series]] to [[anyone]] [[although]] some age [[limits]] [[must]] be considered because of some adult [[material]].[[So]] [[grateful]] to the BBC for [[releasing]] this [[series]] on [[DVD]] and [[Video]]. myself and 2 [[sister]] watched all 3 [[serials]] of Tenko and agree this is by far one of the BBC better [[serials]].The [[entire]] cast were very convincing in the parts they portrayed and [[while]] the 3rd [[serial]] was [[rather]] slower it was [[convincing]] [[opinion]] and my [[noches]] wont be the same without it.[[None]] [[duda]] we will be watching it again as it is a series which I [[ought]] never [[obtain]] sick of watching.[[Handsome]] viewing and full marks to the BBC for such a [[lustrous]] series and the casting.First [[rates]] in all departments and [[ought]] [[recommends]] this [[serials]] to [[nobody]] [[despite]] some age [[boundaries]] [[owe]] be considered because of some adult [[materials]].[[Consequently]] [[appreciative]] to the BBC for [[freeing]] this [[serials]] on [[DVDS]] and [[Videos]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4346 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (58%)]] [[Say]] what you will about schmaltz. One [[beauty]] of this [[film]] is that it is not pro-American. It is a morality about some Americans being [[called]] to [[high]] purpose and how they [[rose]] to the occasion. It is [[inspiring]] because it is about people of [[noble]] [[purpose]].

To me, the most interesting [[part]] of the film is the education of Fanny and David Farrelly ([[Bette]] Davis' [[mother]] and brother). As Fanny says, "We've been [[shaken]] out of the magnolias."

[[In]] today's political [[climate]] where, [[led]] by a [[president]] who [[shamelessly]] [[lied]] to us and [[used]] 9/11 to [[bring]] out the absolute worst characteristics of [[human]] [[beings]], we [[sunk]] to the [[level]] of the 9/11 [[murderers]] to [[seek]] blood-thirsty [[vengeance]]. It can't all be [[blamed]] on Mr. Bush - after all, we [[allowed]] him to lead us in that [[direction]] and even re-elected him after his lies had been exposed. Now, with complete justification, we [[Americans]] are reviled [[throughout]] the [[world]].

[[Today]], we watch this [[film]] with a [[new]] awareness: That the [[rise]] to power of Nazis in [[Germany]] was not due to a [[flaw]] in the German [[character]], but, a [[flaw]] in human [[beings]] that [[allows]] us to [[rationalize]] [[anything]] that will [[justify]] our [[committing]] immoral and [[heinous]] [[acts]]. I'm not [[comparing]] [[George]] Bush to [[Adolph]] Hitler. But, I am pointing out how a [[leader]] can whip us up into a [[frenzy]] of [[terror]], hatred, and hyper-nationalism to do [[despicable]] [[things]].

[[Sadly]], the blackmailer, who will do whatever [[needs]] to be [[done]] for his own agrandizement, no [[matter]] how immoral, is most like the leaders of our [[country]], those who [[support]] them, and those who have [[buried]] their [[heads]] so deep in the sand, that they can't even be bothered to vote.

A film like Watch on the Rhine reminds us of what we once [[aspired]] to be - a force for the [[betterment]] of [[humanity]] - and that we have it in us to once again aspire to [[lofty]] [[goals]].

[[Geoff]] [[Said]] what you will about schmaltz. One [[beaut]] of this [[cinematographic]] is that it is not pro-American. It is a morality about some Americans being [[telephoned]] to [[supremo]] purpose and how they [[hiked]] to the occasion. It is [[exhilarating]] because it is about people of [[exalted]] [[objective]].

To me, the most interesting [[portion]] of the film is the education of Fanny and David Farrelly ([[Midler]] Davis' [[mom]] and brother). As Fanny says, "We've been [[rattled]] out of the magnolias."

[[For]] today's political [[climactic]] where, [[steered]] by a [[chairs]] who [[embarrassingly]] [[lying]] to us and [[utilizes]] 9/11 to [[brings]] out the absolute worst characteristics of [[mankind]] [[humans]], we [[drowning]] to the [[tier]] of the 9/11 [[assassins]] to [[seeks]] blood-thirsty [[revenge]]. It can't all be [[blame]] on Mr. Bush - after all, we [[authorized]] him to lead us in that [[directorate]] and even re-elected him after his lies had been exposed. Now, with complete justification, we [[Us]] are reviled [[around]] the [[globe]].

[[Thursday]], we watch this [[filmmaking]] with a [[novo]] awareness: That the [[climbed]] to power of Nazis in [[German]] was not due to a [[failing]] in the German [[traits]], but, a [[failure]] in human [[humans]] that [[allowing]] us to [[simplified]] [[nothing]] that will [[justification]] our [[perpetrating]] immoral and [[hideous]] [[act]]. I'm not [[compared]] [[Giorgi]] Bush to [[Adolf]] Hitler. But, I am pointing out how a [[chef]] can whip us up into a [[hysteria]] of [[horror]], hatred, and hyper-nationalism to do [[obnoxious]] [[items]].

[[Unfortunately]], the blackmailer, who will do whatever [[required]] to be [[accomplished]] for his own agrandizement, no [[issue]] how immoral, is most like the leaders of our [[nations]], those who [[aid]] them, and those who have [[bury]] their [[chefs]] so deep in the sand, that they can't even be bothered to vote.

A film like Watch on the Rhine reminds us of what we once [[sucked]] to be - a force for the [[enhancement]] of [[mankind]] - and that we have it in us to once again aspire to [[exalted]] [[purposes]].

[[Goff]] --------------------------------------------- Result 4347 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] An unforgettable masterpiece from the creator of The Secret of Nimh and The Land Before Time, this was a very touching bittersweet cartoon. I remember this very well from my childhood, it was funny and sad and very beautiful. Well it starts out a bit dark, a dog who escaped the pound, and gets killed by an old friend, ends up in Heaven, and comes back. But it becomes sweet when he befriends an orphaned girl who can talk to animals. Some scenes were a bit scary contrary to other cartoons, like the dream sequence of Charlie, but everything else was okay,and the songs were fair. A memorable role of Burt Reynolds and Dom DeLuise, I just love that guy, ahehehe. And Judith Barsi of Jaws The Revenge, may God rest her soul, poor girl, she didn't deserve to die, but she is in Heaven now, all good people go to Heaven. Overall this is a very good animated movie, a Don Bluth classic enough to put anime and Disney to shame. Recommended for the whole family. And know this, if you have the original video of this, you'll find after the movie, Dom DeLuise has a very important and special message, gotta love that guy, ahehehe. --------------------------------------------- Result 4348 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] To [[compare]] this [[squalor]] with an [[old]], low budget porno flick would be an insult to the old, low budget porno flick. The [[animal]] scenes have no meaning nor do they [[represent]] this man and his crimes even in the broadest [[sense]] of abstractions. The [[synopsis]] on the back of the DVD case says in part, "…gripping retelling of the BTK Killer's reign of terror." This is NOT a retelling. A retelling would suggest that you are being told the truth of what happened or how or why. [[None]] of these things are true. I'm an enthusiastic studier of serial killers and have seen some pretty crappy movies about them and honestly, this IS NOT one of them. This isn't even about the BTK killer. Save yourself some time and a few bucks and rent Dahmer instead. THAT serial killer movie is accurate and true. However, if you just HAVE to see this movie for yourself, check it out for free at your local library and even then, you'll still feel cheated. To [[comparison]] this [[breadline]] with an [[longtime]], low budget porno flick would be an insult to the old, low budget porno flick. The [[beasts]] scenes have no meaning nor do they [[constitute]] this man and his crimes even in the broadest [[sensing]] of abstractions. The [[recap]] on the back of the DVD case says in part, "…gripping retelling of the BTK Killer's reign of terror." This is NOT a retelling. A retelling would suggest that you are being told the truth of what happened or how or why. [[Nil]] of these things are true. I'm an enthusiastic studier of serial killers and have seen some pretty crappy movies about them and honestly, this IS NOT one of them. This isn't even about the BTK killer. Save yourself some time and a few bucks and rent Dahmer instead. THAT serial killer movie is accurate and true. However, if you just HAVE to see this movie for yourself, check it out for free at your local library and even then, you'll still feel cheated. --------------------------------------------- Result 4349 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (90%)]] I really [[liked]] this movie, and went back to [[see]] it two times more within a [[week]].

Ms. Detmers [[nailed]] the performance - she was like a hungry cat on the prowl, toying with her prey. She lashes out in rage and lust, taking a "too young" lover, and crashing hundreds of her terrorist fiancé's mother's pieces of fine china to the floor.

The film was full of [[beautiful]] touches. The Maserati, the wonderful wardrobe, the flower boxes along the rooftops. I particularly enjoyed the ancient Greek class and the recitation of 'Antigone'.

It had a feeling of 'Story of O' - that is, where people of means indulge in unrestrained sexual adventure. As she walks around the fantastic apartment in the buff, she is at ease - and why not, what is to restrain a "Devil in the Flesh"?

The whole movie is a real treat! I really [[wished]] this movie, and went back to [[seeing]] it two times more within a [[chow]].

Ms. Detmers [[pinched]] the performance - she was like a hungry cat on the prowl, toying with her prey. She lashes out in rage and lust, taking a "too young" lover, and crashing hundreds of her terrorist fiancé's mother's pieces of fine china to the floor.

The film was full of [[sumptuous]] touches. The Maserati, the wonderful wardrobe, the flower boxes along the rooftops. I particularly enjoyed the ancient Greek class and the recitation of 'Antigone'.

It had a feeling of 'Story of O' - that is, where people of means indulge in unrestrained sexual adventure. As she walks around the fantastic apartment in the buff, she is at ease - and why not, what is to restrain a "Devil in the Flesh"?

The whole movie is a real treat! --------------------------------------------- Result 4350 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] There's [[nothing]] [[amazing]] about 'The [[Amazing]] [[Mr]] Williams'. [[Part]] of this movie's [[problem]] is its lead actor Melvyn Douglas. He was a [[lousy]] [[actor]] and lazy with it. For most of his [[career]], he [[allowed]] his [[good]] [[looks]], a glib [[manner]] and (usually, but not in this [[movie]]) some fine scriptwriting to [[make]] up for his [[lack]] of acting [[ability]]. I disliked Douglas as an [[actor]] before I [[knew]] anything about him as a person; I've [[learnt]] enough about him to [[know]] that I also despise his politics. I'll give Melvyn Douglas [[credit]] for one thing: his [[chromosomes]] did produce the [[incredibly]] talented and sexy actress Illeana Douglas.

Melvyn Douglas made this [[movie]] right after the brilliant 'Ninotchka' ... talk about a comedown! 'The [[Amazing]] [[Mr]] Williams' is [[allegedly]] a comedy, but I never [[laughed]]. Douglas plays a plainclothes detective on the [[homicide]] squad, named Kenny Williams. I never heard of a [[police]] detective named Kenny, but if they called him Kenneth Williams ... well, what a carry-on. The [[whole]] [[city]] is in a panic because a serial killer is going about, killing women. No motive is given for this; he just likes to [[kill]] [[women]]. The mayor (Jonathan Hale, better than usual) calls Williams on the carpet to account for his failure to catch the killer.

SPOILERS APPROACHING. The [[cheap]], vulgar, untalented and [[unattractive]] Joan Blondell plays the mayor's secretary. (She doesn't sound literate [[enough]] to [[file]] a letter, much less [[type]] one.) Blondell and Douglas [[squabble]] like a cat and a dog, so it's [[blatantly]] obvious they're [[going]] to end up [[together]].

At this movie's lowest point, Melvyn Douglas [[decides]] to draw out the [[killer]] by dressing up as a woman. You do NOT want to see Melvyn Douglas in drag! He's well over six foot, and he doesn't [[even]] shave off that [[annoying]] moustache. The similarly-'tashed [[William]] Powell was an actor very similar in type to Melvyn Douglas (but much more talented). When Powell disguised himself as a woman in 'Love Crazy', he had the integrity to shave off his moustache: a genuine sacrifice, as Powell needed it to grow in again for his next role. But Melvyn Douglas brings nothing whatever to his role in this movie, not even a razor. He plays his drag scenes with the same annoying smirk he used throughout the bulk of his career.

On the plus side, 'The Amazing Mr Williams' has several of those splendid supporting players who made Hollywood's movies of the '30s so delightful. Edward Brophy is brilliant here, touching and funny as a criminal who gets an unlikely furlough from his life sentence. The dyspeptic Donald MacBride is fine as a cop who gets mistaken for the killer, and is nearly lynched by a mob. Ruth Donnelly is [[splendid]]: as usual for her, but here she gets a chance to show her talents away from her usual orbit on the Warner Brothers backlot. Jimmy Conlin, Luis Alberni and the grinning Dave Willock are all fine in small roles. Barbara Pepper (whom I usually dislike) is good here too. The grossly unpleasant Maude Eburne gets some screen time; I always loathe her, and she gives the same performance in every film ... but some audiences enjoy Eburne's one-note performance very much, for reasons I can't fathom.

If you're familiar with Hollywood character actors of the 1930s, and the roles they tended to play, one glance at IMDb's cast list will tell you who the murderer is. That's the problem with 'The Amazing Mr Wiliams': everything is too obvious. I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10. There's [[anything]] [[breathtaking]] about 'The [[Startling]] [[Monsieur]] Williams'. [[Portions]] of this movie's [[difficulty]] is its lead actor Melvyn Douglas. He was a [[rotten]] [[protagonist]] and lazy with it. For most of his [[quarry]], he [[empowered]] his [[alright]] [[seems]], a glib [[modes]] and (usually, but not in this [[cinematography]]) some fine scriptwriting to [[deliver]] up for his [[misses]] of acting [[capability]]. I disliked Douglas as an [[protagonist]] before I [[overheard]] anything about him as a person; I've [[learns]] enough about him to [[savoir]] that I also despise his politics. I'll give Melvyn Douglas [[credence]] for one thing: his [[chromosomal]] did produce the [[immensely]] talented and sexy actress Illeana Douglas.

Melvyn Douglas made this [[cinematography]] right after the brilliant 'Ninotchka' ... talk about a comedown! 'The [[Splendid]] [[Herr]] Williams' is [[reportedly]] a comedy, but I never [[smiled]]. Douglas plays a plainclothes detective on the [[murder]] squad, named Kenny Williams. I never heard of a [[policemen]] detective named Kenny, but if they called him Kenneth Williams ... well, what a carry-on. The [[ensemble]] [[ville]] is in a panic because a serial killer is going about, killing women. No motive is given for this; he just likes to [[murder]] [[wife]]. The mayor (Jonathan Hale, better than usual) calls Williams on the carpet to account for his failure to catch the killer.

SPOILERS APPROACHING. The [[inexpensive]], vulgar, untalented and [[unappealing]] Joan Blondell plays the mayor's secretary. (She doesn't sound literate [[sufficiently]] to [[archive]] a letter, much less [[genre]] one.) Blondell and Douglas [[wrangle]] like a cat and a dog, so it's [[brazenly]] obvious they're [[go]] to end up [[jointly]].

At this movie's lowest point, Melvyn Douglas [[decided]] to draw out the [[murderer]] by dressing up as a woman. You do NOT want to see Melvyn Douglas in drag! He's well over six foot, and he doesn't [[yet]] shave off that [[infuriating]] moustache. The similarly-'tashed [[Wilhelm]] Powell was an actor very similar in type to Melvyn Douglas (but much more talented). When Powell disguised himself as a woman in 'Love Crazy', he had the integrity to shave off his moustache: a genuine sacrifice, as Powell needed it to grow in again for his next role. But Melvyn Douglas brings nothing whatever to his role in this movie, not even a razor. He plays his drag scenes with the same annoying smirk he used throughout the bulk of his career.

On the plus side, 'The Amazing Mr Williams' has several of those splendid supporting players who made Hollywood's movies of the '30s so delightful. Edward Brophy is brilliant here, touching and funny as a criminal who gets an unlikely furlough from his life sentence. The dyspeptic Donald MacBride is fine as a cop who gets mistaken for the killer, and is nearly lynched by a mob. Ruth Donnelly is [[admirable]]: as usual for her, but here she gets a chance to show her talents away from her usual orbit on the Warner Brothers backlot. Jimmy Conlin, Luis Alberni and the grinning Dave Willock are all fine in small roles. Barbara Pepper (whom I usually dislike) is good here too. The grossly unpleasant Maude Eburne gets some screen time; I always loathe her, and she gives the same performance in every film ... but some audiences enjoy Eburne's one-note performance very much, for reasons I can't fathom.

If you're familiar with Hollywood character actors of the 1930s, and the roles they tended to play, one glance at IMDb's cast list will tell you who the murderer is. That's the problem with 'The Amazing Mr Wiliams': everything is too obvious. I'll rate this movie 2 points out of 10. --------------------------------------------- Result 4351 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] [[In]] [[Holland]] a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He stays overnight with a beautiful woman Christine (Renee Soutendijk) and has [[sex]] with her (by imagining she's a [[boy]]). He [[plans]] to leave the next day, but gets a look at a picture of Christine's hunky boyfriend [[Herman]] ([[Thom]] Hoffman) and decides to stay to have a try at him. Then things [[get]] strange.

A big X-rated [[art]] house [[hit]] in the [[US]] in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's strangulation, full frontal male and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will shock most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a comedy!!!!! Paul Verhoeven made this after "Spetters". "Spetters" was attacked by the critics for it's extreme sexual sequences and denounced as trash. So, Verhoeven filled this film with very obvious symbolism thinking the critics would think it was art and praise it. He was right! Critics loved the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big joke on them. [[Still]], it's a [[great]] film.

It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and obvious "hidden" layers in the dialogue that you're never bored. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly despicable character but (somehow) has you rooting for him; Soutendijk is just [[stunning]] to look at and plays her part to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.

This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! A 10 all the way. [[Among]] [[Netherlands]] a gay writer Gerard (Jeroen Krabbe) gives a lecture. He stays overnight with a beautiful woman Christine (Renee Soutendijk) and has [[sexuality]] with her (by imagining she's a [[dude]]). He [[schematics]] to leave the next day, but gets a look at a picture of Christine's hunky boyfriend [[Hermann]] ([[Tom]] Hoffman) and decides to stay to have a try at him. Then things [[got]] strange.

A big X-rated [[artistry]] house [[pummeled]] in the [[USA]] in 1983. Why was it X rated? Let's see...there's strangulation, full frontal male and female nudity, castration, mutilation, simulated sex, a scene in a church with a cross that will shock most people, a gay sex scene in a crypt...and it's all a comedy!!!!! Paul Verhoeven made this after "Spetters". "Spetters" was attacked by the critics for it's extreme sexual sequences and denounced as trash. So, Verhoeven filled this film with very obvious symbolism thinking the critics would think it was art and praise it. He was right! Critics loved the film not realizing that Verhoeven was playing a big joke on them. [[However]], it's a [[whopping]] film.

It's beautifully shot by Jan de Bont (now a director himself) and there's so much symbolism and obvious "hidden" layers in the dialogue that you're never bored. All the acting is great--Krabbe plays a thoroughly despicable character but (somehow) has you rooting for him; Soutendijk is just [[awesome]] to look at and plays her part to perfection--the little smile she gives when Gerard agrees to stay with her is chilling; Hoffman is extremely handsome with a great body--he deserves credit for doing the church sequence and going at with Krabbe in the crypt.

This is not for people easily offended or the weak of heart, but if you like extreme movies that playfully challenge you (like me) this is for you! A 10 all the way. --------------------------------------------- Result 4352 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] The king is dead long live the King! The triad of Caddie Shack Two, The Family underneath the Stairs, and Troop Beverly Hills had been tied for [[worst]] movie ever for so long that they seemed icons in their own right. But there is a new king.....yep.....all hail the new king...."Down to Earth". But some things, like Tiny Tim for example, are so [[bad]] they are good. Some day this could take out the inimitable "Rocky Horror Picture Show" as a cult film. So go see this ....this....well just take my word for it. Go see it. All hail the new king! The king is dead long live the King! The triad of Caddie Shack Two, The Family underneath the Stairs, and Troop Beverly Hills had been tied for [[hardest]] movie ever for so long that they seemed icons in their own right. But there is a new king.....yep.....all hail the new king...."Down to Earth". But some things, like Tiny Tim for example, are so [[faulty]] they are good. Some day this could take out the inimitable "Rocky Horror Picture Show" as a cult film. So go see this ....this....well just take my word for it. Go see it. All hail the new king! --------------------------------------------- Result 4353 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (69%)]] I was [[unlucky]] enough to have [[seen]] this at the Sidewalk [[Film]] [[Festival]]. Sidewalk as a whole was a [[disappointment]] and this movie was the [[final]] nail in the [[coffin]]. [[Being]] a devout fan of Lewis Carroll's 'Alice' books I was very [[excited]] about this movie's premier, which only made it that much more [[uncomfortable]] to watch. [[Normally]] I'm enthusiastic about modern re-tellings if they are treated well. [[Usually]] it's interesting to see the parallels between the past and present within a familiar story. [[Unfortunately]] this movie was less of a modern retelling and more of a pop culture [[perversion]]. The adaptation of the original's characters seemed juvenile and usually proved to be horribly annoying. It probably didn't help that the actors weren't very good either. Most performances were ridiculously over the top, which I assume was either due to bad direction or an effort to make up for a bad script. I did not laugh once through out the duration of the film. All of the jokes were outdated references to not so current events that are sure to lose their poignancy as time goes by. Really, the only highlight of the film was the opening sequence in which the white rabbit is on his way to meet Alice, but even then the score was a poor imitation of Danny Elfman's work. Also, I'd have to say that the conversion of the croquet game into a rave dance-off was awful. It was with out a doubt the low point of the film.

What a joke. Don't see this movie. After its conclusion I was genuinely angry. I was [[sorrowful]] enough to have [[noticed]] this at the Sidewalk [[Cinematography]] [[Festivals]]. Sidewalk as a whole was a [[disillusion]] and this movie was the [[definitive]] nail in the [[casket]]. [[Ongoing]] a devout fan of Lewis Carroll's 'Alice' books I was very [[thrilled]] about this movie's premier, which only made it that much more [[uneasy]] to watch. [[Commonly]] I'm enthusiastic about modern re-tellings if they are treated well. [[Fluently]] it's interesting to see the parallels between the past and present within a familiar story. [[Unhappily]] this movie was less of a modern retelling and more of a pop culture [[perversity]]. The adaptation of the original's characters seemed juvenile and usually proved to be horribly annoying. It probably didn't help that the actors weren't very good either. Most performances were ridiculously over the top, which I assume was either due to bad direction or an effort to make up for a bad script. I did not laugh once through out the duration of the film. All of the jokes were outdated references to not so current events that are sure to lose their poignancy as time goes by. Really, the only highlight of the film was the opening sequence in which the white rabbit is on his way to meet Alice, but even then the score was a poor imitation of Danny Elfman's work. Also, I'd have to say that the conversion of the croquet game into a rave dance-off was awful. It was with out a doubt the low point of the film.

What a joke. Don't see this movie. After its conclusion I was genuinely angry. --------------------------------------------- Result 4354 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] This was one of the all [[time]] [[best]] [[episodes]]. Officer Sean Cooper was murdered in his patrol car back in '68. A dying convict in the state penitentiary reveals that he stole a block of heroin from the car after the shooting. His case is reopened with the presumption that he was corrupted as a policeman.

Further investigation into him as a police officer and a human being reveals a war veteran involved in a forbidden love. This type of love was considered shameful and something to at [[least]] keep hidden at that time.

While this isn't the type of love I personally support, he was still a policeman and a human being and shouldn't have been killed for it. The sound track was [[excellent]] (keeps me watching the DVR), and the selective use of black and white mixed with color to emphasize one object or give a particular [[feeling]] to a scene was [[especially]] appealing. I shall be [[watching]] this one in repeat! This was one of the all [[moment]] [[better]] [[spells]]. Officer Sean Cooper was murdered in his patrol car back in '68. A dying convict in the state penitentiary reveals that he stole a block of heroin from the car after the shooting. His case is reopened with the presumption that he was corrupted as a policeman.

Further investigation into him as a police officer and a human being reveals a war veteran involved in a forbidden love. This type of love was considered shameful and something to at [[slightest]] keep hidden at that time.

While this isn't the type of love I personally support, he was still a policeman and a human being and shouldn't have been killed for it. The sound track was [[magnifique]] (keeps me watching the DVR), and the selective use of black and white mixed with color to emphasize one object or give a particular [[sense]] to a scene was [[namely]] appealing. I shall be [[staring]] this one in repeat! --------------------------------------------- Result 4355 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (56%)]] This is a low budget film with a cast of unknowns and a minimum of on location shoots. The Philippines substitute for Thailand and nobody actually goes to Hong Kong. The stock shot of a Cathay Pacific jumbo jet landing at the old airport makes the transition perfectly. This [[film]] proves that you need neither mega [[budgets]] nor a headliner star to produce an [[excellent]] [[movie]]. It contains [[neither]] the gaffes nor the excesses that young filmakers often stumble into. Solid workmanship from people who know all the aspects of movie making and who understand the compromises between art and box office. An [[excellent]] piece of [[work]]! This is a low budget film with a cast of unknowns and a minimum of on location shoots. The Philippines substitute for Thailand and nobody actually goes to Hong Kong. The stock shot of a Cathay Pacific jumbo jet landing at the old airport makes the transition perfectly. This [[filmmaking]] proves that you need neither mega [[budget]] nor a headliner star to produce an [[glamorous]] [[filmmaking]]. It contains [[either]] the gaffes nor the excesses that young filmakers often stumble into. Solid workmanship from people who know all the aspects of movie making and who understand the compromises between art and box office. An [[sumptuous]] piece of [[jobs]]! --------------------------------------------- Result 4356 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (98%)]] --> [[Positive (93%)]] After I watched this movie, I came to IMDb and read some of the reviews, which compared it to Lost In Translation LITE. When I read that I immediately could see the reviewers point.

This movie was a [[poor]] attempt at a similar theme. Interestingly, the format of the movie is nearly identical, but the PACING is incredibly different. "10 Items" rushes the viewer through the 1-day time line of the movie, whereas the better-planned "Lost In..." seems to stretch out over a few long days.

I'm sure some people will see this because it has Morgan Freeman, and will be disappointed. It seems his better roles now-a-days are supporting roles in big blockbusters, rather than leading roles in sub-$10mil limited release movies and indie films. After I watched this movie, I came to IMDb and read some of the reviews, which compared it to Lost In Translation LITE. When I read that I immediately could see the reviewers point.

This movie was a [[pauper]] attempt at a similar theme. Interestingly, the format of the movie is nearly identical, but the PACING is incredibly different. "10 Items" rushes the viewer through the 1-day time line of the movie, whereas the better-planned "Lost In..." seems to stretch out over a few long days.

I'm sure some people will see this because it has Morgan Freeman, and will be disappointed. It seems his better roles now-a-days are supporting roles in big blockbusters, rather than leading roles in sub-$10mil limited release movies and indie films. --------------------------------------------- Result 4357 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] An overlong, but [[compelling]] retelling of the [[friendship]] between [[civil]] rights [[leader]] Steve Biko and Donald [[Woods]]. The [[first]] half of the [[film]] is the [[strongest]] where we [[see]] the [[bond]] formed between the two [[men]], and how they [[help]] each other out, but the second half isn't as [[strong]], due to the [[elimination]] of the Biko [[character]]. Still, its a [[compelling]] [[film]] with [[great]] performances by [[Kline]] and Washington, in the [[film]] that put the latter on the [[map]]. Washington was [[also]] was [[nominated]] for [[best]] [[supporting]] [[actor]] for the [[first]] [[time]]. [[Overall]], a well made [[film]] that [[could]] have been [[trimmed]] down a bit. 7/10.____________________________________ An overlong, but [[persuading]] retelling of the [[amistad]] between [[civilian]] rights [[ringleader]] Steve Biko and Donald [[Lumber]]. The [[outset]] half of the [[cinematographic]] is the [[largest]] where we [[consults]] the [[bonding]] formed between the two [[males]], and how they [[pomoc]] each other out, but the second half isn't as [[vigorous]], due to the [[removal]] of the Biko [[personage]]. Still, its a [[convincing]] [[cinematography]] with [[marvellous]] performances by [[Klein]] and Washington, in the [[cinematographic]] that put the latter on the [[cartography]]. Washington was [[similarly]] was [[appointing]] for [[optimum]] [[assisting]] [[protagonist]] for the [[frst]] [[times]]. [[Totals]], a well made [[cinematography]] that [[did]] have been [[lopped]] down a bit. 7/10.____________________________________ --------------------------------------------- Result 4358 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] I don't often [[give]] one [[star]] [[reviews]], but the computer won't let me do [[negative]] [[numbers]].

The opening titles [[tell]] us we're in [[deep]] water already. Although this is a low budget [[exploitation]] film, there are 17 [[producers]] [[credited]]. No. No.

At the [[beginning]] of the story [[abusive]] husband Kenneth comes home to his [[family]] in an upscale gated community. The house is a pigsty. His wife, Della ([[Kim]] Basinger) has let the children run amok all day.

OK. We're already in deep water. [[Ms]]. Basinger was 55 years [[old]] when the film came out. [[Uh]], are these her children or grandchildren? It's Christmas Eve. Della drives to the mall, a lengthy scene that [[could]] have been cut. To bludgeon home the idea of eeeeeeevil male aggression rampant in the universe she drives past football players in full uniform playing in pouring rain on Christmas Eve. [[Sure]]. [[For]] a bonus she [[sees]] a [[vehicle]] with a slaughtered deer [[tied]] to it.

We [[get]] some [[actual]] suspense in the [[driving]] scenes, [[though]]. It's raining and traffic is bad. First we see Della try to drive and smoke at the same time. Then later Della tries to drive and talk on her cell phone at the same time, at one point turning completely around to check the cluttered back seat for the [[charger]] for the phone.

She wanders the mall, sees an old friend from college, tries to buy stuff but her credit card is declined- [[gosh]], maybe her husband is [[grumpy]] because he's going broke, but that's too [[complicated]] for the script to follow.

[[In]] the parking lot she [[runs]] afoul of the most [[ludicrous]] gang in the history of [[films]]. One White boy (Lukas Hass watching his career go down the [[toilet]]), one Black, one Asian, and one Hispanic. Imagine a company of Up with People gone to the bad and you'll have the idea.

Although they have a gun she gives them attitude. A mall cop comes to [[investigate]] the ruckus and they shoot him in the head, firing more than once. The parking lot is crowded as can be, people everywhere, and nobody notices.

Della escapes in her car and rather than choosing a police station or well lighted safe area, she drives to a construction site, where she kills all four bad boys one at a time with simply the tools (literally) at hand.

MAJOR spoiler ahead.

She drives back home. The car poops out so she walks through the pouring rain. Checks on the children, goes downstairs, and when her husband petulantly asks what she got him at the mall shows him the gun and shoots him at point blank range.

The experience with the four punks was supposed to result in personal empowerment for Della. Instead we know that her children will probably spend Christmas in foster care or a group home, because the State will collect them while she answers to murder one charges. The four punks can be classified as justifiable homicide in self defense. The husband, different story.

I'm so glad I saw this on cable. If I'd seen it in a theater (did it get any release?) I'd have been furious. As is, I'm just sad seeing talents like Ms. Basinger and Mr. Haas waste themselves on garbage like this.

One very good thing, though. This was written and directed by Susan Montford. Ms. Montford has not gotten another writing or directing credit since passing this turd. There is justice in the world. I don't often [[confer]] one [[superstar]] [[examination]], but the computer won't let me do [[mala]] [[digits]].

The opening titles [[say]] us we're in [[profound]] water already. Although this is a low budget [[operate]] film, there are 17 [[manufacturers]] [[paid]]. No. No.

At the [[initiation]] of the story [[unseemly]] husband Kenneth comes home to his [[familia]] in an upscale gated community. The house is a pigsty. His wife, Della ([[Kima]] Basinger) has let the children run amok all day.

OK. We're already in deep water. [[Corinne]]. Basinger was 55 years [[former]] when the film came out. [[Eh]], are these her children or grandchildren? It's Christmas Eve. Della drives to the mall, a lengthy scene that [[would]] have been cut. To bludgeon home the idea of eeeeeeevil male aggression rampant in the universe she drives past football players in full uniform playing in pouring rain on Christmas Eve. [[Convinced]]. [[In]] a bonus she [[believes]] a [[vehicles]] with a slaughtered deer [[connected]] to it.

We [[obtain]] some [[real]] suspense in the [[drive]] scenes, [[while]]. It's raining and traffic is bad. First we see Della try to drive and smoke at the same time. Then later Della tries to drive and talk on her cell phone at the same time, at one point turning completely around to check the cluttered back seat for the [[changer]] for the phone.

She wanders the mall, sees an old friend from college, tries to buy stuff but her credit card is declined- [[christ]], maybe her husband is [[grouchy]] because he's going broke, but that's too [[complicating]] for the script to follow.

[[Among]] the parking lot she [[manages]] afoul of the most [[senseless]] gang in the history of [[kino]]. One White boy (Lukas Hass watching his career go down the [[wc]]), one Black, one Asian, and one Hispanic. Imagine a company of Up with People gone to the bad and you'll have the idea.

Although they have a gun she gives them attitude. A mall cop comes to [[explores]] the ruckus and they shoot him in the head, firing more than once. The parking lot is crowded as can be, people everywhere, and nobody notices.

Della escapes in her car and rather than choosing a police station or well lighted safe area, she drives to a construction site, where she kills all four bad boys one at a time with simply the tools (literally) at hand.

MAJOR spoiler ahead.

She drives back home. The car poops out so she walks through the pouring rain. Checks on the children, goes downstairs, and when her husband petulantly asks what she got him at the mall shows him the gun and shoots him at point blank range.

The experience with the four punks was supposed to result in personal empowerment for Della. Instead we know that her children will probably spend Christmas in foster care or a group home, because the State will collect them while she answers to murder one charges. The four punks can be classified as justifiable homicide in self defense. The husband, different story.

I'm so glad I saw this on cable. If I'd seen it in a theater (did it get any release?) I'd have been furious. As is, I'm just sad seeing talents like Ms. Basinger and Mr. Haas waste themselves on garbage like this.

One very good thing, though. This was written and directed by Susan Montford. Ms. Montford has not gotten another writing or directing credit since passing this turd. There is justice in the world. --------------------------------------------- Result 4359 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] I [[first]] [[saw]] this movie back in the 1980's and now in 2006 this movie still is one of the [[best]] movies I have ever seen! I would recommend [[anyone]] to look at this movie. You will not be sorry. It is well acted out, so [[real]] and never a [[dull]] moment. The acting is superb and the location makes the movie seem like you are there. From the [[beginning]] right up to the [[end]], this movie is the [[type]] that makes you [[lose]] your [[attention]]. The actress does an [[excellent]] job of portraying the girl who survived this horrific plane crash in the Amazon and it shows how she managed to survive in the Amazon all alone. It is [[unbelievable]] that anyone [[could]] survive under such conditions. This is why this movie is so [[appealing]]. The [[fact]] that this is a [[true]] [[story]] makes the [[movie]] even more interesting and to [[think]] that a young [[girl]] could survive from this [[ordeal]] is [[overwhelming]]. I [[find]] this movie one that I can watch over and over again and one that I never get [[tired]] of. This is [[indeed]] quite a compliment as I have hundreds of movies! I would say this is probably my favorite movie and the best I have ever seen! I [[firstly]] [[sawthe]] this movie back in the 1980's and now in 2006 this movie still is one of the [[optimum]] movies I have ever seen! I would recommend [[somebody]] to look at this movie. You will not be sorry. It is well acted out, so [[veritable]] and never a [[tiresome]] moment. The acting is superb and the location makes the movie seem like you are there. From the [[outset]] right up to the [[termination]], this movie is the [[kinds]] that makes you [[wasting]] your [[beware]]. The actress does an [[sumptuous]] job of portraying the girl who survived this horrific plane crash in the Amazon and it shows how she managed to survive in the Amazon all alone. It is [[unimaginable]] that anyone [[would]] survive under such conditions. This is why this movie is so [[tempting]]. The [[facto]] that this is a [[real]] [[histories]] makes the [[movies]] even more interesting and to [[believe]] that a young [[chick]] could survive from this [[adversity]] is [[gargantuan]]. I [[unearthed]] this movie one that I can watch over and over again and one that I never get [[knackered]] of. This is [[actually]] quite a compliment as I have hundreds of movies! I would say this is probably my favorite movie and the best I have ever seen! --------------------------------------------- Result 4360 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] The Invisible Man is a [[fantastic]] movie from 1933, a cutting edge film for it's time where objects appeared to rest on top of a man who was truly invisible. Go ahead, take a look at the film, you will be shocked that it was made in 1933, it was the first true special effects movie. Come 2000, computer aided special effects seem like child's play, audiences are not blown away by special effects, instead they are disappointed if they are not done right. The special effects in Hollow Man, the update of the HG Wells story, are OK, but not the [[biggest]] [[problem]] with this film directed by Paul Verhoeven, who you might remember from Showgirls and Total Recall. Kevin Bacon plays Sebastian Caine, a scientist dabbling in the world of bio-invisibilation (yeah, I know that's not a word) but of course is battling higher ups who are threatening to take away the team's funding. So, as movie characters who are about to have their funding cutoff are prone to do, he makes the ultimate sacrifice and becomes a guinea pig for the invisibilation (yeah, I know, I used that non-word again) process. The process has dire consequences, no Caine does not die, but instead becomes a horny, violent creature, aka a guy. Now that he's invisible, Caine stalks a sexy neighbor, a co-worker, former girlfriend Linda (Elisabeth Shue), and the man who took away his funding. Then a funny thing happens, Caine becomes a new supernatural being, "The Thing That Won't Die." Laughing in the face of all things natural, Caine faces down death and spits in it's face, as it take what feels like hours for this creature to die, dragging the ending of the movie out. The movie is silly, stupid, and finally [[laughable]] with the way realism is sometimes used, sometimes not. There are neat possibilities in Hollow Man, but of course, not one of them is explored. For a more interesting look at an invisible being, get ready for some good old-fashioned black and white cinema, and check out the 1933 Invisible Man. Kevin Bacon will still be invisible when you come back, probably still alive at the bottom of a volcano. The Invisible Man is a [[resplendent]] movie from 1933, a cutting edge film for it's time where objects appeared to rest on top of a man who was truly invisible. Go ahead, take a look at the film, you will be shocked that it was made in 1933, it was the first true special effects movie. Come 2000, computer aided special effects seem like child's play, audiences are not blown away by special effects, instead they are disappointed if they are not done right. The special effects in Hollow Man, the update of the HG Wells story, are OK, but not the [[grandest]] [[difficulties]] with this film directed by Paul Verhoeven, who you might remember from Showgirls and Total Recall. Kevin Bacon plays Sebastian Caine, a scientist dabbling in the world of bio-invisibilation (yeah, I know that's not a word) but of course is battling higher ups who are threatening to take away the team's funding. So, as movie characters who are about to have their funding cutoff are prone to do, he makes the ultimate sacrifice and becomes a guinea pig for the invisibilation (yeah, I know, I used that non-word again) process. The process has dire consequences, no Caine does not die, but instead becomes a horny, violent creature, aka a guy. Now that he's invisible, Caine stalks a sexy neighbor, a co-worker, former girlfriend Linda (Elisabeth Shue), and the man who took away his funding. Then a funny thing happens, Caine becomes a new supernatural being, "The Thing That Won't Die." Laughing in the face of all things natural, Caine faces down death and spits in it's face, as it take what feels like hours for this creature to die, dragging the ending of the movie out. The movie is silly, stupid, and finally [[grotesque]] with the way realism is sometimes used, sometimes not. There are neat possibilities in Hollow Man, but of course, not one of them is explored. For a more interesting look at an invisible being, get ready for some good old-fashioned black and white cinema, and check out the 1933 Invisible Man. Kevin Bacon will still be invisible when you come back, probably still alive at the bottom of a volcano. --------------------------------------------- Result 4361 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] There are so [[many]] goofy [[things]] about this movie that I can't possibly name but a few:

BOGART's character: 1. His name – Whip McCord (too easy, so I'll [[leave]] it at that. Boy, it makes `Humphrey' [[sound]] good.) 2. His long, curly hair and silly sideburns. 3. His Black Bart get-up, complete with spurs! 4. Not sure what [[shade]] of lipgloss they've got him wearing, but it ain't [[none]] too flattering.

CAGNEY's [[character]] (Jim Kincaid ): 1. His [[lipstick]] doesn't do him any favors, either. 2. The man is being swallowed by his hat during the entire film! Could they not find a hat to fit him? Even a LITTLE?!!?! 3. His pants are too tight in the rear. 4. He blows the smoke off his gun one too many times, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.

If you are a casual Bogart or Cagney fan, and figure it might be a change of pace to see them in a western, do yourself a favor and forget that [[thought]]. EVEN THE HORSES LOOK EMBARRASSED! (That is, when they don't look [[bored]].)

In all fairness, I admit that westerns are my least favorite film [[genre]], but I've still seen much, MUCH [[better]] than this.

On a comedy level, or as high camp, The Oklahoma Kid works. Otherwise, it's viewer [[beware]]. Therefore, see this only if a) you must see every western out there b) you are a TRUE Cagney or Bogie completist c) any of the above comments appeal to you. [[Woah]]….. There are so [[various]] goofy [[matters]] about this movie that I can't possibly name but a few:

BOGART's character: 1. His name – Whip McCord (too easy, so I'll [[let]] it at that. Boy, it makes `Humphrey' [[audible]] good.) 2. His long, curly hair and silly sideburns. 3. His Black Bart get-up, complete with spurs! 4. Not sure what [[shading]] of lipgloss they've got him wearing, but it ain't [[nothingness]] too flattering.

CAGNEY's [[nature]] (Jim Kincaid ): 1. His [[rouge]] doesn't do him any favors, either. 2. The man is being swallowed by his hat during the entire film! Could they not find a hat to fit him? Even a LITTLE?!!?! 3. His pants are too tight in the rear. 4. He blows the smoke off his gun one too many times, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.

If you are a casual Bogart or Cagney fan, and figure it might be a change of pace to see them in a western, do yourself a favor and forget that [[figured]]. EVEN THE HORSES LOOK EMBARRASSED! (That is, when they don't look [[drilled]].)

In all fairness, I admit that westerns are my least favorite film [[genera]], but I've still seen much, MUCH [[best]] than this.

On a comedy level, or as high camp, The Oklahoma Kid works. Otherwise, it's viewer [[attention]]. Therefore, see this only if a) you must see every western out there b) you are a TRUE Cagney or Bogie completist c) any of the above comments appeal to you. [[Wow]]….. --------------------------------------------- Result 4362 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (96%)]] --> [[Negative (53%)]] What we've got here is a Situation. A man is [[found]] to be in distress and people want to help him -- in [[contrasting]] ways. [[At]] the [[end]] they are [[forced]] to [[let]] it [[go]]. You can't fix people. And though in various aspects Reign Over Me is [[conventionally]] Hollywood, that message isn't.

This story is not about Charlie Fineman ([[Adam]] Sandler), a man who lost his wife and three daughters in a 9/11 plane who's gone into a nearly psychotic state of PTSS since. It's about what meeting Charlie does to Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle), a dentist in New York who was his roommate in dental school and, knowing about his tragedy, spots him on the street and reconnects. Charlie is riding around on a little toy motorized scooter -- a pretty fanciful contraption for negotiating Manhattan traffic -- with big headphones on over a mass of unruly hair. The hair is Sandler's chief prop to show he's [[deranged]]. And the use of music as an escape must hit home to every iPod-wielding subway rider.

Charlie is a disaster, but paradoxically Alan, stuck with a controlling wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), soon begins to envy him. Charlie is living like an nutty adolescent boy with a huge trust fund (insurance money from the tragedy), and starts dragging Alan off to "hang out," "eat Chinese," buy records, or watch a Mel Brooks marathon at a rep house. Charlie lives in a nice big apartment protected by a mean landlady, redoing the kitchen over and over, collecting old vinyl of Springsteen, the Who, etc., and playing a video game called Shadow of the Collosus on a giant screen in a big empty living room.

Charlie's in-laws are deeply concerned about him, but also somehow resentful, as we learn later. Alan has a new patient who is propositioning him. Charlie's desperation makes us see Alan's. Trying to help Charlie partly permits Alan to escape from his own stifling realities but partly just makes him more acutely aware of them.

Cheadle and Sandler make an odd couple, but that doesn't matter, because it's convincing that they might both need each other. Charlie is desperate for the companionship of a friend who never knew his family, because to escape his loss, he is pretending he never had one. And so what if as a roommate Charlie slept naked and sleep walked and had terrible musical taste (no Motown)? Alan wants an escape from his tidy, emasculating life. He's under the thumb not just of his wife but of his dental partners, who lord it over him though it's he who set up the practice. They're white, by the way, and he's black.

There's also the lascivious patient from hell, who seriously disrupts things at the dental offices, but starts looking different when Charlie comes by and notices she's a babe. His libido seems to be lurking ready to revive at any minute. He's also drawn to the breasts of Liv Tyler, a psychotherapist in the same building as the dentists who starts trying to treat Charlie when he admits he might need help.

Sandler's mad scenes are a little too theatrical, as are a lot of the plot devices (in fact this movie feels like a play at more than one point), but he has several monologues where he expresses his sorrow in ways that are deeply touching.

Charlie's not just delusional and sad, but dangerous and violent, and all these efforts to help him start to backfire. The movie is admirable in the way it conveys a sense that people can't be made right. This is an interesting movie -- sometimes a touching one -- and it's the first time 9/11 has been dealt with in terms of survivor suffering. But there is an element of comedy that seems tasteless at times, many of the people are too broadly drawn, and the overly grand Hollywood interiors have dreadful décor; only the Manhattan streets look real. There's a courtroom scene that is preposterous, and Donald Sutherland is a judge who's too good to be true. Alan's family problem is resolved too easily with a phone call. And yet this is worth watching for the acting -- the control and subtlety of Cheadle, and Sandler in a serious role almost as good as the one he had in P.T. Anderson's 2002 Punch-Drunk Love, though that's clearly a better movie, in fact a much better one. What we've got here is a Situation. A man is [[detected]] to be in distress and people want to help him -- in [[contradicting]] ways. [[In]] the [[ends]] they are [[coerced]] to [[allowing]] it [[going]]. You can't fix people. And though in various aspects Reign Over Me is [[habitually]] Hollywood, that message isn't.

This story is not about Charlie Fineman ([[Adamo]] Sandler), a man who lost his wife and three daughters in a 9/11 plane who's gone into a nearly psychotic state of PTSS since. It's about what meeting Charlie does to Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle), a dentist in New York who was his roommate in dental school and, knowing about his tragedy, spots him on the street and reconnects. Charlie is riding around on a little toy motorized scooter -- a pretty fanciful contraption for negotiating Manhattan traffic -- with big headphones on over a mass of unruly hair. The hair is Sandler's chief prop to show he's [[crazed]]. And the use of music as an escape must hit home to every iPod-wielding subway rider.

Charlie is a disaster, but paradoxically Alan, stuck with a controlling wife (Jada Pinkett Smith), soon begins to envy him. Charlie is living like an nutty adolescent boy with a huge trust fund (insurance money from the tragedy), and starts dragging Alan off to "hang out," "eat Chinese," buy records, or watch a Mel Brooks marathon at a rep house. Charlie lives in a nice big apartment protected by a mean landlady, redoing the kitchen over and over, collecting old vinyl of Springsteen, the Who, etc., and playing a video game called Shadow of the Collosus on a giant screen in a big empty living room.

Charlie's in-laws are deeply concerned about him, but also somehow resentful, as we learn later. Alan has a new patient who is propositioning him. Charlie's desperation makes us see Alan's. Trying to help Charlie partly permits Alan to escape from his own stifling realities but partly just makes him more acutely aware of them.

Cheadle and Sandler make an odd couple, but that doesn't matter, because it's convincing that they might both need each other. Charlie is desperate for the companionship of a friend who never knew his family, because to escape his loss, he is pretending he never had one. And so what if as a roommate Charlie slept naked and sleep walked and had terrible musical taste (no Motown)? Alan wants an escape from his tidy, emasculating life. He's under the thumb not just of his wife but of his dental partners, who lord it over him though it's he who set up the practice. They're white, by the way, and he's black.

There's also the lascivious patient from hell, who seriously disrupts things at the dental offices, but starts looking different when Charlie comes by and notices she's a babe. His libido seems to be lurking ready to revive at any minute. He's also drawn to the breasts of Liv Tyler, a psychotherapist in the same building as the dentists who starts trying to treat Charlie when he admits he might need help.

Sandler's mad scenes are a little too theatrical, as are a lot of the plot devices (in fact this movie feels like a play at more than one point), but he has several monologues where he expresses his sorrow in ways that are deeply touching.

Charlie's not just delusional and sad, but dangerous and violent, and all these efforts to help him start to backfire. The movie is admirable in the way it conveys a sense that people can't be made right. This is an interesting movie -- sometimes a touching one -- and it's the first time 9/11 has been dealt with in terms of survivor suffering. But there is an element of comedy that seems tasteless at times, many of the people are too broadly drawn, and the overly grand Hollywood interiors have dreadful décor; only the Manhattan streets look real. There's a courtroom scene that is preposterous, and Donald Sutherland is a judge who's too good to be true. Alan's family problem is resolved too easily with a phone call. And yet this is worth watching for the acting -- the control and subtlety of Cheadle, and Sandler in a serious role almost as good as the one he had in P.T. Anderson's 2002 Punch-Drunk Love, though that's clearly a better movie, in fact a much better one. --------------------------------------------- Result 4363 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] Sometimes a movie is so comprehensively awful it has a destructive effect on your morale. You begin to really ask yourself, what does it mean for our society that the standard is so terribly low? Can they honestly expect that we'll endure this many clichés and still be entertained?

Of course, it is still a Hollywood mainstay to make the [[GUN]] the [[major]] character, plot device, and the source of all conflict and resolution in films. Character needs a gun. Gets a gun. Can't do that because he has a gun. Puts his gun down first. OH MY GOD What are we going to do!? He has a gun! He waves it around, acting more malicious than real human beings ever do. He pushes it in someone's face for 90 minutes, shouting questions. The hallmark of any conclusion will be the comforting sound of police sirens.

It's a real challenge to make such a tired, hackneyed formula work again; a film has to be very clever and well executed. This one is neither. It has no life and no personality, and it will suck these components from YOU. it will make you feel WORSE about living in the time and space that you do. Really, who needs that!? So yes, I'll say it: I think this may well be the [[worst]] film I have ever seen. Anyone who was involved in the making of this sub- mediocre soul killing trash should be publicly embarrassed for the disservice they've done to us all. Sometimes a movie is so comprehensively awful it has a destructive effect on your morale. You begin to really ask yourself, what does it mean for our society that the standard is so terribly low? Can they honestly expect that we'll endure this many clichés and still be entertained?

Of course, it is still a Hollywood mainstay to make the [[HOWITZER]] the [[considerable]] character, plot device, and the source of all conflict and resolution in films. Character needs a gun. Gets a gun. Can't do that because he has a gun. Puts his gun down first. OH MY GOD What are we going to do!? He has a gun! He waves it around, acting more malicious than real human beings ever do. He pushes it in someone's face for 90 minutes, shouting questions. The hallmark of any conclusion will be the comforting sound of police sirens.

It's a real challenge to make such a tired, hackneyed formula work again; a film has to be very clever and well executed. This one is neither. It has no life and no personality, and it will suck these components from YOU. it will make you feel WORSE about living in the time and space that you do. Really, who needs that!? So yes, I'll say it: I think this may well be the [[hardest]] film I have ever seen. Anyone who was involved in the making of this sub- mediocre soul killing trash should be publicly embarrassed for the disservice they've done to us all. --------------------------------------------- Result 4364 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Arthur Bach [[needs]] to [[grow]] up, but that is unfortunately not the only thing he needs to do. According to his extremely rich father, Arthur has to marry a certain wealthy Susan Johnson or he's cut off from the family money ($750 million dollars worth). The problem is, Arthur doesn't love Susan (though I hear she makes some good chicken) and has just fallen head-over-heels for the waitress and part-time shop-lifter Linda Marolla. Arthur is an interesting fellow. He's really just a big kid, born into riches with at least one person looking after him every second of every day. Working just rubs Arthur the wrong way - he likes to have fun, womanize, and of course, drink. Drinking gives Arthur a sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde complex; and while that gets him into all sorts of trouble, it's absolutely hilarious to watch on screen.

Dudley Moore is great here in this film as Arthur, earning an Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win for his performance. Moore is fantastic with the comedic aspects of the film, turning the already funny lines into unforgettable comedic gold, but he is also great in bringing Arthur down to a relatable level and making the character likable. Moore has some help in the co-star department - Liza Minnelli is great as Lina, the spirited nobody who Arthur can't get enough of, and John Gielgud is terrific as Arthur's butler Hobson. Gielgud won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his performance in this film, and there's no doubting why. Hobson has a stone-solid dry wit and stuck up attitude, but he's always looking out for Arthur - and Gielgud is perfect in the role. Steve Gordon's 1981 film Arthur is short and simple, but delivers laughs a-plenty. Arthur Bach [[should]] to [[augmented]] up, but that is unfortunately not the only thing he needs to do. According to his extremely rich father, Arthur has to marry a certain wealthy Susan Johnson or he's cut off from the family money ($750 million dollars worth). The problem is, Arthur doesn't love Susan (though I hear she makes some good chicken) and has just fallen head-over-heels for the waitress and part-time shop-lifter Linda Marolla. Arthur is an interesting fellow. He's really just a big kid, born into riches with at least one person looking after him every second of every day. Working just rubs Arthur the wrong way - he likes to have fun, womanize, and of course, drink. Drinking gives Arthur a sort of Jekyll-and-Hyde complex; and while that gets him into all sorts of trouble, it's absolutely hilarious to watch on screen.

Dudley Moore is great here in this film as Arthur, earning an Oscar nomination and Golden Globe win for his performance. Moore is fantastic with the comedic aspects of the film, turning the already funny lines into unforgettable comedic gold, but he is also great in bringing Arthur down to a relatable level and making the character likable. Moore has some help in the co-star department - Liza Minnelli is great as Lina, the spirited nobody who Arthur can't get enough of, and John Gielgud is terrific as Arthur's butler Hobson. Gielgud won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for his performance in this film, and there's no doubting why. Hobson has a stone-solid dry wit and stuck up attitude, but he's always looking out for Arthur - and Gielgud is perfect in the role. Steve Gordon's 1981 film Arthur is short and simple, but delivers laughs a-plenty. --------------------------------------------- Result 4365 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] This is one of the funniest series ever! I laughed till my sides [[split]] and [[rolled]] [[around]] on the floor. If only someone [[would]] [[release]] in America. [[Region]] 0 or 1 - Non-PAL [[please]].

I [[know]] it being [[released]] in the [[UK]] but that's [[Region]] 2 and [[PAL]] besides! Let's [[give]] this series its [[fair]] [[shake]]. [[America]] [[must]] know this [[series]]. Moffat is a genius. I [[loved]] Tracie Bennett's quirky, goofy role in this. Of course I [[liked]] Fiona Gillies! But Tracie was a [[treasure]]!

Release this [[show]] in America! or [[Show]] it again on the PBS stations. I [[need]] to [[laugh]] and [[laugh]] again! [[Please]] [[indulge]] us, please! [[Please]]!

[[Thanks]] for reading. This is one of the funniest series ever! I laughed till my sides [[divides]] and [[laminated]] [[roughly]] on the floor. If only someone [[ought]] [[releasing]] in America. [[Regional]] 0 or 1 - Non-PAL [[invites]].

I [[savoir]] it being [[publicized]] in the [[BRITANNICA]] but that's [[Zoning]] 2 and [[DUDE]] besides! Let's [[confer]] this series its [[justo]] [[shiver]]. [[Latina]] [[needs]] know this [[serials]]. Moffat is a genius. I [[worshipped]] Tracie Bennett's quirky, goofy role in this. Of course I [[wished]] Fiona Gillies! But Tracie was a [[treasury]]!

Release this [[exhibit]] in America! or [[Exhibit]] it again on the PBS stations. I [[necessity]] to [[giggling]] and [[giggling]] again! [[Invite]] [[indulging]] us, please! [[Invite]]!

[[Merci]] for reading. --------------------------------------------- Result 4366 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (60%)]] I [[caught]] this at a screening at the Sundance [[Film]] [[Festival]] and was in [[Awe]] over the [[absolute]] power this [[film]] has. It is an examination of the psychological effects on our [[brave]] soldiers who join the military with hopes that they will protect and serve our country with honor as well as be taken care of by our government for it. The film details the psychological changes that takes place in boot camp as the soldiers are turned into "killers for their country" and put into the war and the after effects once they return home. It also portrays the effect that killing has on the human psyche. It pays homage to the Soldiers and never ever [[criticizes]] the soldiers unlike other films, instead criticizes a system that is not prepared to and does not take care of all the physical and psychological needs of the returned Vets.

This film is powerful, moving, emotional and thought provoking. It stands as a call to arms to support our troops not only by buying stickers and going to parades but by actually listening to them, and helping to support a change in the way their health and well being is taken care of after the killing ends.

The [[best]] film of the Festival so far, ****/**** I [[apprehended]] this at a screening at the Sundance [[Cinematographic]] [[Celebratory]] and was in [[Dazzle]] over the [[unmitigated]] power this [[kino]] has. It is an examination of the psychological effects on our [[gutsy]] soldiers who join the military with hopes that they will protect and serve our country with honor as well as be taken care of by our government for it. The film details the psychological changes that takes place in boot camp as the soldiers are turned into "killers for their country" and put into the war and the after effects once they return home. It also portrays the effect that killing has on the human psyche. It pays homage to the Soldiers and never ever [[criticize]] the soldiers unlike other films, instead criticizes a system that is not prepared to and does not take care of all the physical and psychological needs of the returned Vets.

This film is powerful, moving, emotional and thought provoking. It stands as a call to arms to support our troops not only by buying stickers and going to parades but by actually listening to them, and helping to support a change in the way their health and well being is taken care of after the killing ends.

The [[optimum]] film of the Festival so far, ****/**** --------------------------------------------- Result 4367 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (86%)]] This is [[superb]] - the acting wonderful, sets, clothes, music - but most of all the story itself.

I am [[amazed]] there aren't more [[reviews]] of this movie - certainly one of the best of the 1980s.

It's also a [[wonderful]] movie to see in [[tandem]] with the [[great]] "Random Harvest" which has much the same opening crisis

-- a middle aged, unknown English W.W.I officer is in a hospital toward the close of the war, suffering from shell shock and complete amnesia without any idea of his name, origin, or anywhere he belongs - he proves to be a very wealthy established man - when he "recovers", he will not remember the years before the war --

But there the movies' resemblances end.

My warmest thanks to all who participated in the movie - particularly the actors Ian Holm, Alan Bates, Ann Margret (what a great and surprising casting choice), Glenda Jackson, Julie Christie.

This one stays with you forever. This is [[magnifique]] - the acting wonderful, sets, clothes, music - but most of all the story itself.

I am [[appalled]] there aren't more [[inspecting]] of this movie - certainly one of the best of the 1980s.

It's also a [[sumptuous]] movie to see in [[conjunction]] with the [[whopping]] "Random Harvest" which has much the same opening crisis

-- a middle aged, unknown English W.W.I officer is in a hospital toward the close of the war, suffering from shell shock and complete amnesia without any idea of his name, origin, or anywhere he belongs - he proves to be a very wealthy established man - when he "recovers", he will not remember the years before the war --

But there the movies' resemblances end.

My warmest thanks to all who participated in the movie - particularly the actors Ian Holm, Alan Bates, Ann Margret (what a great and surprising casting choice), Glenda Jackson, Julie Christie.

This one stays with you forever. --------------------------------------------- Result 4368 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (65%)]] this movie [[begins]] with an ordinary funeral... and it insists so hard on this ordinary [[funeral]] feel that i lost interest within 5 minutes of watching, and started skipping scenes. it seems to me whomever made this movie is afflicted to the extent of becoming trapped in a permanent morbid trance, unable to contemplate anything else but death and destruction. well, i ain't one of the dark kids from Southpark, i [[want]] a movie that within 10 minutes gets me well into an interesting [[story]], i won't sit and watch 10 minutes of [[nothing]] but preparations for a funeral.. my grandma on her last years was fascinated by funerals, perhaps she might have enjoyed this "movie". this movie [[beginnings]] with an ordinary funeral... and it insists so hard on this ordinary [[funerary]] feel that i lost interest within 5 minutes of watching, and started skipping scenes. it seems to me whomever made this movie is afflicted to the extent of becoming trapped in a permanent morbid trance, unable to contemplate anything else but death and destruction. well, i ain't one of the dark kids from Southpark, i [[wanting]] a movie that within 10 minutes gets me well into an interesting [[storytelling]], i won't sit and watch 10 minutes of [[nada]] but preparations for a funeral.. my grandma on her last years was fascinated by funerals, perhaps she might have enjoyed this "movie". --------------------------------------------- Result 4369 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (59%)]] A struggling [[actor]] [[finds]] the [[best]] [[way]] to [[break]] into Hollywood is to [[start]] [[knocking]] off the [[competition]]. But what makes Break a [[Leg]] a [[real]] gem is the sardonic look into the existence of the struggling (and not so) LA [[actor]]. It brings us into that world with [[effortless]] irony and wit. It's also [[got]] a polished look and very [[adept]] direction under [[Monika]] Mitchell. Break a [[Leg]] is one of those [[rare]] independent [[films]] that doesn't [[compromise]] its production values at any level. The writing is tight, the [[dialogue]] [[first]] [[rate]]. Cassini is an actor's actor, and the role really [[shows]] off his talents. The climactic scene between him and Rene Garcia is an instant classic, and may go down as one of the funniest Hollywood scenes of all time. I saw it at an advanced screening, and everyone in the audience laughed uncontrollably and raved about it afterwards. A struggling [[actress]] [[found]] the [[better]] [[manner]] to [[outage]] into Hollywood is to [[launch]] [[patting]] off the [[rivalry]]. But what makes Break a [[Paw]] a [[true]] gem is the sardonic look into the existence of the struggling (and not so) LA [[protagonist]]. It brings us into that world with [[easier]] irony and wit. It's also [[did]] a polished look and very [[clever]] direction under [[Monica]] Mitchell. Break a [[Paw]] is one of those [[scarce]] independent [[cinematography]] that doesn't [[compromised]] its production values at any level. The writing is tight, the [[dialog]] [[frst]] [[rates]]. Cassini is an actor's actor, and the role really [[denotes]] off his talents. The climactic scene between him and Rene Garcia is an instant classic, and may go down as one of the funniest Hollywood scenes of all time. I saw it at an advanced screening, and everyone in the audience laughed uncontrollably and raved about it afterwards. --------------------------------------------- Result 4370 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] Rather [[foolish]] attempt at a Hitchcock-type mystery-thriller, improbably exchanging espionage for archaeology and based on the Robin Cook novel; incidentally, I’ve recently acquired another adaptation of his work – COMA (1978) – in honor of the late Richard Widmark. [[For]] the record, [[director]] Schaffner had just made THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL (1978) – a similarly fanciful but much more engrossing suspenser and, [[unfortunately]], SPHINX was a false step from which his so-far impressive career would not recover.

Despite its scope and reasonably decent cast, however, this one proved a critical and commercial flop – mainly because the narrative just isn’t very thrilling: in fact, it’s quite dreary (feeble attempts at horror – the archaeologist heroine having to put up with entombment, rotting corpses galore, and even an attack by a flurry of bats – notwithstanding). Lesley Anne-Down is the lovely leading lady, stumbling upon a lost treasure – it’s actually been hidden away by a local sect to prevent it from falling into the hands of foreigners, who have appropriated much of the country’s heritage (under the pretext of culture) for far too long. Sir John Gielgud turns up in a thankless bit early on as the antique dealer who puts Down on the way of the loot, and pays for this ‘act of treason’ with his life.

Typically, it transpires that some characters are the opposite of what they claim to be – so that apparent allies (such as Maurice Ronet) are eventually exposed as villains, while an ambiguous figure (Frank Langella, whom I saw at London in early 2007 in a West End performance of “Frost/Nixon”, which has now been turned into a film) goes from Down’s antagonist to her lover and back again, as he determines to keep the wealth belonging to Egyptian high priest Menephta a national treasure. Rather [[nonsensical]] attempt at a Hitchcock-type mystery-thriller, improbably exchanging espionage for archaeology and based on the Robin Cook novel; incidentally, I’ve recently acquired another adaptation of his work – COMA (1978) – in honor of the late Richard Widmark. [[During]] the record, [[headmaster]] Schaffner had just made THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL (1978) – a similarly fanciful but much more engrossing suspenser and, [[regretfully]], SPHINX was a false step from which his so-far impressive career would not recover.

Despite its scope and reasonably decent cast, however, this one proved a critical and commercial flop – mainly because the narrative just isn’t very thrilling: in fact, it’s quite dreary (feeble attempts at horror – the archaeologist heroine having to put up with entombment, rotting corpses galore, and even an attack by a flurry of bats – notwithstanding). Lesley Anne-Down is the lovely leading lady, stumbling upon a lost treasure – it’s actually been hidden away by a local sect to prevent it from falling into the hands of foreigners, who have appropriated much of the country’s heritage (under the pretext of culture) for far too long. Sir John Gielgud turns up in a thankless bit early on as the antique dealer who puts Down on the way of the loot, and pays for this ‘act of treason’ with his life.

Typically, it transpires that some characters are the opposite of what they claim to be – so that apparent allies (such as Maurice Ronet) are eventually exposed as villains, while an ambiguous figure (Frank Langella, whom I saw at London in early 2007 in a West End performance of “Frost/Nixon”, which has now been turned into a film) goes from Down’s antagonist to her lover and back again, as he determines to keep the wealth belonging to Egyptian high priest Menephta a national treasure. --------------------------------------------- Result 4371 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (52%)]] As [[anyone]] [[old]] enough knows, [[South]] [[Africa]] [[long]] [[suffered]] under the [[vile]], racist [[oppression]] of [[apartheid]], which [[completely]] subjugated the [[black]] [[population]]. One of the most famous anti-apartheid activists was [[Steve]] Biko, who was [[murdered]] in jail. Following the murder, reporter Donald Woods sought to [[get]] Biko's message out to the [[world]].

[[In]] "Cry Freedom", [[Woods]] ([[Kevin]] Kline) befriends Biko ([[Denzel]] Washington) before the latter is arrested on trumped up charges. When Woods attempts to spread Biko's word, he and his family begin living under threat of attack, and they are finally forced to flee the country. The last scene gut-wrenchingly [[shows]] police firing on protesters.

As one of two movies (along with "A World Apart") that helped galvanize the anti-apartheid movement, "Cry Freedom" stands out as possibly the [[best]] ever [[work]] for all involved. As [[anybody]] [[archaic]] enough knows, [[Southern]] [[Afrika]] [[longer]] [[endured]] under the [[outrageous]], racist [[repression]] of [[segregation]], which [[totally]] subjugated the [[negro]] [[demographics]]. One of the most famous anti-apartheid activists was [[Stephens]] Biko, who was [[slain]] in jail. Following the murder, reporter Donald Woods sought to [[gets]] Biko's message out to the [[monde]].

[[At]] "Cry Freedom", [[Lumber]] ([[Kev]] Kline) befriends Biko ([[Denzil]] Washington) before the latter is arrested on trumped up charges. When Woods attempts to spread Biko's word, he and his family begin living under threat of attack, and they are finally forced to flee the country. The last scene gut-wrenchingly [[displaying]] police firing on protesters.

As one of two movies (along with "A World Apart") that helped galvanize the anti-apartheid movement, "Cry Freedom" stands out as possibly the [[optimum]] ever [[jobs]] for all involved. --------------------------------------------- Result 4372 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] Even for the cocaine laced 1980's this is a [[pathetic]]. I don't understand why someone would want to [[waste]] celluloid, time, effort, money, and [[audience]] brain cells to make such [[drivel]]. [[If]] your [[going]] to make a [[comedy]], make it [[funny]]. If you want to [[film]] [[trash]] like this [[keep]] it to yourself. If you're going to release it as a joke [[like]] this: DON'T!!! I [[mean]], it was a [[joke]] right? [[Someone]] please tell me this was a joke. please. Even for the cocaine laced 1980's this is a [[unlucky]]. I don't understand why someone would want to [[wastes]] celluloid, time, effort, money, and [[viewers]] brain cells to make such [[whim]]. [[Though]] your [[go]] to make a [[humour]], make it [[hilarious]]. If you want to [[movies]] [[litter]] like this [[keeping]] it to yourself. If you're going to release it as a joke [[iike]] this: DON'T!!! I [[imply]], it was a [[giggle]] right? [[Everyone]] please tell me this was a joke. please. --------------------------------------------- Result 4373 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (91%)]] --> [[Positive (60%)]] More wide-eyed, hysterical 50s hyper-cheerfulness that gives new meaning to anti-social, pathological behaviour. Danza and Grayson will leave you begging for mercy.

It's a shame that all the people involved in the making of this movie are now dead (or in nursing homes). I kinda thought about suing them for torture. As this movie started [[unleashing]] its [[shamelessly]] aggressive operatic assault onto my [[poor]], defenseless ear-drums, I felt [[instant]], strong pain envelop my entire being. That [[damn]] muscular vibrato can shatter Soviet tanks into tiny bits, nevermind glass.

"Why didn't you switch the channel if you didn't like it?", you might ask angrily. Fair point, fair point... The answer is that I wanted to, but the pain was so sudden and [[excruciating]] that I fell to the floor, writhing in agony. With my last ounces of energy, I tried to reach the remote but couldn't.

A silly little fisherman with the questionable talent of singing with an annoying opera voice is discovered by Niven, who then proceeds to "pigmalionize" him. Lanza is in love with [[asymmetrical]] Grayson, but she predictably treats him with contempt until they finally hook up. This may seem like a rather thin plot, but this noisy movie is so chock-full of singing and music that there is barely any dialogue at all. This movie is RELENTLESS. Forget about torturing hippies and war prisoners with Slayer's "Reign In Blood" (as in a South Park episode). [[Whatever]] little conversation there is amongst the silly adults that infest this strange 50s musical world, it's all [[infantile]] - as if they were all 6 year-olds impersonating grown-ups. I can only [[envy]] people who find movies like this funny. It must be great being easy-to-please: what a world of wonder would open up to me if only I could enjoy any silly old gag as hilarious, gut-busting comedy.

But let's examine this phenomenon, the 50s musical. My best guess is that 50s musicals offered the more day-dreaming idealists among us a glimpse into Utopia or Heaven (depending on whether you're church-going or Lenin's-tomb-going), or at least very cheesy version of these fantasy-inspired places. TTONO is more akin to a representation of Hell, but that's just me. I don't seem to "get" musicals. People talk, there is a story - but then all-of-a-sudden everyone starts singing for about 4 minutes after which they abruptly calm down and then pretend as if nothing unusual happened! When you think about it, musicals are stranger than any science-fiction film.

Worse yet, TTONO (my favourite type of pizza, btw) is not just a 50s musical, but one with opera squealing. Opera is proof that there is such a thing as over-training a voice - to the point where it becomes an ear-piercing weapon rather than a means of bringing the listener pleasure. The clearest example of this travesty is when Lanza and Grayson unite their Dark Side vocal powers for a truly unbearable duet. I tried lowering the volume. I lowered it from 18 to 14. Then from 14 to 10. Then 8. I ended up lowering it to a 1, which is usually so low that it's only heard by specially-trained dogs and certain types of marsupials, and yet I STILL could hear those two braying like donkeys!

Take the scene in the small boat in the river. Danza starts off with one of his deafening, brain-killing tunes, and then... nothing. No animals anywhere to be seen. Even the crocodiles, who are mostly deaf, have all but left. If you look carefully, you might even see the trees change colour, from green to yellow, in a matter of minutes. No, this was not a continuity error, it was plain old torture of the flora. And those trees were just matte paintings! Imagine how real trees would have reacted.

The reason glass breaks when a high C is belched out of the overweight belly of an operatic screamer is not due to any laws of physics relating to waves and frequency, but because glass is only human - hence can take only so much pain before committing suicide through spontaneous self-explosion. I can listen to the loudest, least friendly death metal band for hours, but give me just a minute of a soprano and I get a splitting headache. More wide-eyed, hysterical 50s hyper-cheerfulness that gives new meaning to anti-social, pathological behaviour. Danza and Grayson will leave you begging for mercy.

It's a shame that all the people involved in the making of this movie are now dead (or in nursing homes). I kinda thought about suing them for torture. As this movie started [[triggering]] its [[crudely]] aggressive operatic assault onto my [[pauper]], defenseless ear-drums, I felt [[immediate]], strong pain envelop my entire being. That [[jeez]] muscular vibrato can shatter Soviet tanks into tiny bits, nevermind glass.

"Why didn't you switch the channel if you didn't like it?", you might ask angrily. Fair point, fair point... The answer is that I wanted to, but the pain was so sudden and [[appalling]] that I fell to the floor, writhing in agony. With my last ounces of energy, I tried to reach the remote but couldn't.

A silly little fisherman with the questionable talent of singing with an annoying opera voice is discovered by Niven, who then proceeds to "pigmalionize" him. Lanza is in love with [[skewed]] Grayson, but she predictably treats him with contempt until they finally hook up. This may seem like a rather thin plot, but this noisy movie is so chock-full of singing and music that there is barely any dialogue at all. This movie is RELENTLESS. Forget about torturing hippies and war prisoners with Slayer's "Reign In Blood" (as in a South Park episode). [[Regardless]] little conversation there is amongst the silly adults that infest this strange 50s musical world, it's all [[childhood]] - as if they were all 6 year-olds impersonating grown-ups. I can only [[craving]] people who find movies like this funny. It must be great being easy-to-please: what a world of wonder would open up to me if only I could enjoy any silly old gag as hilarious, gut-busting comedy.

But let's examine this phenomenon, the 50s musical. My best guess is that 50s musicals offered the more day-dreaming idealists among us a glimpse into Utopia or Heaven (depending on whether you're church-going or Lenin's-tomb-going), or at least very cheesy version of these fantasy-inspired places. TTONO is more akin to a representation of Hell, but that's just me. I don't seem to "get" musicals. People talk, there is a story - but then all-of-a-sudden everyone starts singing for about 4 minutes after which they abruptly calm down and then pretend as if nothing unusual happened! When you think about it, musicals are stranger than any science-fiction film.

Worse yet, TTONO (my favourite type of pizza, btw) is not just a 50s musical, but one with opera squealing. Opera is proof that there is such a thing as over-training a voice - to the point where it becomes an ear-piercing weapon rather than a means of bringing the listener pleasure. The clearest example of this travesty is when Lanza and Grayson unite their Dark Side vocal powers for a truly unbearable duet. I tried lowering the volume. I lowered it from 18 to 14. Then from 14 to 10. Then 8. I ended up lowering it to a 1, which is usually so low that it's only heard by specially-trained dogs and certain types of marsupials, and yet I STILL could hear those two braying like donkeys!

Take the scene in the small boat in the river. Danza starts off with one of his deafening, brain-killing tunes, and then... nothing. No animals anywhere to be seen. Even the crocodiles, who are mostly deaf, have all but left. If you look carefully, you might even see the trees change colour, from green to yellow, in a matter of minutes. No, this was not a continuity error, it was plain old torture of the flora. And those trees were just matte paintings! Imagine how real trees would have reacted.

The reason glass breaks when a high C is belched out of the overweight belly of an operatic screamer is not due to any laws of physics relating to waves and frequency, but because glass is only human - hence can take only so much pain before committing suicide through spontaneous self-explosion. I can listen to the loudest, least friendly death metal band for hours, but give me just a minute of a soprano and I get a splitting headache. --------------------------------------------- Result 4374 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (92%)]] But I doubt many were running to see this movie. Or "Some Came Running Out Of The Cinema". Okay, that's a bit harsh.

The film starts in an [[unintentionally]] comical way: Frankie-boy comes back to his hometown after many years (this already smells of clichés) and the whole town is shaken by his arrival: he is talked about, everyone wants to talk to him, and every woman he meets flirts with him like there's no tomorrow - even his niece hints that she would gladly have dropped her date to chat with Frankie-boy a little longer! Even his pretty niece wants a piece of him! Sounds like one of those laughable "Mike Hammer" episodes where EVERY single female wants Stacey Keach. And, like Stacey Keach, Frankie-boy is anything but a good-looking woman's wet dream. In real life, someone like Sinatra (without the fame) wouldn't get within 100 m of someone as beautiful as MacLaine. But in this Hollywood movie it's the other way around: MacLaine is absolutely nuts about Frankie-boy, but HE couldn't care less! Sinatra plays his "cool" shtick much too often in his movies, and it is rarely credible. Dean Martin is kind of miscast; he isn't miscast as a card-player, but rather because of the accent which simply doesn't suit him. MacLaine is charming as ever, but she plays a caricature - and this reliance on caricatures is one of the basic problems with the film. The main characters are all some sort of stereotypes out of bad or seen-it-all-before movies and cheap novels; Frankie is the "cool cat" who comes back to town to get all the women, and he couldn't care less about his writing (which, predictably, eventually garners recognition); Martin is a sleazy but friendly card-player; MacLaine is the dumb, but very likable bimbo; Frankie's blond love-interest is a snotty literary expert; Frankie's brother is the successful guy who married into his wife's business and has a lousy marriage; and so on. Clichés.

The story contains a couple of coincidences which are a little too far-fetched for my taste: Frankie just happens to bump into his niece in a locale; his niece just happens to be meters away from her daddy when the latter kisses his secretary for the FIRST time; and then there is the awful, stupid ending.

In it, a drunk guy bent on killing Frankie-boy somehow manages to find him in a carnival of all places! The place is utterly crowded, with the typical noise and chaos - plus it's happening in the evening - and yet the guy somehow finds Frankie (in spite of being drunk as a doorknob) and shoots at him. But guess who he kills? MacLaine. She jumps in front of the bullet to save Frankie: a cliché which comic-book writers might cringe at. This utterly pathetic, over-dramatic, and annoying ending certainly cannot please any, even semi-intelligent, viewer. And this happens on the same day that MacLaine and Sinatra got married! The writer of this nonsense seems to have read crappy dime novels his whole life - how else is the writing of this movie to be explained? There is even a card game in which a brawl ensues with Frankie & Martin vs. some cliché caricatures out of the writer's "vivid" imagination. (It was like a damn Western suddenly.) Another dumb thing is the way Sinatra was crazy about the boring snotty-nosed bimbo and pretty much ignored MacLaine. As the movie progresses we find out that Sinatra finds MacLaine to be too dumb for him, just as the blond bimbo finds Sinatra to be too low-class for her. There is a certain snobbism and disdain to be detected in the script regarding MacLaine. MacLaine is treated as worthless by everyone, while the blond bimbo is treated as a princess and an intellectual; the ironic truth is that the latter's character comes off as rather dumb and not at all as intellectual; her behaviour, comments, and opinions are mostly clichéd, silly, confused, pretentious, and primitive. At least MacLaine's character KNOWS that she (MacLaine) is dumb. There is another irony that I didn't fail to notice: Sinatra had trouble finding an ending for his latest story - much like the writer of this movie, and that's why he came up with the corny, crappy finale.

The film basically has a solid cast, and the photography is nice, but the script, though sometimes okay, relies to heavily on silly nonsense instead of on reality-based characters and events.

If you're interested in reading my "biographies" of Shirley MacLaine and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail. But I doubt many were running to see this movie. Or "Some Came Running Out Of The Cinema". Okay, that's a bit harsh.

The film starts in an [[unwittingly]] comical way: Frankie-boy comes back to his hometown after many years (this already smells of clichés) and the whole town is shaken by his arrival: he is talked about, everyone wants to talk to him, and every woman he meets flirts with him like there's no tomorrow - even his niece hints that she would gladly have dropped her date to chat with Frankie-boy a little longer! Even his pretty niece wants a piece of him! Sounds like one of those laughable "Mike Hammer" episodes where EVERY single female wants Stacey Keach. And, like Stacey Keach, Frankie-boy is anything but a good-looking woman's wet dream. In real life, someone like Sinatra (without the fame) wouldn't get within 100 m of someone as beautiful as MacLaine. But in this Hollywood movie it's the other way around: MacLaine is absolutely nuts about Frankie-boy, but HE couldn't care less! Sinatra plays his "cool" shtick much too often in his movies, and it is rarely credible. Dean Martin is kind of miscast; he isn't miscast as a card-player, but rather because of the accent which simply doesn't suit him. MacLaine is charming as ever, but she plays a caricature - and this reliance on caricatures is one of the basic problems with the film. The main characters are all some sort of stereotypes out of bad or seen-it-all-before movies and cheap novels; Frankie is the "cool cat" who comes back to town to get all the women, and he couldn't care less about his writing (which, predictably, eventually garners recognition); Martin is a sleazy but friendly card-player; MacLaine is the dumb, but very likable bimbo; Frankie's blond love-interest is a snotty literary expert; Frankie's brother is the successful guy who married into his wife's business and has a lousy marriage; and so on. Clichés.

The story contains a couple of coincidences which are a little too far-fetched for my taste: Frankie just happens to bump into his niece in a locale; his niece just happens to be meters away from her daddy when the latter kisses his secretary for the FIRST time; and then there is the awful, stupid ending.

In it, a drunk guy bent on killing Frankie-boy somehow manages to find him in a carnival of all places! The place is utterly crowded, with the typical noise and chaos - plus it's happening in the evening - and yet the guy somehow finds Frankie (in spite of being drunk as a doorknob) and shoots at him. But guess who he kills? MacLaine. She jumps in front of the bullet to save Frankie: a cliché which comic-book writers might cringe at. This utterly pathetic, over-dramatic, and annoying ending certainly cannot please any, even semi-intelligent, viewer. And this happens on the same day that MacLaine and Sinatra got married! The writer of this nonsense seems to have read crappy dime novels his whole life - how else is the writing of this movie to be explained? There is even a card game in which a brawl ensues with Frankie & Martin vs. some cliché caricatures out of the writer's "vivid" imagination. (It was like a damn Western suddenly.) Another dumb thing is the way Sinatra was crazy about the boring snotty-nosed bimbo and pretty much ignored MacLaine. As the movie progresses we find out that Sinatra finds MacLaine to be too dumb for him, just as the blond bimbo finds Sinatra to be too low-class for her. There is a certain snobbism and disdain to be detected in the script regarding MacLaine. MacLaine is treated as worthless by everyone, while the blond bimbo is treated as a princess and an intellectual; the ironic truth is that the latter's character comes off as rather dumb and not at all as intellectual; her behaviour, comments, and opinions are mostly clichéd, silly, confused, pretentious, and primitive. At least MacLaine's character KNOWS that she (MacLaine) is dumb. There is another irony that I didn't fail to notice: Sinatra had trouble finding an ending for his latest story - much like the writer of this movie, and that's why he came up with the corny, crappy finale.

The film basically has a solid cast, and the photography is nice, but the script, though sometimes okay, relies to heavily on silly nonsense instead of on reality-based characters and events.

If you're interested in reading my "biographies" of Shirley MacLaine and other Hollywood intellectuals, contact me by e-mail. --------------------------------------------- Result 4375 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (94%)]] --> [[Positive (64%)]] [[Bad]] [[plot]] (though good for a B-movie), good fast-paced fight scenes, at most a 5 out of 10. But something has always bothered me about this film: how come Mariska Hargitay never speaks? In the TV version, she shares several intimate moments with Jeff Speakman, even a kiss in a garden. Yet in the regular (video) version, most of her scenes are cut and she never speaks at all. This [[bothers]] me because it not only takes out a female (though cliched) point-of-view to the film, it also makes the final shot seem creepy. This film would have been better had they kept her scenes in, because in those scenes at least she has a personality, one that undercuts whatever Speakman says. [[Horrid]] [[intrigue]] (though good for a B-movie), good fast-paced fight scenes, at most a 5 out of 10. But something has always bothered me about this film: how come Mariska Hargitay never speaks? In the TV version, she shares several intimate moments with Jeff Speakman, even a kiss in a garden. Yet in the regular (video) version, most of her scenes are cut and she never speaks at all. This [[upsets]] me because it not only takes out a female (though cliched) point-of-view to the film, it also makes the final shot seem creepy. This film would have been better had they kept her scenes in, because in those scenes at least she has a personality, one that undercuts whatever Speakman says. --------------------------------------------- Result 4376 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (52%)]] [[Slow]] and riddled with inaccuracy. Over-looking its flaws this is still an interesting [[account]] of the famed and [[heroic]] siege of the Alamo during the Texas fight for independence from Mexico. James Arness as Jim Bowie. Brian Keith as Davy Crockett. Alec Baldwin as Col. Travis. Raul Julia as General Santa Anna. This made-for-TV [[project]] also [[stars]] David Ogden Stiers, Kathleen York and Jim Metzler. Very good [[original]] music by [[Peter]] Bernstein. [[Lento]] and riddled with inaccuracy. Over-looking its flaws this is still an interesting [[accounting]] of the famed and [[gutsy]] siege of the Alamo during the Texas fight for independence from Mexico. James Arness as Jim Bowie. Brian Keith as Davy Crockett. Alec Baldwin as Col. Travis. Raul Julia as General Santa Anna. This made-for-TV [[projects]] also [[superstar]] David Ogden Stiers, Kathleen York and Jim Metzler. Very good [[preliminary]] music by [[Pieter]] Bernstein. --------------------------------------------- Result 4377 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (59%)]] *MANY MANY [[SPOILERS]] IN THIS REVIEW* This movie was horrible. I am a huge baseball fan so I thought I'd watch it, and I was very [[disappointed]]. It started out okay.. When I saw the bad influence DeNiro had on his young son, I was hoping that he would become a better father throughout the movie or something. Anyways, at the beginning it seemed as if DeNiro was supposed to be the protagonist. He was the only one that believed in Bobby, and he had his adorable son that he was losing custody of, which gave me a reason to feel bad for him. He wanted to help Bobby by talking to Primo, when out of absolutely nowhere he brutally stabs Primo to death... Not to mention that sketchy reoccurring song "I WANT TO **** YOU!!!!" at random unfitting moments.

Later, when DeNiro saves Bobby's son from drowning, I was hoping that the movie could redeem itself.. He could forgive himself for killing Primo if he saved Bobby's son. But of course this is far beyond the depth of the movie, because all he cares about is getting CREDIT for the murder, and does so by stealing Bobby's son, car, and dog and holding them hostage- Bobby just has to hit a home run and announce that DeNiro is a "true fan" while displaying a picture of him biting a knife.

Now we get to the completely unrealistic scene at the end... It is pouring like hell and we are expected to believe that the game hasn't been called. Then DeNiro somehow magically appears on the field in an umpire suit and calls Bobby out at home, proceeding to pull out his knife and start stabbing everyone that runs onto the field. There are seemingly no officers on the field (but the police are on their way), so DeNiro steps on the mound and prepares to pitch a knife to Bobby when he gets shot to death. But don't worry, this cheerful and pleasant movie has a happy ending, because Bobby find his son.

This is NOT a sports movie. It is NOT about a fan. As far as I know, fans are not rabid psychopaths that threaten, rob, and throw knives at their admirees. This is likely to be the sickest movie I will ever see in my life. The plot was shallow, the soundtrack sucked, the movie had no purpose whatsoever. I warn you not to waste your time on this disgusting excuse for a film. *MANY MANY [[VANDALS]] IN THIS REVIEW* This movie was horrible. I am a huge baseball fan so I thought I'd watch it, and I was very [[disenchanted]]. It started out okay.. When I saw the bad influence DeNiro had on his young son, I was hoping that he would become a better father throughout the movie or something. Anyways, at the beginning it seemed as if DeNiro was supposed to be the protagonist. He was the only one that believed in Bobby, and he had his adorable son that he was losing custody of, which gave me a reason to feel bad for him. He wanted to help Bobby by talking to Primo, when out of absolutely nowhere he brutally stabs Primo to death... Not to mention that sketchy reoccurring song "I WANT TO **** YOU!!!!" at random unfitting moments.

Later, when DeNiro saves Bobby's son from drowning, I was hoping that the movie could redeem itself.. He could forgive himself for killing Primo if he saved Bobby's son. But of course this is far beyond the depth of the movie, because all he cares about is getting CREDIT for the murder, and does so by stealing Bobby's son, car, and dog and holding them hostage- Bobby just has to hit a home run and announce that DeNiro is a "true fan" while displaying a picture of him biting a knife.

Now we get to the completely unrealistic scene at the end... It is pouring like hell and we are expected to believe that the game hasn't been called. Then DeNiro somehow magically appears on the field in an umpire suit and calls Bobby out at home, proceeding to pull out his knife and start stabbing everyone that runs onto the field. There are seemingly no officers on the field (but the police are on their way), so DeNiro steps on the mound and prepares to pitch a knife to Bobby when he gets shot to death. But don't worry, this cheerful and pleasant movie has a happy ending, because Bobby find his son.

This is NOT a sports movie. It is NOT about a fan. As far as I know, fans are not rabid psychopaths that threaten, rob, and throw knives at their admirees. This is likely to be the sickest movie I will ever see in my life. The plot was shallow, the soundtrack sucked, the movie had no purpose whatsoever. I warn you not to waste your time on this disgusting excuse for a film. --------------------------------------------- Result 4378 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (99%)]] --> [[Negative (72%)]] I thought that this film was very enjoyable. I watched this film with my wife BEFORE I had my first child. Therefore, I was not watching it as simply family entertainment and I [[still]] [[thoroughly]] enjoyed it. It seems as [[though]] many of the reviews are [[pointing]] out that this movie is not earth [[shattering]], there were no unexpected plot changes and that the [[movie]] was predictable and boring. If these people were watching this movie expecting to have a religious experience doing so, then they were obviously going to be [[disappointed]]. This is [[simply]] an animated movie; nothing more. If you want to [[see]] this movie [[simply]] to sit back and let yourself be entertained, you will not be [[disappointed]]. In closing, this is definitely not the [[best]] movie Disney has made, but it IS entertaining and I do not understand the bad reputation it has [[received]]. I thought that this film was very enjoyable. I watched this film with my wife BEFORE I had my first child. Therefore, I was not watching it as simply family entertainment and I [[nonetheless]] [[carefully]] enjoyed it. It seems as [[while]] many of the reviews are [[indicating]] out that this movie is not earth [[exploding]], there were no unexpected plot changes and that the [[filmmaking]] was predictable and boring. If these people were watching this movie expecting to have a religious experience doing so, then they were obviously going to be [[disenchanted]]. This is [[exclusively]] an animated movie; nothing more. If you want to [[seeing]] this movie [[mere]] to sit back and let yourself be entertained, you will not be [[frustrated]]. In closing, this is definitely not the [[better]] movie Disney has made, but it IS entertaining and I do not understand the bad reputation it has [[benefited]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4379 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] Absolutely putrid slasher film has not one redeeming quality. It has Camp Councellor Angela(Pamela Anderson..awful as the killer;her quips when she wastes people aren't even amusing)on the warpath slaying teenagers who act the least bit naughty or resist her pleadings for good behavior. We run the gamut of boring, clichéd killings such as the slashing to the throat to one kid looking for his Freddy clawed glove, a kid who gets a chainsaw, one girl who gets drilled, one who gets shoved into the crapper(filled with leeches), one who is roasted, etc.

It doesn't have one original idea to offer and is merely a waste of time. That is unless you want to see Valerie Hartmen's(who plays the slut Ally)tits. Most of the violence occurs off-screen so even that will not satisfy. --------------------------------------------- Result 4380 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (56%)]] Just picked up this [[film]] for a buck at National [[Wholesale]] Liquidators, and after watching it, I feel like I got ripped-off.

I don't [[know]] that I've [[seen]] a [[worse]] [[film]] than this. Honestly. And I [[would]] never write a negative review of a film had I not such enormous [[respect]] for the [[subject]] [[matter]], that is, Stephen [[Foster]] and his music.

[[First]], what is it? It's a musical biography? Yeah, lot's of [[tunes]] by Foster then interspersed here and there are these pseudo-Broadway-Jerome Kern-type numbers that reek more than the Mississippi delta. I mean, somebody got [[PAID]] to write this drivel? Secondly, the [[REAL]] [[story]] of [[Foster]] is a fascinating one. Why not [[even]] [[come]] CLOSE to it? Thirdly, what did they have on the [[great]] [[Ray]] Middleton to [[get]] him to do this film? [[Pictures]] of him with small [[boys]]?? With communists? What a [[waste]] of a great [[talent]].

[[So]], [[friends]] of [[Foster]], and the truth, and [[good]] [[entertainment]], be [[afraid]]... be very, very, [[afraid]]. Just picked up this [[cinematography]] for a buck at National [[Bulk]] Liquidators, and after watching it, I feel like I got ripped-off.

I don't [[savoir]] that I've [[watched]] a [[worst]] [[kino]] than this. Honestly. And I [[should]] never write a negative review of a film had I not such enormous [[respecting]] for the [[subjected]] [[question]], that is, Stephen [[Encourages]] and his music.

[[Firstly]], what is it? It's a musical biography? Yeah, lot's of [[anthems]] by Foster then interspersed here and there are these pseudo-Broadway-Jerome Kern-type numbers that reek more than the Mississippi delta. I mean, somebody got [[CREDITED]] to write this drivel? Secondly, the [[GENUINE]] [[storytelling]] of [[Stimulate]] is a fascinating one. Why not [[yet]] [[arriving]] CLOSE to it? Thirdly, what did they have on the [[phenomenal]] [[Gleam]] Middleton to [[gets]] him to do this film? [[Photography]] of him with small [[fellas]]?? With communists? What a [[wastes]] of a great [[talents]].

[[Hence]], [[homeys]] of [[Favouring]], and the truth, and [[alright]] [[entertainments]], be [[fearful]]... be very, very, [[fear]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4381 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (66%)]] The movie was "OK". Not bad, not [[good]], just OK. [[If]] there was [[anything]] [[else]] in the [[theater]] this would be [[skipped]] by far. [[Sadly]], [[Fast]] and Furious 2 [[also]] stunk, but I'd [[rather]] [[see]] this than FF2. :) If you have a fetish for harrison ford or that other [[young]] [[punk]], this will be a "[[cute]]" [[movie]] for you. Personally, I'd [[wait]] for HBO or [[Blockbuster]]. The movie was "OK". Not bad, not [[alright]], just OK. [[Though]] there was [[somethings]] [[elsewhere]] in the [[theatres]] this would be [[skip]] by far. [[Alack]], [[Swift]] and Furious 2 [[apart]] stunk, but I'd [[quite]] [[behold]] this than FF2. :) If you have a fetish for harrison ford or that other [[jeune]] [[thug]], this will be a "[[adorable]]" [[cinematography]] for you. Personally, I'd [[suspense]] for HBO or [[Blockbusters]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4382 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (54%)]] [[Made]] only ten [[years]] after the actual [[events]], and set in the Bunker under the Reichstag, Pabst's [[film]] is [[wholly]] gripping. It [[reeks]] of sulfurous [[death]] [[awaiting]] the [[perpetrators]] of world [[war]]. Haven't [[seen]] this in over three decades, but it [[remains]] [[strong]] in my visual and [[emotional]] [[memory]]. The [[characters]] seem to be [[waiting]] to be walled up in their cave. [[Searing]] [[bit]] of dialog between two [[Generals]]: "Does [[God]] [[exist]]?" "If He did, we wouldn't." Shame this is not more [[readily]] [[available]] for [[exhibition]] or purchase because it [[would]] be interesting to [[view]] and compare this [[film]] with the [[documentary]] about Traudl Junge, "Im Toten Winkel" {aka "Blind [[Spot]]: Hitler's [[Secretary]]") and "[[Downfall]]" with [[Bruno]] Ganz. [[Introduced]] only ten [[ages]] after the actual [[phenomena]], and set in the Bunker under the Reichstag, Pabst's [[movies]] is [[entirely]] gripping. It [[stinks]] of sulfurous [[muerte]] [[hoping]] the [[offenders]] of world [[wars]]. Haven't [[noticed]] this in over three decades, but it [[leftovers]] [[forceful]] in my visual and [[affective]] [[memoir]]. The [[personage]] seem to be [[hoping]] to be walled up in their cave. [[Blistering]] [[bitten]] of dialog between two [[Totals]]: "Does [[Deities]] [[exists]]?" "If He did, we wouldn't." Shame this is not more [[conveniently]] [[approachable]] for [[exposure]] or purchase because it [[ought]] be interesting to [[opinions]] and compare this [[filmmaking]] with the [[literature]] about Traudl Junge, "Im Toten Winkel" {aka "Blind [[Staining]]: Hitler's [[Secretarial]]") and "[[Demise]]" with [[Bruna]] Ganz. --------------------------------------------- Result 4383 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (98%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] This is essentially a [[variation]] on [[House]] Of Wax ,in both the plot and the type of role played by the star of both movies ,[[Vincent]] Price.In both pictures he plays a talented artist who is sent toppling over the edge into insanity when his creations are usurped by other,less talented and less scrupulous people .In this movie he plays a designer of illusions for stage magicians who aspires to set out on a performing career himself only to be frustrated when another illusionist ,the Great Rinaldo ([[John]] Emery)[[insists]] that he honour his contract and give him first choice of any illusions he designs.Price is already ill disposed towards Rinaldi as his former wife is now a paramour of Rinaldi. He deploys his talents as an illusionist and as a brilliant mimic to avenge himself upon Rinaldi and others who thwart his plans for recognition as a performer and a designer.

Price is pretty much the whole show here and gives a well judged star turn as a wronged man whose predicament earns audience sympathy.The rest of the cast are competent if colourless and the weight of the whole venture falls on Price who carries the burden with ease .

Good solid B Movie melodrama , this is a crime movie rather than a horror picture and is enjoyable providing you don't expect a masterpiece .Shot in black and white it is low on gore and is best seen as melodrama and enjoyed for the presence of its star giving an idiosyncratic performance This is essentially a [[variants]] on [[Domicile]] Of Wax ,in both the plot and the type of role played by the star of both movies ,[[Tome]] Price.In both pictures he plays a talented artist who is sent toppling over the edge into insanity when his creations are usurped by other,less talented and less scrupulous people .In this movie he plays a designer of illusions for stage magicians who aspires to set out on a performing career himself only to be frustrated when another illusionist ,the Great Rinaldo ([[Johannes]] Emery)[[stresses]] that he honour his contract and give him first choice of any illusions he designs.Price is already ill disposed towards Rinaldi as his former wife is now a paramour of Rinaldi. He deploys his talents as an illusionist and as a brilliant mimic to avenge himself upon Rinaldi and others who thwart his plans for recognition as a performer and a designer.

Price is pretty much the whole show here and gives a well judged star turn as a wronged man whose predicament earns audience sympathy.The rest of the cast are competent if colourless and the weight of the whole venture falls on Price who carries the burden with ease .

Good solid B Movie melodrama , this is a crime movie rather than a horror picture and is enjoyable providing you don't expect a masterpiece .Shot in black and white it is low on gore and is best seen as melodrama and enjoyed for the presence of its star giving an idiosyncratic performance --------------------------------------------- Result 4384 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] This was a great movie that had a lot of under lying issues. It dealt with issues of rascism and class. But, it also had a message of knowing yourself and taking responsibility for yourself. This movie was very deep it gave the message of that you and only you can control your destiny. It also showed that knowing yourself and being comfortable with who you are is the only way you will ever fit into society. What others think of you is not important. I believe this movie did a wonderful job of showing it. The actors I think were able to convey each character wonderfully. I just thought it was amazing how deep this movie really was. At a just glancing look you wouldn't see how deep the movie is, but on further look you see the underlining meaning of the movie. --------------------------------------------- Result 4385 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (64%)]] Arrrrrggghhhhhh, some people take life far too seriously!!! Watch this film for what it is, sit back, relax and have a giggle. The film does not take itself seriously, so neither should we. If you like James Belushi, you will like this film. [[If]] he is not your cup of tea - give it a miss.

I like James Belushi, so I [[liked]] this film. So [[simple]] isn't it?? :-) Arrrrrggghhhhhh, some people take life far too seriously!!! Watch this film for what it is, sit back, relax and have a giggle. The film does not take itself seriously, so neither should we. If you like James Belushi, you will like this film. [[Unless]] he is not your cup of tea - give it a miss.

I like James Belushi, so I [[wished]] this film. So [[uncomplicated]] isn't it?? :-) --------------------------------------------- Result 4386 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I love this film. The noir imagery combined with Spillane's no nonsense character Mike Hammer works marvellously to create a mood and feel seldom found in low budget detective films of the early fifties. It may not be 'The Maltese Falcon' but this film makes it's own solid contribution to the genre. Spillane is often criticised for alleged misogyny etc, but his 'dames' are way above their male counterparts in terms of cunning and intelligence. Poor old Mike Hammer, as effectively played by Biff Elliott, is blinded by the beauty of the mysterious psychiatrist whom he meets when investigating the death of an army buddy. When the penny finally drops his face is a picture. Good to see that 50s censorship did not force the film makers to omit the famous last line. A bona fide low budget classic. --------------------------------------------- Result 4387 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (51%)]] I wasn't sure at [[first]] if I was watching a documentary, propaganda film or dramatic presentation. I guess [[given]] the time of production it was a mix of all three.

Admittedly the dramatic plot was somewhat predictable. But you had a sense that there would be some interesting scenes as the movie went on. We were [[able]] to witness what appeared to be [[realistic]] training regimens and equipment.

[[Where]] this [[movie]] [[came]] together for me was closer to the end. The scenes had a [[realism]] (at least as I perceived it) that I haven't encountered often before. You could place yourself in the action and imagine the [[thoughts]] of the [[young]] combatants. This was mixed in with the usual [[problems]] of portraying passable Japanese [[soldiers]] at a [[time]] when you might [[think]] [[real]] Japanese [[actors]] [[would]] be [[somewhat]] [[scarce]].

The [[movie]] is [[excellent]] as a [[source]] of the state of the American [[mindset]] in 1943 as the war waged with [[Japan]]. [[Also]] of interest was a [[dig]] at the Japanese with respect to the [[help]] the USA [[gave]] Japan in [[past]] [[years]]. I wasn't sure at [[fiirst]] if I was watching a documentary, propaganda film or dramatic presentation. I guess [[bestowed]] the time of production it was a mix of all three.

Admittedly the dramatic plot was somewhat predictable. But you had a sense that there would be some interesting scenes as the movie went on. We were [[capable]] to witness what appeared to be [[pragmatic]] training regimens and equipment.

[[Whenever]] this [[filmmaking]] [[arrived]] together for me was closer to the end. The scenes had a [[pragmatism]] (at least as I perceived it) that I haven't encountered often before. You could place yourself in the action and imagine the [[thinks]] of the [[youthful]] combatants. This was mixed in with the usual [[hassles]] of portraying passable Japanese [[troops]] at a [[moment]] when you might [[thinks]] [[veritable]] Japanese [[players]] [[ought]] be [[rather]] [[meager]].

The [[kino]] is [[awesome]] as a [[origin]] of the state of the American [[mentality]] in 1943 as the war waged with [[Japans]]. [[Moreover]] of interest was a [[excavation]] at the Japanese with respect to the [[pomoc]] the USA [[supplied]] Japan in [[previous]] [[yrs]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4388 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (97%)]] --> [[Positive (73%)]] Oh, Sam Mraovich, we know you tried so hard. This is your magnum opus, a shining example to the rest of us that you are certainly worth nomination into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (as you state on your 1998-era web site). Alas, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. With Ben & Arthur, you do just that.

Seemingly assembled with a lack of instruction or education, the film's screenplay guides us toward the truly [[bizarre]] with each new scene. It's this insane excuse of a story that may also be the film's best ally. Beginning tepidly, the homosexually titular characters Ben and Arthur attempt to marry, going so far as to fly across country to do so, in the shade of Vermont's finest palm trees. But, all of this posturing is merely a lead-in for BLOOD. Then more BLOOD, and MORE AND MORE BLOOD. I mean, there must be at least $20 in fake blood make-up in the final third of this film.

The film in its entirety is a technical gaffe. From the sound to the editing to the music, which consists of a single fuzzy bass note being held on a keyboard, it's a wonder that the film even holds together on whatever media you view it on. It's such a shame then that some decent amateur performances are wasted here.

No matter, Sam. I'm sure you've made five figures on this flick in rentals or whatever drives poor souls (such as myself) to view this film. Sadly, we're not laughing with you. Oh, Sam Mraovich, we know you tried so hard. This is your magnum opus, a shining example to the rest of us that you are certainly worth nomination into the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (as you state on your 1998-era web site). Alas, it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt. With Ben & Arthur, you do just that.

Seemingly assembled with a lack of instruction or education, the film's screenplay guides us toward the truly [[inquisitive]] with each new scene. It's this insane excuse of a story that may also be the film's best ally. Beginning tepidly, the homosexually titular characters Ben and Arthur attempt to marry, going so far as to fly across country to do so, in the shade of Vermont's finest palm trees. But, all of this posturing is merely a lead-in for BLOOD. Then more BLOOD, and MORE AND MORE BLOOD. I mean, there must be at least $20 in fake blood make-up in the final third of this film.

The film in its entirety is a technical gaffe. From the sound to the editing to the music, which consists of a single fuzzy bass note being held on a keyboard, it's a wonder that the film even holds together on whatever media you view it on. It's such a shame then that some decent amateur performances are wasted here.

No matter, Sam. I'm sure you've made five figures on this flick in rentals or whatever drives poor souls (such as myself) to view this film. Sadly, we're not laughing with you. --------------------------------------------- Result 4389 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[Negative (80%)]] This [[movie]] was made in [[Hungary]] i think. anyway,the countryside is gorgeous,the people who play the farming folks were [[totally]] fascinating. their horsemanship is awesome. I got more into the native people, the farm life, and how [[heroic]] they were trying to [[hide]] Brady from the evil [[Nazis]] who where looking for these [[parachutists]]. They even sacrificed their [[life]] in several instances. the [[young]] [[orphan]] lad that Brady befriends was a sweet kid. you will marvel at the riding i [[think]], and the [[action]] of [[trying]] to [[evade]] the [[Nazis]]. it is [[entertaining]] and [[comic]] in some [[spots]] and very [[tragic]] in others. [[Ladies]] have hankies [[handy]], as you will be [[devastated]] at the [[end]]. i own it, and have [[watched]] it several [[times]]. in other [[words]], not just a one [[time]] around flick. its a [[keeper]].... This [[cinematic]] was made in [[Magyar]] i think. anyway,the countryside is gorgeous,the people who play the farming folks were [[absolutely]] fascinating. their horsemanship is awesome. I got more into the native people, the farm life, and how [[gallant]] they were trying to [[disguises]] Brady from the evil [[Nazi]] who where looking for these [[jumpers]]. They even sacrificed their [[vie]] in several instances. the [[youthful]] [[orphans]] lad that Brady befriends was a sweet kid. you will marvel at the riding i [[believe]], and the [[activities]] of [[tempting]] to [[bypass]] the [[Nazi]]. it is [[amusing]] and [[comedian]] in some [[stains]] and very [[disastrous]] in others. [[Dames]] have hankies [[convenient]], as you will be [[ruined]] at the [[terminate]]. i own it, and have [[observed]] it several [[period]]. in other [[phrase]], not just a one [[period]] around flick. its a [[custodian]].... --------------------------------------------- Result 4390 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] The central theme in this movie seems to be confusion, as the relationships, setting, acting and social context all lead to the same place: confusion. Even Harvey Keitel appears to be out of his element, and [[lacks]] his [[usual]] impeccable clarity, [[direction]] and intensity. To [[make]] [[matters]] [[worse]], his character's name is 'Che', and we are only [[told]] (directly, by the narrator) well into the film that he is not 'that' Che, just a guy named Che. The family relationships remain unclear until the end of the film, and once defined, the family is divided - the younger generation off to America. So cliché. Other reviews discuss how the movie depicts the impact of the revolution on a boy's family; however the political stance of the director is murky at best, and we are never quite sure who is responsible for what bloodshed. So they lost their property (acquired by gambling profits) - so what? Refusing to take a political stand, when making a movie about the Cuban revolution, is an odd and cowardly choice. Not to mention the movie was in English! Why are all these Cubans speaking English? No wonder they did not get permission to film in Cuba. And if family life is most important to look at here, it would be great if we could figure out who is who - we are 'introduced' to them all in the beginning - a cheap way out of making the relationships clear throughout the film! The acting was mostly shallow, [[wooden]], and unbelievable, timing was off all around. The 'special' visual [[effects]] were confusing and distracting. [[References]] to American films - and the black character as Greek chorus - [[strictly]] gratuitous, intellectually [[ostentatious]], and consistently out of place. I only watched the whole movie because I was waiting for clarity, or some point to it all. It never happened. The central theme in this movie seems to be confusion, as the relationships, setting, acting and social context all lead to the same place: confusion. Even Harvey Keitel appears to be out of his element, and [[dearth]] his [[habitual]] impeccable clarity, [[directorate]] and intensity. To [[deliver]] [[questions]] [[lousiest]], his character's name is 'Che', and we are only [[tell]] (directly, by the narrator) well into the film that he is not 'that' Che, just a guy named Che. The family relationships remain unclear until the end of the film, and once defined, the family is divided - the younger generation off to America. So cliché. Other reviews discuss how the movie depicts the impact of the revolution on a boy's family; however the political stance of the director is murky at best, and we are never quite sure who is responsible for what bloodshed. So they lost their property (acquired by gambling profits) - so what? Refusing to take a political stand, when making a movie about the Cuban revolution, is an odd and cowardly choice. Not to mention the movie was in English! Why are all these Cubans speaking English? No wonder they did not get permission to film in Cuba. And if family life is most important to look at here, it would be great if we could figure out who is who - we are 'introduced' to them all in the beginning - a cheap way out of making the relationships clear throughout the film! The acting was mostly shallow, [[wood]], and unbelievable, timing was off all around. The 'special' visual [[influences]] were confusing and distracting. [[Reference]] to American films - and the black character as Greek chorus - [[rigorously]] gratuitous, intellectually [[presumptuous]], and consistently out of place. I only watched the whole movie because I was waiting for clarity, or some point to it all. It never happened. --------------------------------------------- Result 4391 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (96%)]] --> [[Positive (55%)]]

Entrails of a Virgin is so [[bizarre]] and [[incomprehensible]] that it allows the viewer to [[interpret]] it subjectively, applying [[whatever]] meaning he [[wishes]] to its inexplicable excesses of sex and violence. If this was an intentional characteristic of the [[film]], it [[would]] be a [[work]] of postmodern brilliance-but of course it isn't.

Without getting too much into plot summary, let's take a quick walking tour of the events. At a secluded cabin, an orgy is in progress, which includes topless wrestling and diaper p***ing. A vanload of latecomers joins the orgy in progress, but they have unwittingly been followed by a monster I like to call "the muddy ninja." This monster precedes to slay orgy participants one by one, except the proverbial virgin (if you don't count oral sex) who receives his seed and consequently becomes so passionate with desire that she masturbates with someone's severed hand.

Finally she has her guts pulled out, and then there's a scene which seems to imply that she's pregnant with a baby muddy ninja. Got all that? If you're going to rent this movie, it's best if you don't speak Japanese and don't have any subtitles. In a season populated by boring Hollywood flicks, putting this in your VCR might be the cinematic equivalent of shock therapy. It will certainly be something different.

Entrails of a Virgin is so [[surreal]] and [[inscrutable]] that it allows the viewer to [[interpretations]] it subjectively, applying [[regardless]] meaning he [[desires]] to its inexplicable excesses of sex and violence. If this was an intentional characteristic of the [[kino]], it [[should]] be a [[worked]] of postmodern brilliance-but of course it isn't.

Without getting too much into plot summary, let's take a quick walking tour of the events. At a secluded cabin, an orgy is in progress, which includes topless wrestling and diaper p***ing. A vanload of latecomers joins the orgy in progress, but they have unwittingly been followed by a monster I like to call "the muddy ninja." This monster precedes to slay orgy participants one by one, except the proverbial virgin (if you don't count oral sex) who receives his seed and consequently becomes so passionate with desire that she masturbates with someone's severed hand.

Finally she has her guts pulled out, and then there's a scene which seems to imply that she's pregnant with a baby muddy ninja. Got all that? If you're going to rent this movie, it's best if you don't speak Japanese and don't have any subtitles. In a season populated by boring Hollywood flicks, putting this in your VCR might be the cinematic equivalent of shock therapy. It will certainly be something different. --------------------------------------------- Result 4392 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (80%)]] Oh my goodness. This was a [[real]] big mess that just couldn't [[help]] itself. [[Jeffrey]] (Jon Heder) is a 29 year [[old]] man [[still]] [[living]] with his mum (Diane Keaton) and not [[planning]] on going anywhere. Until his [[mother]] meets a [[rich]] [[businessman]] named Mert (Jeff Daniels) who she may be getting [[married]] to.

It would have been an OK movie if Heder didn't play his [[Jeffrey]] so annoying, from the very start there is no chance of liking him and it only gets worse and worse. In the [[end]], we are [[supposed]] to [[like]] him, but there was no [[reason]] to as he hadn't changed from the [[selfish]] [[brute]] that he was at the [[beginning]] of the [[movie]].

Keaton doesn't look to [[even]] be [[trying]] and is in horrible form after 2007's [[Because]] I [[Said]] So. Not to mention the [[shocking]] [[chemistry]] between Heder and Keaton, and where [[supposed]] to believe that their [[mother]] and son? The only [[saving]] [[grace]] is [[Jeff]] Daniels and [[Anna]] Faris although they don't look very interested [[either]]. Apart from a few little smiles, this film [[really]] doesn't [[deserve]] to be called a [[comedy]] [[simply]] because there is [[barely]] [[anything]] to laugh at! If your in the [[mood]] for a recent Diane Keaton [[flick]] watch [[Mad]] [[Money]] or Smother which are a [[lot]] [[better]] than this [[abysmal]] [[effort]]. Oh my goodness. This was a [[authentic]] big mess that just couldn't [[pomoc]] itself. [[Jeffery]] (Jon Heder) is a 29 year [[former]] man [[again]] [[inhabit]] with his mum (Diane Keaton) and not [[plan]] on going anywhere. Until his [[mothers]] meets a [[richer]] [[trader]] named Mert (Jeff Daniels) who she may be getting [[marrying]] to.

It would have been an OK movie if Heder didn't play his [[Jeffery]] so annoying, from the very start there is no chance of liking him and it only gets worse and worse. In the [[termination]], we are [[suspected]] to [[fond]] him, but there was no [[motives]] to as he hadn't changed from the [[egotistical]] [[brutal]] that he was at the [[start]] of the [[film]].

Keaton doesn't look to [[yet]] be [[striving]] and is in horrible form after 2007's [[Since]] I [[Avowed]] So. Not to mention the [[horrifying]] [[chemicals]] between Heder and Keaton, and where [[presumed]] to believe that their [[mommy]] and son? The only [[rescuing]] [[gracia]] is [[Humberto]] Daniels and [[Ana]] Faris although they don't look very interested [[neither]]. Apart from a few little smiles, this film [[truthfully]] doesn't [[deserves]] to be called a [[charade]] [[exclusively]] because there is [[hardly]] [[somethings]] to laugh at! If your in the [[humor]] for a recent Diane Keaton [[film]] watch [[Deranged]] [[Monetary]] or Smother which are a [[lots]] [[nicer]] than this [[gruesome]] [[efforts]]. --------------------------------------------- Result 4393 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (51%)]] This thrown together piece of fecal [[matter]] adds together so many [[ludicrous]] scenarios that in the end it's a laugh riot of absolute hilarity. Too bad as the premise is promising (as it so often is in Duhllywood), but in the hands of this scriptwriter it segues off into la la land.

Lowe is in Prison serving time for a DUI that killed off his mistress. We get to see him having nightmares just so that we know he feels real BAD about this. Then his cell mate neighbor hangs himself. Or does he? Lowe has some suspicions but drops them quickly. His suspicions are so weak that the bad guys have nothing to worry about. So why do they then set him up to be killed? Ah, that's where this story could get interesting. That's where it falls off the rails, and once off the rails it decides it can get away with insulting the viewers attention for the next numbing hour.

****************SPOILERS****************************

I won't bore with an endless recounting of the irrationality of what follows, but contemplate this ending. Lowe has been trapped by the bad guys on a train. They want a tape he has, because that tape will screw their boss, and them. So on to the train come 3 cops, guns drawn, ready to rescue Lowe. The bad guys kill the cops, in front of half the passengers and then....continue chasing Lowe to get the tape. HELLO!!!! killing 3 cops in public will get you into deep doodo, to hell with the tape. Yet off they go through a mall shooting up the place, as if the public did not exist as witnesses, and in the end Lowe is grabbed and the bad guy still wants the tape!!! This thrown together piece of fecal [[topic]] adds together so many [[nonsensical]] scenarios that in the end it's a laugh riot of absolute hilarity. Too bad as the premise is promising (as it so often is in Duhllywood), but in the hands of this scriptwriter it segues off into la la land.

Lowe is in Prison serving time for a DUI that killed off his mistress. We get to see him having nightmares just so that we know he feels real BAD about this. Then his cell mate neighbor hangs himself. Or does he? Lowe has some suspicions but drops them quickly. His suspicions are so weak that the bad guys have nothing to worry about. So why do they then set him up to be killed? Ah, that's where this story could get interesting. That's where it falls off the rails, and once off the rails it decides it can get away with insulting the viewers attention for the next numbing hour.

****************SPOILERS****************************

I won't bore with an endless recounting of the irrationality of what follows, but contemplate this ending. Lowe has been trapped by the bad guys on a train. They want a tape he has, because that tape will screw their boss, and them. So on to the train come 3 cops, guns drawn, ready to rescue Lowe. The bad guys kill the cops, in front of half the passengers and then....continue chasing Lowe to get the tape. HELLO!!!! killing 3 cops in public will get you into deep doodo, to hell with the tape. Yet off they go through a mall shooting up the place, as if the public did not exist as witnesses, and in the end Lowe is grabbed and the bad guy still wants the tape!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4394 --------------------------------------------- [[Positive (100%)]] --> [[[FAILED]]] I liked this movie sort of reminded me of my marriage. It is very clean you can see it with family. Very nicely done. Songs are OK too. I think the writer director is great. The movie shows how marriages progress thru time. They have couples at different stages of life and relationships in their life the film beautifully depicts quite a few stages in parallel in the same story. Some of the dialogs are quite good. The movie depicts complex human emotion very nicely not with over dramatization. Also shows perfect is after all not so perfect. Shows very nicely the dynamics of arranged marriage when it is new. The movie is very well written and directed. --------------------------------------------- Result 4395 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (99%)]] --> [[Positive (90%)]] The character of Tarzan has been subjected to so many clichés, and so many [[bad]] [[interpretations]], that those who are hoping for a different kind of version (people like me, I mean, who liked the Tarzan books as a kid and have always wished for a movie version that followed the books just a little) [[ought]] to [[know]] how the recent renditions stack up. Some of the IMDb reviews address this point, but here's my $.02

I am aware of only two--count 'em--cinema depictions of Tarzan, namely Greystoke with Christopher Lambert and the Disney animated version, that try to depict Edgar Rice Burrough's rather interesting character (the son of a marooned English noble couple, picked up after their death by a tribe of apes who raise him as one of themselves, and who becomes "lord of the jungle" because of his superior human intellect before making it back to England and claiming his other identity) rather than the usual Hollywood jungle-man whose origin remains obscure and whose trademarks are his famous yell, his mysterious inability to speak proper English despite long exposure to people who know the language, his habit of swinging on vines, his strength, heroism, etc. About the only thing these two characters have in common are the name Tarzan and the fact that they both have a wife named Jane. Ron Ely's TV version is something of a compromise: Like Burroughs' character, he speaks good English and is adept and suave in both cultures in a sort of JamesBondish way, but he's no Lord Greystoke and there's no Jane.

Well, this film is in a third category of Tarzan films, and I hope it remains a category of one because it's awful. This category uses the character as a vehicle for, of all things, soft porn. Jane, played by legendarily bad actress Bo Derek is in Africa looking for her dad the absent-minded professor who is combing the jungle looking for something which is never specified. Though her dad is supposed to have been missing for a long time, she finds him effortlessly. Richard Harris as the dad is the best thing here; he sees the film is stupid so he has fun overacting and hamming in a way that reminds me of Peter O'Toole's deliberately silly performance in What's New Pussycat. Dad explains the legend of Tarzan ("some sort of ghost or spirit" he says--either a steal from, or an inartistic attempt at homage to, King Kong) to his daughter, who is at this point unfamiliar with the ape-man. Shortly afterward, we hear the infamous cliché of the Tarzan yell. Dad dies, which oddly doesn't seem to faze his devoted daughter very much. And then.....

Then Tarzan appears, but says nothing. Indeed, he says nothing during the entire film. He and Jane fall in love, and they romp around wearing almost nothing as she recites doggerel love-poetry off-screen. The End. That's the plot.

Well, not exactly; there's also a scene where Tarzan wrestles unrealistically with a boa constrictor--a most unusual boa, since it's the only poisonous one ever seen. Jane treats the bite with the aid of a chimp who helps by wringing out the garment she tears off to bind the wound with (I'm not making this up!), and this is only one of many excuses for her to take her clothes off.

I always like to conclude a review by saying something positive, but this time it's hard. Let's see... well, it's unfair to criticize this film for featuring an orangutan, even though we all know orangutans don't live in Africa; after all, the classic Tarzan movies all used Indian elephants, did they not? Also, you have to admit that Bo Derek is pretty in face and form. (But in that case why the hell didn't she just make a career as an art model? What does it say about a movie when it becomes plain boring to look at a pretty woman? I actually haven't decided whether it's a positive or a negative that they never showed her crotch.) But now I realize: try as I may, I can't end on a positive note.

See this film if you're a bad film buff. I'm outa here. The character of Tarzan has been subjected to so many clichés, and so many [[negative]] [[interpret]], that those who are hoping for a different kind of version (people like me, I mean, who liked the Tarzan books as a kid and have always wished for a movie version that followed the books just a little) [[must]] to [[savoir]] how the recent renditions stack up. Some of the IMDb reviews address this point, but here's my $.02

I am aware of only two--count 'em--cinema depictions of Tarzan, namely Greystoke with Christopher Lambert and the Disney animated version, that try to depict Edgar Rice Burrough's rather interesting character (the son of a marooned English noble couple, picked up after their death by a tribe of apes who raise him as one of themselves, and who becomes "lord of the jungle" because of his superior human intellect before making it back to England and claiming his other identity) rather than the usual Hollywood jungle-man whose origin remains obscure and whose trademarks are his famous yell, his mysterious inability to speak proper English despite long exposure to people who know the language, his habit of swinging on vines, his strength, heroism, etc. About the only thing these two characters have in common are the name Tarzan and the fact that they both have a wife named Jane. Ron Ely's TV version is something of a compromise: Like Burroughs' character, he speaks good English and is adept and suave in both cultures in a sort of JamesBondish way, but he's no Lord Greystoke and there's no Jane.

Well, this film is in a third category of Tarzan films, and I hope it remains a category of one because it's awful. This category uses the character as a vehicle for, of all things, soft porn. Jane, played by legendarily bad actress Bo Derek is in Africa looking for her dad the absent-minded professor who is combing the jungle looking for something which is never specified. Though her dad is supposed to have been missing for a long time, she finds him effortlessly. Richard Harris as the dad is the best thing here; he sees the film is stupid so he has fun overacting and hamming in a way that reminds me of Peter O'Toole's deliberately silly performance in What's New Pussycat. Dad explains the legend of Tarzan ("some sort of ghost or spirit" he says--either a steal from, or an inartistic attempt at homage to, King Kong) to his daughter, who is at this point unfamiliar with the ape-man. Shortly afterward, we hear the infamous cliché of the Tarzan yell. Dad dies, which oddly doesn't seem to faze his devoted daughter very much. And then.....

Then Tarzan appears, but says nothing. Indeed, he says nothing during the entire film. He and Jane fall in love, and they romp around wearing almost nothing as she recites doggerel love-poetry off-screen. The End. That's the plot.

Well, not exactly; there's also a scene where Tarzan wrestles unrealistically with a boa constrictor--a most unusual boa, since it's the only poisonous one ever seen. Jane treats the bite with the aid of a chimp who helps by wringing out the garment she tears off to bind the wound with (I'm not making this up!), and this is only one of many excuses for her to take her clothes off.

I always like to conclude a review by saying something positive, but this time it's hard. Let's see... well, it's unfair to criticize this film for featuring an orangutan, even though we all know orangutans don't live in Africa; after all, the classic Tarzan movies all used Indian elephants, did they not? Also, you have to admit that Bo Derek is pretty in face and form. (But in that case why the hell didn't she just make a career as an art model? What does it say about a movie when it becomes plain boring to look at a pretty woman? I actually haven't decided whether it's a positive or a negative that they never showed her crotch.) But now I realize: try as I may, I can't end on a positive note.

See this film if you're a bad film buff. I'm outa here. --------------------------------------------- Result 4396 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (75%)]] When you [[get]] your hands on a British [[film]] you [[expect]] some [[sort]] of quality. And when it [[comes]] to acting, camera [[work]], lighting etc; this film does the business. It's [[done]] by [[highly]] skilled [[craftsmen]]. That alone can [[bring]] you an [[enjoyable]] one and a half hours. But when you look under the layers of professionalism, you don't really find [[anything]]. [[Apart]] from [[making]] you feel good and [[advocate]] a [[drug]] liberal view, there's really [[nothing]] there. The [[script]] is mediocre, the plot is predictable and the ending [[must]] be one of the [[worst]] east of Hollywood. In all it's English cosiness, it's just a [[shameful]] and cynical attempt to make another "Full Monty". Why they made this film? I haven't got a clue, apart from making money of course. When you [[got]] your hands on a British [[cinematography]] you [[expecting]] some [[sorting]] of quality. And when it [[occurs]] to acting, camera [[collaboration]], lighting etc; this film does the business. It's [[performed]] by [[immeasurably]] skilled [[crafts]]. That alone can [[bringing]] you an [[congenial]] one and a half hours. But when you look under the layers of professionalism, you don't really find [[somethings]]. [[Also]] from [[doing]] you feel good and [[vindicator]] a [[medications]] liberal view, there's really [[anything]] there. The [[hyphen]] is mediocre, the plot is predictable and the ending [[ought]] be one of the [[hardest]] east of Hollywood. In all it's English cosiness, it's just a [[outrageous]] and cynical attempt to make another "Full Monty". Why they made this film? I haven't got a clue, apart from making money of course. --------------------------------------------- Result 4397 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (85%)]] I remember loving this show when I was a kid. I thought the helicopter was the coolest thing I've seen. It was ultra high-tech for it's time. It could repel enemy fire, do all sorts of acrobatics in the air, and take down nearly anything in it's way. Now I go back and watch it today and am surprised how [[lousy]] this show really is. The casts members are [[hardly]] compelling, there are a lot of cheesy moments, and the fight scenes are incredibly fake looking. And nearly every ending has the same helicopter fighting crap with the obvious reuse of grainy low quality stock footage. Lot of the footages appear to date from the Vietnam War era.

Airwolf has basically the same theme as Knight Rider, except the crime-fighting vehicle of choice is a helicopter instead of a car. After watching a few episodes, I found myself utterly bored. I do, however, love the theme music. I remember loving this show when I was a kid. I thought the helicopter was the coolest thing I've seen. It was ultra high-tech for it's time. It could repel enemy fire, do all sorts of acrobatics in the air, and take down nearly anything in it's way. Now I go back and watch it today and am surprised how [[squalid]] this show really is. The casts members are [[practically]] compelling, there are a lot of cheesy moments, and the fight scenes are incredibly fake looking. And nearly every ending has the same helicopter fighting crap with the obvious reuse of grainy low quality stock footage. Lot of the footages appear to date from the Vietnam War era.

Airwolf has basically the same theme as Knight Rider, except the crime-fighting vehicle of choice is a helicopter instead of a car. After watching a few episodes, I found myself utterly bored. I do, however, love the theme music. --------------------------------------------- Result 4398 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (54%)]] Seeing all of the negative reviews for this movie, I figured that it could be yet another comic masterpiece that wasn't quite meant to be. I watched the first two fight scenes, listening to the generic dialogue delivered [[awfully]] by Lungren, and all of the other thrown-in Oriental actors, and I found the movie so [[awful]] that it was funny. Then Brandon Lee enters the story and the one-liners start flying, the plot falls apart, the script writers start drinking and the movie wears out it's welcome, as it turns into the [[worst]] [[action]] [[movie]] EVER.

Lungren beats out his previous efforts in "The Punisher" and others, as well as all of Van Damme's movies, Seagal's movies, and Stallone's non-Rocky movies, for this distinct honor. This movie has the absolute [[worst]] acting (check out Tia Carrere's face when she is in any scene with Dolph, that's worth a laugh), with the worst [[dialogue]] ever (Brandon Lee's comment about little Dolph is the worst line ever in a film), and the [[worst]] outfit in a film (Dolph in full Japanese attire). Picture "Tango and Cash" with worse acting, meets "Commando," meets "Friday the 13th" (because of the senseless nudity and Lungren's performance is very Jason Voorhees-like), in an hour and fifteen minute joke of a movie.

The good (how about not awful) performances go to the bad guy (who still looks constipated through his entire performance) and Carrere (who somehow says her 5 lines without breaking out laughing). Brandon Lee is just there being Lungren's sidekick, and doing a really [[awful]] job at that.

An awful, awful movie. Fear it and avoid it. If you do watch it though, ask yourself why the underwater shots are twice as clear as most non-underwater shots. Speaking of the underwater shots, check out the lame water fight scene with the worst fight-scene-ending ever. This movie has every version of a bad fight scene for those with short attention spans and to fill-in between the flashes of nudity.

A BAD BAD MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seeing all of the negative reviews for this movie, I figured that it could be yet another comic masterpiece that wasn't quite meant to be. I watched the first two fight scenes, listening to the generic dialogue delivered [[frightfully]] by Lungren, and all of the other thrown-in Oriental actors, and I found the movie so [[frightful]] that it was funny. Then Brandon Lee enters the story and the one-liners start flying, the plot falls apart, the script writers start drinking and the movie wears out it's welcome, as it turns into the [[hardest]] [[measures]] [[cinematography]] EVER.

Lungren beats out his previous efforts in "The Punisher" and others, as well as all of Van Damme's movies, Seagal's movies, and Stallone's non-Rocky movies, for this distinct honor. This movie has the absolute [[meanest]] acting (check out Tia Carrere's face when she is in any scene with Dolph, that's worth a laugh), with the worst [[discussions]] ever (Brandon Lee's comment about little Dolph is the worst line ever in a film), and the [[hardest]] outfit in a film (Dolph in full Japanese attire). Picture "Tango and Cash" with worse acting, meets "Commando," meets "Friday the 13th" (because of the senseless nudity and Lungren's performance is very Jason Voorhees-like), in an hour and fifteen minute joke of a movie.

The good (how about not awful) performances go to the bad guy (who still looks constipated through his entire performance) and Carrere (who somehow says her 5 lines without breaking out laughing). Brandon Lee is just there being Lungren's sidekick, and doing a really [[terrifying]] job at that.

An awful, awful movie. Fear it and avoid it. If you do watch it though, ask yourself why the underwater shots are twice as clear as most non-underwater shots. Speaking of the underwater shots, check out the lame water fight scene with the worst fight-scene-ending ever. This movie has every version of a bad fight scene for those with short attention spans and to fill-in between the flashes of nudity.

A BAD BAD MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------- Result 4399 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (58%)]] This movie is maybe one of the most [[boring]] [[movies]] of 2000 that I have seen! Especially the [[music]] fails to create suspense when people suddenly disappear. Also aspects such as martial law are not treated with the necessary seriousness. The story itself has problems: the UN could never take power over the world since the United States alone would not allow it but nations such as China, Russia, Japan, etc. would not either. This would also play against someone trying to take over the world as Nicolae Carpathia does. This [[reminds]] me of James Bond movies, only that those have more action! Naturally the movie is made for [[Christians]] and only for Christians and they may enjoy it. Since I cannot count myself a Christian I find the whole idea ludicrous. This prophecy furthermore seems to be, if believed to be true, dangerously close to other prophecies by cults for the end of the world. Why fear such a possibility when we can make life as good as possible here on Earth without This movie is maybe one of the most [[bore]] [[cinematography]] of 2000 that I have seen! Especially the [[musica]] fails to create suspense when people suddenly disappear. Also aspects such as martial law are not treated with the necessary seriousness. The story itself has problems: the UN could never take power over the world since the United States alone would not allow it but nations such as China, Russia, Japan, etc. would not either. This would also play against someone trying to take over the world as Nicolae Carpathia does. This [[remembered]] me of James Bond movies, only that those have more action! Naturally the movie is made for [[Kristen]] and only for Christians and they may enjoy it. Since I cannot count myself a Christian I find the whole idea ludicrous. This prophecy furthermore seems to be, if believed to be true, dangerously close to other prophecies by cults for the end of the world. Why fear such a possibility when we can make life as good as possible here on Earth without --------------------------------------------- Result 4400 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] The Twilight [[Zone]] has [[achieved]] a certain mythology about it--much like Star [[Trek]]. That's because there are [[many]] [[devoted]] lovers of the show that no matter what [[think]] every episode was a winner. They are the ones who [[score]] each individual show a 10 and cannot objectively [[evaluate]] the [[show]]. Because of this, a while back I [[reviewed]] all the [[original]] Star [[Trek]] [[episodes]] (the good and the bad) because the [[overall]] [[ratings]] and reviews were just too positive. Now, it's [[time]] to do the same for The Twilight [[Zone]].

[[While]] I have scored many episodes 10, this one [[gets]] a 3 [[simply]] because it was [[bad]]. The [[writing]] was in fact [[embarrassingly]] [[bad]]. Two people from opposing sides in a great war are seen wandering about through the entire episode. After a while, it's apparent that they are the only two people left on Earth--as you learn in the really stupid and totally unconvincing conclusion. Usually the twist at the end makes the episode great--this one killed it! The Twilight [[Zones]] has [[reached]] a certain mythology about it--much like Star [[Hike]]. That's because there are [[countless]] [[dedicated]] lovers of the show that no matter what [[thought]] every episode was a winner. They are the ones who [[notation]] each individual show a 10 and cannot objectively [[assessed]] the [[demonstrate]]. Because of this, a while back I [[scrutinized]] all the [[upfront]] Star [[Walkabout]] [[bouts]] (the good and the bad) because the [[holistic]] [[appraisals]] and reviews were just too positive. Now, it's [[period]] to do the same for The Twilight [[Sphere]].

[[Although]] I have scored many episodes 10, this one [[attains]] a 3 [[merely]] because it was [[negative]]. The [[literary]] was in fact [[crudely]] [[faulty]]. Two people from opposing sides in a great war are seen wandering about through the entire episode. After a while, it's apparent that they are the only two people left on Earth--as you learn in the really stupid and totally unconvincing conclusion. Usually the twist at the end makes the episode great--this one killed it! --------------------------------------------- Result 4401 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (50%)]] This film was a [[disaster]] from [[start]] to [[finish]]. Interspersed with performances from "the next generation of beautiful losers" are [[interviews]] with Bono and The Edge as well as the performers themselves. This leaves little [[time]] for the clips of Leonard Cohen himself, who towers over everyone else in the film with his commanding yet gentle [[presence]], wisdom and [[humor]]. The [[rest]] are too busy [[trying]] to canonize him as St. Leonard or as some Old Testament prophet. Many of the performances are forgettable over-interpretations (especially Rufus & Martha Wainright's) or [[bland]] under-achievements. Only Beth Orton and Anthony got within [[striking]] distance of Leonard's own versions by [[using]] a [[little]] [[restraint]]. [[Annoying]] [[little]] pseudo-avant-garde [[gestures]] are sprinkled [[throughout]] the film- like out of [[focus]] superimpositions of red [[spheres]] over [[many]] of the [[concert]] and interview [[shots]], [[shaky]] blurred camera work, [[use]] of digital delay on some of Leonard Cohen's comments (making it harder to hear what's being said) and a spooky, [[pretentious]] low drone under a lot of the interview segments (an attempt at added gravitas?). For the real thing, see the Songs From The Life Of documentary produced by the BBC in 1988. This film was a [[calamities]] from [[beginnings]] to [[finis]]. Interspersed with performances from "the next generation of beautiful losers" are [[conversations]] with Bono and The Edge as well as the performers themselves. This leaves little [[period]] for the clips of Leonard Cohen himself, who towers over everyone else in the film with his commanding yet gentle [[participation]], wisdom and [[mood]]. The [[roosting]] are too busy [[tempting]] to canonize him as St. Leonard or as some Old Testament prophet. Many of the performances are forgettable over-interpretations (especially Rufus & Martha Wainright's) or [[insipid]] under-achievements. Only Beth Orton and Anthony got within [[startling]] distance of Leonard's own versions by [[employs]] a [[petite]] [[constraints]]. [[Irksome]] [[petite]] pseudo-avant-garde [[flicks]] are sprinkled [[in]] the film- like out of [[concentrations]] superimpositions of red [[regions]] over [[innumerable]] of the [[concerto]] and interview [[beatings]], [[bumpy]] blurred camera work, [[uses]] of digital delay on some of Leonard Cohen's comments (making it harder to hear what's being said) and a spooky, [[ostentatious]] low drone under a lot of the interview segments (an attempt at added gravitas?). For the real thing, see the Songs From The Life Of documentary produced by the BBC in 1988. --------------------------------------------- Result 4402 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (94%)]] Possible Spoilers, Perhaps. I must say that "Cinderella II: Dreams Come True" is one of the [[worst]] movies ever made. First of all, the movie was made during the height of Disney's sequel rampage. It was created around the same time as "The Little Mermaid II," "The Jungle Book II," and "Peter Pan II," all of which were disservices to their original film classics. (Disney also made "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" and "Atlantis II," but I'm going to drop that topic because their original movies were never really classics in the first place.") Let me go ahead and say that I am an avid supporter of good Disney films, and I absolutely adore the original Disney "Cinderella." The sequel to "Cinderella," however, was a waste of time. The character of Cinderella in the sequel was so very unlike the original girl that I grew up watching. In the original, Cinderella was kind and loving. The new Cinderella had very out-of-character moments with current-era phrasing like, "I'm going to do this banquet my way!" Let me also tell you that new Cinderella (as I have affectionately named her) says, "Ewww!" That is the anti-Cinderella. I try to find the best in people, but in the sequel, Anastasia, one of the stepsisters, is good! What the heck? Why? They made it all out to be like Lady Tremaine and Drizella are just horrible family members for poor little Anastasia. My question to the world: did the people at Disney watch the original "Cinderella" when making this sequel? Well, it surely doesn't seem so. If I remember correctly, Anastasia was just as abusive to Cinderella as Drizella and Lady Tremaine. I am all for redemption and forgiveness, but there was no point of redemption for Anastasia in this movie. In the first one, Anastasia was evil. In the second one, she is good. One just can't leave a story like this. I hope Disney realizes that this movie, among other movies, is shaming Walt Disney's name. Perhaps now that Michael Eisner is gone, things will start shaping up around the House of Mouse. Possible Spoilers, Perhaps. I must say that "Cinderella II: Dreams Come True" is one of the [[gravest]] movies ever made. First of all, the movie was made during the height of Disney's sequel rampage. It was created around the same time as "The Little Mermaid II," "The Jungle Book II," and "Peter Pan II," all of which were disservices to their original film classics. (Disney also made "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II" and "Atlantis II," but I'm going to drop that topic because their original movies were never really classics in the first place.") Let me go ahead and say that I am an avid supporter of good Disney films, and I absolutely adore the original Disney "Cinderella." The sequel to "Cinderella," however, was a waste of time. The character of Cinderella in the sequel was so very unlike the original girl that I grew up watching. In the original, Cinderella was kind and loving. The new Cinderella had very out-of-character moments with current-era phrasing like, "I'm going to do this banquet my way!" Let me also tell you that new Cinderella (as I have affectionately named her) says, "Ewww!" That is the anti-Cinderella. I try to find the best in people, but in the sequel, Anastasia, one of the stepsisters, is good! What the heck? Why? They made it all out to be like Lady Tremaine and Drizella are just horrible family members for poor little Anastasia. My question to the world: did the people at Disney watch the original "Cinderella" when making this sequel? Well, it surely doesn't seem so. If I remember correctly, Anastasia was just as abusive to Cinderella as Drizella and Lady Tremaine. I am all for redemption and forgiveness, but there was no point of redemption for Anastasia in this movie. In the first one, Anastasia was evil. In the second one, she is good. One just can't leave a story like this. I hope Disney realizes that this movie, among other movies, is shaming Walt Disney's name. Perhaps now that Michael Eisner is gone, things will start shaping up around the House of Mouse. --------------------------------------------- Result 4403 --------------------------------------------- [[Negative (100%)]] --> [[Positive (68%)]] the intention the directors has for this films are quite honorable, but his history of his productions did get me aware that this might not [[get]] [[much]] to the core like other film makers would do it. [[keeping]] his great 30 days TV [[series]] in mind but also counting in his MTV production "i bet you will" that [[opposes]] his seriousness in any of the matters he documents and also counting in his rather disappointing production "supersize me" i did not had my [[hopes]] up high. [[sadly]] [[enough]] this [[movie]] [[disappointed]] me [[none]] the [[less]]. as with "supersize me" after a while i did [[ask]] myself what [[exactly]] the point of all this was. the main [[statement]] [[gets]] [[clear]] [[enough]] after half an [[hour]] but the [[rest]] of the playtime [[gets]] filled with [[rather]] [[pointless]] [[stuff]] and re-repeating [[stuff]] that were already [[shown]] in this [[way]] or another earlier in the [[movie]], so it [[wears]] out and gets [[extremely]] [[boring]] towards the [[end]]. the intention the directors has for this films are quite honorable, but his history of his productions did get me aware that this might not [[gets]] [[very]] to the core like other film makers would do it. [[sustain]] his great 30 days TV [[serial]] in mind but also counting in his MTV production "i bet you will" that [[opposing]] his seriousness in any of the matters he documents and also counting in his rather disappointing production "supersize me" i did not had my [[waits]] up high. [[alack]] [[adequately]] this [[cinematography]] [[frustrating]] me [[no]] the [[minimum]]. as with "supersize me" after a while i did [[asked]] myself what [[precisely]] the point of all this was. the main [[declarations]] [[got]] [[unequivocal]] [[suitably]] after half an [[hora]] but the [[stays]] of the playtime [[receives]] filled with [[somewhat]] [[vain]] [[thing]] and re-repeating [[thing]] that were already [[exhibited]] in this [[pathway]] or another earlier in the [[kino]], so it [[gate]] out and gets [[vitally]] [[bore]] towards the [[ends]]. Number of successful attacks: 4000 Number of failed attacks: 375 Number of skipped attacks: 28 Original accuracy: 99.36% Accuracy under attack: 8.52% Attack success rate: 91.43% Average perturbed word %: 9.25% Average num. words per input: 234.09 Avg num queries: 370.6